Archive for the 'Random Stuff' Category

« Previous Entries
Next Page »

Open Thread

Posted in Random Stuff on November 7th, 2012 by chunkdz

The New Atheist Credo

158 Comments »

Open Thread

Posted in Random Stuff on October 8th, 2012 by chunkdz

Archie

Please continue the conversation here, meatheads.

72 Comments »

Open Thread – Topo Gigio!

Posted in Random Stuff on August 17th, 2012 by chunkdz

173 Comments »

Science FAIL

Posted in Biology, Random Stuff on July 31st, 2012 by chunkdz

When Nature announced that biologists had artificially created a jellyfish I was very excited. Jellies represent some of the earliest life on the planet and a synthetic version could offer some insight into life's origins. How in the world did they turn rat cells into a jellyfish? Did they find a way to trigger some ancient expression mechanism? Stem cells? Genetic engineering?

No. Turns out that some Cal-Tech dorks glued some rat heart cells to a piece of silicon. Put it in water and zap it with a pulsing electric field and it wiggles – a phenomenon that has been well known for decades.

Now I like bath toys as much as the next guy but really… if this can make it into Nature why can't I seem to find funding for my own experiment?

12 Comments »

Open Thread: Party

Posted in Random Stuff on April 29th, 2011 by Guts

llamaelectrodjdancedancedanceelectrollama

11 Comments »

Guest Post Submission Call

Posted in Random Stuff on March 14th, 2011 by nullasalus

Is there a teleology-related topic that has caught your interest, but we haven't really touched on it here at Telic Thoughts? Would you welcome the possibility of writing a guest blog post about it?

Then this is the thread for you!

Just write up a short summary of the topic you wish to post on. I'll look over the ideas and call attention and hopefully select one or a few ideas to greenlight. I'll add in a few guidelines to let you know what I'm looking for here – common sense stuff, but it helps to list it anyway.

* As said, your topic should be teleology-related at least in the broad sense. A popular focus is typically on teleology in evolution or natural history, but I'd also be interested in discussions of distinctly human teleology. Are you a transhumanist who thinks mankind shall in the future be something like Q Continuum from Star Trek? "That counts," says I. Also, "I hope we'll have a better name than Q Continuum."

* Do you have a low opinion of gnus? So do I, but this shouldn't be the topic of any potential guest post. Really, thorough criticisms of that particular cult have been done to death.

* Is your topic not directly related to teleology, but does argue for an alternate (non-Darwinian) understanding of evolutionary mechanisms? Quite possibly interesting.

There you go. Have additional questions? Ask them in the thread.

17 Comments »

What Biology and Evolution Can Teach Us About Our Safety: Tribute to Darwin

Posted in Random Stuff on March 13th, 2011 by nullasalus

From the "I think I missed this the first time" pile is this 2009 article explaining the daily application of evolution to common security issues. From the article.

"One strategy to reduce risk would be to approach the ATM cautiously and spend a lot of time looking around while there. By doing so, you will spend more time in an exposed position," he said. "An alternative strategy would be to run in and run out as quickly as possible. We see evidence that animals use both strategies in nature. Some species are more vigilant in risky areas, while others are less vigilant, and by being less vigilant, they are able to reduce their exposure to predators because they decrease the amount of time in risky areas. Evolution and the diversity of life show us there are many strategies to solve problems and respond to risk."

It's a remarkable article, really. I mean… … nah, let's just call it remarkable and leave it at that for now.

24 Comments »

Daniel Deming on Dissenting from Darwinism

Posted in Random Stuff on March 10th, 2011 by nullasalus

Just noticed this over at Uncommon Descent. I'll highlight one part of his article that stood out to me.

My critic seemed to think that anyone who would agree with this statement was necessarily a creationist, if not a Biblical fundamentalist that believed the Earth was 6,000 years old. On the contrary, I'm an evolutionist. I'm committed to naturalism in science, and I believe that radioactive dating and other evidence shows the Earth to be about 4.6 billion years old. The reason I'm an evolutionist is that science is based largely on empirical evidence. The fossil record shows progressive change in life through time. The farther back we go in time, the more that life diverges from present day forms. If we do nothing but look at the fossils, we see a process of natural change, or evolution.

There is no scientific reason that one-hundred percent of biologist and geologists should not sign the Dissent from Darwinism statement. Who can disagree that "careful examination of the evidence" is indicated for every scientific theory? And there is plenty of skepticism in the scientific literature regarding the ability of natural selection alone to account for the changes we infer from the fossil record. A 2009 paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science began with the words "I reject the Darwinian assumption…[of] a single common ancestor." A 2005 review paper published in Trends in Ecology and Evolution noted that "the many intermediate forms hypothesized by Darwin" were "missing." These are but two examples that illustrate a pervasive theme of skeptical deliberation.

…

None of this is an argument for supernaturalism. There are many scientific alternatives to natural selection. Endosymbiotic theory proposes that multi-celled organisms arose not through natural selection, but through the interaction of single-celled bacteria. We beginning to become aware that horizontal gene transfer may have played an important role in evolution. We don't know how life began, and we don't understand all the mechanisms by which life evolved on Earth. And we most certainly are not aware of what we don't know. It is relatively easy for us to assess the extent of our knowledge, but impossible to fathom the extent of our ignorance.

An interesting perspective.

98 Comments »

Evolution Drives Many Plants, Animals to be Bigger, Faster

Posted in Random Stuff on March 7th, 2011 by nullasalus

Here's the article.

A classic example is human birth weight. Newborns of intermediate size are more likely to survive than newborns that are extremely large or extremely small. In lieu of driving organisms to be bigger and faster over time, the 'Goldilocks' model — also known as stabilizing selection — favors moderation, the authors explained. But for the vast majority of organismal traits, this pattern is the exception, not the rule. "Rarely is it the case that the individuals that survive and reproduce the best are the ones in the middle," Kingsolver said.

The result is puzzling because the conventional wisdom is that most creatures are well adapted to the environments in which they live. "When we look at nature, we see all these amazing ways species are well-adapted to their lifestyles and habitats," Kingsolver said. "Yet the organisms that are bigger, faster, still do the best in terms of survival and reproduction. Why aren't they already just the right size or speed, or pretty close to it?" he asked.

The answer is largely, "I 'unno. Maybe it's…" But still, worth a read.

3 Comments »

Blind cavefish can develop sighted offspring

Posted in Random Stuff on February 27th, 2011 by nullasalus

Within one generation, no less. From this 2008 article:

It's a miracle! Blind cavefish, despite having adapted to their lightless environment for more than a million years, can produce sighted offspring in just a single generation, a new study reveals.

The ability was discovered when researchers mated fish from distinct populations that had been isolated in separate caves.

In some cases the first-generation offspring of such unions could see.

Anyway, some thoughts below the cut.

Read the rest of this entry »

187 Comments »

Good Bye

Posted in Random Stuff on February 21st, 2011 by Bilbo

And good luck.

13 Comments »

Open Thread: Fire in the Disco!

Posted in Random Stuff on February 19th, 2011 by nullasalus

Because there's currently no Open Thread on the front page, here we go.

Polite, off-topic discussion ahoy. Also, that girl looks like a younger Eugenie Scott.

108 Comments »

Why We Need Critics

Posted in Random Stuff on February 18th, 2011 by Bilbo

Mike Gene has come up with the 10 signs of intellectual honesty, which is a very nice thing to strive to be. Unfortunately, most of us over rate how intellectually honest we really are. And even if we were completely intellectually honest, we are still fallible human beings with a finite amount of knowledge.

Read the rest of this entry »

Gonorrhea acquires a piece of human DNA

Posted in Random Stuff on February 14th, 2011 by nullasalus

Of interest to those among us – like me – who are fascinated by HGT in general. I was just asking Mike about this sort of thing, so this is a bit of serendipity.

CHICAGO — If a human cell and a bacterial cell met at a speed-dating event, they would never be expected to exchange phone numbers, much less genetic material. In more scientific terms, a direct transfer of DNA has never been recorded from humans to bacteria.

Until now. Northwestern Medicine researchers have discovered the first evidence of a human DNA fragment in a bacterial genome – in this case, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, the bacterium that causes gonorrhea. Further research showed the gene transfer appears to be a recent evolutionary event.

More here.

5 Comments »

On Being an Amateur ID proponent

Posted in Random Stuff on February 12th, 2011 by Bilbo

Oleg(t) has dismissed most of us ID proponents as being nothing but a bunch of amateurs. I won't deny his accusation. When it comes to the field of biology, most of us are amateurs. (Of course, when it comes to recognizing other conscious minds and products of intelligent design, I think we are all experts.) But I will deny the relevance of his accusation. You see, the experts of biology, Dawkins, Coyne, Ken Miller, and others, keep writing popular books for us amateurs, in order to convince us of the truth of evolution. Why? Apparently they think we are capable of evaluating the evidence if it is presented to us properly. If they think we are capable of evaluating the evidence, then I see no need to listen to the accusation of another rank amateur telling us that we are not capable of evaluating the evidence.

Read the rest of this entry »

54 Comments »

« Previous Entries
Next Page »
  • You are currently browsing the archives for the Random Stuff category.

  • Featured Books

    Origination of Organismal Form by Muller & Newman

  • The Design Matrix: A Consilience of Clues by Mike Gene


  • Pages

    • About Us
    • bipod
    • Bradford
    • Chunkdz
    • Deuce
    • Nullasalus
    • Techne
    • The Banned List
  • Categories

    • Animal Rights Extremism (40)
    • Approaches (20)
    • Astrobiology (6)
    • Bioethics (35)
    • Biology (213)
    • Books (25)
    • Brain (53)
    • Bunny Fright Week (7)
    • Cancer (1)
    • Causality (7)
    • Cell (32)
    • Climate Change (4)
    • Computer Science (9)
    • Convergent Evolution (7)
    • Cosmology (14)
    • Creationism (59)
    • Critical Thinking (5)
    • Culture Wars (25)
    • Design Inferences (43)
    • DNA Repair (4)
    • Engineering (19)
    • Eugenics (26)
    • Evidence (44)
    • Evo-Devo (12)
    • Evolution (315)
    • Evolutionary Psychology (14)
    • Fine-tuning (16)
    • Friday Quote (33)
    • Front-loading (172)
    • Gene's Gems (12)
    • Genetic Code (8)
    • Genome (12)
    • Guest Post (17)
    • Hating Mike (1)
    • Henry Rollins Award (3)
    • History (34)
    • Hoax (2)
    • Humor (181)
    • Information (12)
    • Intelligent Design (542)
    • Irreducible Complexity (28)
    • Junk DNA (4)
    • Just For Fun (31)
    • Law (2)
    • Media (95)
    • Meeting of Minds (9)
    • Memory Hole (1)
    • Metatalk (50)
    • MikeGenes World (22)
    • Modern Myths (9)
    • Morality (10)
    • Mutations (8)
    • Nanotechnology (2)
    • Natural Selection (32)
    • Nature (24)
    • Nature of Science (95)
    • Origin of Life (71)
    • Paul Mirecki (16)
    • Peer Review (12)
    • Peter Singer (3)
    • Philosophy (94)
    • Philosophy of Mind (40)
    • Physics (12)
    • Politics (18)
    • Post-Wedge World (21)
    • Proteins (14)
    • Quantum (6)
    • Quote Mining (9)
    • Random Stuff (275)
    • Religion (201)
    • Repost (34)
    • Richard Dawkins (105)
    • RNA (18)
    • Scandals (4)
    • Scholasticism (5)
    • School (62)
    • Science (205)
    • Scientific Boundaries (11)
    • Scientism (1)
    • Self-organization (2)
    • Shoddy Science (33)
    • Simulation Argument (2)
    • Stereotypes (7)
    • Systems Biology (3)
    • Teleology (9)
    • The Critics (261)
    • The Debate (326)
    • The Design Matrix (75)
    • The Duck (8)
    • The New Atheists (89)
    • The Rabbit (239)
    • Threatiness (85)
  • Evolution

    • Anthropology Weblog
    • Charles Darwin on the web
    • Darwin@home
    • Genetic Code Evolution
    • Kenneth Miller
    • NCSE
    • Stephen Jay Gould Archive
    • Talk Reason
    • Talk.Origins Archive
    • The Loom
    • The Panda's Thumb
    • Tree of Life
    • Was Darwin Wrong?
  • blogroll

    • Intelligently Sequenced
    • The Design Matrix
  • Teleology

    • Akilli Tasarim
    • An Evangelical Dialogue on Evolution
    • BioLogos
    • Edward Feser
    • Evolution Engineered
    • Evolution Oriented
    • Evolution und Schöpfung
    • Exiled from Groggs
    • ISCID EoSaP
    • Real Physics
    • Reality Cheque
    • Robin Collins
    • Teleomechanist
    • Telic Meme
    • The American Scientific Affiliation
    • The Creation of an Evolutionist
    • Thinking Christian
    • Thought Provoker
    • Wonders For Oyarsa
  • People With Interesting Ideas

    • Albert de Roos
    • Bradley Monton
    • Cell Intelligence
    • Darwin or Design
    • James Shapiro
    • Michael Syvanen
    • Panspermia
    • Paul Davies
  • Anti-Teleology

    • Center for Naturalism
    • Pharyngula
    • Richard Dawkins
  • Archives

    • May 2013
    • February 2013
    • November 2012
    • October 2012
    • September 2012
    • August 2012
    • July 2012
    • June 2012
    • May 2012
    • April 2012
    • March 2012
    • February 2012
    • January 2012
    • December 2011
    • November 2011
    • October 2011
    • September 2011
    • August 2011
    • July 2011
    • June 2011
    • May 2011
    • April 2011
    • March 2011
    • February 2011
    • January 2011
    • December 2010
    • November 2010
    • October 2010
    • September 2010
    • August 2010
    • July 2010
    • June 2010
    • May 2010
    • April 2010
    • March 2010
    • February 2010
    • January 2010
    • December 2009
    • November 2009
    • October 2009
    • September 2009
    • August 2009
    • July 2009
    • June 2009
    • May 2009
    • April 2009
    • March 2009
    • February 2009
    • January 2009
    • December 2008
    • November 2008
    • October 2008
    • September 2008
    • August 2008
    • July 2008
    • June 2008
    • May 2008
    • April 2008
    • March 2008
    • February 2008
    • January 2008
    • December 2007
    • November 2007
    • October 2007
    • September 2007
    • August 2007
    • July 2007
    • June 2007
    • May 2007
    • April 2007
    • March 2007
    • February 2007
    • January 2007
    • December 2006
    • November 2006
    • October 2006
    • September 2006
    • August 2006
    • July 2006
    • June 2006
    • May 2006
    • April 2006
    • March 2006
    • February 2006
    • January 2006
    • December 2005
    • November 2005
    • October 2005
    • September 2005
    • August 2005
    • July 2005
    • June 2005
    • May 2005
    • Meta

      • Register
      • Log in

Telic Thoughts is proudly powered by WordPress
Hosting provided by TopSoftware4Download.com .

Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).