Thursday, February 22, 2007

 

Conservapedia

Bloggers over at Scienceblogs.com are commenting on Conservapedia's treatment of evolution. Predictably, contributors to the original Conservapedia article weren't evolution-friendly or knowledgeable. The article I viewed (4:00 pm CST on 2/22/07) was written by someone who obviously knows the science, but I'll be curious to see how long the article lasts. It states, for example, that "In general, controversy [about evolution] has centered on the philosophical, social, and religious implications of evolution, not on the science of evolution itself; the proposition that biological evolution occurs through the mechanism of natural selection is completely uncontested within the scientific community."

I don't think that kind of definition is going to last on a site that bills itself as an alternative to the "anti-Christian, anti-American" Wikipedia. The main evidence for this charge is that some entries on Wikipedia date events using "CE" instead of "AD." There are other, equally silly charges (28 of them), but none rise above the level of "British spelling is acceptable on Wikipedia; therefore, Wikipedia is anti-American."

Ever heard of Ugly Americans?

 

It's Dolly Day!

A group of intellectually adventurous Scottish veterinarians from the Roslind Institute announced, ten years ago, that they had successfully cloned a sheep using the DNA from an adult animal. Dolly, as she was named (the DNA came from a breast cell!) created a storm of controversy and stoked fears of Frankenmonsters running amok.

Since then, except for a calvacade of kooks (remember the Raelians?) and liars (Hwang Woo-suk of Korea), nothing much has happened. Research continues, but no freakish creatures are ordering lattes at Starbucks. Mice have been cloned, but no primates. No human spare parts industry manufactures lungs or toes.

Politicians have tried to use fear-mongering to gain political advantages. It's the usual suspects: Brownback, Weldon, and other conservative Republicans have proposed bills to stop embryonic stem cell research, and President Bush vetoed legislation that would have expanded federal research funding. Perhaps the Democrats will try again, but I don't know if they have enough votes to override a presidential veto.

What we desperately need is a definition of when human life begins. And while religious input is important, some completely unverifiable notions, like "ensoulment," shouldn't be allowed to kill all scientific attempts to combat disease and improve the quality of life for millions of people around the world.

Dolly became ill and was eventually put down. The life of a sheep isn't worth much, but should Dolly's life have been in vain?

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?