ريتشارد دوكنز's Blog, page 513
April 14, 2016
Our Universe Is Expanding A Lot Faster Than We Thought
Photo credit:
The “penguin galaxy” is the result of the collision between two separate galaxies. Dark matter may be keeping them together, but dark energy is tearing the universe apart. ESA/Hubble
The universe is expanding at an accelerating rate. This is a problem: The continuation of this will result in universe-wide cooling, eventually becoming too cold to sustain life. Ultimately, with heat evenly distributed across the cosmos, time itself will come to an end. Scientists trying to work out this expansion rate are essentially calculating the time until the universe ends.
April 13, 2016
Transforming Stem Cells Into Diabetes Beaters
One of the great promises of stem-cell biology is to use a patient’s own cells as a template to build a real, working organ or tissue in the lab. One prime example: a treatment for diabetes by turning stem cells into working pancreatic beta cells, which release insulin.
"The existing beta cells that our lab and others had created were 90 percent of the way there. But 90 percent still means not functional." Ron Evans, a molecular biologist at the Salk Institute.
Evans compares the stem-cell-derived beta cells they first made to a darkened room. "If you walk into that room, there may be everything in it that you need to be a complete room, with furniture and chairs and everything else. But it's dark. And the key is: what do you need to turn on the light?"
That light switch, Evans discovered, is a gene—called estrogen-related receptor gamma. Flip it on, and it activates a genetic circuit that ramps up mitochondria production, powers up the cell, and endows the almost-functional beta cells with the ability to sense glucose and release insulin in response.
Evans's team recently used that trick to transform stem cells into beta cells that worked just like they would in a healthy pancreas. When they transplanted those cells into mice with a mouse version of diabetes, blood glucose fell to normal levels in half the rodents. The results are in the journal Cell Metabolism. [Eiji Yoshihara et al, ERRγ Is Required for the Metabolic Maturation of Therapeutically Functional Glucose-Responsive β Cells]
Next, Evans says he'll replicate the test in diabetic primates. "Primates get diabetes in a fashion that's very similar to people. So if it works in a primate, very high probability that it's going to work in people." If it does, we might someday replace a shot of insulin with a shot of cells.
—Christopher Intagliata
[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]
Fully Operational Private Space Hotels Could Soon Be On The Way
Photo credit:
What Bigelow's private space station could look like. Bigelow Aerospace
The words “space hotel” probably elicit memories of science fiction films of times gone by, such as "2001: A Space Odyssey." But that fiction is one step closer to reality, thanks to a major new initiative by two private space companies in the U.S.
Fear Of Robot Uprising Is Hampering Development Of AI
Photo credit:
Talk of “The Terminator" and Skynet is holding back the real research into AI. Ociacia/Shutterstock
Talk of artificial intelligence (AI) rising up to thwart humanity in a Terminator-style apocalypse is holding back research and development into the technology, and potentially harming society as a result, claims director of Microsoft Research Chris Bishop.
Here Are The 6 Steps To The Perfect Apology, According To Science
Photo credit:
The jury's still out on whether or not dogs are adept at apologies. file404/Shutterstock
A team of researchers has decided to delve into the human psyche in order to solve an age-old, mystifying problem: what’s the best way to make an apology? According to their study, published in the journal Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, the perfect apology contains six elements, but acknowledging and accepting responsibility for at least part of the perceived wrongdoing is by far the most important.
April 12, 2016
Find Shows Widespread Literacy 2600 Years Ago in Judah
The Hebrew bible was first written down some 2,600 years ago. And scholars have argued that only a population with sufficiently widespread literacy could have accomplished the task. Now there’s new evidence for such literacy—in the form of notes from that same time period, written in ink on shards of pottery.
Scientists have debated whether the first significant phase of the compilation of biblical texts happened before or after the fall of the first Temple, in 586 BCE. To get at the potential answers to that question, a group of researchers in Israel analyzed mundane inscriptions about the needs of daily life on 16 ceramic shards written about 600 BCE from an ancient military fortress in Arad, at the northern edge of the Negev desert. These notes had no direct connection with biblical texts, which were more frequently written on papyrus or parchment and would not have survived the region’s climate. But they reveal that literacy did not belong to a privileged few. The study is in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. [Shira Faigenbaum-Golovin et al, Algorithmic handwriting analysis of Judah’s military correspondence sheds light on composition of biblical texts]
The research team was able to determine that the documents—detailing military movements and food expenses—were written by a minimum of six authors. The scientists could even generally identify those authors, who ranged from a military commander down the ranks to a much lower subordinate.
"This means that not only their priests were able to write, but also the an army administration were literate down to the quartermaster of this fort in the desert.” Shira Faigenbaum-Golovin, a Tel Aviv University researcher involved with the study. “This indicates that in Judah, in the 6th century, there were high literacy ranks in not only the elite people but among simple people also.”
Such widespread literacy in the region could have set the stage for the eventual compilation of the Bible, and thus the foundation of the monotheism that still prevails in the West.
—Cynthia Graber
(The above text is a transcript of this podcast)
13 People Identified As Immune To Genetic Diseases, But Researchers Can’t Find Them
Photo credit:
The researchers looked at over 500,000 patients to identify the dozen resistant. isak55/Shutterstock
After trawling through data from more than half a million people, looking for genetic mutations that would ordinarily cause the patient to suffer from severe childhood diseases, researchers have discovered something astonishing: 13 of the people have mutations to some of these crippling diseases, but suffer none of the symptoms. This raises the fascinating question of whether some people are somehow immune to certain genetic diseases, and if this could somehow be harnessed as a new treatment.
Creationists at NSTA
In late March I traveled down to Nashville to attend one of my favorite conferences, NSTA—the National Science Teacher Association conference. If you haven’t been, this is an absolute must go for anyone interested in science education. Everyone is there, from textbook authors to science celebrities to teachers upon teachers upon teachers. Flamingos run through the exhibit halls (really!), teachers scream with delight as they spin in huge gyroscopes, and Schmitty the Weather Dog tap-dances his way into our hearts. It’s basically Circus Circus for science nerds and I love it.
There is so much going on that you’re lucky to make it to even half of the talks and workshops you plan, and you’re thankful for even making it to that many. I made it to about a third of my planned sessions—but as it happens, I went to just the right one, because I landed smack dab in the middle of a creationist debate.
It was at a talk being presented by one of my favorite science teachers from the south about her work and research on teaching evolution in a very evangelical community. She had a difficult start. While setting up, she dropped her computer, breaking it. As a result, she had to give her entire talk off the cuff. Yikes! I couldn't handle that with aplomb, but she pulled through like a trouper.
When the time came for discussion, almost immediately a creationist popped up with a question.
“Can you define evolution?”
What a strange question to ask! But she provided an answer and moved on.
Again the gentleman raised his hand. “How do you differentiate between micro- and macroevolution with your students?”
For biologists, of course, microevolution and macroevolution describe different perspectives on the history of life—microevolution focusing on patterns of evolutionary changes that occur within species, macroevolution focusing on patterns of evolutionary changes that occur over a larger scale. But for creationists, “microevolution” denotes the evolutionary changes that even they are willing to accept—often in terms of “Biblical kinds”—while “macroevolution” denotes everything else.
Recognizing the bait-and-switch in the offing, the teacher swiftly dealt with the question and moved on. But alas, it was too late. The floodgates (as it were) had been opened and a wave of questions followed:
“What do you think of the Next Generation Science Standards’ coverage of evolution?” (This is a trick question, because even some top-notch educators are not enthusiastic about the NGSS’s treatment of evolution.)
“What do you think of intelligent design?”
When the teacher responded that she doesn’t support teaching non-science in the science classroom, observing that “intelligent design” is not science, another creationist made her presence known. Suddenly the teacher was accused of being rude by dismissing the creationist perspective. Then, as other teachers in the room spoke in the defense of the teacher and in support of evolution, there were repeated cries from the creationists of “No! You are wrong!”
Yes, it happened, in 2016, at a conference of science teachers. Welcome to my world—and that of teachers across the country today.
Teachers tend to be nice, friendly, and approachable people who are not keen on conflict. Science teachers in particular are nice people who love science and want to broaden the tent, not make it smaller by offending people. So it wasn’t surprising that when the creationists were so disruptive, they weren’t actually shouted down.
It was gratifying, though, that so many of the teachers at the talk were willing to speak in defense of the teacher and in support of evolution. If we want more teachers like this, who are willing to stand up for science in the face of creationist attempts to disrupt science education, we need to let them to know that scientists, parents—everybody—are behind them. That we trust you to know the science and we rely on you to teach it to our children. At NCSE, we are trying to send that message. But my trip to Nashville was a startling reminder of how far we have to go.
Stated Clearly, I Am A Big Fan, Part 2
In part 1, Jon Perry told me how his company and website Stated Clearly came to be. The short story is that he wanted to find a way to explain his love of and wonder at evolution to his family and friends, many of whom would be classified as evolution deniers or at least evolution doubters. It didn’t take long for teachers to find and show Perry’s engaging animations in class, which set him on a course of creating videos for educational use. We talked at some length about his most popular video (also his favorite and mine): “What is the Evidence for Evolution?” This video uses the evolution of whales from land mammals to illustrate how different lines of evidence converge in support of evolution.
When we left off, Perry was telling me how anti-evolutionists were responsible, in large part, for the video being so strong. He even got them to review his scripts and first draft animation to point out any weaknesses. Let’s pick up there.
I love that people in anti-evolution forums were so eager to edit and critique your drafts. Did the “reviewers” ever find out you were using them to strengthen a pro-evolution animation?
Yes, it wasn’t a trick. I told them from the start that I needed help reviewing my video so I could make a solid final version. They all jumped at the opportunity anyway.
Do you find that the anti-evolution criticisms/arguments help at all with people who aren’t anti-evolution, but who might not have a strong grounding in evolution?
Yes, they do a lot actually. In part, this is because the anti-evo movement has planted its criticisms in so many people’s heads. That said, evolution is also just a tricky thing to wrap our minds around.
The most helpful critique I got from the anti-evolution editors was that my life reconstructions (drawings of what extinct whales may have looked like when alive) did not belong in a video that was supposed to be strictly showing evidence. They felt like these kinds of reconstructions, popular in textbooks and museums, overstate what we can actually know about an extinct animal. I personally love good paleoart (shout-out to John Conway) and a good reconstructed skeleton to help me imagine how an animal may have lived in the past. That said, I agree that we should be minimalists when building reconstructions that are intended to be used as evidence for evolution.
The main change I did from the draft to the final version was to take out any life reconstructions and replace them with drawings like the one below:
The dark bones represent what was actually found at the dig site, the light bones show what had to be reconstructed through inference, and the light body outline gives just a hint as to what the overall shape of the animal may have been like.
Minimalist reconstructions like this that show exactly what was and was not found are the standard in scientific journals (this one comes from the original paper on Maiacetus). Unfortunately they are not always standard in textbooks and museums. I think they should be. Transparency builds trust.
I agree with you 100%. I was at the London Museum of Natural History last spring, and although I had some issues with a few of their displays, one of the things that really impressed me was the signs that accompanied fossil displays. They were very clear about what was actual bone and what was inferred. That should absolutely be common practice. (Are you reading this, museum people?)
Anyway, back to you! Do you ever get comments/jeers from evolution deniers?
Ha, of course I do, it’s the internet! The whale animation actually got me my first YouTube death threat! Apparently I succeeded in my goal to make a video that couldn’t be explained away by deniers.
Sadly, vulgar comments often come from both sides. The anti-evo folks will say something aggressive, and science-defenders then often respond with equal hostility. Things can get out of hand pretty quickly.
So true. This has happened on our NCSE blog comments, too.
I’m not surprised. It’s unfortunate for many reasons. Worst of all, though, is when defenders get trigger-happy and mistake a person’s sincere question as an anti-evolution attack. Time and time again, I’ve seen genuine questioners get ridiculed by other commenters on the defensive. YouTube is wonderful but can sometimes be a hostile learning environment. Because of this, a good friend of mine, Jeremiah Deasey, volunteered to build our website where people can watch the animations in a much cleaner atmosphere: no ads, no fighting in comment sections. I recommend teachers use StatedClearly.com for sharing with students.
Do you think the animations are changing any minds in the anti-evolution movement?
The ugliness sometimes found in the comment section shows that I’m not convincing everyone. That said, I have been consistently receiving letters from people thanking me and telling me the animations either changed their views, or were useful in helping them change the views of their students or family members. Best of all for me, over a dozen of my relatives, most of whom are Mormon, have gone from being hesitant about evolution, to being curious and accepting of the science. My nieces and nephews get excited when I post a new video and they even come to my talks when I speak locally.
Here’s a blank check question: If you could do another five animations on any topic, what topics would you do, and why?
What is science?
How do complex organs evolve?
How do we know the age of a fossil?
What is a species?
How do new species evolve?
People often feel it’s unfair that evolution is taught in science class when creationism is not. Following NCSE’s example, I’ve found the best way to address this concern is to carefully explain what science is, what science is not, and how science differs from the other methods we use when trying to understand the world.
On YouTube, our oldest video is “What is DNA and How Does it Work?” Those who have followed me from the start, however, will know that this is not actually the first video I made. The original Stated Clearly animation was called “What is Science?” I took it down because, being my first animation, the quality was poor, and it also had a few parts that my religious friends found unnecessary. For example, it included cartoon versions of Moses, Kent Hovind, Joseph Smith, and the Pope. The cartoons weren’t vulgar but they also weren’t particularly flattering. The original is no longer public on YouTube but people who contribute to Stated Clearly on Patreon get access to see it when logged in. After all these years, I’ve come up with a much better way to do that video. I’m excited to get started on it! The other four on my list represent the main requests I’ve been getting from biology teachers. If I had funding, I’d start on them right away!
Let’s hope for funding, then! Any final words for us?
First off, thanks for inviting me to talk with you. It’s an honor to be recognized in this way by NCSE. I’ve been a fan of the organization’s work for many years. The legal battles NCSE has taken on are extremely important. Project Steve is brilliant!
For my concluding words I’ll paraphrase the message of educator John Wooden: If they have not learned, we have not taught.
Postscript: I’m delighted to report that Jon Perry and I have plans not only to collaborate in the future, but also to go back and improve some issues in a few of the earlier videos. If you have questions for Perry, or want to contribute to his cause, you can contact him directly via his website.
Are you a teacher and want to tell us about an amazing free resource? Do you have an idea for a Misconception Monday or other type of post? Have a fossil to share? See some good or bad examples of science communication lately? Drop me an email or shoot me a tweet @keeps3.
Watch What Happens To This Dead Eel When It’s Sprinkled With Salt
Photo credit:
3DOL2/YouTube
Not even being skinned and shoved on a barbecue can stop this eel from creeping you out.
This post from Reddit user Sippingin shows a skinned eel as it wiggles and writhes when sprinkled with salt and placed on a barbecue in a restaurant.
ريتشارد دوكنز's Blog
- ريتشارد دوكنز's profile
- 106 followers
