1. In a Novel Theory of Mental Disorders, Parents' Genes Are in Competition

Comment #283099 by ~manic-depressive on November 13, 2008 at 6:25 am

Cartomancer, PM for you.

2. In a Novel Theory of Mental Disorders, Parents' Genes Are in Competition

Comment #282799 by ~manic-depressive on November 12, 2008 at 6:43 pm

It's not "just a theory", it's just a hypothetical model.

3. 'Child-witches' of Nigeria seek refuge

Comment #281957 by ~manic-depressive on November 11, 2008 at 6:39 am

I'm just reading Carl Sagan's Demon Haunted World so all this sounds sadly familiar.

Michael

4. 'Child-witches' of Nigeria seek refuge

Comment #281531 by ~manic-depressive on November 10, 2008 at 2:39 pm

Not in the least bit surprised. I despise religion for the idiotic and cruel ideas it imposes on the minds of those who know no better.

Where science isn't a candle in the dark, the world is still haunted by demons.

Sam Harris has an interesting piece in his book about witchcraft. To stop any practice it is useful to understand it.

I've fairly sure that if I had stayed in my country of birth, I would have had an exorcism forced upon me by now.

5. The 'Great Debate' in Texas

Comment #281470 by ~manic-depressive on November 10, 2008 at 11:23 am

If it is actually true that Berlinski doesn't believe a word of it, and simply does it for the money, then I've lost all hope for humanity. How could anyone lower themselves that much?

6. Obama will move to veto Bush laws

Comment #281158 by ~manic-depressive on November 9, 2008 at 8:58 pm

I have heard, that Prop 8 had a heavy black vote...

7. Swatting attacks on fruit flies and science

Comment #276072 by ~manic-depressive on November 1, 2008 at 8:02 am

Forgive my ignorance, but what is so great about democracy? Beyond Churchill's comment that it is the worst form of government apart from all the other types, I can't really see that democracy is any sense the "best" form of government.

Something seems to be seriously wrong with a form of government that allows someone like Palin to potentially become Vice-President or even President (if McCain were to die) of the only superpower in the world.

8. 'People say I'm strident'

Comment #273880 by ~manic-depressive on October 29, 2008 at 11:27 am

Before meeting Dawkins, I'd worried that he might be so intellectually impatient as to be crushing. The impression instead is more like that of a lion who has given himself strict instructions to behave like a pussy cat - which is both a relief, and just slightly disappointing.

9. Engineer, Entrepreneur and Philanthropist Hansjorg Wyss Gives $125 Million to Harvard to Create Hansjorg Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering

Comment #262281 by ~manic-depressive on October 8, 2008 at 8:43 am

What an absolutely awesome human being. Making a lot of money is quite commonplace these days, but to give it away to an institution that will use it to help the human race survive... well, it's hard to imagine anything more excellent happening.

10. The rival to the Bible

Comment #261966 by ~manic-depressive on October 7, 2008 at 5:13 pm

"I have read Ehrman's book, "Misquoting Jesus" and recommend it."

Professor Ehrman seems to have this very under-appreciated quality that one might call intellectual integrity.

Unless you're actually interested in the origins of the "Good Book" (as I unfortunately am), I wouldn't waste my time reading Ehrman. It is not that his work isn't important. Thankfully we have people like Prof. Ehrman to show the corruptions of the unholy book. However life is short and for those who have escaped the clutches of biblically based nonsense, little will be served by reading about the bible.

11. Two new fleas are discovered!

Comment #261959 by ~manic-depressive on October 7, 2008 at 5:02 pm

Thanks for the answers to my question! Perhaps a more disturbing question is this: Why SHOULD the average human being care about cosmic truths if they conflict with his or her worldview?

Especially when that worldview is shared by his/her community. Human beings are, after all, social animals. "No man is an island..." It's not easy being shunned by those around you. There are many communities in which one would be in serious danger if one accepted scientific truths.

On an optimistic note, this is exactly why Professor Dawkins's courageous stance is so important. TGD raised consciousness to the fact that it is the dissenter who is better than the sheeple. Moreover, the more people that "come out" as atheists, the easier it will be for those isolated in their own communities.

Now, if only mental illness could be similarly de-stigmatized...

12. Big Bang or Big Bounce?: New Theory on the Universe's Birth

Comment #261950 by ~manic-depressive on October 7, 2008 at 4:52 pm

Hi Laurie, I really have to get around to reading "The Elegant Universe". Unfortunately my reading list keeps piling up!

13. Dawkins: a theologian's perspective

Comment #261949 by ~manic-depressive on October 7, 2008 at 4:50 pm

Is it just me or are there one too many typos in this mess of an essay?

One might be inclined to think that this theologian had to get himself so drunk that he could write this nonsense with a "clean" conscience?

Not that anything a theologian writes is ever clean.

14. Big Bang or Big Bounce?: New Theory on the Universe's Birth

Comment #261935 by ~manic-depressive on October 7, 2008 at 4:34 pm

@Swordmaiden
I really recommend Brian Greene's "The Fabric of the Cosmos". He is both a great physicist and a brilliant communicator. He tries really hard to be understood. With regard to relativity, he explains it with analogy to Bart Simpson on a skateboard travelling near the speed of light. It's just fantastic.

I have been reading books on physics most of my life, though that is not my primary field of interest and Professor Greene's book is superior to work of Davies, Gribbin and definitely Hawking.

This article reminds of the time I wanted so much to be a mathematical physicist, or even just a pure mathematician. As Bertrand Russell said, mathematics has an austere beauty like that of sculpture. Unfortunately I was never a great mathematician nor a great physicist. Oh, with regard to my field of interest... Russell said that in his youth his love of mathematics was the one thing that kept him from suicide.

15. Two new fleas are discovered!

Comment #261803 by ~manic-depressive on October 7, 2008 at 12:03 pm

Can someone please tell me why we think we are winning this war of ideas? As far as I can see, human beings prefer comforting lies to useful truths.

I have to thank people like Nicky Gumble for having once set up such a deceitful caricature of people like Professor Dawkins. When I eventually discovered that Prof. Dawkins was not on an evil agenda to destroy people's hopes but rather a brilliant and passionate teacher who cared about truth, it became obvious to me who was lying.

Still, my question remains... do people actually give a damn about the truth?

16. Debate erupts over proposal to teach creationism in Brunswick schools

Comment #257089 by ~manic-depressive on September 30, 2008 at 3:50 am

"I think the board members are trying to inject their belief in the school system, and that troubles me," Hart said. "As a Christian, I don't think they represent all Christians."

Ah yes, the true Scotsman fallacy. These people aren't the true Christians. The fact that they don't represent all Christians is obvious and would be valid if all Christians did not hold the Bible in some special divine light (and if they didn't somehow manage to convince themselves that despite all evidence to the contrary, their particular god somehow still created life.)

I find it quite amusing that the most reasonable person was the Catholic priest.

17. Creationist Britain (would you Adam and Eve it?)

Comment #250205 by ~manic-depressive on September 19, 2008 at 4:25 am

Is it me, or is it the case that many journalists no longer know how to write? They could be excused if English were not their first language (as is the case with me.)

My understanding is that many journalists have graduated with arts degrees. Does this incline one towards an inability to think and/or write logically or critically? (If the answer is yes, I really don't know why this should be so. Anyone have any ideas?)

18. God, Evolution and Charles Darwin

Comment #249915 by ~manic-depressive on September 18, 2008 at 4:59 pm

One more thing about this theology think-tank: the "I'm an atheist-but" philosopher John N. Gray has recently given a talk for Theos. He says he is unimpressed with the "New Atheists". Maybe he has fallen on hard times and is getting paid well for pandering to the crowd?

(There is a thread about this in the philosophy forum for anyone interested.)

~m-d

19. God, Evolution and Charles Darwin

Comment #249912 by ~manic-depressive on September 18, 2008 at 4:53 pm

"Nick Spencer is director of studies at the public theology think-tank Theos which is conducting, in partnership with the Faraday Institute for Science and Religion a project on evolution."

20. Bolus of nonsense

Comment #246657 by ~manic-depressive on September 12, 2008 at 5:23 pm

I shall extend an invitation to Fuller to join our undergraduates at Birkbeck for a refresher on the Greeks, and he can try this argument again later.

21. Christian Couple Staying Together For Sake Of God

Comment #246653 by ~manic-depressive on September 12, 2008 at 5:04 pm

This is a prime example of Poes law. There really is no way to distinguish this from genuine news.

22. The Origins of the Universe: A Crash Course

Comment #246651 by ~manic-depressive on September 12, 2008 at 4:58 pm

apologies everyone.... that last post was so unconnected to anything anyone has wriotten i'm embarrassed. i''l come back another time after i've reformatted my brain.....

What a clear and concise article - He simplified without making it simple and didn't really patronise the reader.

All science journalists (and a few of Prof. Greene's colleagues around the world) take note, that's how your articles should be written.

23. Origin of the specious

Comment #245983 by ~manic-depressive on September 11, 2008 at 3:53 pm

The ID'ers are correct, god DID design the Human genome and made the intelligence gene recessive.

The truly faithful simply have the dominant version of the gene.

24. Knowledge regained

Comment #245968 by ~manic-depressive on September 11, 2008 at 3:29 pm

The article got off to a good start by referring to Professor Richard Dawkins as, well, "Professor Richard Dawkins".

As for pussy-footing, well maybe you have to talk to children at their level.

"Coochie, coochie coo, you too were made out of *goo, whether you be Muslim, Christian or Jew..."

*goo - the primordial "soup"

Damn, there's something seriously amiss with me today. (Finding it harder to hide the craziness; I'm tired...)

25. Comedian Sabina Guzzanti 'insulted Pope' in poofter devils gag

Comment #245955 by ~manic-depressive on September 11, 2008 at 3:16 pm

I'm not usually so angrily spoken and maybe it's the melancholy speaking... but f*ck the Pope. The Vatican is one of the most openly criminal organizations in the world. It gets away with everything -- child abuse (sexual and mental) genocide (preventing contraception and the spread of AIDS), genocide again (Rwanda), incitement of hatred towards homosexuals, Protestants, non-believers... the list of crimes extends back through history.

Frankly, priestcraft loves suffering; they make their living on it.

You could almost feel sorry for the priestly class -- if humankind were to realize their fraudulence, how would they make any money to feed their illegitimate children?

The Pope doesn't deserve to go to Hell; he needs a decent psychiatrist. Or an exorcist. His choice. B*st*rd.

I have a feeling I'll be editing this post when I'm in a more charitable state of mind.

26. McCain's VP Wants Creationism Taught in School

Comment #239971 by ~manic-depressive on August 30, 2008 at 4:42 pm

Do you think it might make any difference to creationists (i.e. ID believers) if it were pointed out to them what would actually happen if they won politically?

Suppose every bright student in the U.S. was really taught all this nonsense. What if we told the IDists:

"Go on and keep attacking the basis of biology" but don't then expect any development in the medical sciences. Perhaps we could remind them that one day it may very well be their children dying because of antibiotic resistant bacteria and then it will be too late to realize that it was they themselves who screwed it all up.

The Abraham and Isaac story all over again. Don't worry, Yahweh will provide a ram.

27. It's no wonder evangelical atheists need to shout so loud

Comment #238460 by ~manic-depressive on August 28, 2008 at 7:38 am

Well, let's give him a break; he is after all only a professor of political "science". I wonder if he knows what science means.

I've seen a couple of people saying they were going to send letters to the editor, which sounds like a great idea. Thanks to rod-the-farmer for the email. I think I'm also going to send a copy to Mr. Cooper's email address.

28. Religion out of medicine, a new message for Ontario doctors

Comment #232162 by ~manic-depressive on August 17, 2008 at 6:26 pm

"Rene Leiva, a Catholic family doctor in Ottawa, and a former board member of the Canadian Physicians for Life, said if the new rules were adopted it would make it nearly impossible for him to operate in the province."

No shit, sherlock. Sooner the better.

29. Bill Maher hates your (fill in the blank) religion

Comment #227305 by ~manic-depressive on August 9, 2008 at 4:30 pm

Just wanted to echo robotaholic's sentiment which I did not think was the least bit stupid:

As stupid as this sounds, I want to tell you all how mature you sound for even considering the possible hypocrisy of lying to get this movie made in comparison to Expelled - you're all morally superior to christians - and I have yet to hear an objection from a christian for the deceptive tactics of the producers of Expelled-

30. An atheist plays God's advocate

Comment #227289 by ~manic-depressive on August 9, 2008 at 3:52 pm

@Layla Nasreddin

Perhaps [this journalist] could have spent more time filling in HOW it was a good documentary instead of "debunking" the anti-religious bit that wasn't even that prominent, except in [his] head.

31. Camp Offers Training Ground For Little Skeptics

Comment #226750 by ~manic-depressive on August 8, 2008 at 3:14 pm

Teaching children that thinking for themselves, that Skepticism is a virtue --


the "saints" of the Church must be turning in their graves. Poor "Saint" Augustine; poor "Saint" Aquinas and most of all poor "Saint" Paul (no, he was always Saul of Tarsus, the eternal Pharisee).

32. Dawkin 'bout a revolution

Comment #226274 by ~manic-depressive on August 7, 2008 at 8:50 pm

The weirdo in Oxford Street has been walking up and down there for decades!

33. Evangelically Serious Science

Comment #223909 by ~manic-depressive on August 3, 2008 at 5:05 pm

[Prof. Dawkins:] Father Coyne, amazingly, admitted to me that there was literally no good reason at all to believe in God. Of course I promptly asked him why, then, he did believe. His answer was very simple: "I was brought up Catholic."

34. The Boundaries of Belief

Comment #205481 by ~manic-depressive on July 7, 2008 at 11:01 am

Comment #205309 by Steve Zara

... no need to apologise. We post here, and we debate, and we all learn things. I certainly have.

I understand what you are saying ... it is that the kind of free will that religions invoke... that some transcendent non-physical mind can somehow "choose" what to do, and change our brain states, is sheer nonsense.

35. The Boundaries of Belief

Comment #205306 by ~manic-depressive on July 7, 2008 at 3:36 am

I don't think that this is a helpful statement. It suggests that you personally feel that a deep philosophical question has finally been closed.

36. The Boundaries of Belief

Comment #205129 by ~manic-depressive on July 6, 2008 at 4:16 pm

Some fictions are genuinely useful, like money. I have argued elsewhere that the fiction of freewill is useful.

37. The Boundaries of Belief

Comment #205118 by ~manic-depressive on July 6, 2008 at 3:41 pm

The bottom line to see that these are all mental models, systems - tools to be used at one's convenience. There's no point in not believing in god, if it gets you through a dreaded situation. Likewise, there's no reason to keep on believing on one, one the situation has passed. Switching gears is a skill that can be learned. Maybe the people who are experts on this do not come from the professions which consists of safely typing away. I would rather that you'd look for the answers to these questions where they are still relevant - in professions where serious injury or loss of life is a real possibility today.

38. Science is thrilling - except in our schools

Comment #203613 by ~manic-depressive on July 3, 2008 at 8:35 am

What a fantastic article! So much to comment on but I'll stick with this:-

"In the West, we all believe there is one coherent person dominating our brains, directing us as we wander through life. There is You, whole and complete. But we are wrong. The different parts of our brains are locked in a constant electrical war. None of them is in charge. As the neurosphysician Paul Broks puts it: "We are all divided and discontinuous. The mental processes underlying our sense of self �" feelings, thoughts, memories �" are scattered through different zones of the brain. There is no special point of convergence. No cockpit of the soul. No soul-pilot."

This is something we know with enough certainty to be able to say (like we say of evolution): this is true. It is also of such vast significance and if it were not for the monoto-theisms we would have realized a long, long time ago. I found it rather impressive that it wasn't a neuroscientist but a mathematician, the fantastic John Allen Paulos, who pointed to this in the Edge Question for 2006:

"The self is a conceptual chimera

Doubt that a supernatural being exists is banal, but the more radical doubt that we exist, at least as anything more than nominal, marginally integrated entities having convenient labels like "Myrtle" and "Oscar," is my candidate for Dangerous Idea. This is, of course, Hume's idea �" and Buddha's as well �" that the self is an ever-changing collection of beliefs, perceptions, and attitudes, that it is not an essential and persistent entity, but rather a conceptual chimera. If this belief ever became widely and viscerally felt throughout a society �" whether because of advances in neurobiology, cognitive science, philosophical insights, or whatever �" its effects on that society would be incalculable. (Or so this assemblage of beliefs, perceptions, and attitudes sometimes thinks.)"

Indeed, "if this belief ever became widely and viscerally felt... its effects on that society would be incalculable." And just like any belief that faithfully represents reality, the effects would be positive.

39. Former state science director sues over intelligent design e-mail

Comment #203546 by ~manic-depressive on July 3, 2008 at 6:05 am

The tragedy of a nation that fails to educate its citizens is that in its place you have celebrities.

Many of whom are poorly educated themselves, or English Lit majors (humor), and are removed from any semblance of reality. Their self tailored, insulated, fashion driven existence allows them to, in effect, disavow the natural world without consequences...

40. Jesus and Mo on Militant Atheists

Comment #202020 by ~manic-depressive on June 30, 2008 at 3:46 pm

@qomak

Phew, that cruciversary business is too true to be funny... lol.

AND

"Evolution is cleverer than you are."
Orgel's second rule

(I know that's not what your avatar is about, but I just had to take the opportunity to sneak in Orgel!)

http://articles.latimes.com/2007/oct/31/local/me-orgel31

41. Jesus and Mo on Militant Atheists

Comment #202013 by ~manic-depressive on June 30, 2008 at 3:35 pm

Fan-frickin'-tastic. Ah, humour; one of the few respites from drowning in the sea of human ignorance and irrationality... bad mixed metaphor, but what the heck.

42. Trailer for Religulous

Comment #190962 by ~manic-depressive on June 10, 2008 at 2:12 am

I am a little incredulous that atheists expect other atheists to be perfectly rational.

I disagree very much with Maher on the matter of animal testing but what has that got to do with his very sensible approach to religious idiocy?

I, for one, can't wait to see this. I seriously need a dose of comedy. I'm not sure I'd survive without humour.

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

Comment #190953 by ~manic-depressive on June 10, 2008 at 1:53 am

I was half way through that article before I realised it wasn't a brilliant spoof!

Wow! I've read some utter crap from theists over the past couple of years, but that article really takes the piss!

44. Character Attacks: How to Properly Apply the Ad Hominem

Comment #187807 by ~manic-depressive on June 2, 2008 at 5:59 pm

If one's opponent uses trite and facile arguments, it is often much more effective to ridicule him than to answer him, because one implicitly credits arguments with validity by taking them seriously.

Very good point, Cartomancer !

45. We happy hooligans

Comment #185974 by ~manic-depressive on May 29, 2008 at 9:29 am

Thank you MaxD for your reply.

Theologians of this sort though tend to be largely ignored by the traditionally pious.

46. We happy hooligans

Comment #185903 by ~manic-depressive on May 29, 2008 at 3:13 am

You don't know how little I desire to play "God's advocate"; I hope there is at least someone here who won't condemn me before at least listening to my point (I really don't get any pleasure from being outcasted, being of a poetic temperment)...

I am rather glad that theologians like Tillich existed. Let's tell the likes of Alister McGrath to contend with with the likes of Tillich, for whom "God" was something beyond existence and non-existence.

If the theologians want to whittle away the definition of "God" into such obscurity that "God" is nothing more or less than "Ultimate Reality", why not let them? Surely that's far better than the fundamentalist nonsense we hear all-too-much.

My only problem is that theologians of this variety never quite come down from their ivory towers and frankly tell the "average believer" what they really think:

"Ever so sorry, but you're quite wrong in thinking that an anthropomorphic version of God has any credibility whatsoever. Please stop embarrasing us with your simplistic literalism of ancient man-made texts."

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

Comment #185902 by ~manic-depressive on May 29, 2008 at 3:07 am

Please ignore; My apologies for posting in the comments section of the wrong article.

48. Kenya mob reportedly burns 11 'witches'

Comment #184987 by ~manic-depressive on May 26, 2008 at 4:13 pm

Hi Bullet, I too commend you for coming here. As you are 14, and so clearly have enough courage, I will simply ask you to keep seeking the truth. Don't be satisfied with answers that are merely comforting. You have too much courage for that.

(As for the matter of witches, I'm glad you looked up the verse and have thought for yourself. Unfortunately, more questions now arise.

Do witches exist? (The OT presents Yahweh as a god who believes they do.)

How do we determine who is a witch/sorceress or wizard?

What exactly is the NT punishment for such creatures?)

49. Repulsive but right

Comment #184814 by ~manic-depressive on May 26, 2008 at 8:33 am

Just wanted to say that I concur with those who realize that some people need a "rude awakening" (I know I did!) I'm quite impressed when Professor Dawkins gives replies to questions about the comforts of religion with something along the lines of "The first thing to say is that the universe does not owe you hope." I remember how shocking this was to me once -- that the truth may not be something pleasant (but later realized that we are more likely to make life more pleasant if we can accept the fact that the universe is indifferent towards our wishes, hopes and desires.)

"The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference."
-- Richard Dawkins, River Out of Eden: A Darwinian View of Life (1995

50. Repulsive but right

Comment #184544 by ~manic-depressive on May 25, 2008 at 4:32 pm

From the point of view of the religious believer I can see both Professor Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens as coming across as arrogant.

I supposed I am biased in that I have grown a liking to Christopher Hitchens (but then again I was not all that impressed by Professor Dawkins in my days of indoctrination). He comes across both as deeply humane and deeply human. In both his book and in his speech he displays the virtue of someone who really wants to see the end of needless suffering due to idiotic religious beliefs. At the same time, he displays all-too-human failings (e.g. his indulging in alcohol).

"one side is wrong but romantic, while the other is right but (sometimes) repulsive
"

How easy it is for us to sit back and criticize. How easy it is to pronounce judgment. If Mr. Kettle thinks he can do a better job than Christopher Hitchens, by all means Mr. Kettle, please do it; we need all the public freethinkers we can get.