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.
Hili: Who was it on the phone?
A: A certain alpha-philosopher.
Hili: And why did you go directly and read “Plato and a Platypus Walk Into a Bar”?
A: Because some people are so full of airs that you have to let some air in.
Hili: Z kim rozmawiałeś przez telefon?
Ja: Z takim jednym alfa filozofem.
Hili: A dlaczego czytałeś potem książkę “Plato and Platypus Walk into a Bar”?
Ja: Bo niektórzy ludzie są tak nadęci, że po rozmowie z nimi musisz wpuścić powietrze.
This is what happens when a man with a thin skin is repeatedly told he’s mistaken and yet doesn’t have the dignity to absorb his punishment in silence.
The Chopra continues to tweet at me, Dawkins, and Harris, apparently not yet realizing that we haven’t the slightest interest in his lucubrations. Chopra is to science what skin barnacles are to a whale: while they are are a minor annoyance, they don’t impede the progress of the leviathan.
Chopra and Jordan Flesher (a master’s student in psychology) have written yet another piece on “radical skepticism” (his euphemism for skepticism that doesn’t countenance his woo). It’s PART FOUR! And he and his colleague have already touted it on Twi**er seven times today.
Deepak needs to calm down by quaffing some of his soothing ayurvedic teas. At present, he and his co-author just keep tweeting “READ OUR PIECE!” “READ OUR PIECE!” See below:
The latest (this afternoon):
Earlier today:
Never trust a man who doesn’t accept free will. (I presume Chopra’s a dualist rather than a compatibilist.)
Okay, the fun’s over for today. I now realize why I don’t look at Twitter.
In a new, short video, Simon Tofield describes his four real cats: Jess, Hugh (the main inspiration for the cartoon cat), Teddy (the name of my last cat), and Maisy. Three of them are large, and two are rescue cats. Have a look: Simon provides both photos and drawings.
The decision Friday by U.S. District Judge Barbara Crabb could have far-reaching financial ramifications for pastors, who currently can use the untaxed income to pay rental housing costs or the costs of home ownership, including mortgage payments and property taxes.
“It’s a really big deal,” said Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-president of the Madison-based Freedom From Religion Foundation, which filed the lawsuit. “A church currently could pay a minister $50,000 but designate $20,000 of it a housing allowance so that only $30,000 would be taxed as salary.”
Crabb acknowledged in her decision that the exemption is a boon to ministers, referencing a 2002 statement by then-U.S. Rep. Jim Ramstad of Minnesota that the tax exemption would save clergy members $2.3 billion in taxes from 2002-2007. But she said the magnitude of the benefit only underscores what’s wrong with the law.
The exemption “provides a benefit to religious persons and no one else, even though doing so is not necessary to alleviate a special burden on religious exercise,” Crabb wrote.
Although I conclude that § 107(2) violates the establishment clause and must been joined, this does not mean that the government is powerless to enact tax exemptions that benefit religion. “[P]olicies providing incidental benefits to religion do not contravene the Establishment Clause.” Capitol Square Review & Advisory Board v. Pinette, 515 U.S. 753, 768 (1995) (plurality opinion). In particular, because “[t]he nonsectarian aims of government and the interests of religious groups often overlap,” the government is not “required [to] refrain from implementing reasonable measures to advance legitimate secular goals merely because they would thereby relieve religious groups of costs they would otherwise incur.” Texas Monthly, 489 U.S. at 10 (plurality opinion). Thus, if Congress believes that there are important secular reasons for granting the exemption in § 107(2), it is free to rewrite the provision in accordance with the principles laid down in Texas Monthly and Walz so that it includes ministers as part of a larger group of beneficiaries. Haller, 728 A.2d at 356 (noting that Texas amended statute at issue in Texas Monthly to grant sales tax exemption to broader range of groups). As it stands now, however, § 107(2) is unconstitutional.
The next thing that needs to go is religion’s exemption from property taxes.
Congrats to Annie Laurie, Dan, and the gang of attorneys at FFRF.
Dear Dr. Chopra,
The first thing you need to know—after you’ve learned something about evolution and physics—is this: I do not read Twitter. My Twitter account is there as a proxy for my website. Its only “tweets” are links to new posts on Why Evolution is True, alerting readers to items that might interest them. I have Twitter followers, but I do not follow anyone.
Therefore, it is useless for you to keep “tweeting” at me, for I do not read, nor do I care, about what you have to say.
I was informed by a friend that you have just engaged in a frenetic and nasty bout of twittering at me, about me, and against me. When I checked, I found the following hilarious stream of invective on your site:
Actually, I am surprised that, given your busy schedule of doing “science,” lecturing at Harvard, and hobnobbing with the greats, you’ve found time to issue 32 tweets in the last 21 hours, many of them aimed at me. Who’s running Chopra, Inc.? Surely your time would be better spent peddling ayurvedic fertility aids than attacking an obscure scientist.
The problem is that I am not checking my Twitter account, so what you are doing is the equivalent of what this kitten is doing:
If I didn’t know better, and didn’t take your word that you’re rational, I’d call this behavior obsessive. Further, your ignorance of evolution is matched only by your rancor.
I won’t respond in kind. Instead, I will simply proffer you a poem that you are free to use as your own mantra. It’s set to the tune of the old Helen Reddy song, “I am woman.”
I am Deepak; hear me roar
As you patronize my store,
And buy up all the nostrums that I sell.
You may say that I’m a crank,
But just tell that to my bank,
For I’m Deepak, and you can go to hell.Oh yes, I am rich,
Though it’s richness born of woo;
And for those whose life’s a bitch,
I will bilk them through and though.
If I had to, I could sell anything;
I’m a crank,
But I’m a scientist—
I am DEEPAK!
Yours sincerely,
Jerry Coyne
p.s. There is no evidence that evolution is “self directed & purpose driven.”
This time the faith is not religious, but faith in homeopathy and herbal remedies; and the child is not from the U.S. but Canada.
According to both the National Post and the CBC News Calgary, a 44-year old mother, Tamara Sophie Lovett, was charged two days ago with both criminal negligence and “failure to provide the necessities of life” to her 7-year-old son, Ryan, who died in March of a streptococcus A infection. Such an infection is almost invariably curable by penicillin (the bugs, surprisingly, haven’t evolved resistance to that old antibiotic, even over many years). It’s possible that Ryan had necrotizing fasciitis, the so-called “flesh-eating bacteria,” but in a child that is also treatable if caught early.
From the National Post:
According to police, the boy was bedridden for 10 days before his death, however, the mother declined to seek medical treatment, relying instead on homeopathic remedies, including herbal medicines.
“It should absolutely serve as a warning to other parents,” said Calgary Police Service Staff Sergeant Michael Cavilla. “The message is quite simple: If your child is sick, take them to see a doctor.”
Police said they arrested the 44-year-old woman on Friday; charges are pending. She cannot be named until she is formally charged. [Note: the CBC names her since she has been charged.]
According to Sgt. Cavilla, the boy looked poorly before he died and several of the mother’s friends had advised her to seek a doctor. In the early morning on the day of his death, she phoned 9-1-1; paramedics arrived to find the child in cardiac arrest. He was later pronounced dead.. . . An autopsy concluded he had a Group A streptococcal infection that could have been treated with penicillin.
The police said they have no medical records for the boy prior to his death. The child had recently been enrolled in a local school. Prior to January of this year, he had been home-schooled.
The law violated was this one:
Under the Criminal Code of Canada, it is a legal requirement for a parent or guardian to provide the necessaries of life, which are defined by the courts as food, shelter, care and medical attention necessary to sustain life and protection from harm.
“If you do not provide medical attention to your sick child, you will be held accountable,” Staff Sgt. Mike Cavilla said at a press conference Friday afternoon.
From the CBC:
Police allege the victim’s mother ignored pleas from friends to seek medical treatment for Ryan.
“There were a number of people that had contact with the child during the period of illness,” said Cavilla. “These people did approach the mother and suggested that she do take him to see a medical professional.”
The definitive assessment appears in the Post (my emphasis):
Tim Caulfield, a scholar and Canada Research Chair in Health Law and Policy, said cases like this are tragic and increasingly common.
“The interest in and demand for complementary and alternative medicine continues to grow. There are many factors driving this trend, including suspicion of conventional medicine and ‘Big Pharma.’”
He said this has resulted in an increase in measles outbreaks due to vaccination fears, and the growth in popularity of naturopathic practitioners, who often prescribe ineffective homeopathic remedies.
“Alternative medicine is associated with many risks,” he said. Supplements often don’t contain what they proclaim on the label and herbal remedies can interact with conventional medicine.
Further, alternative therapies can induce patients to avoid effective, conventional treatments, he added.
“We don’t need alternative medicine and conventional medicine. We need science-based medicine. Period,” he said.
Indeed, for how can you show that something works unless it’s scientifically tested? Such tests of homeopathy show no effects; likewise with intercessory prayer. And although the Christian Science Church publishes testimonies of healings, they don’t mention the number of time prayer didn’t cure. And even if they did, such reports are anecdotal.
The CBC notes that this situation is not a one-off, even in Canada: “Juliet Guichon, a medical ethicist and an assistant professor in the University of Calgary’s Faculty of Medicine, says it’s not uncommon for the medical profession to run into parents who don’t believe in conventional treatments.”
The fact that Ryan was abused by dosing him with useless herbal and homeopathic treatments shows that the problem here—like the problem with all the children I’ve described who succumbed to religiously-based medical neglect—is ultimately not religion but faith. Faith in alternative medicine shows many of the same pseudoscientific traits as does faith in religion, the main difference being that religious child abusers see the judgment of God hanging over their actions. But in both cases child abuse results from a rejection of modern medicine and an unwarranted faith in unevidenced remedies, whether they be prayer, herbs, or water placebo. Religion, like homeopathy, is a pseudoscience, resting on faulty but strongly held statements about reality. And in this case the conflict between science and faith—a conflict that we’re repeatedly assured is not real—proved fatal.
It’s not rocket science to see this, as did one Canadian police officer:
“We have no direct information that religious beliefs factored into this, but there was a belief system and homeopathic medicine did factor in,” Sgt. Cavilla said.
The CBC site has a video of Ryan dancing around: a lovely and lively child. Here he is:
His grandfather also said the boy was a gifted artist, and frequently participated in community art shows. “[He] was one of the most wonderful little boys you can imagine. I did spend a lot of time with him. I have a baseball that I gave him, which I asked my daughter to give back to me to carry in the car. I speak to him every day. He was full of life.”
h/t: Royce, Don
Here’s a funny video of ten Germans trying to say the world “squirrel.” All fail miserably, though some, like the guy in the straw hat, do better than others.
I’m not clear, even though I can speak German reasonably well, what about makes this word so for native speakers.
BTW, the German word for squirrel is “Eichhörnchen.” I’m not sure how one would parse this, as the German for “oak” is “Eiche,” and I think “hörnchen” means “little horned one.” Perhaps a German reader can tell me if this translates into “little horned creature that lives in oaks.”
An equally funny video could be made of French people trying to say the word “owl.” When I worked in France, my colleagues tried to flummox me by making me say the French tongue twister for “locksmith store” (“serrurerie,” and try to roll those “r”s!). But I’d get back at them by asking them to say the simple word “owl.” All sorts of hilarity ensued as the French twisted their faces into contorted positions trying to say the word. They just couldn’t do it. It always came out in a drawn-out, two-syllable word that sounded like “Ahhhhh-wohllllll”.
Anyway, Germans essay “squirrel”:
Finally, Robyn Schneider has a nice YouTube video (which I can’t embed) giving ten funny or intriguing German words that have no English equivalent. You’ll know at least two of them. My favorite is “Backpfeifengesicht,” which is the first word given in the video. I know many people who have such a feature.
Hili: Is there something interesting for cats in your culinary blog?
Monika: Hmm, it is a vegetarian blog.
Hili: This must be a mistake.
Hili: Czy ten twój blog kulinarny ma coś ciekawego dla kotów?
Monika: Hm, to jest blog wegetariański.
Hili: To chyba jakieś nieporozumienie.
