The Brain’s Architecture Is Finely Tuned

The design of the brain is a wonder to behold, imagine this, one brain holds 200 billion nerve cells that are connected to one another via hundreds of trillions of synapses. Each synapses acts like a microprocessor, where many thousands  of them are able to connect to just one neuron.  Scientists observed in the cerebral cortex alone, roughly one hundred twenty-five trillion synapses which is about how many stars fill fifteen hundred Milky Way galaxies!  The New York Times describes it as…

“There are 100 billion neurons, so the brain probably contains 100 trillion synapses, its most critical working part. At the side of a synapse that belongs to the transmitting neuron, an electrical signal arrives and releases packets of chemicals.  The chemicals diffuse quickly across the minute gap between the neurons and dock with receptors on the surface of the receiving neuron.”

“These receptors feed the signals they receive to a delicate complex of protein-based machines that process and store the information. The 1,461 genes that specify these synaptic proteins constitute more than 7 percent of the human genome’s 20,000 protein-coding genes, an indication of the synapse’s complexity and importance. Dr. Grant believes that the proteins are probably linked together to form several biological machines that process the information and change the physical properties of the neuron as a way of laying down a memory. “

These amazing neurons are the body’s wiring which is able to carry electrical signals called action potentials. When one  action travels to the end of the neuron, then to another. What researchers from Stanford University School of Medicine also discovered, was a resistant to change. Meaning they found proteins to be highly conserved. It’s been well documented that a wide range of mutations in these proteins causes a variety of neurological and psychiatric diseases.

“The work should help in understanding how the synapse works in laying down memories, as well as the basis of the many diseases that turn out to be caused by defects in the synapse’s delicate machinery. The research team, led by Seth Grant of the Sanger Institute near Cambridge, England, compiled the first exact inventory of all the protein components of the synaptic information-processing machinery. No fewer than 1,461 proteins are involved in this biological machinery, they report in the current issue of Nature Neuroscience.”

“Each neuron in the human brain makes an average 1,000 or so connections with other neurons. There are 100 billion neurons, so the brain probably contains 100 trillion synapses, its most critical working part. These receptors feed the signals they receive to a delicate complex of protein-based machines that process and store the information.”

The brain has very advanced circuitry which is phenomenally detailed and complex where different parts are tightly integrated, with a low threshold to change.  In the evolutionary framework it adds more complexity (to solve a problem) in its explanation of slow and gradual, so evolutionists have to believe this design supposedly evolved with changes at an unheard rate of speed before it became finely tuned. Perhaps too quick for the eyes to notice?

Not only is there scant and questionable evidence for intermediate designs leading to the known proteins, but what the evidence evolutionists does reveal with this discovery is that these proteins do not tolerate change which is critical in Darwinian evolution. It takes a lot more to believe in evolution than God. The brain’s design is highly advanced beyond man’s wildest dreams, it points to the work of a intelligent Creator, namely God!

Advertisements

15 thoughts on “The Brain’s Architecture Is Finely Tuned

  1. “The brain has very advanced circuitry which is phenomenally detailed and complex [sic] where different parts are tightly integrated, with a low threshold to change.”[0]

    Brain circuitry is not advanced. It has been around for 500 million years. Some of them are not advanced at all. Jellyfish have a nervous system with a ganglion of neurons without a central brain. the worm C. elegans makes do with 302 neurons in a 959-cell body. As the brain evolved, it did not change its basic architectures—rather, new areas were added on during evolution.[1] Michael merely does not recognize them because he has niot a single synapse dedicated to science. The structures match up perfectly with the evolutionary tree.

    “In the evolutionary framework it adds more complexity (to solve a problem) in its explanation of slow and gradual, [sic] so evolutionists have to believe this design supposedly evolved with changes at an unheard rate of speed before it became finely tuned. Perhaps too quick for the eyes to notice?”

    Michael is of course making this up. 500 million years to grow a neural ganglion into the mammalian brain is not an unheard-of rate of speed. It is creationists who need the blazing speed, because they must proceed from worm brains with 300 neurons on the Fifth Day all the way to human brains with billions on the Sixth Day. A ten million to one increase in a single day! Now THAT is an “unheard of rate of speed.”

    “Each synapses [sic] acts like a microprocessor, where many thousands of them are able to connect to just one neuron.”

    Michael also made this up. In what way does a synapse act like a microprocessor? Haw many megabytes of memory does it have? how many millions of logic gates? Where does its clock signal arise? Anyone who knows anything about neurons, microprocessors, or chasepot rifles understands that neurons run several simple chemical reactions to generate electrical potentials–chemists call them “ion channels.”

    “The 1,461 genes that specify these synaptic proteins constitute more than 7 percent of the human genome’s 20,000 protein-coding genes, an indication of the synapse’s complexity and importance.”

    Michael rhapsodizes over the NYT article. Having no knowledge whatever of this subject, he does not realize that 70% of the proteins in the human brain are devoted entirely to smelling individual odors—and that most of these proteins NO LONGER FUNCTION in humans.[2]

    “What researchers from Stanford University School of Medicine also discovered, was a resistant [sic] to change. Meaning they found proteins to be highly conserved. “

    Which, of course, is exactly what one would expect from evolution. And would not expect if different animals had been designed independently of each other as in the creation model. As noted above, most of the human olfactory region is defunct, while the same proteins/genes in chimps and other mammals operate to sense smells that we cannot.

    .

    As to complexity, we must remind Michael continually that evolved systems tend to be more complex than (human) designed systems for the same function. And they can organize themselves. If Michael knew anything at all about embryology, he would see before his eyes the unfolding of brain structures guided by no external agent whatever. In fact, if Michael applied himself, he might find that the embryo brain organizes in a way that differs from ANY human-designed computer: The brain sprouts synapses profligately, connecting neurons together in tangled mazes of chaotic wiring.

    Then an amazing thing happens. 90% of the synapses wither and die—selectively, according to their targets. In fact, between birth and two years of age, a human child will lose another 2/3 of his synapses, and a great many neurons. What human designer would build any machine in that way, much less a computer?

    .

    Michael, who do you think will read this post and not laugh out loud? Certainly not anyone who knows anything at all about biology.

    ===============

    [0] From the rest of the post, Michael meant a “high” threshold to change, not a low one.

    [1] Two basic forms: The brain of invertebrates surrounds the esophagus, while the vertebrate brain sits entirely above it.

    [2] Yet another example of poor design. Or evidence for evolution, since exactly the same proteins do detect odors in animals in the evolutionary lineage of humans.

  2. @Michael,

    Just because the brain is “complex,’ it doesn’t mean that it didn’t evolve…and just because you do not understand how you can understand how is not a valid argument. — Besides, the brain is KNOWN to evolve…due to the hominid fossil record… Taung Child’s brain was fossilized, and we see a trand in the brain size from the Australopithecines onward to the genus Homo…The brain size of Homo Erectus was smaller than that of Homo Heidelbergensis..The brain of Homo Heidelbergensis was ALMOST as big as our own.. The brain size of Homo Neandertalensis exceeded that our own.

    — And a question, Micahel: You say the brain is “fine tuned.” What makes you think it is fine tuned for us? Why would WE be the ones that are finely tuned for the brain instead?

  3. “If Michael knew anything at all about embryology, he would see before his eyes the unfolding of brain structures guided by no external agent whatever.”

    A recent research paper was prompted by the aurhors’ curiosity as to why[2] certain brain structures were very much alike among a number of species with disparate evolutionary histories. If these structures were built up according to a genetic blueprint, one would expect them to differ greatly. What they found was that these brain areas developed entirely through self-organization in the embryo, without any external guidance at all.

    Complex interconnected pinwheel configurations appeared purely as a consequence of the shapes and connections of their components In the authors’ words:

    “A symmetry-based class of models for the self-organization of cortical networks predicts all essential features of the layout of these neuronal circuits…. We show mathematically that orientation-selective long-range connectivity can mediate the required reactions. Our results suggest that self-organization has canalized the evolution of the neuronal circuitry underlying orientation preference maps into a single common design.”[3]

    That is, at least some of these awesome brain configurations do not even require evolution.

    ================

    [1] Kaschube eta l, , “Universality in the Evolution of Orientation Columns in the Visual Cortex,” Science, 330:1113-16 (19 Nov. 2010)

    [2] Creationists never wonder. They think they already know. Therefore they never find out. Probably the source of the infamous creationist propensity for ignorance..

    [3] Don’t get excited, Michael. What biologists understand by “design” is “configuration” or “layout.”

  4. Michael might be interested to read scientists comments on the evolution of the brain…–Naaahh, who am i kidding?

    Well, just as an introductory:

    http://faculty.ed.uiuc.edu/g-cziko/wm/05.html

    –Saying this, there is no scienmtific reason to assume that the brain did not evolve… In my former comment, I already mentioned to fossil evidence…and to me, that is enough.

  5. . . . . . . . . “The Brain’s Architecture Is Finely Tuned”

    Yes. And “fine tuning” is a consequence of evolution.

    A primitive ganglion works a little bit better when a central node supervises the rest of the system. Animals having this central node have a selective advantage in many environments. Thus primitive brains come into being in worms. They are more “fine tuned” than simple ganglia. Some of these brains developed additional nodes. Insect brains have 3 components, This allows each component to specialize for a different function, thus providing a selective advantage, and leading to greater reproductive fitness. The vertebrate brain becomes much larger and more specialized. This brain is also not a single lump, but a series of nodes at one end of the spinal cord,[1] becoming more finely tuned to different functions. Along the evolutionary way, vertebrate brains have accumulated more specialized units, becoming even more finely tuned—primarily for more complex behaviors, rather than for better sensing or motor control. Mammals keep the 3 earlier units, and add 2 more specialized components. These become progressively larger in the more recently evolved primates. Another fine tuning occurred with the evolutionary appearance of “mirror neurons” in some animals. These interconnect sensory areas with motor area, allowing their owners to learn a behavior without ever needing to actually perform it themselves. Another fine tuning that provides a selective advantage.

    So each addition and each modification was a fine tuning that increased the reproductive fitness of its owner.[2] This is what evolution does: it “fine tunes” features, structures, and traits a little at a time fo increase reproductive fitness.

    Evolution fine-tunes many other structures as well. The first automobiles had crude, inefficient engines. Did they suddenly get designed to 21st Century complexity when someone decided to design them better? No. They became more and more fine-tuned over decades of evolution. Overhead valves replaced L-head configurations early on. Four valves replaced 2 valves later. Variable valve timing replaced fixed timing to fine-tune performance at different speeds. Simple carburetors were fine-tuned with acceleration pumps. Fuel injection replaced carbonation later to fine-tune delivery timing. Direct-injection is now fine-tuning fuel-air mixtures.

    Michael will object that automobiles do not evolve under natural law. But consider the Sun, with its fine-tuned atomic fusion reactions. Was the Sun always fine-tuned? No. We observe other stars in the process of formation, and see that they are in transition from primitive states to more fine-tuned states, where the gravitational force more nearly balances the radiation pressure, where dozens of individual processes become balanced with each other—that is, more finely tuned. And all this by evolving under natural law, without any guidance from a supernatural entity

    Once again, design does not fine-tune. Design would start with the optimum design in the first place. It is evolution that fine-tunes.

    ================

    [1] Many dinosaurs also had another, smaller brain at the other end of the spinal cord.

    [2] Yet the fine tunings did not proceed in a straight line. Different animals found advantage in different abilities, which were reflected in their brain evolution. For example, insects and vertebrates having diverged earlier, show more differences in brain structure than do any two vertebrates.

  6. Started commenting on abother creationist site (Link: http://creationrevolution.com ) — I think they banned me since the last comments i have been able to post are from last night…None of the ones today appeared…even for moderation…

  7. Kriss…”Started commenting on abother creationist site (Link: http://creationrevolution.com ) — I think they banned me since the last comments i have been able to post are from last night…None of the ones today appeared…even for moderation…”

    I didn’t see any of your comments, recent listing goes back to the last week of December. Nice blog though!

  8. My comments on the blog are to be found on these pages linked:

    Link: http://creationrevolution.com/2010/12/israeli-scientist-%e2%80%9cthis-changes-the-whole-picture-of-evolution%e2%80%9d/

    Link: http://creationrevolution.com/2010/12/wow-ancient-humans-bred-with-other-ancient-humans/

    Link: http://creationrevolution.com/2010/12/magnetic-field-data-confirm-creation-model/

    And now for some mysterious reason….I can no longer post….even though as far as I can tell, I have not been mean spirited, vulgar, promoting atheism, or what-not.

  9. Kris, I arranged a test for you. I commented on the magnetic-field reversal post. I’m expecting it will be — shall we say — unmoderateded out.

  10. Kris, the test worked. (Or, rather failed to work, which was the expectation.)

    My cogent, learned arguments and facts on long-term magnetic reversals sank without a trace.

    The next part, I guess, is to submit a few more comments, to see whether Al Kafir[1] will be banned a priori.

    ============

    [1] Another nom de clavier. Literally, “kafir’ refers simply to a villager. But it carries the connotation in Arabic of one who does not accept orthodoxy. I capitalize “Al” to give the semblance of a proper name such as Albert or Aloysius or Alphonse or Algernon or Alistair (take your pick)..

  11. Olorin,

    I am not surprised either… I really do want the mods to give me an answer as to how accepting the fluctuations of the magnetic field are good for a young earth.

    Right now, i think their mentality is “If it doesn’t fluctuate, it is good for young earth, and the same result follows even if it does fluctuate.” A cler sign of people who think their conclusion is right despite the result.

  12. –Sorry about the typos in the last post…I really got to proofread myself.

    (Post Proofread)

  13. Kris, this is an instance of the adage that “A theory that can explain anything explains nothing.”

  14. Olorin, true enough. — It is okay to modify a theory to another version that fits the evidence…but when it comes to the point that theory can never be falsified, then it is not science and is therefore useless….That is what they have now done to the magnetic field decay argument….AT THE VERY LEAST, the older version of the argument was falsifiable….and then falsified.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s