Friday's Feature Fossil

Given my incredible interest in evolution, and my recent dance with Dino’s, I have decided to delve into the fossil record. While researching this topic I will keep you all posted. Each Friday, I hope to post information on the fossils including; when and where they were found, when the organism lived, what they tell us about evolution and other pertinent information. By the end of this project, I should have accumulated a somewhat linear timeline of ancient life.

I will try and post the fossils in the order they appear on the geological timeline. It should be an interesting and informative journey! Hope you all enjoy.

Walking With Dino's

Last night I had the honor of seeing “Walking with Dinosaurs”. A spectacular show! If anyone has the opportunity to see it, I suggest going.

Besides the excellent theatrics, lighting, and music, there was a great deal of science. It was more scientifically based than I expected, honestly. For most adults and, of course, children, there is plenty to learn.

The show began by taking the audience back in time, hundreds of Millions of years. An awe inspiring photo of earth from space is seen on the giant screen. The earth is shown with not seven, but one continent, Pangaea. The show takes the audience on an incredible journey “observing” Dinosaurs in their “natural” environment. Dinosaurs from Brachiosaurus’ to Tyrannosaurus Rexes towered and roared before us. They were incredibly realistic.

I truly believe the show does a great service to the science community by not only bringing the past to life, but also inspiring young children to think “science”.





Habitat For Homonids

Birthday Confusion

I was surprised by the image that Google placed on its website on January 4th 2010, in honor of Sir Isaac Newton’s birthday. You see, everything I’ve ever read about the man claims he was born on December 25, 1642, Christmas morning. I was puzzled by the fact that Google had it wrong, and further by the fact that no one noticed.


Turns out, we were both right. Come to find out, Newton was born on December 25, 1642  and January 4, 1643.  How is this possible? 

At the time of his birth England was utilizing the Julian calendar. It wasn't until the 1700’s, that England began to adopt the Gregorian calendar.  Countries across Europe had begun to adopt this calender as early as the 1500's.

This "new" calendar system changed the position of the New Year and calibrated the calendar to astronomical processes (ie: # of days the earth takes to circumvent the sun). Because of this change, Historical documents dictate that Newton was born on December 25th. The January 4th date is a calibration to the Gregorian calendar, now in use.  This is sometimes notated by "OS" meaning "Old Style" and "NS" meaning "New Style".  These notations are often used by historians, as a way to more accurately report historical events. 

Other interesting dates and changes include George Washington’s birthday. Some historical accounts claim he was born on February 11, 1731, which would be accurate given the Julian Calendar, but we celebrate this on February 22.  Calibrated correctly his birthday would be written February 22, 1732.

Thomas Jefferson had both dates (Julian and Gregorian) placed on his headstone. This was influenced by England’s adoption of the Gregorian calendar during his lifetime.

Habitat for Homonids

Carbon Offsetting

We all have a carbon footprint. Everything we do, directly or indirectly adds CO2 to the atmosphere. For example, the CO2 produced by the plane you took to Paris, the car you took to work, or the production of energy used to power the Wii you exercised with last night all contribute to your carbon footprint and global warming.


In Europe, they have begun to pay a closer attention to human actions and the contribution those actions have to the changing environment. It has become “trendy” to reduce this carbon footprint, both that of individuals and companies. Companies have began to market themselves as “Green”, “Carbon Neutral” and include statements of “sustainability”

This growing awareness is certainly warranted given the evidence that global warming and CO2 emissions are an increasingly problematic issue. However, the methods by which companies and individuals are dealing with the issue might not be doing any good, especially in regards to carbon offsetting.

Carbon offsetting is based in the idea that you can purchase an “offset” to your personal carbon footprint (Normally measured in Tons of CO2). For instance: If you take a plane trip and have a propensity for ensuring your activities are “green”, you can contact a company called TreeFlights. This company claims they can accurately predict the amount of CO2 you are producing with this plane trip and, for a fee, can plant a designated number of trees to “offset” that CO2.

Other companies like Terrapass and Climatecare claim they can offset not only your plane and car trips, but also the portion of your carbon footprint produced by the energy your home uses. They use the money to fund programs lowering emissions elsewhere, thus compensating for YOUR contribution to global warming.

This all seems like a viable solution to the growing problem of climate change. Right? The problem is, it doesn’t really seem to change anything. Paying someone to reduce their carbon footprint, while not reducing your own, seems irresponsible. Mathematically, we are only shifting numbers to make it appear as if there is some real response to the issue. There is also some question, as to whether or not the money you are paying for offsets is being used to actually reduce emissions at all. Lastly, Scientists disagree on how to calculate an individual’s carbon footprint, making these calculations approximations and possibly extremely erroneous.

What’s to stop larger companies from buying substantial amounts of carbon offsets as an excuse to evade challenging their own procedures to actually reduce their emissions? Of course, those companies won’t admit that’s the reason, but I can see them sending out PR that says basically “Offsetting has allowed our company to increase productivity threefold”. All the while, their “carbon footprint” increases with it.

It’s great to see companies, at the very least, giving some sort of thought in the “green” direction. There should also be some substantial action on their part. Throwing money at the problem will not solve it. It takes change in habit and routine. It takes effort!

Habitat for Homonids

It’s ONLY a “theory”

The•o•ry - a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena


I am currently reading “Why evolution is true” by: Jerry Coyne. It’s a really great book and I suggest reading it, not only for those that dismiss evolution, but also for those that want to have a better understanding of evolution itself.

When discussing evolution, one will always encounter the refutation that evolution is “only a Theory”. It is simply a guess of what might have happened or what might be happening.

I always get frustrated at these kinds of arguments, because they come from ignorance. I can never seem to find the words to rebut. I understand that scientific theories are more than just guesses. I can’t begin to understand how someone would argue the Theory of Evolution, and at the same time uphold Cell Theory.

In “Why evolution is true”, Mr. Coyne gives an eloquent explanation. He takes his position by first explaining the difference between an average understanding of the word “Theory” and then giving a scientific definition of “Theory”. He says “Indeed, the everyday connotation of ‘theory’ is ‘guess,’ as in, ‘My theory is that Fred is crazy about Sue.’” This is not, however, the context that the scientific community uses the word theory.

Consider the cell theory, theory of relativity, germ theory, and atomic theory, for example. Few dispute them as a whole. If I were to tell someone that all living things are made of cells, or that bacteria and viruses cause illness, most people would agree. These theories explain those facts. Evolution is no different. The theory of evolution simply explains the processes and principles that govern the idea of life evolving. Mr. Coyne says “…the theory of evolution is more than just the statement that ‘evolution happened’: it is an extensively documented set of principles… that explain how and why evolution happens”. The rest of his book highlights these principles.

I truly could not have said it better!

If you need an in depth look at these principles, take a look at “The Structure of Evolutionary Theory” by; Steven Jay Gould.

From Pig to Primate

Researchers at the University of Ohio will soon begin studying the relationship between temperature and the ability to “jump’ species, in Viruses. This will most certainly be an interesting study.


They hope to understand mutations that have helped viruses adapt to warmer temperatures. They believe there could be a correlation with the same mutation, making it “easier” for viruses to infect species other than those already susceptible.

In the recent past we have seen viruses “jump” species more frequently. N1H1 and the Avian Flu are two such viruses. This, the researchers say, could be related to a rise in temperature across the globe. They believe, mutations that stabilize viruses enough to allow them to thrive in warmer temperatures could pave the way for additional mutations making it easier for the virus to switch hosts.

As I read the article on ScienceDaily.com, I began thinking.

As global temperatures rise, viruses are faced with a “pressure”, so to speak, to adapt or die. The greater the pressure, the more likely viruses will make this adaptation. If this pressure didn’t exist there would be a smaller chance the adaptation to warmer temperatures would occur (evolution and natural selection at its best).

So, if the researchers do find a relationship here, would it mean that we are responsible for the viral pandemics that have occurred over the last 20 years? Also, if we were to do something about global warming, would this decrease the chances of viruses jumping hosts?

Outlook for Science Funding... "Getting There"

United States legislators have just passed a bill for the 2010 fiscal year to appropriate significant funds to some of the nation’s leading science organizations! Bill H.R. 3288 Sec 219 (a) Sub Chapter IV of Chapter 57 states that NOAA, NSF, NASA, and NIH will all receive funds to support their research, education, and programs, if approved by the president.


The bill is now sitting on the president’s desk, waiting to be penned into existence. Find out how your Senators and Representatives voted. Thank them if they voted YAY; tell them you disapprove if they voted NAY. You can look up their contact info here and here.  Contact the president and let him know that you value Science and Technology education and advancement, and he should too!