Wednesday, 15 June 2011

A school of Darwin Fish

How often do we see the christian fish symbol on a car?  Try asking a christian what it actually means sometimes and you will be surprised to hear that they have a variety of different views about the symbol itself and about the obscure Greek characters sometimes contained within.  In that sense it seems to me to be an accurate representation of the different conflicting views of the various churches that make up the 'diaspora' of christianity.



I must admit that I take much more pleasure from the variants on the simple fish.  Many of them are based around the 'Darwin Fish' . . .


What happens when these meet?  There might be a simple staring match . . .



. . . after all Jesus and Darwin can get on pretty well (as they do in many mainstream churches . . .



. . . or was it a kiss?  . . .


Mislead by a bad influence . . .



. . . things could get more complicated . . .



. . . but it doesn't last and a broken hearted fish . . .

 
. . .  consults its lawyer . . .



. . . but events move beyond that  . . . 


. . . and Darwin is wounded . . .




. . . but  just before . . .


. . . we find that Wallace agreed with Darwin . . .

. . . and helped by the Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM) who touches Darwin with its noodly appendage . . .


. . . and calls for prehistoric reinforcements . . .


. . . Darwin is revived and looks as though he is winning again . . . 


And in the end, science can come to the rescue . . .

. . . and although the myth of Jonah's whale will still seem the most attractive to those who prefer faith to reason . . .



. . . Darwin evolves . . .


. . . and ultimately, deciding it is safer not to mock Mohamed. . .




Tuesday, 14 June 2011

Not just the zeitgeist

A few people have asked me about my sources for the posts last weekend (see links below) and pointed out a similarity (although thankfully only a passing similarity) to a 2007 movie called Zeitgeist.  You can see extracts from it on Youtube (link to part 1 here).  Now that I have watched it I feel that it is that strange mixture of a fascinating topic presented in a way that makes it not quite believable.

For example, it mentions that the star Sirius moves into alignment with the stars of Orion's belt and points to the position where the sun rises on 25th December.  Well it might happen to point to roughly the right place, but it certainly doesn't move into alignment with anything.  You might have noticed that it is in exactly the same place all year round.  That is one of the features of stars!  They stay where they are relative to the others.

Having forced myself to watch three parts and semi-enjoyed it in a kind of masochistic sort of way, I have decided that it is impossible to know which parts to believe.  However, you may notice that I aluded to this in my summary of the similarity of the Jesus story to those of Mithra, Horus and Krishna.  You don't have to believe every single line of comparison but you can easily get the flavour that it was not a new story at the time of Jesus.

The thing that clinches the question of veracity for me is the source of the original idea for those posts.  Several times I have heard Christopher Hitchens refer to the fact that the story of Jesus was by no means original, so I started to look around for more details.  Of all the atheist speakers I have heard, Hitch is one of the few that I respect the most.  His erudite presentation of well researched material in a hard-hitting, no-nonsense format has my respect and admiration.  I feel certain that he would have his facts absolutely correct for one good reason.  He has debated some formidable opponents and if he used erroneous evidence in his argument it is certain that an opponent would use it against him.

Long live Hitch!


Additional small note:  I am reminded via Twitter that Bill Maher covered the topic in his movie, Religulous too.  I wish I could remember who I had lent my copy to!  I haven't seen it for over a year.

*******************
Related posts:

Inspiring atheists

Don't let anyone tell you that there are no prominent female atheists around!

It is not secret (even from her I think) that I am a fan of the writing of Paula Kirby.  Whenever I see that there is a new article available I am torn between the two options of 'shall I read it now?' or "shall I keep it to to savour later?"   Of course usually the answer is to do both.

Her regular articles in the Washington Post's 'On Faith' may be the most familiar, but thanks to Richard Dawkins.net I suspect that very little of her writing goes un-noticed

Her recent submission to the Hibernian Times is (unsurprisingly) no exception, and whether you are familiar with her work or not I highly recommend you to read "Breaking Out of the Prison of Religion".  Here is a small extract.

Faith is the acceptance of claims for which there is no good evidence; when someone invites you to take something on faith, they are actively telling you not to challenge it, not to question it, not to enquire whether it is really true: they are telling you to simply accept it on their say-so. And this “accepting it on their say-so” is at the very heart of Christianity. It is the only absolute requirement for salvation: that you accept — on faith — that Jesus died for your sins and took the punishment for them on your behalf. Faith is incompatible with genuine questioning. The moment you begin to question faith . . . read on

Follow the link to see what else she has to say with her usual firm clarity.

Monday, 13 June 2011

Any spider experts?

Is anyone any good at identifying spiders?  This 20mm scale beastie 'attacked' me in southern England today.  (Well - when I say 'attacked' I mean that I found it on a strap on my rucksack.)



Presumably it is carrying an egg sack.  Isn't evolution wonderful?

Not even a new myth!


The posts in the last 24 hours are a small part of the reason why I find it difficult to see why anyone can still be a christian.  We have examined some key aspects of the Jesus myth - indeed most of the important features that make Jesus seem to be a son of god - and found that it is somewhat wanting.

We have seen that several characters have stories with close similarities to that of Jesus. The individual details are not important, but there are so many points that it seems inconceivable that they are coincidences (or all untrue).

Admittedly we have to allow for the fact that these stories come from ancient texts that have been copied and re-copied throughout the centuries, and then interpreted in different ways by 'experts' in recent times. But clearly all three characters, Mithra, Horus and Krishna, predate the Jesus character, with Krishna easily being the earliest version of the story.

The canonical gospels of the New Testament were only agreed long after the time of Jesus, by which time the truth could easily have been 'improved'. Remember that none of the bible was written by eye-witnesses to the life of Jesus, and that human memory is pitifully fallible.  The evidence was, at best, anecdotal.

Perhaps in early centuries CE, these were the features that a god needed to have in order to be credible? The tried and tested formula was just applied to Jesus.

Or else it was all true, and all just coincidental. You have to decide for yourself, either on the basis of evidence or on the basis of faith. (You can safely ignore reports that Mark Twain once said that “Faith is believing what you know ain't so”.)

This is a big decision for christians, because surely if you can't believe any of these magic stories from the life of Jesus you have to ask yourself which other parts you do believe. If the bible really is the inspired word of god, perhaps your god isn't being completely straight with you. (This would be consistent with his performance in the Old Testament - and yes, he IS the same god.)

But no 'true christians' would find any of this reasoning at all compelling - I know.

My own faith is that the Jesus story is a myth, and not even a new myth at the time of writing.

Related posts:

Sunday, 12 June 2011

Krishna and Jesus


Having covered Horus and JesusMithra and Jesus and Historical Jesus?, let us move on to Krishna.

Similarities between the Krishna character and the Jesus character include:
  • Jesus and Krishna were called both a God and the Son of God.
  • Both were sent from heaven to earth in the form of a man.
  • Both were called Savior, and the second person of the Trinity.
  • Both had an earthly father who was a carpenter.
  • The mothers of both were (sometimes said to be) virgins.
  • Krishna and Jesus were of royal descent.
  • Both were visited at birth by wise men and shepherds, guided by a star.
  • Angels in both cases issued a warning that the local dictator planned to kill the baby and had issued a decree for his assassination.
  • Both Jesus and Krishna withdrew to the wilderness as adults, and fasted.
  • Both were identified as "the seed of the woman bruising the serpent's head."
  • Jesus was called "the lion of the tribe of Judah." Krishna was called "the lion of the tribe of Saki."
  • Both claimed: "I am the Resurrection."
  • Both referred to themselves having existed before their birth on earth.
  • Both were 'without sin'.
  • Both were god-men: being considered both human and divine.
  • They were both considered omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent.
  • Both performed many miracles, including the healing of disease. One of the first miracles that both performed was to make a leper whole.
  • Both cast out demons, and raised the dead.
  • Both selected disciples to spread their teachings.
  • Both were meek, and merciful.
  • Both were criticized for associating with sinners.
  • Both encountered a Gentile woman at a well.
  • Both celebrated a last supper.
  • Both forgave their enemies.
  • Both descended into Hell, and were resurrected. Many people witnessed their ascensions into heaven.
The list goes on, but I think that makes the point.  Incidentally, Krishna was on earth sometime between 3000 and 300 years before Jesus.  I think it is clear which story has precedence.

Conclusions later . . .


Related post links, added later:

Horus and Jesus

DO read the more scholarly and critical comments at the end of this surprising story!  

Following the theme of the day, including Mithra and Jesus and Historical Jesus?, let us move on to the myth of the ancient Egyptian deity Horus, who is sometimes represented as a single eye and sometimes as a man with a hawk's head.

Horus was apparently:
  • Conceived by a virgin, Isis-Meri (not Mary but . . .)
  • He was the only begotten son of the God Osiris.
  • His earthly father was Seb, (a.k.a. Jo-Seph), who was of royal descent.
  • His conception was announced by an angel to Isis, his mother.
  • Ancient Egyptians paraded a manger and child representing Horus through the streets at the time of the winter solstice (about 21st December.)
  • His birth was heralded by the star Sirius, announced by angels, witnessed by shepherds and later by three solar deities.
  • Herut tried to have Horus murdered.
  • The God 'That' told Horus' mother "Come, thou goddess Isis, hide thyself with thy child."
  • Horus came of age with a special ritual, when his eye was restored at the age of 12.
  • Nothing is known of his life between ages of 12 and 30.
  • He was baptised in the river Eridanus, aged 30, by Anup the Baptiser, who was subsequently beheaded. 


Are you beginning to spot a pattern emerging?  

You can read a lot more at the web site of the Ontario based organisation, Religious Tolerance, an organisation with members from all religions and none.  Their accounts of a wide range of religious topics seem to be thorough and fair.

Krishna next!




Related post links, added later:

Mithra and Jesus

Having mentioned Mithra in the last post, I ought to say a little more. 

It is alleged that the Mithra character predated New Testament times by centuries, and yet has the following in common with the Jesus character:
  • Mithra was born on December 25th of the virgin Anahita.
  • The babe was wrapped in swaddling clothes, placed in a manger and attended by shepherds.
  • He was considered a great traveling teacher and master.
  • He had 12 companions or "disciples."
  • He performed miracles.
  • As the "great bull of the Sun," Mithra sacrificed himself for world peace.
  • He ascended to heaven.
  • Mithra was viewed as the Good Shepherd, the "Way, the Truth and the Light," the Redeemer, the Savior, the Messiah.
  • Mithra is omniscient, as he "hears all, sees all, knows all: none can deceive him."
  • He was identified with both the Lion and the Lamb.
  • His sacred day was Sunday, "the Lord's Day," hundreds of years before the appearance of Christ.
  • His religion had a eucharist or "Lord's Supper."
  • Mithra "sets his marks on the foreheads of his soldiers."
  • Mithraism emphasized baptism.
You can read a lot more at http://www.truthbeknown.com/mithra.htm.  I can't vouch for its veracity but I am certain that there are scholars who seriously assert the claims listed above and that this linked site addresses the topic in great detail.  

Maybe you know someone who can shed further light?

Then again, it is said that the Mithra story has a lot of parallels with even earlier beliefs about the Egyptian god Horus and the Indian Krishna.  More about them later and some comments about the pattern that is building up tomorrow.






Related post links, added later:
 

Historical Jesus?

Was there a real historical Jesus?  That is a question that most christians do not even entertain.  But many scholars doubt whether there is enough evidence from unbiased or contemporary historians.

. . . the very first thing most Christians often tell me is that most historians accept the historicity of Jesus. This is just an appeal to authority. The fact is that most historians accept the historicity of Jesus on faith. When we really look at the evidence, it is clear that there is very little reason to believe Jesus existed. It is only recently that some historians have started to even question the historicity of Jesus. When they have, no actual evidence has been found to support the claim of a historic Jesus.

So writes Staks Rosch in an interesting and concise post on Examiner.com's Atheism 101: The Jesus Myth.

Of course he is not alone in making the claim that Jesus was not an historical character.  Many others have pointed out that the Jesus story follows the very much earlier story of Mithra.  Even Christmas day was chosen as December 25th which was the date when the Romans celebrated the birth of Mithra.  Surely that is more than coincidence.



Adding some links to later posts in this series:

And another related post:

    Saturday, 11 June 2011

    Religion or Fiction?

    Thoughtful humour to brighten up your afternoon!

    Did you notice?

    Being relatively new at this blogging business, I have fallen into a few traps.  Since I often annoy myself in being able to recognise a mistake whenever I make it again (!!) I have been gradually updating things.  After posting something every day for 4 months I can only say that it has generally been a great pleasure and hardly ever a chore.  I can't recommend Blogger too highly!  And it is free too!  Excellent value for money!

    Have you noticed:
    • It is now easier to leave comments on posts if you do not have one of the accounts listed on the pull down list.  (Anonymous comments are now enabled.)
    • New 'pages' have appeared just under the title (above the line between the grass and the sky), with 'Home' bringing you back to the live blog.  These are for semi-permanent features.
    • Links from my posts will now open in a new tab or window, so you do not lose your place as you are reading.
    Updates and news might appear periodically in the page called BlogNews.  Let me know what you think.

    Lord High Everything else!

    Am I alone in thinking of Gilbert and Sullivan's delightful comic opera, The Mikado, when reading the news this week that Prince Philip has been appointed 'Lord High Admiral of The Navy' to celebrate his 90th birthday?

    If you remember the story from the Victorian era, one of the characters, named Pooh Bah is appointed to the highest office that a citizen can attain, namely Lord High Executioner.  As the story unfolds, we find that he is 'Lord High everything else' at the same time.

    With typical flair for satire, W S Gilbert also touched on the contemporary controversy of evolution, which is a topic that often comes up in my blog posts.  Pooh Bah describes himself as "a particularly haughty and exclusive person of pre-Adamite ancestral descent.  You will understand this when I tell you that I can trace my ancestry back to a protoplasmal primordial atomic globule." 

    As if Prince Philip was not capable of Ninety gaffes in ninety years, I can't help but feel that the British Establishment is now making itself even more of a laughing-stock.  Instituting (or perhaps resurrecting?) trumped up titles for members of the monarchy seems nothing short of risible.

    Alleged sayings by the dear old 'man of the people' incude:

    "How do you keep the natives off the booze long enough to pass the test?" Asked of a Scottish driving instructor in 1995.

    and

    "A few years ago, everybody was saying we must have more leisure, everyone's working too much. Now that everybody's got more leisure time they are complaining they are unemployed. People don't seem to make up their minds what they want."  1981.

    Friday, 10 June 2011

    Uncaged monkeys

    Last month I went to The Hexagon, in Reading, to see a show called "Uncaged Monkeys", which was based on the BBC radio prgramme "The Infinite Monkey Cage" starring Brian Cox and Robin Ince.

    I wondered about blogging about the event at the time, but didn't want to 'give away the ending' for those who had not been to see them yet.  Now it is too late because the tour has finished.  Like all my blog entries - it is partly notes and aides-memoir for myself and partly to entertain you.

    Cox and Ince were joined by some other stars who helped to make it a very lively event.  The whole show was all at more-or-less the right technical level for me because I have read a little bit about almost everything they discussed, so I learned a few things and enjoyed listening to the things I already knew.  You know what they say - a physicist likes to hear nothing better than what he already knows.  (Substitute any other profession for physicist according to your preference!)

    Robin Ince gave a great introduction with humour and gusto.  Already I have forgotten the order of events, but I think Ben Goldacre spoke next.  My neighbour (who got us the tickets) works in pharmaceuticals, and she was not altogether impressed by the way he talked about the 'big pharma' companies.  I must admit that he did dwell on negative aspects, but then again I think they deserve their tricks to be revealed.  I suppose good clinical practice doesn't make good stories.  I was surprised by Goldacre's somewhat restless appearance on stage, and deliberately outrageous comments.

    Matt Parker did some mathematical tricks for us.  e.g. he got someone to read out the digits of a bar code on a product so that he could tell them what the last digit would be.  That was quite a feat of memory, as although the last digit is a check-sum to confirm that the other digits have been accurately read, the algorithm is not a trivial one.  He explained that when you see an item failing to be scanned properly at the supermarket checkout, it is often because the scanner has detected an error in the numbers on the bar code, not that it has failed to read it.  

    Brian Cox did a 'wonders of the universe' talk, and showed us lots of nice pictures (e.g. the Hubble Deep field) and he talked about the LHC and how a proton in the beam of the LHC had the same amount of kinetic energy as an aircraft carrier travelling at 30 mph.  He touched on government spending as a proportion of GDP and noted that UK is below the average for OECD countries.  Apparently the government is addressing this and improving the situation, but not by increasing spending on science.  Instead, they have ring-fenced and frozen the science budget, and they are doing everything in their power to reduce GDP.  Hence the proportion spent on science will increase.

    He talked about relativity and used the global positioning system satellites as an example where general relativity was used to correct the accuracy of the system.  Without it there would be an error in the position of the satellites as big as 36,000 feet per day.  Strange units you might think - but they were used because as you may know, light travels almost exactly 1 foot per nanosecond. (I did happen to know that already and sometimes bore people with it.)

    As an aside, you may also like to know that 1 hour is almost exactly a micro-century - but I didn't learn that at the event.  Next time you are asked how long a meeting is expected to last, try these units and see what reaction you get.

    Someone (can't remember who) talked about the Swiss astronomer Fritz Zwicky, and how he had a special skill for inventing insults.  He coined the term 'spherical bastard' and when someone asked what it meant, he explained.  "A sphere looks the same, whichever direction you look from.  Hence a spherical bastard is someone who is a bastard whichever way you look at him!"

    After the interval there as a short questions and answers, then a couple of songs by Helen Arney.  I had heard the first one and its  available on Youtube.  "Let's make love like animals".  Quite clever.



    Then Simon Singh started off by playing "Stairway to Heaven" backwards (the old ones are the best and easily found on Youtube) and went on to talk about various other interesting ways that the mind fools us. Interesting. I'm sure Singh talked a bit about alternative medicine too, but memory fails me and I have already written enough.

    All in all, a good bit of entertainment and many good laughs for all of us, scientists or not.

    (Did I ever mention that I met Brian Cox once while helping to make a documentary for Horizon?  But that was before I realised that he was famous!)

    Thursday, 9 June 2011

    Endeavour's last flight

    The space shuttle Endeavour has sadly completed its final flight, landing on 1st June.

    This amazing picture from SpaceFlight Now was taken from a plane as it emerged from the clouds on the way to earth orbit.


    It is nearly the end of an era that began with so much promise.  Still - before long the Americans will be able to hitch a lift into orbit with China, India, or maybe even North Korea (exagerating a bit perhaps) whenever the price gets too high to go with the Russians.  Russia would be stupid if it didn't cash-in on its temporary near-monopoly on manned space flight.

    Wednesday, 8 June 2011

    Sayings of perfidious Albion

    In the title of today's post, I quoted from the words of The Erratic Photographer, and unashamedly I bring  you his observations on the topic of working in a vibrant international environment.  .  Click on the link above to read about it.

    Of course there is a good reason why the English speak in such veiled speech.  It is a sign that some of us are just naturally very polite. 

    Small note:  Also, our international friends speak English so well that we have to find a way to keep a few secrets!

    Tuesday, 7 June 2011

    Christopher Hitchens on Mladic

    I had a bit of a rant about the (now imprisoned) Ratko Mladic on 28th May, (poor, sick, victimised old gentleman that he might be).  I must have inspired Christopher Hitchens to write something much more informative and erudite. See


    was published in Slate on 30th May.  Hitch might be struggling with his voice, but the fire is still there in his words.

    Monday, 6 June 2011

    Abiogenesis - Jack Szostak's ideas on the origin of life on earth

    As promised, here is another fascinating video about the origin of life on earth, based on the work of Nobel Laureate, Dr Jack Szostak.

    Sunday, 5 June 2011

    Evolution video - Jack Szostak

    Browing around the Richard Dawkins site on a warm early summer afternoon, (while sheltering from the copious quantities of pollen that have suddenly emerged), I found a thread started by a 17 year old French student, A few questions of biology and the origins of life.

    Buried in the dozens of comments and replies (some better than others as usual), there was a link to this amazing video on the work of Nobel laureate Dr Jack Szostak.  He and fellow researchers Carol Greider and Elizabeth Blackburn shared the Nobel Prize for medicine Monday for their research into how chromosomes protect themselves from degrading when cells divide.

    If you have nine minutes to spare to see how much science is embedded behind the theory of evolution and disproving new earth creationism this is the most condensed stream of information that I have yet seen.  Click the link below this picture.




    The list of evidence is huge.  Great music too! (I wonder what it was.)  That led me to another Szostak inspired video about Abiogenesis - how life could have come about on the primordial earth due to well undertood chemistry and physics.  A link to that is coming soon

    Saturday, 4 June 2011

    Sustainable hunters

    The image of the Native Americans as guardians of the environment, people who lived in harmony with nature, is widespread.  Is it true though? 

    The way that bison were hunted might be considered useful evidence.  Entire herds would be stampeded and guided towards high cliff edges, called buffalo jumps, sending hundreds of animals to their death. 



    The hunters simply had to go and harvest as much of the meat as they could eat before it went off, leaving the rest to be consumed by scavengers.  The picture is of the surprisingly named "Head Smashed-In buffalo jump"

    Harmony indeed.

    Friday, 3 June 2011

    The Voynich Manuscript

    The Voynich manuscript is one of the world's great unsolved mysteries.

    It is a handwritten book, 16 by 23 cm and about 5 cm thick thought to have been written in the 15th or 16th century in Northern Italy.  It has about 240 vellum pages, carbon dated (within the last year at the University of Arizona) to the early 15th century.  The author, script, language and purpose of the document remain completely unknown in spite of various conflicting claims in recent years that it has been decoded. For these reasons it has been described as "the world's most mysterious manuscript"




    It is named after Wilfid M Voynich who acquired it in 1912 and is currently owned by a Yale University library.  People have speculated that it was written by Francis Bacon (who died in 1294, much too early for this particular volume), or by a young Leonardo da Vinci.

    There are many mysteries about this intriguing volume.  For one thing it is written in a unique code which  is statistically plausible compared with known languages, using metrics such as letter frequency, word length and word frequency.  It is consistent from page to page, so it is thought not to be nonsense writing.  If it is nonsense then it is very good nonsense.  It also contains no corrections, and there are no places where the text is squeezed in to fit the space (as is common in hand-written books), so it has been suggested that it is a very well planned copy of an earlier text.  (This is where Francis Bacon comes back into the list of possible authors).

    It has (perhaps) six sections.  Most pages in the first five sections are decorated with illustrations.  The first depicts 113 types of plants and flowers that do not actually exist.  The second is on astrological topics, and the third 'biological' section is filled with pictures of frolicking (generally naked) female forms.  After 'cosmological' and 'pharmaceutical' sections, the final part of the book is known as 'stars'.  Containing no illustrations at all, each paragraph starts with a star symbol.

    Whatever the purpose of the Voynich Manuscript it is still a mystery.  You can find images of all the pages here.

    Thursday, 2 June 2011

    Roaring bears

    Apparently black bears can not roar. 

    It reminds me to the tale I heard about how to distinguish between a brown bear and a grizzly.  All you have to do is to climb a tree.  If the bear climbs it to get you then it is a brown bear.  Grizzlies cannot climb.  If the bear knocks the tree down to get you then it is a grizzly.

    Ascension Day

    Today is the day when christians celebrate the visible part of the invisible magic friend being taken up to heaven.

    Sitting in my (surprisingly chilly) hotel room in Barcelona I was musing that at least the first time Jesus went up to heaven it did actually happen, unlike the May 21st non-event when Mr Camping's prophecy failed to materialise.

    But then I remembered!  The evidence for the historicity of Jesus is more than a little shaky.  Perhaps it didn't happen that time either, but by the time the bible was written down the story had become much more convincing than the reality.

    I am here in Barcelona for a meeting that was arranged before the host realised that Ascension Day is a holiday in quite a lot of Europe.  Rather than change the date, which could have been somewhat inconvenient for those of us with our travel arrangements complete, he has decided to have two separate meetings. 

    It reminded me of a recent dabble with optimism.   I  couldn't quite believe it when I was told that this particular organisation takes all decisions for political reasons, not pragmatic reasons.  Now I think I should have believed it after all!  As I often say . . . no smoke without mirrors!

    Wednesday, 1 June 2011

    Faithful genius - a contradiction?

    How often have you had it pointed out that some famous highly intelligent person has a faith?  Usually it is a polite way to say that this person is much cleverer than you, but they still have faith, so why don't you.  How can you know better than them?  They often reel off a list of names including John Polkinghorne (retired Cambridge particle physicist and now Anglican priest), Martin Rees (Astronomer Royal and the 'compliant quisling' in Dawkins' parlance) and Albert Einstein (who was possibly a deist but fairly obviously not a theist).

    Is it a contradiction of terms to be a faithful genius?  Absolutely not.  From time to time I have had conversations with people on this subject, and we all seem to agree.  Atheism tends to increase with education but it is not necessarily correlated with intelligence.  As an example, anyone who is converted or deconverted in their life will experience a complete change in their outlook, as if by clicking an internal switch.  They are still the same person with the same IQ but something has changed in their mind.  Often they don't even know what caused the change to happen.  Other times something like Richard Dawkins' "The God Delusion" is the catalyst (as it was for me).



    At last I have come across a possible explanation.  I have never read any books by Michael Shermer but I think I should start quite soon.  Shermer is a science writer (with a degree in psychology and biology) and the founder of The Skeptics Society.  His book titles have included "Why People Believe Weird Things" (2002), and his latest book is called "The Believing Brain".  His interviews on podcasts are always interesting and informative.  This week I heard him speaking with Robynn 'Swoopy' McCarthy on the podcast called 'Skepticality'.  (I'm never quite sure why Swoopy is 'co-host' when she seems to do all the actual hosting, but I expect there is an explanation.)

    It seems to be widely accepted that everyone sees patterns in the world and everyone uses those patterns to decide what to believe.  It is clearly a strong evolutionary trait to infer that certain patterns might imply certain threats and to run away from them.  Those who recognise patterns and run away tended to survive and those who did not were more likely to be eaten by predators.  (This explains the phenomenon of pareidolia, (seeing faces in random patterns etc.)  It does not mean that we are all irrational.  We just have to accept the limitations of our own cognition.  I recommend that you try listening to Episode #157 of Skepticality, to hear the highly rational Schermer's own account of the experience of alien abduction, and his subsequent understanding of the subject.

    Shermer's idea is that even brilliant geniuses spot these patterns and are deluded by them as much as the rest of us.  However, the more intelligent the observer, the better they are at creating an explanation to confirm their flawed intuition.  It doesn't mean that they are any more likely to be right about their beliefs but it does mean that it will be harder to argue against them.

    This explanation seems to me to be rational and reasonable.  Is it true?  Who am I to decide.  But if there are logical flaws in my explanation, I am sure that someone will comment (perhaps even by using my own page "Delusional Logic" against me).

    Tuesday, 31 May 2011

    To the moon! (1961)

    I missed the actual 50th anniversary on May 25th, but we are still within the same week, so I suppose I could claim some degree of topicality.

    50 years ago this week, President Kennedy announced that America would put a man on the moon by the end of the decade.



    What an exciting announcement that would have been.  Does anyone remember whether it sent a ripple around the world?  I don't, but then again I was only 4 months old at the time.  At least I remember Apollo 11 and even Apollo 8's first orbit of the moon.

    The burning question for me is whether people actually believed presidents in those days.  If an announcement like that was made today, I think we would all expect it to be canceled again within a few years, usually having wasted half the money with nothing much to show for it.  (Think of the Superconducting Super Collider.)

    How long will it be before USA pulls out of the international fusion project ITER (again)?

    Monday, 30 May 2011

    Only a theory

    Opponents of the Theory of Evolution use the word 'theory' as an insult.  Of course in common parlance, we have to accept that there seems to be some uncertainty about things that are 'only a theory'.

    However, the scientific equivalent of this terminology is the word 'hypothesis'.  This is when someone has an idea but has not yet gathered enough evidence to show that it is true.  In the case of evolution the evidence is completely overwhelming and every day more evidence is gathered, whatever the opponents might think, or feel, or like to believe.

    Just imagine an evolutionary tree with gaps between fossils.  When you find a fossil that fills a gap, it could be said to double the number of gaps.  Whenever you find the fossil of a cousin (thereby not filling a gap) opponents of evolution use it as evidence against evolution when it is, in fact, irrelevant to that particular branch of evolution (albeit interesting and informative).

    There are many scientific theories that are accepted as fact by the general public.  For example, very few people still believe in a flat earth.  But it is 'only a theory'.  Most of us accept now that the Earth orbits the sun once a year.  But the heliocentric theory is 'only a theory'.  And the theory of gravitation is quite attractive too.  But yes - 'it is only a theory'.

    If anyone asks you whether evolution is a theory or a fact the answer is simple.

    Yes. Both!


    Sunday, 29 May 2011

    Delusional Logic

    If you are a fan of spotting logical fallacies in the arguments that people use, and you want a one page 'crib sheet' to help you to name them, here's a link for you (taking you to another page on this blog where you can download the jpg). 



    Collected over a period of several months, this is a new table of the common fallacies that people use, presented for you delectation.  Share it with your friends.

    When this blog post 'disappears' into the archive you will be able to find it from a link at the top of the Something Surprising blog home page.

    Enjoy!

    Another UK farm gate . . .

    Found in Northern England.



    Now we know where Nessie has disappeared to!

    Mladic - of course!

    Of course!  Now that Serbia has nearly handed over Mladic it means that they have nearly done enough to be allowed into the EU!  I should have realised!



    Presumably some people in Serbia decided that the price was worth it, although I read comments (here and there) that are clearly defending him and trying to offer justifications for his actions. 

    According to The Guardian, at this link, Mladic was indicted by a UN war crimes tribunal on fifteen charges for his role in the Balkan wars of the 1990s summarised as:
    Count 1: Genocide
    Count 2: Complicity in genocide
    Count 3: Persecutions on political, racial and religious grounds
    Count 4: Extermination
    Count 5: Murder
    Count 6: Murder
    Count 7: Deportation
    Count 8: Inhumane acts (forcible transfer)
    Count 9: Unlawfully inflicting terror upon civilians
    Count 10: Murder
    Count 11: Murder
    Count 12: Cruel treatment
    Count 13: Inhumane acts
    Count 14: Attacks on civilians
    Count 15: Taking of hostages

    Apart from that then . . . what a nice cuddly grand-fatherly gentle old man! And did I mention that he is not feeling very well at the moment and prefers not to go to The Hague for a 'holiday' while his lawyers delay the course of justice for as long as they possibly can.

    Serbia and some of our EU politicians might think this is enough to demonstrate good will, but the rest of us might feel that they need to do a little more before they are deemed to be worthy partners.

    Saturday, 28 May 2011

    Mladic - worse than bin Laden!

    Just or not, the killing of bin Laden at Abbottabad was at least quick and conclusive.  (I'm not getting off the fence here, not saying whether I think it was right or wrong.)  But I think we are about to be reminded of the consequences of the alternative approach as we see how the same problem is tackled in the European way.

    Could you ever imagine the European president having the courage to sanction the type of action that the American president recently approved?  Of course not, for at least two reasons.  First, do you know who the European President actually is at the moment?  I would be surprised if you do.  Second - it is inconceivable that the EU would ever agree to anything quick or efficient.

    As I often say in my own unique mixed metaphor, in EU politics 'there is no smoke without mirrors'.  We never really know what is going on behind the scenes . . . behind the smoke screen.  The way that Europe deals with another (alleged) mass murderer will reveal a lot about what is wrong with Europe, even if it also reveals something about the fundamental humanity, truth and justice that they would like us to see.  Meanwhile our money will be squandered on a show trial that will seem endless.

    Not many people would say that Ratko Mladic was a paragon of justice.  Even his supporters would only back him because of his successful efforts to eradicate their mutual enemies.  He was indicted in 1995 of the cold blooded killing of between 7,000 and 10,000 Bosnian Muslim men and boys at Srebrenica - the worst single atrocity in Europe since World War II - a much worse atrocity than the 9/11 attack on the Twin Towers where 2,800 died.  In one single event Mladic's forces killed at least twice as many as bin Laden's have killed in total.  Since that time one might speculate that certain Balkan authorities have successfully shielded him from arrest and kept him from facing justice.

    At long last he is now in custody.  But the poor frail little old man isn't feeling very well and he couldn't possibly be expected to face the arduous journey to the Hague. No doubt this short flight would be in a private jet, not suffering the hardship and deprivations (!!) of the normal 'cattle class' tickets that ordinary law abiding peaceful people have on scheduled airline flights. 

    Dear old, scheming, genocidal Mladic has good lawyers, no doubt handsomely paid out of his ill-gotten proceeds, and they will make it difficult at every step of the legal process, spinning out the trial for years.  The costs will reach tens of millions and justice might never be done.

    This is the alternative to sending in a crack squad of soldiers to 'dispatch' him.  The American approach had the additional feature of revealing to the world how Pakistan had kept him 'hidden in open sight', whereas in the European approach nobody would dare to offend another European country by pointing it out. Surely those who deliberately defend and hide indicted mass murderers (whether they are labelled 'terrorist or 'army chief') deserve to be exposed.

    Which is the better approach, the lesser of the two evils?  Please comment.  I can't believe that anyone reading this could claim not to have an opinion.

    Little note.  In typical fashion, the question about who is the president of the EU has at least three possible answers:
    • President of the European Council (since 1 December 2009, Herman Van Rompuy)
    • President of the European Commission (since 22 November 2004, José Manuel Barroso) unelected of course, but clearly the most powerful
    • Presidency of the Council of the European Union (since 1 January 2011, Hungary)
    You see!  Smoke and mirrors!

    Friendly Ulster farmers . . .

     At the end of a tranquil farm drive in peaceful Country Antrim, Northern Ireland  . . .


     . . . you find a friendly and welcoming sign!
     

    C of E in a pickle!

    In the Guardian on 25th May, there was an article Church of England tied in knots over allowing gay men to become bishops.




    Apparently, the archbishop of York's office refused to comment, saying the whole process was entirely confidential.

    I think it would make little difference whether the Archbishop of York commented or not, as on the basis of his performance on Radio 4  on 14th January 2010  I can only assume that we would be left wondering what on earth he was talking about on the topic of gay bishops too.

    I refer to the 'clarity' brought to the subject during John Humphrys’ interview of the archbishop of York, John Sentamu on the Today programme last year. The subject was the Haiti earthquake. This transcription is as close to the spoken words as I can make it.


    H: Why did God allow this to happen?

    S: He created a world which is so beautiful, full of power, full of possibilities that at times . . . water for example, a fantastic reality, can at one time be a devastating thing. Is God got a slot machine in which we put in things and good things come out and bad things come out, no. I actually believe that God is fully engaged, and I have nothing actually to say that that makes sense of this horror. All I know is that the message of Christmas, the message of the death and resurrection of Jesus is that he is with us. Rabbi Hugo Green I think said something more beautiful when he was asked “where was God when Jews were being gassed”. And he said “God was being blasphemed and violated” and what makes it more difficult because if you believe that everybody is made in the image and likeness of god, disaster like this actually make it appalling and very difficult because what we are seeing is the face of God being disfigured and that is quite pretty pretty pretty appalling.

    H: But we are told two things aren’t we? We are told that God is merciful and all powerful.

    S: Yes.

    H: How can those be reconciled with happens to a country like Haiti at a time like this?

    S: Well . . . for the Christian you have got to see the god who is very much like Christ like and in him there is no un-Christ likeness. You know, St Augustine of Hippo said “He lies in a manger but contains the world. He feeds at the breast but also feeds the angels. He is wrapped in swaddling clothes but vests us with immortality.”

    H: Hmm . . . I’m not sure I understand that answer to be perfectly frank with you. I don’t quite see what it has to do with the question.

    S: The question is that the god we are dealing with who is merciful and powerful has shown his face to us in the person of Jesus. And if you believe that God is very much like Jesus of Nazareth, questions of power, questions of mercy, ultimately find their answer not in a sort of a slot machine type god but actually in a god who is with us alongside us, and his power is made more stronger not in dictatorship but in terms of mercifulness, in humility and coming alongside us.

    H: But what you seem to be arguing for here is precisely the slot-machine type god. Because slot machines are random. The suffering that is imposed, that has been imposed on these people of Haiti, clearly entirely innocent people, many many children amongst them, that is random, just like a slot machine.

    S: No no no no no. Jesus was asked a question when there was a Tower of Siloam which killed a lot of people. People were assuming that those who died because they were wicked. Jesus said “No not at all, don’t be complacent, don’t think you can comfort yourself by saying that bad things only happen to bad people. Everyone needs to be aware of their fragility and vulnerability and of their need for one another and for God. You see we are a family, when one weeps we all weep, and I’m afraid the world as it is has got tremendous beauty, tremendous power within it, earthquakes, fire, this can be devastating, and it depends on where you live and you think, well, why did they live in that place? Now with science now for example we know, that the early warning system for the tsunami can actually warn people when this is happening because our world is a world which we are not masters of.

    H: So what do you have to say to someone like Pat Robertson the American evangelical preacher, candidate for President of the United States indeed at one point, who seemed to be blaming Haitians themselves, the country he said swore a pact to the devil at its creation. So in other words they deserved it.

    S: No. I think anybody who talks like this needs to sit at the foot of the cross of Jesus, where what actually you do is don’t throw stones. I think he is absolutely wrong, Haiti is very close to America, and you would have thought that for these generations when the government nearly collapsed, and the United Nations that giving any sense of it (??) that America would have come to their aid, and I am very grateful that, and thankful that President Obama is taking a more proactive ... erm ... help on their doorstep. So Pat Robertson, I am sorry, he is totally wrong, he should re-read his bible properly and realise that what my mother said, never point a finger because when you do three other fingers are pointing back at you.

    H: Archbishop, many thanks.

    So now we should have it clear in our heads, direct from the lips of the 'vice-president' of the Anglican Communion. At the time I showed this to a number of people. The Christians say that it makes perfect sense but they cannot explain how. The others seem as confused as me. Perhaps we should offer up 'thanks to the FSM' for sending us an Archbishop who has his feet firmly planted in the air.


    Friday, 27 May 2011

    Another beautiful rose


    More from the garden - and one of my favorite photos from a couple of years ago.  This rose is a variety called Just Joey.

    Erosion of freedom

    My friend and colleague, The Erratic Photographer, posted an item on his blog a few weeks ago about erosion of freedom in this country. (UK by the way!)  Being a talented photographer, his article was called The War on Photography.  (I reccomend that you follow the link and read it.) 

    Maybe things are more general than that.  I agree with everything he said, but I also feel even more strongly.  The laws that have been implemented to combat terrorism in recent years are gradually and stealthily eroding our freedoms.  In this sense terrorism is winning the war against freedom.  Now I am not defending terrorists.  Regular readers will know that.  I also don't discriminate between the islamic kind and the normal 'cuddly' christian or separatist kinds.  But . . .

    Imagine that you are an innocent person (which shouldn't be too difficult, being the honest decent person that you are) and that somehow by some coincidence you become a suspect in an anti-terrorist investigation.  You could find yourself arrested and falsely imprisoned for weeks without even being charged.  Your house would be ransacked by policemen and your computer taken away for forensic examination.  Many people who's houses are burgled feel that their property has somehow been defiled, but would it be an less defiled because the action was taken by the police?  I think not!

    You would probably lose your job and many of your friends (who might be wary of guilt by association). 

    So far as far as I am aware, not a single suspect kept in custody for as long as the law permits has been prosecuted. 

    Even medieval laws are not perfect, but in this sense they seem more just than 21st century legislation.

    Thursday, 26 May 2011

    A Tiny Storm

    In the news recently, there was a story about a Canadian couple who have named their new baby 'Storm'.  That's an unusual name for a baby. 

    This is not the vegetarian, female, New-Age, Australian 'Storm' who features in Tim Minchin's clever song that I featured on April 12th.

    These parents are determined to keep the baby's gender secret from everyone, including the grandparents.  (What IS the difference between sex and gender in this context?  Someone tell me please.)  They seem to think that this will allow the baby to become the person they want to be, unconstrained by social norms.

    Yes . . . well . . .

    This is going to be one crazy mixed up kid in a few years time.  And the notion that the kid will keep the secret for very long seems to be something of a pious hope.  It will also make it quite tricky for them to find a baby-sitter who they trust.

    I wonder whether this the kind of couple who will also put their baby's life at risk by avoiding the social norm of vaccination.

    Interesting story though!  Thanks to Liz for mentioning it to me.

    Wednesday, 25 May 2011

    Homeopathic cure for terrorism

    It has been suggested that, according to homeopathic principles, the Americans might have taken the first step to cure the world of terrorism. 

    Dropping bin Laden's corpse into the ocean (after 'succussing' it extensively) might be the first step in producing a remedy.

    What a pity that homeopathy has been shown, time and time again, not to be better than placebo.

    More from Guatemala

    One of the most popular posts so far was on 27th April, about  the almost incredible 'sink holes' that appear periodically in Guatemala City.



    Here is another photo of the 2010 event which appeared on 1st June (or thereabouts) during a tropical storm called Agatha.

    Just for comparison, you can see that these events are not unique to Guatemala. Not very far away (on a galactic scale at least) on the Sarisariñama Plateau, Venezuela, there are some older looking sink holes that are about 350m in diameter.


    And if you prefer a marine environment . . .


    The "Great Blue Hole" is an underwater sink hole in Belize.  Would you feel vertigo if you were in that boat going over the edge of the hole?

    Tuesday, 24 May 2011

    Another bus campaign?


    A little fun for those familiar with the 'atheist bus campaign'.

    And here is yet another bus campaign on a similar but opposite theme.

    Schrödinger's Cat had its eyes closed?

    For those who feel they might understand the paradox of Shrödinger's Cat (in quantum mechanics) the key question is:

    "Why doesn't the cat count as an observer?"

    If it did, that would spoil the whole paradox.  I think it must have had its eyes closed.

    First rose of summer


    One month earlier than some other years, the first rose in the garden has beaten the greenfly.

    Monday, 23 May 2011

    Longest brick arch in the world

    Finished in 1838, this spectacular pair of long flat brick arches was contructed by Isambard Kingdom Brunel to carry the Great Western Railway (GWR) over the River Thames at Maidenhead.



    At the time of building, and perhaps even now, these arches were the longest in the world built of brick.  Each span is 39m wide and only 7m high.

    There is an entertaining 'urban myth' about this bridge.  (Or in context, should it be a rural myth?)  It is said that the board of the GWR (in the typical way of boards who know nothing of engineering but something of litigation) were concerned about the bridge collapsing.  They ordered Brunel to leave the wooden 'formers' in place under the bridge - just in case!  (These formers had been put in place to support the arches while they were constructed of course.)


    Brunel (in the typical way of this independent minded engineer who cared little for the voice of authority) complied with their request but lowered the formers slightly so that they took no part in the structure. As you can see - the bridge survived a lot longer than the woodwork which was washed away in a flood, and Brunel was proved right (as usual).


    One can only imagine his glee and admire his innovation.  And as you can see from the state of his boots in this famous photo, he was a real engineer!  That reminds me - I ought to polish my shoes as I am not a real engineer.


    Little note:  GWR - also known as the Great Way Round by competitors, or God's Wonderful Railway by fans of their stylish locomotive engineering.

    Sunday, 22 May 2011

    Adam and Eve featured in the Qu'ran?



    Thanks to Sarah for finding this one!

    Asymmetrical warfare and the 'big brother lecture'

    For as long as I can remember, I have been told "You're the big brother!  You SHOULD know better" and I always felt that truth and justice had no place in the world.  This happened sometimes when my darling little sister, with legendary persistence, had finally managed to provoke me into retaliation, and then I was the one who was punished!  (Well OK, its a while since my mother actually used that line of argument, but still it lingers!  :)

    Even today in my professional life I sometimes find it annoying to get the equivalent of the 'big brother lecture'.  Relatively junior staff sometimes get more leeway and middle management is often an unenviable position to hold.

    Recent events in Pakistan have made me wonder whether there is an analogy to be drawn.  In this case USA is the big brother who has been provoked into drastic action, and Al Quaeda is the poisonous little sibling that has been goading and provoking.  In this view of the situation one is left to wonder whether Pakistan takes the role of another acquiescent sibling, or that of the chiding parent.  However, parts of Europe definitely take the parental tone.

    Last week I was discussing the whole bin Laden saga with an American friend who is a tolerant and decent christian.  I asked her what she thought about the subject and I was quite surprised at the satisfaction that even she clearly felt at the summary justice that had been dispensed.  When I played devil's advocate and asked her the questions that others have asked me, I was not surprised that she felt that USA had been attacked.  However, I was surprised that she thought that USA had been singled out and thought that that gave them some special right to strike back.  National stereotypes aside, I find that many Americans do not to remember about the Madrid and London bombings.

    Now - I might agree with her about the death of bin Laden (although not without reservations) and about whether justice can and should be dispensed in this way.   I have noticed a difference between the views of European and American friends.  Of course as Alexander Dumas said "all generalisations are dangerous, even this one" but I feel that there is a trend for Europeans to be disapproving or guardedly approving.  On the other hand I have yet to meet an American who sees this as a dangerous erosion of international law.  So far all have wanted to celebrate what has happened.

    What does this have to do with the big brother lecture?

    It seems to me that the time has come for the rules of international war to be reviewed.  The 'accepted' codes of conduct have been designed for more-or-less symmetric wars where the two protagonists have broadly equivalent resources and tactics.  Surely by now people have noticed that not all warfare is conducted in such a (dare I say) gentlemanly fashion.

    Over a hundred years ago the British faced terrorist action all around the empire - and of course responded brutally.  We still face criticism from around the world for the barbaric actions of our ancestors whether we as descendants are individually guilty or not.  I feel a parallel with the Garden of Eden story here, and I have more or less the same views on both.  It wasn't my actions and I personally accept no blame for either.

    In recent decades asymmetric warfare has continued unabated, with relatively under-resourced terrorist groups taking action against society and then claiming the moral high-ground when retribution is taken against them.  In the case of Al Quaeda perhaps this started with the attack on the USS Cole in Yemen, and gradually developed to include the Twin Towers atrocity, and the Madrid and London bombings.  Now that bin Laden has been attacked they seem to think that it somehow justifies what they are doing - but they are simply wrong.



    Something has to change.  The big brothers and sisters of this world need to feel that they can defend themselves adequately without being accused of bullying.  I think we can all contribute to our own defence.

    Be vigilant and resist creeping compromise.

    Saturday, 21 May 2011

    From The World's End

    Follow this link for a tongue in cheek report about the Rapture arriving at a pub called "The World's End" last night, by James O'Malley of the Pod Delusion.

    I think it is clear what has happened.  None of the people alive today have been saved, and all those pious individuals who died throughout history have been resurrected.

    Or maybe the Jehovah's Witnesses were right all along.  Don't they teach that only 144,000 will be saved.  In today's world of 7 billion, who would notice?

    Magnitude 6.5 earthquake today

    Being the day of The Rapture (as I'm sure you all know if you have been following me this week), we were led to believe that there would be huge earthquakes all around the world.

    Well, there was quite a big one this morning.  Magnitude 6.5 would normally get reported wouldn't it?  But in this case it was in the south atlantic, thereby causing little devastation.




    False alarm again?  But will this damage the reptuation of that false prophet, Camping?  I suspect not for the following reason.

    In James Randi's classic work "Flim Flam", the fourth 'hallmark of paranormal chicanery' probably applies. 

    "Faults discovered in the story or performance tend to prove the phenomenon real, it is agreed, since a clever trickster would not make such basic errors!"

    Has anyone seen my christians?

    Judgement Day is here (as I mentioned 3 days ago).  Are you still here on Earth too?

    Has anyone felt any earthquakes or noticed that their most pious relatives have gone missing this morning?

    In spite of the title, my christian family are still here. Maybe we have to wait until 2012 for the end of the world after all?

    Friday, 20 May 2011

    Draw Mohammed Day

    May 20th is the second annual "Draw Mohammed Day".  I always smile when I see someone claim that something is the second annual event, as what they really mean is that it happened only once before and they would like you to believe that they will not lose interest in the idea before next year at least.

    Reading a little bit about the subject of drawings of Mohammed, I find that there are many good cartoons around.  Some are perhaps a little offensive, but not by any means as offensive as the attempted murder of Kurt Westergaard for drawing some rather  thoughtful images.  How was he to know that some extremist would add two additional (highly) inflammatory and offensive cartoons and publish all of them in Egypt under his name. 


    Not wishing to provoke the wrath of the Islamic Army of Oxfordshire, I decided to avoid showing any of them here . . . with the exception of the one above.

    However, in the interests of free speech, you might follow the links at this venerable and respectable site, Richard Dawkins.net, where you could join me in righteous indignation and disapproval of the slide show of awful offensive images.

    Incidentally - wouldn't it be funny if it is islamists who manage to introduce a new human right - the right not to be offended!