Goodyear's Religious Beliefs vs. Evolution

Our minister of science continues to argue that his unwillingness to endorse the theory of evolution is not relevant to science policy. As quoted by the Globe and Mail:

My view isn’t important. My personal beliefs are not important.

I find this amazing. How can the minister of science’s views on the fundamental unifying theory of biology not be important?

I don’t expect him to understand the details of evolutionary theory or to have all of his personal beliefs vetted and religious views muted. However, I do expect him – as minister – to champion and support Canadian science, especially basic research. When our minister refuses to acknowledge the fundamental discoveries of science, our reputation is diminished.

There is also a legitimate – though rather exaggerated – concern that the minister’s views on the truth can influence policy and funding decisions. The funding councils are more than sufficiently independent to prevent any undue ministerial influence here. The real problem is an apparent distrust or lack of interest in basic research from the federal government.

CBC.ca | The National | High-Minded Hypocrisy

www.cbc.ca/national/…

Rex Murphy is great at this.

His main point is certainly right: we can’t have the many benefits of energy without consequence and the National Geographic neglected to show these benefits. However, I do think that Canadians need to be aware of the trade-offs we are making and mitigate – to the extent possible – threats to our environment. For most of us, energy just appears when we flip a switch or drive to the gas station.

I think the tar sands are an important Canadian resource and with careful stewardship their benefits could far exceed their costs. However, my sense is that current policies are not focussed on stewardship and we risk squandering the opportunities provided by the tar sands.

globeandmail.com: The latest outrage: Just say no

www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/s…

But here’s a surprise for Stephen Harper. We’re calling your bluff. This time we’re telling Ottawa: not so fast. Lots of Canadians are prepared to risk prosecution and defy the ban on funding Abdelrazik. Through an explicit civil disobedience project called Operation Fly Home, spearheaded by Mary Foster in Montreal, a first group of 115 Canadians have so far donated small sums to buy his air ticket home. All of us are making our names and addresses public, so the Mounties won’t have trouble finding us. Our crime? Paying $20 dollars or so to bring home a stranded fellow Canadian whose only crime is his name and religion.

“Operation Fly Home” is a great initiative in response to this bizarre government behaviour.

Fatal Distraction: Forgetting a Child in the Backseat of a Car Is a Horrifying Mistake. Is It a Crime? Gene Weingarten Reports.

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co…

This is horrifying:

“Death by hyperthermia” is the official designation. When it happens to young children, the facts are often the same: An otherwise loving and attentive parent one day gets busy, or distracted, or upset, or confused by a change in his or her daily routine, and just… forgets a child is in the car. It happens that way somewhere in the United States 15 to 25 times a year, parceled out through the spring, summer and early fall. The season is almost upon us.

Via Give Me Something to Read

Sure, science isnโ€™t that exciting. It tends to offer up steady, incremental bits of knowledge rather than miraculous cures, and there remain a lot of unknowns. But these voids need not be filled with fantasy and snake oil.

And, yes, Big Pharma and big business have had their scandals and excesses, but these have been exposed and denounced by the so-called establishment, and they do not negate the good.

Over time, there has emerged from this โ€œvast conspiracyโ€ pretty good health care.

globeandmail.com: The Internet has changed the nature of scientific debate

Daring Fireball: Observations, Complaints, Quibbles, and Suggestions Regarding the Safari 4 Public Beta Released One Week Ago, Roughly in Order of Importance

daringfireball.net/2009/03/s…

A great example of why I read Daring Fireball: strongly held and insightful opinions, backed by tremendous research and detail.

Death Sentences Review

Death Sentences by Don Watson is a wonderful book โ€“ simultaneously funny, scary, and inspiring โ€“ that describes how โ€œclichรฉs, weasel words, and management-speakโ€ are infecting public language.

The humour comes from Watsonโ€™s acerbic commentary and fantastic scorn for phrases like:

Given the within year and budget time flexibility accorded to the science agencies in the determination of resource allocation from within their global budget, a multi-parameter approach to maintaining the agencies budgets in real terms is not appropriate.

The book is scary because it makes a strong argument for the dangers of this type of language. Citizens become confused and disinterested, customers become jaded, and people loose their love for language. Also, as a public servant I see this kind of language every day and often find myself struggling to avoid banality and cliches (not to mention bullet points). We need more forceful advocates like Don Watson to call out politicians and corporations for abusing our language. This book certainly makes me want to try harder. And whatโ€™s more inspiring than struggling for a good cause against long odds?

The book also has a great glossary of typical weasel words with possible synonyms. So, Iโ€™m keeping the book in my office for quick reference.

In finance, you can never reduce risk outright; you can only try to set up a market in which people who donโ€™t want risk sell it to those who do. But in the CDO market, people used the Gaussian copula model to convince themselves they didnโ€™t have any risk at all, when in fact they just didnโ€™t have any risk 99 percent of the time. The other 1 percent of the time they blew up. Those explosions may have been rare, but they could destroy all previous gains, and then some.

Recipe for Disaster: The Formula That Killed Wall Street

Omnivore

After seventeen years as a vegetarian, I recently switched back to an omnivore. My motivation for not eating meat was environmental, since, on average, a vegetarian diet requires much less land, water, and energy. This is still the right motivation, but over the last year or so Iโ€™ve been rethinking my decision to not eat meat.

My concern was that Iโ€™d stopped paying attention to my food choices and a poorly considered vegetarian diet can easily yield a bad environmental outcome. In particular, modern agriculture now takes 10 calories of fossil fuel energy to produce a single calorie of food. This is clearly unsustainable. We cannot rely on non-renewable, polluting resources for our food, nor can we continue to transport food great distances โ€“ even if it is only vegetables. My unexamined commitment to a vegetarian diet was no longer consistent with environmental sustainability.

I think the solution is to eat local, organic food. This also requires eating seasonal food, but Canadian winters are horrible for local vegetables. This left me wanting to support local agriculture, but unable to restrict my diet. Returning to my original motivation to choose environmentally appropriate food convinced me it was time to return to being an omnivore. My new policy is to follow Michael Pollanโ€™s advice: โ€œEat food. Mostly plants. Not too much.โ€ In addition, Iโ€™ll favour locally grown, organic food and include small amounts of meat โ€“ which I hope will predominantly come from carefully considered and sustainable sources. Iโ€™ve also deciced that when faced with a dillema of choosing either local or organic, Iโ€™ll choose local. We need to support local agriculture and Iโ€™ll trade this for organic if necessary. Of course, in the majority of cases local and organic options are available, and Iโ€™ll choose them.

This is a big change and I look forward to exploring food again.

The best readers are obstinate. They possess a nearly inexhaustible persistence that drives them to read, regardless of the circumstances they find themselves in.

Despite the ubiquity of reading on the web, readers remain a neglected audience. Much of our talk about web design revolves around a sense of movement: users are thought to be finding, searching, skimming, looking.

A List Apart: Articles: In Defense of Readers