1. Opiate of the masses - and evolutionary aid

Comment #260221 by dsainty on October 4, 2008 at 11:48 pm

I wonder where they've observed all this large-scale altruism they're trying to explain.

2. Good Science Writers: Richard Dawkins

Comment #216290 by dsainty on July 22, 2008 at 11:24 pm

Watch any space-heading science fiction moving picture and you'll see that the evolution of a large-brained biped with two skilled hands, forward-pointing camera eyes and other human features is almost a certainty anywhere in the universe, regardless of the planetary conditions.

3. Is the Universe Actually Made of Math?

Comment #195951 by dsainty on June 19, 2008 at 5:45 am

Apathy personified:

You are betraying your ignorance there, if you don't think mathmematics works - don't use your computer or any technology (even the mighty abacus) - maths underpins everything.

Heh. It's ok, I use mathematics quite often, and it always seems to give incredibly accurate approximations of the answers I require.

4. Is the Universe Actually Made of Math?

Comment #195843 by dsainty on June 18, 2008 at 10:37 pm

Pah! Perhaps mathematics is just his comfort blanket. The Schrödinger equation breaks down because mathematics no longer works, in the same way that Newtonian mechanics seems to work until you hit its limits.

Two can play at this game :)

5. Lungless frog discovered in Borneo

Comment #158670 by dsainty on April 10, 2008 at 10:47 pm

On selective pressures, Wikipedia suggests a couple of ideas:

"Scientists conjecture that the lungs were lost as an adaption to the naturally high oxygen content in the cold, fast rivers they live in, and the fact that decreased buoyancy from a lack of lungs makes the fast rivers easier to navigate without being swept away."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbourula_kalimantanensis

6. Bulldozers tear down giant religious teapot

Comment #138830 by dsainty on March 4, 2008 at 8:18 pm

I wonder whether this place was built purely to have a laugh at religion.

Regardless, I can imagine coming out with inner peace after visiting a playground with enormous teapots. Cool! :)

7. Secrets of bird flight revealed

Comment #115821 by dsainty on January 24, 2008 at 9:35 pm

robotaholic: I'm sure that point was relatively idle conjecture. But if you are an animal living in a herd and the herd is running from a predator, you wouldn't want to be the one that skimped on the going-over-obstacles technology that the other herd members have invested in.

8. Double-checking Dawkins

Comment #93370 by dsainty on December 3, 2007 at 12:01 am

Richard may have successfully selected the smallest possible sequence of bytes that produced an interesting and predictable output in and of itself. A lesser person might have taken the easy way out with some dull JSR instruction, relying on some separate piece of code to do the work.

Subtly neat...

9. Study: Babies can tell helpful, hurtful playmates

Comment #90091 by dsainty on November 22, 2007 at 8:45 pm

Lewkowicz seems to come across as surprisingly hostile to the idea that "we have these essential social skills occurring without much explicit teaching". Of course the study might have been misrepresented to him, but I wonder what life experiences he thinks the infants are calling on to aid them in their toy selection at ages of 3 and 6 months.

10. Exorcism death shocks archdeacon

Comment #87693 by dsainty on November 12, 2007 at 9:46 pm

The paper's front page said:

"Charlatans may be to blame", says scholar

So that's the problem. They didn't get a real exorcist.

11. Sir David Attenborough on God

Comment #87334 by dsainty on November 11, 2007 at 9:40 pm

David Attenborough can definitely take credit for some of my own wonder and fascination in the natural world. He is most definitely a hero of mine.

I love his unequivocal "No" answers in this clip. Blunt dismissal... Religion could do with receiving more of that.

12. Hello Again, Michael Behe!

Comment #86267 by dsainty on November 8, 2007 at 9:58 pm

John Done: I am seriously considering taking a course in theology.

I took a paper in theology, though I seem to recall there were few fellow atheists present (Sam won't mind me using the term, we're all friends here :)

I learned all kinds of things about the Roman Catholic franchise that I found myself surrounded by as a child. But what startles me most is that I can't recall meeting a single member of that church before or after that knows even the basics of what they have bought into.

Catholic in name only, they all have just made up their own stories as they go along; mysteriously always making themselves out to be exactly aligned with God's conception of a good person.

So it's a frustrating exercise. Just when you think you might actually get a handle on what it is these people believe they move the goal posts yet again...

13. Science can answer how questions but only religion can answer why questions

Comment #81749 by dsainty on October 25, 2007 at 6:02 am

Science, the search for knowledge, can not only answer "how" questions, it can also help us determine which questions we are in a position to answer. The quest is for truth.

Religion can answer "why" questions because religion, any religion, is unencumbered with concerns of truth. Religion gives answers to the questions science refuses to, because religion deals in the realms of fantasy - where any answer will do, and any answer will be believed.

14. How the Public Resolves Conflicts Between Faith and Science

Comment #70543 by dsainty on September 16, 2007 at 1:37 am

atp/Fedler/Benway: I think what the author means is that people hold that there is no real clash between "science" and "religion", regardless of whether that is a logically inconsistent position or not.

It'd be interesting (but also probably a foregone conclusion) to see whether there is a correlation between ability in solving simple logic problems, and religious conviction.

15. Censoring Sir David

Comment #69712 by dsainty on September 12, 2007 at 10:46 am

I dread to think of the authority of David Attenborough's work being loaned to Creationism...

16. Bush, the ethicist-in-chief

Comment #56129 by dsainty on July 13, 2007 at 11:39 pm

proud atheist USA: That was when the voters didn't know him. In 2004 he was a known quantity, when the voters made an informed decision.

17. Emory Brain Imaging Studies Reveal Biological Basis For Human Cooperation

Comment #54581 by dsainty on July 8, 2007 at 12:16 am

Henri:

Just because morality is subjective does not make it "Faith" in the sense that you use the word here (I.e. tantamount to religion).

It is possible to have a discussion about morals without once making reference to inherent certainties dictated by supernatural beings.

Of course I am an atheist, but a true atheist: one who rejects morality as a faith just as religion. You cannot 'prove' morality.

Surely you do actually hold some moral positions, despite being a true atheist?

You can perhaps prove altruism (as the article suggests), but why is altruism good and not a weakness? That requires faith.

If altruism as a strategy ultimately helps an individual, or perhaps in the long run helps their kin, it's hard to see it as a "weakness". Is it "good"? Perhaps it isn't that either - but it probably is a "strength".

18. I believe that there is no God.

Comment #52748 by dsainty on June 28, 2007 at 1:44 am

I believe there is no god too.

If actual forceful evidence of God existing was found (this isn't going to happen), I would admit I was wrong - that I had held a belief that was wrong.

If a person had never considered nor thought about what it would mean if there were a God, they would also be an atheist. So the definition technically has to be broader than a belief there is no God. But how many people here really fall into that category?

Making the distinction always seemed a bit picky to me.