Dawkins walks out on flying horse?

_{Denyse O'Leary

December 29, 2015

Culture, Darwinism, Intelligent Design}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

Sigh. We need a map. No, listen:

I’m accused by @ggreenwald of refusing to be interviewed by Muslim journalists! Here’s what actually happened.

I was at a Royal Society meeting to launch the new Stephen Hawking Prize for Science Communication sponsored by @STARMUSfestival, the imaginative conference series that brings scientists together with astronauts and creative musicians. The very nice PR woman arranged press interviews for the speakers. Science communication is dear to my heart, and I agreed to be pulled out of the conference for a series of interviews, on condition that the journalists would ask me about the Hawking Prize & STARMUS, not religion. One journalist, from New Statesman, soon made it clear that he wanted to talk of nothing but religion. My impatience grew, fed by my desire to rejoin the conference. I kept trying to drag him back to the agreed topic. Eventually, the PR woman arrived & signalled to the journalist that his time was up, but he asked to be allowed to carry on. He had just admitted that he believed in flying horses. In exasperation that I had left the conference to talk to a time-wasting journalist whose world view was ludicrously unconnected with reality, I terminated the interview and went off with the PR woman. I now find myself accused of refusing to be interviewed by Muslim journalists! More.

Something happened here … What? Also, why aren’t other people involved in this kind of controversy? It doesn’t come up every day.

See also: Dawkins is distressed by the idea of hating religious people. To judge from past history and the responses, Dawkins’s followers know him better than he does.

Contributions solicited to Dawkins’ retirement fund… Use the Donate button at UD, and we promise to do our best to help.

Maybe this is background to how it all got started:

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Comments

Yes, I’ve seen the Ellis quote several times.
He's certainly not the only one that acknowledges it ;)
If you do believe that the universe is around 7000 years old, you’re going to need a lot of epicycles to explain away the observations not only from cosmology, but from geology, paleontology, etc..
I've seen that several times too. Usually in the form of: "There's a MOUNTAIN of evidence that the universe is x billion Darwin years old supported by multiple lines of evidence from xyz and the scientific consensus!!!" It's either that mountain is conveniently hidden away in Neverland or it doesn't exist cause all I ever find is puddles of disappointment.Vy_{January 1, 2016
January
01
Jan
1
01
2016
07:58 AM
7
07
58
AM
PDT}

Vy, Yes, I've seen the Ellis quote several times. It's ironic that you post that, in view of your comment in #18:
Wow, Ptolemy would be proud. “All we need is one more epicycle, just one!”
If you do believe that the universe is around 7000 years old, you're going to need a lot of epicycles to explain away the observations not only from cosmology, but from geology, paleontology, etc..daveS_{January 1, 2016
January
01
Jan
1
01
2016
07:50 AM
7
07
50
AM
PDT}

People need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the observations... For instance, I can construct you a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its center, and you cannot disprove it based on observations... You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds... What I want to bring into the open is the fact that we are using philosophical criteria in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology tries to hide that. - George Ellis

I suspect that the assumption of uniformity of the universe reflects a prejudice... It would be embarrassing to find, after stating that we live in an ordinary planet about an ordinary star in an ordinary galaxy, that our place in the universe is extraordinary ... To avoid embarrassment we cling to the hypothesis of uniformity. - Richard Feynman
Unfortunately for those who prefer to see humans as a cosmic accident, reality isn't always friendly. Also, I think you missed this.Vy_{January 1, 2016
January
01
Jan
1
01
2016
07:37 AM
7
07
37
AM
PDT}

The day 4 expansion of the universe that Hartnett describes sounds just as ad hoc to me as the cosmologists’ version.
Ok, but the 17 or so verses that existed waaaaay before Hartnett was even born describing God "stretching out" the universe disagree with you.
Do you know if Hartnett’s inflation is in any way detectable?
Is God's stretching of the universe at über hyperluminal speeds within a 24hr period some ~7,000 years ago "detectable"? Hmm, it sure sounds interesting but highly unlikely. However, when the BB Storytellers go in search for answers, they consistently return with a discovery that has to be wrong if the BB Story is true, and it's been showing up for the last 4 decades or so. Lawrence "I hope God doesn't exist" Krauss explains it best:
But when you look at CMB map, you also see that the structure that is observed, is in fact, in a weird way, correlated with the plane of the earth around the sun. Is this Copernicus coming back to haunt us? That's crazy. We're looking out at the whole universe. There's no way there should be a correlation of structure with our motion of the earth around the sun — the plane of the earth around the sun — the ecliptic. That would say we are truly the center of the universe. The new results are either telling us that all of science is wrong and we're the center of the universe, or maybe the data is simply incorrect, or maybe it's telling us there's something weird about the microwave background results and that maybe, maybe there's something wrong with our theories on the larger scales.
Improving the tech doesn't make it go away, it just makes it beautifully obvious. :DVy_{January 1, 2016
January
01
Jan
1
01
2016
07:01 AM
7
07
01
AM
PDT}

Vy, Happy New Year. The day 4 expansion of the universe that Hartnett describes sounds just as ad hoc to me as the cosmologists' version. Do you know if Hartnett's inflation is in any way detectable?daveS_{December 31, 2015
December
12
Dec
31
31
2015
04:03 PM
4
04
03
PM
PDT}

It seems even Hartnett has his own brand of cosmological inflation.
"His" brand?
Do you find it more plausible than mainstream theories of inflation?
Hmm... --- x billion Darwin years ago [Once upon a Neverland night], stuff happened and the universe/space/whatever belched, for no reason whatsoever (other than to keep the BB Story superficially less fantastical of course). That led to a purposeless überfast physics defying expansion of space and x years later, stuff happened [which caused TinkerBell and the universe tweaking Starfleet to strap in and step on the cosmic brakes] bringing the purposeless inflation to a screeching halt. --- vs.
Isaiah 45:12 - I made the earth and created man on it; it was my hands that stretched out the heavens, and I commanded all their host.
Yeaaaaa, I'd rather be consistent with GodDidIt than be inconsistent with probablymaybecouldnessdidit with never ending impossible Stuff Happens. Happy New Year! :)Vy_{December 31, 2015
December
12
Dec
31
31
2015
03:15 PM
3
03
15
PM
PDT}

Vy, Wew. It seems even Hartnett has his own brand of cosmological inflation. Do you find it more plausible than mainstream theories of inflation?daveS_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
03:33 PM
3
03
33
PM
PDT}

Yea Dawkins ... isn't he the smartest man in the world? Did ya know he's the one that revealed a long held secret that Edwin Herbert Land actually invented (evolved) the eye. Yea, no kidding Land just held some of his new fancy film up to the sun for a really long time and it turned into an eye ... complete with arms, legs and feet. Nobody would have known that had it not been for the 'smartest man in the world' Richard Dawkins. And did you know he invented (evolved) mountains? Saw it myself where he built this beautiful thing from paper mache. He even said that if you climbed it you would discover the meaning of life. I tried it once, but it smashed down under my fat body so I gave up and looked for a Guru in Tibet instead ... couldn't climb that mountain either. Still looking for the secret of life ... Then he invented (evolved) something or another that eventually turned itself into a hair pin ... can't remember much about that, perhaps some of the readers here remember. Hell yea ... Dawkins is the 'smartest man in the world,' and I love (worship) Him dearly. Careful if you don't agree, you might get called a bunch of bad names and lose your job at Burger King.ayearningforpublius_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
03:14 PM
3
03
14
PM
PDT}

Do you then believe that the universe expanded in the past, but is now static?
If it expanded, it was on day 4 of creation.
Frankly, I don’t even know what a YEC would do with Doppler shift data from galaxies etc., unless it involves some sort of kludge to get around the distant starlight problem.
This and this should help.
I will also note that Carmeli adds fifth “space-velocity” dimension to spacetime, which is interesting given your complaints about fudge-factors above. It looks like he and Barry Setterfield got into a spat over this issue.
And he's responded here.Vy_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
03:12 PM
3
03
12
PM
PDT}

Vy, Do you then believe that the universe expanded in the past, but is now static? Frankly, I don't even know what a YEC would do with Doppler shift data from galaxies etc., unless it involves some sort of kludge to get around the distant starlight problem. I will also note that Carmeli adds fifth "space-velocity" dimension to spacetime, which is interesting given your complaints about fudge-factors above. It looks like he and Barry Setterfield got into a spat over this issue.daveS_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
02:45 PM
2
02
45
PM
PDT}

Here's your question:
Do you believe that the universe is currently expanding?
Vy_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
02:14 PM
2
02
14
PM
PDT}

Vy,
Me: In any case, how do you suggest we resolve the galaxy rotation curve problem? Vy: You could try this.

Me: Do you believe that the universe is currently expanding? Vy: Nope :)
From the Hartnett paper linked above, entitled "Spiral galaxy rotation curves determined from Carmelian general relativity":
Carmeli [5, 6] approached the problem from a different perspective. He formulated a modification, actually an extension of Einstein’s general theory, in an expanding universe taking into account the Hubble expansion as a fundamental axiom, which imposes an additional constraint on the dynamics of particles [2].
Confirmed by creationwiki:
Cosmological relativity is an extension of the principles of Special and General Relativity to cosmological scales. Developed by Dr Moshe Carmeli, this theory is a combination of Einstein's original special and general relativity; however its starting point is the expansion of the Universe and not the propagation of light.
daveS_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
02:08 PM
2
02
08
PM
PDT}

Do you believe that the universe is currently expanding?
Nope :)Vy_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
01:10 PM
1
01
10
PM
PDT}

Are you not interested in a serious discussion of the issue then?
The issue is/was: Does the multiverse, DM, and inflation have more credence than flying horses? Given what has been discovered about those 3 things i.e. a whole lot of zilch, nada, nothing, I'd rather "just add wings" to a horse and send it to some undetectable corner of wherever.
Well do you know what led to the discoveries of Neptune and Pluto?
I wonder what my initial "Of course ;)" meant to you.
I don’t think the discrepancy with galaxy rotation curves disappears if you withdraw any assumption of the Big Bang.
You could stop assuming the BB and long ages. I'm pretty sure less fudge factors could solve it.
I think that’s your problem right there.
Likewise.
That doesn’t parse for me. In any case, how do you suggest we resolve the galaxy rotation curve problem?
You could try this.
Right. My hypothesis, which is that the flying horse bit is just legend, is starting to look more reasonable, no?
Nope. I'd choose a flying horse over DM, inflation and the multiverse any day.
Ok, I will correct myself then—all along I have been assuming terrestrial flying horses.
OK.
Clearly I can’t rule out the possibility of flying horses elsewhere in the universe.
Yup. PS. I don't believe in the existence of flying horses but, IMO, flying horses have more credence than DM, the multiverse (which would lead to a universe of flying horses), and inflation.Vy_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
01:08 PM
1
01
08
PM
PDT}

It’s fascinating how among many old-earth Creationists/ID Proponents the Big Bang is ”one of the best attested theories in science” and it’s the atheists trying to quash the theory (as regularly seen in News stories here), and among YECs it’s often viewed as a silly fairytale that atheists are trying to keep alive by any means.
Absolutely! :)Vy_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
12:50 PM
12
12
50
PM
PDT}

I hope you know that the BB Theory is more or less dead in the water without the unproven and practically unprovable physics-defying naturalistic ad hoc rescue hunch of inflation.
It’s fascinating how among many old-earth Creationists/ID Proponents the Big Bang is ”one of the best attested theories in science” and it’s the atheists trying to quash the theory (as regularly seen in News stories here), and among YECs it’s often viewed as a silly fairytale that atheists are trying to keep alive by any means.goodusername_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
12:46 PM
12
12
46
PM
PDT}

Vy,
I hope you know that the BB Theory is more or less dead in the water without the unproven and practically unprovable physics-defying naturalistic ad hoc rescue hunch of inflation.
Do you believe that the universe is currently expanding?daveS_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
11:58 AM
11
11
58
AM
PDT}

Vy,
Sorry but my flying horse hasn’t arrived yet, I’ll be sure to let you know if your image is 100% correct when it arrives on Smunshnesday.
Are you not interested in a serious discussion of the issue then?
LOL.
Well do you know what led to the discoveries of Neptune and Pluto?
Does inflation, dark matter, dark energy and several other fudge factors exist without presupposing the BB?
I don't think the discrepancy with galaxy rotation curves disappears if you withdraw any assumption of the Big Bang.
Yup.
I think that's your problem right there.
So searching for something you have no idea of is detectable?
That doesn't parse for me. In any case, how do you suggest we resolve the galaxy rotation curve problem?
Maybe so but who said flying horses follow high school physics? For all we know, they transported Ka’el and his family from Universe X25 to ours.
Right. My hypothesis, which is that the flying horse bit is just legend, is starting to look more reasonable, no?
I’m pretty sure we were talking about, as you put it, this universe. You comment is the first one to mention “Earth”.
Ok, I will correct myself then---all along I have been assuming terrestrial flying horses. Clearly I can't rule out the possibility of flying horses elsewhere in the universe.daveS_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
11:54 AM
11
11
54
AM
PDT}

I hope you know that the BB Theory is more or less dead in the water without the unproven and practically unprovable physics-defying naturalistic ad hoc rescue hunch of inflation. And what's worse is that it's not exactly a good hunch.Vy_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
11:26 AM
11
11
26
AM
PDT}

Well, I assumed we were talking about the possibility of flying horses on Earth
I'm pretty sure we were talking about, as you put it, this universe. You comment is the first one to mention "Earth".Vy_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
11:14 AM
11
11
14
AM
PDT}

Andre @20, absolutely!
Where do the powerful muscles driving the horse’s wings attach?
Sorry but my flying horse hasn't arrived yet, I'll be sure to let you know if your image is 100% correct when it arrives on Smunshnesday. FYI
At least there’s a good idea of what a flying horse might look like.
---
Are you aware of how Neptune and Pluto were discovered?
LOL.
What is the falsifying evidence that you’re referring to?
Does inflation, dark matter, dark energy and several other fudge factors exist without presupposing the BB?
And are you a YEC?
Yup.
Dark matter and cosmic inflation are not assumed to be undetectable in principle
So searching for something you have no idea of is detectable? Well, how's the search for comtiquat going? What's comtiquat? It can be the stuff that keeps Saturn's ring old enough to be consistent with the refuted hunch of nebula hypothesis. That's about as much info we have about DM so I hope it's enough.
but I propose that high school physics makes flying horses as depicted in the image practically impossible.
Maybe so but who said flying horses follow high school physics? For all we know, they transported Ka'el and his family from Universe X25 to ours. ;)Vy_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
10:45 AM
10
10
45
AM
PDT}

Is 1 + 1 = 3 true in the multiverse? There are entities that think it is true. :)Mung_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
09:29 AM
9
09
29
AM
PDT}

Andre,
If there an infinite amount amount of universes then EVERYTHING is true and nothing is false. That is the problem with the multiverse.
My question is, how do you know this? Is 1 + 1 = 3 true in the multiverse?
There is no flying horses in the known universe that is for sure but what about the 85% of this universe we don’t know about?
Well, I assumed we were talking about the possibility of flying horses on Earth. Specifically, of the form shown in the painting I linked to. If we're talking about creatures on another planet, for example, I would need to see more details.daveS_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
09:19 AM
9
09
19
AM
PDT}

DaveS If there an infinite amount amount of universes then EVERYTHING is true and nothing is false. That is the problem with the multiverse. There is no flying horses in the known universe that is for sure but what about the 85% of this universe we don't know about?Andre_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
09:10 AM
9
09
10
AM
PDT}

Andre, I'm not convinced that "everything is true in a multiverse". How do you know this? That's really beside my point, however. I claim that flying horses don't exist in this universe.daveS_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
09:07 AM
9
09
07
AM
PDT}

DaveS I'll give you a clue it seems to me you're not really getting it. If the multiverse is true then Jesus is true, Odin is true, fairies are true, Flying horses are true.... You see in an infinite multiverse everything is true nothing is false and science is useless. .. There might not be a flying horse in this universe but I can guarantee you in an infinite configuration of laws they absolutely exist. Oh and so does the FSM, Han Solo, and Frodo. Everything is true in a multiverse.Andre_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
09:00 AM
9
09
00
AM
PDT}

Vy,
Your image fits the bill.
Where do the powerful muscles driving the horse's wings attach? Do you think a horse configured as in the picture would be physically able to fly? Looks unlikely to me.
Hercules should know.
?
Of course.
Are you aware of how Neptune and Pluto were discovered?
So your evidence for the existence of the undetected and undetectable is by using it to explain away falsifying evidence that don’t fit with your presuppositions about the age and formation of galaxies and the universe? Wow, Ptolemy would be proud. “All we need is one more epicycle, just one!”
What is the falsifying evidence that you're referring to? And are you a YEC? Dark matter and cosmic inflation are not assumed to be undetectable in principle. The discrepancy in galaxy rotation curves and the horizon problem exist. Dark matter and inflation are hypothesized to resolve these problems. Do you have any better ideas?
Interesting. Is there anything in the Multiverse 101 Guide that forbids the existence of flying horses in this universe?
No, but I propose that high school physics makes flying horses as depicted in the image practically impossible.daveS_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
08:50 AM
8
08
50
AM
PDT}

What would a flying horse look like?
Your image fits the bill.
If it had wings, how big would they have to be? Does this look like a feasible design?
Hercules should know.
Mercury’s orbit was a totally reasonable thing to do. Nothing unscientific about it.
Of course ;)
If you have a better explanation for this, then please publish it. Likewise, if you have a better solution than inflation for the horizon problem (among other things), let’s hear it.
So your evidence for the existence of the undetected and undetectable is by using it to explain away falsifying evidence that don't fit with your presuppositions about the age and formation of galaxies and the universe? Wow, Ptolemy would be proud. "All we need is one more epicycle, just one!"
The existence of fairies in the multiverse sounds roughly as plausible to me.
Interesting. Is there anything in the Multiverse 101 Guide that forbids the existence of flying horses in this universe? Also, I'm guessing the multiverse just willed itself into being, right? Or perhaps it came from the multi multiverse?Vy_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
07:12 AM
7
07
12
AM
PDT}

Regarding your other points, at the time (mid 1800's), searching for a planet inside Mercury's orbit was a totally reasonable thing to do. Nothing unscientific about it. If you have a better explanation for this, then please publish it. Likewise, if you have a better solution than inflation for the horizon problem (among other things), let's hear it. I don't know what your personal beliefs are, but many of your colleagues believe in spirits and demons in this universe. The existence of fairies in the multiverse sounds roughly as plausible to me.daveS_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
06:53 AM
6
06
53
AM
PDT}

Vy,
At least there’s a good idea of what a flying horse might look like.
What would a flying horse look like? If it had wings, how big would they have to be? Does this look like a feasible design?daveS_{December 30, 2015
December
12
Dec
30
30
2015
06:34 AM
6
06
34
AM
PDT}

1 2 Next

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply