Comments for Genotopia

Comment on Killing off the Ta-Tas? by genotopia

genotopia — Thu, 16 May 2013 20:08:04 +0000

I can’t imagine how wrenching that decision must have been for you as a couple. It sounds like you are not among those who grossly overestimate the risks of genetics; therefore, you ought not to take my observation personally.
This post is not long and analytical, true, but it makes a serious point. You’re aware, I’m sure, that I didn’t make up the “ta-tas”– “Save the Ta-Tas” is a nationwide breast cancer “awareness” (irony quotes) campaign, popular on college campuses. It deeply offends me. I think it objectifies breasts and turns medicine into a frat-house game. I insist that there is a deep and tragic irony to the fact that a simplistic bumper-sticker campaign could be having the opposite effect it intends.
If you read this blog you know that it frequently uses black humor. As with most cynicism, underneath it there is usually a broken heart.

Comment on Killing off the Ta-Tas? by artson

artson — Thu, 16 May 2013 18:30:57 +0000

I am married to a woman who chose to have a double mastectomy. She is a nurse and pretty good at math. She had developed one cancer in her breast with lymph node involvement. Her chances of developing more cancers were above 60%. For both of us, there was simply no choice in the matter and not much interest in saving her “ta-tas” despite the fact she had particularly nice ones.

I found your blog entry offensive, uninformative a little light in the sneakers when it comes to intellectual depth. Bad cess to you. We need more intelligent, informed discussion on the subject, not light, stupid comments such as yours.

Comment on Rocinante Rides Again: Intelligent Design Redux by genotopia

genotopia — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 16:48:47 +0000

Repeating “The ONLY correct opposing view to evolution is [my book] the ‘Observations of Moses’” over and over again isn’t giving much information either. You’re being as dogmatic as the IDers.

Comment on Rocinante Rides Again: Intelligent Design Redux by Herman Cummings

Herman Cummings — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 16:20:14 +0000

Intelligent Design is inept, a waste of class time, and does not explain Genesis, nor the fossil record. Just telling the student that “there had to be a Creator”, over and over again is not giving much information concerning the pre-historic events that lead to the creation of current life forms. The ONLY correct opposing view to evolution is the “Observations of Moses”. Throw away everything else!

Comment on Scientists find gene for love of the sea by DID THE AUTHOR MISS APRIL 1ST? | stephenlirakis.com

DID THE AUTHOR MISS APRIL 1ST? | stephenlirakis.com — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 12:03:42 +0000

[...] What did Thor Heyerdahl, Captain Ahab, and Odysseus have in common? They all may have shared a commo… [...]

Comment on Rocinante Rides Again: Intelligent Design Redux by srajappan

srajappan — Fri, 19 Apr 2013 15:15:00 +0000

You wrote: “Although it claims to deal in the realm of scientific evidence, ID is one of the things that science doesn’t explain (or in this case, explain away). Intelligent Design is not about evidence.”

What do you mean ID is not about evidence? Intelligent Design is not based on some fancy idea that popped into the mind of a 9th grader. From our observable environement through archeology, forensic science etc. we are pretty sure how to recognize presence of civilization and foul play respectively. The reason is because effects/signs of intelligence can be distinguished from effect by natural causes. For example, Mount Rushmore. But one could raise the argument that Mount Rushmore is understood to be caused by intelligence because we know from hstory that it was so. To this it could be replied that archeology finds new civilization and evidence for civilizations. There were archeological findings of civilizations that were totally unknown till the day of finding. One streak of chalk marking in a cave is enough to conclude the presence of Intelligence (civilization). If one finds remains of a bunch of sticks put together and burnt, it is reasonable to conclude presence of Intelligence. Why is it then ID is not science when the theory itself rests on the fact that intelligibility is most probably an effect of Intelligence.

Comment on Strike a blow for (and against) academic freedom by srajappan

srajappan — Fri, 19 Apr 2013 14:38:52 +0000

Why is Intelligent Design not science? Because it challenges the consensual view of Darwinianism/Evolution? One of the things that many say to show the superiority of Science is “self-correcting”. This article shows a “stiff-necked” attitude. Why can’t our understanding of gravity be wrong, “IF” new evidence that challenges our understanding is produced? To exclude this possibility makes it non-falsifiable, which then becomes “NOT” scientific, but dogmatic. I think that’s the beauty of those who do real authentic science (study of nature), correcting constantly and not placing haughtily above everything else. Bradley Monton has rightly said that Intelligent Design has the potentiality to be given a place on the table and not to be rejected a priori.

Comment on Composite photography now and then by The Giants’ Shoulders #58: Without theme | Asylum Science

The Giants’ Shoulders #58: Without theme | Asylum Science — Wed, 17 Apr 2013 07:10:25 +0000

[...] of Maria Sibylla Merian; Keith Moore looked at blue lizards; Genotopia turned attention back to composite photography; John F. Ptak presented pictures of star clusters; St Andrews Special Collections and Paula [...]

Comment on Composite photography now and then by genotopia

genotopia — Mon, 15 Apr 2013 14:18:12 +0000

Glad you enjoyed the post. Check out the original site–those nationalities are all there. Wonder what would happen if you then morphed them. Would it look like you?

Comment on Composite photography now and then by Latest Photography NewsArticle Directory

Latest Photography NewsArticle Directory — Fri, 12 Apr 2013 03:39:06 +0000

[...] Composite photography from [see more about Using An Article Directory] time to time A student * connected me to The Postnational Display, which features composite photographs of different racial, ethnic, and cultural teams. By superimposing many images (picked by unstated criteria) and centering them on the eyes and various other vital facial … Review more on ScienceBlog.com (blog) [...]