Fight: Moray eel vs sea snake

April 18, 2013 • 11:28 am

by Matthew Cobb

In this amazing video, a brave – or foolhardy – banded sea krait has decided to nom a moray eel. It’s hard to express what a dumb idea that is, unless the animal doing the nomming is a great white shark, I guess. Morays are one of the most badass denizens of the deep, and I certainly wouldn’t have got anywhere near as close to it as this diver did, even if it was busy being eaten at the time. Its business end is still in action. The video only lasts 2:40 – make sure you watch to the end.

h/t @edyong209, who spotted this on the excellent Deep Sea News collective blog. Your one-stop shop for all things marine!

 

“Dear evolution” letters: animals bemoan their lot

April 18, 2013 • 4:06 am

UPDATE: The deadline for entries, as I’m travelling today, will be midnight tonight (i.e., Friday night) Chicago time.

_________

The Scientific American “Brainwaves” site has a group of really funny letters (written by Mara Graunbaum and Ferris Jabr) called “Dear evolution: letters of gripe and gratitude”.  In most of them, animals write to evolution to carp about their genetic bequest, but at least one beast is thankful.

There are several; all hilarious, but I’ll reproduce one. It includes a video, which I reproduce as well. But go read them all.

Dear Evolution,

Let’s start with the wings: did you really have to turn them into flippers? Don’t get us wrong—we appreciate the swimming and diving talents. But couldn’t you have come up with some kind of compromise so that we could still fly? Maybe a 2-in-1 special, a wing/flipper hybrid? After all, there are fish that can fly. Some squid can fly. And they don’t even have feathers. We know we’re not alone in being flightless, but you made ostriches, emus and cassowaries total badasses, what with their powerful legs and deadly claws. We’re more like large tuxedoed kiwis.

At least kiwis get to roam lush New Zealand. We’re stuck on the coldest, driest, windiest continent on the planet. We live in Earth’s deep freezer—way at the back, with the pack of peas encrusted in ice. Speaking of ice, where are our retractable keratin crampons? That doesn’t seem like a particularly complicated adaptation. You showed a lot of foresight with snowshoe hares and you found the time to decorate gecko feet with bazillions of sticky microhairs. Can we get a little traction too? We’re pretty good at waddling, but we still slip and fall over—a lot.

Finally, there’s the matter of our voices. There seems to be something of a musical imbalance in the bird world. Thrushes, finches, warblers, Lyrebirds and the like—you gave them all your acoustic gifts. What about the rest of us? Considering that we live somewhere so barren—where the only ambient sounds are calving glaciers, furious frigid gusts and the creepy distended whistles of Weddell seals—it would be really nice to entertain ourselves with some songs. Unfortunately, our best attempts at melody sound like a car struggling to start.

We may live at the bottom of the world but we think it’s time you moved us to the top of your priority list.

Sincerely,
Emperor Penguins

(Be sure to click on the linkes, especially the last one about the voice of the emperor penguin. Oy!)

Oh, and I’ll provide an autographed copy of WEIT (I’m getting a new supply) to the reader who posts the best “Dear Evolution” letter below along the lines of the ones in the Scientific American piece.  I’ll also draw the animal you chose to highlight.

In the comments below, reader Jaxkayaker has highlighted a related and equally funny site, “WTF, Evolution?” This one is ongoing.

h/t: SGM, Jim E.

How many cats can you name?

April 17, 2013 • 5:27 pm

I am at Purdue and posting will be light as I haz talks to give.  But here, via alert reader Pyers, is a drawing from Archibald The Psychotic Housecats Den of Insanity (sic) Facebook page.

How many of these cats can you recognize (name ’em below)? I’d offer a book to the first person who got them all right, but I don’t know them all.  You’ll have to settle for a warm handshake. (Click to enlarge.)

Cats galore

Books on the Cambrian worth buying

April 17, 2013 • 11:30 am

by Greg Mayer

Jerry has recently noted a forthcoming book on the Cambrian by the infamous Stephen Meyer. There is a brand new book, The Cambrian Explosion, by the famous Douglas Erwin of the USNM and even more famous James Valentine of UC-Berkeley, that you might want to read if you really want to learn something about this period in the history of life.

Erwin & Valentine The Cambrian Explosion

Just published in January, you can see by the cover it’s got some great art work, and the publisher, Ben Roberts, has made chapter one and more of the art available at their website (after clicking, scroll down for art; it’s cheaper than Amazon there, too).  Another fairly recent book on the Cambrian Explosion covers the very exciting recent discoveries in the Chengjiang of China, The Cambrian Fossils of Chengjiang, China by X.-Q. Hou and colleagues.

Hou Cambrian book

The Chengjiang is especially exciting for me, because it has revealed a variety of chordates, which are much less diverse in the previously best known Cambrian locality, the Burgess Shale of British Columbia. There are some older books about the Burgess Shale, including The Fossils of the Burgess Shale, by Derek Briggs and colleagues, with great photos by Chip Clark, and The Burgess Shale by Harry B. Whittington, the late dean of Burgess Shale studies. There are also the more polemical Wonderful Life by Steve Gould, and The Crucible of Creation by Simon Conway Morris.

Goshawk hunting

April 17, 2013 • 10:58 am

This wonderful slow-motion footage of a goshawk hunting fake prey was my present from Matthew Cobb on the occasion of our 20,000,000th view.

Some of the footage was taken at 5,000 frames per second (!), and they have the bird attack a water balloon to see how its talons work.

I’m not sure which species of goshawk this is, but I’m absolutely sure that at least one reader will identify it.

Alex Wild is having a print sale

April 17, 2013 • 7:46 am

Alex Wild, writer of the website Myrmecos, and entomologist and photographer extraordinaire, is having a special sale on his photographic prints, and they are doozies: nature at its most weird and wonderful.

There are 30 on sale, and here’s a shot of the lot of them:

Picture 2

The prices are ridiculously low: about $16 for an unframed, 8 X 12 inch photo, and you can get them framed and/or signed by Alex. They’d make great presents for naturalists or insect-lovers, and Christmas is only nine months away.

I’ll show my favorite five of the thirty, but you will probably like others as well (click to enlarge):

i-qqsVkHR-L
Messor pergandei harvester ant – California
Modified by CombineZP
Cephalotes clypeatus golden turtle ant – Paraguay
i-BLfLcNN-L
Eupholus weevil – Borneo
Jumping spiders such as this Phidippus audax have excellent vision
Phidippus audax jumping spider – Illinois, USA

Ant wars: nature red in tarsus and mandible!: Rhytidoponera victoriae (left) fighting with Stigmatomma ferruginea – Victoria, Australia

i-zK5hMgq-L

A (formerly) reputable publisher sells out to creationists

April 17, 2013 • 4:19 am

This isn’t an ad for an upcoming book showing that Jesus caused the Cambrian explosion of animal life (the rapid origin of many phyla about 540 million years ago); rather, it’s an indictment of a once-reputable publisher, HarperCollins, who, under the imprint of HarperOne (its “religion” subsidiary), is going to publish this book in June:

51AhXx78-XL

There are of course many theories for why so many phyla originated within a short time (“short” being 10-30 million years!): explanations based on genes (new developmental plans became available), environmental changes (more oxygen), and biological interactions (predators drove evolution of prey and vice versa).  In a nice article in the 2006 Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences (free pdf), my former colleague, paleontologist Charles Marshall, summarized many of them, concluding that we can’t yet lean strongly toward one explanation, or even toward one key factor.

That’s the way science works: when we don’t know the answer, we say so. A very common—indeed, even trite—sentence in the conclusion of scientific papers is this: “More work needs to be done.”

But creationist Stephen Meyer, from the Discovery Institute, has apparently wrapped up the story. He’s hit upon the real reason for the Cambrian explosion: it’s intelligent design!  Yes, baby Jesus made the phyla! As the ID blog “Evolution News and Views” notes when touting the book:

Here is a sweeping account, stunningly illustrated with gorgeous color photos, of the frontiers of the scientific critique of Darwinism and the case for ID. Exacting and thorough, yet remarkably accessible to the thoughtful lay reader, Darwin’s Doubt introduces us to the challenges to Darwinism based on the study of combinatorial inflation, protein science, population genetics, developmental biology, epigenetic information, and more.

Meyer explains how post-Darwinian alternatives and adaptions of Darwin’s theory — including self-organizational models, evo-devo, neutral or nonadaptive evolution, natural genetic engineering, and others — fall short as well. He demonstrates that the weaknesses of orthodox evolutionary theory, when flipped over head-to-foot, are precisely the positive indications that point most persuasively to intelligent design.

Evolutionary biologists studying gene regulatory networks and fossil discontinuity, among other fields, have come tantalizingly close to reaching this conclusion themselves.

“Tantalizingly close” my yiddische tuchus! Tell that to the evolutionists working on this problem, some of whom I know. I doubt that a single one of them would entertain intelligent design for a second. That’s because it’s a non-explanation, something that creationists like Meyer invoke when science doesn’t yet have an answer. In other words, this promises to be yet another God-of-the-gaps book (as we know, the “designer” of IDers like Meyer is really the Christian God). The “case for ID” here, as it always is, consists of arguing that there are phenomena that supposedly can’t be explained by materialist science. It’s straight natural theology: Paley of the 21st century.

If Meyer can’t adduce positive evidence that a designer created the Cambrian explosion—and I can’t imagine how he could possibly do this—his argument would rest only on our current ignorance of why it happened.  And that is just filling the lacuna in our knowledge with God.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who, unlike Meyer, was a smart theologian, presciently decried Meyer’s strategy in his Letters and Papers from Prison (1997, p. 311):

“If in fact the frontiers of knowledge are being pushed farther and farther back (and that is bound to be the case), then God is being pushed back with them, and is therefore continually in retreat.”

I’ll put my money on science here, and bet that within 50 years we’ll know a lot more about the Cambrian explosion and why it happened.  Or perhaps we won’t, for some scientific answers will forever elude us. But I’ll bet even more money on one thing: Meyer has no positive evidence that the explosion came from a designer.

Shame on him, but even more shame on HarperCollins for feeding and misleading the public with creationism masquerading as science. Have they no shame, at long last?