Defaithed

During the "The Enemies of Reason" interview between Richard Dawins and Professor Michael Baum, the latter makes a point that really resonates. Discussing double-blind testing and other scientific methods for conducting valid medical trials, he notes:

"It is scrupulously honest. And what many people don't understand about the scientific method is how scrupulously honest it is. We are not looking to constantly reinforce out prejudice. The opposite is the truth. We are actually putting at risk, or hazard, our pet belief systems. We're threatening our own belief systems. So this is an intellectually honest, and intellectually modest, approach..."

The gentlemen continue discussing along the topic; it's a great listen. 

What I love there is the focus on that word "honest". In descriptions of scientific methodology, we often hear the words "rational" and "evidence-based" and "replicable" and so on. As well as the word "honest", of course, but it's rarely shouted out as loudly and strongly as I'd like. 

If I had to pick one word as a synonym for the scientific method, it'd be honesty. It's the intellectual honesty that willingly pushes aside the easy answers and the pet beliefs. It's the honesty to mistrust one's own senses, and thus to defer to double-blind tests and peer reviews and constant revision. It's the honesty to say "That's the best explanation I have now for the evidence; I welcome any better explanations or new evidence to change my conclusion." 

It's a lot of things that, to me, all boil down to the single word honesty.

I'm only the zillionth person to point that out, and have nothing wise to add to the discussion. But I was compelled by Prof. Baum's comment to give a round of applause to his depiction of science as honesty. I'd love to see that word given prominence in any description of science and its methods! 

Maybe Jesus needs an image boost. How about some commercials with Jerry Seinfeld?

(Souce unknown)

Remember, kids: Beware of "friendly" strangers online.

(Source unknown)

This pretty much sums up the threat.

(Source unknown.)

Via the Richard Dawkins website:

Brian Dunning, creator of the Skeptoid podcast and author of the companion books Skeptoid: Critical Analysis of Pop Phenomena and Skeptoid 2: More Critical Analysis of Pop Phenomena, takes his debunking skills to the video arena with a freely-distributable 40-minute work, Here Be Dragons: An Introduction to Critical Thinking. Get the DVD or watch it on YouTube:

Brian's goal is to present a basic primer for skeptical thinking, and I think he does a great job of it. Listen yourself, for a look at why people believe silly stuff, and what we can do to battle nonsense.

Most interesting to me was a clear, 10-point list of "red flags" that warn of approaching pseudoscience nonsense. I'll list them here as a handy guide; watch the video for more detail and great examples of each.

Red flags warning of pseudoscience

1. Appeal to Authority

Celebrity endorsements, lab coats, fancy degrees or certifications... all distractions that point to the impressiveness of the claimant, not the truth of the claim. Readeth thou more

Thinking to myself:

Many barnyard fauna are good for more than meat. Cows and goats give milk. Sheep give wool. Chickens give eggs. Horses work.

Sure, they're all tasty too, but there's plenty of reason to keep them alive and healthy on the farm.

On the other trotter, we have the pig. It doesn't give milk, wool, eggs, or labor. It's good for one thing and one thing only: being delicious. If animal royalty were determined by mouth-watering flavor, the lion would step aside and the porker would reign eternal. 

So what does God tell his people? "Sure, eat any of your helpful farm friends – just not the one good for nothing but succulence."

What a divine jerk.

I'll bet that in Eden, too, the forbidden fruit was the only really good fruit in the garden.

I came across another great webcomic, The Pain – When Will It End? It's not about religion, but the artist is definitely a freethinker, and more than a few installments take good cracks at the Godsmacked.

I particularly enjoyed Science vs North Mythology, showing how idiotic the anti-science arguments look when you replace Christianity with a religion that happens to be one we don't inexplicably "respect".

(Hey, I for one do respect Norse mythology. If we're going to make up gods, why not make up cool ones? Thor vs Jesus is a fight I'd pay to see.

Round 1:

Jesus sprints across water toward Thor. Jesus attacks with a basket of loaves and fish.

Thor returns the attack with Mjolnir. SPLAT.

Round 2:

There is no Round 2.)

But even Thor might be defeated by another Bible-inspired hero, wielding a weapon of his own. His name is... no, see for yourself. Click when the boss isn't looking.

Good stuff.

Christian conservatives of America! People of faith! The moment is upon us – and you know which of the candidate parties Jesus wants you to choose.

It's time to make sure that the right candidate ascends to the White House. So get out there and do what you know you have to: 

Pray.

No, don't pray and vote! That's just what the Devil would want you to do. Are not all things in the hands of the Lord? He'll take care of the election; for you to cast a vote would mean you don't trust God to handle it. Leave that matter to the Almighty. Your role is to support His will, and thwart the godless voters for the other candidate, through the most potent force in the universe, the awesome power of prayer. 

Meet in your churches. Gather your families in your living rooms. Convene in parks or wherever you can. Let the faithless flock to the folly of their ballots.

Don't let God down on this one. Stay away from the voting booths and pray like you never have before. Fulfill that mission, and come November 5th, you'll find we've gotten the best candidate to lead our nation!

Debunking Christianity quotes an old Catholic maxim: “Given be a child to the age of twelve and I’ll give you a Catholic for life."

Fantastic author and self-proclaimed atheist Anne Rice is justly famed for her Gothic horror novels of supernatural creatures, from Interview with the Vampire to The Witching Hour (Lives of the Mayfair Witches). One would assume that she's never had a problem distinguishing her fictional creations from reality. Readeth thou more

Via Debunking Christianity:

Once again, Pat Condell gets it so right. You can't rationally debate intentional, gloating irrationality. "Relgion is out of control right now because too many people have been too diplomatic for too long", says Pat. Those who want to provide evidence to support religious beliefs are welcome to a fair debate; those who don't should "expect mockery and ridicule".

Not a surprising stance for Pat, seeing as how good he is at mocking religious idiocy. Another example of the master at work:

I'll add that, yes, there is room for those long-suffering souls who want to civilly meet religion half-way in debate. There's a role to be played by those willing to confer "respect" on the other side's beliefs. Different approaches tackling different fronts – it's a good thing, and we should appreciate all the tacks taken by supporters of rationality. 

But I readily agree with folks like Pat that we've long leaned far too heavily toward treating religion with respectful gentleness. I'd like to see the balance shifted more toward outright derision.