More ways to not settle science

Coming up with a list of people who agree with your position. When I heard Sean Hannity on his Tuesday radio program bemoan the proposed $400-500 million dollar funding of climate change research for NASA by claiming that 650 scientists don't believe there is any climate change, I knew something was amiss. Searching for the source of his claim, I was led to (no surprise) the government sponsored website of Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe.

The UN global warming conference currently underway in Poland is about to face a serious challenge from over 650 dissenting scientists from around the globe who are criticizing the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore.

Look, Discovery Institute publishes a list of people who dissent from evolution. The NCSE has published an even bigger list of biologists named Steve who accept evolution. Take home message: lists don't matter, facts do.

And by the way, the 650 scientists ... turns out to be significantly less than that.

Free trip to Seattle, c/o Discovery Institute

This is not interesting:

Discovery Institute is pleased to announce two intensive summer seminars on intelligent design, science, and culture from July 10-18, 2009 in Seattle. The first seminar is for students in the natural sciences and philosophy of science; the second seminar is for students in the social sciences and humanities (including politics, law, journalism, and theology).

However, this is:

Discovery Institute will pay expenses for students who are accepted into this special program (travel, lodging, meals, books and other course materials).

A free trip to Seattle, and all you have to do is listen to some drones prattle on about biological principles about which they know little and understand even less?

Now, far be it from me to condone unethical behavior; but if a college student wanted to make things more difficult for Discovery Institute by having them waste money and time by preaching to those who know better, this would be a great way.

Plus you could take some time for yourself and explore the underground.

A quick response to Jeffrey Dach

PZ responds to the claims of Jeffrey Dach, another physician who, along the lines of Michael Egnor, is claiming that evolution is not currently sufficient to explain the complexity of life on Earth. PZ, as always does, good job, but I would like to add my own comment to one of Mr. Dach's questions:

4) The Human Genome Project showed that only 1-2% of Human DNA codes for proteins, or about 25,000 genes. These are not enough to account for the complexity of the organism. What is the other 98% of the genome's function? We don't know.

What PZ doesn't mention is that there is a lot of alternative splicing and post-translational modification going on. And in humans there seems to be much more than in some of our mammalian counterparts. That increases the complexity of our proteome greatly. Not that we need complexity to be a successful species.

Surveys aren't the way to do science, but ...

... several people seem to think that they are. You know who I mean, the people who insist that an audience vote after a debate, or an internet poll can determine whether evolution is accurate or god exists. Or if there is global warming. Well, for the last question at least, those who follow in supervidere, veritas should pay attention to this story:

[A] vast majority of the Earth scientists surveyed agree that in the past 200-plus years, mean global temperatures have been rising and that human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures.

Just how much did they agree?

Two questions were key: Have mean global temperatures risen compared to pre-1800s levels, and has human activity been a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures?

About 90 percent of the scientists agreed with the first question and 82 percent the second.

Well, that is still division though. There isn't a consensus, right?

The strongest consensus on the causes of global warming came from climatologists who are active in climate research, with 97 percent agreeing humans play a role.

Petroleum geologists and meteorologists were among the biggest doubters, with only 47 percent and 64 percent, respectively, believing in human involvement.

Petroleum geologists? Well that brings up the other canard of those who trust surveys to settle science: follow the money. Feel free to do so and come up with your own explanation for these results. For the most part, I will trust what one of the study authors said.

"[Climatologists are] the ones who study and publish on climate science. So I guess the take-home message is, the more you know about the field of climate science, the more you're likely to believe in global warming and humankind's contribution to it."

In other words, the experts are experts for a reason.

Today, I can think of but one thing:

Nel mezzo del cammin di nostra vita mi ritrovai per una selva oscura, ché la diritta via era smarrita.

Now for the last ...

Politics is more like baseball than any other sport when it comes to the end-game. Basketball, football, hockey, and even soccer all have a sense of finality as the clock winds down; there exists a point where the fans relize that a comeback or reversal of fortune is not in the cards. But in baseball, a reprieve, not matter how unlikely, is always possible until the final pitch is thrown.

I will not breath a sigh of relief until 12:01 PM tomorrow, though that won't stop me from relaxing, just a little bit, during this the final 24 hours of America's great accidental experiment. While some will take succor in their belief that the past near decade has actually been good, I will instead reflect on the few acts that have brought a wry grin to my visage.

The first ever coup attempt by the Pretzel Underground.



Birds show their dissatisfaction in a way that people can't. Or at least shouldn't.



"Heckuvajob..."



Ducking shoes almost as well as he ducks responsibility.



Fishin' accomplished.



Visual impairment is funny again!



And last, but not least.

"Here's my best impersonation of Garcin ..."



Let us hope his impersonation skills are poor.

NYT tacit approval of Ken Ham's "Museum"

First the Cincinnati zoo goes in on a two-fer deal with Ken Ham. Now the New York Times is sponsoring events there?

...I was disappointed to see Kentucky’s notorious Creation Museum listed among the attractions in The New York Times’ Arts & Leisure Weekend Promotion heralded in a special pullout section of my newspaper last Sunday

During the Jan. 8-11 event, The Times sponsors public debates and discussions of contemporary issues and touts two-for-one admission discounts at museums, movies and shows in New York and around the country.

...

This inclusion is troubling because the Religious Right is always angling to present dogma as science in public school science classrooms. It sends a very misguided message when the Creation Museum is listed in a Times-sponsored event alongside prestigious scientific institutions such as the American Museum of Natural History, Harvard’s Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology and the Lawrence Hall of Science at UC Berkley.

Yes, I am still here

Hopefully, I will return again shortly.