51. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #46505 by Lionel A on May 31, 2007 at 2:06 pm

I also suffered from the

'We're sorry, but the provider of this video has not authorised Google to display this video in your location.'

52. Diary of a Deserter

Comment #46501 by Lionel A on May 31, 2007 at 1:41 pm

Brian,

If you have found your way here then welcome, I like yourself had to free myself after being pressured into baptism in the Baptist church here in the UK. Although no where near as oppressive as the JWs seem to be it has caused waves with one side of my family.

You have very much hit one nail on the head with the following:

'The belief that God is going to swoop down one day

and "fix everything" spawns a dangerous apathy for

the earth we live on now, and the lives we lead now.

Why try to save the planet when God is either going

to blow it up or make it a paradise? Why should I

try to lose weight when God is going to give me a

perfect body anyway?',

53. BBC man says 'I was wrong to lose it. But these scientologists are truly scary'

Comment #41664 by Lionel A on May 16, 2007 at 1:58 pm

I also watched the programme and have nothing but admiration for Sweeney's display of calm in the face of the 'Talking Dalek' who kept pushing his menacing face into Sweeney's space.

Also disturbing is the support that the cult appears to be having from the London police in the form of Chief Superintendent Kevin Hurley. He should be considering his position on this. Are there not laws against the sort of stalking that this cult employs.

54. Travolta spearheads Scientologists' attack on BBC

Comment #41117 by Lionel A on May 15, 2007 at 2:07 pm

Having seen the programme last night I consider that the police should withdraw from any more association with this odious organisation, tantamount to a cult, who clearly use terrorising and intimidating tactics.

55. Row over Scientology video

Comment #40944 by Lionel A on May 15, 2007 at 8:34 am

Well, having watched the programme broadcast last night then I am amezed that Sweeney kept his cool for so long.

I have waited until I had seen the whole broadcast before commenting but that Tommy Davis was totally creepy. One cannot debate with a moron who cannot tell the difference between a postulation in which Sweeny used the 'CULT' word and a direct accusation. Davis reminded me of a Dalek when he was talking as if somebody had placed a tape machine in his mouth and pressed play.

I guess these obnoxious people will be after me now. Let 'em come and find out what kind of publicity they raise. I will not be intimidated which is their real forte. I feel sorry for the poor suckers who fell for their claptrap in the first place and now feel too scared to get out. Judging by last evening programme, one methodology of the scientologists is a form of terrorism

Well done John Sweeney, you are a brave man and doubtless your courage will be tested in the days to come. Don't forget to keep us posted.

They should never, ever, be granted charitable status and the presence of that Chief Constable at the opening of their new UK HQ was worrying, that one needs watching.

56. Christopher Hitchens Explains It All for You: Move over, Sam Harris; another atheist wants the pulpit

Comment #40933 by Lionel A on May 15, 2007 at 8:12 am

Another faithist that fails to understand the difference between faith and belief based on reason.

'Alas, as the preceding paragraph suggests, we are dealing with a very intelligent and well-read author who, when it comes to "religion," is simply incapable of reason.'

When will they understand that religion and reason are mutually exclusive? Probably never for it is become clearer by the day that they have not the wit to grasp the concepts.

57. Pope says science too narrow to explain creation

Comment #31386 by Lionel A on April 12, 2007 at 8:53 am

This Pope and GW should get on well, they are both clueless about anything important in life, other than their own sorry lives that is but then only they think they are important.

58. 160,000-year-old jawbone redefines origins of the species

Comment #25623 by Lionel A on March 14, 2007 at 10:50 am

Comment #25597 by fishfrog on March 14, 2007 at 8:55 am

'Did anyone else notice the name of the person who wrote this? An article about a jawbone by a person named Alok Jha. hmmmmmmmm'

I noticed that. Perhaps they had intended this one for April 1st.

59. An apology to Peter Kay

Comment #25258 by Lionel A on March 11, 2007 at 10:50 am

Comment #25200 by Bizarro Dawkins

On a side note, if you (Dr. Dawkins) happen to catch this comment, would you mind answering some questions for an origins class assignment I'm taking at LU with Dr. David Dewitt? They aren't trap questions or anything of the sort; they're just general questions that are supposed to reveal and contrast the views of Creationists, IDers, and Evolutionists. I understand if you don't want to answer them, but it would be much appreciated.

God bless.

60. An apology to Peter Kay

Comment #25246 by Lionel A on March 11, 2007 at 9:08 am

Bearing in mind Richard's earlier comments I would not wish to extend his pain over this issue however I point to:

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2031243,00.html#article_continue

in case he has missed it. I think of Gerard as a journalistic make weight so rarely does he appear to contribute anything worthwhile.

61. Is America Too Damn Religious?

Comment #22664 by Lionel A on February 20, 2007 at 12:04 pm

For more on Jean Bethke Elshtain, I found this:

http://divinity.uchicago.edu/faculty/elshtain.shtml#shortbio

which will help demonstrate why she cannot understand the difference between proven fact based science and faith based upon the fanciful selection of texts from a work of allegorical fiction where nothing is proven.

On ID v evolution then Jean Bethke Elshtain has not, or deliberately refuses to differentiate between faith and science with respect to dogma. She is a paragon of her kind.

William A Galston, who appears to associate with Jean Bethke Elshtain on a number of public policy think tanks such as:

http://www.publicpolicy.umd.edu/IPPP/publications_Galston.htm

http://www.culturalrenewal.ca/qry/page.taf?id=107

http://www.foundationnews.org/CME/article.cfm?ID=1685

for starters, mentions his father Arthur William Galston Emeritus Professor of Biology at Yale University as if that should be an indicator of his take on the proposition under debate.

I don't know enough about his father's ideology to judge that, only his fields in biology but I have found this on amazon:

http://www.amazon.ca/gp/reader/1402030614/ref=sib_dp_bod_toc/702-7549305-0486408?ie=UTF8&p=S009#reader-link

which may provide clues if I could read the contents. Has anybody here done so and would they care to comment?

William Galston, predictably given his father's field of expertise, brings up Arthur Russel Wallace as an example of a scientist not happy with Darwinian evolution – as if that in itself proves anything.

What his kind, and especially the likes of Jean Bethke Elshtain (who expresses her disdain at the real world v illusory world distinction – proving that her level of fair logical debate is well under par), do not appreciate is that there is no debate within science of the general truth of evolution.

It was painful listening to this pair of deluded deluders whose points were so well rebutted by Susan Jacoby, her summation of the practice of one evangelist; 'This would be funny if our tax dollars were not paying this lunatic to peddle his nutty combination of right wing faith and junk science' – Classic she, Susan Jacoby in her extremely well phrased delivery, could have been referring to the teaching of ID. Well done Susan.

Overall - a broadcast of hope.

62. Fossils: The Devil's Handiwork

Comment #22434 by Lionel A on February 17, 2007 at 8:24 am

Comment #22311 by Eclectic

It seems Viacom have scotched that video from YouTube, you can find it here:


http://www.comedycentral.com/sitewide/media_player/play.jhtml?itemId=18132

That 12 grids around 1 electromagnetic energy woman!

63. Interview with Chris Hedges

Comment #22398 by Lionel A on February 16, 2007 at 9:29 am

OK folks, thanks for putting me straight.

I guess that I have not watched enough of US satire to judge this excerpt as such (although the thought of Jesuses fighting it out should have given me the idea ;-) ). I guess it is a bit like the often subtle British sense of humour doesn't always work in the US.

This is probably a culture thing similar to the service (navy, arm, air-force etc) black humour going down like a lead balloon outside of that culture.

But there again, all that razzamataz at the start gave me the idea that here was another 'happy clappy' type and set the scene for my thinking.

64. Is God a Delusion? Atheism and the Meaning of Life

Comment #22397 by Lionel A on February 16, 2007 at 7:23 am

I was in the local book shop this morning to pick up my ordered copy of Ayaan Hirsi Ali's Infidel when I noticed copies of McGrath's Dawkins Delusion on a shelf. A bit thin isn't it in all senses of the word.

Sorry but I wasn't about to aid McGrath's pension fund by purchasing a copy of this overpriced religious tract, even in the name of research.

Thinking about it though, is that not just the way fundamentalists would react to The God Delusion?

65. Is God a Delusion? Atheism and the Meaning of Life

Comment #22360 by Lionel A on February 15, 2007 at 4:51 am

Comment #22195 by BaronOchs

WRT Richard Wagner and his music; '...the fact an awful man can write great music is a cause for optimism rather than anything else.'

I fail to see how you can possibly draw such a conclusion. He was as you indicate a not very nice man, a racial bigot, so how can his good music (and that is very much a matter of opinion and taste - much of it being too strident and over-emmotional, to the darker side of human feeling for my liking - Bach is far more uplifting and clever, as is Mozart) make amends?

66. Interview with Chris Hedges

Comment #22358 by Lionel A on February 15, 2007 at 4:35 am

Colbert Report.

What an appalling programme, raucous, with silly hand clapping routine. 'Let's do it come on …' to loud music, and so puerile. This is one for Richard to avoid for the presenter's ego is clearly much larger than his intellect, he considers the US to be a Christian Nation, what simplistic, and plain wrong, hubris! A classic example of small minded religious bigotry., '...if saving our souls from hell is being oppressed then I guess we are being oppressed.'

Is this typical of US talk shows where the presenter talks down the guest in such an overbearing way? The few I have watched lately suggest it is. This needs to change before any sensible dialogue can go mainstream. But then of course those who pull the media strings don't want sensible, considered dialogue, preferring intended to be entertaining pap like this.

Went to seminary (whatever that is) and an altar boy for twelve years. Has he read his bible,? 'God wants you to be rich sir', he clearly remembered little of it, to intent on making his facile quips.

67. Believing Scripture but Playing by Science's Rules

Comment #22356 by Lionel A on February 15, 2007 at 4:07 am

Comment #22223 by Yorker

Indeed Yorker; Ross is thus clearly using similar subversive tactics as we witnessed with the Islamic fundamentalist preaching during that Dispatches – Green Lane Mosque video:

http://richarddawkins.net/article,539,Dispatches-Undercover-Mosque,Channel-4

such fifth columnists should be ostracized by the true scientific community or at least severely censured.

68. Is God a Delusion? Atheism and the Meaning of Life

Comment #22213 by Lionel A on February 13, 2007 at 2:05 pm

Interesting thoughts on 'The Dawkins Delusion' at Amazon:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Dawkins-Delusion-Alister-McGrath/dp/0281059276

note the quoted words of Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury.

69. Is God a Delusion? Atheism and the Meaning of Life

Comment #22158 by Lionel A on February 13, 2007 at 4:59 am

Comment #22146 by john_eg

'Or perhaps this isn't the case and McGrath rather is using the spectre of The Holocaust to suggest a future vision of death camp guards with The God Delusion in their back pocket.'

That is how I read McGrath's remarks.

'If so that is despicable.'

I agree. And I think that it is a hallmark of McGrath's tactics. He must have been really stung by TGD and his infantile response to name his book 'The Dawkin's Delusion' deserves all the derision it receives.

70. Is God a Delusion? Atheism and the Meaning of Life

Comment #22156 by Lionel A on February 13, 2007 at 4:51 am

Comment #22150 by scottishgeologist

'Four centuries later, the Nazis used quotations from this pamphlet, which was cited by the publisher of the Nazi newspaper Der Stürmer during the Nuremberg trials, to justify the Final Solution.'

Aye! And it was not by chance that the music of Richard Wagner was adopted with such zeal by that regime for Wagner is known to have extreme anti-Semitic views. There is no shortage of material on the web which covers this.

71. Richard Dawkins interview with Paula Zahn

Comment #22153 by Lionel A on February 13, 2007 at 4:33 am

Is it just me or have others detected a slightly venomous inflection on the word 'atheist' when Zahn asks Richard,' Why are you an atheist?'

Once again Richard displays a calm demeanour whilst expounding the rationale behind his atheism in stark contrast to that odious, and clearly argument limited, reverend. How can his opponents persist in describing him as strident etc. without being utterly dishonest?

BTW If this helps others, I have trouble playing the first clip, via the dawkins.net page or directly from YouTube, on an XP Pro based laptop with dual-core processor whilst in a limited User Account and the side panels of pages on the site don't always load, no such trouble with an older 2.8GHz P4 machine with XP Home (running default Admin account type). Yes I know that the advice is to switch from IE6 to IE7 or Firefox but I simply cannot afford (time and possible data loss if things go pear shaped) to do this at present.

OTOH it could be just that I am running into the slow period here again as seems the case since I began looking at this thread.

Doh! Speed up and down like a Yo-Yo ATM.

72. Is God a Delusion? Atheism and the Meaning of Life

Comment #21999 by Lionel A on February 12, 2007 at 8:21 am

McGrath delivers in a slow, almost pulpital metre, a strange diatribe here, one which intentionally misleads the rather compliant audience. Indeed I began to wonder if 'The God Delusion' that McGrath claims to have read was the same as the one I have recently read. I have to work from memory here as my copy has moved on to my son.

Who are these, 'so many scientists [in Oxford] who are Christians...'?

Predictably he brings in Stephen Jay Gould but ignores the fact that Dawkins and Gould had exchanged correspondence and so Richard was fairly certain of Gould's position for example when he wrote 'A Devil's Chaplain'.

Predictably McGrath bangs on about Stalin's purges and opines that when the people refused to give up on their religion then the firing squads were sent in. What McGrath clearly has not grasped is that this was not a move in the name of atheism but a pogrom based upon dogmatic ideology and the need to reinforce control for Stalin. His accusation that those, he ensures that Dawkins is aimed at here, who claim that violence is not carried out in the name of atheism are living in Lala-land (was that a parrot I heard cawing in the background) is a rather pointed, and low jibe, one totally devoid of any validity.

McGrath makes many specious claims, including that Dawkins is particularly abusive of Judaism and that TGD does not differentiate between eradicating religious belief and eradicating religious people. Here one hears the weasel words 'arguably' and 'could', in association with 'lead to the stigmatisation of religious groups…'. I would ask, does not religion do that all on its own?


McGrath; 'Dawkin's makes statements with great rhetorical confidence… but very often the rhetorical confidence masks poor arguments and sometimes, frankly, abuse of evidence …', McGrath this is absurd, physician heal thyself.

To use an archaic expression once common in Georgian England, this sermon from McGrath is 'all stuff', stuff full of cheap, laughter raising shots which he knew were going to work given the nature of the venue and the audience. A more dishonest counter to the message in TGD is difficult to imagine.

I also had great trouble in persevering to the end of this tiresome piece, a piece which lacks the very fairness and objectivity that he castigates Dawkins for wanting.

McGrath please understand that violence is never carried out in the name of atheism and atheism is based upon the antithesis of dogmatism.

Why is it that interviewers of the Scott Sherman type use up so much time and employ so many words to establish such a simple thing as that Richard Dawkins is not the Stephen Hawking who is wheel chair bound?

I would like to see McGrath in debate with Dennett, Harris and Dawkins, and with an unbiased presenter, the poverty of his arguments would then be exposed for he dare not use his deception tactics there.

The Prospect magazine article alluded to early on, and previously cited here on 21st October 2006, is at:

http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=7803

73. The questions science cannot answer

Comment #21609 by Lionel A on February 10, 2007 at 5:29 am

McGrath will soon be gathering a similar reputation to Lord Haw Haw

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Haw_Haw

with each diatribe against Dawkins he looks sillier and sillier.

74. Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #21496 by Lionel A on February 9, 2007 at 1:25 pm

It seems that Infidel has gone straight into reprint so I will have to wait awhile unless the local Waterstones finds one in stock elsewhere in their chain.

75. We all fund this torrent of Saudi bigotry

Comment #21286 by Lionel A on February 8, 2007 at 1:35 pm

blaine

Sure the clipboard was useful but that did not survive a system crash (I had installed new software AM and I think its call home failed). It would have been four times if I had not created and saved a text file on the third time. ;-)

76. We all fund this torrent of Saudi bigotry

Comment #21260 by Lionel A on February 8, 2007 at 9:54 am

Comment #21203 by MacGruder

I am in agreement with you, that columnist sure has guts. We can be almost sure of a backlash.

As for Bush and Saud, that Craig Unger's book 'House of Bush House of Saud' cited by Johann Hari is well worth looking up. I have a copy which has 'BANNED BY AMAZON.CO.UK' emblazoned on its cover, although purchased in a UK chain shop, make of that what you will.

Excerpts can be found here:

http://www.houseofbush.com/

Another worth a look is 'American Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune, and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush' by Kevin Phillips which along with Michael C Ruppert's 'Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil' amongst a number of others will help to provide insights into events since Bush took office, and before.

(PS this is the third time I have written all this and lost it when the page could not be fetched on Preview. Replying here is like wading through treacle ATM, must be the cold.)

77. Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #20640 by Lionel A on February 5, 2007 at 10:38 am

Comment #20611 by Russell Blackford

Russell, I hear what you and Melisande say and I am of like mind. However I think that at certain times in her life Ayaan Hirsi Ali had to be pragmatic about her options. One time was surely whilst attempting to get Dutch citizenship and another on emigrating to the US and then hob-nobing with the likes of Ms Rice. I am not sure of Ms Rice's religious preferences but talking with her was probably a least worse scenario.

78. Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #20558 by Lionel A on February 4, 2007 at 6:45 am

Comment #20556 by Linda

Thanks for posting that link to the Observer article here. I had posted it to the Dispatches: Undercover Mosque thread and in case that other article I mentioned gets missed I'll repost the link here.

There is an interesting piece, at last, in the UK press. This Sunday's Observer contains an article by regular columnist Henry Porter which mentions the diatribes of Abu Usamah in the Green Lane mosque, see:

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/columnists/story/0,,2005686,00.html

Infidel is on my to get list, snag is I have about a dozen books in the process of being read, nothing new about this though.

79. Dispatches: Undercover Mosque

Comment #20555 by Lionel A on February 4, 2007 at 5:27 am

There is an interesting piece, at last, in the UK press. This Sunday's Observer contains an article by regular columnist Henry Porter which mentions the diatribes of Abu Usamah in the Green Lane mosque, see:

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/columnists/story/0,,2005686,00.html

Also, in the Review section of this paper, there is a most interesting article on the courageous ex-Muslim Ayaan Hirsi Ali which is well worth taking the time to read, see

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,,2005258,00.html

80. James Randi on Larry King Live

Comment #20509 by Lionel A on February 3, 2007 at 2:25 pm

Rosemary Altea is a fake and so is Larry King! Why do I think this? Because in that second section James Randi correctly points up the silliness of Rosemary's inability to contact him WRT the challenge, 'can she not use a phone book...?' At which point Larry King comes in with a total sidetrack. Makes you wonder how much Rosemary bunged him? But of course she doesn't have to go that far because Larry King continues earning from a show which unfortunately is likely to increase its ratings with poop like this. I felt for James Randi.

This is the problem when entertainment and commercial advertising is mixed in with what should be a searching interview.

This is why I value greatly the type of broadcasting we get over here with the publicly funded BBC, although even that isn't exactly free from government interference with respect to the setting of the license fee level.

Perhaps we should have Rosemary and James on Newsnight over here with Jeremy Paxman or John Humphys in charge. Now that would be fireworks worth watching.

81. Root of All Evil? Discussion

Comment #20497 by Lionel A on February 3, 2007 at 8:54 am

Comment #20452 by Mango

'I just want to echo an earlier post about how these kinds of programs would never air on American television.'

Well that is a measure of how democratic your democracy is, sadly. How much worse it could get if McVetites get more sway is a worrying prospect. Ours in Britain is not a whole lot better right now, pressure from the Bush administration being what it probably is.

The mad thing is that about 57 percent on a poll in the Forum think that certain events went much as the US media said it did. Sure if all you watch is Fox News and the likes of the odious Bill O'Reilly. See Al Franken's books for some examples.

82. Root of All Evil? Discussion

Comment #20393 by Lionel A on February 2, 2007 at 6:46 am

McVety on tolerance; strewth what a hypocritical, overbearing, 'adjective of your choice', either intellectually challenged or intellectually dishonest ('Secular Fundamentalism', for Darwin's sake!), considering what is at stake, and mentioned below, I believe the latter.

McVety wants democracy for all who think as he does. Does he understand the meaning of the word democracy? Is this cognitive dissonance or something more sinister? I believe the latter given the huge financial donations from Christian Right to the Bush election campaigns, the same Christian Right organisations, who have increased in number since and who enjoy tax exemptions; this is larceny and fraud on a grand scale, the fraud element being why they fear exposure by argument from atheists.

Cheri DeNovo; just the wishy-washy thinking to be expected from one of her conviction. She stated that her kind do not 'leave their brains and the door' when entering an 'institution of faith' (whatever that is) but she sure left some of her brain behind before coming on to this show, after all she opined that if the peoples of the various faiths abided by their written commandments then they would not kill other human beings. Has she not looked at the Koran, or much of the Bible for that matter? Does she not appreciate the dire warnings inherent in the Koran's instructions with respect to the unbeliever and in particular the apostate, in effect the religious traitor?

DeNovo clearly did not appreciate that it is just her kind of religious moderation that allows the raucous proselytising of the likes of the frightening McVety. McVety provides a window onto what the political landscape would be like if Bush style administrations continue and people think The Inquisition is history. Mcvetyites unopposed will make it the future.

Well done Richard for your gently, gently rebuttals, without any arm waving or finger pointing so characteristic of 'faith-heads'. Note the applause after Richard's expressed fear about 'bringing Christian Values as a matter of law into a country like Canada or America [US]', also note the heckle by McVety during the early part of this particular Dawkins talk. McVety is obnoxious as became more clear in his diatribe immediately following during which it was clear that many in the audience wanted to take issue with McVetyism. Good point about the true origin of the cartoons that were truly offensive to the minds of Islamic fundamentalists, an act of 'fundamentalist deceit'.

Charles offered a very good rebuttal of McVety. How did McVety respond, well by stating that 'evolution is based on death', has he ever looked hard at religion, for Darwin's sake! Then he proceeded to invoke 'Moa, Lenin, Hitler and all these others' with a good deal of good old fashioned snake-oil salesman arm waving and finger pointing. Then he just won't shut up, what a boor. Later he acknowledged his ignorance about Sharia Law, and that is not the limit of his ignorance. See him wriggle on 'following all of the teachings in the Bible', a classic display of evasion and obfuscation so typical of his type, and of incumbent political masters on both sides of the Atlantic. The chorus of laughter at McVety's display here spoke volumes.

The dark haired lass with spec's, and a very level head, following this hit the nail on the head on how Christian values enshrined in law would usher in an exclusive state, for that is exactly what would happen and IMHO with an inquisition following as night follows day.

Another display of cognitive dissonance came with Ben-Ami's response to his position being equated with that of Richard Dawkin's, that is his websites warning about the rise of radical Islam against the west, his response was as if Christian extremists had never existed and would never rise again. How can he state such things given the thinking of the likes of McVety?

Good point from de Sousa on how blind faith, even without war, can be responsible for much suffering and death around the world given what is happening in Africa and the Catholic Church's dogma. The catholic apologist, predictably, completely missed the point. A point re-enforced in Richard's response. McVety's response has been, kind of, torpedoed by none other than evangelist incarnate Ted Haggard recently.

I liked the way Avi Lewis quickly jumped on fundamentalists trying to change the subject and brought them up when needed, not letting them highjack the arguments.

It would be interesting to see a follow up edition of this programme following TGD.

83. Intelligent design is a science, not a faith

Comment #20243 by Lionel A on February 1, 2007 at 8:50 am

Truth in Science has such a misleading name that I think they should be taken to court for misrepresentation, or somesuch, any 'legal eagles' visiting this site?

Truth in Science are clearly aware of their unsound position by the disclaimer on their site at:

http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/site/content/view/191/82/

and which states,

'Please note that the contents of this website and other materials distributed by Truth in Science are not necessarily endorsed by the organisations which the individuals above are employed by or associated with.'

And I should think not indeed!

The Sunday 21st January 2007 edition of the Heaven and Earth Show on BBC One reported and debated the teaching of intelligent design in schools.

Can anybody supply a link to this?

84. Intelligent design is a science, not a faith

Comment #20238 by Lionel A on February 1, 2007 at 8:21 am

Comment #17054 by gimlibengloin

'Such as the fact that living organisms are extremely complex and look designed by Richard Dawkins own admission.'

and
Comment #17161 by gimlibengloin

'Yeteven [?] in 87 in the Blind Watchmaker Dawkins acknowledged appearence of design.'

Now put those assertions back into context and Dawkins does not argue that because things look designed that this is proof that they are, quite the reverse in fact.

Further repeating a false assertion does not make it true. You have just used two examples of the usual cheap tricks expected of IDiots.

85. 'Friends of God' Documentary

Comment #20065 by Lionel A on January 31, 2007 at 8:15 am

Frightening stuff.

At least the outfit's title 'Answers in Genisis' is a little more honest than 'Truth in Science' who should be prosecuted for fraud, until one considers the deception of their answers.

Did that talking hay stack (5.26 clip 1) know even what time of day it was?

86. Does Evolution Select For Faster Evolvers? Horizontal Gene Transfer Adds To Complexity, Speed Of Evolution

Comment #19851 by Lionel A on January 30, 2007 at 9:28 am

Just so happens that I have been reading about this in Dennett's 'Darwin's Dangerous Idea', p.p. 141-145. Yes it can happen and Dennet cited an example where a species of drosophila had another species DNA inserted by an unwitting mite.

This book is now rather 'long in the tooth' and I wondered as I read as to what other discoveries in this area have been made in the interim.

87. Blasphemy Challenge on FOX

Comment #19720 by Lionel A on January 29, 2007 at 1:20 pm

Something going on here with respect to accessing a poster's profile.

When clicking on any poster ID string one gets their profile except in the case of the aggressive and arrogant Robert O'Brien, clicking on his ID string brings up the profile of the immediately preceding poster. Why is this?

88. Young, British Muslims 'getting more radical'

Comment #19684 by Lionel A on January 29, 2007 at 8:49 am

anon and #19657

Teaching critical thinking in schools is a good idea, and TheCodeCrack should be one of the first in the classes, however this will not be easy until the concepts of evolution and science are fully understood and why these are so fundamentally different to the teachings of all 'past their sell-by-date' religions.

TheCodeCrack

So let me see, you would like to see pogroms initiated against Muslims in your neck of the woods. Now the experience of Israel v the Palestinians tells us what exactly?

89. Blasphemy Challenge on FOX

Comment #19680 by Lionel A on January 29, 2007 at 8:29 am

Riley and #19670
I am with you all the way.

This video clip was of yet another Fox presenter behaving in a boorish and overbearing manner shouting down Brian whilst he was trying to answer the questions posed. What an obnoxious scrap of humanity (but shows no signs of same) Kasich appears to be and an intellectual lightweight.

I watched an MNBC clip not long ago with some oik called Tucker Carlson who talked so much during the interview it completely negated the whole purpose of the other chap being there at all. Pity, I cannot recall the subject now.

What is it with these 'so full of their own wind' people? It seems like what they have to say is more important than their so called guest!

90. She told them the boy was dead

Comment #19427 by Lionel A on January 27, 2007 at 5:36 am

With you all the way scooternyc on the public shaming and humiliation. I would go further they should be prosecuted for wasting police time, behaviour prejudicial to the safety of others and downright fraud.

If sent to jail the should be placed in isolation from being a potential danger to other inmates.

91. She told them the boy was dead

Comment #19426 by Lionel A on January 27, 2007 at 5:33 am

linda and #19351

That Benny Hinn guy is frightening. I am real pleased that the Atlantic Ocean is widening and if his private jet comes anywhere near European airspace it should be turned back. Even if that means running out of fuel, after all he should be able to glide all the way back with his powers.

92. 'God Is Not a Moderate'

Comment #19424 by Lionel A on January 27, 2007 at 5:23 am

sandipchitale and #18417

Did you follow the link http://www.anointed-one.net/quotes.html under the sub-head, 'Evolution or Creation? Read quotes by famous evolutionists who admit evolution has no evidence'?

If so what did you think of the quotes?

Quite a number of quotes indicate nothing more than disagreement over details, or woolly thinking. With that latter I note that quotes from Stephen Jay Gould are in there, statements which have been decidedly countered by Richard Dawkins in a number of his books especially 'A Devil's Chaplin' and 'The Ancestor's Tale'.

Such are the straws that the ignorant grasp and it clearly demonstrates why RD was so sad that such an elegant writer as Gould should get things so wrong and thus impede the progress of the dissemination of the truth.

Once again those who consider evolution mere theory just have no clue about the wealth of evidence that has accumulated and should be required to sit down read, and importantly take time to understand, the message in Richard's books. As I read more of Dan Dennett the more I consider the importance of his books by pulling in threads from other scientific disciplines and philosophical debates.

How impoverished is the intellectual world of the fundamentalist.

93. A Culture of Faith, Devoted Yet Complex

Comment #19163 by Lionel A on January 25, 2007 at 10:10 am

John Turner and #19159

During that clip cited is there any significance in Haggard closing his eyelids when answering certain questions?

94. Noam Chomsky Interview on Faith

Comment #18970 by Lionel A on January 24, 2007 at 4:51 am

shigawire and #18881

Well done and thank you for that, I had been working up to address many of Zappi's misconceptions, you have got there first. :-)

Chomsky and Pilger are rich sources for those wishing to discover the truth about the world's twisted trade (it is nothing like the original conception of Adam Smith btw) regimen.

I have a number of books by Chomsky and Pilger or in which they have contributed chapters. Other useful researchers are Mark Curtis and Naomi Kline (No Logo).

Each and every one of your 'Delusion' points, and many more are supported in the above sources.

As for 'blowback'; Chalmers Johnson had much to say on this in his book by that title, 'Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire'.

To be sure the British Empire also grew rich on exploiting the resources and native (in the sense of peoples of the particular countries involved) labour throughout its reach.

Also it must be remembered that the peoples of the home nation were also exploited, badly, in factories and mines. Tales of the conditions of work for the women and children, not to mention the ponies, in 19th century mines in Britain are harrowing.
Pittsburgh in the US was also a bleak, dangerous and generally unhealthy place to work in the 19th century with workers being exploited.

The wheel is turning full circle here (in Britain and the US) as the rich corporations, where the bottom line and shareholder value are king, by moving jobs to places where workers rights, and environmental protection, laws are weaker or non-existent exploit also the workers in the home country. The labour market is in a race to the bottom on wages as profits are in a race to the top. Slavery is only dead in name.

The distortions become clearly obvious when London 'City' workers have recently spent profligately in the run up to Christmas at the same time that Christmas (hamper) Club savers were ripped off when the company taking the money folded. There are many examples of the financial race to the top by the few is having a disastrous effect on the well being of the, already poor, many.

Companies taken over, asset stripped and workers dumped loosing the pensions in which they have been investing for much of their working lives. Then there is another side – environmental disasters, frequently with fatal consequences, because of cheese-paring on safety. If the truth be known about the circumstances that caused a container freighter to be wrecked on Britain's south cost just this last week causing oil spillage and other contamination I would think that the crew competence (lack of sufficient training) and neglect of navigation aids and vessel hull and equipment maintenance all played their part, two more words; Exxon Valdez.

When faced with regulators companies take the easy way out. Witness the recent, un-forecast withdrawal of a Portsmouth (UK) to Bilbao (Spain) ferry leaving haulage firms, amongst others, suddenly disrupted. Is it a coincidence that this ferry was the very one impounded in Portsmouth last year for a number of safety violations?

I could go on, and on, and on but to little further purpose, the enterpreneur (sic) has made up his mind.

95. Noam Chomsky Interview on Faith

Comment #18893 by Lionel A on January 23, 2007 at 1:50 pm

Just started watching this video and immediately recognised Zwicker and where I had seen him before. Zwicker presented the 'The Great Conspiracy: the 9/11 News Special You Never Saw' see:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6529813972926262623

More on the Chomsky video when I have finished watching perhaps.

96. Intelligent design to feature in school RE lessons

Comment #18823 by Lionel A on January 23, 2007 at 4:40 am

Jose and #18818

I am with you on the dangers of bias or incompetence from those teachers assigned to the teaching of RE.

The way out of this is to split the RE course, part to be taught by an RE teacher, a part by a Science teacher and another part with teachers from both sides of the debate present to shake down the arguments.

As for the likes of Richard Buggs they should be hounded on the title of the organisation that they belong to, Truth in Science is an oxymoron of diabolic proportions and should be challenged in court.

97. Unscientific American: US Almost Last in Understanding Evolution

Comment #18676 by Lionel A on January 22, 2007 at 10:17 am

fatduck and #18675
That the USA is below Spain is telling, unless a very unrepresentative sample was taken on each, considering Spain's long history of strong Catholicism.

98. Unscientific American: US Almost Last in Understanding Evolution

Comment #18671 by Lionel A on January 22, 2007 at 9:44 am

SMART and #18632

Brilliant link to smartsociety where there is a must visit link to a spoof religious site.

Thanks for that.

99. Unscientific American: US Almost Last in Understanding Evolution

Comment #18667 by Lionel A on January 22, 2007 at 9:29 am

I began this some hours ago and was interrupted so there have been a number of posts on this topic in the interim but I will not address any of those here.

That films containing scientific fact should be banned from some IMAX theatres is an outrage against the human rights of those who would find such films informative and inspirational.

Those religious bigots who forced this action are behaving in a reprehensible manner and show themselves as the clay-footed, small-minded creatures that they are. It demonstrates that they are worried that such films will undermine the authority of their gods which in turn indicates the shakiness of their beliefs and their dishonesty by knowing that their beliefs are anchored on shaky foundations. These individuals should be thoroughly ashamed of their behaviour in a supposed free society.

Or perhaps many of the above cannot help themselves believe otherwise for they do not have the skills to do so. Any who believe that evolution is still theory are just plain ignorant, this ignorance of course has poor literacy as one prop. A literate, questioning population can of course be a problem for those who wish to erect a totalitarian government. I wonder if studies have been done which show a correlation between levels of literacy and of blind faith?

I have a hunch that, some notable Islamic terrorists excepted, Islamic teaching has such a powerful hold because of the poor literacy rate of populations in Islamic countries in general. Indeed with many, literacy could be restricted to the holy books and/or the teachings of the imams.

This could also be true, to a lesser extent, in the 'Bible Belt' of the US where predators such as Haggard (for that is how they could be viewed e.g. in venality) rely upon the fact that few amongst their congregation will have sufficient literacy, or the necessary stamina, to read all of the Bible, including the nasty or contradictory bits. There are doubtless others in these congregations who are literate but have become taken over by cognitive dissonance. Dissonance perhaps aided by mind altering substances whether deliberately administered or created by mass hysteria.

Those who can read should be pointed to such useful works as 'Chemistry and Life: an Introduction to General, Organic, and Biological Chemistry' by John W. Hill, Stuart J. Baum and Dorothy M. Feigl which would provided the conceptual underpinning to be able to fully appreciate the messages of Darwin, Dawkins and Dennett etc. By this means those who consider a two century, and more old book, as being sufficient to provide a true understanding of how we are should be nudged into thinking otherwise.

100. Federal Way schools restrict Gore film

Comment #18501 by Lionel A on January 21, 2007 at 10:00 am

It would seem that Michael Crichton does have a scientific background with degrees in physical anthropology and medicine, according to this page:

http://www.abc.net.au/science/slab/crichton/story.htm

So, did he deliberately overlook the implausibility, no impossibility of obtaining a sufficiently long strand of a species of dinosaur DNA from blood locked up in the body of an amber fossilized insect, let alone having the luck to find the DNA of several species?

It seems likely for in the work cited he criticizes Richard Dawkins for wondering why the plot of Jurassic Park needed people. To Crichton interest wins over veracity, so is this the rationale behind his take on climate change?

There have since been on TV, in UK at least, some wonderfully produced programmes made such as Walking With Dinosaurs which have been, to me at least, far more interesting.