Rationality Now Rotating Header Image

General

Refusing to debate denialists

Orac, over at Respectful Insolence, has a post titled “Debating Denialists” that talks a bit about how pointless it is to debate denialists, whether they be Holocaust deniers, anti-vaxxers, creationists, or 9/11 Truthers. Deborah Lipstadt, a Holocaust historian, uses the phrase “trying to nail a blob of Jello to the wall” when referring to debating them.

Orac explains…

[…] for a debate to be an intellectually useful exercise, there have to be two reasonable points of view being argued, points of view that have evidence to support them. The evidence doesn’t have to be of equal quantity and quality on each side, of course, but it should at least be somewhere in the same ball park–or on the same planet.

He goes on to say that denialists crave the respect that real science receives and desperately want to be taken seriously by people in relevant fields of study. Being put on the same stage or the same screen as genuine, respected scientists and scholars gives them exactly what they want, so it’s best to just avoid the debate in the first place. Richard Dawkins has taken the same position for the same reasons, refusing to debate creationists.

In his article, he quotes Lipstadt’s listing of a number of tactics that I see all the time from denialists and it’s disheartening to see them, especially when otherwise intelligent people fall into the denialist sewer and veritably flaunt their ignorance and misinformation as though they are spreading enlightenment to the huddled masses. “We need to educate people,” they claim, while deliberately spreading misinformation. “People need to hear the truth,” they say, while making certifiably false claims. “People are just falling prey to the mainstream media,” they cry, while basing their own claims on religious and political ideologies rather than facts.

Regarding the denailist tactics, Orac says [emphasis mine]…

[…] there is a commonality among cranks in the types of fallacious arguments and twisting of data that they engage in. Being a “denialist” is not a matter of what is being argued, but how it is being argued. It’s about bad reasoning, bad science, cherry picking data, and misrepresenting sources to support a preexisting agenda.

Which is why in a debate they are so damned hard to pin down. Like Jello.

Indeed.

Orca pack hunting

Jerry Coyne, of Why Evolution is True, linked to a video today of a pack of orcas hunting together and working cooperatively to get a seal off an ice floe. There’s more info at his article (and the info originally came from the book Here Be Dragons).

I imagine that seal is a bit freaked out.

Scott Roeder convicted of 1st-degree murder

Scott Roeder, the man who murdered Dr. George Tiller on May 31st, has been convicted of first degree murder and faces a life sentence with the possibility of parole after twenty-five years. According to the article, Roeder’s attorneys wanted him to receive a lesser conviction of voluntary manslaughter, but the judge wouldn’t allow it.

I think, in this case, the judge was right in doing so. The murder was pre-meditated, evidently to the point of obsession. From the article…

In his testimony, Roeder told jurors he had considered elaborate schemes to stop the doctor, including chopping off his hands, crashing a car into him or sneaking into his home to kill him.

[…]

But in the end, Roeder told the jury, the easiest way was to walk into Tiller’s church, put a gun to the man’s forehead and pull the trigger.

Testifying as the lone defense witness at his trial, Roeder calmly explained what he admitted publicly months ago — that he killed Tiller to save the lives of unborn children.

Roeder is a psychopath and deserves his sentence.

Pat Robertson Voodoo Doll on eBay

eBay - Pat Robertson Voodoo Doll to benefit HaitiPat Robertson, as you probably already know, decided to rant about Haiti making a deal with the devil to get free of the French which, according to Robertson, is why Haiti has such problems… like earthquakes.

Nevermind that Haiti didn’t make a deal with the devil (or that the devil doesn’t exist) or that devil-deals are supposed to make things awesome (until you die) or that the cause of earthquakes is pretty well known or that thousands of people have died and thousands more are injured and at serious risk of dying… Robertson decided to take the opportunity to peddle his nonsensical, self-righteous bigotry instead of doing something to help those in need.

Well, johnnyvoodoo on eBay has decided to take matters into his own hands and is auctioning a Pat Robertson Voodoo Doll with 100% of the proceeds going to Doctors Without Borders to help with relief efforts in Haiti.

After an exclusive deal with devil, we are finally able to bring black magic into your very own home!  The lucky winner of this auction will attain the soul of Televangelist PAT ROBERTSON in a handheld figurine comprised of the finest straw, cloth, and other organic natural materials!

Ever wanted to cause Pat Robertson a massive headache?  give him back pain?  jab him in the crotch?   Of course you have!  Well then BID NOW to own your very own pysical representation of the dark, dark soul of Pat Robertson.

Accessories included with the doll are Pat’s very own “HOLY” BIBLE and BAG OF MONEY taken from real Americans!  WOW!

The bidding started at 99 cents and, at the time of this writing, was up to $1,200… with 73 bids! (see updates)The idea is awsome, but as johnnyvoodoo says, “the truly awesome people are the bidders.”

In addition, there’s evidently been enough requests that he’s also offering a Rush Limbaugh Voodoo Doll which includes a microphone and a bottle of Oxycontin. The high bid is currently $338.33 with 29 bids.

Each auction is a perfect combination of fundraising, humor, and (well deserved) smackdown!

(via)

Update (1/19/10 @ 11:00am): It seems the Pat Robertson auction has been removed. The Rush Limbaugh auction is still up. I sent a message to johnnyvoodoo asking what happened. I’ll post here if I get an answer. I’m very disappointed.

Update (1/19/10 @ 12:30pm): johnnyvoodoo said that the Red Cross had asked for the auction to be removed… I assume so it wasn’t associated with the dissing of Pat Robertson… so the new auction is to benefit Habitat for Humanity. New auction here. Links have been updated. Sadly, the auction had to be restarted.

Update (1/19/10 @ 9:30pm): Evidently, the new listing was taken down as well because it offered something for sale that didn’t exist. I think it was Pat Robertson’s soul or something, the existence of which johnnyvoodoo admitted he could not prove. So it’s been relisted at this URL. Sadly, again the auction had to be restarted and is without the funny commentary in the description. It also now benefits Doctors Without Borders. The Rush Limbaugh voodoo doll auction has also been removed. eBay has made me sad. That was quite a bit of money that was going to go for charity.

Update (1/20/10 @ 1:40pm): The Rush Limbaugh doll has been relisted. johnnyvoodoo is a hero for perservering through all the item removals and eBay policy issues.

Nova-What Darwin Never Knew

Just a quick post to suggest a fantastic program. I watched this and was mezmorized. The last episode of NOVA (on PBS) was called, “What Darwin Never Knew”.  It delved into the genetics that Darwin could never have been aware of, yet reinforced his theories. The program illustrated just how brilliant Darwin’s theories were, considering he had no access to modern genetic research.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/beta/evolution/darwin-never-knew.html

Teaching ignorance and bigotry

In the comments section of an American Spectator article about Wikipedia, while there are some good, valid warnings against using Wikipedia as a reputable source for everything, there are some pretty amazing comments…. and by “amazing,” I mean “hyperbolic, right-wing, anti-science, anti-intellectual” comments. Though the article is related to the issue of climate change, that’s not where I want to focus, but I did want to convey the source for this post.

One of the commenters, Margie, responding to a long display of denier talking-points and conspiracy theories, posted that her advice, as a solution, was home-schooling. Here’s her initial comment [sic].

My advise? Home school your children. You have to re educate them anyway when they come home from public school anyway if you want them to learn the truth. The truth being that our founding Fathers were not racists, that God created man, that 2 +2 really does equal 4.. that man really cannot control the environment but God does in His loving kindness since the very beginning of this wonderful planet He has given us, that abstinence really does work, that homosexuality is really sin and God did not make us that way.. and I am sure I am missing some other things too.

Home school if you can!

What she is suggesting is to teach ignorance… to teach willful ignorance of reality… to teach that it’s better to not question, to be satisfied with not knowing, to be bigoted and intolerant, and to believe despite a complete lack of evidence. I’ll grant her the 2 + 2 = 4 part and perhaps the founding fathers part (though I’m not sure the relevance), but aside from that, she’s suggesting we keep children ignorant. Worse, actually… that we keep them misinformed with falsehoods and fantasies.

There is a response by William to her post.

If you want to advise people about schooling, it would be a good idea to learn how to spell “advice”.

Did you know that the bible forbids you to eat weasels?

Though I generally find spelling corrections in comment threads to be a bit obnoxious, in this case it was somewhat relevant. The “weasel” comment was amusing, and if you check his website, it makes sense why he included it. The verse to which he refers is Leviticus 11:29-30, which states (in the King James translation):

29 These also shall be unclean unto you among the creeping things that creep upon the earth; the weasel, and the mouse, and the tortoise after his kind,

30 And the ferret, and the chameleon, and the lizard, and the snail, and the mole.

Of course, Margie responds to William’s comment with…

Picky, picky, picky. Typical Leftist picking on the spelling. Maybe it’s because I wasn’t home schooled..ha!

Judging from your website I’d say you definitely weren’t. An atheist, are you?

Now that would be the real issue here, wouldn’t it?

Another sign that you weren’t home schooled is that you don’t know your Bible. It forbids no such thing, as God declared to call nothing unclean as far as animals, to eat! (Acts 10:13).

If you don’t know God, you know nothing.

Even if you do know how to spell.

It’s a disturbing response, but not surprising, given her previous comment (and the venue). First, he’s automatically a “Leftist.” Then she continues by stating that she’s deduced he’s a scientist (based on his website… it’s true), he’s not homeschooled (also probably true) and he’s an atheist (also true). None of that is an issue except, based on the rest of her comment style, it’s a pretty safe bet that she means it all as a bad thing. Of course, the cherry on top is that she says that his atheism is the “real issue here.” I beg to differ and think it’s more likely her love of ignorance and her belief in ancient mythology that is the “real issue here”… the issue being the quality of education.

Of course, according to Margie, not knowing your bible is also a sign that you’re not homeschooled. Since she wasn’t homeschooled, either, it makes sense that the verse she lists doesn’t say what she thinks it says. Acts 10:13 says (again King James)…

13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.

Perhaps she meant to add verses 14 and 15, but it’s hard to say.

14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.

15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

That seems a bit contradictory to the Leviticus passage, but perhaps God changed his mind… and in context, it doesn’t seem to be particularly supportive of her claim, anyway.

In fact, there’s nothing about most of her claims that is supported by anything factual. She simply spouts unsubstantiated religious platitudes as if they are self-evident truths… in support of something that would be horrendously damaging to the intellectual stability (and development) of our country. In addition, she insinuates that being a scientist (and an atheist, though that’s not necessarily related) is somehow an indication of a poor education. That is a clear, cut and dry example of anti-intellectualism… the idea that the more education and training you receive, the less credible you become.

Margie displays a perfect example of the right-wing attitude that “well-educated” equals “untrustworthy.” She holds to her anti-education position by clinging to her religion’s dogma with pit-bull tenacity, evidence be damned, and decries anyone who doesn’t follow in her self-righteously pious footsteps as the “real issue here.”

Her attitude is one that, sadly, must be constantly challenged in this country. It’s an attitude that, unchecked, would lead us toward a theocracy full of ignorance, something that our founding fathers (something about which Margie makes a knowledge claim) would definitely have not wanted. Our purely secular Constitution is perfect evidence of that.

Of course, not all religious people are ignorant or bigoted or anti-intellectual… but the ones like Margie are. Unfortunately, they’re also loud and plentiful enough that their message tends to spread like wildfire, infecting the public discourse with disinformation, pseudo-science, blatant falsehoods, and vitriolic, spiteful indignation. Rational discussions and open, honest debates are nearly impossible in the environment they create. It’s frustrating. It’s sad. It’s pathetic.

But sadly, like Margie, it’s reality.

Jerry Coyne criticizes The Guardian

Jerry Coyne criticizes The Guardian for its “faitheism and mush-headed religious apologetics” and finds a piece by Nancy Graham Holm titled “Prejudiced Danes provoke fanaticism” to be particularly despicable.

In the article, Holm refers to the now infamous Danish cartoons, one of which portrayed Muhammad wearing a bomb as a turban (Holm incorrectly states it was a turban with a stick of dynamite). Kurt Westergaard, the cartoonist, created a political cartoon that was a satirical criticism of Muslim extremists and the violence they lavish on society… violence seemingly swathed in a robe of self-righteous indignation. The extremists’ indignation comes from any disagreement about their unjustified assertion that Islam should be held in gloriously high esteem and revered by all… hence their outrage over Westergaard’s cartoon.

Holm says of the cartoon, the paper who published it, and the Danes in general…

Why did the editors of Jyllands-Posten want to mock Islam in this way? Some of us believed it was in bad taste and also cruel. Intentional humiliation is an aggressive act.

[…]

Danes fail to perceive the fact that they have developed a society deeply suspicious of religion. This is the real issue between Denmark and Muslim extremists, not freedom of speech. The free society precept is merely an attempt to give the perpetrators the moral high ground when actually it is a smokescreen for a deeply rooted prejudice, not against Muslims, but against religion per se. Muslims are in love with their faith. And many Danes are suspicious of anyone who loves religion.

As Coyne says, “Rightly so!”

Holm seems to be blaming the cartoonists and the Danish newspaper for the violent reaction of Muslim extremists. While the cartoons, perhaps, spurred on the actions of the extremists, I don’t think the blame can be placed, even in small part, on the cartoonists. That is akin to blaming the rape victim for looking sexy.

Coyne says…

What the cartoons expressed was not “intentional humiliation,” but criticism of a sexist, oppressive, and lethal form of Islam.  And by blaming Islamic reaction on the Danes themselves, Holm allies herself with those religious loons who find “offense” everywhere, and with the benighted Irish who passed the blasphemy law.

Finding offense seems to be a religious pastime in which not only Muslims participate. From the manufactured “War on Christmas” controversy to Christian outrage over atheist bus ads and billboards, religious fundamentalists seem to be on the lookout for anything onto which they can hitch their pious indignation. Any criticism of cherished beliefs is treated as a grave personal insult.

I commented on Coyne’s post, saying that all religion is (and should be) fair game for criticism and analysis… just as politics, art, literature, and science are. If the adherents to a particular religion don’t like it and become violent, the fault is not of the critic or analyst… much as the rape victim is not at fault for being attacked.

Holm doesn’t seem to get that.

Foundation Beyond Belief Official Launch

Foundation Beyond Belief Looking for an exceptionally worthwhile charity to support this year? Check out the Foundation Beyond Belief, which is officially launching today. Founder Dale McGowan, the author of Parenting Beyond Belief and Raising Freethinkers, started Foundation Beyond belief with the following goals.

To demonstrate humanism at its best by supporting efforts to improve this world and this life; to challenge humanists to embody the highest principles of humanism, including mutual care and responsibility; and to help and encourage humanist parents to raise confident children with open minds and compassionate hearts.

The Foundation features ten charitable organizations each quarter focusing on a number of different areas such as health, education, poverty, child welfare, human rights, etc. When you join and contribute, you determine where your contribution should go (among the ten charities for that quarter). At the end of the quarter, all the donations are distributed and a new set of charities is selected. More information can be found at the Foundation’s About page.

Here are a few details.

  • Foundation Beyond Belief is a non-profit charitable and educational foundation created (1) to focus, encourage and demonstrate the generosity and compassion of atheists and humanists, and (2) to provide a comprehensive education and support program for nontheistic parents.
  • The Foundation will feature ten charitable organizations per quarter.
  • Members join by signing up for a monthly automatic donation in the amount of their choice, and distribute it however they wish among the categories. Contributions are fully tax-deductible.
  • Members can join a social network and forums centered on the ten categories of giving, advocate for causes, and help us choose new beneficiaries each quarter.
  • Featured beneficiaries may be founded on any worldview so long as they do not proselytize. At the end of each quarter, 100 percent of the donations are forwarded and a new slate of beneficiaries selected.
  • On the educational side, the Foundation will help create and fund local groups for the education and social support of humanist/atheist parents.

Here’s the Foundation’s introductory video as well.

Consider the Foundation Beyond Belief for your charitable donations. You’ll be supporting great causes and, as Dale’s mission statement says, demonstrating humanism at its best.

Tim Minchin – Storm

I saw this months ago, but listened to it again and wanted to share it.

Tim Minchin performs his beat poem titled “Storm.” Don’t let “beat poem” put you off. This is such a wonderfully entertaining, funny, and insightful nine minutes that you won’t regret it!

More War on Christmas

Interestingly, many Christians don’t know or understand the pagan roots of many of their Christmas traditions.

More War on Christmas

(via)