Skip to comments.The Delicate Balance of Ear Crystals (Darwinist reductionism undermined by epigenetic development)
Posted on 12/10/2008 5:02:34 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
The Delicate Balance of Ear Crystals
by Brian Thomas, M.S.
UCLA researchers have discovered that tiny crystals called otolithsnecessary parts of a properly functioning inner earform not as the direct result of a gene product, but rather as the result of the physical, swaying motion of hair-like cilia during development.
As adult vertebrate bodies move about, otoliths are pulled by gravity and enable the detection of movement, which is vital for maintaining balance. The researchers studied these crystals in fish embryos, where they accumulate as gelatinous proteins mixed with calcium carbonate. When fully and properly formed, the crystals lie atop sensitive beds of cilia, which are fine, hair-like cellular extensions that are responsible for translating roll, pitch, and yaw information from the semicircular canals of vertebrates ears.
In their study published in Nature, the scientists discovered that otolith formation required more than just genesin this case, properly functioning cilia.1 This represents another example of an epigenetic factor influencing development, whereas a few short years ago scientists thought that purely genetic causes were responsible for the formation of biological structures.
But there is additional significance to this research. The researchers disabled the gene for the protein dynein, the molecular motor responsible for ciliary motion. The result was that the otoliths did not assemble in the correct site. So not only did ear crystals form in the wrong place, but they were misshapen and abnormally sized, according to co-author Kent Hill.2 So the crystals, rows of cilia, sensory cells, skull cavities, inner ear membranes, neuron connections, and many other parts must each be correctly formed for vertebrates to detect motion.
Not only are otoliths complex (being a crystalline arrangement of matter), but their timed and directed formation must result in the correct placement, shape, number, and size for balance detection to work at all. The same Creator who curiously wrought us in our mothers wombs,3 has similarly set up ciliary swaying as the means to build vertebrate ear otoliths. These crystals role in maintaining balance, as well as the precise requirements of their construction, shows clear indications of the Creators hand.
1. Colantonio, J. R. et al. The dynein regulatory complex is required for ciliary motility and otolith biogenesis in the inner ear. Nature. Published online prior to print November 30, 2008, 8.
2. Schmidt, E. Can you hear me now? How the inner ear's sensors are made. UCLA press release, November 30, 2008.
3. Psalm 139:15.
Hi guys and gals. I don’t have my ping list handy, so could you be so kind as to ping this to the appropriate FReepers. Thanks a bunch—GGG
I don’t have a list on this computer either.
This list? Stentor; Marty; Fractal Trader; metmom; John Valentine; editor-surveyor; Mr Ramsbotham; Chode
I’m quite sure the UCLA researchers didn’t use their findings to dispute evolution.
Only those who can’t understand would do so. . .
That’s part of my Rethinking AIDS list. I was speaking of my Creation/ID list. But thanks for trying :o)
All the best—GGG
Read later. I’ll wait for the other shoe to drop.
==Im quite sure the UCLA researchers didnt use their findings to dispute evolution.
Of course not. That must be left to scientists who have broken free from the Temple of Darwin’s materialist straightjacket.
I suspect that on close examination, this conjecture will be shown to be false as well.
Kick the Kool-aid habit and start to use your brain!
More anti-science nonsense, eh? You sure seem to specialize thusly.
The eye is indeed too complex to evolve via random mutation and natural selection. The irrationality award goes to those that believe that Darwin’s brain-dead natural selection god can assemple super-sophisticated biological nano-machines that merely give the “appearance” of design.
I would rather not see FreeRepublic turned into a Creationist forum. There are probably better places for these posts.
It is true that we do not know just how the first cells came into being.
But, given a reproducing cell, evolution hangs together better than any other theory.
Evolution is not about first beginnings. It is about the origin of species by natural selection. If you want to argue that a creator created the first cells a few billion years ago, fine. I will not argue with that possibility. If you want to say that a creator created the universe, with all the fossils intact and the physical evidence for an "old" earth and universe, 6000 years ago, fine. I don't want to destroy your faith.
Too late. The purge of the scientists and other rational thinkers a couple of years ago settled that issue.
How very odd. I think most FReepers would much rather this not turn into a site for apologists for the godless liberal NEA agenda.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.