251. No credit for creationism

Comment #235225 by J Mac on August 22, 2008 at 3:17 pm

"Why, the evidence is all around you! It's in the complexity and intricate balances of nature!"

That is not a statement of evidence, it is a statement that evidence does exist. If the evidence did exist it should be easy to say what it was. What predictions did ID make that were confirmed?

Don't say that evidence does exist, don't say what the evidence is "in," say what the evidence actually is. Present the case.

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

Comment #235223 by J Mac on August 22, 2008 at 3:14 pm

Fanusi,

Those are all simplistic examples you give. How can you say what is "pro-life" in the cases of... oooh say abortion?

Is the pro-life side of that debate actually pro-life? Who's life? It's easy when there is only one person involved. But ethics is a matter of determining what is right and wrong when there are people with differing goals involved.

If both me and the person next to me need the resource that sits between us in order to life what is the morally right action? The action that is "pro-life" as you say, but whose life?

253. No credit for creationism

Comment #235164 by J Mac on August 22, 2008 at 1:40 pm

"Just like there is "no evidence" for the geocentric theory of the solar system."

Of course there is. Observations of the sun rising and setting at predictable times. Geocentrism made some predictions which were confirmed. Of course it failed to explain other things, and thats when it was replaced. But there was SOME evidence for it.

What predictions has ID made that have been confirmed?

254. No credit for creationism

Comment #235144 by J Mac on August 22, 2008 at 1:25 pm

Jesus Jesus!

Stop quibbling about the definition of evidence or how much is needed to establish something as a theory. In the case of ID there is ZERO evidence. I have posed the challenge several times, what are the predictions of ID and what could be used as evidence for ID? You still refuse to respond.

No matter what our standard for the quantity of evidence required if there is NO evidence it is not a theory.

255. Judge says UC can deny class credit to Christian school students

Comment #235131 by J Mac on August 22, 2008 at 1:05 pm

"There does not seem to be a spirit of compromise"

You're right truth is taught, there is no compromise with falsehood.

What are your views on Faith?
You must define faith before I can answer, but by most definitions I'd say it is a foolish and dangerous idea.
Do you seek to eliminate hope that people gain from religion(s)?
No. I'd like to eliminate the LIMITING of hope that religion creates. Please watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Ai-VvboPnA
If there is no God, how do you explain the unexplainable?
Explain the unexplainable? I don't. If it could be explained it would not be unexplainable!
Do you believe in magic at all or science is a ruling factor in how you live your life?
My answer to this would be similar to faith. If you define "magic" we can discuss it. But by most common definitions "magic" is utter crap and only subscribed to by people who are delusional.

256. Judge says UC can deny class credit to Christian school students

Comment #235082 by J Mac on August 22, 2008 at 12:02 pm

"This is only fair."

Which religions?

Should we teach about Zeus when discussing meteorology?

Should we have equal time for flat earth theories in geography?

Should we teach geocentrism in astronomy?

Should we teach astrology?

Should children learn about how the flying spaghetti monster created all life and is waiting for us by the beer volcano and stripper factories in paradise?

"What harm is faith if it enables them to live more comfortably?"

There is no harm, as long as your faith does not say what science teaches is wrong. THEN there is harm.

257. Judge says UC can deny class credit to Christian school students

Comment #235064 by J Mac on August 22, 2008 at 11:51 am

Should we not teach gravity as it is only a theory? Should we encourage children to walk of cliffs and have faith?

I don't wish to be rude, but if you are uncertain about evolution then you are displaying precisely what is wrong with this sort of "scientific" education.

Students can be taught whatever they like about religion, purpose, ultimate origins and so forth. But if you teach a student that evolution is not true then you are wrong and their education is flawed.

I am not prepared to go into detail on the evidence for evolution. There are entire libraries which could be devoted to this. But I will respectfully say that your rejection of it is what is different between you and the other posters on this thread. Evolution is fact, if teach children to deny it you are robbing them of an education.

258. Why Dawkins is right and his critics are wrong

Comment #235047 by J Mac on August 22, 2008 at 11:38 am

"Heck, i've lost my last 3 girlfriends because of my "beliefs"/raised consciousness."

There's an interesting topic. DS Wilson presents religion as a means of in-group identification or a sign of loyalty to a group.

Women, more so than men, are concerned with their partners loyalty. So from a female perspective rejecting or even questioning faith in a god can be cause for concern. Men who passionately and devotedly follow their faith can be displaying characteristics which are attractive to women.

259. Judge says UC can deny class credit to Christian school students

Comment #235039 by J Mac on August 22, 2008 at 11:30 am

But humor can go a long way :op

I did not address this seriously as I am otherwise occupied while I am keeping an eye on comments and I figured someone else would quickly respond to your post.

But on a serious side, a school CAN teach whatever they wish as long as they teach the facts of evolution. If they taught students that newton believed in gravity but gravity wasn't the only theory and might not be true, well then the universities would have reason to be concerned would they not?

If a school teaches falsehoods in a science class their curriculum should be criticized.

If they wish to teach religion in a religion class that would be wonderful. But teaching children that the truths of the universe are not true is a problem.

260. Judge says UC can deny class credit to Christian school students

Comment #235034 by J Mac on August 22, 2008 at 11:22 am

"duel teaching of creationism/science."

There has yet to be a more correct typo.

There should not be dual teaching. But I'm all for a duel.

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

Comment #235002 by J Mac on August 22, 2008 at 10:58 am

Ha,

I suppose it could be another name for elbow macaroni.

But it's short for my name.

-Jesse M.

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

Comment #234998 by J Mac on August 22, 2008 at 10:50 am

Aw crap. I just realized I better clarify my own post before Fanusi, or another intelligent supporter of objective morals tears it apart:

If everyone realizes that there are different options we can open discussion into exploring which one is best.

263. Pastor Michael Guglielmucci spun gospel of lies

Comment #234936 by J Mac on August 22, 2008 at 9:18 am

Agreed #2.

What's new? He's a pastor who spewed a pack of lies to make money. Nothing new here.

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

Comment #234926 by J Mac on August 22, 2008 at 8:48 am

Fanusi, you continue to create false dichotomies:

"But doesn morality, by it's very nature, have to be absolute?"

No, absolutely not. :o)

As an aside what you scornfully call moral relativism is not the only option to an absolute objective morality.

You can defend your views on morality, I'd be disappointed if you didn't. And while I see absolute morality as dangerous it is not my current purpose to try to convince you of that. What I'd like you to realize is that there ARE other systems of morality other than the one you choose.

If everyone realizes that there are different options we can open discussion into exploring which one is best. If you remain in denial that any moral system other than your absolute system can exist then there is no purpose in discussing morality.

265. US school district sued over homophobic 'witch hunt'

Comment #234924 by J Mac on August 22, 2008 at 8:42 am

"[America's] knuckle-draggers are there in numbers where they can set the agenda"

They're elected to offices of, ooh, say, the president.

266. Supernatural science: Why we want to believe

Comment #234664 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 9:01 pm

HA... The best part of that I think is:

"put the mouse into several zip-lock bags"

I suspect now that you mean they used multiple layers, but upon first reading I had the image of one mouse being partitioned into many bags.

267. A flea we missed?

Comment #234659 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 8:55 pm

"Private school" What a euphemism. There's no privacy in a private school. Everyone knows everyone and everything they've done.

I remember at my school when they found a cigarette butt outside the school doors. They shut the whole place down like it was the end of the world. We all got interrogated.

268. Supernatural science: Why we want to believe

Comment #234656 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 8:51 pm

"Road kill cat in NZ generally have a collar and a wee tag so you can post the flattened remains back."

What a crappy way to start the day. I get all excited when I get mail that is hand addressed and not junk mail. So I'd get all excited just to tear it open and see....

269. Supernatural science: Why we want to believe

Comment #234645 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 8:37 pm

Opposum cat-like .... yeah, sounded strange to me, but they can be around the same size as a cat.

Road killed cat and Road killed opposum could be hard to tell apart.

I'm just not sure how a mixture of human and opposum parts got confused with BigFoot.

270. A flea we missed?

Comment #234636 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 8:15 pm

"J Mac, go and get f$(#($d! "

I would, but I just moved here, I'm not sure which street corners have the best deals yet.

271. A flea we missed?

Comment #234631 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 8:09 pm

Ha, I'm glad someone else sees this. I could care less about TWP and I'm not defending HER. I just think its a childish sign of weak-minds to only criticize someone when they are gone.

If anyone has a criticism of me don't be a coward, tell ME. Don't wait until I leave then tell everyone else.

272. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #234605 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 6:54 pm

"You may as well say let's fight a battle against love or hate. We have evolved to love and hate because it makes us "fit" the environment in which we find ourselves. Love and hate make us behave in irrational ways all the time so I guess religious beliefs or superstitions will do the same."

We have evolved to rape and murder, so should we quit punishing people who do?

This screams naturalistic fallacy through the entire post.

Why have schools? Why have hospitals? If we are helpless to change anything.

273. Supernatural science: Why we want to believe

Comment #234601 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 6:16 pm

"People who practice religion are typically encouraged not to believe in the paranormal"

Perhaps the human mind can only hold so many foolish beliefs. Once you pack a whole religion in there there really isn't room for big foot.

274. US school district sued over homophobic 'witch hunt'

Comment #234598 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 6:11 pm

Its ok for the principal to sexually assault female students, but its not ok for female students to be attracted to other female students.

I think lonely dave is just mad that there is a woman who doesn't like men, it lowers his odds.

275. Free Will vs. the Programmed Brain

Comment #234597 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 6:08 pm

"For myself - my biggest question is whether it is even possible, or sensical, for fundamental randomness to exist - as required by certain interpretations of QM. Personally - I hold out for a TOE which binds out indeterminism altogether - and which locks the universe into a perfectly deterministic existence. "

I agree with all that. But this "randomness" is only inherent in some interpretations of QM, while many other interpretations are completely deterministic.

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

Comment #234578 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 4:07 pm

Fanusi,

Do you suffer from dyslexia? There is a clear difference between "no absolute morals" and "absolutely no morals". Read them slowly to yourself and think it over.

Claiming that someone who doesn't agree precisely with YOUR moral system does not mean they don't have one of their own.

277. US school district sued over homophobic 'witch hunt'

Comment #234485 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 12:33 pm

"The other problem is that you just know theists like Robertson will use comments like this to show how nasty RD.net is. "

That's a fair concern, but I don't think it should go un-investigated.

Just because people like Robertson will quote-mine and cherry pick to make this site look bad does not mean we should pander to his wishes. Nor does it mean that he will fail to misquote and misrepresent people here even if everyone were perfect little angels.

I don't hold Robertson accountable for the foolish and hateful things said by other theists. I hold Robertson accountable for his own foolish statements.

If the reputation of this site in the eyes of people like Robertson is a concern to the site admins or a majority of this community then perhaps I should not come here, as I will not pander to him, nor will I walk on eggshells to make sure atheists can "look good" in the eyes of theists.

I do think we must be careful to live up to a worthy moral standard, but I feel no responsibility to live up to the theists twisted moral standard.

278. Scientists Create Blood From Stem Cells

Comment #234477 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 12:15 pm

Ahh, thanks. I was actually curious. I doubt that the statement is true, now having those references I can go check it out.

279. US school district sued over homophobic 'witch hunt'

Comment #234475 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 12:13 pm

So if someone says "I hope he gets hit by an asteroid" do you really believe that the person saying that is going to go build a machine to attract asteroids to the earth?!

If christians sit around with each other saying "gee I hope RD gets hit by a van." Thats there own business. Sending a letter to him saying that is quite different. Anyone who cannot recognize the difference between venting about a bigoted fool such as davis and sending actual death threats is severely disturbed.

What's next, are we to be convicted of thought crimes. If I happen to imagine a van running over davis and I get a giggle out of it will the telepathic police come arrest me.

280. Free Will vs. the Programmed Brain

Comment #234468 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 12:07 pm

I'm done playing with the troll. Your a moron, spew whatever nonsense you like.

281. Free Will vs. the Programmed Brain

Comment #234467 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 12:06 pm

HA, nice misquoting of me.

I never concluded such things, I said it would be worth testing those things.

You make assumptions based on the subjects "feelings" and their "moral responsibility."

I praised the article for not doing that. It presented the fact that the experimental group cheated on the space bar press more than the control group. That is good science. Going from that to assuming an explanation about feelings and moral responsibilities is just nonsense.

As far as your accusation of argumentum ad populum you clearly don't know what that means.

I never said that free will doesn't exist because most people here don't believe it exists. I was responding to your assertion that a lack of belief in free will causes people to be immoral. If that were true than a majority of the people commenting on this thread would be immoral, because most commenters here do not believe in free will. Therefore either your assumption is wrong, or a majority of people here are immoral.

And burden of proof.... ok, read the article. The experimental group DID cheat more than the control group. That was an observation. I don't need to prove it.

282. US school district sued over homophobic 'witch hunt'

Comment #234453 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 11:42 am

"I've a good mind to flag that as offensive."

Even if it wasn't a reference to the letter read in the film, is that really something that warrants being flagged as offensive?

Damn. Is there a way to check how many flags someone has, because if that's all it takes I'm quite sure a majority of my posts have been flagged.

I don't feel any need to be respectful of someone as dimwitted and bigoted as this Davis fellow.

283. Free Will vs. the Programmed Brain

Comment #234450 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 11:35 am

Why is my explanation more parsimonious, oh perhaps because it is not making assumptions about things for which there is no evidence. Look it up asshole.

284. Free Will vs. the Programmed Brain

Comment #234440 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 11:08 am

"I'm just saying that it makes no sense to unequivocally reject it for no reason like you did."

I didn't unequivocally reject anything except your ability to read. I proposed a follow up experiment that would clarify the issue. If you have a problem with such a follow up it must be for fear of having your faith questioned.

"there is NO evidence that the answer to the question: "Does a sense of moral responsibility deteriorate if one doesn't believe in free will?" is "No." "

Unless you think the vast majority of people commenting on this thread are morally irresponsible then yes there is such evidence.

285. US school district sued over homophobic 'witch hunt'

Comment #234421 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 10:29 am

Here's a curiosity.... This article was in the New Zealand Herald?

Is too much of the american media influenced by the fundies to publish this?

286. Free Will vs. the Programmed Brain

Comment #234412 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 10:20 am

"Apparently: people will feel they have less moral responsibility."

This experiment said nothing about anyone's feelings nor anything about moral responsibility.

287. Free Will vs. the Programmed Brain

Comment #234410 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 10:16 am

"What do you mean? I just explained. Your rejected the results of the experiment, and instead gave a (currently) unfalsifiable interpretation of it based on what you wanted to believe."

I didn't reject anything. The results of the experiment was that the experimental group cheated more than the control group. And I didn't reinterpret anything. I gave an alternate more parsimonious hypothesis to explain the observation than that which has been forwarded by people such as yourself.

"I was perfectly clear, and not particularly disrespectful. Why are you mad?"

You were disrespectful, you were unclear. Both of those are your prerogative of course. And I am not mad. I just think you are a senseless fuck. There's no reason for you to be mad about me thinking you're a senseless fuck is there?

288. US school district sued over homophobic 'witch hunt'

Comment #234409 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 10:12 am

Holy crap. I don't even know where to start with this one. When is Florida predicted to sink into the ocean? Not soon enough.

"gentle, peaceful, Christian, family-oriented community."

Oh yeah, you really proved that one.

289. Central Texas Man's Death Sentence Upheld Despite Bible In Jury Room

Comment #234401 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 10:07 am

I just reviewed that Fox news piece. And as usual fox news proved to be unbiased and present good data.... oh wait, today isn't opposite day?

The "conclusions" of this study were the cherry-picked results of other studies that had the most extreme numbers helpful to the pro-execution side.

"Many murderers are cold-blooded killers. They're called sociopaths. I wouldn't even care if the death penalty failed to deter crime. Some people just need to die. "
-I'm choking on the irony of that statement Aspy, it says more about you than it does about the criminal justice system.

290. Free Will vs. the Programmed Brain

Comment #234398 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 9:59 am

"I find your abundance of faith disturbing."

What do I have faith in from your perspective?

"Apparently: people will feel they have less moral responsibility."

That is an article of faith. There is not evidence for that. And this is precisely why I praised the article, they presented the work without drawing unwarranted conclusions as you just did.

I find your abundance of stupidity disturbing. Next time you insult my views take the time to elaborate the problem you see with them, or just fuck off.

291. Scientists Create Blood From Stem Cells

Comment #234387 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 9:35 am

Oops, did I say who made those estimates? Damn that was a typo. Should read:

Who made up those estimates?

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

Comment #234381 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 9:22 am

Wow, he can sure put the DIC in Dichotomy.

Why must it be an absolute moral standard or no morals at all?

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

Comment #234376 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 9:16 am

There are MANY good books available. I just thought of another of my favorites I haven't flipped through in a while: Robert Trivers "Social Evolution".

But anyhow, I better quit or I'll just sit here rambling off titles for a couple hours.

294. Natural 'Knowledge' and Natural 'Design'

Comment #234369 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 9:10 am

As I read these comments I get that funny knot in my stomach that always comes in the presence of a discussion about group-selection.

Thru, you touched on the answer to your own question: Why don't gazelle stand and fight? Who's gonna be the one gazelle dumb enough to try it first? And who will survive that confrontation, the one's who stay and fight or the ones who say screw-it and run away?

Humans aren't so different from gazelle. Look at school shootings. I think it was the Virginia Tech shooting where the gunman had to stop and reload several times. Rooms FULL of people, but NO ONE stood up to stop the gunman. In fact in reconstructing the events they found many people were sitting with their head in their hands essentially waiting their turn to get shot. They WAITED while the gunman reloaded! Now there is a recent push (by Dave Grossman among others) to train teachers and school faculty how to react in such situations. In the absence of training and practice most people just freeze, which is what has been happening at all the schools, they freeze and wait their turn.

In the absence of training and practice however, no one does ANYTHING to resist. If you were in the room as a gunman was going from one desk to the next shooting each person one by one would you be the first to stand up and fight him? We'd all like to think we would be, but the test has been done, no one stands up to fight. More significantly, if one person stood up to fight the gunman and you had an opportunity to choose to either run away or join the fight which would you do? Again we'd all like to think we'd help, but very few people would.

Gazelle are good at running, even if something did inspire one gazelle to stay and fight the genes predisposing them to that behavior would never get passed on.

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

Comment #234361 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 8:53 am

Mitch,

I'd second the recommendation of Matt Ridley's "The Red Queen." He's an amazing author who has made an extremely accessible book, yet even as a biologist I found myself learning much from it.

Oh, and *pats on ass* welcome to the cult.

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

Comment #234354 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 8:42 am

Noone in their right mind thinks it should be okay for a twelve year old girl to be engaging in sexual activity. There are names for this, and there are sound reasons why not.

297. Free Will vs. the Programmed Brain

Comment #234352 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 8:35 am

And they have plenty of mental energy to devote to these gymnastics as they aren't using their brains for anything else.

298. Pastor Rick's Test

Comment #234350 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 8:34 am

"Would flouting the spirit of the first amendment constitute grounds?"

How is participating in a debate flouting anything?

This thread is rather disturbing. The points I agree with is that it is disgraceful that the candidates refused the science debate, but they accepted this one. But there is nothing illegal or unconstitutional in it.

McCain has done a number of town hall meetings... How DARE he chose one town over another, what gives him the right? Thats a pretty absurd question.

If the candidates thought the science debate had as big of a facility and would draw as much of an audience they would be there.

People seem to have a problem with this interview with the candidates solely because the interviewer was christian and most of the audience was christian. Are we supposed to say that no christian is allowed to be involved in political discussions? THAT would be flouting the spirit of the first amendment.

Atheists need to get organized and get respected as a group to have political influence, it is childish to sit around crying about how christians have managed succeed where we have failed in organizing a lobby.

299. Scientists Create Blood From Stem Cells

Comment #234348 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 8:26 am

"Various estimates say that regulations have killed 3-10 times as many people as they've saved! "

Um, who made those estimates?

300. Free Will vs. the Programmed Brain

Comment #234346 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 8:21 am

"What is it about living creatures such as humans that could explain why we have free will?"

Before that question is even worth considering one would have o answer the question: What is it about living creatures such as humans that could justify the title of "living"?

Of those who believe in free will a vanishingly small few would attribute free will to rocks. There would have to be some cut-off, some line delineating free will. Do animals have free will? Do plants? Do fungi, bacteria, viruses?

We seem to have free will, though it is an illusion. In looking at the illusion though we seem to have more of it than some other animals, and all animals seem to have more of it that plants. Free-will is the same kind of illusion as consciousness and life itself. Biologists have come up with definitions of "life" to make it a useful word, but it only has meaning by an agreed upon convention shared by all involved in the discussion. Cognitive scientists and philosophers are now teasing out a working definition of "consciousness," so that even though it falls on a continuum we can still talk about it as a meaningful quality. The same can and should be done with "free will" in order to establish the common sense notion of responsibility.

Clearly "My brain made me do it" as mentioned previously is hardly an excuse. One is their brain, and if it is the brain that made them do it that is the same as saying they made themselves do it; they are responsible as it was their "will." Now, "My hormones made me do it," by similar logic one is their hormones, so it is by their own will the action was taken. One's own will can be defined as all factors which go into their decision making; understanding those factors does not change the fact that it still falls under their will.

People may find this odd as then how could their be any excuses. If someone ELSE put a gun to my head and made me do something am I still responsible? Was it my will, or theirs?

This draws an interesting parallel to Dawkins's The Extended Phenotype; now we have The Extended Will. The decision making factors of one organism (ie their "will") can have action at a distance, outside their own physical body, and at times in the bodies of other organisms. When a crime occurs the question of "who's will was it?" is still valid as we can address who's decision making machinery was a majority of the machinery that lead to the criminal act.