Human Stupidity: Irrationality, Self Deception » fundamentalist christians

Richard Dawkins debunks Creationism. “The purpose of purpose”

admin — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 13:52:48 +0000

“Intelligent design” or “scientific” creationism are buzzwords created by religious fundamentalists, with the agenda to put content of 2000 year old religious books into our children’s school science curriculum.

Dawkins just takes apart all the religous arguments, shreds them into pieces. Watch the video “the purpose of purpose”.

I have seen discussions, where poor scientist just could not lower themselves to argue on the same level of demagogic obfuscation as the religious dogmatists, and thus looked bad. See the following example of a scientist that was too shy to counterattack.

Evolutionary theory has yet unexplained gaps. Therefore we need to be open-minded and to offer out children alternative theories, like “intelligent design”.

Biological knowledge of embryonal development has unexplained gaps. Therefore we need to be open-minded and to offer out children alternative theories, like “stork theory of child delivery”.

The geology of the earth is still not fully explained. Therefore we need to be open-minded and to offer out children alternative theories, like “flat earth theory” and “hollow earth theory”.

Same about alchemy in chemistry classes, astrology in astronomy classes, and witchcraft in medical first aid courses.

If Dawkins is too fiery for you, follows a very cool scientific analysis of scientific creationism

The following video explains:
Theory is not “guesses or hunches”, as in lay people language. Theory to a scientist means explanation, logical constructs of tested hypotheses, facts, laws.

Links to other 23 videos in this series:

“There is no God”. Atheist advertising bus followed by Christian bus

Menschliche Dummheit — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 11:28:24 +0000

Sorry, this entry is only available in Deutsch.

“Child Abuse” Dogmatists Repress Scientific Research

admin — Sat, 02 May 2009 15:03:00 +0000

The blog put up a very very nice listing of persecution of scientists, of repression of scientific research by dogmatic people. It is correctly called radical left. I would not sign off blindly on all their statements.

[Disclaimer: My main topic is "defense of free research", "freedom to find the scientific true facts" without getting death threats. This is not a crusade for underage sex, it is rather about unbiased truth & freedom of research versus dogmatic preconceived ideas]

http://www.radicalleft.net/blog/_archives/2006/6/5/1990675.html

In the only instance of a U.S. Congressional resolution against a scientific paper, the House of Representatives, with only minimal opposition, denounced a study by Dr. Bruce Rind & others, published in the scholarly review, Psychological Bulletin, in 1998.

This “meta-analysis” reviewed several research protocols about adult-child sexuality, and summarized them as showing that relationships in which force was not used did not appear to cause harm, and sometimes might be beneficial. Rind and his co-authors have been systematically ostracized and excluded from many scholarly journals.

In 2005, a book by a major publisher, which contained another scholarly article by Rind, was withdrawn by that publisher (Hayworth) because of protests from fundamentalist Christians.

Other gay writers like William Herdt and John DeCecco who researched sexual outlaw behavior in the U.S. (DeCecco) or intergenerational sexuality in non-western cultures (Herdt) simply moved on to other topics.

This did not keep DeCecco from experiencing extreme persecution—while a Professor in San Francisco he had to hire bodyguards to protect him from right-wing attackers.

A number of women researchers and radical feminists have attempted to undermine or slow down the sex panic.

Among them have been Camille Paglia, Debbie Nathan, Joan Nelson, Elizabeth Stoney, Laura Marks, Gayle Rubin, Pat Califia, Carole Vance, Marjorie Heins, Joanne Wypijewski, Janice Irvine and Judith Levine.

Paglia has been castigated by other sex researchers and many feminist writers for her defense of man-boy sexual relationships in particular.

Although she has published lengthy, well-researched summaries of the history of sexuality and sexual research, she is seldom included in university curriculums involving these topics.

Many of the other women writers suffered similar consequences or censorship of their views. Debbie Nathan, who exposed and virtually stopped the so-called satanic cult child sex panic with her book Satan’s Silence (Basic Books, 1996), has spoken of the icy reception her work has sometimes received.

She said, “… I have often had a sense of being intellectually and professionally marginalized, and I have experienced instances of editors killing pieces I’ve written about sexual hysteria because they got cold feet, as well as refusals to assign such stories.”

One woman writer, who had never had problems with previous articles on other subjects for a prestigious national magazine, attempted a balanced look at the crusade against Catholic priests, especially the sensational case of Father Paul Shanley. She was called in by the editor who said he simply could not run her piece.

Even before Judith Levine’s Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Children from Sex was published in 2002, a massive campaign by fundamentalist Christian groups, including Concerned Women for America, attacked the publisher, the University of Minnesota Press.

While the book was published, the Press created a new process for reviewing its books before publication.

Levine spoke publicly about how she was humiliated time and again in public. She said the manuscript for her book had been turned down by many publishers, treated as if it were “radioactive.”

Among other insights, Levine wrote that “obsession with pedophiles stems for the reluctance to confront incest and the rampant sexualization of children” in American culture.

“Adults project the eroticized desire outwards, creating a monster to hate, hunt down and destroy.” Of the outcry against her book she added, “What happened to me is a perfect example of the hysteria my book is about.”

Nowhere is censorship and shunning greater than against those who would describe or depict childhood or adolescent sexuality, or mere nudity.

The “victims” of the evil perpetrators must also be protected—and projected as the spotless mirror image of their violators—at all costs—their purity and innocence asserted (even in the face of post-Freudian revelations of the sexual lives and interests of children).

Anything portraying the physical beauty of children or erotic aspects of their lives must be banned. (See Bob Chatelle’s excellent summaries of the impact of the child porn crusade on freedom of expression: Kiddie Porn Panic, 1993; Limits of Free expression & the Problem of Child Porn, 1997.)