Down Syndrome Awareness Month

This month is Down Syndrome Awareness Month, and while this is the most common chromosomal abnormality, there is still a lack of social understanding.

So this week’s link(s) are all going to be about the efforts to raise awareness of Down Syndrome.

As NiB has talked about raising money for scientific research (watch Jeremy get soaked with water) I’d like to encourage you to call your congress person and lobby for increased funding for scientific research.

Or make a donation to Down Syndrome research here 

Or please read this article about a parent trying to raise awareness.

Or read about and/or sign up for one of the Down Syndrome Buddy walks here.

Atlanta Falcons Jake Matthews posted a photo of his favorite Falcons fan, his sister Gwen, who has down syndrome.

Or read about other ways to become an advocate at the National Down Syndrome Society.

Or just enjoy these photos of  my adorable friend Charlotte, who is growing up beautifully.

1476496_10101472806385992_7218706268948119320_n 10641106_10101471469749622_6531041890731228190_n

Some are born great…

There has been a lot of interest throughout history in what makes great people great. Like the freakishly great people. The Yo-Yo Mas and the Michael Jordans, if you will. Some research pointed to genetics. Some research pointed to practice making perfect (ever heard of the “10,000 hours” rule?). An article in Slate, “Practice Does Not Make Perfect” sums up some pretty compelling evidence that genes play a mighty big role in all sorts of aptitudes.

In a recently published analysis of the data, researchers found that there was a stronger correspondence in drawing ability for the identical twins than for the fraternal twins. In other words, if one identical twin was good at drawing, it was quite likely that his or her identical sibling was, too. Because identical twins share 100 percent of their genes, whereas fraternal twins share only 50 percent on average, this finding indicates that differences across people in basic artistic ability are in part due to genes. In a separate study based on this U.K. sample, well over half of the variation between expert and less skilled readers was found to be due to genes.

And if you’re already thinking about the implications and ramifications of snubbing practice because it all comes down to genetics, the article discusses that (in depth) too.

It is therefore crucial to differentiate between the influence of genes on differences in abilities across individuals and the influence of genes on differences across groups. The former has been established beyond any reasonable doubt by decades of research in a number of fields, including psychology, biology, and behavioral genetics. There is now an overwhelming scientific consensus that genes contribute to individual differences in abilities. The latter has never been established, and any claim to the contrary is simply false.

 

How much would I have to practice before I could run as fast as Usain Bolt? My guess is infinity.

England is known for its gardens… that can kill you

The english countryside is know for gardens filled with magnificent roses and elegant floral arrangements.

But when the Duchess of Northumberland moved into her husbands family castle she decided to do something a little different with her garden… she made it deadly.

Read all about it over at Smithsonian!

42-57758996.jpg__1072x0_q85_upscale

Understanding the evolution of nocturnal mammals by studying their extinct relatives

Humans are diurnal. We sleep at night and are active during the day. (That isn’t to say that I feel particularly diurnal most mornings, given that my alarm has to make it through a few snooze cycles to wake me up and coffee is the only thing keeping me from napping under my desk at work.) Most mammals, though, don’t share our ostensible predilection for daylight; only 20% of mammal species are diurnal like us. Of our mammalian relatives, nearly 70% are nocturnal. The rest are crepuscular (active at dawn and dusk) or cathemeral (active during both day and night).

A tarsier (Flickr: )

A tarsier from Borneo. (Flickr: Erwin Bolwidt)

Mammalogists like myself often think nocturnality is a particularly mammalian thing because—let’s be honest here—nearly all of the coolest nocturnal vertebrates are mammals. How can you compete with the likes of tarsiers, vampire bats, leopards, and—strangest of them all—the aye-aye? I’ll throw the ornithologists a bone and acknowledge the enduring awesomeness of owls, but they are the odd birds out in a group that’s mostly diurnal.

Continue reading

Science and Religion Blah Blah Blah

88610-Beating-Dead-Horse-gif-Imgur-gxz1

A perennial question, a constant product of the click-bait-and-outrage factory known as internet, that has been, and perhaps forever will be posed, answered, yelled about, and generally used to beat the life and enthusiasm out of so many reasonably evolutionary biologists is “CAN RELIGION AND SCIENCE (PARTICULARLY EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY FOR SOME REASON) COEXIST??!?!!?!!?”

The answer is a simple no, and yes. That’s it. No, because religious belief systems often tend to include specific factual claims about the material world that turn out to be total nonsense. For example, the earth and everything on it was not created in 7 literal days. Therefore, one cannot hold both this belief and the belief that scientific inquiry was a fantastic way of generating useful, more-or-less objective knowledge about the world, because actual scientific evidence absolutely refutes such a notion.

On the other hand, yes, because arguably the most important elements of religious belief systems involve claims about immaterial things, such as the existence and nature of the human soul. On these topics, science literally has nothing to say. One cannot measure with calipers, a telescope, a mass spec, an Illumina Hi-Seq or any other tool devisable by humanity, a divine presence purported to pervade all existence. The hypothesis that a God of any sort exists can be rescued from any and every contradictory empirical finding.

Perhaps you can tell, but I’ve written this rant because I’m sick and tired of the web-traffic generating mutualism that exists between religious fundamentalists and atheists claiming to champion science. They both make equally absurd and unsupported claims about religion and science. Their statements are always absolute.

This was supposed to be a link post, so if you’d like to see the New York Times opinion piece that got me all in a rage about this, here it is. But I don’t recommend reading it.

Postscript: I am in no way religious. I also recognize that certain specific religious beliefs are both widely held, harmful, and in direct contradiction to established scientific facts. I think these beliefs ought to be combated. This does not in any way change my overall tolerance of religious belief.

Thanks, Bush and Obama!

President Obama is expanding the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument today from the wonderful 86,888 square miles President George W. Bush set up in 2009, to about 490,000 square miles. I gotta love anything involving ocean conservation. Thanks, Bush and Obama!

“This is a great moment,” said Greg Stone, chief scientist for Conservation International. “This is some of the last real tropical ocean wilderness left on the planet, so it’s good put some of these kind of reef systems aside. On top of that there are the protections for the open ocean and I’m assuming for the sea floor from mining,” he said.

From the Guardian article: “Tarawa atoll. Photograph: Richard Vogel/AP”