Hi All.
The God vs. Gorrilla debate was very interesting and I have to commend all of you on the preparation you had put in. Hope you were able to appreciate all the different aspects of the issue.
The final assignment in the class will be to write this up. You need to highlight the issues in both ID and Darwin's theory and conclude with your position on the debate. I would like to see some specifics on examples of irreducible complexity (explanatory writing - not just the jargon) and evolution theory's rebuttal to those.
This will be due by midnight, Sunday, April 6th. This is the final deadline. I need to send in the grades soon after that. So, NO EXTENSIONS!
Good Luck and see you on Friday.
vijaya
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Creationism v/s Intelligent design
Hi All
I cam across a few interesting articles on how ID is different from Creationism. Most of it is in question and answer format. so makes an easy read
Here are the links:
http://www.adl.org/issue_religious_freedom/create/creationism_QA.asp
http://www.discovery.org/a/1329
(This one is rather pro-ID. but still makes a good read)
http://skepdic.com/intelligentdesign.html
(This one called ID a hoax but has comments about ID by various people towards the end
I cam across a few interesting articles on how ID is different from Creationism. Most of it is in question and answer format. so makes an easy read
Here are the links:
http://www.adl.org/issue_religious_freedom/create/creationism_QA.asp
http://www.discovery.org/a/1329
(This one is rather pro-ID. but still makes a good read)
http://skepdic.com/intelligentdesign.html
(This one called ID a hoax but has comments about ID by various people towards the end
Monday, March 24, 2008
Human Interest Science
Hi all.
There were a few comments in class today on some of the difficulties of putting human interest elements and science together in a story. Just to show you some of the approaches, here are a couple of stories I wrote on the South Pole Experiment - one for the Frontline and one for the DAWN group of publications, Pakistan.
http://www.hindu.com/fline/fl2211/stories/20050603000506400.htm
http://www.dawn.com/weekly/science/archive/071124/science1.htm
We can discuss this some more on Friday.
See you all on Wednesday evening.
vijaya
There were a few comments in class today on some of the difficulties of putting human interest elements and science together in a story. Just to show you some of the approaches, here are a couple of stories I wrote on the South Pole Experiment - one for the Frontline and one for the DAWN group of publications, Pakistan.
http://www.hindu.com/fline/fl2211/stories/20050603000506400.htm
http://www.dawn.com/weekly/science/archive/071124/science1.htm
We can discuss this some more on Friday.
See you all on Wednesday evening.
vijaya
Sunday, March 23, 2008
epidemic interview question
How strong is media's role in defining an epidemic very strong and dangerous? Also how can media help in reducing the ill effects of an epidemic from spreading
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Interviewing Maryn Mckenna
Hi Folks.
Our interview with Maryn Mckenna is on Monday, 24th March at 6:30 pm (8 am, her time). Please start preparing for the interview, discuss with your class mates and post your questions on the blog.
She is working on a book on drug-resistant staph. Drug-resistant germs are a huge cause for concern - especially in the Indian context where antibiotics are prescribed rather too easily. If you would like more information about this book and ask her questions about this topic, here is the where you can look it up - <http://drugresistantstaph.blogspot.com>
She would also like to hear your views on the Polio Eradication Campaign. Please do spend some time researching and thinking about this.
You can ask her questions on epidemics(Bird Flu, SARS, etc.), health reporting, toxics and RISK etc.
See you all on Monday.
Vijaya
Our interview with Maryn Mckenna is on Monday, 24th March at 6:30 pm (8 am, her time). Please start preparing for the interview, discuss with your class mates and post your questions on the blog.
She is working on a book on drug-resistant staph. Drug-resistant germs are a huge cause for concern - especially in the Indian context where antibiotics are prescribed rather too easily. If you would like more information about this book and ask her questions about this topic, here is the where you can look it up - <http://drugresistantstaph.blogspot.com>
She would also like to hear your views on the Polio Eradication Campaign. Please do spend some time researching and thinking about this.
You can ask her questions on epidemics(Bird Flu, SARS, etc.), health reporting, toxics and RISK etc.
See you all on Monday.
Vijaya
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Some links for the debate
Hi,
Here are some interesting links that i came across related to the debate.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/cosmo.html
http://www.health.adelaide.edu.au/Pharm/Musgrave/essays/flagella.htm (the conclusion is interesting)
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/behe.html
http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/nhmag.html
http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/996_intelligent_design_not_accep_9_10_2002.asp
http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/library/origins/GRAPHICS-CAPTIONS/Flagellum.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/behe/review.html
http://anthro.palomar.edu/evolve/evolve_2.htm
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/darwinism.html
cheers,
nina
Here are some interesting links that i came across related to the debate.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/cosmo.html
http://www.health.adelaide.edu.au/Pharm/Musgrave/essays/flagella.htm (the conclusion is interesting)
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/behe.html
http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/nhmag.html
http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/996_intelligent_design_not_accep_9_10_2002.asp
http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/library/origins/GRAPHICS-CAPTIONS/Flagellum.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/behe/review.html
http://anthro.palomar.edu/evolve/evolve_2.htm
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/darwinism.html
cheers,
nina
Debating the debate
After reading the two links put up about the debate, this is my take.
-------------
Everyone is fascinated with 'how it all began.' Human beings are fascinated with causality; we are always asking how. Sophie's World, a book that could be christened Philosophy for Dummies, has an example. If a ball rolls into your house, you want to peep out looking where it came from. A cat , on the other hand, will prod it and if it smells of fish, sink its teeth into it. What happened before that, before that, before that -- the quest keeps extending and there comes a point when it stops because it encounters a question that is counter-intuitive. As if grappling with eleven dimensions wasn't enough, here is the question of what happens when the notion of 'happen' did not exist -- what happened before space-time came into being.
This is not a new question. From high-school classrooms to seminars, the debate has always been there. The question is tempting, it seems so basic that everyone feels they have to know the answer. Some say they do know. According to Hinduism, there was Ka, the Who, who came into being when he recognised his own existence. Complex? Yes, language is inadequate and so you have tomes explaining this and how it was all created. Hinduism also has its tales about evolution in Dasavatharam or the ten stages in which God incarnated, definitely more fun than Ka. First was the aquatic, then the amphibian and then the terrestrial and so on. It is curiously reminiscent of Darwin.
If at this point, someone jumps and says, 'Hey, Hinduism had a theory that sits perfectly with Darwin's. So, their theory about the beginning of the universe must be true too. The Ka created it all!' then everyone would nod indulgently and say, 'Let us take this as a proposal and see whether it stands the test of the scientific process.' Instead if someone decides to open an institute called the Discovery Institute and then publish papers and create enough debate to discuss Ka such that Indian Institute of Science decides to have a course on Ka, there is something very frightening afoot.
It is frightening because popular discourse cannot replace scientific rigour. What is this scientific rigour? Imagine there are building blocks scattered on the ground. Each one is taken and put through tests. These tests are repeated. They are performed by many. Finally, this piece is taken and placed inside a framework. Similarly, many blocks are placed after going through the same process. Suppose, a block comes along that passes all these tests but does not fit the framework. It seems to displace previous blocks, but with this block in place, there are newer possibilities paving way to a better framework. Then, the older framework is discarded and a new one is put in place.
The key aspect here is that every block has to pass tests. That is how we have an organised body of knowledge that has given us everything we know today from pinhole surgeries to space travel. We have come a long way from light bulbs and there is a danger of familiarity breeding callousness. Science has been able to build and create and unlock mysteries of the universe because of this process. Overhauling the process requires an event of earth-shattering significance. Till then this process needs to be continued.
Because of this process, many blocks that lie outside. Dainiken proposed that the world was made by aliens. He argues that the level of intelligence today could not have occurred unless aliens copulated with humans. He wrote a book called Chariots of Gods. There are compelling examples of circular fields of a diameter on a high mountain that could not have been created with human machinery available in ancient times. He gives such landmarks as proofs that aliens visited earth. We love reading Dainiken. But, we do not teach Chariots of Gods in our schools. We teach science and what Dainiken wrote has not yet been proved. The choice of words is deliberate. No one knows whether what Dainiken wrote is how it happened. It could have happened just the way he told it or not. It has to be proved. Until then, it remains outside the realm of what we term science.
The possibility of a theory being proven true does not translate into it being taken up as an alternative to science. The proponents of Intelligent Design revel in flawed premise. The origin of the universe is a tricky question. The complexity makes it tempting to ascribe a Designer, which is a psuedo-secular substitute for what every child calls God. Just because it seems tempting and because science has not proposed an alternative, does not imply this is the answer. If that rule is applied, Hinduism's Ka, Dainikens Alien are all standing in queue to compete with Intelligent Design. If Dainiken finds an angel investor and has a Creative institute that produces voluminous papers and books and peppers it with comments from biologists and physicists in a moment of existential crisis, it could be the subject of the next debate. But, the burden of proof cannot be lightly cast aside.
Till then, instead of God vs Gorilla, this will remain the Fundamentalists vs the Fundamentals.
-------------
Everyone is fascinated with 'how it all began.' Human beings are fascinated with causality; we are always asking how. Sophie's World, a book that could be christened Philosophy for Dummies, has an example. If a ball rolls into your house, you want to peep out looking where it came from. A cat , on the other hand, will prod it and if it smells of fish, sink its teeth into it. What happened before that, before that, before that -- the quest keeps extending and there comes a point when it stops because it encounters a question that is counter-intuitive. As if grappling with eleven dimensions wasn't enough, here is the question of what happens when the notion of 'happen' did not exist -- what happened before space-time came into being.
This is not a new question. From high-school classrooms to seminars, the debate has always been there. The question is tempting, it seems so basic that everyone feels they have to know the answer. Some say they do know. According to Hinduism, there was Ka, the Who, who came into being when he recognised his own existence. Complex? Yes, language is inadequate and so you have tomes explaining this and how it was all created. Hinduism also has its tales about evolution in Dasavatharam or the ten stages in which God incarnated, definitely more fun than Ka. First was the aquatic, then the amphibian and then the terrestrial and so on. It is curiously reminiscent of Darwin.
If at this point, someone jumps and says, 'Hey, Hinduism had a theory that sits perfectly with Darwin's. So, their theory about the beginning of the universe must be true too. The Ka created it all!' then everyone would nod indulgently and say, 'Let us take this as a proposal and see whether it stands the test of the scientific process.' Instead if someone decides to open an institute called the Discovery Institute and then publish papers and create enough debate to discuss Ka such that Indian Institute of Science decides to have a course on Ka, there is something very frightening afoot.
It is frightening because popular discourse cannot replace scientific rigour. What is this scientific rigour? Imagine there are building blocks scattered on the ground. Each one is taken and put through tests. These tests are repeated. They are performed by many. Finally, this piece is taken and placed inside a framework. Similarly, many blocks are placed after going through the same process. Suppose, a block comes along that passes all these tests but does not fit the framework. It seems to displace previous blocks, but with this block in place, there are newer possibilities paving way to a better framework. Then, the older framework is discarded and a new one is put in place.
The key aspect here is that every block has to pass tests. That is how we have an organised body of knowledge that has given us everything we know today from pinhole surgeries to space travel. We have come a long way from light bulbs and there is a danger of familiarity breeding callousness. Science has been able to build and create and unlock mysteries of the universe because of this process. Overhauling the process requires an event of earth-shattering significance. Till then this process needs to be continued.
Because of this process, many blocks that lie outside. Dainiken proposed that the world was made by aliens. He argues that the level of intelligence today could not have occurred unless aliens copulated with humans. He wrote a book called Chariots of Gods. There are compelling examples of circular fields of a diameter on a high mountain that could not have been created with human machinery available in ancient times. He gives such landmarks as proofs that aliens visited earth. We love reading Dainiken. But, we do not teach Chariots of Gods in our schools. We teach science and what Dainiken wrote has not yet been proved. The choice of words is deliberate. No one knows whether what Dainiken wrote is how it happened. It could have happened just the way he told it or not. It has to be proved. Until then, it remains outside the realm of what we term science.
The possibility of a theory being proven true does not translate into it being taken up as an alternative to science. The proponents of Intelligent Design revel in flawed premise. The origin of the universe is a tricky question. The complexity makes it tempting to ascribe a Designer, which is a psuedo-secular substitute for what every child calls God. Just because it seems tempting and because science has not proposed an alternative, does not imply this is the answer. If that rule is applied, Hinduism's Ka, Dainikens Alien are all standing in queue to compete with Intelligent Design. If Dainiken finds an angel investor and has a Creative institute that produces voluminous papers and books and peppers it with comments from biologists and physicists in a moment of existential crisis, it could be the subject of the next debate. But, the burden of proof cannot be lightly cast aside.
Till then, instead of God vs Gorilla, this will remain the Fundamentalists vs the Fundamentals.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Hollywood Physics
came across this article on popular science . Talks about how movies have got their physics wrong. Incredibly funny. Check it out.
http://www.popsci.com/entertainment-gaming/gallery/2007-09/hollywood-physics
http://www.popsci.com/entertainment-gaming/gallery/2007-09/hollywood-physics
Monday, March 10, 2008
Preparing for the FINAL DEBATE
Hi All.
It is time we started thinking about the final debate. God vs Gorilla. Read, research, think, talk... and make up your mind about which side of the issue you are on. Let's see if we can understand the arguments on both sides.
Post links to sites you think are relevant, post your ideas, opinions and biases on the blog. Let's start the discussion here.
I would like to see all your contributions here... I NEED TO SEE ALL OF YOU CONTRIBUTE.
Here are a couple of links I thought were illuminating.
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/05/30/050530fa_fact
http://www.pbs.org/thinktank/transcript1281.html
Hope your decoding of the RNA's functions are going well. TUESDAY is the deadline.
Talk to you on Wednesday.
vijaya
It is time we started thinking about the final debate. God vs Gorilla. Read, research, think, talk... and make up your mind about which side of the issue you are on. Let's see if we can understand the arguments on both sides.
Post links to sites you think are relevant, post your ideas, opinions and biases on the blog. Let's start the discussion here.
I would like to see all your contributions here... I NEED TO SEE ALL OF YOU CONTRIBUTE.
Here are a couple of links I thought were illuminating.
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/05/30/050530fa_fact
http://www.pbs.org/thinktank/transcript1281.html
Hope your decoding of the RNA's functions are going well. TUESDAY is the deadline.
Talk to you on Wednesday.
vijaya
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Managing deadlines
Hi All.
Looks like we have some learning to do on time management.
Well, you have more time to complete the RNA assignment. It is POSITIVELY due by midnight of 9th March (Sunday). And given the extra time, there are no excuses for incomplete explanations:)
Please prepare for the South Pole Interview - post your questions on the blog, if you will. See you on Friday at 5 pm!
vijaya
Looks like we have some learning to do on time management.
Well, you have more time to complete the RNA assignment. It is POSITIVELY due by midnight of 9th March (Sunday). And given the extra time, there are no excuses for incomplete explanations:)
Please prepare for the South Pole Interview - post your questions on the blog, if you will. See you on Friday at 5 pm!
vijaya
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Metaphor Mongering
Hi All!
This is the link for the article on 'Metaphor Mongering' for Science writing.
may be a bit dull at the start but do read on ;-)
http://www.english.heacademy.ac.uk/explore/publications/newsletters/
newsissue9/cordle.htm
This is the link for the article on 'Metaphor Mongering' for Science writing.
may be a bit dull at the start but do read on ;-)
http://www.english.heacademy.ac.uk/explore/publications/newsletters/
newsissue9/cordle.htm
Sunday, March 2, 2008
Next few weeks...
Hi All.
Hope you have completed your dissertations to your satisfaction and can spend time on other activities.
I have posted a couple of articles this week under "interesting science articles." Please read through and we can discuss this in class.
This week - Me, as a scientist; Interview with winter-overs at the South Pole; Explanatory piece on the RNA due this Friday (by midnight).
Next week's assignment is a piece on the South Pole interview. We need to start preparing for the final debate too - Intelligent Design vs Darwinism. Please start researching this and post links to stories, ideas, questions etc. on the blog.
See you in class.
vijaya
Hope you have completed your dissertations to your satisfaction and can spend time on other activities.
I have posted a couple of articles this week under "interesting science articles." Please read through and we can discuss this in class.
This week - Me, as a scientist; Interview with winter-overs at the South Pole; Explanatory piece on the RNA due this Friday (by midnight).
Next week's assignment is a piece on the South Pole interview. We need to start preparing for the final debate too - Intelligent Design vs Darwinism. Please start researching this and post links to stories, ideas, questions etc. on the blog.
See you in class.
vijaya
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)