Skip to main content

Kraken!

Upon hearing that PZ Myers was reading Kraken by Wendy Williams, I decided that I should read it too. And what a good decision that turned out to be! Kraken, a book about squid, is so much more than that. Not only does she discuss squid, but she also looks briefly at other cephalopods like cuttlefish and octopus. More than that, the book is an insight into the kinds of research underway, from aquariums where cephalopod intelligence is studied to Monterrey Bay where Humboldt squid are tagged to track their movements and try and shed a little light on their behavioral practices. Even further, this is a whirlwind tour through evolution, looking at fossils, ancestors, and the parallel evolution of intelligence in the five hundred million plus years since squid and (what are ultimately) human ancestors diverged. It is a fascinating journey, and very brief at two hundred pages.



Perhaps most interesting of all is the section looking at how research into cephalopods, whether octopus or squid, has helped advance medical technology. Given the current state of research, we may expect further benefits from these inquiries. This should prove a striking rebuttal to those who mock "useless" research done with government funding. So much for that; one never knows when a bit of information gleaned from the world may prove useful.

Even if you have only a passing interest, this book is for you. It covers a wide breadth of information and is well worth reading.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Today I Am Ashamed of My Alma Mater

Over a week ago, my alma mater, Clarion University of Pennsylvania, released what it touted as a "bold" and "ambitious" workforce plan for the next several years. The backlash was both strong and immediate, forcing the University Administration, currently headed by President Karen Whitney, to release a " Frequently Asked Questions " for its plan. The outrage on social media, as well as a MoveOn.org petition with several thousand signatures, doubtless have already channeled the displeasure of the community, alumni, and students with the plan. The University is accepting public feedback, but this seems to be only a political window-dressing for a plan that Whitney herself was  quoted  as saying "...is 95-98% a done deal." For over a week I debated over what form a blog on the topic would take, and while I realize that what I have to say here is little different from what I and others have already stated elsewhere, I feel the need to address thi...

How I Left Creationism

There is a discussion going on right now in the science community about whether or not we should debate creationists: it is a debate within a debate, if you will. There are good arguments on both sides, but I have to think that we should debate creationists, and we should do it as often as we can stand it. Why do I think this? Last week, I saw that Michael Shermer posted a link to a story of a woman who argued this very point. As a former creationist, it was going to debates between Shermer and Kent Hovind that began to convince her of the legitimacy of evolution and of science. I too was once a creationist. Without ever having read anything about it, without it ever having been mentioned in class (I never heard a word about evolution in high school), I was ready to pounce at the merest mention of the topic as false and godless, two of the favorite creationist talking-points. I look back at this self in amazement, at how ignorant and proud of that ignorance I was, how I failed to ...

The Hovinds...Still Poking at Straw Men

Kent Hovind, the false "Dr. Dino", and his ilk are at it again. In a new article on his website, Hovind (or whoever authored the piece, perhaps his son) claims that while creationists have no problems using miracles to explain events (a habit that perpetually makes them unfit to do real science), evolutionists criticize them for it, even though, in Hovind's mind, they rely on miracles just as much to explain their "religion" of descent through natural selection. This is, at its core, demonstrably nonsense. He claims that a "miracle" is needed to make stars and planets form out of gas, a supposed violation of Boyle's Law because there was no "outside force" acting on the gas and dust. How about gravity, Dr. Dino? That would certainly explain it, no miracles needed here. This attack is a non-sequitur. The objection has everything to do with astronomy and cosmology and nothing to do with evolution, which is the development of new species o...