Comments by decius

Comment #228225 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 4:13 pm

Comment #228223 by Gregg Townsend

Yes, hundreds of comments vanished.

Comment #228219 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 4:08 pm

Comment #228216 by Gregg Townsend

That one has been going on for about 5-6 days, with avatars disappearing upon refresh.
The comments being eaten manifested itself yesterday, together with some other minor issues. It looked like the latter had been fixed, but mordy's comment has again disappeared.

1203. Evangelically Serious Science

Comment #228213 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 4:01 pm

oh no!

the nasty bug is back.

1204. Evangelically Serious Science

Comment #228209 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 3:54 pm

Comment #228194 by Sciros

Thanks a lot, without you quoting Terat, I would have missed the incredible line

Lots of guys are downloading porn when they could be hitting on elderly women.

I thought I couldn't be arsed to read his posts any longer, but I now see the error of my ways.

Priceless.

1205. Evangelically Serious Science

Comment #228189 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 3:32 pm

You may be right.

1206. Evangelically Serious Science

Comment #228183 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 3:17 pm

Comment #228181 by al-rawandi

I may be able to make it easier for you. I'll let you know tomorrow.

Do you use firefox?

1207. Evangelically Serious Science

Comment #228179 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 3:11 pm

Comment #228175 by al-rawandi

You have to link to the forum emotica.

i.e. the one above, with added < >

img height="15" width="19" title="Applause" alt=":clap:" src="./forum/images/smilies/eusa_clap.gif"/

1208. Evangelically Serious Science

Comment #228171 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 3:00 pm

Comment #228170 by Steve Zara

1209. Evangelically Serious Science

Comment #228167 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 2:52 pm

Terat,

do you actually mean women when you say "aliens"?

1210. Richard Dawkins replies to Libby Purves

Comment #228156 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 2:39 pm

Comment #228154 by thewhitepearl

Yes, that one too is filmed there.

1211. Richard Dawkins replies to Libby Purves

Comment #228148 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 2:30 pm

TWP

This is my favourite club.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAleKm61ieI

http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=e werk berlin&btnG=Search Images&gbv=2

1212. Richard Dawkins replies to Libby Purves

Comment #228141 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 2:24 pm

Comment #228138 by Sargeist

You have made me very very pleased that I have not been to a nightclub since I was about 22. And it was shite back then, too.

Geez, what a bore.

1213. Richard Dawkins replies to Libby Purves

Comment #228131 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 2:12 pm

Comment #228116 by Mitchell Gilks

Crack is cocaine that has been cut with glucose

Totally wrong. It is not "cut", which suggests simple mixing.
It is a sublimation obtained heating cocaine with baking soda or a precipitation obtained mixing cocaine and ammonium. In both cases, it is a new chemical substance not even resembling the original.

Glucose would destroy cocaine, by the way.

1214. Richard Dawkins replies to Libby Purves

Comment #228122 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 2:03 pm

Comment #228110 by Sargeist

I already agreed with Mitchell that crack and heroin are special cases. What you fail to consider is that drugs like MDMA, cannabis, MDA, amphetamine, cocaine are by far the most popular ones.

Literally millions of people take them and you would hardly notice it.

In fact, given your attitude, probably some people in your circle do it behind your back. If you have a social life, that is.

The problem with indiscriminate prohibition is that relatively innocuous substances are put on the same level with the truly dangerous one, and an artificial social stigma is created with the effect of confusing and misinforming the youths.
And that's more dangerous than allowing for an informed and responsible consumption, as it has been proved time and again in pilot experiments.

1215. Richard Dawkins replies to Libby Purves

Comment #228109 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 1:37 pm

Comment #228104 by thewhitepearl

Crack is different then cocaine

Good point. I will add that its modern popularity is a by-product of the "war on drugs". It is very easy to produce and its recipe ( sublimation, or condensation of 3-5 parts baking soda and one part cocaine) has been known for decades. It used to be called freebase and everybody steered clear from it.

When the cost of cocaine rocketed due to police action, poorer consumers turned to it.

1216. Richard Dawkins replies to Libby Purves

Comment #228100 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 1:21 pm

Comment #228097 by Mitchell Gilks

I agree that crack is a special case, that's why it has zero appeal to recreational users in the first place.
In Europe it is virtually absent for that reason.
The same (nearly but not quite) goes for heroine.

1217. Richard Dawkins replies to Libby Purves

Comment #228092 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 1:08 pm

Comment #228081 by Sargeist

If it could be worked out so that the idiot masses who got hooked on coke, heroin, etc etc (and thereby became utterly useless to the rest of society) could indulge themselves without incurring social unrest, crime

False dichotomy (either non-consumer or junkie), slippery slope, non-sequitur.

I know, they told you that "it is enough a single joint and you will end up like Christiane F".

However, that is not the case. The great majority of drug consumers do it occasionally for recreational purposes.

Medical science recognises five degrees from consumption (through four levels of addiction) to the severest state - toxicomania.
Only very few consumers get there.

1218. Evangelically Serious Science

Comment #228082 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 12:59 pm

. Comment #228079 by Bonzai

And most of all, he clearly never scores in real life.

1219. Richard Dawkins replies to Libby Purves

Comment #228072 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 12:50 pm

Comment #228071 by thewhitepearl

Prohibition was started by a protestant womens group right?

In the States? Yes, and it failed miserably. It only succeeded in creating a prosperous black market and a bunch of criminal dynasties.

1220. Richard Dawkins replies to Libby Purves

Comment #228069 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 12:46 pm

Hi, al-rawandi.

Back from that land of perdition, already?

1221. Richard Dawkins replies to Libby Purves

Comment #228064 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 12:40 pm

Get a grip, Tera,

That would be the day.

I can't stand when people want to dictate others what they can or can't do with their bodies. It's not by chance that prohibitionists and pseudo-moralists against prostitution, controlled substances and alcohol are almost entirely to be found among religious fundamentalists.

1222. Richard Dawkins replies to Libby Purves

Comment #227989 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 7:23 am

Comment #227988 by hungarianelephant

You are welcome.

Most remarkably, these barbarous acts are still with us.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7413268.stm

1223. Richard Dawkins replies to Libby Purves

Comment #227984 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 6:38 am

Comment #227976 by hungarianelephant

do you have any idea why Tyndale was strangled? I understood that the traditional punishment for heresy was burning, and the rich would bribe the executioner to garrotte them before the flames took hold.

I don't know in England, but sometimes Spanish and Italian inquisition would generously grant strangulation before burning if the condemned had promptly confessed his "sins" and repented. "Actus misericordiae" was probably called.

1224. An atheist plays God's advocate

Comment #227963 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 5:11 am

Comment #227952 by hungarianelephant

I agree, the danger that they pose to society and progress should never be underestimated, and it must be opposed in the strongest form.
I just can't help laughing along the way, though.

1225. An atheist plays God's advocate

Comment #227945 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 4:36 am

Comment #227939 by Steve Zara

It is like Richard Morgan had a brain-wipe.

I wonder if there was a pharmacological component to it. It has all the hallmarks.

1226. An atheist plays God's advocate

Comment #227940 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 4:31 am

Comment #227937 by irate_atheist

A PhD candidate in neuropsychology might find this material priceless.

As for the the rest of us, surely the Freaks Church of Scotland is providing endless macabre entertainment. For free.

1227. An atheist plays God's advocate

Comment #227929 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 4:12 am

Comment #227926 by irate_atheist

Yeah, but atheists are foul-mouthed, therefore geeeeezussss.

1228. An atheist plays God's advocate

Comment #227913 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 3:40 am

Here is the troll in person.

Nice new sock-puppet, Morgan. Now fuck off.

1229. An atheist plays God's advocate

Comment #227905 by decius on August 11, 2008 at 3:26 am

Oh dear. He is an atheist who finds it stupid to reject god.

No one else sees any trollish contradiction there?

1230. Novel on prophet's wife pulled for fear of backlash

Comment #227778 by decius on August 10, 2008 at 3:30 pm

Comment #227774 by Goldy

Yes, but... it was a retribution for a muslim attack on hindus that the authorities dismissed by lying about the cause.

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

Unjustifiable, brutal, all what you want, but it didn't come out of thin air.

1231. Novel on prophet's wife pulled for fear of backlash

Comment #227773 by decius on August 10, 2008 at 3:21 pm

The problems of India principally stem out from the incredible level of superstition that plagues all aspects of daily life. Violent sectarianism is by no mean a muslim-only problem, although the islamic faction is certainly the most brutal one.

1232. Novel on prophet's wife pulled for fear of backlash

Comment #227764 by decius on August 10, 2008 at 3:10 pm

Comment #227757 by Goldy

Well, if that is not hogwash (given the source), it may well be a good idea.

1233. Novel on prophet's wife pulled for fear of backlash

Comment #227754 by decius on August 10, 2008 at 2:58 pm

Comment #227750 by Steve Zara

Well, if we are speaking of foreign imams coming to preach hatred, expulsion would be a legal penalty normally inflicted for all sort of felonies, there shouldn't be an exception, here.

For citizens, of course, it wouldn't and shouldn't be legal.

1234. Novel on prophet's wife pulled for fear of backlash

Comment #227747 by decius on August 10, 2008 at 2:50 pm

Comment #227739 by Fanusi Khiyal

Of course we can't deport the whole 40% who say they support Shariah. But if we get goons like Hizb ut-Tahrir and Abu Usama and the rest, that'll send a very strong message: This far and no further.

It seems to me that this isn't what you have been "preaching" during the past weeks.
However, I am glad that you now agree with this level of moderate but firm response.

I would also declare this a shareable position, and perhaps we could move on the discourse - also in future threads about Islam - for the common good, and for a more relaxed atmosphere in general.

1235. Novel on prophet's wife pulled for fear of backlash

Comment #227741 by decius on August 10, 2008 at 2:35 pm

Comment #227736 by John Locke

Whatever the law prescribes, penal or not. There should be no special treatment for religious fanatics.

Comment #227738 by Steve Zara

Precisely. I think accountability means exactly that.

1236. Novel on prophet's wife pulled for fear of backlash

Comment #227734 by decius on August 10, 2008 at 2:26 pm

Comment #227729 by Steve Zara

I think the answer is good education, and teaching about liberal and democratic ideas. I think it is reasonable to be intolerant of those who won't allow children to be educated in such matters.

I agree, but that's far from enough. There must be accountability for rabble-rousing imams and whoever incites violence against kafirs and homosexuals, or encourages misogyny. Mosques (and christian fundamentalist churches, for that matter) where the right of free speech is abused and becomes a vehicle for inciting hatred should be shut down after only one warning.

1237. Novel on prophet's wife pulled for fear of backlash

Comment #227723 by decius on August 10, 2008 at 2:06 pm

I am wondering about the actual extent of the damage to the stored comments. From a perfunctory survey it seems that also older threads got badly affected.

1238. Novel on prophet's wife pulled for fear of backlash

Comment #227708 by decius on August 10, 2008 at 1:41 pm

My dog is more worried by the increasing Chinese presence in the neighbourhood.

1239. Conversation between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox

Comment #227702 by decius on August 10, 2008 at 1:35 pm

Comment #227687 by fizhburn

Yes, I did. It gets even worse toward the end. If you can control the rightful wrath, it can be _entertaining to count the fallacies and fathom the depths of human stupidity.

1240. Conversation between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox

Comment #227578 by decius on August 10, 2008 at 10:16 am

Comment #227566 by phil rimmer

Thanks, dear.

1241. Conversation between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox

Comment #227569 by decius on August 10, 2008 at 10:01 am

Comment #227566 by phil rimmer

Any takers?

I am not going to tell you what you can do with them. :)

1242. Conversation between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox

Comment #227560 by decius on August 10, 2008 at 9:50 am

Geez.

I've finished listening to Robertsn.
Argument from appearance of design, countless non sequiturs, ad homs, distortion of the atheistic position, circular reasoning, arbitrary redefinition of words, etc.

Poor guy.

1243. Conversation between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox

Comment #227554 by decius on August 10, 2008 at 9:38 am

Comment #227550 by Steve Zara

anyone who can get a free copy of Robertson's book "The Dawkins Letters"

That should be easy. Just ask him for a complimentary copy. For sure he is desperate to get a handful of readers.

BTW, I've just googled for extracts of the book, and I came across this video featuring Robertson in person presenting his work.
He looks less like a troll than I expected, more like a leprechaun, I'd say.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2r1GPGDWrI

1244. Conversation between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox

Comment #227511 by decius on August 10, 2008 at 5:06 am

My friends,

we have another competent author challenging the plausibility of the bible and other wacky beliefs.
Oddly enough, he comes from the fields of sociology and engineering.

Check out this 30 min interview.

http://www.pointofinquiry.org/allan_mazur_implausible_beliefs/

1245. Conversation between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox

Comment #227493 by decius on August 10, 2008 at 3:08 am

Comment #227485 by Steve Zara

Comment #227489 by irate_atheist

Imagine the joviality and merrymaking when Robertson and Morgan meet. All seven of them.

Edit- Now that I think of it, Robertson is now two persons ahead of the Trinity. Quite an achievement.

1246. Conversation between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox

Comment #227473 by decius on August 10, 2008 at 1:51 am

Comment #227447 by clearthinker

the reason I have posted under several names is because I was banned at least four times

How does being banned from a site constitute an incentive to register a new account if not in the mind of a duplicitous person who shuns community rules, and how is such a behaviour compatible with a honest and straightforward personality?

1247. Conversation between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox

Comment #227267 by decius on August 9, 2008 at 3:07 pm

Comment #227260 by Diacanu

Very entertaining. :)

1248. Conversation between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox

Comment #227207 by decius on August 9, 2008 at 1:42 pm

Comment #227196 by clearthinker

Of course I cannot present evidence for a virgin birth 2,000 years ago.

By contrast, science daily presents compelling evidence for much more remarkable events that occurred thousands, millions, and even billions of years ago.

Not only you spectacularly fail on account of parthenogenesis, but your ilk does, too, and on all accounts. NEVER a single piece of validating evidence. A spectacular failure enduring 2000 years.

If man can do it today then an Almighty God could arrange it 2000 years ago.

And here is all you can do. Thanks for this public demonstration of incredible inanity.

Explaining an unknown with another unknown.
Justifying a myth with another myth, both contained in the same mythological book.

It's called circular reasoning, and is worthless.

1249. Conversation between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox

Comment #227184 by decius on August 9, 2008 at 1:07 pm

Steve, remember that he used to post under the moniker Wee Flea. I suppose the nastiest stuff is to be found there.

I would, however, pardon his past outbursts, if he could keep it civil from now on.

1250. Conversation between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox

Comment #227152 by decius on August 9, 2008 at 12:29 pm

Comment #227147 by clearthinker

(this is what we call in other circles - the fundamentalist mindset. You ask to debate a subject but you exclude from debate those who disagree with you on that subject in the first place).

Of course you wouldn't consider that the most extraordinary claims (in fact so much so as to be ridiculous) cannot be supported by words alone.

So, it is OK to not provide any evidence for outlandish fairy tales, and then blame on a perceived "fundamentalist mindset" your own shortcomings.

Could you at least show some consistency and accept as genuine Satya Sai Baba's miracles? After all HE SAYS that they are.