Who knows what lies beneath?

First things first:

Rabbit rabbit rabbit! Evil spirits are banished from Nutwood for the month.

Happy April, everyone. This might not be the official start to spring, but doesn't it sort of feel like spring is here as soon as April arrives? It's very blustery here today, but the sun is shining, and it's up to about 50° (about 10° Celsius...I need to remember I have readers who don't think in Fahrenheit terms!). It's also a good day because Ken has a day off, and it's nice to hang with him. It feels like Saturday!

Marty commented on my purple finch sighting: "I don't know why they call that a 'purple finch.' I looks red to me." Good observation, and I actually had an answer for him, thanks to one of my bird books. The Latin name, genus and species, of the purple finch is Carpodacus purpureus. The Latin word purpureus means "crimson" or some other reddish color. I guess the similar sound between purpureus and "purple" made people start calling it a purple finch. I was just thrilled that I got to see him, and I spotted him again just a moment ago! And yes, I DO have a life, thank you very much!

The main story on AOL this morning was the finding of a beautiful stone head a couple of millimeters under the stucco façade on the famous bust of Queen Nefertiti that resides in a Berlin museum. Several years ago, they did a CT scan of the bust, but it wasn't as highly detailed as what they can do now. I found these images amazing, and you all know how I love stuff like this, especially anything to do with ancient Egypt. In looking at the image of Nefertiti, I wonder if this is an accurate rendition of her? Was she really that beautiful, or was the sculptor honoring his queen by making her more beautiful than she really was? While the scientists were able to find the stone figure beneath the stucco, they cannot answer the 'why' of the change...and they shouldn't try.

I recently read an entry on one of my new favorite blogs, Wired Science, that talked about the recent hearings in Texas concerning science textbooks and the teaching of evolution. It's worth a read if you get a chance. I found this particularly interesting (and it's exactly how I feel).

Science is about explaining the how of the natural world: how the universe began, how life originated, how the diversity of species occurred. Scientists feel no need for their work to answer why the universe exists, why we are here. For scientists, those are questions better left to philosophy, religion and after-work hours.

I believe that there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in our philosophy. But that's not what science is about. I love to speculate on the meaning of life, or why things happen a certain way, but for science, it's all about the 'how.' We can't know what was going on the mind of the sculptor who did the bust of Nefertiti, any more than we can know what was going through the minds of those men who wrote the books of the bible. It's all speculation, and there is a time and a place for it. I don't believe that time and place is in the science classroom, although I know there are some who disagree. Science is science, with hypotheses and experiments to prove the validity of those hypotheses. If they can't be proven, they don't become theory.

People have the right to believe what they want to believe. Creationism and intelligent design can be taught at home. They don't belong in science class.

Now...turn your watch back...and I'll meet ya by the third pyramid!