Comments by MaxD

301. Richard Dawkins discusses Einstein's new letters

Comment #179886 by MaxD on May 13, 2008 at 11:52 pm

MindRebel,
I think that you could in no way call him a deist either. Perhaps a pantheist but it is clear that whatever stuff Spinoza's God (the only God Einstein even seems to have fancied) is, it is not the kind of Godstuff the religious tend to like, endorse or even tolerate very well.

302. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #179883 by MaxD on May 13, 2008 at 11:37 pm

Excellent jayalenik. I will certainly keep that foremost in my mind when I address posts to you. It won't stop me posting, but it will help me to remember that you might be a bit of a tosswad on the return.

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

Comment #179881 by MaxD on May 13, 2008 at 11:27 pm

I don't think the Vatican's chief astronomer has really thought this through. I cannot wait to hear Pop Benedict to loose some theological effluent on this matter.

304. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #179878 by MaxD on May 13, 2008 at 11:19 pm

Hopefully you won't think me too flip in my comment. I've been puzzling over our policy on these matters myself. I mean I have a friend who said he watched a woman get stoned to death while he was stationed over there. This seems counter intuitive to me in the extreme.

305. Debate between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox

Comment #179866 by MaxD on May 13, 2008 at 10:50 pm

Oh shit! Sorry I didn't even notice the ancientness of the last post. Oh well.

306. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #179856 by MaxD on May 13, 2008 at 10:11 pm

SSG Davis,
I suppose a little .223 buys a lot of influence in such situations!

307. Debate between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox

Comment #179852 by MaxD on May 13, 2008 at 9:57 pm

Dianelos Georgoudis,
You said:

Agreed, even though I wouldn't so much say "burden of proof" but "burden of justification". For example I cannot prove the proposition "No teapot is orbiting the Sun" but I can justify my belief in that proposition. In any case I have assumed the burden of justifying my claim that idealistic theism works much better than naturalism as a description of objective reality.

You sir don't get it. And that is too bad because you are spending so much of your precious time, and energy on a silly exercise. You have illustrated perfectly why you should feel free to disregard the teapot hypothesis because it violates the probable based on what we know about teapots, china integrity and the general location of such things as they. Until actual proof of the tea pot comes along there is no reason to accept the claim.

This burden of justification is easily the dumbest thing I've ever heard. For one thing it is relative, your justification is an excuse for me to fake sneeze while sneaking out the word bullshit. It is certainly no reason whatsoever for anyone to take the claim, "idealistic theism works much better than naturalism as a description of objective reality" seriously. For such a positive claim requires positive evidence to justify the adoption of new explanatory apparatus. That brings us back, I am afraid, to the pesky burden of proof, that I regret to inform you still rests on your shoulders.

Now if what you meant was something like, "well for me, I think that pheneomna x justifies a belief in deities...uh...for me I mean." Well then good for you. Of course that would useless but whatever floats your boat.

308. God seekers go public

Comment #179846 by MaxD on May 13, 2008 at 9:37 pm

They are a crafty lot these creationist idiots. I've noticed that some of silly ID/creationist visitors are starting to try to co=opt the phrases we use. Artful Dodger, or was it seeker of truth, or no I think it was another one, anyway they tried to use "naturedidit" as if it were the same baseless class of explanation (s)he and his/her ilk are so fond of formulating.

These folk may be untutored in the ways of science but they can be crafty and ruthless in their appeals to uneducated, thoughtless credulity. I worry that we scientists and rationalists and humdrum realitists are not up to the challenge of taking it to these liars. I think Krauss's science debate is a step in the right direction. But these guys have more political muscle than I like to think about.

309. God seekers go public

Comment #179819 by MaxD on May 13, 2008 at 8:13 pm

Diacanu,
I think that is a fair assessment of the formation of our anti-intellectual soil.

310. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #179809 by MaxD on May 13, 2008 at 7:51 pm

jayalenik,
In such venues as these punctuation is actually important. It can help us tell when you are joking, putting together connected thoughts and ideas as well as convey tone. We all understand that nobody posts perfectly every time but a little more effort on your part would only add to the clarity of any dialogue in which you are engaged.

311. The Neural Buddhists

Comment #179623 by MaxD on May 13, 2008 at 12:51 pm

We do indeed. But I can't think of them at the moment either.

312. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #179621 by MaxD on May 13, 2008 at 12:50 pm

Annabanana,
Clearly we were all joking.

Smelly hippie!

Meatheads must stick together

:-) Now if only I had an actual emoticon.

313. The Neural Buddhists

Comment #179617 by MaxD on May 13, 2008 at 12:43 pm

Mysticism and science are joining hands? What a goofy essay.

314. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #179607 by MaxD on May 13, 2008 at 12:29 pm

Smelly hippie!
Meathead
And I thought this was a den of harmony. But alas...: )

315. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #179596 by MaxD on May 13, 2008 at 12:21 pm

I think I just detected a bit of rudeness of attitude toward the lifting of excessive weight coming from the direction of one Annabanana.

316. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #179585 by MaxD on May 13, 2008 at 12:15 pm

While you guys are doing an Ironman triatholon, I will content myself with my normal workouts and then I will, in your honor, watch Marvel Comics latest movie masterpiece of the same name.

317. God seekers go public

Comment #179575 by MaxD on May 13, 2008 at 12:10 pm

Frankus,
I think this is why they are always hankering after proof. Their faith is never, ever enough. This has likely always been so, but in days past it was easier to manufacture the religious miracle (though your Benny Hinn example shows the credulous will still flock to such charlatans). In the modern era the only way to shore up such obviously infantile beliefs is to hope that they will be verified by science.

As I said, faith just isn't enough, and the truly religious don't want to depend on it. Why? Because religion, contrary to what Pascal suggested, is actually an expensive commitment. Who wants to donate time, money and the forfeiture of perfectly harmless experiences on a highly improbably maybe?

318. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #179566 by MaxD on May 13, 2008 at 12:00 pm

Riandouglas, Annabanana!
That ain't excersizin'

That's fancy movin about!

Kidding of course.
Triatholons and biking are quite cool.

319. God seekers go public

Comment #179561 by MaxD on May 13, 2008 at 11:55 am

What is such bullshit is this looking for things to shore up the conclusion they've arrived at in absence of the facts.

I think PhilRimmer's axiomatic, "When you go looking for God you will find God, better to just go looking" is appropriate here.

They are "designed for developing and testing the case for Intelligent Design." (emphasis added) That sounds nothing like science. The testing part seems good and where it all should start. They want to claim to have an established theory, when all they have are exploded hypotheses.

This religious campaign to insinuate their pet theology into science classrooms continues to sicken. And its ability to do this seems, like the expansion of our universe, to be accelerating!

320. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #179550 by MaxD on May 13, 2008 at 11:45 am

Annabanana said it most clearly when she complained about a certain someone's lack of punctuation.

Just to bring it back to bench pressing, I am a bit miffed that Al and I have the same bench press max. Call it my competitve nature.

I weigh 225 though, so I will still claim victory as Al does outweigh me, if memory serves.

321. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #179209 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 9:55 pm

I think he is what passes for a moderate in Britain.
Of course this kind of behavior is inhuman. But that is what happens when you have a mental malfunction like religion pulling your levers.

322. Americans pray at the pump for cheaper petrol

Comment #179208 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 9:52 pm

Quill,
Do you really need to ask that particular question?
Did they vote for Bush?
They think prayer works.....
I bet the answer is yes.

323. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #179201 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 9:30 pm

Goldy,
I failed to mention the place I was refering to when I mentioned the gang rape of the girl for the "offence" of sitting in a car with an unrelated male. It was in Saudi Arabia.
Here is how that turned out.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7096814.stm

324. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #179198 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 9:23 pm

Goldy,

You are picking abnormal situations and colouring it to fit a stereotype.

I am not. I hope you are right. You want to focus on a mother's poignant reaction to the brutal murder of her daughter. I too hope it is a sign things a larger sentiment.

I will use as counter-example the more or less dishonest moderate Muslim man who did not want to answer Dawkin's question about the penalty for apostacy in Islam. I hold this example in my mind to give me pause.

325. The Stupidity of Dignity

Comment #179192 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 9:10 pm

Adonais,
It seems that the mistake goes deeper than that, because Bobby G also collapses one of his dignities into autonomy, the concept Pinker thought more important for forming a serious bioethics upon.

326. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #179171 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 8:17 pm

Goldy,
I think you are maybe a bit off base when you say,

They do not think the same as normal people - the mother's reaction is proof enough for me that this is a rather extreme view and not one the Islamic, and indeed Arab, world would totally agree with.

I think you ought to go back to the article and re-read the parts where the police let the guy go after commending him for jobs well done and all that.

Or maybe you should read up on the joys Afghan women face should they be stupid enough to be progressive and want an education. Or maybe there is the incident where that gang of muslim men gang raped a girl for having the temerity to sit in a car with a male.

While many muslims in say Britain and the US are quite progressive, many, altogether too many are not. And even if they wouldn't beat and kill and stab their own children they would make other strange, ancient demands of obdience to ancient codes of conduct.

327. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #179122 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 5:36 pm

KaiserKriss,

The worst thing Bush and Blair did was to invade Iraq on false pretenses, just because they had a hate on for Saddam. Instead they should have tried to repair relations, encourage commerce and education to build up the country to act as another example for other Muslim countries that religious fanaticism self defeating in the long run.

I don't think there was any way to normalize relations with Saddam. He himself fought any normalizing measures.

328. The Stupidity of Dignity

Comment #179121 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 5:27 pm

Double Bass Atheist,
Did you see the poster for expelled?
It said "Big Science wants to blah blah blah." I would draw your attention to the phrase big science. I laughed out loud while I was standing in line to see Iron Man when I saw that line.
Big Science Ben Stein in his school boy outfit, and his idiot smirk. I wondered if that smirk is because he knows the trick he is about to pull on American audiences.

Stein is another neocon voice that would have the universities discredited in a big way simply because that is where much of what is called liberal criticism is born. Science is of course a huge villain to the neo-con movement, but so is serious art, and literature.

EDIT: I think Dairy Queen, that most insidious, and debauched of American institutions is now my very favorite eatery.

329. The Stupidity of Dignity

Comment #179103 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 2:49 pm

BW022,
You make an excellent point but you miss one as well, or at least you seem too. This kind of bullshit is hindering actual research that the US is more or less well suited to be undertaking. As such it is not an overstatement to say such policies are reducing the quality of life and the life expectancies of millions.

This kind of theostupidity has been instrumental in the application of pressure for abstinence only sex education, and against the wider distribution of the HPV vaccine. The concerns of men and women like Kass have insured that more women will contract HPV and that teen sexual activity will, when it occurs, more reckless than if they'd had more comprehensive sex ed.
Those are just two examples.

330. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #179100 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 2:39 pm

Calilasseia,
Another excellent post, in a sea of them. I'm unsure how it is possible that txpiper can really avoid the arguments put forth by you, the reverend dark and many other's besides. I'm also unsure how it is that txpiper can be so deluded as to the history of his own pseudo-science of creationism.

He said,

I don't know of anyone who resists the idea of speciation, or microevolution, adaptation and selection for that matter. These are all indisputable.

His own side in this debate for years said such things specifically did not happen and had never been proven. Before that, it was where are the transitional species (this charge can still be heard and I think even txpiper has issued a species of the charge). And doesn't this admission that adaptation, selection and yes even speciation are legitamate natural processes do in his claim elsewhere that things are in woeful decline? Me thinks txpiper might want to better think through his biological hypotheses.

331. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #179033 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 12:18 pm

I guess I am at least happy that Muhammed was less speciest than I had orignally supposed. He would have likely tried to share his revelation with Homo erectus, habilis and Homo neanderthalensis and while the message is still utterly stupid, that generosity must be commmended.

332. Evolution: What is 'Natural'?

Comment #179028 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 12:10 pm

It was disgusting, you say true, I say thank ye. To quote a favorite book of mine.

333. Evolution: What is 'Natural'?

Comment #179024 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 12:03 pm

Mphil,
What I remember from Baby Bible Bashers wasn't the spiritual depth of the little preachers it was their child's desire to get approval from their parents and the way the parents almost don't even acknowledge their existence apart from the God context-or worse yet the money earning context.

334. The Stupidity of Dignity

Comment #179021 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 12:00 pm

Robert Maynard,
This we seem to be doing even as we speak. For a little while anyway.
If you look in any gym in any town in the US you will find people looking better and younger than they would have just 10 years ago. Athletes seem to be pushing their competitive years further in sports that are notoriciously rough on older atheletes. Randy Couture, Chuck Liddell are both old men who really ought not be doing as well as they do in combative sports.

335. Evolution: What is 'Natural'?

Comment #179018 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 11:57 am

Damnit MPHil did beat me to it.

336. Evolution: What is 'Natural'?

Comment #179017 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 11:56 am

Artful Dodger,
Would say then that the born again experiences of Jesus Camp are good or bad? Would you agree with the tactics of such evangelicals?

337. The Stupidity of Dignity

Comment #179013 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 11:52 am

Kass is a moron and his ice cream pontifications are proof of this sad fact.

There are those of the this is not my God bent who say Dawkins, Hitch, Harris, Dennett are not speaking to them or the millions who have a more reasoned faith. However I keep telling such people they are in the tender minority of religious apologists.

Doesn't this lend some more weight to the argument made most clearly by Hitch and Dawkins I think that embedded in much of Christian theology is a tendency to totalitarian ideology?

338. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #178967 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 10:24 am

I heard a lot of thunder this week. TOCT, do you suspect this is part of the endtimes?

339. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #178964 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 10:17 am

Diacanu,
You make an excellent point about Rapturitis. This escatology business is one of the most intellectually vapid of pursuits it has been my unhappy experience to encounter.

I mean never has more ink, processing time or human effort been squandered then in the goofy arcana of Endtimes prophecying, and analyses thereof. It has all the precision and meaning of Astrology but without the feel good goofyness, or the superficial appreciation of the stars.

340. Evolution: What is 'Natural'?

Comment #178862 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 6:59 am

Artful Dodger,
There doesn't need to be a referee, only a series of contingent choices, if x then y, or b or what ever. You will note that human interactions while not predictable in fine details is predictable in large scale trends. People are nicer to family and nicer and more generous the more closely related they are. People tend to be nicer to members of communities than to members outside that community especially if those community members are suitably placed to return favors.

Remarried parents tend to treat their biological kids better than they treat there step children, any new children produced by the new couple will be treated better by the mother than any of her biological progeny from the previous marriage or relationship. That is a mother will treat the kid from her new husband better than the kid from the old pairing. (Better can simply mean, more diligent care, more doctor visits, more doting, more toys, etc)

This all falls in line with standard Darwinian reasoning and logic. How is any of it predicted by desert theology?

341. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #178855 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 6:42 am

Txpiperoferranttunes spake unto the ether thusly,

Don't forget, I quoted them, and the quote represents the known statistical realities about mutations.

More untruth, either willful or born of ignorance. You will want to harken back a few posts to one of the definitive refutations of your nonsense by Calissiea (sorry about the mangled spelling of the moniker) who demonstrated that you actually ingnored what the statitistics say about mutation.

But enough of this. The neo-darwinian synthesis is the very best explanation we have for evolution. It is supported by the mass of evidence, and makes predictions, postdictions, that have thus far been correct. But maybe it is a case like Newtonian gravity and close but not quite the real picture. Maybe it is actually ripe for a toppling.

If you have the solution, and indeed you think you do then propose it, mass your evidence and see how well it stands up. Publish your master work collect your prizes and we can get on talking about the new fucking paradigm. Please expand the human range of knowledge or do quit wasting time, and space with your uneducated meanderings.

342. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #178849 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 6:33 am

riandouglas,
I don't think it is that kind of relationship.
Though I could be wrong.

343. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #178848 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 6:31 am

Did anyone find it just the tiniest bit condescending when Txpiper addressed all those errant geologists thusly,
"and you geologists have....blah, blah, blah."

Listening to him, you'd think txpipey was the world's preemminent polymath or something, and not the quote-mining, cut and paste fraud he actually happens to be.

He couldn't even grasp why all those papers were about fish, african cichlids to boot. Allow me to reccommend a book that you won't read txpiper. The one will give you an excellent background on why those fish in particular are of such interest to evolutionary biologists.
The Cichild Fishes: Nature's Grand Experiment in Evolution by George W. Barlow.

344. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #178839 by MaxD on May 12, 2008 at 6:21 am

Mordicacious,
There are womens groups, in Afghanistan, Iran, and Iraq, they are not, however recieving enough support internationally. This is too bad as they essentially have targets pasted on them for their messages (often not all that unorthodox).
Why is that? Perhaps we should all look for ways to send aid to these groups?

345. Evolution: What is 'Natural'?

Comment #178655 by MaxD on May 11, 2008 at 8:46 pm

This is a brilliant little piece on nature and the philosophy that all that is natural is necessarily good.

346. Evolution: What is 'Natural'?

Comment #178652 by MaxD on May 11, 2008 at 8:32 pm

Croatcat,
He (W)is looking out for his. That makes evolutionary sense. It is the tragedy of the commons writ large.

347. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #178651 by MaxD on May 11, 2008 at 8:29 pm

Babrock,
I think we can see much of his motivation is driven by religious impulse by the manner in which he drones on about being willing to kill his sons, and the way they have terrorized the girl's mother.

I would also note that the affair was no such thing. It was a school girl crush. It was infact a thought crime she had the temerity to bring up. She had failed it would seem to have taken that step that would even lend a modicum of credence to the charge of dishonoring her family, or at least the males of it.

348. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #178646 by MaxD on May 11, 2008 at 8:19 pm

Uh Dragonfirematrix,
Do we really need to malign the Neanderthal?
I mean really?

349. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #178642 by MaxD on May 11, 2008 at 8:02 pm

righton,
Actually yes on the dog points. Though I think the limits are mostly strucual reproductive isolation but it would qualify, I think as isolation, and thus in wild systems warrant different specific epithets.

350. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #178640 by MaxD on May 11, 2008 at 7:55 pm

Txpiper said of his/her tendency to quote mine:

I don't see context as an issue.

I think you have said really all that needed to be said about and to you. If you cannot deal with the material you cite honestly, and examine it honestly then you aren't really up for an honest examination of the issue are you?

Here you grace us with a dozy of close reasoning.

I don't buy the "quote mining" accusation. This is just a tactic that had to be developed on account of embarrassing things written by evolutionary writers/theorists. Context is rarely an issue (though I would not disagree that there have been occasional abuses, and I would not excuse those). More often, it is simply about someone publishing some candid observation or admission which in and of itself does not support some point of evolutionary theory.

This I think is an example of you, again, not being honest. Darwin, Gould, Sagan, Dawkins and many others have been, and continue to be deliberately misquoted and the context is almost always important. In fact I've yet to see a quote in which the context was unimportant.

My first exposure this kind of thing was a WatchTower tract that quoted Darwin as saying that they vertebrate eye seemed to defy his explaination. It pulled this quote out of larger paragraph that explained his own rationale for seeing the eye as well within the purview of evolution by natural selection. Since that first exposure, I've seen it done to all the thinkers I've just named, and many I have not named.

You think that it is fine to ignore what an author is actually saying. This means to me you simply haven't figured out a way to wiggle free of it. That is a species of bullshit I think.