Texts are translated automatically from Arabic. Original files and media retain their original language.

Responses to Objections

A Microscopic Chase: A Neutrophil Engulfs Bacteria

3 min read
A Microscopic Chase: A Neutrophil Engulfs Bacteria

It is as if a skilled hunter chases his prey, which in turn flees in search of any escape, but does not stop until he swallows it! Terrible, and amazing, is that it happens in an area dozens of times less than a human hair!! The video is...

This scene is really terrible! It is as if a skilled hunter hunts his prey, who in turn flees in search of any escape, but does not stop until he swallows them! What’s amazing is that it happens in an area tens of times less than a human hair! The video is a microscopic struggle in which bacteria escape the immune cell (neutrophils, the most important type of white blood cells) with all their energy, but the neutral granulocytes eventually succeed in swallowing them. A bacterial cell is about 0.5 to 5 micrometres (m) in size, and is about a hundred times less wide than a human hair! A neutral cell is somewhat larger, measuring between 12 and 15 micrometres in size. Bacteria secrete chemicals known as chemoattracts, as a byproduct of their metabolism, excretion and interactions with their environment, while the neutral cell Neutrophil picks up these chemical signals and moves towards higher concentrations of these chemicals, known as chemotaxis. Moderate cell surface receptors allow detection of chemical gradients for attractants such as interleukin-8 (IL-8), interferon gamma (IFN-QQ), C3a, C5a, and leukotrin B4, which these cells use to direct their chases. The neutral cells move rapidly towards the bacteria using a type of movement called amoeboid movement, which allows them to change shape and push themselves forward, as if chasing prey. When a neutral cell reaches the bacteria, it carries out a phagocytosis process, which it ingests into a phagosome that fuses with the lysosome, killing the phagolysosome. Inside this vesicle, bacteria are destroyed using lytic enzymes and reactive oxygen species (ROS) resulting in oxidative detonation. These physical and chemical explanations are supposed to have removed magic from the living world (as Max Weber and others claimed at the beginning of the last century), but in fact we are still fascinated by this world! In fact, these scientific explanations have raised more questions that we will never stop asking! How did these immune cells emerge with their highly complex capabilities and maximum readiness to deal with various types of micropathogens? Of course the Darwinian answer is present and ready! I grew up gradually! It's as if the word "gradual" is the magic word that's supposed to silence all the questions within us! It's as if the assumption of ghostly intermediate rings is enough to restrain our scientific curiosity! But even the simplest formulas for the emergence of immune cells, the so-called Pattern Recognition Receptors, are far too complex to emerge as a result of the trial and error Darwinism assumes! She clearly needs purpose and purpose to show up! If we go beyond that, and deal with evolutionary hypotheses that need as much energy as possible from overtaking, and assume that the emergence of PRRs was the result of a stroke of good luck, was every other step towards completing these mighty abilities of immune cells, also the result of a stroke of good luck? Richard Dawkins doesn't find that problematic! He tells us that we must be grateful for the repeated good luck strikes that have brought us here! This Richard Dawkins, with his mentality, is celebrated as a scientist! We, when we dare to speak of the need for design and intelligence, of the need for intelligently teleological ordering of parts towards these remarkable ends, are the ones who should go out of the way of science! Perhaps we should discuss these things in the halls of philosophy! or religious studies! So that we don't continue to irritate the great scientist Neil deGrasse Tyson! In fact, when Dawkins and Tyson spoke in this way, they spoke as atheists and not as scientists, and I do not deny here that Dawkins is a biologist and Tyson is an astrophysicist, but their words on such issues have only come from their atheism. - Ayesha. Video clip attached to the post: https://www.diyaa-alandalus.com/api/media/videos/braheen-org-984759793692071-4a8deea7.mp4 — Source: Published on Facebook's "Braheen Center" page https://www.facebook.com/braheen.org/videos/8669057499848614/

Comments

There are no published comments yet. Be the first to comment.

Add your comment

Comments are reviewed before publication.

Visitor Statistics

Loading statistics…

Today’s visitors

—

Online now

—

Today follows Morocco’s time zone. Online now means visitors active within the last two minutes. Counts are approximate; each browser is counted once per day.

Where are our readers visiting from?

Loading visitors by country…

Countries are estimated. We do not display visitors’ IP addresses or precise locations.