Good Bad Adaptations

Here are some quirks in the design of the human body/mind which may turn out to be adaptations:

Abstract of "Morning Sickness: Adaptive Cause or Nonadaptive Consequence of Embryo Viability?" Samuel M. Flaxman1,* and Paul W. Sherman2,†

“Morning sickness” is the common term for nausea and vomiting in early human pregnancy (NVP). Recent interest in why NVP occurs-that is, in the evolutionary costs and benefits of NVP-has spurred the development of two alternative hypotheses. The “prophylaxis,” or “maternal and embryonic protection,” hypothesis suggests that NVP serves a beneficial function by expelling foods that may contain harmful toxins and microorganisms and triggering aversions to such foods throughout pregnancy. The alternative “by-product” hypothesis suggests that NVP is a nonfunctional by-product of conflict-over resource allocation-between the pregnant woman and the embryo. The critical predictions of the prophylaxis hypothesis have been developed and tested, whereas the by-product hypothesis has not been subjected to similar scrutiny. To address this gap, we developed a graphical model and used it to derive predictions from the by-product hypothesis under two different assumptions, namely, that NVP is either (i) a by-product of current conflict between a pregnant woman and an embryo or (ii) a by-product of honest signals of viability produced by the embryo. Neither version of the by-product hypothesis is fully consistent with available data. By contrast, the timing of NVP, its variation among societies, and associated patterns of food cravings and aversions are consistent with the prophylaxis hypothesis.

On Depression:

I recently wrote a paper for my Psychology class about Depression, allow me to quote it:

Why does depression exist? Is it simply a genetic disorder, or is it possible that it is so common because it helps individuals survive in some way? Charles Darwin said, “…Pain or suffering of any kind, if long continued, causes depression and lessens the power of action; yet is well adapted to make a creature guard itself against any great or sudden evil.” [1] Today Psychologists are following suggestions like his in order to find out why so many people suffer from depression. Some believe that after a series of defeats it would be useful to an organism’s survival to adopt a pessimistic attitude and act conservatively[2].

References
[1] p.89, “The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin” by Charles and Francis Darwin. Accessed at: http://darwin-online.org.uk
[2] Nesse RM, et. al “Is Depression an Adaptation?” Arch Gen Psychiatry 2000; 57:14-20
Accessed at:
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~nesse/Articles/IsDepAdapt-ArchGenPsychiat-2000.pdf

AiG's News to Note: Ventastega

It has been a while since I have posted something specifically debunking Answers in Genesis. Anyway, the creationists are up in a tizzy about the latest fossil find, and for good reason. Here is what they have to say:

"[C]ase closed on fish evolving into land animals. Or is it? It is interesting that the authors would suggest that Ventastega is a “midpoint” between the fish Tiktaalik and land animals, since this is not entirely accurate—even using their own framework. In fact, according to the BBC News report, “Ventastega is a later species [than Tiktaalik] but is a more primitive animal.” Setting aside the arbitrary application of “primitive,” it is interesting that something hailed as transitional would be, by the author’s own estimation, a step backwards of sorts. After all, Ventastega was a dead-end that went extinct."

Will anyone teach these idiots about cladistics? The history of life is a branching bush. Think of every transition in life, like the one from water to land, as an explosion of many different species, one of which was the ancestor of modern life forms. We must therefore not be surprised if most fossils appear not as direct ancestors of today's life, but rather as forms related to the ancestors of today's life. And Ventastega is not a "step backwards" but rather should be interpreted as a sort of "cousin species" of our ancestor.

Will Creationists Ever Learn?

I went in a bookstore yesterday and guess what I found: Michael Behe's book, The Edge of Evolution, now in paperback. I even flipped through it and found the passage in which he said HIV hadn't evolved anything biochemically new. When will he learn? I thought ERV handed him his tail on this issue months ago.

Vantastega: Another Transitional

Pharyngula has done a great write up on the newly published fossil, Ventastega. Devonian Times also has a nice page on it, plus lots of other pages on the transition from fish to amphibian.

Baloney Detection, Episode 1

I am starting a new series of posts here at AiG Busted, called "Baloney Detection" (name subject to change). This series is going to be all about detecting pseudoscience. Of course, creationism will be referred to, but this series should give you a good idea of how to detect any type of pseudoscience. The first installment will be a repost of the late Carl Sagan's baloney detection kit, to be found on his website. Here goes:

Warning signs that suggest deception. Based on the book by Carl Sagan, The Demon Haunted World. The following are suggested as tools for testing arguments and detecting fallacious or fraudulent arguments:

Wherever possible there must be independent confirmation of the facts.

Encourage substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents of all points of view.

Arguments from authority carry little weight (in science there are no "authorities").

Spin more than one hypothesis - don't simply run with the first idea that caught your fancy.

Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it's yours.

Quantify, wherever possible.

If there is a chain of argument every link in the chain must work.

Occam's razor - if there are two hypotheses that explain the data equally well choose the simpler.

Ask whether the hypothesis can, at least in principle, be falsified (shown to be false by some unambiguous test). In other words, it is testable? Can others duplicate the experiment and get the same result?

Additional issues are:

Conduct control experiments - especially "double blind" experiments where the person taking measurements is not aware of the test and control subjects.

Check for confounding factors - separate the variables.

Common fallacies of logic and rhetoric

Ad hominem - attacking the arguer and not the argument.

Argument from "authority".

Argument from adverse consequences (putting pressure on the decision maker by pointing out dire consequences of an "unfavorable" decision).

Appeal to ignorance (absence of evidence is not evidence of absence).

Special pleading (typically referring to god's will).

Begging the question (assuming an answer in the way the question is phrased).

Observational selection (counting the hits and forgetting the misses).

Statistics of small numbers (such as drawing conclusions from inadequate sample sizes).

Misunderstanding the nature of statistics (President Eisenhower expressing astonishment and alarm on discovering that fully half of all Americans have below average intelligence!)

Inconsistency (e.g. military expenditures based on worst case scenarios but scientific projections on environmental dangers thriftily ignored because they are not "proved").

Non sequitur - "it does not follow" - the logic falls down.

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc - "it happened after so it was caused by" - confusion of cause and effect.

Meaningless question ("what happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?).

Excluded middle - considering only the two extremes in a range of possibilities (making the "other side" look worse than it really is).

Short-term v. long-term - a subset of excluded middle ("why pursue fundamental science when we have so huge a budget deficit?").

Slippery slope - a subset of excluded middle - unwarranted extrapolation of the effects (give an inch and they will take a mile).

Confusion of correlation and causation.

Caricaturing (or stereotyping) a position to make it easier to attack.

Suppressed evidence or half-truths.

Weasel words - for example, use of euphemisms for war such as "police action" to get around limitations on Presidential powers. "An important art of politicians is to find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the public"

Opening Up a Dialogue...

I want to open up the dialogue on theistic evolution. I know very little about it, all though I have read some of the literature.

Now, my biggest problem with theistic evolution used to be the age of the earth. The bible had genealogies in it that added up to only a few thousand years time, yet we know that the earth is billions of years old. However, I discussed this with blogger "Created and Rational" and he responded:

"Well it has to do with whether or not the geneologies are complete. For example in Matthew 1:8 it says that Joram begot Uzziah, however this is actually skipping several generations as Joram was Uzziah's great-great grandfather.This could be the case in the Geneologies leading from Adam to Abraham."

Indeed, it does appear the genealogies were abbrieviated. It is plausible that the earth is old and Christianity/Judaism true. But what about the evolution of man and the soul? Do theistic evolutionists think that a Homo Erectus was infused with a soul one day, or did the soul come in a little at a time? And was there a religion in the first tens of thousands of years before Moses 5,000 years ago?

More on the Origin of New Genes

Panda's Thumb has once again posted an article on the origin of new genes. For some reason, I find gene origination interesting, not least because it defeats the claims of creationists.