News Bits

by Luke Muehlhauser on March 10, 2010 in News

Gabe Czobel’s new article - An Analysis of Richard Swinburne’s The Existence of God – is a convenient summary of Swinburne’s book and some arguments against it. There are many problems with Swinburne’s book that Czobel does not discuss, but at least Swinburne takes seriously the problem of offering ‘God did it’ as a ‘best explanation.’

On Reasonable Doubts, Tim Callahan of Skeptic Magazine debunks that awful movie Zeitgiest.

I wish I was the coolest guy in the world.

I rewrote my post on Religion and Suicide Terrorism.

Homeopathy gets the smackdown in the U.K.

Swedish cartoonist draws Muhummad with a dog’s body, extremists try to kill cartoonist, police arrest extremists, multiple Swedish papers reprint original cartoon. Yay!

Still more sites added to my Internet Atheism Search Engine.

Reluctantly, and for the first time, I have banned someone from commenting on this site. The endlessly abusive Neil C. Reinhardt will have to degrade dialogue elsewhere.

Previous post:

Next post:

{ 11 comments… read them below or add one }

Rhys Wilkins March 10, 2010 at 10:33 pm


Yeah Neil seemed a little bit batshit.


faithlessgod March 11, 2010 at 12:51 am

Hey Luke, could you add my site to the atheist search engine?


lukeprog March 11, 2010 at 3:03 am


I’ll be surprised if it’s not already there, but yeah.


Jake de Backer March 11, 2010 at 12:56 pm

Was Neil that old war vet dude? Who ALWAYS typed LIKE ***THIS***?



lukeprog March 11, 2010 at 1:18 pm

Yeah, that one.


micthacks March 11, 2010 at 3:09 pm

Hey Luke and other readers.

Thought you might appreciate this comic.


lukeprog March 11, 2010 at 3:22 pm

Yeah, saw that on reddit; pretty funny!


John D March 12, 2010 at 4:53 am

Those extremists were in my neck of the woods.

Good to know.

Irony, btw.


Reginald Selkirk March 12, 2010 at 6:19 am

Pledge of Allegiance Is Ruled Constitutional

A federal appeals court panel ruled Thursday that the Pledge of Allegiance does not violate constitutional rules separating church and state. The opinion, written by Judge Carlos T. Bea, stated that “the phrase ‘one Nation under God’ does not turn this patriotic exercise into a religious activity.”

If adding the phrase “under God” did not have religious intent, then what intent did it have?


Jeff H March 12, 2010 at 5:54 pm

This is off-topic, but Luke, you might be interested in this. the American Psychological Association (APA) fairly recently brought in a new journal called Psychology of Religion and Spirituality. I know you’re more into the philosophy of religion rather than the psychology, but I thought you might be interested. I’m still waiting to see the general tone of the articles in it, but I was pretty excited to find it, considering it’s the area of psychology I want to focus on.


lukeprog March 12, 2010 at 6:42 pm

Jeff H,

That’s so cool. Thanks for the link.


Leave a Comment