Its been a while since I last posted, but these are must-reads.
Happy Jason Lisle day! Diogene's huge smackdown of YEC astrophysicist Jason Lisle's solution to the "distant starlight problem". The anisotropy synchrony convention simply doesnt work anymore.
Smoking Gun evidence of an ancient Earth : GPS data confirms radiometric dating. Naturalis Historia shows how multiple independent methods of dating can form concordance.
By Grace Alone : This is very different from my regular recommendations, but worth a read more than anything else.....
Tuesday, 23 September 2014
Friday, 15 August 2014
Evaluating ID
One thing I noticed is that, it is far easier to attack ideas than to defend them. Often its because defending is in response to an attack, which the defender needs time to think through, carefully deduce the opponents argument, point out flaws and do his or her own research to rebut the attacker. So, I will play a little game, if you may, engaging in back-and-forth arguments for and against design, throwing in some specific examples. This is going to be a long post though, composed over several days.
A note though: I am only familiar with general arguments for ID. If anyone knows more refined points, please inform me and I will take them into consideration.
So what is the concept for intelligent design? At the Intelligent Design homepage, it states "
In the recent years, the Discovery Institute has come under fire for being religiously motivated, but I ll move past that and take a closer look at their arguments. Coming from a physics/engineering background, I can see how design can be appealing, regularly dealing with concrete, specific answers. And although non-religious, I lean towards the Rare Earth Hypothesis that Earth-like planets are a special and unique occurrence.
One of the key features of DI's theory is that the designer is not identified. In other words, you could replace the designer with anyone (God, aliens, the Matrix etc) and the theory remains just as valid.
The first problem immediately becomes apparent. You see, the Discovery Institute doesnt just insist biological systems are designed, even the Earth was designed to accommodate complex, intelligent life. (Check out their documentary the Privileged Planet for example.) What is the problem with this?
It immediately points to the exclusion of certain designers (sorry Cthulhu, you couldn't have created Earth) and very strongly towards God. Their article rebutting the idea of panspermia (life from other planets) heavily implies this. Do they have a religious agenda?Actually it couldnt be less obvious that they are religiously motivated.
However, ID lends support to deism, which is a philosophical, not religious position. Fair enough, lets focus on biological systems first, since arguments for/against fine-tuning of the Universe are wandering into the realm of the un-falsifiable.
First, let me offer credit to intelligent design. There exists other scientific fields that do attempt to detect the presence of deliberate tinkering. Richard Deem of godandscience.org, aside from criticising the general push of ID, has an interesting list of points:
Take the study of stone tools by archaeologists and anthropologists. How would one know if a stone was designed, or simply occurring in nature? Of course, arrow-heads would be a dead giveaway - shapes like that dont occur naturally, written records and observations of arrow-making further back this up. For more obscure, primitive artifacts, we look for systematic flaking i.e. a stone with numerous flake scars is unlikely to have been the result of natural breakage. Natural rocks may have flake scars, but its unlikely they would have so many. See here for more.
This same principle (to me at least) cannot applied to intelligent design. This is because:
a) We do not know the mechanisms the un-identified designer could have used;
b) Our minds may be too primitive to comprehend design, if life was indeed designed.
(In fact some primitive tribes thought cameras could steal your soul. What if we are tribesmen, gazing upon some vastly incomprehensible design?)
Lets go a little into details and revisit William Paley's famous watchmaker analogy. He says that, if we find a watch in the field, we can easily discern that it had a designer. This argument, while compelling, does not work upon closer inspection. First of all, we know a watch is designed because watches dont simply appear as random products of nature. We can even observe them being designed and manufactured!
Well, a counter-rebuttal would be you could say we dont see apes evolve into man either, so how can we know evolution occurred either? I will discuss this further detail in the near future, but we will get to the basics by giving an evolutionary counter-example to the "common design, common designer" argument. It means that common designs that function effectively are re-used by the designer because it works.
In evolutionary theory, two similar biological structures (anatomical or genomic) can be homologous or analogous. The former means that two particular organisms inherited the structure from a common ancestor(common descent theory), while the latter implies the process of convergent evolution i.e. two unrelated organisms gaining a very similar biological structure.
What happens is that organisms with homologous structures slowly attain morphological differences over time, while organisms with analogous structures actually grow more to resemble each other.
One important point is organisms with homologous structures often bear remarkable similarities in genome sequence. In contrast, organisms that arrived at a trait via convergent evolution bear little or no resemblance in genome sequence to each other. A good example would be bats and birds, which diverged all the way back from the age of dinosaurs.
How does this challenge ID? Well I now take "common design, common designer" to its extreme conclusion via reductio ad absurdum. If birds and bats had a common designer implementing a common design for flight into of their wings then wouldnt it follow that they have anatomical and genetic similarities as well? They don't!
![]()
You can see from this picture that bats and birds have different anatomical structures for their wings. Notably bats have the mammalian "five finger" structure. Well you could then say "this is an example of the Designer exerting creative power", but how are we even going to test that?
I ll illustrate this again by a not-completely original example of convergent evolution, first posted at the evolution blog the Panda's Thumb here, by a former YEC.
The Arctic cod and Antarctic nothothenioid are notable in possessing anti-freeze proteins to prevent their blood from coagulating. But the unique thing about them is that their protein structures do not resemble each other. Each evolved their traits independently! If you are interested, please read the original research paper, first published in PNAS here for more information. (Also note that the nothothenioid antifreeze protein is very similar structurally to fibrinogen - a protein involved in blood clotting).
Evolutionary theory produces a unique feature known as a fitness landscape. Taking one particular environmental condition, there are several ways evolution by natural selection can act to produce a population with an average phenotype which is well adapted to its present condition. This is represented by the local "peaks" A, B and C. However if an organism is at the top of a local maxima, say A, it will have to experience a decrease in fitness before being able to climb the highest peak B. (this is a very layman explanation of a complex science, so apologies).
Lets look further at more of the points the Discovery Institute makes.
Another fundamental concept of a scientific theory is that it must be:
a) produce testable hypotheses
b) falsifiable
The IDEA center has a good intro to the testability of ID.
The Short Answer: Yes. Intelligent design theory predicts: 1) that we will find specified complexity in biology. One special easily detectable form of specified complexity is irreducible complexity. We can test design by trying to reverse engineer biological structures to determine if there is an "irreducible core." Intelligent design also makes other predictions, such as 2) rapid appearance of complexity in the fossil record, 3) re-usage of similar parts in different organisms, and 4) function for biological structures. Each of these predictions may be tested--and have been confirmed through testing!
I will be taking a look at them, from 1 to 4. I have already challenged point 3 and will briefly skim through the others.
1) We will find specified complexity in biology. The problem is specified complexity needs to be defined more specifically so to speak. Proteins, although generally complex and carry out specific tasks, are actually less specific than people like to think. Lets look at enzymes, proteins meant to catalyze chemical reactions. Although hundreds of amino acids long, the only real important parts are at the active site which consists of only several amino acids. THOSE are the complex specified parts. Want proof? Go on wikipedia and look up the range of protein structures. Note how many "protein folds" are re-used for different proteins (particularly the alpha helix and beta pleated sheets).
Ah, irreducible complexity. This is actually a very interesting point, because oftentimes evolution that increases complexity proceeds by stepwise transitions until a complex organ/organelle is formed. The logic goes: if an ancestral component protein or anatomical structure is removed, then the whole system would cease functioning, then prior steps would have no function and would be useless according to evolutionary theory.
On the Uncommon Descent blog you can see the icon for ID - the bacterial flagellum. In fact, they should actively testing for its irreducible complexity! Take apart the bacterial flagellum by deleting part by part. See if the flagellum still functions. Experiment on other biological systems too.
A caveat though. Just because a system is irreducibly complex, doesn't mean it couldn't have evolved. Do you know why?
a) Mutations could act upon existing genes, deleting and removing parts of a system. If the parts that have been deleted or pseudogenized only carry out secondary, unimportant functions then the system would still be working. Hence an "irreducibly complex" core - that has lost certain original working parts, but losing more would render the system unusable. A good analogy would be how natural arches form - underlying rocks are eroded until the arch is left. The arch is now irreducibly complex!
b) Exaptation - this is a very important part of evolutionary theory that intelligent design proponents overlook when criticising evolution. What happems is that a prior anatomical structure / gene is co-opted to perform a different function. A cogent example is the fish-tetrapod transition. For a transitional form like Tiktaalik, it is able to use its fins for walking on land as well as swimming in water.
2) Rapid appearance of complexity in the fossil record This is probably referring to the Cambrian explosion. I lack the credentials to properly analyze it, but remember The Cambrian explosion shows a trend of increasing complexity, although a relatively rapid one. Please read this very detailed critique of Darwin's Doubt here to understand the nuts and bolts.
One more note about it is that the Cambrian seas were actually very volatile because oxygen levels were constantly fluctuating, resulting in several extinction events that wiped out many genera. Well maybe the Designer didnt mind watching many newly designed species bite the dust after all......
4) Function for biological structures - Well most biological structures already have a function but i think people are jumping to conclusions by proclaiming it intelligently designed. The problem is there are huge swathes of non-coding DNA in the genome. A general trend of biological complexity goes like this - the larger the fraction of non-coding DNA, the more complex the organism. Take the human genome, which appears as mostly junk. Yes, some of these non-coding DNA have important functions but others don't, and may even be harmful. (See retrotransposons - jumping genes that copy their sequences all over the human genome. Really).
Conclusion
For now ID appears too much to be a philosophical than a scientific one. It needs a greater testability and predictive quality before it can be considered science. Funny enough I don't really mind if they actually do find genuine evidence for design (and its implications) but who knows? Next up I will discuss falsifiability of evolution and intelligent design, as well as more points listed on the IDEA centre.
A note though: I am only familiar with general arguments for ID. If anyone knows more refined points, please inform me and I will take them into consideration.
So what is the concept for intelligent design? At the Intelligent Design homepage, it states "
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.
In the recent years, the Discovery Institute has come under fire for being religiously motivated, but I ll move past that and take a closer look at their arguments. Coming from a physics/engineering background, I can see how design can be appealing, regularly dealing with concrete, specific answers. And although non-religious, I lean towards the Rare Earth Hypothesis that Earth-like planets are a special and unique occurrence.
One of the key features of DI's theory is that the designer is not identified. In other words, you could replace the designer with anyone (God, aliens, the Matrix etc) and the theory remains just as valid.
The first problem immediately becomes apparent. You see, the Discovery Institute doesnt just insist biological systems are designed, even the Earth was designed to accommodate complex, intelligent life. (Check out their documentary the Privileged Planet for example.) What is the problem with this?
It immediately points to the exclusion of certain designers (sorry Cthulhu, you couldn't have created Earth) and very strongly towards God. Their article rebutting the idea of panspermia (life from other planets) heavily implies this. Do they have a religious agenda?
However, ID lends support to deism, which is a philosophical, not religious position. Fair enough, lets focus on biological systems first, since arguments for/against fine-tuning of the Universe are wandering into the realm of the un-falsifiable.
First, let me offer credit to intelligent design. There exists other scientific fields that do attempt to detect the presence of deliberate tinkering. Richard Deem of godandscience.org, aside from criticising the general push of ID, has an interesting list of points:
This is actually quite a good argument. We look for signs, "motifs" if you may, that indicates a particular biological system is designed. However, the first difference one would notice between ID and these other scientific fields is this: we know what features to look for, because we know that natural processes cannot produce certain features, where-else
- Archaeology: Is that rock formation natural or due to intelligent design?
- Anthropology: Do sharp, pointed rocks occur naturally or are they designed by intelligent beings?
- Forensics: Intelligent cause of death or natural circumstances?
- SETI: Are those radio signals natural or caused by intelligent beings?
Take the study of stone tools by archaeologists and anthropologists. How would one know if a stone was designed, or simply occurring in nature? Of course, arrow-heads would be a dead giveaway - shapes like that dont occur naturally, written records and observations of arrow-making further back this up. For more obscure, primitive artifacts, we look for systematic flaking i.e. a stone with numerous flake scars is unlikely to have been the result of natural breakage. Natural rocks may have flake scars, but its unlikely they would have so many. See here for more.
This same principle (to me at least) cannot applied to intelligent design. This is because:
a) We do not know the mechanisms the un-identified designer could have used;
b) Our minds may be too primitive to comprehend design, if life was indeed designed.
(In fact some primitive tribes thought cameras could steal your soul. What if we are tribesmen, gazing upon some vastly incomprehensible design?)
Lets go a little into details and revisit William Paley's famous watchmaker analogy. He says that, if we find a watch in the field, we can easily discern that it had a designer. This argument, while compelling, does not work upon closer inspection. First of all, we know a watch is designed because watches dont simply appear as random products of nature. We can even observe them being designed and manufactured!
 |
| Is this beautfiul snowflake intelligently designed? |
Well, a counter-rebuttal would be you could say we dont see apes evolve into man either, so how can we know evolution occurred either? I will discuss this further detail in the near future, but we will get to the basics by giving an evolutionary counter-example to the "common design, common designer" argument. It means that common designs that function effectively are re-used by the designer because it works.
In evolutionary theory, two similar biological structures (anatomical or genomic) can be homologous or analogous. The former means that two particular organisms inherited the structure from a common ancestor(common descent theory), while the latter implies the process of convergent evolution i.e. two unrelated organisms gaining a very similar biological structure.
What happens is that organisms with homologous structures slowly attain morphological differences over time, while organisms with analogous structures actually grow more to resemble each other.
One important point is organisms with homologous structures often bear remarkable similarities in genome sequence. In contrast, organisms that arrived at a trait via convergent evolution bear little or no resemblance in genome sequence to each other. A good example would be bats and birds, which diverged all the way back from the age of dinosaurs.
How does this challenge ID? Well I now take "common design, common designer" to its extreme conclusion via reductio ad absurdum. If birds and bats had a common designer implementing a common design for flight into of their wings then wouldnt it follow that they have anatomical and genetic similarities as well? They don't!
You can see from this picture that bats and birds have different anatomical structures for their wings. Notably bats have the mammalian "five finger" structure. Well you could then say "this is an example of the Designer exerting creative power", but how are we even going to test that?
I ll illustrate this again by a not-completely original example of convergent evolution, first posted at the evolution blog the Panda's Thumb here, by a former YEC.
The Arctic cod and Antarctic nothothenioid are notable in possessing anti-freeze proteins to prevent their blood from coagulating. But the unique thing about them is that their protein structures do not resemble each other. Each evolved their traits independently! If you are interested, please read the original research paper, first published in PNAS here for more information. (Also note that the nothothenioid antifreeze protein is very similar structurally to fibrinogen - a protein involved in blood clotting).
Evolutionary theory produces a unique feature known as a fitness landscape. Taking one particular environmental condition, there are several ways evolution by natural selection can act to produce a population with an average phenotype which is well adapted to its present condition. This is represented by the local "peaks" A, B and C. However if an organism is at the top of a local maxima, say A, it will have to experience a decrease in fitness before being able to climb the highest peak B. (this is a very layman explanation of a complex science, so apologies).
 |
| There's more than one way to adapt |
Lets look further at more of the points the Discovery Institute makes.
Another fundamental concept of a scientific theory is that it must be:
a) produce testable hypotheses
b) falsifiable
The IDEA center has a good intro to the testability of ID.
The Short Answer: Yes. Intelligent design theory predicts: 1) that we will find specified complexity in biology. One special easily detectable form of specified complexity is irreducible complexity. We can test design by trying to reverse engineer biological structures to determine if there is an "irreducible core." Intelligent design also makes other predictions, such as 2) rapid appearance of complexity in the fossil record, 3) re-usage of similar parts in different organisms, and 4) function for biological structures. Each of these predictions may be tested--and have been confirmed through testing!
I will be taking a look at them, from 1 to 4. I have already challenged point 3 and will briefly skim through the others.
1) We will find specified complexity in biology. The problem is specified complexity needs to be defined more specifically so to speak. Proteins, although generally complex and carry out specific tasks, are actually less specific than people like to think. Lets look at enzymes, proteins meant to catalyze chemical reactions. Although hundreds of amino acids long, the only real important parts are at the active site which consists of only several amino acids. THOSE are the complex specified parts. Want proof? Go on wikipedia and look up the range of protein structures. Note how many "protein folds" are re-used for different proteins (particularly the alpha helix and beta pleated sheets).
Ah, irreducible complexity. This is actually a very interesting point, because oftentimes evolution that increases complexity proceeds by stepwise transitions until a complex organ/organelle is formed. The logic goes: if an ancestral component protein or anatomical structure is removed, then the whole system would cease functioning, then prior steps would have no function and would be useless according to evolutionary theory.
On the Uncommon Descent blog you can see the icon for ID - the bacterial flagellum. In fact, they should actively testing for its irreducible complexity! Take apart the bacterial flagellum by deleting part by part. See if the flagellum still functions. Experiment on other biological systems too.
A caveat though. Just because a system is irreducibly complex, doesn't mean it couldn't have evolved. Do you know why?
a) Mutations could act upon existing genes, deleting and removing parts of a system. If the parts that have been deleted or pseudogenized only carry out secondary, unimportant functions then the system would still be working. Hence an "irreducibly complex" core - that has lost certain original working parts, but losing more would render the system unusable. A good analogy would be how natural arches form - underlying rocks are eroded until the arch is left. The arch is now irreducibly complex!
b) Exaptation - this is a very important part of evolutionary theory that intelligent design proponents overlook when criticising evolution. What happems is that a prior anatomical structure / gene is co-opted to perform a different function. A cogent example is the fish-tetrapod transition. For a transitional form like Tiktaalik, it is able to use its fins for walking on land as well as swimming in water.
2) Rapid appearance of complexity in the fossil record This is probably referring to the Cambrian explosion. I lack the credentials to properly analyze it, but remember The Cambrian explosion shows a trend of increasing complexity, although a relatively rapid one. Please read this very detailed critique of Darwin's Doubt here to understand the nuts and bolts.
One more note about it is that the Cambrian seas were actually very volatile because oxygen levels were constantly fluctuating, resulting in several extinction events that wiped out many genera. Well maybe the Designer didnt mind watching many newly designed species bite the dust after all......
4) Function for biological structures - Well most biological structures already have a function but i think people are jumping to conclusions by proclaiming it intelligently designed. The problem is there are huge swathes of non-coding DNA in the genome. A general trend of biological complexity goes like this - the larger the fraction of non-coding DNA, the more complex the organism. Take the human genome, which appears as mostly junk. Yes, some of these non-coding DNA have important functions but others don't, and may even be harmful. (See retrotransposons - jumping genes that copy their sequences all over the human genome. Really).
Conclusion
For now ID appears too much to be a philosophical than a scientific one. It needs a greater testability and predictive quality before it can be considered science. Funny enough I don't really mind if they actually do find genuine evidence for design (and its implications) but who knows? Next up I will discuss falsifiability of evolution and intelligent design, as well as more points listed on the IDEA centre.
Friday, 11 July 2014
Dark Souls: Epic Narration
This. By far one of the best lore videos for Dark Souls. The writing and flow is just superb.
Once done be sure to listen to this awesome soundtrack of Artorias, the Abysswalker.
Thursday, 10 July 2014
Prologue
Note: This is merely a first draft, so excuse its potential sloppiness. With that, hopefully I can get this project off to a good start.
She worked in the Old Baths. The olive green pools were always filled with patrons from all across Semerium during the day; men and women of high blood and birth. The smell of rancid sweat and fragrant oils coalesced to form a sweet, sickly smell. Great flues blew palls of steam from the houses into the cool spring air. It was such a strange scene, an eerie juxtaposition of chaos and peace, rowdy shouts and mirthful laughter and the clatter of glass breaking interspersed with moments of quiet contemplation. The floors were polished marble, fickle and slippery. Flickering candles cast dancing shadows of leering dragons from the walls. Mocking. Judging. You will never be a dragon. Pity you, hatchling. Their brass heads snorted billowing steam from lead conduits, hidden from view, that ran along their length. But cold. Why was it always so cold. The steam that rolled over her body felt like tenebrous wisps of smoke, devoid of the warmth of life. Conniving eyes seemed to pierce her thoughts everywhere she went.
It was always the same. Their names changed, but their purpose was the same. Only men and women of status, noble as they were, could waste their lives on such debauched pleasantries. The rest, all the other good for nothings, starved and died like the dogs on the wharves.
When she was free of her duties in the depths of the night, she would make her way to the top floor and just gaze balefully at the city beyond, spread out like a sprawling canvas. The shingles from a thousand roofs reflected the starlight from above, twinkling with a playful gaze. To the south, the Styrox River fed into the Bay of Many, along with it dozens of ships bound east. In the distance, the silhouette of Mawgar Palace loomed above the surrounding buildings, casting its eternal shadow into the gloom. She remembered how when she first came here, years ago, she gazed in wonder at the bright and gaudy decorations, a riot of colour and senses, exotic dancers from foreign lands.
But it was all a façade now. She had grown up. Places, like people, had a habit of lying to you. She had learnt this, step by painful step.
She missed home. She missed it so much.
***************************************
Obeying wasn't that hard. So easy to remember. You just have to do what Lady Rishe says. Obey our patrons like a good girl. Serve them tea. Scrub them. Rub their bodies with fragrant oils. Let them touch you. Undress you if they please.
She would slowly get used to it, she told herself. People who were dead inside forget slights against them so easily. The first time she voiced her opinion, grand lady Rishe had struck her till she bled all over. Back to being a good girl then. Forget their gazes. Turn your heart to lightening our guests.
She approached the East wing, a small pot of scented oil under one arm and creamy silk towels under the other. The smallest bath-house, reserved for the wealthy among the wealthy. Her guests were in the Warm Bath, and she had to prepare for their massage.
Three highborn men sat in the pool of green water at the centre of the room, sharing a jest amongst themselves. She recognized the lead man, a plump man of forty with a handlebar moustache as Cretar Cromm, cousin of the viceroy. She averted her gaze away from them and glanced upward. A mosaic of armoured figures at war with each other covered the entire ceiling. She set her towels down, next to the pool.
"Come here, girl."
She looked at him. His clean shaven face bore an enigmatic nature, with slanted brows and a curved jaw. His slit like mouth was twisted in a nearly imperceptible leer. His cheeks were dull grey, as if carved of dying flesh. His deep-set blue eyes watched her as a lion watches its prey.
"More warm water for you, my lord?"
"Fine lady, what could warm me more than the comfort of your touch? Join me."
"My lord, I would love nothing more than to comfort you for your stay, and what better way than an anointment of the sacred oils to ease you?" she forced a smile, noticing that the other two men had fallen silent. "Please come to the antechamber once you are finished, my lord."
"Oh, no, we wont be needing that." He began smiling in return. "Put the pot down and sit here. I command it, fine woman."
There was no way she could disobey the command of an honored guest. She couldn't. Lady Rishe would strike her again.
She stepped into the pool and sat beside him, still smiling.
He drew closer to her and began stroking her hair, ever so gently. "What's your name, girl?"
"Ranili, sir," she lied. "My lord, this is not appropriate-"
"A fitting name," he whispered into her ear, while running his hand under her robe. "Let me show you the grace a lord is capable of bestowing upon good, obedient subjects, especially girls your age.
She stiffened. Don't fight back. Show dis-interest.
His lips began caressing her neck and shoulder. He rubbed his nose on her ear and smelt her "So sweet. Like ambrosia.........that's what I name you. Ambrosia, nectar of the gods."
She pushed away from him, gently "My lord, please, there are things I must do-"
"Shhhh, child, " he hushed. "You are such a beauty, girl," he moved his other arm against the side of her neck, pushing her back against the pool.
"Exarch Jormen, this is neither the time nor the place," said the third man.
Jormen. That was his name. She made a mental note. You will be the first
Jormen shot his companion a stiffening look "This is a place of pleasure. Tis a shame if the girls are not part of it, are they?"
"As you will, my lord."
His hand reached below.
Tears were now brimming in her eyes. "Stop it." She was no longer reacting mindfully but began struggling against his advances. But he was strong. Too strong.
"Stop squirming, girl." He breathed. "Be good, and your lord will reward you," he ripped her dress. She screamed.
He grabbed her hair and smashed her head on the side, stunning her. Then he spun her around and wrapped his arm around her neck.
By the gods, no. She fought back as hard as she could, ramming her elbows to his side to no avail. He pushed her face down on the side of the pool and brought his face next to hers. His hot breath felt like that of a demon.
She felt his cold tongue slide up her cheek and bit back a scream.
"Exarch. Primador Yakov requests your presence immediately." A man stood at the entrance.
Slowly, ever so slowly, his grip released. She coughed and dragged herself out of the pool.
"Would you be so kind as to pass my deferential apologies to the Primador? This house is most uncatering to my tastes, to much misfortune. We will meet in my solar."
She grabbed her flowery robe on her way out and stifled her tears.
This was a place for a proper girl, Lady Rishe always chided. Fight the cold, do as you are told, and you wont be sold.
Good girl, she told herself, good girl and she fell to her knees in great sobs. The pain in her heart twisted, like a knife edge.
Escape. I must escape.
Note: The prologue is meant to be a little perturbing and meant to show what kind of world our protagonist lives in. I welcome any criticism you may have as I am new at this. NEEDS MORE EDITING
She worked in the Old Baths. The olive green pools were always filled with patrons from all across Semerium during the day; men and women of high blood and birth. The smell of rancid sweat and fragrant oils coalesced to form a sweet, sickly smell. Great flues blew palls of steam from the houses into the cool spring air. It was such a strange scene, an eerie juxtaposition of chaos and peace, rowdy shouts and mirthful laughter and the clatter of glass breaking interspersed with moments of quiet contemplation. The floors were polished marble, fickle and slippery. Flickering candles cast dancing shadows of leering dragons from the walls. Mocking. Judging. You will never be a dragon. Pity you, hatchling. Their brass heads snorted billowing steam from lead conduits, hidden from view, that ran along their length. But cold. Why was it always so cold. The steam that rolled over her body felt like tenebrous wisps of smoke, devoid of the warmth of life. Conniving eyes seemed to pierce her thoughts everywhere she went.
It was always the same. Their names changed, but their purpose was the same. Only men and women of status, noble as they were, could waste their lives on such debauched pleasantries. The rest, all the other good for nothings, starved and died like the dogs on the wharves.
When she was free of her duties in the depths of the night, she would make her way to the top floor and just gaze balefully at the city beyond, spread out like a sprawling canvas. The shingles from a thousand roofs reflected the starlight from above, twinkling with a playful gaze. To the south, the Styrox River fed into the Bay of Many, along with it dozens of ships bound east. In the distance, the silhouette of Mawgar Palace loomed above the surrounding buildings, casting its eternal shadow into the gloom. She remembered how when she first came here, years ago, she gazed in wonder at the bright and gaudy decorations, a riot of colour and senses, exotic dancers from foreign lands.
But it was all a façade now. She had grown up. Places, like people, had a habit of lying to you. She had learnt this, step by painful step.
She missed home. She missed it so much.
***************************************
Obeying wasn't that hard. So easy to remember. You just have to do what Lady Rishe says. Obey our patrons like a good girl. Serve them tea. Scrub them. Rub their bodies with fragrant oils. Let them touch you. Undress you if they please.
She would slowly get used to it, she told herself. People who were dead inside forget slights against them so easily. The first time she voiced her opinion, grand lady Rishe had struck her till she bled all over. Back to being a good girl then. Forget their gazes. Turn your heart to lightening our guests.
She approached the East wing, a small pot of scented oil under one arm and creamy silk towels under the other. The smallest bath-house, reserved for the wealthy among the wealthy. Her guests were in the Warm Bath, and she had to prepare for their massage.
Three highborn men sat in the pool of green water at the centre of the room, sharing a jest amongst themselves. She recognized the lead man, a plump man of forty with a handlebar moustache as Cretar Cromm, cousin of the viceroy. She averted her gaze away from them and glanced upward. A mosaic of armoured figures at war with each other covered the entire ceiling. She set her towels down, next to the pool.
"Come here, girl."
She looked at him. His clean shaven face bore an enigmatic nature, with slanted brows and a curved jaw. His slit like mouth was twisted in a nearly imperceptible leer. His cheeks were dull grey, as if carved of dying flesh. His deep-set blue eyes watched her as a lion watches its prey.
"More warm water for you, my lord?"
"Fine lady, what could warm me more than the comfort of your touch? Join me."
"My lord, I would love nothing more than to comfort you for your stay, and what better way than an anointment of the sacred oils to ease you?" she forced a smile, noticing that the other two men had fallen silent. "Please come to the antechamber once you are finished, my lord."
"Oh, no, we wont be needing that." He began smiling in return. "Put the pot down and sit here. I command it, fine woman."
There was no way she could disobey the command of an honored guest. She couldn't. Lady Rishe would strike her again.
She stepped into the pool and sat beside him, still smiling.
He drew closer to her and began stroking her hair, ever so gently. "What's your name, girl?"
"Ranili, sir," she lied. "My lord, this is not appropriate-"
"A fitting name," he whispered into her ear, while running his hand under her robe. "Let me show you the grace a lord is capable of bestowing upon good, obedient subjects, especially girls your age.
She stiffened. Don't fight back. Show dis-interest.
His lips began caressing her neck and shoulder. He rubbed his nose on her ear and smelt her "So sweet. Like ambrosia.........that's what I name you. Ambrosia, nectar of the gods."
She pushed away from him, gently "My lord, please, there are things I must do-"
"Shhhh, child, " he hushed. "You are such a beauty, girl," he moved his other arm against the side of her neck, pushing her back against the pool.
"Exarch Jormen, this is neither the time nor the place," said the third man.
Jormen. That was his name. She made a mental note. You will be the first
Jormen shot his companion a stiffening look "This is a place of pleasure. Tis a shame if the girls are not part of it, are they?"
"As you will, my lord."
His hand reached below.
Tears were now brimming in her eyes. "Stop it." She was no longer reacting mindfully but began struggling against his advances. But he was strong. Too strong.
"Stop squirming, girl." He breathed. "Be good, and your lord will reward you," he ripped her dress. She screamed.
He grabbed her hair and smashed her head on the side, stunning her. Then he spun her around and wrapped his arm around her neck.
By the gods, no. She fought back as hard as she could, ramming her elbows to his side to no avail. He pushed her face down on the side of the pool and brought his face next to hers. His hot breath felt like that of a demon.
She felt his cold tongue slide up her cheek and bit back a scream.
"Exarch. Primador Yakov requests your presence immediately." A man stood at the entrance.
Slowly, ever so slowly, his grip released. She coughed and dragged herself out of the pool.
"Would you be so kind as to pass my deferential apologies to the Primador? This house is most uncatering to my tastes, to much misfortune. We will meet in my solar."
She grabbed her flowery robe on her way out and stifled her tears.
This was a place for a proper girl, Lady Rishe always chided. Fight the cold, do as you are told, and you wont be sold.
Good girl, she told herself, good girl and she fell to her knees in great sobs. The pain in her heart twisted, like a knife edge.
Escape. I must escape.
Note: The prologue is meant to be a little perturbing and meant to show what kind of world our protagonist lives in. I welcome any criticism you may have as I am new at this. NEEDS MORE EDITING
Tuesday, 8 July 2014
Historical Perceptions of the Age of the Earth
This might be an ongoing series, depending on my inclination.
Before evolution, the first dangerous idea, was of course deep time. Espoused by geologist James Hutton and further developed by Charles Lyell, they claim it was this heretical thought that gave Darwin the springboard to formulate his theory of evolution by natural selection. What's ironic is that, the earliest discoverers of deep time were actually opposed to evolution.
First, a little background if you may. The field of geology was expanding enormously throughout the 18th and 19th centuries. People were digging up fossils of extinct animals that, at the time, were utterly bizzare and alien. The public was being wowed by tales of monsters, from the skulls of noble mammoths found in the frozen wastes to demonic plesiosaurs which were purportedly agents of Satan. Enter William "Strata" Smith, the father of English geology. He observed that, while working on railways, how well sorted fossils were from one layer to another, hence earning him his namesake. Using this fact alone, he went on to plot the first geological map of entire Britain. A very remarkable feat indeed, especially considering he worked alone without any modern equipment.
What he never realized was that his valiant efforts would change the perceptions of the world we live in forever.
Geologists began pondering the observations from the fossil record. What did this mean? When did these creatures live? If they were brought aboard Noah's Ark, why have none survived to this day? Most importantly, why were they so well sorted, from layer to layer? How could Noah's flood sort the fossils with such precision?
Bear in mind the notion of a global flood had already taken a beating almost a century ago, during the exploration of the Americas. Naturalists (many whom were also members of the clergy) struggled to explain a) the enormous diversity of animal life, particularly in the Amazon basin b) the origin of native Americans.
A particularly salient (and mildly amusing) question posed by Sir Thomas Browne was in this quote:
"How America abounded with Beasts of prey and noxious Animals, yet contained not in that necessary Creature, a Horse, is very strange"
In which he ponders why, if native American Indians were descendants of Noah who dispersed at Babel, why did they decide to bring rattlesnakes, but forgot the horses? Another pressing problem was that Genesis only described the creation of one land, so to speak. Yet enormous continents existed that were completely separated from the rest of Europe.
Then in 1809, heresy! Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, French war veteran turned naturalist, published his book Philosophie Zoologique, in which he proposed that organisms slowly evolved over time. His foundation for the mechanism by which the change occurred was the theory of inherited traits, which postulated that organisms changed over time with "use or disuse" of their innate organs and passed down these traits to their offspring. He was way off the mark, but his theory actually has some basis in reality.
Lamarckism went against everything the Christian church taught, so enter brilliant distinguished scientist, Georges Cuvier, founder of modern anatomy. A man of wanton erudition, he had already come to realize a vast number of species in the fossil record were extinct. He noted the degree to which fossils were sorted according to strata, and was the first to recognize that elephant fossils found near Paris were distinct from living elephants we see today, or even the skulls of Siberian mammoths, and hence categorized them under a distinct species, the mastodon. He was the first to identify fossils found in South America belonged to a giant sloth, now known as Megatherium. And hence, he came up with the theory of catastrophism. Earth, he argued, had underwent a series of divine creations, succeeded by catastrophes which resulted in extinction events. The global flood, occurring about 4000-5000 years ago, was simply the most recent of them, he argued. In doing so, he utterly dismissed evolution and affirmed the theory of divine creation.
Cuvier's ideas were monumental. It helped found the modern field of palaeontology and formulate the idea of extinction events.
Lamarck soon fell out of favour. In fact, after Lamarck died, penniless, Cuvier wrote a eulogy to him. Although at first glance, it seems to be honouring Lamarck's contributions to natural history, Stephen Jay Gould noted that Cuvier was subtly denigrating Lamarck.
![]()
However, Cuvier's ideas on species' fixity and repeated catastrophes opened the idea that the Earth was far older than 6000 years, contrary the Ussher-Lightfoot chronology. Many theologians still struggled with this issue and eventually came up with the "gap" theory which explained there was a vast period of time which separated the events of Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. That way, a global flood and a young age of Man's existence was still tenable. Nevertheless, even this idea would be challenged in the future.
Conclusion: As you can see, even the most ardent opponents of evolution advocated an ancient Earth. The innate sorting, the striking differences in anatomy of fossils were vital in proving that our Earth is far older than the official date of creation. Joel Duff of the Natural Historian has an excellent series on 19th century scientists as well.
See them here:
The Earth on Show
William Buckland Grappling With Deep Time
Kirkdale Cave Hyena Den: A Challenge to a Young Earth
Mary Anning: Plesiosaurs, Pterosaurs and the Age of Reptiles
Highly recommended!
Next up: the geology of James Hutton and Charles Lyell, and the Reverend William Buckland's admission of error.
![]()
Before evolution, the first dangerous idea, was of course deep time. Espoused by geologist James Hutton and further developed by Charles Lyell, they claim it was this heretical thought that gave Darwin the springboard to formulate his theory of evolution by natural selection. What's ironic is that, the earliest discoverers of deep time were actually opposed to evolution.
.jpg) |
| William "Strata" Smith |
What he never realized was that his valiant efforts would change the perceptions of the world we live in forever.
Geologists began pondering the observations from the fossil record. What did this mean? When did these creatures live? If they were brought aboard Noah's Ark, why have none survived to this day? Most importantly, why were they so well sorted, from layer to layer? How could Noah's flood sort the fossils with such precision?
Bear in mind the notion of a global flood had already taken a beating almost a century ago, during the exploration of the Americas. Naturalists (many whom were also members of the clergy) struggled to explain a) the enormous diversity of animal life, particularly in the Amazon basin b) the origin of native Americans.
A particularly salient (and mildly amusing) question posed by Sir Thomas Browne was in this quote:
"How America abounded with Beasts of prey and noxious Animals, yet contained not in that necessary Creature, a Horse, is very strange"
In which he ponders why, if native American Indians were descendants of Noah who dispersed at Babel, why did they decide to bring rattlesnakes, but forgot the horses? Another pressing problem was that Genesis only described the creation of one land, so to speak. Yet enormous continents existed that were completely separated from the rest of Europe.
But I digress. As you can see, the idea of a global flood and a young clockwork Earth was being increasingly challenged by the fossil record. Remember, this was long before James Hutton's ideas became popular and Charles Lyell first published his book, the Principles of Geology.  |
| Jean-Baptiste Lamarck |
Lamarckism went against everything the Christian church taught, so enter brilliant distinguished scientist, Georges Cuvier, founder of modern anatomy. A man of wanton erudition, he had already come to realize a vast number of species in the fossil record were extinct. He noted the degree to which fossils were sorted according to strata, and was the first to recognize that elephant fossils found near Paris were distinct from living elephants we see today, or even the skulls of Siberian mammoths, and hence categorized them under a distinct species, the mastodon. He was the first to identify fossils found in South America belonged to a giant sloth, now known as Megatherium. And hence, he came up with the theory of catastrophism. Earth, he argued, had underwent a series of divine creations, succeeded by catastrophes which resulted in extinction events. The global flood, occurring about 4000-5000 years ago, was simply the most recent of them, he argued. In doing so, he utterly dismissed evolution and affirmed the theory of divine creation. Cuvier's ideas were monumental. It helped found the modern field of palaeontology and formulate the idea of extinction events.
Lamarck soon fell out of favour. In fact, after Lamarck died, penniless, Cuvier wrote a eulogy to him. Although at first glance, it seems to be honouring Lamarck's contributions to natural history, Stephen Jay Gould noted that Cuvier was subtly denigrating Lamarck.
 |
| The Cenozoic Age of Mammals. Image from http://www.peabodystore.com/images/posters/mammalposter.jpg |
However, Cuvier's ideas on species' fixity and repeated catastrophes opened the idea that the Earth was far older than 6000 years, contrary the Ussher-Lightfoot chronology. Many theologians still struggled with this issue and eventually came up with the "gap" theory which explained there was a vast period of time which separated the events of Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. That way, a global flood and a young age of Man's existence was still tenable. Nevertheless, even this idea would be challenged in the future.
Conclusion: As you can see, even the most ardent opponents of evolution advocated an ancient Earth. The innate sorting, the striking differences in anatomy of fossils were vital in proving that our Earth is far older than the official date of creation. Joel Duff of the Natural Historian has an excellent series on 19th century scientists as well.
See them here:
The Earth on Show
William Buckland Grappling With Deep Time
Kirkdale Cave Hyena Den: A Challenge to a Young Earth
Mary Anning: Plesiosaurs, Pterosaurs and the Age of Reptiles
Highly recommended!
Next up: the geology of James Hutton and Charles Lyell, and the Reverend William Buckland's admission of error.
Saturday, 5 July 2014
Something else....
I have been thinking intensely over the past few months.
Bear with me for a moment. You see plot lines for stories constantly weave through my head, like a restless maelstrom demanding placation. One plotline in particular, struck me in the solar plexus and held me for months. So much so that it is demanding to be written, as much a failure it may become in the future.
I can see the characters, the men and women in the play, giving the breath of life to the world I designed, how they look like, how they behave, their hopes and dreams and fears. I just cant, for the life of me, remember their names and the places they reside in.
Perhaps, if I can finally muster the strength, I will periodically post drafts of my ongoing project to this blog.
A few hints.
Its going to be a fantasy series with interspersed with "high" and "low" elements so to speak. I will try to focus on several characters, maye a false protagonist or two. I drew some inspiration from "A Song of Ice and Fire" as well as some other novels I ve read. Even Dark Souls may come into play.
Ultimately though, the plot came to my mind while I was in a massive bout of depression last year, so one would expect lots of tragedy. I sure hope my characters can survive through it.
Either way, I hope to continually post updates here, time to time alongside my science blogposts.
Hope you all enjoy!
Bear with me for a moment. You see plot lines for stories constantly weave through my head, like a restless maelstrom demanding placation. One plotline in particular, struck me in the solar plexus and held me for months. So much so that it is demanding to be written, as much a failure it may become in the future.
I can see the characters, the men and women in the play, giving the breath of life to the world I designed, how they look like, how they behave, their hopes and dreams and fears. I just cant, for the life of me, remember their names and the places they reside in.
Perhaps, if I can finally muster the strength, I will periodically post drafts of my ongoing project to this blog.
A few hints.
Its going to be a fantasy series with interspersed with "high" and "low" elements so to speak. I will try to focus on several characters, maye a false protagonist or two. I drew some inspiration from "A Song of Ice and Fire" as well as some other novels I ve read. Even Dark Souls may come into play.
Ultimately though, the plot came to my mind while I was in a massive bout of depression last year, so one would expect lots of tragedy. I sure hope my characters can survive through it.
Either way, I hope to continually post updates here, time to time alongside my science blogposts.
Hope you all enjoy!
Bio Geo (part 2)
If you have the time (or money), please visit these awesome places!
Part 1 of this series is here.
Mount Roraima
This is just one of several species of pitcher plants on Roraima. Most of the plateau is bare sandstone, and rainfall continuously washes soil off the edges of its sheer 400m high cliff edges.
What does that mean? Well, because of the nutrient-poor ground, many of the plants have taken on carnivorous traits. Pitcher plants abound on top of this massive table mountain.
Also pictured : the Roraima bush toad. I wont spoil too much, but just watch the linked video here to see how it escapes a hungry tarantula. Just a few of the unique species on Roraima.
In truth though, the plateau isnt as isolated as one would like to think: species from the plains below have occasionally been found on top. Even endemic species have been estimated to diverge from the ancestral population only a few million years ago, which is far younger than the age of the plateau itself.
Why would this be? My hypothesis is that birds may occasionally capture prey from the lowlands and bring them to nesting grounds on the cliff surface. The living species are escaped specimens. Perhaps, but there doesnt seem to be conclusive proof. Furthermore, there is actually a steep ramp to one side.
A caveat for aspiring visitors though: its not easy to get to the top, although thankfully, you dont need to scale the sheer cliff face with rope. There is a track on one side of the cliff face to the top.
See more info here.
Socotra Island
This might seem like trees from another planet, but they are actually from an island on Earth.
Behold, the dragon's blood tree, its scientific name which is dracaena cinnabari, found nowhere else in the world but Socotra. So called because of the crimson sap harvested from their trunks, prized during the Middle ages, the unique, crown shape is a form of adaptation mechanism for survival in dry climate - the crown shape provides an "umbrella" to reduce water loss in the hot and dry climate.
What is unique about Socotra is that it is not a volcanic island. Located in the Indian Ocean, closest to Somalia, but under Yemeni jurisdiction, tectonic activity detached it from mainland Africa during the aforementioned Pliocene, from about 2.6 - 5 million years ago. What researchers believe is that this species went extinct on the mainland but the island's relative isolation prevented it from being out-competed or driven to extinction by fundamental shifts in climate. In fact, almost a third of all flora and fauna on Socotra Island is found nowhere else on Earth!
Another unique species found nowhere else on Earth is this cucumber tree, Dendrosicyos socotranus, related to the cucumbers we eat. (Note that another species of tree, the Averrhoa bilimbi is also known as cucumber tree but is in no way related to the agricultural ground cucumber.)
Just a few of the unique species here. As for endemic birds, I ll let pictures and attached links tell you all you need to know. Read this for starters.
Conclusion
As one can see, biogeography provides evidence for evolution via the process of natural selection. This post is a little sketchy on the details, nevertheless I will provide more info in the future.
Enjoy!
Part 1 of this series is here.
Mount Roraima
 |
| Image courtesy of http://masspictures.net/mount-roraima-venezuelabrazilguyana/ |
South America has no shortage of wonders (see the Cano Cristales River in Colombia or the Salar de Uyuni in Bolivia) but for now lets look at its sprawling mesas. A sight to behold indeed. The image on the left is a helicopter photo of Mount Roraima, the highest tepui (isolated table mountain) in South America. Part of a chain of table mountains known as the Pakairama chain, which stretches across 3 nations: Brazil, Venezuela and Guyana.
The tepui are the remains of an ancient, Pre-Cambrian plateau, once part of the super-continent known as Gondwanaland, uplifted by tectonic activity and slowly eroded over untold eons, leaving these spectacular vistas of roiling clouds and waterfalls higher than anywhere else on Earth.
As you can see, the table mountains are isolated landforms, meaning of course, species that resemble no other can thrive in these geographically unique places. As my previous post pointed out, geographical isolation of small, isolated locales of a sample population leads to peripatric speciation. Lets take a closer look at Mount Roraima.
 |
| Young Heliamphora nutans, red pitcher plants endemic to South American mesas |
What does that mean? Well, because of the nutrient-poor ground, many of the plants have taken on carnivorous traits. Pitcher plants abound on top of this massive table mountain.
 |
| Image courtesy of National Geographic video here |
Also pictured : the Roraima bush toad. I wont spoil too much, but just watch the linked video here to see how it escapes a hungry tarantula. Just a few of the unique species on Roraima.
In truth though, the plateau isnt as isolated as one would like to think: species from the plains below have occasionally been found on top. Even endemic species have been estimated to diverge from the ancestral population only a few million years ago, which is far younger than the age of the plateau itself.
Why would this be? My hypothesis is that birds may occasionally capture prey from the lowlands and bring them to nesting grounds on the cliff surface. The living species are escaped specimens. Perhaps, but there doesnt seem to be conclusive proof. Furthermore, there is actually a steep ramp to one side.
A caveat for aspiring visitors though: its not easy to get to the top, although thankfully, you dont need to scale the sheer cliff face with rope. There is a track on one side of the cliff face to the top.
See more info here.
Socotra Island
Behold, the dragon's blood tree, its scientific name which is dracaena cinnabari, found nowhere else in the world but Socotra. So called because of the crimson sap harvested from their trunks, prized during the Middle ages, the unique, crown shape is a form of adaptation mechanism for survival in dry climate - the crown shape provides an "umbrella" to reduce water loss in the hot and dry climate.
What is unique about Socotra is that it is not a volcanic island. Located in the Indian Ocean, closest to Somalia, but under Yemeni jurisdiction, tectonic activity detached it from mainland Africa during the aforementioned Pliocene, from about 2.6 - 5 million years ago. What researchers believe is that this species went extinct on the mainland but the island's relative isolation prevented it from being out-competed or driven to extinction by fundamental shifts in climate. In fact, almost a third of all flora and fauna on Socotra Island is found nowhere else on Earth!
Another unique species found nowhere else on Earth is this cucumber tree, Dendrosicyos socotranus, related to the cucumbers we eat. (Note that another species of tree, the Averrhoa bilimbi is also known as cucumber tree but is in no way related to the agricultural ground cucumber.)
Just a few of the unique species here. As for endemic birds, I ll let pictures and attached links tell you all you need to know. Read this for starters.
Conclusion
As one can see, biogeography provides evidence for evolution via the process of natural selection. This post is a little sketchy on the details, nevertheless I will provide more info in the future.
Enjoy!
 |
| Socotra golden-winged grosbeak |
|
| Socotra warbler |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)