Comments by a non e-moose

Comment #264040 by a non e-moose on October 13, 2008 at 2:54 pm

isn't dawkins working on a similar book himself at the moment?

Comment #261259 by a non e-moose on October 6, 2008 at 3:01 pm

@mmurray

I don't think they actually believe in it. it seems more like a cosplay type of thing to me...

Comment #261252 by a non e-moose on October 6, 2008 at 2:57 pm

@j.mills

not to mention experiences of something beyond the material or the natural world induced by relatively simple chemicals. I've always found it difficult to understand how religious people will happily attribute drug induced 'spiritual' experinces, no matter how profound, to mere artifacts of the human mind and biochemistry, but consider other types of spiritual experience to be irrefutable proof of their particualar brand of superstition.

54. Dawkins: a theologian's perspective

Comment #261135 by a non e-moose on October 6, 2008 at 1:19 pm

Didn't language evolve around the same time that man started *hunting* meat, and around that same time the brain got larger? (or certain parts of it?)

I know just enough about human evolution to be able to drive an automobile competently, so please correct me if I'm wrong ^_^

Well where his 'philosophers' go wrong is that they seem to think that language is something that evolved in one step with a complete vocabulary and gramatical structure, and that it is something that is innate and hardwired into our DNA.

His philosophers may also be wrong in assuming that language is useless if you have no one to speak it with. Having a system of references for different object enables the inner dialog which we all have, and allows us to organize our thoughts, even if we're not speaking to anyone. Of course this inner dialog could also be harmful if you are unable to tell it apart from a dialog with alledged invisible supernatural beings.

It is also a 'god of the gaps' argument, something he himself critisizes in this very article. Besides, it isn't so hard to imagine a solution to the question he poses, even given its false premise. Suppose an individual recievs a mutation that gives her the Oxford English Dictionary hardwired into her brain. All she has to do is survive with this dictionary long enough to have a few kids who also recieve the dictionary mutation and -TA-DA! They will have a significant survival advantage.

"Aquinas' arguments for the existence of God, such as the Ontological Argument, the Teleological Argument and the Argument from Design, were never meant to be hard and fast proofs to the non-believer to convince them that God exists."

I thought Aquinas didn't like the Ontological argument, and the teleological IS the the design argument.

I'm not altogether sure of this, but if so, isn't it a bit rich for this guy to accuse Dawkins of not understanding theology...

LOL. well spotted.

55. Dawkins: a theologian's perspective

Comment #261075 by a non e-moose on October 6, 2008 at 11:58 am

It would be irritating for a biologist if I were to try to write a book about science in which I displayed my ignorance of the meaning of multicellularity, or the behaviour of chromosomes.

The diffrence is that Dawkins doesn't recognize theology as a legitimate field of study, and he makes the case for why it should not be considered one in his book.

Biology on the other hand is the study of life based on empirical observations; a field of study in which expertise is actually worth something. I would like to hear Mr. Tomlins argument for why this is not a legitimate field of study.

Edit: If you want to argue Leprechauns don't exist you don't read hundreds of volums on the feeding habits of Leprechauns, but if you want to prove that, say, multicellularity evolved several times indipendently, you do read several volums on multicelularity and evolution.

Edit II:

However, there remain a number of questions. For example, several philosophers have pointed out that it is hard to imagine human language appearing through a simple process of genetic evolution. Evolutionary process would normally expect a new ability to have appeared one individual first: however, it is impossible for language to be individual - it has to involve at least two people who converse together.

Hmmm... well perhaps if instead of reading the ramblings of philosophers he read the writings of scientists who study the evolution of language and communication, he would not show his abject ignorance on the topic. That and a better (any?) understanding of natural selection.

Oh wow, I didn't even read this far before I got annoyed and gave up. Yes, Mr. Tomlin, it is indeed very irritating when you write books displaying your ignorance, and I'm not even a biologist.

also "christian scientist" or "theologian" =/= philosopher.

56. YouTube Reinstates Pat Condell

Comment #259830 by a non e-moose on October 4, 2008 at 2:19 am

Everyone always thinks they're being specifically targeted by youtube censorship. Youtube automatically takes down anything that gets enough flags. The system sucks, but it's not any kind of horrible youtube conspiracy against atheists. Usually all it takes is an email to youtube. there's no need get all worked up every time it happens. Although getting worked up about it helps get attention for it, i suppose...

57. Bill Maher's Religulous Opens Today

Comment #259356 by a non e-moose on October 3, 2008 at 9:36 am

I really don't like maher. not sure why... I just don't.

58. Why I left Young-earth Creationism

Comment #258980 by a non e-moose on October 2, 2008 at 4:07 pm

Roger, you seem to fail to grasp that indoctrination from a young age can have a powerful effect on ones world view and way of thinking. To overcome this is certainly something worth respecting. Many people never do.

Edit: I've missunderstood. disregard that, and apply it to paine instead.

59. Earliest reference describes Christ as 'magician'

Comment #258215 by a non e-moose on October 1, 2008 at 3:36 pm

You guys/girls ever wonder what present day christians would do if they were sent back to the early first century AD?
I'm serious, they have no idea what times were like in that era. No medicine, bad hygiene etc..
It would be like dropping a random species on a random planet in spore.

I once debated a christian who claimed a 1st century christian would think he was 'in the bowls of the beast' if he was brought to america in 2008. You know, with all the fetus killing and such going on.

anyway, I agree that this is totally non-news. All it really states is that someone found an old piece of pottery, the evidence for any of the other claims is weak to say the least.

60. Christian review of the Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing

Comment #253609 by a non e-moose on September 24, 2008 at 4:27 pm

If every religious person had this attitude, I would have no problem with it. I'd still think it was BS, I just wouldn't have a problem with it.

61. Cathedral seminar to equip clerics to deal with Dawkins

Comment #252946 by a non e-moose on September 24, 2008 at 12:24 am

win!

62. 'All Terrorists are Darwinists': An Interview with Harun Yahya

Comment #252945 by a non e-moose on September 24, 2008 at 12:21 am

I couldn't write a better parody if I tried.

63. Zehirli Yilanlar, Kaygan Yilanbaliklari ve Harun Yahya

Comment #252562 by a non e-moose on September 23, 2008 at 11:02 am

good thinking

64. Why albino monks won't conduct stem cell research

Comment #251990 by a non e-moose on September 22, 2008 at 12:13 pm

As long as they do proper science (i.e not 'christian' science), I feel they deserve kudos for this, regardles of how you feel about their religion.

65. Richard Dawkins infected with Satanic 'virus of mind', Christian group claims

Comment #251325 by a non e-moose on September 21, 2008 at 11:13 am

Hasn't this story been poster here before, and then mysteriously dissapeared?

66. Turkish edition of The Ancestor's Tale sells out within a day!

Comment #251225 by a non e-moose on September 21, 2008 at 8:14 am

The Ancestors tale is great.

67. The real difference between liberals and conservatives

Comment #250069 by a non e-moose on September 19, 2008 at 12:35 am

saw this a few days ago. I think he's full of shit.

68. God, Evolution and Charles Darwin

Comment #249693 by a non e-moose on September 18, 2008 at 12:36 pm

I only read the quotes, not the article, but they were pretty interesting. Can't you guys leave it at that? No need to get all worked up about it.

69. Genes might not be so selfish after all

Comment #249344 by a non e-moose on September 18, 2008 at 2:28 am

@ B.L.Z. Bub

He also claims to be citing 'medical journals' with that sentance. I suppose it's possible that a wikipedian has plagarised that same journal.

70. YouTube Removes Viral Video on Palin's Churches For Inappropriate Content

Comment #248839 by a non e-moose on September 17, 2008 at 3:59 am

The youtube system is shit, anyone can remove whatever they want in it, at least for a while. Us in the anti-scientology crowd have been struggling with this for months.

71. 'Big Bang' experiment starts well

Comment #245375 by a non e-moose on September 10, 2008 at 2:56 pm

I've been a boincer for years, but LHC@home doesn't seem to work on mac.

72. 'Big Bang' experiment starts well

Comment #245361 by a non e-moose on September 10, 2008 at 2:48 pm

Thanks Quetzalcoatl

73. 'Big Bang' experiment starts well

Comment #245341 by a non e-moose on September 10, 2008 at 2:28 pm

How do you submit one of these articles to the website? I think this might be relevant to your interests if you haven't seen it already.

http://www.vimeo.com/1431471

74. Bizarre Anti-Spore Website Takes Issue WIth Stance On Creationism

Comment #245111 by a non e-moose on September 10, 2008 at 8:19 am

[quote]Buy it legally and there is no issue[/quote]

This is where you are wrong. Download it illegally and there is no issue. Buy it legally, and you are very limited.

If you get a new computer, upgrade OS or your OS crashes one too many times, you will have to call EA and justify to them why you want to install it again, which I don't think is right. And that's assuming that they even keep the re-activation service running.

Suppose you want to reinstall it and play it 5 years from now for nostalgic reasons, chances are you will not be able to.

75. Bizarre Anti-Spore Website Takes Issue WIth Stance On Creationism

Comment #244851 by a non e-moose on September 9, 2008 at 3:07 pm

could well be a viral marketing scheme. Have you guys seen the genuine anti-spore campaign though? check out its reviews on amazon.

76. Biologists on the Verge of Creating New Form of Life

Comment #244646 by a non e-moose on September 9, 2008 at 9:30 am

@ Quetzalcoatl

sorry, I meant to write could have appeared

77. Biologists on the Verge of Creating New Form of Life

Comment #244629 by a non e-moose on September 9, 2008 at 9:09 am

Does this mean that the cell membrane appeared before, or indipendantly of the replicator? I think that's contrary to Dawkins speculations on the subject...

very interesting.

78. Bettany and Connelly to Star in Creation

Comment #243398 by a non e-moose on September 5, 2008 at 4:48 pm

for a second i thought this article was about a creationist propaganda movie. It made me sad because I like jennifer connely.

EDIT: @adk, guess I wasn't the only one

79. Genesis and the origin of the Origin of the species

Comment #240183 by a non e-moose on August 31, 2008 at 2:51 am

I get this problem when debating theists a lot; they latch on to arguments that don't apply to their particular beliefs and ignore the ones that do.

"I don't adhere to the argument from design, therefor you should not bother refuting it when talking to people who do, and all your other arguments are invalid."

80. Judge says UC can deny class credit to Christian school students

Comment #229096 by a non e-moose on August 13, 2008 at 5:09 am

Overall, very good news, but it does have its downside, since everybody who goes to religiously run schools are not religious nuts. They will be victims of this.

81. Camp Offers Training Ground For Little Skeptics

Comment #226969 by a non e-moose on August 9, 2008 at 3:18 am

I really don't like the idea of any summer camps with a political agenda...

82. Richard Dawkins, the naive professor

Comment #225850 by a non e-moose on August 7, 2008 at 12:36 pm

She has a point. Having focused on debates with fundies of various sorts, I sometimes find myself categorizing anti-evolutionists as theists and evolutionists as atheists. This is of course not true (at least not the latter).

I personally think that not only evolution is incompatible with religious faith, but that REALITY is incompatible with religious faith, so there is no need to put evolution in particular in the crossfire between atheism and theism.

Of course, evolution in particular is under attack by creationists, and they want it to be a case of religion vs. atheism, but I think biologists should avoid that, and stick to evidence.

Astronomy and Geology, for example, are equally incompatible with creationism (at least young earth creationism), but they are uncontroversial.

83. Local Idiot To Post Comment On Internet

Comment #225554 by a non e-moose on August 7, 2008 at 2:05 am

THIS POST IS TOTLY GAY!!1 FAG!!
amidoinitrite?

84. Physicist Claims First Real Demonstration of Cold Fusion

Comment #224501 by a non e-moose on August 5, 2008 at 3:41 am

so when is 'Expelled II: No Fusion Allowed' coming out?

just kidding, i'm sure cold fusion might have some merit.

85. The Trolls Among Us

Comment #223675 by a non e-moose on August 3, 2008 at 5:55 am

/b/ is a fascinating place. It has it's good and its bad sides. I used to go there a lot, and still do from time to time. It should be noted that not everyone that goes there do it to watch the lives of others crash and burn.

86. Evangelically Serious Science

Comment #223668 by a non e-moose on August 3, 2008 at 5:23 am

How do you feel about piracy, Richard?

87. Jay Spears: Smak Dem Christians Down

Comment #222392 by a non e-moose on July 31, 2008 at 12:02 pm

this is horrible

88. We're All Going to Hell (Music Video)

Comment #222385 by a non e-moose on July 31, 2008 at 11:51 am

I choked the chicken to this, now I'm definitely going to hell...

89. Beware the Believers

Comment #222380 by a non e-moose on July 31, 2008 at 11:21 am

The way I interpreted it was that it was a pisstake on Dawkins and the atheist 'posse', but still on 'our side'. Lighten up Richard.

I guess it's not funny if you're not familiar with the rap culture it is spoofing as well.

More Pages: Previous | 1 2