1. Emory Brain Imaging Studies Reveal Biological Basis For Human Cooperation

Comment #54261 by Red Foot Oakie on July 6, 2007 at 7:32 am

Interesting article. The MRI and its various incarnatins are fascinating, shining the harsh light of science into the greasy corners of our very minds!

One of the things I'm curious to see, is if this technology can/will be used to find the sociopath. I think, although I can't prove, that the 2-4% of humanity that are sociopaths seem to cause 90% of our problems.

Most of us, the VAST majority of us, are willing to get along pretty well under normal circumstances, but that small percentage just doesn't want to play.

2. The Panel

Comment #53879 by Red Foot Oakie on July 3, 2007 at 10:20 pm

Rtambree:

You gotta tell me how I did on the first set before I go into round two!

Speaking of which, I've seen this gameshow called "Are You Smarter Than A Fifth Grader"- and it's pretty much this format. A bunch of adults competing with a bunch of kids to answer these kinds of trivia questions (not all of them science, but a lot of them). And, since the kids have been going over it in recent memory, they have a real edge.

3. The new age of ignorance

Comment #53878 by Red Foot Oakie on July 3, 2007 at 10:13 pm

Goldy:

I'm not saying that a strong knowledge of science isn't better than a weak one. I'm just saying that, really, we're pretty much a "plug-and-play" species. We actually do pretty well just knowing the high points.

And, generally, we treat viruses the same way as bacteria- we try our best to avoid them or situations where they are likely to be transferred. Prevention is generally easier and cheaper than treatment.

Plus, isn't the medical community in China more at fault in your scenario than your wife?

On a slightly related note, while most people don't think of all the chemistry, phsyics, and electrical engineering that goes on when they drive a car, I've noticed that the religeous are ALWAYS bringing up thier gods. Had a good day? the gods get credit. A bad one? The gods may help. That food that you bought with the money you earned at your job, and was grown/transported/etc by a small army of people? Better thank the gods who provided it before you eat it.

Kind of creepy, if you ask me. But also pretty effective at keeping the cult in the front of people's minds.

4. The Panel

Comment #53845 by Red Foot Oakie on July 3, 2007 at 2:21 pm

Rtambree- I'm game.

Remember, this is off the top of my head.

1. 120 billion years.
2. 80,000 years
3. Chimps. No idea.
4. Liquid, solid, gas, plasma. Plasma is the most common through the universe (stars are made of it). Just guessing on other states, probably something quantum mechanics related. That or darkmatter.
5. Leptons guard pots of gold at the end of rainbows. Fermions are horrid "sea demons" under the merciless (but remarkably fair) rule of Balor of the Evil Eye. Both are products of Irish mythology.

Trick questions.
1. To many ways to mess this one up! I don't even know when Darwin was on the Beagle.
2. I'm gonna say false. More like it orbits the 'average' of the Earth.
3. False. They discovered that DNA was the storehouse for genetic information.
4. I'm going to say false- he theorized about it.

5. The Panel

Comment #53835 by Red Foot Oakie on July 3, 2007 at 1:02 pm

Okay, as I just commented on my own lack of concrete basic scientific knowledge in the "New Age of Ignorance" article, I'm gonna take a crack at these my own damn self. Learn from my humiliation!

1. Why does salt dissolve in water?
Water reacts with salt, and the hydrogen and OH breaks the bonds holding the sodium and chloride atoms together. You get h20, and NaOh, and HCL. It's a covalent bonding thing...

2. Roughly, what is the age of the earth.
Man, this is embarrassing. I've read it a dozen times. ... Four billion years? Or is that the age of the universe?

3. What happens when you turn on a light?
You open a circuit, electricity flows into the light bulb, where it reacts with something. The reaction produces light and heat.

4. Is a clone the same thing as a twin?
Short answer: No.

5. Why is the sky blue?
Refraction. Sunlight hits the atmosphere certain and certain wavelengths are filtered out by the atmosphere. Blue gets through.

6. What isthe second law of thermodynamics:
Hah! Just read this one- that's the one that says with every energy transfer you lose some of the energy- or some of the useful energy.

So how did I do?

6. Don't Mince Words: The London Car-Bomb Plot Was Designed to Kill Women

Comment #53831 by Red Foot Oakie on July 3, 2007 at 12:41 pm

Great article. But I'm confused by one thing.

Not to be ghoulish, but why would you want to kill a bunch of people "whose lose would be regretted by nobody"? I thought that the goal would be to kill people who would be missed.

Perhaps it's a comment on mentality of the perps- maybe it was nobod that THEY would miss.

7. The new age of ignorance

Comment #53829 by Red Foot Oakie on July 3, 2007 at 12:35 pm

An interesting article. I'm very worried about the general scientific ignorance that seems to be on display in the US. Of course, I couldn't tell you the second law of thermodynamics- outside of the fact that it has something to do with energy... maybe energy transfers.

But, at least I'm in the ballpark. At least I know there IS a second law of thermodynamics.

On the other hand, I do think that the observation about "science being for kids" is accurate. And I have a suspicion as to why so many people are happy leaving science behind in their lives.

For example, the actual day-to-day useful bit of biology for most people boils down to this: Wash your hands. Brush your teeth. If you get a cut, clean it up and then cover it up.

You don't really need to know the intermediate steps from bacteria to humans- you just need to know that you need to keep the bacteria OUT.

AND, a hundred or so years after the germ theory of desiese came out, we've come up with lots of great, easy ways to keep the bacteria out that don't rely on you knowing much about what's going on in the microscopic world of your cut fingertip.

It seems that's the way these things evolve. A bunch of science/research is done, something is produced, and then that idea/product is refined and made idiot-proof.

My computer is a great example. So is my car. They are both remarkably complicated objects that took lots of people lots of work to get into their current state. I only have to remember a few basics about them to operate them. I don't need to know much about electronics, or chemistry, or even physics (...although I'd prefer to think that drivers have a decent grasp of physics).

So, I wonder if the "tipping" point is more about people not even realizing that chemistry and electronics and physics is what makes your car and computer "go". Something a lot of people probably don't think about until things stop working- and then they usually just get another one.

8. Convention ends with Satan and immigrants

Comment #36213 by Red Foot Oakie on April 30, 2007 at 1:56 pm

Sweet merciful Christ! What a creepy bunch.

Sometimes I think that democracy is going to ultimately fail because nice normal people don't go to these sorts of meetings- it's the ones who are all rilled up about something.

Madness! Maaaaadness!

9. God Is in the Dendrites

Comment #35485 by Red Foot Oakie on April 27, 2007 at 10:26 am

I liked this article up to the last few lines: "Hot in pursuit of this undecidable proposition, neurotheology will keep on churning out data—but when it comes to the biggest questions, it will never have much to say."

Uh, hello, it has something very simple to say. It's all chemical impulses. The calls are coming from inside the house.

10. Nisbet and Mooney in the WaPo: snake oil for the snake oil salesmen

Comment #32826 by Red Foot Oakie on April 18, 2007 at 11:31 am

This is horrific. That a great researcher like Myers and a great investigative writer like Mooney are trading shots at each other. It breaks my heart. Like watching FDR punch Churchill in the face and walk out of Yalta.

What sin has Mooney committed that is so great? That in a representative democracy where 80% of the public is blinkered by belief in magic, that you might want to put a little extra effort into how you communicate your facts? Well, duh!

You people need to spend some time among the faithful. They practically pine for the soothing tones of Gould. THey pined for it, and they were open to it, and bit by bit he helped beat back the belief in magic.

Richard Dawkins is right. There is no god. Religion is superstition. Mooney admits it.

Mooney is also right. Push too hard and you get a backlash. If there's a chance your research can be exploited/subversed/misrepresented for political gain, it will be. Mooney researched and reported on it.

YOu want to trade real-world victories, hearts and minds and stuff like that, for the high of being able to claim that team science is "right" so fuck 'em? That's fun around the watercooler (and lord knows, I've done my share of it), but in the arena of public policy- and policy starts with that first research report- it is a bad way to bet.

11. Thanks for the Facts. Now Sell Them.

Comment #32824 by Red Foot Oakie on April 18, 2007 at 11:11 am

People! You likely do not have a more valuable ally in the battle against the absurd claims of religion than Chris Mooney.

You! Drop what you are doing and go get a copy of his book "The Republican War on Science" and read it. Now!

Mr. Mooney has done the hard work of hunting down, cataloging, and exposing the exact methodologies that politicians use to distort science, scientific research, and the application of that research in the public arena. He's done it, so you don't have to.

And he has a solid point- the religious do not sit down and think about things that threaten their worldview, they don't read opposing points of view- they PURGE those views. They support any political leader who WILL purge those views. That's why Oklahoma labors with a horse's ass like Inhofe- because he defends the faith.

Scientists, researchers, techs, they all need to do a better job of getting the word out about what it is they do, how they do it, and what it means, so that the public will not be so easily swayed into believing that there is doubt when there is not.

Mooney and Nisbet are fighting for the small victories- like teaching evolution, and demonstrating the scientific consensus on global warming. Not necessarily the same battle that R. Dawkins is fighting, but damned important ones.

They feel that a friendlier tone from team science might have a better chance of swaying the members of team stupid. They have a point.

12. Creationism debate continues to evolve

Comment #29881 by Red Foot Oakie on April 5, 2007 at 10:09 am

"Most respond by teaching neither evolution nor creationism, leaving students with the impression that the two are of equal merit, he says. Others tiptoe around the issue, acknowledging that people of some faiths believe in creationism."

If it weren't for the finely honed passive-aggressive techniques of the theists, they probably wouldn't get half the victories they do.

I've noticed this a lot in the past decade- believers can't win the arguments so they make it so awkward to bring up the subject that people tiptoe around them, careful not to offend lest it start another spat.

It's a fairly effective strategy. I think that's one of the reasons they hate Dawkins and other skeptics- they live for the spats.

13. Time in the Animal Mind

Comment #29555 by Red Foot Oakie on April 3, 2007 at 11:48 am

Hey Ghostbuster,

Is portial labiata that feaky cunning spider? I keep running into behavior studies on those things over the last twenty years.

One day they will figure out how to hunt their greatest prey- MAN!

14. A History of Violence

Comment #29314 by Red Foot Oakie on April 2, 2007 at 2:38 pm

Well, glad to here some good news.

Violence is a cycle that, once started, gets really hard to stop. It is complicated on many levels. We (in the west) are a less violent people, mostly because we have less violence. Whatever the reason, we have less violence and that leads us away from the pre-emptive strike/revenge trap. We also have a lot more freedom to move around, away from those idiots we'd like to kill.

And, of course, murder is getting harder and harder to get away with. It can still be done, but not nearly as easily as it could fifty years ago.

One thing that I think needs to be addressed is the role of the sociopath in all this. I have a theory (which I cannot even begin to prove) that the sociopaths are behind a lot of our most violent behavior as socieities. I've heard that up to 4% of the population has anti-social personality disorder- that they would do nearly anything without a hint of guilt or remorse.

Again, good law enforcement in the western world keeps a lot of them from ever acting out the true potential of their personalities. BUT, I think when there are events that cause general societal breakdown, the sociopaths come out to play.

I see a frightening trend- sociopaths gain either direct or inderect control of a country, they begin wars and purges, a bunch of the other sociopaths come out to fight in the wars or help with the purges, and the cycle just grows out of control.

15. The Case for Teaching The Bible

Comment #27963 by Red Foot Oakie on March 27, 2007 at 1:01 pm

I think this would be a remarkably bad idea. For one, I don't think it can possibly be objectively taught. You'd either have a believer teacher skewing things, or a non-believer teacher constantly being threatened with his/her job by fundies for skewing things.

Also, you really don't ever want to open the door to the idea that its 'okay' to talk about your personal 'faith'. Once they do, they never shut up, and they'll never forget what you said in bible class, you filthy heathen!

16. God's dupes

Comment #26461 by Red Foot Oakie on March 19, 2007 at 1:01 pm

Go get 'em Sam!

17. A 'Sad First' in the History of the Congress

Comment #26455 by Red Foot Oakie on March 19, 2007 at 12:35 pm

Proud Okie Athiest- I'm so going to copy your letter and fax that baby in!

If there were only a way to bring Stark to OK... but no, we get stuck with Coburn and Inhofe. Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dummer.

18. An apology to Peter Kay

Comment #25349 by Red Foot Oakie on March 12, 2007 at 12:18 pm

Prof. Dawkins- a class act all the way.

19. Why there are almost no genuine atheists

Comment #24560 by Red Foot Oakie on March 7, 2007 at 9:08 am

Man, the morality thing just keeps coming up again and again. How hard is it to just realize that morality is something that the vast majority of us just "do". It's a built in function, kind of like not having to think about making your heart beat.

It's usually that tiny percent of the population that DOESN'T have the built-in morality software that causes most of the problems.

20. Atheists Take On Religion

Comment #24231 by Red Foot Oakie on March 5, 2007 at 12:22 pm

Ugh... that was a remarkably shoddy piece of reporting. Clearly, the line between information and infotainment in the US is blurring.

I especially liked the leading question about secularlists being just as fundamental. Way to throw a fastball, there.

Sam Harris did the best with what he had. Which was what? About three seconds?

Dan Barker did pretty well, but how hard is it to respond to "But superstition gives people hope!" with "That doesn't make it true."

21. Darwin's God

Comment #24228 by Red Foot Oakie on March 5, 2007 at 12:04 pm

As Donald and others have said, the whole magic-box thing is a bit of an odd basis for making sweeping decisions about what people really believe.

I mean, c'mon! Most people are probably worried that it's a parlor trick. He's gonna get your driver's license and then what are you gonna do?

22. Falwell says Christians shouldn't focus on global warming

Comment #23767 by Red Foot Oakie on March 2, 2007 at 3:01 pm

Creepy. Anything that directs attention away from the cult for even a moment has to be slapped down.

Pathetic.

23. Religion in Conflict: Are 'Evangelical Atheists' Too Outspoken?

Comment #23763 by Red Foot Oakie on March 2, 2007 at 2:28 pm

I'm glad somebody pointed out that 'sectarian' violence is really fueled by and large by religion.

24. Faith

Comment #23115 by Red Foot Oakie on February 26, 2007 at 12:33 pm

It's amazing how, if one simply states: "You have very little proof of your holy book's claims." you suddenly become a 'militant athiest'.

So... I guess I'm militant!

25. Atheists come in last

Comment #23110 by Red Foot Oakie on February 26, 2007 at 12:07 pm

Awww man... we came in behind the Mormons? The freaking MORMONS!?

26. A Familiar and Prescient Voice, Brought to Life

Comment #22404 by Red Foot Oakie on February 16, 2007 at 11:40 am

Man, I really miss Carl Sagan...

27. My critics are wrong to call me dogmatic

Comment #22016 by Red Foot Oakie on February 12, 2007 at 10:36 am

Keep the pressure on 'em, Dawkins!

28. Meet the Relatives. They're Full of Surprises.

Comment #22011 by Red Foot Oakie on February 12, 2007 at 10:11 am

This sounds cool. If I can get to NYC I'll check it out.

29. Do stop behaving as if you are God, Professor Dawkins

Comment #21295 by Red Foot Oakie on February 8, 2007 at 2:47 pm

Hey SANCUS, I didn't get your comment to my post until today.

What I was trying to say was that, it seems to me, that while children have no real power they are able to emotionally manipulate thier elders. In a way, almost everything outside of basic food and shelter that a child gets is due to some kind of manipulation of someone bigger and stronger (grown up) than they are. I'm painting with a broad brush and I know it, and I admit it, but appears to me that children can't 'get' or 'do' a lot on their own, so they have to manipulate an adult to either help them or simply do it for them.

I think that ability to manipulate people is a handy tool that we use throughout life, but as we get into the elderly years it becomes increasingly important. The elderly seem to be remarkably manipulative. Also I cannot help noting that in my part of the world, it is elderly women who are the lion's share of the population of any given church.

Again, broad brush, and I can't prove any of it, but there it is.

As for the imaginary friend = tooth fairie = god, that's even more of a tenious conneciton, but I have a gut feeling (forgive me Carl Sagan, wherever you are) that the connection is there.

Of course, maybe children just learn the imaginary friend thing anyway. Adults use the tooth fairy and Santa Claus to manipulate kids- but those two imaginary beings are kind of easy gateway beliefs- after all one deals with pieces of your body, one gives you physical stuff, so maybe after some of that action, the young mind is ready to move on to the more complicated issue of god(s).

Maybe. Hopefully that wasn't even more confusing than the original post!

30. Do stop behaving as if you are God, Professor Dawkins

Comment #21012 by Red Foot Oakie on February 7, 2007 at 9:24 am

Some things I notice about these kinds of counter-attacks on Dawkins/Athiesm.

I always find it odd that they never come out and say, really say, what they believe in. You can talk about 'faith' and 'spirituality' and 'scientific integrity' and even 'Christianity' all day long and sound reasonable and sane and smart. But once you start talking about the god(s) that you believe in you start to sound like a crackpot. Notice that McGrath never actually quotes from the bible that (one supposes) he holds to be the words of the god he believes in. In the previous interview, McGrath quotes from C.S. Lewis, but still no bible.

Why?

Because, I think, the moment you start to quote from the bible or the koran or whatever, you start to look less and less the smart reasonable person you hope to appear as, and more like the immature intellectually timid person Dawkins paints you as.

Also, I got to thinking about the whole 'tooth-fairy-belief-is-not-the-same-as-belief-in-god' thing.

Interesting that, as children, we are helpless in the face of the world and must coerce people into doing things for you, providing shelter and food and protection. You also have made-up friends. Odd that old people, who find themselves increasingly helpless in the face of the world, often return to the patterns of coercion that children use, and they cling to the believe in a big imaginary friend- often to aid in the coercion of the younger people on whom they rely on for food, shelter, and protection.

I mean, honestly, how hard is it to see the link between the kind of manipulation one sees in "If you're good, Santa will bring you stuff", "If you take care of your teeth the tooth fairy will give you stuff" and the kind of manipulation one sees in religion?

31. 'Hobbit' human 'is a new species'

Comment #19882 by Red Foot Oakie on January 30, 2007 at 1:05 pm

So, with their clever re-wired brains, perhaps they are not extinct after all, just hiding. Watching. Planning. Slipping onto ships. Building underground utopias.

Clever, indeed.

Seriously, though. Fascinating stuff. Reminds me of Chrichton's EATERS OF THE DEAD, but without the Vikings.

32. Grief Without God

Comment #19880 by Red Foot Oakie on January 30, 2007 at 12:54 pm

I have to admit that the shameless passive-aggressive manipulation of people's grief is one of the things that annoys me the most about the relegious. They are trained to hit you when you're least likley to be able or willing to fight back.