On Death
There is nothing when we die
No hell, no heaven up in the sky.
Dead is dead and this I know
Because the Bible tells me so.
“For to him that is joined to all the living there is hope; for a living dog is better than a dead lion. For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.” Ecclesiastes 9:4-5
Discovery Channel Caves In
PZ Myers has an entry on his blog today about how the Discovery Channel purchased only 6 of the 7 episodes of David Attenborough’s latest, Frozen Planet. The reason? Episode 7 deals with global climate change. Yes, that’s right. The Discovery Channel that supposedly provides educational programming, has decided to strip off the final episode of this wonderful series because they choose to ignore science and fact. How is withholding and ignoring information on a critical topic that effects everyone on the planet educating? That the Discovery Channel chooses to give into ideologically motivated ignorance is infuriating.
I’ve chosen to express my ire to the Discovery Channel at their viewer relations page. Here is what I had to say:
“I am appalled that the Discovery Channel decided not to show the 7th installment of Frozen Planet. I thought that Discovery Channel was dedicated to providing quality educational and science programming, instead, I find that it has decided that it would rather cave to the uniformed idea that global climate change is not real and refuse to show the last installment of this series because it deals with the scientific fact. Shame on the Discovery Channel.”
The (Believers) Problem of Evil
Isaiah 45:7
King James Version (KJV)
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.
For those who believe in a god, especially a loving, merciful god, evil is a real problem. Some say that satan causes evil in the world, others that evil is god’s way of testing our faith.
As far as I can see it, these, and other arguments like them, all fall flat. I could write a whole book against these arguments (and many have), but instead, I think my position can be summed up with the following quote attributed to Epicuris:
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
The first quote, from Isaiah, pretty much shows that the god who Christians like to claim as being a god of love, is also a god of evil. Their Bible is pretty unequivical about it: the LORD creates evil. It really can’t be any other way, if, as they say, their god created everything, for by default, he must have created evil as well as good.
To surrender the cause of evil to an unseen and amorphous entity is to refuse to take any responsibility for the evil that humans visit upon each other. When you accept that evil is a product of human activity, you can then look it straight in the eyes and tackle it head on, instead of pawning it off to an imaginary god or gods.
There are many reasons that I am an atheist; there is my love of science, my thirst for knowledge, and my instance on truth, no matter how ugly it may be. Still, the two quotes above make a very powerful, yet simple, argument against believing in any god or gods. They are a beginning point for shuffling off the imaginary coil of belief and moving onto a life of real responsibility those with who we share this planet.
More Cool Science and Skeptical Images
Here are some more cool science and non-theist images for your enjoyment!
They make as much sense as the Christian trinity.
It is just as plausible as the Christian version.
Science rocks!
The man who showed the world that science can be exciting and beautiful.
Probably the most influential scientist since Newton. Evolution baby!
His work greatly influence Darwin. He is the forgotten hero of evolution.
Pass the peas please! The theory of inheritance derived by his work with peas laid the groundwork for the science of genetics. I still remember this to this day from high school biology class.
Using Humor to Show Up Delusions
There is a well known example that supporters of science use when refuting the idea of a perfect creator. The example is the laryngeal nerve. This nerve supplies motor function and sensation to the larynx. What is unusual about it is that, even though the larynx is located in the throat in most invertebrates, it follows a path down from the throat, into the chest, and back up to the brain, rather than the shorter and more obvious route of going straight from the throat and up to the brain.
In referring to Richard Dawkins use of the laryngeal nerve argument, Wikipedia states:
“The extreme detour of this nerve (over fifteen feet in giraffes) is cited as evidence of evolution as opposed to intelligent design. The nerve’s route would have been direct in the fish-like ancestors of modern tetrapods, traveling from the brain, past the heart, to the gills (as it does in modern fish). Over the course of evolution, as the neck extended and the heart became lower in the body, the laryngeal nerve was caught on the wrong side of the heart. Natural selection gradually lengthened the nerve by tiny increments to accommodate, resulting in the absurdly circuitous route now observed, which, if designed, could only be described as unintelligent.”[1]
I’ve heard this argument against intelligent design given many times and in different ways, some more effective than others, but as is often the case, humor and satire can serve to drive the point home much better than any physical evidence or well articulated argument can.
Jonathan Rosenberg draws the funny, topical, and skeptical Scenes From A Multiverse. Today’s installment address this particular augment with great hilarity and precision. It is a perfect surgical strike against the idea of a perfect creator, and leaves us with the conclusion that god either does not exist or, if he does, is just plain stupid. The next to the last panel says it all.
1. ^ Dawkins, Richard (2009). “11. History written all over us”. The greatest show on Earth. New York: Free Press. pp. 360–362. ISBN 9781416594789. Retrieved November 21, 2009.
Made With Science!
By http://lithiumboy.deviantart.com/
Look around you. If you are reading this then you are most likely surrounded by things that science make possible. When you read about people who are anti-science and who seek to replace science with their fantasies of religion, think about all the things that make your life easier and richer than you would not have without science. I’m not just talking about iPhones and the Internet, or big screen TVs or even cars. Think about running water; clean running water. Think about electricity. How about the fact that most children in western societies regularly survive to adulthood? All these things can be attributed to science. If the religious right (you can’t call them radical anymore as they now make up the mainstream of the GOP) gets their way and vastly useful and proven scientific theories such as evolution, plate tectonics, and germ theory are suppressed in our educational systems and research funding, it can only bode ill for our modern way of life. If they get their way, you will need to move to Canada, Europe or Asia to have the same quality of life you have now.
So next time you hear someone going on about cutting science funding or trying to get intelligent design (creationism) into science classes in public schools look around and remember that much of what you see was made with science.
The Burden of Proof is on You
Believers often ask me to prove to them that God does not exist. The only evidence that I can offer is that there is no evidence. Now, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, so just by saying that there is no convincing evidence that there isn’t a god doesn’t mean that there isn’t.
The real issue here is that I don’t have to prove anything. The onus is on the believer to prove that their god does exists. Most believers don’t see it this way. I could spend hours, and many a scientist, and atheist has, trying to explain how the scientific method and the rules of logic work to believers, but I’d get nowhere. They usually just don’t get it. It is for this reason that I have refused to try to tackle this issue of proving the non-existence of god, or anything else for that matter.
So, you may ask, why am I addressing this issue now? Because I found a lovely illustration that does one of the best jobs of showing why I don’t have to prove the nonexistence of god, and believers do.
By Shelly Rau at http://beautifullychaotic.deviantart.com/
Nuf said.
A Practical Use For A Science Education – A Job
Phil Plait, the Bad Astronomer, has a nice article in where he discusses how data shows that the jobs with the least percentage of unemployed tend to be science based. This means that if you have a science education, any kind of science education, you will likely have an easier time finding a job than those who don’t. He also bemoans the current anti-science platform being pushed by Republican legislatures across the country and nationally because they work against real job creation in the country.
The fact is , science works. It isn’t perfect; it is constantly being revised as we learn more and more about the universe in which we live. In fact, it is this very trait, the falsifiability of scientific theories, that makes is such a powerful tool for understanding and making the most out of the world we live in. It is able to adapt and improve as more data is collected.
Look around you. You are reading this on a computer or smartphone. You cook on stoves that use natural gas or electricity instead of over an open fire. You live in houses that have electricity and running water. In fact, almost everything that you own or use is a product of science. Each law that is passed to push creationism in schools, that strips science funding from colleges and universities, that limits stem cell research, that seeks to deny global warning chips away at the foundation of our economy and national security.
There is a good reason why people call the current religiously motivated, anti-science, Republican party the American Taliban. Like their brethren in Afghanistan, they too seek to take us back to the middle ages where people work from sun up to sunset to scrape together an existence; where children die of starvation and disease in a world surrounded by plenty of food to feed them and medicine to cure them. Yes, this is a bit of hyperbole, but the fact remains that the more science is marginalized and vilified, the more this country loses its place as a leader in the world and becomes a follower, begging scraps from those it once looked down on.
An Excellent Example of Science vrs Pseudoscience
The website atheism.about.com has a really good article examining if astrology is pseudoscience or science. While I agree that astrology is bullshit, that is not what, I think, is the real take away point from the article. You could easily subsitute any number of questionable practices such as “psychic powers” or “homeopathy” for astrology.
The real importance of the article is how well it explains the scientific method. The reason this is important is that so many people have no concept of what the scientific method is and how it works. This leads to a gross misunderstanding and mistrust of science. This is bad because it leads to the undermining of scientific advancement in our society, a society that, more and more, is very dependent on the technology that science gives us.
There is a sad and firghtening trend in this country of mistrust, and even hostility, toward science. This kind of anti-science belief used to be confined to the radical right or left wing movements. The religious right fights against science when it contradicts the Bible (which is does the vast majority of the time). The radical left distrusts it because it is not “natural”, and they fear the possible misuses of science. Now, however, anti-science beliefs and rhetoric have become the norm. We see this in the current election cycle where Republican candidates are falling all over themselves to see who can be more anti-science than the rest.
It used to be that the GOP trumpeted the benefits of science as a way to make our society stronger, better, and safer. Does anyone remember the “Star Wars” program of the Reagan era? How about the Space Race? In this country, the military has always been a major driving force in advancing science and technology. It will be interesting to see how the military responds to the ever growing hostility of the GOP to science, considering that most of the military leadership has tended to be republican, as evidinced by the many generals who have gone into politics after retiring from their military careers.
This country used to be a leader in science and technology and that is what made it a great economic and military power. If this anti-science trend continues, we can only sit back and watch as our scientific technological leadership slips away and our economy because a totally consumer driven one, dependent on the technology of other countries who put science above superstition.
-
Archives
- February 2012 (4)
- January 2012 (2)
- December 2011 (10)
- November 2011 (11)
- October 2011 (11)
- September 2011 (7)
- August 2011 (5)
- July 2011 (3)
- June 2011 (3)
- May 2011 (13)
- April 2011 (16)
- March 2011 (26)
-
Categories
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
