Faith Healing Kills Another Kid

How many more times does this need to happen before they get the hint?

Continue Reading...

More Scientology Protests Today

Looks like Anonymous is at it again. This this time, there were about 50 people across the street from the Scientology Center holding signs and wearing V masks. I honked a cheery tune as I drove past and got a cheer in response. I was in Qdoba earlier and found a stack of anti-Scientology fliers on the table. Keep up the good work guys.

Here are some links to last month's protests. (1, 2)

Continue Reading...

What's the harm?

Here is a site keeping track of those harmed by pseudoscience and dangerous beliefs. Categories include Scientology, exorcisms, homeopathy, vaccine denial, acupuncture, UFOs and many others. I recommend taking a look.

Thanks to the Bad Astronomer for sharing.

Continue Reading...

Jesus Found in a Potato

Can we say pareidolia? There are two quite funny quotes in the article.

Pastor Brewster froze the heart of that potato bearing Jesus. The rest was used to make the potato salad served during their weekly rescue mission.

How was that potato salad? “It was good. It was the best you ever made...it was almost as good as Sister Frankie's,” said Bishop Brewster.

I wonder what deity was in Sister Frankie's potato salad.

“I just want people to know God is still as real today as he was back then and he can show up anytime he gets ready,”

...in bed a potato.

Continue Reading...

Intelligent Design Predictions

Denyse O'Leary presents her predictions from Intelligent Design. This was in response to a question which asked for ID predictions that have already shown to be true. While O'Leary presents none which have been shown to be true already, she does give 10 (as of this posting) predictions which she believes will be true in the future. Let's look at these one at a time.

1. No good theory will be found for a random origin of the universe, either by the Large Hadron Collider or anything else. The universe will consistently behave more like a great idea than a great machine.

This is not testable as worded. Perhaps with a timetable, this would make some sense. Also, what would it mean for the universe to behave like a "great idea"? It seems like the universe works very much like a well-oiled machine based on our ability to make scientific (testable) predictions. Also, the universe could very well be a great idea and a great machine. There is no reason to believe those are mutually exclusive concepts. There is, however, no evidence (because there is no conceivable test) for the universe being an "idea".

2. No good theory will be found for a random origin of life, though there will be plenty of huffing and puffing in favour of bad ideas. All theories that exclude purpose and design fail because they leave out the key driver - the purpose that life should come into existence.

Again, I have a problem with the word "good". This leaves wiggle room for backing out of acceptance of a theory that may be scientifically acceptable but is not "good enough" for the ID proponent (This is also known as God of the Gaps.)

3. Complete series of transitional fossils will not usually be found because most proposed series have never existed. Eventually, researchers will give up on ideologically driven nonsense and address the history that IS there. They will focus on discovering the mechanisms that drive sudden bursts of creativity.

Of course the complete series of transitional fossil will never be found. Animals do not easily fossilize, and we have surely destroyed millions of fossils stomping around the globe creating cities. We have, however found many transitional fossils. Tiktaalik is my favorite. Also, what does the phrase "discovering the mechanisms that drive sudden bursts of creativity" mean regarding fossils. Are we to presume that ID will lead us to an understanding of some god's reasons behind design? The mechanism that drives "sudden bursts in creativity" is evolution.

4. The environment will prove far more resilient than eco-doomsayers believe. People forget that the Permian extinction wiped out 90% of the marine life forms on this planet. Life seems to want to exist on this planet, even at the South Pole (cf March of the Penguins). Note: I have no time for environment destruction, and personally gave up keeping a car, as the simplest and most economical way to reduce my environment footprint. But I am NOT waiting for enviro-apocalypse!! - I don't believe it will happen. There will be changes. That's all. Not the end of the world or anything like it.

How is this related to Intelligent Design?

5. No account of human evolution will show a long slow emergence from unconsciousness to semi-consciousness to consciousness, let alone that consciousness is merely the random firing of neurons in the brain. However consciousness got started, it appeared rather suddenly and it permanently separates humans from our genetic kin, however you want to do the gene numbers and however much time researchers spend coaxing monkeys to stop relieving themselves on the keyboard and type something meaningful.

I do not understand the example about the monkeys, but I believe that neurologists are working very hard on this problem. If I were a neurologist, I am sure I could come up with some fascinating studies. (If anyone knows any good papers on this, leave them in the comments.) Anyway, this is a prediction that is not possible to test. Negatives cannot be proven. (I should not here that O'Leary has "Positive predictions" after each numbered prediction, but they make little to no sense as predictions. I believe she intends them to be positive outcomes from her "predictions.")

6. Claims that the human brain is full of "anachronistic junk" will be falsified, just as century old claims that there are hundreds of vestigial organs in the human body were falsified. The human body will be recognized as suitable for the purposes for which we exist. (Not in all cases perfect, to be sure, but in general suitable.)

I would guess we would needed to know the purpose of our existence to address this claim. However, the first part of this prediction is testable but not very meaningful. Scientific theories change all the time as new evidence is found to support this or that idea. It's just how science works. Chances are we'll improve on every scientific theory given enough time.

7. No useful theory of consciousness will demonstrate that consciousness is merely the outcome of the random firing of neurons in the brain. All useful theories will accept that the mind and the brain exist in a relationship. Research will focus on delineating the relationship more clearly. That will greatly benefit medical research, especially research on difficult mental disorders such as phobias, depression, etc.

This is very similar to prediction 5. I'm not sure many people believe that the neurons in the brain fire completely at random, even if only the ones that produce consciousness. I do agree, however, that learning more about the brain and consciousness is medically useful.

8. No useful theory of free will (human volition) will demonstrate that it does not really exist. Free will (which includes using the mind to help heal bodily injuries) will become an important tool of medicine, especially for helping aging people toward a better quality of life. For example, the fact that a drug only need perform 5% better than a placebo to be licensed for use will encourage the development of mind-based treatments for people who would otherwise be forced to take antagonistic drugs.

I don't know how free will is related to psychic healing, but I am quite sure psychic healing does not exist. In fact, prayer has little to no effect on healing other people. Personal meditation does often helps due to its calming nature.

9. No useful theory of human psychology will be founded on claims about what happened in the caves of our ancestors (= evolutionary psychology). That is because there are no genes that simply "cause" behaviour in a clinically normal human being. The mind is real and humans create their social environment by mental effort. Information is passed on from mind to mind, not through genes or physiology.

This is just wrong. Almost every sentence. Evolutionary psychology is a new field. As it grows, I am sure we will see many new ideas emerge. However, saying that all behavior is caused mental effort (I'm pretty sure she implies this.) is crazy. There are chemicals in the brain which have been proven to produce all kinds of emotions and behaviors. There are even chemicals that produce a profound religious feeling.

10. I have decided to add a tenth prediction (but I am not changing the hedder for tech reasons). The ID guys will win because they are more interesting. I just got done rejecting a whack of comments by people I take to be boring young fogies with plenty of time on their hands (a problem I certainly don't have).

I guess there are no need to include this one except out of a need for completeness. Its ridiculousness is palpable.

As you can see, these predictions are absolutely meaningless and none of them prove anything about ID one way or the other. It's almost as if O'Leary asked an astrologer for ID predictions. They are that vague and untestable. Also, I find it interesting that as a Roman Catholic, O'Leary does no side with the Vatican which have an official stance in support of evolution. That was on of the things I appreciated, being raised Roman Catholic and going to a Catholic grade school. I was still taught science and not fundamentalist fairy tales.

I would also like to quote a comment from the blog. I think it speaks for itself but I will provide some context as a way of being fair. O'Leary is responding mostly to this paragraph of the comment by someone named Corn:

When a med student is learning a procedure (for example, a second trimester D&E) they don't learn about religious objections to the practice, they learn how to perform the practice safely (relative to the mother of course), to minimize risk (to the mother's life), and to look out for the various (medical) complications that may ensue. It is in their philosophy class that they learn about Medical Ethics and what controversies, both religious and non-religious, surround the procedure (at my school ME was a required course, I suspect the same at other schools). It is in their psychology classes that they learn about the psychological trauma that may be experienced by those who've undergone the procedure.

Here is her response.

Corn, your choice of D and E abortions (as "science?") speaks volumes, actually. "Science" is about killing kids and "philosophy" is about the oddd views of people who are upset by the fact that one does it?

As for my predictions, I am simply waiting to see if they pan out. I only argue about such things with publishers.

Then why post about it and accept comments?

Thanks to Blake Stacey and Jason Rosenhouse for leading me to this bit of nonsense.

Continue Reading...

We Have Our Problems, But Today I am Proud

Chalk one up to rationality in Missouri. A Federal court in this state recently ruled on an Establishment Clause case.

A school in Iron County allowed Gideons to distribute Bibles to the fifth graders during class time. Other groups were occasionally allowed to distribute materials, but only the Gideons had a long-standing arrangement to use the class time of children for distribution of reading material.

The superintendent went to the school board and told them this practice was unconstitutional. From the decision,

He further stated that if the Board wanted to allow the distribution of Bibles at school, it should adopt an “open forum” policy that would not allow discrimination against any organization. The Board made no decision or comment on the suggestion of an open forum policy, but instead voted to “pretend this meeting never happened, and to continue to allow the Gideons to distribute Bibles as we have done in the past.”

Once they got sued for it, the district changed their practice, allowing Gideons and other groups to distribute to students, but not during classtime. Well, the court didn't buy it.

From the decision,

The School Board defendants may have voted to pass the new policy, but there is absolutely no indication that they did so because they realized that their old practice was flawed and possibly unconstitutional. To the contrary, they continue to argue that their past practice was proper, and statements from their depositions show that many of them do not view the new policy as either a necessary or a positive change.

The ruling rendered an injunction on the board's old policy, but didn't affect the new policy. Well, they're appealing the decision, which shows how much they cared about the new policy. It's possible this will end up appealed to the Supreme Court. We'll see if they take it.

-Hat tip to Ed Brayton. Also, read about it on The Washington Post.

Continue Reading...

Commandment Canards

Mike Huckabee has once again put his foot in his mouth regarding religion, reported by MSNBC.

As for the Ten Commandments in the Oval Office, "the Ten Commandments are in the Supreme Court," Huckabee said, adding that he "wouldn't hesitate" to hang them in the White House. "The Ten Commandments form the basis of most of our laws and therefore, you know if you look through them does anybody find anything there that would be all that objectionable? I don't think most people would if they actually read them," he said.

This statement has no basis in reality whatsoever. In fact, Ed Brayton lays out nice, concise reasons why most of the commandments would be unconstitutional if they were laws, and the others have nothing to do with biblical morality.

Continue Reading...

Math and Noah's Ark

These are a couple old (but new to me!) articles analyzing the Noah's ark/global flood story with a few back-of-the-envelope calculations.

The first figures out what we would expect if Creationist-style microevolution were actually true. Frightening stuff.

The second uses a video about the flood as a basis for some analysis of the speed of the floodwaters. They were, apparently, pretty fast.

Continue Reading...