51. Consciousness Without Faith

Comment #16622 by Pilot22A on January 7, 2007 at 4:30 pm

I find it somewhat odd that Harris has added a dimension to humanity that doesn't exist. If one is to take evolution back to it's origin, one would have to conclude that for the most of human history (as we can see in the flora and fauna about us) there was no self-awareness/consciousness.

That said, consciousness must have occurred slowly and over a great deal of time for evolutionary purposes.

I don't know what the purpose was; religionists "believe" that the reason we reason is so we can go to some idyllic place and be happy after our brains electrical/chemical processes end. (We die.)

A better answer for Harris's feelings of euphoria/happiness would be pared down to the idea that happy humans don't commit suicide and/or involve themselves in risky activities thereby breeding and advancing the race.

Anything else smacks of silly spiritualism or fantasy.

52. God-less

Comment #16460 by Pilot22A on January 6, 2007 at 4:40 pm

"the atheists are coming out of their spider holes."

Okay, so this guy thinks right off the bat that I live in a "spider hole," as in Saddam Hussein.

That may be, but I have yet to see the "High Priests" of Atheism molesting little boys and girls.

Even the Mormon lay clergy have gotten into the act.

So, I will be content in my "spider hole" and this guys children will be safe, at least from me.

53. Sam Harris's Faith in Eastern Spirituality and Muslim Torture

Comment #16458 by Pilot22A on January 6, 2007 at 4:33 pm

I haven't read "End of Faith." Taking a look at the posts here, I see that some who have read the book sort of take Harris to task for looking at reincarnation.

This totally surprises me.

As I understand reincarnation, one must have a soul and just reading "Letter to a Christian Nation" I concluded that Harris doesn't buy this idea.

Doesn't one have to have a "soul" to be reincarnated?

54. Secular fundamentalists are the new totalitarians

Comment #16307 by Pilot22A on January 6, 2007 at 3:13 am

Once again, the last refuge of the believer in supernaturalism is to attack, and this is a quite good attack. This guy is not a "moron" and this will sit well with his audience.

What must be especially annoying to the faithful, is the realization that guys like Harris and Dawkins have taken the gloves off and are calling into question the underpinnings of the religionists beliefs, and treating them like adults, not children who want to cling to a belief in Santa Claus.

55. Without God, Gall Is Permitted

Comment #16218 by Pilot22A on January 5, 2007 at 3:29 pm

"There is no such sympathy among the new apostles of atheism--to find it, one has to look to believers."

This makes no sense.

Why can't these apologists accept the fact that non-theists exist only because the theists insist on poking disbelievers with the stick of god and the Bible?

56. Executing Saddam Hussein was an Act of Vandalism

Comment #15815 by Pilot22A on January 3, 2007 at 7:06 am

There are a lot of Kurds and Iranians who will disagree with Dawkins on this. Although eliminating despicable characters like Saddam make us uncomfortable (I oppose the death penalty) it was probably outside our view of the big picture to judge this act.

57. Beliefwatch: Blasphemy (Challenge)

Comment #15617 by Pilot22A on January 1, 2007 at 3:58 pm

Before I denied the Holy Ghost, I checked under my bed, didn't find he/it there.(Must be a he or it since men not women think up crap like a Holy Ghost.) Didn't find any other monsters either.

So, besides denying the Holy Ghost, I also challenge Jesus, God, Allah and all the rest of the gods to take a nice juicy lick off of my butt.

Hmmm, I'm still here.

What kind of an inane impotent god needs to scare me with the idea of offending a Holy Ghost?

58. Divided by a common language: Richard Dawkins clarifies his position

Comment #15572 by Pilot22A on January 1, 2007 at 11:29 am

This petition that Dawkins signed simply shows that he is subject to all the human foibles as the rest of us.

That said, the message is the same. Religion taught to freshly minted brains (i.e., children) is a form of child abuse. Dawkins has that right.

Also, a person as closely scrutinized as Dawkins is will surely err and the opposition will pounce on him as was done.

59. Not Yet The Majority But No Longer Silent

Comment #15435 by Pilot22A on December 31, 2006 at 9:37 am

Whether the comparison of atheism to "gays" (and coming out) is meaningful remains to be seen.

Gay has a sexual connection that will never go away.

Atheism is a purely intellectual idea, forced upon all of us simply by the existence of theists as one can easily deduce. Were theists to suddenly see how absurd their tenets are, the idea of atheists would simply cease to exist.

60. How Old is the Grand Canyon? Park Service Won't Say

Comment #15352 by Pilot22A on December 30, 2006 at 3:52 pm

Stunned is an understatement. To read that there exists a book, sold at Grand Canyon National Park, wherein it states that the canyon was created by the Biblical Flood defies commonsense.

I live near the Park and must go there and buy one of these books. No one I know will believe it exists unless I actually show them the book.

The Park Service should be ashamed for printing this nonsense.

61. How the Great Atheist got polite society standing

Comment #14960 by Pilot22A on December 27, 2006 at 11:16 am

Lacking valid attacks on the message, attack the messenger, and make all attacks personal, i.e., "permafrost of his ego."
-----------------------------------------------

"Had there been a Lunatic Asylum in the suburbs of Jerusalem, Jesus Christ would infallibly have been shut up in it at the outset of his public career. That interview with Satan on a pinnacle of the Temple would alone have damned him, and everything that happened after could have confirmed the diagnosis. The whole religious complexion of the modern world is due to the absence from Jerusalem of a Lunatic Asylum."

- Havelock Ellis

62. A Christmas thunderbolt for the arch-enemy of religion

Comment #14721 by Pilot22A on December 24, 2006 at 6:42 pm

"Stalin's atheism, moreover, was no mere private foible, either. It was a violent feature of his ideology. He oppressed, imprisoned, tortured and murdered the Orthodox faithful, destroying their icons and their churches, throughout the length and breadth of Russia. Mao Tse-tung, another enthusiastic atheist, followed suit, and his anti-religious policies continue to this day in China."

So Stalin, clearly a wacko, killed lots of Xians. What's that to do with Evolutionary Biology?

Dawkins "The God Delusion" is worth reading. It has some editing problems and his inclusion of people like Bush and Coulter make for somewhat uncomfortable reading.

Darwinists and evolutionary biologists will never convince believers with logical attacks on religion, and Dawkins may agree here.

What will win converts is the systematical filling of gaps in the evolutionary record, slowly pushing the idea of a creator out.

63. The problem with secularism

Comment #14367 by Pilot22A on December 22, 2006 at 6:39 am

"status of their own first principles and explanatory frameworks"

Atheists exist only because there are theists. Why can't religionists see this "first" principle?




"Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool."
—- Voltaire

64. The Grinch Delusion: An Atheist Can Believe in Christmas

Comment #13377 by Pilot22A on December 17, 2006 at 10:30 am

My wife and I, we find the Christmas carols bring back many fond memories, (and doesn't everyone just love Elvis records at Christmas?) and although strong atheists, we continue to say "Merry Christmas" at Christmas time and "Bless You" when either of us sneezes.

We are A_Theists, not robots.

65. Response to Richard Dawkins' Criticisms in The God Delusion

Comment #13206 by Pilot22A on December 16, 2006 at 7:41 am

At the end of the day Mr. Swinburne, you still believe in invisible supernatural beings and silly ancient fairy tales and Dawkins doesn't.

How do you account for that?

66. Intelligent design: The God Lab

Comment #12928 by Pilot22A on December 14, 2006 at 12:40 pm

Instead of saying, "we will look at your results and try to replicate them to see if your results are correct," these guys say in effect, "your results are wrong and we are going to prove so."

What kind of science is that???

67. Science Weekly for December 11: Creationism special

Comment #12867 by Pilot22A on December 14, 2006 at 5:54 am

Once again, ID and Creationism, and their proponents, seem to attract the same type of individual; people who refuse to think (or study) for themselves.

This seems such an exercise in futility, as in trying to teach profoundly blind people to see.

68. An Exercise in Contempt

Comment #12865 by Pilot22A on December 14, 2006 at 5:47 am

This review by Kirk sounds like a junior high school book report, line after line of criticism without proper reference nor referenced argument.

I have read "The God Delusion" twice now, and it does make me somewhat uneasy when I read Dawkins statements about Haggard and others of Haggards ilk. I am not uneasy about the comments, which are direct and one point, but because I dislike seeing guys like him and Coulter mentioned in an otherwise excellent book.

69. In case you didn't know I'm a fool, here's an article to prove it.

Comment #12772 by Pilot22A on December 13, 2006 at 6:41 pm

For the sake of argument, maybe Stalin was an atheist. That said, he still was a verifiable whack-job. If one were able to line up every insane atheist next to every sane religious figure that involved himself in the Inquisitions, as an example, the theists would win out by numbers for cruelty, murder and mayhem.

Dooley gave himself up when, in the first sentence, he launched a personal attack on Dawkins instead of logically and reasonably trying to undermine Dawkins ideas. Clearly Dooley is out of his league.

70. Vicars in a Twist

Comment #12757 by Pilot22A on December 13, 2006 at 3:57 pm

Telling a Vicar that his religion is inane insanity is like telling a car salesman that his car is a lemon.

Dawkins is attacking these dolts at the source of their employment and livelihood.

They are running scared that their flocks (Sheeple) will abandon the offering plate.