151. Monkeys Enjoy Giving To Others, Study Finds

Comment #237298 by J Mac on August 26, 2008 at 10:29 am

Giskard,

You are right that the article didn't go into detail on the methods, but seeing that they observed a significant difference between the behavior when paired with kin versus non kin there would have to be some other explanation for the difference if the monkeys were not aware that it was their kin there.

152. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #237297 by J Mac on August 26, 2008 at 10:25 am

Al,

Not particularly I don't recall.

IQ tests have changed over time, an I don't know if the current forms still have the problems. But I have read good overviews of the "white bias" in the tests. Of course I can't be sure that the source I got that from was any more credible than Gould and Lewontin's denial that race exists.

From what I recall it was particularly the vocabulary that was used in the questions.

153. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #237287 by J Mac on August 26, 2008 at 10:12 am

IQ tests also have historically been biased to favor caucasian cultures.

People ARE different. Claims by Gould and Lewontin that race is only skin deep are foolish. Just look at any medical text. Black people are more prone to sickle cell anemia, native americans are more prone to diabetes, many caucasian groups are more prone to heart disease.

The problem with the IQ tests is people forget to realize that it only shows a difference... some people think that means one is "better".

To put it bluntly and quite politically incorrectly: White people score better on the white person test because the races ARE different. But just the same black people would score better than whites on a black person test.

IQ does not mean as much as some people want it to.

154. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #237281 by J Mac on August 26, 2008 at 9:56 am

Personally I find the irony of Qomaks statements to be the most delicious part. Quite a patronizing and condescending attitude from someone who does not have impressive credentials himself.

Would be one thing if he was a crust old professor with a lifetime of experience. But those he criticized have as much or more education and experience than he does.

155. Plan to exhume cardinal is 'homophobic'

Comment #237273 by J Mac on August 26, 2008 at 9:34 am

Comment removed by J Mac as referenced comment was removed.

156. Why Dawkins is right and his critics are wrong

Comment #237268 by J Mac on August 26, 2008 at 9:28 am

Is that clear,

I will respond this time as you have actually taken the time to form complete sentences.

"Is this really confusing what I am asking?"

In this last post it is not confusing. In all your previous posts, yes quite confusing. Your posts have been garbled gibberish at best.

But now in a moment of clear typing you accuse professor Dawkins of lying, without reference to what you believe he lied about. Also note that the man you accuse of lying has undoubtedly worked hard to get where he is, referring to someone as "Mr dawkins" when they have earned a doctoral degree and spent a career educating others is insulting. If you wish to be informal everyone here will understand reference to Richard Dawkins, or just RD. If you are going to be more formal the appropriate titles would be Dr Dawkins or Professor Dawkins.

Now, if you can in similarly clear language state what you believe he lied about perhaps you will get a response. If you cannot clearly make your claim then you should remove your insult and apologize.

157. A Teacher on the Front Line as Faith and Science Clash

Comment #237261 by J Mac on August 26, 2008 at 9:14 am

On the other hand "methodological naturalism" says the supernatural may exist, but since science is the only effective way to investigate reality we can never know whether supernatural claims are true or not.

This sounds like NOMA in disguise to me.

158. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #237255 by J Mac on August 26, 2008 at 9:04 am

This is nonsense. To surrender the efficacy and power of your own mind is truly vile. The only verdict that is acceptable is that of your own reason, and the only way you can reach a verdict is by using it and seeking the best evidence available to you.

159. Kamikaze bacteria illustrate evolution of co-operation

Comment #237253 by J Mac on August 26, 2008 at 8:57 am

First reference: This article.

Volvox: Here

The entire text of Robert Trivers' "Social Evolution"

Slime molds: Here

Bacteria in general:Here

From abstract:

Far from being clonal loners, bacteria are highly social creatures capable of astonishingly complex collective behaviour that is mediated, as it is in colonial insects, by chemical communication.

160. Plan to exhume cardinal is 'homophobic'

Comment #237237 by J Mac on August 26, 2008 at 8:42 am

On one level I don't really care what happens to my body after I die. But at another level I want to take precautions so that my remains are not paraded around and put on display for "pilgrims."

This is sick. I joked earlier about necrophilia, but it seems the catholic church does have a morbid and disturbing obsession with corpses.

161. A Teacher on the Front Line as Faith and Science Clash

Comment #237234 by J Mac on August 26, 2008 at 8:40 am

Sargeist, you're a violent idiot :o)

162. Monkeys Enjoy Giving To Others, Study Finds

Comment #237232 by J Mac on August 26, 2008 at 8:35 am

"The reciprocal altruism explanation only makes sense if the recipient of the favor knows who his benefactor is. The article should have made clear if this was the case here. "

It did:

"The monkeys predominantly selected the prosocial token when paired with a relative or familiar individual but not when paired with a stranger. "

163. Plan to exhume cardinal is 'homophobic'

Comment #237229 by J Mac on August 26, 2008 at 8:30 am

"...attempting to cover up the sexuality..."

Let's see here, how many people would have heard anything about this if they weren't trying to dig him up?

Who the hell thought up this strategy: 'hey, if we want to hide his homosexuality lets dig him up, make a big scene, THEN no one will notice.'

Geesh. I actually hope they succeed in this. A gay man becoming a saint... Apparently homosexuality isn't the problem its gay necrophilia that is. As long as your corpse doesn't lie next to someone of the same sex you're fine.

164. Monkeys Enjoy Giving To Others, Study Finds

Comment #237222 by J Mac on August 26, 2008 at 8:19 am

"Isn't this just kin selection and reciprocal altruism? "

Yup, nothing new here. I'd be interested to see what would happen if the "prosocial" option decreased the actors payout, ie: selfish token givens one apple slice, prosocial token gives one slice to family member but only half to the actor.

165. Kamikaze bacteria illustrate evolution of co-operation

Comment #237218 by J Mac on August 26, 2008 at 8:14 am

"but in bacteria it can hardly be attributed to altruistic behaviour. "

Oh, why not?

Many single celled entities engage in altruistic behavior.

166. Imagine No Religion' signs to go up around town

Comment #237101 by J Mac on August 25, 2008 at 10:53 pm

I like repairing lawn mowers. But I'll be damned if I ever use the thing without a fight.

167. Richard Dawkins on Talkback Radio

Comment #237100 by J Mac on August 25, 2008 at 10:51 pm

HA! Laurie, its bad enough to hijack one thread, now your recruiting co-hijackers?!

I don't think it would matter what RD said in response, the person asking the question wasn't going to consider his answer anyways, they had their mind made up.

I'm becoming a bit apathetic in the "cause", do any of these faith-heads ever get converted by logic?

I was once a religiot, but I saw all the problems in it for a long time, it wasn't the logic of the science that swayed me, I already got all that. It was the knowledge that it was "ok" to be an atheist.

168. A Teacher on the Front Line as Faith and Science Clash

Comment #237086 by J Mac on August 25, 2008 at 10:19 pm

The best way I'm aware of to address the concern without either "chickening out" nor turning off the religious is to take the methodological stance.

If one is teaching a science class they just need to establish what science is. A distinction between methodological naturalism and ontological naturalism is useful.

I can see myself leading a class and stating quite clearly that I am an ontological naturalist, as I believe that the natural is all that exists; however that is not a requirement of the students but rather methodological naturalism is: they can believe what they want in their own time, but when it comes to doing science, studying science, and discussing science, natural phenomena are all that apply.

This has a vague similarity to NOMA, but is different in that it doesn't leave religion untouchable, just untouched as long as it stays out of the way of science.

In essence its NOT going out of the way to attack religious ideas, but its a full speed pursuit of science with no apologies given to other ideas that may get run over.

Laplace did not have to attack the idea of god, just frankly state that he had no need of that hypothesis. Why should the issue even be confronted when we also have no need for that hypothesis.

169. Kamikaze bacteria illustrate evolution of co-operation

Comment #237080 by J Mac on August 25, 2008 at 10:01 pm

Hellene,

"So if all the bacteria have the exact same genes, altruistic behavior would be improbable?"

That does not really follow. In fact it is the similarity of their genetic composition that can allow for it.

The important aspect is even if two cells had identical genes they could be expressing different genes at different times.

Genes don't necessarily code for specific behavior (suicide or not) but rather a rule that can respond to the environment.

Imagine emergency medical services responding to a bad accident. They all have the same training, but they will all play a different role in the situation depending upon when they arrive. They don't need to be "programmed" differently.

170. Imagine No Religion' signs to go up around town

Comment #237071 by J Mac on August 25, 2008 at 9:34 pm

"feel guilty because I feel that I could be doing something productive."

Something productive.... like playing on forums and facebook?

:)

171. Priest Antonio Rungi wants beauty contest - for nuns

Comment #237062 by J Mac on August 25, 2008 at 9:08 pm

"they had a beauty contest (yes they had one), no guys where allowed to attend."

Soo... they want girls to decide which girls are the most beautiful. But homosexuality will land them in hell.

Can we say entrapment.

172. Pastor Michael Guglielmucci spun gospel of lies

Comment #237055 by J Mac on August 25, 2008 at 8:50 pm

"2. He appears to be very unwell, mentally"

A bit ironic. A man can believe that the world was created in six days, women came from mans rib, people can come back from the dead, an invisible man can hear all of our thoughts, bread and wine can be turned into the flesh and blood of a man who died 2000 years ago, etc etc... but when he lies about having a medical conditions, well THEN he is regarded as unwell, mentally.

173. What Binti Jua Knew

Comment #237032 by J Mac on August 25, 2008 at 5:55 pm

"We are capable of understanding how sonar works. If that isn't superior, I don't know what is. "

Wow. I didn't suspect the arrogance would go that far.

We understand how it works, yet we cant do it. Even with our computers and technology. Yet bats use sonar quite easily and effectively.

We cannot measure what animals do and don't understand, we can only measure what they DO. And by that measure of sonar bats have bested us by far.

I have read all that from Dennett before, I didn't review every bit of it, but I recall the main points.

Language IS the unique human trait. That is our claim to fame. But ever species has such a claim. On what grounds can we say our gift of language is better than a bats gift of sonar?

Well, language gives us "intelligence." That is just foolish and circular as "intelligence" is measured by one's use of language.

Some people even make the foolish claim that we are the most "highly evolved" species. All species have been evolving for the same amount of time. But even when we look at that it turns on us: we have changed quite a bit over our history. Sea sponges haven't changed much for a long time. Who's more intelligent, the ones who have to keep struggling to keep up, or the ones who quickly picked a working strategy?

Trees live much longer than humans, they have no struggles, no worries. They get to relax and enjoy the sunshine all day long. But you think you are superior because you can understand the process of photosynthesis? The tree doesn't need to understand it, nor does it care to, it just DOES it.

Who is the better musician, the musical savant who neither knows nor cares about the physics of sound waves yet makes the most beautiful music, or the physicist who can UNDERSTAND all the wave mechanics and even the textbook knowledge of acoustical aesthetics yet is unable to carry a tune in a bucket?

What is it your "understanding" gets you? Just the arrogance? I think so.

174. What Binti Jua Knew

Comment #236996 by J Mac on August 25, 2008 at 4:30 pm

They have evolved to fit a different niche. It is arrogant to think we are superior to animals. It is easy to say "oooh we have language and no other animal does." First off that is false, animals communicate in many ways; but I will say that our language is unique. But every species has unique characteristics. Bats have sonar that even our technology cannot match. Should they be considered superior to us?

175. Pastor Michael Guglielmucci spun gospel of lies

Comment #236992 by J Mac on August 25, 2008 at 4:16 pm

"I really only got into this blog to poke a Dawkins-ite and have some fun."

Most of us come here for rational discussion of complex issues. And we do make our jokes and have our fun as well. The "hysteria lurking under the surface" that you see is not the norm, but it is a response to you. You have openly admitted that you only come here to cause trouble; how respectful of a response do you expect?

I wouldn't go onto a christian forum just to "poke a jesus-ite".

If a majority of people in a room dislike you, perhaps it is not the majority that is the problem.

176. What Binti Jua Knew

Comment #236987 by J Mac on August 25, 2008 at 4:03 pm

"The point about apes is that they can't really take care of themselves as a person should. "

And they never will be able to if we don't allow them space to grow on their own.

Wolves can survive quite well in the wild, chihuahuas cant. If we were to turn all the wolves into chihuahuas would we be doing them a service?

Wolves do die in nature, but others live. They learn and they grow. They adapt.

Robbing another species, or culture for that matter, of their potential is a horrible wrong to do to them in my book. I can see your point of view, but I don't imagine I'll ever share it.

177. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236982 by J Mac on August 25, 2008 at 3:48 pm

What really bores me are people like TWP, Fanusi, ... who based on self-education assume they are competent to propose solutions for complex issues even go as far as suggesting to change the constitution of a country.

One true sign of amateur self-educated "thinkers" is the ridiculous confidence that they show when discussing various complex issues (while this is true for many online forums, I was a bit disappointed to find it here).

You did not fall to their level...

178. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236978 by J Mac on August 25, 2008 at 3:39 pm

"make a European Islam (as a stepping stone to unbelief)"

But can that happen? Up until a few years ago I'd say that'd be a great idea. It was working with christianity in america. Most major denominations and churches accepted evolution as fact and accepted other scientific findings. Their god got smaller and smaller, until christianity was no longer a theistic belief, but at best a deistic system with some fun stories that no one really believes.

It looked like it was going well. But when no one took the stories seriously anymore there was no reason for serious theological education. Pastors, rather than having an in depth education, were getting "ordained" through web-based degree-mills. All these ignorant new pastors were the dumbest of the dumb, but the one thing they knew for sure is that they loved jesus and the bible was the inspired word of god.

Now this new generation of theological kindergardeners are running the christian church in america; they are the dangerous ones. And they were allowed to thrive only because the earlier christianity was modified to fit with modern science and culture.

Will modernizing and theologically castrating islam have anything more than short term benefits? Or do we need to just go for the kill of the ideology right from the start?

179. What Binti Jua Knew

Comment #236966 by J Mac on August 25, 2008 at 3:22 pm

"If chimpanzees have human rights then screw conservation of their way of life with a shovel, because their rights are far more precious. "

Mike, we have a very different view on human rights. Granting someone rights does not mean we take over and impose our culture on them. That is not rights, thats forced indoctrination and assimilation; THAT is what should be avoided at all costs.

Panurge,

"Of course, we extrapolate based on data to other humans. But we don't extrapolate to other animals. Now that is a huge assumption."

News flash: Humans are animals. If you are to claim that we are qualitatively different the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that.

"You seem to think that other primates are humans with fur and duck tape over their mouth."

Not quite the way I'd put it, but in a matter of speaking yes.

180. Religion out of medicine, a new message for Ontario doctors

Comment #236959 by J Mac on August 25, 2008 at 3:16 pm

"I can recognise them by looking at them, in exactly the same way that a scientist looking at bands on a gel infers the presence of DNA."

Yes you can infer the presence of DNA from bands on a gel, but only because there is a frame of reference for comparison. Saying you can recognize good things as good and bad things as bad says nothing about the objective or universal nature of those judgements. It only shows that you can make such judgements.

"And the sickening truth of the true monsters is that they really don't care anything for life, not even their own."

Hmm, so they don't share your morals? Apparently those morals are not absolute or objective. Yes, you and I would probably most of the time on who the "true monsters" are; but that is only because our morals are similar, not because they are universal.

If morals were universal there'd be no point in talking about them, there would be no people who you could call "true monsters."

181. Robot with a Biological Brain: new research provides insights into how the brain works

Comment #236830 by J Mac on August 25, 2008 at 12:13 pm

"I wonder what point sentience occurs."

It doesn't.

That's like tracing the history of abiogenesis and evolution and asking at what point life occurs.

You can define life or sentience as some arbitrary qualifying characteristics so you can draw a line somewhere, but there is no significant change between the thing right before the line and the organism right after the line. It's just arbitrary.

182. Religion out of medicine, a new message for Ontario doctors

Comment #236813 by J Mac on August 25, 2008 at 11:23 am

H. Elephant,

"That is an illuminating analogy. Can you really see no difference between a doctor and a waiter? Between handling ham and performing abortions? "

They have a similarity: religious prohibition.

That similarity can be compared. The religious rule is NOT sufficient of a reason to object. In fact not only is it not sufficient, it doesn't count for anything.

Now your question being obviously rhetorical indicates that you think there is a difference. The reasons for not performing abortions go beyond a religious prohibition. THESE reasons can and should be considered. But they must be enumerated without reference to religion.

183. Religion out of medicine, a new message for Ontario doctors

Comment #236810 by J Mac on August 25, 2008 at 11:17 am

Slavery and racism need not be linked, though of course they were in america it is not a given.

And the fact, if I concede that it is a fact, that societies who engage in slavery are "bad" places to be, that doesn't mean slavery is bad. It's an assumption of cause and effect without justification. Perhaps slavery is the means by which societies ride out the storms. Again I am not trying to justify slavery, but saying that slavery causes troubled societies just does not follow from the evidence. It could be just as likely that slavery is caused BY troubled societies as a means of stabilizing themselves.

"Suffering can be objectively measured: you can look for signs like torture and rape squads"

That is circular. You define immoral as that which causes suffering; you define suffering as that which you see as immoral.

I'm not sure how to address the claim that muslims actually believe they are evil. It is such nonsense I can't respond. NO ONE thinks they are evil. People may have a change of heart and look back at their previous actions with remorse saying "I was so evil, I'm sorry." But at the time they were doing those things?

Now your 'other worlds' idea is a valuable one. Morals depend on the environment. But we each have a different environment. We all live on earth, true, but we all experience our environment differently. If all of our environments were identical we would be identical. Some of us are tall, some short, some black, some white, some women, some men, some smart, some creationists (sorry, couldn't resist). We each have a different niche to fill, and as such our morals differ.

Our environments have a lot of similarities, therefore it is reasonable to believe that our morals have a lot of similarities: Do no murder. But then our environments have differences, and therefore our morals differ.

"Just look at the stinking misery of the slaves"

YOU say they were miserable. But you are saying that they were miserable because they were miserable. Its all your view. There is nothing objective about it.

"Compare our modern civilization with the hell of those societies that still practice slavery"

On what grounds can you call their societies hell? Their society is hell because they practice slavery. Slavery is wrong because it is used in hellish societies.

You are putting your values into the mix then making numerous circular arguments. On what grounds are YOUR values objective? They are not, they are YOUR values, by definition your values are subjective.

184. Pastor Michael Guglielmucci spun gospel of lies

Comment #236619 by J Mac on August 24, 2008 at 10:06 pm

"...Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned, "

The operative word there is MAY, it doesn't say WILL.

"you are all just as bad as you say he is by writing all this crap about him."

I don't claim to be perfect. But I haven't made a fortune by lying to people about having a terminal illness.

"have you never sinned before?" That I actually got a good laugh at. You came on an atheist website and expected us to admit to sinning?

Sin: an immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law.

Considering your audience here doesn't buy into your divine law then we do not sin no. We have all done wrong in our lives no doubt, but you word "sin" doesn't mean a hell of a lot here.

185. What Binti Jua Knew

Comment #236605 by J Mac on August 24, 2008 at 9:36 pm

in fact the est example of how to treat them would be in the same sense as we SHOULD have treated primitive tribes of humans discovered in the 2nd half of the 20th century: leave them alone

186. Q&A with Richard Dawkins after lecture at UC Berkeley

Comment #236594 by J Mac on August 24, 2008 at 9:05 pm

Isthatclear: "By the anybody still dare not to wtite the evolution tree? We are all mutating to see it. Even non scientist keeps checking whether the worm turns into an elephant? "

Ladies, this is why you should not do heroin while pregnant.

187. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236587 by J Mac on August 24, 2008 at 8:45 pm

Are we all gonna lay on the therapists couch now and talk about how we feel. Who makes us cry, who we like, who we don't like.

Fuck that. Does anyone really give a damn who gets along with who on a web forum? I'd rather discuss issues that we agree or disagree with.

I'm with Diacanu on the ISSUES in this thread as far as I've read. Post 190 I believe was excellently put.

We should not lower ourselves to torture or other behaviors which we find despicable in our enemies. I think that is a relevant topic to discuss. But at some point this fell into he-said she-said bullshit.

Does it matter if the person making an argument is a bimbo, himbo, jerk, pedophile, nun, or communist? If we can look at the arguments themselves we'll get a bit further.

188. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236580 by J Mac on August 24, 2008 at 8:32 pm

Children children.

Seems I missed some fun while ignoring most of this thread. I might reread it when I have some time.

Reminds me of that south park episode where one of them gets frozen and awakes in the future: Even if we get rid of religion all the atheists will still find reasons to kill each other.

189. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236575 by J Mac on August 24, 2008 at 8:16 pm

Weighing out all the pro's and con's....

Well all the "Pros" are on facebook... but then so are all the "cons"...

I fulfilled my requirement of a tortured pun for the day.

190. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236573 by J Mac on August 24, 2008 at 8:08 pm

Oooh. Damn. I'm not a cool kid.

I looked for Laurie on there. He's hiding. Or hasn't given into the peer pressure yet.

191. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236569 by J Mac on August 24, 2008 at 8:01 pm

Hmm. First time in my life I've been a cool kid....

192. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236559 by J Mac on August 24, 2008 at 7:39 pm

"I always make the distinction between Islam and Muslim"

I'm afraid I don't and apparently I'm a bit ignorant on it.

I thought a muslim was a follower of the religion islam...

193. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236545 by J Mac on August 24, 2008 at 7:09 pm

HA!

I just tried to find goldy on facebook. Apparently I got the wrong one.

Is there another MG in new zealand? Isnt that where you are?

194. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236535 by J Mac on August 24, 2008 at 6:43 pm

"he is a male naked dog and quite ugly. "

Were talking about muslims here.

They don't let women buy cucumbers!

Don't you go imposing your western standards on their sexual repression.

195. A Teacher on the Front Line as Faith and Science Clash

Comment #236528 by J Mac on August 24, 2008 at 6:36 pm

"magical creation"

HA! How do they teach that?

Do they go over the chemical formula for pixie dust that god used?

196. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236527 by J Mac on August 24, 2008 at 6:34 pm

"how a man can fawn over a naked dog is beyond me..."

It's only half naked... waste down... it should only turn on muslims. That is if there are no goats with upturned tails available.

197. Priest Antonio Rungi wants beauty contest - for nuns

Comment #236524 by J Mac on August 24, 2008 at 6:31 pm

"Pedophilia was one of them. I guess I won't hit all 14. "

I wont hit all 14 cause I don't hit on 14 :\

198. Priest Antonio Rungi wants beauty contest - for nuns

Comment #236523 by J Mac on August 24, 2008 at 6:30 pm

Fuck if I know, but I've violated most of them. Its about time too, cause I was tired of violating the old ones, I needed a new challenge.

Genetic engineering is one. Which means that if catholics eat ANYTHING in a grocery store their going to hell. I'm gonna be sure to remind every one of them of that.

There was a recent article here with the video clip that detailed the new ones.

Pedophilia was one of them. I guess I won't hit all 14.

199. A Teacher on the Front Line as Faith and Science Clash

Comment #236521 by J Mac on August 24, 2008 at 6:27 pm

Personally what I have found as an amazing teaching tool is the Wason test (and its social variants). It's fun, hands on, interesting, and it shows how foolish most peoples' natural inclination can be.

Once that sinks in people are much more able to look at evidence for what it is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wason_selection_task

200. Robot with a Biological Brain: new research provides insights into how the brain works

Comment #236519 by J Mac on August 24, 2008 at 6:21 pm

"I was thinking poor, little retarded robot ... only a few neurons to think with ... "

Yet IT wont demand equal time in a class room to rant about how it was designed by an intelligent creator.