NON-RANDOM EVOLUTION

 Some time ago I wrote a blog post which questioned the Darwinian article of faith--Evolution by Natural Selection. As I understood Natural Selection, It was a process of random selection of random mutations to the genetic structure of DNA. My questioning such an article of faith quite naturally caused some kickback from neo-Darwinists. 

One critiquer of my position argued that evolution was not random--that it was a non-random selection from a variety of random mutations. I see two problems with this thesis. First, it says that evolution is both non-random and random at the same time. This, of course, violates the logical rule of non-contradiction. As Aristotle put it, a thing cannot be and not be at the same time. Second, the way out of this logical contradiction is to recognize that if there is a non-random selection from random mutations, then the process of evolution is not random at all. In other words, an intelligence of some sort drives evolution.

To use the "intelligent design" escape from the neo-Darwinian self-contradiction is not to buy into the belief that the "intelligent designer" is God. Here is a theory of evolution which should be congenial to both theists and atheists--a "self-organization" theory. 

Science teaches that there are four fundamental forces of nature--the strong force, the weak force, electromagnetism, and gravity. I theorize a fifth force--the self-organizing force. The phenomenon of self-organization has been identified on all levels of physical science and biology. From the organization of subatomic particles into atoms to the organization of galaxies into clusters and superclusters, the clues of self-organization are everywhere. So how would a self-organization theory of evolution work?

To grossly oversimplify: 

Natural Selection posits that when the asteroid hit Mexico 66,000,000 years ago, the big, lumbering behemoth dinosaurs went extinct, but some dinosaurs accidentally evolved into birds and continue living to this day. This certainly was a fortuitous accident. Out of a near-infinity of possible random mutations (most of which would have been harmful), a mutation occurred which saved the descendants of the dinosaurs.

According to the Self-Organization Theory of evolution, when the asteroid struck, some dinosaur DNA reacted to the fact that its current structure was no longer working and reprogrammed itself to eventually become birds. It will be easy to say, "Self-organization is a godless process like the other four fundamental forces of Nature," and look no farther. But there is a new scientific theory floating around which is suggestive of an Intelligent Designer.

According to this theory, the Universe is actually a virtual reality simulation. Partial evidence of this theory is found in the fact that every aspect of the Universe is so well-organized. 

If we live in a virtual reality Universe, then it stands to reason that somewhere outside the Universe is a Virtual Reality Simulator. One atheistic view of the virtual reality simulator is to imagine the Universe as a computer simulation on somebody's laptop. A theistic view might be that the Virtual Reality Simulator is God. 

Regardless of which theory suits your fancy, or even if neither does, evolution by self-organization makes more sense than evolution by random accident aka Natural Selection.

HOW DO YOU FREE A SKUNK FROM A LIVE TRAP?

 

We have a critter problem in our neighborhood. Armadillos get into the yard to dig holes and root for grubs. I used to sit up late at night with a rifle and try to shoot them when they came into the yard. In order to shoot an armadillo, it has to come into the yard when you are out in the weather sitting on the side yard’s picnic table. I only saw one the whole time I was hunting, and that night all I was armed with was an air gun. I shot him in the butt and he hightailed it out of the yard. I switched over to a .22 rifle loaded with subsonic cartridges and never saw another armadillo on my late night/early morning vigils.

We decided to trap them, and we have caught countless armadillos in our traps. The first we caught I euthanized with a .22 pistol. Being a kind soul, I decided to make sure I killed him instantly. I walked up to the trap and held the gun close to its head. Apparently armadillos have very small brains. I hit his head, but not his brain. The armadillo jumped and tried to spin around. It couldn’t make full spin, but it did spin enough to spatter blood all over my business suit (I was going to court that morning). I shot it again in the chest and then went in to change clothes. The next few times I shot the armadillos in the chest with a .22 rifle. Maybe less human, but definitely less danger to your clothing.

Finally, the milk of human kindness got the better of me, and I started carrying them off to Osceola National Forest and releasing them. Armadillos are very uncooperative animals. I would often have to open the trap and shake them out. Not a lot of fun, since armadillos are known to carry leprosy.

We’ve caught other things in the trap: squirrels, housecats, and possums. Getting squirrels and housecats out of the trap is very easy—just open the door and they dash out. Possums are like armadillos, they don’t seem to want to cooperate with you when you try to get them out. I usually have to resort to shaking them out of the trap.

Yesterday, I was confronted with a new animal. A tribe of skunks seems to have invaded our subdivision. We first became aware of them when they started getting themselves repeatedly run over near the entrance to our subdivision. These incidents were most malodorous, and we could smell them from our house. Then the unthinkable happened. We caught a skunk in our live trap. How do you get a skunk carried off and removed from a live trap without getting perfumed? I called our pest control company, and they said they would be glad to dispose of the skunk IF they had set the trap. Since I had set the trap, however, they would not help.

At a loss for an idea about what to do, I went to that infallible source of odd information, YouTube, and found videos by two skunk trappers. One of them told how to improvise a lance with a hypodermic spearhead. He said it was best to get one of those long, extendable tree pruning poles and extend it to its greatest length. Fill the hypodermic with paint thinner or some other poisonous liquid and affix it to the pruning pole. Stab the skunk and push so that the hypodermic discharged the poison into the skunk’s chest. He said if you were gentle enough when you stabbed the skunk, it wouldn’t spray. If you weren’t gentle enough, the length of your lance would protect you. I decided not to follow this plan.

The next guy said skunks were pretty docile, and the best way to get them out of the trap was to SLOWLY walk up to the trap and CAREFULLY cover it with a blanket you wouldn’t care being rendered stinky. The blanket serves a twofold purpose. First, if the skunk gets agitated and sprays, it theoretically will contain the stench. Second, the blanket cuts off outside stimuli and renders the skunk less likely to spray.

This is the method I chose. First, I changed clothes into an outfit I was willing to part with if the plan miscarried. (My wife warned me that if I got sprayed I would be sleeping in the guest room until I was decontaminated). Then I got our best blanket (just kidding) and slowly walked up to the skunk. I covered the cage very carefully and without incident.

Next, I gently walked the cage to my pickup truck and loaded it in the bed. Then I drove slowly to the deep woods, being careful not to hit potholes. When I got into the wilderness, I was overjoyed to see that the skunk had not sprayed.  The final step was to convince the skunk to come out of his cozy cage. I set the cage on the ground, removed enough of the blanket to get the trapdoor open, and locked it in the open position. Then I waited from a safe distance. Like the armadillos and possums before him, he did not seem overly anxious to escape to freedom. I decided not to use the method I used for emptying the trap of armadillos and possums. I had better sense than to pick the trap up and try to shake the skunk out. Eventually the skunk found the open door and slowly walked to freedom. I wish I had taken pictures of the entire process, but it didn’t occur to me to do so until time to let him out.

Here he is  after he discovered the open door and decided to saunter out.

We have a critter problem in our neighborhood. Armadillos get into the yard to dig holes and root for grubs. I used to sit up late at night with a rifle and try to shoot them when they came into the yard. In order to shoot an armadillo, it has to come into the yard when you are out in the weather sitting on the side yard’s picnic table. I only saw one the whole time I was hunting, and that night all I was armed with was an air gun. I shot him in the butt and he hightailed it out of the yard. I switched over to a .22 rifle loaded with subsonic cartridges and never saw another armadillo on my late night/early morning vigils.

We decided to trap them, and we have caught countless armadillos in our traps. The first we caught I euthanized with a .22 pistol. Being a kind soul, I decided to make sure I killed him instantly. I walked up to the trap and held the gun close to its head. Apparently armadillos have very small brains. I hit his head, but not his brain. The armadillo jumped and tried to spin around. It couldn’t make full spin, but it did spin enough to spatter blood all over my business suit (I was going to court that morning). I shot it again in the chest and then went in to change clothes. The next few times I shot the armadillos in the chest with a .22 rifle. Maybe less human, but definitely less danger to your clothing.

Finally, the milk of human kindness got the better of me, and I started carrying them off to Osceola National Forest and releasing them. Armadillos are very uncooperative animals. I would often have to open the trap and shake them out. Not a lot of fun, since armadillos are known to carry leprosy.

We’ve caught other things in the trap: squirrels, housecats, and possums. Getting squirrels and housecats out of the trap is very easy—just open the door and they dash out. Possums are like armadillos, they don’t seem to want to cooperate with you when you try to get them out. I usually have to resort to shaking them out of the trap.

Yesterday, I was confronted with a new animal. A tribe of skunks seems to have invaded our subdivision. We first became aware of them when they started getting themselves repeatedly run over near the entrance to our subdivision. These incidents were most malodorous, and we could smell them from our house. Then the unthinkable happened. We caught a skunk in our live trap. How do you get a skunk carried off and removed from a live trap without getting perfumed? I called our pest control company, and they said they would be glad to dispose of the skunk IF they had set the trap. Since I had set the trap, however, they would not help.

At a loss for an idea about what to do, I went to that infallible source of odd information, YouTube, and found videos by two skunk trappers. One of them told how to improvise a lance with a hypodermic spearhead. He said it was best to get one of those long, extendable tree pruning poles and extend it to its greatest length. Fill the hypodermic with paint thinner or some other poisonous liquid and affix it to the pruning pole. Stab the skunk and push so that the hypodermic discharged the poison into the skunk’s chest. He said if you were gentle enough when you stabbed the skunk, it wouldn’t spray. If you weren’t gentle enough, the length of your lance would protect you. I decided not to follow this plan.

The next guy said skunks were pretty docile, and the best way to get them out of the trap was to SLOWLY walk up to the trap and CAREFULLY cover it with a blanket you wouldn’t care being rendered stinky. The blanket serves a twofold purpose. First, if the skunk gets agitated and sprays, it theoretically will contain the stench. Second, the blanket cuts off outside stimuli and renders the skunk less likely to spray.

This is the method I chose. First, I changed clothes into an outfit I was willing to part with if the plan miscarried. (My wife warned me that if I got sprayed I would be sleeping in the guest room until I was decontaminated). Then I got our best blanket (just kidding) and slowly walked up to the skunk. I covered the cage very carefully and without incident.

Next, I gently walked the cage to my pickup truck and loaded it in the bed. Then I drove slowly to the deep woods, being careful not to hit potholes. When I got into the wilderness, I was overjoyed to see that the skunk had not sprayed.  The final step was to convince the skunk to come out of his cozy cage. I set the cage on the ground, removed enough of the blanket to get the trapdoor open, and locked it in the open position. Then I waited from a safe distance. Like the armadillos and possums before him, he did not seem overly anxious to escape to freedom. I decided not to use the method I used for emptying the trap of armadillos and possums. I had better sense than to pick the trap up and try to shake the skunk out. Eventually the skunk found the open door and slowly walked to freedom. I wish I had taken pictures of the entire process, but it didn’t occur to me to do so until time to let him out.

Here he is  after he discovered the open door and decided to saunter out.

Here he is strolling toward the woods.

 

And here he is escaping into the woods.

All that was left to do was drive home, throw away the beggar weed infested blanket, pick the beggar weeds off my pants cuffs, reset the trap, and hope that no more skunks wandered into it.

SPACE SHOGI

 

Back in the 1980’s I invented a Shogi variant which transported the Shogi pieces to a 3-D board. The game was described somewhat inaccurately in Michael Keller’s World Game Review. I take full responsibility for the inaccuracy, blaming it on my poor effort to communicate the game to Keller.

 

The game is now on Wikipedia, using Keller’s description. I recently got a communication pointing out that the pieces were too lonely on a 9x9x9 playing field. I agree. I never meant for the game to be played on such a large field. It is now time for me to clear up the inaccuracies.

 

Space Shogi should be played on a field consisting of 81 cubes arranged 3x3x9. Think of the field as consisting of a row of three cubes, each one subdivided into nine smaller cubes. White occupies the 3x3x3 cube on one end of the field, and Black occupies the cube on the other side of the field. The middle cube is vacant.

 

The pieces are identical to those of orthodox Shogi, and their moves are extended to the third dimension. They are:

 

All the rules of orthodox Shogi apply, including captures, drops, and promotion of the pieces. The array is shown below, as are diagrams of the moves of the pieces.

VARIATIONS ON THE THEME OF CHESS

 I have been a chess aficionado since I was in the first grade, and once upon a time I was a fair player, going 2-2-2 in my first chess tournament, the 1980 Florida State Chess Championship. After a while playing tournament chess, I gravitated toward postal chess, and then my passion for the game dried up. It's been years since I played the game, but I still have a collection of some 40-50 chess sets.

In college I got interested in chess variants. I have collected rulesheets for some 200-250 variations on the theme of chess, and I have invented more than a dozen chess variants myself. I must confess that I was more concerned with how the variants looked than how well they played, but I think that some of my variants are very playable.

Which brings me to my latest venture in self-publishing: Variations on the Theme of Chess, available in Kindle and paperback from Amazon. A significant number of the games described in the book are games I invented or modified. 

Games like Chesquerque:

And Cross Chess:

And Hexagonal Shogi:

And Hexagonal Xiangqi (Chinese Chess):

I think any of these games I have illustrated are very playable. 

In addition to my own inventions, I have included descriptions of some ancient and exotic chess variants.

Games like the Prussian National Game: ( In the diagrams below, the empty ranks are omitted)

And Edgar Rice Burroughs' Martian Chess: 

And Tamerlane's Chess: 

I have included some old, established variants.

Like Capablanca's Chess: 

And Courier Chess:

And I have even included some variants which are almost, but not quite Chess.

Like George Parker's Camelot:

And Gala, a game played long ago in Germany:

And one of my favorite not-quite Chess games, Cheskers:

If you like chess variants, you'll probably find one to suit your taste in Variations on the Theme of Chess.

ACCIDENTAL ADAPTATION?

Darwinians are celebrating the adaptation of a Puerto Rican forest lizard to urban life. In an article entitled Forest Lizards Genetically Morph to Survive Life in the City, the adaptation is ballyhooed as proof of Darwin's theory of evolution. This may be a fine example of evolution, but I don't think it supports the neo-Darwinist theory of Natural Selection. According to that theory, random mutations of the DNA molecule are selected to survive because they give the DNA an advantage in the struggle for survival. "Random mutation" equals "Accidental change." Accidents are more often disastrous than serendipitous. 

Which is more reasonable? That when the lizards moved into the city, their genes were randomly modified and the modifications gave the lizards longer legs and modified scales which helped them to better survive in the city? Or that when the lizards came into the city, their DNA recognized the need for longer legs and modified scales and reprogrammed itself to make city life easier?

If evolution is random, why does DNA keep coming up with the same solutions to the same problems? This phenomenon is called "convergent evolution," and convergent evolution has given us the Ichthyosaurus, the Shark, and the Killer Whale, all of which are basically the same. It has also given us Hyenas and Wolves--two very different genera which survive in much the same way. Then we can look at Ants and Termites; pterodactyls, bats, and birds; and myriads of other unrelated species which have "convergently evolved" the same sort of solutions to the same problems.

One of my favorite examples of convergent evolution is the Panda's thumb. The Panda, like primates and people, needed an opposable thumb for grasping things (in the Panda's case it was bamboo shoots). To meet this need the Panda evolved a thumb. It's a very different thumb than the human thumb, but it still is a thumb.

I once read a joke that claimed DNA invented human beings because it wanted to explore extraterrestrial opportunities for replication. The joke was funny because it advanced the "ridiculous" theory that DNA had some form of intelligence, and that evolution was purposeful.

I think Darwinists are allergic to the idea that some sort of intelligence drives evolution because they see the term "Intelligent Design" as a code word for God. If they could remove God from the process of evolution and retain some sort of directing force, they would probably drop Natural Selection like a hot potato.

Henri Bergson, the atheist French philosopher, could accept neither the theory that accident drove  evolution nor the theory that God controlled it. He posited a theory that there was some sort of "elan vital," or "life force," which drove evolution by seeing needs and opportunities and modifying life to meet those needs and opportunities.

I'm not a scientist, a philosopher, or a theologian, but I think I can see a theory of evolution which can satisfy both the proponents of materialistic evolution and theistic evolution. I'll discuss it in my next post.

MORE THOUGHTS ON THE STATE OF COLLEGE AND PROFESSIONAL FOOTBALL

In my last post I talked about the safety measures that have been put in place which have sought to transform football from the brutal sport which I played as a young man into something that is safer. With the exponential growth in the size and weight of today’s players, it is open to question whether these safety measures are as successful as they should be.

I’d like to talk about another change in football which possibly increases safety, but which gives players carte blanche to cheat—the legalization of blockers touching the “blockees” with their hands. When I played on the line, I was taught that if you put your hands on the person you were blocking, you would be flagged for holding and garner a 15 yard penalty. What you were supposed to do was hit the “blockee” with your shoulder and drive him back from the line of scrimmage. You were also taught to put your head between the “blockee” and the hole that the ball carrier was going to hit. This made it more difficult for the “blockee” to slide along the line toward the ball carrier to make the tackle. On defense, the linemen were taught to “read” the blocker’s head. Look and see which side of your body the head was going to be placed on, and slide in that direction to keep from being cut off from pursuing the ball carrier.

Old time defensive linemen defended against a shoulder block with a maneuver called variously a “forearm shiver” or a “flipper.” You hit the blocker with your forearm as hard as you could in order to fight off the block. Some blockers would also hit with the forearm rather than the shoulder. I got my facemask busted and my chin split open from a huge offensive tackle who smashed his forearm into my face. The worst part of it was that the blow caused me to swallow my cud of chewing tobacco. Aiming for the head with a flipper was a good tactic on either side of the line. As a defensive lineman, I aimed my flippers for the head of the offensive lineman. On offense I aimed my flipper at the chest of the opposing lineman. We used to wear flipper pads to prevent injury to the forearms, but my junior and senior years in high school flipper pads were outlawed because some cheaters were “loading” their pads. Consequently, during the course of a game I would beat my forearms bloody from hitting faceguards and chinstrap buckles.

Nowadays I don’t see the linemen throwing flippers. Why? They’ve been outlawed. NFL rule 12, Article 3, Section 1(a) defines unsportsmanlike conduct, among other things, as: "Throwing a punch, or a forearm, or kicking at an opponent even though no contact is made."

Shoulder blocking is why the old-time football linemen had such bulky shoulder pads—to cushion the shoulder against the impact of hitting the “blockee.” Today the offensive lineman’s first move is not to hit with his shoulder, but to put his hands on the defensive lineman and push. Being denied the use of the flipper, the defensive lineman can do nothing but push back.

The push block is less traumatic than the shoulder/flipper block, but that is not why blockers are now allowed to use their hands. They can use their hands because it is “too hard” for referees to police holding. I remember reading about the rule change when it was made, and the justification was that it made the policing of holding easier. It also made holding much easier. If you grab a defender by the front of his jersey, holding is almost invisible. It’s only when the blocker hugs the defender or obviously grabs the defender by the shoulder pads or side of the jersey that holding will be called. This makes pass rushing very difficult. Pass rushers had several tactics for evading the shoulder block of an offensive lineman in a passing situation, and these tactics are not nearly as successful when the blocker has hold of the front of the jersey. One pass rush tactic that would be outlawed today was the head-butt rush. As a pass rusher, your first move was to butt the blocker's face mask with the crown of your helmet. Can we say, "Targeting?"

Because of these rule changes, passers get much more time to get off their passes. So how does the modern game compensate for this great advantage? By legalizing all but the most egregious forms of pass interference. Being able to put your hands on or wrap your arm around a receiver who is trying to catch a pass is an open invitation to do a little grabbing and shaking the receiver to make him drop the pass. This grabbing is hard for referees to detect in the heat of combat, and that is why you constantly hear announcers saying, “Well, the defender got away with interfering on that play.”

Back before they legalized pass interference, the defender’s best way to defend a pass was to time the tackle to arrive at the moment the ball arrived and jar the receiver enough to make him drop the ball. Probably the greatest practitioner of this type of pass defense was Fred “The Hammer” Williamson. Williamson would time his tackles perfectly and deliver a stunning blow to the receiver’s head with his forearm. This blow would usually knock the ball loose from the receiver’s grasp. He also frequently knocked receivers out, and he boasted that he was going to knock the Packers’ top two receiver out in Super Bowl I. It didn’t quite work out as Williamson planned. He instead was the player who got knocked out.

I’m not suggesting that football go back to the old days of shoulder blocking and throwing flippers—those tactics produce a lot more trauma that is inflicted in today’s game, but there ought to be some way to tighten up on the grabbing of jerseys. Only the Umpire is specifically charged with the duty of looking for holding on the line of scrimmage. The Head Linesman and the Line Judge don’t appear to be assigned the task of looking for holding, and they are stationed on either side of the line of scrimmage. If they are not specifically required to look for holding on the line, they should have that task added to their duties. Maybe an off-the-field referee should be added who could monitor the line on a video screen and call in any holdings which are not detected by on-the-field referees. As far as grabbing by the pass defenders is concerned, maybe coaches should be given a limited number of challenges for no-calls in the event of the officials missing egregious pass interference. This right could be limited to interference in the end zone, the red zone, and on passes in excess of twenty yards. Maybe someday the players will wear “smart” jerseys that can signal when they’re being grabbed by opposing players.

THOUGHTS ON THE STATE OF COLLEGE AND PROFESSIONAL FOOTBALL

 I’ve watched more football this past year than I have in many a moon, and the more I’ve watched, the more convinced I am that the game being played today is not the one I played in the 1960’s. Many of the maneuvers that we would have called “good hits” back then will now get you a 15 yard penalty. Targeting? We thought you were a wimp if you didn’t have skid marks all over your helmet from butting heads on the line and leading with your head making tackles. Back in the day, if you got knocked out, you could go right back into play when you woke up. We called getting knocked out "getting a phone call" or "getting your bell rung." We were smaller back then, which meant that head-on collisions at full speed were not quite as awful as getting run over by one of the 325-pound behemoths who stalk the modern football field.

All the changes I have discussed are designed to, and do, reduce the probability and severity of injuries. Probably the best thing that could be done would be to do away with the two-platoon system. If you’ve got eleven guys who run onto the football field for the kickoff and stay there until the final whistle, those guys aren’t going to be carrying a lot of extra weight. Look at the men who play rugby and Australian rules football. There’s not a 300 pounder in sight. Another way to reduce injuries is to restrict the weight of football players. I’m not a mathematician, so these figures might be off, but I’m going to take a shot at calculating the force of a 325-pound (147.7 kilogram) tackle targeting a 220-pound (100 kilogram) quarterback who is in the pocket looking for a receiver. Using the equation F=ma, and taking 8 miles per hour (12.8 kilometers per hour) as the speed of an average human being, we get an equation of F=147.7*12.8. Force equals 527 Newtons. A Newton is the force necessary to accelerate one kilogram a distance of 1 meter. The quarterback is hit in the head with a force of 527 Newtons. That is sufficient to knock his head off if it isn’t screwed down tight, and that is why targeting gets a 15 yard penalty.

Now let’s reduce the size of the defensive lineman to 250 pounds (113.6 kilograms). Our equation becomes F=113.6*12.6. Force equals 404 Newtons. The 250-pound tackle hits the quarterback with only 77% of the force of the 325-pound tackle.

You can make all the rules you want against targeting, and players are still going to do it. And quarterbacks are going to suffer massive trauma to the head. Rules against targeting won’t eliminate head trauma, but a weight restriction will reduce it significantly.

My modest suggestion for player safety in football is: (1) Eliminate two platooning; and (2) put a weight limit of 250 pounds on linemen.

But what about all those 300-pound behemoths? What sport can they play? To paraphrase Marie Antoinette, let them play Sumo. [That’s a joke]. I suspect most of them could eliminate body fat and excess muscle mass, and they would be under 250. When I was in college we had a defensive tackle who stood 6’6” and weighed 245 pounds. He looked like a beanpole. A muscular beanpole. That same player today could pack on weight up to 300+ pounds and carry it easily. But he wouldn't be as healthy.

I've got some other ideas for rule changes to football, but I'll save them for another post.