A thoughful atheist's blog.

For a bit of civilized refreshment and dare I say, pleasure, my readers might enjoy visiting Gay Species. I stumbled across this blog totally by accident and the best way to describe this blog is that it is classical without being typological.

Here are some links to interesting posts at Gay Species to get you started:
http://gayspecies.blogspot.com/2007/05/tuberculosis-in-news-not-news.html
http://gayspecies.blogspot.com/2007/05/possibility-of-spirituality.html
http://gayspecies.blogspot.com/2007/05/musings-on-religious-instruction.html

The blogger, D. Steven Heersink, notes that his mentors are:
Aristotle, Epicurus, Hume, Smith, Darwin, Popper. Hayek, Searle, and Solomon.

I'd like to get all of them together for dinner.

Brownback on evolution

Senator Brownback clarified his position on evolution today in the New York Times. At first his remarks seem reasonably to echo the position of the Roman Catholic Church on evolution. Yet he reveals himself to be a creationist with little more understanding of science than those who believe humans and Tyrannosaurus rex lived peacefully together before the Fall.

For example, he reasonably says that Faith and scientific reasoning can't be contradictory:

"The scientific method, based on reason, seeks to discover truths about the
nature of the created order and how it operates, whereas faith deals with
spiritual truths. The truths of science and faith are complementary: they deal
with very different questions, but they do not contradict each other because the
spiritual order and the material order were created by the same God."

And he is absolutely correct when he asserts that how "these theories"-presumably evolutionary theories- affect our understanding of the "human person" is a fundamental question.

But read more closely and Brownback is unmasked as a creationist-not even a theistic evolutionist. First, he repeats the creationist line about the distinction believing in microevolution (evolution with in a species). For example he says:

"If belief in evolution means simply assenting to microevolution, small
changes over time within a species, I am happy to say, as I have in the past,
that I believe it to be true. If, on the other hand, it means assenting to an
exclusively materialistic, deterministic vision of the world that holds no place
for a guiding intelligence, then I reject it. "

Notice how he not only rejects the concept of evolution of new species but also conflates any belief in evolution of new species from preexisting species with materialism.

So rather than striking a reasonable accommodation between faith and science, Brownback reveals himself to be an extremist wedded to the same sorts of fundamentalist rhetoric, that rejects the power of science to help us understand our humble place in the universe.

Update! Pat Hayes over at Red State Rabble has also posted about Brownback here.

Technorati Tags:
Science
Brownback
Creationism
Evolution

Sex in humans: It's a delicate balance.

For years we have been taught that during human development the default sex was female and an individual with a copy of the SRY gene would develop into a male. There is an interesting interview with Eric Vilain from the University of California in this month's Scientific American. Dr. Vilain's work has updated this simplistic notion and his work has implications that go beyond genetics.

Dr. Vilain studies intersex individuals. He got interested in this topic as a medical student in Paris. He was assigned to the pediatrics unit and was shocked at how doctors made decisions about gender assignment for children with ambiguous genitalia.

His lab has discovered that sex and perhaps gender seem to involve a balancing act between different sets of genes. On the one hand is the SRY gene. Balancing that appear to be a series of what he calls "anti male genes", for instance the WNT4 gene that he calls female specific. Indeed this gene appears to inhibit male hormone production by females. WNT4 and other sorts of genes may also prove to be not just "anti-male" but be required for proper ovarian development, but this still needs to be demonstrated.

Vilain's work has implications for the politics and handling of gender related issues. From the transgender perspective this work is interesting because it provides an approach that might help explain gender identity 'disorders' at least in some situations. After all the SRY gene appears to be expressed in the brain. Might the same hold true for some of these other genes related to gonadal development? Might gender identity and behavior be as much about genetics as about social construction?

Indeed in another interview Dr. Vilain has this to say about gender identity:

"This is really the big enigma and to me it's also the most important aspect of
sex determination to understand because I believe out of all the definitions of
sex, gender is the most important. In fact it's how people feel that is
important, regardless of what they look like, of what their levels of hormones
are, or what their face or genitalia look like. It's what they feel within
themselves."

For the intersex community, his work has led to proposals to replace much of the nomenclature related to intersex individuals. In Vilain's view, the term 'intersex' is too vague and he would replace it with the term 'disorders of sexual development (DSD)'. Some in the intersex community support these sorts of changes because it would enable them to get medical treatment. Others think that the new nomeclature pathologizes what they view as 'normal variants.' Vilain responds:

"We can play with words like that, but for practical purposes these "normal
variants" have a lot of health risks that require lots of visits to the doctor
for a bunch of issues that intersex patients have: fertility issues, cancer
issues (the testis inside the body can increase the risk of cancer), sexual
health issues. So if you're to start going to the doctor a lot for your
condition, you can call it a normal variant, but that's not really useful.
You're calling it a normal variant for political purposes."

Yet the intersex community is not abandoning the term intersex, but using it in the sense of an idenity rahter than a set of medical conditions. Sherri Morris makes this point quite clear in the ISNA blog:

"It would be a mistake to advocate that “intersex” be replaced with “DSD” within
such community, in the same way that people with a variety of different
conditions identify themselves using terms which may vary from the terms
employed by their health care providers. For example, instead of using a
diagnosis such as “achondroplasia,” many individuals with such conditions have
banded together using the term “Little People” because it reflects their
history, culture, and real-life experience."

So we see how genetics research affects more than just medical knowledge; it affects how we view ourselves at some very fundamental levels. For the subtle conflict and balance among the genes in the human organism is reflected in the complex nuances involved in even the most basic aspects of our identity, laying waste to the simplistic notions of male and female clung to by so many in our society.

Other Links:

Brian K. Jordan, Jennifer H.-C. Shen,Robert Olaso, Holly A. Ingraham, and Eric Vilain Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 September 16; 100(19): 10866–10871.

Intersex Society of North America

Technorati Tags:
genetics
gender identity
intersex

Creation Science Museum in NY Times

There is an interesting review in the NY Times of Ken Hamm's Creation Museum. It has lots of pictures and evaluates the museum mainly from the perspective of a museum visitor rather than evaluating the science.

From the article:

"For the skeptic the wonder is at a strange universe shaped by elaborate
arguments, strong convictions and intermittent invocations of scientific
principle. For the believer, it seems, this museum provides a kind of relief:
Finally the world is being shown as it really is, without the distortions of
secularism and natural selection."

Sounds like fun. But overlay that with this study from Science which looks at the origin of resistance to science. The author's note that resistance to science comes when science conflicts with "common sense" and ideologies passed down by trusted sources. In this an article from Edge, the authors Paul Bloom and Deena Weisberg elaborate on their Science study. They note:

"...the developmental data suggest that resistance to science will arise in
children when scientific claims clash with early emerging, intuitive
expectations. This resistance will persist through adulthood if the scientific
claims are contested within a society, and will be especially strong if there is
a non-scientific alternative that is rooted in common sense and championed by
people who are taken as reliable and trustworthy... in the United States, these
intuitive beliefs are particularly likely to be endorsed and transmitted by
trusted religious and political authorities. Hence these are among the domains
where Americans' resistance to science is the strongest."

Trust then has an important role in social learning. Thus, Bloom and Weisberg recommend that the best way for scientists to overcome resistance to science education is to work to convince the public that science in general is trust worthy. From my role as a teacher this suggests the need to give students at all levels the chance to do some sort of science and see for themselves the power of science to help us understand the universe.


Other Links:

Creation Museum Website
Why Do People Resist Science?

Technorati Tags:

Science
Education
Creationism
Learning

Changing my design...

Trying a new layout and it may take a few days to get the design the way I want it.

Blogging for the Pandemic

There's a new blog in town at least for the next five weeks: The Pandemic Flu Leadership Blog. It is sponsored by Health and Human Services to promote discussion about preparations for a possible flu pandemic.

Read the first post, Why care? Why Prepare? by Pierre Omidyar just in case you have forgotten how serious the threat from a flu pandemic is.

"At the national and international level, there is a lot of work to do, and much of it has been underway for quite some time. But the important thing is "..." no matter what gets done at a global level, hospitals and health care may not be there for us when we need it."

Therefore, families and neighborhoods will be on their own during a severe pandemic. If the pandemic is mild, communities could provide some support, but hospitals may still be overwhelmed. (Just look at hospitals during a mild seasonal flu season: most beds are full as it is.)

Interesting experiment. If it works maybe the government will do this sort of blog summit when they have other policy decisions to make-going to war for example. **eg**

Tip of the Antennae to DemfromCT at The Next Hurrah.

Update: Just as viruses often pick new genes via recombination so here's another site worth checking out: Pandemic Flu Information (PFI).

Technorati Tags:
blogging
influenza
pandemic
public health
HHS

Anti-evolutionist may lead National Education Group

Yes it's true. According to The Lawrence Journal World in this story , Kenneth Willard (corrected), who was part of the conservative majority who questioned evolution, is unopposed in his bid to be president of the National Association of State Boards of Education.



Willard says that his disagreement with Darwin has nothing to do with the association's work. And personally if I felt that Willard could be impartial and genuinely interested in education, OK.



But remember, he is part of the same group that wasted thousands of tax payer dollars, not to mention thousands of man hours, on sham evolution hearings in 2005. And he voted for a poorly qualified candidate, Bob Corkins, to be Commissioner of Education in Kansas.

The chickens in the hen house might just as well elect a fox as leader.

Here's another article about this controversy from the NY Times. (Tip of the antennae to Mousie Cat for this link. See Mousie's take on Willard here.)

Update 8:21. See this entry from Josh over at Thoughts from Kansas which fills in more details about the Corkin incident.

Technorati tags:

Kansas
Evolution
Education
NASBE

Rachel Carson: Voices from the Margins...

The University of Kansas is holding a special event examining the controversy surrounding Rachel Carson, called Voices from the Margins. This will be June 7 at 6:30 pm at the Spencer Museum of Art.

"Please join us for an exploration of the change and controversy ignited by biologist Rachel Carson (1907-1964), author of Silent Spring (1962). The film, Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring, originally broadcast as part of the award-winning PBS history series “American Experience,” chronicles reactions to Carson’s views and efforts to discredit her work."

I will be covering this since I have a special interest in Rachel Carson.

See also: www.rachelcarson.org

Update: Here's another Rachel Carson post on her upcoming 100th birthday. (Tip of the antennae to Rebecca over at Pocahontis County Fare for this post.)

Technorati Tags:
insects
science
environment
Rachel Carson