SUPERNATURAL CREATOR 2 from Mareike on Vimeo.

Ollie, Jim, and Andrew discuss the finer points of Mormonism, delve into the depths of the cosmological and kalam arguments for the existence of god, and bring you up to date with some interesting news.

News

• Animated Mormon Jesus
• Parents sacrifice 4-yr-old girl to become rich
• Blow for bishop as orgasm church flops
• Priest blames girl, 12, for sex
• Atheist doctors ‘more likely to hasten death
• Hour-long goat attack puts man in hospital

Professor Donald Arthur Norman is an expert in the field of cognitive science and is widely considered to be the first to advanced human factors to design theory.  He is founder of The Cognitive Science Society and the Nielsen Norman Group, a consulting group on matters of usability which also includes Jakob Nielsen and Bruce Tognazzini – the founder of the Human Interface Group at Apple Computers.

In Donald’s first book “The Psychology of Everyday Things” he outlines a number of design principles which illuminate characteristics of effective human centred design.  Through the application of affordances (the idea you push buttons, pull handles, turn dials, flick switches, etc), constraints (limiting the available options for users), natural mappings (I will speak more on these in a moment), feedback, error tolerance, and social conventions (for example green for “go”) designers can communicate models of how a system operates to the end user.  The idea is to leverage our innate ability to conceptualise our environment in order to understand and predict it.

Norman’s book was a pivotal text in my fundamental thinking regarding design and what constitutes good design from bad.  Consider the following:  Let’s say you have a cook top arranged in a 2×2 grid and the control dials are arranged 4 in a line below.  Which dial operates which hot plate?  Why are there so many possible answers when there is only reality of the situation?

I would routinely turn on the wrong hot plate and wonder why dinner was not cooking.  After reading this book I understood the problem – I had an incorrect model of the cooker in my mind, and the cooktop presented ambiguous information.  Even with careful consideration to the illustrations provided to explain the system, occasionally errors would occur and dinner would be delayed.  A few years ago we had the opportunity to purchase a new cook top and I was able to eliminate approximately 80% of the models available simply by insisting on this one good design principle – natural mapping.

The designer has a mental image of how the system works which they imbed into the object.  The end user interprets the object and derives a mental model of how it may operate using a combination of inherent restrictions, past experiences, social conventions, and logical deduction (among others).

One measure of good design is where the mental models of the system in both designer and user match.  When they do not the designer has not succeeded in their task since the system is projecting the wrong model in the mind of the user.

We have evolved to conceptualise the world around us in this way for good reason.  If we can build accurate mental models of how things work, or predict what another animal might be about to do, then we have better chances of utilising our environment to our advantage, and taking action to pre-emptively avoid harm – such as being eaten by a lion.

In our modern world we have designed, built, and surrounded ourselves with artefacts which serve specific purposes.  Everything around us to purposefully designed to serve particular functions.

Light globes to microwave ovens, video recorders to jet aircraft have all been conceptualised by the collective minds of generations.

In these cases it is valid to deductive conclude these objects were indeed designed.  In every case we are able to see the design process in action. This is an important, critical, and often overlooked fact.

This kind of thinking is so useful and powerful we might not stop to think it could and go astray, but it can – badly.  As I explained earlier, we can conclude incorrect mental models of the world around us, which results in a misunderstanding of how a system is actually works (or how it should be used in the case of truly designed objects).  One of the most powerful tricks of the scientific method is to strip away our preconceptions and continually test proposed models against reality.  Models which are verified through empirical observation are considered provisionally true and accurate.  I say “provisionally” because a model should always be open to alterations should evidence to the contrary arise.  Those which fail crucial tests are either altered to fit the newly discovered data or discarded completely.  Science is intellectually honest, open minded, and self correcting.

However, there is a error here we must be cautious to avoid.

It is tempting to conclude that because some things (indeed many things in modern western societies)are intentionally designed means ALL things are.  This is an error since we can only deductively conclude design if we can observe the design process in action.  The remaining systems may or may not be designed – it is simply unknown at this point.  Those who claim the natural world itself is designed should provide evidence of the design process.

Intelligent Design advocates, creationists, and “cdesign proponentsists” have not meet the burden of proof since they have only forwarded an argument from analogy.  Just because something looks designed does not mean it is.  It is also an argument from ignorance (because they have cannot think of a naturalistic methodology), and has the added problem of inductive reasoning.

Those poor creationists still have all their work ahead of them.

Take this person who has decided to label themselves “indifferent”, who commented on a post I wrote way back in February regarding Saint Mary Mackillop and the bizarre Catholic beatification rituals:

“How could you?? Have you ever had to face the unfair fact that someone you love is dying?? Someone that is a good person, before their time?? Someone that is the most important person in the world to you???”

Yes I have, thanks for asking.

My father in law battled lung cancer for 3 years before succumbing to the disease.  He was a loving, caring man who always had time for other people.  Nothing was too much to ask and he always helped out with a smile on his face and an encouraging attitude.  A year after my wife lost her father, my mother was diagnosed with an aggressive cancer deep in her lower back.

For two years she battled the beast.  We spent countless hours in hospital rooms talking to doctors and nurses ensuring we had the best medical care available.  We travelled interstate multiple times to attend the best cancer treatment facilities in the country.  Every available resource was utilised to ensure the best attention available – my father spent every last dim he had, then some.  When contemporary medicine failed we enrolled for experimental treatments, but nothing worked.  When the pain became too much, she was being given such high doses of pain killers it induced a coma.  We sat by her bedside 24 hours a day hoping she would recover.  After the longest week in my life watching my mother slowly die, she took her last breath.

At no stage during any of this did we feel the need to pray to a sky wizard for a personal favour – not even my mother.  I feel it is highly presumptuous to expect the creator of the universe to make us a special.  If you truly subscribe to the barbaric theology of your religion, then you must reluctantly admit that no one in history has avoid the sting of death – not even your blessed saviour.

“By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return.” – Genesis 3:19

According to your mythology, God himself created the universe and everything in it.  He created the first two people with innate curiosity, then demanded they do not eat from two trees he placed in paradise.  What did he think was going to happen?  Especially since he also placed a talking snake int he garden to trick them.

However, I would be remiss if I left it there – your god certainly didn’t.  He went on to drown every man, woman, and baby except for a drunk and his family.  He ignored most of his creation and chose a small tribe of illiterate desert people in the Middle East as his own.  He toyed with the Pharaoh of Egypt by continually sending waves of plagues, famine, drought, disease, and death while “hardening his heart” so he would not submit and when he tired of utilising his omnipotence in this manner, he lead his special tribe through the desert – signifying his presence as a massive pillar of smoke of fire.  He drowned the Egyptian armies who tried to follow, then though though it would be a good idea to give them some rules for living. Why he didn’t give these to Adam and Eve remains a mystery, but I guess God move in mysterious ways.

As soon as his back is turned his specially chosen people worshipped a golden calf.  His people did this after witnessing death and destruction from the Heavens, and following him through the desert for decades.  Exactly how stupid are they?

Is this really the deity you want us to ask for help in times of trouble?  This jealous, fussy, violent, immoral, prick who kills anything and everything that displeases him?  Why bother with creation at all if it is just going to irritate you so intensely?  Was his omniscience broken that day?

Then you go on to say:

“This is the time when you make take comfort in the talk of miracles.. and pray your arse off for one.. “

No, it is not.  I seek the best medical care available, then hope it works.  I do not think a super helpful magic genie will step in and make everything all rainbows and bunny rabbits if I simply ask him nicely.  Especially if he was the one who inflicted this evil in the first place.  A more cogent question may be “Why does God give people cancer in the first place?”

“… don’t take away peoples coping mechanisms.”

Are you suggesting people cannot deal with reality?  That’s just sad.

“You cannot tell me if you were dangling from a cliff edge by your fingernail… that you might not utter… Oh, god, please help me????!!!”

I might, but only in the colloquial.  I do not expect “the hand of god” to reach down and pluck me from the cliff face.  I would hold on tight and fight with everything in my being to cling to the one life I truly know I have .

For interest, let’s reverse the situation – what if you were hanging by your fingernails from a cliff, but you knew a life of eternal bliss was waiting for you after death?  Why hold on?  Though I do not expect you will actually answer this question, and I will get yet another straw man.

Here is a bonus video I created from the videos on his channel:

Running a web site like this does attract the occasional, long winded, rantish comment or email.  This morning I woke to a comment on a post made way back in March 2010 by one “John M”.  At that time I posted about a Hindu priest who cut the heads off his three daughters and sprinkled the blood all over the house.  This clearly is an horrific and despicable act but, as I said at the time, it is unfair to lay the blame squarely at the feet of religion.  With that in mind, John raised a number of counterpoints to the views I expressed at that time.  Let’s have a look:

“How about looking or asking someone who is an expert, instead of assuming and denigrating an entire mostly peaceful religion?”

There are many religious expert all over the world, each using similar evidence, arguments, and logic to arrive a their preconceptions of spiritual beings, reincarnation, divine judges, and eternal torture chambers.  If theology was a valid endeavour we might expect them to reach a consensus on god’s number, nature, and will.

Yet the reality of religion is the exact opposite – the more “experts” examining the “evidence” the more divisions, denominations, and schisms occur.  Christians are divided into Catholic, Prodestant, Baptist, Pentecostal, and more.  Islam falls into Sunni, Shi’a, Sufism, Ahmadiyya, and others.  Who knows how many deities Hinduism have fractured into over the centuries, but given the nature of polytheism this is not a serious problem.

Which of these religious experts should I consult when one of their members barbarically hacks the heads off their sons and daughters?  Strangely I would say none, since almost without exception they would all distance themselves from such atrocities and deploying religions long standing friend – the no true Scotsman fallacy.

“What we do know is that without religion these kinds of unhinged individuals are far more readily identified.”

Quantify this. You can’t, because you made it up.

It is difficult to identify crazy people when so many otherwise moderate and normal people profess crazy things.  Virgin births, walking on water, miracle cures, alcoholic alchemy, walking dead, bodily ascension into heaven, the existence of spirits, everlasting orgasmic realms, crystal healing, telekinesis, taro cards, horoscopes, and homeopathy to name a few.  With these insane ideas floating around, how can you tell who the normal people are?  Don’t get me wrong – people who believe these things are not necessarily insane themselves, but the ideas certainly are.

“His beliefs could very well be completely irrelevant to the actual cause of his actions. He just as likely may have just been nuts, religion was his excuse. It’s foolish to draw a conclusion either way without further questioning and medical examination.”

Thank you for recognising the entire point of the original post, but the main point still remains – identifying crazy people in a crazy world is a difficult task.  Religion and other mythological superstitious beliefs do nothing to adhere humanity to rational, proven, evidence based beliefs.  In fact, as you illuminate late, faith is considered a virtue.  I do not hold this view in the slightest.

“… because what you define is a ‘good reason’ may differ from someone else’s ‘good reason’. Each person’s path toward or away from faith is an individual one, and it is ENTIRELY egotistical and self-centered to judge another’s path according to your standards….”

This moral subjectivity displayed here is misplaced.  Through identical arguments it would be illogical for anyone to say this Hindu priests “path toward or away from faith” is immoral.  It would be entirely egotistical and self-centered to judge another’s path according to my absurd standards of empathy, compassion, and prevention of suffering.

“The moral ambiguity inherent in all atheist rants is also a glaring hypocrisy. What’s good for you, the right choose to believe there is no God, isn’t good for others, the freedom to choose to believe in God.”

Anyone is free to choose to believe in a deity.  Hell, believe in as many as you like – I do not care.  However, when these beliefs drive people to harm others, when they infringe on the rights of others to live a long and happy life, then I feel obligated to act.  I am sorry you feel I should sit down and shut my mouth when parent slice up their children.

“You save the most repulsive for last, as if the image of a man slaughtering his family and taking his own life is somehow representative of faith and the faithful as a whole.”

Wow, John – did you even read the article you commented on?  If you had you might have noticed the paragraph which reads:

“What drives a man to commit such a horrendous act?  Religion?  Maybe.  Perhaps this man was certifiably lunatic, perhaps he was strictly adhering to some lesser known passage found in his holy texts.  Who knows?”

You see?  I am not blaming the religion as a whole, but pointing out the difficulty in distinguishing crazy people from normal people with crazy beliefs.  If there is a distinction it is that normal sane people to not act on the basis the Bible (or any other “holy book”) is the inerrant word of the one true living god.

“Well, I say imagine the 60-100 million corpses* or so that have rotted under the sun, starved to death or murdered by various atheistic Socialist regimes.”

Clearly John M hasn’t got the slightest clue what atheism is.  Atheism is the rejection of theistic claims – a disbelief.  I have still yet to see a cogent, logical reason how anyone is driven to action by lacking a belief.  Still in doubt?  Finish this sentence for me: “I do not believe in god, therefore you must …..”

“…. each time I run across statements like the ones you make I’m surprised that anyone could be so shallow, vapid, and cruel.”

As cruel as hacking the heads off my daughters and smearing their blood all over the house?

“I don’t care if you believe in God or not, not like you think everyone cares anyway….”

Apparently you care enough to type this tirade of illogical trash.

“Your faith tells you there is no God, so be it.”

Bzzzzt.  Wrong, try again.

I do not state “there is no god” as doing so is illogical and dogmatic.  I do not believe there is a god because there is zero evidence in favour of one.  Present evidence your god exists and I will spin on a dime.

“My faith, my life experiences tell me otherwise, as illogical as it may be.”

Oh, scratch my last comment.  You admit your beliefs are illogical, then wonder why I do not share them.  How do you live with such contradictions?

“Prove God does not exist. You cannot, no more than I can prove God does exist.”

You’re correct – I cannot prove god does not exist and would never make such an idiotic claim.  Perhaps you might like to read my post and subsequent comments arguing this position with Zach’s Mind?  I think you might find it enlightening.

“The only purely logical conclusion is that we don’t KNOW, hence faith.”

Who said anything about knowledge?  Theism is about belief, not knowledge.  As such, atheism is the rejection of a belief.  Atheism makes no claims to knowledge, just as many theists (yourself included) do not claim to know god exists.

“The estimates vary for each individual atrocity or group of atrocities, so much so that when you compound them you end up with about 40M people that may or may not be accounted for, and that’s just counting the big ones.”

Even if a lack of a belief could drive people to action, I fail to see how a tally of the body count on either side bolsters your assertion god exists.  The lesser of two evils?  In any case, this entire argument is an argument from consequences – a logical fallacy.

I care about what is true, whatever the consequences of that may be.  Luckily, I can also build a wondrous, majestic, enthralling view of the cosmos that far exceeds anything proposed by the religions of the world, past or present.

Ollie and Andrew went to the local Skeptics in the Pub event on Monday night, had a few wines, a wonderful meal, and meet Josh – a visiting PHD student of phylogenetics.  Knowing only enough to be dangerous, they decided to invite him along to the podcast to delve into the matter.

We also talk about muslim/gay friendly bars being built near 911′s ground zero – right next to the Mosque.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

The founding fathers used these guiding principles to draft the American constitution and later amendments, seeking to build a nation free from oppression, bigotry, and hatred.  A country where all people have equal rights and privileges.

Future amendments to the constitution further refined the ideals, such as the 14th amendment which established the “Equal Protection Clause”.  It reads in part:

“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States…”

It’s sister, The Due Process Clause is also contained the the 14th amendment:

“No State shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”

In November 2008 California was asked to consider proposition 8, which sought to change the Californian Constitution, adding a new section, which would read:

“Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognised in California.”

Many organisations supported the proposition, including the Roman Catholic Church, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, Eastern Orthodox Church, a group of Evangelical Christians led by Jim Garlow and Miles McPherson, the American Family Association, the oddly named Focus on the Family and the ironically named National Organisation for Marriage, as well as Rick Warren (pastor of the Saddleback Church).

The Mormon Church was heavily involved and issued a letter to be read out in every congregation within the State:

“Do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time.”

This resulted in over 45% of out of state funds supporting proposition 8 come from Utah. ProtectMarriage, the official proponents, estimate around half and of their donations and 80% of their initial volunteers were from Mormon sources.  All tolled the effort to ensure Prop 8 passed cost $40 million, which ultimately resulted in 52.24% of the electorate voting in favour.

So in 2008 the rights of some to choose who they can marry.  Their rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness were impeded.

Kristin Perry, Sandra Stier, Paul Katami ,and Jeffery Zarrillo filed an official complaint on the 22 May 2009 and began an appeal.  On the 5th August 2010 United States District Chief Judge Vaugh R Walker handed down his decision which overturns the unconstitutional legislation enacted by California.

“Proposition 8 was premised on the belief that same-sex couples simply are not as good as opposite-sex couples. Whether that belief is based on moral disapproval of homosexuality, animus towards gays and lesbians or simply a belief that a relationship between a man and a woman is inherently better than a relationship between two men or two women, this belief is not a proper basis on which to legislate.”

and

“They provided no credible evidence to support any of the claimed adverse effects proponents promised to demonstrate. During closing arguments, proponents again focused on the contention that ‘responsible procreation is really at the heart of society’s interest in regulating marriage.’”

America was founded on the rights of the individual.  You cannot vote them rights away, even when then majority of citizens wish it.  In the judge’s 136 page ruling he systematically dismembers every objection raised to same sex marriage, stating:

“Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license. Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite- sex couples are superior to same-sex couples.”

Once again discrimination and injustice against a minority of Americans has been righted.  This gives us all hope that the American dream first penned 234 years ago is not quite dead.

Everyone has a right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”.  Everyone.

References

• Chief Judge Vaugh R Walker Prop 8 Ruling
• The Declaration of Independence
• The United States Constitution
• The 14th amendment

From the incomparable Crispian Jago.

I have been following Dom0ne’s videos for sometime.  Always well produced with an interesting twist.

I am not into rap music, but if it includes Carl Sagan, brings attention to reason and science, and is this funky, then I might be convinced. If you like this and want to hear more, then check out Greydon Square’s Youtube channel or his Reverb Nation account.

Hat tip to Elliot C. Myrick for putting me onto this.

You would think after the thousands of prayers, miracle cures, celestial bureaucracy, and ghoulish investigations into the life of Mary MacKillop that God would be pleased with his new Saint.  Not so.

Mary must have done something to piss the big fella off because he has sent an tornado to destroy her place of birth.  God’s track record with storms, tempests, floods, and hurricanes has recently been less than perfect and he only managed some “battering and bruising” rather than the wholesale destruction we are accustomed to from the Old Testament.  God certainly peaked too early and is now off his game.

However, his timing could not have been better  - the destruction occurs the day before numerous church officials were due to attend a meeting in the historic building to prepare Mary’s final canonisation ceremony.

I think it’s a sign.

Jim, Nigel, and Andrew sit down one Sunday afternoon to talk politics, holy dogs, taking care of your pets after you’re raptured, bigoted politicians, creationism in Queensland, and more.  As a bonus the next door neighbour decides to fire up the chainsaw which set off their yappy mongrel dog just after we started recording.

Stories

• Secular Party of Australia
• Will atheism spell trouble for Gillard?
• Penny Wong on Q&A
• The end of the world is scheduled for 21 May 2011.  Mark your calendars.
• Keep your pets save after the rapture.
• National Chaplaincy in Schools Program
• Creationists hijack lessons and teach schoolkids man and dinosaurs walked together
• I’ve got three pockets in my overalls.
• Can dogs receive communion?
• Liberal candidate David Barker’s anti-Muslim campaign

I am not anti-religious, I am anti- stupidity.  It is not my fault your religion is stupid.

This week the team sits down for a chat with PZ Myers (Pharyngula).  Naturally we talk about “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed” (which I mistakenly called “no design allowed”), Crackergate and the finer details of transubstantiation and the Jewish blood libel, pets with souls, potential theocratic American futures, the Global Atheist Conference (held in Melbourne), and banning the burka.

Pastors and priests tell us about the loving God of the Bible.  How he brutally sacrificed his only son to demonstrate his undying love for creation. We are told God is peace, compassion, and of course love.

You might think given these qualities and the ability to influence the great prophets of the ages he might have inspired great moral teachings.  But have a look at some of the laws the old testament seers enacted:

Human Sacrifice

“The one who has stolen what was set apart for destruction will himself be burned with fire, along with everything he has.” – Joshua 7:15

“… sacrifice the priests from the pagan shrines who come here to burn incense, and human bones will be burned on you.” –  Kings 13:1-2

“You shall be fuel for the fire, your blood shall flow throughout the land.  You shall not be remembered.” – Ezekiel 21:33-37

“Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God.” – Deuteronomy 13:13-19

“Completely destroy all the males and every woman who is not a virgin.” – Judges 21:10-2

Rape

“Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man.  Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves.” – Numbers 31:7-18

“If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father.  Then he must marry her.” – Deuteronomy 22:28-29

“You may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you.” – Leviticus 25:44-46

“When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are.” – Exodus 21:7-11

Slavery

“If the slave survives a beating for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property.” - Exodus 21:20-21

“Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ.” - Ephesians 6:5

Murder

“Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death.” - Deuteronomy 17:12

“You should not let a sorceress live.” - Exodus 22:17

“If a man lies with a male as with a women,  both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed.” - Leviticus 20:13

“.. a medium or fortuneteller shall be put to death by stoning; they have no one but themselves to blame for their death.” - Leviticus 20:27

“Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death.” - Exodus 21:15

You can also kill …

• Adulterers – Leviticus 20:10
• Fornicators – Leviticus 21:9
• Infidels – Deuteronomy 13:13-19
• False Prophets – Zechariah 13:3
• Virgins on their wedding night – Deuteronomy  22:20-21
• Blasphemers – Leviticus 24:10-16
• Anyone who Approaches the Tabernacle – Numbers 1:48-5
• People who work on the Sabbath – Exodus 31:12-15

Is this what an all loving God inspires?

Is this the pinnacle of morality?

Does anyone seriously believe this stuff?

Firstly I must apologise. We had lined up PZ Myers for an interview this week, but he became otherwise engaged.  We hope to schedule another time shortly.  In the meantime enjoy the ramblings of a few good men.

On the menu:

• Julia Gillard confirmed atheist
• Godless Gillard causes concern
• Public benefits test
• Transcripts of tax law amendment meetings
• Digital holy water
• Chemotherapy for Christopher Hitchens
• Whooping cough is declared an epidemic in California
• Buddha ant hill
• Atheists in Uganda