This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

vijay_krishnan's Profile

vijay_krishnan's Avatar Joined about 5 years ago
Gender: Male

Latest Discussions Started by vijay_krishnan

More Discussions by vijay_krishnan

Latest Comments by vijay_krishnan

Go to: Should Richard Dawkins be arrested for incitement to religious hatred?

vijay_krishnan's Avatar Jump to comment 27 by vijay_krishnan

I partly sympathize with people like Cranmer when they talk about the fact that few people have the balls to criticize Islam in the same way as they manage to criticize Christianity. I could relate to Bill Donohue as well when he had the following to say about the South Park creators.

"The ultimate hypocrite is not Comedy Central — that's their decision not to show the image of Muhammad or not — it's Parker and Stone," he said. "Like little whores, they'll sit there and grab the bucks. They'll sit there and they'll whine and they'll take their shot at Jesus. That's their stock in trade."

To be fair I have seen Richard criticize the Islamic law of death for Apostasy etc at time. There is an excellent chance that he would be subject to very real death threats like Geert Wilders, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Ehsan Jami, Taslima Nasrin if he were to spend the same amount of time attacking Islam as he does attacking Christianity.

It is indeed very sad that we can't talk about the elephant in the room as openly and forcefully as we should, due to fear for our lives. At the very least we should throw as much resources as we can supporting the brave men and women who have dared to risk their lives just doing that.

And we should appreciate the fact that Christianity and many other religions for all their vices have one big virtue going for them; it is very unlikely that you'll be murdered for criticizing any of them.

Mon, 01 Feb 2010 07:55:00 UTC | #437383

Go to: An interview with a Taliban Trained Suicide Bomber {With English S/T}

vijay_krishnan's Avatar Jump to comment 43 by vijay_krishnan

I grew up in India and and am a good speaker of Hindi (I would guess that 80% of common urdu words - at least those in this interview are identical to the corresponding Hindi words), and understand Urdu pretty well too.

I can assure you that the subtitles are accurate! The translations have been done as it is - there isn't even a paraphrasing of what was said anywhere.

So if you find the subtitles disturbing, it is not due to misinformation, but due to the ground reality here.

Sun, 15 Nov 2009 07:46:00 UTC | #413551

Go to: Why Are Americans Resistant to Science?

vijay_krishnan's Avatar Jump to comment 15 by vijay_krishnan

3. Comment #358261 by bungoton

"I find the strangest thing is discovering scientists who are resistant to science. I work with a geneticist (PhD) who firmly believes in homeopathy."

Have you dug a bit deep into what he actually believes. I have been to practitioners who call themselves homeopathy doctors, and their stuff does work. The important point to note is the following. They prescribe a bunch of stuff there for common cold etc. A typical prescription looks like:
Take 5 of these small sugar balls presumably dipped in some solution that is diluted insanely (1 in 10^30 parts of water etc.), and ingest this other green liquid.
When I tried the stuff, I always thought it was the green liquid that was doing all the work and I now suspect that to be the case all the more.
So, while it is obvious that the basic premise of homeopathy is a sham (the only alternative is to rewrite all the laws of chemistry), it is the case that individual practioners prescribe stuff that is different from pure water as well. And the stuff that is different from pure water does work better than a placebo for sure, often comparable to scientific medicine at least for some ailments.
With this twist, there are going to be enough people rightfully claiming improvement from personal experience.
This reminds me of Feynman's writings from the book/lectures of "The meaning of it all". He cites the example of a witch doctor in a village who prescribes snakeskin and the bark of a tree for a disease, with some theory of spirits etc. But it turns out that while the snakeskin does nothing, quinine from the bark of the tree does lead to improvements.

I think homeopathy needs to be thoroughly overhauled. It needs to be recognized that the fundamental premise is wrong and if there is anything useful left, it should be absorbed.

Tue, 31 Mar 2009 08:29:00 UTC | #342086

More Comments by vijay_krishnan