If I recall correctly, the hippocampus is located at the "top" of the cortical stack (architecturally speaking) and is known to be critical for the formation of new memories. These changes are distributed down throughout the rest of the cortex when the hippocampus is working properly.

Presumably, a "life changing" religious experience involves a lot of cortical changes and thus extra stress on the hippocampus. Deconversion from religion might also induce the same kind of stress in formerly pious and evangelical types, though I didn't see this mentioned anywhere in the report. (Perhaps something for another study?)

Non-affiliated people presumably aren't having beliefs spoon-fed to them by religion. I'd guess their increased stress comes from having to change their beliefs more often as they work things out for themselves.

Comment 10 by war critic : ... Rather than engage in the tu quoque that is actually fitting in this case...

Tu quoque? No, I don't think that is a fitting response. What's objectionable about this vandalism is not hypocrisy (indeed, I see none evident) but its criminality and its bullying suppression of a perfectly reasonable message. That you'd suggest we resort to a kind of ad-hominem when we have valid points to make is bewildering.

On the other hand, SheliaC's comment, '"Shut up," he explained,' succinctly expresses what's most wrong with the vandal's behaviour.

Thanks, but I won't be taking your advice. I don't think anyone else here should either.

According to Wikipedia, the venue seats 800-1000 people. That'd mean tickets were been sold at a rate of around one every second. Not bad going for what I'd guess is a modestly provisioned e-commerce system.

£4 does seem too cheap for this event; I suspect some people have ordered more tickets than they needed. Thumbs down for any jerks out there now selling them on ebay for a profit.

Comment 71 by spotlamp : Has anyone had a confirmation email from BHA ?

Yes, I had one email from info at humanism dot org dot uk confirming the order and another from Worldpay confirming the transaction.

Order complete - or at least I think it is.

@ spotlamp: Maybe if you give them a big fat donation they'll upgrade their hosting. ;)

Ah, did we DoS their website already? :)

Happy birthday, Richard! I wish you many more to come.

"I don't understand how this is so, therefore Goddidit." - Every argument from design ever.

10:23 participants beware, though. Thanks to the wonders of unregulated markets, it's possible in some countries (including the USA) to buy products labelled "homeopathic" that actually do have active ingredients.

I thought this fact was old news. Apparently not for Fox News viewers...

Comment 18 by Dark Matter :

Does anyone know if it is possible to get a live feed of this Debate?

Yes, and you're required to pay $4.99 for access.

Personally, I will not be handing over any funds that might end up fuelling the Tony Blair gravy train.

Money might well be playing a part here. If I recall correctly, some months ago the CFI announced they had lost a large regular donation to their funds, leaving their finances unviable without major cutbacks.

It would not be so surprising if this change of stance has something to do with making themselves more palatable to other donors, or getting the absconding donor back on board.

Actually, I'd contend that theology IS worth studying - not necessarily as preparation for counter-apologetics but as a comprehensive study in mistakes of cognition.

There are other areas of philosophy that fall into this category, for similar reasons.

Wow, I hope "WOODSTOCK-41" gets the assistance they need from mental health professionals.

It is quite striking insanity though. Maybe we should take a copy before the Washington Post moderators intervene...

Let's get right to the heart of the matter: The Holy See is not a state. Pretending otherwise is a laughable mistake, and should be forgotten.

I guess the police have been briefed to be on the alert for anything potentially embarrassing for the Pope.

So much for priorities - they've already embarrassed themselves.

Profoundly creepy. Good advert for atheism though.

Comment 8 by MauiHorse : Calling someone a clown isn't ad hominem???

Ad-hominen is a personal attack used instead of an argument. Not all personal attacks are used in this way.

PZ's attack was based on a concern Francis Collins' beliefs would corrupt his professional decisions; a reasonable concern at the time. We weren't to know how well Collins does the compartmentalisation trick.

Line up, line up! Lots more money in the pot...

I approve of this proposal. Combining the two events will save us a fortune in rotten groceries! ;)

Comment 18 by Tarantella : There are no atheists here, only people who think they are atheists.

Really? I don't think that claim will hold up to much scrutiny. Let's see:

Ergo, you're mistaken.

Given how evidently sparse theists are here, I'd guess you're using a faulty definition of atheism to be making such a statement.

Hmm. Maybe CrashBangWallace's mental straw-man of Richard Dawkins is fast becoming a "frothing-at-the-mouth, bigoted zealot," but I haven't noticed any corresponding change in the actual Richard Dawkins. While forthright as always in his criticisms, he remains scrupulously objective, eloquent, rational and composed - not to mention far more patient than I would be under similar circumstances.

Mr. Wallace, there are many far worse "posterboys" than Richard for atheism. The baseless, hyperbole-flinging wall of piffle at the head of this discussion qualifies you to be among them. Perhaps you have mistaken your own prejudice for reality?

By the way, the central tenet of humanism is not "relaxed tolerance," as Mr Gill states. It's a rejection of the supernatural and its related dogmas as a guide to life.

Humanism is the belief we should aspire to build better societies for the sake of the people who live in them, as opposed to serving the interests of an imaginary superbeing (and the all-too-real interests of the clergy who represent said beings.)

Sorry to be such a stickler for details, but I think it's important for a journalist to get these facts correct when presuming to speak for so many.

... His atheist inquisition is an embarrassment to humanists...

Really? I suppose we could test this assertion by running a poll. Oh wait, we did...

You don't speak for all humanists, Mr. Gill. Not even a majority of them.

I have to agree, that picture is awesome. :)

Shame the article isn't up to the same quality. It's good to hear Richard's finally getting through to Mr. Gill, but for him to claim with a straight face that this documentary was somehow exceptional among Richard's output goes to show how effective the years of media misrepresentation, caricature and well poisoning have been on the easily suggestible.

And really, monkeys with typewriters? I'm not a bit surprised to hear Mr. Gill doesn't know the first thing about natural selection - it's NOT random, you twit.

Comment 17 by ZenDruid :

Is there any initiative to remove RE from the national curriculum...

I hope not. It could well be a bad idea removing it. Knowing of the diversity and distribution of religions seems to increase resistance to indoctrination in one particular creed. Even the young can be sensitive to how the contingent nature of religious creeds makes them all look silly.

Daniel Dennett certainly thinks so; compulsory education about world religions is the one policy recommendation he makes in Breaking The Spell.

If anything, we should expand the R.E. syllabus and make faith schools teach all of it, not just the bits they happen to like.

Comment 4 by Nails :

Remove the funding - it's the only way...

That'd be no different in effect from an explicit order to close - and there are too many for the other schools to take up the burden. Some schooling in a faith school is probably better than no schooling at all.

The way forward is withdrawing the special privileges faith schools currently operate under. Forbid discrimination based on religion for both admissions and personnel recruitment, just as is legally required in secular schools. Enforce standards for all the syllabus (including R.E.,) to the same standards as secular schools - and those standards better include comparative religion.

If only we would enforce the laws we already have, faith schools would cease to be of use to the divisive interests of the clergy. When we force faith schools to become benign, religion won't want them.

We need to learn to say NO, firmly and without equivocation, when religious authorities ask for a free pass through discrimination laws and inspections. "That contradicts my faith" is no excuse - if that's the case then shame on you.

Having given it some thought, I think their bizarre statement about fresh water not mixing with and going "straight through" salt water may have come from a misinterpretation of the water cycle:

Fresh water does both enter the ocean (directly or indirectly) from rain and leave the ocean (through evaporation) back into the atmosphere. A naive observer might consider this and think the fresh water was passing through the ocean untouched. Of course, this does not follow.

Fresh water does mix readily with salt water. There are phenomenon that can delay this, but that's not why the water cycle works. Water leaves the ocean fresh simply because evaporation leaves the salt behind.

Now, you could state the water molecules are passing through the ocean unchanged - which is strictly speaking true - but that should go without saying! Unless there's a chemical reaction to break its molecular bonds, water is going to stay water. It's a trivial and vacuous statement, and certainly doesn't indicate any divine providence.

So far, so obvious. What concerns me most about their error is that it suggests they do not have the elementary grounding in physics and chemistry to work any of this out for themselves, and they damn well should do if they were getting a decent education.

We've come to expect canards like caricaturing evolution as "humans coming from chimps" and the "only a theory" fallacy from wingnuts like Ray Comfort, but hearing them from professional educators on the state's payroll is inexcusable. If such blatantly incompetent teachers are keeping their jobs, something is very wrong.

Is this the original or one of the revisions?