Atheists who love Science!

Information

Atheists who love Science!

A group for science enthusiasts of all types -- professionals, amateurs, students, anybody who loves science.

Members: 1582
Latest Activity: Jul 14

Whether you're a professional, a student, an amateur, an enthusiast, whatever! Lots of atheists love science. Might as well have a group for it!

Feel free to nerd out, link articles, talk about your favorite field of research, whatever!

The icon is from www.wearscience.com.


9/28/2008
I've been super busy with school this semester -- no time for Atheist Nexus, sadly!!
If anyone who's around here a lot wants me to toss them moderation privileges to run this group or anything, just send me (Sara) a message! Thanks!

11/14/2009
Removed ability to send mass messages to everyone in the group. At 1000+ members, that seems like asking for spam.

Offer still open if anyone active in the group wants moderation privileges, but it appears everything has been going smoothly with all kinds of great discussions without moderation. Fantastic! :)

Discussion Forum

Science Journals suffer large scale peer review fraud

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Clarence Dember Apr 17. 1 Reply

Common sense talk about climate change

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Michael Penn Apr 15. 2 Replies

Time goes both ways in the quantum world

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by tom sarbeck Apr 14. 1 Reply

Ebola Vaccine Very Promising

Started by Patricia. Last reply by Patricia Apr 10. 6 Replies

Wound Healing

Started by Patricia. Last reply by Joan Denoo Mar 14. 2 Replies

The Web is not the Net.

Started by Visvakarman Svetasvatara-Upanish. Last reply by Michael Penn Mar 14. 1 Reply

Science, information, and politics in the Anthropocene

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Mar 12. 3 Replies

Marburg and Ebola Viruses

Started by Patricia. Last reply by Patricia Mar 4. 2 Replies

Dog-human alliance edged out Neanderthals

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Michael Penn Mar 4. 1 Reply

Climate Change Deniers.

Started by Visvakarman Svetasvatara-Upanish. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Mar 4. 8 Replies

FDA hides fraud

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Feb 14. 4 Replies

Vulnerable to science denial

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Grinning Cat Feb 8. 1 Reply

Brain and Spinal Cord

Started by Patricia. Last reply by Joan Denoo Jan 18. 3 Replies

Comment Wall

Comment

You need to be a member of Atheists who love Science! to add comments!

Comment by tom sarbeck on April 3, 2013 at 2:46am

Sign the petition but also support Nat'l Coalition for Science Education at www.ncse.com. (The name would be ncse.org but someone else grabbed the dot org.)

NCSE is a coalition of science teachers and allies in the life sciences, geology, etc. With the ACLU and others they sue states to have creationism laws overturned.

Comment by AgeOfAtheists14 on March 25, 2013 at 8:27am

gotta keep those kids involved with .. mental slavree.. i mean god.. i mean.. ! hey what the!?
Children should be allowed to get bored so they can develop their innate ability to be creative, an education expert says.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-21895704

if a kid is trying to be themselves but beat up at home over morals and god.. wtf! ? peace

Comment by Joan Denoo on March 24, 2013 at 2:44am

Oh my goodness, all we have to do is pay attention to what those who believe there is a god say, fact check, then stand on principles of sound research. Scholarship, well done, provides a solid foundation upon which to stand. Now, the responsibility is on non-believers to do research correctly and report honestly what we find.

As to intelligent design going into public school science courses, there is absolutely nothing to benefit children. Teaching religion and  traditions and values based on beliefs is just not good enough for science courses.

Thanks for your insight. Tom, may I publish your remark on  Facebook with attribution to you? I want my family and friends to read your comments. 

Comment by tom sarbeck on March 24, 2013 at 2:05am

Joan, thanks for the link to "Dishonesty....", where I read "Behe is asserting that he has no need to produce any evidence, .... He simply has to make an assertion...."

Soon after I quit Catholicism (in the 1950s), I learned the Inquisition had operated that way: a charge of witchcraft was evidence of guilt.

While conservatism's hero William Buckley was on radio, a critic remarked that he had the finest mind the 13th Century (Catholicism's Aquinas period) created.

I understand Platonic idealism as saying "Asserting X is evidence for X."

If that's correct, can we describe Behe's mind as the finest one the 4th Century BCE (Plato's time) created?

Plato's student Aristotle also had no use for evidence. He is alleged to have said women have fewer teeth than men. About 2000 years (a period that included the Inquisition) passed before someone with access to the media counted teeth.

Comment by Joan Denoo on March 23, 2013 at 8:39pm

I am amazed at the technique this man uses. It is plain and simply superstition. How can he achieve such credibility when he does not know how to build a scientifically sound, verifiable, repeatable research project? When I do a research project, I am the one who makes it possible to be replicated, verified, and refute the null hypothesis. He did not even include all possible options. Having two options to prove one is a joke and reveals complete lack of scholarly rigor. For the lay public, did you fall for his charade? 

Dishonesty of inteligent design “research”

Comment by Chris G on March 18, 2013 at 6:38pm

The 60 c.p.s. of course would be unbearable to listen to and probably would give you a good idea of what the crickets (?) had to put up with at 24 cps.

Comment by Chris G on March 18, 2013 at 6:25pm

That make sense Kolten. I should have read the small print or thought about it rather than taking it at face value. It might be visible at night with lights if the speaker freq was near 60 cps.

Comment by Joan Denoo on March 18, 2013 at 12:12pm
Chris G, I had not thought of sound pollution. Of course! I wonder if there is a frequency that attracts wildlife?
Comment by Kolten on March 18, 2013 at 7:48am
It's only visible with a 24 fps camera, not the naked eye. Although there is a variation of the experiment that can be seen with the naked eye, but requires a strobe light.
Comment by Chris G on March 18, 2013 at 3:59am

At first I thought I wouldn't need to use my o-scope because the f-generator has a calibrated dial but after looking up Avian hearing thresholds and seeing frequencies as low as 30 Hz for Great Horned Owls I considered the other wildlife and nixed the idea as a permanent installation. Wildlife doesn't need another noise pollutant.

 

Members (1581)

 
 
 

© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service