1. Unintelligent Design

Comment #231928 by Disbelief on August 17, 2008 at 10:23 am

4 spines, cool!

2. A Holocaust Denier Hits Manhattan (And Hearts Hitchens)

Comment #220304 by Disbelief on July 28, 2008 at 9:32 am

And really we're outraged, because we do not cater to that kind of bigotry,

No you cater for a completely different kind don't you

3. How Anecdotal Evidence Can Undermine Scientific Results

Comment #217116 by Disbelief on July 24, 2008 at 12:14 am

The reason for this cognitive disconnect is that we have evolved brains that pay attention to anecdotes because false positives (believing there is a connection between A and B when there is not) are usually harmless, whereas false negatives (believing there is no connection between A and B when there is) may take you out of the gene pool. Our brains are belief engines that employ association learning to seek and find patterns. Superstition and belief in magic are millions of years old, whereas science, with its methods of controlling for intervening variables to circumvent false positives, is only a few hundred years old. So it is that any medical huckster promising that A will cure B has only to advertise a handful of successful anecdotes in the form of testimonials.

Belief Engines? Is there any scientific evidence to support the paragraph above? It seems to imply that Pascals Wager is the only reason that we still have religion.
Could someone please supply a link to some proof of this so I can use it in an arguement.

Sorry I came late to the thread, don't know if any of you are still discussing the article anymore.

PS All lager sucks ass, Stella especially. I'm a Guiness drinker

4. As the world becomes smaller, the need to understand each other's faith grows

Comment #193935 by Disbelief on June 16, 2008 at 8:20 am

Tony Bliar is a freak. Why anyone from any religion would listen to what he says is beyond me. He is only going to make a bad situation in the middle east worse.

5. British Airways takes beef off the menu to avoid offending Hindus

Comment #179341 by Disbelief on May 13, 2008 at 6:23 am

majikthise

And as for the idiotic, snidey remarks about this being some kind of secret, cost-cutting exercise. Well, hold the front page but BA are a commercial company. If they see a way to cut costs that makes good business sense they'll go right ahead and do it and say so. They won't bother to pretend it's to avoid offending people.

To be honest re-reading the article it's not exactly clear what BA said. They did say that they were dropping beef because of it's "religious restrictions". It is the news paper that has decided that it is to avoid offending Hindus.
It is likely that they have noticed that there are a lot of beef meals left at the end of each flight and as beef is more expensive than fish or chicken it makes good business sense to change the menu regardless of why people are not eating it.
As I said in a previous post if they were worried about offending Hindus they would have taken it off the menu in all classes.
I understand how frustrating it is when you see a lot of people reacting heatedly towards an article that has obviously been misrepresented however I resent being called an idiot and snidey.
BA said that cost was not an issue when it quite obviously is in a "commercial company" which I suppose is one that exists to make a profit as opposed to a charity.

6. I Am Evolution

Comment #178399 by Disbelief on May 11, 2008 at 10:58 am

I agree, it's sad that this article had to be written.

Comment #178387 by Quine on May 11, 2008 at 10:39 am
I have said this before, but this is a good place to reiterate that when people ask me if I believe in evolution, I answer, "I don't have to believe in evolution; I can check it."

Right on!

7. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #178392 by Disbelief on May 11, 2008 at 10:47 am

I've lived and worked in the middle east for quite a while now and this part of arab culture never fails to amaze and sicken me.

Some of the most easy going and outwardly open minded men have told me coldly that if their wives or daughters ever brought shame on the family they would kill them.
It would be considered the right thing to do.

Although it is technically illegal the murderers would expect to face minimal punishment (as the article shows) as the judicial system would be lenient on them because they have already been humiliated by their victim.

People who believe that what this man has done is ok are animals.

8. British Airways takes beef off the menu to avoid offending Hindus

Comment #178333 by Disbelief on May 11, 2008 at 8:51 am

Ohnhai :

Couldn't have put it better myself.

I think the paper in question was shopping for controversy where there is none

I would go a step further and say that the editor who put the story out was positively stirring for trouble given that the decision was a no brainer in that he/she could have taken BA to task over cost cutting and lying about it rather than focusing on the Hindu issue which was bound to get a more heated response.

9. British Airways takes beef off the menu to avoid offending Hindus

Comment #178317 by Disbelief on May 11, 2008 at 7:30 am

Hi all. This is my first post on this site. Been "lurking" a while but couldn't let this article pass without comment.
This in my opinion is a cost issue for BA that has been misrepresented.
They would rather be seen to be adjusting their menu according to the tastes/beliefs of their passengers than be seen to be serving a cheaper menu.
I mean, even the journalist knew this as he/she put the rising cost of beef in the article.
BA just won't admit this as it would affect their image as a quality airline and it would no doubt be tied to the disaster at terminal 5 and the huge losses they suffered because of it.
If it was a hindu thing then they would have banned it across all classes. Are you telling me hindus only travel cattle class?

Sorry