As I interpret it's purpose, "L&I" is a place to put various essentially bare links. It is NOT a forum for debating.
The non-admin mode will be dumping a link message in here soon. Perhaps others would like to do the same. We might even go so far as to try to gather past topic's links to here.
PLEASE PUT A GOOD SUBTITLE ON YOUR MESSAGE. THEN THE TOPIC'S INDEX WILL SERVE AS A TABLE OF CONTENTS TO FIND SAID LINKS.
AS ALWAYS, THIS TOPIC AND THIS FORUM IS NOT A PLACE FOR DEBATE. IF YOU FIND SOMETHING HERE YOU WISH TO DEBATE, FIND A SUITABLE TOPIC FOR SUCH, OR PROPOSE A NEW ONE.
Adminnemooseus
Edited by Admin, : Shorten Title
Edited by Admin, : Modify title.
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Add "(not a debate topic)" to topic title
Probably everything you'll ever need to rebut any claims that it is a quality film.
Do not debate this in this topic. If you wish to debate it, please see the guidlines in message 1.
Moose
Edited by Minnemooseus, : Added the "Probably" sentence.
Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment.
"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - John Kenneth Galbraith
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." - H.L. Mencken (1880-1956)
"Nixon was a professional politician, and I despised everything he stood for — but if he were running for president this year against the evil Bush-Cheney gang, I would happily vote for him." - Hunter S. Thompson
"I know a little about a lot of things, and a lot about a few things, but I'm highly ignorant about everything." - Moose
Talk.origins is a Usenet newsgroup devoted to the discussion and debate of biological and physical origins. Most discussions in the newsgroup center on the creation/evolution controversy, but other topics of discussion include the origin of life, geology, biology, catastrophism, cosmology and theology.
The TalkOrigins Archive is a collection of articles and essays, most of which have appeared in talk.origins at one time or another. The primary reason for this archive's existence is to provide mainstream scientific responses to the many frequently asked questions (FAQs) that appear in the talk.origins newsgroup and the frequently rebutted assertions of those advocating intelligent design or other creationist pseudosciences.
Practically anything you could need to defend evolution and rebut relevant ID and creationist claims can be found here. I usually just click on Search the Archive to search for whatever specific material I need. Lots of quality resources there including detailed descriptions of all the different lines of evidence that support evolution, lists of documented speciation events, lists of responses to specific ID and creationst claims, and more.
Many articles relevant to the the creation/ evolution debate and ID which are helpful for defending evolution and pointing out flaws in creation and ID reasoning. Also has a list of relevant books, and links to other relevant sites.
The Committee for Skeptical Inquiry encourages the critical investigation of paranormal and fringe-science claims from a responsible, scientific point of view and disseminates factual information about the results of such inquiries to the scientific community and the public. It also promotes science and scientific inquiry, critical thinking, science education, and the use of reason in examining important issues. To carry out these objectives the Committee:
Maintains a network of people interested in critically examining paranormal, fringe science, and other claims, and in contributing to consumer education
Prepares bibliographies of published materials that carefully examine such claims
Encourages research by objective and impartial inquiry in areas where it is needed
Convenes conferences and meetings
Publishes articles that examine claims of the paranormal
Does not reject claims on a priori grounds, antecedent to inquiry, but examines them objectively and carefully
The Committee is a nonprofit scientific and educational organization, started in 1976. The Skeptical Inquirer is its official journal.
Some of the founding members of CSI include scientists, academics, and science writers such as Carl Sagan, Isaac Asimov, Philip Klass, Paul Kurtz, Ray Hyman, James Randi, Martin Gardner, Sidney Hook, and others. A list of CSI fellows is published in every issue of Skeptical Inquirer magazine.
I was alerted to this by Carol at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/evolutionversuscreationism/ (the precursor of ). Even if you never post there, it may well be worth being a member just to get Carol's tidbits. Just be sure you're set up to receive the messages via e-mail.
Judge Jones, who presided over Kitzmiller v. Dover, is interviewed in PLoS Genetics. The fourth issue of Evolution: Education and Outreach is now available. And Roger Ebert offers his opinion about Expelled.
JUDGE JONES IN PLOS GENETICS
Judge John E. Jones III, who presided over the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial, was interviewed by Jane Gitschier for PLoS Genetics. After recounting his legal career and sketching the legal history of the creationism/evolution controversy, Jones talked about the trial itself. Describing the expert testimony he heard, Jones commented, "I will always remember Ken Miller's testimony in the sense that he did A-Z evolution. And then got into intelligent design. And having laid the foundation with the description of evolution, got into why intelligent design doesn't work as science, to the point where it is predominantly a religious concept." He added, "But Ken Miller went into the immune system, the blood clotting cascade, and the bacterial flagellum -- all three are held out by intelligent design proponents as irreducibly complex, and in effect, having no precursors. He [Miller] knocked that down, I thought, quite effectively -- so comprehensively and so well. By the time Miller was done testifying, over the span of a couple of days, the defendants were really already in the hole."
The expert witnesses for the defense were less impressive to Jones: "Another remarkable moment on the science side was Michael Behe, who was the lead witness for the defendants, and a very amiable fellow, as was Ken Miller, but unlike Miller, in my view, Professor Behe did not distinguish himself. He did not hold up well on cross-examination." And the school board witnesses for the defense, whom Jones lambasted in his decision, he described as "dreadful witnesses ... hence the description 'breathtaking inanity' and 'mendacity.' In my view, they clearly lied under oath. They made a very poor account of themselves. They could not explain why they did what they did. They really didn't even know what intelligent design was. It was quite clear to me that they viewed intelligent design as a method to get creationism into the public school classroom. They were unfortunate and troublesome witnesses. Simply remarkable, in that sense."
Noting that the plaintiffs and defendants both asked for a ruling on the question of whether "intelligent design" constitutes science, Jones said, "if you're going to measure the effect of a particular policy, in this case juxtaposing intelligent design with evolution, on the intended recipients, you have to delve into what the policy is about. What was it about? It was about intelligent design. And to try to determine the effect on the recipients you have to determine what does that concept or phrase stand for? Hence, we got into a search and examination of what exactly does ID say, what is its basis, what are its scientific bona fides or lack thereof. That opens the door for a determination of whether ID is in fact science. And that is what that part of the opinion was. ... I wrote about whether ID, as presented to me, in that courtroom from September to November of 2005, was science, and I said it was not. That it was the progeny, the successor to creationism and creation science. That it was dressed-up creationism."
Looking forward, Jones expressed uncertainty about the long-term effect of the Kitzmiller decision, commenting, "This is speculation on my part -- I don't think that the concept of ID itself has a lot of vitality going forward. The Dover trial discredited that thing that is ID. To the extent that I follow it -- I'm curious about it, but it doesn't go any further than that -- the likely tack going forward is something like teach the controversy, talk about the alleged flaws and gaps in the theory of evolution and go to that place first." He noted that creationists in both Texas and Louisiana seem to be taking such a tack. And, he noted, there is no prospect of the creationism/evolution controversy subsiding any time soon: "They gave me the last word in 'Judgment Day' [a NOVA program on the trial] and I said this is not something that will be settled in my time or even in my grandchildren's lifetimes. It's an enduring, quintessentially American, dispute."
If someone has track of a good "Intelligent Design" topic to plug this into, please do such.
"LINKS AND INFORMATION" IS NOT A DEBATE FORUM - ANY DEBATE OF THIS MATERIAL SHOULD HAPPEN ELSEWHERE.
Moose
ADDED BY EDIT: OK, I found a relevant topic place for it.
Edited by Minnemooseus, : Had an "in in" in the subtitle.
This page describes how there is a preponderance of left handed amino acids in meteorites. It also discusses experiments where this can be transferred to other amino acids.
It also has this comment:
quote:With the exception of a few right-handed amino acid-based bacteria, left-handed "L-amino acids" dominate on earth.
quote:The materials they have found include the molecules uracil and xanthine, which are precursors to the molecules that make up DNA and RNA, and are known as nucleobases. The team discovered the molecules in rock fragments of the Murchison meteorite, which crashed in Australia in 1969.
Talks about measuring the age of organic matter by the ratio of D and L amino acids (over time molecules convert L to D and D to L and end up in equilibrium ...)
Talks about a Potassium filter that needs D and L amino acids but uses glycerin as an ambidextrous one instead: "Glycine’s being the only natural amino acid that can play this role helps explain why the potassium ion filters of all organisms are identical."
the google "clip" on this site is intriguing, but requires AAAS sign in to access the article (abstract doesn't mention it) http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/summary/295/5563/2205?ck=nck "But many bacteria and fungi can turn to an alternative system that allows ... it a specific left- or right-handed amino acid or some other compound--to a ..."
and I love these little guys http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetotactic_bacteria biological compass bacteria?
quote: The neurotransmitter is an amino acid called D-serine. It's odd, Snyder says, because it differs in structure from any known molecule in its class found in mammals and other higher animals. D-serine is what chemists call a right handed amino acid. Normally, amino acids have atoms that extend from the left side of the molecule. These L-amino acids, as they're called, are the rule in vertebrates, whose biochemistry is set up to deal with these forms.
Some primitive organisms, however, notably bacteria, have a mixture of both L-amino acids and their mirror images called D-amino acids. But to find a D-amino acid in humans, Snyder says, "is unprecedented;" it's the equivalent of finding a Pterodactyl in your local pet shop.
Moreover, unlike dopamine, serotonin or other traditional nerve transmitters, D-serine isn't secreted at nerve cell endings in the brain. Instead, it comes from adjacent cells called astrocytes, which enclose nerve cells in the brain's gray matter like a glove.
The current study adds conclusive evidence to the idea that D-serine -- released from astrocytes -- activates receptors on key nerve cells in the brain. Activating these receptors, called NMDA receptors, has long been linked with learning, memory and higher thought. NMDA receptors are also known culprits in stroke damage in the brain, and have become a focus for anti-stroke research.
So they do exist, and D-amino acids are used (a) by some bacteria and (b) (at least one anyway) by humans.
This site has an interesting (and intricate) discussion of fitness landscapes.
It offers some additional discussion of some IDists mathematics regarding fitness landscapes too.
quote:The main fitness-landscape argument used by creationists against evolution is based on Dembski's No Free Lunch work. NFL is a family of theorems which (stated informally) says: averaged over all possible fitness landscapes, no search algorithm can possibly do better than a random walk.
...
quote: Evolution works in landscapes with structure. Another way of putting that is that evolution works in landscapes where the result of a search step provides feedback about the structure of the landscape. But the key takeaway here is that NFL doesn't provide any meaningful rebuttal to information, because we don't expect evolutionary search to work in all possible landscapes!
quote:Lately, Dembski and friends have been taking a new tack, which involves talking about "smuggling information". They've been using the NFL argument for years, but they've run into a rather serious problem: evolution works.
In response (there are two)
quote: The first one is, in a word, "Duh!". That is, of course there's information about the landscape in the system. As I discussed above, there's no such thing as a search algorithm that works on all landscapes, but for landscapes with particular properties, there are search algorithms that are highly successful. If you look at it from an information-theoretic viewpoint, any search algorithm which can successfully operate in a particular search space encodes information about the space into its structure. From the viewpoint of math, this is just totally, blindingly obvious.
And it's not a problem for biological evolution. Biological evolution is based on mutation, reproduction, and differential success. That is, it's a process where you have a population of reproducing individuals, where the children are slightly different from the parents. Some of the children survive and reproduce, and some don't. This process clearly only works within a particular kind of search space; that is, a search space where the survival to reproduction of a subset of the population indicates that that subset of the population has a higher fitness value.
Evolution, modeled as a search, requires certain properties in its search space for it to work. The information smuggling argument basically claims that that means that it can't work. But every successful search algorithm has certain requirements for he search-space in which it operates. By the arguments of Demski and friends, there is no such thing as a successful search that doesn't cheat.
quote:The Swedish government has announced plans to clamp down hard on religious education. It will soon become illegal even for private faith schools to teach religious doctrines as if they were true.
...
quote:Creationism and ID are explicitly banned but so is proselytising even in religious education classes. The Qur'an may not be taught as if it is true even in Muslim independent schools, nor may the Bible in Christian schools.
It struck me more of a political move than striking any blow for truth. It seemed clear that their goal was to combat the rise in home-grown Islamic extremism:
quote:The law is being presented in Sweden as if it mostly concerned fundamentalist Christian sects in the backwoods; but the Christian Democratic party, which represents such people if anyone does, is perfectly happy with the new regulation. There is little doubt that combating Islamic fundamentalism is the underlying aim, especially in conjunction with another new requirement that all independent schools declare all their funding sources. This would allow the inspectors - whose budget is being doubled - to concentrate their efforts on those schools most likely to be paid to break the rules.
In the background to these announcements comes the release of a frightening documentary film on Swedish jihadis, which follows young men over a period of two years on their slow conversion to homicidal lunacy.
Fundamentalist extremism of any stripe is a problem (though Islamic extremists do seem to present more physical danger than Christian extremists who seem more intent on destroying science education and religious freedom) and governments do need to figure out how to deal with it. It's a tough problem even to address, particularly in any society that values religious liberty and tolerance. As Tom Lehrer had put it: you feel like a Christian Scientist with appendicitis. If we hold too strong to tolerance, then they'll literally physically destroy us, but if we try to stop the madness, then we're abandoning tolerance. There must be a balance, but the trick is to find it.
{Content hidden - Links only, this is not a debate/discussion topic. If you wish such, you need to propose a new topic or take the material to another topic - Adminnemooseus}
™ Version 4.0 Beta
