Interesting Stuff Thread

Hotblack Desiato

recedite wrote: »

Witchcraft, bloodsucking leeches....

That'd be a priest, not a doctor

robindch

In the USA, people who self-describe as non-religious are not only growing as a proportion of the population, but they're becoming irreligious as well:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/11/religious-nones-are-not-only-growing-theyre-becoming-more-secular/
http://www.pewforum.org/2015/11/03/u-s-public-becoming-less-religious/

Pew Research wrote:

Religious “nones” are not only growing as a share of the U.S. population, but they are becoming more secular over time by a variety of measures, a fact that also is helping to make the U.S. public overall somewhat less religious, according to surveys done as part of our Religious Landscape Study.

The “nones,” a category that includes people who self-identify as atheists or agnostics, as well as those who say their religion is “nothing in particular,” now make up 23% of U.S. adults, up from 16% in 2007. But there is more to the story. To begin with, this group is not uniformly nonreligious. Most of them say they believe in God, and about a third say religion is at least somewhat important in their lives.

At the same time, between the Pew Research Center’s two Religious Landscape Studies – conducted in 2007 and 2014 – we also see consistent evidence that the “nones” are becoming less religious. For example, the share of religious “nones” who say they believe in God, while still a majority, has fallen from 70% to 61% over that seven-year period. Only 27% of “nones” are absolutely certain about God’s existence, down from 36% in 2007. And fully a third of religiously unaffiliated Americans (33%) now say they do not believe in God, up 11 percentage points over that time.

Similar trends are seen on some other key measures of religious engagement. The share of religious “nones” who say they seldom or never pray has risen by 6 points in recent years, and now stands at 62%. And a bigger proportion of the unaffiliated now say religion is not important in their lives (65%) than said this in 2007 (57%).

Data from the survey can be combined with U.S. population figures to estimate the total number of what might be thought of as “nonreligious” Americans at 36.1 million in 2014. (These are adults who are not affiliated with a religious group and who also say religion is not important in their lives.) As of 2007, there were only 21 million “nonreligious” adults who fit this description.

The question of why the “nones” are growing less religious does not have a simple answer. But just as is the case for why “nones” are growing as a share of the U.S. public, generational replacement appears to be playing a role. Religiously unaffiliated Americans are younger, on average, than the general public to begin with, and the youngest adults in the group – that is, those who have entered adulthood in the last several years – are even less religious than “nones” overall.

Fully seven-in-ten of these youngest Millennials (born between 1990 and 1996) with no religious affiliation say religion is not important in their lives. A similar share (70%) also say they seldom or never pray and 42% say they do not believe in God, all bigger percentages than among religious “nones” as a whole.

KomradeBishop

Another win for Pastafarians

robindch

Head of the CIA, John Brennan, had some blunt words to say about climate change:

CIA wrote:

Mankind’s relationship with the natural world is aggravating these problems and is a potential source of crisis itself. Last year was the warmest on record, and this year is on track to be even warmer. Extreme weather, along with public policies affecting food and water supplies, can worsen or create humanitarian crises. Of the most immediate concern, sharply reduced crop yields in multiple places simultaneously could trigger a shock in food prices with devastating effect, especially in already-fragile regions such as Africa, the Middle East and South Asia. Compromised access to food and water greatly increases the prospect for famine and deadly epidemics.

Akrasia

Just thought I'd recommend this book for anyone looking for a cheeky secret santa present this year :P

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Story-God-Chris-Matheson/dp/1634310241/ref=tmm_hrd_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=1447844393&sr=8-1

Basically, it's a short version of the entire bible told from the perspective of God and every single story is taken on face value as being completely true.

Chris Matheson is the author, he's most famous as the screenwriter behind the Bill and Ted movies

robindch

Lego have an IDEAS site where users create Lego designs - once the design reaches 10,000 supporters, it's submitted for review within Lego.

One neat one is this design for Darwin's 'Beagle':

https://ideas.lego.com/projects/93900

and here's what it looks like:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/127520452@N04/sets/72157648284308873/

robindch

robindch wrote: »

National Geographic sells itself. To climate-change deniers, Rupert Murdoch and the general Fox News hivemind.

Following Murdoch's takeover, NG fired around 10% of its staff in November.

The lead story in December's issue is a fawning portrait of the worship of Holy Mary:

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2015/12/virgin-mary-text

recedite

The lead story in December's issue is a fawning portrait of the worship of Holy Mary:

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2015/12/virgin-mary-text

I was thinking they must have lifted his story from Alive newspaper, due to the staff shortages at Nat Geo, until I saw the photos of the naked woman in the stream, and the man peeing in the stone bath.
Its definitely a departure from the usual style alright.

Hotblack Desiato

I remember persuading my mam to pick up a pile of 'oh so educational' NGs at a charity shop, in the hope of my seeing bewbs

And yes, there were some bewbs.

Shrap

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

I remember persuading my mam to pick up a pile of 'oh so educational' NGs at a charity shop, in the hope of my seeing bewbs

And yes, there were some bewbs.

Don't worry, there's still bewbs only now with no "educational" justification. Like in The Sun, but with added Catholic guilt. Enjoy lads

silverharp

the Regressives in the media have lost their minds , ex Muslims being given a hard time by Facebook and the BBC


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-a-rizvi/post_10571_b_8615610.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfOR_l_a9jc

silverharp

some bad ass Nuns , respect where its due.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/religious-sisters-dress-up-as-prostitutes-to-rescue-trafficking-victims-from-brothels_564c9f74e4b045bf3df1e27b?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063

Religious Sisters Pose As Prostitutes To Rescue Trafficking Victims From Brothels
The low-key network of 1,100 sisters currently operates in 80 countries.

LONDON, Nov 18 (Thomson Reuters Foundation) - An army of religious sisters who rescue victims of human trafficking by posing as prostitutes to infiltrate brothels and buying children being sold into slavery, is expanding to 140 countries, its chairman said on Wednesday.

John Studzinski, an investment banker and philanthropist who chairs Talitha Kum, said the network of 1,100 sisters currently operates in about 80 countries but the demand for efforts to combat trafficking and slavery was rising globally.

The group, set up in 2004, estimates one percent of the world's population is trafficked in some form, which translates into some 73 million people. Of those, 70 percent are women and half are aged 16 or younger.

"I'm not trying to be sensational but I'm trying to underscore the fact this is a world that has lost innocence ... where dark forces are active," said Studzinski, a vice chairman of U.S. investment bank The Blackstone Group.

"These are problems caused by poverty and equality but it goes well beyond that," he told the Trust Women Conference on women's rights and trafficking hosted by the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

Detailing some cases involving trafficking and slavery, Studzinski said the treatment of some victims was horrific.

He told of one woman enslaved as a prostitute who was locked up for a week without food, forced to eat own her faeces, when she failed to have sex with a target of 12 clients a day.

In another extreme case, one woman was forced to have sex with a group of 10 men at the same time.

Studzinski said the religious sisters working to combat trafficking would go to all lengths to rescue women, often dressing up as prostitutes and going out on the street to integrate themselves into brothels.

"These sisters do not trust anyone. They do not trust governments, they do not trust corporations, and they don't trust the local police. In some cases they cannot trust male clergy," he said, adding that the low-key group preferred to focus on their rescue work rather than promotion.

"They work in brothels. No one knows they are there."

The sisters were also proactive on trying to save children being sold into slavery by their parents, setting up a network of homes in Africa as well as in the Philippines, Brazil and India to shelter such children.

He said the religious sisters of Talitha Kum raised money to purchase these children.

"This is a new network of houses for children around the world who would otherwise be sold into slavery. It is shocking but it is real," he said.

Studzinski said the network of religious sisters, that was in the process of expanding, also targeted slavery in the supply chain with sisters shedding their habits and working alongside locals for as little as 2 U.S. cents an hour to uncover abuses.

He said Talitha Kum, which translated from Aramaic means arise child, was now being hired by companies to see what is going on with respect to the supply chain and expanding globally would help address this issue.

"You can't generalize about trafficking and slavery as no two countries are the same," Studzinski said.

recedite

I'm guessing the 3 on the street are nuns, and the 3 in the window are the prostitutes. Think the nuns need to work harder on their disguise.

silverharp

recedite wrote: »

I'm guessing the 3 on the street are nuns, and the 3 in the window are the prostitutes. Think the nuns need to work harder on their disguise.

:pac: on the plus side these chicks have done more useful work then the all the whiny first world feminists combined :cool:

silverharp

Thunderf00t has one hundred million views, takes some well aimed shots

That feminist haven of Freethoughtblogs vowed to 'drive me out of the community' and have me 'forever a pariah'.
How'd that work out for you?
Just felt like asking cos my view counter just past 100 million....

Then you look at conferences like Skepticon... and they have ~ 30 people at them..... **** Ill bet NAMBLA could fill a bigger room than these losers! But the one thing thats certain, a movement that cant fill a small hall at a FREE national conference is impotent to the point of comedy. I miss the days of The Horsemen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emrD6hTKkIY

challengemaster

Acceptance Of Profound-Sounding "Bullsh*t" Linked To Lower Intelligence

Pennycook and a team of researchers recruited 300 test subjects to rate the profundity of these randomly generated bull**** phrases on a relatively arbitrary scale of one to five. On average, the sentences were rated 2.6, suggesting that the quotes were halfway between “somewhat profound” and “fairly profound.”

More pressingly, 27 percent of participants gave an average score of 3.0 or more. This meant that over a quarter of the participants felt that the meaningless phrases were “profound” or “very profound.”

In a second test, these participants were shown real-life examples of bullshít phrases: They were asked to read and rate the profundity of tweets composed by New Age spiritualist Deepak Chopra, who famously causes physicists angst by “borrowing” terminology from quantum mechanics and using it in a hugely erroneous way. Biologists are equally unimpressed.

Unsurprisingly, when his tweets were mixed in with the computer-generated bullshít aphorisms, the average ratings were very similar to the first test – suggesting that randomly generated and human-made bullshít are essentially indistinguishable.

A final test asked participants to rate both mundane statements and well-known “profound” statements. As expected, the mundane statements were not rated very highly, whereas the popular inspirational quotes (e.g. “a wet person does not fear the rain") were considered profound.

When the individual results were compared with the person’s measured numeracy skills, verbal intelligence, religious beliefs, and ability to distinguish between a metaphorical and a literal statement, a fairly clear pattern was revealed. Those who were more likely to believe outlandish conspiracy theories, those that think alternative medicine is effective, those with a strong belief in the paranormal, and those that confuse metaphors for factual pieces of information, were found to not be the most analytical or intelligent of people.

Link to the actual research paper: http://journal.sjdm.org/15/15923a/jdm15923a.pdf

And the interesting part...

BSR (Bullshít receptivity) was strongly negatively correlated with each cognitive measure except for numeracy (which was nonetheless significant). Furthermore, both ontological confusions and religious belief were positively correlated with bullshít receptivity.

Therefore, religious belief is also positively correlated with lower intelligence.

Shots fired? :pac:

Shrap

challengemaster wrote: »

Acceptance Of Profound-Sounding "Bullsh*t" Linked To Lower Intelligence

I was laughing at an item about this on Newstalk yesterday. Ivan Yates and Chris O'Donaghue were rating a few choice bullsh1t phrases - Ivan won. Far too cynical to fall for any of them

Sounds like a brilliant study - hope they make a public "bullsh1t acceptance test", as it would be a nice link give people who persist in posting "inspirational" quotes.

recedite

The very word "ontological" is a great favourite of priests. It crops up regularly at funerals, where it sounds very profound. It also reinforces the "authority" of the priest when he uses a word that he just knows nobody will understand.
It typically goes something like this...
"Don't feel sad for Joe Bloggs, because he is already up in heaven, smiling and looking down on all of us gathered here. It is we who are left behind that are the unfortunate ones. Looking at Joe in this box here, our puny human brains cannot truly comprehend the philoophy of this, but rest assured that he is up there, and still with us, while appearing to be gone from us. We will leave the ontology to the theologians, but let us now continue to recite the mind numbing but comforting chants that we are more familiar with..."

robindch

recedite wrote: »

The very word "ontological" is a great favourite of priests. It crops up regularly at funerals, where it sounds very profound.

I wonder if there's a link between the word "ontological" and profound-sounding bullshit.

recedite

Definitely.

Hotblack Desiato

They were asked to read and rate the profundity of tweets composed by New Age spiritualist Deepak Chopra

:pac: :pac: :pac:

The Uncrowned King of Total BS.

robindch

In a splendid blow for equality, South Korea provides the nation's priests with full access to a range of civil ceremonies which had previously been closed to it:

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/12/03/asia-pacific/south-korea-converts-monks-priests-taxpayers

Japan Times wrote:

After a debate stretching back more than 40 years, South Korea’s parliament has approved a bill that will finally compel the country’s influential clergy to pay taxes. The bill was passed shortly before midnight Wednesday by 195 votes to 20, with 50 legislators abstaining.

It has been a long road to legislation, with previous efforts to bring monks, priests and pastors into the national tax fold being repeatedly foiled by vehement clerical opposition and political timidity. In a reflection of the issue’s sensitivity, the new bill has a lengthy built-in time delay, only coming into effect from the start of 2018.

Kang Seog-hoon, a legislator with the ruling Saenuri Party, said the grace period would be used to communicate with religious groups “so that the policy can settle down without turbulence.” South Korea has an estimated 360,000 priests whose earnings will be re-classified as “religious income” rather than the current label of “honorarium.”

A sliding bracket means those earning 40 million won ($34,500) or less a year will only be taxed on 20 percent of their income. At the upper end, those earning more than 150 million won will have to pay tax on 80 percent of their income. Public opinion polls have long favored extending tax responsibilities to religious groups, some of which are highly secretive about their financial arrangements.

recedite

robindch wrote: »

In a splendid blow for equality, South Korea provides the nation's priests with full access to a range of civil ceremonies which had previously been closed to it.

I doubt they will find the tax paying ceremony quite as genteel as the tea drinking ceremony. Nevertheless, equality is always good to have!
Its a pity our lads are still getting away with the "if its to do with religion, shur it must be a charity" line.

recedite

I see an image of The Flying Spaghetti Monster has been found on an ancient royal seal, made from an oval piece of bullcrap. In olden times the FSM was also known as Dim Sum, or Winged Sun.
Proof at last that Pastafarianism is the one true church.

robindch

An oldie, but a goodie:

14 Propaganda Techniques Fox “News” Uses to Brainwash Americans

http://churchandstate.org.uk/2011/07/14-propaganda-techniques-fox-news-uses-to-brainwash-americans/

State-controlled media in Russia uses exactly the same propaganda techniques as Fox, just with a greater budget.

robindch

How well do you know the main Abrahamic religions?

www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/12/13/opinion/sunday/13kristof-how-well-do-you-know-religion.html?_r=3

9/14

MrPudding

robindch wrote: »

How well do you know the main Abrahamic religions?

www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/12/13/opinion/sunday/13kristof-how-well-do-you-know-religion.html?_r=3

9/14

8. I am disappoint.

MrP

PopePalpatine

I got 9/14.

oscarBravo

8/14.

recedite

8/14

Hotblack Desiato

9. That's above average, same as having two legs :pac:

looksee

9/14 I wonder are we all getting the same ones wrong. I made a few good guesses, I'd say I was only totally confident of about 6.

8mv

8/14

recedite

The point of the quiz is apparently to show that one brand of BS is much the same as another. But even though stuff such as polygamy, death to apostates, and the stoning of adulterers may feature in both the OT bible and the Koran, you'll find that Christians and Jews have moved on, and don't actually apply these laws.

Choc Chip

2. Painfully embarrassing.

I'd have been better picking the first answer all the way down.

Shrap

Choc Chip wrote: »

2. Painfully embarrassing.

I'd have been better picking the first answer all the way down.

You're braver than me ;-) I got 3, but didn't dare post it till someone else went first! And all 3 were guesses.

magicbastarder

http://www.salon.com/2015/01/01/i_get_it_%E2%80%93_you%E2%80%99re_an_atheist_you_should_still_capitalize_%E2%80%9Cgod%E2%80%9D/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=socialflow

TL;DR - use 'God' rather than 'god' because it's a name.

Pherekydes

I got two, too. Not a bit embarrassed.

recedite

magicbastarder wrote: »

http://www.salon.com/2015/01/01/i_get_it_%E2%80%93_you%E2%80%99re_an_atheist_you_should_still_capitalize_%E2%80%9Cgod%E2%80%9D/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=socialflow

TL;DR - use 'God' rather than 'god' because it's a name.

The true nature of creation may be in dispute, but the proper usage in this case is not. Webster’s Dictionary tells us that a “god” is “a spirit or being that has great knowledge, strength, power, etc.” while “God” is “the perfect and all-powerful spirit or being … worshipped by Christians, Jews, and Muslims …”
One is a noun. The other is a name. If it weren’t a name, it would be necessary to use a different sentence construction, as in: “They forced the sergeant to swear to the god,” or, “Is the god good?”

I think "the god" is the most correct here (as they almost admit at the end of this quote). Especially if the sergeant does not consider the god to actually exist.
If you wanted to be more specific Yahweh, Jehovah and Allah are the proper names. These are nouns. If you write God as a noun, then you are implying that there is only one true God, and all the others are fake gods.
Surely that is disrespectful to the Hindu gods?

Absolam

12/14. Who knew North Korea doesn't ban churches.......

robindch

Ok, one day late, but yesterday was the 19th anniversary of the death of Carl Sagan, and the tenth anniversary of the Kitzmiller v. Dover judgement, which largely did in Intelligent Design, but caused major speciation within the creationist movement in the USA.

Hotblack Desiato

Happy Winter Solstice

The real reason for the season!

magicbastarder

Is aer lingus unique in that it names its planes after catholic saints? Maybe they should consider naming them after irish town names instead. I'd prefer getting on a plane called bastardstown or man'o'war to one called saint declan.

silverharp

magicbastarder wrote: »

Is aer lingus unique in that it names its planes after catholic saints? Maybe they should consider naming them after irish town names instead. I'd prefer getting on a plane called bastardstown or man'o'war to one called saint declan.

its not very inclusive is it?, maybe some Protestant saints like Cromwell

Samaris

magicbastarder wrote: »

Is aer lingus unique in that it names its planes after catholic saints? Maybe they should consider naming them after irish town names instead. I'd prefer getting on a plane called bastardstown or man'o'war to one called saint declan.

Hah, it does? I dunno, I kinda like them having people-names rather than town names.

Although it'd only be a matter of time before there was a plane called Muff.

MrPudding

Samaris wrote: »

Hah, it does? I dunno, I kinda like them having people-names rather than town names.

Although it'd only be a matter of time before there was a plane called Muff.

And if that plane had to make an emergency descent...?

MrP

recedite

Horse and Jockey would be another good one.
We have some quirky placenames alright, and with most air passengers being fluent English speakers, the idea has the potential to bring a wry smile to peoples faces, knowing that all the planes were named after Irish towns and villages.
Smiles are always good for business.

MrPudding

I was listening to Radio 4 yesterday and there was an interesting segment. it was related to "Growth Attenuation", something I had never heard of. In simple terms, for those that don't know, it is using hormonal treatments to stop growth in profoundly disabled children. When I first heard it I was a little shocked, to be honest.

They had an interview with a woman in NZ that had it carried out on her daughter. The daughter was starved of oxygen during birth for around an hour, and suffered massive brain damage. She effectively has the brain development of a new born, and it will never improve. They also had an English woman on, who was very against this treatment. To be honest, she came across as a little preachy.

The NZ woman made a number of good arguments, and certainly brought me round to being supportive, in principle, of the procedures (she also had her daughter sterilised). She was very defensive, and on occasion aggressive in her justifications for what she did, but I suspect she may receive a huge amount of grief for her decisions, and reacts accordingly.

I am not sure if I can get the R4 piece, but here is a article abut the NZ woman.

Thoughts...?

MrP

looksee

I agree with what she did; but it should be private and a decision made by the family without outsiders pushing their views.

We had a baby that became ill within days of birth (around 40 years ago). He had a degenerative brain disease, there was never any possibility of recovery, it was just a matter of waiting for him to die, which he did at 14 months. In the meantime his body grew normally, or even more than normally. By the time he was around 12 months old he was a dead weight of floppy, inert baby. He had to have a cot downstairs as it was too difficult to carry him up and down. If he had been going to continue to live in the same physical condition he was at that stage it would have been a very sensible idea to restrict his growth, though of course at that time it was not an option.

One eyed Jack

MrPudding wrote: »

I was listening to Radio 4 yesterday and there was an interesting segment. it was related to "Growth Attenuation", something I had never heard of. In simple terms, for those that don't know, it is using hormonal treatments to stop growth in profoundly disabled children. When I first heard it I was a little shocked, to be honest.

They had an interview with a woman in NZ that had it carried out on her daughter. The daughter was starved of oxygen during birth for around an hour, and suffered massive brain damage. She effectively has the brain development of a new born, and it will never improve. They also had an English woman on, who was very against this treatment. To be honest, she came across as a little preachy.

The NZ woman made a number of good arguments, and certainly brought me round to being supportive, in principle, of the procedures (she also had her daughter sterilised). She was very defensive, and on occasion aggressive in her justifications for what she did, but I suspect she may receive a huge amount of grief for her decisions, and reacts accordingly.

I am not sure if I can get the R4 piece, but here is a article abut the NZ woman.

Thoughts...?

MrP

From an ethical point of view, I don't support growth attenuation using hormones on children (it has other applications too!). I don't support the medical procedures that were made available to these parents (in the Ashley X case, these procedures were declared illegal).

From purely a moral point of view, I can understand where the parents are coming from, and I still can't say I would support them in what they chose for their daughter.

In saying that, I have long supported the Groningen Protocol, or infant and child euthanasia. I simply don't see how what they've put their child through has improved the child's quality of life. I think it was done to improve the parents quality of life, and that for me is where the moral dilemma arises, and certainly there are ethical considerations to allowing these kinds of procedures to gain widespread acceptance in wider society.