Leaf with dew drops

0 Comments

Photograph by Ken Phelps, a.k.a. Capt. Stormfield.

Photography Contest, Honorable Mention.

Leaf with dew drops
Morning dew on an unidentified leaf, Ganges, Saltspring Island, B.C. Canon 40D, 100 mm macro. Mr. Phelps writes: "Vancouver Island is temperate rainforest. Our property is mostly a sharp, rocky ridge with a couple micro-climates. Standard issue fir trees, ferns, etc. on the north side, and a bit more of a Southern Oregon feel on the top of the ridge, with some pines and lots of Arbutus. Very hot in summer with all the rock." He adds that since taking the photo some years ago, he has learned that the droplets might be due to transpiration rather than dew. He further adds parenthetically that Capt Stormfield is a "name adopted from Mark Twain's short story 'Extract from Captain Stormfield's Visit to Heaven.' Reading this at the age of 14 – despite the disapproval of the teacher at the [Seventh Day Adventist] church school I was attending – is my first recollection of the awakening skepticism that led me out of fundamentalism by my undergrad years."

To see comments on this post click below:

The difference between skepticism and denial; Darwin, Wilberforce, and the Discovery Institute

0 Comments
Book cover

Bishop Wilberforce, in 1860, was a skeptic, praised by Darwin for the skill of his questioning. Today’s creationists, not least the Discovery Institute, are denialists, endlessly asking the same questions as he did, although they have long since been answered.

Yes, Bishop Wilberforce really did ask T.H. Huxley, “Darwin’s bulldog,” whether he would prefer an ape for his grandfather, and a woman for his grandmother, or a man for his grandfather, and an ape for his grandmother. And Huxley really did say that he would prefer this to descent from a man conspicuous for his talents and eloquence, but who misused his gifts to ridicule science and obscure the light of truth. This and more at the very first public debate regarding Darwin’s work on evolution, only months after the publication of On the Origin of Species.

I first wrote the above paragraph in 3 Quarks Daily in 2017, shortly after Richard England had published on the way that the events had been described in the Oxford Chronicle, the fullest contemporary account available of the encounter. That account refuted doubts that had been raised 1 by some historians, and which I had seen referred to by creationists, wishing to minimise the episode or even to regard it as legendary. These doubts were based largely on the absence of the episode from the account in the gentlemanly Athenaeum, but England convincingly showed that the Athenaeum had practised censorship.

I am writing about this again today in response to an article in the mendaciously mistitled Evolution News, mouthpiece of the neocreationist Discovery Institute, by Robert Shedinger, Professor of Religion at Luther College, Iowa. Shedinger has discovered a second career dissing Darwin. He is best known to readers here for his recent book, Darwin’s Bluff, where he argues that Darwin’s voluminous unpublished notes demonstrate his inability to support his views, and the article I am discussing is an extract from that book. We must therefore regard it, not as a mere passing comment, but as the author’s considered opinion.

In Kentucky, "inclusive" means "Christian"

0 Comments
Replica of Ark on opening day
"Replica" of the Ark on opening day. Credit: Dan Phelps.

It appears that, in Kentucky, at least, “inclusive” means “Christian.” At least, that is what you might deduce from an article by Jolene Almendarez and Ana Rocío Álvarez Bríñez in the Cincinnati Enquirer late last year. The article announces the launch of the Kentucky Faith Trail, which is a self-guided road trip that will take you to 11 important faith-based sites, all of them Christian.* The program has received a $305,000 grant from the state. Its purpose, according to a press release of the northern Kentucky tourism organization, as paraphrased by the Enquirer, is to “pay homage to the role religion plays in Kentucky’s identity.” It is also designed to promote religious tolerance and understanding:

The trail is designed to be inclusive, welcoming people of all faiths and backgrounds to embark on a shared journey of discovery and reflection[.]

The Freedom from Religion Foundation (FFRF) will have none of it. In an article entitled Don’t promote Ark Encounter and Creation Museum, FFRF asks state of Kentucky, FFRF notes that all 11 sites are Christian sites, a fact which hardly makes the trail welcoming to people of all faiths and backgrounds. Worse, they note that two of the sites, “the Ark Encounter and Creation Museum, are well known for spreading misinformation and promoting anti-science worldviews[.]” Here at PT, where we are perhaps more forthright, we would say they spread disinformation, which is to say, deliberate misinformation. Additionally, unlike most of the others, they have no historical value.

FFRF goes on to describe these two “museums” and notes that they are owned by Answers in Genesis (AIG), which they accurately describe as “an extreme evangelical Christian organization that spreads misinformation and scientifically inaccurate teachings about our world.” Homing in on AIG, they stress that the Northern Kentucky Convention & Visitors Bureau “must cease using taxpayer money to promote a Faith Trail that includes the Ark Encounter and Creation Museum” and conclude that “[b]y promoting exclusively Christian sites, including two sites that spread blatant misinformation, the Bureau is unconstitutionally favoring Christianity over all other faiths.” You may see the complete letter to the president of the Convention and Visitors Bureau here.


* Here, for the record, are the 11 attractions: Abbey of Gethsemani (sic), Ark Encounter, Basilica of St. Joseph Proto-Cathedral, Cathedral Basilica of the Assumption, Creation Museum, Mother of God Catholic Church, Old Mud Meeting House (Dutch Reformed Church), Old Mulkey Meeting House, “Raccoon” John Smith’s Cabin, Red River Meeting House, South Union Shaker Village.

Anas platyrhynchos

0 Comments
mallard duck
Anas platyrhynchos – mallard duck, Boulder, Colorado, March, 2024. I am no great fan of mallard ducks (we have almost as many as we have Canada geese, but at least they seem to be housebroken). This one, a male, must have had especially clean, new feathers, because he clearly shows the green, iridescent coloring on his head. That is, the coloring is not due to pigment, but rather interference colors owing to layering in the feathers. You can tell because the color faces you, but is absent elsewhere. Mallards also show bluish iridescence farther back, but that is not visible in this picture. Like many things, the green head looks better in life than in a photograph, but a photograph is the best I can do.

To see comments on this post, click below.

Spider web

0 Comments

Photograph by John Trawick.

Photography Contest, Honorable Mention.

Spider web
Spider web – made visible by early morning dew at Lake Murray Reservoir, San Diego, California. Nikon D7100.



To see comments on this post click below: