Interesting News Articles

I was cruising the web, when I thought I would post some more interesting news articles that touch upon some of the issues that have been discussed on this blog. Nothing like getting a new perspective on matters, eh? (No, I’m not Canadian, but I am Norwegian on both sides of my family, and grew up in a little town that was about a hundred clicks south of the Canadian border in the Upper Midwest.)

First is an article from the St. Paul Pioneer Press that elucidates the illusion of a battle raging between Science and Faith. Some people who are regular readers of this blog know that I hold fundamentalists in disdain. That being said, I think I must emphasise that it is only fundies that I hold in disdain. The rest of Christendom seems to get the fact that science does not challenge God, but magnifies Him, whether if it is Evolution, Mathematics, Physics, or Anthropology.

June’s article on Gas Prices is a great starting point for researching the huge difficulties in economics, politics, and sociology when it comes to understanding the dependence the world has developed on the petrochemical industry. It is an indisputable fact that some companies have been negligent in their responsibility to safe-guard the pollution that inevitably develops from refining oil, as well as the negative impacts our exhaust has on the environment and weather patterns. However, the best remedy to this, as I stated in her comments section, is to support those companies that are doing something about it! The Stirling Heat Engine, while and old technology, is promising for the future in new and inventive ways to pave our way to energy independence. There is an interesting article in Discover Magazine about the new industry that is growing out of the frustration a lot of people are experiencing in regards to high energy prices. They had another one on a company combining Stirling Engines and Solar power to become the biggest producer of alternative energy in the nation, but for some reason I can’t find the article right now. I will post it when I remember the title of the article.

The latest rage in the literature is discussing Genomics and its application to cure disease. However, Proteomics is the way to go! Just look at this list of people to watch out for in the biological sciences from Discover. Also, look at this introduction to the field, courtesy of Wired.

In anticipation of Nick‘s article on Creationism and Evolution, I thought a little history about the Intelligent Design movement would be in order. Also, another great overview ofCreationism’s Legal Woes from a different perspective.

In Linux news, check out the new Gnome 2.16 Desktop Environment! While I use KDE, Gnome is the DE that most people that are fairly new to Linux see, as it seems that Ubuntu is the most widespread of all Linux OSes out there. Also, it seems that Gnome is the force behind the new XGL and Compiz 3D Desktop Interface, an interface that puts Windows Vista to shame. It does more than Vista, on hardware that even XP would have problems running on! Click on the Desktop Interface link to drool! 🙂

Speaking of Microsoft, it seems that their Live Search is now out of Beta Testing. While I normally do not like MS or their products (I used to work for them before I went into the Army), I will grant you that fair competition is a great thing. Maybe Google will find a way out of the morass that their Google Ad Sense program has become. Personally, I used the Live Search a few months ago, and was not impressed.

That should be enough until tonight. As usual, comments are a blogger’s best friends, so type away! 🙂

Great Deluge Models

A conversation with Nick prompted me to bring up the Great Flood Myth in the Bible. It seems like he is one of the people that takes this particular story in its literal sense, which, to me, does not make sense. In regards to that, let me preface this article with a brief description of the Scientific Method.

In order to advance the knowledge of a particular field, a scientist will make observations about the phenomenon that she perceives. (The sun rises and sets every day.) Then, the scientist creates a hypothesis to explain the perceived phenomenon. (The sun circles the earth.) Then, when the scientist is done with the creation and description of the hypothesis, she will then perform experiments to see whether if the hypothesis is correct, and has the ability to predict future actions. (In this case, the hypothesis should predict that other planets also circle the earth.) Then the research is submitted for critical peer review. (Galileo Galilei’s observations, and Kepler’s Laws of Planetary Motion falsify the Geocentric model.) If the hypothesis proves to be correct, and it is useful for predicting future actions, then it will generally become a theory or a scientific law, as long as no new evidence comes along to falsify it. If it is proven incorrect, then the hypothesis needs to be modified to fit all extant data, or become invalidated.

Of course, this is a rough approximation, but more information regarding the Scientific Method can be found here.

Now, Creationists propose a hypothesis that a Great Flood happened in the recent past. Fundamentalists believe this to be the case because of their belief in the literal truth of the passages in the Bible which relates the Flood Myth. With this belief in mind, combined with the Scientific Method, we can see whether if such a flood has happened in the past. First, the hypothesis: The Earth was covered in water, where even the highest mountain had a span of twenty feet of water covering them. Note that they completely ignore observations about the natural world in the forming of this hypothesis. They start with a theory, and then try to work backwards from there. Okay, be that as it may, we can form some predictions based on the hypothesis already. Some, but not all, predictions would be:

1. The amount of water in use to cover the entirety of the earth. The best approximation that I have read would necessitate over 2.5 times the volume of water already in the ocean to make this model true. To date, no data supports this.
2. The model should reflect why the polar ice caps are still there. If the earth were flooded, then the polar ice caps should have broken up. In six thousand years, we should only see a number of ice layers in the polar ice cores that have been taken that reflects the time since the flood. To date, no data supports this.
3. Mountain erosion. We should see in different mountain ranges similar erosion activity at the same time to reflect flooding conditions. Again, no data supports the Great Flood Myth.
4. Unusual amounts of terrestial detritus within the ocean floor core samples that have been taken. If there was a great flood, then terrestial silt and animal by-products (skeletons and such) should be found in great quantities within the core samples. To date, this also has not been the case.
5. The presence of Mitochondrial DNA. In the process of tracking back the most recent ancestor for mitochondrial DNA, we should expect to arrive at a number of about 6,000 years or so. Instead, we have evidence that Mitochondrial Eve was alive no more recently than 150,000 years ago! Again, the evidence that we have to date does not correlate with the Flood Model.
6. Geological Sorting. The fossil record that we have today should correspond to models of hydrological sorting processes if such a flood had happened. Instead, all corroborated evidence and data in the Scientific Community shows that such a process has not happened in the past.
7. Dispersion of human settlements. The Flood Model has not, and cannot, account for all of the evidence pointing to gradual human dispersion throughout the globe.
8. Extant Writings. If the Flood happened, then we should not see any written documents from the time that the flood was purported to happen. Instead, we have slabs and slabs of rocks from the Sumerians, Akkadians, Babylonians, Egyptians, Chinese, and so forth, that were written and dated at the same time as when the flood happened!

These are just some of the problems with the Hypothesis of the Great Deluge. The model, in effect, has not made any predictions that have been valuated, and because Creationists worked backwards, they had no observable phenomenon to quantify before the formation of the Hypothesis.

In effect, the Flood Myth has been falsified over and over again. To present, there is no evidence that such a global flood has taken place.

Recent Science Articles

I’m still on a four day weekend right now. As such, I have plenty of time to write and post, but I’m intending to utilize my time to be lazy this weekend. Hence, the scarcity of posts on this blog recently. However, in the wake of the two on-going discussions within the comments section of certain posts, I thought I would take a lighter touch for this afternoon, and posts the heavy articles later on tonight. So, for your reading enjoyment, I’m presenting some interesting news of the day articles for your reading pleasure this afternoon!

First off, in tangential relation to the evolution arguments that are present on this blog, take a look at this article that gives a synopsis of Intelligent Design. For once, I think a fair and balanced approach has been taken to this contentious topic, although the Creationists in the Hovind model will still be unhappy with the outcome.

Ever wonder about the Ark? Has it been found? Where is it? LiveScience.com also has an article that goes over the past hoaxes, frauds, and interesting sitings of Noah’s Ark.

Still in the Microsoft versus Open Source Software debate? It seems that this conversation is becoming moot, as more and more businesses are embracing Free/Open Source Software.

For those developers who work with C++, here are some more verification tools for you! Yeah!

Anyone who may be engaged in the Evolution/Creation debate, take a look at the Top Ten Myths About Evolution. Most people on the Creationist side who begin these debates lack a serious grounding in evolutionary theory, what it’s about, what it’s facts are, and the theory model that predicts future changes.

The Chimp strikes back with the obvious! President George W. Bush this past weekend stressed the importance of not relying on foreign oil. Duh!

ABC will, on September 11th of this year, present a new “docudrama” on the events leading up to, and including, the terror attacks on the World Trade Center. However, this television event is biased, distorts reality, and is basically a gift to the extreme right. With all the controversy surrounding this project, I’m surprised that ABC hasn’t distanced themselves from the project’s creator. Since the project was only vetted by extreme right-wing Republicans, only previewed by Right-wing Bloggers, and was created by people with extreme right-wing political views, one has to wonder whether if it is based in fact, or in revisionist history?

In the light of all the recent advances in genomic studies, one has to wonder about the use of evolutionary techniques in modern day novels. I like Greg Bear, who is a very good author of some Hard Science Fiction. (“Hard” in this case means the usage of modern “hard” sciences in a theoretical novel. No telepathy, space jumps, wormholes, or the like are allowed as they are all hypothesii (sic) that have no direct evidence in experimental studies.) Especially with the last two novels I read that were written by him, _Darwin’s Radio_ and _Darwin’s Children_, one has to wonder about the science of Human Endogenous Retrovirii. This article gives a very good overview of the science behind the novels.

Well, this should keep people interested until later on this evening! Ciao!