1. Evangelically Serious Science

Comment #223700 by antipodesman on August 3, 2008 at 8:07 am

Congratulations Richard on another outstanding effort. I veiwed the trailers and was really taken by the clip on the beach with the students. What a wonderful way to get kids thinking. I think the kids in the high school might have started to think a bit more had you had a little more time. Maybe it will get through to them. One of the girls seemed to be thinking. Perhaps she was just smitten with the great Richard Dawkins. I saw you speak to school teachers at London University 7 years ago and I think we need to do more to inspire science teachers to inspire students.
from Canada home of the Burgess Shale

2. An Open Letter to Richard Dawkins

Comment #97014 by antipodesman on December 11, 2007 at 9:22 am

I rejoice in the offer to form a coalition of rational-minded people to condemn all fanaticism. Perhaps as a sign of good will the Catholic Church will make a contribution to the Security Fund for Ayan Hirsi Ali.

3. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #38783 by antipodesman on May 9, 2007 at 7:19 am

I think this is one of the best inteviews that I have seen with Dawkins. He seemed far more relaxed and clearly enjoyed the interview himself. Maybe he just knew he was no longer in the Land of the Fundies. George nicely zeroed in on the fact that other interviewers had missed the point by comparing the number of nasty atheists in the 20th century with the number of nasty theists.

4. The Selfish Green

Comment #29423 by antipodesman on April 2, 2007 at 10:32 pm

Back in the 50s and 60s the burning issue was global nuclear armaggedon. That issue is mostly forgotten now perhaps because of the end of the cold war. Those weapons still exist and the danger is perhaps greater than ever. A nuclear war would destroy all life forms except perhaps a few bacteria taking the world back to pre-cambrian conditions.
By comparison a little global warming seems pretty benign. Jane Goodall suggested that the decline of the human race might not be such a bad thing. I wonder if global warming might not solve the problem of nuclear proliferation. For my part, I would choose a world without humans where life still exists over a world consumed by nuclear holocaust where life might not return for billions of years.
Individually humans have the capacity for reason and may have an altruistic philosophy but collectively there is no chance for focused action to "save the planet". Consider the inability of the United Nations to take preventive action in the case of the Rawandan genocide. Our technological culture is able to make some predictions about the world but not to make substantial alerations, even in our own behaviour.
BTW: Richard there may be legislation against slavery but some estimates suggest there are more people in slavery now than ever in the 18th century. Slavery isn't limited to the 3rd world either.

5. Darwin 'was committed to publish'

Comment #28850 by antipodesman on March 31, 2007 at 8:29 am

Prevaricate is to deviate from the truth. Does he mean procrastinate?
There does not appear to be any discussion of the fact that the draft manuscript for the Origin sat wrapped up in a closet in Down House for many years with instructions to Emma for publication if anything happened to him. There are probably many reasons for his procrastination.

6. Richard Dawkins at The Sunday Times Oxford Literary Festival

Comment #28393 by antipodesman on March 29, 2007 at 4:11 am

Sam said "an agnostic is someone who refuses to take a stand one way or the other."

This is the common misinterpretation of agnostic. I used to say, looking at the difference between a 6 and a 7, only an agnostic tries to live without faith. An agnostic is a 6 and an atheist is a 7. After the God Delusion I can say that an atheist doesn't have to be a 7. What a relief. I no longer have to explain what an agnostic is to every Tom, Dick and Harriette.
Sam, you're not suggesting that Richard refuses to take a stand when he calls himself an agnostic are you? Perhaps we should surrender the term agnostic to the indecisive 4s. It would be a shame as the word has a noble origin being coined by no less a scientist than T H Huxley. I can't imagine he was thinking of 4s at the time.

7. Richard Dawkins at The Sunday Times Oxford Literary Festival

Comment #28325 by antipodesman on March 28, 2007 at 6:43 pm

An interesting debate. Dawkins - focused and compelling as usual. Mcgrath was as good as it gets for religion but muddled at best.
One point by Dawkins shocked me. In God Delusion he made a compelling argument that agnostics should recognize that the burden of proof is on the believers. I was convinced by his argument and even though I too find myself at 6 on his scale of 7 I now call myself an atheist rather than agnostic. Imagine my surprise to hear Dawkins call himself an agnostic. What gives????

8. Cold is hot in evolution -- Researchers debunk belief species evolve faster in tropics

Comment #26058 by antipodesman on March 16, 2007 at 11:00 am

What about the vast array of endemic species in small rainforest niches that apparently did not exist 10 thousand years ago at the end of the last ice age? It seems like circumstantial but compelling evidence for very rapid evolution of biodiversity in tropical zones.