Batty Illogic Published in Evolutionary Paper

first_imgScientific papers do not emerge from pure realms of wisdom and knowledge.  They are written by people, who can be illogical sometimes.One has to be pretty smart and well-educated to get into the National Academy of Sciences (NAS).  The criteria for getting published in the Proceedings of the NAS are stringent.  Somehow, though, the criteria for evidential rigor and sound logic are relaxed when the subject is evolution.  Here’s what a recent paper by evolutionists primarily from China said in PNAS about “Adaptive evolution of energy metabolism genes and the origin of flight in bats” —Bat flight poses intriguing questions about how flight independently developed in mammals. Flight is among the most energy-consuming activities. Thus, we deduced that changes in energy metabolism must be a primary factor in the origin of flight in bats. The respiratory chain of the mitochondrial produces 95% of the adenosine triphosphate (ATP) needed for locomotion. Because the respiratory chain has a dual genetic foundation, with genes encoded by both the mitochondrial and nuclear genomes, we examined both genomes to gain insights into the evolution of flight within mammals. Evidence for positive selection was detected in 23.08% of the mitochondrial-encoded and 4.90% of nuclear-encoded oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) genes, but in only 2.25% of the nuclear-encoded nonrespiratory genes that function in mitochondria or 1.005% of other nuclear genes in bats. To address the caveat that the two available bat genomes are of only draft quality, we resequenced 77 OXPHOS genes from four species of bats. The analysis of the resequenced gene data are in agreement with our conclusion that a significantly higher proportion of genes involved in energy metabolism, compared with background genes, show evidence of adaptive evolution specific on the common ancestral bat lineage. Both mitochondrial and nuclear-encoded OXPHOS genes display evidence of adaptive evolution along the common ancestral branch of bats, supporting our hypothesis that genes involved in energy metabolism were targets of natural selection and allowed adaptation to the huge change in energy demand that were required during the origin of flight.These evolutionists must surely know that the earliest fossil bat is already 100% bat (2/16/08, 4/20/06, 1/28/05).  That empirical problem aside, the authors of this paper assume that the presence of “genes involved in energy metabolism” was sufficient to create flying mammals.  The high-performance genes for ATP production (involving the exquisite molecular machine, ATP synthase) somehow made a ground-based rodent take off into the air, with all the systems involved for powered flight.  Why?  Because natural selection “allowed” it.  Since flight “required” a huge change in energy demand, once the genes arrived (somehow), the “origin of flight” resulted.We’re holding up this example of patho-logical inebriation (i.e., drunken stupor) for the world to see that scientists can say really dumb things when under the influence of Darwine.  Don’t let their jargon fool you.  This is blubbering foolishness masquerading as scholarship.Let’s apply this theory to flying dogs.  Some dogs are high-strung, and some are calm.  The high-strung dogs meet the stringent requirements for flight, don’t they?  Tell your dog you “allow” him or her to fly, and watch natural selection bring “the origin of flight” to pass.Some horses are high-strung, too.  Maybe we could call this the Pegasus Theory of Evolution.  If energy requirements being met is all that’s necessary for horses to fly, then evolutionists should expect to find flying horses in the fossil record.  Maybe unicorns, too. (Visited 10 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0last_img read more

Gallery: Brand South Africa in Davos – the campaign

first_imgBrand South Africa had a strong and vibrant presence at the 40th Annual Meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, in late January 2010, with a particular focus on the 2010 Fifa World Cup. The following adverts supported the campaign.Click on a thumbnail for a larger image. BRAND SOUTH AFRICA IN DAVOS PART 1 PART 2 PART 3 THE CAMPAIGN More galleries: For more great South African photography, including the Proteas jetting off to the ICC World Cup, grassroots football, Nelson Mandela meeting Bafana Bafana, high-rise office buildings in Sandton, and South Africa’s new ape-man fossil – visit the Media Club South Africa gallery page.last_img

As Mobile-Payment Giants Bicker, Startups Step Up

first_imgWhy IoT Apps are Eating Device Interfaces Tags:#Carriers#e-commerce#Mobile Payments The Rise and Rise of Mobile Payment Technology Role of Mobile App Analytics In-App Engagement Related Posts center_img What it Takes to Build a Highly Secure FinTech … dan rowinski The mobile payments industry is stuck in neutral. The ability to pay for your goods and services at brick-and-mortar locations from your smartphone is a dream of technologist and financial companies, but the realities of a complicated industry with billions of dollars at stake and too many moving parts has stymied progress. Well, almost.No Momentum For Big Mobile Payments PlayersThe companies with the biggest vested interests in mobile payments are all multi-billion-dollar, publicly traded behemoths. This group includes the payment processors like Visa, MasterCard and American Express as well as giant technology companies like Apple, Google and PayPal. The banks of the world do not want to be left out in the cold to become the “dumb pipes” of the payment industry (places where money is merely stored and transferred). And the mobile carriers – Verizon, AT&T, Sprint and T-Mobile – want their slice of the mobile payments pie. Every one of those companies has some derivation of a mobile payments system that could be seen as ill-conceived (PayPal), immature and un-deployed (Isis from the carriers), stuck in the maelstrom of competing interests (Isis as well as Google Wallet) or illogical (various mobile payments systems from the payment processors). When it comes to the top of the so-called mobile payments market, there are too many moving parts, too many squabbles and not enough infrastructure or actual solutions. But the very mess being created by the big boys in mobile payments is opening opportunities for fast- moving startups that understand that the best way to make mobile payments work is to place their services inside as many physical retail spaces as possible. Right now. Not preparing for some theoretical future where everything is all of a sudden ripe for success.The leaders in the mobile payments space are not MasterCard or Google. The real leaders are little startups like Square, ShopKeep, Dwolla and LevelUp. These companies see an opportunity and are rushing to fill it, leaving behind the big bureaucracy and striking real partnerships with real business. LevelUp’s Small-Time ApproachLevelUp is a good example of a small mobile payments provider creating traction at the bottom of the market. The Boston-based startup (which is a derivative of social location app SCVNGR) provides QR-code-based payments for local merchants by providing businesses with Android-smartphones to act as scanners that process payments from the LevelUp smartphone app. It now has 500,000 users and just completed its first 2 million transactions. Those numbers are small potatoes compared to the big payment processors, but in many ways LevelUp is the bellwether for the progress of the mobile payments industry in the United States. LevelUp thinks outside the box, thinks big thoughts, makes significant partnerships, and perhaps most importantly, actually finds its way into actual businesses. LevelUp has expanded to several cities in the U.S. and its growth is accelerating. It took LevelUp 424 days to reach its first million transactions and about 100 days to reach the next million. Unlike the big payment processors (or even startups like Square), LevelUp does not charge an interchange fee (taking a percentage of each transaction) for every payment it makes. LevelUp makes money by offering deals to consumers within the app. For instance, the app will take $3 off your burger the first time you visit a restaurant and pay with LevelUp. You come back enough times and pay with the app and you get better rewards. Fundamentally, it is an advertising and data business model that LevelUp believes will be central to the future of mobile payments.  LevelUp has gone from an app that makes payments to a platform that provides payment capabilities. In addition to its apps on iOS, Android and the mobile Web, it also partners with companies that wish to have a mobile payments presence themselves. These custom-branded mobile payments apps can be used by merchants to provide deals to its customers as well as process the transactions themselves. LevelUp says that it has sold many of these custom-branded mobile payments apps but so far it has announced only one, with Washington, DC-based eatery Sweetgreen. The startup is now looking to expand, announcing on Wednesday a partnership with a mid-tier bank – First Trade Union Bank – to create a mobile payments app for its customers. The app will integrate First Trade Union banking features with LevelUp’s payment and loyalty functions to provide an app that will likely be able to check your balance and make a payment at the same time.At first blush, this may seem like a shrug-worthy event for both LevelUp and First Trade Union. A middling startup and a middling bank just made an app. Great. So what?Tackling Mobile Payments Without The Innovators Dilemma The fact of the matter is that LevelUp and its kin (Square, ShopKeep etc.) are going after a key segment of the American retail market – small businesses and small banks that make up a giant swath of the American economy. One bank or one eatery chain may seem small compared to Visa or MasterCard’s footprint, but when you put all of those pieces together they can become a powerful force. And one that the biggest so-called players are not penetrating while they argue amongst themselves and wait for inertia to begin moving in their direction.“In my opinion it’s not just that they’re big and thus slow, it’s that they have the mother of all innovator’s dilemma’s. They all make money in the wrong ways (and huge sums of it) so taking advantage of this new market is really tricky. My belief is that mobile payments and the next-gen of [point-of-sale systems] are all driven by data and advertising,” said SCVNGR and LevelUp founder Seth Priebatsch. The innovator’s dilemma, as far as the payment processors go, is a big one. American Express, Visa and MasterCard want to move aggressively into the emerging mobile payments industry – but cannot do so without significantly disrupting their existing business models. That’s why they seem to drag their feet – and force the rest of the payments industry get down on their knees and crawl with them. Companies like Google are blocked because they are forced to deal other companies’ innovators dilemma and do not have the resources or motivation to attack the bottom of the retail industry piecemeal the way Square or LevelUp do. “It’s easy for me, ShopKeep, CloverOS to go after that because we don’t make any money off of anything else and so forgoing those other rev streams is easy. But for [American Express], giving up $10 billion in interchange is too tough a pill to swallow on a gamble that data/advertising is a bigger market. For Isis, their parents make money off of data and wireless plans, so it’s just not a key priority or easy thing to shift the model to be competitive in the new mobile payments space,” Priebatsch said. Eventually, the large companies will get their act together and make a concerted push towards actual, ubiquitous mobile-payment solutions on the ground level. But that process is taking longer than many pundits and consumers hoped it would. In the meantime, the startups of the mobile payments world are taking advantage. Lead image courtesy of Shutterstock.last_img read more