And just what is the ‘scientific method’. We hear about this a lot but no one ever really categorically defines what binds say medicine with astrophysics. The randomised double-blind placebo controlled trial (RDBPCT) is considered the gold standard of epidemiology but I can’t imagine how such a technique would be of any use in understanding how stars form. But what do I know? I think peer-review is nothing more than a euphemism for appealing to authority and its main purpose is to protect academic guilds from clandestine thoughts. Now that’s ‘otherworldly and alien’ for you.

What do you know indeed. Anyone who thinks the process of peer-review is an appeal to authority has obviously never experienced it. The whole point of peer-review is to allow other experts in your field to critically examine your findings, conclusions, and methodology to detect possible mistakes, misinterpretations, or even outright fraud. As for double blind tests, the reason this is so effective is it prevents human biases from influencing test results. It’s a method meant to prevent the very people attempting to isolate the effect of a drug (or any other substance) from unconsciously affecting the results. It fucking works, and that’s why people love it.

Now you should be starting to get an idea of the extraordinary deception that vaccine ‘science’ requires. When they say no link has been found, you can rest assured that no link was looked for. More than that, they had to cover their eyes in order not to see all the elephants in the room.

To cite only one example of how untrue this statement is (since adding more would make this article far too lengthy), the Canadian Pediatric Society spent millions studying the supposed link between the MMR vaccine and autism, and like the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences and the UK National Health Service, they found none. But with these clowns, it doesn’t matter how rigorous your testing is: they will always find something to criticize that they don’t really understand.

We might also be people who are innumerate (which presumably includes people who think that the double in double blind trial actually means something), or have low cognitive skills. This is quite strange really given that in the Western world, those who question vaccinations are almost invariably among the more educated and better paid, but never mind.

While it’s true many parents who refuse to immunize their children are educated, many (like the author of this article) are scientifically illiterate. Rather than be risk conscious, they are risk averse, convinced the potential harm of vaccination outweighs the benefits. Because we all benefit from high rates of vaccination, herd immunity is often enough to protect these jackasses, although not always. As the “Super Bowl outbreak” demonstrated, it doesn’t take much slack for there to be serious and deadly consequences. As their numbers grow, so too does the chance of an outbreak.

If only their stupidity affected only themselves. Unfortunately, there are those of us who are at risk because of compromised immune systems, like cancer patients, the elderly, and children suffering from certain types of maladies. It’s their carelessness and fear mongering that puts these vulnerable people at risk. Hey Australian skeptics, can you put these assholes in their place, please?

It’s misleading for Harris to define faith as “belief without evidence,” Haught says. Faith, which is similar to “trust,” is embedded in our humanity. Atheists, for instance, act out of faith when they trust their partners, or even when they hope rationality is capable of solving every problem.

It’s interesting this author is trying to conflate the various definitions of faith. While it’s true I trust my partner will be faithful, I do so because I have plenty of evidence of fidelity in the past. This trust may not always be a “rational” thing to believe, but it is grounded in some degree of reality, something religious faith cannot claim. To use this shitty example against itself, if there was any proof my partner no longer deserved my trust, then it would quickly erode my “faith’. I can assure you there is little in the form of evidence that moves a religious believer away from their dogmatic commitment to bullshit.

Even though atheists are correct in saying many faithful people do come to irrational “supernatural” conclusions, Haught says theologians have for centuries offered a more complex definition of faith.

More sophisticated forms of nonsense are still rooted in nonsense, regardless of the relative intelligence of their proponents. Besides, so few believers are actually familiar with these arguments that one wonders if they should even bother to come up with more ridiculous justifications for believing in things without evidence.

The author seems to believe rationalists are incapable of imagination, or even intuitive thinking, when in fact, our commitment to rationality is a statement about knowledge itself. While I fully accept not all aspects of humanity should be governed by rationality, it does not mean the irrational ideas of the religious are suddenly true, or even meaningful.

In other words, as Einstein suggested, authentic scientists may well be rational and analytic — but they also have imagination, vision, empathy and a sense of values and aesthetics. All of which helps guide them in their intellectual pursuits…In that way, scientists are just like many spiritual people.

If you chose to so poorly define something, then sure, you could claim that. Or, if you used your brain for a moment, you would realize perhaps what these people have in common is imagination, although that similarity ends as soon as one group decides what they feel intuitively must be the truth without even bothering to back it up with any evidence. If scientists were more like spiritual people, then we wouldn’t have a lot of good science; just a bunch of meaningless, untested theories.

Ultimately, what Haught and the author fail to realize rationality is what grounds us in reality. While I don’t deny that we must let our imaginations soar once in a while, it does not mean that we should suddenly abandon what is still our most important weapon in our intellectual arsenal. To suggest rationality is overrated in a world still dictated by so much superstition is both dishonest and ignorant. Perhaps if our society was ruled exclusively by logic and cold rationality, I might agree. As it stands, I think the world could use a lot more of it, not less.

So it rightly criticises creationism and ‘intelligent design’, yet it rarely challenges the mystifications of deep environmentalist thinking, such as Gaia theory, or the numerous varieties of Eastern mysticism that are so fashionable in Hollywood.

I don’t know about you, but I’ve always been an equal opportunity hater. In any case, the notion we haven’t spanked environmentalists or Buddhists properly is mainly a matter of expertise: while Gaiaism may be silly, it’s impact on the world is relatively small compared to the big boys. You don’t see countries under the yoke of Jainism jailing unbelievers for daring to question dharma.  When going to war on irrational ideas, you need to pick your battles, and to stick to the ones you have a good knowledge base on. Accusing us of being “focused” is quite possibly the lamest accusation I’ve ever heard. Oh wait, it gets better:

Yet while attempts to reverse the separation of church and state are always a cause for concern, the real challenge facing humanists today does not emanate from organised religion. Rather, it is now often secular movements that promote the idea that human beings are powerless, vulnerable and victims of their circumstances.

If you have no idea what he’s talking about, you aren’t the only one. I’ve been too busy reporting on how atheists are being persecuted with horrible blasphemy laws that demand either their incarceration or their death to notice how much we’ve “hobbled the dignity of humanity”.

The real question confronting us is not the status of any god but the status that we assign to humanity. And the most powerful threat to the realisation of the human potential today comes, not from religion, but from the moral disorientation of Western secular culture.

Isn’t it fun to say stuff you don’t need to prove? If I can try to interpret this man’s confused argument for a moment (no easy task), he’s basically saying our systematic attack of religion is causing society to become “morally disoriented”. This, folks, is the true tragedy of religion: it’s convinced very naive or poorly educated people that morality is hopelessly entangled in their ignorant bullshit. While studies show that non-believers are actually more compassionate towards their fellow man than believers, mouth breathers like Frank Furedi will continue to foolishly argue against the evidence. The saddest thing in all of this is Franky-boy is supposedly on our side. Honestly, if he continues to write shitty, confused articles like this, we don’t need him.

Got a bunch of spare time to listen to a debate? Odds are if you’re trolling TGA, you have plenty of free time on your hands. You may appreciate this debate “Is Christianity Good for America?” While you probably already know the answer to this question, it’s always important to know what “the enemy” (I say this in the least vitriolic of terms) is thinking. On our side: Susan Jacoby, who I interviewed a few years ago. Be sure to watch this!

About one in 10 people globally also said they were experiencing fear or anxiety about the impending end of the world in 2012. The greatest numbers were in Russia and Poland, the fewest in Great Britain.

That makes sense: If I had to live in Russia or Poland, I’d probably be looking forward to the End Times. There isn’t enough vodka or pierogies that will ever convince me to live in either of these frozen shit-holes (I’m happy in mine, thanks). Is there perhaps some overriding factor which causes people to believe in such nonsense?

Gottfried also said that people with lower education or household income levels, as well as those under 35 years old, were more likely to believe in an apocalypse during their lifetime or in 2012, or have anxiety over the prospect.

Ah, so if you’re an uneducated twat, odds are you’ll easily be convinced by lazy journalism the Mayan calendar “ending” means something more than the simple resetting of “the long count” (Carisa’s favorite YouTuber has a great video explaining all of this).

If you really want to be depressed, the figures are much higher in both Turkey and the US (two of the most religious countries in the world), where 22% are convinced the end is nigh. Oh America, you still lead the world in religiously motivated ignorance.

…after posting “God doesn’t exist” on Facebook, the soft-spoken civil servant, 30, faces up to 11 years in jail for what is considered blasphemy in Indonesia… From the medium-security rural prison where he has been held for the past two months, Aan has little hope for the future. He has been beaten by angry mobs, rejected by his community and endured public calls for his beheading.

Alex had no way of knowing the horrible consequences of rejecting the idea of God. While he inherited his bravery from the West, he has little hope for support half a world away. Our words gave him the audacity to question God, but it did not prepare him for the misery and abuse he would face as a consequence. What can we offer him in return? What words of comfort can alleviate his fear the world he lives in isn’t getting worse in the light of a resurgence of Islamic fundamentalism, itself a direct consequences of our own war on religion?

“I only want to see a better world and help create a better world,” he says. “If I cannot … then I would prefer to die.”

Declaring my atheism isn’t just something I do for myself; I do it because like Alex, I want to make a better world, and the only way to do that is to fight the evils of religion head on.

“I apologize to anyone I have unintentionally offended,” Sean Harris, pastor of Berean Baptist Church wrote in a statement on his church’s website. “I did not say anything to intentionally offend anyone in the LGBT community.

He claims his speech was intended as a joke, but judging by all the “Amens” you hear during his speech, it’s clear the audience was rather receptive to his abusive message. His non-apology also rings hollow when statements like this are made:

Harris said in the sermon that same-sex couples are free to live together. He argued Tuesday that there was “not an ounce of hate being communicated in that,” but said in the sermon that such couples live together “in the most sick and ungodly way.”

It’s the whole: “I don’t hate you: God does” argument that gets old real fast. The fact Harris despises gay couples is undeniable, and any attempt not to look like a total asshole is impossible. What I find amusing in all of this is only a few days ago, Dan Savage delivered a speech to high school journalists condemning the Bible for promoting (among other things) homophobia. A few of the students walked out, and the religious right immediately screamed religious discrimination. Savage was essentially vindicated by the Harris’ sadistic and cruel comments, which demonstrated yet again the toxic effects of religious faith. Nice work, Danny-boy.

The latest scandal involves Cardinal Sean Brady. According to an investigation by the BBC, in 1975 he was made aware of the abuse of several children at the hands of Fr Brendan Smyth, who would later turn out to be Ireland’s most prolific pedophile. When confronted with these powerful allegations, he did what any man of the cloth in his position would do: he swore the children to silence and covered it up.

While it is true that the abused boy’s father travelled with him to the interview, he was not allowed inside the room while his son was questioned…Nor did Brendan Boland [one of the abused boys] feel able to tell his father about what had taken place, as he was sworn to secrecy, upon the Bible, before leaving.

The Church’s stand on this is about as shockingly ignorant as one can get:

The Catholic Church has said that the “sole purpose of the oath” signed by Brendan Boland in Cardinal Brady’s presence was “To give greater force and integrity to the evidence given by Mr Boland against any counter claim by Fr Brendan Smyth”.
The Church also points out that in 1975 “no State or Church guidelines for responding to allegations of child abuse existed in Ireland.”

Because without the law telling you specifically to report child abuse, you would just stand by and continue to let children get raped by these predators, am I right? You would if you’re the Cardinal Brady and the Catholic Church! Did I mention new laws forcing the Church to report abuse is being framed as an affront to their religious liberty by Bill Donohue and his Catholic League?

Some of you may be wondering what’s been going on with the site, and in particular, the show. As some of you may know, I’ve moved to Calgary, but like any big move, you often find yourself couch surfing while you try and secure a place to live. Calgary is an expensive town, and finding something on our meager budget wasn’t easy. I’m happy to announce, however, Carisa and I have found a place to live. We move in, unfortunately, in only 2 weeks. So while I’ve been trying to do shows, the truth is the stress and uncertainty of our transition makes doing shows almost impossible. I’ve been trying to produce as much content as possible, but unreliable Internet has made this difficult.

Luckily, in 2 weeks we’ll be getting back on track and in a big way: regular show schedule, posting will be amped up, and production of the book will be the new top priority. I apologize to those of you disappointed by the lack of shows. Please understand this stressful situation will soon pass, and the shows will be better than ever now that I have a home again after almost a year and a half of hopping around all over the place. I look forward to getting back on track!

When you stop placating people and call them out on their bullshit, you’re bound to hurt their feelings. While some of us are comfortable with the idea of letting dumb or dangerous ideas thrive under the banner of “tolerance”, there are those brave few who cannot stay silent in the face of the injustices brought on by antiquated religious belief. When Dan Savage recently spoke to students at a High School Journalism Conference, he condemned the Bible for being used to justify not only bigotry, but slavery. This prompted a few of the students to walk out in protest, and one of them yelled “that’s bull!” (obviously, this young person, like most Christians, have never read this book). Enter this man, who echoes the sentiment of so many of his fellow believers who were shocked someone would be so incensed as to dare call these guys on their shit.

How does he justify this behavior? He makes a claim leveled by many by saying “there are people using the Bible as an excuse for gay bullying, because it says in Leviticus and Romans that being gay is wrong.” This is wrong on two counts. First, there are not “many people” doing anything even remotely like “gay bullying” and there is not one single account I have heard of where someone specifically used the Bible as their justification for bullying gays.

If you bury your head in the sand deep enough, that would explain why you’re totally unaware your fellow Christians bring up the Bible as a way of justifying their homophobia on a daily fucking basis. How can you even talk to someone who is that willfully ignorant? Does he not watch TV? Has he not heard one speech by the Pope, or that moron Bradlee Dean, or the countless other preachers continually quoting Leviticus?

It is a lesson about intolerant people claiming Christians are intolerant, bullying by those who claim to help the bullied, and hypocrisy from the same people who point the finger at others claiming they are hypocrites.

The irony here is a few days ago, another beautiful young man committed suicide because of the bullying he suffered at the hands of religious homophobes. His death coincided with a recent Southern Baptist Conference decrying the renewal of the Violence Against Women Act because it included provisions for LGBT victims of domestic abuse. Dan Savage’s response to these kinds of tragedies cuts through the bullshit: the majority of perpetrators of homophobia are unmistakably religious.

In the light of criticism, Christians have declared their religious freedoms are violated by any pro-gay legislation. This sort of tactic has been used before: Southern Baptists argued during the civil rights movement that laws designed to prevent discrimination against blacks violated their religious freedom (the Bible is pro-slavery, after all). In the face of constant pressure to conform, they eventually abandoned this strategy, although there are a few remnants of it here and there (bigotry does not disappear easily).

Dan Savage, as is the case with those who hate and do not understand Christianity, is simply ignorant. My task in educating my children will be to teach them how to deal with that ignorance, intolerance and oppression, simply because they are Christians.

What most Christians fail to understand is many non-believers and critics of the religion were themselves entangled in it at one time. Survey after survey proves our understanding of religious materials is superior to believers. That’s not very surprising. The more you uncover about faith, the more you realize it’s a smoke and mirror show. Ignorance, as it turns out, is the only way to remain a believer. They have a fancy word for it: they call it faith.

NOTE: originally I said it was a mom, but was corrected. Guess it just sounded like a “mama” thing.

So here’s some guy taking Neil to task for being too much of a pussy to be honest about his belief. Good. I can’t stand when people still placate the ignorance of superstitious belief while simultaneously decrying the lack of critical thinking in the world. Get some fucking balls, dude.

How are we bullies, you might wonder? It must have something to do with the fact we’re done taking their shit sitting down. When these “culture warriors” try to dictate the reproductive rights of women, prevent gays from enjoying the same rights as the straight counter-parts, and stop stem cell research, fighting back makes us seem like we’re the bad guys. Good. Just try to punch me in the fucking mouth, Matt. See what happens.

Luckily I have a few spare shows kicking around I’ll be putting up. You should also take this opportunity to go back and visit old shows. They are still just as funny as the day we recorded them. With so few Montrealers wishing me a farewell, here’s hoping Calgary has a few more fans willing to hang out!

When Swedish prosecutors attempted to bring two Congolese parents to justice after they systematically tortured their daughter, the defence was able to argue that exorcisms were part of their religious freedom. Combined with too little physical evidence (those horrible scars could have been anything, they say), the prosecution was unable to get a conviction.

I find myself in the uncomfortable position of agreeing with my right wing counterparts who despair multiculturalism, albeit for entirely different reasons. I don’t believe that all cultural achievements are equal. I believe many traditions are barbaric, dehumanizing, misogynistic and unworthy of being maintained. Religious freedom is simply a new way of framing dangerous or hateful practices in such a way that masks their true nature. Why are we so fucking gutless in the face of religion? The torture of any child is indefensible, and we have laws to protect them. Why do we chose instead to protect ideas whose time has long since passed?

NOTE [I originally said the prosecutors were Dutch, but was corrected. Thanks]

Despite the fact my 12 year old cousin could figure out the flaw in that logic, Ray has learned over the years if you repeat a lie often enough, someone will believe you. How else can you explain them using what is arguably the stupidest “rebuttle” in the world? Do they not realize it’s a fucking joke?

“Me wearing Hijab is my relationship between me and Allah”

It’s always a good sign when your deity has an inherent distrust of the female form. Better cover it up, since it’s the only way you can be guaranteed someone won’t molest and rape you (sounds like you need a gun more than a bed sheet)!

“I’m not preparing myself for this world. I’m preparing myself for the world after this”

Is that the one filled with milk, honey, and a shitload of dark-eyed virgins? Why not actually try to enjoy the one world you know is real while you’re still around to experience it, girl?

“My intention is to please Allah, not the world”

That’s honestly what the rest of us find so frightening, lady! Your God has a bloodlust for anyone not affiliated with his misogynistic religion. The very meaning of Islam, submission, is not a word the rest of us find romantic or inspiring. All we see is a confused young woman who has some pretty naive ideas about the world.

Mahnassi has no religious affiliation, and rightly feels that the school has no business holding their ceremony in a church, especially one mired in so much controversy. Despite her impressive grades, she’s decided to stand up for what she believes in. This is exactly the kind of act that we should be supporting as a community. It’s people like Mahnassi that are out there fighting the good fight, taking all the risks. They should not be alone in their struggle! Share this story with anyone you think will care, people.

(via American Jesus)

One serious exception to this rule is Brigham Young University, one of the few Universities in the country that has an honor code that specifically prohibits any gay behavior:

“Homosexual behavior is inappropriate and violates the honor code. Homosexual behavior includes not only sexual relations between members of the same sex, but all forms of physical intimacy that give expression to homosexual feelings”

The video above was made independently by gay, lesbian and straight supporters of the school. While the video seems to suggest to gays at the school there are people around them that “love them”, the truth is the campus is still extremely unfriendly to gays. Since any student can be expelled for engaging in any homosexual behavior, it seems pretty obvious to anyone watching this video the real culprit in all this terrible hate is Mormonism itself. One cannot help but feel as though their message “it gets better” has a hollow ring to it when the very institution has such animosity towards the gay and lesbian community. It would be more accurate to say it does get better, but only if you leave the faith.

The school isn’t very happy about the video, but has decided to take no action, since it claims that:

The honor code…is “based on conduct, not on feeling, and if same-gender attraction is only stated, that is not an honor code issue.

If the message of the religion is still that homosexuality is wrong, then no, it does not get fucking better. Religion, as always, is not the answer.