Sean Carroll debunks the “fine-tuning” argument for God

December 31, 2015 • 2:00 pm

I don’t know how many readers watched Official Website Physicist™ Sean Carroll debate theologian William Lane Craig on whether cosmology gives evidence for God, but nonbeliever Carroll clearly won (I’m not unbiased, of course!). Here Carroll takes apart the argument that the so-called “fine tuning” of the physical constants of the Universe constitutes evidence for God (the “FTA”). Since, as Carroll notes, this is the most “sophisticated” argument for God in theologians’ poorly stocked arsenal, it’s incumbent on us to understand why it’s wrong. I deal with this in Faith Versus Fact, but here’s a nine-minute primer. You might want to watch it before you get drunk tonight.

Carroll is a fluid and eloquent speaker, anticipating and then answering his audience’s objections before they’re even uttered.

Carroll’s written summary of the debate, including the fine-tuning argument, can be found in his post at Preposterious Universe. Here are his five arguments (in his words) why the FTA doesn’t prove theism:

  1. We don’t really know that the universe is tuned specifically for life, since we don’t know the conditions under which life is possible.
  2. Fine-tuning for life would only potentially be relevant if we already accepted naturalism; God could create life under arbitrary physical conditions.
  3. Apparent fine-tunings may be explained by dynamical mechanisms or improved notions of probability.
  4. The multiverse is a perfectly viable naturalistic explanation.
  5. If God had finely-tuned the universe for life, it would look very different indeed. [Carroll considers this his most important point. Here he goes into not only the cosmos, but the nature of human culture which, Carroll avers, comports much better with naturalism than with theism.]

He goes on in his post to explain his own intentions and to dissect Craig’s responses.

I should add that Sean is giving the prestigious Gifford Lectures in October of next year in Glasgow. That lectureship, originally endowed to promote the study of “natural theology” (the observation of nature as evidence for God), has had some prestigious honorees. They include, for example, William James, whose talks became The Varieties of Religious Experience. Other lecturers included Paul Tillich, Hannah Arendt, Arthur Eddington, Reinhold Neibuhr, Carl Sagan, J.B.S. Haldane, and Steven Pinker.  You can see that there are some lecturers, like Haldane, Sagan, and Pinker, who weren’t espousing natural theology at all, but talking about straight naturalism. Kudos on the organizers for starting to include nonbelievers, who, after all, probably have something more substantive to say.

When I asked Sean if he was going to turn the lectures into a book, which I believe is expected, he said he already had. And indeed, the book is already on Amazon, scheduled for publication by Dutton in May. Click on the screenshot to go to the listing:

513x4J1UIiL._SX326_BO1,204,203,200_

I expect that this book will be very good, summarizing Carroll’s views on the implications of particle physics and cosmology for philosophy and our own self-image. Here’s the advance summary:

In short chapters filled with intriguing historical anecdotes, personal asides, and rigorous exposition, readers learn the difference between how the world works at the quantum level, the cosmic level, and the human level–and then how each connects to the other.  Carroll’s presentation of the principles that have guided the scientific revolution from Darwin and Einstein to the origins of life, consciousness, and the universe is dazzlingly unique.

Carroll shows how an avalanche of discoveries in the past few hundred years has changed our world and what really matters to us. Our lives are dwarfed like never before by the immensity of space and time, but they are redeemed by our capacity to comprehend it and give it meaning.

The Big Picture is an unprecedented scientific worldview, a tour de force that will sit on shelves alongside the works of Stephen Hawking, Carl Sagan, Daniel Dennett, and E. O. Wilson for years to come.

I’ll be reading it for sure.

 

World’s unluckiest person: man dies from cancer contracted from his tapeworm

December 31, 2015 • 12:30 pm

I read about this study on LiveScience, and then went to the Nov. 4 issue of The New England Journal of Medicine to check it out. It turns out to be true, and perhaps the case of the unluckiest person on the planet. Well, there are others who die from bad luck (what we call “the unexpected results of the laws of physics”), but this guy died from a quintuple whammy:

  1. He contracted HIV
  2. He also got tapeworms.
  3. One of those tapeworms got “cancer,” probably via a somatic mutation in one of its stem cells
  4. The HIV, weakening his immune system, prevented him from fighting off the neoplasm, which invaded his body from the tapeworm.
  5. The tapeworm cancer spread and ultimately killed him.

This appears to be the first known case of a human dying from a cancer caught from a parasite.  Here’s a screenshot of the article; clicking on it will take you to a summary page where, I think, you can download the full pdf:

Screen Shot 2015-12-31 at 11.58.19 AM

The short story: a 41-year old man in Medellín, Colombia, presented with fever, fatigue, and cough. Stool and body examination revealed cysts of the dwarf tapeworm Hymenolepis nana (one of the most common human tapeworms, usually caught from rodents), as well as cancerous-looking masses in his liver, abdomen and lungs. The cells, however, were not typical of human cancers. The masses proliferated in the lymph nodes, and five months later the man died.

Here’s one figure from the paper showing the tumors and some features of the cells. The caption for these panels is from the paper:

Figure 1  Radiographic and Pathological Features of Malignant Hymenolepis nana. Anteroposterior and axial CT scans in Panels A and B, respectively, show the presence of lung nodules. Panel C shows a biopsy specimen from a cervical lymph node containing firm, solid masses. Panel D shows small, atypical cells in an air-dried lymph-node touch preparation stained with Diff-Quik.

Screen Shot 2015-12-31 at 12.15.05 PM

DNA sequencing of the tumorous masses showed that they derived from H. nana; in other words, they were cancers from a tapeworm. Although these tapeworms weren’t previously known to get cancers, it’s likely that a mutation in the tapeworm’s stem cells, combined with the patient’s compromised immune system, led to the formation of these tumors.

What’s the lesson? It’s not yet clear. They didn’t use human cancer treatments against these masses (the man got anti-tapeworm drugs and anti-retroviral medication), so they’re not sure that will work. But it’s possible that this kind of disease is more widespread than we think, and goes largely undetected because infected patients either don’t present themselves or die of HIV. It’s also not clear whether a person uninfected with HIV could get such malignancies; perhaps an uncompromised immune system could have fought off the mutant tapeworm cells.

12 Days of Evolution #11: Are we still evolving?

December 31, 2015 • 9:30 am

By far the most frequent issue I’m asked about when giving public lectures on evolution is this: “Are humans still evolving? If so, how? Where are we going?” The short answer is “Yes, we’re still evolving, but not in ways that excite most people.” And what answer you give depends on whether you’re talking about whether we’re evolving right now, are referring to the recent past (about 10,000 years ago), or whether you’re talking about the species evolving as a unit or whether different populations are evolving in different directions.

Rather than reprise all the answers, I refer you to a few posts I’ve written about this question (here, herehere, here, and here.)  The answer is that most recent human evolution has involved different populations evolving in different directions (for example, lactose tolerance evolving in pastoral populations, light skin pigmentation evolving in populations farther from the equator, selection for the sickle-cell allele in malaria-infested African populations—though not evolution, since it has led to a situation in which gene frequencies ultimately reach an equilibrium—and selection for genes allowing low oxygen tolerance in Tibetans). Those are all forms of selection sussed out not by looking at differential reproduction of individuals, but at the genetic signature of selection that acted within the last few thousand years in portions of the DNA. As far as “real time” selection measured by looking at offspring production, such studies are again limited to one population (in the US); those show evolution for reduced age of first birth and increased age of menopause in women, and for reduced levels of serum cholesterol.

The video below talks mostly about “ancient” selection (still a good example for those in the know, but one that creationists don’t accept because we weren’t around to see it happen), and about sickle-cell anemia, which is selection that hasn’t led to evolutionary change. (One exception: the sickle-cell allele is decreasing in frequency in US African-Americans, since they don’t experience selection for malaria resistance.) The allele for HIV/AIDS resistance is speculative; I’m not sure we’ve actually seen this allele increase in frequency in Africa.

There are no howlers or blatant mistakes in this video, and it is useful in pointing out that scientists have indeed acquired good evidence for natural selection in our species. But the whole series has suffered by being limited to 1.5-minute videos, severely reducing your chance of absorbing anything.

Website stats: end-of-the-year summary

December 31, 2015 • 8:15 am

Every year WordPress sends me a late-December email giving some yearly summary stats for the site.

First, the number of views. As is so often the case, the most popular posts were largely reposts, in this case the sad tale of Heather McManamy, the dying mother who, an unbeliever, asked people not to tell her young daughter that she was in heaven after she died. I simply put up Heather’s final Facebook post, which was incredibly poignant, and added a few remarks. But my old Mother Teresa post (a simple notice that two Canadian researchers had published a paper criticizing her and her work) continues to be a perennial favorite, rediscovered and put on reddit once or twice a year. By this time next year, she’ll be Saint Teresa.

Screen shot 2015-12-31 at 6.00.14 AM

More data: we didn’t miss a day. Average was about 7.4 posts per day, which seems a bit too many, no?

Screen shot 2015-12-31 at 6.05.00 AM

Below are the most viewed posts (but not necessarily the ones that got the most comments). You can see that the Mother Teresa post, over 2½ years old, still heads the pack. I’m not sure why people keep returning to it.

Screen shot 2015-12-31 at 6.07.56 AM

Here are the most prolific commenters, which will be no surprise to regular readers. I suspect Ben Goren will slip considerably next year due to his new inamorata. I am surprised, though, that a free-will post about the resemblance between compatibilists and creationists (I should have said “theologians” instead of “creationists”) got so much attention.

Screen shot 2015-12-31 at 6.10.18 AM

And here are the views by country for the year. As far as I can see, we’re missing only the Central African Republic and North Korea (one blessed year we had two views from the DPRK, but of course Internet is prohibited to all but high officials there). Svalbald looks blank, but it counts as part of Norway.

Screen shot 2015-12-31 at 6.23.34 AM

Top ten countries (total views):


Screen shot 2015-12-31 at 6.25.25 AM

Bottom ten countries:

Screen shot 2015-12-31 at 6.26.10 AM

Readers’ wildlife photographs

December 31, 2015 • 7:00 am

I’ve included a couple of landscapes in today’s photographs, and thanks to the many readers who sent me photos over the holidays. This lovely photo is by Rick Wayne:

My previous wildlife photo submission included an elk strolling along Yellowstone Lake. So I have to include another picture of Yellowstone Lake, but this is the one in Wisconsin, in the eponymous state park. The light pollution alone gives it away, but actually helps this composition:
vert_composite
 And from Old Blighty, two pastoral photos by reader Mark Jones:

I enclose a couple of shots of Chanctonbury Ring, a hill fort now planted with trees, on the South Downs; the second features some Belted Galloways clinging to the side of the hill.

20150521-chanctonbury

20150521-galloways

Not to neglect other beasts, Stephen Barnard sent some photos from Silver Creek Ranch in Idaho; here are two:

This pair of female pronghorns (Antilocapra americana) has been hanging out in my alfalfa field for several days. They graze under about 2 feet of snow. Deets [the border collie] knows, but he’s given up on his utterly futile attempts to herd them.

I’m not sure why Deets is failing, but the pronghorn is the world’s second fastest land mammal—second only to the cheetah. And remember, it’s not an antelope, but occupies its own family (the Antilocapridae), and its closest living relatives are actually the giraffe and okapi.

RT9A2860

Red-tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicensis) getting ready for a quick take-off by discarding excess weight.

I had trouble spotting the poop: I thought it was a twig!

RT9A2882

Finally, two photos of a Northern Harrier (Circus cyaneus):

RT9A2781

RT9A2788

Thursday: Hili dialogue (and squirrel lagniappe)

December 31, 2015 • 6:00 am

It’s the last day of 2015, Coynezaa is officially at an end, and those of us who will stay up (probably not including me) will see in the New Year tonight. Posting will be light until tomorrow as PCC(E) has business to attend to, but the end-of-the-year website report will be forthcoming today. Which post was most popular? Who commented the most? What countries didn’t have a single reader? All that and more; stay tuned. Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Hili is messing with her staff again; she’s probably petulant because it’s been too cold for her to stay out for very long:

Hili: I have a New Year resolution.
A: What resolution?
Hili: Not to make any resolutions.

P1030741

In Polish:
Hili: Mam noworoczną obietnicę.
Ja: Jaką?
Hili: Że niczego nie będę obiecywać.
A birthday squirrel from Anne-Marie Cournoyer and Claude Pelletier:
Squirrel of the day signals at you with his tail. (A nice question mark, isn’t it?) He hopes you’re happy! And healthy. And ready for the winter! Happy birthday!
DSCN0704
And, as an extra end-of-year treat, here’s Gus carefully stepping in the footprints of owner Taskin:
Gus went out leashless yesterday and followed my footstep trail out to the bird feeder.

 

12 Days of Evolution. #10: Why are there still monkeys?

December 30, 2015 • 1:30 pm

This the tenth video in the PBS/”It’s Okay to be Smart” series—and that series can’t end too soon for me—is a response to that perennial creationist question, “If humans evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?” The no-brainer response is decent, but it neglects the important part of the answer: both modern apes and modern humans evolved from a common ancestor that was not the same as any modern ape or hominin. That’s an important thing to say! We no longer see the ape-y ancestors that gave rise to modern humans, chimps, gorillas, and so on. In fact, the video’s answer, “There are still apes because apes are good at being apes,” doesn’t really answer the question. Apes are good at being apes so long as their environment doesn’t change so radically that apes go extinct.

But in maybe in just a few generations, it won’t be possible to ask this question, as there will be only one species of ape left: H. sapiens.

It’s all just very confusing, conflating, as the other videos in the series have done, a number of diverse issues.

A day at the Aquarium, part 2

December 30, 2015 • 12:15 pm

by Greg Mayer

Having emphazised the cartilaginous inhabitants of the  Okinawa Churaumi Aquarium yesterday, let’s go to a distant part of the phylogenetic tree today: manatees. There are three species of manatees (Trichechus), all in the tropical Atlantic or Atlantic drainages; this is either the West Indian (T. manatus) or West African (T. senegalensis) species.

A manatee
A manatee

The manatees were feeding on aquatic plants. Note that this one is using it’s right forelimb to manipulate the food.

A manatee feeding, using its right 'hand'.
A manatee feeding, using its right ‘hand’.

Their skin texture was interesting; I’m not sure what the white structures all over the skin are (hair?).

Closeup of a manatee's head while feeding
Closeup of a manatee’s head while feeding

And, in this very interesting view, we see a manatee supporting itself off the bottom with its right forelimb. We can clearly see its ‘fingernails’. (They are true nails– but it sort of doesn’t have fingers.)

Manatee supporting itself on its right forelimb. Note the nails and the flexure in the limb.
Manatee supporting itself on its right forelimb. Note the nails and the flexure in the limb.

In the picture above, we can also see the limb is flexed. The most distal curve, nearest the nails, is the joint between the phalanges and metacarpals; this is an extension. A bit above this, there is a slight flexion of the wrist joint. The elbow joint is considerably higher, near the body, with a slight flexion. This shows that, though paddle shaped, the limb is not stiff, but retains considerable mobility distal to the shoulder joint, allowing the manatee to use the limb in balancing and propulsion on the bottom, and, as seen three pictures above, as an aid in feeding. The diagram below shows the manatee’s limb skeleton, which shows the familiar “one bone, two bones, many bones” pattern of tetrapods and their immediate lobed fin ancestors.

Forelimb skeleton of the West Indian manatee, from
Forelimb skeleton of the West Indian manatee, Fig. 379 from Henry Alleyne Nicholson, 1880, A Manual of Zoology, Blackwood (http://chestofbooks.com/animals/Manual-Of-Zoology/index.html).

I’ve been fascinated by manatees and their relatives (the mammalian order Sirenia) ever since reading years ago about Steller’s sea cow (Hydrodamalis gigas), a giant sirenian of the cold North Pacific, which was discovered by scientists in 1741 and extinct by 1768. (There have been some intriguing late sight records, but none have panned out). Then, in graduate school at the Museum of Comparative Zoology, I walked underneath the following Steller’s sea cow skeleton almost every day (it hung in a different hall back then; it’s now in the main mammal hall). Note that this specimen lacks the distal parts of its forelimbs.

Steller's seacow at the MCZ, by
Steller’s seacow at the MCZ, by mhmcfee (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tankgrrl/4665058027/in/album-72157624069183829/).

The evolution of sirenians from terrestrial ancestors is fairly well documented in the fossil record, much of the work being done by Daryl Domning of Howard University. The story is not as widely known as that of whales, and I don’t know of any single sirenian evolution website, but you could start learning the story here and here.