1Kings 8-14 Young's Literal Translation.

8. Then doth Solomon assemble the elders of Israel, and all the heads of the tribes, princes of the fathers of the sons of Israel, unto king Solomon, to Jerusalem, to bring up the ark of the covenant of Jehovah from the city of David -- it [is] Zion;
2 and all the men of Israel are assembled unto king Solomon, in the month of Ethanim, in the festival -- [is] the seventh month.
3 And all the elders of Israel come in, and the priests lift up the ark,
4 and bring up the ark of Jehovah, and the tent of meeting, and all the holy vessels that [are] in the tent, yea, the priests and the Levites bring them up.
5 And king Solomon and all the company of Israel who are met unto him [are] with him before the ark, sacrificing sheep and oxen, that are not counted nor numbered for multitude.
6 And the priests bring in the ark of the covenant of Jehovah unto its place, unto the oracle of the house, unto the holy of holies, unto the place of the wings of the cherubs;
7 for the cherubs are spreading forth two wings unto the place of the ark, and the cherubs cover over the ark, and over its staves from above;
8 and they lengthen the staves, and the heads of the staves are seen from the holy [place] on the front of the oracle, and are not seen without, and they are there unto this day.
9 There is nothing in the ark, only the two tables of stone which Moses put there in Horeb, when Jehovah covenanted with the sons of Israel in their going out of the land of Egypt.
10 And it cometh to pass, in the going out of the priests from the holy [place], that the cloud hath filled the house of Jehovah,
11 and the priests have not been able to stand to minister because of the cloud, for the honour of Jehovah hath filled the house of Jehovah.
12 Then said Solomon, `Jehovah hath said to dwell in thick darkness;
13 I have surely built a house of habitation for Thee; a fixed place for Thine abiding to the ages.'
14 And the king turneth round his face, and blesseth the whole assembly of Israel; and all the assembly of Israel is standing.
15 And he saith, `Blessed [is] Jehovah, God of Israel, who spake by His mouth with David my father, and by His hand hath fulfilled [it], saying,
16 From the day that I brought out My people, even Israel, from Egypt, I have not fixed on a city out of all the tribes of Israel, to build a house for My name being there; and I fix on David to be over My people Israel.
17 `And it is with the heart of David my father to build a house for the name of Jehovah, God of Israel,
18 and Jehovah saith unto David my father, Because that it hath been with thy heart to build a house for My name, thou hast done well that it hath been with thy heart;
19 only, thou dost not build the house, but thy son who is coming out from thy loins, he doth build the house for My name.
20 `And Jehovah doth establish His word which He spake, and I am risen up instead of David my father, and sit on the throne of Israel, as Jehovah spake, and build the house for the name of Jehovah, God of Israel,
21 and set there a place for the ark, where [is] the covenant of Jehovah which He made with our fathers in His bringing them out from the land of Egypt.'
22 And Solomon standeth before the altar of Jehovah, over-against all the assembly of Israel, and spreadeth his hands towards the heavens,
23 and saith, `Jehovah, God of Israel, there is not a God like Thee, in the heavens above, and on the earth beneath, keeping the covenant and the kindness for Thy servants, those walking before Thee with all their heart,
24 who hast kept for Thy servant David my father that which Thou spakest to him; yea, Thou speakest with Thy mouth, and with Thy hand hast fulfilled [it], as [at] this day.
25 `And now, Jehovah, God of Israel, keep for Thy servant David my father that which Thou spakest to him, saying, There is not cut off to thee a man from before Me, sitting on the throne of Israel -- only, if thy sons watch their way, to walk before Me as thou hast walked before Me.
26 `And now, O God of Israel, let it be established, I pray Thee, Thy word which Thou hast spoken to Thy servant, David my father.
27 But, is it true? -- God dwelleth on the earth! lo, the heavens, and the heavens of the heavens do not contain Thee, how much less this house which I have builded!
28 `Then thou hast turned unto the prayer of Thy servant, and unto his supplication, O Jehovah my God, to hearken unto the cry and unto the prayer which Thy servant is praying before Thee to-day,
29 for Thine eyes being open towards this house night and day, towards the place of which Thou hast said, My Name is there; to hearken unto the prayer which Thy servant prayeth towards this place.
30 `Then Thou hast hearkened unto the supplication of Thy servant, and of Thy people Israel, which they pray towards this place; yea, Thou dost hearken in the place of Thy dwelling, in the heavens -- and Thou hast hearkened, and hast forgiven,
31 that which a man sinneth against his neighbour, and he hath lifted up upon him an oath to cause him to swear, and the oath hath come in before Thine altar in this house,
32 then Thou dost hear in the heavens, and hast done, and hast judged Thy servants, to declare wicked the wicked, to put his way on his head, and to declare righteous the righteous, to give him according to his righteousness.
33 `In Thy people Israel being smitten before an enemy, because they sin against Thee, and they have turned back unto Thee, and have confessed Thy name, and prayed, and made supplication unto Thee in this house,
34 then thou dost hear in the heavens, and hast forgiven the sin of Thy people Israel, and brought them back unto the ground that Thou gavest to their fathers.
35 `In the heavens being restrained, and there is no rain, because they sin against Thee, and they have prayed towards this place, and confessed Thy name, and from their sin turn back, for Thou dost afflict them,
36 then Thou dost hear in the heavens, and hast forgiven the sin of Thy servants, and of Thy people Israel, for Thou directest them the good way in which they go, and hast given rain on Thy land which Thou hast given to Thy people for inheritance.
37 `Famine -- when it is in the land; pestilence -- when it is; blasting, mildew, locust; caterpillar -- when it is; when its enemy hath distressed it in the land [in] its gates, any plague, any sickness, --
38 any prayer, any supplication that [is] of any man of all Thy people Israel, who know each the plague of his own heart, and hath spread his hands towards this house,
39 then Thou dost hear in the heavens, the settled place of Thy dwelling, and hast forgiven, and hast done, and hast given to each according to all his ways, whose heart Thou knowest, (for Thou hast known -- Thyself alone -- the heart of all the sons of man),
40 so that they fear Thee all the days that they are living on the face of the ground that Thou hast given to our fathers.
41 `And also, unto the stranger who is not of Thy people Israel, and hath come from a land afar off for Thy name's sake --
42 (for they hear of Thy great name, and of Thy strong hand, and of Thy stretched-out arm) -- and he hath come in and prayed towards this house,
43 Thou dost hear in the heavens, the settled place of Thy dwelling, and hast done according to all that the stranger calleth unto Thee for, in order that all the peoples of the earth may know Thy name, to fear Thee like Thy people Israel, and to know that Thy name hath been called on this house which I have builded.
44 `When Thy people doth go out to battle against its enemy, in the way that Thou dost send them, and they have prayed unto Jehovah the way of the city which thou hast fixed on, and of the house which I have builded for Thy name;
45 then Thou hast heard in the heavens their prayer and their supplication, and hast maintained their cause.
46 `When they sin against Thee (for there is not a man who sinneth not), and Thou hast been angry with them, and hast given them up before an enemy, and they have taken captive their captivity unto the land of the enemy far off or near;
47 and they have turned [it] back unto their heart in the land whither they have been taken captive, and have turned back, and made supplication unto Thee, in the land of their captors, saying, We have sinned and done perversely -- we have done wickedly;
48 yea, they have turned back unto Thee, with all their heart, and with all their soul, in the land of their enemies who have taken them captive, and have prayed unto Thee the way of their land, which Thou gavest to their fathers, the city which Thou hast chosen, and the house which I have builded for Thy name:
49 `Then Thou hast heard in the heavens, the settled place of Thy dwelling, their prayer and their supplication, and hast maintained their cause,
50 and hast forgiven Thy people who have sinned against Thee, even all their transgressions which they have transgressed against Thee, and hast given them mercies before their captors, and they have had mercy [on] them --
51 (for Thy people and Thy inheritance [are] they, whom Thou didst bring out of Egypt, out of the midst of the furnace of iron) --
52 for Thine eyes being open unto the supplication of Thy servant, and unto the supplication of Thy people Israel, to hearken unto them in all they call unto Thee for;
53 for Thou hast separated them to Thyself for an inheritance, out of all the peoples of the earth, as Thou didst speak by the hand of Moses Thy servant, in Thy bringing out our fathers from Egypt, O Lord Jehovah.'
54 And it cometh to pass, at Solomon's finishing to pray unto Jehovah all this prayer and supplication, he hath risen from before the altar of Jehovah, from bending on his knees, and his hands spread out to the heavens,
55 and he standeth and blesseth all the assembly of Israel [with] a loud voice, saying,
56 `Blessed [is] Jehovah who hath given rest to His people Israel, according to all that He hath spoken; there hath not fallen one word of all His good word, which He spake by the hand of Moses his servant.
57 `Jehovah our God is with us as He hath been with our fathers; He doth not forsake us nor leave us;
58 to incline our heart unto Himself, to walk in all His ways, and to keep His commands, and His statutes, and His judgments, which He commanded our fathers;
59 and these my words with which I have made supplication before Jehovah, are near unto Jehovah our God by day and by night, to maintain the cause of His servant, and the cause of His people Israel, the matter of a day in its day;
60 for all the peoples of the earth knowing that Jehovah, He [is] God; there is none else;
61 and your heart hath been perfect with Jehovah our God, to walk in His statutes, and to keep His commands, as [at] this day.'
62 And the king and all Israel with him are sacrificing a sacrifice before Jehovah;
63 and Solomon sacrificeth the sacrifice of peace-offerings, which he hath sacrificed to Jehovah, oxen, twenty and two thousand, and sheep, a hundred and twenty thousand; and the king and all the sons of Israel dedicate the house of Jehovah.
64 On that day hath the king sanctified the middle of the court that [is] before the house of Jehovah, for he hath made there the burnt-offering, and the present, and the fat of the peace-offerings; for the altar of brass that [is] before Jehovah [is] too little to contain the burnt-offering, and the present, and the fat of the peace-offerings.
65 And Solomon maketh, at that time, the festival -- and all Israel with him, a great assembly from the entering in of Hamath unto the brook of Egypt -- before Jehovah our God, seven days and seven days; fourteen days.
66 On the eighth day he hath sent the people away, and they bless the king, and go to their tents, rejoicing and glad of heart for all the good that Jehovah hath done to David His servant, and to Israel His people.
Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
9.And it cometh to pass, at Solomon's finishing to build the house of Jehovah, and the house of the king, and all the desire of Solomon that he delighted to do,
2 that Jehovah appeareth unto Solomon a second time, as He appeared unto him in Gibeon,
3 and Jehovah saith unto him, `I have heard thy prayer and thy supplication with which thou hast made supplication before Me; I have hallowed this house that thou hast built to put My name there -- unto the age, and Mine eyes and My heart have been there all the days.
4 `And thou -- if thou dost walk before Me as David thy father walked, in simplicity of heart, and in uprightness, to do according to all that I have commanded thee -- My statutes and My judgments thou dost keep --
5 then I have established the throne of thy kingdom over Israel -- to the age, as I spake unto David thy father, saying, There is not cut off to thee a man from [being] on the throne of Israel.
6 `If ye at all turn back -- you and your sons -- from after Me, and keep not My commands -- My statutes, that I have set before you, and ye have gone and served other gods, and bowed yourselves to them,
7 then I have cut off Israel from the face of the ground that I have given to them, and the house that I have hallowed for My name I send away from My presence, and Israel hath been for a simile and for a byword among all the peoples;
8 as to this house, [that] is high, every one passing by it is astonished, and hath hissed, and they have said, Wherefore hath Jehovah done thus to this land and to this house?
9 and they have said, Because that they have forsaken Jehovah their God, who brought out their fathers from the land of Egypt, and they lay hold on other gods, and bow themselves to them, and serve them; therefore hath Jehovah brought in upon them all this evil.'
10 And it cometh to pass, at the end of twenty years, that Solomon hath built the two houses, the house of Jehovah, and the house of the king.
11 Hiram king of Tyre hath assisted Solomon with cedar-trees, and with fir-trees, and with gold, according to all his desire; then doth king Solomon give to Hiram twenty cities in the land of Galilee.
12 And Hiram cometh out from Tyre to see the cities that Solomon hath given to him, and they have not been right in his eyes,
13 and he saith, `What [are] these cities that thou hast given to me, my brother?' and one calleth them the land of Cabul unto this day.
14 And Hiram sendeth to the king a hundred and twenty talents of gold.
15 And this [is] the matter of the tribute that king Solomon hath lifted up, to build the house of Jehovah, and his own house, and Millo, and the wall of Jerusalem, and Hazor, and Megiddo, and Gezer,
16 (Pharaoh king of Egypt hath gone up and doth capture Gezer, and doth burn it with fire, and the Canaanite who is dwelling in the city he hath slain, and giveth it [with] presents to his daughter, wife of Solomon.)
17 And Solomon buildeth Gezer, and Beth-Horon the lower,
18 and Baalath, and Tadmor in the wilderness, in the land;
19 and all the cities of stores that king Solomon hath, and the cities of the chariots, and the cities of the horsemen, and the desire of Solomon that he desired to build in Jerusalem, and in Lebanon, and in all the land of his dominion.
20 The whole of the people that is left of the Amorite, the Hittite, the Perizzite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite, who [are] not of the sons of Israel --
21 their sons who are left behind them in the land, whom the sons of Israel have not been able to devote -- he hath even lifted up [on] them a tribute of service unto this day.
22 And out of the sons of Israel Solomon hath not appointed a servant, for they [are] the men of war, and his servants, and his heads, and his captains, and the heads of his chariots, and his horsemen.
23 These [are] the heads of the officers who [are] over the work of Solomon, fifty and five hundred, those ruling among the people who are labouring in the work.
24 Only, the daughter of Pharaoh went up out of the city of David unto her house that [Solomon] built for her; then he built Millo.
25 And Solomon caused to ascend, three times in a year, burnt-offerings and peace-offerings on the altar that he built to Jehovah, and he perfumed it with that which [is] before Jehovah, and finished the house.
26 And a navy hath king Solomon made in Ezion-Geber, that is beside Eloth, on the edge of the Sea of Suph, in the land of Edom.
27 And Hiram sendeth in the navy his servants, shipmen knowing the sea, with servants of Solomon,
28 and they come in to Ophir and take thence gold, four hundred and twenty talents, and bring [it] in unto king Solomon.
Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
 10. And the queen of Sheba is hearing of the fame of Solomon concerning the name of Jehovah, and cometh to try him with enigmas,
2 and she cometh to Jerusalem, with a very great company, camels bearing spices, and very much gold, and precious stone, and she cometh unto Solomon, and speaketh unto him all that hath been with her heart.
3 And Solomon declareth to her all her matters -- there hath not been a thing hid from the king that he hath not declared to her.
4 And the queen of Sheba seeth all the wisdom of Solomon, and the house that he built,
5 and the food of his table, and the sitting of his servants, and the standing of his ministers, and their clothing, and his butlers, and his burnt-offering that he causeth to ascend in the house of Jehovah, and there hath not been in her any more spirit.
6 And she saith unto the king, `True hath been the word that I heard in my land, concerning thy matters and thy wisdom;
7 and I gave no credence to the words till that I have come, and my eyes see, and lo, it was not declared to me -- the half; thou hast added wisdom and goodness unto the report that I heard.
8 O the happiness of thy men, O the happiness of thy servants -- these -- who are standing before thee continually, who are hearing thy wisdom!
9 Jehovah thy God is blessed who delighted in thee, to put thee on the throne of Israel; in Jehovah's loving Israel to the age He doth set thee for king, to do judgment and righteousness.
10 And she giveth to the king a hundred and twenty talents of gold, and spices very many, and precious stone; there came not like that spice any more for abundance that the queen of Sheba gave to king Solomon.
11 And also, the navy of Hiram that bore gold from Ophir, brought in from Ophir almug-trees very many, and precious stone;
12 and the king maketh the almug-trees a support for the house of Jehovah, and for the house of the king, and harps and psalteries for singers; there have not come such almug-trees, nor have there been seen [such] unto this day.
13 And king Solomon gave to the queen of Sheba all her desire that she asked, apart from that which he gave to her as a memorial of king Solomon, and she turneth and goeth to her land, she and her servants.
14 And the weight of the gold that hath come to Solomon in one year is six hundred sixty and six talents of gold,
15 apart from [that of] the tourists, and of the traffic of the merchants, and of all the kings of Arabia, and of the governors of the land.
16 And king Solomon maketh two hundred targets of alloyed gold -- six hundred of gold go up on the one target;
17 and three hundred shields of alloyed gold -- three pounds of gold go up on the one shield; and the king putteth them [in] the house of the forest of Lebanon.
18 And the king maketh a great throne of ivory, and overlayeth it with refined gold;
19 six steps hath the throne, and a round top [is] to the throne behind it, and hands [are] on this [side] and on that, unto the place of the sitting, and two lions are standing near the hands,
20 and twelve lions are standing there on the six steps, on this [side] and on that; it hath not been made so for any kingdom.
21 And all the drinking vessels of king Solomon [are] of gold, and all the vessels of the house of the forest of Lebanon [are] of refined gold -- there are none of silver; it was not reckoned in the days of Solomon for anything,
22 for a navy of Tarshish hath the king at sea with a navy of Hiram; once in three years cometh the navy of Tarshish, bearing gold, and silver, ivory, and apes, and peacocks.
23 And king Solomon is greater than any of the kings of the earth for riches and for wisdom,
24 and all the earth is seeking the presence of Solomon, to hear his wisdom that God hath put into his heart,
25 and they are bringing each his present, vessels of silver, and vessels of gold, and garments, and armour, and spices, horses, and mules, the matter of a year in a year.
26 And Solomon gathereth chariots, and horsemen, and he hath a thousand and four hundred chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen, and he placeth them in the cities of the chariot, and with the king in Jerusalem.
27 And the king maketh the silver in Jerusalem as stones, and the cedars he hath made as the sycamores that [are] in the low country, for abundance.
28 And the outgoing of the horses that king Solomon hath [is] from Egypt, and from Keveh; merchants of the king take from Keveh at a price;
29 and a chariot cometh up and cometh out of Egypt for six hundred silverlings, and a horse for fifty and a hundred, and so for all the kings of the Hittites, and for the kings of Aram; by their hand they bring out.
Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
11.And king Solomon hath loved many strange women, and the daughter of Pharaoh, females of Moab, Ammon, Edom, Zidon, [and] of the Hittites,
2 of the nations of which Jehovah said unto the sons of Israel, `Ye do not go in to them, and they do not go in to you; surely they turn aside your heart after their gods;' to them hath Solomon cleaved for love.
3 And he hath women, princesses, seven hundred, and concubines three hundred; and his wives turn aside his heart.
4 And it cometh to pass, at the time of the old age of Solomon, his wives have turned aside his heart after other gods, and his heart hath not been perfect with Jehovah his God, like the heart of David his father.
5 And Solomon goeth after Ashtoreth god[dess] of the Zidonians, and after Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites;
6 and Solomon doth the evil thing in the eyes of Jehovah, and hath not been fully after Jehovah, like David his father.
7 Then doth Solomon build a high place for Chemosh the abomination of Moab, in the hill that [is] on the front of Jerusalem, and for Molech the abomination of the sons of Ammon;
8 and so he hath done for all his strange women, who are perfuming and sacrificing to their gods.
9 And Jehovah sheweth Himself angry with Solomon, for his heart hath turned aside from Jehovah, God of Israel, who had appeared unto him twice,
10 and given a charge unto him concerning this thing, not to go after other gods; and he hath not kept that which Jehovah commanded,
11 and Jehovah saith to Solomon, `Because that this hath been with thee, and thou hast not kept My covenant and My statutes that I charged upon thee, I surely rend the kingdom from thee, and have given it to thy servant.
12 `Only, in thy days I do it not, for the sake of David thy father; out of the hand of thy son I rend it;
13 only all the kingdom I do not rend away; one tribe I give to thy son, for the sake of David My servant, and for the sake of Jerusalem, that I have chosen.'
14 And Jehovah raiseth up an adversary to Solomon, Hadad the Edomite; of the seed of the king [is] he in Edom;
15 and it cometh to pass, in David's being with Edom, in the going up of Joab head of the host to bury the slain, that he smiteth every male in Edom --
16 for six months did Joab abide there, and all Israel, till the cutting off of every male in Edom --
17 and Hadad fleeth, he and certain Edomites, of the servants of his father, with him, to go in to Egypt, and Hadad [is] a little youth,
18 and they rise out of Midian, and come into Paran, and take men with them out of Paran, and come in to Egypt, unto Pharaoh king of Egypt, and he giveth to him a house, and bread hath commanded for him, and land hath given to him.
19 And Hadad findeth grace in the eyes of Pharaoh exceedingly, and he giveth to him a wife, the sister of his own wife, sister of Tahpenes the mistress;
20 and the sister of Tahpenes beareth to him Genubath his son, and Tahpenes weaneth him within the house of Pharaoh, and Genubath is in the house of Pharaoh in the midst of the sons of Pharaoh.
21 And Hadad hath heard in Egypt that David hath lain with his fathers, and that Joab head of the host is dead, and Hadad saith unto Pharaoh, `Send me away, and I go unto my land.'
22 And Pharaoh saith to him, `But, what art thou lacking with me, that lo, thou art seeking to go unto thine own land?' and he saith, `Nay, but thou dost certainly send me away.'
23 And God raiseth to him an adversary, Rezon son of Eliadah, who hath fled from Hadadezer king of Zobah, his lord,
24 and gathereth unto himself men, and is head of a troop in David's slaying them, and they go to Damascus, and dwell in it, and reign in Damascus;
25 and he is an adversary to Israel all the days of Solomon, (besides the evil that Hadad [did]), and he cutteth off in Israel, and reigneth over Aram.
26 And Jeroboam son of Nebat, an Ephrathite of Zereda -- the name of whose mother [is] Zeruah, a widow woman -- servant to Solomon, he also lifteth up a hand against the king;
27 and this [is] the thing [for] which he lifted up a hand against the king: Solomon built Millo -- he shut up the breach of the city of David his father,
28 and the man Jeroboam [is] mighty in valour, and Solomon seeth the young man that he is doing business, and appointeth him over all the burden of the house of Joseph.
29 And it cometh to pass, at that time, that Jeroboam hath gone out from Jerusalem, and Ahijah the Shilonite, the prophet, findeth him in the way, and he is covering himself with a new garment; and both of them [are] by themselves in a field,
30 and Ahijah layeth hold on the new garment that [is] on him, and rendeth it -- twelve pieces,
31 and saith to Jeroboam, `Take to thee ten pieces, for thus said Jehovah, God of Israel, lo, I am rending the kingdom out of the hand of Solomon, and have given to thee the ten tribes,
32 and the one tribe he hath for My servant David's sake, and for Jerusalem's sake, the city which I have fixed on, out of all the tribes of Israel.
33 `Because they have forsaken Me, and bow themselves to Ashtoreth, god[dess] of the Zidonians, to Chemosh god of Moab, and to Milcom god of the sons of Ammon, and have not walked in My ways, to do that which [is] right in Mine eyes, and My statutes and My judgments, like David his father.
34 `And I do not take the whole of the kingdom out of his hand, for prince I make him all days of his life, for the sake of David My servant whom I chose, who kept My commands and My statutes;
35 and I have taken the kingdom out of the hand of his son, and given it to thee -- the ten tribes;
36 and to his son I give one tribe, for there being a lamp to David My servant all the days before Me in Jerusalem, the city that I have chosen to Myself to put My name there.
37 `And thee I take, and thou hast reigned over all that thy soul desireth, and thou hast been king over Israel;
38 and it hath been, if thou dost hear all that I command thee, and hast walked in My ways, and done that which is right in Mine eyes, to keep My statutes and My commands, as did David My servant, that I have been with thee, and have built for thee a stedfast house, as I built for David, and have given to thee Israel,
39 and I humble the seed of David for this; only, not all the days.'
40 And Solomon seeketh to put Jeroboam to death, and Jeroboam riseth and fleeth to Egypt, unto Shishak king of Egypt, and he is in Egypt till the death of Solomon.
41 And the rest of the matters of Solomon, and all that he did, and his wisdom, are they not written on the book of the matters of Solomon?
42 And the days that Solomon hath reigned in Jerusalem over all Israel [are] forty years,
43 and Solomon lieth with his fathers, and is buried in the city of David his father, and reign doth Rehoboam his son in his stead.
Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
 12.And Rehoboam goeth to Shechem, for to Shechem hath all Israel come to make him king.
2 And it cometh to pass, at Jeroboam son of Nebat's hearing (and he [is] yet in Egypt where he hath fled from the presence of Solomon the king, and Jeroboam dwelleth in Egypt),
3 that they send and call for him; and they come -- Jeroboam and all the assembly of Israel -- and speak unto Rehoboam, saying,
4 `Thy father made hard our yoke, and thou, now, make light [some] of the hard service of thy father, and his heavy yoke that he put upon us, and we serve thee.'
5 And he saith unto them, `Go -- yet three days, and come back unto me;' and the people go.
6 And king Rehoboam consulteth with the elders who have been standing in the presence of Solomon his father, in his being alive, saying, `How are ye counselling to answer this people?'
7 And they speak unto him, saying, `If, to-day, thou art servant to this people, and hast served them, and answered them, and spoken unto them good words, then they have been to thee servants all the days.'
8 And he forsaketh the counsel of the elders which they counselled him, and consulteth with the lads who have grown up with him, who are standing before him;
9 and he saith unto them, `What are ye counselling, and we answer this people, who have spoken unto me, saying, Lighten [somewhat] of the yoke that thy father put upon us?'
10 And they speak unto him -- the lads who had grown up with him -- saying, `Thus dost thou say to this people who have spoken unto thee, saying, Thy father made our yoke heavy, and thou, make [it] light upon us; thus dost thou speak unto them, My little [finger] is thicker than the loins of my father;
11 and now, my father laid on you a heavy yoke, and I add to your yoke; my father chastised you with whips, and I -- I chastise you with scorpions.'
12 And they come -- Jeroboam and all the people -- unto Rehoboam, on the third day, as the king had spoken, saying, `Come back unto me on the third day.'
13 And the king answereth the people sharply, and forsaketh the counsel of the elders which they counselled him,
14 and speaketh unto them, according to the counsel of the lads, saying, `My father made your yoke heavy, and I add to your yoke; my father chastised you with whips, and I -- I chastise you with scorpions;'
15 and the king hearkened not unto the people, for the revolution was from Jehovah, in order to establish His word that Jehovah spake by the hand of Ahijah the Shilonite unto Jeroboam son of Nebat.
16 And all Israel see that the king hath not hearkened unto them, and the people send the king back word, saying, `What portion have we in David? yea, there is no inheritance in the son of Jesse; to thy tents, O Israel; now see thy house, O David!' and Israel goeth to its tents.
17 As to the sons of Israel, those dwelling in the cities of Judah -- over them reign doth Rehoboam.
18 And king Rehoboam sendeth Adoram who [is] over the tribute, and all Israel cast at him stones, and he dieth; and king Rehoboam hath strengthened himself to go up into a chariot to flee to Jerusalem;
19 and Israel transgresseth against the house of David unto this day.
20 And it cometh to pass, at all Israel's hearing that Jeroboam hath returned, that they send and call him unto the company, and cause him to reign over all Israel; none hath been after the house of David save the tribe of Judah alone.
21 And Rehoboam cometh to Jerusalem, and assembleth all the house of Judah and the tribe of Benjamin, a hundred and eighty thousand chosen warriors, to fight with the house of Israel, to bring back the kingdom to Rehoboam son of Solomon.
22 And the word of God is unto Shemaiah a man of God, saying,
23 `Speak unto Rehoboam son of Solomon, king of Judah, and unto all the house of Judah and Benjamin, and the rest of the people, saying,
24 Thus said Jehovah, Ye do not go up nor fight with your brethren the sons of Israel; turn back each to his house, for from Me hath this thing been;' and they hear the word of Jehovah, and turn back to go according to the word of Jehovah.
25 And Jeroboam buildeth Shechem in the hill-country of Ephraim, and dwelleth in it, and goeth out thence, and buildeth Penuel;
26 and Jeroboam saith in his heart, `Now doth the kingdom turn back to the house of David --
27 if this people go up to make sacrifices in the house of Jehovah in Jerusalem, then hath the heart of this people turned back unto their lord, unto Rehoboam king of Judah, and they have slain me, and turned back unto Rehoboam king of Judah.'
28 And the king taketh counsel, and maketh two calves of gold, and saith unto them, `Enough to you of going up to Jerusalem; lo, thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.'
29 And he setteth the one in Beth-El, and the other he hath put in Dan,
30 and this thing becometh a sin, and the people go before the one -- unto Dan.
31 And he maketh the house of high places, and maketh priests of the extremities of the people, who were not of the sons of Levi;
32 and Jeroboam maketh a festival in the eighth month, in the fifteenth day of the month, like the festival that [is] in Judah, and he offereth on the altar -- so did he in Beth-El -- to sacrifice to the calves which he made, and he hath appointed in Beth-El the priests of the high places that he made.
33 And he offereth up on the altar that he made in Beth-El, on the fifteenth day of the eighth month, in the month that he devised of his own heart, and he maketh a festival to the sons of Israel, and offereth on the altar -- to make perfume.
Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
  13.And lo, a man of God hath come from Judah, by the word of Jehovah, unto Beth-El, and Jeroboam is standing by the altar -- to make perfume;
2 and he calleth against the altar, by the word of Jehovah, and saith, `Altar! altar! thus said Jehovah, Lo, a son is born to the house of David -- Josiah his name -- and he hath sacrificed on thee the priests of the high places who are making perfume on thee, and bones of man are burnt on thee.'
3 And he hath given on that day a sign, saying, `This [is] the sign that Jehovah hath spoken, Lo, the altar is rent, and the ashes poured forth that [are] on it.'
4 And it cometh to pass, at the king's hearing the word of the man of God that he calleth against the altar in Beth-El, that Jeroboam putteth forth his hand from off the altar, saying, `Catch him;' and his hand is dried up that he hath put forth against him, and he is not able to bring it back unto him,
5 and the altar is rent, and the ashes poured forth from the altar, according to the sign that the man of God had given by the word of Jehovah.
6 And the king answereth and saith unto the man of God, `Appease, I pray thee, the face of Jehovah thy God, and pray for me, and my hand doth come back unto me;' and the man of God appeaseth the face of Jehovah, and the hand of the king cometh back unto him, and it is as at the beginning.
7 And the king speaketh unto the man of God, `Come in with me to the house, and refresh thyself, and I give to thee a gift.'
8 And the man of God saith unto the king, `If thou dost give to me the half of thine house, I do not go in with thee, nor do I eat bread, nor do I drink water, in this place;
9 for so He commanded me by the word of Jehovah, saying, Thou dost not eat bread nor drink water, nor turn back in the way that thou hast come.'
10 And he goeth on in another way, and hath not turned back in the way in which he came in unto Beth-El.
11 And a certain aged prophet is dwelling in Beth-El, and his son cometh and recounteth to him all the deed that the man of God hath done to-day in Beth-El, the words that he hath spoken unto the king, -- yea, they recount them to their father.
12 And their father saith unto them, `Where [is] this -- the way he hath gone?' and his sons see the way that the man of God hath gone who came from Judah.
13 And he saith unto his sons, `Saddle for me the ass,' and they saddle for him the ass, and he rideth on it,
14 and goeth after the man of God, and findeth him sitting under the oak, and saith unto him, `Art thou the man of God who hast come from Judah?' and he saith, `I [am].'
15 And he saith unto him, `Come with me to the house, and eat bread.'
16 And he saith, `I am not able to turn back with thee, and to go in with thee, nor do I eat bread or drink with thee water in this place,
17 for a word [is] unto me by the word of Jehovah, Thou dost not eat bread nor drink there water, thou dost not turn back to go in the way in which thou camest.'
18 And he saith to him, `I also [am] a prophet like thee, and a messenger spake unto me by the word of Jehovah, saying, Bring him back with thee unto thy house, and he doth eat bread and drink water;' -- he hath lied to him.
19 And he turneth back with him, and eateth bread in his house, and drinketh water.
20 And it cometh to pass -- they are sitting at the table -- and a word of Jehovah is unto the prophet who brought him back,
21 and he calleth unto the man of God who came from Judah, saying, `Thus said Jehovah, Because that thou hast provoked the mouth of Jehovah, and hast not kept the command that Jehovah thy God charged thee,
22 and turnest back and dost eat bread and drink water in the place of which He said unto thee, Thou dost not eat bread nor drink water -- thy carcase cometh not in unto the burying-place of thy fathers.'
23 And it cometh to pass, after his eating bread, and after his drinking, that he saddleth for him the ass, for the prophet whom he had brought back,
24 and he goeth, and a lion findeth him in the way, and putteth him to death, and his carcase is cast in the way, and the ass is standing near it, and the lion is standing near the carcase.
25 And lo, men are passing by, and see the carcase cast in the way, and the lion standing near the carcase, and they come and speak [of it] in the city in which the old prophet is dwelling.
26 And the prophet who brought him back out of the way heareth and saith, `It [is] the man of God who provoked the mouth of Jehovah, and Jehovah giveth him to the lion, and it destroyeth him, and putteth him to death, according to the word of Jehovah that he spake to him.'
27 And he speaketh unto his sons saying, `Saddle for me the ass,' and they saddle [it].
28 And he goeth and findeth his carcase cast in the way, and the ass and the lion are standing near the carcase -- the lion hath not eaten the carcase nor destroyed the ass.
29 And the prophet taketh up the carcase of the man of God, and placeth it on the ass, and bringeth it back, and the old prophet cometh in unto the city to mourn and to bury him,
30 and he placeth his carcase in his own grave, and they mourn for him, `Oh, my brother!'
31 And it cometh to pass, after his burying him, that he speaketh unto his sons, saying, `At my death -- ye have buried me in the burying-place in which the man of God is buried; near his bones place my bones;
32 for the word certainly cometh to pass that he called by the word of Jehovah concerning the altar which [is] Beth-El, and concerning all the houses of the high places that [are] in cities of Samaria.'
33 After this thing Jeroboam hath not turned from his evil way, and turneth back, and maketh of the extremities of the people priests of high places; he who is desirous he consecrateth his hand, and he is of the priests of the high places.
34 And in this thing is the sin of the house of Jeroboam, even to cut [it] off, and to destroy [it] from off the face of the ground.
Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
 14.At that time was Abijah son of Jeroboam sick,
2 and Jeroboam saith to his wife, `Rise, I pray thee, and change thyself, and they know not that thou [art] wife of Jeroboam, and thou hast gone to Shiloh; lo, there [is] Ahijah the prophet; he spake unto me of [being] king over this people;
3 and thou hast taken in thy hand ten loaves, and crumbs, and a bottle of honey, and hast gone in unto him; he doth declare to thee what becometh of the youth.'
4 And the wife of Jeroboam doth so, and riseth, and goeth to Shiloh, and entereth the house of Ahijah, and Ahijah is not able to see, for his eyes have stood because of his age.
5 And Jehovah said unto Ahijah, `Lo, the wife of Jeroboam is coming to seek a word from thee concerning her son, for he is sick; thus and thus thou dost speak unto her, and it cometh to pass at her coming in, that she is making herself strange.'
6 And it cometh to pass, at Ahijah's hearing the sound of her feet [as] she came in to the opening, that he saith, `Come in, wife of Jeroboam, why is this -- thou art making thyself strange? and I am sent unto thee [with] a sharp thing:
7 Go, say to Jeroboam, Thus said Jehovah, God of Israel, Because that I have made thee high out of the midst of the people, and appoint thee leader over my people Israel,
8 and rend the kingdom from the house of David, and give it to thee, -- and thou hast not been as My servant David who kept My commands, and who walked after Me with all his heart, to do only that which [is] right in Mine eyes,
9 and thou dost evil above all who have been before thee, and goest, and makest to thee other gods and molten images to provoke Me to anger, and Me thou hast cast behind thy back:
10 `Therefore, lo, I am bringing in evil unto the house of Jeroboam, and have cut off to Jeroboam those sitting on the wall -- shut up and left -- in Israel, and have put away the posterity of the house of Jeroboam, as one putteth away the dung till its consumption;
11 him who dieth of Jeroboam in a city do the dogs eat, and him who dieth in a field do fowl of the heavens eat, for Jehovah hath spoken.
12 `And thou, rise, go to thy house; in the going in of thy feet to the city -- hath the lad died;
13 and all Israel have mourned for him, and buried him, for this one -- by himself -- cometh of Jeroboam unto a grave, because there hath been found in him a good thing towards Jehovah, God of Israel, in the house of Jeroboam.
14 `And Jehovah hath raised up for Him a king over Israel who cutteth off the house of Jeroboam this day -- and what? -- even now!
15 And Jehovah hath smitten Israel as the reed is moved by the waters, and hath plucked Israel from off this good ground that He gave to their fathers, and scattered them beyond the River, because that they made their shrines, provoking Jehovah to anger;
16 and He giveth up Israel because of the sins of Jeroboam that he sinned, and that he caused Israel to sin.'
17 And the wife of Jeroboam riseth, and goeth, and cometh to Tirzah; she hath come in to the threshold of the house, and the youth dieth;
18 and they bury him, and mourn for him do all Israel, according to the word of Jehovah, that he spake by the hand of His servant Ahijah the prophet.
19 And the rest of the matters of Jeroboam, how he fought, and how he reigned, lo, they are written on the book of the Chronicles of the kings of Israel.
20 And the days that Jeroboam reigned [are] twenty and two years, and he lieth with his fathers, and reign doth Nadab his son in his stead.
21 And Rehoboam son of Solomon hath reigned in Judah; a son of forty and one years [is] Rehoboam in his reigning, and seventeen years he hath reigned in Jerusalem, the city that Jehovah chose to set His name there, out of all the tribes of Israel, and the name of his mother [is] Naamah the Ammonitess.
22 And Judah doth the evil thing in the eyes of Jehovah, and they make Him zealous above all that their fathers did by their sins that they have sinned.
23 And they build -- also they -- for themselves high places, and standing-pillars, and shrines, on every high height, and under every green tree;
24 and also a whoremonger hath been in the land; they have done according to all the abominations of the nations that Jehovah dispossessed from the presence of the sons of Israel.
25 And it cometh to pass, in the fifth year of king Rehoboam, gone up hath Shishak king of Egypt against Jerusalem,
26 and he taketh the treasures of the house of Jehovah, and the treasures of the house of the king, yea, the whole he hath taken; and he taketh all the shields of gold that Solomon made.
27 And king Rehoboam maketh in their stead shields of brass, and hath made [them] a charge on the hand of the heads of the runners, those keeping the opening of the house of the king,
28 and it cometh to pass, from the going in of the king to the house of Jehovah, the runners bear them, and have brought them back unto the chamber of the runners.
29 And the rest of the matters of Rehoboam, and all that he did, are they not written on the book of the Chronicles of the kings of Judah?
30 And war hath been between Rehoboam and Jeroboam all the days;
31 and Rehoboam lieth with his fathers, and is buried with his fathers, in the city of David, and the name of his mother [is] Naamah the Ammonitess, and reign doth Abijam his son in his stead.
Young's Literal Translation (YLT)

On Russia's war on religious liberty II:The Watchtower Society's commentary.

Experts Decry Russia’s Threat to Ban the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures

This is Part 2 of a three-part series based on exclusive interviews with noted scholars of religion, politics, and sociology, as well as experts in Soviet and post-Soviet studies.


ST. PETERSBURG, Russia—Russian authorities are attempting to ban the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures published by Jehovah’s Witnesses, labeling it as “extremist.”

Ironically, if the court rules in favor of the prosecution, any ban placed on the New World Translation would “violate the amendment to Article 3 of the Federal Law on Extremism signed by Mr. Putin in the fall of 2015,” according to Dr. Ekaterina Elbakyan, professor of sociology and management of social processes at the Moscow Academy of Labor and Social Relations. The amendment to Article 3 clearly states: “The Bible, the Quran, the Tanakh, and the Kangyur, their contents, and quotations from them cannot be recognized as extremist materials.”

“Who would have imagined that adopting a law giving immunity to certain holy texts would provoke the banning of other holy texts?” states Dr. Roman Lunkin, head of the Center for Religion and Society at the Institute of Europe, Russian Academy of Sciences in Moscow. “The first to suffer have been the Jehovah’s Witnesses, along with their translation of the Bible.

Additionally, “as an ICCPR [International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights] member state, Russia’s attempt to ban such a Bible would be contravening freedom of religion conventions,” notes Dr. Jeffrey Haynes, professor of politics and director of the Centre for the Study of Religion, Conflict and Cooperation at London Metropolitan University.

The case against the New World Translation is being held at the Vyborg City Court, 138 kilometers (85 mi.) northwest of St. Petersburg. On April 26, 2016, the second day of preliminary hearings, the judge granted the prosecution’s request to suspend the case, pending a court-appointed analysis of the New World Translation. The Witnesses were not given a chance to present their defense, and the court assigned the analysis to be done by the Center for Sociocultural Expert Studies, whose negative conclusions about the New World Translation served as the basis for the prosecutor’s original claim. Assigning the center to analyze the New World Translation again violates the precedent set by Russia’s Supreme Court to disqualify an expert if he has previously expressed his opinion about a subject being considered in court.

While the court-appointed analysis is pending, scholars have expressed their regard for the Witnesses’ translation. One such scholar, Dr. Gerhard Besier, director of the Sigmund Neumann Institute for the Research on Freedom and Democracy, comments: “The New World Translation has received high praise worldwide from Bible scholars representing diverse religious communities.”

Likewise, the Moscow-based SOVA Center for Information and Analysis stated in the February 2016 edition of their monthly news release Misuse of Anti-Extremism: “We don’t find any signs of extremism in the New World Translation.” Since then, in almost every monthly news release, SOVA Center has repeated its definitive position against Russia’s actions, such as was published in June 2016: “We would like to reiterate that we view persecution against Jehovah’s Witnesses in Russia and bans against their literature and communities as religious discrimination.”

Facts About the New World Translation:
For over a century, Jehovah’s Witnesses in Russia worshipped using a variety of Bible translations, including the Russian synodal and Makarios translations. In 1994, the Witnesses embarked on what would be a 12-year project to translate the Bible into contemporary Russian. In 2007, the complete New World Translation in Russian was released. Since then, over 4.8 million copies in Russian have been produced. The New World Translation is available, in whole or in part, in 137 languages, with over 217 million copies printed. The nearly 175,000 Witnesses in Russia use a variety of peaceful and societally responsible methods to offer Bibles to interested ones free of charge.

Media Contacts:

International: David A. Semonian, Office of Public Information, 1-718-560-5000


Russia: Yaroslav Sivulskiy, 7-812-702-2691

On Russia's war on religious liberty.:The Watchtower Society's commentary.

Experts Explain: Russia Uses Anti-Extremism Law as Ploy to Criminalize Jehovah’s Witnesses

This is Part 1 of a three-part series based on exclusive interviews with noted scholars of religion, politics, and sociology, as well as experts in Soviet and post-Soviet studies.

ST. PETERSBURG, Russia—The Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation is attempting to declare Jehovah’s Witnesses “extremists.” If the court rules in favor of the prosecution, it could lead to the Witnesses’ national legal entity being liquidated, effectively banning their activity throughout the federation. The Witnesses have appealed the charges against them and court proceedings are expected to resume on September 23, 2016.


The case against the Witnesses is based on Russia’s anti-extremism law, which scholars are calling “discriminatory,” “deeply flawed,” and “patently absurd.”

“The kinds of extremism that should be combatted are those that endanger the physical lives of persons,” says Dr. Derek H. Davis, former director of the J.M. Dawson Institute of Church-State Studies at Baylor University. “Combatting anything else is itself a form of extremism.”

The reason for such extreme action against a nonviolent religious group like the Witnesses is explained by Dr. Mark Juergensmeyer, director of the Orfalea Center for Global and International Studies at the University of California, Santa Barbara: “The curtailment of religious freedom in the name of combatting extremism is a regrettable ploy.” Additionally, explains Dr. Jim Beckford, fellow of the British Academy, “elements within the Russian Orthodox Church connive with the forces of order to promote their own interests and to suppress any perceived competition.”(Emphasis mine)
  
Experts explain that the problem is not only the abuse of the law but also that the law’s framework accommodates the abuse. According to the Moscow-based SOVA Center for human rights: “As we have repeatedly stated, the anti-extremist legislation, with its vague wording, makes a perfect instrument for prosecution of political opponents or other groups that stand out from the mainstream.”

“Russian citizens should be troubled by the State’s decision to discriminate against Witnesses,” reasons Dr. Emily B. Baran, assistant professor of Russian and Eastern European history at Middle Tennessee State University, “because it suggests that the State is prepared to revoke equal rights for other groups, and to take similar measures against other minority communities.”

Facts About Jehovah’s Witnesses:
Jehovah’s Witnesses have been active in Russia since 1891. There are some 175,000 Witnesses in Russia and over 8 million in 240 lands.


Media Contacts:

International: David A. Semonian, Office of Public Information, 1-718-560-5000


Russia: Yaroslav Sivulskiy, 7-812-702-2691

The Cell's quality control systems v.Darwin.

Two Mechanisms Proofread DNA Translation. Make That Three.
Evolution News & Views 

If you recall the translation steps animated in Unlocking the Mystery of Life, you remember that messenger RNA (mRNA) transcripts are read in sets of three letters (codons). Matching the mRNA codons are transfer RNA molecules (tRNA), each equipped with a matching "anticodon" at one end, and an amino acid at the other end (when fully loaded, they are called aminoacyl-tRNAs, or aa-tRNAs). As the codons and anticodons pair up in single file inside the ribosome, the amino acids fasten in single file with peptide bonds. The growing polypeptide chain will become a protein after translation is complete. Additional molecular "chaperones" ensure that the resulting polypeptide chains are folded correctly into functional molecular machines.

The Uppsala team peered into the ribosome to take a closer look at the step where tRNA meets mRNA. They knew that selection of the correct tRNA was a crucial first step, first predicted by Linus Pauling seven decades ago. When the measured accuracy in translation was shown to be actually higher than Pauling predicted, molecular biologists suspected some kind of error correction mechanism must be at work. A proofreading mechanism was subsequently found in the ribosome. But how does it work? We can relate to human proofreaders, but how do molecules without eyes proofread in the dark inside of a ribosome?

Accuracy amplification by proofreading requires substrate discarding to be driven by a chemical potential decrease from the entering of a substrate to its exit along the proofreading path. One way to implement such a drop in chemical potential is to couple the discarding of substrates by proofreading to hydrolysis of GTP or ATP at high chemical potential to the low chemical potential of their hydrolytic products.
In short, proofreading needs to be energy efficient, but it won't happen without the expenditure of an energy-rich molecule to push it along. The reaction must favor getting the right molecule where it belongs.

Biochemists knew that each aa-tRNA has to be prepped for its role by binding to an assistant called Elongation Factor Tu (EF-Tu) plus a fuel molecule, GTP. But after that step, the authors found two more:

We have found that the bacterial ribosome uses two proofreading steps following initial selection of transfer RNAs (tRNAs) to maintain high accuracy of translation of the genetic code. This means that there are three selection steps for codon recognition by aa-tRNAs. First, there is initial codon selection by aa-tRNA in ternary complex with elongation factor Tu (EF-Tu) and GTP. Second, there is proofreading of aa-tRNA in ternary complex with EF-Tu and GDP. Third, there is proofreading of aa-tRNA in an EF-Tu−independent manner, presumably after dissociation of EF-Tu·GDP from the ribosome (Fig. 1).
This significantly amplifies the accuracy of translation. "Although it was early recognized that multistep proofreading confers higher accuracy and kinetic efficiency to substrate-selective, enzyme-catalyzed reactions than single-step proofreading," they say, "it has been taken for granted that there is but a single proofreading step in tRNA selection by the translating ribosome." The new findings shed new light on the actual molecular steps required for high accuracy proofreading. And although their work was done on bacteria, "we suggest that two-step proofreading mechanisms are at work not only in bacteria but also in eukaryotes and, perhaps, in all three kingdoms of life."

How does an evolutionist explain this? Early in the paper, they say, "We suggest that multistep proofreading in genetic code translation has evolved to neutralize potential error hot spots originating in error-prone initial selection of aa-tRNA in ternary complex with EF-Tu and GTP." But that cannot be true. It's a teleological statement. Natural selection cannot "evolve to" do anything. Later in the paper, they focus more on the question, laying out the plot for an evolutionary fairy tale: "Why Did Mother Nature Evolve Two Proofreading Steps in Genetic Code Translation?"

The existence of two distinct proofreading steps may appear surprising, because the accuracy of initial codon selection by ternary complex normally is remarkably high. Therefore, we suggest that two-step proofreading has evolved to neutralize the deleterious effects of a small number of distinct error hot spots for initial codon selection as observed in vitro and in vivo.
This should cause even more grief for neo-Darwinism, because it shows that single-step proofreading "normally is remarkably high." In essence, the cell double-checks its already-accurate translation. They actually use the word "rechecking" to describe it. They estimate it provides a million-fold increase in accuracy, "far above the here observed modest accuracy amplification in the range of 300."

Apart from the unexpected finding of two proofreading steps, the present study has identified the structural basis of the first, EF-Tu−dependent, step and suggested mechanistic features of both proofreading steps. These findings will facilitate structural analysis of the proofreading steps along with structure-based computations of their codon-discriminating standard free energies for a deeper understanding of the evolution of accurate reading of the genetic code.
Other Examples of Redundant Systems in the Cell

This is not the only case of multiple, independent systems in the cell. Three researchers in Massachusetts, also publishing in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, found redundant mechanisms for repairing double-stranded breaks in DNA. The two pathways, NHEJ and MMEJ, may work as primary and backup systems. "It is possible that there is partial redundancy between the NHEJ and MMEJ pathways, with MMEJ serving as a backup and NHEJ being the primary mechanism." The backup pathway contributes to repair of some double-stranded breaks but not all of them.

Past posts here at Evolution News have pointed out redundancy in biological systems, such as this one stating that "pathways are organized into an intertwined, often redundant network with architecture that is closely related to the robustness of cellular information processing." Another article pointed out that chromosomes appear to have a backup site for centromeres.

What we learn in these papers comports well with what David Snoke said in an ID the Future podcast about Systems Biology as an engineer's way of looking at life (for more, see this from Casey Luskin). Engineers understand concepts like backups, redundancy, double-checking, and quality control. They realize that there are tradeoffs between accuracy and speed, so they seek to optimize competing design requirements.


Instead of the bottom-up view of the reductionist, the systems biologist takes the top-down view: how do all the components work together as a system? In actual practice, he says, systems biologists seek to understand living things as examples of optimized systems, and also to "reverse engineer" them in novel ways. In both contexts, intelligent design -- not Darwinian evolution -- is the operative concept driving the science.

How Scientism can obstruct true science.

American Lysenkoism
Jonathan Wells

Historian Gerard DeGroot recently published a review of Simon Ing's forthcoming book, Stalin and the Scientists. Amazon's description of the book includes the following:

The Soviet Union had the best-funded scientific establishment in history. Scientists were elevated as popular heroes and lavished with awards and privileges. But if their ideas or their field of study lost favor with the elites, they could be exiled, imprisoned, or murdered.

Stalin's favorite scientist was agronomist Trofim Lysenko (1898-1976). In the 1930s and 1940s, Lysenko gained Stalin's favor with various ill-founded ideas about heredity, and he used his political power ruthlessly to suppress his critics, many of whom lost their jobs and some of whom suffered imprisonment or even death.

This is not a review of Ing's book (which won't be released until February 2017), but it reminds me that some Darwinists have compared ID to Lysenkoism. Retired physicist and ID critic Mark Perakh has written that the behavior of ID advocates is "often redolent of that by the suppressors of biological science in the former USSR." Perakh claimed that the "denial of Darwinian biology" by ID advocates is similar to "the denial of the neo-Darwinian synthesis by the Lysenkoists." And according to philosopher and ID critic Robert T. Pennock:

[I]n the former Soviet Union, Darwinian evolution was rejected on ideological grounds. Because the Communist Party denounced the Darwinian view in favor of Lysenkoism, a variant of Lamarckism that was more in line with Party ideology, biological research was set back for a generation. ID-ology could have the same effect in this country, if it succeeds in its lobbying efforts.

But Perakh and Pennock have it exactly backwards. Stalin and Soviet Communists embraced Darwinism. They liked its historical approach to human origins and its materialistic rejection of religion. Although Lysenko was not a Marxist, after Isaak Prezent (president of the Society of Marxist Biologists) introduced him to evolutionary theory Lysenko became a devoted Darwinist. In The Origin of Species, Darwin had speculated that new variations might arise through "use and disuse," or the inheritance of acquired characteristics (a view generally attributed to Lamarck). But Gregor Mendel's theory of inheritance was incompatible with Lamarckism, and in the 1920s and 1930s many biologists considered Mendelism to be incompatible with Darwinism. So Lysenko declared that Mendelian genetics was unacceptable because it contradicted Darwinian evolution.

Soviet Minister of Agriculture Jakov Jakovlev supported Lysenko by announcing that Mendelism was inconsistent with true Darwinism. In 1937, Prezent (using typical Communist jargon) praised Lysenko for "marching... under the banner of reconstruction of biological science on the basis of Darwinism raised to the level of Marxism." Mendelians, by contrast, were portrayed as "powers of darkness."1

So Lysenkoism was fueled by the conflict between Darwinism (which had Lamarckian elements) and the new Mendelian genetics. The Soviet Union had the best-funded scientific establishment in history, and it used that establishment to persecute scientists who challenged the official view of Darwinian orthodoxy or defended Mendelian genetics.

The tragedy of Lysenkoism was that it used government funding and authority to suppress a scientific idea that contradicted established orthodoxy. The parallel with ID is clear: Scientists and scientific organizations supported by billions of dollars in taxpayer money are being used to suppress a scientific idea that challenges Darwinism. Although the United States, thank God, is very different from the former Soviet Union, and dissident scientists are not being imprisoned or murdered, many have been exiled from their careers because of their views. What we have is American Lysenkoism.

Notes:


(1) See Nils Roll-Hansen, The Lysenko Effect: The Politics of Science (Amherst, NY: Humanity Books, 2005), pp. 86-89, 218-220; Zhores Medvedev, The Rise and Fall of T. D. Lysenko (New York: Columbia University Press, 1969), pp. 46-49.

Have the one percent pulled up the ladder?:Pros and cons.

'Image' in scripture:The Watchtower Society's commentary.

IMAGE

Any representation or likeness of a person or thing.—Mt 22:20.

Whereas references to images in the Bible frequently relate to idolatry, this is not always the case. God, in creating man, said first, “Let us make man in our image [or, shadow, semblance], according to our likeness.” (Ge 1:26, 27, ftn) Since God’s Son stated that his Father is “a Spirit,” this rules out any physical likeness between God and man. (Joh 4:24) Rather, man has qualities reflecting, or mirroring, those of his heavenly Maker, qualities that positively distinguish man from the animal creation. (See ADAM No. 1.) Though in the image of his Creator, man was not made to be an object of worship, or veneration.

Even as Adam’s own son Seth (born to him in his imperfection, however) was in Adam’s “likeness, in his image” (Ge 5:3), Adam’s likeness to God originally identified him as God’s earthly son. (Lu 3:38) Despite man’s fall to imperfection, the fact of mankind’s originally having been made in God’s image was cited after the Noachian Flood as the basis for the divine law authorizing humans to serve as executioners in putting murderers to death. (Ge 9:5, 6; see AVENGER OF BLOOD.) In Christian instructions concerning feminine head covering, Christian men were told they ought not to wear such a covering, since the man “is God’s image and glory,” while the woman is man’s glory.—1Co 11:7.

Has Jesus always reflected his Father’s likeness to the same degree?

God’s firstborn Son, who later became the man Jesus, is in his Father’s image. (2Co 4:4) Inasmuch as that Son was obviously the one to whom God spoke in saying, “Let us make man in our image,” this likeness of the Son to his Father, the Creator, existed from when the Son was created. (Ge 1:26; Joh 1:1-3; Col 1:15, 16) When on earth as a perfect man, he reflected his Father’s qualities and personality to the fullest extent possible within human limitations, so he could say that “he that has seen me has seen the Father also.” (Joh 14:9; 5:17, 19, 30, 36; 8:28, 38, 42) This likeness, however, was certainly heightened at the time of Jesus’ resurrection to spirit life and his being granted “all authority . . . in heaven and on the earth” by his Father, Jehovah God. (1Pe 3:18; Mt 28:18) Since God then exalted Jesus to “a superior position,” God’s Son now reflected his Father’s glory to an even greater degree than he had before leaving the heavens to come to earth. (Php 2:9; Heb 2:9) He is now “the exact representation of [God’s] very being.”—Heb 1:2-4.

All anointed members of the Christian congregation are foreordained by God to be “patterned after the image of his Son.” (Ro 8:29) Christ Jesus is their model not only in their life pattern, as they follow in his footsteps and imitate his course and ways, but also in their death and resurrection. (1Pe 2:21-24; 1Co 11:1; Ro 6:5) Having borne the earthly “image of the one made of dust [Adam],” as spirit creatures they thereafter bear “the image of the heavenly one [the last Adam, Christ Jesus].” (1Co 15:45, 49) During their earthly life, they are privileged to “reflect like mirrors the glory of Jehovah” that shines to them from God’s Son, being progressively transformed into the image conveyed by that glory-reflecting Son. (2Co 3:18; 4:6) God thereby creates in them a new personality, one that is a reflection, or image, of his own divine qualities.—Eph 4:24; Col 3:10.

Improper Use of Images. Whereas humans are to imitate and endeavor to mirror the qualities of their heavenly Father and model their lives after his Son, the veneration of physical images in worship is consistently condemned throughout the Scriptures. God’s detestation of such practice was clearly expressed in the Law given to Israel. Not only carved images but the making of the “form” of anything in heaven, on earth, or in the sea as an object of religious worship was prohibited. (Ex 20:4, 5; Le 26:1; Isa 42:8) Such objects might be made of any substance, in any form—wood, metal, stone; carved, cast, hammered, hewn; in the figure of humans, animals, birds, inanimate objects, or just symbolic forms—but none were approved by God for veneration. The making of them was a ‘ruinous act,’ the committing of evil in Jehovah’s eyes, a detestable and offensive thing bringing his curse upon those doing so. (De 4:16-19, 23-25; 27:15; Nu 33:52; Isa 40:19, 20; 44:12, 13; Eze 7:20) The decking of them with gold and silver would not make them less disgusting in God’s sight nor prevent their being defiled and discarded as “mere dirt!”—De 7:5, 25; Isa 30:22.

Such use of images is shown to be inexcusable before God, since it goes contrary to all reason and intelligence and betrays foolish, empty-headed reasoning as well as a refusal to acknowledge obvious facts. (Isa 44:14-20; Jer 10:14; Ro 1:20-23) The images would prove to be of no benefit; giving no knowledge, guidance, or protection; being speechless, helpless, and lifeless, an eventual cause for shame. (Isa 44:9-11; 45:20; 46:5-7; Hab 2:18-20) Jehovah’s prophetic declarations, accurately foretelling future events, thwarted any efforts of the unfaithful Israelites to attribute the outworking of such events to their idolatrous images.—Isa 48:3-7.

Despite God’s clear pronouncements, the Israelites and others foolishly attempted to combine the use of religious images with the worship of the true God, Jehovah. (Ex 32:1-8; 1Ki 12:26-28; 2Ki 17:41; 21:7) A woman in the time of the Judges even sanctified certain silver pieces to Jehovah and then used them in the making of a religious image. (Jg 17:3, 4; 18:14-20, 30, 31) Prior to Jerusalem’s destruction by the Babylonians, detestable religious images had been introduced into the temple area, and one such is described as a “symbol of jealousy,” evidently referring to the incitement of God’s jealousy by giving to an image the praise rightfully belonging to him.—Eze 8:3-12; Ex 20:5.

However, certain objects, formed in the image of plants, flowers, animals, and even cherubs, were made at Jehovah’s command and hence were proper. While serving as symbolic representations in connection with God’s worship, they themselves were given no veneration, or worship, as in the matter of prayer or sacrifice.—See IDOL, IDOLATRY.

Images in the Book of Daniel. In the second year of Nebuchadnezzar’s kingship (evidently counting from the time of his conquest of Jerusalem in 607 B.C.E.), the Babylonian king had a dream, the effect of which greatly disturbed him, producing insomnia. He apparently did not recall the full contents of the dream, for he demanded of his wise men and priests that they reveal both the dream and its interpretation. Despite their boasted ability as revealers of secret things, the Babylonian wise men were unable to fulfill the royal request. This brought upon them the decree of death, and the lives of Daniel and his companions were likewise endangered. By divine help Daniel was able to reveal not only the dream but also its meaning. Daniel’s expression of praise and thanksgiving upon receiving the revelation draws attention to Jehovah God as the Source of wisdom and might and as the one who is “changing times and seasons, removing kings and setting up kings.” (Da 2:1-23) The dream was clearly the result of God’s doing and served to illustrate in a prophetic way God’s irresistible dominion over earth’s affairs.

Nebuchadnezzar’s dream was of an immense image, in human form. The body parts were of metal; from top to bottom, they were made of progressively less valuable but harder metals, beginning with gold and terminating with iron; the feet and toes, however, had clay mixed with the iron. The entire image was crushed to powder by a stone cut out of a mountain, the stone thereafter filling the entire earth.—Da 2:31-35.

What is the meaning of the parts of the dream image seen by Nebuchadnezzar?

The image obviously relates to domination of the earth and Jehovah God’s purpose regarding such domination. This is made clear in Daniel’s inspired interpretation. The golden head represented Nebuchadnezzar, the one who, by divine permission, had gained power as the dominant world ruler and, more importantly, had overthrown the typical kingdom of Judah. However, in saying, “You yourself are the head of gold,” it does not seem that Daniel restricted the head’s significance to Nebuchadnezzar alone. Since the other body parts represented kingdoms, the head evidently represented the dynasty of Babylonian kings from Nebuchadnezzar down till Babylon’s fall in the time of King Nabonidus and his son Belshazzar.—Da 2:37, 38.

The kingdom represented by the silver breasts and arms would therefore be the Medo-Persian power, which overthrew Babylon in 539 B.C.E. It was “inferior” to the Babylonian dynasty but not in the sense of having a smaller area of dominion or of having less strength militarily or economically. Babylon’s superiority may therefore relate to its having been the overthrower of the typical kingdom of God at Jerusalem, a distinction not held by Medo-Persia. The Medo-Persian dynasty of world rulers ended with Darius III (Codommanus), whose forces were thoroughly defeated by Alexander the Macedonian in 331 B.C.E. Greece is thus the power depicted by the image’s belly and thighs of copper.—Da 2:39.

The Grecian, or Hellenic, dominion continued, though in divided form, until it was finally absorbed by the rising power of Rome. The Roman World Power thus appears in the image symbolized by the baser but harder metal, iron, found in the legs of the great image. Rome’s strength to break and crush opposing kingdoms, indicated in the prophecy, is well known in history. (Da 2:40) Yet Rome alone cannot fulfill the requirements of being represented by the image’s legs and feet, for the rule of the Roman Empire did not see the completion of the prophetic dream, namely, the coming of the symbolic stone cut out of the mountain as well as its crushing the entire image and thereafter filling the entire earth.

Thus, the expressions of some Bible commentators are much like those of M. F. Unger, who says: “Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, as unravelled by Daniel, describes the course and end of ‘the times of the Gentiles’ (Luke 21:24; Rev. 16:19); that is, of the Gentile world power to be destroyed at the Second Coming of Christ.” (Unger’s Bible Dictionary, 1965, p. 516) Daniel himself said to Nebuchadnezzar that the dream had to do with “what is to occur in the final part of the days” (Da 2:28), and since the symbolic stone is shown to represent the Kingdom of God, it may be expected that the domination pictured by the iron legs and feet of the image would extend down to the time of the establishment of that Kingdom and till the time it takes action to “crush and put an end to all these kingdoms.”—Da 2:44.

History shows that, although the Roman Empire enjoyed an extension of life in the form of the Holy Roman Empire of the Germanic nation, it eventually gave way to the rising power of its onetime imperial subject, Britain. Because of their close affinity and general unity of action, Britain and the United States today are often referred to as the Anglo-American World Power, the present dominant power in world history.

The mixture of iron and clay in the feet of the great image graphically illustrates the condition due to be manifest in the final expression of political world domination. Clay is elsewhere used metaphorically in the Scriptures to stand for fleshly men, made of the dust of the earth. (Job 10:9; Isa 29:16; Ro 9:20, 21) Daniel’s interpretation thus appears to equate the clay with “the offspring of mankind,” the mixing in of which produces fragility in that which is symbolized by the image’s feet and toes. This points to a weakening and a lack of cohesion in the ironlike strength of the final form of world domination by earthly kingdoms. (Da 2:41-43) The common man would wield greater influence in affairs of government.

The golden image later set up by Nebuchadnezzar on the Plain of Dura is not directly related to the immense image of the dream. In view of its dimensions—60 cubits (27 m; 88 ft) high and only 6 cubits (2.7 m; 8.8 ft) broad (or a ratio of ten to one)—it does not seem likely to have been a statue in human form, unless it had a very high pedestal, one that was higher than the human statue itself. The human form has a ratio of only four to one as to height and breadth. So the image may have been more symbolic in nature, perhaps like the obelisks of ancient Egypt.—Da 3:1.

The Image of the Wild Beast. After a vision of a seven-headed wild beast that rises out of the sea, the apostle John saw the vision of a two-horned beast ascending out of the earth, speaking like a dragon and telling those who dwell on the earth “to make an image to the [seven-headed] wild beast.” (Re 13:1, 2, 11-14) Beasts are consistently used in the Bible as symbols of political governments. The image of the seven-headed wild beast must therefore be some agency reflecting the characteristics and will of the globe-dominating political system represented by the seven-headed wild beast. Logically, it should also have seven heads and ten horns like the wild beast out of the sea that it represents. It is of interest to note, then, that another seven-headed beast, distinct from the wild beast out of the sea, is described at Revelation chapter 17. Its significance, as well as that of both the seven-headed wild beast and the two-horned beast, is considered under BEASTS, SYMBOLIC.


After its first mention in Revelation chapter 13, the image of the beast is regularly referred to along with the wild beast, particularly in connection with the worship of that wild beast and the receiving of its mark. The image of the beast shares in these things.—Re 14:9-11; 15:2; 16:2; 19:20; 20:4; see MARK, II.

On Darwinism in Nazi Germany.

Was Darwinism Banned from Nazi Germany?
Richard Weikart 

My new book, Hitler's Religion: The Twisted Beliefs that Drove the Third Reich , is out today, so I know I am going to hear a refrain I've heard before when my earlier books were published: Darwinism (they will say) not only did not serve as an important component of Nazi ideology, but Darwinism was banned from Nazi Germany.
This notion that Darwinism was banned in Nazi Germany is pretty widespread on blogs, especially those by atheists and freethinkers. For instance, a blog called Skeptical Science  states emphatically: "Fact: Darwin's books were banned in Nazi Germany, not endorsed." A blogger on Patheos claimed that "the Nazis burned copies of the Origin of Species." The famous atheist Christopher Hitchens once responded to a question about the link between Darwinism and Nazism by replying, "Darwin's thought was not taught in Germany. Darwinism was derided in Germany, along with every other form of unbelief." University of Chicago historian Robert Richards in his book, Was Hitler a Darwinian? agrees that Darwinism was persona non grata in Nazi Germany.

If we want to know whether Darwinism was taught or banned in Nazi Germany, the logical place to start would be to look at the schools and universities. The Nazis were zealous about controlling the educational institutions, so they could inculcate their ideology into the minds of the youth.

What was in the official Nazi biology curriculum and the textbooks? As it turns out, the Nazi Ministry of Education published curricular guidelines in 1938, and the biology curriculum mandated extensive teaching about evolution. Further, the National Socialist Teachers' League developed a biology curriculum in 1936-37. Of the ten major topics covered in the higher grades, one was biological evolution and another was human evolution. I have examined numerous biology textbooks published in Nazi Germany, which were approved by the Nazi Ministry of Education, and they uniformly taught Darwinian evolution, devoting considerable attention to it in the higher grades.

What about the universities? Were Darwinian biologists and anthropologists demoted or promoted there? Most biologists and anthropologists at German universities embraced Darwinism before the Nazis came to power, but the Nazi regime continued to appoint Darwinists to biology and anthropology professorships. Karl Astel, whom the Nazis appointed professor of human genetics and later promoted to rector (equivalent of president) of the University of Jena, was an avid Darwinist. He was also an SS officer who wanted to turn the University of Jena into a fully Nazified university. In order to accomplish this goal, he received Himmler's help in recruiting the biologist and SS officer Gerhard Heberer as a professor of human evolution at the University of Jena. Nazis appointed many other Darwinian biologists and anthropologists to professorships, too.

If we examine the Nazi press, we find that the official Nazi newspaper, magazines, and journals occasionally published articles favorable to Darwinism. Der Biologe, the official journal for biology teachers, was taken over by the SS and regularly published articles promoting Darwinism and bashing creationism. One of these articles was by Konrad Lorenz, a later Nobel Prize winner, who argued that Darwinism was a firm basis for Nazi racial ideology. Articles against Darwinism were nowhere to be found in the Nazi press.

Where, then, did this myth of the Nazis banning Darwin arise? As with many myths, there is a small element of truth, but it was wrenched from its context and blown out of proportion. In 1935 a minor official overseeing the libraries of Saxony published an article in a journal for librarians, in which he recommended banning certain categories of books. One category was: "Works of worldview or biological character whose content is the superficial scientific enlightenment of a primitive Darwinism and monism (Haeckel and those emulating him, as well as Ostwald)." Note that the target was "primitive Darwinism and monism," not Darwinism per se. Also, the only two authors mentioned were Ernst Haeckel and Wilhelm Ostwald, not Darwin nor any of the myriad of other Darwinists who continued to publish pro-Darwinian science books and articles throughout the Nazi period.

Worse yet for those who base their argument on this supposed "ban," there is no evidence that this ban ever took place, despite this one article (by a low-level functionary in a relatively obscure journal). Indeed, other articles published later in the same journal approvingly reviewed books with heavy doses of Darwinism, so clearly Darwinism was not banned.

Not even Haeckel was banned in Nazi Germany. Indeed, some books lauding Haeckel were published in Germany during the Nazi period and received positive reviews in the Nazi press. In 1943, twenty-nine books by Haeckel published by five different publishers were still in print, including his two most important works, Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte (Natural History of Creation) and Welträtsel (Riddle of the Universe). Also, in 1941 Heberer and Astel formed the Ernst Haeckel Society and recruited professors from all over Germany to join. Before doing this, they asked the Nazi Gauleiter (district leader) Fritz Sauckel to be the honorary head. He consulted Martin Bormann and Alfred Rosenberg, both of whom gave him the green light. Apparently these high-ranking Nazis did not get the memo that Haeckel was banned.

Now, none of this proves that Hitler's ideology relied on Darwinism. For that evidence, you should read my new book, Hitler's Religion, which provides plenty of evidence that Hitler's worldview was Darwinian. But the myth of the Nazis banning Darwin does show how desperate the counterarguments of my critics are.


Richard Weikart is professor of history at California State University, Stanislaus, Senior Fellow at Discovery Institute's Center for Science & Culture, and author most recently of Hitler's Religion and The Death of Humanity: And the Case for Life.

Irreducible complexity v. Darwin.

Irreducible Complexity -- A Simple Idea with Far-Ranging Consequences, Deadly to Darwinism

David Klinghoffer 





Biochemist Michael Behe's observation that many evolutionary innovations are "irreducibly complex" is a simple idea, conveyed effectively in just 2 minutes and 38 seconds in the video above. But its challenge to Darwinian explanations of life's wonders is severe, and one to which evolutionary advocates have found no convincing answer.

This month we celebrate Dr. Behe's work and the 20th anniversary of his path-breaking book Darwin's Black Box. That work is the subject of a new hour-long documentary,  Revolutionary: Michael Behe and the Mystery of Molecular Machines, written and directed by John West. It's available now on  DVD  and Blu-ray. Get yours now!

'Spectator' hails Michael Denton's bomb throwing re:Darwinism.

London Spectator Hails Denton's Evolution: Still a Theory in Crisis as a "Best Book" of 2016
David Klinghoffer

Wow, congratulations to Discovery Institute biologist Michael Denton! He has won richly deserved praise in the London Spectator. In a feature highlighting "The best and worst books of 2016," with choices from a panel of contributors, the distinguished literary critic A.N. Wilson selects Denton's  Evolution: Still a Theory in Crisis  as his best nonfiction work of the year:

Michael Denton's Evolution: Still a Theory in Crisis (Discovery Institute Press, £16.80). A sequel to his 1985 book -- Evolution: A Theory in Crisis -- this takes us up to date with the dazzling developments of life sciences over the past 30 years. Denton is a sceptic about Darwin's theory of evolution on purely scientific grounds. It is hard to see how anyone reading his book could not be persuaded. Palaeontology provides abundant evidence of evolution within species, but none of one species morphing into another. Denton is fascinatingly clear in his exposition of the science of genetics, and how it destroys the Darwinian position. A truly great book.

Cover with border small.jpgReviews don't come better than this. "A truly great book" -- agreed. "Fascinatingly clear" -- indeed. "Destroys the Darwinian position" -- correct.

Wilson, a biographer and novelist, is himself a dazzlingly accomplished writer and thinker. His recognition of Denton doesn't come as a complete shock, since he has voiced his evolution doubts in the past. But Dr. Denton and Evolution: Still a Theory in Crisis have helped advance him toward a resolution of the Darwin question. He was previously impressed by another terrific book by a friend of ours, James Le Fanu. Wilson said in a 2009 interview in the New Statesman:

I think the jury is out about whether the theory of natural selection as defined by neo-Darwinians is true, and whether serious scientific doubts, as expressed in a new book Why Us?   by James Le Fanu, deserve to be taken seriously. For example, does the discovery of the complex structure of DNA and the growth in knowledge in genetics require a rethink of Darwinian "gradualism"? But these are scientific rather than religious questions.


Seven years later, it seems the jury is no longer out for Wilson. When it comes to whether neo-Darwinism has been falsified by the scientific evidence, "It is hard to see how anyone reading [Denton's] book could not be persuaded." If you haven't read Evolution: Still a Theory in Crisis, now's the time. There is also much more about Denton's thought, including excellent videos and documentary features, at the  Privileged Species  website.

Long live the nanny state?:Pros and cons

On skepticism and pretensions of skepticism.

I Told You So
David Berlinski 

From the introduction to The Deniable Darwin:

My own view, repeated in virtually all of my essays, is that the sense of skepticism engendered by the sciences would be far more appropriately directed toward the sciences than toward anything else. It is not a view that has engendered wide-spread approval. The sciences require no criticism, many scientists say, because the sciences comprise a uniquely self-critical institution, with questionable theories and theoreticians passing constantly before stern appellate review. Judgment is unrelenting. And impartial. Individual scientists may make mistakes, but like the Communist Party under Lenin, science is infallible because its judgments are collective. Critics are not only unwelcome, they are unneeded. The biologist Paul Gross has made himself the master of this attitude and invokes it on every conceivable occasion.
Now no one doubts that scientists are sometimes critical of themselves. Among astrophysicists, backbiting often leads to backstabbing. The bloodletting that ensues is on occasion salutary. But the process of peer review by which grants are funded and papers assigned to scientific journals, is, by its very nature, an undertaking in which a court reviews its own decisions and generally finds them good. It serves the useful purpose of settling various scores, but it does not -- and it cannot -- achieve the ends that criticism is intended to serve.

If the scientific critic finds himself needed wherever he goes, like a hanging judge he finds himself unwelcome wherever he appears, all the more reason, it seems to me, that he really should get around as much as possible.


I told you so.

On distinguishing the hypothetically possible from the plausible.

New Peer-Reviewed Paper Demolishes Fallacious Objection: "Aren't There Vast Eons of Time for Evolution?"
Casey Luskin 

When debating intelligent design (ID), there are countless times I've heard the old objection, "But aren't there millions of years for Darwinian evolution?" Perhaps there are, but that doesn't mean the Darwinian mechanism has sufficient opportunities to produce the observed complexity found in life. Darwin put forward a falsifiable theory, stating that his mechanism must work by "numerous successive slight modifications." Michael Behe took Darwin at his word, and argued in Darwin's Black Box that irreducible complexity refuted Darwinian evolution because there exist complex structures that cannot be built in such a stepwise manner. Darwin's latter day defenders responded to Behe by effectively putting Darwinism into an unfalsifiable position: they put forth wildly speculative and unlikely appeals to indirect evolution. Largely based upon "exaptation," these scenarios required that complex biological systems be built by spontaneously "co-opting" or borrowing multiple parts within the cell to suddenly to perform wholly different functions in an entirely new system. The only evidence for such speculative scenarios is typically "protein homology," or sequence similarity between one part and another. The mere remote possibility of such a story is said to salvage evolution from falsification by Behe's arguments.

But is "mere possibility" sufficient justification to assert "scientific plausibility"? A new peer-reviewed article in Theoretical Biology and Medical Modelling asks just this question. The abstract states:

Mere possibility is not an adequate basis for asserting scientific plausibility. A precisely defined universal bound is needed beyond which the assertion of plausibility, particularly in life-origin models, can be considered operationally falsified. But can something so seemingly relative and subjective as plausibility ever be quantified? Amazingly, the answer is, "Yes." A method of objectively measuring the plausibility of any chance hypothesis (The Universal Plausibility Metric [UPM]) is presented. A numerical inequality is also provided whereby any chance hypothesis can be definitively falsified when its UPM metric of ξ is < 1 (The Universal Plausibility Principle [UPP]). Both UPM and UPP pre-exist and are independent of any experimental design and data set.
(David L. Abel, "The Universal Plausibility Metric (UPM) & Principle (UPP)," Theoretical Biology and Medical Modelling, Vol. 6:27 (Dec. 3, 2009).)

It's not just prominent proponents of intelligent design who are publishing peer-reviewed articles that support ID arguments. Other scientists are doing the same--and this article by Abel in fact cites to the work of Douglas Axe, Stephen Meyer and William Dembski, eloquently explaining why the progress of science depends on our rejecting falsified theories and not retaining highly unlikely explanations:

But at some point our reluctance to exclude any possibility becomes stultifying to operational science. Falsification is critical to narrowing down the list of serious possibilities. Almost all hypotheses are possible. Few of them wind up being helpful and scientific ally productive. Just because a hypothesis is possible should not grant that hypothesis scientific respectability. More attention to the concept of "infeasibility" has been suggested. Millions of dollars in astrobiology grant money have been wasted on scenarios that are possible, but plausibly bankrupt. The question for scientific methodology should not be, "Is this scenario possible?" The question should be, "Is this possibility a plausible scientific hypothesis?" One chance in 10200 is theoretically possible, but given maximum cosmic probabilistic resources, such a possibility is hardly plausible. With funding resources rapidly drying up, science needs a foundational principle by which to falsify a myriad of theoretical possibilities that are not worthy of serious scientific consideration and modeling.
(David L. Abel, "The Universal Plausibility Metric (UPM) & Principle (UPP)," Theoretical Biology and Medical Modelling, Vol. 6:27 (Dec. 3, 2009).

The willingness of modern evolutionists to tolerate highly unlikely explanations in order to avoid the design inference has always reminded me of the great scene from "Dumb and Dumber" when Jim Carrey, who plays a socially awkward buffoon named "Lloyd," asks his secret crush Mary about the odds that she will return his love. As the exchange goes:
LLOYD: I'm gonna ask you something flat out and I want you to answer me honestly: What do you think the chances are of a girl like you and a guy like me ending up together?
MARY: Lloyd, that's difficult to say. I mean we hardly--

LLOYD: --I asked you to be honest, Mary.

MARY: But Lloyd, I really can't--

LLOYD: --Come on, give it to me straight. I drove a long way to see you, the least you can do is level with me. What are my chances?

MARY: Not good.

LLOYD: You mean not good, like one out of a hundred?

MARY; I'd say more like one out of a million.

LLOYD: So you're telling me there's a chance?

Only an illogical emotional infatuation for Mary kept Lloyd hoping she would return his love. But if Lloyd understood how the world works, he would have realized Mary just told him that his chances of ending up with her are effectively zero, short of a miracle. Lloyd's hopes of getting the girl should have been falsified.
Michael Behe responded to his critics by noting that like Lloyd, they need to learn when it's time to acknowledge they're not gonna get the girl. He thus writes:

[O]ne needs to relax Darwin's criterion from this: "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." to something like this:
If a complex organ exists which seems very unlikely to have been produced by numerous, successive, slight modifications, and if no experiments have shown that it or comparable structures can be so produced, then maybe we are barking up the wrong tree. So, LET'S BREAK SOME RULES!
Of course people will differ on the point at which they decide to break rules. But at least with the realistic criterion there could be evidence against the unfalsifiable. At least then people like Doolittle and Miller would run a risk when they cite an experiment that shows the opposite of what they had thought. At least then science would have a way to escape from the rut of unfalsifiability and think new thoughts.

(Michael Behe, "Answering Scientific Criticisms of Intelligent Design," Science and Evidence for Design in the Universe, Proceedings of the Wethersfield Institute, Vol 9:146-147 (Ignatius Press, 2000))

Behe's arguments are echoed by Abel's new paper:
The same standard should apply in falsifying ridiculously implausible life-origin assertions. Combinatorial imaginings and hypothetical scenarios can be endlessly argued simply on the grounds that they are theoretically possible. But there is a point beyond which arguing the plausibility of an absurdly low probability becomes operationally counterproductive. That point can actually be quantified for universal application to all fields of science, not just astrobiology. Quantification of a UPM and application of the UPP inequality test to that specific UPM provides for definitive, unequivocal falsification of scientifically unhelpful and functionally useless hypotheses. When the UPP is violated, declaring falsification of that highly implausible notion is just as justified as the firm commitment we make to any mathematical axiom or physical "law" of motion.
(David L. Abel, "The Universal Plausibility Metric (UPM) & Principle (UPP)," Theoretical Biology and Medical Modelling, Vol. 6:27 (Dec. 3, 2009).

Abel then calculates the universal probability bounds wherein we are able to "falsify not just highly improbable, but ridiculously implausible scenarios." According to Abel's calculations, the probability bounds for various environments are as follows:
cΩu = Universe = 1013 reactions/sec X 1017 secs X 1078 atoms = 10108
cΩg = Galaxy = 1013 X 1017 X 1066 = 1096

cΩs = Solar System = 1013 X 1017 X 1055 = 1085

cΩe = Earth = 1013 X 1017 X 1040 = 1070

Thus, even though there are billions of years available in the universe, that does not imply that there are unlimited probabilistic resources. By calculating the maximum number of chemical reactions given the available time, Abel ably calculates the probabilistic resources. He concludes:
The application of The Universal Plausibility Principle (UPP) precludes the inclusion in scientific literature of wild metaphysical conjectures that conveniently ignore or illegitimately inflate probabilistic resources to beyond the limits of observational science. The UPM and UPP together prevent rapidly shrinking funding and labor resources from being wasted on preposterous notions that have no legitimate place in science. At best, notions with ξ < 1 should be considered not only operationally falsified hypotheses, but bad metaphysics on a plane equivalent to blind faith and superstition.
(David L. Abel, "The Universal Plausibility Metric (UPM) & Principle (UPP)," Theoretical Biology and Medical Modelling, Vol. 6:27 (Dec. 3, 2009).


Such clarity of thought will undoubtedly be bitterly opposed by the evolutionary scientific community.

The case for mind re:The Origin of Life

Information Runs The Show -- The Understatement of the Century!
Jonathan M.

An interesting paper published in Nature by . Evgenia et al. documents the ability of the DNA double helix to exist in a functional alternative form for 1% of the time, called an "excited state." What does this mean for neo-Darwinism?

What is particularly remarkable is that the base-pairs present in these alternative forms show the ability to break apart and come together again to form stable structures which are non-characteristic of Watson-Crick base-pairing (called "Hoogsteen base pairs"). While these Hoogsteen base pairs have been observed before in instances where DNA has been subjected to damage or bound to drugs, this is the first time where such Hoogsteen base pairs have been observed under normal circumstances.

The authors report in the paper's abstract,
Sequence-directed variations in the canonical DNA double helix structure that retain Watson-Crick base-pairing have important roles in DNA recognition, topology and nucleosome positioning. By using nuclear magnetic resonance relaxation dispersion spectroscopy in concert with steered molecular dynamics simulations, we have observed transient sequence-specific excursions away from Watson-Crick base-pairing at CA and TA steps inside canonical duplex DNA towards low-populated and short-lived A�T and G�C Hoogsteen base pairs. The observation of Hoogsteen base pairs in DNA duplexes specifically bound to transcription factors and in damaged DNA sites implies that the DNA double helix intrinsically codes for excited state Hoogsteen base pairs as a means of expanding its structural complexity beyond that which can be achieved based on Watson-Crick base-pairing. The methods presented here provide a new route for characterizing transient low-populated nucleic acid structures, which we predict will be abundant in the genome and constitute a second transient layer of the genetic code. [Emphasis mine]
The researchers used NMR to study the structure of the alternative form, and they concluded that the observed chemical shifts were characteristic of a structural orientation in which particular base-pairs are flipped 180 degrees to form a "Hoogsteen base pair." This was further corroborated by computer modelling.

As the papers' authors suggest, those results may imply that the DNA molecule is responsible for coding for excited state Hoogsteen base pairs as a means by which it can expand its structural complexity beyond that which it is able to achieve through classical Watson-Crick base-pairing.


If this prediction is correct, then it succeeds in adding a whole additional layer to the information enigma. This, of course, raises the pertinent issue of whether this discovery sits more comfortably with a neo-Darwinian paradigm or with an ID paradigm. Since neo-Darwinism, to date, may be considered to be demonstrably impotent to account for that specific property of living systems -- namely, information -- I would be inclined to significantly favour the latter.

See no evil,hear no evil,speak no evil.

Who Is James Le Fanu? Part V: Darwin's Three Monkeys
David Klinghoffer

Anyone who raises doubts about evolution in public discussions with non-scientists knows the automatic response you always get from the Three Monkeys crowd. Hands wrapped tightly over eyes, ears, and mouth, they chant: See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil -- about Darwin!

That's not exactly how it comes out. People will say things more like: But science has spoken! Scientists say! Science wins! Which sounds reasonable at first, until you reflect that it's a little like a Roman Catholic fending off some challenge to his faith by pointing out that 98 percent of Catholic priests agree with Catholic doctrine, and who knows more about Catholicism than Catholic priests? So it must be true. (Or substitute rabbis and Jewish doctrine, pastors and Protestant belief, etc.) As James Le Fanu smartly notes in his new book Why Us? How Science Rediscovered the Mystery of Ourselves  (Pantheon), there is a similar circularity to the "Scientists say!" case for Darwinian dogma:

The commitment to Darwin's materialist explanation of the living world would, in time, become a qualification requirement for all who aspired to pursue a career in biology -- where to express doubt (at least publicly) was tantamount to confessing to being of unsound (or at least unscientific) mind.
I've been writing this week in praise of Dr. Le Fanu's extremely lucid, readable, and unapologetic narration of Darwinism's increasingly obvious failure to account for the evidence of science, with an emphasis on recent advances in our knowledge about the brain and the genome. Then why is the meaning of these advances ignored, greeted with a great, booming silence?
Scientists themselves, apart from being qualified for the priesthood on the condition of their voicing no doubts about Darwin, are caught in a conflict of interest. Their professional standing is predicated on explaining a purely physical reality:

Scientists cannot acknowledge the possibility of there being a 'dual' nature of reality, with both a material and a non-material realm, for that would be to subvert their exclusive claims to understand how the world 'works.' Hence the silence. Scientists cannot 'see' the significance of the findings of the recent past because they cannot stand outside their materialist view and conceive of forms of understanding different from those in which they have been trained....
The dual nature of reality has, in short, been censored, written out of the script as being of historical interest only, a relic of the superstitious ways of thinking of the distant past.

So you find that the case against Darwin is made by a brave band of professional scientist dissenters, a vocal minority in the scholarly community, but more so by those outside the academic scientific cathedral. Like James Le Fanu, a physician and peer-reviewed writer of medical journal essays, but not the picture of a lab-coated scientist that the Three Monkeys insist on hearing from.
The loss is all of ours. Le Fanu describes the cost of Darwinism: "We have lost that sense of living in an enchanted world" that was taken for granted 150 years ago. As Richard Dawkins himself puts it, in his world there is "no design, no purpose, no evil and no good -- nothing but blind, pitiless indifference." Or as Isaiah Berlin bizarrely remarked, "As for the meaning of life, I do not believe it has any -- and [that] is a source of great comfort."


The situation is not irreversible, though: "It cannot be long before a proper appreciation of the true significance of the findings of the recent past begins to sow doubts in inquisitive minds." If as many people read Le Fanu's book as it deserves, the time of that hoped for outcome will have been advanced at least a little.