Comments by epeeist

1701. Murder plot against Danish cartoonist

Comment #126339 by epeeist on February 13, 2008 at 3:06 am

Comment #126335 by Henri Bergson

Could someone tell me how to add pictures to posts here?

There used to be a set of posting guidelines that told you how to do it, but I can't find them.

You need to include an "img" tag with the src set to the URL of the image.

1702. Why Darwin matters

Comment #126338 by epeeist on February 13, 2008 at 3:03 am

Comment #126327 by Quetzalcoatl

Uh oh, Epeeist's borogroves are going mimsy. Everyone stand well back!

Scoff all you like. But you have not seen the little green door, nor have you feasted under the figures in the glass.

(Cartomancer may be able to explain the above, I just wanted to see if I could be as surreal as wooter.)

1703. Why Darwin matters

Comment #126320 by epeeist on February 13, 2008 at 1:24 am

Comment #126318 by Quetzalcoatl

but do you not agree that cromulent words can sometimes embiggen a conversation?

That reminds me, wooter never answered my question:

Can chimeras bombinating in a vacuum nourish second intentions?

Personally I find this a totally brillig question, it makes the borogroves go all mimsy and the toves all slithey.

1704. Why Darwin matters

Comment #125809 by epeeist on February 12, 2008 at 5:02 am

Comment #125804 by irate_atheist

It's Professor Dawkins to you, you prick.

But this as nothing to wooter's BA and MA don't you know.

And just to fill out his qualifications they are:

Clinton Richard Dawkins MA, D.Sc. (Oxon), FRS, FRSL, Hon. D.Litt. (Saint Andrews), Hon. D.Litt. (Australian National University, Canberra), Hon. D.Sc. (Westminster), Hon. D.Sc. (Hull), Hon D.Univ. (Open University)

1705. Why multiculturalism must be abandoned

Comment #125754 by epeeist on February 12, 2008 at 1:44 am

Comment #125484 by Ian Bamlett

There are alot of theories but from what I have read it boils down to the religious males fear of the life giving power of the women.

Interesting, was Jewish society matriarchal before Yahweh interfered?

1706. Are the 'New Atheists' avoiding the 'real arguments'?

Comment #124653 by epeeist on February 10, 2008 at 12:45 am

Shrommer - various comments

I am fairly neutral about the existence of Jesus, though sceptical about the miracles. There is no contemporary evidence outside of the writings of his cult that he existed, spoke as he purportedly did or carried out the miracles that he was supposed to have done. Now, given that this was a fairly obscure bit of the Roman empire this may not be surprising.

However, when you get verses out of Matthew like the following

27:51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
27:52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
27:53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

You have to wonder why there are no other reports of this. An earthquake, graves opening and dead people wandering around and nothing gets back to Rome or even appears in documents from neighbouring countries?

As Diacanu sort of indicates - we actually have more evidence for King Arthur than Jesus, from the Gododdin (which was written not long after he may have existed), the Mabinogion, Geoffrey of Monmouth. We also have the Vulgate cycle of books, Malory, Tennyson. Just because we have the documents doesn't mean that he was any more than a post Roman Dux Bellorum though, and the likelihood of him rescuing a cauldron of plenty from Hell and going to Avalon (see the parallels) to have his wounds healed so that he can rescue England in its hour of need seem pretty small.

1707. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #124401 by epeeist on February 9, 2008 at 11:06 am

Comment #124393 by Sleep of Reason

If you think that the Daily Mail is extreme right wing then either you don't get out enough, or you don't read enough newspapers.

It may not be quite as right wing as it used to be when it supported Oswald Mosely and the Black Shirts, but it is still one of the most loathsome newspapers in the UK.

It still seems to have the same editorial policy as it had under Lord Northcliffe, that of giving its readers a "daily hate".

1708. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #124257 by epeeist on February 8, 2008 at 11:40 pm

If Rowan Williams focus is really things like arbitration and family law then it would be good to hear from some of those who will be principally involved.

All the interviews with Muslims I have seen and heard have over the past couple of days have been male. Why have their been no interviews with women who are prominent in the religion?

1709. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #123990 by epeeist on February 8, 2008 at 5:20 am

Just had the Bishop of Hulme on BBC radio 4 claiming that Williams is one of the greatest minds in the nation.

Also essentially saying that we should be looking at possible modifications to the law for the benefits of all faiths in the country.

Lost it, shouted "what about people with no faith you stupid bugger" at the radio.

1710. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #123970 by epeeist on February 8, 2008 at 3:37 am

Comment #123926 by PJG

If I could be bothered, I would love to list the ad hominem attacks made on each of the Horsemen. If you removed those, I think the book would be about 50% shorter!!!

Before you start removing bits that are logical fallacies you need to take out the purely rhetorical sections. I think this might have an effect on your estimate.

1711. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #123954 by epeeist on February 8, 2008 at 2:58 am

Comment #123931 by aleprechaunist

Calm down folks, and actually read the transcript...

Been there, done that - http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,,2254270,00.html

He points out that Sharia law obtains its authority from the "mind of God" and as such there is no renegotiation of the universal claims for such law.

He states that some of the things we associate with Sharia are actually cultural rather than religious, i.e. forced marriages.

He takes side swipes at the Enlightenment, particularly the idea of a social contract, legal universalism and positivism.

He argues for a "market" system of laws, so you could choose which you assent to.

And all of this is tied together with a need for theology and faith schools.

A few asides - there was the usual interesting discussion of Melvyn Bragg's "In Our Time" (never knowingly relevant) last night on the social contract.

I have dropped a message on the Daily Mail article on this pointing out that since we have ratified the European Human Rights act then it wouldn't be possible to implement Sharia law anyway. Couldn't help myself I'm afraid. Just waiting to see if they print it.

I have tried to start a petition on the UK governments petitions site to disestablish the CofE. Will let you know the URL if they allow it.

1712. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #123899 by epeeist on February 8, 2008 at 12:34 am

It was slightly, but only slightly, tongue in cheek.

It actually varies. We have had some thoughtful theists on the site that have provoked some interesting discussions, for example Mark Taunton had a long running thread going on biblical prophecy. Steve and I, amongst others, had an initially enlightening set of discussions with an idealist theist.

We are a target for Biblical literallists and Young Earth Creationists and the like (devolved, Bizarro Dawkins, ADH and the like). The standard dialogue eventually comes down to how "you evilutionists" can't show that evolution, particularly "macro-evolution" happened. So you point them at a site like http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/, which would take the average biologists a couple of weeks to plough through if they checked all the references. They normally come back within 15 minutes or so with a random link, usually to Answers in Genesis or Creation on the Web.

We also get others, like revcort, who simply reject anything that is said if when you point out contradictions in the position.

Finally we get the cherry pickers, those who are happy to discard Leviticus for example, but want to keep Adam and Eve. They point out that you have to read things "in context", but generally can't tell you why you should choose a particular gospel but reject some of Paul, or why their choice is truer than that of other people.

As for your evidence. You claim a being that interferes in the world, but all we ever get is personal revelation. Personal revelation is subjective, what we want is some objective way to your god.

As I have said, I have a working hypothesis that says there are no personal gods. I am willing, as are most people here, to be convinced otherwise. But if all you can bring to the table is a voice in your head then you aren't going to convince many people.

1713. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #123704 by epeeist on February 7, 2008 at 2:21 pm

Does anyone know how to set up a poll on the You-gov site?

Time to press for disestablishment of the Church of England I think.

1714. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #123542 by epeeist on February 7, 2008 at 10:25 am

Comment #123518 by Kardashovel

And Epeeist, I would love to hear your evidence that God does not exist. Do you know any? Or were you talking about another belief of mine besides my God-belief?

Since I can explain large chunks of phenomenological reality without the need for a supernatural being I rather think the burden of proof falls on you to provide evidence for the existence of such a being rather than the other way around.

I suspect most people here know my little syllogism by now, but just for you:

I have the following hypothesis

~(Exists x) G(x)

In other words, the class of personal gods is empty. Call this t. Now there will be predictions from this hypothesis, e.g. there was never a Noachic flood. Call these predictions p

So

t -> p
~p
Therefore ~t

So all you have to do is to find one prediction which is undeniably falsified and you have disproved my hypothesis.

Of course it doesn't mean that the particular supernatural being involved is Jesus, but that's your problem not mine.

So, you know the task. Go for it...

1715. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #123491 by epeeist on February 7, 2008 at 9:02 am

Comment #123476 by Kardashovel

I can dialog with other faiths about our beliefs, but a discussion with Atheists inevitably becomes another episode of "show me some evidence"

Theist arguments seem to follow the pattern:

If there is contrary evidence to evolution then the theory of evolution is wrong

If there is evidence contrary to [insert your personal belief here] then the evidence is wrong

1716. Richard Dawkins talks about The God Delusion

Comment #123146 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 2:03 pm

Comment #122982 by al-rawandi

Post Christian British society:

Guesses from a non-brit:

-Still drink tea

Being gradually replaced by coffee drinking. However Betty's teashops are as popular as ever

-Stuffy sense of humor

From the country that brought you the Goons and Monty Python?

-Play cricket and rugby

And still come second

-A democracy

Corporate Oligarchy, same as the States

-Queen might be gone *fingers crossed*

Replaced by arch-loony Charles

-In tune with the global economy

Lots more billionares, lots more serfs, smaller middle class

-Children with healthier psyches

Hated by virtually the whole of society (well, Daily Mail readers anyway) and accused of being "feral"

-Amy Winehouse will still be alive

The Halle Orchestra celebrates its 200th anniversary and the York Early Music Festival goes from strength to strength. Opera North does a complete "Ring Cycle"

1717. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #123032 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 11:37 am

Comment #122987 by SRWB

Why? We're these ancient cultures incapable of writing fiction? :-)

Choices, choices...

Read the bible or the Illiad...

No contest - "Goddess, sing the wrath of Achilles..."

1718. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #123012 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 11:09 am

Comment #123007 by Storeo

Reading the chapter on Science, wow. Its certainly an insight into how his mind works.

I have skim read through it. It isn't going to win any literary prizes is it?

All the chapters seem to follow a similar structure. Lots of rhetoric up front, to get the punters salivating and then a tiny bit of analysis towards the end. Loads of references, presumably to make him look erudite and most of them irrelevant or wrong.

The science chapter was interesting. A quick reference to Popper with a totally puerile attempt to say what his philosophy is all about then, presumably because it would cause him problems later, a switch to PZ Myers informal definition which he can use more effectively to his advantage.

1719. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122973 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 9:52 am

Comment #122938 by al-rawandi

The place he keeps his wallet when naked.

It is no coincidence that fundament and fundamentalist are so similar.

1720. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122932 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 9:27 am

Comment #122913 by steveroot

You really need to broaden your horizons, my friend. (Eg.: Pi = 3)

As I have posted elsewhere today, a reasonable approximation to Pi is 666/212.

And just to show how backward the Israelites were the Egyptians estimate was 4 * (8/9)**2, i.e. about 3.16, an error of around 0.5%. This is in the Rhind Papyrus from 1650 BC.

1721. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122924 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 9:22 am

Comment #122899 by hes2@usa

By the way, I have never heard a believer in God who was an amputee, pray and ask God to regrow his/her limb, have you, any of you?????

My grandfather damaged his foot in a mining accident. Both he and his wife were Catholic and prayed for it to get better. It developed gangrene and his leg had to be amputated. He accepted this and was looking forward to having an artificial leg fitted when he developed septicaemia which led to his death.

A good friend of mine had a motor cycle accident. His mother was deeply religious and prayed continuously. It didn't improve and they had to amputate. God certainly wasn't answering her prayers.

So take your fucking smarmy posts and the efficacy of prayer and stuff em where the sun don't shine.

1722. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122908 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 9:10 am

Comment #122876 by Tyler Durden

Anecdotal evidence doesn't count. Empirical, double-blind, testable, if you please!

Like this one you mean, from the Templeton foundation no less.

www.templeton.org/pdfs/press_releases/060407STEP_paper.pdf

1723. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122901 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 9:06 am

Comment #122866 by hes2@us

Not to mention, if we accounted for all peoples of the world, those who believe in a god/the God and those who deny a Deity, you are in the minutest of people groups.

Did you study the Trivium in this Ph.D. of yours. If so you must have been absent for the lecture on logic.

How many people read their horoscope in the newspapers on a daily basis? Does it prove that the stars influence your daily life?

1724. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122893 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 9:00 am

Comment #122847 by hes2@usa

and . . .
MORE EVIDENCE OF WALT BROWN

Walt Brown - bugger, I think I just wet myself laughing.

You didn't read the FAQ link I posted did you.

You might want to try the following
http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/6339_issue_25_volume_9_number_1__8_21_2003.asp
http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/9154_issue_26_volume_9_number_2__8_21_2003.asp
http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/2595_issue_27_volume_10_number_2__11_17_2003.asp

and this

http://mypage.direct.ca/w/writer/hydro.html

1725. Blasphemy

Comment #122788 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 4:53 am

Comment #122783 by ghost of numf-el

I feel that you would be better served getting in touch with your MP / Senator / local newspaper

Done in this country in the Independent.

There is an editorial about the case in today's Washington Post. You can leave comments on this if you are registered with the site.

1726. Math Religion Trouble

Comment #122782 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 4:33 am

Just as a matter of interest today (Feb 5) is the 111th anniversary of the Indiana Pi bill.

http://www.agecon.purdue.edu/crd/Localgov/Second Level pages/indiana_pi_bill.htm

EDIT: A reasonable estimate for pi is 666/212. If 666 is the number of the beast, what is 212?

1727. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122780 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 4:09 am

Comment #122494 by The Reverend Dark

I'll see your fat bastard and raise you one!

I am presuming that is you in action.

To return the complement -
http://www.nw-fencing.org.uk/index.php?option=com_zoom

1728. The Pagan Christ

Comment #122778 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 4:00 am

Comment #122588 by albondigas

I'm not saying it should be believed because a lot of people do. I'm saying that since it's the established belief, the best reason for change is to prove that it's false.

Its established because a lot of people believe it, which still makes it an ad populum fallacy.

Nevertheless, let's look at why we shouldn't accept it as the base position. One of the major problems is actually defining what we are looking for. You will have noticed that we often get "that's not my god you are discussing" kind of responses. You point out, for example, that more than 99.999% of humans were killed by god in Noah's flood, which gets the response that this didn't actually happen, that it is "symbolic", or that you haven't read the account "in context". It is virtually impossible to disprove something that morphs into something different every time you think you have a handle on it.

If you start from the other end, that personal gods do not exist, then all it would take (in theory at least) is a demonstration of something that contradicts this position to disprove the hypothesis. To re-use the above example, one prediction from our no-gods hypothesis would be that a global flood could not have taken place. Definitive evidence that it did would certainly put our hypothesis at risk.

1729. An Altar Beyond Olympus for a Deity Predating Zeus

Comment #122765 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 2:35 am

Comment #122468 by Cartomancer

ctually, "Zeus", "Theos", "Deus" and even Jupiter (Dius-pater) all have the same etymological root - a proto indo-european word simply meaning big sky god.

So, would Yahweh have the same root?

1730. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #122762 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 2:17 am

Comment #122760 by Richard Morgan

On my visits to Brazil I have met some lovely people. Particularly the "maids" of the people I was staying with. Oops - with whom I was staying.

Its OK, Anna doesn't seem to be about at the moment.

Nice story, did you need to send the bottle of water (is this a homoeopathic remedy?)? I think it is debatable. The bunch of flowers? A purely human gesture, no religion required.

A positive book would be difficult but I think it needs doing, there is a need to move beyond polemic. You have raised one element of it, the lack of the need to be prescriptive. There was a series of posts about skin colour on another thread, one of which looked forward to interbreeding between people so that we eventually end up a uniform chocolate colour (To which the inimitable Dr. Z. pointed out that it would make life difficult for such people both in the tropics and at the poles).

Personally I would be sad to lose the diversity, loathsome though racism is. Let us celebrate the variety of cats and the difficulty of herding them, rather than trying to force them into a single, authoritarian mould.

1731. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #122751 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 12:30 am

Steve - if you do produce a book then let's have something positive. Dawkins, Harris and the rest have produced necessary polemics about the abominations of religion, what is needed is something that shows the positive side of what life without religion could be like.

Could I also recommend "Writer's Cafe" as a useful program to organise your thoughts. Not Open Source,k but relatively cheap and produced in the UK.

1732. Dusty Clues: Study suggests no dearth of Earths

Comment #122746 by epeeist on February 5, 2008 at 11:47 pm

Comment #122581 by arogop

"There are two kinds of people in the world, those who do the work and those who take the credit. Be one of the former, there is less competition."

Great quote. Is this your creative juices? I want to use it and give credit.

Indhira Gandhi

1733. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122582 by epeeist on February 5, 2008 at 2:00 pm

Comment #122497 by hes2@usa

I took this quote off of one of the posts on the Flood Debate. I liked many of the comments but I didn't get to see the debate itself.

"Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous?" - Calvin

Why go to Calvin when Luther has all the best lines - "Reason must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed. Faith must trample underfoot all reason, sense, and understanding, and whatever it sees must be put out of sight and ... know nothing but the word of God."

1734. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122488 by epeeist on February 5, 2008 at 10:45 am

Comment #122443 by Peacebeuponme

I guess epeeist would be man-at-arms

No finesse, this is more me -

1735. Are Darwin's Theories Fact or Faith Issues?

Comment #122479 by epeeist on February 5, 2008 at 10:24 am

Comment #122475 by Geoff

Ah, but that's because of the conspiracy of scientists wanting to suppress their research.

Think of the famous scientists that you know of, Newton, Darwin, Einstein, Planck, Heisenberg. All of them famous for changing the then current view of science. If the ID'ers really had something and could show it then they would be as famous as any of those in my list.

It really is possible to stir science up in this way, look at the reaction to Anthony Garret Lisi's paper An Extremely Simple Theory of Everything for a current example.

1736. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122465 by epeeist on February 5, 2008 at 9:47 am

Comment #122457 by Geoff

Annabanana (and others), did you ever come across the (now infamous) afDave "flud" debate?

Oh yes, it (and the associated peanut gallery) are still there in the forum. Makes hes2 look vaguely rational.

1737. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122451 by epeeist on February 5, 2008 at 9:28 am

Comment #122443 by Peacebeuponme

I guess epeeist would be man-at-arms. Annabanana could choose between She-Ra and Evil Lyn as well.

Does that mean she has to wear the appropriate costume :-D

1738. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122446 by epeeist on February 5, 2008 at 9:24 am

Comment #122442 by annabanana

Also, I'm still waiting on the peer-reviewed findings about how pangea supported all of that life and that there were 2 billion people on the planet at the time of this flood.

I hadn't picked that up. My percentage death figures were based on the estimate of 20 million. If it was two billion then god's kill rate is 99.9999996%, not counting all the animals and plants. The bastard really is a sadist.

You might be waiting for some peer reviewed papers I am waiting for answers to the Noah's ark FAQ I posted. Like you I haven't seen anything so far.

1739. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122445 by epeeist on February 5, 2008 at 9:18 am

Comment #122421 by hes2@usa

We still, even in this room, have yet to figure out that we are the size of a grain of sand on the beach in this universe. Yet because we have mastered this grain of sand and even left to visit the next grain of sand, that makes us Supreme Beings?

Absolutely not, Carl Sagan said it best

"In some respects, science has far surpassed religion in delivering awe. How is it that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded, “This is better than we thought! The Universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle, more elegant. God must be even greater than we dreamed!”? Instead they say, “No, no, no! My god is a little god, and I want him to stay that way."

1740. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122440 by epeeist on February 5, 2008 at 9:10 am

Comment #122435 by hes2@usa

avatarEpeeist,
You are closest to the answer with your comment!

Brilliant, I knew you would agree in the end. So god is a sadist and pathological liar.

1741. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122431 by epeeist on February 5, 2008 at 8:59 am

Comment #122427 by Tyler Durden

Whisper it quietly: it was *magic* :)

Having worked on a pig farm during my school years the one thing that gets me is how 8 people could shovel so much shit in a day.

1742. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122413 by epeeist on February 5, 2008 at 8:41 am

Comment #122399 by Peacebeuponme

Except we would never have made it through the last 6,000 years. You are essentially saying that continental drift is about 42,000 times faster. The kind of earthquakes and tsunamis that would bring would make the planet uninhabitable.

They never consider the energy implications of condensing the estimated age of the universe down to 6,000 years. However that can all be waved away as a "miracle".

The things that get me are the fact that in WWII some 3.7% of the world's population died. As opposed to the flood where something like 99.9999% died. Compared to god, Hitler was a fscking amateur.

The other thing is that we have all this evidence that the universe is around 13.5 billions of years old, the earth about 4.5 billions years old, evidence of how geological change and evolution took place. What they are saying is that the god who supposedly gave us the ability to reason all of this out is actually lying to to us.

Then of course they want us to accept him as the ultimate source of morality.

1743. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122398 by epeeist on February 5, 2008 at 8:29 am

Comment #122390 by hes2@usa

Nar, no kidding here.
I don't kid about creation.

Care to answer any of the points here with some good science - http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

1744. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122389 by epeeist on February 5, 2008 at 8:18 am

Comment #122371 by hes2@usa

Preflood Earth

You are kidding, aren't you?

1745. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122360 by epeeist on February 5, 2008 at 7:59 am

Comment #122348 by hes2@usa

Are you just unhappy that you don't have as many credentials, or just nothing published?

Quite an assumption on your part. How do you know what qualifications I have or what I have published?

1746. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122342 by epeeist on February 5, 2008 at 7:50 am

Comment #122327 by hes2@usa

*Jerry Bergman teaches biology, chemistry, and physics at Northwest State College in Archbold

If he does this he must do it at a pretty low level. Any decent secondary college would have specialist teachers for each of these subjects. Any tertiary college would go even finer, e.g. I had different lecturers for classical and statistical thermodynamics, quantum mechanics etc.

As for his publications, I tend to use Google Scholar to look these up. He doesn't appear to have many outside of "Creation Research Society Quarterly".

1747. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122332 by epeeist on February 5, 2008 at 7:42 am

Comment #122318 by hes2@usa

Many times we hear the phrase "all scientists believe or accept evolution as fact" or that "the overwhelming majority of scientists believe or accept Darwinian evolution." This is simply not true.

Fair enough, what are they proposing instead (noting that evolution is a fact, it has been observed both directly in nature and in the laboratory and indirectly in the fossil record). Looking at your list, it is shorter than the year intake of students for Oxford University's biological sciences degree. How come over half the list aren't actually biologists? How did they find out that Blaise Pascal preferred creationism to Darwin's theory of evolution when he was dead before it was propounded?

1748. Are Darwin's Theories Fact or Faith Issues?

Comment #122321 by epeeist on February 5, 2008 at 7:33 am

Comment #122314 by LorienRyan

There is a good explanation at:

http://wilstar.com/theories.htm

Aargh, no. Facts and laws are totally different. We can't get to a law in science because we can never know whether something will come along to disprove it, which is why we stop at theories. We don't have verification, because that would assume things to be true. The best we can have is corroboration or verisimilitude.

1749. Are Darwin's Theories Fact or Faith Issues?

Comment #122307 by epeeist on February 5, 2008 at 7:07 am

Comment #122305 by home8896

I find myself cringing now when I hear people use "theory" in place of "nutty idea I thought up while I was drunk, last night" which goes to show my consciousness has been raised over the last few years.

That would be a conjecture. If you want to take it any further can I recommend Popper's "Logic of Scientific Discovery" and "Conjectures and Refutations".

1750. A Letter From Hell

Comment #122306 by epeeist on February 5, 2008 at 7:05 am

Comment #120030 by irate_atheist

Are you solid or oil fueled? (If you say 'gas, actually', can I call you a crafty little beggar?)

Well, gas actually...

It isn't that difficult really. What you do is change the height of the shelves depending on what temperature you want to cook at. You also use the warming oven as well. Anyway, must go pop my beef in beer with caramelised onions in the oven.