The handy-dandy Aslan/Affleck refuter

October 6, 2014 • 7:43 am

In the past week or so we’ve heard Ben Affleck defend Islam against the criticisms of Sam Harris and Bill Maher, with Affleck (and Nicholas Kristof) claiming that many Muslim-majority countries are—unlike Saudia Arabia and Iran—benign, even supportive of women’s rights.  And right before that, Muslim apologist Reza Aslan went on CNN to make the same points, also arguing that female genital mutilation (FGM) is not an Islamic practice, but an African practice (sometimes done by Christians), and cannot in any sense be pinned on his religion.

In general, all of this is Islam-osculation reflects Americans’ desire to bend over backwards to avoid offending Muslims. Part of it is fear of the misguided accusation of “Islamophobia;” part of it is reverse racism (although Islam is not a race): the notion that Muslims should be held to a lower standard of behavior than people in the West; and part of it is simple fear of what will happen if we offend the feelings of Muslims.

Regardless, a lot of the defense of Islam is factually incorrect. While some assertions have a grain of truth (FGM is practiced by non-Muslims, and has been co-opted by the faith), a lot is simple apologetics. Reza Aslan is a particularly good example of someone who distorts the truth to defend his faith, and it’s made him popular and, with two religion-coddling bestsellers, well off.

But even countries like Malaysia and Indonesia—often cited as examples of “good” Muslim countries—are hardly paradise. In a new post at The Friendly Atheist, two “apostates”, Muhammad Syed and Sarah Haider, co-founders of Ex-Muslims of North America, have written a rebuttal to Aslan’s claims, ‘Reza Aslan is wrong about Islam and this is why.

You’ll want to read it. It isn’t that long, but is informed by the knowledge of two ex-Muslims who know a lot more than most of us do about those “good Muslim states.” As Syed and Haider say in their post:

Nearly everything Aslan stated during his segment was either wrong, or technically-correct-but-actually-wrong. We will explain by going through each of his statements in the hopes that Aslan was just misinformed (although it’s hard for us to imagine that a “scholar” such as Aslan wouldn’t be aware of all this).

They take on three issues highlighted by Aslan. I’ll give only brief excerpts, which I’ve indented.

1. Women’s rights. 

Aslan contends that while some Muslim countries have problems with violence and women’s rights, in others like “Indonesia, women are absolutely 100 percent equal to men” and it is therefore incorrect to imply that such issues are a problem with Islam and “facile” to imply that women are “somehow mistreated in the Muslim world.”

Let us be clear here: No one in their right mind would claim that Indonesia, Malaysia, and Bangladesh are a “free and open society for women.” Happily, a few of them have enshrined laws that have done much to bring about some progress in equality between the sexes. But this progress is hindered or even eroded by the creeping strength of the notoriously anti-woman Sharia courts.

For example. . .

2. Women as heads of state in Muslim-majority countries.

Aslan’s claim that Muslim countries “have elected seven women as their heads of state” is an example of “technically true, actually false” — a tactic we have often noted among religious apologists.

It is true that there have been seven female heads of state in Muslim-majority countries, but a closer inspection would reveal this has little to do with female empowerment and often has much more to do with the political power of certain families in under-developed parts of the world. . .

3. Female genital mutilation.

Finally, we get to Aslan’s claim that it is “actually, empirically, factually incorrect” that female genital mutilation (FGM) is a “Muslim-country problem.” Rather, he believes it is a “central African problem.” He continues to state that “nowhere else in the Muslim, Muslim-majority states is female genital mutilation an issue.”

This is an absolutely ridiculous claim. . .

To know why the claims are bogus, go read the post, which has garnered 750 comments.  I find Aslan a slippery character, one who’s prone to exaggerate his credentials as a “religious scholar.” Of course I generally frown on “credential flaunting,” but it doesn’t speak well for someone’s integrity to bend the truth about one’s training.  And he constantly mentions his exaggerated credentials to buttress his claims.

More important, Aslan’s treatment of Islam (he’s a Muslim) is often a whitewash, as I found by reading his book No god but God. In it, he bends the history of Islam towards the most charitable possible interpretation of everything, and he’s been caught out a few times. One thing that irritated me immensely was Aslan’s excusing, in the book, Muhammad’s taking and having sex (if you can call it that) with a nine-year-old girl. As Syed and Haider note:

This isn’t the first time Reza has stated half-truths in defense of his agenda. In his book No God But God, he misleads readers about many issues including the age of Muhammad’s child-bride Aisha. Scripture unanimously cites Aisha’s betrothal at age 6 or 7 and consummation at 9. Similarly, he quotes Mariya the Copt as being a wife of the prophet when overwhelming evidence points to her being Muhammad’s concubine.

Of course there are many moderate Muslims, but I want to know how many of them truly are for full women’s equality and also decry the oppressive sharia law favored by so many of their coreligionists. If they’re out there, why don’t they speak up?

Well, they are out there, but we know why they keep quiet.

 

Readers’ wildlife photos

October 6, 2014 • 5:50 am

Water birds today: pelicans, egrets, and a heron, all from reader Joe Dickinson, who notes:

A reader from Iowa sent pictures of the cooperative feeding behavior of white pelicans (Pelecanus erythrorhynchos) a week or two ago just as I was observing that behavior in a pond next to a freeway in Novato, CA. Interestingly, a number of snowy egrets (Egretta thula) often joined from the landward side as the pelicans drove prey toward shore (1st photo).  They would converge from wherever they had been foraging when the pelicans approached the shore.  Not exactly interspecific cooperation, I suppose, but certainly one species being aware of and taking advantage of the activities of another.  The 2nd photo is a better shot of the several egrets.  A great blue heron (Ardea herodias), shown catching the early morning light, was initially more aloof but also joined the hunt when the pelicans came his way.   The rest of the photos are just some favorites from four mornings returning to that site.

pelicans 1

pelicans 2

pelicans 3

pelicans 5

pelicans 6

pelicans 7

pelicans 8

pelicans 9

And for the mammal lovers, a group of elk (Cervus canadensis) from Stephen Barnard in Idaho. He says he will cull one of the females for eating, as there are too many for the area.

Elk Oct. 3 Barnard

 

 

First Nobel Prize of the year goes to three neuroscientists

October 6, 2014 • 5:24 am

Well, another year went by, and with sadness I must put my bottle of champagne back in the fridge (it’s well past its prime by now). According to CNN, the Karolinska Institut announced this morning that the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine went to three people: two Norwegians (a couple who works together) and an American working in England. Here they are:

141006110511-nobel-medicine-prize-winners-story-top

It’s a sad state of affairs that I have neither heard of any of them nor of their discoveries, described by CNN as follows:

John O’Keefe, along with May-Britt Moser and Edvard Moser, discovered cells that form a positioning system in the brain — our hard-wired GPS.

Those cells mark our position, navigate where we’re going and help us remember it all, so that we can repeat our trips, the Nobel Assembly said in a statement.

Their research could also prove useful in Alzheimer’s research, because of the parts of the brain those cells lie in — the hippocampus and the entorhinal cortex.

Humans and other mammals have two hippocampi, which lie in the inner core of the bottom of the brain and are responsible for memory and orientation. The entorhinal cortices share these functions and connect the hippocampi with the huge neocortex, the bulk of our gray matter.

In Alzheimer’s patients, those two brain components break down early on, causing sufferers to get lost more easily. Understanding how the brain’s GPS works may help scientists in the future understand how this disorientation occurs.

The research is also important, because it pinpoints “a cellular basis for higher cognitive function,” the Nobel Assembly said.

The scientists conducted their research on rats, but other research on humans indicates that we have these same cells.

I’m not sure how overblown the Alzheimer’s implications are; perhaps a reader could tell us, or further describe the research. Remember that this prize, the only one explicitly designated for biology, is supposed to go for insights that improve human welfare. In practice that’s not always the case, as prizes have been given for fundamental breakthroughs in non-health-related work (viz. T. H. Morgan’s prize for genetic work in Drosophila or Axel and Buck’s 2004 prize for work on olfactory receptors), but one can always argue that such work has potential implications for humans, as Morgan’s indeed did.

The physics prize will be announced tomorrow, the chemistry prize Wednesday, the peace prize on Friday, and the economics “prize” (not really a Nobel Prize) will go to a University of Chicago Professor, as always, a week from today (Oct. 13). The prize for literature will be announced at an unspecified date.

Would anybody care to guess the recipients? If you get two out of the five, you’ll get an autographed copy of WEIT with a Nobel-winning cat (sporting the medal) drawn in it. You can guess all five if you wish. Deadline by today at 5 p.m., and one guess per customer. First correct answer wins.  (p.s.: our panel of expert judges is looking at the “cat vs. dog breed” answers.)

Good morning!

October 6, 2014 • 4:31 am

Why not start the work week with an example of either kin selection or altruism, which this behavior apparently represents? If you’re an internet maven, you’ll have already seen it; if not, it’s cute, but also demonstrates how rapidly elephants rush to help their kin/group members. The information below, from YouTube, doesn’t say whether any of the adults who helped were relatives, but I believe elephants (including these Indian ones (Elephas maximus), cooperate in groups to help each other and their offspring.  In a zoo, all the elephants kept together would constitute such a group.

Note that the two “helpers” not only right the fallen baby, but then another adult joins them and they walk the baby (or rather push it) around the too-high step so it can get where it wanted to go without climbing.

The YouTube description:

When an elephant calf stumbled onto her back at Zoo Zürich in Zurich, Switzerland, a group of elephants sprinted to the little one’s aid. After rolling 6-week-old Omysha back onto her feet, the adults surround her and safely guide her away from the habitat’s steps.

These wonderful beasts, like their African relatives, are killed for their tusks.

Monday: Hili dialogue

October 6, 2014 • 2:58 am

Monday again? Oy vey! Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Cyrus is being obsequious again—and looming. 

Cyrus: I like you very much.
Hili: I like you too, but I’m glad that you at least do not jump on the desk.

aza
In Polish:
Cyrus: Bardzo cię lubię.
Hili: Ja ciebie też, ale cieszę się, że przynajmniej na biurko nie

Here’s the caterpillar!

October 5, 2014 • 1:30 pm

Did anybody spot the caterpillar? It’s out there in plain sight, I tell you!

It’s circled below. If you couldn’t see it, what do you think the chances are a bird would?

These photos and their explanation are from Mark Sturtevant, who posed the puzzle earlier:

FindMe2

The hidden caterpillar is of course the mature larva of the giant swallowtail butterfly (Papilio cresphontes). The giant swallowtail is the largest butterfly in the U.S., and is a truly magnificent insect that always takes my breath away. I found larvae feeding on a type of prickly ash (Xanthoxylum americanum) which is one of its favored woodland food plants. Finding larvae of this species was one of my bucket list items, and so it was a great thrill for me. I now have several pupae, and I am looking forward to when the butterflies emerge early next summer.

DSCN1258

The mature larva are generally found on branches, but their markings are a bit puzzling. Although they are camouflaged to look like bark when viewed at a distance, they seem to take on a different appearance when seen up close. They have a distinctly swollen thorax with folds (eyelids?) over what looks like false eye spots. They also have iridescent rings of color on their skin. Some think that the mature larvae are mimics of a snake head, complete with glistening scales.

Other species of swallowtails (like the larva of the tiger swallowtail and the spicebush swallowtail) really do seem to be snake head mimics. Deception in the animal kingdom is a marvel of evolution by natural selection, and perhaps our giant swallowtail larva is an example of an evolving deception that has not progressed as far. Fully formed deceptions are very interesting, but cases of partially formed deceptions are valuable evidence for evolution.

DSCN1256

They may not be great snake-head mimics, but giant swallowtail larvae are excellent bird dropping mimics in their earlier instars. Here, they go for broke trying to look like big, wet and gooey bird droppings that landed in the middle of a leaf. They are perfectly dry to the touch.

8giant2

 

The divine Sarah on SNL

October 5, 2014 • 12:37 pm

Sarah Silverman, heartthrob of all right-thinking atheist males (including Dan Dennett and Sam Harris, who follow her on Twi**er) hosted Saturday Night Live last night. Though that’s well past my bedtime, I wasn’t going to miss the clips of her intro and sketches, which I dug up on Hulu.  The sketches (including one of a Joan Rivers roast in Heaven) were okay, but the opening monologue was best. Of course you have to find her brand of humor appealing to like this kind of stuff, but I’m in the club.

You’ll have to watch a short ad first.

Also, there’s some real biology at the end!

http://www.hulu.com/watch/695297