Schadenfreude: Sylvia Browne

I suppose this is going to make me a bad, bad person in some people's minds*, but my guess is that - like practically everything else she "predicted" - she didn't see it coming. Ah, well.

(*As usual, I await your emails of complaint, etc.)

Frederick Sanger, 1918-2013

You'd do better to read the entire L.A. Times obit, but one of the true giants of biochemisty is gone. Luckily, his life's work isn't.

And the prize goes to...

I fail to see how these two shouldn't have got the 2013 Nobel Prize in physics, but I'm sure someone will argue that point. I won't.

Nearly 50 years ago, Francois Englert of Belgium and Peter Higgs of the United Kingdom had the foresight to predict that the particle existed.

Now, the octogenarian pair share the Nobel Prize in physics in recognition of a theoretical brilliance that was vindicated by the particle's discovery last year.

The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences awarded the prize to them.

Higgs and Englert's theories behind the elusive Higgs boson explained what gives matter its mass.

The universe is filled with Higgs bosons. As atoms and parts of atoms zoom around, they interact with and attract Higgs bosons, which cluster around them in varying numbers.

Certain particles will attract larger clusters of Higgs bosons, and the more of them a particle attracts, the greater its mass will be.

The explanation helped complete scientists' understanding of the nature of all matter.

"The awarded theory is a central part of the Standard Model of particle physics that describes how the world is constructed," the Royal Swedish Academy said in a post on Twitter.

As is tradition, the academy phoned the scientists during the announcement to inform them of their win. They were unable to reach Higgs, for whom the particle is named.

The conversation with Englert was short and sweet. "I feel very well, of course," he said, when he heard the news. "Now, I'm very happy."

Deservedly so, I might add.

(Also on WTTFTG)

Texas SBoE: your tax dollars at wr0k

This is just so special:

At a Texas State Board of Education meeting last month, the Republican head of the school board defended the qualifications of a biology textbook review panelist who said that “creation science based on biblical principles should be incorporated into every biology book that is up for adoption.”

 SBOE chair Barbara Cargill defended the panelist, who is not a biologist but… a dietitian. Cargill defended another Creationism advocate on the panel, a businessman, because he has a degree in chemical engineering, saying that not enough biology teachers wanted to serve on the panel reviewing textbooks.

Which, it seems, is a bold-faced lie:

They might be well-qualified in their own professional fields, but they are no more qualified to review biology textbooks than a biologist would be qualified to review a mathematics or engineering textbook,” Dan Quinn of the Texas Freedom Network points out.

He also notes that Cargill’s claim that teachers didn’t step up to serve on the panels is baloney, as 140 of the 183 of the “individuals who applied or were nominated by State Board of Education members to serve as biology textbook reviewers” were educators, and the “vast majority of them have degrees and teaching experience specifically in biology." 

At least part of this bad joke is documented on video below:

On the other hand, educators specializing in biology (or - even worse - an actual biologist working in the field) might have good reason to stay away from working with the Texas SBoE since they've shown nothing resembling intellectual honesty in matters like this. It might be necessary to refute this ongoing nonsense, but it's hardly rewarding - unless you're really fond of filling up airsickness bags day after day, that is.

- See more at: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/texas-school-board-chair-hails-creationist-dietitian-and-businessman-biology-experts#sthash.rDpRPGVD.dpuf

State legislative attacks on evolution in science education since 2011: a rough guide (UPDATED)

Well, it's been roughly a year since I last did this, so here it is again. The more things change...

From the original post:

It took me a while to get around to this, and for obvious reasons; so many of these bills have been proposed since January 2011 that even writing up a brief list of them (with massive help from the NCSE's archives, of course) took a fairly long time to compile and edit. The following is a list of bills that either contains language attacking the teaching the Theory of Evolution (or that advocate "alternative theories" such as Intelligent Design) that have been proposed in state legislatures from January 2011 to the present; they also include information on who proposed the legislation, whether anthropocentric global warming (AGW)  or other scientific topics were also targeted and whether the bill has passed, was voted down or merely died in committee as a result of being tabled.

KENTUCKY House Bill 169: proposed by Tim Moore (R-26th district) on January 4, 2011; died in committee as of March 9th, 2011.

MISSOURI House Bill 195: proposed by Andrew Koenig (R-88th district) and 13 others on January 13th, 2011; died in the House Elementary and Secondary Education commitee as of May 13th, 2011.

OKLAHOMA SENATE BILL 554: prefiled by Josh Brecheen (R-6th district) on January 19th, 2011; died in committee on February 28th, 2011.

OKLAHOMA House Bill 1551: prefiled by Sally Kern (R-84th district) in January 2011; initially rejected in committee on February 22nd, 2011; reintroduced by Gus Blackwell (R-61st district) on February 20th, 2012; passed the House 56-12 on March 15th, 2012; died after being rejected by the Senate Education Committee. Bill also attacked academic discussion of AGW, abiogenesis and human cloning.

NEW MEXICO House Bill 302: introduced by Thomas A. Anderson (R-29th district) on February 1st, 2011;  died in committee on March 8th, 2011. Bill also attacked discussion of AGW, abiogenesis and human cloning.

TENNESSEE House Bill 368: introduced by Bill Dunn (R-16th district) on February 9th, 2011; passed the state House of Representatives by a 72-23 vote on March 16th, 2012; allowed to become law by Governor Bill Haslam without signature on April 10th, 2012. Bill also attacks discussion of AGW, abiogenesis and human cloning.

TENNESSEE Senate Bill 893: introduced by Bo Watson (R-11th district) on February 16th, 2011; passed the state Senate by a 24-8 vote on March 19th, 2012; allowed to become law by Governor Bill Haslam without signature on April 10th, 2012. Bill also attacks discussion of AGW, abiogenesis and human cloning.

FLORIDA Senate Bill 1854: introduced by Stephen R. Wise (R-5th district) on March 5th, 2011; died in committee on May 7th, 2011.

TEXAS House Bill 2454: introduced by Bill Zedler (R-96th district) and James White (R-12th district) on March 8th, 2011; died in the House Committee on Higher Education on May 30th, 2011.

NEW HAMPSHIRE House Bill 1148: prefiled by Jerry Bergevin (R-17th district) on December 21st, 2011; defeated 280-7 by House vote on March 16th, 2012. Also attempted to compel inclusion of the "political and ideological viewpoints (of  "theorists") and their position on the concept of atheism".

NEW HAMPSHIRE House Bill 1457: prefiled by Gary Hopper (R-7th district) and John Burt (R-7th district) on December 21st, 2011;  killed by voice vote in week previous to vote for HB 1148 above.

INDIANA Senate Bill 89: prefiled by Dennis Kruse (R-14th district) in December 2011; passed by the Senate by a 28-22 vote on January 30th, 2012; shelved by the House of Representatives in early February 2012.

MISSOURI HOUSE BILL 1227: introduced and sponsored by Rick Brattin (R-124th district) and five others on January 10th, 2012; died in committee on May 18th, 2012.

MISSOURI HOUSE BILL 1276: sponsored by Andrew Koenig (R-88th district) and 13 others on January 11th, 2012; died in committee on May 18th, 2012.

OKLAHOMA SENATE BILL 1742: prefiled in January 2012 by Josh Brecheen (R-6th district) in January 2012;  Bill also attacked AGW, abiogenesis and human cloning. Died in committee on March 1st, 2012.

ALABAMA HOUSE BILL 133: introduced on February 7th, 2012 by Blaine Galliher (R-30th district); died in committee on May 16th, 2012. Would have authorized "local boards of education to include released time religious instruction as an elective course for high school students.", including courses in "creation science".

OKLAHOMA HOUSE BILL 2341: a previously passed bill that was amended by Steve Russell (R-45th district) to include language identical to Oklahoma HB 1551 above; bill died when it was not brought to the floor for a vote in amended form on April 26th, 2012.

MONTANA HOUSE BILL 183: originally proposed by Clayton Fiscus (R-46th district) on November 5th, 2012. Originally had "intelligent design" language included which was later changed to an "encourage critical thinking regarding controversial scientific theories" gambit. 

TEXAS HOUSE BILL 285: prefiled on December 14th. 2012 by Bill Zedler (R-96th district). Specifically mentions "intelligent design" in text. Legislation died in committee on May 6th, 2013 on expiration of committee passage deadline. Bill tabled in committee on February 5th, 2013.

COLORADO HOUSE BILL 13-1089: introduced on January on January 16th, 2013 by Stephen Humphrey (R-House 48th) and Scott Renfroe (R-Senate 13th) and 10 others. Rejected in committee on February 4th, 2013. Bill also attacked AGW.

MISSOURI HOUSE BILL 79: introduced on January 16th, 2013 by Andrew Koenig (R-99th district) and 10 others. Died in committee on May 17th, 2013.

OKLAHOMA SENATE BILL 758 and HOUSE BILL 1674: prefiled by Josh Brecheen (R-6th Senate) and Gus Blackwell (R-61st House) on or around January 18th, 2013. Senate bill died in committee on February 25th, 2013; House bill died in March 14th, 2013 when a reading deadline in the Oklahoma House of Representatives was not met.

INDIANA HOUSE BILL 1283: introduced on January 23rd, 2013 by Jeff Thompson (R-28th district). Attempted to take a stealth "teach the controversy" approach and was introduced by the House sponsor of Senate Bill 89 above. Bill died on February 25th due to a missed reading deadline.

MISSOURI HOUSE BILL 291: introduced on January 24th, 2013 by Rick Brattin (R-58th district) and two others. Died in committee on May 17th, 2013 (see above).

ARIZONA SENATE BILL 1213: introduced primarily by Judy Burges (R-22nd district) and Chester Crandall (R-6th district) with 4 others as cosponsors on or around January 26th, 2013. Bill died on February 22nd, 2013 when it failed to be passed by its committee.

NOTE: although there have been separate bills proposed in state legislatures attacking the scientific basis for Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW), those bills (such as Kansas House Bill 2306) will have to be left for a separate post at a later date.(Also on WTTFTG)

Identity politics, Christian fundamentalist style

This is rich.

Ten to twenty years ago, proponents of this type of crap would be the exactly the same sort of people who'd bitch and whine if a similar strategy came from a left-leaning legal foundation, similarities in tactics be damned:

Ed Brayton:

In case you thought Kansas hadn’t had enough idiocy over science curricula in public schools, a group of fundamentalist Christians has filed a federal lawsuit to prevent the implementation of science standards on the grounds that they will teach things that are “inconsistent with the theistic religious beliefs” of the plaintiffs. The Pacific Justice Institute, which is representing the plaintiffs, said in a press release:

In addition to citing numerous areas of law that the standards violate, the complaint cites that the standards cause the state “to promote religious beliefs that are inconsistent with the theistic religious beliefs of plaintiffs, thereby depriving them of the right to be free from government that favors one religious view over another.”…
Brad Dacus, President of Pacific Justice Institute noted, “it’s an egregious violation of the rights of Americans to subject students—as young as five—to an authoritative figure such as a teacher who essentially tells them that their faith is wrong.” He continued, “it’s one thing to explore alternatives at an appropriate age, but to teach theory that is devoid of any alternative which aligns with the belief of people of faith is just wrong.”

 Brayton again, pointing out the silliness in all its glory:
:
Exactly! So they should immediately stop teaching that the earth is round because that would subject children of Flat Earth Society members to a “teacher who essentially tells them that their faith is wrong.” And heliocentricity has got to go too, since that will expose the children of geocentrists to a “teacher who essentially tells them that their faith is wrong.” There isn’t a single thing taught in any school that does not conflict with someone’s religious beliefs. That has precisely nothing to do with what ought to be taught in public schools.

Of course it doesn't.

Unfortunately, the truth of the matter is this - ignorance can be educated out of people; willful stupidity is a terminal condition.

(Also on WTTFTG)

Buffoon, uninterrupted

Yesterday's post on the Texas State Board of Education's hearing concerning science standards (translation' The ToE, primarily) mentioned that Don McLeroy got a crack at proving that he is, indeed, still Don McLeroy.

From the link at Right Wing Watch:

One of the first people to speak was Don McLeroy, a former chairman of the State Board of Education who was prominently featured in the documentary The Revisionaries. While most people were allowed just two minutes to speak, the board let McLeroy go on for over ten minutes in a bizarre speech in which he argued that the current textbooks teaching evolution should be approved because their evidence is so “weak” that children will realize that the theory of evolution is just “words” and a “just so story," and thereby strikes a "final blow" to the theory.

WARNING: that's this thing, right here. Consider yourselves warned. I take no responsibility for any noticeable decline in your overall intelligence as a result of watching this with the sound on.

And of course, a certain scene from an Adam Sandler film needs to be added; luckily, it doesn't actually feature Adam Sandler.

Texas SBoE hearings on science textbook standards

The Texas Freedom Network helpfully posted a live blog of the State Board of Education hearings on textbook standards, and although they characterized it as a "lopsided victory for science" there was plenty of testimony by people who wouldn't know the meaning of the word "science" if it...well, free free to insert the cliche of your choice. It also Included testimony by one (very un-) usual suspect:

2:28 - Don McLeroy, former SBOE chair and leader of the creationist faction when the board adopted the controversial science curriculum standards in 2009, is about to testify. McLeroy lost re-election to current member Thomas Ratliff of Mount Pleasant in the Republican primary in 2010.

2:30 - McLeroy claims that textbooks are “filled with dogmatic” support for evolution. But he says the board should still vote to adopt the textbooks because they will somehow destroy evolution (“strike a major blow to the teaching of evolution”). Huh? He claims that while the textbooks claim solid evidence for evolution, McLeroy says, the books actually don’t do so. Yeah, sure. If it makes you feel better to believe that, Don.

 2:32 - What we see around us supports what the Bible says, McLeroy says. He claims even the textbook chapters on evolution supports what the Bible says.

 2:34 - McLeroy is essentially arguing that the textbooks make such weak cases for evolution that the only alternative is what the Bible says. (“It’s weak!”) Interestingly, the creationists serving on the textbook review teams seem to disagree. Their reviews are filled with objections that the textbooks claim that evidence shows that evolution is well-established, mainstream science.

2:38 - Thomas Ratliff, who defeated McLeroy in 2010, asks McLeroy to try explaining again. McLeroy says students will see so little evidence for evolution in the textbooks that they will think that God didn’t use evolution.

 2:40 - And with that, McLeroy’s fascinating (and nonsensical) testimony ends.

Seriously, where do they find people like The Deranged Dentist? And can we actually send him back?

Big news on the HIV vaccine front

Normally, the use of the word "vaccine" in one of my posts would usually presage my bringing up  yet another chunk of anti-vax woo being expounded by someone else jumping on that crowded bandwagon of idiots (for example, see the bizarre nonsense from Louie Gohmert, below), but not today.

From scienceblog.com:

Sumagen Canada Inc and Western University announced today that the Phase I Clinical Trial (SAV CT 01) of the first and only preventative HIV vaccine based on a genetically modified killed whole virus (SAV001-H) has been successfully completed with no adverse effects in all patients (emphasis mine). Antibody production was also boosted after vaccination.

Being a realist on this issue, I realize that this hardly a well-deserved death knell for HIV/AIDS; only a completely giddy optimist would believe that. But it's a promising start, for reasons that Medical Daily lays out here:

Since the virus was characterized in 1983, pharmaceutical companies and academic institutions around the world have attempted, yet consistently failed, to develop a vaccine. What is unique about (Dr. Chil-Yong) Kang’s vaccine is its use of a killed-whole HIV-1, which is similar to the vaccines developed for polio, influenza, and rabies. HIV-1 is also genetically engineered; this raises its safety profile and the possibility of it being produced in large quantities.

Anti-vax hysteria of a different, possibly even stupider kind

Shorter Louie Gohmert: "Hey, I want to get in on the anti-vaccination bandwagon that Jenny McCarthy and Andrew Wakefield are riding on, and I know just how to do it"!

Just for comparison's sake, this video seems to be more...er...coherent.

Georgia on my mind (just not for a good reason)

This data from the NCSE website is more than a bit disturbing, to say the least:

A new poll (PDF) of Georgia voters suggests that creationism is popular in the state. Asked "Would you say you believe more in creationism or evolution," 53% of respondents preferred creationism, 29% preferred evolution, and 18% were not sure.

I guessed I really shouldn't be surprised, since this is the bible belt we're talking about: I hardly expected the numbers to be the reverse. But 53% to 29%? Really? In 2013?

On the other hand, this is a state where people like Paul Broun get elected without so much as token opposition. An object lesson in the failure of congressional politics on the local level, I guess, but that's what happens when you let the terminally uninformed get their hands on elected office so easily. In a district that includes the University of Georgia, no less. 

Education in a backward, Third World country named Texas

You'd think that the previous removal of arch-cretin Don McLeroy from the Texas State Board of Education in a primary election might count for something in this day and age, but apparently it didn't. From the Texas Freedom Network:

It looks like the Lone Star State’s reputation as a hotbed of anti-science fanaticism is about to be reinforced. At least six creationists/”intelligent design” proponents succeeded in getting invited to review high school biology textbooks that publishers have submitted for adoption in Texas this year. The State Board of Education (SBOE) will decide in November which textbooks to approve. Those textbooks could be in the state’s public school science classrooms for nearly a decade.

Among the six creationist reviewers are some of the nation’s leading opponents of teaching students that evolution is established, mainstream science and is overwhelmingly supported by well over a century of research. Creationists on the SBOE nominated those six plus five others also invited by the Texas Education Agency to serve on the biology review teams. We have been unable to determine what those other five reviewers think about evolution.
Although 28 individuals got invites to review the proposed new biology textbooks this year, only about a dozen have shown up in Austin this week for the critical final phase of that review. That relatively small overall number of reviewers could give creationists even stronger influence over textbook content. In fact, publishers are making changes to their textbooks based on objections they hear from the review panelists. And that’s happening essentially behind closed doors because the public isn’t able to monitor discussions among the review panelists themselves or between panelists and publishers. The public won’t know about publishers’ changes (or the names of all the review panelists who are in Austin this week) until probably September. Alarm bells are ringing.

The TFN link has a full list of the intellectual lightweights in question, but it's entirely unsurprisingly that most of them are either shills for Intelligent Design (one of them - namely, Raymond Bohlin - is a research fellow of the Discovery Institute) or are avowed, open creationists. Only one (Richard White) seems less than enthusiastic about jumping up and down about his ID/creationist affiliations despite advocating the same "teach the controversy" nonsense that his comrades in arms are far more open about.

As it is, this is going to be a long, hard march to November. Then the real silliness begins.

(Also on WTTFTG)

Smokin' the creationist bluegrass

It used to be that you had to make stuff like this up, mostly for the sake of parody or research for a play (a point to be brought up later). Not anymore, though:

Supporters and critics of Kentucky’s new science education standards clashed over evolution and climate change Tuesday amid a high-stakes debate on overhauling academic content in public schools.

The article (quoted from the original at cincinnati.com, by the way) continues:

"Students in the commonwealth both need and deserve 21st-century science education grounded in inquiry, rich in content and internationally benchmarked,” said Blaine Ferrell, a representative from the Kentucky Academy of Sciences, a science advocacy group that endorses the standards.

 Dave Robinson, a biology professor at Bellarmine University, said neighboring states have been more successful in recruiting biotechnology companies, and Kentucky could get left behind in industrial development if students fail to learn the latest scientific concepts.

Now, those are perfectly reasonable points made by perfectly reasonable people working in academic fields (or advocating for them) that have considerable relevance to the subject of science education.

Now comes the bad part.

But the majority of comments during the two-hour hearing came from critics who questioned the validity of evolution and climate change and railed against the standards as a threat to religious liberty, at times drawing comparisons to Soviet-style communism.

One parent, Valerie O’Rear, said the standards promote an “atheistic world view” and a political agenda that pushes government control.

Matt Singleton, a Baptist minister in Louisville who runs an Internet talk-radio program, called teachings on evolution a lie that has led to drug abuse, suicide and other social afflictions.

“Outsiders are telling public school families that we must follow the rich man’s elitist religion of evolution, that we no longer have what the Kentucky Constitution says is the right to worship almighty God,” Singleton said. “Instead, this fascist method teaches that our children are the property of the state.”

At one point, opponent Dena Stewart-Gore of Louisville also suggested that the standards will marginalize students with religious beliefs, leading to ridicule and physiological harm in the classroom, and create difficulties for students with learning disabilities.“The way socialism works is it takes anybody that doesn’t fit the mold and discards them,” she said, adding that “we are even talking genocide and murder here, folks.”

Yep, all of the usual bizarre fundamentalist/YEC/Tea Party tics are there for the taking, if you actually want them: misused snarl words like "fascism" and "socialism", unverified anecdotal assertions about how evolution leads to "drug abuse, suicide and other social afflictions" (and I'm sure that Mr. Singleton actually has case studies in his possession that can actually prove those anecdotes, right?) and a whole slew of  accompanying gibberish that makes me wonder if any of the aforementioned speakers  have cracked open a book on science past the age of 18, much less read any of it.

Speaking of gibberish:

At one point, opponent Dena Stewart-Gore of Louisville also suggested that the standards will marginalize students with religious beliefs, leading to ridicule and physiological harm in the classroom, and create difficulties for students with learning disabilities.“The way socialism works is it takes anybody that doesn’t fit the mold and discards them,” she said, adding that “we are even talking genocide and murder here, folks.”

What?

That's the way socialism works?  Funny, but what that mushwit just described is pretty much how something like bullying works. Of course, Ms. Stewart-Gore is one of those people who probably thinks it's perfectly okay if non-Christian students are bullied for their religious beliefs, but that thought probably never popped into her head when she used the term "religious".

Likewise, the assertion that teaching real science will "create difficulties for students with learning disabilities" seems to be based on the singularly odd belief that students with learning disabilities (a dangerous, one-size-fits-all term of convenience if there ever was one) are one uniform blob of stereotypical mentally challenged gimps who can't learn anything, whether it has to do with biology or tying their own shoes. It's as if the kids who are wheelchair-bound are being thrown in the same room with those suffering from dyslexia, hyperactivity or ADD and are all classified as uneducable as a result.

Yes, people actually believe this shit. And no, I couldn't think of a word more poetic than "shit", since that's the most straightforward way of classifying this nonsense.

As mentioned before, this stuff could be the subject of a play. It has been in the past. Reading the original version of Inherit the Wind is entirely relevant. Inherit, incidentally, came out back in 1955, at the tail-end of the McCarthy era.

Feeling intellectually threatened, yet?

(Also on WTTFTG)

Fossils, fossils and yet more fossils

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome Nasutoceratops to the fold:

This year's sensation from Utah might well be another ceratopsian, Nasutuceratops titusi, known from an almost complete skull and an associated left forelimb, as well as skull fragments from two other individuals. Some skin impressions were also found with the forelimb. Nasutuceratops is still a nomen nudum (“naked name”), meaning it has not been officially and formally described in a published scientific journal yet. It has been named by Eric Karl Lund (advisor: Scott Sampson) in his Master of Science Geology thesis submitted to the faculty of the University of Utah in 2010. In a comprehensive phylogenetical analysis, this short snouted long horned centrosaurine ceratopsian was found to be closely related to the contemporary Avaceratops lammersi from Montana.

Add to this the fact that there's new evidence that anyone trying to ride a T-Rex might've made a big mistake and the whole YEC "humans co-existed with dinosaurs!" idiot lobby might have to spend a whole thirty seconds or so wrestling with intellectual inadequacy issues before posting their next  non-response to actual scientific research.    

News travels slow in Louisiana, I see...

Shorter Louisiana House of Representatives concerning the Balanced Treatment for Creation-Science and Evolution-Science Act.: "it don't matter if the Supreme Court said it's illegal back in 1981 in Edwards v. Aguillard - we're still keepin' it on the books! Yeeehah!"

Prediction: one of these days, they'll be downright scandalized that a Civil Rights Act was enacted on the Federal level back in 1964.

Better late than never: the Pigasus Awards

Okay, I admit it. I've been busy. But that's no reason not to finally get around to posting the results of the latest James Randi Educational Foundation Pigasus Awards, right?

My congratulations to Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski, the Pumpkin Hollow Retreat Center, SyFy, Alex Jones and Dr. Mehmet Oz for choosing to step in it hard and deep. Your hard work at fostering differing forms of woo and complete bullshit are a cautionary lesson in gullibility and a source of unintentional humor for the rest of us.

(Also on WTTFTG)

Higgs. Yes, *Higgs*.

Earlier in the week, there was some degree of confusion as to whether CERN had actually discovered the Higgs Boson (or the "God particle", if you so choose); apparently, they did:

We observe in our data clear signs of a new particle, at the level of 5 sigma, in the mass region around 126 GeV. The outstanding performance of the LHC and ATLAS and the huge efforts of many people have brought us to this exciting stage,” said ATLAS experiment spokesperson Fabiola Gianotti, “but a little more time is needed to prepare these results for publication.”

"The results are preliminary but the 5 sigma signal at around 125 GeV we’re seeing is dramatic. This is indeed a new particle. We know it must be a boson and it’s the heaviest boson ever found,” said CMS experiment spokesperson Joe Incandela. “The implications are very significant and it is precisely for this reason that we must be extremely diligent in all of our studies and cross-checks."

“It’s hard not to get excited by these results,” said CERN Research Director Sergio Bertolucci. “ We stated last year that in 2012 we would either find a new Higgs-like particle or exclude the existence of the Standard Model Higgs. With all the necessary caution, it looks to me that we are at a branching point: the observation of this new particle indicates the path for the future towards a more detailed understanding of what we’re seeing in the data.”

(Also on WTTFTG)

Creationism in state legislatures: same old same old

It's been a while, but the anti-science legislation mills that exist on the state legislature level are back in action as usual. To wit:

Missouri: House Bill 179 (primarily sponsored by Andrew Koenig [R-District 99] who was also responsible for House Bill 1276 from last January) was introduced to the Missouri House of Representatives on January 16th. Unsurprisingly, the language of the new bill seems just a little reminiscent of the earlier one. 

Colorado: House Bill 13-1089 was introduced on the same day by cosponsors Stephen Humphrey (R-House District 48) and Scott Renfroe (R-Senate District 13)  and regurgitates the usual boilerplate about "respectfully (exploring) scientific questions and learn about scientific evidence related to biological and chemical evolution, global warming, and human cloning." It's as if merely repeating those words in every one of these bills will somehow cause them to get passed by accident. It's also the first time a pro-creationism bill was proposed in the Colorado legislature since 1972.

Oklahoma: Not to be outdone, the state with one of the worst records in similar legislation attacking  the biological sciences saw the introduction of two more bills, namely Senate Bill 758 (Sponsored by Josh Brecheen [R-District 6], who was also responsible for Senate Bill 554 in 2011 and Senate Bill 1742 in 2012) and House Bill 1674 (sponsored by Gus Blackwell [R-61], who also sponsored the revival of 2011's House Bill 1551 in 2012). What's surprising here is the lack of Sally Kern's hand in promoting this latest slew of bills; she's practically made a career out of it.

The really frightening thing here actually isn't the bills themselves, since most probably won't make it out of committee and certainly none will survive a court challenge. The really terrifying fact is that politicians continue to do this for all the usual reasons (pandering to a still virulent conservative evangelical voting bloc, for example) despite the fact that just like Flat Earthers, Holocaust deniers and Birthers their obvious quackery just gets more and more unintentionally funny (while remaining disturbing for its anti-intellectual tone) with time.

UPDATE: this is somewhat old news, but the Oklahoma bills are effectively dead - at least for now.


(Also in WTTFTG)