Friends

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/scienceblogs/pharyngula/~3/i_gyLGBuvMM/omg_drool.php

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/12/omg_drool.php

Be still my heart…Isabelli Rossellini dressed up as a squid demonstrating their mating ritual.

This is much more convincing than the God Equation.

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/scienceblogs/pharyngula/~3/8OOyJlRTBSM/the_god_equation.php

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/12/the_god_equation.php

We atheists are done for now. Behold, the God Equation, which I received in email and proves that a deity created us all:

Scientists working in the UK have discovered robust evidence that the creation of the earth and moon was a deliberate act. The researchers found that the earth, moon, and beyond were engineered according to a specific equation. They have dubbed it the God Equation. The equation, which looks like this:

shows a constant, unchanging relationship between the speed of light, the ratio between the circumference and diameter of a circle, and the radio frequency of hydrogen in space. Artificial intelligence engineer David Cumming, CEO of the Edinburgh-based company Intelligent Earth, recently discovered the equation, and said: "I am a scientist and as such I didn't at first really believe it myself. But physics is physics, and maths is maths, and you can't argue with it."

The discovery of the equation began with research by engineer Professor Alexander Thom (1894-1985) of Oxford University, into the properties of megalithic constructions such as Stonehenge. He found that their construction did not follow existing measurement systems, but did fit in to a pattern of specific lengths which he called megalithic yards. Two independent researchers Christopher Knight and Alan Butler, based in York, then showed that the megalithic system of measurement was directly derived from characteristics of the Earth's movements through space.

Linking this system of measurements with known constants such as π (pi, the relationship between the circumference and diameter of a circle), Hl, the radio frequency of the hydrogen fine transition in space, Ω (0.0123456789 representing all the characters of the base 10 number system), and the speed of light in a vacuum C0 (C0 = 299,792.458km/sec), and building on research by Knight and Butler, and the work of Professor Alexander Thom, former Reading University doctoral researcher Cumming followed a research programme that resulted in his discovery of the God Equation. The God Equation shows a direct link between the speed of light, the radio frequency of hydrogen in space, pi, and earth's orbit, rotation and weight. As the possibility of the Earth having the exact required characteristics to fit the equation by chance is remote, and the equation has, in theory, been in existence since the beginning of the Universe, this means that the Earth's orbit, rotation and weight must have been engineered to fit this equation.

Cumming states: "Although the ratio of a diameter of a circle to its circumference has been known for thousands of years, we have only recently discovered the hydrogen line, the speed of light, and rediscovered the megalithic measurement system. The advance of science, combined with the uncovering of ancient knowledge passed down through the ages, has only now made the discovery of the God Equation possible."

Well, overwhelming, except for a few little problems.

For instance, the term Hl has units of MHz; the other parameters seem to be dimensionless; and C has units of km/sec. This does not compute. That seems like a rather fundamental error in a very simple equation that must have been formulated by a couple of the geniuses of the age, don't you think?

Oh, wait…there's that mysterious Ω term — maybe we're just missing its units. Except…"0.0123456789 representing all the characters of the base 10 number system". Oh, come on. I call shenanigans on that one. That's completely arbitrary and contrived.

How do you get earth's orbit, rotation, and weight from π?

So I plugged in all those numbers anyway, and did the calculation works out to a value for C of 361,448.9 MHz. This is a bit off.

Oh, but there's more! There's a footnote to the email I was sent that mentions that you have to calculate the speed of light in megalithic yards, derived by some esoteric calculation from the dimensions of Stonehenge. A megalithic yard = 0.82966 meters, which then gets you to the right number for the speed of light.

Not bad for a formula with three terms, one of which is pulled out of someone's ass, and the whole thing requiring a magic fudge factor to bring it into line with neolithic technology.

In case you're wondering who could be crazy and ignorant enough to propose this kind of nonsense, the mail included a handy set of bios for them.

David Cumming is an innovative scientist working in the field of artificial intelligence. A former PhD student of famous Professor Kevin Warwick at Reading University, England, David is also a graduate of Glasgow University, and Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen. At Robert Gordon University, he was awarded a rare MSc with Distinction for his work on a NASA space shuttle microgravity experiment that flew as a full canister experiment on the Space Shuttle Endeavour.

David was also leader of the Intelligent Earth team that developed the world's first advertising system that changes advertising according to the gender and age of the person watching the advert - a technology that removes unwanted and annoying advertising and makes advertising appropriate to the watchers. The company also developed Doki, 'the World's most gender aware robot, featuring in the Guinness Book of World Records for several years'

</p> He is also the CEO of Safe Cities, who developed a prize-winning intelligent custody photography system in collaboration with ACPO's Facial Images National Database (FIND) Project and several large Police Forces. These systems are now installed around Britain as an important front end of the National Database. </p>

Christopher Knight's background is in research. From 1976 he investigated the origins of the rituals used by Freemasons before publishing his first book on the subject in 1996. 'The Hiram Key' became an immediate international best seller selling over a million copies and is now in 37 different languages. This was followed by several other bestsellers chronicling his investigations that were taking him further and further back in time. In 1997 he teamed up with Alan Butler to continue his researches, which had taken him back to the late Stone Age. Following in the footsteps of engineer Professor Alexander Thom, Knight and Butler have reconstructed a complete system of measurement that was used in the British Isles and western France 5,000 years ago. These systems, still identifiable in existing artefacts, were more sophisticated than modern units of measure, although both the Imperial and metric systems have evolved directly from this Neolithic origin.

Alan Butler's historical studies extend to an in-depth research into the Cistercian monastic movement and the Order of the Knights Templar, about which he has also written extensively. As a professional writer, who has always possessed an absolute fascination for history, Alan set out on a two decade search that led to the unravelling of some of the most important details regarding prehistoric knowledge and achievement in Europe. Alan has also been writing on the subject of astrology since his 20's and is the most published writer on the subject in Britain.

Crackpots all across the spectrum.

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/scienceblogs/pharyngula/~3/ePtNov2zkAQ/glenn_beck_made_a_movie.php

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/12/glenn_beck_made_a_movie.php

I hadn't heard anything about it. Apparently, almost nobody else had, either.

In New York, Beck sold 17 tickets. In Boston, another 17. And in Washington, D.C., the hotbed of political activism, his tearful film drew only 30, Raw Story has found.

Glenn Beck's new movie The Christmas Sweater - A Return To Redemption -- released for a viewing Thursday night in hundreds of theaters across the country. While it performed better in the south and in rural, more conservative areas, his ability to draw viewers in major US markets was a bust.

"The theater's almost empty," a representative at Regal Cinemas in Manhattan told Raw Story moments before it began.

The flick features the firebrand Fox News host sharing with willing souls his most profound childhood memories, along with his philosophies on life, love and happiness.

"It is the story of faith, tragedy, redemption and hope," Beck says in the trailer. (Reporter's caution: he cries in it.)

Yeesh. It sounds even worse than Expelled. The trailer (I don't recommend it) evoked feelings of revulsion and disgust, which isn't usually what you want to do to fill the seats.

Although, you never know…maybe he was trying to tap into the "two girls one cup" demographic.

http://majikthise.typepad.com/majikthise_/2009/12/afghanistan-reality-check.html

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/scienceblogs/pharyngula/~3/iuSmg18iOhs/dont_tug_on_supermans_cape.php

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/12/dont_tug_on_supermans_cape.php

…and don't get into an argument with Aron Ra about creationism.

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/scienceblogs/pharyngula/~3/kshsA6yEZuE/id_like_to_see_a_magazine_cove.php

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/12/id_like_to_see_a_magazine_cove.php

It puts it all in perspective, doesn't it?

There is the unfortunate fact that most Americans would probably regard Kirk Cameron as a legitimate authority, rather than a whiny and arrogant clod with delusions of competence, however…

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/scienceblogs/pharyngula/~3/9R9qNB2Uw1M/it_must_be_pick_on_new_jersey.php

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/12/it_must_be_pick_on_new_jersey.php

Good thing it's an easy one. I was up way too late last night with all those young people in the Twin Cities, so I can't think too hard right now.

Should New Jersey legislators legalize same-sex marriages?

Yes 50%
No 50%
Not sure 0%

I suspect we can tip this one way or the other rather easily.

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/scienceblogs/pharyngula/~3/MQrw_3D3HqU/save_the_footprints_new_jersey.php

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/12/save_the_footprints_new_jersey.php

Sign this petition to protect a valuable dinosaur trackway quarry in New Jersey — it's going to be bulldozed and built over with condos if you don't. It might even if you do, but make a little effort to bring this deplorable waste of a scientific resource to people's attention, anyway.

http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?f=1259

Piled Higher & Deeper by Jorge Cham		www.phdcomics.com
title: "Ready, set..." - originally published 12/2/2009

http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=1937

Comments on my "What is this question about?" posting have drifted off into a separate (and rather confused) thread about orange as referring to a fruit or a color and about orange juice. This is a case where the facts are well known and easily discoverable, but instead people have chosen to speculate and invent. So to set things straight …

Orange juice (as it's been used in this discussion) is entirely parallel to grapefruit juice, lemon juice, etc. It's a noun-noun compound, with primary accent on the first word, meaning 'juice of/from oranges'. There's also an adjective-noun phrase orange juice, with primary accent on the second word, meaning 'juice that is orange in color'. Orange juice (noun + noun) is in fact an orange juice (adjective + noun), though there are orange juices (adjective + noun) besides orange juice (noun + noun).

On to the fruit and the color.

The name of the fruit came into English from earlier French, and before that, according to the OED, the word had a history in (going backwards) Arabic, Persian, Sanskrit, and some Dravidian language. The fruit noun originally began with an [n], which was lost somewhere along the line, possibly by metanalysis (compare Spanish naranja). The fruit — in particular, the bitter, or Seville, orange — came to Europe in the Middle Ages; the sweet orange arrived later, in the 16th century.

The name of the color is a metonymy from the name of the fruit; the color orange is so-called because it's the color of oranges. Compare the color names apricot, charcoal, cinnamon, fuchsia, lemon, lilac, lime, rose, tangerine, and so on. What sets orange apart from these other color names is that somewhere along the line it became a basic color word of English. Before that, orange was just a kind of red (which is why "carrot-tops", people with orange hair, are called red-haired). It's no longer possible to refer to orange-colored things as being red, though you can refer to lemon-colored things as being yellow and lime-colored things as being green.

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/scienceblogs/pharyngula/~3/_jTYFqhKPuc/do_we_get_a_bright_yellow_bord.php

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/12/do_we_get_a_bright_yellow_bord.php

This is pretty cool: Scienceblogs and National Geographic have joined forces to create a mighty partnership to conquer the interwebs. I think. I'm not sure on what exactly we'll gain just yet, but the people with vision at the top have hinted at some juicy things.

Here's the press release:

National Geographic Digital Media (NGDM) and ScienceBlogs.com today announced that they have formed a strategic partnership spanning technology, advertising, business and content development. Through this partnership, Nationalgeographic.com and ScienceBlogs.com will create and exchange content through connected social media features, as well as work together to create new multimedia programming for both sites. ScienceBlogs.com will feature content from National Geographic bloggers and National Geographic explorers. The site also will have access to National Geographic's news resources and will significantly increase its exposure through NGDM's worldwide audience. NGDM in turn will feature content from ScienceBlogs.com and renowned SB bloggers on its award-winning site Nationalgeographic.com.

In addition, NGDM will lead advertising sales — headed by Jim Hoos, VP of Digital Media Sales — on ScienceBlogs.com, adding a vibrant social media platform to the portfolio and giving advertisers access to an audience of more than 2 million young, educated and digitally savvy readers. Under the terms of the agreement, NGDM will acquire a minority stake in ScienceBlogs, LLC, parent company of ScienceBlogs.com.

"ScienceBlogs.com shares our mission to create a fully comprehensive Web destination that allows users to explore, engage and exchange," said John Caldwell, NGDM president. "This partnership not only allows National Geographic to strengthen its leadership in the science and technology space, but it also allows NG.com to reach an extensive community of young and engaged users who are deeply immersed within it."

"We are thrilled to be teaming up with National Geographic, a brand we greatly admire and an organization that shares the values of the ScienceBlogs community. This partnership highlights SB's standing in social media and lays the foundation for growth and greater reach and recognition in the future," said Adam Bly, chairman of ScienceBlogs, LLC.

NGDM and ScienceBlogs.com's initial rollout will feature blog content and applications that highlight green, science and technology subject matter.

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/scienceblogs/pharyngula/~3/LxBqRVBB6Yk/friday_cephalopod_breeding_swa_1.php

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/12/friday_cephalopod_breeding_swa_1.php

Loligo opalescens

Figure from Cephalopods: A World Guide ^{(amzn/b&n/abe/pwll)}, by Mark Norman.

http://aldaily.com

As Twilight shows, not all that girls like is good art - or good feminism. But the backlash against Twilight should matter to feminists, even as they shudder... more

What might it mean to hate the Roman Empire with all your heart? Think yourself into the murderous soul of Mithradates, and maybe you'll understand... more

"It is a truth universally acknowledged..." tells us something about Jane Austen's temper and her times. Her world was one where there really was universal truth... more

http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=1936

Yesterday and today, I'm at Washington University in St. Louis at a meeting on open infrastructure for studies of the U.S. Supreme Court, organized by Andrew Martin at the Center for Empirical Research in the Law.  (That sentence sets some kind of local record for prepositional phrase density, but a couple of quick attempts to fix it made things worse.  Just to start with, you've got CERL, which has two, and WUSL, which adds one more…)

Andrew is one of the principals of the Supreme Court Database Project.  Other participants in the meeting include Jerry Goldman of Oyez,  Wayne McIntosh of the Digital Docket project, Sarah Frug of the Cornell Legal Information Institute, Daniel Ho from Stanford, and Mike Bommarito and Dan Katz of the Computational Legal Studies blog.

That's all I have time for this morning, but I invite you to explore this area a bit by following some of those links.  For example, recent posts at Computational Legal Studies will lead you to static and dynamic visualizations of the East Anglia Climate Research Unit leaked email network (how's that for a perfectly comprehensible 8-element complex nominal?), and to a post on Distance Measures for Dynamic Citation Networks, with an application to community structure in the early Supreme Court, and an associated paper:

Acyclic digraphs arise in many natural and artificial processes. Among the broader set, dynamic citation networks represent a substantively important form of acyclic digraphs. For example, the study of such networks includes the spread of ideas through academic citations, the spread of innovation through patent citations, and the development of precedent in common law systems. The specific dynamics that produce such acyclic digraphs not only differentiate them from other classes of graphs, but also provide guidance for the development of meaningful distance measures. In this article, we develop and apply our sink distance measure together with the single-linkage hierarchical clustering algorithm to both a two-dimensional directed preferential attachment model as well as empirical data drawn from the first quarter century of decisions of the United States Supreme Court. Despite applying the simplest combination of distance measures and clustering algorithms, analysis reveals that more accurate and more interpretable clusterings are produced by this scheme.

The Digital Docket's web site will lead you to its publications page. The Supreme Court Database Project offer some nifty online analytic possiblities, as well as the option to download all of its data in various convenient formats. And so on…

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/scienceblogs/pharyngula/~3/GItJVRbJaO0/reminder_to_minneapolitans.php

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/12/reminder_to_minneapolitans.php

I'm going to be speaking at the U of M tonight. I actually have to leave soon for this, because we had a light snowfall yesterday, and last I checked, the roads were slick as shellacked snot. I'm giving myself lots of extra driving time to improve my odds of actually getting there intact and with a still functional vehicle.

Also, some of us will be meeting at the campus club in Coffman Union sometime before the 7:30 talk. Feel free to stop by and say hello!

Skatje and I are here — the roads were good and we made it plenty early. Stop by the Campus Club (4th floor of Coffman Union) any time before 7:30. If you take too long, all the salmon will be gone, I warn you.

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/scienceblogs/pharyngula/~3/Na3BwCRSyOA/wait_what_happened_to_the_octo.php

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/12/wait_what_happened_to_the_octo.php

I hate these annoying cliffhangers.

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/scienceblogs/pharyngula/~3/kms3L9uA8yQ/how_much_porn_do_you_watch.php

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/12/how_much_porn_do_you_watch.php

A study that tried to analyze how pornography affected men's views ran into an unfortunate problem: no control group. It seems there does not exist a population of males that doesn't see some porn regularly. Still, they went ahead and at least got some shaky numbers on porn viewing habits.

Single men watched pornography for an average of 40 minutes, three times a week, while those in relationships watched it 1.7 times a week for around 20 minutes.

The study found that men watched pornography that matched their own image of sexuality, and quickly discarded material they found offensive or distasteful.

I found this rather disturbing — personally, I'm way, way down below the average. Was there something wrong with me? But then I had to wonder how they defined "pornography". I occasionally watch R rated movies — does that count? I personally feel that what constitutes pornography is often something I find offensive or distasteful, so I don't watch it…but if it is inoffensive or tasteful, it can't be porn.

If I search for movies of squid mating, am I looking for porn? It matches my image of sexuality, after all. And why are they only looking at men? Don't women ever look at what some might define as pornography?

Now I'm very confused. I don't think there is a normal level, so papers that try to measure one seem to miss the mark.

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/scienceblogs/pharyngula/~3/W-xIdiSeR_w/another_debate_with_creationis.php

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/12/another_debate_with_creationis.php

Oh, when will we learn? Michael Shermer and Donald Prothero duked it out with a pair of Discovery Institute charlatans recently, to predictable results: the creationists cried victory afterwards. It simply doesn't matter that they had no evidence.

Anyway, a couple of things struck me as too typical in these affairs.

• The creationists changed the topic the morning of the debate, from the general "Origins of life" to the "Adequacy of Neo-Darwinian natural selection and mutation to explain the origin of life", which already skews the subject. It's amazing how common it is for creationists to pull this tactic of shifting the goalposts the day of the game. It's also surprising how often we let them get away with it.

• Despite their change of topic, the creationists ignored it! One guy yammered on about "information," despite not understanding it; the other made the impossibility of whale evolution the centerpiece of his argument. Whale evolution is cool, but it's a fact…and note that there were no whales around at the time of the origin of life.

• As usual, our side is all about the evidence. Their side is all about rhetoric and appeals to biases. Guess which side fares best in the debate format? It's even true in their books: note that Meyer's book is subtitled, DNA and the Evidence of Intelligent Design, and he couldn't gasp out any evidence at all for their theory, which they cannot even state.

Oh, well. We're game, at least, and willing to charge into their playing field no matter how much they have to stack the odds against us. Now if only they would try to do likewise…but of course, they can't. They've got nothin'.

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/scienceblogs/pharyngula/~3/3X8kySt6Dng/there_ought_to_be_a_qualifying.php

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/12/there_ought_to_be_a_qualifying.php

It's another of those cases where people unfit to be parents abuse their children. Samuel McGehee is accused of murdering his youngest son, suffocating him to death because he wouldn't take a nap. That's horrible, but the next question I have to ask is why this guy was allowed in the same room with small children after what he did last year.

A detective testified that in March 2008, McGehee, concerned about the family's financial state, decided to circumcise his other son at home, using a filet knife.

"There was severe damage to the shaft of the penis," Detective Shawn Jenkins said. "There was a lot of skin removed."

The 3-month-old's scrotum was also lacerated during the procedure, Jenkins said. The child has subsequently endured extensive reconstructive surgeries, and more are expected.

What is it with these religious kooks and their children's penises? I'm the father of two boys, and aside from assistance with basic hygiene when they were very small, I pretty much left their business alone…and the idea of taking a knife to them was unthinkable. I really wonder what crazy fundagelical church this man went to that made circumcision such a priority.

If the law had taken this lunatic aside when he'd committed such a stupid crime and told him that his parenting rights were immediately suspended, there's another little boy who might still be alive today.

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/scienceblogs/pharyngula/~3/zBCKVBYF9kE/roger_ebert_is_such_a_skeptic.php

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/12/roger_ebert_is_such_a_skeptic.php

He takes on our country's curious attitude towards patent inanity.

We are edging into an Election Season where strange beliefs will get an unusual airing. Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee are up front in their disdain for Darwinism and their embrace of one degree or another of Creationism. Obama and most Democrats, and many Republicans have no problem at all with Darwinism, but will be wise to keep that out of their basic stump speech. Palin can draw applause by affirming she doesn't believe mankind shared a common ancestor with oran utans, but Obama will prudently refrain from revealing his belief in the quite provable fact that we do.

It will be a fascinating aspect of the coverage of the approaching campaigns to watch how mainstream news organizations tread on this thin ice. There was an outcry in some circles when most news outlets were slow to simply state that George Bush was wrong about Brownie doin a great job, and Palin was wrong about the Bridge to Nowhere. They were wrong, but few in the MSM said they were, and even fewer, perhaps none, of those outlets will say that Palin or Huckabee are just plain wrong, wrong, wrong about Creationism. Not since Flat Earthers has there been a public dispute in which one side (Darwinism) has so throughly and merciless demolished the other (Creationism). Yet at most the MSM might venture to mention a "debate" or "controversy" between Darwinism and Creationism. News at 10: The debate about the theory of gravity.

He doesn't just target the right-wing follies, either: the lefties get a skewering for their promotion of New Agey Nonsense. It's a good read.