1. 'Expelled' ripped off Harvard's 'Inner Life of the Cell' animation

Comment #160879 by Duffman6 on April 14, 2008 at 2:07 pm

Considering the indignant actions correlated by the ID community, a manifesto of childish popular psuedo-science such as Expelled: I would love to see a refutation or a collective response.

Copyright infrigement, intellectual dishonesty, PZ Meyers' infamous Expelled incident, etc. The movie has it all, litterally, and it is simply begging to be refuted by 'big science' proponents. As Meyers said in one of his reviews, this movie is dishonest enough and stupid enough to appeal to a large majority of the American public. A cinematic refutation would be a utopia of atheistic gratitude.

2. Richard Dawkins' secular army must be stopped. God is behind some of our greatest art

Comment #160346 by Duffman6 on April 14, 2008 at 1:20 am

What was this?


Chapter 3 of The God Delusion?


This articles is what manifests as a result of arguments from ignorance. Dawkins clearly states his position on religious art: which is none less than reverence and respect with the reason of not buying into it's message. St. Matthew's Passion by Bach was one of the mentioned religious arts. It is a very, very simple concept. The common man or woman does not need a degree in physcology to know that people draw inspiration from both reality and delusion. Nor does a reporter need to read much into Dawkins to know his stance on it.

So Dawkins doesn't believe in god and wants Atheism to be taken seriously.

How it is translated in this article: The militant war lord Richard Dawkins should be impeached from his position as general of the atheist army before he and his soldiers burn down churches and make bonfires out of Paradise Lost and Veggie Tales.

Anyone with a high school education in journalism could recognize the ignorance in it.

3. Happy Birthday, Richard Dawkins!

Comment #150200 by Duffman6 on March 26, 2008 at 2:57 pm

Happy Birthday, Richard!

You truly are a 'candle in the dark'.

4. No Admission for Evolutionary Biologist at Creationist Film

Comment #148011 by Duffman6 on March 21, 2008 at 7:14 pm

4 articles on the same subject- 3 being on the same day, and one on the day just before; 1 article from The New York Times?


"Explosive" might be an overstatement. But I would say it's somewhere in the ballpark.

5. Two More Fleas

Comment #146279 by Duffman6 on March 18, 2008 at 9:40 pm

I was considering ordering a few of these fleas from my local book shop, in light of my desire to stay open minded and criticize everything I believe to be true. The majority of these books were extremely trashy CBN-style propoganda exploiting the casual strawman/ad hominem arguments for Christianity; but I am still looking for a solid 'refutation' of The God Delusion to equate and expand upon my studies.

That being said, I scanned briefly through the pages of comments and didn't see a comment by Richard on the number of books written against his. Any comments, Professor?

6. Two More Fleas

Comment #143913 by Duffman6 on March 14, 2008 at 3:45 pm

"The DEVIL'S DELUSION".

Heh. I rather like that one.

Seriously though, is 'Fleas' the right term to use here?

Granted their parsitic, bothersome and at times obnoxious. But still.

7. Ben Stein Wins Intelligent Design Money

Comment #140861 by Duffman6 on March 8, 2008 at 11:19 pm

Behind every Anti-Evolution movement or media there is always an agenda to promote Intelligent Design, and is constantly being funded by a Christian organization. With every gap there is in Evolution, there is a team of Christians hovering over the sight with helicopters and news cameras. The next day, there's a book written about how Evolution is disproven and Intelligent Design wins.

The day after, they're refuted; they are litterally beaten over the head with evidence of Evolution and progressive scientifc theories that easily undercut their claims. The process begins again.

Thus only proves Intelligent Design is religion-based. The Discovery Institute, for example; a "Secular defense of Intelligent Design" is gargantuanly funded by Christian oragnizations.




...And they say we're the ones with the agenda.

8. Christopher Hitchens on Real Time with Bill Maher

Comment #137784 by Duffman6 on March 3, 2008 at 1:27 pm

Christopher did a great job, despite his much too assuming statement on Buddhism.

His Atheistic politics argument was gold.

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

Comment #135402 by Duffman6 on February 28, 2008 at 11:09 pm

I most certainly agree with Simmons that science should be debated, argued, reformed, etc; especially the 'theory' (which he obnoxiously puts so much emphasis on, like any loyal Creationist would; as well as make extremely false claims on the fossil record and strawman arguments against Darwin) of evolution and its gaps. But simmons presents nothing, absolutely nothing worthy of discussion here; Myers makes a complete fool out of him, destroying his inane statements at every turn.

I look forward to the next debate, should there indeed be one.

10. Add another flea to the list...

Comment #133117 by Duffman6 on February 25, 2008 at 4:00 pm

Well; looks like a lively bunch atleast. I will consider reading some of these propositions.

'The New Atheist Crusaders and Their Unholy Grail: The Misguided Quest to Destroy Your Faith' is one, however, that I will deliberately avoid in light of the obvious religious paranoia.

11. The Lava Lizard's Tale

Comment #130940 by Duffman6 on February 21, 2008 at 2:17 pm

Splendid.

12. Hitchens and Boteach Debate on God

Comment #125116 by Duffman6 on February 11, 2008 at 1:58 am

Boteach is obnoxious in his attempts to both belittle Evolution and exaggerate to the extreme any form of religion. Before quoting any excerpt of scientist or theologian, he would prime it with, "The most famous american scientist that ever lived and obviously the smartest man ever to walk this planet says..." then continue with something that helps his cause. That, and quite frankly, wailing his arms about and yelling in a high pitched voice "COME ON PEOPLE OPEN YOUR EYES!" or succumb himself to sounding like an 8-year old girl by yelling 'I'M SORRY!' when Hitchens diligently pointed out a fallacy in his blabbering, outspoken argument doesn't do a single, positive thing for the religion he represents. Also the countless contradictions, both saying 'I support evolution', then follow with 'Richard Dawkins is one of the last men who supports long-term evolution'. Your classic, textbook example of a Strawman argument mixed in with sympathetic, wishy-washy emotional baggage exaggerating the meaning of life, way too frequently pointing his finger and whining that Hitchens is being unfair. However, where he absolutely fails- to me- is his constant idolization of Judaism. He is way out of line to believe that The Golden Rule is exclusive to Judaism, or even religion, and even more so out of line to say that charity is religious and anyone who is charitible succumbs to religion. Its rubbish, absolute rubbish. You hear it way too many times from a Judeo-Christian apologist, the argument (I'm sure it has a name) that all morality comes from spirituality, that Evolution doesn't explain beauty, and so forth. And his sheer ignorance is appalling, how "We've found oil and gold, WE'VE FOUND EVERYTHING!", typical Behe-esque foolery.

Hitchens, on the other hand, is calm and precise. I too laughed out loud at some of his comments, especially the subtle bitterness such as 'I'm not the one with the burden of proof' or 'You asked for it- you asked for white noise and you got it'. His introduction was superb, absolutely superb. Religion was indeed mankind's first and worst philosophy. Like Harris was with Rabbi Wolpe, he calmly refutes- literally massacres- religious pretenses. And, like Harris, with every debate I see of him I respect him more and more. Fantastic.

13. Richard Dawkins talks about The God Delusion

Comment #123869 by Duffman6 on February 7, 2008 at 7:48 pm

Shmeezers, theres a wealth of theories on morality through an evolutionary perspective such as 'The Evolution of Morality' by Richard Joyce; 'Moral Minds' by Marc Hauser; 'Evolutionary origins of Morality' by Leonard D. Katz; and a summary by Richard Dawkins in chapter 6 of The God Delusion.

Time Magazine did a recent cover story of morality (December 3 2007) explaining why we feel a sense of right and wrong. Clearly no theology is needed, and no theology ever will be needed.

14. Sam Harris debate with Rabbi David Wolpe

Comment #117487 by Duffman6 on January 29, 2008 at 12:11 am

Superb discussion form too civilized sides. Harris, of course, crushes him- but Rabbi David Wolpe made an admirable case.

15. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #117470 by Duffman6 on January 28, 2008 at 10:55 pm

Richard indeed did great in this interview, especially when dealing with the standard run-of-the-mill 'Evolution is unprovable' Christian. I find it somewhat sad that so many Christain fundamentalist do not realize that faith doesn't hold up in any kind of scientific argument, and by claiming his capacity of faith and how nothing will ever shake it he quickly inflicts a fatal blow in his credibility, as already obvious with 'Where are all the tansitional animals?' bit.