Urban Evolution
Because nothing warms my heart like a good story about evolution :)
You're viewing all posts tagged with science
“
“The Apollo program created a zeitgeist in the country where science was seen as a way to take us into the future. And once that attitude descends on a culture, it affects everything. It affects what you want to be when you grow up. It affects how government monies are spent. It affects how people treat the field of science….
I see it as three-pronged: the teachers, the actual agencies that fund curiosity-driven research, and then the vision statement. And the vision statement comes from saying, ‘We’re going to Mars,’ ‘We’re going to land on an asteroid,’ ‘We’re going to understand the nature of the universe.’ All three of these together I think is the one-two-three punch that can take us out of our doldrums and put us back in the leadership role that so many of us took for granted in the 20th century.”
— Neil DeGrasse Tyson, on the factors that lead to scientific innovation and popular acceptance of science, from this conversation
(One thing he doesn’t mention, though, is science fiction, and more broadly, popular portrayals of science. As a kid, I enjoyed watching Star Trek: The Next Generation, and I also had an affinity for many other forms of science fiction. I think that may be a big part of why I personally have strong, positive views towards science.)
“
In retrospect, this magazine’s coverage of so-called evolution has been hideously one-sided. For decades, we published articles in every issue that endorsed the ideas of Charles Darwin and his cronies…. Good journalism values balance above all else. We owe it to our readers to present everybody’s ideas equally and not to ignore or discredit theories simply because they lack scientifically credible arguments or facts…. Get ready for a new Scientific American…. This magazine will be dedicated purely to science, fair and balanced science, and not just the science that scientists say is science.
Editorial from Scientific American, here
XKCD: The problem with scientists…
(via)
(Source: hatefulatheist)
Two astronomy papers recently published in Nature put forth evidence that the universe might contain as many as three times the number of stars as was previously though.
Prior estimates had put the total number of stars at 100 sextillion (that’s 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000). But recent work by astronomers at Harvard and Yale indicates that one key assumption behind the old estimate — the assumption that most galaxies have the same composition as our own — doesn’t appear to be true. Their work suggests that elliptical galaxies (which make up a third of all galaxies in the universe) could contain up to 20 times the number of stars that they were previously thought to have.
If indeed these astronomers are correct, and the universe contains such an immense number of stars beyond what was previously thought, then that would only serve to increase the odds that extraterrestrial life exists in some distant solar system, while also providing further support for the argument that the emergence of life on earth was non-miraculous, and was perhaps even inevitable, given the number of solar systems in which life has had the opportunity to develop.
(source)
Knock Knock …
(via)
Evolution by Religious Selection
How ironic! A religious ritual in southern Mexico that involves poisoning a species of fish local to the Cueva del Azufre, a sulfuric cave, has led to some of the fish evolving an immunity to the poison.
(via)
Vatican and Science. Is religion at odds with science?
This is an interesting article on how the Vatican is claiming how science and religion don’t have to be at odds.
“ Pope Benedict XVI praised the achievements of modern science. He said that the Catholic Church ‘both encourages and benefits from’ scientific research and told his audience that people must neither fear science nor hold it up as a panacea capable of answering all of our deepest existential questions.
“Scientific activity ultimately benefits from the recognition of man’s spiritual dimension and his quest for ultimate answers,” Benedict explained.”
While the Catholic church view’s on contraception is not to based on science in any way, it is a sad state of affairs that the same institution notorious for its persecution of scientists, is much more welcoming than most “modern” protestant churches (in the US at least)
“astronomer and priest Giuseppe Tanzella-Nitti sounded a note of caution regarding the Catholic Church’s place in modern society. He said that science and religion have never been in conflict, but that there is instead an ‘image of conflict, brought about by specific events’ and believes that in order to combat this the Catholic Church must give priests a better education in science. ” Seems sad that the catholic church is the fairly reasonable institution in comparison to many others now days…
Bacteria evolve complex abilities contrary to creationist claims
OK if you read the article you will note it is not new, it is from 2008, but I just saw it so I hope you all enjoy. However if you get into a pseudo scientific debate with a creationist they frequently deny that anything new can arise from evolution. At most they will go along with natural selection, but deny anything new comes from it (yes its an odd twist of logic but I’ve heard it many times).
Heres a quote from the article “ ’The thing I like most is it says you can get these complex traits evolving by a combination of unlikely events,” he says. “That’s just what creationists say can’t happen.’ “
