I waste my time for you — Debate: Does God Exist?

This isn't the first time I've live-commented on Facebook while watching or listening to some online media or other. In line with my recent decision to repost (or archive — knowing how volatile other fora can be) my stuff from Facebook, here's my reaction to a 2004 debate linked to in the CFI group.

---

http://youtu.be/qMuHMVVoPjw
Debate - Does God Exist? Hare Krishna Monk vs Stephen Law (1-0)



Here's the YouTube blurb:

"They Said It Was Chance"

Open Discussion on the Existence of God between
HH Sivarama Swami and Dr Stephen Law at University College, London

And here are the comments posted in the Skepticule Extra Facebook group:

• 
  Fergus Gallagher What does "(1-0)" signify?

  4 hours ago ·
• 
  

  Paul Jenkins Don't know. I haven't watched it yet. (It looks suspiciously like a score...)

  4 hours ago ·
• 
  

  Fergus Gallagher Indeed it does.

  4 hours ago ·
• 
  

  Paul Jenkins I'm nearly half way through this now — just started with audience questions.
  
  HH Sivarama Swami has rather odd ideas about induction and deduction. Stephen Law is running his Evil God Challenge, based on an agreed definition of "God", but the discussion is now floundering as that definition becomes indistinct.
  
  Also (unless I misheard him) HH Sivarama Swami seems to be claiming that personal revelation can be proved experimentally.

  3 hours ago ·
• 
  

  Paul Jenkins We're now into what I would characterise as the "karma of the gaps in our understanding of causality" argument. (Or to put it another way, total BS.)

  2 hours ago ·
• 
  

  Paul Jenkins The swami seems to be conflating "order" and "structure" with "moral goodness". He has a very loose definition of God, which he appears to think allows him to make sweeping generalisations about God's character. Stephen Law, on the other hand, has been specific in repeatedly tying the definition down to omnipotence and omnibenevolence, which allows him to run his EGC to show that theodicies and the mystery card simply don't work.
  
  Then there's the argument about free will, which is a whole other kettle of worms.

  2 hours ago ·
• 
  

  Paul Jenkins Good summing up by Stephen Law. Show of hands: 62 to 17 (with 14 abstentions) in favour of HH Sivarama Swami.

  about an hour ago ·
• 
  

  Paul Jenkins The swami repeated his claim to have performed an experiment to show the existence of God, and that it was repeatable, but did not cite any peer-reviewed papers to back up his claim. Bizarrely he also claimed that those who have performed the experiment do not need to debate the matter — so what was he doing here?

  about an hour ago ·
• 
  

  Fergus Gallagher I didn't know SL had developed his EGC way back in 2004

  about an hour ago ·
• 
  

  Fergus Gallagher Worth watching?

  about an hour ago ·
• 
  

  Paul Jenkins Meh. I waste my time for you ;-)

  about an hour ago ·
• 
  

  Fergus Gallagher True secular altruism.

  about an hour ago ·

Burnee links for Sunday

Stephen Law: Religious Experience and Karen Armstrong's God
Well, that's that then.

Next up: Everything I have to say about William Lane Craig | The Uncredible Hallq
Should be interesting, and comprehensive; Chris Hallquist is no lightweight.

BBC Radio 2 - Ian D Montfort Is: Unbelievable
A truly fantastic radio psychic medium — cold reading and barnum statements given hilarious over-the-top treatment (original audio no longer available, but there's a two-minute clip on the site).

Fire-walking gone awry | Mano Singham
What happens when woo-meisters don't understand what's really going on...

Phlegmatic - Interpreting the Olympic Opening Ceremony
We all know the Olympics opening ceremony was highly symbolic, but here's a helpful explanation for those who might have got the wrong end of the stick.
(Via Paul Wright.)

Triablogue: Funeral for atheism
This is what you get when you can't see beyond dogmatic scripture.

I get confidential email

This is another Facebook repost, from a while back:

---

I received a confidential email. I know it's a confidential email because it says it's confidential right there in the email itself. Plus, it's addressed to "undisclosed recipients" and you can't get more confidential than that. Anyway, here's what it said:

As-Salamu Alaykum,

I am Aisha Tagro from Republic of Ivory Coast .Being that I lost my Father recently. My father was a Minister of interior withthe regime of Ex-president Laurent Gbagbo (Mr. Desire Tagro) until his death.

He was assassinated by the Rebels following the politicaluprising. Before his death, he deposited $15. 500,000.00 (Million dollars) Thefunds are in a safe private bank here is my country which I will give youdetails upon receipt of your acknowledgement of this confidential message Iwant you to do me a favour to retrieve this money from the bank and save itinto your bank account in your country or any safer place as the beneficiarymeanwhile I have plans to do investment in your country.

This is my reason for writing to you. Please, if youare willing to assist me indicate your interest by replying me soonest I don’tmine becoming a Christian if that is what I have to do to have a good and reliable assistance for my good future.

Best regards.

Yours sincerely,

Miss. Aisha Tagro.

It's a terrible story. Miss Tagro's father was assassinated by rebels, but he seems to have been lucky in being able to stash away fifteen and a half million dollars in a safe private bank. Unfortunately Miss Tagro herself seems unable at present (though I can't see why) to use that money to invest in the UK and wants me to do it for her. Sympathetic as I am to her dire plight, I don't really see what I can do. I have little investment expertise so I can't honestly advise her, other than to suggest she contacts the concerns she wants to invest in and asks for their assistance. That, it seems to me, would be a more efficient way of going about things.

Also, I'm concerned that she thinks I might be some kind of right-wing Christian bigot, as she offers to convert to Christianity — as if that would make me more likely to assist her. It's all very confusing, and makes me wonder if she might not be a little unhinged as a result of her recent bereavement. I think she may have sent this request in grief-stricken haste and might possibly come to regret it. For the moment, therefore, I shall not respond, unless she contacts me again after taking some time to rethink her audacious plan.

(I'd be obliged if you folks didn't spread this around, since it is — as she states in her email — confidential.)

---

Check out the comments on the original post, as they shed some light on email scammers' motivations.

What's in your head counts more than what's on it

Those headgear option selectors are at it again. Talk about parading your blatant obscurantism for all to see. All together now — assert with me:

"Christianity is a process. It is a commitment, a vow, a pledge. It is a complete overhaul and reformation. The creatures of God, created for the purpose of living and breathing the truth and glory of their Creator: that is Christianity."

Inevitably the presup spiel bursts forth (though McFormtist manages to achieve this without using the word "account"):

"As difficult as it may be to admit, even unbelievers are creatures of God and hence bear His image, and so due to common grace they are aware of such things as double-speak and hypocrisy, even if they aren’t consistent in their application of that judgment to themselves."

I'm wondering (again) exactly what "...bear His image" actually means. Like a tattoo? A brand? An earmark? And amongst the professed gratitude for atheistic criticism we of course we get the usual PA claim (which can never be delivered without its hallmark smugness):

"Along the same lines of our response to the problem of evil, we should be thankful whenever we see unbelievers calling these things out. It demonstrates unbelievers’ recognition of evil. We must be careful to call evil “evil” and not make excuses for it. We must agree that evil is evil, but we must also be ready to make specific qualifications for what exactly constitutes it. We need to show them that they have no basis to call anything evil on their own terms, and that only on ours can they make any sense of evil and have a reason to fight against it."

Sez you.

(Reposted from Facebook.)

"Compatibilist" free will — God-given?

This blog has been quiet of late, which I regret, but while I've neglected Evil Burnee I have been posting stuff on Facebook. So I've decided to repost anything remotely substantial here (edited as I consider necessary), while brief items will be included in Burnee Links (Facebook friends and subscribers may wish to tweak their settings if they feel they're getting too much of me).

---

Some really blinkered stuff has come out of Choosing Hats recently. Here's "RazorsKiss" simultaneously exhibiting the usual snark at "village atheists" while playing the mystery card with respect to "God's will". All while berating another believer who just happens not to be a member of the preferred sect. Also, note the "impossible state of God not existing" — a revealing assertion that tells us in no uncertain terms (as if we didn't already know) where this blogger is coming from. How about this:

"For all their talk of reason, and logic, note that it all arises from and because of random chance – which is definitionally irrational. If God doesn’t control all things in this pastor’s worldview, what does? He ceded the field, and has practically denied Isaiah 46, which says God has declared the end from the beginning."

So much for free will, as God has everything predetermined, and the death of those poor kids was their destiny. Pretty sick, in my opinion.

(Reposted from Facebook.)

Atheist prayer — isn't this just silly?

Posted by Justin Brierley in his Unbelievable? Facebook group:

Are you an atheist? If there is a God do you want to find out? On the latest show I announced The Atheist Prayer Experiment. I'll post up more details in due course, but if you want to take part then email unbelievable@premier.org.uk

What on earth could this be? Getting atheists to pray to a god they don't believe in? Is there any way this "experiment" could be in the least valid?

Who knows? This strikes me as another theistic attempt to inject scientific rationality into something intrinsically irrational. I was highly skeptical of the recent experiment aiming to determine the efficacy of intercessory prayer. As it turned out, the study showed a marginally negative effect — that is, heart patients aware that they were being prayed for did slightly worse in their overall recovery. But that doesn't change my view that such experiments are pretty much worthless; after all, who's to say that any patients weren't being randomly prayed for by people not involved in the study, with consequently unpredictable skewing of the results? And isn't God supposed to take a dim view of being tested (despite being perfectly OK with testing his subjects — Abraham and Isaac, for instance)?

To me the whole idea seems like a pointless waste of time — nevertheless I await Justin's explication (though I'm not holding my breath).

---

UPDATE 20120819:

The paper by Tim Mawson to which Justin Brierley referred in his announcement is available here:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/a77r315j041p4213/?MUD=MP

The Atheist Prayer Experiment webpage is here:
http://www.premier.org.uk/atheistprayerexperiment

---

UPDATE 20120822: 


More here:
Notes from an Evil Burnee: An experiment designed to be useless

Burnee links for Thursday

To Paula | The Heresy Club
I tend to agree. It saddens me that such a letter needs to be written.

Your freedom to impose your religion ends where your child begins | coelsblog
Circumscribing the circumcision debate.

History, My Bum Knee, and Some People I Want to Thank | Greta Christina's Blog
Western society makes progress.

Temple of the Future — We Have Failed Leah Libresco
James Croft says humanists must be able to explain their morality.

Tessera: The Emotional Eating Kit
Sounds like good stuff. Not actually harmful, anyway. Not anything, to tell the truth, but don't let that stop you throwing your money away if it makes you feel better (if not in actual fact better).

Voice of Reason: Lawrence Krauss - Reality is liberating - YouTube
"The great thing about science is not knowing."


Higgs Boson announcement from CERN: why the god particle is so important. - Slate Magazine
More Krauss, this time on the CERN announcement and nothing interesting.