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

Comment #44822 by Rtambree on May 25, 2007 at 10:52 am

Interesting how some people are more worried about countries that MIGHT get a bomb in the future, rather than being worried about the countries that presently DO HAVE the bomb (and lots of them) and have already demonstrated they're not afraid to use them on civilian populations or to attack another country pre-emptively.

652. E.O. Wilson and Daniel Dennett

Comment #44764 by Rtambree on May 25, 2007 at 9:03 am

>1. Comment #44738 by ranjani on May 25, 2007 at 8:36 am

>I wonder if Dr.Wilson in addition to Dr.Steven Pinker will be invited to this year's BB conference

I hope so. And Robert Sapolsky was invited to the first one but couldn't make it - hopefully he can this time. Christof Koch from Caltech might be another good one to have, as he's so close to the Salk Institute.

653. Penn & Teller's Bullshit - Holier Than Thou With Christopher Hitchens

Comment #44753 by Rtambree on May 25, 2007 at 8:56 am

Season One and Two were great, then something happened for Season Three and beyond. It just got stupid, trivial and opinionated, like a right-wing shock-jock rant. It attacked positions that nobody held and the its use of silly gimmicks was getting tiresome. I think I gave up after about Season 4.

654. Lightning damages Jesus statue

Comment #44425 by Rtambree on May 24, 2007 at 4:49 pm

This is obviously proof that there is no God but Allah.

655. Hitchens on Falwell, Part 2

Comment #44171 by Rtambree on May 23, 2007 at 2:11 pm

To paraphrase Fox - "Don't you think it's disrespectful to his family to call Falwell, and I'll repeat the comments for those who missed them..."

656. The Conversion of the Casual Evolutionist - You can't spell love without evolve

Comment #44143 by Rtambree on May 23, 2007 at 12:39 pm

Most couples pair in narrow social tiers.

We all want the a-list, but the a-list doesn't want us.

So there's a ceiling and a floor in each strata.

University-educated people tend to prefer university-educated spouses, upper class to upper class, middle class to middle class, working class to working class, welfare class to welfare class, etc. Then there's the relationship between women's dress size and men's income. There's all sorts of interesting patterns that are *generally* the case.

There's a saying - don't criticize the faults in your partner, because it's those faults that prevented your partner from getting someone better.

This works for employers, employees, friends, spouses, etc.

657. Bible drawn into Hong Kong sex publication row

Comment #41917 by Rtambree on May 17, 2007 at 9:49 am

>>9. Comment #41878 by Luthien on May 17, 2007 at 8:47 am

>Hey Privateeye, I say we start by sueing the Giddions

Good idea! A class action! I'm deeply offended on every level.

658. Christopher Hitchens to God: Drop Dead

Comment #41913 by Rtambree on May 17, 2007 at 9:43 am

Religion is supposed to be about Absolute Truths. Immutable. From the Creator of 100 Billion Galaxies. If God says jump, we're supposed to say "how high"?

You can't just reform Absolutes. That feels like pushing a shopping trolley through a supermarket - "today I don't like Limbo - I'll leave that on the shelf, but I do like my Afterlife, and my Guardian Angel. But I don't like Hell - I'll 'reform' that."

659. Antarctic 'treasure trove' found

Comment #41909 by Rtambree on May 17, 2007 at 9:39 am

What - no Hitchens?

Where's the Man In White's opinion on this?

660. The Colbert Report: The Intolerant

Comment #41901 by Rtambree on May 17, 2007 at 9:31 am

I agree - we tolerate the intolerance of tolerance not nearly half as much as we intolerate the tolerance of the intolerant.

661. Hitchens on Falwell

Comment #41854 by Rtambree on May 17, 2007 at 7:54 am

I just watched the video, but I'm still not clear on it. Does Hitchens like Falwell or not?

662. 5000 Darwin letters go online

Comment #41778 by Rtambree on May 17, 2007 at 12:29 am

Joseph Banks, President of the Royal Society for over 40 years, wrote about 100,000 letters.

What are biographers of today's intellectuals going to use? Emails?

663. Statement of Concern about Impact of AIG's Creation 'Museum'

Comment #41193 by Rtambree on May 15, 2007 at 3:41 pm

11. Comment #40964 by BaronOchs

Good point. You're right - the evaporation of religion relies on the assumption of improving universal living standards.

But once again, on the whole, living standards have trended upwards in the last 250 years. Even the poor in Cincinnati live better than medieval Kings & Queens.

So, it's a simple extrapolation...

But you're right - it could all go pearshaped and we start regressing again - like we did from 400AD to about 1400AD (when 'coincidentally', Christianity was at the height of its powers).

664. Statement of Concern about Impact of AIG's Creation 'Museum'

Comment #40945 by Rtambree on May 15, 2007 at 8:34 am

2. Comment #40927 by rufustfirefly

>Unfortunately, religion will never be "wiped" out, either by reason or by force

I disagree. I think it will disppear of its own accord. In fact, it has been doing so for 250 years. Most of the Scandinavian countries are already irreligious - due to a security and high standard of living. No one forced them.

If all of humanity could live under a Scandinavian social welfare model (i.e. Norway is #1 on the UN Human Development Index) then religion will evaporate altogether. There might be some fringe recalitrants and the odd cult that springs up here and there, but religion will no longer be a political, cultural, social or economic force.

The process will accelerate once a majority of politicians, media, celebrities, intellectuals, academics, and other leaders become atheists. The herd will follow, if for no other reason than fashion.

Once there's a critical mass, and it becomes a social disadvantage to believe in invisible friends, the human drive for status will do the rest.

I give it another 250 years.

665. Statement of Concern about Impact of AIG's Creation 'Museum'

Comment #40914 by Rtambree on May 15, 2007 at 7:44 am

This would be a great museum to visit for a laugh. Anyone live nearby that can visit it "ironically"?

When religion is wiped out, we could keep it as a museum to the stupidity and irrationality of religion.

666. Nothing sacred: Journalist and provocateur Christopher Hitchens picks a fight with God

Comment #40896 by Rtambree on May 15, 2007 at 7:10 am

With everyone out to get him, let's hope we don't hear about Hitchens' fishing accident.

667. God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything by Christopher Hitchens

Comment #40890 by Rtambree on May 15, 2007 at 7:00 am

Hear hear.

Hitchens' book is about to be released here in England, then The God Delusion is out in paperback - more publicity as publishers like to double-dip with two releases. Another documentary on superstition by Dawkins is about to be released, and another one on Atheism by Moyers.

With Paris Hilton in jail, there's less competition for press coverage so people are slowly being confronted with these issues. All good stuff.

668. Hitchens vs. Hannity on Religion and God

Comment #40878 by Rtambree on May 15, 2007 at 6:40 am

That white suit must be getting smelly by now.

Why doesn't Hitchens retort with the "Where did God come from?" argument when asked where did the Universe come from? That's a no-brainer. Then there are two more steps. The theist then predictably says "God is eternal" and then the atheist comes back with "Why not have the multiverse eternal?" and save an unnecessary step.

A thousand years ago, philosophers devoted their whole lives to writing weighty tomes on these issues, and Fox covers it in 5 minutes. It's progress, of a sort.

I expected worse - it could've just descended into an Islam-bashing session where they're both on the same side, having agreed to ignore the other two Abrahamic religions.

669. Pale Blue Dot

Comment #40858 by Rtambree on May 15, 2007 at 5:24 am

21. Comment #40811 by meepo

>i liked this one better

That version is good too - it set it up nicely, and with a good selection of clips, but the music soundmix level was wrong - Carl Sagan's eloquent speech was a little drowned out.

The Cosmos Vangelis music was better and it needs to be soft to emphasise the words.

Can anyone remix it to create a hybrid uber-version?

670. Bill Maher interviews Christopher Hitchens

Comment #40853 by Rtambree on May 15, 2007 at 5:14 am

3. Comment #40848 by Phadrus

You want good news? Here's an excellent article, with intra-country comparisons, demonstrating that atheism is the only movement gaining converts...

It's called Why the Gods are Not Winning.

http://www.edge.org/documents/archive/edge209.html#gp

671. Bill Maher interviews Christopher Hitchens

Comment #40847 by Rtambree on May 15, 2007 at 5:01 am

Wow - a sympathetic host that didn't trot out the same old stupid questions!

672. How dare you call me a fundamentalist

Comment #40839 by Rtambree on May 15, 2007 at 4:40 am

41. Comment #40800 by pwagner on May 15, 2007 at 2:43 am

>I'm sure others have noticed the theme when a man like Dawkins speaks his mind. They extract every word and try to twist it around and turn it into something other than what he said. Just once I would like to see a Christian fundamentalist say, "you know what Richard I don't agree with you, and I'm keeping my faith". End of story. Because ultimately that's the end result anyways.

Yes, I agree - there's a second delusion. The first delusion is that they think their invisible friend exists. But the second, unspoken delusion, is that they've arrived at their conclusions via RATIONAL means, when it's clearly an emotional need. They begin with the conclusion and then work backwards. All this pseudo-intellectualising about God existing is a self-delusional at best and a dishonest pretention at worst.

673. How dare you call me a fundamentalist

Comment #40787 by Rtambree on May 15, 2007 at 1:39 am

34. Comment #40778 by The Wee Flea

>I don't suppose you would blame science for nuclear weapons, global warming or biological weapons?

As the risk of sounding like the NRA, science doesn't kill people, people do. As Shermer stresses, science is a verb, a method of knowing, and the best (and some would say, the only) method of knowing. What else is there?

Knowledge is double-edged. Radioactive materials can treat cancer or they can kill Japanese. Ditto for any science. How we use it is up to us. I'm willing to bet that the administration and Generals that decided to drop the bomb where God-fearing Christians.

Also, the dialogue between the pro-science and the pro-religious has a risk of talking past each other when the each camp defends the theorectical purity of their own discipline while attacking the *practice* of the other's discipline.

So you'll have theists defending an ideal notion of their faith, while attacking science as practised: social Darwinism, nuclear weapons, etc.

And atheists will be defending science as abstract knowledge while attacking religion as actually practised.

This confusion needs to be clarified so we're comparing apples with apples.

674. Among the Disbelievers

Comment #40499 by Rtambree on May 14, 2007 at 11:18 am

Sounds like the author may be too insulated within the USA. He should get out more - live in Sweden or Norway for a while, and see how atheists get on perfectly well with each other, without resort to an invisible friend.

675. In God, Distrust

Comment #40497 by Rtambree on May 14, 2007 at 11:13 am

7. Comment #40453 by TrashcanMan79

>I shall be using "god-worship"

I like "Invisible Friend" - that puts them immediately on the defensive.

676. Pale Blue Dot

Comment #40458 by Rtambree on May 14, 2007 at 10:07 am

Classic. Immortal. Profound. Poignant.

No one does it better.

677. Christopher Hitchens - God is Not Great

Comment #40232 by Rtambree on May 14, 2007 at 12:44 am

17. Comment #40205 by Shuggy

Many of the phrases that Adams' employs are world-weary, ironic ones. He's been around.

In any case, Steven Pinker's next book will address the issue why sex is often referred via euphemisms e.g. would you like to come upstairs for a coffee?

678. Unintelligent Design

Comment #40174 by Rtambree on May 13, 2007 at 2:17 pm

63. Comment #40166 by Mash

It's an interesting question: i.e. something that is true (proven) but morally repugnant. It brings to mind the Natural Fallacy i.e. confusing 'is' with 'ought'.

Dawkins has sometimes said he's an anti-Darwinian when it comes to social policy (but he doesn't elaborate), whereas the Christian right-wing nutjobs are pro-Darwinian (low taxes, no health care, etc).

On all the great social and ethical issues, (abortion, capital punishment, gay marriage, gun control, sex education & contraception, etc), scientific truth is actually compatible with a moral position.

679. The meaning of freedom

Comment #40161 by Rtambree on May 13, 2007 at 12:55 pm

There's some residual double-standards for gender & dress in the west, the last vestiges of our common Abrahamic ancestry...

1. It is acceptable for men to be barechested in public, but not women.

2. Nudity is much more heavily censored in western films than violence. Blow her to bits, behead her, impale her, but for God's sake, don't remove her top.

3. The most common marriage ceremony in western countries is the father of the bride "handing over" the bride to the groom. Sure, it's symbolic, but Muslims would approve. Also, the white of the wedding dress represents virginity - crucially important for women, but not at all important for men (origins due to concealed ovulation).

4. Catholic Nuns wear a habit. So do Amish and some puritanical Christian sects. It's not just Muslims.

5. Promiscuity in women is still largely looked down upon by westerners. We have no such qualms with the male equivalent. There is no derogrative term for a male slut - it's the complimentary "stud".

We're ahead of the Muslims, but we've got a little bit to go too.

680. Unintelligent Design

Comment #40150 by Rtambree on May 13, 2007 at 11:01 am

57. Comment #40112 by Mash

Are you saying the science of Social Darwinism was sound?

Jews are degenerate? Or, if we let the mentally handicapped breed, it'll reduce the average IQ of society?

Well, we DO let anyone breed who wants to, and the average IQ of society has increased, so this Social Darwinist assumption has been disproved. The science was not sound.

Just what prescriptive morals arise from True (i.e. validated) Social Darwinism?

681. Christopher Hitchens - God is Not Great

Comment #40079 by Rtambree on May 13, 2007 at 3:11 am

Church Tax in Europe.

Almost every town and city on the continent has a giant old church in the middle that needs maintenance. As attendances are so low, a church tax pays for the upkeep.

In Germany, you can opt out, but not everyone does, as they still like to get married in a church or buried by the church (or a christening). If you opt out, you forgo these services.

Some of the buildings are 1,000 year old Gothic cathedrals - very elaborate, ornate and always in need of some repair.

In a sense, it's not a religious tax, as it could be viewed as a 'building maintenance tax' that ultimately attracts the tourists. Some cities like Chartres, Cologne, Milan are famous for their cathedrals and I'm sure visitors boost local economies.

So what do atheists propose?

1. Sell them off to become carpet warehouses, etc and get private enterprise to maintain them?

2. Tear them down, ignoring their architectural and heritage value? i.e. Whatever the market can afford, and if the market can't make the upkeep financially sustainable, then the asset has become full depreciated and expended.

3. Get the businesses who benefit from tourism to pay a higher rate of tax?

4. Charge an entrance fee to enter the church? St Pauls & Westminster Abbey in London do this now - they feel more like museums than religious institutions.

5. Put it to a vote of the townsfolk?

6. Turn them into monuments, warning of the depravity, irrationality, and violence of bronze-age superstition - a memorial to all those who suffered at the hands of religion. Lest we forget. Exhibit inquisition torture equipment in Catholic churches, weapons used by protestants in Anglican churches, a display of circumcision instruments, a wax figure of a scientist burning at the stake, a recreation of Galileo's trial, representations of the vast gold wealth while the poor starved, a sample "Indulgence", display cases full of Papal Bulls and other Decrees promoting ignorance.

682. Consciousness Comes from DNA

Comment #39897 by Rtambree on May 12, 2007 at 8:15 am

The problem with words is that they force our brains to think discretely... e.g. either the animal is consciousness or it is not.

Thinking along a continuum, i.e. that there's a spectrum of consciousness, is more difficult.

There's no one event in the lifetime of a embryo - fetus - baby - infant - juvenile - adult, where it suddently becomes conscious.

The brain is still developing into late teens - early 20s, and then it peaks and starts to die in the late 20s, so consciousness is always in flux.

Question - if language is the foundation to human consciousness through the ability to manipulate abstract concepts, are people with large vocabularies more "conscious" than people with people with small vocabularies? Can they have more thoughts?

683. Al Sharpton and Christopher Hitchens

Comment #39889 by Rtambree on May 12, 2007 at 7:21 am

It's amazing how much the Reverend was willing to jettison.

It's like the proponents in London's recent Intelligence Squared debate (Dawkins, Graying & Hitchens v Scruton, Spivey, Neuberger) where the proponents of religion throw out the Bible, the interventionist God, miracles, and any defence of the church).

Organisers of these debates should get a proper opponent in to actually defend religion *as practised*, rather than people who defend some vague wishy-washy deistic spirtual force who may have been present at the Big Bang.

684. The meaning of freedom

Comment #39883 by Rtambree on May 12, 2007 at 7:16 am

Even the MCC at Lords Cricket Ground eventually allowed women to be members.

It didn't happen overnight, but it will happen.

685. Christopher Hitchens - God is Not Great

Comment #39878 by Rtambree on May 12, 2007 at 7:10 am

If only this would filter up into the Australian government.

What is it about religion that disproportionately motivates people to enter politics and get into positions of power? Most of the world's leaders are MORE religious than their countryfolk.

England, Australia, and Germany are largely irreligious countries, but have religious Prime Ministers and Chancellors.

686. Unintelligent Design

Comment #39877 by Rtambree on May 12, 2007 at 7:04 am

5. Comment #39872 by Mash

Science discredits racism by undermining all the traditional arguments used to support racism - e.g. other races were less highly evolved, they had inferior intelligence, base temperment, or no morality. Mormonism and other religious justifications for racism focused on the fall of Adam, God's punishing one race because it was cursed it, et.

In theory, you're right, racists can simply make up another rationale, but all I'm saying is that science has discredited the justifications that were *actually* used. If most of the variation between humans is non-racially based (only 15% of the variation is racially-based) then one needs to indulge in some convoluted intellectual gynmastics to justify discrimination.

So, yes, science does aid morality by clarifying reasons why something is right or wrong.

If people say "we can't abort embryos because they suffer" and neurologists determine that you need a nervous system to suffer, then that reason not to abort is negated. Once again science assists in making moral decisions by placing them on a firm footing.

The same principle applies for whatever basis is used to discriminate against gays - science undermines that prejudice. It's not true that it's choice.

Irrational, superstituous, religious people can no longer just concoct some pseudo-intellectual rationale to justify whatever their emotions or religion tells them is right or wrong.

687. Unintelligent Design

Comment #39865 by Rtambree on May 12, 2007 at 6:27 am

"No society has ever endured more than a few generations without an unquestioningly true, but rationally inscrutable moral foundation."

What a stupid thing to say. Atheism's only been around since the 18th century and it's been growing ever since. The highest ranked countries in the world have the highest degree of secularism.

We don't get our morals from religion. We cherry-pick from the scriptures to find passages that can be interpreted to agree with whatever we agree with now.

Science DOES give us morals. The recent knowledge of common ancestry, 99% genetical overlap, and Jared Dimaond's geographical basis for differential development, gives us a firm empircal basis to discredit racism.

688. The Debate: Can We Live by Reason Alone?

Comment #39713 by Rtambree on May 11, 2007 at 5:35 pm

Anyone know how to get this FULLSCREEN?

689. Welsh Hindus fight to save Shambo the sacred bull

Comment #39425 by Rtambree on May 10, 2007 at 3:19 pm

This monkey says "thin out its numbers".

690. Londonistan Calling

Comment #39254 by Rtambree on May 10, 2007 at 8:23 am

Yeah, I would agree more with the article if it's applied consistently - Blair and Bush's war speeches (e.g. Bring 'em on, etc) can be incitement to violence, and the west kills a lot more innocent Muslims than Muslim extremists kill innocent westerners, principally because they've got the deadlier toys.

So, by all means, lock up the hate mongers and violent extremists - just so long as it's ALL of them, including the ones with the WMDs that repeatedly demonstrate they're not afraid to use them.

691. Anderson Cooper interviews Christopher Hitchens

Comment #39250 by Rtambree on May 10, 2007 at 8:15 am

He says "I would miss it"

Huh? All the nice things about religion that some people like (music, poetry, architecture, paintings) would still be there, and can be taught in History lessons.

The historical record of religion is enormous - even if the entire world was atheist and secular, the religious artistic legacy would survive for those who want to enjoy their Mahler symphonies or George Herbert poems.

Religion SHOULD BE TAUGHT in history, so that we don't make the same mistakes again and so that we know how fallible the brain is in over-attributing agency to the universe.

692. Disney daughter calls Muslim Mickey evil

Comment #39139 by Rtambree on May 10, 2007 at 4:38 am

Using imaginery beings to teach about imaginery beings is perfectly consistent.

693. Is Christianity Good for the World?

Comment #39132 by Rtambree on May 10, 2007 at 4:18 am

These letter exchanges are a waste of time because the participants can easily ignore any points they're uncomfortable with.

I prefer a live debate where you can directly challenge and pin down your opponenent on a specific issue and not relent until he or she concedes or reconciles.

694. Atheist offers to send letters post-Rapture

Comment #38901 by Rtambree on May 9, 2007 at 12:34 pm

What about a Post-Rapture Legal Service?

Need your wills executed when you ascend? Just $666 up front.

695. A Bunch of Monkeys

Comment #38302 by Rtambree on May 7, 2007 at 1:03 pm

It's the executive summary of Dawkins' The God Delusion and Sagan's Pale Blue Dot.

If you can't read the book, watch this video

696. The torture of the grave Islam and the afterlife

Comment #38098 by Rtambree on May 7, 2007 at 1:10 am

What's the difference between the story above, Christianity, Scientology, Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, or the Old Testament?

697. Your favorite book in the last 25 years?

Comment #37281 by Rtambree on May 4, 2007 at 1:33 am

4. Comment #37192 by davyB

>No fair naming more than one book!

You're right - If I had to name JUST ONE book from the last quarter-century, it would have to be...

Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs & Steel

...for it's originality, analysis, depth and quality of research, and in genuinely answering an interesting non-trivial and realworld question in a new way, backed up with lots of evidence and presented in a very clear and engaging style. It cleaned out all the science awards in its year and is often quoted by all the other pantheon members - Dawkins, Dennett, Pinker, etc.

There hasn't been a better science book in the last decade. By "better", I mean, new analysis in a readable way.

Lots of science books are well-written, but most simply rehash other people's ideas. Guns, Germs and Steel is the closest we have to 'On the Origin of Species' in the last decade.

698. Your favorite book in the last 25 years?

Comment #37185 by Rtambree on May 3, 2007 at 3:40 pm

Guns, Germs & Steel - Diamond
Demon Haunted World - Sagan
Understanding Power - Chomsky
Ancestors Tale - Dawkins
A Terrible Beauty - Watson
Blank Slate - Pinker
Surely You're Joking - Feynman

699. Christians and Atheists to Debate Existence of God in First-Ever 'NIGHTLINE FACE OFF'

Comment #37121 by Rtambree on May 3, 2007 at 12:34 pm

Thank you for debating the Rational Response Squad. Please hold - someone will be with you shortly. Your arguments are important to us.

Press #1 if you're arguing that all "this" had to come from somewhere.

Press #2 if you arguing that science can't explain everything.

Press #3 if you're claiming Hitler & Stalin were atheists

Press #4 if you're arguing that we can't disprove God.

Press #5 if you're arguing God gives people morality, consolation and hope

or...

Press #6 if you have any evidence whatsoever for the existence of God.

700. Richard Dawkins in the Time 100

Comment #37075 by Rtambree on May 3, 2007 at 10:37 am

Where does this list rank on "The Top 100 Meaningless Lists"? Vote now...