vjtorley

Denmark and Sweden are two countries which are often cited by atheists as proof that secular morality can work. Professor Jerry Coyne, for instance, has written dozens of articles praising Denmark (see here for instance, and see also here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here). At the end of one here, directed at Rabbi Joseph Sacks, Coyne writes: My answer is this: Sweden and Denmark, dear Rabbi. Are those countries, which are largely atheistic, immoral and falling apart? I don’t think so. And what about this? If Scruton wants to see how much a truly secular society devalues the sacred, I suggest that he get himself to Sweden or Denmark. Do the Danes and Swedes Read More ›

A report by Adam Withnall in The Independent (7 October 2014) titled, Life after death? Largest-ever study provides evidence that ‘out of body’ and ‘near-death’ experiences may actually be real makes for fascinating reading. Writes Withnall: There is scientific evidence to suggest that life can continue after death, according to the largest ever medical study carried out on the subject. A team based in the UK has spent the last four years seeking out cardiac arrest patients to analyse their experiences, and found that almost 40 per cent of survivors described having some form of “awareness” at a time when they were declared clinically dead. Experts currently believe that the brain shuts down within 20 to 30 seconds of the Read More ›

Jerry Coyne has written a post in which he states that he is inclined to believe that Jesus never existed, although he hasn’t made up his mind yet. And on what does Coyne base his tentative opinion? An article in the Huffington Post by a biopsychologist named Nigel Barber, a self-published book by a systems engineer, Michael Paulkovich, which Coyne admits he hasn’t read, and finally, another book which he hasn’t read, written by atheist activist Richard Carrier, who has a Ph.D. in ancient history, but who (judging from his Wikipedia biography) has no teaching or research position at any accredited institution. [Update: according to his C.V., Carrier teaches classes at the Center for Inquiry Institute Online (a think tank Read More ›

PZ Myers has written a post in which he reprimands Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson for failing to acknowledge that he falsely quoted former President George Bush in some talks he gave. I wonder if Professor Myers will publicly apologize for attributing a false quote to equity feminist Christina Hoff Sommers in a recent post he wrote on September 16, 2014, in which he accused Dr. Sommers (pictured above), who is currently employed by the American Enterprise Institute, of being “a professional selective quote-miner and anecdote-citer who is on a mission from AEI to discredit all of feminism” and “a contrarian beloved by anti-feminists … with a reputation for dishonesty and twisting the facts.” For good measure, he added that “she’s Read More ›

It had to happen sooner or later. Professor Jerry Coyne has identified what he sees as an inconsistency in Dr. William Lane Craig’s Divine Command theory of ethics, and after reading his latest post on the subject, I have to agree that Coyne is basically right and Craig is wrong. Consider the following statements by Professor Craig (see here and here): Remember: on perfect being theology, God is a maximally great being, a being which is worthy of worship. According to the version of divine command ethics which I’ve defended, our moral duties are constituted by the commands of a holy and loving God. On voluntaristic theories God’s commands are based upon His free will alone. He arbitrarily chooses what Read More ›

Rafi Letzler has written a fascinating article titled, Is a simulated brain conscious? in which he poses several interesting thought experiments. For instance, would a group of people standing together in a giant field, with each person obeying the rules that one of the 86 billion neurons in a typical human brain obeys, possess a collective group consciousness? What about a supercomputer that can simulate the entire brain of a human being? Or what about a Boltzmann brain, formed by atoms suddenly coalescing together at random in an exact replica of the atoms in a human brain? Dr. Scott Aaronson, a theoretical computer scientist at MIT, offers his own thought-provoking answers to these questions, but in this post, I’d like Read More ›

Catholic blogger Simcha Fischer has written an excellent post titled, But what if we’re not scientists?, which addresses the question: how can laypeople decide whether or not to accept a scientist’s say-so on a given topic? She warns against some of the common cognitive pitfalls that we are all liable to make, on occasions (I’ve listed her key points only): So, how do we go about deciding which experts to trust, and which to be suspicious of? Here are a few of the traps we can fall into: Mistrusting a knowledgeable person because he expresses his ideas in an unpleasant way.… Mistrusting a knowledgeable person simply because he said something that makes you mad or upset or scared. Trusting a Read More ›

Simon Hadlington of Chemistry World reports that quantum mechanical simulations of the 1953 Miller-Urey experiment, which used an electrical discharge to generate amino acids from simple organic molecules, suggest that formic acid and formamide may have acted as short-lived chemical intermediates in the reactions that gave rise to life on Earth. However, some experts are not convinced. Nir Goldman, from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, notes: “One criticism is that the authors chose to use a somewhat reduced or hydrogen-rich mixture in their study, whereas the atmosphere on early Earth is thought to have been carbon dioxide rich, which could entail very different chemistry in the presence of an electric field.” Jeffrey Bada, from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, was not Read More ›

The rift between P.Z. Myers and Richard Dawkins is now official. After Dawkins tweeted that he admired equity feminist Christina Hoff Summers (the author of Who Stole Feminism?) for her bravery, and mockingly referred to Myers’ Free Thought Blog as the “Feedingfrenzy Thoughtpolice Bullies”, Myers hit back, accusing Sommers of being “an anti-feminist … on a mission … to discredit all of feminism” and added: “Well, I’m going to have to write off Richard Dawkins now. He’s been eaten by the brain parasites… I couldn’t be more shocked if Dawkins had endorsed a creationist… Thanks, Richard Dawkins! You’re now officially an anti-feminist!” Sommers’ great crime, apparently, consisted in being currently employed by the American Enterprise Institute, which Myers labeled “a Read More ›

If you had to summarize your reasons for believing in God in ten words or less, how would you do it? Here’s what I’d say: “The world is contingent, complex, fine-tuned, rule-governed, mathematical and beautiful.” For me, these features of the world point towards a Being Who is necessary (or self-explanatory), perfectly integrated, and limitlessly intelligent, creative and bountiful – a Being in Whom we live and move and have our being (Acts 17:28). As you can see, I’ve listed not one but several features of the natural world which (I believe) point to the existence of a Creator. Here’s a question. How would you react if someone told you that you didn’t need to list all these features: just Read More ›

In a comment on kairosfocus’ latest excellent post, Does ID ASSUME “contra-causal free will” and “intelligence” (and so injects questionable “assumptions”)?, Mark Frank proposes a thought experiment in support of his view that determinism is fully compatible with free will. It goes as follows: Start with a dog. Dogs make choices in the sense that they may accept or reject a treat, may obey or disobey an order, may chase a rabbit or not. Suppose we advance our understanding of dogs’ brains and thought processes so that a genius vet can predict with 100% accuracy how a dog will choose in any given situation given its past history and current circumstances. Surely this is conceivable? If we manage this do Read More ›

In my last post, I commended Professor P. Z. Myers for arguing that children with Down syndrome are fully human, and that their lives are worth living, even as I noted that Myers and I disagree on the morality of abortion. In a new post, Myers proposes a thought experiment in support of his pro-choice stance. Astonishingly, he maintains that a pregnant woman has the right to end the life of the embryo or fetus she is carrying, even if (hypothetically) it were as intelligent as you or I. In a previous post, Myers had written: Even if I thought embryos were conscious, aware beings writing poetry in the womb (I don’t, and they’re not), I’d have to bow out Read More ›

Hot on the heels of Denyse O’Leary’s recent post on Richard Dawkins’ tweet that it would be immoral to bring a kid with Down syndrome into the world by choice, P.Z. Myers has weighed in against Dawkins. Myers writes: I’m fully in agreement with Dawkins that abortion is not an unethical choice. The woman can choose whether to keep a child or not, and it is perfectly reasonable, and even responsible, for her to include any information about genetic disorders in making her decision. However, singling out children with Down Syndrome is seriously problematic — it is not immoral to have a child with Downs. It is immoral to insist that a fetus with Down Syndrome should be aborted. I Read More ›

Atheist and feminist blogger Greta Christina recently wrote an essay for AlterNet titled, Why You Can’t Reconcile God and Evolution, which has been re-published in Salon magazine under the title, The truth about science vs. religion: 4 reasons why intelligent design falls flat. The article was then critiqued by an agnostic called Andy Ihnatko and finally, New Atheist P. Z. Myers commented on both the article and the critique over at his science blog, Pharyngula. Although I disagree with Greta Christina on many subjects, she writes well and is generally a fair-minded person, so I thought her piece deserved a reply from the Intelligent Design community. Let’s have a look at her four reasons why God-guided evolution won’t work. Greta Read More ›

University of Chicago biologist Jerry Coyne twice emailed the academic who invited Dr. William Dembski to speak at a UC seminar on August 13, comparing Dr. Dembski to a Holocaust denier: “Would you invite a Holocaust denier to speak to a history department? For this is exactly what you are doing by inviting Dembski… And yes, seeing lies purveyed as truth, and creationists paraded out as if they were academically respectable researchers, is painful to me, and in similar ways that Holocaust denialists are painful to Jews like me.” The quotation above is a conflation of Jerry Coyne’s remarks in two separate emails, but as readers of Coyne’s latest post on the seminar can readily verify for themselves, it accurately Read More ›