401. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #151073 by Dr Benway on March 28, 2008 at 5:51 am

Bonzai: ...like my brother, he doesn't believe in God, but he believes in ghosts; he thinks both evolution and creationism are wrong, perhaps he believe in aliens

If I were falsely accused of malpractice, would I want such a person on the jury? Hmm. I think not.

402. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #151071 by Dr Benway on March 28, 2008 at 5:40 am

Skeptigirl: Which scientists are ridiculed and banned for not treating evolution theory as dogma? That is a bold faced lie on its own merits.

That's not quite right.

I know a university physicist who does research on the sun. He believes the sun has much to do with global warming. He's said to me, "But you can't say these things aloud or they'll destroy you."

And it's true. Humans in groups are pack animals, particularly frightened humans. Stand up for an argument most your colleagues believe is daft and your credibility will take a hit.

That's not necessarily a bad thing, in my opinion. There's nothing stoping this fellow from doing a bit of broader self-education concerning atmospheric physics, and nothing wrong with keeping your mouth shut until you've become better informed. Saves everyone concerned a lot of time. But from his perspective, it feels like mob rule rather than the rule of evidence.

Larry Summers, president of Harvard, was forced to resign June 2006 after speculating aloud at a conference about innate differences between the sexes as a possible explanation for why there are so many more men than women in science and engineering. Now, politics at academic institutions can be fierce. As an outsider, I would guess there was more to the firing than the single incident. Nevertheless it does serve the argument that academic freedom ain't so free.

Fear is the enemy of rational discourse. Scientists can feel afraid just like everyone else. And so many will suppress their questions, and many will resent the fact that they have to do this, and some will feel sympathy with the premise of Expelled, perhaps more than we might like.

Oh, if we could forget partisan politics. If we could strip away the rhetoric and speak simply about our shared values. We need a reliable system for sifting evidence about the world. If public faith in the peer-review scientific establishment is undermined, we are all in huge trouble.

403. Expelled Overview

Comment #150973 by Dr Benway on March 27, 2008 at 9:02 pm

Even today no one is particularly enthusiastic about institutionalized retarded people having babies. But it's difficult to have a rational conversation about the problem, thanks to Hitler.

404. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #150971 by Dr Benway on March 27, 2008 at 8:49 pm

The self-reinforcing conservative Christian sub-culture is starved for content. Dreck that none of us could sit through actually can make a lot of money - e.g., "The Passion of the Christ."

The Expelled project targets that audience and plays to the lowest common denominator with its David vs. evil Goliath premise. It's like porn the whole family can enjoy. How can it not make money?

Richard Dawkins (TM) is merely a commodity to fill a niche. Shabby treatment goes with the assigned role. Nothing personal. Strictly business.

405. Wicked untruths from the Church

Comment #150935 by Dr Benway on March 27, 2008 at 5:21 pm

No, what he was actually calling for was for Catholic MPs to be able to vote following their conscience. And by conscience he meant Catholic church doctrine.

I don't understand your system in the UK. People vote for what they feel is best, no? If some church happens to agree with them, so what. It's their vote. If the constituents don't like it, well, boot the guy out next election.

406. Fleabytes

Comment #150925 by Dr Benway on March 27, 2008 at 4:44 pm

Guiness is a little too smokey for my tastes.

If you and/or your husband (or anyone else here from overseas) are ever in the UK, you have to be introduced to the delights of the Black Sheep brewery

I've had their Holy Grail, which is imported into the US. Quite tasty.

Sometimes people describe beers that sound interesting, but there's no US importer. I imagine you can't just have a case of booze sent overseas without some hassle. Perhaps I'll just have to arrange a vacation to Europe.

I once had a housemate who brewed a batch in a 5 gallon water bottle. I think he sent away for a kit. He poured it into old beer bottles, which he freshly capped. I was surpised at how wonderful it tasted.

407. Fleabytes

Comment #150901 by Dr Benway on March 27, 2008 at 2:32 pm

We've probably got a lot in common with China now, seeing how they managed to crawl up the butt of the US Defense Department computer network for the past several months.

408. Fleabytes

Comment #150888 by Dr Benway on March 27, 2008 at 2:08 pm

The problem with internet is, it isn't like Gas or Water or Electricity. Those utilities receive monopolies because building the infrastructure would be pointless without guaranteed future revenues.

It is much like those industries. The fibre optic cable itself is expensive. And an entirely new infrastructure of switching terminals must be installed. The network interface at the home is another expensive piece of equipment.

Perhaps similar to the XM-Sirius situation, competition doesn't make sense. We don't need a redundant satellite system, and we don't need a redundant fibre optic network. We need the economy and efficiency of a single, well managed system.

So Fairpoint surely is a sockpuppet.

409. Fleabytes

Comment #150874 by Dr Benway on March 27, 2008 at 1:44 pm

Al, it might be fun to talk to you about Verizon, which is selling off its land lines in New England to a tiny company called "Fairpoint." Utilities are strange beasts, as bad business decisions don't always suffer the usual market corrections.

Verizon is poised to make serious money once they sell video on demand over FIOS. But the cost of bringing fibre to the home is a couple thousand per install. They aren't going to recoup that for several years, and so they need a lot of cash, fast. Ergo, the sale.

But, Fairpoint can't actually afford the network, as far as I can tell. I wonder if they're a sockpuppet, an Enron-type trick, a way to move the liabilities of an aging copper network off the books for a few years. Then, when Fairpoint tanks, they buy the whole thing back cheap. Plus they've likely broken the IBEW in the meantime.

But maybe you haven't been following this, as you're on the otherside of the country from me.

410. Fleabytes

Comment #150854 by Dr Benway on March 27, 2008 at 1:26 pm

al-rawandi, I am in awe. I know nothing of money.

I have an aunt who was a broker, now comfortably retired. She talked my mom into some junk bonds in the 80s. Oops! A little family tension that has never died.

411. Fleabytes

Comment #150841 by Dr Benway on March 27, 2008 at 1:12 pm

al-rawandi: What great Canadian beers are there? We wash urinals with Molson. Mossehead is also used as a household cleaner.

I recommend La Fin Du Monde made by Unibroue. It's tasty, and it gives the best buzz of any beer I've ever had - a nice, expansive euphoria. I don't know how they do it, as it contains no crack as far as I can tell.

Unibroue was bought by a big corporation a couple of years ago, so I expect it will start to suck in the near future. Enjoy it while you can.

I'm often limited to what I can get at the supermarkets. Years ago I liked Newcastle. Now it seems a bit too flat. I don't mind Becks Dark or Bass Ale. My husband is a Guinness man.

412. Fleabytes

Comment #150608 by Dr Benway on March 27, 2008 at 7:02 am

Richard, if you were in fact simple, you could not pretend to be so.

You're too smart not to realize that one can try to approach a problem without prejudice, imagining the argument from one side and then the other. So when you take me to task for using the word "side" as though it contradicted my wish to avoid approaching the discussion as "we atheists," I know you're playing.

You lent me the right to play Simon Cowell earlier.

413. Fleabytes

Comment #150601 by Dr Benway on March 27, 2008 at 6:50 am

Oh yes, Richard. The nutters have become astonishingly well organized politically here. Look at Florida, which is about to pass an "education freedom" law which will allow creationism into the biology classroom.

Bonzai: Well the average believer probably doesn't read the Bible.

Quite right. They trust their pastors to do that for them. And their pastors reassure them that with a little study, it's obvious what the text means.

414. Fleabytes

Comment #150594 by Dr Benway on March 27, 2008 at 6:37 am

Well, as a born-again Christian, I was told that the Bible was an almost perfect record of God's message to mankind. My pastor admitted there were a few areas of dispute concerning trivial things. But the book as a whole was astonishingly accurate. Moses wrote the first 5 books, the apostles wrote most of the New Testament, etc.

In college I learned about the several writers of the pentateuch, each with a slightly different theological perspective - the Elohimist, the Yahwehist, etc. I was astonished. Why had I never heard of this before?

Just a little study of the Bible proves it to be a man-made document. They do talk about these things at seminaries. But the average believer hears very little about this.

Dr Benway : You say "I prefer to avoid approaching problems with an in-group/out-group mindset." then you go on to talk about "the believer"s side".

Don't be simple. You don't have to take sides to appreciate them both.

415. Fleabytes

Comment #150572 by Dr Benway on March 27, 2008 at 6:07 am

Then you talk about "escape routes" and "shaky presumptions" as if they concerned us, as atheists. Surely, having once decided that God doesn't exist, then interpreting what humans have said in his name is hardly our problem.

It is our problem politically. Anyone who claims to know how to read scripture accurately holds authority over us in their own minds and the minds of others whom they convince.

By raising everyone's consciousness regarding problems of interpretation, we undermine this spurious authority.

...as if they concerned us, as atheists.

Again, I prefer to avoid approaching problems with an in-group/out-group mindset. I start by imagining myself as a generic human considering propositions about God without prejudice. If I can see things from the believer's side, maybe I'll also understand how to move their thinking forward a notch.

416. Fleabytes

Comment #150560 by Dr Benway on March 27, 2008 at 5:30 am

Richard Morgan: OK. You're not alone in this. How is it important to you?

The interpretation problem isn't personally important. It's important to the problem of social authority.

In modern western societies, we start with the notion that we're all political equals. We grant special status to experts, but that's a fairly egalitarian system. No one is presumed to be born an expert. There's a body of information and experience an expert must master. Thus the authority of expertise reduces to the authority of evidence, or so we hope.

If God exists and has communicated His will to humans, and those humans have written their understanding of His will in scripture, that's not something we can ignore. God as all-knowing creator of all that exists is the expert's expert.

Unfortunately the scriptures available to us prescribe things most of us would rather not do. Stoning people who break the sabbath and killing apostates are just two examples.

Some believers resign themselves to these commandments like soldiers accepting an upleasant order from a superior officer. But most people would like a way out.

There are three potential escape routes:
1. Argue that the God of scripture has not been proven to exist.
2. Establish that the scriptures aren't sufficiently error-free and reliable to serve as an authoritative record of the divine will.
3. Establish a credible, reliable method for interpreting scripture that gets us off the hook for the really awful stuff.

Atheists take the first route out. Unitarians, pantheists, transcendentalists, deists, and many very liberal believers take the second route. Most everyone else takes the third route. Saudi Arabia bravely doesn't even try to find a way out.

Now, the third route has its problems. Not all believers are aware of these problems. And of those who see them, many presume that their religious leaders and scholars must have them sorted.

By talking about the interpretation problem, we shed light upon these shaky presumptions.

417. Fleabytes

Comment #150244 by Dr Benway on March 26, 2008 at 3:52 pm

Richard Morgan: OK guys, I think you've all proved how smart you are pointing out the difficulties of interpreting ancient texts. Don't you think it's time to pass onto more adult argumentation now?

Well who died and appointed you Simon Cowell?

If no one is saying anything interesting, make your own contribution to the discussion.

I find the question of how one interprets holy writ very important.

418. Fleabytes

Comment #149772 by Dr Benway on March 26, 2008 at 8:13 am

So mlearnedfriend, does the Bible say men ought to dominate women?

419. Fleabytes

Comment #149759 by Dr Benway on March 26, 2008 at 8:00 am

As we wait for mlearnedfried, ArtfulDodger, et al to explain their method for sorting metaphor from not, I propose a general test:

The Benway test: If any method of Biblical interpretation might conceivably result in a belief that slavery or genital mutilation are okay, we must reject that method.

So far I've heard these vague methods:
1. Some verses are clearly metaphor. It's rather obvious if you read the text without prejudice.
2. You need to go to Bible college first to get it.

As both these methods do not prevent us from concluding that God is fine with slavery, or that He wants us to cut pee pees, they must be rejected.

420. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #149745 by Dr Benway on March 26, 2008 at 7:42 am

I don't think an inanimate object can be an agent, hungarianelephant.

421. Fleabytes

Comment #149736 by Dr Benway on March 26, 2008 at 7:37 am

Yet even this is a much greater simplification of the text. Robert Fyall (OT Prof Durham University) indicates 24 sections (I won't list them here) with a chiastic structure...

Oh I see. The Bible, being God's Word, ought to be the law of the land that we all follow. However, a special learned priesthood is needed to understand The Bible, as it is subtle and complex.

Sorry mlearnedfriend, you can have one or the other, but not both:
1. The Bible as a source of authority regarding God's will
2. The Bible as a literary document with ambiguous meanings

422. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #149721 by Dr Benway on March 26, 2008 at 7:22 am

hungarianelephant, I take issue with your use of the word "purpose."

There's a problem in the comparison below:
1. What's the purpose of a cup? Why, it's to hold coffee.
2. What's the purpose of a human? Why, it's to make more humans.

"Purpose" implies an agent with an intention or objective. With respect to the cup, the agent is an abstract any-man who might like a cup of coffee.

With respect to the "human" example, who is the agent? In fact there is no agent. The question is nonsense.

If you asked me what my purpose was, I'd give you a number of answers. Making copies of myself wouldn't be one of them.

423. Expelled Overview

Comment #149714 by Dr Benway on March 26, 2008 at 7:09 am

And they could take along a video camera, record it, upload it to the 'Net, and let us all tear it to bits without paying the creationists a cent.

Can we please stop with expressing an intent to commit a Federal crime? Downloading movies illegally might be stupid. Talking about doing it is unquestionably stupid.

No one is anonymous on the Internet. Big Brother is watching. Don't get him pissed.

424. Fleabytes

Comment #149706 by Dr Benway on March 26, 2008 at 6:45 am

mlearnedfriend, did you notice that Job seems to have two different authors with two different answers to the question of suffering?

The preface and the epilogue support the standard notion that God rewards the just.

The poetic verse in the middle offers a different answer: Your ways, O Lord, are not my ways. This answer has one advantage over the other: the sufferer is not to blame for his own suffering.

This is a book written my human beings trying to sort out why bad things happen to good people. There's nothing to indicate otherwise.

425. Fleabytes

Comment #149693 by Dr Benway on March 26, 2008 at 6:12 am

I think it's pretty awesome sharing a birthday with Richard Dawkins AND Capt. James Tiberius Kirk!

426. Fleabytes

Comment #149686 by Dr Benway on March 26, 2008 at 5:54 am

I seem to bump into people with this birthday a lot. The husband of the casemanager I work with shares it. And here's a list of other amazing and interesting people born March 26th:

1479 - Vasili III, great prince of Moscow (1505-33)/son of Ivan III
1516 - Konrad von Gesner, Zrich Switz, naturalist (Bibliotheca Universalis)
1577 - Elisabeth of Nassau, daughter of Willem I and Charlotte of Bourbon
1659 - William Wollaston, Coton England, philosopher
1671 - Giacomo Cesare Predieri, composer
1684 - Johann Graf, composer
1717 - Manuel Jeronimo Romero de Avila, composer
1753 - Benjamin Thompson, physicist (Royal Inst of Great Britain, Woburn MA)
1758 - Johann Daniel Ferstenberg, composer
1773 - Nathaniel Bowditch, mathematician/astronomer/author (Marine Sextant)
1783 - Johann Baptist Weigl, composer
1806 - Josef Slavik, composer
1813 - Thomas West Sherman, Bvt Major General (Union Army), died in 1879
1817 - Herman Haupt, Brig General (Union volunteers), died in 1905
1819 - Francisco Eduardo da Costa, composer
1819 - Louise Otto, Germany, author/feminist
1821 - Earnest Angel, German statistician (Law of Angel)
1827 - Emanuel Kania, composer
1830 - John Rogers Thomas, composer
1830 - Eliza Laurillard, Dutch vicar/poet/writer
1833 - Betsy Perk, [Christina E], Dutch journalist/writer/feminist
1840 - Carli Zoeller, composer
1840 - George Smith, London England, assyriologist (cuneiform (script))
1850 - Edward Bellamy, author (Looking Backward)
1854 - Braulio Dueno Colon, composer
1856 - David Alfred Thomas, Glamorganshire UK, 1st Viscount Rhondda
1859 - A[lfred] E[dward] Housman, England, poet (Shropshire Lad)
1859 - Nikolay Alexandrovich Sokolov, composer
1862 - George William Louis Marshall-Hall, composer
1863 - Henry Royce, founder (Rolls-Royce Limited in 1884)
1868 - Fuad I, king of Egypt (1922-36)
1871 - Seraf¡n Alvarez Quint‚ro, Spanish dramatist/playwright (El Flechazo)
1873 - [Louise] Sophie de Vries, actress (On Hope of Blessing)
1874 - Gerald du Maurier, London Engld, actor (Power, Escape, Masks and Faces)
1874 - Oskar Nedbal, composer
1874 - Robert Frost, SF, poet (Mending Wall, Road Not Taken)
1875 - Syngman Rhee, pres of South Korea (1948-60) [or Apr 26]
1880 - Duncan Hines, US, restaurant guide writer (Out of Kentucky Kitchens)
1884 - Wilhelm Backhaus, Leipzig Germany, pianist (Rubinstein 1905)
1885 - Julius Harrison, composer
1885 - Robert Blackburn, British aviation pioneer
1888 - Sigurd Erixon, Swedish etnologist (Atlas "ver Svensk Folk culture)
1889 - Vaclav Kapral, composer
1890 - Jozef Arras, Flemish writer
1893 - Palmiro Togliatti, founder (Communist Party of Italy)
1894 - Will Wright, SF CA, actor (Living Christ Story)
1896 - Richard Flury, composer
1897 - Jean Epstein, French director (Sa tˆte/Eau vive)
1898 - Renzo Massarani, composer
1899 - William Baines, composer
1899 - James B Connant, chemist/college president (Yale)
1900 - Isadore Freed, composer
1902 - Leslie Melville, economist
1904 - Emilio Fernandez, El Seco Mexico, director (La Choca, Flor Silvestre)
1904 - Hermann Schroeder, composer
1904 - Joseph Campbell, mythologist (Mythic Image)
1905 - Viktor Emil Frankl, pyschiatrist (Man's Search for Meaning)
1905 - Pablo Garrido, composer
1907 - Leigh Harline, composer
1907 - Louis Saguer, composer
1908 - Robert William Paine, architect
1908 - Kenneth Mellanby, entomologist
1908 - Hilda Krahwinkel Sperling, Essen Germany, tennis star (French 1935)
1908 - Hank Sylvern, Bkln NY, orch leader (Jane Froman's USA Canteen)
1908 - Betty MacDonald, [Anne E Campbell Bard], US writer (Egg and I)
1909 - Chips Rafferty, Broken Hill Australia, actor (Desert Rats)
1909 - Chris[tiaan R] Reumer, Dutch opera singer
1911 - Bernard Katz, biophysicist
1911 - Tennessee Williams, Columbus Miss, playwright (Cat on a Hot Tin Roof)
1913 - Paul Erdos, mathematician
1914 - Ian McGeoch, Vice-Admiral
1914 - William Westmoreland, Saxon SC, army general (Vietnam era)
1916 - Vic Schoen, Bkln NY, orch leader (Patti Page Olds Show)
1916 - Sterling Hayden, NJ, actor (Dr Strangelove, Asphalt Jungle, Cobra)
1916 - Mort Abrahams, producer (Dr Doolittle, Planet Of Apes)
1916 - Harry Rabinowitz, British? composer/conductor
1916 - Christian B Anfinsen, US chemist (cell physiology, Nobel 1972)
1916 - Bill Edrich, cricketer (Middlesex and England bat, Compton's mate)
1917 - Jean Graham Hall, circuit court judge (England)
1917 - Rufus Thomas, Miss, singer (Walking the Dog)
1919 - Strother Martin, Kokomo Ind, actor (Cool Hand Luke, Slapshot)
1920 - George E Brown Jr, (Rep-D-CA, 1963-71, 73- )
1921 - George Jefferson, CEO (British Telecom)
1921 - Joe Loco, [Jose Esteves, Jr], musician
1921 - Peter Horsley, CEO (Osprey Aviation)
1922 - William Milliken, actor (Drive-in)
1923 - Elizabeth Jane Howard, British novelist (After Julius)
1923 - Clifton Williams, Traskwood Arkansas, band master (Sinfonians)
1923 - Bob Elliot, Boston Mass, comedian (Bob and Ray, Get a Life)
1925 - Claudio Spies, composer
1925 - Lord Graham of Edmonton, House of Lords (chief opposition whip)
1925 - Lord Hooson QC, crown court recorder
1925 - Maqsood Ahmed, cricketer (Pakistani batsman in 16 Tests 1952-56)
1925 - Pierre Boulez, Montbrison France, composer/conductor (Visage Nuptial)
1926 - Ann Curtis, US, 400m freestyle swimmer (Olympic-gold-1948)
1927 - Jonathan Tod, Vice-Admiral (England)
1928 - Carole Carr, singer/actress (Down Among the Z Men)
1929 - Am‚d‚e Turner, QC/MEP
1929 - Maurice Simon, jazz musician
1930 - Sandra Day O'Connor, Texas, 1st woman Supreme Court Justice (1981- )
1930 - Gregory Corso, beat poet (Happy Birthday of Death, Long Live Man)
1930 - Cristobal Halffter, composer
1931 - Leonard Nimoy, Boston, actor (Spock-Star Trek, Mission Impossible)
1932 - Dick Nolan, football coach
1934 - Alan Arkin, NYC, actor (Catch 22, In-Laws, Simon, Wait Until Dark)
1934 - G T Pryce, CEO (Dalgety)
1934 - Gino Cappelletti, ORFU, AFL running back (AFL Player of Year 1964)
1935 - Earl of Kinnoull
1936 - Fred Paris, rocker (Five Satins)
1936 - Erich Urbanner, composer
1937 - Barbara Pearl Jones, Chic Ill, 4X100m relayer (Olympic-gold-1952, 60)
1937 - Lord Chetwode
1937 - Wayne Embry, holder of 7 basketball records (Miami of Ohio)
1939 - Stuart Sutherland, Professor Emeritus (Sussex U)
1939 - Phillip R Allen, Pitts, actor (Harry-Hardy Boys Mystery, Mitch-Alice)
1939 - James Caan, Bronx NY, actor (Brian's Song, Killer Elite, Godfather)
1939 - Colin Webb, general manager (Press Assn)
1940 - Servaes [J S] Huys, Dutch MP (PvdA)
1940 - Rod Lauren, rocker (If I Had a Girl)
1940 - Nancy Pelosi, (Rep-D-California)
1940 - Braulio Baeza, jockey (National Horse Racing Hall of Famer)
1940 - Bill Ind, Bishop-designate (Truro)
1941 - Barclay Plager, hockey player/twin brother of hockey's Bob Plager
1941 - Bob Plager, hockey player/twin brother of hockey's Barclay Plager
1942 - Erica Jong, [Mann], NYC, author (Fear of Flying)
1943 - Robert Woodward, investigative reporter (Watergate, CIA crimes)
1944 - Diana Ross, [Earle], Detroit, (Supremes, Lady Sings Blues, Mahogany)
1945 - Mikhail Voronin, USSR, horse vault gymnist (Olympic-gold-1968)
1946 - Johnny Crawford, LA Calif, actor (Mark-The Rifleman)
1947 - Carmen Krolis, Suriname/Neth singer
1948 - Steven Tyler, NYC, rock vocalist (Aerosmith-Janie Got a Gun)
1948 - Richard Tandy, rock bassist (ELO)
1948 - Kyung-Wha Chung, Seoul Korea, violinist (Chung Sisters)
1949 - Baroness Hayman
1949 - Fran Sheehan, rock bassist (Boston-More than a Feeling)
1949 - Vicki Lawrence, Inglewood Ca, actress (Carol Burnette, Mama's Family)
1950 - Tony Papenfuss, Minneapolis Minn, (Daryl-Newhart)
1950 - Teddy Pendergrass, Phila, singer (Turn Off the Lights)
1950 - Ronnie McDowell, Fountain Head Tn, country singer (King is Gone)
1950 - Martin Short, Hamilton Ontario, comedian (SNL, SCTV, 3 Amigos)
1950 - Graham Barlow, cricketer (England batsman in 3 Tests 1976-77)
1950 - Ernest Thomas, Gary Ind, actor (Roger-What's Happening!!)
1951 - Richard B Shull, US actor (Hail to the Chief, Big Bus)
1952 - David Amess, MP
1953 - Tatyana Providokhina, Russian 1K runner (world record)
1953 - Michael Bonagura, Newark NJ, country singer (Baille and Boys-Oh Heart)
1954 - Curtis Sliwa, founder (Guardian Angels)/radio personality (WABC)
1954 - Piers Gardner, director (Brit Institute of Intl and Comparative Law)
1955 - Dean Dillon, Lake City TN, country singer (Chair)
1956 - Tatyana Kochergina, USSR, team handball (Olympic-gold-1976, 80)
1956 - Charly McClain, Jackson Tn, country singer (Radio Heart)
1957 - Leeza Gibbons, SC, TV host (Entertainment Tonight, Leeza)
1957 - Walter Rohlfing, Dusseldorf, WLAF defensive line coach (Rhein Fire)
1959 - David Delong, Portland Ore, Canadian Tour golfer (1988 BC Open)
1960 - Michael Evans, Fontana CA, US water polo player (Olympic-silver-88)
1960 - Marcus Allen, NFL running back (LA Raiders, KC Chiefs, Heisman 1981)
1960 - Debbie Hall, LPGA golfer
1960 - Billy Warlock, Hawthorne Calif, actor (Flip-Happy Days, Baywatch)
1961 - Leigh Bowery, designer
1961 - William Hague, Secretary of State for Wales
1962 - Yuri Pavlovich Gidzenko, Russia, lt-colonel/cosmonaut
1962 - Richard Coles, rocker (Communards-Don't Leave Me This Way)
1962 - Maarten de Young, soccer player (SC Heerenveen)
1962 - Kevin Seitzer, Springfield IL, infielder (Milwaukee Brewers)
1962 - John Stockton, Spokane Wash, NBA guard (Utah Jazz, Olympics-gold-96)
1963 - Paul de Leeuw, Dutch TV host (Cry of the Lion)
1963 - Rebecca Twigg, Seattle Wash, 79K cyclist (Olympic-silver-1984, 92, 96)
1964 - Ab Plugboer, soccer player (FC Utrecht)
1964 - Ulf Samuelsson, Fagersta SWE, NHL defenseman (Team Sweden, NY Rangers)
1966 - Wesley Walls, NFL tight end (NO Saints)
1966 - Mike Remlinger, Middletown NY, pitcher (Cin Reds)
1966 - Lee Porter, Greensboro NC, Nike golfer (1992 Texarkana Open-5th)
1968 - Shane Reynolds, Bastrop LA, pitcher (Houston Astros)
1968 - Mike Trevathan, CFL slot back (BC Lions)
1968 - Kari Gronroos, WLAF kicker (Scotland Claymores)
1968 - Ian Hutchings, Zimbabwe, Canadian Tour golfer (1994 Klondike Klassic)
1968 - Edward Kaminski, KC Kansas, javelin thrower
1969 - Vikram Rathour, cricketer (Indian Test opening batsman 1996-)
1969 - Luke Richardson, Ottawa, NHL defenseman (Edmonton Oilers)
1969 - Beth Howell, Clinton Mississippi, Miss Mississippi-America (1991)
1970 - Evan Richards, LA Calif, actor (Frankie-Mama Malone)
1970 - Paul Bosvelt, soccer player (Go Ahead Eagles/FC Twente)
1971 - Tommy Fagan, CFL/NFL defensive end (Atl Falcons, Winn Blue Bombers)
1971 - Rennae Stubbs, Sydney Australia, tennis star
1971 - Jesus Tavarez, Santo Domingo Dom Rep, outfielder (Florida Marlins)
1971 - Dave DeGraaf, Lansing Mich, team handball circle (Olympics-1996)
1972 - Naoko Kijimuta, Yokohama Kanagawa Japan, tennis star (1996 Jakarta)
1972 - Steve Anderson, CFL defensive linebacker (Calgary Stampeders)
1973 - Marshall Faulk, running back (Indianapolis Colts)
1974 - Mike Peca, Toronto, NHL center (Buffalo Sabres)
1974 - Irina Spirlea, Bucharest Romania, tennis star (1996 Amelia Island)
1974 - Hakeem Abdul-samad, rocker (Boys)
1974 - Alfred Shipman, CFL slot back (BC Lions)
1979 - Heidi Zeigler, actress (Sherry-Just the 10 of Us)
1986 - Jessica McClure, baby trapped in Texas well in 1988
1988 - Jose Vizcaino, San Cristobal Dom Rep, infielder (NY Mets)
2228 - James T Kirk, science fiction captain of USS Enterprise (Star Trek)

427. Expelled Overview

Comment #149505 by Dr Benway on March 25, 2008 at 7:06 pm

But I do give very many more hoots about permitting as global and public a crushing and decimation of creationist/ID irrationality as possible, which will ensue following this - I would argue - welcome crystallization of ID bullshit.

Haha u funny guy.

Dawkins is a nobody. His book has sold what, 1 millionish? Pastor Rick Warren's Purpose Driven Life has sold over 24 million. And there are hundreds of books just like it selling as well.

The idiocy of this movie is an event in our little bubble. But the rest of the country will sympathize with Ben Stein.

428. Sue Blackmore debates Alister McGrath

Comment #149468 by Dr Benway on March 25, 2008 at 4:34 pm

How about this: A Joyful Noise Unto the Lord

429. Expelled Overview

Comment #149467 by Dr Benway on March 25, 2008 at 4:28 pm

Thanks for the point-by-point. I think I'll forward the expelled exposed link to my old high school biology teacher. She's gonna have to fight a battle when hordes of her students bring it up in class.

It's time consuming, cleaning up after this nonsense.

I remember these parents who would drop off magazines for me to read to get my opinon on some cranky new autism cure. Sometime it would take 3-4 hours of my time developing a clear rebuttal to the horrible trash. And they did this to me about monthly. Ugh.

430. Expelled Overview

Comment #149464 by Dr Benway on March 25, 2008 at 4:20 pm

For example, when he came back into the office from resting in his car, I said something like "gentlemen, I've got work to do so I'd like to wrap this thing up now," he looked at me like "hey, don't you realize who I am and that you should be grateful to be talking to me?"

Oh man, that is awesome!

I liked it too. I imagine Stein's reaction: "Can you believe the arrogance of that Shermer guy?!"

431. Fleabytes

Comment #149458 by Dr Benway on March 25, 2008 at 4:12 pm

mikejswalker: Man, she was horrid. I'm not at the point yet that i feel all religionists are that sinister. Are you?

You're not actually reading my posts, are you.

I don't believe any significant moral difference exists between atheists and religious people. I might fault a specific religious person for not thinking through his premises to their logical conclusion. But that alone isn't a relationship deal breaker for me.

Mathis and wee flea would be just as odious, from my vantage point, were they atheists.

432. Expelled Overview

Comment #149429 by Dr Benway on March 25, 2008 at 3:39 pm

"CRYSTALS!? On the backs of CRYSTALS!?" The film cuts to B&W video of creepy fortunetellers hunching over crystal balls.

Oh man.

Stein says something like "I thought science was decided by evidence, not the courts."

Oh man.

You'd have to be pretty stupid to think that Panspermia is the same as a 1950's flying saucer movie, but once again, Stein and Mathis know their audience.

Oh man.

Eugenics is mentioned as an "extension" of Darwinism

Oh man.

Stein says it's time to confront the head of the Evolutionists, Richard Dawkins.

Oh man.

Stein says something like "I can't go up against Big Science all by myself!" over images of what looked like Nazi tanks and troops protecting a building, driving home the alleged connection between scientists and Nazis.

Oy.

433. Sue Blackmore debates Alister McGrath

Comment #149409 by Dr Benway on March 25, 2008 at 3:09 pm

Bonzai: Should the people be blamed for cherry picking or the Church for not taking into account that people cherry pick, even when Papal declarations supposedly "represent them"?

I think the Pope represents Jesus on earth.

If the cherry picker is an ordinary person, we likely don't have to worry much about his method of sorting the right way from the wrong way of reading scripture.

But if the cherry picker holds real power over us, we ought to worry about that method. Power requires limits, and cherry picking imposes no limits.

If Joe Neighbor feels God's against butt sex, well so what. But if the US Congress decides God doesn't like butt sex, I'm afraid you gays are fucked. Even Jonnie Cochrane ain't gonna help you, when you stand facing your accuser and your accuser happens to be God.

I'm sure the government employees would feel badly about having to round up all the gays, who generally are nice people. But, well, what's a mere mortal to do. The Lord's ways are not always our ways. Those balls simply gotta come off.

434. Sue Blackmore debates Alister McGrath

Comment #149320 by Dr Benway on March 25, 2008 at 1:09 pm

Imagine you were a battlefield commander. You receive instructions from central command. Unfortunately, the instructions are ambiguous. One reading would require you to mount an attack upon the enemy immediately. Another reading suggests that you merely send in scouts to assess the enemy's strength. Parts of the message seem to be missing, so it's not entirely clear that either of these readings are definitive.

You try calling central command for clarification, but can't get through. Now what?

Well, obviously you just have to do your best. You have to assess the situation and move your troops in a manner that maximizes your control of the theater.

Ambiguous orders are really no orders at all.

Now, a clever commander will try to think up a post-hoc justification for his actions that seems like a valid reading of the orders, just to cover his ass. But if he could be honest he'd say, "I couldn't be sure of the order so I simply used my best judgment."

So long as the Bible is seen as merely inspiring literature with no social authority, there's no problem. It's only when the Bible is used as an authoritative reference regardng God's will that the trouble starts.

We do need to place limits upon those in authority over us. At the very least, we ought to demand that their statements not be self-contradictory. If a religious leader tells us that God does not approve of homosexuality, and the leader quotes the Bible to prove his point, we have to ask why he eats shellfish and doesn't stone his neighbor for working on the sabbath.

435. Fleabytes

Comment #149149 by Dr Benway on March 25, 2008 at 7:29 am

Sometimes i think subtle insults are actually lost on the the person doing the insulting, but i take your point.

The first time. But after it's been explained a few times that the term is an insult, it's clearly intentional.

I don't think Richard D should debate David R because of the steam roller banana analogy. I also agree with your thoughts on the matter. But a more sadistic part of me...

You've got it entirely backwards. People like Mathis and Robertson are the steamrollers. They're professional winners. They know more about winning than you'll ever understand.

Remember Nurse Ratchet from One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest? Never a harsh word from her mouth. A woman who might kill you with her kindness.

Nice people can be more dangerous than any hot-headed bloke who throws a punch without thinking.

436. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #149138 by Dr Benway on March 25, 2008 at 7:04 am

The Stalin-Hitler argument is an appeal to my moral judgment. The person who says, "Stalin and Hitler were atheists" knows that I will agree with him in condemning the behavior of Stalin and Hitler. He therefore proves that a living atheist can share a sense of human solidarity that would prevent the the kind of ugly, brutal behavior of a Stalin or a Hitler.

And thus he shoots his own argument in the foot.

437. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #149132 by Dr Benway on March 25, 2008 at 6:47 am

Excuse me? "I wanted to give ID its best shot?"

A good lawyer always tries to imagine as strong a case as he can for the opposing side.

438. Sue Blackmore debates Alister McGrath

Comment #149124 by Dr Benway on March 25, 2008 at 6:39 am

By insisting one can only read the bible like a fundamentalist the atheist critique comes off as naive and shallow for the sophisticated believers. It is not "fudging" to acknowledge that language is complex.

Understanding the Bible using modern methods of scholarship removes the magical authority some say that document holds. All fine and good.

But the scholar who then quotes the Bible as evidence of God's will is slipping back into the magic.

I don't think atheists have a problem with scholarship. They have a problem with thinking about the book as anything more than literature. They criticize the scholars for trying to have things both ways.

439. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #149114 by Dr Benway on March 25, 2008 at 6:13 am

Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot did NOT collect stamps. Their non-stamp collecting lifestyle led them to kill millions.

440. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #149110 by Dr Benway on March 25, 2008 at 6:06 am

If this movie is as stupid and senseless as he says - I would NEVER spend so much energy to refute it.

Sadly, much of the public lacks the tools needed to see through such inflammatory propaganda.

WHY would humans act un-Darwinian?? If all the rest of the animals are acting Darwinian (according to natural selection) - why would/should the humans act differently?

Altruism may not be "un-Darwinian." We evolved in settings where most people around us would be kin sharing many of our genes. Thus we jump in a river to save a drowning child without a second's thought, as a consequence of our genetic heritage.

Our modern life of distant travel is relatively new.

441. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #149093 by Dr Benway on March 25, 2008 at 5:45 am

I still think that Coulter has it basically right concerning the connection between Darwinism and Nazism (as inconvenient that sounds to most of you).

Natural selection is a description of the way a natural environment selects for more adaptive traits over time.

Eugenics is not natural selection. It's a form of artificial selection. It's much like selective breeding, which humans have practiced for thousands of years.

The Nazis decided blonde haired blue eyed "Aryans" were superior to others. This belief can't be supported by Darwinian evolution.

442. Fleabytes

Comment #149088 by Dr Benway on March 25, 2008 at 5:28 am

The irish question was at least given a chance to be resolved by a rule that said the epithets should stop.

I'm guessing both sides agreed to this rule.

We're back to the rules of civil discourse again. Once both parties agree, you can appeal to the rules to get the discussion back on track.

But some people are quite one sided. They start the discussion with subtle insults like, "Dawkins' followers."

The school shootings have taught us a few things about bullying. "Just ignore them" doesn't work. We don't say this to kids now.

This matter of how to handle aggression has nothing to do with religion or atheism. It has to do with the judgment of another's character. There are dangerous people in the world and they must be handled a little differently.

Dawkins has demonstrated that he's not particularly good at making character judgments. He's been suckered more than once. For this reason, we can't let the wee flea near him.

443. Fleabytes

Comment #148994 by Dr Benway on March 24, 2008 at 9:27 pm

it should not be surprising that some of us feel uneasy about the invective and "abuse" that seems to characterize some posters.

These criticisms cause more harm than good. You have to tell a person directly when they've said something that bothers you. General statements about "people" who "say naughty things" are only going to cause chaos and confusion.

444. Fleabytes

Comment #148988 by Dr Benway on March 24, 2008 at 8:59 pm

Richard, I'm just saying that it's often difficult for a third party to understand why two people are having it out with each other.

Are you suggesting that the aggressiveness and ridicule that recurs here is expressed by people who have suffered at the hands of religionites in the same way that others have suffered from being robbed, raped or beaten?

See, I wouldn't use the term "religionites." That strikes me as needlessly in-group/out-group.

In my experience with abusive people, religion hasn't been a front burner concern. Ontological beliefs are a thousand times less relevant than other personality characteristics.

I'm not angry at religion. I'm not angry at religious people. But pathological liars, whether religious or atheists, do push my buttons. People who tell me what I ought to feel also push my buttons.

445. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #148976 by Dr Benway on March 24, 2008 at 8:10 pm

MPhil, the madman excerpt is stirring. I read that many years ago and didn't think much of it. Now the words strike me differently. My brain must have changed. Perhaps I'm not the same person now as then.

446. Fleabytes

Comment #148970 by Dr Benway on March 24, 2008 at 7:52 pm

mikejswalker: Are you saying you are not aware of a debate that is starting to open up about the way we deal with religionists, apologists for religionists, fence sitters, and atheists who find our tactics too heavy handed, too smarmy, too loud, ridiculing etc?

Seems beside the point. Either Jesus died for our sins or he didn't. Either Allah is the only God and Muhammad is his prophet, or not so much.

Atheists are no better than other people. Best to disabuse people of thinking otherwise early on.

If two people are arguing and you don't like how one party is handling things, you've a right to say that. But why repeat yourself? Do you imagine someone else's behavior reflects on you? That seems strange.

Go have a chat with clearthinker or pathfinder if you want. Be as friendly as you want to be. No one will stop you.

In any given case, it's easy to be wrong about when to be nice and when to be blunt. If I'm not directly involved, I defer to the person engaged in the argument. Sometimes a survival instinct guides these things.

Have you ever been robbed? Raped? Beaten? Some have. Such experiences can strip you of your capacity to tolerate certain abuses. That's just the way it is.

I don't self-identify as an atheist in my actual life. So you don't have to worry that any bad behavior on my part will sully your own reputation as "one of the atheists."

__________
Happy birthday, Richard!

447. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #148948 by Dr Benway on March 24, 2008 at 6:03 pm

Oh look, there's Lord Privy Seal on the cover of "Feeding the Media Beast."

448. The science of religion: Where angels no longer fear to tread

Comment #148927 by Dr Benway on March 24, 2008 at 4:23 pm

sidfaiwu:

I am a novice when it comes to evolution but an expert in mathematics. Can anyone point me to the publication(s) related to the mathematical implausibility?

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

449. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #148758 by Dr Benway on March 23, 2008 at 9:06 pm

I really wish the likes of Dawkins would stop engaging these half-wits. It just lends creedence to their malfeasance.

I wouldn't worry. There's a narrow window for kicking the bad people in the nads. It will close soon.

450. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #148728 by Dr Benway on March 23, 2008 at 5:01 pm

MPhil, I forgot you were in Germany. Guess I can understand your caution.

I make Nazi references fairly frequently, as in, "Take this back to med records or the chart Nazis will be on your ass." But there is no danger such analogies will be construed as an allegation that the med records staff are somehow the seeds of destruction for all humanity.

In contrast "Expelled" does seem to be making a serious comparison between the methodological naturalism of Dawkins and Myers and proto-fascism.

"Gauleiter" is funny in a hyperbolic yet precious way. I must remember it.

"Goon" isn't meant to be funny I think; just angry. I don't take it as a slight against the off duty officer so much as a slight against the unseen boss. Nasty bosses always have goons to do their bidding.