Fish sounds:
"Fish make all kinds of sounds from grunts to slow hoots to foghorns, and
a sound like knocking on wood, fast like a woodpecker and slow like a fist
banging on a door. One kind of fish makes a sound like a bottle being filled
with water, and another kind like a Second World War bomber, an yet another
like a short snatch of Beethoven on a bass guitar. Most fish make sounds
by banging or squeezing their gas filled swim bladders." ... 'Squawk, Burble
And Pop',.New
Scientist Magazine, April 8, 2000.
The
Downy woodpecker: The Downy woodpecker
is one of the smallest woodpeckers found in the United States. Unlike its
cousins, the downy woodpecker has a much smaller bill and uses its stiff
tail feathers to prop itself while probing for insects.
The woodpecker comes with
a thick skull with shock absorbing tissues, muscles, etc. To have functional
value 'compound traits' depend on one another. When a woodpecker slams
its head into a tree, the deceleration experienced is many times gravity.
The nerve and muscle coordination must produce a dead on hit; a slip to
one side or the other could virtually wrench the cover off the brain! The
eyelids snap shut when the beak strikes its target. Some scientists say
that is to keep wood chips out of the eyes; others say it’s to keep the
eyeballs from popping out of their sockets! Both may be right!
For such drilling, a woodpecker
obviously needs a tough bill, a heavy duty skull, and shock absorbing tissue
between the two. But if the woodpecker were put together by time and chance,
without any planning ahead, which part came first? Suppose, just by chance,
a baby bird is born with a tough bill. It decides to try it out. WHACK!
It throws its head into a tree. The bill is just fine, but it squishes
in the front of its face. One dead bird, end of evolutionary story!
Neither the tough bill nor
the heavy duty skull would have any functional survival value until both
occurred together, along with the shock absorbing tissue, nerve and muscle
coordination.
We expect drilling tools
created by people to have interdependent parts that must all be completely
assembled before the machine works. That’s just good sense, and good science.
We would surely expect no less from the perfect devices created by God!
Woodpeckers look for bark
beetles. The beetles hear all this pounding, of course, so they just crawl
further down their tunnels. To reach the beetles, the woodpecker needs
more than just drilling tools; it needs a long, sticky tongue. The woodpecker
slips its tongue into a muscular sheath that wraps around the skull under
the scalp and inserts it into the right nostril!
Could mutations produce the
coordinated set of structural and behavioral adaptations necessary to originate
the woodpecker? Let’s see what two well known evolutionary biologists have
to say about that.
Nobel prize winner Albert
Szent-Gyorgyi writes the following about a system much simpler than the
woodpecker. He is talking only about how a young herring gull pecks at
a red spot on the beak to get the adult to spit up some food. He says "All
this may sound very simple, but it involves a whole series of most complicated
chain reactions with a horribly complex underlying nervous mechanism ...
All this had to be developed simultaneously." It's the same thing for the
woodpecker.
So what are the odds of getting
all the random mutations required for an advantageous behavioral response
at the same time? Szent-Gyorgyi says that a coordinated behavioral adaptation
such as the woodpecker's drilling and probing, as "random mutation, has
the probability of zero". Its survival value, he says, just cannot come
about by time and chance and the process of mutation and selection.
Then Szent-Gyorgyi goes on
to say "I am unable to approach this problem without supposing an innate
'drive' in living matter to perfect itself." That innate
drive he calls 'syntropy', the opposite of entropy.
Here is a scientist who recognizes that creation can be logically.inferred
from observations of certain kinds of order.
Garrett Hardin, noted biologist
and textbook author, in an old, but timeless.Scientific
American.book
on adaptations and ecology,.39
Steps to Biology, in the second section 'Nature’s Challenges to Evolutionary
Theory', discusses remarkable relationships which, he says, "...are only
a few of the unsolved puzzles facing biologists who are committed to the
Darwinian theory of evolution".
Then he openly wonders "Is
the (evolutionary) framework wrong? That is, do our observations of the
living world force us, at least for the present, to rule out evolution
as an explanation for origins?"....comprised
with Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft
Corporation. All rights reserved, and Gary Parker's.Facts
of Life.
The coelacanth
has the lowest oxygen consumption among all living vertebrates.
Sea
urchins have a unique
system set up.
How do fish survive in frigid
arctic waters? They have a substance in their blood produced from glycoproteins,
which enables the blood to have a low freezing point. These proteins
bind to ice crystals and stop them from growing inside the fish. It's yet
another example of an irreducibly complex biological structure and a superior
product when compared to the antifreeze man developed, which could be deadly
to blood cells.
There are many questions
regarding all species and their complex processes which answer to the fact
of a designer, than to random selection from genetic material. Why does
one fish reproduce 2-10 offspring (Shark), and another, 2 to 11 million
(Atlantic Cod)? Why is the reproduction frequency different? Some annually,
others biennially (every two years). Why also does the gestation period
also widely vary. And the eyes! Let me tell you about how
weird they are.....continues
