Saturday, February 12, 2005
We link to the excellent Pharyngula far too seldom, but as today marks the 196th anniversary of Charles Darwin's nativity, we felt it incumbent upon us to rectify this sad state of affairs. Let us therefore direct your attention to a series of highly entertaining posts in which you will find our eminent colleague P.Z. Myers:
- exposing (here and here) the dishonesty and intellectual shabbiness of Michael Behe's recent NYT op/ed, in which he "explained" that we must take intelligent design seriously because . . . well, because it quacks like a duck;
- collecting a few stray gobbets of the pulp to which Juan Cole beat "the ghastly Jonah Goldberg," and whipping them into puree;
- generously educating, at no expense, an ID proponent named Amitai Etzioni, who made the outlandish claim that "no fact about evolution is the result of an experiment," and rebutting his (non-)rebuttal;
- linking to a fascinating post at Big Monkey, Helpy Chalk, entitled "The Evolution of the Human Female Orgasm":
Mostly the thoughts I want to sort out revolve around my continuing belief that the human female orgasm is an adaptation. It’s not like the male nipple, which is just there as a byproduct of female nipples. Moreover, I think the human female orgasm was selected for because it facilitated social relations in one or more ways, including preventing conflicts and aiding reconciliation after conflicts, regulating tension, solidifying same sex and different sex alliances, and expressing social status. These are the functions that sexual pleasure seems in general to serve in everyone’s favorite super-sexy-love-primate, the bonobo (see Huhmann and Fruth 2000), and the bonobo strikes me as the right super-sexy-love-primate on which to model human evolution.Is it Valentine's Day yet?