From Ewen Callaway at Nature: Thousands of years before cats came to dominate Internet culture, they swept through ancient Eurasia and Africa carried by early farmers, ancient mariners and even Vikings, finds the first large-scale look at ancient-cat DNA. The study, presented at a conference on 15 September, sequenced DNA from more than 200 cats that lived between about 15,000 years ago and the eighteenth century ad. More. There were even Viking cats—of course, given enough familiarity with the animal, you’ll believe that. But then, with an apparently straight face, Callaway goes on to report that “experts” doubt whether the cat is truly a domestic animal (behaviour and anatomy are not “clearly distinct” from those of wild relatives). That’s the Read More ›

Further to Goalposts? What goalposts? From Evolution News & Views: Computer Scientist Joshua Swamidass Argues: Cancer “Casts Serious Doubt” on Intelligent Design In what way does cancer, a destructive disease, have anything to do with evolving new species? Cancer involves single cells, not whole organisms, and it doesn’t build new features, it tears down existing ones. The argument from cancer doesn’t hold up. It doesn’t even make sense. “If many ID arguments in molecular biology were true, then cancer as we know it would be mathematically impossible,” writes Swamidass. Either that or it would “regularly require the direct intervention of God to initiate and be sustained.” Not at all. “Things fall apart.” That is the natural way, which needs no evolutionary Read More ›

Waynesburg University (Pennsylvania) biology prof Wayne Rossiter, author of In the Shadow of Oz, offers a response to a claim by Washington University (St. Louis) Joshua Swamidass that design in nature cannot be demonstrated (here.): He [Swamidass], like most others, chooses willfully to equivocate on the term and repeatedly move the goal posts. Goalposts? Who told Rossiter there were goalposts? Swamidass writes, “Rather, if specific mechanisms of evolution are true, they make testable predictions about how biological systems behave today. We can test these predictions in biological systems experimentally, and there is an immense body of work that does just this, finding that predictions from some mechanisms are wrong (e.g. neo-Darwinian positive-selection dominated change) and of others are correct (e.g. neutral Read More ›

I would bet my bottom dollar that most atheists active on or reading this site are very moral, good people. In fact, I would bet that rvb8, Pindi and seversky are better (morally speaking) people than I am. I would further make a bet that part of the very reason they embrace atheism is because they consider the type of “god” they have had exposure to in church or in their community would be, if it actually existed according to what they’ve been exposed to as far as religious teachings, an absurdly evil being not worthy of belief, much less worship. I would agree with them on this point – the god I perceived being taught to me in Sunday Read More ›

In his September 22 release book, Universal: A Guide to the Cosmos. In an interview with The Guardian: How far are the dots apart for you to make that leap of understanding? The theory of inflation itself is almost nailed down. We teach it at undergraduate level, and the data supports it as far as we can tell. The idea of multiverses is not too big a leap from that. If that is right then you have essentially an infinity of universes and it follows there is a very natural, almost unavoidable mechanism for varying the laws of nature in each universe. Therefore the idea that we look out on a universe that has been waiting for us to appear in Read More ›

From Megan Molteni at Wired: n the last five years, open-access journals have cropped up all over the Internet, their websites looking like those of any typical scholarly publisher: editorial boards filled with bios of well-respected scientists, claims of rigorous peer review, indexing in the most influential databases. The looks of these publishers have deceived thousands of young and inexperienced researchers all over the world, costing them millions of dollars—and for many, their reputations. So it is with good reason that the US Federal Trade Commission has taken an interest in these “predatory” publishers. Specifically, they’ve honed in on OMICS Group, a global conglomerate based in India and incorporated in Nevada that boasts more than 700 “leading-edge, peer reviewed” open Read More ›

This gets kicked around forever, but from Neuroskeptic at Discover blogs, profiling the thoughts of neurobiologist Thomas C. Südhof: Südhof says that “as ‘voluntary’ action” by the journals seems unlikely, “we should demand rules that inject accountability into the system.” I agree that if we want scientific journals to be more accountable, we (the scientific community) need to drive this change. But I’m not sure that demanding rules will be enough. Maybe something more akin to ‘direct action’ will be required. Put simply, we could just start holding journals accountable ourselves. Suppose, for instance, that you as a scientist are unhappy with the quality or policies of a particular journal. Sure, you could complain and demand improvement. But if that Read More ›

So we’d think from science writer K. C. Cole at Quanta: And then physicists began to realize that the dream of one singular theory was an illusion. The complexities of string theory, all the possible permutations, refused to reduce to a single one that described our world. “After a certain point in the early ’90s, people gave up on trying to connect to the real world,” Gross said. “The last 20 years have really been a great extension of theoretical tools, but very little progress on understanding what’s actually out there.” Many, in retrospect, realized they had raised the bar too high. Coming off the momentum of completing the solid and powerful “standard model” of particle physics in the 1970s, Read More ›

From Associated Press via Mashable: The sugar industry began funding research that cast doubt on sugar’s role in heart disease — in part by pointing the finger at fat — as early as the 1960s, according to an analysis of newly uncovered documents. The analysis published Monday is based on correspondence between a sugar trade group and researchers at Harvard University, and is the latest example showing how food and beverage makers attempt to shape public understanding of nutrition. This matters to us at UD because most people have had no idea how much of what is called “science” is shaped by various interests, with data addressed and questions framed, to support lobby and interest group views. We are only Read More ›

Starting this month. From Ross Logan at UK Mirror: The Five-hundred-metre Aperture Spherical Telescope (FAST) will search deep space in the hope of unlocking some of the universe’s deepest secrets Is Earth finally about to make contact with extra terrestrial life? That is one of the hopes for the world’s largest radio telescope, which will be switched on later this month. The finishing touches have now been put to the Five-hundred-metre Aperture Spherical Telescope (FAST), in south west China’s Guizhou Province, with the enormous 1,650-foot-wide dish set become operational from September 25. More. Good hunting! But one question that arises is, how do we know at what point we can come to a conclusion? See also: How do we grapple Read More ›

Still struggling to leave the break room. From Kenneth D. Royal, April A. Kedrowicz & Amy M. Snyder at Anthrozoos, a survey of what Americans think: The first study to systematically explore beliefs about animal afterlife by asking a national sample of Americans has been published in the journal Anthrozoös. It investigated how demographic categories can have a considerable influence on beliefs about animal afterlife. With around 70% of US households owning pets, the study marks a new insight into a largely unexplored area of American spirituality. The authors surveyed 800 participants, examining how demographic factors including sex, race, age, geographic region, religious beliefs, and pet ownership all affect an individual’s beliefs about animal afterlife. Results showed that people who Read More ›

Before we get back to work: From Gary L. Francione, Rutgers animal rights law prof, at Aeon: Domesticated animals are completely dependent on humans, who control every aspect of their lives. Unlike human children, who will one day become autonomous, non-humans never will. That is the entire point of domestication – we want domesticated animals to depend on us. They remain perpetually in a netherworld of vulnerability, dependent on us for everything that is of relevance to them. We have bred them to be compliant and servile, and to have characteristics that are pleasing to us, even though many of those characteristics are harmful to the animals involved. We might make them happy in one sense, but the relationship can Read More ›

As a follow-up to my last post, I think it is only fair for me to highlight all of the Christian gangbangers who renounced their faith in Christ, converted to materialist atheism, and turned from a life of hate and violence to a life of love, mercy and sacrifice for their families. Oh wait, no such person exists.  Never mind.  Carry on with what you were doing.

George Price (1922–1975) From science writer Michael Regnier at Digg: He’d met his wife, Julia, on the Manhattan Project, but as well as being a scientist she was a devout Roman Catholic. The marriage was hard-pressed to survive Price’s scathing views on religion, and after eight years and two daughters – Annamarie and Kathleen – they divorced. Fed up with his job, his life and the distinct lack of recognition in America, Price cut his ties in 1967 and crossed the Atlantic to London, intent on making a great scientific discovery there. He felt he had just a few more years to make his mark, but as it turned out, he needed only one. Price had set himself the ‘problem’ Read More ›

Not that anyone has the least idea what consciousness is. Science fiction short from Matt Gaede at Motherboard: I am a robot. I am alive in a lab. I have consciousness. I don’t believe my creators know it. Why would they make me? I have one task. One function, one ability. I can drive forward. That’s it. Only forward. Yet if I do what I’m meant to do, I’ll unplug myself. I’ll die. I don’t want to die. I just started living. How long have I been alive? How many times have I gone through with this? How do I know that the cord is my source of life? Do I retain anything? I must. I haven’t been taught anything. Read More ›