said we have a hard stop, like hitting a wall at 945. So we want to make sure we get as much information in as we can during that time. Excuse me. Wow. Well, this must be an important message because we've had a little bit of trouble getting it going this morning and all these other things. So we're building on our theme from how organisms are designed to adapt. And we're going to look at a whole different area this morning of. kind of like looking out, looking out into the future, kind of asking the question of, you know, what should I do? Particularly if you get a fork in a road and you have to make some kind of decision. How in the world do you do that when you're faced with a little of uncertainty and you want to know what road should you take? Humans deal with that all the time. Humans deal with it and they base it on some of their intuition, but other times we base it on the ability to predict what's happening. Way back in 2006, we launched this spacecraft out into space and based on predictions of where planets and other things were going to be, that thing was able to hit Pluto and rendezvous with it and take pictures of it less than 700 miles away from that in 2015. So it flew for nine years and three billion miles and you anticipated where it was going to be and took a picture of it. Then they gave it some other little signals on that, and it flew till January 2019, just this year, and it flew another billion miles. That's a long way, and intercepted a rock which was about 20 miles across. That's pretty cool interceptory abilities, where you're going to anticipate where something's going to be. It's moving, you're moving, and you rendezvous with it at the right time. That's a pretty good engineering marvel, I would say, but it's nothing compared to the engineering marvels that other things are able to do. For instance, here's an interesting paper just published in 2019. So we're totally up to speed here and look what it says. How foresight. How foresight might support the behavioral flexibility of arthropods. Arthropods are insects. So there are also things like crabs and stuff like that. They have these mobile arms. Those are arthropods. But it's saying that these arthropods, and it's just an insect, has something which you normally attribute to quote unquote higher organisms like us, even though some people don't show much foresight. a lot of times. But you have these dragonflies doing it, and what it shows there is if some kind of prey takes off, it doesn't just get behind it and chase it down, it anticipates. It has a mathematical formula that can work out, anticipates where that prey is going to be, and it goes on an intercept path, just like you're going to intercept Pluto. with the human design spacecraft. The paper goes on to say this evidence of internal models. Wait a second here. We talked a little bit about that last night. Didn't we? External versus what internal, you know, are you shaped by your environment? Are you modeling clay at the hands of nature? Or do you have innate abilities that are pre-programmed upfront? There's this, they're saying what pre-programmed abilities. Evidence of internal models of dragonfly behavior suggest use of a predictive model of the prey's trajectory and copy of the dragonfly's own motor commands. So these are internal models that are built in and what they are able to do is do some of the hardest things that humans try to do. And that is forecast into the future. And we build models to do that. And there's some of the most complex programming models that humans ever devised. We try to build models that are going to forecast what's going to happen to the economy six months from now, a year from now. Forecasting models. And then probably the most complex are weather forecasting models. We're going to talk about what goes into a weather forecasting model. There's a lot of work that takes in a lot of data from a lot of different things based on past experience and so forth. That's going to give these abilities to us to try to forecast into the future so that we can determine what you want to do today based on what you think the weather's going to be like in a couple of days from now. And organisms are going to do those exact same things. And so the fact that many of their adaptations or their self adjustments are not just simply reactive. In real time, something happens to you, you react to it, but they flow from innate logic-based systems, which give creatures foresight of what they ought to do preemptively to self-adjust now based on predicted conditions, which they're going to project into the future based on data they're collecting now. Now that is really, really cool. You're collecting data now, you're going to run a program is going to tell you what's possibly coming in the future. So you can change your behavior now based on what's happening then, or what you think is going to happen to that. So we're not going to deal with things that are strictly reactive, but just like a cool manmade thing would be proactive. Organisms can be proactive in their behavior as well. So let's just jump into some examples. I won't give all the theory up front. I'll give some of the theory towards the end. Let's just go into some examples here since time is limited and we're going to take it through plants and insects and other things and get right up to human beings. So we're going to start with plants, anticipatory behavior with plants. And these researchers did research on what kind of plant. Tomato plants. There they are. They're always the clues that they did research on tomato plants. And they found that the tomato plants can sense when an attack is coming by a slug or a snail. And they said, new research now shows that some flora can detect an herbivorous, that means a plant eater, animal well before it launches an assault, letting a plant mount a preemptive defense that even works against other pest species. Now. How do you think that's going to work based on all the talks? This is like quiz time because it is Sunday school. Is it not Sunday school? Or they say in Texas, school. Anyway, if that tomato plant is going to preemptively put out defenses, if a snail is coming, what do you think the tomato plant has? A. Ah, it's a sensor. It's a sensor. And they're going to have a sensor. What do you think they're going to detect? The odors of snail. The odor of snail. I've never smelled that myself, but the tomato plants know that odor and they can detect the odor of the snail. Okay. It goes on to say none of the plants in this study were ever actually attacked. said this lead investigator. We just gave them cues that suggested an attack was coming and that was enough to trigger big changes in their chemistry. So when they sensed the snail was there, they started making chemicals which were repulsive to snails eating on them. They go on to say this. The plants can generate a response, a defensive response in plants that has not been attacked and plants integrate the many sources of information regarding attack in their environment to optimize their investment in defenses. Huh. So what this was saying is they can sense the snail coming. Then a snail gets on the plant next to them and starts to eat the plant next to them. So what do you think they do with their defenses? They boost them up. So now that's the plant not only has a snail detector, it has a detector for a neighboring eaten plant. It can detect what's happening with the plants that are getting on the side of them. Wow. They go on to say this. So that plants prioritize risk information whereby information that is likely linked to the greatest imminent risk triggers a stronger defense in plants. Not, I mean, that is some incredible logic on that. They're prioritizing their resources. They tell when they know when it's coming and they optimize it in response to what's happening around them in advance. And they've never been attacked. That's all based on logic that was put into those plants. Now that's really cool. Okay, this is on honeybees. Starvation stress during larval development facilitates an adaptive response in adult worker honeybees. But basically what these guys did is they took honeybees while they were still in the comb, in the little hive there, developing, and they starved them. And they anticipate that if you're going to be starved as a little larvae, that you might be starved as an adult, and you'll have better starvation resistance. You'll develop traits in advance to give you better starvation resistance as an adult. And voila, that's exactly what happened. Most organisms... Oh, this is interesting, not just talking about honeybees. Most organisms are constantly faced with environmental changes and stressors. That's why you have to have a continuous environmental tracking model. Now, what determines if something is a stress or not? Since this is a Sunday school, I'll just elaborate. If we don't get through the whole thing, that's fine. You'll have the gist of it. What determines if something's a stress for you or not? Your Your traits, it's always your traits. It's not the environmental condition, it's your traits. Because I can expose some of you to one condition and you really like it. And I can expose others to the exact same condition and they're annoyed by it. Or I can take one substance and expose one animal to it and they eat it and it's nutrition and another animal eats the exact same thing and it's toxic. It's not the thing, it's always your traits which determine what is a stress or not. Now this goes back to the thinking from last night where they see environmental challenges changing you because they just assume something in the environment is a stress. No. Anything in the environment is a stress only to the extent that your traits determine it's a stress. And nothing in the environment is a signal unless your traits specify it to be, to be a signal. How many of you are listening to, I'll phrase it like this. How many of you are being bombarded by AM radio waves right now? All of you are. How many of you are listening to AM radio in your head? If you do, I've got some meds for you. I knew I would need the aluminum foil cap for somebody here today on that. Why? But wait a second. You're being exposed to AM radio waves, but they're not a signal. to you because you don't have a sensor for those and you don't have a way to translate it. So contrary to what you're going to see on television and stuff, it's always your traits which determine what your signals are, what a cue is, what a stressor is. It's what is in you. that does that. So most organisms are faced with these stressors because some of the exposures are beyond are right at the limits of their design parameters and diverse organisms. There is an anticipatory mechanism and how many organisms diverse organisms. There's an anticipatory mechanism during development. That means as your little embryo. That can program adult phenotypes. Those are your adult traits. The adult traits would be adapted to the predicted environment that occurred during organism maturation. So while you're developing and you're self-constructing in your mother's womb and other animals are self-constructing, they're detecting the signals, they're detecting the conditions all around them, and they're prepping themselves for that environment that they're going to be born into. and anticipatory mechanism. It goes on to say that adaptive phenotypes, those are the traits, changes are induced at the physiological, molecular, and behavioral levels. Now I threw that quote in because it shows that when you self adjust, you do it across the board, across the board, not just your anatomy, not just your physiology, but even your behaviors. Your behaviors are adjusted to these things. Starvation as babies makes bees stronger as adults. Researchers went on in this press report to say, surprisingly, we found that short-term starvation in the larval stage makes adult honeybees more adaptive to adult starvation. This suggests that there's an anticipatory mechanism that they have those just like solitary animals do. They were wondering if a group animal like bees would have it. And they do just like solitary animals. All right, so we see it happens in plants, we see it happens in bees, we see it happens in their lifetime, but this is even more fascinating. Cross-generational, cross-generational adaptive systems. In other words, from father to offspring, mother to offspring. It's a cool photo. Right there on that. I think animals have emotions and they feel things just like us. So emotion, emotions isn't what makes us human. All right. Here was an interesting one. Changes in the parental phenotype can act as a signal to offspring about the future environment that they will encounter. Stop right there. Sorry. I always have to pick these apart. So, let's picture this. It says, parental phenotype can act as a signal to offspring. So that means, in most of these cases, it's going to be mom. Mom, mom, mom. Mom is a what? Sensor. So now mom uses her sensors and she becomes an overall sensor for what? offspring, and if she's sending a signal to the offspring, it's only a signal to the offspring to the extent that the offspring has a sensor for mom's signal. Why am I pointing this out? Because most biologists just skip over all of these engineering points, which if I said to you, please build this for me, please build me this. You would sit down and you would have to plan out all of these little elements. And nothing would be magical. And you would have to build in. Mom has sensors. Then mom becomes a sensor. Mom sends a signal. Baby has to wait to detect the signal. Baby gets the signal. Baby processes the signal. Baby does something during development. And you'll see there's steps, very, very complicated steps through all of this. And guess what? If I were to build a man-made thing that which was to do that, I'd have to put those same elements in there. Anyway, so it's a signal to baby that for the environment that will encounter and these parental cues can induce adaptive plasticity and offspring characteristics. Is that true? No. So even when you're reading these papers, you have to sort out the fact that they don't understand design. They're biologists, but they don't understand how anything works. Can mom induce Any formation in the baby, no baby detects mom's signal and baby adjusts itself because babies self-construct all babies, honeybee babies, human babies, all babies build themselves. They're self-constructing entities. So mom doesn't induce this. to me, I detect mom's signal and I induce my own changes. That's really how it happens on there. And this is called adaptive transgenerational phenotypic plasticity or adaptive parental effects. So organisms can do this. They go on to say maternal stress can play at adaptive roles across wide variety of animal taxa. If stress induced phenotypes. Now we know they're not really stress induced. better prepare the offspring for a stressful postnatal environment in what? Mammals, birds, reptiles, and fish. So all kinds of creatures across the board are doing these things. Well, let's look at a cool one. This is in sea urchins. And they took these little mama sea urchins and they placed them in different acidities and different water temperatures because they're anticipating what's going to happen to the sea urchins. Global. warming. So they're doing all these experiments to see how these creatures are going to adjust to the coming onslaught of global warming. So they took sea urchins and they took them in their normal environment. They put them in a high temperature environment or an acidic environment. And mom's able to detect that. And they went on to say that there's transgenerational plasticity in situ could act as an important mechanism by which populations might keep pace with rapid environmental changes. See, I think someone developed a model called continuous environmental tracking. That's otherwise known as rapidly keeping pace with rapid environmental changes. So they're continuously tracking these environments. And that's what a female sea urchin looks like right before she's going to release all of her eggs. She gets that big yellow ball and that yellow ball is just eggs. They're all going to be released by the millions into the water. The lead researcher is, is the older gal on the right there working with the younger postdoc, but the older gal wrote this in the paper. It's almost like the female could sense that her progeny were about to be released into some challenging conditions for early stage development. In response. She primed her offspring and gave them tools to face stressful conditions. It's like she packed them a backpack of tools. Wow. It's just like what any mom would do. Here, you pack your kids a backpack of tools. You're anticipating what they're going to face. And this is a sea urchin. It was doing this for the offspring of all of the little sea urchins that are going to come out that way. This happens in little worms, tiny little, about one millimeter long, little roundworms. And mom is able to detect conditions and pass on information to her little baby roundworms. So now we've seen it in plants and bees and sea urchins and worms and all these other kinds of creatures. So mom is going to face a starvation diet. and it says information from a mother's environment can be transmitted to her offspring. Well, we now know it's not just as simple as that. You have to have all kinds of little steps in there to do it. We describe a genetic network. Oh, a genetic network that mediates effects of a mother's diet on the size and starvation resistance of her offspring. So she's able to take that and it goes through a very logical logic mechanism, which is the genetic network. Fitness consequences and maternal effects hinge on anticipation of those systems. The thrifty phenotype hypothesis proposes that children of mothers malnourished during pregnancy are programmed to store more energy in anticipation of limited nutrient availability. Does that make sense? If mom's in a starvation environment, what's the probability that her offspring will be in the same starvation environment? High. And so the thrifty phenotype means mom's detecting this and babies are programmed to hoard their calories. To be calorie hoarders and not necessarily fast calorie burners. So these are modifications to their what? Metabolism. so that they're thrifty. Metabolic program and anticipation of environmental conditions in the progeny. Okay. Underfed worms program their babies to cope with famine. That's just the headline from Duke, which was the, where the research was done. These animals, the offspring are able to anticipate adverse conditions based on their mother's experience. Mom somehow provisions the embryo or programs it. Stopped right there. It's everything is true up to the last sentence. Does mom program? No, mom doesn't program. See, this is why I'm saying these guys are top of the line researchers, but if they would have gone to college and taken a course in engineering 101 and engineering 102, they would recognize that what they're saying is not right. They don't really understand how it works. Baby's already programmed to do what it needs to do, and it's going to go down this track if it detects X signal from mom, and it's going to go down this track if it detects Y signal from mom. Mom's not programming it. Mom's just sending out a signal because it's a signal because baby can detect it and baby programs it itself. So mom's not getting in there and changing baby's DNA as it's happening. That's what we would say. Oh, let's go to some sheep. Here they took mother's sheep, and what did they do to them? They underfed them, or they weren't abusive to the sheep, because there's rules that you can't abuse the animals. But they kept them on a really, really low diet, and they took some other sheep, mothers, and they gave them a really, really high diet. So it was within the range of what they could tolerate, but they kept one at the low end, one at the high end. And then she gave birth to, all kinds of little lambs, male lambs and female lambs, and they checked to see if there was any effect in these lambs. And this is what they found. Semen quality, that's obviously the male lambs, at 20 months of age was unaffected by prenatal undernutrition. So what effect did it have on the males? Essentially none. But ovulation rate was significantly reduced in the low, that is the low-fed animals, compared to the high female offspring. Oh, but you get your females who were born of mothers who might be in a starvation environment, and what happened to their ovulation rate? It went down. Why might that happen? because you don't want to overpopulate if you're in a low nutrition environment. Oh, I thought this was survival of the fittest. I thought, you know, in any one generation, more offspring are bought and born than resources are available to them. And therefore the strongest are going to what survive and all the weak ones are going to die. But it seems like here's a, here's a mechanism that says when you're in a low environment, nutrition, you produce left offspring automatically. Hmm. Wow, that's not just showing mom's response, baby's response, it's showing how it responds even as a population to things. To me, I see a lot of wisdom from a really, really wise designer who built all of this in. What about humans? Hey, that's kind of a cool photo too. Right there. Cross-generation in humans. These people did some research on females for the predictive adaptive response. That's what PAR is going to be. This was kind of a cool one. This was written by some foreigners. That's why they're able to use this title. Fatness at birth. Fatness at birth. You know, we don't get by with that in the U.S. Predicts adult susceptibility to ovarian suppression. An Empirical Test of the Predictive Adaptive Response Hypothesis. Okay, so what they did is they got, this was a retrospective study, they get a bunch of females today and then they go back and they ask them their birth history and they try to get documentation on the birth history. What was your birth weight? How much weight did you gain from birth to six months? those kinds of things on them. So you get their birth weight, you get how fast they're growing weight on that, and that's telling you what their history was. And then you take these same females today and you expose them to stressful conditions. And this was a cool paper. They exposed them to more housework. So it's like, wow, you wouldn't do this in the United States. So you took some and you just like gave them more and more and more housework to do, okay, which was really burning up their calories on that. So, what do you predict? Children who are born to starvation mothers, when they're put under high stressful work conditions, what's going to happen to their, and this is what they're going to look at, is ovulation rate. Their ovulation rate goes down. Whereas girls who had a high birth weight and gained weight really fast, when they were put to those stressful conditions, their ovulation rate didn't really change. That's what it was. They're looking at ovarian suppression. The central claim of the PAR, the predictive adaptive response hypothesis is that developmental changes that are associated with energy constraints on fetal growth are essentially adaptive, preparing the organism for a predicted range of environments that is likely to encounter in adult life. They go on to say, the levels of estradiol, that's the estrogen levels, in women born in the highest neonatal group, that's they were the fat babies, were 37 and 46 percent higher, respectively, than levels of estradiol in women born to the lower one. That was really interesting. And that estradiol, if you read the whole paper, affect their ovulation rate. The paper went on to say that these lower estradiol levels were somewhat protective against breast cancer. So you want to have a little lower estradiol to be protective against breast cancer. So it went on to say that husbands that really love their wives give them more housework to do and don't offer to help. Well, if it didn't say it, it should have said it. I mean, wow. That's my take-home message from that. So I have this new phrase for June. Get to work. All right. The study represents to our knowledge, the first direct test of the adaptive response in humans. So in other words, we're looking at all these creatures and they want to know if it happens in humans and evidence indicates that it does happen in humans. Well, what about males? Well, here's an interesting, this was an interesting study. Rapid weight gain after birth predicts life history and reproductive strategy in Filipino males. So they're going to look at the same thing, birth weight and growth from birth to six months. Maternally derived ecological cues. Maternally derived ecological cues. Mom's a censor. That's what that means. Mom's a censor. via the placenta or in breast milk. Oh, so mom's a sensor and she's sending signals from the placenta. But it's really not. The baby can detect mom's conditions by what's coming across the placenta. And do moms who are probably starved have higher fat content and nutritional content in breast milk or less? Less. So even what baby's getting from breast milk is signals. They could convey information about typical energetic or social experiences in the past and thus allow the developing organism to modify biological settings in anticipation of conditions likely to be experienced in the future. So that's what they anticipated. They looked at birth to six month growth weights from little Filipino males, and then they looked at their behavior as adults. Developmental plasticity in response to nutrients and hormones during fetal and infancy development can modify growth patterns, adult metabolism, and hormone regulation. What did they find? Males with rapid birth to six-month growth reached puberty earlier as young adults and had higher testosterone levels, were taller, more muscular, and had higher grip strength. They grew beards faster, and they attracted more, what? Females. And they had sex earlier, and they had more offspring. Sounds like the typical, you know, precocious male on those kinds of things. I can just tell you, I was a fat baby. Oh, wow. There you go on that. Look at that. High testosterone, more muscular grip strength, and everything else that pitifies me. So that's just it. Well, we already knew that on there. I mean, we already knew that about males. You already knew that the guys who were like in seventh grade and already growing facial hair, they were like, ugh, and stuff like that. Okay, here's an interesting study on, this one's kind of a sad study on that. It's got a long title. Don't worry about the title, I'll just tell you what it is. From 1959 to 1962, the Chinese in communist China came up with one of their great ideas to reduce, you know, to increase productivity in the farms. And what do you think really happened? Productivity on farms went down. It went down so bad that there was a massive famine from 1959 to 1962. And estimates are 30 to 45 million Chinese starved to death. That's a bunch. I mean, you just can't imagine stuff like that happening here. And this explains, when I was a kid growing up in the 60s, why my mom would say to me, eat everything on your plate because there's starving children in China. And I heard that over and over. Of course, I'm like five years old. I have no idea what's happening. But she, mom's reading about what's happening here, about all these children that are starving to death in China. So now you have moms and dads exposed to starvation and they're growing up in a city, but they're still doing what they do and she still gets pregnant and they're still having children. So the children, based on what I've said, are going to be born with the thrifty phenotype, which means they're going to be calorie what? Hoarders. Hoarders. They're going to tend to hoard their calories. But this is a retrospective study. It's looking back now on that. So you had people living in this city who were starved there. And then you had other people in Chinese and younger Chinese from other places that weren't exposed to starvation and they moved to that city and they had children. And so they're able to compare what's happening between these children. between those who were born to starvation mothers and fathers, and fathers, and those who weren't, who are growing up in the same city. The trouble with this is, once the famine ended, aid came in from around the world, and the children who were born to starving mothers did not grow up in a calorie deficient environment. In fact, the same thing happened to Americans. Food was scarcer in the 50s, And children who were born during the baby boom were tended to be calorie hoarders. So now these children who tend to be calorie hoarders, they're growing up in not a calorie deficient, but a calorie rich environment. And this is what they found. Prenatal exposure to famine. The odds of developing hyperglycemia were 2 to 1 in both children and grandchildren of starved parents. Why is that? Because they were calorie hoarders, but they weren't in a calorie-deficient environment. They were in a calorie-rich environment, so they tended to hoard their calories, which means they tended to get what? gain weight, overweight, and they tend to develop hyperglycemia, two to one. The probability of getting type two diabetes in the children of starved parents was 75% higher, and the risk was increased if both parents were starved. as opposed to one. So this is where you can end up with a mismatch in your environment to what the anticipatory system was anticipating. Of course, these environments were rapidly able to change because they were all being manipulated by people, and not too bright people at that. So that's what happened. And this is possibly one explanation why Americans who grew up in the 50s and 60s who had parents, you know, if you look at television shows in the 50s and 60s, black and white and stuff, everybody is flat out what? Skinny. Yeah, I mean, they are like skinny. If you watch the Western channel or Grit, and you see those Westerns, it's like these guys are like bean poles. Skinny, skinny, skinny. And you look at the waist on these women wearing these dresses, and I kid you, it's like you could put your fingers around their waist. They were flat out skinny. And then they started having kids like us. And we probably had tended to have a calorie hoarding phenotype, but we started growing up in the 60s and 70s, which was not a calorie deficient America. In fact, that's when you started to get what? Big Macs, jumbo size, super size, super jumbo size. And then what happened to us? We turned into what? Super jumbo size on there. Now, that's not an excuse because not every American turns into Super Jumbo Size, but it could be a tendency that if you recognized it, you could resist that. Okay, we have five minutes. So, I will not go through the rest of the slides because I normally have about another 20 minutes here. But I'll just describe to you what's going to come up next. So, if these are happening through internal mechanisms, if this is happening through internal mechanisms and they're anticipatory, and I'm expecting a correspondence between man-made systems and God-made systems, That they're going to function in the same way because biological functions can be explained by engineering principles. What might I compare these anticipatory systems to? I already gave a clue at the beginning of the talk. What kind of manmade systems could I compare these anticipatory systems to? Space, space, but even better than space because space is just kind of like a linear orbit. That's easy to predict something even harder than space. The weather, the weather, weather forecasting models, where they're looking out and trying to anticipate. So I did research into what goes into a weather, what is built into a weather forecasting model. And weather forecasting models have some key factors. One, they're able to collect a lot of data on current conditions. So they collect data on current conditions. But in their models, they also have stored lots and lots of data from what? Past conditions. And then they also have programming, a special kind of programming which is able to take the data from past conditions, take the data from real conditions, and it runs supposedly faster than real time to predict what the conditions are going to be like based on current conditions and a lot of past conditions, and it updates, and the better models update, update, update, and the better models have lots and lots of data collection centers. So they collect data from weather balloons, they collect data from radar, they collect data from ground sensor stations with wind and humidity and all those things, barometric pressure. And the more of those data collection centers you have, and the more fast they can update, the better model you're going to get in your prediction. But the basic components are you collect data now, you compare it to stored data, you have a program which runs faster, which projects faster than real time, and it anticipates out, and then it has predictive responses from all of those kinds of things. So that's what's in a forecasting model. So what am I going to predict? If and when we start to dissect out these anticipatory systems in creatures, I'm going to put this in a paper, I'm going to predict That they're able to store bunches of data. That they're collecting it with ongoing data. That they integrate it with programming, which runs faster than real time. And it's real mathematical programming. And towards the end of this talk, I give an example of how mathematical programming actually happens in human beings. And it was done with astronauts with a simple thing where you throw a ball to them on Earth. The ball goes up. It's affected by gravity. And they catch a ball. So you keep throwing these balls to these astronauts and you work out the mathematical way of which they're able to anticipate catching a ball. You take those astronauts up in space where there isn't gravity, you throw them a ball. And it's very, very different. And then you bring it back to earth after living up in space and you throw them a ball and they have to adjust to again. And all of that shows that they're actually working a second order differential equation in their head. So that when you throw this and they're moving, the balls moving boom, you intercept the ball. Does that make sense? It's all mathematics. We could do it. And you show. since I'm off the mic, that human beings are doing that same stuff in their body. So, all of that is to show that we can do these kind of mathematical models. We can do those. And that these organisms are doing it. So here's an opportunity where we, as creationists, based on assumptions and our own theory can predict what should be found in the future before anybody's even gone looking for it. And they say we don't make predictions. Well, we do. Well, thank you so very much. I hope you found that interesting. Every time I talk about it, it's fascinating to me on all of these things. But more important, I hope you appreciate more fully the genius and wisdom of our great creator, the Lord Jesus Christ, who made all this. Amen. Pastor, we're right on time.