Astrologer Royal Martin Rees ‘Wins’ Templeton Prize

No, the title is not a mistake. It’s just me taking the pee out of Martin Rees, supposedly one the UK’s great astronomers and scientific thinkers. However, it wouldn’t surprise me if he was into his astrology too, perhaps even tarot cards and voodoo.

Now, Richard Dawkins once said of the Templeton Prize that it is given “usually to a scientist who is prepared to say something nice about religion.” In the case of Rees this is certainly true. Apparently Rees has “liking for choral evensong in the chapel of Trinity College”. I think that tarot cards are wonderfully designed too! He also thinks science and religion are compatible. You mean just the bits that science hasn’t figured out yet. Religion gave up on the bits science could explain many centuries ago.

But then there is the issue of money. The Templeton Prize is worth $1 million, and the Templeton Foundation is a very rich organisation indeed. Is it right that the former President of the Royal Society should accept such a prize given the history between religion and science. What would Galileo think? The Templeton Foundation gives away an estimated $70 million to various groups every year, including lots of scientific groups. Is this the reason why so many scientists are willing to “say something nice” about religion? Something about the Templeton Foundation stinks.

But get this. Martin Rees is an ATHEIST. So why the hell is he accepting such a prize. Some have suggested it is a middle finger to the likes of Dawkins, who Rees thinks is far too “militant” in his atheism. Dawkins has called Rees a “compliant Quisling”, BTW. Personally, I’d follow the money.

So, for me, Martin Rees will now be known as The Compliant Quisling. Not as quite as militant as calling someone a “heretic”, or indeed, ordering them to death.

Jerry Coyne in The Guardian also makes many similar points here. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2011/apr/06/prize-mug-martin-rees-templeton)

The Flames of Madness

Another day, another example of religious-inspired madness and murder. A UN mission in Afghanistan was stormed by Islamic fascists, resulting in the murder of several of those working there. Some reports suggest two people were beheaded. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/01/afghanistan-united-nations-killings)

Now what provoked this bloodlust? Was it revenge for the deaths of fellow comrades in Afghanistan? Was it just the latest murderous rampage against perceived “Western imperialism?” Was it because somebody had drawn a picture of the Prophet Muhammad? It was none of these, although the last suggestion isn’t far off.

It turns out that our old friend Pastor Terry Jones has been at it again. You may remember this was the devout Christian who threatened to burn Korans at his non-denominational Christian Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Florida in 2010. This debacle turned into worldwide news as the ‘International Burn A Koran Day’ grew ever nearer. Seemingly every few hours, Mr. Jones would address the media outside, in front of a large sign promoting the event in large homely red letters. This was because he thought Islam was evil (or perhaps the wrong religion, in his view), and this act of book-burning would set them right. After various soap-opera shenanigans, sanity appeared to break out with Mr. Jones backing down.

However, on March 21^st, with the cameras and media attention focused on far more important events such as the earthquake in Japan, and the NATO intervention in Libya, Pastor Jones was in attendance at the burning of a Koran organised by a fellow pastor, a certain Wayne Sapp. Details seem to suggest there was a mock trial where the Koran was found guilty, something that Jones’s Monty Python namesake probably couldn’t make up. This is where the amusing nonsense ends though.

Already a fatwa has been placed on Pastor Jones’ head, although it is hard to have sympathy with such an idiot. More worryingly, we have seen the above-mentioned massacre by a bunch of fascists who can be triggered by nothing more than the burning of a book. Troublemakers everywhere now know you can kick-start massacres by simply burning a badly-written book. Talk about sparking things off!

For atheists this incident must be very depressing. The silliness of the U.S. Christian Right Wing and the barbarity of Islamofacism are rooted in books of myths, lies and hatred. However, while the act of Pastors Jones and Sapp may seem juvenile to us atheists, the reaction of certain Muslims is simply horrendous. Just how many more trivial things are they going to get upset about? How many more fatwas are going to be issued because of offence taken via a burnt book of mythology? How many more murders over a drawing of the Prophet Mohammad?

The problem for the civilised world is that this sort of barbarism can’t be contained (without resorting to full-scale war), can’t be negotiated with and can’t be reconciled with. At the moment, radicals of all religions can hide behind the myths, grievances and traditions upheld by so-called ‘moderate’ believers. As an atheist, one of the solutions could be the flourishing of secular, non-religious values. That would at least, leave the fundamentalists alone and isolated.

Sadly, and worryingly, it appears that these brutes have plenty of support. The enlightenment began in the 16^th and 17^th centuries in Europe. Crucially, it hasn’t even begun elsewhere, and that could be humanity’s downfall. I fear this is just the beginning of the flames of madness.

Richard Dawkins Converts To Islam

Just breaking...

Confusion and fear reigns in the atheist community after Richard Dawkins confirmed he has converted to Islam.

More on this bombshell soon...

Banana Man Strikes Again

You gotta see this. (http://www.thegoodatheist.net/2011/03/28/ray-comfort-on-the-atheist-experience/)

Perhaps the best evidence against the theory of evolution is in the form of Ray Comfort. How could evolution produce such a moron? You may know him from his ‘banana’ argument, which argues that the “design” of a banana is “proof” of a Creator. He claims the banana is intelligently designed so that it fits in the hand, it is ‘bent’ (stop sniggering) in a way that makes eating them easier, and so forth. Presumably coconuts are not evidence of a Creator – they are, after all, pretty hard to crack open! Just watch a video of him explaining this and prepare yourself for supreme stupidity and ignorance.

Anyway, Ray appeared on the Atheist Experience and demonstrated his ignorance yet again. We already know that Ray does not know anything about evolution (he doesn’t seem to know that bananas are cultigens, alarmingly), and not much about science in general. That’s not the point. With Ray it’s all about faith, and how faith “proves” there is a God. Naturally, Ray, along with other religious folks engaging in apologetics, seems to think that his faith has to be accepted as “proof” of God. The predictable double standard occurs with regard to his view on evolution. Now, could you convince Ray on evolution just through “faith”. I mean, if it works for religion, then why not evolution? If I tell someone I have “faith” evolution is true, then it is obviously correct? Yes? Of course not, and no atheist would ever resort to such fallacy and hypocritical argument. But forget mere “faith” in evolution, what about all the evidence? Well, Ray rejects that too, as it is not specific enough! That’s if he actually understands the evidence. I guess he doesn’t.

Essentially his argument, as we already know, is that that to prove Creationism all you need is “faith”. But to even begin to support the theory of evolution, you need far more than just “faith”, but something more. What that something more is, only Ray Comfort knows, because no amount of scientific evidence (of which we have a lot already) will ever convince somebody who possesses such ignorance and stupidity.

For someone who opposes the theory of evolution so vehemently, you would expect his knowledge of evolution, and biology in general, to be up to a certain standard. Sadly, and rather tragically, it is not. That is why it is essential to mock and laugh at the likes of Ray Comfort. If he can’t be bothered to teach himself about what he is arguing against, he deserves all the ridicule he gets.

The Courage of Common Sense

Take a look at this clip (http://richarddawkins.net/videos/607471-why-wafa-sultan-left-islam) of Wafa Sultan explaining her reasons for leaving her religion – in this case Islam.

It is hard not to be moved by this. I do wonder what the Western Left would make of her. They have a habit of apologising and justifying the fundamental aspects of Islam and its treatment of women. Some of them also have a habit of turning on brave women such as Wafa and Ayan Hirsi Ali. Shame on them.

Could you show the kind of bravery this woman shows? I'm sure not many could, and I'm sure she has probably made a lot of enemies, perhaps within her own family. I really do wish her well.

Many thanks to the Richard Dawkins Foundation.

The Nit-Picking of Bias

Great fun can be had watching the ding-dong battle between the BBC and its ‘watch’ site Biased-BBC. I look at the BBC site quite a lot, and I also check out the Biased-BBC site from time to time.

Naturally, Biased-BBC is not too happy that the BBC is allegedly pumping out lots of anti-Christian propaganda before the UK census. This post lists the charge (http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/2011/03/just-as-census-beckons.html).

There are essentially two accusations. Firstly, the Beeb is “trying to neutralise the presence of Christianity in the UK ahead of the Census.” As backup, it cites the BBC’s recent story about the “extinction of religion” in certain countries (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12811197), and then a link to the British Humanist Association’s recent study about religion in the UK. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12799801).

I haven’t really noticed the BBC ripping into Christianity any more than usual. If we go back to the influence of Christianity in the UK (certainly in terms of church attendance), it could arguably be said that it needs to be neutralised even more. Why does the BBC have to reflect the religious makeup of the country anyway? It does not. The second of the stories (the BHA study) is simply the reporting of facts. Admittedly, facts that Biased-BBC and various Christian groups don’t want to hear. I think it is down to Biased-BBC being more of a conservative outfit, than a religious one, though.

Biased-BBC also implies that the BHA is not partial (no evidence, of course), before describing archaeologist Francesca Stavrakopoulou as an ‘atheist’. This is something of a stretch. This is the woman who claimed God may have had a wife, remember! An atheist wouldn’t say such a silly thing. She has a doctorate in theology and presented the BBC’s ‘Bible Secrets’ programme, which Biased-BBC claim sets out to undermine the Bible. I would point out we hardly need archaeological digs to undermine the Bible! I would also point out that she is most definitely not an atheist.

Biased-BBC then moves onto Dr. Brian Cox, whose wonderful science-based programmes have been enjoyed by millions, even if the background music is a little loud (according to some). Biased-BBC claim he presents “theories on which there is often no scientific consensus as fact, with supreme confidence and naturally without the need for God.” Yes, you generally don’t need God when you make a science programme. BTW, Biased-BBC doesn’t say what theories are without scientific consensus. Maybe it’s because I could call them on it. This is just simple nit-picking.

The second criticism, more reflected in the comments of the thread, is that the BBC gives Islam far much more respect than say, Christianity. Biased-BBC may well be right here.

Like any central-Left media outfit they are frightened of offending Muslims. Christianity does not have the “special protection” demanded by Muslims for their religion. Believe me, there are many Christians and religious people who do demand that they are respected and that their faith is not questioned or mocked. But in the UK, there is a long tradition of questioning and mocking, and it is taken for granted that Christianity has no special privilege not to be criticised or mocked. The same attitude does not prevail towards Islam, simply because of the reason stated above. The double standard is glaring, but why should Christianity get the respect it wants just because another faith gets its respect through veiled threats. It shouldn’t, and I would argue, neither should Islam.

As an atheist I don’t have trouble with this double standard, but I do have trouble with the demands various religions make. It is time for it to stop. No religion is automatically granted special privilege not to be criticised or mocked, whatever religion it happens to be.

Dark Side of The Super Moon

I’m sure it hasn’t escaped your notice recently that we are lucky to witness a so-called ‘super moon’ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermoon). This is essentially when the Moon is at its closest (perigee) to the Earth (some 357,000 kilometers). As you’d expect, this has promoted all kinds of nonsense. (The Moon has a long history of inspiring weirdos – hence the term ‘lunatic’)

The ‘super moon’ theory was developed by astrologer Richard Nolle in 1979. Now, read that last sentence again. Yep. Astrologer! This gets the alarm bells ringing straight away. Now, his theory claims that the ‘super moon’ coincides with natural disasters, and because the awful Japanese earthquake and tsunami occurred fairly close to a ‘super moon’, some are now claiming this to be truth.

The science however disagrees. No stand-out natural disasters or freak tides match up to the previous dates of ‘super moons’. If Richard Nolle and his followers are going to point to this disaster as proof of their theory, then it is simply a case of counting the hits and ignoring the misses. A common logical fallacy used by all psychics, astrologers and charlatans.

Perhaps the most disappointing aspect of this story is how the UK media (including all of the tabloid press, of course) promoted this story in relation to the Japanese earthquake. Hardly any mention is given to the failure of the theory during previous ‘super moons’. Instead, we are treated to yet more quackery on the very same pages that detail real-life death, tragedy and disaster. Putting it towards the back of the newspaper with the other star sign advice would have been more prudent.