51. An apology to Peter Kay

Comment #25094 by Homo economicus on March 10, 2007 at 5:00 am

Journalists should report the news, not try to create it.

Richard Dawkins is behaving impeccably.

52. Response to Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris

Comment #24993 by Homo economicus on March 9, 2007 at 3:36 pm

Yet religion is an ideology as a human concept. It divides humanity rather than bringing us together as one.

Call human's demons? You mean like epileptics, and the mentally ill were? Many expressions use animals as a metaphor. If I said you are eating like a demon, rather than a pig, it has no meaning which is that your table manners are not following etiquette.

We have failed our religions? No, we have outgrown them as atheists; we need more than a meaningless concept to answer questions about the natural world and philosophy. This part of human discourse we have moved on from in the enlightenment era.

Man I am so hungry I could eat a demon!

53. Economics and human evolution

Comment #24880 by Homo economicus on March 9, 2007 at 3:02 am

So the fact that an efficient division of labour, and advantages in trade allowed Homo sapiens to have a comparative advantage, that helped their society to prosper is not something to consider because you do not like free market ideology?

If you can try to seperate economics as a science from economics as an ideology/philosophy.

The issue is did it give them an advantge that led to more food, higher birth rate, and a domination over Neanderthals?

No economist would say that capitalism makes us human! Well, unless they want to be laughed at.

54. Economics and human evolution

Comment #24812 by Homo economicus on March 8, 2007 at 5:48 pm

The article I get my name from. I hope that this may help that economics is not dismal and does deserve the term science.

55. British Book Awards shortlists 2007

Comment #24721 by Homo economicus on March 8, 2007 at 7:46 am

Well compared to the other books, TGD should win hands down.

'Rubbish. The Dawkins personality cult on these boards is really getting to embarrassing levels.'

May I draw your attention to the difference between your accusation and hero worship?

'A cult of personality is a term applied to a political institution in which a country's leader uses mass media to create a larger-than-life public image through unquestioning flattery and praise. The term often refers as well to leaders who did not use such methods during their lifetime, but are built up in the mass media by later governments.

A cult of personality differs from general hero worship in that it is specifically built around political leaders. However, the term cult of personality is often applied by analogy to refer to adulation of non-political leaders; an argument could easily be made, however, that the only notable differences to be found between the terms "hero worship," "cult of personality," or even, more simply, excessive admiration are largely in the context of the person making the accusation.' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_cult

Hero worship of Richard Dawkins on a Richard Dawkins website. Seems rational that such things will happen.

I do not think we see Dawkins as a political figure. A voice of reason crying out in the wilderness that other people, whether they like it or not, are having to listen too a bit more now.

56. Why there are almost no genuine atheists

Comment #24593 by Homo economicus on March 7, 2007 at 1:55 pm

iamb_spartacus

You assume that religion developed to give us moral values. What do you base that assumption on?

If we go back to the dawn of Homo sapians, did religion develop for other reasons? To explain the sun rising and falling. To make sense of death. To offer explanation.

Did it develop as a superstition; do this to avoid that. That human destiny was impacted by certain actions, rituals and beliefs.

You see, I do not think that religion was the starting point. There did become a point in human history when the discussion of moral values and what it is to be human became only possible through religion. Religion achieved a power function over the lifes's of citizens, and the only means to think about these terms.

The enlightenment is called such because of the realisation that we did not have to rely on tradition and superstition to answer questions about the natural world, or ethical behaviour. It was a revolution in thought, and religion slowly began to loose it's privledged position in society and monopoly to answer these questions for us.

Religion is a part of the human discourse. But to say it started with religion is not exactly true. It started with Homo sapians and group dynamics.

57. Why there are almost no genuine atheists

Comment #24586 by Homo economicus on March 7, 2007 at 1:04 pm

'The only response a genuine atheist would have to that fact is, so what? Which helps explain why there are almost no genuine atheists.'

We are human beings, despite our differences, and to equate athiesm with nihilism is flawed. We care about humanity, about its suffering. It is why we reject the concept that a loving entity would create this universe. Why we want to do something about it in this life-time.

There is no proof that one faith follows a path to such a meaningless concept as God. We have so little precious time on this earth, and we spend it fighting one another intellectually or worse killing one another, wetting our streets with blood for something as meaningless as the Easter bunny.

Untill we can find a world view that embraces our common humanity, that recognises that we are all a part of the same moral community, that our interdependence on each other makes space and time irrelevant, this bloodshed will continue.

A new human discourse is needed. God is the least important part of it; we as human beings made of flesh, blood, bile, puss, hopes, dreams, love and fears. We have to find a way together.

We have reached a point where we can kill ourselves with timid ignorance of the facts, or deliberately bring us to the point of nuclear war in our hatred and attachment to teachings of long dead men. Whose bones decay while the young die without having even wrestled with such questions or dared to have the dream that a new world, born free of hatred yet celebrating the individual differences that make cultures we can saviour as a part of our world heritage.

Do not insult me by saying that as an athiest I do not care.

58. Atheist Apostle

Comment #24342 by Homo economicus on March 6, 2007 at 4:58 am

Sam Harris does have a problem with torturing people:

"Given that many of us believe about the exigencies of our war on terrorism, the practice of torture, in certain circumstances, would seem to be not only permissible but necessary. Still, it does not seem any more acceptable, in ethical terms, than it did before." (End of Faith, pp. 199).

Now, the charge he makes against Chomsky on pp. 139-41 about ignoring the difffrenece of intentions is kind of forgotten here by Harris. Collatoral damage there is no intention to cause pain and death to non-combatants. When torturing someone you fully intend to casue pain and suffering to a person, even if it is to save millions of lives in a ticking time bomb scenerio.

Yet we are skwimish about exceptional circumstances, and not so about the thousands and hundreds that die because of war who are innocent of the conflict. I agree with Sam that it does seem something of a paradox.

If you answer no I would not use force to get this guy to talk to me in any of the scenerios that Sam mentions to you, then are you making a decision that leads to more evil than if you did? That is the question you need to answer before you dismiss what Sam is saying outright.

59. Religion and Politics

Comment #24341 by Homo economicus on March 6, 2007 at 4:41 am

15. Comment #24292 by steve99
17. Comment #24296 by kkant

Very true steve99, I was limiting myself to where the pool of candidates for President would come from. No doubt there are also US citizens that really do believe in hungry ghosts as real entities too. Buddhism is foremost a philosophy that very easily can have the trappings of religion. This is most regratable.

kkant: yes sadly there are supernatural interpretations of the Buddha. It was kind of happening in his life time as well so he changed his name to the Tagatha shortly before he died, which means of the same suchness. The point here is that he was a man, no different from any other man. The whole concept of Buddhahood really does get in the way, and that has been recognised.

Most people reject the supernatural stories of the Buddha, especially in the Zen tradition. Thich Nhat Hanh's "Old Path, White Clouds: Walking in the Footsteps of the Buddha" is an account of the Buddha's life and teachings which strips out all the supernatural elements of his life.

They really are not necessary (and are made up) unless you need proof of special powers/portent signs before you will listen to someone.

60. Religion and Politics

Comment #24285 by Homo economicus on March 5, 2007 at 4:55 pm

You want a leader who will do the right thing for the country, even if it goes against the faith they hold or even their ethical prnciples. The common good of the people is what counts.

For us outside the US we would want them to do what is right for the world.

Oh to have a philosopher king as a leader. Ours, if Tony's holiday reading is anything to go by, a theological king. Soon be gone. Will have a big party that day.

When you get rid of samsra, past lives, you are kind of left with buddhism as a phliosophy rather than a religion. I think that is how most practice in the West. It should be no more a bar to standing than if you admire the philosophy of Rawls or Nozick.

61. Atheists Take On Religion

Comment #24168 by Homo economicus on March 5, 2007 at 5:53 am

I did like the banner "How about some reason based initiatives!"

A crucial point that fails to get mentioned is that religious people too can be secularists as it is a political idea. Of course that did not come out in the news reports, as if atheism and secularism were interchangeable terms.

I did like Sam in the shades. Is he going to be touring the UK any time soon?

62. Houses of the Holy

Comment #24114 by Homo economicus on March 4, 2007 at 10:07 pm

Hold them to account now.

Why is it worth taking a chance that justice may be done in the after life?

Why are members of the flock not asking questions like where is the money going, where did you get that nice watch, can we see the paper trail for the charitable activties?

"God will punish them."

No, please let society do it!

63. Was there ever dog that praised his fleas?

Comment #24113 by Homo economicus on March 4, 2007 at 10:01 pm

Well if a christian offers you the book you could say heres my "Letter to a Christian Nation", we will compare notes afterwards.

This could work as I have "The End of Faith", and "The God Delusion".

And I should get them back shoudn't I. As they'd be hell to pay if they didn't.

I glanced at "Dawkins God" that McGrath wrote. I get the impression he fell in love with Christianity at University. Truely, madly, deeply. Head over hills and still going strong. His arguments are not even worth going into. Unless you share this love, how can you begin to understand why anyone else would?

64. The Silence That Kills

Comment #24023 by Homo economicus on March 4, 2007 at 10:31 am

I think the invasion of Afghanistan was justified; we let the political situation there develop to a point that we could be attacked from there with the Taliban's blessing. We only seemed to have the will to deal with the situation when 9/11 happened despite reapeted attempts in the past.

The thing is the allies resources should have been concentrated there. Iraq was not the threat it was made out to be, and we have become overstretched that we have not sorted out Afghanistan.

It is a mess, the West looks weak unable to even condemn suicide bombers. It is almost like people want Armageddon to come.

Hang on, oh .....

65. Daggers Drawn

Comment #23829 by Homo economicus on March 3, 2007 at 3:38 am

Just because we may be emotionally charged when having this sort of debate does not make us fundementalists. Infact by dictionary definition atheists cannot because we do not have any traditional orthodox religious beliefs to strictly maintain. Nor do we trust in any particular doctrine.

We do not want to ban religion or take away people's freedom to speak or believe. What secularists want is no special priviledge within the public square for faith issues or religious opinion or people. In the concept of pluralism we want a level playing field in public policy debate.

66. Research links some scriptures to hostile acts

Comment #23709 by Homo economicus on March 2, 2007 at 6:43 am

He He

For years they have been saying computer games,films and literature by showing violence promotes violence. Only a matter of time before it was thrown back at them that the bible is full of violence, rape, incest, murder, exploitative behaviour and would have an impact on readers.

Anyone remember Clockwork Orange when he is in prsion and reads the bible?

67. Bishops must not sit in reformed House of Lords

Comment #23708 by Homo economicus on March 2, 2007 at 6:39 am

That was a hoot on the census form - they tried to disallow it but I think they failed. The force is strong on this.

The issue is that democracy is about accountability to the people for whom you are making these decisions on behalf off. The House of Lords fails miserably on that score, the House of Commons has left reform so long because it does not want a legitimate chamber that can seriously challenge it.

As to bishops, why not refuse collectors, headmasters, doctors or any other group have a special privledge in a legislative branch?

We have parliamentary democracy in Britain, but Labour are tweaking rather than having any guiding principle to House of Lords reform. That is the problem.

68. Falwell says Christians shouldn't focus on global warming

Comment #23705 by Homo economicus on March 2, 2007 at 6:29 am

Apparently so Luthien. My mother used to read new age consipracy books and apparently Gore worships mother earth.

Have watched An Inconvenient Truth. Made a convincing case for us to be very concerned.

69. The Dawkins Confusion: Naturalism ad absurdum

Comment #23688 by Homo economicus on March 2, 2007 at 4:47 am

75. Comment #23665 by Corylus

Well spotted, the one thing that could be factually accurate in the whole article and he gets the chapter wrong!

I think it is more to do with Dawkins being a biologist who on their own territory is being more read and listened to then themselves.

70. Merkel wants EU to be vocal about Christian roots

Comment #23599 by Homo economicus on March 1, 2007 at 4:32 pm

Anyone else think this a "we do not want Turkey in the EU" kind of signal?

Or maybe an attempt to woe Christians to support the constitution?

There is this idea floating around that till we get in touch with our spiritual side the human race will be heading for its own destruction.

I think till we actually try to solve humanity's problems we will be on that course; this is not helping we need to look to the now and the future not misty eyed for a past that never was.

71. The Dawkins Confusion: Naturalism ad absurdum

Comment #23597 by Homo economicus on March 1, 2007 at 4:19 pm

Well having read it the argument seems to go on name calling and arguments that just make no point whatsoever. As irritating reading as when you cut up chillies then make love without first washing your hands.

Watch a child dying of leukaemia and then tell me that we should be pleased with God.

I do not see any evidence that there is a super being that consciously created the universe. If God does exist one worthy of worship? With Fry and Hitchins on that one.

72. If God is talking to you, too, Mr Cameron - don't listen

Comment #23485 by Homo economicus on March 1, 2007 at 3:47 am

Michael Portillo is a regular on BBC "This week" which is a casual smart look at politics in the UK
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/this_week/default.stm

I think Portillo is trying to say something nice about faith when he talks about a sense of right and wrong. People do cherry pick; that's why we are free to use reason and not an ancient collection of writings.

In the UK during General Election night it was a saying "Did you stay up for Portillo?" when he lost his seat in 1997. Several Cabinet Ministers lost their seats in Parliament and a journalist Martin Bell beat a corrupt MP Neil Hamilton. Tony Blair came to power and for a while most of us were under the delusion things could only get better.

It ended quickly for me when they introduced tution fees having said they would not. Dorms at uni were full with people sleeping in corridors as people did not take their gap years to avoid the fees. It was a fiasco, and took ages to find accomodation for everyone.

73. Memo: Stop teaching evolution

Comment #22630 by Homo economicus on February 20, 2007 at 3:48 am

I came across a book yesterday in the business management section about workplace environment. It advocated 'a zero tolerance for arseholes.'

I believe it is important that this crucial concept is actively applied in public life as well.

74. God, sex, drugs and politics

Comment #22555 by Homo economicus on February 19, 2007 at 6:01 pm

Hooray an article from The Economist makes it on here at last!

Hope the economics part of the front website fills up soon.

75. Researchers find 6,000-year-old fossil evidence

Comment #22421 by Homo economicus on February 17, 2007 at 3:08 am

'We knew from historic and ethnographic records that people were eating domesticated chili peppers, but this archaeological evidence confirms those findings.'

Looking for evidence, now that seems like a good idea. Wonder who would be against that? ;)

76. Foreword for the UK edition of 'Letter to a Christian Nation'

Comment #22420 by Homo economicus on February 17, 2007 at 3:05 am

Have just bought the book in England, and halfway through it. Also reading The End of Faith.

It is the book that all Christians should read, because even if the arguement does not move them, it should show a reasonable argument not to subscribe to any religion.

Wish this book had been out when I was younger.

One note: the book was on the same shelf as David Icke. Which was why I had problems finding it till the shop assistant helped me. So you have the God Delusion in popular science, and Sam Harris in Mind, Spirit and Body section. Suggested it should either be in religion or philosophy or next to the God Delusion. Not next to David Icke!

77. My critics are wrong to call me dogmatic

Comment #22366 by Homo economicus on February 15, 2007 at 6:06 am

For the sake of inquiry I read "Dawkin's God" after having read "The God Delusion". McGrath's arguments come to the conclusion that christianity gives a beauty to existence, a framework from which to go about life with meaning.

Bully for him.

To say that Dawkins is wrong to challenge the intellectual underpinnings of such belief is wrong. In debate you should be able to challenge anything, you need evidence or at least logic on your side and the ability to argue rationally.

Religion is a human concept. It is impossible to prove any supernatural support for any particular faith. Saying that your faith gives you a sense of purpose or a warm glow does not make it true.

The issue with religion is that by taking as gospel a holy book that cannot be debated, allows views to spring which endanger humanity and the world. This is the problem when reason and debate are not allowed, because my God is right so shut up.

There are people seriously saying that God will not allow the environment to kill us so pollute away. That the end of the world is near so do not try and tackle social issues. That killing the non believer is your moral duty to protect the faith. That life after death means that only spirtual matters count. That my faith is more important than what science has to say.

Dawkins is right to get involved. Yet I hope that he concentrates on the public understanding of science. Because I fear that science as a whole is not well taught in the UK and as adults many of us try to undo the damage by reading him.

78. Does Richard Dawkins exist?

Comment #21927 by Homo economicus on February 11, 2007 at 10:55 pm

Well lots of varied opinion, but in the main it does not do anything to damage RD's hypothesis about religion. The person does not like RD's books; well clearly a small minority of the readership.

And I think if anyone doubts the importance of RD weighing into the debate, Anderson does illustrate the importance of science keeping its rigour. There are faith heads out there that want faith in the science classroom.

Wrote to my MP about science education. He replied:

"Thank you for your recent email about creationism and education.

As you are aware the government has made it clear the Truth in Science materials should not be used in science lessons. In a response to the Labour MP Graham Stringer on November 1, Jim Knight, a minister in the Department for Education and Skills, wrote: "Neither intelligent design nor creationism are recognised scientific theories and they are not included in the science curriculum."

Do not rest on your laurels. They will keep trying.

79. Does Richard Dawkins exist?

Comment #21404 by Homo economicus on February 9, 2007 at 3:47 am

If we believe the web link, this was done as an attack on Dawkins.

Yet it seems to me an attack on Alister McGrath (who wrote the Dawkin's Delusion) as well.

Dr Tommyrot
'My main objection is simply this they are following a delusional Dawkins... when they should be following me.'

'The Dawkins Delusion published by Banter and Twaddle'

I thought it sounded funny and did not have any clever counterpoint to what Dawkins says. Rather it seemed the punch line at the end was on Dawkins well known parasite.

So if this really was aimed squarly at Dawkins it fails. Me thinks there is more mischeif to this piece.

80. Interview with Alister McGrath, author of 'The Dawkins Delusion?'

Comment #21092 by Homo economicus on February 7, 2007 at 2:42 pm

I always wonder, if during McGrath's first few days at Oxford he had been grabbed by some firendly highly intelligent philosopher types (some Humes, Poppers and a few Kants) that showed him some thinking about the world he had not thought about before. Yet it was the christians.

Ah well, there but for the Grace of God . . .

81. Give us back our bones, pagans tell museums

Comment #20770 by Homo economicus on February 6, 2007 at 11:31 am

In what way are these bones their property?

Next they will ask for ownership of Stonehenge for the same reason.

82. Believing In Things Unseen Is Not Delusion

Comment #20767 by Homo economicus on February 6, 2007 at 11:20 am

'For my part, I believe in the historicity of the biblical story—that is, that the God of Abraham formed a covenant with the people of Israel and that, in the first century in Judea, a son of Israel, Jesus of Nazareth, offered his followers a story of salvation that involved a human atoning sacrifice and a physical resurrection—a series of events, grounded in time and space, that, mysteriously and in ways veiled from complete human understanding, have effected the forgiveness of sins and have promised the gift of eternal life.'

I really try to think there are moderates in religion. Then people like this turn up and kind of ruin it for me.

I suppose for me moderates are those that believe their faith is a human construct, that has a culture and traditional significance for them.

Jon Meacham is Newsweek editor. He really wants to claim he is not delusional in literally believing in the resurrection and atonement of original sin? Sorry but just because you read it does not make it true, as he of all people should know in his profession.

83. U.S. 'Satisfied' With Religion's Public Role, But More Want Less

Comment #20720 by Homo economicus on February 6, 2007 at 6:26 am

Thats the nature of polls.

They survey a small random sample, and sometimes weigh the results based on the total population (eg. if most of the population is 20-30 then this group will have more weight in the poll).

It really helps to know who conducted the poll, how the sample was choosen, and the results finalised. If you do not have this information, scepticism is worthy.

I should add that Gallup are considered fairly reliable as a polling organisation.

84. Benny Hinn Faith Healing Scam - Burton and Tinkler

Comment #20718 by Homo economicus on February 6, 2007 at 6:19 am

Said MIND_REBEL:
'This perfectly demonstrates the moral and ethical limitations of a capitalist society.'

No, it perfectly illustrates how desperate people will try anything for those they love, and that rationality goes out the window for some when their life is at stake.

The charlatan needs no economic or political system to flourish. Just willing people to pay him in the hope of a fix. That in Benny Hinn it is so blatant on such a scale you would hope more people would be ridiculing him and have him up for fraud.

Maybe the best hope would be a full tax audit?

85. Tolerating intolerance is still this country's besetting sin

Comment #20635 by Homo economicus on February 5, 2007 at 9:37 am

I am with the Bishop of Oxford in that people of moderate faith need to be more passionate about their faith and reclaim it from the preacher haters.

Here is a scenerio I worry about. With Dawkins, Harris, the moderates will whimper away, - perhaps one of the very reasons they are moderates is that they are culturally religious rather than have faith. The religious people left are the hard liners, who we will not be won over we rational debate.

I think we need an alliance among religious secularists, religious moderates and ourselves. I think that will be difficult (especially with faith schools) but we need the moderates to reclaim their faith and challenge their own who preach hate.

If they are not prepared to do that then maybe they are part of the problem not the solution. I just do not think that polarising ourselves will solve anything.

86. Tolerating intolerance is still this country's besetting sin

Comment #20607 by Homo economicus on February 5, 2007 at 4:25 am

The tolerance of intolerance. The respect of disrespect.

We need to reclaim our language here!

If someone incites to violence or murder that is clearly aginst the law, regardless of the person's belief or political ideology. This needs to be applied to hate preachers, animal extermists and others who believe that murder and intimidation are acceptable tools in public debate.

No one has special exemption from this.

87. Ministers to ban creationist teaching aids in science lessons

Comment #20561 by Homo economicus on February 4, 2007 at 7:04 am

I have e mailed my local MP about this asking for him to support the science curriculum. Let your representatives know how you feel about the issue.

The last thing we need is science going from dumming down to putting faith on a par with scientific inquiry.

88. Sextuplet parents take B.C. to court over baby seizures

Comment #20560 by Homo economicus on February 4, 2007 at 6:58 am

As a child my family studied with the JWs, and if you follow the link in my signature you can find out what such an experience is like.

JWs will attempt to do anything to prevent blood transfusions from happening, even abducting children so that a hospital cannot do so.

The interests of a child's life should take precendent over the belief's of parents. Remember the people who used to sacrifice newborns to their gods in worship? Parental rights over their children are not absoulte; you cannot seriously claim in the name of religion doing something that will harm your children.

I remember one sister who was really morose about having had a blood transfusion when a child. She felt unclean as a result having joined the JWs as an adult.

The issue is that a child cannot give consent on medical issues (how can a child understand?). The issue is whether medical treatment is in the interests of the child or not. I do not think this is a slippery slope; it is something that happens in the world. The patient's interests are always paramount.

Joing Jws in study
http://www.richarddawkins.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=55408&highlight=#55408

Leaving and brief mention of transfusions
http://www.richarddawkins.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=58912&highlight=#58912

89. Evolution Debate - Pigliucci vs Hovind

Comment #20536 by Homo economicus on February 3, 2007 at 10:46 pm

It is so complicated it needs a designer. So who created God? Or is God less complex than a living organism?

This seems to me the most logical reason against saying that complexity is a justified argument for a designer.

Did not come up, though I thought the phone caller who came from an oil family was going to touch on it. Personal increduality is not evidence of a creator, let alone that such a being should be imagined to be worthy of worship. Otherwise there are many painters and writers I should be building shrines too.

Ken has an outlook that goes against the scientific outlook. I believe this, and any evidence that counters this is flawed because I refuse to believe it. Good science looks at the evidence regardless of the personal views of the scientist.

Despite being an atheist I am moved by the life of William Tyndale. While he was burnt to death for translating the bible into common english he cryed 'God open the King's eyes!' The irony is the King James Bible, done a few years later, took the majority of its scholarship from Tyndale.

That ideas should be expressed in the common tongue, and understanding shared with others is an important ideal.

Romans 13:5-7
For this reason you must obey the authorities - not just because of God's punishment, but also as a matter of conscience. That is also why you pay taxes, because the authorities are working for God when they fulfil their duties. Pay, then, what you owe them; pay them your personal and property taxes, and show respect and honour for them all.

God give me my just desert? With butterscotch please :)

90. Send The God Delusion to your MP

Comment #20532 by Homo economicus on February 3, 2007 at 8:26 pm

i accept that a standard letter would be useful, in it makes it easier for ourselves. Yet we can write a few words ourselves. In the UK we can e mail our MPs.

MPs respond to volume of mail, rather than volumes we may send. MPs are concerned about votes, sometimes about certain principles. You want to make them think about secularism, write to them and attend meetings that they do. Go to their surgery and speak about your concerns.

I will say one thing about fundies - they get off their backside and do something. Lets put the herding of cats line to rest - as individuals acting on our concerns we can make a difference.

91. Smoking changes brain chemistry

Comment #20236 by Homo economicus on February 1, 2007 at 8:10 am

Well at least on July 1st onwards people where I work should become less depressed thanks to a smoke free environment.

92. Neil deGrasse Tyson - Death by Black Hole

Comment #20234 by Homo economicus on February 1, 2007 at 8:07 am

It would be great that people would have a scientific literacy the way people do of language.

Yet we seem to be struggling at my place of work for people to be competent in simple maths.

I think his approach to encouraging inspiring sparky teachers is great. If we can find a way to encorage these sort of people in the profession and to join than maybe we can be optimistic.

93. 'Friends of God' Documentary

Comment #20144 by Homo economicus on January 31, 2007 at 3:10 pm

Job 40:15
'Look at the monster Behemoth; I created him and I created you. He eats grass like a cow,

BEHEMOTH: Some identify this with the hippopoatamus, others with a legendary creature.' The Good News Newcomer Bible.

The words straw and clutching spring to mind

94. Durham Council Votes To Continue Saying Lord's Prayer

Comment #19539 by Homo economicus on January 28, 2007 at 3:40 am

Yes I thought it was Durham UK too.

However, one note that did happen here. Shortly before women were going to be admitted to Durham University, at the banquet meal that was held, the senior students stood up in protest and walked out. This allowed my politics lecturer as a freshman to gorge himself on wine and food.

In short, these kind of silly things happen in the UK too. I think solidarity is a necessary part of the humanistic condition.

For example, in the UK MPs have to swear alleigence before the Queen. Tony Ben, hard left socialist Labour MP, usually does it by saying before 'As a lifelong committed republican I swear ...

That somehow pray will effect the natural world - may one day reason and hard work be the order of the day in politics.

95. CNN Sylvia Browne Fraud

Comment #19538 by Homo economicus on January 28, 2007 at 3:27 am

Entirley agree Katana.

These con artists prey on desperate people in all situations who want answers and go against reason in there such for them.

Why such people are given air time granting legitmacy is a travesty of human intellect.

96. Are politics in your DNA?

Comment #19453 by Homo economicus on January 27, 2007 at 9:36 am

Did Frank Herbert know something we did not? In the Dune series other memory (ego/memories) of ancestors was passed genetically. Are we heading in that direction?

Would need to know more about the study's methodology to know how seriously we should be taking this.

97. Send The God Delusion to your MP

Comment #19118 by Homo economicus on January 25, 2007 at 3:56 am

Ok I am going against the grain here, but only in the how.

Writing to your MP about the importance of secularism is a wonderful thing - perhaps a standard letter requiring just our signature and postage to our MP would be wonderful. MPs respond to volume in their mail bags from constituents.

TGD being sent is fine but may cause people to think thats it. Do not think so. Everyone that cares about secularism and religions impact on public policy write to your representative.

One thing better than hotel rooms - how about putting scientific prose on railway station posters - get people thinking about science. In the UK loads of christian posters and scripture readings at stations.

98. The Bright Revolution

Comment #19061 by Homo economicus on January 24, 2007 at 3:08 pm

Do not like the brights term either. Have posted the issue of a better modern term:

http://www.richarddawkins.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5744&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

My prefered phrase is a free thinker that takes a down to earth approach. Would love to see it on a T-shirt with a comission ;)

99. Intelligent design to feature in school RE lessons

Comment #18954 by Homo economicus on January 24, 2007 at 1:08 am

I managed to escape RE at school, and when in the library did extra maths and english - this proved more benefical I think.

However, that was when studying with JWs as a child. Out of the pot and into the fire ...

The good thing about the curriculum is showing to children that there are diverse opinions out there, especailly if logic and reason is included. Usually (especially in religion) if any difference is mentioned it is done in a way that you would not accept it.

100. The Mystery of Consciousness

Comment #18916 by Homo economicus on January 23, 2007 at 3:41 pm

This is something I have only started getting into. Reading William H. Calvin's 'A Brief History of the Mind.' That chemical reactions and nerve cells firing have such consequances for animals.

That melatonin released from a squirrel's pineal gland every night from days becoming shorter causes the hoarding of nuts in winter (page 9).

Neurobiology is fascinating.