1. The simple falsehood at the heart of Expelled

Comment #158828 by Burton on April 11, 2008 at 5:03 am

Even if Hitler used Darwins ideas it is hardly Darwins fault. If Hitler allowed only one book to survive the burning and that was his personal copy of the Origin of Species it hardly makes the theory any less true.

Should we blame Newton when we drop something on our toe? Does gravity stop being true because it can hurt you when you step off a cliff?
Should we blame Oppenheimer for Nagasaki? (I think not, me may have made the technology but he didn't push the button).
Should we blame Steven Hawking when the universe runs out of inertia and collapses in on itself killing everything?

The point I am rambling towards here is that physical phenomena cannot be blamed on the people who discovered them, only the people who implement them.

2. Happy Birthday, Richard Dawkins!

Comment #150656 by Burton on March 27, 2008 at 8:21 am

Happy B day, RD.

Keep it up.

3. Secrets of bird flight revealed

Comment #117020 by Burton on January 28, 2008 at 5:15 am

I wonder if a combination of jumping and falling was used.

If wings developed in a few places seperately (they are complex so perhaps unlikely, but they are also very useful...) then one could have been "bottom up" another "top down".

If they developed in only one place then perhaps a tree dwelling reptile that feeds on the ground and needs to get down from the tree and away from predators has double the incentive to evolve wings than just one reason. More so than their ground dwelling contemporaries. Then once in the air they had a monopoly and thrived and mutated and speciated into what we see today.

If someone knows where and when and how often wings evolved please enlighten me...
And pick holes in this hypothesis if it is total rubbish.

4. Borders Tags Atheist Book with 'O Come All Ye Faithless' Cards

Comment #100213 by Burton on December 18, 2007 at 11:42 am

I love this card.

Though I saw it at least a month ago (probably more like 2). Why is it only being bashed now?

I don't know of a single athiest who would object to a nativity scene in a school or other public place. One must return to the eloquence of a preious poster.

Don't get your panties in a twist about it, lighten up.

5. An Open Letter to Richard Dawkins

Comment #97184 by Burton on December 11, 2007 at 3:43 pm

One point that Dawkins made in that debate was that people who do good things do so becasue they are good not because of their religion, "[you can make a list and find as many good athiests as anything else]".

I must say that for the first time I disagree (a bit). Many religious people do good things because they are religious, it can be a force for peace (I happen to think the war outweighs the peace, but that is by the by).
Dawkins appeared to say religious people do good for their own reasons and bad because of religion. It seemed to me a lot like assuming the worst from religion.

I do however agree that athiesm is nice and neutral, we won't do good or bad because of it. Our goodness or badness is defined by us not by what we believe.

I would also like to make mention of the guy who asked if he is abusing his children. I would say "yes".
At best it is feeding kids your personal opinion and omitting everyone else's.
At worst it is deliberate misinformation.
This, to me, constitutes abuse (mild I'll grant you but mild counts).

6. This deadly religious resistance to vaccinations

Comment #97131 by Burton on December 11, 2007 at 1:23 pm

If a patient refused a life saving organ transplant because the only available donor is/was black they would never be taken seriously. It isn't so different from not wanting any transplant at all.

7. This deadly religious resistance to vaccinations

Comment #97129 by Burton on December 11, 2007 at 1:19 pm

This is appalling. It is in a different league to "no blood transfusions 'cos god told me not to" and bombing abortion clinics. They are small scale, this could be global.

Religion leads to death through ignorance.

It should be OK (I think it is but maybe it should be easier) for a doctor or a friend to intervene (ie get medical proxy or something) on behalf of a child whose parents want to cause its death for a religios reason. Or even for a person who wants it for themselves.

If a friend of mine was dying and a blood transfusion they don't want for religios reasons would save them I would probably have a go at taking them to court and trying to force them to accept life saving treatment.