At www.scienceblogs.com/neurophilosophy, the author with the curiously
à propos name of "Mo" writes about transexual mice - not physically,
but in every other way - by the removal of one gene: TPRC2
http://tinyurl.com/2xxz2g
"Without the gene, female mice acted exactly like males - even towards
male mice - complete with mounting, pelvic thrusts and the ultrasound
calls that males use to attract a mate."
(There's even film at 11 - or whatever time you go to his site)

It's kinda hard for the straitjacketed religionazis who are all-too-
rife amongst us to argue that homosexuality is simply "a sinful
choice" when the loss of one single gene changes so much.

But my main thrust here, if you will, is to lay this one upon you,
from that same site:
http://tinyurl.com/2yd4zw
"Now, a new study published in Nature Neuroscience demonstrates
that pheromones from dominant male mice elicit hormonal changes in the
brains of females that stimulate neurogenesis in the olfactory bulb
and the parts of the brain encoding olfactory memories, and that the
newly-generated cells may have a role in mating behaviour.
"Although newly-generated neurons migrating into the olfactory
bulb or dentate gyrus are known to become integrated into the existing
circuitry there, the function of these new cells has until now
remained unclear.
"The new findings show that the cells generated in response to
alpha male pheromones are involved in encoding memories of the
pheromone signatures that are essential for the selection of an
appropriate mate."

So my question here is in two parts. First of all, did the so-called
intelligent so-called designer *forget* to include and program these
cells when he designed mice? Did he have to toss them in later,
rather like a security update with a Microsoft application?

Or is there just undirected and (obviously!) unplanned evolution at
(fore)play here?

The second part of the question has to do with this whole alpha male
arrangement in the first place.

Just exactly when was this "designed" and why? Was the creation so
abysmally designed to begin with that the designer had to belatedly
trick-out his creations with this Alpha-Romeo-Revs-Up-The-Chicks
package?

How does a perfect designer sin and fall short of the glory of
himself? How does a perfect creation even start to go south (unless
it's a flock of migrating birds, of course)?

This alpha business implies that the majority of males (or females
dependent upon the actual mating details) in sexually competitive
species were *designed* to be substandard - to lead miserable lives,
get no partners, lose fights, and end up being taken out to dinner not
by the daters, but by the predators.

Would a loving, beneficent god really create something like this,
where it's all about fighting, stress, tough competition, predators
taking the young, the infirm, the old, the sick, and devil take the
most hind?

Is *this* supposed to set an example, to show us the beauty of this
god's creation?

Creationists like to whine about how atheism is responsible for all
the evils of the world, but they never observe themselves in that same
looking glass, do they? If they did, they'd have to spend the rest of
their life reflecting on how badly and inequitably "designed" this
universe really is.

Unless, of course, it wasn't designed at all, in which case it's
divine!

Budikka