FTBCon 2 round up

For those of you who weren’t able to watch the live panels this weekend, here are all those in which ACA members participated.

Beth Presswood and Martin Wagner joined in the “Artistic Secularism” panel, with Amy Davis Roth, Ryan Consell, Ashley Hamer, and Lauren Lane.

Jen Peeples and Russell Glasser did a parenting panel with Dale McGowan and Elyse Anders.

Russell and his son Ben, a three year veteran of Camp Quest, briefly dropped in on the Camp Quest panel with David Diskin, before it was cut short by technical difficulties.

Russell was in a “Counter-Apologetics” panel, with Justin Schieber of Reasonable Doubts, and Dan Linford.

A few other panels you might enjoy checking out:

There are plenty more, so please check out the full schedule for many other great videos.


  1. houndentenor says

    Thanks for doing this panel. I’m a classically trained singer. Between the very religious and the woo-fanatics, I don’t come across a lot of other atheists in my field. Actually that may not be true. Most of us aren’t out at gigs because it’s such a nightmare to open that can of worms. Actually the woo is more of a problem for me than the religious people. A lot of them are religious in only the most superficial way. The woo people are serious and get really angry if you roll your eyes when they drone on about mercury being retrograde and that’s why their computer crashed or some other nonsense. There’s a lot of woo among artists. There’s no simple explanation for where inspiration comes from and a great deal of what we do and experience is hard to explain. I know why people find it so attractive. But when you promote something that ought to be verifiable but can’t be (homeophathy, for example) then you deserve to be mocked. Sometimes I’m just not up for the fight.

  2. says

    Dan, on the Counter-apologetics panel… for the first bunch of times he said “sophisticated theology”, I laughed. I thought it was supposed to be a joke term, since that’s the only context I’ve heard the phrase.

    Then he kept saying it.

  3. Kao Valin says

    On the question of letting a child drown in a pool of water; anyone can rationalize any action even if its irrational. I can claim anything, even if that claim is false, even if that claim seems rational to me. It is not the sole purview of theists to make irrational choices. Someone who is an anti theist could posit that any choice is both rational and irrational in nature due to the human condition. It is demonizing to posit that a theist would make an irrational choice about the child drowning and the atheist would make a rational choice. It could be called rational to believe that drowning in a pool was darwinian in nature. One could make up any number of rationalizations for trying to save the child and not trying to save the child.

  4. Matt Gerrans says

    I think sophisticated could be the appropriate term. It means pseudo-philosophical theology that is more complicated, intricate, deceptive and misleading than the usual run-of-the-mill theology. It only sounds wrong if you interpret “sophisticated” to mean more learned and rational. I think “sophisticated” implies sophistry, which is what I thought of when I heard the term used; when you consider it that way, it says that this kind of theology is a trickier and perhaps more subtle (at first blush), but is really a fallacious method of reasoning (or, more accurately, failing to reason). I think this is what Dan means by “sophisticated theology,” though I could be wrong. I guess we should ask him.