The Atheist Blogger

A the title suggests, I would like to know which state (or area) of the USA is considered the most secular / non-believing. Since I live in the UK I am putting this question out to all my American readers in hope that they can throw back some figures for me.

Why do I want to know? Well, I’m currently going into my second year of university studying Computer Science with Information Security (which is way more interesting to me that it sounds to you). It’s a three year course, and at the end I will weigh up my options before deciding whether to do a PhD in it. Whenever I actually leave university, I have always had plans to emigrate to America. Truth be told, there are far more jobs in the computer industry over there, especially in the areas I want to go into (Gaming and/or Web Technology).

I don’t want to end up in a Bible Belt area for obvious reasons, so I’d like a place where I could feel at ease with my beliefs, and find other secular people to hang out with. California’s “Silicon Valley” is a good place to start, since it has the technology and I know of at least one secular/atheist group for workers there. Amiable Atheist recently made me aware of Arizona which has an increasing number of non-believers.

So, which state do you consider the most secular / atheist? Do you have any figures to show this result? What other aspects of this area would make it desirable for a liberal atheist technology geek like myself?

I await your answers!

So The Atheist Jew reckons he can tag me eh? Fair play, fair play. Here are my answers to the 10 questions:

Q1. How would you define “atheism”?

Atheism is the philosophical view that there are no gods. Whether you class this view as a belief or disbelief is up to semantics. I personally refer to it as both.

Q2. Was your upbringing religious? If so, what tradition?

I was brought up in a Christian family with my father, mother, sister, and grandmother. I went to two Church of England primary schools as a child, although I don’t remember visiting church much at all. One humourous story is that when I was 3 my grandfather died, and I asked my mother why he wasn’t coming back from hospital. She told me “he’s gone up to heaven”. I apparently remarked “Well can’t we just get a really long ladder and visit?”. The first stages of rationalism or a cute response? You decide.

At age 11 I went to a grammar school that is situated outside the tallest cathedral in the country. It was there that I shook free the chains of religion.

Out of the remaining family (my gran died 3 years ago), my mother is still theist and she works at the cathedral in the education centre. My sister could be described as agnostic / apatheist, and my father has only just revealed to me that he is also an atheist / agnostic.

That was a rather long answer wasn’t it.

Read the rest of this entry »

Nick from the forums brought up a few interesting questions about the influence of majority opinion when it comes to religion.

Christianity is so mainstream, at least here in America. Ask someone what religion they are, and they will most likely say that they are of the Christian faith.

My question is if someone knew of the religion but knew that no one practiced it, would they still become a Christian?

Do people really believe so strongly in these things or do they just THINK that they do because the majority of the population believes the same?

Is it like a school or club where everyone just wishes to fit in, or are there really honest beliefs in a God and “The Messiah” despite proven sciences supporting something else?

I am willing to bet many Christians would respond to these questions saying “Yes I would still be a Christian.” What if it were shunned upon to be a Christian? Would you still believe in what you do?

Here in America, I think it is somewhat brave to be an Atheist, at least an open one. It is very frowned upon here, mainly because of huge misunderstanding. When you tell someone that you are an Atheist (at least a Christian, which makes up most all of the population) they immediate hold somewhat of a resentment against you, which is unfortunate for me if it ever is a topic for employment.

Read the rest of this entry »

Popular atheist biology professor turned blogger PZ Myers has written a response to a question put to him in an email:

How did life evolve from one (I suspect) chromosome to… 64 in horses, or whatever organism you want to pick. How is it possible for a sexually reproducing population of organisms to change chromosome numbers over time?

Firstly: there would have to be some benefit to the replication probability of the organisms which carry the chromosomes. I don’t see how this would work. How is having more chromosomes of any extra benefit to an organism’s replicative success? Yes, perhaps if those chromosomes were full of useful information… but the chances of that happening are non existent and fly in the face of ’small adaptations over time’.

Secondly, the extra chromosomes need to come from somewhere. I’m not sure about this, but I believe chromosome number are not determined by genes, are they? There isn’t a set of genes which determines the number of chromosomes an organism has. So the number is fixed, determined by the sexually reproducing parents. Which leads me to believe that if the number does change, and by chance the organism is still alive and capable of sexual reproduction, that the number will start swinging back and forward, by 1 or 2, every generation, and never stabilising. The chances of this happening are also very very slim.

It’s an important question, and a lot of people (myself included) have wondered about it. I’ve often searched for a answer online but found nothing, so I’m glad PZ has swooped in with an easy to understand (albeit lengthy and descriptive) answer.

If you thought you knew a lot about Evolution, prepare to be amazed…

Basics: How can chromosome numbers change?

After reading Friendly Atheist’s blog post about the “Questions for God” proposed over at Ethical Atheist, I went to go have a read of them. Quite a few of the questions I thought were a bit harsh, and were either presented in a very sarcastic manner, or were extremely stupid. For example:

Do you know how to use email?  Surely you do, right?  Why haven’t you written us yet with all the answers?

and

Why do men and women have the same number of ribs if you stole one from Adam to make Eve?

The first question is just plainly meant as a joke, and the second ignores the biological fact that if a parent loses a limb or bone, the child won’t be affected. In fact, a believer actually pointed this out the the author of the question in their answer.

I think that although the idea of asking questions to God, and allowing his followers to answer is a great idea, because it allows understanding of theist thinking in ways atheists cannot understand. Some of the answers produced are actually quite rational, and only rely on partial support from the supernatural to work. However, whilst the idea itself is good, the Ethical Atheist version of the questions has taken the entire thing as a joke, which lessens the importance of the whole project, and probably accounts for the reason why most of the questions have been unanswered.

Read the rest of this entry »