Thread 9 From Outer Space!

Greetings, my friend. We are all interested in this thread, for that is where you and I are going to spend the rest of our lives. And remember my friend, future events such as these will affect you in the future. You are interested in the unknown…the mysterious. The unexplainable. That is why you are here. And now, for the first time, we are bringing to you, the full story of what happened on that fateful thread. We are bringing you all the evidence, based only on the secret testimony of the miserable souls who survived this terrifying ordeal, like Sven. The incidents, the places, the birthdays. My friend, we cannot keep this a secret any longer. Let us punish the guilty. Let us reward the innocent.

It’s happened again. One thread dies, another is born.

A good first step

The director of the Sam Noble Museum of Natural History (the one hosting a Discovery Institute event) has posted an open letter about the program. I presume there will be more coming, because while it’s a beginning, I’m not too impressed yet.

Although the museum does not support unscientific views masquerading as science, such as those espoused by the Discovery Institute, the museum does respect the religious beliefs of all people. Moreover, the museum is obligated to rent its public space to any organization that is engaged in lawful activities, free speech and open discourse. The museum does not discriminate against recognized campus organizations based on their religious beliefs, political philosophy, scientific literacy, or any other factors.

It’s nice that they clearly dismiss the DI as unscientific, but they would have been better off leaving out the nonsense about respecting the religious beliefs of all people. They don’t have to come out and say they disrespect some religious beliefs, as I would, but they shouldn’t have pretended otherwise. No one should offer blanket respect to all religious foolishness — the kind offered by the DI, or any creationist group, is antithetical to the mission of a science museum. Do not offer them false comfort!

Their plan to address the bogosity that will be presented in their halls is currently a bit vague.

We invite everyone interested in an accurate description of how life developed over the last four billion years to visit our galleries. The well-organized and scientifically accurate exhibits illustrate – through real specimens and scientific methods – the fact of evolution by natural selection as first described by Charles Darwin and continually supported by all branches of science ever since that time. The museum also recommends that people interested in evolutionary science review the more than 1,000 publications by our curators and professional staff that are based in evolutionary biology.

The museum’s many galleries will be open for free before and after the showing of the Discovery Institute’s film “Darwin’s Dilemma” on Sept. 29 so the public can see that there is no scientific controversy in evolutionary science’s explanation of the development and history of Earth’s biodiversity.

“Read our publications” and “free admission before and after the presentation” will not do the job. I hope that more will be added later — but they really need to directly address the lies that the creationists will be peddling. With this minimal plan, I know exactly what will happen: most of the creationists will arrive just for the DI’s movie, and leave afterwards. They will tell their friends that they saw a movie about science in a science museum that proves that a god created all life on earth. Some might stay a little later and browse, but the DI will have their people there to provide a creationist spin to all the exhibits.

They need to address the dishonesty directly: stir up controversy of their own to get people to want to hear the rebuttals. Don’t claim to respect every religious belief out there; point out that this religious belief is incredibly bad science and rotten theology, and have people lined up to criticize it without the lame excuses. They don’t need to bring in a bunch of atheist hired guns to do that, either: they almost certainly have biologists on campus with religious views of all kinds who will happily agree that intelligent design creationism is garbage.

The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution

There are no more excuses. None.

The defining characteristic of all arguments with creationists is how damned ignorant they are. I’m sure many scientists have been stupefied into stunned silence when they first encounter these people; these advocated of creationism are typically loud and certain and have invested much time and effort into apologetics, but when you sit down and try to have a serious discussion with them, you quickly discover that their knowledge of basic biology is nonexistent. It’s worse than that. We’re used to freshmen entering our classes who don’t know much about the basics, and we can deal with that; these, though, are people with negative knowledge, whose brains are so packed with raging falsehoods that we have to struggle to overcome an unfamiliar hurdle.

For example, last year I got into a radio debate with a Discovery Institute creationist, Geoffrey Simmons. He had written a whole book for creationists arguing that there are no transitional fossils…yet he had never heard of any of the major fossil discoveries in the whale series, and seemed to have gleaned all of his understanding from a garbled misreading of a short Scientific American article.

It’s infuriating. You want to argue against evolution? Then you’d better have some elementary understanding of what evolution actually says. We’ve got the same phenomenon going on right now in one of the comment threads, where a particularly obtuse creationist, Sean Pitman, is raving about the inadequacy of natural selection. I wouldn’t mind, except that he’s a freaking idiot. This goes on day after day — creationists are mired in a pit of ignorance so deep and so black that it takes incredible patience to lead people out of it (and also, some rhetorical boot-stomping against the fools who are trying to drag others even deeper into the darkness).

I have no illusions that we’ll suddenly see a blossoming of enlightenment, but we now have tools to help us, a whole series of recent books that cover the basics. Everyone should read at least one of these, especially if you’re one of those clowns who wants to argue that there is no evidence for evolution. Read and understand, please; we’ve already got enough idiots who claim to have read them and didn’t grasp anything in them.

Read Donald Prothero’s Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why It Matters(amzn/b&n/abe/pwll). Or Sean Carrol’s The Making of the Fittest: DNA and the Ultimate Forensic Record of Evolution(amzn/b&n/abe/pwll). Or Neil Shubin’s Your Inner Fish: A Journey into the 3.5-Billion-Year History of the Human Body (amzn/b&n/abe/pwll). Or Jerry Coyne’s Why Evolution Is True(amzn/b&n/abe/pwll). These are all eminently readable, and are aimed at an audience that knows next to nothing about biology — they will quickly pull you up to a level at which you can at least ask intelligent questions. We even use Carroll’s book here at UMM in our freshman biology course, with the idea that it will introduce them to the concepts they should have gotten in high school, but most didn’t.

Now we have another entry in this collection: Richard Dawkins’ The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution(amzn/b&n/abe/pwll).

READ IT.

Maybe you already know everything Dawkins writes about in this book, if you’ve got a degree in biology and have done a fair amount of reading in the field; there really aren’t any radical surprises here, just a lovely review of familiar facts. You should read it anyway. Realize that this is the level that you have to operate on if you want to discuss the science of evolution with the public. What this (and the other books I mentioned above) is is a primer on how to communicate the ideas of science to a wider audience. It’s an overview and a synthesis, and it takes each piece of evidence and makes them part of a narrative. This is science plus storytelling — it’s what you have to do.

Or maybe you’re a high school student who is interested in science, but all you’re aware of is that the dumbed-down curriculum in your school has stripped out all of the important content from your courses. Or maybe you’ve got a teacher who is promoting creationism in subtle or not-so-subtle ways in the classroom. Get this book: it will give you the preparation for college that the conservatives on your local school board want to deny you. It’ll also make you ten times smarter than your creationist science teacher, which always feels good.

Hey, and when you graduate, give that science teacher a copy as a parting gift. Or perhaps as a gift to the next class.

Or maybe you’re just a sensible layman who’d like to know more about this subject, but really don’t want to have to get a Master’s degree to understand what the author is talking about. You want something you can read on a quiet Sunday morning, before the football game starts. You want to learn, but you’re not about to invest a lot of sweat in the effort. This is your book. It touches lightly on a lot of lines of evidence, and explains them clearly. You too can become informed painlessly, and for a low, low price!

Like I said, there are no more excuses. If you want to argue for or against evolution, cretins like Ken Ham or Ray Comfort or Carl Baugh or Eric Hovind or any of the thousands of other wandering ranters against the Enlightenment are about to face a big problem: more and more of the people in their audiences are going to have read these books, and are going to be prepared to call them on their bullshit. The enemy of ignorance is education, and the creationists know that; it’s why there is so much effort by the religious conservatives to destroy public education. These are books that provide an end-run around the current deficiencies in science education in this one area, and what they ought to do is help people question the wanna-be theocrats. If they lie about evolution, if they are so transparently wrong about this one subject, maybe more people will wake up to the anti-science agenda so many are peddling in this country.

Dawkins’ new book is very much a grenade thrown right at the heart of the creationists. The God Delusion was a kind of wake-up slap to shake people into attention, and now The Greatest Show on Earth follows on to pound them into the ground with a fusillade of evidence backed up by sound theoretical explanations. It’s all beautifully explained, too, a kind of elegant overview of the various lines of evidence supporting evolutionary theory, with much of the discussion informed by an awareness of the kinds of denial creationists typically make.

Read it, please, please, please.

We need a vocal and informed group of activists in this country who understand the science, but we can’t demand that they all go to grad school. This book and others like it will help us build the intellectual foundation and the network of well-versed literate elites who can can address the rot at the root.

What are you Coloradans doing on Halloween?

You don’t need to watch a spooky movie or visit a haunted house to see dead zombies walk: you’ve got an Intelligent Design creationism conference going on in Castle Rock! Watch them stagger about, drooling, looking for some brains, frustrated because there aren’t any on stage. They’ve got Michael Behe, Stephen Meyer, and David Berlinski (oooh, a zombie with an affected air of superciliousness! Creepy!), and they’re going to explain to you how Darwin drowned the world in a sea of meaninglessness. And you get to learn how to turn the tide! Right.

It’s a little bit revealing, too, that this is organized by the Shepherd Project, which provides “Christian speakers, conferences and resources to help Christians maximize their impact on the world for the sake of God’s Kingdom”. I thought ID was a secular hypothesis? Was I wrong?

Isn’t pleiotropy handy?

Look at the interesting snake found in China — it’s got a leg.

i-e7a81c62f3c114f35ef67cbe7d63a464-clawed_snake.jpeg

How can this happen? Genes are pleiotropic — they tend to have lots of different functions. The genes involved in making a limb are also expressed in other places; for instance, the Hox genes that specify identity along the length of the body are also reused in specifying identity along the length of the limb. What that means is that when the snake evolved limblessness, it didn’t do so by simply throwing away a collection of leg genes — it couldn’t, not without also destroying genes that functioned in generating its body plan. Instead, it evolved genes or modified the regulation of genes to actively suppress limb development…but the genes to build a limb are still in the genome, and still functional, and still actively working in other ways.

What most likely happened here is that some environmental agent suppressed the suppressor, allowing the old developmental program for a limb to be re-expressed. The retention of such programs is, of course, evidence that this animal evolved from limbed ancestors.

It would be interesting to know what triggered this change. It’s not likely to be genetic (the asymmetry suggests that), but is probably a consequence of some pollutants that disrupt development. It’s not a good sign, anyway.

Some good suggestions from the comments: it may not even be a teratogenic deformity. It could just be a poor lizard that punched a claw through the abdominal wall as it was being digested, and the snake was briefly trundling about in pain from the injury.

We need to do a dissection!

Just in case you’re looking

It turns out that there are a few simple rules to follow when submitting your computer dating form.

Around 42 per cent of messages which included the word “atheist” achieved replies, significantly higher than the average response rate of 32 per cent.

References to “Christian”, “Jewish” and “Muslim” boosted a message’s success rate only marginally, while mentioning “god” in a first approach actually discouraged people from replying.

So just maybe, being godless will increase your fitness in this next generation. Although, given the growing reputation of Christianity, it might just be a matter of distancing yourself from labels that are associated with obsessive kookiness.

What kind of laws do you have over there in Australia?

I’m very disappointed in Australia. Here I thought it was the kind of place where individuality was valued, and there was some good old rugged common sense to the people. But then I read this ghastly story.

In short, Tegan Leach gets pregnant at the age of 18, she and her boyfriend sensibly realize they are too young to be having children, and she obtains some RU486 to induce an abortion. That’s smart and practical, although it would have been better if she’d gotten the assistance of a health care professional to monitor the situation.

Apparently, that wasn’t an option. Doctors refuse to perform abortions of any kind in Queensland, and the laws are hopelessly muddled. The courts are freaking out, and the citizens are insane. These kids had their house firebombed, and their car attacked. Now she’s being prosecuted, and faces seven years in prison.

Maybe she’ll feel mature enough to bear children when she gets out. It’s an interesting social strategy: perhaps you could cage all the girls and women until they are of an age to get pregnant, and then you could release them briefly for breeding? Then, of course, they’d be returned to a larger cage with a crib and a changing table.

Shame on the Sam Noble Museum of Natural History

The Discovery Institute is up to their usual shenanigans — they’re pushing another propaganda movie (say, whatever happened to their research program?), Darwin’s Dilemma. It’s complete nonsense.

This documentary will examine what many consider to be the most powerful refutation of Darwinian evolution–the Cambrian fossil record. Charles Darwin realized that the fossil evidence did not support his theory of gradual, step-by-step evolutionary development. He hoped that future generations of scientists would make the discoveries necessary to validate his ideas. Today, after more than 150 years of exploration fossil evidence of slow, incremental biological change has yet to be excavated. Instead, we find a picture of the rapid appearance of fully developed, complex organisms during the outset of the Cambrian geological era. Organisms that embody almost all of the major animal body plans that exist today. This remarkable explosion of life is best explained by the existence of a transcendent intelligence.

Wait, what? They’re planning to overstate the rapidity of the Cambrian, ignore the vast amounts of morphological change that has occurred in the half a billion years since, and do the usual stunt of waving away scientific explanations so they can claim creationism wins by default. An utterly worthless bit of hokum.

The real shame, though, is that they’ve landed a respectable venue for the premiere: The Sam Noble Museum of Natural History in Oklahoma. Well, it was respectable. This will put a little spot of schmutz on their glossy reputation, I fear. And they’re planning to turn it into a real kookfest, with both Jonathan Wells (whose book, Icons of Evolution, revealed that he was an ignorant maroon on the subject of the Cambrian) and Stephen Meyer, the philosopher-creationist with his own book on molecular biology (hah!) to peddle, there to lecture at the opening. I guess any clown can rent the integrity of the U of Oklahoma for a day.

So, where are the University of Oklahoma biology professors? Where is the staff of the museum? Where are the rational people of the state of Oklahoma? They should all be rising up in disgust to mock this ridiculous affair. At least they’ve got ERV to stick up for them.

I wonder if the Oklahoma legislature will try to censure the university for allowing religion on campus, as they did against Richard Dawkins?

In the department of NO-FRICKIN’-BIG-SURPRISE, the movie has two big name scientists in it, Simon Conway Morris and James Valentine…and their interviews were obtained under false pretenses. Of course. I wonder if there isn’t some universal law behind this, that every creationist movie is obligated to lie to some scientist somewhere to get their words on tape?