• Home
  • About Alex Wild
  • Articles
  • Galleries
  • Myrmecology News

Myrmecos Blog

the little things matter

Feeds:
Posts
Comments
« Friday Beetle Blogging: Araeoschizus Ant Beetle
Beware the Cow-Killer »

The Fair Treatment of Intelligent Design

April 18, 2008 by myrmecos

Ben Stein’s propaganda flick Expelled comes out today. Since other people have hashed the film to death, I won’t write about Expelled except to make the following observation.
evopubs1.jpg

This is a graph showing the number of technical publications indexed in PubMed under the search terms “evolution” and “intelligent design”. I threw in a third search term, “biochemistry”, just to give a sense of how evolution sits relative to another large research field. Basically, the graph measures the productivity of a field in terms of scientific publications. In 2007, scientists produced 17 technical publications every day that employed or tested some aspect of evolutionary theory.

See the blue flatline at the bottom? That’s the productivity of intelligent design. It is dead weight.

The point of Expelled seems to be that intelligent design proponents are being treated unfairly. I don’t agree. They’re being treated about as fairly as one would expect for people that have produced no tangible results. If they want equal time in the classroom, they’ll need to put in equal time at the lab bench.

(And what’s with the death spiral of biochemistry 1995-1998? Did all those folks start keywording with proteomics? Can we expect Ben Stein to narrate a movie lamenting the surpression of biochemistry?)

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook

Like this:

Like Loading...

Related

Posted in Current Events, Science | Tagged ben stein, Biology Links, Evolution, expelled, intelligent design | 10 Comments

10 Responses

  1. on April 19, 2008 at 2:48 am oceallaigh

    Did all those folks start keywording with proteomics?

    “Molecular biology”, I’ll bet.

    Sadly, I think Ben & Co. would turn your stats to their profit. “Of course intelligent design has no productivity, as measured by those who benefit by making sure that the rules of measurement exclude ID.”

    As I’m sure you know, most argumentation in this world is based on persuasion, not analysis – and especially not analysis based on the principle of falsification. If this were not so, OJ Simpson would be behind bars today. Analysis based on falsification (one way of talking about the “scientific method”, I guess) is, I propose, an “iron curtain” preventing people with sexy but doubtfully workable ideas from making money off of them.

    Fortunately for Ben & Co., the scientific method is hard to master. Most people can’t get their heads around it, or won’t try. This circumstance opens the door for those who argue by persuasion. Which works well in the arts and in politics, where “he who shouts loudest has the floor”, and the winner stacks the house with loyalists to his ideology. Whether or not it actually works, Mr. President.

    The productivity that matters to Ben & Co. is the 75%(!!!) of Americans who assert that some form of creationism should be taught in American public schools. Which means that, once again, evolution will be gutted in, or pulled from, America’s science textbooks. Ben & Co. will have succeeded, once again, in pinning the label of Frankenstein on the one segment of humanity that has the analytical tools to pull that humanity out of the various planet-threatening messes that it’s gotten itself into.

    Sigh.


  2. on April 19, 2008 at 9:02 am Gene

    Good job on the graph, and good points. I’m a fan of ants (and spiders and dragonflies) myself. I’m glad to see the film is being panned.

    cheers,
    Gene


  3. on April 19, 2008 at 9:57 am James

    You make an interesting point here. The greatest weakness of the ID camp is their lack of foundational research. I am sorry to have offended you with my post, although I think you misunderstood my point. I have added a sentence for clarity.


  4. on April 19, 2008 at 10:02 am myrmecos

    James-

    Your post didn’t at all offend me- I quite liked it. It’s Ben Stein’s movie I was referring to. Sorry that I wasn’t clear.


  5. on April 19, 2008 at 10:33 am James

    By the way, your photographs are really awesome. My wife and I were admiring them. I also like the name “myrmecos,” mostly since I know what it means, but not because I’ve ever studied ants, just Greek.


  6. on April 19, 2008 at 5:40 pm Matt

    Yeah, I’d have to agree that ID hasn’t been a particularly productive theory, and that it’s really not clear that it could be. Evolution provides a lot of general framework that becomes useful for asking and answering many other scientific questions. I do think ID asks some interesting questions, specifically, “Is it possible to scientifically determine whether an organism has been designed?” However, to me it’s really unclear whether this question could ever be answered, and it doesn’t seem likely to lead to much more fruitful research.


  7. on April 20, 2008 at 2:27 am Cheno

    I would apologize for cluttering your blog, but now that I’ve found it (via your comments on consanguinity), i will probably subscribe because it is rather fascinating. I will apologize for not having a blog where you might reply to any of my opinions. I read faster than i write, and don’t really have anything interesting to say. my email address is correct though, should i err.
    there is no polite way that i have found to tell someone they approached statistics wrongly. A good deal of the past 4 years of my life has been given to the study of how to correctly apply statistics to reality in order to gain something that is, if not true, honest. please spend the time to study the correct use of statistics, or do not use them. I would pick the later, because bugs are far more interesting than statistics. After all, you have a fascinating blog, and i don’t.


  8. on April 20, 2008 at 2:28 am Cheno

    P.S. – i agree with james! kudos on the photography!


  9. on April 20, 2008 at 10:56 am Longing for Holiday

    My sense (and I can’t say this for sure) is that many folks who really do believe in Intelligent Design (in the sense that there’s a God behind creation) are embarrased by the folks who are on the forefront of the ID side of the debate. These people really do believe that the Bible is God’s truth (or perhaps they adhere to another theistic belief), but they are not stupid and realize that science of course can’t be all wrong. They believe that the truth of science will one day fully coinicide with the truth of the Bible and look for ways to find compatabilty. For example, man of the ID folks are also “young earthers,” who are adamant that the world was created in 7 24 hour days. But this has not been the position of many many of the church leaders through the centuries and of many thinking Christians today. There’s absolutely no reason to interpret the Bible this way and there is plenty of Biblical evidence (let’s start with the fact that the sun and moon don’t appear til the fourth day, so what lights separated day and night before? not necessarily any 24 hours… not to mention that the word often translated day can also be translated age…). It’s a shame to me that the more strident members of both sides of this argument are who we hear in the public squre, when there is in fact a middle ground that few hear or know about (like the physics professors who had a great impact on my faith).


  10. on April 22, 2008 at 6:43 am kevin z

    Since Cheno is so knowlegable about statistics, perhaps he can enlighten us as to where Alex used statistics in the post, and offer suggestions for improvement? All I see is data presentation.

    I don’t think its clear that much is ecology, evolution and other biological fields are really just applied statistics. For example, I have taken more graduate level statistic coursework than graduate level biology coursework during my tenure as a grad student.



Comments are closed.


  • This blog is an archive; the Myrmecos blog has moved.

    Please update your bookmarks!
  • Alex’s Galleries

    alexanderwild.com

  • Recent Photos

    # SaloméArtificial Street Photography 1Kettering, Ohio, 2022IN WINTER'S GRIPVegetazione metallica.Un regard hypnotisant / A mesmerizing gaze
    More Photos
  • Biology Links

    • Tree of Life
    • Understanding Evolution
  • Blogroll

    • Ainsley Vs Livejournal
    • Ammonite
    • Anna’s Bee World
    • Archetype
    • Arthropoda blog
    • Backyard Arthropod Project
    • Beetles in the Bush
    • biodiversity in focus
    • Bug Dreams
    • Bug Eric
    • Bug Girl’s Blog
    • Burrard-Lucas Photoblog
    • Catalogue of Organisms
    • Creature Cast
    • Dan Heller
    • Debbie's Insect Blog
    • Dechronization
    • Drawing the MotMot
    • Entomoblog
    • Evolving Thoughts
    • Fall to Climb
    • Generant
    • Historias de Hormigas
    • Life on Six Legs
    • Macromite
    • microecos
    • mirmekolozi
    • myrmecoid
    • Myrmician
    • Natural Imagery
    • Nature in the Ozarks
    • NCSU Insect Blog
    • No Cropping Zone
    • omit needless words
    • Photo Synthesis
    • Princess Peppercloud
    • Science Blogs
    • Snail’s Tales
    • Stu Jenks
    • The Ant Hunter
    • The Ant Room
    • The Bug Whisperer
    • The Loom
    • This Week in Evolution
    • What's Bugging You?
    • Wild about Ants
    • Xenogere
  • Insect Links

    • Ant Farm Forum
    • Ant Insights
    • Antweb
    • Bug Squad
    • bugguide.net
    • Xerces Society
  • Photography Links

    • Canon Photography Forums
    • Digital Photography Review
    • DIY Photography
    • Igor Siwanowicz
    • Mark Plonsky
    • photo.net
    • Piotr Naskrecki
    • The Strobist
  • Popular Posts

    • Rover Ants (Brachymyrmex patagonicus), an emerging pest species
    • Specimen Request: Army/leafcutter/bullet ant queens for morphometrics
    • Friday Beetle Blogging: Nicrophorus orbicollis
    • Myrmecology enters the age of genomics
    • New Species: Coprophanaeus caroliae
    • Eureka! Heureka! An Astonishing New Ant!
    • Ants of the Paraná, then and now
    • Reader question: who discovered the sex of ant workers?
    • Army Ants of the North
    • My, what big eyes you have...
  • Recent Posts

    • This blog has moved.
    • Friday Beetle Blogging: The Hollyhock Weevil
    • The Friday Beetle will be late…
    • Bed bugs reach an all-time high
    • Answer to the Monday Night Mystery
  • Recent Comments

    • Donald Byron Johnson on Reader question: who discovered the sex of ant workers?
    • Anonymous on Update on the Rogue Taxonomist
    • Ant on Arizona Daily Star covers “Planet of the Ants”
    • Ga. Girl on Beware the Cow-Killer
    • Anonymous on Beware the Cow-Killer
  • Categories

  • Archives

  • animation Ants aphids arachnids Argentina arizona army ants art Bees beetles behavior biodiversity biology Biology Links bugs Canon carabidae coleoptera copyright Darwin desert diptera E. O. Wilson ecology entomology Evolution fail fire ants Flies formicidae genetics google haiku Harpegnathos imaging Insect Links Insects invasive species lighting Linepithema macro macrophotography macro photography Martialis media miniscule muppets music myrmecology mystery natural history Nature new species odontomachus Parasites Paratrechina pests pheidole Photography Photography business photoshop phylogenetics phylogeny Pogonomyrmex politics predation Scarabaeidae Science SEM social insects spiders Taxonomy termites travel wasps
  • Nature Blog Network
    Add to Technorati Favorites

    Follow this blog

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

WPThemes.


  • Follow Following
    • Myrmecos Blog
    • Join 91 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Myrmecos Blog
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Copy shortlink
    • Report this content
    • View post in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
%d bloggers like this: