When I launched my occasional sceptical podcast Skepticule in September last year I lamented the apparent dearth of British sceptical podcasts. Little did I know that at the very same time a weekly UK-based sceptical podcast, The Pod Delusion, was also in the process of being launched. Though I had reservations about the variable audio quality of the first few episodes of The Pod Delusion, which perhaps is inevitable when a variety of independent contributors are involved, this now seems to have settled down.
Audio quality, though important, is secondary to content, and the latest edition of The Pod Delusion has scooped the global sceptical podcast community by releasing an interview by Jon Treadway with the new president of the James Randi Educational Foundation, D. J. Grothe. (And by the way, the audio quality is fine.)
D. J. comes to the JREF from the Center for Inquiry and the well-respected podcast Point of Inquiry. I've related elsewhere on this blog how I discovered sceptical podcasting — Skepticality was the first, but Point of Inquiry runs it a close second, and D. J. has some exciting revelations about the future of Point of Inquiry as well as sceptical podcasting from the JREF.
He also announced that there will be a second TAM London in 2010. This is great news. TAM London was a defining event for me last year and I'm delighted to hear that there will be another this year. I only hope the venue will be big enough, and that the registration will be less of a lottery.
The relevant Pod Delusion episode is available here:
http://poddelusion.co.uk/blog/2010/01/08/episode-16-8th-january-2010/
or you can subscribe in iTunes here:
http://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=332231975
or with any podcatcher using this feed:
http://www.ipadio.com/phlog_rss.asp?phlogid=9216
You can listen to an extended version of the D. J. Grothe interview here:
http://www.ipadio.com/phlogs/PodDelusionExtra/2010/01/08/The-Pod-Delusion-DJ-Grothe-Interview
and this is also downloadable from RapidShare here:
http://rapidshare.com/files/333329812/PodDelusionExtra_DJGrothe_20100108.mp3
It seems that UK scepticism is at last taking off; we've already had the relaunch of the UK Skeptic magazine, and later this month I shall be pleased to attend the inaugural Winchester Skeptics in the Pub. Things are looking up.
Sunday, 10 January 2010
D. J. Grothe on The Pod Delusion
Saturday, 9 January 2010
Forthcoming radio discussion of "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed"
Next Saturday, on Premier Christian Radio's Unbelievable? discussion programme at 2:30 pm, host Justin Brierley will be talking with Stephen C. Meyer of the Discovery Institute (and whose new book is Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design) about the film Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. The programme is in advance of a screening of the film that Premier are arranging concurrent with the DVD release in Britain. (Unlike in the US the film will not be on general release in the UK, but has gone straight to DVD.) I understand that Premier's screening will be followed by a debate.
When I learned of Premier's plans I posted the following on the Premier Community discussion forum:
Details (venue and date) of the screening have yet to be finalised, but they will be available at the Unbelievable? website.
__________________________
*Actually no. Although Godwin's Law manifests egregiously towards the end of the film, the footage at the beginning is of the Berlin Wall. In a fit of vituperation I carelessly conflated Nazis—Germany—Berlin, but I promise to try harder next time.
When I learned of Premier's plans I posted the following on the Premier Community discussion forum:
In last week's show Justin made much of Premier's efforts to arrange a screening of the disgracefully mendacious film Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. I've seen it, and I urge anyone, whether or not they've already seen the film, to check out the US National Center for Science Education's website about it, Expelled Exposed, which contains point-by-point refutations of all the claims made in this horrible production.
Also well worth your while is the unedited audio (in two parts) of a discussion between the editors of Scientific American and Mark Mathis, associate producer of Expelled.
In addition there is available a subtitle track to enable those tech-savvy enough to know what to do with it to watch the film with explanatory notes that point out each lie as it comes up (warning: it's not just here and there — it's a steady stream of text).
The history of Expelled, from its deliberate deception of its interviewees, through to its pre-release marketing and the production's manifestation of Godwin's Law from the very start*, is a sorry tale of dishonest, cynical manipulation. In short, this film stinks.
__________________________
*Actually no. Although Godwin's Law manifests egregiously towards the end of the film, the footage at the beginning is of the Berlin Wall. In a fit of vituperation I carelessly conflated Nazis—Germany—Berlin, but I promise to try harder next time.
Thursday, 7 January 2010
Burnee links for (a snowed-in) Thursday

As for McGrath…sorry, vacuous, mealy-mouthed, and boring are not sufficient qualities to make one an authority.
Rabbit is the question « Exquisite With Love — mirandacelestehale.net
Interesting satirical take on the unknowable deity, particularly the comments to the post itself and on RD.net.
Atheist Ireland Publishes 25 Blasphemous Quotes | blasphemy.ie
From 2010JAN01 blasphemy is illegal in Ireland. Congratulations, Ireland, for your giant leap backwards. (Via Pharyngula and RD.net)
Skeptic » Reading Room » Seeking a New Fulcrum
David Brin's article could be a companion piece to Jason Colavito's. Brin's take on psi, in particular telepathy, is similar to my own; he's used it in his stories, as I have in mine.
The Atheist Experience: Why we need blasphemy
...and why rational people need to stand together on this issue.
TPM: The Philosophers’ Magazine | Voicing our disbelief
I agree with Russell Blackford (and I definitely recommend his book).
Reiki Distance Healing Goes to Court : Reiki Healing Information
Witchcraft? Magic spells? Alive and well — but effective?
(Via Jack of Kent)
Should the bishops be evicted from the House of Lords? — Freethinker
On Wednesday 27 January there's to be an open debate in the Houses of Parliament (Committee Room 10). I've booked my (free) ticket; it should be ... interesting.
Posted by
Paul S. Jenkins
at
21:09
Burnee links for (a snowed-in) Thursday
2010-01-07T21:09:00Z
Paul S. Jenkins
Burnee links|
Comments


Labels:
Burnee links
Wednesday, 6 January 2010
What would convince me of the existence of God?
In response to Manic Street Preacher's blog-post on the recent Premier Christian Radio Unbelievable? discussion between Lewis Wolpert and Russell Cowburn, I made the following comment (quoting MSP first):
_____________________
*Wolpert suggested that having his deceased wife returned to him would probably be enough.
I have often been asked what evidence that I as an atheist would accept for the existence of God.
I can’t say that I’ve often been asked this question, but I have heard it put to atheists enough times to make me consider what my own response would be.
And I don’t know. I think an ostensibly supernatural experience would most likely make me wonder about my sanity before I would accept that the cause of the event was divine intervention (although Lewis Wolpert’s example* would, I admit, be pretty convincing).
My answer to the direct question would probably be a request for clarification of the term “God”. I might be convinced of the deistic wind-up-the-clockwork-of-the-universe-and-throw-away-the-key type of god, but the God of Abraham seems so utterly ridiculous and untenable in so many ways, I simply have no idea what could possibly convince me of his existence, other than the most obvious, miraculous, personal revelation, in the presence of others whose sanity and corroboration I had no reason to doubt.
But really, there’s no need for me to be concerned about this. If the omni-whatever God of Abraham really exists and really wants me to believe in him, he knows perfectly well what it would take to convince me, even if I myself have no idea — and yet, so far, he appears indifferent to my lack of faith. This leads me to only one conclusion.On a related note, I see that MSP has provoked the ire of William Dembski's Uncommon Descent bloggers (who incidentally seem to have got hold of the wrong end of the stick — so what's new?).
_____________________
*Wolpert suggested that having his deceased wife returned to him would probably be enough.
Wednesday, 30 December 2009
Burnee links for Wednesday (and my 200th EB post)

The big question for evolutionists is, since our DNA breaks down when left to itself, how did our ancestors survive before the many and complicated DNA repair mechanisms evolved? As this SUMO protein story shows, the more we discover, the more complicated it is. SUMO proteins certainly bear the hallmark of design.
On pulling teeth and asking AnAtheist for some evidence | The Tentative Apologist
I've been sorely tempted over the past few months to register with this site in order to post some comments of my own. Thankfully I've resisted the temptation, because I know I would likely be drawn into fruitless and frustrating to-and-fro. Randal Rauser, the "Tentative Apologist", is one of those theologians who refuses to be pinned down on anything at all. This latest post is about his request for one of his commenters, AnAtheist.net, to provide evidence for his atheism. Mr. Tentative Apologist knows perfectly well that the burden of proof does not lie with AnAtheist.net, because it isn't AnAtheist.net who is making a claim. Nevertheless Mr. T. A. continues to maintain that lack of belief in a god or gods is a claim of some kind, which requires evidence in support of it. It's telling that William Lane Craig uses the same tactic in debates about the existence of God, where he always reframes the question so that he can demand that his opponent provide "evidence that atheism is true". But if I say I see no compelling evidence for the existence of a god or gods, I'm not making a claim about the existence of anything. What use is it, therefore, to ask me to provide evidence for the lack of evidence? (I'm glad I've so far resisted the aforementioned temptation.)
Bad Idea of 2009: “other ways of knowing” « Why Evolution Is True
My vote for the worst idea of 2009 — at least in the “faith wars” — is that science and religion provide complementary (and equally valid) “ways of knowing.” It’s an idea that’s been bruited about by not just the faithful, but by atheist accommodationists like those running the National Center for Science Education.
This idea is terrible because a. it’s nonsensical, b. its proponents never examine it critically, because if they did they’d see that c. it’s wrong. It’s a mantra, a buzz-phrase.
Stephen Law: Seeing Angels
This is about the recent Radio 4 Beyond Belief programme in which Chris French was asked what evidence would convince him of the existence of angels. Professor French gave a perfectly reasonable reply, in terms of a controlled experiment, which was then summarily rejected on the grounds of such things as angels being not susceptible to scientific investigation. The woo-merchants do this all the time — it makes me wonder what precisely they mean by "existence". (See my own blogpost for various links to the audio.)
Skeptic » eSkeptic » Wednesday, December 30th, 2009 — Oh, the Horror! Why Skeptics Should Embrace the Supernatural on Television by Jason Colavito
An interesting essay on the origins of supernatural fiction. (The title, however, is misleading — it's not about TV.) Some people automatically assume that if you write about ghosts you naturally believe they exist. Not so; I think the evidence for the existence of ghosts is extremely poor, but that doesn't stop me writing stories in which they feature as "real" entities. One thing that does annoy me about some "hackwork" (to use Colavito's term), and which does often apply to TV as well as film, is the idea that not only is the supernatural element real, but that it is also completely understood. I've lost count of the number of B-movie horror plots in which some character ("expert", "scientist", "investigator" or whatever) takes ten minutes to perform some massive infodump that leaves nothing to speculation. That usually occurs in the first half-hour, which at least gives me the chance to say, "Thanks, but no thanks," and switch off.
Celebrations! (or something....) — this is my 200th Evil Burnee post.
Posted by
Paul S. Jenkins
at
20:02
Burnee links for Wednesday (and my 200th EB post)
2009-12-30T20:02:00Z
Paul S. Jenkins
Burnee links|
Comments


Labels:
Burnee links
Monday, 28 December 2009
Professor Chris French on "Beyond Belief" BBC Radio 4

The podcast audio (mp3) can be downloaded here for 7 days:
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/radio4/belief/belief_20091228-1700a.mp3

http://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=261779770
Or stream the audio from iPlayer:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b00pfpdg
The mp3 can also be downloaded from RapidShare, here:
http://rapidshare.com/files/327227955/Belief__28_DEC_09.mp3
UPDATE 2010-01-01: See also:
Chris French on Radio 4’s Beyond Belief discussing guardian angels « manicstreetpreacher
and:
Stephen Law: Seeing Angels
Labels:
BBC,
Beyond Belief,
Chris French,
guardian angels,
Radio 4
Book review: The Jewel of Medina — by Sherry Jones
The Jewel of Medina had been in my pre-order/save for later list on Amazon for many months, waiting for it to be finally published. The self-censorship chill surrounding this novel after it was unceremoniously pulled by publisher Random House had piqued my interest in what could have made them so jumpy, given that until they received an unfavourable report from one of their pre-publication readers they were keen to spend tons of money to promote it. Then the British publisher was bombed and yet again the book was withdrawn.
But when I saw that this story of Muhammad's favourite wife was available on Amazon's Kindle Store, for immediate download, I requested a free sample (which Amazon allows Kindle users to do) and a minute later I was reading it. It seemed like a straightforward fictional tale about some recognisable historical figures, told using unfamiliar-to-me terminology (which I later found explained in a glossary at the end of the book).
When I reached the end of the substantial sample I ordered the whole novel, and in another minute I was able to continue where I left off. (Why am I boring you with the technicalities of Kindle readership? Because The Jewel of Medina was the first novel I purchased for my new Kindle e-reader, that's why.)
Much has been made of the Prophet's paedophilic tendencies in taking a wife aged nine years (she was betrothed to him at age six), but in this fictional account of her marriage to Muhammad, though A'isha is indeed married aged nine, it's not until she is 15 that her marriage is consummated. I've no idea how accurate this narrative is. Sherry Jones, the author, who is not a Muslim, explains in a Q & A at the end of the book that she did take certain liberties with the historical account, but this particular aspect is not mentioned.
Being the first-person story of a child, this is inevitably a self-centred story. A'isha is headstrong and full of her own importance, alternating with bouts of extreme self-doubt, with the result that her fickleness tends to tedium after a while. The shallowness of her vision is reflected in the narrative, though this might be expected in a child's story. It might also explain why we never get any real sense of place; Mecca and Medina are locations of geographical uniqueness, but A'isha, constrained as she is in purdah and subsequently in Muhammad's harem, tells us little of what these places are like. She makes frequent visits to the poor in a "tent city" but all too frequently we are confined in her thoughts of other things.
At one point she runs away, almost indulging in a fling with her childhood sweetheart — this is giving nothing away, as the conclusion of this event is what opens the story. Unfortunately it looks as if this messing with the structure of the novel might have been done at the last minute, as the text appears to have been simply clipped from the middle of the novel and plonked on to the beginning, with only rudimentary attempts to fix the ragged edges left behind.
There are some moments of pithy and evocative writing towards the end of the novel, but not enough to balance the shallow and often leaden prose that goes before. This may have been the author's intention, to show A'isha's outlook and intellect maturing, but it seems ill-judged to fetter the majority of the narrative for such small effect.
One aspect of the novel's style, which I'm assuming isn't an artefact of its formatting for the Kindle, is an unconventional quirk in the way dialogue is shown. Conventionally, when someone speaks and then someone else speaks — whether or not there are dialogue tags (he said, she said and the like) — the second speaker's words are shown in quotation marks, but in a new paragraph. Many times this format is used in The Jewel of Medina, but it turns out that the same person is speaking. Unfortunately this format quirk isn't sufficiently different from the conventionally accepted (and most popular) style, with the result that it simply confused me, and I had to stop and re-read. Anything that drops the reader out of the narrative is undesirable and an impediment to good novelistic style.
The Jewel of Medina is not a bad book, but it isn't a particularly good one either. Its interest lies in its historical subject matter and, inevitably, the controversy surrounding it. I read somewhere that the novel, dealing with the Prophet's intimate relations with his wives, was pornographic. It isn't.
Posted by
Paul S. Jenkins
at
16:13
Book review: The Jewel of Medina — by Sherry Jones
2009-12-28T16:13:00Z
Paul S. Jenkins
book review|Islam|Kindle|Muhammad|Sherry Jones|
Comments


Labels:
book review,
Islam,
Kindle,
Muhammad,
Sherry Jones
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)