1. Group finds Starbucks logo too hot to handle

Comment #180904 by Corylus on May 16, 2008 at 4:00 am

Hmm.

So we have someone setting up a group called 'The Resistance' and then going up against a huge company...I'm smelling a martyr complex here.

"Infamy, infamy.... they've all got it in for me."

2. The Dissent Of Darwin - The World Of Richard Dawkins

Comment #180723 by Corylus on May 15, 2008 at 3:58 pm

Cartomancer

Are we going to have to have a violent schism now and start killing each other?

Nah, darling.

Well, not unless you want to start talking about dualism, in which case I might just have to kill you dead.

I have had a nice dinner followed by some port and I simply can't manage such discussions after a certain hour.

I fear I'm a lightweight :-)

3. The Dissent Of Darwin - The World Of Richard Dawkins

Comment #180711 by Corylus on May 15, 2008 at 3:31 pm

Comment, no 180678 by Cartomancer

*Sniggers* :-)

----

There you go Dodger, dissent on a fundamentalist atheist message board.

I will leave it up to you to decide what to call out in the middle of the night, and in whose hearing.

4. The Dissent Of Darwin - The World Of Richard Dawkins

Comment #180667 by Corylus on May 15, 2008 at 1:35 pm

Best of luck Artful.

BTW - I reserve the right to dislike you intensely if you understand the articles straight away.

With philosophical works I like to...


1) First, read with no hope of understanding and then...
2) Have a sleep.
3) Second, read with a hope of understanding a little and then...
4) Have a swim.
5) Third, read with concentration and optimism and then...
6) Have a nice bath.
7) Fourth, read a dissenting view and then...
8) Have another sleep.

When I am very, very lucky I find that my subconscious has worked and I sit up in bed in the middle of the night calling out "Well, bugger me!!"*

If I am not lucky, well... *shrugs* at least I am clean and my complexion glows.

Take your time.

----

*Best to only do this when you are on your own.

5. The Neural Buddhists

Comment #180642 by Corylus on May 15, 2008 at 12:42 pm

I personally will read Richard Morgan's conversion story with interest when he posts it for all to see.

He need not be afraid that I will subject it to kneejerk ridicule - this is not my style - although I do reserve the right to tease a little :-)

However, I'm afraid to say that this statement

(I have re-opened PM access so if you do want to have further details, you can PM me.)

Smacks to me of the 'Why not come to our Church and see for yourself, no pressure, honest." line.

I am, no doubt, an overly cynical individual, but my caution concerning getting into private correspondence with people that I do not have a complete handle on has served me well.

P.S, BTW RichardM you need not have any concern for me. I am not one of the posters on here about which you so tantalising stated...

And for those, who, behind intellectual brilliance hide a profound emotional anguish, especially.....*

I am neither brilliant nor anguished. As I am sure you are glad to hear.

---
*See below for full quote.
http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2488,Open-Letter-to-a-victim-of-Ben-Steins-lying-propaganda,Richard-Dawkins,page36#173048

6. The Dissent Of Darwin - The World Of Richard Dawkins

Comment #180627 by Corylus on May 15, 2008 at 12:13 pm

When I'm asked questions like yours about testicles, the best strategy may be to refuse to answer. Because if you allow yourself to exercise your ingenuity in solving a particular question, then people come up with another one that you just can't think of an answer to.

*Wonders to self just how many questions about testicles I would have to get asked in a public debate, before I could get that blase; or not collapse into giggles.*

HeeHee - guess I'm just a prude.

-----

Artful_Dodger Why not check out the site below if you are into the philosophy of mind? Lots of interesting articles with differing viewpoints on there.

http://themindi.blogspot.com/

I do think that the story of the unfortunate dualist is very sweet :-)

http://themindi.blogspot.com/2007/02/chapter-23-unfortunate-dualist.html

7. Vatican: It's OK to believe in aliens

Comment #179960 by Corylus on May 14, 2008 at 3:17 am

Praise Quetz!!

8. Vatican: It's OK to believe in aliens

Comment #179948 by Corylus on May 14, 2008 at 2:59 am

Hmmph - can get this embedding picture thing to work. Bah.

Top one on today's page...

http://icanhascheezburger.com/

9. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #179070 by Corylus on May 12, 2008 at 1:30 pm

'They are men and know what honour is,' he said.

Interesting. I have noticed how the term 'honour' can sometimes be used as a smokescreen for sexual jealousy.

I find myself wondering what thoughts this murderous low-life had in the dark of the night concerning his daughter.

Children are not property, in any sense of the term.

10. Church of Scotland mediators to quell disputes

Comment #178313 by Corylus on May 11, 2008 at 7:09 am

I wonder if these mediators are working for free? Doubt it.

That being the case, those troublesome parishoners are (when putting money into the collection plate or tithing) contributing to the payment of someone being sent to stop them agitating.

Strange when you think about it.

If I were in this position I would simply leave the institution in question. If god is omnipresent - what need for a church? This leads me to the conclusion that this is more likely to be about petty scraps than doctrine.

---
BW022

The first rule of getting someone to overlook your own failings is to blame someone else.

Very good point.

11. Scientists Know Better Than You--Even When They're Wrong

Comment #177939 by Corylus on May 10, 2008 at 2:49 am

Spinoza

They're criticisms and they may be justified or not, but they ought to be dealt with rationally and calmly...

Okay, dude, I'll give it a bash. :)
-----
Setting aside the question of 'lay' contributions for a second (those discussion tend to get emotional with accusations of intellectual snobbery flying around), let's look at whether this article works on its own terms. I don't think it does for one simple reason.

There is a danger here that the author does not seem to have considered (maybe because he has shut himself up into a very specific area of physics), that his dichotomy between 'lay' and 'expert' is not just applicable to scientists and non scientists, but also between scientists of different fields.

How do you distinguish the people who can and can't contribute to a specialized field?
The key to the whole thing is whether people have had access to the tacit knowledge of an esoteric area;tacit knowledge is know-how that you can't express in words. The standard example is knowing how to ride a bike. My view as a sociologist is that expertise is located in more or less specialized social groups. If you want to know what counts as secure knowledge in a field like gravitational wave detection, you have to become part of the social group. Being immersed in the discourse of the specialists is the only way to keep up with what is at the cutting edge.

Well, I can understand Collins' admiration for people with specialized knowledge and can see why specialisation is necessary. If you look at the history of science over the last 200 hundred years what you see is the increasing and astonishing amount of specialisation. This is understandable, no one can learn everything; this concentration on one specific thing can be hugely productive.

However, and this is a huge 'however', by this statement he appears to rule out the possibility of cross-disciplinary dialogue and knowledge sharing. If one professional tells another that their particular pet theory will not work because of evidence from other fields are they to be dismissed merely because they cannot 'walk the talk'?

People need to be able share knowledge without being forced into written tests. That is the way they can work towards coming up with ideas that work in both fields. The question is not whether they can bullshit their way through a test. The question is whether or not they are right.

What you have to do is not sort out the people who are right and wrong; what you have to sort is the people who can make sensible contributions from those who can't.

Umm... Isn't being right making a sensible contribution? By definition?

Too narrow.

12. My Response to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #177715 by Corylus on May 9, 2008 at 2:29 pm

Fascinating. I have been catching up on this business by reading the linked documents and watching the Youtube videos of Rabbi Shlmuley. Oh dear.

Good letter, Ian. I liked the honest tone. I agree with you that playing fast and loose with the age of the universe for rhetorical effect was a particularly low trick.

13. Churchgoing on its knees as Christianity falls out of favour

Comment #177411 by Corylus on May 9, 2008 at 3:41 am

Increasing numbers of Muslim youth, while young people are leaving Christianity in droves? Hmm. It might be that some of the variance in the figures is down to the apostasy taboo, and the threats that can result for people who leave this religion. I am sure that there are many people who simply trapped and too frightened to leave.

This is why the West has a moral duty to support the brave people in the Central Council of Ex-Muslims.

Grayling on this organisation:

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/ac_grayling/2007/06/the_courage_of_their_convictions.html

Their website:

http://www.ex-muslim.org.uk/

The majority of Muslims probably do want to stay in the religion, however, we mustn't forget to fight for the rights of those that want to leave.

----
Anyways, I was absolutely intrigued as to why churches were moaning about their water bills...

Hundreds of churches are protesting at soaring water bills, with some parishes facing increases of up to 1,300 per cent. Senior churchmen from the Church of England, Methodist and other churches are meeting officials from Ofwat, the industry regulator, to argue their case against the charges today.

Huh? I thought, it's a while since I went to a church service, but I don't recall seeing a dishwasher on the go, or the vicar's smalls hanging on a line from the steeple...

So I did a bit of research

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tees/7386647.stm

It appears that they are protesting at the thought of being charged the same as everyone else.

14. Faith in Britain today

Comment #177122 by Corylus on May 8, 2008 at 3:40 pm

Amoungst all the waffle were slipped both a frightening statement and a deeply demeaning one.

First the frightening one...

Only a modern person would think that religion is a private matter, something the individual does in his or her solitude, but the tradition of Catholicism is that Christianity is profoundly social. How can it be otherwise if the first commandment to love God is inseparable from the second commandment to love our neighbour? True Christianity always becomes culture.

This is someone with absolutely no understanding of the separation of church and state. These people scare me.

(Any lurking christian here that does not understand why I'm worried - try swapping the word 'Christianity' for 'Islam' to see why. This argument could be used for imposing sharia).

Now the demeaning one...

But where does this sense of 'missing' God come from? ..... our hearts are always restless until they rest in God: before that point, we are missing something, or rather, we are missing someone, the one whose love pulses the blood through our veins.

The BBC translate this as 'respect atheists. Urgh. I am shocked and disappointed that they do not recognise denigration and dehumanisation when they hear it.

As for the use of the Coupland quote...

...I need God; that I am sick and can no longer make it alone. I need God to help me give because I no longer seem to be capable of giving; to help me to be kind, as I no longer seem capable of kindness, to help me love, as I seem beyond being able to love".

Strange. I can honestly say that I have never needed god to make me capable of giving, I have never needed god to help me to be kind and I have certainly never needed god to make me capable of loving. I fail to see what it is that I am 'missing'. I wonder, what precisely is it that I lack?

What a dreadful world the archbishop must live in to think that god is the source of all love.

How dare he.

15. An Atheist Goes Undercover to Join the Flock of Mad Pastor John Hagee

Comment #176562 by Corylus on May 7, 2008 at 3:27 pm

I feared for my normal.

Sign of sanity that.

Mr Taibbi, if you are reading this, remember to take some time out for yourself after this experience.

Your normal life can feel both real (in that it is familiar) and also unreal in that you know that there is a harsher reality elsewhere.

P.S. Loved the clown story :)

16. The detail in the Devil

Comment #176236 by Corylus on May 7, 2008 at 1:23 am

And it happens to good people, Bradshaw theorizes, noting that targets tend toward the innocent, highly virtuous and unusually gifted.

It's true that often the darkest amongst us can often be found in bright daylight. Doesn't mean they are possessed though - just practiced deceivers.

... asking if people could be that inhumane to each other independently of ultra-human assistance, or if a kind of demonic possession was involved...

It is hard to believe what some people are capable of, and you can invent daemons to take away your sense of disillusionment with humanity.

However, this is a very dangerous thing to do because this explanation shifts the blame away from where it should truly lie. Also, post exorcism, the individual concerned is given another chance to re-offend.

17. A New Jack Chick Tract: Moving On Up!

Comment #175164 by Corylus on May 4, 2008 at 5:30 pm

PBUM

A minor thing, but something that niggles me as much as your latin name (bringing out the latin is something you unfortunately share with some of my fellow atheists. They seem to turn into freshers when it comes to wannabe pretentious use of latin alternatives.)

Arh come on... tis just natural honesty on my part.

I like to use my real name, but I also like to get people to work to know it...

;-)

18. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #174817 by Corylus on May 3, 2008 at 3:29 pm

Thank you Quine, I'm calming down now.

19. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #174773 by Corylus on May 3, 2008 at 12:48 pm

exp(2*i*pi)=1

The reason I'm here is that I saw Ben Stein yesterday on Glenn Beck's program on CNN's Headline news.

Thank you so much for flagging this interview, I tracked it down, and I think others on here would be interested in viewing it.

I starts off with some dreadful individual saying to Ben Stein 'You are like the smartest man I know'. It then goes downhill...

http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2008/04/29/gb.stein.economy.cnn

Warning: It's bad. It's very bad - but worth perservering with just for the marvellous Freudian slip at the end.

Don't worry, exp(2*i*pi)=1I won't ask you to watch it twice :-) Interestingly, Stein does not mention RD.net in this interview - maybe it's been cut..

P.S. Great first post by the way.

[Edit: I see that the video I found was just the trailer for this extravaganza! (Bangs head on wall) - did anyone see the full version?]

20. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #174645 by Corylus on May 3, 2008 at 3:47 am

You're getting it now Brian!

21. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #174640 by Corylus on May 3, 2008 at 3:38 am

Rian

I thought mastication was a sin? :-)

I understand it is ok if you penitently floss afterwards.

22. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #174636 by Corylus on May 3, 2008 at 3:36 am

Yep Brian, muscardinus avellanarius is a blast at parties.

You do need to keep us away from the nut liqueur though, or we get over confident and pick fights with the biggest ferret in the room ;)

23. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #174632 by Corylus on May 3, 2008 at 3:26 am

Oh for pity's sake! Is that what we are reduced to now? The argument from dentistry??

Kardashovel, if you are still reading this, do please come back and chat, we need smart Christians to talk to.

N.B. Hope you weren't offended by my frivolous treatment of your thought experiment; I get playful at times.

However, there was an element of seriousness in there, in that my solution (obviously howlingly wrong!) seemed (prima facie?) to be more parsimonious than yours.

Anyway, what did you think of the videos that Quine and Frankus linked?

24. Was the new finger a 'natural' miracle?

Comment #174525 by Corylus on May 2, 2008 at 2:57 pm

Robotaholic

You're a good looking guy - one picture at a time is fine :-)

25. Jesus Camp: A scary movie that should frighten us all

Comment #174502 by Corylus on May 2, 2008 at 2:08 pm

For people with access to UK TV, an edited version of this will be shown on Channel 4 at 11pm on Tuesday 6th May.

26. Was the new finger a 'natural' miracle?

Comment #174469 by Corylus on May 2, 2008 at 1:22 pm

Actually, I 'm quite glad to see Bizarro back. While he is here he is talking. Ok, generally being priggish and snide, but talking nonetheless.

He is not stupid and it breaks my heart to think of his promising mind in the intellectual prison that is Liberty University.

I'm not ready to give up yet.

------

Bizarro What are your views on god healing amputees? Is he unable? Or able but unwilling?

27. Muslim Rebel Sisters: At Odds With Islam and Each Other

Comment #174399 by Corylus on May 2, 2008 at 11:29 am

Her first book, a collection of essays, was entitled "The Caged Virgin: An Emancipation Proclamation for Women and Islam

This book actually has an interview with Irshad Manji in one of the chapters. Overall, It is an interesting (if harrowing at times) read.

(N.B. The subtitle is "A Muslim Woman's Cry for Reason" in the UK edition)

28. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #174299 by Corylus on May 2, 2008 at 3:23 am

Fides

Where's Steve?

Taking a break - exhaused by dealing with the concentrated ignorance of the creationist and ID trolls brought here via the Expelled site.

Can't say I blame him. Have to say, I did wonder where our theistic posters were when this was going on. Some comments from them to the creationists might have filtered through and encouraged them to read some books.

Help of this nature would have been much appreciated. It would also have been a wonderful opportunity for you to demonstrate that faith and reason are compatable. Oh well, I am sure you will participate next time we get some loons on here.

I wonder if it would be possible for the Prof to revise future prints of his book to make them more representative of his views, now that he's had the opportunity to be more informed about the issues covered in them.

I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume that this comment was a genuine point, rather than a snide dig.

The new preface to the God Delusion is read by RD on the link below.

http://richarddawkins.net/article,1305,The-new-preface-to-The-God-Delusion-paperback-and-QampA,Richard-Dawkins

29. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #174088 by Corylus on May 1, 2008 at 3:20 pm

Alien64,

Thank you for your comment.

It is however, somewhat general. It would help if you could quote the statements you take objection to, with the name of the person making them.

That way the individuals responsible can address you directly, and either apologise or defend their position.

Generalised comments tend to lead to people mistakenly taking things personally.

---
Instructions on how to quote comments and highlight names in bold (so people do not miss comments addressed to them) can be found when you click on 'Comment Posting Guidelines' which is just above the box in which you type your post.

30. Bill Good Interviews Richard Dawkins

Comment #174086 by Corylus on May 1, 2008 at 3:11 pm

Heh, very well, Henri we'll drop it.

It is not as if we are not going to agree anytime soon.

I just couldn't resist playing for a second.

31. Bill Good Interviews Richard Dawkins

Comment #174031 by Corylus on May 1, 2008 at 12:55 pm

Henri

Having said that though, 'the Golden Rule' ("treat others as you would like to be treated") is, despite Dawkins' claim, not a logical proposition (i.e. not true empirically or analytically).

Another person could say, "treat others as you wish" ('the Iron Rule'), and you could not, through reason, contradict him/show him to be logically wrong.

Actually, I have problems with the Golden Rule too: for the simple reason that it is somewhat egocentric.

Far better is ("treat others as they would like to be treated").

Whilst not true empirically or analytically either, you can argue that it has a certain utility in that it prevents dreadful confusion for individuals into S&M.

32. Bill Good Interviews Richard Dawkins

Comment #173274 by Corylus on April 30, 2008 at 3:04 pm

ZZyx1170

I placed an mp3 of this without advertisements on RapidShare

Thank you, appreciate it.

33. Pat Condell: Anthology DVD available now!

Comment #172756 by Corylus on April 30, 2008 at 3:46 am

Not my style of humour, I have to admit, I go for silliness more than anything else.

However, I do note from the interview with Pat below (linked on his website), that this is a non-profit thing for the benefit of RDFRS, so I will say nothing further.

http://www.freethinker.co.uk/2008/02/27/laughing-religion-off-the-planet-an-interview-with-pat-condell/

I was also pleased to see Pat recommending that people in the UK join the National Secular Society and/or the British Humanist Society.

34. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #172558 by Corylus on April 29, 2008 at 6:11 pm

Note to self:

Do not piss off Calilasseaia.

35. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #172479 by Corylus on April 29, 2008 at 3:43 pm

Goldy, oh dear, and I said that I wouldn't post anymore recipes. Karda's marriage and all that.

OK, I'll put up, but will hope that all men present will make this for their wives* to please them...

First, you need to know the basics...

Basic Creme Brulee (I don't know how to get the little French Symbols to work on here - so you will have to imagine that I have)

Equipment : Four ramekins
Ingredients:
233ml double cream
83ml of whole milk
4 large egg yolks
50g of caster sugar
Demerara sugar for sprinkling.

(I know these measurements seem over precise, but this is scaled down from a bigger recipe)

Instructions:
1. Preheat oven to 140 C (mark 1, or the lowest it will go) and butter the ramekins.
2. Heat cream and milk to scalding point.
3. Beat egg yolks until pale. Pour hot cream onto egg yolks a third at a time whilst whisking (you don't want scrambled eggs)
4. Whisk in sugar. Then strain mixture through sieve. Pour into ramekins,
5. Bake for 45 minutes (or until lightly set)
6. Allow to cool and then chill, thoroughly.
7. Sprinkle with Demerara sugar and caramalise with blow torch.

Ginger Infused Variation
1. Add one inch square piece of fresh ginger (finely chopped) to milk and sugar when heating (step 2).
2. Substitute sugar syrup from jar of stem ginger for the caster sugar (step 4)
3. Then follow classic recipe, but serve with finely sliced and fanned out piece of stem ginger on side of plate.

*[Edit] or partner :)

Kardashovel Do please watch that video Frankus linked. She seems such a lovely lady.

36. Girl, 17, killed in Iraq for loving a British soldier

Comment #172472 by Corylus on April 29, 2008 at 3:32 pm

I'm fine with the inability to change posts...

iff

a) the preview function is brought back (I make lots of typos!)

b) there is some way of stopping people posting if they have left their tags open. I feel bad when I do this, and try to rectify straight away.

c) There is an easy way to request to admin that duplicate posts are removed.

d)The one and only time I have completely deleted a post was when I was trying to get something to go on the alternate thread (the George Scales article) and it kept going on the main one.

Maybe, if there are two threads available, there is some sort of comfirmation requested about which one you want it to appear on?? (If you are not the person responsible for the troll thread, that is!)

I don't know if this can be done.

37. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #172412 by Corylus on April 29, 2008 at 2:35 pm

Frankus, listening now - absolutely fascinating. Cheers :)

OK Quetz, I tremble and obey, however, I would point out that if you smite me completely you will never learn the secret of my ginger infused creme brulee..

38. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #172391 by Corylus on April 29, 2008 at 2:12 pm

Sharon, of course you can have cake, but to keep the universe in balance you will have to consume an equal amount of cabbage... Sorry.

Steve I am indeed capable of making a cake that big, but I choose not to do for the sake of your arteries. I am a caring god, see.

39. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #172383 by Corylus on April 29, 2008 at 2:06 pm

Quetz

Why do bad things happen to good people

Because when I created everything I had to split myself into pieces that were (by definition) incomplete and imperfect. When I finish the job of reassembling myself, everything will be well. Good people will become a part of myself and feel bliss.

Are there puppies in heaven?

Oooh, of course! .... No sodding cats though...

40. Girl, 17, killed in Iraq for loving a British soldier

Comment #172374 by Corylus on April 29, 2008 at 2:02 pm

No hat. Just to make the votes even.

Free will comes with the ability to make a choice between two equally compelling possibilities.

41. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #172360 by Corylus on April 29, 2008 at 1:56 pm

Thank you Sharon :)

I await Kardashovel's analysis.

42. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #172332 by Corylus on April 29, 2008 at 1:39 pm

Kardashovel

OK; I'll play your thought experiment. It's only fair as you have been working hard to explain your position on here. However, I am afraid I will not be able to take part in the theoretical physics part. I would only make myself look an idiot if I did that :) My background is psychology and philosophy.* Therefore, my solution will be; of necessity; both personal and abstract...

Kardashovel'sThought Experiment - My Turn

Suppose you became convinced that there is a personal "god" with detailed knowledge of the past and of the likely future. This god will not roll over and beg for you, but nevertheless he/she/it did respond to certain questions on the fly and succeeded in persuading you that it is real. You have no reason to believe that this experience is unique to yourself (although it is uncommon), and you have poor information about the nature or motivations of this being, but no reason to assume malevolence.

From what you have told me (correct me if I am wrong here)

1) The voice had privileged access to personal information that I had told no other person about.
2) The voice chose to correspond in a fashion that is not directly accessible to anyone else.
3) The voice is unable to communicate at this level constantly; it is subject to constraints.
4) This voice did not tell me to do anything that would place myself (or anyone I cared about at risk)
5) This voice gives prophetic information, indicating that it is either not constrained by time or experiences it in a different fashion than I do.

Right.

What theories would you develop to explain this experience, aside from the conclusion that you were just loopy for a moment and that could be cured by getting some psychiatric assistance?

Ok, 1 to 4 would indicate that I am talking to myself and having a bit of an um episode :P ... and should seek assistance. However, 5 is at direct variance with this.

5 means that I must conclude that:

a) a being which is outside time exists
b) this being is taking an interest in me (as it is giving me personal prophecies)

Very well, but then I have the problem of explaining why a small creature like myself would be the subject of such attention.

There is one very simple solution to this dichotomy. A way to reconcile both 1-4 and 5.

I am talking to myself not because I am mad, but because I am the being that exists outside of time.

F*&K me! I am is the answer!

I am an aspect of God, the divine part of my existence (that which exists both within and outside of time) is merely giving me a message from a different part of myself (the greater part) in a language that I am capable of understanding.

I conclude that God exists, and that I'm her. It is just that she is keeping that terrifying realization of the truth from the fragmented, physical, small part of my psyche. For my own good.

I am not yet ready for the dreadful realisation of what I am capable of. I am the part of God that is not all seeing, not all knowing, not all good. I am merely as smart, as knowledgeable and moral as I need to be at the present time. The very definition of God.

In the future, my physical fragmented part will be reunited with the part of me that is divine. When I have worked hard enough. The problem of evil will disappear when I reunite the two parts of myself. I will then not only be willing, but also capable of curing the ills of the world.

It explains it all.

I'm God.

*I do also have a miscellaneous qualification in critical theory (postmodernist thought) but I don't mention that.
----
How did I do? :D

43. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171920 by Corylus on April 29, 2008 at 2:34 am

Well done Goldy.

Also, many congrats on the forthcoming arrival.

Sounds like you are a bit worried though. Look, your wife is living in a technologically advanced country with a medical savvy partner watching over her. Two huge pluses :-)

44. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171322 by Corylus on April 28, 2008 at 12:31 pm

Well, it appears that Dick Dawkins is succeeding with his aim of trolling and shit stirring here.
Notice how he has stopped posting?

Fighting Falcon, Why not read his posts over the last few pages and see the context in which the avatar change was made? I would be very interested in hearing your view, as a serving member of the American military, about this man's comments concerning his military background.

Thank you.

P.S. Do not click on the picture he linked unless you have a very strong stomach. It is not pleasant at all.

45. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #170353 by Corylus on April 27, 2008 at 5:06 pm

Blimy Geoff, I think you're right. That and sleep deprivation. Oh rats, work tomorrow.

46. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #170340 by Corylus on April 27, 2008 at 4:33 pm

Ok, Kardashovel for the sake of your marriage I will avoid posting any more recipes :-)

However, I would point out that one thing women like is a man willing to spend some time in an effect to please...

Why not make your wife something nice? I expect she is spending a great deal of time caring for kids, tis nice to feel cared for as well. I recommend making her something out of this book as a special treat. (The dark and delicious chocolate torte is particularly fine).

http://www.amazon.com/Gordon-Ramsays-Just-Desserts-Ramsay/dp/1844000192/ref=pd_bbs_11?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1209337631&sr=8-11

N.B. I would advice keeping her out of the kitchen when you do this though. Gordon Ramsey recipes require extreme concentration and the use of gratuitous and constant profanity when cooking to work.

47. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #170264 by Corylus on April 27, 2008 at 2:31 pm

Hi MPhil

Have you read the defence of the Slaughter of the Canaanites by Lane Craig?

http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5767

I'm thinking he should stick to cosmology and avoid ethics.

---
Hello Kardashovel, nice to see you back.

48. Does science make belief in God obsolete?

Comment #170218 by Corylus on April 27, 2008 at 1:43 pm

Stuart, I don't think we disagree much (you certainly didn't offend!) I like to be a purist about words too. I think this is why I am sensitive to them being used in an emotional fashion. (Or emotive words being picked when perfectly useful non-emotive ones are available).

You need a specific definition of the terms used in a question before you can even begin to answer it.

The TF aren't playing by the rules.

49. Does science make belief in God obsolete?

Comment #170195 by Corylus on April 27, 2008 at 1:23 pm

Stuart

Thanks ever so for respectfully disagreeing. Most people just disagree with me :-))

I think my point (which is I believe is the same as Benway's) is that obsolete is such as value laden term. It makes people think of redundancy and anonymity. You have to be very, very careful about what words you use. See the Twilight Zone episode she linked.

Also look at this Auden poem, The Unknown Citizen

http://www.poets.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/15549

When hear the word 'obsolete' we think of our older relatives that worked hard all their lives only to die early. People who kept quiet and worked diligently, only to be considered as surplus to requirements, people who probably believed in god.

The very word calls up the emotional notion of class conflict. It taps into the anti-intellectualism vein.

The Templeton Foundation has some very clever people working for it.

50. Does science make belief in God obsolete?

Comment #170155 by Corylus on April 27, 2008 at 12:51 pm

Does science make belief in God...

Obsolete?

(Urgh, bad word, makes people think of arrogant youth... obsolete)

Extraneous?

(Better, but in practice completely unworkable...extraneous)

Superfluous?

(Hurray!!)

Incidentally, the superfluous word would be the best response to the Kauffmann essay, which I enjoyed a great deal, but didn't agree with.