Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)

Comments by Geoff


551. Fleabytes

Comment #132304 by Geoff on February 24, 2008 at 3:15 pm

Paula #802.

Have you looked in "Convert's Corner"? Approaching 300 stories there, I think.

http://richarddawkins.net/convertsCorner,page1

I'll happily post mine (or PM if you prefer, but there's nothing secret about it). It'll be a copy & paste from my intro in the "new members" forum.

All this Latin takes me back to my schooldays (sadly mostly forgotten now!), but also reminds me of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIAdHEwiAy8

552. Physicist Neil Turok: Big Bang Wasn't the Beginning

Comment #132288 by Geoff on February 24, 2008 at 2:57 pm

Steve, are physicists anywhere near being able to test this, using the gravitational waves, or is it likely to remain err..."just a hypothesis" for a long time yet?

I'm quite keen on the idea, if only to piss off the Catholic church...

You quite rightly say that it's a minority viewpoint at present, but so are many other ideas in "cutting edge" physics, and Turok does have credibility (trying to avoid the "Argument from Authority" here, but it seems to be, in principle, testable).

Basically a long-winded way of me saying "I dunno, but...".

Just got a wonderful thought of the theists postulating their god with a brane in either hand, like a couple of table-tennis bats, and banging them together.

553. Richard Dawkins on five of his favorite books

Comment #132160 by Geoff on February 24, 2008 at 11:23 am

I wish people would stop adding to my reading list! I cant' keep up!

Only read Hoyle out of those 5, and that must have been 40 years ago.

Oh well, amazon, here I go again...

554. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!

Comment #132117 by Geoff on February 24, 2008 at 8:09 am

wooter, it's been suggested time and time again that you read an elementary biology textbook. Clearly you still haven't. All the points you raise, and many more that you clearly struggle to comprehend, will be covered in it.

Once we've answered those 4 (I cant be bothered but someone probably will), you'll just keep coming up with more, until you've asked every FAQ from AiG, all of which have been repeatedly debunked on talkorigins and many other places.

That last post is actually bordering on the sesnsible (by your standards) though.

555. Fleabytes

Comment #132073 by Geoff on February 24, 2008 at 5:01 am

Quetzalcoatl:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCOZQSRzKmU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OA-chhs5uOA

556. The Lava Lizard's Tale

Comment #132067 by Geoff on February 24, 2008 at 4:46 am

Did somebody mention lagomorphs?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7253518.stm

557. Fleabytes

Comment #132063 by Geoff on February 24, 2008 at 4:41 am

712. Comment #131970 by scottishgeologist

http://www.thebards.net/music/lyrics/The_Orange_And_Green.shtml

716. Comment #131984 by Bonzai

Did you watch that Dave Allen clip I posted earlier on another thread?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxo81Ok9Urk&feature=related

558. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!

Comment #131914 by Geoff on February 23, 2008 at 3:28 pm

285. Comment #131795 by Richard Morgan

ah, the "other" code of rugby...

Sadly, I was still in mourning after
Hull 24 Wigan 22

559. Fleabytes

Comment #131911 by Geoff on February 23, 2008 at 3:24 pm

"A night exploring the debate of science versus faith..."

Presumably he's giving both sides of the debate himself? Impartially, of course...

560. My Argument With God

Comment #131902 by Geoff on February 23, 2008 at 3:05 pm


Oh, and as for free will, there is a long conversation to be had about that...


Nooooooooo! Not more reading! I'm already 7 books behind in my list!

Oh, go on, then, I guess I don't have a choice....or do I?

561. The coming religious peace

Comment #131899 by Geoff on February 23, 2008 at 2:59 pm

17. Comment #131872 by Ian Bamlett

Agreed, Ian, that's where I was coming from with my earlier, more pessimistic, post (albeit in the UK).

562. Fleabytes

Comment #131887 by Geoff on February 23, 2008 at 2:24 pm

Steve, another for your reading list, if you haven't already come across it: combining two of your interests (almost) seamlessly...

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0812695933/ref=pd_ecc_rvi_3?_encoding=UTF8

563. The coming religious peace

Comment #131833 by Geoff on February 23, 2008 at 12:06 pm

I wish I could be as sanguine. Many parts of the article were persuasive, but I felt that at least two factors, though mentioned, were underestimated.

One is the power base of Islam, the other is the financial and political power of the Christian right in the US. Neither will give up their position without a struggle, I feel, and there could well be much "collateral damage" ensuing.


...religious leaders prone to fanaticism are likely to find that the price of using force to spread God's word, or to try to monopolize it, will be a greatly diminished hold on the future.


I'm not convinced that follows.


...entrepreneurs of the spirit compete to save souls, honing their messages and modulating many of their beliefs so as to appeal to the consumer.


Indeed so, but also "modulating" many of their customers to subscribe to their product. Fighting for market share can be a pretty ruthless process.


I'd love to be as optimistic as that article, but...

564. My Argument With God

Comment #131759 by Geoff on February 23, 2008 at 6:44 am

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxo81Ok9Urk&feature=related

565. Whale Evolution

Comment #131732 by Geoff on February 23, 2008 at 4:52 am

Excallent idea, Steve! There is a similar concept already in existence in the rarely explored wilds of the fora, though:

http://richarddawkins.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16061

566. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!

Comment #131730 by Geoff on February 23, 2008 at 4:50 am

Agreed, Brian, and apologies! It was this line that stood out for me. though:


No. I like you because you demonstrate that my occasional moments of stupid are as a single raindrop. You are an ocean of stupid, on which the tiny paper boats of your breathtakingly grotesque analogies bob momentarily, before being decimated by the fleet guns of rational thought, clear science, logic (the real meaning of the word, not the strange one you assign to it), and careful, peer reviewed science.

567. Fleabytes

Comment #131728 by Geoff on February 23, 2008 at 4:47 am

Yeah. "god always answers prayers; sometimes the answer is no!"

They don't seem to see that prayers to, say, FSM, have exactly the same set of responses.

568. Whale Evolution

Comment #131727 by Geoff on February 23, 2008 at 4:44 am

So much to read; so little time! I will try that one, though, Bonzai, thanks.

Steve, yes, I wasn't impressed with his RICL (about the same time that "Nature's Numbers" came out, as I recall? '96, '97, round about then). Can't remember if I got the book before I saw his lecture; I suspect so. Wasn't one of the episodes called something like "fearful symmetry"?

569. Whale Evolution

Comment #131722 by Geoff on February 23, 2008 at 4:24 am

Bonzai:

I've recently re-read Ian Stewart's "Nature's Numbers"; a quite fascinating book. Symmetry breaking was also discussed in a recent article on here (can't remember which one, now!), in which some of RD's "CMI" ideas figured prominently - again coming back to Steve's comment about "direction" (front & back; top & bottom, for example).

570. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!

Comment #131715 by Geoff on February 23, 2008 at 4:08 am

Thank you, Reverend, for that carefully thought out
prose. I'm unsure as to where it ranks in the POTY competition, but certainly in the top 10. I think TonyA still leads, though.

571. Over half of Britons claim no religion

Comment #131713 by Geoff on February 23, 2008 at 4:02 am

141. Comment #131707 by Duff

Well, in my case it's mainly because of the fact that they (theists) try at every available opportunity to cram their "theological concepts" down everyone else's throats.

572. Fleabytes

Comment #131703 by Geoff on February 23, 2008 at 3:18 am

Err...nope, just developing the theme found in #601 & #602...

573. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!

Comment #131700 by Geoff on February 23, 2008 at 3:13 am

TonyA #262 & #266

Two more brilliant ones, but how did you manage to post them using wooter's username?

Quetz: yep, the tale of the curious wooter, indeed.

574. My Argument With God

Comment #131694 by Geoff on February 23, 2008 at 3:00 am

Some hilariously off-topic ramblings in the Amazon comments thread here:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/review/R12BLM7FR2357U/ref=cm_cd_pg_prev?_encoding=UTF8&cdPage=1

575. Fleabytes

Comment #131691 by Geoff on February 23, 2008 at 2:52 am

605. Comment #131685 by Steve Zara

Indeed, Steve, but I have to admit that some sort of horrible fascination keeps drawing me back in to take another look, if only to check whether irate_atheist is still constipated...

576. Revealed: Secrets of the Camouflage Masters

Comment #131532 by Geoff on February 22, 2008 at 2:00 pm

Epinephrine, as a (fairly poor) guitarist, I find it's a constant struggle to get people to say "plectra".

577. Fleabytes

Comment #131527 by Geoff on February 22, 2008 at 1:58 pm


The one thing I will say about my own review is that I made a sincere effort genuinely to engage with the points he made in his book. It will be interesting to see whether he returns the compliment.


It will, but judging from his first attempt, I'm not holding my breath.

578. Moral thinking

Comment #131338 by Geoff on February 22, 2008 at 9:21 am

Am I alone in finding nothing much new in that article?

579. Revealed: Secrets of the Camouflage Masters

Comment #131324 by Geoff on February 22, 2008 at 8:52 am

[bollox]

More proof that god watches over all his creatures, even painting them different colours to hide them...and starve his other creatures that want to eat them...

[/bollox]

Absolutely wonderful. Well deserved standing ovation at the end of that TED talk!

580. Fleabytes

Comment #130848 by Geoff on February 21, 2008 at 11:48 am

D'Arcy, off topic, but is your avatar available on a t-shirt?

581. Missing link found in Sydney Harbour

Comment #130840 by Geoff on February 21, 2008 at 11:35 am

Yeah, but it's not a new "kind"!

And it's just made two gaps instead of one.

582. Why Darwin matters

Comment #130838 by Geoff on February 21, 2008 at 11:32 am

778. Comment #130764 by Tyler Durden

Jesus Christ walks into a hotel. He hands the desk clerk 3 nails and asks "could you put me up for the night?"

I'll get my cross.. ;)

583. Why Darwin matters

Comment #130835 by Geoff on February 21, 2008 at 11:22 am

766. Comment #130671 by al-rawandi

No, that sounded more like yoda.

Something like this post from TonyA is needed:

http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2251,Feb-12th-Happy-Darwin-Day,RichardDawkinsnet,page5#130593

584. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!

Comment #130789 by Geoff on February 21, 2008 at 9:37 am

226. Comment #130593 by TonyA

Shame on you; you started another of my asthma attacks!

That was hilarious!

Post of the year? Oh yes!

585. Fleabytes

Comment #130658 by Geoff on February 21, 2008 at 5:48 am

235. Comment #130653 by Artful_Dodger

You miss two points here:


What I am saying is that if evolution is indeed indifferent, if it neither knows nor cares, then it is meaningless to expend our energies in defense of the weak and vulnerable.


One is the evolutionary emergence of altruism, which has been observed in many other animals as well as humans.

The other is the fact that we are not totally controlled by our genetic inheritance, as shown, for example, every time we use contraception (thus overriding the "desire" of our genes).

586. Why Darwin matters

Comment #130319 by Geoff on February 20, 2008 at 9:46 am

He's not a real fundy - it's someone taking the piss!

587. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!

Comment #130309 by Geoff on February 20, 2008 at 9:10 am

TWIN CITIES CREATION SCIENCE ASSOCIATION !

I just wet myself...

588. Why do we believe in God? 2m study prays for answer

Comment #130305 by Geoff on February 20, 2008 at 8:56 am

124. Comment #130067 by irate_atheist

Actually, it seems to me (as I think someone else has already said) that this thread has contributed significantly to their research. Perhaps we could claim some of the £1.9m for the RDF?

589. Fleabytes

Comment #130301 by Geoff on February 20, 2008 at 8:31 am

Paula, that is truly awesome!

I've only read one of them (McGrath) and found that to be a particularly unpleasant experience. To have the patience to do what you've just done, to not one, but four, of them is beyond my comprehension.

Thank you for two hours of extreme pleasure (which I've only ever said before in a completely different context).

590. State Approves Evolution As 'Scientific Theory'

Comment #130066 by Geoff on February 20, 2008 at 2:50 am

I picked this up from the comments on pharyngula:


Actually, the standards also do a pretty good job of explaining what a "scientific theory" is:

Starting in grade 3, students are supposed to be instructed as to:

BIG IDEA 3: The Role of Theories, Laws, Hypotheses, and Models The terms that describe examples of scientific knowledge, for example; "theory," "law," "hypothesis" and "model" have very specific meanings and functions within science.

By 6th grade:

SC.6.N.3.1 Recognize and explain that a scientific theory is a well-supported and widely accepted explanation of nature and is not simply a claim posed by an individual. Thus, the use of the term theory in science is very different than how it is used in everyday life.

SC.6.N.3.In.a
Identify that a scientific theory is an explanation of nature supported by evidence.

And, in 9th through 12th grades:

SC.912.N.3.1 Explain that a scientific theory is the culmination of many scientific investigations drawing together all the current evidence concerning a substantial range of phenomena; thus, a scientific theory represents the most powerful explanation scientists have to offer.

SC.912.N.3.In.a
Recognize that a scientific theory is developed by repeated investigations of many scientists and agreement on the likely explanation.

Between that and labeling plate tectonics, gravity, electromagnetism, etc. as "scientific theories," what are the kids going to think when their parents and preachers try to tell them evolution is "only" a theory? This could turn out worse for the creationists than if the original proposal had been adopted.

Not to mention that this heads off the state legislature that was making noises of adding "theory" to "evolution," where they would, doubtless, have singled evolution out.

Posted by: John Pieret

591. Why do we believe in God? 2m study prays for answer

Comment #129561 by Geoff on February 19, 2008 at 10:05 am

Steve:


They usually figure out for themselves that there is no Santa Claus, don't they?

More usually from older children, in my experience, plus the fact that adults don't believe, and don't really try to maintain the fiction beyond a certain age. If that cycle is broken, so that adults continue to believe, and pass on their beliefs, why not?


Also, they don't tend to unquestioningly follow their parents


I'd say "obey" rather than "follow", in that context. It seems clear that in most cases, they unquestionably believe what their parents do, especially where religion is concerned.

I'm thinking of something similar in concept to Dean Hamer's "god gene", but referring to credulity rather than mysticality.

From my teaching experience, I know that some children (and adults, of course) are naturally more credulous than others; whether there's a genetic factor remains to be seen (I think).

592. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!

Comment #129553 by Geoff on February 19, 2008 at 9:50 am

188. Comment #129551 by epeeist

Bugger! I still haven't got used to the wiki rules, We've always played under the 2001 almanac rules, but including the Garbadale variations.

you win!

593. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!

Comment #129548 by Geoff on February 19, 2008 at 9:37 am

180. Comment #129409 by irate_atheist

Dollis Hill, of course.

594. Why Darwin matters

Comment #129540 by Geoff on February 19, 2008 at 9:26 am

wootard.

troll.

595. Bill Moyers Interviews Susan Jacoby

Comment #129535 by Geoff on February 19, 2008 at 9:13 am

quill:


I don't think Jacoby is correct, though, in her suggestion that television is to blame. Honestly, reading books will dumb you down just as much. It's not as if reading words on a page requires a great deal more brain activity than following along with something on television. They're both passive entertainment. It depends on what television you watch, or what books you read.


I got a diffent image to you, from what Jacoby was saying.

"parents reading to their children", to me, suggests my child sat on my lap, following the words in the book as I read them. That's how I learned to read (pre-school), and how I taught my children to read. I think the distinction between that, and just plonking them in front of the TV to keep them quiet, is what she was trying to bring out.

When I visit someone's house, I'm always struck by the apparent inverse correlation between the number of books on view and the intelligence/education of the occupants. Maybe I'm just biased, because I NEVER have enough bookshelf space.

[urn] coffee please, not tea. [/urn]

596. Why do we believe in God? 2m study prays for answer

Comment #129523 by Geoff on February 19, 2008 at 8:58 am

I'm with Richard, in that I suspect a "credulity" gene is at the root of it; religion simply takes advantage of an evolved "gullibility". I wonder if there might be a "switching gene" that turns (or fails to turn) off credulity in adulthood?

Having said that, the answer "because they're fucktards" (with apologies to irate_atheist!) surely deserves the £1.9m. They can send the money to my PayPal account...

Wouldn't it be wonderful if we could find a cure, though?

597. Bill Moyers Interviews Susan Jacoby

Comment #129146 by Geoff on February 18, 2008 at 5:01 pm


Oops. Fixed. Rather embarassing, actually.


Yep - I'm in a teasing mood tonight, sorry!

Time for bed.

P.S. It gets even more embaRRassing...

Sorry again, I'll get my pyjamas.

598. Bill Moyers Interviews Susan Jacoby

Comment #129144 by Geoff on February 18, 2008 at 4:57 pm

I just wanted to add my voice [to those] who find careless spelling and punctuation a barrier....?

I just wanted to add my voice[s,] who find careless spelling and punctuation a barrier....?

I just wanted to add my voice[.] Who find[s] careless spelling and punctuation a barrier[?]...?

Still struggling, sorry...

599. Why Darwin matters

Comment #129140 by Geoff on February 18, 2008 at 4:51 pm

Argumentum ad bovum?

600. Bill Moyers Interviews Susan Jacoby

Comment #129139 by Geoff on February 18, 2008 at 4:49 pm


I just wanted to add my voice who find careless spelling


not sure I understand this bit...

More Pages: Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 | Next