04 April 2012

The Northwest Free-thought Alliance conference

This conference was held Friday the 30th through Monday the 1st in Renton, WA (near Seattle), and I went -- it's only about 160 miles away, and Richard Dawkins would be there.

About 340 people attended, and it was an unusual experience for me to be surrounded by so many people who were all atheists. Many had come from places significantly less hospitable than Portland -- the first person I talked with at any length was from Spokane, and some others were from small towns.

There was a report from the Reason Rally in Washington DC a week earlier, which had drawn 20,000 people despite rain.

The core of the conference was the lectures and workshops on Saturday. There were three time slots, each with four options (schedule here). For the first two time-slots I naturally chose Dr. Jon Peters's "The Genome and Evolution", which was an eye-opener.

I've known for years that the evidence from genetics is overwhelming; even if there were no fossil record at all, the genetic evidence all by itself would be absolutely conclusive that the theory of evolution is true. Much of what Peters discussed, however, was very recent further discoveries -- from the last year or so. Biology, like medicine and computer science, moves at a very rapid pace these days.

Much of it concerned the genetics of atavistic traits that occasionally appear (humans with tails, whales with legs, etc.), and of various kinds of DNA segments which are non-functional and thus get passed on from generation to generation unaffected by natural selection. Work on these issues has greatly multiplied the number of known phenomena which can be explained only by common ancestry among species -- including and especially between humans and other great ape species.

An interesting aside was that other work in genetics has given us a surprising amount of knowledge about the history of human population sizes. The total human population at any one time could never have been smaller than about 8,000 people.

Peters was not shy about pointing out the implications of these discoveries for religion, which go far beyond merely refuting the Genesis creation myth. Since there could never have been just one pair from whom all modern humans are descended, for example, the story of the Fall and inherited original sin are nonsensical, and thus so is the sacrifice of Jesus -- and there goes most of the core of the Christian belief system. Anyone who thinks that Christianity and modern science can be made compatible with each other doesn't understand the science, and probably doesn't understand Christianity very well either.

Peters mentioned that even some Evangelical Christians who are geneticists, and who worked on these discoveries, had abandoned their resistance to the theory of evolution and are now trying to convince their fellow Christians that rejecting it is no longer tenable. He called 2011 a "Galileo year" for biology. See his website for details on these matters (the boxes on the left aren't clickable -- mouse over the headers at the top for drop-down menus).

For the final time slot I went to "Current Separation Cases", on recent court decisions affecting separation of church and state. The focus was on the conflict between employment non-discrimination laws and the right of religious organizations to conduct their business (including hiring and firing) on the basis of the taboos and general arbitrary weirdness which they exist to promote. Let's just say that the reasoning in some recent decisions has proven pretty arbitrary and weird too, even on the Supreme Court. It's anyone's guess how any given case will be decided (but we definitely need to make sure that there will not be a Republican in the White House to make judicial appointments any time soon).

On Sunday morning Dawkins arrived, along with two leaders of the US branch of the Richard Dawkins Foundation -- Elizabeth Cornwell and Sean Faircloth -- who spoke on the ongoing harm done by special legal privileges for religion (religious day-care centers in the South are exempt from the regulations imposed on non-religious day-care, for example, and at least two children have died as a result), and how to work toward a more secular society. Dawkins interviewed two former pastors who had abandoned religion (there is a special atheist initiative, The Clergy Project, to help such people make what is obviously a very difficult transition) and who were dealing with the devastating rejection by bigoted family members and friends which so often accompanies "coming out".

Atheist activism, by the way, now clearly embraces the analogy with the gay movement, and this came up several times during the conference. Gays used to be stigmatized rather as atheists are, by the same kinds of people and for similar reasons; yet they've won much greater acceptance and significant legal successes (such as the spread of gay marriage) in a surprisingly short span of time. Clearly theirs is an example worth studying.

Last of all came the book signing. I'd brought along my copy of The Extended Phenotype for this, and it now bears the great man's signature; unfortunately, given the huge crush of people waiting in line, there was no opportunity to talk with him at any length.

After the conference there was another event in Bellevue a few miles away, where Coldwell, Faircloth, and Dawkins spoke again. Attendance was far larger than at the conference -- I wouldn't be surprised if there were more than a thousand people there -- and the doors didn't open until almost an hour after the scheduled time. But it was well worth it. Dawkins spoke on the need to reclaim words like "pro-life" and "intelligent design" and "morality" which have been seized by religionists as Trojan horses for their various inanities. Faircloth, a passionate speaker, emphasized organization and political activism (for his full program, see his book), while Coldwell talked about what's currently being done, which is a lot.

As she pointed out, it would be very easy for Dawkins to just relax at home in Britain and watch his book royalties roll in; instead, he's touring the US and helping atheists here get active and organized, because he understands what's at stake. Given the tremendous power and cultural influence of the US, the ambitions of American fundamentalism represent a global threat, not just one confined within our own borders.

Dana Hunter has a report on the Bellevue event.

If you've never been to a conference like this, I recommend it. Everyone I encountered was friendly, and the organizers and volunteers were always helpful when I had a question about something. I'm not generally comfortable in crowds or groups, but it can be surprisingly liberating to be among hundreds of people who share one's understanding of the insanity and inanity of religion.

5 Comments:

Blogger Ranch Chimp said...

Thanx for the read and link's Infodell. Sound's like it would be fun also for small chat and socializing too. I dont know much about this stuff as you do, but am a fan of Dr.Richard Dawkins, as far as what he has to say. I did some posting a week or two ago, called something like "Atheist's under Attack" or similar (in America), because it seem's to have been that way if you look at the current condition, it was based off that rally in DC. But anywayz ... the most confusing thing to me in so much of this is the "non" belief in "evolution", is what I cant understand anyway I try to twist my thinking to. I mean, aint that like not believing that we do space travel, or not believing that MRI's a X-ray's, etc are valid? I heard some of the creationist talk for instance and seen video's of the museum's where these prehistoric animal's were sitting with human's in love and harmony like a familia and their house pet's ... that is just difficult for me to understand and totally opposite looking at nature. My familia for instance is saturated with catholic's, I dont think I can recall meeting any that didnt believe science or evolution, despite they also say they believe in God (to some degree) ... so you can see that it is "confusing", especially when you look at all that has been discovered through science, archeology, astronomy, etc ... to think that it is a conspiracy to get away from God or whatever would be a very difficult to pull off. The talk about the Bible and what it sayz ... well ... I dont think that most people that are religious even read the Bible in it's entirety (I have read all the old Testament and about 90% of the old Testament) or even know of the other gospel's that were taken out, espcially the one's from women, how it was basically put together by a Roman Emporer (Constantine) and a crew back in the early 4th century, and dont even understand the history behind it. As far as what the Bible sayz ... I mean ... wrote in such a time, what do they expect it to say? As far as the execution of Jesus ... show me the record's, ancient Rome recording in writing execution's. Anywayz, enough from me on this.

Later Infodell ....

04 April, 2012 06:41  
Blogger Robert the Skeptic said...

DNA and it's role in human genetics was discovered during my lifetime. I recall at the time thinking that DNA's role in explaining biological evolution in explicit detail would drive the final nail in the concept of Creationism.

Not! What I see in extremist literature either completely dismisses DNA, terms it a "lie" or ignores it completely.

Perhaps in a generation or two it will finally be accepted for what it is, and explanation of the origins of life.

04 April, 2012 13:37  
Blogger Infidel753 said...

Yep, plenty of socializing -- and a lot of the people I met there were from Portland.

It's becoming impossible for people who know anything about science to reject evolution, but of course there are plenty of people who know nothing about it. I expect the number of creationists to shrink steadily, but we may never be entirely rid of them. There's still a tiny remnant of people who believe the Earth is flat.

05 April, 2012 13:45  
Blogger Blurber said...

It would be very difficult for wacko Christian anti-evolutionists to listen to Dawkins (not that they ever do, of course).

He's so rational, thoughtful, quiet-spoken, intelligent, knowable, and convincing to those who do take the time to listen.

09 April, 2012 15:07  
Blogger Infidel753 said...

I don't think they do. I see them call him a lot of names, but almost never address the substance of what he says.

11 April, 2012 03:27  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home