1. Fire the starting gun! The Darwin year begins...NOW!

Comment #202525 by beelzebub on July 1, 2008 at 3:16 pm

I started reading Darwin's Origin for the first time! I really hope the coming years activities will inform more people as to what evolution is really about, and dispel some of the nonsensical drivel that is floating about.

2. CFI-UN Hamid Karzai Letter

Comment #202023 by beelzebub on June 30, 2008 at 3:51 pm

Comment #201992 by Fanusi Khiyal
Fanusi, whether we like it or not, no country - not even the might of the US, is going to spend anything like the money and resources required to 'pacify' Islam.
Anyway, think what your reaction would be, if massive Muslim armies attacked and occupied your country - would you say "Oh, I was wrong and you have shown me the light"? Doubt it, so why would you think Muslims would do so? Why do you think others reactions would be any different from your own?

3. Stephen Hawking's explosive new theory

Comment #202007 by beelzebub on June 30, 2008 at 3:23 pm

Comment #201988 by Oystein Elgaroy

If they are merely exploring possibilities, then fine. But the summary seems to imply something more definite. I really need to read the article itself, unfortunately it is subscription only.
Upon re-reading the summary, it does seem a bit confused, first Quantum Gravity, then String Theory - These are not quite the same thing, so what are Hawking et al looking at?
I really need to live next door to a university :-)

4. Stephen Hawking's explosive new theory

Comment #201980 by beelzebub on June 30, 2008 at 2:11 pm

Comment #201908 by Oystein Elgaroy on June 30, 2008 at 11:57 am

Comment#201876 by beelzebub

No, they take the current state of the universe and try to say something about what constraint it puts on the initial conditions for the Universe. Assuming, of course, that their model is correct. It is speculative, just like all other attempts to figure out how the Universe started. But I think it is too harsh to compare this idea and similar cosmological speculations to creationist drivel.

Hi Oystein,
The problem I have with their approach, is that they have chosen a hypothesis, THEN tried to fit the observations with it. Unfortunately, the hypothesis quite literally predicts all and any possible scenarios
"they argued the universe began in just about every way imaginable "
So, rather than creating an hypothesis based on observation, they are running the risk of trying to fit observation with their hypothesis.
In any case, what real use is an idea so flexible it can create, with equal likelihood, any possible scenario - so what if it includes a solution that looks a bit like reality, it can have no predictive power as it is essentially divergent, so pretty much useless. A bit like saying "Hey, I dunno, maybe Goddidit"
Just my tuppenceworth :-)

5. Stephen Hawking's explosive new theory

Comment #201876 by beelzebub on June 30, 2008 at 11:09 am

Hmm... Are they saying "Lets take an idea that gives an infinite number of answers, then pick the ones we like"? Isn't this a wee bit like the creationists saying "Here's the conclusion, now let's try and find evidence to support it"?

6. Galaxy map hints at fractal universe

Comment #200040 by beelzebub on June 26, 2008 at 4:57 pm

Fractals are facinating! My first programming experience was generating Mandelbrot sets (See "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandelbrot_set") from the book "The Fractal Geometry of Nature" by Benoit mandelbrot.
As to the structure of the universe, I would have thought it is trivialy fractal, whatever further observations find?

7. 'I despise Islamism': Ian McEwan faces backlash over press interview

Comment #197502 by beelzebub on June 22, 2008 at 9:10 am

Mordacious1 said:
"Uh oh. Here comes the "Islam isn't a race, so you're not a racist if you slam them" posts. Hey, if you you remove the I in Islam, you get slam. They're asking for it.

Balkinization of GB. OK, this guys last name IS McEwan. Ha, Ha."

Not sure where you are coming from, Mordacious1? Are you seriously siding with those who would split the whole of Humanity into two groups - 'Whites' and 'Everyone Else'?
A curiously 'Racist' position to take, no?
We are talking about religion here, not 'Race' (Whatever the heck that is!). If a religion has to resort to accusations of 'Racism' to defend itself, then it cannot have much faith in it's own position, can it?

8. Is the Universe Actually Made of Math?

Comment #195651 by beelzebub on June 18, 2008 at 4:29 pm

Um... I kinda lost it here:
"The question then becomes, what is the nature of this external reality?
If a reality exists independently of us, it must be free from the language that we use to describe it. There should be no human baggage.

I see where you're heading. Without these descriptors, we're left with only math.
The physicist Eugene Wigner wrote a famous essay in the 1960s called "The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences." In that essay he asked why nature is so accurately described by mathematics. The question did not start with him. As far back as Pythagoras in the ancient Greek era, there was the idea that the universe was built on mathematics. In the 17th century Galileo eloquently wrote that nature is a "grand book" that is "written in the language of mathematics." Then, of course, there was the great Greek philosopher Plato, who said the objects of mathematics really exist. "

So....
Basically,
Maths = Language
External Reality /= Language therefore
No External Reality!
OK Mr clever-clogs, go walk through that wall then! :-)

9. The History Channel might do something right

Comment #176148 by beelzebub on May 6, 2008 at 5:13 pm

It'll probably be a few months before it gets over here, but I hope it will be an informed and intelligent overview of evolution. Alas, there are at least two errors in the write-up that I can see (And others here have noted) -
Insects in the pre-cambrian?????
95% of living species have eyes????
...and I'm not too sure about the "To evolve is to conquer!" bit - surely to 'survive' is to live long enough to reproduce? It's not about !!conquest!!

10. Evolution's Critics Shift Tactics With Schools

Comment #175170 by beelzebub on May 4, 2008 at 5:53 pm

Thanks Quine for the '+' code - I thought my PC was playing up! :-)

Inferno writ
"Why is evolution (ie biology) always on the creationists school hit list? "
Well, it seems to me that they are so stuffed-full of themselves, being almost god-like (in his image and all that), that they cannot stand being reminded that, in fact, they really are members of the animal kingdom! Why this should be is a mystery to me (I love the idea that the whole totality of life, from the simplest bacteria, to the great apes, are all, in some deep way, interconnected!).
Of course, another nasty idea came to me the other day - Christians always seem to portray Man as white anglo-saxon, whereas Chimpanzees and Gorillas are black. Could there be an unspoken racial element here?
Just my tuppence-worth :-)

11. Evolution's Critics Shift Tactics With Schools

Comment #175005 by beelzebub on May 4, 2008 at 5:20 am

rod-the-farmer - I've had this problem myself, the web-site times-out and loses all your hard work. I now make my comments in Notepad, then copy&paste into the message box. Job done :-)

EvidenceOnly - I thought 1plus1=10 (really, it does :-) )

On a more serious note, American legislators could do worse than examine Islamic history. Here was (by the standards of the time) a liberal, outward-looking, enthusiastic society that freely accepted mathematics and scientific inquiry, eagerly collecting the works and knowledge of other cultures and enthusiastically embraced the arts, literature and philosophy. All this whilst the Christian Europeans were mired in the dark-age barbarism of religious ignorance. (http://www.al-bab.com/arab/science.htm)
Then, around the 12th-13th century, something changed. Islamic religious leaders began expressing concern that the fundamentals of Islam were being diluted and lost, and within a very short period, the shining light of Islamic culture was extinguished. Islam decended into a dark-age at the same time that Europe began to climb out (The Rennaisance, Enlightenment etc). To this day, there is hardly any Islamic science or mathematics. All the science, medicine and technology that the wealthy arab states use and take for granted, is the result of the western, reductionist, materialistic scientific method. It is true that the western world learned much from Islam, but this did not help the Muslims from their own decline. Sadly, to this day, Islam shows no sign of embarking upon their own Enlightenment, and seem doomed to remain in the ignorant and stultifying grip of religious fundamentalism.
America should be careful not to follow Islam's example - could the last 800 years of Islam's history be America's future?

(minor edit 'plus' I can't seem to get the 'plus' sign - minus '-' works fine??))

12. Girl, 17, killed in Iraq for loving a British soldier

Comment #171595 by beelzebub on April 28, 2008 at 3:38 pm

Guys, you're still getting hung-up about Muslims! This ghastly issue really is about ignorant, un-informed, un-educated culture. What about that poor Kurdish girl filmed being stoned to death last year? How about Hindu 'honour killings'? In some parts of India, widows are expected (and often forced) to throw themselves upon their husbands funeral pyre! What about the many cultures that kill innocent, new-born babies just because they are the wrong sex?
This is NOT a religious issue, but one of ignorance and fear. Improve their lives, education and security, and you might just help reduce or even eliminate this senseless slaughter!

13. Girl, 17, killed in Iraq for loving a British soldier

Comment #171525 by beelzebub on April 28, 2008 at 2:34 pm

As with al-rawandi, I find this whole commentary has decended into race-hate. This issue runs across race and religion, it is a cultural issue - ignorant, brutal and nasty, yes, but not the realm of any one religion or people. From an article on the BBC's web-site:

"Honour killing, Mr Gidoomal continues, is not a religious issue.
None of the world's major religions condone honour-related crimes. But those who are guilty have sometimes tried to justify their actions on religious grounds.
"Honour crime happens across the board in the Asian community," insists Mr Gidoomal. "People try to blame Muslim, Hindus or Sikhs but it tends to happen in families where there are the strongest ties and expectations. It's a very strong cultural issue.""

14. Orangutan attempts to hunt fish with spear

Comment #171447 by beelzebub on April 28, 2008 at 1:48 pm

I'm so impressed, I've made it my avatar! :-)

15. Interview with Dan Dennett

Comment #168356 by beelzebub on April 25, 2008 at 4:43 am

Another BBC radio series, 'In Our Time' had a facinating program on materialism.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/inourtime/inourtime_20080424.shtml

Quote from Baron D'Holbach, 1770, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/inourtime/inourtime.shtml

"If we go back to the beginning we shall find that ignorance and fear created the gods; that fancy, enthusiasm, or deceit adorned or disfigured them; that weakness worships them; that credulity preserves them, and that custom, respect and tyranny support them."

Can't say more than that! :-)

16. The science of religion: Where angels no longer fear to tread

Comment #148581 by beelzebub on March 23, 2008 at 10:41 am

Steve Zara wrote:
"You aren't being naive at all. This is an important question. What matters is what it is that is actually being selected. Consider a family, and close relations. They tend to love and care for each other, and co-operate. This is gene selection even though it benefits the group, because what is actually happening is that genes are recognising bodies that have copies of themselves and trying to help them survive (to anthropomorphise). "
I'm not so sure about the 'Family' argument - when the kids reach adulthood, they split from the family, to form families of their own. If this was all that groups were about, then there would be no tribes, no societies, no nations etc. If we are looking at the gene level of selection, then surely it would be those genes whose emergent properties are 'societal', hence enhancing the individuals chances of survival and reproducing, that would get passed-on? Genes that produced purely selfish behaviour would stand less chance of survival. So, "selfish genes" tying to get passed-on will tend towards maximising 'societal' behaviour in their phenotypic expression - those producing the more optimal societies will get selected more often - The more optimal societies will out-survive the less optimal societies, and so we have - Group selection!!
Or does the term "Group Selection" have a different, technical, meaning?

17. The science of religion: Where angels no longer fear to tread

Comment #148560 by beelzebub on March 23, 2008 at 9:51 am

Hmm... I'm a bit confused over this apparent dichotomy (Selfish-Gene/Group-Selection). Clearly humanity benefits enormously by organising themselves into groups (Tribes, Faiths, Societies etc), individuals, or groups of (selfish) indiviuals, who try to 'go it alone' will not reap the benefits of (altruistic) group membership (Security, resource-sharing, care when sick etc). Individuals who subsume their immediate self-interest for the interests of the group, will surely have a better chance of passing on their genes (especially in tough times). Is this not 'Group Selection'? Those groups of individuals that co-operate best, survive? This seems obvious to me, so why is it so dismissed?
Am I being a bit naive here? :-)

18. It looks like Man crucified

Comment #148529 by beelzebub on March 23, 2008 at 9:03 am

I was somewhat saddened by this transparent 'yearning for God' piece - until I went and read the comments on the Times article
(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/mick_hume/article3593483.ece). It seems lots of reasonable folk have seen straight through Mick Humes' confusion - perhaps he should read them, then have a re-think?

19. Italian TV urged to scrap BBC film accusing Pope of abuse cover-up

Comment #44620 by beelzebub on May 25, 2007 at 5:41 am

Looks like they might go ahead with the show, but only if the church is allowed a right of reply.
"http://www.mediawatchwatch.org.uk/?p=724"
As the article says, if the church is innocent, why should it be worried? :-)

20. Consciousness Comes from DNA

Comment #39906 by beelzebub on May 12, 2007 at 8:45 am

I love this line
"Gallup found mirror self-awareness in oranges, but not gorillas."
Conscious fruit? Amazing!! :-)

21. How Did the Universe Survive the Big Bang? In This Experiment, Clues Remain Elusive

Comment #31431 by beelzebub on April 12, 2007 at 4:27 pm

I found the original article at
http://www-boone.fnal.gov/publicpages/prl8.pdf
Still not sure what bearing this has on the matter/anti-matter imbalance in the early universe.
Edit: Also this nice detailed presentation of the results.
http://www-boone.fnal.gov/publicpages/First_Results.pdf

22. How Did the Universe Survive the Big Bang? In This Experiment, Clues Remain Elusive

Comment #31428 by beelzebub on April 12, 2007 at 4:03 pm

I thought the matter/anti-matter problem was resolved through Charge-Parity (CP) Violation, in which some particles decay slower than their anti-particle. Not sure where neutrinos come into this. Will look further.
Anyone know more about this?

23. Is God a Delusion?

Comment #29758 by beelzebub on April 4, 2007 at 3:08 pm

He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy wrote...
"These arguments are so basic, how come we need to keep restating the same points over an over?"

That's because the media are scared of going into any detail for fear of losing their audience. I have numerous news channels, and the content is the same on all of them - hardly any depth, just the same old headlines. Sad :-(

24. Selfish genes may drive out disease

Comment #28602 by beelzebub on March 30, 2007 at 4:26 am

Correction!
I see it now -
Modified Mozz + Modified Mozz = 100% repro
Modified Mozz + Normal Mozz = 50% repro - all surviving progeny have malaria-passing resistance.
Nice! :-)

25. Selfish genes may drive out disease

Comment #28600 by beelzebub on March 30, 2007 at 4:21 am

Hmm... let's see..
Normal Mosquitos breed 100%
Modified Mosquitos breed 50%
I wonder which will out-compete the other? :-)

(BTW, Infected mozzies are reproductively impaired by malaria, but no where near 50%!)

26. Memo: Stop teaching evolution

Comment #22478 by beelzebub on February 19, 2007 at 9:43 am

Surely this is a joke? I mean, no one with even a single brain cell could go for this stuff? Anyway, that 'Fixed Earth' site looks suspiciously like a spoof to me - maybe the representatives are taking the p** out of us! :-)