Author: gthumanists_admin
Excellent Religion Debate on NPR
NPR program Intelligence Squared sponsored an excellent debate on the following proposition: “The world would be better off without religion.” Two proponents and two opponents argued the proposition. It was an excellent debate, well worth listening to. Check it out at http://intelligencesquaredus.org/index.php/past-debates/the-world-would-be-better-off-without-religion/
House Reaffirms “In God We Trust” as U.S. Motto
From Center for Inquiry…
As you may have already heard, the U.S. House of Representatives yesterday approved a resolution reaffirming “In God We Trust” as the national motto. The non-binding measure, H. Con. Res. 13, also promotes the display of “In God We Trust” in public schools and other public buildings. It passed 396-9, with 2 abstentions.
The Center for Inquiry (CFI) strongly condemns this resolution as a hollow, divisive, and unnecessary gesture toward monotheistic faith. It is irresponsible and shameful for lawmakers to use faith as a political tool to divide the nation along religious lines, especially at a time when America is confronted with multiple pressing national issues.
Congress only adopted “In God We Trust” as the national motto in 1956, when American leaders sought to distinguish the United States from the communist Soviet Union. Yet the motto ignores and reinforces the outsider status of the nation’s many nonbelievers, as well as members of minority religions that do not recognize a monotheistic god (including, for example, Buddhists and Hindus). Polls show that 16 percent of Americans have no religious identity, while over 40 million Americans do not identify with a monotheistic God.
A far better motto for the nation is the Latin motto adopted in 1782 as part of the national seal: “E Pluribus Unum,” or “Out of many, one.” America’s original motto accurately describes the nation as a unity comprising people from many religious and nonreligious perspectives.
H. Con. Res. 13 now moves to the U.S. Senate. CFI will track its progress and lobby against its passage.
Atheist group wants to stop World Trade Center cross
- It is “an impermissible mingling of church and state,” the group says
- The cross has become an icon to some after it was found in the wreckage after the towers fell
- The cross was moved to a museum during a ceremony Saturday
(CNN) — A group of atheists has filed a lawsuit to stop the display of the World Trade Center cross at a memorial of the 9/11 terror attacks.
The “government enshrinement of the cross was an impermissible mingling of church and state,” the American Atheists say in a press statement.
The group says it filed the lawsuit this week in state court in New York and posted a copy of the lawsuit on its website.
The lawsuit names many defendants, including the state of New Jersey, the city of New York , New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie.
The World Trade Center cross, two intersecting steel beams that held up when the twin towers collapsed on September 11, 2001, is seen as iconic to some.
The cross was moved Saturday from near a church to its new home at the 9/11 Memorial and Museum. There was also ceremonial blessing of the cross in a service led by Father Brian Jordan, a Franciscan monk who ministered to workers clearing the area after the 9/11 attacks.
Joe Daniels, 9/11 Memorial president, said Saturday that the cross is “an important part of our commitment to bring back the authentic physical reminders that tell the history of 9/11 in a way nothing else could.
“Its return is a symbol of the progress on the Memorial & Museum that we feel rather than see, reminding us that commemoration is at the heart of our mission.”
But the atheist group says the cross sends a symbol of something different.
“The WTC cross has become a Christian icon,” said Dave Silverman, president of the atheist group. “It has been blessed by so-called holy men and presented as a reminder that their god, who couldn’t be bothered to stop the Muslim terrorists or prevent 3,000 people from being killed in his name, cared only enough to bestow upon us some rubble that resembles a cross. It’s a truly ridiculous assertion.”
Mr. Deity Homepage
Barry Lynn on “In God We Trust”
Book Club Discussion: The Moral Landscape
>Nov 28 2011: Media Night
7 p.m….home of Eric Bravick (email eric.bravick@gthumanists.org for directions)
Can science give us answers when it comes to questions of morality? Sam Harris argues that indeed it can. Join us in reading and discussing this very important book, one that changed the mind of Richard Dawkins! Read Dawkins’ comments here, along with a fascinating Q and A with Sam Harris.
HOLY CRAP! Pat Robertson Tells Woman Who Can’t Pay Mortgage She Must Keep Tithing In Order To Receive God’s Blessing
The Moral Landscape by Sam Harris
November 2011
Sam Harris’ first book, The End of Faith, ignited a worldwide debate about the validity of religion. In the aftermath, Harris discovered that most people from religious fundamentalists to non-believing scientists agree on one point: Science has nothing to say on the subject of human values. Indeed, our failure to address questions of meaning and morality through science has now become the most common justification for religious faith. It is also the primary reason why so many secularists and religious moderates feel obligated to respect the hardened superstitions of their more devout neighbors.
In this explosive new book, Sam Harris tears down the wall between scientific facts and human values, arguing that most people are simply mistaken about the relationship between morality and the rest of human knowledge. Harris urges us to think about morality in terms of human and animal well-being, viewing the experiences of conscious creatures as peaks and valleys on a moral landscape. Because there are definite facts to be known about where we fall on this landscape, Harris foresees a time when science will no longer limit itself to merely describing what people do in the name of morality; in principle, science should be able to tell us what we ought to do to live the best lives possible.
Bringing a fresh perspective to age-old questions of right and wrong, and good and evil, Harris demonstrates that we already know enough about the human brain and its relationship to events in the world to say that there are right and wrong answers to the most pressing questions of human life. Because such answers exist, moral relativism is simply false and comes at increasing cost to humanity. And the intrusions of religion into the sphere of human values can be finally repelled: for just as there is no such thing as Christian physics or Muslim algebra, there can be no Christian or Muslim morality.
Using his expertise in philosophy and neuroscience, along with his experience on the front lines of our culture wars, Harris delivers a game-changing book about the future of science and about the real basis of human cooperation.
Pre-Human Fossils Viewed as ‘Game-Changer’ for Evolution
WASHINGTON An analysis of 2-million-year-old bones found in South Africa offers the most powerful case so far in identifying the transitional figure that came before modern humans, findings some are calling a potential game-changer in understanding evolution.
The bones are from Australopithecus sediba. The research places that pre-human branch of the evolutionary tree as the best candidate to be the ancestor of the human line, said Lee R. Berger of the University of Witwatersrand in South Africa.
The bones, found in 2008 in the fossil-rich cave region of Malapa near Johannesburg, show a head-to-foot combination of features of Australopithecus and the human genus, Homo.
“It’s as if evolution is caught in one vital moment, a stop-action snapshot of evolution in action,” said Richard Potts, director of the human origins program at the Smithsonian Institution. He was not among the international research team, led by South African scientists. Their research was published online Thursday in the journal Science.
Scientists have long considered the Australopithecus family, which includes the famous fossil Lucy, to be a primitive candidate for a human ancestor. The new research establishes a creature that combines features of both groups.
The journal published five papers detailing the findings, including separate reports on the foot, hand, pelvis and brain of A. sediba.
Berger said the brain, hand and foot have characteristics of both modern and early pre-human forms that show a transition under way. It represents a bona fide model that could lead to the genus Homo, Berger said.
Kristian J. Carlson, also at Witwatersrand, said the brain of A. sediba is small, like that of a chimpanzee, but with a configuration more human, particularly with an expansion behind and above the eyes.
This seems to be evidence that the brain was reorganizing along more modern lines before it began its expansion to the current larger size, Carlson said in a teleconference.
“It will take a lot of scrutiny of the papers and of the fossils by more and more researchers over the coming months and years, but these analyses could well be ‘game-changers’ in understanding human evolution,” according to the Smithsonian’s Potts.
Missing link?
So, does all this mean A. sediba was the “missing link”?
Well, scientists don’t like that term, which Berger calls “biologically unsound.”
This is a good candidate to represent the evolution of humans, he said, but the earliest definitive example of Homo is 150,000 to 200,000 years younger.
Scientists prefer the terms “transition form” or “intermediary form,” said Darryl J. DeRuiter of Texas A&M University.
“This is what evolutionary theory would predict, this mixture of Australopithecene and Homo,” DeRuiter said. “It’s strong confirmation of evolutionary theory.”
But it’s not yet an example of the genus Homo, he said, though it could have led to several early human forms including Homo habilis, Homo rudolfensis or Homo erectus — all considered early distant cousins to man, Homo sapiens.
Rethinking required
These articles “force a rethinking of how traits are coupled together in human evolution,” the Smithsonian’s Potts said in an email from Kenya, where he is doing research.
“For example, in previous definitions of our genus, the leading edge in the emergence of Homo has been brain enlargement. The sediba bones show, however, that reorganization of the brain and pelvis typically connected with the evolution of Homo need not have involved brain enlargement,” he noted.
“The more we learn about human evolution, the more we see that traits” that must have happened together could occur separately, Potts said.
The study of the hand shows that major changes in the thumb usually associated with stone toolmaking “did not imply abandoning life in the trees. In the foot article, we’re introduced to a unique and previously unknown combination of archaic and advanced traits in sediba,” Potts explained.
A full fossil hand
The fossil provides the first chance for researchers to evaluate the function of a full hand this old, said Tracy Kivell of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Germany. Previously, hand bones older than Neanderthals have been isolated pieces rather that full sets.
The researchers reported that the fingers of A. sediba were curved, as might be seen in a creature that climbed in trees. But they were also slim and the thumb was long, more like a Homo thumb, so the hand was potentially capable of using tools. No tools were found at the site, however.
The heel bone seems primitive, the researchers said. Yet its front is angled, suggesting an arched foot for walking on the ground, and there is a large attachment for an Achilles tendon as in modern humans, they said.
Bigger pelvis predated bigger brain
The pelvis is short and broad like a human pelvis, creating more of a bowl shape than in earlier australopith fossils like the famous Lucy, explained Job Kibii of the University of the Witwatersrand.
That find may force a re-evaluation of the process of evolution because many researchers had previously associated development of a humanlike pelvis with enlargement of the brain, but in A. sediba the brain was still small.
The subjects of the research were the bones of an adult female and a child. After the discovery, the children of South Africa were invited to name the child, which they called “Karabo,” meaning “answer” in the local Tswana language. The older skeleton has not yet been given a nickname, Berger said.
The juvenile would have been aged 10 to 13 in terms of human development; the female was in her 20s and there are indications that she may have given birth once. The researchers are not sure if the two were related.