A reliable informant.

A reproduction of the watchtower society's article

A Book You Can Trust—Part 1

Egypt in Bible History

The Bible was written over a period of some 1,600 years. Its history and prophecy are linked to seven world powers: Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome, and Anglo-America. Each of these will be considered in a series of seven articles. The objective? To show that the Bible is trustworthy and inspired of God and that its message is one of hope for an end to the suffering caused by human misrule.

EGYPT, famous for its pyramids and the Nile River, was the first world power of Bible history. Under its shadow the nation of Israel was formed. Moses, who penned the first five books of the Bible, was born and educated in Egypt. Do secular history and archaeology corroborate what Moses wrote about that ancient land? Consider some examples.

Trustworthy History

Titles and terms. Accurate history is often revealed in the details—customs, etiquette, names and titles of officials, and so on. How do the books of Genesis and Exodus, the first two books of the Bible, measure up in this respect? Regarding the Genesis narrative about Joseph, a son of the patriarch Jacob, as well as the Bible book of Exodus, J. Garrow Duncan says in his book New Light on Hebrew Origins: “[The Bible writer] was thoroughly well acquainted with the Egyptian language, customs, beliefs, court life, and etiquette and officialdom.” He adds: “[The writer] employs the correct title in use and exactly as it was used at the period referred to. . . . In fact, nothing more convincingly proves the intimate knowledge of things Egyptian in the Old Testament, and the reliability of the writers, than the use of the word Pharaoh at different periods.” Duncan also states: “When [the writer] brings his characters into the presence of Pharaoh, he makes them observe the correct court etiquette and use the correct language.”

Brickmaking. During their period of slavery in Egypt, the Israelites made bricks out of clay mixed with straw, which served as a binding material. (Exodus 1:14; 5:6-18)* Some years ago, the book Ancient Egyptian Materials and Industries stated: “In few places has [brickmaking] been practised more than in Egypt, where sun-dried bricks still are, as they always have been, the characteristic building material of the country.” The book also mentions “the Egyptian practice of using straw in making bricks,” thus corroborating that additional detail recorded in the Bible.

Shaving. Hebrew men of ancient times grew beards. Yet, the Bible tells us that Joseph shaved prior to appearing before Pharaoh. (Genesis 41:14) Why did he shave? To conform with Egyptian custom and etiquette, which considered facial hair to be a sign of uncleanness. “[The Egyptians] prided themselves on being clean-shaven,” says the bookEveryday Life in Ancient Egypt. In fact, cosmetic sets consisting of razors, tweezers, and mirrors, along with their containers, have been found in tombs. Clearly, Moses was a meticulous chronicler. The same can be said of other Bible writers who documented events relating to ancient Egypt.

Business enterprises. Jeremiah, who wrote the two books of Kings, gave specific details regarding King Solomon’s trade in horses and chariots with the Egyptians and the Hittites. A chariot cost “six hundred silver pieces, and a horse . . . a hundred and fifty,” or one quarter the cost of a chariot, the Bible states.—1 Kings 10:29.

According to the book Archaeology and the Religion of Israel, the Greek historian Herodotus and archaeological findings both confirm that a lively trade in horses and chariots was carried on during the reign of Solomon. In fact, “a standard exchange rate of four . . . horses for one Egyptian chariot was established,” the book states, corroborating the figures given in the Bible.

Warfare. Jeremiah and Ezra also mention the invasion of Judah by Pharaoh Shishak, specifically stating that it occurred “in the fifth year of [Judean] King Rehoboam,” or 993 B.C.E. (1 Kings 14:25-28; 2 Chronicles 12:1-12) For a long time, the only record of that invasion was the one found in the Bible. Then there came to light a relief on the wall of an Egyptian temple at Karnak (ancient Thebes).

The relief depicts Shishak standing before the god Amon, Shishak’s arm raised in the act of smiting captives. Also recorded are the names of conquered Israelite towns, many of which have been identified with Biblical sites. Additionally, the document mentions “TheField of Abram”—the earliest reference to the Biblical patriarch Abraham in Egyptian records.—Genesis 25:7-10.

Clearly, the Bible writers did not pen fiction. Recognizing their accountability to God, they wrote truth, even when doing so was unflattering—as in the case of Shishak’s victories in Judah. Such candor contrasts sharply with the varnished, exaggerated chronicles of the ancient Egyptian scribes, who refused to record anything that might be uncomplimentary to their rulers or people.

Trustworthy Prophecy

Only Jehovah God, the Author of the Bible, can unfailingly predict the future. Note, for example, what he inspired Jeremiah to foretell concerning two Egyptian cities—Memphis and Thebes. Memphis, or Noph, was once a prominent commercial, political, and religious center. Yet, God said: “Noph itself will become a mere object of astonishment and will actually be set afire, so as to be without an inhabitant.” (Jeremiah 46:19) And so it turned out. The book In the Steps of Moses the Lawgiver says that “the titanic ruins of Memphis” were pillaged by Arab conquerors, who used them as a quarry. It adds that today “within the circuit of the ancient city not a stone protrudes above the black soil.”

Thebes, earlier called No-amon or just No, suffered a similar fate, along with its impotent gods. Concerning this onetime capital of Egypt and principal center of the worship of the god Amon, Jehovah said: “Here I am turning my attention upon Amon . . . and upon Pharaoh and upon Egypt and upon her gods . . . And I will give them into . . . the hand of Nebuchadrezzar the king of Babylon.” (Jeremiah 46:25, 26) As prophesied, the Babylonian monarch conquered Egypt and its prominent city of No-amon. Then, after Persian ruler Cambyses II dealt another blow to the city in 525 B.C.E., it steadily declined, finally being completely ruined by the Romans. Yes, accurate prophecy puts the Bible in a class of its own, giving us confidence in what it says about our future.

A Hope You Can Trust

The very first prophecy recorded in the Bible was penned by Moses during the time of the Egyptian world power.* Found at Genesis 3:15, the prophecy states that God wouldproduce a “seed,” or offspring, who would crush Satan and his “seed”—those who adopt Satan’s wicked ways. (John 8:44; 1 John 3:8) The primary “seed” of God proved to be the Messiah, Jesus Christ.—Luke 2:9-14.

Christ’s reign will encompass the entire earth, from which he will remove all wickedness and oppressive human governments. No longer will ‘man dominate man to his injury.’ (Ecclesiastes 8:9) Moreover, like Joshua of old, who led Israel into the Promised Land, Jesus will safely lead “a great crowd” of God-fearing humans into a far greater “Promised Land”—a cleansed earth that will be transformed into a global paradise.—Revelation 7:9, 10, 14, 17; Luke 23:43.

That precious hope calls to mind yet another prophecy recorded during the time of ancient Egypt. Found at Job 33:24, 25, the prophecy states that God will deliver humans even from “the pit,” or the grave, by means of a resurrection. Yes, in addition to those spared through the coming destruction of the wicked, many millions now dead will be raised to life with the prospect of everlasting life in Paradise on earth. (Acts 24:15) “The tent of God is with mankind,” says Revelation 21:3, 4. “He will wipe out every tear from their eyes, and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore.”

Trustworthy history and prophecy—that theme will continue in the next article in this series, which will focus on ancient Assyria, the world power that followed Egypt.

A reliable informant II

A reproduction of the watchtower Society's article

A Book You Can Trust—Part 2

Assyria in Bible History

This is the second in a series of seven articles in consecutive issues of Awake! that discuss the seven world powers of Bible history. The objective is to show that the Bible is trustworthy and inspired of God and that its message is one of hope for an end to the suffering caused by man’s cruel domination of his fellow man.

THE very mention of Assyria to people of the ancient Middle East may have made their blood run cold. According to the Bible book of Jonah, when that prophet received an assignment from God to preach a judgment message in the Assyrian capital, Nineveh, he fled in the opposite direction! (Jonah 1:1-3) Perhaps that was so because of the Assyrians’ fearsome reputation.

Trustworthy History

The Bible prophet Nahum described Nineveh as “the lair of lions” and “the city of bloodshed.” He added: “Prey does not depart! There is the sound of the whip and the sound of the rattling of the wheel, and the dashing horse and the leaping chariot. The mounted horseman, and the flame of the sword, and the lightning of the spear, and the multitude of slain ones, and the heavy mass of carcasses; and there is no end to the dead bodies. They keep stumbling among their dead bodies.” (Nahum 2:11; 3:1-3) Does secular history corroborate the Bible’s description of ancient Assyria?

The book Light From the Ancient Past calls Assyria “the ruthless fighting machine whose calculated frightfulness was the terror of its enemies.” The following is the way one Assyrian king, Ashurnasirpal II, boasted of his treatment of those who opposed him:

“I built a pillar over against his city gate, and I flayed all the chief men who had revolted, and I covered the pillar with their skins; some I walled up within the pillar, some I impaled upon the pillar on stakes, . . . and I cut off the limbs of the officers, of the royal officers who had rebelled. . . . Many captives from among them I burned with fire, and many I took as living captives.” When archaeologists excavated Assyrian royal palaces, they found the walls decorated with depictions of horrendous treatment being meted out to captives.

In the year 740 B.C.E., Assyria conquered Samaria, the capital of the northern kingdom of Israel, and took its people into exile. Eight years later, Assyria invaded Judah.* (2 Kings 18:13) The Assyrian King Sennacherib demanded of Judean King Hezekiah a tribute of 30 talents of gold and 300 talents of silver. The Bible record states that this tribute was paid. Even so, Sennacherib insisted that the capital of Judah, Jerusalem, also surrender unconditionally to him.—2 Kings 18:9-17, 28-31.

At Nineveh archaeologists have found an account of the same events in the annals of Sennacherib. In the text, which is inscribed on a hexagonal clay prism, the Assyrian king boasted: “As to Hezekiah, the Jew, he did not submit to my yoke, I laid siege to 46 of his strong cities, walled forts and to the countless small villages in their vicinity, and conquered (them) . . . Himself [Hezekiah] I made a prisoner in Jerusalem, his royal residence, like a bird in a cage.” Sennacherib then claims that Hezekiah sent him “30 talents of gold, 800 talents of silver, precious stones, . . . (and) all kinds of valuable treasures,” inflating the number of silver talents that he actually received.

Note, though, that Sennacherib does not claim to have conquered Jerusalem. In fact, he says nothing about the crushing defeat his army suffered through divine intervention. According to the Bible, God’s angel took the lives of 185,000 Assyrian soldiers in one night. (2 Kings 19:35, 36) Says scholar Jack Finegan: “In view of the general note of boasting which pervades the inscriptions of the Assyrian kings, however, it is hardly to be expected that Sennacherib would record such a defeat.”

Trustworthy Prophecy

About a hundred years before the fall of the Assyrian Empire, Isaiah declared thatJehovah God would call those proud conquerors to account for their insolence toward his people. “I shall make an accounting for the fruitage of the insolence of the heart of the king of Assyria and for the self-importance of his loftiness of eyes,” Jehovah said. (Isaiah 10:12) Furthermore, God’s prophet Nahum foretold that Nineveh would be plundered, its gates would be opened to its enemies, and its guards would flee. (Nahum 2:8, 9; 3:7, 13, 17, 19) The Bible prophet Zephaniah wrote that the city would become “a desolate waste.”—Zephaniah 2:13-15.

Those prophecies of destruction were fulfilled in 632 B.C.E. That is when Nineveh fell to the combined forces of the Babylonians and the Medes, bringing the Assyrian Empire to an inglorious end. A Babylonian chronicle of that event states that the conquerors “carried off the vast booty of the city and the temple” and turned Nineveh “into a ruin heap.” Today the desolate waste that was once Nineveh is marked by mounds of ruins on the east bank of the Tigris River, opposite the city of Mosul, in Iraq.

Assyria’s destruction also contributed to the fulfillment of yet another Bible prophecy. Earlier, in 740 B.C.E., Assyria took the ten-tribe kingdom into exile. About the same time that Assyria did this, God’s prophet Isaiah foretold that Jehovah would “break the Assyrian,” “tread him down,” and bring Israel back to its homeland. Isaiah wrote: “The remnant of his people who will remain over from Assyria . . . , he [God] will collect together.” That is exactly what occurred—about two hundred years later!—Isaiah 11:11, 12; 14:25.

A Promise You Can Trust

Long before Nineveh’s fall, while her kings still struck terror into the hearts of their enemies, Isaiah foretold the coming of a very different kind of ruler. He wrote: “There has been a child born to us, there has been a son given to us; and the princely rule will come to be upon his shoulder. And his name will be called . . . Prince of Peace. To the abundance of the princely rule and to peace there will be no end, upon the throne of David and upon his kingdom in order to establish it firmly and to sustain it by means of justice and by means of righteousness, from now on and to time indefinite. The very zeal of Jehovah of armies will do this.”—Isaiah 9:6, 7.

The rulership of the “Prince of Peace,” Jesus Christ, will embrace the entire earth.Psalm 72:7, 8 says: “In his days the righteous one will sprout, and the abundance of peace until the moon is no more. And he will have subjects from sea to sea and from the River [Euphrates] to the ends of the earth.”

Through this mighty “Prince of Peace,” Jehovah God will fulfill the promise at Psalm 46:8, 9: “Come, you people, behold the activities of Jehovah, how he has set astonishing events on the earth. He is making wars to cease to the extremity of the earth. The bow he breaks apart and does cut the spear in pieces; the wagons he burns in the fire.”

As a prelude to the fulfillment of this Bible prophecy, Jehovah’s Witnesses are carrying out a Bible education program that teaches people the ways of peace, as Jesus did. Indeed, not man, but God will fulfill the Bible prophecy recorded at Isaiah 2:4: “They will have to beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning shears. Nation will not lift up sword against nation, neither will they learn war anymore.” In contrast, today the world and its rulers spend a trillion dollars a year on military endeavors!

Accurate history and prophecy put the Bible in a class of its own, demonstrating to those sincerely searching for the truth that it is indeed a book worthy of our trust. In the next article in this series, we will consider ancient Babylon, the capital of the third great empire of Bible history.

A reliable informant III

A reproduction of the Watchtower Society's article

A Book You Can Trust—Part 3

Babylon in Bible History

This is the third in a series of seven articles in consecutive issues of “Awake!” that discuss the seven world powers of Bible history. The objective is to show that the Bible is trustworthy and inspired of God and that its message is one of hope for an end to the suffering caused by man’s cruel domination of his fellow man.

SITUATED on a fertile plain some 50 miles south of modern-day Baghdad, the ancient city of Babylon was truly magnificent. With massive double walls and a surrounding moat, Babylon seemed impregnable. The city was renowned for its majestic temples, hanging gardens, and temple towers. As one of the greatest cities of the ancient world, Babylon has recently been dubbed the city of wonders.

In the Bible, it was named “Mistress of Kingdoms” and was the capital of the third world power of Bible history. (Isaiah 47:5) Like the Egyptian and the Assyrian empires before it, the Babylonian Empire played a prominent role in Bible history, enabling us to compare what the Bible says about it with what secular sources say.

Trustworthy History

The Bible book of Daniel tells us that a man by the name of Belshazzar once ruled as king in Babylon. (Daniel 5:1) However, some secular sources have stated in the past thatBelshazzar, though powerful, was never king. Was the Bible wrong? Archaeologists have uncovered a number of clay cylinders in the ruins of Ur in Mesopotamia. The cuneiform inscription on one cylinder included a prayer by Babylonian King Nabonidus for “Bel-sar-ussur, my eldest son.” Later findings confirmed that Belshazzar had “acted as regent for more than half his father’s reign,” states the New Bible Dictionary, “during which time he was to all intents and purposes king.”

History also shows that ancient Babylon was an extremely religious city, rife with astrology and divination. For example, at Ezekiel 21:21, we read that the king of Babylon resorted to divination in order to determine whether to attack Jerusalem. The king “looked into the liver,” the Bible says. Why the liver? The Babylonians used this organ in quest of omens. The book Mesopotamian Astrology tells us that at just one site in ancient Babylon, archaeologists found “32 [clay] liver models, all inscribed” with omens.

Noted archaeologist Nelson Glueck once said: “I have excavated for thirty years with a Bible in one hand and a trowel in the other, and in matters of historical perspective I have never found the Bible to be in error.”

Trustworthy Prophecy

How would you respond if someone told you that a major capital—such as Beijing, Moscow, or Washington, D.C.—would become an uninhabited ruin? You would rightly be skeptical. Yet, that is what happened with ancient Babylon. Some 200 years in advance, about the year 732 B.C.E., Jehovah God inspired the Hebrew prophet Isaiah to put in writing a prophecy about the demise of mighty Babylon. He wrote: “Babylon, the decoration of kingdoms, . . . must become as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah. She will never be inhabited, nor will she reside for generation after generation.”—Isaiah 13:19, 20.

But why would God foretell Babylon’s destruction? In 607 B.C.E., Babylonian armies destroyed Jerusalem and took the survivors off to Babylon, where they were treated cruelly. (Psalm 137:8, 9) God foretold that his people would have to endure this bitter treatment for 70 years because of their own wicked deeds. Then God would deliver them and let them return to their homeland.—Jeremiah 25:11; 29:10.

True to God’s prophetic Word, in 539 B.C.E.—just as Judah’s 70-year exile was about to end—the seemingly invincible city of Babylon was overthrown by Medo-Persian armies. In time, the city became a heap of ruins—just as predicted. No human could foretell such a striking achievement. Without a doubt, the act of prophesying, or foretelling events in advance, sets the Author of the Bible—the true God, Jehovah—apart from any other god.—Isaiah 46:9, 10.

A Hope You Can Trust

Yet another prophecy is having a remarkable fulfillment in our day. The prophecy involves King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon and a dream that he had about an immense image. The body was divided into five parts—the head, the breasts and arms, the belly and thighs, the legs, and the feet—each one with a different metal composition. (Daniel 2:31-33) These metal parts stood for a succession of governments, or kingdoms, that started with Babylon and continues down to the Anglo-American World Power, the seventh of Bible history.—Daniel 2:36-41.

Daniel discloses that in the feet and toes of the image, there was a noteworthy change of materials. How so? Pure metal was replaced with a mixture of iron and moist clay. By way of explanation, Daniel told Nebuchadnezzar: “Whereas you beheld iron mixed with moist clay, they will come to be mixed with the offspring of mankind; but they will not prove to be sticking together, this one to that one, just as iron is not mixing with molded clay.” (Daniel 2:43) Yes, mixing iron and clay results in a fragile union; there is no “sticking together.” How accurately this describes the politically divided world in which we live today!

Daniel also reveals another significant development. In his dream, King Nebuchadnezzar saw a stone that was cut out of a large mountain. This stone was lifted up, and “it struck the image on its feet of iron and of molded clay and crushed them.” (Daniel 2:34) What does that mean? Daniel himself answers: “In the days of those kings [during the time of the final world power] the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite.” (Daniel 2:44) That prophecy pointed forward to a Kingdom unlike any other government known to mankind. Its King is Jesus Christ, the Messiah. As mentioned in previous articles of this series, Jesus will crush Satan and all his followers, human and spirit, thus bringing about universal peace and harmony.—1 Corinthians 15:25.

[Blurb on page 11]

“I have excavated for thirty years . . . , and in matters of historical perspective I have never found the Bible to be in error.”—Nelson Glueck

[Box on page 12]

FORETOLD BY NAME

  One of the most remarkable prophecies regarding the downfall of Babylon involved its conqueror, King Cyrus of Persia. Nearly two centuries before Cyrus rose to power, Jehovah God mentioned him by name and foretold that he would be the one to conquer Babylon.

  Pointing forward to Cyrus’ conquest, Isaiah was inspired to write: “This is what Jehovah has said to his anointed one, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have taken hold of, to subdue before him nations, . . . to open before him the two-leaved doors, so that even the gates will not be shut.” God also foretold that the city’s protective moat would, in effect, dry up.—Isaiah 45:1-3; Jeremiah 50:38.

  Greek historians Herodotus and Xenophon confirm the fulfillment of this amazing prophecy. They reveal that Cyrus diverted the Euphrates River, causing the moat to recede. Cyrus’ armies thus gained access to the city through its gates, which had been left open. As foretold, mighty Babylon fell “suddenly,” in one night.—Jeremiah 51:8.

[Box/Pictures on pages 12, 13]

BABYLON THE GREAT

  The Bible book of Revelation mentions a symbolic harlot named “Babylon the Great.” (Revelation 17:5) What does this harlot represent? The evidence points to its being a religious entity.

  Ancient Babylon was an extremely religious city, having over 50 temples dedicated to various deities. The Babylonians believed in trinities of gods and an immortal soul that at death would descend to a dark netherworld. There, “human existence beyond the grave is at best only a dismal, wretched reflection of life on earth,” says Funk & Wagnalls New Encyclopedia.

  In time, those teachings spread throughout the world. Today they, or modified versions of them, can be found in the religions of Christendom. Together, these religions make up a major part of the global religious entity Babylon the Great!

File under 'Well said':II

A Quote by Laozi


He who controls others may be powerful, but he who has mastered himself is mightier still

Allowing the birds their say re:Darwinism

Special Birds with Specialized Abilities

Evolution News & Views July 20, 2015 1:22 PM

Illustra's film Flight: The Genius of Birds showed some amazing specialties in a few bird species: the hummingbird with its nectar-trap tongue, starlings in formation flight, and Arctic terns in long-distance migration. It would take many hours of similar movies, and a book of ENV articles, to even begin to do justice to the many diverse kinds of birds that warrant our admiration. From time to time we can, though, point out particular cases coming to light in new research.

Image Stabilization

Lovebirds; aren't they sweet. We're not talking about newlyweds, but small parrots that inhabit Africa and Madagascar (which do, by the way, show affectionate behavior). A zoologist incorporated the help of mechanical engineers to study something Olympic about them: they can turn their heads "super-fast" in flight. In a paper in PLoS One, the team measured the head turn rate. Although the birds flick their heads back and forth, the rotational motion measured by a high-speed camera is exceptionally fast: 2700 degrees per second.

High-speed flight recordings revealed that rapidly turning lovebirds perform a remarkable stereotypical gaze behavior with peak saccadic head turns up to 2700 degrees per second, as fast as insects, enabled by fast neck muscles. In between saccades,gaze orientation is held constant. By comparing saccade and wingbeat phase, we find that these super-fast saccades are coordinated with the downstroke when the lateral visual field is occluded by the wings. Lovebirds thus maximize visual perception by overlying behaviors that impair vision, which helps coordinate maneuvers.... Our observations show that rapidly maneuvering birds use precisely timed stereotypic gaze behaviors consisting of rapid head turns and frontal feature stabilization, which facilitates optical flow based flight control. [Emphasis added.]

The strategy resembles the way early combat aircraft could fire machine-gun rounds without blowing off the propellers. The bird turns the head just in time to minimize the time the wing is in the way of seeing. A summary of the findings tt PhysOrg gives another reason why this research is interesting. "The authors also hope that the accuracy and speed of these visually guided flight-maneuvers may inspire camera rotation design in drones to improve imaging."

Lest you feel any sense of inferiority at this little bird's design, notice what the authors write in the Abstract: "Similar gaze behaviors have been reported for visually navigating humans." This paper in Current Biology about "microsaccades" (tiny eye movements), which unwittingly sample our visual field during focused attention, also bears reading (see the summary atMedical Xpress).

Smell Navigation

Illustra's new film Living Waters points out that the ability to navigate by the sense of smell or by the earth's magnetic field is widespread in many types of animals. Here's a case in point: seabirds. An article at Live Science reports on work by zoologists in the UK who found that "Seabirds smell their way home." Flying over large expanses of open water, birds like Cory's shearwaters manage to find their nesting sites and feeding grounds without error. How do they do it? There aren't many cues available. The authors ruled out some senses, like sound.

Observing how the birds explore an area in detail then move a distance and repeat (a search strategy called a Lévy flight pattern), the researchers found that models based on the sense of smell gave the best fit. It's not easy, though. For smell navigation to work, not only must the sense of smell be incredibly acute, but the birds have to be able to integrate olfactory data with other forces in the environment.

Birds may associate smells, such as those from phytoplankton, with wind directions, the researchers noted. For instance, the seabirds may know to fly westward when they smell one odorand to fly eastward when they smell another. Or, a combination of both smells may prompt them to fly northeast, the researchers said.

However, smells aren't always detectible because of atmospheric turbulence, so birds will reorient and change direction until they find another recognizable smell, the researchers found.

In addition, the birds must have an "odor map" written in the brain that associates the odor cues with memory. In effect, the cues tell the bird, "This combination of odors means you are here, and you need to head that way." As the feeding ground approaches, the birds can rely on additional cues, like "landmarks, flights of other birds and 'colony odors'." Living Waters illustrates a similar capability in fish: a nasal switchboard that guides salmon through a maze of tributaries to its natal stream.

Vocal Imitation

Who hasn't had fun listening to parrots imitate human speech? It takes a special kind of brain to do this. Parrots, parakeets (budgerigars), cockatiels, keas, and our affectionate friends the lovebirds are good at it. Neurologists at Duke University were curious to know what structures in the brain seem to be responsible. They found particular regions they dubbed "shells" around core speech centers that are found in all these species. One researcher's reaction has some bearing on Kuhnian science:

"The first thing that surprised me when Mukta and I were looking at the new results is, 'Wow, how did I miss this all these years? How did everybody else miss this all these years?'" said Jarvis, who is also member of the Duke Institute for Brain Sciences. "The surprise to me was more about human psychology and what we look for and how biased we are in what we look for. Once you see it, it's obvious. I have these brain sections from 15 years ago, and now I can see it."

The news release seems obsessed with how this brain region evolved, stating that whatever mutation led to it happened 29 million years ago, based on assumed evolutionary lineages. That doesn't come close to explaining it:

The new results support the group's hypothesis that in humans and other song-learning animals, the ability to imitate arose by brain pathway duplication. How such a copy-and-paste job could have happened is still unknown.

It's not clear how duplicating a gene or pathway can cause a new complex ability like voice imitation: "It takes significant brain power to process auditory information and produce the movements necessary for mimicking sounds of another species," one of the researchers said. The article does not speculate on what kind of mutational event led to the exceptional abilities of unrelated birds, like the mockingbird or lyrebird.But of what evolutionary survival value is this ability? Clover seems to be enjoying her intricate brain and vocal apparatus. If we don't think human impressionists evolved their repertoire by mistake, perhaps we should give intelligent design, not Darwinian evolution, the credit for bird mimicry and the other exceptional talents

A second helping of doubt.

A Scientific Controversy That Can No Longer Be Denied: Here Is Debating Darwin's Doubt

David Klinghoffer July 21, 2015 12:01

Today marks the anniversary of the famous Scopes "Monkey" Trial, decided this day, July 21, 90 years ago in Dayton, Tennessee, in favor of the prosecution. A public high school teacher, John Scopes, was convicted and fined $100 for teaching in favor of Darwinian evolution in violation of what was state law at the time.

While that's nearly a century past, defenders of Darwinian theory still present the conflict between unguided evolution and intelligent design as if it had not advanced a bit since Clarence Darrow jousted with William Jennings Bryan over Biblical literalism that summer before a courthouse crowd in 1925.

The truth is very different. To commemorate the Scopes Trial, Discovery Institute Press today releases Debating Darwin's Doubt: A Scientific Controversy That Can No Longer Be Denied, a sequel to Stephen Meyer's 2013New York Times bestseller, Darwin's Doubt: The Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the Case for Intelligent Design.

For a limited time, you can get Debating Darwin's Doubt at 35 percent off the cover price by going here and entering the discount code 4DXTSYJU. It's also available now for Kindle and Nook, and from Barnes & Noble.

In a way, my Discovery Institute colleagues and I took a leaf from Hollywood, where no box office blockbuster is complete without a sequel. Dr. Meyer's milestone case for intelligent design kicked up a storm of controversy, and we realized that we couldn't let the matter rest there. Meyer's book must have a sequel, and that's what we are launching. I had the honor of editing the new book, and I can say it is important for three reasons.

First, it is a sequel. Gathering material from Evolution News & Views, the daily online voice of the intelligent design movement that I also edit, Debating Darwin's Doubt documents the intense scientific arguments sparked by Meyer's book. Top ID scholars respond to Meyer's most challenging critics, from sources ranging from The New Yorker and National Review up to America's most prestigious journal of scientific research, Science.

Among the book's 44 chapters are 10 by Meyer, includy

Why the irreducible complexity of the bacterial flagellum has not been explained away

Why the Type III Secretory System Can't Be a Precursor to the Bacteria Flagellum

Casey Luskin July 20, 2015 3:50 AM |

As I wrote here last week, biophysicist Matt Baker recently published an article at the Australian Broadcasting Corporation website, "The bacterial flagellar motor: brilliant evolution or intelligent design?," arguing against Michael Behe and the intelligent design of the flagellum. Behe first offered his argument for ID based on irreducible complexity (IC) in his 1996 bookDarwin's Black Box. In the intervening couple of decades, Darwin defenders have offered the same assortment of ineffectual replies, again and again. Now there comes along Dr. Baker, who has very little that's new to say. I'm taking the time to answer him because these objections, while unconvincing, are such hearty perennials.

He thinks he's found one main flagellar component that can function outside the flagellar system and that this refutes irreducible complexity. It's nothing new to ID proponents. It's called the Type III Secretory System (T3SS) and it's basically a pump that's used to transport proteins across the cell membrane of bacteria. Baker frames his case this way:

Proof of the flagellar motor's 'reducibility' -- that its component parts can function elsewhere -- comes in the form of the injectisome; another fabulous molecular machine found in bacteria. This needle-like complex is used by disease-causing bacteria to punch holes in the host's target cells.

The protein machinery used to assemble the proteins that make up the punching needle is identical to that used to assemble the 'propeller' part of the flagellar motor -- the filament and hook of the motor. In addition, nine core proteins of the flagellar motor share common ancestry with injectisome proteins -- the genes that code for them are so similar they have clearly come from the same genetic ancestor.

This argument is so old that it was already dealt with and refuted in the 2003 ID documentary Unlocking the Mystery of Life.

So in the interest of accuracy, let's reframe Baker's argument for him. Part of the flagellum is a molecular pump, the T3SS, which is used to pump proteins from inside the cell to the outside of the cell where they self-assemble into the flagellum. The injectisome uses the T3SS for a similar function -- it is involved in both assembling the injectisome and in the injectisome's function.

The injectisome is used by certain predatory bacteria to inject toxic proteins into eukaryotic cells, which then kill the eukaryotic cells so they can be ingested by the bacterium. It's just a molecular pump; that's it.

Baker suggests that the injectisome's proteins are "identical" to the "flagellar motor" but the T3SS isn't actually part of the motor portion of the flagellum. It's only part of the pump that is used during flagellar assembley, which then also serves as the basal body that anchors the flagellum in the cell membrane.

Nor is it the case that these proteins are "identical." I'm quite willing to grant that some proteins between the T3SS and the flagellum appear homologous, but it's certainly not correct to call them "identical." One authoritative paper by Pallen and others in 2005 suggests that a flagellar protein (FliK) and a protein from the T3SS (YscP) are "homologous" because, across a stretch of about 58 amino acids within their 300 or so amino acids, 13 residues are identical in at least 50 percent of the proteins studied, and another 23 amino acids within that stretch have similar chemical properties. (See Pallen et al.(2005), Figure 4.) That means that less than 25 percent of the amino acids are identical across a stretch that represents less than 20 percent of the total protein. While the proteins are clearly similar -- perhaps very similar -- and probably homologous, it's misleading to say they are "identical."

But let's say they are identical -- it doesn't really matter. In fact let's grant that nine of the proteins in the T3SS of the injectisome are identical to the proteins of the T3SS used by the flagellum. Does this constitute an evolutionary explanation? No, for many reasons.

First, at most the sequence similarity can establish, as Baker puts it, that "they have clearly come from the same genetic ancestor." But Michael Behe is quick to remind us why establishing common ancestry is different from establishing a Darwinian explanation:

• "Although useful for determining lines of descent ... comparing sequences cannot show how a complex biochemical system achieved its function -- the question that most concerns us in this book. By way of analogy, the instruction manuals for two different models of computer put out by the same company might have many identical words, sentences, and even paragraphs, suggesting a common ancestry (perhaps the same author wrote both manuals), but comparing the sequences of letters in the instruction manuals will never tell us if a computer can be produced step-by-step starting from a typewriter. ... Like the sequence analysts, I believe the evidence strongly supports common descent. But the root question remains unanswered: What has caused complex systems to form?" (Behe, Darwin's Black Box, pp. 175-176.)


• "[M]odern Darwinists point to evidence of common descent and erroneously assume it to be evidence of the power of random mutation." (Behe, The Edge of Evolution, p. 95.)

Second, it's doubtful that the T3SS is useful at all in explaining the origin of the flagellum. The injectisome is found in a small subset of gram-negative bacteria that have a symbiotic or parasitic association with eukaryotes. Since eukaryotes evolved over a billion years after bacteria, this suggests that the injectisome arose after eukaryotes. However, flagella are found across the range of bacteria, and the need for chemotaxis and motility (i.e., using the flagellum to find food) precede the need for parasitism. In other words, we'd expect that the flagellum long predates the injectisome. And indeed, given the narrow distribution of injectisome-bearing bacteria, and the very wide distribution of bacteria with flagella, parsimony suggests the flagellum long predates injectisome rather than the reverse. As one paper observes:

Based on patchy taxonomic distribution of the T3SS compared to that of the flagellum, widespread in bacterial phyla, previous phylogenetic analyses proposed that T3SS derived from a flagellar ancestor and spread through lateral gene transfers."

(Sophie S. Abby and Eduardo P.C. Rocha, "An Evolutionary Analysis of the Type III Secretion System" (2012).)

Likewise, New Scientist reported:

One fact in favour of the flagellum-first view is that bacteria would have needed propulsion before they needed T3SSs, which are used to attack cells that evolved later than bacteria. Also, flagella are found in a more diverse range of bacterial species than T3SSs. "The most parsimonious explanation is that the T3SS arose later," says biochemist Howard Ochman at the University of Arizona in Tucson.

Now under normal evolutionary reasoning, one would take this kind of phylogenetic evidence to indicate that the flagellum long predates the T3SS, and that the T3SS is in no way a precursor (or closely related to a precursor) of the flagellum. But don't expect evolutionists to use their normal reasoning when trying to oppose potent arguments for intelligent design. Here, they reject standard phylogenetic concepts like parsimony and assume that somehow the T3SS is (or is very similar to) some kind of a flagellar precursor. Normal evolutionary analysis would absolutely reject that hypothesis.

Additionally, it's interesting that flagellar genes are always present (whether vestigial or suppressed) whenever injectisome genes are present. Thus, the injectisome is always found with the flagellum, but not vice versa. Again, this implies the injectisome has an origin that postdates the flagellum, and that it may even be derived from the flagellum.

So the evidence strongly suggests that the injectisome (or something like it) did not predate the flagellum, and thus can't help explain how the flagellum evolved.

Finally, there's the fact that the function of the T3SS (whether in the injectosome or in the flagellum) really has nothing to do with explaining the propulsion function of the flagellum. Again, the T3SS is just a pump that can move bacteria across the cell membrane. It doesn't in any way explain how the flagellum motor and its core propulsion function arose. I like how William Dembski captures the essence of the logical and empirical flaws in the T3SS argument:

[F]inding a subsystem of a functional system that performs some other function is hardly an argument for the original system evolving from that other system. One might just as well say that because the motor of a motorcycle can be used as a blender, therefore the [blender] motor evolved into the motorcycle. Perhaps, but not without intelligent design. Indeed, multipart, tightly integrated functional systems almost invariably contain multipart subsystems that serve some different function. At best the TTSS [Type III Secretory System] represents one possible step in the indirect Darwinian evolution of the bacterial flagellum. But that still wouldn't constitute a solution to the evolution of the bacterial flagellum. What's needed is a complete evolutionary path and not merely a possible oasis along the way. To claim otherwise is like saying we can travel by foot from Los Angeles to Tokyo because we've discovered the Hawaiian Islands. Evolutionary biology needs to do better than that.

(William A. Dembski, Rebuttal to Reports by Opposing Expert Witnesses.)

Given that Baker nowhere tries to provide any kind of a stepwise explanation for the evolution of the flagellum, he certainly has not met his standard of proof nor has he met Dembski's challenge.