101. The day of judgment

Comment #189741 by black wolf on June 7, 2008 at 5:59 am

Laurie,
great idea of renaming your class. The title attracts all sorts of people who wouldn't know critical thinking if it bit them. And you let them in, figuratively close the door and set the hounds loose.
I hope you'll someday have the great reward of a former woo thinker or a fundy sending you a message that your class was the first step in freeing their mind. Or have you already?

102. The Expelled Evolutionist

Comment #189084 by black wolf on June 5, 2008 at 11:34 am

The point is that the 'academic freedom' offense is not about being contrary to the scientific mainstream, which in itself isn't uniform down to the last detail. Their pursuit is to make completely unscientific - in terms of methodology, evidence, logic, parsimony and just about every conceivable other factor - ideas appear as having scientific credibility. Once they get that into place anywhere, pupils will leave school with the impression that there is some sort of science behind the claims. These students then go on to vote on or become school board members, which is precisely the political snowball method creationists want to achieve. It's the wedge to eventually get the very definition of science changed, just as Behe explained at Dover. If they can't do it by force, they'll try to deteriorate and muddy the definition bit by bit. An idea that thrives solely in the realm of politics and propaganda has no place in science classes.

103. Stupid flies live longer: study

Comment #189079 by black wolf on June 5, 2008 at 11:23 am

How much offspring does Jeff Goldblum have, and how intelligent is he? Which Pavlovian method led him to select Geena Davis?
Gee, this article doesn't answer any important questions.

104. Lizards make adaptive change

Comment #188986 by black wolf on June 5, 2008 at 6:30 am

Ah, yes, AiG grasping at straws again. Have they got any evidence how the marsupial 'kind' evolved kangaroos, mice, bears and wolves within 6,000 years and moved the whole lot to Oz yet? Or did these species all evolve from different 'kinds' - each from just one breeding pair - and miraculously all ended up on the same continent? Or how each generation of the Ark's 'kinds' had to split into about 10,000 different species to explain the number we know today?
What I would like to see is a psychologist's explanation (in team with the theologians) why a group of people like AiG submit to stampeding moronity and happily gallop deeper in every year.

105. A New Step In Evolution

Comment #188657 by black wolf on June 4, 2008 at 10:48 am

happinessiseasy,
there are many plant-eating bacteria and viruses already, so the new strain would have to compete with those. The flesh-eating bacteria would still remain in nature, and not compete with the plant-eaters, so both would continue to exist. What we'd get is another danger to wildlife and humans. Imagine animals eating contaminated plants, and it turned out that the plant-eating bacteria could survive in animal digestion tracts. They would probably thrive on the food the animals take in, and possibly produce toxic substances which could kill the animals, as some bacteria species do.

106. Bible Theme Park Faces Opposition in Tennessee

Comment #188654 by black wolf on June 4, 2008 at 10:41 am

Yeeeee-Haaaawww!
Maybe we're getting our first own fundamentalist Bible theme park in Germany now!
http://fr-aktuell.de/in_und_ausland/politik/aktuell/?em_cnt=1344765&sid=d4631a7f568412d6c0e8f56a9d735f3c
The theme park is planned by Swiss group Genesis Land AG in the heartland of Catholicism near Heidelberg, one of Germany's most renowned university cities. They're looking for financial investors, mendaciously asserting the non-profit goal of 'displaying history'. You know, the imaginary version of history where Earth is 6,000 years old and the Ark floated globally.
Politicians and the Protestant church have expressed concern and opposition. A Green party member of the local senate has expressed her concern that this park will make the state look ridiculous as a science location. The 'world view appointee' of the Protestant church says, 'the Bible is not a biology textbook'. He claims the creation story has been interpreted and understood for a long time, contrary to the fundamentalists' view. Pseudo-scientific readings as displayed in Genesis Land construed contrasts between science and theology that had long been overcome. He hopes the project will not be realized for a lack of investors, as a lack of funding had prevented other stupidity in some cases.

107. Scientists rally against creationist 'superstition'

Comment #187023 by black wolf on June 1, 2008 at 5:34 am

So, what do the Anglicans and other 'modern' churches (Episcopals) think about this? Am I wrong in my impression that their best answers are, 'that's not my faith you're criticising' to the atheists and, 'those people represent just a fringe minority' about the creos? Have I biasedly overlooked statements from church organizations, ministers' associations and such confronting the creos, or is it just not happening?
I read the following document, the Catechism of Creation:
http://www.episcopalchurch.org/19021_58398_ENG_HTM.htm
It is clear on its acceptance of evolution (within a NOMA paradigm), but the following quote addresses my questions:
"Has the Episcopal Church spoken on the creationists' claims?

In 1982, General Convention passed a resolution (a) to "affirm its belief in the glorious ability of God to create in any manner," (b) "and in this affirmation reject the rigid dogmatism of the 'Creationist' movement" and (c) further affirmed "our support of the scientists, educators, and theologians in the search for truth in this creation that God has given and entrusted to us.""

Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, 2006: "I think creationism is ... a kind of category mistake, as if the Bible were a theory like other theories ... if creationism is presented as a stark alternative theory alongside other theories I think there's just been a jarring of categories ... My worry is creationism can end up reducing the doctrine of creation rather than enhancing it."
from http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/mar/21/religion.topstories3

Episcopal Church: Resolution A129 Affirm Creation and Evolution
http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2006/06/episcopal-churc.html

Well, all that's not bad, but I doubt that it is nearly enough. In contrast to the about weekly statements from the Anglican, Episcopal, Catholic and European Protestant churches about social morality, economics, contraception, stem-cell research and so on, their statements on creationism are rather weak and far between.

108. That's it. Texas really is doomed.

Comment #186013 by black wolf on May 29, 2008 at 10:58 am

Colwyn,
Richard who? George 'Richard' Carlin?

109. 'Framing Science' and The Dawkins Effect

Comment #186011 by black wolf on May 29, 2008 at 10:56 am

windfall,
it was, on March 14th:
http://richarddawkins.net/article,2359,I-dont-believe-in-atheists,Salon

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

Comment #185931 by black wolf on May 29, 2008 at 6:43 am

yep, al-rawandi
I've been there. What you want to do is drive through in a climatized vehicle, take some nice pictures of the exotic landscape (leave the vehicle for 3-4 minutes if you must), and then get outta there to look at some redwood trees or a Pacific sundown. With all the mobility of the US society, I'm amazed that anyone stays there for more than a week. How much of their income do residents spend on cooling systems and water transportation there?

111. Probe lands on Mars, NASA says

Comment #184951 by black wolf on May 26, 2008 at 2:12 pm

On an off-topic side note, I just came across this:
http://raycomfortfood.blogspot.com/2008/05/smartest-man-alive.html

The creos are now trying to drag Stephen Hawking to their side, now that they've given up on Einstein, who will be in hell with us according to them. If someone can comment on the above article (on their site), it might help the lurkers at least. I'm admittedly at a loss for words, as I haven't read A Brief History of Time.
Didn't Paula Kirby comment on Robertson's Hawking citation in the Fleabytes thread?

112. That's it. Texas really is doomed.

Comment #184921 by black wolf on May 26, 2008 at 12:28 pm

padster,
what you call 'batshit crazy stuff' is mainstream theology (or should I say theo-policy) and an opinion shared by many politicians (for all I know a large majority) in Europe and America. The Christianity-freedom-enlightenment-democracy connection is being peddled everywhere, it's not something McLeroy just made up himself. I read this every time there's a religion discussion on any forum. It's one of the cornerstones of the Christian claim of social value, going from that to argue the downfall of civilization without (Christian) religion. It's at best a skewed interpretation of the historical evidence, but that doesn't seem to bother anyone in the political arena, even less so the further you move up the ladder.

113. The Mind-Altering Role of Incense in Religion

Comment #184909 by black wolf on May 26, 2008 at 11:55 am

I read an article on these mildly hallucinatory properties years ago in a German paper. I think we even have some legislation regulating the times and amounts incense can be used in churches. It depends on where they get the incense from and what concentration they use, so no doubt some churches will have more effective stuff than others. If we define mind-altering as influencing brain chemistry, then the term applies well even for a relaxing, soothing effect. I assume smoke-sticks used in Asian temples and shrines have similar effects. The more I think about it, the more I realize that I can't think of a single religion that does not involve some sort of inhaled or ingested substance (Scientology?).

114. Repulsive but right

Comment #184755 by black wolf on May 26, 2008 at 5:47 am

I hereby proclaim that I will quit smoking. I've never been a heavy smoker like Hitchens, but it just doesn't give me much anymore. I had stopped years ago for a while, but got into the habit again later, shame on me. It'll be hard, but if Christopher can do it, I can. This is my last pack.
I hope my wife will stop too.

115. Animal Science Without Evolution

Comment #184746 by black wolf on May 26, 2008 at 5:26 am

Exactly Mitchell. It's because they never learn what understanding really means. For fundies, the best understanding is that which feels best and confirms what they've been told, forming a mindset where evidence is not even of secondary importance. The evidence doesn't fit the faith? Then it must be wrong, so let's put it in the basement and ignore it.

116. Animal Science Without Evolution

Comment #184739 by black wolf on May 26, 2008 at 5:00 am

As I've read, a few states in the US are taking tentative steps to raise the requirements of home-schooling parents. As others have said on this site, a kid can get a really good, well-rounded education if the parents are up to it. Simply picking up books that agree with your personal choice superstition will not do. Of course there are many recommended books, but does any education agency or office actually check what material parents use? As far as I've read into the subject from an outside viewpoint (we don't have but a literal handful of home-schoolers in my country), the pot often boils over when the kids want to enter a college or university. As colleges have reported, a high number of Christian-homeschooled youth fail entry exams, especially for scientific curricula. Then what happens is not that the parents admit setting back their kids for years and give them a chance to re-learn properly (who'd dream of that), but that the college gets sued (so far unsuccessfuly in every case). I don't know if it's spreading, but there definitely is a subculture of self-sustaining fundamentalism in the US that's willfully holding on to in a vicious generational circle scheme that separates more and more from modern society, all the while feeding of the progress others make (science, medicine, media, technology etc.). It makes me honestly sad to think of all the miseducated kids who get segregated before getting a chance to develop their skills.

117. A Tribute to Douglas Adams: Towel Day May 25th

Comment #184342 by black wolf on May 24, 2008 at 5:50 pm

I'll be doing it, with my personally signed copy of the Guide under my arm.

118. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #183906 by black wolf on May 23, 2008 at 6:50 am

Over the past few months it has become painfully clear it is impossible to have any kind of dialogue or conversation with someone who can only relate with those who believe the same nonsense he believes.

From reading various dialogues amongst Christians and other believers, I suspect most don't actually communicate with each other, in the sense of sharing and adding to each others' information. For them, 'relating' means simply a gut reaction to certain key words and phrases. They simply presume that because someone else uses terminology (actually no -logy at all) they use, that they agree and therefore are 'brothers in faith'. They are satisfied by throwing scripture and spiritually loaded language fragments at each other, and the fuzzy warmth they get from that is enough confirmation of truth. Critical questioning and following evidence in a logical manner just doesn't get into the picture. That is why any intrusion by a clear thinking, critical individual is an immediate disturbance and a threat to their 'modus communicatus', and therefore quickly met with hostility. Any line of reasoning that doesn't add comfort is worthless and necessarily avoided. When evidence and logic lead to the conclusion of a purposeless universe without a grand plan or an afterlife, it is fearsomely unacceptable and utterly incomprehensible. They have a special definition of doubt, which is that if the real world doesn't seem to correspond to the picture of divinity they have, then their view of the real world must be skewed. The logical, parsimonious and elegantly consistent step of accepting the nonexistence of divinity is simply too terrifying to consider.
I'm very glad that many people who post on this site have had the courage to take that last step and found a greater, more beautiful and awe-inspiring universe than their previous beliefs had allowed them, shedding the anthropocentric and ultimately egocentric skin of faith that religions want us to hold as indispensable.

119. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #182973 by black wolf on May 21, 2008 at 7:03 am

Tez,
you still not picture from antworld when color # 2 and 4 is all. Fragment in beach shell picked up and filled in ears is no border to evolin antworld. Can you not taste banana like ant tastes clouds? You think short as step from Mecca.

120. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #182970 by black wolf on May 21, 2008 at 6:59 am

Yes Quetz, I must agree on good point.
Hand hold on sand crumb like is wisdom, but not fills beach in Russel mind. Look in brain will not form mind of Picasso when painted face can not cover snake.

121. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #182966 by black wolf on May 21, 2008 at 6:57 am

Tez,
you yell from antworld but not change insight in picture frame. Xipe is empty as coke can pressed in banana. A figment of crocoduck not confuse antworld, just as leaves not green caused from seasons.

122. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #182964 by black wolf on May 21, 2008 at 6:54 am

epeeist,
you make sentence grammar clear, but is not deep as ocean of wisdom found in Muhammad. Show link that is old as wisdom of painter, and listening evolins will change idea of antworld. Effort make not wisdom as nature not make cloud rabbit. Take word is prime.

123. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #182962 by black wolf on May 21, 2008 at 6:49 am

Oh please al-r.
Human makes only Hindu when fractal theory meets antworld. Open for cloud image will grow fungus on picture frames, is very clear to existence.

124. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #182958 by black wolf on May 21, 2008 at 6:46 am

Is this some sort of experiment to see how much a brain can stand before it explodes or turns into liquid?
Man, us evolins sure are an evil bunch...

Quetz, one thing you don't understand is leaves only green in summer. It is eye who makes seasons, not mindgod and not evolin professor. Create is only phylactery in antworld. Fruit make cake not monalisa from wheat, got it?

125. The Lava Lizard's Tale

Comment #182895 by black wolf on May 21, 2008 at 5:17 am

sophia_mr,

Hm. This reminds me... can anybody tell me if Neil deGrasse Tyson has a column in Natural History magazine? I know he has one, I'm just not sure wich magazine

January 1995, ongoing
Author of column titled "Universe" for Natural History magazine.
from Neil's home page:
http://research.amnh.org/~tyson/cv.php#Magazine_Columns

126. Lab agrees to test Shroud of Turin for new theory

Comment #182890 by black wolf on May 21, 2008 at 5:11 am

He's been at this for years now, along with other like-minded people around the globe. Interestingly, the first thing they usually do, before submitting any papers to the actual scientific community, is to widely publicize their 'hypothesis' on multiple websites, where they conveniently quote each other to create the image of working in an active and promising field of science. Wait a few months for the uneducated and straw-clutching believers to disseminate their ideas, and then start to accuse the real scientists (Big Science (tm)) of suppressing their 'legitimate theories'. While selling sloppily assembled books filled with interpretable photographs, mined quotes and skewed calculations to the flock. Same old, same old, from the Exodus to the Shroud, just like what von Däniken made a fortune of. Who cares about raping the minds of generations when you can make cartloads of money to finance a good life. It's at least the second oldest fast-profit profession invented by mankind.

127. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #182512 by black wolf on May 20, 2008 at 9:48 am

Clearmind, are you Turkish? What do you think of Harun Yahya

Interesting how two guys from very different cultural backgrounds with a somewhat different religion based on the same story, who undertake the same mission to de-educate the public using the same materials and arguments, go to jail for the same basic reasons - unlawful conduct of financial matters on a similar scale - within a short time of each other. That raises some suspicions about the reasons they took up their flags in the first place. Is it that a desire for profiteering without doing too much work leads either to becoming an astrologer or a creationist author and lecturer? Or is it that promoting creationism leads to an accelerated desire for more money (and influence) once the cash starts rolling in? Apparently taking it up for the Good Cause (tm) has no impact on a bad personality in any way distinguishable from the regular human greed we observe in other people. So much for the moral high ground.

128. New Tool To Understand Evolution Of Multi-domain Genes Developed

Comment #182199 by black wolf on May 19, 2008 at 11:20 am

From Wikipedia:

A protein domain is a part of protein sequence and structure that can evolve, function, and exist independently of the rest of the protein chain. Each domain forms a compact three-dimensional structure and often can be independently stable and folded. Many proteins consist of several structural domains. One domain may appear in a variety of evolutionarily related proteins. Domains vary in length from between about 25 amino acids up to 500 amino acids in length. The shortest domains such as zinc fingers are stabilized by metal ions or disulfide bridges. Domains often form functional units, such as the calcium-binding EF hand domain of calmodulin. Because they are self-stable, domains can be "swapped" by genetic engineering between one protein and another to make chimera proteins.

The majority of genomic proteins, two-thirds in unicellular organisms and more than 80% in metazoa, are multidomain proteins created as a result of gene duplication events.[20] Many domains in multidomain structures could have once existed as independent proteins. More and more domains in eukaryotic multidomain proteins can be found as independent proteins in prokaryotes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structural_domain

129. Pelosi, Reid shunning Ten Commandments?

Comment #181363 by black wolf on May 17, 2008 at 3:38 am

When looking up what the Bible has to say about stealing for my above post, I came across several sermons and lectures given by theologians. Interestingly (and as I expected) they contradicted each other in their use of the exact same Bible verses. Never let yourself be fooled to think that they've got it figured out. A common statement to rebut critics is that the only thing that really counts is Jesus' word and that the rules and laws of the OT weren't binding to Christians. Well, as I found out, they have no qualms whatsoever to draw upon Exodus, Leviticus, Deuteronomy to flesh out their arguments and sermons. The pattern is, point to those books to demonstrate the comprehensive and detailed laws of God (to make it appear he's thought of everything), and then point to the nice stories Jesus told about forgiveness to make it all appear as benevolent as possible.

130. Pelosi, Reid shunning Ten Commandments?

Comment #181360 by black wolf on May 17, 2008 at 3:20 am

For stealing I prefer the dictum expressed by Richard Sharpe in Bernard Cornwall's Sharpe series. "Don't steal unless you are starving."

Exactly. Going by the Bible, the stealing person would have to repay the victim or return the stolen goods if possible, plus a fraction of its value. BUT, when the theft was during nighttime or in the dark - the thief shall be killed on the spot if caught in the act. Note that the New Testament does not even differentiate between theft, manslaughter and murder. It's all the same there (John 10:10). When a thief can't recompensate for the crime, he is to be forced into servitude (i.e. slavery). When the crime cannot be proven, the thief is to be cursed by God, and that shall be prayed for. Then the Bible turns around and allows a hungry person to take fruit (not more than can be eaten on the spot), and crops (to be torn out by hand, cutting is not allowed).
Biblical law contradicts itself in so many places that any modern judicial system would make itself the laughing stock of the world, sensible in some places and crass punishment in others for the same deed.

131. The amazing intelligence of crows

Comment #181352 by black wolf on May 17, 2008 at 2:37 am

No final stage of having the crows scavenge the city for loose change?

Nah, they're smarter than that. As reported in this thread, they've made the step to form gangs preying on the defenseless already. It's just us stupid humans that feel there's an intermediate step necessary to acquire monetary pieces to trade.
Soooo, got any change on ya mister?
Change?
Chaaaaaaange?

132. The Neural Buddhists

Comment #181140 by black wolf on May 16, 2008 at 1:17 pm

Quetz,
the report I read didn't mention another leader. Did that guy say if 'postponing the Apocalypse' was a good thing in his view?
How about providing ready-made and furnished caves all over the world for all the cults to live in for as long as they want to. That would solve more than one problem at once, I think.

133. Indian village proud after double 'honor killing'

Comment #181134 by black wolf on May 16, 2008 at 1:12 pm

Time to play arrest-a-village. But that would be unrespectful, right?

134. The amazing intelligence of crows

Comment #181130 by black wolf on May 16, 2008 at 1:09 pm

seqenenre,
I can confirm that:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/12/1209_041209_crows_apes.html
Hardly controlled conditions, but apparently a true account.

135. The amazing intelligence of crows

Comment #181119 by black wolf on May 16, 2008 at 12:53 pm

Yup, thanks for that Caudimordax. Is it a worldwide conspiracy? DUNH-DUN-DUUUUUNHHH!!!
I read a somewhat silly sci-fi short novel years ago, based on the idea that environment protectionists and Green parties had come to power worldwide. As a consequence, the birds took over the top of the food chain and had grown to huge proportions. All the humans could do was hide in caves and send out sacrificial persons once in a while.

136. The amazing intelligence of crows

Comment #181116 by black wolf on May 16, 2008 at 12:47 pm

Zeus chose crows (ravens to be exact).
Yahweh chose sheep.

'nuff said.

137. The amazing intelligence of crows

Comment #181111 by black wolf on May 16, 2008 at 12:43 pm

I'm sure this goes against the creationist dogma that all animals were 'created' as they are today, having gone through zero change and having never needed to accumulated those instinctive skills to adapt, think and survive.

*whiny voice or D'Souza pitch*
'But they're still only crows! And the nylon bug is still a bug!'

138. Richard Dawkins Interview on TVOntario

Comment #181107 by black wolf on May 16, 2008 at 12:39 pm

evo bevo,
you're right, 'polemicist' is an awkward label. Like 'lobbyist', it gives the impression that the proud title carrier would take up any cause if the money's right, without having to know too much about his subject of discussion.
Btw, are theologians anything more than polemicists in that specific area? Has any theologian ever been labeled as a polemicist, given he provided a lot of assertions with little to no evidence?

139. The amazing intelligence of crows

Comment #181098 by black wolf on May 16, 2008 at 12:28 pm

He needs to work on the behavior of these crows, however, who have taken to stealing food out of childrens hands!

That reminds me of some 'adaptation' in behavior I once witnessed at a pier restaurant in California. I had ordered a hamburger and fries, but they forgot to make the fries and gave me only by burger. So I put the burger on my table and told my friends not to take it (they are fond of such pranks). I hadn't thought of telling the seagulls. When I came back from the counter with my fries, my burger was gone, and my friends pointed at the few pieces left of it lying around on the floor near our table. A seagull had pierced the whole burger with its beak and taken the whole patty away by flight.
I went back to the counter, thinking 'they'll never believe that, what a waste of money', but the clerk gave me a new burger without question. Apparently the seagull population of that area had worked out that unattended (meaning in my hands) food was free to take, even when within half a meter of humans.

140. The amazing intelligence of crows

Comment #181096 by black wolf on May 16, 2008 at 12:22 pm

Quine,
that's exactly along the lines I've been thinking. I've been running various simulations based on evolutionary algorithms, and it's obvious that weight and mass distribution are of prime importance, especially to flight, where even alterations barely noticeable to the naked eye have great impact. The wings and their muscles would not only have to be much stronger, but they would also need a different balance (which can be attained by a different angle of the wings' axis), but that would make the bird slower in turn. Also, a more elongated brain to allow better aerodynamics of the skull would be more difficult to 'wire' neurologically than a more or less spherical or oval brain. But I leave further comment on this to Prof. Dawkins and other biologists, as I presume they'd probably have more ideas that I haven't thought of.

141. Group finds Starbucks logo too hot to handle

Comment #180897 by black wolf on May 16, 2008 at 3:35 am

Wow, I think our new supersport will be better than baseketball.
Let's also give the fighters robotic arms to incorporate Hinduism.
And they'll have to drink half a bottle of Rum to give Voodoo its part.
The winner gets to ride home on a kangaroo, and the loser gets knocked into Dreamtime.

142. Group finds Starbucks logo too hot to handle

Comment #180894 by black wolf on May 16, 2008 at 3:26 am

Quetz, epeeist,
Stephen Colbert writes that fencing should involve throwing stars, first blood and masculine pirate sabers to become a respected sport...
Let's see: stars, crescent-shaped sabers with cross-shaped hand protection, piracy... Now just how do we get the Buddhists into the scheme? Any suggestions?

143. Turkish Islamic author given 3-year jail sentence

Comment #180888 by black wolf on May 16, 2008 at 3:05 am

It seems they're trying to do with Freemasonry exactly what Hitler (no this is not a Godwin) did with the German Worker's Party. Get in there, sway or coerce a majority, take over the leadership, and then reform the statutes (and the organization's name) to fit your ideology. Then proceed to do the same thing with your country. Then your neighboring countries. People like these always move to criminal behavior sooner or later.

144. UC Berkeley is going to court over Evolution website

Comment #180883 by black wolf on May 16, 2008 at 2:53 am

I have several books on my shelf that deal with stuff beyond the natural world. Brothers Grimm, Iliad, Gilgamesh, the Edda etc. Since they're 'beyond', that must mean they've more truth value than books limited to the natural, right? So why aren't they respected in science? It would make science soooo much more valuable, ecompassing the natural and the supra-natural. I think I'm gonna sue.
Seriously, atheists, agnostics, scientists, deists, philosophers have been saying for decades that the pandering approach can never work. When a religious group really believes what they say they believe, by definition they can't restrict themselves to a NOMA box without reckognizing themselves as hypocrites. Even when they get treated with the most reverent respect, they must strive to speak out and in most cases missionize. Mere toleration and respect is never enough, for as soon as a religious group is diminishing, or perceives itself that way, it'll make efforts to get into growth zone. And that will mean making claims about reality that are scientifically unconfirmed and often unconfirmable. They will step on science's toes, and they will not step back and apologize for it most of the time. When science decides to be diplomatic and stand back to postpone conflict, that's the opportunity for religion to step forward. We've seen it for centuries, and it doesn't work. All we get from that are theocracies.

145. Cult leader Pyotr Kuznetsov tries suicide after realising he was wrong about doomsday

Comment #180878 by black wolf on May 16, 2008 at 2:34 am

This just in:
The last nine cult members have left their cave; two female corpses could now be retrieved from the hole in the ground; the women had died some unspecified time earlier.
The article I read is on Spiegel Online (German).

146. The Dissent Of Darwin - The World Of Richard Dawkins

Comment #180517 by black wolf on May 15, 2008 at 6:37 am

Proposing a behavioral choice sphere or area is not dualism. It is a philosophy, a completely abstract concept. Nobody's implying that this sphere is an independently existing thing. You might just as well claim that literature has an existence above nature independent of printed works. All of it are products of our mind, which is for all empirical evidence a brain function that we conceptualize.

147. God seekers go public

Comment #180437 by black wolf on May 15, 2008 at 12:09 am

From the link Geodesic17 posted:

After the adverse vote from several coordinating board members meeting as a committee, Mr. Morris said the institute [ICR] may revise its application or take its case to court.

"We will pursue due process," he told the board. "We will no doubt see you in the future."

People of their mindbogglingly stagnant mindset have been promising Jesus would return very soon for nearly the last 2000 years. I deduct that they will keep pursuing lawsuits for the next 2000. Or until stupidity becomes outlawed.

148. God seekers go public

Comment #180111 by black wolf on May 14, 2008 at 8:23 am

Thanks for that insight, Barry.
Apparently they're going for reverse artificial selection with their personnel. Take the people who failed at science (or refused to do the job they had been hired for), and put them to work on mutual standards of varying incompetence.
From having a bit of experience with fitness algorithms in simulations, I assume that their scientific fitness will not increase in any significant value. Their population size is just too small and offers just about no variation at all to produce any improvement. ;o)
Any chance of beneficial improvements by chance? I'm not holding my breath.

149. A natural selection

Comment #180060 by black wolf on May 14, 2008 at 6:48 am

The why question boils down to the same trouble that the design inference gets into, just not as quickly and obviously. In order to determine the why, you have to either know the designer's/god's will and intentions/plans (which is what the religious claim to have gotten revealed, without any evidence above hearsay), or you have to reach an endpoint where nothing happens anymore in spite of what should happen through natural laws (read evolution). As the former is unlikely to a degree of about 1, and the latter is nowhere in sight, I think we can reasonably conclude with great certainty that the why question is as vacuous as the design presumption.

150. God seekers go public

Comment #179410 by black wolf on May 13, 2008 at 8:15 am

I'm actually curious as to WHAT they can do in a lab at all. What predictions can you make in a lab regarding intelligent design?

I guess something like 'we should find things we can't explain in the light of evolution that could only have been put together by the designer'. Then they examine a bacteria culture under the microscope and go, 'I have no idea what that stuff is, but it's clearly alive. Since I can't explain it, it's designed'.
Therefore a design hypothesis must be: 'whatever I can't explain because I'm too lazy to read the papers already published is designed'.
Predicting, defining and explaining ID in a nutshell.