1. WHERE DOES EVOLUTION LEAVE GOD?

Comment #414218 by Cluebot on September 12, 2009 at 8:01 am

So, Karen Armstrong needs God to grasp the wonder of the Universe? I'm sorry to hear she lives under such an impoverishing debilitation; I've found the concept to be highly corrosive to appreciation of the Universe - a belittling distraction.

2. 20 coolest atheist T-shirts for sale on the web

Comment #414210 by Cluebot on September 12, 2009 at 7:37 am

I am also unimpressed. These are a lot better:

http://controversy.wearscience.com/

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

Comment #413301 by Cluebot on September 8, 2009 at 10:42 am

I suspect we would see articles like this regardless of the content under review.

It might be an interesting experiment to send these journalists some ghost written content under Richard's name and see how much of the famous Dawkins "arrogance" they can project onto it.

4. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #397525 by Cluebot on July 17, 2009 at 10:58 am

That introduction is more telling of Robert's character; I wonder how many villains we'd find in his family tree if we looked that many generations back. Wouldn't it be interesting to find out? :)

Richard, how do you keep your temper with these unprincipled hypocrites?

5. MBB 2009 Distinguished Lecture Series

Comment #383341 by Cluebot on May 31, 2009 at 5:25 am

I hear you, mikerpiker - I've already got a share ratio of 5.65 and we still have only one other seed. It seems a number of people are downloading then disconnecting with low share ratios. If any of those douchebags are reading this, come back at once! :P

In stark contrast, the video torrent seems very well seeded. Well done to all concerned! :)

Sorry Ardiem, I don't know of any transcripts - and yes, it was interesting. Subtitle files could be made, but not without volunteers - I'm not doing that alone! Who here can help with such an endeavour, and how many would make use of it?

6. Children of a stupid god

Comment #383289 by Cluebot on May 30, 2009 at 5:38 pm

Re: Comment #383223 by Valjean

Why does this matter? Oh, where to begin...

It matters because provincial religious identities and the close-minded convictions they come with promote xenophobia, prejudice and hate of those who don't share the same ones. It matters because life-long loyalty to these teams is often forged in children, by means of contemptible manipulation techniques. It matters because religion defends itself with, and thus encourages, irrationality and systematic hypocrisy, corrupting every aspect of society. It matters because organised religion puts wealth and political power in the hands of cynical parasites and bigots. It matters because the veneration of myth as ultimate truth motivates pissing in the well of knowledge, eroding the same hard-won enlightenment that exposed religion as the hoax it is. (Quite apart from the aesthetic loss, this is also dangerous - denying us the knowledge we will need to survive and prosper in a dangerous and indifferent universe. To make matters worse, religion also gives us the childish notions that a magic substitute parent will come and save us if we fail, or that the end of days will be one of Glory for True Believers.)

In short, it matters because truth matters, knowledge is precious and theological tribalism is dangerous.

7. MBB 2009 Distinguished Lecture Series

Comment #383244 by Cluebot on May 30, 2009 at 1:50 pm

Thanks streamripper, I'll bear that in mind. I did attempt to upload at Mininova, but the upload page complained I was not logged in so I assumed sign-up was required. Apparently this was due to my cookie settings - nice misleading error message there.

I've now put the audio torrent on Mininova: http://www.mininova.org/tor/2638253

8. MBB 2009 Distinguished Lecture Series

Comment #383063 by Cluebot on May 29, 2009 at 4:50 pm

Here's the resized videos:

http://www.mediafire.com/file/0nymzzjzxnm/MBB 2009 Distinguished Lecture Series (lowres).torrent

Looks like we now have another seeder on the audio files; I'm going to start on this one now.

Yes streamripper, there is a reason: MediaFire didn't insist on making an account to host the torrent file without absurd limitations (like the 10 downloads limit on rapidshare) and I don't fancy the aggravation of setting one up, giving one of my email addresses to another organisation and having to remember yet another login. I used the Pirate Bay's open tracker for similar reasons - public trackers will track unregistered torrents.

9. MBB 2009 Distinguished Lecture Series

Comment #382969 by Cluebot on May 29, 2009 at 10:22 am

I now have all the files. Once they're re-encoded to a more reasonable size I'll be seeding them. Meanwhile, here's a torrent for just the audio:

http://www.mediafire.com/file/y4ryewqmjnz/MBB 2009 Distinguished Lecture Series (audio only).torrent

You'll need a bittorrent client and a modern media player; the files are mp4 containers with the original AAC streams. The tracker is public, so you will not need an account to connect.

10. MBB 2009 Distinguished Lecture Series

Comment #382645 by Cluebot on May 28, 2009 at 2:32 pm

Fascinating. Who would've thought the absence of pareidolia would lead to misunderstanding? ;)

Yes, it's a dog's backside. I don't know if it's been 'shopped as I didn't take it. The fact someone bothered to photograph it at all does suggest it might be real though. All I've done with it is scale and crop for use as an avatar.

11. MBB 2009 Distinguished Lecture Series

Comment #382504 by Cluebot on May 28, 2009 at 8:30 am

I'm guessing from the "LAN" tag in each URL that this was only intended for their local area network, not general release.

12. MBB 2009 Distinguished Lecture Series

Comment #382438 by Cluebot on May 28, 2009 at 7:02 am

Good news: I got a connection for the first file.
Bad news: It's coming down at a mere ~5kb/s.

Torrent going up... oh, in about 2 days at this rate. Let's hope it speeds up.

13. MBB 2009 Distinguished Lecture Series

Comment #382420 by Cluebot on May 28, 2009 at 6:26 am

If early reports be true, these files are a gigabyte each. That's a lot of data to transfer even just once, and I also doubt commenters on this page are the only people trying to download them.

14. MBB 2009 Distinguished Lecture Series

Comment #382416 by Cluebot on May 28, 2009 at 6:15 am

Quicktime isn't the problem. We're the problem. Too many people swamping their server with requests for data.

Like I said, I'd be happy to set up a torrent for distribution, but we have to stop hammering their server for a bit or nobody will be able to see anything. If you're not going to help upload, please disconnect and wait. :)

15. MBB 2009 Distinguished Lecture Series

Comment #382394 by Cluebot on May 28, 2009 at 5:04 am

Seems we killed their media server. I'd be happy to put up a torrent if I can just get a complete copy...

16. Children of a stupid god

Comment #381615 by Cluebot on May 26, 2009 at 12:40 pm

Re: Comment #381577

Valjean, your objection is identical to how believers in every unsubstantiated claim from anti-vax to Zodiac-rules-your-life defend their position. "You can't disprove it!" "Our personal experience supports it!" So what? It's possible to convince yourself of all kinds of madness so long as you're willing to ignore reality.

It is not unreasonable, nor close-minded, to ask for evidence, especially when faced with extraordinary claims. On the contrary, demanding evidence is the only way to remain open minded without becoming gullible.

As for your other straw man, if God can perform Miracles, at least part of his influence exists in physical reality. Such an abdication of the laws of nature would support the existence of a supernatural entity. Well, we're looking. Nothing so far.

If, on the other hand, God is merely a "spiritual" phenomenon then we can agree on something: God exists in the minds of those who believe in Him, and nowhere else. Again, so what? From what I've seen of his influence, I don't want him in mine.

17. YouTube has banned the James Randi Educational Foundation!?!?

Comment #358208 by Cluebot on March 31, 2009 at 7:20 am

Re: Comment #358116 by Decius:

Oh my, Decius, you've given me so much to work with here. Where to begin? Let's start with the ongoing hypocrisy:

I never mentioned insulting Youtube...

More than mentioning it, you actually did it when you called their staff "incompetent twats." Would you take advice or criticism from someone who spoke to you in that way?

I had seen your acknowledgement. Once again, I was only objecting to your stance for inaction, particularly to this.

What stance for inaction? I have not presented any such thing! I am advocating intelligent action, and you've presented yet another straw man.

Previously, I made one specific suggestion for action. I note you haven't even commented on it, let alone made one of your own. How about some constructive thinking, Decius?

Youtube has a history of penalising our side..

Yes, and that's why we should find effective ways to change their stance. Attacking them as an "enemy" has not been effective.

YouTube is a household name, and will likely remain so for the foreseeable future. It's worth fighting to hold this ground against the enemies of reason. Boycotting YouTube doesn't hold anything; what it does is give our real enemies exactly what they want: Us, gone. If hosting the voices of reason causes operational problems they don't want to pay the costs of addressing, YouTube will want us gone too. That is why I call these loosing strategies.

18. YouTube has banned the James Randi Educational Foundation!?!?

Comment #357952 by Cluebot on March 30, 2009 at 6:53 pm

Re: Comment #357909 by vertigo25

The last video uploaded by them in my feed reader is a SNL sketch. It may be that NBC took issue with them.

That makes a lot of sense; I suspect you are right. Just because the creationists are always pulling this kind of stunt doesn't mean others might not try it to shield themselves from embarrassment.

As to whether this is actually a false (DMCA) claim, I was under the impression that international copyright law had fair use exemptions when public value outweighs private interest - e.g. critical review, educational purposes (both of which may apply here) - but then I am no lawyer.

Speaking of Lawyers, I'd bet NBC can afford bigger, scarier ones than the JREF. That shouldn't matter, but you know it does...

Re: Comment #357905 by decius

Decius, your reply assumed I was ignoring the wrongful actions and inaction of YouTube moderators and their indifference to our complaints when in fact I had already acknowledged both in my argument. Make no mistake; you did erect a straw man.

The reasons for the phenomenon of false flagging, false DMCAs etc. are not irrelevant. They are critical. If we lose this battle on YouTube, we can lose it elsewhere and for the same reasons. How else do we solve problems if not by understanding them first?

If you think labelling YouTube's staff as "incompetent twats" is a sufficient explanation and that all we need do is find substitutes, think again. The problem may be a lot more nuanced than that.

The solutions we crave might not be affordable or even feasible, but even if they're both we won't get them implemented on YouTube by boycotting YouTube, insulting YouTube or making a nuisance of ourselves on YouTube. They are losing strategies.

Casting ourselves as victims and then blaming YouTube is not going to seem persuasive from their perspective. No, it alienates the most powerful ally available in that forum - the same ally that creationists and other woo merchants are successfully using to their advantage in this popular media outlet. Think of that: Outwitted by creationists! We really should be ashamed of that, if nothing else.

Don't think that our boycott could blackmail YouTube into obedience either. Our corner of their site is not so great that they cannot live - that is, make a profit - without it.

I also suspect the educated, rational, critical thinking sceptics of our community might be the lowest performing ad clickers on YouTube - I mean, when did you last click on a banner? There is a positive aspect to that of course: When YouTube ignores us we can take it as a complement. ;)

If giving us what we're demanding would cost more than we're worth to them, we won't get our demands from them. More or better moderators, hardware to run more anti-abuse code - it all comes out of the advertising revenue. Ultimately, YouTube legitimately runs the site as a privately owned business. So long as no laws are broken, they have the right to control use as they see fit. We don't have the right to demand anything from them, especially if it is unviable as a business concern.

Yes, it stinks. It's reality though, and you don't change reality by telling it what it should be. What you can do is learn how to negotiate with it.

19. YouTube has banned the James Randi Educational Foundation!?!?

Comment #357903 by Cluebot on March 30, 2009 at 4:27 pm

Re: Comment #357900 by decius
Decius, FYI I have all Thunderf00t's videos saved to disk for referral and have long been doing so; please stop pretending you know anything about me.

For the last time, I am speculating about the reason for the moderators' behaviour and how we should act accordingly. I am not disputing that they make disingenuous or inapt decisions and in fact have stated that they do. For goodness' sake, stop erecting a straw man in my place.

20. YouTube has banned the James Randi Educational Foundation!?!?

Comment #357893 by Cluebot on March 30, 2009 at 4:06 pm

Re: Comment #357887 by decius
Decius, I think you're rather missing my point: The abusers' unreasonable behaviour may be forcing the moderators to be unreasonable just to process all the reports (which, I'll remind you, is the job they're being paid for.)

I'm saying let's not get confused about who the real enemy is, and who you need as an ally to defeat them. Above I've made one proposal that might help make this a reality.

If, as you claim, anyone with "half a brain" could've solved this mess by now, let's hear your solution, in sufficient detail to implement.

21. YouTube has banned the James Randi Educational Foundation!?!?

Comment #357886 by Cluebot on March 30, 2009 at 3:39 pm

It's the official JREF channel that's been suspended, confirmed on the JREF website here:

http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/jref-news/496-problem-with-youtube.html

Misuse of YouTube's feedback systems (e.g. flagging campaigns, false DMCA claims and rating 'bots) to suppress contentious opinions is sadly a common occurrence, though this has to be one of the most respectable and high profile victims yet.

I say we should not place all - or even most - of the blame on YouTube, though. They're the one group of people we need on our side to get the misuse issues fixed, and we can both benefit from achieving that goal. No, blame the jerks who are gaming YouTube's system to remove that annoying cognitive dissonance from their little fantasy world. I doubt any of them ever thought of the trouble they cause for YouTube's staff when they indulge in this pathetic activity.

I suspect their chilling effects go much further than the victims who are silenced. YouTube's community moderators must surely be in despair for having to arbitrate over this nonsense; I can easily imagine all such content pushed out of public view simply because the chaos created by these malcontents is too costly to control.

Don't boycott YouTube. Help it become a better place for us. For a start, we need to persuade them that something as subjective as personal offence is an unworkable criterion for censorship. Just getting that established will help cut through a lot of the unwarranted flagging.

22. Facebook users wage condom campaign against Pope

Comment #356940 by Cluebot on March 28, 2009 at 11:32 am

Big City:
I don't think I understand your point.
Are you saying that the pope believes that promoting condom use is going to increase unsafe sex?

Not my point, his - and yes, that is near enough the claim to be dealt with. He's saying condoms promote a more promiscuous attitude to sex, and hence more opportunities for infection.

My point is we should ask for the evidence and see if it supports the claim. Unfortunately, he's not in the evidence business...

23. Facebook users wage condom campaign against Pope

Comment #356924 by Cluebot on March 28, 2009 at 10:33 am

If I may play devil's advocate for a moment, perhaps we are attacking a straw man? Claiming condoms don't inhibit the transmission of disease during intercourse would of course be an absurdity, but he actually seems to be arguing something else - specifically, that by lowering the perceived risks of intercourse, promoting condom use will increase people's tendency towards promiscuous sex (hence increasing infection opportunities.)

I'm fully aware this is the grotesque "wages of sin" argument in disguise. However, whatever we feel about allowing fear of deadly disease to control people's private lives, we should not conflate that normative question with the objective one: Is the claim true? I, for one, would like to see the evidence for and against a link between promiscuity and condom use.

Having said all this, I'll point out the Pope is also attacking a straw man. The pro-condom health programs he's busy attacking also advocate abstinence - the well-known ABC approach (Abstinence, Be faithful (to one partner,) Condoms.)

24. Happy Birthday Richard Dawkins!

Comment #356122 by Cluebot on March 26, 2009 at 2:02 pm

Happy Birthday, Richard! May you have many more. :)

25. The deification of stupidity

Comment #354043 by Cluebot on March 21, 2009 at 6:25 am

As for the quote from Hitchens (in comment 50 from Beanson), I find "No child's behind left" doesn't flow very well, and suggest "Leave no child's behind" as an alternative. ;)

26. Darwin was right. Up to a point

Comment #340347 by Cluebot on February 14, 2009 at 6:44 am

Unfinished business, eh? It's such a pity all the research scientists have gone home to contemplate other careers now that they've wrongly concluded science has all the answers...

27. For Good Self-Control, Try Getting Religious About It

Comment #310128 by Cluebot on January 1, 2009 at 4:08 am

Essentially, the claim is that improvements in self-discipline are available through the prefabricated value systems and reinforcement rituals of religion. Yes, I think that's probably right - not to mention obvious. The article does suggest that "secular version[s]" might provide similar benefits, though one might think Dr McCullogh isn't aware they already exist and are in use.

The study was devised to answer a specific question about possible benefits of religious practices, hence the pathological effects - advocating unfounded moral decrees, bigotry against non-practitioners, belief in the supernatural, reliance on prayer, etc. - needn't be mentioned. I'd like to hear the journalist explain why they never raised that topic though.

28. Is Yahweh a Moral Monster?

Comment #304339 by Cluebot on December 20, 2008 at 6:35 pm

It's nice to see apologetics is still making an embarrassment of itself. Long may it continue...

29. Religious Ed. rebellion

Comment #304337 by Cluebot on December 20, 2008 at 6:26 pm

Re: Comment #304310 by Fizzle

And they still refuse to give up the ruse of interfaith dialogue. Really, what's the use?

Such tactics may be uncomfortable to those who value intellectual integrity, but if concessions to articles of faith make the initial work more palatable to the faithful, this could be for the best. Eugenie Scott seems to think so, and the NCSE is getting some encouraging results.

30. Religious Ed. rebellion

Comment #304329 by Cluebot on December 20, 2008 at 6:11 pm

Re: Comment #304316 by SpEcImEn128

The Quebec humanist assossiation was trying to get this course removed because it do not say a word about agnostism and insist on the supposition that all religions are peaceful. The course also try to link ethics to religion...

If that's true, I claim their objection is misguided.

Strategically, raising awareness of and knowledge about other faiths is a step in the right direction. We needn't demolish all fallacies at once; it may be a lot easier to be heard when refuting "religion is peaceful" and "religion is the wellspring of ethics" once knowledge of other faiths has done its work exposing the contingent nature of faith.

31. Religious Ed. rebellion

Comment #304314 by Cluebot on December 20, 2008 at 5:33 pm

The religious instruction of parents is not being censored or repudiated, so in what way is "freedom of conscience" threatened by learning the content of other religions? It worries me that the validity of such an easily refuted non-sequitur is not directly challenged in this article.

The only thing under threat from such a course is the parents' assumed authority to suppress their own child's freedom of conscience. That's a right no parent should have, and their desire for it an admission of their profound insecurity of belief.

32. Earth Not Center Of The Universe, Surrounded By 'Dark Energy': Cosmologists Report

Comment #303772 by Cluebot on December 19, 2008 at 11:26 am

Don, the alternate "special place" hypothesis was that we are in the center of a finite void (i.e. a below average density area) within the universe and that the matter outside the void was causing the acceleration.

33. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #303757 by Cluebot on December 19, 2008 at 9:51 am

Re: Comment #303753

Frankus, I too am bewildered by assertions that meaning and value can only be imposed from outside physical reality. The idea that our "soul" has some underlying mechanisms making it all possible does not make it any less real, nor any less valuable. On the contrary, that is why it's real.

Some people want the rabbit hole boarded up, with a big sign reading "No Entry - Magic In Progress." This is the same kind of mentality that leads people to throw money at frauds like Uri Geller because they think there's some "real magic" available.

Actually, that's exactly what the religious are doing in many cases.

34. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #303721 by Cluebot on December 19, 2008 at 6:36 am

Confirming the same problem as decius. Doesn't really bother me though...

35. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #303714 by Cluebot on December 19, 2008 at 6:28 am

Re: Comment #303705

I couldn't agree more, Brian. The evanescence of life and love is part of their value, and the reason we must live the one life we know we have. Spending your waking hours dreaming of some unknowable other life is time wasted.

36. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #303705 by Cluebot on December 19, 2008 at 6:02 am

Re: Comment #303690
Point taken, Brian. I'll discard that part of the hypothesis. He's not quite a "tribe of one" though: We have the quantum consciousness woo-woo from Stuart Hameroff and friends; the "reality isn't real" proposal isn't unique either, though the combination of the two does seem to be rather less common.

Not many people believe the world is the thoughts of a universal mind.

It's not really a new idea though. Al-Ghazali's claim that God is the true cause of every phenomenon is, I think, equivalent. Is there any hard data available on how many Muslims believe this proposition today?

If something like e.g. Leonard Susskind's concept of information as the fundamental "stuff" of the universe was ever fully vindicated, we might need a better definition of "real." That still doesn't lend much credence to the idea of a Universal Mind or Spirit, though. One has to wonder why biology was driven to evolve brains if minds can exist without them. That seems to me a very troubling anomaly for proponents of this idea, yet it seems not to bother them.

Personally, I find the phenomenon of other minds sufficient evidence to disregard solipsism. If the people you know haven't surprised you with some thought you'd never conceive of yourself, you need to find more interesting friends. :)

37. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #303688 by Cluebot on December 19, 2008 at 4:43 am

Brian, I claim this is infantilism expressed as attachment to a particular species of theism. Religions offer the possibility of joining a "tribe" that extends vastly beyond your own social group, merely by professing devotion to it.

The ideology you sign up for in popular religions has become broad by necessity, since growing scepticism would otherwise made them untenable. A side effect of this is even fringe nut jobs can be "in."

DG isn't that far off centre either. The claim that atheists have no moral compass and no means of perceiving meaning in their lives is actually rather common, as can often be observed. The science aspect isn't so unusual either; it reduces to God of The Gaps or Science Is Uncertain, which are very popular lines among the apologists.

38. How can the Earth be so perfectly suited for life by coincidence?

Comment #303684 by Cluebot on December 19, 2008 at 4:28 am

Where did you crib this from, credim?

Also, paragraphs. Use them. :)

39. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #303682 by Cluebot on December 19, 2008 at 4:19 am

Comment #303628 by Goldy on December 19, 2008 at 1:29 am

It's the detachment I find so chilling.

Indeed.

Diacanu attributes this to infantilism, and I do agree that plays a large part. I reckon it's not quite sufficient in itself though. I ask what psychological mechanisms are at work; what exactly is it that is under-developed or, for that matter, under-suppressed?

The devotion to his religious identity, the emotional detachment from fellow humans outside the group defined by that identity, the excuses and diversions when the common ideas of that group are threatened - sounds to me like the signatures of tribal psychology.

The liberal perspective consists of tuning our moral values such that loyalty to group identity, deference to authority and purity are subservient to the primary values of compassion and fairness. This willingness to question authority on its moral utility is both the engine that has driven social improvement and our defence against misplaced devotion to bad institutions.

DG is an example of what happens when, for lack of an effective defence, the pathological memes take over and you become devoted to a rotten institution.

40. New 'Molecular Memory' Only 10 Atoms Thick: Massive Storage Possible

Comment #303481 by Cluebot on December 18, 2008 at 7:11 pm

This story relates to a paper published on November 16 2008:

Electronic two-terminal bistable graphitic memories
Yubao Li, Alexander Sinitskii1 & James M. Tour

Abstract

Transistors are the basis for electronic switching and memory devices as they exhibit extreme reliabilities with on/off ratios of 10^4–10^5, and billions of these three-terminal devices can be fabricated on single planar substrates. On the other hand, two-terminal devices coupled with a nonlinear current–voltage response can be considered as alternatives provided they have large and reliable on/off ratios and that they can be fabricated on a large scale using conventional or easily accessible methods. Here, we report that two-terminal devices consisting of discontinuous 5–10 nm thin films of graphitic sheets grown by chemical vapour deposition on either nanowires or atop planar silicon oxide exhibit enormous and sharp room-temperature bistable current–voltage behaviour possessing stable, rewritable, non-volatile and non-destructive read memories with on/off ratios of up to 10^7 and switching times of up to 1µs (tested limit). A nanoelectromechanical mechanism is proposed for the unusually pronounced switching behaviour in the devices.

Sounds like a newly observed phenomenon.

41. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #303461 by Cluebot on December 18, 2008 at 5:57 pm

Diacanu, I'm with the consensus, but not for the reason you might think.

I'm optimistic that religion can act as a vaccine against religion if minds are properly prepared to resist the initial infection. Hence, I want the amateur faith heads, professional theologians and apologists to keep on going just as they are now.

We know how to defeat all their arguments, but how can future generations be expected to take up this burden without good working examples to learn from? It would be the bitterest pyrrhic victory ever if we were to crush religion only to have it spring up again to blight our descendents. I believe arguing with these folks is a tradition worth preserving.

As a corollary, here's some advice for the pro-religion lobby: The most effective thing you could do for the cause is to shut up and never speak again. Of course, many of you won't ever do that, because then it wouldn't be your delusion that rose up again.

42. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #303444 by Cluebot on December 18, 2008 at 5:31 pm

Cartomancer, I can forgive the initial characterisation of Merry and Pippin as adolescent twits and all the other nonsense for one simple fact: There's no Tom Bombadil.

Apparently, Tom was one of Tolkien's favourite characters. Incredible...

43. What Came Before The Big Bang? Interpreting Asymmetry In Early Universe

Comment #303441 by Cluebot on December 18, 2008 at 5:22 pm

Heh, if the Holy Spirit gets worn down to that we're almost home. All that's left is to figure out how to stop believers conflating theism with deism and all creation myths die.

44. What Came Before The Big Bang? Interpreting Asymmetry In Early Universe

Comment #303430 by Cluebot on December 18, 2008 at 4:56 pm

Re: Comment #303420

AC, if you want some perspective, consider this: Viewed from somewhere else in the Universe, one of the tiny fluctuations in the CBR corresponds to what would become the galaxy that gave you life.

Cosmology is hard partly because the theories themselves are hard to understand, but also because the evidence needed to test all the theories and discriminate the true from the false is hard to acquire. This is why we need to keep building better instruments with which to see the Universe, both at the cosmological and particle physics scales. Glory to the Plank satellite, and its successors. :)

45. What Came Before The Big Bang? Interpreting Asymmetry In Early Universe

Comment #303419 by Cluebot on December 18, 2008 at 4:25 pm

Re: Comment #303417

If I recall correctly, the exact phrase coined by Richard was "middle world".

46. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #303413 by Cluebot on December 18, 2008 at 4:17 pm

Wights, huh? Max, don't let Carto order any soft drinks. http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=JqBa7eay6Fo

47. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #303368 by Cluebot on December 18, 2008 at 3:21 pm

Goldy, that's very christian of you. (runs away!)

Now then Brian, you know the rules about personal attacks. ;)

48. 'Tis the Season To Be Incredulous

Comment #303311 by Cluebot on December 18, 2008 at 2:31 pm

Re: Comment #303282

Let me clarify, root2squared. I mean that atheists can celebrate when we please. Tradition is a bad reason we don't have to follow.

Just remember: It's a hijacked pagan festival anyway. Enjoy the irony.

49. 'Tis the Season To Be Incredulous

Comment #303264 by Cluebot on December 18, 2008 at 1:32 pm

Re: Comment #303258

Why? Tradition.

Don't complain. It means we can celebrate any day we please.

50. New 'Molecular Memory' Only 10 Atoms Thick: Massive Storage Possible

Comment #303259 by Cluebot on December 18, 2008 at 1:29 pm

So, when do we get our graphine transistor super-CPUs? Forget sand, I want to compute with soot! :)