Over the weekend, between bouts of rounding on patients and seeing consults (I was on call), I perused the Last 24 Hours channel on the ScienceBlogs homepage, when I came across a fellow SB’er discussing a recent paper in Science about evolution. It was a study of the finches of the Galapagos Islands by Princeton evolutionary biologists Peter and Rosemary Grant. Being a physician and not a hardcore evolutionary biologist, I must confess that I don’t always get into the nitty-gritty of how biologists study evolution, but this was a compelling story that was fairly easy for me to understand. …
Category: Evolution
Thirsty for the truth? Visit the 38th Meeting of the Skeptics’ Circle!
It’s that time again, time for the 38th Meeting of the Skeptics’ Circle. Thirsty? Well, LBBP over at Skeptic Rant offers parched skeptics a fine assortment of beverages including Satire Cider, Quack Quencher, Woo Brew, and Creationist Tonic, among others. It’s just the cool, refreshing dose of critical thinking to quench that skeptical thirst that’s been intensified by the rampant credulity of society in general and the blogosphere in particular. Drink deep! And come on back for the 39th Meeting of the Skeptics’ Circle, which will be hosted by Mike over at (appropriately enough) Mike’s Weekly Skeptic Rant on July …
A lovely fisking of Ann Coulter
Via Evolving Thoughts, this article about Ann Coulter’s misrepresentation of the Dover case is just too good for me not to link to also. Best excerpt: One part of her latest book that’s getting little notice is the part that deals with Dover and what is purported to be the “debate” over evolution. She begins her screed by saying that liberals have contempt for science. What? She offers as proof that liberals support stem-cell research. Yes, I know, I don’t get it either. Lots of conservatives also support stem-cell research. Nancy Reagan, for one. Arnold Schwarzenegger, for another. Gov. Arnold …
Is it possible to be to the right of Ann Coulter?
I don’t know if it’s possible to be to the right of Ann Coulter, but Spacemonkey over at IMAO gives it a try. I’m not sure that he succeeds. After all, he says, “We let God’s will or survival of the fittest, if you swing that way, be the appeals process.” I don’t think that Coulter would never concede even in the least that anything even remotely connected with evolution could be true–at least not in public.
William Dembski on Ann Coulter’s Godless
A few days ago, given that light of the “intelligent design” creationism movement, William Dembski, had bragged about how much he had helped Ann Coulter write the chapters in her latest screed (Godless: The Church of Liberalism) attacking evolution, I had wondered what he might think now of being associated with her, given some of what we now know to be also in her book, such as her vicious attacks on liberals in general and certain 9/11 widows in particular (“I have never seen people enjoying their husband’s death so much” and “now that their shelf life is dwindling, they’d …
I wonder what William Dembski thinks about Ann Coulter now…
A couple of days ago, on the Day of the Beast (6/6/06), Ann Coulter took the opportunity to unleash yet another spray of spittle-drenched attacks on liberals (Godless: The Church of Liberalism) into bookstores across the nation. As is her schtick, she’s made quite the stir over the airwaves by making very inflammatory and offensive statements. This time, it was about the 9/11 widows during an interview with Matt Lauer Tuesday morning (video here) about what she wrote in her book: These self-obsessed women seem genuinely unaware that 9-11 was an attack on our nation and acted like as if …
A crank’s favorite gambit: Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus
Science and history deniers love to misapply legal principles to arguments over scientific and historical evidence, for example, falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus (false in one thing, false in all things). It's a useful principle to apply to witness testimony in a court, but it's not how evidence is evaluated in science and history.
Medicine and evolution, part 5: “Quit whining” about intelligent design?
One annoying thing about the blogosphere for someone like me is that a lot of things that I want to write about pop up during the day, when I’m at work. Blogging is all about immediacy and time. Wait too long to write about a topic, and the moment’s passed. For me, by the time I get home in the evening, even though someone may have e-mailed me an article that they thought I’d like to comment on, I often find myself refraining from jumping into the fray, simply because so many have already commented on it already. This problem …
Intelligent design activists make hay out of the Larry Darby case
Geez, who could have seen this one coming? Straight from the Discovery Institute’s blog regarding atheist and Holocaust denier Larry Darby in reference to his activities against ID in Alabama, Casey Luskin bloviates: An outspoken opponent of the bill has been activist Larry Darby. Mr. Darby’s vehement opposition to the Alabama Academic Freedom Bill was on full display at a House Education hearing back on April 29, 2004. According to reports I have received, committee chair, Rep. Yvonne Kennedy (D), did not allow citizens to testify for the bill. But for some reason she let Mr. Darby alone provide special …
Everybody wants to get in on the act
Enough, already! Over the last couple of days, we’ve had Signs You Might Be an Intelligent Design Critic. Next, we had You May Be an Intelligent Design Supporter If… Just remember who got the ball rolling with these silly Jeff Foxworthy-inspired lists way back in January 2005 and updated it shortly after landing here at ScienceBlogs. Alright, I’m a little envious. I wish I had thought of this list. I guess, though, I’ll console myself with the fact that I do have one “You might be an X if…” sort of list to my credit. And, I have to confess, …