Idiotic Beauty Contestants Insult My Science

Let us talk about evolution.

Of course, when I say "let us talk," I mean that I'll write nonsense and you'll read it. I am the enlightened despot of this here blog, and you are the voluntary citizenry.

Anyway, evolution. When Darwin studied it in the Galapagos, he described the observance of the variance of particular genetic traits in a population of finches, and how these traits proved to be more or less successful, depending upon the availability of certain types of food. That is evolution, in fact- the comparative success of certain genetic traits in a population through time, based upon the varying conditions of the surrounding environment.

Other non-science venues, however, insist that evolution means that "apes turned into men." Well, as a student of physical anthropology, I feel comfortable in saying that's a load of crap. There were no magic wands, and we were not magically transformed into people from something else. We trace our genetic history backwards through the history of Mammalia and further back. This is established; we have mapped out much of the human genome and discovered that we've inherited a surprising amount of coding from other species.

Let us get a few things straight. There is no "other side of the story." Evolution is not a theory in the common linguistic sense; it is a theory in the sense that gravity is a theory. It is quite uncommon to hear someone say "I don't believe in gravity," so why can someone "believe" in evolution? It's ludicrous to claim that evolution and "creation myths" are even on some kind of playing field. Creation myths are cultural legacies, cultural understandings of the world. Evolution is a scientific concept, a hypothesis that has had the scientific method repeatedly applied to it.

Yes, the scientific method, that thing you learned in school that involves making a hypothesis, testing it under controlled conditions, observing the experiment, analyzing the results, making a conclusion, and modifying the hypothesis if necessary. These are the standards you use in elementary school, and they're the standards you use when you're in college. These are the standards used to test evolution. Evolution is not something people just noticed and said, "hey, let's make that a thing." The scientific theory of evolution represents over a hundred years (at least) of research. To claim that something like the Book of Genesis is at all comparable to evolution is insane; there is no way to test religion using the scientific method, therefore, it cannot be treated as science.

I agree with people who say that evolution and religious theories should be taught in schools, but not because I think they're somehow different sides of some coin. Evolution should be taught in schools simply because it is a part of science that is a foundation for entire fields (physical anthropology, for example). Religions of the world ought to be taught in school too, albeit a different class. Religion is not science; science is not a religion. A person can have a scientific view of the world and still be religious. This is not a "one-or-the-other" situation.

Therefore, it is personally insulting to me when someone says "I don't believe in evolution," as if it is something in which a person can believe. Evolution is not a belief system- there is no Church of Evolution. Evolution is part of biological science. You can believe in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, love at first sight, and Peter Pan, but you can't believe in evolution. Like any science, you can understand it, you can respect it, and you can build a career out of it, but it's not something you "believe in." It simply "is," and that's all there is to it. Whether you grasp it or not is akin to whether or not you grasp cellular biology.

Thus the question stands: should evolution be taught in school?

Well, if we have to have classes like technical reading and writing, we had better damned have evolution, too.

A Year in Salt Lake

Moving to Salt Lake was probably the most daring thing I've done in my life.

I'm not kidding; the last time I'd been in Salt Lake, I was eleven and going to the Olympics with my parents. I had never really been here before. I'd never seen the University of Utah, and I had no clue what my apartment was going to look like. I truly moved here on a whim; Portland wasn't working out, and I wanted somewhere bigger than Boise, so (with the suggestion of a few friends) I picked Salt Lake.

I'll never forget coming around a bend near Tremonton and seeing the Wasatch for the first time. It was love at first sight; I'd never seen mountains so breathtaking before in my life. I'll never forget driving down South Temple for the first time on that hot, muggy day in June and seeing the view I now see every day. My father and I carried my belongings up those god-awful stairs, and I was in love with my apartment. It was quirky, and it was old. It had personality. I moved there without having ever seen the building previously.

I had no preconceived notions about what my experience would be like, and maybe that's what made it all so great for me. I came here because I hadn't liked Portland or Portland State, and I've never been so happy about a choice made at random. Instead of envisioning all of these plans for the future, Salt Lake was a kind of blind restart for me, absent of anything I'd planned.

Living here has taught me a lot over the last year, too. I've learned that living in the moment, with few expectations, is better for a person than trying to live for the future. I've learned from the Mormons that taking yourself too seriously just makes you look ridiculous. Most importantly, I've learned that when something isn't working for you, you have every right to change it.

I've loved this last year of living in Salt Lake. I'm sure there were moments I didn't like, but I don't remember them. Enjoying the adventure of living here has been so much more important to me than dwelling on the little things that go wrong. I love Utah, and I love Salt Lake. It was an impulsive choice that paid off, and I am so glad I had the balls to take that chance.

Back Pain Inspires Political Ravings

It's been awhile.

It happens; you get to doing all kinds of crap and while you see plenty of things to write bits about, you decide against writing. Which is not to say that I haven't been writing; come on, me not writing is like me not breathing. I haven't been writing in my blog for various reasons, mostly because I have summer school.

Well, today I'm not at school because last night, I somehow completely wrecked my back. Don't ask me how, because all I know is that I woke up around three and realized I could hardly move. So now, I'm sitting on the couch, wincing often, Icy-Hot patch and ibuprofen applied. I ought to eat breakfast, but that's looking like a long, uncomfortable walk to the kitchen. I'm sort of in a foul mood, and there's not better time to write than when you're caught in the midst of a smoldering temper.

Let's talk about Sarah Palin. If you haven't heard, she's an idiot who refuses to acknowledge that she's an idiot. She tries to dismiss her gaffes as "technicalities." Recently, she was quoted talking about Paul Revere, and how he (apparently) sounded bells and horns to tell the British that we were there.

Upon watching this clip of Palin's idiocy, I felt annoyed. Why is it that people with no real education can get this far in the political sphere, all the while spewing this kind of crap and being smug about it? Palin isn't the only one, either; in the midst of telling people Americans need to read the Constitution, one politician cited "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," a well-known quote from the Declaration of Independence.

Is this the new standard? Have the anti-intelligence masses become such a majority that well-organized, thoughtful arguments are a thing of the past? In any other developed country on this blue planet, those who are well-educated and worldly are considered far superior potential leaders than those who use blind, irrational fear to gain popularity. In any other country, people like Sarah Palin would be laughed out of town.

So is this what America has become? Is this the other side of democracy? We now consider people who don't even know their own country's history to be legitimate contenders. These are against people who have taught American law in universities, people who hold doctorates in political theory and have made a lifetime career of understanding the complexities of the US government. This is insanity, but it is also the reality of a democracy where the citizens have become lazy and uninformed.

Alas, I am in pain and I'm cranky. I'm missing a class I like and I'm going out of town on Thursday. Packing whilst suffering from back pain is akin to throwing myself down the stairs repeatedly. I'm not looking forward to it. And I suppose that's the problem with the nation in general- we all have stuff to do. The economy's weaving up and down like a drunken sailor, unemployment grew slightly, everything's on fire or everything's flooded. This, however, is the price of living in a country run by the people. If we are unwilling to pay attention to what's happening, who is left to maintain the watch? Not anybody we want to leave in charge, I'll tell you that.