Breaking News: Stem Cell Research

Adult stem cell research is providing opportunities to treat people with a various  diseases and conditions.  In 2010, a man’s ankle refused to heal so the doctor took  bone marrow from the man’s pelvic bone with a needle, condensed it to about four teaspoons of rich red liquid, and injected that into his ankle. Four months later, the ankle was healed!

Since 2000, there has been great controversy over stem cell research namely embryonic stem cells which is mainly left-wing  ideology that blamed former President Bush for denying treatments rather than where the science goes. Embryonic stem cells are taken from a developing embryo at the blastocyst stage, destroying the embryo, a developing human life.

Adult stem cells, on the other hand, are found in all tissues of the growing human being and, according to latest reports, also have the potential to transform themselves into practically all other cell types, or revert to being stem cells with greater reproductive capacity.  Here is some of the latest research concerning stem cells…

How often have you donated or seen money raised for muscular dystrophy? Has there been any progress recently? Well yes there has been!

In phys.org…

“The research, published today in Cell Stem Cell, outlines the strategy for the development of a rapidly dividing population of skeletal myogenic progenitor cells (muscle-forming cells) derived from induced pluripotent (iPS) cells. iPS cells have all of the potential of embryonic stem (ES) cells, but are derived by reprogramming skin cells. They can be patient-specific, which renders them unlikely to be rejected, and do not involve the destruction of embryos.”

“Upon transplantation into mice suffering from muscular dystrophy, human skeletal myogenic progenitor cells provided both extensive and long-term muscle regeneration which resulted in improved muscle function,” the article said.

In North Carolina  School of Medicine, they had discovered that embryonic stem cells will commit suicide rather than risk DNA damage! Bax is a protein that is responsible for causing cell death.

In phys.org…

“Of all the important things our bodies’ cells do, staying alive is clearly key. But a cell’s ability to die when something goes wrong is equally critical. For example, a faulty self-destruct button is one factor that allows cancer cells to proliferate unchecked and cause tumors.”

“Deshmukh and his colleagues discovered stem cells are extremely sensitive to DNA damage, which can be caused by factors like chemicals, radiation or viruses. The experiment showed that virtually 100 percent of human embryonic stem cells treated with a DNA-damaging drug killed themselves within 5 hours, as compared to 24 hours for other types of cells.”

There had been concerned over iPS stem cells but techniques for inducing pluripotent stem cells from tissues (iPS) continue to improve.

“Our results show that human iPS cells accrue genetic changes at about the same rate as any replicating cells, which we don’t feel is a cause for concern,” says Linzhao Cheng, Ph.D., a professor of medicine and oncology, and a member of the Johns Hopkins Institute for Cell Engineering.

“Each time a cell divides, it has the chance to make errors and incorporate new genetic changes in its DNA, Cheng explains. Some genetic changes can be harmless, but others can lead to changes in cell behavior that may lead to disease and, in the worst case, to cancer.”

Great research continues to progress with adult stem cells, the craziness of promoting ES back in 2000 to the present day were wrong.  If If iPS cells or other adult stem cells do better with fewer problems and no moral concerns, why is there a dispute?

Scientists Claim: They Performed Evolution

Geneticists are in the process of engineering molecules which is great science, but when scientists alter molecules which is not found in nature, are they performing evolution which is a mindless unguided process or intelligent design? Is there any evidence for evolution in the experiment?

The abstract in the paper goes like this…

Genetics provides a mechanism for molecular memory and thus the basis for Darwinian evolution. It involves the storage and propagation of molecular information and the refinement of that information through experience and differential survival. Heretofore, the only molecules known to be capable of undergoing Darwinian evolution were RNA and DNA, the genetic molecules of biology. But on page 341 of this issue, Pinheiro et al. (1) expand the palette considerably.”

“They report six alternative genetic polymers that can be used to store and propagate information; one of these was made to undergo Darwinian evolution in response to imposed selection constraints. The work heralds the era of synthetic genetics, with implications for exobiology, biotechnology, and understanding of life itself. “

Here the paper uses circular reasoning, “Genetics provides a mechanism for molecular memory and thus the basis for Darwinian evolution.” There was no observation of nature selecting the defined structures nor the targets, nor the aptamers! It was an international team of scientists who did the selecting! Not only that but their altered molecules “remains relatively inefficient.” unnatural or designed by scientists are poor polymerase substrates at full substitution.

Molecular memory is not a demonstration of evolution rather it’s an assumption of the data.  Scientists invented their own selection strategy which they call  “compartmentalized self-tagging.”  

The conclusion of the paper says…

Our work establishes strategies for the replication and evolution of synthetic genetic polymers not found in nature, providing a route to novel sequence space. The capacity of synthetic polymers for both heredity and evolution also shows that DNA and RNA are not functionally unique as genetic materials.”

“The methodologies developed herein are readily applied to other nucleic acid architectures and have the potential to enable the replication of genetic polymers of increasingly divergent chemistry, structural motifs, and physicochemical properties, as shown here by the acid resistance of HNA aptamers (fig. S17). Thus, aspects of the correlations between chemical structure, evolvability, and phenotypic diversity may become amenable to systematic study. Such “synthetic genetics” — that is, the exploration of the informational, structural, and catalytic potential of synthetic genetic polymers — should advance our understanding of the parameters of chemical information encoding and provide a source of ligands, catalysts, and nanostructures with tailor-made chemistries for applications in biotechnology and medicine.”

Other media makes wild claims that this experiment produces a more understanding about the origin of life which is nothing more than presupposes the existence of DNA. Because without DNA along with its specified information, and proteins to build DNA, nothing happens! Unless scientists are observing this in nature without their tinkering around, this is not evolution rather they are tinkering with something that was intelligently designed by God.  Even if evolution was true, just because it was done in a lab, doesn’t mean nature does it and altering molecules in a lab is not a demonstration on how evolution works rather just like evolution itself, it’s a man-made up story about the experiment.

New Discovery Puts Neanderthal Man Myth To Rest

In creationism, variants within a kind is predicted in nature and when it comes to Neanderthal man, if confirms that very expectation. While some may hold to evolutionary theory as a “developing field. It will be different tomorrow” but with vast mounting evidence to the contrary, the perception in evolutionary circles to overturn what they had missed labeled as sub-human and developed a story that included very little intelligence and grunts for communication.

Prior to the latest discovery which will be addressed, these are the following evidences which demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that Neanderthal Man was human after all.

A) Research has shown that stone tool technologies invented by modern humans from the past were no more efficient than the ones produced by Neanderthal man.

B) Broad use of land resources with scheduling resource use by the seasons.

C) Neandertal’s genome showed modern humans and Neanderthals have very little differences. “…new research published online May 6 (2010) in the journal Science reveals that we differ hardly at all.”

D) Europeans and Asians share about 1% to 4% of their nuclear DNA with Neanderthals, indicating that there was substantial interbreeding that went on between modern man and Neanderthals.  This is very important evidence which blows away the story used within evolution because when a species can interbreed then they are the same species!

E) A research team back in 2008, had examined shells that were used as containers to mix and store pigments. Black sticks of the pigment manganese, which may have been used as body paint by Neanderthals, have previously been discovered in Africa. The discovery lead researchers to think that Neanderthal man is not “so-dimwitted” as previously suggested.

Then comes the latest discovery on how Neanderthal man lived…

“The world’s oldest works of art have been found in a cave on Spain’s Costa del Sol, scientists believe. Six paintings of seals are at least 42,000 years old and are the only known artistic images created by Neanderthal man, experts claim. Professor Jose Luis Sanchidrian, from the University of Cordoba, described the discovery as ‘an academic bombshell’, as all previous art work has been attributed to Homo sapiens.”

Are evolutionary scientists now ready to move on from the story concocted over the years with all this hard evidence to the contrary or are they still desperate in using Neanderthal man as a link to modern humans? Once they move on or if they move on, stories from media outlets like the Huffington Post will follow.

The more that is discovered about Neanderthal man, the harder it will be for them to hang on to a group of people who they thought were “so-dimwitted” who disappeared because of competition with modern human (when in fact there is little difference), although there is another proposal that climate change was responsible and one camp believes food went scarce while others believe Neanderthals didn’t have a modern human brain in order to survive the change in weather which is the old line of thinking in the story of evolution.

“The traditional story in textbooks doesn’t fit well with what we know about hunter-gatherers. For the most part, they don’t like to go far from home. It’s dangerous,” Barton said…Other than the fact that they disappeared, there is no evidence that Neanderthals were any less fit as hunter-gatherers of the late Pleistocene than any other human ancestor living at that time. It looks like they were as capable as anyone else,” Barton said.”

Their disappearance is based on much speculation and there is a good chance we may not know what exactly happened to them in the past, but one thing is for sure, there is no doubt that Neanderthals were human beings like the rest of us from intelligence to genome to tool technologies to behavior and now artistry which all confirms the creationist account that there are only variants within a kind which includes humans!

The Cell’s Importance Of Optimizing And Repair

A car gasoline engine cannot be bigger and faster while getting better gas mileage than smaller cars. A computer cannot run more components without using more electricity. Thus, it is not always possible to have all the elements of a product be ideal.  Recent recent research shows a unique combination of the two.

The title of the PNAS paper says the “Genetic code translation displays a linear trade-off between efficiency and accuracy of tRNA selection.”  There are competing forces the paper admits, “Translation of the ancient and universal genetic code into protein on ribosomes requires precise mRNA decoding by aminoacyl-tRNAs (aa-tRNAs) and rapid formation of nascent peptide chains.”   Accuracy and speed are required for the cell to survive and since this is the case with the limitations of time and space, how do they work together for the benefit of the cell?

When it comes to the transfer of  RNA, the  anticodon must find the right codon within a certain time frame. The article says  in regards to this, “Codon reading by aa-tRNAs ultimately relies on the specificity of cognate in relation to noncognate codon–anticodon interactions, but two ribosome-dependent specificity enhancements greatly improve mRNA decoding.”

There is not one but incredibly two well-designed mechanisms that act like an editor whose job is to proofread to make sure the job is done right, ” “the ribosome enhances the accuracy of codon reading by a twostep mechanism in which initial codon selection by a tRNA is followed by a proofreading step.”  The speed is accomplished by the tRNA matching up initially with its cognate, but “editors” in the ribosome during translation clean up any mistakes.

Then the authors looked for optimizing by examining the “maximal possible discrimination between a cognate and a noncognate codon–anticodon interaction: the ‘d value’,”  Just tentative numbers, further study is required for a better conclusion. Not surprisingly, the article then gives credit to evolution where it says,Finally, we propose that quantitative estimates of the d values of the genetic code in conjunction with the remarkably simple efficiency-accuracy trade-off revealed by the present experiments will clarify how the accuracy in living cells has been evolutionarily tuned for maximal fitness of growing bacteria.”

It really doesn’t explain evolution other than the authors believe in it rather this is amazing observational science. Darwinism actually hinders the science with a better understanding that comes from  intelligent design. The designs we see in nature come from a mind not a non-thinking process. These designs are highly advanced and require much study for us mere humans to understand.

Creationism’s Predictions vs Evolution’s Predictions

Creationism predicts genetic entropy in nature, which means the DNA for humans was much better with the ancients than it is today while evolution predicts gains in function with the purpose of enhancing fitness. There was a study recently with Vitamin C which is interesting, because humans have lost the ability to manufacture it, so it must be obtained through a diet. And we are not the only ones, certain bats, and certain birds, some fish, guinea pigs and anthropoid have also lost the ability to manufacture Vitamin C.

The study was focused on why this has happened, in PLoS they say, “The ability to synthesize Vc has been reported in many ancestral vertebrate lineages, suggesting the ability for de novo synthesis is ancient.” Nowhere in the paper do the authors explain for the most part on how Vc emerged in the first place such as gains in function within various transitional forms. Rather, the paper mentions quite a bit on loss of function.

“Interestingly, ancestral sequence reconstruction exhibits a stepwise mutation pattern (figure 4) that starts around the time when the tested bat species first evolved from a common ancestor around 58 mya.”

“The ancestor of all bats maintains most of the original Laurasiatheria gene form (with only two mutations) after divergence with non-bat Laurasiatheria species; the ancestor of Hipposideridae, Rhinolophidae, and Megadermatidae (origin around 52 mya) has 3 mutations; the ancestor of Hipposideridae and Rhinolophidae (origin around 39 mya) has 4 mutations; the ancestor of Pteropodidae (origin around 23 mya) has 7 mutations; and the ancestor of the recently emerged Pteropus bats (around 3 mya) have 13 mutations, hence showing a stepwise accumulation of mutations during bat GULO evolution.”

They assume the evolutionary dating, but all this is showing is how many mutations a species had rather than gains that transforms the animal into a bat, what they are showing is the number of mutations with loss in function. Is this really evolution? Wouldn’t it be better for the body to already have the supplement instead of having to obtain it through diet? If any thing, the prediction of evolution would be the other way around. All this study consists of mutations taking away function. Their answer, well the humans and animals can eat, so it wasn’t necessary to manufacture the supplement.  It is interesting to note, the paper mentions, the ancestor of all bats” but there is no common ancestor of bats! They just assume it because where is it? The oldest bat fossil is one hundred percent bat!

In another study from last year, Peter A. Lind, Otto G. Berg, and Dan I. Andersson from Uppsala University conducted an experiment on Salmonella bacterium which was published in the journal of science in November 2010. Their focus here was to come up with new insights on how evolution increases fitness. What surprised evolutionists about this experiment, the mutations caused a loss in fitness rather than an increase in fitness which also confirms the creationist prediction of genetic entropy in nature!

In another paper in Nature, “Experimental evolution reveals resistance to change” where it says…

“Experimental evolution systems allow the genomic study of adaptation, and so far this has been done primarily in asexual systems with small genomes, such as bacteria and yeast.  Here we present whole-genome resequencing data from Drosophila melanogaster populations that have experienced over 600 generations of laboratory selection for accelerated development.”  We conclude that, at least for life history characters such as development time, unconditionally advantageous alleles rarely arise, are associated with small net fitness gains or cannot fix because selection coefficients change over time.”

Science continues to confirm genetic entropy in nature and scientists are now taking a look at on how they they could restore the body being able to make  Vitamin C again. “The gene encoding GULO in guinea pigs and humans has become a pseudogene.” Wouldn’t that be great? No more having to ingest Vitamin C anymore!

The Truly Amazing, and The Bizarre in Science

All living things ranging from animals to humans rely on the ATP ability to manufacture a “energy pellets” in order to survive. There have been some remarkable discoveries on how the  ATP synthase works. It continues to astound with truly amazing features.

A team of scientists in Germany have detected  the rotary engines of ATP synthase and other parts of the respiratory chain and created a diagram that resembles a factory. The design of the ATP is highly advanced with engines that are arranged in pairs, the F0 parts are observed to almost touching, their F1 parts separated, by angles ranging from 40° to 70° depending on the species. And quite interestingly, the authors of the paper mention that the ATP isconserved during evolution”.  Have they grasped a better understanding about how evolution works? No! Have they grasped a better understanding of its design and how it works? Yes!

Last week it was reported that scientists turned a chicken into an alligator, well not quite that profound but rather, “rewinding evolution: scientists alter chicken DNA to create embryo with ‘alligator-like’ snout.” Since mutation experiments have been falsifying evolution, evolutionary scientists are trying to advocate a more simple approach to the problem. Flip some switches, and new information is created or at least that is what is believed.

The scientists who altered the DNA in the chicken by inserting a protein gel into the eggs to that would restrict certain gene regulators actually created a deformity or another words a defect. There was no new information created in the genomes which would turn the chicken into an alligator. This research lacks any value for trying to understand evolution with malformations. Rather this is great research for studying birth defects and how to prevent them!

In another story, Jerry Coyne who is an American professor of biology and known for his public opposition of creationism and the modern intelligent design movement, recently, natural selection has been an interesting topic for him because of what he had written in various publications. The first being, “The Improbability Pump” where it says…

“In principle, natural selection is simple. It is neither a “law” nor a “mechanism.” It is, instead, a “process”–a process that is inevitable if two common conditions are met.”

Jerry says it simple, but is it? He writes about natural selection again in his book, “Why Evolution Is True” and on page three it says…

“In essence, the modern theory of evolution is easy to grasp. It can be summarized in a single (albeit slightly long) sentence: Life on Earth evolved gradually beginning with one primitive species—perhaps a self-replicating molecule—that lived more than 3.5 billion years ago; it then branched out over time, throwing off many new and diverse species; and the mechanism for most (but not all) of evolutionary change is natural selection.”

I ask again, simple Jerry? Are you really trying to tell us natural selection is that simple? So which is it? Is natural selection a mechanism or not or is it just a process or a combination of both and why? His writings on the subject are a bit confusing which is not surprising considering evolution is full of confusing stories that evolve over time due to falsifications. One wonders about the growing complexity in evolution, which perhaps has it gotten to the point where it is even confusing to those who are trying to tell the public it’s factual? Sure does looks that way!

On August 23, 2011, MSNBC reported that daddy-long-legs has remain relatively the same after the supposed assumed time frame of 300 million years. There are other species that have been quite amazing, not showing evolution. The fossil record is becoming less and less Darwinian as more studies are done with it. It is not as bizarre as calling certain animals, “living fossils” as though they came back from the dead and now are alive!

What was thought to be just a fossil from long ago is actually swimming pretty good in the water. A report by phys.org

“A new species of eel found in the gloom of an undersea cave is a “living fossil” astonishingly similar to the first eels that swam some 200 million years ago, biologists reported on Wednesday.”

Where is the evolution? Labeling it incorrectly as a “living fossil” like Charles Darwin, doesn’t explain evolution. When you take away all those millions of years that evolutionists believe in, and you discover that the resemblance of these creatures to their fossilize ancestors means they are not separated by millions of years through evolution but variants within in kind that was designed by God!

Microbiology Reveals Amazing Specified Cell Operations

When I was a child in the sixth grade, I watching and listening in school to my cousin on TV, he was giving a lecture on the microscopic world. It had inspired me to get my first microscope. I began to read books at that age on one-cell animals, and took various samples around my area to view with new microscope. Things have changed a lot since then, a microscope no longer does the cell justice anymore, it only shows a very tiny fraction of what is going on.

New research papers have been popping up all over in the science journals that detail astounding things going on in the microscopic world.  Do you enjoy having a healthy heart, brain and pancreas? If you do, you can thanks your sodium channels for their health! They regulate a wide range of physiological activities and also when mutations are in the voltage-gated sodium channels causes heath problems according to the paper which was published in science like “epilepsy, migraine headaches, heart rhythm disturbances, periodic paralysis, and some pain syndromes.”

Science daily outlines what sodium channels as researchers discovered a way to obtain a high resolution of the “crystal structure showing all of the atoms of this complex protein molecule.”

“Sodium channels are pores in the membranes of excitable cells — such as brain nerve cells or beating heart cells — that emit electrical signals. Sodium channels selectively open and close to allow the passage of millions of tiny charged particles across the cell membrane. The gated flow of sodium ions generates tiny amounts of electrical current.”

Quite amazing! Have you ever heard of electric eels? I’m sure most of you have, but what about electric bacteria? Electrical properties of cells was the focus of Harvard researchers that was published in science

“Bacterial membrane potential provides a major component of the driving force for oxidative phosphorylation, membrane transport, and flagellar motion. Yet this voltage is inaccessible to techniques of conventional electrophysiology, owing to the small size of bacteria and the presence of a cell wall. Little is known about the electrophysiology of bacteria at the level of single cells.”

So they took a looked at E. coli bacteria and noticed it was producing electrical spikes at a rate of about one per second.  The electrical charge is generated by ion channels in the membrane that create electrical gradients, working against the natural tendency of charges to cancel out.  Research suspect that the bacteria is electrically regulated, that must organize their active transport mechanisms as a unit. Regulation response like this generally known in higher organisms, like electric eels and humans, but this new data has researchers rethinking some of the tenets of neuronal electrophysiology concerning bacteria.

In another publication, it says DNA has its own orchestra, RNA polymerase II molecules are like musicians waiting for their cue at the start sites that have developmentally controlled genes that are waiting for the go ahead so they can execute their part in the genomic symphony. The medical researchers discovered a Super Elongation Complex (SEC), that helps give RNA polymerases the correct beat to start transcribing the gene. This quick start reduces a lot of required steps in the process and also always cells to react quickly to the signals. Using the orchestra metaphor, researchers wrote, “Transcriptional control by RNA polymerase II (Pol II) is a tightly orchestrated, multistep process that requires the concerted action of a large number of players to successfully transcribe the full length of genes.” 

The cellular world continues to astound and it is interesting to note in these various articles, Many of them talk about how parts are “highly conserved” which means unevolved with their ‘theory’ from bacteria to humans. It is not surprising there is no explanation on how this could have emerged by chance without the operations falling apart in the process of being built without destroying the cell. Evolutionists will have to restort what it does best and that is, one comes up with a story for an explanation that the rest agree with, such as simpler cells must have existed and that somehow these cells obtained information that is open to major changes with its critical and specified operations because the ones we are observing now, are not.