Visiting Poland - Better Make Sure You Are Heathly

If Poland is in your vacation plans, make sure you visit your trusted doctor first, stock up on medicine and hope (dare I say, pray) that nothing happens to you, when you are there.

Why? Because faith healing seems to be gaining popularity in that country (full disclosure: I was born there and spent the first 19 years of my life there) and I would not want to be caught sick there, knowing that depending on the doctor you end up with, your therapy might be prayer.

To give you more detail, while the health care is considered to be free and widely available in Poland, the quality is lacking and the availability is restricted by long wait times (months) and extensive restrictions on residency. To top that off, recently, with a strong backing of the very powerful Catholic Church, the doctors there were asked to sign a "Declaration of Faith", which basically gives them a way out of any modern standard of care, based on their "conscience". While signing of this document was voluntary, given the pressure coming from the Church and the local communities, I suspect there will be more and more doctors, who are afraid of performing some controversial procedures, even though they are medically viable and legal under the local law.

While the majority of discussions around this topic were focusing on abortion, it also affects other reproductive rights and many "end-of-life" issues. The problem here is not with anyone's faith, conscience, or anything in between. The problem is with a very personal decision by a someone who should be following scientific knowledge and who is expected to do so in the best interest of a patient. How do we decide where that "freedom of conscience" ends for a given set of beliefs? Is it only abortion, contraception, blood transfusions, separation of men and women in health care, prolonging unnecessary treatments, or refusing some others? Where and how that thin line is drawn? Who makes that decision?

I, for sure, would not want to end up under care of someone who thinks he (or she) knows better, based on their faith and not reason and science. So, if you are going to visit Poland anytime soon, make sure your are healthy, or your best bet might just be to pray (literally).

The Countries I Would Not Want To Visit

... or live in, for that matter.

Here is an interesting article in the Washington Post, that shows what countries in the world have apostasy laws (you get prosecuted for leaving your religion) and blasphemy laws (NO freedom of speech):

MAP: Where offending a religion could get you executed

Unfortunately, my native Poland is on the list of countries with an active blasphemy laws. Not only it has that law on the books, but it is used pretty often to silence people from expressing their views. The cases are numerous: here, here and here (in Polish).

Blasphemy laws are just a way to limit free speech, and there are no excuses for them in civilized countries. We all should have complete freedom of discussion of any topic, as that's the only way to ensure that all ideas have a chance to be heard. Bad ideas and crazy beliefs should be eliminated from the public forum, buy showing their weaknesses, not by legislating them out of existence.

Interesting Debate: Death Is Not Final. Or Is It?

Great debate, with some of the best skeptical minds participating:

I Don't Understand Creationism

I have never understood creationism... it is so out of touch with reality and so disconnected from any logic that it defies any explanation. Yes, it might have been somehow compelling 500 years ago, when scientific evidence for pretty much anything around us was scarce, but by the last century, there were no reasons to stick with it. One has to have some really strong cognitive dissonance going in order to remain in the pure creationism camp (the earth being 6000 years old, geological strata deposited by a great flood, etc). Even the newer incarnation of creationism, Intelligent Design (ID), does not pass logical and scientific analysis, because it bases itself on faulty understanding of physics and biology.

To illustrate my point I give you the latest Science vs. Nonsense Debate:




What's even more interesting than the debate itself, was an "experiment" done right before it took place, when a reporter asked a bunch of people coming to see the debate to write questions for Bill Nye. Here is the result:

22 Messages From Creationists To People Who Believe In Evolution

Some of those questions are pure gold... and for most of the people who have even the basic understanding of science, they are either nonsensical, or very easy to answer, but there are two sources that are worth reading:

Phil Plait's Bad Astronomy Blog: Answers for Creationists
and
Steven Novella's NeuroLogica: Questions from the Nye-Ham Debate

Now... That's Funny!!!

Here, laugh away!!!

Is Science an Enemy of Humanity?

There is an interesting debate going on, on the virtual pages of the New York Times. It's a rather standard creationism vs. science/evolution exchange of ideas, started by an article "Why I'm a Creationist", written by Virginia Heffernan, that attracted some well-deserved criticism, and was answered by Steven Pinker in an article titled "Science Is Not Your Enemy". I have to confess that I find myself much more attached the Pinker's side (obviously):

In other words, the worldview that guides the moral and spiritual values of an educated person today is the worldview given to us by science. Though the scientific facts do not by themselves dictate values, they certainly hem in the possibilities. By stripping ecclesiastical authority of its credibility on factual matters, they cast doubt on its claims to certitude in matters of morality. The scientific refutation of the theory of vengeful gods and occult forces undermines practices such as human sacrifice, witch hunts, faith healing, trial by ordeal, and the persecution of heretics. The facts of science, by exposing the absence of purpose in the laws governing the universe, force us to take responsibility for the welfare of ourselves, our species, and our planet. For the same reason, they undercut any moral or political system based on mystical forces, quests, destinies, dialectics, struggles, or messianic ages. And in combination with a few unexceptionable convictions— that all of us value our own welfare and that we are social beings who impinge on each other and can negotiate codes of conduct—the scientific facts militate toward a defensible morality, namely adhering to principles that maximize the flourishing of humans and other sentient beings. This humanism, which is inextricable from a scientific understanding of the world, is becoming the de facto morality of modern democracies, international organizations, and liberalizing religions, and its unfulfilled promises define the moral imperatives we face today.

than to any of his opponents, especially, the religious and the politically motivated ones. Like the one from Ross Douthat:

Because we know the universe has no purpose, we must imbue it with the purposes of a (non-species-ist) liberal cosmopolitanism! Because of science, we know that modern civilization has no dialectic or destiny … so we must pursue its “unfulfilled promises” and accept its “moral imperatives” instead!

Ouch... do I smell "ad-hominem" attack? Call Pinker some names, and disregard his stance that only rational analysis and scientific thinking has been proven to better the human race for ages.

There is also a typical "science requires faith too" gibberish:

But this belief in science collapses on itself: there is no scientific evidence to prove that science is the only reliable way to discover truth. Once we take unproven hypotheses and dogmatize them, we have moved beyond scientific evidence into philosophical reflection on truth and the scientific method. Naturalist or not, when it comes to the world’s origins, we are all in the realm of faith.

Nope... there is no faith in science. Not in the way you would want to. It's just about simple rational thinking and understanding that, only via this avenue, we can learn anything useful about the world that surrounds us.

It's good to see that there are some, who understand it:

We need not, however, enter into simplistic debates that lead to endless conflict. Rather, we can bring science and the humanities together to explore a new synergy of scientific fact and human values. Recognizing that we are now understanding these evolutionary processes through science and appreciating them through art, poetry, literature, music and spirituality gives us an opportunity to discover our own role in this unfolding story.

Science does not invalidate humanism, poetry, art, and countless other "soul-based" activities. It enhances them and makes them work pursuing, especially when we realize we have very little time to do it.

Faithful Get Offended... Again

Recently I wrote about a case of a bad "blasphemy law" in Poland (well, there is no "good" blasphemy law in my opinion, since they all infringe on people's freedom of speech in the name of someone unvalidated opinion), and this week brings us another case, this time from India (thanks to the New Scientist).

This particular case has been brewing for a few months, but finally, it is getting attention it deserves in the "mainstream" media, not just in the skeptic and rational circles. Senal Anamaruku, a skeptic from India, is accused of "hurting religious feelings" by exposing a purported miracle. The case is very straightforward: people believe in a miracle, they are swindled by others, who are trying to make money, someone exposes the fraud (intentional, or not, it's irrelevant) and gets blamed for "hurt feelings" of those who prefer to cling to irrational beliefs at all costs.

The main point to learn from this case, is of course, freedom of speech. And someone's opinion, is, and always should be, protected by this basic freedom, even if others don't agree and even if it goes against people beliefs.

There is also an important nugget of wisdom by Senal:

Once trapped into irrationalism, they become more incapable of mastering reality. It is a vicious circle, like an addiction. They become vulnerable to exploitation by astrologers, godmen, dubious pseudo-psychologists, corrupt politicians and the whole mega-industry of irrationalism.

Great point and worth repeating every day, when someone says "what's the harm?"

Can You See Our Precious Education Funds Going to the Lawyers?

Yes... all the lawyers across the Florida must have been jumping with joy, when they found out that our not-so-smart governor Rick Scott signed the Florida school prayer bill into law (also here), which authorizes school boards to enable students to deliver "inspirational message" (a.k.a. prayer) in public schools. This seems to be so unconstitutional, that the legal challenges will come quickly, and our school board districts will have to pay the legal bills.
You know this law has nothing to do with what its authors pretend it to be, when even prominent religious leaders are against it. It was politics at its worst, from the bill's sponsors, Sen. Gary Siplin and Rep. Charles Van Zant, to our governor (not that I expected any better from him), catering to the religious right to gain some dubious votes, and at the end our children will pay the price when the lawyers come knocking.
Maybe it's time for the sane ones to make sure the people above (let's repeat: Sen. Gary Siplin, Rep. Charles Van Zant, and Governor Rick Scott) are not allowed to represent us in the future. Let them know when the next election day is here.

Science? We Don't Need No Stinking Science...

... says Jonathan Saenz of the Liberty Institute:

“We don’t need some liberal California group coming into Texas telling us how to do our science and our teaching when they have their own problems.”

Continue reading: SMU professor: Science doesn’t choose between Christians and non-believers

Fortunately, this battle ended well for Texas (and the rest of us in the U.S.), but we need to keep an eye on the crazy ones, as they tend to pop up all over the place. We have our own fair share in Florida.

What Are Your Plans For Tomorrow?

May 21st is almost here, but the real question for tomorrow is "which local party to pick: The Best Damned Party, or The Left Behind Party?"...

If you want your daily dose of news high tomorrow, make sure you check weather.com for the latest unusual and violent weather, and the Unites States Geological Survey for earthquake activity.

Have a great Saturday... let's wait for 2012.

The End of the World: A Better Perspective

Here is a much better take on the upcoming "end of the world" from Richard Dawkins:

However it happens, the end of the world will be a parochial little affair, unnoticed in the universe at large. The end of the universe itself is a matter of current debate among physicists, a debate that I recommend as providing a salutary, long-term, humbling perspective on human preoccupations and follies.

More: Science explains the end of the world

I tend to agree with Dawkins. We are probably on the way to do away with ourselves nicely, as we have more and more power in our hands, with less and less reason to guide us. Let's hope he's wrong on this one.

Oh, No... Could This Be Our Next President?

Hours after declaring Sunday that he expects to be running for president within a month, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said he's worried the United States could be “a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists,” in the foreseeable future, according to Politico.

Thanks CNN: Gingrich fears 'atheist country ... dominated by radical Islamists'


I certainly hope NOT!
The "dumb" is strong with this one. Unfortunately, such is the case with most of the Republicans nowadays. I fear that no matter who runs in 2012, there will be no choice but to vote against the "lightheaded" ones, instead of actually voting for someone well qualified to be our next fearless leader.
How do you get an "atheist" country, dominated by Islamists? Last time I checked, being an Islamist implied not only being religious, but it meant being CRAZY religious, pretty much at the same level as being an Evangelical Christian in this country. Nice going Mr. Gingrich. You have just proven that you will say anything, no matter how dumb it is, just to get elected. Fear mongering and simple FUD seem to be your political strategy.