When I was young I much enjoyed watching the NBC TV show Columbo. The very skilled actor Peter Falk played a very smart Los Angeles homicide detective named Lieutenant Columbo who would always figure out how a murder occurred. But let us imagine a homicide detective named Lieutenant Clueless that is rather the opposite of Columbo, a detective more like the bumbling Inspector Clouseau played by Peter Sellers in the "Pink Panther" series of comedy movies. Some of his case investigations might go like this:
Case #1: The Wife Who Was Shot
Sargent Davis: "So I can summarize the evidence we have gathered. The police were called to a house because a child heard the husband screaming loudly that he was going to kill the wife. When the police arrived, the husband was found with a smoking gun in his hand, in the same room as the dead wife, who had been shot in the back of the head. Ballistic tests proved that the bullet found in the wife's body came from the same gun that the husband was holding. A few weeks beforehand the husband had taken out a million dollar life insurance policy on the wife. A few minutes before dying, the wife had called her mother, saying that her husband had threatened to kill her very quickly."
Lieutenant Clueless: "So let's drop the case without making any arrest. Very clearly, it was just an accidental shooting."
Case #2: The Boyfriend Who Was Knifed
Sargent Davis: "So I can summarize the evidence we have gathered. In his apartment a man named Bill was found dead with twenty stab wounds all over his body. Questioning revealed that the man had been having an affair with his married co-worker Jane. Jane says that she confessed her infidelity to her husband James. Jane says that James was enraged, and swore that he was going to go over and kill Bill immediately. The security camera at Bill's apartment showed James entering Bill's building a few minutes before the calculated time of Bill's death, holding a big knife. We found in the apartment of James a scrapbook that showed pictures of Bill's dead bloody body, with a caption of 'I gave him a just reward!' Also we found in the desk of James a bloody knife like could have been used to kill Bill. DNA blood tests showed that the blood on this knife matched exactly the blood of the dead man Bill, with a match so strong it would only occur one time in 50 billion by coincidence.
Lieutenant Clueless: "So it's clear what we should do: drop the case without making any arrest. Very clearly, it was just an accidental death, caused by someone carelessly mishandling a knife."
Case #3: The Girlfriend Who Fell
Sargent Davis: "So I can summarize the evidence we have gathered. A woman's dead body was found at the bottom of a 12-story apartment building. The woman lived on the eleventh floor with her boyfriend Alan. Questioning of the neighbors revealed that Alan had often loudly threatened to kill the woman. The woman fell from the balcony of her apartment. A neighbor's security camera showed Alan knocking the woman on the head with a sledgehammer, and throwing her off the balcony. The security footage then shows Alan dancing around gleefully after the woman fell eleven stories. A neighbor says that Alan yelled gleefully, 'Hurray, I finally got rid of her!' An hour before the woman's death, Alan had called his lawyer saying he was going to need his services real soon.
Lieutenant Clueless: "So it's obvious what must be done: we should drop the case without making any arrest. Very clearly, it was just an accidental death by falling."
Our biologists act just like such a Lieutenant Clueless. Trying to explain the origin of biological innovations and vast levels of functional organization in organisms, so many things that look nothing like accidents, our biologists keep telling us, "It was all just an accident." This is even though our bodies are full of the most impressive examples of engineering that look about as accidental as an aircraft carrier or a suspension bridge.
Among the many wonders of the body is the tendency of individual molecules to come together to form fantastically complex molecular machines. An example of many such molecular machines in the body is shown below.
In the visual above, we see one of many examples where several different types of protein molecules come together to form an extremely complex structure consisting of thousands of well-arranged amino acid parts, which altogether makes a total of tens of thousands of well-arranged atoms. A page describes the action of these individually useless proteins coming together to form a functional protein complex:
"The process of programmed cell death, also known as apoptosis, is highly regulated, and the decision to die is made through the coordinated action of many molecules. The apoptosome plays the role of gatekeeper in one of the major processes, termed the intrinsic pathway. It lies between the molecules that sense a problem and the molecules that disassemble the cell once the choice is made. Normally, the many subunits of the apoptosome are separated and inactive, circulating harmlessly through the cell. When trouble occurs, they assemble into a star-shaped complex, which activates protein-cutting caspases that get apoptosis started."
Another site that includes a 3D rotating animation of the structure shown above says this:
"The apoptosome is revealed as a wheel-like complex with seven spokes. On top of the wheel is a spiral-shaped disk that allows for docking and subsequent activation of proteases, which then target cellular components. When active, the apoptosome is revealed to be a dynamic machine with three to five protease molecules tethered to the wheel at any given time."
Below from page 137 of a PhD thesis is a list of biological systems described as if they were very impressive machinery:
Subcellular assembly | Sample of ‘molecular machine’ language | Source reference |
Ribosome | “probably the most sophisticated machine ever made” | Garrett (1999) |
Proteasome | “a molecular machine designed for controlled proteolysis” | Voges et al. (1999) |
Glideosome | “a molecular machine powering motility” | Keeley et al. (2003) |
Spliceosome | “among the most complex macromolecular machines known” | Nilsen (2003) |
Blood clotting system | “a typical example of a molecular machine” | Spronk et al. (2003) |
Photosynthetic system | “the most elaborate nanoscale biological machine in nature” | Imahori (2004) |
Bacterial flagellum | “an exquisitely engineered chemi-osmotic nanomachine” | Pallen et al. (2005) |
Myosin filament | “a complicated machine of many moving parts” | Ohki et al. (2006 |
RNA degradasome | “a supramolecular machine dedicated to RNA processing” | Marcaida et al. (2006) |
RNA Polymerase | “a multifunctional molecular machine” | Haag et al. (2007) |
An article by scientists discusses molecular machines in the human body:
"A molecular machine (or ‘nanomachine’) is a mechanical device that is measured in nanometers (millionths of a millimeter, or units of 10-9 meter; on the scale of a single molecule) and converts chemical, electrical or optical energy to controlled mechanical work [1,2]. The human body can be viewed as a complex ensemble of nanomachines [3,4]. These tiny machines are responsible for the directed transport of macromolecules, membranes or chromosomes within the cytoplasm. They play a critical role in virtually every biological process (e.g., muscle contraction, cell division, intracellular transport, ATP production and genomic transcription)...Myosin, kinesin and their relatives are linear motors that convert the energy of ATP hydrolysis into mechanical work."
Another wonder of biological organization in the human body is the spliceosome, shown below:
At the site here, we read this about the human spliceosome:
"The spliceosome is a complicated and formidable example of a multi-subunit molecular machine, with the pre-catalytic form being the largest spliceosomal complex, containing 5 RNA molecules and 65 proteins, in addition to a substrate mRNA precursor. The arrangement and activities of all of these has to be intricately coordinated, paradoxically to catalyse a rather simple chemical reaction."
The paper here describes the spliceosome as a highly dynamic machine, like some race car that has its parts changed or replaced by a pit crew as the race car stops for pit stops:
"Indeed, ∼45 proteins are recruited to the human spliceosome as part of the spliceosomal snRNPs, whereas non-snRNP proteins comprise the remainder. The composition of the spliceosome is highly dynamic with a remarkable exchange of proteins from one stage of splicing to the next. These changes are also accompanied by extensive remodeling of the snRNPs within the spliceosome."
Below are the number of amino acids involved in these parts, which I looked up using the UniProt online database (you can use the links to check the numbers I have given):
Protein | Number of amino acids | Comment |
| 793 | On Chromosome 22 | |
| 462 | On Chromosome 19 | |
| 501 | On Chromosome 1 | |
| 683 | On Chromosome 1 | |
522 | On Chromosome 9 | |
2335 | On Chromosome 17 | |
972 | On Chromosome 17 | |
| 499 | On Chromosome 19 | |
522 | On Chromosome 9 | |
| 800 | On Chromosome 11 | |
| 586 | On Chromosome 5 | |
| 420 | On Chromosome 5 | |
112 | On Chromosome 19 | |
855 | On Chromosome 19 | |
758 | On Chromosome 19 | |
514 | On Chromosome 4 | |
The structure shown above clearly requires thousands of amino acids that have to be arranged in just the right way. Neither the apoptosome structure shown neither the spliceosome structure shown above is specified in DNA, which merely specifies which amino acids make up each of the protein parts of such structures. DNA does not specify which proteins belong to particular protein complexes, so we cannot explain structures like the ones above by appealing to lucky DNA mutations. The amino acid information needed to make the structure above (only a small part of what is needed to make the shown structure) is not at all contiguous in DNA. To assemble the structure above, among other wonders of construction a human body must magically gather genetic information scattered across many different chromosomes in the nucleus, like someone quickly finding just the right 45 loose pages hidden in random books of 45 tall, long bookcases in a public library. The table above shows that at least eight of the 23 human chromosome pairs would need to be accessed: Chromosome 1, Chromosome 4, Chromosome 5, Chromosome 9, Chromosome 11, Chromosome 17, Chromosome 19 and Chromosome 22.
Another example of accidentally unachievable molecular machinery in the human body is the ATP synthase protein complex. It's a very complex molecular motor system described in a paper entitled "ATP Synthase: Motoring to the Finish Line." The paper refers to this complex as a "sophisticated molecular machine." We read this: "ATP synthase is an unusually efficient rotary motor that synthesizes ATP at rates exceeding 100 molecules per second." Another scientific page tells us this:
"ATP synthase is one of the wonders of the molecular world. ATP synthase is an enzyme, a molecular motor, an ion pump, and another molecular motor all wrapped together in one amazing nanoscale machine. It plays an indispensable role in our cells, building most of the ATP that powers our cellular processes....Why have two motors connected together? The trick is that one motor can force the other motor to turn, and in this way, change the motor into a generator. "
Below are some of the components of ATP synthase, as listed in the UniProt database.
Protein | Number of amino acids | Comment |
| 51 | On Chromosome 20 | |
| 68 | From Mitochondrion | |
| 226 | From Mitochondrion | |
| 215 | On Chromosome 14 | |
| 108 | On Chromosome 21 | |
| 58 | On Chromosome 14 | |
| 246 | On Chromosome 12 | |
| 69 | On Chromosome 4 | |
161 | On Chromosome 17 | |
| 94 | On Chromosome 7 | |
529 | On Chromosome 12 | |
| 168 | On Chromosome 19 | |
| 553 | On Chromosome 18 | |
| 136 | On Chromosome 17 | |
| 298 | On Chromosome 10 | |
| 141 | On Chromosome 12 | |
| 213 | On Chromosome 21 | |
| 142 | On Chromosome 2 | |
| 256 | On Chromosome 1 | |
ATP Synthase seems to require thousands of amino acid parts arranged in just the right way, which amounts to a special arrangement of tens of thousands of atoms. The arrangement of the parts of the ATP Synthase complex is not specified in DNA, which does not specify which proteins are parts of particular protein complexes. To assemble the structure above, among other wonders of construction a human body must magically gather genetic information scattered across many different chromosomes in the nucleus, like someone quickly finding just the right 19 loose pages hidden in random books of 19 tall, long bookcases in a public library. The table above shows that at least 12 of the 23 human chromosome pairs would need to be accessed: Chromosome 1, Chromosome 2, Chromosome 4, Chromosome 7, Chromosome 10, Chromosome 12, Chromosome 14, Chromosome 17, Chromosome 18, Chromosome 19, Chromosome 20 and Chromosome 21.
The examples given above are only a few of thousands of similar examples of enormous organization that biological organisms provide. You cannot explain the fast arising of such molecular machines from many simpler components in a human body by appealing to evolution, because evolution is something claimed to occur over very long time scales to populations of organisms, not something happening on some short time scale within a single body. Referring to such protein complexes, a scientific paper tells us, "Very little is known about how protein complexes form in vivo," using the phrase "in vivo" to refer to what goes within a living body. As complex as such molecular machines are, such molecular machines are thousands of times simpler than most cells, which are additional examples of wonders of enormous organization not specified by DNA. The human body has about 200 types of cells, most with a complexity so great they are comparable to large factories filled with many different types of manufacturing machines.
Teleology and purpose are such fundamental aspects of nature that they are as plain as the nose on your face. Believing in the progression of the universe from the seemingly infinite heat and density of a mathematical point to a state in which there is a planet as richly populated with life as planet Earth, and acknowledging the dependency of our universe on a long series of fine-tuned fundamental constants and laws, and being aware of a genetically unexplained progression of each human from the speck-sized simplicity of a zygote to the enormously organized state of a human body with more than 20,000 types of functionally folded protein molecules (each an arrangement of parts as unlikely to appear by chance as a full page of purposeful and well-spelled text), as well as roughly 200 types of cells (each resembling a factory in its complexity), the scientist who denies teleology and denies that nature is purposeful is like some person walking the length of Manhattan while denying the existence of architecture.
But most foolishly our biologists keep claiming that all of the breathtaking innovations of biology were mere accidents of chance. In this regard they are acting like the Lieutenant Clueless described above. How could such a Lieutenant Clueless arise? It might be because someone got a very bad training at some school of criminology. We can imagine some profoundly dysfunctional Institute of Criminology that trained police detectives. At such an institute everyone might be taught something that was called the Supreme Principle of Criminology: a rule defined as the principle that "whenever anyone suddenly dies, it's always an accident." We can imagine everyone trained at the institute being instructed that this rule was a glorious insight of some esteemed master who lived long ago, someone called the Great Guru. At this Institute of Criminology, there might be conversations like this:
Student: "But I think that some sudden deaths might be caused on purpose, for I have heard that there is such a thing as murder."
Teacher: "No, no, you are defying the long-hallowed consensus of our institute. Following the wonderfully brilliant insight taught many decades ago by the Great Guru, we all believe that whenever a sudden death occurs, it is always an accident. All proper criminologists follow this supreme rule: whenever you encounter a sudden death, always believe it is just an accident."
Such an utterly dysfunctional Institute of Criminology is like the colleges and universities that biologists are trained in. They have anointed Charles Darwin as their hallowed Great Guru who must be followed. Such institutes have senselessly instructed biologists that they must follow the rule that every case of vastly organized engineering within organisms must be thought of as a mere accident. Like people who made a "Decision for Jesus" in one of the revival meetings of evangelist Billy Graham, the Darwin disciples have "Chosen for Charles," and for them that's a lifelong commitment, locking them into speech customs that persist until death. And so we have generation after generation of biologists that offer explanations as senseless as those of Lieutenant Clueless mentioned above. Such biologists are so bad at paying attention to very obvious clues that these biologists seem more like bumbling Clouseaus than brilliant Columbos.
Clouseau and Columbo
TV's Lieutenant Columbo was a very smart man, but he almost always acted in a very humble manner as he slowly gathered and analyzed his clues. In this sense he was the opposite of many science professors, who so often strut about as if they are brilliant beacons of insight, as they persistently overlook the most obvious clues.
We might say something similar about our physicists. Physicists have recognized that our universe has fundamental constants and laws that are very fine-tuned to allow the existence of organisms such as ourselves and long-lived stable stars such as our suns. Our physicists say that there are quite a few physics numbers in nature that have to be just right, and that if such numbers were not very precisely fine-tuned we never could have existed. An example of such fine-tuning is the ratio between the absolute value of the charge of every proton and the absolute value of the charge of every electron, which in our universe is exactly 1.00000000000000000. If that ratio was not very precisely 1.00000000000000, not only would biological life be impossible, but it would not even be possible for large stars and planets to persist, as the astronomer George Greenstein pointed out. But so many of our physicists refuse to draw the obvious conclusion implied by such fine-tuning. We might put it this way: the modern physicist is someone who is very good at math, very good at calculus and differential equations, but someone who cannot put two and two together.
Ignoring the fact that a multiverse does nothing to explain a huge number of still-unexplained purposeful progressions in our universe, such as the progression from a speck-sized zygote to the vastly greater organization of a full-grown human body (something not explained by DNA or genes), and does nothing to explain mind or memory (not explained by brains), our physicists offer the fantasy of some vast number of universes to try to explain our universe's fine-tuning (ignoring the fact that if such universes existed they would be irrelevant because they would not change the relevant ratio, which is the ratio between successful universes like ours and sterile unsuccessful universes). To get an analogy for claims of physicists that the fine-tuning of our universe is best explained by assuming a multiverse, some huge collection of a vast number of universes, we must imagine one more case handled by Lieutenant Clueless:
Case #4: Death by an Arrow
Sargent Davis: "Well, this seems like a pretty open-and-shut case. Neil Davidson was found dead in the middle of the street with an arrow in his neck. He was right across from the house of Alan Kolren, who was Davidson's sworn enemy. We questioned neighbors who said that Kolren would often vow that he was going to kill Davidson. And they also said that Kolren would often practice archery in his back yard."
Lieutenant Clueless: "So it's obvious what must be done: we should drop the case without making any arrest. Very clearly, it was just an accidental death. I have a theory as to what happened. I speculate that there may have been a huge military cargo plane filled with arrows, and that plane may have malfunctioned, accidentally dropping many thousands of arrows into the air as it flew. With so many thousands of arrows falling down from the sky, it is no surprise that someone got killed by one of them."
No comments:
Post a Comment