Deleted at the request of Brian Batson
Pharyngula
Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
Deleted at the request of Brian Batson
Wilkins has submitted to some silly book meme, and anything John does I have to do better.
Sorry about that last post. I am still trying to figure out how to format this blog correctly. Here are links to the abstracts of the articles I used to design my experiment. Admittedly I played up the sophomoric college student part a bit. Apparently a bit too much. To answer a few concerns about this experiment, the fish are not likely to die. I would never preform an experiment that was cruel or served no purpose other than my own personal enjoyment. While, it is not likely that I will have any groundbreaking results, I hope to further my own personal research experience and possibly recreate some fairly important biomedical research. Drinks like a fish and the second article Ethanol effects on three strains of zebrafish
There are those who have questioned the reason for getting fish drunk. I could stumble through the explanation and make the issue much more confusing than it has to be, or I could just post a few of research articles I used to design my experiment.
Gerlai, R., Lahav, M., Guo, S., Rosenthal, A. 2001. Drinks Like a fish: zebra fish (Danio rerio) as a behavior genetic model to study alcohol effects. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior. 67:773-782
Dlugos, C.A., Rabin, R.A., 2003. Ethanol effects on three strains of zebrafish: model system for genetic investigations. Pharmacology, Biochemistry, and Behavior. 74:471-780
This is getting ridiculous. Now I’m accused of “trying to drive a wedge between those who are against evolution” … because I think belief in angels and demons is absurd.
Damn. Just because someone accepts evolution doesn’t automatically make them a good guy, and if they’re praising evolution and at the same time babbling about demons causing appendicitis or angels warding off curses, they aren’t on my side in the cause of increasing rationality.
I’m beginning to wonder if there is some psychological transference going on here. People who think that merely believing in Jesus grants them redemption must also think that believing in evolution is a magic charm that grants them exemption from criticism of any nonsense they might hold. It doesn’t work that way. There is no get-out-of-criticism-free card.
As I pondered what to post about on Pharyngula this week my thoughts immediately turned to football *wink* …which got me thinking spinal cord injuries (and no… not in the context of malice toward Drew Brees), which got me thinking of last year’s Distinguished Alumni speaker, physiatrist (and poet!) Jon Mukland ’80.
Dr. Mukland presented his research on the development of the BrainGate Neural Interface System– a program designed to interface victims of spinal cord injury with a computer. A silicon chip implanted in the motor cortex uses feedback from hundreds of probes to map electrical activity patterns associated with certain motor tasks. For example, if the patient is asked to imagine they are moving a computer screen cursor to the left, the implant records the pattern of electrical activity associated with that function. A computer is programed to interpret that activity and move the cursor left when it receives that input again. This is duplicated for other kinds of movement. The result is that a the patient is able to manipulate a computer cursor with his or her mind.
Dr. Mukland went on the describe the benefits of this system. The ability to manipulate a cursor independently, even in limited ways, opens up a host of quality of life opportunities for paralysis victims. Computer programs could be designed to allow patients to turn on appliances, use the internet, or communicate electronically. As the technology improves, the implications for improved quality of life increase dramatically.
I’ve never been so proud to be a UMMer :)
I recently mentioned the way some serious theologians believe in demons and exorcisms. I can’t help it; I find these notions ridiculous to an extreme, and the absurdity of serious scholars blaming diseases on demonic possession in the 21st century is something one has to find laughable. I was being hard on Christianity, though. I left out an important exonerating factor for these people.
Some of them believe in angels, too.
Yes, I’m joking when I say this is an exonerating factor. This merely makes them even more silly. But no, you say, they can’t possibly argue for demons and angels being real agents in the natural world, can they? This must all be metaphorical, not literal. Judge for yourself.
Here’s a passage from the foreword to a 2002 book by Peter S. Williams, The Case for Angels. This is a book that argues for the literal reality of angels, and that they are important because “Angels (with a capital ‘A’, good angels) are worth studying because they are true (real), noble, right pure, lovely, admirable, excellent and praiseworthy. Fallen angels (demons are worth studying because they are real and because it behoves every army, including the army of Christ, to know its enemy.” The author of the foreword agrees. Can you guess who it is?
Peter Williams’ The Case for Angels is about…the theological rift between a Christian intelligentsia that increasingly regards angels only as figurative or literary devices, and the great mass of Christians who thankfully still regard them as real (a fact confirmed by popular polls, as Williams notes in this book). This rift was brought home to me at a conference I helped organize at Baylor University some years back. The conference was entitled ‘The Nature of Nature’ and focused on whether nature is self-contained or points beyond itself. The activity of angels in the world would clearly constitute on way nature points beyond itself.
Hey, it’s safer than going after Iran.
The offenses of creationists aren’t always blatant: it’s the sneaky erosion of science, the quiet omissions, the gradual degradation of good science where they make the most gains, and it’s where they get bold and stick their heads out (like Dover) where they get slapped down. We need to be aware of the small stuff, too, because it adds up — like this effort by Dutch evangelicals to edit David Attenborough’s documentaries. Some changes have to be made in translations and so forth, and the BBC does allow cuts up to about 5 minutes per hour, but the nasty thing is how targeted the cuts are at slicing out just those bits a pathologically ignorant theist would find objectionable.
I’ve had some people complain that we ought to reserve our outrage for the big stuff, the dramatic crap the creationists try to pull. I’m going to have to disagree. The little stuff that nibbles away at accurate information and slowly destroys the public education of science that must be confronted just as strenuously.
Just watch the little suck-up grovel for the Religious Right. It isn’t pretty.
McCain: I think the number one issue people should make [in the] selection of the President of the United States is, ‘Will this person carry on in the Judeo Christian principled tradition that has made this nation the greatest experiment in the history of mankind?’
Whenever I see these pious testimonies to “Judeo-Christian values”, I always wonder…how many Jewish founding fathers were there? How many Jewish presidents have we had? I have no objection to electing a Jewish president, but it always seems to me that these claims that toss in the word “Judeo” are made solely to put up a pretense of inclusiveness — they really mean “conservative Christian,” and they include an invisible, unnamed token Jew to hide their real narrowness.
