Collected

Home

Create collection

Browse collections

Join Collected

Username


Password


Forgot your password?


atheistblogroll

A collection of:

Atheist Blogroll blog feeds   

By:

Larro   

Visits:

25,002   

View:

 
2 favorites | Add to favorites |

EXCELSIOR, MOTHERFUCKERS!


ICED BORSCHT 28 Jan 2012, 2:37 am CET

Finally! THE DEBATE WE ALL NEED!

Related articles

—————————————————————– —————————————————————– —————————————————————–

The Daily Dose of Dumb


The Radula 28 Jan 2012, 2:27 am CET

This is going around FB:
Now I can never hear this song (aka Earth's Anthem) again without ROTFLMAO.

Could a moon base be a probable event


Spewing Truth in the face of Lies 28 Jan 2012, 2:24 am CET

I’m sure everyone by now has heard Newt Gingrich’s plan to establish a moon base by the year 2020. Well, not so much a plan.

I’d love for this to happen but I understand the realities of it and I doubt it will happen by 2020, at least not if it’s just the United States doing it.

But click here to read the article and watch the video.

In it they make a good point. To sell this in congress there will have to be relevance in every state.

I counter that the Apollo program did have activity in EVERY state as well as having a public/private collaboration. My uncle was an engineer at EG&G and helped design seals used in the Apollo spacecraft. That was here in Rhode Island!

So we could make a manned base on the moon. But I say lets spend the money on what Dr. DeGrasse-Tyson mentions, Science, Technlogy, Engineering and Math programs. Lets train the scientists and engineers for the remainder of the 21st century. Because what they might come up with could change the game considerably once they get out into the field.

The Lucky Negro


Saint Brian's Chronicles 28 Jan 2012, 2:17 am CET

Just a short post this time. This situation with Gignritch and Romney is very interesting. It seems to me that they are almost unbelievaly starting to destroy the eventual primamry winner's chances in the general election. All the while, Obama is starting to rise, or perhaps I should say, rise faster since he has been rising a bit in recent weeks... What I particularily like is how the two of them, Fatso and Ken, are making each other look so amazingly incompetent. Moon bases and an eventual Lunar State, claiming the moon basically for the US? All that is going to do with your base of bottom-feeding vindictive ignoramuses is infuriate them! They HATE science! And now they think that you're a total flake! Which, hey, you are! Or would you prefer the Incredile Plastic Man with the ever-shifting stance on every issue that exists, who couldn't personify the uncaring rich more if he wore a monacle and a top hat? His version of 'I feel your pain' is 'I feel the pain of all those poor corporate people, who are more people than real people are, making their pain so much worse!' Plus, both of them are lying and getting caught in lies here, each and every day, which eventually even percolates down through a christian mind shield if it's apparent and obvious enough. Which these are. Right now, the two of them both look like screaming liars and utter hypocrites. More so than usual even, I mean. Plus plus, and to me this is the sweetest part, the economy is improving in spite of all the best (worst) efforts of the republicans to eep it in a stinking mess! And if that is happening, noody's going to come close to Obama in the general. They'll have no chance. How did Barack Hussein Obama ever get so lucky? Anyhow, assuming that Obama wins again, can you even *imagine* the rage and frustration on the religious right? They'll be gnawing off their own feet! The whole tea party will dissolve down into a pool of it's own rancid venom... I can't wait!

Comic Relief


ex-apologist 28 Jan 2012, 2:08 am CET

Nailed it.
Exapologist

Bananas!


The Greenbelt 28 Jan 2012, 1:26 am CET

cover of It's true: you can learn something every day. I had no idea that O. Henry coined the term "banana republic" - and possibly less that it originally referred to Honduras having only one export.

Fresh from The Greenbelt

Ron Paul, Racist Crap and the Pointlessness of the Protest Vote


Strangely Blogged 28 Jan 2012, 1:23 am CET

It turns out that it's been corroborated: Ron Paul did proof and sign off on the racist nonsense that was in the newsletters that went out under his name. Dave Weigel points out that Paul supporters don't seem to know or care, mostly because Paul is a protest vote.
I think this might explain a lot of the "yeah but he's against the drug war" arguments, which seem to rest hopes on the idea that if you cast a protest vote, somehow your protest will register and people will know what you meant.
I don't understand this thinking. There's no logical reason a vote for Ron Paul will be assumed to be a vote against foreign escapades, or against the racist drug war. For all anyone knows, it could mean you really, really grok von Hayek or think the gold standard makes sense, or, I don't know know, just agree with Rand Paul, and for that matter, me, that the TSA has no business touching your junk.  It seems sort of like passive-aggressive voting, in a way. The Field of Candidates: "But what did we do?"  Angry Voter: "Oooohhhh, YOU KNOW!"
But the answer is really: they don't know. The message voting is supposed to send is: this is the person I think would best fill the job I'm voting them in for, out of all the people whose names I could have gone for. So when a certain number of votes gets cast for a Ron Paul, there just isn't any way to tell if you identify with Stormfront or NORML. We have to guess that any or all of his ideas are legitimized to an extent.  And that will include that really cheap, crappy, "profiting from racism and homophobia" stuff.
Sigh; but that's just my opinion. You all just do what you're going to do. It's a free country.

Apologetics class


The Secular Outpost 28 Jan 2012, 12:42 am CET

A high school senior emailed me and asked me to answer a bunch of questions, for her "Apologetics class." Here are the questions and my short replies, for amusement value:
What is the origin of the universe and man? 
As physicists and biologists describe it. 
What is the purpose of mankind? 
We're not tools: not the sort of things that have a predetermined purpose. 
What is satisfaction and how do I obtain it? (how can I be happy) 
This probably does not have a useful answer applicable to everyone. 
What has gone wrong with the world? (Why is there evil in the world - Why do bad things happen to good people) 
The way the world works is indifferent to human flourishing or suffering. 
What is the solution to the problems we face? (what happens when I fail and how do I make things right) 
There is no single meaningful answer to such a question. 
What is right and wrong? (is moral truth absolute or relative) 
Right and wrong is due to the interests of and agreements between sentient beings. 
Is there a universal moral law? (does everyone know the difference between right and wrong) 
No.
What happens at death? (Where are we going when we die- How do we know and what does it look like, and if it is heaven-then how do we get there) 
Life ends. 
What does your faith do with the person of Jesus? 
Faith?
Too bad I'm not going to get to see the canned apologetic comparisons between "faith"s designed to make Christianity the One True Faith.

Letting Go of God - Julia Sweeney


Atheist Movies 28 Jan 2012, 12:33 am CET

In this single live performance which was recorded at the Ars Nova Theatre in New York City, Julia Sweeney tells her path out of religion and how she became a more skeptical person and an atheist in humorous monologue format.
I had posted the audiobook version of the show here.
File Name ..........: Julia Sweeney - Letting Go Of God.avi Total Size (MB) ....: 1.807,42 MB Video Length .......: 02:10:10 https://www.rapidshare.com/files/1690719852/Julia.Sweeney-Letting.Go.Of.God.part1.rar https://www.rapidshare.com/files/4186077503/Julia.Sweeney-Letting.Go.Of.God.part2.rar [Buy it]

Indiana creationist bill passes committee | NCSE


European Alliance for Rational Thought 28 Jan 2012, 12:27 am CET

Indiana creationist bill passes committee NCSE

Wierenga on Plantinga, Defeaters, and the EAAN


ex-apologist 28 Jan 2012, 12:07 am CET

In "Plantinga's 'Defeat'" (draft -- don't cite) Edward Wierenga evaluates Plantinga's analysis of defeaters. Near the end of the paper, he raises some interesting criticisms of Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism.
Exapologist

The Real Problem WIth Craig's Version of Reformed Epistemology (Slightly Revised)


ex-apologist 28 Jan 2012, 12:03 am CET

In Reasonable Faith, Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview, and in several places online (here, for example),  William Lane Craig endorses a modified version of Plantinga's Reformed Epistemology. According to Craig's version, the Christian can know that Christianity is true in the basic (i.e.,immediate, non-inferential) way by means of "the self-authenticating witness of the Holy Spirit". As Craig summarizes his view:
. . . the experience of the Holy Spirit is veridical and unmistakable (though not necessarily irresistible or indubitable) for him who has it; that such a person does not need supplementary arguments or evidence in order to know and to know with confidence that he is in fact experiencing the Spirit of God; that such experience does not function in this case as a premiss in any argument from religious experience to God, but rather is the immediate experiencing of God himself; that in certain contexts the experience of the Holy Spirit will imply the apprehension of certain truths of the Christian religion, such as "God exists," "I am condemned by God," "I am reconciled to God," "Christ lives in me," and so forth; that such an experience provides one not only with a subjective assurance of Christianity's truth, but with objective knowledge of that truth; and that arguments and evidence incompatible with that truth are overwhelmed by the experience of the Holy Spirit for him who attends fully to it.
Although both Plantinga's and Craig's models of warrant-basic belief in Christian theism make essential reference to the activity of the Holy Spirit, Craig's model differs from Plantinga's in terms of the means by which the Holy Spirit's activity generates such belief:
Plantinga's model involves crucially what is usually called the inner witness of the Holy Spirit. In his model the Holy Spirit functions on the analogy of a cognitive faculty, producing beliefs in us. I myself prefer to think of the Spirit's witness either as a form of literal testimony or else as part of the experiential circumstances which serve to ground belief in God and the great truths of the Gospel. In either case His deliverances are properly basic.(ibid)
Furthermore, Craig is a bit more explicit than Plantinga with respect to whether he thinks such Holy-Spirit-generated belief can function as an intrinsic defeater-defeater for objections to Christianity:
Plantinga does not to my knowledge clearly commit himself to the view that the witness of the Holy Spirit is an intrinsic defeater-defeater. Such a thesis is independent of the model as presented. But I have argued that the witness of the Spirit is, indeed, an intrinsic defeater of any defeaters brought against it. For it seems to me inconceivable that God would allow any believer to be in a position where he would be rationally obliged to commit apostasy and renounce Christ. It seems to me rather that in such a situation a loving God would intensify the Spirit's witness in such a way that it becomes an intrinsic defeater of the defeaters such a person faces. (Ibid. Emphasis mine.)
Two common complaints about William Lane Craig's "Holy Spirit epistemology" (to borrow an expression from Michael Martin) are that (i) it's a form of fideism and that (ii) it's an unacceptable form of dogmatism. According to (i), Craig is asserting that one can know that Christianity is true without evidence (or at least without sufficient evidence). According to (ii), Craig inappropriately asserts that one can and should believe that Christianity is true even if no arguments for God are persuasive, and even if there is very strong evidence against Christianity. I think that both criticisms of Craig's Holy Spirit epistemology fail. However, I think there is a successful criticism of it that grants the failure of (i) and (ii).
First, though, here is why I think criticisms (i) and (ii) fail. The basic problem is that both fail to appreciate the core idea of Craig's Holy Spirit epistemology: Craig takes the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit to present the truth of the Christian faith in such a way that it's on a par with ordinary Moorean facts (or at least beliefs roughly analogous to such in terms of force, vivacity, and warrant. Hereafter I leave this qualification implicit). That is, (following Plantinga) Craig thinks the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit presents the truth of the Christian faith in such a way that it's on a par with the claims that I exist, that material objects exist, and that there are other minds besides my own. This comes out in the analogies he mentions in his discussions of his account. Thus, he appeals to Plantinga's "purloined letter case" to illustrate the notion of an intrinsic defeater-defeater, which can be summarized as follows:
The Purloined Letter Case: Suppose I have means, motive, and opportunity to steal an embarrassing letter that was in fact stolen from the office of my department chair. There is also very strong evidence against me (e.g., I've been known to steal in the past; a trustworthy colleague says he saw someone who looks like me enter the Dean's Office on the day of the incident, etc.). However, I have a clear and vivid memory of being alone in the woods all day on the day of the incident. In this case, I'm rational to retain my belief that I didn't steal the letter because of my memory, even without propositional evidence and argument that could defeat the reasons brought against me; My belief that I was alone in the woods all day on the day of the incident is thus an intrinsic defeater-defeater of the claim that I stole the letter.
Or consider the illustration he offers here, regarding the certainty that one is alive:
The "I'm Alive" Case: "Pick any belief that you hold confidently and then imagine a state of affairs in which that belief would be false if that state of affairs obtained. For example, I am absolutely sure that I am alive; but if someone were to discover a grave containing my bones, then that belief would be falsified. Should I worry?"
In both cases, it's not prima facie implausible that the corresponding beliefs (that I was alone in the woods all day; that I'm alive, etc.) are justified or warranted in the basic (i.e., direct, non-inferential) way. Furthermore, it's not prima facie implausible to think that in such cases, the force, vivacity, and warrant such beliefs enjoy is so strong that they can function as intrinsic defeaters of very strong evidence against them. And Craig (following Plantinga) is arguing that Christian belief, when grounded in attentiveness to the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit, is sufficiently relevantly similar to such cases in terms of force, vivacity, and warrant.  Therefore, since the latter can function as intrinsic defeaters to virtually any evidence that comes into conflict with them, so, likewise, can the former.  
Given this sketch of Craig's variation on Plantinga's Reformed Epistemology, we can see why criticisms (i) and (ii) fall far short of being persuasive. First, criticism (i) is less than persuasive, since most will not find the acceptance of ordinary Moorean facts to be a form of fideism. So if the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit presents the truth of Christianity in such a way that it's on a par with ordinary Moorean facts, then such people should likewise grant that acceptance of the former is not a form of fideism.
Criticism (ii) is less than persuasive as well. For it's not obviously inappropriate to accept Moorean facts even in the face of seemingly good arguments to the contrary. So if the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit presents the truth of Christianity in such a way that it's on a par with ordinary Moorean facts, then it might well be appropriate for such people to likewise accept the former in the face of seemingly good arguments to the contrary. (At least I grant this for the sake of argument.)
Although I find criticisms (i) and (ii) less than persuasive, I think there is a simple yet decisive criticism of Craig's Holy Spirit epitemology: at least for the majority of Christians, the Holy Spirit (if such there be) fails to present the truth of Christianity in such a way that it's anywhere near being on a par with ordinary Moorean facts. In this regard, Craig's Holy Spirit epistemology suffers from a key problem shared by Plantinga's account of warranted-basic Christian belief. Therefore, as with Plantinga's account, Craig's account fails to show how Christian belief can be warrant-basic -- at least in the sense that Christian belief enjoys sufficient warrant to function as an intrinsic defeater-defeater for strong objections to Christian theism.
Exapologist

Album Of The Day: Week 4


Kelosophy 28 Jan 2012, 12:01 am CET

Sunday (22/01): Opeth - Blackwater ParkMonday (23/01): sleepmakeswaves - ...and so we destroyed everythingTuesday (24/01): Cathedral - Forest Of EquilibriumWednesday (25/01): Porcupine Tree - Fear Of A Blank PlanetThursday (26/01): Argus - Boldly Stride The DoomedFriday (27/01): Black Tusk - Set The DialSaturday (28/01): Tool - Ænima

Friday fabulous flower - a Bignon


The Phytophactor 27 Jan 2012, 11:50 pm CET

Bignoniacae, the bignon family, are largely tropical trees and lianas, and most of them have large showy flowers adapted to different pollinators.  Catalpa trees and trumpet creeper are our temperate members of this family.  Here's one of my captive tropical bignons, Tecomaria capensis, a species widely used as an ornamental in warmer climates.  This is just such a classic example of a flower adapted to hummingbird pollination.  It's fairly large, it's oriented laterally, it's bright red, has ample nectar, and is scentless.  The corolla is highly asymmetrical with the lateral and lower corolla lobes folded back and an over arching upper corolla lobe.  The stigma is exerted to contact the bird's head as it arrives, and as the bird moves in closer to get it's beak and tongue down into the corolla tube, then the head contacts the two pair of anthers picking up more pollen.  It's a great showy plant and a cheerful mid-winter display.

God Claims: An Index


Answers in Genesis BUSTED! 27 Jan 2012, 11:15 pm CET

So, I'm currently working on a book called An Index to Theistic Claims which will be kind of like An Index to Creationist Claims except focusing only on god belief. I've already written about 70 pages of the book itself, here is my table of contents. Have I missed any arguments or claims made by theists? Leave a comment if I have. A. Purely Logical and Miscellaneous Arguments for God’s Existence 1. The Classic Ontological Argument 2. The Modal Ontological Argument 3. Descartes’ Conceptual Argument 4. The Argument from Numbers 5. The Moral Argument 6. The Argument from Consciousness 7. The Argument from Personal Experience 8. The Argument from Common Consent 9. Pascal’s Wager 10. If You Don’t Stand for Something, You’ll Fall for Anything B. Presuppositionalist Arguments 1. The Transcendental Argument 2. Inductive Reasoning Presumes the Existence of God 3. Without God, You Cannot Trust Your Own Thoughts. 4. Plantinga’s Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism. C. First-Cause/Cosmological Arguments. 1. The Kalam Cosmological Argument 2. Swinburne’s Cosmological Argument 3. The Argument from Contingency D. Design Arguments 1. Paley’s Watchmaker Argument 2. The Evolution/Creation Dichotomy 3. Dembski’s Explanatory Filter 4. Irreducible Complexity 5. Information Requires a Creator 6. Only God Could Have Created Life 7. The Argument from Lawfulness 8. The Fine-Tuning Argument 9. The Argument from Beauty in Physical Laws 10. The Argument from an Intelligible Universe E. Arguments from Holy Scripture 1. Arguments from Biblical Prophecy: 1.1 World Events Predicted 1.2 Claims of Advanced Scientific Knowledge in the Bible 1.3 Old Testament Prophecies of Jesus 2. C.S. Lewis’ Trilemma: Lunatic, Liar, or Lord? 3. Q&A on the Arguments for the Resurrection of Jesus 4. Arguments from Qu’ranic Prophecy: 4.1 World Events Predicted 4.2 Claims of Advanced Scientific Knowledge in Qu’ran F. Q&A on The Problem of Evil G. Common Anti-Atheist Claims and Rhetoric

Photo: Snake dead on the way


Lifecruiser 27 Jan 2012, 11:07 pm CET

I captured a snake on photo at our summer island (Gotland) once, which I think is a Swedish grass snake (snok in Swedish) - or Natrix natrix, family: Colubridae. We have two subspecies: N. n. natrix and N. n. gotlandica - which not even many Swedes know actually.

gotland-snake

I think this one is a N. n. gotlandica, but it’s hard to tell, they can look rather different from each other, up to 40 percent are black without the characteristic yellow spots on the neck - and there sometimes are black European Viper (huggorm in Swedish), Vipera berus, too.

See that it’s blurry, the photo? That’s because I was not totally convinced it really was dead and not was the more dangerous Viper. I do have a fear for snakes, so I was trying to take a good photo for a long time, but I was shaking too much… ha ha…

It was not I who killed this snake - in fact: all snakes in Sweden are protected species. I think it might have been increasing a little the last couple of years, because we even saw the farm cats playing with a snake at the farm yard once.

This also reminded me that one should always do research about a countries dangerous species before going there as a tourist. It’s always best to be prepared.

©Lifecruiser Love Swedish Nature  

Copyright © 2012 Lifecruiser. This Feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this material in your news aggregator, the site you are looking at is guilty of copyright infringement. Please contact Captain Lifecruiser at lifecruiser.com so we can take legal action immediately. Plugin by Taragana

Praise Jesus or die from DRUG AIDS


Cubik's Rube 27 Jan 2012, 11:00 pm CET

I only discovered Dusty recently, and I’m ready to join his cult. Here he is talking us through the fantastic Christian propaganda of a Chick tract:

 

Look, I’ve posted this already, but the happy runs so deep:)


It's About Time 27 Jan 2012, 10:38 pm CET

This is something i posted on Google+ , and shared via ifttt :

Look, I've posted this already, but the happy runs so deep:)
Terry Jones, the Python who oversaw Life of Brian, to direct 'sci-fi farce' in which remaining comics voice a group of aliens

Wish Qantas would do this:)))) marvelous stuff!


It's About Time 27 Jan 2012, 10:38 pm CET

This is something i posted on Google+ , and shared via ifttt :

Wish Qantas would do this:)))) marvelous stuff!
When the Finnair cabin crew on flight AY201 to New Delhi decided to do a Bollywood dance routine on the flight to mark India's Republic Day, they didn't expect to become a YouTube hit.

Laconica Fortuita


Diaphanitas 27 Jan 2012, 10:09 pm CET

"Laconica Fortuita" "Random Laconics"
One particular problem that I see with the abortion debate is the belief that the issue would be solved by coming up with an answer based on the concept of "Theories of Life" ("when does life/personhood begin?"). Science is often seen as the tool to come up with an answer, but this is missing the point. The concept of "Theories of Life" involve core values, most of them religious, and thus by their nature are incommensurable with one another. An answer would not be agreed upon, and even if one could be, the only real option for a woman that is taken seriously is "carry the fetus to term." Thus, "when does life/personhood begin?" becomes a nice way of saying, "When should a woman be an incubator on legs, and a fetus be an intraspecific parasite with alienable rights?"
More