We’re already up to Tropical Storm Ophelia, which is dumping a lot of rain on my house in Boca Raton, and it’s just the beginning of September. There are only six names left to use as we move into the heaviest part of hurricane season.

Another childhood myth demolished. Dinosaurs had feathers. This lends even more credence to the theory that they still walk (or, rather, for the most part, fly) among us. But unlike the case that would be if their ancestors still lived, we’re above them in the food chain.

[Via Alan Boyle]

Another childhood myth demolished. Dinosaurs had feathers. This lends even more credence to the theory that they still walk (or, rather, for the most part, fly) among us. But unlike the case that would be if their ancestors still lived, we’re above them in the food chain.

[Via Alan Boyle]

Another childhood myth demolished. Dinosaurs had feathers. This lends even more credence to the theory that they still walk (or, rather, for the most part, fly) among us. But unlike the case that would be if their ancestors still lived, we’re above them in the food chain.

[Via Alan Boyle]

I hate to keep beating on this drum, but it’s an error that many defenders of evolution make. Frederick Turner says:

…I did state flatly that the theory of evolution had been proved. I wanted it to be clear where I stood. Much of the mail I received protested about that statement. I hold to it, and hold to it not as my own opinion, but as a fact, like the existence of Australia, which is not my opinion but a fact. But I do know that there are many who sincerely, and given their range of knowledge, rationally, do not believe in the theory of evolution.

This ignores the (in my opinion, correct) position of one who believes in evolution, but doesn’t believe that it has been “proved.” This is because no scientific theory is ever “proved.” Proofs are for mathematics and the courtroom, not science. Scientific theories are useful in that they can be disproved, something that Creationism cannot.

I discussed this at length several months ago.

An interesting, and amusing, disquisition on different scientific approaches:

I started to contemplate how biologists would determine why my radio does not work and how they would attempt to repair it. Because a majority
of biologists pay little attention to physics, I had to assume that all we would know about the radio is that it is a box that is supposed to play music.

How would we begin? First, we would secure funds to obtain a large supply of identical functioning radios in order to dissect and compare them to the one that is broken. We would eventually find how to open the radios and will find objects of various shape, color, and size (Fig. 2, see color insert). We would describe and classify them into families according to their appearance. We would describe a family of square metal objects, a family of round brightly colored objects with two legs, round-shaped objects with three legs and so on. Because the objects would vary in color, we will investigate whether changing the colors affects the radio’s performance. Although changing the colors would have only attenuating effects (the music is still playing but a trained ear of some people can discern some distortion), this approach will produce many publications and result in a lively debate.

This is pretty cool. Researchers have sequenced the DNA of an extinct cave bear. They seem to be overly pessimistic about the implications of this, though, at least in my opinion:

“In hundreds or thousands of years from now, we may have advanced our technology so we can create creatures from DNA sequence information,” Dr Eddy Rubin, director of the US Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute in Walnut Creek, California, told the BBC News website.

I think that “decades” is the appropriate timeframe here. And this is the most interesting part, to me:

the scientists hope to be able to sequence the DNA of ancient humans, which lived at the same time as cave bears, raising the prospect of perhaps one day being able to “build” a Neanderthal from their genetic blueprint.

This would raise some interesting ethical issues. Would a Neanderthal be considered fully human, with standard-issue human rights? Or would he or she be kept in a glorified zoo? It might be dangerous to let them run loose, because we would have no idea what the temperament would be, and the fossil evidence of their musculature indicates that they could probably wrestle cave bears for recreation.

Just making one wouldn’t necessarily give us insight into the subspecies as a whole, in terms of its mental capacity, temperament, etc. But it would be fascinating to find out just how smart a modern Neanderthal, raised in a modern technological environment, would be.

Stephen Gordon has a couple tales of evolution.

It looks like wormholes aren’t all they’re cracked up to be, when it comes to time travel. I’m kind of shocked. Does that mean they’re implying that Star Gate SG-1 and Deep Space Nine were fictional?

I guess that explains the low attendance by backward time travelers.

Speaking of natural disasters, it’s been a quarter of a century since Mount St. Helens blew. Just a little reminder that our single homeworld isn’t always the safest place to be, and a drop in the bucket compared to what would happen if Yellowstone explodes again.