Slashdot Mirror
HMS Beagle (Possibly) Found
With the Beagle 2 lander lost on Mars, good Beagle-related news has been lacking, until now. British paper The Observer is reporting that the original HMS Beagle, the ship Darwin travelled on during his famous voyage, may have been found. Marine archeologists believe they have found the ship, which has been resting at the bottom of some Essex marshes for the last century.
Finding the Beagle is just historic curiosity. It remained in service for something like fourty or fifty years after Darwin's voyage, first as a coast guard ship, and was later permantly docked as a customs boat. I've heard it was even sold or rented as a houseboat for a while. Even if they recover the ship intact, there won't be any indication that Darwin ever set foot on it.
I think we may have solved the mystery of all the crap that goes missing down there.
That "mystery" has already been solved. Statistically there are less ships and aircrafts gone missing there then in other regions of the Atlantic. For example the Atlantic is a lot more dangerous close to the Spanish coast.
Actually, most of them have not. Peking man turned out to have arthritis, true, but it ended up being Homo Erectus.
Utah Man was a fabrication by antievolutionists, although they like to twist it around and say they weren't really the ones to be fooled. It was originally found, and claimed to be a human tooth and jaw, the presence of which (in North America) would prove that man didn't have time to evolve and migrate from Africa. It was triumphantly presented to a scientific institute, and rejected because it was a pig.
There are still over seven hundred significant skeletons that haven't been debunked, and in fact, only TWO that have been, both of which were cited as proof by antievolutionists.
but I thought it was relevant to the general conversation for you liberal, anti-war zealots out there who actually believe the theory of evolution.
What about conservative American patriots who actually believe the theory of evolution? Not all conversative American patriots are troglodytes, you know.
-kgj
-kgj
The two superpowers had their various deep benthic submersibles that they've used for stuff like tapping each other's deep-sea cables and pulling up each other's dead subs and so on. (You might want to Read "Blind Man's Bluff" for an okay popular history of that stuff.) Now that the cold war's over, there are private markets for the technology, and the navy's happy to lend its stuff to Robert Ballard to poke around the Meditteranean, looking for history.
Underwater archaeology's taking off as a result. We've had an amazing run of shipwreck-finding, haven't we? Heck, let alone shipe -- we get Black Sea villages that've been preserved in anaerobic environments since "THE flood." All sorts of sailing vessels. Nazi subs. It's a great time to be looking for ships down there. Go down off of the canaries, and you almost have too many ships to choose from.
(William Broad's "The Universe Below" is a decent run through the military history of this stuff, and concentrates more on the shipwrecks side than, say, Richard Ellis's "Deep Atlantic." Broad also considers the legal and ethical problems -- who does a shipwreck from 1500 belong to? Ellis is more about the biology, which is cool too.)
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
Audience members heard stories of silver, gold and jewels salvaged in recent years from wrecks dating to the days of the Spanish galleons. Hess recalled his excitement at seeing real treasure chests bursting with pieces of eight." Story Continues
He said advances in scuba diving technology will make sunken ships around Kodiak more accessible. Hess foresees a time when diving could join fishing and hunting as a local economic asset. "I think you have the beginnings of a new industry," he said.
"Once something is found, the first thing that's asked is, 'Who owns it?'" he said.
Assuming that a ship's owners have abandoned a wreck, the basic principle of salvage law is simple: finders keepers. That still has validity in the maritime context, Hess said.
-cp-
Micro- vs. macro-evolution is a distinction without a difference. Enough small changes add up to a big change. Biologists have long ago realized that there's no difference between the two except time. Only anti-science religious zealots masquerading as "intelligent design theorists" or whatever they're calling themselves this week still pretend that it's a meaningful distinction.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
http://www.icr.org
The institute for creation research (icr) is a place that has nothing to do with science. They just try to claim they do. I suggest the talk.origons website as a better reference for the creation/evolution debate.
-MDL
Happy meals fund terrorism