Comments by decius

1151. Do stop behaving as if you are God, Professor Dawkins

Comment #229295 by decius on August 13, 2008 at 10:29 am

Cranks are the funniest, really. They make creotards look like the paragon of sanity.

1152. Al-Qa'eda in Iraq alienated by cucumber laws and brutality

Comment #229256 by decius on August 13, 2008 at 9:27 am

Comment #229251 by J Mac

Congratulations. That's what I call sophisticated theology.

1153. Al-Qa'eda in Iraq alienated by cucumber laws and brutality

Comment #229249 by decius on August 13, 2008 at 9:12 am

Comment #229243 by J Mac

That would sketch a rather bizarre, albeit interesting picture.

"Salomon using wind to fly on a carpet muncher".

1154. Al-Qa'eda in Iraq alienated by cucumber laws and brutality

Comment #229241 by decius on August 13, 2008 at 9:03 am

Comment #229237 by J Mac

Guess what else didn't exist then Al-Qa'eda: AIRPLANES!

Yeah, but they had flying carpets and winged horses - it's in the q'ran.
Clearly, aeroplanes are just modern equivalents.

1155. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #229227 by decius on August 13, 2008 at 8:41 am

Comment #229149 by Cartomancer

Carto, wouldn't you agree that Richard's tailor should be hanged?

1156. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #229224 by decius on August 13, 2008 at 8:39 am

Comment #229139 by Steve Zara

I take back my statement :)

You shouldn't. The long article posted by bonzai raises some serious issues, but misrepresents evolutionary psychology.
It treats it as if it were an evidence-free pseudo-scientific endeavour, which certainly is not. Many experiments validate its fundamental tenets, and its speculations - based on such empirical evidence - are tested whenever possible.

And yes, Pinker is a serious scientist.

The case for Nurture has been demolished. Get over it, Bonzai.

1157. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #229086 by decius on August 13, 2008 at 4:50 am

Comment #229081 by Oystein Elgaroy

If I fail as an astrophysicist

Just co-author a paper with your father-in-law. It should do.

1158. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #229084 by decius on August 13, 2008 at 4:48 am

Comment #229071 by irate_atheist

My friend, that sounds really noble to me. I renew my admiration for your attitude. I am far more selfish, I suppose.

1159. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #229067 by decius on August 13, 2008 at 4:18 am

Comment #229063 by Dr Doctor

That's a tough question, but probably I wouldn't divorce them on those grounds only. I imagine a strong bond being already in place.

1160. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #229066 by decius on August 13, 2008 at 4:16 am

Comment #229062 by Tyler Durden

Well, I know myself well enough for being able to affirm that with a certain degree of certitude. Also from past experience of occasional sex with women theists, the fun was over the moment they spoke.

1161. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #229061 by decius on August 13, 2008 at 4:04 am

Comment #229011 by irate_atheist

It must be tough. I admire your patience and open-mindedness.

Personally, I couldn't get married or engaged with a theist. This may sound smug, but that's the way it is. I don't really respect their intellect and attitude towards life. Therefore, I can't imagine a deeper feeling developing.
I can't help it.

1162. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #229059 by decius on August 13, 2008 at 3:58 am

Comment #228987 by Dr Doctor

Now she is pretty old and limits her efforts to ~~teaching~~ indoctrinating children in third-world countries. She is in India as we speak.

Prior to this - as a "missionary" - she would proselytise adults for her particular brand of fundamentalist lutheran creed, also in places where it is explicitly forbidden to do so (like Israel and China). She got in trouble a few times, got deported, and she is now banned from Israel.

It is interesting to note how these people consciously prey on the ignorant and poor. Here in Scandinavia there are plenty of atheists and free-thinkers - one would think that they constitute a prime target for proselytisers. Far from it, they entirely direct their efforts abroad on the economically weaker part of the population of a given troubled country - enticing people with food and distributing bibles.

I don't know the details of the fundie-boat episode, only that they failed to comply with security regulations and overloaded the vessel with people, most of which were her co-religionists.

In fact, I never get to talk with her about anything consequential, as she would always ascribe the most mundane event to supernatural intervention, never accepting scrutiny of her claims. Thus, I have completely lost interest in engaging her. To be honest, I avoid meeting her as much as possible without appearing rude.

To be fair to her - her church is not preaching hatred or anything particularly nasty. It is fundamentalist with regard to the level of superstition and to the holier-than-thou proselytising approach.

1163. Evolution as Described by the Second Law of Thermodynamics

Comment #228830 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 3:20 pm

Comment #228825 by phil rimmer

He now is a sort of Marvel superhero.

the Ivy Man

1164. Evolution as Described by the Second Law of Thermodynamics

Comment #228821 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 3:11 pm

Comment #228818 by Brian English

Precisely.

1165. Evolution as Described by the Second Law of Thermodynamics

Comment #228816 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 3:06 pm

. Comment #228815 by Brian English

His husband mistakenly sprayed him with fertilizer and the foliage took over.

1166. Richard Dawkins replies to Libby Purves

Comment #228805 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 2:51 pm

Very beautiful places, good choice.

1167. Richard Dawkins replies to Libby Purves

Comment #228801 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 2:45 pm

Al,

happy holiday.

If I were you I would concentrate on las chicas, rather than on fish. Or may be both. :)

1168. Richard Dawkins replies to Libby Purves

Comment #228789 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 2:37 pm

The three of you should consort and merge into an all-powerful trinity, instead of squabbling.

1169. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #228776 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 2:17 pm

Comment #228764 by Dr Doctor

Consider yourself lucky.

Ours is an aunt - a lutheran missionary who was deported from Israel for "preaching the truth of Jesus to the jews".

In another occasion, she almost drowned in the Chinese sea after their fundie-boat capsized. Do you think she thanked the rescuers? No need, in her mind it was a supernatural intervention that saved her.

A few weeks ago, she asked our help to look for her glasses that she lost during a walk in the forest. We found them pretty soon, because some hiker had put them on a bench.

Guess what...

"It was the Lord who mercifully picked them up".
I wonder why an omnipotent "lord" wouldn't do home deliveries.

1170. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #228759 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 1:58 pm

Comment #228756 by Dr Doctor

our family theist did not show

Like the village idiot, every family has one.

1171. CBI wants more pupils in science

Comment #228746 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 1:34 pm

Comment #228735 by Mitchell Gilks

Mitch, may be I didn't express myself clearly.
I never said that there is a dichotomy between non fiction and science, I said that they are the same thing.

MRA brought up non-fiction books and science books do fall in that category. I then demonstrated which objective parameters are available to judge such a book regardless of how influential it is.

Your example helps us further, since oxymoronic "creation science" is neither factual, nor informative - two of the parameters that I outlined earlier.
The goals in the mind of an author are indeed subjective, and they do not alter the objective quality of a non-fiction book.

Of course these parameters are not set in stone and may be partly conditioned by personal taste, but only to a very small degree.

1172. Do stop behaving as if you are God, Professor Dawkins

Comment #228727 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 1:01 pm

I echo clodhopper and I am still awaiting an answer.

We already agreed on the fictional character of the bible, but you started your rants by talking of mysterious energies for which you have provided zero evidence.

1173. CBI wants more pupils in science

Comment #228722 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 12:54 pm

Comment #228710 by Mitchell Gilks

How is that difficult to see?

Anyway, he spoke of non-fictional books.
Any science book will qualify. Its quality is measured on how informative, factual and well-researched it is. These are objective parameters, not a matter of debate.
I could read an excellent book on pterosaurs, learn a lot in the process and not have my thinking influenced in the least.
There is a hell of a difference between learning and having thoughts changed.

1174. CBI wants more pupils in science

Comment #228703 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 12:36 pm

Comment #228701 by MRA

Books quality isn't measured by how much they influence people's thinking. You are setting up a major straw man.

1175. Do stop behaving as if you are God, Professor Dawkins

Comment #228667 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 11:03 am

Rowan is a genius.

1176. Do stop behaving as if you are God, Professor Dawkins

Comment #228663 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 10:54 am

Troubles with html, sorry

Try this:

http://tinyurl.com/yrcjwh

1177. Do stop behaving as if you are God, Professor Dawkins

Comment #228655 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 10:45 am

I anyway welcome some some new age crankery, for a change. It is boring to deal always with the same set of delusions, whence ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTzXJMU1sLc ) human gullibility knows no boundary.

1178. CBI wants more pupils in science

Comment #228632 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 9:58 am

Comment #228631 by hungarianelephant

And with English accents.

Don't forget the hunchbacked assistant, usually called Igor.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

1179. Do stop behaving as if you are God, Professor Dawkins

Comment #228629 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 9:48 am

Comment #228622 by nightwatchman

We know all that, although it is not Greek mythology, but Hebrew mythology, quite a distinct thing.

We all agree that the bible is fiction.

How do your beliefs about Kundalini Energy follow from that?

1180. Do stop behaving as if you are God, Professor Dawkins

Comment #228621 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 9:37 am

So, when the bible doesn't support your hypothesis it is crap, when it does it is reliable.

Interesting approach.

1181. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #228617 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 9:32 am

Comment #228609 by Philip1978

John Frumm jumps to mind.

1182. Do stop behaving as if you are God, Professor Dawkins

Comment #228614 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 9:30 am

Comment #228611 by nightwatchman

Look, we know that the bible is a load of bollocks, how does your set of beliefs bootstrap from there?

1183. Do stop behaving as if you are God, Professor Dawkins

Comment #228608 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 9:22 am

Comment #228603 by nightwatchman

And the evidence for your extraordinary claims is?

1184. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #228597 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 8:55 am

Comment #228588 by Bonzai

Jesus might very well exist,--based on scholarly consensus

The amazing thing is that the scholarly consensus had already turned the other way during the XIX century, then - without any new favourable evidence coming to light, and purely on opinion - has reverted to the ancient position.

The double standard is incredible, as historians normally would never accept as historical a figure whose existence is NOT corroborated in the slightest by any contemporary source.

At the time when the Romans ruled Giudea, there were forty major historians active - all very attentive to new leaders, rebellions, small or large uprisings in any remote region of the empire. They MAGICALLY failed to notice the Nazarene.
Add to this that the gospels are full of egregious mistakes, which squarely categorises them as mythology books.

I wouldn't call this a conspiracy, of course, but with some many departments of humanities active in the fields of biblical criticism, christian history, theology etc, it is conceivable that too many interests were at stake, and going all the way to the inescapable conclusion would have constituted half a hara-kiri for a lot of scholars.
Not to mention the shock-wave propagating downward to church and believers.
Better for everybody to keep it wishy-washy?

This anomaly cannot endure forever, hopefully, as long as the available positive evidence amounts to NULL.

Edited for mistakes

1185. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #228524 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 6:52 am

Comment #228520 by Steve Zara

Utterly disgraceful. But, hey, we already knew that the FCOS is a hotbed of anti-intellectuality and fundamentalism.

1186. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #228519 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 6:31 am

Comment #228514 by phil rimmer

ditto

1187. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #228509 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 6:04 am

And, most importantly...

I WAS WRONG.

1188. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #228506 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 5:59 am

Yeah, Scottish is right.

The guy seems consistent with ddjango here.

1189. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #228500 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 5:50 am

Comment #228487 by Brian English

Freud just pulled ideas out of his butt. Some useful insights, but mostly evidence free bull.

I agree, but I wouldn't dismiss him in the radical way suggested, among others, by Shermer.

I find Freud's method for the analysis of dreams largely effective. How recent memories enter a dream, the fulfilment of unconscious desires etc.

Psychopathology of daily life offers another plethora of working mechanisms.

With regard to the alleged sock-puppet's phrase, there seems to transpire the forma mentis of someone who takes for granted the need to substitute god with another father-like figure.
If not god, then Dawkins - if not Dawkins then Robertson or back to god.
In any case, not really how the mind of an atheist works. We wouldn't consider for a second to be guilty of worshipping RD.

1190. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #228484 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 5:25 am

Comment #228482 by phil rimmer

Yes, but re-read it through your Freudian glasses.

Most likely I am totally wrong there, though.

1191. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #228477 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 5:14 am

Comment #228470 by Steve Zara

Ok, here is a clue to the clues.

ddjango: "It would be stupid of me to reject g*d"

He is posing as an atheist, who would not capitalise "god", yet he can't bring himself to offend the imaginary friend. Hence the asterisk, which is a rather uncommon character to be used.

Confront this, please.

Richard Morgan: "...their clear-thinking ideas with the frequent use of f**k words..."

Most importantly, he gets confused and contradicts himself.

ddjango:

I am an atheist. Dawkins is not my spokesperson. It would be stupid of me to reject g*d, only to take up Dawkinism.

He is an atheist, but he hasn't rejected god. Riiiiight.

Finally, ddjango appears only once, then morgan's enthusiastic reaction to his very weak points.

This is all circumstantial, of course, but then there is a history of sock-puppetry. More than enough to get suspicious.

1192. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #228466 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 4:40 am

I caught the sock-puppetry immediately.
He leaves behind clear clues.

http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2966,An-atheist-plays-Gods-advocate,Telegraph,page3#227913

1193. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #228460 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 4:34 am

Comment #228444 by Steve Zara

What I think stinks is to do that and to then claim to be "holier than thou"

You are right, it stinks and it's false, and - most importantly - it's a rhetorical device in the fundies' arsenal commonly used to sidetrack the conversation and distract the opponent.

Admittedly, Robertson deploys it at masterly level.

There are two possible responses to it.

- Fall for the tu-quoque fallacy (forgive the over-simplification, I know that there are nuances to this).

- Ignore it and keep focused on the actual issues exposing the pseudo-morality of religion. Scapegoating, vicarious punishment, endorsement of slavery, misogyny, hatred for the different etc. We could go on for two hours, just by listing them, let alone eviscerating them.

Now, let me ask you, what is more effective? And which one will more likely convince the fence-sitters?

1194. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #228435 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 3:46 am

Comment #228420 by Quetzalcoatl

Sorry, I disagree.

This is precisely the mentality that we are here to fight against. Those people really believe to have the moral high-ground, and that without an ontological set of rules set by a supernatural entity there cannot be morality at all.

I don't find it offensive - I find it wrong, annoying, ignorant, pig-headed and worth of contempt.
Yet, there is a need to grow a thicker skin, if you want to effectively address the issue. Playing the offence card is what religious people do all the time and it just makes you look like a wuss.

Let them whine about perceived offences, and let's keep offending them with even more with ridicule and sharp logic.
In other words, tu quoque is not going to achieve anything, and seen from outside is pathetic.

Just my opinion.

1195. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #228415 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 3:19 am

Comment #228406 by Steve Zara

Steve, to be honest, I don't think those comments are in any way offensive. They fall well within accepted internet standards. Except, of course, for the one equating homosexuality with paedophilia, which plainly dumb and dishonest.

1196. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #228413 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 3:15 am

Tyler,

I welcome your new avatar. I couldn't understand your fascination with one of the most mindless films ever.

1197. Saudi Arabia Bans Dog Walking in Capital

Comment #228404 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 2:53 am

Comment #228245 by Border Collie

And, thanks, decius ... I sprayed a mouthful of water all over my computer as I read your comment.

You're welcome, I hope no damage was done to your equipment.

Comment #228309 by eclampusvitus

Now, all we need is for the God Delusion to be translated into Arabic and air-dropped by the thousands into that "Holy" country.

You know, I think it is a really good idea, seriously. Except the air-drop part.

An Arabic translation available for free download on this site could go a long way. Richard won't lose any revenue. TGD will never be published in the Arab world, not in this millennium, anyway.

1198. Richard Dawkins replies to Libby Purves

Comment #228389 by decius on August 12, 2008 at 2:13 am

Beanson

There's a fee.

1199. Saudi Arabia Bans Dog Walking in Capital

Comment #228237 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 4:30 pm

It must be the drive towards modernity announced by the king a few months ago.

1200. Evangelically Serious Science

Comment #228229 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 4:19 pm

Comment #228227 by Gregg Townsend

Posting becomes pointless and you will be left with a lot of free time that you can spend joining Teratornis's sex rampage at the hospice.