biolog

What is it with humans and our existential insecurities? Rapture this global warming that. Apparently, the price of an oversized cortex is a steep one. It means we make movies, Mad Max, Night of the Living Dead, Day After Tomorrow and Idiocracy and write books, Left Behind, The Stand, Oryx and Crake, and The Road , slapping ourselves on the wrist over our transgressions to god and mother Earth: one-size fits all diatribes. Even behind the cheap laughs of Idiocracy and bravado of Mad Max stands akimbo a stern-looking Miss Wormwood telling us to sit-up straight, take notice and recycle, say our prayers, and stop being such greedy little bastards. (Shawn of the Dead being an obvious exception.)

Adding to the pantheon is a movie (The Age of Stupid) due in spring, and a TV series (Remnants) with no release date. If the movie is anything like its trailer below, it’ll be an uninspiring hour and a half of non-sequiturs backdropped against post-production cgi. If the series is anything like its trailer, it’ll be the Office post global pandemic. Though these two genre vehicles have similar subject matter, they are somewhat opposite in their approach to that material.

The Remnants (preview) from John August on Vimeo.

The Age of Stupid: final trailer Feb 2009 from Age of Stupid on Vimeo.

Eugene C. Scott & Glenn Branch writing in the journal Evolution: Education and Outreach have a wonderful article addressing a common misconception. Their title says it all: Don’t Call it “Darwinism”

ABSTRACT: Evolutionary biology owes much to Charles Darwin, whose discussions of common descent and natural selection provide the foundations of the discipline. But evolutionary biology has expanded well beyond its foundations to encompass many theories and concepts unknown in the 19th century. The term “Darwinism” is, therefore, ambiguous and misleading. Compounding the problem of “Darwinism” is the hijacking of the term by creationists to portray evolution as a dangerous ideology—an “ism”—that has no place in the science classroom. When scientists and teachers use “Darwinism” as synonymous with evolutionary biology, it reinforces such a misleading portrayal and hinders efforts to present the scientific standing of evolution accurately. Accordingly, the term “Darwinism” should be abandoned as a synonym for evolutionary biology.

When we see someone in the MSM getting things horribly wrong we howl in savage delight. Like a pack of African Wild Dogs, we’ll zero in on the lame creature, separating it from the false safety of the herd–all the while yipping for others to join in the hunt–tire the hapless prey and run it to ground, then bite and tear off large dripping chunks as it thrashes instinctively, helplessly. Those of use who don’t partake in the slaughter revel in watching the macabre unfold.

Every so often, though, we must admire our quarries vim and vigor, paying respect to a spirit of vitality. Take a moment to read this strong editorial in the Guardian on “the greatest Englishman since Newton.”

In a democracy, citizens should respect each other’s beliefs; and citizens have a right to express their beliefs. But in a democracy, a newspaper has an obligation to what is right. The truth is that Darwin’s reasoning has in the last 150 years been supported overwhelmingly by discoveries in biology, geology, medicine and space science. The details will keep scientists arguing for another 200 years, but the big picture has not changed. All life is linked by common ancestry, including human life. The shameful lesson of this 200th anniversary of his birth is that Darwin’s contemporaries understood more clearly than many modern Britons.

We sit and file our teeth. For now.

Update: That didn’t take long. Prime cut, highest quality and marbled with flagrant ignorance. Carcass ready for abattoir.

I wouldn’t expect the sensation retailers on the editorial board at New Scientist to get this.

Genetic Experiment Goes Horribly Right

PASADENA, CA—A grotesque and unsettling genetic experiment in which human corneal tissue was grown on the backs of naked mole rats has gone horribly, horribly right, sickened Caltech scientists announced Monday. “Never in our worst nightmares could we have foreseen the appalling success of this advantageous abomination,” head researcher Dr. Trevor Keller said of the phenomenal medical breakthrough, which could potentially treat those suffering from congenital blindness. “Oh the humanity! The benefit to humanity!” Keller said that mankind’s only hope is for his team to continue their research.

The abomination in question.

Larry Moran , suggested this pithless headline, “More evidence that Charles Darwin didn’t know everything there is to be known about evolution when he published his book in 1859.”

Black Stacey called it yellow journalism and even had problems with the relatively more sensible (to biologists at least) editorial inside. Something about how when a distinguished but old scientist says something is possible he’s usually right, and when he says something is impossible he’s usually wrong.

“To gild refined gold, to paint the lily, to throw perfume on the violet, is just fucking silly.”