Hemant Mehta's Blog, page 1951
August 17, 2014
A Debate on God and Cosmology, Between William Lane Craig and Sean Carroll
Earlier this year, Christian apologist William Lane Craig debated theoretical physicist Sean Carroll on the topic of “God and Cosmology”:
It’s a long debate (with Q&A), topping out at well over two hours, but it features two excellent speakers which makes it at least somewhat easier to digest.
Reader Laurence writes that this debate was fun to watch, even though he believes Craig was out of his league in terms of expertise:
… Craig attempted to debate a cosmologist on cosmology, and while his debating skills were, as usual, superb, his arguments and failed him, especially in juxtaposition to Carroll’s, who not only made definitive, devastating counterarguments (mostly about how Craig was misunderstanding his own evidence he used to make his point), but knew how to speak with almost (but not quite) as much finesse as Craig. I thoroughly enjoyed it…
If any moments stand out to you, please leave the timestamp/summary in the comments!
August 16, 2014
COSMOS: A SpaceTime Odyssey Wins Four Emmy Awards
Last month, we learned that COSMOS: A SpaceTime Odyssey received an impressive 12 Emmy nominations:
Earlier tonight, the Creative Arts awards (which include all the nominations for COSMOS) were handed out and the show took home awards in four categories:
Outstanding Music Composition For A Series (Original Dramatic Score)Outstanding Original Main Title Theme MusicOutstanding Sound Editing For Nonfiction Programming (Single Or Multi-Camera)Outstanding Writing For Nonfiction ProgrammingDespite not taking home the one award they all *really* wanted (for best nonfiction series), Seth MacFarlane lauded his show’s winners on Twitter:
When Alan Silvestri accepted his award for “Original Main Title Theme Music,” he memorably gave a special shout-out:
“I have two special thanks left.” He then thanked “Neil DeGrasse Tyson” and “the voice of Neil DeGrasse Tyson.”
Alas, Neil deGrasse Tyson will go home Emmy-less this year. (All the more reason to have a second season of the show.)
In case you’re curious, in 1981, the original COSMOS received five nominations and took home three Emmys.
Nine Things Churches Do Right
The video below, part of The Atheist Voice series, discusses nine things churches do right (really):
A rough transcript of the video can be found on the YouTube page in the “About” section.
We’d love to hear your thoughts on the project — more videos will be posted soon — and we’d also appreciate your suggestions as to which questions we ought to tackle next!
And if you like what you’re seeing, please consider supporting this site on Patreon.
8 Things I Learned from Reading an Article about the Institute for Creation Research
The Dallas Morning News just ran a feature on the Institute for Creation Research, where Texas Creationists go to do… um… whatever it is they do.
Let me share with you everything I learned from the piece:
They have a budget that dwarfs actual research labs (yet absolutely nothing of value to show for it).God is lying to them. And they’ve got problems.“Our attempt is to demonstrate that the Bible is accurate, not just religiously authoritative,” said Henry Morris III, CEO of the nonprofit with a 49-person payroll and an annual budget in the $7 million range.
Even Pat Robertson thinks they’re idiots.“The rationale behind [ICR] is this: If God really does exist, he shouldn’t be lying to us,” [Morris] said. “And if he’s lying to us right off the bat in the book of Genesis, we’ve got some real problems.”
Credit where it’s due: They’re actually a decently managed non-profit.This spring, televangelist Pat Robertson said on the Christian-themed television show The 700 Club that people would “have to be deaf, dumb and blind to think that this earth that we live on only has 6,000 years of existence. I think to deny the clear [geologic] record that’s there before us makes us look silly.”
Astrophysicist Jason Lisle thinks the reason he’s never going to win a Nobel Prize is because he’s a Creationist, not because his research would earn failing grades in introductory science courses.ICR earned a three-out-of-four star rating from watchdog group Charity Navigator in 2013, which means it meets or exceeds industry standards for efficiency. ICR’s administration costs are low; about $1 out of every $10 donated dollars is spent on administration.
Lisle, who thinks he should at least have a shot at winning the Nobel Prize, believes in scientific “mysteries” that have already been solved .Jason Lisle, an astrophysicist and the research director at ICR, said he has no chance of winning a Nobel Prize, even if he makes a groundbreaking discovery. Secular scientists, he said, would never bestow the field’s highest honor on a creationist.
It should be the goal of every real scientist to be cited as the voice of reason in an article about Creationists.Lisle says his team analyzes the same data as secular scientists — but they interpret it differently, and often find flaws in accepted assumptions.
…
[Like] dinosaur bones — if they’re millions of years old, scientists should not be recovering soft, protein-based tissue in them.
You can let the reporter know that there is indeed “something wrong in this story.” He referred to Creationists as “scientists.”“The problem is, they’re not scientists,” said Ron Wetherington, who teaches human evolution and forensic anthropology at SMU. “They cherry-pick data in order to use it to justify the Genesis account of creation.”
Alabama County Commissioner Wants to Put Up a Ten Commandments Display at the Local Courthouse
More than a decade ago, Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore installed a giant Ten Commandments monument in the courthouse in the dead of night. When he was told to remove it, he said no, eventually defying other courts’ orders and becoming a Fake Christian Martyr in the process. Eventually the eight other justices on the Supreme Court ruled that the monument had to go — and not long after that, Moore was removed from his seat altogether. (Though, in 2012, he was re-elected to Chief Justice.)
Roy Moore’s Ten Commandments monument (via Angela Orlando)
He’s pretty much the perfect example of why religion and politics shouldn’t mix. He lost credibility when he decided to put his faith above the very law he swore to protect. And why place your trust in a judge who doesn’t seem to give a damn what the law says?
That’s also why we should be concerned about Jackson County (AL) Commission member Tim Guffey, who wants to put up his own Ten Commandments monument in the local courthouse. In order to avoid Moore’s fate, though, Guffey is disguising his true intentions:
“What I’m trying to do is erect a monument of historical documents,” Guffey said Thursday in an interview with AL.com. “It’s the Constitution, the Ten Commandments and the Declaration of Independence. I feel like that’s what this country was founded on. These documents helped America become the greatest country in history.”
Inclusion of the Ten Commandments is for historical reasons, not religious, Guffey said. The influence of the Ten Commandments, he said, cannot be separated from the writings of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.
Two out of three is still pretty bad in this case.
There’s just no clear line between the Commandments and our current law. Our secular government doesn’t (and shouldn’t) care if you have any other gods before the True God, worship false idols, take the Lord’s name in vain, or work on the Sabbath. Hell, those first Commandments violate the First Amendment (Establishment Clause and freedom of speech).
And even if it’s a good idea to honor your parents, not commit adultery, not covet what others have, and not lie (sans perjury), those things are not illegal under our law.
Essentially, the only Commandments which are enshrined in our law are the ones which deal with common sense notions — don’t steal, don’t kill.
So how exactly did the Ten Commandments influence our current law?
It didn’t. Guffey won’t even bother trying to explain how it does.
But he’s very open about wanting to take Moore’s path without necessarily facing the same fate:
“I have a lot of respect for Judge Moore,” Guffey said. “When Judge Moore did the monument, it was for the Ten Commandments. It was for religious purposes. And I commend him. He believed it was his right to put that up and he was going to stand on it.
“This situation is not that situation. I’m trying to show people where (the historical documents) came from.”
They didn’t come from the Ten Commandments, that’s for sure, no matter what pseudohistorian David Barton tries to tell you. The Magna Carta has far more of an impact on our law than the Ten Commandments does, but Guffey doesn’t even bring that document up in conversation.
He’s working off of the notion that it’s sometimes legal to display the Ten Commandments as one of many historical documents, a tactic that might work if the intention of the display isn’t to promote religion. But that’s precisely what Guffey is doing here.
Chuck Miller, the Alabama regional director of American Atheists, already knows how he’ll respond if Guffey goes through with this display: He’ll either file a lawsuit or request that an atheist monument also be placed on courthouse property like we saw in Bradford County, Florida:
AA President Dave Silverman sits on the bench (via @AmericanAtheist)
The problem, according to Miller, is that any organization should have the right to place their own monuments at the courthouse and that could get “unwieldy,” he said.
…
“Personally, as an Alabama taxpayer, I would prefer that there is an outcome where it wouldn’t wind up in court simply because of the expense involved,” Miller said. “If the county went ahead and erected a monument, there is any number of organizations — Freedom from Religion Foundation, American Atheists, Americans United — any of those organizations might well decide to launch legal action.”
…
“I’m not offended,” Miller said. “The Ten Commandments don’t offend me. The Bible doesn’t offend me. What I find objectionable is when anybody of any religion wants to force their particular ideas into the public space and make them part of public policy.”
That’s the right attitude. It’s not about using the government to promote your beliefs. It’s about everyone being treated equally under the law. A Ten Commandments monument, even with a couple of (actually) historical displays surrounding it, sends the message that non-Christians won’t get a fair shake under the law and that Christians will get special treatment.
There’s simply no justification for it… unless Guffey just wants to lay the groundwork for a future run for higher office, and knows that promoting Christianity through the government is a surefire way to fire up his religious base.
Alabama has seen this play out before. They shouldn’t let it happen again.
Jehovah’s Witness Publication Urges Faithful to Treat Disfellowshipped Loved Ones as if God Killed Them
In case you need another reminder that Jehovah’s Witnesses can be heartless, just look at the latest issue of The Watchtower:
One of the articles brings up the story of Nadab and Abihu, the children of Aaron who disobeyed God and were killed because of it. In the Bible, the priests (including Aaron) are told not to mourn the sons’ deaths because that would be seen as a rebuke against God’s wishes.
Here’s what The Watchtower says about that story (p. 14):
A heartrending experience for Aaron’s family is recorded at Leviticus 10:1-11. They must have been devastated when fire from heaven consumed Aaron’s sons Nadab and Abihu at the tabernacle. What a test of faith it was for Aaron and his family not to mourn their dead relatives! Are you personally proving yourself holy with regard to not associating with family members or others who have been disfellowshipped?
Whoa, talk about a pivot!
Aaron was a great guy because he didn’t mourn the death of his disobedient kids! Are you, too, making God happy by refusing to talk to anyone who’s been excommunicated by the church?
Even JW critic John Cedars seems surprised by how low they’ve stooped:
In what should surely rank among some of the most grotesque propaganda ever to be churned out by Watchtower’s writing department, Jehovah’s Witnesses are being asked to think of their disfellowshipped family members, not just as being dead, but as having been killed by Jehovah. As such they are not to be mourned.
He adds that, to make that connection, you’d need some strong proof that God endorses your religion and no others… and JWs have no proof of that whatsoever.
There are certain faiths that rarely get called out on their practices, even by critics of religion, because they manage to stay under the radar. Outside of periodic blood transfusion issues, you don’t see too many Jehovah’s Witnesses in the news. But make no mistake: this idea of exclusivity among JWs, that they must shun those who are not in the faith or (even worse) those who have been kicked out of it, is incredibly pernicious. It damages families and ruins friendships. And it’s all done to appease a God that doesn’t even exist.
(Thanks to Robert for the link)
Brevard County (FL) Officials May Block Atheists from Giving an Invocation Since They’re Not a “Faith-Based” Group
Since Greece v Galloway, I’ve posted a number of examples of atheists delivering invocations at city council meetings. It’s a natural result of the Supreme Court’s decision: they ruled that sectarian prayers were allowed at government meetings, but that also meant no group, including atheists, could be excluded.
The Brevard County Commissioners in Florida (below) have a different interpretation of the law. They believe that invocations can rightfully be limited to “faith-based” groups — to hell with the atheists.
It all started back in May when David Williamson of the Central Florida Freethought Community sent a letter to the commissioners requesting that a member of his organization be allowed to deliver an invocation:
In the recent Supreme Court decision, Town of Greece v. Galloway, the Court emphasized that a government’s prayer practice must be “nondiscriminatory” and it must make reasonable efforts to include invocations from all members of the community, regardless of their faith. Note that Humanism is recognized as a religion under the First Amendment in numerous cases and excluding a particular faith group from consideration is unconstitutional.
In light of these facts, it is clear that local government meetings should include Humanist invocations as well as those from any other religious minorities. Therefore, we respectfully request the opportunity to offer invocations at your meetings.
…
We request that you notify us in writing at your earliest convenience about the next opportunity for us to offer the invocation at an upcoming meeting. If you require, we can identify persons in Brevard County to offer this invocation, however, we have several members of our organization who are endorsed by The Humanist Society, a religious organization, or who are otherwise ordained and accorded the same rights and privileges granted by law to traditional clergy.
It’s a simple request that’s been accepted several times over already. But there was no response. More than two months later, on July 22, Williamson sent a second letter, once again requesting permission to deliver an invocation.
Finally, Mary Bolin Lewis, the chair of the commission, responded… by telling them that she would be having none of it:
The Invocation portion of the agenda is an opening prayer presented by members of our faith community. The prayer is delivered during the ceremonial portion of the County’s meeting and typically invokes guidance for the County Commission from the highest spiritual authority, a higher authority which a substantial body of Brevard constituents believe to exist. The invocation is also meant to lend gravity to the occasion, to reflect values long part of the County’s heritage and to acknowledge the place religion holds in the lives of many private citizens in Brevard County.
In short: The atheists were being blocked from giving an invocation because they weren’t part of a “faith community” and the majority of citizens were religious. Because apparently that matters. So there.
Lewis added that atheists were welcome to speak during the “Public Comment” portion of the meeting, but that’s it. No invocation.
She’s completely wrong about this.
It’s not helping that Brevard County Attorney Scott Knox is siding with Lewis, saying that invocations can indeed be limited to just the “faith-based community.”
Meanwhile, Williamson’s doing everything he can to warn the Commission of its error before he files any lawsuit. In a Florida Today article, he laid out the problem with this “compromise”:
[Williamson] said Brevard County “should think twice before they send a letter of denial,” adding that an offer to speak during the public-comment time is not enough.
“I would equate that to separate, but equal,” Williamson said, alluding to the time of racial segregation in the United States.
This Tuesday, when the Commission holds its regular meeting, they plan to discuss how to respond to Williamson.
It shouldn’t be a long discussion. All they have to do is say “Yes” and they avoid further hassle, not to mention a potentially costly lawsuit.
For some reason, I don’t have enough confidence in them to do the right thing. And I’m sure they would love to hear your thoughts on the matter before they get together, so here are all of their email addresses:
Robin Fisher
Chuck Nelson
Trudie Infantini
Mary Bolin Lewis
Andy Anderson
You should (politely) let them know that atheists have as much of a right to speak as every faith-based group in Brevard County. To argue otherwise could cost the taxpayers a lot of money, money which would be better spent just about anywhere else.
(Thanks to Brian for the link)
In Georgia, an Atheist and a Christian Stage a Public Dialogue at a Local Bar
Justin Mullinix, an atheist from Georgia, recently volunteered to sit down with Will Dyer, a local pastor, in front of a large crowd at a bar and answer questions from the audience. It wasn’t a debate. It wasn’t confrontational. It was just a chance for everyone to watch a civil dialogue about serious differences in opinion:
The considerate and knowledgeable exchange is exactly what Monkey Barrel owner Albert Reeves had in mind. The bar and restaurant owner felt inspired to instigate a calm conversation between the Baptist minister and the atheist.
“From talking with both of them and them both being friends of mine, I want to share with others how easy it could be to talk with each other,” Reeves said. “And I wanted to make sure it was not a debate, it was a discussion.”
High fives all around. It’d be great to see more public dialogues like this happening everywhere.
(Image via Shutterstock)
August 15, 2014
How to Fix Science Education in the United States: Be Louder
Somehow, Clickhole has the most face-palmingly accurate article I’ve seen about vaccinations in a long time:
You see, this shrieking TV woman began by saying that she is not a doctor or medical professional of any kind, which already had me skeptical about whatever she was going to shout next. But then she delivered her position on why parents shouldn’t vaccinate their children in a much louder voice than my doctor, and it put some serious doubts in my mind. Would someone less sure of herself be able to be quite so loud? It seems unlikely.
Yep. That’s how science education seems to work in this country…
Canadian Pastafarian Fights to Wear Colander on Head in Drivers License Photo
Usually, when Pastafarians wear strainers on their heads for a driver’s license picture, they end up with the Reddit-bait photo op they wanted, which is either amusing or stupid, depending on your perspective. But when they’re denied that opportunity, it raises questions about whether a belief qualifies as silly or serious.
In Surrey, British Columbia, Obi Canuel wanted to renew his license while wearing a colander, but he was rejected:
“The truth is sometimes I have the spiritual inkling to wear the colander and I don’t think [the Insurance Corporation of B.C.] should be making decisions about what kind of religious headgear is appropriate or not,” Canuel told CTV Vancouver.
Canuel was able to wear it, however, when he got his B.C. Services card:
The reason for the rejection is extremely vague, with ICBC explaining that its head cover policy was intended to “strike a balance between respect for the driver’s religious beliefs and a need to preserve the integrity of the licensing system.” But you could also argue they’re making a judgment call they shouldn’t be in the position to make.
You can watch Canuel explain his dilemma in a video he posted to YouTube earlier this month:
I don’t know how anyone could see this as anything but serious. I mean, there’s a video and everything.
(Thanks to Steven for the link)
Hemant Mehta's Blog
- Hemant Mehta's profile
- 38 followers
