1. Happy Birthday Josh Timonen!

Comment #118768 by CJ on January 31, 2008 at 12:49 am

Happy Birthday Josh

Many thanks for your great work keeping this site up and running!

Regards
Chris

2. The Mix Tape of the Gods

Comment #67982 by CJ on September 5, 2007 at 2:01 pm

Full details of the disk

3. After Blair, Labour MPs opt for 'God Delusion'

Comment #61635 by CJ on August 6, 2007 at 3:48 am

Would an MP admit to reading sloppy romantic novel or a racy sex novel or anything seen detrimental to their public persona? I think it is marvellous that they will admit to reading The God Delusion. Here is a quote from an American member of the forum " I doubt that anyone in the US government would admit to having ever even touched a copy of the book, much less read it."

I would love to see the American sending copies of The God Delusion to their politicians.

4. After Blair, Labour MPs opt for 'God Delusion'

Comment #61601 by CJ on August 6, 2007 at 1:02 am

A discussion thread is also on the forum here it contains a detailed breakdown of the Waterston's survey.

I have just come off the phone with Andy McSmith at The Independent and I can confirm that he was not aware of J Christies efforts to get every MP a copy of TGD which is here at Pledgebank

5. Leading Article: Divine inspiration

Comment #61600 by CJ on August 6, 2007 at 12:41 am

A discussion thread is also on the forum here which also contains a detailed breakdown of the Waterstone's survey.

6. Interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #56974 by CJ on July 18, 2007 at 2:40 am

46. Comment #56934 by PeterK on July 17, 2007 at 10:34 pm

huh? Just what video were you guys watching?

She's a snooty moron.

Well that was a stunningly intellectual contribution to the forum. This "moron" as you so politely refer to her speaks at least four languages. Has dragged herself up from the pits of ignorance and studied for and achieved a doctorate in one of the greatest universities on earth. She was a member of the Dutch parliament. She worked as a translator in schools, prisons and hospitals. She worked as a cleaner and warehouse packer when her fellow Somalia refuges just took all that the Dutch people would pay because she wanted to earn her way.

Read her life story, Infidel, and then criticize her. I suspect you will just feel ashamed at your ill judged comment.

7. Brainwashed children plead to die as martyrs in Red Mosque siege

Comment #54653 by CJ on July 8, 2007 at 11:16 am

4. Comment #54647 by Quetzalcoatl on July 8, 2007 at 11:01 am

And yet, this is the first I have heard of this story.

It's been on the front page of the BBC News since it started.

8. Rats influenced by the kindness of strangers

Comment #54607 by CJ on July 8, 2007 at 6:05 am

In doing so, they provide the first evidence of an unusual form of altruism that appears to violate evolutionary theory.

Ok it's a tiny few paragraphs to work on but genes produce structures and behaviours, the environment does the selection bit. If the environment favours altruistic behaviour, purely in the sense of gene survival, then altruistic behaviour will strengthen over the generations. What this does imply is behavioural flexibility is built into the rat's instinctive repertoire. This implies that at some point altruistic behaviour did improve gene survival chances sufficiently to be retained as a possible behaviour.

So altruism does not violate evolutionary theory because if circumstances dictate that gene survival is improved by altruistic behaviour then altruistic behaviour will become the order of the day.

9. Interview with Dan Dennett on Danish TV

Comment #54427 by CJ on July 7, 2007 at 3:04 am

Thanks to Ben Hope for finding the original and magetoo for the Youtube versions. DD is, as always, just wonderful to watch, he's like the loving old sage of a grand daddy that every child should have. One day I to will try to grow a soup filter like that.

10. Richard Dawkins talks about Darwin and his visit to the Galapagos

Comment #53212 by CJ on June 30, 2007 at 6:12 am

re; 4. Comment #52990 by Bizarro Dawkins on June 28, 2007 at 11:58 pm

It is therefore not rational to believe in an elusive process that has never been observed, nor can be clearly inferred from the evidence.

Sutiabley corrected.

It is therefore not rational to believe in an elusive God that has never been observed, nor can be clearly inferred from the evidence.

Thanks for the usually giggle BD

11. From a Few Genes, Life's Myriad Shapes

Comment #53013 by CJ on June 29, 2007 at 2:23 am

If I have understood this correctly it would appear that so called "toolkit genes" control the development of overall structures in animals e.g. beak length. So beak length changes with a mutation in its controlling toolkit gene. So the mutation is simple at the DNA level but produces a disproportionate effect in beak length. In part of the toolkit gene is encoded beak length = 7mm, a small mutation in this area of the gene would change beak length to any value in the range 0mm to 1km. So this simple and therefore possible mutation can produce significant structural change and then natural selection then comes into play and the bird with the 11mm beak gets to exploit a different food source in the environment better than the 7mm version and speciation starts to occur.

It would appear that there is a balance in gene stability and desirable mutation. The highly stable gene pattern that throws out few mutations eventually gets caught out by environmental changes and becomes extinct. A gene pool with too high a rate of mutation would eventually mutate itself out of existence because it could not breed true. Somewhere between these extremes would be a band of optimal mutation rates where natural selection would operate to produce speciation.
So natural selection would actually militate against complete genetic stability and total genetic chaos, which appears to be exactly what we see around us.

Fascinating stuff!

Of course this is where the faith-heads start chanting "Science got it wrong again, look they've changed their minds!", yet again deliberately missing the point of the scientific method.

12. I believe that there is no God.

Comment #52726 by CJ on June 28, 2007 at 12:06 am

I suppose how you see this article depends on where you sit on the theist/atheist scale posited by Richard Dawkins in The God Delusion. Penn appears to have arrived hard up at the end stop of 7 so anybody who rates themselves lower than this will consider him more extreme to a greater or lesser extent than themselves.

I rate myself 6.99 in my head because I know I can't prove there isn't an elephant in my car's boot, but in my heart I'm with Penn at 7. I agree with him that once you free yourself of that last 0.01 of doubt things just get disproportionately clearer.

So I have a philosophical certainty that God does not exist. How does this make me different from a theist that is philosophical certain that God does exist? Well I have the whole body of human knowledge that shows that nearly every single thing claimed as the specific work of God has an alternative naturalistic explanation that is repeatedly verifiable by thousands of scientist all around the world every day. The theist on the other hand has an ever eroding pile of superstitious assertions based on the uninformed, uneducated political infighting of a bunch of desert tribes.

I'm sorry if it upsets some people but I'm going to behave as a 7 until some demonstrable proof moves me away from that position.

Come on God, do something, do anything to move me back by just 0.01. No? Well I'm not surprised.

One other point, belief is the effect not the cause. Belief can be based on faith or evidence and we all know that faith isn't worth the paper it's written on when it comes to describing reality.

13. His word

Comment #51581 by CJ on June 23, 2007 at 1:47 pm

I thought it was a bit out of character for our pet Jewish football friend. Maybe he'll do a better job when he's finished it. The bit that rankles with me is he got paid for writing this. Money for old rope if you ask me!

14. 'Purity' ring case in High Court

Comment #51279 by CJ on June 22, 2007 at 7:40 am

I bought my kids books on sex education when they were 11 and came across a medical text book with some very graphic colour pictures of the results of STDs. We sat down and studdied this one together. I then noted that "The Blue Book" was regularly trotted out and shown with squeals of horror to the local kids. Worked a treat! If you can harness curiosity then education is self fulfilling.

One thought that crosses my mind is what message does this send about the kids not wearing the ring? Are they to be considered easy or sluts?

15. Create a back-up copy of your immune system

Comment #51270 by CJ on June 22, 2007 at 7:25 am

Re 2. Comment #51236 by jonecc on June 22, 2007 at 3:11 am

So presumably you'll be asking $750 down and $20 a month ;)

It also doesn't say how much it will cost to make use of the collected cells, but at that point they've got you over a barrel. But it does sound sensible.

16. The courage of their convictions

Comment #51036 by CJ on June 21, 2007 at 8:09 am

A marvellous piece of news, I'm grinning from ear to ear!!

It may just be that western European freedom will be the acid that erodes Islam. I for one hope it will be.

17. Rushdie knighted in honours list

Comment #50410 by CJ on June 18, 2007 at 12:06 am

Iran reacts-
a) With polite acknowledgement of the authors skill
b) Calm criticism of honouring a person who has upset you.
c) Like rabid lunatics

Video here

Where you surprised?

18. The Future Forum Presents: Christopher Hitchens and Marvin Olasky

Comment #49909 by CJ on June 14, 2007 at 4:18 am

It was such a pleasure to watch a debate where each person got to have their say without being continually shouted down by the other person or a biased interviewer in love with their own voice.

But Olasky is right Religion doesn't poison everything. That would be a statistical impossibility given the number of religions and the number of people practicing them 24/7. Some good will have happened somewhere. This is why Olasky based his argument on that element of the book. He only has to prove one example that runs contra to the strap line and it shoots CH's arguments down. It's a classic example of using arguments about language and its interpretation to rubbish your opponent. I think on balance Olasky failed because CH didn't sink to that level of argument but stuck to his own major point about the damage religious thinking does.

In the UK the strap line for Christopher's book is "The case against Religion", which would appear to be more appropriate.

It was unfortunate that Olasky did get on hit in without CH giving and adequate rebuttal. It was the comment about the origin of life and the construction of proteins. It was a sham RD wasn't there to field that one; it would have been another floor mopping job.

19. Bengali Translation of The First Chapter of The God Delusion

Comment #49752 by CJ on June 13, 2007 at 8:42 am

4. Comment #49736 by PeterK on June 13, 2007 at 7:37 am

If not already done, TGD should be translated into Arabic and copies by the millions air dropped over the entire Muslim world...for a start.

Great idea, but I wouldn't give a plugged nickel for RD's life after that.
By the way anybody what is a plugged nickel?

20. Bengali Translation of The First Chapter of The God Delusion

Comment #49750 by CJ on June 13, 2007 at 8:36 am

It could of course be translated into much simpler language, Bible Belt American (BBA).

Big man in sky does not exist!

There you go, all done!

Unfortunately one gets the feeling from some of the posts around here that the BBA translation has about as much chance of making a difference as the original ;-)

21. A Compass That Can Clash With Modern Life

Comment #49748 by CJ on June 13, 2007 at 8:12 am

Cast your mind back (if you're old enough) to Star Trek with Spock, Kirk and Scotty. I recall an episode where they were facing an all powerful alien probe called Nomad. They confused it with an illogical conundrum so they could destroy it. I seem to recall they took the entire episode to figure this out, they obviously didn't have access to this rich source of stupidity.

AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

22. The Great Mutator

Comment #49692 by CJ on June 13, 2007 at 2:00 am

This article was aimed specifically at refuting Behe's book. A little while ago Jerry did a general ID killer article which can be found here. It is also extremly interesting and insightful.

23. Religion - our maelstrom of ignorance

Comment #49548 by CJ on June 12, 2007 at 10:56 am

There are lies, damned lies and statistics.

The chart that correlates the belief in evolution to church attendance looks to me like a classic mis-juxtaposition of two variables. There is a third factor related to both church attendance and belief in evolution that is not shown but is related to both. What I would like to have seen is the level and nature of the education and specifically the scientific education of the respondents and factored this into the equation.

Why is the chart a problem? Because, in my opinion, it fails to explain what is really happening. If you take the chart at face value if you stopped people attending church they would start to believe in evolution, conversely if you make people go to church they would stop believing in evolution.

While I like the results I really don't think they are much more than numbers for news sound-bite production.

Politicians use statistics in the same way a drunk uses a lamp post, for support rather than illumination.

24. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #49545 by CJ on June 12, 2007 at 10:51 am

The question of morality pops up again in the article. A little while ago I posted this thread in the Faith & Religion forum called The Five Bases of Morality. If you are new to the site it may be of interest.

25. Majority of Republicans Doubt Theory of Evolution

Comment #49539 by CJ on June 12, 2007 at 10:25 am

There are lies, damned lies and statistics.

The chart that correlates the belief in evolution to church attendance looks to me like a classic mis-juxtaposition of two variables. There is a third factor related to both church attendance and belief in evolution that is not shown but is related to both. What I would like to have seen is the level and nature of the education and specifically the scientific education of the respondents and factored this into the equation.

Why is the chart a problem? Because, in my opinion, it fails to explain what is really happening. If you take the chart at face value if you stopped people attending church they would start to believe in evolution, conversely if you make people go to church they would stop believing in evolution.

While I like the results I really don't think they are much more than numbers for news sound-bite production.

Politicians use statistics in the same way a drunk uses a lamp post, for support rather than illumination.

26. The Benny Hinn Report

Comment #49338 by CJ on June 11, 2007 at 2:42 pm

Christianity has exploited the fear of illness, disease and death for 2 millennia. As a religion it is expert in exploitation, corruption and fraud. But being a religion it is above human law. This is a sickening example of the depths to which religiously inspired morality will go if left unchallenged. If Benny Hinn hadn't stood in front of a cross he would be locked up as insane. So in the land of the free and the home of the brave it has come to this. He makes the average mugger look like a saint. Apparently there are 400,000 people in American jails for using recreational drugs. Can't you just do a straight swap for one of these? Hinn's is a drug baron par excellence but obviously he's peddling the right sort of ecstasy.

27. Tome truths

Comment #49309 by CJ on June 11, 2007 at 12:57 pm

Perhaps that squeaking is the opening chord of a music of hope for a world too long oppressed by the superstitions of its infancy, too long forced to live whole litanies of lies, too wounded and wearied by the violence and hatred that they have loaded upon it. If so, it would be a sweet music indeed.

As long as the net movement is from superstition to rationalism then we will succeed. It might take centuries, but at some point our ancestors will look back and give thanks to the likes of those mentioned above and A C Grayling and every person who stands up and says no to dogma, ignorance and superstition. It's up to us folks nobody else is going to do it.

28. Religion and Child Abuse

Comment #49280 by CJ on June 11, 2007 at 10:31 am

Re 8. Comment #47538 by Bizarro Dawkins on June 4, 2007 at 11:05 pm

God forbid that any government ever tells me what to teach my own children.

Osama Bin Laden agrees with you, he really, really agrees with you. He agrees with you so much that he would take his un-civilianized AK-47 and blow away you, your kids and wife and the rest of your congregation and country, because Allah told him to. So don't pray for religious intolerance because you just might get it and when you do you had better be so sure that God's name isn't Allah because if it is YOU ARE GOING TO HELL because you are no Muslim. The No1 religion on Earth is Islam, get over it!
Have a nice delusion Bizarro ;-)

29. Dobson and John MacArthur fantasize about the downfall of America

Comment #49233 by CJ on June 11, 2007 at 5:04 am

His diatribe slowed down about the point he mentioned God destroying a city in America. Did New Orleans cross his mind? If so was he a) Shocked he might be right or b) About to make the link himself and though better of it because of the problems that inference has caused to others of his ilk or c) Something else?

Answers on a post card to:-
God/Allah/etc.
Co Heaven/Paradise/Hell
Third star to the left and on till morning.

30. Evolution: God as Genetic Engineer

Comment #49231 by CJ on June 11, 2007 at 4:48 am

10. Comment #49187 by severnaya on June 10, 2007 at 11:52 pm

Personally, I think that challenges on scientific grounds to Darwinism from religious believers should be welcomed so that they can be shown to be wrong in the light of reason and evidence. Such a dialog is in the nature of science and more fruitful than trying to argue with those who rely on revelation as their authority. Any scientific theory which survives such challenges is the stronger for doing so. For this alone, even though I may completely disagree with Michael Behe, I am grateful for how he chooses to exercise his academic freedom.

I don't disagree with the sentiments of your post and I have myself encouraged some of the more idiotic faith-heads we see here sometimes to continue posting just so we can get some turkey shooting practice.

If Behe had submitted work to a scientific paper for a proper peer review process his work would have been ripped to shreds. As it is he has bypassed the processes of the scientific method but still claims the results to be scientifically valid. He is a charlatan, conman and flim-flam artist who is exploiting the gullibility of the American people to line his own pockets and sod the consequences to individuals or America as a whole. By attempting to discredit evolution he is actually discrediting science and that I'm afraid should not be tolerated. This man is a liar and a fraudster and if possible should be sued for libelling the scientific method.

31. In Saudi Arabia, a view from behind the veil

Comment #48377 by CJ on June 7, 2007 at 4:06 pm

Rememeber that if hardcore Saudi Muslims get their way the whole world would end up like that, forever.

If this article worried you and you have yet to read The End of Faith by Sam Harris don't, it'll scare the living crap out of you!

This is good, in a totally related article this female reporter explains what it is like for women who want to swim in Saudi

32. Scopes Two

Comment #48228 by CJ on June 7, 2007 at 6:09 am

_J_ wrote

Can everyone else see these videos? I'd just like some confirmation that I'm not actually going mad.

Unfortunatly I can see them to, so hopefully that does not make us both delusional.

It really goes to show that whatever politicians are, they are first and foremost, vote whores.

33. Sen. Clinton: Faith got me through marital strife

Comment #47907 by CJ on June 6, 2007 at 2:36 am

Faith. Guiding our Votes
Is it only me or is the banner heading creepy? Any politician who stood in front of a banner like that in mainland UK would be politely treated like a mostly harmless misguided nutter. It's the ingrained acceptance of the god delusion in the USA that I have the greatest difficulty in understanding. I suppose I'm just fortunate that I haven't been subjected to a lifetime of propaganda. That some of these people can get to the point of sitting in the White House is utterly absurd. Personally I think Hillary is the least worst candidate in part because at the end of the day she stuck by Billy boy when all around were baying for his blood.

34. My Road to Atheism, What Took Me So Long and The Aftermath

Comment #47802 by CJ on June 5, 2007 at 2:50 pm

I, like some others here, have found atheism to be the normal state of existence. I really have no common ground for the experiences described by carnitine. None the less I find it immensely encouraging that somebody pervaded so deeply by any religion can find the strength, determination and sheer intellectual integrity to make such fundamental changes to their view of the world. To make such a change must be very traumatic, but this story should give others hope and encouragement to move out from under the cloud of religious dogma into the light of reason.

35. 6 Billion Bits of Data About Me, Me, Me!

Comment #47638 by CJ on June 5, 2007 at 5:42 am

Personally I've never been quite sure what is wrong with the concept of doing the best one can to elliminate abnormalities and propensities for disease.

While I basically agree with this there is a huge element of luck involved. For example cystic fibrosis, a genetically inherited illness, is caused when both the mother and father carry the gene for it and both pass it on to a child. But if one parent passes the gene on the illness is not carried forward, so it would appear simple to engineer out the effected gene. However possession of a single gene gives immunity from typhoid. There was also an old wife's tale that salty babies don't live more than a couple of years. Well it transpires that children with cystic fibrosis have excessively salty sweat.

There is a similar situation with sickle cell anaemia and malaria where a single gene gives protection from the malaria parasite.

The genetic code of all creatures is the result of natural selection not design as we continually have to state. Sorry if I'm preaching to the choir here. This means that there is a lattice work of support within our genome. Modifying this evolved lattice could, in my opinion probably would, result in unforeseen effects. The catch 22 is that to find out which elements of the lattice do what you have to modify the lattice but by attempting that modification you risk unwanted results. These unpredictable results may be acceptable if say mice are the subject but could we ever continue the experimentation into the human genome? I think that would be a very serious ethical question.

36. Man to die over insult

Comment #47214 by CJ on June 3, 2007 at 2:18 pm

Just picked this up from here http://www.assistnews.net/Stories/2007/s07060009.htm

Friday, June 1, 2007
Pakistani Christian sentenced to death for blasphemy
By Michael Ireland
Chief Correspondent, ASSIST News Service
LAHORE, PAKISTAN (ANS) -- A Pakistani Christian, Younis Masih, has been sentenced to death for blasphemy by the sessions court in Lahore.
According to sources in Pakistan, following the sentencing on May 30, a large mob led by Islamic clerics responded by shouting slogans against Younis Masih and threatening anyone involved in providing security or legal assistance to "blasphemers."

Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW) says Mr Masih, a Christian from Chungi Amar Sadu in Lahore, was charged on September 10, 2005 under Section 295C of the Pakistan Penal Code. Section 295C relates to blasphemy against the Prophet Mohammed and carries the death penalty. Although no one has yet been executed by the State for blasphemy, several have been murdered by extremists. He has been held in Kot Lakhpat prison since September 11, 2005, where he faces regular threats to his security.

CSW says Pakistan's blasphemy laws are regularly misused as a means of settling scores or targeting religious minorities. Although Younis Masih will now appeal against the sentence in the High Court, he faces death threats from extremists even while he remains in jail.
The human rights organization says that Section 295C of the Pakistan Penal Code, which relates to blasphemy against the Prophet Mohammed, was introduced in 1986 by the then ruler of Pakistan, General Zia ul-Haq. Section 295B, relating to desecration of the Koran, was introduced in 1982.
The blasphemy laws require simply an accusation by one man against another for a case to be filed. In almost all cases the charges are entirely fabricated. Younis Masih was outspoken against incidents of rape committed against Christian girls, and is a Christian himself. It is believed these were the reasons he was accused of blasphemy.

Group Captain (Rtd) Cecil Chaudhry, Executive Secretary of the All Pakistan Minorities Alliance (APMA) and one of Pakistan's leading human rights activists, said: "This judgment in the case of Younis Masih is an example of the blatant abuse of the blasphemy laws. The laws require absolutely no evidence, and no proof of intent, and as such they are a tool in the hands of extremists to threaten and destroy the lives of anyone they disagree with.

"In addition, the judiciary is threatened and is therefore unable to provide a fair trial. Furthermore, the safety of the accused, and of the lawyers defending them, is under constant threat. Younis Masih faces severe danger in jail. It is imperative that the international community raises this case with the Pakistani authorities as a matter of urgency to ensure that Younis Masih, and others like him, receive proper protection and a fair appeals process. Ultimately, this unjust law which is so open to abuse must be repealed."

Stuart Windsor, National Director of Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW), said: "We are so saddened and deeply concerned to hear that Younis Masih has been sentenced to death. We will do all we can to raise his case with the Pakistani authorities and the international community. This is a blatant miscarriage of justice and the world should not stand by while an innocent man faces death."

CSW is a human rights organization which specializes in religious freedom, works on behalf of those persecuted for their Christian beliefs and promotes religious liberty for all.
For more information, please contact Penny Hollings, Campaigns and Media Manager at Christian Solidarity Worldwide on +44 (0)20 8329 0045, email pennyhollings@csw.org.uk or visit www.csw.org.uk.

37. Man to die over insult

Comment #47197 by CJ on June 3, 2007 at 12:31 pm

Re: 47. Comment #47192 by insurance25844 on June 3, 2007 at 12:07 pm

I don't mean to flame or troll, but what I see is one set of religious freaks killing other religious freaks; why do we care again?

I must say to my shame I did think the same thing at one point. Then I remembered that all the people here, Muslim and Christian, are people just like us but unlucky enough to have been born in a different place. They are all victims of dogmatic, superstitions creeds. Then it gave me a warm happy feeling that us evil atheists are pitching-in to try to make a difference for a fellow human being in trouble, regardless of his race, colour or creed.

38. Man to die over insult

Comment #47166 by CJ on June 3, 2007 at 9:28 am

Here are the details of the most senior official of the Pakistan government in the UK.

Dr. Maleeha Lodhi
High Commissioner
Pakistan High Commission

Taken from http://www.pakmission-uk.gov.pk/HC/Usefulcontacts.asp

Their email is info@phclondon.org

Email just sent

To Dr. Maleeha Lodhi
Regarding the potential death sentence for blasphemy of a Christian man Younis Masih.

Dear Dr Lodhi

I would like to draw your attention to this article http://www.dailyherald.com/search/searchstory.asp?id=319066

I would appreciate a response as to the validity of the article and your thoughts on the likely outcome of the trial.

Regards
etc

Now we wait.

[Edit]

This makes interesting reading from the Pakistni High Commission website.

Pakistan is key partner to promote global inter-faith harmony

Pakistan's envoy to Britain, Dr. Maleeha Lodhi has said that Pakistan is the international community's "indispensable partner" in the key global enterprise to establish interfaith understanding and harmony.

She was speaking to a multicultural audience in Leicester to mark Pakistan Day and the 60th year of the country's independence. The event, organized by the Muslim Forum at the Community Resource Centre, was attended by the Lord Mayor, MPs and Councillors.

Dr. Lodhi said that Leicester has been judged to be among Europe's most successful multicultural cities, characterized as a role model for cultural diversity and cohesion. She congratulated the local leaders for an achievement that she said should be emulated to promote inter-civilizational cooperation.

Pakistan's High Commissioner said that in the wake of the earthquake in Pakistan and Azad Kashmir over a year ago, we saw a spectacular demonstration of the human spirit to help those in distress. The extraordinary response to the tragedy underlined that human compassion transcended faith, ethnicity or nationality.

Recalling the genesis of Pakistan, Dr. Lodhi said that among the important things that the Quaid-e-Azam emphasized for the new nation were education, the equal participation of women and achieving economic viability and progress.

She then cited the significant gains the country had made to translate this vision into reality. However, much she said, remains to be done.

She pointed out that the greatest challenge now was to distribute the gains of high economic growth registered in the past four years to the people. In this regard, she explained, a dent had been made in reducing poverty, but the numbers were still unacceptable and needed to be changed by a concerted and sustained attack on poverty.

She also detailed the political reforms undertaken in recent years including those that had given record representation to women at the national, regional and local levels.

Dr. Lodhi also underscored Pakistan's role in promoting international peace and stability. This is reflected in the fact that today Pakistan is the world's largest contributing nation to UN peacekeeping forces.

London

April 2, 2007

39. TB and the Question of Evolution

Comment #46944 by CJ on June 2, 2007 at 10:30 am

One of the oft trotted out arguments against the "theory" of evolution is that "You can't see it in the lab or do experiments on it". Well that would now appear not to be the case. Bookmark this article for future use. It's just rather unfortunate that so many people have already died and will continue to die as a result of the lack of respect for the scientific method and one of its most important results.

40. What I Think About Evolution

Comment #46563 by CJ on May 31, 2007 at 4:41 pm

It's 00:29 in the morning in the UK when I finished reading this. I've just come in from a great night out with some old mates I haven't seen for years. Had skin full of beer and then I made the mistake of logging on. Oh my fucking God! What the hell is this guy on? The idiocy is just stunning. How can such an asshole even get airtime as a presidential candidate, it utterly beggars' the mind! I knew more about evolution and the use and role of science when I was 14 and that's 33 years ago. Well I'll leave now and answer properly when sober tomorrow, good night/ good morning as appropriate :-)




[Edit]

Well its 8:24 now so good morning from this time zone, I'm now sober with a 4/10 hangover, you know not so much painful as muzzy headed. Read the article again and yep it's still a pile of poo!

Ok so what would I say to this guy if he had a brain worth engaging with? Well let's get a definition in first. Faith as used in this contest I take to mean blind religious faith not the rational faith one can have in the scientific method with its demonstrably effective processes, checks and balances.

In our sound-bite political culture, it is unrealistic to expect that every complicated issue will be addressed with the nuance or subtlety it deserves. So I suppose I should not have been surprised earlier this month when, during the first Republican presidential debate, the candidates on stage were asked to raise their hands if they did not "believe" in evolution. As one of those who raised his hand, I think it would be helpful to discuss the issue in a bit more detail and with the seriousness it demands.

I agree with this bit in that media dumbing down doesn't help to bring true understanding of any subject.

The premise behind the question seems to be that if one does not unhesitatingly assert belief in evolution, then one must necessarily believe that God created the world and everything in it in six 24-hour days.

The premise here is did God do it or not. If you invoke God then the time and method become irrelevant because God is the ultimate trump card and excuses any scientifically invalid proposition.

But limiting this question to a stark choice between evolution and creationism does a disservice to the complexity of the interaction between science, faith and reason.

There is no complexity in the relationship between science, faith and reason. If you subscribe to faith you deny reason and as reason is the foundation of science you consequently deny science. Belief in science or faith is mutually exclusive. I know there are people who do straddle this fence but I along with RD see them as, to a greater or lesser extent, deluded. For some personal reason they must feel they have to live in this strange state of limbo to reconcile some fundamental fear of a godless reality.


The heart of the issue is that we cannot drive a wedge between faith and reason. I believe wholeheartedly that there cannot be any contradiction between the two.

As already said faith and reason are mutually exclusive positions so in reality are completely separate anyway. The contradiction is built into the very fabric of the language for everyone to see.

The scientific method, based on reason, seeks to discover truths about the nature of the created order and how it operates, whereas faith deals with spiritual truths. The truths of science and faith are complementary: they deal with very different questions, but they do not contradict each other because the spiritual order and the material order were created by the same God.

Again the delusion (trump card) of God is played to excuse the irrationality of religion faith. Spiritual truth in the sense of explaining demonstrable reality is an oxymoron. Sam Harris tackles the effect of altered perceptual states interpreted as spirituality in The End of Faith. He argues that the human mind can expand into irrational states which could be interpreted as spiritual in the superstitious sense. However as our mind was created by evolution this superstitions spirituality is no more god given than anything else about us.

People of faith should be rational, using the gift of reason that God has given us.

Dumbstruck by the sheer asinine stupidity of this statement.

At the same time, reason itself cannot answer every question.

I'll concede this as technical truth on the basis that we can probably never test every possible question. However I do not agree that reason could not answer every question accurately, because all correct answers have to be, be definition reasonable. That is the definition of a correct answer, that which is reasonable.

Faith seeks to purify reason so that we might be able to see more clearly, not less.

Does the phrase; superstition "seeks to purify reason so that we might be able to see more clearly, not less." have any validity? No? I though not. Again the false balance of faith and reason appears.

Faith supplements the scientific method by providing an understanding of values, meaning and purpose.

This is another example of attempting to infer some sort of argumentative equality between faith and reason. He appears to be just using his own sound-bite over and over again to make his audience believe there is some justifiable linkage.

More than that, faith — not science — can help us understand the breadth of human suffering or the depth of human love. Faith and science should go together, not be driven apart.

He repeats same false arguments again and again to infer an argumentative equality between faith and reason.

The question of evolution goes to the heart of this issue. If belief in evolution means simply assenting to microevolution, small changes over time within a species, I am happy to say, as I have in the past, that I believe it to be true. If, on the other hand, it means assenting to an exclusively materialistic, deterministic vision of the world that holds no place for a guiding intelligence, then I reject it.

This is the paragraph that sums up this man's true feelings and why he held his hand up, the rest is just smoke and mirrors intended to hide his real world view.

There is no one single theory of evolution, as proponents of punctuated equilibrium and classical Darwinism continue to feud today.

He is attempting to discredit the science behind evolution by exploiting negligible peripheral arguments that are part and parcel of the scientific process. RD answers this one in detail in The Blind Watchmaker.

Many questions raised by evolutionary theory — like whether man has a unique place in the world or is merely the chance product of random mutations — go beyond empirical science and are better addressed in the realm of philosophy or theology.

Yet again an example of an attempt to create an untouchable "safe haven" for superstition, required because of the irrational claims of faith.

The most passionate advocates of evolutionary theory offer a vision of man as a kind of historical accident. That being the case, many believers — myself included — reject arguments for evolution that dismiss the possibility of divine causality.

Well that is what we are, the result of aeons of natural selection that spawned and destroyed countless species of which we are but one. If he can't cope with that reality he will squirm and obfuscate all he can to deny that reality which is precisely what he is doing.

Ultimately, on the question of the origins of the universe, I am happy to let the facts speak for themselves. There are aspects of evolutionary biology that reveal a great deal about the nature of the world, like the small changes that take place within a species. Yet I believe, as do many biologists and people of faith, that the process of creation — and indeed life today — is sustained by the hand of God in a manner known fully only to him.

99% creationist with a 1% concession to evolution forced out him to give him a pitiful place to hide when pinned down by the original question; "were asked to raise their hands if they did not "believe" in evolution."

It does not strike me as anti-science or anti-reason to question the philosophical presuppositions behind theories offered by scientists who, in excluding the possibility of design or purpose, venture far beyond their realm of empirical science.

Nothing, not one thing, is beyond the remit of scientific study. The methods must be ethical but given that caveat there is no forbidden ground.

Biologists will have their debates about man's origins, but people of faith can also bring a great deal to the table. For this reason, I oppose the exclusion of either faith or reason from the discussion. An attempt by either to seek a monopoly on these questions would be wrong-headed. As science continues to explore the details of man's origin, faith can do its part as well.

Biology explains faith not the other way around.

Biologists The fundamental question for me is how these theories affect our understanding of the human person.

Presumably so he can better exploit his audience's gullibility.

The unique and special place of each and every person in creation is a fundamental truth that must be safeguarded. I am wary of any theory that seeks to undermine man's essential dignity and unique and intended place in the cosmos. I firmly believe that each human person, regardless of circumstance, was willed into being and made for a purpose.

This demonstrates his desire for a hierarchy in existence that justifies his desire to rule other people, to have his opinion weigh more in the balance of discussion than that of others.

While no stone should be left unturned in seeking to discover the nature of man's origins, we can say with conviction that we know with certainty at least part of the outcome. Man was not an accident and reflects an image and likeness unique in the created order. Those aspects of evolutionary theory compatible with this truth are a welcome addition to human knowledge. Aspects of these theories that undermine this truth, however, should be firmly rejected as an atheistic theology posing as science.

Without hesitation, I am happy to raise my hand to that.

When all is said and done, however this man tries to hide behind a facade of reasonable argument, he is a superstitious creationist pure and simple.

Sam Brownback is a Republican senator from Kansas.

This man is a scar on the face of America, a blight that all but the most ignorant will see.

Thanks for reading my rant. It is a bit repetitive but then again his comments are repetitive and there are only so many ways you can say fool!

Well its 11:00 now so I'm off for a bath and spend some quality time soaking up God is not Great.

41. Why Do Some People Resist Science?

Comment #46205 by CJ on May 30, 2007 at 2:48 pm

Well at least the USA beat Turkey on the belief in evolution scale. There is hope!!!

Ah but they were also 32nd out of 34 so maybe not!

42. Dawkins at the Hay Festival

Comment #45988 by CJ on May 30, 2007 at 1:17 am

On two comments I have seen RD make it would appear that there have been times when publishers and spin doctors have got the better of him. One was the title for The Root of All Evil and the other was The God Delusion. Richard has stated previously that the word delusion could be taken as harsh but that still didn't make it wrong.

And what else could you have called the book?

The God Insanity
God Mythology
God Myths
The mythology of Gods
Gods, Memes and Religion
Deprogramming the faithful
What god?
What God!
Etc etc

And whatever you call the book the message is still the same that belief in a superstitious god is a delusion. So back peddling on the title is a futile waste of time. People choose to take offence and will do so every time they want to.

43. The Dawkins delusion

Comment #45854 by CJ on May 29, 2007 at 11:54 am

But he hasn't a clue about what David Brooks, in a recent New York Times column, calls the "quasi-religious" people who make up perhaps the majority of societies like this. He just doesn't get what makes people tick.


Richard if you're reading this I'm sure we would all like to hear a direct response if you have the time to spare.

44. Scientists divided over alliance with religion

Comment #45838 by CJ on May 29, 2007 at 11:30 am

To hijack an old adage

Science needs religion like a fish needs a bicycle!

Religion is the antithesis of science. If religions can't keep their own houses in order then it isn't for science to buddy up to them and help them out of a hole. Push them in deeper I say, show them up for what they are don't dare give them a get out of jail free card!

Rant over. Take deep breaths. Calm down.

45. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Robert Winston

Comment #45621 by CJ on May 28, 2007 at 1:55 pm

Well that was a complete waste of every body's time.

As already pointed out "Dawkins and Winston need to stage a 15-Round Title Fight."
I agree totally. This debate just isn't suited to sound bite journalism.

46. Teachers rebel over atheism promotion

Comment #45037 by CJ on May 26, 2007 at 1:04 am

I must say I aggree with the feelings expressed that childhood should not be turned into an idological battle ground. So when the last religion based camp is closed (or stops spouting superstitious rubbish) then we can consider the battle at least part won. Until then though we face the unpalitable battle for hearts and minds.

47. God help us all - The No. 2 book on Amazon right now is a

Comment #45035 by CJ on May 26, 2007 at 12:30 am

Let's get inclusive:-

Fundifacism
Religiofacism
Abrahmic Facism

On the nuclear issue, Iran has proven to be dishonest in western terms but is consistent with its establishment as a Muslim state. We know the Koran says it's perfectly acceptable, in fact desirable, to deceive the infidel (us).

However much it pains me to say it, I think at some point Iran will have to be given a nuclear ultimatum. There is no point in waiting until they have thrown their bomb and then just flatten them. They have to understand they will be flattened just for testing a weapon. Why just testing a weapon? Because they consistently deny they are building one so by testing one they are proving themselves institutional liars (again). Therefore any denial of future use would be as trustworthy as the denial they were building one in the first place.

The flip side of the deterrence argument is that it forces Iran's hand as far as first use is concerned. If use, even a test, would bring about destruction then where do I use my first and only bomb? Israel, Saudi Arabia (Sunni/Shia issues), America, UK, Europe? If delivered accurately even a fizzing detonation of a uranium bomb would do significant harm as a dirty weapon.

Having said all that I think Iran building nuclear weapons is inevitable. The martyr syndrome is so inculcated in the Iranian psyche that seeing the whole of their country burned would actually appeal to some of them.

So if deterrence and sanctions won't work what options are left? Well there is always sit down over a cup of tea. Winston Churchill said "Better jaw jaw than war war." The other choice is outright conventional war to deprive Iran of its nuclear capability before it can weaponise it. The way things appear to be going I tend to think this is the least worst option.

But while we are on this subject what happens if Islamists gain control of the Pakistani nuclear arsenal?

For further reading on nuclear weapons have a look at http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/ it's a fascinating site.

48. Adam and Eve in the Land of the Dinosaurs

Comment #44801 by CJ on May 25, 2007 at 10:03 am

Sounds like an atheist coach trip to me. Lots of booze and go round and just laugh at the exhibits!

49. Richard Dawkins to appear in Second Life

Comment #44163 by CJ on May 23, 2007 at 1:52 pm

I have difficulty coping with this reality, why on earth would I want a second one.

Anyway God can't possibly exist in a heathen construct like Second Life so what the hell is Dawkins' doing there.

50. A galactic fossil - Star is found to be 13.2 billion years old

Comment #44135 by CJ on May 23, 2007 at 11:58 am

Re: 1. Comment #43884 by sane1 on May 23, 2007 at 3:26 am

What's this thing doing on our galaxy then?

Nothing now, it died billions of years ago.