Anyway, a colleague has just sent me Jim Mackenzie's paper, How biology teachers can respond to Intelligent Design, which I thought I'd talk about here. As Mackenzie says, a significant number of authors have already argued convincingly that IDT is bankrupt as far as scientific theories are concerned. He proposes several strategies that science teachers can use in dealing with attempts to introduce IDT into their classrooms, and comments that it's possible to use these with younger children. I think this is particularly useful given that the 2010 NZ science curriculum makes evolution an organising theme for biology (aka the 'Living World') from the earliest years of primary schooling. Mackenzie's strategies are drawn from a case dating back more than 20 years, from an attempt to mandate the teaching of creation 'science' - surely an oxymoron - in Arkansas schools. I found this a little surprising given the more recent Dover case, but then it is all creationism under the skin, despite attempts by various ID proponents to claim otherwise.

The release in question came from a UK pest control firm, & it contained 'data' that seemed to show alarmingly high levels of pest infestation on London public transport. (Or, in the case of dust mites, surprisingly low. Only 500 of these tiny critters in a whole railway carriage?) Things like cockroaches, bedbugs, fleas. (Apparently bedbugs are raising their nasty little heads in New Zealand - not something I'd want to see gain a significant foothold here!). Cue a number of rather hysterical media articles.

Ben has done his usual thorough job of investigating this one. And he found - that the company did no studies whatsoever of in-service public transport vehicles. None. Zero. Zilch. Their scary figures were based on a model, which made a whole lot of unsupported & highly unlikely assumptions. As Ben hasn't been able to track down the original release, we can't be certain of its contents. But I have to say - to pretend some sort of scientific support for the numbers sent out to the media is to misrepresent what was done as good science. And that does none of us any favours.

I've just been reading a post by Tim Kreider, over at Science-Based Medicine. Tim's talking about the learning experiences of medical students, but a particular phrase caught my eye. I''m reproducing it here because I think it can be applied much more widely: students are in the habit of transcribing and commiting to memory everything uttered by the professors who grade them.

I've seen this happen myself. I remember talking with a class about fungi & saying that while most fungi are saprophytes (consuming dead material), some are predatory. And they all (well, all those I could see, anyway) wrote this down unquestioningly. 'Hang on a minute,' I said; 'does this sound likely to you?' They agreed that no, it didn't really, it didn't match with what they already knew about fungi. 'Well then,' I said; 'why didn't any of you call me on it?' 'Because,' they said, 'you wouldn't tell us anything incorrect, would you?' Which showed a touching faith but also a worrying lack of willingness to question things that didn't sound right.

Anyway, when we get on to talking about flowering plants, one of the topics is adaptations for pollination. Some flowering plants (eg grasses) simply shed their pollen to the wind, but for many successful pollination has required the establishment of a plant-animal relationship. And some of those involve some very kinky activity indeed - the animal 'vector' comes to a flower, not for a nectar reward, but because in its eyes the flower looks like a member of the opposite sex...

And thanks to PZ, who always finds these things first!

Now, while the cartoon is funny, the message is not (& hopefully some of my first-year students are reading this - pay attention, guys!). Leaving an assignment to the last minute is not a good strategy for success - not in science, & not in any other area either.

So maybe we'll see you there some time soon?

Now it seems that the case appears to have sparked somethng of a backlash in the UK, with chiropractors advised by their professional body to remove from their websites & other publicity material any claims of the ability to treat conditions such as whiplash and colic. This is interesting given that the BCA had previously released what it described as a 'plethora' of evidence supporting those claims. However, as Edzard Ernst has noted, of the 19 references included in that list, it seems that 4 didn't even contain data relating to chiropractic treatment. A further 8 are not based on controlled clinical trials, and the remaining 7 are flawed in methodology or conclusion - for example, a lack of double-blinding that doesn't allow us to rule out the placebo effect, in a comparison of chiropractic vs an anti-colic drug.  (Ernst also points out that several robust, rigorous trials of chiropractic interventions, that don't show any effect better than placebo, aren't included in the BCA list.)

If the BCA is now advising that claims concerning ailments other than back pain should not be made, where to next for the case against Singh?

"During a period in which 'evolution' became a bad word [in New Zealand] punishable by revocation of credentials and confiscation of property [the 1980's], I refused an order from a department chairman to withdraw my books Darwin's Universe and Time Gate from press," he told a contemporary writers' website.

Anyway, the Science Media Centre has some very good commentary & resources centred on this seismic event, & I thought that those teachers with students who'll be working on 'Planet Earth' standards this year might find them extremely useful. There's a media briefing here, and a post by Peter Griffin, that includes a presentation by Victoria University's Dr John Townsend, here.

Big quakes are not uncommon in Chile, given that it sits above the boundary of two big tectonic plates. Charles Darwin wrote about the aftermath of one such event in his Beagle diary, and it's still worth a read today. He also complained, in a letter to his sister Catherine, about how he'd experienced 'just' one little earthquake himself - he almost sounds disappointed! Those looking for some other reading material might enjoy Perils of a restless planet by Ernest Zebrowski. I found it fascinating, although my Significant Other laments that there a are no colour pictures (hardly surprising when you consider that the book covers past events, some of which occurred well & truly before cameras were invented, much less colour film!)

OK, so far no-one's mentioned s*x, but a busy social life certainly can certainly have an impact on study - less time for homework, & if you have a few too many late nights you'll probably end up sleeping too long & missing lectures. (And as I think I've said before, your university lecturers probably won't nag you about it - & the office certainly won't phone home!)

One rueful young man told me he wouldn't be missing classes again. "I've worked it out," he said; "you're paying about $60 a lecture in fees & that's a lot of money to throw away." Now, that puts it in perspective! And someone I don't think he'll be back in my office for this again :-)

Shinichi began his studies here a year or so after I joined the University staff. He was invited to do a BSc(Hons), something reserved for the really able students, & it's a sign of the quality of his research project (on zebra finches) that he's since published five papers from it. After gaining his PhD at a UK university, Shinichi's come back to New Zealand to work at the Universit of Otago. Over the last few years he's begun to use meta-analyses more & more to identify relationships (or the lack of them) between data sets, & this particular research tool & its applications were the subject of his enthusiastic presentation. (He recommended Morton Hunt's 1997 book How science takes stock: the story of metanalysis as an excellent introduction to the area, written by a journalist for a lay audience.)