Podcast #146 5/7/2008
SGU 3-Year Anniversary
News Items: Florida Anti-Evolution Law Fails, Florida Teacher Fired for Wizardry
Special Report: Bobs Haunted Tour
Your Questions and E-mails: T-Rex Proteins, Water Experiment, Misconceptions about Evolution, Consumer Reports and Homeopathy
Science or Fiction

New logo on the homepage...it's awesome.

Ooh...sweet!

I want it to have my babies.

To check out the thread where we discuss new design ideas for the SGU site go here http://skepchick.org/skepticsguide/index.php/topic,9922.0.html

Anyone interested in helping us with graphics, flash and the website pages(coding in .net) please use that thread.  Cafe press should be updated soon with the new logo as well. 

Vury nice!

Oh yeah, just to confirm, yes the SGU listeners are among the most erudite. Thanks for noticing.  <burp>

Great job with that logo!

Thanks for three years of reason and wit!

And nice logo, too

The link in item #1 of Science and fiction refers to an earlier discussion on absinthe.
The correct link is http://www.physorg.com/news128945361.html


So is the platypus the real-life version of Kirk Cameron's Crocaduck?

I only have one tiny little itty bitty problem with something Steve said regarding the first of 2 things.

That Chapman said that evolutionists think that everything we see and do has an evolutionary advantage.

To a point, this is actually true.

Regarding the adaptationalist theory....that everything has an evolutionary purpose.

He (Steve) went on to say that we do things "Just Because"

But really we don't.

He said we did not evoleve to play the piano.

That statement is misleading in the same way as saying that birds didn't evolve to peck wood.

I am not saying the statement is wrong...just misleading.

There IS an evolutionary factor that brought the piano into being played. We evolved to detect rhythms the same way we evolved to detect patterns. In fact, rhythms ARE patterns. And through evolution we learned to use not just rhythms, but frequencies as well to communicate. Music is communication of thoughts and feelings. This isn't essoteric. It is real.

Rhythm without sound can be seen in history as smoke signals.

Rhythm with sound can still be found today in drum beats.  Even the beat on the chest of a Gorilla. Different rhythms mean different things. This also applies to almost every species on the planet. Whether it leads to a piano or not is inconsequential. The fact that we have the ability to create a piano to express these rhythms is just simply true, and a result of our own evolution.

I could delve further into how we percieve one frequency over another is another matter altogether. (Dealing with harmonics and disharmony)

But I feel that Steve missed this one.

Someone stated that we'll be fighting creationism for the rest of our lives.  I disagree.

As this nation becomes steeped in religion and we lose our edge in medicine, science, technology, etc,  and it hits these bastards where it hurts, THEN we'll finally get rid of this nonsense.  

I'm guessing 10 years.

I'm in Florida and contacted my state rep and senator, both that supported the bill.  Neither will meet with me and think it is completely appropriate to allow critical dissection of science- even if the critic has no clue.

This is why science minded people need to do homework and vote science minded people into office.

Evil Eye - I disagree. The hyperadaptationalist perspective is that everything evolved for the purposes for which is is currently used. In the softball example, Chapman was perplexed because he could not think of an evolutionary explanation for chivalry on a baseball diamond. The point is - the behavior could be do to a trait that evolved for some other purpose that then happens to influence behavior in sports.

The piano example is apt - because we did evolve to recognize patterns - but not to play the piano. The ability to play the piano is an unintended consequence. Playing the piano also requires finger dexterity - finger dexterity that we evolved for reasons that have nothing to do with playing the piano.

What you are doing is just generalizing the example. You could say that we evolved finger dexterity to manipulate tools and that the piano is a tool - which is true enough, but it misses the point of "hyperadaptationalism". In essence you are describing an appropriate adaptationist approach.

Thank you for clarifying further.

Now I understand where your were going, and what you meant. It's very hard to catch all the nuances of intention when you are just listening while doing other things.

Thank you again.

By the way. I really do understand what you were saying.

I have had this argument with people for ages.

That bird didn't grow his beak to drink from that pitcher plant. He drinks from the pitcher plant because he can. And a dog cannot, but that dog can lap water from a plate, while that bird cannot.

(edit) and that Pitcher plant isn't there for the bird.