Old House Is Old

Archaeologists have discovered Britain’s oldest house. I know, it doesn’t seem on the surface to be a terribly interesting story, but there’s lots going on there, so bear with me here. I saw it on Science Daily, and thought it was worth passing on.

The house dates back to 8500 BC, which makes it half a millenium older than the previous oldest house in Britain, and it sounds a lot like how people would have lived for many, many years to come. The evidence suggests that this might not have been an isolated house, but a part of a community of many. That’s pretty wild to think about. That’s potentially an early prototype for a city dating back more than ten thousand years.

And they had puppies!

Actually, the domestication of dogs would have been in full swing at that point. As I learned recently in this fascinating Neurologica post, we’ve been shacking up with dogs for about 14,000 years. The article’s an interesting one that talks about how the domestication of dogs was an integral part of our recent evolution.

I find the whole thing quite interesting. We talk about recorded history and how it doesn’t go back that terribly far, but archaeologists are finding some fantastic things like this house that may well serve us just as well. We won’t have any idea about the specifics of the lives of these early humans, but we can tell a lot about where they had come from and what sorts of social and survival traits they had developed. For example, the article states that they weren’t agrarian per se, but “the inhabitants did burn part of the landscape to encourage animals to eat shoots”.

Jim

The Genome Has Taught Us Bupkus

When I first heard about mapping the human genome, I must admit I felt a bit concerned. True, I was intrigued by the possibility of our decoding humanity and understanding at the deepest level how we were put together, but the much-touted image of scientists programming the genome to produce humanity in vats a la Brave New World certainly made me a little concerned. I began to wonder how much knowledge was too much, and if we as a people were actually ready for this kind of information.

Fortunately, I was a dumb ass. Our mapping of the human genome didn’t trigger the mass of chaos I had been worried about any more than the calendar year 2000 triggered the end of the world. What we ultimately learned from the genome is that it’s really bloody complicated, and the biggest lesson we’ve learned is that all of our traits are triggered through the combined functions of many genes working in harmony.

This morning, I read an article on Pharyngula talking about an interview by Spiegel with Craig Venter entitled We Have Learned Nothing From The Genome. Like PZ Myers, the more I have learned about Venter as a person and a scientist, the more I have found him to be an entirely interesting individual. His original TED Talk was fascinating, and he comes across as a man who understands both the importance and non-importance of the genome.

This ties in with PZ’s article that I commented on last Monday explaining that evolution isn’t just single changes slowly impacting the species, but a complicated network of genetic variances. Read the interview, I’m sure you’ll find it fascinating.

Jim

An Excellent Overview Of Evolution

I know, you’re a hardcore science buff and you understand evolution perfectly. Well, that may or may not be true. But if you want to know for sure if you’ve got the theory down correctly, I’d suggest reading PZ Myers’ recent blog post, It’s more than genes, it’s networks and systems. It’s a simple and much more accurate explanation than most of us regular folks have mastered.

Honestly, there was stuff there that was new and interesting for me, and I’m a huge nerd. So if you have a layman’s understanding of evolution, give this a read and enjoy finding out more about what is an exceptionally cool aspect of how we got here.

Jim

Why I Am A Honky

I’ve always believed that the notion of race was irrelevant. I was raised by liberal Christians who felt that everybody should be equal, and to this day I take a same-but-different stance. My opinion, honestly, is that there are a lot of adjectives to describe a person. Race is one of them. Gender another. I am apathetic to the sum total of those adjectives. If I was hiring a person for a job, I would base my opinion on those adjectives, looking for the combination that best suited the job in question. Race very rarely comes into this equation, unless the job was something that actually related directly to qualities possessed by a particular race. Off the top of my head, I can’t think of one. without really stretching, like pretending I had to hire someone to perform experiments on for a study on sickle cell anemia, a disease that is statistically more common in people who’s ancestors lived in malaria-ridden tropical and sub-tropical climates. But that’s a weak example at best, as race wouldn’t be the issue, presence of sickle cell anemia would be.

But I digress. Clearly, the world is full of people who actually care very deeply about the shade of their flesh, the shape of their face, and all the other myriad traits associated with a given race. And so long as you aren’t a dick about it, I call it no harm no foul. But I do find it strange that people worry about this. Perhaps that’s because I’m a honky, and was raised in a honky part of a honky city.

Continue reading

Chickens, Eggs, and Exorcists

Back when I was a lad, I had a thing for horror novels. In fact, I imagined that one day I would write horror novels as a career. It wasn’t until years later that I published two short stories in a horror magazine and then read the other entries in the magazine that I changed this opinion. Horror, it dawned on me, was lame. However, in those formative years I read a tremendous amount of horror fiction from a variety of sources. One of my favorite sets of books was The Exorcist, and later Legion, by William Peter Blatty.

I’m pretty sure that it was Legion that tackled evolution, but I could be wrong. At any rate, I remember really enjoying the philosophical debates about evolution that are documented in the book. As a young Christian lad, they resounded with me, and the fact that the feeling the reader is left with includes a loving hand of God made that young Christian in me awful pleased. The one argument that stayed with me, and that I later came to recognize as fallacious, was the idea of the egg.

I’m going somewhere with this, trust me.

I’m stretching the ole’ gray matter back a long ways, but if I’m right in my remembrances, Kinderman talks about the incredible requirements of an egg. It would have to have a food source. It would have to have a bladder. It would have to be tough enough to protect but not so tough that the embryo could not escape. The embryo would need an egg tooth. And on and on and on, he listed the many things that an egg would need in order to succeed, and if any one of those features was not present, the embryo would die. Later in life I would learn that this is the argument from irreducible complexity.

Continue reading

This Is Not The End

Each and every one of us is a transitional creature. That’s one of those thoughts that changes how you think about evolution. As a kid I understood as most do that we had evolved from apes, but I didn’t, as I think most don’t, understand that the process wasn’t finished. Its easy to look at the wonder of human society and believe that we are the end product of everything; evolution, culture, understanding, you name it, we do it best. Or at least we do from our perspective. But as with all things, we can always do it better.

I used to teach a class in Systems Analysis to students who were studying computers, and one of the important tenets of systems analysis is that any system can always be iteratively refined and made different. The hope, of course, is that the system is made better, but anyone who has ever worked in the field knows that this is not always the case. Evolution is the systems analysis of life, with refinements happening in perpetuity on a tiny scale, but lacking an analyst who directs the changes.

The goal of evolution isn’t to get somewhere, achieve some perfect creature. Far from it, evolution is a process, not a path. Random minuscule mutations happen, and if they help then they may get passed down to future generations. That’s all there is.

Continue reading

Anger – The Adaptation Voted Most Likely To Succeed

Today, I am going to do something I never ever ever do. I’m going to talk out of my ass. Not literally, of course. I’ll be typing rather than talking, and typing out of my ass would cause a rather unpleasant effect on my keyboard. No, the talking out of my ass I intend to engage in is me pontificating on something I know nothing about, which probably makes up the lion’s share of my articles. So you’re used to it.

Last night I had a fabulous conversation with a friend of mine about a comment she had been fed in an anger management class. The instructor told her that anger is a secondary emotion. This is the teacher’s way of saying that anger comes from some outside stimulus. First we feel some other feeling, such as frustration or confusion, and it leads to anger. The argument presented was that we need to learn how to deal with the primary feelings such that we do not allow the secondary emotion to surface and create difficulty for us. We both agreed that while there might be some small amount of logic to this statement, it was ostensibly bullshit.

Continue reading

Colored Aphids And Invading Fungi

I just read the most interesting thing over at the Myrmecos web site about how the red pea aphids got their color. It turns out that research has found that the color is actually a lateral transfer of genetic material that took place who knows how long ago from fungi. In other words, some of the aphids are red/pink and some are not because some of them have a naturally occurring mutation that allows them to produce carotenoids. In a given population of pea aphids they will have both pink/red and green members. That’s an entirely uncommon situation, as usually selection will result in the mutation either succeeding and propagating throughout the population or failing and disappearing.

The chances of an organism becoming infected with a fungus and then incorporating some of the genes into it’s own are very minimal, and as Alex Wild (the author of the Myrmecos blog entry) points out, this is typically something we associate with viruses.

If you’ve never read Myrmecos before, it’s a gorgeous science blog that features some incredibly beautiful pictures of tiny creepy-crawlies, and this particular entry does not skimp out on the imagery. Enjoy!

Jim

Is Religion An Adaptation Or A By-Product?

I just finished reading some interesting words by PZ Myers about the topic of religion and whether it is an adaptation in our human development or a by-product of some¬†other process, and thought I’d share them. I have NOT read the document he is talking about in this article, but I’m hoping to squeeze it in sometime today.

I find the topic of morality particularly intriguing. As an atheist, I do not perceive myself to be any less moral than a religious person. In fact, given that I’m at least a moderately self-actualized person, I would have to assume my morals to be much more strong than those who would argue that the only reason they don’t act immorally is because of fear of divine retribution. However, the notion always seems to be that morality is a function of religion.

This has never sat well with me, even before I lost my faith. I knew many people who were faithful but terrible people, and I knew many people who were good but had no real faith, ranging from the twice-a-year faithful to agnostics and atheists. The way I saw it, if my religion and the strength of that faith were the things that made me a¬†moral person, then it stood to reason that people who didn’t have those things would also not have as strong a morality. But this was clearly not the case.

So at a young age I saw that there was no significant relationship between morals and faith, but to this day I have people proclaiming the opposite. Now we have this research which, if I read PZ’s take on it correctly, takes that idea that religion/morality link to task, implying that morality is much deeper than religiosity. Interesting stuff.

Jim