Science
evolgen | April 20, 2007It seems like everything is coming in twos the past couple of days. Yesterday we mentioned two books on the evolution of genomes and two stories involving either Wolbachia or sex determination. Today, we have two stories involving criticisms of scientific papers. One deals with the evolution of the bacterial flagellum, and the other addresses natural selection on the brain expressed gene ASPM in humans.
The first story involves everyone's favorite irreducibly complex cellular apparatus: the bacterial flagellum. During the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial, Nick Matzke worked with the plaintiffs (the…
oracknows | April 20, 2007
Pity poor Nikola Tesla.
A sure sign of the most potent woo is when the woo-meister responsible claims to base it on the work of a great scientists, particularly a great scientist who's been dead well over 60 years.
Like Nikola Tesla.
The deader the scientist is and the longer he or she's been dead, the more sure the woo-meister can be that only the few actual scientists who pay attention to woo and bother to refute will have the necessary background knowledge to refute it. Moreover, the longer ago the scientist lived, the less chance of any pesky relatives caring enough to tell the woo-…
pharyngula | April 19, 2007There is considerable interest in a recent paper in PNAS that purports to have found some rather substantial homologies in the proteins that make up the bacterial flagellum. That would be extremely interesting if it were true, but it looks like there are massive methodological problems in the work. Matzke has put up a preliminary criticism; the gang at PT are working on a much more detailed analysis, and if half of what I'm hearing about the paper is true … well, it's going to be rather thoroughly sunk.
If you are arguing against ID's favorite example, the flagellum, do not use the data in…
jrosenhouse | April 19, 2007Some of the commenters to my previous two posts have suggested that they are tired of this subject. But since Matthew Nisbet himself stopped by to alert me to this post over at his blog, I figure the least I can do is reply to it.
The bulk of the post consists of comments from Steve Case, an assistant director of the Center for Science Education at the University of Kansas. Case is supportive of the Mooney/Nisbet thesis about the importance of framing in discussions of evolution. Let's consider his remarks in full:
OK, here is a from the hip Monday morning rant . I have been reading all…
oracknows | April 19, 2007Richard Dawkins will be interviewed by Bill O'Reilly on the O'Reilly Factor on Monday, April 23.
Talk about walking into the lion's den! I'm not sure this is such a good idea on Richard Dawkins' part. The problem, of course, is that Bill O'Reilly blusters and yells and doesn't let guests that he doesn't like talk. I have to wonder if Dawkins knows what he's in for. Even though he's almost certainly capable of handling a bully when both are on equal terms, O'Reilly controls the microphone and the show; he won't tolerate being slapped down the way he deserves. Being on The Colbert Report (…
evolgen | April 19, 2007On yesterday's episode of Mythbusters they tested the myth that birds in a trailer decrease the weight of the trailer when the birds take flight. The 'busters put a bunch of birds into a trailer, weighed the trailer + birds, and then allowed the birds to fly in the trailer, measuring the weight every fraction of a second. The myth was rejected because, while the weight fluctuated a fair bit, the mean weight remained the same before and after the birds took flight.
When a bird (or anything else that flies) gets airborne, it must exert a downward force equal to its weight. The weight of the…
jrosenhouse | April 18, 2007My SciBlings Chris Mooney and Matthew Nisbet have created quite a stir recently, first with this article in Science and later with this article for the Washington Post. The basic premise is that scientists need to become more effective communicators, especially on controversial issues like evolution and global warming. In particular, they need to “frame” scientific issues in a way that will have resonance with specific groups of people. In some cases this might mean eschewing a discussion of the scientific minutiae in favor of discussing more practical ramifications of the issue at hand.…
pharyngula | April 18, 2007You're bored with it? I'm bored with it. All bored now. But since the discussion is still going on everywhere, and I'm frothing rabid (as everyone knows) and always ready to snarl and bite even when (especially when?) I'm beset with ennui, I'll call your attention to Greg Laden again. He's pointing out that Nesbit/Mooney have poorly framed — I swear, I never want to use that word ever again — their argument for the evolution-creation conflict, which might explain why they are being so poorly received by some of us who are focused on that ugly mess. That, and the fact that parts of their…
evolgen | April 18, 2007
Two unemployed stem cell researchers have performed a pilot study indicating that the chief researcher's dog likes beer (reported here). They noticed that erratic behavior tended to increase with beer consumption, but his tolerance did increase over the course of the experiment. The dog also preferred certain beers over others, although the researchers did not have sufficient funds to test the dog's preference for anything better than Presidente. And they didn't see if he enjoyed salt in his beer either.
This research was partially funded by a New Jersey state research subsidy of $2.55 from…
oracknows | April 18, 2007I remain confused.
Yes, I know that people who don't like me very much or at least don't like the message that I lay down here day in, day out, week in, week out probably aren't surprised at this startling admission, but I don't mean it in a general fashion (although no doubt those aforementioned people will take it that way). No, in 10 days or so since I first weighed in about it, I remain confused at the vociferously hostile reaction that Chris Mooney's and Matthew Nisbet's recent article in Science, Framing Science, and their follow up article published on Sunday in the Washington Post.…
drorzel | April 18, 2007I've got another long lab this afternoon, so I'm stealing an idea for an audience-participation thread from James Nicoll:
Name five things we didn't know in the year that you were born that make the universe a richer place to think about.
This is actually a really interesting exercise for showing how rapidly the world has changed in the last N years. I'm not all that old-- to put it in pop-culture terms, the Beatles broke up before I was born-- but when I try to think about the landscape of science since then, it's astonishing how much the world has changed:
My own field of laser cooling,…
oracknows | April 17, 2007From fellow ScienceBlogger Abel, I'm made aware of an excellent post on the Health Care Renewal Blog about the financial reality of being an academic physician in a modern U.S. medical school. It's an excellent overview of how medical schools view clinical faculty as, in essence, cash cows that have to bring in the cash and pay for themselves. The same thing actually applies to basic scientists as well, and I do have to quibble a bit with the internal medicine-centered view of the various ways that faculty are expected to bring in money, which do not necessarily apply to academic surgery…
oracknows | April 16, 2007...because he's sure as heck doing his best to cause it damage with his latest antievolution "broadsides," even to the point where it needs the loving ministrations of a neurosurgeon! His latest screeds produce in me a nearly irresistible urge to pound my head against the nearest hard surface to make the psychic pain stop. He's placing me in danger of real, physical pain, from epidural hematoma (in fact, I wonder if I'm in the middle of a lucid interval right now) to subdural hematoma to cerebral contusions.
First of all, regular readers may have noted that I haven't yet responded to the…
pharyngula | April 16, 2007Pimm is looking for examples of good laboratory homepages — he has links to a few, but is looking for more.
There is actually a conundrum there: most labs don't want to reveal work in progress on the web (except to a limited extent), they aren't particularly interested in public PR (something it would be good to change), and they are mostly populated with students and post-docs with a limited tenure and a specific brief that does not include webmastering. Most of the lab web pages I've seen out there are simple portals to a cv and maybe a few publication pdfs.
drorzel | April 16, 2007After three glorious sixty-degree days in California, we returned to Schenectady just in time for a major winter storm. In mid-April. There's an inch or two of icy slush all over everything, and it's still raining. Whee!
It occurs to me again that what we're seeing locally from climate change feels more like a climate phase shift than a consistent warming. Yeah, December was really warm, but March and April have been cold and shitty. Summer extended well into September last year, but it didn't really get started until July-- teeth were chattering at our commencement ceremony last year in mid-…
pharyngula | April 14, 2007Nisbet and Mooney do it again, with an op-ed in the Washington Post … and I'm afraid they've alienated me yet further. I am convinced now that theirs is not an approach that I could find useful, even if I could puzzle out some useable strategy from it. In the very first sentence, they claim that Richard Dawkins gives "creationist adversaries a boost" — it's the tired old argument that we must pander to religious belief. This is their rationale:
Leave aside for a moment the validity of Dawkins's arguments against religion. The fact remains: The public cannot be expected to differentiate…
oracknows | April 14, 2007Prometheus makes the case that our current age of unreason can be largely attributed to the Baby Boomers. As someone who can be viewed either as a very young Baby Boomer or a very old GenX-er, I nonetheless heartily agree with his clarion call near the end of his analysis:
Our society is growing more and more dependent on rationality, science and technology to keep it from collapsing. It's too late to turn back, now - giving up on reason and returning to magical thinking will cause a human (and probably environmental) catastrophe that would beggar the imagination. And, at the same time, the…
pharyngula | April 13, 2007Science magazine has an article today on extracting and sequencing proteins from T. rex bones, and I'm already getting email from people wondering whether this is believable, whether it challenges the stated age of dinosaurs, whether this means we can soon reconstruct dinosaurs from preserved genetic information, and even a few creationists claiming this is proof of a young earth. Short answers: it looks like meticulous and entirely credible work to me, these fossil bones are really 68 million years old, and it represents a special case with limits to how far it can be expanded, so scratch "…
evolgen | April 13, 2007Science has published two papers on Tyrannosaurus rex proteins (are we in the golden age of dino molecular biology?). In one paper, the authors report that they extracted proteins from T. rex soft tissue that was preserved for millions of years. In the other paper, some of the same researchers write about how they used mass spectrometry to determine the sequences of proteins obtained from a 68 million year old T. rex fossil and a mastodon that died hundreds of thousands of years ago. But the title of the paper is:
Protein Sequences from Mastodon and Tyrannosaurus Rex Revealed by Mass…
pharyngula | April 10, 2007He should be so proud — he has taken first place in the 2007 Jefferson Muzzle Awards. These are awards given for "egregious or ridiculous affronts to free expression in the previous year", and little Georgie won it for:
For its unprecedented efforts of discouraging, changing, and sometimes censoring the reports and studies of government scientists in order to make them more supportive of political policies, a 2007 Jefferson Muzzle goes to… the Bush Administration.
It's a well deserved honor. The description goes on to list several specific instances of Bush administration manipulation of…