1. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278006 by Isaksson on November 4, 2008 at 10:36 am

I've been following the mainstream media articles here from Sweden, downloaded some stuff on the subject and browsed around some, and I can say that McCain gives me nightmares. (Well, not really.. I cant even remember if I ever had nightmares, but you know what I'm trying to say.) And that Palin woman! She scares the crap out of me. I am sure I don't need to go into details as you all probably know this topic better than me.

I do not usually judge people for having their tounge in a knot when speaking, as I try to listen to what is said, not how it's said. This time, however, I am amazed that what is said from McCain and Palin most often are both poorly presented and idiotic. In my opinion, they seem to represent the US government to the fullest at present. My opinion in general of the US is as follows. Wonderful geographic landscapes, Well mannered and generous people but a totally arsewipe political system.

2. No-God squad climb aboard the atheist bus

Comment #270532 by Isaksson on October 24, 2008 at 8:57 am

> hungarianelephant

"She is the "thinking man's crumpet".

At least, she was 40 years ago."

Well, she wouldn't take it the wrong way then, I suppose.

>clatz

"How about we pay for a monument to all of the dead Gods? ... leaving plenty of space for a few more to be added at a later date. "

I'm all up for that one! I've learned a hell of a lot of useful stuff from all sorts of religions, (so a monument would "probably" be a good thing) mostly in the line of "Don't trust everything you read." and " Don't put your trust in just about anyone, they might not even exist." oh and my favorite "Don't talk to strangers, they most likely are Biblebabblers."

Edit below:

>Steve Zara

"We need to end up with people considering a belief in Gods to be equivalent to a belief in fairies - eccentric and embarassing."

I do actually believe in fairies. I see them in the pub all the time, although I've had the suspicion they really are dressed up men for quite some time.

3. No-God squad climb aboard the atheist bus

Comment #270472 by Isaksson on October 24, 2008 at 7:28 am

Yes!

I just turned 31 and I'm still considered young!

Thank you Joan Bakewell, I'd kiss you, but I don't know how you look. (I'm a bit picky, I admit.) Besides, I can't really afford the flight right now.

4. Debate: Would We Be Better Off Without Religion?

Comment #256126 by Isaksson on September 28, 2008 at 7:04 pm

That bible reading woman, whatshername, said, "the larger the brain, the larger the group of individuals", or something of the sort. I got one thing I'd like to say..

Ants.

Edit:
Oh, and that John Lennox figure really made me wish, for just a second, that we, the human race, would just off our selfes.

5. Richard Dawkins infected with Satanic 'virus of mind', Christian group claims

Comment #251481 by Isaksson on September 21, 2008 at 2:01 pm

I laughed so damn hard when I read this. Actually, I'm still laughing.

..."despite him being spiritually dead for over 60 years."

6. Texas State Board of Education approves Bible course for high schools

Comment #214148 by Isaksson on July 19, 2008 at 6:01 pm

"The State Board of Education on Friday gave final approval to a rule establishing an elective Bible course for high schools"

Here we go..

"But a majority of board members, including all seven aligned with social conservatives, said they preferred to adopt a general rule now and not get into the specifics of what will be taught in the classes."

Oh nice! You've got your arses covered now, don't you?

"Critics contend that the board standards for the course are so vague and general that many schools might unknowingly create unconstitutional Bible classes that either promote the religious views of teachers..."

No shit!

*sigh*

Im going to bed.

7. VOICES OF SCIENCE - Available Now on DVD

Comment #211469 by Isaksson on July 16, 2008 at 3:53 am

This is pure earcandy! I so enjoy listening to this sort of conversations. To broaden ones pespective should always be a drive in life.

Ive always thought, that when presented with a problem, Its like I am standing on a cliff, staring at the unknown, and if I decide to engage the problem in question, I simply just jump off. The problem, to me, isn't a wall you need to hammer down, it's a freefall into the mysteriouse, where you can swirl around, looking out from different views, experiment with total fredom the way you fall. The solution isn't the other side of a wall, It is hitting the bottom. Sometimes you can get clues of how the bottom is layed out by studying what passes you as you fall, sometimes you can even see the bottom. But most often, I would hope, you just hit the bottom with total and utter surprise.

8. Disproving Conventional Wisdom On Diversity Of Marine Fossils And Extinction Rates

Comment #210581 by Isaksson on July 14, 2008 at 8:47 pm

King of NH

"So why do we need a bill telling scientists to do what they apparently do already, quite willingly?"

So those people that are coming up with ideas, put the bill up for discussion and those who vote for them has something to do to show they really earn the money they get?

Just a thought.

9. PLEASE WRITE IN SUPPORT OF PZ MYERS

Comment #210575 by Isaksson on July 14, 2008 at 8:34 pm

Daleadil

"To be honest, I'm sort of offended by the way PZ Myers is going about this. There are far better ways to make a point."

Can you parehaps explain how and why you are offended, and give an example of how you would go about it? To make a point to the fact, so to speak. Im just interested in your point of view.

"I think he should be disciplined for his behavior."

I would also like to ask you as to why you think he should be disciplined in your opinion, and how this should be done?

10. PLEASE WRITE IN SUPPORT OF PZ MYERS

Comment #209921 by Isaksson on July 13, 2008 at 2:06 pm

Although I am not in no way one to write letters often, I felt as I should do so now. I wrote as follows:

President Robert H. Bruininks

I have taken the time to write this letter to you in regard to the issue Professor Paul Zachary Myers addressed in an article he wrote about an incident regarding a student, Webster Cook, removing a wafer from a church, titled: "IT'S A FRACKIN' CRACKER!".

I am utterly horrified by the response from the Catholic community and others who hold similar values. How can one put thoughts of bodily harm, and/or the ruin of an individual's life, career, freedom and safety, in proportion to walking away with a wafer in his mouth?

This also applies to the response from the above mentioned aggressors to Professor Paul Zachary Myers article. It is most unsettling, to say the least, if this should have any negative impact on Professor Paul Zachary Myers current standing with the University of Minnesota. He has simply put forward his opinion on this particular issue.

It should be any individual's right to point out his or her view to whomever so chooses to listen, as it is everyone's right to either agree, or disagree to views held by others. This does not, however, give people the right to threaten, or in other ways do harm to those who have different opinions than they them self have.


Regards,

"Firstname" Isaksson

"Adress", Sweden

11. Atheist soldier sues Army for 'unconstitutional' discrimination

Comment #207143 by Isaksson on July 9, 2008 at 8:38 am

Dhamma

So true, and look how horrible we are, starting wars, crime going through the roof, terrorism, and... Wait a minute!!!!

One thing though, I really dont like this FRA survailance thing our goverment are doing. It has to be withdrawn, or it will cost us who live here and this country greatly, I fear. Thats another topic, however.

All in all, it's not a bad place to live.

12. Atheist soldier sues Army for 'unconstitutional' discrimination

Comment #207134 by Isaksson on July 9, 2008 at 8:21 am

When I did my service to this country (sweden), It was with a complete lack of religiouse influence. Im not even sure we had a military priest, shaplin or whatever you call them.

Religion has no place in the military, to my experience, and if someone are so inclined, go pray on your free time. Dont blame me if you lack quality time with your mate due to praying though.

13. Richard Dawkins on Doctor Who

Comment #201895 by Isaksson on June 30, 2008 at 11:37 am

Steve Zara

Well,your points is well taken, indeed. I have no option to agree to them, in the way you put them forward. Although, I would like to point out that The next generation also has some good issues they put in play. Take Cmr. Data for exaple. He raises the question of what is to be considered human, and what humanity realy is. Jean Luc Pikard often drives morality and ethics to its very edge. Often both issues even go hand in hand in some episodes. These are just two examples I can think of that are very relevan today, when pondering genetics, artificial intelligence, medical pocedures amongst other things. SG1 goes there too, but in its own way, and in slightly different areas, focusing on what you mentioned.

Battlestar Galactica also has a few good issues it raises in these areas, and goes even so far as to nibble on religion in its own way. Come to think of it, so does SG1.

Oh, and Hunter Z? I do not speak Klingon, altho I must confess I thought about learning it at one point. *laughs*

14. Charles Darwin was not the father of atheism

Comment #201885 by Isaksson on June 30, 2008 at 11:20 am

What the hell was that all about? *points to the article*

Ive come to belive that in order for us as a species to survive, we have adopded many ways of working around our shortcomings.

This might be one option..

As infants we grab hold of our parents and guardians, and as we get just a little bit older and start to explore our world around us, we listen and believe what they say without reservation. (Atleast untill we are able to make up our own minds.) Thus, I think, we are all born atheists.

For whatever reason, we sometime in our amcestral past became self aware, and was able form abstract thinking outside of ou selfes. But we didnt know very much, and we hadnt yet developed the ways to figure things out. That might have been the birth of early religiouse thoughts, as a way of explaining, for our ancestors, the unexplainable.

For a society with a great number of people to coexist, you need some type of thing that unifies them. As a result, its not far fetched to see religion filling this gap. It might at one time have stilled both our lack of knowlage and kept folks in line with the rulers laws, for the sake of prosperity and what not.

So, it would be only natural for parents, that has learned to survive in their particular society by their parents, to teach their kids what they have learned throughout generation after generation.

This, however, I dont think is the case today. People are figuring out that they can survive, and undertand this world without any notions of god/gods, ancestral spirits or whatever, that says you can and cannot do certain things. We have other things that takes the place of religion, and those things only gets better as time moves forward.

I might ofcource be wrong, as im not a scientist or some such. But I wonder if the stonage people could even begin to grasp a notion like this.

In other words, Darwin does not seem to be the bloody father of atheism, evolution was, just as it was the father of religion, as a means of survival. He was the discoverer of evolution. Big fucking difference.

Wether religion is a byproduct of some other beneficial evolutionary happenstance, or the social evolution as we got more numerouse, I dont know.

If an arse like me can play around with my thoughts and form something like this with the bits and pieces I have heard here and there, how come older and more intelligent folk with more experience than me can't?

15. Richard Dawkins on Doctor Who

Comment #201848 by Isaksson on June 30, 2008 at 10:26 am

Well, Steve, about the age thing. After passing a certain age, you actually get younger for each year that passes. A 5 year old has a hard time keeping track of his/her toys, and so will we when we reach 85.

And in my.. (here it comes) opinion, the reason I like SG1 is due to the whole idea of the wormhole travel thingie and how they made a story out of it, and the fact that there is about 10 seasons with some 20 (something?) episodes in each. Thats a hell of a lot of hours I DO NOT regret. The pure length of the series is its strongest entertainment value. And as with Star Trek aswell as Dr. Who, it is nice to see the implementation of new ways of filming, special effects and so on.
But SG1 as the #1? Well, not in my taste.

16. Richard Dawkins on Doctor Who

Comment #201837 by Isaksson on June 30, 2008 at 10:02 am

Steve, altho I agree to what you are saying, Im a bit confused as to why you are adressing it to me. I have never compared Dr. Who to a childrens program. (maby you thought so because your post mentioned in my and Hunters posts was a reply to some such claim) Although I can on some points see how one could compare it to one, I do not think it entirely is just that. I belive you are right in that it is for kids of all ages, wether they be 5 or 55. In other words, I can subscribe to the notion it is family oriented. (Much just like Farscape)

HunterZolomon
Glad to hear your not that hurt by my opinions afterall. But even if I like Star Trek, I am no trekkie per se. If you compare Star Trek to say, the new Battlestar Galactica currently airing.. well, Im more of a Odama fan than a regular old Spock fan. And BG is one of the best, prolly even the best Scifi series I have ever seen. Hows that for an opinion!

17. Richard Dawkins on Doctor Who

Comment #201764 by Isaksson on June 30, 2008 at 8:31 am

HunterZolomon

Ive read the comment by Steve, and as far as I can see, he is just stating his opinion in the same manner as you and me. Although he has a reference to the fact Dr. Who has won some awards for drama or what not. If your opinion is in line with his, its fine by me. But I am in no way, shape or form forced to agree with anyones opinion that differs from mine, regardless of whom holds the opposite opinion. (Facts and opinion are two different things, I would say.) If Dr. Who has won some awards, that is a fact. The reason for having won the awards are based on opinion though, and to those I am not forced to agree.

As for actors that can give Stewart a run for his money, as you put it, there most certainly are a few of those. On that note I certainly agree. But If you where to mention, lets say five, and then I would name five, Im sure the five actors we mentioned would differ. Some actors are good at comedy, but bad at drama, and vice versa, but there are those who think one actor is bad at drama and others who think that the same actor is good at drama. This is also due to our difference in opinion.

To make this simple, if your opinion differs from someone elses, then its a matter of opinion. So I would like to point out that your statement about this not being a matter of opinion is false.

And for you to say I am wrong? Well, thats your opinion, isn't it?

Oh, and nice to see a fellow swede.

18. Richard Dawkins on Doctor Who

Comment #201702 by Isaksson on June 30, 2008 at 5:42 am

HunterZolomon

First of all, Im a dyslectic swede, so please forgive my poor writing skills. I usually use an external editor to help me with spelling. Sometimes, like now, I dont bother tho.

For me, a B-series can be a lot better than an A series, due to the fact that an A-series is most often to short lived. What is considered to be an A or B-series is on the other hand a matter of opinion, as it is your opinion that I sound like "the snooty dinner table snob who subscribes to the rather limited tastes of the culture elite". I am in no way going to hold that agaist you.

A B-series is often underfunded, and that leads to "filler" episodes, in order to save up for the season finale and what not, but the a-rated series keeps an even quality in all episodes. Each has its charm.

Well, for giving an example, Star Treck the next generation is in my opinion an A-rated series, and a long one at that. Patrick Stewart is in my opinion also an A-rated actor. It is possible, however, for an A-series to have filler content and B-actors. Its unavoidable really, come to think of it. You always need the background folks or people thats gonna die or what not. This said, if most actors in a series are B-actors you can actually get a better flow of things, as one actor/actors doesnt take over the set as much, as is the case with the next generation. Patrick, in my opinion, stands out a bit much at times. In Dr.Who, you have a more balanced set.

Ive seen most schifi series out there, and I liked them all, in their own way. Most of the time, its even unfair to try to compare them to eachother.

19. Richard Dawkins on Doctor Who

Comment #201263 by Isaksson on June 29, 2008 at 2:08 pm

Well, this is not a reply to any specific person, but just my line of thought on the matter of preference.

Yes, Dr. Who is most certanly a B-series, with B-acting and for the most part, but not allways, made up from B-scripts.

Yes, in that regard, Mr Dawkins is a B-rated actor if he is to be considered an actor at all, as he, atleast in my opinion, does just as good as anyone else on Dr. Who.

With this in mind, I whole heartadly think Dr. Who is turning out to be a good series. Im so utterly fed up with reality shows that aren't more real than santa. Not to mention that I dont even want to hear about that bloody Britney Spears and her babies, boyfriends and what not she have, or have not, problems with. The same goes for Most of the news broadcasts out there. If you put on a tape, recorded in the 80:ies, its just the same as now, just different places, dates and different people, but the same killings, sports and weather as we always have had.

Its so rare to find something that is as reliable as an old B-series, and that does not have any other agenda than to entertain you.

20. Richard Dawkins on Doctor Who

Comment #201018 by Isaksson on June 28, 2008 at 7:09 pm

I just like to say, that Dr. Who is actually turning out to be a farily good TV-series. Oh, and Mr Dawkins.. nicely done indeed.

21. Group wants Wi-Fi banned from public buildings

Comment #186197 by Isaksson on May 29, 2008 at 10:23 pm

Im sorry if this allready has been covered, but it would seem to me that the very idea of electro radiant allergies and what not simply just isnt a fact to be considered when dealing with pain and other types of issues one can have with allergies. If folk, however, has some kind of issue such as chronic pains and does not get any help and/or does not have any insight in what could be the cause, I cant see it being a far step to blaim whatever happens to be closest at hand to be the cause of it, even if its not based on facts. We humans tend to blaim fairies and trolls for all sorts of things. Just look at religion in general.

Radiation allergies seems a bit far fetched tho, as we are litteraly bombarded with all types of radiation, every second of every day, from our sun and from space in general in forms of background radiation and what not.

Id sugest to get a doctors opinion on the matter, and not to give up if you do not get a diagnose and treatment that suits your need. If you do not get the help you need, move on to another doctor. But please, leave your self made diagnose at the door to the hospital, the doctors only need the symptoms. If he indeed need anything else, im sure he will ask.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronic_pain
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allergy