1. UC Berkeley is going to court over Evolution website

Comment #180717 by chuckgoecke on May 15, 2008 at 3:42 pm

I'm inclined to agree with MelM. I think that all religions that "accept evolution" as fact are just on their way towards atheism. Most likely they'll never get there, but they are trying to bridge over a fundamental incompatibility.

2. Youngest galactic supernova (not aliens) found

Comment #180709 by chuckgoecke on May 15, 2008 at 3:30 pm

I think the coolest thing about these super novae is how they pert-abate the surrounding clouds of gas and dust, blowing some areas clean, and piling stuff up in others, almost like a wind does to dust in the desert. Where the stuff piles up, new solar nebula start forming, and the asymmetrical movements within it get amplified by the ensuing gravitational condensation, and it starts to rotate. Pretty soon, there is a new star and bright shiny new planets!

3. 3QD interviews Richard Dawkins

Comment #180390 by chuckgoecke on May 14, 2008 at 7:12 pm

Abbas,
I heartily enjoyed your interview of Richard. It was brilliant! The questions were wonderful, provocative and refreshing different, as many have noted. The dialog was just great, and the excitement I saw in Richard, especially in some of the questions, how he shifted in his seat, and leaned forward, he was almost giddy to answer. This is a sign of someone really engaged, and really enjoying himself. Of course we all know Richard is great, but you brought out even more. I loved the setting, the production, and every thing about it. It goes to show that its all about the people doing the interview, the dialog, and not about the technology, or the production or the polish. Thank you so much!

4. Atheists are nice people who will roast in hell, says Cardinal

Comment #177820 by chuckgoecke on May 9, 2008 at 7:10 pm

While I'm ready for the brimstone, fire and lava(I love volcanology), I suspect hell for me will be something different. The old Night Gallery series had an episode called "Hells Bells" staring John Astin(aka Gomez Adams). Watch it here: Click Here

5. Regulating Evolution: How Gene Switches Make Life

Comment #176167 by chuckgoecke on May 6, 2008 at 6:17 pm

I have to second what jeremynel said, but add that the evo/devo folks like PZ might want to further complicate it. PZ recently had a good article about the developmental "Toolbox" full of reusable development control molecules that, in amazingly complicated ways, guide development(in his article about teeth development). Timing, proximity, concentration gradients, promoter/antagonistic combinations, others all work to guide the reading of the genetic code. Evolution has been amazingly frugal in the creation of new species using these varied techniques... sometimes. Then there's always the other extremes, of reinvented wheels, and unused appendices. Natural selection's undesigned development processes seem to be able to solve problems both with far greater elegance and simplicity and in some situations much more clunkiness than any designer could or would.

6. Record-setting Laser May Aid Searches for Earthlike Planets

Comment #176158 by chuckgoecke on May 6, 2008 at 5:42 pm

Wager: An earth classed planet with chlorophyll signature is found within 10 years.

7. Dumb and Dumber: A discussion between Ben Stein and Glenn Beck

Comment #176157 by chuckgoecke on May 6, 2008 at 5:37 pm

I couldn't even make it through episode 1. Mindnumbingly dumb!

8. The Neanderthal Debate

Comment #175173 by chuckgoecke on May 4, 2008 at 6:07 pm

I've said something like this before and I'll repeat it again, the more modern data about Neanderthals and modern humans comes in, the better I think Jean M. Auel, got it amazingly right, way back in 1980, with her book and series, Clan of the Cave Bear. A pretty good bio of her is on wiki: CLICK HERE This book, or actually the series, is one of my fav's, although I've not read the two most recent. The series is obviously fictionalized, and she jams too much excitement, innovation, and action into the few characters, but that's just to make it a good story. Parts are pretty spicy also I seem to remember. It was a bit unfortunate that the movie turned out rather crappy. I think "Valley or the Horses" and the later, more Cro-magnon(modern) human concentration books would make better movies, because of her premise that the moderns had a fully developed language, as compared to a primitive one in the Neanderthals, with mostly hand signs. The article about her also mention that besides the anthropological accuracy, the ethno-botany was praised also. I still highly recommend the books and was happy to hear she is working on a final book even now.

9. Humans nearly wiped out 70,000 years ago, study says

Comment #169304 by chuckgoecke on April 25, 2008 at 6:31 pm

I think the most significant thing about this is that it shows how closely related we all are; all modern humans. It also would explain a lot about how Neanderthal, Heidelberg, Java men, etc. all were outside our line of descent. Our racial differences are trivial, compared with our similarities. Our ancestors also undoubtedly drove out of existence, most of these other human experiments, although not necessarily directly, like actually killing and eating them, just out competing them. I think human evolution and anthropology are some of my favorite topics. I mean squids are cool, bu humans, I just have a close place in my heart for them.

10. Interview with Dan Dennett

Comment #168045 by chuckgoecke on April 24, 2008 at 1:36 pm

One of my favorite concepts that i believe we can attribute a great deal to Dan, that many who profess to believing in god actually believe in believing in god. They feel that it is good for society and their friends, and they go through the motions, but deep in their hearts, they doubt, sometimes to the degree that they have no real faith at all, ergo Mother Teresa, Ted Haggart, etc. This kind of thought process must be very common in amoungst the very pious, and thus makes them particularly dangerous.

11. Teacher Expelled Over Religion

Comment #162357 by chuckgoecke on April 16, 2008 at 6:05 pm

When this story broke, I fired off a livid letter to this women's supervisory chain, and to the Dallas Morning News letters to the editor. I'm a parent of high schoolers in an affluent Dallas suburb, so this crap directly affects me. Never heard a peep back from any of them, bastards!

12. Evolution fray attracts top scientist

Comment #162355 by chuckgoecke on April 16, 2008 at 5:53 pm

26. Comment #162211 by jimbob ...
Ah Florida--the future Venice of the USA if the science on global warming is correct. ;-)

It seem fitting that a state apparently filled with christian scientific naysayers may soon become irrelevant, due to its being either under water, or nearly so. Well, alligators are pretty smart reptiles, maybe then this silly debate will be over.

13. Victims: Pope Benedict Protects Accused Pedophile Bishops

Comment #161840 by chuckgoecke on April 15, 2008 at 7:21 pm

Owing to the reluctance of many to report abuse, I wonder if the abuse reported within the Catholic church isn't the proverbial tip of the iceberg. South Park had an episode that suggested that this priest on alter-boy abuse has always gone on. I don't know. I wonder what percent of priests were alter-boys. This would seem to be something that might propagate down through the generations, with the help of proper cover-up. My favorite line from that episode: "Sex with women, no no no, do you realize that Galgemeth females have 3 foot wide vaginas fill with razor sharp teeth"

14. Reviews of Expelled

Comment #159276 by chuckgoecke on April 11, 2008 at 8:26 pm

I am somewhat dismayed that no matter how logical and correct the rational side is in demolishing this crappy movie, the movie producers are going to benefit from the publicity. Britney spears has proven that any publicity is better than no publicity. This is similar to a bratty child or dog, acting up for attention. Their family relationship is characterized by such neglect, that negative activity is all they know. Stein, Mathis, et al are the neighborhood bratty kids, trying to stir up trouble, and make a buck(times a few hundred million). I'm afraid it might happen.

My most hopeful line from the posts today, the guys who own the copyright to the cell animation videos stolen for the Expelled movie: We expect you to keep track of the number of tickets you sell.

15. Discussion between Richard Dawkins and Paula Kirby

Comment #157296 by chuckgoecke on April 8, 2008 at 9:23 pm

Paula, Great Job! I loved how, in your honest lay-person manner, you brought out the best of what an honest lay person could get out reading and following Richard. Magnifico!

One question that was, I guess, sort of technical, was the one the chinese gal( I think from her accent) asked about why genes get their ages reset each generation? I think there is a technical answer, something about telomeres, but it escaped me right now.

16. Scientists reshape Y chromosome haplogroup tree gaining new insights into human ancestry

Comment #154755 by chuckgoecke on April 3, 2008 at 4:59 pm

Sadly I believe I recall reading that some countries, possibly Indonesia or Malaysia, are talking about forbidding their citizen from giving samples for human DNA cataloging. I think they were rationalizing it as a part of their natural resources and wanted compensation, or they were just anti messing with God work. Figures.

17. Cult leader Pyotr Kuznetsov tries suicide after realising he was wrong about doomsday

Comment #154742 by chuckgoecke on April 3, 2008 at 4:37 pm

Nice to see natural selection alive and well and working on humans today. Too bad the religious procreate at generally higher rates than the rational. Well at least stuff like this directionally evens things out.

18. CEAI Action Alert for Science Teachers

Comment #154124 by chuckgoecke on April 2, 2008 at 5:58 pm

many of us that object to the "science" used to present evolution as a fact have no recourse but to teach the lie of evolution as though it is a proven fact.

Exactly where is the "critical analysis" and objectivity used to come up with this statement?

19. Sean Carroll on the Today Program

Comment #154112 by chuckgoecke on April 2, 2008 at 4:58 pm

Best catchphrase: "a devastating argument against creationists" equal and similar to "breathtaking inanity". Just my 2 cents

20. Expelled Overview

Comment #149503 by chuckgoecke on March 25, 2008 at 6:55 pm

I plan to spend on this nugget of shit, exactly what I spent on Mel Gibson's shitty snuff heap, zero$. I like the idea of paying for another movie at one of those megaplexes, and crashing Expelled. I'd probably pay for a Disney or Kids movie, then go skoff and snort and Bull-shit cough(like Belushi). Actually, my greatest hopes are that members of the rational community, plus scientists, engineers, and teachers will all be out at the edge of the theater property, picketing this film as utter misleading crap. Maybe it won't be necessary, if the movie is delayed from opening again, perhaps it'll just die an unnatural death, sent directly to VHS(better yet Beta) for church basements.

21. Expelled Overview

Comment #149469 by chuckgoecke on March 25, 2008 at 4:36 pm

The Killer's song exerpts stolen for this film are from a song and video with an anti-immigration /vigilante minutemen theme. Note the white cowboys versus the hispanic and asian hot babes in the video, who kick their asses. Its not terribly relavent to Expelled's theme, except that politically, I seriously doubt the Killer's would approve of the use of their music by this Republican hack. If it stays in the movie, I'd be suspect that The Killers were duped, like Richard, PZ, and Genie (and Michael, and ....).

22. Discussion on PZ Myers being expelled from Expelled

Comment #148120 by chuckgoecke on March 22, 2008 at 6:22 am

As PZ and Richard discussed, I highly recommend that everybody register for these showings/previews, show up and protest, complain, etc. but in very nice and polite ways. Additionally, we should, when this piece of offal hits the theaters, protest outside, at least until we all are "Expelled". I personally would love to be "Expelled" from this fecal shitstorm.

23. Biology prof expelled from screening of 'Expelled'

Comment #148007 by chuckgoecke on March 21, 2008 at 7:11 pm

I went to the original article at twincities.com, link above, and just for fun, read some of the comments there about the original article. I was expecting some fun, and a lively discourse. I am sick to my stomach. This was my home state, and the number of utter idiots, with absolutely nothing to add to the discussion, was just appalling. There were a few good commnets, even a few from the wrong side, but ... it just hurt my brain. Interestingly, the behavior of PZ, when confronted by the officer and theater management, were independently described by two fellow attendies, and he was of course, very well behaved. Their comments about the chilling effects of having an officer patrolling about were equally priceless. I haven't read PZ's account yet, I'm heading that way next.

24. Sci-fi guru Clarke to have secular funeral

Comment #147494 by chuckgoecke on March 20, 2008 at 4:56 pm

Just as I now use the idle processing power of my Mac Mini to help science, when I pass on, I hope my organs and tissues of any value will be used for transplantation, and the rest of my body, given to science, perhaps to help a team of medical students become better doctors.

25. First 'Rule' Of Evolution Suggests That Life Is Destined To Become More Complex

Comment #146195 by chuckgoecke on March 18, 2008 at 6:27 pm

In my previous comment I eluded to increasing complexity being easy to see in the fossil record. One group that this is clearly demonstrated in, I recall(from my geology days at U or Mn, Morris, PZ Meyers' current university), were the Mesozoic Ammonites. In particular, one can see increasing complexity in the suture pattern on the sides of the shells. Ammonites are shelled cephalopods like the contemporary nautilus, but which died out with the dinosaurs at the end of the Cretaceous. The sutures are expressions of the walls formed between the current and previous body compartments, added as the animal grows. The suture patterns, which started out simple, became steadily more complex, and dendritic in later forms, through the Cretaceous. Additionally, the shells became more ornate with ridges and ornamentation. These fossils are abundant in the Pierre Shale which covers much of western South Dakota, and were the subject of my Senior Paleontology Project in 1979. (Several of my most beautiful specimens are in a display cabinet at my Republo-Christian brother's house, which were plundered from my collections while I was a grad school - if that ain't ironic).

26. Writer Arthur C Clarke dies at 90

Comment #146085 by chuckgoecke on March 18, 2008 at 3:39 pm

We have sadly lost a great imagination and visionary, in a man who also was rational, level headed, and a strong caller for reason and science. Good Bye, Arthur, Sir. I will miss you. Joyously, you will live on forever in our hearts and minds; everyone you have touched in your life.
Chuck

27. First 'Rule' Of Evolution Suggests That Life Is Destined To Become More Complex

Comment #146026 by chuckgoecke on March 18, 2008 at 1:47 pm

I can see it now.... Some intelligent designer will be attributed with pushing this drive to complexity. Rather than seeing this, as it really is, evidence of a natural process that leads, naturally to higher and higher complexity, the enemy will twist this around in exactly the opposite way. Oh well, they always do. Very interesting, if a bit obvious, to anyone who's ever looked at the fossil record.

28. Richard Dawkins on The Alan Colmes Show

Comment #143956 by chuckgoecke on March 14, 2008 at 6:10 pm

This was the first time I've heard Alan by himself. He's a great guy and very level headed, and it comes out perfectly when he's by himself. Put him with Hannity, and the avalanche of moronic drivel is so great, that Alan is overwhelmed. Alan needs to stiffen up his backbone and call the Fox morons out more often on the TV show.

29. Taking evidence seriously

Comment #137394 by chuckgoecke on March 2, 2008 at 7:35 pm

I am of course concerned about pseudo-scientific and mystical crap being swallowed by the public without any skepticism, but I'm also concerned about what I see as two misuses of skepticism. First is the distrust of well tested new technologies and products that are definitely going to greatly benefit mankind. These would be things like
1) Irradiation of food to kill micro-organisms.
2) Inserting certain genes in food crops to make them immune to broad spectrum but environmentally safer herbicides(Round-up Ready corn and soybeans). These things are tested for years before being released to the environment and food supply.
3) Cloning of Meat and Dairy animals to increase the number of highly productive individuals(been done in the plant world for thousands of years).
4) many more....

The second is the establishment medical or scientific community setting too high a hurtle of provable effectiveness in any new or alternative production or techniques.
Some examples of this I've noticed lately are:
1) Herbs - The studies of the herb Echinacea found that the herb did not prevent colds and only some studies showed that there was moderate reduction in symptoms and duration of the colds. The medical community appears to have written this herb off as useless. The proper dosing and other details of the studies may not have been met, plus it is not rational to expect anything to prevent a cold(no medicine does), caused by virus that an individual may not have any immunity for. Echinacea is something that is a cheap and has no negative side effects, and if it "may" reduce the duration of a miserable cold, I'll take it. The same could be said about moderately higher doses of Vitamins like C and E, and other antioxidants.

2) In my particular area of expertise, horticulture and agriculture, there is a constant and long running debate about organic versus synthetic techniques. In the area of fertilizers, very often the establishment of universities and chemical companies tell us that plants can only absorb nutrients in their ionic form, thus synthetic forms are just fine and all that is ever needed. Organic gardeners claim that strong synthetic fertilizers "burn" organic matter out of the soil, and reduce the biodiversity of the soil micro-organism community. Establishment people claim that there are no studies that show this happening, they see lots of micro-organisms in any soil. This particular argument is a dilemma, because who has the burden of proof here? The problem is that we don't know. We don't know what the baseline soil micro-organism diversity is or ought to be. Some recent studies suggest that we haven't even scratched the surface of what is the real range of soil micro-organism diversity. The ocean gene assay that we've read about recently needs to be repeated for the all soils of the earth, where it may be possible that moving laterally 10 feet(inches?) or vertically 2 inches results in a totally different community. A daunting task! Add to that, finding pristine soils in heavily agricultural areas may be impossible. I appears to me, that erring on the side of preserving soil bio-diversity might be smart. Thankfully, our mother earth seems able to fix a lot of our fuck-ups, but we may be reaching the limit of her abilities. Praise be to Gaia!
Conversely, some claims of organically inclined people are wildly unscientific, so I don't tend to automatically fall into their camp. In my neck of the woods, some claim that the magnetic properties of some rock powders have great impacts on plant growth. I can just say to that, "Show Me".

In summary, heathy skepticism is good, but blind, ignorant, ludditic or politically motivated skepticism is not.

30. Potentially Habitable Planets Are Common, Study Says

Comment #132479 by chuckgoecke on February 24, 2008 at 8:04 pm

I am all for SETI. I wish they would reinstate federal funding for it. My previous post was just to emphasize that it really is like looking for a needle in a giant haystack. But hopefully, there are lots of needles....

31. Richard Dawkins on five of his favorite books

Comment #132471 by chuckgoecke on February 24, 2008 at 7:46 pm

Matt Ridley - The Red Queen
Carl Sagan - Contact
Frank Herbert - The Dune Trilogy
Sir Arthur C. Clarke - Childhood's End
J. R. R. Tolkien - The Lord of the Rings Trilogy

Richard, Please, Please give us at least one novel, before you die. Carl did it. Do it for us; do it for Carl.

32. The Salamander's Tale

Comment #132448 by chuckgoecke on February 24, 2008 at 7:01 pm

This just emphasizes what I have said in another post of what an artificial, convenience term, the "species" is. Its an attempt to pigeon-hole what is in reality an amorphus genetic cloud. (being pulled around by the genes themselves, right, Richard?)

33. Evidence can't shake your faith if your faith excludes it as evidence

Comment #132436 by chuckgoecke on February 24, 2008 at 6:41 pm

His arguments are like the parapsychologist who claims that scientific observation somehow spoils the psychic energy, thus always ruining the attempts to verify the claims. I just heard that James Randi has removed this 1 million dollar challenge, having never had anyone close to winning it in the many years his challenge has been up.

34. Physicist Neil Turok: Big Bang Wasn't the Beginning

Comment #132418 by chuckgoecke on February 24, 2008 at 6:19 pm

I visited the site pulsar1z recommended, and think it very interesting. I love cosmology, although I do not have the background to "check the math" myself. However I think that breakthroughs are also possible coming from non-high level mathematics types. I just takes great imagination and maybe luck, plus lots of mental perspiration to come up with, or integrate, or synthesize or cross pollenate ideas into something that is closer to the truth. The high level math is required to ultimately check, or actually do the science, and hopefully confirm the theories. Amateur astronomy and cosmology is alive and well!

The Neil Turok's theory is similairly very interesting. I take issue with one thing he said, though. I do not believe that it would be fair or even correct to say that there is not any practical benefits to cosmological theories. The practical spinoffs are not likely to evident for some time, but thats like asking Ben Franklin what were the practical applications to his electrical experiments. The future practical aspects of understanding the nature of space-time and possible manipulation and control of it might be gia-normous(my wife remind me that the term doesn't apply to me.) I want a world with transporters and warp drive and worm holes and all that fun stuff.

35. Bart Ehrman, Questioning Religion on Why We Suffer

Comment #130526 by chuckgoecke on February 20, 2008 at 7:11 pm

I though of another reason I like my stupid tee shirt for my avatar. It so nicely highlights what a bunch of rabid, cannibalistic wife beaters living in a trailers us atheists are.... Uooops... I guess I should speak for myself.

From the underwhelming response for me to remove my avatar, I just might have to leave it for a while.

36. Bart Ehrman, Questioning Religion on Why We Suffer

Comment #130142 by chuckgoecke on February 20, 2008 at 6:19 am

Dear Mr., Ms., or Mrs. Teapot of Greatness,
Sorry you disapprove of my tee shirt pic. It's not me, although I sort of look like the guy. If I owned a tee shirt like that, I wouldn't burn it, but I also wouldn't wear it, except around certain friends. I like the pic, not because I advocate beating women, nor cannibalism, its the double-double entrandre, that I like. If you don't see that, sorry, but maybe you also might lighten up a bit. If lots of people are offended, all take the pic down.

37. Potentially Habitable Planets Are Common, Study Says

Comment #129926 by chuckgoecke on February 19, 2008 at 7:01 pm

The sad thing is that alien civilizations looking and listening for us here on earth only will have about a 100 year window of time when we are leaking radio energy out into space, basically the 1920's to the 2020's.(Out of a 14 billion year universe life and a 4 billion year earth habitability.) The rate that cellular, satellite, and fiber optic networks are replacing broadcast radio and TV, we will very soon not be leaking much radio energy out into the universe. Likewise we listeners for other civilization have this severe constraint on us, plus the possibility that many if not most other civilizations may not want to be listened to. Maybe they are worried about Borg-like super robot civilizations that assimilate other civilizations that they encounter( ie. find, by listening for), and spread across the universe like an ultra slow virus. Scary!

Maybe we should all observe the WWII poster with a GI holding up his cup and saying, "How about a nice cup of shut the fuck up".

38. Bart Ehrman, Questioning Religion on Why We Suffer

Comment #129882 by chuckgoecke on February 19, 2008 at 5:51 pm

Having now heard almost all of the show, it seems like Bart must have read Richard, Chistopher, et al reciently.
Chuck

39. Hitchens and Boteach Debate on God

Comment #125066 by chuckgoecke on February 10, 2008 at 9:21 pm

Boteach display some of the most breathtaking inanity in his misunderstanding of the science I've ever witnessed(I didn't partake in the Dover trial). Most of his arguments had the tone of extreme Zionist apology, as if Israel needs an apologist, especially one as inept and down right nasty as he. Except for about doubling my blood pressure, this debate was quite enjoyable.
chuck

40. Why Darwin matters

Comment #124215 by chuckgoecke on February 8, 2008 at 7:38 pm

Although Most of the "interesting stuff" happens within species it would be inaccurate to assert -if I remember "The Blind Watchmaker" correctly- that species selection is not something that happens and has an effect at all. This could be understood from reading this piece, and is not strictly true. I think one should be careful not to overstate one's point so as not to have one common misconception replaced by another. Clearly species selection can and does happen (some species end up in blind alleys and die off, others manage to find a path that leads to survival), although complexity itself evolves within a species.

The problem here is the term "species". It is more of a convenience term, then a precise definition(not unlike the biblical "kinds"). A species is a way to compartmentalize what in reality is a cloud of genetic traits, a cloud that is diffuse in some organisms and more sharp in others. The cloud drifts around, changes shape, and sometimes splits and rejoins with itself. If a split off of the cloud drifts away long enough, it becomes unable to rejoin with the original cloud. Sharply defined clouds would be organisms with little genetic diversity(like cheetahs), which may be more susceptible to changes in their physical or competitive environment. Larger clouds that are more diffuse have lots of variability and less susceptibility to extinction(like panthers). Really large clouds that are diffuse may have blobs breaking away and rejoining at all their edges, and some of them may become new species. Physical barriers may make this more likely. Behavioral barriers may also develop. Selection is the wind that pushes this drift around, blowing from multiple direction a different times. Occasionally the selection wind blows one organism's cloud over and pushes another's out of existence. Additionally, each organisms clouds are interacting with all other organisms clouds to one degree or another, sometimes helpfully, lots of time, harmfully, and mostly benignly. This is my understanding of genetic drift and speciation.

41. Blasphemy

Comment #122614 by chuckgoecke on February 5, 2008 at 4:03 pm

Hear, Hear, well said. We all must redouble our efforts to combat the political correctness and multicultural forgiveness that is going to make a bad situation worst in the coming years. Dan's comments here do just that.

42. Belief in Belief

Comment #117431 by chuckgoecke on January 28, 2008 at 7:33 pm

Brilliant stuff! Hitchens always makes me feel that I'm proud to stand with him, and that I am on the moral high ground, keeping myself in the rational world. I'd like to see more discussion of the whole discipline of theology, how it is an empty intellectual endeavor, just a bunch of old men, stroking themselves and rehashing tired old topics.

43. George Scales, War Hero and Generous Friend of RDFRS

Comment #111789 by chuckgoecke on January 15, 2008 at 6:54 pm

Dear George,
Thanks for your wonderful contributions to to this wonderful organization. The truth has a way of getting out. Good luck with your operations, give em 'ell there at the hospital, and realize that since you are fully within the realm of geezerdom(ear hair is a dead giveaway), you get free grabbing rights to the asses of all the lovely young nurses, and conversely free psssbping rights to all the ugly old ones.
chuck

44. The Group Delusion

Comment #110672 by chuckgoecke on January 11, 2008 at 9:58 pm

Anybody heard about the insomniac agnostic dyslexic...


He would lie awake at night wondering if there ready is a dog.

Wooter, First The primordial soup they talk about was the result of the reducing, (non-oxidizing, i.e. no oxygen) atmosphere, and the presents of high energy sources, like ultraviolet light, electricity from lightning and heat from lava, natural catalysts like clays and minerals and the raw elements like hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen and oxygen. Amino acids , lipids, simple sugars were forming, and being destroyed all the time. Amino acids are molecules with a basic amino or ammonia-like end, and a acid or vinegar-like end. The whole ocean was literally a "soup" of thick, nasty organic sludge and gunk. Stanley, et al showed this happening in the 1950's. His experiment was an apparatus that contained maybe 1 or 2 liters of water. 4.3 billion years ago, the whole earth's ocean was the experimental vessel. These compounds were continually forming and breaking down, but some of them were more stable, so they started to accumulate. Some of them were able to hook-up with others in special ways, that aided their stability. They were mostly chains of amino acids, because the basic and acid ends attract to each other. In order for these molecules to be able to hook-up with their friends, their friend had to be special shape, or one type of mirror image of several. Molecular assemblages started to form, and the start of selection was occurring, even though, you could hardly call them "living". They couldn't reproduce yet, but the assemblages might have just grown, until they became unstable, and broke into small parts that they would then go on growing. Eventually, an assemblage was able to form that used a backbone of a simple chain called RNA to hang on to. RNA is kinda like an amino acid chain, only it has simple sugars and phosphates, as well as nitrogen containing compounds. This backbone could tear away from its assemblage, and help form a new assemblage. These assemblages were helping to stabilize each other, possibly forming together into a ring-like clusters, with their more vulnerable ends protecting each other, and their master RNA, sitting in the middle of the group, making more copies. That RNA was also able to make copies of itself, if conditions were right, and occasionally they were, but not most of the time. The copies were not very accurate, though, and there were lots of mistakes. Sometimes the mistakes were actually better at aggregating the amino-chains and releasing them, or better at making the chains that were themselves more stable, thus evolution was well off and running. Eventually RNA began copying itself with a similar backbone, with a slightly different sugar, that gave it much different properties. It was stiffer, and not as good at aggregating amino chains, but it was able to pair itself with an exact copy of itself, but in a converse or mirror image form, DNA. This was the backup copy if itself, and walla, genetics was born, an actual proto-life form was formed. Its called the "RNA world". These activities may have been at first occurring on the edges of clay crystals, that look like decks of cards, perhaps around very hot, violent places like near volcanos. Places people once thought not conducive to life, until they looked.
Thats the primordial soup story.

As far as how could life become complex, just look at a tree in the forest. It grows from a seed, thats pretty simple. Many seeds are similar when they first germinate, but each has a different life history, and its branching structure that develops is do to the complex interactions with its environment. The final tree is a very complex in shape and structure, but no one, no intelligence, has guided it on it way up into the forest canopy. Similarly, the evolution of life has been one long big tree, starting out as simple bacteria-like organisms becoming more complex all the time, but in a blind and unguided way, lots of false starts, broken branches, dead ends, and also with no set goal, just a tendency to spread out and upward as far as it can, filling every opening in the canopy.

45. The Group Delusion

Comment #110224 by chuckgoecke on January 10, 2008 at 4:44 pm

I am not a student of Biology (in fact, I am an absolute beginner on the subject), but after a careful reading of this article I have a question regarding the outcome of the research shown: while it can be shown that some species reach a pareto-optimal point in their behaviour, why is it we can see other similar species not exhibiting this behaviour, yet surviving just as well? Therefore, does this behaviour have an evolutionary advantage at all? Given the generational span of insects and the age of the earth, shouldn't we expect to see all insect species currently behaving in the same, optimal way?

Can anybody help?

Besides the multitude of ways of making a living etc., that Richard and others mentioned, all living things have multiple levels of adversities constantly coming their way, those adversities themselves are always evolving. One such group are parasites and disease organisms. Matt Ridley's book "The Red Queen" covered this marvelously. Like the Lewis Carol's Alice in Wonderland Red Queen, life forms are evolving (running) as fast as they can, just to stay in place.

46. What have you changed your mind about? Why?

Comment #105783 by chuckgoecke on January 1, 2008 at 8:16 pm

Hi everyone, Merry Solstice, and Happy New Year. Since I have officially changed underwear for 2008, I thought I'd share something I've change my mind about also.

Coming up with this admission, is actually very hard for me, because I know so much, and am very sure of my own correctness. But my major change of mind over this last year or so has been about Global Warming. No question that global warming is occurring, or that it is probably going to cause significant disruptions to agriculture, ecosystems, and human habitation. I am now convinced that these disruption are actually going to be net harmful to human society. Coming from Minnesota, global warming, as it became more and more obvious, reminded me of how much I hate cold weather. I love mild winters. I thought that, in-spite of the disruptions, the net gains would out-way the losses, people displaced by rising sea level could be relocated, and ecosystems, like agriculture, would just shift. Some farms will become ranches, soybeans will be replaced by peanuts, corn by cotton, spruce forests by wheat fields or hardwoods.

Trying to project the future climate can only done in terms of a range of possibilities; the models are far from perfect, but getting better. (In my former life, I used to be a petroleum engineer reservoir modeler, so I know a little about numerical modeling). My thinking that things might not be so bad, like many of our politicians - apparently, is based on splitting the differences between the best and worst cases, picking a probably future scenario that runs down the middle of the tornado shaped cloud of future possibilities.

At the beginning of 2007, the arctic scientists were thinking that the loss of permanent sea ice was was out in the 2030 time frame, but summer of 2007 musta been a scorcher up there, because they are now worried that the sea ice might be gone in five years or so. If one looks at the trend of the projections, rather than the projections themselves, it is worrisome. Considering the thinning of the ice, as well as the loss of area, summer after next starts looking like the time to invest in a sailing marina at Point Barrow, Alaska.

It will be a shame to loose all those big beautiful bears, walruses, and seals, but more importantly, it is the worst case scenarios, which are off the scale of the current models, that really worry me. The real worst case scenario, as I understand it, is not just bad droughts, hot summers, flooded coast lines. A runaway greenhouse could kill most all higher life on Earth. If the global circulation, the North Atlantic conveyor belt were to shut down, the whole Earth's oceans could, like the Black sea, become anaerobic below the surface. A permanent ocean thermo-cline could develop, which would have to very dire outcomes. (The Black Sea actually has a halo-cline due to different salinity of the incoming Mediterranean water and fresh surface water runoff). The ocean would not product nearly the food and oxygen it has up to now, but in a very worst case scenario the ocean might actually poison the earth's atmosphere with hydrogen sulphide. Sulfate reducing bacteria are the culprits, and there is nothing we could do about it by then. H2S is very poisonous; at levels like 2 - 4 parts per million. Sulfate reducing bacteria are photosynthetic purple colored very primitive life forms, usually found in hot springs. They use either light or carbon(organic matter) to make H2S from sulfate salts in the water. They are the nemesis of aquarists, and cause loss of fish and corals when a power outage stops aquarium circulation. Some geologists are now thinking that such a global runaway greenhouse H2S poisoning may have been the cause of the Permo-Triassic or other major extinction events. Fortunately for life on earth, not all critters are as sensitive as us humans, and mammals, but things won't be the same.
I think I'll try riding the train to work tomorrow.

47. U.S. Congress Recognizing the importance of Christmas and the Christian faith

Comment #98500 by chuckgoecke on December 13, 2007 at 7:11 pm

Here's a few more resolutions we need:
Butterflies are Free!
Kissing Babies is Nice.
Apple Pie is Good.
We all Love our Moms... oh wait, we already have a day for that.
Cow shit is much better smelling than pig shit.
Nascar races are fast and furious.
How about them Cowboys!

48. An Open Letter to Richard Dawkins

Comment #96640 by chuckgoecke on December 10, 2007 at 7:32 pm

Dear Father Jonathan,
So you think the horrible governments of Stalin, Mao, Pol , et al were horrible because they were atheist, then consider this. How do you think Richard Dawkins and the other free thought secularists (i.e. the four horsemen) would have faired in the Stalinist Soviet Union, or Pot Paul's Cambodia, trying to promote their ideas of free thought and stuff? Free thinkers would have been the first to disappear. I think you just call these governments atheist because they suppressed the church(s). They were suppressing any and all groups that attempted any free thought. That's what we call totalitarian - total control, of everything, including thought and action. Kinda patriarchal wouldn't you say? ...Father?

With Great Irreverence,

Chuck

49. Banishing the Green-Eyed Monster

Comment #91920 by chuckgoecke on November 29, 2007 at 2:51 pm

USA_Limey:

Defending Clintons lying about his philandering on the American tax payers dime in the whitehouse

Limey, if you could say that you have always given 100% of your time to your employer, you can make this comment un-hypocritically. But I doubt it. Clinton screwed up, no doubt, but neither the screw-up or the lying about it after word, come even remotely close to impeachable, except to a wickedly partisan congress. Clinton was a relatively brilliant president, especially considering the congresses he had to work with. He never lied about national security related issues such as Iraq, nor used his power to suppress good science, or career federal prosecuters. It was unfortunate that Clinton's indiscretions occurred in the Whitehouse, but remember, this is where he lived and worked, and it was the only place available to him. As for cohersion of a subordinate, I think Monica was the aggressor in this situation, she knew what she was doing, and knew enough to save the evidence, for what ever future plans she had for it. I wish you could, like his wonderful wife, find some way of forgiving him.
As for the breach of trust in a marriage, when there is an acceptable choice of degree of monogamy, perhaps some marriages can be held up to higher standards. People all have this reptilian personality lurking inside of them, and they will screw up occasionally. Is a 20 minute screw-up enough reason to throw away a twenty year relationship?

50. Stem cell breakthrough

Comment #90611 by chuckgoecke on November 25, 2007 at 7:34 pm

I'm ready for the full body stem cell makeover. You know, they take a cell of mine, pluripotentiate it, grow it into stem cells for all my major tissue types, heart, GI tract, nerve, etc. and inject them, in the right proportion. They float around, find their correct tissues, and six months later, I start reverse aging, and I'm back to 20 years old in 3 years. No problem, when do I sign up? Will my insurance cover this?
Chuck (reposted from Pharyngula)