First man on moon Neil Armstrong dead at 82

Sometimes UD commenter, NR has started a thread at TSZ, which addresses my new poster child of illogical conduct by objectors to design theory series. Unfortunately, the thread all too soon illustrates just why it is wise to cordon off sites that harbour abusive commentary as enablers of uncivil behaviour. And into the bargain, it seems that Toronto manages to become a poster child with bar, i.e. s/he does it again (and Petrushka follows, as we will see). Let’s clip: NR: Over at UD, KF has started a new thread criticizing Toronto.  He had earlier started a thread criticizing Petrushka. It would have been nicer if KF had joined here to launch his criticism, instead of taking pot shots from Read More ›

“When you cannot even act as if what you say is true, you really should reconsider your beliefs.” William J. Murray

Radical feminists are attempting to seize leadership of the New Atheist movement (aka GNU atheist movement). With big fanfare, we hear: Atheism Plus: New New Atheists Let me introduce you to Atheism+, the nascent movement that might be the most exciting thing to hit the world of unbelief since Richard Dawkins ….. there have been suggestions that atheism and scepticism are philosophies disproportionately attractive to men. Indeed, the stereotype of the atheist as white, intellectually overconfident male – as Richard Dawkins – has long been a favourite among religious apologists. …. To remember that not all atheists look like Richard Dawkins. Dawkins is an “A” Atheist. We know what he looks like. So what does an “A+” Athiest look like? Read More ›

The illustration to the right is a Hertzprung-Russell diagram of two star clusters, and is used to infer ages for these clusters. How is that done? Stellar clusters are gravitationally bound and so the stars seem to be of the same general age and composition, also they are at about the same distance from us. So, on the physics of collapsing Hydrogen-rich gas clouds (in turn based on relativity, atomic physics, spectroscopy etc), star formation, and the resulting life cycle, in particular the model timeline for main sequence turnoffs to the giant band, we can estimate the age of the cluster. In this case, M67 is estimated at ~ 4BY, and NGC 188 at ~ 5 BY. (SOURCE: Wiki CCA, Read More ›

Continuing on with the wonderful Dawkins Festival at Uncommon Descent (UD), I would like to mention the Dawkins Spectrum of Theistic Probability. 1.Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C.G. Jung: “I do not believe, I know.” 2.De facto theist. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. “I don’t know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there.” 3.Leaning towards theism. Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. “I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God.” 4.Completely impartial. Exactly 50 per cent. “God’s existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable.” 5.Leaning towards atheism. Lower than 50 per Read More ›

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-19336438 In the above story, the combination of an empirical investigation of the here-and-now – what creationists like myself like to call “operational science” – together with speculative Darwinian faith, leads to this final take-home quote:  “The high rate of mutations is dangerous for the next generation but is generating diversity from which nature can select and further refine this product we call man,” he said. “So what is bad for the next generation may be good for our species in general.” Got that? It’s similar to the way in which your team losing this week and then repeating the performance next week results in winning the league at the end of the season.  

Recently, Uncommon Descent featured a post by News, inquiring of readers what they would like to ask Richard Dawkins, if they could interview him. I wrote a response. I have been told that News has gone on holiday and would welcome posts on UD, so I’ve decided to put up my question as a separate post. So here’s what I’d really like to ask Professor Richard Dawkins. “Professor, I understand you’re a great fan of Rev. William Paley’s work, Natural Theology, which Darwin continued to speak highly of, even after he believed he had refuted it. Indeed, you even described yourself as a ‘neo-Paleyan’ in The Blind Watchmaker. Paley, as you’re well aware, contended that unguided natural processes were incapable Read More ›

For some, apparently Richard Dawkins is their guide to life, death and eternity. Here’s Dawkins on the Bible, supplied by UD News:  DAWKINS: The evidence [Jesus] existed is surprisingly shaky. The earliest books in the New Testament to be written were the Epistles, not the Gospels. It’s almost as though Saint Paul and others who wrote the Epistles weren’t that interested in whether Jesus was real. PLAYBOY: You’ve read the Bible. DAWKINS: I haven’t read it all, but my knowledge of the Bible is a lot better than most fundamentalist Christians’. Here’s the apostle Paul, author of 13 or perhaps 14 (the authorship book of Hebrews is uncertain) of the 27 books of the New Testament: For I delivered to Read More ›

  Occasionally, there is a need to make a note for record, and to document what we have to deal with here at UD. I do so now, as I have just learned how I have been slandered at The Skeptical Zone by Petrushka, as one who would censor for mere disagreement. (Joe, thanks for watching my 6.) This is the key part of the comment at TSZ from last evening, that I must correct for record: As I predicted, mphillips has disappeared. I have no idea why, but it happened right after KF threatened bannation. How do you respond when the moderator accuses you of immorality for disagreeing? Petrushka may not acknowledge it but s/he has a duty of Read More ›

“Is sex outside of marriage a sin? Is it a public matter? Is it forgivable?” No, of course sex outside marriage is not a public matter, and yes, of course it is forgivable. Only a person infected by the sort of sanctimonious self-righteousness that religion uniquely inspires would apply the meaningless word ‘sin’ to private sexual behavior. It is the mark of the religious mind that it cares more about private than public morality. http://richarddawkins.net/articles/1926-banishing-the-green-eyed-monster According to Dawkins, sexual morality and fidelity to marriage vows is an entirely private matter, and nobody else’s business. Married men who want to have sex outside of marriage should be allowed to do so, with no shame or disapproval from others. You don’t need Read More ›