tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12669850402902426632024-03-19T04:00:32.699-04:00ExChristian.NetEncouraging doubting, de-converting, deconstructing and former ChristiansDave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.comBlogger30125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-83486233665977126062019-04-12T12:46:00.003-04:002019-07-09T12:24:03.350-04:00Praise the Lord for Black Holes! <i>By Webmdave ~ </i><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhMmh2iT52jURAdFgCuCJbcZhwQ1fvqK313i2sUIKoidz99crdK0bhc2nrUEXWSHpxZuicMMhei3JncYWutvQPWEBI7rFaot4ZWuHyQjqJ6dQDKhrAkaJOL0TrVW1q3ulYOW89g1Jmbdqo/s1600/blackholephoto.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="643" data-original-width="864" height="476" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhMmh2iT52jURAdFgCuCJbcZhwQ1fvqK313i2sUIKoidz99crdK0bhc2nrUEXWSHpxZuicMMhei3JncYWutvQPWEBI7rFaot4ZWuHyQjqJ6dQDKhrAkaJOL0TrVW1q3ulYOW89g1Jmbdqo/s640/blackholephoto.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<span class="dropcap"><br /></span>
<span class="dropcap">I</span>f you've been watching the news, you know that astronomers have revealed the first-ever "image" of the black hole at the center of the Messier 87 galaxy, 55 million light-years away.<br />
<br />
Thinking this image and the ensuing conversations about the age of universe, etc. might've thrown a monkey wrench into the <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/science-choice/201504/what-is-confirmation-bias">confirmation bias</a> of some Christians, I decided to trawl the Internet for evidence of initial Christian reaction to this tremendous scientific revelation. Below are a few examples of what I found: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>
A black hole is a perfect example of something we’ve believed in even though we cannot see it or touch it. -- <a href="https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2019/04/10/can-you-find-god-black-hole">The Jesuit Review</a></blockquote>
<blockquote>
It is a reminder of the amazing complexity of the universe that God created. The fact that black holes exist and that we cannot see inside them because no light escapes, reminds us there will always be mystery in God’s creation – and in God himself. -- <a href="https://www.eternitynews.com.au/world/world-first-image-of-black-hole-revealed/">Eternity News</a></blockquote>
<blockquote>
I was fascinated by the first photograph of a black hole. No, I don't understand the physics but it spoke to me about the grandeur of the universe and in doing so strengthened my belief that the universe is made and governed by an almighty God. -- <a href="https://www.christiantoday.com/article/the-black-hole-and-the-cross/132200.htm">Christian Today</a></blockquote>
<blockquote>
Heavenly Father, Your creation is wonderful to behold. Thank You for letting us see a portion of Your work in the heavenlies. -- <a href="https://www.ifapray.org/blog/">Intercessors for America</a></blockquote>
<br />
I was reminded that a recent (2017) <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/210956/belief-creationist-view-humans-new-low.aspx">Gallup poll</a> showed a marked decline in the number of Americans still clinging to anti-scientific beliefs:<br />
<ul>
<li>38% say God created man in present form, lowest in 35 years</li>
<li>Same percentage say humans evolved, but God guided the process</li>
<li>Less-educated Americans more likely to believe in creationism</li>
</ul>
<div>
From the Gallup poll: </div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<img border="0" data-original-height="412" data-original-width="570" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi7ef-H0qu6nCYOZ8HwI1quCtsyYJPz1lCyZs9Q5_jfiIfLOqy6Nn1i8vJKw6CKJqUD8wSSB8O4yqpfqEJBhKrItjZFn62rW8SJTxdn7tosVCjOBikGdCCX4_keWse7v0IP9cYrL3fLDIw/s1600/gallup+image.png" /></div>
<br />
It appears to me that although there is some small decline in faith based anti-intellectualism, there is still a sadly high level of superstition held by the American population. <br />
<br />
With so many unable to differentiate scientific reality from religious fantasy in their thought processes, it's no wonder we experience so many social ills and so much societal chaos. It makes me wonder if we should mistrust the logical abilities of those who faithfully cling to Christian, or any religion's, mythology.<br />
<br />
What's your opinion?Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-8045173347200837482019-04-11T11:59:00.002-04:002019-04-15T14:54:04.666-04:00Previously unknown human species found in Asia raises questions about early hominin dispersals from Africa<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhVRJeN7rJM1M-NRaaRvNGujJb1hXA7llY3TYPqebtsbgmE2LN0HW6Exf4rMNxXmNdHy7vEVVXMhDGDGG3HdSN_XQJ-7-vU4gpw3yus_RaJ1f_nW-Jcsn2roDMQKH-ZSV_cHFCalLyd5ZA/s1600/d41586-019-01019-7_16616640.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="359" data-original-width="800" height="143" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhVRJeN7rJM1M-NRaaRvNGujJb1hXA7llY3TYPqebtsbgmE2LN0HW6Exf4rMNxXmNdHy7vEVVXMhDGDGG3HdSN_XQJ-7-vU4gpw3yus_RaJ1f_nW-Jcsn2roDMQKH-ZSV_cHFCalLyd5ZA/s320/d41586-019-01019-7_16616640.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<i style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Lora, Palatino, Times, "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 17px;">Homo sapiens</i><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "lora" , "palatino" , "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 17px;"> </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "lora" , "palatino" , "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 17px;">is the only living species of a diverse group called hominins (members of the human family tree who are more closely related to each other than they are to chimpanzees and bonobos). Most extinct hominin species are not our direct ancestors, but instead are close relatives with evolutionary histories that took a slightly different path from ours.</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "lora" , "palatino" , "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 17px;"> </span><a data-label="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1067-9" data-track-category="body text link" data-track="click" href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1067-9" style="color: #006699; font-family: Lora, Palatino, Times, "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 17px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Writing in <i>Nature</i></a><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "lora" , "palatino" , "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 17px;">, Détroit</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "lora" , "palatino" , "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 17px;"> </span><i style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Lora, Palatino, Times, "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 17px;">et al</i><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "lora" , "palatino" , "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 17px;">.</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "lora" , "palatino" , "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.75px; line-height: 0; position: relative; top: -0.5em; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01019-7#ref-CR1" style="background-color: transparent; color: #006699; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;">1</a></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "lora" , "palatino" , "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 17px;"> </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "lora" , "palatino" , "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 17px;">report the remarkable discovery of one such human relative that will no doubt ignite plenty of scientific debate over the coming weeks, months and years. This newly identified species was found in the Philippines and named</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "lora" , "palatino" , "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 17px;"> </span><i style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Lora, Palatino, Times, "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 17px;">Homo luzonensis</i><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "lora" , "palatino" , "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 17px;"> </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "lora" , "palatino" , "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 17px;">after Luzon, the island where bones and teeth from individuals of this species were excavated from Callao Cave. Specimens of</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "lora" , "palatino" , "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 17px;"> </span><i style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Lora, Palatino, Times, "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 17px;">H. luzonensis</i><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "lora" , "palatino" , "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 17px;"> </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "lora" , "palatino" , "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 17px;">were dated to minimum ages of 50,000 and 67,000 years old, which suggests that the species was alive at the same time as several other hominins belonging to the genus</span><i style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Lora, Palatino, Times, "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 17px;"> Homo</i><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "lora" , "palatino" , "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 17px;">, including</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "lora" , "palatino" , "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 17px;"> </span><i style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Lora, Palatino, Times, "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 17px;">Homo sapiens</i><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "lora" , "palatino" , "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 17px;">, Neanderthals, Denisovans and</span><i style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Lora, Palatino, Times, "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 17px;"> Homo floresiensis</i><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "lora" , "palatino" , "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 17px;">.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "lora" , "palatino" , "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 17px;"><br /></span>
Read the entire article here: <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01019-7">https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01019-7</a>Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-48388425852584646372012-05-13T08:03:00.000-04:002019-07-09T12:24:03.187-04:00Frans de Waal: Moral behavior in animals<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgcL6WFW6xMoc3ZXDRRx3XbehkEeQSFEqRTXDhfRTcOQd9D2U93CK1wJn_hsfDBj6kWJjw3SPA6lde1K499pMmnNqGmrTCP1ALlMwr-Bo67kR2W27-ryQYVdDNH_9LNnXBZzk29v2rcPgW2/s1600/HandReaching.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="281" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgcL6WFW6xMoc3ZXDRRx3XbehkEeQSFEqRTXDhfRTcOQd9D2U93CK1wJn_hsfDBj6kWJjw3SPA6lde1K499pMmnNqGmrTCP1ALlMwr-Bo67kR2W27-ryQYVdDNH_9LNnXBZzk29v2rcPgW2/s320/HandReaching.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">E</span>mpathy, cooperation, fairness and reciprocity -- caring about the well-being of others seems like a very human trait. But Frans de Waal shares some surprising videos of behavioral tests, on primates and other mammals, that show how many of these moral traits all of us share.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>If you ask anyone, what is morality based on? These are the two factors that always come out: One is reciprocity … and a sense of fairness, and the other one is empathy and compassion.” (Frans de Waal)</blockquote><br />
Dr. <a class="zem_slink" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frans_de_Waal" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Frans de Waal">Frans B. M. de Waal</a> is a biologist and primatologist known for his work on the behavior and social intelligence of primates. His first book, <i><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Chimpanzee-Politics-Power-among-Apes/dp/0801863368" style="border-width: 0px; color: #ff2b06; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="Chimpanzee Politics">Chimpanzee Politics</a></i><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>(1982), compared the schmoozing and scheming of chimpanzees involved in power struggles with that of human politicians. Ever since, de Waal has drawn parallels between primate and human behavior, from peacemaking and morality to culture. His scientific work has been published in hundreds of technical articles in journals such as Science, Nature, Scientific American, and outlets specialized in animal behavior. His popular books – translated into fifteen languages – have made him one of the world’s most visible primatologists. His latest books are <i><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Our-Inner-Ape-Frans-Waal/dp/1573223123" target="_blank" title="Our Inner Ape">Our Inner Ape</a></i><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>(2005, Riverhead) and <i><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Age-Empathy-Natures-Lessons-Society/dp/0307407764" target="_blank" title="The Age of Empathy">The Age of Empathy</a></i> (2009, Harmony).<br />
<br />
De Waal is C. H. Candler Professor in the Psychology Department of <a class="zem_slink" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emory_University" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Emory University">Emory University</a> and Director of the <a href="https://www.emory.edu/LIVING_LINKS/" style="border-width: 0px; color: #ff2b06; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="Living Links Center">Living Links Center</a><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>at the<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="https://www.yerkes.emory.edu/" style="border-width: 0px; color: #ff2b06; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="Yerkes National Primate Center">Yerkes National Primate Center</a>, in Atlanta. He has been elected to the <a class="zem_slink" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Academy_of_Sciences" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="United States National Academy of Sciences">National Academy of Sciences</a> (US), the <a class="zem_slink" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Academy_of_Arts_and_Sciences" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="American Academy of Arts and Sciences">American Academy of Arts and Sciences</a>, and the <a class="zem_slink" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Netherlands_Academy_of_Arts_and_Sciences" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences">Royal Dutch Academy of Sciences</a>. In 2007, he was selected by <i>Time</i> as one of<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="https://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1595326_1595329_1616472,00.html" style="border-width: 0px; color: #ff2b06; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="World's 100 Most Influential People Today">The Worlds’ 100 Most Influential People Today</a>, and in 2011 by <i>Discover</i> as among 47 (all time) Great Minds of Science.<br />
Read <a href="https://tedxpeachtree.com/speaker-q-a-frans-b-m-de-waal-ph-d/" target="_blank">TEDxPeachtree's Q&A with Frans de Waal >></a> <br />
<br />
<object height="374" width="526"> <param name="movie" value="https://video.ted.com/assets/player/swf/EmbedPlayer.swf"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"/><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><param name="bgColor" value="#ffffff"></param><param name="flashvars" value="vu=https://video.ted.com/talk/stream/2011X/Blank/FransDeWaal_2011X-320k.mp4&su=https://images.ted.com/images/ted/tedindex/embed-posters/FransDeWaal_2011X-embed.jpg&vw=512&vh=288&ap=0&ti=1417&lang=&introDuration=15330&adDuration=4000&postAdDuration=830&adKeys=talk=frans_de_waal_do_animals_have_morals;year=2011;theme=how_the_mind_works;event=TEDxPeachtree;tag=animals;tag=community;tag=morality;tag=science;&preAdTag=tconf.ted/embed;tile=1;sz=512x288;" /><embed src="https://video.ted.com/assets/player/swf/EmbedPlayer.swf" pluginspace="https://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" bgColor="#ffffff" width="526" height="374" allowFullScreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" flashvars="vu=https://video.ted.com/talk/stream/2011X/Blank/FransDeWaal_2011X-320k.mp4&su=https://images.ted.com/images/ted/tedindex/embed-posters/FransDeWaal_2011X-embed.jpg&vw=512&vh=288&ap=0&ti=1417&lang=&introDuration=15330&adDuration=4000&postAdDuration=830&adKeys=talk=frans_de_waal_do_animals_have_morals;year=2011;theme=how_the_mind_works;event=TEDxPeachtree;tag=animals;tag=community;tag=morality;tag=science;&preAdTag=tconf.ted/embed;tile=1;sz=512x288;"></embed> </object>
<div class="zemanta-pixie" style="height: 15px; margin-top: 10px;"><img alt="" class="zemanta-pixie-img" src="https://img.zemanta.com/pixy.gif?x-id=05f45c77-c112-4476-8066-1327f07189b7" style="border: medium none; float: right;" /></div>Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-54337917444849135482012-02-24T03:22:00.000-05:002019-07-09T12:24:03.215-04:00Darwin's Birthday Bash<i>by C.T. Ogden ~ </i><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBNS8qyHej1w2fq9Tv5FusRexEpPIPITvObWfXAI0LAnZ_yD-u4_krl7Z2bkd1VA_IiRbkJP01z1Tw_uxLDD4l1zteb4etUIztRkzD6coc3bcNwVXVGWWrctdoud35yKyK607fEAG_DZwF/s1600/JesusRaptor.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBNS8qyHej1w2fq9Tv5FusRexEpPIPITvObWfXAI0LAnZ_yD-u4_krl7Z2bkd1VA_IiRbkJP01z1Tw_uxLDD4l1zteb4etUIztRkzD6coc3bcNwVXVGWWrctdoud35yKyK607fEAG_DZwF/s320/JesusRaptor.png" width="209" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">T</span>he argument concerning the teaching of evolution and creationist ideologies in schools is one that has long swept the floors of our school boards and state legislatures. It is so teeming with personal convictions of educators and legislators that one may find it quite difficult to wade through the ridiculous and come up with a viable decision on the matter. According to the article that I have selected,"On eve of Darwin’s birthday, states take steps to limit evolution" by Kimberly Winston (Washington Post), the schools of certain states are attempting once again to remove theory repeatedly proven by exact and methodical scientific testing, and replace it with fantasy.<br />
<br />
I find my atheism very apparent from that last statement, but I will attempt to remain as non-biased as possible concerning the subject matter; which I assure you is very biased even so. Whatever side of the spectrum you find yourself on, it is very difficult and almost certainly naive to deny the validity of <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwinism" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Darwinism">Darwin's Theory of Evolution</a>. There are very few laws in science, and even fewer in the field of biology, Darwin's theory not included; but rest assured that Darwin's theory is hardly arguable subject matter. Which brings me to my next point.<br />
<br />
With all of this overwhelming evidence supporting something that is the basis for our existence, why would one consider combating this theory with something so preposterous as the idea that we are the absent minded side project of an ever present being within the expanse of our unimaginable universe? Now lets be clear here, I'm not arguing the existence of God, I'm arguing the <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_and_evolution_in_public_education" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Creation and evolution in public education">teaching of Creationism</a>. As these lawmakers would have it, the earth is 6000 years old, carbon dating is always wrong, and <a href="http://www.dailysquib.co.uk/most-popular/1236-scientists-prove-jesus-walked-with-dinosaurs.html" target="_blank">Jesus rode a velociraptor</a><a class="l" href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CDwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FVelociraptor&ei=gkdHT5z_AoKJtwe4o_WyDg&usg=AFQjCNEcEK-JFsEzYXtLWvBFmJFLl03eXg&sig2=5Inkxjywjs5zQMeGVxEOYw"><i></i></a>. If that is what you want to believe, please be my guest, but keep it out of our public schools. The idea of <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Separation of church and state">Separation of Church and State</a> works both ways, not only to protect the minds and freedoms of those who do not subscribe to faith, but also to protect those of faith from very "unreasonable" men like myself. By instituting faith-based logic on our public school children, you send an open invitation for doomed souls to break down your "logic". (Please be away that by stating "you", I am not implying "You" the reader, only those applicable concerning the article.")<br />
<br />
I find it so difficult to accept the fact that they wish to outlaw the atheists, to paint them as evil men and women of no moral value. The idea of atheism is so deeply in tune with the moral views of man, that it would even seem that our counterparts are threatened. They are threatened by the idea that we, of no faith, can be humans of great value. They find it so difficult to believe the someone could walk within the bounds of righteousness with no means of support, that they lash out at the very idea of one without faith. The atheist needs no guiding light, he finds that light within himself, and will stand as a light for those around him.<br />
<br />
One quote from the article especially caught my attention. “I want the full portrait of evolution and the people who came up with the ideas to be presented,” Bergevin told the Concord Monitor. “It’s a worldview and it’s godless. Atheism has been tried in various societies, and they’ve been pretty criminal domestically and internationally. The Soviet Union, Cuba, the Nazis, China today: They don’t respect human rights.” They almost make it too easy for anybody with sense to see through the fallacy. If we are to explore the extent of Atheism, which we do in History every day, then we must also explore the extent of Christianity. And I assure you, it is a history riddled with inconsistencies as well as atrocities. So I find it almost amusing that this man would attempt to put his faith on the chopping block, when I know with the upmost certainty that it will not withstand the flood of logic and reason that we of little or no faith find so handy within ourselves. We breath logic with every breath, and with each passing day we find new reasons to see light beyond the darkness that religion has cast. So if this man wishes to stack his faith up against the truth of this world, he can rest assured that am I but the lowliest of the great minds that I stand with. It will take more than that simple invitation to silence the free thinkers.<br />
<br />
But what about intelligent design? We don't need to teach the kids about Adam and Eve, but certainly that the Universe is the framework of something set in place by a very impressive being. To most, this being would be considered God, and to many; God would be exactly who they are implying. Though I can't argue with the idea that children should be left to make up their own minds concerning creation, I can argue that this cloak of Creationist deception is completely unnecessary in their upbringing. We don't need to waste taxpayer's money concerning our kids with the even more confusing idea that, "There is a God, but we can't tell you anything about him".<br />
<br />
So what do we do, teach them nothing? If we can't find common ground on the creation of man, should we just ignore it completely? The ludicrousness of it all can be answered simply; teach them fact. Teach them proven ideas, and allow them to make own decisions based on their upbringing and their life ahead. If we aren't teaching them fact, then we aren't telling them the truth. If we aren't telling them the truth, then why are we teaching them at all? <br />
<div class="zemanta-pixie" style="height: 15px; margin-top: 10px;"><img alt="" class="zemanta-pixie-img" src="http://img.zemanta.com/pixy.gif?x-id=f4ab05dd-c775-462b-b57d-55c77c812591" style="border: none; float: right;" /></div>Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-47830923338088715562011-07-23T18:59:00.000-04:002019-07-09T12:24:03.182-04:00Debunking the Kalam Cosmological Argument of William Lane Craig<i>By <a href="http://www.youtube.com/user/skydivephil">skydivephil</a> ~ </i><br />
<br />
We hope this is the definitive take down of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalam_cosmological_argument">Kalam Cosmological Argument</a>. <div class="zemanta-img separator" style="clear: right;"><a href="http://commons.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Big_bang.jpg" style="clear: right; display: block; float: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;" target="_blank"><img alt="Big bang" height="148" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cb/Big_bang.jpg/300px-Big_bang.jpg" style="border: none; font-size: 0.8em;" width="300" /></a><span class="zemanta-img-attribution" style="clear: both; float: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; width: 300px;">Image via <a href="http://commons.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Big_bang.jpg" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a></span></div>We show how it is contradictory and that the physics being used to support it doesn't do so. We also had this video reviewed by Marcus, one of the Cosmology Advisers on <a href="http://www.physicsforums.com/">Physics Forums</a> to make sure there were no errors. His words:<br />
<blockquote>"I think it is excellent.Your narrator comes across as really smart and personable....I don't see any glaring errors, really amazingly good. It's charming, intelligent, visually engaging, sporadically really beautiful like the brief cut of the <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Space_Telescope" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Hubble Space Telescope">Hubble telescope</a> and the volcano etc. Well-made!"</blockquote><br />
<br />
<center><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/baZUCc5m8sE" width="560"></iframe> </center> <br />
<div class="zemanta-pixie" style="height: 15px; margin-top: 10px;"><img alt="" class="zemanta-pixie-img" src="http://img.zemanta.com/pixy.gif?x-id=141d0556-2178-4636-bdd0-c2a273e73983" style="border: none; float: right;" /></div>Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-20092447270145153342011-07-03T08:29:00.000-04:002019-07-09T12:24:03.018-04:00Why religious people are not science-friendly<i>By Paul ~ </i><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>The general nature of religious worldviews: Why religious believers are not science-friendly.</b></span><br />
<br />
<span class="dropcap">T</span>he debate between science and religion is a complex one, but I don’t want to focus on all the details. I want to explore the underlying reason why many religious believers have difficulty relating to scientific facts and explanations than religious ones. It is not mere stupidity, although many religious believers have displayed ignorance, but something deep. I am not saying that those deep reasons for being uncomfortable with scientific facts are a good reason to reject science (I think it is a bad reason to deny scientific facts), but rather I am trying to provide an insightful explanation to this problem.<br />
<br />
<div class="zemanta-img separator" style="clear: right;"><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/40861420@N00/3978414091" style="clear: right; display: block; float: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;" target="_blank"><img alt="Science, religion and perceptions of reality" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3437/3978414091_a12244faff_m.jpg" style="border: none; font-size: 0.8em;" /></a><span class="zemanta-img-attribution" style="clear: both; float: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">Image by <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/40861420@N00/3978414091" target="_blank">Noel A. Tanner</a> via Flickr</span></div>Many times, either religious people try to reconcile science with religion or they assert that science and religion are not reconcilable. The problem with this is that it is not really science as a whole that religions are having problem with, but specific theories and descriptions of the world that disturbs them. It is not only evolutionary theory and big bang theory that many religious have problems with, but other scientific understanding of the world such as the fact that neurobiology has no evidence for the “soul” or that the earth is more than 6000 years old. Many other scientific facts and theories contradict religious tenants about the cosmos which brings discomfort to many religious adherents. Despite this, there are many scientists in the United States that are religious, and accept scientific explanations. Other religious believers in <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainline_Protestant" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Mainline Protestant">Mainline Protestantism</a> also accept scientific explanations since they interpret the bible allegorically.<br />
<br />
The relation between science and religion become more complex not only in regards to <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_science" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Natural science">natural science</a> but also history and other social sciences. History, including modern biblical criticism, has shown that the bible is not necessarily a coherent text but a compilation of books written in different times, which inevitably lead each text to contradict each other. I will not go deep into biblical criticism, but I will say that the results of the <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Scientific method">scientific method</a> in history and the archeology have not received favorable reception among religious conservatives. Even though the scientific method of history and archeology has successfully found evidence for other historical events, which religious believers are either indifferent to or receptive to, whenever it comes to finding contrary evidence against biblical “accounts” believers react with discomfort and disapproval.<br />
<br />
Theologians have insisted in the separation between science and religion, but the separation is not always clear. Religion certainly deals with distinct norms, rituals, holidays, communities, etc. These aspects of religions do not really have much to do with explanations of the <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Nature">natural world</a>, which is not necessarily in dispute with science. But the underpinning or foundational of religions are usually some kind of explanation of reality which human beings inhabit. Somehow these explanations are very much tied into justifying or rationalizing distinct customs, habits, norms, worship, etc than a sophisticated investigation of understanding the natural world. In this respect, religions do not necessarily investigate what the natural world is but have preconceptions about the world that are frameworks for human behavior, attitude, conventions, communities, etc; religious explanations are meant to regulate attitude and behavior of human beings.<br />
<br />
While some religions are more metaphysical than others (by metaphysical I meant focusing on the fundamentals quality of reality), many of the metaphysical beliefs always have some relation to human behavior and attitudes. Religion, then, defines the world not only for its own sake but also to delineate the purpose of human actions. I am not saying that religion seeks to control people’s behavior in a totalitarian matter (although that does occur), but rather religions display a common human feat: that is to impose intelligible purpose on actions to justify them. We do this many times, in which we formulate or impose a purpose to meaningfully elucidate our behavior. The purpose is not always imposed by rationality but also by desires and motivation. In this sense religion tries to relate human actions to reality, by providing a belief system about reality that can prescribe a general way to impose a purpose to many <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_behavior" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Human behavior">human behaviors</a>.<br />
<br />
An example of this is that in Buddhism there is a metaphysical belief in the <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Karma">Karma</a>/Rebirth. The belief in Karma basically states that there is a causal law about our actions in that consistent negative actions lead us to be reborn in the worse life, while positive actions will lead us to be reborn in a better life. But in the overall scheme any kind of existence leads to suffering, which we all need to transcend. The four noble truth and he eightfold path is prescribed unto human behaviors to achieve a certain state of mind in order to transcend karma. The metaphysical belief about the world (karma) is deeply connected to the prescription of the eightfold path and four noble truths. Likewise in Christianity, the world we inhabit is infested with sin and suffering, and our human nature is incapable of relating to the supreme ruler. The narrative of the fall, <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence_of_God" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Existence of God">existence of God</a> (including Jesus) is beliefs about the history of reality that relates to the human condition to the extent that it meaningfully prescribes certain norms and behavior. When the norms, behaviors, rituals, and customs that are prescribed are followed it becomes an identity for the believers; basically, you are what you do.<br />
<br />
Science on the other hand describes the world for its own sake, but provides evidence to prove the description. The description is merely a hypothesis until there is sufficient evidence to support it. The description does not merely describe but also predicts the behavior of nature. In this sense science is impersonal and objective, indifferent to human behaviors. It does not seek to justify human behavior other than the act of scientific investigation and curiosity. Applied science, on the other hand, is not indifferent to the natural world but manipulates the principles of nature in order to develop technologies that maximize the efficiency of human actions. But this application does not seek to describe the natural world but uses the principles already described to benefit human actions.<br />
<br />
With this basic difference between science and religion (and I say basic because the difference maybe more complex than it is) it seems that science has the kind of intellectual integrity to understand the world even if reality goes against human preconceptions. Religions on the other hand holds unto the preconceptions not just because it is believed to be true, but those preconceptions are the essence of the believer’s identity that normatively regulates behaviors and communal values. To simply introduce the scientific explanation of the world that is supported with overwhelming evidence cannot always appeal to the religious believer, because the mind of the religious believer is primarily focused on the narrative values of their identity which science by its very nature does not appeal to. That doesn’t mean that the believer is correct, but it is difficult for the believer to relate to scientific explanations since science only seeks to explain nature for its own sake rather than providing some kind of social-regulating values that religious myths and rituals can provide. That doesn’t mean that science can never convince religious believers to accept scientific facts, but it does explain why it is difficult for people to accept scientific facts because their minds are still in the pre-modern and pre-scientific era that emphasizes on explaining the world intelligibly to the extent that it also prescribes human values. Human beings have the tendency to look at nature through human eyes, and this means that the view of the world is anthropocentric in that nature is understood as justifying prescribed values through deities or other supernatural forces. Justifying prescribed values leads to justifying certain sense of identity important to the religious believes. In the world we inhabit, religions express the need to interpret the world meaningfully to the believers such that they can existentially inhabit the world. Science doesn’t seem to do that since it seeks to understand the world objectively, not in terms of existential and subjective terms. This isn’t necessarily bad for science, since it displays intellectual integrity to understand the world with an open and self-critical mind.<br />
<br />
I am not defending religion, but rather explaining why it is difficult for religious believers in general to relate to scientific facts into their worldview. What I explained is that worldviews cannot be merely descriptive but must also be existentially prescriptive (e.g. “What should I do? What is the purpose of what I do?”), and this is something that religions emphasize. I am not saying that this is all what religion is, since religions are more complex to be explained that way. But I do believe that this is the fundamental and underlying reason why religions are attractive to religious believers. I do believe that we all need to try to understand the world in its own terms, not in human terms, to be intellectually honest. I do not think that by doing this we are destroying our motives to do anything in this world, because it’s quite obvious that our motives are not always related to impersonal facts about the world. Religions have consistently emphasized the notion that the way world is must justify prescribed human values that many religious people are under the false impression that they cannot live life if they find out that the world they believe they inhabit does not really exist but rather they live in a world indifferent to their actions. <br />
<div class="zemanta-pixie" style="height: 15px; margin-top: 10px;"><img alt="" class="zemanta-pixie-img" src="http://img.zemanta.com/pixy.gif?x-id=0128b77d-452f-4299-b604-5b3cea01e940" style="border: none; float: right;" /></div>Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-29278351857327643112011-05-30T07:11:00.003-04:002019-07-09T12:24:03.090-04:00The Fallacy of Fine-Tuning<b><span style="font-size: large;">Why the Universe Is Not Designed for Us</span></b><br />
<br />
<i>Book by</i><i> <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victor_J._Stenger" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Victor J. Stenger">Victor J. Stenger</a> ~ </i><br />
<br />
<i>This article by Cheryl Krajna ~ </i><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Fallacy-Fine-Tuning-Why-Universe-Designed/dp/1616144432?ie=UTF8&tag=exchrisnetenc-20&link_code=bil&camp=213689&creative=392969" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;" target="_blank"><img alt="The Fallacy of Fine-Tuning: Why the Universe Is Not Designed for Us" src="http://ws.amazon.com/widgets/q?MarketPlace=US&ServiceVersion=20070822&ID=AsinImage&WS=1&Format=_SL160_&ASIN=1616144432&tag=exchrisnetenc-20" /></a><span class="dropcap"><img alt="" border="0" height="1" src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=exchrisnetenc-20&l=bil&camp=213689&creative=392969&o=1&a=1616144432" style="border: none !important; margin: 0px !important; padding: 0px !important;" width="1" />A</span> number of authors have noted that if some physical parameters were slightly changed, the universe could no longer support life, as we know it. This implies that life depends sensitively on the physics of our universe. Does this “fine-tuning” of the universe also suggest that a creator god intentionally calibrated the initial conditions of the universe such that life on earth and the evolution of humanity would eventually emerge? Some influential scientists, such as National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins, think so. Others go even further, asserting that science “has found God.”<br />
<br />
In this in-depth, lucid discussion of this fascinating and controversial topic, physicist Victor J. Stenger looks at the same evidence and comes to the opposite conclusion. He states at the outset that as a physicist he will go wherever the data takes him, even if it leads him to God. But after many years of research in particle physics and thinking about its implications, he finds that the observations of science and our naked senses not only show no evidence for God, they provide evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that God does not exist.<br />
<br />
Stenger argues that many of the claims by theists are based on their misunderstanding of the science. He looks at the specific parameters and shows that plausible reasons can be found for the values they have within the existing standard models of physics and cosmology. These models are introduced in detail so that the reader has the background needed to understand the role of the parameters claimed to be fine-tuned and judge the veracity of the arguments.<br />
<br />
Although Stenger has touched on the subject of fine-tuning in other books, this is his most thorough exploration of a topic that continues to intrigue scientists and the lay public alike.<br />
<br />
About the author: Victor J. Stenger is adjunct professor of philosophy at the University of Colorado and emeritus professor of physics and astronomy at the University of Hawaii. He is the author of the <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_York_Times_Best_Seller_list" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="The New York Times Best Seller list">New York Times bestseller</a> <a class="zem_slink" href="http://www.amazon.com/God-Failed-Hypothesis-Science-Shows/dp/1591024811%3FSubscriptionId%3D0G81C5DAZ03ZR9WH9X82%26tag%3Dexchrisnetenc-20%26linkCode%3Dxm2%26camp%3D2025%26creative%3D165953%26creativeASIN%3D1591024811" rel="amazon" target="_blank" title="God: The Failed Hypothesis: How Science Shows That God Does Not Exist">God: The Failed Hypothesis</a>, and many other books, including <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Science-Latest-Results-Purpose-Universe/dp/1591020182?ie=UTF8&tag=exchrisnetenc-20&link_code=btl&camp=213689&creative=392969" target="_blank"></a><a href="http://www.amazon.com/New-Atheism-Taking-Science-Reason/dp/1591027519?ie=UTF8&tag=exchrisnetenc-20&link_code=btl&camp=213689&creative=392969" target="_blank">The New Atheism</a><img alt="" border="0" height="1" src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=exchrisnetenc-20&l=btl&camp=213689&creative=392969&o=1&a=1591027519" style="border: none !important; margin: 0px !important; padding: 0px !important;" width="1" /><img alt="" border="0" height="1" src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=exchrisnetenc-20&l=btl&camp=213689&creative=392969&o=1&a=1591020182" style="border: none !important; margin: 0px !important; padding: 0px !important;" width="1" />, <a class="zem_slink" href="http://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Gods-Jeff-Love/dp/0877284768%3FSubscriptionId%3D0G81C5DAZ03ZR9WH9X82%26tag%3Dexchrisnetenc-20%26linkCode%3Dxm2%26camp%3D2025%26creative%3D165953%26creativeASIN%3D0877284768" rel="amazon" target="_blank" title="Quantum Gods">Quantum Gods</a>, <a class="zem_slink" href="http://www.amazon.com/Unconscious-Quantum-Metaphysics-Physics-Cosmology/dp/1573920223%3FSubscriptionId%3D0G81C5DAZ03ZR9WH9X82%26tag%3Dexchrisnetenc-20%26linkCode%3Dxm2%26camp%3D2025%26creative%3D165953%26creativeASIN%3D1573920223" rel="amazon" target="_blank" title="The Unconscious Quantum: Metaphysics in Modern Physics and Cosmology">The Unconscious Quantum</a>, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Science-Latest-Results-Purpose-Universe/dp/1591020182?ie=UTF8&tag=exchrisnetenc-20&link_code=btl&camp=213689&creative=392969" target="_blank">Has Science Found God?</a><img alt="" border="0" height="1" src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=exchrisnetenc-20&l=btl&camp=213689&creative=392969&o=1&a=1591020182" style="border: none !important; margin: 0px !important; padding: 0px !important;" width="1" />, <a class="zem_slink" href="http://www.amazon.com/Comprehensible-Cosmos-Where-Laws-Physics/dp/1591024242%3FSubscriptionId%3D0G81C5DAZ03ZR9WH9X82%26tag%3Dexchrisnetenc-20%26linkCode%3Dxm2%26camp%3D2025%26creative%3D165953%26creativeASIN%3D1591024242" rel="amazon" target="_blank" title="The Comprehensible Cosmos: Where Do the Laws of Physics Come From?">The Comprehensible Cosmos</a>, <a class="zem_slink" href="http://www.amazon.com/Timeless-Reality-Symmetry-Simplicity-Universes/dp/1573928593%3FSubscriptionId%3D0G81C5DAZ03ZR9WH9X82%26tag%3Dexchrisnetenc-20%26linkCode%3Dxm2%26camp%3D2025%26creative%3D165953%26creativeASIN%3D1573928593" rel="amazon" target="_blank" title="Timeless Reality : Symmetry, Simplicity, and Multiple Universes">Timeless Reality</a>, and <a class="zem_slink" href="http://www.amazon.com/Physics-Psychics-Search-Beyond-Senses/dp/087975575X%3FSubscriptionId%3D0G81C5DAZ03ZR9WH9X82%26tag%3Dexchrisnetenc-20%26linkCode%3Dxm2%26camp%3D2025%26creative%3D165953%26creativeASIN%3D087975575X" rel="amazon" target="_blank" title="Physics and Psychics: The Search for a World Beyond the Senses">Physics and Psychics</a>. <br />
<div class="zemanta-pixie" style="height: 15px; margin-top: 10px;"><img alt="" class="zemanta-pixie-img" src="http://img.zemanta.com/pixy.gif?x-id=4c0ae424-1db8-47a5-9c44-ee3bc60ef308" style="border: none; float: right;" /></div>Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-16455462935156492352011-04-14T16:52:00.000-04:002019-07-09T12:24:02.990-04:00The God Debate<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0Ei4epHv0D1KON6DI4-RnLPCUqdxah2Xez0hB81VswO2g_7QNU0EZ3a4DgUeErUBQoBoku5_Xf3U9bHz17cBaCGruh5tj1e8K2FLu8gWc0BGSz0EOG0jjdu5pOPij3DRWCYKh-W3f2eu8/s1600/debate-craig-harris.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0Ei4epHv0D1KON6DI4-RnLPCUqdxah2Xez0hB81VswO2g_7QNU0EZ3a4DgUeErUBQoBoku5_Xf3U9bHz17cBaCGruh5tj1e8K2FLu8gWc0BGSz0EOG0jjdu5pOPij3DRWCYKh-W3f2eu8/s200/debate-craig-harris.jpg" width="200" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">O</span>n April 7, a sold-out audience in Notre Dame’s Leighton Concert Hall watched this year’s edition of “The God Debate.”Before a packed house, “<a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Atheism" rel="wikipedia" title="New Atheism">New Atheist</a>” <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Harris_%28author%29" rel="wikipedia" title="Sam Harris (author)">Sam Harris</a> and <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_religion" rel="wikipedia" title="Philosophy of religion">philosopher of religion</a> <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Lane_Craig" rel="wikipedia" title="William Lane Craig">William Lane Craig</a> argued whether God is the source of morality.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>I simply argued for a scientific conception of moral truth and against one based on the biblical God. This was, after all, the argument that the organizer’s at Notre Dame had invited me to make. -- <a href="http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/the-god-debate/"><i>From Sam Harris' blog</i></a></blockquote><br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="368" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/yqaHXKLRKzg?rel=0" title="YouTube video player" width="600"></iframe> <br />
<div class="zemanta-pixie" style="height: 15px; margin-top: 10px;"><img alt="" class="zemanta-pixie-img" src="http://img.zemanta.com/pixy.gif?x-id=bb5f02d4-1fff-4775-ba03-b3fac0dceac1" style="border: medium none; float: right;" /></div>Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-78732166141837983762011-04-05T16:42:00.001-04:002019-07-09T12:24:03.334-04:00A response and perspective on debate with Craig<i>Renowned Physicist <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_M._Krauss" rel="wikipedia" title="Lawrence M. Krauss">Lawrence Krauss</a> recently participated in a public debate with Evangelical Apologist William Lane Craig. Here are his comments (<a href="http://www.facebook.com/notes/lawrence-krauss/a-response-and-perspective-on-debate-with-craig/1970320340056">as posted to his Facebook Page</a>) regarding the debate.</i><br />
<br />
<i>By Lawrence Krauss ~ </i><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi3BLOFLGtMSDMHnE0eMdbs4a0ZX9RK3_lcivUAf1sS22c5J8Pc2Agj-2I38VVkHbJCDQRUXTBTyu4zr67qvRPdSvDf9tFcj2H4IX4e_47CelwHgtx-ss22vfGWECH91IuCrWpK5SxoZPiR/s1600/physicists.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="256" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi3BLOFLGtMSDMHnE0eMdbs4a0ZX9RK3_lcivUAf1sS22c5J8Pc2Agj-2I38VVkHbJCDQRUXTBTyu4zr67qvRPdSvDf9tFcj2H4IX4e_47CelwHgtx-ss22vfGWECH91IuCrWpK5SxoZPiR/s320/physicists.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">I</span>t sometimes surprises me, although it shouldn’t, how religious devotees feel the need to regularly reinforce their own convictions in groups of like-minded individuals. I suppose this is the purpose of regular Sunday church services, for example, to reinforce the community of belief in between the rest of the week when the real world may show no <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence_of_God" rel="wikipedia" title="Existence of God">evidence of God</a>, goodness, fairness, or purpose.<br />
<br />
Nevertheless I was not prepared for the self-congratulatory hype that I have seen spouted on the web, and have received in emails, including a typically disingenuous email from William Lane Craig to his followers regarding a debate I had with him in North Carolina last week. While carrying out the debate in the first place was something that broke my normal rules--as I said during the debate, I far prefer civil conversation and discourse as a way of illuminating knowledge and reality--I will break another rule and write this blog-like note on my own perspectives, in the hope that it may circulate and counter some of the nonsense that has propagated in the fundamentalist and religious blogs of late. Perhaps Craig will post this on his blog and send it out as well.<br />
<br />
I believe that if I erred at all, it was in an effort to consider the sensibilities of the 1200 smiling young faces in the audience, who earnestly came out, mostly to hear Craig, and to whom I decided to show undue respect. As I stressed at the time, I did not come to debate the existence of God, but rather to debate about evidence for the existence of God. I also wanted to demonstrate the need for nuance, to explain how these issues are far more complex than Craig, in his simplistic view of the world, makes them out to be. For this reason, as I figured I would change few minds I decided also to try and illustrate for these young minds the nature of science, with the hope that what they saw might cause them to think. Unfortunately any effort I made to show nuance and actually explain facts was systematically distorted in Craig’s continual effort to demonstrate how high school syllogisms apparently demonstrated definitive evidence for God.<br />
<br />
Let me now comment, with the gloves off, on the disingenuous distortions, simplifications, and outright lies that I regard Craig as having spouted. I was very disappointed because I had heard that Craig was more of a philosopher than a proselytizer, but that was not evident the other evening.<br />
<br />
Craig began with an attempt to demonstrate his scientific and mathematical credentials by writing a rather meaningless equation on this first slide, which he then argued would be the basis for his ‘evidence’. The equation, in words said that if the probability, given the data, gave one a greater than 50% likelihood for God’s existence, then this was evidence. He even presented this as a pseudo- Bayesian<br />
Argument.<br />
<br />
The problem is that using mathematical probabilities in this fashion ONLY makes sense if you have a well defined probability measure, and if one can check that the conclusions one draws are not sensitive to one’s priors. He did not explain this at all, nor do I think he understood it when I tried to explain it to him. For the rest of the evening Craig simply proceeded to spout his claimed evidence, and then proceeded to state that each gave him a greater than 50% belief in God. The whole purpose of the mathematical nonsense at the beginning was to give some kind of scientific credibility to a discussion which was anything but. It was disingenuous smoke and mirrors. (Moreover, as I tried to explain, in modern scientific experiments, merely finding an unexpected result, with say only a 20% chance of being wrong, is not sufficient to establish evidence. One needs to go to much higher levels of confidence, especially if the claim being made disagrees with all other evidence. It is hard to think of a grander claim than evidence for a divine being who creates the universe without apparent purpose, dominated by dark matter and dark energy and containing hundreds of billions of galaxies, lets it evolve untouched for billions of years, and then roughly a million years into human evolution decides to intervene at a time before Youtube or any other objective recording and archiving tool was available.)<br />
<br />
Next, if one is going to frame the argument scientifically, as I argued is essential when discussing empirical evidence, which Craig later took great pains to disavow, one must point out that in science when one is trying to explain and predict data, one tries to explore all possible physical causes for some effect before resorting to the supernatural. Happily it is precisely this progress in our natural philosophy that ended such religious atrocities as the burning of witches. In each and every case the actual syllogism that one ended up with was:<br />
<br />
<ol><li>Craig either doesn’t understand how something could happen, or instead believes that events happened that confirmed his pre-existing belief system.</li>
<li>In the absence of understanding physical causes or exploring alternatives, this implies evidence for the existence of God.</li>
<li>Therefore there is evidence that God exists.</li>
</ol><br />
This is what I framed as the “God of the Gaps” argument and I continue to view, upon reflection, most of the claims of Craig as falling in this well-known theological trap.<br />
<br />
Let me work backwards through his 5 “arguments”:<br />
<br />
<ol><li><i>The <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resurrection_of_Jesus" rel="wikipedia" title="Resurrection of Jesus">resurrection of Jesus</a>, and that fact that the followers of Jesus were willing to die for their beliefs provides evidence of God</i>: I admit that this claim is so sloppy and fatuous that in an effort to demonstrate some margin of respect for Craig I tried to avoid it for as long as I could. Craig argued that most New Testament scholars believe in the resurrection. Even if this were true, though Craig provided no evidence of this, this of course is simply proof that New Testament scholars have an <i>a priori</i> faith that guides them. It is like claiming that most Islamic scholars may believe that Mohammed actually ascended to heaven on a horse. In the first place, there are no definitive eyewitness accounts of these events, and in the case of the claimed resurrection the scriptures were written decades after the claimed event, and the different accounts are not even consistent. Not only are there serious theologians who doubt the resurrection, there are historians who doubt the <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus" rel="wikipedia" title="Historicity of Jesus">historical existence of Jesus</a> himself. Whatever one’s views in this regard, however, one must ask oneself the simple question: Is it more likely that all known physical laws were suspended so God could demonstrate divinity--and moreover demonstrate this in a hackneyed way that recreated previous resurrection myths, down to the number of days before being raised from the dead, of several previous, and now long-gone religious cults—or is it more likely that those who were preaching to convert fabricated a resurrection myth in order to convince those to whom they were preaching of Christ’s divinity? Finally, the remarkable, and completely trite claim that the fact the Christians were willing to die for their beliefs demonstrates the validity of these beliefs would be laughable, if it weren’t so pitiful. Especially, as I indicated during the event, in light of the fact that people were recently willing to fly planes into skyscrapers because of their beliefs in a religious framework that I know Craig has openly disavowed. Throughout history people have been willing to die for their beliefs, and it is often the beliefs one is willing to die for that are most suspect. Did Roman soldiers believe in Romulus and Remus. Did Viking warriers believe in Thor. Did Nazi soldiers believe in the superiority of the Aryan race. I found and still find Craig’s statement not only facile, and not even worthy of a high school debater, but I find the claim offensive. </li>
<li><i>FineTuning:</i> The appearance of design is one of the most subtle and confusing aspects of our Universe. Charles Darwin, with his Origin of the Species, brilliantly and masterfully explained how the modern world, with its remarkable diversity of life forms may have the appearance of design without any design at all. It was one of the greatest and most striking scientific discoveries of all time, and it is the basis of modern biology and medicine, leading to countless other discoveries that have continued to save countless lives. Craig is aware, from his superficial reading of cosmology, of fine tuning problems in Cosmology, which he then immediately argued requires the existence of intelligent life, implying purpose to the universe. Not only does he fall prey to the same fallacy that those who, before Darwin enlightened us, ascribed design in biology fall prey to, he also continually misrepresented the nature of any apparent fine-tuning of quantities that we currently may not understand from first principles. I tried to explain to him that the current entropy of the universe is not fine tuned, nor need the initial entropy be fine tuned, because Inflation provides a mechanism to wipe out initial conditions and produce huge amounts of entropy, without God. I tried to explain to him that the Cosmological Constant, which is perhaps the most confusing finely tuned parameter we know of in the Universe, is fine tuned in a mathematical sense, compared to the naïve value we might expect on the basis of our current understanding of physical theory. While it is also true that if it were much larger, galaxies would not form, and therefore life forms that survive on solar power would not be likely to form with any significant abundance in the universe, I also explained that if the Cosmological Constant were in fact zero, which is what most theorists had predicted in advance, the conditions for life would be, if anything, <i>more favorable</i>, for the development and persistence of life in the cosmos. Finally, even if some parameters in our currently incomplete model of the universe do appear fine tuned for human life to be possible, (a) we have no idea if other values would allow other non-human-like intelligent life forms to evolve, since we have no understanding of the locus of all possible intelligent life forms. And, beyond this, just as bees are fine tuned to see the colors of flowers which they can pollinate as they go about their business does not indicate design, but rather natural selection, we currently have no idea if the conditions of our universe represent a kind of cosmic natural selection. If there are many universes, for example, as may be the case, and as are predicted in a variety of models, none of which were developed to address God issues, we would certainly expect to find ourselves only in those in which we can live. All of these are subtle and interesting issues worthy of discussion by knowledgeable and honest intellects. I found Craig to be lacking in both of the qualities during his discussion of this issue. </li>
<li><i>Absolute Morals: </i>Craig argued that the existence of absolute morality gives evidence for God. Once again this is simple minded. Indeed in a meeting we convened at my Origins Project of distinguished philosophers and neuroscientists we debated the subtle issues of morality and human evolution, the possible variants of morality, and a host of other issues, without once ever resorting to God. As I tried to explain to Craig, paraphrasing fro Steven Pinker, if there were a God, either God would have the choice to determine what is right and wrong or not. But in this case, if God determined that raping and murdering 2 year-olds is morally acceptable would it be so? If not, as reason and experience suggests, then God really has to resort to other considerations, kindness, compassion, etc (except for the Old Testament God!), on which to base God’s decisions. But if that is the case, why not just dispense with the middle-man? Lastly, if there is evidence that God provides absolute Morality, it is missing from the world of our experience, where different religious groups, all of whom claim divine inspiration, have incompatible moral views, often leading to horrendous and violent acts against women and children, for example. Indeed, the Old Testament is full of such acts.</li>
<li><i>Contingency: </i>Frankly the argument that humans or the universe do not have to exist but they do as providing evidence for God is something I find unfounded, so I will not devote any more words here to this subject. Many ‘contingent’ phenomena occur by natural causes, from earthquakes to snowflakes and I do not have to invoke God’s will to explain them. What applies to earthquakes and snowflakes applies to the Universe. Just because I cannot yet explain the origin of the Universe does not imply the existence of God…again God of the Gaps.</li>
<li><i>Our Universe had a beginning, therefore God must have created it: </i>Actually the issue of the beginning of the Universe is the only truly interesting question worth discussing here. A host of scientific arguments need to be discussed here, and there is no doubt the question of chicken and egg is a vexing one for cosmologists as well as theologians. However, let me make a few points here: (1) All things that begin may have a cause, even if the cause is rather obscure and purposeless. However, what is important to note is that every known physical effect whose cause we understand has a physical cause. There is no reason therefore to assume the same will not be true of our universe itself. (2) There are no arguments that our universe need be unique and not derived from something pre-existing, or even eternal. Indeed, the Ekpyrotic Universe promoted by Turok and Steinhardt, which I don’t find compelling, argues for potentially eternal periods of expansion and contraction. Craig doesn’t understand the physics. (2) I continued to try and explain that quantum gravity may imply that space and time themselves are created at the moment of the big bang. This is a rather remarkable statement if true. But if it is true, in the absence of time itself, how one can ascribe arguments based on causality is unclear at best. </li>
</ol><br />
This last point illustrates what I tried hardest to explain. Classical human reason, defined in terms of common sense notions following from our own myopic experience of reality is not sufficient to discern the workings of the Universe. If time begins at the big bang, then we will have to re-explore what we mean by causality, just as the fact that electrons can be in two places at the same time doing two different things at the same time as long as we are not measuring them is completely nonsensical, but true, and has required rethinking what we mean by particles. Similar arguments by the way imply that we often need to rethink what we actually mean by ‘nothing’, from empty space, to the absence of space itself.<br />
<br />
What I hoped I could convey to the truly open minded intellects in the audience, of which of course Craig was not one, was that the amazing effort to understand how the universe works reveals wonders far more remarkable than those presented by Bronze age myths, developed before we had any clear understanding of how the universe works. Simply arguing that one doesn’t understand the results, or doesn’t like the results and therefore one has to resort to supernatural explanations, which was the crux of Craig’s rather monotonous repetition of his syllogisms, is indeed intellectually lazy, as I did say at the time.<br />
<br />
I have taken great effort to describe our actual understanding of the Universe and its implications for understanding how it might be possible for something to come from nothing, i.e. non-existence, in my new book, which will come out in January of 2012. <br />
<div class="zemanta-pixie" style="height: 15px; margin-top: 10px;"><img alt="" class="zemanta-pixie-img" src="http://img.zemanta.com/pixy.gif?x-id=2b8f71f0-dd8e-4b7e-928b-733de1533dcf" style="border: medium none; float: right;" /></div>Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-52634973611205127912011-02-20T19:33:00.001-05:002019-07-09T12:24:03.205-04:00Evolution Made Us All<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhSLh6XgvUHKuuPCOIiwfQ5Jhxy7e44Luy35rNm_woI3wwwkQE4htYysoAPIm6d1XUEUY5dxXw480dDGU2qc9MyY2XSkWVF3jO-d-xuqCcr1PN8uuJRUWaI8Heduq3qVVtm8ZYZ9YWAJzMn/s1600/evolution.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhSLh6XgvUHKuuPCOIiwfQ5Jhxy7e44Luy35rNm_woI3wwwkQE4htYysoAPIm6d1XUEUY5dxXw480dDGU2qc9MyY2XSkWVF3jO-d-xuqCcr1PN8uuJRUWaI8Heduq3qVVtm8ZYZ9YWAJzMn/s1600/evolution.jpg" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<i>by <a href="http://vimeo.com/user832355">Ben Hillman</a> ~ </i><br />
<br />
<iframe frameborder="0" height="326" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/19416924" width="580"></iframe><br />
<a href="http://vimeo.com/19416924">Evolution Made Us All</a> from <a href="http://vimeo.com/user832355">Ben Hillman</a> on <a href="http://vimeo.com/">Vimeo</a>.Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-61258911800013177602011-02-17T17:58:00.000-05:002019-07-09T12:24:03.255-04:00Fine-Tuned Universe Argument Debunked<i>Recommended by Atheist Tooth Fairy (ATF)</i> ~ <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwoVBz8OCm2kDfzT4ubIBZRSF6H-1kfaJtxm5DAVEzFmppk5yUNSXrK6yMBp87FeStAldPhEvCvlsy3cp_c6gHgzDuhdMI2VEemE7tnQsBjn3pMG4pD1uEm_xcCyP_NgYpWO6ra8WXjCB-/s1600/finetuned.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="105" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwoVBz8OCm2kDfzT4ubIBZRSF6H-1kfaJtxm5DAVEzFmppk5yUNSXrK6yMBp87FeStAldPhEvCvlsy3cp_c6gHgzDuhdMI2VEemE7tnQsBjn3pMG4pD1uEm_xcCyP_NgYpWO6ra8WXjCB-/s320/finetuned.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>There must be a divine artificer because the universe is so complex and so fine-tuned for our survival.<br />
<b><br />
OR</b><br />
<br />
Since the universe came <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Billions-Thoughts-Death-Brink-Millennium/dp/0345379187?ie=UTF8&tag=exchrisnetenc-20&link_code=btl&camp=213689&creative=392969" target="_blank">billions and billions</a><img alt="" border="0" height="1" src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=exchrisnetenc-20&l=btl&camp=213689&creative=392969&o=1&a=0345379187" style="border: medium none ! important; margin: 0px ! important; padding: 0px ! important;" width="1" /> of years before we did, the universe isn't <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuned_Universe" rel="wikipedia" title="Fine-tuned Universe">fine tuned</a> for us. We developed in such a way so as to survive within the bounds of the <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_law" rel="wikipedia" title="Natural law">natural laws</a> of the universe in which we find ourselves. <br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="356" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/rt-UIfkcgPY?rel=0" title="YouTube video player" width="580"></iframe> <br />
<div class="zemanta-pixie" style="height: 15px; margin-top: 10px;"><img alt="" class="zemanta-pixie-img" src="http://img.zemanta.com/pixy.gif?x-id=099a12b3-5406-41f4-9853-d87c11246cd6" style="border: medium none; float: right;" /></div>Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-91100728180069719602011-01-26T16:05:00.005-05:002011-01-31T07:02:33.912-05:00Why Celebrate Darwin Day? Watch the Video!<div class="gmail_quote"><div><table align="center" background="http://secure.americanhumanist.org/view.image?id=560" border="0" cellpadding="15" cellspacing="0" style="background-color: #eff2f9; background-repeat: repeat-x; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 12px; text-align: justify; width: 100%;"><tbody>
<tr> <td align="center" valign="top"><table border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width: 600px;"><tbody>
<tr> <td><table align="center" bgcolor="#ffffff" border="0" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" style="width: 600px;"><tbody>
<tr> <td colspan="2"><div align="center"><img height="110" src="http://secure.americanhumanist.org/view.image?id=632" width="550" /></div><div>Dear Friend,<br />
<br />
This February 12, people all over the world will commemorate <b>Darwin Day, an international celebration to honor the discoveries and life of Charles Darwin</b>—the man who propelled science forward by first describing biological evolution via natural selection.<br />
<br />
When I reflect on what Darwin accomplished, I'm also reminded of the challenges that science and evolution face in our nation today. <b>A recent Gallop poll still found that 40% of Americans believe in creationism.</b> And stealth creationist organizations like the Discovery Institute are spending millions of dollars to push so-called "intelligent design" into public schools.<br />
<br />
Help us fight back! You can start by doing two simple but meaningful things:<br />
<blockquote><b>First, <a href="http://secure.americanhumanist.org/page.redir?target=http%3a%2f%2fvimeo.com%2f19178513&srcid=8083&srctid=1&erid=187888" target="_blank">please watch this brief two-minute video</a> by the American Humanist Association about the importance of Darwin Day—a day to celebrate science and humanity. </b> </blockquote><br />
<div align="center"><iframe frameborder="0" height="338" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/19178513?byline=0&portrait=0&color=ff2121" width="601"></iframe></div><br />
<blockquote><b>Second, <a href="http://secure.americanhumanist.org/page.redir?target=http%3a%2f%2fsalsa.democracyinaction.org%2fo%2f318%2ft%2f10503%2fpetition.jsp%3fpetition_KEY%3d2221&srcid=8083&srctid=1&erid=187888" target="_blank">sign our petition to President Obama</a> asking him to officially declare February 12 to be Darwin Day in the United States.</b></blockquote>Our message is clear: religious infiltration in our science classrooms will not be tolerated. Our elected leaders must show that scientific discovery and integrity are top priorities—priorities that are needed now more than ever as right-wing extremists attempt to undermine science.<br />
<br />
<b>Please share the video and petition with family and friends by posting them on <a href="http://secure.americanhumanist.org/page.redir?target=http%3a%2f%2fwww.facebook.com%2fshare.php%3fu%3dhttp%253A%252F%252Fvimeo.com%252F19178513&srcid=8083&srctid=1&erid=187888" target="_blank">Facebook</a> or <a href="http://secure.americanhumanist.org/page.redir?target=http%3a%2f%2ftwitter.com%2fhome%3fstatus%3dWhy%2520Celebrate%2520Darwin%2520Day%3f%2520Watch%2520the%2520video%3a%2520http%3a%2f%2fvimeo.com%2f19178513%2520%2523DarwinDay%2520%2523Humanism&srcid=8083&srctid=1&erid=187888" target="_blank">Twitter</a>, or by sharing this article now. </b><br />
<br />
The International Darwin Day Foundation, a project of the American Humanist Association and founded by Dr. Robert Stephens, provides resources and publicity for individuals and organizations around the world to celebrate Darwin Day. <b>If you would like to attend or promote a Darwin Day celebration, please visit our website at <a href="http://secure.americanhumanist.org/page.redir?target=http%3a%2f%2fwww.darwinday.org%2f&srcid=8083&srctid=1&erid=187888" target="_blank">www.darwinday.org</a>. </b><br />
<br />
We also want to hear from you! Why do YOU celebrate Darwin Day? Make a video or write a Darwin Day story about how you plan to celebrate and email it to us at <a href="mailto:darwinday@americanhumanist.org" target="_blank">darwinday@americanhumanist.org</a>.<br />
<br />
Together, let's promote Darwin's legacy and ensure that it lives on in the science classrooms in the United States.<br />
Happy Darwin Day,<br />
<img height="66" src="http://secure.americanhumanist.org/view.image?id=555" width="200" /><br />
Roy Speckhardt<br />
Executive Director<br />
<br />
P.S. <b>After you watch our special Darwin Day video and sign the petition, I hope you can do more. <a href="http://secure.americanhumanist.org/page.redir?target=http%3a%2f%2fwww.facebook.com%2fshare.php%3fu%3dhttp%253A%252F%252Fvimeo.com%252F19178513&srcid=8083&srctid=1&erid=187888" target="_blank">Share the video and petition</a></b> with family and friends. <b><a href="http://secure.americanhumanist.org/page.redir?target=http%3a%2f%2fwww.darwinday.org%2fevents%2f&srcid=8083&srctid=1&erid=187888" target="_blank">Sign up to attend</a></b> a Darwin Day event near you. And <b><a href="http://secure.americanhumanist.org/page.redir?target=https%3a%2f%2fsecure.americanhumanist.org%2fdonate&srcid=8083&srctid=1&erid=187888" target="_blank">donate to the American Humanist Association</a></b> to boost our efforts to promote science and reason. </div></td> </tr>
</tbody> </table></td> </tr>
</tbody> </table></td> </tr>
</tbody> </table><img alt="" border="0" hspace="0" src="http://secure.americanhumanist.org/smtp.mailopen?id=187888" /> </div></div><br />
<div id="avg_ls_inline_popup" style="left: -5000px; visibility: hidden;"></div><style type="text/css">
#avg_ls_inline_popup{position: absolute;z-index: 9999;padding: 0px 0px;margin-left: 0px;margin-top: 0px;overflow: hidden;word-wrap: break-word;color: black;font-size: 10px;text-align: left;line-height: 130%;}
</style>Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-65401032856765891232010-12-22T17:01:00.002-05:002020-04-02T11:20:40.615-04:00The Scale of the Universe<div class="zemanta-img separator" style="clear: right;"><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/32628328@N00/2806711443" style="clear: right; display: block; float: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="The Scale of the Universe" height="424" src="https://farm4.static.flickr.com/3057/2806711443_4f6331d7ac_m.jpg" style="border: medium none; font-size: 0.8em;" width="640"></a><span class="zemanta-img-attribution" style="clear: both; float: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; width: 240px;">Image by <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/32628328@N00/2806711443">paalia</a> via Flickr</span></div><object classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" height="400" id="myId" style="visibility: visible;" width="600"> <param name="movie" value="https://www.documaga.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/scaleofuniverse.swf"><!--[if !IE]>--> <object type="application/x-shockwave-flash" data="http://www.documaga.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/scaleofuniverse.swf" height="400" width="600"> <!--<![endif]--> <div><h1>Alternative content</h1><p><a href="http://www.adobe.com/go/getflashplayer"><img src="https://www.adobe.com/images/shared/download_buttons/get_flash_player.gif" alt="Get Adobe Flash player"></a></p></div><!--[if !IE]>--> </object> <!--<![endif]--> </object>
<a href="http://primaxstudio.com/stuff/scale_of_universe/">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">ORIGINAL LINK</span></b></a>
<div class="zemanta-pixie" style="height: 15px; margin-top: 10px;"><img alt="" class="zemanta-pixie-img" src="https://img.zemanta.com/pixy.gif?x-id=3906e68d-ab5d-4a09-80b2-8d99b9d1cb75" style="border: medium none; float: right;"></div>Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-78257269946747443262010-11-11T10:49:00.000-05:002019-07-09T12:24:03.329-04:00Science Saved My Soul<i>By </i><a href="http://www.youtube.com/user/philhellenes"><i>philhellene ~ </i></a><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEghelv9zl4OTEg-gR6Pcf1-gcaGG5Ue7ZJuo9wgxtTk3xOHOjWzF4ZPs6aDD-MqFsSiMTOGmMLeTONbzLTelM_-VbO6pqdsGy-6gD9qid8BHv1XxL_ecGXOmwnfG1iynW1nKzGLQ-6ixYTN/s1600/Milky+Way+mini.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEghelv9zl4OTEg-gR6Pcf1-gcaGG5Ue7ZJuo9wgxtTk3xOHOjWzF4ZPs6aDD-MqFsSiMTOGmMLeTONbzLTelM_-VbO6pqdsGy-6gD9qid8BHv1XxL_ecGXOmwnfG1iynW1nKzGLQ-6ixYTN/s1600/Milky+Way+mini.gif" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<object height="475" width="600"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/r6w2M50_Xdk?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/r6w2M50_Xdk?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" height="475" width="600"></embed></object><br />
<br />
<div class="zemanta-pixie" style="height: 15px; margin-top: 10px;"><img alt="" class="zemanta-pixie-img" src="http://img.zemanta.com/pixy.gif?x-id=b8a5a719-5663-41c1-870c-e4ec490bc6c7" style="border: medium none; float: right;" /></div>Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-17678824100424689432010-10-23T04:41:00.001-04:002019-07-09T12:24:03.009-04:00Eddie Izzard - Science vs. Religion (2009)<div class="zemanta-img separator" style="clear: right;"><a href="http://commons.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:EddieIzzard.jpg" style="clear: right; display: block; float: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="Eddie Izzard at The Lyric Theatre, 2nd Decembe..." height="200" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ec/EddieIzzard.jpg/300px-EddieIzzard.jpg" style="border: medium none; font-size: 0.8em;" width="132" /></a><span class="zemanta-img-attribution" style="clear: both; float: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; width: 300px;"></span></div><br />
<b>Edward John</b> "<b>Eddie</b>" <b><a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddie_Izzard" rel="wikipedia" title="Eddie Izzard">Izzard</a></b> (born 7 February 1962) is a <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom" rel="wikipedia" title="United Kingdom">British</a><sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-0"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddie_Izzard#cite_note-0"></a></sup><sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-2"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddie_Izzard#cite_note-2"></a></sup> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-up_comedy" title="Stand-up comedy">stand-up comedian</a>, actor and <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_acting" rel="wikipedia" title="Voice acting">voice-over artist</a>. His comedy style takes the form of rambling, whimsical <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monologue" title="Monologue">monologue</a> and self-referential <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantomime" title="Pantomime">pantomime</a>. <br />
<br />
During his <i>Stripped</i> tour, Izzard said he realized he was an atheist. "I was warming the material up in <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York" rel="wikipedia" title="New York">New York</a>, where one night, literally on stage, I realised I didn’t believe in God at all...I just didn’t think there was anyone upstairs."<sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-Hollywood_Commons_26-0"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddie_Izzard#cite_note-Hollywood_Commons-26">[*]</a></sup><br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe frameborder="0" width="525" height="296" src="http://www.dailymotion.com/embed/video/xb82zx?width=525&theme=denim&foreground=%2392ADE0&highlight=%23A2ACBF&background=%23202226&additionalInfos=1&hideInfos=1&start=&animatedTitle=&iframe=1&autoPlay=0"></iframe><br />
<br />
Download this clip: 55MB avi<br />
<a href="http://rapidshare.com/files/310301477/eddie_izzard_2.avi">http://rapidshare.com/files/310301477/eddie_izzard_2.avi</a> <br />
<div class="zemanta-pixie" style="height: 15px; margin-top: 10px;"><img alt="" class="zemanta-pixie-img" src="http://img.zemanta.com/pixy.gif?x-id=03038d9a-77b7-4318-a2f0-45b840163a9e" style="border: medium none; float: right;" /></div>Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-28129811303072503682010-10-20T04:07:00.002-04:002019-07-09T12:24:03.085-04:00Teach Creationism?<i>By WizenedSage (Galen Rose) ~ </i><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">The following is my letter-to-the-editor which was published Oct. 13, 2010 in a local weekly newspaper here in <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maine" rel="wikipedia" title="Maine">Maine</a>. I offer it here as it may provide some of you with useful ammunition in the evolution debate, and to show how I use letters by others as a jumping off point for my main message. My message, which always gets into every one of my letters, no matter what the surface topic, is simply that the bible is primitive bullshit. <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libby_Mitchell" rel="wikipedia" title="Libby Mitchell">Libby Mitchell</a> (Dem.) and <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_LePage" rel="wikipedia" title="Paul LePage">Paul LePage</a> (Rep.) are candidates for Governor.</span><br />
<br />
<div class="zemanta-img separator" style="clear: right;"><a href="http://commons.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Intelligentdesign.svg" style="clear: right; display: block; float: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="Intelligent design" height="286" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9a/Intelligentdesign.svg/300px-Intelligentdesign.svg.png" style="border: medium none; font-size: 0.8em;" width="300" /></a><span class="zemanta-img-attribution" style="clear: both; float: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; width: 300px;">Image via <a href="http://commons.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Intelligentdesign.svg">Wikipedia</a></span></div><b>“Teach <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism" rel="wikipedia" title="Creationism">Creationism</a>?”</b><br />
<br />
This is written in response to <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connie_Cooper" rel="wikipedia" title="Connie Cooper">Connie Cooper</a>’s letter of last week titled, “How Does Mitchell know what Maine is all about?”<br />
<br />
In her letter, Ms. Cooper takes Libby Mitchell to task for her TV ad in which, “she states Paul LePage <a href="http://progressivebumpersticker.com/2010/07/19/fact-check-paul-lepage-creationism-and-public-schools/">supports teaching creationism in public schools</a> and that is not what Maine is all about.”<br />
<br />
I think Libby Mitchell made that ad because it demonstrates that LePage is out of touch with modern science and voters need to know that. He apparently has no appreciation of it, and so he appears to prefer his bible stories as explanations of how the world works. I agree with her implication that a Governor lacking an appreciation of modern science could do great harm.<br />
<br />
Ms. Cooper and LePage have fallen for the “teach the controversy” argument of the creationists. In fact, there is no controversy concerning the truth of evolution among the real experts in this field, the biologists. None! All current research in the field concerns the fleshing out of the details. “<a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Origin_of_Species" rel="wikipedia" title="On the Origin of Species">On the Origin of Species</a>” was published over 150 years ago, and biological research has since amassed a literal mountain of published, peer reviewed works which support the theory, over and over and over again. The creationists speak of “Darwinism” as if no one but Darwin had noticed the fossil record or the DNA code in the last 100 years.<br />
<br />
The creationists (and “intelligent design” people) complain about missing “transitional” fossils and supposed “irreducible complexity.” In fact, since 99% or so of all species that have ever existed are now extinct, EVERY fossil (except of current species) represents a transition from an older species to a newer one. And every argument for “irreducible complexity“ has been refuted. One needs only do a web search and be willing to read non-Christian sites to find those explanations.<br />
<br />
The creationists have claimed that scientists are colluding in a vast conspiracy to exclude their views (remember the movie “Expelled,” with <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Stein" rel="wikipedia" title="Ben Stein">Ben Stein</a>?). How could this possibly work? If any scientist could disprove evolution, fame and fortune would be his in an instant. The Nobel Prize (worth a million-plus) would be a cinch, and he would be considered as great a scientist as Einstein and Newton. Now how do you hold together a conspiracy against that type of pressure, and do it for 150 years?<br />
<br />
The sad truth is that the authors of the bible were primitive people who knew no science to speak of. If they didn’t have an explanation for something, they just made a guess. This explains why the bible speaks of four legged fowl, a flat earth, the demon theory of disease, and that incredible story about cows in a pasture with striped posts giving birth to striped offspring (Genesis 30:37-39)?<br />
<br />
I think Libby Mitchell is right. A man who takes his science from 2,000-year-old texts with dozens of proven errors would be a poor choice for <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governor_of_Maine" rel="wikipedia" title="Governor of Maine">Governor of Maine</a>. <br />
<div class="zemanta-related"><h6 class="zemanta-related-title" style="font-size: 1em; margin: 1em 0pt 0pt;">Related articles</h6><ul class="zemanta-article-ul"><li class="zemanta-article-ul-li"><a href="http://www.grist.org/article/paul-lepage-hates-obama-reporters-and-the-planet/">Maine: Guv candidate Paul LePage hates Obama, reporters, and the planet</a> (grist.org)</li>
<li class="zemanta-article-ul-li"><a href="http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/10/14/910149/-Cheers-and-Jeers:-Thursday">Cheers and Jeers: Thursday</a> (dailykos.com)</li>
<li class="zemanta-article-ul-li"><a href="http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/10/11/still_very_close_in_maine.html">Still Very Close in Maine</a> (politicalwire.com)</li>
<li class="zemanta-article-ul-li"><a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130653324&ft=1&f=1014">Tone, Temperament At Issue In Maine Gov. Race</a> (npr.org)</li>
</ul></div><div class="zemanta-pixie" style="height: 15px; margin-top: 10px;"><img alt="" class="zemanta-pixie-img" src="http://img.zemanta.com/pixy.gif?x-id=82c8a996-504c-4394-844c-0fa92e821842" style="border: medium none; float: right;" /></div>Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-1765218622838172552010-10-11T06:15:00.001-04:002019-07-09T12:24:03.004-04:00Galapagos -- Beyond DarwinBy <a href="http://www.youtube.com/user/WhyEvolutionIsTrue">WhyEvolutionIsTrue</a> ~ <br />
<br />
<object height="385" width="480"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/p/E0DA58C9981081E2?hl=en_US&fs=1"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/p/E0DA58C9981081E2?hl=en_US&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object><br />
<br />
<div class="zemanta-img separator" style="clear: right;"><a href="http://commons.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Galapagos-satellite-esislandnames.jpg" style="clear: right; display: block; float: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="Satellite photo of the Galapagos islands overl..." height="234" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/77/Galapagos-satellite-esislandnames.jpg/300px-Galapagos-satellite-esislandnames.jpg" style="border: medium none; font-size: 0.8em;" width="300" /></a><span class="zemanta-img-attribution" style="clear: both; float: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; width: 300px;">Image via <a href="http://commons.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Galapagos-satellite-esislandnames.jpg">Wikipedia</a></span></div>Description: Climb into a state-of-the-art <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submersible" rel="wikipedia" title="Submersible">submersible</a> and plunge 3,000 feet beneath the surface as history's first <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_diving" rel="wikipedia" title="Deep diving">deep-diving</a> expedition to the <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gal%C3%A1pagos_Islands" rel="wikipedia" title="Galápagos Islands">Galapagos</a> probes the depths where no camera has gone before. <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin" rel="wikipedia" title="Charles Darwin">Charles Darwin's</a> historic voyage to these islands forever changed our view of the world, yet he only scratched the surface. Beneath the waves, an extraordinary variety of creatures continue to evolve, undisturbed by <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_settlement" rel="wikipedia" title="Human settlement">human settlement</a>. Share the discovery of over two dozen new species and capture creatures never before seen or even named! Be part of the expedition scientists will be writing about -- and you'll be reading about -- for years. Narrated by <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roscoe_Lee_Browne" rel="wikipedia" title="Roscoe Lee Browne">Roscoe Lee Browne</a>. <br />
<div class="zemanta-pixie" style="height: 15px; margin-top: 10px;"><img alt="" class="zemanta-pixie-img" src="http://img.zemanta.com/pixy.gif?x-id=885d0989-c9e3-4432-99c3-8ea017db0d44" style="border: medium none; float: right;" /></div>Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-89856145749186207732010-07-13T04:20:00.000-04:002019-07-09T12:24:03.387-04:00Science Works<i>By WizenedSage (Galen Rose) -- </i><br />
<br />
<i>My latest foray onto the Letters-to-the-Editor page of a local weekly newspaper here in Maine is printed below. Please feel free to offer it or any part of it to your own local newspaper under your own name. I’m not interested in attribution, I’m interested in waking people up.</i><br />
<br />
<div class="zemanta-img" style="display: block; float: right; margin: 1em; width: 138px;"><a href="http://commons.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PrirodneNauke.svg" rel="nofollow"><img alt="Science icon from Nuvola icon theme for KDE 3.x." height="128" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/PrirodneNauke.svg/128px-PrirodneNauke.svg.png" style="border: medium none; display: block;" width="128" /></a><span class="zemanta-img-attribution">Image via <a href="http://commons.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PrirodneNauke.svg">Wikipedia</a></span></div><span class="dropcap">S</span>ome recent letters on these pages and elsewhere have brought my attention to an important issue which is too often ignored or swept under a rug. It needs to be recognized that in some religious sects, the emphasis is clearly on fear. One is preached at to do whatever he’s told by the “sacred” texts or he will be very, very sorry. Imagine how frightening this world must be to those who believe that every word in those texts is the literal truth, who believe there are witches, demons and devils lurking in every dark corner, with the sole purpose of leading them astray and/or making their lives miserable. (I mean the kind of witches who allegedly suspend the <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_law" rel="wikipedia nofollow" title="Physical law">laws of nature</a> with incantations, potions, etc.) Clearly, for these people, life is a frightening passage over the knife edge of obedience to <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernatural" rel="wikipedia nofollow" title="Supernatural">supernatural powers</a>. One misstep can bring on the punishment of everlasting pain. This is indeed a very scary way to live.<br />
<br />
This is the world that some churches and Sunday schools are teaching the children. Now, if the world really is like this, full of witches, demons and devils, then it would certainly be helpful to know this. But, if we are not certain this is true, does it make sense to send the kids down this fearful path? Life can be difficult enough for children, with all the insecurities they must deal with concerning fitting in with others, dealing with the opposite sex, deciding on a career path, and all the rest. Does it make sense to add the fear of an assortment of malevolent, supernatural creatures to their lives?<br />
<br />
<span class="pullquote">In the entire history of modern science, no claim of any type of supernatural phenomena has ever been replicated under strictly controlled conditions.</span> I suggest that it makes sense for parents to do some research on this issue. Many people think the Bible has all the answers to how the world really works even though nothing in that book has changed for nearly 2,000 years. Would you consult a 2,000 year-old medical book on how to treat a cancer? The past few hundred years have seen an explosion of scientific knowledge and we are surrounded by the fruits of the <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method" rel="wikipedia nofollow" title="Scientific method">scientific method</a>. Science works. There’s really no reasonable argument on this issue. Consider the <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printing_press" rel="wikipedia nofollow" title="Printing press">printing press</a> this newspaper was printed on, and the automobile, airplane, computers, TV, vaccines, surgical procedures, Velcro, and the zipper in your pants. The fruits of successful science surround us.<br />
<br />
Now, consider that supernatural causes were once attributed to thousands of things which we now can explain using only the laws of nature. These things include everything from thunder and lightning to volcanoes, hurricanes, earthquakes, childbirth and disease. Science works. Now, can you name just one thing that used to be explained by the laws of nature but has since been discovered to be supernaturally caused? Anything at all? No? Neither can anyone else. Do you see a pattern here?<br />
<br />
In the entire history of modern science, no claim of any type of supernatural phenomena has ever been replicated under strictly controlled conditions.<br />
<br />
Science doesn’t have all the answers and it never will, but it works; it continually expands and refines our knowledge of how the world actually works. Now, consider if you will that <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science" rel="wikipedia nofollow" title="Science">mainstream science</a> has never uncovered any evidence whatsoever of witches, demons, or devils. If these things existed and had effects on our world, those interactions would be there for us to detect and measure.<br />
<br />
Think about this: electrons are so tiny they are invisible to even the strongest microscopes and have never been seen. Yet, we have detected and measured their interactions with other objects and fields, written equations describing them, and can predict with great accuracy how they will act in various experiments. We know enough about them that we can design electronic circuits which give us the HDTV, the <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microwave_oven" rel="wikipedia nofollow" title="Microwave oven">microwave oven</a>, the computer and hundreds of other gadgets, plus those same electrons power our homes, giving us heat and light and the means to power dozens of other devices. Science works. Science is dependable.<br />
<br />
Should you or your church and Sunday school be teaching your children about witches, demons, and devils when the only “evidence” for them consists of anecdotal claims and ancient texts written by people who thought the earth was flat (Matthew 4:8)? As <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Sagan" rel="wikipedia nofollow" title="Carl Sagan">Carl Sagan</a> said, “<a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_skepticism" rel="wikipedia nofollow" title="Scientific skepticism">Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence</a>.” This is why mainstream science has rejected these creatures.<br />
<br />
Do you know what your kids are “learning” in Sunday school? Have you asked? Could it be that putting the fear of such creatures into children without very good cause is as immoral as threatening them with the boogeyman? Is there anything more important than the <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_health" rel="wikipedia nofollow" title="Mental health">mental health</a> of your children? Please think about it. Maybe your children will thank you some day, as mine have thanked me.<br />
<div class="zemanta-pixie" style="height: 15px; margin-top: 10px;"><img alt="" class="zemanta-pixie-img" src="http://img.zemanta.com/pixy.gif?x-id=e0a5aa50-a8cf-4916-9c99-c837b92495c6" style="border: medium none; float: right;" /></div>Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-25362440428687495012010-07-06T08:47:00.000-04:002019-07-09T12:24:03.063-04:00Rare Look Inside Bible Belt Classroom<div class="zemanta-img" style="display: block; float: right; margin: 1em; width: 250px;"><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/71832042@N00/3864382539" rel="nofollow"><img alt="Description unavailable" height="180" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2462/3864382539_e0c4627fd8_m.jpg" style="border: medium none; display: block;" width="240" /></a><span class="zemanta-img-attribution">Image by <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/71832042@N00/3864382539">thelazydba</a> via Flickr</span></div><span style="font-size: large;"><b>Public high school in the South (<a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dayton%2C_Tennessee" rel="wikipedia nofollow" title="Dayton, Tennessee">Dayton, Tennessee</a>). Christian values kept alive and well.</b></span><br />
<br />
<object height="480" width="600"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/L640vc_XBjk&hl=en_US&fs=1?rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/L640vc_XBjk&hl=en_US&fs=1?rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="600" height="480"></embed></object><br />
<div class="zemanta-pixie" style="height: 15px; margin-top: 10px;"><img alt="" class="zemanta-pixie-img" src="http://img.zemanta.com/pixy.gif?x-id=0d2811b0-229b-458f-90e3-cfbf17565b44" style="border: medium none; float: right;" /></div>Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-15865035757696612602010-05-04T03:58:00.000-04:002019-07-09T12:24:02.986-04:00You Can't Trust Science!<object width="580" height="360"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KRLR9jhP_DM&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KRLR9jhP_DM&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="580" height="360"></embed></object><br />
<br />
"Science has an agenda! Science is unreliable!" If you've ever heard a religious person say these words, you'll love this video. <p class="zemanta-img" style="margin: 1em; float: right; display: block; width: 250px;"><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/99796131@N00/19925290" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/14/19925290_6dcd287b01_m.jpg" alt="Science Project 1974" style="border: medium none; display: block;" width="240" height="179"></a><span class="zemanta-img-attribution">Image by <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/99796131@N00/19925290">The Rocketeer</a> via Flickr</span></p><div style="margin-top: 10px; height: 15px;" class="zemanta-pixie"><img style="border: medium none; float: right;" class="zemanta-pixie-img" alt="" src="http://img.zemanta.com/pixy.gif?x-id=a1098402-2980-4bd9-be8a-c8aa46134fc5"></div>Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-10521133177096225442010-04-14T10:18:00.004-04:002019-07-09T12:24:02.935-04:00'Why Evolution Is True' by Jerry Coyne<object height="360" width="580"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/w1m4mATYoig&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/w1m4mATYoig&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="580" height="360"></embed></object><br />
<br />
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Coyne">Jerry Coyne</a> explains '<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Why-Evolution-True-Jerry-Coyne/dp/0143116649?ie=UTF8&tag=exchrisnetenc-20&link_code=btl&camp=213689&creative=392969" target="_blank">Why Evolution is True</a><img alt="" border="0" height="1" src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=exchrisnetenc-20&l=btl&camp=213689&creative=392969&o=1&a=0143116649" style="border: medium none ! important; margin: 0px ! important; padding: 0px ! important;" width="1" />' (also the title of his excellent new book) at the <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheist_Alliance_International" rel="wikipedia nofollow" title="Atheist Alliance International">Atheist Alliance International</a> 2009 conference, sponsored by <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins_Foundation_for_Reason_and_Science" rel="wikipedia nofollow" title="Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science">The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science</a>.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg9wrjsiDqQTL0sVYPT_db7iggLmNFpplr8qT2gD409vuVhKUz_RctuQx_QE015Fb6ExlJmCdJIqmrmT6bIWGKZ-VvLKoRhcToSZ-pqv6mmJh-Sswm2FEA_g4ztu-rI9kMa1d_lgfmPQ5NU/s1600/Jerry-Coyne.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="168" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg9wrjsiDqQTL0sVYPT_db7iggLmNFpplr8qT2gD409vuVhKUz_RctuQx_QE015Fb6ExlJmCdJIqmrmT6bIWGKZ-VvLKoRhcToSZ-pqv6mmJh-Sswm2FEA_g4ztu-rI9kMa1d_lgfmPQ5NU/s200/Jerry-Coyne.jpg" width="200" /></a></div><br />
Buy Jerry Coyne's new book "<a class="zem_slink" href="http://www.amazon.com/Why-Evolution-True-Jerry-Coyne/dp/0670020532%3FSubscriptionId%3D0G81C5DAZ03ZR9WH9X82%26tag%3Dexchrisnetenc-20%26linkCode%3Dxm2%26camp%3D2025%26creative%3D165953%26creativeASIN%3D0670020532" rel="amazon nofollow" title="Why Evolution Is True">Why Evolution Is True</a>" at Amazon.com.<br />
<br />
Jerry Coyne's Blog: <a dir="ltr" href="http://www.youtube.com/redirect?username=richarddawkinsdotnet&q=http%3A%2F%2Fwhyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com&video_id=w1m4mATYoig&event=url_redirect&url_redirect=True&usg=LIeCYFrGRUTmQ1a-ZLA4Mzn4jpE=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" title="http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com">http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com</a><br />
<br />
Download Quicktime version:<br />
Small: <a dir="ltr" href="http://www.youtube.com/redirect?username=richarddawkinsdotnet&q=http%3A%2F%2Fc0116791.cdn.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com%2FCoyne-AAI09-sm.mov&video_id=w1m4mATYoig&event=url_redirect&url_redirect=True&usg=ogFPQ8Xa6Cy2u3RPM5QDxUyc2kA=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" title="http://c0116791.cdn.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/Coyne-AAI09-sm.mov">http://c0116791.cdn.cloudfiles.racksp...</a><br />
720p HD: <a dir="ltr" href="http://www.youtube.com/redirect?username=richarddawkinsdotnet&q=http%3A%2F%2Fc0116791.cdn.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com%2FCoyne-AAI09-720-v4.mov&video_id=w1m4mATYoig&event=url_redirect&url_redirect=True&usg=5DKsQZS0JISNoY1o1LONqmgJYYo=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" title="http://c0116791.cdn.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/Coyne-AAI09-720-v4.mov">http://c0116791.cdn.cloudfiles.racksp...</a><br />
<br />
<a dir="ltr" href="http://www.youtube.com/redirect?username=richarddawkinsdotnet&q=http%3A%2F%2Fricharddawkinsfoundation.org&video_id=w1m4mATYoig&event=url_redirect&url_redirect=True&usg=2FiiVmtuxj-51n2_rkPS9y6N4m8=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" title="http://richarddawkinsfoundation.org">http://richarddawkinsfoundation.org</a><br />
<a dir="ltr" href="http://www.youtube.com/redirect?username=richarddawkinsdotnet&q=http%3A%2F%2Fatheistalliance.org&video_id=w1m4mATYoig&event=url_redirect&url_redirect=True&usg=lzyOY8RGM34TUJ52sfRIB95AOjw=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" title="http://atheistalliance.org">http://atheistalliance.org</a><br />
<br />
Filmed by <br />
JOSH TIMONEN<br />
<br />
Edited by <br />
JOEL PASHBY<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="zemanta-pixie" style="height: 15px; margin-top: 10px;"><img alt="" class="zemanta-pixie-img" src="http://img.zemanta.com/pixy.gif?x-id=361ca6e2-c316-49e4-b719-d158e4026e8a" style="border: medium none; float: right;" /></div>Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-44146234000711642872010-04-12T12:33:00.001-04:002019-07-09T12:24:03.161-04:00'The Evolution of Confusion' by Dan Dennett<object height="360" width="580"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/D_9w8JougLQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/D_9w8JougLQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="580" height="360"></embed></object><br />
<br />
Dan Dennett talks about purposely-confusing theology and how it's used. He also describes his new project interviewing clergyman who secretly don't believe anymore, and introduces a new term: "Deepity."<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="zemanta-img" style="display: block; float: right; margin: 1em; width: 310px;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKCn__pwbnDke_hDYohCE2Ma4U8JxLW9LFE3fHM2-h58mxxqMuP4CDMp1UpQDRVc05e-hFr-Fft4CB485DdeQ9BFWb_w-QXp3ponUUxYCwVF-andZH_yhYlpk1P2ojT9m6i9_RHV4YsX7N/s1600/daniel_dennett_200.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKCn__pwbnDke_hDYohCE2Ma4U8JxLW9LFE3fHM2-h58mxxqMuP4CDMp1UpQDRVc05e-hFr-Fft4CB485DdeQ9BFWb_w-QXp3ponUUxYCwVF-andZH_yhYlpk1P2ojT9m6i9_RHV4YsX7N/s320/daniel_dennett_200.jpg" /></a></div></div>Dan Dennett is the author of many excellent books, including "<a class="zem_slink" href="http://www.amazon.com/Breaking-Spell-Religion-Natural-Phenomenon/dp/067003472X%3FSubscriptionId%3D0G81C5DAZ03ZR9WH9X82%26tag%3Dexchrisnetenc-20%26linkCode%3Dxm2%26camp%3D2025%26creative%3D165953%26creativeASIN%3D067003472X" rel="amazon nofollow" title="Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon">Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon</a>" and "<a class="zem_slink" href="http://www.amazon.com/Darwins-Dangerous-Idea-Evolution-Meanings/dp/068482471X%3FSubscriptionId%3D0G81C5DAZ03ZR9WH9X82%26tag%3Dexchrisnetenc-20%26linkCode%3Dxm2%26camp%3D2025%26creative%3D165953%26creativeASIN%3D068482471X" rel="amazon nofollow" title="Darwin's Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meanings of Life">Darwin's Dangerous Idea</a>". He is also featured in the video "The Four Horsemen" along with <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins" rel="wikipedia nofollow" title="Richard Dawkins">Richard Dawkins</a>, <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Harris_%28author%29" rel="wikipedia nofollow" title="Sam Harris (author)">Sam Harris</a> and <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Hitchens" rel="wikipedia nofollow" title="Christopher Hitchens">Christopher Hitchens</a>.<br />
<br />
Download Quicktime Version <br />
Small: <a dir="ltr" href="http://www.youtube.com/redirect?username=richarddawkinsdotnet&q=http%3A%2F%2Fc0116791.cdn.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com%2FDennett-AAI09-sm.mov&video_id=D_9w8JougLQ&event=url_redirect&url_redirect=True&usg=bsCjh_AyBOlZ-tkEjZPu1waV7L8=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" title="http://c0116791.cdn.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/Dennett-AAI09-sm.mov">http://c0116791.cdn.cloudfiles.racksp...</a><br />
720p HD: <a dir="ltr" href="http://www.youtube.com/redirect?username=richarddawkinsdotnet&q=http%3A%2F%2Fc0116791.cdn.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com%2FDennett-AAI09-720.mov&video_id=D_9w8JougLQ&event=url_redirect&url_redirect=True&usg=sFYIO0o5Etsax6kkeUesB9AfVII=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" title="http://c0116791.cdn.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/Dennett-AAI09-720.mov">http://c0116791.cdn.cloudfiles.racksp...</a><br />
<br />
Watch "The Four Horsemen" in HD on YouTube:<br />
<a dir="ltr" href="http://www.youtube.com/redirect?username=richarddawkinsdotnet&q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D9DKhc1pcDFM%26feature%3DPlayList%26p%3DCFE979715AE46A0E%26index%3D0&video_id=D_9w8JougLQ&event=url_redirect&url_redirect=True&usg=NzIAkHMuANf30Us0pk8XpdvRQG0=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" title="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DKhc1pcDFM&feature=PlayList&p=CFE979715AE46A0E&index=0">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DKhc1...</a><br />
<br />
Filmed by <br />
JOSH TIMONEN<br />
<br />
Edited by <br />
JOEL PASHBY<br />
<div class="zemanta-pixie" style="height: 15px; margin-top: 10px;"><img alt="" class="zemanta-pixie-img" src="http://img.zemanta.com/pixy.gif?x-id=fd81249c-b61e-4398-b764-e9c5ca98f2be" style="border: medium none; float: right;" /></div>Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-73356558010453702342010-04-11T11:01:00.002-04:002019-07-09T12:24:03.301-04:00The First Card Trick in Space<p class="zemanta-img" style="margin: 1em; float: right; display: block; width: 310px;"><a href="http://commons.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Edward_Tsang_Lu.jpg" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c7/Edward_Tsang_Lu.jpg/300px-Edward_Tsang_Lu.jpg" alt="Edward Tsang Lu, American astronaut." style="border: medium none; display: block;" width="300" height="373"></a><span class="zemanta-img-attribution">Image via <a href="http://commons.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Edward_Tsang_Lu.jpg">Wikipedia</a></span></p><a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Randi" title="James Randi" rel="wikipedia nofollow">James Randi</a> and American physicist and <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronaut" title="Astronaut" rel="wikipedia nofollow">astronaut</a> <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Lu" title="Ed Lu" rel="wikipedia nofollow">Ed Lu</a> perform the very first Card Trick in space. Randi talks with Ed over the telephone while he is hovering in space and instructs him of the steps to take for the trick to be done.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<object width="500" height="405"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/1EgJBQiiqoM&hl=en_US&fs=1&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/1EgJBQiiqoM&hl=en_US&fs=1&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="405"></embed></object><br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="margin-top: 10px; height: 15px;" class="zemanta-pixie"><img style="border: medium none; float: right;" class="zemanta-pixie-img" alt="" src="http://img.zemanta.com/pixy.gif?x-id=b34dc38e-1267-4324-988f-4729680174c2"></div>Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-37702058545492634632010-04-05T08:03:00.000-04:002019-07-09T12:24:03.147-04:00Brush up on your Darwin<i>By Pauly Danyl -- </i><br />
<br />
<span class="dropcap">W</span>e've all encountered the argument that those who believe in evolution are without wonder at the natural world. Have we ever considered that in truth it is the polar opposite? <p class="zemanta-img" style="margin: 1em; float: right; display: block;"><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/58462991@N00/149334530" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/55/149334530_a64c6f8d0e_m.jpg" alt="darwin" style="border: medium none; display: block;"></a><span class="zemanta-img-attribution">Image by <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/58462991@N00/149334530">latvian</a> via Flickr</span></p>If God truly exists, why should we wonder at, why should we consider or study, Hell, why should we even be surprised that an all powerful being created the full contents of the Earth? If God were in fact real, wouldn't it just be EXPECTED that he would make some awesome (to us at least) stuff?<br />
<br />
Have you ever discussed with a religious person the concept of evolution? "Well, if we evolved from monkeys, how come there are still monkeys?" There's a simple concept in the <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution" title="Evolution" rel="wikipedia nofollow">theory of evolution</a> called common ancestry, we are not direct descendants of monkeys, we are simply descendants of the same ancestor as monkeys.<br />
<br />
"Well, it's statistically impossible that a single cell could just turn into a human being, it's like a tornado hitting a junk yard and making a 747." Let's ignore the fact that statistically speaking it is just as impossible that some benevolent and all powerful being pulled a planet out of nothingness to sit down and play in the mud making human beings from dirt and then for some reason meddling with their lives and caring whether or not they believe he exists. Ever heard of a concept called cumulative selection? It says that that one cell never turned into a human being, it turned into a slightly different cell, which turned into another different cell and so on for millions of years. At some point a couple of the cells would work together and they would survive better, and so produce more small groups to work together. After three billion years of small successive changes, (with non beneficial changes dying out of course) we have arrived at a complex being. So in your analogy, how about two guys in a bike shop try to make something that flies, and then for close to a century the greatest human minds keep tweaking stuff, throwing away the changes that don't work and building on those that do and you have...wait for it...a 747.<br />
<br />
<span class="pullquote">Statistically speaking it is just as impossible that some benevolent and all powerful being pulled a planet out of nothingness to sit down and play in the mud making human beings from dirt and then for some reason meddling with their lives and caring whether or not they believe he exists.</span> "Well, if creatures can just turn into other creatures, why don't we see it happen in nature, surely for there to be so many kinds of plants and animals this has to happen all the time." I won't even bother with trying to point out that Darwin developed his theory by observing creatures adapt differently to isolated environments in the <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gal%C3%A1pagos_Islands" title="Galápagos Islands" rel="wikipedia nofollow">Galapagos Islands</a>, because I know the first thing you'll argue is that those creatures were still the same species, so they didn't really change. The fact is that we'll never directly observe speciation in evolution because our lifespan is at best a hundred years, and these events take thousands of generations over tens of thousands of years. We're pretty close to creating species in recorded history though if you define species as things that cannot interbreed. I don't know if anyone's tried it, but I bet that a pug couldn't breed with a wolf, and if it can then it shouldn't be too much longer before they can't. It can't have been more than a couple thousand years since humans started a codependent relationship with wolves, and merely by breeding for traits we valued we've created a staggeringly broad range from Chinese Cresteds all the way to English Mastiffs.<br />
<br />
I could keep going but instead I will share what triggered this rant. I was baptized a Methodist, attended occasional Lutheran, Baptist, and Catholic services as a child, worked at a Presbyterian church in college, and spent a lot of my life considering God. I was about nine when I asked my mom what religion I was, and she told me "Your grandpa had you baptized Methodist, but I can't tell you what religion you are, that's something for you to choose." I didn't understand much about it at the time other than the Sunday school stories, but I knew that picking your religion was serious business.<br />
<br />
I spent the next ten years of my life learning all I could about God and my spiritual side. I read the Bible, the Qur'an, the Talmud (all English translations of course). I read about Buddhism, Wicca, Hindu, Confucianism, Taoism, naturism, humanism, and more isms than I care to recall. It all just seemed like stories to me. I found my answers in a high school biology class and a battered copy of The Blind Watchmaker loaned to me by my teacher because the PTA wouldn't allow it in the school library. Now I find myself drawn often into debates with people of many faiths. Mostly because I'm too passionate about what I've learned to keep my fool mouth shut when people say things like "The only evolution I worry about is the one in Genesis where man was made in God's image and Eve evolved from Adam's rib." I know there's little hope of defeating such determined ignorance, but it just infuriates me when those people come out with such determined "evidence" that evolution is a lie that turns out to be merely manifestations of the fact that they don't understand what Darwin actually states in <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Origin_of_Species" title="On the Origin of Species" rel="wikipedia nofollow">The Origin of Species</a>. I have studied enough in my life that I feel confident in playing devil's advocate and debating scripture with friends who have attended seminary. If I hadn't studied it I would never approach the topic, but is it too much to ask for someone to have at least a basic understanding of a concept before they attempt to debate it?<br />
<br />
<div style="margin-top: 10px; height: 15px;" class="zemanta-pixie"><img style="border: medium none; float: right;" class="zemanta-pixie-img" alt="" src="http://img.zemanta.com/pixy.gif?x-id=0d49ac34-4e9c-4aa6-b25a-599dd5ce8479"></div>Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-56713551255183876672010-03-12T10:02:00.001-05:002019-07-09T12:24:03.233-04:00Symphony of Science - The Poetry of Reality (An Anthem for Science)<object height="360" width="580"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/9Cd36WJ79z4&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/9Cd36WJ79z4&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" height="360" width="580"></embed></object><br />
<br />
The Poetry of Reality is the fifth installment in the <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symphony_of_Science" rel="wikipedia" title="Symphony of Science">Symphony of Science</a> music video series. It features 12 scientists and science enthusiasts, including <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Shermer" rel="wikipedia" title="Michael Shermer">Michael Shermer</a>, <p class="zemanta-img" style="margin: 1em; float: right; display: block; width: 310px;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Symphony_of_Science.jpg"><img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/35/Symphony_of_Science.jpg/300px-Symphony_of_Science.jpg" alt="Symphony of Science" style="border: medium none ; display: block;" height="301" width="300"></a><span class="zemanta-img-attribution">Image via <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Symphony_of_Science.jpg">Wikipedia</a></span></p><a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Bronowski" rel="wikipedia" title="Jacob Bronowski">Jacob Bronowski</a>, <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Sagan" rel="wikipedia" title="Carl Sagan">Carl Sagan</a>, <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil_deGrasse_Tyson" rel="wikipedia" title="Neil deGrasse Tyson">Neil deGrasse Tyson</a>, <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins" rel="wikipedia" title="Richard Dawkins">Richard Dawkins</a>, Jill Tarter, <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_M._Krauss" rel="wikipedia" title="Lawrence M. Krauss">Lawrence Krauss</a>, <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Feynman" rel="wikipedia" title="Richard Feynman">Richard Feynman</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Greene">Brian Greene</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking">Stephen Hawking</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolyn_Porco">Carolyn Porco</a>, and <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PZ_Myers" rel="wikipedia" title="PZ Myers">PZ Myers</a>, promoting science through words of wisdom. <br />
<br />
Special thanks are due to The Sagan Appreciation Society:<br />
<a dir="ltr" href="http://www.youtube.com/user/SaganAppreciationSoc" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" title="http://www.youtube.com/user/SaganAppreciationSoc">http://www.youtube.com/user/SaganAppr...</a> <br />
<br />
and Connie Barlow:<br />
<a dir="ltr" href="http://www.youtube.com/user/ghostsofevolution" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" title="http://www.youtube.com/user/ghostsofevolution">http://www.youtube.com/user/ghostsofe...</a><br />
<br />
for their huge help in finding source materials. Check out their Youtube pages! Thanks also to all of you who suggested footage that I have not mentioned, I really appreciate it.<br />
<br />
Check out <a dir="ltr" href="http://symphonyofscience.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" title="http://symphonyofscience.com">http://symphonyofscience.com</a> for more science music videos!<br />
<br />
And my other website for more original electronic music: <a dir="ltr" href="http://www.colorpulsemusic.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" title="http://www.colorpulsemusic.com">http://www.colorpulsemusic.com</a><br />
<br />
<span>Lyrics:<br />
<br />
[Michael Shermer]<br />
Science is the best tool ever devised<br />
For understanding how the world works<br />
<br />
[Jacob Bronowski]<br />
Science is a very human form of knowledge<br />
We are always at the brink of the known<br />
<br />
[Carl Sagan]<br />
Science is a collaborative enterprise<br />
Spanning the generations<br />
We remember those who prepared the way<br />
Seeing for them also<br />
<br />
[Neil deGrasse Tyson]<br />
If you're scientifically literate,<br />
The world looks very different to you<br />
And that understanding empowers you<br />
<br />
Refrain:<br />
[Richard Dawkins]<br />
There's real poetry in the real world<br />
Science is the poetry of reality<br />
<br />
[Sagan]<br />
We can do science<br />
And with it, we can improve our lives<br />
<br />
[Jill Tarter]<br />
The story of humans is the story of ideas<br />
That shine light into dark corners<br />
<br />
[Lawrence Krauss]<br />
Scientists love mysteries<br />
They love not knowing<br />
<br />
[Richard Feynman]<br />
I don't feel frightened by not knowing things<br />
I think it's much more interesting<br />
<br />
[Brian Greene]<br />
There's a larger universal reality <br />
of which we are all a part<br />
<br />
[<a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking" title="Stephen Hawking" rel="wikipedia">Stephen Hawking</a>]<br />
The further we probe into the universe<br />
The more remarkable are the discoveries we make<br />
<br />
[Carolyn Porco]<br />
The quest for the truth, in and of itself,<br />
Is a story that's filled with insights<br />
<br />
(Refrain)<br />
<br />
[Greene]<br />
From our lonely point in the cosmos<br />
We have through the power of thought<br />
Been able to peer back to a brief moment<br />
After the beginning of the universe<br />
<br />
[PZ Myers]<br />
I think that science changes the way your mind works<br />
To think a little more deeply about things<br />
<br />
[Dawkins]<br />
Science replaces private predjudice <br />
With publicly verifiable evidence<br />
<br />
(Refrain) <br />
<br />
mp3: <a dir="ltr" href="http://symphonyofscience.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" title="http://symphonyofscience.com">http://symphonyofscience.com</a><br />
<br />
</span><br />
<br />
<div class="zemanta-pixie" style="height: 15px; margin-top: 10px;"><img alt="" class="zemanta-pixie-img" src="http://img.zemanta.com/pixy.gif?x-id=591ef0e8-77b8-4a3f-aca9-ad61514a41a7" style="border: medium none ; float: right;"></div>Dave Van Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08288914445803411893noreply@blogger.com0