1. The Great Evangelical Decline

Comment #188816 by Damien White on June 4, 2008 at 4:26 pm

This article ties in with an observation made some time ago by a poster to this site: if as many people went to church as said they actually do, how come there isn't rush hour traffic on Sunday mornings?

2. When two worlds collide: threat of class warfare over faith-based schooling

Comment #188282 by Damien White on June 3, 2008 at 5:40 pm

Whoops! Sorry about that, dr joneZ, I can't believe I got the URL for my own blog wrong. Honestly, i'd forget my own head if I hadn't securely stapled it on...

Try www.captaindoobie.blogspot.com

3. When two worlds collide: threat of class warfare over faith-based schooling

Comment #187873 by Damien White on June 2, 2008 at 11:54 pm

This reminds me of the email I recieved from Amanda Rishworth during last year's hustings.

Amanda was the ALP candidate for the Seat of Kingston, so I wrote her an email asking her for the ALPs policy of teaching creationism in schools. She sent back a very explanatory email stating that the ALP were determined to keep religion out of the classroom.

If anyone wants to see it i placed it on my blog, captaindoobie.blogger.com way back in October last year.

4. Fossil reveals oldest live birth

Comment #186129 by Damien White on May 29, 2008 at 4:29 pm

Great. Now we have to pay the Baby Bonus to 350 million-year-old fish.

5. Car dealership advert tells atheists to 'shut up'

Comment #185386 by Damien White on May 27, 2008 at 5:41 pm

This is crap. Everyone knows that God drives a Plymouth: "And He drove Adam And Eve from the Garden of Eden in His Fury."

And that Moses liked British cars: "The roar of Moses' Triumph was heard throughout the hills."

On the other hand, Jesus humbly drove a Honda but didn't brag about it, because in his own words: "I did not speak of my own Accord."

6. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185091 by Damien White on May 26, 2008 at 10:42 pm

"but it's also true that Autralians, in general, are more racist."

Not really. We're more open about things though. We had a wave of European immigration in the 1950s, Asian immigration in the 1970s and we're currently experiencing a wave of arabic immigration. With both the European and Asian immigration we saw a lot of two-way assimilation, with both cultures opening up over time and enriching the other. This has not really occurred with the arabic community, as their religion keeps them a tight-knit group rather than letting them open up to the wider community.

While I can only speak for myself, Australians have a great deal of tolerance for those who are friendly. If you emigrate, live in an enclave, run your own schools and don't try to integrate with the local community, this is percieved as unfriendly, and you can't expect people to be terribly accommodating.

7. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185072 by Damien White on May 26, 2008 at 9:17 pm

Goldy:
"If a person wishes to be a muslim, they can be so - they'll just have to follow the laws of the land and not demand change. This is up to the government not to fall for this "My culture is better than yours and I demand change!" line."

Islam cares little for local law - they have their own. If enough Muslims move into a country and they become a majority, they can legitimately change the laws of that country. What of the original inhabitants? Perhaps they shouldn't have let them move in in the first place. But whenever anyone tries to block immigration for this reason they are instantly labelled racist.

8. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185045 by Damien White on May 26, 2008 at 7:02 pm

If Camden does not have a current Muslim community, what is the wider Muslim community's aim in placing a school there?

They wish to change the religious demographic of the area.

It is the Muslim community in this case who are acting in a bigoted manner by wishing to change the status quo. Resisting this change does not require one to be xenophobic, just questioning of the Quarantic Society's long term motives.

Why, in the name of 'multiculturalism' should anyone wish for the racial or religious demographic of their home to be changed to their detriment?

9. Repulsive but right

Comment #184541 by Damien White on May 25, 2008 at 4:27 pm

"Anglicanism has constantly changed its views over history. In the past it defended slavery; now it is wholeheartedly ashamed of what it once defended. In the past it outlawed divorce; now it rightly embraces those who seek a second marriage. In the past it disallowed women from the priesthood; now it welcomes them, though not yet fully or warmly enough."

It amazes me how religites can constantly point out the flaws in their own doctrine, yet not admit that there may be more flaws to be found.

10. Sun's properties not 'fine-tuned' for life

Comment #183825 by Damien White on May 23, 2008 at 12:05 am

Vergil,

Difficult to define, isn't it? I've been trying for 31 years. It's what led me to become an atheist in the first place.

If it cannot be defined intrinsically, without becoming subjective, how can limits be placed on where it can and can't arise?

11. Sun's properties not 'fine-tuned' for life

Comment #183809 by Damien White on May 22, 2008 at 9:59 pm

Vergil,

What constitutes 'life'?

12. Sun's properties not 'fine-tuned' for life

Comment #183768 by Damien White on May 22, 2008 at 7:02 pm

vergil,

There is probably parasitic microbial life in my pen, and without a doubt there are living organisms within my boots. Granted, the average IQ of the boot dwellers decreases when I put them on, but them's the breaks.

Instead of limiting our search for life within a narrow band, why are we not concentrating our search in areas much closer to home? Why shouldn't there be life in the Earth's core?

13. Sun's properties not 'fine-tuned' for life

Comment #183735 by Damien White on May 22, 2008 at 4:39 pm

Until we feel qualified to put limits on the formation of life we cannot say how or where life can develop and where it can't.

14. Missing matter found in deep space

Comment #182708 by Damien White on May 20, 2008 at 10:25 pm

It's always in the last place you look, isn't it?

15. Group finds Starbucks logo too hot to handle

Comment #180828 by Damien White on May 15, 2008 at 11:01 pm

Wow - cognitive dissonance has immediately set in. On the one hand, i'd like to point out to 'The Resistance' that the logo is in fact a twin-tailed mermaid with seaweed for a hat; while on the other i'd like to point out to Starbucks how goddam *stupid* it it to have a twin-tailed mermaid wearing seaweed for a hat as a logo for a coffee company.

16. Bible Theme Park Faces Opposition in Tennessee

Comment #180742 by Damien White on May 15, 2008 at 4:41 pm

"Instead of a waterslide, imagine an indoor exhibit on the parting of the Red Sea with water shooting into the air and the booming voice of Moses raining down."

If you can recreate a miracle every hour for the benefit of an audience, doesn't that shed some doubt on the impossibility of it being done in the first place?

17. 'Spiritual' dentist fined $10,000

Comment #180419 by Damien White on May 14, 2008 at 9:27 pm

DasSquid:

"I'm happily living in Victoria."

This is physically impossible, even if you did manage to win the match on the weekend :o)

18. 85% of Americans Want a Presidential Debate on Science

Comment #179758 by Damien White on May 13, 2008 at 4:31 pm

It's nice to see how Americans think when their judgement is not being clouded by overt religosity. Does anyone think these same results would have been garnered had the first question the survey asked been about evolution?

19. On Fitna, the Movie

Comment #178661 by Damien White on May 11, 2008 at 9:01 pm

While it is fine for Maryam Namazi to state that these immigrants are atheists and free thinkers escaping political Islam, was there not an article recently on this very site which explained that for the children of immigrants, a strict (and increasingly militant) adherence to Islam had become a symbol of their culture?

20. My Response to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #177224 by Damien White on May 8, 2008 at 7:28 pm

Religious people shriek when challenged because they are frightened. Unknowingly or unwillingly they respond to anyone pointing out the logical holes in their argument with terror. They are like children, hoping that the loudest voice will win the day and somehow become truth.

They need to remember that shouting and yelling until everyone gives up trying to talk sense to them does not constitute a victory.

21. Faith in Britain today

Comment #177142 by Damien White on May 8, 2008 at 4:40 pm

An unfortunate fact of living on the other side of the world has meant that in this instance I was unable to offer my suggestion to Richard in time, but i'd like to make the point anyway.

Richard, I think the best way to rebut this rubbish would be to stop at the second sentence. It presupposes the existence of god. Too often religious people make this sort of literary 'leap of faith' then simply move on as if everyone is with them, and all too often those called in to rebut them ignore it as well. The best use of this article would be to highlight that it doesn't matter how long an article you write, if the facts contained at the start can't be corroborated or upheld, the entire thing is useless.

Hope the interview went well.

22. Is Liberal Catholicism Dead?

Comment #176170 by Damien White on May 6, 2008 at 6:53 pm

windweaver, it's not just the catholics, and it's not just Queensland. I know someone who was a regular member of the Salvation Army Church here in Adelaide who got asked to stay behind after a service, then found that they were going to attempt an exorcism upon him. He got out and complained to the Captain (the head of the congregation) who privately denounced the practice, yet no censure was ever placed on the cabal of members who had attempted the rite.

23. Research Volunteers Needed

Comment #175218 by Damien White on May 4, 2008 at 11:16 pm

Done!

May the fourth be with you.

24. Was the new finger a 'natural' miracle?

Comment #175157 by Damien White on May 4, 2008 at 4:44 pm

Bizarro Dawkins asks why more Christians don't comment on atheist sites.

Perhaps because a wise man only builds his house upon the rock, not the sand.

25. Religion a figment of human imagination

Comment #171634 by Damien White on April 28, 2008 at 4:30 pm

I think that certain animals do display at least a limited capacity to understand language. The best example of this would be a sheepdog. While they may not understand the words used themselves, they can link sounds and tasks such that sounds can be used to get them to perform quite complex tasks. If this is not at least proto-language, I don't know what is.

26. Judge orders La. school district to stop Bible giveaways

Comment #167168 by Damien White on April 23, 2008 at 5:22 pm

Good old Gideons. I'm gonna catch me one soon, just like Bill Hicks did: ring up the motel front desk and complain that you don't have a bible in your room, then wait behind the door with a big net...

Whenever I stay in a hotel/motel I always take the time to write out a little statement pointing out the major plot-holes in the bible on the hotel stationery, then pop it inside the Gideon's bible as a bookmark.

27. Religion is 'the new social evil'

Comment #164946 by Damien White on April 20, 2008 at 10:01 pm

While we're on the subject of pedantry:

"Tom Butler, the Bishop of Southwark, rejected the indictment of faith. He said: "People meeting together, week after week, for worship, support and education in church, synagogue, temple, gurdwara and mosque can not only help people build local community but can teach children to become good citizens."

I'd just like to point out that 'can' is not the same as 'does'. interesting wording, Bishop.

28. Evolution: 24 myths and misconceptions

Comment #164763 by Damien White on April 20, 2008 at 4:57 pm

Dear me. What a difference a word and an unsympathetic ear makes.

Yes, padster1976, I did refer to homosexuality as an ideology. Not so much a linguistic slip on my part (although it was sloppy) but rather an attempt to realise two things:
First, that the 'causes' (for want of a better word) of homosexuality are not yet fully understood, and thus the subject of 'nature or nurture' is still in doubt;
Secondly, given the extreme xenophobia to which my comments on the simple nature of HOW GENES GET PASSED ON were subjected to, you will forgive me for thinking that there does seem to be an ideology at work here.

In simple terms, homosexuality: not ideology; Gay Power/Pride: ideology.

It was never my intention to upset or belittle anyone on this site, but rather to stimulate discussion. The same, it seems, cannot be said for others.

29. Evolution: 24 myths and misconceptions

Comment #163064 by Damien White on April 17, 2008 at 11:58 pm

Any children produced by heterosexual reproduction at the behest of or for the benefit of gay couples are still produced heterosexually.

Natural selection of any such children will not be affected by the ideology of their parents.

30. Evolution: 24 myths and misconceptions

Comment #163054 by Damien White on April 17, 2008 at 11:12 pm

secondsoprano:

"Homosexuality. Infertility. Totally different things. OK?"

Never said they weren't. It's just that Male-to-male or female-to-female sex will not produce offspring.

31. Evolution: 24 myths and misconceptions

Comment #163025 by Damien White on April 17, 2008 at 8:58 pm

Comment 4 by babrock:

"mothers and t odd female offspring of gay men should tend to be more fertile"

Um, they're gay. There won't BE any offspring. Tends to be a fundamental flaw in the, er, design....

32. Yoko Ono, Filmmakers Caught in 'Expelled' Flap

Comment #162406 by Damien White on April 16, 2008 at 10:10 pm

Honestly, how long would it have taken James Boyce to check his facts before blogging?

Perhaps if people are going to comment on 'Expelled' or whatever as atheists representative of a wider group they need to be far less eager to fly off the handle and actually check things out first.

Can you imagine what the makers of Expelled could have done with this if they'd got their act together? "Look at those crazy atheists all jumping to the wrong conclusions!" they'd crow, "that's all they ever do, that's why they're atheists."

Atheists as a group enjoy being characterised as rational thinkers, so we should probably display rational thought wherever possible.

33. Victims: Pope Benedict Protects Accused Pedophile Bishops

Comment #161791 by Damien White on April 15, 2008 at 5:12 pm

Before I jump to conclusions and have my self-righteous passions enflamed by this article, i'd like to know what some of the accusations were, and who decided they were 'credible'.

Consider: if a bishop get accused and is actually innocent, what then? No-one deserves to be hounded out of office on mere accusations, even if they are terribly deluded in their religious beliefs. The stereotype of the paedophile priest is firmly entrenched in our society but that's all it is, a stereotype, and not indicative of every priest.

Perhaps the article should provide some substance to it's claims of 'credible accusation' lest it be accused of scaremongering and incitement.

34. Richard Dawkins' secular army must be stopped. God is behind some of our greatest art

Comment #160312 by Damien White on April 13, 2008 at 11:36 pm

Wow. This is one of the few time i've ever felt like slapping an atheist/agnostic for their beliefs.

The author seems to be advocating that everyone but himself should be religious so that he can live off of the supposed benefits of the society they create. Essentially he's happy being atheist but he's not happy that everyone else is.

Mark Ravenhill, whoever you are, please stick your head in a bucket of water three times and pull it out twice.

35. Did pre-big bang universe leave its mark on the sky?

Comment #158612 by Damien White on April 10, 2008 at 8:23 pm

Isn't this just a new reiteration of the 'galactic heartbeat' model of the universe popular back in the good* old days of the 1970s? If so, do the arguments against that theory still hold true?

*for a given value of good.

36. Good people doing evil things

Comment #125071 by Damien White on February 10, 2008 at 9:54 pm

People's gods do not form the basis of their morals, people's morals form the basis of their gods.
That's why most people quote the commandment 'thou shalt not kill' instead of god's instruction to kill anyone caught working upon the sabbath.

37. An Altar Beyond Olympus for a Deity Predating Zeus

Comment #122594 by Damien White on February 5, 2008 at 2:35 pm

In "Prolegomena to the Study of Greek Religion," Jane Ellen Harrison, a British scholar, wrote in 1903, "The Zeus of Homer demanded and received the titbits of the victim, though even these in token of friendly communion were shared by the worshipers."

Ouch. Dirty devil :o)

38. US scientists close to creating artificial life: study

Comment #115805 by Damien White on January 24, 2008 at 8:24 pm

Another nail in the creationist coffin, in accordance with the prophecy.

Honestly, how annoying would it be for Jehovah's Witnesses to rock up to Venter's house and start telling him all about how God created life only to have him say "Oh, that? Yeah, i've done that too."

39. The real danger in Darwin is not evolution, but racism

Comment #115209 by Damien White on January 23, 2008 at 6:47 pm

This article is nothing but twaddle.

I challenge the author to read "King Solomon's Ring" by Konrad Lorenz. If he did, i'm sure he'd find that Lorenz was quite clearly Germany's answer to James Herriot.

40. George Scales, War Hero and Generous Friend of RDFRS

Comment #111405 by Damien White on January 14, 2008 at 2:19 pm

Mr Scales,

From all the way down here in Australia, thank you for your support, and I wish you the best of health and a very speedy recovery!

Damien White

41. Why people believe weird things about money

Comment #111171 by Damien White on January 13, 2008 at 9:28 pm

DasSquid,

Utility differs from person to person, as it is a relative value.
In the survey results Shermer gives, it seems that most people place a higher value upon earning more than anyone else as opposed to actually earning more money. I agree with you that it is petty and stupid, but that's beside the point. These people are simply maximising their own personal values of utility.

My point is: so what? Didn't we already know that people do that anyway?

42. Why people believe weird things about money

Comment #111164 by Damien White on January 13, 2008 at 8:18 pm

Radesq,

The difference is that Shermer is saying "people would accept less money? Gosh, aren't we humans a strange lot!" when in reality his article shows that people are simply choosing the path which gives them the highest utility, which is not strange at all.

(Not that there's anything wrong with that.)

43. Why people believe weird things about money

Comment #111152 by Damien White on January 13, 2008 at 6:40 pm

The problem is that Michael Shermer, like most people, doesn't understand basic economics.
People do not work for monetary units, they work for what the monetary units will buy them. Physically, there are few things you can do with cash: burn it, eat it, build a pile of coins. In and of itself it's not very useful. It's only use is as a medium of exchange, to enable you to buy goods and services. All goods are valued not in terms of dollars, but in units of utility: i.e. how useful the item is to the consumer?
What Michael Shermer has discovered is that the method by which money is earned has it's own utility, and that some people place a high price upon this.

BTW, I am an economist, and we've known about this for many, many years. It's as my economics lecturer used to say: most people will readily admit their lack of knowledge of pure mathematics, or chemistry or computers, but everyone thinks they're an economist.

44. The Group Delusion

Comment #110209 by Damien White on January 10, 2008 at 4:15 pm

Thank you for your explanation Richard. At the moment i'm about halfway through The Ancestor's Tale, and i'm on a fairly steep learning curve.

45. The Group Delusion

Comment #110155 by Damien White on January 10, 2008 at 2:47 pm

I am not a student of Biology (in fact, I am an absolute beginner on the subject), but after a careful reading of this article I have a question regarding the outcome of the research shown: while it can be shown that some species reach a pareto-optimal point in their behaviour, why is it we can see other similar species not exhibiting this behaviour, yet surviving just as well? Therefore, does this behaviour have an evolutionary advantage at all? Given the generational span of insects and the age of the earth, shouldn't we expect to see all insect species currently behaving in the same, optimal way?
Can anybody help?

46. Another critic who hasn't read the book

Comment #109222 by Damien White on January 8, 2008 at 3:42 pm

"Did Dawkins make a surprise visit to Minneapolis specifically to shoot Emily Condon's dog or something?"

Mysanthropy, not lycanthropy.

47. Mother Nature is Not Our Friend

Comment #105818 by Damien White on January 1, 2008 at 9:38 pm

Diacanu-

Your words, post #12:
"Okay, fine, but you still have a mountain of work cut out for you to persuade me that humanity has to re-scuplted into some new super being "fit", for "living in the 21st century world".

And who decides the criteria?

I'm hard pressed to think of a single human on the planet I trust with a choice that big."

You don't have to say 'fascism' in order to talk about it, it would seem. Not saying the word itself does not excuse you from the meaning of your comments. If, however, I have misinterpreted your meaning in the above statement, please feel free to enlighten me in language somewhat less enigmatic than that which you have used so eloquently up until this point.

48. Mother Nature is Not Our Friend

Comment #105791 by Damien White on January 1, 2008 at 8:32 pm

How is the artificial modification of the human genome any less damaging to the process of evolution than the development of antibiotics?

Humans are the first species to alter the evolutionary pressures on them by artificial means. To continue the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" meme, our ancestors smashed through that particular glass ceiling millennia ago when they found that pinching wounds together stopped the blood from leaking out. From there it was a short step to tourniquets, bandages, sterilisation and modern medical practice.

Humans have long stepped beyond evolution at the behest of mother nature (at least up to the point of the massive cataclysms that Sam Harris talks about). We wear clothes and build shelters to keep out the cold. We take medicines to ward off disease that would otherwise kill us. The logical result of this is that we tinker with our genetic makeup indirectly, so why shouldn't we tinker directly? The only opposition to that is the eugenic scaremongers who somehow prophesy with disarming clarity that we're all going to end up Nazi Supermen. For some reason people feel that genetic modification goes hand-in-hand with fascism.

Then again, many people think that fascism marches hand-in-hand with atheism too. If we can see the logic gap in one statement, can't we see it in the other?

49. Believe it or not

Comment #97723 by Damien White on December 12, 2007 at 2:49 pm

I'm going to start using 'realist' straight away. It says everything it needs to.

50. Girl, 16, dies after hijab dispute with father

Comment #97310 by Damien White on December 11, 2007 at 9:45 pm

Any religion which requires half its members to wear a bag over their heads has some serious issues to deal with.