<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel>
    <title>Nature Network - science and religion</title>
    <description>The latest taggings for science and religion</description>
    <link>http://network.nature.com/announcements</link>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <ttl>40</ttl>
    <item>
      <title>Theodore Brown</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Theodore Brown - ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A-Tone-ment?</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Lee Turnpenny - A re-emphasis on the common good has been progressed with fair points made by Cath Ennis on the "analogy":http://network.nature.com/blogs/user/ennis/2008/03/31/ashtrays-and-atheists between unwanted cigarette smoke and objectionable religious and atheist pontification. Taking this further into a discussion on the relative benefits/costs to]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>On talking shite!</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Lee Turnpenny - _This post originally contained retaliatory comments pertaining to a dispute that arose from a difference of opinion in this blog. However, as the matter has been resolved, and in response to an act of graciousness, I have happily edited to]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Some science and religion stuff &#8211; and why not?</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Lee Turnpenny - Science and religion are often perceived to exist in a permanent state of conflict. This is not actually the case: many scientists are religious, and religion as primary vocation would seem to represent no impediment to scientific advance (the fundamentals]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>If it looks like a beaver...</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Lee Turnpenny - That oracle Stephen Fry never fails to inform and amuse. The ‘B’ series of _QI_ is currently being re-run, and last Friday, one of the subjects was the _beaver_. And, it turns out – get this, if you’re as unaware]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Secularism in crisis?</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Lee Turnpenny - A year ago, my colleague, Michael Carroll, and I wrote to Alan Johnson MP, then Secretary of State for Education and Skills at the DfES, expressing our concern about the activities of the Christian organisation, ‘Truth in Science’, and its]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>On temporality</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Lee Turnpenny - I’ve just spent a week in Florence; I’m not telling you this to suggest an itinerary of things to see, should you go, or to check off against your own experience. What I might appreciate and find of interest may]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A mix of physics, religion and, now, $2.2 million in grant money</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Corie Lok - A new Cambridge-based nonprofit, "Foundational Questions Institute":http://www.fqxi.org/index.html, today announced its first set of "grants":http://www.fqxi.org/awardees.html, totaling $2.2 million, to physicists in the US, Canada and Europe (including five from MIT, Tufts, Harvard and UMass) to study, as its name implies, the]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The warrior vs the wimp: the never-ending battle between science and religion</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Corie Lok - E.O Wilson, the venerable Harvard evolutionary biologist, award-winning author, and defender of biodiversity, has decided to dive into the debate of science vs. religion. And he’s critical of the debate. Earlier this evening in Harvard Square, he was plugging his]]>
      </description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
