Friday, June 16, 2006

And biological evolution marches on, thank you very much.


Oh, look ... more evidence for biological evolution:

Scientists have uncovered remarkably preserved fossils – including feathers and webbed feet – of the oldest known relatives of modern birds, which also shores up the theory that birds evolved from aquatic environments.

Little is known about birds from the age of dinosaurs, since fossils that date back to the early Cretaceous Period – some 105 to 115 million years ago – have rarely been found. So the discovery reported in Friday's issue of the journal Science is particularly exciting for those trying to fill gaps in the avian family tree.

Cue spectacularly ignorant right-wing attack poodles, yammering on about "fact" versus "theory" and getting all of it gloriously wrong.

BONUS TRACK: And while evolutionary scientists do actual science, creationists do pretty much what they've always done.

OHMIGOD DOUBLE PLUS GOOD SUPER BONUS SNARK: Based on PZ's (inappropriate, in my opinion) sweeping condemnation when he writes:

Lying, stealing, and misrepresentation are common creationist values, I guess—Allah must endorse theft.

we have none other than our old friend Jinx McHue/Jason, weighing in with the comment, "Whee!!! Broad brushes are fun!"

Keep in mind, this whining about broad brushes comes from someone whose home page reads, "The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left. --Ecc. 10:2"

Yes, Jinx is just the person to be lecturing the rest of us about unfair generalization, isn't he?

5 comments:

Scout said...

theft is....well, when it comes to copyright, news, internet etc., that's an area i have my own beliefs on but don't expect others to follow, believe, or even remotley care about. it's in my header at my site, yet 'the threatened' have posted their links to 'adversiting on blogs'. go ahead, you do that, i don't care if you do, i just am not going to.

creationism: i've always found it interesting that darwin retracted his research in the end. hmm. the biblical version is no different from indigenous creation myths, and that's why we call them myths or stories, because they are to be learned from. hard to learn from the bible when it's interpretation upon interpretation.

science: there's merit but it's not the be all end all it proclaims. what is 'true' today will not be viewed as 'true' in 100 years, just like much of what science held as 'true' 100 years ago is not 'true' today.

i think i'll do a post on an experience i had with my good hopi friend, dan. thanks for the inspo :)

my cree ancestry has it's creation story. it's not a question of it being taken literally or metaphorically, it's a matter of accepting it, because we were never meant to find the answer. but in mankind's quest 'the big bang' theory came along and what resulted was science discovering fission and fusion. and where has that gotten us?

with the knowledge of creation comes the knowlede of destruction and we've been doing too much of that, n'est pas?

i think it's more important for schools to drop the subject entirely......either that or leave it wide open and say, 'look, here's the approach of different cultures, religion and science, make up your own mind'. naw , we wouldn't want to teach our kids to 'think', would we?

an interesting story you've pointed us to, thanks.

CC said...

scout writes:

"i've always found it interesting that darwin retracted his research in the end."

He did no such thing. I suspect you're referring to the apocryphal "Lady Hope" story, which is thoroughly debunked here.

M@ said...

"science: there's merit but it's not the be all end all it proclaims. what is 'true' today will not be viewed as 'true' in 100 years, just like much of what science held as 'true' 100 years ago is not 'true' today."

Are you saying that, by comparison, religions never change? New ones don't appear, points of dogma don't arise or disappear in response to new social conditions?

Quick lesson: the thing that doesn't change about science -- and hasn't since the enlightenment -- is the method. That's what makes it powerful: that as more is known about the world, what was thought to be true can be refined (e.g. our model of the atom) or enhanced (e.g. the effect of genetics on our understanding of evolution).

It is in fact their relative inability to change that makes religions unsuited to dealing with a dynamic society. Unless you think that your understanding of the world is enhanced by sticking dogmatically to texts written by people who didn't understand the mechanics of rainfall...

thickslab said...

but in mankind's quest 'the big bang' theory came along and what resulted was science discovering fission and fusion.

Yes. Because nuclear weapons are a result of research into the big bang.

*eyeroll*

Scout said...

cc: true about darwin, i stand corrected.

m@: no, i'm not saying much about religion other then what i already stated. i speak in large about indigenous creation stories. while what many hear has been anglosized for non-natives and natives who don't speak their rongue, these stories generally have not veered.

science has it's methodology and i wrote that i have benefitted from science.

quick lesson: there's many things in science that were once held true but no longer are. there are flaws in the methodoligy, and that's why today's answers are not to be taken with great grain as 'truth'. science's power doesn't just come from it's methodology.....it comes from it's own propoganda.

there are many scientists who have valid theories but who go unrecognized because no matter what, the structure of acedemia is 'who you know' and if you are following set standards of belief by the top guns of science.

there's a schmooze factor involved because no
matter what, we are human. this goes for all areas of academia (NOTE: THERE ARE MERITS TO ACADEMIA, DON'T TAKE THIS OUT OF CONTEXT). in conversations with scientists i have talked with they agree with what i say.

some theories will always hold true....other won't.

look at the theory of evolution itself. it has changed. it will continue to change. but too many who put absolute in science believe what is true today IS true. hence beringia is well accepted. tomorrow may bring a differnt answer.