Ain't no creator, faith-healer, or climate change neither

So much news, so little time! After a brief respite, here's what's been going on this week.

Natural selection and evolution: material, blind, mindless, and purposeless

@seanmcarroll shares with us a succinct argument on why evolution and natural selection cannot be taught alongside creationism. Saddening, I know. The bottom line is essentially that what is observed in nature is absolutely indiscriminate. At no point in humanity's research has any deliberate, mindful, or "miraculous" touch been witnessed. As much as a god is supposed to be responsible for the heavens, the earth, and whether or not we find a twenty by the side of the road, he or she certainly hasn't revealed any identity or cause in the origins of life. "Why are we here?" may not be definitively answerable in science (yet), but "how" we got here is a matter of evidence. How we got here is a rich, incredible tale of ideal circumstances with just a pinch of dexterity. This ought to lead us not into questioning what purpose a god has given us, but rather a profound appreciation of how lucky we are, and how easily circumstances may conspire to take it all away.

Religion: Oregon to eliminate faith healing as legal defense

@BibleAlsoSays provides the next news item. As science has revealed no need for a creator hypothesis lying in the origins of nature, Oregon swiftly rejected all protections for faith-based practices, revoked tax-credits for churches, and required all of its children to have a rudimentary understanding of biology. We wish. Still, they've taken a step in the right direction for society by firmly stating that allowing a child to remain ill and possibly die of an easily preventable illness is NOT a terrific way to raise a child. I don't know why people would insist on playing Russian-roulette with their own spawn, but if the motivation is secretly based in eugenics, aiming to create a more resilient generation of determinable ignorance, may I suggest starting with an education in genetics before throwing caution (and reason) to the wind? Perhaps then a simple antibiotic, or even an aspirin for crying out loud, may not seem so morally reprehensible. It's a delightful snippet of the human condition to see people finding a shot of insulin more repugnant than letting a child succumb to diabetic ketoacidosis.

Ray Kurzweill: Climate change no problem

Care of @guardianscience, Ray Kurzweill, of "singularity" fame, shares his views on how progress in solar energy will rapidly diminish our need for fossil fuels, thus reducing global to emission levels far below the tipping point climatologists have been warning about. If you're not familiar with the singularity, a quick summary: Humanity's ingenuity, understanding, and advancement of medicine and technology will unite biology and circuitry into a being with a vastly superior intellect and possibly endless life span. Kurzweill believes this revolution will come sooner than we think and shares the sentiment with solar energy's influence on society. If the technology could advance in the commercial sector as he predicts, we may be seeing self-charging cars, phones, clothes, homes, and countries within a handful of decades. Skeptics often down-play Kurzweill's lofty predictions, which I cannot refute. However, in some aspects of life and humanity, a little faith ain't so bad!