ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » Welcome to ISF » Skeptical Events
 

Notices


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 18th July 2010, 12:27 PM   #201
paperskater
Master Poster
 
paperskater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,486
There are also those people who register on-site as well.
__________________
Susie Facebook (Please let me know who you are!) - Twitter --- Makes Me Think

"I think most of us would be horrified to meet ourselves and discover what everyone else already knows about us." - Bill Watterson, creator of Calvin and Hobbes
paperskater is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2010, 03:26 PM   #202
AdMan
Philosopher
 
AdMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 9,597
Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer View Post
Don't they ask shirt size on the registration form?
Nope.

ETA: Nope = Yes

Last edited by AdMan; 18th July 2010 at 04:31 PM.
AdMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2010, 03:35 PM   #203
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 48,257
Originally Posted by Horatius View Post
The problem then is, the sizes aren't all that consistent. A Large from one manufacturer that fits you might be different from another manufacturer. So you'd probably still have people wanting different sizes.
You tell them no.
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer
The Central Scrutinizer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2010, 04:14 PM   #204
xinit
Muse
 
xinit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 581
Originally Posted by AdMan View Post
Nope.
I would swear that I entered my shirt size when I registered, but that was ages ago.
xinit is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2010, 04:29 PM   #205
Sc00ter
Critical Thinker
 
Sc00ter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 317
Originally Posted by xinit View Post
I would swear that I entered my shirt size when I registered, but that was ages ago.
Yes, it was on the registration form.
Sc00ter is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2010, 04:29 PM   #206
AdMan
Philosopher
 
AdMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 9,597
Originally Posted by xinit View Post
I would swear that I entered my shirt size when I registered, but that was ages ago.
My apologies--I just checked and you are right!

But it didn't seem as if that made much of a difference--they still asked for my size when I went to pick up the shirt.

Maybe it helps with the original order.
AdMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2010, 05:00 PM   #207
SkepticScott
TAM Volunteer Guy
 
SkepticScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,897
Originally Posted by paperskater View Post
I do remember Scott asking all the volunteers via email about which size shirt they wanted.
We have asked sizes on the registration form at some TAMs. It seems sporadic. Yes, I asked all the volunteers what size they wanted so we wouldn't waste any of them. I'm glad you got a small, paperskater.

We ran out of small shirts first, then medium shirts later. One thing I noticed with the volunteers this year is that the average size got smaller. It may be due to having more women attend, or maybe skeptics have just gotten in better shape since TAM7.

Originally Posted by AdMan View Post
But it didn't seem as if that made much of a difference--they still asked for my size when I went to pick up the shirt.
The sizes were not printed on the badges. While we could have looked you up on the master list, it was easier to simply ask people what size they wanted. I'm sure the entries on the registration form were used to decide what to order. At least I hope they were.
__________________
-- Scott
If mho, the unit of conductance, is in units of 1/ohm, are IQ and qi similarly inversely related?

"I love that you nerds turned a thread about a party into a debate over currency aerodynamics." -- Rebecca

Last edited by SkepticScott; 18th July 2010 at 05:04 PM. Reason: added t-shirt size info
SkepticScott is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2010, 03:52 AM   #208
Cuddles
Decoy
Moderator
 
Cuddles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 18,415
Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer View Post
Until hotel security tosses you out.

See: Forum/Skepchick Party, TAM 4, 5, 5.5, 6
Then you move to the next room.

Originally Posted by markb View Post
We did take him to a certain.. uhm... club. That was interesting.
I don't understand why we haven't been told this story yet.

Originally Posted by Sc00ter View Post
Also her "solution" seemed to be to wait for the old white guys to die. That's not really a solution.
Not only is it a solution, it's pretty much the only possible solution. The problem is that you can't just throw out people who are already at the top of their field. If 90% of professors are male, you can't just fire half of them and replace them with women, you have to wait until they are no longer professors. Generally you only have to wait for people to retire rather than actually die, but the principle is the same.

In addition to that, you can't choose new professors based on gender, race, or whatever, because that would be doing exactly what you are supposedly trying to avoid. You can't solve discrimination by simply discriminating in the opposite direction. This makes things even slower, since even if things are now exactly equal, once half those professors have left, half of the new ones will be male and there still won't be equal numbers of men and women.

The problem is that many people don't seem to understand what a slow process change often has to be. They want equality now and think that means having equal proportions right now. But what it actually means is just that everyone has equal opportunities now. The actual proportions in jobs will only change over a long period of time as the people who currently hold those jobs leave.

And of course, that ignores all the issues about men and women actually being different, and the questions of how much of preferences for particular jobs is genetic as opposed to environmental. As well as how much we can, or even should, try to actively change things as opposed to merely removing the discrimination and letting things sort themselves out.

Originally Posted by paperskater View Post
I wish that the forum table was placed a little more prominently as I think the forum is a fabulous means of reaching out to people and building the sense of community. If it wasn't for the forum, I probably wouldn't be attending TAM anymore.
This is a good point. Someone brought me my badges while I was working on registration, but I struggled to find the table later since it was hidden right at the end past all the other tables and the actual presentations. It was only by making a deliberate effort during a break and ignoring all the shiny things on the way that I was actually able to track it down. For people who are already members that may be enough, but we're unlikely to attract many more people with it hidden like that.

Quote:
More recognition for the people behind the scenes, please. I'm not sure how this could be done, but the most important people that made TAM happen were never to be seen and only mentioned once or twice.
I tend to agree with this as well. While the volunteers got a clap, I don't remember people like Allison and Deanna being mentioned at all, as well as Jeff, DJ, Hal and so on who were far more than just famous people to be gazed at in awe, they were the ones running around like headless chickens the whole time making it actually work.

Originally Posted by Bloodtoes View Post
One thing that irked me was on the climate change panel, James McGaha. Not the fact that he had a dissenting opinion... that's great to have at least someone up there who will argue the point. I mean, that's what we're about right? Scientific skepticism. But by the end I had to ask, "Why was he on this panel?" Was he the only person they could find who would argue from the anti-AGW side? Did nobody try to find out what he might be like on such a panel, what his points might be? I guess that says something about the issue. He really took his time while hinting at conspiracy and threats. "I have friends who are in a related fields who have been threatened..." This is supposed to be a panelist at a skeptics conference? Whatever side of the issue you're on, you should know that such a claim is worthless and a waste of time.
While I missed this panel (stupid mornings), I think this actually sounds entirely representative. This is the whole problem with climate "skepticism" - there's rarely anything vaguely skeptical about it. The vast majority of it really does just consist of vague insinuations about conspiracies along with various other unfounded and unsupported claims. There's plenty of room for discussion about the actual science, but almost all the legitimate discussion is about exactly what will happen, how fast it will happen and what we might be able to do about it.

Perhaps he wasn't great in terms of providing good discussion in the panel, but if he got people to realise just how silly and unskeptical most of the climate change denial is then I'd say it could well have been worthwhile.

Originally Posted by Tressa View Post
Except for the last few minutes, when Dawkins talked about the book he was working on, the interview didn't cover anything that hadn't been heard in other interviews/podcasts/articles over and over. Dawkins also had to correct Grothe twice when he (Grothe) synopsised what Dawkins had just said incorrectly. Very, very disappointing.
I saw that almost exactly the opposite way around. DJ pointed out the blatant hypocrisy Dawkins was saying and was desperately trying to get him out of, and Dawkins just insisted on making himself look like a complete ass. I've always been a fan of Dawkins based on his biological work, but I've never really paid much attention to his religion bashing. That interview really brought home just how much of a fanatical hypocrite he is when talking about religion. He should stick to the science. When he talks like that, he just gives skeptics and atheists a bad name.

Originally Posted by SkepticScott View Post
We ran out of small shirts first, then medium shirts later.
Clearly the obesity epidemic is working properly. We need people to eat more so we can stop worrying about sizes and just order XL for everyone.

Quote:
The sizes were not printed on the badges. While we could have looked you up on the master list, it was easier to simply ask people what size they wanted. I'm sure the entries on the registration form were used to decide what to order. At least I hope they were.
Of course, given the usual problems with registration with a crowd that big, even if we tried to have everyone assigned t-shirts in advance, we'd still somehow end up with people getting the wrong ones, or not having theirs listed, or whatever. It's one of the laws of physics, like hoses getting tangled no matter how carefully you store them - as soon as a list reaches a certain size, there will be errors on it no matter how carefully or how many times you check it.


Incidentally, I've found another thing that didn't work - the USB stick. It doesn't fit in a USB socket. It's not bent or anything, it's just the wrong size. Very odd.
__________________
If I let myself get hung up on only doing things that had any actual chance of success, I'd never do anything!
Cuddles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2010, 04:15 AM   #209
zooterkin
Nitpicking dilettante
Moderator
 
zooterkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 29,161
Originally Posted by paperskater View Post
  • I wish that the forum table was placed a little more prominently as I think the forum is a fabulous means of reaching out to people and building the sense of community. If it wasn't for the forum, I probably wouldn't be attending TAM anymore.
If it wasn't for the forum, I wouldn't have known about TAM, let alone attended.

Originally Posted by Cuddles View Post

Incidentally, I've found another thing that didn't work - the USB stick. It doesn't fit in a USB socket. It's not bent or anything, it's just the wrong size. Very odd.
Really? I had to wiggle mine a bit, but it went in. Possibly it's due to being a cut-down plug, I think. Have you got it the right way up?
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell
Zooterkin is correct Darat
Nerd! Hokulele
Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232
zooterkin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2010, 06:18 AM   #210
Sc00ter
Critical Thinker
 
Sc00ter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 317
Originally Posted by Cuddles View Post
Not only is it a solution, it's pretty much the only possible solution. The problem is that you can't just throw out people who are already at the top of their field. If 90% of professors are male, you can't just fire half of them and replace them with women, you have to wait until they are no longer professors. Generally you only have to wait for people to retire rather than actually die, but the principle is the same.
That might be true in the professional field, but the panel was about women in skepticism not women in science in general. In skepticism they can totally step it and and do talks, there's a huge hole to fill for doing talks for local groups, and it's easy to get talks on the big stage if you know what you're doing.

As has been pointed out before, TAM7 would have had more women, but the ones that the JREF reached out to said they didn't want to speak, or backed out later. They have a platform in this community, but they're just not using it for some reason.
Sc00ter is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2010, 04:05 PM   #211
Dicon
is not a radish
 
Dicon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,106
Originally Posted by Cuddles View Post
Incidentally, I've found another thing that didn't work - the USB stick. It doesn't fit in a USB socket. It's not bent or anything, it's just the wrong size. Very odd.

I just tried mine is several differnet USB sockets and it fit fine in all of them. Apologies in advance for what is going to sound like a very silly question, but... did you first pivot it into the open position?
Dicon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2010, 05:09 PM   #212
SkepticScott
TAM Volunteer Guy
 
SkepticScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,897
Originally Posted by Cuddles View Post
I tend to agree with this as well. While the volunteers got a clap, I don't remember people like Allison and Deanna being mentioned at all, as well as Jeff, DJ, Hal and so on who were far more than just famous people to be gazed at in awe, they were the ones running around like headless chickens the whole time making it actually work.
I agree. TAM will fail without the help of so many people: Allison, Jeff, Hal, Deanna (she was so much better than we paid for), the Kings, Austin (he donated his time to be the press coordinator -- if you weren't press or a speaker you probably never dealt with him), etc.
__________________
-- Scott
If mho, the unit of conductance, is in units of 1/ohm, are IQ and qi similarly inversely related?

"I love that you nerds turned a thread about a party into a debate over currency aerodynamics." -- Rebecca
SkepticScott is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2010, 06:17 PM   #213
Chris H
Magician Among Spirits
 
Chris H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 846
Originally Posted by SkepticScott View Post
Austin (he donated his time to be the press coordinator -- if you weren't press or a speaker you probably never dealt with him), etc.

I never "dealt" with Austin, but I chatted to him a fair bit and he was awesome!
Chris H is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2010, 07:41 PM   #214
saganite
Black-and-white Cat-foot
 
saganite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,304
The tee shirt conversation reminded me of something I forgot to mention: whoever designed this year's logo did a great job. Admittedly I usually save my TAM t-shirts to wear to bed, but not this one.

Somebody on Twitter posted a picture of their teenaged son wearing an "emo" version of the shirt (by pairing it with a wool cap, sneakers and a hangdog expression), which I think speaks to the coolness of this year's design.
__________________
"Live every week like it's Shark Week." -- Tracy Jordan
saganite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2010, 08:01 PM   #215
HawaiiBigSis
List Management
 
HawaiiBigSis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Under the rainbow
Posts: 5,338
Originally Posted by Cuddles View Post
Then you move to the next room.
Incidentally, I've found another thing that didn't work - the USB stick. It doesn't fit in a USB socket. It's not bent or anything, it's just the wrong size. Very odd.
I can't get mine in any of the three USB ports on my 'puter either.

Wiggling it, opening it, turning it this way and that...none of those work.

Oh wait. Pushing it REALLY hard (harder than I thought safe) seems to have done the trick.
__________________
The easy confidence with which I know another man's religion is folly teaches me to suspect that my own is also. - Mark Twain
HawaiiBigSis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2010, 09:38 PM   #216
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 48,257
Originally Posted by saganite View Post
The tee shirt conversation reminded me of something I forgot to mention: whoever designed this year's logo did a great job. Admittedly I usually save my TAM t-shirts to wear to bed, but not this one.
I can't think of any better use for a JREF shirt. I'm drunk, don't hate me.
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer
The Central Scrutinizer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th July 2010, 06:04 PM   #217
Allecher
Critical Thinker
 
Allecher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 449
I have a mixed opinion of the workshops. From what I can tell they were well attended, so they were probably a money maker for the JREF. However, some of them were not much different than the main presentations so it is not clear to me why they required a separate cost.

The juggling workshop lived up to my definition of a workshop - concrete instruction and materials (JREF juggling balls) to take home with you. I was surprised the other workshops did not provide books, DVDs or some other take away to justify the cost.
__________________
"When I do good, I feel good; when I do bad, I feel bad. That's my religion."
-Abraham Lincoln, 16th president of the U.S. (1809-1865)
Allecher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th July 2010, 06:13 PM   #218
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 48,257
Some people got to make Angry Vaginas.
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer
The Central Scrutinizer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th July 2010, 06:32 PM   #219
Chris H
Magician Among Spirits
 
Chris H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 846
Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer View Post
Some people got to make Angry Vaginas.

Others already had them...
Chris H is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th July 2010, 07:30 PM   #220
Sc00ter
Critical Thinker
 
Sc00ter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 317
Originally Posted by Allecher View Post
The juggling workshop lived up to my definition of a workshop - concrete instruction and materials (JREF juggling balls) to take home with you.
That you had to pay extra for to keep them ($10)
Sc00ter is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th July 2010, 07:39 PM   #221
xinit
Muse
 
xinit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 581
Originally Posted by Sc00ter View Post
That you had to pay extra for to keep them ($10)
The $10 was pretty fair - Goudeau donated the balls to the JREF, so it was a $10 (optional) donation. I mean, you could always pick up hand-made shiny balls instead, for a bit more than $10... shiny chainmail ball set
xinit is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2010, 05:11 PM   #222
qarnos
Cold-hearted skeptic
 
qarnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,984
A few people have mentioned religion-bashing at TAM.

I am curious to know what this involved. Was it any different in tone or nature to the psychic-bashing and dowsing-bashing that I'm sure also takes place?

I'd appreciate it if someone can provide examples/quotes of where they feel the line was crossed. The whole "skeptic-schism" thing has me fascinated.
__________________
"In the twenty years since the Chernobyl tragedy, the world's worst nuclear accident, there have been nearly [FILL IN ALARMIST AND ARMAGEDDONIST FACTOID HERE]" - Greenpeace press release.
qarnos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2010, 05:13 PM   #223
Sc00ter
Critical Thinker
 
Sc00ter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 317
Originally Posted by qarnos View Post
A few people have mentioned religion-bashing at TAM.

I am curious to know what this involved. Was it any different in tone or nature to the psychic-bashing and dowsing-bashing that I'm sure also takes place?

I'd appreciate it if someone can provide examples/quotes of where they feel the line was crossed. The whole "skeptic-schism" thing has me fascinated.
I can tell you a protocol to properly test dowsing and psychics.

Please show your protocol to test the existence of "god", that is, if you can even define what "god" is.
Sc00ter is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2010, 05:21 PM   #224
kittynh
The Hupsu Detective

auctioneer
 
kittynh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 22,639
good answer

also when Dawkins said the "number one" threat to the UK now was Islam, even moderate Islam. There was a kind of shiver that went through some people. How about saying "religion" or "Intolerance" or "too much time spent in pubs" or "inbreeding within the royal family"... or the breakdown of the National Health plan?

Nope it's Islam. And he was very clear that tolerance of even any moderate version of any religion was as bad as tolerance of the most fundamental version of that religion. You an Episcopalian with a lesbian priest and a gay Bishop? Sorry... you are as guilty as the most violent fundamentalist snake handling faith healing nut jobs. Because just by attending ANY religious organization, be it Unitarian or Buddhist or Jedi...you are "supporting" the radical religions. But those ISLAMICS!

There was kind of a hush as people wondered if he was going to suggest a "solution" to the "Islamic" problem in the UK.

say an "Ultimate solution".

eeeekkkkk!!!
__________________
www.Yankeeskeptic.com, aliens, Bigfoot, and other friends
kittynh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2010, 05:29 PM   #225
AdMan
Philosopher
 
AdMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 9,597
Originally Posted by Sc00ter View Post
... that is, if you can even define what "god" is.

I assume this was the part that was deemed by some to have gone over the line, and I agree it sounds presumptious and should have been phrased better.

But really, I can't agree that this kind of point or similar discussion (again, watching how it's put) should be frowned upon at all at a skeptics' conference.
AdMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2010, 05:47 PM   #226
Sc00ter
Critical Thinker
 
Sc00ter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 317
Originally Posted by AdMan View Post
I assume this was the part that was deemed by some to have gone over the line, and I agree it sounds presumptious and should have been phrased better.

But really, I can't agree that this kind of point or similar discussion (again, watching how it's put) should be frowned upon at all at a skeptics' conference.
I never said that discussion should be frowned upon.. I didn't hear anybody complaining when people brought up testing specific claims from specific religions. Claims of miracles for example.

But what if my view of God is that it was something that created the universe, set things in motion, then vanished. What if praying for me is a cultural thing more than a super natural thing? Something that helps center me or clear my mind. There seemed to be an air that all of that is bad.

What was funny was when Dawkins said that he didn't see the point of science fiction and fantasy books there was a bit of a buzz on twitter about that..

But even Dawkins said that most concepts of God are untestable.
Sc00ter is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2010, 05:47 PM   #227
AdMan
Philosopher
 
AdMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 9,597
Originally Posted by kittynh View Post
There was kind of a hush as people wondered if he was going to suggest a "solution" to the "Islamic" problem in the UK.

say an "Ultimate solution".

eeeekkkkk!!!
"I might retort that such hostility as I or other atheists occasionally voice towards religion is limited to words. I am not going to bomb anybody, behead them, stone them, burn them at the stake, crucify them, or fly planes into their skyscrapers, just because of a theological disagreement."

Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, p. 282

ETA: I might add that if you absolutely don't want to hear strongly anti-religious comments, one suggestion is to not invite Richard Dawkins to your conference!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F

Last edited by AdMan; 21st July 2010 at 06:23 PM.
AdMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2010, 05:50 PM   #228
kittynh
The Hupsu Detective

auctioneer
 
kittynh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 22,639
yeah and I think a lot of people feel that things like the alternative medicine crisis, and the anti vaxxers... are a good focus of skeptic energy. Atheism is a very personal thing. Point is there is NO church of atheism. I know atheist anti vaxxers, and the town chiropractor is an atheist. So atheism as some sort of litmus test of critical thinking skills isn't perfect.
__________________
www.Yankeeskeptic.com, aliens, Bigfoot, and other friends
kittynh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2010, 05:56 PM   #229
AdMan
Philosopher
 
AdMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 9,597
Originally Posted by kittynh View Post
So atheism as some sort of litmus test of critical thinking skills isn't perfect.
Absolutely agree!--case in point: Bill Maher.
AdMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2010, 05:56 PM   #230
qarnos
Cold-hearted skeptic
 
qarnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,984
Originally Posted by Sc00ter View Post
I can tell you a protocol to properly test dowsing and psychics.
Yeah, I suppose. After all, whenever a psychic fails a test, they immediately accept the result and stop claiming they have psychic powers.

Quote:
Please show your protocol to test the existence of "god", that is, if you can even define what "god" is.
So you avoid answering a question by asking a question of your own. Well done. I never claimed I could devise a test of a gods existence. I asked if you could provide me with an example of what you (or anyone else) felt crossed the line.
__________________
"In the twenty years since the Chernobyl tragedy, the world's worst nuclear accident, there have been nearly [FILL IN ALARMIST AND ARMAGEDDONIST FACTOID HERE]" - Greenpeace press release.
qarnos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2010, 06:03 PM   #231
AdMan
Philosopher
 
AdMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 9,597
Originally Posted by qarnos View Post
I asked if you could provide me with an example of what you (or anyone else) felt crossed the line.

Unless I misread it, that post was an example. Maybe it was missing the quotation marks.
AdMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2010, 07:20 PM   #232
qarnos
Cold-hearted skeptic
 
qarnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,984
Originally Posted by AdMan View Post
Unless I misread it, that post was an example. Maybe it was missing the quotation marks.
Hmmm... You may be right. I'll wait for Sc00ter to clarify.

And to clarify my own position, I'm not looking to get into a religious argument here. I legitimately want to know what theists are taking objection to. If it's along the lines of "Theists are stupid", then I would be on their side. If, OTOH, it is just general discussion of religion in the same way we might discuss homeopathy, then I think they are the ones who are out of line.
__________________
"In the twenty years since the Chernobyl tragedy, the world's worst nuclear accident, there have been nearly [FILL IN ALARMIST AND ARMAGEDDONIST FACTOID HERE]" - Greenpeace press release.
qarnos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2010, 08:06 PM   #233
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
 
Horatius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 23,791
Originally Posted by qarnos View Post
If it's along the lines of "Theists are stupid", then I would be on their side. If, OTOH, it is just general discussion of religion in the same way we might discuss homeopathy, then I think they are the ones who are out of line.

The problem is, there seemed to be quite a bit of both.
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd
Horatius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd July 2010, 01:39 AM   #234
Sc00ter
Critical Thinker
 
Sc00ter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 317
Originally Posted by qarnos View Post
Yeah, I suppose. After all, whenever a psychic fails a test, they immediately accept the result and stop claiming they have psychic powers.
Did I say that they would? Why would that matter, it's about evidence. By doing the test we gather data and evidence. It's not always (I would say hardly ever) about convincing the person we're testing, it's about showing others.

Quote:
So you avoid answering a question by asking a question of your own. Well done. I never claimed I could devise a test of a gods existence. I asked if you could provide me with an example of what you (or anyone else) felt crossed the line.
No, I'm showing you the difference between something that is tangible and testable, versus something that is untestable and unknowable. If you continued to read the thread you would have seen other examples. But it's hardly skeptical to claim you know that god doesn't exist when you can't even explain a test proving it so.
Sc00ter is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd July 2010, 01:51 AM   #235
qarnos
Cold-hearted skeptic
 
qarnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,984
Originally Posted by Sc00ter View Post
No, I'm showing you the difference between something that is tangible and testable, versus something that is untestable and unknowable. If you continued to read the thread you would have seen other examples. But it's hardly skeptical to claim you know that god doesn't exist when you can't even explain a test proving it so.
Once again, another strawman. I have never claimed, and would never claim, to know, as a matter of absolute knowledge, that a god doesn't exist. I simply don't believe one does.

There is a big difference between a claim of belief and a claim of knowledge. For instance; I wouldn't claim as a matter of absolute knowledge, as it appears you do, that something is unknowable.
__________________
"In the twenty years since the Chernobyl tragedy, the world's worst nuclear accident, there have been nearly [FILL IN ALARMIST AND ARMAGEDDONIST FACTOID HERE]" - Greenpeace press release.
qarnos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd July 2010, 04:05 AM   #236
Sc00ter
Critical Thinker
 
Sc00ter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 317
Originally Posted by qarnos View Post
Once again, another strawman. I have never claimed, and would never claim, to know, as a matter of absolute knowledge, that a god doesn't exist. I simply don't believe one does.
But that's what was coming off during TAM by quite a bit of the atheists at the conference, including some of the speakers. This has been a bit of a debate for TAMOz as well, that to be a true skeptic, to reach the pinnacle, you must become an atheist.

Quote:
There is a big difference between a claim of belief and a claim of knowledge. For instance; I wouldn't claim as a matter of absolute knowledge, as it appears you do, that something is unknowable.
Most of the respected paranormal investigators (Joe Nickell, Ben Radford) all that that to evaluate an eye witness account, you can never really know, since you weren't there and the ability to gather proper evidence is now impossible. You can come up with reasonable explanations based on what you know now and what you can do for testing now and draw conclusions based on that, but it's still not 100%.

But I still come to my example of what some people think of as god. Something that was around, generated the universe, and then was gone (vanished, died off, on the outside of viewable space, in a different universe, whatever). Please explain to me how you could possibly test that? I'm not saying that there isn't, and I'd like to know how, but I can't think of any way to test that.

To make it even more simplistic, my grandfather lost his arm in some type of accident before my father was born. I've heard the stories of how he lost his arm, but the only people that were there at the time was him, and the guy driving the car. They're both dead, all I have is 3rd hand accounts at best, but that doesn't necessarily tell me what actually happened, and there's no way for me to ever find out. I accept the story because it's plausible.
Sc00ter is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd July 2010, 06:07 AM   #237
Cuddles
Decoy
Moderator
 
Cuddles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 18,415
Originally Posted by qarnos View Post
A few people have mentioned religion-bashing at TAM.

I am curious to know what this involved.
Have to say I have no idea. Other than Dawkins, I didn't notice any at all.

Originally Posted by Sc00ter View Post
Something that was around, generated the universe, and then was gone (vanished, died off, on the outside of viewable space, in a different universe, whatever). Please explain to me how you could possibly test that?
You mean like the big bang, or inflation? Those were around, generated the universe, and are now gone. Yet they make plenty of falsifiable predictions and are constantly being tested in various ways. This is one of the big problems with the "god of the gaps" argument that is so popular these days. It's not just that constantly squashing god into smaller and smaller gaps where we can't yet conclusively prove he isn't hiding proves what a useless concept god is and is often in direct contradiction to most of the claims made by the people who do this, it's that the gaps they're trying to squash him into often don't actually exist at all.

In addition, the whole idea of testability misses an extremely important point. Skepticism isn't about testing explicit claims. The basic idea behind skepticism is simply to follow the evidence. When it comes to a god of the gaps, there is no evidence, and cannot be any by definition since as soon as any evidence turns up he just gets moved to a different gap. We don't need any testable claims to see that there is no evidence, and believing in something despite a complete lack of evidence is not skeptical, pretty much by definition.

Note that I am in no way saying we should exclude religious people. There is no such thing as a True Skeptictm, everyone is less skeptical in some areas than others, even if they may not realise it. What I am saying is that religion should not get any special treatment. The fact is that if you are religious, you are not skeptical when it comes to religion, or at least to certain aspects of at least one particular religion. That's not a personal attack, it's a simple logical conclusion based on what skepticism and religion actually are. It's no different from saying someone who thinks there might be something to astrology is not skeptical in that area, even if they're the greatest skeptic in the world when it comes to homeopathy and conspiracies. The only difference with religion is that some people seem to think that if anyone suggests that just maybe believing in something without any evidence to support it isn't entirely skeptical, this constitutes a terrible personal attack and amounts to them being excluded from everything.

In fact, I think part of the problem is the idea of being "a skeptic". Really, there is no such thing. Everyone is skeptical to a greater or lesser extent, and everyone applies skepticism in different amounts to different things. A religious person can still be skeptical about dowsing, just as an astrologer can still be skeptical about homeopathy. I think a large part of the disagreement here is that people seem to think that if they admit to not being skeptical about religion, that means they are no longer "a skeptic" and will have to hand in their badges and be excluded. That's just not the case. If someone admits to not being skeptical about religion, it means they've admitted to not being skeptical about religion. It says very little about their skepticism in any other area.

Skeptical organisations like the JREF do not exclude religious people any more than they exclude psychics, dowsers, homeopaths, and any other believers. But that does not mean that religious beliefs will be given a free pass and not be addressed at all. Sadly though, they do tend to be addressed less often and openly due to huge political power religion has, and the outrage that tends to be expressed when they are criticised.
__________________
If I let myself get hung up on only doing things that had any actual chance of success, I'd never do anything!
Cuddles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd July 2010, 06:16 AM   #238
Sc00ter
Critical Thinker
 
Sc00ter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 317
Originally Posted by Cuddles View Post
Skeptical organisations like the JREF do not exclude religious people any more than they exclude psychics, dowsers, homeopaths, and any other believers. But that does not mean that religious beliefs will be given a free pass and not be addressed at all. Sadly though, they do tend to be addressed less often and openly due to huge political power religion has, and the outrage that tends to be expressed when they are criticised.
I still think there is a difference.. I can say to a dowser "I don't believe in dowsing, because in every single, scientifically controlled, double blinded test, it fails"

I can say to a religious person "I don't believe that payer works because it also fails double blinded, scientifically controlled tests"

But when it comes to the basic idea of "god", I can't really draw on those things. All I can honestly say is "I don't know"

In fact, I prefer the description that Jeff gave during a Rational Alchemy episode of being a "Scientific Naturalist" over Atheist. I'm starting to feel that Atheism, especially in the skeptical movement is getting very heavy handed and downright annoying. I might just got the Scientific Naturalist route, or just say screw it and be agnostic again.
Sc00ter is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd July 2010, 06:26 AM   #239
Hokulele
Official Nemesis
 
Hokulele's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 28,139
Originally Posted by Sc00ter View Post
I still think there is a difference.. I can say to a dowser "I don't believe in dowsing, because in every single, scientifically controlled, double blinded test, it fails".

Do you believe in ghosts? If not, why not?
__________________
Yvette: "Blasty! Blasty! Blasty!"
Some person: "Why did you shoot that?"
Yvette: "Blasty! Blasty! Blasty!"

- Tragic Monkey
Hokulele is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd July 2010, 06:31 AM   #240
Sc00ter
Critical Thinker
 
Sc00ter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 317
Originally Posted by Hokulele View Post
Do you believe in ghosts? If not, why not?
Ahh! Very nice. I will say this. I don't believe in ghosts the way they are explained in popular culture. That is floating spirits or things that throw objects around. They have not been observed properly.

But if you explain ghosts as a spirit that is invisible to everything, have the ability to pass through matter and "walk" among us.. Then I really don't know, but would say it's unlikely.

If you noticed, I had to define what it is we're talking about first.
Sc00ter is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » Welcome to ISF » Skeptical Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:39 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.