No rational case for God = increasingly desperate attacks on atheists

[Cato]

To put all this into context, Gray is building a case and making a specific point about what he calls 'secular fundamentalism' not secularism in general. There is a danger that can be inferred to mean there is a subgroup of secularists who are fundamentalists, I don't think that is what Gray is saying, he is saying we do not recognise fundamentalism, which can occur in any ideology, in secularism and that it is easy to cross the line (as illustrated through his given example of Dawkins' 'meme') without being checked.

Rightly or wrongly I think what Gray is attempting to do is redress the balance of criticism in the overall debate and puncture the bubble of complacency that has led to the misuse of scientific thinking outside its proper context, that can only be healthy, can't it?

I recognize and agree with the concept of secular fundamentalism, but disagree with your assessment of Gray's motivation and use of the concept.

Secular fundamentalism is real and is most often encountered when someone asserts the absolute that there can be nothing we call supernatural to the point where it becomes dogmatic. I think this is a very rare position in that most advocates of science will adhere to scientific principles of hypothesis testing rather than being simply dismissive of particular claims. Take for instance the particular pictures presented in this thread.

The demand of the supernatural proponent is that science test the hypothesis for an event that cannot be replicated. Science is therefore left without some of its most valuable tools in that conditions cannot be controlled, monitored and analyzed in the hope of accepting or rejecting the hypothesis that the photos are of actual ghosts. In steps philosophy armed with the breadth of our collective scientific knowledge to ask the question, "Absent the ability to replicate the event, is it reasonable to conclude that we have a picture of an actual ghost?".

There are many facts that suggest no: a significant percentage of spirit photographs can be shown to be hoaxes, spirit photography was an industry dating back to the American Civil War with well understood methods of 'inserting' departed loved ones into pictures; i.e., the ability to create convincing photos of ghosts is not a new phenomenon, the fact that apparition sightings are exceedingly rare, evidence of sightings even more so, the same routine is used by all claimants of unusual/unexplained entities/events such as chupacabra, the New Jersey Devil, Big Foot, Loch Ness Monster, alien encounters, etc. Don't forget the highly tuned human ability of pattern recognition and ability to discern shapes, particularly that of faces. When our entire body of scientific knowledge and experience is brought to bear on the subject, it is reasonable to conclude there are no such things as ghosts. The handful of unexplained pictures will have to remain thus pending new information which may never be obtained. Those that wish to believe in ghosts based on this thin evidence in are free to do so, but all things considered it's not a very justifiable position.

The above process can hardly be considered 'secular fundamentalism', which I think you will agree to. The charge of secular fundamentalism is usually lobbed in the direction of skeptics when claims of this nature are immediately dismissed without exposition of the underlying thought process.

Now back to Gray. I think our disagreement concerning Gray centers not on the definition of what secular fundamentalism is, but Gray's broad application of the concept. As I attempted to demonstrate above, most people aren't dismissive of the supernatural simply because the claims are supernatural; i.e, dogmatically enforcing a materialistic worldview (secular fundamentalism), but because we have very good reasons not to accept the claim based on what little evidence is provided and supported by sufficient previous consideration.

In my opinion, Gray's desire to equivocate secularism and religion is simply a strategy to keep us all in the same herd in an attempt to validate his ridiculous "plague of people" mantra.

Edit: MM, I just realized I referenced ghost pictures that are in a different thread. Hope this doesn't confuse my argument.