Creationists make Jen's brain go boom

This gem of a letter was published in the opinion section of our student newspaper today. It’s kind of hilarious until you realize that it probably isn’t a Poe, and this student is attending a Big Ten university that prides itself in science.

Evolutionists fear possibility of God’s existence

In reference to Ms. DeWeese’s March 31 column, thank you so much for writing on an important subject. Unfortunately, Ms. DeWeese’s approach does not permit open debate about the origin of our universe and of mankind. Evolution has many gaps that should be openly discussed in the classroom. The Darwinists are terrified of scrutinizing evolution and fear the possibility that God exists. Fossils don’t even prove that an organism reproduced, let alone evolved. Evolution is a theory that argues that everything came from nothing. Knowing this, they are justified in their fear of debate.

I thought that the foundation of science was questioning. If schools insist on teaching the philosophy of evolution, then there should be an open discussion. Darwin’s book was not called “Adaption of Species”; it was called “Origin of Species.” If you choose to believe that you came from nothing, where did you get your value? If evolution is true, then people are just an accident. Evolution says the strongest should live, and the weak should die. I believe that all people have intrinsic value because they were created by God. I recognize that my belief in the Bible is faith, just as evolutionists’ belief in “Origin of Species” is faith. If evolutionists are so confident that their theories are factual, then wouldn’t they encourage discussions about the weaknesses of evolution?

As a high school student, I bought into the ideology of believing in God and evolution. After exploring opposing arguments, I realized that belief in God and evolution are logically incongruent. A director cannot use an undirected mechanism to create. While this discussion cannot be settled in 300 words, it’s a reminder that there are two sides. Even though evolutionists will attack the intelligence of theists, there is another side of the story. It’s worth considering.

John Westercamp
Junior, School of Management

I don’t even know if it’s worth replying any more, but I feel duty-bound. I’ve had about three pro-evolution letters published since I started school here. The idea that people can spew this kind of imbecilic bullshit and not have someone lay the smack down on them saddens me. At the same time, I have physics homework to do, and the only response I can come up with is “You are an ignorant baffoon, please do not procreate.”

I have a feeling that wouldn’t help the situation much.

Creationists make Jen’s brain go boom

This gem of a letter was published in the opinion section of our student newspaper today. It’s kind of hilarious until you realize that it probably isn’t a Poe, and this student is attending a Big Ten university that prides itself in science.

Evolutionists fear possibility of God’s existence

In reference to Ms. DeWeese’s March 31 column, thank you so much for writing on an important subject. Unfortunately, Ms. DeWeese’s approach does not permit open debate about the origin of our universe and of mankind. Evolution has many gaps that should be openly discussed in the classroom. The Darwinists are terrified of scrutinizing evolution and fear the possibility that God exists. Fossils don’t even prove that an organism reproduced, let alone evolved. Evolution is a theory that argues that everything came from nothing. Knowing this, they are justified in their fear of debate.

I thought that the foundation of science was questioning. If schools insist on teaching the philosophy of evolution, then there should be an open discussion. Darwin’s book was not called “Adaption of Species”; it was called “Origin of Species.” If you choose to believe that you came from nothing, where did you get your value? If evolution is true, then people are just an accident. Evolution says the strongest should live, and the weak should die. I believe that all people have intrinsic value because they were created by God. I recognize that my belief in the Bible is faith, just as evolutionists’ belief in “Origin of Species” is faith. If evolutionists are so confident that their theories are factual, then wouldn’t they encourage discussions about the weaknesses of evolution?

As a high school student, I bought into the ideology of believing in God and evolution. After exploring opposing arguments, I realized that belief in God and evolution are logically incongruent. A director cannot use an undirected mechanism to create. While this discussion cannot be settled in 300 words, it’s a reminder that there are two sides. Even though evolutionists will attack the intelligence of theists, there is another side of the story. It’s worth considering.

John Westercamp
Junior, School of Management

I don’t even know if it’s worth replying any more, but I feel duty-bound. I’ve had about three pro-evolution letters published since I started school here. The idea that people can spew this kind of imbecilic bullshit and not have someone lay the smack down on them saddens me. At the same time, I have physics homework to do, and the only response I can come up with is “You are an ignorant baffoon, please do not procreate.”

I have a feeling that wouldn’t help the situation much.

Dominance Regulated Sex Determination

Aka, “Biology is Fricking Amazing”

My Evolution of Behavior class is full of amazing, insane facts about animals. Every day I leave that class excited to share these random facts with people, so you get some of them! While I could attempt to explain things in my own words using my notes from class, I’m going to be lazy and use Wikipedia. It probably has more information anyway.

From the Wikipedia entry on clownfish:

“Each group of fish consists of a breeding pair and 0-4 non-breeders. Within each group there is a size-based hierarchy: the female is largest, the breeding male is second largest, and the male non-breeders get progressively smaller as the hierarchy descends. If the female dies, the male changes sex, becomes the breeding female and the largest non-breeder becomes the breeding male. The fish apparently form lifetime pairs, exhibit courting behavior, and depending on the size of the female spawn about 400-1500 eggs per cycle. The expected tenure of breeding females is approximately 12 years and is relatively long for a fish of its size, but is characteristic of other reef fish.

It has been unclear why the non-breeders continue to associate with these groups. Unlike non-reproductives in some animal groups, they cannot obtain occasional breeding opportunities, because their gonads are non-functional. They cannot be regarded as helpers at the nest, since it has been found their presence does not increase the reproductive success of the breeders. Recent research (Buston, 2004) suggests that they are simply queuing for the territory occupied by the breeders, i.e. the anemone; non-breeders living in association with breeders have a better chance of eventually securing a territory than a non-resident. The probability of a fish ascending in rank in this queue is equal to that of the individual outliving at least one of its dominants because an individual will ascend in rank if any one of its dominants dies, and not simply when its immediate dominant dies.”

Or as my professor said, “What they didn’t tell you about Finding Nemo was that at the end, Nemo turns into a girl.”

Wholesome Disney movie, or insidious plot to introduce transsexualism to our children? You decide.

Warning: Girliness

Anyone who knows me will tell you that I am not a stereotypical girly girl. However, I do relapse in three main ways:

1. I’m a D cup. ‘Nough said.

2. America’s Next Top Model is my guilty pleasure TV show. I have no idea why. Tyra Banks’s insanity is always amusing, and it’s just so addictive watching girls be catty to each other when you’re not involved. I think I’m satisfying some sort of primal female urges that I otherwise ignore. Oh, and artsy pictures are a plus.

3. I hate bugs, insects, spiders, and any other kind of creepy-crawlies.

Yes, I know that I’m a biologist…but I am not a hippie/pot smoking/one with nature and all of God’s creatures biologist. Hiking and bird watching and camping are all just sort of “meh, okay” to me. I get excited over stuff like genes and evolutionary theory (I’m super cool). I’d honestly enjoy nature much more if I had a magical force field that kept bugs a meter away from me.

That being said, I found a cockroach in my apartment this morning. Not. Cool. I’m sort of glad no one was around to witness me doing the “freeze in spot and flail arms uselessly” pose, which I totally did. The nasty thing was just lying on its back in the middle of the bathroom floor not moving. I wondered why the hell it would randomly drop dead and roll over in the middle of the floor, so I got a cup to try to scoop it up…and it came back alive.

*insert flailing and squealing here*

Wtf, seriously? Was it trying to trick me? Why the hell was it playing dead? I ended up just putting the cup over it and leaving it for my roommate to dispose of…who wasn’t too happy about it. Blech. I really hope this is an isolated case, but you know what they say…when there’s one, there’s more. The apartment I lived in last summer was infested with them, and it was horrible. Every night I had Kafka-esque nightmares of giant cockroaches trapping me in my bedroom.

The worst part is I know my fear is illogical. If cockroaches were rainbow colored or shiny neon green, I would probably be poking them with sticks or playing with them. Buprestids are awesome looking. But no, they had to be twitchy and poo-colored, and who wants that as a roommate?

Nebraska Trip Mini-Recap

I was in Lincoln, Nebraska this weekend for the Midwest Ecology and Evolution Conference (that’s some exciting stuff right there). It was a ten hour drive through brown, empty farmland. The only highlights of the drive were crossing the Mississippi (took a couple minutes to figure out what that giant body of water was…doh), seeing all the cool giant wind turbines, and this gas station:
Is this seriously a chain out in the great plains? That’s the most horrendous name ever. I was giggling like a 13 year old for a while over this one.

The University of Nebraska Lincoln had a really nice campus. It was a total ghost town though…not just campus, but all of Lincoln. There were no people or cars anywhere. Did they hear the evolutionists were coming and leave or something?

Anyway, the conference itself was pretty good. I got to hear great talks by David Quammen, Svata Louda, Randy Moore, and David Hillis. Randy Moore was the winner of the Discovery Institute’s Award for Most Dogmatic Indoctrinator in an Evolutionary Biology Course, and his talk was about the history of creationism in the US. Pretty interesting, since I only knew about modern figures. Since we talked a lot about people like Dawkins and PZ Myers in the Q&A, I introduced myself as the President of the Society of Non-Theists afterwards and got a loud “Good for you!” Woot!

My favorite part was that our poster session was held in Elephant Hall, a natural history museum on campus focusing on mastadons. Their statue pretty much owns our lame Neil Armstrong statue at Purdue:
It was pretty wonderfully random having a poster session surrounded by fossils and fake elephants. It’s also home to the largest mastadon statue ever discovered (at least, according to the little informational thingy). I’m really glad these things aren’t around anymore. Except for the dwarf mammoth. That thing looked adorable, and was the size of a medium dog. Apparently the ancient Greeks used to think its skull was from a cyclops, since its nasal cavity leaves a weird hole in its head. I just sort of want it as a pet <3

They also had an Irish Elk skeleton, which is my favorite story of runaway sexual selection ever. Not to mention a gigantic armadillo thing:

In conclusion, nature is fucking awesome. This is why I love being a biologist <3

Roses are red…because they’re yucky?


A new study from researchers in Australia has found that red coloration in flowers is used to deter herbivores. Large red flowers have increased levels of cyanide, and herbivores learn to associate the bitter taste of cyanide with the color. Isn’t evolution cool?

I wonder if all red flowers are honest signalers, then. That is, do all red flowers have higher levels of cyanide, or are some just using Batesian mimicry in order to avoid being eaten as well? I smell a good research project…that someone else can do, because plants are boring.

One thing bugs me, though. The article claims this “disproves” the idea that colorful flowers are used to attract pollinators, but I disagree. Colors can be used for different reasons in different plants. Just because red acts as a warning doesn’t mean other colors aren’t used as attractors. If anything, it just adds another layer of complexity to how flowers convey information.

Roses are red…because they're yucky?


A new study from researchers in Australia has found that red coloration in flowers is used to deter herbivores. Large red flowers have increased levels of cyanide, and herbivores learn to associate the bitter taste of cyanide with the color. Isn’t evolution cool?

I wonder if all red flowers are honest signalers, then. That is, do all red flowers have higher levels of cyanide, or are some just using Batesian mimicry in order to avoid being eaten as well? I smell a good research project…that someone else can do, because plants are boring.

One thing bugs me, though. The article claims this “disproves” the idea that colorful flowers are used to attract pollinators, but I disagree. Colors can be used for different reasons in different plants. Just because red acts as a warning doesn’t mean other colors aren’t used as attractors. If anything, it just adds another layer of complexity to how flowers convey information.