For the Sake of Science

From the Leader of the New Creationists

Michael Hawkins — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 22:08:28 +0000

Official New Creationists Newsletter

Fellow New Creationists, our strength to undermine science grows stronger every day!

As you know, I have just released my version of events in a new book. In this New Creationist document, I distance myself -and thus our ultimate goals – from “wild-eyed fundamentalists”. I stake claim to a position of “nuance”. I have taken a fundamental step in achieving the plan laid out in our mission statement; I have shown just how easy it is to Reach a Middle Ground.

In lieu of our stated first step to use Christian scientists to espouse our coy creationism, I have put myself in the forefront of political and media life to carry out this goal. I have spoken of my upbringing by a father who was a science teacher. This, fellows, is what the American people want. I have suggested my background makes me sympathetic to science. What I say must be viewed as a reasonable Middle Ground; I hate not science (as the public believes) yet I do not shy from entering theology into the discussion. QED.

As is par for the course, I have advocated “teaching both sides”, a key component in Reaching a Middle Ground, but I have furthered our cause by bringing a classic bait-and-switch back into the game. “Microevolution” is perfectly acceptable to all New Creationists. How can we reject it? We can’t. And so we actually embrace it. We are so amiable to science that we have taken the time to investigate – through Academic Freedom, no doubt – the important distinctions in biology. We have concluded (for the sake of the public’s eye) a most reasonable Middle Ground position. “Macroevolution” is simply the stuff of those religious New Atheists. They haven’t bothered to adopt a position as “nuanced” as ours.

We are the New Creationists.

Hitler was a creationist

Michael Hawkins — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:57:18 +0000

From Mein Kampf:

Walking about in the garden of Nature, most men have the self-conceit to think that they know everything; yet almost all are blind to one of the outstanding principles that Nature employs in her work. This principle may be called the inner isolation which characterizes each and every living species on this earth. Even a superficial glance is sufficient to show that all the innumerable forms in which the life-urge of Nature manifests itself are subject to a fundamental law–one may call it an iron law of Nature–which compels the various species to keep within the definite limits of their own life-forms when propagating and multiplying their kind.

Unlike creationists, however, I will show some honesty about the fact that Hitler was a creationist: Creationism did not lead to Hitler. Furthermore, even if it did lead to Hitler, that does not make it false. It would be a fallacious point, a red herring to argue such nonsense.

Thought of the day

Michael Hawkins — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 00:56:58 +0000

If you believe Hitler used Darwinism to justify the Holocaust you are (a) wrong, (b) ignorant of history (Hitler did no such thing), (c) attempting to make an Argument from Consequence (which is logically fallacious), and (d) not saying a damn thing about the validity of evolutionary theory.

Leonid Meteor Shower

Michael Hawkins — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 04:42:35 +0000

There is a meteor shower tonight. Most any location should offer decent views, but it will be necessary to stay up a bit late. The best viewing hours are between 1 a.m. and about until the sun comes up on the east coast.

Humble pie

Michael Hawkins — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 04:37:55 +0000

Some time ago I wrote a letter to the editor of the Kennebec Journal. After 10 days without seeing it in print, I sent an email.

I recently submitted a letter to the editor. It has been over a week since I sent it. It refuted the irresponsible claims made by a pseudo-doctor. It was properly uncharitable to the man; his ‘profession’ earned as much.

I am wondering if the reason I have yet to see my letter published due to this unkindness. If the KJ coddling anti-science, anti-medicine quacks who have no evidence (or grossly misrepresent evidence)? I hope I am simply jumping the gun and I will see my letter come Monday or Tuesday.

I took an aggressive tact because the KJ has in the past denied publication of one of my letters. They lied to me and said they could not confirm certain facts. It’s no secret they were legally covering themselves. This naturally made me a bit bitter; my letter was about a stunt of a man who actively defended paying an employee under $8 an hour after 8 years of service (in 2005). The fact that his reputation was being protected was disgusting to me.

So, with that in the back of my mind, I wondered if the same was happening with my recent letter. I attacked a quack ‘doctor’ who had recently written about naturopathy. As my above email says, I was not kind. He hasn’t earned such respect.

I made an assumption that the KJ was coddling the man. Of course, I mean two things by that. First, they gave an extra little blurb after his letter describing his ‘profession’. This gives the man credence he doesn’t deserve. Second, the paper has shown itself afraid to let its readers use strong language in the past.

Turns out I was wrong.

Mr. Hawkins,
We are struggling to get those letters in the paper right now because both of the people who handle them have been out sick. We’ll be catching up later in the week, I hope.

Jim Evans
Managing Editor

What happened here was a poor consideration of the evidence around me. Of course, people may be out sick. Or maybe priority had been given to larger pieces (recent editions of the paper have been scant on letters to the editor). I should have given the issue more consideration. I’m happy to admit that I did jump the gun with my accusing questioning. It’s a good lesson.

Protecting Killers

Michael Hawkins — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 02:35:17 +0000

I wrote some time ago about Leilani and Dale Neumann. They thought it appropriate to only pray for their diabetic daughter. They did not take her to get diagnosed, and when her health became grave, they continued in their quest to neglect her. They deserve to be put in prison; they have other children, not to mention the fact that not convicting them would encourage more parents to neglect their children through the meaninglessness of prayer.

Well, there’s good news and bad news. They were convicted earlier this year. Unfortunately, despite the fact that a jury decided these people were guilty of second-degree reckless homicide, the judge gave them a slap on the wrist. He sentenced them to 6 months in prison with 10 years of probation. The 6 months will be served over the course of 6 years – just one month a year. Compare this to the maximum they could have received – 25 years each – and it’s obvious that justice has not been served.

There are two mitigating factors to be noted, neither of which had a legal bearing on this particular case. The first is that Wisconsin is one of 30 states that protect faith-healing monsters. The law did not apply in this case. However, it’s hard to imagine it wasn’t a factor in sentencing. Second, the judge took pity on this couple because of their religion. He gave them an unfounded respect for their wacky and dangerous beliefs. Prayer will cure diabetes as well as it will restore an amputee’s leg.

The above link to their sentencing also cites similar sentence lengths for other, far less offensive crimes.

Russell J. Wozniak Jr. and Jennifer Ann Wozniak, of Chippewa Falls, Wis., received basically the same sentence as the Neumanns for, the criminal complaint said, allowing their 2-year-old to wander around covered in vomit and wearing a full diaper.

It’s absurd to pretend that the death of Kara Neumann is at all equal to what the Wozniak’s did. They had a child in a bad situation. So did the Neumanns. The difference is that the Wozniak’s child is still alive.

Then there are similar cases with differing sentences.

Then there are the parents of Alex Washburn. The 22-month-old died after hitting his head at home in Cross Lanes, W.Va. His parents, Elizabeth Dawn Thornton and Christopher Steven Washburn, said the boy fell a lot and hit his head on the corner of a table and his chin on a toilet. They apologized for not seeking medical help and agreed to terminate their parental rights to their other children, handing over custody to the state. “I wish I did seek medical treatment for my son faster,” Washburn told the court. “That will definitely be with me for the rest of my life.” The court sentenced both parents to three to 15 years in prison.

There are two differences here with the Neumanns. First, religion was not a factor for Thornton’s and Washburn’s actions. Second, Washburn was remorseful. He did not believe what he did was right; he recognized the evil in his actions. In contrast, here is a quote from Neumann.

If I in a moment of crisis and in a moment of time, I went to anyone else but the Lord, it would not have been favorable to God,

Here he has defended his inhumane actions. That should be unacceptable to anyone of rationality. Here is another quote (found in sentencing link).

I am guilty of trusting my Lord’s wisdom completely. . . . Guilty of asking for heavenly intervention. Guilty of following Jesus Christ when the whole world does not understand. Guilty of obeying my God.

As if his lack of regret about his cruelty was not enough, his wife feels the same.

I do not regret trusting truly in the Lord for my daughter’s health.

Really read that. This woman does not regret acting in a way that resulted in her daughter’s avoidable death. If you’re a parent reading this, ask yourself if you could ever say such a horrible thing. Ask yourself if you would ever be proud of behaving in a way that resulted in the death of your child.

More naturopathy

Michael Hawkins — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 07:12:43 +0000

Over at ScienceBlogs, Greg Laden has an excellent post concerning naturopathic medicine. Here he describes one incident of the sort of danger these quack practitioners pose.

The Naturopath treated John with various herbal and homeopathic medicines, and recommended other treatments such as massage. But during the last few months, John had become weaker and weaker, threw up more and more often, and despite a marked increase in the herbal treatments (which, unfortunately, were not particularly homeopathic, and thus not guaranteed to be as harmless as water) John started to lose weight at an alarming rate.

John had a gut obstruction in his small intestines which prevented him from consuming enough food and retaining proper nutrients. This could have been diagnosed and fixed when it first showed up. Instead, John would need emergency surgery. He almost lost his life because of naturopathic ‘medicine’.

Lac Operon

Michael Hawkins — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 05:25:11 +0000

The lac operon of E. coli is the classic example for describing inducible prokaryotic gene expression. One excellent video description of it can be found here.

The jist is this. Not all genes are turned on all the time. There are ones which are needed constantly, others which are only needed in specific types of cells, and then others which are ‘turned on’ in specific situations. It is on this last point which I will focus.

In order for a gene to be ‘turned on’, it must be ‘off’ in the first place. All this means is that an organism’s (relevant) DNA is not being transcribed, thus preventing translation and the manifestation of proteins. The way this occurs in E. coli by means of the lac operon is that the lac repressor is bound to a DNA sequence.

A repressor is itself a protein. It binds to an organism’s DNA, thus preventing RNA polymerase from transcribing anything. This is a physical blockade; the repressor prevents the RNA polymerase from physically attaching and running along a specific sequence of DNA. This is the default position for an inducible repressor.

The way the repressor is removed is simple to understand. It has a specific shape to it which enables it to bind to the DNA sequence. However, this shape can be changed if lactose is present. The lactose will bind to the repressor, thus causing an allosteric change in shape. This means the repressor is no longer the specific shape needed to attach to the DNA, so it releases its ‘grip’.

This release allows the RNA polymerase to continue with transcription. This, eventually, turns to translation. In this stage, enzymes are created, two of which are β-galactoside permease and β-galactosidase (there is a third which can be ignored here). The former of the two is membrane-bound. This means it becomes embedded in the cell membrane. This quickens the transport of lactose from outside to inside the cell. Think of it like a tunnel through which only specific shapes can fit.

Once these specific shapes (lactose molecules) pass into the cell, ß-galactosidase breaks them into their constituents, one of which is glucose. This is used as a key source of energy in many organisms, including E. coli.

Once concentration falls, lactose molecules are no longer bound to the repressor, making it free to resume its normal duties attached to DNA.

Thought of the day

Michael Hawkins — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 20:42:58 +0000

Is it fair to be suspicious of an entire profession because of a few bad apples? There are at least two important differences, it seems to me. First, no one doubts that science actually works, whatever mistaken and fraudulent claim may from time to time be offered. But whether there are any “miraculous” cures from faith-healing, beyond the body’s own ability to cure itself, is very much at issue. Secondly, the expose’ of fraud and error in science is made almost exclusively by science. But the exposure of fraud and error in faith-healing is almost never done by other faith-healers.

~Mr. Sagan

Water on the Moon

Michael Hawkins — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 18:25:44 +0000

NASA discovered there is plenty of water on the moon.

Experts have long suspected there was water on the moon. So the thrilling discovery announced Friday sent a ripple of hope for a future astronaut outpost in a place that has always seemed barren and inhospitable.

“We found water. And we didn’t find just a little bit. We found a significant amount,” Anthony Colaprete, lead scientist for the mission, told reporters as he held up a white water bucket for emphasis.

He said the 25 gallons of water the lunar crash kicked up was only what scientists could see from the plumes of the impact.

This is equivalent to roughly a bathtub’s worth of water from this double-impact.

One part of me wants to endlessly speculate at the possibility of microbial life. But all reason and rationality tell me to be cautious. Water does not automatically mean life (especially when its frozen).

…but what if it does mean life, at least in this case? Would the world realize the utter significance of this discovery? Not since Darwin described evolution by natural selection has there been such an important find.