I am back from the vacation but have not caught back up to speed yet. Give me a day or two.

Headed West

This is a picture taken near White Sands National Monument. Unfortunately, I have precious few pictures there since I was so deathly afraid of taking my SLR out into the dunes. As it was, I had to blow dust out of the sensor when I got back. Everything is very dry out here and very sparse. The trip between Abilene and El Paso was simply amazing. Miles and miles of nothing. No towns, no people...nothing except desert, shrub and mountains.




On to Phoenix.

Vacation!!

I will be going on a two-week vacation with my family beginning May 16. I will have limited access to the internet during that time so I may not be able to post at all since any internet time I do have will be used re-editing the latest BioLogos post I just turned in. I will commence posting here when I get back.

Religous Agnostic Wins Templeton Prize, Atheists Infuriated

That is a bit of a dramatic headline but the story is exactly that. The winner this year is Martin Rees, the Astronomer Royal in Great Britain. Steve Connor, of the Independent, writes:

Martin Rees, the former president of the Royal Society and master of Trinity College, Cambridge, was given the award for "exceptional contributions to affirming life's spiritual dimension" through his research and writings on cosmology. Lord Rees of Ludlow, who has said he holds no religious beliefs, defended the prize on the grounds it was awarded by a foundation which has given money to fund important science projects at respectable research institutions, including Cambridge.

This did not sit well several members of the scientific establishment:

Jerry Coyne, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Chicago, said the Templeton Foundation is "sneakier than the creationists" by introducing the idea of faith into a discipline where faith is anathema. "Religion is based on dogma and belief, whereas science is based on doubt and questioning. In religion, faith is a virtue. In science, faith is a vice," he said.

Oddly, Coyne is correct here. Science, especially evolution, is demonized by many as being dogmatic and religious, yet Coyne is presenting it exactly as it is, a scientific discipline that proceeds along scientific principles. In other writings, it is clear that Coyne thinks that religion in general is a vice but that is not his point here.

----------------
Now playing: Genesis - Supper's Ready (2007 Remaster)
via FoxyTunes

A. boisei Ate Soft Foods

Now it looks like there is evidence that the hyper-robust Australopithecus boisei did not survive on a diet of nuts and berries, as has been thought for decades. New research by Thure Cerling suggests that their primary subsistence was on grass, instead. On the other hand, the LiveScience article by Jeanna Bryner notes:

An early human with a big mouth made for chomping strangely preferred to eat soft, squishy fruits, new dental analyses suggest.

The finding — the big guy's teeth showed only light wear — might force scientists to downgrade everything they thought they knew about hominids' diets. For starters, the findings could cause this hominid, Paranthropus boisei [or Australopithecus boisei], to relinquish rights to its long-held moniker, the Nutcracker Man, in the eyes of anthropologists.

The Nutcracker Man lived from about 2.3 million years ago to 1.2 million years ago, before vanishing from the fossil record. He boasted a huge jaw with massive chewing muscles and flat, tough teeth whose crushing power could obliterate the roots and nuts of his home on the African savanna.

This is in stark contrast to the recent article by Cerling et al., which states very clearly:

Carbon isotope studies of P. robustus from South Africa indicated that it consumed some plants using C4 photosynthesis such as tropical grasses or sedges, but were also consistent with most of its dietary carbon (approximately 70%) having been derived from the C3 food items favored by extant chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) such as tree fruits. In contrast, stable isotopes measurements of two P. boisei specimens from Tanzania suggested a high component of C4 biomass in its diet...¹

In this case, C4 biomass is grasses and sedges. The PLoS article advocating the fruit position by Ungar et al. has this to say:

While the craniodental functional morphology Paranthropus boisei suggests an ability to generate and dissipate forces associated with the consumption of extremely hard or tough foods, microwear texture analysis offers no evidence that these hominins regularly did so.²

They list as a possibility that boisei ate fruit and suggest that it may have practiced a diet like the modern gorilla.

At this point, the only thing the two papers seem to have in common is that A. boisei ate softer foods than A. robustus. It will still have to necessitate a subsistence model change for this hominin.


Articles cited:

¹Cerling, T. E., Mbua, E., Kirera, F. M., Manthi, F. K., Grine, F. E., Leakey, M. G., et al. (2011). Diet of Paranthropus boisei in the early Pleistocene of East Africa. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1104627108

²Ungar, P. S., Grine, F. E., & Teaford, M. F. (2008). Dental Microwear and Diet of the Plio-Pleistocene Hominin Paranthropus boisei. PloS one, 3 (4), e2044.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0002044


----------------
Now playing: Paul Desmond - Nancy
via FoxyTunes

Creationism in New Jersey

New Jersey.com is asking the question Should N.J. Public Schools be allowed to teach creationism? I just voted no. So far, 69% of the respondents agree with me but that is only 217 people so far. The story has this to say:

Creationism: The doctrine that matter and all things were created, substantially as they now exist, by an omnipotent Creator, and not gradually evolved or developed.

That's the textbook definition, and the way Gov. Chris Christie was speaking at a town hall meeting last week, school districts would be free to teach it.

It seems Christie knew he was about to put his foot in his mouth, then did it anyway.

“I probably have little business getting myself involved in these kinds of questions,” Christie said, adding that local school boards “should be making those decisions about what curriculum is being taught in your schools.”

I think that I would quibble with the definition, since what they really mean is young-earth creationism. After all, I am a creationist as well; just an evolutionary creationist. The problem is that the YEC crowd is so vocal that, in the eyes of the media, that is creationism.

I doubt that Christie, who is tied up right now in facing off with the unions and trying to save the state’s economy, is thinking much about creationism. As such, he might be receptive to suggestions to allow such teaching. One never knows. He ain't sayin'.

Answers in Genesis Responds to Criticisms of the Ark Encounter

Answers in Genesis received a blistering email from a reader who complained that the Ark Encounter was a waste of money. Since AiG doesn't allow comments to their posts, this must have been written directly to the organization. It reads in part:

In an over inflated egotistical effort to try and prove themselves right and waste money this has to be the tops! Two $10,000,000 projects to build housing with education, community services and ministry support and call them Ark (ACTS of Real Kindness is a much better idea!

The battle for mankinds mind isn't lost but without the heart there is no hope and without God and Jesus there is no love, faith or hope and you have put the 7 day creation as your God.

He is absolutely correct about that last part as we have seen from numerous posts from both the ICR and AiG. They have responded to this email on their site thus:

Perhaps we haven’t communicated well enough the nature of the Ark Encounter project and why we think it will be even more impactful [Ed: Is that a word?] for Christ in our culture than our evangelistic Creation Museum. People mock our museum, but God has blessed it beyond our expectations.

Frankly, we believe the Ark will be an extremely powerful evangelistic tool. It provides a picture of salvation, and thus allows us a great opportunity to proclaim salvation through the ultimate Ark of salvation: Jesus Christ. While the Flood was a judgment by God upon the rebellious people of the day, a gracious God provided a means of salvation for Noah and his family. What could possibly be more important in this world than evangelism? I’d like to hear your opinion.

Correct me if I am wrong but isn't an evangelistic tool the same thing as a ministry? In the interview with Anderson Cooper, Ken Ham, when asked if the Ark Encounter was a “ministry” specifically stated that the Ark Encounter was a “profit organization set up to give a particular view of biblical history centered around Noah's Ark.” This makes it sound like just another historical museum, no different than the Natural History Museum in Washington, D.C., which is set up to give a view of natural history centered around mainstream science. In fact, Ham uses the phrase “profit organization” three times in the space of two minutes and never focuses on the religious aspects of the park. Why, if the purpose of the park is evangelism, would Ken Ham want to hide that? Here's why.

As Jeff Toobin points out “The Government can't sponsor something if the primary purpose is to advance religion.” Therefore, Ken Ham cannot be open about the park because if he is, then he draws unwarranted attention to the true nature of the park (evangelism), which might lead to it losing the subsidies. How's that for subterfuge?

The other thing that strikes me about this is something that I mentioned in the last post: that Ken Ham makes a point of stating that AiG is only a small part of the whole endeavor, just one partner of many, in an effort to de-emphasize the religious aspects of it and to appear to distance themselves from the project. Yet, Mark Looey, the writer of the email response states:

Some people have wondered why we have mentioned the possible numbers of people who might be coming to the Ark (1.6 million in the first year). First, it’s because we are excited to have the opportunity to share the gospel. As we design the Ark Encounter, we are keeping in mind that perhaps half the visitors will not be regular churchgoers.

Not “As the Ark Encounter is designed,” or “As they design the Ark Encounter,” as you would expect if AiG is only one small partner, but “As we design...” It is clear that Answers in Genesis is taking not just a subsidiary role but a major role in the whole untertaking, something that Ken Ham isn't willing to admit on television. Yet more subterfuge.

Is Answers in Genesis going to be above board about any of this?

Hat tip to Chemostrat1646

----------------
Now playing: Bill Bruford's Earthworks - Triplicity
via FoxyTunes

Lee Berger on Australopithecus sediba

Daily Web Day has a story on Lee Berger's comments at the recent American Association of Physical Anthropologists' convention. The author writes:

The researchers said that the hominin shows some surprisingly modern traits and its species may even be an ancestor of our own genus.

“We really have found something very, very odd and very unexpected,” Science Now quoted discovery team leader Lee Berger of the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg, South Africa, as saying.

But other paleoanthropologists are waiting for more detailed analysis of the still-unpublished fossils before they agree on its identity or place in the human family tree.

According to new dates reported by Berger in his talk at the annual meeting of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists (AAPA), the four hominin individuals died when they fell into a “death trap” in a cave about 2 million years ago at Malapa, South Africa.

The growing concensus is that A. sediba shows up just after the appearance of Homo but that it may have been on a line that gave rise to the genus Homo. The curious thing is that there is scant evidence of Homo in South Africa but quite a bit in East Africa. In East Africa, however, there are only robust australopithecines that overlap with early Homo for a good 800,000 years. I will side with those that want more evidence first.

----------------
Now playing: Emerson, Lake & Palmer - The Endless Enigma (Part 1)
via FoxyTunes

The Times Colonist on Belief in a “Supreme Being”

Patricia Reaney of Reuters has an article in the Times Colonist on belief in a “Supreme Being” around the world. She writes:

Belief in a god, or a supreme being, and some sort of afterlife is strong in many countries around the globe, according to a new Ipsos/Reuters poll.

Fifty one per cent of the 18,829 people across 23 countries who took part in the survey said they were convinced there is an afterlife and a divine entity, while 18 per cent said they don't believe in a god and 17 per cent weren't sure.

But only 28 per cent believe in creationism, the belief that a god created humans, compared to 41 per cent who believe in human evolution and 31 per cent who simply don't know what to believe.

This strikes me as probably been true, since creationism tends to be in pockets in developed nations, with the exception of the United States where it has taken a stronghold. She also notes this:

At the other end of the spectrum, among those who said they do not believe in a god or supreme being nearly 40 per cent were most likely to live in France, followed by Sweden, Belgium and Britain.

I would be curious to know exactly what the questions were but there is no link to the questionnaire. A pity.


----------------
Now playing: Anderson Bruford Wakeman Howe - Quartet - I) I Wanna Learn, II) She Gives Me Love, III) Who Was The First, Iv) I'm Alive
via FoxyTunes

Werner Herzog Tackles the Upper Palaeolithic

Acclaimed filmmaker Werner Herzog has directed a documentary on Chauvet Cave in France, where the walls are covered in artwork that dates to around 30,000 years ago. Chris Garcia, writing for the Wall Street Journal, has this to say:

Because the cave is accessible only to scientists, Mr. Herzog had to acquire special permission from the French government to film inside and had to adjust to extreme time and technical limitations, using a crew of only four.

What the veteran filmmaker, 70, discovered inside was a world of subterranean splendor, namely cave paintings in pristine condition—Ice Age menageries of rhinos, lions, mammoths, bison and cave bears, amid glistening lunar-like surfaces.

The film has been shot in 3D and will be out at the end of April in the larger cities and then other places later. The funny quote from the interview, however, is about Woody Allen:

CG: You're an extremely fast filmmaker, a lot like Woody Allen.

WH: Woody Allen is like a snail. He makes a film a year. I make two to three films a year.

Now, that's funny.

----------------
Now playing: The Alan Parsons Project - In The Lap of the Gods, Pt. 2 (Backing Track Rough Mix)
via FoxyTunes

A Real Noah's Ark

Barefoot and Progressive points us to a Real-life Noah, Johan Huibers, who is building a lifesize Ark that, instead of sitting as a tourist attraction, will be sailed around the world. The video is in Dutch but you can figure out what is going on.



The video dates from a year ago so I am not sure if the thing is still getting built but it is quite a task, especially for one person. On the other hand, isn't that what Noah did?

Tennessee “Academic Freedom” Bill Withdrawn

According to the Chattanooga Times Free Press, the Academic Freedom bill that was put forth by Bo Watson has been taken off the table. Andy Sher writes:

Faculty in UTC’s biological and environmental science department recently wrote a letter to the Times Free Press in which they said “every major scientific professional society ... has endorsed the Theory of Evolution as the best scientific interpretation for the development and diversification of life on Earth.”

The theory has been “scientifically tested over and over again, supported every time, for over 150 years,” the professors and instructors wrote, noting the Roman Catholic Church concluded in 1950 that evolution is not in conflict with Christian doctrine.

In Watson's defense, according to the story, he actually did go speak with the professors involved and asked them what they didn't like about the bill. Eventually, the legislature decided that it needed too much work to get it into session for this year. I have yet to see a bill like this that doesn't specifically target evolution in the hopes of subverting its teaching. Good riddance and bad rubbish.

----------------
Now playing: Anthony Phillips - Catch You When You Fall (1978)
via FoxyTunes

AiG Reports Clergy Opposition to the Ark Encounter

AiG has a news update reporting that there are some that are not all that happy that a life-size copy of Noah's ark is being built in Kentucky. The “clergy” in question, in this case, is Barry Lynn, head of Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the subject was a debate between Lynn and Ken Ham. They write:

Rev. Lynn’s main argument was that Kentucky was subsidizing religion if the state granted incentives to the Ark Encounter LLC. In the full debate, he went on to state (falsely) that if Kentucky grants the incentives, the state would not get the full money needed for education, fire stations, etc.

In order to counter this wrong impression that the Ark project will be a drain on Kentucky’s state revenues, I made it clear that the incentives are not a grant of state funds to help build the Ark Encounter. No funds will be taken from the state budget and away from its programs (e.g., social services, schools, etc.) to help construct or operate the Ark Encounter.

Somehow, when I think of clergy, Barry Lynn is not exactly the first person that comes to mind. He does not, that I am aware of, speak for any major denomination. The catch is that, as I understand it, legally, the Ark Encounter is on solid legal footing here and so, as Ham points out, debate can only focus on the content of the exhibit, which is, of course, based on the young earth creationism model.

Here is the debate, hosted by Anderson Cooper, of CNN:

Lynn is correct that this park does promote a specific religious viewpoint and that it is, at heart, a ministry. AiG is correct, though, that what really sticks in Lynn's craw is the message that the Ark Encounter brings to the table, that dinosaurs and humans lived on earth at the same time, which, as Lynn points out, is “only true in the Flintstones.”

Ham does get a bit slithery at times, though, by saying that the park will create 14,000 jobs as a “ripple effect” with 250,000,000 dollars in the first year. When he is confronted with these funny numbers, he remarks that the critics “can say whatever they want” but that they are based on “the state's own figures.” As we have seen, that is not entirely true. Further, he takes great pains in the beginning of the interview to distance himself and AiG from the Ark Project by stating that AiG is only one member of the project. Later, however, he states “we have a track record, as an organization, at the Creation Museum” suggesting considerably greater ties between the two projects. Lynn points this out, calling AiG a “primary partner.”

I think that Ham and the builders of the Ark Encounter are taking advantage of the letter of the law, as is certainly their right, but that they are also laughing all of the way to bank, knowing that, at heart, it really is a young earth creationism ministry and is every bit as religiously-based as it looks.

Todd Wood on BIO-Complexity

Remember when the Biologic Institute produced BIO-Complexity, a new journal that would investigate the scientific evidence for design. Here was the tag line:

BIO-Complexity is a peer-reviewed scientific journal with a unique goal. It aims to be the leading forum for testing the scientific merit of the claim that intelligent design (ID) is a credible explanation for life. Because questions having to do with the role and origin of information in living systems are at the heart of the scientific controversy over ID, these topics—viewed from all angles and perspectives—are central to the journal's scope.

Todd Wood writes that he was originally enthusiastic about the new journal and its mission. Today, within the context of a review of a paper in that journal, he writes the following:

In the larger scheme of things, I am sensing a discouraging pattern to BIO-Complexity publications. As I quoted above, the journal is supposed to be about "testing the scientific merit of the claim that intelligent design (ID) is a credible explanation for life," which is a great goal. But this is the fifth paper published by BIO-Complexity, and it's the fifth paper that focuses on perceived inadequacies of evolution. So when are we going to test "the scientific merit of the claim that intelligent design (ID) is a credible explanation for life?" I don't want to be too pessimistic, though, since I am a big fan of research and technical publications. I'm genuinely happy that BIO-Complexity exists and is publishing this sort of work. I just hope that in the future, we'll begin to see some positive research for ID rather than just anti-evolution work.

Why am I not surprised? It still is not clear to me that there can ever be research that can test the scientific merit of the ID claim. The principle problem is that no mechanism exists. Because no mechanism exists and, consequently, no theory exists, ID can only be shown to be a viable explanation when all other explanations have been shown to be false. It MUST focus on anti-evolution work because as long as the evolutionary framework exists to explain the genetic and biological diversity, there is no reason to accept the ID explanation. This, to me, is a critical failing in current ID research.

New Creation Museum Ad on Fox

Ken Ham is set to have an ad shown on Fox today for the Creation Museum. It is a short 30-second spot that plays the persecution role to the hilt.




Well, part of it might be because you are so hateful to those museums that teach evolution. There seems to be a lot of that going around.


Hat tip to Barefoot and Progressive.

----------------
Now playing: Tim Story - In The Winter's Pale
via FoxyTunes

“Critical Thinking” Bill Passes Tennessee House

The Tennessee House voted 70-25 on a bill (HB 368)to promote “critical thinking” in science classrooms. Andy Sher of the Chattanooga Times Free Press writes:

Rep. Richard Floyd, R-Chattanooga, a bill supporter, said "since the late '50s, early '60s when we let the intellectual bullies hijack our education system, we've been on a slippery slope."

He called Dunn's legislation "a common-sense bill. Thank you for bringing this bill to protect our teachers from the other intellectual bullies."

Another proponent, Rep. Jeremy Faison, R-Crosby, said "evolution between one species to another species has never been proven. So how could you teach that as a fact?"

But House Minority Leader Craig Fitzhugh, D-Ripley, said, "I question the need for this. What are we trying to improve, what problem are we trying to solve? Or are we just creating a problem here?"

To what intellectual bullies is Rep. Floyd referring? Is he referring to the science educators who wanted to bring sound science into the classroom? The language he uses is the same as that of Don McLeroy, in Texas when he meant “they took young earth creationism out of the classroom.” Why yes, they did.

Rob Zimmer remarked that we should always invite critical thinking. He is correct, but the tortured, ill-informed response of Rep. Faison indicates that there is not a whole lot of that going on here.

----------------
Now playing: Dan Fogelberg - The Reach
via FoxyTunes

New Fossils Confirm A Very Warm Earth During the Pliocene

Mollusks that have been found in Pliocene sediments indicate that the temperature may have been between 18 and 28 degrees Fahrenheit higher than today. The Pliocene was toward the tail end of the “age of the apes” in which there were large-bodied hominoids in just about every continent on earth. It was at the end of the Miocene that the ape fossil evidence begins to disappear in non-tropical areas. Kim DeRose, of PhysOrg writes:

“Our data from the early Pliocene, when carbon dioxide levels remained close to modern levels for thousands of years, may indicate how warm the planet will eventually become if carbon dioxide levels are stabilized at the current value of 400 parts per million,” said Aradhna Tripati, a UCLA assistant professor in the department of Earth and space sciences and the department of atmospheric and oceanic sciences.

The key word in that sentence is “eventually.” Admittedly, the Pliocene is not that far back and so it is clear that the climate can change somewhat quickly. It also seems clear that the earth is going to do what the earth is going to do and there is not much we can do to change it. The temperature got that high during the Pliocene without any humans around to help it do so. It is not immediately clear that humans are going to make a whole heck of a lot of difference this time.

----------------
Now playing: Emerson, Lake & Palmer - Memoirs Of An Officer And A Gentleman
via FoxyTunes

Really, Really Off-Topic But Really Funny

What if Moses had Facebook:

More Concern in England For Science Teaching in Public Schools

The Independent has an article updating the concerns about science teaching and young-earth creationism in public schools in England. Andrew Williams writes:

Dr Michael Behe is the biologist whose theory of Irreducible Complexity forms the supposed scientific basis of ID. I asked him about the consensus in many quarters that it is not scientific. While genially admitting that I had "hit a nerve", he defended its credentials as a science. "Science is just using physical evidence and reasoning to come to a conclusion about nature," he says. "The definition of science is supposed to help us investigate nature and if it of itself becomes a barrier, it won't serve a useful purpose."

Does Dr. Behe remember that, a scant five years ago, he defined science in a courtroom as including astrology? How does that help us investigate nature and serve a useful purpose? Williams continues:

Dr Behe, though, makes a more serious allegation about any future requirement to teach evolution in primary classes: "It shows that certain people have an agenda to get children to think like them, to indoctrinate them on their side. And to prejudice young minds to one side before they're capable of understanding is the opposite of education."

Philip Bell, the chief executive of Creation Ministries International (UK/Europe), makes the same point. He goes on to say that when we consider the facts on which science is based, we do so from a worldview point. If we approach, say, the fossil record or DNA from the viewpoint that God created the world in the way literally set out in the Bible with a global flood centuries later, the science stands up.

It does? Why cannot it get the support of any mainstream scientists, then? When people like Bell say things like this, without a trace of admission that there are serious scientific problems with this viewpoint, all credibility goes out the window. Behe's viewpoint, where science can incorporate astrology is a post-modern deconstruction of science, while Bell's is a rejection of modern science outright. I am not sure which is worse.

----------------
Now playing: David Lanz - Variations On A Theme From Pachelbel's Canon In D Major
via FoxyTunes

Darrel Falk on Ken Ham and Christian Charity

Darrel Falk has written a BioLogos piece on the Great Home School convention/Ken Ham dustup that happened a week and half back. I posted on it a few times, including a very uncharitable post, written in anger. Darrel is quick to point out that, while Mr. Ham has made mistakes, we all have and it should be in the spirit of Christian charity and forgiveness that we move forward. He writes:

Please pray for Mr. Ham and his ministry during these days. Pray that on matters surrounding this highly divisive issue of how best to seek harmony between God’s two books we might all draw closer to God and to each other. Pray that Mr. Ham’s great fear—that BioLogos will damage the integrity of Scripture as the fully inspired Word of God—will never be realized. We understand his fear and sympathize with his concerns. Please pray that we at BioLogos might always seek the wisdom which is from above, and that we not give into the temptation to advocate a compromise purely for the sake of appearing wise.

Contrast that with the words of Mr. Ham about the event:

More and more organizations are being formed and more books printed by people—even within the church—to try to get God’s people to reject Genesis as literal history, and thus undermine the authority of God’s Word. No wonder we are losing the next generation from the church. For instance, even at this homeschool convention, there are a number of people (including speakers) that are associated with the extremely liberal Biologos Foundation—an organization that is dedicated to trying to get people in the church to believe evolution and millions of years as fact. And now they are embarking on producing homeschool curriculum—such as that from Dr. Peter Enns who spoke at this conference.

But at the same time, I praise God for the opportunity, that even in this sea of lies permeating our culture, I am able to teach the truth of God’s Word to many. Here is a photograph of me presenting at one of the sessions yesterday: (Picture not included)

A greater contrast could not be apparent. Darrel is correct, we do need to pray for all of us who are involved in this area of research. As importantly, however, we do need a dose of humility about what we think and how we arrive at the conclusions we do. My wife admonishes me to pray continually about the things I write. She is correct to do so.

I hope that Mr. Ham prays as well and that he will see that his viewpoint and attitude are harsh and unchristian. Further, they are divisive and serve only to show the outside world that, despite our protestations to the contrary, we can be very good at mean spiritedness and name-calling. Not a shining day for the image of Christianity.

----------------
Now playing: Anthony Phillips & Joji Hirota - Midway-Island of Life: Dolphins, Seals & Rays
via FoxyTunes