Archive for September, 2008

CNN and CBS have recently presented another “hard-hitting” series of reports on pareidolia with its piece on Jesus found in the water stains of a weight-loss centre’s ceiling.  The patrons and staff alike confide that they’ve since watched their language, avoid lying, and generally act civil while face-to-ceiling with the water stain Jesus.

Link.

As is typical with stories concerning seeing images in random patterns or artifacts, I don’t see Jesus.  In fact, I see Gorn.  It then becomes a surprise to me that patrons of the centre chose to pacify themselves rather than fashion a cannon out of a hollowed-out bamboo shoot.

So what’s appeared on the ceiling, then?  A) Jesus or B) Gorn?

The answer is neither.  It’s a [Gorn-shaped] water stain.  That’s pretty much it.

It’s always refreshing when the journalists actually get science news right. Regarding the Large Hadron Collider:

But there has been a struggle to explain to the public that, though this energy is vast from the perspective of a circulating proton, each collision between a pair of protons will release an amount of energy comparable to that of two colliding mosquitoes.

What next — the Vatican comes out in support of evolution? Madness!

—

• Telegraph.co.uk: Large Hadron Collider: could it defrost a pizza?
• msnbc.com: Vatican: Guess what, Darwin? Evolution is OK

If any of our readers who are currently students at the University of Toronto are interested in forming a skeptical society, please let me know in the comments section — or through our forums at http://forums.lintbox.com.

Found on this website, “Ten Questions to Ask Your Biology Teacher About Evolution” is meant to be a handy guide for students skeptical of evolution. According to this article at The New York Times, science teachers in the US are increasingly having to deal with similar anti-evolution ploys. Reading through the list gave me a few chuckles, so I thought — with only my knowledge from high school biology — I would go through the list and do my best to respond to the various challenges.

—

1. ORIGIN OF LIFE. Why do textbooks claim that the 1953 Miller-Urey experiment shows how life’s building blocks may have formed on the early Earth — when conditions on the early Earth were probably nothing like those used in the experiment, and the origin of life remains a mystery?

It appears to be a favorite tactic of anti-evolutionists to try to tie evolutionary biology with the question of the origins of life. The truth is, biological evolution, natural selection, and common ancestry don’t say anything about how life began. Life could have started any number of ways; evolution is merely the proposed mechanism to explain the diversity and robustness of modern life.

That being said, we aren’t completely in the dark as to how life on Earth began. Unfortunately, we may never be able to prove how life on Earth began, but rather only likely ways that it could have began. While there is some controversy as to whether the Miller-Urey experiment replicated the atmospheric conditions of early Earth¹, it did show us the possibility of creating the building blocks of organic life from non-living materials. In that respect, it is still an important experiment, with implications for our search for the origin of life.

Regardless, this is not a criticism of evolution — it’s a criticism of the Miller-Urey experiment.
Read the rest of this entry »

In what is certifiably a rare occurrence, I’ve found myself reasonably impressed by the skepticism found in a special news article.  Specifically, by the piece 9/11 Conspiracy Files, which aired on CBC Newsworld this week.

The hour-long program focuses on perhaps the largest foundation of the 9/11 “Truthers’” conspiracy theory, the collapse of WTC7.  In it, while true douchebags like Dylan Avery of Loose Change are given time to have their say, it’s the engineers, firefighters and the families of the victims who have the final word.  What’s more, the program makes no hesitation to refute conspiracy theory claims surrounding the collapse of the third tower with real science, reason, and at times just plain common sense.

For those unfamiliar with the Truthers’ nonsense, the meat of the 9/11 conspiracy theory surrounds the collapse of WTC7, which they say is a “smoking gun” for the government’s supposed involvement in the attacks, as it had not appeared to have sustained significant damage and must therefore have been destroyed in a controlled demolition through the use of explosives.  The program’s response to this argument, based on official research into the collapse of the tower, leaves no stone unturned, as it picks apart every conspiracy theory claim neatly thoroughly.

First and foremost, the argument that WTC7 suffered no damage prior to its collapse is debunked by foorage from all angles of broken windows as well as fire and smoke pluming from all sides.  On the claim that the fire left raging in the building could not be hot enough to melt the steel foundations of the structure, a team of engineers explain that the melting of the steel isn’t necessary to produce a collapse.  Instead, the steel needs merely to be weakened by the intense temperatures of the fire to the point where it can no longer support the weight of the structure (This is accomplished long before the steel is at its melting point).  Conspiracy theorists even argue that the sight and sound of the building’s collapse indicate that explosives were present in the building to initiated its destruction.  The program offers two explanations for this.

One is practical:  Those “hearing” and “seeing” explosions have little to no experience on what real-life explosions sound and look like, and thus cannot be relied on to provide a realistic assessment.  The other explanation is more technical.  The “explosion” seen by observers is itself a result of the collapse.  As the structure’s foundations fails and it begins to collapse, air within the building is trapped, much like in a balloon.  The pressure builds until the air is finally able to escape, which it does very violently.  Indeed, this may be called an explosion, but not as a result of explosives.  It is, rather, a result of the physics of the building’s collapse, and nothing more.

We here at Lintbox have yet to write an extensive piece on 9/11 conspiracy theories, which we should sometime in the future (at the risk of facing the often very harsh responses from Truthers.)  Nevertheless, CBC/BBC managed to produce one very satisfying, scientific approach to the conspiracy theory, and for that I’m left impressed.  Maybe there’s hope for the media, after all!

Scientific American has published this handy map of the creationism battle in the United States. Specifically, the map explains what’s currently going on — and where.

This is a must see for anybody who is concerned about, but not too familiar with, the current creationism battlegrounds.

Well, the Large Hadron Collider has not destroyed the world yet, a fact which many are looking upon with disappointment. We’ve all seen movies; the apocalypse always looks so awesome. But for now, the scientists working at CERN seem to be the only ones who really get to enjoy the LHC.

Not anymore. The folks over at io9 have made a drinking game of it. I wholeheartedly support this particular use for multi-billion-dollar scientific equipment.

For those of you not following the news too closely, I thought it might be of interest to you that the Large Hadron Collider has not yet destroyed the world! It seems, at least for the time-being, that we are still alive — and doing science!

Keep checking http://hasthelargehadroncolliderdestroyedtheworldyet.com/ for updates!

Shame on you, MSN!

*sigh*

Has the Large Hadron Collider Destroyed the World Yet?

This should prove a handy tool for those worried over the nonsensical doomsday claims regarding the LHC.

Be sure to check the website frequently to make sure you haven’t been swallowed by a cloud of micro black holes, or engulfed by and converted into strange matter!