We and everything and everyone you have or will know fits on the third dot on the bottom left. From https://www.facebook.com/ScienceIsSeriouslyAwesome on 3/21/13.

# Month: March 2013

# The Glasswing Butterfly!!!

This is a glasswing butterfly (Greta oto) – a brush-footed butterfly with transparent wings.

They’re found from Mexico through to Panama and have a wingspan of 5.6 to 6.1 cm.

http://www.facebook.com/ScienceIsSeriouslyAwesome on3/17/13.

Glasswing butterflies^{1} (e.g. the *Pteronymia *sp. pictured) have large clear patches on their wings.

Many would claim they ‘*evolved’* transparent wings (to minimize their visibility to predators). Christians might retort that only a *Creator* could have made these beautiful see-through wings. Who’s right?

Actually the ‘glass’ wing areas are *missing* a feature of coloured butterfly wings—*scales*. Both glasswings and colourful butterflies have transparent wing membranes, but colourful butterflies have pigmented or translucent scales covering them. In iridescent butterflies, by diffracting the light rays in a complex manner, the translucent scales (not pigments) produce the vivid colours, more vibrant than any painting.^{2} The electron microscope reveals ‘how complex the structures are and difficult to fabricate’.^{3}

Such complexity, which man with all his technology struggles to copy, was surely constructed by Someone even more intelligent (Romans 1:20 ).

So, *colourful* (and especially iridescent) butterflies reflect more strongly the Creator’s handiwork than do *glasswings*. In this post-Fall ‘bondage to decay’ (Romans 8:19–22), glasswings have evidently *lost* genetic information (for scales)—in common with other observed mutations.

Such mutations demonstrate ‘**de**volution’, not evolution.^{4} Natural selection sometimes favours defects—e.g. the glasswing is likely less visible to predators than are colourful butterflies. But this is *not* evolution—no new information has been produced, notwithstanding that *Pteronymia* has been given its own species name, separate from other (coloured) types of Lycaenid butterflies.^{5}

And the fact that the glasswing can fly, just like butterflies with scales,^{6} confounds evolutionists on two counts. First, the aerodynamic intricacies of butterfly flight defy evolutionary explanation, pointing instead to a Creator.^{6} Second, the glasswing ‘proves scales are not needed for flight’,^{7} indicating that the original colourful butterflies were ‘over-engineered’ for flight.^{8}

So why did the Creator bother to make *colourful* butterflies?

Maybe it’s because God appreciates beauty, and, given that we’re made in His image, He knew that we would, too.

References

- Also known as clearwing butterflies.
- Sarfati, J., Beautiful black and blue butterflies,
*Journal of Creation***19**(1):9–10, 2005. - Graydon, O., Blue microstructures mimic nature,
*Optics.org*, < optics.org/cws/article/research/18712 >, 8 December 2003. - I.e., the changes are
*downhill*, not the ‘uphill’ ones evolutionary theory requires. See: Wieland, C., The evolution train’s a-comin (Sorry, a-goin’—in the wrong direction),*Creation***24**(2):16–19, 2002. - Speciation is
*not*evolution. See: The*Heliconius*hybrid butterfly: speciation yes, evolution no, 23 June 2006. - Why a butterfly
*flutters*by,*Creation***26**(2):56, 2004 - Brockman, N., The delicate wings of a butterfly,
*Iowa State University Extension News*, www.extension.iastate.edu/newsrel/2004/dec04/dec0431.html>, 20 December 2004. - Examples of over-engineering’ abound in nature, presenting a major difficulty for evolutionary theory

# Higgs Boson

Since it was proposed, the Higgs boson has remained very elusive despite numerous experiments looking for it. This is because it is alleged to have a very high mass and it therefore takes a lot of energy to create one. Hence the use of the Large Hadron Collider to accelerate particles travelling in opposite directions to very high energies, then bash them together and hope a Higgs pops out. One doesn’t actually see a Higgs boson since they decay extremely quickly. What is observed, it is hoped, are the products of that decay.

These experiments that seem to confirm the existence of the Higgs boson are a remarkable example of operational science at work. That is, the experimental, repeatable, observational science that tells us how things work in the present. (As opposed to historical or forensic science, which tries to work out what happened in the unrepeatable, unobservable past). This is the sort of science necessarily used to study origins. It is quite different in its

methodology and in the role played by bias and personal philosophy in the interpretation applied to the data. The Standard Model does, however, provide an amazing example of super-intelligent design. There are only 3 fundamental particles, each of which comes in a few variants for a total of only 24 elementary (matter) particles—6 quarks, 6 leptons and 12 gauge bosons. Everything in the entire universe is made up of these 3 fundamental particles in 24 variants. Think about it! There are 118 chemical elements in the periodic table which can be combined to create almost innumerable compounds like iron oxide or calcium carbonate or hydrogen hydroxide (aka water) and these can be combined to create almost innumerable substances like bubble gum and chocolate cake and amino acids and concrete and these can be combined to create even grander structures like buildings and airplanes and computers and … the human body. Yet all these things are made using just 24 different components! __That sure looks like design at its best.__

Furthermore, the 12 bosons provide 3 of the 4 forces that hold everything in the universe together. Eight of them (gluons) provide the strong nuclear force that holds quarks together to form neutrons and protons and also holds the protons and neutrons together to form nuclei for atoms. Three of them provide the weak force which is involved in radioactive decay processes. One of the bosons, the photon, provides the electromagnetic force which is stronger than the weak force but weaker than the strong force—maybe should have been called the middling force. It binds electrons to nuclei in the atom and is responsible for pretty much all the phenomena we experience in daily life apart from gravity, which is the

fourth and weakest force. These forces cover an incredible range of strengths.

For example, the strong force is 10^{38 }times as strong as gravity—that’s 100 million million million million million million times as strong. The forces all behave differently: gravity only attracts; the electromagnetic force both attracts and repels; both act over infinitely long distances whereas the strong force only acts within the nucleus and the weak force only in close proximity to the nucleus. Gravity accounts for the motion of the stars and planets, the electromagnetic force accounts for light travelling from the stars to earth, and the strong force keeps all the nuclei in atoms from flying apart due to the electromagnetic repulsion between the protons. Yet all this is accomplished with only 12 particles. __Again, design at its best.__

K.I.S.S (Keep It Sane Simpleton). Interestingly, when the Z

boson was named, it was called ‘Z’ because it was considered to be the lastelementary particle needed by the Standard Model. Apparently not! Perhaps thisillustrates just how dangerous it is to consider that anything is ‘settledscience’. They will make changes to it as more and more discrepancies are founddo to our expanding knowledge.

# What is SET theory and why!

Briefly, SET theory is a perfect example of obfuscation (transitive

and intransitive verb to make something obscure or unclear, especially by making it unnecessarily complicated) done by scientists and politicians.

**Set theory** is the branch of mathematics that studies sets, which are collections of objects. Although any type of object can be

collected into a set, set theory is applied most often to objects that are relevant to mathematics. Seems pretty straightforward doesn’t it? But because this is mathematics they have to complicate it or it wouldn’t be scientific. So they created an entire language to deal

with sets of objects. Set theory begins with a fundamental binary relation between an object *o* and a set *A*. If *o* is a **member**

(or **element**) of *A*, write *o* ∈ *A*. Since sets are objects, the membership relation can relate sets as well.

Just as __arithmetic__ features __binary operations__ on __numbers__, set

theory features binary operations on sets. The:

of the sets__Union__*A*and*B*, denoted*A*∪*B*, is the set of all objects that are a member of*A*, or*B*, or both. The union of {1, 2, 3} and {2, 3, 4} is the set {1, 2, 3, 4} .of the sets__Intersection__*A*and*B*, denoted*A*∩*B*, is the set of all objects that are members of both*A*and*B*. The

intersection of {1, 2, 3} and {2, 3, 4} is the set {2, 3} .of__Set difference__*U*and*A*, denoted*U*\*A*, is the set of all members of*U*that are not members of*A*. The set difference {1,2,3} \ {2,3,4} is {1} , while, conversely, the set difference {2,3,4} \ {1,2,3} is {4} . When*A*is a subset of*U*, the set difference*U*\*A*is also called the__complement__

of*A*in*U*. In this case, if the choice of*U*is clear

from the context, the notation*A*is sometimes used instead of^{c}*U*\*A*, particularly if*U*is a__universal set__as in the study of__Venn diagrams__.of sets__Symmetric difference__*A*and*B*, denoted*A*△*B*or*A*⊖*B*, is the set of all objects that are a member of exactly one of*A*and*B*(elements which are in one of the sets, but not in both). For instance, for the sets {1,2,3} and {2,3,4} , the

symmetric difference set is {1,4} . It is the set difference of the union and the intersection, (*A*∪*B*) \ (*A*∩*B*) or (*A*

\*B*) ∪ (*B*\*A*).of__Cartesian product__*A*and*B*, denoted*A*×*B*, is the set whose members are all possible__ordered pairs__(*a*,*b*) where*a*is a member of*A*and*b*is a member of*B*. The cartesian product of {1, 2} and {red, white} is {(1, red), (1, white), (2, red), (2, white)}.of a set__Power set__*A*is the set whose members are all possible subsets of*A*. For example, the power set of {1, 2} is { {}, {1}, {2}, {1,2} } .

Some basic sets of central importance are the __empty set __(the unique set containing no elements), the set of __natural numbers__, and the set of __real numbers__. (As opposed to “fake numbers”? )

Not only that but they’ve come up with this: fuzzy set theory is an object that has a *degree of membership *in a set, a number between 0 and 1. For example, the degree of membership of a person in the set of “tall people” is more flexible than a simple yes or no answer and can be a real number such as 0.75.

K.I.S.S. (Keep It Stupid Simpleton) Now, I’m not totally opposed to everything I have used fuzzy logic in the development of software program’s. For our purposes we just need to keep it simple – when we talk about sets it’s either an idea or an object is part of or not part of that set.

# 400 lb gorilla?

From www.facebook.c0m/scienceisawesome. Thursday 2/28/2013

A baby common marmoset (Callithrix jacchus) is pictured here.

They might be completely adorable, but you do NOT want one as a pet. They have very tiny, very sharp teeth and they bite.

And can you imagine then, they also have every single part that a 400 pound gorilla has. Again how could these two be so identical and so separate by random chance. Intelligent design involved here for sure.

# The itsy-bitsy spider

You know that they’re beautiful, but did you know that peacock spiders are itty bitty? (That’s the technical term, by the way).

You can check out more of Jurgen Otto’s beautiful peacock spider photography here: http://bit.ly/YwWfyj. Many , many more pictures of such a beautiful creature.

# The Mantis Shrimp

From: //www.facebook.com/evolutionarybiology May 17.2012

The mantis shrimp is one of the most incredible creatures found in our oceans. Over millions of years, it has equipped itself with an arsenal to rival that of any other organism, besting the limits of human technology on more than one front…. Firstly, it packs the biggest punch of any predator, with a sophisticated muscle mechanism allowing speeds in excess of 50mph to be attained. Couple this with the ability to create extreme low pressure behind it’s extended arm, causing the water to spontaneously boil, no prey stands a chance. This action releases intense energy, enough to break sheets of glass. For a very interesting TED talk on exactly this, visit: http://www.ted.com/talks/sheila_patek_clocks_the_fastest_animals.html

That is not all. The mantis shrimp has the most sophisticated and extensive eyes of any known creature. With their unique shape and composition, the shrimp can see in most directions simultaneously, as well as observing more of the spectrum than us humans, both at the infra-red and ultra-violet ends. This excellent asset, coupled with the killer punch, makes the mantis shrimp one of the most effective predators in the world, as well as being one of the most beautiful. The in-depth explanation for this exquisite sight