THIS is what the Science March should have been about, and who should have been its honorary chair

April 20, 2017 • 8:30 am

Below is a 5-minute video Neil deGrasse Tyson just posted on his Facebook page, saying that it contains perhaps “the most important words” he’d ever spoken. Although I’ve had my differences with Tyson, this video, outlining the benefits of science, calling out society for losing the ability to judge what is scientifically true, and criticizing those people who “rise to power” despite their ignorance of and contempt for science—yes, this video is eloquent and powerful. Tyson’s main example, at 1:14, is Mike Pence in Congress saying “Let us demand that educators around America teach evolution not as fact, but as theory.” What a maroon! (Pence is now, of course, America’s Vice President.) Tyson also alludes to GMOs, global warming, and vaccination.

Tyson’s message is this: today, more than any time in his lifetime, he sees people “standing in denial of science.” He briefly discusses the toolkit of science and how it produces truth, which it does “better than anything we’ve ever come up with as human beings.” Those truths, he adds, should be used to inform political conversations like that about global warming. What we decide to do based on those facts may be moral or philosophical or political choices, but science can inform them.

The message to me: science is not politics itself (it’s a toolkit for finding truth) but should be used to inform politics whenever possible. THAT, to me, should have been the overriding message of the Science March. Period—perhaps with a few examples of the type Tyson gave. And had that been the Science March message, I’d be out there in the streets behind Tyson—though I haven’t heard whether he is marching. Note that he said nothing about the problems with the nature of America’s scientific establishment or about identity politics.  I suppose there are those who would argue: “Wait a minute: he should have added say that science is bigoted, oppresses minorities, and has done bad stuff!” But there’s a reason he didn’t use this video to flagellate the field.

THIS is the guy who should have been the honorary chairman of the Science March.

Video and Tyson’s intro below:

h/t: Barry

Readers’ wildlife photos (and video)

April 20, 2017 • 7:30 am

Reader Greg Geisler sent some additional photos of Western Screech Owls (Megascops kennicottii), with bonus chicks! His notes are indented:

You may recall the photos of the adult Western Screech Owl I sent a while back that you posted. This weekend we noticed some furry little heads poking out of the roosting box when mom wasn’t sitting there. There are at least 2 young ones inside, and I managed to get a few decent photos and a short video before they ducked back down into the box. The male sits diligently in a nearby tree during the day and we see him swooping in and out at night with prey he has captured and delivers to the box. The female, when not in the box, sits in a different adjacent tree and keeps an eye on it. We have seen the male dive bomb a squirrel and bluejay who came too close to the box, so he’s being a good protector!

The roosting box:

This chick looks a little peaked:

Here’s one adult from the previous post:

And Greg sent a short movie as well:

Thursday: Hili dialogue

April 20, 2017 • 6:30 am

Welcome to Thursday, April 20, 2017! And it’s an extra good day because it’s National Pineapple Upside-Down Cake Day, a cake I dearly love (even when made with canned pineapple), but which I haven’t had in ages! It’s also “4/20” Day (in American date style), and 420 is widely celebrated as a number connected with marijuana (see the link for the tortuous reason why).

On this day in 1535 a “sun dog” appeared over Stockholm, and was celebrated in the famous painting “Vädersolstavlan“ (“sun dog painting” in Swedish), whose artist isn’t known for sure. Here’s a freaky 17th-century copy by Jacob Elbfas; as Wikipedia notes, “While chiefly noted for being the oldest depiction of Stockholm in colour, it is arguably also the oldest Swedish landscape painting and the oldest depiction of sun dogs.” [The sun dogs aren’t really accurate.]

On this day in 1861, Robert E. Lee resigned his commission in the U.S. Army to begin serving for the Confederacy in the Army of Virginia. On April 20, 1862, Pasteur and Bernard completed their experiment falsifying the idea of spontaneous generation. On this day in 1902, Marie and Pierre Curie isolated radium chloride, the first compound of radium obtained in a pure state. Exactly 14 years later, the ill-fated Chicago Cubs played their first game in what is now Wrigley Field. On April 20, 1961, the U.S.-sponsored Bay of Pigs Invasion failed miserably, and in 1999 the Columbine school massacre took place, killing 13 and injuring 24.

Notables born on this day include Odilon Redon (1840), Adolf Hitler (1889), Joan Miró (1893), Willi Hennig (1913), and Jessica Lange (1949; my year!),  To wash out the bad taste of Hitler, here’s a lovely painting by Redon:

Those who died on April 20 include Archibald MacLeish (1982), Benny Hill (1992), and Cantinflas (1993). Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, little Hania, who used to live upstairs, has returned for a visit with her parents—and Hili finds she isn’t so little any more!

Hania: Did you grow up?
Hili: No, you grew up, I’ve just increased a bit.
In Polish:
Hania: Czy ty urosłaś?
Hili: Nie, ty urosłaś, ja się troszkę powiększyłam.

HuffPost publishes post urging that white men be disenfranchised, first defends it and then removes it because it was a hoax

April 19, 2017 • 1:36 pm

I think I’m gonna lay off PuffHo after this one; I’m tired of reading them, I’m tired of criticizing them as a widely-read but Regressive Leftist organization, and they’re probably already licking their wounds over their latest gaffe.

What was it? They published an article by one “Shelley Garland” called “Could it be time to deny white men the franchise?” That article no longer is available at HuffPo—and that’s part of the story—but you can find it archived here.  The author identified herself as a student at the University of Cape Town working on a master’s degree in philosophy, and as an “activist and feminist working on ways to smash the patriarchy.” That last bit should have raised a red flag to at least half mast, but it didn’t. What was worse, though, was the article itself, for it called for white men worldwide to not only be politically disenfranchised, losing the vote for several decades, but also to have their property confiscated and redistributed. Here are a few quotes:

Some of the biggest blows to the progressive cause in the past year have often been due to the votes of white men. If white men were not allowed to vote, it is unlikely that the United Kingdom would be leaving the European Union, it is unlikely that Donald Trump would now be the President of the United States, and it is unlikely that the Democratic Alliance would now be governing four of South Africa’s biggest cities.

If white men no longer had the vote, the progressive cause would be strengthened. It would not be necessary to deny white men indefinitely – the denial of the vote to white men for 20 years (just less than a generation) would go some way to seeing a decline in the influence of reactionary and neo-liberal ideology in the world. The influence of reckless white males were one of the primary reasons that led to the Great Recession which began in 2008. This would also strike a blow against toxic white masculinity, one that is long needed.

At the same time, a denial of the franchise to white men, could see a redistribution of global assets to their rightful owners. After all, white men have used the imposition of Western legal systems around the world to reinforce modern capitalism. A period of twenty years without white men in the world’s parliaments and voting booths will allow legislation to be passed which could see the world’s wealth far more equitably shared. The violence of white male wealth and income inequality will be a thing of the past.

. . . Some may argue that this is unfair. Let’s be clear, it may be unfair, but a moratorium on the franchise for white males for a period of between 20 and 30 years is a small price to pay for the pain inflicted by white males on others, particularly those with black, female-identifying bodies.

Well, that’s strong stuff, and racist and unfair as well, but of course HuffPo (the article originated in HuffPo South Africa) defended it as consonant with feminism, and even gloated at the hits that odious piece got! Their defense was later removed, but, called “This Blog On White Men Is Going Viral. Here’s Our Response“, it’s been archived. Here’s part of their defense, given after they list some of the pushback on social media against “Shelley Garland”‘s article:

Garland’s underlying analysis about the uneven distribution of wealth and power in the world is pretty standard for feminist theory. It has been espoused in many different ways by feminist writers and theorists for decades now. In that sense, there was nothing in the article that should have shocked or surprised anybody (or so we thought.) It would appear that perhaps much of the outcry derives from a very poor reading of the article — or perhaps none at all. [JAC: Poor reading? It’s pretty clear to me!] Dismantling the patriarchal systems that have brought us to where we are today, a world where power is wielded to dangerous and destructive ends by men, and in particular white men, necessarily means a loss of power to those who hold it. A loss of oppressive power. Those who have held undue power granted to them by patriarchy must lose it for us to be truly equal. This seems blindingly obvious to us.

This doesn’t necessarily mean we agree or endorse everything in Garland’s blog. The point of our Voices section is to invite a wide array of voices and views. [JAC: Don’t make me laugh!]

We hope, as reads continue to rack up on this blog, that those who are tempted to fire off an angry email to us would first engage with the underlying analysis in Garland’s blog. [JAC: they did!]

Here’s a tweet (now deleted) in which HuffPo blogging editor Sipho Hlongwane defended the piece:

And HuffPo South Africa defended the piece as well:

 

White Men And The Vote: Why We Took The Blog Down

Huffington Post SA has removed the blog “Could It Be Time To Deny White Men The Franchise?” published on our site on April 13, 2017.

13/04/2017 03:56 SAST | Updated 12 hours ago

Huffington Post SA has removed the blog “Could It Be Time To Deny White Men The Franchise?” published on our Voices section on April 13, 2017.

We have done this because the blog submission from an individual who called herself Shelley Garland, who claimed to be an MA student at UCT, cannot be traced and appears not to exist.

We have immediately bolstered and strengthened our blogging procedures that, until now, have operated on the basis of open communication and good faith. From now on, bloggers will have to verify themselves.

We will hold discussions on putting in place even better quality controls.

In addition, we note the commentary on the content of the blog post and will submit it to the South African Press Ombudsman Joe Thloloe for his analysis of the opinion we carried.

Huffington Post SA stands aligned to the Constitutional values of South Africa, particularly the Preamble of our Constitution which states that: “We the people of South Africa believe that South Africa belongs to all who live in it, united in our diversity.”

We further understand that universal enfranchisement followed a long struggle and we fully support this.

In addition, Huffington Post South Africa is a signatory to and supporter of the South Africa Press Code. We support free expression as limited by the following value as set out in that code.

5. Discrimination and Hate Speech

5.1. Except where it is strictly relevant to the matter reported and it is in the public interest to do so, the media shall avoid discriminatory or denigratory references to people’s race, gender, sex, pregnancy, marital status, ethnic or social origin, colour, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, language and birth or other status, nor shall it refer to people’s status in a prejudicial or pejorative context.

5.2. The media has the right and indeed the duty to report and comment on all matters of legitimate public interest. This right and duty must, however, be balanced against the obligation not to publish material that amounts to propaganda for war, incitement of imminent violence, or advocacy of hatred that is based on race, ethnicity, gender or religion, and that constitutes incitement to cause harm.

We apologise for the oversight. We welcome further discussion. Please email blogs@huffpostsa.com.

Well, would they have published the piece if they verified that Shelley Garland did indeed exist? That’s what they imply, but at the same time they say her article violated their own speech code and was “hate speech”. Which is it, PuffHo?

What I think happened is that HuffPo South Africa published a piece that resonated with their own ideology, which includes blaming the world’s woes on white men, without thinking too hard about what it means to take the vote away from a whole group of people and redistributing their property.  And, had the author not been a hoaxer, the article would be up still, because they’d refused to remove it on the grounds of content alone. What we see is a Sokal-style hoax that exposes PuffHo’s identity politics—an invidious identity politics that is explicitly racist.

Well, I’m done with this venue for the time being. Disenfranchising people isn’t right just because they’re not an “oppressed minority”. What happened to equal rights for everyone, including voting rights?

The Science March: why I’ve opted out

April 19, 2017 • 11:15 am

In the past two days. I’ve been interviewed by five media outlets: two television stations, one radio station, one journalism review, and one newspaper.  All of them want one thing: to use me as someone opposed to the Science March (I’m not marching for reasons I’ve articulated, this one being the last straw, telling me that the organizers have an ideological agenda and are merely hiding it in the face of pushback). Yet the journalists are diverse in their  background knowledge: some have read what I’ve said or written about the March, others are clueless about nearly everything, and one even misrepresented to me the views of another person on a proposed discussion panel to make me think the discussion was “balanced.”

Again, the main reasons I will not be participating are that the March hasn’t clearly articulated its goals, is infused with identity politics, has organizers that are ham-handed and are constantly revising its goals and “diversity statement” (and withdraw tweets!), have appointed Bill Nye, who’s not even a scientist, as one of its honorary chairs (that caused another fracas because he’s an Old White Man), and, mainly, because I don’t want to waste my time on a march that, I think, will be useless at best and counterproductive at worst. This is my decision and I don’t ask others not to participate. I will continue to do my bit for science, writing about it and popularizing my own field, and weighing in politically when and where I can, but, as the old song goes, “I ain’t a-marchin’ anymore.”

My views will be aired in at least three of the five venues (I haven’t decided about the others), so stay tuned for links, all within a week. I’ve spoken in much more detail with some of these folks, so my reasons will be clearer when the shows are aired and the publications appear. I’ve been in many marches in my life, but the goals of the others were clearer, and those marches weren’t riven by factionalism and tests of ideological purity. I prefer to stand up for science on my own.

The Science March takes place this Saturday.

A new and legal way to read scientific papers, even if they’re behind a journal paywall

April 19, 2017 • 9:15 am

If you’re a scientist or a layperson who’s frustrated by the inability to access paywalled science articles (even if the research was funded by the public!), this is a browser extension you need. Called “Unpaywall“, it’s a free extension (go to previous link) Chrome and Firefox. You add it to your browser with just a mouse click, comme ça (click on screenshot):

Once you’ve installed the extension, and you get to a paper that’s paywalled, do this: if it has a green tab beside it, just click on the tab and the extension searches the web for author-loaded and other open-access versions of the pdf. This will be successful, the developers say, 60-85% of the time. (FAQ here).  And it’s perfectly legal; in fact, it was developed with grants from the National Science Foundation and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.

Try it. If you click on the green button below and have the extension, you’ll go t0 a Nature article with a free pdf (just click the screenshot below):

Again, this is legal, and the site doesn’t collect information about you or your browsing habits. You can read more about it at the Unpaywall site, or at the article about the extension published at Open Culture.

I’ve added the extension, and recommend it. Published science should be free for all readers, especially because, at least in the U.S. and U.K., most published science is funded by taxpayers who support governmental granting agencies. It’s simply unfair to charge the taxpayer to access research they’ve already paid for!

If you’d like to see other free sources for reading journal articles, go to the list and links at MetaFilter.

h/t: Greg

Readers’ wildlife photos

April 19, 2017 • 8:00 am

Today we have another batch of fantastic photos of peregrine falcons taken by Bruce Lyon. It even has a title! His text is indented.

Peregrines during Jerry’s peregrinations

Jerry’s put up previous posts on these bird s(see here, here, here, here, and here), and it’s nesting season again for the pair of peregrine falcons (Falco peregrinus) I have been observing for the past four years along the California coast between Santa Cruz and San Francisco. Every year the pair has nested in a small cave in a cliff above the ocean. This year I was lucky enough to watch the female lay her first egg in mid-March. This post, however, is about last year’s nest, but I include a photo of the normal cave nest site to put last year’s turn of events into perspective.

Below: March of this year—the female walks to the nest with three eggs at the back of the small cave; the next day she laid a fourth egg and the both adults have since shared in incubation. When walking to the eggs the falcons resemble parrots which is not that surprising since we have learned in the past decade that the falcons are close to parrots on the avian family tree (and not related to hawks and eagles).

Last year, the birds nested in the same cave they used in the two previous years, but that nest was not successful, for unknown reasons (the eggs disappeared between my weekly visits). Previous studies of peregrines in central California found that they will often have a second nesting attempt after a failed first nest. My birds did eventually re-nest but they shocked me by their choice of nest site. The second nest was a tiny open shelf at the top of the cliff, at eye level and very close to where I always sit to observe the birds! It does not get better than this from a natural history perspective—tame falcons nesting at eye level in an open photogenic spot.

Below: The male settling in to incubate the three chestnut eggs. I find the egg color quite beautiful.

Below: A close-up of the male turning the eggs.

Below:  The female was snoozing when the male showed up to take a turn at incubation. The fact that she was snoozing while I sat 40 feet away shows how comfortable the birds had become with me. Perhaps they see me as just another dumb cow on the landscape.

Below: The male’s sudden arrival startled the sleeping female; she started to fall over and had to spread her wings to maintain balance.

Below: The female with two fairly recent hatchlings.

Below: Ten days later the male checks out the one surviving chick. The brood was quickly reduced to one chick, presumably due to limited food. Some starvation is normal in falcons, and peregrines and many other birds have a mechanism to efficiently cull the brood size (“brood reduction”) if it turns out they laid an overly optimistic number of eggs. They create an asynchronous hatch by starting incubating the eggs before all have been laid. This gives the early eggs a head start and a competitive advantage should food be limiting.

The adults each have their roles and the female seems to be the one who controls food at the nest. Whenever the male brought food directly to the nest she would rush to the nest to get the food from him. The sequence of photos below shows such an encounter. The male showed up with a freshly killed female red-winged blackbird and perched for a bit on a nearby rock before flying to the nest. As soon as he went to the nest the female showed up within seconds. The male then took off with the prey item, with the female following in hot pursuit. She eventually got the blackbird from him in an aerial transfer and then returned to the nest with it. Amusingly, the chick then stole the prey item from her and it took her a few minutes to get it back from the chick.

Below: The male perched next to the nest with a female red-winged blackbird.

Below: Before the male could even land at the nest with the prey the female showed up, causing him to take off with the meal.

Below: As the chick got older it started to harass the parents, perhaps telling them it was hungry and that they should go at get some dinner for it. Here the chick has rushed the female who was perched at the nest and she complains and decides to leave.

Below: Another example where the male showed up at the nest with prey, only to have the female arrive within seconds and cause the male to leave. In this particular encounter, I had watched the pair kill the prey item about half an hour earlier. The male and female went after a mourning dove that they had watched go in and roost in a bush on a hillside several hundred yards (meters) away from the nest. The female flushed the dove from the bush and the male then nailed it. This photo was taken in the evening and had lovely backlighting, an effect I am very fond of.

Below: The chick five days before fledgling. It is hanging onto a branch while flapping furiously, presumably to strengthen its flight muscles in preparation for real flight.