1. Science writer Simon Singh wins ruling in chiropractic libel battle

Comment #423987 by shaunfletcher on October 15, 2009 at 7:11 pm

Simon is sticking with his actual original intent which was to use bogus to refer to the treatments directly, and to mean treatments which do not work as claimed. He did not intend to write that the BCA agree they do not work and deliberately lie about it which was the original judge's interpretation.

Its a bit odd to say he should have meant something else because we would like him to have done so because they deserve to be called deliberate liars.. They may well BE that but he didnt set out to call them that. If he had done so then he would indeed have to prove it.

2. Dawkins Inspires Us to Be More Visible in the Community

Comment #423791 by shaunfletcher on October 14, 2009 at 11:12 pm

This, and a thousand other events, articles, books, comments, complaints etc show how completely wrong the likes of mooney or other 'hush richard, we have to be nice to get heard' people are.

If Richard's approach is a failure then please someone explain why he is the single most prominent atheist thinker in the world? The one who everyone talks about, talks to, goes to see, reads, writes about etc etc?

Way to fail. We should all fail so badly ;)

3. Fossil finds extend human story

Comment #420896 by shaunfletcher on October 2, 2009 at 12:01 am

Much warbling about this in the popular press I fear.. along the lines of 'Basis of human evolution changed!' and 'We arent descended from chimps!'

The work is damned interesting though.

4. The Angry Evolutionist

Comment #420645 by shaunfletcher on October 1, 2009 at 5:53 am

"The real gap in RD's Darwinian analysis is not in his take on the Animal Kingdom, but rather how he seems to focus on only evolution starting with multi-cellular eukaryote life. "

Have you considered reading at least SOME of Richard's books before commenting on his analysis? Just a suggestion.

5. Sex abuse rife in other religions, says Vatican

Comment #420088 by shaunfletcher on September 29, 2009 at 8:42 pm

They are PROUD that ONLY 5% of them have been caught and proven to have raped children in their influence? It is reasonable to assume that this 'research' is favourably slanted and only counts those actually tried and proved, which everyone knows is a minority of the actuality, which seems likely to be be well over 10% in that case.

Wow. just wow. anyone else would be horrified and thinking of shutting up the whole fucking shop.

Oh and then to say 'Dont worry, it was only teh gay perverts' got him another few centuries in his hells, should they exist.

6. Who needs theology?

Comment #419885 by shaunfletcher on September 29, 2009 at 4:53 am

I think that the piece by Stackhouse is, perhaps, the single most insane thing that I have read in recent years. I am astonished that an educated person can not only take seriously such preposterous ideas, but speak with such epic hubris and arrogance, and go on to berate and threaten those who do not buy that pile of rubbish.

I am appalled.

7. People with 'no religion' gaining on major denominations

Comment #418250 by shaunfletcher on September 23, 2009 at 8:35 am

"There are no formal criteria for determining what a countries national dish is appart from pure declaration."

Then stop telling people who have lived somewhere all their lives what the regional specialities of their countries are. Silly person.

Also "accepting the consensus of the people who write the books and teach this stuff to students who have to memorize it to pass the class." wha?? You actually think that that is a good reason to accept something?

8. Kirk Cameron has gone too far! But we can stop him.

Comment #416617 by shaunfletcher on September 18, 2009 at 3:54 am

Okay I will add my name to the 'burn the witch' list if they have abridged the book in any meaningful sense. Thanks for that info PZ

9. Kirk Cameron has gone too far! But we can stop him.

Comment #416595 by shaunfletcher on September 18, 2009 at 1:45 am

I actually think this is a very ill conceived strategy. These are students and its by no means inconceivable that they will actually read the book. Once they get through the rest, the first 50 pages of crap will be nothing but a laughable memory

10. Unbelievable: From Atheism to Christian Faith

Comment #415470 by shaunfletcher on September 15, 2009 at 8:01 pm

This fellow (and many others with similiar patterns of behaviour) are very much like Douglas Adams' very apt Electric Monk. Each time the latest belief is 'the one', the true one that will remain with them forev-- oh wait, look, the ground is green not pink, how foolish I was before I learned the true way!

They are unfortunates and probably to be pitied and directed to help not punished or abused I think.

11. 'The Greatest Show on Earth' debuts at #1 on the Sunday Times Bestseller List!

Comment #414782 by shaunfletcher on September 13, 2009 at 10:36 pm

Congratulations.

It would seem strident is now attached without thought or malicious intent by journalists to Richard's name.. it seems to have become a meme. Somewhat ironic I suppose.

12. A skull that rewrites the history of man

Comment #413680 by shaunfletcher on September 9, 2009 at 10:13 pm

There seems to be a hint of both nationalist pride and personal aggrandisement about this one? Or am I being unfair?

13. Forget Design, It's All About Adaptations: Review of The Greatest Show on Earth

Comment #413230 by shaunfletcher on September 8, 2009 at 1:36 am

I actually think the most patronising thing I can imagine is a philosopher saying

'oosa ickle christian ina pew then? oo is? yes its you isnt it you sweet deluded ickle person. Dont you worry about a thing now, mr philosopher will do all the hard thinking for you' (This is essentially how I see the accomodationist position)

Saying 'Well actually I think you are wrong, and I will explain why because I think you are capable of understanding this, but it may require you to concentrate because I think you may not be used to this manner of thinking' is not remotely patronising.

14. Forget Design, It's All About Adaptations: Review of The Greatest Show on Earth

Comment #413192 by shaunfletcher on September 7, 2009 at 10:29 pm

I generally treat anything I would personally find patronising as simply directed at a target with a different starting point of knowledge or comprehension than me.

An author attempting to explain things to a wide target audience (as a book like this manifestly aims to do) needs to provide a range of detail and additional information and assistance for those at the 'lower end' of his audience. Yes that means that X% of the book is irrelevant to someone already familiar with the material or with a solid logical and academic base, but it is better to do that than to provide something obscure to many readers, and thus narrow one's audience by providing an academic paper.

Reading a book as if it was just for you is silly when it is for hundreds of thousands of people.

15. Review of The Greatest Show on Earth

Comment #413187 by shaunfletcher on September 7, 2009 at 10:17 pm

One can only hope that this kind of sniping has the same effect as it did on The God Delusion, and this book proves to be as unpopular and poorly selling as that one ;)

(My copy is on order)

16. Review of a Review

Comment #412747 by shaunfletcher on September 6, 2009 at 12:27 am

Hey every one of these 'articles' sells a few hundred more copies. Keep it coming creo's.

17. How to teach of the facts of life and its origins: Review of 'The Greatest Show on Earth'

Comment #412260 by shaunfletcher on September 3, 2009 at 10:09 pm

I believe Richard has frequently, and eloquently, stated that he considers teaching children about religion from a historical, literary and socialogical perspective to be an essential part of education.

18. The New Yorker takes a swipe at everyone

Comment #410070 by shaunfletcher on August 27, 2009 at 11:05 pm

We should, of course, beware of wasting too much time on these wittering dinner-party intellectuals. The fight is against exactly what these people accuse Richard and his ilk of targeting, which is the mass public view of religion which dominates huge swathes of the world and results in all the inequities, indoctrinations and wickedness we want to eliminate.

The deists and accomodationists are a valid target, but they are a secondary target and it is vital not to let them trick us into wasting all our time and mental 'ammunition' on them.

19. Collins Sets Five Themes for NIH

Comment #407721 by shaunfletcher on August 20, 2009 at 8:14 am

oh Im more than happy to discuss it, but not in terms like 'scientific progress has a certain optimal pace whereby certain discoveries are promulgated through the community' without a large amount of supporting theory or evidence.

This is drivel. Sorry.

20. Collins Sets Five Themes for NIH

Comment #407641 by shaunfletcher on August 20, 2009 at 12:10 am

"I rather subscribe to the notion that more money ultimately yields low quality, high volume research results with low impact. In other words, scientific progress has a certain optimal pace whereby certain discoveries are promulgated through the community, new techniqes adopted, and new technologies utilized. "

But why do you subscribe to this notion? On what rational basis? Is there some actual evidence or theoretical way you think this could work? I mean without either empirical evidence or a theoretical engine this doesnt even rise to the level of a hypothesis, but is merely 3am after the pub talk of the 'no cos listen, right, everyone has a kind of purpose in life, no listen right, Im serious, everything happens for a reason' kind.

I guess you just like the sound of it? I like the sound of actual scientists doing actual research better.

21. Why I Think the New Atheists are a Disaster

Comment #405873 by shaunfletcher on August 15, 2009 at 2:32 am

I wonder if a campaign to the get the dictionary definition of Agnostic changed to:

ag.nos.tic
–noun
1. A religious person who is misrepresenting themselves in order to lend respectability to their arguments.
2. An atheist who does not understand what that word means.
3. An atheist who is scared of appearing confrontational or who wishes to appear smugly superior to other atheists.

Might succeed?

I ask because those are the only three types I have encountered.

22. A scientist who's a Christian asks, 'Are we crazy?'

Comment #404410 by shaunfletcher on August 11, 2009 at 7:45 am

Yes, a little bit crazy. I really do think so. There is a fundamental disconnect from rationality necessary in order to be able to sit on that very high and very sharp fence for long.

23. Elaine Morgan says we evolved from aquatic apes

Comment #401604 by shaunfletcher on August 2, 2009 at 2:08 am

I would note that you have to think about a couple of things before defending this idea and its proponent:

1 - It is not a new idea, and has been pushed for many many years. It was not rejected on sight, it is rejected after many years.

2 - Many serious acedemics spent a lot of time end effort exmining this. Its a sound enough starting point/hypothesis that it got a lot of people interested.

3 - Unfortunately for the hypothesis, that examination did not support it in any serious way. There really isn't anything meaty supporting it, just a hell of a lot of 'sounds nice' stuff.

4 - Apparent 'beauty' or elegance in a hypothesis do not in themselves support that claim. Ever.

5 - When you defend your theory to the death in the face of, and using ridiculous tactics against, countering evidence, you end up being seen as a crank.

24. Atheist bus ads 'pathetic:' Philosopher

Comment #400126 by shaunfletcher on July 28, 2009 at 10:59 am

It's amusing that he manages to be exactly the kind of sneering, arrogant, strident bully that theological wafflers of his stripe invariably claim the dreaded 'new atheists' to be.

25. Ready, aim, miss

Comment #399213 by shaunfletcher on July 23, 2009 at 4:45 pm

The shrinking people thing could well not be actual inheritance at all, simply badly nourished people having less healthy babies, who are then inherently less healthy and have less healthy babies.. eventual size being affected by diet and general health not a fixed inherited characteristic. This would then correct itself over time perhaps as the effect peters out. All without meaningful inheritance taking place.

26. Christian right aims to change history lessons in Texas schools

Comment #398917 by shaunfletcher on July 22, 2009 at 8:34 pm

I think I see it actually..

See if it wasn't for religious repression in europe (of religious people by religious people of other sects) a lot of the colonies would not have come into being, ergo religion is responsible for the founding of those colonies and thus the nation. Without religion to provide that real quality repression you dont get in boring old secular societies people would likely have stayed at home.

Or something ;)

27. The Trouble with the New Atheists: Part II

Comment #398489 by shaunfletcher on July 21, 2009 at 1:56 pm

It's perfectly legitmate to assert that telling the truth may have some bad consequences. It probably will, most things do. People arent very reliable or very predictable and will indeed often use reality to justify (regardless of any actual justification it may or may not provide) their, often illogical or wicked, preconceptions.

However, I plan to go on telling the truth. Telling pretty lies to fool what you perceive as the unwashed masses into behaving how you want is not the way. Not only is it in itself wicked and arrogant, but the aforementioned unreliability means you have no idea how people will respond to your engineered fake reality anway.

28. Church and state clash over equality laws

Comment #397986 by shaunfletcher on July 19, 2009 at 4:25 pm

The sports one has a justification, but its usually the reverse of the one you might think of..

Womens rugby leagues for example can demonstrate a need to be able to not allow the selection of men rather than mens leagues banning the selection of women. In fact the only valid justification mens sports leagues could come up with for banning women is that womens sports leagues need the ban to be reciprocal if they arent to lose the very best players, the couple of percent of women players who can compete with men to the better paying (usually) mens leagues.

Its not ideal but its probably the best solution.

29. RDF TV - Nebraska Vignettes #1 - Show me the intermediate fossils!

Comment #396454 by shaunfletcher on July 14, 2009 at 3:59 pm

Thank you Richard, this is most enjoyable. Cetaceans are, with ring species (which I again have to thank you for introducing me to), such beautifully persuasive and clear examples of evolution in action, right now in the world, that I have found them great material for discussions and debates on the subject.

I have yet to find someone not impressed and interested by either topic.

(Oh, and "Hippopotamuses is correct, as is ignoramuses" is delightfully funny, if a little harsh)

30. Father Ted creators back challenge to the blasphemy bill

Comment #393957 by shaunfletcher on July 6, 2009 at 8:38 pm

'Quite why Buddha has a high-powered rotary cannon I have no idea though... '

Im not entirely sure why that line is so funny but it is. Thank you.

31. New support group Recovering Religionists helps people who leave the church

Comment #387465 by shaunfletcher on June 13, 2009 at 8:26 pm

a life without forgiveness? Really? my experience has been that those without religious ties are far more likely to genuinely be forgiving, instead of parroting the words while holding lifelong grudges.

32. Chiropocalypse

Comment #387017 by shaunfletcher on June 11, 2009 at 3:18 pm

Goldy, I have a feeling I went to the same chiro as you (at the time I had never even heard of chiropracters as anything but back manipulators I must say) when I jinked my back moving something heavy and couldnt bend properly or stand straight. After a couple of visits where the guy (the wimpy one) messed about and mostly tried to sign me up to a long term program, while only slightly improving the pain, I got a bit vexed with him about it still hurting and he put me on the table, did his thing and just fixed it in one go.

I havent been back because I was offended by being given the sales patter for weeks when he could have stopped it hurting any time. But he did fix it I cant deny him that. Fix lasted 3 years too. Noone there talked about anything other than back/neck pain and alignment to be fair to them.

33. Chiropocalypse

Comment #386670 by shaunfletcher on June 10, 2009 at 4:17 pm

Pass friendly welcoming comments like 'Hello there, nice to meet you. Oh and by the way, How do you sleep nights after fleecing all those old ladies you slimy snake oil shilling woo-woo merchant?'

34. Did Chris Mooney tell me to shut up?

Comment #385771 by shaunfletcher on June 7, 2009 at 8:37 pm

'Scientists can also be religious, very good people and perfectly sane in all spheres of public speech.'

They can do this, as long as by 'very good' you dont mean 'honest' as truly religious scientists are lying to someone, even if it is first and foremost themselves. By rationalising away their religion to the point of meaningless abstraction they can probably function as scientists without polluting their work completely, but then sane becomes a debatable term.

35. Did Chris Mooney tell me to shut up?

Comment #385616 by shaunfletcher on June 6, 2009 at 6:26 pm

Another way of looking at this occurs.

There are two potential meaning of 'accommodation' at play here, and that fact is being abused by the religious and by their shills.

There is accommodation between religious and non-religious people in terms of each letting the other live their lives unmolested. This is a realistic thing to ask for, and generally is granted by everyone to varying degrees and with varying intepretations.

Then there is accommodation as it pertains to the value or accuracy of ideas. This is never going to be possible, and asking for it is not reasonable. Broadly the religious seek this and the scientific (except those who cling to religion like Collins and Miller) do not. Those who do seek it couch it in terms of the first kind of accommodation in order to try and get it. They act as if failing to grant the latter is failing to grant the former, and act with outrage. Religious scientists like go along with this because it suits their purposes, and well meaning but mistaken 'nice philosophers' like this Mooney fellow fall into the trap with ease.

36. Did Chris Mooney tell me to shut up?

Comment #385375 by shaunfletcher on June 5, 2009 at 10:24 pm

Whats so sad about this type of person is that they want to be one side of some big debate about accommodationism, as if they can WIN that debate and have those actually busy working against religion's pernicious influence stop doing so.. As if they have a right to say to people like richard, PZ, Christopher 'lets have a debate to decide if you are allowed to continue what you are doing'

Well, there IS no debate, accommodation isnt a position its a tactic and everyone is free to choose their own tactics, push to have those tactics employed by influential organisations, dismiss other tactics, but the two sides are religious thought and scientific thought.

They are, always have been and always will be the two sides in the meaningful debate.

Sitting in the middle saying 'well now can we all not just get along' just means you are an irrelevance to both sides. And guess what? the losing side will (and does) embrace you, pervert your message and use you like the naifs you are.

37. Get a Galileoscope! Hurry!

Comment #384221 by shaunfletcher on June 3, 2009 at 2:25 am

iSharp, your work is.. beautiful.

And to anyone, it does NOT need fancy equipment to see amazing things and to even get some lovely images. Im just starting out with astronomy and photography.. I posesss a second hand 80mm refractor and modified a webcam myself. I havent even got a tracking mount. total equipment cost is equivalent to less than 300 UK pounds. My best image so far is:

moon mar 2009 over auckland

very large version

-not in isharps amazing territory, but really from day one with my first 150 dollar nasty chinese scope someone bought me for christmas Ive been hooked, and this galileoscope is as good as that was.

38. Get a Galileoscope! Hurry!

Comment #383087 by shaunfletcher on May 29, 2009 at 8:21 pm

Just to reassure, this seems to be a HIGHLY respectable project.. Ive heard a lot about it from astronomy groups etc.

39. War room is no place for Bible study

Comment #381852 by shaunfletcher on May 26, 2009 at 10:04 pm

I was sceptical in the extreme at first hearing of this but it has been a BIG noise in the states and with not a word of denial its effectively a given that this is real.

Utterly shocking.

40. Discussion between Richard Dawkins and Paul Davies

Comment #379182 by shaunfletcher on May 20, 2009 at 4:48 pm

Thank you Richard for all the clarifications, and a belated thanks for that chapter in 'Improbable' which I recently completed and found tremendously increased my understanding of these areas.

41. Discussion between Richard Dawkins and Paul Davies

Comment #378841 by shaunfletcher on May 19, 2009 at 3:34 pm

Thanks Steve. I have had a read myself (and even as a casual reader/student have previously heard of some of these things) but have been waiting to hear your rather more informed response.

I have the impression that from my reading that these are interesting (and yes, quite exciting) theories and avenues of research but that WereGryphon is
a: overblowing them both in impact and in certainty (he presents them as facts that Richard should be accepting and propgating)
b: Assuming ignorance of this whole field where what he is likely seeing is that Richard, like many others, is aware of them but not convinced.

Oh and I love the shirt.. Ive been eyeing that one for a while on the site.

Shaun

42. I'm an atheist, OK?

Comment #378395 by shaunfletcher on May 18, 2009 at 2:53 pm

Most agnostics are either atheists who dont want to sound confrontational or atheists who want to be smug about being more 'thoughtful' than others.

Almost noone who declares themself to be agnostic is in any way agnostic

43. Atheists: No God, no reason, just whining

Comment #377979 by shaunfletcher on May 17, 2009 at 1:31 pm

It sounds like someone called Nigel complaining that evceryone he meets is really boring because they are not interested in a really detailed discussion on the 1974 northern region british train timetables.

Boredom is, in this case, a mirror.

44. Rage of reason

Comment #377435 by shaunfletcher on May 15, 2009 at 4:00 pm

Steve, is it not perhaps the case that scientific 'statements' are things that are tested whereas hypotheses, ideas or comments could be things that never get tested? Im reaching here though

To Luis, that is true, but just because one person was right does not in any way imply another is. For every esoteric theory that is right many thousands are nonsense. String theory of course has gone past many more posts than most ideas do, but it still has the potential to not exist outside its own mathematical world.

'They laughed at Galileo you know!'
'Yes and they also laughed at the village idiot'

String theorists are no idiots mind, but they may well be making useful models that are descriptive of some aspects of reality without being in any way true.

45. God delusions cloud a world of wonders

Comment #373068 by shaunfletcher on May 5, 2009 at 1:17 am

Goldy, spot on on the validity of religious claims in this area (I merely mentioned it as a relevant curiosity)

I do think the hypothesis needs some really solid backup though.. there are a number of way to think about the origin of religion and the golden rule 'story' is a neat one that gives possibly too easy a ride to religious people of the 'well its all about being nice REALLY' type.

46. It happened. There is now a Supreme Court vacancy

Comment #373045 by shaunfletcher on May 4, 2009 at 10:52 pm

I would say that 3/5 interpretation is under question by simple mathematics. 59/99 is less than 3/5 therefore no vote

47. God delusions cloud a world of wonders

Comment #373029 by shaunfletcher on May 4, 2009 at 9:20 pm

Its a hypothesis that religion is based in this 'Golden Rule', and nothing more.

That hypothesis is also flatly rejected by most religious belief and contradicted by typical religious scripture and dogma.

48. God delusions cloud a world of wonders

Comment #373005 by shaunfletcher on May 4, 2009 at 7:29 pm

I would interject that from my experience (amongst in theory one of the most moderate religious community in the world, the CofE) the moderate talk is almost exclusively used when talking to outsiders. Inside the cult everyone is quite clear that sinners are hellbound, that such as muslims are probably even worse hellbound, and that atheists are pretty much evil.

The very same sentence will talk of god's all encompassing love and of hateful punishments. There is a sort of dissembling 'oh its a shame these people are not saved and thus are going to hell' thing but its a smug kind of sympathy and there is a real 'hate of others' underlying things.

There is of course a 'modern' progressive arm of religion that has gay priests and the archbish talking in wooly jumpers about niceness.. but its got nothing to do with actual religion as practiced by the mass of its adherents, who generally think of such people as silly intellectuals, and who are far far from modern or moderate.

Ive for one never seen evidence of any religion being better, and many seem much worse.

49. Yasmin Alibhai-Brown: Who'd be female under Islamic law?

Comment #372644 by shaunfletcher on May 3, 2009 at 10:16 pm

It is impossible for most to leave for many many reasons. A few:

No financial independence.
Risk of being killed for shaming by own family.
Forced estrangement from everyone and everything one knows.
Risk of arrest for being indecent/failing to be subservient.
Lack of education in all senses.
Destruction of self esteem and independent thought.
The list would be enormous..

50. PUPILS QUIZ PROFESSOR ON EVOLUTION

Comment #371739 by shaunfletcher on April 30, 2009 at 9:38 pm

My school would have had him speak in a second, and at that age I would have been enthralled too I think.