No oxygen? No problem!

According to David Aaro of Fox News, “Researchers on Monday said they found the first animal out of millions of known species that can survive its entire life without oxygen.”

anooxygen 2

The Henneguya salminicola (H. salminicola) normally lives in the muscle of its salmon host. The 10-celled creature has evolved to the point where it doesn’t breathe at all, according to a study published in the National Academy of Sciences.”

anooxygen 3

‘“Aerobic respiration was thought to be ubiquitous [“present, appearing, or found everywhere,” for all of you hillbillies out there like me] in animals, but now we confirmed that this is not the case,’ said Dorothée Huchon, a zoologist at Israel’s Tel Aviv University in a press release. ‘Our discovery shows that evolution can go in strange directions. Aerobic respiration is a major source of energy, and yet we found an animal that gave up this critical pathway.’”

anooxygen 4

Okay, doc…, I may not have known what “ubiquitous” means, but I’m smart enough to not assume this animal “gave up” its ability to breathe via some reverse evolution process.

I’m also honest enough to admit it when I don’t know something.

The possibility that this creature was designed and created this way is not even considered.

This is just another example which shows these scientists don’t know everything, and actually they know very little in the grand scheme of things.  They don’t even know what they don’t know!

“The new discovery could impact a common understanding between scientists that multicellular life needs oxygen to live on Earth.”

I would say it definitely does “impact a common understanding between scientists that multicellular life needs oxygen to live on Earth,” or anywhere else for that matter.

“Using deep sequencing approaches, the study found the H. salminicola has no mitochondrial DNA — normally containing the genes for respiration — which means the parasite ‘lost the ability to perform aerobic cellular respiration.’”

Excuse me, but no, it doesn’t mean “the parasite lost the ability to perform aerobic cellular respiration.” It means the parasite has no “ability to perform aerobic cellular respiration,” or just doesn’t need to.

Why do these “scientists” always have to interject their evolutionary biases into everything.

It’s not just me…, you can see this as well, right?

“It’s not clear how the H. salminicola survives without oxygen, but Huchon — who led the study — said it might be taking energy from the fish. He added that the parasite’s anaerobic traits were an accidental discovery.”

‘“It’s not yet clear to us how the parasite generates energy,’ Huchon said. ‘It may be drawing it from the surrounding fish cells, or it may have a different type of respiration such as oxygen-free breathing…it has shed unnecessary genes responsible for aerobic respiration and become an even simpler organism.’”

“The parasite is a myxozoan relative of jellyfish and corals that reportedly causes disease or cysts in the flesh of its salmon host, but is harmless to humans.”

Excuse me if I take that “harmless to humans” part with a grain of salt.

“Mitochondrial respiration has been an ancient characteristic of multi-cell organisms on our planet. Every cell in our bodies except red blood cells has large numbers of mitochondria, according to science alert.”

“They are essential for breaking down oxygen to produce adenosine which provides energy to drive many processes in living cells.”

“A few single-cell organisms lost the ability for aerobic respiration, but never in animals, the study said.”

‘“It is generally thought that during evolution, organisms become more and more complex, and that simple single-celled or few-celled organisms are the ancestors of complex organisms,’ Huchon concluded. ‘But here, right before us, is an animal whose evolutionary process is the opposite.’”

So when we discover a creature that flies in the face of the “evolutionary process” [macro-evolution that is], they don’t question the validity of the process, they just write it off and keep right on going.

Very scientific.

So, how far are we away from the parasitic aliens like the creatures from “The Thing” or the “Alien” series of movies?

anooxygen 5

anooxygen 6

We may still be pretty far away, but we definitely are closer!

 

I value your feedback and I’d love to hear from you!

If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the white “FOLLOW” button at the bottom of that page, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Climate Change!  Global Warming!  It’s the end of the world as we know it…, and I feel fine.

There are a lot of misconceptions and misnomers being thrown around by “Climate Change Alarmists.”

Climate Change Alarmists are individuals who look at you as if you have three heads if you dare to question any of their Climate Change claims or appeals.

Climate Change Alarmists call people other people who don’t swallow their story hook, line and sinker, “Climate Change Deniers.”

Ok…, let’s be clear…, NOBODY believes the climate doesn’t change or isn’t changing.

Some people just believe the Earth’s climate changes naturally, and on its own, just like it is scientifically documented to have done throughout the world’s history, whether people were around or not.

“Climate Change Deniers” are also typically skeptical of policies directed at combating Climate Change because they don’t believe there is anything people can really do to effect the climate one way or the other.

My question to the Climate Change Alarmists would be, “Did you actually expect the Earth’s climate to NOT change from time to time?  Did you really expect the Earth’s climate to remain exactly the same forever?

That seems to be where these Climate Change Alarmists are coming from.

The Earth has had periods of “Global Warming,” “Global Cooling,” and even “Ice Ages” in the past when people either weren’t even around, or people did not burn fossil fuels.  How does the Climate Change community explain this?  How did the climate change back then without the help of the “evil” human polluters?

Let’s look at a recent article by Harry Pettit, of News.com, as a typical example of a Climate Change Alarmist spinning another fantasy climate change story and scenario that just doesn’t make any sense.

According to Mr. Pettit, “An Antarctic ‘time bomb’ is waiting to go off.”

He says that, “Earth’s sea levels should be nine meters higher than they are,” and that “dramatic melting in Antarctica may soon plug the gap.”

That’s over 29 feet higher for us unscientific and/or American Neanderthals.

So…, the oceans should be 29 feet higher than they are?

That’s like a three story building you know?

Really?

Do you understand how stupid that sounds?

“They say global temperatures today are the same as they were 115,000 years ago, a time when modern humans were only just beginning to leave Africa, he continues.”

Oh really?  How could that be?  What types of cars were people driving back then?  They must have had a lot of factories pumping out plenty of emissions in old Sub-Saharan Africa, huh?

Again, do you understand how stupid that sounds?

“Research shows during this time period, ‘scorching’ ocean temperatures caused a catastrophic global ice melt.  As a result, sea levels were six to nine meters higher than they are today.  But if modern ocean temperatures are the same as they were during that period, it means our planet is missing a devastating sea rise.”

I feel like I’m dumber for just having read that.  Please take a moment to reread the previous paragraph in order to properly appreciate all of the contradictions and false assumptions made here.

And again, do you understand how stupid that sounds?

“If oceans were to rise by just 1.8 meters (about 6 feet), large swathes of coastal cities would find themselves underwater, turning streets into canals and completely submerging some buildings,” and that, “There’s no way to get tens of meters of sea level rise without getting tens of meters of sea level rise from Antarctica,” said Dr. Rob DeConto, an Antarctic expert at the University of Massachusetts in the U.S.

“In the next century, ice loss would get even worse,” he added.

Even if you throw all common sense out the window and take all of these doomsday predictions at face value, do these people really think that having America return to the Middle Ages would make any difference?

If we all stopped driving cars, stopped transporting things with trucks, stopped flying in commercial jets and stopped using fossil fuels for electric power tomorrow, would that avert all of this supposed ice melting?

If you really think so, I’ve got this bridge I’m looking to sell…, cheap.

“The Sun” newspaper, in the United Kingdom, actually has a “sea level doomsday simulator” on its website if you’d like to know whether your home would be wiped out by rising oceans!

Well isn’t that special.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of this site and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

ice-caps melting

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑