501. Nato accuses Taliban of using children in suicide missions

Comment #53440 by Vinelectric on July 1, 2007 at 1:29 pm

Ms/Mr Khiyal

Thanks for your infuriated and one sided view on the conflict.

Why would the moral responsibility of any massacre lie with anyone else but the murderer? Sorry but that is some twisted logic.

Judging by your furious tone, you too seem like the type of person who would consider blowing themselves up if your family is butchered and your possessions removed for the pleasure of some lunatic zionist settler. I don't know what planet the zionist sympathizers come from but in what way dd you expect the palestenians (muslim and christian) to react to your excesses. Violence begets violence and that is the sad situation at the moment. I sitll feel there is room for peace if we keep angry crackheads like you from agitating the already too volatile situation.

Mr King was absolutely wrong on equating anti zionsim with anti semitism. Among the orthodoxy of Jewish Rabbis are anti-zionists and among my personal friends and mentors are Israeli Jews.

502. Nato accuses Taliban of using children in suicide missions

Comment #53418 by Vinelectric on July 1, 2007 at 11:26 am

anyone who thinks the Palestinians are murderous scum just because of Israel

Yeah they were doing it long before the British raped the geography of the middle east with the zionist bastard, aka the state of Israel. Long before the religious and secular fanatic murderous Haggana thugs started terrorising the local population and driving thousands of locals out of their homelands...

should find out what they did to the Maronite Christians in the Lebanese civil war - the same Maronite Christians that gave them refuge

Oh I see. Is that why the maronite militias surrounded the defenseless refugees in their camps and massacred 3,500 of them at once at Sabra and Chatilla?

503. Yes, the universe looks like a fix. But that doesn't mean that a god fixed it

Comment #53214 by Vinelectric on June 30, 2007 at 6:14 am

steve99

Stegner's views may not conform with the consensus but he quotes several authors that have all reached similar conclusions independently. It would be hard to discredit either position and to be honest it would be a bit pointless trying to do this in the first place. The universe simply couldn't be any other way than what it is.

504. Yes, the universe looks like a fix. But that doesn't mean that a god fixed it

Comment #53204 by Vinelectric on June 30, 2007 at 4:39 am

GBG

How can anyone confidently make a statement about a necessary existence?

In the abscence of direct empirical evidence for the presumed originator of material existence how can anyone go one step further and make a double assumption:

1. It exists.
2. It is uncaused.

This could well be an excercise in self deception that we could all do well without.

505. Yes, the universe looks like a fix. But that doesn't mean that a god fixed it

Comment #53133 by Vinelectric on June 29, 2007 at 3:34 pm

Roll

Vic Stegner (Failed Hypothesis and the Comprehensible Cosmos) addresses this point quite well. There's room for fiddling with the knobs and still ending up with a viable universe.

506. Bill O'Reilly and Kirk Cameron on Atheism

Comment #51297 by Vinelectric on June 22, 2007 at 8:35 am

Transitional forms:
what about Platypi?

507. We of little faith

Comment #48823 by Vinelectric on June 9, 2007 at 6:16 am

I will be writing a very angry letter to my mp to ask him if he thinks it is a good use of public funds to give money to a religious organisation for 'further study'. What the fuck is there to study anyway.

That really cracked me up.. thanks pewkatchoo !!

508. The 'Is God...Great?' Debate

Comment #48063 by Vinelectric on June 6, 2007 at 1:11 pm

can anyone nominate the least worst, or the most articulate, of the God-botherers?

Reza Aslan debating Sam Harris.

509. The 'Is God...Great?' Debate

Comment #48048 by Vinelectric on June 6, 2007 at 12:03 pm

Monotonus and nauseating.

If anyone finds a link to the full debate let me know.

510. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Robert Winston

Comment #45786 by Vinelectric on May 29, 2007 at 9:18 am

This shows the most profound lack of understanding of much that science has taught us over the last century and a half.

I'm surprised that you managed to come up with such a conclusion. I'd rather you made an effort to tackle the two examples of 'directionality' of physical and biological processes that I mentioned earlier. Lets cut out the condescending crap!

511. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Robert Winston

Comment #45646 by Vinelectric on May 28, 2007 at 4:32 pm

Bonzai you've just summarised religious mysticism in a nutshell!

512. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Robert Winston

Comment #45644 by Vinelectric on May 28, 2007 at 4:27 pm

Wrought wrote:

Sadly, one listener to the above show already said to me: "Ahh... you didn't tell me Richard Dawkins says he's only 99.9% sure... that means a tiny part of him thinks there is a God."

But why wouldn't you or RD reserve that 0.1% ?

Many physical and biological phoenomena appear to pursue some sort of direction/target. Entropy tends to increase over time, evolution tends to proceed along the lines of increasing functional complexity. The latter has culminated in a consciousness and intelligence without which (as has been poetically expressed by one of the readers of the site) the universe wouldn't have developed the capacity to perceive itself. Indeed that may have been the case for billions of years.

A universe determined to pursue any sort of 'direction' may as well have 'something in mind'. I agree that the observable data don't point to a personal God but to suggest that we, personal, purposefull, sentient beings are a product of an impersonal blind purposeless system is probably the ultimate oxymoron.

Moreover you hear Daniel Dennett say that 'evolution happens because it can' or RD say that inquirng about the purpose of our existence is a query that doesnt' deserve an answer and I wonder if that is supposed to be an 'intellectually satisfying' answer at all.

Maybe that's a question for philosophers to play with. I'd imagine that if Hume lived to learn of Quantum weirdness and its defiance of the logic of causality he would've conceded that not even his discipline is likely to contribute significantly towards understanding the mystery of existence.

That 0.1% is defiintely worth more than you're suggesting.

513. Al Gore on Reason

Comment #44963 by Vinelectric on May 25, 2007 at 5:11 pm

mind-rebel writes: god guided evolution is wrong and unscientifc

steve 99 replies: ...anyone with a deep understanding of evolution knows that it is incompatible with God, but you have to take into account that Gore (and John Paul II) almost certainly don't have thet deep understanding...

In other words steve is saying that theism and evolution can be wrongly perceived as compatible when one's understanding of evolution is deficient.

doesn't that just support Mind_Rebel's statement? i.e that evolution-theism is unscientific"

Carrnitine writes:

Saying it's not logically sound is arguing a point that wasn't made.

Indeed it's a shame the point was not raised. As if it's not crucial to reflect on the validity of any belief.

It's an absolute fact that many people believe in God and evolution.

And the point being?

Bear in mind that nowadays many believers would also fall within the domain of some monotheistic religion. According to the scriptures modern man was created directly from clay.

For once I agree with Mind_Rebel: to accept God (as depicted in religious scripture) is not truly compatible with evolution unless the theist concedes to a compromise.

514. I'm Sure God is Scared

Comment #44829 by Vinelectric on May 25, 2007 at 11:06 am

It's a funny world we live in. Believing in a God you have never seen makes you close-minded and hateful, but being sure that God does not exist and exhibiting coarse, overt hostility to religion proves your mind is open and you love all humanity.

If that wasnt' true what's the point in writing:

Lots of male/female couples in which the men were clearly gay. In fact, lots of gays, period. In retrospect, I realize I should have expected that. After all...Leviticus.

I guess if one uses the writer's own logic in explaining Hitchens hate of religon

I can only assume that at one point in his childhood, Hitchens was spanked too hard by a nun.

then (no disrespect to gay people) one may assume the wirter was somehow abused by gay person as a child..

515. I'm Sure God is Scared

Comment #44828 by Vinelectric on May 25, 2007 at 10:59 am

goatboy

to be fair to Hitchens he seems to bear no grudge against Spinoza's god. his beef is primarily with the god of religious scripture.

516. Cult leader sparks Sikh riots with 'guru' stunt

Comment #43344 by Vinelectric on May 21, 2007 at 6:37 am

Azven

Who benefits from this strory? A government that can point to 'those Sikhs, fighting amongst themselves again' perhaps!

The prime minister is Sikh.

517. Pedal power takes Islamic shape in Iran

Comment #42125 by Vinelectric on May 17, 2007 at 4:57 pm

Tony B:

No muslim will tell you it's "god's law fucking blah blah" as you so eloquently put it; this time the perpetrators happen to be non-muslims (Yezidi).

518. God: The Failed Hypothesis and The Comprehensible Cosmos (book reviews)

Comment #40486 by Vinelectric on May 14, 2007 at 10:45 am

The only author I know who gives a reader-friendly scientifc explanation to why 'nothingness' would be too unstable not to break down into 'something'. Thus the existence of matter independent of a creator is explained in a convincing and succint manner without resorting to any convoluted philosophical acrobatics.


The problem is that reading God: Failed hypothesis made it difficult for me to endure the prolonged essays of the God Delusion or the hostility of SamHarris's End of Faith. If we can lay fundamental questions like the one above to rest then a good portion of religious ideology would subsequently collapse almost automatically.

519. The torture of the grave Islam and the afterlife

Comment #37999 by Vinelectric on May 6, 2007 at 3:46 pm

No scottishgeologist we can't

I guess that's the whole pointless point of 'having faith'

Read the following verses. You may have come across people who would have a sort of a vulnerability-a predisposition into buying into this sort of psychological subversion. You may even imagine what the effect would be on children raised to hear these sorts of stories from a young age. Those children need not have the same predispositions as the parents but the psychological scarring is permanent. You'll get the idea how the meme then propagates down the generations.

Bear in mind it sounds quite strongly poetic and rather intoxicating in its original Arabic.

This passage talks about death and Judgement day (from surah 79)

[1] By the (angels) who tear out (the souls of the wicked) with violence;

[2] By those who gently draw out (the souls of the blessed);

[3] And by those who glide along (on errands of mercy),

[4] Then press forward as in a race,

[5] Then arrange to do (the Commands of their Lord),

[6] One day everything that can be in commotion will be in violent commotion.

[7] Followed by oft-repeated (commotions):

[8] Hearts that Day will be in agitation;

[9] Cast down will be (their owners') eyes.

[10] They say (now): "What! Shall we indeed be returned to (our) former state?

[11] "What! When we shall Have become rotten bones?"

[12] They say: "It would, in that case, be a return with loss!"

[13] But verily, it will be but a single (compelling) Cry,

[14] When, behold, they will be in the (full) awakening (to Judgment).

Hope this gives you an idea about how the faith system works.

520. Interview with Pierre Rehov

Comment #37895 by Vinelectric on May 6, 2007 at 6:57 am

Muslims are taught that the utmost reward anyone can have is to see the face of God. 72 virgins is just part of a long package of pleasurable rewards for the different senses (food, wine, music..etc being some of the others).

521. Interview with Pierre Rehov

Comment #37894 by Vinelectric on May 6, 2007 at 6:53 am

What about the miserable and hopeless existence of those Palestenian suicide kids. Does this play no role whatsoever? This case is completely different to 9/11 where brainwashing alone transformed educated middle class men into braindead monsters.

Decades of Israeli brutality worked on corrupting the mentality of the desperate Palestenians and this explains why it took so long for this type of sucide cult to emerge. Interestingly the leaders of the fundamentalist Wahabi sect denounce such attacks, not out of sympathy to the innocent victims, but because unless you try exceptionally hard to twist the meaning of the scriptures or adopt Machiavellian principles there is no way you could justify these attacks from an Islamic perspective.

72 virgins are promised for those martyred in conventional warfare and not for suicide missions. Hamas would not agree much to the dislike of the most fundamentalist Wahabi leaders. However the majority of muslims approve of the attacks so as not to be seen as traitors to the Palestenian cause. Unfortunately there is no sympathy for Israeli victims.

I hope Rehov has considered that in his documentary.

522. Against All Gods, by A C Grayling

Comment #36155 by Vinelectric on April 30, 2007 at 10:27 am

Belief in a personal God could be on the way out but untill atheists can persuade us that 'Why' is 'How' (as suggested by Peter Atkins) then people will always ask Why the hell are we here!! Why did the big bang occur and why does evoultion work at all.

The only attempt at an answer is that provided by Vic Stegner in his latest book. He aruges that the natural state of affairs may be of existence rather than non-existence. Nice answer but who can ever prove that Stegner is absolutely right. Who can ever perusade RD to score a full 7/7 on his belief/disbelief scale?

523. Evolution Booklet

Comment #35919 by Vinelectric on April 29, 2007 at 10:15 am

Atheist in Nigeria wrote

The Sihk and the Muslim commentator spewed anti-scientific nonsense. "We believe in science as long as it is line with our holy books, otherwise we reject it"

I checked the booklet to see what the muslim chap actually said. To my surprise it appeared to totally contrast with your claim.

However, most Muslim scientists do accept some form of Darwinian evolution because of the experimental evidence.

He actually went to explain how people are beginning to reinterpret the texts in light of that evidence. You may argue that his viewpoint is not representative of the whole community. Soon the evidence will overwhelm the traditionalists and our viewpoints will conform more and more to yours. I'm sure you'll ask why this change is not happening overnight if the evidence is so clear. My response would be to simply come down to earth.

Religious ideology has such a tight grip on our communities that it would be wise to just present your evidence, sit back and watch as evolution works its magic on the religious meme. Impatientce, prejudice and false accusations will get us nowhere.

524. Scientists look to disrupt the brain chemistry of violence

Comment #35633 by Vinelectric on April 28, 2007 at 3:38 am

Nails:

The problem is that doctors will tell you that, unless the structural abnormalities are gross, they tend to correlate poorly with their actual clinical manifestations. We have a lot more to learn before we can even begin to consider what you suggest.

525. Was Muhammad Epileptic?

Comment #35631 by Vinelectric on April 28, 2007 at 3:13 am

fonex_86
Did you not say in your first post:

....Day by day, I'm seeing less and less alternatives to total war against Islam...

Was I making that up? And do you expect me to not question your mental status by calling for total war? I guess you wouldn't because one of the hallmarks of what you suffer from is a total lack of insight and you probably wouldn't appreciate that what you wrote was either silly or plain madness.

You don't like my bad-mouthing? Well in your first post you jumped in (without previous exchange between us) and threatened/promised me a truckload of whatevers. Go and read that post again to figure out why it is only fair of me to give you the mouthful you deserve.

You didn't get my point about charity because you seem so upset you can't really think straight. The point you missed about the charity foundations is that unlike the situation your family faced there is no chance in hell a single individual like me can ever hope to seek influence on huge charity organisations like the two I mentioned. I can't ever say to them one day I want your patients to wear headscarves. So mine is an example where muslims do have your standard moral sense as I can only give the charity for the sake of it.

You seem to live under a fundamentalist regime so why not just get out if you can afford to. There's more to life than working up frustrations about whatever you were moaning about.

By the way I completely lost interest in this discussion so you won't get no more responses from me.

526. Was Muhammad Epileptic?

Comment #35496 by Vinelectric on April 27, 2007 at 11:28 am

Godless Heathen,

I don't see why we are in disagreement. It is possible that is these social pressures or some other change in society's understanding and definition of morality that forces religious people to cherry pick their texts and bend the interpretation of their holybooks. My point is that selective application of religious teachings happens all the time as people are at least smart enough to realise that strictly following behaviour prescribed in their holy texts is just no longer acceptable by today's moral standards.

You think the Koran is a joke, a religious person may see that statement as a joke too. It is a completely different mindset and if you look around you will hear of many people being persuaded into converting to Islamic belief while others stop practising the religion. Both may seem to genuinely think they've made the correct logical decision. Humans seem to have this vulnerability that makes it possible to persuade them into completely redefining their perception of what is logical and what is not if you try hard enough.

527. Was Muhammad Epileptic?

Comment #35490 by Vinelectric on April 27, 2007 at 11:16 am

Fonex_86

I support both the British Heart foundation and the Royal National Institue of the deaf. What true colours do you think I'm waiting to show them?

Ideas in the Koran plain nuts? Maybe, but with your call for total war I think you're crazy too.

528. Was Muhammad Epileptic?

Comment #35344 by Vinelectric on April 26, 2007 at 11:57 pm

savroD

I was talking about the other authors' general approach and integrity. These are general principles that apply nomatter what the field of the expertise of the author is. The problem with Hitchens is that he has access to media, print and government so his other views on politics such as his war mongering tendencies ultimately do have a palpable effect on the lives of many that is why I threw in the disrespectful remark.

Your analogy on religon is a bit odd but I have to consede: religion doesn't seem to work. People eventually attain good behaviour by cherry picking the texts or twisting the meaning of the more absurd teachings. But that toilet business is uncalled-for bigotry.

529. Was Muhammad Epileptic?

Comment #35229 by Vinelectric on April 26, 2007 at 4:10 pm

Friend Giskard

Asinine remark? Well I have to remind you how easy it is to reciprocate such remarks between any two nomatter who is actually right and who is not. Who are you trying to impress with that? By the way what else did you really expect from a muslim other than apologetics. Are you trying to point out the obvious? But hey I'm trying to be open minded and learn something from the site so let me have a word in or two. Will you? Or should I just obediently shut up and pretend I agree with whatever religious bashing Hitchens feels like muttering every now and then.

There is nowhere in cyberspace you'll find me criticizing RD or Sam Harris as I admire their eloquent reasoning, self integrity and disciplined approach. Hitchen's is a talented piece of shit.


You rightly pointed out polygamy and wife beating and that is indefensible. Full bloody stop! There are ideas in the Koran that just don't fit in the modern world. I won't say nothing more...

But charity restrictions towards unbelievers? Sorry mate but you've made that up...

As for your URLs why not try this for a change

http:// www.islamic-awareness.org

Bigotry gets you nowhere and those sites you suggested are plain crap. I've seen them all. The secular web (www.atheism.org) has better material on Islam.

530. Was Muhammad Epileptic?

Comment #35228 by Vinelectric on April 26, 2007 at 4:03 pm

Bonzai: I agree humanist values don't support claims of divine inspiration. I'm sure I never alluded to that. My point is that it was wrong to say that the religion has nothing to offer. Fact is, like other reilgions (as I've mentioned before you pointed it out) it does. Doesn't mean it's divine but that's besides the point.


AnatheistinNigeria:
You are perfectly right. Especially with constant hammering of ideology from a young age it would be difficult to change your beliefs befcause of some psychological barrier. I'm just wondering what part of my post prompted you to make this specific point?

I said I found the poetry appealing but it is obvious I meant it from the aesthetic point of view. I also said the koran attempts to 'convince' between the inverted quotes so again I can't figure out how exactly I'd come across the way you put it.

531. Was Muhammad Epileptic?

Comment #35197 by Vinelectric on April 26, 2007 at 2:37 pm

To be fair to Islam the man was talking straight out of his arse when he said that the religion has nothing in its teachings to offer humanity. Most religions do. Islam does its fair job of encouraging family values, charity and many other humanist values.

One more thing the Koran does attempt to 'convince' you of its authenticity through the argument from design. The poetry is superb and quite enchanting to an Arabic speaker.

532. Was Muhammad Epileptic?

Comment #35195 by Vinelectric on April 26, 2007 at 2:29 pm

Aaron

Do you really think that the billion or so strong members of the Islam fail to see your simple logic?

People adhere to the religion partly because of the constant bullying through the threat of punishment. Living in fear is supposed to be a healthy attitude in Islam. You will quickly identify this as brain washing and psychological abuse but unfortunately the religious people are as convinced as you are that your logic is twisted too!

Quite a frustrating situation.

533. Bill O'Remix

Comment #35137 by Vinelectric on April 26, 2007 at 10:17 am

You could see it in RD's face that he was a bit bored and unimpressed with the level of dialogue that O'reilly was trying to engage him in. If I can guess what was going on inside RD's mind during the interview it would be something similar to what we saw in this video !!

534. One Hell of a Religious Read

Comment #34878 by Vinelectric on April 25, 2007 at 1:47 pm

Sane1

Modern standard arabic (the formal language used in the media) hasn't changed much from the ancient (called Classical) arabic. If you can spare any time ask anyone with some knowledge of the language and get back to me if they tell you something different. Remember this is a cult where quite a few members learn the whole bloody book by heart. This explains why we are the least group to be open minded about our beliefs. The training and hard wiring of Islamic ideolgoy is often quite intense and begins at a very young age. As it happens Hitchen's is an example where a lay person with modest knowledge of the book can see the flaw in his argument. I know where the guy is coming from but I just wanted to point out that strictly speaking he's erred in confusing concepts in the Koran with those in the Hadith. If he'd rephrased his comment slightly differently I would've had no problems with it.

Your point on my approach is valid but is it always wrong to appeal to authority? If a native wants to tell you a bit about their culture it is inevitable that they would appeal to some sort of authority because they're naturally qualified to do so, as the culture is almost all I've been exposed to for decades.

535. One Hell of a Religious Read

Comment #34832 by Vinelectric on April 25, 2007 at 11:47 am

I don't depend on translations as the arabic language is my mother tongue and I was raised in that culture. Hitchens definitely got it wrong. Want to make the same mistake? Be my guest but I have to just point it out every time echoes it.

The Koran makes referrences to female companions with some vague descriptions on their specific role. Anything more is either taken from the Hadith or exists in Hitchen's imaginary version of the Koran.

The book can be criticized for many other issues but Hitchens definitely got this one wrong.

536. Shout your doubt out loud, my fellow unbelievers

Comment #34796 by Vinelectric on April 25, 2007 at 9:02 am

Wefree wrote: "Really? Why? The track record of those who have espoused such militant atheism is hardly good. I do not expect a new wave of tolerance."


The Scandinvians, and to a slightly lesser extent the Western Europeans, have almost completely marginalised religion from politics and indeed from everyday life. The success story of their secular humanism is all too evident so why ignore all this and point out to a handfull of communist psycopaths who happened to be Atheist as well?

537. One Hell of a Religious Read

Comment #34781 by Vinelectric on April 25, 2007 at 8:28 am

"I simply laugh when I read the Koran, with its endless prohibitions on sex and its corrupt promise of infinite debauchery in the life to come."

As already pointed out the Koran is criticized for its overprescription of sex rather than 'endless prohibitions'. The infinite debauchery Mr Hitchens point to may be in referrence to the famous 70 virgins promised to each martyr. However that is derived not from the Koran but from the collection of sayings and other traditions commonly known as the Hadith.

I wonder what else the man is bullshitting about. His writing appears to be world's apart from the delightfull reads of RD or Vic Stegner. Hope the book is not as bad as the excerpts.