The Platypus Uploaded

[Thylacoleo Gal]

Hah, I noticed some readers on the other board are sceptical about evolution. Consider the platypus in that case?

Neither fish nor fowl: Platypus genome decoded

www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/05/08/2238461.htm

Scientists have for the first time unveiled the unusual genetic make-up of the Australian platypus.

According to the study released this morning in the journal Nature, the semi-aquatic animal is a genetic potpourri - part bird, part reptile and part lactating mammal.

The task of laying bare the platypus genome of 2.2 billion base pairs spread across 18,500 genes has taken several years, but will do far more than satisfy the curiosity of just biologists, say the researchers.
"The platypus genome is extremely important, because it is the missing link in our understanding of how we and other mammals first evolved," explained Oxford University's Chris Ponting, one of the study's architects.
"This is our ticket back in time to when all mammals laid eggs while suckling their young on milk."

Native to eastern Australia and Tasmania, the semi-aquatic platypus is thought to have split off from a common ancestor shared with humans approximately 170 million years ago. The creature is so strange that when the first stuffed specimens arrived in Europe at the end of the 18th century, biologists believed they were looking at a taxidermist's hoax, a composite stitched together from the body of a beaver and the snout of a giant duck.

But the peculiar mix of body features are clearly reflected in the animal's DNA, the study found. The platypus is classified as a mammal because it produces milk and is covered in coat of thick fur, once prized by hunters. There are reptile-like attributes too; females lay eggs, and males can stab aggressors with a snake-like venom that flows from a spur tucked under its hind feet.

The bird-like qualities implied by its Latin name, Ornithorhynchus anatinus, include webbed feet, a flat bill similar to a duck's, and the gene sequences that determine sex. Whereas humans have two sex chromosomes, platypuses have 10, the study showed.

"It is much more of a melange than anyone expected," said Ewan Birney, who led the genome analysis at the European Bioinformatics Institute in Cambridge. The animal also possesses a feature unique to monotremes, an order including a handful of egg-laying mammals, called electroreception.... SNIPPED ...

"By comparing the platypus genome to other mammalian genomes, we'll be able to study genes that have been conserved throughout evolution," said senior author Richard Wilson, a researcher at Washington University.

In captivity, platypuses have lived up to 17 years of age..... SNIPPED ...

[Deleted]

I don't doubt evolution but I also don't rule out a guiding hand. I also don't understand the paranoia of those who are opposed to the concept. There is no evidence for or against but many are against considering the concept - why?

[Deleted]

If you "accept evolution" but "don't rule out a (supernatural) guiding hand" then you would appear to be what's called a "Progressive Creationist"? That is that the history of life on Earth is punctuated by acts of "mini creation". Prog Crets. "accept" that a certain amount of "variation" is allowable within species or "kinds" but that one species or family can't morph into another. Macro-evolution is a No No, hence the sacred distinction between humans and our embarrassing relatives is preserved and thus we retain our "special place" in the scheme of things. Just as it says in the Good Book?

The snag is the fossil record is replete with examples of transitional forms. You can line them up and see evolution taking place. Do they mean god created an infinite series of transitions as well as the start and finished forms? Sounds like an extreme case of special pleading to me.

I don't think paranoia is the right word to describe a scientist's antipathy to crusading nutcases. Extreme exasperation is better. Mainly because when confronted by them, you're expected go over the same old ground over and over. Then they accuse you of lying and membership in some vast materialist, probably communist, world wide conspiracy. Like science isn't fact based but rather it's a weird fundamentalist religion and thus a kind of mirror image of their own loopy ideas. The fact they're allowed to peddle their crap in these private religious schools is definitely scary IMO.

There are stacks of books that expose creationism/ID as the fraud that it is. We should possibly put up a permanent list on the forum?

A big reason why I personally dispute the Judaic-Christian-Muslim religious account is that the bible, especially the Old Testament, is a compilation of outright fictions and folk legends that were stitched together with a view to aid political necessities of the day. From that point of view, one might well say the Old Testament was "intelligently designed"!

Here's a book that should be read by Christians, Jews and Muslims.

The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts by Neil Asher Silberman and Israel Finkelstein.

The authors are Israeli archaeologists. What they say is that archaeological record in Israel/Palestine does not support the biblical account. In particular, the Exodus never happened, the Pariarchs, if indeed they existed did not live at the time claimed, the story of Jericho and the Promised Land is fiction, Solomon's empire did not exist, the first Temple if it even existed was by no means the elaborate structure as described and examples like these. The Hebrew Testament was compiled in the time of Hezekiah - Manasseh - Josiah, that is in the Iron age around 700BC. Its purpose was to integrate the administration of the Kingdom of Judah, in particular. As time went by, its purpose became one of how to explain away the great disasters that befell first Israel and then Judah, if Yaweh was as all powerful as advertised. So the physical evidence says the Old Testament, from Genesis through to at least the Song of Solomon is merely a compilation of legends drawn from surrounding nations.

The stories were crafted so as to provide an "instant" heroic history when a nationalist epic was needed for the political purposes of the new Kingdom of Judah. We can't pick on the Jews in particular for that because it's pretty much the same scenario with the New Testament & the early Catholic church. The Romans likewise cooked up a fairy story about their heroic past as told in the Aeneid. Doubtless the Muslims have their own fairy tales about miraculous happenings and heroic deeds.

Anyway, you'd be more cognizant of these scriptural matters than me, Den.

[Deleted]

Anyway, you'd be more cognizant of these scriptural matters than me, Den.

Probably; I am also familiar with the work of Silberman and Finkelstein it naturally caused a stir in some circles. There are a number of works that make claims and findings in direct opposition to their work. In fact the number of discoveries that support Biblical narrative outnumber those that don't but both sides have convincing arguments.

We need to be careful about selective reading because as yet there is no difinitive proof one way or the other. The Jury should still be out but a lot of players have convinced themselves that their idea is proved.

[molloch]

One reason to dismiss the "supernatural" guiding hand is that it is completely unnecessary, we already have a guiding hand that has been proven to work again and again - the ever changing environment. In my experience, people tend to invoke the guiding hand as an attempt to hold on to some religious belief that gives them some form of comfort after understanding that evolution is real, normally promise of something after death.

The old testament is full of contradictions, stories and bad examples of "righteuos" behaviour to justify the politics of the times - why do current catholics uphold the contraception and homosexuality "morals" but dimiss the laws of slavery? The bible is not inerrant, therefore it cannot be trusted in any of its other claims.

The "proof either way" arguement is completely flawed as often pointed out by the likes of Dawkins, Douglas Adams etc. You cannot disprove that there is a Flying Spagetti Monster that is responsible for the creation of all things, the burden of proof is on those making the claim, not the nonbeliever. In science there are thousands of papers testing and supporting the theory of evolution by natural selection. In religion there is a single book stating a position and no evidence to back it up. Historical evidence for bits of narrative in the bible do not invoke god, they just prove that examples writted in the bible were based on the knowledge and observations at the time it was written.

As with everything, every generation interprets the bible differently from the last generation, our understanding of genetics casts the adam and eve story into "metaphore" just as advances in geology cast "Noah's flood", the flat earth, and countless other ancient interpretations into myth. Most followers of the old testament now accept these as being metaphoric, but a few hundred years ago they were as fiercely upheld as the inerrant truth as the creation myth is today.

Who designs their lives around ancient Greek mythology today? Ancient Egyptian mythology? No, the times move on and all of these stories as eventually cast off as the myths they are.

There are two kinds of people, those that read an article like this and think: "Wow, another link in the evolutionary tree of life, tis is giving us a much better understanding." and those that think "Ha. A missing link? Well that just creates two more missing links."

[Deleted]

That is that the history of life on Earth is punctuated by acts of "mini creation".

It doesn't have to be acts of mini creation the whole thing could still be one continuous act of creation, guided to the end result of a perfect being - ME.

I grew up in a time when reading the Bible was common and our society was religious to its core. It was impossible to imagine there would come a time when the majority of people did not respect religion or believe in a Supreme Being in some form. Once most people simply accepted science as being the description of how the creator did his work and religion as the reason; no conflict. Conflict only comes from those whose education is lacking is one topic or the other. It was a time when Christians and Jews were forbidden to enter Jerusalem but believed that one day they would be able to because it was predicted in the Bible. Jews were suffering terribly under the Nazis in Europe but despite Biblical predictions that said the same fate would befall Christians none of us could ever imagine Western society becoming so apostatised that those who held firm to a belief in a Creator would be ostracised and attacked.

Currently the attacks are predominantly verbal but gain momentum and vitriol daily, anti-Semitism is also growing but now it is no longer driven by discrepancies of belief (apart from by Muslims) now it is part of a concerted attack on all religious belief. I had always considered that this prophecy could never eventuate in my lifetime but now that it has begun it can only get worse; this was predicted to be a sign of the beginning of woes. I don’t know what the end will be or exactly when it will be but if current trends continue there will be a pretty decent conflagration in the near future and I am sure many will be surprised by the way things unfold. I have seen a lot of things that I did not believe possible come to fruition and now I will not be surprised by any eventuality. I am too old to change my philosophy even if I thought it necessary, the greater the attack on religion the more faith is vindicated.

[mingle]

molloch & QFT,

Points well made... I wish I had more time (and have had more sleep last night!) and I would chip in as well...

No offence Dennis, but I'm with the lads on this one! :-)

Cheers,

Mike.

[molloch]

I've had the best of both worlds. not a strict religious upbringing but plenty of positive education about the bible, been christened, gone to church regularly etc. I've undoubtably read more of the bible than 90% of people that base their lives around it.

Once you understand the concept of evolution and the power of natural selection, along with a bit of physics and geology and a sense of time, the need for a supreme being just seems uneccessary. In fact it seems conceited.

Dennis, I certainly don't deny or want to attack your faith. the good thing about not having a faith is that I don't have to attack those that oppose my views to vindicate or defend it. I'll leave that for the millions of muslims, scientologists etc.

I really don't know many scientists who verbally attack and ostracise religious people, the problem may be that the pious are so easily offended and take so much to heart. It's that inferred respect thing that religion has. I'm sure that if I was to verbally oppose your political views you wouldn't view that as an "attack" would you?

All the best.

Michael

[Deleted]

It does seem that religion today is the domain of the elderly (and I guess I qualify) I still feel like a teenager but trapped in an almost 70 YO body. The young all agree the need for a supreme being just seems uneccessary but they are unaware that has always been the case. There is no "need" that is why belief is called faith.

[Thylacopardus]

I think if humanity ever ceased waisting effort and time in stories written by extremists in cloaks and gowns etc. then we may finally be able to return some kind of balance to nature on earth. But I think as insecure beings, it is probably beyond us humans.

I think the concept of faith has its place in every person, the trouble occurs when it blurrs the truth and destroy opposition.

The Platypus is a fitting reminder that evolutionary forces extend countless folds in time beyond any conceived time line of any faith.
What about the story of the Arc...Now do creationalist call that a fact....and if so how did Noah capture a Thylacine???

Stop dreamin the faith dream when it comes to science.
Dream the dream of faith for oneself yes.

But push a fairy tale faith story over the top of science and buddy.........science will burn you as a heretic....Well only figuratively speaking. The real burning and mass human slaughter of opposition is only the relm of the religions. I think when you nut it down over the eons it is only the creationalists who are paranoid...science just debates the facts.

God have mercy on me!!!!!few Iam still breathing!!!!!! Oh no a meteorite is heading straight for meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee...................................

[Deleted]

These creationist nutballs constantly put out the BS lie that there's "no transitional fossils" and so evolution is false. Transitional fossils turn up all the time. Only fraudsters deny these facts.

Aussie scientists find world's oldest fossil mum - ABC News (Australi... www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/05/29/2258708.htm?section=...
2 29/05/2008

Died giving birth: Materpiscis Attenboroughi

By science reporter Sarah Clarke

Australian scientists say they have found a 380-million year-old
fossilised fish which was in the process of giving birth before it
died.
The fossil belongs to an extinct species which scientists found on a research trip to the 'Gogo formation', a famous fossil
deposit in the Kimberley, in 2005.
Now it has been revealed the fish was giving birth to live young when it died, and shows evidence of an umbilical cord still
attached to the offspring.
The find makes the fish the world's oldest-known vertebrate mother.
Professor John Long from Museum Victoria, where the fish will be officially unveiled later today, says the fossil is the
oldest evidence of a live birth.

....SNIP

Dr Kate Trinajstic was involved in the excavation project and she says it is a significant find.
"It's very significant because we always thought that egg laying was the primitive condition among fish," she said.
The fossil could also offer new insights into the evolutionary timeline for vertebrates.
Dr Trinajstic says there is more research to be done. "It's telling us that the basic body plan that makes us a vertebrate was already present 380 million years ago, and we are now looking at how these animals grew and reproduced," she said.

..... SNIP

Dr Trinajstic believes there are more significant fossils to be found at the site.
"Wonderful transitional fossils which are helping us get an understanding of how fish moved out of the water and onto the
land," she said..... SNIPPED

[youcantry]

I dunno. You say you don't believe in the bible, then you go plugging the fact people should read it. See this morning's screen grab below... ;D ;D ;D

www.wherelightmeetsdark.com/files/uplink/thylacoleo.jpg

[Deleted]

They're Proboard's ads! Be the Devil to pay if we tried to block them .... ;D

[Deleted]

Anyway, speaking of religion and the bible, it now appears our good friend Dennis may have evolved to his present beliefs .. ;D

Religion is a product of evolution, software suggests.

God may work in mysterious ways, but a simple computer program called Evogod may explain how religion evolved. By assuming that a small number of people have a genetic predisposition to pass along unverifiable information, the program predicts that religion will flourish. However, according to the US scientist who wrote the program, religion only takes hold if non-believers help believers out – perhaps because they are impressed by their devotion.

Read the full story here:
email.newscientist.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBWXh0MXfuP0mli0E3Qg0EQ

[Deleted]

More likely inherited, 3500 years ago one side of the family were standing in front of G-d's Holy Mountain receiving instructions the other side were running around naked and painting themselves blue - which side would you lean toward?

[Deleted]

I have read that Celts did go into battle naked and painted blue. Doubtless the technique was meant to scare the enemy sh*tless. The trick didn't work so well against the Romans, unfortunately. The tribe of Judah too was badly dealt with by the Romans, and by other overlords, and so people of Celtic and Hebrew descent share a common experience of oppression and persecution. Nothing to be gained by nitpicking over whose silly religious books are best, eh? Besides, the Celts put their mental energies into technology, especially iron working, as well as astronomy. Considering the Israelites' bad experiences at the hands of the Babylonians, Assyrians, Romans et al, they may have been better served had they, like the Celts, focussed more on military innovation than on bookishness?

This actually brings us to a point, Den. It appears the Celtic tribes and the Israelite tribes appear in history at around the same time, although, of course, on opposite sides of the Mediterranean. Say circa 700 BC, a few centuries after the "Bronze Age Collapse". Civilisations rise then collapse suddenly throughout the Holocene. Then follows a "dark age" and they rise again. The signature is loud and and clear in the archaeological and climate record. It appears too that 'old' religions are discredited after these periodical disasters and new ones arise. Like Judaism. I have no doubt the spectacular imagery of the Exodus records a memory of real events, although direct involvement of the early Israelites does not seem to be backed up by archaeology. But then who knows?

I find this whole subject fascinating, as well as ominous for obvious reasons. How about you?

From Wiki:

The Celtic languages form a branch of the larger Indo-European family. By the time speakers of Celtic languages enter history around 400 BC (Brennus's attack on Rome in 387 BC), they were already split into several language groups, and spread over much of Central Europe, the Iberian peninsula, Ireland and Britain.

Some scholars think that the Urnfield culture of northern Germany and the Netherlands represents an origin for the Celts as a distinct cultural branch of the Indo-European family. This culture was preeminent in central Europe during the late Bronze Age, from ca. 1200 BC until 700 BC