Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
PZ Myers is a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, Morris.
…and this is a pharyngula stage embryo.
• a longer profile of yours truly
• my calendar
• Nature Network
• RichardDawkins Network
• facebook
• MySpace
• Twitter
• Atheist Nexus
• the Pharyngula chat room
(#pharyngula on irc.synirc.net)
+++ Divide By Cucumber Error. Please Reinstall Universe And Reboot +++
(Terry Pratchett, Hogfather)
Evolution of Hormone Signaling
Development, medicine, and evolution of the neck and shoulder
Stay abreast of your favorite bloggers' latest and greatest via e-mail, via a daily digest.
« Beyond Belief II: a summary | Main | A presidential debate on science…it'll never happen »
Category: Weblogs
Posted on: November 5, 2007 1:50 PM, by PZ Myers
As long as we don't have to respect his authority or consider him infallible, we can say hello to The Quantum Pontiff.
Although…computer science? What do we need their kind for? Shouldn't we be getting more biologists here?
(TrackBack URL for this entry: )
YES! Send me a free issue of Seed.
If I like what I see, I'll receive 5 more issues (6 in all) for just $14.95. That's 50% off the cover price! If I'm not completely satisfied, I'll simply write "cancel" on the invoice and owe nothing. The free issue is mine to keep.
(Non-U.S. subscribers, click here.)
Comments
Your puny biology will fall before the barbarous ranks of physical reductionism! Physics spits at your "emergent properties" and "holism"!
Posted by: Mike P | November 5, 2007 2:00 PM
You will no doubt enjoy this recent exchange between Scott Aaronson and Eliezer Yodkowsky:
SA: "If true, this is a beautiful argument for one of two conclusions: either that (1) digital computers shouldn't have as hard a time as one might think surpassing billions of years of evolution, or (2) 25MB is enough for pretty much anything!"
EY: "... In an amazing and completely unrelated coincidence, I work in the field of Artificial Intelligence. Did I mention DNA is on the way out in much less than a million years? ..."
Posted by: Tristram Brelstaff | November 5, 2007 2:24 PM
What is the quantum of pontification, anyway?
Posted by: Jon H | November 5, 2007 3:18 PM
"Although...computer science? What do we need their kind for? Shouldn't we be getting more biologists here?"
Two answers:
1. I should think it obvious to anyone that Conway's Game of Life is far more interesting than actual *life*.
2. What branch of biology *doesn't* use simulations these days?
Posted by: Mango | November 5, 2007 3:30 PM
The quantum of pontification, if by which you mean what is pontification measured in, is definitely a Thaum.
The amount of prayer required to create 1 white dove out of nothing.
Posted by: Aaron Lemur Mintz | November 5, 2007 3:32 PM
Now, misquoting Terry Pratchet will result in a deluge of angry (and drunk on shandy) propellor heads descending like the wrath of an incontinent cow on this blog...
Posted by: laserboy | November 5, 2007 3:46 PM
I took genetics from a guy who claimed he wsnted to be proclaimed the "pope of genetics" just long enough to simplify and standardize the vocabulary.
Posted by: fardels bear | November 5, 2007 4:22 PM
Hey, I'm a physicist! Okay, maybe I'm a computer scientist and a physicist. Either way biology is certainly just a subdiscipline of computer science or physics (take your pick) :) One discipline to rule them all!
Posted by: Dave Bacon | November 5, 2007 4:31 PM
Dave Bacon, you need to update your address ;)
Posted by: archgoon | November 5, 2007 4:47 PM
Doh. My fingers just automagically type that old address. Time to retrain my fingers (takes out hammer...)
Posted by: Dave Bacon | November 5, 2007 5:07 PM
Computer science sucks. I don't know why anyone studies it.
Welcome to ScienceBlogs, Dave!
Posted by: Tyler DiPietro | November 5, 2007 5:31 PM
Good to see CS being represented around here, it's certainly needed to compensate for all the biology and such (although I'm admittedly very interested in AI, where neuroscience contributes a great deal). Anyways, welcome!
Posted by: Zero | November 5, 2007 6:02 PM
Any field which has "science" in its name... probably isn't.
Posted by: Moggie | November 5, 2007 6:09 PM
Biologists? Forget that; you have enough of those species crawling around here. What about the lowly chemists? They deserve better than to be lumped in with the physicists here!
Posted by: Shawn Wilkinson | November 5, 2007 6:17 PM
What about the lowly chemists? They deserve better than to be lumped in with the physicists here!
Indeed! Harumpff!
Posted by: Tlazolteotl | November 5, 2007 6:23 PM
"Any field which has "science" in its name... probably isn't."
Like "neuroscience"?
Posted by: Tyler DiPietro | November 5, 2007 6:33 PM
As long as we don't have to respect his authority or consider him infallible, we can say hello to The Quantum Pontiff.
Don't worry, the uncertainty negates the infallibility.
Posted by: Patrick Quigley | November 5, 2007 6:39 PM
"Like 'neuroscience'?"
Well, "brainology" sounded stupid, and brainology.com was already taken, so "neuroscience" was the next-best option. :)
Posted by: Lezard Valeth | November 5, 2007 7:31 PM
Lezard,
You think that's bad? Another term for computer science that has currency in some circles is "datalogy". Tell me that doesn't sound stupid!
Posted by: Tyler DiPietro | November 5, 2007 7:59 PM
Whoa?! What's with the CS crack at the end?
Don't computers make all new even possible? They don't program themselves. The correct algorithms to use and how to weave it together to help solve scientific problems should not be trivialized.
OK, I'm a CS grad/programmer and I'm sensitive! :)
Posted by: Castaa | November 5, 2007 8:41 PM
Happy Guy Fawkes Day! All together now:
A penny loaf to feed ol'Pope,
A farthing cheese to choke him.
A pint of beer to rinse it down,
A faggot of sticks to burn him.
Burn him in a tub of tar,'
Burn him like a blazing star.
Burn his body from his head,
Then we'll say: ol'Pope is dead.
Posted by: hf | November 5, 2007 9:05 PM
Let us not forget the Guy Fawkes was the only man ever to enter parliment with admirable intentions.
Posted by: Tyler DiPietro | November 5, 2007 9:49 PM
You've really done it now, PZ, with that crack about Computer Science ... ;-)
I'm sure you'll get comments from all five of us CS types who regularly lurk here ...
Besides, better Computer Science than "Creation Science"!!!
Posted by: axolotl | November 6, 2007 12:31 AM
Tyler, are you dissing my department?
For those who don't get it, Datalogy was a phrase coined by Peter Naur, the founder of computer science in Denmark, and the first head of the Department of Computer Science at the University of Copenhagen. Unsurprising, computer science is called Datalogy in Denmark, and the name of the department reflects this.
Posted by: Kristjan Wager | November 6, 2007 1:53 AM
"Shouldn't we be getting more biologists here?"
How about more biology from the biologist we have hosting this blog. He used to be pretty good at conveying the excitement and wonder that evo-devo produced as it began to explain the deep commonalities we organisms share. Has evo-devo come to a dead end?
Posted by: Mike from Ottawa | November 6, 2007 8:39 AM
I'm sure you'll get comments from all five of us CS types who regularly lurk here...
Oh, surely, there are at least a dozen of us.....
Posted by: Hairy Doctor Professor | November 6, 2007 8:54 AM
Hrm.. does it count that I defected from Electrical Engineering to Computer Science... before I got kicked out of school?
Or does it count that Dad's a pysicist and Mom's a historian? ( Would mention the sister that's also a physicist with a minor (or was it a dual major) in Systems, but she's negated by the sister who's an artist)
Or that I have practiced biology in the past ( I have two kids )
I even have a couple telescopes...
and at last count (back to CS) I have at least 8 functioning computers at home (family of 4) and somethign like 45 computer carcasses in my garage?
Of course not. I just like to brag occasionally about my family.
As for the definition of science - if you can't smack it with a stick, it's not science, no matter what you name it.
Posted by: Lurchgs | November 6, 2007 3:36 PM
Have fun bioposting your biocomments on your bioblog made out of, I guess, agar and electric eels. Jackass.
Posted by: Gilmore | November 6, 2007 6:55 PM
Another Computer Science student offended by little quips made at the end of blogs, that are hosted by computers, and accessible on the internet, which, unless there's some bible passage proving me wrong, was created by computer science types.
Posted by: summatusmentis | November 7, 2007 1:27 AM
Actually, some of what gets taught in CS isn't science - it is technology ...
But CS is unusual - a feature shared with some psychology departments - that there are is basic (think theory of computing), applied (algorithms) and technology (software engineering) taught and researched in one place.
Posted by: Keith Douglas | November 10, 2007 11:25 AM