Why Evolution is True is a blog written by Jerry Coyne, centered on evolution and biology but also dealing with diverse topics like politics, culture, and cats.
We have some younger photographers who are very promising. One is Jamie Blilie. His father James sent in Jamie’s photos in April with some notes and IDs:
Here are some more photos from my son, Jamie, age 13. Shot with his Canon Powershot SX530 HS camera.
This one is a little unusual: Yellow-rumped Warbler (a.k.a. Audubon’s Warbler, Setophaga coronata):
Good morning on a not-too-hot summer day in Chicago; it’s July 8, 2017. Is everyone having a good time? If not, it’s National Chocolate with Almonds Day, though I prefer mine plain, undiluted with nutmeats.
On this day in 1497, Vasco da Gama set out from Lisbon, sailed around Africa, and landed in what is now Kerala, India, on May 20 of the next year. It was the first sea voyage from Europe to India. On this day in 1932, the Dow Jones Industrial Average hit its lowest point during the Depression, closing at 41.22. As of yesterday it was 21,414.34, about 522 times higher. Finally, on this day in 1994, Kim Il-sung died, leaving the leadership of North Korea in the hands of Kim Jong-il. He’s been in charge for over 45 years. After his death, the government abolished the office of President, which Il-sung (is that the way to say it?) held, and designated the dead leader as Eternal President of the Republic. He’s therefore still in charge—as a stiff! (His body is preserved à la Mao, and is on display.) Here are the 22.5 meter high statues of the first Dear Leader and his son at the Mansu Hill Grand Monument—an obligatory stop for all visitors to the DPRK.
Notable born on this day include John D. Rockefeller (1839), Nelson Rockefeller (1908), Billy Eckstine (1914), Jaimoe, drummer for the Allman Brothers (1944), and Joan Osborne (1962). In honor of Joan’s birthday, have a listen to her rousing version of “Heat Wave,” accompanied by the Funk Brothers, the original Motown backup musicians. It’s the best version by anyone other than Martha and the Vandellas:
And let’s not forget Billy Eckstine, a great vocalist and musician who’s been largely forgotten. What a mellow voice he had! Have a listen:
Those who died on this day include Elihu Yale (1721; his riches helped found the eponymous University), Kim Il-Sung (see above), Sir John Templeton (2008, his legacy is bad), and Ernest Borgnine (2012). Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Hili is again trying to perplex her interlocutor:
Hili: I’m trying to understand.
A: What are you trying to understand?
Hili: What I see.
A: And what do you see?
Hili: That’s what I’m trying to understand.
Who’s on first?
In Polish:
Hili: Próbuję zrozumieć.
Ja: Co próbujesz zrozumieć?
Hili:To, co widzę.
Ja: A co widzisz?
Hili: Właśnie to próbuję zrozumieć.
Stephen Barnard sent a photo of the kitten Jerry Coyne VI, now owned by his tenant. (You can see Jerry VI when he’d just been caught, around June 11, here. At that time he was named Jerry Coyne V, but then we realized that another Jerry Coyne the Cat, the real Fifth, was in New Mexico and had been forgotten). This one is captioned “Mountain lion in the desert”:
Ben Goren has a new kitten named Vega; he caught it roaming about on the street. So far Baihu, Ben’s other cat, has tolerated it. Vega has been taken to the vet, de-flead, and appears otherwise healthy:
Finally, out in Winnipeg, gus went to bed after dinner. Here’s his photo, titled “Gus snoozing on the deck”
Reader Bill B. sent a link to a video about a blind raccoon (I’d call him “Milton”) who, mirabile dictu, has survived in the wild (albeit with human help) for five years.
This is a Blind Raccoon. He is at least 5 years old and has been coming to our house for about 5 years. There is something wrong with his tapetum lucidum. His eyes shine bright green during the day. He is at least partially blind. He walks into things. He is afraid of the wind, high grass, birds, and snow.
He is out and about during the day. He comes to our house for food early in the morning usually around 6-9AM. He often returns for seconds and sometimes comes back for thirds. His bottom lip is missing so we feed him soft pasta noodles soaked in cream of chicken soup. We often cut up small pieces of hot dogs, ham, pork, etc. He refuses to eat canned cat/dog food.
Recently (late October 2014) 2 black kittens have been hanging around our yard. And they became close with the Blind Raccoon. They would magically appear when he would come for food. So they figured out that Blind Raccoon = FOOD. So they would appear when the Blind Raccoon (and sometimes other raccoons) would show up.
And then THIS happened today….
Well, I’m not sure what “THIS” is, unless it’s the kittens following the raccoon about, but what lovely people to feed him such fancy food! Sadly, the raccoon died in 2015, but he lived at least twice as long as wild raccoons, or so the staff says in the comments.
The Johnson Amendment, in effect since 1954, is in fact named after Lyndon Johnson, who introduced it as a congressman. It’s part of the U.S. Tax Code, and specifies behavior prohibited for 501(c)(3) non-profit organizations (the amendment itself is the part in bold below):
(3) Corporations, and any community chest, fund, or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational purposes, or to foster national or international amateur sports competition (but only if no part of its activities involve the provision of athletic facilities or equipment), or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals, no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual, no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation (except as otherwise provided in subsection (h)), and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.
These organizations, the most important of which are churches, are thus prohibited from siding with one candidate or party, or criticizing others. They are, however, allowed to engage in nonpartisan activities like voter-registration drives.
There are two reasons why this amendment is necessary in a secular country. First, churches are already subsidized by taxpayers with respect to property taxes, other taxes, and ministerial housing allowances, and if churches became partisan it would be partly at the taxpayers’ expense. Further, if you made a political donation to a church that endorsed a candidate or party, that donation would be tax-deductible (unlike other political contributions) and also by law would not be “disclosable” like other donations are. This would produce an invidious inconsistency in how political donations are made. Polls have shown that the public, most clergy, and nonprofit umbrella organizations favor this amendment and frown on churches being able to endorse candidates.
Trump has been against this amendment since he began running as a candidate; as Wikipedia notes:
During his 2016 presidential campaign, Donald Trump called for the repeal of the amendment. On February 2, 2017, President Trump vowed at the National Prayer Breakfast to “totally destroy” the Johnson Amendment, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer announced to the press that the President “committed to get rid of the Johnson Amendment”, “allowing our representatives of faith to speak freely and without retribution”, and Republican lawmakers introduced legislation that would allow all 501(c)(3) organizations to support political candidates, as long as any associated spending was minimal.
On May 4, 2017, Trump signed the “Presidential Executive Order Promoting Free Speech and Religious Liberty.” The executive order does not (nor can it) repeal the Johnson Amendment, nor does it allow preachers to endorse from the pulpit, but it does direct the Department of Treasury that “churches should not be found guilty of implied endorsements where secular organizations would not be.” Douglas Laycock, speaking to The Washington Post, indicated that he was not aware of any cases where such implied endorsements have caused problems in the past.
As the Washington Post reports, Congress is trying to do an end run around the tax code by gutting the government’s ability to investigate transgressions of this amendment:
Many pastors already ignore the so-called Johnson Amendment, and the IRS rarely investigates churches that violate a law that many clergy feel provides a chilling effect on their free speech. But some observers fear the language proposed in a new spending bill released this week would make it difficult for the IRS to investigate any claims of pulpit politicking or money flowing between houses of worship and political campaigns.
During his campaign for the presidency, Donald Trump targeted the Johnson Amendment as a big part of his pitch to religious conservatives, but because the amendment is law, repealing it would take an act of Congress.
Instead of trying to repeal the amendment, legislators appear to be targeting it through a spending bill that says the IRS can’t use funds to investigate a church for breach of the Johnson Amendment without the sign-off of the IRS commissioner, who must report to Congress on the investigation.
Why is this happening? Because, of course, it’s Trump and the Republicans catering to their conservative Christian base—a base that wants churches to endorse conservative candidates (those who are, for instance, anti-gay and anti-abortion). The Post also points out that if churches were allowed to engage in political endorsements, politicians could pressure churches by various means to direct their endorsements in a particular direction.
I’ll follow this measure over time to see if it passes. If it does, it’s just another breach in the real wall the U.S. needs: the one between church and state. It may not get the attention of the Great Mexican Wall, or of the dismantling of Obamacare, but it’s part of the metastasizing theocracy that is part of Trump’s plan—though he’s probably an atheist—to appeal to his supporters.
What do you think when someone who espouses oppressive, religiously based views, and favors the adoption of sharia law, also hates and campaigns against Donald Trump? Well, you can agree with her about Trump but disagree about the other stuff. That, I suppose, is my view about Linda Sarsour, a hijabi who has often praised sharia law and has also called for the (presumably symbolic) removal of Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s vagina (apparently not realizing that some of it had already been removed by FGM). But self-proclaimed Leftists go farther and absolutely worship the woman. She was one of the co-leaders of the Women’s March on Washington, and regularly appears as a Leftist icon, despite the fact that if she were President, we’d be living under a very different kind of law. Wearing a hijab doesn’t make you a hero, but the Cntrl-Left sees the garment as a sign of her moral value, because it means she’s oppressed (she’s not). She is the symbol of what I see as a dangerous alliance between the Left and a repressive form of Islam.
Though at some point she calls for “jihad” against the Trump administration, I’m not going to make anything of that, for although the word can mean a real battle against the enemies of Islam, it can also mean simply a “struggle” for what are considered good aims, and that’s what Sarsour says she means. The word in this speech has been seized upon by the right-wing press as a call for terrorism, which is a huge overreaction and misunderstanding (did they hear what she said?). Rather, I’d point out her repeated praises to Allah, like Republicans praising God (she says Muslim’s top priority should be “to please Allah, and only Allah,” something that scares me); her statement that the Muslim community should be “perpetually outraged every single day” (18:56, that’s a mindset that led to Muslim riots and murders over the Danish cartoons and Rushdie’s The Satanic Verses, as well as to a British teacher’s arrest and imprisonment in Sudan for naming a teddy bear “Muhammad”); her assertions that “if you’re not with us, you’re against us”; her call for people to invest in dubious propaganda organizations like CAIR, and her praising her mentor and “favorite person in the room,” Siraj Wahhaj. Wahhaj (born Jeffrey Kearse) is a black American imam (a convert to Islam) at the Al-Taqwa mosque in Brooklyn, New York, where Sarsour lives, and the leader of The Muslim Alliance in North America (MANA). Sarsour describes Wajjah as “a mentor, a motivator, and encourager” who advised her to “speak truth to power and not worry about the consequences.”
Wahhaj is a dubious character, and was listed by prosectors as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, though he denies any involvement and was never charged.
Wahhaj has long supported every facet of Sharia Law, including its call for brutal punishments like the removal of one’s hands as the penalty for theft, and death by stoning as the penalty for adultery. By Wahhaj’s reckoning, such harsh measures are wholly justified by Islamic scripture. As he proclaimed in a May 1992 sermon: “I would cut off the hands of my own daughter [if she stole] because Allah stands for Justice.” On another occasion, Wahhaj said: “If Allah says 100 strikes, 100 strikes it is. If Allah says cut off their hand, you cut off their hand. If Allah says stone them to death, through the Prophet Muhammad, then you stone them to death, because it’s the obedience of Allah and his messenger—nothing personal.”
Wahhaj has been a longtime supporter of Hizb ut-Tahrir, an organization that seeks to create a worldwide Islamic caliphate, or kingdom, governed by Sharia Law. In the summer of 1994, Wahhaj attended a Hizb ut-Tahrir conference in London, where Islamists openly called for jihad, denounced democracy, and declared that “the Islamic system is the only alternative for mankind.” Less than a week later, back in the U.S., Wahhaj lauded Hizb ut-Tahrir’s “scholarly brothers” for their “good insight” and “their pushing for the Khilafah [Caliphate].”
In 1995, U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White named Wahhaj as a possible co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Soon thereafter, Wahhaj stated during one of his Al-Taqwa sermons, “I’m not frightened by no list, by no government! I thank Allah. I’m honored that they thought enough of me to put me on a list.”
Wikipedia says this, with supporting links:
Wahhaj has made statements in support of Islamic laws over liberal democracy. He also supports capital punishments such as stoning for adultery and cutting off of hands for thievery. He has said: “Islam is better than democracy. Allah will cause his deen [Islam as a complete way of life], Islam to prevail over every kind of system, and you know what? It will happen.”
He has also said: “If Allah says 100 strikes, 100 strikes it is. If Allah says cut off their hand, you cut off their hand. If Allah says stone them to death, through the Prophet Muhammad, then you stone them to death, because it’s the obedience of Allah and his messenger—nothing personal.”
And here are some quotes by Wahhaj provided by the Clarion Project:
“If only Muslims were clever politically, they could take over the United States and replace its constitutional government with a caliphate. If we were united and strong, we’d elect our own emir and give allegiance to him. Take my word, if eight million Muslims unite in America, the country will come to us,” Wahhaj said in 1992.[5]
“As long as you remember that if you get involved in politics, you have to be very careful that your leader is for Allah. You don’t get involved in politics because it’s the American thing to do. You get involved in politics because politics are a weapon to use in the cause of Islam,” he said in 1991.[6]
“The trap we fall into is having a premature discussion about Sharia when we are not there yet,” he said in 2011.[7]
You can hear the rest of the talk—much of it is unobjectionable—and judge for yourself. My impression is that Sarsour isn’t all that smart, but she’s canny and good at organizing. That, of course, applies to a lot of politicians—perhaps even Trump (except for the “organizing” part). But she’s canny enough to gull a lot of the Left into thinking she’s a beacon of feminism, all the while covering herself out of modesty and making approving statements about sharia law. She favors a one-state solution to the Israel/Palestine problem, a “solution” that she knows would destroy Israel as it is today, and she’s a BDS supporter. She is an expert at leveraging Leftist guilt to achieve her own ends.
She’s a queer duck, though I think that’s an insult to ducks. I feel about her the way I feel about Pamela Geller: I agree with some of what she says but disagree profoundly with her underlying aims and bigotry. Sadly, while Geller is a hero to the right, Sarsour is a hero to the Regressive Left. If we should take any Muslims as leaders of true progressivism, it should be someone like Maajid Nawaz. I’d also mention people like Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Sarah Haider, but, like all Muslims who are rational and can’t abide the faith’s dictates, they’ve become ex-Muslims, apostates singing with the choir invisible,
The other day I posted on the vicious killer and maimer of 15 threatened Laysan albatrosses, one Christian Gutierrez, a 20 year old NYU student who did the carnage on Oahu with some fellow thugs. Six of them were on a camping trip, and three of them (two juveniles and Gutierrez) were charged with a variety of crimes, including animal cruelty and destruction of property. Gutierrez originally pleaded “not guilty,” but changed his plea to “no contest” after a plea deal in which he’d be allowed to face lesser charges in return for testifying against the other murderers.
There was some lively discussion on this site about whether Gutierrez should get jail time; I said “yes” because it would be a deterrent to those who hurt wild animals—something that’s often not even prosecuted.
The judge rendered his decision yesterday, and it’s the slammer for Christian—but only for 45 days. He also has to pay $1000 for “his share of restitution for the stolen monitoring equipment”, and must serve 200 hours of community service.
A college student who graduated from one of Hawaii’s most prestigious high schools — former President Barack Obama’s alma mater — was led out of a courtroom in handcuffs Thursday after a judge sentenced him to 45 days in jail for slaughtering vulnerable seabirds at a nature reserve.
Prosecutors and wildlife conservationists urged a judge to sentence Christian Gutierrez to a year behind bars, saying he deserves full punishment for the grisly killing of federally protected Laysan albatrosses.
Gutierrez and a group of buddies from the Honolulu prep school Punahou went camping in 2015 on the westernmost tip of the island of Oahu. Prosecutors say they killed at least 15 Laysan albatrosses near the Kaena Point Natural Area Reserve by bludgeoning them with a bat and machete and shooting them with a pellet gun. The teens cut off the birds’ legs, tied the birds together and threw them over a cliff into in the ocean, prosecutors said. Nests and eggs were smashed.
In March, Gutierrez pleaded no contest to animal cruelty, theft and other charges. He gave in to peer pressure and initially denied his involvement because he was embarrassed to tell his parents, said his defense attorney, Myles Breiner.
. . . The small courtroom’s gallery was standing-room-only for his sentencing, where a stuffed albatross sat on the prosecution table. [JAC: Good move since in criminal trials the prosecution often shows photos of the victims.] Environmental Court Judge Jeannette Castagnetti listened for several hours as wildlife conservationists and state officials described the impact of the destruction.
“He turned my favorite place on Earth into a crime scene,” Lindsay Young, executive director of Pacific Rim Conservation said through tears, describing how the crimes left her “life’s work and spirit shattered.”
William Aila, former director of the state Department of Land Natural Resources, chanted in Hawaiian then urged forgiveness and a “period of solitude” for Gutierrez.
The Laysan albatross is culturally significant to Native Hawaiians who consider them aumakua, or “revered ancestors and guardian spirits,” prosecutors said in a sentencing memorandum, which called them “peaceful and trusting birds who do not recognize predators.”
Unfortunately, there were echoes of Cntrl-Leftism in the comment, invoking Gutierrez’s “privilege”. Given that he’s of Hispanic extraction, this is a bit ironic, for Hispanics are considered an oppressed minority in the U.S. If Gutierrez was indeed well off, then calling him “privileged” means that we cannot use ethnic background as a sign of entitlement. The report says this:
The killings “smacked of privilege and entitlement,” Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Janice Futa said.
Gutierrez had to bear the brunt of public backlash that called for punishment of privileged teens because he was the only one charged who was 18 at the time, said his defense attorney, Myles Breiner. Two other cases are being handled confidentially in juvenile court, he said.
The Washington Post, which questions whether Gutierrez got off too easy, also invokes “privilege”:
In Hawaii, the albatross killings were particularly shocking because they implicated privileged young men who allegedly committed the crime for the fun of it — and who should have known better. All are former classmates from Punahou School, where the eighth-grade curriculum includes a field trip to one of the world’s best-studied albatross breeding colonies at Ka‘ena Point. That the accused were privy to the importance of the remote site as a safety zone for the vulnerable species has deepened public outrage over the assault.
I applaud the sentence, which is long enough to act as a deterrent (or so I think) but not so long—it could have been a year—that he’ll be exposed for a lengthy period to hardened criminals. He’ll also have a criminal record, which I think is appropriate and may be necessary if he proves to be a sociopath.
(From the Washington Post): A Laysan albatross and chick at the Ka‘ena Point Natural Area Reserve on the Hawaiian island of Oahu. (Courtesy of Lindsay Young)
Christian Gutierrez appears in a Honolulu courtroom to plead not guilty to animal cruelty charges. (AP Photo/Jennifer Kelleher, File)
h/t: Avis (whose ornithologist mom named her after birds)
We have a new contributor today, reader José Ramón López from Puebla, Mexico, a lovely town that I visited several years ago and will revisit this coming November. Not all of his species are identified, so readers can help. His notes are indented:
I submit four non-artsy photos. Hope they´re good enough…
The first two: orioles. Third and fourth: a blue jay (in the fourth, the good fellow is very serious under the rain). They all live in Puebla, México. Feel free to correct me if needed. I think those birds are orioles and blue jay, but I´m not an Audubon…
[JAC]: aren’t these robins?
And what are these?
Stephen Barnard is still photographing the brood of eleven (now ten) gadwall ducklings (Anas strepera); here’s part of the brood in a picture named “Proud mom”:
