The consequences of bad journalism

There are two things I've noticed as a consequence of the 'We are born to believe in God' story in the Times. I said a couple of days ago that it seemed like poor journalism, and not surprisingly it has led to Christians claiming that it is evidence for God's existence. Secondly, the Daily Mail published a similar story which was written in an almost identical manner. Two newspapers, two different authors yet the articles are so similar that if I was a University professor I would cry plagiarism.

Of course, said that this study doesn't prove we innately believe in 'God', only that we have the tendency to believe in supernatural things as children. However, the Christian in this blog takes it a step further. He decides that a tendency to have supernatural beliefs means we are all born believing in God.

'But really, how can all of this be explained? I'm really glad that scientists were able to figure out that belief in the supernatural, or God, is inherent within every individual, but what does this really mean? Why does this happen? If you're a Christian, or even if you're not a Christian, but just a rational non-believer, you know the answer; because God exists. Why would every person be born with a belief in God if God didn't exist?'

This statement has already been better debunked at the Blag Hag blog, so I won't do it again here. The only thing I would point out is that supernatural beliefs don't just mean God, and it just shows how easy it is to twist bad journalism. If this study had been better reported, then misunderstandings like these wouldn't happen (or at least if they did, anyone who bothered to check the original article would see any religious ravings were just that).

So now my real question is why are the Daily Mail and Times articles so similar? Let's take the Richard Dawkins mention:

The Daily Mail: The findings challenge atheists such as Richard Dawkins, the author of The God Delusion, who has long argued that religious beliefs result from poor education and childhood 'indoctrination'.

The Times: The findings challenge campaigners against organised religion, such as Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion. He has long argued that religious beliefs result from poor education and childhood “indoctrination”.

I don't think the Times and Daily Mail are owned by the same people (I may be wrong, but the Times is owned by Rupert Murdoch and theres no mention of him owning the Mail on his Wikipedia page). Why is it these articles are similar? This research hasn't been published in a journal, and had not been presented at a conference at the time these articles were published. I therefore find it unlikely it came from the researcher Bruce Hood.

Someone decided this research would get more press if it refuted Dawkins, which these two major newspapers then latched onto. Perhaps one newspaper copied the other, doing minimal research into the issue themselves. If this is the case it says something about the reliability of the news we read, since a mistake by one paper is just reprinted in the other without any effort to check the facts are correct.

A wish for better science journalism

I just found an article on the Times website reporting findings from a psychologist suggesting that in some ways we are hardwired to have 'supernatural beliefs' (and that this is more likely as children and only later do we have more rational thoughts). The idea that religious belief is in some way innate wouldn't surprise me, since we do need to be trusting as children and not question everything we are told. However, the article is very poor and it is impossible to judge how strong these conclusions are. I would love to know how the study was conducted, but no details are given. The article states:

The findings challenge campaigners against organised religion, such as Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion. He has long argued that religious beliefs result from poor education and childhood “indoctrination”.

Bruce Hood, professor of developmental psychology at Bristol University, believes the picture is more complex. “Our research shows children have a natural, intuitive way of reasoning that leads them to all kinds of supernatural beliefs about how the world works,” he said.

“As they grow up they overlay these beliefs with more rational approaches but the tendency to illogical supernatural beliefs remains as religion.”

Without knowing anything about the study it is impossible to come to the conclusion that religious beliefs result from indoctrination. Without first being told of God/Allah/Osiris, a child certainly wouldn't come to the conclusion they existed. Would a child hold any religious beliefs without any information? Would they make their own religion up? Or does this article completely misrepresent the study, and force conclusions from it which the researchers did not intend?

While at university we had an interesting media workshop, where a science journalist essentially told us that newspapers put the words in the researcher's mouths. They will make up quotes, then e-mail the quote off to check the scientists are happy for it to be published. Ever since finding that out I have read newspaper and magazine articles in a different light. I could quite easily see that happening with this quote, and the author not realising it would be published with the paragraph above it.

Atheist Blogroll

I've been added to the atheist blogroll, which after much messing around with the blogger settings has been put on the sidebar of this blog. It's hosted by MoJoey at Deep Thoughts. There's also a photography contest on that site, and I'm thinking of sending a couple of entries in.

The God Squad at Reading Festival '09

Another year of Reading over, with amazing performances from Radiohead, Billy Talent, Bloc Party & Placebo. Disappointing headliners this year (Arctic Monkeys & Kings of Leon) but then Radiohead were one of the best I've seen after 5 years of festivals. Arctic Monkeys were good, just not my idea of a headliner, although from what others have said I'm very glad I went to see Billy Talent instead of Kings of Leon. So I'm back home now, after surviving another year of the cess pit, and debating whether to buy myself a ticket for next year.

The Christians at Reading were out in full force again, although this year they were sadly not giving out free drinks meaning I had to fork out for my own soft drinks. The board just outside of the festival had a new question: 'Why Did Jesus Die?' However, it was a good source of amusement while walking to the pub for an extortiontely priced breakfast. Some of the more memorable answers were:

• He was a Crystal Palace fan
• Suicide
• Attention
• The Wizard Theory: To prove he was the greatest wizard of all time

My personal favourite was the wizard answer, although I think he failed in his quest - at least Gandalf took a Balrog out with him. Sadly I couldn't take any photos, my old camera has sand in it from my last trip to Whitby and I wasn't able to fix it.

Sunday saw the return of last year's question (If you had one question to ask God what would it be) although most of the answers were too long to glance at while passing by. The only one I saw was 'Who's your Dad?'

If the Christian's aim was for festival goers to take the piss out of them, then they achieved their goal. Or maybe they just enjoy wasting their bank holiday weekend.

Another group of Christians were from the New Testament Church of God, and they were giving out plastic bags with leaflets in them. These Christians obviously don't want to save the planet, the last time I checked you could give out a leaflet without using a bag. It did come to one good use, allowing me to sneak a bottle of vodka into the festival! The leaflet contained a book with 'encouraging words every day', although it's main aim was to encourage you to give them money to keep open their prayer hotline. It was called the Word For Today, but only £13 a month would allow the distribution of 'Word 4U 2Day' to youth groups - because we all know that text speak is just the way to indoctrinate the young people of today.

Finally there was a guy giving a talk outside Waitrose, which from what I could gather whilst walking past was about there being more to life than making money. I would say there is more to life than standing outside a supermarket preaching at people who are there to buy vodka and crates of beer.

The God Squad at Reading Festival

I'm off to Reading Festival today, hoping for no rain but the weather's not looking great outside! Looking forward to drinking in a field with my mates, and listening to some bands (but gutted about the AFI/Radiohead clash!)

Last year at the festival I was surprised to see the Christians out in force. I may not have noticed it in previous years, although perhaps with the increasing Muslim population and the God Delusion release they're getting worried. I wasn't at the 2007 festival so they may have been there that year.

Just outside the festival gates there were a group of young Christians standing next to a large pinboard, with a notice saying 'If you had just one question to ask God, what would it be?' They were handing out post-its for people to respond. I have no idea what they are trying to achieve, a festival is one of the last places I would try to find converts. Even if someone had a revelation and decided to give their life to Jesus, they would probably forget about it by the next morning.

There was also a Christian presence further into the town centre. Outside churches there were tables with free soft drinks on them. This was happening at least two churches. I wonder if their congregation realise the collection money was being spent on giving out drinks to the drunk/stoned people wandering into town for more alcohol.

I guess I find it strange to see this in England, it's the kind of thing I would expect to see in America. Maybe the Christians in this country are becoming increasingly evangelised, and joining these churches rather than the good old CoE.

Insects in the Peaks

On Sunday I visited the Peak District with a couple of friends and my new camera! The walk was very easy, we only had to walk up one small hill (I'm impressed my friend found a route in the Peaks that didn't have many uphill sections!). The photos below are the insects we found, and my attempts at identification!

Heather fly (Bibio pomonae) - These flies were all around the heather, and it was pretty horrible because they kept flying onto us. There were thousands of them, and we spent half the walk swatting them out of our faces. I'm not sure if it was mating season or if the flies just mate all year round/throughout the summer, but many were on the floor copulating.



Cordulegaster boltonii: A dragonfly we saw in a small pond at the start of the walk.



Peacock butterfly (Inachis io): Bad photo on my part, but it flew away before I could take another one. Really beautiful. Gatekeeper butterfly (Pyronia tithonus): I think this is a male because of the brown markings in the middle of the top wing (I'm sure theres a technical name but never mind). Females don't have this. The internet says this is because the markings are scent glands, which may or may not be true.

Lastly, something which isn't an insect but cute!

A 'Christian' child in the Times

Richard Dawkins is well known for telling us we shouldn't call children Christian, Jewish or Muslim, in the same way that we don't name them by the political views of their parents. The other day I had been wondering how much of an issue this was, and whether our daily newspapers really do this on a regular basis. Upon reading the Times today it therefore jumped out at me when it was mentioned (and to be honest, I was expecting to see an example in the Daily Mail, which I also skimmed today, rather than the Times).

The article was about a Islamic based comic, called the 99s, which is about superheroes who each have one of the 99 characteristics of Allah (although apparantly there will never be 99 superheroes as it is forbidden to portray all of Allah's powers). It then said 'Its mission: to insil old-fashioned Islamic values in Christian, Jewish and atheist children'. I don't have any problem with the magazine itself, I actually think its quite a nice idea since according to the article it was originally made to give children in Islamic countries better role models than Saddam Hussein. Disagreeing with the comic would mean I'd also have to say Narnia and His Dark Materials should not be read by children.

Instead, I was surprised to see the labelling of childrenin print, it's the first time since reading the God Delusion that I've actually noticed this happening. I fully agree with Dawkins that children should not be labelled with the religion of their parents, and that also goes with labelling a child an atheist.