Comments by Brian English

501. More than 100,000 rare gorillas found in Congo

Comment #224971 by Brian English on August 6, 2008 at 4:10 am

1. Do you believe that you have an absence of belief in God?

Yes, it's a belief.

2. How do you know that you have an absence of belief in God?

How do you know you're alive? Oh that's right, you think about it....

3. If the absence of belief in God is a requirement to qualify as an atheist, how does one achieve this?

By not believing in God you niny.

502. More than 100,000 rare gorillas found in Congo

Comment #224965 by Brian English on August 6, 2008 at 4:05 am

Quetz, I'm a lesser god because I didn't want the sooky-la-la prima-donna gods to get their panties in a knot (immortals who whine really make eternity a downer) and I don't like administration. So, any god who proclaims himself supreme deity does so at my pleasure.......

503. More than 100,000 rare gorillas found in Congo

Comment #224964 by Brian English on August 6, 2008 at 4:03 am

Now we have found a base and know they plan to attack, they'll speed up their plans, it's only a matter of time...

I second the earlier post welcoming our Gorilla overlords. A person like me could be quite helpful in snitching on those who don't obey you, oh hairy masters.

504. More than 100,000 rare gorillas found in Congo

Comment #224957 by Brian English on August 6, 2008 at 4:00 am

Apart from the tight shorts, Laurie described his cult. Strange.

505. More than 100,000 rare gorillas found in Congo

Comment #224955 by Brian English on August 6, 2008 at 3:57 am

Thanks Quetz, I thought I'd let you see my deity avatar. I'm impish, sort of a lesser God. Not a creator god, more a trickster/destroyer god.

506. [UPDATED] Venomous Snakes, Slippery Eels and Harun Yahya

Comment #224954 by Brian English on August 6, 2008 at 3:56 am

Joe, how about you think for yourself? Stop posting meaningless quotes, they don't convince anybody. We're not arguing if person A said quote B, we're arguing over whether God exists or not. No book that relies on God can prove God exists, so forget the Quran. How about an argument that you understand that is convincing or that you believe is convincing and not some slabs of quotes? You can do it Joe, you can't be a stupid as you appear with all those sad quotes.

507. More than 100,000 rare gorillas found in Congo

Comment #224946 by Brian English on August 6, 2008 at 3:45 am

Quetz, she's just projecting. All she probably does is evangelize and indulge in circular reasoning.

508. More than 100,000 rare gorillas found in Congo

Comment #224938 by Brian English on August 6, 2008 at 3:39 am

Sex, sex sex. That's all you men thing about. Now where were we?

Oh, you were thinking about Joe? I reckon sex is probably more interesting....

509. Evangelically Serious Science

Comment #224847 by Brian English on August 5, 2008 at 10:16 pm

And we're back....

alternate banking systems such as Islamic banking instruments
Like cutting off the hands of thieves? Good instruments them....

510. Evangelically Serious Science

Comment #224829 by Brian English on August 5, 2008 at 5:36 pm

And there you have it. If a man is getting it, he's not wandering. I've always thought that sex is only important in a relationship when there isn't any or insufficient to keep the guy (or girl) from getting toey.....

Back to Goldy's moobs.....

511. Evangelically Serious Science

Comment #224820 by Brian English on August 5, 2008 at 5:14 pm

I'm well and truly fat. I'd blame the beer and fatty food, but it wasn't their fault they were born so enticing and I'm too nice a guy to deny myself anything. :D

512. Evangelically Serious Science

Comment #224814 by Brian English on August 5, 2008 at 5:11 pm

Goldy, only 100Kg? You're a lightweight. How tall? Sounds like I've got the bigger set of faux mammaries. :P

513. Evangelically Serious Science

Comment #224806 by Brian English on August 5, 2008 at 4:53 pm

Coco, Goldy is a dirty old man with man-boobs. He gets quite upset when his attempts to bridge the divide between men and women via simulated mammaries aren't noticed. :)

514. More than 100,000 rare gorillas found in Congo

Comment #224797 by Brian English on August 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm

I've often thought that if the Thylacaine was found in a remnant population in Tasmania that the best thing the government and researchers could do was to deny that they found a live Thylacaine. Reason being that people would soon wipe it out just because they wanted to see or capture such a rare creature. I'm not saying this has happened, but the case is similar with this find. Why tell everybody? Why not quietly coerce the Congalese government with some largesse and strong-arm tactics into sealing off this area and keeping people away from the Gorillas? Oh well, I guess with 125K of Gorillas the bush meat and poaching trade will feed lots of starving Congalese for a while.....

515. Richard Dawkins branded 'secularist bigot' by veteran philosopher

Comment #224781 by Brian English on August 5, 2008 at 4:15 pm

I thought they nailed a Jew to a tree for our sins. Yet we still have them? From birth? Well, that crucifiction was a bloody waste of time then, wasn't it!

Goldy, there's no such thing as a free lunch. You only get the sin wiped if you eat the Jew for lunch on a regular basis. You got to eat the cracker!

516. Richard Dawkins branded 'secularist bigot' by veteran philosopher

Comment #224767 by Brian English on August 5, 2008 at 3:34 pm

The reader "Knowledge: Readings in contemporary epistemology" by Sven Bernecker and Fred Dretske (editors) and - for a completely novel position, Timothy Williamson's "Knowledge and its Limits"

More pimping for Amazon! I'll put them on the list.

517. Richard Dawkins branded 'secularist bigot' by veteran philosopher

Comment #224765 by Brian English on August 5, 2008 at 3:30 pm

think all the talk of "innocence" is hogwash anyway - for it presumes metaphysical attributes of persons - not guilt as simply having done something that violates a norm but really being free of some metaphysical "guilt", which is really a very similar concept to that of "sin".

The idea that people are born guilty, sort of like an attribute of being human is to be guilty really is begging the question isn't it?
Why do we deserve hell? Because we're guilty. How can we be guilty of something we haven't done? Because all humans are born guilty.

518. Richard Dawkins branded 'secularist bigot' by veteran philosopher

Comment #224762 by Brian English on August 5, 2008 at 3:27 pm

Brian - still holding to the JTB-view of knowledge? How old-fashioned of you :)

I don't need to hold to it. I've seen so many Xtians describe knowledge thus. I guess I think of knowledge as believing a fact and not just guessing the right answer but that's about as philosophically sound as swiss cheese.

of course! Now it all makes sense. Perfectly coherent and justified - not ridiculous at all. *cough*

Still holding on to coherency and justification? How quaint. ;)

519. Richard Dawkins branded 'secularist bigot' by veteran philosopher

Comment #224488 by Brian English on August 5, 2008 at 3:26 am

From MPhil's link:

What we do know is that either eternal torment in hell or eternal joy in heaven awaits all people after death, based on whether they trust in Christ's payment for sin or reject Christ.

They know? So it's a justified true belief? The mind boggles.

520. Physicist Claims First Real Demonstration of Cold Fusion

Comment #224479 by Brian English on August 5, 2008 at 3:01 am

Oystein you're as bad as Steve. How do you expect to be convinced if you wait for reproducible results? It's so self defeating! Just give in to the belief.

521. Physicist Claims First Real Demonstration of Cold Fusion

Comment #224472 by Brian English on August 5, 2008 at 2:54 am

Steve, you're always bringing logic and reason, and a demand for empirical evidence into a discussion. How do you expect to be convinced of amazing things if you keep being so skeptical? Can't you see how self-defeating your attitude is?

522. Richard Dawkins branded 'secularist bigot' by veteran philosopher

Comment #224469 by Brian English on August 5, 2008 at 2:49 am

Euthyphro? Don't use your logic and clear thinking in an argument!

523. Richard Dawkins branded 'secularist bigot' by veteran philosopher

Comment #224467 by Brian English on August 5, 2008 at 2:47 am

How is such a punishment not evil?

God = good, whatever god does = good. If god deprives a person of every joy and good emotion because it's god = good.

524. Physicist Claims First Real Demonstration of Cold Fusion

Comment #224463 by Brian English on August 5, 2008 at 2:38 am

Steve, keep the champagne in the cold fusion reactor for now. Don't want it to get hot. :)

Quetz, I think you've demonstrated cold-fusion. Not in a way that's useful in a power-plant (unless that plant be solar) but still, it's now demonstrated!

525. Physicist Claims First Real Demonstration of Cold Fusion

Comment #224460 by Brian English on August 5, 2008 at 2:32 am

And if I had thought SZ's comment was a considered use of consensus in the sense you describe, I would not have made my response.

Apologies if I've put my foot in it but I just assume Steve's responses are considered. He's English after all. ;)

526. Physicist Claims First Real Demonstration of Cold Fusion

Comment #224450 by Brian English on August 5, 2008 at 2:20 am

Go with the consensus? Baaa There's a reason why going with the consensus is important. It's possible to get a result that for various reasons is false. When many other people do the tests independently and get the same result, they form a consensus. It increases the probability that the theory is explaining reality. This is a strength of science, it deserves more than a Baaa.

527. Physicist Claims First Real Demonstration of Cold Fusion

Comment #224449 by Brian English on August 5, 2008 at 2:18 am

Steve:

The thing that everyone is after is not fusion, but reproducible fusion with enough excess heat to supply energy.

Look at the sun man! Or the hydrogen bomb!

Or did you mean cold fusion?

528. Richard Dawkins branded 'secularist bigot' by veteran philosopher

Comment #224409 by Brian English on August 4, 2008 at 10:03 pm

Mike, just started reading Swinburne's 'coherence of theism.' So far I'm not converted and there's nothing I find particularly objectionable. But I'm only at the stage where he, like Mackie later make the case against strong verificationism. Or should I say that we can coherently comprehend claims that theism makes in some sense.

529. The Emptiness of Theology

Comment #223887 by Brian English on August 3, 2008 at 3:45 pm

Theology is a subset of philosophy.

Then so is science and maths. Yet all have their own faculties.

530. The Emptiness of Theology

Comment #223881 by Brian English on August 3, 2008 at 3:34 pm

Is that a coherent system? That is a theological question.

Isn't coherency a logical attribute? Thus it is really the province of any field that uses logical conjecture, maybe Philosophy (but then again, most philosophers won't waste their time).

531. Richard Dawkins branded 'secularist bigot' by veteran philosopher

Comment #223871 by Brian English on August 3, 2008 at 3:06 pm

1. There is an ultimate scientific explanation for everything.

Could be. Science has been quite (as in ridiculously) good at explaining things but I have no reason to suppose that the method can explain or our minds understand all there is.

2. This explanation can be discovered and understood by humans using the scientific method.

See above.

3. The explanation is in some sense "simple."

As far as we can tell the universe is all energy, and energy is wavelike. Pretty simple it would seem.

4. When we find this explanation it will vindicate the world view of Richard Dawkins.

I think Richard Dawkins subscribes to the scientific viewpoint. Which has been incredibly productive and explanatory. But science changes and I believe thus that Richard Dawkins' viewpoint would follow to the consensus position. His position would change over time. So, if we ever get a complete explanation of the universe it would not be difficult to hold that that will be the position of a scientist like Dawkins.

532. Breeding for God

Comment #223396 by Brian English on August 2, 2008 at 7:23 am

Religion in Europe is dying.!

Thank God!

533. Richard Dawkins branded 'secularist bigot' by veteran philosopher

Comment #223278 by Brian English on August 1, 2008 at 11:26 pm

I've been culling slacker brain cells for years. Yet I'm not really a high performing intellectual. I can't think why?

Regarding the article: Richard is correct, flew can't write a book these days but when you read the statement it seems somewhat callous. Though it surely wasn't intended so. What is it about humans feeling sorry for people who've lost it? I thought we were supposed to be rational egoists! ;)

534. The Trolls Among Us

Comment #223217 by Brian English on August 1, 2008 at 8:00 pm

Carto, I think those net speak acronyms started off as an argot for the in crowd or a sign of membership. Like all things deemed cool they are spread by the people who want to fit in (teenagers) and are just a pain in the arse.

535. The Trolls Among Us

Comment #223216 by Brian English on August 1, 2008 at 7:56 pm

If people didn't use such nasty, trite little net-speak tags they would have to find a way to couch their sentiments in more eloquent and varied language

Sublimely put dear chap. Sterling effort. ROFLMAO. ;)

536. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #223161 by Brian English on August 1, 2008 at 3:56 pm

Good post fizhburn.

I was trying to achieve something similar but much more modest fashion with this Humean inspired post.

537. The Trolls Among Us

Comment #223158 by Brian English on August 1, 2008 at 3:47 pm

When I saw the article title I thought it was just a comment by Josh about our friends Wooter, Jooter and Txpiper and their demise on the RD.NET site.

538. The moment of truth

Comment #223154 by Brian English on August 1, 2008 at 3:26 pm

that Western converts or believers are stark-raving bonkers

Edited for accuracy. ;)

539. What's wrong with science as religion

Comment #222811 by Brian English on July 31, 2008 at 11:55 pm

Hey, I'm all for religion shedding it's claim to truth about the universe and being about finding ones place and spirituality. I'm not sure religious people are.

540. What's wrong with science as religion

Comment #222801 by Brian English on July 31, 2008 at 11:37 pm

Old Sarum. When people speak of a philosophy, they're not referring to the study of philosophy. A business may have a philosophy of paying workers well for example. This has no relation to the academic pursuit.
The word has different meanings in these contexts.

541. What's wrong with science as religion

Comment #222776 by Brian English on July 31, 2008 at 10:23 pm

For many, the search itself is the point of the adventure - a cognitively exuberant embrace of the world that renders that world much more joyful (& comforting) than it otherwise would be.

I think the we should seek knowledge, discovery is fun and but I don't like the need to have an over arching meaning for everything. It smacks of the need for a security blanket. Something religion is only too willing to offer. But I may have misunderstood your comment.

542. What's wrong with science as religion

Comment #222772 by Brian English on July 31, 2008 at 10:14 pm

I think it's simple projection Dr. Doctor. They have dogma in their lifes. So, atheists must have dogma and that dogma must be science as that's all they ever mention.

543. What's wrong with science as religion

Comment #222770 by Brian English on July 31, 2008 at 10:10 pm

But religion at its best is centrally concerned with rendering the universe humanly meaningful,

That presupposes the universe is humanly meaningful. Religion just assumes this. It's not at all evident or necessary to have a meaningful life.

544. What's wrong with science as religion

Comment #222764 by Brian English on July 31, 2008 at 9:56 pm

J Mac, your example of particle/anti-particle shows that something comes from nothing.

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=are-virtual-particles-rea&topicID=13

545. Breeding for God

Comment #222712 by Brian English on July 31, 2008 at 6:51 pm

And did you know that 64% of statistics are wrong Kent?

Or something similar the great Homer once uttered.

546. What's wrong with science as religion

Comment #222675 by Brian English on July 31, 2008 at 5:20 pm

I'd like one of these "other ways of knowing" people to give a clear explanation of what, besides the evidence of the senses (plus whatever a priori stuff we get from brain structure), we have to work with. How does that evidence (supposing it is evidence) provide justification for belief? What in heck is the epistemology of the "supernatural"?

Hear, hear!

547. Breeding for God

Comment #222655 by Brian English on July 31, 2008 at 4:42 pm

Laurie, how's the free-thinking conference coming along?

548. Breeding for God

Comment #222654 by Brian English on July 31, 2008 at 4:42 pm

Brian - the encyclical on contraception (1968, if memory serves) *is* infallible.

I think Humanae vitae was infallible. But it's not the case that because the pope said something it's automatically infallible....

549. Breeding for God

Comment #222632 by Brian English on July 31, 2008 at 4:21 pm

Just consider Catholics. They all, in principle, sign up to the business about the Pope being in charge and having a tendency to be infallible, and yet the number who use contraceptives (especially in Western democracies) is considerable.

This may have been pointed out already but most of the Pope's statements aren't considered infallible. It's only when he makes a statement ex cathedra that it's considered infallible.....

550. Kung poo panda 'The Sex Lives of Animals' exhibit digs deep.

Comment #222201 by Brian English on July 30, 2008 at 10:02 pm

Goldy, I was just recalling a part of my life. It doesn't cause me sorrow. I can understand Carto feeling down, he's going through it.
Good story Sarmatae1