Atheistic Evolution - Discuss Atheism - Beliefnet Community

Atheistic Evolution

I'm curious how you all account for your own existense sans god.
Godman

Somewhere circa 3.5 billion years ago a hungry strand of RNA found that by hiding in a lipid membrane it could duplicate itself and split off another lipid membrane to hide the copy. It was better at doing so than any of the other replicators around and made a lot of copies of itself and survived this was my first ancestor. One of these copies had a mistake in copying and was even better at co opting lipids and survived even better this was a later ancestor. Later another ancestor found out that DNA was better at replicating without errors, and survived better than RNA predecessors. Much later another ancestor found a better way to survive and prosper. The key here is that there is an unbroken line of organisms that survived long enough to reproduce including my parents, that accounts for my own existence sans God. Improbable? Yes indeed. One might even call it a miracle. But it was a miracle with no God required."

The Fixed-Wing In America's Cup

The Fixed-Wing Is In: America's Cup Sailors Plan to Use Rigid Carbon-Fiber Airfoil on U.S. Entry: Scientific American: "The Fixed-Wing Is In:
The U.S. team for the America's Cup is replacing its boat's mast and cloth mainsail with a hard, fixed wing that is 80 percent larger than a Boeing 747 wing, not to mention difficult and dangerous to maneuver"

Gee, what ever happened to the fat kid hanging out on the trapeze? They still ought to make them power the hydraulics with coffee grinders. Stink boats in the America's cup. What is the world coming to.

Axioms for the Sapient.

Axioms for the Sapient.

have you enumerated your axioms? For I don't see how any theory of knowledge can be achieved with none.
Lavengro

Thank you, or damn you, Lavengro. I know this wasn't directed at me but must be responded to. Version 3.2 necessarily tentative follows:

1. I exist.
That is that portion of my brain that evaluates stimuli, integrates them, and relates them to the gestalt of previous stimuli exists. Cogito ergo sum.

1.a. Spirituality exists.
Spirituality is that portion of my brain that evaluates the importance of the various integrations of stimuli. It is necessarily internal.

2. Other exists.
Other consists of that which has the potential to present stimuli to sapient beings.

2.a. Other includes the material.
That which presents direct stimuli that can be measured. The material includes the stuff of my body and brain, and that of others (people.) Reality in the material world is conformance to measurements of self and others.

2.b. Other includes the conceptual.
Stimuli from the working of the other thinking beings alive and dead, usually expressed as stories, myth and theories. It contains the integrated gestalt of individuals or groups of thinking beings. Truth in the conceptual is that which resonates with the gestalt that is me. It is necessarily subjective.

2.c. Other includes the social.
The others which by chance or choice I must allow stimuli both ideological and material from and incorporate into my existence. Morality is the ideology that permits the smooth functioning of my social reality. Morality is necessarily reflexive.

3. Other exists independently of observation.
Other exhibits changes in lapses of observation.

Creationist Quiz

The Secret - Origins of Life

EarthScientist: Let's play match the creationist, draw a line from the YEC creationist to their real name!

Jan Peczkis - - - - - - 57/trilobyte/YEC

Stuart Nevins - - - - - John Woodmorappe

Karl Crawford - - - - - Steve 'not stone cold' Austin"
..........................................................

Blü: EarthScientist

Karl and faith will be able to solve two of your three puzzles but they'll never work out the third one.

............................................................

SIS: ? But if you know two of the three doesn't the third Q have only one remaining answer?

Oh, I see now, even if it is totally obvious to everyone else that only one answer remains, creationists still won't get it.

That's a profound insight, Blu. Quite profound.

It is not about life after death. It is about the funeral.

Does proselytizing commodify human beings? - Discuss Atheism - Beliefnet Community:

It’s not about your death. It’s about the lives of your grandchildren and their grandchildren.
Blü

And much more important the lives of those that showed up at the funeral or memorial service (or should have.) For most people only the children and grandchildren have any real interaction with the live parent. After that the genetic and memetic legacy is important in the progeny, but the folks at the funeral carry most of the social and loving legacy of the deceased. This is a fact for all, religious or not. Christians may get pie in the sky after they die, and Muslims their attendants, but that is myth. Those at the funeral are truth, whether they are there or not."

Two Careers, two children '70s

Ontological Inferiority of Women in Paul and the OT - Discuss Atheism - Beliefnet Community:

Men want to take a more active role in caring for their children, but two out of five admit they do not spend enough time with their sons or daughters.
Kwinters

As an early adopter of the concept of a two high level career household with children, I found many social norms to be totally incompatible with the concept, in two cases costing me my job and career prospects due to role issues for males and females. I chose to take the hit as I had the social (male ease of job movement) and educational resources, to be able to. The fact that my wife was not paid a head of household salary in spite of having a head of household job made the choice harder, but we both knew what we were up against in both large and small social issues. Just being the only adult male in a preschool area of a park was frequently an interesting experience. I would occasionally have to call my kids to justify my presence there, a few times to cops. Not complaining, mind you, we both chose the road with clear knowledge of the ruts and potholes. And believe me, the gender ruts were obvious and unavoidable.

It started when we were admitted to a big name U for Grad school, she in medicine me for an MBA. We went to financial aid and said "We are broke, how do we do this?" The aid guy said its easy she gets a job and puts you through the MBA then you get the big bucks from the MBA and put her through med school. We said we are both starting in the fall, what part of that don't you understand? To their credit they found a way, a grant for her tuition and a crippling loan for tuition and expenses for me. Abject poverty is good for the soul and for concentrating on studies, a movie was off the budget even if we smuggled in our own popcorn.

Tenure track medical education was no walk in the park in those days or now for women, which is why I had to use the MBA connections many times involuntarily. Like the time the boss said your wife must be at this party for the sake of your career. Guess what? He was right. She wasn't there (professional obligations) and I had to find another opportunity. I suppose if the promotion had been more important to me I could have arranged it, but I was pissed. It wouldn't have worked anyway as the company culture was wife as help mate in company politics.

The idea of social structures without a sexual division of labour is an interesting one...
Kwinters

It can be done. It just takes a major commitment on both sides. Mom was in her lab 'till lunch time in prep for a planned 2:00 induction for our second. In return I had to handle the middle of the night feeding. That is get up, get the kid, hang him on the teat, wait till he pooped, change the diaper and put him back in the crib.

Determinism, Randomness, and Free Will --Randomness

Determinism, Randomness, and Free Will - Discuss Atheism - Beliefnet Community: "I am quite comfortable with the randomness of living. Unlike some of the hard theists here, I think causality is the exception rather than the rule. If God is watching over anybody Hesh is doing a lousy job. In my view free will is expressed by how we react to the random events that color our lives including that huge one of our inevitable death. Our lives began with the random meeting of gametes, and random events like finding and losing friends, and lovers define how we choose to live. I live my life intentionally, in that I choose which random events I wish to react to and how I do so. Free will is not even an issue, there is no compulsion to do anything I choose not to do. Although things may happen that I must choose to react to. But there is always a choice. When the green car came flying over the center barrier into my lane, I could choose to do nothing and experience the fun of a high speed head on, or I could choose to steer as close to the barrier as I could. One might say the choice was forced, but it was still a choice. Making good choices is the essence of living in a random world."

Determinism, Randomness, and Free Will ---Solipcism

Determinism, Randomness, and Free Will - Discuss Atheism - Beliefnet Community

I need the axiom to get rid of solipsism &c.
Blü

What is wrong with solipsism? It needs to be recognized, understood and controlled, but even your axioms are fundamentally solipsistic. They are what you believe and what make you comfortable with your relationship with the material world. Pretending otherwise may cater to your materialism, but does not get rid of the solipsism.

I have no problem with solipsism. As a wonderful quote from Heinlein notes, 'Sometimes she goes away, but I am always here.' That is how I know the relationship of self with the rest of the world. I do not doubt the reality of the rest of the world, even when it 'goes away' but I do know the difference between self and other."

Determinism, Randomness, and Free Will

Determinism, Randomness, and Free Will - Discuss Atheism - Beliefnet Community:

Forgetting 'random' for the time being -- if the brain's random we might as well pack up and go home --
Lavengro

What everyone is forgetting is that random is not an either/or condition. In fact rationality might be defined as reasonable responses to random events that occur both internally to the brain and externally as in spilled cumin in the curry. (Should I eat it or spit it out?) The brain has sophisticated feedback that evaluates odd inputs either internal or external to see if it is important to current events in the mind. That random linear flash of reflected sunlight might be nothing. In the vicinity of a passing car the brain will ignore it. But in a crowd of people the brain might decide to direct the full attention of the mind to look for danger associated with such linear flashes. Many millions of years of separating out dangerous random signals from similar random signals that are normal patterns in the environment make dealing with the randomness of the environment a critical survival trait.

The brain's internal random juxtapositions of thought patterns is the essence of human creativity and free will. A vaguely remembered dream of a snake biting its tail juxtaposed to a vexing structural chemical problem may be responsible for modern organic chemistry. One can play the determinism game all night long and say August Kekulé had the dream because of a logical train of subconscious thought on his problem, but the waking correlation of the dream to the problem at hand seems to be deterministically improbable to the point of ridiculousness. The mind might be envisioned as a laser cavity of random thought processes that reinforce to produce meaningful waves or flow past each other without hooking up at that time. Sooner or later less important thought processes are relegated to the memory for future use as needed, (don't ask me how the mind knows they are needed, or how it retrieves them from the memory, I am not that smart.) But I do know that the mind is extremely versatile in processing that endless stream of data.

Determinism, Randomness, and Free Will -- Peek-a-boo

Determinism, Randomness, and Free Will - Discuss Atheism - Beliefnet Community:

As I said, the only non-arbitrary starting point for knowledge to begin, which is implicit in all knowledge, is the distinction between something which is observed and ourselves as observers of it. Before we can know anything about anything, we must first observe something which we subsequently attempt to know (ie determine the nature of).
Clardan

A recent AI article in Scientific American noted that peek-a-boo is the AI holy grail. I have been thinking about that a lot recently, not only because peek-a-boo is fun to play with kids, but because an infant in the cradle can play peek-a-boo with a relative stranger and still tell the difference between self and other no matter which of them is doing the hiding. I would agree that the distinction between the observed and ourselves as observers and interpreters of what is observed is fundamental.

I think Blü is entitled to his axioms:

There is a world external to the self. The senses are capable of perceiving this world. Reason is a valid tool.

They describe the reality that he observes, just as the theist is entitled to the axiom that all observations are manifestations of the will of God, and Descartes is entitled to his view that observations are manifestations of his will. I agree that Blü's axioms are probably the best description of our interactions with what we observe, but he has no greater claim to TRUTH than the bible thumpers.

I have no problem with a separate material external reality that we can discover and manipulate with science and technology. I also have no problem with a separate internal reality in other people by which they view the world. If it includes a God that watches over them and will take care of them if they pray hard enough

how hard, hard enough to make water flow uphill. Lazarus Long

that is as much their privilege as it is Blü's and mine to depend on materialistic science and technology. I find the God that many pray to is worthless, but it is still their free choice to do so. Sometimes I would like to warn them that God and Herm followers are subject to evolution just like all the other animals out there, but it would do no good, and probably annoy them in the process.

How are people created?

Let's play a science game - Origins of Life - Beliefnet Community:

If 'Yes' did you cause yourself to exist?
If 'No' then something else was by NECESSITY responsible for your existence
CaliberCadillac

I did not cause myself to exist I exist because of the random meeting of gametes, which were generated by meiosis a random division of germ cells which creates a random mix of the characteristics of my parents (and their ancestors) to create maximum diversity in my genetic makeup.

I was fortunate (that is the product of a series of favorable random events) to inherit an intelligent reasoning ability to evaluate my society and fit myself into the reasoning and intelligent portion of it. I was also fortunate to have a deficiency in the ability to kowtow to arrogant preachers and apologists who think they have all the answers to all questions. In fact it is more than a deficiency it is an active rejection of all such individuals and their BS."

Speed Dating

Head Lines: Men Are Choosy, Too: Scientific American: "Ladies must be picky because they invest more in their offspring, according to the oft-repeated evolutionary theory. But when researchers made the simple switch of having women do the table hopping while men stayed seated, the two sexes suddenly became equally choosy,"

So much for evolutionary explanations for a dumb experiment.

Just Don't Do It.

Obviously prior to contraceptives and STD preventative measures being commonly available this edict made considerable sense. With the ubiquitous availability if not use of these measures it would seem that the edict makes less sense than it used to. After all, the pair bonding efficacy of sex is a useful feature in a desire to form a pair bond against the vicissitudes of the big bad world out there. If that is the only intent of the pair bond, that is it does not include a desire or plan for parenting, I see no reason not to proceed. However when the pair bonding is for the eventual purpose of conception I have reconsidered the thought of contraceptive sex as a recreational or pair bonding activity.

Having been around the horn (pun intended) several times in several relationships with and without the intent for progeny, the decision to try for a child by a loving couple inevitably changes a relationship by changing the focus from each other as people and partners to the planned family with all the extra responsibilities and commitment that a family entails. With all of the other pair bonding activities available to a couple that are mutually gratifying and intimate there seems to be a case to be made for reserving that ultimate bonding act intended by nature for the welfare of the continuation of the species for the time when the couple is ready, willing and able to do so. Certainly "taking off the rubber" changes things, but in my opinion and experience not really enough.

Maybe all those religions know what they are talking about when they say "Just Don't Do It." Particularly for couples that commit early, and must defer family for educational or financial considerations, it would seem that the other pair bonding activities should be used to keep the pair bond intact and save the lets make a baby for the icing on the (wedding) cake, even if the wedding is off in the future. First gestations are notoriously short, but should never be an accident. If the couple has thought about it, talked about it, and decide parenting it right for them, the power of the first time "as one" seems to me to be worth the wait.

All Souls New York City

All Souls New York City: "REV. FORREST CHURCH


September 23, 1948 — September 24, 2009

Remembering Forrest—An Online Tribute"

Me, Myself, and I?

Me, Myself, and I? :

So for both atheists and theists out there, is there an overarching definition of personal identity, or is the answer based on who you ask?
Furthermore, how do you define yourself in such a way if that is taken away, one cannot call themselves same person that they were when they had that?
Ephemerae_inc.

"The differentiation between the mind and the sensory workings of the brain is what separates the concept of self from everything else, including the functioning of one's own body and brain. Whether this self concept is internal, that is supported by the activity of the brain, or imposed from some external source (God) will depend on who you ask.

Many who use Genesis as a source will aver that what God 'breathed' into Adam was the sense of self with the ability to reason about what one experienced, and not incidentally, the ability to separate a stimulus, that is hunger from the response, that is to decide what to eat. This ability to separate a stimulus from the appropriate response is what a theist will call a soul, and consider it to be separate from the body and ego and originating outside of either.

I find this a natural function of a brain of sufficient complexity. Right now I am training a puppy, and one of the things I am training him on is the appropriate responses to certain stimuli. And teaching him the concept of his space. This requires that I assume he has some ability to separate his actions from the stimulus that might lead him to leave his space. He has learned that his space is different from the space of others in his life. When someone leaves his rooms he must not follow as a dog normally would, he must stop at the edge of the rug which defines his space, and not pass the boundary.

My sense of self is much more complex of course, but includes the concept of my space, those things I can affect and respond to, and my ability to determine reliably and quickly appropriate responses to stimuli that affect my space. This includes of course other people who contact my space, and morality consists of how I respond to stimuli that they present. If someone smites me on the right cheek, I need to decide whether the natural response of a swift kick to the crotch is appropriate or not. But even the swift kick must be a reasoned response if I am to be comfortable with the self concept that separates me from all the others around me. The time a response is reactive to a stimulus is where I lose the sense of self and self control and become just another animal in the jungle."

Jeff Danziger on Health Care Reform

Fairy Godmothers

Facebook | Home: "Meg Barnhouse from Nina and Dan: 'If I could I'd find a fairy godmother with a magical wand and combat boots so that she could grant your wishes and kick the crap outta anything that tried to get in the way of your happiness.' Thanks!"

One of the many reasons Meg Barnhouse is on my Google Alert list.

Mary Travers

From an email to members from Rosanne Zoccoli President of NYCS.

She has said everything I have been trying to get posted so much more eloquently than I ever could.


Dear members,

No doubt by now many of you have heard the sad news that longtime folk legend and friend of NYCS, Mary Travers, has passed away following a valiant battle with leukemia.

Along with fellow performers Peter Yarrow and Noel (Paul) Stookey, Mary was part of an enormously successful collaboration with NYCS. For 21 years, Peter Paul and Mary performed their pioneering brand of folk music with the NYCS on the stages of Carnegie and Avery Fisher Hall, on Broadway and on television. Throughout our collaboration with the trio, they had always donated their services free of charge to the NYCS - a gift for which we will forever be grateful. We will forever be thankful for the gift of music they gave to us and our audiences.

In all of these concerts, Mary was a central figure. She sang, smiled, and loved being a part of NYCS. Those of us who have been in NYCS for many years also remember fondly how Mary would bring home-made chopped liver to rehearsal ---a gift for all to enjoy.

Thank you very much.
Sincerely,

Rosanne

Mary Travers, Singer of Protest Anthems, Dies at 72 - Obituary (Obit) - NYTimes.com

A giant who made the world a better place is a beloved memory now. The privilege of rehearsing with and performing with PP& especially Mary was a highlight of my many years with the New York Choral Society.

Mary Travers, Singer of Protest Anthems, Dies at 72 - Obituary (Obit) - NYTimes.com: "Mary Travers of Peter, Paul and Mary Dies at 72

By WILLIAM GRIMES
Published: September 16, 2009

Mary Travers, whose ringing, earnest vocals with the folk trio Peter, Paul and Mary made songs like “Blowin’ in the Wind,” “If I Had a Hammer” and “Where Have All the Flowers Gone?” enduring anthems of the 1960s protest movement, died on Wednesday at Danbury Hospital in Connecticut. She was 72 and lived in Redding, Conn.
....
Ms. Travers brought a powerful voice and an unfeigned urgency to music that resonated with mainstream listeners. With her straight blond hair and willowy figure and two bearded guitar players by her side, she looked exactly like what she was, a Greenwich Villager directly from the clubs and the coffeehouses that nourished the folk-music revival.

Moral Evolution

The evolution of morality : "The 2000 year old text is really two different and incompatible texts. In one a radical humanist preacher tried to update a morality suitable for desert marauders into one more suitable for a more cosmopolitan diverse society. He shifted moral responsibility from God and the priesthood to individuals. The other recaptured God centered morality ironically elevating the radical humanist to God.

I find many Christians are finding the humanistic preacher more applicable to a modern diverse society, and are rejecting the God Centered morality of the OT and non-synoptic NT. I can't count the number of times I hear the Two Great Commandments of Jesus as the essence of Christian morality. Fundies and Bibliolators may disagree, but for me and for Jefferson, the morality of the Synoptics is a reasonable basis for a cosmopolitan morality."

What is "Real"?

What is "real?" : "

What do you mean by 'real'?
Clardan

"Since everybody else is playing dodge-ball with this issue, let me try. Real for the human mind or brain if you prefer, is a conception of an object external to the mind that can be described with sufficient precision to be identifiable to others as a similar conception in their mind of sufficient power and experience. Hence, rocks, rainbows, even virtual particles are real. A mythical entity such as Santa Claus can be considered to be real, as the conception is of an object that can be described and understood by others, even though certain properties may be differently conceived by different minds and the referent of the myth is fictional.

Please note that even the magical aspects of Santa Claus, the flying reindeer, the self replenishing present supply, can be considered real at the unsophisticated child level although the sophistication is not age related. An adult given no opportunity to understand the differences among magical, mythical, and material reality may not be able to conceive the difference.

Maturity of mind allows us to separate reality into categories like magical, mythical, material, and conceptual among others depending on the sophistication of the mind involved. The big bang, or inflation, is a conceptual reality for those able to deal with the concept of best explanation of reality to date but not necessarily a material reality. "

So for me, reality's (first) what's out there and (second) the reasoned inclusion of oneself in the resulting picture.
Blü

Which eliminates all of the interesting conceptual, fictional and mythical things that inform and amuse the mind, which of course does not exist in your material world. I find your material world orderly, understandable, and boring. I much prefer the messy, incomprehensible, wonder-filled world of the mind, where truth is not found by observation but by understanding.

You can borrow my Vintage Playboy collection if you get too bored.
Blü

Typical materialist. Just look at the pictures and you don't have to deal with the interesting conceptual, fictional and mythical complexities of a real woman.

I will go with the materialists that consciousness or mind is supported by neural activity of the brain. Where I differ from them is that consciousness is not dependent on input from the sensual processing areas of the brain, but uses selected data from those areas and creates a relationship between itself and the rest of the world as sensed, and in addition provides self referential feedback on how to manage that relationship.

Pain input from the senses, causes the reflex action to minimize the pain, but also triggers the consciousness to analyze the source of the pain, and the consciousness will analyze the cause of the pain and figure out ways to avoid it in the future, or perhaps decide that it is a necessary accessory to some other project the consciousness has in its in-box. The easiest way to avoid the pain of a hot stove is to stay away from hot stoves. But the consciousness says I'm hungry and some scrambled eggs would be good right now, and that means go near that dreadful hot stove. Be careful Y'all.

As noted I have no problem with the mind being supported by neural activity of the brain, but I would bet long odds against sombody with a fMRI being able to say "Here lies the mind"

Labels, Prayers and Wishes.

Antitheism? - Discuss Atheism - Beliefnet Community:
"If wishes were prayers and all worth a penny we would all be rich. People cling to labels, and prayers and wishes because they cannot or will not deal with the reality of a changing world where wishes, prayers and labels are holdovers from a time where ones local social group membership was all important, and ignorance was rampant. Today we can choose our social group(s) ignorance is dispelled with a click on Google, and all who chose can find out anything they want on the net.

Those clinging to labels are desperately refusing to adapt to the modern human ecology. This is known as evolution in action. (Thanks Niven and Pournelle, if you haven't read Oath of Fealty it is worth the price.)"

Material or immaterial mind?

The mythical "non-fundamentalist atheist":

Isn't the mind and brain the same thing?
Ephemerae_inc.

I would think that even a strict materialist would say no. Certainly an intricate series of neural firings supports what we think of as the mind, but the intricate feedback loop between the working of the mind and the neural actions which support and are affected by the working of the mind strongly suggest a separate conceptual entity. It certainly develops with the brain and ceases to exist when the brain ceases to function, no dualism here, but I find the mind to be a separate entity.

To an idealist, no - the brain (and all other matter) is an 'objectification' of mind which is non- material.
Clardan

To a realist ****waves hand and says "Teacher call on me!"**** both the material and the immaterial exist in reality. A rainbow exists only in the mind, damn the pedants who draw ray diagrams to show it is merely (sic) an optical phenomenon. The rock I stubbed my toe on was real and material, the pain was real and immaterial. I didn't imagine the pain.

No, the pain was not immaterial.
farragut

Yeah, it was just the firing of neurons telling the mind "Hey dipshit, you just fuckedup. Don't do it again.

Now, was the mind's response to that firing of neurons material?

The Mind, making sense of chaos.

The mythical "non-fundamentalist atheist" - Discuss Atheism - Beliefnet Community: "The conscious mind evolved or emerged if you wish, to make sense of the chaotic material input presented to the brain by the senses. To take a simple example, at a large cocktail party with many conversations going on with perhaps music and other random noises are presented to the brain by the auditory nerve complex. The mind needs to separate out the important noises, like the conversation one is engaged in. It can even sort out ones name mentioned in a conversation across the room. Visual stimuli are even more chaotic. Reality is much too messy to deal with in its unfiltered existence. Hence the mind to make sense of the data overload."

Tax, borrow or inflate.

Theism - anti-democratic? :

I think that democracy is terrible at self-correction, since democratic governments tend to increase taxes, borrow, or inflate the money supply 'unsustainably', and it is very difficult to reverse this process.
Eudaimonist

"As my Econ Prof said, so what? Governments have many ways to pay for the pork and wars and the pork and wars generate income so it all comes out even in the end. By the way this is true for all government types, democracy has no patent on tax, borrow or inflate."

Sexual morality

Another Question for Theists :
"Every atheist I know has extremely well developed and usually fairly strict moral standards with regard to sex. Without trying to speak for all atheists, I only know a few well enough to discuss sexual morality, the common thread seems to be radical respect for the feelings and integrity of the partner, and an absolute prohibition of non-consensual sex. Most heterosexual atheists consider sex with the intent to create children to be a commitment to the family to remain together at least until the children are old enough to understand any separation.

Note the differences with Christian morality. Serial monogamy is fine, screw any children, sometimes literally, as is diddling on the side with either sex, as long as man and wife show up in church occasionally. Non-consensual sex is fine if the couple is married in Church and indeed is expected to produce an unending stream of new Christians. Disgusting."

Trip home

1800 miles of wonderful driving in three days including Hells Canyon, Mt Lassen and the Feather River Canyon. A brown bear cub was posed for a photo op on the Hells Canyon road, but dummy had the camera in the glove box, and by the time it was ready the bear was headed toward the lake, to fish, maybe swim. I wasn't into photos, dammed lakes don't float my boat, even though it floats many others. The trip to Susanville was beautifully twisty with empty roads to enjoy it. Lassen was a worth while side trip on the way to the Feather River Canyon road. From there home, and I was ready. If wishes came true I would have been transported from Oroville home, but alas I had to drive. I had done it enough that autopilot with good music on the CD made it endurable.

Horse camping with Family.

Went with Kevin, Beth, Alex, Gabriel and friends to Troy, OR which is basically a permanent tent camp for hunters and horse-people for the labor day weekend. I spent most of my time with the Grand-kids, while the ones with calluses on their butts toured the surrounding area on horseback. Fair trade is no robbery I enjoyed the time with the kids including a beautiful trip to Joseph's OR, a delightful tourist trap. Campfires morning and night that I didn't have to build. I am still looking for the downside of the weekend.

Crater Lake

No pix, you have to be there. The scale into the crater and out to the surrounding land is mind boggling. A life long dream fulfilled. Worth every mile of the exhilarating drive.

Avenue of the Giants

The ultimate blue road. The Pix above is one of thousands of possible shots. I would love to go back and walk the Avenue of the Giants so I could take them all. But it was a long day and a few hours was all I could afford. I took them all. Very late to the motel as it was.

Point Reyes

Glad I went, but I am not much of a beach person, so I probably won't go again. They claim 417 miles of trails, but other than one spectacular stand of windblown cypress at the lighthouse, I am not sure how I would tell one mile from the next. I can appreciate the attraction for people into the bucolic, great inns and B&Bs, wildlife and tame life, but other than the T-Shirt not much for me. Made for a short day, not bad for the first day.

4000 miles of pure joy.

Well actually 3900 I had to go through Sacramento and Walnut Creek to get home.

But a BMW with free miles to the end of the lease, essentially empty roads with very few straight sections, what is not to like about that. I hated to see even the long days end.

Charles Fiterman on facing death.

Beliefnet Discussions - Beliefnet.com: "I have bladder cancer and was given 6 to 18 months. I think I'm facing it fairly well. I ask daily what am I doing with my time that justifies the pain and expense and inconvenience to others of going on. When the answer becomes bad enough I will do the right thing." Written on 2/25/2005.

Charles died June 19, 2005 at The Palliative Care Center & Hospice of the North Shore, 2821 Central St., Evanston, IL 60201.

As a committed Libertarian, I am sure Charles would not support the public option, but if it had to be he would certainly argue for hospice care as a part of it. Hospice care is not a death panel, it is a death option. It should be a basic right for all people.

Petitionary Prayers

Prayer and Magic - Science & Religion - Beliefnet Community:

common sense alone says that most people wouldn't go to the trouble of asking if they didn't think it would work.
McAtheist

"Arguments based on common sense are generally false. Sense is not common and when people are using what sense they have about things that they don't understand the chances are that their sense is misleading them.

In my experience petitionary prayers that are a part of a liturgy or a religious ritual are not expected to be answered. The rituals and liturgies have a powerful unifying value for those who choose to believe. Whether this unity is with God or with their religious fellowship is really unimportant. But the petitionary prayers are integral to the ritual and liturgy not because of expectation of fulfillment but as a promise that God or the religious fellowship is listening and paying attention. Prayer circles have the same function. It is not that God will respond if a lot of people care, it is the fact that a lot of people care that is important.

I have spent thousands of hours studying and singing liturgical works not because I believe that any of the prayers contained therein will be answered, obviously since I do not believe in the referent God, but I learn much about how people respond to things like death and tragedy that they cannot understand. The prayer for peace Dona Nobis Pacem that ends the mass is at least ironic as Beethoven reminds us in the Missa Solemnis with the martial interlude. Do people really believe that God will give us peace in our time or in our lives? If not why have they been praying for just that every Sunday since the Nicene Creed was adopted? What does common sense have to say about that? "

Yosemite rockfall forces Ahwahnee evacuation | San Francisco Examiner

Yosemite rockfall forces Ahwahnee evacuation | San Francisco Examiner: "Park spokesman Scott Gediman said a series of falling rocks, some as large as microwave ovens, tumbled at least 100 feet from the base of the cliff and into the valet parking lot, where several cars were damaged. No injuries were reported."

As one who wondered about that when I had the valet park my car at the Ahwahnee, all I can say is Duh! They had to move boulders bigger than microwaves to make the parking lot in the first place. Surprise, surprise, there are more of them up there.

Atheist Prayers

The supernatural??? - Science & Religion - Beliefnet Community:

yet as we know, knowledge doesn't increase by becoming more and more vague, and ending up with a heap of improbable possibilities to pick and choose from for the sake of personal meaning.
F1fan

"Do you worship knowledge, or the increase of it? Does knowledge provide personal meaning for your life? Does the heap of improbable possibilities surrounding the origin of the universe or the development of humanity and other existing species help you pick and choose for the sake of personal meaning?

I have spent a lifetime of hard work creating a coherent philosophy to provide personal meaning and moral guidance for my self and by extension those I share it with. For many good reasons some people choose a prepackaged version of both. I see no good reason to argue with them about it. I don't particularly like dark chocolate. Is my preference for caramel worth arguing about? If God answers questions others don't want to deal with why not say 'God bless you?' It doesn't hurt a bit. It is not even an admission that God exists. Ever since a very good Catholic friend of mine in a time of devastating trouble asked me to pray for him with the admonition that God even listens to atheists, I have prayed for theists when requested. I even pray for some without being asked when I think they could use a prayer. It costs me exactly nothing. I am thinking of them anyway and of ways I might help. The prayer was not in lieu of more realistic help, but if they felt better because of it, why would I deny them the comfort of a familiar placebo.

If God tells them to impose their beliefs on others that is a totally different matter. They will find I am a rather formidable opponent, with no scruples about destroying their beliefs if possible. Due to my study of religions I am well equipped to do so. The destruction of a pernicious belief is beneficial to society, and in accord with my personal meaning in life."

Aller Menschen werden Brüder

Heroes - Religion and the Human Mind - Beliefnet Community:

I'm interested to see you describe your heroes in terms of teaching you how to wrestle with the angel.
Blü

"Not so much how to wrestle with the angel, but how to deal with the victory. The Nicene God provides believers with a way to deal with a life in which lots of bad things happen and death is inevitable. Kill the God and you need to deal with a life in which lots of bad things happen and death is inevitable. Trying to do it alone is to deal with Neitzscheian nihilism or the existential angst of Sartre. In his Freude, Freude, Aller Menschen werden Brüder Beethoven gives his triumphant answer. Joy! Joy! All humans are siblings.

We can look to our fellow humans for all the answers to meaning and purpose, and how to deal with the bad things in life and its finite duration, with courage, optimism and joy. We don't need God with Herm pie in the sky after we die. We don't need God to make us feel good that there is something out there that cares if bad things happen. Or even to thank when good things happen. Aller Menschen werden Brüder and they care when I make their lives better. They care when I hurt. I can thank them for their help and support. And when my contribution ends if I have done well, they will remember me with pleasure and joy."

Collecting - A Concours of Misfits (Hold the Élégance) - NYTimes.com

Collecting - A Concours of Misfits (Hold the Élégance) - NYTimes.com: "Standing proudly beside his sparkling 1971 Ford Pinto, which is festooned with thousands of tiny square mirrors to create a disco-ball effect, he added: “No matter what, it will always be a Pinto.”

He said that as if it were a good thing."

Designed Universe?

The supernatural??? - Science & Religion:

Show your evidence, not your belief.
F1fan

"There are many things that might indicate a creator. Just the asymmetry of the matter anti-matter in the universe, for example is explained just as well by God sorting it out as by the scientific theories of the beginning of matter. There are many constants that have been defined that keep the universe working the way it does. It can certainly be argued that the universe is as it is because it conforms to those constants. But it cannot be disproven that God designed those constants because Hesh likes to watch the gravitational dancing of the galaxies. I know I do. I waste much of my time on my APOD bookmarks of colliding galaxies. Frankly I cannot conceive of anything or even any God that could do such things, so I favor natural explanations myself. But ask me to prove that God didn't put those APOD photos up for my enjoyment, other than a weak 'I am not that important,' I couldn't prove God didn't do it. With very little effort I could prove that a specific God e.g. any of the primitive Mesopotamian Gods didn't do it. It is easy to prove they couldn't be that smart. But some Deist Creator? I wouldn't even try."

Personal Evidence

Antitheism? - Discuss Atheism:

But faith, as such, is blind - not reasonably justified by evidence...
Clardan

I don't think that is true. Whilst there may be debate about the 'reasonably' bit of 'reasonably justified,' my faith (and I can only speak for my own) is not without evidence.
I fear you are misled by Richard Dawkins and his ilk. Faith, says Dawkins in The Selfish Gene, 'means blind trust, in the absence of evidence, even in the teeth of evidence.' He is mistaken.
Lavengro

Actually Lavengro, I thought this independently of Dawkins, but how is he mistaken? I take it you agree that it is not reasonable to believe in things independently of evidence, and that a belief can only be rationally justified by sufficient evidence. How then is your faith rationally justified ?
Clardan

Dawkins is mistaken by the common fundie mistake of assuming some=all. He compounds that by the common atheist mistake of refusing to consider personal evidence. If I am convinced I have had a (Kantian) transcendental experience, and have examined that experience dispassionately as the scientist I am and found evidence that it was indeed transcendent, there is no possibility of reproducing that evidence for another. It happened to me. It was based on the integration of all of the mental and psychological factors that make up my mind which cannot be imposed on another. But if you trust my judgment as a scientist why can you not trust my evaluation of my experience as transcendent. "

Changing Destiny.

Pessimism v. Optimism - Discuss Atheism:

So your optimism is based on how other people act that are in your local world. Is that a fair statement? So say you were ... would you be optimistic there,
Godman

"The fact is that we choose our local world, at least by the time we grow up. Our choice will be heavily influenced by the world we grew up in. So say you were a fundie and lived in a Southern small town away from a cosmopolitan area. Would I be optimistic that you could learn to think for yourself about important areas of your life? A few years ago I probably would say no. But these days with mandatory email as a window to the world, it is all too easy to sneak a peek on the internet and be corrupted. You might have to worry about your parents as the common ad here suggests, but if you are really pessimistic about being anything about being a couch potato spending free time from that in church there is a way out. Don't get me wrong, it won't be easy, your determination to change your destiny must be strong, but these days it will be possible."

Heroes - Religion and the Human Mind

Heroes - Religion and the Human Mind - Beliefnet Community:

Who are your heroes? What makes them heroes to you?
Blü

To stay with the theme of the board, my lifelong hero has to be Beethoven. By studying his Masses, and indeed all of his music I learned what an atheist can learn from God. Indeed his war with God, which in my opinion he won particularly in the Ninth Symphony taught me more about being human than anyone else. But in my mind the Missa Solemnis is the definitive comment on the relationship to man and God, God being defined as the Nicene God of the Anglican, Catholic, Eastern and Orthodox liturgy. Mahler followed in his footsteps and turned the path to humanism into a highway. But Mahler was not at war with God, he took Beethoven’s victory as a given and built on it, as did many others, too numerous to mention as heroes. Bach might be included in the pantheon, but it wasn’t until I had thoroughly studied his music and Masses that I realized that he too was on the humanist path, but so constrained by his employer, the Church, that he couldn’t be obvious about it. But it is no accident that he introduced the tritone (The devil’s interval) into music even, God forbid on the pain of death, to church music. Although in my view the tritone is an intensely human interval with its eternal questioning and questing.)

In literature, Steinbeck stands tallest in the God wrestling business. If there is a humanist bible East of Eden (1952) has to be near the top of the list. The interpretation of the verb timshel from Cain’s charge as “Thou mayest triumph over sin” is brilliant. Not you will. Not you can. Not you must. But you may choose to triumph over sin is profoundly humanist and taught me how to deal with the serious mistakes I made that I couldn’t nail to the cross like my religious friends. Most of the Science Fiction/fantasy authors following Asimov and Heinlein wrote some great humanist novels, with not so incidentally some of the best humanist moral discussions to be found anywhere, most are on my reread list when I need some moral support as a humanist. Niven-Pournelle, Card, Clark, Tall, Tolkein, the list is too long to remember them all. Omissions are memory failures not intentional.

Interestingly philosophers are not on my hero list, although their contribution to my life has been immense, if only by providing the challenge to my thinking to make it what it is today. A few of them were religious philosophers (theologians) and one Jesuit that made major contributions to my intellectual growth as an atheist.

I would agree with many of the scientist and mathematician heroes but they are not so much in the God wrestling business as in the advancing human knowledge business. Incredibly important in the mind part of the title, but not much in the religion part. Their quest is not religious but the intensely human desire to become omniscient, not by definition, but by hard work."

When Gods Crash

"When a child first catches adults out -- when it first walks into his grave little head that adults do not always have divine intelligence, that their judgments are not always wise, their thinking true, their sentences just -- his world falls into panic desolation. The gods are fallen and all safety gone. And there is one sure thing about the fall of gods: they do not fall a little; they crash and shatter or sink deeply into green muck. It is a tedious job to build them up again; they never quite shine. And the child's world is never quite whole again. It is an aching kind of growing."
— John Steinbeck (East of Eden)1952

And the second is like the first. When a believer finds out that herm God, whatever it is, or the portrayal of it is not always wise, or true or just, and the god crashes, and shatters, the rebuilding is an interesting process as God cannot be unwise, unjust or untrue. Some put the shattered God back up on its pedestal, pastes the gold leaf back in place and denies the God ever fell. It does no good to point out the cracks, those cracks are not the cause of the fall and therefore do not exist, frequently with vehemence.

Others look at the ugly mess, and decide it is not worth even picking up the pieces, or find a few pieces that look OK and try to rebuild their life without God or perhaps with a new one built of the shards. Inevitably the wisdom, trust, and justness of the new God is tentative, and the failure causes reliance on the human resources for wisdom, trust, and justice inherent in all of us.

Those who have rebuilt their life after the fall, whether with a new God or none, are almost always good people to be around. Those who rebuilt their God are not.

Insults with class

“He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire.”
–Winston Churchill

“I have never killed a man, but I have read many obituaries with great pleasure.”
–Clarence Darrow

“He has never been known to use a word that might send a reader to the dictionary.”
–William Faulkner (about Ernest Hemingway)
"Poor Faulkner. Does he really think big emotions come from big words?"
—Ernest Hemingway (about William Faulkner)

“I’ve had a perfectly wonderful evening. But this wasn’t it.”
–Groucho Marx

“I didn’t attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying I approved of it.”
–Mark Twain

“He has no enemies, but is intensely disliked by his friends.”
–Oscar Wilde

“I am enclosing two tickets to the first night of my new play; bring a friend... if you have one.”
–George Bernard Shaw to Winston Churchill
“Cannot possibly attend first night; will attend second, if there is one.”
–Winston Churchill’s response to George Bernard Shaw

“I feel so miserable without you; it’s almost like having you here.”
–Stephen Bishop

“He is a self-made man and worships his creator.”
–John Bright

“I’ve just learned about his illness. Let’s hope it’s nothing trivial.”
–Irvin S. Cobb

“He is not only dull himself; he is the cause of dullness in others.”
–Samuel Johnson

“He is simply a shiver looking for a spine to run up.”
–Paul Keating

“He had delusions of adequacy.”
–Walter Kerr

“Why do you sit there looking like an envelope without any address on it?”
–Mark Twain

“His mother should have thrown him away and kept the stork.”
–Mae West

“Winston, if you were my husband, I would poison your coffee!”
–Lady Astor to Winston Churchill at a dinner party
“Madam, if I were your husband, I would drink it!”
–Winston Churchill’s response to Lady Astor

"Thank you for sending me a copy of your book; I'll waste no time reading it."
—Moses Hadas"He has the attention span of a lightning bolt."
—Robert Redford

"They never open their mouths without subtracting from the sum of human knowledge."
—Thomas Brackett Reed

"He inherited some good instincts from his Quaker forebears, but by diligent hard work, he overcame them."
—James Reston (about Richard Nixon)

"He loves nature in spite of what it did to him."
—Forrest Tucker

"He can compress the most words into the smallest idea of any one I know."
—Abraham Lincoln

"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts — for support rather than illumination."
—Andrew Lang (1844-1912)

“Some cause happiness wherever they go; others, whenever they go.”
–Oscar Wilde

"You, Mr. Wilkes, will die either of the pox or on the gallows."
–The Earl of Sandwich
"That depends, my lord, whether I embrace your mistress or your principles."
–John Wilkes's response to The Earl of Sandwich

"A modest little person, with much to be modest about."
—Winston Churchill

An edited collection from somewhere on the web.

Scientific Illiteracy in America

Scientific Illiteracy in America - Science & Religion - Beliefnet Community:

science writers Chris Mooney and Sheril Kirshenbaum argue that America's future is deeply endangered by the scientific illiteracy of its citizens

"The scientific illiteracy of American citizens is a self correcting problem. Scientific illiterates will not be able to compete in a modern technological society and will follow in the fossil footsteps of other non-competitive species. This is known as bad luck."

Thanks to RAH for the bad luck quote. The complete quote is relevant here

Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded -- here and there, now and then -- are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty. This is known as "bad luck"
From the Notebooks of Lazarus Long,1973.

This small minority, is much bigger now. It is still opposed by the majority, but there are enough of them now, and they gravitate to positions of importance in the society due to their skills, and the opposition, being stupid if organized, cannot effectively oppose them any longer. The majority will stand on street corners waving signs and honking horns full of noise and fury signifying nothing. The minority will be on the internet, the phones and making life better for all that care to participate. Unfortunately participation takes brains and the ability and willingness to use them. It will be interesting to see how long those with neither the willingness nor ability can hang on on in their service and manual labor jobs that are rapidly disappearing. The economy is improving but unemployment is approaching double digits. Are the resulting couch potatoes going to get off the couch even to breed?

Gene Mutation Tied to Needing Less Sleep - NYTimes.com

Gene Mutation Tied to Needing Less Sleep - NYTimes.com: "What distinguishes the two women in the study and other naturally short sleepers is that they go to bed at a normal time and wake up early without an alarm. The two women, one in her 70s and the other in her 40s, go to bed around 10 or 10:30 at night and wake up alert and energized around 4 or 4:30 in the morning, Dr. Fu said."

Sounds like I carry the gene. Although 6 hours seems a bit excessive. The 10pm crash time sounds about right, but socially midnight is better, and getting up at breakfast time is important.

from mother to gypsy - Meg Barnhouse

uuworld.org : from mother to gypsy: "My love and I are walking down the road. That house is not for us right now. We carry what we can lift and no more. It’s time for a new perspective. Out of my back pocket peeks a small white sock."

All you need to know is in that short paragraph, but you will read the whole sermon again and again as I will. Meg Barnhouse is good people.

Hosephus shows his ass

Beliefnet Discussions - Beliefnet.com:
A very useful phrase that has been lost in the beliefnet archives.
Thank you "ReasonOverFaith"

"I am shocked that you are unfamiliar with the parable of Hosephus and the ass:

Hosephus was a shepherd known for his piety. One day Hosephus was leading his flock across a shallow river, on his way to the market to offer them for sale. God decided to test Hosephus, and caused a mighty flood to sweep the flock away, never to be seen again. Hosephus, safe on the far shore atop his ass, watched helplessly as his livelihood disappeared in a pitiful, bleating frenzy of foam and fleece. He silently beseeched God for guidance.

After the last lamb had disappeared, Hosephus spurred his ass forward, all the way to his marketplace stall. As the other vendors watched in amazement, Hosephus dismounted from his ass and offered the animal for sale.

As word spread in the village, people came from miles around to see if what they heard was indeed true--That Hosephus the shepherd was showing his ass.

So, as time went on, the phrase, "He's showing his ass," was used to describe a situation where a person forges ahead after the unexpected loss of his revenue or resources. Originally meant as a compliment, over the centuries the use has evolved to describe a person who insists on standing by a principle after all of his proofs and evidence have been "washed away." It is now synonymous with "pigheaded," or "stubborn to the point of foolishness."

FOXP2 and the Evolution of Language

FOXP2 and the Evolution of Language: "The molecular evolution of FOXP2

Now let's move on to 2002 when Enard et al (authors include Svante Paabo & Anthony Monaco) (6) published a paper describing work that investigated the evolution of FOXP2. The first thing they note is the extremely highly conserved nature of FOXP2. We have already seen that in all cases, in all species investigated, the amino acid mutated in the KE family is identical. The major splice form of the protein encoded by the gene (it has a pair of alternatively spliced exons) is 715 amino acids long and the protein is identical with no differences whatsoever in chimpanzee, gorilla and rhesus monkey. The mouse FOXP2 differs in just one amino acid from these three species. However, human FOXP2 differs from gorilla, chimp and rhesus macaque in two further amino acids (and thus differs from mouse in three amino acids out of 715). So, in 75 million years since the divergence of mouse and chimpanzee lineages only one change has occurred in FOXP2, (and that equates to 150 million years of evolution as we don't know whether the mutation occurred in the mouse or the primate lineage) whilst in the six million years since the divergence of man and chimpanzee lineages two changes have occurred in the human lineage.

Fig 1: Silent and replacement nucleotide substitutions mapped on a phylogeny of primates. Bars represent nucleotide"

I posted this mainly for Fig 1 which shows very clearly the stability of FOXP2 until the Chimp Homo divergence.

Science and God

Why does anyone believe in G-d? - Discuss Atheism - Beliefnet Community: "Science and many religious people are unable to explain God because they both are looking in the wrong places to find God. Both science and some believers are looking for external evidence for a supernatural omnipotent alpha humanoid that exists outside the minds of believers. Those who are able to find God are those who are willing to look where the only evidence exists that is in the minds of believers.

Science has a hard time even finding experiments to do although the God Helmet at least is trying to establish a data point of where God exists in the brain. Science and skeptics in particular simply refuse to study the most important evidence for God that is available, that is the anecdotal testimony of what a believer is experiencing in church especially but whenever a believer feels hesh is in contact with God."