1. After Bibles seized, U.S. group won't leave Chinese airport

Comment #232556 by adamhaar on August 18, 2008 at 10:54 am

If someone tried to bring 300 books, any books, into any country, I would expect there to be some difficulty with the customs service. Especially if they were all the same book. Surely most countries would charge some sort of tax (300 books exceeding the 'duty-free' limit) and there may be questions asked about why someone is importing so many books.

2. The End of Theory: The Data Deluge Makes the Scientific Method Obsolete

Comment #199927 by adamhaar on June 26, 2008 at 2:03 pm

Re: 25. Comment #199900 by kwhitefoot
Hear, hear!
That was the first thing that I though of after reading the article. All data mining can do is examine the past; to attempt reasonable prediction one needs a model of some sort.

3. The Great Evangelical Decline

Comment #188969 by adamhaar on June 5, 2008 at 4:31 am

Re: 43. Comment #188882 by acs

It only takes 1 generation for the rational to be replaced by the loon.

Your statement certainly sounds plausible but the evidence you show to support this conclusion is not.
1. While higher education is not free, it is definitely not like the U.S.A.'s system. I suggest you educate yourself on HECS/HELP for university students and the very-highly-subsidised TAFE courses (at least in Victoria; other states may charge full fees for TAFE students for all I know).
2. The 1970s were not a time of "genuine regard for human rights". Sure, there were many who had such regard, but many more did not. Australia did nothing to protect the rights of the East Timorese against the invasion by Indonesia (perhaps because we wanted the oil). Gay rights might have been coming into place, but bashing of gay men was common. Refugees and immigrants were treated badly by the general populous.
Today, some things have changed and some stay the same. Just this year the Labor Federal Government repeated the Liberal (coalition) Goverment's actions a few years back to quash the ACT's gay marriage legislation. As for locking up people who come to Australia outside of a recognised refugee program, there are two things: 1. the new Government is changing things (although it remains to be seen what the outcomes are) and 2. it is more complex than your assertion allows for.

[EDIT: remove unfounded assertion.]

4. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185142 by adamhaar on May 27, 2008 at 4:38 am

Well, shit. So much inference from so little data.

Disclaimer
For those who think that they need it: I am a citizen and resident of Australia.

Attempts at fact:
Camden is a small town in NSW (New South Wales, Australia's most populous state), on the outskirts of Sydney (Australia's most populous city). The locality of Camden itself has a population of less than 3000, although the Camden Local Government Area has a population of over 50 thousand. [Ref: http://www.camden.nsw.gov.au/page/population_figures.html]

Most of the Australian population is identified (either by self or by parents) as having some sort of religious belief or affiliation that is reasonably described as christian. Camden is no different. [Ref 1: http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/3416.0Main Features22007?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=3416.0&issue=2007&num=&view=] [Ref 2: http://www.censusdata.abs.gov.au/ABSNavigation/prenav/ViewData?producttype=QuickStats&subaction=-1&areacode=SSC11165&action=401&collection=census&textversion=true&breadcrumb=LP&period=2006&navmapdisplayed=true&]

Camden residents have some history of opposing 'development'. [Ref: the BBC article above]

Unsubstantiated claims:
Small townships have a 'reputation' for opposing change.

Australians (warning: gross generalisation coming up) do have a tendency to be wary (at best) of change.

Australians also (warning: another gross generalisation coming up) do have a tendency to be suspicious of the 'other' who comes into a community and doesn't want (or seem to want) to be a part of it.

Australia has had (and continues to have) a problem of bigotry of all sorts, though it would be unsubstantiated bigotry to assert that all Australians are bigots.

An hour to get to school is not a big trip. Commuting is not rare in Australia.

Criticism of other posters
Don't be so damn precious. Surely we all know that it's hard to communicate well with people we don't know using a purely textual medium.

Some people seem to be very quick to play the 'cry racism' card. Some people are quick to defend 'muslim culture' but quick to denigrate others. Why is someone racist for opposing a muslim school unless also opposing a christian church?

Opinion and Attempts at Analysis:
What we're really doing here is making shit up. We have little here to go on except what the BBC has chosen to give us. I claim Molehill -> Mountain.

It's likely that some of the townsfolk are bigots of some kind (anti-immigration, anti-muslim, anti-foreigner, whatever, just because). However, I suggest (without evidence) that the BBC has quoted those with the most 'interesting' statements and ignored the rest.

A 1500-student school is a very large development for such a small town. A school of that size would be a concern regardless of the type.

I suggest that opposition to a church would be less than opposition to an islamic school for at least two reasons:
1. a church is a lot smaller.
2. most of the population profess to be some sort of christian so it's not something 'different'.

Having said that, I suspect that a 1500-seat mega- (or is that kilo-?) church would also be opposed, but since we have no polling data, we can't really say anything except what we make up ourselves.

There is a difference between christian schools and islamic schools. Justified or not, islamic schools have here a reputation for preaching hatred (probably based on reports from overseas). Christian schools do not.

5. Jesus saves

Comment #147611 by adamhaar on March 21, 2008 at 1:20 am

Also, for those who don't know, this was taken from The Wry Side column. That title ought to be sufficient to indicate its intentions (though not whether it's successful at achieving them).

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

Comment #112364 by adamhaar on January 17, 2008 at 1:19 am

Re: various comments in this thread
Bizzaro: I don't know if you'll see this post here in the 'Alternate Comment Thread', but I want to say something to you about this thread.

Your original post (Comment #111423), signed personally, and especially your revised post (Comment #112248), and your willingness to revise it, show you as a man of good character.

Regardless of what other people may think or say (and I have seen you cop a lot of flak here), no matter your religious persuasion, you have shown sense and wisdom in the various follow-on posts here.

I have found this short discourse between you and Enlightenme.. to be refreshingly civil.

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

Comment #111529 by adamhaar on January 15, 2008 at 12:09 am

All the best, George, and I wish you a full and rapid recovery.

8. Another critic who hasn't read the book

Comment #110690 by adamhaar on January 12, 2008 at 1:05 am

Comment #110486 by emilycondon

. . . I will try to speak to the wrath raised against me here

Emily,
Thank you for your considered response. It's unfortunate when the message gets 'corrupted' during editing, but it's a shame when people automatically jump to an offensive interpretation.

9. Another critic who hasn't read the book

Comment #109462 by adamhaar on January 9, 2008 at 5:20 am

Far from the vitriolic diatribe of a God-hating misanthrope like Richard Dawkins, Hitchens's work is both appropriately respectful and right.

I read this in an entirely different light: an attempt at humour that (judging by the reaction) failed the translation from thought or speech into text. Having read both Dawkins and Hitchens, and listened to them both speak (alas only on the Internet), I saw this as a swap, playing for laughs.

Perhaps some of us are getting so used to being attacked that we start to see it where it doesn't exist. Or perhaps I'm giving too much benefit of the doubt.

10. Face to faith

Comment #83088 by adamhaar on October 28, 2007 at 10:54 pm

It seems that Mr Vernon would prefer us all to be ignorant and fearful.

11. Catholic condom ban helping AIDS spread in Latam: U.N.

Comment #81117 by adamhaar on October 24, 2007 at 6:56 am

Re: 1. Comment #80891 by BathTub
I think you've hit the nail on the head. The pope could ban whatever he likes and it won't stop people doing what they like; people will just use the papal ban on condoms as an excuse to pressure other people, conveniently ignoring the papal ban on pre- and extra-marital sex. Agree with the stance or not, if there was no sex outside of marriage, the sexual transmission of HIV would be much reduced. (OTOH, if condoms were always used in such situations the transmission of HIV would be much reduced, and probably the abortion rate, too.) As much as it annoys me to say, I think that in this case the hypocrites are the people more than the pope. I suggest that people are digging holes for themselves and then blaming the pope.

12. Downward, Christian soldier

Comment #80883 by adamhaar on October 23, 2007 at 10:25 am

Re: 16. Comment #80807 by Mercurius

there are atheists and agnostics in foxholes General

I think that's what the General would like to change . . . .

13. Call for 'post-9/11' RE teaching

Comment #50339 by adamhaar on June 17, 2007 at 1:47 am

Wouldn't it be nice if they taught *about* religion, especially all the different religions of the world, past and current.

14. Genie shows barred by Islam, clerics say

Comment #31906 by adamhaar on April 14, 2007 at 11:04 pm

"We don't want to promote a belief in the supernatural and in superstition, which we do not know about. So we do not need to focus on such things or play them up by having such exhibitions."

So why then do they try to promote their superstitions and belief in their supernatural 'god'? If it's a threat to the faith of their believers, why not simply tell Muslims not to go? Let the rest of the country do their own thing. Just because a majority of the population are Muslim (Wikipedia quotes a 2000 census indicates approx. 60%) doesn't mean that they get to push aroung the rest of the population.

15. Thanks for the Facts. Now Sell Them.

Comment #31903 by adamhaar on April 14, 2007 at 10:57 pm

It seems to me that the authors of the article would prefer scientists to conceal detail and have the public accept their findings on 'faith'.
Along the same lines as Janus' comment #31899, it's not enough to know (believe) a fact; we need understanding, evidence and reasoning. If those things are concealed then scientists become priests and we the public merely followers (reminds me a little of Asmiov's Foundation).

16. Answers To the Atheists

Comment #30374 by adamhaar on April 7, 2007 at 10:38 pm

Dionne Jr states:

As for me, Christianity is more a call to rebellion than an insistence on narrow conformity, more a challenge than a set of certainties.

What about the certainty of the Christ? What about the certainty that Jesus was the son of god and the saviour of mankind?

I thought these things were the most important and fundamental aspects of Christianity and that everything else was secondary. Or is Dionne Jr now trying to define Christianity as something so vague and wishy-washy that it no longer has any real meaning?

17. Senator calls for answer on creation of universe

Comment #24242 by adamhaar on March 5, 2007 at 1:24 pm

The whole question seems pointless, as a simple answer will prove nothing. An intelligent designer of the universe doesn't rule out evolution. Some 'god' or other could have created the universe with a big bang, just right for us to evolve as we have, and then left us all alone.

Even if evolution as we understand it is not correct, it still doesn't prove the biblical book of Genesis nor any intelligent design.

Does Finney think that all creation stories ought to be taught in science? Or just his own beliefs? The Norse and Greek stories are interesting enough. What criteria does he think should be used to determine what is taught?

Speculation of what/which/if some undetectable god might have done can be called philosophy, but not science.

18. Native American populations share gene signature

Comment #23804 by adamhaar on March 2, 2007 at 8:56 pm

Re: Comment #22468 by MartinSGill
Your final comment was off topic, but I hink it deserves a response:
Please keep in mind that the Catholic Church also forbids sex outside of marriage. Do we really think that people who ignore the Pope's rules on sex would obey on condoms?