1. Researchers Discover Remnant of an Ancient 'RNA World'

Comment #213500 by D'Arcy on July 18, 2008 at 1:58 pm

Brilliant stuff! The pursuit of knowledge about how the real world works can only be good. Yes, squinky's right loads and loads of things we don't know yet, but then when I was growing up computers took up whole buildings and had little pieces of card with holes punched in to process data.

If this research has medical implications, then hopefully the patent people can't ration the knowledge.

2. The Return of Religion

Comment #212642 by D'Arcy on July 17, 2008 at 1:43 pm

Auraboy has a brilliant idea:

Now seriously I want a real battle of the bishops game show, where Peter 'The Hammer' takes out his latent homosexual angst on pinko liberal american god-botherers in a ring of combat. Like gladiators in silly frocks. Now if that doesn't bring the faithful flooding in I don't know what will. Lambeth conference? Pah. Lambeth Smackdown! God bringeth the rumble.

The Anglican Olympics! Just think of all the theological tourists it will bring to Lambeth Palace! Events could include the three legged race, for consenting bishops only; bishop v lions as a test of faith; snake handling with extra points for conversing; mental gymnastics; and of of course the marathon where bishops have to discuss theology with each other. The last three remaining awake get the medals! Forget the Open Golf, this could really be riveting viewing!

3. The Return of Religion

Comment #212096 by D'Arcy on July 16, 2008 at 3:41 pm

Philosophers can build palaces with their words, but woe betide anyone that wants to step inside.

Having "scrutonised" the article, the author says something I think is very true:

It is this mystery which brings people back to religion.

Exactly! Religion is nothing more than organised superstition, which in turn is based upon ignorance (mystery) of nature. At least the authors of the Bible and Koran had no way of knowing what we know now, but modern Cambridge dons have no such excuse. To resort to the "uncertainties" of quantum physics, as some sort of evidence for God is pretty pissquick stuff. And he gets paid plenty for his very comfortable lifestyle perptuating superstition.

Grrrrr!

4. Fury at funeral songs ban

Comment #211946 by D'Arcy on July 16, 2008 at 12:12 pm

My family members have been personally promised by me, that if any priest, witch doctor or other mumbo jumbo merchant, is allowed anywhere near my corpse, then my spirit will make its soul purpose to come back and haunt them! For those that want to attend my funeral, instructions have been given that a good dram must be available for all and hopefully plenty of upbeat music.

Too bad about the jazz player, but then the answer obviously lies away from the Catholic bully bhoys.

5. MnIndy interview: Unrepentant science-heathen PZ Myers still intends to prove 'this cracker is nothing'

Comment #211207 by D'Arcy on July 15, 2008 at 3:16 pm

Steve says:

Thanks all for the discussion. It has been useful. I think my mind has nearly been changed. I am definitely wavering.

Bill Donahue says nothing so concilliatory. The attitude that man expresses makes me think that he would happily be the grand inquisitor or the witch finder general.

Respect for the body of Christ? Bollocks to superstition!

6. Taking a Cue From Ants on Evolution of Humans

Comment #211165 by D'Arcy on July 15, 2008 at 2:38 pm

If Marx's ideas are to be confused with economic determinism, ( an ant's gotta do what an ant's gotta do), let's see what the man actually said as regards how humans can influence their own history:

Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past. The tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1852/18th-brumaire/ch01.htm

I agree. Everyone of us can influence history, but only with the materials at hand, unlike Dan Dennett's ant.

7. Ants, terrorism, and the awesome power of memes

Comment #211135 by D'Arcy on July 15, 2008 at 2:16 pm

Despite your incoherence mudmind, evolution is a proven fact.

8. Ants, terrorism, and the awesome power of memes

Comment #211131 by D'Arcy on July 15, 2008 at 2:13 pm

Hell! I thought I was going nuts. I listened to Dennett and then read through all these articulate replies to clearmind, whose original message wasn't to be found on my screen. Clever stuff Josh; at the top of the first post is the "alternate comment thread" to which (searches for Biblical reference), mudmind has been exiled.

If memes are ideas socially passed from one human generation to the next then undoubtedly some can be harmful and others beneficial. Those muslims who hijacked the planes on 9/11 were undoubtedly in the grip of memes more powerful than that of Dennett's ant. But then the human brain is bigger and more powerful.

9. Man Sues Church Over 'God Injury'

Comment #209916 by D'Arcy on July 13, 2008 at 1:59 pm

If God loses this case, who is going to enforce the judgment?

10. Church Cancels Teen Gun Giveaway

Comment #209908 by D'Arcy on July 13, 2008 at 1:46 pm

Christians have always loved firepower. As Jesus Himself said:

"Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man's enemies will be the members of his household. He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for My sake will find it." (Matthew 10:34-39 NASB)

If the last sentence isn't condoning martyrism, I don't know what is.

11. Host Desecration is Old Anti-Semitic Nonsense

Comment #209879 by D'Arcy on July 13, 2008 at 1:13 pm

With a name like D'Arcy, I should be a Catholic, (Irish/French), but I'm not, thanks to my dear father who lost his temper with a bullying priest for telling him that he, (my father), couldn't read anything written by Alexandre Dumas. My father's copy of The Three Musketeers was thrown accross the room by the priest, and my father stormed out saying something like "no bloody priest is going to tell me what I can read!" This all happened before I was born, but the result for this D'Arcy was that he was not subjected to any religious indoctrination. I'm lucky.

Maybe the Christians will realize that science is their best friend, since they are all waiting for Jesus to return, and they have access to Jesus's flesh and blood, science can bring them what they have been waiting for all this time!

Since when did faith need science? Never. If there were ever any evidence at all for God, we would be hearing it shouted form the rooftops and in our dreams. Faith is a leap in the dark. I'm reminded of that crazy Christian 2-3 years ago in ?Kiev who literally climbed into the lion's enclosure in the zoo saying something like "God will protect me!". Needless to say the lions killed him.

12. Lourdes fears priestly scandal will make profits dry up

Comment #209796 by D'Arcy on July 13, 2008 at 11:14 am

'Without the shrine, most of us would be out of business, so we have to get on,' said Philippe Bianco, head of the local Chamber of Commerce.

Ah yes of course! I forgot God smiles on the entrepreneurs and risk takers! The Zambelli affair may just be warning for them from on high.

13. Religious bigotry upheld in court

Comment #209531 by D'Arcy on July 12, 2008 at 2:26 pm

Moron says:

I did write a lengthy post sending up the mental gymnastics of the religious appeasers on the "Goddamn cracker" thread.

It went missing.

Next time type it into your word processor first and save it, then post it in the normal way (copy, paste). It's annoying isn't it? The Dawkins' site give you about 30 minutes before it forgets you're logged on.

14. France rejects Muslim woman over radical practice of Islam

Comment #209525 by D'Arcy on July 12, 2008 at 2:12 pm

The women's lib organisations used to have the slogan "ban the bra". When will muslem women start shouting the slogan "ban the burqua"?

15. Weak US dollar hits papal profits

Comment #209519 by D'Arcy on July 12, 2008 at 1:49 pm

10 Hail Marys and the stock market will be forgiven.

16. Religious bigotry upheld in court

Comment #208122 by D'Arcy on July 10, 2008 at 3:39 pm

Religious liberty

Bollocks to "religious liberty". The very notion is a contradiction in terms. Since when did Christianity, (add in religion here) ever give "liberty" to anyone? Organised superstition requires social control.

17. Conversation between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox

Comment #208078 by D'Arcy on July 10, 2008 at 2:55 pm

J. Anderson has come and read some posts, has been suitably shocked, and has labled the posters as "assholes". He/she has now buggered of to be offended elsewhere.

As one of the "assholes", I stick to my remark about Lennox being a gasbag.

If words alone could create anything, then Lennox should be able to create a very nice universe to suit himself. The reality is that Lennox has the gift of the gab in this particular universe, has himself a very nice job in Oxford University talking about theology, and probably has to every so often, endure the odd banquet involving very fine claret, and of course the best of spirits, some 15 year old Scotch malt whisky.

It's a hard life being an academic at Oxford!

18. New legal threat to school science in the US

Comment #207336 by D'Arcy on July 9, 2008 at 2:16 pm

Questioning the basis of any scientific theory can only be a good thing, as long as the evidence for the theory remains clear. As I understand it, a scientific theory is the best available current explanation of reality. Theories are necessarily provisional. If the Flinstones of Louisiana really want to discard modern science, then they will also have to discard any benefits that are derived from its ("just") theories. Go and join the Amish and ride horses, put down your guns and pick up a spade. Don't use modern medicine, that's based on the scientific method which is all "just theories".

I hope the teachers will be able to explain just how the Earth, sorry the sun, stood still for a day to help Joshua. I never could understand it.

19. The BBC announces a major season marking the life and work of Charles Darwin

Comment #207284 by D'Arcy on July 9, 2008 at 12:52 pm

Bring on the Darwin programmes! It should provide some counterbalance to the daily, mainly, Christian religious broadcasts. Most CoE believers accept Darwin's ideas because they have become "sophisticated" and look for metaphors rather than literal truth in the Bible. The fact that Darwin's own observations gradually turned him away from his religion must be a clarion call for everyone to investigate nature more.

20. Conversation between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox

Comment #207276 by D'Arcy on July 9, 2008 at 12:36 pm

Richard, you may well have enjoyed this encounter with Lennox because he was being so frank about what he believed, instead of creating a smokescreen of, as you say, "that's not my God" type argument. However for this particular listener, it was boring in the extreme. Even when you responded to his remarks, you were interrupted after just a few seconds with yet another monologue from Lennox. Yes give them enough rope, but not too much rope , please!

With McGrath and Lennox both at Oxford, I now understand better your view about theology as a non subject. Are the Christians at Cambridge any more worthy?

21. [UPDATED] Venomous Snakes, Slippery Eels and Harun Yahya

Comment #206631 by D'Arcy on July 8, 2008 at 3:29 pm

However, according to Tegmark, if you hit him with the saucepan and it is a quantum event, then a version of him has not been hit in the multiverse, so why should he care?

Ah the great multiverse where all possible worlds occur. Elvis is still alive, Elvis is convicted of mudering hamburgers, Elvis climbs Everest backwards and blindfold, Elvis joins the Beatles, Elvis marries Kylie... the possibilities are endless. Schrodinger's cat must have 9 times an infinite number of lives to lve.

For all that there is more possibility of the multiverse than there is of Mohamed riding a winged horse into the next field.

22. Landlords protest after pub swearing ban gets them sacked

Comment #206617 by D'Arcy on July 8, 2008 at 2:50 pm

The Flemings have been together for seven years and have six children. Three of the children live with them above the pub in Islington.

Now that is a fucking miracle, unless of course divine intervention (or other human partners) explain it. People that breed like that and only look after 3 of their 7 children, have no fucking right to tell me whether to swear or not. As it happens I don't go in their pub, nor will I.

23. Conversation between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox

Comment #206606 by D'Arcy on July 8, 2008 at 2:28 pm

What a waste of an hour. If Lennox's first evidence of a creator is the "fine tuning" of nature's constants then that is pretty piss poor. Whilst the Christian religion is based upon almost zero evidence for superman/god, it has nicked most of its ideas from previous religions, and only developed any strength, as the religion of the slaves, under the Roman Empire, it is still built as firmly as a sandcastle. As long as the water and wind keep off, so long will its ramparts stand. The tide of knowledge has filled its moat and is now rapidly undermining those dodgy foundations.

Has it not occured to Lennox that if one of the "finely tuned" constants of nature was different then all of the others would also be?

I suspect Lennox talked himself into his job at Oxford and it will probably need divine intervention to remove him. Gasbag.

24. [UPDATED] Venomous Snakes, Slippery Eels and Harun Yahya

Comment #205626 by D'Arcy on July 7, 2008 at 2:27 pm

Turkey's equivalent of Ron Hubbard? Or what's his name (Colliding Worlds) Van Daniken?

25. [UPDATED] Venomous Snakes, Slippery Eels and Harun Yahya

Comment #205593 by D'Arcy on July 7, 2008 at 1:46 pm

The man is a fraud, and recognized as such even in Turkey.

I don't know enough, but I suspect Al is 100% right.If you write a book about evolution, surely you would know the difference between eels and snakes.

The cost of production of such a book must have been extremely high, and one is bound to wonder where the money came from to produce it and then distribute it gratis in so many copies and so many languages.

Ah here's the rub! Who did pay for the production of this book? If it wasn't the Saudis, then certainly someone or some group who feel threatened by the fact of evolution. Or could it have been the author? Did he make enough on the holocaust book to finance this one? Conspiracy theories abound.

For all I know it could have been the same people who fund the Discovery Institute. It wouldn't surprise me at all.

I don't suppose the book has any references to the rapid evolution of SARs, HIV, Avian Flu or other pathogenic critters out to eat humanity given the chance. All part of Allah's wonderful creation!

26. Tablet Ignites Debate on Messiah and Resurrection

Comment #205099 by D'Arcy on July 6, 2008 at 2:44 pm

SupportsChrist is probably watching the same game as Al Rawandi. As to this stone tablet "solidfying his faith", well Christianity is already so dense and impenetrable that it always falls to the bottom of the ocean of knowledge, just like the gangster with concrete wellingtons.

Jesus can't and didn't revive corpses, the best he could do was curse a fig tree to death because it didn't produce fruit out of season. Why kill a tree just cos you're pissed off?

And why didn't Adam and Eve have the chance to enjoy childhood? Adam was no man without a childhood behind him and the same for Eve. Just robotic clones in the eyes of the Bible writers.

27. The Boundaries of Belief

Comment #205082 by D'Arcy on July 6, 2008 at 1:53 pm

I'm getting confused. So just when do believers think John Frum is going to re-appear from under his volcano? He won't be dressed as a pirate, He will be dressed as a G.I.

28. Tablet Ignites Debate on Messiah and Resurrection

Comment #204887 by D'Arcy on July 6, 2008 at 4:51 am

My favourite piece of music is the Mass in B Minor by J. S. Bach.

Yeah, ok, religious music, but music written and played by real live human beings. In fact the same sort of two legged creatures that made this mysterious stone, which appears to tell us nothing new.

What could possibly be new or modern about religion? It's a social hangover from the days of ignorance.

29. Prayer refusal pupils 'disciplined'

Comment #204703 by D'Arcy on July 5, 2008 at 2:47 pm

For once, I find myself in agreement with David Robertson (clearthinker). No child should be forced to pray nor should any child be forced into any religion. Let them reach an age where they can make up their own minds about whether or not to follow any particular religion.

Yes, I know it doesn't work that way in the real world, including Robertson's Free Church of Scotland. If someone like Robertson can say that children shouldn't be forced to pray, I'm sure there are many "closet" muslims who feel the same way. There must be muslims who feel their religion is a burden to be jetisoned or at least "modified" to suit life in the west.

The western European Catholics are mostly quite happy to ignore the pope on birth control and still go to mass once in a while.

30. Muslims outraged at police advert featuring cute puppy sitting in policeman's hat

Comment #204693 by D'Arcy on July 5, 2008 at 2:18 pm

I have some admiration for dogs, but I don't particularly like them. I do hate the obnoxious ideologies of ALL of the religions including Islam. Religions throughout the world are used by our rulers as part of the thought control process.

The up and coming capitalists in Europe in the 18/19th century were happy to embrace the attacks on religion and its social power represented by enlightenment ideas, until such time as they saw what had happened in France with its revolution where everyone's head was fair game. Certainly in England, religion (Christianity) was encouraged, mainly as a force for stability.

Where would the Saudi Kingdom be without Islam? I may be wrong, but I believe that Saudi Arabia is still the No. 1 exporter of oil in the world. No wonder Iraq, with its large reserves of oil, is populated by foreign armies.

31. Prayer refusal pupils 'disciplined'

Comment #204620 by D'Arcy on July 5, 2008 at 11:31 am

Some of the richest footballers in the world live in Cheshire. They need protection. If Cheshire County Council is really going to thoroughly investigate the complaints, can I suggest they call in the Dundee Police?
http://richarddawkins.net/article,2806,Muslims-outraged-at-police-advert-featuring-cute-puppy-sitting-in-policemans-hat,Daily-Mail

32. When too much Rapture is barely enough

Comment #204610 by D'Arcy on July 5, 2008 at 11:13 am

Dear oh dear! This Christian (male Jewish virgin?) is seriously deluded. He appears to have already lost his head well before the rapture.

The best "Rapture" was of course the one done by Blondie. (The man from Mars that eats guitars).

33. Sharia law 'could have UK role'

Comment #204255 by D'Arcy on July 4, 2008 at 2:19 pm

I read the article in The Times and, I, not being an expert in jurisprudence, felt the judge's ruling had some basis in fact. The higher court judges would be much happier deciding legal issues like Pringles v potato crisps than issues like shall Ali be allowed to divorce his wife by saying it 3 times.

The higher courts are the equivalent of the priests. They have "special" knowledge of jurisprudence and the special earthly powers that come therewith. Most people can't afford to take any legal action, let alone action in the High court.

34. Group Asks for Divine Intervention to Ease Oil Prices

Comment #204240 by D'Arcy on July 4, 2008 at 1:20 pm

I'm wondering if the Christians' God is Oilimpotent. Will Allah win the great battle and grab back Iraq? Somehow I doubt it, however unpopular the war is. One thing is certain: that too many human lives will be lost in the battle for control over natural resources in the middle east, and elsewhere.

35. Group Asks for Divine Intervention to Ease Oil Prices

Comment #204202 by D'Arcy on July 4, 2008 at 11:43 am

From the article:

As the price of oil continues to rise, some are turning to God and prayer for an answer to their financial troubles.

The Pray at the Pump Movement, founded by Rocky Twyman, has been holding prayer vigils at gas stations across the country. On Monday, Twyman decided to take his movement from Exxon and Shell stations straight to the steps of the Embassy of Saudi Arabia in Washington, D.C., hoping to encourage the oil-rich country to raise the amount of barrels they release each day from 200,000 to 1.2 million.

If these people really believe in miracles, and apparently they do, why don't they just pray for the almighty to provide more oil in their backyard? (Yes I do know about the current row going on about oil exploration in Alaska). As these people don't believe in a 4.5 billion year old Earth and presumably fossil fuels being several million years old, they will happily pray for "Give us this day our daily gas" and not give it another thought.

Luckily for humanity, there are more fruitful things to do than pray.

36. Did newborn Earth harbour life?

Comment #203926 by D'Arcy on July 4, 2008 at 12:44 am

Tack asks:

I understand that C-14 dating is only accurate within some tens of thousands of years.

Is it the case then that the method they used (examining the ratio of C-12 to C-13) can be used to gauge age in the order of billions of years?

The short answer is radiometric dating of rocks.
Wikipedia seems quite good on this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometrically_dated

The creationists have of course got their tame "scientists" to argue that God has made rocks that decay radioactively in line with a 6004 year old Earth. Pathetic stuff. Just Like God speeded up the light from anywhere outside of 6004 light years away in the unvierse to make it look 13.7 billion years old.

37. Can't Darwin and God get along?

Comment #202528 by D'Arcy on July 1, 2008 at 3:18 pm

But you reject the idea that God tinkers and has his hand in day-to-day processes, so how do nature and God interact?
...........................
That's the tough question. You should rewind the tape and erase the question because I don't really have a good answer. What I would say, however, is when you know a lot about how something works, it's reasonable to rule out certain things and say, well, I don't think it could be this or that. When you know almost nothing about how something works, you need to be more humble.

Ahh! Mysterious are the ways of God!

38. PZ Myers - Expelled from Expelled

Comment #202520 by D'Arcy on July 1, 2008 at 3:07 pm

Thanks Styrer.

It is a constant mystery to me how scientists - and eminent ones, on occasion - can truly believe in a supernatural realm. I understand Richard's compartmentalisation idea, but you really would think that scientists - whose day job is utterly dependent on evidence!- would know better.

Utterly baffling.

Not quite so baffling if you look at the upbringing of the people concerned. In the western world, Christianity was almost certainly in the immediate environment, if not at home.

The fact that some people are scientists does not mean that they are immune from the illusions that magicians or priests can induce. Scientists are also human beings!

39. Richard Dawkins on Doctor Who

Comment #202505 by D'Arcy on July 1, 2008 at 2:40 pm

In the spirit of science fiction, I must say that I just don't understand how the Earth could have been moved to another location in the universe, when it had already been destroyed by the Vogons building a hyperspace by-pass, and also the messing up of the Arsenal game that day. Surely Arthur Dent tells no lies?

40. PZ Myers - Expelled from Expelled

Comment #202439 by D'Arcy on July 1, 2008 at 1:41 pm

....arguing instead that there is a direct link between science education and religious skepticism.

Well! What a surprise! The more people find out about the world, the less they are inclined to invoke spirits or gods. The good Christian geologists who went searching for the evidence of Noah's flood, found instead evidence of lots of floods and sedimentation over millions of years. Similar discoveries in the other sciences showed that the Earth and life was in fact much, much older than what the Bible had said, even allowing for every day to be 1000 years. The observable facts conflicted with the stated religion. Like wily politicians, the Christians theologians proved "flexible". The talking snake didn't really talk, it was metaphor. The sun didn't really stand still for a day, it was a metaphor. The universe wasn't really created in 6 days, it was a metaphor. As to why an omnipotent God would have to rest on the 7th day must remain a theological mystery. Where were His powers to be replenished from?

No wonder people who study the real world, including scientists, find less and less room for supernatural explanations.

41. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #200425 by D'Arcy on June 27, 2008 at 3:23 pm

Al says:

What right do you have to FORCE someone to give up the fruits of their labor for other people? That is what you are saying, people should be forced to live in your system.

Al, you have completely misread or misinterpreted what I have written. If socialism is ever established it will require the majority of people wanting to bring it into being using democratic political action. The will of the majority will be FORCED upon the minority capitalist class. Their days of monopoly ownership will be up. At the moment the workers run capitalism from top to bottom, highly paid and lowly paid. But they run it on behalf of the privileged owning class, not on behalf of society as a whole. Don't tell me that human nature means that society is incapable of operating in its own best interests.

For the umpteenth time, I am not advocating nor do I want the kind of state capitalism that exists in China, Cuba etc. These places are just at a different level of development from the more advanced capitalist countries.

You act, like MArx so blindly did, like there is no way for someone who labors to move up and become an owner.

Al, don't underestimate Marx. He knew full well that some lucky ones could indeed become capitalists, and he also knew that the unsuccessful capitalists could be driven out of business if their enterprises did not produce profits, reducing them to the ranks of the workers. Whatever the individual circumstances, every capitalist requires a large number of workers to produce new profits for him. Workers are in fact the golden geese without which no new profits will be forthcoming.

And of course you are ignoring every single business that has employee ownership.

When Mrs. Thatcher was the prime minister in Britain, she encouraged just this kind of "popular capitalism". Everybody (in principle) can become a capitalist just by buying a few shares, or taking out a mortgage and buying a house. The fact that the house didn't actually belong to you until about 25 years' or more payments later was never mentioned. The fact that the shares you bought might give you 1/ 100,000th ownership of the company was also never mentioned. It's very simple, all you need to become a capitalist is capital. All you need to climb a mountain is sky hooks.

Why don't you start a business and implement an employee ownership system, maybe it will catch on.

Does Al know about people like Robert Owen, a utopian socialist, his Grand Consolidated Union, and the Co-operative Movement in Britain?

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/IRowen.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Owen

The most successful co-ops necessarily become capitalist enterprises as witness in Britain the Co-op itself or National Express. The unsuccessful co-ops go bust and we don't hear about them.

The difference between current western systems and socialism, is that in western systems, you are allowed to change how things are, while in socialist societies there is no personal ambition.

If Al is right, and China is a socialist country, then I see lots of change there, at a vast pace, and plenty of personal ambition and even a few billionaires. Come on, Al admit it, capitalism exists in China.

You could easily make use of your liberty by attempting to implement aspects of your proposed system, and perhaps one day you will get your dream of robbing people of their liberty.

Al, as I have explained, it won't be D'Arcy implementing socialism, it will be the majority of humanity by wanting it and working for it. As for my dream of robbing people of their liberty…..pure fiction on your part. Don't misrepresent what I say, you are proving Marx right. I'd rather have my dream of socialism than your bloody nightmare of capitalism where one third of the world lives or dies, in dire poverty. So much for their "liberty". The freedom to die of starvation and disease!

I have said it once and I will say it again, people come to the US to pursue their dreams for a reason.

They used to say that the streets of London were paved with gold. They aren't and never were, but in the centre they are paved with rather nice and expensive stone. Yes workers will follow the economic migration routes to those places where they are likely to find a job and be better off. Unlike California, we in Britain don't have that many Mexicans, but we have plenty of eastern Europeans and others from all over the world, whose countries have far better climates than Britain. Those, with capital, like the Sultan of Brunei, come and buy one or two very nice houses, those without capital come and struggle to find anywhere affordable to live.

42. Creationist critics get their comeuppance

Comment #199949 by D'Arcy on June 26, 2008 at 2:29 pm

Thanks to Tezpatlipoca for the correction.

I think it was Paley who was talking about potentiation or whatever. Lenski is the scientist doing the experiment with the e-coli who got pissed and did a helluva job whacking Schlafly in the rebuttal letters.

My mistake by mixing the names. The sentiment stands. Creationists are dishonest.

43. Creationist critics get their comeuppance

Comment #199926 by D'Arcy on June 26, 2008 at 2:01 pm

Lenski really clutches at straws:

But how are we to know if these traits weren't 'potentiated' by the Creator when He designed the bacteria thousands of years ago, such that they would eventually reveal themselves when the time was right?

Perhaps we should also ask how we don't know the these "traits" weren't created by Harry Potter. After getting rid of Voldermort, he must be doing something else a year on? Notice the dishonest "thousands of years ago", for the alleged time of the alleged design.

All creationists are consistently dishonest, being prepared to ignore real evidence and fabricate their own. All in the Lord's name of course, so that makes it alright. Bastards.

44. An Interview with Prof. Richard Dawkins

Comment #199343 by D'Arcy on June 25, 2008 at 2:44 pm

Do you not find it ironic, that many great scientists, well versed in the 'scientific method' still find it possible to maintain their religious beliefs?

Richard Dawkins

I am not sure that this is true today. For me the great watershed would have come with Darwin and I am utterly unmoved by the fact that Newton was religious. Anyone living before Darwin, one might expect to be religious.

The "great watershed" that came with Darwin was the early (Christian) geologists' realisation in the 19th century that there had been no such "great watershed" as Noah's flood. Instead of finding evidence of Noah's flood, they found evidence of loads of past floods, they also found evidence of millions of years of sedimentation. Evidence which obviously conflicted with the age of the Earth as calculated by Bishop Ussher of Armagh, roughly 6-000 years, by going backwards through the various ages of the characters in the Bible.

No wonder Christianty was rocked on its heels, and before Darwin dared to publish.

45. Galaxy map hints at fractal universe

Comment #199321 by D'Arcy on June 25, 2008 at 2:12 pm

Any sign of God out there? Or is He hiding in one the 11 dimensions predicted, but not yet observed, by string theory? The LHC (Large Hadron Collidor) may find the Higgs particle, (nicknamed God particle), when it finally gets to run, or it may not.

Whatever the particle physicists and or the astromers discover, we can be sure that the theologians will it claim as a proof of God's marvellous creation.

At least a fractal is the same at all scales. God is non-existent at all scales.

46. Darwinists for Jesus

Comment #196167 by D'Arcy on June 19, 2008 at 11:53 am

The creationists have something of a point. IF the Bible is wrong about the origins of the Earth and biology, as evolution, in particular, and science in general shows, then what else is "incorrect". Their whole house of cards has been built upon the shifting sands of knowledge.

The more slimy Christians who accept evolution as God's way of doing things, must make do with a virtually non interventionist deity, who allows malaria, HIV, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, floods and other disasters that have befallen humanity. A deity who waited some 13.7 billion years to put Adam on the Earth. But what's 13.7 billion years to a god? A piss in the ocean.

47. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #193100 by D'Arcy on June 14, 2008 at 3:22 pm

Al says:

D'Arcy,





You are really proving to be pretty thick headed.


Wage labour, correct. What is the point, what is the matter with earning money for your work. Why shouldn't people who are better, smarter and harder working be rewarded to a greater extent?

Sorry Al, if I'm thick. The point that you still don't get is that if most of humanity works for wages, it means that those people don't own enough capital of their own. Someone else owns the businesses, companies, farms whatever that they work for. Al you, yourself, said in an earlier comment that you were alright because you were contributing towards your own pension, (as I am), but it means that neither of us has enough capital to be able to live off it. Mr. "Son of Our Dear Leader" in N. Korea and Mr. Castro and brother in Cuba will never have to worry about their pension company going bust. They and their class will have accumulated enough capital to be able to live off the work of others; the very thing that you, Al, seem to be objecting to.
The very existence of the wages system means that there is an employing class and a working class. The motivation for production is profit, no profit, no production. Profit can only be realised from the labour of the working class. That's the way it works at the moment. Too bad if people can't afford to buy food, they'll just have to go without, as indeed they do. Maybe not in California so much, but in large parts of the world.

Al asks why the better, smarter and harder working shouldn't be rewarded. Well the reality is that the more highly trained workers are better paid and have better conditions than the less well trained. My point is that however well paid or not, they are still dependent on the owners of capital to employ them.

I would prefer a world without employers and employed, where the labour of myself and others is used to satisfy human needs and not for the production of profit for a privileged class. That is my objection to wage labour.

48. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #190799 by D'Arcy on June 9, 2008 at 3:09 pm

D'Arcy, of the fuzzy rabbits and rainbows, would like to point out that before anything can be traded on a market, it must first be produced. (Yes I have heard of futures being traded), but they are basically bets on what will happen. Same with derivatives.

Production is carried on in the modern world using wage labour, for the purpose of producing profit. No profit, no production. No production, no market. Human needs are not considered.

State ownership equals state capitalism as in places like Cuba, North Korea etc. State capitalism is still capitalism or is Fort Knox really full of socialist gold?

49. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #186514 by D'Arcy on May 30, 2008 at 1:16 pm

Al, you're just not up to Olympic speed tonight.

50. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #186510 by D'Arcy on May 30, 2008 at 1:04 pm

Quetz asks

How else would socialism be established in a capitalistic society without the regulation of a central authority? If you think there is a better way, by all means enlighten us.

Obviously establishing socialism will require a willing majority taking conscious political action in their respective countries to gain control of the machinery of government including the armed forces. In this way the socialist majority can force their will over the will of the capitalist class to keep things as they were. The state machinery is used as the agent of emancipation to dispossess the capitalists and to make the productive forces the common property of all humanity regardless of race or sex. As Engels puts it:

"When, at last, it becomes the real representative of the whole of society, it renders itself unnecessary. As soon as there is no longer any social class to be held in subjection; as soon as class rule, and the individual struggle for existence based upon our present anarchy in production, with the collisions and excesses arising from these, are removed, nothing more remains to be repressed, and a special repressive force, a State, is no longer necessary. The first act by virtue of which the State really constitutes itself the representative of the whole of society â€" the taking possession of the means of production in the name of society â€" this is, at the same time, its last independent act as a State. State interference in social relations becomes, in one domain after another, superfluous, and then dies out of itself; the government of persons is replaced by the administration of things, and by the conduct of processes of production. The State is not "abolished". It dies out. This gives the measure of the value of the phrase: "a free State", both as to its justifiable use at times by agitators, and as to its ultimate scientific inefficiency; and also of the demands of the so-called anarchists for the abolition of the State out of hand.

I will now look into my crystal ball and make a prediction that Al Rawandi will respond to this post within 2 minutes along the lines of "D'Arcy's talking nonsense as usual" in his own aggressive style.