Science, AntiScience and Geology

Earth Magazine Article July 2011

2011-06-08T18:31:00.000-05:00

Steve Newton of the National Center for Science Education has a very nice piece coming out in next month's issue of Earth. The article is entitled "Creationism Creeps into Conferences: Are creationists taking geologists for a ride?". The article discusses events that took place during the 2010 meeting of the Geological Society of America national meeting in Denver. The article focuses on a field trip led by young earth creationist 'scholars' to Garden of the Gods. It is even handed and compliments the leaders on a nice field trip (even if their thinly disguised motives are clear). It also mentions at the end, and exchange between myself and creationist Marcus Ross.

I don't know if Geological conferences are the only place these things happen, but creationists have been welcome at both AGU and GSA (our biggest conferences) for years and as far as I know there is no movement to limit their participation. I think that's a good thing since they could claim censorship (ala the now bankrupt "expelled"). I do think that when they choose to participate, they should also realize that they will be challenged if they speak from two sides of the coin. Marcus Ross can't make a living out of claiming that he has scientific evidence for a 6000 year old earth and then claim he also has good evidence for a millions of years old ammonite!

Anyway, it's a good read and the magazine does a nice job.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Senator Wise Evolution Bill

2011-03-11T10:37:00.000-05:00

Senator Wise singles out evolution for critical analysis, but the real question is what is he really aiming for? The Sunshine State Standards ALREADY MANDATE that all science is critically evaluated and that includes evolution. Consider the standards as written:

Standard 1: The Practice of Science ...C: Scientific argumentation is a necessary part of scientific inquiry and plays an important role in the generation and validation of scientific knowledge.
Benchmark: SC.912.N.1.3 Recognize that the strength or usefulness of a scientific claim is evaluated through scientific argumentation, which depends on critical and logical thinking, and the active consideration of alternative scientific explanations to explain the data presented.

So it's right there in the Sunshine State Standards. Why do we need to single out evolution in a bill that includes a whole lot of hokey nonsense to make the true goal (teaching creationism) somehow more palatable. Consider too that the standards state very clearly:

Standard 15: Diversity and Evolution of Living Organisms A. The scientific theory of evolution is the fundamental concept underlying all of biology. B. The scientific theory of evolution is supported by multiple forms of scientific evidence.
Benchmark: SC.912.L.15.1Explain how the scientific theory of evolution is supported by the fossil record, comparative anatomy, comparative embryology, biogeography, molecular biology, and observed evolutionary change.

Again examination of the evidence is mandated in the Science standards so Senator Wise is merely spending taxpayer money on a nonsensical bill that is really a stealth bill for getting religious ideas (HIS OWN RELIGIOUS IDEAS) into our classrooms! Don't we have more important things to worry about here in Florida, Senator Wise?

Cheers

Joe Meert

In Florida... Teachers get ready to take one up the butt

2011-03-10T18:50:00.000-05:00

So not only is the conservative house and senate now intent on all kinds of silly changes to the teaching standards, they also are now going to assure that potential teachers steer well clear of the state. The legislature is fast-tracking a bill that will (a) tie teacher's salaries to standardized tests and (b) eliminate tenure in favor of yearly contracts. The arguments made by the republicans are that by rewarding good teachers, more of the good teachers will want to come to Florida and teach. Sounds good in a perfect world, but Florida is not a perfect world and teaching is not a perfect profession. So let's look how this might actually affect teachers in the state. Consider:

(1) Teachers in Florida:Average salary is about $43,000 . The national average is somewhat higher, but as usual it's tough to compare state to state as cost of living factors in. The site linked above puts Florida about mid-way in terms of comfort level with that average salary. Someone has to be in the middle, so why not Florida, right?

(2) So given that Florida is right in the middle in terms of salary and comfort level, what's going to attract better teachers? The legislature seems to think that teachers are going to flock to Florida for a guaranteed one year (ok 9 month) salary with the hope that they can teach to the test enough that they will get a second one year contract and a raise. Pay for performance, sounds normal? I think that there are only a handful of teachers who feel that performance should not be tied to salary, but there is a strange dynamic in public schools. Performance on standardized tests are tied not only to how well the teacher can prep the students on the tricks of ST, but also depends on the family environment and the resources available to the teacher. So let's say a really strong teacher comes into a low performing district and raises the average performance of his/her group by 50%; however that 50% increase only brings the class average to the 10th percentile in comparison to the rest of the state? Is the teacher non-renewed because of failure to meet test standards? In Florida, that's what would happen.

(3) It can easily be argued that most jobs involve a trial period and job security is tied directly to the individual's performance. Perfectly understandable. Suppose you are hired to a new management position and your job and raise depends on your ability to raise production by 50%. As manager you can fire the underperforming worker. You can request additional resources that may be required to raise productivity. Management is unlikely to tell you that you must raise productivity without also giving you the free rein to alter how things are done. A teacher cannot expel students for not being up to par on the test. They cannot expect to receive additional resources to raise performance levels. They must deal with what they have and do the best they can.

(4) In short people in the private sector do have some form of job security. It's not perfect and it is possible that a top-performing worker could lose their job for economic reasons. Believe it or not, that is also true for the tenured teacher. A tenured teacher can also be dismissed for other reasons. Post-tenure reviews are a good idea and most support this notion, but it's unlikely that a state can expect people to flock to their teaching ranks for 9 months of security with their hands tied.

I am also of the opinion that standardized testing measures nothing more than the ability of a student to learn the tricks of the standardized test. In college, students cringe at tests that require more thought than multiple choice. Teaching to the test doesn't create an environment conducive to producing the best and the brightest. So I don't have all the answers and certainly the Florida legislature thinks this is something that's needed in our state. Time will tell, but I'm betting that this results in more problems than it allegedly plans to solve.

Joe Meert

Senator Stephen Wise (Florida) Bigoted Bill

2011-03-08T08:34:00.008-05:00

Senator Stephen Wise (Florida State Senator) has introduced a bigoted and prejudicial bill into consideration. Specifically SB1854 makes a mockery of this country's rich and diverse history. Consider that the bill requires the following:

(1)The history of African Americans, including the history of African peoples before the political conflicts that led to the development of slavery, the passage to America, the enslavement experience, abolition, and the contributions of African Americans to society.

(2)The study of women’s contributions to the United States.

(3)The study of Hispanic contributions to the United States.

All of these are admirable goals and extremely worthy of inclusion, but one wonders exactly what sort of prejudice Senator Wise holds against the Native American population and their contributions to the United States. This, in a state that contains a rich history of Native American culture and life. One wonders why Wise does not care to mandate a discussion of the contributions of Irish-Americans, Italian-Americans and Asian-Americans? This bill fails to acknowledge the contributions of different religious groups to the US from the Quakers, the Jews, the Christians and the Muslims! Senator Wise needs to stand up and admit that he is bigoted and narrow-minded in mandating that ONLY the contributions of African-Americans, women and hispanics should be taught in our schools. The very fact that he disregards the contributions of so many others that make this country great makes this proposal laughable in its extreme. Consider that SB1854 also mandates:

Kindness to animals

Wise apparently thinks that being kind to animals is far more important than acknowledging the contributions of those stated above. Senator Wise, why do you ignore the contributions of so many Americans? You claim to follow Christ, but I ask you WWJD? Yes, he would be kind to animals, but not at the expense of disregarding the contribution of ALL Americans to our great society. He would not ignore the Native Americans in such a callous manner. But Wise's bigotry and hatred doesn't end there. Wise also singles out evolutionary biology for criticism under point #1 of this rambling legislation:

(1) A thorough presentation and critical analysis of the scientific theory of evolution.

Why can't teachers present critical analyses of other sciences? Why has Wise chosen evolutionary biology for thorough analysis? Why not the scientific theory of gravity? Under this legislation, will I have the duty to present a critical analysis of quantum gravity? String theory? Or am I stuck teaching Newtonian gravity? Why does the bill not mandate that our students learn a thorough understanding of plate tectonic theory? In an era where petroleum is once again over $100 a barrel, it seems imperative that our students understand basic geology. Why doesn't Wise mandate that students learn to critically analyze "Plates versus Plumes"? This bill is bigoted towards science as well mandating that only one scientific theory be analyzed critically. Should we teach the controversy about 'historical Jesus' as well? If we are going to mandate the criticisms of one theory, shouldn't we mandate the criticism of all ideas (historical, scientific and philosophical)?

C'mon Senator Wise, step up to the plate and teach all the controversies or teach none of them. Stop the bigotry towards scientific education.

Senator Wise I notice that the bill mandates:

The true effects of all alcoholic and intoxicating liquors and beverages and narcotics upon the human body and mind.

That would include the health benefits of red wine, the uses of medical marijuana for pain as well as the many other benefits of alcohol on the human body. Surely that was your intent?

Senator Wise also mandates a thorough teaching of the holocaust which again is an admirable goal, but shouldn't we also teach of the great human carnage brought about by Pol-pot? The massacres during the Crusades? Genocide in Africa (Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda, Somalia) and all the other horrible genocide in human history? Should we not also teach the role of religious bigotry in those events? C'mon Senator Wise don't ignore all the other horrific tragedies.

Senator Wise, show you are not a bigoted anti-Christian man. Step up to the plate and either withdraw this bigoted piece of legislation or make it so that all contributions by all people that make up our great country are acknowledged. Don't single out one scientific theory and ignore the controversial aspects of all the others. Don't ignore all the other genocidal events in Human history. Make this a fair piece of legislation or remove it from consideration.

Cheers

Joe Meert

As Predicted Academic Freedom Bill comes to Florida

2011-03-07T18:31:00.001-05:00

Shortly after the elections last fall, I looked over the different Florida house and senate races and saw the 'perfect storm' for the so-called Academic Freedom bill to be reintroduced. Sure enough SB1854 was introduced by Stephen Wise (also in the prediction). Stay tuned to see how this plays out. It doesn't look good for the pro-science education groups in Florida as the conservatives control both the house and senate by a wide margin and Rick Scott is sympathetic to creationism.

What's particularly interesting is that the anti-evolution legislation is tucked into a bill that is basically a rant of conservative 'principles'. This reminds me of the scene in American graffiti where the underage Toad goes into the store to buy liquor. He asks for everything under the sun and then slips in 'a bottle of old harper' with the hope that the guy will just fill the list because it all sounded so harmless.

Cheers

Joe Meert

National Geographic Channel

2011-03-04T20:51:00.000-05:00

Is showing the premiere of its new CGI animated Story of the Earth program. I had the good fortune of being one of the scientific consultants for this film and am anxiously awaiting the premiere.

Terry Jones can't get enough

2011-01-08T19:05:00.001-05:00

Well, "Dr." Terry Jones just did not like the brevity of his 15 minutes, so he's at it again. About a week ago, he parked a trailer outside his church (now numbering a weird 20 or so members) calling for "International Judge a Koran Day" on March 20, 2011. Apparently some of his more intelligent followers might have told him "You do know that some could judge the Koran to be 'excellent literature' or 'the word of God' or other superlatives"? Today, he amended the signage to what you see pictured above. Now he is calling on people to "Burn it", "Drown it", "Shoot it" or "Shred It". My sincere hope is that the news media will just ignore him this time. It led to far too much stress for our quiet little neighborhood last time.

I've e-mailed Ryder truck rental to ask if this is the sort of press they might be seeking.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Decay Rates are not Constant?

2010-12-29T10:12:00.001-05:00

Ok, now that I have the attention of the young earth creationists, I can report on a just published study in the journal Earth and Planetary Science Letters (Nebel et al., 2011 "Evaluation of the ⁸⁷Rb decay constant by age comparison against the U–Pb system, v301, p.1-8).
The paper is significant because it proposes the first revision since 1977 for the decay constant of ⁸⁷Rb. Steiger and Jager (1977) calculated a decay constant of 1.42 x 10^-11 yr^-1. Nebel and colleagues used analyses on the same rock samples to recalibrate the ⁸⁷Rb decay constant by comparison with the U-Pb system. The 'new' decay constant is 1.393 x 10^-11 yr^-1. That may not seem like a significant revision, but it means that age determinations using the 'old' constant are off by about 2%. Sorry creationists, but the new constant makes things about 2% OLDER so definitely not a find in your favor. Perhaps more interestingly, it appears to be moving back toward the 'old' standard of 1.39 x 10^-11 yr^-1. We'll have to wait and see if the new 'constant' holds up to further analysis, but certainly in the examples given by the authors it brings the U-Pb and Rb-Sr ages into better agreement.

Oh and just in case you take refinement of this numerical value to signify that decay rates are not constant, that is not what the paper is about. It's about refining the exact value of the decay constant which is subject to both analytical and experimental error. Nevertheless, this isn't going to result in the Earth becoming 6000 years old.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Ediacara

2010-12-23T07:43:00.000-05:00

Discovery by UF geologist rekindles debate on origins of multi-cellular life

Filed under Research, Sciences on Wednesday, December 22, 2010.

GAINESVILLE, Fla. — A recent discovery by a University of Florida geologist may lend support to the theory that one of the defining moments of evolution may not have occurred as currently thought.
While studying the ancient microcontinents that make up the geography of central Kazakhstan in Asia, geological sciences professor Joe Meert and colleagues uncovered evidence that multi-cellular organisms may have evolved 100 million years earlier than previously thought, well before the Cambrian Era. His findings are published online today in the journal Gondwana Research.
The Cambrian era is known for an explosion of multi-cellular life, including the first hard-shelled organisms. Most modern species can trace their evolution back to this event, which is unique in the evolutionary record. Prior to the Cambrian era, the fossil record becomes more cryptic, as the soft-shelled organisms of the era leave relatively few fossils. The prevailing theory is that multi-cellular life developed just after a series of glacial episodes 750 to 653 million years ago.
Meert discovered the fossilized remains of two Ediacara fauna, Nimbia occlusa and Aspidella terranovica, in a rock formation that predates the earliest glacial period by more than 50 million years.
“I am sure that the fossils will be controversial due to their enigmatic nature and the fact that they are more than 100 million years older than similar fossils” Meert said.
While the findings may support the theory than metazoan life developed much earlier than previously assumed, the exact nature of Nimbia Occlusa remains a subject of controversy. Scientists are split on whether it is a multi-cellular animal, a bacterial colony, or a microbial mat. The new fossils are identical to those that appear in the fossil record up to 150 million years later, meaning it passed through tectonic, climatic, oceanic, and atmospheric events without significant change.
The research was supported by the National Science Foundation.

Florida Academic "Freedom" Coming Soon?

2010-11-14T15:38:00.000-05:00

So today I was preparing for my talk tomorrow to the Gainesville Humanist Society. I am reviewing creationist legislation in Florida and how the Florida Citizens for Science has been fighting against creationism. In 2008 (and several other sessions in the 21st century), "Academic Freedom" Legislation has been introduced in the Florida House, Senate (or both). The most recent attempt was co-sponsored by Senator Ronda Storms and Representative Alan Hays. The bill passed both the house and senate, but there was significant difference in the language of the bill. Eventually, time ran out and the two houses could not agree on a common language and the bill died. Now, Hays and Storms will both be in the Senate (Hays was elected this fall) and they will have Stephen Wise who will strongly endorse a new bill. They will have at least one ally in the house Rep. Dennis Baxley who introduced a similar bill in 2005. Considering that the governor elect, Rick Scott is also friendly to the intelligent design crowd, it may be the perfect storm for passing this sort of legislation in the state of Florida.

Humanist Society of Gainesville

2010-11-12T21:15:00.000-05:00

I'll be giving a talk Monday night at the Alachua County Library (downtown branch) to the Humanist Society of Gainesville. The tenative title of my talk is "The Florida Citizens for Science and the Struggle against Creationism!". I will give a historical perspective on the battle between science and YEC'ism with particular attention to the state of Florida. Given the results of the recent elections (conservative house, senate and governership), it is highly likely that anti-evolution bills will be proposed in the Florida legislature. The talk is at 6:30 pm on the 4th floor of the library.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Southern Baptist Pastor turns atheist.

2010-11-09T10:20:00.000-05:00

From ABCNews about a pastor who has lost his faith. It's interesting that someone so entrenched in faith can eventually read widely enough to challenge their long-held beliefs. I link to this article because it speaks of Noah's flood and given the Southern Baptist background he more than likely was an anti-evolutionist.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Marcus Ross Two Faced Again

2010-11-04T13:29:00.006-05:00

Creationist Marcus Ross was at it again during the 2010 Geological Society of America Meeting. He, along with creationists Steve Austin, William Hoesch, John Whitmore and Timothy Clarey led a field trip called "Garden of the Gods at Colorado Springs: Paleozoic and Mesozoic Sedimentation and Tectonics". One of the students from the University of Florida attended the field trip and I am hoping to entice him into a guest blog entry. My blog is going to focus on Marcus Ross' contribution to a session on Cretaceous ammonites.

The abstract listings can be found by following this link. Ross' abstract is the last one on the list. The abstract itself is rather innocuous and does not refer to a young earth or a global flood. Nevertheless, I wanted to see exactly what Ross was going to say. To be honest, Ross gave a very nice talk, sprinkled with humor and good slides. He was prepared and the presentation was of a professional quality. So what happened?

Basically Ross was using ammonites as a correlation tool to put his mosasaur fossils in a stronger temporal framework. The abstract itself contains little details of the methodology, but suffice it to say that Ross used the geological time scale (millions of years), showed images of dentition changes in mosasaur fossils (but did not mention evolution), hiatuses in the stratigraphic record and then used these all to demonstrate that ammonites could be a useful proxy for placing mosasaur fossils in a proper stratigraphic framework.

I was sitting in the audience thinking, "OK, this is pretty decent work but it sure as hell doesn't harmonize with his stated position on the age of the earth and the occurrence of a global flood!". First of all, a global flood would have rendered such a statistical method useless as there is no reason that ammonites should be zoned in a global flood and furthermore there would be no correlation between ammonite zones and the changes in mosasaur populations through millions of years of geologic time. Furthermore, there would be no way to make this work in a column of rocks that include erosional hiatuses that took place over millions of years.

After his talk, I asked the following question; "How do you harmonize this work with your belief in a 6000 year old earth on which a year long global flood took place?". He was immediately flustered and then a bit tersely replied "My talk had nothing to do with a global flood or a 6000 year old earth so your question is irrelevant". I then pointed out the fact that indeed his talk was completely counter to his public statements/creationist position because he showed correlation between strata/fossils, millions of year ages, evolution of mosasaurs and hiatuses in the rock record. He then replied (and I am paraphrasing to the best of my recollection) "Ok, for everyone in the audience who doesn't know it, yes I am a young earth creationist who believes the Earth is 6000 years old and a global flood took place. However, I am not speaking as a young earth creationist here. When I speak at young earth creationist meetings I use a different framework than when I speak at the Geological Society of America meeting." Several jaws dropped at that point, but someone in the audience felt sorry for Marcus and invited him to look at his collection etc. It would be nice if Marcus could eventually see that what he just described in his talk actually argued against a young earth, but it won't happen.

Students came up to me afterward and one wondered why I was so harsh with Ross. It's a good question and I have an answer. Creationists like Marcus Ross, Steve Austin etc don't necessarily care about how they are viewed at these conferences, but they attend and present so that they can go out to their creationist brethren and flash credentials. It's not so much what they say or do, but that their followers think that they are actually making an impact in the world of science. If you don't believe me, take a look at this post from the ICR describing last years meeting. The article claims that they were 'influential' at the meeting and thus makes it appear that they are making inroads in moving geology back to the 18th century. In fact, all Ross did was to show that he is schizophrenic when it comes to science. I don't yet comprehend how he compartmentalizes these two opposing viewpoints and claims to be 'honest' about his approach to both. The simple fact is that one cannot hold that the earth is both 4.5 billion years old AND only 6000 years old. It's akin to saying that 3=69. One is reminded of the biblical quote

""No one can serve two masters; for a slave will either hate the one and love the other, or be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth. "

There is another point to be made. Marcus Ross, Steve Austin and many others are also trying to overthrow science education in this country in favor of a new system under perhaps a conservative Christian theocracy. This is the reason I am so harsh when I see such blatant hypocrisy. For Austin, Ross and others of their ilk, the Ph.D. and the presentations at meetings like GSA are all about trying to enhance their image amongst their followers. If they can appear to be real scientists, then those who don't know any better might believe that young earth creationism is also good science. They might then be persuaded to act at the local, state and national level to have creationism instituted in the public schools.

Marcus Ross is just one of many two-faced creationists and I'm going to call them out on this hypocrisy any chance I get.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Ernie Harwell Dies

2010-05-05T19:31:00.003-05:00

"The Sun is shinin, the stands are fillin and it's a fine afternoon for baseball....."

Longtime Detroit Tigers baseball announcer Ernie Harwell died yesterday at the age of 92. I grew up in Michigan listening to Ernie and the Tigers. Ernie had an inimitable style of describing the action and was loved by all Tiger fans. Ernie, along with UM football announcer Bob Ufer always bring back fond memories of my childhood. You will be missed Ernie.

Some Nice News

2010-05-04T19:25:00.002-05:00

Today I received word that I had been elected as a Fellow of the Geological Society of America. It's not a huge deal, but it's nice to be recognized as a contributor to my field of science.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Health Care debate and Creationism: Short rant

2010-03-20T19:44:00.002-05:00

One of the more interesting aspects regarding the health care debate is how arguments (on either side) are being framed. By and large every senator or congressman comes up with an anecdotal story about how the bill will positively/negatively affect a particular individual. It reminds me of creationists arguments which largely build upon a perceived strength/weakness of the science involved. While individual stories are compelling, they don't speak to the true strength or weakness of the bill itself. It's frustrating.

Cheers

Joe Meert

John Upchurch Answers in Genesis

2010-03-17T20:10:00.003-05:00

An interesting, and oft repeated viewpoint on atheists was posted on the Answers in Genesis website by John Upchurch.

His thesis is summarized below with my comments:

I stand by my claim that atheists are inconsistent when it comes to compassion.

You may stand by your claim, but you don't defend it very well by conflating science with atheism.

>Naturalism strips life and death of moral value. Humans may ascribe moral value to other humans (or animals or inanimate objects), but according to the evolution story, we are here because of time and death.

This is simply an emotional appeal that is entirely based upon the a priori assumption that time and death are insufficient for the development of moral values. You make absolutely no case for that assumption. In fact, one could make the argument that religion (and faith) is an evolutionary response to time and death! For a sentient creature, death is a traumatic thing to witness. A once interactive animal is reduced to a pile of decaying tissue. One reaction is to simply deny that what was once living is now gone by insisting that death is a transient phase we must go through to reach 'eternal life'. Most religions are centered around death and some sort of 'rebirth'. Scientifically, we only have concrete evidence for the dead part.

When looking back to the supposed history of the universe, atheists have no problem claiming that asteroids and famines and earthquakes killed off individuals and entire species so that other species could emerge and dominate the earth (including us), but many also act as if current extinctions and deaths are more important, more valuable.

This is also a 'trick' of linguistics. Do creationists have a problem claiming that natural disasters kill off individuals or entire species? What exactly does he mean by saying 'don't have a problem with claiming'? Stating facts in evidence says nothing about how one 'feels' about those facts. If an atheist says "Thousands of people were killed by the earthquake in Haiti" is it any less factual than Billy Graham making the same observation?
In another very clever use of language, he states "So that other species could emerge and dominate". Clever, but inaccurate. Natural disasters happen, they don't happen SO THAT another species can dominate. To use a non-biological example, the earthquakes in Haiti and Chile did not happen so that old buildings could be razed and new ones built. Nature responds to natural events (as do humans) and changes take place.

Fossil Neanderthals (i.e., bones of the dead) are often “evolutionary dead-ends,” but modern graveyards are sad reminders of loss.

More emotive appeal from the author. Stating a fact "Neanderthals were evolutionary dead-ends" says nothing about how one feels about the death of a particular Neanderthal. It speaks only to the facts. I find it somewhat amusing that someone who believes in eternal life would argue that 'modern graveyards are sad reminders of loss'.

This double speak exposes an underlying flaw in the philosophy.

That's true and one wonders why you chose your own double speak to make a point. Conflating statement of fact with 'morality' is an absurdity. I know why you chose the emotive language to try to make a point, but a careful read exposes the flaw in your thinking.

Whether there’s an evolutionary “reason” for compassion, the core problem remains unchanged.

In fact, you have made no strong case for any 'core problem'.

If atheism is correct, then death is meaningless

Death happens regardless of the 'correctness' or 'incorrectness' of atheism. In fact, I find it hilarious that you state in one paragraph that atheists claim that death 'allowed other species to emerge' and then later claim that atheists think death is meaningless. Did you fail to think that through properly? If death is meaningless, then you cannot also say that atheists attribute meaning to death!

: humans have simply evolved a coping mechanism to deal with or temporarily prevent loss.

This is true. Humans do have a coping mechanism to deal with death.

But that mechanism goes against the flow of a purposeless history

.

Begs the question.

Death, according to evolution, frees other members of the species (or another species) to flourish.

No, death according to evolution means an organism ceases to interact with the environment, other organisms and decays. That's it. Death is about individuals, evolution acts on populations. Whether or not other species occupy a particular niche is an observation, not a judgment call.

I do understand how a rabid creationist might come to a conclusion that it is a judgment call. The Bible is full of such claims. The Israeli's were freed because god made a judgment call about Egyptian slavery. Noah was saved because god made a judgment call about everyone else. All evolutionists are atheists because that's the creationist judgment call.

In that worldview, humans have no more worth than dodos or dinosaurs or any other extinct species. We survive for now—they don’t. Whether we live or die out from here is immaterial.

Bullshit. That's about the most blunt answer I can give to the 'logic' that culminated in the most illogical of conclusions. In essence you are making the claim that statements of fact represent a 'worldview'. This is false.

Cheers

Joe Meert

On Climate and Dinosaurs

2010-03-05T07:20:00.002-05:00

Two interesting stories came out yesterday and today. The first was a major paper that reiterated that it was the impact of an asteroid near the Yucatan peninsula that killed the dinosaurs. The headlines made it seem that no one challenges this view anymore, but that's a bit deceptive. This was a collective summary conclusion by those who favor the impact hypothesis. There are those who still question the timing of the impact and its overall role in the demise of the dinosaurs. There are those who still think that the Deccan traps volcanism was responsible and those who think that the dinosaurs were in decline and that both the impact and the eruptions at Deccan were just nails in an already open coffin. Stay tuned, it's unlikely that this is settled.

On a second note, the story linked here speaks of climate scientists fighting back against all the criticism they've received of late. Good for them, but I hope they can stick to the science while playing politics. This is something that needs to happen, but it's also a dangerous road. If nothing else maybe they can explain the difference between 'weather' and 'climate'. If I hear one more radio talk show host talk confuse the two, I think I'll puke.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Hmm, Florida Science Education takes a step backward

2010-03-02T19:46:00.000-05:00

From Bridge for Tomorrow:

Florida House GOP Proposal Would Leave High School Science Behind

Florida House Republican and Speaker hopeful Eric Fresen has filed a bill for next spring’s legislative session that is being touted as a way to raise standards for high school graduation. But in science, Fresen’s bill would leave Florida behind Georgia, Alabama and even Mississippi.

House Bill 61 would require three science courses for graduation, as the law presently does. In one respect, the bill’s provisions on science are an improvement over a bill on graduation standards that Representative Fresen filed last year. Last year’s bill would have allowed a student to graduate from high school without having taken any courses in the physical or Earth sciences, leaving them without any background with which to understand the pressing issues of energy and global climate change. This year’s bill would require students entering high school in 2013 or later to take at least one biology class and at least one class in chemistry or physics. Unfortunately, Earth science is not mentioned in Representative Fresen’s bill.

While HB 61 would set the bar for high school graduation in science at three courses, our neighboring states – Alabama, Georgia and Mississippi – are already requiring four courses in science for graduation. In a recent commentary published in the St. Petersburg Times education blog Gradebook, Republican Representative John Legg, Chairman of the K-12 Education Policy Committee in the Florida House, said that “Our long term economic recovery is dependent on our students’ educational success.” This assertion, which is beyond debate, certainly requires us to be able to compete with our neighbors in the area of science education.

Florida’s standing in science relative to its neighboring states was demonstrated in the recently released results for 2009 high school graduates from the ACT exam, which includes a separate science section (as recently highlighted by Leslie Postal in the Orlando Sentinel’s School Zone blog). While not all of Florida’s high school graduates took the exam, 62% of them did, earning an average score on the science section of the exam of 19.0 (of a possible 36). In Alabama, a larger fraction of the high school graduates took the exam (76%), but as a group they outperformed Florida with an average score of 20.1. In Mississippi, nearly all the high school graduates took the exam (93% vs. Florida’s 62%); nevertheless, that state’s students nearly kept up with Florida with an average score of 18.7. At 20.3, Georgia’s average was the highest in the region, but only 40% of their graduates took the exam. In short, Florida’s high school graduates are not competing well with graduates from our neighboring states in science.

This summer, a group of 90 science faculty from Florida’s colleges and universities drafted a white paper on high school graduation requirements in science. While the professors did not go so far as to propose that four science courses be required for graduation, the group did argue that four science courses should be required for a student to be eligible for a Bright Futures scholarship. Furthermore, the white paper specified that in order to graduate, every student should take at least one biology course, one physical science course (chemistry or physics) and one course in the Earth and space sciences.

Florida competes with Georgia, Alabama and Mississippi for high tech industries, and the scientific skill of our workforce as developed in the K-12 schools is a critical factor in these competitions. We cannot afford to fall further behind.

Scientists Predict Chilean earthquake

2010-03-02T13:51:00.002-05:00

Well actually in a broad sense this was predicted in a paper by Ruegg et al. (2009) in Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors (v175, p 78-85).

The Concepción–Constitución area [35–37◦S] in South Central Chile is very likely a mature seismic gap,
since no large subduction earthquake has occurred there since 1835.

and

Finally a convergence motion of about 68mm/year represents more than 10mof displacement accumulated since the last big interplate subduction event in this area over 170 years ago (1835 earthquake described by Darwin).
Therefore, in a worst case scenario, the area already has a potential for an earthquake of magnitude as large as 8–8.5, should it happen in the near future

Not too bad.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Biology Professor arrested?

2010-02-12T19:33:00.002-05:00

http://blog.al.com/breaking/2010/02/biology_professor_accused_in_u.html

And how long before evolution is to blame? I bet within 24 hours

POST-BLOG

far too easy for me.

Jesus the Pooh

2010-02-09T18:23:00.004-05:00

So I was reading this book called "The Holy Bible" the other day and was fascinated to read the story of Jesus of Pooh. In reading the gospel according to Matt, I learned that Jesus' mother "Maury" was impregnated by a martian who came down in a spaceship and told her that she would be the mother of God. Fascinating. It turns out that Maury and her husband "Joe" were on their way to a Nazareth concert one December long ago and could find no room in any of the hotels. It's unclear why the hotels were all booked, but Matt speculates it was due to either it being so close to Christmas or simply a lot of Nazareth fans. Anyway, that part was not real clear to me.

Joe, the father of Jesus did not seem all too ticked off that a martian was the father of his child. Joe, was a talented garbage man at the time and assumed that whatever god wanted was good enough for him. So jesus was born in a converted garage of some friends they had and a whole bunch of people found out and brought gifts including goalposts, Frankenstein dolls and myrrh (whatever that is). Jesus grew up and apparently was very confrontational. At 13 he argued with a bunch of old men with beards and told them they were going to hell. The old men said "Christ you're not bringing that crap up again" and that is how jesus earned the nickname "christ". Apparently people began to hate Jesus because he kept taking all the good fishermen away and making them work for him (for free). At one point they were about to lynch Jesus but the guys learned to bake bread and caught a whole crapload of fish so that kept everyone happy for a while.

In the end though people didn't like Jesus the Pooh and he was stabbed outside a deli. He didn't die (even though everyone thought he did) and was having lots of fun spooking people by suddenly appearing at dinner parties and saying "Boo!". Then one day he just up and disappeared and no one has seen him since. He has attracted a large following of 'Christ'ians to this very day.

-----------
Cheers

Joe Meert

PS: I wrote the above for one reason only. Often I am approached by young earth creationists and asked to 'well explain this problem with science I've found?'. When I read the 'problem' it becomes apparent that they've completely mangled the real science such that they are asking me to defend/refute a straw man. My answer is to ask them to defend why they believe in the story of Jesus the Pooh as told in the bible (above). If truth be told, my parody of the story of Jesus is at times far more true to the bible then some of their depictions of science.

Continuing on the Austin Chalk

2010-02-09T08:28:00.007-05:00

So, the challenge for me by my creationist friend was to explain the Austin chalk because he apparently believes its existence is supportive of a global flood. I don't know where he got the idea that massive Cretaceous chalk deposits were evidence for a global flood because they are typically held forth as evidence AGAINST the global flood. Nevertheless.....

As I noted yesterday, creationist Steve Austin places the Cretaceous chalk deposits in the latter part of the year-long flood. Austin creates a scenario through which the photic zone in the turbulent, volcanic-laden, rain-soaked oceans manages to be 5 times thicker than in normal oceanic water and argues that such turbulent conditions favor blooms.

As fantastic as that sounds, I was more intrigued to learn that Austin actually placed these deposits within the 'latter stages of the flood'. This is important because I've long taken creationists to task for not being able to specify what rocks are pre, syn and post flood. So, at least we know that the Cretaceous chalk deposits are late 'syn-flood'. While that does not tell us specifically where all the rest of the geologic column was formed during the flood, it does allow us to make a few conjectures. So here goes:

(1) In creationist geology, the flood must be THE defining event in the rock record. There is no other mechanism by which to form the vast thicknesses of sedimentary rock on the globe absent the flood.

Based on (1) and the conclusions of Austin, I think it is safe to say that what geologists call 'Jurassic' and "Triassic" strata must also be syn-flood sedimentary deposits. That means that during the deposition of these strata, the world was covered with water and that water was turbulent and that massive rain was falling on the ocean and that massive volcanic eruptions were occurring as the fountains of the deep ruptured (based on creationist Austin's description).

I have some questions :). How were termites able to build giant nests during this global tempest? Below is a photo of a Jurassic termite mound discovered by Dr. Steve Hasiotis

Furthermore, how is it that we had forest fires during this global flood. Below is a photo of petrified wood (burnt) from the Chinle Formation (Triassic) in New Mexico:

(Photo by J. Meert).

Then there is the little issue of the vast number of paleosols found throughout Triassic and Jurassic strata. How exactly did those form during the global flood? These complete with infilled burrows (photo by Steve Hasiotis)!!

So, you see I never would have chosen the Austin chalk as an example of the global flood. Too many problems that are not easy to hide---unless you can rationalize those problems away with unrealistic invented scenarios---

I'll repeat my challenge to ye-creation geologists and their supporters:

a. Where can a geologist find, on a global basis, the pre-flood/flood boundary? You will not find a continent-by-continent listing of formational names and type sections for this boundary in the creationist literature.

b. Where can a geologist find, on a global basis, strata laid down during the peak of the global flood (i.e. globally correlatable strata all deposited under water)? You will not find a continent-by-continent listing of formational names and type sections for these rocks in the creationist literature.

c. Where can a geologist find, on a global basis, the flood/post-flood boundary? You will not find a continent-by-continent listing of formational names and type sections for this boundary in the creationist literature. To be fair, creationists have a little more leeway in defining this boundary since the flood waters receded over a slightly longer time interval, but it still should be possible to provide considerable detail.

Cheers

Joe Meert

On the global flood

2010-02-08T13:22:00.005-05:00

So a creationist on facebook has challenged me for an explanation of the "Austin chalk line". I take it for some reason that the existence of the Austin Chalk is evidence for a global flood. I must admit that were I ever to return to young earth creationism, I would not use the Austin chalk as evidence for the great flood, let alone a young earth. In fact, I would be very careful not to mention chalk deposits like this one (or the white cliffs of dover) in the hope that the old earther I was debating would forget to bring it up. Why is this such a poor example for flood geology?

There are several arguments relevant to chalk deposits that are often used to counter the flood model. The first has to do with the incredible density of microscopic organisms required to make up the deposits if they were deposited in a single year. A second problem has to do with the time it takes for chalk deposits to form. These are microorganisms that rain down on the seafloor. In surface water, the dead tests of these organisms can be carried by currents and remain suspended for some time though eventually they will fall to the seafloor and accumulate. Even if the massive blooms required for the chalk deposits were formed in a flood, the tests would not settle down in such pure layers during the flood. Most, if not all, would remain suspended in the water column. The third problem with chalk layers is where they reside in the rock record. For the most part the large deposits of chalk are Cretaceous in age and that forces flood geologists to pin down at least part of the flood during this interval in the rock record. So let's look at the creationist explanation.

Creationist like Steve Austin (aka evolutionist Stuart Nevins) claims that chalk deposits are not problematic for the flood. While I encourage you to read the entire article, I want to highlight several 'explanations' given by Austin:

(1) Creationist geologists may have different views as to where the pre-Flood/Flood boundary is in the geological record, but the majority would regard these Upper Cretaceous chalks as having been deposited very late in the Flood.

Interesting claim by Austin, more on this in a moment.

(2)Quite clearly, under cataclysmic Flood conditions, including torrential rain, sea turbulence, decaying fish and other organic matter, and the violent volcanic eruptions associated with the ‘fountains of the deep’, explosive blooms on a large and repetitive scale in the oceans are realistically conceivable, so that the production of the necessary quantities of calcareous ooze to produce the chalk beds in the geological record in a short space of time at the close of the Flood is also realistically conceivable.

Now there are many things to take issue with in Austin's article, but these two are problematic in their own right. Let's start with point #2. Austin concedes the conditions under which these organisms form. Torrential rain, sea turbulence and violent eruptions are the stated conditions. Now let's review the biology of these microorganisms. Coccoliths and forams that make up these deposits are planktonic. Indeed the most abundant form of coccolith occupies the photic zone (upper 100 m of surface waters), but reread Austin and note that he places them in water depths 5x the 'norm' and this in turbulent, cloudy waters of the flood. In short, he changes the entire ecosystem and claims that these conditions would 'foster' blooms of these organisms! Secondly, Austin tries to deal with the population density problems outlined by Glen Morton who astutely points out the ridiculous population densities required by flood proponents. Austin's sleight of hand many be difficult for the creationist to grasp, but the simple answer is that Austin deals with the population problem by essentially assuming that these are the only things in the ocean. Morton discusses the physics and life cycle issues in far more detail than Austin and I encourage you to read Morton's discussion as well as the discussion of land fossils in that essay.

Now turning to point #1 placing these blooms in the latter part of the flood. Ok, let's assume that Austin is correct and that the Chalk beds represent the latter part of the flood. That means that the earlier part of the flood waters would be represented by strata of Jurassic, Triassic and Paleozoic age. But let's forget about the Paleozoic strata and look just to the strata that immediately pre-dates the Austin chalk (namely Jurassic and Triassic). We will use these terms without any absolute time connotation and assume that what normal geologists call Jurrassic and Triassic are all less than 6000 years old and that they were deposited in the year of the great flood.

More to come.

Answers to some questions

2010-02-06T09:24:00.004-05:00

I received the following questions from a young earth creationist on facebook. Not much room to answer there, so I've posted them here:

Question 1: Are we (eg humans) energy?

Answer: No, humans are not energy though we are composed of energetic particles that form the matter in our bodies. An assembly of energetic particles does not necessarily equate to a living being.

Question #2: Does energy die?

Energy is neither alive nor dead, so the question is unanswerable because it is based on a false premise.

Question 3: Is there evidence to show that man and dinosaur coexisted?

Answer: Of course, this depends on what you call a 'dinosaur'. Birds, by scientific consensus are in the dinosaur family tree and we certainly co-exist with birds. If by dinosaur you mean "Did man ever hunt t-rex?" the answer is no. T-rex died out 60 million years before the first hominids appear on earth. There are people like Carl Baugh who claims that human and dinosaur footprints are found together at Paluxy; however careful analysis refutes this claim.

Question: Is there evidence for a global flood?

Answer: No, there is no evidence for the type of flood described initially in the Sumerian epic of Gilgamesh (later incorporated into the Hebrew legend of Noah). There have been large floods in the past, but none that completely enveloped the globe and killed all living organisms except for a few on a boat. In fact, there is a wealth of evidence refuting the flood and creationists refuse to specify just what constitutes the flood interval in the geologic record.

Question: Is there proof for evolution?

This answer could be very long, but I'll make it short because it is based upon a lack of background. Evolution is observable and verifiable and is also profitable in that it leads to useful predictions and retrodictions about life.

Question: Is there any prophecy that has been refuted?

Answer: By prophecy, I assume you mean biblical prophecy? It doesn't matter most 'prophecy' is always interpreted in hindsight and the true believer will find someway to justify that prophecy. let's take the case of the messiah. Jewish people don't believe that the prophecy has come to fulfillment yet. Christians make the claim that it did. So how are we to judge this very simple prophecy that two religions disagree upon? Similarly, you'll find proponents of Edward Cayce who claim that he is prophetic. Velikovskian followers tout his prophecies, but I would have to say that all prophecy is largely viewed as 'true' or 'false' depending on whether one wants it to be true or false not on evidence. But I'll give you one prophecy at the beginning of the bible that was false. God supposedly told Adam that on the day he ate from the tree of life he would surely did. He did not die on that day. Prophecy was wrong. Sure I know that the believers try to argue that because he eventually died (if he existed at all) the prophecy was true, but that's simply rationalization. Biblical literalists can't have it both ways. The bible clearly shows that Adam did not die on the day he ate from the tree.

Question: Where is the grave of Yeshua?

Answer: Who knows and who really cares? I don't, but if you are arguing that the absence of a grave means that he rose from the dead, then apparently so have many millions of other people who have no marked grave. I can't believe that even the most ardent thinking Christian would argue that the resurrection is true based on the absence of a grave!!

Question:What writings are more reliable than the bible?

The question assumes a priori that the bible is the most reliable book. I would argue that nearly any modern book is far more reliable than the bible, but every book contains errors, omissions, misinterpretations etc because books are written by humans who are prone to errors. I would also ask 'which bible?'. There are many different bibles out there with different contents and words. So when you ask is the bible the most reliable book I would say not even close.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Evolution is a Lie

2010-01-26T21:59:00.002-05:00

Well, ok. it's taken me many, many years to come to this realization. Evolution is false. The earth is 6000 years old and all of science is wrong. Now what?

Does this mean I must bow down and begin to worship jesus as god? Hmm, I guess I don't see the connection. For so many years people keep telling me that if evolution is false, I must bow down to their god. Don't get it. Suppose that evolution is completely false who do I bow down to? Allah? Zeus? Thor? Jesus? The Flying Spaghetti monster? They all have convincing stories that might compel me to consider them as the creator of everything, but I have no way to distinguish between their claims.

So here I am having rejected evolution, but still unable to distinguish reality.

On coincidence and science

2010-01-15T09:48:00.002-05:00

So I had an interesting 'interview' this morning. A student from the University newspaper came to talk to me about the recent number of sinkholes that opened in Polk County Florida and elsewhere. The student noted that it seemed very odd that the sinkholes opened up within a few hours of the earthquake in Haiti and that perhaps the earthquake triggered the events. Her second thought was that freezing and thawing of groundwater may have caused the sinkhole collapse because of the recent cold weather we've been having.

As I started thinking about this, I realized that the human mind sometimes makes strange connections that become very powerful. The student insisted that this seemed very 'strange' and 'odd' that they should have happened so close together. So I looked at some newspaper clippings from Jan 12, 2010 and made the absurd suggestion that what triggered the sinkholes was Obama's recent comments on healthcare that came out just minutes before the sinkholes opened. Anyone (well mostly anyone) could see the absurdity in that claim.

So then I explained that the more likely cause for the opening of the sinkholes was due to a drop in the water table caused by the massive pumping of water by citrus growers trying to save their crop. Again she asked "but so many sinkholes right one after the other?" Seems like an earthquake is more likely cause.

The connection was welded. So then I asked her why would an earthquake cause sinkholes to open in Polk County? The connection between energy and earthquakes and damage was the answer. A reasonable connection? I said 'perhaps, if they had all opened up within seconds of each other following the passage of the seismic waves through the crust of Florida and if they only needed a very, very, very small amount of energy in order to push them over the edge. It's highly unlikely that multiple sinkholes were poised and ready to open so I returned to the suggestion that groundwater withdrawal was the more likely culprit.

I don't know what will finally be written, but the student was a little disappointed that the earthquake was not responsible for the sinkholes here. I warned her about coincidence and how they may seem logical once our brains have made the connection, but turn out to have nothing to do with one another.

Why Pat Robertson Should be applauded for his comments on Haiti

2010-01-14T18:08:00.002-05:00

Everyone is up in arms over the comments that Pat Robertson made the other day regarding the earthquake in Haiti. For those who have been asleep, Robertson asserted that because haiti made a pact with the devil to be free from French rule, they have suffered ever since. The point he was making was that Haiti got what it deserved. So why should anyone applaud such an asinine comment? Simple, it serves as evidence of the intolerance and bigotry that permeates evangelical religions. Christian wackos like Robertson are no better than nutballs from any other religion.

Whenever someone tries to tell me that Christians are tolerant and caring, I can drag out people like Robertson and my own wacko neighbor Terry Jones. Jones is so far to the right that he would make Robertson look like a flaming liberal, but both show that the conservative Christian movement is about hatred and intolerance. Nothing more, nothing less. So let's hear it for Pat. He's an intolerant imbecile who shows us that Christianity is no better than any other religon.

Some thoughts on mythical creatures and morality

2009-10-22T06:11:00.003-05:00

I'm constantly bombarded by claims that without god, there can be no morality. Such a claim is absurd in the highest degree, but I thought it might be useful to explain why I think belief in a god is not required for 'morality'. Morals are entirely a construct of society. They are fluid and ever changing and I would argue that there are no single 'fixed absolutes' when it comes to morality. Each religion can make a claim to these absolutes, but it's largely an exercise in mental masturbation. In essence, the claim to an absolute morality is nothing more than an attempt to bolster an individual's belief that they have found the one true religion. 99% of the time I've encountered this argument I am also told that it's impossible to be an atheist and have morals (i.e. I'm immoral). Such an argument does two things. (1) It bolsters the belief in the accuser that morals stem only from their belief in god and (2) that the believer is somehow 'better' than the atheist because of that faith.

I've been told that without morals and without a belief in a god, that I am wasting my life. I reject those arguments as well. From an evidence-based perspective, this life is all there is. Death is final (all anecdotes aside). So, while we are alive, it seems that we serve both our own good and the good of our species to take care of each other and to support each other as best we can. That means (to me) that among other things the strong should protect the weak. In the simplest case, our species would cease to exist if we do not hold to this simple 'morality' because babies are weak and cannot survive without the protection of the strong.

Some say that the 10 commandments are the source of morality, but for the most part they merely codify common sense survival of the species concepts. The 'god' things are merely thrown in to make them look religious and to be self-serving to maintain the religion for which they were written. here's my view

ONE: 'You shall have no other gods before Me.'

JM: Big deal. This is a self-serving commandment for religious leaders to maintain the discipline of their followers. There is no moral imperative in this commandment.

TWO: 'You shall not make for yourself a carved image--any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.'

JM: Another silly order with no moral imperative behind it. The commandment is in the self-interest of the leaders of the religion nothing more.

THREE: 'You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.'

JM: No moral imperative. Self-serving to the religion.

FOUR: 'Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.'

JM: No moral imperative. Self-serving to the religion.

FIVE: 'Honor your father and your mother.'

JM: This is a somewhat reasonable imperative, though not necessary for a moral society. One can think of numerous cases whereby it would be detrimental to honor either parent. Still, an infant is more likely to survive to reproductive age by honoring the commands of the parents (eat your veggies etc). This is not 'moral' though it may in many cases be very logical.

SIX: 'You shall not murder.'

JM: This is a moral imperative, but society has shown this to be a 'special case' imperative. Though shalt not kill except in war, or in the case of self-defense or in the case where killing might remove a greater danger etc etc. I would argue that again in the simplest case, murdering is most likely to reduce the gene pool and therefore be of less benefit to a reproductive species than the alternative.

SEVEN: 'You shall not commit adultery.'

JM: The commitment of one husband to one wife decreases the genetic pool, but it also provides stability and protection to the family. Perhaps the better morality would be not to commit adultery once you have children. Again, this is one of those very fluid morals in society.

EIGHT: 'You shall not steal.'

JM: Except when.....There are many cases where theft has been justified, but again in keeping with the idea that society benefits most when resources are shared seems a reasonable evolutionary strategy.

NINE: 'You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.'

JM: Not really a moral imperative.

TEN: 'You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's.'

JM: A rather nonsensical 'morality' in that coveting does no real harm to society and the actions that might result from coveting are covered elsewhere.

In short, the 10 commandments are not really much in the way of a moral imperative so I fail to see how religion can really make the claim that morality is impossible without religion. Morality is not expressly defined all that well by religion and most 'moral imperatives' are aimed at protecting the religion over the protection of the individual. Talk about a selfish gene!

Reflections on Creationism: Dr Dino

2009-10-12T21:10:00.002-05:00

I wrote the following a few years back:

I was introduced to young earth creationism in the rudest manner possible. A local high school teacher in Indiana told me that a ‘famous’ creationist was going to speak at his school. Furthermore, this person was going to rally the community to teach a ‘balanced approach’ via a 3-day seminar at a local Baptist church. I had heard that there were still people (long after the Scope’s trial) who still found fault with evolution, but I thought these were a small fringe group that perhaps suffered from isolation during reproduction. Thus, I walked into the church with mild curiosity and in good humor.

What I heard over the next three days was overwhelming. The speaker, one “Dr.” Kent Hovind, harkened me back to my 18th birthday when I went to buy my first car. The car dealer talked so fast and was so convincing that I started into a contract to buy a mustang convertible with pinstripes, rust-proofing, decals and a whole bunch of other unnecessary stuff while working a minimum wage job. Fortunately, my credit was so bad that financing could not be arranged. Hovind was even smoother than the car salesman and far more successful at selling his ‘product’ to a captive fundamentalist crowd. The people attending that conference were called to arms and for the next few months, I was involved in efforts to stop book banning in Terre Haute Indiana and a constant battle with creationists that I’ve been fighting ever since.

I hope to give you a glimpse inside the crevo (creation-evolution) debate and a glance into how, like the immortal cells of Henrietta Lacks, the debate never dies. Florida is about to undergo revision of education standards and the demons of fundamentalism are stirring!

---Surprisingly, nothing has changed since I first went to battle with ye-creationism. There are no new arguments though there are new faces making the old arguments and for the most part, creationists prefer to politic their cause rather than bring it to the scientific literature (no surprise there!).

Cheers

Joe Meert

Obama wins Nobel???

2009-10-09T08:33:00.004-05:00

I'm sure many people will blog on this topic. Here's my little rant. Whenever he is critized for not getting things done, his defenders say 'Give him a little more time he's only been in office a few months'. Now he wins the Nobel Peace Prize? I don't buy it. Perhaps in a few years when things are settled in Iraq and Afghanistan. Perhaps when Iran stands down her nuclear ambitions. Perhaps when Obama's actually done something to earn the prize, I'd be the first to congratulate him. Right now, it makes a mockery of the prize and I'm quite sure there were some other (more worthy) nominees. Oh, and don't forget, the nominations were due in February of this year? So he had been in office for less than a month???

My suggestion? Have Obama turn down the prize or offer the money to more deserving nominees.

Joe Meert

Searching for God

2009-10-08T13:25:00.004-05:00

I love local news coverage. There's always something to learn about my community. Just yesterday I found out that during the commission of a bank robbery, both the Alachua County Sheriff's Department and the Gainesville Police department were answering to a higher call......Read on

from WCJB TV 20

Gainesville Police are on the trail of a thief who robbed a bank Wednesday afternoon in Northwest Gainesville.
It happened at the Sunstrust Bank on the corner of Northwest 43rd Street and 39th Avenue.
Authorities say a man walked into the Suntrust Bank around 4 p.m.
He handed the teller note demanding money. he said he had a gun but the teller never saw it. She gave him the money and he left on foot. No one is hurt but he is still on the loose.
The suspect is a white man about six feet tall, 180 lbs. he was wearing glasses, a flannel shirt and blue jeans. He has brownish gray hair. Authorities say he left the bank heading south toward the business complex behind it.
Helicopters from both the Alachua County Sheriff's Office and the police department were searching for the man in the sky.

If you have any information call the Gainesville Police Department.

No reports of any sighting and I have no information for helping GPD find god.

Cheers

Joe Meert

What was God's judgement on Dino Adventure Land?

2009-08-31T18:59:00.004-05:00

Today is August 31, 2009 the day that the Hovind family was to come up with funds to save DAL or turn it over to the feds as payment for Kent Hovind's criminal activity. At one point earlier this month, Eric Hovind asked donors to send cash to support DAL. There was a quick early support for the effort, but then Eric went tripping around the lights of Holywood in awe of Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort. For those who don't know Kirk is a former actor cum 'evangelist' who knows little about the bible and even less about science. Ray Comfort is the penultimate con-artist who uses religion more as a weapon than a tool for salvation. Anyway, the question of the day is whether or not Eric raised the cash to prevent the takeover. I guess either way 'god's will' has been served. If they raised the money, then God saw fit to protect the ministry and if they did not raise the money, then God is using them in a new fashion. Doncha just love prayer? Always answered and therefore impossible to test. My bet is that DAL is dead. It died while Eric kissed up to a former childhood actor and a man who's con game is selling bananas to streetwalkers in Hollywood?

Cheers

Joe Meert

PS: I'll bid $1.00 on the leap of faith swing at DAL

More Wackiness from a local 'Christian' Church

2009-08-29T08:16:00.001-05:00

They are at it again. The cult "Dove Church" just up the road from our house is now forcing the children of the church to send a message of hate by wearing "Islam is of the Devil" t-shirts. The good news is that no local t-shirt company would print the shirts and the schools are kicking the kids out for dress code violations. The "Reverend Jones" who runs the church is becoming increasingly strange. One can only wonder if this is a prelude to another religious tragedy. The church is very, very strange.

Link to the News story in the Gainesville Sun

How about this for a rambling note

2009-08-20T07:38:00.002-05:00

about how I should view evolution??

I am narrow minded. I did say you should be open minded, but challenged you to Biblical. Jesus Christ said that Adam was in the beginning. Do you know the limiting factors. Just from a scientific perspective that are lots of facts that do limit the age of the earth.

I will not and can not be open minded when it comes to God and His word. I am fundamental in my believes. And see evolution as a faith that has no scientific origin.

The fact that we see changes in the different kinds of animals does not make a elephant out of a mouse. Cosmic evolution is a faith just as Creation is. Consequently when men start making God in to a monkey, for said He let us make man in our own image (Genesis 1:26) , it is clear that they became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart are darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.(Rom 1:19-23)

Jesus said: Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
(Matthew 7:13-15)

So if you are by own admission broad 'open-minded' surely you are on a way that leads to destruction. The Word of God will be our guide and not some philosophy of unbelievers.

Again is point out to you that death came after Adam sinned, not millions of years ago in some primarily soup. Death came in the garden of eden. (1Co 15:21-22)

I don't know it all, but my God does. You don't know it all and certainty not those who think themselves to be wise.

For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. (1 Corinthians 1:18-24)

I could give you a thousand video clips to look at, but O what will it profit you if all you find is the opinions of man.

Seek God! http://www.tangle.com/view_video?viewkey=bff5711d9b63cec5077b

Ahh, I so appreciate love notes. This was sent to me after I suggested he watch the following youtube video:

open-mindedness

Cheers

Joe Meert

Eric Hovind starts facebook campaign

2009-08-19T06:19:00.004-05:00

In order to save Dinosaur Adventure Land. He has 30 days to come up with $380K or turn over the land. I'm no tax expert, but can funds donated to the ministry be transferred to pay a tax debt? I guess if he comes up with the money, we'll find out.

Anyway, there probably are 380,000 fools who are willing to part with their money, so I'm not sure I'd bet against it. One can always have hope that one blight on the Pensacola community can be removed. I'd love to say good-bye to Dino Adventure Land.

Eric claims 'with God all things are possible'. I like the quote attributed (incorrectly) to PT Barnum "There's a sucker born every minute".

Kent Hovind Dr, Dino's Park Taken by the Feds

2009-08-05T13:31:00.004-05:00

Creationist preacher cum Federal convict, Kent Hovind was dealt another blow this week. His 'Dinosaur adventure land' is being seized to cover debts related to his conviction for tax fraud. Dinosaur Adventure land is a rather low-tech, low-budget amusement park made especially for people who read the bible as a scientific text rather than a book about the history of the Hebrew people and the story of salvation from the christian godhead known as Jesus.

Hovind's ministry is currently being pushed by his son Eric Hovind who seems to be operating a scaled-back lecture circuit that largely mimics what his father presented on a series of videotapes. Like most creationists, Eric is mainly about preaching long-ago discredited arguments against evolution in the name of his peculiar religious viewpoints. The good news is that a few suckers will save some cash should they happen to stumble upon the soon-to-be defunct dino adventure land.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Michael Jackson Dead

2009-06-25T19:22:00.002-05:00

Of course, he eclipses Farrah Fawcett who fought a brave fight against cancer. I truly enjoyed his music. I was appalled with his views toward young people.

Ahh Field Camp

2009-05-31T12:53:00.002-05:00

I've been out of the loop for the past three weeks teaching field camp in New Mexico. Of course the good news is that UF decided to limit the damage to CLAS and thereby saved geology. Unfortunately, cuts were made elsewhere and there are faculty going through the same problems as might have happened to us. I wish all those who are having problems can find new possibilities that will improve their lot. I also remember that sage this year means nothing for future years.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Travel

2009-05-12T07:23:00.000-05:00

I'm currently traveling and will post some updates this evening

Machen on Fox Business News

2009-05-09T14:40:00.003-05:00

Thanks to one of the readers here is a video of Bernie Machen on Fox Business News. Not a particularly heartening discussion. Basically, it sounds like the plan is final and the announcement is nothing more than a formality. I hope I am wrong and they'll be some time for faculty input, but it doesn't look good.

Now, who made the following statement:

I cannot emphasize enough the preliminary nature of these proposals. These are options to consider. We do not know how many of them we will adopt"

The statement was made 3 weeks ago.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Budget finalized

2009-05-08T11:27:00.005-05:00

Today is likely going to be the last day of the legislative session in Tallahassee and so we can expect some decisions regarding the budget plan at UF within the next two weeks (if not sooner). Things at UF are strangely silent as one might expect during break week.

From the rumor mill I am hearing the Communication Science and Disorders (of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences) will be merged (or partially merged) into the College of Health Professions. That means at least some of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences vertical changes are taking place. I don't know (and have not heard) where that leaves religion and geological sciences, but I can tell you no one around here is very comfortable.

In the meantime, Money Magazine has a nice article on Public Universities featuring our Department as the lead in.

UPDATE: BUDGET HAS PASSED.

Cheers

Joe Meert

In the Dark

2009-05-07T10:12:00.004-05:00

Rumors, and that's all they are at this point, are that layoff announcements and letters of non-renewal may come out next week. If true, the decisions are being made with minimal of faculty input since this is the break week between spring semester and summer A.
News is sketchy about what part of the plans will be implemented, but clearly there are hints in the news about how stimulus money will be used at UF. Consider this from the Palm Beach Post

At the University of Florida, President Bernie Machen will get about $42 million from the federal stimulus.

He said he plans to use the money for retirement and separation packages for employees, to transition state funded programs to the private sector, to allow students to finish majors that may be terminated, and to plug a 12 percent hole in the school's base budget.

So we see that some majors may eliminated (if reporting is correct) and that there will be layoffs. Interestingly the same article had a more pointed argument for how stimulus monies should be spent:

"Arguing that you don't want to do anything recurring is probably an overly narrow view of how to use this money," said John Curtis, director of research and public policy for the American Association of University Presidents. "The whole point is to get us through a difficult time and one way to do that is invest in the faculty who provide the education and ideas that can help transform the economy."

Plus, all of Florida's universities will likely have a new power beginning in the fall to raise student tuition up to 15 percent each year - a revenue generating machine that could bring in $39 million statewide in the first year and up to $200 million annually by year three.

That's new recurring money that can help plug the hole left when stimulus dollars run out.

one other person who 'gets it'

"The federal government has been very clear that this support is designed to save and create jobs," Chancellor Robert Holub told university employees last month. "In this budget plan, we do exactly that."

That's the way most people view the intent of the stimulus funding. Rebuilding programs or re-inventing programs is a costly and lengthy process. Elimination of programs without consulting faculty who make up the University is scary. I hope that those who will be affected by the cuts are told face-to-face rather than via e-mail. Despite the warm summer weather and blue skies, there is a dark cloud hanging over this campus.

That was quick

2009-05-06T06:20:00.004-05:00

Today an article in the Gainesville Sun reported that UF will go ahead with deep cuts to UF in spite of the fact that there is stimulus money to cover the campus for two more years. The rationale given is that since we don't know where we will be in two years, it's best to cut programs now in anticipation of a bad economy in two years. That's the 'logic' folks, I kid you not.

However as was recently pointed out to me the legislature has given UF cuts of ~49 million in recurring funds. That means that UF may be able to use stimulus money to get us through the next two years, but if the legislature does not reinstate the 49 million (or more) within the next two years then the issues remain. Machen has not said how the cuts will be made, if they will be made this year or whether there will be some 'saves'. Nonetheless, these cuts (whatever they are) will hurt someone.

Cheers

Joe Meert

How about some science? Bengtson find vindicates Azmi?

2009-05-05T07:33:00.004-05:00

A long story, but basically about the Vindhyan basin central India. The age of this basin has been controversial since an Indian scientist by the name of Azmi discovered so called small shelly fossils (SSF's) and brachiopods from the lower part of the Vindhyan basin in rocks called porcellanites. The finding is triply odd since (a) porcellanites are volcanic ash beds and unlikely spots for preservation of these types of fossils (b) the age of the lower Vindhyan was thought to be around 1100 Ma at the time and the fossils Azmi claimed to have discovered are Cambrian in age and (c) Azmi was unable to show others where the fossils were discovered.
Since that time, Azmi was vilified for his 'discovery'. Ages obtained from the rock units studied by Azmi are now known to be 1600 million years old (about 1050 million years too old for his 'fossils'). No one has been able to duplicate his findings and experts who looked at his fossils claimed that they were not fossils at all. The younger part of the Vindhyan basin, the so called 'upper vindhyan' contains evidence that it too may be far older than previously thought casting doubts on fossil discoveries in the Upper Vindhyan; however the newer age constraints (made in my lab) are not as concrete as we would like. They are highly suggestive of an older age. In short, life has been hard for Azmi.

Enter paleontologist Stefan Bengtson who has recently published a paper in PNAS regarding 'fossils' in the Lower Vindhyan. Bengtson found fossils similar to those reported by Azmi, but showed clearly that they are not small shelly fossils or brachiopods, but traces of filamentous algae, bacteria and gas bubbles.

Azmi claims he is vindicated, but I'm not so sure this is the case. Azmi continues to insist that the whole of the Vindhyan is 600-500 million years old despite strong evidence to the contrary. The fossil discoveries made by Azmi have not been confirmed and, in fact, the discovery by Bengtson et al. are not brachipods or small shelly fossils. Azmi has demanded a retraction of all criticisms regarding his find, but I'm not so sure that a retraction is needed. Azmi was clearly wrong on many levels and his continued insistence that the Vindhyan is all very young also looks to be wrong. Lastly, no fossils have been found in the porcellanite beds where Azmi claimed to have found SSF's.

Azmi's insistence that he is correct is problematic. At the same time, as Bengtson noted, if Azmi had not been so insistent then it is unlikely that he (Bengtson et al) would have made their discovery. Science moves forward in strange ways.

In my opinion, the paper showed yet again why Azmi's original claims were wrong. We'll have to see if he finally moves towards the consensus on the age of the Vindhyan basins.

Cheers

Joe Meert

An awesome photo

2009-05-04T18:12:00.003-05:00

A friend of mine sent this photo. It's one of the coolest I've ever seen.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Cooling off period

2009-05-04T11:27:00.003-05:00

The Florida house and senate have agreed to the major budgetary issues and are nearly ready to begin the mandated 72 hours of cooling off before voting on the final budget. Note that during this 72 hours, we still pay $40000 a day. The University is taking a look at the figures and will begin to make their decisions on how to handle the revenue reductions. Stay tuned....

Our "Dear Colleague" letter from the Dean confirms the ~45 million in cuts or ~6% to the University. Of course, how that 6% is distributed across the university is the critical part:

Dear Colleagues,

I’d like to update you on the budget situation and to share a few thoughts at the end of the academic year.

As you probably know, the leaders of the House of Representatives and the Senate announced a budget agreement last week, and details are currently being worked out in budget committees. It looks like UF’s net cut (after tuition increases are figured in) will be about $45 million. That’s roughly equivalent to the six percent cut we faced last year. It will be some time before the UF senior administration and Trustees announce how UF’s cut will be allocated, but I continue to be hopeful that this College will avoid the most draconian parts of the ten percent plan we submitted in early April.

In the College plan, this puts Geology in the gray area regarding substantial cuts to our program. No details of course, but scary to think about. I'm sure other departments and employees are checking their place on the list.

The Silence in the Aftermath

2009-05-03T07:29:00.002-05:00

The Florida legislature will conclude this session (at $40,000+ a day) by passing a budget that is not a lean or mean to higher education as initially feared. It's not clear how much political pressure came down on the legislators to forge this deal (all behind closed doors), but it's interesting to see the reaction. I've scanned the local newspaper (the gainesville sun) for articles discussing how the proposed budget will affect UF. Nope, the sunday headlines are about graduation at UF (not bad, two articles on swine flu and discounts at area theme parks. UF is the economic driving force in the city and the cuts, whatever they might be, are going to hurt the city. The city does not seem to care.

Perhaps this lack of attention is precisely what the legislators learn early on in their political careers. They are probably told that they'll hear complaints for a couple of days and then the complaints will stop. So why not forge ahead with deals that will aid their political careers no matter how damaging it might be to many of their constituents. In politics, it seems that action taken is far less important than promises made.

Cheers

Joe Meert

A day of Excess

2009-05-02T07:19:00.002-05:00

So this morning, the Meert family embarks on a yearly ritual. Today is a busy day on the UF campus as thousands of students leave for the summer or head out into the real world. As part of the move out process, large dumpsters are set out by the dorms and hundreds of thousands of dollars of furniture, clothing, food, computer equipment and electronics are tossed into the trash. To its credit, UF has instituted a donation center at the dorms as well, but based on what we see, much of it ends up in the trash. So, we go out and dumpster dive for treasure. In previous years we've brought so much home that we were able to raise hundreds of dollars at a garage sale and donate other stuff to local charities. The amount of waste is tremendous. Well off we go.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Bruce MacFadden writes about geology

2009-05-01T15:06:00.001-05:00

UF needs geology--By Bruce MacFadden

In 1968 as a freshman at the University of Maryland, I took a geology course as part of my liberal education requirement and found my major. Then and there I decided that I wanted to study geology.

After consulting the catalog, however, I discovered that UMD had neither a geology major, nor did it have a department with this name (my course was taught by the agronomy department). After spending some time reading through other college catalogs, I determined that UMD was the only flagship university in the U.S. without a geology department.

I wrote a letter to UMD President Elkins telling him that I had decided to major in geology, but that I would have to transfer. A little while later the liberal arts dean called me in for a chat. He was not happy about my letter. He talked about chain of command and used words such as "impertinence."

I left UMD, went elsewhere for my B.S., and then ultimately received my Ph.D. in geology. Several years after my departure, UMD founded a geology department that now is roughly the size of our current one at UF.

Ironically, if the proposed budget cuts are enacted and the UF geology department is eliminated, then we will become unique among flagship universities.

University stakeholders oftentimes seek superlatives to separate their institution from others, although I doubt that the Gator Nation will proclaim: "Hey, UF is unique among flagship universities because we do not have a geology department!"

Bruce J. MacFadden,

WWTD?

2009-05-01T06:19:00.004-05:00

What will Tigert do? That's the big question now that the budget deal has been ironed out. It's been interesting to follow the dialogue on the College of Liberal Arts and Science page regarding who should be cut and why. The tone, as you might guess, is mostly negative. The administration at UF has essentially been given the green light to make some fairly big changes to the structure of the University if they so desire. They also have the power to leave the fundamental structure of the University intact though it is clear that a 40-50 million dollar cut cannot be made without some consolidation, downsizing and some layoffs.

Now, we sit and wait. The President had originally planned to release his cuts on May 15, 2009. I don't know if that date is still firm or if it will be delayed a week to allow the legislature to pass the proposed budget and have the governor sign it. Not a whole lot of news on this in the Florida newspapers.

It will also be interesting to see how the administration will make its decision. Will they advise the programs/people being cut ahead of the news release or will those programs/people discover their fate in the newspaper?

Cheers

Joe Meert

Love the Sunshine

2009-04-30T17:52:00.003-05:00

Well it looks like the House and Senate have finished their 'sunshine' budget conferences on higher education. I found it amazing how fast they closed the gap in conference (not). I'll never be good at politics because I find it hard to lie to someone straight to their face and smile the whole time I do it. Budget cuts to UF will be somewhere between 40-50 million which is about 1/2 of what the planned budget cuts were for. I suppose we should be happy about that, but the truth is that 50 million still allows the administration to rid themselves of whatever they don't particularly value and that might include my own department. We shall see. I suspect that UF is already looking at its options even given the preliminary numbers. If I hear anything, I'll post it here.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Senate Accepts House Offer

2009-04-30T09:30:00.003-05:00

The senate agreed to the house offer. There are still a few small differences, but the big ones General Revenue and total budget are essentially the same.

That's a shame since this simply must have been the back-door deal that was agreed upon before conferencing. Now we'll just have to see how it breaks down by University.

I've just received the following preliminary indications of the UF budget from a highly reliable source

Under the current proposal - which is subject to change - we estimate UF's base budget to be cut by approximately $68 million. Tuition would generate more than $21 million in revenue, and we get $2.4 million additional lottery dollars. This makes the net reduction about $45 million.

Since the budget has not been approved by both houses or signed by the governor, it's best to view these numbers as 'ballpark' rather than firm estimates.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Next update

2009-04-30T08:39:00.003-05:00

The Senate should have their counter-offer on the table for higher education later this morning. The current proposal is tough to fully evaluate even for those who are in the know. Here's a quote regarding the UF Budget

At the University of Florida, officials say they could still lose $30 to $50 million with the new budget.

“Our people are still analyzing what these cuts mean,” said UF spokesman Janine Sikes. “It’s an improvement from where the House was.”

30-50 million is a big range. At the 30 million dollar level, most programs could be salvaged. As you head up to the 50 million range, things get dicier. We'll have to wait and see what the senate does and ultimately how the funds are allocated.

In the meantime, transparency is a bit opaque in these discussions!

Cheers

Joe Meert

Latest Numbers out of Tallahasee for Higher Education

2009-04-29T12:32:00.003-05:00

Before today:

Senate $ 3,016,003,106
House $ 2,753,132,815
Difference $ 262,870,291

Latest:

Senate $ 3,016,003,106
House Offer #1 $ 2,925,015,362
Difference $ 90,987,744

Senate can respond later today. Best to contact everybody again and ask them to move more towards the Senate budget.

Here are the people sitting on the conference committees

Higher Education Appropriations -- Senator Lynn, Chair; Senators Constantine, Deutch, Gelber, and King

State Universities & Private Colleges Appropriations - Proctor (Chair), Precourt (Vice Chair), Heller (Democratic Ranking Member), Burgin, Dorworth, O'Toole, Patterson, Reed, Taylor.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Florida finally limits animal sex

2009-04-29T08:11:00.002-05:00

Yes, I guess it was ok to have sex with animals in Florida. Even more surprising is that there are 16 other states without such laws. The Florida house is not as kind to some animals because any animals who endanger airplanes can be killed without penalty. I'm packing a gun next time I fly! Oh well, I digress.

The budget committees are meeting today to iron out differences between the house and senate. One of those committees will decide the budgets for individual universities in Florida meaning that we might know in the next couple of days exactly how large the cuts to UF will be. It looks like this morning it's simply a meet and greet (45 minutes are scheduled).

The senate also passed a bill supporting a 15% increase in tuition for state universities and the house is expected to also support this legislation. For the University of Florida that means an extra 20 million or so for the next year. These tuition increases can continue (no more than 15%) until Florida is in line with most other states in terms of tuition costs.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Geology may be saved along with much of higher education

2009-04-28T11:48:00.002-05:00

The house has agreed to budget negotiations and have sliced nearly 80% of their proposed cuts to higher education. The total of the cuts is thought to be $120 million so for UF that's about a 30-40 million cut. Much of that will be made up via tuition increases such that we may be safe. Having said that, the budget is not finalized until the governor signs it, but it's a move in the right direction. The details have not been released nor have any agreements been signed. We'll have to wait, but I consider this some progress.

I really liked this comment:

$110 million in cuts to universities, which should be covered by $125 million from tuition increases;

Cheers

Joe Meert

Budget deal near

2009-04-28T08:42:00.003-05:00

Word out of Tallahassee is that a budget deal will be announced shortly. No word on the exact details, but looks hopeful that the deal will be done either today or Wednesday.

Although this makes it sound less likely.

TALLAHASSEE -- House Speaker-designate Dean Cannon, R-Winter Park, just told reporters what has become obvious: lawmakers physically don't have enough time to finish their budget work by the Friday adjournment of the regular, 60-day lawmaking session.

Because the finalized plan must sit on lawmakers' desks for 72 hours before it can be passed, the $65 billion-plus spending plan would have to be negotiated and off the printers by midnight Tuesday. But Senate President Jeff Atwater and House Speaker Larry Cretul haven't yet even signed off on how much money committee chairmen would have to divvy out to spending programs. So the chances of turning around the budget in the next 29 hours is near-impossible.

"First, you've got to agree on how much money you want to spend and reductions you have to make," said Cannon, who has been pushing to carry over a large surplus for when the state's share of the federal stimulus money runs out in two years.

But Cannon deflected just about every other question, saying the decision-making has been in the hands of the presiding officers since the end of last week.

It is confirmed that conferencing talks will begin at 4 pm today with hopes of finalizing the budget by May 8, 2009. No word yet on what deals were struck to reach this point.

Cheers

Joe Meert

President Obama's Address to the National Academies

2009-04-27T20:48:00.002-05:00

Remarks of President Barack Obama - As Prepared for Delivery
National Academy of Sciences
Washington, DC
April 27, 2009

It is my privilege to address the distinguished members of the National Academy of Sciences, as well as the leaders of the National Academy of Engineering and the Institute of Medicine who have gathered here this morning.

I'd like to begin today with a story of a previous visitor who also addressed this august body.

In April of 1921, Albert Einstein visited the United States for the first time. His international celebrity was growing as scientists around the world began to understand and accept the vast implications of his theories of special and general relativity. He attended this annual meeting, and after sitting through a series of long speeches by others, he reportedly said, "I have just got a new theory of eternity." I'll do my best to heed this cautionary tale.

The very founding of this institution stands as a testament to the restless curiosity and boundless hope so essential not just to the scientific enterprise, but to this experiment we call America.

A few months after a devastating defeat at Fredericksburg, before Gettysburg would be won and Richmond would fall, before the fate of the Union would be at all certain, President Lincoln signed into law an act creating the National Academy of Sciences.

Lincoln refused to accept that our nation's sole purpose was merely to survive. He created this academy, founded the land grant colleges, and began the work of the transcontinental railroad, believing that we must add "the fuel of interest to the fire of genius in the discoveryŠ of new and useful things."

This is America's story. Even in the hardest times, and against the toughest odds, we have never given in to pessimism; we have never surrendered our fates to chance; we have endured; we have worked hard; we have sought out new frontiers.

Today, of course, we face more complex set of challenges than we ever have before: a medical system that holds the promise of unlocking new cures and treatments - attached to a health care system that holds the potential to bankrupt families and businesses. A system of energy that powers our economy - but also endangers our planet. Threats to our security that seek to exploit the very interconnectedness and openness so essential to our prosperity. And challenges in a global marketplace which links the derivative trader on Wall Street to the homeowner on Main Street, the office worker in America to the factory worker in China - a marketplace in which we all share in opportunity, but also in crisis.

At such a difficult moment, there are those who say we cannot afford to invest in science. That support for research is somehow a luxury at a moment defined by necessities. I fundamentally disagree. Science is more essential for our prosperity, our security, our health, our environment, and our quality of life than it has ever been. And if there was ever a day that reminded us of our shared stake in science and research, it's today.

We are closely monitoring the emerging cases of swine flu in the United States. This is obviously a cause for concern and requires a heightened state of alert. But it is not a cause for alarm. The Department of Health and Human Services has declared a Public Health Emergency as a precautionary tool to ensure that we have the resources we need at our disposal to respond quickly and effectively. I'm getting regular updates on the situation from the responsible agencies, and the Department of Health and Human Services as well as the Centers for Disease Control will be offering regular updates to the American people so that they know what steps are being taken and what steps they may need to take. But one thing is clear - our capacity to deal with a public health challenge of this sort rests heavily on the work of our scientific and medical community. And this is one more example of why we cannot allow our nation to fall behind.

Unfortunately, that is exactly what has happened.

Federal funding in the physical sciences as a portion of our gross domestic product has fallen by nearly half over the past quarter century. Time and again we've allowed the research and experimentation tax credit, which helps businesses grow and innovate, to lapse.

Our schools continue to trail. Our students are outperformed in math and science by their peers in Singapore, Japan, England, the Netherlands, Hong Kong, and Korea, among others. Another assessment shows American fifteen year olds ranked 25th in math and 21st in science when compared to nations around the world.

And we have watched as scientific integrity has been undermined and scientific research politicized in an effort to advance predetermined ideological agendas.

We know that our country is better than this.

A half century ago, this nation made a commitment to lead the world in scientific and technological innovation; to invest in education, in research, in engineering; to set a goal of reaching space and engaging every citizen in that historic mission. That was the high water mark of America's investment in research and development. Since then our investments have steadily declined as a share of our national income - our GDP. As a result, other countries are now beginning to pull ahead in the pursuit of this generation's great discoveries.

I believe it is not in our American character to follow - but to lead. And it is time for us to lead once again. I am here today to set this goal: we will devote more than three percent of our GDP to research and development. We will not just meet, but we will exceed the level achieved at the height of the Space Race, through policies that invest in basic and applied research, create new incentives for private innovation, promote breakthroughs in energy and medicine, and improve education in math and science. This represents the largest commitment to scientific research and innovation in American history.

Just think what this will allow us to accomplish: solar cells as cheap as paint, and green buildings that produce all of the energy they consume; learning software as effective as a personal tutor; prosthetics so advanced that you could play the piano again; an expansion of the frontiers of human knowledge about ourselves and world the around us. We can do this.

The pursuit of discovery half a century ago fueled our prosperity and our success as a nation in the half century that followed. The commitment I am making today will fuel our success for another fifty years. That is how we will ensure that our children and their children will look back on this generation's work as that which defined the progress and delivered the prosperity of the 21st century.

This work begins with an historic commitment to basic science and applied research, from the labs of renowned universities to the proving grounds of innovative companies.

Through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and with the support of Congress, my administration is already providing the largest single boost to investment in basic research in American history.

This is important right now, as public and private colleges and universities across the country reckon with shrinking endowments and tightening budgets. But this is also incredibly important for our future. As Vannevar Bush, who served as scientific advisor to President Franklin Roosevelt, famously said: "Basic scientific research is scientific capital."

The fact is, an investigation into a particular physical, chemical, or biological process might not pay off for a year, or a decade, or at all. And when it does, the rewards are often broadly shared, enjoyed by those who bore its costs but also by those who did not.

That's why the private sector under-invests in basic science - and why the public sector must invest in this kind of research. Because while the risks may be large, so are the rewards for our economy and our society.

No one can predict what new applications will be born of basic research: new treatments in our hospitals; new sources of efficient energy; new building materials; new kinds of crops more resistant to heat and drought.

It was basic research in the photoelectric effect that would one day lead to solar panels. It was basic research in physics that would eventually produce the CAT scan. The calculations of today's GPS satellites are based on the equations that Einstein put to paper more than a century ago.

In addition to the investments in the Recovery Act, the budget I've proposed - and versions have now passed both the House and Senate - builds on the historic investments in research contained in the recovery plan.

We double the budget of key agencies, including the National Science Foundation, a primary source of funding for academic research, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology, which supports a wide range of pursuits - from improving health information technology to measuring carbon pollution, from testing "smart grid" designs to developing advanced manufacturing processes. And my budget doubles funding for the Department of Energy's Office of Science which builds and operates accelerators, colliders, supercomputers, high-energy light sources, and facilities for making nano-materials. Because we know that a nation's potential for scientific discovery is defined by the tools it makes available to its researchers.

But the renewed commitment of our nation will not be driven by government investment alone. It is a commitment that extends from the laboratory to the marketplace.

That is why my budget makes the research and experimentation tax credit permanent. This is a tax credit that returns two dollars to the economy for every dollar we spend, by helping companies afford the often high costs of developing new ideas, new technologies, and new products. Yet at times we've allowed it to lapse or only renewed it year to year.. I've heard this time and again from entrepreneurs across this country: by making this credit permanent, we make it possible for businesses to plan the kinds of projects that create jobs and economic growth.

Second, in no area will innovation be more important than in the development of new technologies to produce, use, and save energy - which is why my administration has made an unprecedented commitment to developing a 21st century clean energy economy.

Our future on this planet depends upon our willingness to address the challenge posed by carbon pollution. And our future as a nation depends upon our willingness to embrace this challenge as an opportunity to lead the world in pursuit of new discovery.

When the Soviet Union launched Sputnik a little more than a half century ago, Americans were stunned: the Russians had beaten us to space. We had a choice to make: we could accept defeat - or we could accept the challenge.. And as always, we chose to accept the challenge.

President Eisenhower signed legislation to create NASA and to invest in science and math education, from grade school to graduate school. And just a few years later, a month after his address to the 1961 Annual Meeting of the National Academy of Sciences, President Kennedy boldly declared before a joint session of Congress that the United States would send a man to the moon and return him safely to the earth.

The scientific community rallied behind this goal and set about achieving it. And it would lead not just to those first steps on the moon, but also to giant leaps in our understanding here at home. The Apollo program itself produced technologies that have improved kidney dialysis and water purification systems; sensors to test for hazardous gasses; energy-saving building materials; and fire-resistant fabrics used by firefighters and soldiers. And, more broadly, the enormous investment of that era - in science and technology, in education and research funding - produced a great outpouring of curiosity and creativity, the benefits of which have been incalculable.

The fact is, there will be no single Sputnik moment for this generation's challenge to break our dependence on fossil fuels. In many ways, this makes the challenge even tougher to solve - and makes it all the more important to keep our eyes fixed on the work ahead.

That is why I have set as a goal for our nation that we will reduce our carbon pollution by more than 80 percent by 2050. And that is why I am pursuing, in concert with Congress, the policies that will help us meet this goal.

My recovery plan provides the incentives to double our nation's capacity to generate renewable energy over the next few years - extending the production tax credit, providing loan guarantees, and offering grants to spur investment. For example, federally funded research and development has dropped the cost of solar panels by ten-fold over the last three decades. Our renewed efforts will ensure that solar and other clean energy technologies will be competitive.

My budget includes $150 billion over ten years to invest in sources of renewable energy as well as energy efficiency; it supports efforts at NASA, recommended as a priority by the National Research Council, to develop new space-based capabilities to help us better understand our changing climate.

And today, I am also announcing that for the first time, we are funding an initiative - recommended by this organization - called the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Energy, or ARPA-E.

This is based on the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, known as DARPA, which was created during the Eisenhower administration in response to Sputnik. It has been charged throughout its history with conducting high-risk, high-reward research. The precursor to the internet, known as ARPANET, stealth technology, and the Global Positioning System all owe a debt to the work of DARPA.

ARPA-E seeks to do this same kind of high-risk, high-reward research. My administration will also pursue comprehensive legislation to place a market-based cap on carbon emissions. We will make renewable energy the profitable kind of energy in America. And I am confident that we will find a wellspring of creativity just waiting to be tapped by researchers in this room and entrepreneurs across our country.

The nation that leads the world in 21st century clean energy will be the nation that leads in the 21st century global economy. America can and must be that nation.

Third, in order to lead in the global economy - and ensure that our businesses can grow and innovate, and our families can thrive - we must address the shortcomings of our health care system.

The Recovery Act will support the long overdue step of computerizing America's medical records, to reduce the duplication, waste, and errors that cost billions of dollars and thousands of lives.

But it's important to note: these records also hold the potential of offering patients the chance to be more active participants in prevention and treatment. We must maintain patient control over these records and respect their privacy. At the same time, however, we have the opportunity to offer billions and billions of anonymous data points to medical researchers who may find in this information evidence that can help us better understand disease.

History also teaches us the greatest advances in medicine have come from scientific breakthroughs: the discovery of antibiotics; improved public health practices; vaccines for smallpox, polio, and many other infectious diseases; anti-retroviral drugs that can return AIDS patients to productive lives; pills that can control certain types of blood cancers; and so many others.

And because of recent progress - not just in biology, genetics and medicine, but also in physics, chemistry, computer science, and engineering - we have the potential to make enormous progress against diseases in the coming decades. That is why my Administration is committed to increasing funding for the National Institutes of Health, including $6 billion to support cancer research, part of a sustained, multi-year plan to double cancer research in our country.

Fourth, we are restoring science to its rightful place.

On March 9th, I signed an executive memorandum with a clear message: Under my administration, the days of science taking a back seat to ideology are over. Our progress as a nation - and our values as a nation - are rooted in free and open inquiry. To undermine scientific integrity is to undermine our democracy.

That is why I have charged the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy with leading a new effort to ensure that federal policies are based on the best and most unbiased scientific information. I want to be sure that facts are driving scientific decisions - and not the other way around.

As part of this effort, we've already launched a website that allows individuals to not only make recommendations to achieve this goal, but to collaborate on those recommendations; it is a small step, but one that is creating a more transparent, participatory and democratic government.

We also need to engage the scientific community directly in the work of public policy. That is why, today, I am announcing the appointment of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, known as PCAST, with which I plan to work closely.

This council represents leaders from many scientific disciplines who will bring a diversity of experiences and views. I will charge PCAST with advising me about national strategies to nurture and sustain a culture of scientific innovation. It will be co-chaired by John Holdren, my top science advisor; Eric Lander, one of the principal leaders of the Human Genome Project; and Harold Varmus, former head of the National Institutes of Health and a Nobel laureate.

In biomedicine, for example, this will include harnessing the historic convergence between life sciences and physical sciences that is underway today; undertaking public projects - in the spirit of the Human Genome Project - to create data and capabilities that fuel discoveries in tens of thousands of laboratories; and identifying and overcoming scientific and bureaucratic barriers to rapidly translating scientific breakthroughs into diagnostics and therapeutics that serve patients.

In environmental science, it will require strengthening our weather forecasting, our earth observation from space, the management of our nation's land, water and forests, and the stewardship of our coastal zones and ocean fisheries.

We also need to work with our friends around the world. Science, technology, and innovation proceed more rapidly and more cost-effectively when insights, costs, and risks are shared; and so many of the challenges that science and technology will help us meet are global in character. This is true of our dependence on oil, the consequences of climate change, the threat of epidemic disease, and the spread of nuclear weapons, among other examples.

That is why my administration is ramping up participation in - and our commitment to - international science and technology cooperation across the many areas where it is clearly in our interest to do so. In fact, this week, my administration is gathering the leaders of the world's major economies to begin the work of addressing our common energy challenges together.

Fifth, since we know that the progress and prosperity of future generations will depend on what we do now to educate the next generation, today I am announcing a renewed commitment to education in mathematics and science.

Through this commitment, American students will move from the middle to the top of the pack in science and math over the next decade. For we know that the nation that out-educates us today - will out-compete us tomorrow.

We cannot start soon enough. We know that the quality of math and science teachers is the most influential single factor in determining whether or a student will succeed or fail in these subjects. Yet, in high school, more than twenty percent of students in math and more than sixty percent of students in chemistry and physics are taught by teachers without expertise in these fields. And this problem is only going to get worse; there is a projected shortfall of more than 280,000 math and science teachers across the country by 2015.

That is why I am announcing today that states making strong commitments and progress in math and science education will be eligible to compete later this fall for additional funds under the Secretary of Education's $5 billion Race to the Top program.

I am challenging states to dramatically improve achievement in math and science by raising standards, modernizing science labs, upgrading curriculum, and forging partnerships to improve the use of science and technology in our classrooms. And I am challenging states to enhance teacher preparation and training, and to attract new and qualified math and science teachers to better engage students and reinvigorate these subjects in our schools.

In this endeavor, and others, we will work to support inventive approaches. Let's create systems that retain and reward effective teachers, and let's create new pathways for experienced professionals to enter the classroom. There are, right now, chemists who could teach chemistry; physicists who could teach physics; statisticians who could teach mathematics. But we need to create a way to bring the expertise and the enthusiasm of these folks - folks like you - into the classroom.
There are states, for example, doing innovative work. I am pleased to announce that Governor Ed Rendell will lead an effort with the National Governors Association to increase the number of states that are making science, technology, engineering and mathematics education a top priority. Six states are currently participating in the initiative, including Pennsylvania, which has launched an effective program to ensure that his state has the skilled workforce in place to draw the jobs of the 21st century. I'd want every state participate.

But our work does not end with a high school diploma. For decades, we led the world in educational attainment, and as a consequence we led the world in economic growth. The G.I. Bill, for example, helped send a generation to college. But in this new economy, we've come to trail other nations in graduation rates, in educational achievement, and in the production of scientists and engineers.

That's why my administration has set a goal that will greatly enhance our ability to compete for the high-wage, high-tech jobs of the 21st century - and to foster the next generation of scientists and engineers. In the next decade - by 2020 - America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world. And we've provided tax credits and grants to make a college education more affordable.

My budget also triples the number of National Science Foundation graduate research fellowships. This program was created as part of the Space Race five decades ago. In the decades since, it's remained largely the same size - even as the numbers of students who seek these fellowships has skyrocketed. We ought to be supporting these young people who are pursuing scientific careers, not putting obstacles in their path.

This is how we will lead the world in new discoveries in this new century. But it will take far more than the work of government. It will take all of us. It will take all of you.

And so today I want to challenge you to use your love and knowledge of science to spark the same sense of wonder and excitement in a new generation.

America's young people will rise to the challenge if given the opportunity - if called upon to join a cause larger than themselves. And we've got evidence. The average age in NASA's mission control during the Apollo 17 mission was just 26. I know that young people today are ready to tackle the grand challenges of this century

So I want to persuade you to spend time in the classroom, talking - and showing -young people what it is that your work can mean, and what it means to you. Encourage your university to participate in programs to allow students to get a degree in scientific fields and a teaching certificate at the same time. Think about new and creative ways to engage young people in science and engineering, like science festivals, robotics competitions, and fairs that encourage young people to create, build, and invent - to be makers of things.

And I want you to know that I'm going to be working along side you. I'm going to participate in a public awareness and outreach campaign to encourage students to consider careers in science, mathematics, and engineering - because our future depends on it.

And the Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation will be launching a joint initiative to inspire tens of thousands of American students to pursue careers in science, engineering and entrepreneurship related to clean energy.

It will support an educational campaign to capture the imagination of young people who can help us meet the energy challenge. It will create research opportunities for undergraduates and educational opportunities for women and minorities who too often have been underrepresented in scientific and technological fields - but are no less capable of inventing the solutions that will help us grow our economy and save our planet. And it will support fellowships, interdisciplinary graduate programs, and partnerships between academic institutions and innovative companies to prepare a generation of Americans to meet this generational challenge.

For we must always remember that somewhere in America there's an entrepreneur seeking a loan to start a business that could transform an industry - but she hasn't secured it yet. There's a researcher with an idea for an experiment that might offer a new cancer treatment - but he hasn't found the funding yet. There is a child with an inquisitive mind staring up at the night sky. Maybe she has the potential to change our world - but she just doesn't know it yet.

As you know, scientific discovery takes far more than the occasional flash of brilliance - as important as that can be. Usually, it takes time, hard work, patience; it takes training; often, it requires the support of a nation.

But it holds a promise like no other area of human endeavor.
In 1968, a year defined by loss and conflict, Apollo 8 carried into space the first human beings ever to slip beyond the earth's gravity. The ship would circle the moon ten times before returning home. But on its fourth orbit, the capsule rotated and for the first time earth became visible through the windows.

Bill Anders, one of the astronauts aboard Apollo 8, could not believe what he saw. He scrambled for a camera. He took a photo that showed the earth coming up over the moon's horizon. It was the first ever taken from so distant a vantage point, soon to become known as "Earthrise."

Anders would say that the moment forever changed him, to see our world - this pale blue sphere - without borders, without divisions, at once so tranquil and beautiful and alone.

"We came all this way to explore the moon," he said, "and the most important thing is that we discovered the Earth."

Yes, scientific innovation offers us the chance to achieve prosperity. It has offered us benefits that have improved our health and our lives - often improvements we take too easily for granted. But it also gives us something more.

At root, science forces us to reckon with the truth as best as we can ascertain it. Some truths fill us with awe. Others force us to question long held views. Science cannot answer every question; indeed, it seems at times the more we plumb the mysteries of the physical world, the more humble we must be. Science cannot supplant our ethics, our values, our principles, or our faith, but science can inform those things, and help put these values, these moral sentiments, that faith, to work - to feed a child, to heal the sick, to be good stewards of this earth.

We are reminded that with each new discovery and the new power it brings, comes new responsibility; that the fragility and the sheer specialness of life requires us to move past our differences, to address our common problems, to endure and continue humanity's strivings for a better world.

As President Kennedy said when he addressed the National Academy of Sciences more than 45 years ago: "The challenge, in short, may be our salvation."

Thank you all for your past, present, and future discoveries. God bless you and may God bless the United States of America.

Life Goes On

2009-04-27T12:13:00.004-05:00

Lots of news today about the Florida budget mess, but not any of it is all that interesting. Basically, the leaders of the House and Senate are trying to cover their future political asses (and here I'm talking about the republicans). Rep Cannon is poised to take over leadership of the House and he wants to have a very lean budget so that he can campaign for future office without having to impose higher taxes during his term as speaker. His solution is to cut funding to higher education (among other targets). Meanwhile over on the other side of the aisle is Sen Atwater who has political aspirations for governor or US Senate but does not want the baggage of being the one who killed the University system in florida. Charlie Crist meanwhile just wants everybody to get along and does not say much at all because whatever he says might be held against him in his bid for the US Senate. In the meantime, the state faces a $40,000/day extra session because their political aspirations take precedent over their job.

Still, today was a good day because I found out my proposal to do more work in India will be funded.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Sunday, Bloody Sunday

2009-04-26T16:19:00.002-05:00

Not much happens on Sunday. The news from around the state indicates that there is not much movement on the Florida budget. In reading editorials and comments to the editorials, it appears that the state is still polarized regarding its support (or lack thereof) for education. Here's what our own Jon Martin had to say about geology in the Gainesville Sun:

Geology's mission vital to UF's future

The Sun's recent article explaining how President Machen's commitment to the environment goes beyond a symbolic gesture of riding an electric bike to work is encouraging.

His actions during the current budget crisis, however, belie these words, particularly in his acceptance of proposed budget cuts offered by the Dean of Liberal Arts and Sciences to "eliminate program in Geological Sciences."

Geological Sciences is much more than collecting and classifying rocks; we take a uniquely holistic approach to the study of the Earth, especially the Earth's physical environment in which we all live.

Active areas of research and teaching within Geological Sciences at UF address many topics, to name just a few: the Earth's magnetic field, which shields us from solar radiation; climate change; carbon cycling; links between earthquakes, tsunamis, and water flow in oceanic crust; groundwater quantity (Florida's drinking water source); groundwater's vulnerability to contamination; excess nutrients in groundwater and surface water; sinkhole formation and other ground disturbances; glacier dynamics; rates of sea level variations; hurricane frequency; and beach erosion.

All of these processes affect the sustainability of civilization, and many, such as climate and sea level change, are crucial for Florida's future.

Each year, we in Geological Sciences typically teach 4,000 to 5,000 students in a variety of courses about the Earth, contributing significantly to the education of citizens of Florida about these important issues.

Rather than cut viable, productive programs that successfully address environmental issues, UF should strengthen its commitment to departments that conduct research and teach in the area of environmental science.

I hope Geological Sciences will be around to provide its unique contributions to the university's commitment to the environment, in whatever shape that commitment takes.

Jonathan B. Martin,

Professor

Other good reads on the state budget can be found:

Good video as well.

Harold Troxler on Higher Ed.

Given that tomorrow is a pretty hard budget deadline for no special session, it looks like we're headed to overtime on this one.

Cheers

Joe Meert

A cool letter

2009-04-25T20:47:00.002-05:00

One of my students sent the following letter to Florida Senator Atwater. Pretty cool.

Senator Atwater,
I know that you place a great deal of emphasis on quality education as you have your own children enrolled in St. Clare’s (of which I’m an alum). Education in today’s global economy should be considered vital and should be a top priority for all administrators and politicians. How else can Americans expect to compete with countries that have a higher emphasis on higher education? I believe that you along with the other Senators should hold your stance on your proposed budget cut for higher education as opposed to the much higher budget proposed by the House. Higher education is the foundation on which we (future generations) must rely on to build our lives higher and higher and should it be weakened in any substantial way, it is as if we “will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand.” Matthew 7:26 As any sound Floridian knows, sand isn’t the foundation you’d want for your home, so why would you want to build your future with a weakened higher education system? I urge you not to agree to the budget cuts for higher education proposed by the House, for all future generations of Floridians who wish to pursue a quality education.

and the response

Thank you for your recent email expressing your concerns regarding the state budget and importance of adequate funding to our education system. I appreciate you taking the time to share your comments.

As a parent of four, I fundamentally believe it is the State of Florida’s paramount duty to provide an excellent school system and learning opportunities for our children. You have my assurance that I am going to do everything I can to hold education funding harmless from further cuts during this legislative session. I will continue to look at ways on how we can better support our schools including a review of potential new revenues and possible elimination of sales-tax exemptions.

I will be mindful of the important role these budget decisions play in our students’ academic future. Thank you for your commitment to better our education system. I appreciate the constant feedback as it is people like you that will shape the future of Florida for our children.

Jeff Atwater

brilliant.

Impasse

2009-04-25T20:34:00.004-05:00

The Terrafugia flying car---if cars can fly, why can't the House and Senate agree on a budget?

So it seems to be a slow weekend with neither the state house or senate getting very far in their double-secret probation meetings. The sticking point seems to be how best to fund (or not) education. Me, I took my spring break at Sun 'n Fun in Lakeland.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Self-serving complaints?

2009-04-24T10:51:00.002-05:00

I fully understand the sentiment that goes something like this "Meert is just trying to preserve his own program and fails to recognize that in saving his, someone else must lose". Guilty as charged to the first part of that statement. I am interested in saving Geology, but I was interested last year in trying to save the philosophy Ph.D. program at UF when that was cut. In fact, believe it or not, I'm interested in saving the religion department here, the geology department at Florida State, the anthropology department at FLorida State and most of higher education in Florida. I blog about Geology because it's what I know best and I understand the implications of those cuts to the state better than the others.

Higher education has been underfunded in Florida for a long time. Our tuition rate is the lowest among AAU member schools (and most other universities) and we have seen our budgets trimmed even before the present economic downturn. The more interesting thing about these particular cuts is that there are ways to save money and not have layoffs or departmental closures, but they require the administration to be clever and to think outside of the box. The UF plan was hastily put together without input from the faculty. For example, I believe that the faculty would be willing to collectively accept a temporary pay cut to preserve the academic integrity of the University. Shared pain for the better good. I know I would accept such a cut.

I am an unabashed supporter of education whether it's K-12 or higher education and see education as the key to economic recovery. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'll continue to defend science and education as long as I can.

Lastly, I'll note that in the current plan for cuts, my job is safe so I could just as easily sit back and do nothing, but it's simply too hard to watch as education takes a hit without fighting back.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Panda's Thumb

2009-04-24T10:48:00.002-05:00

Has blogged on the situation in Florida.

You can read the post and comments by following this link.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Cut the budget for our sons and daughters

2009-04-24T06:35:00.003-05:00

So says Florida House Speaker designate Dean Cannon (R-Winter Park). Yes, Representative Cannon, a downgrade in the bond rating for the state would amount to a temporary tax on our sons and daughters. However, if those sons and daughters can't attain the earnings provided by a college education, you've taxed them far more than you would by a temporary downgrade in Bond rating. In saving a dollar now, you are costing them hundreds of thousands of dollars in the future. Of course, by then you will have served your term as speaker and had your picture hung on the walls of the capital. All-in-all why not say that your legacy is more important than our sons and daughters.

WUFT

2009-04-23T18:50:00.003-05:00

To broadcast a 'state of the budget emergency' discussion tonight at 8 pm. I'll report on the discussion, but don't expect too much enlightenment. Provost Joe Glover, UFF Chair John Biro and a couple of Faculty Senate members will be on the panel.

A TV show where very little was said.

Glover claimed the Union broke the agreement, Biro said no. Glover was asked how the decisions were made on what programs to cut. He said we rely on the expertise of the deans who know the programs the best. The problem is that our Dean is new and had very little detailed information on our program. I suspect that is true about the other two programs targeted for elimination.

Cheers

Joe Meert

The news from Tallahassee is not good

2009-04-23T08:33:00.002-05:00

At least for higher education. The house and senate are in 'double secret' negotiations and it appears that the house is swaying the senate towards their funding levels. In particular, one of the future republican leaders is arguing for huge cuts so that the budget can look good under his leadership. None of the discussion seems to focus on how bad things look for the Universities at the moment.

The 11 presidents of the state universities are converging on Tallahassee to complain about the house plan. They will argue for their respective universities, but as one news reporter said "They are likely to come away disappointed".

I've also been reading comments to articles about cuts to higher education and for the most part, people seem to think it's a good idea. There's not much looking to the future only statements like "We have to tighten our belts, so should higher education". Nevermind that we've been tightening our belts for the past 4 years! At some point, higher education in Florida will cease to be 'higher' and due to the past budget cuts, the dream of a top university is gone. We now have to struggle to stay mediocre.

Applaud Cuts to Higher Education in Florida

2009-04-22T09:28:00.005-05:00

The State University system is complaining about the massive cuts proposed in the House version of the budget. It’s time to applaud House Speaker Cretul (R-Gainesville) for insisting that any deal with the Senate include the cuts to higher education. After all, what good is higher education when the state is suffering through an economic crisis?

It’s naïve to think that an educated populace can lead Florida out of this budgetary mess. It’s silly to believe that we need higher education in a state where the three largest industries are tourism, agriculture and mining. How much of an education does it require to put on a Mickey Mouse outfit and parade around Disneyworld to the delight of educated children from other states? Do we really need college graduates to work the parking lots of Universal Studios and Seaworld? Agriculture has been practiced by humans for millennia and certainly those who developed the citrus and strawberry industries in the state required no formal education. Just plant the tree, wait and in a few months you’ve got your crop. Mining? It’s pretty simple to dig up phosphate and put it in a dump truck. No intelligence needed.

It took great foresight and courage for the House to take monies from education in an effort to solve our current budgetary crisis. If we need a few leaders for business, we can get them from some other states that foolishly think that an educated populace is a good idea. The medical, scientific and legal community can get their leaders from other states as well. After all, Florida is a great melting pot. We don’t need to bother with education when educated people are going to move here anyway. I’m sure when they realize that they won’t have to pay taxes for education, that will make our state even more attractive.

I’m tired of hearing about the ‘brain-drain’ blamed on cuts to higher education. If those ‘perfessors’ had real brains, then they never would have come to Florida in the first place. We don’t need their research funding or their discoveries. We certainly don’t need the best of the best to educate our students because we really don’t need education. Our doctors, lawyers, scientists etc can be brought in from other states. We can supply them with support staff who can be trained on the job. I say, let academia in Florida rot away. It’s not the business of our state to support education, it’s the business of our state to support the big three industries, increase our tax base and play host to the educated people from elsewhere in the US. They don't want smart tour guides, they want guides who can make silly jokes and make the tourists feel smart.

Water issues? In Florida? We’re surrounded by water on three sides!! How can we possibly have water issues in Florida? Why do we need high tech industry in Florida? Isn’t that what silicon valley is all about? One needs only look at the problems in California to realize that high tech is not a solution to our problem. In fact, I’m not at all convinced that we need to fund K-12 education either. A 6th grade education should be good enough. Just teach our kids the basics of readin’, writin’ and arithmetic and turn them loose into the workforce. Any education beyond the 6th grade is really just a preparation for higher education and I think it’s clear Florida can do without higher education.

Call or write your legislator and tell them that “Floridian’s don’t need no stinkin’ education”. We’re already near the bottom in support for education, with this push by the House we can reach that goal and move on to more important things like football and basketball championships.

Drill baby drill

2009-04-21T18:08:00.004-05:00

The florida house approves offshore drilling. Who you gonna call to help figure out the geology? The nonsense in this state knows no bounds. Exploit the geology, but don't train geologists.

and then we see this

But geology is not important, right?

Cheers

Joe Meert

University of South Florida

2009-04-21T14:43:00.002-05:00

Cuts jobs, but refuses to lay off tenured or tenure-track faculty. They also announced no majors will be eliminated.

Link

Cheers

Joe Meert

Florida House Speaker on Budget negotiations

2009-04-21T13:13:00.002-05:00

Here's the timeline. The differences between the House and Senate budgets must be worked out by next Monday (perhaps Tuesday) in order to have the requisite 72 hour discussion period in place prior to voting on the last day of the legislative session May 1, 2009. I say Monday because the budget must be printed and distributed which can take a day or so. At present, the two sides are discussing the issues behind closed doors. House speaker Larry Cretul provided an update on those discussions this afternoon and the news is not good for higher education.

Cretul notes:

We have informed the Senate that we would be willing to consider supporting nearly all of the proposals for additional revenues contained in their budget. But in return, the House is asking the Senate to support nearly all spending reductions proposed by the House.

This will ensure a long-term, fiscally sound budget approach. That approach responsibly reduces state government spending in the coming fiscal year.Such a course would prepare the state for the expiration of federal stimulus dollars beginning next year.

Those cuts include huge cuts to the University system. This is getting dire. If you have not written your representative and senator, there is no more time.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Dr. James Tull: Firing Squad

2009-04-21T12:18:00.002-05:00

Received this today regarding geology at our sister school

The history of chivalrous firing squads is such that the individual is granted a final word. Although chivalry may have died at some point during the so far relatively short history of Florida government, last words may still be allowed. These may be some of them. Living the dream of academic accomplishment, success, and fulfillment is one of life’s greatest gifts to a fortunate few. Being able to contribute to the betterment of the future of society through teaching, mentoring, and conducting meaningful scientific research is both enriching and rewarding. This has been the story within Florida’s academic institutions for many decades as they rose toward national prominence and endeavored to serve, and, in so doing, to enrich the lives of essentially all Floridians. However, many are finding that there is a quick transition from this life dedicated to public service and expanding our world of knowledge, to being “targeted for closure,” words with a much different (and cold) ring to them. I am only one example, and maybe not so significant a one at that. One could look across the spectrum of dedicated public servants in this state and find many more, and perhaps better examples.
I, and several of my colleagues, have served in FSU’s Department of Geological Sciences for nearly 30 years. In the “current financial crisis,” our leaders, from the President, to the State Legislature and Governor, to the university administrators are being forced to make many very hard choices about the future of our state and country. Rarely in most of our lifetimes have we been more in need of wise leaders to steer us through troubled waters. Each has his or her perspectives and ultimate goals, yet history will show that the wisest will devise plans that will best enhance our children’s future. Now being forced to cut core academic programs, universities must make what amount to lose-lose decisions for their institutions. Programs offered up to the budget axe are presumably deemed to be academic areas that produce graduates that Florida and the nation can somehow afford to go without. Among those are Geological Sciences at FSU. In this case, our graduates are placed in: A) the nation’s oil and gas industry, mostly in exploration for energy resources, B) Uranium exploration-searching for future deposits to fuel our nuclear reactors, C) non-fuel mineral exploration and production-searching for all of the natural mineral and rock materials that modern society can not function without, D) water resources- finding, cleaning, safely disposing of, and protecting that fluid that is most vital for Florida’s present and future, E) government agencies (U.S. and Florida Geological Surveys, Water Management Districts, DEP, DOH, DOE, etc., and private industries, all of which deal with the public’s protection and understanding of a myriad of environmental issues ranging from regulatory functions, to public health, coastal erosion, waste disposal, causes and effects of sea level rise and global climate change, and oh yes, F) in faculty positions in academic institutions across the country and the region that do for their important constituencies what we do for Florida.
If you want to see high salaries, you will need to look elsewhere than with our faculty. Our graduates would be a good place to start. Historians (the ones not also “targeted for closure”) may someday say correctly, that FSU served as an important center for earth science education and research from early after its transition from the FSCW, to early in the 21st century, but then, even with their eyes gazing into the uncertain future, and with the words “energy”, “environment”, and “climate change” continuously echoing across political campaigns and media outlets, Florida’s leaders considered programs like earth science to be expendable at Florida’s premier institutions of higher learning because this great (4th largest) state apparently can’t even afford to maintain a few quality universities.
James F. Tull
FSU Professor of Geological Sciences

Stanley G. Tate wants to stop 15% increase

2009-04-20T14:05:00.004-05:00

Here is his op-ed.

I've got to hand it to Mr. Tate for wanting to make college affordable to all Floridians. Here's the problem with his thinking. Even with a 15% increase in tuition, college does remain affordable in the state of Florida. Disproportionately so. A University education in Florida can be had on the cheap (or for free) thanks to the Bright Futures program. This program is also the same program that's going to kill the University of Florida system unless increased fees are approved. UF is poised to get hammered by the pending House budget. What good is a cheap education if the schools granting the degrees can't afford to provide you with a quality education?
Mr. Tate seems to think that quality can come cheaply. A good education requires top teachers and scholars. Those top teachers and scholars are running away from Florida because the legislature continues to underfund the Universities and because the cuts are causing the Universities to cut programs. Have a look at what UF and FSU propose if their funding comes in at 2009 House levels. A florida education may remain affordable, but its value in the market place will continue to fall. I can appreciate the need to educate Floridian's at the lowest cost possible, but we've been operating below the lowest cost possible for a long time. I salute Mr. Tate for his efforts to keep our educational system inexpensive, but I don't agree with his opposition to the 15% increase. Inexpensive is good, cheap is not.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Another nice editorial

2009-04-20T12:53:00.003-05:00

By Mary Ann Lindley on the AWOL Board of Governors. Florida higher education system (not just UF and not just Geological Sciences) is facing dreadful cuts and apparently the Board of Governors is taking a wait and see attitude. Not good. It might be good to e-mail or call the BOG. The contact information can be found by following this link.

Miami Herald reports that the House-Senate budget meetings have been delayed because they are so far apart. It gets really stupid if we have to go to an extended session. Basically, an extended legislative session would suck money out of the Florida budget to pay for the legislators to work on (and their staffs---and the lights etc). The house blames their lack of inaction this legislative session on the problems with the indicted former speaker. Just keep calling and telling them to figure this all out by May 1 and don't cut higher education.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Interesting article

2009-04-20T06:30:00.002-05:00

By Doug Blackburn

Florida's universities are primed to offer a new type of degree program designed to dovetail with the high-tech sector of the job market.
Called a professional science master's degree, it is one of the fastest growing programs in higher education. Some 60 universities in 25 states already offer PSM degrees.
The Florida Council of Graduate Deans met today in Tallahassee with representatives of the Board of Governors, the governor's office and perhaps most importantly, a handful of industry leaders in the state in an attempt to develop PSM programs at all 11 schools in the State University System.
There didn't appear to be any opposition to the initiative, which could begin to take shape at Florida State University soon. FSU already offers master's degrees in financial mathematics and computational science, and may apply for the formal designation to call them PSMs, said Nancy Marcus, dean of the Graduate School.
"It's a recruiting tool in a way to be officially designated," Marcus said. "We want to develop additional master's degree programs, particularly in health-care technology."
Fiona Crawford, associate director of the Roskamp Institute in Sarasota, said there's a genuine need for graduates with master's degrees. Roskamp is a growing basic science institute.
"Too often we're finding that Ph.D. graduates are far from ready to face the real world," Crawford said. "This would provide skill training with a focus, which we would welcome."
The national Council of Graduate Schools strongly supports Florida's efforts to develop a statewide PSM program, according to Carol Lynch, a program director at the council. She noted that the federal stimulus package provided $15 million for PSM programs.

One of the misconceptions about our department (and cited as to why we were targeted for cuts) was that geology awarded more MS than Ph.D. degrees. We made the point that for geologists, a master's degree is a professional degree. Students with the MS get better jobs and better pay than BS students (who also have no trouble finding jobs). While this is a 'new deal' for Florida, it's something UF has been doing for years. Wonder if anyone cares.

Cheers

Joe Meert

A few of the better commentaries on Higher Education in Florida

2009-04-19T11:26:00.002-05:00

St. Pete Times.

Tunnel vision from the Gainesville Sun.

Tallahassee

Nice Blog

News from the Orange and Blue

2009-04-19T07:48:00.003-05:00

This was sent to me anonymously...thought I'd post it.

There was a little bird who attended the Orange and Blue game Saturday at the swamp. This little bird was able to fly up to the President's Skybox and listen in to the discussions about football, the University and the nonsensical things that people talk about at football games. This little bird indicated that perhaps all is not lost at the University of Florida (academically) and that expectations of program cuts are not as likely as it may appear.

----------------------------------
We'll have to see if this little bird got the right message. In the meantime, an article buried in the local newspaper discusses the practical problems facing budget resolution between the house and senate. Ron Cunningham has a very nice editorial in the newspaper. There are also a couple of good letters from students involved in the cuts.

Here's the bottom line for those who are interested in saving higher education in Florida. Write your house members and tell them to up the funding. Write your senators and tell them not to drop their funding.

Oh yes, the Orange won the game 31-21.

Cheers

Joe Meert

University of Florida: Big News

2009-04-18T08:49:00.005-05:00

In perusing the local newspaper, the Gainesville Sun, this weekend it's clear that there is one major concern. Will the Blue team or Orange team win the vaunted intrasquad spring scrimmage? Forget the fact that the University that the team supposedly represents is falling apart from within. Forget the fact that most of these student athletes will have to put food on their plates via some other means than athletics. The cuts proposed by UF are going to limit the options for these students and is going to diminish their degrees.

Look, I'm a UF alum so I'm all for college athletics and the pleasant diversions they bring and the loyalty they instill amongst the alumni. What I don't understand is when the athletics dominate the conversation over the mission of the University. Look at the Gainesville Sun forums. The cuts get maybe one or two comments whilst the orange and blue game is discussed like a war was taking place. It's an intrasquad scrimmage folks, that's it.

Well, this happens at other Universities. It will be interesting to see if the cuts are announced at the game with the request for fans to contact the Florida house. Right now the Senate budget would result in minimal damage whereas the House budget would devastate UF (and many other Florida Universities). It's too bad that UF alumni don't demand the same excellence from their academic programs as they do the athletic programs.
I've said nothing new here, I know but it makes me feel better to say it.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Something different

2009-04-17T21:03:00.002-05:00

Flew to Destin today on an Angel Flight just to get away from it all. Suffice it to say that along the flight we passed beaches undergoing erosion, rivers recently flooded and a whole bunch of phosphate and cement plants. It just goes to show that you can't really get away from geology in this state (unless you attend the new UF and FSU).

Cheers

Joe Meert

Whoop, dere it is (or isn't)

2009-04-16T18:18:00.003-05:00

The President of the Medical School of Florida (er University of Florida) presented his plan for cuts to the University. As we have been all along, the department is still a deer in the headlights. The most brilliant comment was that our President claims that the use of stimulus funds is not an option because we might have a budget crisis next year!! Regardless of how people feel about stimulus money, the objective is for those monies to be used to help revive the economy and avoid cuts?? So if the monies are available and can help reduce layoffs for the upcoming year, what is wrong with using them for that purpose? If the economy does not recover, then the program can be discussed again next year. Here's what President Machen had to say:

While this appears to be a good solution, it is only a temporary fix. This practice of using non-recurring funds to pay for recurring costs puts us in a very dangerous situation in the future. Two years from now, our base state funding will be millions of dollars less than it is today, and there will be no stimulus dollars to make up the difference.

In fact, we have no idea if this statement is true. It is either an expectation by Machen or an excuse to trim money from some programs and prevent damage to his favorites. Consider that in the present budget, the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences loses three degree granting programs along with a number of other cuts while Engineering suffers no real losses (they simply won't fill vacant positions). The College of Medicine loses 1 staff member and leaves some vacancies unfilled (note that the college is still hiring!).

So there it is and Machen tries to make the point that this is a worst case scenario. In my humble opinion, the University of Florida has a myopic view of the future and the budget proposal laid before the Faculty Senate is poorly conceived on many, many levels.

Fortunately, the Dean of our college has promised that if other Colleges do not follow the 'vertical cut' mandate, he will ask to revisit our plan. We'll see if that happens.

A last point, several people have asked to speak to Machen about the cuts to our department. His secretary said that he is not taking calls at this time.

Sigh.

D-Day

2009-04-16T10:26:00.003-05:00

Today is the day the UF will announce it's 'semi-final' plan from the president. It will likely be announced at the Faculty Senate meeting at 3 pm. The idea is to open up the process for comments. Stay tuned....

The State of Stupid: Florida

2009-04-14T17:02:00.002-05:00

Florida State University is not content to play second fiddle to the University of Florida. Today the President of FSU announced programs that will be eliminated if FSU's funding is decreased. Just like Florida, the FSU administration is targeting their department of Geological Sciences. These cuts, if enacted, will deprive the state of the majority of their Geoscientists trained in Florida. The points made regarding the importance of geology to the state can be reviewed here.

Cheers

Joe Meert

UF Budget cuts- Write to the Legislature

2009-04-11T08:52:00.002-05:00

The Senate and House budget bills are widely divergent on the amounts allocated to higher education. The Senate bill is some $50 million more than the house allocation although both represent cuts. In order to minimize the damage to UF (and of course geology), it is imperative that we contact the legislators and urge them to support UF. There is a form located here that will send the e-mail for you, but I urge you to add a personal message so that they don't simply get a template e-mail.

Cheers

Joe Meert

More Drama at University of Florida

2009-04-09T17:07:00.004-05:00

So today we've learned (through a little bird) that the three departments targeted for cuts in the college (religion, communication science and disorders and geological sciences) all have something in common. The current Dean of the college has only held that position for about 8 months. Previously he was at Kansas University (which has a very strong geology program). The Dean was interim, but is now the provost of the University. The interim Dean was also a candidate for the 'permanent' Dean's job. Here's where the story gets interesting. During the time that Glover served as interim Dean, he (along with UF) was named in two lawsuits. The Departments in which those lawsuits arose? Geological Sciences and religion. Consider that 8 months is not a long time for a new Dean to get to know each department in a large and diverse college. Consider that 'advice' on where to look for cuts may have originated from the previous interim Dean and you see where the story leads. So how does CS&D play into all of this? Well, the chair of CS&D was also the chair of the search committee for the new Dean. Her opinion on Glover? That he was not fit to serve as the dean of the college? 1,2,3 strikes and you're out? Who says politics does not play a role on campus?

Today's announcement from the Dean

2009-04-01T16:11:00.002-05:00

Here is the letter we were given

Dear Colleagues:

Today I sent to the Provost the revised version of the CLAS 10 percent budget cutting exercise. Soon it will be posted on the Provost’s website. We will post it on our site as well.

The plan has been revised since it was first presented two weeks ago. Most noticeable is a change in the format of the document. Rather than aggregating the cuts into ten “tiers,” this document breaks them out more discretely into 47 individual cuts. This fits the format provided by the Provost’s office (and allows us to provide more detail on the consequences of each cut), but it doesn’t by itself change the content or sequence of the cuts.

Several changes to the numbers are fairly minor, and involve revisions based on more precise accounting or on updated expectations of attrition.

I have adopted one significant change recommended by the Finance Committee. In the original plan, Geological Sciences would take a significant reduction in “tier 8” and Religion would take a significant cut in “tier 10.” In the current plan, those cuts would be distributed more equally, so that both departments would take part of their cut in what used to be tier 8, and part in what used to be tier 10. Those cuts are now in lines 43, 44, 46, and 47. I think that the Finance Committee found this to be a more equitable approach, and I agree.

In conveying the plan to the Provost’s office, I will stress the following points.

1. Even taking half these cuts would be deeply damaging to CLAS, to our students, and to the University. Attrition will leave our capacity to pursue our mission considerably diminished.

2. Before any of the most serious cuts are taken (those that would dramatically cut a department) I would like to discuss the consequences directly with the Provost and President, and I believe that it would be appropriate for them to meet directly with the concerned departments.

3. If other colleges are allowed to implement plans that avoid vertical cuts, CLAS should have the opportunity to revisit its plan, which is based on the belief that vertical cuts are mandated.

There has been only one good part of this process, and that has been the thoughtful way all of you have approached this impossible situation. People have asked hard questions. They have listened to the answers, even when the answers were not very satisfying. Criticisms of both the plan and the process have been intense, but have been expressed civilly. I know that this process has damaged morale in this College, and especially in those departments that would bear the brunt of the cuts, but we have also demonstrated our ability to maintain our principles even under severe strain. I’m grateful for that.

Best,

Paul
Dean College of Arts and Science

A long day

2009-03-30T19:00:00.004-05:00

So today we met with the Dean and then a meeting with the Faculty of our college. There was minimal movement with regard to changing the plan and saving any of the departments involved. The newest idea is to further share the pain. Rather than taking 100% of our (Geology's) cuts if the budget cuts reach a certain percentage (for example 7% percent), the new plan is to divide the cuts at that level evenly between geology and religion. In the previous plan if a 7% cut was required by the college all of it would have been absorbed by geology. In the revision, a 7% cut would be shared, but an 8% cut would also be shared resulting in the same devastation to our department. This gives us a little more hope that the cuts won't be QUITE as devastating, but this is still not what we hope for. It also should be noted that once the plan goes forward, there is no reason that the Provost and President can't change it and take all, or none of Geology. Right now, those who are interested in fighting this need to push the Florida legislature to fund education and also we need to let the Provost know that these cuts are not acceptable.

On a separate note, the Gainesville Sun had a great op-ed by religion prof Bron Taylor on how we might deal with the budget crisis on a collegial basis. No real groundswell for this option, but count me in!

Cheers

Joe Meert

University of Florida Geology Cuts: Additional thoughts

2009-03-28T16:43:00.002-05:00

So it's the weekend before the big day. I must hand it to our faculty, our students and our alumni for fighting hard in defense of the department. It's heartening to read the e-mails and letters of support pouring in for us and we all deeply appreciate the thoughts. The good news is that we have support. The bad news is that the plan is likely to go forward as is.

We've tried to figure out the rationale for choosing geology and quite honestly it seems to be that cutting geology will cause the minimum amount of grief to the university as a whole. There is no indication that the University is thinking about the larger impact of cutting the department, the revenue it generates or the service role it plays in a state absolutely reliant on the earth for its survival. We've made many arguments, but the bottom line is that our college feels 'stuck' to its original plan. We'll keep arguing to the Dean and to the college until the plan goes forward, but then we'll turn our attention to the Provost and president.

Anyway, for me personally (a UF alumnus and professor) the mood is hopeful and grim.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Geology cuts planned at the University of Florida

2009-03-21T13:15:00.003-05:00

This week the Dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences outlined his plan for cuts to the college should the state legislature trim the University of Florida budget due to the decreased revenue projections. Several departments within the college were targeted for massive cuts. One of these departments, Geological Sciences will be gutted of the younger faculty and research scientists under the plan. I am an alumnus of that Department (B.S. 1986; M.S. 1988) and am currently an Associate Professor in Geology. My bias is clear and I make no apologies for my bias.
The University of Florida is both a Land and Sea Grant University and as such is tasked with the preservation, exploration and careful use of land and sea resources. The three largest revenue producers in the state are, in order, (1) Tourism; (2) Agriculture and (3) Mining. These three industries are joined at the hip to the study of Geological Sciences. The main mining industries in the state of Florida are phosphate mining and heavy mineral mining. Phosphates are used in a variety of products but agriculture relies heavily on the phosphate industry for fertilizer. A recent estimate shows that the state of Florida provides about two-thirds of the nation’s phosphate needs and about 25% of the global phosphate supply. Geologists are integral to the exploration and exploitation of phosphate resources and also in preserving the environment during the mining enterprise. Although not as active as phosphate mining, heavy mineral deposits are mined from Florida for (among other things) their titanium. Titanium and titanium dioxides are used in a tremendous variety of products such as paints, sunscreen, food coloring, plastics. Geologists trained at the University of Florida play a central role in this industry as well.
Florida is surrounded by coastline and the highest elevation in the state is only 350 feet above sea level and most of the state sits at a much lower elevation. Global climate change has become a politically charged topic; however given the fact that Floridian’s reside within an hour of a coast, the potential impacts of sea level rise (or fall) has serious implications for our state. The University of Florida’s Department of Geology is studying these changes in the past and present to provide a clearer picture of what we might expect with any sort of changing climate.
Tourism has played a role in altering the coastal morphology of the state through the building of jetties, groins and other ‘beach preserving’ structures. Building along the beachfront and the development of large coastal cities such as Tampa and Miami has led to problems associated with the fresh water supply in the state and even an increase in the development of sinkholes and other construction hazards. Who evaluates these problems? By and large it’s geologists working in concert with engineers. Our state is also home to several Environmental Protection Superfund sites (including one right here in Gainesville Cabot-Koppers). It is hydrogeologists who evaluate and help plan remediation for these superfund sites and it is the University of Florida’s Department of Geology who is training those students.
We also are constantly reminded (in our pocketbooks) about our dependence on natural resources like coal and oil. Who is charged with finding these resources? Once again the answer is geologists. Our students work for petroleum and mining industries and are working to find new prospects and reserves to supply our countries fuel needs.
In an economy that is struggling today, there is still at least one employment bright spot and that is in Earth Science disciplines. In the state alone geologists work in a wide variety of industries ranging from mining, environmental, groundwater, surface water, construction, nuclear test monitoring all rely on the skills of highly trained geoscientists. Walk into any of these businesses in the state and you will find UF alumni. The Geology Gator nation has far reaching tentacles that positively benefit our state and nation. By any metric you wish to apply, the University of Florida is a preeminent school in Geosciences. Our faculty are internationally respected researchers whose goal it is to see their students succeed in helping Florida maintain and develop our natural resources and also to protect our citizens from geological hazards such as diminishing groundwater resources and pollution. Budget cuts mean pain, but targeting a department that is so integral to the economy of the state is simply criminal.

McCain=Obama: My one political post

2008-08-21T07:00:00.001-05:00

Here's what I don't get about America. We have people who seem to think that these two are polar opposites when a careful examination shows they are fraternal twins. The 'issues' that are claimed to separate the two are manufactured by people within each party. Electing either one of these career politicians is not a vote for change but a vote for the perception of change. Yet, we are stuck with an idiotic two-party system. In part this is because the american electorate has succumbed to the notion of either/or and they manufacture issues in order to make differences seem real. If Obama wins, we get no real change. If McCain wins, we get no real change. In spite of this we get rabid arguments about the patriotism, religious beliefs and experience of each of the candidates as if it really matters. This election, like the last, the one before that and then one before that is all about a politician seeking to cement their legacy. Our apathy has led us down a path were real vision is lacking and real leadership is an illusion.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Snelling makes some refreshing comments

2008-08-20T18:07:00.005-05:00

At the recent creationist convention in Philadelphia, creation geologist Andrew Snelling made one of the final presentations. He described, quite frankly, the problems that young earth creationism is having with being taken seriously. After reading his powerpoint slides, I am now placing Snelling on an even keel with Kurt Wise who has been similarly honest about the lack of scholarship associated with YEC'ism. Mind you, that's not an admission on my part that YEC'ism has any scientific merit, but it's very nice to see some self-reflection on their part. So, here is the list provided by Jason Rosenhouse. I make comments on each point.

1) Organizationally we are in very poor shape!

I would agree. Creationists are in poor shape because there is no rigor to their science and they feel that anything that attacks evolution is good enough to forward to their intended audience.

a. there is a lack of unity

This is a troubling statement taken at face value, but see point (b,c,d) below and my comments.

b. there are schisms and inter-personal animosities

c. there are too many different personal agendas

d. there is too much apparent competitiveness

There are personal agendas, schisms, competitiveness and inter-personal animosities in real science as well. The difference, I think, is that in real science all those agendas, schisms are hashed out in the literature. One can have a very strong personality and be very competitive, but if the science is bad, it doesn't mean a thing. So, what is Snelling getting at here? I'm not sure, but apparently he seems to think that there should be a unified front against evolution. Indeed, despite the fact that conventional science suffers from all these 'weaknesses', we don't really argue too much about the basics. Evolution happens, we argue about how and why, but not about whether or not it occurs.

2) We have several strong advocacy organizations and lots of unaccountable individuals.

I suspect this is a Ham-slam (or a Hovind dunk). It's true. Ken Ham has decided that evidence be damned, there is a hell of a lot of money to be made by pushing anything (good, bad or dishonest) appearing to support YEC'ism. I think this led to the schism between the Australian and American AIG groups.

3) We have enormous varying scientific quality control standards.

I don't mean to be flippant, but from what I've seen, there are NO control standards other than the following..."if it supports yec'ism, it's good enough to get published". Even in Snellings own writings, there is no hint that there might be any problem with the analysis. Interestingly, these suggestions do come out elsewhere in creationist writings.

4) We thus have confusion over advocated scientific models, because our constituency thinks that all such models are equally valid scientifically, when they are not.

That's because of your starting point. Creationists are quite clear in their philosophy that anything that supports YEC'ism is valid science. It doesn't matter if that 'science' is flawed, illogical or scientifically dishonest. The ends (holding the masses to a YE-model) justify any and all means (including lies, damned lies and statistics)

5) But how well have we done at building the Creation Model?

Abysmal! But you're gonna admit that aren't you?

6) If we are honest, by looking at the current status of the Creation Model, the answer would have to be “poorly".

Ok, I said abysmal, you said poorly.

a. we do not yet have a unified cosmological model

You don't even have a start on one!

b. even nearly five decades after The Genesis Flood we still have no comprehensive model of earth history explaining the geologic (strata and fossil) record that includes general agreement on Creation Week rocks. Pre-Flood/Flood and Flood/post-Flood boundaries.

Not five decades Andrew! Well over 400 years (and I'm being generous). The flud 'hypothesis' has been around far longer than 50 years. It was one of the reigning ideas of the 16th and 17th centuries. What I am pleased about is to read a YEC acknowledging something I've been harping on for more than a decade. In short, according to creationists the 'flud' is THE defining geologic event on earth. Everything else is miniscule. So why is it so hard to define the time line? One can read the first few paragraphs of this to see my challenge.

c. We are even still arguing about the nature of the geologic record, whether there really are rock sequences that can be traced across continents and correlated between continents.

To be fair to Snelling, this is also true of real geology so I can hardly fault creationists on this one.

d. We still don’t hav a complete understanding of radiometric dates (e.g. concordant dates, meteorite dates), RATE notwithstanding.

We do! What's even better is that our explanations are internally self-consistent and have withstood test after test after test. RATE has simply looked desperately for a few examples where radiometric dating APPEARS flawed. In each and every case, conventional geology can explain these 'anomalies (this is one of Snelling's assertions)'

Anyway, I thank Andrew for being honest about the overall failure of YEC'ist geology. I suspect he will either look deeper into this matter and be forced (ala Glenn Morton) to admit that YEC'ism is vacuous or retrench into the self-denial that YEC'ism demands.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Bigfoot found

2008-08-14T19:09:00.002-05:00

Again. This time the hoaxsters are going to provide DNA evidence of Bigfoot and also pictures of the creature in a freezer. Right. If this is really Bigfoot, then I am going to have to confess that I've bagged a chupacabra (oh wait, they found one of those this week too!). Well, at least the Montauk monster frenzy has subsided.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Indian Basins getting older

2008-08-07T11:42:00.000-05:00

Last month a new paper by my research group was published online (Precambrian Research). The paper will appear in print on July 30,2008.

We have been working in the Vindhyan Basin (one of a half-dozen or so "Purana" basins) in north-central India. These Purana basins were assumed to be Neoproterozoic in age, but we think that the new ages for the Vindhyan have a lot to say about life on earth and the evolution of the Indian subcontinent. National Geographic did a decent job of writing this up.

Dr. Ron Carlson takes over for Kent Hovind

2008-08-06T12:21:00.004-05:00

Ugh, I listened to a 10 minute rant by Dr. Ron Carlson. The video can viewed here. The number of factual errors in this 10 minutes makes me happy that they cut off the video. I do pity the people who had to listen to more of his nonsense. It seemed eerily reminiscent of a Kent Hovind seminar and proves once again that young earth creationism is built on a bed of lies. I e-mailed Carlson with the following points. We'll see if he responds.

Dr. Carlson,

I watched the video on Worldview and was surprised at how poorly you spoke about paleontology and geology. Your video contained many factual errors. I'd be surprised if you'll correct these, but I don't believe that it should be the duty of a Christian to misrepresent science in order to further a worldview. So here are some of the errors I noticed:

(1) The circular reasoning argument- False. You said fossils are dated by the layers they are found in and the layers by the fossils they contained. If true, it would indeed be circular reasoning. It's not true. The geologic column was assembled without knowledge of absolute (years) ages. It was based on the observation that the layers of rock seemed to be the same worldwide. For example, trilobite fossils are found in layers beneath dinosaurs and dinosaurs beneath fossils of humans. At the time, geologists like Lyell and Hutton made the assumption that the layers were in a correct relative order with the oldest rocks on the bottom. Rock layers are dated using radiometric methods. That's how the years were put into the geologic column, by actually using radiometric methods to determine their ages. What was so cool is that those age determinations confirmed the logic of Lyell and Hutton and the lower layers were found to be older than the upper layers. The correct argument is "Fossils are dated by radiometric dating of the rocks they are found in". Nothing circular.

(2) Lyell did not know how old the earth was and is not credited with the currently held age of 4.5 billion years. The age of 4.5 billion is based on work in the 20th century long after Lyell died. At the time of Lyell (or shortly thereafter), the earth was thought to be 20-70 million years or less (based on work of Kelvin, de Buffon and Joly).

(3) The Jurassic is not 65 million years ago. That date is the end of the Cretaceous. The Jurassic began around 199 million years ago and ended 145 million years ago.

(4) Lyell was trained in geology by William Buckland. He chose law as a first career and later decided to work in geology. He was, by all measures, a good scientist. It seems strange that you would criticize him for being a lawyer doing geology when you are a theologian speaking about paleontology. Do you criticize Einstein for being a 'dead patent clerk'?

(5) The Grand Canyon strata are in the correct order of the geologic column. There are some time periods missing, but the ordering of the strata is correct. Furthermore, the top layer in the Grand Canyon can be traced laterally to the bottom of the younger Zion Canyon and the top layer in Zion Canyon can be traced laterally into Bryce Canyon. The so-called "Grand Staircase" spans over 1 billion years of earth history.

(6) The geologic column has been found nearly complete in several places on earth. I suggest you google Glenn Morton and take a look at what this former young earth creationist and geologist has to say about this issue.

(7) Evolutionary events are not presented on every geologic column, but even if they are, so what? The layers were directly dated and thus have absolute ages. What such a picture shows is the history of life on earth. One can even deny that those organisms 'evolved', but their history on earth is accurately depicted. It's similar to creating a family tree based on date of birth.

I know that most creationists don't bother to correct facts. I corrected Kent Hovind and lo and behold, he never changed his spiel. However, at least I can remind you of this e-mail if I ever do hear your speech again.

Cheers

Joe MEert

Is Science a Religion?

2007-07-08T18:50:00.000-05:00

Science explores the natural world and makes predictions, retrodictions and constantly tries to falsify itself. Very few religions make daily attempts to falsify themselves. Very few religions (certainly not Christianity or Islam) spend day after day trying to refute the very fundamental tenets of their beliefs. If we use Christianity as an example, Christians accept on faith that God is a holy trinity and that one of the godhead came to earth as man, died as a man and rose again as a god. That tenet is not tested, it is not testable and it is not science. When most people say that 'science is religion' most of the time they are speaking of evolutionary biology. In extreme cases it means everything from geology to chemistry to physics, but I find that extremists generally don't understand geology, chemistry and physics. Instead they view those sciences as supporting evolution, and they then reject them as religious.

What I find particularly odd is that the assertion 'science is religion' is actually used in the pejorative. It's not elevating science, it is denigrating science. That we all know, but how many of use pay equal attention to the fact that when calling 'evolution a religion', they are also denigrating their religion. The mocking tones are really saying 'evolution is stoopid' (to paraphrase inmate Kent Hovind). But if evolution is a religion and it's stupid, then aren't Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Taoism etc all 'stoopid' as well? In calling science a religion, creationists are shooting themselves in the foot. Read these two sentences and tell me which one is more likely to be defended by a creationist.

(1) If science is a religion, then why should I believe evolution?
(2) If Christianity is a religion, then why should I believe Christ rose from the dead?

They will try to separate these two statements and convince you that you should believe in Christ even though it is a religion and should not buy into evolution because it is a religion.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Lucky 7 Day July 7, 2007?

2007-07-08T10:55:00.000-05:00

A first class exhibit of the pseudoscientific belief in the USA is the fact that so many believed that yesterday July 7, 2007 or 7/7/07 was somehow a 'lucky' day. A news report notes

More weddings will be held Saturday than on any day in recent history, experts say. Hotels are offering commemorative 777 packages, a pizza chain is giving away 777 pizzas, a state lottery is offering.....

The fact is that according to current odds, 50% of the marriages made yesterday will end up in divorce. The odds of winning yesterday's lottery were the same as any other day. The chance that you will have a 'lucky day' was the same yesterday as any other day. Yet, somehow people feel that 7/7/07 is a special day and no doubt someone or another will claim that 'yes, 7/7/07 was their lucky day. Others were not so lucky yesterday. Consider:

An on-duty Plano police officer whom colleagues described as a good-natured, hard-working country boy died Saturday morning after being thrown from his motorcycle while pursuing a motorist.

Professor Donald Michie, 84, and Dame Anne McLaren, 80, were killed when their car left the M11 motorway as they travelled from Cambridge to London on Saturday.

John Mark Karr, who made what turned out to be bogus claims of killing JonBenet Ramsey, was jailed Saturday in a domestic argument at his father's house in suburban Atlanta.

One need only scan the news to see that there was nothing particularly special about 7/7/2007. Superstition is stupid. Wonder how many people will lock themselves inside because this friday is the 13th?

Cheers

Joe Meert

Jo Hovind Sentenced

2007-06-29T09:46:00.000-05:00

The wife of creation 'evangelist' Kent Hovind was sentenced today in Pensacola, Florida. Her husband Kent Hovind is currently serving a 10 year sentence in South Carolina. Both convictions were based on trying to avoid tax authorities in one way or another. Kent Hovind claims he did not owe taxes because he was employed by God.
Jo Hovind was sentenced to 1 year and 1 day. That's a pretty light sentence and the judge probably took into account the fact that she was mostly controlled by an overbearing criminal husband. After listening to the tapes that Hovind made while in prison and his treatment of his wife in those calls, I feel some sympathy towards Jo Hovind. Still, if you are an accomplice in a crime, you're going to do the time.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Answers in Genesis 'hires' Snelling

2007-06-19T19:44:00.000-05:00

Well, actually Snelling's been underemployed by Answers in Genesis for a while, but today there was much fanfare about his new position as Research Director. AIG heralds Snelling as a 'renowned rock doctor', but the truth is something less than that. Snelling is known only amongst young earth creationists and perhaps a few mining geologists in Australia. AIG wants us to believe that Snelling:

“Dr. Snelling’s stature among the scientific community should be an unequivocal sign to the academic world and the media that serious research is being conducted at AiG and its museum,” Ham said.

Sad to say, but if anyone had any doubts about Ham's knowledge of science, his reference to Snelling as being a serious researcher should tell you all you need to know about Ham's ability to discern quality science from quackery. Snelling has done very little professionally as a geologist. GEOREF lists two publications since 1988. One is a response to Ian Plimer about creationism in Australia and the second is an abstract. It's quite safe to say that Snelling has no stature and if Ham's assessment is accurate, then AIG is not conducting any serious research either.

They should have hired John Baumgardner. At least he has a few professional publications even if they are old earth.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Weighing in on Gonzalez's tenure decision

2007-06-12T09:12:00.000-05:00

Yes, it's been a while since I posted on the blog (summer field season gets busy), but I wanted to weigh in on the decision at Iowa State University to deny tenure to Intelligent Design advocate Guillermo Gonzalez. The Discovery Institute is all over this claiming that denial of tenure is a slap in the face of academic freedom. Given how little the Discovery Institute knows about science, it's not surprising that they've got it all wrong on the tenure process as well. I've been through the tenure process now twice. Once at Indiana State and once at the University of Florida. I've been able to get tenure both times and have a pretty good insight into what it takes to receive tenure. Everyone is focusing on GG Intelligent Design views and very few have focused on what it takes to get tenure at a state University. First, tenure is not a guarantee. It's something that is earned and the decision is based on inputs from colleagues and peers across the country and even international. It's not based solely on what you've done so far, but that certainly plays a role. Tenure reviews are based on your previous work and your trajectory. A person who received multiple grants in their first two years of appointment and wrote 15 papers in those two years will not receive tenure if no grants or pubs were made in the subsequent 5 years. Similarly, a lack of grants or papers in the first two years is not going to stop someone from getting tenure if that person obtained funding and published a lot in the subsequent years. Tenure is based on the body of work and the likelihood of continued productivity once tenure is granted. Because tenure assures a lifetime of employment, the employer wants some assurance that the lifetime contract is going to work out for the insitution and department and not simply work out best for the person being given tenure. By all accounts, Gonzalez had a good publication record up to his involvement with the Disco Institute, but his trajectory was on a downslide and not an upslide. In his public statements regarding the rejection of Gonzalez's appeal, Iowa State University president makes the following observations:

Because the issue of tenure is a personnel matter, I am not able to share the detailed rationale for the decision, although that has been provided to Dr. Gonzalez. But I can outline the areas of focus of my review where I gave special attention to his overall record of scientific accomplishment while an assistant professor at Iowa State, since that gives the best indication of future achievement. I specifically considered refereed publications, his level of success in attracting research funding and grants, the amount of telescope observing time he had been granted, the number of graduate students he had supervised, and most importantly, the overall evidence of future career promise in the field of astronomy.

I've bolded the most important part of the statement. Basically, this decision came down to the fact that his future career did not hold much promise. In fact, once Gonzalez began dabbling in the supernatural, his scientific career started to wilt. Tenured professor Michael Behe is on a similar decline since he started dabbling with the supernatural. For all intents and purposes, Behe is an academic dead-duck at Lehigh. Behe has tenure and cannot be fired, but Lehigh has lost out on this investment. Iowa State decided that the scientific trajectory of GG was most likely to lead to a dead end and followed the proper procedures for termination.
Tenure is not a guarantee. It's an earned privelege and tenure is not granted to everyone who applies. According to a report by the Chronicle for Higher Education in 2006:

Earning tenure at a major research university is one of the biggest hurdles of a professor's career. But just how many young scholars who start at a particular institution make it through the process and out the other side?

Only about half, says a new study that provides the first-ever data on the subject. A report on the study, called "Tenure Achievement Rates at Research Universities," was completed by Michael J. Dooris, director of planning research and assessment at Pennsylvania State University at University Park. The study found that only 53 percent of the 1,382 young scholars hired in the 1997-98 academic year by 10 major research universities stayed long enough to be considered for tenure and earned it. And a significantly smaller proportion of women succeeded than men: 48 percent versus 56 percent.

Now, there are many reasons why the percentage is low, people move to new jobs, see the 'writing on the wall' and leave etc. The percentage of faculty who stay for the tenure decision and make it through the process is higher, but not 100%. Some simply refuse to see the writing on the wall and stick out the process. What troubles me most about the GG decision is that there was no warning shot in his direction. At UF, faculty are evaluated on a yearly basis and part of that evaluation (for non-tenured folk) is an estimate of what it will take to earn tenure. By the time a faculty member reaches the tenure point, the writing on the wall should be clear and the process should be transparent. Whether or not GG was warned that his package was not up to snuff is unknown as are the exact reasons for his tenure denial. Only GG knows what the decision letter says and he has not yet made that public. What we do know is that GG is not the only assistant professor to be denied tenure this year. He's simply the one making the largest stink about it.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Extinctions due to Galactic interference?

2007-05-02T08:04:00.000-05:00

Adrian Mellot and collegues at the University of Kansas have come out with an explanation for the 62 Ma periodicity in marine extinctions/radiations on earth discovered by Rhode and Muller a few years back. The movement of the Sun north of the galactic plane is argued to increase cosmic ray influx to the earth causing a higher rate of mutation and subsequent extinctions. The periodicity is derived from an analysis of marine fossils in the record (see Figure at the top of the page). Mellot and colleagues re-analyzed the same dataset. Basically, they looked for periodicity in the extinction/radiation cycle by looking at residuals following a cubic spline fit to the data. The statistical analysis employed by Mellot and colleagues was slightly different, but the same 62 Ma periodocity was observed.
The argument that there is a celestial driver to radiations and extinctions on earth is nothing new. "Nemesis" stars have been proposed for the extinction periodicity, asteroids and comets have been blamed for mass extinctions as have gamma-ray bursts (GRB's). GRB's, asteroid and comets are aperiodic so only the Nemesis and this new proposal fit the periodicity models. Nemesis has largely been rejected because the passage of a companion star would cause far more havoc than mere extinction of life, but the movement of the sun above the galactic plane may be more reasonable.
Here's what troubles me about this paper. I had the opportunity to sit with Adrian Mellot for a few hours a couple weeks back and also to listen to his presentation on the subject. What struck me was that the periodicity ends at about 140-160 Ma. That is, the 62 Ma cycle is only clearly evident in the 360 Ma interval prior to about 140-160 Ma. While sitting listening to Mellot talk, I realized that 140-160 million years ago is close to the age of the oldest oceanic crust. Why is that important? Remember that the periodicity is based on the marine fossil record. Since there is no significant amount of oceanic crust older than ~160 Ma, the pre-160 Ma fossil record is only that which is preserved on continental margins or inland continental seas. Continents make up ~1/3 of the earth so, at first glance 2/3 of the fossil record might be missing from the analysis. One could argue that most marine diversity is to be found in shallow seas and therefore the available fossil record is a sufficient sample. If so, then why doesn't the periodicity appear in the most robustly sampled fossil record (the most recent 160 Ma)?
This is an interesting story and I am sure that Mellot, Lieberman etc will be looking at this more carefully and attempting to explain the lack of periodicity during the last 160 Ma. Stay tuned.....

Cheers

Joe Meert