1. Logical Proof of the Existence of a Divine Creator, Why Atheism is Not Logically Sound

Comment #190542 by healthphysicist on June 9, 2008 at 8:44 am

YAWN, YAWN.

The only "new" argument that the Jews have as compared to the other religions is the giving of the Torah in front of 600,000 families.

However, it is the Torah that makes that claim and it wouldn't be difficult for a small tribe to write that and then teach it to their kids. There are also conflicts within the Torah as to whether the people actually "saw" anything.

What a bunch of bull.

2. Karma comedians

Comment #186718 by healthphysicist on May 31, 2008 at 7:53 am

Everything does seem to happen for a reason...just because we don't know the exact cause(s) doesn't mean there weren't any. Things can look random because of their complexity.

Only in quantam mechanics does there seem to be real non-predictability, though there are probability distributions.

3. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #175356 by healthphysicist on May 5, 2008 at 9:54 am

This video response to Fitna, certainly makes thing interesting:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpiccERJaFk

4. The Neanderthal Debate

Comment #174713 by healthphysicist on May 3, 2008 at 10:20 am

Just today I was watching a documentary series on T.V. called Miracle Planet. The show hypothesized that modern humans had language and Neanderthal did not. This was seen as the significant survival ace for modern humans.

5. The Encyclopedia of Life, No Bookshelf Required

Comment #133737 by healthphysicist on February 26, 2008 at 4:09 pm

But doesn't this basically already exist?

http://www.tolweb.org/tree/

6. Fleabytes

Comment #129821 by healthphysicist on February 19, 2008 at 3:49 pm

Steve Zara:

Good point, what about the weak nuclear force causing beta decay?

7. Fleabytes

Comment #129771 by healthphysicist on February 19, 2008 at 3:00 pm

Small error under Cosmological Questions, paragraph 4 regarding radioactive decay.

It does have a cause which is related to the neutron-proton ration in the nucleus.

No little men though.

8. Map reveals extent of human damage to oceans

Comment #127565 by healthphysicist on February 15, 2008 at 12:23 pm

There is a whole bunch of evolutionary biology videos on YouTube posted by Gravitationalist.

This series talks about Extinctions in general and also man's contributions:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0p9NecLfZs

If you have a slow weekend, there are hours and hours of this stuff posted by this person.

9. Dusty Clues: Study suggests no dearth of Earths

Comment #122270 by healthphysicist on February 5, 2008 at 3:46 am

LorienRyan:

Maybe you were first thinking of South Park:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLnSJo3Z-Iw

10. 'Gospel of wealth' facing scrutiny

Comment #104221 by healthphysicist on December 28, 2007 at 6:27 am

Let us not forget:

http://www.earthsgreatestlawsuit.org/

11. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, etc. were atheists, and they were terrible! Answer that!

Comment #83256 by healthphysicist on October 29, 2007 at 12:55 pm

RE: aLifeLessMagic's post on atheists in prison... I have heard this before, but is it possible that a large percentage of "former" atheists turn to religion while in prison? They might then answer a survey that they are religious, when perhaps they were really atheist while committing a crime. Or do the statistics correct for conversions post-sentencing?

12. Debate between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox

Comment #76290 by healthphysicist on October 5, 2007 at 11:15 am

Here's a couple of points not yet mentioned:

Lennox mentions that at least the bible got right the fact that there was a beginning. Though RD reponded marvelously (50% chance of getting it right), I would have thought he would have attacked areas where the bible got it wrong. Like the 6 day creation. Lennox would have to redefine a "day" or say that the bible got it wrong. If a "day" is redefined that opens up a Pandora's box of inquiry into what are we to believe the bible says, and of course if the bible got it wrong, that is worse.

More importantly, it demonstrates that the bible is following science. The religious have to hope the bible ends up agreeing with science. When it doesn't, they rationalize new meanings. When they can't rationalize new meanings, they're really stuck (and that's why we see the strong resistance to evolutionary theory...too difficult to rationalize away without saying the entire bible is to be taken non-literally, in which case what's really left?).

I think RD could have pressed more for evidence. Evidence of God, evidence of God providing humans with morality, evidence of one God and not many, evidence that even if evolutionary theory was found to be wrong how do we know there isn't any other non-God cause, etc.