Lenski and Adami are at it again (see 05/08/2003 headline), attempting to demonstrate Darwinian evolution in the computer with “digital organisms” which they describe as ”domesticated computer viruses” Their digital organisms are small computer programs with logic functions that can reproduce and respond to mutations. They reward the ones that evolve with more resources (CPU time and memory). Last time, the rewards were constant. “In this study,” by contrast, “we used a configuration in which the reward obtained by a particular organism for performing any logic function declines with consumption of the reward by other organisms.” Presumably that stimulates what Darwinists term “adaptive radiation,” or rapid speciation when organisms invade a heterogeneous new environment. The motivation for this new study was to troubleshoot a Darwinian anomaly: “The explanation for differences in species richness among habitats has been called ’perhaps the greatest unsolved ecological riddle.’” Assuming that productivity (defined as resource inflow to the system) has the greatest effect on species richness, they ran their simulations to reward productivity and found:In experiments with evolving digital organisms and populations of fixed size, maximum species richness emerges at intermediate productivity, even in a spatially homogeneous environment, owing to frequency-dependent selection to exploit an influx of mixed resources. A diverse pool of limiting resources is sufficient to cause adaptive radiation, which is manifest by the origin and maintenance of phenotypically and phylogenetically distinct groups of organisms.What is a “species” in cyberspace, by the way? “As our operational definition of species, we use clusters of organisms that all have small phylogenetic distances from one another. The phylogenetic distance between two organisms is defined as the total number of intermediate organisms (having different genotypes from their parents) along the lines of descent leading to their most recent common ancestor.”1Chow, Wilkie, Ofria, Richard E. Lenski and Christoph Adami, “Adaptive Radiation from Resource Competition in Digital Organisms,” Science, Vol 305, Issue 5680, 84-86, 2 July 2004, [DOI: 10.1126/science.1096307].Same fallacies (see 05/08/2003 and 05/24/2004 headlines), same irrelevancies, same verdict: dumb (repeat 5x to the tune of Dragnet). This is not Darwinian evolution, it is (marginally) intelligent design. Talk about dysteleology; a Panda’s thumb is more sensible than these arbitrary “adaptations”. They need to read the Dec 4 issue of Nature (see 12/03/2003 headline) before assuming adaptive radiation is real, otherwise their project was nothing more than a rigged demonstration of a fantasy. As with most unsolved riddles, the answer is often obvious, but where you least expect it. Any guesses?(Visited 14 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
(Visited 99 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0 It’s a little late to begin a new climate of transparency among climatologists. What does that imply about the past?It happened by accident, Paul Voosen reports in his article for Science Magazine, “Climate scientists open up their black boxes to scrutiny.”It began with an unplanned leave of absence. But it has blossomed into a full-fledged transparency movement for climate science.In 2010, Erich Roeckner, a longtime guru behind the global climate model at the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology (MPIM) in Hamburg, Germany, was unable to work. The timing was inopportune: Deadlines loomed for an international project that would compare the major climate models with one another, and MPIM’s had a bug….With Roeckner out of commission, a team of six people spent several months tuning the MPIM model to match the climate and eliminate the glitch. Their work, though laborious, was fairly routine. What was unusual was their decision, in 2012, to publish a detailed accounting of it. Roeckner’s absence was random. But in hindsight, it was the butterfly flapping that has now led climate modelers to openly discuss and document tuning in ways that they had long avoided, fearing criticism by climate skeptics.This revelation should strike readers as disturbing on several levels. That the details of such a politically-fraught subject have been concealed from the public in a “black box” seems contrary to the very spirit of science, where transparency in scientific methods should be paramount. Voosen has just let the cat out of the bag: “fearing criticism by climate skeptics,” climate modelers have “long avoided” letting the public look inside the box. Why? If their data are incontrovertible—as all the big science institutions constantly assure the public—why the fear?We also see a disturbing situation in that modelers “tune” their inputs to the climate in clunky ways. Does the following sound like the classical scientific method? Count the ways things could go wrong as you listen to Voosen describe the sausage-making in the modeling rooms:At their core, climate models are about energy balance. They divide Earth up into boxes, and then, applying fundamental laws of physics, follow the sun’s energy as it drives phenomena like winds and ocean currents. Their resolution has grown over the years, allowing current models to render Earth in boxes down to 25 kilometers a side. They take weeks of supercomputer time for a full run, simulating how the climate evolves over centuries.When the models can’t physically resolve certain processes, the parameters take over—though they are still informed by observations. For example, modelers tune for cloud formation based on temperature, atmospheric stability, humidity, and the presence of mountains. Parameters are also used to describe the spread of heat into the deep ocean, the reflectivity of Arctic sea ice, and the way that aerosols, small particles in the atmosphere, reflect or trap sunlight.It’s impossible to get parameters right on the first try. And so scientists adjust these equations to make sure certain constraints are met, like the total energy entering and leaving the planet, the path of the jet stream, or the formation of low marine clouds off the California coast. Modelers try to restrict their tuning to as few knobs as possible, but it’s never as few as they’d like. It’s an art and a science. “It’s like reshaping an instrument to compensate for bad sound,” Stevens says.Wait a minute: who decides what is a “bad sound”? There seems to be a lot of wiggle room in this “art” of modeling – enough to get a politically-motivated result by turning enough knobs. This is definitely not a case of following the evidence where it leads. It’s more like Finagle’s Rule #3, “Draw your curves first, then plot your data.” If funding sources, the politically powerful and the UN want a result they can promote like “Man-caused global warming will raise global temperatures by 2 degrees in 100 years,” then who is a lowly modeler to get a contrary result from his black box, especially if he fears climate skeptics? Voosen says this is exactly what has been going on all along.For years, climate scientists had been mum in public about their “secret sauce”: What happened in the models stayed in the models. The taboo reflected fears that climate contrarians would use the practice of tuning to seed doubt about models—and, by extension, the reality of human-driven warming. “The community became defensive,” Stevens says. “It was afraid of talking about things that they thought could be unfairly used against them.” Proprietary concerns also get in the way. For example, the United Kingdom’s Met Office sells weather forecasts driven by its climate model. Disclosing too much about its code could encourage copycats and jeopardize its business.One can see plenty of room for corruption here: profit motives, reputations, the us-vs-them mentality. Secret sauce? Taboos? This is not Las Vegas, where what happens there stays there. It looks for all the world like political parties or competing corporations using dirty tricks, not scientists seeking to understand the real world. His terminology about secrecy and fear should be alarming to a wary public that respects science but is worried about the economic costs of draconian climate mitigation policies, such as carbon taxes and elimination of fossil fuel jobs, that the politicians say, based on these models, must be imposed for the good of the planet.Voosen’s article doesn’t give much hope that climate science will improve with the new transparency fad. The following episode most likely never made it into the Paris accords or the latest IPCC report:Recently, while preparing for the new model comparisons, MPIM modelers got another chance to demonstrate their commitment to transparency. They knew that the latest version of their model had bugs that meant too much energy was leaking into space. After a year spent plugging holes and fixing it, the modelers ran a test and discovered something disturbing: The model was now overheating. Its climate sensitivity—the amount the world will warm under an immediate doubling of carbon dioxide concentrations from preindustrial levels—had shot up from 3.5°C in the old version to 7°C, an implausibly high jump.MPIM hadn’t tuned for sensitivity before—it was a point of pride—but they had to get that number down. Thorsten Mauritsen, who helps lead their tuning work, says he tried tinkering with the parameter that controlled how fast fresh air mixes into clouds. Increasing it began to ratchet the sensitivity back down. “The model we produced with 7° was a damn good model,” Mauritsen says. But it was not the team’s best representation of the climate as they knew it.Voosen undoubtedly believes in anthropogenic global warming, as do the editors of Science. But if they thought this article was going to make the public feel better about climate experts, they must be kidding themselves. Bugs, leaks, plumbers – what’s going on here? And look at this photo caption: “Storm clouds are too small for climate models to render directly, and so modelers must tune for them.” Think about that. Surely clouds must be one of the most important factors in any climate theory, but this says they can’t use real cloud data. They have to fudge the model. They have to tinker with the numbers to get the result they want.If modelers were afraid of revealing their secret sauce, what will they do now that the window is open? Published in Science, this exposé into how international climate policy has been shaped by a group of inept tinkerers in back rooms will give the skeptics a field day like the re-opened FBI investigation into Clinton’s emails. But perhaps that’s just dandy. After all, every cloud has a silver lining, and sunshine is the best disinfectant.If this goes on in climate science, given all the funding and political pressure involved, you can be sure similar tinkering goes on in models of Darwinian evolution. The DODOs and DOPEs must keep the Darwin skeptics at bay at all costs. Don’t count on transparency there.
Share Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest Not much change in the forecast this morning. Ultimately, we probably are not quite as wet for the 10-day period combined, but even that is a very close statement. Today will be very warm, with plenty of sunshine and high humidity values. Temps will average a good 6-10 degrees above normal.We still have rain moving in for tomorrow, mostly in the afternoon, and then continuing through the overnight into Thursday morning. Rains start early to mid afternoon in west central and NW Ohio, spreading southeast from there. We are bumping rain totals a bit, putting most of the state in range of .25”-1”. We feel more strongly about thunderstorms and the potential for some heavier rain, so we will not be surprised to see some inch and a half totals, but they will be rather limited in scope. Right now, we think the best chances for thunderstorms happen tomorrow late afternoon in north central and NE Ohio. . The map shows rain totals from the system for tomorrowThe rest of the week still features a rather unsettled weather pattern, but even though we see a warm and humid set up, it may not trigger as much of a threat of pop up showers or thunderstorms. In fact, Thursday can be dry, once showers leave the far southern part of Ohio with the front Thursday morning. Friday should be mostly dry too, with only a few hit and miss pop up showers. Saturday can bring some action into the northern part of the, and then we see on an off precipitation potential from there through the balance of the weekend and next Monday. The entire 5-day period, from Thursday into early next week can bring up to .75” to about 60% of the state. The biggest holes in coverage will be central to southern Ohio.We are dry for next Tuesday and Wednesday, then have a weak front for next Thursday. Moisture again has potential, but the front is not all that impressive at this time.For the extended period, we will keep an unsettled pattern from next Friday night on through the rest of the 11-16 day window. We can’t rule out showers any of those days and we see increasing chances and frequency of moisture as we move through the period. All told, we see potential of an inch or more of rain combined through the entire 11-16 day window, and we may finish it out near the 11th with a strong cold front poised to move through.Once again, this forecast is not quite as wet as yesterday, but with the heat, humidity and overall unsettled feel, don’t close the door on moisture yet. While this system for tomorrow is by far the biggest one we see in the next two weeks, it will not take much to ramp up action out of these more minor disturbances. Temps remain above normal through September 10.
A Bharatiya Janata Party MP has joined the chorus for death sentence to rapists “even if he is one of ours” as more cases of sexual assault were reported across Assam and Meghalaya.“The guilty should be publicly hanged or shot dead. There should be no leniency with rapists, juvenile or adult. Even if the guilty is found to be a BJP member, he should be executed publicly,” R.P. Sharma, Lok Sabha member representing Tezpur parliamentary constituency, said on Thursday.Mr. Sharma, a lawyer by profession, has often embarrassed the BJP with his outspokenness. In October last year, he had accused some ministers of denting the party image by taking bribes and 10% commission for various work.The MP’s outburst followed the arrest of a 60-year-old man in Meghalaya’s North Garo Hills district for raping his seven-year-old granddaughter. The accused, Deny Marak of Kharkutta area, had reportedly committed the crime on April 10 and used threats to silence the child.On Wednesday, the police in western Assam’s Dhubri town arrested one Nurjamal Haque for sexually assaulting a teenage girl while she was alone in a house where works as a maid.In the last 24 hours, the police in Guwahati arrested two men for sexually exploiting girls through blackmailing. Cases had been registered against the two in the city’s Chandmari Police Station.While one of the accused, Anjan Kalita, had been blackmailing a girl in the city’s Gandhibasti area, the other – a security guard named Rabindra Phukan – had been exploiting a resident of an apartment in Chenikuthi area.
Pravin Amre has worked with a number of India players.Such is the magic of one-day cricket that it can make one forget even excruciating losses suffered in Test cricket a short while ago.The gap between Tests and ODIs in England was not long, yet in that span of time, skipper MS Dhoni and coach Duncan Fletcher had to face intense media scrutiny, and rightly so. The moment India slipped back into winning mode in the shorter form of cricket, all talk is about winning again.Till some time ago, Suresh Raina was the butt of ridicule when he played abroad as he was unable to score on tracks which offered something to the pace bowlers.Suresh Raina trained under Amre for four days before leaving for the England tour.Call it a metamorphosis or getting into the right mode mentally, Raina was able to conquer the demons and hammer a hundred in style in the second ODI.As reported by Mail Today, the sudden transformation for Raina came after some good “mental sessions” with Pravin Amre, whose stature as a private coach is now rising.We all know that in a sport like cricket, coaches are usually associated with a batsman or a bowler in the initial stage of development. From the time a budding player picks up a bat or starts bowling with a tennis ball, then a cork ball and then the red leather cherry, it’s all about individual efforts.It’s only when the player starts performing and gets associated with a good local club that he gets assistance from coaches. In a place like Delhi, there are so many coaching ‘shops’ being run by former cricketers who have played club cricket or domestic cricket.advertisementThe more business-like former international cricketers are ready to lend their name to an academy where fundamentals are imparted and youngsters turn up in whites for nets.The way cricket is played has changed drastically over the years and emphasis is no longer on what was called ‘copybook’. It’s not just Raina who has gained from Amre, who played 11 Tests and 37 ODIs for India.Amre has made a mark with his ability to help out a few other well-known cricketers like Ajinkya Rahane, Robin Uthappa and Naman Ojha as well.By Amre’s own admission, his job varies from case to case and he is quite happy doing a freelance job sitting in Mumbai. He knows he will not be travelling with Team India and whatever contributions he is going to make will be from home.You and I may think that Amre needs to be present at the nets to iron out the chinks but so advanced has technology become today that the guru can see it all on television. Today, TV replays and videos are available easily and for a coach to spot any major chink is not a problem.Then again, just as the top tennis professionals from Roger Federer to Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic hire the best personal coaches for working on technique and tactics, cricket is seeing a new trend emerging.It’s good to note that former cricketers like Amre are able to give back to the sport what they learnt from guru Ramakant Achrekar. Today, cricketers are professionals and have a right to earn, be it an active player or anyone offering assistance.The days of charity are over when Bishan Singh Bedi offered tips to almost anyone who wanted his guidance, be it a player from India or overseas. One of India’s best left-arm spinners has a sharp cricketing brain and never minces words when he has to be critical.One does not expect the newage freelance coaches in India to offer free service like Bishan paaji, but they should take pride in what they do. Amre, for instance, was able to work with Rahane differently, as the latter lacked power in his shots.Amre relied on “baseball techniques” to improve Rahane’s hitting in the shorter format of cricket where generating power in shots is important. And the results are there to see.Before this, one also heard of India opener Gautam Gambhir taking help from Tamil Nadu’s W.V. Raman to help him out with his technique. Cricket is now an art and a science thanks to the three distinct formats.Gambhir and Raman were part of the same IPL franchise – KKR – but the time has come when more batsmen and bowlers could be seeking professional help as they have the money to do it.advertisementIf people like Amre and Raman are recognised for their contributions as coaches, there are former bowlers who have also helped. Manoj Prabhakar has been readily available for teaching budding bowlers the art of reverse swing.There are some more names like Subroto Banerjee, T.A. Sekhar and Narendra Hirwani, who offer valuable insight to bowlers.So the day is not far when we could have a Team India captain planning strategy and tactics with “foreign coaches” while cricketers seek professional help from personal coaches for perfection in technique.Dangerous for the likes of Fletcher, isn’t email@example.com