Photograph by Jim Kocher

Photography contest, Honorable Mention

This picture is 180 degrees out of phase with our usual biweekly posts, but you do not see a giant sunspot every day. (You may see a more or less ordinary sunspot at about 4:30 on an imaginary clock, provided that the hour hand is short.) EarthSky at the link above discusses the sunspot in the picture:

NOAA just released its April 2025 solar data. The monthly sunspot number climbed to 140.6, up from 134.2 in March, a clear signal that we remain firmly in solar maximum for Solar Cycle 25. This peak phase could continue for several more months before experts call the downturn. Leading the charge is AR4079, a behemoth sunspot region now dominating the sun’s northeast quadrant. Stretching six to seven Earths wide, it’s easily visible with eclipse glasses (always use proper eye protection!)....

They further note that the sunspot “carries serious flare potential, [though f]or now, it’s been surprisingly calm[.]” They add, “Eyes on the sun!” But please, as they advise, with proper protection.

I took the picture using the same setup I used to photograph the 2017 solar eclipse here. There is no truth to the rumor that I never throw anything away.

The Discovery Institute’s “Evolution News” is always a great place to look for tenuous and dubious arguments against evolutionary biology. Lately they have been touting a book by EN journalist David Klinghoffer, published by Discovery Press, the DI’s house publisher. The book is “Plato’s Revenge: The New Science of the Immaterial Genome”. Emily Sandico, a DI staff writer, has a piece calling attention to the book.

The book by Klinghoffer describes the views of Richard Sternberg. Sternberg has two Ph.D. degrees, one in molecular evolution and another in systems science. His own web page (here) explains that, in his view

Evolutionary genetics leaves open the central issue of how the one dimensional genotype can specify the four dimensional phenotype. The approach I am taking to this problem is a variant of structural realism, by which I mean that biological phenomena are manifestations of logico-mathematical structures. This perspective is orthogonal to the origins debate, if you will, because all historical actualities are understood to be space-time instances of pre-existing non-temporal possibilities. Within this context one can accept all that is empirically valid in evolutionary biology, while not axiomatically dismissing the position that structures as well as their “real” instantiations have an intelligent cause. My position asserts that the cosmos is fundamentally intelligible in such a way that it can be logically, mathematically, and scientifically recognized to be such; and moreover–following Proclus–that the universe emanates from Nous (mind). In this sense my thinking is compatible with intelligent design broadly defined.

Sternberg’s site also links to a PDF explaining in more detail how he came to his views.

To Klinghoffer, as quoted by Sandico’s post

When Dr. Sternberg thinks of ID, he’s thinking of the here and now. With echoes in the ancient philosophy of Plato, which pointed to immaterial “forms” shaping life, he finds scientific evidence of agency at work in the formation of every embryo, the development of every organism in the womb, and in the ongoing operation of every cell. The genome is not a material entity alone — DNA — but one that transcends space and time, employing DNA as an instrument, right now.

which he calls “intelligent design in real time”. Andrew McDiarmid, EN’s head of podcasts, has interviewed Klinghoffer (here) about his book on Sternberg’s views.

To me this all sounds a bit strange. Plato argued that real organisms were but imperfect reflections of ideal forms, which existed in some other realm. What evidence do Sternberg, Klinghoffer, Sandico, and McDiarmid have that this is so? Let’s look at an example …

Continue Reading

Reproduced from NCSE Monitor, with permission. Original article by Glenn Branch.

Safeguarding Sound Science — NCSE’s new podcast, intended to combat misinformation, disinformation, and misconceptions with actual science — recently completed its first season, with all seven episodes now available:

• Episode 1: "What Climate Change? Tackling Climate Denial" with Michael E. Mann and NCSE's Glenn Branch
• Episode 2: "A Century of Disinformation: Naomi Oreskes and the Merchants of Doubt" with Naomi Oreskes
• Episode 3: "Miseducation in the USA: How Our Kids Are Too Often Denied Climate Facts" with Katie Worth and Melissa Lau
• Episode 4: "Zombie Theories Must Die! A Conversation with Climate Communicator Marshall Shepherd" with J. Marshall Shepherd
• Episode 5: "Today's Forecast: Climate Change, Trusted Sources, and a Sprinkling of Local Relevance" with Bernadette Woods Placky and Edward Maibach
• Episode 6: "Making Every Classroom a Climate Classroom" with NCSE's Amanda L. Townley and Bertha Vazquez
• Episode 7: "Hope in the Face of the Climate Crisis: Youth Activism and Leadership" with three youth climate activists

All episodes are hosted by Mat Kaplan and all are now available via all your favorite podcasting platforms, including Apple Podcasts and Spotify. If you like what you hear, consider making a special donation to support the future of Safeguarding Sound Science!

Photograph by Marilyn Susek

Photography contest, Honorable Mention