Entropy

Trainspotting

Such a good movie. Such a good soundtrack.

Blasphemy Day: Any Video Suggestions?

So, Blasphemy Day is tomorrow (Sept. 30th) and I am going to make a video today in celebration of it. The question is, what should I do? It needs to be blasphemous, obviously. If you have any good/comical suggestions, lets have them!

Here's the first, more serious video...

Miike Snow

Religious and Practical Faith

Everybody has faith, whether it be in some magical god of the universe or in the invisible force we call gravity. I have no problem saying that I place faith in the engineered design of my chair every time I sit down on it, because it is in fact a version of faith. Innocent and simple enough, right? The trouble comes when a person of religion begins inquiring about the aforementioned “chair faith.” I think most skeptics have held a similar dialog at least once in their lives:

Believer: Excuse me, I couldn’t help but notice you are sitting in a chair today.
Skeptic: Yes. I enjoy chairs.
Believer: Praise Jesus!
Skeptic: ?
Believer: You see, the fact that you place faith in your chair means you are capable of
having faith in other things, like God.
Skeptic: Oh. I think you are confused…
Believer: Don’t be silly. The evidence is undeniable. We are creatures of faith, your chair
proves it, and therefore faith in God is natural and real. And also, God created bananas
for you to hold.
Skeptic: …Ray Comfort?
Ray Comfort: *vanishes into a cloud of self-righteousness*

I thought I would take the time to explain the differences between religious and practical faith, which mirrors the differences between religious and practical reasoning.

Faith: Belief without clear evidence or knowledge.

Humans are pattern seekers by nature. It is how we make educated decisions for our futures, how we see potential danger, how we learn to interpret the behaviors of our friends… etc. We learn through conditioning and a highly developed pattern recognition system. When a person decides to sit down in his chair, the most basic reason for his decision is because he has recognized a pattern… that chairs typically don’t break when sat on. Just like a science experiment, he has witnessed the act of chair-sitting so often that he makes an educated guess on his future chair-sits, and so, he sits. The faith component to this chair-sitting saga is that one cannot foresee the future. I don’t KNOW that the chair has a faulty hinge, but based on my previous encounters I predict that the chair will be just fine.

So how does practical faith differ from religious faith? The difference is in the process of forming a hypothesis. Practical faith involves the scientific method… physical experimentation and observation. Religious faith cuts out the experimentation process completely and utilizes the Descartes philosophy, “I think therefor I am,” or more accurately, “I say, therefore it is.” It’s like guessing what the picture of a 1000 pieced puzzle is by looking at three random pieces. Without experimentation, one cannot accurately perceive a pattern. Without observing a pattern, one cannot make an educated prediction of said pattern.

In closing, my chair-faith and Ray Comfort’s God-faith have no logical ties to one another. One is the result of learning, while the other is the result of wishful thinking.

original content: http://logiclounge.wordpress.com/2009/09/23/religious-and-practical-faith/

Another Song

Age of Consent

I was debating this with a male friend a little while ago and thought I'd bring the debate here to get more opinions. The topic is the legal "age of consent," which is the age a country or state legally recognizes an individual's adult decision to have intercourse. If you have s*% with an individual who is younger than the legal age of consent, it is considered rape by the state (statutory rape) and you can be punished by the state for child abuse.

My question is this: What age do you think the "age of consent" should be?

But before you answer, consider these quick facts:

A female is generally physiologically ready to reproduce by the time she is between 12-14. The youngest girl to ever birth a child was 5 years 8 months old. Her name is Lina Medina, born in 1933, and she is still alive today.

Social constraints may play a bigger role in a pregnant 12 year old's psychological stress level than we might think. A 12 year old from a tribal culture would most likely psychologically cope with a pregnancy far better than a pregnant 12 year old in western culture. Reason being, Western society tells children they aren't supposed to have szw and get pregnant until they are older. Tribal cultures do not do this.

So, your opinion? What should the age of consent be and why?

Songs I'm Liking

Another New Pet

This time it's a Blood Red Cornsnake. He's a little over a year old, around 1.5 meters longs, and very tame. I don't know what to name him yet

Lawsuit Against TEA for Teaching Creationism in Public Schools

Chris Comer, whose lawsuit challenging the Texas Education Agency’s policy of requiring neutrality about evolution and creationism was dismissed on March 31, 2009, is now appealing the decision. Formerly the director of science at the TEA, Comer was forced to resign in November 2007 after she forwarded a note announcing a talk by Barbara Forrest in Austin; according to a memorandum recommending her dismissal, “the TEA requires, as agency policy, neutrality when talking about evolution and creationism.”

In June 2008, Comer filed suit in federal court in the Western District of Texas, arguing that the policy violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment: “By professing ‘neutrality,’ the Agency credits creationism as a valid scientific theory.” The judge ruled (PDF, p. 18) otherwise, however, writing, “As a matter of law, the Agency’s neutrality policy, if it advances religion at all, only does so incidentally. Further, a reasonable observer of the neutrality policy would not believe the Agency endorses religion through the policy.“

http://anatheist.net/go/news/?x=47e

Where does a rational person even begin to try and address this? I still cannot fathom how or why Ms. Comer was dismissed from the “agency” in the first place. If I were in her position–Director of Science for the Curriculum Division of the Texas Public School system–I would have reacted far worse than she if I was told I was required to incorporate a lecture called “Inside Creationism’s Trojan Horse” into the public schooling agenda.

The lecture was scheduled to be given by Ms. Barbara Forest, a philosophy professor from Southeastern Louisiana University. I like to point out the fact that the lecture was given by a professor of Philosophy rather than a Science professor, yet the TEA argues that this lecture is supposed to be viewed as a rational scientific origin theory, rather than the speaker’s area of expertise: Theology or philosophy.

The Judge’s commentary particularly appalls me for a few reasons. First, his judgment to uphold the TEA’s 1.) claim that creationism is a scientific theory, and 2.) the implementation of a “neutrality policy,” which exists for the singular purpose of accommodating religious sensitivity.

Note: to challenge my claim that the “neutrality policy” within public schools exists only for the purpose of accommodating religious sensitivity rather than providing children with a proper education, find out how many religiously neutral legitimate scientists view creationism as a valid scientific theory.

Lastly, the Judge had the tenacity to tell the plaintiff she was being unreasonable to worry that the TEA was disregarding the Constitution of America by allowing a publicly funded educational institution to undermine the scientific method and teach the mentality that “god did it” as an alternative scientific theory. So, not only am I forced to fund the defilement of science AND indoctrination of children, I am also forced to fund paychecks for Judges who are allowed to interpret the law without the requirement of understanding so much as a high school science textbook.

American Universal Healthcare Coverage: Strictly Numbers

I have been toying with the data on the National Coalition on Health Care’s (NCHC) website, and I’m really having trouble understanding how these numbers are supposed justify the implementation of Universal Healthcare in America. To see what I’m seeing, visit:

http://205.207.175.93/HDI/TableViewer/tableView.aspx

The data is from the national census taken in 2007 which includes statistics on the uninsured population of America. The table says that an estimated 42,672,022 Americans between the age 0-65yo were uninsured in 2007. For the purpose of scale, I will add that the White House claims there is currently an estimated 46 million Americans without health insurance (more on this later).

42.6 million is a lot of people…nearly 15% of the population. But, lets take a closer look at the other statistics on that 15% provided by the NCHC and national census bereau.

10,682,986 people out of the 42,672,022 (25%) were considered “poor.”
13,845,061 people out of the 42,672,022 (32%) were considered “near poor.”
18,143,985 people out of the 42,672,022 (43%) were considered “unpoor.”

And finally, lets look at the breakdown of income levels from the census.gov website (statistics are still coming from the same 2007 census).

19% of uninsured Americans reported an income of $25,000 or less that year.
24% of uninsured Americans reported an income of $25k-49.9k that year.
20% of uninsured Americans reported an income of $50k-74.9k that year.
37% of uninsured Americans reported an income of $75k+ that year.

http://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/p60-235.pdf

Ready for me to make my point now? The vast majority of Americans without health insurance can most likely afford it. The American government wants to restructure the entire healthcare system for the sake of approximately 3.5% of the population… does that really make sense to you?

Now, I am not trying to say that the <5% of Americans who cannot afford health insurance should go on unassisted. The only point I want to stress is this: The price tag on Universal Healthcare coverage–which will be paid/felt by >95% of Americans–seems quite excessive in attempting to supplement a very, very small minority. The numbers don’t make sense when you really sit down and examine them, yet these are the same numbers the US Government is using to justify restructuring the entire healthcare system.

An additional point to note is the White House’s continuous unsubstantiated claim that there are 46 million Americans without insurance. The last census taken was the data I just supplied you with in 2007, and the next census will not be taken until 2010. I searched the internet high and low to try and find WHERE the White House pulled “46 million” from, and have yet to find that answer. If I do find it, I will be sure to let you know.

America takes lead in... Atheism?

This may purely be due to the fact that I'm American and my media might be a little off, but doesn't it seem that America ironically has the lead in Atheistic Public Figures? Off the top of my head:

Christopher Hitchens
Daniel Dennett
Sam Harris
Michael Shermer
Penn and Teller
PZ Myers

I'm not trying to be arrogant... I honestly just find it strange that a country who is so hell bent (no pun intended) on being a theocracy boasts some of the world's most prominent (living) atheist spokesmen. If I'm wrong, please enlighten me so I don't continue in my ignorance.

Animal Testing in Medical Research

If it doesn't work yet, wait a few minutes. Freshly Uploaded.

Apologists for Evil

Next WireClub Video

Anyone have a topic they would like me to make a video on? In the past I've done an ethical dilemmas video on genetic manipulation, and some various other religious things. Its getting to be that time again, so I'm looking for suggestions.

2012 Doomsday

is a hoax. How many people on this site agree with me (all, I hope).

Dogma is More Important than Reality, Apparently

The ongoing saga of the Brazilian 9-year-old girl who was raped a few months ago by her stepfather, had an abortion, and was then excommunicated by the Catholic Church for said abortion. Many Catholics voiced their sympathies for the girl, saying they thought it was cruel of the Brazilian Catholic Church, but finally Rome has released its official statement on the matter:

…there is a more important principle at stake. Anyone involved in an abortion for any reason is to be automatically excommunicated, no exceptions. "We have laws, we have a discipline, we have a doctrine of the faith," the official says. "This is not just theory. And you can't start backpedaling just because the real-life situation carries a certain human weight."

If religion isn't designed for real-life situations, then... who was it written for? Ignore the fact that it is physically HARMFUL for a 9-year-old girl to birth a child, ignore the fact that she was the victim in a horribly violent crime, and ignore the fact that a 9-year-old does not have legal authority to request an abortion. All that is too much "human-weight," you know... the kind of stuff that makes you sad to think about.

To clarify the gravity of the Pope's decision, he has directed over 50% of the world's population (who are Christians) to close their doors on this little girl. To not talk to her, let alone help her in her time of need. And they said Atheists were immoral...

Astroid Coming to a Planet Near You in 2029!

You all may know about this, but for those of you who don't, we may be on a collision course with a 20 million ton asteroid It will pass between the moon and Earth (even lower than our communications satellites) in 2029, and may meet us for a strike through orbit in 2036. Here is the article from NASA's Space.com:

WASHINGTON, D.C. - A former NASA astronaut will call on the U.S. Congress to evaluate an asteroid with a small chance of hitting Earth in 2036 and suggest lawmakers consider a space mission to monitor the object, SPACE.com has learned.

Russell Schweickart arrives here today to make his case. He'll also ask Congress to assign to a government agency the responsibility of protecting the public from space rocks.

The call to action stems from an orbiting hunk of stone that for a few days around Christmas had scientists on the edges of their seats.

The asteroid, named 2004 MN4, was found last year. It orbits the Sun but crosses the path of Earth. In December, preliminary observations showed it might strike in 2029, according to NASA scientists. It briefly had the highest odds ever assigned to a possible collision. Further investigation ruled out the 2029 impact scenario, but scientists cannot yet rule out an impact in 2036.

The odds of a collision in 2036 are about 1-in-10,000, Schweickart says.

In fact, there are several scenarios between 2034 and 2065 in which 2004 MN4 has even smaller odds of striking. Schweickart and other scientists stress, however, that future observations are likely to reduce all these odds to zero.

Reptile Show Result + Video

I went to another reptile show today. I bought another one. Crap. Why do I keep doing this?

Meet Jean-luc, my new Columbian Red-Tail Boa.

Baloney Detection Kit

A good video by Michael Shermer on rationalism: what, why, and how to employ it.

Brain Differences Found Between Believers in God and Non-Believers

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/*******60400.htm

ScienceDaily (Mar. 5, 2009) — Believing in God can help block anxiety and minimize stress, according to new University of Toronto research that shows distinct brain differences between believers and non-believers.

In two studies led by Assistant Psychology Professor Michael Inzlicht, participants performed a Stroop task – a well-known test of cognitive control – while hooked up to electrodes that measured their brain activity.

Compared to non-believers, the religious participants showed significantly less activity in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), a portion of the brain that helps modify behavior by signaling when attention and control are needed, usually as a result of some anxiety-producing event like making a mistake. The stronger their religious zeal and the more they believed in God, the less their ACC fired in response to their own errors, and the fewer errors they made.

"You could think of this part of the brain like a cortical alarm bell that rings when an individual has just made a mistake or experiences uncertainty," says lead author Inzlicht, who teaches and conducts research at the University of Toronto Scarborough. "We found that religious people or even people who simply believe in the existence of God show significantly less brain activity in relation to their own errors. They're much less anxious and feel less stressed when they have made an error."

These correlations remained strong even after controlling for personality and cognitive ability, says Inzlicht, who also found that religious participants made fewer errors on the Stroop task than their non-believing counterparts.

Their findings show religious belief has a calming effect on its devotees, which makes them less likely to feel anxious about making errors or facing the unknown. But Inzlicht cautions that anxiety is a "double-edged sword" which is at times necessary and helpful.

"Obviously, anxiety can be negative because if you have too much, you're paralyzed with fear," he says. "However, it also serves a very useful function in that it alerts us when we're making mistakes. If you don't experience anxiety when you make an error, what impetus do you have to change or improve your behaviour so you don't make the same mistakes again and again?"

The paper, appearing online in Psychological Science, was co-authored by Dr. Ian McGregor at York University, and by Jacob Hirsh and Kyle Nash, doctoral candidates at the University of Toronto and York University, respectively.
Adapted from materials provided by University of Toronto.

Moderation in Forums?

What I'm about to say is nothing new: the forums here are terrible. Why? Because people are allowed to post with no regard toward any other post, which produces either something completely random and unrelated OR repeats posts that have already been written in the same thread.

Now, I'm not suggesting that someone should be a moderation nazi and delete all repeating or random posts, because sometimes random is fun (in the right context). What I am suggesting is that some forums may need moderation while others should remain a free-for-all. General Forum, for one, should definitely remain unmoderated. Religion, on the other hand, needs some assistance.

Its sad that most people with a decent head on their shoulders have stopped posting there, including myself, because it has recently been SWARMED by people who disregard all other posts, repeat the same crap thousands of times, or just preach. A "forum" is supposed to be a place of conversation... and there isn't any of that there.

What do you think? Good idea? Not a good idea? (Not that posting this is going to make any real difference).

Blasphemy Law in Ireland Passes

Its a sad day for freedom of speech. The new Blasphemy Law makes it illegal for any person to "blaspheme" any other religion. This means Jews cannot say that Jesus is not the Messiah, Christians cannot say Mohamed is a false prophet, Atheists cannot say God is imaginary, etc. Violators of this law can be fined to upwards of 25,000 euros.

I guess I have to cross Ireland off my list of places to see now

50 Brilliant Atheists

From ListAfterList.com


Democritus - ancient Greek philosopher and "father of modern science"

Diagoras of Melos - poet and sophist

Epicurus - ancient Greek philosopher

Theodorus the Atheist - ancient Greek philosopher

Andrew Carnegie - American industrialist, businessman and philanthropist whose the second richest man in history

Ivan Pavlov - Russian physiologist, psychologist and physician who won the Nobel Prize in medicine in 1904 for research on the digestive system

Sigmund Freud - Austrian psychiatrist who founded the psychoanalytic school of psychology

Clarence Darrow - American lawyer who was the defense of Tennessee teacher John Scopes in the "Monkey Trial"

Richard Strauss - German composer who began writing music at the age of six and continued almost until his death

Bertrand Russell - British philosopher, logician, mathematician, historian, pacifist and social activist

Jawaharlal Nehru - follower of Mahatma Gandhi and ledaer of the Indian National Congress

Linus Pauling - chemists who wrote the Millennium Essay in the journal Nature, one of the greatest thinkers and visionaries of the last thousand years.

Paul Dirac - British theoretical physicist who contributed to the early development of quantum mechanics and quantum electrodynamics

Ayn Rand - Russian-born American writer of "Atlas Shrugged"

Katherine Hepburn - actress who received 12 Academy Award nominations for Best Actress in a film

Jacques Monod - French biologist who contributed greatly to the understanding of the Lac operon as a regulator of gene transcription in cells, suggested the existence of mRNA molecules in the process of protein synthesis, and further contributed to the field of enzymology

Subrahmanyan Chandresekhar - Nobel Prize in Physics and has a space-based X-ray observatory named after him

Alan Turing - English mathematician, logician, computer scientist and cryptanalyst

Francis Crick - co-discoverer of the structure of DNA

Claude Shannon - electronic engineer and mathematician known as "the father of information theory.

Richard Feynman - development of quantum mechanics

Noam Chomsky - American philosopher

James D. Watson - Nobel Prize in physiology/medicine in 1962 as co-discoverer along with Francis Crick and Maurice Wilkins of the molecular structure of DNA

Peter Higgs - theoretical physicist and emeritus professor at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland

Warren Buffet - American businessman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway and the richest person in the world in the first half of 2008

John Searle - American philosopher and spokesperson for the Free Speech Movement in Berkeley during the late 1960s and early '70s

Steven Weinberg - American physicist best known for his work on unification of electromagnetism and the weak force, for which he shared the Nobel Prize in physics

Carl Sagan - American astronomer, astrochemist, and successful popularizer of science

David Suzuki - Canadian zoologist, geneticist, science broadcaster and entironmental activist

George Carlin - comedian

Bruce Lee - American born Chinese martial artist, philosopher, instructor and actor, the founder of the Jeet Kune Do combat form

Leonard Susskind - American physicist specializing in string theory and quantum field theory

Stephen Jay Gould - paleontologist, evolutionary biologist and historian of science

Richard Dawkins - scientist and writer with radical discoveries in biology and popular science books

Daniel Dennett - American philosopher and spy for the OSS

Stephen Hawking - Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge

M*#z Jagger - rocker from Rolling Stones

Richard Leakey - conservationist, a promoter of civil rights and a supporter of the Kenyan Safina Party

David Gilmour - rocker from Pink Floyd

Brian Eno - English musician, composer, record producer, music theorist and singer best known as the father of ambient music

David Sloan Wilson - SUNY Distinguished Professor of Biology and Anthropology at Binghamton University in New York, a prolific popular science writer, and a promoter of evolution by group and multi-level selection

Steve Wozniak - Apple founder and computer engineer

Douglas Adams - English writer, dramatist and musician, best known for his Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy series

Steven Pinker - experimental psychologist and cognitive scientist best known for his advocacy of evolutionary psychology and the computational theory of mind

PZ Myers - evolutionary developmental biologist and professor of biology at the University of Minnesota

Jodie Foster - Actress who has won three Bafta Awards, two Golden Globes, a Screen Actors Guild Award, a People's Choice Award, and two Emmy nominations

Russell T Davies - Welsh writer and producer of the modern version of the popular science fiction television series Doctor Who

David Chalmers - Australian philosopher, director of the Center for Consciousness and past director of the Center for Consciousness Studies at the University of Arizona

Sean Carroll - theoretical cosmologist specializing in general relativity and dark energy

Mark Zuckerberg - Facebook founder and computer programmer

Ray Kurzweil - Inventor of text to speech synthesizer, best selling author, and made famous The Law of Accelerating Returns

Air Force Intel

To my dismay, the Navy's Intel Officer division is closed for recruitment until 2011. I'm checking with the Air Force now. *crosses fingers* Anyone have any experience in the Air Force?

My New Obsession

My new Asus Mypal626 PDA! I know it's not a smartphone, but I would love it less if it made me pay $80/month for it.