Radio Freethinker

Vancouver's Number 1 Skeptical Podcast and Radio Show

  • Welcome to Radio Freethinker!

    Radio Freethinker is a radio show/podcast that promotes skepticism, critical thinking, and secular issues.
  • Follow Us!

  • Categories

  • Archives

Posts Tagged ‘Evolution’

Radio Freethinker Episode 181 – Science Strikes Back Edition

Posted by Don McLenaghen on September 11, 2012

This week:

- Canada Cuts Diplomatic Ties to Iran
- Organic Shmorganic

- Korean Science strikes back, and
-Interview with Desiree Schell from Sceptically Speaking

Download the episode here!

Canada Cuts Diplomatic Ties to Iran

Syrian Blood Bath

Why did we cut diplomatic ties? What are the issues involved: Nuclear power, human rights, embassy security in the face of ‘western’ sections or protest against Iran’s support for Syria?Why treat Iran different than Russia?Is this a better response to Syrian atrocities than what was done to Libya?

Find out more:

Organic Shmorganic

Another study shows Organic not better than ‘regular’ food; although some important ‘non-health’ issues were left out (ie. environmental, health of farmers….). We discuss yet another blow to the cult-of-organics while acknowledging organic is not all pseudo-science.

Find out more:

Korean Science strikes back

After reporting on the science ‘fail’ of South Korea when attempts by South Korean evangelicals, the Society for Textbook Revise, to have evolution removed from science textbooks looked like they were about to succeed; it seem science has struck back!

This sparked outrage among scientists and the population in general. The resulting furore led the government to set up an 11-member panel, led by the Korean Academy of Science and Technology  and including five experts on evolution and fossils, to oversee science-textbook revisions

We reported the fail, we now report that win!

Find out more:

Interview with Desiree Schell from Sceptically Speaking

Desiree Schell is the host of the live Canadian call-in radio talk show and podcast “Skeptically Speaking”.[1] A Skeptic, Desiree is a strong advocate for critical thinking and is strongly interested in the promotion of skepticism publicly. In her work as a labour organizer, Desiree creates curricula and teaches courses on effective activism.

Find out more:

Skeptical Highlights:

Out of the Blogs and On To the Streets: What Skepticism Can Learn from Social Movements

Organized skepticism is currently at a crossroads – we’re making more public progress than ever before, but there are internal and external challenges that could prevent us from affecting real change. Many social movements have been down this road, and many of them have come through it stronger, more united, and more effective. If social movements are the experts at affecting change, what can we learn from them to apply to our own community?

When:  Friday, September 14th 2012 at 7:00 pm
Where: Room 1700 of SFU Harbour Centre, 555 West Hastings Street, Vancouver
Who: Desiree Schell
Cost: Suggested donation of $2 to $10

Effective Skeptical Activism

A number of politicians have had their careers prematurely cut short because of perceived or actual issues regarding their personal lives. If the issue does not directly relate to their job, is this fair? Does, and should, one’s personal morals or religion reflect upon their professional conduct?

When:  September 15th 2012 at 2:00 pm
Where: Room 2245 SFU Harbour Centre, 555 West Hastings Street, Vancouver
Who: Desiree Schell
Cost: Admission is $20 and includes a copy of Desiree’s guidebook ‘Skeptical Activism’

Video: To the Bat Cave!

Bat biologist Nickolay Hristov, of UNC’s Center for Design Innovation and Winston-Salem State University, develops new techniques for filming and visualizing bats and the caves they occupy. Some of the tools in his kit include a long-range laser scanner–for modelling bat cave morphology–and portable thermal cameras–to capture bat-life when the lights are off.

Wonderful to watch!

lrg-batcave2-090712.mp4

NPR’s Science Friday September Book Club Winner Is…FlatLand

Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions is an 1884 satirical novella by the English schoolmaster Edwin Abbott Abbott. Writing pseudonymously as “a Square”,[1] Abbott used the fictional two-dimensional world of Flatland to offer pointed observations on the social hierarchy of Victorian culture. However, the novella’s more enduring contribution is its examination of dimensions, for which the novella is still popular amongst mathematics, physics, and computer science students.

Free Download: Flatland (illustrated version)

Taking a Scientific approach to public policy…for real!

Government should be more evidence based, and that wherever possible, they should do randomised trials to find out which policy intervention works best. They often have no idea whether the things they do in government actually work or not, and achieve their stated goals.

Ben Goldacre got together with come of his government co-workers and science heads to wrote a  Cabinet Office paper on randomised trials of government policies to explain why randomised trials of policy are so powerful; we explain exactly how to do them; and we explain how to identify a meaningful policy question that can be explored cheaply in a good quality trial.

The paper is not perfect, but a good move in the right direction.

Download: Test, Learn, Adapt: Developing Public Policy with Randomised Controlled Trials

Posted in Show notes | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Saturday Stub: Maybe Humans and Neanderthals Didn’t…you know…

Posted by Ethan Clow on August 18, 2012

So I’m doing Saturday Stub’s again. For a refresher, this is where I take a small item and write a bit about, not too much since it’s Saturday, but enough to get you thinking.

A while back there was an interesting news story that hinted that perhaps, long ago, our human ancestors interbreed with Neanderthals.

It was not something completely out of the question. Early humans were living areas where there were lots of Neanderthals. The question of course is how much interbreeding and what was the outcome? Not just in biological terms either. What did this mean when it came to human-Neanderthal diplomacy (if I can use that word) Because early humans were sharing space with these folk, it’s likely they were also competing for resources, shelter, and everything else. Did humans and Neanderthals try setting aside their tribalism and interbreeding was the result? Or was this the result of widespread contact that was not always consenting?

But here’s a news story suggesting that the initial idea might not even be true. Quote from The Guardian:

“When scientists discovered a few years ago that modern humans shared swaths of DNA with long-extinct Neanderthals, their best explanation was that at some point the two species must have interbred.

Now a study by scientists at the University of Cambridge has questioned this conclusion, hypothesising instead that the DNA overlap is a remnant of a common ancestor of both Neanderthals and modern humans.”

Basically it comes down to 4% of our genetic link to Neanderthals. One explanation for this connection that most people who lived outside of Africa had, was that their ancestors who left Africa in the past, interbreed with Neanderthals and the native African population, descended from people who didn’t leave the continent never interbreed and thus don’t that that shared 4% of DNA.

Scientists Andrea Manica and Anders Eriksson are suggesting that the so-called 4% is an over-estimation. Further, they suggest that it can be explained as an indicator of a common ancestor that humans and Neanderthals shared about 500,000 years ago.

So what about the fact that Africans don’t share the 4 (or less) percentage of DNA? Manica and Eriksson say that we need to take into account “substructuring” which is the variation of genetics among populations that are not homogeneous or well mixed, as Manica and Eriksson claim African populations were like during the time period in question.

A link to the actual study can be found here.

The folks championing the interbreeding hypothesis, aren’t taking this laying down either (no pun intended) Professor Svante Pääbo, who sequenced the Neanderthal genome, is quoted as saying that Manica and Eriksson’s hypothesis was viewed as “a less parsimonious explanation.”

Pääbo has a paper awaiting peer review that he believes will further support his conclusions.

I eagerly await more human-Neanderthal intrigue.

 

Posted in Blogs, Ethan's Blogs | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Dis-Education – Christian home schooling part 1 – Physical Science

Posted by Don McLenaghen on July 27, 2012

This is the first in a three part series into Christian home schooling. Let’s start by looking into ACE…no, not the flying kind or the one in a royal flush but the acronym for Accelerated Christian Education. This has been a popular topic on the inter-web because of new lax textbook requirements in Louisiana and Texas. However, ACE has a Canadian branch which has been providing home schooled Christians un-educational material.

Some of the books on sale currently on the ACE Canada website are:

George Washington, the Christian; A Case for Creation; Ordained of the Lord and Shadow of the Almighty. Nothing unexpected even though I suspect historians may be dubious about Washington. One did catch my attention – “None dare call it conspiracy”. This tasty bit combines the communists, environmentalists, trans-nationals, the UN and others…to form your slightly off standard world conspiracy theory a la one world government/new world order/illuminati. His style, less Christian and more Libertarian, is known as ‘Producerism’…where the productive people of the world are being parasitize by the OTHER. It’s acceptable to ACE because they share some common themes like ‘traditional values’; God rewards the righteous and biblical end-times scenarios. The first chapter though is very telling; it’s entitled – ‘Don’t confuse me with the facts’. Very much in line with ACE teaching philosophy.

So, we will discuss not only the bad science in these works but also the bad social science and some more sinister implications of this style of teaching.

First some of the things children are being dis-learned about science.

The Loch Ness Monster Disproves Evolution

According to Christian home schooling dis-learning material:
“Are dinosaurs alive today? Scientists are becoming more convinced of their existence. Have you heard of the `Loch Ness Monster’ in Scotland? `Nessie,’ for short has been recorded on sonar from a small submarine, described by eyewitnesses, and photographed by others. Nessie appears to be a plesiosaur.”

Nessie appears to be a plesiosaur so dinosaurs are not millions of years old and did exist with humans.

Now, the fact that Nessie has long been shown to be a myth…even crypto-zoologist have pretty much given up on Nessie after a complete sonar scan of the Loch 1987 and again in 2003 for the show “Searching for the Loch Ness Monster”on BBC which found nothing.

Now, the Loch Ness Monster is still trendy in the popular press so it’s an easy plot point (I say plot point because religion’s like fiction you must remember you plot) everyone THINKS they know. We remember the ‘photo evidence’ (which is not evidence) and the ‘dramatizations’ but rarely the ‘depression’ of real documentary shows that prove its fiction.

A Japanese Whaling Boat Found a Dinosaur

Like Nessie, this is supposed to be evidence that proves dinosaurs are still here. Of course the evidence is a couple of photos of what a Japanese fishing trawler hulled up in the late 70s. If you look at one of the photos quickly you may see something that might look like a long necked thing, but the condition of the carcass is in extreme decay. That is there is no skin, little flesh…and looking at it, it’s your standard well decayed thing…possibly a shark, that’s what they thought in 1977 when it was found. Looking at the other photos you see thinks like dorsal fins indicative of a shark.

Now, why put this in? Sowing seeds so when a child (or when their grownup) is confronted with the overwhelming evidence about the existence of dinosaurs then have a ‘mental’ safe room to compartmentalized it. They might say ‘Yes, of course dinosaurs existed…along with people, but God let them all die during the Noah’s flood’; or something like that.

Humans and Dinosaurs Co-Existed

Fossilised human footprints have been found alongside dinosaur tracks in the bed of the Paluxy River, Texas. Now there are a number of photos of these on the internet. However, there have been two explanations for this apparent anomaly. First, they were faked. The most ‘convincing’ human foot prints complete with toe prints are on souvenir rocks, not those in situ (i.e. those still part of the ancient river bed). It apparently was a booming business during the depression to sell moonshine and fossils. When either ran low, they just went to the shack and made some more (i.e. faked ‘fossils’).

The other explanation is erosion. When the tracks are made, the soft mud often falls into the track, giving them an distorted appearance, coupled with erosion from natural elements, can transform three toed dino prints into a human foot shape heal print…these don’t have toe prints.

Why would ACE et al, use such poor ‘evidence’ when once released into the reality based world they will be confronted with what I have just mentioned? If their aim was to educate then it would be stupid but we are talking about dis-education; their aim, at least in areas of theology, it to set up thinking processes and ways of ‘learning’ that impede and retard education. It is not good enough for them not to know the facts of the world but they must also attempt to ensure they can never truly learn them ever.

Solar Fusion is a Myth

The sun is shrinking because it is burning up its fuel, in the conventional BBQ sense of burning. So, the earth can’t be billions of years old, the Sun would have to be bigger than the orbit of the Earth if the solar system was billions of years old – HA! Take that science.

This sounds kooky to most people so why say it? Well, first I must ask do you (my loyal reader) know how solar…well any nuclear fusion works? Simply put, it’s the mashing together of two small atoms to make a bigger atom plus a s#it load of energy. To do this, you must have the atoms very close together and energetic (i.e. hot). This happens when a massive body…like the sun…compresses under its own weight. The pressure and heat at the center skyrockets until a point where two hydrogen atoms fuse to form helium plus energy. The energy pushes back on gravity, stops the sun collapsing and gives us light (not the mythical guy ACE would like you to credit).

The Second Law of Thermodynamics Disproves Evolution.

The entropy of a closed system cannot decrease.” They take it to mean things invariably progress from order to disorder. Therefor the Earth was created in a perfect ordered state (Garden of Eden) and is progressively becoming more decayed and disordered over time…until the big G pulls the plug (Armageddon).

Now in a closed system this is true, the order to disorder part, not the God stuff. However life, earth…even the galaxies are not closed systems. The universe as a whole, is dissipating…a better term that disorder. That is why one of the theories of the ‘end of the universe’ is the Big Freeze; where mater/energy is so evenly disperses in the universe there will be nothing but cold atoms (Quarks?).

Life on earth gets increased energy because the sun, to name one thing, inputs energy…or in our context order…into the ‘evolutionary’ system; thus giving the appearance of violating the 2nd law but not really.

No Transitional Fossils Exist…enough said.

Sorry, for those new to this argument, check here, I can’t waste my time on this one.  Five Major Misconceptions about Evolution

Scientists Believe the “Hopeful Monster” Theory

“Theory states that certain organisms experienced (for some unexplained reason) a dramatic genetic disturbance that hurled them across the gap left by the missing links”

They have a cute cartoon to explain this theory…as they see it the last hope for evolution…line one has a fish plus a fish equals a fish, the next has a fish plus a fish plus genetic disturbance equals a frog.

This is what I can only believe is willful misunderstanding of evolution. I don’t want to restate what may be obvious to most of our listeners but there are two major camps in evolutionary thinking the gradual evolution and punctuate evolution. The first holds that gradual changes over hundreds…thousands…millions of years gradual selects for adaptations best suited for the organisms environment; thus leading to speciation…classic evolution.

Punctuated evolution, still controversial, posits that in isolated groups, like those stranded on an island…let’s say the Galapagos…evolution can be accelerated and more dramatic. Create a new species in the space of decades or centuries.

Creationists believe that we believe that two frogs have sex and give birth to a duck. This shows their misunderstanding of the term random mutation. The term does not mean the comic book style mutation where parents give birth to a Nightcrawler of the X-Men but where a gene or 10 are mis-copied in such a way as to create a new trait/resistance/what have you…but these are small changes. There is a great example in the recently published work of one scientist who over decades ‘evolved’ bacteria to digest citrate.

This ties into the other elements (i.e. Solar Fusion, fossils, geology such as the Grand Canyon) where they are desperate to show the earth is young…bible young…six thousand-ish. Because evolution posits change over a LONG period of time, if they can deny science time, it implicitly denies evolution and this protects the biblical account of the ‘creation’.

Part of their problem with evolution is it implies that ‘creation’ was not perfect that God is not perfect. However, they do not stop with evolution because creationist believe God created a perfect world and will ensure his creation does not end…well until he decides to kill everyone off during Armageddon. There for they make claims like…

It “cannot be shown scientifically that man-made pollutants will one day drastically reduce the depth of the atmosphere’s ozone layer.”

“God has provided certain ‘checks and balances’ in creation to prevent many of the global upsets that have been predicted by environmentalists.”

This is why Republicans in the US and Conservatives here have been pushed to reject ‘Climate Change’ because of the power of the evangelical movement. Oddly enough it also provides a great example as to why religion is so antithetical to ANY science.

If a fundamentalist Christian accepts climate change they make two dangerous acknowledgments. First, that God’s creation is not perfect and that when it says in the Bible that after the great flood God will ensure the world is a nice place to be until the end-times…then climate change will make the Earth a NOT nice place to be…it will be a refutation of the promise of God…so it is the first step in rejecting biblical literalism

Related to that is… if you accept that science can show/prove climate change, then why not accept its evidence for solar fusion…for evolution…for the great length of time from ‘creation’…to the un-necessity of a God at all. It’s a slippery slope of rationality and creationist what nothing to do with that.

ACE science curriculum is not to educate children but to arm them with the ability to reject science when they are free of the cocoon of the home school. Teach a child to not learn, and they will be ignorant for life…so sayeth the Lord.

The next segment we will leave the realm of the physical science for Christian home schooling views on the Social Sciences.

Posted in Blogs, Don's Blogs | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Super human mutants

Posted by Don McLenaghen on July 9, 2012

Human mutants are among us and they may be using their super power to keep an eye on YOU!!!

Okay, before we tell you about the super humans that are among us, let start with a primer on colour. Every creature with eyes sees some colour, although the vast majority see only black, white and various greys. Others called Dichromatics can see two colours…most mammals are thought to be dichromatic, like your dog. Humans and a select number of other animals see three colours and their blends. Bees can see ultraviolet but not red, weird eh?

Most foraging insects, some birds and fish can see four colours, pigeons and lampreys may be able to see 5 colours.

Now you may say,” Well I can see more than 3 colours” but you would be wrong…and right. If you look at your colour printer you will notice that it only has 3 colours or what are also known as the primary colours. From these three, all other colours we can perceive are created…about a million in total and that is under ideal conditions. Normally we notice only a fraction of these. These colours are perceived by cells called “cones”. Each cone is for one colour; so your dog has 2 types of cones, we have three, and pigeons have 5.

Now, as I said under optimal conditions we can see a million or so colours but for some of us, we either lack a cone or they are deformed. When this happens to you, we say you are colour-blind. Now in theory any one of the cones could be deficient but in humans mostly the red or green cones are defective. It is also known that cone colour blindness is a sex related trait; over 95% of those with colour blindness are men.

Now, sometimes cones are missing but most times they are mutated and don’t perform well but they do kinda work…in a way they can’t see red but do see pink, if the colour is intense, it becomes discernible to them. This creates a cone that is a semi-tone of the primary colours.

Although women are relatively immune to colour-blindness they do carry the gene for these defective cones. Some researchers as far back as the 1940’s theorized that some women may have the three normal cones as well as the mutant cone…making them Tetrachromatic. Dr.  Gabriele Jordan reported in an interview with Discovery Magazine that she has not only discovered a number of women with the extra cone but at least one of them actually has ‘super vision’ because of it. Research subject named cDa29 (not her real name) passed a test created to distinguish the active fourth cone.

The test was relatively simple; the subjects were placed in a dark room and flashed three coloured circles. For people like you and me, the three circles would look like the same colour but to cDa29, they were not the same.

Only one of the 25 tested showed an extra working cone but it is calculated that up to 12% of the female population may have this extra cone. So, the next time you think about having an argument with a woman remember she may literally be a mutant and see more than we can.

Now, of course the same warning should be applied but it is interesting that as a species it appears we may still be evolving even in how we see the world.

Reference:

The Humans With Super Human Vision
The woman with superhuman sight

Posted in Blogs, Don's Blogs | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Sex sell music…DUH!

Posted by Don McLenaghen on July 6, 2012

A recently published meta-study purported to prove what everyone already knew, sex sells. One study that tracked the number of ‘reproductive messages’ in the billboard top 10 for Country, Pop and R&B, showed that 92% made at least one reference to reproduction with the rest as a whole making an average of 10.49 references.

This study was a lyrical analysis of songs on the billboard in 2009. What qualified as ‘reproductive messages’ fell into 18 categories ranging from “Any explicit, implicit, implied or slang reference to genitalia” to “Commitment and Fidelity”.

On the surface, we all kinda figured this was true. Continuing in the obvious, but perhaps good to confirm, Country songs had an average reference rate of 5.96 while R&B had a whopping 16.77. Now when I first read this article I was thinking R&B was Barry White and BB King…so was surprised by the extreme references. However as I read on, R&B included Hip-Hop and Rap…so, THAT explains it, at least from my ill-trained ears perspective.

Country songs made reference most often to commitment, parenting and rejections, again corresponding to my stereotype. While R&B referenced sex appeal, sex acts and resources most often; Resources being like money and possessions. Pop focused on sex appeal, reputation and ‘short term strategies’.

Another study, which compared the sex references of charting songs vs. non-charting songs for an artist also showed that sex sells. That charting songs had almost twice as many ‘reproductive references’ than non-charting songs.

A third study attempted to test the hypothesis over time. They compared ‘top ten’ lists from selected years from 1959 to 2009. This showed a relative stability over time. Interestingly Pop started out with fewer references than Country and R&B but all three were about equal by the 1970s. Then in the 90’s, again to no-one’s surprise I suspect, R&B (with the advent of Hip-hop) skyrocketed in reference, having four times more references now than in 1970.

The last study attempted to push back the clock by analysing operas and art songs going as far back as 1597. This showed a difference in category distribution, none the less they make a similar number of references as modern songs.

The conclusion of the study, if the music has been and continues to be an avenue of evolutionary reproduction, that we, at least partly, are attracted to songs that re-enforce themes of reproduction.

Now there were a number of significant issues with these studies. First off, some of the terms that were deemed ‘reproductive’ included mentions of “Money”…perhaps because it’s a sign of partner fitness? Some categories like ‘rejection’ see less re-enforcing reproduction, than arguing against it. Listen to any number of Country and Western songs and you will get the idea the ’partnering up’ and ‘reproduction’ always end in heart ache and best avoided.

Also, if it’s an evolutionary advantage…to whose advantage is it, the writer, the performer, the listener? Not to mention the reverse correlation argument. That, again relying on stereotypes, as an performer becomes more popular their ‘reproductive encounters’ increase, thus when they write the themes lyrics; they write what they know…sex… also their writing skills increase meaning the songs are more likely to be top of the charts. A self-fulfilling prophecy

But these are perhaps niggling issues.

References:

Posted in Blogs, Don's Blogs | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Radio Freethinker Episode 173 – Dis-Education Edition

Posted by Don McLenaghen on July 3, 2012

This week:

- Hitting kids crazy,

- What’s to hate about standardized testing, and

- Dis-education – A look at the harms of Christian home schooling

Download the episode here!

Topics:

Hitting you kids crazy

We talk about a new study about the correlation between mental illness and levels of corporal punishment on children.  

Find out more:

What’s to hate about standardized testing?

Responding to an article published in Washington Post, we discuss the pros and cons of standardized testing. And yes, there will be an exam on this.

Find out more:

Dis-education – A look at the harms of Christian home schooling

We take an extended look at the ACE (Accelerated Christian Education) curriculum and what some home schooling text-book are actually teach our children about the physical sciences as well as the social sciences.

Find out more:

Skeptical Highlights:

Mind Lab

“Mind Lab,” laboratory of the mind, houses four short introductory movies and sixteen trials with those you can experience visual phenomena and illusions used for study in psychological experiments.

Mind Lab

WELCOME TO SKEPTICISM 101!

The Skeptical Studies Curriculum Resource Center –  Skeptic.com has released a new resource for teachers and skeptics for class rooms and public education. THE SKEPTICAL STUDIES CURRICULUM RESOURCE CENTER its a comprehensive, free repository of resources for teaching students how to think skeptically. This Center contains an ever-growing selection of books, reading lists, course syllabi, in-class exercises, PowerPoint presentations, student projects, papers, and videos that you may download and use in your own classes.

SKEPTICISM 101

Posted in Show notes | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Radio Freethinker Episode 171 – Living Wage Edition

Posted by Don McLenaghen on June 19, 2012

This week:

– Chinese rockets,

- Neanderthal painters,

- The crime of atheism,

- Reproductive music,

- The poor and working poor (Part 2 of 2 interview with Iglika Ivanova)

Download the episode here!

Topics: China’s rockets

China launched a manned mission Shenzhou 9 to their orbiting space station Tiangong 1. We talk about the future of China’s space program.Find out more:

Neanderthal painters

Resent research pushed back the date of the earliest cave art to about 41,000 years old. The new twist is homo-sapiens were thought to be the only species to create cave art but humans were not suppose to have arrived in the region until 35,000 years ago. Some people are now speculating that Neanderthals may have been the artist.Find out more:

The crime of being an atheist

An atheist in Indonesia has been sentence to 10 years on jail for professing his atheism. A Kuwaiti man faces 10 years of hard labour in prison and feel lucky he avoided a potential death sentence for blasphemy. We discuss the criminalization of atheist around the world, the need to be vigilant and globally supportive. Find out more:

Reproductive music Research has shown the obvious that sex sells but how it manifest itself in different genre of music and the dubious link to evolutionary advantage make it an interesting topic for the show. Find out more:

The poor and working poor

Don’s sits down with Iglika Ivanova in the Radio Free Thinker virtual studio and discusses poverty and Living wage. Iglika Ivanova is a research economist at the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives for BC. Find out more:

Skeptical Highlights:

Walk for Peace

This year marks the 30th anniversary of the Walk for Peace march. In 1982, 35,000 people marched from Kitsilano to the West End calling for world peace. By 1984, the march had grown to 100,000 people. Keeping with the Humanist commitment to global peace, BC Humanist Association invites you to join them in the walk to help raise their banner and the humanist commitment to peace, respect and a civil society

When: Saturday, June 30 at Noon Where: Sunset Beach or meet up at the Sunset Grill around 11:50 am Cost: Free

Humanist Brunch for Peace?

The BC Humanist Association doesn’t want to you walk on empty stomachs, so before the march, they are planning to meet at the Sunset Grill for brunch at 10:00 am. Afterward, they will join the march which departs at noon and wraps up at 2pm at Sunset Beach for entertainment, music, and celebration.

Please RSVP if you plan to join them for brunch (so they can confirm our reservation) RSVPs close on Wednesday, June 27th.

When: Saturday, June 30 at 10:00 am Where: Sunset Grill (Yew and York Street) Cost: Whatever you order off the menu

Aan’s Legal Defence Fund

Atheist Alliance International has launched an appeal for donations to help pay for Aan’s legal costs and to support the Aan family’s living expenses while he is in jail.

CFI Transnational wants to make the voices of those who support Alexander loud and clear to the Indonesian government. The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) is organizing a letter-writing campaign on Alexander’s behalf, and CFI urges you to take part. They have created a custom letter which you can sign or add to and add your voice to those fighting for Aan’s freedom.

Please support Atheist around the world in their struggle against persecution by donating here.

Posted in Show notes | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

South Korea Creationist Controversy

Posted by Ethan Clow on June 13, 2012

In all time science fails committed on a national scale, this one has to be near the top. South Korea has banned evolution from its text books across the country, giving into pressure from creationists.

Nature reported on this shocking national “dumbening” (my words) of S. Korea.

It began when a petition to remove references to evolution from high-school textbooks succeeded last month after the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MEST) revealed that many of the publishers would produce revised editions that exclude examples of the evolution of the horse or of avian ancestor Archaeopteryx. Not surprisingly, the country’s leading biologists were not consulted.

The campaign was led by the Society for Textbook Revise (STR), which aims to delete the “error” of evolution from textbooks to “correct” students’ views of the world, according to the society’s website.

The STR is an independent offshoot of the Korea Association for Creation Research (KACR), according to KACR spokesman Jungyeol Han. Thanks in part to the KACR’s efforts, creation science — which seeks to provide evidence in support of the creation myth described in the Book of Genesis — has had a growing influence in South Korea.

In a 2009 survey conducted for the South Korean documentary The Era of God and Darwin, almost one-third of the respondents didn’t believe in evolution. Of those, 41% said that there was insufficient scientific evidence to support it; 39% said that it contradicted their religious beliefs; and 17% did not understand the theory. The numbers approach those in the United States, where a survey by the research firm Gallup has shown that around 40% of Americans do not believe that humans evolved from less advanced forms of life.

About half the people of South Korea practice religion, of which the two most popular are Christianity and Buddhism.

Specifically, references to Archaeopteryx (one of the most famous transitional fossils ever) have been removed. The Society for Textbook Revision also plans to have references to human evolution and finch beaks as well.

As I was reading more about this story I saw a few comments from South Koreans who were taking issue with some of the phrasing of the story. A few have suggested this is at most a hollow victory for creationists. They attest that evolution will still be taught in South Korean high schools and the removal of material from the text books is small in comparison to the amount of science that is being taught.

I can understand that. This clearly isn’t a death blow to science. It’s not like universities are being closed down and biologists are being fired and locked up in prison. That being said, this is a big deal. We’ve seen the direction that creationist activists in the US have been working to undermine the science in America. They frequently infiltrate school boards and rely on support from their conservative religious public to help them manipulate the system.

They also disguise their attack as scientific criticism, referring to creationism as “creation science” or “intelligent design”. These tactics are meant to sew doubt amongst moderate believers. Give them the impression that perhaps there is scientific debate about evolution. This manufactured controversy then fuels more “revision” and “debate” which further drives this wedge of misunderstanding and undermines the teaching of evolution.

South Koreans should be very worried about this and not try to shrug this off as a small victory for creationists.

I saw something else while I was researching this. Have you heard of the TIMSS? Beginning in 1995 and every four years thereafter, The Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) has been conducted. TIMSS tests fourth, eighth and 12th grade students around the globe on both science and mathematics and the huge data set allows knowledge levels to be compared by country.

In science, students in the United States ranked third at the fourth grade level but fell to 17th at the eighth grade level and rose slightly to 16th at the 12th grade level. Students from South Korea, in comparison, were first and fourth in fourth and eighth grade, respectively. (South Korea didn’t test their 12th grade students.)

to quote Dr. Michael Zimmerman in his article on the Huffington Post

“Koreans will soon realize that when biology education removes evolution as the organizing principle for the discipline, students will no longer be able to make sense of the science. Without evolution serving as the central idea tying all facets of biology together, all that’s left is a collection of random facts and experiments. Teaching biology without evolution is akin to teaching history simply by asking students to memorize dates. No context, no integration of ideas, no learning.”

Posted in Blogs, Ethan's Blogs | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Pseudo Censorship

Posted by Don McLenaghen on January 9, 2012

A University of Louisiana professor is suing his university for violation of his first amendment rights by both criticizing his methods as well as preventing him from teaching

The first anti-vaxxers

Professor John Oller Jr., who worked in the Communicative Disorders Department, claims the Dean of Arts became hostile to his theories and systematically excluded him from teaching students. There have been reductions of his class size, a banning of his self-authored textbook, a lack of lecture opportunities and, according to Oller, a general ostracization by his fellow professors. Communicative Disorders Department deals with topics like Autism, Dyslexia and learning disabilities that affect communications. Oller specializes in sign language but more recently has focused on Autism. In 2010 he published a book – Autism: The Diagnosis, Treatment, & Etiology of the Undeniable Epidemic. The forward is written by Andrew Wakefield.

In the book, he promotes the false link between vaccination and the supposed ‘autism’ epidemic. Remember, his expertise is in linguistics not immunology or even biology.  There is more; he is also a believer in Intelligent Design and Creationism. He has spoken many times to the Louisiana legislature as an expert to promote the teaching of ID in Louisiana high school biology curriculum.

Oller, when presenting himself to the legislature, is seen as a doctor, as a member of the faculty of the University of Louisiana…using this position of respectability and authority, he gave testimony on a subject matter (biology/evolution) that he has no expertise. As a public representative of the university, this has a direct impact on the image and credibility of the university in general and the faculty of Communicative Disorders directly.

Oller is also a tenured professor…that is, unless he kills a student, he cannot be fired. Usually tenure protects professors from inappropriate persecution, however occasionally the discrimination is warranted, as in this case. Oller has used his academic and teaching platform to espouse his outlandish theories about both the causes of autism and the belief it’s an epidemic…theories in fields that are not his area of expertise. It is because of this that the department attempted to limit the damage he could do in his attempt to pollute students minds. If he had limited his teaching time…his lectures to discussing aspects of overcoming communication deficiencies of those affected by autism…maintained his comments to disorders that affect communication; the position of the dean would be weak.

The Dean and several faculty members (there does not seem to be any faculty that support Oller) mention that on several occasions they have had to deal with issues arising from Oller’s teaching and that they had been told by many his presence hurts the department’s credibility. Again, Oller is welcome to his own personal opinions that he may express and promote on his personal time; however if he uses his academic position to forward his cause…misusing his credential by implying knowledge in topics he does not have credentials…this transforms his personal activities to activities that have implications for the university…a transformation that gives the university a say (veto?) in how he presents himself in those occasions.

Evolution of the Creationist

He is, in part, being defended by the ADF – Alliance Defence Fund, a servant organization that provides the resources that will keep the door open for the spread of the Gospel through the legal defense of religious freedom, the sanctity of life, marriage and the family. Sorry for the ad hominem…

Okay, I think we have three issues here – is he competent to teach his subject, does his professional activities outside teaching (and outside the university) provide the university justification for workplace actions and lastly does his private activities provide the university justification for workplace actions?

Now, on the first case, Oller was hired to teach about methods of communications and issues arising from that. He was NOT hired to comment, speculate or imply in his capacity as an instructor on the root causes of Autism. Now, instructors are often give some leeway to provide ‘editorial’ comment in class (take any class in political science or economics and you will hear at least one tangential theory from your professor); that said it is unclear specifically how far Oller expounded on his ‘theories’ in class but considering his self-authored textbook, it does appear to be more than a passing comment…to the point where is appears to be a central tenet of his instruction. So, on this ground the university was with its rights to ‘silence’ him.

On the second grounds, his promotion of both anti-vaccination and creationism would involve the university if he gave such lectures through the university lecture circuit or in off-campus activities where he identified himself as both an expert on subject he did not actual have accreditation AND affiliated himself with the university.  In doing this, and again it has been claimed by the faculty that he did this not irregularly, he not only risks his own professional reputation but also that of the faculty and university he is associated with. Again, it seems the university has a right to censor his activities as best they can.

On the last point, where he promotes his ‘wacky’ ideas on his own time as ‘just a regular citizen’; although I find his views offensive and dangerous; I do not think the university has the right to interfere with these aspects of his life. IT may, as collateral damage, tarnish the image is a report Googles his name and discovers he is a faculty member but that is not the offence of Oller. However, it seem Oller was not content to limit is activities to ‘private citizen’ acts but used the weight (and thus the prestige) of both his position and his association with a credible institution to make his outlandish remarks.

It’s a shame he will be used in future as an argument against the tenure system. It has it faults but it does provide academics the freedom to be a counterbalance to the establishment; however when one wishes to be counter-establishment there is a greater weight upon them to ensure their views can be backed up with evidence and that they are not a throwback to a disproved and discredited point of view.

Posted in Blogs, Don's Blogs | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Engineering Enzymes: Steps in the Right Direction

Posted by Jenna Capyk on December 6, 2011

Enzymes: you’ve heard me rave about their incredible abilities before and you’ll hear it again. These specially-abled proteins can perform in microseconds all kinds of nifty chemistry that would otherwise take centuries or even millennia. In order to accomplish their specific chemical tasks, each enzyme has been honed by thousands of years of evolution to have the specificity and chemical capacity necessary to keep all biological systems alive and ticking.

Of course, scientists, with their big egos (kidding) aren’t going to be out-done by natural selection. Oh no, they have to go ahead and make their OWN enzymes. Really, a group of scientists form the University of Michigan reported this week in Nature Chemistry that they’ve managed to create an enzyme “de novo” (read: from scratch) that is able to perform the same chemical reaction as one of our own enzymes.

What enzyme did these scientists create? They created a whole new enzyme, but its reactivity is based on human carbonic anhydrase II. This enzyme takes carbon dioxide and water and spits out carbonate and protons. Like all enzymes, the natural carbonic anhydrase has a specific shape that contains a small location called the active site and this is where the chemistry happens. The scientists in Michigan came up with an entirely new shape, totally new scaffold, and stuck in something that looks a bit like the carbonic anhydrase active site. The result: it works. Well, it is able to perform the same carbon dioxide transformation as well as another reaction that carbonic anhydrase catalyzes. How well does this frankinenzyme do what it was literally designed to do? About 550 times less well than the natural enzyme, but to be fair, natural evolution has had a lot longer to work on it.

Now, you might argue that this type of research is completely unnecessary: wasting money to reinvent the wheel. Why would anyone ever spend tons of time and resources on designing an enzyme, from scratch no less, that is far less efficient than an enzyme that already exists in nature? If you made this argument, however, I would argue that your argument is wrong. This work is an incredibly interesting and important step forward in our understanding of how enzymes work. You can tinker with an engine all you want, but you won’t really understand one (or so I’m told) until you put it together from the individual pieces. The same is true for enzymes. By starting from scratch and designing this protein from the bottom up, these scientists are testing our understanding of the fundamental principles governing enzyme function. The fact that this totally synthetic protein is able to perform the exact chemistry it was designed to catalyze demonstrates that we have a decent grasp on the basics of how enzymes work, and that we can apply these concepts to create proteins that perform specific reactions.

As mentioned above, the specific reaction that this novel enzyme performs is already catalyzed by a natural enzyme. In fact, it’s catalyzed really quickly by a natural enzyme. So why did this group decide to target a reaction that we already have in our biological tool-belt? The answer is that they needed something to compare it against. The natural enzyme is kind of a benchmark that we can work toward. Using this standard enables scientists to create what can then be deemed an “efficient” enzyme. Without having a natural enzyme to compare it to, there’s no way to tell how fast the chemistry really has to be to be considered “good”. Having this benchmark allows these scientists to evaluate their progress with a realistic goal in mind.

So where does this type of research lead? This progress represents a really interesting development because it is moving toward creating brand-spanking-new enzymes to perform chemistry that is not already covered by naturally evolved enzymes: think breaking down Styrofoam, or any number of other human-created chemicals nature has a tough time getting rid of. Scientists have been working on the same problem by altering existing enzymes, but creating them from scratch might prove to be a strategy allowing for a broader range of novel chemical reactions.

Some people might call this type of research playing God, I like to think of it as playing Evolution, or at least learning from it.

Want to know more? Check out my blog post at And That’s Science! While you’re there you can read some of the other posts about what enzymes are, what they do, and how.

Posted in Blogs, Jenna's Blogs | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 252 other followers