News to Note, October 24, 2009 (another would-be "Icon of Evolution" bites the dust)

AiG ^ | October24, 2009

[GodGunsGuts]

(For all these stories and more, click on the excerpt link below)

1. BBC News: “Primate Fossil ‘Not an Ancestor’”

Remember “Ida,” the missing link that wasn’t? In a Nature letter, scientists attack the lofty claims that surrounded the announcement of the fossil primate.

2. Did the Baby Mammoth, Lyuba, Suffocate in a Dust Storm?

In a special guest news analysis, creationist (and mammoth expert) Michael Oard considers the well-preserved mammoth “Lyuba” (whom we first discussed in A Mammoth Discovery). The occasion? Lyuba’s worldwide debut.

3. National Geographic News: “Chimps Display Humanlike Good Will”

Chimps, especially mothers and their offspring, help each other. While that makes them “more similar to humans than previously thought,” does it mean we’re all just apes?

4. ScienceDaily: “Are Humans Still Evolving? Absolutely, Says a New Analysis of a Long-term Survey of Human Health”

Many humans believe evolution does indeed happen. Is it happening to them as well?

5. BBC News: “‘Ethical’ Stem Cell Crop Boosted”

Research into stem cell therapies continues to find new ways to harvest the valuable cells without ethical compromises, as is shown by a new breakthrough described in Nature Methods.

6. And don't miss...

[GodGunsGuts]

Ping!

[Alter Kaker]

Here's a simple formula for GGG's spam posts.

Step 1: Find a scientist saying X.

Step 2: Find a scientist who disagrees with X.

Step 3: Since two scientists do not agree, science must be morally bankrupt.

Step 4: Post on Free Republic.

Step 5: Repeat, ad infinitum.

[GodGunsGuts]

Another spam reply from Alter Kaker, signifying nothing.

[muawiyah]

So what. That's just one form of argument. Another is to go dig up a skeleton that's clearly ancestral to us, but it's not an ape ~ more like a large tail-less monkey that wades in rivers and lakes to catch fish and crabs to eat.

Didn't you realize that the "evolution theorists" (those who try to imagine the "causes" of certain features) really blew it when it comes to the Chimp/Human relationship. It's undoubtedly there (else why all the genetic similarities) but it's not in our line.

Watching some bears lined up along a river in Alaska I had a sudden epiphany about why we had heels ~ it was clearly to minimize our energy costs while standing up in water. Then there's the running ~ we are the only primates who can run long distances. That's obviously to get out the way of the alligators!

[Alter Kaker]

Another spam reply from Alter Kaker, signifying nothing.

Actually, my post is a very useful cribsheet for those Freepers whose busy lives do not afford them the time to peruse the massive volume of mindless anti-science drivel you post from your goat-herder's tent.

[Alter Kaker]

I’m sure your post means a lot to you, but I find it completely incomprehensible.

[dangus]

I wish people on both sides of the creationist - evolutionist debate would please note the dynamic of the ancestor that wasn’t.

A scientist makes an important-seeming discovery, announcing what he hopes the discovery means. Being merely human, they naturally are prone to excitement and presumption.

The news media states with certainty what the discovery suggests, without waiting for any scientific confirmation, making all sort of inferences from it.

Here’s the key: Other scientists continue the process of validating or refuting the initial hypotheses and/or model. The system pits those their same human emotion against those of the original scientist. motivating them to disprove the original scientist.

They succeed or they don’t. In this case they do. They announce their own findings with a slightly overstated sense of assuredness. The scientific community weighs the merits of each set of arguments.

The news media largely ignores the later scientists, because their system is designed for pushing an opinion (and actually always has been), not discerning the truth.

[count-your-change]

“This is the first link to all humans,” said Jørn Hurum, a member of the Darwinius team, at the press conference. His colleague Jens Franzen likened its scientific impact to “an asteroid falling down to Earth.” Hurum said the fossil, named “Ida” in honor of his daughter, would be a paleontological “Mona Lisa for the next 100 years.” Ida was front-page news; Google celebrated it with an iconic logo cartoon. The only people unimpressed by their conclusions were scientists.”

WiredScience 10/21/09

What a difference a few months makes. Ida to Coulda to Nada.

But I won't sit in front of the T.V. wearing my “I Love Ida” tee shirt, waiting for an extravaganza with fade in/out graphics and dramatic music announcing “the Mona Lisa for the next 100 years” barely made it for 100 days before getting The Hubris Hustle out the door.

Or as the Boffins of Bones might put it, “Glad Ida Dad Now Sad, Ida Had Bad Clad, Ida Not So Rad.”

My advice to Mr. Hurum: “Get a real hair cut, not the one they just gave you”.

[dangus]

To be briefer: Most scientists legitimately are trying to find the truth, as should be demonstrated by the fact that other scientists pulled the rug on this ancestor story. The problem is that the news media sensationalizes one side, and ignores the other. And while I believe most creationist arguing are well-intentioned Christians, I fear that by pounding on the rift between science and religion, they skew the jury pool.

[mysterio]

As a Christian and a scientist, I have to say the way you spam with this and the AIDS stuff sometimes makes me wonder about your real motives here.

[dangus]

Looks like Ida’s dad was making a bit of an advertisement to sensationalize his discovery.

I’d a had an Ida sad if Ida said Ida’s ad.

[beefree]

“anti-science drivel “

I honestly want to know what drives a person to engage in this type thread if this is how one feels. Please help me to understand why one wouldn’t ignore it instead.

[Alter Kaker]

I honestly want to know what drives a person to engage in this type thread if this is how one feels. Please help me to understand why one wouldn’t ignore it instead.

Because ignoring propaganda isn't an answer. It has to be confronted.

[count-your-change]

You’re hired! As I’m mired since helper fired.

[GodGunsGuts]

What AIDS spam would that be? Would it be the AIDS spam from National Review? The AIDS spam from the Amercian Spectator? The AIDS spam from the Hoover Institution’s “Policy Review”? The AIDS spam from Reason Magazine? The AIDS spam from the same people who produced “The Great Global Warming Sindle”? Which AIDS spam are you referring to exactly?

[mysterio]

Your "AIDS isn't caused by HIV" nonsense. That's where I think you overplayed your hand.

Christians play a large role in scientific research. You would paint us as flat earth conspiracy theorists. I have worked in research my whole adult life, and I can assure you that there's no conflict whatsoever between my faith and my work.

I've also spent almost 8 years posting here, and I think your dozens of threads every day do nothing positive for the site. I generally avoid your threads, but your spam volume has gotten to the point that I see no way to ignore it.

[beefree]

I appreciate that you responded. Propaganda: ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one’s cause or to damage an opposing cause. Each side believes the other utilizes it. Since propaganda exists, why not let each FReeper decide for themselves which thread is important/interesting? It bothers me that nothing seems to get resolved via respectful debate or persuasion but often is simply an avenue for insults and name-calling. I would like to see threads posted, that a lay-person can understand, about the current position on evolution. Perhaps they exist and I have simply missed them. It often seems that opponents of GGG don’t actually refute the message, merely attack the messenger. God bless all FReepers, I am just asking us all to try to be kind, we should stick together against the Liberal takeover of U.S., and disagree respectfully on other matters, such as Crevo.

[GodGunsGuts]

BTW, I just noticed that you are attempting to hijack a creationist thread by diverting it into a debate about AIDS. If you wish for me to eat your lame AIDS alarmist arguments for lunch, please locate one of my Rethinking AIDS threads and deposit your comments there.

Have a nice day—GGG

[mysterio]

I think when discussing your motives, your thread history is certainly admissible.

However, my objection has been noted and I won't interrupt the thread further.

Have a good one.