Recent Articles

Secrets of happy couples

What are the secrets of happy couples? I found this well-crafted infographic on Lifehacker.

February 9, 2014 | By | Reply More

Creationist questions translated

Following the so-called debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham, many of Ham’s creationist followers wrote out questions to prove their case. This page a Imgur translates those questions for those who might be perplexed that they are being asked.

February 9, 2014 | By | Reply More

Exclusive interview of Edward Snowden by German Television

Fascinating interview of Edward Snowden by German Television Channel NDR.

As reported by Jay Syrmopoulos, this interview of Edward Snowden was largely ignored by the U.S. corporate media.

February 7, 2014 | By | Reply More
Ken Ham’s Lack of Wonder

Ken Ham’s Lack of Wonder

By now, I’m sure, many people know about the debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham.  Only 9% of respondents apparently saw Ham as the winner.  Of course that won’t be the end of it. 

February 7, 2014 | By | 1 Reply More

No rest for the weary

I found this quote by the Dalai Lama on FB:

Dalai lama

February 6, 2014 | By | Reply More

Search for her former self

What happens when a person forgets who they are, but the new version become an excellent writer? The result is an article well worth reading. I found this true story to be captivating.

February 6, 2014 | By | Reply More

Fix for Sisyphus

I liked this cartoon. It hits a deep issue, I think.

February 6, 2014 | By | Reply More

Elizabeth Warren: Obama filling federal bench slots with corporate attorneys

Barack Obama is seeking only skin-deep diversity when he chooses judicial nominees. 70% of judicial nominees come from the corporate sector and only 3.6 percent of the president’s nominees have a background in public interest organizations. Elizabeth Warren is concerned:

“Power is becoming more and more concentrated on one side,” she said. “Professional diversity is one way to insulate the courts from corporate capture.”

February 6, 2014 | By | Reply More

Creationist questions, scientist answers

First, there was the debate:

After Bill Nye’s debate with evidence-free Ken Ham, the Creationists lined up with their questions.

At Slate, Phil Plait provides the answers.

Plait offers links to two excellent resources for those who really care to learn more about evolution:

1. Understanding Evolution. This is a collaborative project of the University of California Museum of Paleontology and the National Center for Science Education.

2. FAQ’s for Creationists by TalkOrigins.
Talk.origins is a Usenet newsgroup devoted to the discussion and debate of biological and physical origins. Most discussions in the newsgroup center on the creation/evolution controversy, but other topics of discussion include the origin of life, geology, biology, catastrophism, cosmology and theology.

Plait ends his article with a link to another of his excellent articles, “Is Science Faith-Based.” Here’s why science is not faith-based:

The scientific method makes one assumption, and one assumption only: the Universe obeys a set of rules. That’s it. There is one corollary, and that is that if the Universe follows these rules, then those rules can be deduced by observing the way Universe behaves. This follows naturally; if it obeys the rules, then the rules must be revealed by that behavior . . . Science is not simply a database of knowledge. It’s a method, a way of finding this knowledge. Observe, hypothesize, predict, observe, revise. Science is provisional; it’s always open to improvement. Science is even subject to itself. If the method itself didn’t work, we’d see it. Our computers wouldn’t work (OK, bad example), our space probes wouldn’t get off the ground, our electronics wouldn’t work, our medicine wouldn’t work. Yet, all these things do in fact function, spectacularly well. Science is a check on itself, which is why it is such an astonishingly powerful way of understanding reality.

February 6, 2014 | By | Reply More