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: 1579
Latest Activity: on Tuesday

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

Google Makes First Fully Self-Driving Car

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Clarence Dember on Tuesday. 1 Reply

The Web is not the Net.

Started by Visvakarman Svetasvatara-Upanish Dec 17. 0 Replies

Intelligent life 90% less likely

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Tom Sarbeck Dec 9. 3 Replies

100 Billion Frames per second camera

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Dec 4. 0 Replies

Stem

Started by C.L.A.W.S.. Last reply by Sean Murphy Oct 31. 2 Replies

Green Tea Boosts Brainpower

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by John Jubinsky Oct 28. 5 Replies

Quick Ebola tests on the horizon

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Deidre Oct 18. 2 Replies

Tenured Professor shouts "Fire!" in crowded theatre

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by David Layton Sep 27. 4 Replies

Max Planck on New Scientific Truth?

Started by Tom Sarbeck. Last reply by Luara Aug 13. 5 Replies

Electric Bacteria

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Luara Jul 18. 3 Replies

Vantablack

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Sean Murphy Jul 15. 1 Reply

Roundup Ready Corn IS Toxic

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Jul 13. 7 Replies

Crowded rooms make you dumb

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Pat Jul 5. 4 Replies

Comment Wall

Comment

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

Comment by Tom Sarbeck on March 18, 2013 at 1:20am

PS. Higher frequencies than we humans hear might bother neighborhood dogs.

Comment by Tom Sarbeck on March 18, 2013 at 1:18am

Chris, if you also have an oscilloscope you can see your frequency generator's output.

Comment by Chris G on March 17, 2013 at 5:05pm

I have a frequency generator and will do that in the back yard if I can find an cheap weatherproof speaker and it doesn't bother the birds.

 

Members (1579)

 
 
 

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

 

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service