John Sidney McCain III made his first national "executive" decision a few weeks ago. He chose a person who was singularly unqualified to hold even city wide office to be his (and, unfortunately, our) Vice President.

I think that single decision shows us who John Sidney III really is, reveals him more clearly than anything I have seen in this or his many previous failed campaigns.

His choice, as far as I have been able to determine, may have been partially forced upon him by the darker forces of neo-conservative Republican politics. The Roves and the Cheney's intend to rule from Mordor long after their official tenures are over in Washington. They need their Bushes, their McCains and Palins.

Forced though the choice may have been, McCain made it with a degree of public glee, of arrogance and cynicism that I have never personally witnessed in presidential politics in my tired old life.

Fell behind on this last week. This is the fourth week in a row I am doing my "Articles They Don't Want You to See" feature. This week I want to highlight science...the science they don't want you to understand. Specifically Evolution, Global Warming and the HIV/AIDS connection. I write about the first two topics a great deal and will draw from earlier diaries I have written. The HIV/AIDS connection is something I only recently realized had a denial lobby associated with it that needed countering. I am a scientist and have been a scientist during the bulk of the history of AIDS research. Almost took a job in Seattle working on an AIDS vaccine (moved to NYC instead). I knew that there were deniers in South Africa and that is a major problem in Africa, but now I have encountered HIV/AIDS deniers on dKos and realize I can suggest some articles regarding that issue as well.

Some years after Douglas Adams had received world-wide renown from his quirky sci-fi concoctions, he hit upon the idea of a new project.  For this book, called Last Chance to See, Adams would travel round the world, visiting creatures which were not only endangered, but down to the last of their numbers.  Adams recognized quite well that his near universal celebrity was essential to the plan -- even if you're charged with keeping people away from the final example of some vanishing oddity, how can you resist showing it off to Douglas Adams?  And he took advantage of the opportunity to describe these animals, and their plight, with his signature mix of humor and insight.    

Since the book came out in 1992, at least one of the endangered creatures he visited may have lost its fight.  Just as sad, from my admittedly anthropocentric point of view, is that Adams himself has said his farewells.  Were he here today, Douglas Adams would not have had to travel so far to see creatures in danger of disappearing.  He'd only have to stroll down to the beach, because it now seems that the oceans are dying.

This story has nothing to do with Kennewick Man or disputed sites like Calico.  We're talking before that, way before.

If you attend any journalism school, one of the the first things they tell is to get the heart of your story at the top of the page.  Drop all those W's, -- who, what, when, where -- into your opening paragraph, then come back and fill in the details and background.  But then, it's been a long time since I even pretended to be a journalist, so you'll have to forgive me if I write this story in reverse.  

Eventually, I'm going to get to the news, but I'm going to start the story nearly 400 million years and two thousand miles from the important events.  In fact, I'm going to start in my own backyard.

Sometimes people try to stomp on knowledge directly -- like the Kansas school board's blantant appeal to ignorance.  At least those people have the guts to stand up in front of the cameras.  They're wrong on every point, but they're not cowards.

More insidous are those who simply scrub away at learning without a vote or any pretense at a public forum.  In Arkansas, it now appears that evolution has quietly disappeared.

Teachers at his facility are forbidden to use the "e-word" (evolution)with the kids. They are permitted to use the word "adaptation" but only to refer to a current characteristic of an organism, not as a product of evolutionary change via natural selection. They cannot even use the term "natural selection."

 Think that's bad?  It gets worse.

The bill was first proposed in the Utah state Senate by Republican Chris Buttars, who said it was "time to rein in teachers who were teaching that man had descended from apes, and rattling the faith of students."  The Republican dominated Senate passed the proposal on a 16-12.

As the bill headed into the equally lopsided Republican state House, it looked as if Utah was on the way to joining the Kansas Club -- those states that have mandated "alternative theories," or forced the placement of stickers on text books, or otherwise given science a punch in the gut.

Then a funny thing happened in the governor's desk.  

In honor of Charles Darwin's birthday on February 12th, I am posting a series of diaries on Darwin and his theory. My first entry in this miniseries covered the basics of Darwin's theory of evolution. My second essay addressed some of the objections that have been made to Darwinian evolution and showed how year after year we find more evidence to support the theory of evolution. Today, I want to finish this miniseries by describing something about Darwin himself.

Since I will be busy herding a group of pre-teens to pizza, a movie and a party on the 12th, I will finish this series of essays one day early. Happy Birthday, Mr. Darwin. This one's for you!

In honor of Charles Darwin's birthday on February 12th, I am posting a series of diaries on Darwin and his theory. My first entry in this miniseries covered the basics of Darwin's theory of evolution. In this essay, I wish to discuss some of the objections that have been made regarding his theory and show how more than 100 years of research have done nothing but bolster or minorly modify Darwin's theory.

In honor of Charles Darwin's birthday on Feb. 12th, I want to spend some time discussing just what is Darwin's theory of evolution and, in another article, addressing some of the criticisms of this theory.

As Darwin Day approaches, we are facing an increasing assault by right wing extremists on Darwin's theory. Kansas is one of the big battlegrounds, of course, and it is depressing watching the battle unfold.

A recent issue of Science covered the upcoming Kansas state school board elections and let me tell you, it really is embarassing to read about this shit happening in 2006 America!

What is Evolution Sunday ?

On 12 February 2006 hundreds of Christian churches from all portions of the country and a host of denominations will come together to discuss the compatibility of religion and science.   For far too long, strident voices, in the name of Christianity, have been claiming that people must choose between religion and modern science.  More than 10,000 Christian clergy have already signed The Clergy Letter demonstrating that this is a false dichotomy.  Now, on the 197th anniversary of the birth of Charles Darwin, many of these leaders will bring this message to their congregations through sermons and/or discussion groups.  Together, participating religious leaders will be making the statement that religion and science are not adversaries.  And, together, they will be elevating the quality of the national debate on this topic.

Not long ago I wrote a diary on the validity of global warming. I followed that up with a description of how the right wing in America is attacking science, with an emphasis on the "Intelligent Deception" movement. I now want to put the former in the context of the latter and discuss the "Lobby of Denial," a concerted effort to interfere with genunine science in studying climate change.

Recently I posted a diary on global warming which drew some offline interest from global warming deniers which I covered in the comments to that story. I don't know much about those who attacked me offline, and I don't much care. Whether they intend it or not, they are part of a right wing attack on science that I recently wrote about on Daily Kos but which seems worth updating for the benefit of Political Cortex.

It started when I was reading a biography of Darwin and had just come to the part where the publication of Origin of the Species has produced a huge religion vs. science debate at an Oxford scientific conference. I was struck by how far we have come since then only to see reactionary forces pulling us back towards willfull ignorance. My anger at the willfull ignorance of a wide section of American culture is what led to this article.

On November 30th Cal Thomas and Bob Beckel published an op-ed in USA Today, under the headline, `Intelligent design': What do scientists fear? Let's have a public debate on the merits.  

Patricia Princehouse, a biology professor at Case Western University in Ohio says, bring it on. But not in the elementary schools: how about between scientists at a major university?

I am fat.  Not obese -- not yet, anyway -- but according to the health fair that my company does once a year, I have definitely sagged into the "overweight" category.  A category that puts me in good company with a growing number of Americans.

While some people have sound reasons for their increasing girth -- metabolic disorders, eating to relieve depression, the mind control beams that Jack in the Box generates from those millions of antenna balls -- I know all too well why my "BFP" refuses to stay down there in the "lean and mean" category: I eat too much.  It's a pretty simple bit of physics and chemistry.  I take in more calories than I burn, and the leftover goes into straining that "comfort band" at the waist of my trousers.

Among other sources of my new found pounds, there's a vending machine right down the hall.  I can state with absolute certainty that the trip from my office to the machine and back again, does not consume enough energy to offset any of the various sweat and or salty contents.  Not even if you include the terrible effort of lifting my arm and pushing the selection buttons.

However, it has occurred to me that the vending machine is more than a clever ploy by the cardiologist's retirement fund.  It's evolution in action.