- May 5, 2017
- 5,611
- 3,999
- 56
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
In another thread, the current evolutionnewsandviews spam-bot mentioned Jon Wells, Senior Fellow at the Discovery Institute.
I have Wells' "Icons of Evolution." I could only bring myself to read it a chapter at a time, as I ended up spending hours looking up references and scribbling refutations of his claims in the margins.
He is a prime example of the way that creationists heap un-earned and unwarranted accolades on their heroes - regardless of their actual accomplishments. Surely, we have all noticed how some 'nobody' creationist is referred to as "world renowned" this or "highly accomplished" that - in fact, I came across a web page that consists solely of a brief bio of Wells', wherein he is referred to an an "expert on biology textbooks and biology science curriculum as it relates to Darwinian evolution." How such an accolade is warranted is unknown. But as far as being a scientist? 3 publications while at Berkeley is, shall I say, sub-standard. Oh, sure, he did publish one other paper - in a journal run by a creationist, that did not actually contain any research (see below), but I don't think that really counts.
Do centrioles generate a polar ejection force?
Wells, J.
Abstract
A microtubule-dependent polar ejection force that pushes chromosomes away from spindle poles during prometaphase is observed in animal cells but not in the cells of higher plants. Elongating microtubules and kinesin-like motor molecules have been proposed as possible causes, but neither accounts for all the data. In the hypothesis proposed here a polar ejection force is generated by centrioles, which are found in animals but not in higher plants. Centrioles consist of nine microtubule triplets arranged like the blades of a tiny turbine. Instead of viewing centrioles through the spectacles of molecular reductionism and neo-Darwinism, this hypothesis assumes that they are holistically designed to be turbines. Orthogonally oriented centriolar turbines could generate oscillations in spindle microtubules that resemble the motion produced by a laboratory vortexer. The result would be a microtubule-mediated ejection force tending to move chromosomes away from the spindle axis and the poles. A rise in intracellular calcium at the onset of anaphase could regulate the polar ejection force by shutting down the centriolar turbines, but defective regulation could result in an excessive force that contributes to the chromosomal instability characteristic of most cancer cells.
That is, they look like turbines, therefore they ARE turbines (therefore Jesus? Or would that be Father Moon?).
He never tested his hypothesis. This is because there is no polar ejection force - at least not the naive kind that Wells' pretends, being made by little Designed turbines. The polar ejection force is, as we have known for some time, produced by the shortening of microtubules:
"Motion analysis also allowed us to measure the magnitude of the polar ejection force exerted on chromosome arms during metaphase by individual microtubules."
Not by the spinning like a turbine of the centrioles. Wells should have paid more attention to his instructors at Berkeley than to Father Moon.
I have Wells' "Icons of Evolution." I could only bring myself to read it a chapter at a time, as I ended up spending hours looking up references and scribbling refutations of his claims in the margins.
He is a prime example of the way that creationists heap un-earned and unwarranted accolades on their heroes - regardless of their actual accomplishments. Surely, we have all noticed how some 'nobody' creationist is referred to as "world renowned" this or "highly accomplished" that - in fact, I came across a web page that consists solely of a brief bio of Wells', wherein he is referred to an an "expert on biology textbooks and biology science curriculum as it relates to Darwinian evolution." How such an accolade is warranted is unknown. But as far as being a scientist? 3 publications while at Berkeley is, shall I say, sub-standard. Oh, sure, he did publish one other paper - in a journal run by a creationist, that did not actually contain any research (see below), but I don't think that really counts.
Do centrioles generate a polar ejection force?
Wells, J.
Abstract
A microtubule-dependent polar ejection force that pushes chromosomes away from spindle poles during prometaphase is observed in animal cells but not in the cells of higher plants. Elongating microtubules and kinesin-like motor molecules have been proposed as possible causes, but neither accounts for all the data. In the hypothesis proposed here a polar ejection force is generated by centrioles, which are found in animals but not in higher plants. Centrioles consist of nine microtubule triplets arranged like the blades of a tiny turbine. Instead of viewing centrioles through the spectacles of molecular reductionism and neo-Darwinism, this hypothesis assumes that they are holistically designed to be turbines. Orthogonally oriented centriolar turbines could generate oscillations in spindle microtubules that resemble the motion produced by a laboratory vortexer. The result would be a microtubule-mediated ejection force tending to move chromosomes away from the spindle axis and the poles. A rise in intracellular calcium at the onset of anaphase could regulate the polar ejection force by shutting down the centriolar turbines, but defective regulation could result in an excessive force that contributes to the chromosomal instability characteristic of most cancer cells.
That is, they look like turbines, therefore they ARE turbines (therefore Jesus? Or would that be Father Moon?).
He never tested his hypothesis. This is because there is no polar ejection force - at least not the naive kind that Wells' pretends, being made by little Designed turbines. The polar ejection force is, as we have known for some time, produced by the shortening of microtubules:
"Motion analysis also allowed us to measure the magnitude of the polar ejection force exerted on chromosome arms during metaphase by individual microtubules."
Not by the spinning like a turbine of the centrioles. Wells should have paid more attention to his instructors at Berkeley than to Father Moon.
