Two small-potatoes news items demonstrate that the on-going attacks on evolution are not over, despite the substantial legal defeat of intelligent design in Pennsylvania.

The two events are minor in scope and media coverage, compared the Dover, Pa., school controversy, but they highlight the tenacity of anti-evolutionists.

One, coincidentally in Pennsylvania, involves a public school science teacher proposing a public debate on whether evolution is science or a faith, since it is atheistic. (Their words, not mine!)

The other, in Lancaster, Calif, involves “teaching the controversy” about evolution in the local public schools, by allowing student challenges and questions about evolution in class.

Both developments demonstrate the level of obfuscation anti-evolutionists reach in their war on science.

Tom Ritter teaches high school chemistry and physics at Annville-Cleona High School in Annville, Pa. Last month, he and the Constitution Party of Pennsylvania announced they would stage a debate in May between Ritter and a challenger on whether evolution is a science or a faith.

The exact wording of the resolution is convoluted, which might explain why no one has yet taken up the challenge, despite the possibility of winning a $2,000 pot. The party is also offering a $500 finder’s fee, the deadline for which ends tomorrow.

The question reads, “Unless the teacher acknowledges an alternative, teaching materialistic evolution as an explanation for the origin of life, the variety of sexual species or the existence of the human mind is an article of faith.”

April 6th, 2006 | Tags: Professional skeptic, Science | Category: Commentary | Comments (2)

Science as a field of study does not exist separate from other human pursuits. Philosophers from the time of Aristotle have contemplated what it is we can really conclude about our observations of the world around us. In other words, what do we really know?

There is a certain ambiguity within the scientific enterprise. Scientists recognize that theories and models are only approximations of the Real Thing. Since any theory can be demolished by a single contrary discovery, each theory is a just a tentative explanation. As I discuss elsewhere here (The Deaths of Theories), scientific theories come and go. It’s the whole nature of science.

There are at least two philosophies of science available to us. One is Scientific Realism — what we discover about the universe using science is in fact real. Another is Scientific Instrumentalism — what we discover about the universe using science is not strictly speaking real but it is still highly useful. Opponents of the theory of evolution (and even some proponents) have a naive idea about what science is, which just mires the whole evolution/ID debate in fruitless debates on the truthfulness of one concept over another.

March 11th, 2006 | Tags: Science | Category: General stuff | Leave a comment

A family in a remote part of Turkey have a genetic anomaly that has prevented their five children from walking on two feet, the BBC reports. Instead, the children walk on all fours. Researchers believe the strange gait may provide us with clues about how our ancient ancestors developed bipedalism.

The scientists reject the idea that there is a gene for two-legged walking, but they suggest that the children’s compensation for not being able to walk upright may be an instinctual response. Our ancestors may have used this form of walking, they say, before bipedalism became all the rage.

Chimpanzees and gorillas walk on their knuckles, inhibiting their fingers’ dexterity. The Turkish siblings instead use their wrists to bear their weight, freeing their fingers for more delicate work. If our ancestors also walked this way, it would have given them an evolutionary advantage over knuckle-walkers.

March 7th, 2006 | Tags: Science | Category: Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Unfortunately, our governor’s views about intelligent design have not endeared him to writers of science blogs. Just what Kentucky needs — negative publicity that reinforces the national impression of Kentuckians as backwoods rubes.

The Kentucky Academy of Science in December issued a press release to explain its opposition to teaching intelligent design in the public schools. Fletcher responded with a letter supporting ID and explaining why it should be taught. The text of both documents are at The Panda’s Thumb.

Careful readers may find Fletcher’s letter repeats the same arguments about ID that were in his State of the State address in January. In fact, some are verbatim repetitions of that address. I’m not sure what to conclude about the similarities, other than Ernie is just recycling them. Politicians don’t waste words, you know.

Right after the address, I drew up a rebuttal to the pro-ID arguments, and submitted them to the LEO. They did nothing with them, so here they are. Ah, the power of self-publication …
::
OK, class. For today’s lesson in logic, we are going to analyze this segment of Kentucky Gov. Ernie Fletcher’s State of the Commonwealth address on Jan 9. How many fallacies in the argument can you find?

“As I close, let me recognize Kentucky’s veterans. You have served to protect our liberty and the freedom that spurs our quality of life in this nation. Please know that this administration is committed to supporting you.

March 7th, 2006 | Tags: Professional skeptic, Science | Category: Commentary | Leave a comment

The BBC carried a story tonight about Russian cosmonauts who want to hit a golf ball off the International Space Station. NASA, ever the spoilsport, is cool to the idea.

The stunt is apparently yet another effort by the Russian space agency to raise funds. The cosmonauts will use a special golf club provided by Element 21, a golf equipment maker, and a special golf ball equipped with global positioning transmitters, also from Element 21.

The goal is to see how far the ball will go. Element 21 gets bragging rights, and the Russians get to one-up the US yet again. One of our astronauts, Alan Shepard, hit a nice drive on the moon in 1971, but the Russian ball will travel millions of miles and be the first golf ball in orbit.

NASA says it’s not sure the stunt is safe, and may nix the deal. (Of course, Shepard smuggled his equipment on board Apollo 14 to avoid NASA safety nazis. Who’s to say the Russians won’t try it, too?) A golf ball in the same orbital plane as the ISS could damage the habitat, the NASA guys say.

So the cosmonaut has to hit the ball hard enough and in the right direction to minimize that possibility. While wearing a bulky space suit. In microgravity (aka zero-G). Uh-huh. This I gotta see.

March 4th, 2006 | Tags: Science, Technology | Category: Uncategorized | Comments (1)

Our ultimate ancestor may have been a virus, according to the intriguing cover article in this month’s Discover magazine.

Until recently, viruses were considered to be a latecomer in the scheme of life, a form of opportunistic, quasi-living entity that uses other organisms to reproduce. With the discovery of a comparatively large, more complex virus, named Mimivirus, biologists are now wondering if viruses actually predate the hosts they invade, and sometimes kill.

There are three domains of living organisms currently recognized by biology: eukaryotes, which have nuclei in their cells and include plants and animals, bacteria, single-celled organisms which may or may not have nuclei, and archaea, “extremist” microbes without nuclei. Viruses were considered to be more chemical assemblages than biological entities — basically not part of the “tree of life.”

Now it seems viruses are more complex and older than previously thought, and may warrant being added as a fourth domain of organisms. Viruses may have also interacted with bacteria and archaea in the dim past to form the first eukaryotes, which eventually evolved into human beings.

So, welcome your distant cousin, influenza, to your family tree. Hopefully, it won’t pay you a surprise visit at the next family reunion.

February 26th, 2006 | Tags: Science | Category: Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The book and the movie Jurassic Park were all about the nasty reptiles, but many moviegoers might not realize there were mammals around then. Tiny rodent-like animals aren’t particularly dramatic, though.

But it seems there were larger mammals abroad in the Jurassic than had been suspected. An international team has uncovered in China a very well preserved fossil of a hitherto unknown species of mammal resembling the modern otter or beaver.

The water-dweller has been named Castorocauda lutrasimilis. Castorocauda had a beaver-like tail, strong arms for digging, and sharp teeth specialized for aquatic feeding, similar to the modern river otter.

The fossil includes the carbonized remains of the creature’s water-proof underfur and the impressions in the surrounding rock of its outer pelt. It lived during the middle Jurassic, or Mesozoic Era.

Exciting news, but still, it’s hard to imagine a scary movie featuring Ollie the Otter. Anyway, it seems he’ll be starring in his own movie, probably without T. rex to upstage him.

Details about the find are at the Carnegie Museum of Natural History site.

Ollie the Otter
DVD: Jurassic Park
Book: Jurassic Park

February 25th, 2006 | Tags: Science | Category: General stuff | Leave a comment

The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) has asked the nation’s churches to join scientists in the battle against teaching creationism and intelligent design in public schools.

Meeting in St. Louis for its annual sessions, the AAAS also started a new organization to foster scientific understanding, the Alliance for Science.

Referring to repeated attempts by anti-evolution forces to introduce creationism and intelligent design in public schools, AAAS president Gilbert Omenn said:

“Such veiled attempts to wedge religion - actually just one kind of religion - into science classrooms is a disservice to students, parents, teachers and taxpayers

“It’s time to recognise that science and religion should never be pitted against each other.

“They can and do co-exist in the context of most people’s lives. Just not in science classrooms, lest we confuse our children.”

Anti-evolution proponents characterized the efforts as a sign of the weakness of science.

Tom Willis, president of the Creation Science Association for Mid America, based in Cleveland, Mo., ridiculed the scientists’ efforts. His group believes in a literal interpretation of the Bible as a basis for much of science.

“Most would be out of a job if they couldn’t sell evolution to children,” Willis said of the scientists. “They’re desperate.”

Yup, that’s a scientist — the kind of person who force feeds evolution, instead of Biblical mythology, on innocent minds. Next they’ll be teaching kids that the earth orbits the sun.

February 20th, 2006 | Tags: Science | Category: Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Infants have a sense of number by the time they reach seven months, researchers at Duke University have found. Given visual and aural cues, babies will preferentially look at videos of faces that match the number of voices they hear.

Non-verbal animals, such as rhesus monkeys, have similar abilities, implying that math — or at least counting — is innately part of our makeup.

Now if we could just figure out why kids lose their interest in math around the age of 10 …

How To Teach Your Baby Math: The Gentle Revolution

February 15th, 2006 | Tags: Science | Category: Uncategorized | Leave a comment