Comments by j.mills

Comment #282497 by j.mills on November 12, 2008 at 9:41 am

I said:

by definition every species is unique, but not in each case because of some simplistic single feature; rather, each species is defined by a 'cluster' of attributes.

- which I didn't think would be at all controversial. But then Brian said:

Species is not fixed and set. It's an arbitrary cataloging (based on certain criteria such as reproducible offspring, location, etc) that humans do, not nature.

I don't see how that contradicts what I said, though Brian seemed to think it did.

And Rod points out that other creatures have opposable thumbs, and other people point out that animals use tools. This is the point I was making: simply that no one characteristic can be used to 'separate' us, but that no two species share all the same attributes; and a package of a few attributes may suffice to identify a species uniquely. Seems almost tautological to me, even if it was Midgeley I was drawing from!

202. Clever Monkeys

Comment #282171 by j.mills on November 11, 2008 at 7:09 pm

Would have been harder to do all that if we had to spend hours of each day grooming, Frankus...

203. Clever Monkeys

Comment #282165 by j.mills on November 11, 2008 at 7:01 pm

Well, you know, language isn't all it's crakjskjgj shs s;f jiifk. lajksg.

Mary Midgeley (considered accursed around here) wrote something years ago that I thought sensible. In response to What distinguishes humans from animals? she said: "Almost everything is wrong with this question." She preferred, What distinguishes humans among the animals? And added that by definition every species is unique, but not in each case because of some simplistic single feature; rather, each species is defined by a 'cluster' of attributes.

In humans, this includes: bipedalism, big brains, opposable thumbs, tool use, language, complex socialising, constant fertility, prolonged infancy, culture (ie. memes and artifacts), consciousness(?) and hairlessness. (EDIT: and descended larynx, enabling vocalisation.) Most or all of these things have been proposed by one thinker or another as 'the' characteristic that 'separates' us 'from' animals (along with more glib and less sustainable offerings, like laughter, compassion, dreams, dignity, etc). Clearly it's a bit more complicated than that.

204. Humanists Launch Godless Holiday Campaign

Comment #282159 by j.mills on November 11, 2008 at 6:46 pm

I know a family called Jones who have a dog. If their surname was Gordon, I could call her the Gordons' dog. So what am I actually to call her? The Joneses's dog??

(I suppose I could just call her Meg...)

For no particular reason, here's what I got when I googled God's apostrophe:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/vox/2345902522/

205. Clever Monkeys

Comment #282153 by j.mills on November 11, 2008 at 6:24 pm

Was it on this site I read recently about wild dolphins learning tail-walking from their fellows that had been released from a dolphinarium? And they appeared to be doing it for fun, no other purpose having yet been discerned.

Watched tman's video link. Them crows is too clever by 'alf, you mark my woords.

206. Humanists Launch Godless Holiday Campaign

Comment #282152 by j.mills on November 11, 2008 at 6:13 pm

Now, I read a guideline way back when that was about the vowel sound preceding the 's' at the end of the word. So you might say Jesus's dog and the Argus's crew, but Dickens' novels and Jimmy Smitts' performance; you're not gonna say Smitts's, are ya?

But that would lead me to say James' novels (since the 'e' isn't voiced as a vowel), whereas I'm more comfortable with James's novels - and indeed Dickens's novels. So I dunno.

Perhaps the best advice I ever read about prose in general is: do what most helps the reader.

In the present scenario, you could make a case for goodness's sake, but it would ruin the reference to the well-known phrase (which I suppose is also wrong).

(EDIT: Boy, could we find anything smaller to argue about? :) )

On the main event: it's a good slogan, whoever's putting it out there, because it pithily sets out the morality position. But yes, humanism is something that needs a longer defence than atheism. Secularism, on the other hand, ought to unite people across interest groups, being essentially a civil agenda.

207. Marine census discovers more than 200 new species

Comment #282146 by j.mills on November 11, 2008 at 5:50 pm

King of NH said:

When I say I would like to watch them breed, I mean divide. I'm not THAT open minded.

That led me to invent (so I thought!) the word microporn, and google it. As usual, the Internet was there before me...

Article doesn't mention if they've found R'lyeh down there. But then, it wouldn't, would it? [Taps nose, winks.]

208. Marine census discovers more than 200 new species

Comment #282053 by j.mills on November 11, 2008 at 1:54 pm

a type of giant bacteria living in the eastern South Pacific that can grow several centimeters long.

:o !!!

A unicellular beast the size of yer thumb?! I mean, is it me, or crikey?!

209. Dr Adam Rutherford criticises teachers' views on creationism

Comment #281104 by j.mills on November 9, 2008 at 4:46 pm

Until September I worked at a secondary school where one of the science teachers was a creationist, and one of the science technicians had her doubts about evolution. Christians of course. It's likely to get worse there: I left when the school became an Academy - run by ULT, a branch of the CoE...

If such teachers keep their bonkers unscience out of the classroom, they're welcome to it. But it's hard to believe they can teach natural selection properly if they can't see past their faith to the strength of the evidence. It's worrying. I'M not a science teacher, and I seem to have a much better understanding of evolution than many people paid much more than me precisely to understand and communicate evolution.

Perhaps we should be filtering these folks out. Ben Stein claims we're doing it anyway, so might as well get hung for the sheep as the lamb... :)

210. Does Religion Make You Nice?

Comment #281101 by j.mills on November 9, 2008 at 4:33 pm

Bonzai said:

Godel's second incompleteness theorem. If you are sure that you are sane, you must be insane.

Better known as Catch-22...

My PC runs Ubuntu. (Though I keep toying with the idea of having a Windows one around just for certain applications I'm used to.)

211. Tolerance Over Race Can Spread, Studies Find

Comment #281023 by j.mills on November 9, 2008 at 10:33 am

geechie said:

I can't help being racist, but I know better.

I think you're misunderstanding geechie, sctparker. I took him to mean that upbringing (and evolutionary in-group preferences?) can create 'racist' impulses that may be unavoidable, but that what you do about those impulses is up to you. That's where you apply a civilising filter to your own words and actions, because, as geechie says, you know better.

EDIT: Ta for West Wing info, Steve.

212. Does Religion Make You Nice?

Comment #281019 by j.mills on November 9, 2008 at 10:21 am

What's wrong with "Secularist Community", if that's the aim?

213. Unknown 'Structures' Tugging at Universe, Study Says

Comment #281017 by j.mills on November 9, 2008 at 10:00 am

Sometimes the police turn to psychics too. Doesn't seem like a sensible use of taxes to me, but then how would I know? I'm not psychic!

214. Unknown 'Structures' Tugging at Universe, Study Says

Comment #280889 by j.mills on November 8, 2008 at 5:41 pm

Bonzai and Brian, the claims you make are the kind that I expect would reasonably demolish Sheldrake's evidence, I'm with you on that. But the whole incident would have looked better if Richard had said as much.

215. Unknown 'Structures' Tugging at Universe, Study Says

Comment #280883 by j.mills on November 8, 2008 at 5:24 pm

Here's Sheldrake's papers on telepathy:

http://www.sheldrake.org/Articles&Papers/papers/telepathy/index.html

The page contains citations and links to the papers. I make no comment, I merely offer them up.

216. Unknown 'Structures' Tugging at Universe, Study Says

Comment #280881 by j.mills on November 8, 2008 at 5:20 pm

The Sheldrake article that Dr Hameer has posted originally appeared in the Forum section of the Fortean Times, about 9 months ago(?). I wanted to bring it to this forum at the time but couldn't find an online version, even on Sheldrake's site. It led to numerous letters in the magazine from RD's defenders (like me) and detractors; but in my own letter I added that I would like to hear RD's response to Sheldrake's account, and I still would. So if you're listening, Richard...

Sheldrake's a 'fringe' kinda bloke - he has the scientific credentials but works on dubious phenomena, as above. He's a Christian too, for what it's worth. I'd be surprised if his evidence holds up to scrutiny, but as Dr Hameer implies, science doesn't have the luxury of dismissing it out of hand - particularly if you've gone along to talk to him about it!

217. Tolerance Over Race Can Spread, Studies Find

Comment #280776 by j.mills on November 8, 2008 at 9:58 am

Pitchers of Space said:

Well, we have long figured that the early seasons of the television programme ‘24’ may have contributed to ‘this situation’

Not just 24 - Obama's election seemed startlingly like the last season of The West Wing, where a Latino gets in but refuses to fight the election on race.

(EDIT: 24 did have influence: the US military asked them to stop using and mis-portraying torture, as many new recruits came in convinced that torture was acceptable and useful.)

(EDIT 2: And it's much mentioned how Lieutenant Uhuru on the original Star Trek gave a morale boost and role model to American blacks.)

Regards the article: something not exactly mentioned there is the idea that it's easy to maintain a prejudice about a group you've no experience of, but much more difficult when confronted with an individual. When you meet someone, the single aspect about them that you can see at a distance is the least of your experience of their whole personality; and it would be embarrassing to uphold your prejudice in that situation.

I don't like the word "tolerance". It implies that the other person is at fault and I must overlook it. A better word is acceptance, which puts the problem in my court, where it should be. (Alas, unacceptance is kinda clumsy.)

Still: good to see a positive article for once!

218. Does Religion Make You Nice?

Comment #280769 by j.mills on November 8, 2008 at 9:06 am

dfledermaus said:

I think it's more accurate to say that certainty = bliss and that ignorance just helps you remain certain.

David Bowie sang:

I don't want knowledge. I want certainty.

(Singing as a character, I fancy, rather than expressing his own position.)

On the Crusades: Chris de Burgh (no, really) did a great song, Crusader, expressing the righteousness of a Christian army fighting in common cause for God. Powerful stuff - and absolutely wrong in every single historical particular! :) (EDIT: Especially egregious given that he's descended from Richard the Lionheart.) Mind you, it does end by condemning the naivety of believing that that's how wars happen.

219. Does Religion Make You Nice?

Comment #280763 by j.mills on November 8, 2008 at 8:47 am

Come to think of it, how do they do these surveys? If somebody asked me, "Are you happy?" I'd have to say: "Define happy. In fact, define are."

(I might let them get away with you...)

220. Does Religion Make You Nice?

Comment #280761 by j.mills on November 8, 2008 at 8:42 am

Thoroughly agree with everything Dr Doctor just said, without in any way wishing to join his gang. :)

Happiness: I heard Clare Rayner say (she might have been quoting) that the natural state of humanity is modified unhappiness. Sounds alright, do for me. I'm much more keen to feel secure (in terms of basic needs) and respected (as a citizen) than to experience constant happiness, which would be a frankly insupportable response to the world around us.

If, as Frankus says, suicide rates are low in developing countries, I wonder if a contributing factor is a greater sense of community? I've no evidence for that - village life can be claustrophobic and miserable too. But I wonder if in poverty (or, a preferable condition, subsistence) there is more support to be had from those around you.

221. Unknown 'Structures' Tugging at Universe, Study Says

Comment #280755 by j.mills on November 8, 2008 at 8:26 am

Reading early comments, I was going to throw in some stuff from Edward Harrison's Cosmology, which I'm reading at the mo, but Oystein has said what I was going to and more, rather more clearly. Still, I recommend this fantastic book for its patient and thorough explorations of all the stuff under discussion: homogeneity, isotropy, relativity, spacetime, interpreting the three kinds of redshift (doppler, gravitational and expansion), the different possible topologies, etc. Couldn't ask for better - though I'm sure it won't be up to date on dark everythings.

I was especially startled to read in there that the cosmic microwave background radiation effectively provides a rest frame in which we can measure absolute velocity. This sounded like relativistic heresy, and I'm still recovering from the shock and absorbing the implications. (I'd welcome your comments, Oystein!)

Harrison didn't like the balloon analogy either, Steve, because it implies an embedding in a higher-dimensional spacetime - in particular, it suggest there is a centre we are expanding from, even if it's outside our dimensionality.

However, when Steve says:

Dots drawn on a balloon will expand with the balloon, so no-one living on the balloon would notice any change.

...I'm inclined to disagree. I once read a list of ways we could tell the difference if everything doubled in size overnight; alas, only one stuck in my brain (or remained in the visible part of my expanding mind), which is that since the strength of our muscles is proportional to their cross-sectional area, and our mass is proportional to our volume, we'd be only half as strong as the night before. Of course, we might mistake that for man-flu...

On visualising multiple dimensions: an Excel pivot table is an arbitrary n-dimensional object that's been squashed flat. Easy. :)

Did anyone get whether the 'dark flows' alleged in this article are parallel or convergent? Kinda makes a big difference in interpretation. Convergence might indicate something like a giant black hole, whereas parallel motion would be an effect on a much bigger scale.

There's still that issue Steve raised about how an object has had time to make its presence felt. Related to that, is everything moving at the same velocity? That would again imply that this is an enormously large-scale phenomenon, in both time and space. (Plus, I make that velocity about 1000km/s, which ain't so much for galaxies, given all their peculiar motions. You'd need to be very sure of your facts...)

222. Does Religion Make You Nice?

Comment #280738 by j.mills on November 8, 2008 at 7:32 am

Wosret (hardly recognise you without your lesbians) and Steve, you're teetering on forming a community of mutually affirming non-communitarians. I sniff Russell's Library Paradox around the corner...

Speaking of libraries around corners, my town's Carnegie Library is just round the corner from the Mechanics Institute. Since the latter was disused, I wouldn't be surprised if the library had extended its pseudopods into it by now, thereby supplanting one public education initiative with another...

Naturalist1 said:

Excuse me...May I please ask how it is that I am deemed to be Miserable?

Look at your avatar, man. Q's hardly a picture of jollity in that one.

223. Does Religion Make You Nice?

Comment #280560 by j.mills on November 7, 2008 at 7:35 pm

Yeah, Carnegie it was who said: The kept dollar is a stinking fish. Mind you, I heard he was hardly Mr Perfect on his way up.

Likewise, Bill Gates is gradually dispensing most of his money. Well and good, but I still hate the b*stard because he made all that money by monopolising the market and imposing his garbage pseudo-functional software on the whole world, creating endless hours of stress and fury for hundreds of millions of paying customers. Not that I'm bitter...

(Life is so much more peaceful now that I've discovered Ubuntu... http://start.ubuntu.com/8.04/ )

224. Does Religion Make You Nice?

Comment #280489 by j.mills on November 7, 2008 at 3:39 pm

As Hitch says, WITH God, all things are permitted.

225. Does Religion Make You Nice?

Comment #280478 by j.mills on November 7, 2008 at 3:14 pm

Speaking of donations, though sort of off-topic: there's a story popping up around the net about Dungeons & Dragons creator, E Gary Gygax. He died recently, so by way of tribute the GenCon gaming convention has just raised $17,000 for his favourite charity - which alas turns out to be the CCF, http://www.christianchildrensfund.org/

Supposedly the CCF turned it down when they realised where it came from. They say that they didn't want to give the appearance of endorsing a convention they had no part in, but that does seem a bit limp. Common view is that they don't want to be associated with D&D (ooh, witches, scary!), although one poster on the site below reckons it's because there was also pornographic material available at GenCon (that again seems a bit of a stretch).

http://www.gamepolitics.com/2008/11/04/children039s-charity-turns-its-back-gygax-memorial-donation

226. Anti-religion agenda among social media users

Comment #280468 by j.mills on November 7, 2008 at 2:48 pm

Oh, wait wait wait. It appears to be a spoof picture by one Derek Chatwood:

http://www.imagekind.com/Showartwork.aspx?IMID=9a342134-6228-4507-a5f1-48489f80a1ab

How disappointing!

227. Anti-religion agenda among social media users

Comment #280464 by j.mills on November 7, 2008 at 2:43 pm

Yah, the dinosaur picture is astonishing. I particularly relished the suggested colours: Flesh Of Christ and, get this, Omnipotence Yellow. (No wonder Wordsworth was impressed by those daffs.)

228. Bad Faith Awards 2008: Vote now

Comment #279929 by j.mills on November 6, 2008 at 4:12 pm

I went for Stephen Green, for virulence.

Styrer said that Oktar is:

A cunt of the first water.

Careful, Styrer, you may be "violating his personality" again...

Care to chew on this, folks?

Statement from the Governing Body

The Government is rolling out a vaccination programme for girls aged 12 and 13. The vaccination aims at protecting girls from a virus which can cause cervical cancer.

St. Monica's Governors took great care in considering whether the vaccination should be given on the school premises. They recognize the seriousness of this cancer, but they unanimously came to the conclusion that vaccination against it is a personal matter for parents to decide in consultation with their family doctor and their children.

The Governors also believe that such injections should be given in a sterile clinical setting with the appropriate professional medical personnel at hand should they be needed. This is not an issue for schools, but rather a matter of public health. Preventative inoculations are not now given in schools for any illness.

Moral considerations such as those reported in the Manchester Evening News for 24th September did not form any part of the Governors' decision.

Unfortunate for them, really, that apparently no other school in the country shared their concerns...

(EDIT: Still, kudos to them for spelling inoculations correctly...)

229. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #279194 by j.mills on November 5, 2008 at 4:54 pm

in this Rabbi's case, he became an atheist, then went BACK to religion.

It's a fair cop, guv.

230. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #279166 by j.mills on November 5, 2008 at 4:06 pm

See Kiwi's comment, LeeC, number 12 above.

231. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #279163 by j.mills on November 5, 2008 at 4:03 pm

Matt7895, I thought we all kind of 'agreed' that believing in a sky-fairy doesn't make you 'stupid'. We say 'deluded'. You know? Like 'vertically challenged'? :)

One bit that bugged me was the Rabbi claiming that free will couldn't come from genetics or environment. He's conflating character (from genetics, environment, introspection) and free will (one for the philosophers, whether you're religious or not).

232. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #279157 by j.mills on November 5, 2008 at 3:55 pm

I watched it on this link: http://www.thejewishweek.com/

Be aware that the first 11 minutes are introductory pablum, and that the video breaks up here and there, sometimes quite comically.

It's an okay debate, the Rabbi's not stupid. But even in a 90-minute discussion, so many things get smuggled past that demand their own scrutiny - leaving us to pick over the bones in our quiet corner of the web.

233. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278786 by j.mills on November 5, 2008 at 7:35 am

zeroangel said:

RD is dead on here.

I can't be the only person who found that phrasing startling... He means "dead-on", folks! :)

A pro pos of nothing: apparently the Irish Catholics' domain name was bought up by some atheists, who left this video. It's well funny, treat yourself to a click:

http://www.catholic.ie/

234. Paddy Power offers odds of 4-1 that God exists

Comment #278777 by j.mills on November 5, 2008 at 7:12 am

Speaking of religion in Ireland, an atheist bus donor left the following note:

The catholics forgot to renew their domain name and it was bought by atheists: www.catholic.ie (great video).

He's right, it's a great video! You owe it to yourself to click. :)

235. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278770 by j.mills on November 5, 2008 at 6:46 am

Much as you are a cartomancer, Cartomancer, I thought the Richard Amerike idea had been disposed of by now.

236. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278767 by j.mills on November 5, 2008 at 6:38 am

Then George Bush would be saying "God bless Mohammed".

Surely it would be, "Wotan bless Vinland"?

Or, "Coyote bless Turtle Island"?

237. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278549 by j.mills on November 4, 2008 at 9:30 pm

G'night, folks. I go to bed happy. :)

238. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278539 by j.mills on November 4, 2008 at 9:23 pm

We don't have anyone in the UK who can orate with such conviction - we're all too small and cynical I guess! :)

239. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278530 by j.mills on November 4, 2008 at 9:18 pm

Marvellous stuff! Glad I stayed up for that self-assured speech. That's what I call a president! Who wrote that, Aaron Sorkin? Great seeing the hope on the faces in the crowd.

240. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278503 by j.mills on November 4, 2008 at 8:49 pm

Hilarious interview with Gore Vidal on the Beeb just now. Dimbleby all at sea!

241. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278476 by j.mills on November 4, 2008 at 8:29 pm

Gracious speech by McCain, credit where due.

242. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278449 by j.mills on November 4, 2008 at 8:09 pm

Fab. I feel like we've come out of a tunnel! Now I can go to bed... Nice to spend the night with you, folks! :)

243. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278440 by j.mills on November 4, 2008 at 7:28 pm

Gotta love this bumbling BBC coverage. "Let's go now to - oh, they're not there..." People talking over each other or staring blankly at the camera... Dimbleby has already referred to North Hampshire and forgotten which state he's in! Great amateurish stuff, and very British. :)

244. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278426 by j.mills on November 4, 2008 at 6:47 pm

LeeC: I think they call based on exit polls, whose accuracy will have been calibrated in previous elections. But you're right, it's technically possible that this could all go belly-up...

245. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278423 by j.mills on November 4, 2008 at 6:42 pm

Looking good for Senate and Congress too. Is it normal for all 3 to be in the hands of one party? Obama could do anything with that power! (Politics being what it is, I expect he'll manage to disappoint...)

246. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278418 by j.mills on November 4, 2008 at 6:38 pm

And any candidate that worries Rupert Murdoch can't be all bad! :)

247. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278412 by j.mills on November 4, 2008 at 6:24 pm

OOOOOOOHIOOOOO!!!

248. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278396 by j.mills on November 4, 2008 at 5:52 pm

What's with the bizarre environment the Beeb have built for Jeremy Vine to play in? Bit bloomin' OTT.

249. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278394 by j.mills on November 4, 2008 at 5:49 pm

Sheesh! Can we pleeease stop talking up war between the US and China? Are things not bad enough for ya?!