Posts Made By: Darin Joeckel

Steve Hollenbach said:

Hi All,
I have a question about bino-viewers in general. I know they don't actually provide a wider field or magically increase the number of photons.

However, my question is; even with a split light path, does the use of both eyes improve the percieved visual presentation of the night sky? Does the picture formed in the brain "see" more detail?

I looked through one and didn't see a whole lot of difference than through a single high quality EP.

Thanks,
Steve
8)

Robert Provin said:

Jim Brown said:

Hi Guys:

I linked to this Stephen J. Gould essay this morning, but it was buried deep in a deep thread. Sleeping with the fishes so to speak. I read the entire essay at lunch. Like all Gould essays it is shockingly well written and provocative. As I'm sure you know, Gould was a paleontologist and evolutionary biologist professionally, but he is perhaps best known as an essayist who brought evolution to the masses. He was a humanist. Sadly, Gould died at the too young age of 60 a few years back. Gould testified as an expert for the plaintiffs in the landmark McLean v. Arkansas creationism trial. He even voiced himself in an episode of The Simpsons.

http://www.inf.fu-berlin.de/lehre/SS05/efs/materials/FlatEarth.pdf

This essay was published in 1995. I think that Gould's summation of the complimentary and non-exclusive relationship between the institutions of science and religion, which may be found near the end of the essay, is both insightful and important.

Read the whole thing, it's really quite good.

Jim

Here is a short review of Gould's NOMA concept that pretty much reflects the views of many scientists:

http://www.godslasteraar.org/html/gould_s_non_overlapping_magist.html

For my part, NOMA is a quaint fiction since many of faith feel science is in error when it contradicts their myths. The evidence does not count. Then they want to have their myths taught in our science classrooms, I suppose to correct the perceived errors!

Robert

John Agnew said:

An interesting video on why religious arguments (from either side) fail most of the time:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9L9c7rG6Urs

John Agnew said:

The Catholic Church recently revised its own laws on clerical sex abuse and the ordination of women.
It increased its own statute of limitations on clerical sex abuse of children from ten to twenty years, but remained silent on reporting clerics to the police. It also declared that the ordination of women is a "grave sin against the church" and such matters are handled by the same office that handles sex abuse cases. No wonder people are leaving the church by the tens of thousands... that happens when the people are enlightened a lot faster than the patriarchs.
You can listen to the entire report on NPR's "Morning Edition" (about 3.5 minutes)
http://www.npr.org/templates/rundowns/rundown.php?prgId=3
it's the fourth story down the list of links.

Daniel Unger said:

last month i paid $12 to join astromart's forum,
but deeply regret it:
most forum updates are on the subject of religion !

to those that answered my brief question in the beginner's section,
i am deeply thankful,
but it is obvious that,
aside from being free,
cloudy nights' quality and quantity of discussions
is light years ahead.

ps.
i dont mean to be disrespectful,
but i always thought that observing the heavens,
would sooner or later trigger some curiosity about physics or geology (perhaps biology?),
even to those with no former background in either,
but to my surprise,
one finds biblical "astronomers" in here.
oh well,
then again,
newton loved his bible...

John Agnew said:

Our discussion about gay marriage seems to center around the family and whether gays would be acceptable parents. It has been pointed out that while the evidence for gays having a negative affect on marriage is slim, there is ample evidence that being Christian can actually make you more likely to get a divorce. We all know the terrible effects that divorce can have on children.

This website looks at divorce statistics for various faith groups:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm

"Divorce rates among conservative Christians were significantly higher than for other faith groups, and much higher than Atheists and Agnostics experience."

By myself I am statistically insignificant, but I'm a liberal atheist, and I've been married to my one and only wife for 37 years. My own take on this statistic is that your typical atheists and agnostics tend to be much more educated than your typical conservative Christian. Education level can have significant correlation to divorce rates.

I find this really interesting, since the conservative Christians are those who are yelling the loudest about gay marriage.