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

Comment #183307 by EvidenceOnly on May 21, 2008 at 7:56 pm

Isn't this like putting the previous US president in charge of White House interns or worse, putting the current US president in charge of torture investigations?

102. In God's Name

Comment #183078 by EvidenceOnly on May 21, 2008 at 10:57 am

Richard Dawkins is so right calling religious indoctrination of children a grave form of child abuse.

Many of the reactions in this forum are like a frog promptly jumping out when abruptly thrown in hot water. We react with disgust and run away from such nonsense.

But religious child abuse is like putting a frog in room temperature water and then very slowly bringing it to a boil. The frog has no idea what is happening and sits still until it dies. This child abuse slowly brings the mind of children to a boil until their ability to critically think is completely killed.

We need to start calling this a crime against humanity. These religious nutcases belong in a mental institution.

103. MPs reject calls to cut abortion limit

Comment #183001 by EvidenceOnly on May 21, 2008 at 7:52 am

If Mr. Cormac Murphy O'Connor is so passionate about saving 200,000 embryos each year from being aborted, he should be even more passionate against his boss, Joseph Ratzinger whose passion against condoms is causing 1.6 million deaths of HIV in Africa each year. Needless to say these are people who were already born.

Isn't it ironic that religions seem more concerned about the welfare of people before they are born or after they get into a vegetative state (Terri Schiavo in 2005) than when they are alive?

Hypocrisy is too nice a label for such these guys.

104. 16% of US science teachers are creationists

Comment #182579 by EvidenceOnly on May 20, 2008 at 2:57 pm

We need a new survey about math as well:

- How many math teachers do teach that 1 plus 1 is 2?
- How many math teachers teach this together with the belief that 1 plus 1 is 3 (or any other number)?
- How many math teachers only teach the belief that 1 plus 1 is 3 (or any other number)?

Can we make these kind of surveys such that teachers who deviate from the scientific theory automatically send in their resignation?

I'm sure they can find alternative employment in some government recognized faith-based initiative instead.

With enough faith, the "intelligent designer" provides for all your needs, so employment is really not that important :)

105. Indian village proud after double 'honor killing'

Comment #181142 by EvidenceOnly on May 16, 2008 at 1:17 pm

Is there any believer out there who, after reading this, can explain to me why religion is a virtue and deserves even the tiniest bit of respect?

106. Vatican: It's OK to believe in aliens

Comment #179806 by EvidenceOnly on May 13, 2008 at 7:46 pm

In 1632, the Vatican convicted Galileo for his scientific evidence that our planet orbited around our sun.

In 1992 Pope John Paul II expressed regret for how Galileo was treated.

In 2008, Pope Benedict XVI stated that the Church really did the right thing in 1632.

Weeks later, they believe that aliens exist?

How about embracing total equality of everyone irrespective of gender and sexual orientation, contraception, women's right to choose, same sex marriage and a slew of other social issues where they are hopelessly behind the times.

Isn't that of much higher priority than to belief in aliens?

Or are they counting on the aliens to make this happen?

107. God seekers go public

Comment #179399 by EvidenceOnly on May 13, 2008 at 7:59 am

The behavior of all these GodDidIt IDiots is proof of evolution :)

Each time they run into the brick wall of reality we call scientific evidence they morph their story to keep their nonsense alive longer.

First creationism, then intelligent design, then blaming Darwin for all evil in this world, then expelling all intelligence from their own ranks, then claiming freedom of opinion in science class for teachers and students, then setting up false biology research centers. What's next?

For the pious who claim patent rights to morality, they obviously belief that the highest level of morality is lying for Jesus.

Should we call this the Lying for Jesus Disorder (LJD)?

Could science come up with a cure for this terrible disease?

108. Americans pray at the pump for cheaper petrol

Comment #179165 by EvidenceOnly on May 12, 2008 at 7:59 pm

This praying nonsense reminds me of an old joke.

A old man had prayed every night his whole life asking whatever God he believed to let him win the lottery.

One night, he heard a thundering voice from above: "It would really help if you started buying lottery tickets".

I'm sure that this came from his neighbor in the apartment above him who was sick and tired of all that begging night after night.

:)

109. Atheists are nice people who will roast in hell, says Cardinal

Comment #177843 by EvidenceOnly on May 9, 2008 at 8:08 pm

Here is EvidenceOnly's Wager:

1. If you don't believe in God and there is no God: no problem

2. If you believe in God and there is no God: you wasted a good part of your life

3. If you don't believe in God and there is a God: you get rewarded because you have used your God-given ability to think critically and came to the sensible conclusion that there was no evidence whatsoever for the existence of a God (or any God) when you were alive

4. If you believe in God and there is a God after all: (a) you get punished for NOT using your God-given ability to think critically and instead using blind faith that a God existed even though there was absolutely no evidence for a God when you were alive, and (b) get punished again for inventing a God in your own image that could not possibly be anywhere close to the real thing (There is an infinite probability that you believed in the wrong God!).



Conclusion: Following the evidence (or in this case the lack thereof) is the ONLY thing to do!

I've seen the deep pain in the eyes of grown-ups when they describe how they have been threatened with everlasting burning in hell by their parents or educators. This is child abuse that is hard to overcome by many.

Having said that. Can anyone invent a hell for people like this pious cardinal? He should get a taste of his own medicine.

110. Scientists Know Better Than You--Even When They're Wrong

Comment #177833 by EvidenceOnly on May 9, 2008 at 7:48 pm

2 things come to mind:

1. You don't have to become an expert in tooth fairies before stating that the existence of tooth fairies is extremely improbable. You can replace tooth fairies with anything for which no evidence exists. Keep doing this Richard!

2. When I get in an airplane, I don't argue with the pilots that I can fly the plane myself because I don't want to risk my life nor that of the other passengers. However people who believe things not based on any evidence (IDiots, GodDidIts, etc) keep pushing policies onto society based either on pseudo science or on bogus morality claims that jeopardize the life of many people. Examples are (a) the Pope's opposition to condoms which every year kills 1.6 million from HIV in Africa (the equivalent of 1.5 NINE-ELEVENs each and every day), (b) the opposition to stem cell research, (c) I could go on for a very long time here!

111. My Response to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #177205 by EvidenceOnly on May 8, 2008 at 6:39 pm

It seems like most IDiots and GodDidIts have to raise their voice when uttering nonsense in order to hide their lack of intelligence and to appeal to the emotions of the ignorant.

Are Allistair McGrath and Ben Stein the only ones who deliver their nonsense in a monotonous voice that puts you to sleep?

112. Is Liberal Catholicism Dead?

Comment #175879 by EvidenceOnly on May 6, 2008 at 7:36 am

Let's see the Pope for what he really is: the CEO of the largest pedophile organization in the world.

Would the head of a non-religious child care organization with thousands of pedophiles stay out of jail by simply apologizing for this child abuse?

Bastions of Dogma do not need to grow up. They should disappear!

113. Dumb and Dumber: A discussion between Ben Stein and Glenn Beck

Comment #175462 by EvidenceOnly on May 5, 2008 at 1:15 pm

The list of organizations or groups in which absolutely no intelligence is allowed is growing rapidly, proving Einstein's statement: "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."

114. Evolution's Critics Shift Tactics With Schools

Comment #174927 by EvidenceOnly on May 3, 2008 at 9:41 pm

All these laws are to let IDots and GodDidIts bring their opposing view into science education, starting with biology and evolution.

It is like giving Fox Noise total control over public education. "The jury is out on what 1 plus 1 is since there are opinions ranging from minus infinite to plus infinite. Isn’t 0 a reasonable average? Why should teachers be fired for saying 1 plus 1 = 11? Not in America, the land of the free with a constitutional freedom of speech!"

Here is what we should lobby for with our politicians:

You either reject his nonsense or make everything “Fox Fair and Balanced” across the board:

- At each and any event of a tax-exempt or religious organization, all opposing view have to be invited, better yet MUST participate, because education is really important and should not stop with high school or college.

- IDots and GodDidIts will be required to walk to each such event and bring a candle light, a flag and a rope with them since the Theories of Electronics, Mechanics, Wireless Communication and Gravity do not include any of the popular GODS in their equations and are just “theories” that cannot be trusted and do not explain everything. They can then light the candle when the lights fail, wave the flag to their loved ones from the tower of the church in case the meeting lasts longer than expected, tie themselves to the ground in case gravity fails, etc.

- Freedom of speech and opinion should also be extended to the election of anyone in a tax-exempt or religious organization. Non-believers and believers of competing religions should be able to vote when the largest pedophile organization in the world elects its next Pope.

I could go on and on and on. You get the point.

We can never rest in the education of critical thinking in the population.

115. Science leads to killing people

Comment #170741 by EvidenceOnly on April 27, 2008 at 11:40 pm

The true meaning of the title: "EXPELLED, NO INTELLIGENCE ALLOWED" just became crystal clear to me:

1. EXPELLED is the nonsense of anything not based on scientific evidence at any University worthy of such a name.

2. NO INTELLIGENCE ALLOWED is the target audience of their movie.

3. SCIENCE is the arch enemy of IDiots and Creationists. When people use their brain they would not fall for their biblical nonsense.

4. KILLING is what Ben Stein wants to see more of and at a much larger scale than the killings he accuses Darwin of doing during the Holocaust.

This man belongs in a mental institution.

116. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #166348 by EvidenceOnly on April 23, 2008 at 7:22 am

I posted this on a different topic, It is relevant here to put the "uncertainty" of science and religion in perspective.

The common response to "we don't know yet" [the scientific uncertainty) is "god-did-it" (the religious certainty].

The life of a scientist is to discover what we don't yet know and each time we learn something new, we also find new things we don't yet know.

Under the "god-did-it" philosophy, we scientists would have stopped long ago searching for answers:

- Computers and the internet would not exist

- Travel would still be with horses and sailboats

- Diseases would still kill millions/billions of people

- IDiots would not be able to create a movie full of lies in which they expelled any form of intelligence.

- Scientists would no longer say that they don't have an answer yet

- Everyone would be pious, pray and praise their favorite undefinable supernatural creator

- All would be well, at least if you define never ending religious wars of our history as "well".

I prefer the alternative: science in search of answers annoying the crap out of the "god-did-it" folks who are all too happy to use the results of science (electronics, transportation, healthcare, entertainment, ...).

117. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #166237 by EvidenceOnly on April 23, 2008 at 3:10 am

Regarding "the book of Job".

I recently read Prof. Bart Ehrman's book: "God's problem - How the bible fails to answer our most important question: Why we suffer"

It is by thinking about suffering that he became an agnostic and convinced that if there is a God, it is certain it is not the Christian God.

Here is how the explanation of suffering EVOLVED over thousands of years:

1. God rewards you when you obey him and punishes you when you don't
2. When 1. does not seem to agree with reality, you invent Satan who gets all power (WTF?). Now those who obey God get punished by Satan and those who don't get rewarded
3. So why would you want to want to obey God? Well Jesus will come back soon (as in during Paul's life), will rise all the death, establish his Kingdom on Earth and reward those punished by Satan and punish those rewarded by Satan.
4. When Jesus did not come back during Paul's life ("Houston we have a problem"), you invent Heaven and Hell and life after death where essentially 3. will happen.
5. 2000 years have gone by. What do we want to invent next?????

(3 is the horizontal duality of Heaven and Hell = both are real and on Earth while 4. is the vertical duality of Heaven and Hell = both are in the afterlife, Hell is below the Earth and Heaven is above the Earth and nowhere to be seen by us Earthlings).

The moral of this? Mankind has invented just about anything to keep everyone dumb and sheepishly staying in line of man-made religion. No clearer evidence that man created god in his/her image!

118. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #166226 by EvidenceOnly on April 23, 2008 at 2:49 am

35, That is kind of covered in option 4, punishment (b)

119. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #166224 by EvidenceOnly on April 23, 2008 at 2:45 am

Here is how you can ridicule Pascal's wager:

1. If you don't believe in God and there is no God: no problem
2. If you believe in God and there is no God: you wasted a good part of your life
3. If you don't believe in God and there is a God: you get rewarded for using your God-given ability to think critically and come to the sensible conclusion that there was evidence whatsoever for a God when you were alive
4. If you believe in God and there is a God: (a) you get punished for NOT using your God-given ability to think critically and instead used blind faith that a God existed even though there was absolutely no evidence for a God when you were alive, and (b) get punished again for inventing a God in your own image that could not possibly be anywhere close to the real thing

Following the evidence (or in this case the lack thereof) is the right thing to do!

120. Responses to 'Gods and Earthlings' by Richard Dawkins

Comment #165946 by EvidenceOnly on April 22, 2008 at 4:01 pm

The common response to "we don't know yet" is "god-did-it".

The life of a scientist is to discover what we don't yet know and each time we learn something new, we also find new things we don't yet know.

Under the "god-did-it" philosophy, we scientists would have stopped long ago searching for answers:

- Computers and the internet would not exist

- Travel would still be with horses and sailboats

- Diseases would still kill millions/billions of people

- IDiots would not be able to create a movie full of lies in which they expelled any form of intelligence.

- Scientists would no longer say that they don't have an answer yet

- Everyone would be pious, pray and praise their favorite undefinable supernatural creator

- All would be well, at least if you define never ending religious wars of our history as "well".

I prefer the alternative: science in search of answers annoying the crap out of the "god-did-it" folks who are all too happy to use the results of science (electronics, transportation, healthcare, entertainment, ...).

121. Mecca should become core to measure time zones: scholars

Comment #165206 by EvidenceOnly on April 21, 2008 at 7:58 am

How long will it take for:

1. A counter announcement from the IDiots, supported by the usual fake science from Behe and Demski, that the Christian world should use the address of the Discovery Institute in Seattle as its reference point for time zones.

2. A new Ben Stein movie that claims that Darwin is responsible for the current use of Greenwich with details of numerous scientists who have lost their jobs for proposing research to prove that Seattle is the Jesus point and not Greenwich.

3. Bush to declare a new "war on timezones" and invade Greenwich.

Nutcases.

122. Ben Stein Vs. Sputtering Atheists

Comment #164994 by EvidenceOnly on April 20, 2008 at 11:14 pm

Creationists and IDiots are all "Lying for Jesus", lack any critical thinking to see through the lies of their brethren or simply want to further distribute these lies to an ignorant population.

Only quality education of science can help us.

123. Lizards Undergo Rapid Evolution After Introduction To A New Home

Comment #164742 by EvidenceOnly on April 20, 2008 at 4:34 pm

Hi "Devolution",

You would be right if Creationists put a theory and evidence forward that does not survive critical analysis but they don't.

This makes it 5,432,673 for evolutionists and -infinite for creationists.

124. Sex for diploma offer caught on tape

Comment #164218 by EvidenceOnly on April 19, 2008 at 6:05 pm

Steven Weinberg said: "Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion."

We often see people lead a parallel evil life and this is at its worse when people do it from a religious position of authority (as is the case with this founder of a christian school).

Here is the recipe:

1. Claim fundamental unshaken belief in something for which absolutely no evidence exists (religion)
2. Proclaim that this gives you the right to define morality for all of us
3. Get involved with young children (schools and churches) to indoctrinate them with your worldview before they develop critical thinking
4. Use your position in or association with religion as a facade to abuse children (the Catholic Church) and their parents (as is the case here)
5. When caught, deny and cover up as long as you can
6. When your evil act is undeniable, say you're sorry many many times (as the Pope did this week).

With some luck, especially if these evil acts have gone on for a long time on a massive scale, you may get welcomed with open arms by an equally pious but corrupt world leader (as happened this week).

Yes believers and non-believers do bad things but we should not be surprised that the faithful seem over-represented in the prison system while the leaders of the faithful who are very good at covering up never get caught and keep getting praised.

That is one of the many reasons why religion poisons everything.

125. The Child Preachers

Comment #163702 by EvidenceOnly on April 18, 2008 at 8:13 pm

Child Abuse #1: All religions know that they need to steal the mind of people before they develop the skills of critical thinking that would prevent such indoctrination. We have evolved over millions of years to the point that we have the ability to think. It is ironic that religions who believe that a supernatural being created us that way do everything they can to prevent people from using these skills.

Child Abuse #2: What Christopher Hitchens calls the "No child's behind left" doctrine of the Catholic Church. The Pope is really the CEO of a world-wide day care center (where they keep young and old away from critical thinking). He and his organization have protected thousands and thousands of pedophile priests to protect the "assets" of the organization. If a school principal did this, he/she would get life without parole. This week, our "No Child Left Behind" leader welcomed the "No Child's Behind Left" leader with open arms. Despicable! A hypocritical apology is not sufficient.

We cannot be harsh enough against all forms of child abuse. Religion is not off limits in this.

126. Victims: Pope Benedict Protects Accused Pedophile Bishops

Comment #161936 by EvidenceOnly on April 15, 2008 at 8:57 pm

Today, the leader of "No child's behind left" was welcomed by the leader of "No child left behind".

They really deserve each other, don't they?

Also, the Pope was careful to say that he wants to stop pedophiles from becoming priests and NOT that he wants to stop priests from becoming pedophiles.

Maybe he does not have enough money to start a "No priest left behind" program!

127. The Art of Creating Controversy Where None Existed

Comment #160047 by EvidenceOnly on April 13, 2008 at 3:06 pm

The urge of some people to create controversy where none exists is driven by their inner value system. Here are the characteristics of 2 opposing value systems:

The scientific value system

- Scientific theories are ALWAYS subject to new discovery
- New discovery MUST come with overwhelming supporting and verifiable evidence
- Scientific theories get adopted on the strength of their evidence after broad peer-review
- Scientists go back to the drawing board when their evidence is deemed insufficient
- Scientists rejoice when a new more powerful theory with better evidence supersedes theirs

The faith-based value system

- Faith is ALWAYS claimed to be an unquestionable revelation and absolute truth (funny how all can claim to be the one and only truth at the same time with a straight face)
- New revelation MUST NOT come with any supporting evidence (no evidence by design)
- Faith gets adopted on the strength of lies, deception and fear
- Religion claims intolerance when their faith is criticized
- Religions put the fear of their god in whoever does believe in it

What happens when a faith-based system attacks a scientific theory:

- First oppose a scientific theory on religious grounds
- Then oppose science with pseudo science (based on lies and the experience that lies repeated often enough eventually become accepted by many as truth)
- When science shows that there is no supporting evidence for this pseudo science, claim that the scientific establishment is boycotting your evidence
- When that does not work claim that the scientific establishment is preventing your scientists to search for evidence within the academic world (they do not get tenured or get fired)
- When that does not work, create controversy where none exists and demand equal representation in science class
- If that does not seem to get you anywhere, claim freedom of speech and use the "Fox" standard of deception by demanding that both sides are thought in a "fair and balanced" way (this moves the average far away for the scientific theory)
- Eventually claim that the scientific theory is extreme left, anti-religion, anti-god, the reason for all misery in the world, supported by liberals, communists, gays, lesbians, the ACLU, an attack to our freedoms, worse than terrorism, …
- Finally have enough parents attack and intimidate science teachers so that they stop teaching "controversial" subjects. This creates new fertile grounds of ignorance which makes de facto results in a double victory.

This recipe is used diligently to distort the scientific evidence about the environment (global warming), health (tobacco, AIDS), biology (evolution, homosexuality), as well as a many issues in society (same-sex marriage, immigration), …

We should not be surprised that people who make claim all patents of morality based on faith without evidence consistently spread lies to stuff their view down everybody's throat.

While the pope is visiting the US this week, Garry Wills' "Papa Sin, Structures of Deceit" is an excellent reminder that the absolute truths of the catholic church are neither absolute, nor truths.

We should NOT stay silent but us scientists should first learn a lot from George Lakoff, a UC Berkeley professor, cognitive linguist and founder of a progressive think thank (www.rockridgeinstitute.org).

In "Thinking Points" (available in PDF online at: http://www.rockridgeinstitute.org/thinkingpoints/) he reframes political and social issues in a progressive way using the power that language has on all of us.

He explains why being against something only enforces the thing you are against. For example, being against Bush's "Tax Relief" and his "War on Terror" only reenforces that taxes are inherently evil and that those against his efforts to protect the country are anti-patriotic while the the insanity of giving huge tax credits to the wealthy while engaged in an immoral 3 to five trillion dollar "occupation of Iraq" (more than $20K per second) gets lost in people's mind.

It is time we reframe the debate with creationists and IDiotic friends and all others who attack solid scientific evidence.

128. The List: The World's Worst Religious Leaders

Comment #159094 by EvidenceOnly on April 11, 2008 at 12:33 pm

The pope should be on this list for the following reason:

According to http://www.avert.org/aids-africa-questions-1.htm, 1.6 million people died of AIDS in Africa in 2007.

This is the equivalent of 1.5 NINE-ELEVENS per day, every day for years gone by and years to come!

A very large number of this could have been prevented by encouraging people to use condoms.

Yet, the Catholic church (and the Bush administration) will only allow for education of abstinence since condoms go against their religious beliefs.

Some bishops in Africa use fear tactics to scare people away from condoms. They claim that condoms are infected by the West to kill Africans.

Let's measure the badness of all leaders in how many 9/11s they directly or indirectly cause.

129. 'Expelled' ripped off Harvard's 'Inner Life of the Cell' animation

Comment #159020 by EvidenceOnly on April 11, 2008 at 10:49 am

Why are we surprised of the continuous deception coming out of the Discovery Institute?

Religion starts with believing that human-written books are the word of a supernatural being (initial deception).

Each religion then claims that their supernatural being is the one and only and therefore their religion is the TRUE religion (second deception).

They then go on ignoring the texts in their books that don't really fit them and use what fits them to drive a political agenda that forces their "truths" down everyones throat such as anti gay, anti gay marriage, anti stem cell research, anti condoms, ... (3rd deception).

I could go on an one for a very long time.

Somewhere in this list is violating copyright and claiming this is original new work.

Somewhere in this are claims that Darwin caused all misery in the world (as if there was no misery in the world before Darwin?).

Let's face it. These just add to the very long list of lies that go thousands of years back.

That does not mean that they should get away with it though.

130. The simple falsehood at the heart of Expelled

Comment #158310 by EvidenceOnly on April 10, 2008 at 10:12 am

Great short and to the point article!

Blaming Darwin for the crimes of the Nazis is like prosecuting Isaac Newton when someone gets killed falling from a ladder or the inventor of the combustion engine when someone dies in a car accident.

Religions claim patent rights to morality and truth but make stuff up and spit out an endless stream of blatant lies.

It' not ignorance. It's much worse: massive organized deceit.

131. Anti-evolution bill clears another hurdle

Comment #157506 by EvidenceOnly on April 9, 2008 at 7:52 am

Paraphrasing Lewis Black, these people think that an episode of the Flinstones is a scientific documentary.

How long before we bring "academic freedom" to first grade math class and teach that:

1 plus 1 is "any number that you want it to be as long as the answer does not hurt your religious feelings"

We should add this to Wikipedia as the new definition of "totally nuts".

132. Richard Dawkins on The Big Questions

Comment #157096 by EvidenceOnly on April 8, 2008 at 2:50 pm

If you compare this debate to the middle ages, I have to conclude with deep regret that, while evidence-based science has advanced enormously (represented by Richard very few others), superstition and blind faith rule equally strong (evidenced by the nonsense uttered by most people).

On the plus side, Richard was not burned on a pile of wood at the end of the program for which a Pope would have to apologize 500 years from now.

133. Richard Dawkins: 'Growth in creationist beliefs a problem for schools'

Comment #156281 by EvidenceOnly on April 7, 2008 at 8:25 am

At the March 9th "AGAINST IGNORANCE: SCIENCE EDUCATION IN THE 21ST CENTURY, A Conversation with Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss", Larry said:

"The purpose of education is not to validate ignorance but to overcome it"

All schools should be measured against this golden rule of education and schools who violate this rule should not be in the business of educating anyone!

134. Pastor attacks scientist's talk

Comment #154745 by EvidenceOnly on April 3, 2008 at 4:38 pm

Szymanowski stated: "For the sake of balance, the Free Church of Scotland should invite Richard Dawkins to debates within its church services, instead of giving one-sided sermons...".

Let's take this one step further and make it a requirement that you can only make a statement based on faith when someone else is there with you to "balance" what you are saying with "an alternative view" solidly based on scientific and peer-reviewed evidence. That will stop a lot of nonsense in the world right then and there!

135. Sue Blackmore debates Alister McGrath

Comment #149413 by EvidenceOnly on March 25, 2008 at 3:20 pm

If Alister McGrath was not introduced as both a scientist and a theologian, I would have guessed he had a degree in "nothingness". I would rate his ability to make a clear and convincing point in a short time as the inverse of Richard Dawkins.