New Podcast & Vids

I recently did an interview for the Think Atheist podcast, which is now available. We discuss historical method generally, how historians work and what makes their work logically valid, including discussion of Bayes' Theorem and the philosophy of history, and the completion schedule of my four books currently in progress (one of which is completed and now under contract at a publisher and in the stage of formal academic peer review).

Video of my St. Louis gigs has also gone online now: Carrier-McKay Debate (atheist vs. atheist: Goal Theory vs. Desire Utilitarianism); From Robots to the Moon (ancient science and technology; this was in a pub, so the video and audio quality is not fabulous); Ancient Christian Hostility to Science (how the church fathers of the first three centuries reacted to all that science and technology; this was also in conditions not conducive to producing quality a/v).

Still waiting for the Carrier-Holding debate video.

New Vids and Podcast

Besides the major video release I mentioned yesterday, two other known videos of me came out around the same time, plus a new podcast. I'm blogging those three items today.

(1) Back in 2008 the guys of Give a Damn? came to my home and interviewed me for their film (which I've seen, and it's pretty awesome, hopefully it is near to a general release). I didn't make the final cut, so Rob Lehr, the atheist of the pair (Dan Parris is his Christian friend, and he's one of the cool Christians), put my whole original interview online. It's unedited so a bit random and rough (and they ran out of tape almost mid-sentence at the end), but actually it's really good, one of the best unedited interviews I've ever seen, and interesting for covering a lot of novel ground (since it is principally about whether we ought to "Give a Damn" about poverty in Africa). To watch it click here.

(2) Every year or so I speak to a Christian youth group called Stand to Reason. I've been doing this for years. But back in 2010 I spoke on metaethics and my lecture was recorded. It's now available online. It's a casual interactive lecture, not a formal talk, and it was mostly for the benefit of the students there, and only addresses a few specific questions, so it doesn't work that well as a video per se (much better for that is my Michigan talk on moral theory; and for more discussion and links on this topic see Darla the She-Goat and of course read Sense and Goodness without God). But if you are interested, click here.

(3) Finally, I did a Mindcore podcast: Interview with Richard Carrier. Mindcore is a rather low-production-value underground podcast for "elitist college dropouts" (as self-described). It's not an atheist podcast, it just happened to center around that issue this particular show. First half is a discussion between hosts Don Recuero (an atheist) and Diana (a kind of vaguely New Age theist). The interview then starts with me at minute 40:25. I'll briefly describe it from there.

Don begins with discussing the nature and history of the New Atheist movement and my role in it. We segue into politics of atheists. Note that I speak of naturalists of the kind I defend in my book, who accept empirical moderatism, but I mistakenly give the impression I'm speaking of all atheists, when certainly there are dogmatically ideological atheists (and across the entire political spectrum, too). Then we segue into moral theory and mataethics. I talk about the new book The End of Christianity (the now-completed sequel to The Christian Delusion that will be released this year, in which I have three chapters--I'll blog all about it when it's out). Then we close with a discussion of the Jesus myth debate specifically, and the development of the New Testament canon in general.

This was recorded way back in 2010, and the sound quality is not good, and we had delay issues that made it hard not to talk over each other, and I compensated by rambling too much. And not much new ground covered. So not the best show ever. But some may find it of interest.

CSA Interview

Luke Muehlhauser of Common Sense Atheism interviewed me at the CSH Conference for his podcast, on historical method and the historical Jesus. I discuss my upcoming books and their content and progress. We also digress on other topics like education, the McGrews' use of Bayes' Theorem on the resurrection, and Bayes' Theorem's application to the fine tuning argument. The audio is now available to the public here. A transcript is included.

New Vid and Podcast

Quick report on a new video and podcast of me some of you might be interested in.

Video: a decent video of the second Carrier-Licona debate on the Resurrection of Jesus (more a conversation really, a completely different and in many ways more illuminating format than our formal debate on this same topic at UCLA years back) is available for free viewing online. This took place at Washburn University in Topeka, Kansas, this year (2010), with almost double the audience of the UCLA debate. Luke Muehlhauser gives a good recap of this new debate, and he and I ended up in an interesting exchange there about the Bayesian epistemology of witness testimony (on his blog Common Sense Atheism).

Podcast: Luke also runs a podcast Conversations from the Pale Blue Dot, and his first interview of me is available here. The topic is my chapter in The Christian Delusion on Christianity and ancient science. Nice companion piece to that.

AM 770

I might be on AM 770 (a Canadian radio station out of Calgary) this Tuesday night (Jan. 26). Check out their website for a schedule (I'll be on the Rob Breakenridge show) and where there might be an internet simulcast. I haven't been given any precise info on when (sometime between 7 and 10pm Calgary time, whatever that is) or if it will be live (or recorded and aired another day entirely) or what the topic will be (several ideas were bounced around but nothing finalized). I know that's pretty lame as far as a heads up, but this just happened last minute. This is the best I can do. Those who want to catch the show, good luck!

I also still haven't received any specifics on my supposed Thursday talk (my debate in Calgary is Wednesday evening). All I know is that if it happens, CFI Calgary (contact info at bottom here) should have the info as to where and when, or perhaps someone will post it at the local meetup list (that's just wishful thinking).

The Growl Tomorrow

Just a quick notice: at 11pm EST (8pm PCT) tomorrow (Thursday, August 27, 2009), Missouri State's student run internet station, The Growl, will be having a conversation with me on a variety of topics, including the new chapters I prepared for an upcoming anthology by John Loftus (one of those agreements I made years ago that finally came due, I'll blog it when it hits the presses next year), and various things about faith, science, cosmology, and why we bother criticizing religion. This is part of the run up to the big MSU Skepticon II event this November, but I'll tell you all about that in a couple of weeks (I'm waiting for the completion of their official website, which should be any day now). For now, if you're keen, you can listen in tomorrow by going to The Growl online and clicking 'listen' at the designated hour. It doesn't appear they archive shows, so if you miss it live, you missed it for good. I apologize for the short notice, but they only just asked me last night!

Stark on Ancient Science

Last year I recorded a new lengthy interview for the Polyschizmatic Reprobates Hour on Rodney Stark's disastrously awful treatment of ancient science. Dan the Demented cut the show into three parts, the third on other topics, but the first two on Stark. Those two episodes are now up and available, on the PRH website and as podcasts. You can listen to them here: [Season 3 Episode 3] [Season 3 Episode 4]. Together this is essentially a two-part lambaste of Rodney Stark's embarrassing forray into ancient history, where I pillory his claim that Christianity made science possible, by educating the listener on the actual historical facts of Greco-Roman science (and technology). We quote his books For the Glory of God and The Victory of Reason and dissect their absurd falsehoods point-by-point. Each show runs 45 minutes.

The nature of an off-the-cuff interview lends itself to occasional slips of wording, so I must correct two of those: (1) obviously I meant to say a catheter goes into the bladder, not the kidney (they had a separate instrument that could enter the kidney to extract kidney stones); and (2) it was Ptolemy's lunar orbit that was (in combined motions) nearly elliptical, not his planetary orbits (the latter were still non-circular, describing curlycues, and were still eccentric, with velocities varying in reference to a focal point anticipating Kepler's Second Law--they would only have been nearly elliptical if anyone translated his system to a heliocenter).

A more concise and thoroughly vetted and referenced version of this show's argument will appear in a forthcoming book being edited by John Loftus.

Infidel Guy Casuale

On Thursday April 30 (2009) at 5pm PST (8pm EST) I will be the guest on The Infidel Guy (a godless internet radio show, for those not in the know), for about an hour. It will be by phonecon, which I hate, but it will be casual and informal, and topical. We might wander over many subjects, but the big three will be my thoughts on The Jesus Project, my recent debate with William Lane Craig, and my new book Not the Impossible Faith.Go to the website for The Infidel Guy to learn how to listen live (I believe only subscribers can listen to archived shows after that). I think you can also listen live through iTunes (just search Infidel Guy in the podcasts section to find the feed). His website also has a phone number for calling questions in as the show airs.

On Radio This Friday

I'll be on live broadcast radio this Friday evening, discussing the origins of Christmas and the historicity of Jesus. It's the new Lowwdown show on KCAA 1050 AM (an NBC affiliate), which hits some of the Riverside market in Southern California (but you can also listen online from their website), with hosts Robert and Loredana (The Legal Diva). Normally I don't do call-in shows anymore, but since this one's broadcasting to a major market (albeit on a minor station) and is relatively mellow and the hosts are nice, I'll see how it goes. The show airs Fridays from 6-7pm (and they do take calls during the show). I'll be on this Friday (December 19), probably not for the whole thing, but maybe the first half-hour or so (the show actually starts around 6:06pm and will have a bunch of intro from the hosts, though that may come up later, since I'm the critical one, as you know). For those who miss it, it should eventually be archived for streaming or downloading (to run the mp3 for that specific show click here).

Ancient Science Podcast

The San Francisco Exploratorium has launched a new website on "Evidence: How We Know What We Know." I was interviewed some time ago for this new launch, and elements of that interview are now available on their site as a podcast. Go to their new project page (above), click "Enter the Site" and select the Podcasts option down on the right side. I'm the second guest. It's about eleven minutes on "Why do Nutcrackers Work? (and other historical questions of science)," where I talk about the ancient origins of modern scientific values and the meaning of this for today.

There was perhaps an hour of Q&A recorded, but only ten minutes were used. Though I understand the need of that, this did create some problems. The editor stitched together elements of my answers into a continuous lecture. So you don't hear the questions I'm answering, or the entirety of my answers, so it sounds like I'm just rambling from topic to topic. Hearing it back I found it a little confusing at times. For example, in the full discourse I would quicken my pace at points to emphasize certain things before and after, but if you just keep the middle bit it sounds like I'm just arbitrarily talking too fast. And the change of topics can seem odd this way, there being no context or explanation of why suddenly I'm talking about something else. For example, my explanation of who Ptolemy was and when he lived wasn't included, until later on in the podcast, so at first it sounds like I just out of the blue start talking about this Ptolemy guy.

But otherwise there are some gems in there, and in the other podcasts. There are also other cool things on that site that are great, though it's all mainly for kids and teens. Currently the site is about the introductory basics of evolution science, but emphasizing the neat cutting-edge stuff scientists are now doing in the field, and how they learn from it, rather than just giving you a class on evolution. The aim of the Exploratorium is to get people excited about science. So it tries to spy out what's exciting, rather than merely lecturing at you. And the How Do You Know? project is about how we know things, the basic underlying methodology and way of looking at data. Its inaugural test case is evolution (though my podcast isn't about that, just science in general). But cases from other sciences will be added over time.

Letters and Radio

It occurred to me recently that many of my fans might not know that I have several significant letters to the editor published in journals, and have appeared on many web radio shows, since none of these are listed anywhere else. So this post is for anyone who wants to obsessively read and hear everything significant of mine, and didn't know about my work in letters and radio.