51. Sex for diploma offer caught on tape

Comment #164358 by Radesq on April 20, 2008 at 5:50 am

The only point worth noting is that you can avoid having to pass some sort of test and still get your diploma if you go to a religious school. So much for "I'm not really religious but I send my kid to the religious school for a better education."

52. Expelled Overview

Comment #164357 by Radesq on April 20, 2008 at 5:48 am

Still early here, haven't got the sarcasm meter warmed up yet.

53. Expelled Overview

Comment #164349 by Radesq on April 20, 2008 at 5:26 am

RE: 240. Comment #164342 by HaveEngngDegreeHeHe

That makes perfect sense given that some of the most fundamentalist religions allow men to have multiple wives (apparently as young as 13 or so). Solomon had how many wives concubines and children again? What are you thinking?

54. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164345 by Radesq on April 20, 2008 at 5:18 am

Epeeist:

This is the point at which you deliver the "coup de main". The best we were doing before was a "coup des deux veuves".

I think it can take quite a bit of brain power to try and squish science and the bible together into some kind of festering model of the world.

55. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164247 by Radesq on April 19, 2008 at 8:27 pm

Holy comic character confusion Diacanu! Surely you meant to say Dick Grayson. I'll do my best to take care of these jokers in your absence.

56. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164242 by Radesq on April 19, 2008 at 7:44 pm

I don't believe this guy is for real D. If you read through the posts (which I don't advise unless you are trying to counteract an overdose of blood pressure medication) it is like ticking off a list of popular ways to present as completely oblivious to reality. He is either a fraud or is very upset because his child brides have been taken away by the state of Texas.

57. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164209 by Radesq on April 19, 2008 at 5:49 pm

Remnant:

Genesis 34:30 (King James Version)
And Jacob said to Simeon and Levi, Ye have troubled me to make me to stink among the inhabitants of the land,


Now piss off.

58. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164191 by Radesq on April 19, 2008 at 5:23 pm

You see remnant aka assface: you can't prove that the words in a book of fiction aren't the word of god because the same arguments you would use would prove that your gospels are pure fiction as well. Are they worthless...no, but can you prove they are the word of god emphatically no. So you decide to throw insults as well, that's easy enough So go "f" yourself you ignorant schmuck.

59. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164181 by Radesq on April 19, 2008 at 5:12 pm

Remnant I thought you were talking about science or more correctly the antiscience of creationism/ID. Now you just want to assert that scripture is the truth -- God's truth. Says who?

Those old and new testaments are about a false God just like all the Gods before him. Eru the true God did not interact with man until the 20th century when his inspired words were written down by JRR Tolkien in what would later become known as the Ainulindale a part of the greater Silmarillion.

Don't believe me? Prove it.

60. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164165 by Radesq on April 19, 2008 at 4:49 pm

remnant you are not a real creationist. You are pretending. No real creationist would throw out all these softballs for us to hit over the fence -- and then tie ID to the gospel. Thanks but we don't need the help - fraud.

61. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164126 by Radesq on April 19, 2008 at 3:19 pm

Remnant;

Perhaps you think you are clever using terms like blind faith, false religion etc... to describe belief in the theory of evolution (if so you are alone in that thinking). Maybe you think that attacking modern science for its lack of critical thinking will turn heads. Ooh I'll throw their own words back at them...they will be so confused. Unfortunately for you your propagandizing and doublethink does not ring true at all. Your words are so easily turned back on you that it isn't even fun to do it. As Epeeist has been pointing out to you (with no refutation) ID has no value as science it makes no predictions, is not falsifiable (testable) and makes little attempt to explain anything about the world around us. It is nothing more than a disingenuous critique of evolution and it is more of an anti-science than anything else.

62. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164047 by Radesq on April 19, 2008 at 1:04 pm

What can men do against such reckless ignorance?

63. I'm gonna be a MOVIE STAR

Comment #163726 by Radesq on April 18, 2008 at 10:10 pm

"I must say that your first venture onto this site seems a trifle brusque. Would you not rather try some courtesy,..." -- Styrer

Wiley is not likely to answer your question; and of course he doesn't really need to you know who his designer is. But it is only slightly more likely Styrer that you will be able to keep up that gentlemanly facade in your last post. You may have retracted the claws for the moment, but it won't last.
Best,
Radesq

64. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #163680 by Radesq on April 18, 2008 at 6:59 pm

apbooking: You must spend a great deal of energy keeping the real world at bay. Evolution is a process...there is ample evidence that this process has been occurring in living organisms for millions and millions of years. The mechanism that makes evolution work is genetic mutation, (you could just say change if the word mutation sounds scary) change happens. Look around you, there are new breeds of dogs and cats wheat and corn all the time. Granted, this has been done "purposefully" for the most part. Given the time frames involved -- is it so hard to understand the change becoming so dramatic that the resulting plant or animal can be considered a new species? Look at a great dane and a chihuahua -- they once had a common ancestor and not very long ago on an evolutionary time scale. The same applies to humans and apes; quite a bit longer ago (the scientists here could be more specific on just how many million years)they had a common ancestor. Some of the ancestors became the great apes of today and some became early humans. Some of those early humans became modern man (some died off).

65. Gods and earthlings

Comment #163646 by Radesq on April 18, 2008 at 5:25 pm

"If we could land a jumbo jet beside a medieval village, would we not be worshiped as gods?"

Perhaps, or maybe the villagers would be whipped into a xenophobic frenzy so that within a week they would kill us and destroy the jumbo jet with axes.

66. Evolution fray attracts top scientist

Comment #162352 by Radesq on April 16, 2008 at 5:40 pm

Whitepearl, there's no point trying to get noticed for a job in the Bush administration now -- they are one their way out. ;-)

67. Victims: Pope Benedict Protects Accused Pedophile Bishops

Comment #162346 by Radesq on April 16, 2008 at 5:18 pm

Cartomancer please compare & contrast paedophile priest and church organist.

68. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #162335 by Radesq on April 16, 2008 at 4:18 pm

FF on the gold standard I don't disagree with your wish that it would in some ways be a nice thing to not have a baseless currency that can be inflated on a whim. This is again Dreamertarianism -- that ship has sailed, that horse is out of the barn, the genie is out of the lamp/bottle -- you can't get the toothpaste back in the tube, etc...ad infinitum.

Lastly private schools are competition for the public schools. There needs to be a robust public (free to poor people -- yes I know nothing's free we all pay property taxes for other peoples children blah, blah, blah)school system. The alternative is worse and will cost us all more dearly in the long run.

edit: I think at bottom we both feel like if only you were the CEO of America, Inc. you could run it right and the government could just butt out and everything would be great; or if only I were the King of America I would do it right and keep all these robber barons in line and everything would be just great. (ain't gonna happen and it almost certainly wouldn't work out anyway). I am probably closer to you on the personal freedom issue (bleeding heart that I am)but you can't go to theoretical extremes there either. I'd just hate to be satisfied with the current state of affairs where I could be spirited away to some detention facility without a word or a lawyer or a judge that could set me free until the NeoCons get bounced from office.

69. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162333 by Radesq on April 16, 2008 at 4:10 pm

Diacanu:

I haven't read what all the fuss is about Richard Morgan. I take it from the posts above that he has been posting under various guises - and has supposedly been seduced by the dark side of the force?

I will forgive him if he resumes posting under the avatar with the bouncing pair in the black top.

70. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #162330 by Radesq on April 16, 2008 at 4:03 pm

Alright Falcon here's the problem, sales taxes even vat are regressive taxes, in that the poor have very little disposable income and have by necessity a relatively low savings rate (or at least ability to save). Therefore a much greater percentage of their income is spent (taxed). You might say -- well poor people are the ones who get all the benefits from the government so why shouldn't they pay the most in taxes. Well, for one thing it is just wrong...the defense department that you work for and State, Commerce, Interior, etc... all insure and provide a stable and safe economic business place where those with high incomes derive most of the benefits. The poor just slog along from welfare to dead end job, etc...until they can make the right business connection, get enough college credits to move up in the job market, or otherwise get some lucky break that moves them into the middle class (the taxpaying class). The well to do in America are dependent on America for the freedom to make their money -- they should pay the most freight.

I'm willing to listen to cutting deductions, flattening the brackets some if possible, and by all means lowering the brackets further if possible. How that money gets spent is another matter...you and I would probably have more in common in our views on waste fraud and abuse in government spending (just not on who is responsible and how to fix it).

71. Religious education as a part of literary culture

Comment #161942 by Radesq on April 15, 2008 at 9:03 pm

Teratornis:

We need that pulp forest land for growing miscanthus...

72. School bars same-sex partners at formals

Comment #161887 by Radesq on April 15, 2008 at 8:12 pm

The unedited version of the article almost certainly contained the line.

"We welcome homsexuals to our classrooms and welcome them in our churches, but we will not allow them anywhere near our balls; I'm afraid I'm quite firm on this."

73. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161873 by Radesq on April 15, 2008 at 7:59 pm

Dr. Steve: you keep using that word (sorry) -- I do not think it means what you think it means. ;)

74. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #161855 by Radesq on April 15, 2008 at 7:42 pm

Nice parting shot...drop a couple moabs like abolish the income tax and go back to the gold standard -- yawn, off to bed... I'll expect you to defend those wild eyed ideals upon your return.

Cheers,

Radesq

75. For sale: 13-year-old virgin

Comment #161850 by Radesq on April 15, 2008 at 7:29 pm

Dr. Steve:
That reminds me of variation of a story I remember from school. A priest, a lawyer and a scientist are having a discussion while riding on a train. They look out the window and see a dozen white swans floating in a pond. After they pass by the discussion turns to the question - What do we know about swans? The priest says "swans are white", the lawyer says "those dozen swans are white" the scientist says "those dozen swans are white on one side". So I suppose that the laws of physics and mathematics may not hold in some places we haven't observed yet. I have no reason to think so - but I am uncertain. He is confusing uncertainty with faith - I think.

76. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #161836 by Radesq on April 15, 2008 at 7:15 pm

FF: Thank you for your service.

On the founders and the private sector: this from Wikipedia-

"In the United States, government chartering began to fall out of vogue in the mid-1800s. Corporate law at the time was focused on protection of the public interest, and not on the interests of corporate shareholders. Corporate charters were closely regulated by the states. Forming a corporation usually required an act of legislature. Investors generally had to be given an equal say in corporate governance, and corporations were required to comply with the purposes expressed in their charters. Many private firms in the 19th century avoided the corporate model for these reasons (Andrew Carnegie formed his steel operation as a limited partnership, and John D. Rockefeller set up Standard Oil as a trust)."

About the only thing I trust less than the government is a large corporation created to amass wealth and practically speaking unaccountable to the public. Too many Enrons, Tycos, Adelphias, etc... Government often screws the public out of incompetence or indifference -- corporations that reach the bureaucratic size of governments seem to screw people on purpose. Pick your poison. Capitalism like Democratic Republicanism is a flawed system - it is just better than anything else that has been tried.

77. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #161831 by Radesq on April 15, 2008 at 6:48 pm

FF: You're right a greedy and incompetent government is not a good answer. Still, a marketplace is a competitive place. Like most competitive activities -- in order to have an organized competition you have to have rules. If you are going to have rules -- you'll need a referee to ensure that the rules are followed and that the competition is fair. That is the government's role. Poor referees can interfere too much or too little. If you don't like the government -- vote -- if you can't find anybody to vote for -- stand (run) for election yourself. If your party (Libertarian - although I recall you are not an actual member)can't win single member district elections lobby for multi-party elections. Holding contempt for the government (which sounds like a trait you and I share though I speak for myself)and wishing it would go away doesn't make it any better - quite the contrary.

edit: What a load of self righteous crap I just wrote...take it or leave it... your a grown up... you don't have to listen to me, after all it's still a free country (for the most part).

78. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #161815 by Radesq on April 15, 2008 at 6:03 pm

FF:

Both Rand and myself take for granted that people will act honestly, openly and with integrity.

79. For sale: 13-year-old virgin

Comment #161807 by Radesq on April 15, 2008 at 5:44 pm

Using the financial calculations in this article. Muslim martyrs should be able to purchase 72 virgins for about 26,000 pounds - no suicide bombing required.

80. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161802 by Radesq on April 15, 2008 at 5:35 pm

bih4u

How would faith defined as "firm belief in something for which there is no proof" be of any use in finding the truth? One can have a firm belief in something that is false as easily as something that is true. Faith is superfluous.

81. For sale: 13-year-old virgin

Comment #161103 by Radesq on April 14, 2008 at 7:52 pm

Goldy "bedouins would be close" bedyoungins sounds closer.

82. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #161101 by Radesq on April 14, 2008 at 7:50 pm

Libertarian arguments always seem to boil down to -- "I really can't understand why you all think I'm nuts...must be something wrong with you."

83. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #161084 by Radesq on April 14, 2008 at 7:21 pm

Diacanu,

Athe-ism?

84. For sale: 13-year-old virgin

Comment #161083 by Radesq on April 14, 2008 at 7:18 pm

"Two of her sisters, Ritu, 35, and Manju, 25, have built one of the few stone houses in their village, for which they paid the equivalent of £14,600..."

"The normal rate is 100 rupees (£1.30)"

*shudder*

85. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #161073 by Radesq on April 14, 2008 at 6:31 pm

Ever notice that Christopher Hitchens bears a strong resemblance to Chief Inspector Charles Dreyfus from the Pink Panther movies?

86. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #160233 by Radesq on April 13, 2008 at 8:41 pm

What about hemp Teratornis? Could we make oil out of hemp? That'd be far out man.
If we are about to have a world food crisis because of peak oil/ethanol. What about hydrogen cars? Worldwide water shortage?
No stationary power should be coming from fossil fuels there are enough alternatives for that out there. Solar, wind, geothermal, tidal, water, nuclear, landfill gases higher efficiency superconducting transmission wires or "heaven" help us microwave transmission of energy...

87. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #160225 by Radesq on April 13, 2008 at 8:31 pm

I only said "your" Militiamen because you first mentioned them. Best of luck to you FF, I won't be able to get any sleep if Mike Timlin continues to give up damn homeruns and loses this game for Dice K.

88. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #160215 by Radesq on April 13, 2008 at 8:09 pm

Apology accepted Captain Needer...

What about GOP protectionist like Pat Buchanan or Lou Dobbs? I believe the theory that free trade is good for growth -- in practice it is pretty worrisome though especially in the short term. I am generally supportive of immigration being of positive impact on the economy -- again there are short term problems in that arena as well.

My point is that the free market is never really free in the real world -- your classroom absolutist theories just do not work as a practical matter. There will be winners and there will be losers but the government does have to manage this so that your Montana and NH Militiamen can still afford to buy their bullets and there way too large reflective sunglasses when the black helicopters arrive.

89. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #160203 by Radesq on April 13, 2008 at 7:54 pm

Falcon read the post next time before you comment. It is because corporations clearly behave as you say that regulation is neccesary. Jesus Maria Olazabal!* Pay attention when I am agreeing with you - it won't happen often so you have to be on the look out for it. Once again Libertarians take good idea to their logical extremes where they become nonsense. and you wonder why everyone thinks your ilk are kooks!

*lesser known relative of the Spanish pro golfer

90. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #160197 by Radesq on April 13, 2008 at 7:48 pm

Laurence are you out there? Your definition of Libertarianism is rapidly losing ground. Dreamertarianism might be a better descriptor.

91. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #160175 by Radesq on April 13, 2008 at 7:12 pm

F'ing Falcon

An Oligopoly has generally the same effect as a monopoly in stifling competition and innovation all to the detriment of the consumer and to the unjust enrichment of the cartel members. If mom & pop could get into the gasoline production business and undercut price they would quickly be bought out. Sound like any other industry you mentioned earlier? It is not free market capitalism it is merely power politics. While tree huggers and basically anybody would NIMBY an oil refinery in their neighborhood -- the petroleum companies have the political clout to get them built if they want to ... but why should they? Nobody else can afford to do it and keeping supply restricted increases the marginal return on every gallon they produce.

When you have a product that everyone wants, that is hard to substitute, in a market that is collusive and barren of real competition -- you no longer have a fair bargained exchange for value. You have a US economy that has been snake bitten and corporations with the only available antivenom.

edit: I wouldn't expect corporations as you describe them or their officers to act differently (in terms of some unwritten social contract to offer their product at some "fair" price other than the maximum they could get). That is precisely why government regulation of the market place is both necessary and desirable in many cases.

92. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #159711 by Radesq on April 12, 2008 at 11:48 pm

GLX I buy gasoline so that I can drive to work. (don't you dare give me a bunch of BS suggestions on how I should solve that dilemma) There is not enough competition in the gasoline production industry and that is a problem. It leads to collusion and artificial supply line problems to inflate prices. I don't want government price fixing I want oversight. I want the oligopoly broken up to increase competition (the barriers to entry in that business are too high). I want the government to require additional refining capacity to be built so there isn't a supply/demand problem with every change of the seasons or when there is a fire or flood at one facility. The market is not the masses speaking if it was the price of gas would not have dropped dramatically prior to Bush's last reelection bid.

And Monopoly is the only unfettered capitalism you are likely to find in a western country so giggle all you want.

93. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #159704 by Radesq on April 12, 2008 at 10:41 pm

131. Comment #159688 by FightingFalcon

The Austrian School of Economics makes so much sense to me that I find it hard to believe that there are actually people out there who continue to advocate government intervention in the market place.

94. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #159676 by Radesq on April 12, 2008 at 7:16 pm

Teratornis wasn't oil discovered in Western PA? At $175.00 per barrel maybe you can set up a derrick to find some black gold there in OH.

95. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #159659 by Radesq on April 12, 2008 at 6:18 pm

Laurence -- thanks for the explanation of Libertarianism. If I understand you correctly Libertarians are swingers who often find themselves in awkward positions. Just kidding...I think your view of centrists is mistaken however. Whereas your Libertarians compromise by moving toward the middle of the political spectrum -- centrists compromise by moving toward the fringe because there are no moderate non-partisan candidates in US politics. What you are describing as centrists are the mis/uninformed (clearly the largest voting block).

96. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #159590 by Radesq on April 12, 2008 at 3:16 pm

Laurence: I'm the one who said that Maher was partly Libertarian. To me a Libertarian is just a Conservative or a Liberal who abandons pragmatism for ideals. Since you claim to be one, please feel free to school me on why that description of Libertarianism is incorrect.

97. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #159582 by Radesq on April 12, 2008 at 3:07 pm

Steve -- if the condensate reduces the speed of light to zero would it then be dark matter? Perhaps not, but that got me thinking what were the theoretical percentages of dark matter and dark energy in our universe again? Pretty high I thought. How come our space exploration vehicles that have been traveling the solar system and beyond for the last 30 years haven't run into any yet? If the Voyager spacecraft or some other vehicle flew into dark matter would it be like smashing into matter? Like an asteroid?

98. Cult leader Pyotr Kuznetsov tries suicide after realising he was wrong about doomsday

Comment #159558 by Radesq on April 12, 2008 at 1:52 pm

There's a good psychology paper opportunity here. When I worked at a mental hospital twenty years ago there was a patient who used to listen to old records on headphones all day while rocking in his rocking chair. His conversations would inevitably boil down to "hey do you know Elvis Presley? I f***ed him last night in the shower. You know Ricky Nelson? I f'd him too." Now I thought this guy was a riot. But because I saw him often and sort of "knew" him I would have been sad if his illness caused him to beat himself bloody (or possibly to death)with a log or whatever else.

Had this guy been a real problem at the hospital attacking other clients or staff or if I had known he had done horrible things to other people...I probably would have had less sympathy for him. Likewise, just reading a story about some Russian guy who beats himself with a log kind of seems funny -- add in the fact that he was talking sh*t to people and endangering their safety in a cave over some religious mumbo jumbo and I have even less sympathy for what must be a pretty high level of mental illness (is there something else you could call this guy's behavior?). Still, I am reminded a little bit of that guy with the headphones and the rocking chair and I think ...what a shame that people can go so wrong in the head.

So I suppose there could be a sympathy equation involving a)how close you can relate to the person who is mentally ill and b)what sort of evil acts they may have committed and c)how irrational versus simply irritating they are.

This story doesn't score much sympathy from me because a) is relatively low in comparison to b) and c).

99. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #159552 by Radesq on April 12, 2008 at 1:30 pm

Agreed. Bill Maher is far from perfect, apparently some on this site are far closer. Given the typical fare on American television that passes for political discussion -- I'll put up with Bill's eccentric views on health/medical care and some of his ScooterNycish Libertarian ideas to get the rest of the frank discussion. Whoever was complaining about him equating and bashing religion and belief - you need to find something else to complain about.

100. Inadequate, private and late apology with grotesquely inadequate excuse

Comment #159234 by Radesq on April 11, 2008 at 5:44 pm

Yes those poor beleaguered physicians. They must get so mad at lawyers sometimes they want to just drive their Porsche right of the end off the pier at the yacht club. *tear*