Category: Science
-
First Biology, Now Astronomy…
For years, biologists have had to put up with the gnat-swarm of Creationists and IDers. Now it seems as though the swarm is moving on to fresh victims: the scientists in NASA. -
The War on Science
So, last night, the BBC’s Horizon tackled the debate over Intelligent Design. It wasn’t quite as bad as I feared, but I felt that the programme makers still held back from plunging the wooden stake into ID’s heart, where it so surely belongs.The programme gave a good slice – the first 25 minutes – to the proponents of creationism and ID to set out their stall. Fair enough.The first response was then from Richard Dawkins, who clearly is as tired as I am of IDers. His response, while heartfelt and accurate, probably was somewhat counterproductive in trying to neutralise the poison of ID, when viewed from the perspective of joe public. His words were: "Physicists don’t have to fight a kind of rearguard action against the yapping terriers of ignorance, the way biologists do". A wonderful soundbite, and spot on, but unfortunately, I fear that perception is reality for most people. Many of those who do not understand the issues would have thought that Dawkins was being arrogant in his dismissal, and hence may have thought that, at bottom, there might be something in ID.While Dawkins is then allowed to set out the reasons for refusing to engage with IDers (the debate format gives the false impression that there are two sides to the case – in agreeing to a "debate" the scientist hands to the ID side the propaganda victory that there is something worth debating), the programme voiceover then makes an odd statement: "but the proponents of intelligent design were more than ready to defend their claims". Well of course they would be, but what is being said here? It almost sounds as though the programme makers are rooting for the underdog because they have a case. And then immediately we cut to William Dembski claiming "this is a spirited scientific discussion… the problem is the other side does not want to admit that is is a scientific discussion, because as soon as they do, then we have a place at the table and then the critique of evolutionary theory that we have offered has to be taken seriously". This is clearly disingenuous of Dembski (but heaven forfend that the makers of Horizon would deign to point it out). For a thorough fisking of ID, one only has to read the material at TalkDesign.org.We then move on to Dr. Stephen Meyer at the Discovery Institute. Whilst acknowledging the fact that the institute is funded to the tune of "multi-million dollars", Horizon says nothing further about the sources of funding (a story that I feel would be an interesting one), and does not challenge Meyer’s "we have over 450 scientists who have signed a list to say that they doubt that Natural Selection can produce the complexity of life". This is a complete canard, and Horizon really should have allowed a response.Still, things were not all passed by. The central flaw of ID – that the designer creates, outside of nature, things by means that are undetectable – was pinned down by Prof. Miller, and the question of who creates the designer was voiced by Dawkins.It was also interesting to see father George Coyne – a Jesuit astrophysicist – dismiss the view that Darwin’s theory of evolution is not compatible with Catholic doctrine, followed by the observation that cardinal Schonborn’s criticism of evolution was prompted rather more by the zeal of the Discovery Institute’s Public Relations department, and not by any religious Truth.And the final word was left to David Attenborough; his quiet dismissal of ID from his perspective as a zoologist: "We would be wrong to suppose that evolution is the ultimate answer to everything… if you find something that you don’t understand, then of course you can say that it was created by a divine spirit. But that of course answers nothing really; that simply says we don’t know". And that for me is more naturally right, than the blind insistence that Goddidit. -
Ambient Intelligence
Philips Research is experimenting with something it calls Ambient Intelligence. It’s where you are surrounded in your home by a network of devices (lights, air-conditioners, entertainment systems, curtains, chairs, etc.) that all communicate with each other and are aware of what you are doing.There’s a scenario that Philips has put together to describe what storytelling to your children might be like in such an environment. Sounds more like the first step to the dystopia described by Paul Di Filippo to me… -
Transgenic Pigs That Glow
Fascinating story, although doubtless ammunition for those who think that scientists are either a) mad, b) have far too much time on their hands to be able to think up bizarre experiments or c) both of the above.(hat tip to Mike, over at CoffeeCorner, who, naturally, is worried about the culinary implications) -
Teaspoon Research
Here’s a prime candidate for a mention in the Annals of Improbable Research: a longitudinal cohort study of the displacement of teaspoons in an Australian research institute, published in the British Medical Journal this week.(hat tip to Nicey over at NiceCupOfTeaAndASitDown) -
Warning – Pedant Ahead
I’m afraid this news story brought out the pedant in me. It began with the headline – "New Aluminum Windows Stop .50-Caliber Bullet". And no, it’s not the fact that Americans use "aluminum" and "caliber" instead of the proper English words of "aluminium" and "calibre" – I’ve long given up on those sort of battles.No, what irritated me was the suggestion that scientists have been able to make aluminium as transparent as glass. That would be astounding, if true, and, of course, it isn’t. It turns out that they have made a material – aluminium oxynitride – and this happens to be transparent. This is rather like saying that scientists have been able to make a food flavouring out of the highly reactive metal sodium and the extremely poisonous gas chlorine – when all that is being described is sodium chloride – common salt.The story also contains another possible push to my pedantry. The head of the research team is quoted as saying: "The substance itself is light-years ahead of glass". Now, it may be that he genuinely meant this in terms of metaphorical distance (miles ahead), but I suspect that he meant it as an even more impressive-sounding version of the common phrase: "it’s years ahead of its time". In which case, he really should be rapped on the knuckles with a ruler. A light-year is a measure of distance, not of time. -
The Fascination of Pi
I came across a number of mentions of Pi today. First, Neatorama tips its hat to people who memorise Pi, including Daniel Tammet, who has recited Pi to 22,514 decimal places. Second, I was listening to Kate Bush’s latest double CD, Aerial, which has a song about Pi on it. In it, she recites the decimal places of Pi. Sounds bizarre, but it works. However, Simon Singh, in the Telegraph today, points out that Kate gets it wrong – she misses out 22 digits in the middle of the string. Something that Daniel would never do… -
Mentos + Pop = Whoosh
This experiment takes me back in time. When I was ten, I discovered this chemical reaction for myself. Except I used sugared almonds and Qualtrough’s best lemonade. The effect was the same. I didn’t try a whole packet at once though. Too much of a good thing can get quite messy. -
Water That Tree
With Christmas fast approaching, we will soon be installing our annual Christmas tree. The US Fire Administration has some scary videos of what can happen if the tree dries out… -
Stick to the Day Job, Scott
Scott Adams is the creator of Dilbert, a comic strip that has, I freely admit, raised a few chuckles with me over the years. He also has a blog. A couple of days ago he opined on the topic of Intelligent Design versus Evolution. Oh dear, oh dear. A more perfect example of why he should stick to the day job of cartooning I have yet to see. Luckily, PZ Meyers of Pharyngula was on hand to dissect Scott’s ramblings piece by messy piece. Worryingly, Scott has titled his entry as "Intelligent Design part 1". One can only hope that part 2 is not the pile of dogs bollocks that part 1 turned out to be.Update: Well, he’s now posted part 2. It basically boils down to "yah, boo, sucks to you, PZ Meyers". An even bigger pile than part 1, I think. Feet of clay, and all that. Goodbye, Scott, don’t bother to close the door on your way out. -
Tinfoil Research Rebuttal
Last Friday, I wrote about research that had been done in MIT to show that tinfoil hats did not work. Now a member of the conspiracy community has hit back with a rebuttal, done in fine style. Nice one, Zapato. -
Foil Hats Don’t Foil
Distressing news for paranoiacs everywhere. Wearing of tinfoil hats – long believed to be efficacious in blocking the government’s secret radio waves aimed at brainwashing a compliant populace – don’t in fact block the waves. Indeed, they may even increase the effect…Is nothing sacred? -
Bone Conduction
The Yubi-Wa is the latest mobile phone from Japan’s NTT – but with a twist. It’s not a handset, but an oversized pebble-sized ring worn on the finger. To listen to someone on the other end of the phone, you stick your finger in your ear. The sound is conducted through the finger. It’s an interesting idea, but the ring is too big as far as I’m concerned. Mind you, I suspect that ostentation is part of the attraction for the sort of people who would buy it in its current form. -
2005 Ig Nobel Prizes
The 2005 Ig Nobel prizes have just been announced. As well as some interesting research on penguins’ pressurized poo pellets (go here for more details), I see that the inventor of Neuticles has also been honoured. I wrote about these back in June, when I observed that their success probably plays more upon the human owners’ feelings of inadequacy than any emotion felt by the animal in question.Oh, and talking of feelings of inadequacy, one wonders about the writer of this piece of fanmail to the organisers of the Ig Nobel Awards ceremony… -
It Never Rains…
…but it pours. If you thought that the depressing news around the Avian Flu virus wasn’t worrying enough, here comes news that a bunch of scientists have recreated the 1918 Spanish Flu virus – one of the deadliest ever to emerge. And it that wasn’t bad enough, it appears as though the genetic sequence of the virus is being made available online. Oh, great, now any competent mad molecular biologist can recreate the plot of Twelve Monkeys for real.The thing to remember about scientists is that they’re just fallible humans like the rest of us. A white coat does not guarantee intelligence and wisdom. -
But Y’Are, Blanche, Y’Are!
"We are not one-dimensional creationists" claims Nigel McQuoid in today’s Guardian. He’s the director of schools at the Emmanuel Schools Foundation – a faith-based organisation.He’s aggrieved because he thinks his organisation is being tarred with the creationist brush, and he believes the label is unfair. He writes:The individual beliefs of our teachers and students may vary, as in any school, between the atheist and the believer, but the commitment to rigorous, critical thinking is prized, as is the sanctity of personal, free and informed choice.All very praiseworthy stuff (although that word "choice" tends to make my hackles rise when used in the free market sense – but that’s a rant for another day). But, warming to his theme, Nigel then writes:So exactly what do we say about how the world began? Put simply, we teach that there are many views of how we came into being, and from which we might derive meaning and purpose for our lives. Many would applaud such openness in philosophy or RE, but something very strange seems to happen when anyone suggests that debate should ever creep into the science classroom.Er, excuse me? Who ever suggested that debate has no place in science? The whole point about science is that it is based on evidence that has been carefully tested through the scientific method – and that includes debate about the truthfulness of the evidence. Steady on, Nigel, I think you’re getting carried away a bit here.Even though the national curriculum for science encourages students to recognise controversy (behold, citing Darwinism as their single example!), Darwin’s own modern high priests fight tooth and nail to leave him untouched and unquestioned.
Sorry, Nigel, you’ve just blown it. There is plenty of controversy in evolutionary theory, but it’s controversy that rages around scientific evidence, not faith-based positions. You’ve just given yourself away. So, you think you’re not a one-dimensional creationist? Y’are, Blanche, y’are…
-
Just When You Thought…
… that traditional film was all but dead – killed by digital photography – comes news of a German laboratory that preserves your digital photos by copying them onto film… Oh, the irony of it all… -
The Pushmepullyou Car
Our car (that’s English for automobile) is too old to have one of these new-fangled electronic key thingies. However, reading about this interesting design quirk by Mercedes, I’m not in any hurry to upgrade. -
Getting Closer – Part 2
I wrote last week about the fact that the avian flu virus is getting close to Europe.On a parallel track, the Intelligent Design meme (a "virus of the mind") has been spotted in the UK. It’s a piece written by Bryan Appleyard for the once-great Sunday Times: George Bush and the Meaning of Life. As is only to be expected, it’s rubbish. There is an excellent dissection of Appleyard’s twaddle over at the Educated Insolence blog.
Geoff Coupe's Blog 