Missionary Lizards!

How many ignorant claims can a creationist pack into a short clip?

If there’s one thing the world uses to steal the hearts and minds of our kids it’s dinosaurs.

One thing? Absurd. We have all of reality to entice kids away from the lies of Answers in Genesis.

“Hey look kids. Look at these fearsome creatures. They’re amazing. They’re fascinating. They died out 65 million years ago. They’re products of evolution. They’re just the results of chemicals bumping together over millions of years.

Come on. If you’re going to convince people that evolution is not true, you should start by accurately describing it. No one claims that dinosaurs arose spontaneously from simple chemical processes.

Just like you, evolution’s true.” They use dinosaurs to convince our kids they’re nothing but rearranged pond scum.

We also don’t claim that.

Stop and think. Why would scientists be arguing that, when it’s not true, and wouldn’t accomplish much of anything? It’s clear that this guy is proselytizing and trying to recruit followers, so if we just assume that scientists have a similar, competing motive (we don’t), how does telling someone they are rearranged pond scum serve our purpose? Or Satan’s purpose?

We use dinosaurs to call our children back to the authority of the word of God. We call dinosaurs missionary lizards because we want to give children sound biblical scientific answers about these incredible creatures.

I do appreciate that contradictory phrase, biblical scientific answers, especially given that the Bible says nothing about dinosaurs. But AiG will tell us all about it! The next AiG video linked to by the above short is titled You’ve Been LIED to About How Dinosaurs Looked, which explains how a creationist artist uses the Bible to help him figure out how dinosaurs actually looked.

The unfathomable question is why AiG chose to use this AI-generated image of “dinosaurs” on their video?

Abomination, I say! Who is lying to kids about dinosaurs now?

Humanity is not fading away

The world population stands at 8.2 billion, and it’s continuing to grow. It is not shrinking. We are adding 70 million people each year. Some simple facts:

During the 20th century alone, the population in the world has grown from 1.65 billion to 6 billion.
In 1970, there were roughly half as many people in the world as there are now.
Because of declining growth rates, it will now take over 200 years to double again.

Does it bother you that it’s going to take 200 years to fill up the planet with 16 billion people? The 1970s were not that overcrowded nor was it empty. I don’t think we gained that much by adding 4 billion people since then, especially since so many of the additions are being exploited and are suffering to benefit relatively rich people like me.

I wonder if some people are confused by graphs. Here’s a plot of the growth rate, not total population, and yes, the rate has gone down (which is good news), but that does not mean we’re losing population.

But this graph keeps Elon Musk awake at night, because he’s a very stupid person.

Billionaire Elon Musk told Fox News recently that falling birth rates keep him up at night. It’s a drum he’s been beating for years.

Musk is one of the world’s most visible individuals to elevate this point of view. Vice President JD Vance also talks about wanting to increase birthrates in the U.S.

I am untroubled by it. I am more concerned about whether my grandchildren have a good quality of life and opportunity to personally live and grow, and whether all the other children living in the here and now also have equal opportunities. Increasing the world’s population does not increase our happiness — we should care more about the quality of life than creating bulk quantities of consumers.

I also have to ask…why are so many of the people advocating for increased growth rates such horrible fascists? There was a meeting of these “pro-natalists” back in March, and these weren’t people who just love children and want to build hospitals and daycares and open up more educational opportunities and expand vaccination, all things I would consider virtuous evidence of a true desire to help a burgeoning population…quite the opposite. The philosophy seems to be strongly tied to Nazis.

A natalist conference featuring speakers including self-described eugenicists and promoters of race science, apparently including the man behind a previously pseudonymous race-science influencer account, and the founder of a startup offering IQ screening for IVF embryos, will be held at a hotel and conference venue operated by the public University of Texas, Austin.

Details of the conference have emerged as a prominent supporter of pro-natalist positions, the tech billionaire Elon Musk, lays waste US government agencies under the banner of his “Doge” initiative, with the blessing of Donald Trump.

Natalism in its current often rightwing iteration encourages high birth rates, and Musk has been a vocal proponent. He also maintains a large compound home near Austin, where reportedly he plans to house some of his children and two of their mothers.

composite image of people wearing maga caps with red stars on their mouths
‘The basis of eugenics’: Elon Musk and the menacing return of the R-word
Read more
The Natal conference website embeds a Musk post on X, reading: “If birth rates continue to plummet, human civilization will end.” Musk, who reportedly has at least 13 children by four mothers, was in recent days confronted on X by musician Grimes and the rightwing influencer Ashley St Clair over his alleged neglect of the children he has fathered with them.

The conference, scheduled for 28-29 March, is being organized by Kevin Dolan, who the Guardian identified in 2021 as the person behind a Twitter account that was prominent in the far-right “DezNat” movement, and last year as the organizer of the first conference. It is the second time the conference has been held, and once again, the speakers roster runs from provocateurs who emerged from the “fascist fitness scene” to practitioners of “liberal eugenics”.

Uh, Elon…civilization will not end if we maintain a low, stable, sustainable growth rate. If you’re so concerned about too few people, open the doors of America to more immigration. More is better, right?

Also, eugenics is eugenics. Attaching the adjective “liberal” to it doesn’t make it beneficial, you’re still making value judgments on the worth of individuals. Whether you’re euthanizing them or hiding them away in institutions or giving special advantages to people who meet your subjective criteria, it’s all the same thing — it’s an attempt to short-sightedly dictate what kind of people will be allowed to thrive.

Here’s the organizer of that natalist conference.

KEVIN DOLAN: But the topic of demographic decline clearly matters to Elon Musk, JD Vance and many others in the Trump administration, which means that the great ideas developed here can get a hearing that would not have been possible last year.

HAGEN: Dolan left his data science job in 2021 after his anonymous Twitter account was exposed. Among other things, he’d used it to promote the racist notion that white men are superior to other races and women. After getting doxxed, Dolan continued sharing his thoughts about how society should be ordered on his podcast.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

DOLAN: We’re expected to lie about the existence of these hierarchies all of the time. And if our goal is to rehabilitate hierarchies of nature, then the best place to start is the most fundamental natural hierarchies, which are found in the family. And that brings us back to where we started, with selective breeding.

What natural hierarchies? Nature is more of an anarchist collective, without a big boss deciding who benefits from selective breeding. Nature does not follow any human ideology, so it’s fallacious to try and attach one to it, or worse claim that humans should follow your biased interpretation of how it ought to work.

LISA HAGEN, BYLINE: Simone Collins, in her thick-rimmed, round glasses, is one of the more visible faces of pronatalism – on purpose.
SIMONE COLLINS: My whole entire, like, Etsy getup right now, it’s intentionally cringe.
HAGEN: She’s here at Natal Con in her signature look, which she describes as techno-puritan.
COLLINS: There should obviously be more cybernetics in my outfit, but we are combining, like, chunky hipster glasses and a lot of modern equipment with a bonnet and linen clothing.

Some of the more prominent faces in this movement are Malcolm and Simone Collins, a pair of dorks who complain about “demographic collapse” (whatever that undefined disaster is) while saying that oh, no, they have nothing to do with those horrible people running the conferences they attend. They gave the keynote speech at the Austin natalist conference!

Image is everything to them. The Collinses are quick to verbally denounce fascists and the far right, but then you have to look at what they do: they ally themselves with people like Charles Haywood.

CHARLES HAYWOOD: And generally, women should not have careers. They should be socially stigmatized if they have careers.

HAGEN: That’s Charles Haywood at the first Natal Con a couple years ago. This year, he’s behind the scenes as a sponsor. He made his money as a shampoo magnate. Haywood blames birth rate declines on feminism and the overturning of what he sees as natural hierarchies of gender and race.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

HAYWOOD: The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and its progeny are probably the single most destructive set of laws in American history, and all should be wiped forever for the history of this nation.

They can tell me they’re progressive and good people when they get around to denouncing that guy and all the racist/misogynist/neo-nazi scum that form their audience.

I should also mention the incident that put them in the news a while back when Malcolm Collins slapped his son Torsten in the face.

Torsten has knocked the table with his foot and caused it to teeter, to almost topple, before it rights itself. Immediately – like a reflex – Malcolm hits him in the face.

It is not a heavy blow, but it is a slap with the palm of his hand direct to his two-year-old son’s face that’s firm enough for me to hear on my voice recorder when I play it back later. And Malcolm has done it in the middle of a public place, in front of a journalist, who he knows is recording everything.

Oops, the mask slipped for a moment. It’s OK, it was never a very convincing facade that they’ve put up, anyway.

Spider season begins

I told you I was running away from home this afternoon! I was walking for 2 or 3 hours, and now my quads are killing me–I’ve been sedentary for too long. I didn’t have much luck finding any interesting spiders, but the bushes are alive with spider food, swarms of gnats and midges, and if you feed them they will come.

As soon as I got home, of course, I find a spider on my garage door. It’s a very small Attulus fasciger, and it has been hunting successfully. That’s a midge of some sort, totally wrecked in the spiders jaws.

Asiatic Wall Jumping Spider

More will be coming. It is that time of year. Hooray!

Have mercy!

I think I’ve got my final exam written — it’s an online exam, automatically graded, due on Friday, but I’ve posted it already. The students will have no excuses, they’ve got oodles of time, but I’m being absolutely rock-solid rigid on the due date. If they post it at 12:01 on Friday they get nothing, not one point.

I’m drawing a line here, finally, because the classes I thought were done (Yay! Relax!) suddenly received an influx of late submissions. “Here’s my lab report I forgot to turn in last March, can you grade it now and give me credit?” I’m such a pushover that yeah, OK, I’ll let it slide in, and so I’ve been grading old papers and catching up all over again. Now I’m behind where I thought I was.

There’s only one thing to do: run away. The sun is shining, the sky is blue, I’ve been sitting on my butt reading teeny-tiny print on my computer all morning, so I think I’ll flee the house and walk to a park and optimistically look around for spiders. Anything but thinking about these classes that I want done.

Bye!

Mix Harvard and the NY Times to get perfect mush

Harvard privilege + NY Times centrism gets this kind of crap published: I Teach Computer Science, and That Is All. It’s an op-ed by a clueless Harvard professor explaining that while it’s deplorable that Trump is dismantling the educational system in the US, the fault lies with those professors who bring their politics to work.

Nothing justifies the unwarranted attacks by the Trump administration on universities as a whole and on my institution in particular. I am proud of Harvard’s leadership for resisting the impossible demands made of it. I also believe these attacks are enabled by the lack of popular support for universities. We academics should look at how we contributed to this erosion of trust by allowing the blurring of the lines between scholarship and activism.

In recent years the mantra of bringing your whole self to work has replaced the old notion that you should leave it all at the door. This movement has had some positive outcomes. Ensuring everyone feels included and has access to mentors and role models can be crucial to attracting and retaining talent.

Some have taken it too far, letting the personal and political overtake the professional, which has led to pressure on businesses to take positions in matters outside their domain. Makers of business software weighed in on elections. Google employees staged a sit-in over Gaza. Right-wing activists began a boycott of Bud Light after it was featured in a transgender influencer’s promotional social media post. The result is that people who disagree with one another find it hard to work at the same company or buy the same products, increasing the problem of polarization.

Oh, yeah, the real problem here isn’t Republican politics, it’s that Google employees thought genocide was bad and Budweiser briefly featured a trans person in an ad. That’s polarizing! We can’t can’t confront and conflict with terrible ideas and actions, that’s not the university’s job. (Except…it is.)

It wouldn’t be a NY Times op-ed without a healthy dose of both-siderism.

On the extreme right, the same idea has taken hold in government, where the very notion of a nonpartisan public servant is threatened, and those deemed insufficiently loyal have been fired. Both versions, on the left and the right, are toxic.

On the one hand, having a trans woman in an ad; on the other, boycotts, death threats, and Kid Rock shooting up beer cans with an assault rifle. Both equally evil! On one hand, Google employees peacefully protesting their employers’ policies; on the other, Israel bombing and killing civilians. We’re supposed to be confused about these two entirely equivalent actions. I have to conclude that any idiot can become a Harvard professor, and the NY Times will happily publish any waffle they shit out.

And this is how he teaches.

You might think I can avoid politics in the classroom only because I am a computer scientist. This is not the case. Faculty members who are determined enough can inject politics into any topic, and after all, computer science has brought huge and significant changes to society. The interaction of computer science and policy sometimes arises in my classes, and I make sure to present multiple perspectives. When I teach cryptography, a topic at the heart of the tension between privacy and security, I share with my students writings by former National Security Agency officials as well as “The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto.”

In fact, I believe that the lessons students learn from computer science (and science in general) can make them better citizens. Trying and failing to solve hard problems teaches students that there is such a thing as an objective truth and our first attempts to find it are often wrong.

Oh. So he’s the guy who has been teaching that imaginary pseudophilosophical claptrap about there being no such thing as truth. Now everyone can stop picking on post-modernism and go after the Harvard computer scientists instead. He teaches cryptography, a subject that he considers himself an expert in, but he can’t say anything about the dangers of crypto, because that would be political, and professors shouldn’t have political opinions.

OK, I don’t know much about crypto, but then he gives examples I’m more familiar with.

All academics are experts on narrow topics. Even when they intersect with the real world, our expertise in the facts does not give us authority over politics. Scientific research shows that vaccines work and climate change is real, but it cannot dictate whether vaccines should be mandated or fossil fuels restricted. Those are decisions for the public, with the scientific evidence being one factor. When academics claim authority over policy, the result is not an increased effect on policy but decreased trust in academia.

That is insane. College professors do not have direct power, so the idea that they “dictate” anything is nonsensical — all we can do is inform and encourage people to use their knowledge wisely. Vaccines WORK, hell yes they do, and we can confront our students with the data and evidence and experiments that show that they are effective and save citizens’ lives, and further we can show that bad policy, like that perpetrated by that grand fraud, Robert F. Kennedy jr., will not work and will kill people, so for a biology professor to sit on their hands and refrain from stating the truth is a criminal neglect of their responsibilities. Hush now with that science and facts and history — it’ll make people distrust academia, because we keep saying that your misconceptions and errors are wrong.

But that is our job.

The author, Boaz Barak, is an Israeli, and serves on Harvard’s Presidential Task Force on Combating Antisemitism and Anti-Israeli Bias (he seems to avoid saying where he stands on anti-Palestinian bias) so he’s a hypocrite. He’s happy to denounce all those academic activists who are eroding the public’s trust in the universities by taking a stance on the politics he disagrees with, but he himself thinks that his politics are great and good, and that no one should be offended by them.

I might disagree with his politics, but I don’t think he should be fired for holding them. I think he should be fired for being a colossal hypocritical dumbass who can’t think his way out of a soggy paper bag.

1/3 done

It’s been a heavy grading day, but at least I can say I’ve got one of my three classes done, and it was the largest one. Can I get the other two done tomorrow? Before I go to the local humane society fundraiser in the evening? Yes, I will. It shall be done.

I wish I could make stuff up and call it science

I took a break and went looking for some light entertainment, which is reliably discovered in the fringes of arXiv. Here we go: Ground to Dust: Collisional Cascades and the Fate of Kardashev II Megaswarms.

Extraterrestrial intelligences are speculated to surround stars with structures to collect their energy or to signal distant observers. If they exist, these most likely are megaswarms, vast constellations of satellites (elements) in orbit around the hosts. Although long-lived megaswarms are extremely powerful technosignatures, they are liable to be subject to collisional cascades once guidance systems start failing. The collisional time is roughly an orbital period divided by the covering fraction of the swarm. Structuring the swarm orbits does not prolong the initial collisional time as long as there is enough randomness to ensure collisions, although it can reduce collision velocities. I further show that once the collisional cascade begins, it can develop extremely rapidly for hypervelocity collisions. Companion stars or planets in the stellar system induce perturbations through the Lidov-Kozai effect among others, which can result in orbits crossing within some millions of years. Radiative perturbations, including the Yarkovsky effect, also can destabilize swarms. Most megaswarms are thus likely to be short-lived on cosmic timescales without active upkeep. I discuss possible mitigation strategies and implications for megastructure searches.

Has anybody seen a Kardeshev II civilization? Spotted any megaswarms through your telescopes? It must be fun to write papers about speculated phenomena, as if they exist.

There’s a fair bit of math in that paper, and I can see where it might be applicable to, for instance, the fate of Saturn’s rings, but I think I’ll wait on developing mitigation strategies until we actually have a Kardashev type II civilization, if such a thing is even possible. It’s a bit like guessing how a god would deal with a few billion angels suddenly showing up at the gates, and getting it published as a science paper.

Oh no, I’m an accountant!

I got up this morning and started punching new numbers into a spreadsheet. I go to work and pull up a couple more spreadsheets and start collating columns. I’m going to meet with students this afternoon and get more data that I can enter into more tables of numbers. Tomorrow, more numbers flow into my computer and I have to organize them, and then I have to to enter a bunch of formulas to normalize scores and adjust totals and double-check that nothing is missing, all so later this weekend I can punch a couple of keys and letter grades come tumbling out that I’ll then have to move into the crude, primitive tables that students can access to see if they’re likely to get into medical school or not.

This is the usual end-of-term rut: I have to stop thinking about science and genetics and pretend to put on the stupid green visor* and calculate numerical assessments. While I respect the profession, I am not an accountant and do not want to be one. I get to stop cosplaying an accountant on Monday, I think. Please end it soon.

*OK, maybe it’s not stupid, according to multiple sources.

The green visor, also known as the green eyeshade or the dealer’s visor, dates back to the late 19th century and the early 20th century. It was worn by accountants, telegraphers, copy editors, and other professionals who had to work with a lot of paperwork and numbers under harsh lighting conditions.

I’m sitting in a small room with bright fluorescent lights, looking at tables of numbers. Maybe I should get myself a green visor.

Winding down

Today was the very last day of lecture. It wasn’t even me lecturing — the students were doing presentations on ethics and and genetics. They were all very good! One of the virtues of working at a liberal arts university is that our students are good at comprehending and presenting their ideas.

I’m not going to be lecturing at anyone until mid-January 2026! That does feel good.

I’m not quite done, though. I have one lab section left, in which I’m just going to go through and make suggestions for their final lab report. Tomorrow morning will be spent going through all the papers and records for my 3 courses, so I can get their final grades together. Friday is all about grading those lab reports, and Saturday is about assembling a final exam that will be graded electronically. Then, with any luck, my summer break and sabbatical begin on Cinco de Mayo, and the university can just fade away for a little while as I spend my days frolicking with spiders.

I wish I could laugh anymore

It’s from McSweeney’s. It’s a joke.

The all-gender bathrooms will be changed to “both-gender” bathrooms because, as biology tells us, there are only two genders.
(The biology department has informed us that this is not true.)
The biology department has been dissolved.

Ha ha, it’s satire that exaggerates a potential problem, therefore it’s funny. Ha ha.

Except…it includes a link to an article on the American Association of University Professors site.

Similarly, the University of North Texas administration recently censored the content of more than two hundred academic courses, including by mandating the removal of words such as race, gender, class, and equity from undergraduate and graduate course titles and descriptions.6 These actions were allegedly taken in response to state legislation banning certain diversity, equity, and inclusion programs and practices, even though the legislation specifically exempted academic course content. While university administrators and faculty members may be compelled to comply with legislation and court orders, even where these run counter to professional and constitutional principles, they remain free to register their disagreement. And under no circumstances should an institution go further than the law demands. Yet, the examples above depict an eagerness to obey on the part of administrative officers, portending a bleak future for higher education.

Wait…is this still satire? Should I keep laughing? Is the AAUP, normally a pretty damned serious site, joking?

No?

I tell you, don’t go to college in Texas. Get out of the state as quick as you can. There may be good colleges there, but the state government is certifiably insane and will be chopping the hell out of the education system there.