









1. Richard Dawkins replies to Libby Purves
Comment #227941 by TonyA on August 11, 2008 at 4:32 am
Billy,
Agreed. The Jesus story just seems so unimpressive to me. We've all seen or heard of far more significant sacrifices than the one God staged with his fake razzle-dazzle routine.
My disappointment with religion doesn't stop there, of course. Burning bushes, talking asses (or whatever), and vague predictions do not impress me. How incredibly inept God turns out to be. He can't do math, he doesn't know science, he has bad morals, he's ignorant of geology, astronomy and sociology and he couldn't even think of a way to make his message unambiguous and widespread.
I am stunned at the credulity of believers. It actually feels tragic to me. It hurts my mind and soul to know there are so many people living in ignorance of something so vital.
2. Richard Dawkins replies to Libby Purves
Comment #227920 by TonyA on August 11, 2008 at 3:53 am
You can only be saved because your god sent his son on a suicide mission? How morbid is that?
3. Richard Dawkins, the naive professor
Comment #226350 by TonyA on August 8, 2008 at 2:11 am
It is "The Sun" (http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/) with longer words, no tits and a little less concentration on celebs.Really? I clicked this link to check. Yep, tits everywhere... Not that there's anything particularly wrong with that.
Comment #223249 by TonyA on August 1, 2008 at 10:37 pm
Operation aborted." I/m getting this on several other sites that are basically anti-religion: Evolved and Rational, Jihad Watch and so on. Is there a disturbance in the Intertubes?
5. Brain That Changes Itself: into the abyss
Comment #220757 by TonyA on July 29, 2008 at 2:07 am
She was balancing with her eyes alone, I think.The article says, "She gives a big grin, stands free with her eyes closed, and does not fall." Something besides the tongue and the eyes are helping her balance. I still like my hypothesis, weak as it is. Of course we have nearly no actual data.
6. Brain That Changes Itself: into the abyss
Comment #220650 by TonyA on July 28, 2008 at 7:35 pm
Suppose she only lost 95% of her vestibular function. Maybe her brain suddenly perceived the sharp reduction of data as a total loss of data, something like falling below the squelch level. The tongue treatment might be teaching the brain to reactivate the balance centers and readjust the level of input necessary to control those centers. It is thus possible that the brain is being trained to operate on only 5% of the original input.
7. Richard Dawkins on Al Jazeera English
Comment #220261 by TonyA on July 28, 2008 at 9:05 am
FER,
God is not subject to the limits that some on here are trying to place on him. It's illogical to try and constrain him in any way.Sheer wish-thinking...
8. Richard Dawkins on Al Jazeera English
Comment #220122 by TonyA on July 28, 2008 at 5:54 am
Since we agree that "we do not know but we are trying to find out" ...This is the primary goal of scientific endeavor. It's nice to think you are considering joining us. We will continue to try to find out how we came to be, whether a god exists or not. As it stands, there is no evidence for the existence of any gods, nor is there any rational reason to suppose there is one. It would be trivially easy for any god to solve this problem. But if a god does exist, why has it been playing this curious hiding game? What god would sit idly by, hiding in the ever-shrinking gaps of knowledge, while millions of innocent people needlessly suffer every single day?
9. Richard Dawkins on Al Jazeera English
Comment #220112 by TonyA on July 28, 2008 at 5:22 am
FER,
He could do anything he wanted I would've thought.Maybe not. How can you know so much about something that does not exist in spacetime?
Comment #220067 by TonyA on July 28, 2008 at 3:57 am
thewhitepearl,
I can also proudly say that the university has also done it's share of ID bashing.
http://www.smu.edu/dedman/viewpoint.pdf
Comment #212838 by TonyA on July 17, 2008 at 6:35 pm
CocoCantare
His faith is very private and he's mostly about "good works for the sake of doing good" while here on earth because he really doesn't care if there is an afterlife or not. But I just can't see him giving up faith in some sort of God. I think once he told me he was more of a Deist. Could be worse, right?This sounds like an atheist in hiding to me. Isn't it possible he is just as afraid to come out to you as you are to him?
12. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach
Comment #182380 by TonyA on May 19, 2008 at 10:16 pm
smearmind
As for preaching, compare to Mr dawkins' fruitless and numberless interviews, articles, BOOKS, I WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED TO BE PREACHING.Dawkins has a converts corner.
13. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach
Comment #182377 by TonyA on May 19, 2008 at 10:09 pm
rearwind:
Bad words belong to the the mouth that pops up.OMFg, Dude! Are you, like, 15 years old?
14. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach
Comment #181871 by TonyA on May 18, 2008 at 2:07 pm
You are an idiot.clearmind:
Bad words again. You know the rule.
15. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach
Comment #181589 by TonyA on May 17, 2008 at 3:24 pm
wooter:
Logic says; I am smarter than evolution, and evolution says i am defetaed in a battle against logic.While I disagree with your logic, I do agree with evolution, in fact you are defeated in a battle against logic.
I would buy a farm and make a little pond, get some worms, wait for the evolution to happen again.You are an idiot. Keep preaching it, brother. Theism surely regrets your allegiance.
16. Two More Fleas
Comment #169833 by TonyA on April 26, 2008 at 11:08 pm
JohnQ,
Good point. I hope a "Perfect World Church of Wooter" never reaches critical mass anywhere in this Universe.
p.s. Oops, I slipped and hit the "offensive" button on your post. Clearly it isn't.
17. British schools are falling for the pseudoscience of Brain Gym. Why fill kids' heads with nonsense?
Comment #169824 by TonyA on April 26, 2008 at 10:46 pm
katie,
I assume you are confusing the term "homeopathic" with something else. Homeopathic 'technology' was clearly not involved with the discovery of Penicillin.
Homeopathy is not, and never was, a science of natural extracts. It is a pseudoscience based on a faulty (actually, extremely faulty!) understanding of both science and simple mixtures.
18. Lying for Jesus?
Comment #169814 by TonyA on April 26, 2008 at 10:22 pm
Jesus overcame death itself on the cross and returned to life and is now seated at throne of God and is interceding for us on our behalf. Now tell me that is not a loving and wonderful God!That's not nearly as impressive to me as the untold number of atheists who have died in defense of others, knowing that they were putting their only life in eternal jeopardy.
19. Lying for Jesus?
Comment #169810 by TonyA on April 26, 2008 at 10:03 pm
I wanted to be an astronomer when I grew up (stinking eyesight ruined it for me!).I have to say that good eyesight is definitely not one of the things that an astronomer needs. Nearly all astronomy is done with instruments or cameras. I would hate to think this errant comment might dissuade anyone from pursuing astronomy.
20. British schools are falling for the pseudoscience of Brain Gym. Why fill kids' heads with nonsense?
Comment #160703 by TonyA on April 14, 2008 at 9:55 am
Does it say the author's name somewhere in the article, or do you guys just know it? I looked for it, but it only refers to Charlie at the end. Often there seems to be no author listed in articles here, and I think that should change. It's just nice to know who I'm reading.Most articles, including this one, include a link to the original source. Simply follow that link to see the article in its original habitat.
Comment #160366 by TonyA on April 14, 2008 at 2:02 am
Some of they do, but some of them do not dare to join since the level of discussion is easily down to insulting and swaering once evolution is down by Logic and reason. To me I have done my job because now more people join in through logic and reason to prove that evolution is no more than a joke not explicitly but through their smart discussions.Wooter,
Comment #158719 by TonyA on April 11, 2008 at 1:27 am
wooter:
My job is done, pal.
Comment #158711 by TonyA on April 11, 2008 at 1:20 am
I feel sorry for you chamber/clearmind/wooter.
I always thought it would be fun to have a pet chimpanzee, but you've reminded me that long after the novelty wears off, you still have a dung-flinging pain in the ass that all-too-frequently needs his diaper changed.
24. Richard Dawkins' US Tour begins this week
Comment #149260 by TonyA on March 25, 2008 at 10:48 am
AllanW,
I agree, but we should probably thank the author directly.
25. Two More Fleas
Comment #149249 by TonyA on March 25, 2008 at 10:19 am
Dearest and most honorable chamber/wooter/clearmind,
Your puncturing logic, unskewered reason and self-flagellating communications skills obviously place you deep into an intellectual category all by yourself. Your points reveal an incomprehensible wisdom that negates thousands of years of so-called "scientific progress" made by hundreds of thousands of the very smartest and brightest of God's creation.
I seriously and honestly want to know what it was that caused you, dear wooter, to reach such a level of intelligence that you are able to mentally demolish virtually everything that has ever been learned in the last several thousand years. Is it not amazing that God's brightest have all worked on the same body of knowledge over such a long time only to be shot down by wooter! Clearly God works in mysterious ways.
Did your rare and dizzying mental skills lead you to religion or did your religion lead you to your unique and stunning mental abilities?
Please clear this up for me. On the one hand we have everything we see around us that science has developed and on the other hand we see your contra-reasonable opinions about why the Sun never runs out of wood to burn.
If I want to be like you, you think me to help get smarter too? Clearly to me the informations you are provided about the nature of the universe are much, most simpler, but were can you help see to me that it is also much logicaler and more truefully?
Talk to the logic. Help me out of small pond, my amino acids are trying to turn into worms, but I am still waiting. Can you teach me the logic so your reason and logic explain so much wood? Help me kill the blind watcmaker in my delusional selfish genes.
Tony
26. Richard Dawkins' US Tour begins this week
Comment #149005 by TonyA on March 24, 2008 at 10:55 pm
Any news on how the Columbia, NYU and Austin gigs went yet?I was turned away at the door, but there is a good write-up of the Austin visit here:
27. Richard Dawkins' US Tour begins this week
Comment #147117 by TonyA on March 19, 2008 at 9:26 pm
I have no clue. The Hogg website http://www.utpac.org/venue/seating.php claims seating for 1,200 so I thought I would get in.
28. Richard Dawkins' US Tour begins this week
Comment #147109 by TonyA on March 19, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Along with a great many others, I was turned away at the door in Austin. It was a full house. I hope somebody gives a report.
29. Two More Fleas
Comment #146213 by TonyA on March 18, 2008 at 7:20 pm
Could someone hand me a working Babel Fish so that I can translate from this into something resembling syntactically and semantically correct English?
1)The evolution with HIS MIND AND INTELLIGENT WITH THE HELP OF BLINDWATCMAKER AND A LITTLE CHANCE WILL NOT BE HURT MAKE every snowflake differently,
2) T The evolution, THE VERSION FOR SKY, with HIS MIND(!) AND INTELLIGENT FIGURES OUT THE SUN AND EARTH LOCATION, DAYS AND NIGHTS, SEASONS, is spinning planets and rotate them every morning around the sun,
3) The EVOLUTION SEND THE WOODS TO THE SUNEVERY DAY, NAM A LOT FO WOOD IS NEEDED. So evolution asked help from dinasours to evolve into such a way that they can fly in the space so that they can carry some woods. The problem is that BERTRAND AND DARWIN STILL LOOKING FOR AMOINO ACIDS IN THE POND.
4) That EVOLUTION try to make all the plants and animals to only serve humans along with shield,SEVEN LATERS, REVEIVING HARMLESS SUNLIGHT, THE EXACT POWER OF GRAVITY, OXYGEN, CARBONDIOAXIDE THEIR COOOPERTAION WITH TREES, BUT EVOLUTION NEEDED HELP? Where is blindwatcmaker? Oh man he is lost again on the way. Methinks, go get him and methinks says" don't bother me, I am trying to think HOW I CAN THINK?
6) That there is a Birmingham palace CAME OUT BY ONE OF THE BRICKS INSIDE. But amino acidsm sorry, I mean bricks do not know how they evolve into different structures like glass, iron, wood so that they can GOT THE CERTAIN DESIGNS LIKE WINDOWS, TABLE OR OVEN?
7) Mona Lisa came out by evolution. The dark colour dropped from sky and it thought(!) what can I be what can I be? I got it I got. I can be a painting. Hm But I am only one colour. And Evolution is getting in scene right on time. Don't worry I will mutate you and evolve you into many colours? Then there you go many colours(!) But How can I do the painting? I have no mind, no talent, no conscious, And evolution says,' do not look at me, me neither! I am nothing. I am just an idea. Please call Learno da vinci then, the colours says. Leorna comes in looks for the thing it calls him. " hey colours where are you? And colours says, I am here, don't you see me? Leonarda says, "no". And colours says, Oh may God I am delusion, evolution come over here? Why? And Evolution says, " because I am delusion too.
Leornardo says, " don't worry, I brought my colours. And Leonarda did Mona Lisa and the reason why she smiles is the conversation above.
30. Fleabytes
Comment #146150 by TonyA on March 18, 2008 at 5:21 pm
Ah yes. Monty Python. No it wasn't!No you can't. Your five minutes are up.
Yes it was.
I think we could easily hit 10,000 this way.
31. Two More Fleas
Comment #144385 by TonyA on March 15, 2008 at 10:27 pm
wooter:
To TonyWell it looks to me that your citation is in agreement with what I said. This is hardly surprising, as I only know about this from reading and learning to understand what Richard Dawkins was saying.
Okay let's see what Prof Dawkins says: [quote omitted]
32. Two More Fleas
Comment #144025 by TonyA on March 14, 2008 at 10:24 pm
It is impossible that This Dna can act selfishly, or have a conscious. The parts of DNA are unconscious particles that can be selfish.You are a nitwit. The "selfish gene" is a description of a conceptual viewpoint, much like when one says, "water wants to flow downhill." Nobody would say that the water has true emotional desire, nor would any honest person claim that genes have consciousness or self-contained desires.
The designer of a very well- designed palace, [car, truck, watch, etc.] ...These little stories do little more than allow your profound ignorance to be known by all. You are presupposing a designer and then finding yourself amazed that your presupposition influences your conclusions.
33. Two More Fleas
Comment #143915 by TonyA on March 14, 2008 at 3:46 pm
"Clearmind/wooter/wipeout/selfishmind:"
He also posted as user "chamber"
Please how does evolution explain the work of our nose through chances and being selfish?Bogus question, but ...
34. Full house captivated by atheist Dawkins' take on religion
Comment #143480 by TonyA on March 14, 2008 at 6:39 am
demented audience ... listening to a load of smelly old hogwash ?So very lame.
35. Two More Fleas
Comment #143352 by TonyA on March 14, 2008 at 3:22 am
I've been reluctant to look at Vox Day's book. After seeing that Steve thinks the first two pages might be enough to form an opinion, I decided to have a look at it. I read the first two pages, and then another and another until I had read nearly five pages. I was ready to erase if after less than six minutes, but I endured dozens and dozens of additional pages until I convinced myself that I wasn't going to be able to find the page where the shit stopped and the intelligent arguments started.
It is my considered opinion that $0 is very much too high a price for a book of this caliber.
For the curious among you, consider reading the first two pages, but be prepared for a disappointing read. The book appears to be written by a defensive and vulnerable debater. The frequent drive-by rhetorical insults evoke the stereotype of a ranting, factually-challenged schoolyard bully.
Very sincerely,
Tony
36. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!
Comment #132152 by TonyA on February 24, 2008 at 10:59 am
Tony, maybe the following questions/statements can answer your river thing. I also mention here the blood, the river of life in our body- .Nope. I didn't see anything responsive to my query in your return volley of questions. If you have meant for me to answer on your behalf, under the safe assumption that you are a moron, you've succeeded brilliantly, indeed suspiciously brilliantly.
37. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!
Comment #132148 by TonyA on February 24, 2008 at 10:51 am
But Wooter is an idiot.While this is undoubtedly true, I feel a curious admiration for the sheer audacity and hubris of his self-inflicted ignorance.
Comment #132082 by TonyA on February 24, 2008 at 5:27 am
Earlier, I challenged wooter thusly:
Bring some logic and I'll talk to it. If you keep exposing your wooter instead, what response do you expect?I've seen plenty more spewing, wooterish, semi-liquid projectiles, but I'm still waiting for the logic. Bring on the logic, wooter!
You have an open opportunity to demonstrate that your opinions are more valuable than spontaneous, explosive diarrhea.
39. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!
Comment #132077 by TonyA on February 24, 2008 at 5:19 am
Diacanu, I greatly appreciate your posts too. I have seen you act heroically as the last line of defense on many occasions. Quite often your posts serve to reduce or remove a burning urge to write a lengthy and thoughtful post to some shithead who doesn't deserve the effort.
40. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!
Comment #132065 by TonyA on February 24, 2008 at 4:43 am
wooter:
Tony's Reverse psychologyIt wasn't reverse psychology, it was full-on mockery.
[wooter] stands with logic against E.T. May be I can make it simple for your just in case you don't get it again?If you knew what evolution was, yet you still rejected it, I could at least forgive your wrong but honest misunderstanding. However, your stunning and overwhelming ignorance creates howls of puerile derision instead. You must be proud.
Logic: How does ET explain the amazing mathematical calculations on honey combs while it is based on LUCK AND CHANCES?You've already been told. You might ponder how soap bubbles are able to "figure out" how to mimic minimal mathematical surfaces, without ever passing a math class (something the soap bubbles and you share, it seems). Read a book and learn something before you waste what's left of your life selfishly dreaming of an imaginary daddy in the sky.
I am asking you who built the White house and decorated it? It is really so nice. Who is the designer?James Hoban and others.
Logic: How does ET explain the snowflakes?Since snowflakes are not life, evolutionary theory does not explain them. Snowflakes are crystallized water. Snowflakes are no more made by god than piles of rocks are. In addition, I would caution you to avoid taking powers away from your god. When you require him to make the snowflakes individually, you have denied him the possibility of creating natural processes to make snowflakes. Who are you to deny such powers from your god? Oh yeah, since you created him (in your own feeble mind), you can define him any way you choose.
41. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!
Comment #132055 by TonyA on February 24, 2008 at 3:50 am
The Reverend Dark,
Despite the multi-sensory assault caused by your courageous description of the odoriferous excre-wooter, your post was thoroughly enjoyable.
p.s. Thanks for showing that the giant frog, though dead for millions of years, brings more sense to this world than some of those who post here.
42. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!
Comment #130932 by TonyA on February 21, 2008 at 2:05 pm
Thanks for the comments on my faux-wooter. I worried that I should not post it.
After a wootering like that, I slept well.
43. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!
Comment #130593 by TonyA on February 21, 2008 at 1:12 am
wooter:
Please make sense when you write.
Comment #130574 by TonyA on February 20, 2008 at 11:49 pm
wooter
What can I say to you? Chances, luck, blind watchmaker, did it? If it will make you happy, I can but logic gets in the way again and stops me. Talk to the logic.Bring some logic and I'll talk to it. If you keep exposing your wooter instead, what response do you expect?
Comment #130038 by TonyA on February 20, 2008 at 12:30 am
I don't believe the wooter really holds the beliefs that he so voluminously excretes here. He's clearly jerking his wooter a bit too hard.
I remember the first time I encountered the Eliza computer program. The best part was figuring out a way to make it say something absurd and ridiculous. For the wooter, it's all too easy to induce it to say something asinine. Yet curiously, I wait with some anticipation for the next steaming pile of wooter to appear.
46. Fleabytes
Comment #130035 by TonyA on February 20, 2008 at 12:18 am
Be sure to rank this article. I've ranked it Excellent.
47. Fleabytes
Comment #130017 by TonyA on February 19, 2008 at 10:59 pm
I wonder if they felt that Dawkins would somehow "collapse under the weight" of their arguments, a sort of "let's all shout at the same time" approach.Surely we've all noticed that many theists seem to decide what reality is based on a sort of group popularity or herd mentality. Strength of opinion, probably aggregately, appears to be of great importance. I would call them 'poor jurors.' I'm referring to the ones who spend their jury time trying to decide which group of lawyers is more believable, without much regard or concern for the evidence itself, seemingly on the belief that they can trust one camp or the other, if only they could decide which group was more certain of themselves.
48. Fleabytes
Comment #129946 by TonyA on February 19, 2008 at 7:49 pm
Thanks, Paula. I read every word. Nice work. I appreciate your fearless efforts. You are a great asset.
Comment #129397 by TonyA on February 19, 2008 at 4:01 am
Maybe that's why he's too busy to stop mass murderers and to feed starving children. At least he ensures that most of their corpses are uniquely identifiable.
50. Richard Dawkins talks about The God Delusion
Comment #129393 by TonyA on February 19, 2008 at 3:56 am
One finds reason only to find how unreasonable life is!!But at least I know the truth. It would sure suck if I spent my entire life living in ignorance and being proud of it. How can you tolerate all the religious pomposity and arrogance? Aren't you embarrassed by your slavish and servile behavior to a god that isn't there?