651. Why I left Young-earth Creationism

Comment #258851 by Roger Stanyard on October 2, 2008 at 12:20 pm

Rational Skpetic - thanks for the comments about the CBC programme. I must admit that is roughly the way I seen things. It seems to me that creationism is nothing more than a subset of fundamentalism which in turn, is part of the culture wars in the USA. A war, if you like, between backward and progressive America or between reason/thinking and emotion or between education and ignorance.

Identity, power and culture are central to it.

652. Why I left Young-earth Creationism

Comment #258818 by Roger Stanyard on October 2, 2008 at 11:35 am

Janus,

40% of American scientists do believe in religion. In that sense, Glenn is far from being odd. He's pretty well mainstream.

Why America still clings to religion, though, is another matter. I'm baffled by the country.

Roger Stanyard, British Centre for Science Education

653. Why I left Young-earth Creationism

Comment #258812 by Roger Stanyard on October 2, 2008 at 11:30 am

Blitz442 comments about Glenn ""Nothing that young-earth creationists had taught me about geology turned out to be true"....would that not be same for biology, cosmology, physics, logic and reason in general???"

IIRC Glenn accepts all of mainstream science including evolutionary biology.

In reply to Cartmancer, BCSE is aware of two graduates from Oxford who are young earth creationists - Richard Buggs (PhDE in biological sciences, felft 2006) and David Anderson with a 1st and masters in maths (left around 2003). Neither are now resident in the UK.

In addition there appears to be a couple of IDers amongst the academic staff, one of whom is John Lennox (i'm just about to read his latest book on the matter.)

It seems that Oxford has been targeted by creationists. There is a fair amount of info on the matter on our web site at www.bcseweb.org.uk

The fundamentalists have gained controlled of Wycliffe Hall.

I was at a debate last year between Steve Fuller and Lweis Wolpert. It was held at Royal Holloway and amongst the audience there were clearly a number of creationists. I did notice, though, that Muslims seemed to be the most vocal amongst them.

Where the creationists are "getting" at the universities is through evangelical Christian Unions. The overall body overseeing the CUs appears to have been heavily infiltrated by creationists.

I certainly never noticed any fundamentalists whilst I was an undergraduate (or postgraduate) but then I am one of the "Godless Scum of Gower Street). Andy McIntosh was a contemporary of mine at Cranfield Institute of Technology. I don't recall him there, though.

Roger Stanyard, British Centre for Science Education

654. Why I left Young-earth Creationism

Comment #258785 by Roger Stanyard on October 2, 2008 at 11:03 am

One point about the ICR and its graduates.

It appears that not one of them has ever put their money where their mouth is and set up a mineral/oil exportation company using "Flood Geology".

This is more than a minor point. A huge proportion of geologists is not in academia - but actively working for commercial companies. They (and the creationists) cannot argue that "creationism" is subject to a scientific conspiracy by "liberals" or whatnot.

All the creationists need to do is to show how their alternative "flood geology" leads to finding resources more effectively and they are sure onto a winner. The mineral exploration companies will be banging on their doors with employment contracts.

Perhaps Andy McIntosh might like to substantiate his claim that coal can be formed in a few hours by telling the energy industry where this process can be seen in action today. He'd make a damn fortune if he did.

655. Why I left Young-earth Creationism

Comment #258775 by Roger Stanyard on October 2, 2008 at 10:53 am

I know Glenn Morton - he has helped us at the BCSE and I highly respect him.

However, he is highly unusual. He has really used his intellect to over-ride his emotion. Very few of the creationists or IDers that I have ever debated with online are capable of using their intellect. The whole shooting match is about emotion.

Moreover, whilst most of the "debate" about creationism centres on biology and the theory of evolution, Glenn's background is in geology where the pro-science arguments are much more easily demonstratable (just look at the landscape).

I can't take John Morris seriously. His father (Henry Morris) was a hydraulic engineer who did a PhD in the subject "to prove" that a literal interpretation of the BIble was "true". (i.e. that Noah's Flood could have happened.) He did not go in with an open mind. I dunno what Richard thinks but it seems to me that in any undergraduate or post graduate course at all but the lowest grade of university (such as the creationist universities in the USA, BJU, etc.), an open mind is essential. You simply cannot learn without it.

As Royal Holloway College has pointed out to me, it's getting creationist students who, because of their "beliefs" are essentially unteachable. I've been through universities four times and what I came out knowing bears little resemblance to my pre-conceived ideas about what I expected to learn before I entered each course.

Lenny Flank (over ar Debunk Creation) has been fighting creationisn for 25 years and says that in all that time, he has only ever seen a couple of creationists change their minds and accept mainstream science.

My own opinion, for what it is worth, is that the problem runs deeper than science v religion. With creationism you're dealing with a fundamentalist mindset. That is an ideology that ecompasses far more that just "creationism". Even in the are event of there being a "conversion" to mainstream science, the extreemism and ideological mindset remain.

I don't, incidentally, think that is the case at all with Glenn.


Roger Stanyard, British Centre for Science Education

656. A biologist reviews an evolution textbook from the ID camp

Comment #255194 by Roger Stanyard on September 27, 2008 at 2:55 am

Soilworker describes Explore Evolution as "Of Pandas and People, 3rd Edition". Maybe, but it sounds to me more like the implementation manual for the Wedge Document.

Roger Stanyard

657. A biologist reviews an evolution textbook from the ID camp

Comment #255191 by Roger Stanyard on September 27, 2008 at 2:42 am

Interesting.

Paul Nelson is an out and out young earth creationist.

His PhD is in philosophy and he is on record as saying that there is no scientific theory of intelligent design.

Meyer has a first degree in geology but his PhD is also in philosophy.

Not very impressive, is it?

Roger Stanyard, British Centre for Science Education

658. Turkey bans biologist Richard Dawkins' website

Comment #250677 by Roger Stanyard on September 20, 2008 at 5:56 am

Quirinus,

Does anyone actually know where BAV and Harun Yahya actually get their money from? We've been told that his organisation receives funding froom Saudi Arabia but I am sceptical about the claim.

Roger Stanyard, British Centre for Science Education

659. Turkey bans biologist Richard Dawkins' website

Comment #250283 by Roger Stanyard on September 19, 2008 at 8:51 am

"Here is what CIA Director Porter Goss said bluntly before the Senate Intelligence Committee in February 2004, "It may be only a matter of time before Al Qaeda or other groups attempt to use chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapons. We must focus on that." And we know that he knows; has known for the longest time!"

This, of course, is the same CIA that brought us evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

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

Comment #250216 by Roger Stanyard on September 19, 2008 at 5:02 am

Wes McNabb is pastor of the Slade Eveangelical Church in Plumstead in London. It appears to be some form of Baptist church. A quick seearch on Google through up connections with a couple of fundamentalist organisations/churches.

I have my svere doubts whether McNabb has any serious influence. My past research suggests that such churches as his tend to have tiny memberships/congregations. In any event the number of white evangelicals in the UK is falling (offset by black evangelicals, in London mostly from Africa).

I couldn't find out which denomination/sect his church is affiliated to. That might throw up some usefull information. The leading fundamentalist/creationist Baptist church in London is the Metropolitan Tabernacle which was centre stage in introducing creationism into Britian during the 1970s. It is still run by the same pastor. Nominally, the church is "independent" but in practoce is a 19th century breakaway church from the mainstream Baptist Union.

It is in the independent/breakaway Baptist churches where you will find much of the fundamentalism/creationism in Britain today.

661. Turkey bans biologist Richard Dawkins' website

Comment #249373 by Roger Stanyard on September 18, 2008 at 4:05 am

Epeeist - Ha Ha and BAV did more than lift crapola from AiG's web site. A lot of their material was supplied by the Institute for Creation Research, which bragged about it all as well.

Whereever you look in the creationist world, American and Australian fundamentalists are behind it.

BTW, John "Necrophilia" Mackay is back in the UK on his annual "tour"

662. Charles Darwin to receive apology from the Church of England for rejecting evolution

Comment #247429 by Roger Stanyard on September 14, 2008 at 12:15 pm

I must say I think it very good news indeed that the CofE has taken this position because, in effect, it is distancing itself from creationists in a very public, albeit discrete, manner. It sounds like a very clever move to me and makes the Royal Society look somewhat stupid.

Quite frankly, why is it that the Anglican church has openly come down against creationism and Royal Society not? On the one hand we have a religious organisation backing science and on the other a National Academy of Sciences stuck with its foot in its mouth unable and unwilling to say anything sensible and making an utter fool of itself.

My personal opinion, for what it is worth, is that the Anglican Church has saved England from religious extremism for 350 years. The Royal Society seems blind to the problem now emerging. The CofE doesn't.

I suspect I will annoy many in here by my position but will remind everyone that creationism is not a science v religion battle. It is a political battle and the more we have onside in this battle, the more we are likely to win. The CofE is now onside. The Royal Society isn't.

663. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #246794 by Roger Stanyard on September 13, 2008 at 7:59 am

Fanusi, I can't recall where the 10% figure came from but there are numerous and regular surveys of religious belief in the UK.

IIRC The Economist quoted one recently which showed that 50% of children born in the UK to two believing Muslim parents end up apostate. It is exactly the same percentage for children born to two believing Christian parents.

So I'll ask the question again in a slightly different form "Whom are you gonna kill, how do you select them and why are you gonna kill them?"

I think what more to the point is why some UK Muslims end up as religious monsters. You don't have to look to Islam to find the answer. You can see then same thing operating amongst American fundamentalist rednecks. They feel politically isolated, nobody represents them, they have limited education, they live in a near closed world, they don't understand what is going on around them and all too frequently are poor and on the margins of society.

Precisely what do you think is the difference between an American fundamentalist redneck clutching a rifle in one hand, a bible in the other and hating the US goverenment is and a Muslim with a crap job, a rifle in one hand and the Koran in the other and hating the British government?

Was Timothy McVeigh a patriot as he thought he was or was he just another Mohammed Atti?

664. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #246753 by Roger Stanyard on September 13, 2008 at 3:24 am

"Right now the long war against Islam has heated up again. That means ideas such as patriotism, or at least a visceral civilizational loyalty, will be desperately necessary."

Given that 2.5% of the population of the UK are Muslim (and 10% of these are apostate), does that mean we should, as patriots, go to war against our own fellow citizens over religious differences? Who do you propose we kill?

665. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #246258 by Roger Stanyard on September 12, 2008 at 3:44 am

The problem with the idea of patriotism is that it is often indistinguisable from blind jingoism and seriously clouds people's judgement.

It's also life threatening. I jest not. The killing fields of Northern France in the 1914-1918 war were fueled by a nasty country-loving concotion of jingoism and partiotism. Not surprisingly after WW1 the world patriotism became a dirty word and fell out of favour.

I also comment that the Soviet Union used the term "Great Patriotic War" to describe WW2. As Johnson said, patriotism is the last refuge of the despot. In this case, Stalin.

666. Teachers should tackle creationism, says science education expert

Comment #246252 by Roger Stanyard on September 12, 2008 at 3:25 am

Worldview = all ecompassing ideology where everything must fit to it or be discarded and demonised.

Examples: Trotskyism, Maoism, Polt Pot, Robert Mugabe, Fascism, National Socialism, Stalinism, Marxism, Creationism, Intelligent Design.

The Demonised: Liberals, non-believers, fellow travellers, intellectuals, the well educated....

Outcome: Totalitarianism and mass killings.

Examples: 9/11, London bombings, Madrid bombings, Oklahoma City, Jonesville and the whole of history.

Modus Operandi: Learn nothing, forget nothing.

Roger Stanyard, British Centre for Science Education

667. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245838 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 1:03 pm

Patriotism = the last refuge of the despot. Dr Johnson.

668. Teachers should tackle creationism, says science education expert

Comment #245791 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 12:29 pm

Let's get one thing straight first. Teachers are not allowed to teach creationism or ID in science classes.

Secondly, ID is not just not science, it is a political tool to re-engineer society (see the Wedge Document). Let it into the science classroom and you have just let in politics.

There is no half measure about this. Truth in Science has been pushing ID for all it is worth. It is still doing so.

Thirdly, precisely what is it the fundamentalists want "taught" in the science lesson:

1. Young Earth Creationism?

2. Old Earth Creationism?

3. Muslim creationism (a third variant)?

4. Intelligent Design?

5. Theistic Evolution?

6. Hindu creationism?

7. Recolonisation theory (another YEC variant)?

Teach these and there is no time left for proper science.

Riess also has a problem in that the courts in the USA have repeatedly concluded that there is no science in creationism and it is solely a religious position.

So what Reiss is calling for is religion to be taught in the science classroom to serve the political objectives of deeply conservative fundamentalists.

It's worse than that, though because the creationists don't limit themsleves to undermining the theory of evolution. It's any part of science that contradicts their religious position including physics, chemistry, geology, physical geography and no doubt others.

So ever time a physics teacher says that the speed of light is a constant, he/she has to explain heaven knows what crackpottery that claims it isn't because the world is only 6,000 years old?

Or if the geography teacher explainingg where coal coal comes from has to present Professor Andy McIntosh's idiocy that coal seams were formed in a few days?

I'll continue. What er, text books are going to be used to "explain" all this idiocy? Of Panda's and People? Or McIntosh's work on geology? What are the teachers going to do apart from hand out religious tracts?

Are they going to hand out the gibberish from BAV even when the books themselves are full of breaches of copyright?

Talk about screwing up the educational system.

Roger Stanyard, British Centre for Science Education

669. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245761 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 11:54 am

"First, you already HAVE shariah courts. They are "voluntary", and deal with certain domestic and financial issues."

They have no standing in law whatsoever.

"There were several Iranians who requested asylum. One was gay and was sent home despite the fact that he would face death (interesting since the British won't send a suspect back to the US if he faces death). The other a political dissident who begged not to be sent home."

So why were they sent back? We get this stick all the time. One lot says we are too weak in allowing Muslim asylum seakers in, another lot says we should stop all but the most extreme cases.

Back to my orginal question: How was backing Bush and sending our own armed forces into Iraq (for the second time, and Afghanistan) a form of appeasement to Muslims? There are a lot of good soldiers still dying there.

Good grief, we've had London bombed, attempts at bombing it again, attacks on airports and heaven knows what planned attacks on aircraft as a consequence of our participation in Iraq. How is that appeasement or a whimper?

The UK, probably above all countries in Europe has stood up to what it thought were the excesses of the Muslim world. And unlike one European country, we didn't run away when we got bombed as a result.

670. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245726 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 11:29 am

"P.S. BTW, many of your "leading scientists" are foreigners who completed their undergraduate degrees outside the U.S. You have some of the best research institutions in the world, no question about it. But your basic education is a mess."

The best of the US universities are very good indeed and much of Europe (notably France) should be ashamed of its own universities.

However, the Economist newspaper pointed out some while back that even the top American universities (Ivy League and so on) are now losing their international reputation - basically through bad management and complacancy. Oxford and Cambridge know it as well. Watch this space.

671. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245715 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 11:05 am

Al Rawandi "Britain. Shariah courts." Since when?

Who are these er, "dissidents" we deport and how is that appeasing muslim fundamentalism?.

Um, backing the USA in the invasion of Iraq? How was that appeasing Islam?

672. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245711 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 10:55 am

"Bill didn't launch airstrikes against Afghanistan, he ordered Cruise Missile Strikes. So pull your head out of your ass, and quit making shit up."

Most readers will be delighted to know that Al Rawandi has nothng against donkeys, ass of course refering to bum (or arse in the vernacular this side of the pond).

673. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245692 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 10:16 am

Al Rawanada "America is not the flavor of the month? What can I do, this must be in Europe, where "appease Islam" is now a national sport."

Really? Where in Europe is appeasement a national sport?

674. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245674 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 9:46 am

Apathy personified "Would you like it if i blamed you for 11 years of 'new' labour?"

New Labour does, indeed, part reflect what I am and my country in general. If New Labour is to "blame" for the current state of the UK, then, indeed, I can be criticised.

We get the politicians we deserve.

What I won't do is walk away saying it's nothing to do with me and new labour doesn't represent the UK. It does. It has won 3 general elections in a row.

PS - However I voted in past general elections had no impact on whether Labour got into power. I live in a constituency that has only ever once returned a Labour MP and that was over 60 years ago. The choice open to me has been between Lib Dem and Tory.

675. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245662 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 9:04 am

Al Rawanda "You are proud you don't live in a country leading the world in scientific research, athletics, music, art, etc... "

Maybe the comment was a bit daft but the USA is hardly the flavour of the month outside of its own borders. Yep, America is the biggest and in many ways the best but it has lost is almost reveared status in the last 8 years.

I don't want to see America lose its way - nobody benefits from that. It's just a lot of us have become very sceptical about it.

Pray tell me, how could it be otherwise given that there are no WMDs? The whole of American foreign policy looks to be seriously flawed. You lot voted in Bush twice, not the rest of the world.

676. What does atheism say about the purpose (or the meaning) of life?

Comment #245646 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 8:37 am

ForestMist "I think religion came about because some people didn't like the thought that once they die, they die and there is nothing that carries on apart from memories in other people's minds, which in turn are only temporary things."

Maybe, but I suspect there is more to it in the sense people don't like the death of others close to them, especially their own children.

Maybe, also, they don't like the death of those that the are dependent on - leaders, parents, etc.. As a result, religion often centres around a deity that is a father figure of some kind or, somehow, an all-knowing leader.

Something to love or be loved by - perhaps as a substitute for the parent-child relationship.

Methinks that there is probably much more to it than concern about our own deaths.

I'm really talking ad lib here as I am not at all knowledgable on the world's religion.

677. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245626 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 7:53 am

Chewedbarber - it's a rhetorical question. You may wish to answer it. Is there a connection or not?

678. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245625 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 7:49 am

Sciros comments - "Wow Roger Stanyard you must be some kind of grand social psychologist."

Well, yes, I do apply psychology because it is an exceedingly useful tool in understanding group behaviour. I'm not a psychologist by profession but I have had professional training in the subject matter.

679. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245623 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 7:42 am

OK, well I'll put it bluntly, Crime rates commited US black people are far higher than those commited by whites. The homicide rate is 7 times higher. So these huge rates of crime commited by black people have nothing at all to do with high levels of gun ownership amongst whites?

Really?

680. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245619 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 7:34 am

Al Rawanada "Race is a large problem in the US because we largely let just about anyone come here, and most are successful at some point, but blacks have never managed to get it together."

That's a complex social and political issue. For what it is worth, over the course of my lifetime, the USA has done very well at addressing the issues. The civil rights movement was a bit before my time but its effects are still reverberating around the world, not just in the USA. It had a powerful effect in my country for which we have to thank America.

I just think at times, though, the USA loses its way.

There's a second, issue, though, which I draw on from the experience of Northern Ireland. Ancient enmities in society can last an awful long time and have very deep roots. They are not easy to overcome.

That remains an exceedingly and visibly segregated society and basically an outsider would often have no idea how to tell whether someone belonged to which lot.

I may be wrong, but an exceedingly high proportion of blacks in the USA have escaped poverty and the down at heel areas and ghettos.

Correct me if I am wrong, but about half would consider themselves reasonably prosperous and wholly integrated (for lack of a better word) Americans who have got their act together.

681. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245603 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 7:11 am

Hungarianelephant - I stand corrected. IIRC a major reason for the ceasefires that led to the 1997 agreement was the loyalist paramilitaries ended up in the late 1980s and early 1990s killing more than the republicans. Most of the killings, IIRC were, though, in the 1970s.

682. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245598 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 7:02 am

Al Rawanda "Arguement ad tourism" I was working there on business, not as a tourist.

Ted Haggard represented far more that the 12,000 members of his church. he was head of the National Association of Evangelicals and probably the most powerful man in religion in the USA. he bragged about his weekly access to the White House. He represented a vast swath of America. IIRC 25%.

No one ever claimed that the UK has fixed its race problems. Neveretheless there are no all-black ghettos in British cities.

Britain's inner cities have always had their rough parts where outsiders fear to go. So have all major cities world-wide. There are large parts of Belfast, which is basically a white city, that have been out of bounds for years.

But the poor whites got out and the blacks are getting out and most Asians never ever started there.

Ever been to Brixton, a place which many think is some kind of black ghetto? It's nothing of the sort and not even remotely comparable with what you have in many US inner city areas.

683. What does atheism say about the purpose (or the meaning) of life?

Comment #245592 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 6:48 am

ForestMist "Roger - but the universe we are at the centre of is a construct of our own mind and ego and when we die, that universe will die with us. "

Interesting point but I guess, out of the top of my head, our individual universe does not completly die with us because it is partly shared with others - its a social as well as an individual construct. We can influence and change the individual universes of others after our death. Indeed, in life we create them through creating our off-springs.

Therein probaably lies the orgins or foundations of religious belief. There is a permanence of our experience of life after our deaths. It's a social thing, largely, in practice, centred on our own immediate families or those closest to us.

684. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245587 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 6:37 am

Al rawanada,

So all those riots re Rodney King were a figment of my imagination and everything is actually hunky doory.

The work dpone by our associate Lenny Flank on the politics of fundamentalism is likewise utter fiction? Do do, who us your review of his work.

Bill Clinton's widely and international reported comemnts about whites fearng blacks were all made up?

The Americans were lying when I've been in Wshington DC and New Orleans and been told for my own safety to keep to the central area?

Your inner cities are all safe areas where I can wonder round at my heart's content 24 hours of the day?

Ted Haggard's church in Colorado Springs refelected the etnic black/white mix of the USA?

Pull the other one.

685. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245584 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 6:25 am

Al Rawanda "Ya you're right, that probably had nothing to do with British occupation and the Socialist IRA running around terrorizing people. Good analysis...."

The local Prods killed more than the IRA.

686. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245570 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 6:05 am

Vall "I don't really follow Al's reasoning that it is an American's right to bear arms. That may have been the case 300 years ago, when the homesteaders had to fight off Indians and when the country was in its fledgling state. Now, however, I would have said the proliferation of firearms in the hands of simpletons would be a very strong case to change the constitution to reflect the 21st century."

i don't get it either. When the UK ruled Ireland, the Royal irish Constabulary was armed. It was the only way we could control the place. As soon as it gt independence, the Irish politicians rightly decided to disarm the Gardai. Ever sinnce Southern Ireland has had astonishingly low crime rates.

Northern Ireland - well, we continued to rule it with arms. The locals armed themselves up to the eyeballs during the 1970s and left the place bombed out, broke, backwards and riddled with crime. The streets were simply not safe to walk for years.

I think I have to be really un-PC here and say that the real reason why America is a gun culture is that they haven't got their act together on race relations. It's fear of the black man. Like Northern Ireland, it is a society deeply ill at ease with itself.

I'll take the issue further. Religious fndamentalism in the USA is just racism in another guise. That's why the fundamentalists are all right-wing gun nuts.

It's all just a ploy to convince themselves of their self annointed moral superiority over black people rather than address the issues of a deeply divided society.

Federal taxes? Just a way by which "liberals" can steal their money and give it to dangerous immoral black people.

You can probably guess that most fundamentalist churches are, de facto, segregated.

687. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245560 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 5:48 am

Vaal, yep that was my training in the CCF. I'm surprised though that ammunition and parts are still readily available. The Lee Enfield uses a rimmed bullet which was pretty obsolete, as far as I can gather, when the 1st Lee Enfields were produced back in 1895.

They certainly did give a kick!

i mut admit that my ability to strip down, clean and reassembly a Lee Enfield was one of the most utterly useless skills I was ever taught at grammar school. As my sister said at the time, it looked as if we we being trained to re-fight WW2.

I've never had the slightest interest in guns ever since.

688. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245552 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 5:30 am

Vall - if it was a .303 Lee Enfield it should have been in a museum. I trained on those in the 60s and they were then long gone as standard army issue. In fact, IIRC, it was a WW1 standard issue rifle.

689. What does atheism say about the purpose (or the meaning) of life?

Comment #245550 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 5:25 am

ForrestMist - Interesting but in a sense each of us is actually at the centre of our own universe - the way that we perceive, behave and interact with others and the cultural, social and physical environment aroud us. Each of us has a big such universe to deal with. We're all big fish in a big pond, if you like. Perhaps that's what makes life so interesting and worthwhile.

690. Michael Palin for President

Comment #245542 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 4:55 am

Philster "I shall welease Woger"

How kind! How about weleasing my bwother Woderwick as well?

Biggus Dickus might be well pleased.

Silius Sodus

691. What does atheism say about the purpose (or the meaning) of life?

Comment #245536 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 4:39 am

"The only reason you think life has meaning is because that's what you want to think and not because it does have meaning. I call that delusional thinking."

I seem to recall the crie de cour in Monty Python's Life of Brian here. "You have to work it out for yourself".

Sadly I can't understand what on earth this person is trying to say.

Anyone else have a clue?


Roger

692. Biologists on the Verge of Creating New Form of Life

Comment #245501 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 1:48 am

"But the problem of understanding some initial event which brought non-living matter to life is still a justification for divine agency."

How the heck is it a justification?

693. Devolution in Education

Comment #245494 by Roger Stanyard on September 11, 2008 at 1:10 am

Justaminute "Science does no such thing. Scientists who believe by faith in Scientific Naturalism do the discounting."

Nope. Science doesn't give a stuff about religion - not mine, not yours and not anybody else's. There is no such thing as religious science.

Just as there is no such thing as "creation science".

Unless, of course, you can tell us what the scientific theory of creatiionism/ID is and how can it be tested with the scientific method.

[Waits for every for this.]

But of couse we have already told justaminite that science is not a faith - it's a methodology.

Like all fundies - they never listen and keep on repeating themselves.

694. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245371 by Roger Stanyard on September 10, 2008 at 2:55 pm

Fanusi "My two cents on this issue is as follows: Apparently Scotland and England are more violent places than America - by far - so nuts to the more social violence argument."

Where did you get that crap from. The homicide rates in the UK are miniscule compared with the USA. Moreover, the homicide rate in Scotland, IIRC, is five times that of England and Wales (crime rates in the UK are usually split by region with England and Wales combined).

695. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245330 by Roger Stanyard on September 10, 2008 at 2:10 pm

Fanusi "It is difficult to drag people away in the middle of the night when those people are armed."

Nope. It's no problem at all. See Northern Ireland.

The British army did it, the IRA did it and the Protestant militia did it.

There is a very clear issue here. In a modern democracy, you don't use guns to solve political issues. The only method at the end of the day is the ballot box. If some Americans think their democracy is so weak and the federal government so evil that they need guns, all I can say is that they have just given me another reasons not to live in the USA.

Strange, isn't it, that the guns for the IRA came from the USA. IRA = the nastiest terrorist organisations ever seen in modern Western Europe. And a complete damn failure.

696. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245326 by Roger Stanyard on September 10, 2008 at 2:02 pm

Al rawanada - death from drink driving is not "Theoretically preventable."

The USA tried prohibition after WW1 and it didn't work. You cannot, in effect, ban alcohol. It's no more realistic than banning cars to stop drink driving.

Tell me, why do you think the civil war in Northern Ireland is almost universally considered to be over?

Answer - the IRA "decommissioned" its guns.

697. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245318 by Roger Stanyard on September 10, 2008 at 1:54 pm

Al Rawanda - "Anyhow, America is vastly different from other countries, Roger Stanyard listed a dozen reasons why this is, and why everyone else is "better"."#

Where the heck did I say that everywhere was better? That I don't want to live in the USA is my choice for the reasons given, including the fact it is dripping in politicised sanctimonious religiousity.

If anyone had asked me 10 years ago, I would have said that the USA would be top of the list of places for me to live in.

However, the world has moved on, including the USA.

698. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245172 by Roger Stanyard on September 10, 2008 at 11:01 am

Al Rawanada "Unarmed police? Not been a problem ever in recruiting them either in the UK or the Republic of Ireland. What's more the vast majority of police officers are opposed to be armed.

Wasn't it you that just went on a rant describing how America is SOOOOO different from other countries. Now you make a comment like this that begs a comparison. You can't claim America is so vastly different from other countries, then say "Well other countries do this, why can't America".

What the heck are you talking about. I've openly pointing out that the USA is different because of its different attitude to guns. The USA is free to do whatever it damn wants with guns. It still doesn't make the gun culture attractive to me.

It's damn effing ugly, full stop.

Moreover, you haven't answered by question as to why the rules are different in the Republic of Ireland and the UK.

"Sometimes I wonder if this level of cognitive dissonance is harmful to one's health."

Cognitive dissonance doesn't enter into it.

699. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245169 by Roger Stanyard on September 10, 2008 at 10:53 am

Al Rawanada "So if you walk by a dead body you are more appalled if the cause was gun shot wound, as opposed to splattered through the windscreen in head on collision with a drunk?"

I would equally find it distressing whether the person was killed by reckless driving, excessive speed or a gun or excess drink.

700. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245165 by Roger Stanyard on September 10, 2008 at 10:49 am

Al rawanada "There is no debate to be had with people who think gun deaths warrant legal action, but alcohol deaths do not."

Wanna bet!

Nobody is claiming that the law should not be applied to drink-drivers. It is and is everywhere.

On the other hand, if people want to drink themselves to death, then that is there business, not yours or mine. We live in a society where we have freedom and the cost of that freedom is that some will use it for personal abuse.

If I wish to drink to excess without harming anyone that is not anybody's business and certainly not that of the courts or the police.

That alcohol is abused by some does not mean that it should be denied as a pleasure to all.

Alcohol is enjoyed by the vast majority of the adult population and is deeply part of Western culture. Such forms as wine are amongst the most sophisticated and finest foodstuffs ever made.

Moreover, just to make sure that it doesn't get out of control, society heavily regulates the consumption of alcohol, by law, taxation and customer.

Your argument is about as stupid as saying that driving cars should be banned because some people drive recklessly and can kill people.