1. A Tribute to Douglas Adams: Towel Day May 25th

Comment #184388 by ADParker on May 25, 2008 at 12:41 am

RamziD!! Your post has personally offended me. As a "militant atheist" I must STRIKE YOU DOWN.

Of course, as "Militant atheism" only amounts to mild rebukes, I have now done so. (Do you feel all smited and stuff?)

Ha, Just kidding.

42 is the answer to the question of the meaning of Life, the Universe and Everything. From which a new superior computer (called "The Earth") was built to find out what the question is.

2. The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing, ed. Richard Dawkins

Comment #181704 by ADParker on May 18, 2008 at 2:43 am

SteveN wrote:
According to this article http://www.observer.com/2008/richard-dawkins-follow-god-delusion-sold-free-press-3-5-million Richard is to be paid $3.5 million for a book on the evidence for evolution. It has a great title: Only a theory? (read it aloud as a question).

As I understand it Richard Dawkins has yet to give that book a title; "Just a Theory? is the working title, but he doesn't like it as it has been used before. In the last interview I saw of his he was still calling it as "yet to be named".
There is even a thread on this forum asking for serious suggestion for a title.

Oh, and it was his publisher who pushed him to write it to commemorate the 150th anniversary of The Origin of Species and the 200th of Charles Darwin's birth - he wanted to write that children's book he has long been thinking about, so if anyone is "trying to cash in"...it's his publisher.

3. Research Volunteers Needed

Comment #175247 by ADParker on May 5, 2008 at 2:17 am

Done, all four.
They aren't that long really and pretty simple, so give 'em a go if you haven't yet.

4. A New Flea

Comment #160306 by ADParker on April 13, 2008 at 11:22 pm

Here's a few more I found on Amazon:

Dawkins' GOD: Genes, Memes, and the Meaning of Life

Answering the New Atheism: Dismantling Dawkins' Case Against God

Why Monkeys Are Monkeys and People Are People: The Case Against Dawkins, Hitchens and Hawking

Dawkins' Dilemmas

The New Atheist Crusaders and Their Unholy Grail: The Misguided Quest to Destroy Your Faith

5. Happy Birthday, Richard Dawkins!

Comment #150403 by ADParker on March 26, 2008 at 8:55 pm

Happy Birthday Richard!

Your books (starting with TGD, and now encompassing all of them to date) sparked a new (long atrophied) passion for "Science Appreciation". I must thank you for re-opening my eyes to the wonder and beauty to be found therein!

6. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!

Comment #126216 by ADParker on February 12, 2008 at 3:59 pm

D'oh missed it.
Oh well, a belated Happy Darwin day everyone!

7. George Scales, War Hero and Generous Friend of RDFRS

Comment #111533 by ADParker on January 15, 2008 at 12:30 am

Best wishes George. Our thoughts are with you.
Thank you for your generosity and support to the RDFRS and to science, secularism and reason in general.

Sincerely
Andrew D. Parker
New Zealand.

8. A War On Science

Comment #106216 by ADParker on January 2, 2008 at 1:55 pm

I saw this a while back on Television
A rather rare thing to get this kind of stuff on New Zealand TV!

I didn't think it held a candle to the NOVA doco on the Trial, and it didn't add anything new to it either. I would recommend that one (NOVA) instead

9. Bad Faith Awards: Vote for the winner now

Comment #94519 by ADParker on December 5, 2007 at 10:38 pm

It was a tough call, but I had to vote for D'Souza.
It was the "most scurrilous enemy of reason" that tipped the scale. All of them (except the obvious of course) are pretty bad misuses or plain old abandonment of reason, but D'Souza's method of twisting (pseudo)reason to his own ends most aptly epitomises the meaning of the award I felt.

10. Frequently Asked Questions about the Ayaan Hirsi Ali Security Trust

Comment #89455 by ADParker on November 20, 2007 at 7:59 pm

Thanks Sam, I note a lot of people raising concerns and questions. good of you to respond.

I for one just pledged a donation.
To my mind it doesn't much matter if it ends up doing no good, or even, as suggested by one or two, if she was pulling the wool over everyones eyes (I completely fail to see how that conclusion can be reached but anyway).

The simple fact is, we have a chance to do a good deed, to "put our money where our mouth is" as some say, to personally try to help a fellow non-theist in need of aid.

I also like the idea that if a (wealthy) government refuses to help a person in need, the people (the "evil" atheist ones no less!) are willing to step in with their much more meager assets and do what they can.
I'm just a poor postman making a meager wage indeed, I gave my $25 donation ($33.66 of my NZ dollars), surely most of you can at the very least afford to do the same?
Stop second guessing everything and give from the heart.
To me it is no big deal if my donation comes to nothing, I gave to what I considered a good cause, I tried to help, to improve the world just a little. I did good, no matter the consequences.

11. Debate between Michael Shermer and Dinesh D'Souza

Comment #82832 by ADParker on October 28, 2007 at 1:48 am

Impressive work there Dinesh!
I noted:
Equivocation,
Argument from incredulity,
Naturalist Fallacy,
Straw Man argument,
Appeal to consequences,
False Dilemma

Just off the top of my head.

It is just a pity that Christopher Hitchens seemed so off his game when they debated. Otherwise he would have wiped the flaw with this garbage.

12. A Matter of Faith

Comment #64846 by ADParker on August 22, 2007 at 4:20 am

I like how the only arguments in favour were:
"Faith" - Please!
"Religious anti-slavery and Civil Rights" - There were theists (and atheists) on BOTH sides, and justification for the slavery/discrimination in the bible and religious teachings, and strong religious resistance to the changes, hardly convincing.

"Stalinism etc. = Atheist regimes" - Pathetic, old and tired religious rhetoric.

13. Won't anyone stand up for God?

Comment #54564 by ADParker on July 7, 2007 at 8:05 pm

Strange, strange article.
It seemed to offer plenty of good reasons NOT to believe in God, and then offers little more than the tired old "There is a lot science does not yet know, so let's rely on religion for those bits, 'cause it's better to belive something than admit ignorance, right?". Rubbish!
As to the equally tired "Science tells us how not why", in many cases Science tells us, evolution of life and species for example, that WHY is the wrong question, as it seems to assume there was some intent in it all. As too the remaining why questions, why not try philosophy, or just thinking for yourself, rather than relying on a highly dubious (agreed by the author's own admissions) preachings.
All in all I would say this is not a bad article to suggest to those 'on the fence', it is quite likely to push them to admit that their lingering religious faith is misplaced and unfounded.

14. Does God Exist? The Nightline Face-Off

Comment #39804 by ADParker on May 12, 2007 at 1:22 am

To sum up the debate, Pathetic.
The RRS were in no way skilled debaters, or anywhere near as knowledgable in the facts of their case as say R.Dawkins or S.Harris. And yet they still wiped the floor with the God-Boys.
Who offer zero evidence of God. They start out by saying they won't mention faith, and immediately in the first argument from Comfort(Creationism / Paley's Watch)he says uses the word Faith SIX TIMES! and all consequent arguments are based on faith and the biblical texts. Pathetic.
And why was the poll submitted "Do you Believe in God?" Should it not have been (or at least began with "Did Cameron and Comfort PROVE the existence of God", that was what they claimed they would do.

15. Prophets of the new atheism

Comment #30579 by ADParker on April 8, 2007 at 10:43 pm

"faith-based set of values that makes exclusive claims for its truth and explains the mysteries of the universe"
Obviously has not read Dawkins' and Harris' books (at least properly). They both go to great lengths NOT to make such claims.
Typical Religious Drivel.
I like how they try to belittle Atheism by labelling it a religion though. I would laugh if this crap didn't work on so many Faith-Heads, bolstering their faith.
I won't even dignify "atheist communism" with a response. Gods what a fool.

16. 'God Is Not a Moderate'

Comment #22389 by ADParker on February 16, 2007 at 12:11 am

A point I considered when reading Mr. Harris' last entry to this facinating debate:
In reply to Mr. Sullivan's claim that his "successful ordeal of living as a homosexual in a homophobic faith" strengthened him and his faith, he mentions the similar effect of some cancer sufferers (Best thing to happen to me).
He could have easily, but to my surprise (It was in my mind as I was reading) failed to continue the simile and suggest the obsurdity of, from that fact, claiming that cancer was in any way a good thing.
Overcoming trials such as prejudices can often result in making one a stronger/healthier person. Not by imbracing those things, group or ideas, but on the contrary by opposing and ultimately defeating them.

Just imagine an African-American man having to deal with the prejudices of the KKK, and in doing so gains a greater sence of self-worth and inner strength. So concludes that since it was the KKK that facilitated this improvement, he would join and support the KKK and their ideals!
Ridiculous! Yet no more ridiculous than supporting a religious system that openly discriminates against you (be it due to your Race, Gender, Sexuality,...).