Final Post

Time and Reason compel me to simplify. Natural Reckoning has been moved over to the sister-blog Mystery of Mysteries, now under the new name "Evolving Complexity".

Richard Wilson article riles HIV Deniers.

Richard Wilson, author of Don't Get Fooled Again in an article on Against the Evidence:

In a sceptical age, even those disseminating wholly bogus ideas - from corporate pseudo-science to 9/11 conspiracy theories - will often seek to appropriate the language of rational inquiry. But there is a meaningful difference between being a "sceptic" and being in denial. The genuine sceptic forms his beliefs through a balanced evaluation of the evidence. The sceptic of the bogus variety cherry-picks evidence on the basis of a pre-existing belief, seizing on data, however tenuous, that supports his position, and yet declaring himself "sceptical" of any evidence, however compelling, that undermines it.
While it is easy to guess the motivations of an industry-funded scientist denying the dangers posed by his commercial sponsor, or a far-right historian expressing "scepticism" about the Holocaust, other cases are more puzzling. It is difficult to explain why, for example, a respected academic would dismiss the mountain of proof that HIV causes Aids. But several have, notably the Berkeley virologist Peter Duesberg.

Read the whole article, and the denialist responses here.

Sunday Sermon - Russell's Orbiting Teapot

"Many orthodox people speak as though it were the business of sceptics to disprove received dogmas rather than of dogmatists to prove them. This is, of course, a mistake. If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time. It is customary to suppose that, if a belief is widespread, there must be something reasonable about it. I do not think this view can be held by anyone who has studied history. Practically all the beliefs of savages are absurd. In early civilizations there may be as much as one percent for which there is something to be said. In our own day.... But at this point I must be careful. We all know that there are absurd beliefs in Soviet Russia. If we are Protestants, we know that there are absurd beliefs among Catholics. If we are Catholics, we know that there are absurd beliefs among Protestants. If we are Conservatives, we are amazed by the superstitions to be found in the Labour Party. If we are Socialists, we are aghast at the credulity of Conservatives. I do not know, dear reader, what your beliefs may be, but whatever they may be, you must concede that nine-tenths of the beliefs of nine-tenths of mankind are totally irrational. The beliefs in question are, of course, those which you do not hold. I cannot, therefore, think it presumptuous to doubt something which has long been held to be true, especially when this opinion has only prevailed in certain geographical regions, as is the case with all theological opinions.

My conclusion is that there is no reason to believe any of the dogmas of traditional theology and, further, that there is no reason to wish that they were true. Man, in so far as he is not subject to natural forces, is free to work out his own destiny. The responsibility is his, and so is the opportunity."

(From Bertrand Russell, "Is There a God?" (1952), in The Collected Papers of Bertrand Russell, Volume 11: Last Philosophical Testament, 1943-68, ed. John G. Slater and Peter Köllner (London: Routledge, 1997), pp. 543-48).

Near the British Museum...

A home of Bertrand Russell.

Sunday Sermon - T.H. Huxley on Descarte

But "learn what is true, in order to do what is right,"
is 'the summing up of the whole duty of man, for all
who are unable to satisfy their mental hunger with the
east wind of authority ; and to those of us moderns who
are in this position, it is one of Descartes' great claims to
our reverence as a spiritual ancestor, that, at three-and-
twenty, he saw clearly that this was his duty, and acted
up to his conviction. At two-and-thirty, in fact, finding
all other occupations incompatible with the search after
the knowledge which leads to action, and being possessed
of a modest competence, he withdrew into Holland;
where he spent nine years in learning and thinking, in
such retirement that only one or two trusted friends
knew of his whereabouts.

In 1637 the first fruits of these long meditations were
given to the world in the famous " Discourse touching
the Method of using Reason rightly and of seeking
scientific Truth," which, at once an autobiography and a
philosophy, clothes the deepest thought in language of
exquisite harmony, simplicity, and clearness.
The central propositions of the whole "Discourse " are
these. There is a path that leads to truth so surely, that
any one who will follow it must needs reach the goal,
whether his capacity be great or small. And there is one
guiding rule by which a man may always find this path,
and keep himself from straying when he has found it.
This golden rule is — give unqualified assent to no propositions
but those the truth of which is so clear and
distinct that they cannot be doubted.

From Lay Sermons, Addresses and Reviews: On Descartes' "DISCOURSE TOUCHING THE
METHOD OF USING ONE'S REASON RIGHTLY AND OF SEEKING SCIENTIFIC TRUTH." pg 322. "An Address to the Cambridge Young Men's Christian Society, delivered on the 24th of March, 1870, and subsequently published in Macmtilaai's(?) Magazine"

Green Party Can't Join Old Boy's Club

News from the CBC tells us that broadcasters will not include the Green Party in the leaders debate:

The consortium of networks, which includes the CBC, said three of Canada's parties were opposed to May's inclusion, but did not give more details.

In recent days, the Conservatives, Bloc Québécois and the NDP have all expressed their opposition to May joining the debates.

"It became clear that if the Green party were included, there would be no leaders' debate," the consortium said in a press release.

Smacks of collusion doesn't it? Just what do the major parties have to be afraid of?

A woman's viewpoint? A party with new ideas, perhaps popular ideas?

Darwin Adoration - Miracles Expected

In Dayton, Tennessee, a Darwin shaped stain on a wall is drawing hordes of adoring worshipers. But contrary to the evidence of this miracle, some are still not taking the revelation seriously:

"It's a stain on a wall, and nothing more," said the Rev. Clement McCoy, a professor at Oral Roberts University and prominent opponent of evolutionary theory. "Anything else is the delusional fantasy of a fanatical evolutionist mindset that sees only what it wishes to see in the hopes of validating a baseless, illogical belief system. I only hope these heretics see the error of their ways before our Most Powerful God smites them all in His vengeance."

For the rest of the article, go here.

Sunday Sermon - Darwin on Loss of Belief

"By further reflecting that the clearest evidence would be requisite to make any sane man believe in the miracles by which Christianity is supported,—that the more we know of the fixed laws of nature the more incredible do miracles become,—that the men at that time were ignorant and credulous to a degree almost incomprehensible by us,—that the Gospels cannot be proved to have been written simultaneously with the events,—that they differ in many important details, far too important as it seemed to me to be admitted as the usual inaccuracies of eye-witnesses;—by such reflections as these, which I give not as having the least novelty or value, but as they influenced me, I gradually came to disbelieve in Christianity as a divine revelation. The fact that many false religions have spread over large portions of the earth like wild-fire had some weight with me. Beautiful as is the morality of the New Testament, it can hardly be denied that its perfection depends in part on the interpretation which we now put on metaphors and allegories.

But I was very unwilling to give up my belief;—I feel sure of this for I can well remember often and often inventing day-dreams of old letters between distinguished Romans and manuscripts being discovered at Pompeii or elsewhere which confirmed in the most striking manner all that was written in the Gospels. But I found it more and more difficult, with free scope given to my imagination, to invent evidence which would suffice to convince me. Thus disbelief crept over me at a very slow rate, but was at last complete. The rate was so slow that I felt no distress, and have never since doubted even for a single second that my conclusion was correct. I can indeed hardly see how anyone ought to wish Christianity to be true; for if so the plain language of the text seems to show that the men who do not believe, and this would include my Father, Brother and almost all my best friends, will be everlastingly punished.

And this is a damnable doctrine."


(From his Autobiography, pg 67. )