Not that this makes Menstruation any more fun to deal with, but as always, now that I know the scientific reason behind the function, I feel better about this monthly ordeal. From Pharyngula: Menstruation is a peculiar phenomenon that women go through on a roughly monthly cycle, and it’s not immediately obvious from an evolutionary …
From Science Daily: “Babies love to imitate. Ask any parent and they’ll report how infants mimic sounds, facial expressions and actions they observe. Now new research from Concordia University, published in the journalInfant Behavior and Development, has found that infants can even differentiate between credible and non-credible sources. Simply put, most babies won’t follow along …
Another Great Debate was held at ASU. This time pulling in Richard Dawkins and Craig Venture, to name a few. The first panel, back in November 2010 featured Sam Harris and Steven Pinker discussing the question “Can Science Tell us Right from Wrong?” I had my share of complaints about the lack of definitions of …
Left handed people have always fascinated me. At one point I thought it was their disposition to be different that made them creative, independent and successful people. Left handers make up between 8 and 12% of the population, the majority of those being men. Scientists have been able to look into the brains of lefty’s …
This weekend, the Origins Project hosted an academic discussion at Arizona State University. The topic, title “Can Science Tell us Right From Wrong” was presented by Sam Harris, Simon Blackburn, Lawrence Krauss, Steven Pinker, Peter Singer and Patricia Churchland.
In my opinion, the evening went awry from the moment it began. The topic, being as vague as possible, gave no inference as to the definitions of morality or the perimeters of the sciences being suggested. There is an immense difference in the traditional definition of morality and the definition of ethics. Half the panel seemed to be speaking to the former and half to the latter.
Despite its coverage of all the ways in which evolution can be demonstrated, Why Evolution is True provides a compact read of all the evidence for evolution. Only at the very last chapter does the author address creationism directly. Coyne suggests that anti-evolutionists do not oppose the idea of evolution solely, but rather reject the science because of the implications evolution has on the meaning of their personal religious beliefs. In short, evolution more than adequately explains how humans and our surroundings developed into what we are today. It leaves no gaps for a god to fill. To combat this rejection for the sake of religion, Coyne says: “Evolution is simply a theory about the processes and patterns of life’s diversification, not a grand philosophical scheme about the meaning of life. It can’t tell us what to do, our how we should behave.”(p. 225)
Recent Comments