Into the second day of TAM London with Marcus Chown and his Ten Bonkers Things About The Universe:
Among these bonkers things were the fact that the entire human race would fit in the volume of a sugar cube; if the sun were made of bananas it would be equally hot; 98% of the universe is invisible; and you age more slowly on the ground floor of a building than on the top floor.
Marcus went through his ten items at some speed, perhaps mindful of the necessity of engaging his audience on a Sunday morning after a possibly late night, and he therefore didn't go into much detail. Probably he could have done a complete presentation on each item. He paced the stage rather than standing at the lectern, and his slides were varied — though naturally had a cosmological emphasis. He book-ended his talk with audio-visuals that included music from Elton John and David Bowie. This was a good start to the second day.
Wednesday, 30 March 2011
Tuesday, 29 March 2011
The Comfort zone of a fundagelical Christian
Well, it happened. Ray Comfort was on the Atheist Experience last Sunday. I listened to the podcast, and it was one of the fastest hours I can remember.
I didn't know what to expect, although I thought it likely, given the professionalism of the Atheist Experience hosts, that it would be a civilized affair. Ray is a decent chap, that's clear, though plainly misguided and lacking intellectual rigour when it comes to matters of science — especially biology. At one point he started in with his argument about male and female evolving separately; that he still proposes this as a refutation of evolution demonstrates that he has minimal grasp of what the theory of evolution actually states, and that he's willfully ignoring patient explanations offered to him in the past (P. Z. Myers', for example).
One problem the Axp has with a discussion like this, is that an hour is nowhere near long enough to address all the various nonsense that Ray continues to come out with over the years. Matt Dillahunty and Russell Glasser did a good job, but the show could easily have been three times as long and just as packed.
If I have reservations, these would be about the wider effect of a match like this. Though it was hugely entertaining, the show let Ray appear as pleasant but deluded — not as a raving fundagelical who actively promotes a hellfire and brimstone version of Christianity that he wants everyone else to adopt. Which of these portrayals is more likely to motivate active opposition? When two members of the Rational Response Squad debated Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron the latter were shown up as creationist loons. When Ray Comfort and Thunderf00t took part in a video-recorded discussion, Ray came over as sincere but disastrously wrong. And here on the Axp he seemed to be a regular guy with some wonky ideas about evolution and nature.
Whether this show motivates opposition to Ray's wrong-headed views or not, it's necessary to challenge such views wherever and whenever they threaten to impinge on people's rights, and on that score the Axp hosts continue to be supremely competent.
I didn't know what to expect, although I thought it likely, given the professionalism of the Atheist Experience hosts, that it would be a civilized affair. Ray is a decent chap, that's clear, though plainly misguided and lacking intellectual rigour when it comes to matters of science — especially biology. At one point he started in with his argument about male and female evolving separately; that he still proposes this as a refutation of evolution demonstrates that he has minimal grasp of what the theory of evolution actually states, and that he's willfully ignoring patient explanations offered to him in the past (P. Z. Myers', for example).
One problem the Axp has with a discussion like this, is that an hour is nowhere near long enough to address all the various nonsense that Ray continues to come out with over the years. Matt Dillahunty and Russell Glasser did a good job, but the show could easily have been three times as long and just as packed.
If I have reservations, these would be about the wider effect of a match like this. Though it was hugely entertaining, the show let Ray appear as pleasant but deluded — not as a raving fundagelical who actively promotes a hellfire and brimstone version of Christianity that he wants everyone else to adopt. Which of these portrayals is more likely to motivate active opposition? When two members of the Rational Response Squad debated Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron the latter were shown up as creationist loons. When Ray Comfort and Thunderf00t took part in a video-recorded discussion, Ray came over as sincere but disastrously wrong. And here on the Axp he seemed to be a regular guy with some wonky ideas about evolution and nature.
Whether this show motivates opposition to Ray's wrong-headed views or not, it's necessary to challenge such views wherever and whenever they threaten to impinge on people's rights, and on that score the Axp hosts continue to be supremely competent.
Monday, 28 March 2011
Episode 2 of Skepticule Extra is now available
After the phenomenal success of the first episode of our absolutely brilliant new podcast I know everyone's eagerly awaiting the next episode of Skepticule Extra.
So here it is:
http://www.skepticule.co.uk/2011/03/skepextra-002-20110327.html
This episode is mostly about the wife of a fascist god who visits hospitals to teach creationism to the patients. (Or something — I may have garbled that slightly.)
So here it is:
http://www.skepticule.co.uk/2011/03/skepextra-002-20110327.html
This episode is mostly about the wife of a fascist god who visits hospitals to teach creationism to the patients. (Or something — I may have garbled that slightly.)
Sunday, 27 March 2011
Burnee links for Sunday
The Atheist Experience™: Ray Comfort - on the show this Sunday
I can't quite believe this is actually going to happen.
The Meming of Life » There is no normal » Parenting Beyond Belief on secular parenting and other natural wonders
More catching up with Dale McGowan — on familiar awesomeness.
Skeptics with a K – Special #008 « The Merseyside Skeptics Society
A ten-minute spot on Radio Merseyside — well worth a listen. And well worth a read is Marsh's relevant blogpost of 10th March:
NHS Wirral and The North West Friends Of Homeopathy: A Typical Wednesday Evening Out
New Statesman - Against the evidence
Richard Wilson explains the difference between doubt and dogmatism.
Atheist attempts to educate Rabbi Adam Jacobs on morality - Philadelphia atheism | Examiner.com
This article could have dealt more with the concept of absolutism. Which is the main theistic argument (even though it's false).
Science: How To Fake It
This how all those ridiculous "science" stories get into the popular press.
Bad Reason: Talking Bollocks about Cox
Don't diss Brian.
(Via @kashfarooq)
Godless in Tumourville: Christopher Hitchens interview - Telegraph
Excellent in-depth update on the Hitch.
I can't quite believe this is actually going to happen.
The Meming of Life » There is no normal » Parenting Beyond Belief on secular parenting and other natural wonders
More catching up with Dale McGowan — on familiar awesomeness.
Skeptics with a K – Special #008 « The Merseyside Skeptics Society
A ten-minute spot on Radio Merseyside — well worth a listen. And well worth a read is Marsh's relevant blogpost of 10th March:
NHS Wirral and The North West Friends Of Homeopathy: A Typical Wednesday Evening Out
New Statesman - Against the evidence
Richard Wilson explains the difference between doubt and dogmatism.
Atheist attempts to educate Rabbi Adam Jacobs on morality - Philadelphia atheism | Examiner.com
This article could have dealt more with the concept of absolutism. Which is the main theistic argument (even though it's false).
Science: How To Fake It
This how all those ridiculous "science" stories get into the popular press.
Bad Reason: Talking Bollocks about Cox
Don't diss Brian.
(Via @kashfarooq)
Godless in Tumourville: Christopher Hitchens interview - Telegraph
Excellent in-depth update on the Hitch.
Saturday, 26 March 2011
My part ownership
Watching Brian Cox's inspiring Wonders of the Universe episode "Stardust" I was once again struck by the thought that though this arrangement of parts that I call me is, in the grand scheme of things, ephemeral, the parts themselves — the atoms that make up the molecules that make up the chemicals of which I am temporarily composed — are as near immortal as anything is likely to get. Forged in the nuclear furnaces of dying stars, my fundamental particles have been around a lot longer than I have, and before I was here they were probably doing sterling service elsewhere. And after I'm gone, these particles will be recycled for other purposes — I will, in a sense, live again as reincarnated diaspora.
There is a hierarchy in this compositional framework that I call me: though at bottom I am the quarks, I am also the complex functioning organs that comprise my body — which are themselves composed of simpler parts right down to those atoms and the quarks that comprise them. Such a view gives me pause, to consider my ownership of the parts of which I currently comprise.
This clip from Lawrence Krauss's superb lecture at the 2009 AAI Convention makes a related point:
https://youtu.be/7ImvlS8PLIo
(Ironically this clip was linked by Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis!)
There is a hierarchy in this compositional framework that I call me: though at bottom I am the quarks, I am also the complex functioning organs that comprise my body — which are themselves composed of simpler parts right down to those atoms and the quarks that comprise them. Such a view gives me pause, to consider my ownership of the parts of which I currently comprise.
This clip from Lawrence Krauss's superb lecture at the 2009 AAI Convention makes a related point:
https://youtu.be/7ImvlS8PLIo
(Ironically this clip was linked by Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis!)
Labels:
Answers in Genesis,
BBC,
Ken Ham,
Lawrence Krauss,
organ donation,
Professor Brian Cox,
XKCD
Friday, 25 March 2011
The Bible is not a science textbook
With Robert Kaita's "Creator and Sustainer — God's Essential Role in the Universe" we are into Section Two, The Question of Science, of Dembski and Licona's Evidence for God. And immediately we run into problems:
This misunderstands what scientific laws are, even though the above quote actually contains a germ of the truth. Scientific laws are not some underlying or intrinsic quality of how the universe works, they are merely a set of descriptions that approximate to our observations ("The same law of gravity can be used to describe...").
Kaita uses a line of dominoes as an analogy for deism, then says, "Somehow, we have a sense that such a picture is not very satisfying." But the way things actually are — the truth — is not contingent on whether it produces a satisfying picture. Nevertheless Kaita uses the further analogies of car maintenance and practical nuclear fusion (his own scientific field) to support his idea that God must take an active role in the universe to keep it running. That doesn't sound very god-like to me — whatever happened to omnipotence?
That's not Kaita's only evidence for his sustaining creator-god; he also quotes from the Bible:
4truth.net:
http://www.4truth.net/fourtruthpbscience.aspx?pageid=8589952965
Einstein posed a question that scientists, as scientists, still cannot answer. He asked why the universe is comprehensible. We do not know, for example, why there are only a few laws of physics. The same law of gravity can be used to describe how we are held to the earth, but also how immense galaxies are attracted to each other to form clusters.
Kaita uses a line of dominoes as an analogy for deism, then says, "Somehow, we have a sense that such a picture is not very satisfying." But the way things actually are — the truth — is not contingent on whether it produces a satisfying picture. Nevertheless Kaita uses the further analogies of car maintenance and practical nuclear fusion (his own scientific field) to support his idea that God must take an active role in the universe to keep it running. That doesn't sound very god-like to me — whatever happened to omnipotence?
That's not Kaita's only evidence for his sustaining creator-god; he also quotes from the Bible:
As long as the earth endures,The Bible, however, is not a science textbook. Anyone who tries to support theism from a scientific viewpoint — especially in a section entitled The Question of Science — by quoting the Bible, has already lost the argument.
seedtime and harvest,
cold and heat,
summer and winter,
day and night
will never cease.
(Genesis 8:22 New International Version, ©2011)
4truth.net:
http://www.4truth.net/fourtruthpbscience.aspx?pageid=8589952965
Thursday, 24 March 2011
Burnee links for Thursday
Creation Science Movement - News
Stephen Hayes reviews Alister McGrath's Why God won't go away: engaging with the New Atheism — and gets in plenty of incidental invective against Dawkins, Hitchens, Dennett and Harris, accusing them of rabble-rousing, and their output as "too vile to be quoted". McGrath apparently "exposes the the real nastiness in the underbelly of this movement". (And for good measure The God Delusion is a "revolting book of crude and bigoted propaganda".) I think I can tell where he's coming from, but even without this helpful review I shan't be reading McGrath's book. I've read some of his stuff online and I've heard him speak — or rather circumlocute, and I choose not to subject my brain to being savaged by a blancmange.
Jourdemayne: Mrs. God
The shocking revelation turns out to be a bit old hat.
Free schools will not teach creationism, says Department for Education | Science | The Guardian
Credit to the BCSE for getting a response, but I wonder how much Gove's assurances are worth.
John Ronson On...
Useful links to Jon Ronson's BBC Radio 4 documentaries.
Advertising that will catch your attention: 20 awesome billboards
Some of these are fun, some clever. All eye-catching.
Do You Have Free Will? Yes, It’s the Only Choice - NYTimes.com
Fascinating article. I tend towards the compatibilists.
Atheist throws in towel: 6-year lawsuit challenging Pledge of Allegiance in California | Spero News
This is curious. Not sure what's going on here.
Harvard University professor Michael Sandel said Tuesday that reasoned argument is missing in political discourse, but the solution is more debate, not less | Gainesville.com
Michael Sandel tells us what's missing in public debate. And I really must find time to watch his series Justice (which I have on my iPod).
Hell and linoleum | Andrew Brown | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk
Andrew Brown attempts to ponder the justice of Hell — and finds he can't.
I've no faith in this idea that religion is dying out | Wendy M Grossman | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk
Wendy Grossman isn't buying it.
Stephen Hayes reviews Alister McGrath's Why God won't go away: engaging with the New Atheism — and gets in plenty of incidental invective against Dawkins, Hitchens, Dennett and Harris, accusing them of rabble-rousing, and their output as "too vile to be quoted". McGrath apparently "exposes the the real nastiness in the underbelly of this movement". (And for good measure The God Delusion is a "revolting book of crude and bigoted propaganda".) I think I can tell where he's coming from, but even without this helpful review I shan't be reading McGrath's book. I've read some of his stuff online and I've heard him speak — or rather circumlocute, and I choose not to subject my brain to being savaged by a blancmange.

The shocking revelation turns out to be a bit old hat.
Free schools will not teach creationism, says Department for Education | Science | The Guardian
Credit to the BCSE for getting a response, but I wonder how much Gove's assurances are worth.
John Ronson On...
Useful links to Jon Ronson's BBC Radio 4 documentaries.
Advertising that will catch your attention: 20 awesome billboards
Some of these are fun, some clever. All eye-catching.
Do You Have Free Will? Yes, It’s the Only Choice - NYTimes.com
Fascinating article. I tend towards the compatibilists.
Atheist throws in towel: 6-year lawsuit challenging Pledge of Allegiance in California | Spero News
This is curious. Not sure what's going on here.
Harvard University professor Michael Sandel said Tuesday that reasoned argument is missing in political discourse, but the solution is more debate, not less | Gainesville.com
Michael Sandel tells us what's missing in public debate. And I really must find time to watch his series Justice (which I have on my iPod).
Hell and linoleum | Andrew Brown | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk
Andrew Brown attempts to ponder the justice of Hell — and finds he can't.
I've no faith in this idea that religion is dying out | Wendy M Grossman | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk
Wendy Grossman isn't buying it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)