Archives 2009

Bill Nye Booed for Stating Fact

Looks like Texas is the new Florida.

Think Atheist is reporting
that
Bill Nye the Science Guy was
giving a talk in Waco, TX, and mentioned that despite what it says in
Genesis 1:16,
the moon does not emit light, but merely reflects the light of the
sun. So he got booed, and one woman left with her children, so that
they wouldn’t have to hear such antireligious hate speech.

Note that this story does not appear at the Waco Tribune web site, or
in
Google News,
so take it with a grain of salt.

Update, 13:20: Fez points out that according to the nonfunctional link on Think Atheist, this story apparently dates to 2006.

Catholic Clergy Have Their Own Psychiatric Hospital?

Today’s Post
reports:

A Silver Spring psychiatric hospital that specializes in treating Catholic clergy has been cited for problems that are “serious in nature,” according to a report from Maryland health officials who investigated the facility after a patient drowned himself in a bathtub there in January.
[…]

St. Luke, which sees about 600 people a year, almost all of them priests and nuns […]

The thrust of the story is about poor conditions at the hospital, it
being ill-equipped to deal with suicidal patients, and so forth. Which
is a scandal, but not what caught my attention, which was:

There’s a psychiatric hospital that specializes in priests and nuns?
Seriously?

There are hospitals that specialize in soldiers, like Walter Reed. And
I imagine there are psychiatric hospitals that specialize in police
officers and firefighters. But clergy? Really?

If it’s that stressful a lifestyle, then maybe they should rethink how
they’re doing it.

GOP Not Reactionary Enough for Dwyer

Don DwyerLegum’s New Line is reporting that Maryland General Assembly member, arch-reactionary, homophobe, reanimated corpse, and all-around asshat Don Dwyer (R-I Feel Sorry for Anne Arundel) has left the Republican caucus because they wouldn’t support his attempt to amend the Maryland constitution to define anything from a fertilized egg onward as a person.

I realize that Maryland is a fairly liberal state, but even so, it’s fairly impressive that Dwyer is so far to the right, he won’t even play with the Republicans.

More on ARIS’s “Nones”

I’ve taken a second look at the ARIS results, particularly the “Nones” which have attracted so much attention. Here’s a graph of various Nones through the three surveys, as a percentage of the US population at the time:

ARIS's "Nones"
(click to see a little larger.) This graph is drawn from data in Tables 1 and 3, and 4 of ARIS 2008.

Here, the topmost line represents what ARIS 2008 calls the “Nones”: atheists, agnostics, “anti-clerical theists”, nonreligious, and so forth. As expected, it’s the largest group.

It’s also the group that has grown the most since 1990, when NSRI 1990 (the survey to which ARIS 2001 was a followup) was conducted. However, its growth has slowed down substantially since 2001.

The red line at the bottom shows self-described agnostics, and the purple line just below that, self-described atheists. NSRI 1990 lumped atheists and agnostics together, so the leftmost data point actually shows the sum of both. This also explains the dip in 2001. The sum of self-described atheists and agnostics is 0.7% in 1990, 0.9% in 2001, and 1.6% in 2008, so the trend is actually increasing, and has apparently picked up steam (there were 29% more atheists+agnostics in 2001 than in 1990, and 78% more in 2008 than in 2001).

It’s interesting to contrast this to the slowing growth in Nones overall. I note that the “new atheist” bestsellers all came out between the last two surveys: The End of Faith in 2004, The God Delusion, Breaking the Spell, and Letter to a Christian Nation in 2006, and god is not Great in 2007.

It would be nice to say that the Four Horsemen led to the growth in nonbelief, but there’s not enough data in here to jump to such a conclusion. At most, I think we can say that Harris, Dawkins, Dennett, and Hitchens haven’t killed atheism; atheists aren’t going back into the closet.

Lastly, the three triangles with no lines, in 2008, represent the answers in Table 4:

  • Atheist A: there is no such thing as a god.
  • Agnostic A: there is no way to know whether there are any gods.
  • Agnostic B: don’t know whether there are any gods.

The obvious thing to notice is that there are far more of them than either self-described atheists, agnostics, or both together. Doubtless this includes some Buddhists, Taoists, Scientologists, etc., but there are too few of those to account for these numbers. I suppose that some come from the “generically non-religious” pool, while others identify themselves as members of some mainstream religious group, but don’t accept all of the group’s tenets. “Cultural Catholics”, if you will.

All in all, it’s a bit disappointing that with all the hoopla about “the new atheism” and uppity unbelievers, out-of-the-closet atheists still haven’t cracked the 1% mark.

Another point that’s been talked about is the growth in “generic” Christianity (“Christian unspecified” and “Non-denominational Christian” in Table 4 of ARIS 2008). Some of this is due, I’m sure, to smaller churches shutting down and their parishioners migrating to generic megachurches. But the growth of the Nones leads me to suspect that it’s also due to a growing disenchantment with organized religion.

It’s not uncommon to hear a sentiment along the lines of “I’m a Christian, but religion is bullshit”. People who feel the divine, but feel that organized religions are corrupt, or self-serving, or otherwise undeserving of their membership. These people are not swelling the ranks of rationality; but at the same time, they’re diminshing church rolls, and helping to reduce the power base that the Pat Robertsons and Ted Haggards of the world can mobilize and use to wield social and political (to say nothing of monetary) power. So they’re a net gain.

In other words, what this data seems to show is that a) Americans are rejecting religion, and b) Americans are rejecting superstition. These are two separate issues, but in both cases, we’re moving in the right direction.

BillDo Lies About Stem Cell Ban

Today, BillDo put out a
release
boldly proclaiming
Obama to okay killing embryos“.

It is precisely because there are ethical alternatives to killing embryos that President Obama’s decision is doubly flawed: (a) it is immoral to intentionally destroy nascent human life, and (b) it is even more irresponsible to do so when morally acceptable alternatives exist.

This is so wrong that it’s hard to refrain from saying that Bill is
flat-out, pants-on-fire lying, so I won’t. Obama’s
executive order
lifts the restriction on federal funding for stem cell research; it
doesn’t change where embryonic stem cells come from.

To the best of my knowledge, embryonic stem cells for research come
from leftover embryos for in vitro fertilization, i.e., ones that
weren’t chosen to be implanted in the want-to-be-mother. As I
understand it, people who want to
carry someone else’s child
get first crack at them. Researchers only have access to those that no
one else wants.

And finally, the leftovers are disposed of. By incineration, I
understand.

So BillDo’s “morally acceptable alternatives” no only exist, but are
being implemented, and no one has a problem with this.

What he’s saying is either “let’s shut down the IVF clinics!” (which I
doubt) or “don’t offer clusters of embryonic cells to researchers!
Throw them into the fire right away!”

People are already “intentionally destroy[ing] nascent human life”.
This has been going on for ages, but I don’t hear BillDo complaining
about that. No, he’s afraid that a lot of good might come of the
process. So FOAD, Billy.

The New ARIS Is Out!

ARIS 2008,
the American Religious Identification Survey, has just been released,
and the atheosphere is as giddy as a bunch of schoolgirls upon the
release of Harry Potter and the Adjective Noun.

The most significant finding, IMHO, is that the “Nones”
(atheist/agnostic/no religious preference) are up since 2001,
although nowhere near as dramatically as betwen 1990 and 2001. But
still the fastest-growing segment of the population.

One new feature is that, unlike the 1990 and 2001 ARISes, the 2008
survey asked “what do you believe?”-type questions, rather than just
“what do you call yourself?”

Table 3
in the
full report
(p. 5) lists atheists as comprising 0.7% of the US population, and
agnostics at 0.9%. However,
table 4
(p. 8) lists people’s answers to
the question of whether there is a god: “There is no such thing”
(atheism) comes in at 2.3%, “There is no way to know” (proper
agnosticism) at 4.3%, and “I’m not sure” (common agnosticism) at 5.7%.
(IMHO it might be interesting to see how many people haven’t really
thought about it. Maybe next time.)

In other words, there are a bunch of people who are atheists and
agnostics, but don’t call themselves that. Presumably they either just
call themselves “None of the above”, “No religion”, or “Spiritual, but
not religious”; or else they’re members of religious groups that allow
that kind of latitude, such as Buddhism or Taoism.

Table 7
(p. 11) shows that religion is stronger among women than men. In most
religions listed, there are more women than men. “None” is an
exception to this rule (as are “Eastern Religions”, “Muslim”, and “New
Religious Movements/Other”), but the skew is most pronounced: 60% of
Nones are male vs. 40% female.

Update, 16:14: USA Today has a nice
interactive graph
of the survey results.

I’m guessing that the sharp drop in “Other religions” in Wyoming, and of “Don’t know/Refuse” in Delaware represent statistical anomalies (i.e., they happened to get a bad batch of poll respondents), rather than real demographic trends.

Quickie Fundie Quiz

Who said this?:

I am embarrassed that it took me 38 years as a Christian to see in God’s Word that prison, as a form of punishment, violates the Bible.

If you said
Kent Hovind,
currently serving 10 years in federal prison for not
rendering unto Caesar
that which is Caesar’s“,
give yourself a pat on the back and a nice steaming cup of
schadenfreude.

McCain’s Porkiest Pork

Apparently John McCain has discovered Twitter, and has recently tweeted (twitted? twote?) his list of “the TOP TEN PORKIEST PROJECTS in theOmnibus Spending bill the Congress is about to pass“.

Phil has already shown him to be an antiscience luddite (item #2 is $2 million for astronomy in Hawaii — as if that were a waste of money).

And the #1 porkiest project in the omnibus spending bill is

$1.7 million for pig odor research in Iowa

It looks as though this refers to the SOMMRU, the Swine Odor and Manure Management Research Unit, at the National Swine Research and Information Center on the campus of Iowa State University in Ames.

Now, maybe it’s just me, but I for one think that a lot of people who live or work near pig farms would like it if they smelled less (remind me to check with my Iowan friend about that). Okay, maybe that’s a luxury that isn’t worth $1.7 million (or $1.8 million, if you believe the NY Times), but I bet that you can tell a lot about a pig’s health by its smell. And unhealthy pigs → reduced profits.

But beyond all that, McCain has seized on the word “odor”. SOMMRU’s About Us page shows that there’s more to their work than pig farts:

The mission of the Swine Odor and Manure Management Research Unit is to conduct basic and applied research to solve problems in the livestock industry that impact production efficiency and environmental quality. Multidisciplinary research teams generate and integrate knowledge for evaluation and development of new management practices that minimize nutrient excretion, malodorous emissions, and the release of pathogens into the environment as well as have a positive impact on animal health.

(emphasis added.)

In other words, yes, they do research on pig smell, but also work on improving farming practices.

Their Research page confirms this. How about this Salmonella study?:

Objective:

(1) Determine the persistence of Salmonella in swine manure as affected by dietary treatment. (2) Identify genes important for Salmonella colonization of the swine gastrointestinal tract and persistence in manure.

Or improving pig diet?:

Objective:

Objectives of the proposed research are: (1) evaluate the ability of commercially available enzyme preparations to improve the apparent dry matter (DM), lipid (EE), phosphorus (P), nitrogen (N), energy (E), and fiber (NDF and ADF) digestibility of diets containing 30% corn dried distillers grains with solubles (DDGS); and (2) evaluate potential interactive effects between enzymes and mechanical processing (extrusion) on nutrient digestibility.

In other words, as I understand it, how can pig feed be prepared so it’s digested more efficiently (i.e., so they don’t crap out half the corn they’re fed).

Ditto the fat from your fries:

Objective:

To determine the variation in metabolizable energy (ME) content of crude glycerin samples from a range of plants and feedstuff sources such as soybean oil, animal fat, and used restaurant grease.

And corn and more corn.

Now, this doesn’t address questions inevitably related to pig farming, such as how the pigs are treated (to say nothing of vegetarians’ concerns). But if we assume for the sake of argument that pig farming is a Good Thing, these seem like the sorts of questions we should be asking, questions that directly affect the pork business.

Besides, a million bucks doesn’t buy as much as it used to. At my place of employment, I could name a couple of million-dollar “computing infrastructure” projects. In this light, $1.7 million to improve pig farming seems like a bargain.

But, of course, I could be wrong. It could be that ISU is full of weirdos who like smelling pig farts.

Dance, Monkeys! Dance for My Enjoyment!

Today seems to be the day when a bunch of right-wing fundies all decided to make themselves look ridiculous in public, seemingly only to entertain me.

For a while now, Ray Comfort’s weblog wasn’t accepting new comments, because he had been hired by Examiner.com as their Creationism Examiner, and he wanted comments to be posted there.

This morning, however, I found a post on his old site, with a bunch of comments. I can only surmise that the Examiner decided that Ray was too kooky for them, and booted him back to blogspot.com.


Then there was the kook fight: according to this WND story (sorry, I couldn’t find a reliable source), Ray basically accused Catholics of not being True Christians™

But the Vatican has chosen to officially believe Darwin rather than Jesus

BillDo, recognizing in Comfort one of the rare people who could make him look reasonable and measured by comparison, responded by saying that the Catholic church’s position is that it’s okay to accept evolution, as long as you still believe in a magic man in the sky.

Ray’s response to that basically boils down to “is not!”

(HT PZ.)


But the one who had me laughing out loud all morning was Brannon Howse, who has a show on Christian Worldview Radio.

Howse recently put in an appearance at a church in Ft. Worth. Bud Kennedy, a reporter for the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram, wrote an article about it, under the title “Who knew that yoga is a tool of Satan?”, talking about Howse’s superstition, ignorance, and paranoia.

I wasn’t at the event in Texas, but Kennedy’s account is pretty much in line with what Howse has talked about on his radio show: ZOMG teh gays, the Earth is 6000 years old, Obama == Hitler, and so forth.

So Brannon Howse spent an entire episode whining about how the article made him and other True Christians™ look foolish and extreme, at one point asking, “is there anything extreme about saying that there’s nothing Christian about yoga?” (Yes, Mr. Howse. Yes, there is.)

What had me laughing out loud was that Howse’s “corrections” of Kennedy’s librul yellow journalism just made Howse look as bad as before, if not worse. For instance, he claims that he never said yoga is a tool of Satan. It is, however, an Indian occult practice, and anti-christian.

On other topics, like the notion that the stimulus package is a way of achieving a worldwide monetary system and a one-world government, his response was basically, “Well, yes, I said that, because it’s true. But when Kennedy puts it in the paper, it makes us look foolish.”

Yes, it does, Brannon. As the saying goes, people who don’t want their beliefs ridiculed shouldn’t hold such ridiculous beliefs.


And finally, to cap off a perfectly wonderful day, here’s Richard Dawkins’s response to Ray Comfort’s challenge to debate him for $10,000.

Go read the whole thing. It’s wonderful.

$10,000 is less than the typical fee that I am ordinarily offered for lecturing to a serious audience (I often don’t accept it, especially in the case of a student audience, because I am a dedicated teacher). It is not, therefore, a worthwhile inducement for me to travel all the way across the Atlantic to debate with an ignorant fool. You can tell him that if he donates $100,000 to the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science (it’s a charitable donation, tax deductible) I’ll do it. A further condition is that it will be filmed by Josh Timonen for my website, RichardDawkins.net, and distributed by Josh as a DVD, if he thinks it is funny enough. To this end, it would be nice if Mr Comfort would reprise the ever popular Banana Sketch.

Richard Dawkins

(HT Shelley.)

Wednesday List

Some bands that were obviously named before Google became the one and only way to find anything anywhere:

  • ABC
  • AC/DC
  • The Band
  • Foreigner
  • Genesis
  • Guess Who
  • James
  • Leæther Strip (yes, that’s L, E, A-E ligature)
  • M
  • Prince
  • (The Artist Formerly Known as Prince)
  • Secret Service
  • Squeeze
  • The The
  • Type O Negative
  • U2
  • Wham
  • Yes
  • Bands named after places: Boston, Chicago, Kansas, Nazareth, etc.
  • Bands named after common items: Heart, Hole, Journey, Madness, Ministry, Nirvana, Opposition, Orgy, Pig, Queen, Rush, Starship, Wire, etc.

I considered

  • Mr. Mister
  • The Smiths
  • The Who

but if you put those names in quotes, Google can find them.

Bonus list: album titles that Google can’t find:

  • by KMFDM
  • ? by Nena
  • Promises by Opposition