x-no-archive: yes

http://www.newkerala.com/topstory-fullnews-28908.html

http://article.wn.com/view/WNATE16B9CDEDFC4500F11BBDE2A7B44DBCC/

I found the story in the Daily Heil, but it doesn't appear to be
available there yet.

(Hi Fergus)

Evil Nigel

Evil_Nigel@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
> x-no-archive: yes
> 
> http://www.newkerala.com/topstory-fullnews-28908.html
> 
> http://article.wn.com/view/WNATE16B9CDEDFC4500F11BBDE2A7B44DBCC/
> 
> I found the story in the Daily Heil, but it doesn't appear to be
> available there yet.
> 
> (Hi Fergus)
> 
> Evil Nigel


so my backturners theory has no credence then

wrote in message 
news:46f2871c-fcbc-44b1-a884-ebf9faf57e1d@y79g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> http://www.newkerala.com/topstory-fullnews-28908.html
>
> http://article.wn.com/view/WNATE16B9CDEDFC4500F11BBDE2A7B44DBCC/
>
> I found the story in the Daily Heil, but it doesn't appear to be
> available there yet.
>
> (Hi Fergus)
>
> Evil Nigel

Hmmm, like the Jews and Palestinians, they are always giving each other 
presents.  Usually exploding ones.

"Lachlan - KotU" <hamfish(nospam)@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:gMWdnV2rhdgR63vV4p2dnAA@posted.plusnet...
>
>  wrote in message 
> news:46f2871c-fcbc-44b1-a884-ebf9faf57e1d@y79g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>> x-no-archive: yes
>>
>> http://www.newkerala.com/topstory-fullnews-28908.html
>>
>> http://article.wn.com/view/WNATE16B9CDEDFC4500F11BBDE2A7B44DBCC/
>>
>> I found the story in the Daily Heil, but it doesn't appear to be
>> available there yet.
>>
>> (Hi Fergus)
>>
>> Evil Nigel
>
> Hmmm, like the Jews and Palestinians, they are always giving each 
> other presents.  Usually exploding ones.

Washington, Oct 3 : Your faith in the almighty could help you become 
more helpful, honest and generous, but only under certain psychological 
conditions, says a new study by University of British Columbia 
researchers.

For the study, the scientists analyzed the past three decades of social 
science research.

Translation: They picked out the bits that supported their preordained 
conclusion.

UBC social psychologists Ara Norenzayan and Azim Shariff said that 
religious people are more likely than the non-religious to engage in 
prosocial behaviour - acts that benefit others at a personal cost - when 
it enhances the individual's reputation or when religious thoughts are 
freshly activated in the person's mind.

Translation: They'll be nice if it's advantageous for them to do so. 
They lack an internal moral compass and need an external guide to behave 
in a decent manner.

Firstly, the study reviewed data from anthropology, sociology, 
psychology and economics. Later, the researchers explored how religion, 
by encouraging cooperation, became a factor in making possible the rise 
of large and stable societies made of genetically unrelated individuals.

Translation: Conform or be cast out.

Norenzayan said that till date, the public debate whether religion 
fosters cooperation and trust has largely been driven by opinion and 
anecdote.

"We wanted to look at the hard scientific evidence," said Norenzayan, an 
associate professor in the Dept. of Psychology.

Translation: They only looked at the good stuff.

Across all the disciplines, the researchers closed in on complementary 
results. Empirical data within anthropology suggests there is more 
cooperation among religious societies than the non-religious, especially 
when group survival is under threat.

Translation: If you mess with us, our bunch will gang up and slaughter 
your bunch.

Economic experiments indicate that religiosity increases levels of trust 
among participants, while psychology experiments show that thoughts of 
an omniscient, morally concerned God reduce levels of cheating and 
selfish behaviour.

Translation: It's a good insurance policy - trust me. Would I cheat a 
brother?

"This type of religiously-motivated 'virtuous' behaviour has likely 
played a vital social role throughout history. One reason we now have 
large, cooperative societies may be that some aspects of religion - such 
as outsourcing costly social policing duties to all-powerful Gods - made 
societies work more cooperatively in the past," said Shariff.

Translation: Violate God's Law and you shall be stoned to death.

The authors observed that across cultures and through time, the notion 
of an all-powerful, morally concerned "Big God" usually begat "Big 
groups" -large-scale, stable societies that successfully passed on their 
cultural beliefs.

Translation: God was on their side of the wars.

Also, the study highlighted that in today's world religion has no 
monopoly on kind and generous behaviour.

In many findings, non-believers acted as prosocially as believers. In 
the last several hundred years, the world has seen the rise of 
non-religious institutional mechanisms that include effective policing, 
courts and social surveillance.

"Some of the most cooperative modern societies are also the most 
secular. People have found other ways to be cooperative - without God," 
said Norenzayan.

Translation: See? It was all a big scam!

The findings appear in the paper "The Origin and Evolution of Religious 
Prosociality" published in the latest issue of the journal Science.

Translation: Even a scientific journal needs to try and appease the 
zealots.

On Oct 3, 8:46 pm, "Lachlan - KotU" <hamfish(nospam)@gmail.com> wrote:
>  wrote in message
>
> news:46f2871c-fcbc-44b1-a884-ebf9faf57e1d@y79g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>
> > x-no-archive: yes
>
> >http://www.newkerala.com/topstory-fullnews-28908.html
>
> >http://article.wn.com/view/WNATE16B9CDEDFC4500F11BBDE2A7B44DBCC/
>
> > I found the story in the Daily Heil, but it doesn't appear to be
> > available there yet.
>
> > (Hi Fergus)
>
> > Evil Nigel
>
> Hmmm, like the Jews and Palestinians, they are always giving each other
> presents.  Usually exploding ones.

lol, maybe shouldn't have but made me smile

CJ Dunnaway  wrote:

> "Lachlan - KotU" <hamfish(nospam)@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >  wrote:
> >>
> >> http://www.newkerala.com/topstory-fullnews-28908.html
> >>
> >> http://article.wn.com/view/WNATE16B9CDEDFC4500F11BBDE2A7B44DBCC/
> >>
> >> I found the story in the Daily Heil, but it doesn't appear to be
> >> available there yet.
> >>
> >> (Hi Fergus)
> >>
> >> Evil Nigel
> >
> > Hmmm, like the Jews and Palestinians, they are always giving each 
> > other presents.  Usually exploding ones.
> 
> Washington, Oct 3 : Your faith in the almighty could help you become 
> more helpful, honest and generous,

`Than what' is not specified - a comparison with no comparand[1]?  A
sure sign of bullshit.

> but only under certain psychological 
> conditions, says a new study by University of British Columbia 
> researchers.
> 
> For the study, the scientists analyzed the past three decades of social
> science research.
> 
> Translation: They picked out the bits that supported their preordained
> conclusion.
> 
> UBC social psychologists Ara Norenzayan and Azim Shariff said that 
> religious people are more likely than the non-religious to engage in 
> prosocial behaviour - acts that benefit others at a personal cost - when
> it enhances the individual's reputation or when religious thoughts are
> freshly activated in the person's mind.
> 
> Translation: They'll be nice if it's advantageous for them to do so. 
> They lack an internal moral compass and need an external guide to behave
> in a decent manner.

The research would be more valid if they'd compared people who believed
in god with people who have an equally strong set of moral and ethical
principles as supplied by god-bothering religions without beliving in
god.

[snip]

> The findings appear in the paper "The Origin and Evolution of Religious
> Prosociality" published in the latest issue of the journal Science.
> 
> Translation: Even a scientific journal needs to try and appease the 
> zealots.

`Science' (and to a lesser extent, `Nature') has lost its standing as a
reliable journal if you ask me.  It's been publishing a lot of crap like
this lately - sensationalist rubbish.  And a lot of it /is/ rubbish -
known as such to the editors.  They're excuse `We're publishing this so
the reader can make up his own mind'.

Yeah, but the reader's not expert enough to do so in almost all cases,
and the point of a scientific journal is for the editorial staff to
judge it in advance and only publish stuff that's not crap.  If you
don't do that, if you publish sensationalist nonsense for the sake of
sales (and `Science' has been following that policy for some years now),
you're no better than a Murdoch `news'paper as far as I'm concerned.

Rowland.

[1]  If that word's not in the dictionary, I've just made it up and it
ought to be, so there.

-- 
Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell@dog.physics.org
                                            Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org                             http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker?   Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking