1. Can't Darwin and God get along?

Comment #202378 by dyak on July 1, 2008 at 12:10 pm

"...Steven Jay Gould [isn't] walking around glum all the time..."

Ok, no argument with that part.

As for the rest....

2. Aliens need Christ's redemption, too

Comment #201470 by dyak on June 29, 2008 at 5:42 pm

Imagine a whole bunch of born again aliens slithering around smiling lamely at everyone and praying for you. What if the Mormons get to them first?

3. As the world becomes smaller, the need to understand each other's faith grows

Comment #192807 by dyak on June 14, 2008 at 2:06 am

Good career move for a war criminal.

4. Logical Proof of the Existence of a Divine Creator, Why Atheism is Not Logically Sound

Comment #190556 by dyak on June 9, 2008 at 8:52 am

Great title. Probably one of the best and most clearly worded titles I've ever come across in this debate. Yes indeed. That was a good title. Well done.

5. Male circumcision is a weapon in the sperm wars

Comment #189589 by dyak on June 6, 2008 at 3:07 pm

As Mango, #1, pointed out, this is not an "evolutionary explanation".

No wonder their is so much confusion about what evolution is and how it operates when a theory like this (regardless of its merits) is presented as an "evolutionary explanation" of a behaviour.

The behaviours are clearly cultural rather than inherited or genetically influenced.

--Or have I misunderstood something?

6. Karma comedians

Comment #186770 by dyak on May 31, 2008 at 9:36 am

Actually the world should have reacted to The Secret in the same way as it reacted to Stone.

7. Louisiana's latest creationism bill moves to House floor

Comment #185505 by dyak on May 28, 2008 at 1:37 am

Why don't they go after historians as well? Historians claim the earth is older 6000 years. And archeologists, linguists, anthropologists.....???

8. Mail-boat record 'proves Darwin stole his original ideas from a Welsh scientist'

Comment #184700 by dyak on May 26, 2008 at 1:53 am

"Davies, a former head of factual programmes at BBC Wales" - BBC "factual"? Hahahahaha. Someone from Wales promoting a welsh scientist? Uhuh.

Whatever happened, it was Darwin who spent decades of painstaking research to provide support for the theory. Sealing it up for posthumous publication hardly seems like the act of a ursurper in the struggle for glory.

Maybe I'm being unjust, but I can't help thinking a certain author from the BBC is trying to make a quick buck amplifying an questionable detail about history's most controversial scientist.

9. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #167006 by dyak on April 23, 2008 at 2:34 pm

P.S. TruthID go back to my question on #702, answer it and point out exactly which part of it you think is double talk.

10. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166981 by dyak on April 23, 2008 at 2:23 pm

TruthID see #702 and answer it please.

11. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166979 by dyak on April 23, 2008 at 2:21 pm

TruthID, no scientist would oppose the idea that there might be a creator to life. What would interest them would be if someone bothered to show them some evidence for it. Until then the question remains outside the realm of science, and incidentally, outside the realm of common freaking sense.

You quoted Lipson as saying he had persuasive experimental evidence. What was it, or were you just parroting something you took from some loony website?

12. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166963 by dyak on April 23, 2008 at 2:10 pm

Lipson said that the "experimental evidence" was what made him feel there was a creator. He probably meant "my interpretation of particular experimental evidence" and was probably just blithering and hoping no one would check it out.

If TruthID or any other complete moron wants to use this, they'd better provide the evidence....which of course he won't and can't and will change the subject with another argument from authority which he has probably cribbed from some godfearing website.

13. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166931 by dyak on April 23, 2008 at 1:50 pm

I'm still waiting for ID to outline the experimental evidence for the creation.

Strange. Experimental evidence for God's existence, but he doesn't want to share it. Why ever not?

I guess ID thinks "The Origin of Species" means the origin of all life. Tricky to argue against a book if you haven't read far enough to have understood what the title refers to.

But I digress......Before you go off avoiding everyone else's questions, what exactly is this experimental evidence revealing the activity of a divine creator?

(After you've provided that, I'll be wanting to know how you know he wrote the bible.)

14. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166907 by dyak on April 23, 2008 at 1:37 pm

You ignored my response. What was the experiemental evidence he was referring to?

You can go into detail.

15. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166896 by dyak on April 23, 2008 at 1:31 pm

What "experimental evidence" what he referring to?

16. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165523 by dyak on April 21, 2008 at 2:54 pm

To BillySands (#312) Thank you - even funnier than your one word assessment of that Robertson twit!

Here's a scientific question: can evolutionary biology explain how creationists developed the ability to write without ever having developed the ability to read?

17. Interviews with Richard Dawkins and Michael Shermer

Comment #164208 by dyak on April 19, 2008 at 5:48 pm

Like Jayday, I also found Shermer's tone rather strange. It's as if there's nothing at stake in the issue. He seems completely undisturbed about the fate of science in in his country.

I don't know his work at all, but I can't help but wonder if he is not seeking out a market niche as a "tolerant sceptic" or something.

Also I am sick of hearing Professor Dawkins' "tone" being questioned - is it "good for the campaign" to be so outspoken. Atheism is habitually associated with nazism. I find his responses and general tone articulate, polite, reasonable, open, engaging, and his response to ignorant boorish interviewers is stunningly patient. Any atheist who has a problem with Dawkins' tone is a quisling.

18. Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss

Comment #162435 by dyak on April 17, 2008 at 1:17 am

Re Science education. In Australia & the US - don't know about UK or anywhere else, one really dumb thing science teachers do is get 9 and 10 year old kids to dissect frogs or mice in the name of "science".

Sickening for young kids to see that an animal's life is destroyed just so they can cut it up. The philosophical issues raised are simply ignored. In teacher training one of the first things I learned was classification of bugs etc - by removing them from their habitat, killing them....

Why not start off by encouraging interest in the way creatures live? Doing violence to things is not only violent, it de-emphasises fascination, wonder; science as a way of thinking, observing...

Learning about animal behaviour would be a much more sensible place to start and spend a LOT of time on (dissecting can first be done at university level). And surely a good knowledge of animal behaviour leads naturally into a practical understanding of evolution.

19. Pastor attacks scientist's talk

Comment #154784 by dyak on April 3, 2008 at 5:47 pm

I just registered after looking at this site for quite a while. After reading that this goose reckons he could make a better case for atheism than The God Delusion, I wanted encourage him to have a go.

Please!

And then how about getting a sixth former to write one as well, and we compare them.