
Observations and inanities by a second-shift assistant supervisor in the Puppy-Grinding division of the Evil Atheist Conspiracy® (our motto: "Sure it's cruel, but think of the jobs!"), your host, Brent Rasmussen.
Quantum Cosmology
Magnitudes And Perspectives
Submitted by Brent Rasmussen on January 15, 2008 - 2:31pm.Back in 2005, Stephen Darksyde published a fantastic article here at UTI called "Ancestral Magnitudes". It used the metaphor of the "generation", and colorfully described human evolution in terms of our ancestors.
[DarkSyde] If the idea of a flat-earth or the Sun-god is a part of that faith then you either ignore the science and live in willful ignorance-at least in regard to that conflict-and trust to faith, or you adjust your theology. Those really are your only two choices as far as I can see.
What your objection more than likely reveals is that you don't like the idea of being the product of 'random' physics and biochemistry, that you feel there is no room for a Creator in such a scenario. I cannot imagine greater natural evidence for the Brilliance of a Creator than complex process unfolding over billions of years through countless steps in exquisite order spanning the entire Cosmos. The technical skill and artistic vision of such is to be admired in awe, and in that context evolution should be worthy of your devotion, not your disdain.
I encourage you to read the whole thing if you haven't already. It'll blow your mind.
A few days ago, Xavier Onassis from the blog "Doubting Faith" published the same sort of mind-blowingly cool article about our universe, and it puts our place in that universe into stark, unflinching perspective.
[Xavier Onassis] Just for the sake of argument, let's assume that a universe this vast, and this spectacular could not be a random occurrence. Personally, I don't have a problem with it being one big coincidence. But, let's just say it's not.
Do you really think that a hypothetical all-powerful, all-knowing God, responsible for the creation of EVERYTHING in this incredibly vast universe would really give a flying fuck how you voted in the last election? Whether or not a couple of gay guys get married? Whether or not you keep Kosher or go on The Hajj?
Get over yourselves. You're not that fucking important. You need to look at the Big Picture and put things in perspective.
Just excellent. Highly recommended. Great job, Xavier.
Varghese And The Traitorous Bees
Submitted by Brent Rasmussen on May 4, 2007 - 7:11am.Roy Abraham Varghese, theistic apologist and god-bothering author from the "Institute of Metascientific Research", was recently interviewed by the Dallas Observer. Varghese is widely credited as "the man who won over Anthony Flew", and is now currently working on a book called "There Is A God" with Flew.
Varghese is an interesting character because his contention is that without a meta-intelligence, all science devolves into incoherence if you drill-down deep enough, or pull back far enough.
It's a lot of pseudo-scientific nonsense of course, a philosophically slick update to the theistic evolutionist's mantra.
More below the fold...
Grist For The Mill
Submitted by Brent Rasmussen on December 19, 2006 - 11:26pm.Evolution is a fact. It happens. It has happened. It continues to happen.
This is not in question. Those who protest either don't know what the heck evolution actually is, or they are lying to themselves and to you.
What I would like to talk about today is the perception that people have about what evolution is and is not, as well as what I believe we can do about it.
I have been arguing the creation/evolution debate for a long, long time. Back in 1986 I jumped into the infant online world with both feet, learning how to think critically and how to construct arguments. I have been an atheist since I was about 17 years old. I have been interested in science and the scientific method for much longer than that. The idea of a personal invisible imaginary friend seemed ridiculous to me even at the age of ten.
So, when the virtual world of the the new online services presented itself to me, I was floored. Here was a pure realm consisting of exact meaning. A world where people talked to each other almost mind-to-mind - cutting away the traps and the pitfalls that usually accompanied face to face conversation. Nervousness, apprehension, emotion, forgetfulness, shyness - none of this mattered when you were composing your thoughts off line in a text editor. You were able to edit and vet your words, making sure that they flowed well and made sense.
But those things which so attracted me to online text-based communication seemed to make others dumber than they would have been otherwise. Time and again I witnessed ostensibly intelligent people stumble and rush through a message or a rebuttal, making themselves sound like fools due to incoherent rambling, spelling and grammar errors, and faulty, fallacious reasoning.
It's almost as if they didn't care how they were perceived when they were online.
I didn't understand it then, and I don't understand it now. Online communications in this day and age - YouTube notwithstanding - is primarily text based. That is to say that if you cannot form cogent and thoughtful sentences, spelled correctly with the meaning coming through crystal clear, then why the hell are you arguing online - using text to try and get your meaning across to the other guy?
But that is neither here nor there - except as a base for my thoughts about evolution and the way that I have observed that people look at it.
More below the fold...
Go read...
Submitted by Jim Downey on October 30, 2006 - 8:56am.Just a quick note: go read The God Conundrum by Sean Carroll over at Cosmic Variance (my favorite String Theory blog - and how often can you say that?) He deals exquisitely with the issues Terry Eagleton raises in his review of Dawkins's The God Delusion, specifically with the whole "Dawkins doesn't address sophisticated theological scholarship" critique. Like much of what Sean writes (that I can follow - I lack the advanced mathmatics to keep up with more than his general posts), it is brilliant.
Jim Downey
Meet the Cosmologists
Submitted by DarkSyde on July 18, 2005 - 11:21am.How did the universe get here and where is it going? Is string theory viable? And most importantly, how did the fundamentalist dopes get theology and politics in my science?
The answers to these questions and more .... are a mystery for now. But lo, the new group blog Cosmic Variance is on the case! This intro piece by Risa sounds an awful lot like the perspective found somewhere 'round here ...
So go over and say howdy to them with a big sloppy link of love!


















Recent comments
4 hours 50 min ago
17 hours 27 min ago
17 hours 47 min ago
17 hours 56 min ago
18 hours 8 min ago
19 hours 13 min ago
19 hours 30 min ago
20 hours 4 min ago
1 day 1 hour ago
1 day 4 hours ago