4 March 2009; after school edition (er make that early morning)

Note: I got an idea for a paper that I’ve been working on off-and-on for a year or two; the idea came to me when I explained something in class. I’ll have to get on it.

I am delinquent in my research duties; I need to get one finished paper to the referee, one referee’s job done and to write up my ideas on this newer idea.

Scientists, Religion, Society and Misconceptions
The Vatican is clearly annoyed by Richard Dawkins. Unfortunately, they aren’t savvy enough to know what they are annoyed about:

A Vatican cardinal said Tuesday that the Catholic Church does not stand in the way of scientific realities like evolution, though he described as “absurd” the atheist notion that evolution proves there is no God.

Cardinal William Levada, head of the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, reiterated church teaching about faith and science at the start of a Vatican-sponsored conference marking the 150th anniversary of Charles Darwin’s “The Origin of Species.”

. . .

He said that while the Vatican did not exclude any area of science, it did reject as “absurd” the atheist notion of biologist and author Richard Dawkins and others that evolution proves there is no God.

No. Dawkins claims that the evidence from evolution would indicated that we evolved without a set design in mind. Dawkins also claims that it is impossible to prove that there is no god, just as it is impossible to prove that the Invisible Pink Unicorn doesn’t exist.

In short, there is no need to hypothesize the existence of a god.

True, there are many Catholic philosophers and scientists who understand this, but I do wonder about some of the more pious higher-ups.

Cosmic Variance has an interesting take on things: first they react with amusement at this mini-movement to get young people to wear “ex-something bad” t-shirts.

I have my own ideas:

“ex Bayesian”. “ex Republican”. “ex Creationist”. “ex Fundamentalist”. “ex spandex on women lover.” “ex Supply Side Economist”. “ex anti-Keynesian Economist”.

Cosmic Variance has another post:

Well, it seems that (influenced by Sean, I’m sure) Maureen Dowd has picked up on John McCain’s twitter feed, and has placed yet another mocking stab at science in the mainstream press. (”Catfish and grape genetics”? Ha ha ha! “Promotion of astronomy”? Bwah!)

The specific line from McCain’s feed is the sarcastic “nothing says new jobs for average Americans like investing in astronomy”. And I think this is the essence of why scientific projects continue to be held up for derision.

Simply, most people assume science has absolutely nothing to do with them. Nobody blinks an eye at massive building projects that funnel money to construction workers, even though construction accounts for only 5% of the non-farm employment in the US. However, even though the “average american” is highly unlikely to work in construction, they at least imagine that they could.

In contrast, science is perceived as something that is done by an elite group of people that “average americans” could never hope to join, or even meet. So, it’s not that the government’s money is going to someone else, it’s that it seems to be going to someone they could never, ever be. I’ve always found it terribly sad that scientists are almost universally cast as a tribe of “others”, so distinct from “average americans” that they cease to be realistic aspirational figures. Pro-basketball players are equally unusual and elite in their physical attributes, training, and skill sets, but that doesn’t stop generation of kids wanting to grow up and play in the NBA. In contrast, scientists often come across as “born that way”, and not as the end products of rigorous training that a large fraction of smarter-than-average people could engage in. (And note that it’s not just the fault of the nebulous “media” — in their quest to climb to the top of the scientific heap, plenty of scientists cultivate an aura of “impressiveness”; while this may be useful for their individual careers, it can be plenty demoralizing for those on the lower rungs, who are questioning if they have what it takes.)

The article goes on to say that the public sees a disconnect between investment in basic science (e. g., the “bear DNA research” that McCain mocked, or the “fruit fly research” that Palin mocked; yes Senator Proxmire (D) was notorious for this sort of nonsense as well)

Humor/yoga humor: Even an idiot can practice yoga. Follow the link to see the cartoon; it is pretty funny.

Politics Follow the bouncing Rush Limbaugh.

President Obama’s Honeymoon: how long will it last?

Right now 84 percent of the public thinks that Obama inherited this economic mess. However patience will not last forever. The good news is that evidently the public at large might be more patient than the professional economists, according to Nate Silver.

Of course, that doesn’t stop Republicans from trying to pin the mess on Obama. What his helpful is that they don’t have coherent leadership in place; at this time they are a pathetic, ragtag bunch. Even better, they don’t see themselves as being at all to blame.

You might enjoy this “ha ha ha Republicans” rant from a local liberal blogger; note from the comments that the local Republicans appear to be every bit as clueless as the leadership.