EvoLiteracy Update from Hawaii

Best wishes for 2016. A bit late, but I am still traveling and will resume the Evolution Literacy postings shortly. This last part of the journey comes from Hawaii.

Below, I share a few images from the island of Oahu. I have been coming to Hawaii yearly since 2012. Prior to that, I traveled to the Galapagos –yearly and non-stop– from 2005 to 2011. Comparatively, these archipelagos are amazing (i.e. volcanic origin, hot spots, endemism, adaptive radiation). Spectacular exemplars of evolution on islands.

For now, enjoy the images. I will discuss themes related to evolution on islands in the postings to come. You can find some of these images, and many more, on Twitter @gpazymino and Facebook. Aloha. – GPC

Shark Bernice P Bishop Museum Honolulu - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: A suspended-in-air shark at the Bernice P Bishop Museum, Honolulu.

Plumerias in bloom Koko Bot Garden Oahu - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: Plumerias in bloom Koko Bot Garden Oahu, Hawaii.

Golden Barrel Cactus Koko Bot Garden Oahu - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: They look like moving, rolling as a group. Golden Barrel Cactus at the Koko Crater Botanical Garden, Oahu, Hawaii.

Golden Barrel Cactus close up Koko Bot Garden Oahu - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: Golden Barrel Cactus at the Koko Crater Botanical Garden, Oahu, Hawaii.

Lady Columbia Honolulu Memorial - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: The beautiful Lady Columbia, Honolulu Memorial, Hawaii.

The Bernice P Bishop Museum Honolulu - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: The Bernice P. Bishop Museum (main building), Honolulu, Hawaii.

Sperm Whale Bishop Museum Honolulu - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: Sperm whale cast at the Bernice P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu, Hawaii.

Sperm Whale inside Bishop Museum Honolulu - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: Real skeleton inside sperm whale cast at the Bernice P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu, Hawaii.

A - Achatinella spp evolution Hawaii - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: Great didactic model (A) of Achatinella spp. snail evolution in Hawaii: “giant” introduction (for kids).

B - Achatinella spp evolution Hawaii - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: Model B of Achatinella spp. snail evolution in Hawaii: real snails (very small, about 2 cm, less than an inch).

C - Achatinella spp evolution Hawaii - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: Model C of Achatinella spp. snail evolution in Hawaii: real snails.

D - Achatinella spp evolution Hawaii - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: Model D of Achatinella spp. snail evolution in Hawaii: real snails.

E - Achatinella spp evolution Hawaii - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: Model E of Achatinella spp. snail evolution in Hawaii: real snails.

Achatinella spp snail diversity Hawaii - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: Outcome F of Achatinella spp. snail evolution in Hawaii: real snail diversity (40+ species).

Wooden slit drums of Vanuatu Bishop Museum Honolulu - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: Wooden slit drums of Vanuatu represent Hawaiian ancestors and ancestors’ voices. Bernice P Museum, Honolulu.

Plumerias Koko Bot Garden Oahu - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: The beautiful Plumerias at the Koko Crater Bot Garden, Oahu, Hawaii.

Iolani Palace Honolulu Hawaii - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: The majestic Iolani Palace, Honolulu, Hawaii.

Iolani Palace Red Room Honolulu Hawaii - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: Iolani Palace, the Red Room, Honolulu, Hawaii.

Iolani Palace Red Room close up Honolulu Hawaii - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: Iolani Palace, close up of the Red Room, Honolulu, Hawaii.

Sausage Tree Campus UH Manoa - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: “Sausage Tree” (looks like a giant tamarindo, although distantly related to the latter). In the genus Kigelia sp. (from Africa). Each fruit can weigh up to 15 pounds. I found this one at the University of Hawaii Manoa.

The Forest Tree Koko Bot Garden Oahu - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: The forest at the Koko Botanical Garden, Oahu Island, Hawaii.

The Forest Koko Bot Garden Oahu - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: The forest at the Koko Botanical Garden, Oahu Island, Hawaii.

The Forest Giant Cactus Koko Bot Garden Oahu - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: The forest at the Koko Botanical Garden, Oahu Island, Hawaii.

The Cactus Section B Koko Bot Garden Oahu - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: The forest at the Koko Botanical Garden, Oahu Island, Hawaii.

Pachypodium Koko Bot Garden Oahu - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: Pachypodium (native to Madagascar) at the Koko Botanical Garden, Oahu Island, Hawaii.

The Cactus Section at Koko Bot Garden Oahu - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: The impressive cacti at the Koko Botanical Garden, Oahu Island, Hawaii.

Ukuleles four Hawaii - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: My ukuleles, the first one is a Mele from Maui (the box is built on mango wood); second, a miniature Kanile’a from the Big Island (koa wood); third is s DeVine from Oahu (mostly koa wood); and the last one is a tenor Kanile’a (koa) also from the Big Island.

Sunset Light House B&W Honolulu - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: Evening in Honolulu – I don’t like sunsets much, but occasionally it is fun to play with an amateur camera and a lighthouse.

Sunset Sailing Boat House Honolulu - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: Oahu sunset, Hawaii.

USS Arizona Memorial Pearl Harbor Hawaii - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2016

Above: USS Arizona Memorial, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.

Related Posts:

Mauna Kea Telescopes to Sink in the Pacific

The Art Of Nature: Sculptures Of Dinosaur Tracks and Traces

By Guillermo Paz-y-Miño-C PhD — © 2015

New England Science Public – An Initiative for the Public Understanding of Science – on Twitter @gpazymino@EvoLiteracy – Facebook – ResearchGateAcademia.edu

An Amazing Museum in the Heart of Massachusetts

[click on subtitle to be redirected to The Standard Times]

“…Edward Hitchcock’s collection of fossilized tracks and traces of dinosaurs is one of the largest in the world and the Beneski Museum of Natural History exhibits them as fine art, carved by nature… Under soft lighting, a saturation of textures emerges from or deepens into the flat rocks. The 200-million-year-old footprints are so exquisite…”

Anchisauripus and Grallator tracks - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Cast of Anchisauripus and Grallator tracks at the Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

The United States houses the world’s best exhibits of natural history. From the Smithsonian National Museum in Washington D.C., which opened in 1910 and now cares for 126 million specimens (the largest collection ever), to smaller local displays of high quality, like the University of Nebraska State Museum, in Lincoln (85,000 specimens catalogued since 1871). Its “Elephant Hall” and skeletons of the North American megafauna —which vanished 5,000-10,000 years ago— are spectacular.

Beneski Earth Sciences Building - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2015

Beneski Earth Sciences Building – Photo GPC

But my latest encounter with fossils just happened at the Beneski Museum of Natural History in Amherst College, where precious casts of dinosaurs’ footprints are showcased as fine art, sculptured by nature. An award-winning facility (for its architecture), the Beneski Earth Sciences Building (2006) blends a permanent exhibit for the public with a research collection of 200,000 objects available to scholars and students, and the teaching labs.

I returned to inland Massachusetts attending an invitation to present a seminar at the UMass Amherst Graduate Program in Organismic and Evolutionary Biology. A privilege to reach an audience of 70, including faculty, postdocs and graduate students, and discuss with them my research on acceptance of evolution. Professor Jeffrey Podos, the host, organized a visit to the Beneski Museum during my two-day stay. What a treat.

“…More than feeding the public’s dinosauria-frenzy, the goal of the Museum is to educate about the geology and paleontology of New England by taking advantage of the fossils’ beauty…”

Although the collection of dinosaur tracks is the main treasure guarded by the Beneski Museum, its 1,700 objects on display for the general public are, not only introductory for what the visitor will experience once face-to-face with the fossilized footprints, but also cleverly distributed in three floors within the building’s brick, steel and glass structure. More than feeding the public’s dinosauria-frenzy, the goal of the Museum is to educate about the geology and paleontology of New England by taking advantage of the fossils’ beauty.

Dire wolf and Sabertoothed Cat - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Dire wolf (left) and Sabertoothed Cat (right) at the Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

Beneski’s main hall welcomes the visitor with gentle, almost unpretentious bone casts of a dire wolf and a sabertoothed cat (both roamed 100,000 years ago). Behind them, however, enormous skeletons of a mammoth and a mastodon capture all the attention, to the point that the wolf, cat, and the soon-to-be-seen cave bear and Irish elk appear small in contrast to the tusks protruding out of the proboscideans‘ (elephants’) skulls.

Mammoth and Mastodon - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Mammoth and Mastodon at the Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

This floor includes two more displays. The evolution of the Equids (horses), which took place almost entirely in North America, from ancestral forms of dog-sized quadrupeds, which over 50 million years —since the Eocene— gradually increased in mass, decreased in the number of toes —from 5 to 3 and to the single middle digit on which modern horses gallop— and changed their diet from browsing to grassing, as revealed by their teeth. All visible traits in the fossil record and unequivocal evidence in support to Darwinian evolution.

“…Brontops was a browser shaped like a colossal rhino and with two blunt horns over the snout. On display, its cast shrinks the presence of its wall-of-fame, equally extinct hoofed companions…”

The Ungulate Wall of Fame - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

The Ungulate Wall of Fame, with Brontops at the bottom, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

The last prominent display in the main lobby is of ungulates. On a wall, half of their skeletons, as seen from aside, come out as 3D sculptures mounted on the silhouettes of their flesh. The largest is a Brontothere, member of a lineage that became extinct 30 million years ago, and that was remotely related to today’s rhinoceroses, which, by the way, belong to the odd-toed mammals (together with horses and tapirs). This Brontops was a browser shaped like a colossal rhino and with two blunt horns over the snout. On display, its cast shrinks the presence of its wall-of-fame, equally extinct hoofed companions.

The Museum’s tradition goes back to the foundation of Amherst College (1821) and the hire of Edward Hitchcock, who by 1825 had left the Congregational ministry to become Professor of Chemistry and Natural History. His “Ichnology Collection” of fossilized tracks and traces of dinosaurs became one of the largest in the world and the Beneski Museum exhibits casts of them in its lower level. I counted 25 by 15 steps while assessing the tracks’ gallery. It was divided in four alleys with eight parallel displaying walls. On them, and under soft lighting, a saturation of textures emerged from or deepened into the flat rocks. They were so exquisite.

“…Footprints of early Jurassic dinosaur transients were left on muddy soils along the Connecticut River Valley. The tracks dried out, hardened and rock formed over time…”

Casts of Fossilized tracks and prints B - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Casts of fossilized dinosaur tracks and prints at the Wolansky Gallery, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC – Click on image to enlarge.

Footprints of early Jurassic dinosaur transients were left on muddy soils (200 million years ago) along the Connecticut River Valley, and the geological chronology of this ancient plateau is explained in the third floor of the museum. The dino-tracks dried out, hardened and rock formed over time. Nowadays, we know they belonged to the hind limbs of bipedal species like Eubrontes (3-toes), Grallator (3-toes), Otozoum (4-toes), and the quadrupedal Anomoepus, with 5-toed forelimbs and 3-toed hind limbs.

“…As former clergyman, Hitchcock could not avoid espousing the fallacies of Natural Theology, and during his entire career attempted —and failed— to prove God’s existence in (from) nature. A dead-end path taken with his contemporaries Louis Agassiz, Richard Owen and Adam Sedgwick, who also opposed Charles Darwin’s proposal of evolution via natural selection…”

Edward Hitchcock - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Edward Hitchcock as carved on marble by artist Martin Milmore, Wolansky Gallery, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

As former clergyman, Hitchcock could not avoid espousing the fallacies of Natural Theology, and during his entire career attempted —and failed— to prove God’s existence in (from) nature. A dead-end path taken with his contemporaries Louis Agassiz (Harvard), Richard Owen (British Museum) and Adam Sedgwick (Cambridge), who also opposed Charles Darwin‘s proposal of evolution via natural selection. By 1845, Hitchcock became President of Amherst College, at times when highly educated academic administrators were still on demand. But not surprisingly, a later President, Julius Seeyle, a Reformist Pastor, prohibited, in 1877, the teaching of evolution on campus. In retrospect, Hitchcock’s Ichnology Collection —rather than his bureaucratic and creationist distractions— was destined to become the most valuable possession of the Beneski Museum.

Despite the abundance of splendid natural history exhibits in the U.S., where evolution is so creatively communicated to the public, only 40 percent of Americans —or just 60 percent of New Englanders— embrace the reality of evolution. A regrettable contradiction in a nation that continues to lead today’s most meaningful scientific discoveries. — © 2015 by Evolution Literacy all rights reserved.

Image Gallery:

Mammoth frontal view B&W - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Mammoth, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

Mammoth close up - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Mammoth close up, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

Mastodon frontal view B&W - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Mastodon, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

Mastodon hind leg - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Mastodon hind leg, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

Mastodon African Elephant Mammoth Teeth - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Mastodon, African Elephant and Mammoth Teeth, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

Cave Bear - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Cave Bear, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

Diceratherium - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Diceratherium, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

Eryops megacephalus - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Eryops megacephalus, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

Gryposaurus - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Gryposaurus, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

Tyrannosaurus rex - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Tyrannosaurus rex, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

Tyrannosaurus rex upper jaw - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Tyrannosaurus rex, maxilla or upper jaw, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

Tyrannosaurus rex lower jaw - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Tyrannosaurus rex, lower jaw, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

Triceratops - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Triceratops, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

Diplodocus longus - limb - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Diplodocus longus – limb, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

Gastropod fossils - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Gastropods in the fossil invertebrate collection, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

Ammonites - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Ammonites parkinsoni, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

Promicroceras - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Promicroceras, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

Clypeaster - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Clypeaster, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

Phacops - trilobite - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Phacops – trilobite, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

Hominid micro exhibit lateral view - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Hominid micro exhibit lateral view, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

Hominid micro exhibit front view - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C Beneski Museum 2015

Hominid micro exhibit front view, Beneski Museum of Natural History – Photo GPC

Related Articles:

Hiking Among Trilobites, Ancient Whales and Dinosaurs

On Whales And A Whaling Museum

Boston’s Hayden Planetarium carries standard of scientific study

Suggested Readings: click on image for open access PDFs

Journal Book Covers Paz-y-Mino-C Espinosa Articles

 

EvoLiteracy News 10 26 2015

Today in EvoLiteracy News: A recent study about the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin caught my attention for two reasons. First, it was published in Scientific Reports, a science-media outlet sponsored by Nature. Second, five authors believed to have tested two “hypotheses” when, in reality, they reconfirmed –indirectly– support for an old thesis (i.e. the Medieval origin of the shroud, 800 years ago) and speculated over a historicity-based idea (i.e. that the shroud originated in Jerusalem, 2000 years ago, and it was later transported to Turin). The study is an exemplar of conceptual error, and it can be used in scientific-methodology courses to educate our students on how to avoid making similar mistakes. – Guillermo Paz-y-Miño-C

Shroud of Turin, Poor Science, and the Persistence of a Myth

I will dedicate some length to examine this study (Uncovering the Sources of DNA Found on the Turin Shroud), which falls apart by itself when attempting to combine modern DNA analysis with a silly, pseudoscience project: to find scientific evidence to justify believing in a myth. The concerning part is that five authors, Barcaccia et al., were fortunate to publish the research (October 5, 2015) in Scientific Reports, a fairly known science-communication venue.

A - Shroud of Turin 2015

Negative of the Shroud of Turin printed as positive 1898

The team examined “two” hypotheses, one scientific, the other a historicity supposition. The scientific thesis –for which Carbon dating has provided unequivocal evidence since 1988/9— is that the Shroud of Turin is a fake, a fabrication of Jesus’ body’s imprint on ordinary linen traceable to the 13th and 14th centuries, specifically to 1260-1390 (C-dating is quite accurate). The historical supposition, in contrast, suggests that the shroud must have come from the years 30 or 33, of modern times, which makes it a 2000-year-old relict. The latter has no scientific sustain. But the authors build up –in a technical report format– the argument that their molecular analyses bring support to “both” hypotheses (Medieval origin and Jesus’ timeline). This is not the case. In fact, it is impossible to merge both proposals because the shroud is 800 years old, while the Jesus-person tale –if real– is three times older. Therefore, there is an irreconcilable mismatch in time between the two views.

Readers can judge the study for themselves (at this link), but I prefer to summarize the reality of its findings –while avoiding the authors’ convoluted logic– as follows:

First, Barcaccia et al. admit that the Carbon-dating piece of evidence –a crucial element in this case– demonstrates that the Shroud of Turin originates in Medieval times (statistical confidence 95 percent). That is, we are pretty sure that the linen does not come from 2000 years ago. The shroud is one third the age it is supposed to be under the historicity hypothesis. Therefore, everything else upon which the authors speculate in the study is irrelevant. The Barcaccia et al. conjectures, no matter how the investigators spin them, are inconsistent with the Carbon-dating clock: 800 years old.

Second, the shroud is contaminated with plant material (particularly pollen, which can be detected via chloroplast DNA analysis) belonging to plant species from, almost, all over the world (see figure below). Because the shroud’s linen is 800 years old, the contamination must have occurred during recent times.

C - Shroud of Turin 2015

Plant DNA species found on the Shroud of Turin. Schematic overview of the centers of origin of plant taxa identified in samples of the shroud. Image source Barcaccia et al. 2015.

Third, the linen of the shroud is also heavily contaminated with human DNA (detected via mitochondrial DNA profiling; see figure below), which belongs to multiple individuals, from multiple ethnic backgrounds and, therefore, from multiple geographic locations (Europe, West Asia, Northeastern Africa, Arabia, Middle-East, all the way down to India –not from the Americas). Again, because the shroud is 800 years old, human contact with it must have occurred during recent times.

D - Shroud of Turin 2015

Human mtDNA haplogroups found on the Shroud of Turin. Schematic overview of the current geographical distribution of human mtDNA haplogroups and sub-haplogroups identified in samples of the shroud. Image source Barcaccia et al. 2015 (click on it to enlarge).

Fourth, and this is not a trivial finding, although the authors report it as extraneous, the shroud is also contaminated with DNA from the bird Southern Grey Shrike (Lanius meridionalis), distributed in Southwest Europe, Northern Africa, the Near East, and Southwest Asia. And also with genetic traces of a marine Nemertine worm (Cerebratulus longiceps), from the Northern Pacific Ocean (species description from Alaskan samples, 1901). Once more, as it becomes crucial to remind the readers, because the shroud is 800 years old, bird- or marine worm-DNA must have contaminated the fabric during the past eight centuries.

Fifth, despite these findings, the authors bend over backwards, put aside the age of the shroud and free fall into speculating that if we –somehow– eliminate the noise of the overwhelming DNA contamination, we can “parallel” the genetic patterns of human DNA contamination with the historical path taken by the shroud’s carriers, allegedly from Jerusalem to Turin. A sort of “spatial” retracing of the shroud’s migration. That is, an attempt to find in the genetic markers –which in reality only inform us about the diverse geographic sources of the DNA contaminants– the evidence in support for the historicity hypothesis: Hh that the linen has traveled from Jerusalem to Turin, and via human hand-to-hand (with occasional bird or marine worm intervention) along an envisioned route. And this way of reasoning –by Barcaccia et al.– is so troubling, because it is a blunt Type One Error, a conceptual violation of scientific scrutiny. It picks and chooses what type of contaminant DNA is more informative than other (when all of them are, in principle, contaminants of a cloth one-third the age it is supposed to be), in order to fit the authors’ wish to force support for the historicity hypothesis. And this is done in plain sight of an 800-year young cloth or, in fact, a fake 2000-year-old-wanna-be relic.

“…To be authentic, the Shroud of Turin must be 2000 years old. It is not. Carbon dating places it only eight centuries ago, in Europe. And there is no evidence to link the shroud to Jerusalem, and to the years 30 or 33.”

Sixth, what Barcaccia et al. seem to have found, after cleaning some of the noise in the multiple genetic contaminations (i.e. by discarding some contaminants and keeping “informative” DNA sequences) is an artifact, a byproduct effect of the spatial source of the contamination, that gives the impression of a geographic pattern of migration of the shroud (from Sacred Land to Turin). In reality, it is a pattern of the source of the contamination (not a reflection of the origin of the shroud), consistent with the history of human-worshipers’ approaches to the linen, to touch it. This actually explains the apparent absence of human DNA contaminants from the Americas in contrast to the more-likely-contaminants to be found: the people living nearby the shroud, from the years 1200-1300s onwards. And this is a more parsimonious explanation to the Barcaccia et al.‘s speculations. The authors could have just rationalized over a 2×2 table (see figure below) when designing the tests for: Medieval-origin hypothesis (spatial and temporal evidence) and historicity hypothesis (spatial and temporal evidence). In other words: Medieval-origin hypothesis (Europe and 800 years) and historicity hypothesis (Jerusalem and 2000 years). It becomes obvious that the authors cannot combine, in any manner, one hypothesis with the other because the proposals do not match in time (the time dimension). Therefore, any spatial speculation of consistency, as Barcaccia et al. propose, is senseless. More so when the spatial argument for “possible parallelisms” between hypotheses relies on the capricious use of DNA-contaminants and the exclusion of the timeframe disparity (800 vs. 2000 years). Poor science, indeed.

E - Shroud of Turin 2015 Evolution Literacy

To be authentic, the Shroud of Turin must be 2000 years old. It is not. Carbon dating places it only eight centuries ago, in Europe. And there is no evidence to link the shroud to Jerusalem, and to the years 30 or 33. A: spatial evidence for the Medieval origin hypothesis vs. the Historicity hypothesis; European art techniques used to fake the shroud have been confirmed vs. the genetic contaminants used to speculate that the shroud may come from the Sacred Land. B: Temporal vs. spatial evidence; radio Carbon-dating places the shroud 800 years ago, which is inconsistent with the hypothetical Jerusalem origin. C: Temporal vs. spatial evidence; the hypothetical 2000-year-old age of the shroud is inconsistent with the Medieval European art techniques used to fake it 800 years ago. D: Temporal vs. temporal evidence; the 2000 years of age required for the hypothetical Jerusalem origin of the shroud is inconsistent with the actual 800 years of age determined by Carbon-dating. – GPC

CONCLUSION: Barcaccia et al. study is another, among many, in-text acknowledgments that the shroud of Turin is a Medieval fake, only 800 years young (C-dating) and not a 2000-year-old relic (as demanded it to be in any test of the historicity hypothesis). Reality occurs in a space-time context, yet the authors chose to put time aside to facilitate survival of the historicity tale. The shroud is heavily contaminated with plant, human, bird and marine worm DNA, a phenomenon enhanced exclusively during the past eight centuries, during which the linen has had increasing exposure to people –and their debris, including critters’ goo– from Europe and nearby locations (not to mention the rest of the world). The genetic spatio-temporal mapping presented by Barcaccia et al. reflects a pattern of contamination by humans of multiple ethnicities, consistent with convergent traveling, from diverse locations, in the direction to the object, the shroud, possibly to worship it. If anything, this paper documents the spatial distribution of human contamination of the linen from likely-geographic locations. It fails to provide any evidence in support of the historicity hypothesis (due to the time dimension incongruity), and it actually strengthens the notion that the shroud of Turin is a Medieval fake. The study by Barcaccia et al. is exemplar of how far poor judgment can go, and how belief in supernatural causation disrupts, distorts, delays or stops (the 3Ds + S cognitive effects of illusory thinking) the acceptance of scientific evidence before the very eyes of the investigators, and with their own data. – GPC

B - Shroud of Turin 2015

Negatives (left and right images) of the Shroud of Turin. The cloth is about 14 x 4 ft.

VIDEO: Click on image below to be redirected to NatGeo video Remaking The Shroud, in which techniques for faking it are discussed, and some modern-technology tests shown, including UV light and 3-D imaging.

F - Shroud of Turin 2015 Evolution Literacy NatGeo

EvoLiteracy News 10 23 2015

Today in EvoLiteracy News: Louder Vocalizations in Howler Monkeys Correlate with Small Testicles. The significance of this study is the simultaneous test of three hypotheses (vocal competition, environmental adaptation and size exaggeration) and the elegant documentation of an “evolutionary trade-off” in which vocalizations (rather than the usual morphological traits) are involved. Enjoy! – GPC

In 1871, Darwin suggested that the vocal organs of male Mycetes (Alouatta) –howler monkeys– have been sexually selected. What for? Darwin implied that, in sexually dimorphic species, females prefer and mate with males possessing conspicuous ornaments (e.g. large antlers, bright coloration, elaborate vocalizations), which convey information about fitness.

  • Darwin wrote: “…The vocal organs of the American Mycetes caraya [Alouatta caraya] are one-third larger in the male than in the female, and are wonderfully powerful. These monkeys in warm weather make the forests resound at morning and evening with their overwhelming voices. The males being the dreadful concert, and often continue it during many hours, the females sometimes joining in with their less powerful voices… Whether most of the foregoing monkeys have acquired their powerful voices in order to beat their rivals and charm the females, or whether the vocal organs have been strengthened and enlarged through the inherited effects of long-continued use without any particular good being thus gained, I will not pretend to say; but the former view, at least in the case of [another primate] the Hylobates agilis [the gibbon*], seems the most probable…” (The Descent of Man and Selection In Relation to Sex, 1871).
    • [*Darwin highlights that the gibbon (H. agilis) “…is remarkable from having the power of giving a complete and correct octave of musical notes, which we may reasonably suspect serves as a sexual charm…]

A new study published in Current Biology explains that hyoid bones (crucial for roars in Alouatta) are highly sexually dimorphic, vary among species and with greater sexual dimorphism in species with larger hyoids. The study examines a phenomenon called “evolutionary trade-off;” a situation in which the enhanced expression of one trait (hyoid bone) is directly associated with the diminished expression of another (size of testicles). The assumption is that both traits are costly for an organism to express and, therefore, the trade-off resides in allocating resources to only one of them, for optimization.

B- Howler Monkeys Curr Biol 2015Here is the story: All species of howler monkeys have a modified larynx with an enlarged hyoid bone, which works as a resonance chamber. Howls are energetically expensive to produce (link to video below). Now, what is the connection between the monkeys’ vocalizations and the size of their testicles? The study, authored by Dunn et al. (nine co-authors), explores three hypotheses: vocal competition (i.e. acoustic signals announce presence during defense of territories), environmental adaptation (i.e. hyoid bones are important for sound frequency adjustments in dense forests), and size exaggeration (i.e. voluminous hyoids work as enhancers of the acoustic impression of body size conveyed by roars).

F- Howler Monkeys Curr Biol 2015

RIGHT: Skeleton of a male Alouatta in which the hyoid bone is clearly visible –throat region. LEFT: two images of the hyoid bone showing its chamber-like structure (top) and smooth surface and elongated shape (bottom). The hyoid is very robust (made mostly of compact bone tissue).

Dunn et al. found support for the vocal competition and size exaggeration hypotheses, but not for the environmental adaptation. Here are some of the authors’ generalizations:

(1) males of various species, who live in larger groups of males, have smaller hyoid bones (panel A in figure below) and larger testicles (panel B), the latter an adaptation for sperm-sperm competition (the trade-off: because both roars and sperm production are expensive, only one trait is conspicuously expressed);

C- Howler Monkeys Curr Biol 2015

(2) males with large hyoid bones have smaller testicles (panel C in figure above; the trade-off again; these monkeys usually live in single-male-and-many-females groups);

(3) males with larger hyoid bones vocalize at low(er) frequencies (panel D in figure above; size exaggeration hypothesis); and

(4) all howler monkey species produce very low-frequency vocalizations in respect to their body mass and in contrast to other mammals or corresponding body mass (see figure below; also consistent with the size exaggeration hypothesis). – GPC

D- Howler Monkeys Curr Biol 2015

VIDEO: Take a look at the energetic movement of the thorax while this howler monkey vocalizes; the entire anatomy participates in the roaring. In the rainforest, howler monkeys’ vocalizations can heard from kilometers away.

EvoLiteracy News 10 21 2015

Breaking News – New Species of Galapagos Tortoise is Identified

Sorry for the introductory drama. Today, my pick for EvoLiteracy News includes a study just published -hours ago- in PLoS ONE. A characterization of a distinctive lineage of Galapagos Giant Tortoises. The study is rich in data; below I summarize its major points. Enjoy! – GPC

C - New Sp Galapagos Tortoise Chelonoidis donfaustoi PLoS One 2015

The two populations of Galapagos tortoises in Santa Cruz Island apparently belong to separate species. Click on image to enlarge.

First, the discussion over the “correct genus” of the Galapagos tortoises has been vivid since 1914, with three justified proposals: Testudo (14 species: 1914), Testudo elephantopus (all subspecies, 1955), Geochelone (as genus, 1957) and Chelonoidis (as sub-genus of Geochelone, 1957). The latest proposal is that all sub-species (13 or 14), or valid biological species, should be placed within Chelonoidis (2006), as legitimate taxa (the problem with Geochelone is that it seems to be polyphyletic, a fancy word to imply “artificial” rather than a natural group, as Chelonoidis).

Second, historic classifications of tortoise varieties based on carapace shape are informative, but taxonomically unreliable (i.e. saddleback, dome, intermediate, and unknown).

Third, populations from different islands represent independent evolutionary lineages, geographically isolated, even within islands, and are distinguishable genetically (via nuclear microsatellites).

B - New Sp Galapagos Tortoise Chelonoidis donfaustoi PLoS One 2015

The skull of the holotype (i.e. the representative specimen) used for description of Chelonoidis sp. nov. from Cerro Fatal, Santa Cruz. Click on image to enlarge.

Fourth, the new species is described for Santa Cruz Island. It belongs to a separate population (Chelonoidis donfaustoi sp. nov., from “Cerro Fatal,” estimated divergence 0.43 million years ago), genetically distinctive and only 20 Km distant from Chelonoidis porteri (from “Reserva,” estimated divergence 1.74 million years ago).

Fifth, the new species C. donfaustoi is genetically identifiable (via nuclear microsatellite and mitochondrial DNA), which suggests reproductive isolation.

Sixth, the new species has only 250 surviving individuals, which makes it one of the rarest, possibly one of the most endangered lineages of extant Galapagos tortoises.

CONCLUSION: The paper by Poulakakis et al. (total 12 authors), which was published today in PLoS ONE, is interesting and well documented. Keep in mind, however, that populations naturally –and not unusually– move, drift over time, colonize environments, become isolated, and gradually diversify (i.e. the foundation of species radiation). In this respect, the study adds specificity to our previous understanding of the Galapagos tortoises’ population genetics. It gives us additional hints about island connectivity during the  geologic past of the archipelago; for example, if we look closely into the mtDNA (mitochondrial) haplotype phylogeny of the extant and extinct tortoises, including museum specimens (below), the newly described “species” (C. donfaustoi) branches as sister taxa of the San Cristobal Island tortoise C. chathamensis, today a separate island, but likely connected to Santa Cruz in the past. Hopefully, the study by Poulakakis et al. generates support to conservation efforts (funding) of these magnificent giant tortoises. – GPC

D - New Sp Galapagos Tortoise Chelonoidis donfaustoi PLoS One 2015

Tree constructed from data including mitochondrial DNA haplotypes sampled from extant and extinct species, plus museum specimens of Galapagos tortoises. Click on image to enlarge.

F - New Sp Galapagos Tortoise Chelonoidis donfaustoi PLoS One 2015

2015 Nobel Prize in Chemistry Goes to Curiosity-Based Research

By Guillermo Paz-y-Miño-C PhD — © 2015

New England Science Public – An Initiative for the Public Understanding of Science – on Twitter @gpazymino@EvoLiteracy – Facebook – ResearchGateAcademia.edu

Nobel Prize in Chemistry Goes to Curiosity-Based Research

[click on subtitle to be redirected to The Standard Times]

“…Mutations are essential to evolutionary change; they provide the genetic variability that lineages of organisms need to persist over the eons. At the same time, evolution has equipped our cells with repairing mechanisms to fix, edit DNA errors that can be detrimental…”

If completely stretched into a single, long molecular chain, the DNA of a human cell would measure about two meters. During our lifetimes, our bodies would replicate enough DNA that, theoretically, it could be extended from Earth to the Sun, and back, 250 times. Ample opportunities to accumulate 37 trillion mutations while re-copying the genetic material.

D - DNA Repair image by Tom Ellenberger

DNA-repair, image by Tom Ellenberger, Washington University in St. Louis.

Yet, evolution has equipped our cells with repairing mechanisms to fix, edit such DNA errors. And this year’s Nobel Prize in Chemistry has been awarded to Tomas Lindahl (Sweden), Aziz Sancar (Turkey) and Paul Modrich (US) precisely for discovering and characterizing –independently— these processes.

What I admire most in these investigators is their obsessive pursue of knowledge during a vigorous exploration of the intimacy of our inner molecules. As Modrich puts it “curiosity-based research is so important; you never know where it is going to lead.” And it did lead them from almost extraneous observations of the harmful effects of UV-light on the DNA of bacteria to –four decades later— its applications to our current understanding of cancer, neuro-degenerative disorders and ageing. Another lesson for today’s academic administrators infatuated with worshiping the science-for-profit model.

All began in the 1920s when American geneticist Hermann Muller (Nobel Laureate in Physiology or Medicine, 1946) found that X-rays could harm bacterial cells. By the 1940s, it was known to scientists that UV-light also had mutagenic effects on most cells. Interestingly, despite radiation-induced damage in bacteria, laboratory colonies continued to persist, which led researchers to infer that these organisms had repair-mechanisms to reinstate the internal chemistry. In 1944, DNA was recognized as the material of heredity and UV-light as a deteriorating agent of its structure.

“…What I admire most in these investigators is their obsessive pursue of knowledge during a vigorous exploration of the intimacy of our inner molecules… [Their] story only grows in beauty…”

The first breakthrough in DNA-repair mechanisms was unexpected: Albert Kelner (US) discovered that, in response to UV-induced cellular damage, bacterial enzymes could reverse the process by using –surprisingly— light, and capturing its energy-particles (photons), which excite electrons in the enzymes’ functional parts, thus jump-starting their repairing engines. The process was termed photo-reactivation and the enzymes photolyases. The story only grows in beauty.

Keep in mind that DNA is built of four “bases,” called adenine A, guanine G, cytosine C and thymine T. Under ordinary circumstances, A always pairs with T, and G with C, hence forming the steps of the DNA’s double helix, which is usually depicted as a staircase. In 19741976, Tomas Lindahl studied a frequent mutation in which G, rather than pairing with C (as G-C), had, as partner, the base U (uracil), a constituent of other molecules in the cell. Why? C and U are very similar, but when C loses some of its parts, due to predictable chemical contingencies, it can resemble U more closely. Thus DNA would temporarily accept the pairing G-U, but the cell would fix it by enzymatically chopping off U and restoring the correct coupling G-C. And Lindahl mapped, so elegantly, this entire process, which was labeled single-base excision repair. Later, it became part of the cell’s toolbox for DNA repair mechanisms, of which numerous have been described.

A - Base Excision Repair

Illustration: Johan Jarnestad – The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences (click to enlarge).

In a separate study, Aziz Sancar experimentally manipulated with UV-light-induced mutations and characterized how the cell could fix errors via an alternative pathway, termed multiple-base excision repair, which included cutting off several bases, not only one, as described by Lindahl. Sancar knew that UV-light could make T behave strangely and pair with its homologue (T-T), rather than with A, as it normally does (T-A).

Let us imagine two parallel rows of DNA sequence in which the top one is G,C,T,T,C,G. Its complementary, bottom, pairing (following the rule A-T and G-C) would be C,G,A,A,G,C. However, UV-light damage can induce the Ts on the top row to pair with each other, as T-T, rather than with their corresponding As in the bottom, as T-A and T-A. Thus creating a bump loop on the top row (T-T), leaving the As in the bottom unpaired.

In 1983, Sancar plotted the entire mechanism of repair of the T-T mutation, which included multiple enzymes responsible for accurately cutting and restoring 12 bases in the top row of DNA, five prior and five post T-T. An amazing work.

B - Nucleotide Excision Repair

Illustration: Johan Jarnestad – The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences (click to enlarge).

By 1989, Paul Modrich had unveiled a third mechanism, which involved the fixing of DNA sequence mismatches, which randomly emerge during cell divisions. A process called DNA mismatch repair. It included even larger stretches (beyond 12 bases) of folded DNA, which specific enzymes would cut and restore to the correct sequence (watch VIDEO).

C - Mismatch Repair

Illustration: Johan Jarnestad – The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences (click to enlarge).

What is the value of curiosity-driven research? Because cancer, neuro-degeneration and ageing start with DNA damage, almost all we understand about them –including drug treatment— relies on the basic science of DNA repair mechanisms. — © 2015 by Evolution Literacy all rights reserved.

E - DNA Repair cartoon

DNA Repair during evolution… Image from public domain Google Images

Suggested Readings:

Historical paper by Tomas Lindahl published in Nature 1993: Instability and decay of the primary structure of DNA.

Press Release from the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences: the 2015 Nobel Prize in Chemistry

Scientific Background on the 2015 Nobel Prize in Chemistry: Mechanistic Studies of DNA Repair, compiled by the Class for Chemistry of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences.

Popular Science Background: DNA Repair – Providing Chemical Stability for Life.

History of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1901 – 2015.

*  *  *  *  *     *  *  *  *  *     *  *  *  *  *

Evolution Stands Faith Up: Reflections on Evolution’s Wars By NOVA Publishers, New York Soft Cover. Find it at Barnes & Noble, Amazon.comAmazon UK.

Paz-y-Mino-C_Book_Cover_Evolution_Stands_Faith_Up_JPEG

“This is an inspiring, readable collection of essays of reflective value to everyone. Paz-y-Miño-C points to the vain attempt by many to try and accommodate scientific rationalism with supernatural beliefs. They are simply incompatible. The author has a marvelously eloquent style of writing, full of inspiring metaphors and lateral observations that reinforce connections to the foundations of scientific inquiry and to biological evolution in particular. These thoughtful essays… are inspiring… [and] help clear the fog in our communities and arm our neighbors [with arguments] against theistic anti-science, medical quackery and other irrational nonsense.” – Greg M. Stott, PhD, Geoscientist with the Ontario Geological Survey, Canada.

“Paz-y-Miño-C doesn’t ask the reader to ‘believe’ in evolution. He provides overwhelming evidence, clearly written, that shows how scientific inquiry leads to important and practical results, while superstition and faith lead nowhere. Although we may not be able to reason someone out of what they were never reasoned into, the author presents a roadmap for those whose minds are open to discover the wonders and beauty of science.” – Herb Silverman, PhD, author of Candidate Without a Prayer: An Autobiography of a Jewish Atheist in the Bible Belt.

“Too many of our colleagues work so hard to appear open minded that their brains seem to have fallen out. When they teach our students that they can pick and choose when to be logical, critical thinkers, they are modeling the type of reasoning that leads to the politics of convenience and its bridesmaids: racism, sexism, and the whole host of xenophobias. Paz-y-Miño-C is a prolific essayist, he does not pull any punches, but when he cuts to the core of an argument, he does it with the flare of a true artist.” – Stan Braude, PhD, Professor of Practice in Biology, Washington University in St. Louis, USA.

EvoLiteracy News 10 06 2015

I just returned from Chicago after attending the VII International Conference on Science in Society (October 1-2, 2015), an annual event organized by Common Ground (publishers) at the University Center Chicago. The program included theme presentations, workshop sessions, colloquium, poster session and garden conversation. About 70 scholars attended, from 20 countries.

Common Ground is the publisher of the International Journal of Science in Society. We published a paper in it a few months ago (Evolution Controversy: A Phenomenon Prompted by the Incompatibility Between Science and Religious Beliefs), which served as the theme for our presentation/workshop.

Each of three parallel workshop sessions was attended by about 20 people. I enjoyed our session (The Values of Science) very much, perhaps precisely due to the size of the meeting, the diversity of scholars participating (i.e. sociologists, chemists, anthropologists, philosophers, physicists, biologists, educators, media specialists), and the interdisciplinary format of the discussions.

At the meeting, we were informed that The Science in Society Community, including the conference and the journal, had joined with their sister community Interdisciplinary Social Sciences. –  GPC

The entire program is available here. Our workshop session included:

The Values of Science

Anti-scientism and Its Impact on the Relationship between Science and Religion: The Role of Science in a Postmodern Society. Dr. Mohamed Almisbkawy, Department of Philosophy, British University in Egypt, Fayoum University, Cairo, Egypt. Overview: The clash between classic science and religion was due to the similarly in their internal structures. Science has overcome this nature of scientific system by shifting from scientism to anti-scientism.

Evolution Controversy: A Phenomenon Prompted by the Incompatibility between Science and Religious Beliefs. Dr. Guillermo Paz-y-Miño-C, New England Center for the Public Understanding of Science and New England Science Public, Roger Williams University, Bristol, USA. Dr. Avelina Espinosa, New England Center for the Public Understanding of Science and New England Science Public, Roger Williams University, Bristol, USA. Overview: This paper explores the evolution controversy under three predictions of the incompatibility hypothesis.

Chicago Sci Soc Presentation - G-Paz-y-Mino-C Oct 1 2015

Some of the images used in our presentation at the VII International Conference on Science in Society, Chicago, October 1-2, 2015. We discussed in detail the Incompatibility Hypothesis.

Formally Trained Science Communicators: A Solution to the Unreasonable Expectations Placed on Lay People and Professional Scientists. Dr. Teresa Branch-Smith, Department of Philosophy, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada. Jay Michaud, Department of Philosophy, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada. Overview: We need to formally train science communicators to facilitate the transmission of knowledge from scientists to people because it requires expertise that neither group should be expected to acquire independently.

Chicago Science in Society Oct 1-2 2015

Our hostesses and organizers of the VII International Conference on Science in Society at The University Center Chicago, October 1-2, 2015.

 

*   *   *   *   *          *   *   *   *   *          *   *   *   *   *

Suggested Reading:

Just Published: Evolution Controversy and the Incompatibility of Science and Religion

Cover Int Journal Science Society Paz-y-Mino-C and Espinosa 2015

Click on image to be redirected to the International Journal of Science in Society

Published in The International Journal of Science in Society — Paz-y-Miño-C & Espinosa (2015). Evolution Controversy: A Phenomenon Prompted by the Incompatibility between Science and Religious Beliefs. Int. J. Sci. Soc. 7(2). ISSN 1836-6236. -May 14, 2015.

The complete article, which includes 23-pages, 11 figures and 59 references, can be downloaded —for free— from the International Journal of Science in Society. Click on the image (left) to go to the journal website to download the PDF.

A media-friendly summary can be read HERE.

EvoLiteracy News 09 09 2015

Protisto-Biologists Flock to Seville for ECOP-ISOP Scientific Meeting

A - ISOP meeting Seville Spain 2015

Strassmann and Espinosa ECOP ISOP Seville - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2015

Joan Strassmann (left) and Avelina Espinosa (right) discussing kin-recognition in unicellular eukaryotes (protists) at a symposium organized for the purpose at the ECOP-ISOP 2015 conference in Seville, Spain.

SEVILLE, SPAIN (EvoLiteracy Sep. 9, 2015) — Organized by ECOP-ISOP, the protistologists’ meetings always surprise me, not only because I must pinch others to remind them that unicellular eukaryotes, or “protists,” are the stars of these annual conferences, but also because like no other scientific gathering, these events attract world specialists who share passion for organisms that look –and are– single celled. That’s it; all distantly –and some more closely– related groups of “unicell” creatures that populate the Earth, and in all environments. The evolutionary concestors of animals, plants and fungi.

I have attended these meetings during the past five years: Kent, UK 2010; Berlin, Germany 2011; Oslo, Norway 2012; and Banff, Canada 2014. I missed the 2013 reunion in Vancouver, Canada, which I had no alternative but to trade it for the World Evolution Summit in the Galapagos.

Plenary Session - ECOP ISOP - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2015

Plenary session on Cryptic Diversity in Organisms and Organelles, ECOP-ISOP 2015 meeting in Seville, Spain.

The ECOP-ISOP (European Congress of Protistology – International Society of Protistologists) meetings will run September 5-10, 2015, and the sessions will take place at the Reina Mercedes Scientific Campus of the University of Seville. The format will include plenary lectures, symposia, workshops, and posters (mostly by graduate students).

Protistologists are interested in multiple topics in which unicellular organisms (e.g. amoebas, paramecium, euglenas, or trichomonas) are central: ecology, evolution and applications of basic research to medicine, biotechnology and even industry. But the collective goal of these investigators is to understand the extraordinary diversity of these organisms, put it in a broad context and link it to the origin and evolution of multi cellular bionts, carriers of billions of cells, like sponges, bees, humans, elephants or whales. — Guillermo Paz-y-Miño-C for EvoLiteracy — © 2015

University of Seville - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2015

The Reina Mercedes Scientific Campus of the University of Seville where the ECOP-ISOP 2015 meeting will take place from September 5th to 10th.

Audience ECOP ISOP Seville - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2015

Top: Phylogeny and Evolution presentations just ended, today, September 9th. Bottom: Poster session discussions, a friendly setting for one-on-one (or two) interactions.

College Educated But Deeply In Debt For An Overpriced Degree

By Guillermo Paz-y-Miño-C PhD — © 2015

New England Science Public – An Initiative for the Public Understanding of Science – on Twitter @gpazymino@EvoLiteracy – Facebook  ResearchGateAcademia.edu

College Educated, But Deeply In Debt For An Overpriced Degree

[click on subtitle to be redirected to The Standard Times]

Ivory Tower 2015

“The breakdown of the Ivory Tower is figurative in the architectonic sense, but not in the intellectual. Education does not need to be cheap, just affordable, sincere. Not vibrant entertainment.” – GPC

“…The race among higher-ed campuses to capture the funds available to students for education is self inflicted, a textbook example of out of control free market competition, in which education is a commodity, rather than a priceless investment in culture, the ultimate possession of a nation…”

The current for-profit model of higher education in America is destined to crash. Its failure will injure primarily the students, today’s borrowers of $1.19 trillion. What for? Mostly tuition and collateral life expenses in exchange for an overpriced degree.

During the past three decades the cost of college has grown 1,120 percent, doubling health care (600 percent), and more than quintupling the expenses of food (200 percent higher since 1978). A reality aired in Ivory Tower, the 2014 documentary by Andrew Rossi on how “the very concept of the institution of higher-learning is about to be broken.”

Price Increases Since 1978 Ivory Tower Evolution Literacy

Source: Ivory Tower 2014 – Documentary by Andrew Rossi

“…education is expensive and its alternative, ignorance, would be more damaging in the long term…”

If the quality of higher education had improved parallel to its fees, then the argument for an overcharged college certificate would be unsound. Now, education is expensive and its alternative, ignorance, would be more damaging in the long term. But, how expensive should education be to justify its actual cost?

Total Debt Balance 2015 Evolution Literacy

By 2015, the total debt balance in the U.S. reached $11.85 trillion; 69 percent of it corresponded to mortgages; 10 percent to student loans; and the remaining amount to auto, credit cards, and revolving loans. Note how from 2003 to 2015 student loans (red bars) grew significantly in respect to other types of loans. Image source: Quarterly Report on Household Debt and Credit, May 2015.

The race among higher-ed campuses to capture the funds available to students for education is self inflicted, a textbook example of out of control free market competition, in which education is a commodity, rather than a priceless investment in culture, the ultimate possession of a nation.

About 40 million Americans are borrowers of student loans, two million of them currently owing at least $100,000. But the situation is complex and a distinction must be made between undergraduate and graduate student loans.

Ivory Tower Evolution Literacy 2015“…the assumption has been that post-graduate degree holders shall be reliable payers, and not flock toward debt-forgiveness programs. A risky supposition…” 

Sixty percent of the $1.19 trillion debt belongs to the undergraduate students. The technicality here is that the remaining 40 percent of the balance corresponds to 14 percent of the borrowers, who are graduate students. Thus, the per capita obligation is much higher for the latter. In either case, the responsibility to pay back is substantial, although the assumption has been that post-graduate degree holders shall be reliable payers, and not flock toward debt-forgiveness programs. A risky supposition considering that since 2007, when such initiatives started, additional rescue plans emerged, including President Obama’s 2012 Pay As You Earn.

The forgiveness paths facilitate government agencies, nonprofit organizations, and the private sector to hire debt-borrowers to work for a reduced salary and, in return, benefit society by taking public-service roles during a prearranged period. Other alternatives, like the President’s debt relief law, include the capping of monthly payments at 10-15 percent of the borrower’s discretionary income, thus lessening the stress while carrying the loan over time.

“…the national student debt is… a time bomb… comparable to the mortgage transactions of the 2000s, which benefitted financiers but turned unmanageable for home-owners wannabes…”

Despite these damage control policies, the national student debt is, in foresight, a time bomb. Its societal sequels will unveil in a few years. As The Wall Street Journal characterizes it: “offering unlimited loans to students, with the prospect of forgiveness, creates a moral hazard by allowing borrowers to amass debts they have little hope or intention of repaying, all while enriching institutions and leaving taxpayers to pick up the tab.” Sounds comparable to the mortgage transactions of the 2000s, which benefitted financiers but turned unmanageable for home-owners wannabes.

Percent of Balance Delinquent by Loan Type 2015

By 2015, student loans reached the highest percent of balance 90+ days delinquency in contrast to credit card, mortgage, auto loan and revolving loans. In essence, 10+ percent of student borrowers were not repaying. Image source: Quarterly Report on Household Debt and Credit, May 2015.

And this situation is central to the looming collapse of our country’s higher education, the repercussion of handling colleges and universities like corporations. Statistics from the New America Education Policy Program —which uses information from the U.S. Department of Education’s National Postsecondary Student Aid Studies— are telling:

In 2004, the typical borrower (combined graduate and undergraduate) owed $40,000 upon graduation (undergrads $20,000). In 2012, the latest data processed by NAEPP, the standard student borrower owed $57,000 (undergrads $25,000). These are median values, which convey fractional information: one in every ten borrowers owed $153,000 once graduated.

These figures varied according to field of expertise and as per typical borrower: $161,000 among those graduating from the medical and health sciences, $140,000 from law school, $58,000 from a master of arts program, $50,000 from a master of science or education, and $42,000 from a master in business administration.

Share of Graduate Degrees NAEPP 2014 Evolution Literacy

Typical debt of borrowers (share of graduate degrees). Source: New America Education Policy Program, March 2014.

Among the in-debt, the typical monthly payment, at a 6 percent interest rate and 15-year repayment term, was: $1,365 among graduates from the medical and health sciences, $1,187 from law school, $494 from the arts, $429 from science or education, and $354 from business administration (values adjusted to 2012).

“…The present generation of student borrowers is fated to limited socio-economic mobility, to be trapped in an unsustainable system in which, as customers, they demand satisfaction…”

On the administrators’ side, in contrast, the finances have been blooming. The top ten U.S. public college presidents‘ earned, in 2013-2014, from $1.5 million to $745,000, while their top five counterparts at private colleges made from $7.1 to $1.8 million in 2012.

Highest Paid Presidents Public Private Colleges US Evolution Literacy

Top: highest paid Presidents at public colleges in the United States. — Bottom: highest paid Presidents at private colleges (smaller numbers in histogram = base pay salaries). Data from The Chronicles of Higher Education (see summarized list in Business Insider).

The breakdown of the Ivory Tower is figurative in the architectonic sense, but not in the intellectual. The present generation of student borrowers is fated to limited socio-economic mobility, to be trapped in an unsustainable system in which, as customers, they demand satisfaction, rather than proper schooling.

Education does not need to be cheap, just affordable, sincere. Not vibrant entertainment.

— © 2015 by Evolution Literacy all rights reserved.

Student Debt by Donkey Hotey

Illustration by Donkey Hotey

Related Articles:

Imminent Collapse of Basic Science Under For-profit Model

Dehumanizing Academia by Dismantling the Humanities

Fragmentary Truths and the Intellectual Imbalance in Academia

Evolution Illiteracy at America’s Colleges and Universities

Massachusetts Gets an A- in Science Standards

*  *  *  *  *     *  *  *  *  *     *  *  *  *  *

Evolution Stands Faith Up: Reflections on Evolution’s Wars By NOVA Publishers, New York Soft Cover. Find it at Barnes & Noble, Amazon.comAmazon UK.

Paz-y-Mino-C_Book_Cover_Evolution_Stands_Faith_Up_JPEG

“This is an inspiring, readable collection of essays of reflective value to everyone. Paz-y-Miño-C points to the vain attempt by many to try and accommodate scientific rationalism with supernatural beliefs. They are simply incompatible. The author has a marvelously eloquent style of writing, full of inspiring metaphors and lateral observations that reinforce connections to the foundations of scientific inquiry and to biological evolution in particular. These thoughtful essays… are inspiring… [and] help clear the fog in our communities and arm our neighbors [with arguments] against theistic anti-science, medical quackery and other irrational nonsense.” – Greg M. Stott, PhD, Geoscientist with the Ontario Geological Survey, Canada.

“Paz-y-Miño-C doesn’t ask the reader to ‘believe’ in evolution. He provides overwhelming evidence, clearly written, that shows how scientific inquiry leads to important and practical results, while superstition and faith lead nowhere. Although we may not be able to reason someone out of what they were never reasoned into, the author presents a roadmap for those whose minds are open to discover the wonders and beauty of science.” – Herb Silverman, PhD, author of Candidate Without a Prayer: An Autobiography of a Jewish Atheist in the Bible Belt.

“Too many of our colleagues work so hard to appear open minded that their brains seem to have fallen out. When they teach our students that they can pick and choose when to be logical, critical thinkers, they are modeling the type of reasoning that leads to the politics of convenience and its bridesmaids: racism, sexism, and the whole host of xenophobias. Paz-y-Miño-C is a prolific essayist, he does not pull any punches, but when he cuts to the core of an argument, he does it with the flare of a true artist.” – Stan Braude, PhD, Professor of Practice in Biology, Washington University in St. Louis, USA.

Lucy’s Pride 3.2 million years later

Lucy’s Pride, an open-minded Australopithecus, as it was casual 3.2 million years ago. We finally evolved, or did we?

— © 2015 by Evolution Literacy all rights reserved

Lucy's Pride Australopithecus afarensis - Photo G-Paz-y-Mino-C 2015

Related Postings:

Evolution Controversy and the Incompatibility of Science and Religion

Evolution Wars: Another EpisodeEvolution Wars: Episode II

*  *  *  *  *     *  *  *  *  *     *  *  *  *  *

Just Published: Evolution Controversy and the Incompatibility of Science and Religion

Cover Int Journal Science Society Paz-y-Mino-C and Espinosa 2015

Click on image to be redirected to the International Journal of Science in Society

Published in The International Journal of Science in Society — Paz-y-Miño-C & Espinosa (2015). Evolution Controversy: A Phenomenon Prompted by the Incompatibility between Science and Religious Beliefs. Int. J. Sci. Soc. 7(2). ISSN 1836-6236. -May 14, 2015.

The complete article, which includes 23-pages, 11 figures and 59 references, can be downloaded —for free— from the International Journal of Science in Society. Click on the image (left) to go to the journal website to download the PDF.

A media-friendly summary can be read HERE.

 *  *  *  *  *     *  *  *  *  *     *  *  *  *  *

Evolution Stands Faith Up: Reflections on Evolution’s Wars By NOVA Publishers, New York Soft Cover. Find it at Barnes & Noble, Amazon.comAmazon UK.

Paz-y-Mino-C_Book_Cover_Evolution_Stands_Faith_Up_JPEG“The sweet spot of this collection of essays is the interface of science, history and literacy. Paz-y-Miño-C is, in essence, a champion of rationalism and a passionate defender of literacy standards. His essays deftly weave hard survey data and memorable turns of phrase with evocative imagery… While the essays in this collection are vast in coverage —from climate change to energy policy, stem cell research, vaccinations and, especially, evolution— a clear underlying theme emerges: [the author’s] goal is no less than to counter, through the lens of history and the majesty of rationalism, social forces that sanction ignorance, celebrate denial and… continue to diminish our global status in the fields of science and technology.” Jeff Podos, PhD, Professor of Biology, University of Massachusetts Amherst, USA.

“Paz-y-Miño-C  is a firm believer in evolutionary processes. He would like to see decisions made on the basis of facts, not unsupported opinion. He abhors and fears irrational thinking, especially ‘the views of those who see evil in truth and menace in the realities discovered by science.’ He marvels at the intricacy and diversity of life, and how it came about through natural selection… and is clearly frustrated by the unwillingness of so many to see the beauty and majesty in this view of the world and all that it explains.” – Jan A. Pechenik, PhD, Professor of Biology, Tufts University, USA, author of The Readable Darwin: The Origin of Species, as Edited for Modern Readers.