Comments by epeeist

1151. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #166187 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 1:35 am

Comment #166172 by MartinSGill

Having recently read Viktor Frankl's book (Man's Search for Meaning) I drew the conclusion that he was either agnostic/atheist or possibly a deist, despite his Jewish heritage.

I can't find the quotation. But wasn't it Frankl who said the biggest lift in the morale of camp inmates was being moved to a new camp where there were no chimneys?

EDIT: Just waiting for A S Marques to come along and tell me none of the camps had chimneys.

1152. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166181 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 1:24 am

Comment #165844 by chewmanfoo

I look at your avatar and think, "My she's a pretty girl.

I don't buy this notion of Anna being pretty. Pretty is a little girl going to a party in a pink frock. Anna is beautiful.

Now I don't have too much problem with some of the invariant triggers, such as glossy hair, clear skin and good teeth being indicators of health, size and shape being indicators of child bearing ability.

However, I do wonder about cultural differences. We had a Japanese girl stay with us from a time who was very good looking. However, I am not sure whether I saw her beauty in the same way as a Japanese person would see her.

1153. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165884 by epeeist on April 22, 2008 at 2:08 pm

Comment #165839 by Remnant

A little reading material regarding genetics, mutations,and the implausibility of macro-evolution.
It is never too late to pry open volitionally closed minds...

All cretinists do is whine about the ToE.

So, in the interest of fairness I would like to invite you to present some features of ID. Specifically:

What predictions does it make?
How can these predictions be tested and falsified
What tests have been made and what were the results?

Now this is a dialogue, so you should really follow the rules that are normally accepted by participants.

I have given a list of things to be avoided here - http://www.richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2484,Interviews-with-Richard-Dawkins-and-Michael-Shermer,Skepticality-The-Official-Skeptic-Podcast,page3#165735

1154. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165869 by epeeist on April 22, 2008 at 1:45 pm

Comment #165865 by chewmanfoo

geeze you'd think with all the powers of Satan, principalities and powers, Dawkins could get a bigger pipe and more servers.

Unless of course he is being DDoSed by all the "Expelled" groupies.

1155. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165782 by epeeist on April 22, 2008 at 10:05 am

Comment #165772 by TheTruthID

I find it funny that Dawkins, when caught off guard, admitted to ID in the movie "Expelled".

Well, I was nice to you yesterday. However you have exhausted the patience I had.

You were asked to provide evidence that ID is science. You didn't do it.

You were asked to show what predictions ID makes. You didn't do that either.

You were asked to show how any predictions that ID makes could be tested. Did you answer? That would be no.

Finally, you were asked to tell us what tests had been conducted on ID and what results had been found. Anything? Well apart from an echo that is. Zilch.

In this post - http://www.richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2484,Interviews-with-Richard-Dawkins-and-Michael-Shermer,Skepticality-The-Official-Skeptic-Podcast,page3#165735 I give some of the things one should not do in a critical dialogue. Included there are things like changing the agenda, not fulfilling the burden of proof or attempting to shift it, failing to reply to questions and being evasive.

All of these describe what you do here. The question is why you do it. It is very simple.You are an ignorant and gullible fool. There is no evidence for ID, no tests have ever been done, no results have ever been produced. In short, ID has the same empirical strength as extispicy.

So as clodhopper says - you might as well get the scriptural quotes and threats in now, that is what all theists like you descend to. It is all you have got, you certainly haven't got any valid arguments or you would have shown them to us by now.

1156. If God Is Dead, Who Gets His House?

Comment #165771 by epeeist on April 22, 2008 at 9:37 am

Comment #165763 by irate_atheist

Outrageously slow. Slower than a badgers arse.

I wonder whether the site is being DDoSed. My innate sense of conspiracy blames the infestation of theists that we have had from the "Expelled" site.

1157. Interviews with Richard Dawkins and Michael Shermer

Comment #165735 by epeeist on April 22, 2008 at 7:29 am

Comment #165715 by Incredulous

**** him! I wouldn't wait around for a sensible reply from clearmind if I were you, epeeist.

I am not expecting a great deal. We have had a series of cut-and-run theists of late, at least one of whom was directed here from the "Expelled" site. All of them doing exactly the same, coming here with maximum braggadocio and minimum knowledge and attempting to generate quarrel dialogue.

We have been too nice to these people, trying to explain things and expecting them to be reasonable and actually read the explanations. The best they can do is provide a link to a random page on AiG that shows our explanations are "wrong".

The time has come to make them provide some answers. If ID is science then let them tell us how it works.

All I am asking for is for them to follow the rules for an informal, critical dialogue. To paraphrase from Douglas Walton's "Informal Logic"

Unlicenced attempts to change the agenda are not allowed
Not making a serious attempt to fulfill an obligation is a bad strategy. Notable here are failures to meet a burden of proof or to defend a commitment when challenged.
Trying to shift the burden of proof or alter the burden of proof is illicitly is not allowed.
Purporting to carry out an internal proof using premises that have not been conceded is not allowed.
Appealing to external sources of proof without backing up your argument properly can be subject to objection.
Failures of relevance including providing the wrong thesis, wandering away from the point to be proved or answering the wrong question in a dialogue are not allowed
Failing to ask questions that are appropriate for a given stage of dialogue should be prohibited, along with asking questions that are inappropriate.
Failing to reply appropriately to questions should not be allowed, including replies that are unduly evasive.
Failing to define, clarify or justify the meaning of a definition in accord with standards of precision appropriate to the discussion is a violation if the use is challenged by another participant
A participant must not try to force the premature closure of a dialogue until it is properly closed, either by mutual consent or by fulfillment of the goal of the dialogue.

1158. Interviews with Richard Dawkins and Michael Shermer

Comment #165709 by epeeist on April 22, 2008 at 4:53 am

Comment #165704 by clearmind

84 per cent of world population stick to their faith because they are rational and see the things through logic and reach the conclusion that perfect things require perfect design and a designer.

Argumentum ad Populum. A master logician like you should know this.

Wooter - it is extremely rude to leave a thread without answering the questions that were asked of you. Anyone would think you were unable to reply.

Could you please answer the questions I raised here
http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2480,Gods-and-earthlings,Richard-Dawkins,page4#165692

1159. Gods and earthlings

Comment #165692 by epeeist on April 22, 2008 at 3:46 am

Comment #165689 by clearmind

EEPIST
How do explain the earth and other planets' rotation and spinning around themselves, their relation between them and the creatures on the earth by sky evolution? (Sky evolution ?) Or again unexplained CHANCES?

No, this isn't how dialogue works. You have asked some questions, we gave you some answers. Now it is time for you to give us some answers to our questions.

Here are mine

why is "Intelligent Design" science?
What are its basic hypotheses?
hat predictions does it make?
How can these be tested?
How can it be falsified?
What tests have been made and what were the results?

Until you answer these questions I don't think you have the right to ask any more questions.

Oh, and I want rather better answers than you gave to Frankus "things cannot be questioned" is to admit your ignorance and bigotry.

1160. If God Is Dead, Who Gets His House?

Comment #165676 by epeeist on April 22, 2008 at 3:11 am

Talk about a sign

The Folio Society have just offered me "Great Cathedrals of the Middle Ages". I think I will have Chartres.

1161. If God Is Dead, Who Gets His House?

Comment #165626 by epeeist on April 22, 2008 at 12:24 am

Comment #165620 by Artful_Dodger

It seems that the "atheist faith" meme is alive and well.

You are David Robertson and I claim my £5.

1162. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165495 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 2:18 pm

Comment #165491 by The Reverend Dark

(Nice way of saying my arse would be kicked so hard that it would end up as a set of hairy Canadian earmuffs.)

Total aside. I had some lessons off the former Canadian national coach (he was the British national coach at the time). A guy named Bob Anderson, he did one or two other things as well ;-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Anderson_(fencer)

1163. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165493 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 2:15 pm

Comment #165488 by clodhopper

epee: you're a bit chuffed about that, aren't you?

Just a bit :-D

My hated rival from another club looked grimmer and grimmer as it became obvious my two pupils would be the two finalists.

The guy on the left fences for Ireland (as you can tell from his breeches) and is due to spend some time training with the Spanish squad. The guy on the right is on the British Olympic Pathway looking to qualify for 2012. Shall we say there is a certain amount of resentment at my (indirect) success.

1164. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165486 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 2:04 pm

Comment #165480 by The Reverend Dark

Epeeist thrust thusly

Hey, want to see my body guards

http://www.nw-fencing.org.uk/index.php?option=com_zoom&Itemid=73&page=view&catid=8&PageNo=1&key=0&hit=1

1165. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165481 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 2:01 pm

Comment #165474 by TheTruthID

I will look into the Spartina grass species you recommened. You seem like the only one who will have respectful dialouge. Is there any way I can e-mail you privately in order to continue this dialouge?

We didn't have a dialogue. You asked some questions, we gave you some answers.

We asked you some questions and got nothing, zilch, nada in return. Why do you think that was?

Here is some free information. ID is not science. It is not a theory, it doesn't even rank as a conjecture. It is creationism in another guise as the Wedge document indicates - http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Wedge_document

Just look in "Pandas and People" and compare it with "Creation Biology" - http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2005/11/missing_link_cd.html

1166. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165475 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 1:55 pm

Comment #165470 by The Reverend Dark

No laughing boy, you started by making inflammatory statements, coupled with assertions that would be laughable coming from a grade school child, let alone and adult.

We are knocking 10 points off his estimated IQ every time he refuses to come up with any answers.

At the moment I think it is down to about the level of a very small beetle.

1167. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165459 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 1:43 pm

Comment #165456 by TheTruthID

I have done my reading and sought out the mountains of information available thus came to my belief in ID.

Then share it with us. You constantly avoid giving answers. It really is very simple. Scientific theories have evidence to back them up, they make predictions, the predictions can be tested and failures in the tests falsify the theory.

You have shown us nothing. No evidence, no predictions, no tests, no results. You claim to have mountains of information, show it to us.

1168. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165449 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 1:36 pm

Comment #165442 by TheTruthID

Why I accept ID.

If you accept ID then you can tell us how it works. We want the process. How do organisms get designed? Who or what does the design? How can this be tested and falsified. Show us some of the tests that have been made and what the results were.

Please don't tell me to read a book or go to some gibberish website. You explain to me the process.

If you won't read a book then how are you going to learn? The Theobald paper on the link I gave you gives a whole stack of evidence for evolution by natural selection, how it can be tested and how it can be falsified. That explains the process.

We are not here to educate you. That is your responsibility.

All we want is for you to show us what makes ID a theory in the Popperian sense. Just get on with it.

1169. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165444 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 1:30 pm

Comment #165439 by al-rawandi

Another deduction and we will have a garden salad.... Fat free dressing.

I suggested a tactical switch this weekend. Stop being nice and explaining stuff and ask for answers from them. I think you need to add another cause of death to the canonical list - "I am not coming back because they asked me hard questions for which there are no answers on the AiG website".

1170. Resentment Over Darwin Evolves Into a Documentary

Comment #165438 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 1:21 pm

Comment #165375 by black wolf

Current IMDB score 3.6 out of ten.

Current score on Rotten Tomatoes is 13% - http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/expelled_no_intelligence_allowed/

1171. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165433 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 1:15 pm

Comment #165425 by TheTruthID

I don't understand something. Please inform me of what I do not understand?

No, you don't have a free pass.

Answer the questions that have been put to you. What makes ID science, what predictions does it make, how can it be tested, what tests have been made and what were the results.

Don't forget - every time you make a post that doesn't answer the questions an angel loses its wings.

More importantly - every time you fail to answer marks you out to be a complete no-nothing and we deduct another 10 from your estimated IQ. Not long before you are down to negative numbers.

1172. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165423 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 1:06 pm

Comment #165419 by TheTruthID

Your question of the Bird Flu. I agree, I want the scientists to use their ideas of MICRO-evolution to try and trace the origin of the infection, not Macro-evolution. I assume you know the difference?

Since Steve has a Ph.D. in biology then I guess he might.

I seen you still haven't answered any questions that have been asked of you. Why does that not surprise me. Come on, why is it taking so long?

Show us why ID is a better theory than Darwin's. In fact, show us why it is a theory rather than just creationism in a fancy vocabulary.

1173. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165415 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 12:58 pm

Comment #165403 by TheTruthID

You ask, what does ID predict? How has MACRO-evolution predictions been tested and whether it can be falsified and misrepresented? I want to know what tests were cunducted and what the results were. I challenge you to show me one shred of scientific evidence that proves MACRO-evolution?

Oh that one is easy - http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

Now - get with the show. Answer the questions that have been put to you. How is ID science, what does it predict, how can it be tested and falsified, what tests have been done and what were the results?

Prevaricate once more and we will know that you actually don't have any answers.

1174. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165407 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 12:53 pm

Comment #165399 by BillySands

Shame David Robertson is not here to see the tolerant love of christians.

Oh, he is. Look on the Open Letter thread. The most despicable post I have ever seen from him. So loathsome that it even got Steve Z. seriously pissed.

Well dished by MPhil though.

1175. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165400 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 12:47 pm

Comment #165393 by Diacanu

So, was that shit a death threat, or what?

Remember the guy who came across from Vox Day's site with the penis replacement as an avatar.

Anyway, do you want to borrow my bodyguards - http://www.nw-fencing.org.uk/index.php?option=com_zoom&Itemid=73&page=view&catid=8&PageNo=1&key=0&hit=1

1176. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165394 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 12:38 pm

Comment #165387 by TheTruthID

I would love to see how evolution is recorded in the fossil record?

No, that isn't the way it works. You came, raised a point and got some answers.

Now it is your turn to answer questions.

Here are my questions - I want to know what makes ID (that stands for Intelligent Design by the way, not Ignorant Deism) science. I want to know what it predicts, how its predictions can be tested and whether it can be falsified. I want to know what tests have been conducted and what the results were.

1177. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165365 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 11:49 am

Comment #165350 by navyjake95

Furthermore, it's culture warriors that are flocking to see this movie - I suggest you think about that.

If you can provide some evidence that this is so, then I might just do that.

Mind you, you are going to have to convince me the New York Times hasn't got a clue what it is talking about - http://movies.nytimes.com/2008/04/18/movies/18expe.html?scp=1&sq=expelled review&st=nyt

The guys from Scientific American don't seem to enthused either - http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=ben-steins-expelled-review-john-rennie

1178. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165357 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 11:42 am

Comment #165336 by righton

Expelled came in 8th or ninth in box office earnings. Considering there is usually about eight to ten different movies playing at a given movie theater this is not a good showing at all.

I note that it came in just below another fantasy movie "Horton Hears a Who".

1179. Ben Stein Vs. Sputtering Atheists

Comment #165164 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 6:44 am

Comment #165157 by Incredulous

What next? I guess there comes a point where we just have to be satisfied with being sane and continue to do our little bit to forward reason by simply being reasonable and scientific.

There was a time I would have agreed with you. However, I think that time is past. See my post - http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2394,Lying-for-Jesus,Richard-Dawkins,page51#163736

In a follow-up post I suggest that at best we should treat the likes of remnant with polite ruthlessness. It must have struck a chord since Steve Zara has now gone on the offensive (though he still adds "please" after demanding evidence).

1180. Gods and earthlings

Comment #165156 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 6:18 am

Comment #165151 by clearmind

wOW THE PICTURE IS THE EVOLUTION OR BEFORE MONKEY OR AFTER MONKEY

Your caps lock is stuck.

Are you going to make an attempt at answering my post #165107?

1181. Expelled Overview

Comment #165148 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 6:04 am

Comment #165145 by HaveEngngDegreeHeHe

Suppose you look under the hood of two different model cars from the same manufacturer. You may notice some similarities. The obvious explanation for this is "design and manufacturing efficiency"

Wow, you have cars that breed and mutate. That is so fucking cool!

1182. Gods and earthlings

Comment #165107 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 4:21 am

Comment #165093 by clearmind

This is where atheists or evolinn get stuck. They do not want to deal with logic or reason while they put their evolution idea forward, or they go with Dawkins' UNEXPLAINED DODGING.

Clearmind (sic). You are very active in shouting about the problems of evolution.

What you have never provided is an alternative theory. Now when I say theory I mean something that actually predicts something. I also want something that can be tested and falsified if it is wrong.

Here for example is an article in the Washington Post that gives some information on how Darwins theory can predict things - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/25/AR2005092501177.html

You will note that the predictions are testable

So give it your best shot, use "Intelligent Design" if you like since you appear to think it trashes the theory of evolution. What predictions does ID make, how can these predictions be tested and falsified? If they have been tested then what were the results?

1183. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165058 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 2:10 am

Comment #165020 by jonwes

(3.1 million last I saw)

I heard 3.2, but I wouldn't want to worry about the difference.

What I did want to ask is, what is the average price of a cinema ticket in the US? This should give us a rough count of the number who went to see it.

The one thing that it isn't going to be possible to estimate is how many of these were Christian groups who were being bribed to attend.

1184. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164685 by epeeist on April 20, 2008 at 2:07 pm

Comment #164674 by Frankus1122

That is why Tolkien's series of stories and writings are all so interesting. To me, at any rate

Myth-index. He uses just about every entry in the catalogue. Bound to hit you somewhere.

1185. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164682 by epeeist on April 20, 2008 at 2:05 pm

Comment #164675 by MPhil

well, Berkley's idealism was almost "theistic" - he said that matter doesn't exist, only minds and ideas

Sorry, in joke. We had a user Dianelos Georgoudis who was the bane of Steve and I (and several others) over a period of months. He started off interesting but we got nowhere with him. Mind you Steve and I were young and naive then. I think we would do a better job now, thanks to you and others on this site.

1186. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164672 by epeeist on April 20, 2008 at 1:58 pm

Comment #164670 by stew99

Great news! Expelled did a lousy $3.2 million at the box office this weekend, despite its huge media push.

Evidence please.

Err, sorry. Could you give us a link.

EDIT: sorted - http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iTFVPukHHFXxfTOmpSb22BHpnJeQ

I see it comes just behind another fantasy movie "Dr. Seuss' Horton Hears a Who!"

1187. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164671 by epeeist on April 20, 2008 at 1:56 pm

Comment #164664 by Steve Zara

Oh yes! I have used the "D-word" here in the last few days.

Seems to be getting to MPhil too. He is talking about solipsism, Berkley-idealism and brains in vats. I am just waiting for him to put "theistic" in front of the hyphen.

We're doomed I tell you, doomed...

1188. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164665 by epeeist on April 20, 2008 at 1:53 pm

Karda - as someone who suggested we be polite but ruthless with theists I am happy for you to stick around. The banter is fun too, keep with it.

Just knock off the faux humility, okay?

1189. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164653 by epeeist on April 20, 2008 at 1:43 pm

Comment #164648 by Kardashovel

ThoughtsonCommonToad, based on your last post to me, you might find this site/article interesting:
http://www.simulation-argument.com/

Steve, are you getting the feeling of deja vu?

1190. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164647 by epeeist on April 20, 2008 at 1:39 pm

Comment #164636 by Kardashovel

We've directed our own evolution on a limited scale since free will has been involved (mammals, perhaps birds and reptiles). But that is just animal per-animal, "unnatural selection".

Now evolution itself is evolving. We need not depend on sex and mutations to create fundamentally different genotypes. And we're just getting started.

Karda - stop this now. You are mutating in front of me. You are turning into...

Teilhard de Chardin

1191. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164582 by epeeist on April 20, 2008 at 12:29 pm

Comment #164576 by Kardashovel

You never speculate, enjoy the freedom of that type of though(t)

Of course I do.

You want to deny us the freedom to sneer at your half-cocked ramblings?

1192. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164572 by epeeist on April 20, 2008 at 12:23 pm

Comment #164570 by Mark Smith

Kardashovel
Sorry if you have addressed this before, but your version of Christianity seems pretty much one off.

Oh shit, another Dianelos.

1193. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164568 by epeeist on April 20, 2008 at 12:19 pm

Comment #164555 by Kardashovel

As I have intentionally accepted the notion that it is speculation, not science, I am not compelled by anything other than your begging to speculate further about the physics.

In which case all you have is a conjecture, a glorified opinion.

You are entitled to this of course. However we are equally entitled to sneer at and dismiss it out of hand.

1194. Gods and earthlings

Comment #164527 by epeeist on April 20, 2008 at 11:18 am

Comment #164520 by MPhil

Once you're through with the Knowledge compendium (only took me a year :)

I suspect it will take me a little longer. Got to keep well in with SWMBO and make sure that I don't have too much month at the end of the money.

I presume that you would disagree with moderationsmuse who seems to want science to be the realm of philosopher-kings. Science definitely is not cosy and can definitely be edgy. My supervisor held up my thesis for some considerable time because the mathematics I used did not follow the standard (but outdated) text book on the subject.

1195. The Child Preachers

Comment #164513 by epeeist on April 20, 2008 at 10:57 am

Comment #164418 by Santi Tafarella

One additional thought on the child preachers. Who would you all bet has a more economically successful adult life: the African American child preacher, or an African American child, perhaps living next door to him, who spends time after school watching television?

Ooh, contraries and contradictories.

How about "neither" as an answer?

1196. Gods and earthlings

Comment #164509 by epeeist on April 20, 2008 at 10:53 am

Comment #164491 by moderationsmuse

As you're in the UK, I respectfully don't think you could have acquaintance with American churches to make good use of whatever poll stats you've found.

I didn't. I was pointed at the data by an anthropologist who happens to have an American boyfriend. He now lives in Boston, but was born and raised in Arkansas where all his relatives still live.

1197. Gods and earthlings

Comment #164506 by epeeist on April 20, 2008 at 10:49 am

Speaking as an ex-physicist with little exposure to biology I found "The Blind Watchmaker" to be fascinating. Different in style to, say, Richard Penrose's "The Road to Reality" and Douglas Hofstadter's "Godel, Escher, Bach" but all of them enjoyable.

I have also found Hofstadter's "Le Ton beau de Marot" to be interesting too.

Things this site has led me to have included Susan Haak's "Philosophy of Logics", Mackie's "Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong". I also intend to read "Knowledge - Readings in contemporary epistemology" edited by Bernecker and Dretske and Paul Churchland's "A Neurocomputational Perspective: The Nature of Mind and the Structure of Science".

For me at least this site has led to an expansion of my scientific awareness.

1198. Gods and earthlings

Comment #164472 by epeeist on April 20, 2008 at 9:52 am

Comment #164464 by moderationsmuse

He appears to be addressing non-scientists exclusively. And thus ironically he devotes his attention to an audience incapable of accessing independently any claims he makes of a scientific nature (though honestly I couldn't find any science in the book I looked at).

You seem to be neglecting the aims of the post that RD currently holds, there is more information at http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/index.shtml

My wife teaches chemistry at girls' school. Most of the girls she teaches go on to do something else besides science. Should we stop teaching science to those who go on to read say anthropology at university?

Neither of my daughters have gone on to be scientists. It was obvious at an early age this was going to be the case. Should I not have taken them to hear Sir Harry Kroto lecture?

1199. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164461 by epeeist on April 20, 2008 at 9:37 am

Comment #164456 by Diacanu

Tch, limeys...

Hey, I did say the best they should expect.

I met a coach yesterday whose last ever competitive fight I saw. Complete retaliation - blade to the head of his opponent, guard into face, knee into crotch. All on a single foot movement. Would this suffice?

1200. Gods and earthlings

Comment #164454 by epeeist on April 20, 2008 at 9:24 am

Comment #164446 by moderationsmuse

Few Christians believe the earth is 6,000 years old, by the way.

So this is wrong? http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm

I would disagree with you about Muslim and Christian fundamentalism (why do you immediately raise terrorism when Islam is mentioned?). Do a quick Google for the "Wedge Document" and see what the aims of the Christian right is in the USA. I should note that creationists are strongly active here in the UK too.

I find the prospect of a future theocracy of "Rapture Ready" Christians just as frightening as a Muslim theocracy.