1. Better Know a Lobby - Atheism

Comment #240566 by ImagineAZ on August 31, 2008 at 3:29 pm

Richard Dawkins,

I definitely understand where you're coming from. I view Dane Cook's standup that way: everybody laughs because they think it must be funnier than it seems to be, and maybe they've just missed the brilliance that has everyone else rolling in the aisles. I rarely find Dane Cook funny.

But it's fun to laugh and it's especially fun to laugh together in a group. I'm sure you've seen the studies where somebody in a waiting room starts laughing, and within a couple minutes, everyone else is laughing, and they're not laughing at anything other than the laughter itself.

Once the people found out it was an experiment, they all smiled: "Ha! We all laughed at an experiment. How funny!" And the laughter starts again. We humans are strange animals.

2. Genesis and the origin of the Origin of the species

Comment #239609 by ImagineAZ on August 30, 2008 at 2:52 am

This article is really just a classic example of: "Hopefully none of my readers have ever read the Hebrew Bible, so if I'm vague enough, everyone will assume that I'm making a point, and that my point is right."

A couple people have already mentioned these ideas, but I couldn't sit still without saying something:

"peace is nobler than war..." Rabbi, have you ever read Numbers? The Book of Joshua? Please give us your summary of how God commanded the Israelites to peacefully take over Canaan.

"God forbids cruelty to animals." Rabbi, have you ever read Leviticus? (Genesis has already been mentioned.) How many times did God say that he enjoys the smell of burning animals?

After you finish reading the Hebrew Bible (for the first time, apparently), please read some Victor Stenger and Steven Weinberg, lest you come across as a moron when it comes to the "fine-tuning argument."

3. The Boundaries of Belief

Comment #204977 by ImagineAZ on July 6, 2008 at 10:45 am

Without studying the Pew survey myself, I'd have to guess that the survey was aimed pretty exclusively at religious people. If only 1.6% of those surveyed called themselves atheists, and many of those 1.6% also said they believe in a god, then the main finding of this survey is that they need to put together a better survey and aim it at a better cross-section of people.

4. Richard Dawkins lecture at ASU's Tempe Campus

Comment #184356 by ImagineAZ on May 24, 2008 at 6:47 pm

saraswati,

Here is the transcript of the Douglas Adams lecture. I used to have the actual video recording (really bad quality handheld) but it seems to have vanished.

It's in print and in audio (read by Simon Jones) in "The Salmon of Doubt."

http://www.biota.org/people/douglasadams/

5. Richard Dawkins lecture at ASU's Tempe Campus

Comment #183722 by ImagineAZ on May 22, 2008 at 4:01 pm

I was at this lecture. Standing room only, with many people gathered outside in hopes of scoring a ticket. And there was a really long line to get an autograph and to shake his hand.

You can just feel in the air that people have been waiting so long to stand up and say "I don't believe any of this nonsense either!"

The lecture really loses a lot without video. Richard presented many funny slides and such, and I'd have to say that the person providing closed captioning gave everybody many big laughs as well :) Anyone who was there will understand.

6. Richard Dawkins Interview on TVOntario

Comment #181676 by ImagineAZ on May 17, 2008 at 10:36 pm

I skimmed through all the comments here, but I didn't see anyone mention this point: the clinical psychologist, who was speaking against Dawkins for the most part, pretty much said that God in the old testament was simply a metaphor for capricious nature!

Isn't that what we've all been trying to say all along? God's not real. He's an ancient symbol for nature combined with the personal ideas and prejudices of the writers.

7. Believing the Unbelievable: The Clash Between Faith and Reason in the Modern World

Comment #56167 by ImagineAZ on July 14, 2007 at 7:47 am

I've heard/seen Sam speak MANY times, but I honestly think this was the single best lecture I have ever seen on any topic.

Thank You, Sam

8. Is Christianity Good for the World? A discussion between Christopher Hitchens and Douglas Wilson

Comment #55544 by ImagineAZ on July 11, 2007 at 1:35 pm

Our morals HAVE evolved, and they are also CONTINUING to evolve...and that's a good thing.

The Bible recommended slavery and subjugation of women. Look where we are today compared to our morality during the time of Constantine. Our two leading candidates to run our country are a woman and a black man. The BOOK seems hopelessly outdated.

Conclusion: having no BOOK to judge right from wrong is a good thing.

9. Sean Hannity with Christopher Hitchens

Comment #54797 by ImagineAZ on July 9, 2007 at 1:52 am

I thought Hitchens did quite well. There was an obvious EDIT when Hannity asked a question and instead of an answer, there was another question, but other than that, I think Hannity got properly butchered.

10. Christopher Hitchens and Al Sharpton

Comment #53431 by ImagineAZ on July 1, 2007 at 12:29 pm

VJocys,

Thank you for those posts. I may quote you if you don't mind.

11. Christopher Hitchens and Al Sharpton

Comment #53428 by ImagineAZ on July 1, 2007 at 12:25 pm

Well, you all have valid points. On the one hand, we should trust Hitchens and his methods, but on the other hand, this was his least impressive performance in my eyes.

I think that a straight answer to a straight question asked out of ignorance is a very powerful tool, and I wish Hitchens had used that tool more often in this conversation. A question like "Where does gravy come from?" is something a 4-year-old child might ask, so I can understand that Hitchens felt no need to address it, but a simple answer like "I believe that Einstein has given us an adequate answer to that question" would have gone a long way.

But I agree with Lauregon that if he had been given a chance to finish his answers, they would have buried many of the questions.

12. Messiah

Comment #52408 by ImagineAZ on June 27, 2007 at 1:38 am

JazzX,

I've seen explanations of fake seances and many other such fake phenomena. And maybe they only showed the few pictures he got right and deleted the rest.

But of course we all thought the lady with the pictures was probably a plant, and maybe the skeptics who got converted were plants, but he specifically said (and it was written on screen as well) that he didn't use any actors. If he used actors, then he is a charlatan in the worst sense of the word.

Basically, what you're saying is that he's not even an honest fake.

13. Messiah

Comment #52397 by ImagineAZ on June 27, 2007 at 1:09 am

Ok, I've seen many videos of people performing tricks like this before, and I've seen fake cold readers, but I have never seen anything like this. He needs to explain how he does it all.

I mean, he got that lady's pictures perfect. The dream catcher isn't too hard to explain. The seance was fairly standard for a fake seance, but that lady's pictures were dead-on accurate. Also, I was quite surprised that he made a room full of people fall down.

We need an explanation video.

14. Messiah

Comment #52385 by ImagineAZ on June 27, 2007 at 12:19 am

I'm only at the beginning, but this guy has BALLS lol. I'm from quite near Sedona btw.

15. His word: Attacking religion can seem like breaking a butterfly on a wheel

Comment #51491 by ImagineAZ on June 23, 2007 at 5:42 am

Well, who is this guy? It reads like a book review from a junior high newspaper.

16. The new preface to The God Delusion paperback and Q&A

Comment #50976 by ImagineAZ on June 20, 2007 at 7:24 pm

Professor Dawkins,

On the many Christian people who complain that many of your arguments seem to have been pointed at certain tenets and/or beliefs of Christianity that are not necessarily held by ALL Christians:

Perhaps you could, as a sequel of sorts, write 2 billion separate books - one for each individual Christian. That would be much more fair :)

17. Debate between Sam Harris and Chris Hedges

Comment #50593 by ImagineAZ on June 19, 2007 at 2:27 am

After hearing more than half of the whole thing now, I'm wishing Sam would say the obvious: "Suicide bombers and inquisitors are people following the doctrines of their holy books. The books instruct us to torture and kill. I'm not claiming that 100% of religious people will kill for their god, but the ones who believe in their god and DON'T kill are the ones who are NOT following the doctrines. In other words, religion gets better as people believe it and follow it less. And this tendency will carry through all the way to the end of religion."

18. Debate between Sam Harris and Chris Hedges

Comment #50590 by ImagineAZ on June 19, 2007 at 2:00 am

I'm a bit surprised that some of you were impressed by Hedges at all. I've only heard his opening so far, but he seems like he's defending religion and attacking religion at the same time.

He totally contradicts his previous argument in order to present his current argument. He claims that Christianity isn't violent, because Stalin was violent. (Of course, Stalin merely usurped the role of God; he became the intolerant god himself.) Then he defends Islam by saying that much of the violence blamed on Muslims was actually perpetrated by Christians and Catholic priests. (Sorry, I didn't take notes, so I'm just going off hazy memory.)

I was really listening, and I never heard any coherent actual defense of religion or of faith.

19. The Great God Debate

Comment #50069 by ImagineAZ on June 14, 2007 at 8:58 pm

MARK ROBERTS: "I think there are certainly moral, good people who believe all kinds of things, including atheism. In fact, I have sometimes said that I sometimes believe Christians kind of rely on God, and need God here because they actually are not as good people as folk who not believers."

Anything else need to be said about that?

20. Christopher Hitchens on Religion

Comment #48337 by ImagineAZ on June 7, 2007 at 1:35 pm

Christopher Hitchens is just a master of the perfect response to the stupid argument.

21. Atheists: Get off of our country!

Comment #44751 by ImagineAZ on May 25, 2007 at 8:54 am

Can I just say that while atheists were unnecessarily attacked in the hoax of a letter, another group was attacked - in the response to the letter.

"Which makes me wonder which of the local heavy metal bands has taken the newspaper hostage."

Set aside for the moment the well-known and almost universally accepted fact that heavy metal musicians tend to be far less religious than the average American. That still leaves us with the insults of bigotry and stupidity. As a lifelong fan of heavy metal music and a musician myself, I shall be sending my rant to the paper.

Heavy metal musicians are traditionally very liberal. And don't let our long hair and mosh pits fool you - we're a spirited lot, but not unintelligent.

22. The stone is cast

Comment #41810 by ImagineAZ on May 17, 2007 at 5:32 am

jonecc,

Yours was actually quite a good (albeit short) tribute. You had me all the way until the last three words...then it got better.

It reminded me of Richard Dawkins ending his Yahweh characterization with "bully."

23. Richard Dawkins' lecture at the State House Convention Center

Comment #40391 by ImagineAZ on May 14, 2007 at 8:23 am

Sorry to break the chain, but...

We really need video to this thing. The audience was laughing hysterically at the visual display and we don't get to see it!

24. Those fanatical atheists

Comment #38061 by ImagineAZ on May 6, 2007 at 10:18 pm

I really think the simple essays like this one are the ones that have a chance of making a difference. It's hard to imagine reading this and not thinking to yourself "Hmm...in that light, my faith looks kinda silly."

25. Religion & Culture Panel

Comment #36702 by ImagineAZ on May 2, 2007 at 3:34 am

Wow, Hitchens was just awesome. I have read, heard and seen a million articles, essays, debates, etc., including other brilliant pieces by Hitchens himself, and I thought I had heard every perfect analogy.

In this video, Christopher Hitchens came up with at least a half dozen more simple and flawless encapsulations of faith. Brilliant. (not for the first time)

Simply brilliant.

26. Scene Caused by Christian Group at NYC Stage Show

Comment #35947 by ImagineAZ on April 29, 2007 at 12:33 pm

I think we're too focused on the negative. This could turn out to be a huge lift for free speech, for performance art, for freethinking, etc.

And the honesty and sincerity of Mike Daisey shine through from the moment it happened to the last word of his second response article. I was impressed.

And what has already become a solid cult following could roll into a hugely successful career - all thanks to this protest group.

So in effect, the "terrorist attack" appears to be furthering the causes of everything the attackers despise.

27. Evolution Booklet

Comment #35603 by ImagineAZ on April 27, 2007 at 7:58 pm

This seemed to me like it was geared toward much younger kids than high school. Do you really think it was made for 16-18 year olds?

28. Evolution Booklet

Comment #35539 by ImagineAZ on April 27, 2007 at 2:23 pm

I think this is awesome for kids.

To those who don't like the theology, you have to keep in mind: changing the world has to be done in steps. Getting the religious to accept evolution will be an important step in modernization. And getting a mind to open has a snowball effect.

29. Richard Dawkins interviews the Bishop of Oxford

Comment #33400 by ImagineAZ on April 20, 2007 at 2:56 am

If Bishop Harries spoke for Christians, there would be no major issues between Christianity and naturalists.

Imagine how awful it must be for him to look out over a world full of people who, in a sense, share his faith, but who inevitably come across as thundering morons.

30. Kansas State School Board Bans Pokemon Due to Evolution Content

Comment #29782 by ImagineAZ on April 4, 2007 at 4:52 pm

Can someone help me out here?

I'm searching for a poll that has measured the correlation between UNDERSTANDING (not necessarily believing in) the theory of evolution and religiosity. It seems that every poll simply measures religiosity of people who ACCEPT the theory, and I'm wondering if that is because understanding it almost always means accepting it. But I'm assuming that it may be possible to explain the evidence and conclusions to another person, but not accept the conclusions.

Thanks for any help.

Imagine

31. The God Debate

Comment #29153 by ImagineAZ on April 1, 2007 at 10:40 pm

Briancough

What book?

32. The God Debate

Comment #29150 by ImagineAZ on April 1, 2007 at 10:24 pm

Quork,

You are on it. Very nice.

33. In the Beginning

Comment #28741 by ImagineAZ on March 30, 2007 at 2:53 pm

With everything I've heard so far, she's disagreed with every single thing the creationist said...politely yes, but she shot down every single thing he said.

34. In the Beginning

Comment #28740 by ImagineAZ on March 30, 2007 at 2:52 pm

I'm only halfway through and I haven't heard her agree with anything at all.

35. Interview: Jerry Coyne

Comment #28734 by ImagineAZ on March 30, 2007 at 2:32 pm

Yeah, he kind of came across as "Ok, we've now heard from the deluded satanist - now onto the truth!"

36. The Fifth Flea!

Comment #28268 by ImagineAZ on March 28, 2007 at 3:10 pm

I absolutely disagree that RD is preaching to the choir. How many people are in the Converts Corner? I have personally spoken to a good dozen or so whose beliefs changed or went away from reading Richard or something similar.

Yes, TGD provides strength of argument for atheists, but it also reaches out to people who were not sure, and to people who labeled themselves as Christian or whatever, but didn't realize that they don't really believe the crap.

Conversely, the MANY responses like this are directly aimed at Christians to keep them from leaving.

Have you all ever read the attack on Dan Barker's book? It was like a 50-page pile of crap with this conclusion: "You don't have to worry about Dan Barker's book; it's not a threat to your faith." It took 50 pages to say "You don't have to worry about it."

37. Richard Dawkins at The Sunday Times Oxford Literary Festival

Comment #28265 by ImagineAZ on March 28, 2007 at 3:02 pm

This might not be funny, but I laughed while writing it. This is my interpretation of the debate.

http://blog.myspace.com/preachreality

38. Peanut Butter, The Atheist's Nightmare!

Comment #27910 by ImagineAZ on March 27, 2007 at 7:50 am

Thanks Eamonn Shute,

I had found that site from a Google search. I found most of what I was looking for there, but not quite. I was specifically looking for a source for Sam Harris' claim that top nations in the Human Development Index are predominantly non-religious. Norway actually has a national religion to which 89% officially belong, but only 3% actually go to church. This is quite interesting, because it implies that ignoring religion is the best way to make it go away.

39. Peanut Butter, The Atheist's Nightmare!

Comment #27903 by ImagineAZ on March 27, 2007 at 7:24 am

I know I should know this, or I should at least be able to easily find it, but I'm stuck. Anyone have a link to a good index of religion by nation. I'm looking for percentages of population of nations that belong to at least the major faiths and non-faith.

Thanks for any advice.

40. Peanut Butter, The Atheist's Nightmare!

Comment #27890 by ImagineAZ on March 27, 2007 at 6:16 am

Sorry, I was just having such a good time enjoying the laugh....

But anotherclinton is exactly right: by that method, sodomy is equally proven.

41. Peanut Butter, The Atheist's Nightmare!

Comment #27886 by ImagineAZ on March 27, 2007 at 5:57 am

lol anotherclinton

Imagine that in an Australian accent:

"Now, what I'm doing now is dropping my pants and bending over. Now, look at that. Notice that my anal opening is round and roughly the width of your penis. Go ahead and show them. Stick your penis in my anus. There. See how perfectly that fits? Also notice that my anal cavity goes deep enough to take the whole shaft. Go ahead and show them how you can repeatedly move your penis in and out. Good. See how perfectly that fits?"

42. Peanut Butter, The Atheist's Nightmare!

Comment #27883 by ImagineAZ on March 27, 2007 at 5:52 am

Yeah, it looks like the guy on the right was getting hard, so he had to jostle and move both hands in front of his crotch, then jostle again, then finally turn completely sideways so that one leg covered his extending penis.

43. Peanut Butter, The Atheist's Nightmare!

Comment #27875 by ImagineAZ on March 27, 2007 at 5:22 am

Well, I laughed hysterically after seeing these little pieces, but after seeing the full-length video, I'm just scared and depressed. If people actually take this crap seriously, it makes it very easy to understand how the people of Germany bought Hitler's ideology.

44. Peanut Butter, The Atheist's Nightmare!

Comment #27867 by ImagineAZ on March 27, 2007 at 4:50 am

How come God only made bananas for us?

45. Peanut Butter, The Atheist's Nightmare!

Comment #27864 by ImagineAZ on March 27, 2007 at 4:41 am

I had seen the banana video quite a while ago, but the peanut butter one was new to me.

My girlfriend was in the other room and she heard me laughing like a madman. She ran in and was trying to ask me what was so funny, and I absolutely could not speak from laughing so hard. I would try to catch my breath, but so many thoughts kept popping into my head that the more I would try to stop, the more I'd laugh. It's been 20 minutes and I'm still giggling.

I kept thinking of Christopher Hitchens: "It is impossible to distinguish creationist argument from creationist parody."

46. 'God Is Not a Moderate'

Comment #27371 by ImagineAZ on March 24, 2007 at 8:54 am

Also, for what it's worth, I think Sam Harris may have the greatest gift of analogy on earth.

47. 'God Is Not a Moderate'

Comment #27369 by ImagineAZ on March 24, 2007 at 8:49 am

For what it's worth, the commonly accepted solution to the common version of the Monty Hall Problem is flat wrong.

48. Debate between Alister McGrath and Peter Atkins

Comment #27091 by ImagineAZ on March 23, 2007 at 5:56 am

I just love it when people ask me stupid questions like "If God doesn't exist, why do so many people believe in him?"

I reply with equal logic: "About 2/3 of the world is not Christian. So by your argument of strength in numbers, you just got out-voted 2 to 1. Once, EVERYBODY believed that the world was flat. That doesn't make them right."

49. Debate between Alister McGrath and Peter Atkins

Comment #27088 by ImagineAZ on March 23, 2007 at 5:41 am

When I debate a believer, I try to keep the arguments as simple and logical as possible. I have de-converted many and even those who won't admit defeat are clearly defeated. It is regrettable that some obviously come to the realization that they believe in something fictional but they simply won't say the words "You're right," but a happy fact of the universe is that nobody who thinks like that will try to stop gay people from getting married or fly a plane into a building. It takes strength of conviction to assert your beliefs in that way, and no one has that strength of conviction after having a debate with a well-spoken opponent.

50. Debate between Alister McGrath and Peter Atkins

Comment #27072 by ImagineAZ on March 23, 2007 at 4:52 am

I wasn't impressed by Atkins, though I quit about an hour into it.

The simple explanation for the believers' superior oratory powers is that everything they say is rehearsed, nothing new. They don't THINK to answer questions; they simply pull out the rehearsed answer that most closely answers the question.

I'm not even convinced that McGrath believes in the god he defends. His arguments don't convince me that even he's convinced. He just has a point to defend, so he's defending to the best of his ability.

I really wish I was at one of these debates. Every question and Christian point is SOOOO thrashable, they should be dissected to the point where every person in the room would have to accept the fact that it's no point at all.