Jerry Coyne lobs another bomb at the accommodationists…to the barricades!

It’s another one of those long traveling days for me today. I’m on my way to Oregon (I’m at the airport already, so don’t worry about any more accidents!), so I may be a bit quiet for a while. Which means I should put something here to keep everyone in a busy uproar for a while.

My job is done, and Jerry Coyne has done the dirty work for me. He has put up a long post criticizing the accommodationist stance of several pro-evolution organizations, particularly the NCSE.

Among professional organizations that defend the teaching of evolution, perhaps the biggest offender in endorsing the harmony of science and faith is The National Center for Science Education.  Although one of their officers told me that their official position on faith was only that “we will not criticize religions,” a perusal of their website shows that this is untrue.  Not only does the NCSE not criticize religion, but it cuddles up to it, kisses it, and tells it that everything will be all right.

In the rest of this post I’d like to explore the ways that, I think, the NCSE has made accommodationism not only its philosophy, but its official philosophy. This, along with their endorsement and affiliation with supernaturalist scientists, philosophers, and theologians, inevitably corrupts their mission.

Let me first affirm that I enormously admire the work of the NCSE and of its director, Eugenie Scott and its president, Kevin Padian.  They have worked tirelessly to keep evolution in the schools and creationism out, most visibly in the Dover trial.  But they’re also active at school-board hearings and other venues throughout the country, as well as providing extensive resources for the rest of us in the battle for Darwin.   They are the good guys.

I give it ten enthusiastic thumbs up, not just for the deserved criticism but also for the praise given to the NCSE’s efforts. As Coyne explains, they are trying to have it both ways, arguing that science is a secular enterprise, but at the same time leaning over backwards to incorporate theological arguments, an act of political pragmatism that compromises their mission. It’s a failed strategy that is leading us down a dangerous path — I already feel that there is an unfortunate atmosphere that favors scientists with religious leanings over the more sensible majority.

He also includes a marvelous quote from Charles Darwin. As I’ve said many times, Darwin was not an atheist, but an agnostic, and that he refused to engage in conflict with religion…a sentiment that I think is fair and a personal choice, and one that I think the NCSE wants to follow as well (which I would think is also a reasonable strategy). However, by favoring theism as much as they have, they have broken away from the spirit of that plan.

I entirely reject, as in my judgment quite unnecessary, any subsequent addition ‘of new powers and attributes and forces,’ or of any ‘principle of improvement, except in so far as every character which is naturally selected or preserved is in some way an advantage or improvement, otherwise it would not have been selected. If I were convinced that I required such additions to the theory of natural selection, I would reject it as rubbish. . . I would give absolutely nothing for the theory of Natural Selection, if it requires miraculous additions at any one stage of descent.

Note that what Darwin is rejecting in that statement is what we now call theistic evolution.

I freely admit to being anti-religious myself, and I would agree that an organization trying to represent all of science and promoting science education does not have to be on the same page with me (and maybe even ought not to be), but the NCSE, NAS, and AAAS have all been erring in the opposite direction, jumping merrily into bed with every evangelical god-botherer who blows them a kiss. If they are going to snub the raging new atheists in the name of religious neutrality, they should be similarly divorcing themselves from Christian apologetics.

Richard Dawkins has weighed in…and asks whether we should take the gloves off in dealing with the accommodationist position. Too late! They’re off!

Larry Moran shares a similar view.

Many people seem to be misinterpreting Coyne’s article — it actually makes much the same point I have in talks over the last year. The science classroom must remain secular — that is, it is not a place to endorse atheism or theism, or for those conflicts to take place. We should be teaching about science and science only, and let the implications of that science on culture be discussed freely outside. Organizations like the NCSE and the NAS and AAAS are supposed to be defenders of that secularism. Nobody is asking them to promote atheism. What we’re objecting to is that they have gone too far in mollycoddling theistic views, and have falsely represented science as being congenial to religious interpretations, to the point where godless explanations are being actively excluded.

I know they have a very narrow path they have to walk to be diplomatic and try to gather popular support for science education. The point is that they are wobbling off the tightrope to court the faithful — and the science they are trying to encourage is looking less and less secular.

Bad joke, bad poll

This is an old, tired joke that has just been posted on the site of a right-wing moron’s radio show. I have heard it quite a few times before, usually by smug nitwits who think they’ve delivered a knock-out themselves.

A United States Marine was attending some college courses between assignments. He had completed missions in Iraq and Afghanistan. One of the courses had a professor who was an avowed atheist and a member of the ACLU.

One day the professor shocked the class when he came in, looked to the ceiling, and flatly stated, “God, if you are real, then I want you to knock me off this platform. I’ll give you exactly 15 minutes.”

The lecture room fell silent. You could hear a pin drop.

Ten minutes went by and the professor proclaimed, ‘”Here I am God. I’m still waiting.” It got down to the last couple of minutes when the Marine got out of his chair, went up to the professor, and cold-cocked him, knocking him off the platform. The professor was out cold.

The Marine went back to his seat and sat there, silently. The other students were shocked, stunned, and sat there looking on in silence.

The professor eventually came to, noticeably shaken, looked at the Marine and asked, “What the heck is the matter with you? Why did you do that?”

The Marine calmly replied, “God was too busy today protecting American soldiers who are protecting your right to say stupid stuff and act like an idiot. So, He sent me.”

I love this joke. It’s a perfect illustration of the problem of religion. Set aside the inane caricature of a college professor made by someone who has apparently never met one, and look at the ‘hero’, the Marine. There is no reason to believe he is actually on a mission from a god, other than that he claims it. And he has used this claim to justify violence. Isn’t this the way it always is?

Let’s revise the joke. Substitute “radio show host” for “college professor”, and in the opening paragraphs, describe him as reactionary patriot waving the flag for god and country and demanding that his god strike him down if sending men to war wasn’t a righteous cause. Then have the Marine’s actions play out in exactly the same way.

Still funny? Maybe funnier? Or do you still think the Marine should still be arrested for assault?

That’s why I like the joke. It reveals the ignorance of the people who tell it, and it says much about how much of religion is an exercise in rationalizing criminal behavior.

That site also has a poll attached to it. You can tell the man is an amoral jerk by the way it’s worded, too.

One of the terrorists who planned the 9/11 hijackings is Khalid Shaikh Mohammed. While in CIA custody, newly released documents reflect that the Ron Jeremy-lookalike was waterboarded 183 times, far more than previously admitted to by government officials under the Bush Administration.

You Hear This Information and Think What?

Who freakin’ cares? He’s lucky we didn’t attach jumper cables to his nads.
84.62 %
It’s horrible, but we needed to do it to prevent further American deaths.
5.98 %
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and others should be going to jail over this.
9.40 %

That our country has engaged in torture is one of the great shames of our generation; that we still have these thugs bragging about it is a continuing disgrace. Show them what you think—the people who find this behavior vile must speak up and act.

Annals of the Texas Board of Education

The NCSE has been posting videos of events at the Texas Board of Education — they are very informative and well worth spending some time watching.

Here’s an example of the bad guys: Don Patton preening smarmily and accusing Darwinism of failing because a ‘prediction’ had failed. The ‘prediction’, as he presents it, is that the fossil record would disgorge a complete accounting of all of evolution…and he can quote biologists from Darwin to Eldredge saying that such a complete series has not been found. He ignores the fact that the actual scientific prediction that the fossil record would always be spotty and incomplete, and most importantly, that there are multiple lines of evidence supporting the idea.

To counter that, here’s historian Abigail Lustig. Notice that right off the bat what she does is point out the distinction between common descent and the mechanism of natural selection, and that more than fossils were involved: biogeography, sysematics, comparative anatomy, etc.

This is also something to emphasize: she’s a historian. The creationist assault on education is not confined to just biology—they have targeted every discipline that challenges their claim of Christian superiority and the infallibility of religious belief.

Potential retirement planet discovered for me

Those astronomers keep finding new extrasolar planets — 350 of them so far — but none are just right. Two new planets have been discovered that are almost earthlike.

Gliese 581 e is the closest in size to Earth, only 1.9 times larger. Unfortunately, it’s also too close to its star, and is probably way, way too hot.

Gliese 581 d is even larger, but it’s sitting square in the habitable zone, where liquid water would be possible. The gravity would be a killer there, but…hmmm. If it were covered in water, it could be a perfect place for squid — huge colonies of space squid in a vast ocean. And it’s only about 21 light years away, right next door! As long as I’m imagining space squid, I think all I need to do is imagine a faster than light drive, and presto, I’m there!

The fine art of religious expression

Once, religion gave us Bach and the Sistine Chapel. That was then; now religion gives us…

  • Holy Flash Abuse, Batman! You have to see the intro page for the International Congress of Churches & Ministers to believe it. Somebody had way too much coffee.

  • If your religious kitsch preferences are more old school, try crafting a god box.

    A God box is an object of intense beauty used for manifesting goodness in your life. You can buy it or build it. You can adorn it with faux finishes, faux lapis, strings soaked in glue, making loops, like spaghetti rococco, then paint it, varnish it, maybe gluing on many sparkling, faux jewels or pearls.

    You can do a collage of cut out magazine photos, or seed catalogue flowers or pictures of saints, Gods and Goddesses. You’ll come across the most beautiful articles to put on the outside of your box, if you look at graphics, posters, magazines and the calendars made by the popular painter, THOMAS KINKAID, or Renaissance poster art.

  • Web pages are for nerds. Glitter and glued pasta is for Sunday School. You are hardcore. For your art, you go to the Church of Body Modification. (Warning! Photos of people achieving god-insight through intense pain will be in your face if you click on that link!)

I get email

Yeah, crazy people write to me, too.

Hello dear Ladies and Gentlemen!

I would like inform you that Scarlett Johansson “actress” actually is a clone from original person Scarlett Galabekian last name, who has nothing with acting career,
surname Galabekian, because of adoption happened in 1992. Clones was created illegally by using stolen biological material. Original person is very nice (not d**n sexy), most important – CHRISTIAN young lady! I’ll tell you more, those clones (it’s not only one) made in GERMANY – world leader manufacturer of humans clones, it is in Ludwigshafen am Rhein, Rhineland-Palatinate, Mr. Helmut Kohl home town. You can not even imaging the scale of the cloning activity. But warning! Helmut Kohl clone staff strictly controlling all their clones (at least they trying) spreading around the world, they are very accurate with that, some of them are still NAZI type disciplined and mind controlled clones, so be careful get close with clones you will be controlled as well. Original person is not happy with those movies, images, video, rumors and etc. spreading on media in that way it would be really nice if we all will try slow down that ”actress” career development, original Scarlett will really appreciated that. Please remember that original Scarlett Galabekian family did not authorize any activity with stolen biological materials, no matter what form it was created in it was and it is stolen. It all need to be delivered to authorize personals control in Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles. Original Scarlett never was engaged, by the way!

Her close friend Serge G.

P.S. CONTROLLING ACTIVITY OF ANY CLONES IS US MILITARY OPERATION.

So, I’m sure everyone wants to know…what is the mailing address of this cloning factory in Ludwigshafen am Rhein? Are they taking orders for Scarlett Johannsen clones? Do they have any other models in stock?

Perversely brutal

All right, I like cephalopods. I admit it. So why do I find this article about hunting octopus in the Mediterranean so entertaining? I mean, the guy is diving down, stabbing the octopus between the eyes with a pointy stick, and then…

Next step: the octopus must be tenderized by slamming it against a large rock at least a hundred times or more. When its natural color changes to white, I rinse it repeatedly in sea water and drag it back and forth over a rough rock surface with a rhythmic motion. A white foam is released, and this movement must continue until all the foam disappears. When the muscle has completely relaxed, the texture of the flesh changes and the color turns to a grayish white. I grab two tentacles and pull them apart gently…the flesh should tear. Then—and only then—is the octopus ready for cooking.

What follows are recipes. Forgive me, I must be truly evil, because he had me drooling.

A refreshing way to start the morning

Ah, what can be better than a good night’s sleep, a hot shower, a cup of coffee, and finding a book review by AC Grayling on a cool spring morning? In this case, it’s not so much a review as a cheerful dismemberment and deposition of the fragmented corpse into an acid bath. John Polkinghorne has written another of those books of religious apologetics that tries to claim the privilege of scientific thought while not engaging any.

John Polkinghorne’s former student Nicholas Beale runs a website on behalf of his mentor, on which questions about religion, and the relation of religion to science, can be posted. This apparently self-published book is a compilation of 51 of these website questions with Beale’s and sometimes Polkinghorne’s answers. The questions range over creation, the existence of evil, evolution, intelligent design and most of the other familiar old debating points, plus “How does the death of Jesus save the world?”, “Why believe Jesus rose from the dead?” and “How much do you need to believe to be a Christian?”

Since these latter questions premise membership of the asylum already, I shall focus just on the various questions that touch on the relation of science and religion, because the interest attaching to Polkinghorne is that he is a physicist who became a Church of England vicar, which makes people think that he has a special line into the science-religion question. Were he a vicar who gave up the Church of England to become a physicist he would not be regarded as anything more special than sensible; but this is how the world wags.

See? Bracing! Read the whole thing to wake yourself up fully and be prepared to meet the day with a happy contempt for foolishness.

Theoretical ecology of vampires

For some reason, I find this hilarious — it’s an exercise in applying the mathematics of population ecology to the dynamics of human-vampire interactions. It’s the real deal, the actual kinds of math used by those wacky evolution and ecology nerds, all built around some estimates of the rates of vampire siring measured against the rates that Buffy-style vampire slayers take them out. Here’s the kind of thing you’ll see in the document:

i-40ab1ceba09a7ced56a36f54f4e7dc5a-vampire_calc.jpeg

I like it. In case you’re wondering, Buffy’s Sunnyvale reaches a stable equilibrium with a population of about 36,000 humans and 18 vampires.

(Hmm. I posted this in the “Life Science” channel of scienceblogs. Maybe I need to lobby for an “Undead” channel now.)