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 epeeist


851. Expelled Overview

Comment #158713 by epeeist on April 11, 2008 at 1:22 am

Comment #158702 by Jon_Sociologist

You need to back it up with some question about how evolution explains the function of a tortoise's rectum or something.
Just came across this one on http://iidb.infidels.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=104906

Why do our maxillary sinuses drain at the top? As is pointed out there, it makes a fair amount of sense for a deer, but what designer in her right mind would use the same design in creatures walking upright.

I also like the quotation from Late_Cretaceous - 'Creationist " I did not even bother to read your post, becasue it is nothing more then a lot of evolutionist hand waving. I know for a fact that it is all a fallacy and that evolution is unscientific. If evolution really was valid science as you claim, then why can't your provide any proof to support it?"'

Says it all really.

852. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #158469 by epeeist on April 10, 2008 at 3:09 pm

Comment #158460 by Goldy

Especially the Eddas.
Absolutely

The fool who fancies he is full of wisdom
While he sits by his hearth at home
Quickly finds when questioned by others
That he knows nothing at all

The ignorant booby had best be silent
When he moves among other men,
No one will know what a nitwit he is
Until he begins to talk;
No one knows less what a nitwit he is
Than the man who talks too much

853. German Church admits aiding Nazis

Comment #158292 by epeeist on April 10, 2008 at 9:45 am

Comment #158286 by FightingFalcon


We're dealing with Adolf Hitler here - the man said many things in public that he did not truly believe. Why would anyone take what Hitler and Goebbels said publicly at face value? The only thing that matters is what they said/wrote in private and their actions.
There is always debate on this topic and it never runs to a final, definitive conclusion.

I am quite happy to leave it to the historians to discuss the details, the main thing is to squash the canard of the equivalence between Hitler and atheism.

854. Rep. Davis: The Worst Person in the World

Comment #158284 by epeeist on April 10, 2008 at 9:33 am

Comment #158241 by Quetzalcoatl

A quick search of Google has turned up the following:

http://blog.kjmastaw.com/
Which is open for comments. Enjoy!

855. Richard Dawkins on The Big Questions

Comment #158282 by epeeist on April 10, 2008 at 9:31 am

Comment #158275 by Steve Zara


He does seem to be putting a lot of effort into this, doesn't he?
It could certainly give him a nasty case of carpal tunnel syndrome.

It all looks like cut and paste from a set of standard paragraphs to me.

856. Rep. Davis: The Worst Person in the World

Comment #158249 by epeeist on April 10, 2008 at 8:55 am

Here's a thought.

Al-Rawandi has put together a list of the common "causes of death" of theists at this site (Pascals wager, I am busy and I have to go, argumentum ad hitlerum etc.).

You can also typify some of the posters, from the raving lunacies of wooter, through to the thoughtful YEC of Mark Taunton, the Vox Day sockpuppets, the post-and-run fundies and so on.

It must be possible to produce a correlation matrix providing we come to some sort of classification.

857. Rep. Davis: The Worst Person in the World

Comment #158232 by epeeist on April 10, 2008 at 8:40 am

Comment #158225 by irate_atheist

Hmm...does my Masters in Engineering Sciences count as:
Either is honourable.

Too much bloody snobbery in the UK about a petty distinction. Both are necessary, both can be creative and innovative.

858. Rep. Davis: The Worst Person in the World

Comment #158217 by epeeist on April 10, 2008 at 8:18 am

Comment #158182 by kjmastaw

I'd venture to guess that very few of you really understand what the scientific method is, could explain the difference between scientific fact vs. scientific theory
You might want to reconsider this after you have looked at some of the other posters, such as Steve Zara (Ph.D. and post doc biologist), Billy Sands (research biochemist), maxD (biologist), Annabanana (biologist) myself (Ph.D. physicist), MPhil (philosopher, with an emphasis on science), Quine (philosopher), Russell Blackford (philosopher), Bonzai (mathematician) and so on. These are just the ones I picked off the top of my head and whose backgrounds I am aware of.

859. Richard Dawkins on The Big Questions

Comment #158163 by epeeist on April 10, 2008 at 6:52 am

Comment #158162 by Cartomancer


You see, I've had my consciousness raised by the creationist lobby. Thank you Richard Dawkins! I now know exactly what to look for in devious monomaniacal fruitcakes who feed in these waters.
I suspect RD would acknowledge Carl Sagan, in particular "The Fine Art of Baloney Detection" from "The Demon Haunted World".

860. Richard Dawkins on The Big Questions

Comment #158160 by epeeist on April 10, 2008 at 6:48 am

Comment #158130 by Philip1978

Deborah Lipstadt, a proper historian, said:
Are you sure she is a proper historian? With a name like that don't you think she might be, you know, a little Jewish...

Which would obviously make her part of the world wide conspiracy of Illuminati Zionists who rule everything.

EDIT: Sorry, not the Illumaniti, it was the stonecutters - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homer_the_Great

861. Fleabytes

Comment #158132 by epeeist on April 10, 2008 at 5:42 am

Comment #158125 by irate_atheist

On the subject of starting a topic in a topic, more halfwittery from the self-deluded:

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/pressass/20080410/tuk-cathedral-puts-ban-on-jerusalem-6323e80.html
Well Blake was hardly your common or garden Church of England member was he? A mystic who was a follower of another mystic. And Jerusalem was written as part of a homage to Milton which has references to Joseph of Arimethea and the book of Revelation.

862. Commentary: Democrats finally getting religion on religion

Comment #158111 by epeeist on April 10, 2008 at 4:41 am

Comment #158100 by scooternyc

NEWSFLASH TO CANDIDATES: Shut up about your religion, it's like your sex life - boring, useless and nobody cares!
How strange, something we can almost agree on.

Unfortunately I think you have to qualify it in one of two ways. Either change "nobody" to "nobody with any sense", or (unfortunately) add "unless we can make political capital out of it" to the end.

863. German Church admits aiding Nazis

Comment #158072 by epeeist on April 10, 2008 at 3:43 am

Comment #158068 by Jon_Sociologist

So I am curious how this all squares with the allegations by high level church officials, that the Nazis were an "Atheist" organization.
This is one to put on the bookmark list.

The next time someone comes along with an argumentum ad hitlerum then there is an admission by the church, not just some debatable evidence from Hitler's writings.

864. Fleabytes

Comment #158067 by epeeist on April 10, 2008 at 3:36 am

Comment #158062 by keith

Just don't forget to massage his ego from time to time, otherwise he could be defecting back again within the month.
A prophecy, a veritable prophecy. Praise the Lord!

http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2292,The-Lava-Lizards-Tale,Richard-Dawkins,page3#158065

865. Fleabytes

Comment #158066 by epeeist on April 10, 2008 at 3:33 am

Extracted from David Robertson's post noted by Quetz in comment #158030 (just so one can see the attribution).

I personally liked "Given the ethos of the site I thought they would say that you were a defector, a poor soul who needed the comfort of meaningless religion, a fraud, an idiot, someone not worth bothering about anyway and that the post here was really not from you at all, but another subtle trick by the evil Robertson. Guess what - all of the above is on the website - as well as the usual pseudo psychological analysis."

It sounds awfully like the questioner in the UHI trying to demonstrate the validity of biblical prophecy.

866. Reviews of Expelled

Comment #158063 by epeeist on April 10, 2008 at 3:28 am

Comment #158058 by yussel123


If Hitler's version of Evolution was bad science, why did the scientists in Nazi Germany go along with it?
Is this a rhetorical question?

Scientists are human as well you know, so the answer is why did politicians, engineers, church goers, fisherman and any other group you can mention go along with it?

You might also ask why Lysenko was so successful in the Stalinist Soviet Union.

If you want answers to why individual scientists went along with it then you are going to have to look at the biographies and psychology of the individuals involved.

867. Richard Dawkins on The Big Questions

Comment #157745 by epeeist on April 9, 2008 at 1:49 pm

Comment #157740 by Cartomancer

I take it back - these guys are just like the moron creationists we normally get!
Just back from a small celebration with a fellow coach (one of his pupils took bronze at the world under-17 championships) so I missed most of this.

A pretty loathsome character but as you have noted not atypical of the creationist we get, even down to the usual cause of death. I am surprised Al-Rawandi didn't call it.

868. Expelled Overview

Comment #157538 by epeeist on April 9, 2008 at 8:39 am

Comment #157529 by clearmind

I am busy
In the absence of Al-Rawandi.

Time of death: 16:40 UTC, reason "I am busy"

869. Richard Dawkins: 'Growth in creationist beliefs a problem for schools'

Comment #157407 by epeeist on April 9, 2008 at 4:10 am

Comment #157401 by Steve Zara


I think the question is why does it have to continue in public? It is not just off-topic (not something I am too worried about), but positively abusive. Surely you can see that it would make sense to discuss who needs to apologise to whom and in what way off-line, and then if agreement is reached, appropriate things can then be said in public.
Agreed - this has become a classic example of personal quarrel dialogue - http://www.philosophy.ed.ac.uk/ug_study/documents/Informallogic1_001.pdf

It isn't adding to the general discussion and should be taken offline by its two protagonists.

870. Get out of here, atheists!

Comment #156829 by epeeist on April 8, 2008 at 9:59 am

Comment #156824 by al-rawandi

Do you propose the one party solution of communism?
As opposed to the two pseudo-parties of corporatism you mean?

871. Richard Dawkins: 'Growth in creationist beliefs a problem for schools'

Comment #156826 by epeeist on April 8, 2008 at 9:57 am

Comment #156815 by al-rawandi


Then he had the nerve to describe me as a genocidal prone right wing fascist.
Nah, total teddy bear you.

872. Richard Dawkins: 'Growth in creationist beliefs a problem for schools'

Comment #156704 by epeeist on April 8, 2008 at 7:06 am

Comment #156683 by Philip1978


Here is a VERY odd question indeed, can you speed up or slow down the speed of light from stars?

Surely the light from stars moves at a constant speed, some are just further away than others?
A mere supposition. It is obvious to every YEC that the light moved very, very much more quickly 6000 years ago. Hence the reason we can see light from galaxies several billion light years from here (I told you it was very much faster).

I have to say that the one I really like is - http://gondwanaresearch.com/hp/adam.htm

The one that seems to be engendering some doubts on a theist site that I have been posting on looks like:

Them: You can't disprove the existence of God (note the G).

You: I accept that, the best that I can show is that a personal god is highly improbable

Them: Jesus exists, praise the Lord

You: But that means neither your or I can disprove the existence of Zeus, Odin or Atum (Wikipedia the last, at least he sounds to have had some fun creating the universe).

At this point the conversation goes dead.

873. Richard Dawkins: 'Growth in creationist beliefs a problem for schools'

Comment #156675 by epeeist on April 8, 2008 at 6:14 am

Comment #156670 by Vaal

Phil, not to mention the scale of the Universe. Is the Universe also 6000 years old? What are Galaxies then? How far are the nearest stars? Is Astronomical measurements so far out? How do they address that? I would have said that that would be the biggest death knell to the Young Earth crowd.
It doesn't work I am afraid.

You: There are 40,000 varve layers in Lake Suigetsu, one for each year
Them: Well when volcanoes erupt in lays down hundreds of thousands of layers simultaneously

You: The light from some stars and galaxies comes from millions of light years away
Them: God started all the light from 6000 light years away, or, the speed was faster when the universe was created

You: Evolution is a fact, look at this paper - http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/
Them (after not more than 15 minutes): Very interesting, but it is disproved by this random page from Answers in Genesis.

874. Richard Dawkins: 'Growth in creationist beliefs a problem for schools'

Comment #156272 by epeeist on April 7, 2008 at 8:14 am

SWMBO teaches at a girls' school in Manchester. Because it is girls only it does have a significant number of pupils who are there to limit their contact with the opposite sex. These are mostly Muslims.

In the mumble-mumble years she has taught there she has noticed a gradual increase in the number of these girls who have a creationist outlook. This correlates fairly closely with an increase in religiosity.

We both find it strange that the parents of these girls are sending them to a school whose founders were looking to give girls the same educational opportunities as boys and wanted an emphasis on the teaching of science - http://www.withington.manchester.sch.uk/Home/About WGS/Founders/

875. Fleabytes

Comment #156209 by epeeist on April 7, 2008 at 5:39 am

Just as a matter of interest. If there is an absolute morality and it is defined by religion then why is Monsignor Girotti, regent of the Vatican Penitentiary looking to update the list of sins?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/07/opinion/07mon4.html?ref=opinion

876. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #156158 by epeeist on April 7, 2008 at 1:19 am

Not sure whether it should go on this thread or the perpetual "Fleabytes" one, but I picked this up today. Not particularly new, but it does spell out a solution to the chirality issue.

http://www.physorg.com/news126694357.html

877. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #156017 by epeeist on April 6, 2008 at 1:45 pm

Comment #156012 by sdbranum

I've got life to get on with now.
Time of death 20:46 UTC, reason "I have to rush".

878. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #156011 by epeeist on April 6, 2008 at 1:36 pm

Comment #156009 by Mark Smith


You replied to my suggestion that you post something substantive by lumping me in with a highly generalised and negatively stereotyped 'you' and by making entirely unwarranted assumptions about me. But the approach you are taking will not lead to constructive debate.
I think the assumption that he came here to take part in constructive debate. Quarrel dialogue, yes. Persuasion or critical dialogue, obviously not from his first post.

879. Dawkins warns of human extinction

Comment #156003 by epeeist on April 6, 2008 at 1:28 pm

Comment #155993 by Vadjong

So, where on earth do we find enough energy to make one big enough to be dangerous ?
http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20080406

880. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #156000 by epeeist on April 6, 2008 at 1:25 pm

Comment #155992 by sdbranum


Though it depends upon the various sects, most recognize the Humanist Manifesto as authoritative
You mean this? http://contenderministries.org/humanism/manifesto1.php

Not my style personally.

881. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #155996 by epeeist on April 6, 2008 at 1:19 pm

Comment #155986 by sdbranum

what ID enthusiasts believe, then proceed to trash argument the person or persons never made nor intended. Among bo9th Christians and Atheists, there are those who believe what they believe because that is what they have always been told, or they have placed their trust in someone they believe to have performed rigorous research
Dear oh dear, ID and rigorous research in the same paragraph.

Is this another to add to Al-Rawandi's list, i.e. death by oxymoron?

882. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #155991 by epeeist on April 6, 2008 at 1:14 pm

Comment #155969 by BillySands

Nope, and it doesn't take much intelligence to use a word processing programme. Did a grown up or your carer show you?
Hey come on Billy, give the man a chance.

It seems he can cut and paste from Wikipedia (okay, whether he can do it by himself is moot). Standard theist practice though, don't attribute what you get elsewhere.

A bit like the bible filching Ningizzida the Lord of the Tree of Life or Utnapishtim and pretending it was all their own invention.

883. Dawkins warns of human extinction

Comment #155831 by epeeist on April 6, 2008 at 2:36 am

Comment #155825 by elmeraho


Some of the Parts is available online here.
I award this site the first prize for being the most inaccessible website I have seen this year.

The implementer deserves to be beaten about the head with a hardback copy of the WCAG.

884. Fleabytes

Comment #155701 by epeeist on April 5, 2008 at 9:28 am

Comment #155690 by robotaholic

haha, jehovah's witnesses just knocked on my door while i was getting up and i went to the door and they started talking and it was just gibberish
I keep random pamphlets from the Mormons, Scientologists and Christians Scientists about, as well as old copies of "The Watchtower". Depending who calls I try to cross-sell with a pamphlet from a different organisation.

I keep meaning to add to the pile with information from the NSS but I haven't got around to it as yet.

I was accosted a while back by a young lady with a long skirt and a silly triangle of a head scarf. Tried to tell me about the truth of the bible, I made some random remark about it conflicting with the distance of the stars and lake Suigetsu varves and her whole team (who were all listening by this time) suddenly decided they were in a rush.

In true Al-Rawandi fashion I declared a time of death and the cause to be "I'm in a rush", which I think is number 10 on his list.

885. Dawkins warns of human extinction

Comment #155344 by epeeist on April 4, 2008 at 11:07 am

Comment #155340 by Artful_Dodger


As for the resurrection, it is the most plausible explanation for the empty tomb and the post-mortem appearances of the risen Christ.

Alternatively
  1. It never happened
  2. It was misreported, either inadvertently or deliberately for the purposes of spreading a cult
  3. The body was moved by the authorities to avoid bits of it being used as trophies or political confrontations
  4. It was moved by the members of the cult so that they could proclaim a miracle
All of this in two minutes without putting any real effort into it.

886. Dawkins warns of human extinction

Comment #155323 by epeeist on April 4, 2008 at 10:22 am

Comment #155311 by Cartomancer

In fact you'd be hard pressed to find a mythical hero figure worthy of his salt who didn't ascend to the heavens...
Spoken by a man who comes from Glastonbury I believe. Not too far from the Isle of Avalon...

887. Dawkins warns of human extinction

Comment #155279 by epeeist on April 4, 2008 at 9:47 am

Comment #155264 by Artful_Dodger


So how do you resolve the question of which God to believe in?
Jesus of Nazareth
Sorry, he's just a metaphor.

888. Dawkins warns of human extinction

Comment #155223 by epeeist on April 4, 2008 at 8:43 am

Comment #155198 by al-rawandi


I must pronounce time of death....

8:10 am.

Cause:

Pascal's Wager.
Sorry doctor, I am afraid you are wrong. The patient actually died yesterday, the cause of death was "fundie post-and-run" syndrome complicated by "skip-threads-to-avoid-answering-difficult-questions".

The "Pascal's wager" thing was just an after effect of rigor mortis.

889. Pastor attacks scientist's talk

Comment #155063 by epeeist on April 4, 2008 at 5:56 am

Comment #155038 by VanYoungman

Robertson may be an asshole, but logic dictates he makes a valid argument.
In the hope of helping the Rev. Dark out - shouldn't that be "logic requires", rather than "logic dicates".

890. Pastor attacks scientist's talk

Comment #154998 by epeeist on April 4, 2008 at 4:01 am

Comment #154973 by The Reverend Dark


Your answer to metaphorical vrs literal is not an answer, you were not asked for the general, but the specific. Specific verse. Specific event.
And in addition he was asked how he could decide these specific instances were literal or metaphorical. And by what authority could he declare something that is purportedly either directly or indirectly the word of god to be literal or metaphorical.

AD - you are engaging in something that anyone who has had to give a lecture or presentation of any kind as "hand waving", i.e. trying to distract your audience so they don't realise that you either don't have a clue as to what you are talking about or are knowingly dispensing bullshit.

However, I think in your case it is more a case of "not waving but drowning".

891. Upside-down church sculpture on hit list

Comment #154926 by epeeist on April 4, 2008 at 1:48 am

Comment #154773 by riki


There use to be a sculpture of a prostitute in Sydney. A number of people didn't like it and kept knocking it's head off.
Try this one in Dublin - http://www6.worldisround.com/photos/1/602/175.jpg

Hint - her wheelbarrow is full of cockles and mussels. There are apparently contradicting views about it ;-)

892. Pastor attacks scientist's talk

Comment #154913 by epeeist on April 4, 2008 at 12:54 am

Comment #154912 by scottishgeologist


An old Phillips drilling superintendent told me years ago "hey, boy, opinions are like assholes - everybody's got one - and yours stinks!"
I wonder whether anyone looks at the bottom of the Guardian "Comment is Free" page to see the end of the C.P. Scott quotation "but facts are sacred".

893. Pastor attacks scientist's talk

Comment #154909 by epeeist on April 4, 2008 at 12:50 am

Comment #154902 by MaxD


Your diligence on this metaphor point is really quite something! Artful Dodger sadly isn't as deft as his namesake would suggest.

Devolved, Bizarro Dawkins, Gimlibengloin, Artful_dodger are all one trick ponies. Pin them into a corner and they disappear for a while until, as Steve Zara has said, their reset button gets pushed and they reappear as though nothing had happened.

Billy Sands and I are still waiting for devolved to reappear from around 18 months back. I have some queries on a flood I want answered and Billy wants to raise some questions on opsin genes.
I think it was a meta-litero scalding. And this as we all know is the very worst kind.
That only raises the next bit of my questions to AD - how can you tell, and who gave you the authority to determine this ;-)

894. Pastor attacks scientist's talk

Comment #154900 by epeeist on April 3, 2008 at 11:39 pm

Comment #154738 by Artful_Dodger

After the scalding Dawkins got the last time
Would that be a literal scalding or only a metaphorical one?

Isn't it about time you actually answered some questions rather than doing the standard post-and-run fundie thing.

895. Pastor attacks scientist's talk

Comment #154646 by epeeist on April 3, 2008 at 2:33 pm

Comment #154642 by andydjw


Mr Robertson said he could have written a better case for atheism
That would be nice. He could actually tell us what all the tenets are that are supposedly the basis of our fundamentalist beliefs.

896. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #154476 by epeeist on April 3, 2008 at 10:33 am

Comment #154464 by Steve Zara

They were deceived.
No, they were lied to. Deceived is far too nice a word.

897. Fleabytes

Comment #154402 by epeeist on April 3, 2008 at 7:21 am

Comment #154400 by al-rawandi


More childish nonsense. Perhaps we could discuss something substantive instead of referencing vapid American pop culture?

Really people, don't rob me of my intellectual stimulation in life.
So what are the odds of Yorkshire finishing above Lancashire in the county championships this year?

And do you think that the Duckworth-Lewis rules ought to be amended?

898. Fleabytes

Comment #154397 by epeeist on April 3, 2008 at 7:16 am

Comment #154387 by The Reverend Dark

PS: Epeeist - polite, but reverent applause for an excellent re-branding riff, especially as you bring C.S. Lewis into it from an unexpected, uncomfortable, direction.
Thank you for that. To attempt to close the circle, Tolkien (in a quotation that I can't find to hand at the moment, though I believe it was in the introduction to the single volume of "The Lord of the Rings") claimed that he disliked allegory in all its forms. An interesting comment since that is really all that Narnia is (I particularly dislike the last volume, both sanctimonious and racist). Telling too, in that Tolkien and Lewis were drinking buddies, well known in the "Eagle and Child" on St. Giles.

899. Fleabytes

Comment #154383 by epeeist on April 3, 2008 at 6:52 am

Comment #154378 by annabanana

Sorry to be OT, but does anyone else find it funny that when mlearnedfriend's name is abbreviated as MLF it's really close to MILF?
Haven't you already apologised once for being OT?

Perhaps we could call him "Trumpkin", aka "Dear Little Friend", aka "DLF" from the Narnia Chronicles.

Should young ladies like yourself be aware of what MILF stands for?

900. Fleabytes

Comment #154374 by epeeist on April 3, 2008 at 6:34 am

Comment #154363 by Philip1978


Well, Mylearnedfriend is in Scotland, you are "up north" and I am in Southern Jessie land, I reckon if we meet half way I could make an afternoon pint but it would have to be a swift one!
I wasn't sure whether MLF would be allowed out to play on a Sunday afternoon.

Does Cambridge count as "Southern Jessieshire"? I was there with my elder daughter last week and had a nice pint of Greene King IPA followed by an even nicer pint of Old Speckled Hen. Not a patch on Timothy Taylor's Landlord though ;-)

More Pages: Previous | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 | Next