Pharyngula

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | October 18, 2009 10:47 PM

Firs.....

bah just kidding.

Where are the trolls tonight. My teeth feel dull.

Posted by: SC, OM | October 18, 2009 10:50 PM

Owlmirror may have had the thousandth, but I got in the very last, a train sex scene...

:P

Posted by: SC, OM | October 18, 2009 10:56 PM

Aw, yay! I was just listening to the CD you made for me! 'night!

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | October 18, 2009 11:00 PM

Aw, yay! I was just listening to the CD you made for me! 'night!

*big smile*

He was in Mpls a couple weeks ago, but I couldn't justify a trip after having been there the previous weekend to visit fam (and hear the SPCO)

If anyone has a chance, go see Franti and Spearhead. Cathartic experience (and this has been five concerts--all amazing experiences. Fun while simultaneously intensely emotional)

Sleep well all!!!!!!

(and SC, I'll call in a week or so--my monthly minutes are up for about a week and I went $150 over the first month of the move)

Posted by: Mozglubov | October 18, 2009 11:11 PM

Last chance to comment before the comment registration kicks back in and makes it impossible to do so again...

How's the book coming, PZ?

Posted by: Sphere...Coupler | October 18, 2009 11:21 PM

Tis, good to read you are in good spirits. My belated condolences. Bet that guy drinks your brand of milk from now on.

Posted by: 'Tis Himself | October 18, 2009 11:39 PM

Not another unending thread. Will our suffering never cease? However, as Tim Minchin points out:

Some People Have It Worse Than Me

Posted by: Janine, Vile Bitch, OM | October 19, 2009 12:02 AM

Finally this buggy abomination lets me through!

Jadetawk, I loved the subtlety of that site. Clever how there is an image of Karl Marx over Obama's left shoulder. Though it is a game, what came to mind was The Turner Dairies. Yes, I think there is a huge overlap between the teabaggers and the militia movement of the last thirty years.

Posted by: strange gods before me, OM | October 19, 2009 12:06 AM

I got a 403 error on Moveable Type. I backed up to the sign-in page, pressed Shift+Ctrl+R in Firefox and tried signing in again. This time it worked. This Shift+Refresh method forces the browser to clear the cache as it fetches the page again. No guarantees that it will work for you too.

K'NAAN performs Waving Flag

Posted by: Sphere...Coupler | October 19, 2009 12:07 AM

Just checking, so if the lights go out again and I turn into a forced lurker please don't think less of me, rather don't think of me at all, I'll be lurking by and by.

Posted by: SpriteSuzi | October 19, 2009 12:25 AM

Smoggy,
Why? Why? Why? I've now got "how lucky we are" stuck in my brain, and I can't make it stop!!! I've been in NZ almost 4 years now, but somehow I'd never heard that song before, although I have heard of Fred Dagg...

A truly annoying little mind-worm of a song, but I must admit we are very lucky! It was a beautiful spring day here in the Far North :)

Posted by: Alex | October 19, 2009 1:15 AM

How long is this going to be kept up? My god...

Posted by: Standard curve | October 19, 2009 2:03 AM

The Phelps clan swings through San Diego. Their presence is dwarfed by the counter-protests.

http://lastblogonearth.com/2009/10/17/hateful-religious-zealots-provide-for-a-teachable-moment/

http://lastblogonearth.com/2009/10/16/photos-from-westboro-protest/

Posted by: AJ Milne | October 19, 2009 2:41 AM

Can't decide if this is seriously scary, or fucking hilariously bad.

Me, I'm a gonna go fer both.

But let us again review what constitutes dastardly deeds in the executive branch, 'n a terrifying threat to the civil liberties of all 'Merkins:

1) Throwing people with darkish skin 'n beards in jail for most of a decade with no recourse to public trial, publically and unashamedly saying that this was precisely because you didn't have sufficient evidence to keep them there if their cases ever actually went before a proper judge?

Whatever. That sorta thing, that's A-OK, babe. Habeas corpus shmabeas shmorpus.

2) Attempting modest reforms to a horrifically Byzantine and generally wasteful, messy, and wantonly cruel health care insurance system?

Fascism! To the barricades! Load yer muskets! Why, what could be more evil than modestly suggesting healthcare may actually in some remote way be a public good and attempting in pathetically piecemeal fashion to make it somewhat more generally available!? 21st Century Paul Revere, yer country needs you!

(/Just so's we're clear, here...)

Posted by: boygenius | October 19, 2009 2:49 AM

And now for a musical interlude...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYrdfFpxTXQ

Posted by: Peter McKellar | October 19, 2009 2:57 AM

If anyone even noticed my absence over the past week, I was down in Canberra visiting my 39 week pregnant daughter (last weekend) and ADSL was down the rest of the week. I was going to try to contact Kel and other pharynguloids but time didn't allow. I am looking at moving down there ASAP and will wander into the Wig and Pen when I move.

I can however report some success with PZ's secret atheist breeding program. Tyler Jacob was born on Monday 12th Oct and mother and son are both well (technically he was 1 day premmie but shows no problems). And it was only a three hour labour even though it was her first. I will report on the father's health when they pry him off the nitrous mask and he stops giggling enough to make sense...... ;)

Posted by: Bruce Gorton | October 19, 2009 3:10 AM

Not particularly tied to any comment but:
Catholic diocese files for bankruptcy
http://www.timeslive.co.za/news/world/article156674.ece

Posted by: Kel, OM | October 19, 2009 3:31 AM

I was going to try to contact Kel and other pharynguloids but time didn't allow. I am looking at moving down there ASAP and will wander into the Wig and Pen when I move.

When you do, we'll have to organise a Wig and Pen session sometime.

Posted by: Walton | October 19, 2009 3:54 AM

1) Throwing people with darkish skin 'n beards in jail for most of a decade with no recourse to public trial, publically and unashamedly saying that this was precisely because you didn't have sufficient evidence to keep them there if their cases ever actually went before a proper judge?

In a feeble attempt at justifying this policy from a legal perspective, the Bush Administration tried to argue, simultaneously, that (1) the detainees at Guantánamo were "enemy combatants" held outside US jurisdiction, so had no civil rights enforceable in the US courts; but (2) that the detainees were also "illegal combatants" and therefore did not have the rights of enemy POWs under the Geneva Convention. They essentially tried to place the detainees in a legal black hole where they would have no enforceable rights whatsoever. Thankfully, the Supreme Court realised this was bullshit.

I don't intend to be smug, however. In my own country, the UK, the government was detaining foreign terror suspects indefinitely without trial in Belmarsh Prison, until the House of Lords ruled that this was a violation of the Human Rights Act (A v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] UKHL 56).

Posted by: Kel, OM | October 19, 2009 4:24 AM

I'm not sure how much help I can be, I'm still pretty new to the business world and I've only been with the one company in that time. But when the time comes, I'll see what little knowledge I have of how things work down here can be of assistance to you.

Posted by: Peter Ashby | October 19, 2009 4:37 AM

@Smoggy

I'm with you mate, though can mine be a parsnip please? I want to show how immensely lucky I am.

BTW didn't John Clarke piss off over the ditch shortly after making that uplifting piece? seems he couldn't handle all that good luck.

Posted by: Peter McKellar | October 19, 2009 5:37 AM

Many thanks Tammy and others. Re evolution - I was aiming for a post-human with more fingers or maybe an uber-cortex but he seems to be human standard.

In fairness, where could I have obtained sufficient quantities of nuclear waste to make any difference anyway?

Kel, Its been about 15yrs since I lived in Canberra but I still have a few contacts - if I can help you instead, that works too ;)

Posted by: neon-elf.myopenid.com | October 19, 2009 7:19 AM

Peter McKellar @#40

Peter, I work in IT in Canberra. If you shoot me a resume I can pass it on to my manager. I don't know which areas we are hiring in right now, but it's one other avenue to try.

Email to:
linden(dot)wolfe(at)immi(dot)gov(dot)au
(trying to avoid spambots:-))

Now, I'll probably get spammed by fundies :-(

Posted by: Ryan F Stello | October 19, 2009 8:35 AM

Hey, does anyone else think Colin Clive was drunk as a skunk when he did this scene? Listen to him slur "simulacrum"

I thought they both were.
I mean, "Say-Line"?

Posted by: nigelTheBold | October 19, 2009 9:04 AM

@Peter McKellar --

Congratulations, Granddad! Thanks to you and your family for swelling the roles of the Atheist Horde.

(Shouldn't some troll be here posting about how atheists aren't reproducing, so we are doomed?)

Posted by: Peter McKellar | October 19, 2009 9:37 AM

Thanks neon elf, I will email u.

Knockgoats - this is why I should have paid more attention in chemistry. But never fear, I expect more grand-progeny and I should have sourced a supplier for colchicine by then :)

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | October 19, 2009 9:58 AM

An ugly metazoan trying to be cute.

And succeeding.

:-}

Posted by: Dianne | October 19, 2009 10:37 AM

I've been tempted to do this sort of thing. But I read non-threat to authority figures so strongly that they might just say, "Good point. We'll bring it up at the next TSA meeting."

Posted by: Lynna | October 19, 2009 11:22 AM

'Tis Himself @992 on the previous endless thread:

Hi, folks, I'm back.
I thank all of you for your kind wishes and good thoughts about my father's death. Thank you very much.
There was one funny thing that happened when I was in Wisconsin. I was sent to the store to get some milk. As I was putting it in the car a man walked by and noticed the license plate. "Are you from Connecticut?" he asked?
"Yes," replied I.
"What are you doing here in Wisconsin?"
"Buying a gallon of milk."
The look on his face was priceless.

I'm so glad to see you back, and in good form, 'Tis.
My brothers hiked to a highcountry lake that was still frozen. My brother, Jerry, sat on a rock and practiced casting with his flyfishing rod. Two hikers arrived on the scene and stood there watching for a few minutes:
Hiker: What are you doing?
Jerry: Ice fishing. [takes a swig from bottle of Jack Daniels]
Hikers: [Silence, followed by rapid departure from the scene.]

Posted by: Gregory Greenwood | October 19, 2009 11:56 AM

"You must mean andyet. Whatever did happen to him? You'd think he'd be back since registration is down."

Maybe he is busy attempting to reproduce. Quite possibly with himself.

Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | October 19, 2009 12:17 PM

Janine, VB @ # 16: I think there is a huge overlap between the teabaggers and the militia movement of the last thirty years.

Yup. For continuing updates & historical context, consult Orcinus.

Posted by: ~Pharyngulette~ | October 19, 2009 2:50 PM

Peter McKellar @32

Congrats on the new generation of atheists! Let no one brainwash him into theism.

Speaking of what evolution has brought us, I'm impressed by your daughter's 3-hour first labour! This is the sort of woman whose genes for smooth and non-life threatening childbirth should be scattered more generously throughout the human population! My poor sister's first child took over 40 hours to enter the world and since then, I've decided that I'll personally be ready to have kids when labour takes about as long to run as an episode of The Simpsons, and involves lashings of chocolate fudge and a foot massage. (This could explain my childfree status.)

Posted by: Sven DiMilo | October 19, 2009 3:25 PM

Ooo, sniny new subThread!!

Shit, I mised it...post # 11111 was this one.

12345 and/or bust!

Posted by: Sphere Coupler | October 19, 2009 4:44 PM

Sven, where's the link to your update?

So now that the cold has broken for a few short weeks(sometimes called Indian summer)The ravenous cousin to the lady bug (Coccinellidaehas) awoken and is conducting an attack on any structure resembling their native habitat.Which it seems is anything.If you are not aware of this scourge brought to us from the United States Agricultural Department then listen up...Several years back the USDA brought these Japanese beetle (Harmonia axyridis) back to the US in an attempt to control a aphid, this aphid being a pest to soybeans and other plants.These Jap beetles fucking bite they are not the passive cute lady bugs we all grew up with.They arrive by the millions find any crack to infest your home, short out your electronics, taste like shit,kill many native plants totally destroy any outside activity you my want to conduct in the nice weather, just a wonderful fucking job USDA.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonia_axyridis

Posted by: Dianne | October 19, 2009 5:27 PM

I've decided that I'll personally be ready to have kids when labour takes about as long to run as an episode of The Simpsons, and involves lashings of chocolate fudge and a foot massage.

It's called an elective c-section. You'll have to bring someone with you to provide the chocolate fudge and foot massage though.

Posted by: Drew | October 19, 2009 6:17 PM

Off topic in an off topic thread, but here's a clip of PZ on the Non-Prophets, talking about a Ardi the recently discovered hominid fossil.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ua4TB0S9buk

Posted by: Carlie | October 19, 2009 6:36 PM

It's called an elective c-section. You'll have to bring someone with you to provide the chocolate fudge and foot massage though.

But the recovery will kick your ass. It is not fun trying to shuffle around while feeling like all of your guts are likely to spill out at any moment.

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | October 19, 2009 7:39 PM

No cab? Bacon!!!

Posted by: Qwerty | October 19, 2009 9:38 PM

Ahhh, I finally got in to comment. And that's my comment.

My heart: It's still beating!!!

Posted by: Carlie | October 19, 2009 9:57 PM

Required link to the palindrome song.

Posted by: cicely | October 19, 2009 10:50 PM

I can't believe it took 76 posts before someone added the bacon.

Peter McKellar, congrats on the addition to your gene-line. Extra fingers or glow-in-the-dark eyes would be nice, but in my opinion, a 3-hour labor time is not to be sneezed at. May this be a heritable characteristic that will propagate widely, to the joy and relief of billions.

(Ya know, I don't believe I've ever heard a woman grieving that her labor was over too quickly....)

Posted by: Owlmirror | October 20, 2009 12:51 AM

L.A. Cigar -- too tragical!

Rats live on no evil star.

A lug nyr ahp -- Pharyngula?

Posted by: Kel, OM | October 20, 2009 1:20 AM

For those into palindromes, the ultimate name for a partner would be Naomi. That way every time you're having sex and you're moaning her name, that's a palindrome.

Posted by: Max Udargo | October 20, 2009 1:46 AM

I did not know that the human heart is more complex than any other part of the body. I always learn something new when I visit this blog.

Posted by: Kel, OM | October 20, 2009 3:13 AM

Sounds like a good idea, at least until the government imposes sex at noon taxes

The bastards. That will make me rise to vote, sir! Rise to vote against it.

Posted by: Kel, OM | October 20, 2009 4:28 AM

To be honest, I got both of mine from the Weird Al song. Just seemed appropriate in the context :P

Posted by: DJ | October 20, 2009 11:20 AM

I challenge you, my fellow free thinking atheists, to put on your fighting pants and Fight My Brute!

http://killa-jigg.mybrute.com

What better place to take out your frustrations than against my uberbrute?

Posted by: 386sx | October 20, 2009 12:50 PM

Ladies and gentlemen

Oooop I did it again. Ladies and gentlemen... and Floyd. (Sorry Floyd.)

Posted by: Alan B | October 20, 2009 2:32 PM

Blew me away first time I heard it.
Atmospheric photos too:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdSIlVZhsDw

Posted by: Alan B | October 20, 2009 2:45 PM

Shortest statement of identity:

"I'm I"

Posted by: Sven DiMilo | October 20, 2009 3:24 PM

Thread update

Posted by: 386sx | October 20, 2009 5:09 PM

Posted by: deadwildroses.wordpress.com | October 20, 2009 5:42 PM

Shameless self promotion or plea for sanity...

Ahhh, Alberta the only place in the world that the phrase 'changing the political landscape' means moving even further to the right.

You thought our anti evolution and homosexual bills were bad, just wait till the next great political party vies for power.

http://deadwildroses.wordpress.com/2009/10/20/lets-fight-fire-with-gasoline/

Only in Alberta.

Posted by: Kel, OM | October 20, 2009 6:40 PM

In a metal mood.

Pink-Boris

Rumors Of War-High On Fire

Oblivion-Mastodon

All very nice choices, especially Mastodon

Posted by: Britomart | October 20, 2009 6:59 PM

I got busy moving my daughter back to Boston and I missed the last thread, but I am sure you are all still wondering.

Alan Clarke, your webpage is still broken!!

Is he still around being dumb in other places ? I find it amazing that a computer professional would have a broken link on his web page for how many months now? Where else can we pester him?

Thank you kindly

Posted by: Sili | October 20, 2009 8:22 PM

En af dem der red med fane.

Yes, I suck at palindromes and other wordplay.

Does any of out resident palaeontologists care to comment on the paper that suggests that something like two thirds of all dinosaur species are in fact mischaracterised older or younger individuals of other known species. Or something like that. It was on the SGU and they interviewed the author, but he obviously thinks he's right. Funny guy, really, very odd speech pattern. Made him sound arrogantish.

Posted by: Owlmirror | October 20, 2009 9:21 PM

One possibility I had completely overlooked is that they could be undertracks; those are often much bigger than true tracks

Does "undertrack" mean the sort of track that results from feet that have picked up a lot of soft, sticky mud?

Wouldn't the distance between tracks be a way to tell if the foot size was being distorted in some way?

Posted by: SC, OM | October 21, 2009 12:56 AM

I feel like dancing...All Night Long.

I knew what that was going to be...and still clicked on it!

...

and then added it to my music file.

*hangs head*

Posted by: Ignis | October 21, 2009 1:18 AM

Pretty quiet in here now. I guess the party ended already. Drat. :(

Maybe we can get a bigger crowd on Friday night.

Posted by: SC, OM | October 21, 2009 1:32 AM

I like smaller, more intimate parties anyway. ;)

Posted by: Rorschach | October 21, 2009 1:51 AM

Alan B @ 99,

For anyone who cares, I am set to go for cardioversion this Thursday a.m., UK time

Good luck and all the best mate !! I'm sure it will all go well !

Posted by: Owlmirror | October 21, 2009 4:07 AM

Vatican makes bid for schismed franchise: "You think gays and women are unholy and inferior. Well, so do we! It's a match made in heaven!"

  http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/21/world/europe/21pope.html

Posted by: Ragutis | October 21, 2009 4:49 AM

Did someone say metal?

Guess what number I'm thinking of....

George Orwell in leather

Gutta lufe-a Svedeesh metel ... bork bork bork

Posted by: tom | October 21, 2009 8:15 AM

Alert: Skeptics In Trouble! There is a long thread about Ghosts following a "post" by Noted Paranormal Expert Dan Ackroyd on Huffington Post. It is notable for the well educated commenters who nevertheless are telling endless ghost stories and castigating the few skeptics for being closed minded. It is an interesting exercise in almost religion-free superstition. The skeptics need some assistance.

Posted by: SC, OM | October 21, 2009 10:37 AM

I was off to work at the end of the Horror thread, wanted to find you a vid of that song, but it really doesnt seem to be out there, best I could find was this:

You're sweet. Thanks.

(I've had the music since the CD came out several years ago, but my iPod isn't working. *pout*)

Posted by: a_ray_in_dilbert_space | October 21, 2009 10:51 AM

Owlmirror says, "Vatican makes bid for schismed franchise: "You think gays and women are unholy and inferior. Well, so do we! It's a match made in heaven!""

Hmmm....Loss of Church property...$20 million

Cost of throwing out all those Prayer books...$2 million

The thought of a homophobic bigot taking a communion wafer from a had that 5 minutes ago was up the ass of an alter boy...priceless...disgusting and sad, but priceless.

Posted by: Matt Heath | October 21, 2009 11:00 AM

The RCC making a grab for reactionary Anglo-Catholics is probably a very good thing. The reactionary evangelical Anglicans also want out which leaves an established Church of England consisting of wooly-minded but liberal and social-justice-minded Jolly Nice Chaps. Cameron's new government will probably think they are a bunch of Bolsheviks and, YAY, disestablishment.

Posted by: SC, OM | October 21, 2009 11:02 AM

Battery die (these can be replaced) or HD died? I have my second battery ready to put in my G3 iPod.

Seems to be working fine, but no sound. :(

Posted by: phantomreader42 | October 21, 2009 11:21 AM

Sven De Milo @ #101:

Nobody's mentioned Ozzy's prayer?
Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas!

I prefer
"Oh, evil Satan
Oscillate my metalic
sonatas live, ho"

(not original, from the game Kingdom Of Loathing)

Posted by: bc23.5 | October 21, 2009 11:49 AM

Metal? You mean like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WIB6AMaU10
Also, if anyone could tell me how to get my links to not show the url, I would think that was dandy.

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | October 21, 2009 11:55 AM

out which leaves an established Church of England consisting of wooly-minded but liberal and social-justice-minded Jolly Nice Chaps. Cameron's new government will probably think they are a bunch of Bolsheviks and, YAY, disestablishment.

Interesting perspective.

Horner (and, for that matter, Bakker) is also a fairly shameless publicity hound, and frankly I'm never sure any more when he means what he's saying and when he's just stirring the pot.

He probably doesn't mean it when he (and nobody else on the planet) says Tyrannosaurus was an obligate scavenger (…when adult).

Probably.

Also, if anyone could tell me how to get my links to not show the url, I would think that was dandy.

<a href="URL here">Like this.</a>

Posted by: Owlmirror | October 21, 2009 12:14 PM

Also, if you check out the next two pages of the book after following my link @#141, Prothero posts a "kill curve" (after Poag 1997, says the caption, which is "Roadblocks on the kill curve: Testing the Raup hypothesis", Palaios 12:582-590), where the late Eocene impacts are, again, shown as having almost no effect on species diversity.

Although that curve confuses me a bit, since it has Vredefort and Sudbury along with Chicxulub, and as far as I can tell (with an admittedly brief Wiki check), both of those two occurred before the evolution of metazoans. So I'm not sure how an estimate of nearly 100% species killed could be made.

Posted by: Sven DiMilo | October 21, 2009 1:33 PM

Yeah, I knew a fish-taxonomy aspirant in grad school who had to go back and re-do his whole thesis when it turned out that throughout he was describing sexes as separate species.

Posted by: bc23.5 | October 21, 2009 8:20 PM

David @ 142 It works, thank you! I searched for it in the tubes but I don't even know what it's name is?

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | October 21, 2009 11:15 PM

Back to our fictional opera. Act 1, scene 1. Opens in the Pharyngula saloon, presided over by a buxom lady of indeterminate age, with a computer in the middle of the bar.

Already sounds a bit too much like the HIDEOUS La Fanciulla del West

Posted by: MrFire | October 22, 2009 6:15 AM

*raises naive hand*

How does Skeptoid compare to SGU?

Posted by: Sili | October 22, 2009 6:48 AM

I like SGU enough to listen to it, but I certainly won't give it ten thumbs.

They can be extraordinarily annoying and in-jokey. And spend ages waffling about some subject which they themselves admit they have no understanding of. I can do that myself!

But when they do get an expert on, it gets really good, yes.

Best podcast (of the few I listen to - even though PeeZed keeps expanding that list) is hands down Are We Alone for the SETI Institute.

The Guardian's Science Weekly Podcast is very good too.

Posted by: MrFire | October 22, 2009 8:42 AM

I knew what that was going to be...and still clicked on it!

No need to be ashamed.

In theory, I'm a happily married straight man.

In practice...well, there's Lionel Richie.

How about another musical interlude - and masterclass in glorious 80s awfulness - from Modern Talking?

P.S. Ignis? Are you my Latinate alter-ego?

Posted by: aratina cage | October 22, 2009 11:45 AM

Did all you people who have been awared the OM know that you were awarded it for being "abrasive".
At least that is what a moron called Bilbo has being saying over an M & Ks blog, The Intersection.

Where is Ken Cope, anyway? I'm sure he would put that windbag Bilbo in his place.

Posted by: Rorschach | October 22, 2009 12:01 PM

Where is Ken Cope, anyway?

Seconded !

Posted by: Walton | October 22, 2009 12:05 PM

The fact that Bilbo makes McCarthy look intelligent should stop you all worrying to much about it.

Which McCarthy? Jenny or Senator Joe?

Posted by: Matt Penfold | October 22, 2009 12:11 PM

W

hich McCarthy? Jenny or Senator Joe?

I had Anthony in mind. He is a regular commentator over at the Intersection. I believe his lips have now become attached to M & K's backside he has been kissing them so much.

Though either Joe or Jenny work just as well.

Posted by: Feynmaniac | October 22, 2009 12:22 PM

The McCarthy name sure does seem to be getting a bad reputation...

Posted by: Janine, Vile Bitch, OM | October 22, 2009 12:29 PM

Posted by: Matt Penfold| October 22, 2009 12:22 PM

I just want to add that rather than abrasive, I find most OMs to be rather cuddly.

As long as a you are not here making idiotic defences of religion, creationism, homophobia etc. In other words, if you behave like a civilised human being they are cuddly.

Yeah, just avoid feeding us after midnight and do not get any of us wet. Also, never interrupt our initiation orgies.

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | October 22, 2009 12:36 PM

I find most OMs to be rather cuddly.

Only when I'm freshly shorn.

And I'm not right now SO DON'T FUCK WITH ME.

Or at least, don't hug me.

Posted by: Carlie | October 22, 2009 1:02 PM

Did all you people who have been awarded the OM know that you were awarded it for being "abrasive".

This is actually fabulous, because if I come off as an abrasive punk here, that means that no one IRL will ever even think to connect my online persona to my fluffy cuddly passive "let's-all-get-along" meatself, regardless of how uncommon my name is. Mwoo-ah-ha-ha!

Posted by: JeffreyD | October 22, 2009 1:24 PM

In general, I find the OM recipients to be rather nicer than the average poster, myself included. The OMs do love playing with trolls, but are more likely to engage someone in a long discussion and try to teach. Unlike the delightful Carlie, I am much worse in real life than I am on here. Hard to believe, eh? (smile)

Ciao y'all

Posted by: Rorschach | October 22, 2009 1:38 PM

I'm not an OM, but there is a reason for my moniker, and I am a bit like that, at least at work when it's needed...:-)

Posted by: Alan B | October 22, 2009 1:59 PM

Re #122

Hi Rorschach - Seemed to go fine. Arrived 07:30, asked my address 17 times. Had part of my chest shaved and the loose hairs picked up by sticky tape. Wheeled into the room where every thing happens by 09:20. Recovered from the sedative around 10:20. Home before 13:00.

According to the specialist it needed only one go and the heart in back in rhythm. No alcohol tonight to celebrate (SHAME). Could get some BACON out of the freezer ...

Posted by: Janine, Vile Bitch, OM | October 22, 2009 2:09 PM

My comment was deleted a second time. I think that M&K do suffer from tha vapours.

Posted by: aratina cage | October 22, 2009 2:20 PM

I responded to Bilbo, saying this; "Sastra is abrasive? Thanks for the laughs." I also used the moniker of Janine OM. How uncivil it must have been, it was deleted.

The nerve of those people (M&K, not OMs)! Perhaps their aversion is because Sastra is a Pharyngulord. Ho-hum, I nominate Bilbo for a BM.

Posted by: Janine, Vile Bitch, OM | October 22, 2009 2:26 PM

...since moving to North Dakota, my inner slut has died.

Not dead but hibernating.

Posted by: IaMoL | October 22, 2009 2:33 PM

It's a circle jerk at Discover comments with Gilt the lone defender of sanity. Kwok has made an appearance without marionetting Frank McCourt's corpse for once and Bilbo is doing his best Igor as slobbering sycophant impression. Some people deserve to be cock-punched daily.

Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | October 22, 2009 2:37 PM

There's a principle behind this I'm straining to name... Somethin' like the Peter Principle for wannabe tutors of internet/culture war etiquette...

Short form: those who whine most steadily about 'civility' are about the last people on the planet from whom you'd actually want to be taking lessons in such niceties...

we already have a principle like that. The very appropriately named Mooney's Law. :-)

Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | October 22, 2009 2:45 PM

apparently that was a double brianfart. it's Auffangbecken

I'm going offline until after coffee :-p

Posted by: Alan B | October 22, 2009 5:11 PM

"Share and Enjoy"

[For newcomers, this is the next post in an ad hoc series looking at YEC and Flood Geology through articles and papers produced by YEC Flood Geologists. Since they are unwilling or unable to give us a coherent explanation, this is an attempt to reconstruct it. The writer is a retired industrial chemist and currently a "mature" student from the UK, most of the way through a distance learning Geosciences degree.]

See also #700 on the Horror Train thread.

Just to get people's minds back into gear (mine especially) I would like to get you thinking about how YEC flood geologists are going to get around the problems raised by the British/European Model or, to their adversaries, the "Recolonisation Model” that I have outlined previously.

Imagine [just very briefly, please]. You have had pointed out by your own people (strongly affirming to be YEC) that on many points the geological record is in conflict with the traditional flood geology model of Whitcomb and Morris of “The Genesis Flood” fame. The Precambrian to beginning of the Quaternary flood duration just is not consistent with what you see when you get out into the "field" and examine the rocks themselves.

How are you going to handle the situation? You can, of course, “excommunicate” the offenders – say they are beyond the pale – warn people about what they write. In sadness, of course:

”It is the sad duty of AiG to point out where otherwise conservative evangelicals have compromised on the truth of Scripture beginning with Genesis.”

(AiG quoted in #700, Horror Train)

Answers in Genesis, taking on themselves the role of defenders of the traditional position, dislike the “Strong Recolonisers” because they move the goal posts back to before 6000 years. They also distrust the “moderate Recolonisers” who do not because by insisting in looking at science (horrors!) they leave the door open for skeptics.

(Alan B from #700 Horror Train)

They don't really want to do it but they must to protect the flock ...

So, putting yourself in their shoes, how would you respond to this threat to the faithful?

Posted by: Sphere Coupler | October 22, 2009 5:42 PM

Allen B, good to hear you're back *in phase*
oh and as per the last time we wrote...It doesn't sound so bad when spoken by a fowel caricature (DD).

So, putting yourself in their shoes, how would you respond to this threat to the faithful?

Hide under a rock?

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | October 22, 2009 6:29 PM

David @ 142 It works, thank you! I searched for it in the tubes but I don't even know what it's name is?

Erm... it's part of the language called HTML (Hypertext Markup Language). The language Internet pages are written in. As it says right above the comment box:

"Comments: (you may use simple HTML tags for style)"

<blockquote> is a tag, and a rather simple one.

High up on the walls are pictures of famous atheists through the centuries.

Complete with a cheesy fantasy portrait of Cārvāka, the first to call a religious rite of his own culture "obscene".

...except that now they will, because I've just let on. Curses!

HA HA HA HA ....

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | October 22, 2009 6:35 PM

The Brianfart: ...actually, my dictionary merely translates the endpoint of the metaphor and thus goes straight to "rallying point". Meh.

Try "collecting basin"... the background of the metaphor appears to be a sewage treatment plant.

<sing>Ohwise look on the broight so-oide of loife...</sing><whistle>

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | October 22, 2009 6:44 PM

So, putting yourself in their shoes, how would you respond to this threat to the faithful?

Ouch! Those shoes hurt, and can't be put on. Ever try fitting EEE's into a AAA width (I really do have fat [EEE] feet)?

Well, other than lying to themselves, which they are already doing, I can only assume fast talking and ignoring the evidence, and saying "Yahweh did it".

Posted by: 386sx | October 22, 2009 7:37 PM

This song changed the sound of drums forever...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krA-MArKly4

At long last, tom toms didn't have to sound like crap any longer.

Posted by: Lynna | October 22, 2009 7:50 PM

MAJeff @185

since moving to North Dakota, my inner slut has died.

LOL. I love that so much that I've already repeated it to several friends. I hope I've helped your bon mot onward to internet meme.

Alan B @180

According to the specialist it needed only one go and the heart in back in rhythm.

Hurrah for Alan B's cooperative heart! Now that you have rhythm, let's dance.

Janine @182

My comment was deleted a second time.

I thought your comment was almost shockingly mild, considering the source. I was personally offended by its mildness. It must have been the "OM" that really offended the sensibilities of M&K. This is actually very efficient of you -- you can now offend without actually being offensive.

Posted by: 386sx | October 22, 2009 8:18 PM

Pretty gimmicky song huh? They pulled out all the stops on that one. Every trick in the book.

Posted by: Carlie | October 22, 2009 8:25 PM

Here come the drums.

Posted by: 386sx | October 22, 2009 8:31 PM

Today is drums day on pharyngula!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erE8WTngaAY

Everybody!

Drums!!

Here they come!!!

Posted by: 'Tis Himself | October 22, 2009 8:38 PM

Did all you people who have been awared the OM know that you were awarded it for being "abrasive".

Fuck him up the nose with woven hose. I am not abrasive. I'm soft and warm and cuddly. I help little old ladies cross the street, whether they want to go or not. I think he should be anally probed with a porcupine. That'll show him what abrasive means.

On a different note, I've been unable to sign in since Monday. Fucking TypePad. And for those who tell me that the Movable Type confirmation email is in my span folder, I can assure you that it isn't. I've looked in each and every one of my folders and determined that confirmation emails are a myth.

Posted by: 'Tis Himself | October 22, 2009 8:45 PM

Alan B, I'm glad your procedure went well. Since you're not able to indulge in alcoholic beverages, I'm having some in your behalf. Since I don't know if you're a beer drinker or a whisky drinker, I'll have both a Newcastle Brown and a single malt, just in case.

Posted by: 386sx | October 22, 2009 8:51 PM

Awesome! They have Phil Collins to thank for that!!

Posted by: Sven DiMilo | October 22, 2009 8:57 PM

afro-cuban
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ki2Y0SO_xfk&feature=related

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | October 22, 2009 8:58 PM

I'll have both a Newcastle Brown and a single malt, just in case.

Just saw the Mythies show that mixing drinks isn't as hard on you as pure beer.

Posted by: Lynna | October 22, 2009 9:06 PM

Here come the drums.

Carlie @210 Nice, Carlie! BTW, I enjoyed you outing yourself as a mild-mannered Mrs. Rogers type who is a good neighbor. Razor-sharp thoughts in your head all adeptly disguised, eh?

Posted by: Carlie | October 22, 2009 9:18 PM

To follow up on Thelonious386sx, possibly the best drum accompaniment ever.

Razor-sharp thoughts in your head all adeptly disguised, eh?

The meek ones are always the ones you should watch out for. :D

Posted by: Sphere Coupler | October 22, 2009 9:29 PM

Another fav from the past...John Bonham

Moby Dick! Moby Dick!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRuTcnd8YLU
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_fwcFjzyik

Now thats talking in my language.

Posted by: frozen_midwest | October 23, 2009 12:06 AM

Drums.is it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbMlHAFZXx0

Posted by: strange gods before me, OM | October 23, 2009 5:06 AM

Hey SC, was this the interview you were talking about?

And I remember the photos coming in of the US—the Marines conducting, the Rangers conducting themselves at their arrival. And I was thinking, this is not good, this is going to lead to something. There was a picture of a US soldier holding down a Somali boy with his foot on his neck and his gun held high. And that was two days after they had arrived. And so, there was a photo of that. And just being Somali, I know what that means. You know, that literally—that photo gets published in Mogadishu, that literally means war. That doesn’t mean conversation.

Posted by: 386sx | October 23, 2009 10:06 AM

Awesome song, except for the weird part at 1:29...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAsDLGjMhFI

It was going great until 1:29. What happened Beethoven? What were you thinking!!

Posted by: aratina cage | October 23, 2009 11:26 AM

The U.S. Senate overwhelmingly approved the Matthew Shepard Act, 68-29 on Thursday, although it was voted on as part of a larger war funding bill. The act will expand existing federal hate crimes law, which enables the federal government to support or take over state and local hate crime investigations and prosecutions, to include sexual orientation, gender identity, gender and disability.

Posted by: Lynna | October 23, 2009 3:39 PM

aratina @236: I was pleased to see the Matthew Shepard Act approved! My state, Idaho, is one of those that recently defeated attempts to include sexual orientation in the list of characteristcs against which employers could *not* discriminate. So Idaho legislators wanted Idaho employers to be able to fire anyone for even looking gay. The feds will have to take over investigations in Idaho that are related to discrimination against gays.

In anti-gay news, I'm here to track the mormons to their lair once more, and drive them into the open. James Bopp Jr. was special advisor on life issues for the Mitt Romney presidential campaign. He also wrote some articles for National Review defending Romney's mormonism to other conservatives:

Many social conservatives do not share Romney’s Mormon faith, but his faith should be viewed by social conservatives as a good sign, not as a matter of concern. The Mormon religion, while having tenets that Christians do not share, is profoundly conservative in its support for life, family, and marriage. ... All people of faith believe that the best public officials are those with God, not man, at the center of their lives.

What is James Bopp Jr. up to now?

James Bopp Jr., of Indiana, a conservative federal and state elections-law attorney who is representing Family PAC, is also the attorney for Protect Marriage Washington in that group's lawsuit seeking to block the release of names of people who signed Referendum 71 petitions. It's that case that's now being considered by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The quote above is from the Seattle Times. Here's another excerpt from that article:

Family PAC wants a federal judge to declare unconstitutional the state's public-disclosure laws, which limit to $5,000 contributions from businesses and individuals made within 21 days of the election.
The laws also require campaigns to disclose names and addresses of those who donate more than $25. Those contributing more than $100 must also include their employers' names and addresses, as well as their occupations. The suit seeks to keep all that information from being disclosed.

Posted by: aratina cage | October 23, 2009 4:35 PM

Lynna #238, that's interesting. I kind of thought the Mormons would be whooping after Justice Kennedy "block[ed] a federal appeals court ruling... that [had] ordered the release of the [anti-gay referendum-71 signers'] names", but I'm a little surprised to know that the prosecuting attorney is Mormon and that the celebration has spawned a new federal lawsuit to change the state's public-disclosure laws. (Who loves activist judges again?)

The Mormon religion, while having tenets that Christians do not share, is profoundly conservative in its support for life, family, and marriage.

Those last three are code words for "control over women's bodies", "subjugation of women's lives and maintenance of the male hierarchy", and "suppression of homosexuality and acquiescence to anti-gay violence".

Look how that Seattle Times report ended:

Some who donated to Proposition 8, which repealed California's same-sex marriage law last November, reported being harassed by people who found their names on state campaign-disclosure Web sites and were angry over their support.

Some said they lost their jobs after gay-marriage supporters threatened to boycott their places of employments. Some even reported death threats.

Just like in the Mormon thread. No evidence, just baseless assertions by bigots with hurt feelings.

Posted by: Lynna | October 23, 2009 5:00 PM

Just like in the Mormon thread. No evidence, just baseless assertions by bigots with hurt feelings.

Persecuting others, infringing on the rights of others, and then launching the Mormon Persecution Complex (MPC™) when anyone objects to their strong arm tactics is par for the course. We saw the same mormon-think in the thread about Dallin Oak's speech.

For any newcomers, there are quite a few discussions of jaw-dropping mormon outlandishness in the Pharyngula archives, but the most recent one is here:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/10/the_mormon_leadership_demonstr.php

What the lawsuit to change disclosure laws is really all about is making sure the press doesn't realize the mormons are once again funding anti-gay campaigns -- the mormons didn't like the bad press they got on Prop 8. There was definitely not enough harassment to justify hiding the names of contributors. In the earlier thread, MAJeff made the point that gay people have a right to stop patronizing a business that supports anti-gay legislation. Some mormons call this "people losing jobs" or "harassment".

The suit seeks to change the rules about maximum donations so that organizations like Focus on the Family, the Catholic League, *and* the LDS Church can contribute hundreds of thousands of dollars at a time.

Donate big money in big chunks, and don't disclose the sources of the donations. Smells bad to me.

There are also "donations" of other kinds being made and not reported. A prime example is the anti-gay video that was showing in Washington State. The video included a painting of Adam and Eve that came directly from the film shown in Temple ceremonies where mormons receive their endowments. (Even the voice over: "God created a man and a woman" is from the mormon film. This video has since been pulled from youtube. I haven't checked to see if it's still airing in Washington on TV.

The same guy that created the anti-gay Prop 8 videos is in charge of the Washington campaign ads. My guess is that Focus on the Family and the mormons are paying him to do the work, but they are funneling payments through the National Organization for Marriage and then into the state-by-state PACs.

Posted by: 'Tis Himself | October 23, 2009 5:37 PM

Alan B,

I apologize for drinking an ale you consider inferior. Does the Glengoyne 17 Year Old single malt I also had meet with your approval?

Posted by: 386sx | October 23, 2009 6:13 PM

Thought I would give the ol' Adobe Reader a whirl once again for old times sakes. So, when I deleted the desktop icon it installed to my desktop, it kindly put it right back there for me. How nice! Plus it added two new thingies to load every my computer starts up. Lovely! So very thoughtful of them.

Posted by: Carlie | October 23, 2009 7:02 PM

I suspect you have a soft, cuddly, underbelly like most others here!

No! Not the underbelly! It tickles!
Um, I mean, no, I didn't just say that.

I hope everyone's having a nice, calm evening. Except MAJeff, who probably suffers from far too many calm evenings in his current location - I hope he found a rockin' bar somewhere.

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | October 23, 2009 7:08 PM

And Nina

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PipX3l1tEeU

Posted by: Sven DiMilo | October 23, 2009 7:11 PM

I just lay there unconscious!

Sounds like my ex-w...

nevermind

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | October 23, 2009 7:21 PM

OY, I just discovered another reason not to leave the house tonight:

http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/article/id/138174/

OK, instead need something "country" that doesn't make me want to vomit:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1plvBR02wDs

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | October 23, 2009 7:27 PM

OK, maybe I'll open the prosecco, even though the last box from the move is still packed.

Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | October 23, 2009 7:54 PM

oops, I totally missed the part of this conversation where our precious Alan had his heartbeat corrected
glad it all worked out perfectly, and indeed Thank Doctor for a quick and easy procedure :-)

and on the foodie side of this conversation: my boyfriend's aunt dropped two giant bags of apples on us not too long ago, so for almost a month now I've been eating cranberry-apple pie for breakfast :-p

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | October 23, 2009 7:58 PM

I've heard of red wine with salmon. Actually, most of the food critic and chefs I've read recently have gone away from the fish/white steak/red meat/wine business, and say drink what you like.

Posted by: 'Tis Himself | October 23, 2009 8:16 PM

Sven DiMilo #253

I'm not much into jazz, but that is some excellent sax playing.

Here's something more to my taste:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvJFByxC4Sc&feature=rec-HM-rev-rn

Posted by: Lynna | October 23, 2009 8:26 PM

Alan B @247

strange pictures in the mind about the possible value of shoe fetishism involving maybe:
http://www.kristopherdukes.com/images/Prada-shoes-flower-heels.gif
or something similar, perhaps in all red

Wow! That is one beautiful shoe! MaJeff, take note (but get a napkin first to catch the drool.)

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | October 23, 2009 8:30 PM

MaJeff, take note

My size?

I do need a new pair of heels. I threw away the old 4" platform heels three moves ago.

Posted by: 'Tis Himself | October 23, 2009 8:36 PM

...tonight is worth savoring. It's just all kinds of happy, happy win.

I am very glad to hear that. It's extremely pleasant to know you're enjoying yourself. :)

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | October 23, 2009 8:48 PM

I've posted this before, but damn if it ain't my night (and a night I needed so desperately)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8tuTSi6Sck

Saw, George Michael try to perform it a couple summers ago. Great concert, but on this one...give up, Nina's perfected it.

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | October 23, 2009 10:08 PM

So, a bottle of Zin by one's self...

...well, compare and contrast:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEQpipS_qfc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRecliV1l14

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMgO5PtlYVk

Posted by: Owlmirror | October 23, 2009 11:16 PM

Did someone say 太鼓?

On looking up taiko in Wikipedia, I note that the modern ensembles were started by a Japanese jazz drummer. Huh.

Oh, and in this, I spotted this, which seemed appropriate to link to here.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | October 23, 2009 11:49 PM

Reading the abstract for the iron in wine article, it looks like the compounds in the scallops causing the fishy taste are similar to some chemical signals used by insects. I wonder if scallops use them for a similar purpose.

Posted by: Alan B | October 24, 2009 7:39 AM

#266

Hi Lynna Hoped you'd like it! Alan B

Posted by: Alan B | October 24, 2009 8:56 AM

#277 cicely said:

If I've missed any of the Old Endless Thread Traditions, consider them mentioned here.

Well, Britomart #110 has already given us (in horrible colours):

Alan Clarke, your webpage is still broken!!

(Thanks for your congrats)

Posted by: Eternal...Thread | October 24, 2009 3:03 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRamB30E9mU&feature=related

I'm back!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQ-InqiYEkU&feature=PlayList&p=D2A863E2094FA9CA&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=19

Posted by: Sven DiMilo | October 24, 2009 3:28 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ent6Hb1G3PA

Posted by: Sili | October 24, 2009 4:17 PM

I couldn't access this (and a coupla others - like the gopher one), nor ERV at all.

Must be SB 'fixing' stuff.

Posted by: Knockgoats | October 24, 2009 4:38 PM

Since nothing is OT on this thread, I'll just tell/remind any Brits in attendance that the first of the new series of The Thick Of It is on at 10.10 - BBC1, I think. If you've never watched it, don't miss this opportunity!

Posted by: 'Tis Himself | October 24, 2009 6:11 PM

Must be SB 'fixing' stuff.

It certainly seems that every time SB tries to "fix" stuff it just gets worse.

Posted by: Marcelo Greco | October 24, 2009 7:41 PM

And now, for something completely different.

Posted by: Alan B | October 24, 2009 8:12 PM

#295 (((Billy))) The Atheist

But I'm American, so commenting on scotch whiskey may be crossing the line.

Because you are American I shall forgive you!

There is no such thing as "scotch whiskey". There is "Irish whiskey" and I suppose there is "Scotch whisky" (capital "S" and without the "e"). Normally, it would be single malt whisky unless you are talking about cheap blends that don't merit the title, "single malt" (a defined term over here in the UK).

As a matter of curiosity, which single malt whisky have you found to vary so catastrophically from year to year? In principle it could vary slightly but any decent distillery will ensure that there is a consistency from year to year. So much so, that many single malts can instantly be named, regardless of year.

I (and many, many others) can tell a Laphroaig from a Bowmore, from a Lagavulin from Bruichladdich, from Ardbeg, even though they are all produced within a few miles of each other on a single small island (Islay) of the West coast of Scotland.

If the single malt whisky you are getting varies so much you need to complain. It may be bad storage or shipping and the distillery would want to know.

Posted by: 'Tis Himself | October 24, 2009 9:11 PM

Congratulations, Bastion, you got the Wall o' Text error message that many of us see several times before TypePad finally deigns to sign us in.

Posted by: Peter McKellar | October 24, 2009 9:27 PM

I'll be away from the keyboard for about an hour but keen to pursue this subject further if others are.

Posted by: Sven DiMilo | October 24, 2009 9:53 PM

public-service/community-wise, registration is OFF...no need to muck w/ frigged-down esoteric login rituals for now.

Music-wise:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5658179668911329606&hl=en

Posted by: Sven DiMilo | October 24, 2009 10:12 PM

Well, 'Tis, I enjoyed that one. From approx. 1/4 of The Clancy Bros. w/ Tommy Makem, a prayer to save the seafaring among us (many, e.g., of my ancestors). I also correctly predicted, and therefore got a huge kick out of, the truck driver's gear change at the end.

Posted by: Sven DiMilo | October 24, 2009 10:23 PM

hmm, no...I neither twitter nor tweet, so thanks for cluing us Luddites in. Seems like this is something They could have thought about before now...?

Posted by: 'Tis Himself OM | October 24, 2009 10:35 PM

a prayer to save the seafaring among us

That includes me.

Posted by: Sphere...Coupler | October 24, 2009 11:18 PM

In honour of Victor Mizzy (January 9, 1916 – October 17, 2009)an American composer.

The ghost and Mr. Chicken
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nz_crHdfggY&NR=1

the Addams family
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_X9S-_8wXk

Green Acreas
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mbk81X6WHA4

Posted by: Peter McKellar | October 24, 2009 11:50 PM

Kel @301

The secular party was the first potential Australian political party which I wholeheartedly agreed with their general mission.

Looking at their website I agree with you that this is a party worth supporting. But on first reading it appears pretty esoteric and wishy-washy. Statements like "we support separation of state and church" doesn't really equate to much (order of state and church is mine, not theirs). Even little things like this are, imo, a concession.

On Dawkin's atheist scale of 1 to 7 I have pushed through to an 8 or 9. Paybacks a bitch. We don't have to burn our oppressors at the stake - that's the theist way. But they shouldn't be given a pat on the back and a "continue on" wave of semi-approval.

I am more interested in some specifics - justice for all, starting with the Palm Islanders seeing Hurley's "get out of jail free" card revoked and his immediate incarceration - he's already been found guilty, the government just elected to give him 2 promotions and $100,000 rather than a prison term. His police buddy co-conspirators should also be imprisoned for perverting the course of justice.

Child abuse laws need to be changed to prevent brainwashing minors - let 18yrs+ decide for themselves. Shut down the Christian Bretheren and have their children removed from their custody and placed with parents that actually care for their kids. JWs would also find themselves under intense scrutiny. I would even go so far as to suggest that maybe (knowing their mental health issues) they not be allowed to join the organisation unless they get a medical certificate saying they are not clinically mentally ill.

The drug laws need to be changed totally, not some watered down decriminalisation with all the vilification and stigma remaining. Those presently rotting in prisons need to be released (and compensated) and (if we can identify) the people that shouted the loudest for their imprisonment need to take their place. I would start with the crimebusters list of neighbours informing on each other and see what the busybody sanctimonious think of hard labour and manacles. We could ease up after a few years but the signal would be sent.

All the government depts outsourced to religions and their derivatives under Howard and maintained by Rudd need to be in-sourced back to a secular government and the theocratic parasites behind the organisations fired (without a shadow of apology). There are plenty of good hearted unemployed (atheist, theist or dont cares) that would be happy to work in the new departments and the employment rates should not vary considerably - its just the individuals involved at the top will swap places. Most of the employees could be carried over to the new institutions.

Howard needs to face war crime trials. Maybe they will stick, maybe they won't but at least during the trial we would find out what actually went on. The AWB executives need to be brought before a court also.

My list of policies is extensive (and all in my head as I fume from dawn to dusk about the idiocracy we live in as I enumerate the abuses).

Can you see how my policies would make the secular party look like good guys? ;)

Game for more? Maybe taking this offline would be more appropriate?

Posted by: Rorschach | October 25, 2009 12:00 AM

Maybe taking this offline would be more appropriate?

I think so.

Kel, ty for the lecture links ! Had a quick peek, will watch them when the Cricket finishes (got to have your priorities right)....:-)

Posted by: Peter McKellar | October 25, 2009 12:12 AM

Rorschach @314

Maybe taking this offline would be more appropriate?

I think so.

Noted and actioned :)

(wow, my first nested blockquote)

Posted by: Peter McKellar | October 25, 2009 3:17 AM

Kel,

To spare the others re politics, bounce me an email (I don't have your address) and we can continue the discussion offline. find me with first initial (immediately followed by) surname at gmail.com

On the videos - I've been downloading both vids (69% as I type) but its been going for an hour or 2 now :( I noted also PZ's lecture (Design vs Chance), so I added that to the list. Others can find it at:

http://www.richarddawkins.net/article,4431,Design-vs-Chance-by-PZ-Myers-AAI-2009,PZ-Myers-AAI-RDFRS-Josh-Timonen

Sphere...Coupler @315

How do you get colliding galaxies in a uniformally expanding universe?

This has perplexed me too. I'm not a physicist or cosmologist. My take is that whilst the universe is expanding uniformly, the contents are not - they are still governed by the laws of physics. The space may expand and matter and energy may occupy parts of it, but clumping can occur. In other words, the matter and energy components are not uniformly distributed and gravitaional effects can draw closer objects together.

This would mean that whilst the galaxies are flying away from the origin point of the Big Bang at a certain speed, that doesn't prevent them from being drawn off their "perpendicular" path to travel obliquely.

Relativity may also have some local frame effects I don't grasp that could just warp the intervening space away.

Seeding of star systems with anything heavier than helium (produced in 2nd and subsequent generations of the star) also requires that things come together rather than fly apart. Maybe basic newtonian motion is sufficient here - when a star goes supernova the ejected matter is travelling faster than expansion producing a nett movement in a particular vector. But then, I'm talking through my arse.

Anyone here that actually knows the accepted explanation and is able to explain it?

Posted by: Rorschach | October 25, 2009 8:40 AM

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | October 25, 2009 9:23 AM

How do you get colliding galaxies in a uniformally expanding universe?

Easily: the galaxies are not uniformly distributed. Some are close enough to attract each other by gravity more strongly than the expansion pushes them apart.

See also: galaxy cluster; supercluster.

The Universe is the response to thermal expansion and condensation.

What is that supposed to mean?

Normal matter is Dark Matter condensate.

And what is "condensate" meant to mean? Dark matter can't clump together by anything other than gravity – unless you want to, out of the blue, postulate a heretofore unseen and unsuspected new force of nature, and I don't recommend that.

Posted by: Sphere Coupler | October 25, 2009 10:10 AM

Easily: the galaxies are not uniformly distributed. Some are close enough to attract each other by gravity more strongly than the expansion pushes them apart.

Ok, then if the original (cosmic egg) as they say or a pin point spot(before big bang) and the void was void how do you explain nonuniformally distributed galaxies? ...Irregular quantum fluctuations?

Anywhere the tempature is not absolutely 0 the Universe is thermal.

What does the Great Marjanović think Dark Matter is?
The Higgs Boson? or something else?

Posted by: 'Tis Himself | October 25, 2009 10:20 AM

...galaxies are not uniformly distributed. Some are close enough to attract each other by gravity more strongly than the expansion pushes them apart.

In a mere two to three billion years, the Andromeda Galaxy will collide with the Milky Way Galaxy. There's a total lack of preparation for this impending catastrophe. Everyone seems to take the attitude "what has posterity ever done for me?"

Posted by: Sphere Coupler | October 25, 2009 10:51 AM

Nerd
(I mean it to be understood as)
Thermal as in an elevated state from absolute 0.

David to be more clear...What is the cause of an non-uniformally distributed Universe if the void was truely uniformally void and
(the cosmic egg)(infinate pinpoint)(nothing)(State of nothing/everything before their was something)whatever they want to call it)
was truely uniform.

If quantum fluctuations caused the BB, what prevents this action from being a uniform reaction once the process began. I'm speaking of the very instant of the BB and very shortly after.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | October 25, 2009 11:31 AM

If quantum fluctuations caused the BB, what prevents this action from being a uniform reaction once the process began. I'm speaking of the very instant of the BB and very shortly after.

The QM fluctuations, like the collision of branes, causing the BB is all speculation. After the BB occurred, inflation and several phase transitions occurred, all of which could lead to slight non-homogeneity of matter. So, I still don't see what you are getting at. Is it that after inflation, phase changes, and atomic condensation, you believe everything would be totally uniform?

Posted by: John Scanlon, FCD | October 25, 2009 11:48 AM

They started yesterday here, and since I can't escape the sound I might as well share it.

What is this, anyway, the Pharyngula Hotel's back bar?

Posted by: Sphere...Coupler | October 25, 2009 12:45 PM

David,
In the universe that I understand, the initial state of the Universe was below the Bose-Einstien condensate in thermal properties and Dark Matter (possibly void of thermal properties) is The constant transition of normal matter before it became normal matter.
In other words Dark Matter cannot renormalize to normal matter since it was never normalised to begin with, tho normalisation should be possible.
So Dark Matter could be the Transitional state between Initial state and normal matter.
That's how I see it, how do you see it?

(let me clarify a difficult concept *constant transition* of sub-atomic particles never combining in a state that could be seen by radiation because state is not achieved it is in *constant transition*)

Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | October 25, 2009 3:01 PM

alright! The War on Halloween™ is in full swing!

I just picked up my mail from yesterday and Friday, and I found several invitations to "Harvest Festivals" and "Movie Nights" by various church groups... all scheduled for Oct. 31.

and here I thought the Christians were slacking off this year

Posted by: 'Tis Himself | October 25, 2009 3:44 PM

Rorschach wants a Hubble picture? There's loads of them at hubblesite.org.

This one, the Whirlpool Galaxy (M51), is my present desktop wallpaper.

Posted by: Sphere Coupler | October 25, 2009 4:53 PM

But the best place for those ideas is the literature or a physics blog, not a biology blog.

Oh I agree it's not geology or biology but it is relevant to us, you seem to have a grasp at what is possible, as do others...just a little more and I'll conclude.

While we work our way through the self view into the word view into the solar system view into the galactic view we see that the self view explains the biological self procreation, the world view allows the normal gravity interaction,the solar system view provides the elements, the galactic view provides the difference of potential between the dark matter and black hole, this difference of potential is the creation of our reality. Within our reality or within the galactic view is it possible to see a Universal view?, can we honestly say that the universe is forever expanding just because it is what we happen to see from our galactic viewpoint...If birkeland currents connect our solar system, then is it not possible that dark matter is also connected in a universal medium and if it is could it not operate much like a pendulum where the vertical position is a BB and the upward swing is what we view from our limited view point and the process continues ad infinitum...done,and now

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGa70tVYVKo

Posted by: Sphere...Coupler | October 25, 2009 6:53 PM

If the universe is flat, how come space is curved ?

It's my understanding of this view is, that space from a galactic viewpoint is curved along an assumed flat plane, tho David or (I believe his name is) Saw Wells could explain it in much more detail than Me.

Posted by: 'Tis Himself | October 25, 2009 8:27 PM

My understanding about a flat universe is that there are three possible shapes for the universe. If the density of the universe (the Hubble Constant H₀) is greater than 1, then sooner or later the universe will stop expanding and, due to gravity, collapse into a "Big Crunch." This is called the closed universe. If H₀ is less than 1, there is an open universe which will continue to expand forever. However, if H₀ is exactly equal to 1, then the universe is flat. A flat universe will expand forever, but at an ever slowing rate of expansion.*

The density of the universe also determines its geometry. If the density of the universe exceeds the critical density [H₀>1], then the geometry of space is closed and positively curved like the surface of a sphere. This implies that initially parallel photon paths converge slowly, eventually cross, and return back to their starting point (if the universe lasts long enough). If the density of the universe is less than the critical density [H₀<1], then the geometry of space is open, negatively curved like the surface of a saddle. If the density of the universe exactly equals the critical density [H₀=1], then the geometry of the universe is flat like a sheet of paper. Thus, there is a direct link between the geometry of the universe and its fate.

*Personally, I don't see the difference between the fates of an open universe and a flat universe.

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | October 25, 2009 9:07 PM

Thermal as in an elevated state from absolute 0.

That's not the same as "capable of thermal expansion".

David to be more clear...What is the cause of an non-uniformally distributed Universe if the void was truely uniformally void and (the cosmic egg)(infinate pinpoint)(nothing)(State of nothing/everything before their was something)whatever they want to call it) was truely uniform.

Do keep in mind that the Big Bang was not an expansion of matter into an already existing space. It was the origin of spacetime itself. Space itself is what's expanding. The void itself is expanding.

Matter is capable of thermal expansion. Empty space isn't. But empty space is expanding.

If quantum fluctuations caused the BB, what prevents this action from being a uniform reaction once the process began.

Heisenberg's Uncertainty Relation, which requires further quantum fluctuations.

(Mind you, while the interpretation of the BB as a quantum fluctuation is my preferred one, it's probably an untestable speculation at the moment, and it's likely to remain so for a lot of time to come. Don't take it too seriously.)

And I speculate that Dark Matter gravity and Normal Matter gravity have some differing properties...Anyone care to speculate what these properties might be?

Hang on a second. First you explain what the vertical gene transfer makes you think there are two different kinds of gravity even though phenomena like the Bullet Cluster don't make such an assumption necessary. I mean, you're willy-nilly postulating a sixth force of nature here. That's a really extraordinary claim; it needs evidence.

In the universe that I understand, the initial state of the Universe was below the Bose-Einstien [sic] condensate in thermal properties and Dark Matter (possibly void of thermal properties) is The constant transition of normal matter before it became normal matter.

What and what, respectively???

Please explain. All I see here is technobabble. :-(

While we work our way through the self view into the word view into the solar system view into the galactic view we see that the self view explains the biological self procreation

All I see here, in contrast, is a blur. Could be because it's past 2 am over here (and summertime just ended 12 h ago), but I doubt that.

And what's a Birkeland current, and what exactly does it mean that such currents "connect" the solar system?

Posted by: Sphere Coupler | October 26, 2009 12:18 AM

I would like to provide some interesting papers(including the Birkland paper when I find it) but I don't know how to link to a pdf that resides in my documents folder and have forgotten the link from which they came...anyone?

Posted by: Sphere Coupler | October 26, 2009 1:27 AM

This is NOT the most current and up to date info on Birkeland currents and as I said before it is a poor analogy depicting a solarsystem view and projecting the same [*type of phenomena* (very loosly)]at the galaxy view with Dark Matter.

I only intended to use Birkland currents as a model for possible Dark Matter connections between Galaxies.

Birklands work had to wait many years to gain popular acceptance and has been added to from many differing projects.

http://www-spof.gsfc.nasa.gov/Education/wcurrent.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birkeland_current
(scroll down to "In 2007, NASA's THEMIS")

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/themis/news/magnetic_tremors.html

Posted by: Rorschach | October 26, 2009 5:24 AM

Would you believe, I'm watching a movie I've somehow never seen before,

North by Northwest

Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | October 26, 2009 6:06 AM

Where I come from, Harvest Festivals usually means you'll be spending three hours with folks yelling at you about how you need a savior.

I suspect that's precisely what they are. I wasn't joking when I called it the war on Halloween, since all of those events are set up for the express purpose of getting people to spend the day at a church rather than doing something satanic like taking the kids trick-or-treating or going to a Halloween party.

Posted by: a_ray_in_dilbert_space | October 26, 2009 12:06 PM

WRT cosmology, I agree that this is more suited to a physics blog than a biology blog, but most of what we actually know comes from the WMAP probe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilkinson_Microwave_Anisotropy_Probe

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/

The expansion of the Universe is not thermal and not really uniforme. Some portions of the Universe have experienced inflation, for instance.

The problem is that as you push back further in time, you eventually reach a point where radiation and matter were in equilibrium, so the radiation carries very little information from the period before the point where radiation and matter decoupled. Things like the asymmetries observed by WMAP become critical to learning more about this period.

Of course, if we learn how to do neutrino astronomy, we could extend things even further back.

Posted by: Lynna | October 26, 2009 2:37 PM

Orson Scott Card is a board member of the National Organization for Marriage. To see his mormon flavor, see Mormon Times.
To see an announcement of his NOM support, with *no* mention of the mormon connection, see NOM Latest News
The NOM Latest News article also mentions Matt Holland, a founding member of NOM who is also a mormon. The mormon connection is carefully ignored.

Posted by: Sphere Coupler | October 26, 2009 4:45 PM

David, David, David ,if you don't like or understand my Universe...go build your own.

Posted by: Feynmaniac | October 26, 2009 6:24 PM

Dear lord! Kwok, McCarthy and Silver Fox on the same thread. I've only seen that much concentrated stupid once....

Posted by: 386sx | October 26, 2009 7:04 PM

Be back later folks, I have a date at the theater with my esteemed colleagues and close acquaintances Mr. Charles Nelson Reilly and Ms. Megan Fox. Gotta run!!

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | October 26, 2009 7:16 PM

Sphere, I'll take my physics from either Blake Stacy or A_Ray_In_Dilbert_Space. They understand the need to convince their peers (fellow physicists) of their ideas. You tend toward flights of fancy, and here you are trying to convince paleontologists, chemists, and geologists of your ideas. It is the old "what is wrong with this picture?", and sets off my skeptic alarms. The peer reviewed journals await your input.

Posted by: 'Tis Himself | October 26, 2009 7:45 PM

You folks have it all wrong. Lawsonomy, with its theory of Zig-Zag-And-Swirl, explains how space functions.

Penetrability of varying density makes possible that any body or particle moves through Space in countless directions at the same time. A body does not move in a straight course, it does not move in a circle, but moves as a Zig-Zag-and-Swirl and is neither coming nor going in any direction.

So it is necessary to go beyond man's higher mathematics to compute the movements of bodies or particles in the Zig-Zag-and-Swirl and therefore a system of superlative mathematics must be created for the purpose.

Zig-Zag-and-Swirl is a movement in which any formation moves in a multiple direction according to the movements of many increasingly greater formations, each depending upon the greater formation for direction and upon varying changes caused by counteracting influences of Suction and Pressure of different proportions.

For example, a germ moving across the surface of a blood corpuscle might think he is going in a certain direction in Space. If he could understand he would know that the blood corpuscle also moves in another direction, and that the blood current was also carrying him in still another direction.

And still that would not end there as the germ corpuscle, and blood current are all dependent for further movement and other directions in Space upon a greater formation, man.

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | October 26, 2009 8:56 PM

David, David, David ,if you don't like or understand my Universe...go build your own.

You don't get it.

What's confusing me is how a small population can undergo rapid change, yet a large population remain relatively stable over long periods of time. To me it feels like in a large population, it's more likely that mutations would occur that infer an advantage, so why is it that over long periods of time we don't see an accumulation of mutations of that nature in a large population while in a small population there's rapid change?

Large populations have more mutations at the disposal of selection and drift, but both selection and (especially) drift work faster in small populations.

BTW, natural and sexual selection often result in a compromise. For instance, there are birds where natural selection favors shorter, rounder wings, while sexual selection favors longer, more pointed wings, and most members of that species end up in the middle.

Self View-The point of view as an adolescent,not yet aware of the world.

Worldview-The point of view obtained or calculated from Planet Earth.

Solar System view-The point of view obtained or calculated outside of the influences of earths dynamics.

Galactic view-The point of view obtained or calculated outside of the solarsystems influence.

Universal view-The point of view obtained or calculated outside of Galactic influence.

Fine, thanks – but these definitions still aren't enough to make sense out of what you wrote. How does physics appear to differ from these views?

(I use parentheses) by pressing the shift button and the 9 or 0 ;?)

That's how you make them. I want to know what you want to express by them, because you use them in ways nobody else does, and I can't quite figure out what those ways are.

What makes you think *empty space* is empty? Is this the same attitude that Birkeland ran into when THEY would not accept his data on Birkeland currents?

Forget "empty". My point is that space itself expands, not matter in space. If it were perfectly empty (which it's not), it would still expand – faster than otherwise even, because there'd be less gravity in it.

Yes, this is counterintuitive. Yes, it is hard or even impossible to imagine. That's called "bad luck". Reality doesn't care about the limited capabilities of our poor bloated brains.

Sorry, should be Mass=Universe to imply the we are regarding Universe as Mass.

That's just wrong.

The asterisk implies that empty space is a joke

Why didn't you just use scare quotes like everyone else?

Correct, the distance between the Galactic bodies governs the rate of transition from Dark Matter to normal matter thus changing the Gravity variance.

OK. And how is that supposed to work?

The Dark Matter is subatomic particles that are not combined to make a particle.

Surely you don't mean that dark matter consists of electrons (or even of free quarks, which is impossible anyway)? It quite obviously doesn't. If it did, it would behave very, very different.

It is this separation that creates Gravity.

What separation?

In reality, gravity is a shape, this shape is created by particles in transition.Think of a bowl of cereal The cheerios represents the electroweak, the milk is the strong nuclear force and the bowl is gravity.

In all seriousness this time: are you high?

rather consider all mass and energy converging into a specific area with no difference of potential

Impossible. Every mass has potential energy with respect to every other mass within its light cone. Even more generally, every charge has potential energy with respect to every other charge that belongs to the same force: mass with respect to mass, electric charge with respect to electric charge, "color" with respect to "color", weak charge with respect to weak charge.

The initial state is BELOW the Bose-Einstien condensate. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnqAwtorUTE

OK, I'll watch that sometime tomorrow.

BTW: ei and ie are not pronounced the same in German (or in fact anything but English). ie is like English ee. It's Einstein.

NEGATIVE, Gravity is created by the (particle in transition).

See, this is a use of parentheses that I don't understand and that I've never seen anybody else do.

Oh, so you mean gravity is somehow caused by dark matter becoming normal matter???

NEGATIVE, Gravity is created by the (particle in transition).Example A particle of normal matter in TRANSITION or a particle of dark matter in TRANSITION. Do not think of the creation or normalisation or renormalisation as the act that creates gravity. It is the TRANSITION.

That's precisely what I was saying. Unless, of course, if I've completely misunderstood what you mean by "transition". I thought it meant "change from dark matter to normal matter".

In a closed system the outer most expansion and the inner most contraction.

Oh, so you simply mean "limits". Why didn't you just say so!?!

Actually I think you're following along quite nicely...for a paleontologist.

Don't pretend you're a physicist.

David, you must remember this is Theoretical Physics.
It may not be correct, or it may only be correct for it's time.

There is no such thing as "correct for its time".

In fact, there's only "shown to be wrong" and "so far not shown to be wrong".

These are not facts

Duh!

Posted by: Kel, OM | October 26, 2009 9:35 PM

Large populations have more mutations at the disposal of selection and drift, but both selection and (especially) drift work faster in small populations.

Okay, cool. Thanks for that.

BTW, natural and sexual selection often result in a compromise. For instance, there are birds where natural selection favors shorter, rounder wings, while sexual selection favors longer, more pointed wings, and most members of that species end up in the middle.

Cool. So in terms of implications for the fossil record, that this compromise be enough to account for the apparent stability over a long period of time and through different climates? Or is there more to it, such as the longer period of time needed for the accumulation of beneficial or neutral mutations in a larger population like you suggested above?

Posted by: Lynna | October 26, 2009 10:39 PM

Pretty damned cool how the Krauss video that PZ posted as an antidote to the homeopathy vid covers a lot of the discussion above between David and Sphere Coupler. Krauss is better. :-) "We're all fucked," L. Krauss.

Posted by: Kel, OM | October 26, 2009 10:55 PM

Pretty damned cool how the Krauss video that PZ posted as an antidote to the homeopathy vid covers a lot of the discussion above between David and Sphere Coupler. Krauss is better. :-)

Didn't the discussion start because I linked that video back in post #311?

Posted by: Rorschach | October 27, 2009 3:24 AM

Didn't the discussion start because I linked that video back in post #311?

Indeed !! I think PZ watches our hangout place...:-)

Nerd question for the day : If the universe is 1% us, 30 % dark matter and 70% dark energy, is it possible that there is life out there made of dark matter?

Posted by: Sili | October 27, 2009 3:54 AM

is it possible that there is life out there made of dark matter?

Sean Carroll did have some fun with work on 'dark photons', but my impression is that for DM to 'clump' into life it'd have to have strong interactions (not necessarily strong force strong, but something like EM), and that that doesn't really seem to be the case. It clumps, but no more so than what is required by gravity.

Posted by: Kel, OM | October 27, 2009 5:10 AM

How do we know that it clumps?

The observations that Dark Matter explains. Check out the blog Starts With A Bang for a good intro to the subject.

Posted by: Sphere Coupler | October 27, 2009 7:08 AM

Well Kel, I did watch your link after you posted it and the flat Universe is just so...so boring.
I liked the closed version cause it comes back to bite ya right in the ass:?)

Posted by: Rorschach | October 27, 2009 7:55 AM

And from another awesome music movie, "Across the Universe" :

All you need is love

All my loving

Hey Jude

Posted by: Carlie | October 27, 2009 8:31 AM

I loved every second of Across The Universe. I can't stand purists who complain that making a Beatles movie had already been done by them, so why bother, and who could ever do any interpretation any good other than the Beatles, anyway. As a reviewer noted, do people complain when another version of Romeo and Juliet gets made? "Jeez, Shakespeare already did it, so why bother?" Do they say no one could do Eroica like Beethoven, so no one else should try? No, they don't. So hmpf.

My two favorites from the movie, in complete contrast to each other:

Let it Be
Mr. Kite, featuring Eddie Izzard.

Posted by: Carlie | October 27, 2009 8:57 AM

And for best choreography, along with best surprise appearance by Boyd from Dollhouse: I want you

Posted by: Lynna | October 27, 2009 11:36 AM

Didn't the discussion start because I linked that video back in post #311?

Sorry, Kel, I must have a missed a couple of days of the endless thread. Either that, or I was an idiot and didn't make use of the link you provided.

When I travel, it's to places with no cell phone service, no wireless connections for the laptop, etc. That's my half-assed excuse that may or may not be applicable.

Posted by: Lynna | October 27, 2009 1:02 PM

From the latest issue of Scientific Computing: " An international team of astronomers has reported an unexpected link between mysterious dark matter and the visible stars and gas in galaxies. This could revolutionize our current understanding of gravity."
...
"Now, the astronomers believe that the interactions between dark and ordinary matter could be more important and more complex than previously thought, and even speculate that dark matter might not exist, and that the anomalous motions of stars in galaxies are due to a modification of gravity on extragalactic scales."
http://www.scientificcomputing.com/news-DS-102609.aspx

Posted by: Janine The Ineffable, OM | October 27, 2009 1:45 PM

I Want You(She's So Heavy)-Booker T And The MGs

Beyond The Valley Of A Day In The Life-The Residents

She Loves You-Peter Sellers

Posted by: a_ray_in_dilbert_space | October 27, 2009 2:00 PM

Sphere Coupler, while it may be fun speculating about what dark matter is and whether it even exists, at present there's very little to constrain such speculations to the real axis. That may change with upcoming space missions, such as the Joint Dark Energy Mission (JDEM) and perhaps teh James Webb Space Telescope. Until then, we and all the theorists can speculate all we want. It's fun, but it's not really science.

Posted by: Kel, OM | October 27, 2009 4:20 PM

To continue the lecture tradition on the everlasting thread

I've seen the Jared Diamond lecture before (I even posted it on my blog), but I'm yet to see the other two. Looking forward to them, I'll add them to my pile of lectures to watch.

Sorry, Kel, I must have a missed a couple of days of the endless thread. Either that, or I was an idiot and didn't make use of the link you provided.

Nah, it's all good. Was just pointing out that things went full circle as opposed to being just a coincidence. Though who knows, I'm betting that PZ didn't get the link from this thread.

Posted by: Alan B | October 27, 2009 7:22 PM

Skull of a giant pliosaur found on the Jurassic Coast, Weymouth bay, England (famous for discoveries of other marine reptiles including those found by Mary Anning).

Comparable to other recent finds in Norway - may have been 10-16m long overall.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_8322000/8322629.stm

The skull and lower jaw were found in pieces over a period of time by an amateur collector but they have been purchased by Dorset Council. Discussions are going on about how best to prepare it.

The tip of the skull was found first so the remainder is probably still in the cliff which suffers from major landslips so it will presumably appear in time. What has been shown on the site above is just big hunks of bone with no teeth. I don't know how much else there is.

Posted by: Alan B | October 27, 2009 7:55 PM

#402

Been exploring a bit further.

Some high resolution photos (up to 2 Mb) on this site along with a bit more info.

http://www.dorsetforyou.com/index.jsp?articleid=393960

There are some remains of teeth in parts of the jaw.

155 Ma makes it in the Kimmeridgian Stage of the Upper Jurassic Series. From memory, most of the Kimmeridgian Stage rocks are shales with a series of hard limestone bands. Where they come down to sealevel at Kimmeridge Bay there are oil shales and one of the few on-shore oil wells in the UK. The Kimmeridge shales are responsible for many (?most, ??nearly all) the landslips in the area.

In Weymouth Bay (presumably near Lyme Regis) the bottom of the cliffs is the Lias in the lower Jurassic. They seem cagey about where exactly it was found (hardly surprising!) but I would guess it would be somewhere around Charmouth, possibly between Charmouth and Lyme Regis. The Black Ven area, indeed, from Lyme Regis East and West is notorious for landslips.

The rocks of the Jurassic coast in this area dip gently (a few degrees) towards the East so rocks high in the cliffs ate Lyme Regis come down to sealevel a few miles further East.

LOTS of information on the general area (not this fossil) on Ian West's massive site e.g. Lyme Regis to Charmouth:

http://www.soton.ac.uk/~imw/lymchar.htm

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | October 27, 2009 8:02 PM

Carlie, rum for the brownie after a straight scotch.

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | October 27, 2009 8:04 PM

What do you think Dark Matter is?

No idea, but it's not normal matter (as the Bullet Cluster and other galaxy collisions show very clearly; thanks for the link, Kel). Perhaps the particles predicted by the supersymmetry theory, some of which the LHC might find.

We'll see.

Cool. So in terms of implications for the fossil record, that this compromise be enough to account for the apparent stability over a long period of time and through different climates?

Does such stability through different climates even occur?

Keep in mind that punk eek is only visible at very high resolution, which the fossil record usually doesn't contain.

"Now, the astronomers believe that the interactions between dark and ordinary matter could be more important and more complex than previously thought, and even speculate that dark matter might not exist, and that the anomalous motions of stars in galaxies are due to a modification of gravity on extragalactic scales."

Doesn't work (see Kel's link) because it can't explain the Bullet Cluster.

Posted by: Carlie | October 27, 2009 8:46 PM

Alan B - blended, Chivas 12; it was a gift. Tastes pretty good with ice cream, but I don't have any at the moment. :)

Finally got word a minute ago that I can still buy wood for the winter even this late, but it's being delivered first thing in the morning. That means instead of drinking and going to bed early, I'm going out to get the cash and cleaning out the garage to make room for the load. And since it's coming then, the kids are at school and can't help and the spouse is down with a bum knee, so it's just me moving it all from the driveway where it gets dumped to the garage where it won't get rained on. Yea for exercise?

Posted by: Sphere Coupler | October 27, 2009 8:57 PM

I think PZ is right, Physicist are weird, tho probably for a good reason.

http://www.aip.org/history/newsletter/spring2009/photo_explained.html

Posted by: Sphere Coupler | October 27, 2009 9:25 PM

Carlie, Heating with wood warms you twice, once when you cut it and once again when you burn it.(In your case when you move it.)

Heres a fav of mine.

http://www.aip.org/history/heisenberg/voice1.htm

Enjoy, catcha later I've got to get some brownie's
;?)

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | October 27, 2009 9:46 PM

Great, the eternal thread is now getting bigger due to spam.
*Yells PZ, like Kirk did for Khan in ST II*

Posted by: Kel, OM | October 28, 2009 12:42 AM

Glenlivet 12YO single malt scotch. The quality / price relationship is unmatched.

Posted by: Janine The Ineffable, OM | October 28, 2009 1:12 AM

Posted by: Carlie | October 27, 2009 7:24 PM

Janine, the covers were all excellent during the movie, which was 3/4 of why I liked it so much. :)

No problems. It just got to me that you claimed that people who had no use for the movie were purists. Then I got carried away with the videos.

Posted by: Sili | October 28, 2009 2:05 AM

A friend of an acquaintance got big into wine at some point. They go to France and haul home crates of the stuff. Presumably he'll go this year, too, then.

's not like I buy anything by cheap plonk, myself ...

Glenlivet? Note taken.

Posted by: Feynmaniac | October 28, 2009 4:53 AM

Ever wonder where water on the moon came from? This creationist knows the answer:

You probably? won't believe me, it's from the flood of Noah, when the fountains of the deep broke open, a bunch of the water that shot up into the atmosphere froze and make ice meteors, that's also why some of the world is covered in ice.

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | October 28, 2009 8:07 AM

The initial state is BELOW the Bose-Einstien condensate. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnqAwtorUTE

OK, I'll watch that sometime tomorrow.

I just did. It doesn't explain any such thing.

You see, there simply is no such thing as "BELOW" a Bose-Einstein condensate. That state of matter goes all the way down to absolute zero. In fact, as far as I can tell, it is at absolute zero – that and the 3^rd Law of Thermodynamics are why you can never get all of the atoms in your sample to join the condensate.

Posted by: Sphere Coupler | October 28, 2009 9:25 AM

a_ray_in_dilbert_space, I really don't think Physicist are weird. Actually Physicist, from my perspective seem to be quite normal compared to most people I have met in my lifetime.As far as the Higgs goes, I too think the concept could be worked into the current state of knowledge but this would not add to are current knowledge base and after all(as you say) an expansion of this base is the desired outcome.

In my banter with David I was trying to make him understand that there is an infinite number of possibilities below the Bose-Einstein condensate and that the initial state may not play by our rules we use in everyday life.

What I was trying to get across, was that Dark Matter may have been created (in the first moments)of the BB as a state of transition, never materialising into anything we would recognise such as normal matter and if it does it would be at such long and infrequent time scales as to not be occurring at all.

The knowledge base that we have is a very good foundation to build upon and is quite relevant,yet Imagination can lead one to interesting possibilities and the details can fall into place perhaps at a later date, of course this is not without restrictions. I know you understand what I'm talking about,but I have trouble explaining this to David.

Posted by: Lynna | October 28, 2009 12:05 PM

Alan B - blended, Chivas 12; it was a gift. Tastes pretty good with ice cream, but I don't have any at the moment. :)

Hey, Carlie, glad to hear of a woman after my own heart (or taste buds, as the case may be). I've always like whiskey with icecream, but only had some when I was alone. I was afraid that it might be a sin -- one of those unforgivable sins of lowlife questionable taste.

Thanks to all for the "sea monster" discussion. Loved the BBC video, with the dramatic music making for much hilarity along with the impressive info. So, if I really need something to bite small cars in half, I know what to breed.

Smoggy, Floyd has such good ideas that I am in awe. A bathtub full of liquor, brownie mix, and Floyd! Finally, someone has described a desirable Heaven. (I realize this may be other people's depiction of Hell, but that's only because they are hosting ironic demons whose favorite trick is to turn the virtue of pleasure into a vice.)

Posted by: Carlie | October 28, 2009 12:21 PM

I was afraid that it might be a sin -- one of those unforgivable sins of lowlife questionable taste.

Ha - I came up with it once when I was alone for the evening, and specifically thought "What is the most egregiously decadent thing I can concoct with the ingredients in my house right now?" And thus the brownie-scotch-ice cream dish was born.

The wood is still sitting there, because it's been pouring rain since last night and it was soaked. I figured it has a better chance of drying out in the driveway for a few days. My brother was a tree guy for awhile, but doesn't live where wood heating is common and state land is plentiful, so he didn't make extra money off of the forest service option the way most of the people who sell wood here do.

Posted by: Alan B | October 28, 2009 1:16 PM

#417 Sili asked:

Any recommendations for a complete newbie? Without sophisticated tastebuds.

Until you come to understand the enormous variety of single malts I would suggest you stay away from the island malts such as Islay (Laphroaig, Bowmore, Lagavulin - heavily peated and iodine/sea-weedy) and Talisker (peppery). There is nothing wrong with any of these (very much the opposite) and any visitors who like that style of whisky will thank you but they tend to be an acquired taste.

Once you've avoided the more specialist taste there are then who whole range of Speyside, Highland and Lowland whiskys. Again these range in flavour but the Lowland tend to be subtle, light, fruity, and dry in style i.e. more of an apperitiff than a whisky to snuggle up with after a great meal.

So, I would suggest you start with Highland or Speyside (Note that all these Regions are stated on the label). Look for single malt, Scotland and at least 10 years old. Common sense obviously says, start at the cheapest and see how you like that style then explore. There are many sites which give tasting notes on different whiskys which may or may help. Depending where you live, you may find miniatures to sample or you might go round to someone you know likes whiskys and say you are just starting into whisky and you may find they'll help your search further (get someone else to drive the car ...)

Posted by: Alan B | October 28, 2009 2:20 PM

#430 Lynna said:

So, if I really need something to bite small cars in half, I know what to breed.

The stakes have been raised - in one of the UK papers it is said it could bite small armoured cars in half.

"Do I hear Challenger 2? No? Howabout M1 Abrams with Chobham armour? Ah, a new plesiosaur in the corner - M4? AlrightbutI'm sure we can do better than that. Predator X, Dorset Pliosaur? Come on - any more bids?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnbyXzusn0c&feature=related

or, among the professionals: only in America would they sell you a DVD on how to do it ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcSFhGOSmkY&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvfrR0ZU-L4&NR=1

Posted by: Sphere Coupler | October 28, 2009 5:19 PM

routine?...Now I have foreign matter in my nose.
(caused by abrupt and suppressed laughter)

Posted by: Sphere Coupler | October 28, 2009 6:22 PM

Apparently the more refined method won't work for me, my sinuses were fucked up before the Feynmaniac posting of (reaching thru the Internet and spontaneously activating biological processes)
The wasabi looks good tho,yet I've never had it(I think.)

I do keep a medicinal jar of pretty hot peppers (and yes they are pretty)for colds and unexpected occurrences.

Think I read somewhere a long time ago (before the Internet) that the Spanish during their travels in humid regions in the earlier centuries had dried pepper in a snuff box hanging from a small rope(necklace.)

Just can't bring myself to snorting anything, so I just ate a pretty pepper.I mean a pretty hot pepper.

Posted by: 'Tis Himself | October 29, 2009 5:46 PM

Step we gaily on we go, Heel for heel and toe for toe, Arm in arm and row and row, All for Marie's wedding.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JddRkt_FYDY

Posted by: MrFire | October 30, 2009 2:03 PM

This little number is for all you Paolo Conte lovers out there...

Posted by: JeffreyD | October 30, 2009 6:02 PM

'Tis Himself at #442, I do not have a video for it, but I love the Van Morrision/Chieftains version of Marie's wedding. Do you know it?

Ciao

Posted by: 386sx | October 30, 2009 8:16 PM

Looks like Ray Comfort took the ol' scissors to his On the Origin of Species.

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/god-and-country/2009/10/30/how-creationist-origin-distorts-darwin.html

Surely he does this dumb stuff for attention! Or spite. Or both! Who knows...

Posted by: Kel, OM | October 30, 2009 9:28 PM

Looks like Ray Comfort took the ol' scissors to his On the Origin of Species.

Knew that would happen. The lying bastard!

Posted by: Kel, OM | October 30, 2009 10:12 PM

I guess I expect even the slightest bit of honesty from people. But that's me as an atheist, somehow I'm the one who holds honesty as moral and I'm the one called who is labelled immoral...

Posted by: Sphere...Coupler | October 30, 2009 10:22 PM

David, I am in agreement of your statement:

Imagination is fine. It's after all where all new theories come from. But it needs to be constantly thrown against reality so we can find out when it leads into error. (Lest we end up writing book after book about hot air, the way Plantinga does for instance.)

In regards to this statement please see comment 206 in this link.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/10/physics.php

But have you got any evidence that that's the case?

The quest for knowledge is a long and wonderful road.

$1.386sx ® Regarding:

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/god-and-country/2009/10/30/how-creationist-origin-distorts-darwin.html
Isn't the alteration of someone else's work, and the distributing of it as complete...illegal?

Posted by: Sphere Coupler | October 30, 2009 11:06 PM

Kel, If you have ever been in a position where confronted by blatant lies from an employer and that employer and his yes men know the truth yet follow in step...it is the oddest experience that I have ever had, kinda like bizarro world.
Indeed, take heart because lies are built on a poor foundation and will not survive time.

Nerd, sometimes it really bites to be that guy, you know, where your presence is needed above all else...Damn leash.

Posted by: Sven DiMilo | October 30, 2009 11:27 PM

Sometimes I loves the Internets, and right now it's for this amazing vid (actually from 1959).

Posted by: Sphere Coupler | October 31, 2009 12:02 AM

$1.386sx ®

I understand that people do parodies of other peoples work but it shows a great malfeasance to alter and mislead by omittance, which is akin to trying to rewrite history.
Maybe it's not illegal but these works are in the public domain and what a waste of resources they have created in dishonesty.
Someones should offer the omitted parts for free.

These people have my contempt.

Kel,This is my experience and you may never be confronted with such extremes but if you are and your humanity is shattered by the experience, remember that it was but a small subsection of humanity that brought it upon you and
in contrast to the whole picture is insignificant. Ones humanity is very resilient.

Sven...Got another?

Posted by: Sphere Coupler | October 31, 2009 12:28 AM

Oh believe me I've had my doubts about humanity and have reached some real lows yet it tends to be short lived, Humans have a redeeming quality, not sure what it is, but we have one.
Somehow, I can't picture you in "cotton wool 24/7"

Wow,you're just starting out,what a exciting time in you're life.(I'll refrain from posting George Burns "I'd like to do it again.)

Posted by: 386sx | October 31, 2009 2:15 AM

Daniel Dennett nails theology...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_9w8JougLQ

Posted by: 'Tis Himself | October 31, 2009 6:17 AM

I love the Van Morrision/Chieftains version of Marie's wedding. Do you know it?

That's a good version as well. Here it is (ignore the video, the lyrics don't synchronize with the scrolling words):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLc-khXNS-k

Posted by: 'Tis Himself | October 31, 2009 6:40 AM

The background for SEF's comment reminded me of a fun* website: Design your own tartan.

*Okay, I find it fun. But then I'm a nerd.

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | October 31, 2009 8:34 AM

Just re'd this paper. It says nothing whatsoever about "states below the Bose-Einstein condensate", for any meaning of "below". What it does is to predict the temperature below which a Bose-Einstein condensate can exist from the density of the thin gas that exists above that temperature. So what was your point?

In regards to this statement please see comment 206 in this link.

Just did so. I still don't see your point. The scientific method consists of making hypotheses up (imagination) and then comparing them to reality to see if they can be shown to be wrong, and if not, if they can be shown to be more complicated than necessary.

My point is that you make up hypotheses without bothering to test them.

But have you got any evidence that that's the case?

The quest for knowledge is a long and wonderful road.

Here, on the other hand, I do understand your point: you want to say "no" in as poetic a way as possible.

Posted by: llewelly | October 31, 2009 11:42 AM

Soak a Laphraoig into a brownie and you will get the kind of taste experience you deserve!!

A few times I made coconut milk fudge and soaked it with Islay. I loved it, but I think most people would find it unspeakably weird.

Posted by: Sphere Coupler | October 31, 2009 12:19 PM

David said:
My point is that you make up hypotheses without bothering to test them.

Sphere Coupler says:
hypothesis implies insufficient evidence to provide more than a tentative explanation.

David says: I don't want to know what's on first,who's on second.

Sphere Coupler says:I'm telling you who's on first.

David says:I don't know is on third.

Good luck David your on your own.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | October 31, 2009 5:10 PM

Alan B, you don't need to sign in at the moment.

Posted by: Alan B | October 31, 2009 6:22 PM

#476 Nerd of Redhead, OM

So why did it tell me I had to? And why did it say:

Thanks for signing in, Alan B. Now you can comment.

"Now" I can. Before it said I couldn't. But I didn't have so the computer was telling fibs. I'm going to bed.

P.S. Haven't forgotten I am going to produce some more YEC "stuff". I was waiting for the erudite commenters to resolve the origin of the Universe (and I've found it more difficult to sort out what I want to say - and how to say it).

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | October 31, 2009 6:32 PM

Alan B, PZ threatened to turn on registration last weekend, but didn't. Probably an artifact from that.

I tend to stay registered, since that way I don't have to keep typing in my moniker and e-mail on that antiquated piece of #$%^&* at work. I just carry that habit over to home, where there is a nice type-ahead feature to fill in these forms.

Posted by: 386sx | October 31, 2009 11:50 PM

FOX & Friends Discuss: Atheism vs. Christianity
Christopher Hitchens and Pastor Douglas Wilson

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22XjLvWi2bU&feature=player_embedded

Christianity is not a myth, because if Jesus didn't come back from the dead, then Christianity would be appalling.

Nice argument. Makes perfect sense! (Not.)

Posted by: Alan B | November 1, 2009 5:17 AM

#480 Nerd of redhead said:

I tend to stay registered, since that way I don't have to keep typing in my moniker and e-mail...

So do I but it kicks me off about every 3 days!

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | November 1, 2009 7:13 AM

hypothesis implies insufficient evidence to provide more than a tentative explanation.

Not at all. That's not what "hypothesis" means. The difference between "hypothesis" and "theory" is mainly one of size – theories (aim to) explain bigger parts of reality than hypotheses.

David says: I don't want to know what's on first,who's on second.

Sphere Coupler says:I'm telling you who's on first.

David says:I don't know is on third.

I don't understand any of that. Please help me out.

It's a culture shock, you see: I'm not used to your poetic-mystical metaphors.

so, ummm... back to explaining punk eek to the layman?

Stabilizing selection and directional selection alternating – the latter occurring only when the environment changes.

So why did it tell me I had to [sign in]?

What is "it"?

Yes, above the comment field it says "Sign in to comment on this entry". But that has been up ever since it became possible to sign in. It's a plain lie. Signing in has only been obligatory when PZ turned registration on, and it has been off for... was it really just one week?

As mentioned above, PZ said he'd turn registration back on. He didn't do that, however.

Posted by: Sphere Coupler | November 1, 2009 9:06 AM

David

You provided a link to *General Assembly of the State of Ohio*...you've got to be kidding, you want me to accept that drivel as explanation of scientific processes, oh and by the way trying to segway into a creationist forum to acquire sympathetic response from our fellowship is pathetic.

David you'll have to do better than that,I would accept an explanation from the field of Physics only.

Posted by: Lynna | November 1, 2009 11:38 AM

I, very belatedly, caught up with the coverage of the dust and fire storms in Australia. There was a great article in The New Yorker on "The Inferno", plus a nice bit of writing from Christopher Hitchens on the dust. Excerpt from Hitchens:

SYDNEY, Australia—This wondrous city awoke last month to find that it was experiencing any metaphor you like, from "darkness at dawn" to "red dawn." A gigantic cloud of dust had blown in from the interior, shrouding the capital of New South Wales in a sinister and choking mist of particles. A completely sane friend and editor of mine said that he thought for a few moments that the North Koreans had finally succumbed to a death wish and decided to obliterate Down Under as a dress rehearsal. A taxi driver hailing from Serbia was more phlegmatic, telling me that for once he was glad of the lack of rain, because if it had come down while the air was full of this matter, the whole place would have been waist deep in mud. But the wind brought it, and the wind bore it away—dumping some dust as far away as New Zealand—and the experience would have been fairly easily forgotten if not for the nagging fact that no meteorologist or climatologist had come anywhere close to predicting what, in retrospect, had evidently been brewing for some time.

http://www.slate.com/id/2232190/
     I thought of Smoggy and Floyd. Floyd would have loved being "waist deep in mud" but all that lung-invading dust didn't coincide with rain.
     In a "bonus explainer" Slate correspondent Brian Palmer salved my need for constant injections of geological facts:

Why is the dust orange in the first place? Because there's so little vegetation. Southeastern Australian soil is composed of weathered ferric rocks. The iron makes the resulting clay minerals—like nontronite, saponite, and volkonsokite—orange-ish. This process is certainly not unique to the land Down Under. Many regions started out orange but eventually transitioned to brown or black as vegetation sprang up in the fertile clay and composted into dark organic matter. The climate around Sydney is too arid for trees and shrubs to proliferate, so the area retains its original hue. The lack of vegetation also explains the frequent dust storms. Clay is flaky, and there aren't many trees or roots to prevent it from sweeping across the plains.

An abstract of The New Yorker story is Here A digital subscription is required to read the whole story. It's quite dramatic:

By the time he was a few miles from Marysville, he could see a colossal firewall coming toward him from the southwest. It was three hundred feet high. He raced it all the way back to the town, driving on the wrong side of the road to get through blocked intersections and dodging cars that sped toward him in their effort to flee. The fire behind Ackerman emitted a roar like a jet engine and threw embers and fireballs out ahead of him. Huge patches of trees and grass ignited around the car as he drove. In his mind Ackerman started running through the steps of his fire plan.

Reminds me of the time when huge chunks of Yellowstone National Park, the Scapegoat Wilderness, and the Bob Marshall Wilderness burned here in the late 1980s. We still saw the scars from those fires when we hiked the Continental Divide Trail.

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | November 1, 2009 1:07 PM

the organism remains basically the same through several small changes until it's quite different, at which time the organism goes through strong selection and therefore rapid evolution to match it.

The population, of course, not any single organism.

You provided a link to *General Assembly of the State of Ohio*...

Please.

Keep reading. And visit the homepage. You must be very short-sighted and/or impatient indeed to confuse that with a creationist forum.

I would accept an explanation from the field of Physics only.

All these terms have the same meanings all over science. Biology is no different from physics here.

David, you still may or may not get it...it's very American, a baseball thing.

Ah. Then I'll not get it. :-)

Posted by: 386sx | November 1, 2009 3:11 PM

Posted by: Sven DiMilo | November 1, 2009 6:14 PM

#496 Posted by: Drugs Online Pharmacy | November 1, 2009 5:53 PM [kill]​[hide comment] Fioricet pills pain relief pills overnight shipping free prescription http://DrugsOnlinePharmacy.com

Can you believe this shit? PharmSpam in the Thread Eternal!

Not only is it most annoying, but soon we'll have to deal with logging in again.
plus it's gonna fuck up the count when it gets disappeared...

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | November 1, 2009 6:31 PM

For now, alcohol for a pain killer. Later, naproxin.

Begone Spambot....

Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | November 2, 2009 1:44 AM

Dracula+Zombies+Frankenstein's Monster=Jesus

though, technically, since Dracula has also risen from the dead, that would be Dracula=Jesus

Posted by: Rorschach | November 2, 2009 3:51 AM

There goes another irony meter, german cardinal Meisner godwins Dawkins:

http://forum.richarddawkins.net/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=97946&start=0

Posted by: Rorschach | November 2, 2009 3:57 AM

He's a bit notorious for it that chap....One of the worst, together with that Fulda guy I forget his name....

But man is Meisner killing evil strawmen in that rant, what a complete and utter moron.

Posted by: SEF | November 2, 2009 8:28 AM

This example of someone being expelled for science has been rumbling on for a few days now in the UK; but I haven't seen mention of it here yet. NB The Grauniad seems to have been following it more closely over the days (that's just one of many articles there).

Posted by: Lynna | November 2, 2009 3:20 PM

The Philadelphia Enquirer has a nice roundup of the legal issues surrounding gay marriage at http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20091101_Yes__It_is_a_fundamental_right_under_the_U_S__Constitution_.html?viewAll=Y&text=#comments Excerpt below:

The constitutional issue is quite simple. The Supreme Court repeatedly has held that the right to marry the person of your choice is a fundamental human right guaranteed by the equal-protection and due-process clauses of the Constitution:
     In 1967, in Loving v. Virginia, a unanimous court overturned the laws of more than 20 states that at the time prohibited interracial marriage.
     In 1978, the Supreme Court, in Zablocki v. Redhail, vacated as unconstitutional (by an 8-1 vote) a Wisconsin law preventing child-support scofflaws from getting married. The court emphasized, "Decisions of this court confirm that the right to marry is of fundamental importance for all individuals."
     In 1987, in Turner v. Safley, the court, in a unanimous opinion written by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, struck down as unconstitutional a Missouri law preventing imprisoned felons from marrying, holding that marriages were "expressions of emotional support and public commitment. These elements are an important and significant aspect of the marital relationship."
     In 2003, Lawrence v. Texas held that states could not constitutionally outlaw consensual homosexual activity. In his dissenting opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia noted that the court's ruling undermined the rationale for any state limitations on gay marriage.

The article goes on to outline the legal arguments for States to decide on their own.

Posted by: Alan B | November 2, 2009 4:31 PM

“Share and Enjoy”

Part 1 of the follow-on from #194 & #247

Before I start I would like to make a few things clear:

1) I am trying to look at what YEC flood geologists have written in the open literature. Everything I have cited and quoted so far is available without paywalls or special passwords and can be accessed straightforwardly. Occasionally it takes a bit of finding but there appears to be no deliberate attempt to hide how YEC contributors are attempting to develop YEC flood geology. For this they are to be applauded. In one way this is an improvement on the formal scientific literature where it is often difficult to get access to anything beyond an abstract, the paper being protected by paywalls.

2) Please note, all of this is my personal opinion. I am trying not to talk too much about motives, especially motives of named individuals although sometimes I may drift too close to this border for some (and stay too far away for others).

3) I am aware that some of those I am quoting may have moved on from views expressed 10-15 years ago. I have not deliberately quoted sources that I know to be out of date. To my knowledge, none of the ideas have been repudiated at the level of the initial statement and many of the papers are cited by more recent articles and statements from YEC organisations. Not surprisingly, some authors have informally said they have moved on in their thinking. For example, I understand that one of the British “non-traditionalists” now would support a Flood/Post-Flood boundary at the end of the Ordovician rather than the end of the Palaeozoic but I cannot afford the time to follow up every nuance.

4) If only RogerS or Alan Clarke had come up with a formulated position it would save all of this. If it were based on evidence it would have been even better!

Last time I started talking about how AiG and other “Traditional” YEC flood geologists have tackled the alternative YEC approach where some attempt is made to look at the evidence supplied in the geological succession. Quoting a profoundly excellent source [myself!]:

The actual route for denormalising the alternative model seems to have had two parallel threads:

Raise doubts about the validity of the scientific interpretation of the geological record and

Propose an entirely new way of interpreting the record in line with the Genesis story as (mis)understood by YEC.

I would like to concentrate on the second route this evening.

[Part 2 to follow as soon as I have written it!]

Posted by: Carlie | November 2, 2009 5:22 PM

A major concern of Genie Scott was that the copy of On the Origin of Species sent to her by my publisher was missing "four crucial chapters," as well as Darwin's introduction. She will be pleased to know that the second printing of 170,000 copies (the one that we will give to students) is the entire book. Not one word will be omitted.

That's how he starts it - so he doesn't even bother to try to explain why! It basically reads as "Ha ha, you caught me. My bad."

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | November 2, 2009 7:30 PM

<hands rock hammer and Estwing Special Geo-Paleo Pickaxe™ to Jadehawk>

Nerd, did PZ mention when registration would resume?

Er, yes... a week ago. :-| Somehow didn't happen.

Posted by: Sphere Coupler | November 2, 2009 10:33 PM

Omne salutare PZ de libera orationis.

quemadmodum monumentum?

Nullus est liber tam malus ut non aliqua parte prosit

Posted by: Feynmaniac | November 2, 2009 11:05 PM

A terminator breaks into the Dollhouse and (surprise!) it's played by a former Battlestar Galactica cast member.

Posted by: Sphere Coupler | November 2, 2009 11:32 PM

Carlie,
I have some friends in the printing industry so I know a little of the biz, very little.

You have to provide the printer with a proofed copy and on a large run the printer would have made sure all work proofed printed before he printed very many copies, especially in today's world where the number of printers has diminished.

If a large amount was printed I would suspect the proof provided lacked the entire work and it was not the printers fault.

Posted by: Kel, OM | November 3, 2009 1:18 AM

Victim in Fatal Car Accident Tragically Not Glenn Beck

That was tragically hilarious.

Glenn Beck - Proof there is no God, or if there is it's not one worthy of worship

Posted by: Kel, OM | November 3, 2009 1:59 AM

Honestly I think Glenn Beck would be absolutely hilarious if it weren't for the fact that a fair percentage of the American population take him seriously. Same goes for Ray Comfort - that guy cracks me up until I remember that honest people give that charlatan dishonest liar for Jesus money.

Posted by: Alan B | November 3, 2009 8:26 AM

The oldest British dinosaur to be found is to be excavated and reconstructed now that money has been provided.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20091103/tuk-uk-s-oldest-dinosaur-to-be-excavated-dba1618.html

Thecondontosaurus antiquus.

210 Ma, cost £295,000, to take 3 years.

I'll see if I can find out more.

Posted by: Alan B | November 3, 2009 9:01 AM

#526/527

Detailed anatomy and systematics paper on the Bristol dinosaur species (obviously not the current specimen):

http://cincyevolution.com/vertpaleo/Curator%20publications_files/Benton,%20et%20al.%202000

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | November 3, 2009 9:20 AM

Alan B, I'll take a look when I get home. Sounds interesting.

For those of you in the USA, the PBS show Nova starts a three part series on "Becoming Human" tonight.

Posted by: Forbidden Snowflake | November 3, 2009 1:01 PM

Dear Pharyngulites, let's play a game of NAME THAT CHARACTER!

Some traits:
- Possessed superhuman abilities
- Often communicated in obscure fables
- Often spoke of mythical, absent father figure
- Fed multitudes of poor in public displays
- Held the accumulation of wealth in low regard
- Held academic learnin' in low regard
- Rubbed the authorities the wrong way
- Forgave own enemies

Any guesses?

Posted by: AJ Milne | November 3, 2009 1:09 PM

Oh! Oh! Pick me! Pick me!

Is it Popeye?

...

No?

(/Also sucks at Trivial Pursuit...)

Posted by: aratina cage | November 3, 2009 1:12 PM

Mao Zedong?

Posted by: Forbidden Snowflake | November 3, 2009 1:25 PM

Oooh! I have one more!

- Promised most faithful followers salvation from the inevitability of aging and dying.

Also:
aratina cage: wow. just wow.

Posted by: aratina cage | November 3, 2009 1:41 PM

wow. just wow. -Forbidden Snowflake

I thought it might be a trick question, but I guess not. There are stories of Mao's superhuman abilities (especially during the Long March) so it didn't rule him out in my mind. See Cult of Mao for a little taste of Mao the legendary character.

Posted by: Janine The Ineffable, OM | November 3, 2009 1:49 PM

There are two kinds of personality cults. One is a healthy personality cult, that is, to worship men like Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin. Because they hold the truth in their hands. The other is a false personality cult, i.e. not analyzed and blind worship.

Mao Zedong

It is breathe taking in how utterly self serving this statement is. Your blind worship of me is not blind worship.

Posted by: Forbidden Snowflake | November 3, 2009 2:02 PM

*sigh*

OK, one final hint:
- Owned a horse and a monkey and lived in a villa in Sweden all on her own.

Posted by: Ragutis | November 3, 2009 3:07 PM

Is this attention grabbing enough?

Hope so, because I'm guessing more than a few around here will be interested:

NOVA has a new 3 part special "Becoming Human" and it starts tonight. (8pm ET) This is the first I'm hearing of it, and figured I should spread the word. Make sure you've got liquid refreshment and get the popcorn popping.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/beta/evolution/becoming-human-part-1.html

Posted by: Alan B | November 3, 2009 3:41 PM

#544

http://www.kiddiematinee.com/p-pippi.html

Posted by: Alan B | November 3, 2009 4:00 PM

#548/549 Grr!!

Posted by: Rorschach | November 3, 2009 7:05 PM

This was just posted in the Australian "Age" newspaper :

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/a-plague-of-atheists-has-descended-and-catholics-are-the-target-20091103-hv52.html

The comments are pretty much unisono opposed to the nutcase who wrote it, who happens to be vice-chancellor of a catholic Uni.
Good to see the upcoming convention is having such a strong media echo and is causing public debate !

Posted by: Rorschach | November 3, 2009 7:27 PM

Hi Brian,

very heartening to read the comments though (yours included) dont you think?
It seems society is ready to have this debate now, and that's great !

Posted by: Brian English | November 3, 2009 7:38 PM

Rorschach, it's great. This article is a sign that we're making waves. They'd ignore us if they could. But they can't.

Posted by: 'Tis Himself | November 3, 2009 7:53 PM

Rorschach,

It appears that Craven thinks he's a wit. He's half right.

Posted by: 'Tis Himself | November 3, 2009 7:58 PM

Caine,

My experience in Catholic schools was similar to yours. I wasn't sexually abused, but I was beaten (I still have scars on my buttocks) and generally mocked. I was studious, intelligent, hard working and generally inoffensive, so I got off lightly compared to some of the other boys.

Posted by: Dianne | November 3, 2009 8:08 PM

Would this be the Harry Potter with a vault full of gold?

Pippi also had a trunk full of gold. But both are characterized as seeing money as a useful but not terribly important thing.

Posted by: John Morales | November 3, 2009 8:31 PM

I too went through Catholic schooling, and yeah corporal punishment and/or humiliation were the first choices for perceived infractions or dissent. Particularly at the boarding-schools, which thinking back on it were much like prisons.

I have no fond memories of those years, at all — but, at the time, it was no biggie — we children didn't know any better, it was just the way things were.

Posted by: Rorschach | November 3, 2009 9:00 PM

I liked this comment :

"They want everyone to know that they have not found God"? What rot. We want christians (and competing brands) to get a grip, cast aside medieval superstition and enter the 21st century.

Posted by: Caine | November 3, 2009 9:22 PM

The "They want everyone to know that they have not found God" bit caused me to roll my eyes so hard my spine hurt. It's classic 'twist it all about, then shout'.

If PsychoSkyDad or Jesus knocked on my door and provided actual evidence of who they were, I'd be glad to offer them a cuppa tea or something stronger and have a chat. If that happened, yeah, I'd believe they existed. It certainly wouldn't mean I'd fall down and worship them.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | November 3, 2009 9:49 PM

That's assault and battery to say nothing of child abuse.

Parents just don't press charges. If they do, the kid is kicked out of school, and many parents don't want their kids in public schools (never mind that the pregnancy rate at the local Catholic HS was much higher than that at the Public HS).

Posted by: 'Tis Himself | November 3, 2009 9:52 PM

The abuse at school was considered to be par for the course, so to speak. More thought of as discipline, I suppose.

The one time I complained to my parents about being beaten the response was: "If you didn't act up then Brother Louis wouldn't have to discipline you."

I actually received a good education at those schools. I'd probably have appreciated it more if getting the education wasn't so painful, both physically and psychologically.

Posted by: Dianne | November 3, 2009 9:56 PM

Parents just don't press charges.

First reaction: Whatthe? If it were my kid...well, ok, I might not press charges. I might settle for flinging the guilty party into a wall instead. (Not an approved method of dealing with the situation but I won't pretend to be the perfect pacifist.) But seriously, the kid went to the hospital! It was probably dumb luck that he wasn't killed. Press charges!

If they do, the kid is kicked out of school, and many parents don't want their kids in public schools

Ok, given that I broke and asked to go to a private HS when I found out that my older sister's (public school) biology teacher was a creationist, I can sympathize. But how good a school can it be if the teachers spend their time having fits like that?

(never mind that the pregnancy rate at the local Catholic HS was much higher than that at the Public HS).

Abstinence education and example will do that for you.

Posted by: Rorschach | November 3, 2009 10:02 PM

To get the general tone of that article here's the intro :

FROM time immemorial, this world has been troubled by plagues. From bogong moths in Canberra to frogs in biblical Egypt, unwelcome and unlovely creatures have the awkward habit of turning up in bulk.

Just now, we are facing one of our largest and least appealing infestations. Somewhat in advance of summer's blowflies, we are beset by atheists. Worse, they are not traditional atheists. These tended to be quiet blokes called Algie with ancillary interests in nudist ceramics, who were perfectly happy as long as you pretended to accept a pamphlet in Flinders Lane.

Posted by: Owlmirror | November 3, 2009 10:18 PM

Caine -- was this in Ireland?

I've seen anecdotes of two types of Catholic school -- the nearly secular ones, where science was taught as understood, and religion was something tacked on extra, and it was all very modernist; and those like you describe, a little slice of Hell.

Did Sister Mary Augustus receive any penalties?

Posted by: Caine | November 3, 2009 10:27 PM

Owlmirror, no. St. Anne's, in Santa Ana, California, U.S.A. As for Sister Mary Augustus, no penalties. If she was ever scolded, chastised or whatever for her behaviour, it was kept private. Her behaviour in class never changed. She actually used to stamp her feet - the sort of thing little kids are supposed to do. She was a frightening person, and while she never gained any respect from her class, we were intimidated to the core. That seemed to be satisfactory to her, but you could never be sure of her.

Posted by: Kel, OM | November 3, 2009 10:51 PM

This is a response I wrote, I'll put it up on my blog later. Any tips / suggestions / errors? It's very tl;dr.



The Persecution Song

Thanks to Pharyngula commenter Rorschach, I've been alerted to this opinion piece in the age. The Vice Chancellor of the Australian Catholic University rallying against what he sees as an infestation of atheists that want to attack Christians and Catholics in particular.

Just now, we are facing one of our largest and least appealing infestations. Somewhat in advance of summer's blowflies, we are beset by atheists. Worse, they are not traditional atheists. These tended to be quiet blokes called Algie with ancillary interests in nudist ceramics, who were perfectly happy as long as you pretended to accept a pamphlet in Flinders Lane.

Yes, if only we were at a point where atheists were meak and inoffensive, a but nutty and not at all to be taken seriously. Gone are those days (I'm only 25, did they ever exist?) and there has been a new paradigm shift in behaviours of non-believers.

No, the new hobby atheist is as brash, noisy and confident as a cheap electric kettle. They want everyone to know that they have not found God, and that no one else should.

In a religious world, finding the confidence to speak out is tough. In Australia we have it lucky, there's not much overbearing religion so I find there's no reason really to speak out against it. I'll happily rant on the internet where believers are more than willing to engage, but outside the cyberwalls there's just no need. But I think there's a fundamental truth hidden inside such a statement, in a society where its expected to believe in a higher power, it should be able to be stated that it's not necessary and there are means by which to live without such a belief.

Though I wonder where such claims are being heard. I've seen plenty of Christians doorknocking, handing out pamphlets. I've even had a Buddhist stop me and try to sell me a book. Plenty of people trying to get me to sign up for different charities. But not once have I had a single person on the street ever preach there is no God. Maybe they exist on streets I don't walk on.

Their particular target seems to be Catholics. On the surface, this is odd, as there are plenty of other religious targets just waiting to be saved from a vengeful, non-existent deity. Smaller herds, such as the Christadelphians or the Salvation Army, might seem more manageable. But the Catholic Church has two incomparable advantages as an object of the wrath of proselytising atheists. First, it is the biggie. Taking out the Catholics is the equivalent of nuking the Pentagon. Guerilla bands of Baptists and Pentecostals can be liquidated at leisure.

I would really love to see evidence that this is anti-Catholicism. This sounds quite paranoid actually. Interesting that arguing against Catholic activity is being compared to terrorism, rather than protesting the United States military involvement. Maybe it's just me but I can see a difference between speaking out on the US occupation of Iraq and trying to blow up the symbol of American military dominance. When atheists start blowing up churches and threatening to destroy the vatican, I'll concede the point.

Though this may again be symptomatic of my socio-economic status, but the biggest bashing I see by Australian atheists is on fundamentalist religions - Hillsong is more than anything else the organisation that draws the biggest ire. Beyond that it seems that the complaints against Catholicism are to do more with the running of the church than anything else. But I'll come to that soon.

Second, the Catholics have the undeniable advantage that they do still demonstrably believe in something. Attacking some of the more swinging Christian denominations might mean upsetting people who believe a good deal less than the average atheist.

Yes, those Evangelical chruches who take the bible as the inerrant word of God are the ones who don't really believe demonstratably in anything. Again, the main focus I've seen most atheists attacking is what Catholics should consider a straw man argument - it's against a literal interpretation of the bible. But again that's just my experience.

Mind you, the appeals of atheism as a diverting pastime are not immediately obvious to those of us who are on relatively easy terms with God. Why would anyone get so excited about the misconceptions of third parties as to the existence of a fourth party in which they themselves do not believe?

Why would atheists rally against religion? I'm looking forward to this.

The answer is twofold. First, the great advantage of designer atheism is that you get to think of yourself as immensely clever. After all, you are at least much brighter than all those dumb-asses who believe in a supreme being, such as Sister Perpetua down the road, Thomas Aquinas, Isaac Newton and Dietrich Bonhoeffer. So satisfying.

The sense of intellectual superiority. Interesting. I suppose there is something to this, people must be real dumb-asses to believe in the Judeo-Christian construct of God. That 44% of Mensa believe in Astrology and 56% believe that aliens have visited our world is besides the point, smart people cannot believe in weird things. Thus Spake Zarathustra.

And the obligatory namedropping of smart believers in a situation like this. Look smart Christians, therefore I've completely invalidated this straw man argument. ha ha! You can taste the desperation in the air, though maybe that's because I'm on a floor full of IT workers. I'll give Craven the benefit of the doubt here.

The second factor has to do with wit. For some reason, contemporary Australian atheism seems to consider itself terribly funny. Its proponents only have to wheel out one of the age-old religious libels to lose control of their bladders. To outsiders, of course, it is a bit like watching a giggling incontinent drunk at a party. This is not to say that believers - and perhaps especially Catholics - do not get seriously irritated by atheists. They do, but not because atheists are fearfully clever or Wildely funny.

Again he's got us, damn and here I was thinking that Tim Minchin settled this debate in his humourous song "Ten Foot Cock And A Few Hundred Virgins" where he used incredible wit to ridicule Paley's watchmaker argument and thus destroy the designer argument that Hume couldn't do because he wrote it in a philosophical dialogue - and Aussies are more about the wit than the substance.

Frankly, the prime reason the average believer finds the common or garden atheist as appealing as a holiday in Birchip is because they consign them to that sorry category of individuals who spend their lives loudly congratulating themselves on their own intelligence without noticing that no one else is joining the chorus. Thus, as a Catholic, I do not normally sense in some tabloid atheist the presence of a supreme discerning intellect. I simply place him or her in much the same pitiable bin of intellectual vulgarians as the chartered accountant who cannot see the art in Picasso, the redneck who cannot admit of indigenous culture, and the pissant who cannot see the difference between Yeats and Bob Ellis.

It's not about saying "I'm more intelligent than you", but I'm sure when someone says a cherished belief if silly that it must be out of stupidity. So Muslims who believe that Muhammad ascended to heaven on the back of a winged horse only believe that out of stupidity, and the Christians who reject that are doing so out of smarts... of course not. Does the muslim who rejects the notion of the trinity do so out of a sense of intellectual superiority? Does the Buddhist? What about rejecting the notion that Uri Gellar can bend spoons with his mind? Keep working that straw man.

It is not deep perception we encounter here, but a critical failure of imaginative capacity. It is a bit like the old joke: how many atheists does it take to screw in a lightbulb? None - no matter what they do, they just can't see the light.

oh I get it, the use of wit. For some reason, contemporary Australians seem to consider themselves terribly funny...

The second wearying thing about the new atheism is that it is not new at all. It is so banally derivative of every piece of hate mail ever sent to God that I am amazed Satan has yet to sue for copyright infringement. No old chestnut is too ripe, rotten or sodden, especially when it comes to the Catholics as accredited suppliers of what apparently is the Christian equivalent of methamphetamine.

I actually agree, there's not anything new in the arguments really of the new atheism. Not that there needs to be. Creationism still does just fine trumpeting long discredited arguments like evolution violates thermodynamics. Just because the argument still exists in the public sphere doesn't mean that it hasn't been discredited already. The difference between the new atheists and what came before (from what I can tell) is that it is a reaction to the spread of cultural relativism; that it's considered important to speak out against what is perceived wrongness. As for what is that perceived wrongness?

In an average week of atheistic bigotry in the Melbourne media, we can expect to learn that Catholics endorse child molestation, hate all other religions, would re-introduce the crusades and the auto de fe at the slightest opportunity, despise women, wish to persecute homosexuals, greedily divert public moneys for their own religious purposes, subvert public health care, brainwash children, and are masterminding the spread of the cane toad across northern Australia.

Endorse child molestation? No. If there was a childcare organisation that systematically covered up the abuse of children in its care by moving carers from one child centre to another and paid hush money to the victims, that wouldn't be endorsing it. To label homosexuality and abortion deadly sins aren't in the slightest acts to persecute homosexuals or deny the rights of the woman. And offering disgruntled Anglican priests who are against the Church of England's allowance of gay and women priests a place in the Catholic Church? That's not anything at all. George Pell may have threatened NSW politicians who voted for stem cell research with excommunication, but you're not meant to focus on that.

This is what I don't get, it seems somwhere along the lines the happenings of the Catholic Church has been conflated with individual Catholics themselves. To speak out against the sytematic cover-up of child abuse by members of the Catholic order is meant to be taken as a condemnation of all people who call themselves Catholic. This is nothing more than claiming persecution where there is none, protecting immoral practices on the grounds of indignity.

At the bottom, of course, lies hate. I am not quite clear why our modern crop of atheists hates Christians, as opposed to ignoring or even politely dismissing them, but they very clearly do. There is nothing clever, witty or funny about hate.

Hate? HATE?!? It's not about hate at all. I've got to say I don't know any atheist who hates Christians just because there are Christian. But again, that may be just in the circles I reside in. I know atheists who are incredibly anti-theist, others who are supportive of religion, and many who don't care. But it seems that daring to speak out on social issues that go against the church has to be underlined by hate. It can't be about protecting children, it can't be about equal rights - we must hate Christians and particularly Catholics in order to say anything.

I'd be tempted to write it off as projection on account of the author, but maybe I'm wrong. I really didn't know that Melbourne has become an anti-Catholic war-ground. Yet I'm stuck in Canberra where no-one seems to care. Had to bus in a religious fanatic from Victoria to pray over parliament house - that's probably telling.

Posted by: Rorschach | November 4, 2009 1:10 AM

Nice one, Kel !

Regarding Melbourne being the hotspot of catholic bashing, here's a link to an interview on the ABC with UMSS "president" Jason Ball the other day.Note that the host, Catherine Deveny, is going to be a speaker at the convention !

http://www.atheistconvention.org.au/2009/10/25/catherine-deveny-interviews-jason-ball/

Posted by: John Morales | November 4, 2009 5:23 AM

Sigh. Every now and then I check the recent comments, and see a bunch by spammers.

My trained neural network pegs only ZenMonkey as a genuine comment (no, I'm not gonna bother to verify empirically :) ).

--- cut'n paste----

Recent Comments

* ZenMonkey on Ray Comfort Replies to Eugenie Scott
* Abiren on Religious philosophy, succinctly explained
* Abiren on Religious philosophy, succinctly explained
* Piradien on My Fargo visit makes the local news!
* Cadaeth on Destroy your computer NOW!
* Abiren on Religious philosophy, succinctly explained
* Sevamma on Evolution of the mammalian vagina
* Piradien on My Fargo visit makes the local news!
* Abiren on Religious philosophy, succinctly explained
* Abiren on Religious philosophy, succinctly explained

Posted by: SEF | November 4, 2009 6:20 AM

It would help if registration and logging-in was first made reliable though. Far too many "forbidden", lost email etc errors putting people off and locking them out for hours (yes, sometimes literally an hour or more of repeated attempts!) or days/weeks because they're not computer-literate enough to recognise that the condition might be transient (or really don't have the time to waste on any significant amount of retrying).

Posted by: Feynmaniac | November 4, 2009 2:08 PM

Holy fuck, Ray Comfort has actually apologized for his stupid 'what evolved first, male or female?' argument:

A Genuine Apology

I’m going to try and put this so that it can’t be taken out of context. I sincerely apologize for misrepresenting what Darwinian evolution says about the origin of males and females. I have checked out the references you have given me as to what the theory has to say about their genesis, read them again and again, and I still don’t understand what you believe. It doesn’t make sense to me because I can’t reconcile what I see in creation with what you would have me believe about evolution. Still, that doesn’t give me the right to misrepresent your beliefs, even if it was done in ignorance.

Sadly, Comfort admitting his own ignorance is probably the closest thing to honesty I've seen from a creationist.

Posted by: Lynna | November 4, 2009 2:26 PM

@524:

Honestly I think Glenn Beck would be absolutely hilarious if it weren't for the fact that a fair percentage of the American population take him seriously. Here in Idaho it's not just a "fair percentage" but an overwhelming majority that take Glenn Beck seriously. They say things like, "I listen to Glenn Beck for the news." This is the same Glenn Beck who said on The View that he doesn't check facts because he's not a journalist.

There's even a very tiny backlash, with some mormons saying that people are worshipping Glenn Beck as if he were Joseph Smith, and we can't have that.

Posted by: Lynna | November 4, 2009 3:12 PM

Sigh. Blockquote fail in my comment @592. Let's try to get this right.
@524:

Honestly I think Glenn Beck would be absolutely hilarious if it weren't for the fact that a fair percentage of the American population take him seriously.

Here in Idaho it's not just a "fair percentage" but an overwhelming majority that take Glenn Beck seriously. They say things like, "I listen to Glenn Beck for the news." This is the same Glenn Beck who said on The View that he doesn't check facts because he's not a journalist.

There's even a very tiny backlash, with some mormons saying that people are worshipping Glenn Beck as if he were Joseph Smith, and we can't have that.

Posted by: Alan B | November 4, 2009 4:00 PM

Can I start by saying I am not and never have been a Catholic: nor were my parents. I have no axe to grind in this issue. Also, please note that I am not trying to gainsay the experience of others. I can only give the experience of my family members.

It is widely believed that education in Britain has deteriorated dramatically, both in terms of content and normal discipline. We could see this in our local schools and my wife has had a career in teaching. As a result we took the decision to send our 3 children (the oldest now 40) to a local Catholic primary school. The Headteacher was a nun and there were several other nuns from a small teaching order. In addition there were other teachers who were non-catholic and non-religious (i.e. not from religious orders). The school was VA – Voluntary Aided which means it was within the state system and non fee-paying. Part of the finances were provided by the RC church in return for a say in the appointment of staff and other aspects of running the school. We asked around and the general view was that the school was the best in the local area (by a considerable margin). Many parents tried to get their children into the school. While there was religious education it was not excessive and while they would have liked our children to have become Catholics they largely prevented it by having them experience how BORING and to them, odd, the whole thing was! The nuns would have been appalled at the behaviour of teaching staff referred to in other posts. (Whether they knew about problems elsewhere was never a discussion point. The Headteacher in particular was highly intelligent, deeply committed to teaching and to the success of her pupils but she was NOT naïve so I would guess she knew it occurred.)

Our son (in the middle of 3) went on to a single sex private (read fee-paying but with a syllabus consistent with the state system) grammar school associated with a Church of England Cathedral. The quality of the education there was excellent and the boys were as lively and happy as I have seen at any school. Apart from occasional services in the Cathedral (and the opportunity to sing in the Cathedral choir if you were good enough) religion was not emphasised. An act of religious worship was a daily requirement under the 1944 Education Act and nothing ever went beyond that.

Our 2 daughters went on to the same single sex private grammar school – again run by a teaching order of nuns (may have been the same as the primary school). The only problem here was one particular girl who was a bully and violent with it. She picked on our older daughter who could look after herself but our younger daughter was so put off that we moved her to a different school. The problem was that the nuns were too nice and did not really know how to deal with the one rogue girl. Shortly after that year moved on the bully got involved heavily in drugs and prostitution. She died in unusual circumstances. The nuns failed with her but i wonder if anyone could have got through.

Finally, to complete the story, our grandson goes to a private primary school and is in his final year there (12/13). Again, this has a Catholic foundation but has no religious on the staff. The overwhelming majority of parents are not Catholics – it is simply the best school around, regardless of religion, in a slightly old-fashioned way. We feel it has a family atmosphere in a totally positive way. While extremely bright pupils get on well there, it does not go out of its way to be a hothouse and takes children (mixed sex) of all abilities. There are only a small handful of confirmations each year and no noticeable pressure to conform to Catholicism, other than attendance at the occasional form and school Masses. I cannot even conceive of the violence and abuse referred to by others ever happening.

So. That's it. The moral? I am led to believe that violent and sexual abuse has been (and probably continues to be) an issue in some Catholic schools. I would not dream of suggesting that the experiences given in this thread or elsewhere are incorrect. BUT, our children and grandson all have experienced outstanding Catholic education in England. Have we been lucky? Maybe. We have always been concerned with getting the best education for our children. Violence and bullying by staff and pupils goes on in the background at some schools in Britain but we have not experienced it as an issue in Catholic schools. Maybe the ethos is different. Maybe the system of mandatory Government inspection helps. There seem to be plenty of Catholics in education who are totally sincere (and professional) about what they are trying to achieve. I'm sorry that some of you have had such different and painful experiences.

Posted by: Owlmirror | November 4, 2009 4:12 PM

BTW, Alan B, in your investigation of YEC geology, have you seen anyone that actually comes out and explicitly states that any geology that makes the Earth look older than 6000 years is a deliberate illusion (of either God or the Devil)? Or do they all seem to prefer thinking/saying that it has just been "misinterpreted"?

Posted by: Alan B | November 4, 2009 5:05 PM

#598 Owlmirror asked:

"... have you seen anyone that actually comes out and explicitly states that any geology that makes the Earth look older than 6000 years is a deliberate illusion (of either God or the Devil)?"

What I've been looking at recently is the closest the YEC come to their scientific, peer-reviewed, literature and in particular Creation Research Society Quarterly (CRSQ) and Journal of Creation (formerly a range of titles - I believe it was once Ex nihilo or something similar, but don't quote me).

In these they take a 6000 (longer for a few, up to 10,000 maybe) year Universe as incontrevertible fact. When we talk about "evidence" and "data" and "fieldwork" they would turn to the Bible. There is no way in their minds that what they read or what they see is a deliberate illusion. What I have read recently has not directly referred to the "appearance of age" but I would suspect they would all subscribe to it i.e. when God created trees they were mature including giant sequoias and gnarled bristlecone pines. They would not call this an illusion in the sense of a conjuring trick but a prediction based on what Genesis tells us happened and a the natural result of God's creative power.

Likewise, yes, they really do believe with all their hearts that the flood happened and explains the large majority of the rocks and fossils and it all fits within about a year within the 6000 years. It is us who have rejected the obvious and infallible truth of the Bible.

In general, what I've read recently don't go into Satan (although I am sure he/she/it is real to them). Thus
I cannot give you a direct quote from the papers I have read recently. While I am not sure what the YEC scientists believe or say, I suspect it would be on the lines that we are deceived. The more generous, I suspect, would say we are unknowingly deceived by a mixture of our own fallen human nature that cannot accept God and His loving reign over us, His creatures, and by Satan's influence. Some would suggest that a number of us are knowingly taking the anti-God approach to geological science to justify our willful rebellion against God.

Anything further would be saved for public preaching and might be used in the cut and thrust of debate on the internet.

An idea of the general style is an appeal for action that comes from the Conclusion of the next paper I want to cover:

"Belonging to an intellectual minority is always a challenge. Religious prejudice only makes it worse. Swimming against the tide of centuries of naturalistic interpretation, supported by all the institutional weight of academia, much of the church (sadly), and relevant industry, makes the task of the creationist appear as impossible as any that has ever been attempted. Only the vision of gaining spiritual, intellectual and emotional satisfaction of delighting the Creator with our advocacy of His truth can possibly sustain an ongoing, viable creationist enterprise.

"History is replete with examples of God’s underdogs overcoming impossible odds, and I believe that the modern creationist movement is a developing continuation of that history. But time passes, and as we derive intense satisfaction from the growing assault on Darwinian biology, we must finish the task by liberating the rock record from naturalistic assumptions. That will be best achieved through a systematic, global effort of comprehensive stratigraphic reinterpretation of the wealth of data that currently exist. Whitcomb and Morris pointed the way in 1961; it’s time for us to just do it."

Posted by: 'Tis Himself | November 4, 2009 5:33 PM

Alan B,

I too have been reading and enjoying your series on YEC. Thank you very much for the time and effort you've put into your posts. They've been quite enlightening in a darksome way. Also I enjoy your dry wit.

Posted by: Alan B | November 4, 2009 6:21 PM

#595 Owlmirror said:

Yanno, Josh has not posted a single comment in this instantiation of the undying thread. This is worrying.

I agree. Where is Josh?

I heard a rumour that Josh had been transmogrified:

http://www.perkowitz.com/images/uploads/902_54_fort_big_rock,_cr.jpg

But the date stamp on the picture showed this was on a previous field trip.

The sun never set on the British Empire (see all the pink on the world map - no, not today's - a century back)! So I sent out a man with a message in a forked stick to see if he could get a message to Josh. Unfortunately, he lost the message during a fight with a [kimodo] dragon:

http://www.antibodysystems.com/archivedsite/DragonsJohnnyBrokenStick.jpg

Further into the jungle he thought he had got just behind Josh but could not identify him for certain:

http://stickman.rainierarms.com/galleries/AR15%20Carbines%20II/IMG_4815%20Stick.jpg

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | November 4, 2009 6:36 PM

Josh? The shores of Lake Superior?

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | November 4, 2009 6:56 PM

Owlmirror, since god supposedly created Satan, and is omnipotent and omnipresent, that means god wants the old earth deception?

Posted by: Alan B | November 4, 2009 7:40 PM

#607 Owlmirror

Sorry, but the term "Omphalos" always reminds me of the Oompa-Loompas from Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qw0zZttfUaw&NR=1

With that, bed calls - Good Night all!

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | November 4, 2009 8:53 PM

Josh? Canadian Rockies? (Playing Where in the World is Josh the Pharyngulite?)

Posted by: Owlmirror | November 5, 2009 12:05 AM

Sorry, but the term "Omphalos" always reminds me of the Oompa-Loompas

Ompha-Lompha-YECity-Doo
I've got quite a puzzle for you
Ompha-Lompha-YECity-Dee
If you have faith you will listen to me

What do you get if the past is a lie
One billion years is the blink of an eye
The rocks and the stars are nothing but bunk
Their dates are fake so the science is junk
The universe was made last week

Ompha-Lompha-YECity-Da
If you trust nature you won't go far
Read Genesis for what's really true
Like the Ompha-Lompha-YECity do
YECity do

Posted by: Owlmirror | November 5, 2009 12:11 AM

Bah.

the line should read:

"Ten billion years is the blink of an eye"

Fixed

+1

Posted by: Mr T | November 5, 2009 2:41 AM

re: Sphere Coupler's video @ #603:
Thanks, I enjoyed that. Spoiler warning. I don't want to take away all the fun, but I'm the type who thinks scholarship is fun. There are a lot of reasons why I found the video (and the info on the page) to be misleading at best, which probably most people would overlook.

1) If true, it would be better to call it "the oldest known music notation to date".

2) I'll have to research it further, but I'm very suspicious of dating that tablet to 3400 b.c. They've found many such tablets in the area, but the earliest one I'd heard about is a very similar-looking one (not identical) from 1400 b.c., also from Ugarit, Syria. I'll look into it, but my first instinct is that someone on youtube has committed a typo -- yes, I know, it's rather shocking that youtube could sink to such a level.

3) On the top half of that tablet are the words to be sung, and the bottom contains information about the melody. The harmonies, rhythms, tempo, etc., are not notated on the original, but are simply modern interpretations. They are interesting, and probably inferred from the tuning system, melodic contour, and perhaps even the lyrics, but that's beside the point.

4) The ancient Babylonians/Assyrians used a pythagorean tuning system. It's a very subtle difference, but the piece was played in equal temperament. This is hardly worth mentioning, since it lacked the kinds of intervals and distant keys that would have made it noticeable, and for the rest it was only a difference of a few cents (hundredths of a semitone).

5) The orchestration is pleasant, but it would be more authentic with just a voice and a few accompanying instruments -- for even more accuracy, using ancient instruments like lyras and such.

6) Even if they had established a standard pitch (e.g., a certain size of metal rod for tuning), we can not know that pitch's frequency to tune modern instruments accordingly. It's therefore extremely likely that we heard a transposition from the original.

Considering all of that, it's obvious that isn't actually how the music originally sounded. Unless we obtain much more information, which I doubt will ever come, it will be impossible to reproduce the original music accurately.

Posted by: Kel, OM | November 5, 2009 4:09 AM

I'm no longer affianced. Now entering married life.

Posted by: Sphere Coupler | November 5, 2009 4:33 AM

Mr.T, I was assuming, yet never stated that some artistic liberties were taken, as I'm sure there was some embellishments in the piece. I'm thinking the original might not be as long as the remake. As far as any further research it sounds as if your the one who could shed some light.Thanks

Kel, congratulations!
Wishing you and your spouse the best.

Posted by: Alan B | November 5, 2009 6:44 AM

#620 Kel, OM & #623 Islander

Congratulations to all four from an old codger - married 43 years this December (to the same wife for the cynics out there ...)

There are 4 rules:

1) Love each other

2) Respect each other (not so easy but a necessary part of love)

3) Keep talking with each other (not at each other)

4) Don't collect grudges about each other. "Don't let the sun go down on your wrath". Even if it is from the Bible, it works well

5) Ignore advice from well-meaning old codgers who can't count! Work it out for yourselves - you have a lifetime ahead to do it.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | November 5, 2009 6:56 AM

I'm no longer affianced. Now entering married life.

Congratulations! Hope you are happy. It's been 35+ years for me and the Redhead.

Posted by: Alan B | November 5, 2009 11:05 AM

#627

What's our next notable milestone then, Sven?

Posted by: Lynna | November 5, 2009 12:29 PM

Merry Smithmas, happy folly days and whatever other greetings are suitable! Steve Benson, vocal former mormon, drew a great atheist cartoon that is now featured on the sides of buses in Seattle: http://ffrf.org/news/2009/seattlebus.php

Moreover, there are six interior bus ads! Oh happy day:

Posted by: Lynna | November 5, 2009 12:38 PM

Here's Steve Benson talking about the "Freedom From Religion" bus ads in Seattle:

I drew it free of charge (based on an idea which I had previously come up with), for the Freedom from Religion Foundation (FFRF), a national organization of freethinkers based out of Madison, Wisconsin.
     FFRF sent along a photo of the sign plastered on the side of a Seattle bus as it motored on down I-5. The picture taker, who took the shot through the windshield of his car, included a note: "BLASPHEMATASTIC!!!!" (I don't know if that was in reference to Santa or to God). One of FFRF's directors added their own aside when emailing the photo to me: "And the fun begins!!!," admitting, "I AM so hoping to make some waves . . . ."
     Lordy, lordy. :)
     This particular season's greeting is scheduled to run on the sides of Seattle's public buses through the month of November, with plans to place it on a freeway billboard in the local area.
     FFRF also decided to take the rough draft of the bus sign that I originally did up in colored pencil and convert it into an irreverent card for non-believers (again, in the true spirit of the season, with no commercial monetary benefit coming to me from Santa or anyone else). The card comes with the greeting: "Wishing You a Splendid & Secular Winter Solstice." They even sent bad-little-boy me a batch of them (just in time for mailing out to family and friends for Xmas), with a thank-you note attached addressed to "Mr. Heathen Stephen" warning me to "watch for the fireworks" when "the bus signs go up on Nov 1-ish" and asking "if you want a few more packs." (You can quit rolling over in your grave, Grandpa; they're not talking about cigarettes).
     The message seems to be generating some response, which I suppose is a good thing. After all, it's about time Santa stood up and spoke his mind. As they say in the unchurched world, "Happy UnholyDays." Here's a news story making reference to the busting-God bus art from the "Seattle Times" newspaper:
     http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/text/2010195429.html
     So, see what happens when you leave Mormonism?

Posted by: Lynna | November 5, 2009 12:45 PM

In the meantime, religious nutters in Moscow, Idaho are keeping sign painters in business. Once again, they have vandalized a billboard. http://www.ktvb.com/news/Humanist-billboard-vandalized-again-in-Moscow-69173932.html

MOSCOW, Idaho -- A group called the American Humanist Association says its billboard in Moscow, Idaho reading "Millions are good without God" has been vandalized again.
     It appears the sign was altered to make the "out" in "without" blend into the background, so the sign appeared to read "Millions are good with God."

Posted by: Owlmirror | November 5, 2009 1:21 PM

Congrats Kel!

Many happy years!