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.
In the next-to-last section of its 5-part report on the Islamic State (IS; the jihadist group formerly known as ISIS), VICE News has another look at sharia law in a piece called “Christians in the Caliphate”. I’m not sure why it has that title given that most of the piece is on Islam, but it’s still fascinating to look inside a sharia court and to see how the Caliphate deals with Christians (they have to pay a special “Christian tax,” and if they don’t do that or convert, it’s death to them). You can also see some young terrorists in the making.
Granted, these VICE pieces are short and don’t go into depth, but no other news organization has given us this kind of inside look at a jihadist organization as it tries to spread Islam through the world. And, of course, it’s scary.
Here’s VICE’s summary:
In part 4 of The Islamic State, VICE News visits the Sharia courts where those accused of infractions are sentenced to harsh penalties, including execution followed by public crucifixion. But the courts don’t just handle crime. Citizens can bring all manners of complaints, including family disputes, and see the Islamic State’s form of justice doled out.
With unprecedented access, VICE News reporter Medyan Dairieh also visits the section of the court specifically set up for Christians, where the Islamic State discusses its treatment of minorities, and sees a former Armenian Catholic Church that has been converted into an Islamic center.
Landing on a comet! That’s the goal of the European Space Agency’s Rosetta probe, which for ten years (three of them spent dormant) has been speeding toward the Comet 67P, which comes around the sun once every 6.5 years. Once it’s near the comet, and in orbit around it, the probe will launch a lander which, for the very first time, will enable humans to sample the surface of a comet. To show the magnitude of this achievement, the BBC reports that the chase has involved 6 billion km, and the comet that the probe has now rendezvoused with is travelling 55,000 km per hour (34,175 mph). That a species can do this defies the imagination.
Here’s what the comet looks like:
How big is it? Not too large:
A YouTube video (notes below) show that the probe’s approach to the comet was via a series of triangular motions, and the Economist excerpt below that shows why they did it this way:
(YouTube): After a ten year journey through space, ESA’s Rosetta spacecraft will reach comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko in August 2014 [JAC: it did that on Aug. 6]. After catching up with the comet Rosetta will slightly overtake and enter orbit from the ‘front’ of the comet as both the spacecraft and 67P/CG move along their orbits around the Sun. Rosetta will carry out a complex series of manoeuvres to reduce the separation between the spacecraft and comet from around 100 km to 25-30 km. From this close orbit, detailed mapping will allow scientists to determine the landing site for the mission’s Philae lander. Immediately prior to the deployment of Philae in November, Rosetta will come to within just 2.5 km of the comet’s nucleus.
This animation is not to scale; Rosetta’s solar arrays span 32 m, and the comet is approximately 4 km wide.
So how does Rosetta move in a triangle? Essentially, by cheating. Every few days it fires its thrusters to execute the turn at each corner of the triangle. Rosetta will remain 100km from the comet for a couple of weeks, before closing to 70km. The long sides of the triangle, and the amount of fuel burn required to execute the turns at its corners, will allow the probe’s controllers to observe the effect of the comet’s gravity, and thus determine its mass. To complicate matters, the comet is oddly shaped, which makes its gravitational field irregular. Next month, once the comet’s mass has been established and its gravity field is understood, Rosetta will go into a circular orbit at a distance of 30km. After making further observations, it will then shift to an elliptical orbit in which it passes 10km from the comet at its closest point.
In November, Rosetta will eject the robotic lander Philae, which is small (total mass 100 kg, payload 27 kg). Here it is:
According to Wikipedia, the small sampling probe contains the following instruments.
APXS (Alpha Proton X-ray Spectrometer) APXS analyzes the chemical element composition of the surface below the lander. The instrument is an improved version of the APXS of the Mars Pathfinder.
COSAC (COmetary SAmpling and Composition) The combined gas chromatograph and time-of-flight mass spectrometer perform analysis of soil samples and determine the content of volatile components.
Ptolemy an instrument measuring stable isotopic ratios of key volatiles on the comet’s nucleus
ÇIVA (Comet Nucleus Infrared and Visible Analyzer)
ROLIS (Rosetta Lander Imaging System)
CONSERT (COmet Nucleus Sounding Experiment by Radiowave Transmission). The CONSERT radar will perform the tomography of the nucleus by measuring electromagnetic wave propagation from Philae andRosetta throughout the comet nucleus in order to determine its internal structures and to deduce information on its composition.
MUPUS (MUlti-PUrpose Sensors for Surface and Sub-Surface Science)
ROMAP (Rosetta Lander Magnetometer and Plasma Monitor)
SESAME (Surface Electric Sounding and Acoustic Monitoring Experiment)
SD2 (Drill, Sample, and Distribution subsystem) Obtains soil samples from the comet at depths of 0 to 230 millimetres (0.0 to 9.1 in) and distributes them to the Ptolmy, COSAC, and Civa subsystems for analysis. The system contains four types of subsystem: drill, carousel, ovens, and volume checker.[15] There are a total of 26 platinum ovens to heat samples—10 medium temperature 180 °C (356 °F) and 16 high temperature 800 °C (1,470 °F)—and one oven to clear the drill bit for reuse
Finally, although I thought comets were made of ice, this one apparently isn’t. While still releasing water from its surface, it’s rocks, or rather two rocks that may have formed when two comets collided.
I had no idea this was going on, though you space buffs surely did, but the idea of landing a probe on a comet only a few km across, and travelling 55,000 km per hour, is stunning. They’re almost there, and I have little doubt that the probe landing will be successful. Stay tuned.
This nightjar-less photo was sent in by photographer Peter Green, whose website is www.providenceraptors.com. There’s a ground-nesting killdeer in here somewhere. In case you don’t know what a killdeer looks like, I’ve posted another pic by Peter which shows you what to look for. Answer tomorrow.
Here’s a killdeer (anybody any idea why they have that name? The obvious would seem to be unlikely):
Peter and Rosemary Grant, known to all evolutionists as simply “The Grants,” have just come out with a new (April, 2014) book on their long-term field work, 40 Years of Evolution: Darwin’s Finches on Daphne Island (marginally cheaper at Amazon). I haven’t yet read it, but I know the work well, for the Grants do much of their research in my own field, speciation.
And, nine days ago, Jon Weiner wrote about the Grants’ book and work in a New York Times article called ‘In Darwin’s footsteps.” Weiner, as you may know, wrote a book about the Grants’ work two decades ago, The Beak of the Finch, which won a Pulitzer Prize for nonfiction. His new article updates the old one, although by necessity it leaves out many of the gazillion findings the Grants have made since then.
The Grants’ research program on the Galapagos began in the mid 1970s; for the first ten years it was carried out by students and postdocs (like my colleague Trevor Price; see below), and the Grants began working on the island themselves around 1985.
Nearly all of the Grants’ work, by the way, takes place on a tiny and godawfully desolate volcanic cone in the Galápagos: the island of Daphne Major, which has only a few trees (genus Bursera) and no fresh water (all supplies, including water for long field seasons, is brought in by boat and carried up the hill). It’s about 5 km², and so is tiny. But it has finches:
(Times caption): aphne Major, foreground, a volcanic cinder cone island in the Galápagos, has served as a natural laboratory for two British biologists for the past 40 years. Credit D. Parer and E. Parer-Cook
One of the Grants’ findings is singled out by Weiner: a possible new “hybrid species” formed after hybridization between existing species twenty-odd years ago. It was itself founded by a probable hybrid male formed by interbreeding between two of the archipelago’s 14 finch species, and the male then mated with a member of one of its parental species (a “backcross”). That created (over a decade later) a population that interbreeds only among itself, and, if you employ the Biological Species Concept, its reproductive isolation from other species and interbreeding among itself means that we have seen, in just a few years, the creation of a new species. Biologists find such speciation exciting because the possibility of new species forming by hybridization between others is not only fast, but something we can study, as the Grants have in real time. It belies the creationists’ claim that we’ve never seen new species form. (I deal with that issue in both WEIT and my book Speciation with Allen Orr, showing that we already know of several “polyploid” plant species that have formed in historical times.)
The interesting thing about this hybrid finch “species” is that the isolating barrier between it and other species is based almost entirely on song. The males inherit their song culturally, by hearing and imitating their father, and females mate with the song they hear when they’re nestings. That means that since the original hybrid male (a descendant of the populations’s hybrid founder,”Big Bird”) had an unusual song, his descendants would sing only that song (if male) and mate only with males singing that song (if female). The lineage would be interbreeding but isolated from others. And while there are some genetic differences between the new hybrid species and any other finch species, the isolating barrier itself could be based on culture, not genes.
My own view is that there are some good cases of hybrid species, but that the phenomenon is probably not ubiquitous. The Grants are wary of calling this new population a “species,” though for the time being it’s certainly acting like one. My colleague Trevor Price at Chicago, who got his Ph.D. working with the Grants on Daphne, isn’t inclined to call it a species because, he feels, it may eventually fuse with another species via hybridization. (He points out that two well-demarcated species on Daphne, the cactus finch and the medium ground finch, are hybridizing fairly extensively, and my one day fuse.)
But I consider species concepts to operate in the here and now, not prospectively. Who knows whether this new isolated lineage will persist? Whether it does is a matter of waiting. Do we decide, for instance, that we’ll call it a new species only if it is still distinct in 2090? Nevertheless, my own view, like Trevor’s, is that the existence of this “species” is precarious. But so long as it lasts as a population for at least a while, and doesn’t mate with other species, we can provisionally say we’ve seen The Origin of A Species.
I got to know Peter and Rosemary when I did part of a sabbatical in Princeton, and I called them “The World’s Nicest Scientists.” I meant that, because they’re simply wonderful and generous folks. And they’re tenacious: I, for one, couldn’t maroon myself on a desolate island for several months every year to study the birds onsite. I love my Chinese food and urban attractions too much. But the Grants have persisted for four decades. They’re both 77, and, as Weiner says, they know they can’t keep it up forever. But it’s still the longest-running and most fruitful field work on evolutionary genetics and ecology that I know of, and the Grants deserve the many honors they’ve accrued. Here they are on Daphne, working away:
(From the Times): Peter and Rosemary Grant on Daphne Major, capturing and measuring finches. Their work documented the evolution of finches in the genus Geospiza in real time. Credit K.T. Grant
As you may know, Steve Pinker has recently gone to Tasmania, and of course took his digital SLR equipment with him. Here are a few snaps from his travels; you can find the whole collection here.
Actress Lauren Bacall has died, an official from the estate of her late husband, Humphrey Bogart, tells CNN. She was 89.
The husky-voiced Hollywood icon made five films with Bogart, including “To Have and Have Not” and “The Big Sleep.” She went on to receive two Tony Awards and an honorary Oscar.
Her death was confirmed by Robbert de Klerk, the co-managing partner of the Humphrey Bogart Estate with her son Stephen Bogart.
“She passed away peacefully earlier today in New York,” according to family, de Klerk said.
She’s another one of those halcyon-days-of-Hollywood actors who simply seemed immortal, so this is a surprise. Bacall—dead? I met her once (a friend had a bit part in one of her plays), but of course this is the Bacall we remember:
If ever a woman could be described as “feline,” it was her.