Sunday: Hili dialogue

April 24, 2016 • 6:30 am

by Grania

Good morning, welcome to Sunday. Today is International Sculpture Day. Be sure to hug any sculptures you meet.

It’s also the birthday of Barbra Streisand today, the woman who gave us the Streisand Effect as well as countless movies and songs so it would be impossible to choose the right one to represent her work, but I am choosing one anyway, so here goes.

Here she is singing The Way We Were. It is interesting that although the movie of the same name was set post World War II, some of the themes are as relevant today as they every were.

In Poland today, conditions have reached very serious levels. Hili is being very restrained and calm in the face of disaster if you ask me.

A: I’m afraid that the cans of pâté have run out.
Hili: So that’s your assignment.

P1040077
In Polish:

Ja: Obawiam się, że te puszki z pasztetem już się skończyły.
Hili: No to masz zadanie.

National Geographic publishes article on atheism and secularism, but descends into Authoritarian Leftism and slanders against Harris and Dawkins

April 23, 2016 • 12:00 pm

Well, it’s time to cancel your subscription to National Geographic—if you still have one. For a while it’s been turning into a religously-infused tabloid rather than the educational nature/anthropology magazine that I loved of yore. In several posts I’ve documented its increasing tendency to coddle religion (see here), and it’s only going to get worse since the magazine was taken over by Rupert Murdoch.

Now the magazine has hit its lowest point yet, polevaulting the shark in a new piece by journalist Gabe Bullard, “The World’s Newest Religion: No Religion.” While starting off as a decent bit of reportage about the rise of nonbelief and secularism, it suddenly descends into slander and clickbait, highlighting the “privilege” of nonbelief, the dominance of atheism by white males, and accusations that the “leaders” of atheism (whom they name) are misogynists. Here are some excerpts:

. . . The secularizing West is full of white men. The general U.S. population is 46 percent male and 66 percent white, but about 68 percent of atheists are men, and 78 percent are white. Atheist Alliance International has called the gender imbalance in its ranks “a significant and urgent issue.”

And this (my emphasis):

The Privilege of Not Believing

There are a few theories about why people become atheists in large numbers. Some demographers attribute it to financial security, which would explain why European countries with a stronger social safety net are more secular than the United States, where poverty is more common and a medical emergency can bankrupt even the insured.

Atheism is also tied to education, measured by academic achievement (atheists in many places tend to have college degrees) or general knowledge of the panoply of beliefs around the world (hence theories that Internet access spurs atheism).

. . . The social factors that promote atheism—financial security and education—have long been harder to attain for women and people of color in the United States.

Around the world, the Pew Research Center finds that women tend to be more likely to affiliate with a religion and more likely to pray and find religion important in their lives. That changes when women have more opportunities. “Women who are in the labor force are more like men in religiosity. Women out of the labor force tend to be more religious,” says Conrad Hackett with Pew. “Part of that might be because they’re part of a religious group that enforces the power of women being at home.”

In a Washington Post op-ed about the racial divides among atheists, Black Skeptics Group founder Sikivu Hutchinson points out that “the number of black and Latino youth with access to quality science and math education is still abysmally low.” That means they have fewer economic opportunities and less exposure to a worldview that does not require the presence of God.

Religion has a place for women, people of color, and the poor. By its nature, secularism is open to all, but it’s not always as welcoming.

Some of the humanist movement’s most visible figures aren’t known for their respect toward women. Prominent atheists Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins have awful reputations for misogyny, as does the late Christopher Hitchens. Bill Maher, the comedian and outspoken atheist, is no (nonexistent) angel, either.

Remember, this is National Geographic! O, magazine, have you no sense of decency, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?

I’m not sure why this article descends from journalism to unsupported assertions based on anecdotes, and finally to slander and ad hominems (check the links to see its “sources” for indicting atheism); but I showed it to Grania, who sent me the following response (she was one of the active members of the Atheist Ireland organization). I quote her response directly (it’s indented), and with permission. Be sure to read the whole National Geographic piece first.

  1.  Belonging to an atheist group is a self-selecting process. It’s probably safe to say that the majority of non-believers in the USA and Europe don’t belong to a formal humanist/secularist/atheist group, see no reason to, and often don’t have the time to devote to it. It is not at all accurate to attribute this to dislike of perceived “leaders”. In most cases atheist NS and secularist groups exist for the purposes of political advocacy—something that a lot of people have no interest in.
  1. It is completely skewed to claim that because there are only a small group of people who have become global household names in atheism (at least on the internet) this is therefore representative of atheism as a whole. If you look at atheist and humanist groups around the world (who have nothing at all to do with Dawkins et al.), they have plenty of women both as leaders as well as members. Although there is often a gender imbalance, it would be tendentious, and probably dishonest, to claim that this was all about sexism. Instead of complaining that there aren’t enough women in atheism, they could try promoting the existing women in atheism. Increased visibility of the thousands that are already there would probably attract more women. These women include Jane Donnelly of Atheist Ireland, Shappi Khorsandi of British Humanists, Jen Peebles of Atheist Community of Austin, Sarah Haider (co-founder of the Ex-Muslims of North America), and Inna Shevchenko, anti-religious activist and head of FEMEN. Annie Laurie Gaylor is already quite prominent (and effective) as co-President of the Freedom from Religion Foundation, but is often left off the AL’s lists of “atheist leaders”.
  1. There is an awful habit of dismissing of the “wrong” kind of women in atheism, i.e., any women who a few bloggingheads have decided are not the type of woman they approve of. These women range from Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Eiynah (“Nice Mangoes”) to the women mentioned in point 3—women who do real work in real atheist organisations, and work that has a genuine and measurable affect on the communities in which they live.

JAC: I’ll add that the notion of nonbelieving being a “privilege” is a canard based on a half-truth. The word “privilege”, of course, is one used by authoritarian leftists (ALs) to denote that one has an undeserved advantage based on race, background, class, and so on. It is a pejorative term, and if you have “privilege” you are supposed to admit it and try to expunge its effects (racism, etc.) from your behavior. But the “privilege” of atheism is not like this.

I do think that nonbelief spreads when people are no longer so destitute, oppressed, or laden with feelings that society doesn’t care about them that they turn to God for succor. That was Marx’s thesis, and I agree with him. Religion will largely disappear when societies learn to take better care of their members—something instantiated in the nations of northern Europe. This is noted in the National Geographic piece.

But the oppression, despair, and destitution that keep minorities religious is not the fault of atheists, and we should not see atheist “privilege” as something that we need to expiate or be ashamed of. Indeed, some religions gain power from trying to keep the disenfranchised satisfied with a substandard life, promising that the next one will be better (cf. Mother Teresa).

I believe that to rid the world of religion, we need to raise the water level to float everyone’s boat: create the kind of “successful societies” (à la Greg Paul) that eliminate the need for religion. This is where atheism and humanism make common cause. But the religiosity of the oppressed, and of minorities, can in no way be pinned on the nonreligious, or on their supposed failure to welcome minorities.

Here’s one reaction to the National Geographic piece, which really is a travesty—the conversion of a once-respectable magazine into a clickbait venue that’s going the way of BuzzFeed. Bullard’s journalist ethics, and efforts, are reprehensible. It’s truly sad.

Author Bullard didn’t bother interviewing anybody but AL atheists, although plenty of people would take issue with his claims. As one commenter noted, “Whaa?? NatGeo is quoting salon.com, accusing Dawkins of misogyny?? Is this Tumblr, am I lost?”

Another comment:

Screen Shot 2016-04-23 at 9.05.29 AM

h/t: JT

Readers’ beefs

April 23, 2016 • 11:00 am

The bit below was not a comment or attempted comment on the site, but an email sent directly to me.  The article to which it refers, one I wrote for John Brockman’s annual Edge Question book This Idea Must Die, was about how we should dispense with the idea of free will. As I recall (I don’t have my essay here), I didn’t say much about religion. Nevertheless, this person became quite exercised about my short piece. He/she sent this:

Dear Professor Coyne

I’ve read what you said in This Idea Must Die. Why do you want to destroy religion? If you read pages 447-465 of “American Grace” by two very prominent social scientists, Robert Putnam of Harvard and David Campbell of Notre Dame, you will see that religious people are more generous than atheists, more likely to volunteer their time, and even more likely to donate blood.

Plus, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Milosevic, Pol Pot, Putin, and the guys who rule in China right now all are/were atheists. Do you think that is just a coincidence?

I know Dawkins says Hitler was a Catholic. That is a lie. Steven Pinker said in The Better Angels of Our Nature that Hitler, in adulthood, was no kind of Christian. I forget the page number, but check the index for the pages where Hitler is mentioned, and it is on one of them. If you read The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by William L. Shirer, and go to the index and see the only page where Shirer mentions Nietzsche, you will see that Hitler publicly declared himself to be a great admirer of Nietzsche. Only an atheist would admire Nietzsche.

Regards,
NAME REDACTED

These arguments are shopworn, and I’m pressed for time, so if readers want to respond, feel free, and I’ll refer the writer to this post. But regardless of the effect of religious belief on behavior, it’s better to know the truth rather than act in service of something for which there’s no evidence. The notion that we need religion, regardless of its truth, to motivate good behavior, is the patronizing “Little People” argument, one refuted by the nations of Scandinavia, arguably more moral in governance than is the hyperreligious U.S.

I’d add that religious people are also more likely than atheists to kill abortion doctors, withhold medical care from their children, refuse vaccination, commit acts of terrorism, brainwash their children, deny rights to gays and women, and inculcate their coreligionists with guilt, as well as policing their behavior, dress, and sex life. And I’m not sure how good those studies about religiously-based generosity are; I haven’t read the original reports. Readers who have can weigh in below.

The Pol Pot/Mao/Stalin argument founders on the claim that although those leaders (Hitler was an exception, I think) didn’t accept or promulgate religion, and were anti-religious, they also acted in service ideologies that were the equivalent to religion, having god-like leaders, punishment for blasphemy, and so on. They killed in the name of these ideologies (to which religion posed a challenge), not explicitly in the name of atheism. The problem is not one of religion per se producing bad behavior, but extremist and irrational ideologies doing so. And religion is one of those extremist ideologies, but it posits a Great Leader and mandates conduct that can be punished or rewarded in the afterlife.

The wider war, as I’ve often said, is not between science and religion, but between rationality and superstition, with science being the most exquisitely refined form of rationality, and religion the most pervasive and common form of superstition. As Sam Harris said, “‘There is no society in human history that ever suffered because its people became too reasonable.”

As for “only an atheist would admire Nietzche,” that’s a pretty dumb argument to show that someone’s an atheist, for I’ve known moderately religious people who have admired some of Nietzche’s arguments.

Caturday felid trifecta: British Foreign Office hires Chief Mouser, lynx pwns wolf in rare encounter, puking cat salsa/gravy dispenser

April 23, 2016 • 9:45 am

As usual, we have three cat-releated items today, the first including the announcement from the BBC that the foreign office has employed a Chief Mouser named Palmerston. (There’s already a Chief Mouser to the Cabinet Office, Larry, at 10 Downing Street, but his mousing abilities are horrible. He is cute, though.

Larry_Chief_Mouser
Larry, Chief Mouser to the Cabinet Office
enhanced-5610-1460555203-1
Palmerston, Chief Mouser to the Foreign Office

As with Larry, Palmerston came from the Battersea Dogs and Cat home, and the Foreign Office sent out a nice notice of his hiring:

Palmerston will be living at one of the country’s most famous addresses among the UK’s top diplomats and ministers.

Foreign Office bosses has been quick to point out he will be no burden on the taxpayer.

“Palmerston’s domestic posting will have zero cost to the public purrse as a staff kitty will be used to pay for him and all aspects of his welfur.”

. .  “Palmerston is HM Diplomatic Service’s newest arrival and in the role of FCO Chief Mouser will assist our pest controllers in keeping down the number of mice in our King Charles Street building.

“We have worked closely with Battersea Dogs and Cats Home on Palmerston’s deployment and they have inspected his new home, as they do for all pawtential new owners of their rescue cats.”

The two year old domestic short hair was found wandering the streets of London. He was hungry, underweight, and had no microchip, meaning his previous owners could not be traced.

Battersea’s Head of Catteries, Lindsey Quinlan told Newsbeat: “”He’s a very confident cat, loves being with people, and enjoys a good chin rub.

“If his behaviour at Battersea is anything to go by, we predict Palmerston will be a formidable feline, very deserving of his new name.”

You can read an interview with Palmerston at BuzzFeed, and there’s also a report on the BBC Newshour.  Reader “j.j.” notes this about the BBC piece:

What makes this report noteworthy beyond other reports I’ve heard is that Lindsey Quinlan, head of the Battersea Catteries (what a job!) is interviewed about Palmerston’s history and the work at the Battersea cat rescue center (dogs, too).  They actually do hire out cats as mousers — not just any rescued cat, they vet them for the job.

*********

As reported by the World Wildlife Fund, which posted this video, we see a rare encounter between a gray wolf (Canis lupus) and a Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx), both endangered and protected in Europe:

The video shows the “wild ancestors” of our dogs and cats meeting together in the snowy forests of the Carpathian Mountains in Poland. It was produced by the biologist and video-photographer Zenek Wojtas, who commented on this unique encounter saying:

“Observing wild lynx and wolves in their natural habitat is extremely difficult and rare. I often spend months in freezing conditions to see animals in nature. This encounter is unique as it gives us an insight into the harmony that exists in nature, where predators can live in the same habitat without harming each other. As the wolf slowly walked towards the female lynx, she arched her back to protect her kittens, as all mothers would do. It was not a fight, the wolf only wanted to play.”

Of course the cat pwns the d*g!!!:

*********

Finally, don’t you think you need one of these food dispensers? Imagine how much it can liven up your next dinner party! Sadly, they appear to be sold out for good.

h/t: Pyers, j.j., Sergio, jsp

Readers’ wildlife photographs

April 23, 2016 • 8:00 am

Reader Lou Jost, who lives and works in Ecuador, found a really cool beetle, and a case of possible mimicry that I didn’t know about. His descriptions are indented:

Here’s another weird insect I found. This one is a translucent chrysomelid beetle larva, subfamily Cassidinae, which builds a rough likeness of another insect or spider, by carefully placing bricks of poop onto its back with its “anal turret” (that’s a real term!!). It does this by touch since it can’t see what it’s doing back there. When this creature grows up it turns into a partly-transparent beetle that also has a fake insect on its back, a fly, but this time it is just done with pigment.

_1050338

_1050283

JAC: The adult, with spider-like markings on its back:

2016-03-02-13.52.01 ZSDM retouched371_89v2InProgress

2016-02-28-17.38.22 ZS retouched875_86v2

The adult also has amazing feet. They are like wet mops and can stick to glass and other surfaces, and withstand enormous forces (60-100 times their own weight). The liquid is a viscous lipid. The feet are marvelous under a microscope. I think the claws might be used as levers to get the wet, flattened, divided hairs to unstick from the surface.

I must have taken many thousands of images of this thing during its life. The foot pictures shown here required about 700 pictures each. You can see the microscopic droplets of lipids on the flattened hair tips. There are more photos and info here.

2016-03-08-00.51.09 ZS retouchedv4

Saturday: Hili dialogue

April 23, 2016 • 6:53 am

by Grania

Good morning!

Today, as many of you have no doubt seen on Google, is the anniversary of the death of William Shakespeare, English poet and playwright and subject of many a Francis Bacon dunnit conspiracy theory. I’ve loved Shakespeare ever since I was a young child and my father put a copy of Macbeth into my hands, possibly as a joke – I was looking for a book with witches in it. When he returned I had already memorised Act 1. As a ‘Witch Book’, Macbeth sucks; but I found I didn’t care – I’d found a new love.

In Shakespeare’s honor, The Telegraph has put together a list of Shakespearean insults. “Villain, I have done thy mother” needs no explanation, while others such as “I bite my thumb at you” don’t even make the list as an insult, as it loses its sting if it requires footnotes to be understood.

[JAC addendum: The New York Times has published an obituary for the bard, as if he had just died. It’s very nice and also interactive, so you can click on the words—or phrases from his plays—and learn more. There’s also a Google Doodle; click on it to show where it goes:]

celebrating-william-shakespeare-5125440101416960.2-hp

Hili is verging on the blasphemous today, or as those of us in the reality biz like to say: reasonably accurate.

GOD IS ONLY A THEORY

Hili: What are we posting today?
A: Jerry’s article about a philosopher who says that God is the question.
Hili: So God is just a theory and one based on a very wobbly hypothesis?

P1040071

In Polish:

BÓG JEST TYLKO TEORIĄ

Hili: Co dziś dajemy?
Ja: Artykuł Jerrego, o filozofie, który mówi, że Bóg jest pytaniem.
Hili: Czyli Bóg to tylko teoria i to oparta na hipotezie o wysokiej tolerancji rozpoznania?

 

Friday moggie: Simon’s Cat gets scientific

April 22, 2016 • 2:30 pm

An old favorite, Simon’s Cat (website here), has added some Science to the cartoons, combining the usual amusing animations (in this case, one called “Let me in”) with an expert’s explanation of cat behavior (the expert here is Nicky Trevorrow). Apparently “Simon’s Cat Logic” will be a continuing series.

Note that throughout this video, Simon Tofield, who appears in person, makes the cat noises himself. The regular animation, with an introduction by Tofield, starts at 3:00.

The explanation:

Simon’s Cat Logic is a fun new series where we speak to a Cat Behaviour Expert at Cats Protection about why cats do the silly things they do, and how we can help our cats lead happy and healthy lives.

Portland: Day 2

April 22, 2016 • 1:30 pm

The Big Event yesterday was my two-hour session with the 120 students in Peter Boghossian’s “Pseudoscience” class at Portland State. I lectured for an hour, and then there was a question-and-answer session. The students had some good questions. Peter also teaches an “Atheism” class and a separate “New Atheism” class, both of which are wildly popular: they have to turn students away. That’s a good sign, and most of the students are either nonbelievers, doubters, or simply want to learn more about the nature of modern nonbelief.

Peter took this photo of me lecturing (I’m showing the genetic data that refute Adam and Eve as our sole ancestors):

IMG_5920

Afterwards we went to lunch, and I noticed, as we ate outside (it was a glorious day), that many more young people are tattooed here than in Chicago. Peter noticed that out waitress had a tattoo, too, and I asked her if I could photograph it:

P1100356

Portland outfit: flannel shirt and clunky shoes:

IMG_0990

Three archetypal Portlanders (the locals love their smartphones!):

IMG_0992 (1)

I’m staying two nights in The Ace Hotel, a lovely old place that is a refubished old building. And, in line with Portland culture, there are drawings over my bed:
 Ace 1

My cute sink (the shower is down the hall):

Ace 2

Peter took me to the hotel last evening in an Uber car—my first ride in one, and it was terrific (also prompt and much cheaper than a cab). He noticed that the final tab (you don’t tip with Uber) was the Devil’s Number—an appropriate fare for two militant atheists. Coincidence? I think not. . .

uber-ride

Tonight at 7 I talk on Free Will for the local Center for Inquiry. The information is here, so come if you’re in the area and have the time. I’m not sure if they’ll be selling my books, but if you bring one you’ve already bought I’ll be glad to sign it.

Party tomorrow!