151. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250674 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 20, 2008 at 5:52 am

Steve, were off-track now, but I agree. I think I read it was kinda good to flush the tubes through. Anyway, god's punishments haven't stopped me yet.

152. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250665 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 20, 2008 at 5:37 am

That problematic prostate. I'm sure it's just god's way of punishing us all for those moments of self-abuse.

153. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250655 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 20, 2008 at 5:25 am

Steve, I'm sure you said it earlier. Vote Fanusi or the puppy gets it.

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

Comment #250653 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 20, 2008 at 5:12 am

I have just now seen Creationist Britain - and it's scary. Be afraid. No really, be afraid!

John Mackay gave an "interesting" talk to a devoted creationist audience of easily 200 people.

Now I appreciate that genuine science sometimes makes some simplifying assumptions to get to a first order answer to a problem (you know - the properties of an Ideal Gas even though no ideal gas actually exists), but John really does throw out the baby with the bathwater. He sucks the science out of science and then tells the world that mainstream scientists are all sadly mistaken. I fumed silently as I heard him explain that the accepted laws of physics didn't work that way 5000 years ago. The implication of what he said was that our understanding of the behaviour of protons and neutrons and the decay rates of isotopes could have been wildly different thousands of years ago. And there was no-one to measure their properties back then, so no-one will convince John that such science is anything more than another "faith" position!

Aaaarrrgggghhhh!!! I suppose gravity was all different then and it was only god's steadying hand keeping the Earth in orbit, and everyone could fly around like superman.

This is tragic. If anyone is in any doubt about how dangerous christianity is to society then this should wake you up. It's not "straw men" I'm describing. This is belief in the bible and any sucker in church could be led down this Young Earth Creationist path.

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

Comment #250209 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 19, 2008 at 4:35 am

Quetz, Thanks. Yes it is an old drawing of Brian from family guy. I'll give the avatar a bit more thought at some other time, but the subdued-head-bowed-with-a-drink suits me at the moment.

This is the Primary school curriculum I have just found, if anyone is interested to take a glance:
http://www.primaryresources.co.uk/science/docs/science_levels.doc

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

Comment #250203 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 19, 2008 at 4:23 am

Quetz

I'm shocked. You're not that old. I started teaching (and I left 4 years later) in the early 90s, when the new National Curriculum was being introduced in England and Wales. The National Curriculum for Science then stressed the need for understanding of stuff like "Fair Tests". You couldn't get a level-4 in Science unless you understood what a fair test was, which is a building block in the Scientific Method. I'm still shocked to keep hearing that students just learnt facts and figures. It certainly wasn't what was being proposed in 1990.

157. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250187 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 19, 2008 at 3:32 am

Fanusi

Unless we show fairness to all, whilst specifying and enforcing what we consider to be our modern, decent standards of behaviour then I cannot see any other outcome other than total bloody war.

As long as we understand that, then that's ok. I just think the position has to be clear. We have competing ways of living. One that wants freedom to think and do pretty much whatever we want, with all the ugliness that goes with it and the other wants absurd twisted control of thoughts and behaviour, with all the disastrous ugliness associated with it. To maintain our way of life we have to kick the other way of thinking out of existence. That creates martyrs on both sides and will inspire a long, horrific war. I believe that Oppenheimer said that he wasn't completely clear how the 3rd world war would be fought, but he was sure that the 4th one would be fought with rocks and sticks.

I'd rather give Steve's approach a go.

158. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250182 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 19, 2008 at 3:15 am

Fanusi

I don't see how anyone has the power to stop all Muslim immigration between all countries. If you mean no more Muslim immigration to Britain, then I have a firm understanding of what you mean.

As for adult conversation, I think I'm trying to have one. If someone says "let's sort out the Jihad Muslims" then that's too vague. Even if someone says "anyone that mentions Jihad must be deported" is not telling us the whole story. We need to know what to do with those Muslims that remain. They'll be seeking foreign help and will more fervently demonstrate why their god-system is right and why I must convert or die.

Which ones do we trust? How do we check what they are plotting against us? Do we ban conversions to Islam? The culture is different. They have more children and they are more motivated to make things happen their way. How do we eradicate the disease within?

159. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250162 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 19, 2008 at 2:43 am

Laurie
Yes it did thanks. I replied too.
Again, really appreciated.

160. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250159 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 19, 2008 at 2:36 am

Fanusi

I did pay attention, but what does
A total end to all Muslim immigration "to" the dar al-Harb
mean?

Anyway, back to the problem on our doorstep. We got all these Muslims, and they're everywhere, even in our prisons getting more converts of people who like doing despicable acts. So do we deport all Muslims? We know that Islam is a complete system which demands their way is right, and they have to overthrow what they see as an evil society. And they don't half breed. So, do we just deport half of them and then "really" monitor / bug the rest of them? What about the castration idea? Any merit in that?

161. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250142 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 19, 2008 at 2:01 am

Fanusi
I've always found Steve's comments & ideas to be very reasonable. I do think that you don't believe now's the time for "polite society" to be "reasonable". I do believe that you now think it's time to get nasty and give Islam a good sharp kicking.

Now I also realise that it's not Muslims you have a problem with, it's the Jihadists. But you've already said many times that the "nice" Muslims are just putting on a public persona for my consumption, but as soon as they get back to their mosques then they are spitting on my name and planning the destruction of the Kuffir.
So what is your solution really? Tell me again, because whenever I hear it it involves death penalty for the Abu Hamza's. Deportation of anyone that mentions Jihad. No trust of any other Muslim, because they are probably lying to you. And in fact, in general, Muslim societies breed quicker than polite western society. Islam is the most virulent disease spreading wildly and undermining our hard fought freedoms and it must be stopped.

Is that what you're saying? Perhaps we could castrate all the men? Concentration camps - but modern, nice ones?

162. Sharia courts operating in Britain

Comment #249622 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 18, 2008 at 11:19 am

TWP ... Test PM sent to you

163. Turkey bans biologist Richard Dawkins' website

Comment #249458 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 18, 2008 at 6:48 am

Laurie
I've left a comment (I think)

164. Turkey bans biologist Richard Dawkins' website

Comment #249451 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 18, 2008 at 6:25 am

Laurie (or Quetz), I'd seen mention of Laurie's blog on the Reiss thread, so I thought I'd find the address of the blog there. No luck. Anyone like to give me the link? Cheers.

165. Turkey bans biologist Richard Dawkins' website

Comment #249442 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 18, 2008 at 6:08 am

njwong, I will do, thanks.
Laurie, Quetz - I'm on it.

166. Turkey bans biologist Richard Dawkins' website

Comment #249439 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 18, 2008 at 6:06 am

Laurie
I don't even know how to get to the dashboard type thingy (can you tell I work in IT?)
When I click on my username in the top-right on the hompage it takes me to a further sign-on screen. I have an option to re-request and "activation email". I've requested this "so" many times!

167. Turkey bans biologist Richard Dawkins' website

Comment #249434 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 18, 2008 at 5:51 am

Would it be bad form to publish my email address?

168. Turkey bans biologist Richard Dawkins' website

Comment #249430 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 18, 2008 at 5:46 am

(*In the voice of the fly in the web in the black&white version of The Fly*)
"Help me"
(EDIT - I do exist, really I do, I'm sure of it!)

169. Turkey bans biologist Richard Dawkins' website

Comment #249428 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 18, 2008 at 5:43 am

Laurie
My saviour ... I hope?
How do I get it?

170. Turkey bans biologist Richard Dawkins' website

Comment #249426 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 18, 2008 at 5:42 am

nalfeshnee
The link you gave worked for me.

171. Turkey bans biologist Richard Dawkins' website

Comment #249423 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 18, 2008 at 5:40 am

By the way, I wouldn't try to derail this thread, and I'd love it of people could "PM" me (whatever that is), but I've not been able to set up my profile or get any of the functionality you guys have. I did email "Admin", but I've had nothing back. Sorry. Resume discussion of Turkey censorship.

172. Turkey bans biologist Richard Dawkins' website

Comment #249419 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 18, 2008 at 5:36 am

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

173. YouTube Removes Viral Video on Palin's Churches For Inappropriate Content

Comment #248706 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 16, 2008 at 4:55 pm

Well, I'm off to bed, but I'm working myself up for the events ahead. I've agreed to go to a meeting soon, hosted by John McKay, international director of Creation Research. He'll be telling the good people of middle England all about naughty scientists and their conspiracy to let the Devil in. Any suggestions about what to expect from the YEC types? Any suggestions of what I should do when I'm there?

174. YouTube Removes Viral Video on Palin's Churches For Inappropriate Content

Comment #248702 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 16, 2008 at 4:40 pm

Mordacious

I think you're so wrong. I am quite sure that this sort of charismatic form of religion is trying to squeeze itself in to a church near you. I've already seen my lot speaking in tongues, prophesying, and trying so desperately and hopefully to cure the sick.

175. The Holy Laughter Anointing

Comment #248700 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 16, 2008 at 4:32 pm

I've only got this one thing to say about such mass hysteria. "Shove it up! Shove it right up for Jesus! Show the Lord you care and shove it right up!"

There, that's better.

176. Creationism call divides Royal Society

Comment #248683 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 16, 2008 at 3:46 pm

No you haven't been missing me. I've just been quiet. Silent voyeurism. Be afraid all!

177. Creationism call divides Royal Society

Comment #248673 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 16, 2008 at 3:37 pm

I also posted in admiration of Cartomancer's delightful poem (totally different thread), but lost it (snooze-looze)

I was trying to be supportive by comparing him to half-Morrissey, better-looking Kenneth Williams, chameleon, corinthian and characature. Well, anyway, I just thought Cartomancer is so entertaining - there's little need for such morose introspection.
P.S. Little need, but it's part of his charm. We wouldn't want him any other way. But I hope he feels a bit more valued than he portrays.

178. Creationism call divides Royal Society

Comment #248670 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 16, 2008 at 3:33 pm

TWP
I've not been away. I have been dipping in, but missed Richard's original postings. Then I was shocked to see that Reiss had resigned (it was all so fast). And I kinda-wondered why Richard had said the thread had been derailed. It wasn't like Clearmind had posted. Was Richard's original comment controversial at all?

179. Creationism call divides Royal Society

Comment #248657 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 16, 2008 at 3:18 pm

Wow. It's been a hectic few days in Christendom. It's a bit of a sad debacle, but Reiss can only blame himself.

As for Davey-boy's comment. Actually, I'd be proud if Orwell was proud of me.

Don't fret TWP. I've got a small penis too. Although Al's is huge ... with good girth too.

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

Comment #247752 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 15, 2008 at 2:32 am

Doesn't even sound like a proper apology. Is Rev Dr Malcolm Brown truly representing everyone in the CofE? Does that mean I can expect evolution to be discussed and accepted in every Church in the land?

And having listened to Radio-4 this morning there was some religious scientist (I'm sorry I didn't catch his name) explaining the Church never opposed Darwin. The wording is subtle: "owes you an apology for misunderstanding you and, by getting our first reaction wrong". So it was just their first reaction that was a tiny bit of a problem. Everything else the CofE did was quite correct and proper!?!?

181. Robert Winston criticises dangerous 'science delusion'

Comment #247703 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 14, 2008 at 11:12 pm

"66. Comment #247612 by Layla Nasreddin on September 14, 2008 at 4:17 pm"

Layla

Thanks for that. You've clarified Winston's position better than I could. As you can probably tell, I have quite a soft spot, but none of my liking of him is going to dig him out of the awkward spot he is in.

182. Robert Winston criticises dangerous 'science delusion'

Comment #247574 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 14, 2008 at 3:24 pm

Layla, I think you'll find that Dawkins refers to Winston's almost godless beliefs in TGD. I don't have my copy at the moment, my sister has it, so I cannot back up my claim with a direct quote. I've also heard other commentators discuss Winston and the lack of any god when discussing religion with him.

I've listened out for Winston to see what he has to say on faith. I've heard him mention the bible, but only to promote some humility, not to promote praise or belief in miracles. So, "no", I don't think I'm being too presumptious.

Did I say something wrong? Was I supposed to state how stupid Winston is and how intellectually superior everyone here is in comparison to "that complete jerk"?

183. Robert Winston criticises dangerous 'science delusion'

Comment #247553 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 14, 2008 at 3:01 pm

Robert Winston is a pretty cool promoter of Science to the general public. What is slightly amusing is that I don't think he believes in God either. I don't think he ever comes out and says it. But the "comfort blanket" he has is hardly even religion, it's just culture. I think a lot of Jews don't believe in God, but they are Jewish because they are born so, and are immersed in their culture. He could denounce the existence of God, but he doesn't because the culture (mostly sensible) in which he exists leaves the door open to that possibility. It would be good if Robert admitted he doesn't believe in God. But at the very least he shouldn't expect the rest of us to walk that tightrope.

When he says, "many scientists including my good friend Richard Dawkins present science as the truth and present it as factually correct. And actually of course that clearly isn't true" I can see what he means. He's not talking about science facts about gravity and evolution, he's talking about the science all around us that does not work in a vacuum. Scientific ideas bounce around within the culture we live and the politics of the time. You can't present Soylent Green ideas as scientific fact. Ideas like that can be considered, but have to somehow fit within the culture and the politics.

184. Why we evolved to be superstitious

Comment #246395 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 12, 2008 at 9:16 am

The conclusions they have drawn seem highly plausible, that "worrying about dangers that are not there, and pinning hopes on mostly harmless placebo medicines/actions, can give a slight evolutionary benefit"

But it doesn't mean we can't be cleverer than that. People who rely on placebos for all their cures will surely not successfully produce the next generation as well as those that accept genuine cures for illnesses. And as DamnDirtyApe says, big teeth can't help you build a rocket.

185. [UPDATED] Venomous Snakes, Slippery Eels and Harun Yahya

Comment #244740 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 9, 2008 at 11:57 am

Epeeist, if that's as simple as we can make it, we got no chance.

186. Michael Palin for President

Comment #244573 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 9, 2008 at 7:01 am

Michael Palin's Black Holes were so black ... even the white bits were black!

187. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #244235 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 8, 2008 at 1:16 pm

I know that this is going to be tricky for you guys, but I'm going to have to ask you to ignore me. I was at least a page behind when I decided to post my comment above.
(*shakes head*)
So embarrassing!

188. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #244228 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 8, 2008 at 1:12 pm

Brandy

I see what you just did there. You're turning other's accusations against them. No matter how ridiculous to claim Fanusi defends any part of Islam, I do believe that you are still asking for them to tell you exactly where it was that you defended Islam.

189. Large Hadron Collider readies for world's biggest experiment

Comment #243842 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 7, 2008 at 1:54 pm

Just off to bed, although I've also just seen the discussion of the "Standard Model", which I knew a little of during my degree in mid-eighties. So I've tried to do a quick catch up, and my simple question
- why is the proposed Higgs Boson sometimes called the God Particle?

190. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #243236 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 5, 2008 at 10:11 am

No, no, Al, you mis-hear me. It's really interesting over there (*I'm splitting my sides here with childish glee*)

I must grow up.

191. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #243230 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 5, 2008 at 10:04 am

We're all over at the Large Hardon Collider. Come and see :-)

192. Large Hadron Collider readies for world's biggest experiment

Comment #243225 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 5, 2008 at 10:00 am

Large Hardon Collider
Tee-hee. Kyuk-kyuk!

193. Atheists: The Last Political Outcasts

Comment #243214 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 5, 2008 at 9:46 am

severalspeciesof

I'm afraid I cannot help very much. All I can say is that MPhil knows a lot more about these things than I do. But I'll give an amateurish stab at my opinions.

I think you're trying to rip away MPhil's foundations by saying that any measurement or experience is subjective, therefore you can only approximate to the best of your ability what is "objective" and therefore absolute good-and-evil may well exist just as much as we accept that gravitational forces between bodies exist.

But that's where I disagree. We have perfected the ability to measure things accurately. The input involved in experiencing the force of gravity is exact, and many different people around the world can give get the same measurements and conclude independently the absolute truth about gravity. There is no absolute truth about right and wrong. There is no absolute truth that it is wrong to kill. I personally find it difficult to say that abortion is fine, but I wouldn't subject people to my own warped sensibilities, and if I found myself in particular circumstances I'd probably change my tune pretty quick. I don't approve of British soldiers killing unknown German soldiers, but I reckon I'd have done it if I were there, and understood that I didn't want Hitler's people governing my world. I don't approve of people forcing ideologies upon my bit of society, but it happens all the time. I can only say that I think some things are wrong, and say it for good reason. There may be good reasons for people to agree with me, but it doesn't make for absolute good-and-evil.

194. Atheists: The Last Political Outcasts

Comment #243193 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 5, 2008 at 9:19 am

... wind whistling ... tumbleweed ...

195. Opening minds

Comment #243113 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 5, 2008 at 5:59 am

Pink Floyd? I guess "Wish your were here" would be suitably sad and funny at my funeral.

196. Opening minds

Comment #243103 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 5, 2008 at 5:40 am

Titania

You need to also play "Heroin" by Lou Reed and Velvet Underground. That should give you the full set!

197. Opening minds

Comment #243068 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 5, 2008 at 4:19 am

Laurie

(Back from lunch) Yep, I agree with you. I reckon the solution you mentioned for the nuclear-power student could work for creationists too ;-)

It's not easy this "teaching lark". It's not worth much, but you have my respect for giving it your best shot. We just can't expect complete rationality all the time, but the rational answers we have must be pushed towards the students. Insisting that there are some things that just cannot be explained or that some areas should not be considered - that's weak and dangerous.

I watched a programme in the UK yesterday, about Super Doctors, presented by Robert Winston. There was a doctor fixing "club foot". He was promoting a non-surgical method to fix soon after birth. The medical establishment were not keen on his method. They cling to the tried and tested things they do best. So I guess we are all irrational at times. I just hope people will keep pointing out when I'm being stupid and I hope I try to stay as open to new ideas as Susan suggests (84. Comment #243057 by Susan Blackmore on September 5, 2008 at 3:38 am )

198. Opening minds

Comment #243049 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 5, 2008 at 3:13 am

Laurie

Ha ha! Quite a few bodies, heh.
(blimey, didn't expect you to still be awake!)

So what about the clever ones that argue for creationism? I'm told that there are organisations (churches) that "tool up" their students with loads of creationist arguments and awkward questions to ask their teachers. It's quite likely that there will be some strong advocates of creationism and then you'll have a difficult time balancing the discussion. Do you reward the students for an excellent statement about the difficulties of carbon dating (the students who agree with you about evolution might have thought carbon dating was simpler than it really is). How do you carry the debate in the right direction without getting into "dictator teacher" mode?

199. Opening minds

Comment #243043 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 5, 2008 at 2:41 am

Laurie

Dunno if you're still up, but I'm always interested in people's educational methods (I was a teacher for a couple of years). Your approach reminds me of how Pirsig tried to teach Quality to his students in "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance". Actual research and discussions and allowing students to come to their own conclusions sounds like good education to me.

But if I were to be cynical about what you do:
1) First you tell them what is true
2) then you tell them to go away and research
3) then they come back and discuss their viewpoint
4) then you tell them that you were right all along

I'm betting you're more sympathetic than I'm putting it here. I also appreciate that the most important part is the discussion in the middle. But how do you praise people that argue well for creationism? Do you reward for good process?

In Science you should approve of good research, good hypothesis, good experimental technique, good execution, good results, good conclusions. At any step of the way the student might say or do something completely different to the standard approach, or different to how you would do it. But there could still be something clever about what they are thinking, and their approach. So you have to reward that. And then at the end they produce crap measurements, crap results and crap conclusions!

I guess another example would be the student that argues well, especially considering they are only 14 years old, for building nuclear power stations. Someone less intelligent might argue for more wind turbines and butterflies. You might think the conclusion to try more wind turbines is better, but they haven't put together a good argument like the nuclear-student. So you have to give more marks to that one.

I guess I'm asking how you allow for genuine debate, where you allow yourself to be wrong (and not a simple educational dictator) and where you value the student's process. And still get the students concluding that what you said at the start was an extremely good idea.

200. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #242147 by ColdFusionLazarus on September 3, 2008 at 12:26 pm

Al

I couldn't do it.
1) I'm too frightened
2) I don't have a gun, and don't want one
But when privilege and lack of any sympathy and care for some of the less well off goes too far, then some desperate nutter is going to come round your house and give it a try.

Anyway, I remember hearing a while ago about how you'd just been speaking to your senator. Sounded a bit like a personal audience. I also have my personal memory of queueing 10 years ago to speak to my local Member of Parliament. Two hours waiting for 5 mins talking. Complete waste of time. Your contacts and hunting made it sound like you were doing pretty well. But if it's all self made, then you have my complete respect.