ICR: Sense of Balance Proves Creationism

The brilliant creation scientists at the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) — the fountainhead of young-earth creationist wisdom — continue to pile up evidence for creationism.

Their latest nail in the coffin of evolution is Discovery: Spine Signals Ears to Maintain Balance. It was written by Brian Thomas. He’s usually described at the end of his articles as “Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.” This is ICR’s biographical information on him. Here are some excerpts from his stunning article, with bold font added by us:

Bodies bounce while jogging or performing any number of other vigorous activities, usually without getting dizzy. However, bodies get dizzy when they are “bounced” from the outside, like while on a boat or airplane. What’s the difference? Researchers pinpointed amazing new details behind the mechanism that maintains balance during voluntary motion, but their notion of its origins clearly misses the mark.

The vestibular organ (VO) resides inside the semicircular canals of the inner ear and senses head motions in all directions and all six rotations. It must have a process to dampen its sensitivity when the body itself causes motion. Without this dampening function, intentional body movements would disrupt balance — imagine getting motion sick every time you go for a jog. How does your VO protect against self-inflicted motion sickness? The answer involves a mechanism with precision parts and precise timing that has every characteristic of fine-tuned, intentional design.

Ooooooooooooh — fine-tuned, intentional design! How could the researchers have missed that? ICR informs us:

Researchers from Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München in Germany experimented on tadpoles, which use the same basic VOs as humans.

Gasp! Does that mean we’re related to tadpoles? ICR doesn’t follow up on that. Perhaps they will some other time. For now, they’re focused on the balance issue, and they tell us:

The team found that when tadpoles initiated swimming motions, their tiny spinal cords sent out two copies of the swim signal — one goes to the body’s swimming muscles, and another goes to the VO. They published their results in Nature Communications.

This is the paper they’re talking about: Spinal corollary discharge modulates motion sensing during vertebrate locomotion. You can read it all without a subscription, but we’ll stay with ICR because we want The Truth — which only creation science can provide. Let’s read on:

As is often the case with high-tech design, the researchers found that timing is key. Precise nerve signal arrival times make this system work just right. The spinal cord sends two copies of the same signal: One signal arrives at the ears just before the same signal reaches the relevant muscles. Lead author Boris Chagnaud told the University, “This feedforward principle is crucial.” If the timing were off, then the system would disrupt balance instead of helping it.

Okay, so your body knows whether you are: (a) deliberately bending over to tie your shoe; or (b) unintentionally falling over on your face. Very nice. You, dear reader, in your ignorance, probably accept that as part of your nature. But ICR sees deeper. Much deeper. Their article continues:

How could a system with this kind of exquisite timing — the brain, brainstem, spinal cord, spine, ear, VO, neurons, and muscles all working in exacting and concerted harmony to make seamless locomotion — have originated? According to Chagnaud, “Here, evolution has not only come up with an elegant means of anticipating the effects of locomotion on the body but also of compensating for them in an adaptive fashion.”

That makes sense, doesn’t it? No, you fool! This is what the creation scientists at ICR say:

Natural forces never anticipate. They cannot think ahead because they do not have minds, will, or volition. However, intelligent minds can anticipate.

Then they ask the ultimate question:

Does this indicate that supernatural forces were involved?

This is how they deal with it:

What experiment has determined that evolution deserves the credit for constructing this elaborate system?

Admit it, dear reader — they got you that time, didn’t they? And your lesson isn’t over yet. Here’s another excerpt:

One could substitute the word “magic” in place of “evolution” to further reveal the complete lack of science behind Chagnaud’s statement.

Perhaps you’re starting to see the light. This is the end of the article, and if it doesn’t persuade you, then you are forever lost:

We see neither magic nor nature inventing such sophisticated machinery. But we do see actual designers do it. The Creator, not evolution, deserves the credit. The God of the Bible anticipates needs and meets them in advance.

See? No magic. Nothing supernatural. Just the “God of the Bible.” Obvious, isn’t it?

Copyright © 2015. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

22 responses to “ICR: Sense of Balance Proves Creationism

  1. May I be the first to proudly declare:

    I ain’t no kin to polliwogs!!!

  2. One could substitute the word “magic” in place of “evolution”…

    Which would make ICR’s case. After all, magic requires a magician. Case closed.

    ICR advances the notion that a deity spoke the universe into existence. Isn’t that casting a spell? Haven’t they ever watched “Harry Potter”. Sheesh.

  3. Didn’t mean to be anonymous.

    [*Voice from above*] Nothing is hidden from me.

  4. Is this another example of:
    Nature produces things which are so different from what anyone has thought of designing, that they must be designed?
    Or is it an example of:
    Living things are so similar to one another that they must have been the product of different designs?
    Or is it an example of:
    … they designer is constrained by the laws of nature so that things must be designed this way?

  5. Mister Brian Thomas, M.S. shows us yet again his ability to perform as a poor man’s Casey Luskin.

  6. What experiment has determined that evolution deserves the credit for constructing this elaborate system?

    What experiment has demonstrated that supernatural forces were involved?

    Natural forces never anticipate. They cannot think ahead because they do not have minds, will, or volition. However, intelligent minds can anticipate.

    Brian Thomas demonstrates once again that creationists can’t tell the difference between a figure of speech and a literal statement.

    But then, they’re Biblical literalists (except when it suits them not to be, such as when interpreting “days” as “years” in various Biblical prophecies), so that’s no show-stopper for them.

    Natural forces don’t have to literally anticipate anything. And in any case, in the quote to which Thomas is responding, “anticipate” clearly refers to how the system of balance works, not how it came to be. In other words, Chagnaud is referring to the body “anticipating,” not to evolution doing so. Evidently creationists not only don’t understand metaphors, they don’t understand sentence structure either.

  7. The answer involves a mechanism with precision parts and precise timing that has every characteristic of fine-tuned, intentional design.

    Had researchers simply applied Dempski’s numerology schema, they would have immediately detected the characteristics of intelligent design, thus proving once and for all the existence off the blessed designer to skeptics one and all and put to rest any more talk of evolution.

  8. While Megalonyx claims he’s no kin to some polliwogs, I’m beginning to suspect I ain’t no kin to no stiinkin creationist! How someone can be as ignorant as Brian Thomas, and apparently proud to be so, is definitely a puzzle.

  9. 20,000,000 pollywogs hatch from their eggs. One little pollywog has a mutation that lets its spine communicate with its vestibular organ, giving it an advantage over its brethren (and its sisteren as well). It gets around better, finds food better, and mates better — and it lives longer, allowing it to mate more times.

    Pretty soon (in the grand scheme of things) there are more and more frogs with this mutation, and it’s not long before they take over the world — or at least, the frogs’ world. After a while, the frog without this mutation is the rarity.

    Natural selection works its “magic” one more time. It’s truly strange that creationists can’t see this — must be some sort of scriptural blindfold, I guess.

  10. retiredsciguy says:

    Natural selection works its “magic” one more time. It’s truly strange that creationists can’t see this — must be some sort of scriptural blindfold, I guess.

    Oh yeah? Can you prove that it wasn’t the work of the designer? Well, can you?

  11. abeastwood wrote: “How someone can be as ignorant as Brian Thomas, and apparently proud to be so, is definitely a puzzle.”

    Don’t you know? Brian will get a big ole pat on the back from Jesus when he gets to heaven because he’s doing such a good job fighting back those evilutionists.

  12. SC:
    “Oh yeah? Can you prove that it wasn’t the work of the designer? Well, can you?”

    Hey — I always thought the burden of proof lay with the one making the claim. I’ll start working on my proof when some creationist shows me proof that it is the work of the Grand Old Designer.

  13. @Eric Lipps:
    About Biblical literalism and science.
    The Bible literallly says that the Sun goes around the Earth.
    The Bible does not say anything about there being fixed taxa. (Species, “kinds” or anything else.)

  14. Oops, an egregious error in my previous post re: my pedigree.

    It turns out that, on my father’s side, I am indeed descended from a very long line of tiny tadpoles–and every single one of them a gold-medallist swimming champion!

  15. One could indeed substitute the word “magic” in place of “evolution”, but Brian Thomas apparently prefers the equally valid substitution of a synonym for “magic”, such as “goddidit”.

  16. Could it be my punisment for being first to notice that sHam’s grip of science is rather tenuous?
    I was woken at about 3:30a.m.GMT (the peak of the eclipse) by the sensation of a running nose.
    sHam’s Blood Moon had given me a bloody nose!
    Beware the ides of sHam!

  17. Megalonyx traces his family tree (or should I say pondweed):
    “…I am indeed descended from a very long line of tiny tadpoles–and every single one of them a gold-medallist swimming champion!”

    And they all grew up to be celebrated jumping frogs!

  18. I am currently studying our sense of balance (as an archery coach) and I have to tell you, if our system of balance was designed, the designer has [excrement] for brains. As with so many functions of the human body we know a great deal about them because of all of the things that go wrong and the sense of balance is no different. No sane designer would have designed such a system. It is clearly cobbled together from available parts that were previously used for other purposes and it works okay up to a point, then you end up puking your guts out into your shoes.

    If these ICR people are so keen on the existence of their “intelligent designer” why do they set the intelligence bar so low?

  19. @Steve Ruis: Indeed. One of my standard comments to people who go on about the wonderful intelligent designer is: “I’m an anatomist, and I know that as far as design goes, a freshman engineer at (pick your favorite engineering school) could do a better job.

    They don’t seem to understand that, for natural selection to work, a trait doesn’t have to be perfect, it just has to be good enough to ensure some of it’s owners manage to survive to reproduce. It takes a pretty dumb designer, for example, to have the air and food pipes cross in the throat, ensuring that a proportion of his/her/its dearly beloved will choke to death on steak each year. But it’s quite easy to see why they are that way if you know how they evolved.

  20. bad design
    There are standard answers to the “bad design” argument:

    We don’t know all the reasons for what looks like bad design. It could be that there is some reason that such-and-such is done that way.

    What seems to be bad design in the adult is a result of a developmental process. Can you describe, not just a better design, but also the way that that better design can grow from a single cell?

    Bad designs are the result of the Fall of Adam.

    Bad design is design, still. The argument from design does not depend on it’s being optimal design, just that it cannot be the result of chance (or whatever else).

  21. But guys, perfect design would favor one species over another. Either the predators would starve to death, or the prey animals would all be eaten (which would then lead to all the predators starving to death).

    We wouldn’t want the G.O.D. playing favorites now, would we? No, in order to preserve some semblance of balance, nature needs to be imperfect. The fact that that looks like evolution, well…

  22. Techreseller

    And why did god create viruses and bad bacteria? How does that fit into the grand plan? I would fire an engineer planned thusly.