Again??

December 4, 2013 • 1:35 pm

This article, reproduced in toto, comes from HuffPo’s “Religion and Science” section (there’s a 2.5-minute video there, too). I’ll make no comment, as I’m too disheartened to do anything except bold the good parts, and because the piece discredits itself. Yes, I know I’m phoning it in, but it’s more important to work on my book today than debunk this stuff, which is the usual pottage of consciousness, quantum mechanics, and cosmology. I’m starting to realize that these elements go together in the woo-mind like peanut butter and jelly. Oh, Morgan Freeman!

In a video that recently aired on “Through the Wormhole” narrated by Morgan Freeman on the TV channel Science, Dr. Hameroff claims, “I believe that consciousness, or its immediate precursor proto-consciousness, has been in the universe all along, perhaps from the Big Bang.”

Understanding where consciousness comes from could solve mysteries such as what happens to the “soul” during near-death experiences, or when a person dies.

Dr. Hameroff goes on to share hypothetical scenarios derived from the Orch-OR (orchestrated objective reduction) theory of consciousness that he and Roger Penrose, mathematician and physicist, proposed in 1996. According to the theory, consciousness is derived from microtubules within brain cells (neurons) which are sites of quantum processing.

But what exactly is consciousness, where does it come from and can it be scientifically proven? Dr. Stuart Hameroff, MD, is Professor Emeritus at the Departments of Anesthesiology and Psychology and the Director of the Center of Consciousness Studies at the University of Arizona and much of his research over the past few decades has been in the field of quantum mechanics, dedicated to studying consciousness.

According to Dr. Hameroff, in a near-death experience, when the heart stops beating, the blood stops flowing, and the microtubules lose their quantum state, the quantum information in the microtubules isn’t destroyed. It’s distributed to the universe at large, and if the patient is revived, the quantum information can go back to the microtubules. In this event, the patient says they had something like a near-death experience, i.e. they saw white light or a tunnel or floated out of their body. In the event that the patient is not revived, “it’s possible that the quantum information can can exist outside the body, perhaps indefinitely, as a soul,” he said.

The Orch-OR theory of consciousness remains controversial in the scientific community. [JAC: That’s for damn sure!] Many scientists and physicists have challenged it, including MIT physicist Max Tegmark, who wrote a paper in 2000 that was widely cited.

Still, Dr. Hameroff believes that “nobody has landed a serious blow to the theory. It’s very viable.”

Nobody cares about landing a serious blow to the theory. It’s like trying to land a serious blow to a garbage can.

Must-watch television show on escaping Mormonism

December 4, 2013 • 11:10 am

One of our readers with her own website, Lady Atheist, has a nice review of a new television show on TLC (formerly The Learning Channel). It’s called “Breaking the Faith,” and is about children escaping the odious Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.  That’s a sect of Mormon Church that practices polygamy (illegal in the U.S.) and was formerly headed by Warren Jeffs, now in jail for life for sex crimes. But apparently the faith goes on, polygamy and all, and I don’t know how they avoid being forced to obey the law. One of the women (girls, really) who is trying to escape comes from a family with 32 mothers and 302 siblings!

The show’s website is here, and there are intriguing—and very frightening—clips.  Were I not the only American who didn’t have cable t.v., I’d surely be watching, for the clips clearly show what brainwashing can do to children, and they break my heart. Here’s a snippet of Lady Atheist’s review:

The FLDS makes the Amish look like the Kardashians.  The control is total and they grew up with almost no contact with “gentiles.”

Four boys/young men (ages 18-20) who are already on the outside break out four girls/young women (ages 18-22) who have gotten word to them that they want out of their religious prison.

These kids reveal an astonishing alternate reality that has been constructed by the cult.  The “prophet” is the top guy.  There is also a “bishop” and a group of brownshirt types nicknamed the “God Squad”.  People on the outside are called “gentiles” and there is an inner circle called the “United Order.”  Their compound is called “The Crick.”

. . . Despite a tightly controlled environment, each realized that there was something wrong in their Paradise, inspiring them to escape.  In some instances, they left behind a sibling who also wanted out, and their regret about this is palpable.

Of course, their limited experiences didn’t prepare them for what they would find on the outside.  Although they came to see their leader and lifestyle as flawed, most of their beliefs are so entrenched that they experience intense fear and guilt almost immediately.  Apparently later episodes show them having fun, but the first episode gives you a glimpse into what is much more than culture shock.   They knew there was something wrong with their cult lifestyle, but they had no idea how much of their lives was based on lies, and they are genuinely dismayed as they try to sort it out.

They stay at a safehouse which is actually the home of one of the cult’s most notorious turncoats –and they hear the other side of the story for the first time in their lives.  The girls look terrified as they face a loving woman who wants them to have a dignified and safe life for themselves.  It would be like one of us meeting Jeffrey Dahmer and hearing him say that all those stories about eating people were made up.  They aren’t sure what to believe, and they are reluctant to give up everything at once.  Who would?  This will be tough going for them.

This is a real-life version of “Big Love,” and I recommend it if you get cable.

The women dress like something out of the 19th century. Here’s a screenshot:

Picture 1

How sad for young lives to be completely ruined simply by an accident of birth. I wish there were a way to make it illegal to indoctrinate your child in any religion before the age of, say, 18.

p.s. There’s also a show called “Breaking Amish,” which deals with leaving that closeted community.

Religious accomodationism in a public museum

December 4, 2013 • 8:08 am

The sign below, forwarded by a reader who just visited this institution, just went up in front of the new Nature Lab at, of all places, The Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County—a public museum. Nature Lab appears to be a hands-on facility where everyone, but mostly kids, can learn about how science is done. That’s a great idea, but why on earth did they have to mar it with this paean to a fictional being?

Natural history museum

Given the quotation marks, I bet the donor insisted on the wording. It would be much truer, and not a possible violation of the First Amendment, to say “to celebrate all of evolution’s creatures.”

My guess is this: the donor was going to give big bucks to the Museum, but insisted on mentioning God’s creatures as a condition of his donation. The Museum, eager for cash, decided to bite the bullet and add some deity to the exhibit, but put it in quotation marks.

But that’s not good enough for the petulant Professor Ceiling Cat. First of all, it misleads the public in two ways: by giving a scientific imprimatur to the idea that animals are “God’s creatures,” and second, by not really making it plain that the quote was insisted on by the anonymous donor—if that’s the case. I myself didn’t get that when I first saw the sign, so how many people will understand? The lesson they will take away is that creatures were the product of God, and that the Museum endorses that.

It’s a cowardly capitulation to religion, all in the desire to get money. That’s the same thing that motivates people to take Templeton cash. And had I been the director of the Museum, I would have refused the donation if the mention of God came with it. Polluting science with religious garbage takes precedence, to me, over having a Nature Lab. What if the gift came with a requirement to endorse “God’s creatures that were all created at once 6,000 years ago”?

At least the Smithsonian is too smart (and perhaps sufficiently well off) to have signs like this.

I’ve emailed Dr. Jane Pisano, the president and director of the museum, as well as the education and public programs office of the Museum (email addresses at links), voicing my objections and asking for an explanation. Here’s my email, and stay tuned:

Dear Dr. Pisano,

A friend of mine who recently visited the new Nature Lab at your Museum forwarded me the attached sign, which ascribes the existence of animals to God.

I suspect, but don’t know, that this quote was one that came from the anonymous donor, as implied by the quotation marks.  Perhaps he or she insisted on this quote as a condition for funding, something that I think the Museum should have resisted strongly.

As an evolutionary biologist, I object to the invocation of God—in two ways. First, scientific evidence shows us that animals are not “God’s creatures,” but “evolution’s creatures.” Thus the sign gives the impression that God had a hand in evolution, and implicitly puts the Museum’s imprimatur on that sentiment. Second, it’s not perfectly clear that this quote comes from the donor (I didn’t get that myself on the first glance), and will certainly be misinterpreted by some people as the Museum’s own sentiments.  Thus the sign is doubly misleading.  Finally, the invocation of God in a public museum could be seen as be a violation of the First Amendment.

Regardless of what the donor wanted, I think it abrogates our scientific principles to “celebrate all of God’s creatures” when that statement is, by scientific lights, palpably wrong.  Would you have taken the money from someone who insisted that the gift celebrates “all of Wotan’s creatures,” or “all the creatures created by space aliens”? Those signs are just as scientifically supportable as what appears on the sign now.

I recognize that Museums are strapped for funding, and do think that Nature Lab is a good thing. But I don’t think it’s worth kowtowing to religious sentiments, and polluting the nature of science, simply to get money.  The very existence of the sign, in fact, undercuts the mission of Nature Lab: to teach people how science is done. I needn’t remind you that science is done by ignoring God, and has never given the slightest bit of evidence for the intercession of God in the origin, evolution, and diversification of life.

Yours sincerely,
Jerry Coyne

Fox week, day 3: Two other species

December 4, 2013 • 6:38 am

What a great group of readers I have! I complained about my dearth of fox pictures, and what happens? Ceiling Cat sends me readers bearing gifts of fox pictures and videos, including species other than Vulpes vulpes.  In fact, I now have more than enough pictures for a week; but if you have some good ones, I’ll still accept them.

Today I’m featuring species besides the familiar red fox (but Reynard will return).  First, we have three bat-eared foxes (Otocyon megalotis) from reader Bob Johnson, photographed by him in Kenya in 2008 (click to enlarge):

Bat eared fox 1

The bat-eared fox has a disjunct range in Africa, with each of its two regions representing a separate subspecies (O. m. megalotus in the south and O. m. virgatus in the east).  Its ears are large (about 13 cm, or 5 inches), as is usual for foxes inhabiting warmer climes.

The observation of longer extremities in related species (or in populations of a single species) in warmer habitats is called “Allen’s rule.” It holds for warm-blooded animals like mammals and birds, and that should be a clue to its evolutionary significance. Try to guess the answer without Googling. There two possible answers, both of which may hold:

Bat eared fox 3

The range:

Bat-eared_Fox_area

Like the fennec below, the bat-eared fox is largely insectivorous, dining mainly on termites. It’s also monogamous and, unusually, males do most of the parental care—at least according to Wikipedia.

Bat-eared fox 2

The fox with the longest ears relative to body size is the fennec (Vulpes zerda), which lives in the Sahara desert (the reason for those crazy ears).  The species is nocturnal, and 80% of its diet consists of termites.

It’s the smallest of all foxes (1.5-3.5 lb, or 0.7-1.6 kg), weighing less than an average housecat. It’s my favorite of all foxes because it’s adorable, furry, and the most catlike of canids. Here are two pictures taken from the web. The second is a cub, whose ears look even more ridiculous because all dogs and cats have relatively larger ears when they’re young:

fennec5

OMG:

6a010535647bf3970b01116898bd5b970c

And, from the other half of the world, an Arctic fox—also snapped by Bob during a trip to Churchill, Manitoba this November (I posted one of his polar bear snaps from the same trip here).

Arctic fox 1

The species name is Vulpes lagopus, and it has a pan-Arctic range:

660px-Cypron-Range_Vulpes_lagopus.svg

As you see, this species has much smaller ears, and the selection pressures involve at least one environmental factor that drove the evolution of large ears in desert foxes. Its tail is also bushy, and during the cold Arctic winters (animals can tolerate temperatures of -50 C), it wraps its tail around its head like a muffler. It’s snout is also relatively less pointed than that of foxes in more temperate climes—for the same reason why the ears are small.

Unlike the fennec or bat-eared fox, this one is a carnivore, dining on small mammals like rabbits, mice, and voles.

Another adaptation of this species is that, like many Arctic birds and mammals, it changes color with the seasons, being white (as above) during winter, and turning grey or brown in summer. That is also adaptive and simply can’t be explained by genetic drift (pay attention, Larry Moran!), for it’s a parallel trait seen in many Arctic animals. And the adaptive significance is clear.

There are also two morphs: the regular one (‘white’) and a ‘blue’ morph that lives in more coastal regions, though both can be found in the same place, as seen in the picture below. The blue color is due to homozygosity for a single recessive gene.  Blue foxes, prized for their pelts, were moved to the Aleutian Islands en masse to try to preserve the morph.

Blue Morph and White Arctic Foxes

Wednesday: Hili dialogue

December 4, 2013 • 4:41 am
Sadly, this is the catnip mouse I brought Hili as a gift last fall. She has shown no interest in either the toy or its psychedelic contents.
Hili: It looks like an artificial mouse, it smells like an artificial mouse, it squeaks like an artificial mouse…

A: Because it is an artificial mouse.

Hili: Probably it is for cats who are totally inexperienced.
1476364_10202220350137511_722696131_n
In Polish:
Hili: Wygląda jak sztuczna mysz, pachnie jak sztuczna mysz, piszczy jak sztuczna mysz…
Ja: Bo to jest sztuczna mysz.
Hili: Pewnie dla kotów, które nie znają życia.

Readers’ cats: the late Spook

December 3, 2013 • 1:56 pm

It makes me sad to post readers’ cats that are no longer with us, but most of us will outlive our cats (I’ve endured the death of two), and it helps us remember the good parts of their companionship.  This photo and note come from reader Carol Taskin. a musician:

We said goodbye to our cat two weeks ago.  Spook was a tiny stray kitten when we found him one Halloween night and he came to us at a moment when we needed a black ray of sunshine.  His life became intertwined with ours, he was good company and a faithful friend, we loved him and he loved us. I keep thinking I see him out of the corner of my eye and I miss the sound of him pawing at the floor as he always did before drinking from his dish.

Probably the most remarkable thing about him was his transformation when our two older cats died.  His personality completely changed: he was overjoyed to be an only cat and instantly took over the whole house.  He started talking, greeted people at the door and would come from wherever he was in the house when I sat down to play the harpsichord. He seemed to know to wait for cadences in the music for me to be free to give him a scratch.

Spook had some health problems early on which later in life lead to diabetes, kidney and liver disease on top of his heart murmur.  He rallied so many times from illness, more than nine lives worth.  It’s pretty amazing, if not a bit ironic, that he made it to 13.

This photo I call ‘King Spook’ because he looks so regal.  He was a superior cat.

King Spook 1

 ‘Floor cat’ is the view I frequently had sitting at the harpsichord: he would come from wherever he was in the house when I started to play.

Spook harpsichord

[JAC]: Finally, a picture that could be called “Where are my noms? Those fish aren’t real.”

spook looks up

The U.S. is going to hell

December 3, 2013 • 12:30 pm

Exhibit A supporting my contention: a group of talentless hacks who possess a genius for self-promotion has captured the country’s attention, making millions of dollars in the process.

I’m referring, of course, to the Kardashian family. As far as I can see it, contributes nothing to humanity by way of genuine entertainment, which requires talent. It is a severe indictment of America that we’ve made them rich. In fact, even now I am scourging myself with hooks for publishing this.

Yes, the famous Kardashian Christmas Card has just been released, showing just the female side of the family, except for the increasingly bizarre Bruce Jenner, who is encased in a tube on the right (the person who sent this to me commented, “If you think your life sucks, just imagine being Bruce Jenner”).

The photo is big and high-resolution, so click on it if you want to savor every detail. The production company of their “reality” show paid the $250,000 for this mess, so the family, rich as it is, doesn’t even have to buy its own Christmas cards.

Kardashians_PRG0_18

And if this isn’t enough for you, go over to the E! site to the fascinating feature, “Analyzing the Kardashian Christmas card: 24 things you might not have noticed.” There you’ll find answers to burning questions like, “Where’s Kanye?” and “How many images of Kim appear in the card?”

Knock yourself out (first figuratively, then literally).

Best abstract of the year

December 3, 2013 • 10:29 am

Well, from 1991, actually, but publicized this year. It’s from the Wired website Cladistic Detritus by Brian Romans, originally posted by Kyle House. As Brian notes, it’s real:

AGU [The American Geophysical Union] tells me via Twitter that this abstract is indeed authentic: 1991 EOS Trans. AGU Vol 72, No 27-53, p456

Although the e-journal is in our library, for some reason this volume is missing (I wanted a cleaner copy), so I’ll take the AGU’s word.

fractal-analysis-of-deep-sea-660x862

This is obviously something that snuck by the reviewers (if abstracts are even reviewed for this journal), but it’s a good one. I love the last sentence of the abstract.

h/t: Matthew Cobb