Biocurious is a weblog about biology through the eyes of physicists. More...
Academics
Andre's Research
Biocuriosities
Books
Graduate School
History of Science
Hot off the Press
Igor's Research
Interdisciplinarity
Molecule of the Month
Open Access
Philip's Research
Philosophy of Science
Physics
Physicsworld.com
Backreaction
Ceclia's Blog at PHD Comics
Cocktail Party Physics
Cosmic Variance
The Daily Transcript
Easternblot
Everyday Scientist
The Evilutionary Biologist
Evolgen
Freelancing Science
The Futile Cycle
Good Math, Bad Math
iMechanica
in singulo
Incoherently Scattered Ponderings
Juniorprof
Klara Stefflova
Life of a Lab Rat
The Loom
Malletrivia
Metadatta
Mixed States
Morning Coffee Physics
Not Even Wrong
Notes from the biomass
Notional Slurry
OpenScience Project
Pharyngula
PLoS Blog
Ponderings of a fool
Recombinants
The Sandwalk
SciAm Observations
ScienceBlogs
Shtetl-Optimized
Three-toed Sloth
Uncertain Principles
What's New by Bob Park



This week’s What’s New has picked a winner from their question last week as to what should be asked of all future Supreme Court nominees. The winner?
How does being descended from a monkey affect your judicial philosophy?” – from Abi Soffer at SLAC.
The hardcore biologists in the audience are of course cringing – we aren’t descendents of monkeys, monkeys are more like our evolutionary brothers! Because of this (though I still think it is a fine question), I think I prefer Bob’s own:
Good stuff. In other What’s New news, the trial in Dover, PA has brought about an interesting revelation. According to creationist intelligent design proponent Michael Behe, our current definition of “science” as given in the Oxford English Dictionary is too limiting, but then acknowledged that `scientific theory’ by his definition would fit astrology as well as intelligent design.”
Doesn’t sound like a very good definition to me.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
to see movie “judge of jungle”