Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)

Comments by monoape


1. Scientists Know Better Than You--Even When They're Wrong

Comment #178171 by monoape on May 10, 2008 at 5:01 pm

Don_quix: "I think a significant number of scientists, especially climatologists, are not entirely sure that climate change is 100% due to humans"

100%? Never. Too many variables. However, the vast majority (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change) are certain that anthropogenic climate change is *reality*, and if we don't change our behaviour soon there will be millions of people struggling for survival - not to mention the mass species extinction that is happening *now*. Fortunately, for most of us on this website, it'll be the poor people around the middle of the planet who die before us.

Hopefully the irony of the statement, "a significant number of scientists"*, provided without any evidence, is not lost on this thread.

P.S. I'm disappointed that I'm the first to 'jump' on this. This is an issue at least as pressing as religious idiocy. The interweb is full of people denying the reality of anthropogenic climate change, using the same arguments as creationists: "many scientists disagree", "liberal conspiracy", "big science", "there's no evidence". I implore others to take interest and participation in this conversation - http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=climate change

* To pre-empt the usual link to that 'significant number' of scientists - http://www.desmogblog.com/heartland-still-misrepresenting-500-scientists-as-co-authors-of-denial-paper

2. Richard Dawkins on The Alan Colmes Show

Comment #143933 by monoape on March 14, 2008 at 4:38 pm

DIRTYDUNNZ, there's a key on your keyboard that says 'Caps Lock'. Touch it once. ;)

Great interview. Good interviewer. Wonderfully confused callers. Keep it up, Richard. Every one of us needs to call out this ignorance and you're providing an inspirational example.

3. Deadly Sins 101

Comment #143063 by monoape on March 13, 2008 at 12:01 pm

It's a fiendishly brilliant scheme of the religious - heap a few more sins on the faithful so that they need to come in more often to be de-sinned ... and while they're on their knees, begging forgiveness from Chief Sky Fairy, pass the ol' collection plate around.

The HRCC'll soon have that $660 million settlement payout for paedophile priests recouped....

4. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #128073 by monoape on February 16, 2008 at 3:15 am

Silly, silly person.

For those who missed it first time around, Madeline demonstrates her deeply confused and lazy thinking at http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/madeleine_bunting/2007/09/the_smallest_signs_of_retreat.html. As with this 'debate', total lack of evidence or reality doesn't stop her holding strong 'beliefs'.

"The thing I really dislike about religion is that it makes otherwise intelligent and articulate people do and say stupid things". - Christopher Hitchens

5. The New Atheist Movement

Comment #123191 by monoape on February 6, 2008 at 3:04 pm

You gotta love the opening. No longer is it just really clever people, hiding in dark, evil science centres who are atheists - the unwashed masses are also at it. Hilarious.

One can only hope this isn't the usual Xtian, 'Chicken Little' hysteria and that atheism really "is on the march". However, 75% of students losing their faith? That smells a little like FUD. Where did they get such an accurate measure?

If it is FUD, and they're hoping to scare all the good Jesus Gang to act, it could have the opposite effect and get them all *thinking* about why so many people who are "gettin' the lurnin' of that evil knowledge" are leaving their death cult in droves.

6. Pope says some science shatters human dignity

Comment #120346 by monoape on February 1, 2008 at 1:52 pm

What is "human dignity"?


And is it more important or relevant than the dignity of any other animal on the planet. Of course, there's a sliding scale, but the primates, and animals such as dogs, dolphins, etc. demonstrate all the attributes we hold dear - empathy, group welfare, family bonding, loyalty.

No doubt someone has voiced the concern before, but why does the Holy Roman Catholic Church require hundreds of millions of $ in property, fine art and gold-plated accoutrements? Does the xtian god move those with material wealth to the head of the queue?

7. Are Darwin's Theories Fact or Faith Issues?

Comment #120341 by monoape on February 1, 2008 at 1:40 pm

... and one rather lovely result of the debate is that the 'cdesign proponentsists' at Ucommon Descent (aka 'Uncommonly Stupid') deleted a post where all their loyal followers agreed that Meyers wiped the floor with Simmons - http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/dr-geoff-simmons-vs-pz-myers-debate-link-to-listen-to-it/

8. Sentenced to death: Afghan who dared to read about women's rights

Comment #119048 by monoape on January 31, 2008 at 9:29 am

A vile situation, no doubt. My signature added.

P.S. I roundly condemn the murderous ranting of 'agn' at the beginning of these comments, and the subsequent defence of them by 'A'. Barbaric blood-letting is not solved by more of the same. This website is, usually, a refuge from the irrational, murderous, neocon half-wits that inhabit a lot of the web - I hope it stays that way. I would have expected more condemnation from the regulars here.

A:
You may not care what these people do, but many of us do care.


Again, I'm surprised more regulars didn't jump all over this pathetic straw man....

9. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #117456 by monoape on January 28, 2008 at 9:48 pm

I posted the following at http://voxday.blogspot.com/ (look for 'TIA reviews and interview' and then click 'Comments' below it to add your own):

From "'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers" (http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59905):

"... Dawkins's stupid assertion that a religious upbringing is worse than sexual child abuse"

Professor Dawkins has never said any such thing. He had said that labelling a child 'Christian', 'Muslim', etc. is "a form of abuse".

"Dawkins thinks humanity should follow Darwin just long enough to cast off Jesus Christ, then ditch Darwin in favor of following Richard Dawkins' opinion on life, the universe and everything"

A ludicrous assertion without a shred of evidence to back it up.

So, rather than using "reason, science and historical documentation" to argue "the atheists into an inescapable corner", you've employed blatant and crude straw men, ad hominem and hysterical, baseless assertions? Doesn't bode well for the quality of the rest of the book, does it?

"... atheism will never be a widespread phenomenon"

Someone better 'phone Sweden and let them know - up to ~80% of Swedes profess no belief in gods, fairies, etc. And Sweden, by many measures, is one of the healthiest, happiest countries on the planet. Similar stats apply to other 'godless' countries, such as Norway, Japan. And in every developed country on the planet, the incidence of disbelief is increasing (ignoring the influx of Muslims to Europe, which is artificially inflating the percentage of religious whackos there). Facts. Real inconvenient at times. No wonder you religious apologists are squawking and flapping so loudly at the moment!

The 'irrational' atheists will look forward to dismantling the rest of the book when it becomes available for download.

10. Launch of 'Atheists in Foxholes' Book Anthology

Comment #116122 by monoape on January 25, 2008 at 2:45 pm

Ian Bamlett: "I am conflicted about this. ... as someone who sees arbitrary allegience to a flag as not much better that arbitrary allegience to a God"

I recently emigrated to Australia (didn't work out - now back in England) and attended Australia Day. I didn't get it. We're great because we're Australian? Explain that to me again. Yeah, OK, it's a simple celebration of European settlement on the Australian continent. Isn't *that* more a cause for head hanging? The locals didn't do too well as a result of European invasion, if I understand correctly....

Anything that emphasises nationality (which always equates to ethnicity, colour of skin, colour of religion, even dialect, etc.) can only lead to segregation. It's a no brainer IMVHO.

11. A War On Science

Comment #105512 by monoape on December 31, 2007 at 7:34 pm

Not saying I disagree, but one could tell the way the editorial team leans on this program by the 'duelling banjos' played after Dubya's sound bite. Ding-a-ding-ding-ding---ding-dingding.

12. Pope's exorcist squads will wage war on Satan

Comment #104853 by monoape on December 29, 2007 at 5:49 pm

the Telegraph version ... addendum at the end where an RC bishop has claimed that some teenagers want to be abused


Puts a new spin on "she was asking for it, m'lord" ... now we have "The choir boy was asking for it via demoninc possession, m'lord".

You can't make this stuff up.

13. Pope's exorcist squads will wage war on Satan

Comment #104721 by monoape on December 29, 2007 at 8:29 am

Authenticity of this story aside, I really wish any information originating at The Daily Mail was banned from this website.

For those outside the UK, this paper is a jingoistic, hypocritical and hysterical waste of perfectly good trees. It's a definition of narrow-minded England. Anything that suggests the downfall of society is jumped on with glee and milked for all it's worth.

Headlines that you can expect to see in The Daily Mail:

"Muslims call for female cats and dogs to wear hijab"
"Teenage mothers given thousands of £s to buy crack"
"Drunken 8 years old hold city hostage"
"Pensioners used as fertiliser"

That sort of a thing. I feel like showering any time I read it.

P.S. Good (!) to hear I'm not the only one who suffers from being logged out every couple of minutes. Why is this happening? Why has it been happening for so long? Fix it already. :/

14. 2007, a bad year for God squadders

Comment #101743 by monoape on December 20, 2007 at 9:17 pm

Seizing on the old Jesuit principle of getting them while their young, ...


'Their'? Don't think so. Try 'they're'. This coming from "Gerard Baker is United States Editor and an Assistant Editor of The Times." lmao.

That God would choose to come among us in such a way is so strange, so inexplicable, so unbelievable, it compels us to believe.


Bollocks. It might compel someone devoid of all critical reasoning, but the rest of us spot the 'unbelievable' component as quite a large clue.

This thread now wins the "most use of the word 'bollocks' among the first 41 comments" prize. ;)

15. A universe that follows 'laws' implies a 'law giver'

Comment #98722 by monoape on December 14, 2007 at 6:23 am

The articles section of this website is not the correct platform for 'debating points'. The forum would be a much better location - those interested can monitor and participate.

Please stop cluttering up the articles section.

16. How can the Earth be so perfectly suited for life by coincidence?

Comment #98721 by monoape on December 14, 2007 at 6:22 am

Agreed, USA_Limey - the articles section of this website is not the correct platform for 'debating points'. The forum would be a much better location - those interested can monitor and participate.

Please stop cluttering up the articles section.

17. Controversial Anti-Muslim Dutch Film Adds to Already Simmering Tensions

Comment #97708 by monoape on December 12, 2007 at 2:37 pm

Whether or not this man is a racist, his stated intention of producing a film that challenges intolerant and violent beliefs and actions should be applauded and encouraged. The delusional need more ridicule and condemnation heaped on them - not less - especially the violent Islamic faction.

If anyone wishes to live in a society that has, at its foundation, the right of free speech without fear of reprisal, then they must accept that right - whether or not they like where that free speech is directed.

If (when!) the Rage Boys start throwing petrol bombs or threatening violent retribution in response to his film, they should be dealt with by the same standards that the rest of us live by.

18. Bill O'Reilly Interviews Lori Lipman Brown

Comment #95628 by monoape on December 8, 2007 at 8:57 pm

O'Reilly - an odious, ignorant, arrogant little fuckwit.

In his opening, he exposes his homophobia and conflates (his evident view of) 'perverted' gay marriage with atheism.

That aside [breathing deeply], does anyone else see the similarity between Romney and Max Headroom (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Z-Ud8rbt4Q)?

19. The Pagan Christ

Comment #95175 by monoape on December 7, 2007 at 2:00 pm

I could name many Christians who came to faith later in life, and whose backgound and upbringing was entirely secular.


I would love to see *that* list. The only list I have is in the opposite direction. The only method the religious has, in my experience, is to indoctrinate and terrify children in to believing in the 'boogey man'.

Once we are armed with science, experience, reason and rational thought, we most often become immune to the superstitious nonsense peddled by the 'god gang'. And that is the reason why many of the religious wail when evolution, historical fact and rational thinking are put in front of children.

Your go.

20. The Pagan Christ

Comment #95170 by monoape on December 7, 2007 at 1:42 pm

ADH, you've given the response I expected: completely missing the point.

What does it prove? It proves that without indoctrination, there would be no Christianity. There would be no Islam or Judaism. Without promises of salvation or damnation, there would be no reason to carry on with the fairytale.

I'm not at all surprised at the number of people who have converted from Islam to Christianity. In comparison, it's a lovely cult, tempered as it has been by a few hundred years of European secular watering down.

Nevertheless it's still a cult. Full of noxious beliefs and superstitions.

the number of Christian believers there are in Iran, Iraq, Indonesia, India and China, not to mention Africa ... is vastly greater (in percentage terms) than the number of Christians in the UK


What stands out amongst this list of countries and the disparity of religious belief? Education? Welfare? 'Modern civilisation'? You've produced a great demonstration of where and how superstitious, ignorant belief flourishes. We need just look at some international measures of societal health (http://www.skeptic.com/the_magazine/featured_articles/v12n03_are_religious_societies_healthier.html) to see correlation between religious belief and societal dysfunction.

I look forward to the next 'round of ammunition' that you hand me.

21. The Pagan Christ

Comment #95151 by monoape on December 7, 2007 at 1:03 pm

Damn. Posted earlier but lost on this flaky website. [sigh]

Elsewhere on the interweb I posed this question to the 'other side':

Finally, a question for the Jeebus Gang: did it ever occur to you that the god you believe in is almost always dependent on when and where you were born? It has nothing to do with fact and validity. If you'd been born in Iran, you'd be on your little carpet 5 times a day, bobbing up and down to Mecca. If you'd been born in Denmark 2000 years ago, you would've been damn sure Odin and Valhalla was The Real Deal.


Sincerely interested in a response. ADH? djspideyspinster? et al?

22. The Pagan Christ

Comment #95072 by monoape on December 7, 2007 at 9:44 am

Oh, and shame about those Aboriginal Austrailians who had to wait another 1,700 years for the 'good news'


Actually USA_Limey, if we accept that the 'Aussie locals' arrived on the continent ~45,000 years ago, they had to wait (along with the rest of us) a feckin' long time before they received the 'good news' and became aware of their status as sinners in need of redemption! And there they were, catching fish, fornicating and chillin' out, with no knowledge that Yahweh wasn't happy with them. Lucky they were saved by those righteous Christians (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stolen_Generation). [sigh]

23. The Pagan Christ

Comment #95064 by monoape on December 7, 2007 at 9:31 am

As we have a couple of the 'opposing team' in this thread, perhaps they would like to respond to a question I posed on another forum recently (I'm assuming that you subscribe to the Christian overseer):

Finally, a question for the Jeebus Gang: did it ever occur to you that the god you believe in is almost always dependent on when and where you were born? It has nothing to do with fact and validity. If you'd been born in Iran, you'd be on your little carpet 5 times a day, bobbing up and down to Mecca. If you'd been born in Denmark 2000 years ago, you'd been damn sure Odin and Valhalla was The Real Deal.


If anyone has a few minutes to kill, taken from http://forums.courier-journal.com/viewtopic.php?t=86665

24. The Pagan Christ

Comment #95061 by monoape on December 7, 2007 at 9:18 am

I remember finishing the last sentence in this exhaustive criticism of Christianity and feeling the weight of over 30 years of doubt worry, and fearful study being lifted off of me and an amazing change in my perspective on life, love and the world around me.


I find that words written by those who have de-programmed themselves some of the most poignant and compelling. Bravo, bamafreethinker.

I'm not going to let you get away with this monoape.


[goggle-eyed look] I'm not, or attempting to, 'get away' with anything! I'm purely putting forward a very commonly held assessment of the authenticity of the claimed 'Jesus paragrpahs' in Josephus' writings.

You should know bay now that Wikipedia articles have to be taken with a barrel or two of salt. I'm sure that if I had used Wikipedia to support any of my points you would have quite ightly told me the same.


No one is claiming Wikipedia to be a 'gospel' of information, it's simply a well-organised, peer-edited resource. There is certainly inaccuracy and disinformation, but that doesn't mean you can dismiss it all out of hand. Your reaction smacks of some form of fallacious argument (not sure which variety - perhaps someone could help me?).

No, if you had referenced Wikipedia I would have addressed the content and not the source.

Oh, and shame about those Aboriginal Austrailians who had to wait another 1,700 years for the 'good news'

What bollocks.


Nice one, centurion.

25. The Pagan Christ

Comment #95032 by monoape on December 7, 2007 at 7:45 am

@ djspideyspinster - I scanned most of the first link you provided and found it a rather meandering, waffly sermon that provides little in the way of fact or reasonable argument. However, I picked out one piece of clear language:

"Highly reliable sources. There are two of these: Tacitus and Josephus."

I would suggest anyone who considers Josephus to be a 'highly reliable' extra-biblical source of evidence for Jesus' existence to read a little further, perhaps starting with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus#Testimonium_Flavianum. I recall someone describing the paragraphs describing Jesus as though "someone had inserted a chewing gum advert in to a book written by Chaucer".

Both articles appear to me to be more of the "I know Jesus is the son of (a) god, I just need to find the evidence" variety.

26. The Pagan Christ

Comment #95017 by monoape on December 7, 2007 at 7:14 am

Thanks, Murray - I should've spotted the URL (www.cbc.ca) to know it was Canadian. Good to hear that it had a prime time airing.

Think I'll add this book to my reading list.

27. Colouring book warns kids of pedophile priests

Comment #94994 by monoape on December 7, 2007 at 6:15 am

As I commented elsewhere on the interweb a while ago: "If a priest doesn't have his hand in your wallet, it's in your child's underwear" (yes, I was baiting a Jeebus Clapper ;)).

28. The Pagan Christ

Comment #94991 by monoape on December 7, 2007 at 6:01 am

For those of us outside the USA: the TV channels / times - are they 'mainstream / primetime' viewing?

29. Daniel Dennett Debates Dinesh D'Souza

Comment #93315 by monoape on December 2, 2007 at 4:40 pm

First, Dinesh is a weasley, odious, little toad. OK, done with the ad hom.

Second, I really wish someone would nail the religious when they start ranting on about Hitler's atheism, as DD did here. I commented on http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article2977564.ece (waiting for my comment to appear) and it applies equally here:

Over and over, truly ad nauseum, the religious try to pin the atheist label on Hitler. Let's take a few quotes from the great man himself:

"I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so."

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."

"My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter."

"... it is Christians and not international atheists who now stand at the head of Germany."

"This human world of ours would be inconceivable without the practical existence of a religious belief."

If it looks like pig, smells like pig, squeals like pig and tastes like pig, it's most likely not a chicken.

I can understand the Jeebus Clappers not wanting Herr Hitler in their gang, but tough - you've got him. Repeatedly saying it's not true does not make it so ... just as repeatedly saying "there is a god" does not make it true.

30. Poll finds more Americans believe in devil than Darwin

Comment #92645 by monoape on December 1, 2007 at 3:03 am

None of that would have played a part in this poll, since it was conducted online in questionairre format. You might read into it before dismissing it like that.


I didn't read the source. Regardless, polls are open to a multitude of variables that affect accuracy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_poll#Potential_for_inaccuracy). Where did they find the 2455 respondents? Did they self-select (if so, we know how the religious love to share their stupidity faith)? How many who were asked refused to answer? Perhaps those who refused were 'closet atheists'? That's not an outlandish possibility given the stigma associated with being a 'devil-worshipping atheist' in the USA.

Also, my quick post last night was borne of incredulity - surely there can't be *that* many stupid people in a developed society?! Hope springs eternal....

Watts_Pete:

Whenever you see that Twain twaddle you know you are listening to a simian brain embarassed about the facts that they have just been presented with, and can think of no other riposte.


http://richarddawkins.net/userComments,page1,27258

So far, out of 5 comments, we've got: 1 rambling and incoherent insult (do you feel a sense of achievement and increased manhood in going out of your way to insult someone?); 2 pedantic, nit-picking-on-typos (while demonstrating an inability to spell ('embarassed' has 2 Rs), do capitalisation or form proper sentences.); 1 rambling-bordering-on-racist post; and 1 really rather slimy invite to a female.

The amateur psychologist in me thinks you may have some self-esteem issues.

Or maybe you're just a twat?

31. Poll finds more Americans believe in devil than Darwin

Comment #92381 by monoape on November 30, 2007 at 11:46 am

Doesn't the phrasing or 'tone' of a question contribute to the answer received?

Imagine asking "do you believe in a literal hell?" in a sincere-eye-contact-very-concerned-look way, as opposed to the you-cannot-possibly-think-that's-a-possibility-wide-eyed-smirking way.

Lies. Damned lies. Statistics.

32. Sir David Attenborough on God

Comment #86847 by monoape on November 10, 2007 at 9:52 am

You cannot define god in your own way (man on a cloud, etc.)


My definition of a god was one of flippant brevity and a (weak) attempt at humour.

The never-ending torment of the atheist includes the 'slippery bar of soap' that deists / theists are ... "that's not my god / religion / Jesus / Mohammed you're describing, mine is much more nuanced and defies labelling".

To have an argument one must take a position. No? Define your god and we can then move forward ... until then I can only work with my definition of (one of the hundreds of) god(s) that have been concocted by humans.

Yes, we all develop a 'personal reality' - "I'm witty, handsome and a sublime driver", but those are purely subjective (apart from the driving thing, based on the shiny go karting trophy on my shelf). The assertion that you *know* there is a god that 'did it all' and will look after you when you croke, is baseless. It's wishful thinking (assuming one doesn't subscribe to Hitchen's view of the 'celestial North Korea'). It's pure delusion. And my main point was that if there's a sniff of delusion in someone, I have no way of telling how far that delusion spreads.

Off to drink Guinness now. Adieu.

33. Sir David Attenborough on God

Comment #86833 by monoape on November 10, 2007 at 9:08 am

As the [expletive] forum is down *yet again*:

I'm starting a project that will hopefully do a little more than my ranting on these pages:

http://www.theatheistanswer.info/

My hope / intention / plan is that it's a community-driven website that distills all the arguments that we encounter and refute ad nauseum. Anyone can contribute, although if we get too many God Botherers spoiling things I'll need to close down editing privileges. There are many very accomplished writers on RD.net - I hope most of you will help build the site with me.

It's only a few hours old, and the design and content are not in place. I'll work on that in the coming days.

If you'd like to get involved, please register and start editing the home page with your ideas (I've scribbled down a few things that occurred to me).

34. Sir David Attenborough on God

Comment #86829 by monoape on November 10, 2007 at 8:44 am

"Not all religious people are Bush or Bin Laden, it is a strawman."

There is no strawman.

If you believe, without any evidence, that there is a bloke sat on a cloud, who clicked his fingers, created the cosmos and takes a keen interest in our sex lives and headwear, you are deluded. By my definition and, I would imagine, every vaguely cognisant person on the planet. There's no equivocation, no wriggle room available.

Bush, Bin Laden, Blair, Brown (suspicious pattern there) et al supposedly believe this. They are ape shit delusional in my book. Don't like 'em, don't trust 'em. And it's a testament to how young the human species is that millions of people swallow the story without contest.

I'm absolutely certain there are some genuinely nice people who have succumbed to the religious spell. However, there 'niceness' is borne of society reigning in the madness of religious belief. 500 years ago we'd all be happy to wander down to the village green and burn the witch (aka lonely, old spinster who someone accused of putting a hex on the chickens that all mysteriously keeled over one day) .. and it wasn't religion that woke up to that atrocity, it was rational, humane thought.

[slap] Wake up.

35. Sir David Attenborough on God

Comment #86754 by monoape on November 10, 2007 at 4:35 am

Just because someone is religious it doesn't follow that (s)he cannot see there is a boundary between the private and the public. In my country Canada quite a few Catholic politicians voted for same sex marriage, so there you go. We don't need a reverse Inquisition.


If someone is delusional, and anyone who answers "yes" to "do you believe in (a) god", fits that shoe for me. So, once I've established that they are delusional, I don't know where that delusion ends. Gordon Brown, Blair, Dubya, Bin Laden - all delusional. Do they hear voices that tell them what to do? I don't know and I don't trust them to tell me the truth. If they can 'bake the mental pretzel' of religion in their heads, what else is possible?

@Elcristoph - http://gretachristina.typepad.com/greta_christinas_weblog/2007/10/atheists-and-an.html

And I'm fucking angry as well.

@ericcolumba - sc-c-c-cary.

... another guest speaker clutching his bible and proclaiming that he believed in it 100%.


If you're not able to do it in front of the kids, would you consider challenging any similar speakers privately with a recent favourite of mine: http://www.nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/judges/judges15.htm.

Who can read that and believe any part of the fairytale is true? Three hundred innocent animals were tortured, people were murdered by beating and by fire ... and what was the reason? Let's not even start on the logistics of finding and catching 300 foxes!

36. Sir David Attenborough on God

Comment #86746 by monoape on November 10, 2007 at 3:49 am

Sorry to pick on you, Matt7895, but: "... he doesn't have to speak out against ID because it holds no sway in the UK whatsoever"

"City Academies are the government's Big Idea for education ... Of the 46 academies opened by October 2006, 14 – just under a third of the total – will be entirely in the control of Christian organisations or evangelical Christians."

Sir Peter Vardy [literal biblist / creationist], whose wealth comes from ... the second-hand car business he inherited from his father, put up £2 million for each of his three academies, which have cost the taxpayer many times that amount. It is you and I who pay the bills.


http://newhumanist.org.uk/1477

Don't know about you, but that scares the bejeebus out of me, not to mention that I'm abjectly pissed off that *I* am paying for children to be lied to. And our government is not listening: http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page12064.asp

Many parents who are not members of a particular faith value the structured environment provided by schools with a religious character.


And many parents think it's acceptable to feed their children microwave pizzas 7 days of the week. It still doesn't make it right.

They may be delusional, but they ain't stoopid. "Slowly, slowly, catchy monkey" springs to mind.

37. Sir David Attenborough on God

Comment #86732 by monoape on November 10, 2007 at 3:19 am

@Matt7895: "... our political parties are all secular".

Q: "Do you believe in God?"
A: "Yes I do" (Gordon Brown, our unelected PM)

We may not suffer the religious piffle that the US of A has to put up with, but let's not get complacent ... the bloke running the country is delusional. And his belief in The Big Sky Fairy is not going to stop our taxes getting spent on subsiding religious organisations or funding 'faith' schools to indoctrinate the next generation.

38. Sir David Attenborough on God

Comment #86725 by monoape on November 10, 2007 at 3:00 am

Isn't it encouraging that we have most of the intelligent, thoughtful and kind people on our side?

And they want us to believe a "just and merciful god" thought http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/841401.stm was a good idea?

If that concept weren't so appalling, it'd be funny. grrr.

39. Losing faith in Quebec

Comment #86430 by monoape on November 9, 2007 at 7:58 am

Sorry, Mon Ami Giskard - "... of course, all of the girls have lovely bottoms". Hopefully that makes amends. If not:


Father Ted: Maybe he's agoraphobic.
Father Dougal: Jack? Scared of fighting? I don't think so, Ted!


For those sat on the 'bewildered side of the theatre': Father Ted ... the greatest comedy ever created (although I have no proof for that assertion [side-to-side eye movements, wary in the company of atheists ... damn your fact-and-reality-based thinking. It's just true. OK?]).

40. Losing faith in Quebec

Comment #86424 by monoape on November 9, 2007 at 7:28 am

Talking of 'feck', how does one 'quote' on this fecking site. Testing:

blasphemy ... a victimless crime

blasphemy ... a victimless crime


blasphemy ... a victimless crime

blasphemy ... a victimless crime


A ha - 'preview' showed me the light. Oh, glory be. '< blockquote >' (without spaces) for those in the dark.

In Sweden we have had classes like this for a long time.


Can I come and live with you? :) Along with Norway (http://russellsteapot.com/comics/2007/Dra-Til-Helvete.html), I think you 'Vikings' are ahead of the curve (as usual - eco, sex, education?).

41. Losing faith in Quebec

Comment #86417 by monoape on November 9, 2007 at 7:17 am

[quote]That would be an ecumenical question.[/quote]

Drink. Feck. Arse. Gerls.

42. Debate between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox

Comment #86395 by monoape on November 9, 2007 at 6:17 am

Is this a record for comments?

@AppliedMootist - wonderful penmanship.

Lennox is baking mental pretzels. Nuff said.

43. On Being Not Muslim Enough

Comment #86365 by monoape on November 9, 2007 at 4:35 am

What irate_atheist said.

She's just another 'a la carte' theist / deist / 'totally confused and an Olympian of cognitive dissonance', picking the bits she likes.

On a positive note, she is making some encouraging noises ... but must try harder.

Next.

44. Losing faith in Quebec

Comment #86361 by monoape on November 9, 2007 at 4:19 am

[quote]I got more lessons in being good that I carried through life from Luke Skywalker and Superman ... [/quote]

Very good, Diacanu. I think the same may be true here.

P.S. Stayed in a hotel recently and made the mistake of flicking through The Good Book and came across: http://www.nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/judges/judges15.htm.

Who can read that and believe any part of the fairytale is true? Three hundred innocent animals were tortured, people were murdered by beating and by fire ... and what was the reason?

45. Losing faith in Quebec

Comment #86357 by monoape on November 9, 2007 at 4:02 am

Wonderful.

This (sort of thing) is where it starts.

Hopefully they'll include The Flying Spaghetti Monster.

46. Believe it or not, courtesy counts

Comment #84044 by monoape on November 1, 2007 at 4:17 am

Thanks, Quetzalcoatl - I'll try and work out why that is (he says, having just logged back in a-feckin-gain to post this :)).

47. Believe it or not, courtesy counts

Comment #84038 by monoape on November 1, 2007 at 3:47 am

Respect is earned, not demanded. And it certainly isn't won by pleading "stop being mean to our fairytales".

Or: I have no respect for 'The Infallible Leprechaun Book of Rainbows', even though a bloke called Seamus O'Flarity wants me to. Should I comply? I think not.

P.S. Is it just me or do other people need to log in every single bloody time you want to leave a comment?

48. Are the 'New Atheists' avoiding the 'real arguments'?

Comment #83914 by monoape on October 31, 2007 at 4:10 pm

Marvellous. If only we could get every theist to read this out aloud repeatedly until each argument was seared in to their conscious as much as the religious indoctrination they suffered as children.

Talking of "new atheists" (comment #7), I came across a new one (for me): "world-class "atheists"" (sic - gawd knows why the 'atheists' got quoted) - see http://www.townhall.com/columnists/JanetMLaRue/2007/10/30/faithful_atheists ... the comments are a riot, as well.

Comment #16 - Yes, I could grow to like the label 'New Atheist' ... especially if it consigns 'Brights' to the dustbin of well-intentioned-but-really-rather-crap-ideas (which gave me cause to wince when I saw a large banner of it behind the lectern in the recent AAI videos).

Who knows, 'New Atheism' could attract those who believe that 'old' atheism is nothing more than Satan-worship and orgies in the forest? Hmmm, actually that old-style atheism is sounding tempting as well. Decisions, decisions.

49. Evolution to be taught in SA schools

Comment #82859 by monoape on October 28, 2007 at 3:38 am

Hmmm, this might explain why the one SA person I know got very prickly when I mentioned my admiration and support for Dawkins, Hitchens and Harris. Regrettably I didn't have the courage to pursue the issue and changed the conversation. Maybe next time....

50. Face to faith

Comment #82855 by monoape on October 28, 2007 at 3:28 am

@Macho Nachos - thanks for the excellent post ... you saved me needing to read the drivel. :)

More Pages: 1 2 | Next