Is human dignity and uniqueness an outmoded conceptual relic? Do humans have a claim to inalienable rights not enjoyed by the great apes? Princeton University Bioethics Professor Peter Singer does not appear to think so. Nor does the nation of Spain. Is this just another social movement waiting to happen? Waiting for the right alignment of political power and judicial precedents?

Theron Bowers alludes to these issues and more in his article THE WORLD'S MOST DANGEROUS IDEA Being human is no big deal. Perhaps the concerns mentioned are a bit far fetched. They are clearly at variance with biblical ideas which have framed basic values of western civilization. But do those hostile to such values have any grounds for rebuking Singer? Spain?

See Orac's critique here

Harvard Law Professor Cass Sunstein has been confirmed Director to the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs by a vote of 57-40 in the Senate. Sunstein has been controversial based on his views that the internet should be regulated according to some fairness doctrine and that animals should enjoy the right to sue humans. Undoubtedly Cass has somehow been the victim of wing nuts. I actually have some sympathy for tort reform and have come across a test case which could serve as a legal precedent template in this brave new world.

Read the rest of this entry »

Cass Sunstein has been selected to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. Here is one view of Sunstein and here is another. He has supporters and detractors representing a broad part of the political spectrum. Surprisingly he has some support from conservative sources. I think there is much truth in this quote from the WSJ article:

In other work, Mr. Sunstein has developed the concept of an "availability cascade" — the way in which ideas gain prominence simply by being prominent, until we take their truth for granted.

Read the rest of this entry »

Spain’s Parliament has voiced its support “for the rights of great apes to life and freedom.” Yet this bold and historical decision to extend human rights to apes is plagued with arbitrary thinking.

Read the rest of this entry »

Dr. John Krystal, corresponding author of this commentary and Editor of Biological Psychiatry, remarks: "We felt that it was important to respond publicly to the attacks that have been directed at scientists, their families, and their neighbors because to be silent in the face of the attacks is to condone them. We condemn these misguided attacks.

- Here

Although scientists are advised to remain silent for fear of attacks, Professor Tipu Aziz, a consultant neurosurgeon, and Professor John Stein, a neurophysiologist have told the Guardian they believe it is time to stand up to the radicals who have attempted to stop the project.

"I think that it is important to speak out," said Prof Aziz, whose research into Parkinson's disease involves the use of primates.

["¦.]

Work was restarted on the lab in November after a year's delay when the original contractor, Montpelier, pulled out amid threats and intimidation from animal activists.

Today the identity of the new contractor, which operates on South Parks Road behind a five meter (15ft) barrier remains a secret. Builders wear balaclavas and the vehicles involved are all unmarked.

["¦.]

"I feel passionately that animal experiments have benefited mankind enormously and almost all of the medical advances of the last 100 years have happened through animal experiments. People just don't seem to know this, it hasn't been got across."

["¦]

Other researchers will remain silent on Saturday, privately believing Prof Aziz and Prof Stein are taking a huge risk. One, who would not be named, said it was not even sensible to discuss animal testing anywhere publicly in Oxford for fear of being overheard by anti-vivisectionists.

- HERE

Another animal rights extremist unveils his peaceful and tolerant guide to activism. This time, it's Gary Yourofsky in the University of Southern Indiana newspaper, dreaming about inflicting violence on animal researchers, hunters and fur-clad women.

So, while my lifestyle and lectures are based on compassion, those who refuse to stop harming animals force me to support 'eye for an eye' and 'by any means necessary' philosophies. …

Institutionalized violence doesn't simply vanish with a peaceful protest, a dose of logic and whole lotta love. If people continually deny animals their inherent right to be free, radical tactics are necessary and justified. …

Deep down, I truly hope that oppression, torture and murder return to each uncaring human tenfold! I hope that fathers accidentally shoot their sons on hunting excursions, while carnivores suffer heart attacks that kill them slowly.

Every woman ensconced in fur should endure a rape so vicious that it scars them forever. While every man entrenched in fur should suffer an anal raping so horrific that they become disemboweled. Every rodeo cowboy and matador should be gored to death, while circus abusers are trampled by elephants and mauled by tigers. And, lastly, may irony shine its esoteric head in the form of animal researchers catching debilitating diseases and painfully withering away because research dollars that could have been used to treat them was wasted on the barbaric, unscientific practice vivisection.

HT: Secondhand Smoke

Should it be a surprise to anyone that it took European bureaucrats to come up with an 11,700-word document to say that science is good, creationism is bad, and thus creationism should be kept out of the science classroom?

Not surprisingly, the bureaucrats think ID = creationism (yet complain creationism is contradictory because ID accepts evolution) and represents a threat to democracy:

the Parliamentary Assembly is worried about the possible ill-effects of the spread of creationist ideas within our education systems and about the consequences for our democracies. If we are not careful, creationism could become a threat to human rights which are a key concern of the Council of Europe.

Borrowing a page from George Bush's war strategy, the champions for human rights declare a preemptive strike:

Investigation of the creationists' growing influence shows that the arguments between creationism and evolution go well beyond intellectual debate. If we are not careful, the values that are the very essence of the Council of Europe will be under direct threat from creationist fundamentalists. It is part of the role of the Council's parliamentarians to react before it is too late.

Thank goodness they acted before it was "too late," as that ever growing Creationist Threat(iness) is always on the constant march.

But this made me wonder if the Champions for Science and Civilization had written at least 10% the number of words warning about the threat from extreme animal rights groups. After all, it is in a European country where construction workers must hide their identity because they dare build a science lab. So I did some Googling and couldn't find where the Council of Europe has defended science against the animal rights extremists.

But hey, I did find this.

A group of radical creationists placed an explosive device under evolutionary biologist Arthur Rosenbaums car; a faulty fuse was the only reason it didn't go off. Pro-science blogs are roundly condemning this attack, which they claim is impeding scientific progress.

Nah, just kidding. In reality, Dr. Arthur Rosenbaum is a pediatric ophthalmologist using animals in his research at UCLA, and it was radical animal rights activists that placed a deadly explosive under his car. Oh yeah, and the reaction from the self-described "pro-science" blogs has been deafening silence.

It gets worse. A prominent spoksesperson of the violent animal rights-movement is Jerry Vlasak, a 49-year-old trauma surgeon working at several community hospitals. From the article:

Read the rest of this entry »

… if by "terrorism" you mean vague threats against no one in particular:

"There were no overt threats to anybody specifically by name," [police commander Brad] Wiesley said. "It basically said anybody who doesn't believe in our religious belief is wrong and should be taken care of."

In case you read this post, expecting to see something about real terrorism, here's a little story, from less than two weeks ago:

Animal-Rights Militants Say They Put Bomb Under UCLA Scientist's Car

In another attempted attack on a UCLA professor by animal-rights extremists, federal and local authorities are investigating the placement of a bomb on Sunday under a car belonging to an eye researcher at the university. The explosive failed to detonate, according to today's Los Angeles Times. The incident resembles one last summer, in which activists claimed to have tried to bomb the residence of another researcher at the University of California at Los Angeles. That explosive also failed to blow up, and it was left at the wrong house in any event.

As the critics attempt to rationalize their angry, steeled toes by wrapping themselves in the Flag of Science, never forget that the same crowd just can't seem to get all that angry by news such as this:

An Oxford college has been firebombed by animal rights campaigners – almost one year after a fightback was launched against intimidation by extremists.

Two incendiary bombs were found in an annexe of Templeton College, forcing the evacuation of dozens of staff and students.

[...]

Last week animal rights activists released a call for action against staff members of the university, along with the disclosure of personal details of 40 people linked to animal testing or the building of the laboratory.

Activists were told that they had "nothing to lose and everything to gain by hitting these targets hard".

Read the rest of this entry »

Imagine what it would be like if someone else was to blame for this situation:

Susan (not her real name) is not just ex-directory. The name she is known by at work cannot be found on the electoral roll, and she has done her best to delete it from mailing lists of all kinds. As an animal researcher, you can't be too careful, she says.

Most of her family do not know exactly how she has spent the past 17 years in the lab. "I wish I could be more open about it. I wish I had the courage to be," she says. "I would love to tell people the fascinating things I have found out through my research. But some people will never understand my work, however much I might justify it as ultimately helping humans." Now that Susan is a mother of two, she is even more careful to ensure animal rights activists do not get their hands on her contact details.

Jackie (also not her real name) will not read any scientific paper on animal research on the tube, or talk about her rodent experiments outside her home. "You don't know who might be sitting at the next table. I don't want to put those I am close to in a potentially dangerous position," she says. "I have been doing animal-based pharmacology research for 30 years, and have always been advised to be cautious about whom I talk to."

They actually feel they have to hide their science. It really is a shame how a certain cyber-community can rally its forces to defend against the evils of a Bill Dembski or a Francis Collins, while abandoning Susan and Jackie to the real world.

From the Oxford Mail:

Two letterbombs have been delivered to science firms in Oxfordshire today. A woman was hurt when a package exploded as she opened the post at Orchid Cellmark, in Blacklands Way, at Abingdon Business Park, at 9.15am. And at 1.45pm police were called to another firm in Culham where another suspicious package was found. … Both packages are being linked to animal rights protesters.

The article also mentions Oxford University, where the construction of an animal testing laboratory has prompted a number of attacks from animal rights terrorists. I'm sure Richard Dawkins, Oxford's resident professor for the public understanding of science, would love to defend his colleagues and educate the public on the necessity of animal testing. Too bad he's busy with his campaign of painting religious parents as child abusers.

Richard Dawkins is having an e-mail battle with Bill Dembski. "I had not given the Blasphemy Challenge any thought until you called it to my attention," says Dawkins. Actually, given that evidence of much thought is lacking, I'm not surprised that Dawkins gives little thought to the things promoted on his own official web page. But then Dawkins does a little bragging:

Now that you have done so, I do not seem to feel strongly one way or the other. As that admirable bumper sticker has it, Blasphemy is a Victimless Crime. So, am I going to send in my own film clip denying the Holy Ghost? No, that is not what Oxford professors do, they write books instead.

Not quite. Oxford professors also hang out in basements with kids and bash religion. Look, while one Oxford professor is doing what he can do to make it illegal for parents to take their children to church, another Oxford professor, David Weatherall, has been behaving like a real scientist and trying to help the public understand the importance of scientific research.