
Darwin's Voyage Done Over, Live 147
thrill12 writes "Almost 178 years ago, Charles Darwin set sail in the HMS Beagle, to do the now famous explorations that formed the basis for Darwin's On The Origin Of Species. Now, a group of British and Dutch scientists, journalists and artists set sail again to redo the voyage of the Beagle. This time, they are taking modern equipment with them and they have live connections through Twitter, Youtube, Facebook and Flickr. As they re-explore, and (re)discover, we can join that 8-month-long trip, live over the internet."
Almost... (Score:5, Funny)
"Almost 178 years ago, this piece of news was released to the world. Now, Slashdot reports."
Dupe - similar story on Slashdot 178 years ago (Score:3, Funny)
Dupe - similar story on Slashdot 178 years ago
Waste of time? (Score:5, Insightful)
Whoever thinks this should be tagged waste of time is just silly. Hell, if I were single and had the opportunity this would be a really interesting experience. If the media attention helps to remind people even a little of the fragility of the ecological balance on the planet all the better, and surely not a waste of time.
(Disclaimer: I don't believe that an "ecological balance" equals no changes, but we can't honestly claim not to be raping the planet in several aspects at the moment. IMHO anyway...)
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt mainstream media will pick this up, "evolution" is still very controversial stuff. They just virtually banned the current Darwin inspired film in the US.
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
otoh. in Europe this is proving to be quite popular, in The Netherlands it's getting a prime time slot appaerently
Re: (Score:2)
That's just not true. That is what the producers are claiming, however. But that's just propaganda, and an attempt to raise publicity. The truth is that the movie had bad reviews at festivals, and thus distributors didn't pick it up for the US market. Perhaps, potential evolutionist backlash may have played some very small part in that, but controversial movies like "The Last Temptation of Christ" have thrived on the negative publicity.
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt mainstream media will pick this up, "evolution" is still very controversial stuff. They just virtually banned the current Darwin inspired film in the US.
Charles Darwin is on the back of the £10 note [bankofengland.co.uk], he's hardly controversial here.
The Daily Mail [dailymail.co.uk] calls Darwin, "the great evolutionist", and that's considered a conservative newspaper (Wiki [wikipedia.org]: "The Mail takes an anti-EU, anti-abortion view, based upon "traditional values", and is pro-capitalism and pro-monarchy, as well as, in some cases, advocating stricter punishments for crime. It also often calls for lower levels of taxation. The paper is generally critical of the BBC, which it argues is biased to the l
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"evolution" is still very controversial stuff
This is, quite unfortunately, true in America these days. I find it positively baffling that 60% of a modern society can find it appropriate to take the word of a goat herder who lived in a tent 4,000 years ago over the whole of modern science. We are all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts. Evolution is a fact. It is no longer in dispute that all life on Earth evolved over about 3 billion years and that all life has a common unicellular ancestor, and that life tends to become more complex
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, it is painful to realize that we are living in dark ages of sorts still
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Adrianople_(378) [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, they don't, and they don't
Maybe you should try to understand it and check in with really before complaining.
Job opening? (Score:1)
I'm sure the position of "peg boy" is wide open.
BORING. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Deification of Darwin (Score:5, Insightful)
Darwin certainly deserves to be remembered and respected for the amazing groundwork and insights he gave us. But I think there's a danger of looking too fixated on one personality and his centuries-old pronouncements at the expense of modern and more solid results. It sucks that we have to consider stuff like this, but like it or not there is an ideological battle going on. Because IDers and creationists are basing their arguments on emotion and strawmen, we have to consider what attacks we're exposing ourselves to, even (or especially) if they're unfair and totally illogical.
It does look like the ship will be packed with modern research equipment; hopefully the media they put out will heavily emphasise the modern data supporting evolution and acknowledging where Darwin's work has been improved upon, emphasising the success of the scientific method over the hero-worship.
Re:Deification of Darwin (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Dn't ignore them. If you do they end up on your school board and getting sceince facts removed fromt he class room and replaces witha belief system.
Best crush their skull^H^H^H^H^H beliefs, with rocks^H^H^H^H^H Logic.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
yes, be redoing Darwin's voyage is also an tribute to one of the key features of the scientific method: repeatability.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
This does sound like a cool project and I'll keep an eye on it, but I worry about the consequences of lauding Darwin and his work too much. Creationists, IDers and other crackpots often attack evolution by attacking errors or omissions that Darwin made, ignoring almost two centuries of refinements and advancements since his work. They also love to strawman scientists and other people who accept the evidence for evolution by referring to them as "Darwinists", implying that it's a simple case of "faith in God
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile, a recent survey [guardian.co.uk] says that half of Britons either don't believe in evolution or say they're too confused to have an opinion.
Shut Up... (Score:2)
... you... you scientist!
Re: (Score:2)
Creationists, IDers and other crackpots often attack evolution by attacking errors or omissions that Darwin made, ignoring almost two centuries of refinements and advancements since his work.
The ones that do that often fail in the process. I really don't see a material effect on evolution science, if someone really did deify Darwin. It might even provide an amusing distraction for Creationists and similar folks.
Re: (Score:2)
Science can be tested and proven, and it's constantly being improved and refined. That's about as perfect as it gets.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Falsified. Science can be tested and falsified.
Re: (Score:2)
Scientific hypotheses can be falsified.
How exactly would one set up an experiment to falsify science itself?
Re: (Score:1)
[...] many people in our world may not worship Darwin but they worship science and have science as their object of faith. Science is great but it is not perfect (I mean both that science is not perfect and the scientific method is not perfect).
One of the major features of science is that it can never be perfect, and it is the very opposite of accepting things on faith, so "worshipping" it or having science as an object of faith sounds a bit strange. Then again, people do worship things they don't understand... hmm, actually I'm not sure one can worship and understand the same thing.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps Richard Dawkins talks about "Darwinian Evolution" as opposed to the other methods of evolution people have come up with. Darwin does deserve to be associated with the current Theory of Evolution since he got so much of it correct. That is not "Worship" as you say, but giving credit where credit is due.
From what you've said, me thinks you don't know what the Scientific Method is.
It isn't something to have faith in. It is a method of finding out truth from non-truth and it is the best way anyone has f
Re: (Score:2)
At its core, science really is about finding out facts, not truth (I learned this dis
Re: (Score:2)
If we don't rely on the Scientific Method to find out the truth, what do you propose we use instead?
Goat entrails, obviously.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Dawkins is one of the main faces of anti-Creationism / pro-evolution and he does exhibit Darwin worship. Sure, he's only one person but I've met many like him in their beliefs of evolution.
What acts do you mean by "Darwin worship"?
I think it's important to not put too much faith in the scientific method either.
Now that sounds like a straw man - do you have an example of this?
Most scientists, and atheists for that matter, are aware of the limits of science (the objection is just to people claim that if scien
Re: (Score:2)
Religion can answer those questions. And if you don't like the answers it gives you, just try a different one.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Further, many people in our world may not worship Darwin but they worship science and have science as their object of faith.
.jpg or it didn't happen... I've never even heard of anyone participating in the following "science faith" activities:
1) Interpretive dance in the full moon-light at the solstice in hope that my copy of "science news" magazine will be delivered.
2) Sacrificed a goat or chicken before organic chemisty lab in hopes of my grignard reagent not having moisture contamination.
3) Prayed to the "pharmo-industrial complex" to cure an illness. (their only god is money, anyway)
4) Sing hymns of praise for the AAVSO websi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As for science worship, I am going to have to simply disagree with you. Placing your 'faith' in science is not faith
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
To get more to the meat of what you are saying here, I don't feel that my statements discount art or agriculture in one bit -- both of those things are extremely effective at the things they claim to do. Agriculture at saving lives, art at entertaining and often educating us. Religion claims to be able to improve you
Re: (Score:2)
cute but no cigar (Score:2, Interesting)
wake me up when they do an intergalactic voyage with an FTL drive to see the evolution of life across the universe... darn, I'm afraid I'm gonna have to sleep a long time :)
So sayeth the book of Darwin (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
You don't know how deep/true the last sentence is, considering that one can see ideas/mindsets/realities as lifeforms, growing, reproducing, feeding, and perhaps... having thoughts themselves?
Any usefulness? (Score:2)
Have those scientists, journalists (?) and artists (??) gained any new knowledge from this trip?
Re: (Score:2)
A young person might get into science?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe it's just something fun they want to do?
I don't consider it fun, but I'm not going to project that on them and come to some conclusion that it is a waste of time.
Live Video?!?!? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
If its on youtube it won't be live. Perhaps they use a sat phone to do a daily upload.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If you have the money it is actually not that difficult to do live video links using smallish satellite receivers. A laptop and an antenna the size of a briefcase is all you need to go live on television from anywhere in communication satellite range.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The main partners in this project are the Dutch and Belgian broadcasting corporations. I saw the first episode and they seemed to be using the same satellite setup they use for live reports.
Re:Live Video? Green Video! (Score:2)
Anyone know how they're doing live video at sea?
The first few weeks of video would be quite educational, if they actually used a ship like the Beagle. Puking over the side every few minutes as the ship rolls at the least ripple on the sea, puking in horror on discovering what a state-of-the-art "marine head" was in the 1830s, puking at the sight of the maggoty gourmet cuisine served to officers and VIPs, puking at the smells of one's fellow voyagers (want a shower? dream on!). Almost like a twisted reality TV with green faces. Then there's the little iss
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Twitter etc... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Bandwidth?
Re: (Score:2)
Comparatively cheap these days. Scripts for micro-blogging, standard blogging, etc? Freely available. Not just being another hype-follower? Priceless.
I suspect their are arguments like "because people use it" and "because people know it" and "because people don't need to make separate registrations". All it means is that you get buried in junk instead, or force people who wouldn't otherwise bother with an account on one of these "trendy" services to get an account just to comment (while avoiding t
Re: (Score:1)
Comparatively cheap these days. Scripts for micro-blogging, standard blogging, etc? Freely available. Not just being another hype-follower? Priceless.
So why are you here on "trendy" Slashdot like the rest of us? Surely you're better off building your own site to post your opinions to, instead of following the hype, right?
I suspect their are arguments like "because people use it" and "because people know it" and "because people don't need to make separate registrations". All it means is that you get buried i
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Twitter etc... (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Thats what I ment with obscure and I was referring to the website.
Also I fully endorse this expedition. Many people see it as a waste of time but a lot of new discoveries and/or insights are found when recreating an old scenario or wal
Dutch AND Belgian! (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Bollocks, she's Belgian.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
http://www.nycgovparks.org/sub_your_park/historical_signs/hs_historical_sign.php?id=7712 [nycgovparks.org]
Why they changed it I can't say. (Score:2)
Then a few years later they losted it.
Horrible (Score:3, Interesting)
Looks like a great project, however the website has got to be one of the most horrid and difficult to use things Ive seen in a web browser. Ever. Add that apparently they have been drinking from the MS Silverlight koolaid machine, and despite my interest in the project, I can say it will not be a site I will waste my time visiting anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
No kidding!
That's the first time I've seen a multi-document interface implemented inside a web page. What were they thinking?
Re: (Score:1)
http://vprobeagle.hyves.nl/ [hyves.nl]
http://twitter.com/beagleproject [twitter.com]
http://www.youtube.com/user/VPROBeagle [youtube.com]
And a fan-site:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=57984394055 [facebook.com]
Alfred Wallace says - Been There, Done That (Score:1)
Next up! (Score:2)
I plan to reproduce the famous "Franklin lightning, kite, key in the thunderstorm" experiment. If you don't hear from me again, you'll know how it went.
BBC Documentary (Score:3, Interesting)
Anyone who is interested in this topic should watch the BBC documentary "Galápagos: The Islands That Changed the World". It is fascinating and beautifully shot. You can buy it on DVD or BD, or rent it from Netflix.
Re: (Score:2)
Must be a entertaining read (Score:1)
Eight month trip huh? Must be real entertaining read.
"At sea, the horizon is empty in every direction"
"Still at sea, nothing to do, playing WoW"
So, who would read this log of travel long enough to get to them making landfall?
Gentlemen, we need a new word. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Social networking is not a fad, and isquite importnt.
For example:
DUring the Iran protest, Twitter change there upgrade times to lesson any impact on the copmmunication between protestors.
Right there shows how damn important social networking is.
Here is a suggestion:
Communicator.
I can't believe the tards on this site the poo-poo new ways to communicate. It's like saying writing is a waste of time becasue most people only write crap that isn't useful to anyone else.
It's a Luddite position to take.
And no, you
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Since this is a Do over (Score:2)
"Huh... I guess Darwin was a scam artist. That sucks, he really had us going there with that whole 'evolution' thing. You think someone would have tried to verfiy."
Ok... very very small chance but still.
Re: (Score:2)
No, the discovery of DNA pretty much solidified Darwin's Hypothesis pretty firmly.
OF course new evidence may be forth coming to change that, but it will need pretty strong evidences. In fact so many scientific discoveries confirm evolution that even if Darwin 'made it up' it would be irrelevant because it's true. I mean, he would get called out as a sham artists, but that doesn't mean all the other evidence goes away, it just means he got lucky with his 'sham'.
Since it's been confirmed on the islands by oth
The Voyage of the Beagle (Score:3, Interesting)
If anyone's interested, Charles Darwin's book The Voyage of the Beagle [gutenberg.org] is available from Gutenberg, free in both senses of the word.
Re:This is 2009. (Score:5, Funny)
By now the finches will have evolved to feed on natural historians, and other assorted crew.
Re:This is 2009. (Score:5, Funny)
By now the finches will have evolved to feed on natural historians, and other assorted crew.
"If you watch closely the lower left corner of the picture, you'll be able to see an impressive specimen of Dr. Johansson's newly discovered Devoratrix Historiator; or, as the team liked to call them, a 'skullfucker'"
"On the next picture you can see a closer image, slightly darkened by some of Dr. Johansson's blood and brain pieces on the camera."
Re: (Score:1)
This type of educational movie making is good (Score:4, Informative)
The last time there was a truly made-for-the-classroom movie, it was called The Voyage of the Mimi [wikipedia.org]. It not only brought the crisis of dwindling humpback whale populations to elementary school students, it provided survival education lessons on avoiding contaminated foods, creating drinkable water, and building shelter. I'd not be so quick to dismiss edutainment, especially when it is in the pursuit of re-enacting one of the most important non-hard scientific studies of all time.
As an added bonus, you never know which child actor will grow up to become one of Hollywood's most popular and gifted actors.
Re:This type of educational movie making is good (Score:5, Interesting)
But the original voyage was a hard scientific study. The Beagle was on a mission to verify chronometer readings and thereby confirm readings of longitude around S. America. Darwin did his other stuff on his own time. And he hadn't developed any theory on natural selection at that time, he was just a keen naturalist who took the opportunity to gather samples and make drawings. It was only after seeing all those different forms of life that he started to develop his theory. So he didn't make the facts fit the theory, his theory was based on observable evidence.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Why isn't there a +1 troll mod? I was halfway through typing a response to that last line before I clued in.
Well played, sir!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
"Wow. I am immediately going to apply for a national science foundation grant to recreate the historic of Hunter S Thompson. "
Bags Shotgun...
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)