Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)

Comments by Quetzalcoatl


1401. Add another flea to the list...

Comment #133043 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 2:41 pm

Wyattroberts-

*Generally* speaking, there seems to be a shared sense of morality that transcends cultures and civilizations. I believe this comes to us through a concept commonly referred to as "natural law."


As mentioned above, this depends on how you define "natural law". But morality itself has an evolutionary origin. We have witnessed acts of empathy in the higher primates, as well as among other species, and though we may not know everything about the evolution of morality as yet, we know enough to be able to say that a God is most probably not required.

1402. Add another flea to the list...

Comment #133030 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 2:30 pm

Brian-

your picture is starting to look remarkably devilish. Strange.

1403. Evidence can't shake your faith if your faith excludes it as evidence

Comment #133027 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 2:27 pm

Cthulhu is also welcome to join the pantheon. Then we could have a trinity- the winged serpent, the monkey and the squid-thing. Sounds like a winning combination.

1404. Add another flea to the list...

Comment #133011 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 2:06 pm

Searching on Amazon gave me the title of Chapter 5- "The problem of wicked atheists- Stalin, Hitler, Mao and Pol Pot".

- Thumps head against keyboard -

1405. Add another flea to the list...

Comment #133009 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 2:05 pm

Annabanana-

Yes, all 98 lbs (44 kg) of this little atheist is a threat to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness of all those theists out there.


I always suspected you were. Thanks for finally admitting it. Have you killed anyone lately? :)

1406. Evidence can't shake your faith if your faith excludes it as evidence

Comment #133002 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 1:58 pm

Juxtamonkey-

YOU UNDERSTAND...COME and join my religion...trust me ;)


I already have my own religion (Quetzalcoatl, god of tea, hybrid creatures and sarcasm). Perhaps we can team up and start a super-faith... we could rule the world! Or at least this site. What do you think? :)

1407. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!

Comment #132808 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 8:17 am

My apologies to everyone for going way off topic here-

Wooter/Wipeout/whatever else you call yourself-

you are NOT welcome on my blog. Please do not post there again. Further comments from you will be deleted as soon as I see them.

1408. Fleabytes

Comment #132807 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 8:14 am

SRWB-

of course, I wasn't suggesting otherwise. I only meant by comparison to the wee Flea.

1409. Fleabytes

Comment #132797 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 8:02 am

SRWB-

while I agree with you, Mark was at least willing to talk. And he was certainly far more reasonable and polite than the Wee Flea.

1410. Church is paying a high price for its celibacy rule

Comment #132757 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 7:25 am

The Catholic Church is destroying itself (at least in Ireland). Excellent. Now we militant atheists can turn our attentions elsewhere.

1411. Fleabytes

Comment #132750 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 7:20 am

I think there are two reasons Wee Flea uses the phrase "fundamentalist atheists".

1) To provoke us.

2) Because he's so used to a religious environment, that is how he views everyone. He perhaps cannot actually conceive of the notion that someone can hold strong opinions yet decide things on an evidence-based framework that allows them to change their minds or modify their opinions when they are shown to be incorrect. He is so used to blind faith that he cannot imagine other ways of deciding things.

Al-rawandi-

you're right, loads of people on this site have changed their minds during debates. Myself included. Hardly the attributes of a "fundamentalist".

1412. Fleabytes

Comment #132722 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 6:57 am

I can't think of any. Most of the theists suddenly become very evasive when this comes up, can't imagine why.....

1413. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!

Comment #132714 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 6:45 am

I'm almost certain they're the same guy, especially as Wipeout talks about how great Wooter is. Nobody else does that.

1414. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!

Comment #132698 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 6:16 am

Wipeout-

You are all afraid of wooter guy because he wipes you out in your delusional world.


I know it's sometimes hard to understand the tone of comments when you're reading them, so when reading on I'd like you to imagine that I'm laughing in disbelief-

Ha ha ha ha. Ah ha ha ha! AH HA HA HA HA HA ha ha. Stop it, you're killing me.

Reverend Dark-

I'd just like to take this opportunity to say in all sincerity that I do enjoy reading your posts. They're a lot of fun.

1415. Evidence can't shake your faith if your faith excludes it as evidence

Comment #132686 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 6:05 am

At that point the surgeon would be too busy thinking "By Darwin, a talking fish!" And he'd never get the surgery done.

1416. Fleabytes

Comment #132670 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 5:32 am

Philip-

well you would think that, you close-minded fundamentalist. :)

1417. Fleabytes

Comment #132651 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 4:39 am

Hungarian elephant

My latest divine commandment (fairly legible I think you'll agree)-

Keep an open mind. Do not be afraid to challenge the beliefs of others, but expect that yours will be challenged in turn. This is not to be feared, for by challenging yourself you will continue to learn and grow.

Verylee-

funny, he still hasn't spelled out precisely what those tenets actually ARE, despit numerous challenges from Epeeist.

1418. Fleabytes

Comment #132649 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 4:35 am

At least his arguments are a little more cogent than Wooter's.

1419. Fleabytes

Comment #132642 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 4:24 am

Hungarian elephant-

see comment 131889 for his "evidence".

1420. Fleabytes

Comment #132637 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 4:15 am

Steve-

I have indeed forgotten it.


I think it also had something about "suffering not the believer to live", but it was a while ago.

1421. Fleabytes

Comment #132627 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 4:05 am

Also, I believe that David is confusing "atheist textbook" with the "atheist handbook" that we all get when, after having passed all the tests and exams, and paid our entrance fees, we qualify as atheists


Ah, that would be the handbook we were quoting from the other day. And you forgot the atheist Oath of Allegiance.

1422. Fleabytes

Comment #132621 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 3:53 am

Clearthinker-

I agree completely. Of course a lot would depend on the presuppositions, honesty and reliability of the testers. If you seek you will find


Many have sought. They cannot all be dishonest and unreliable. But how many have found anything?

And yes I have read God is not Great but can I suggest you move away from your atheist text books and actually have a broader reading?


Tut tut, assuming that Paula is not well read on the subject.

What intrigues me about your review of this letter is what you miss out â€" most of it! The inhouse war between atheists (the Respect and the Ridicule parties


This is absurd. Precisely how many atheists have DIED because of this "in-house war"? None. Zip. Zero. Using this as a comparison is preposterous. I'm not surprised she didn't waste her time with it.

the Danish cartoons and the response of the British media, and the responsibility of all (atheists and Christians alike) not to inflame their followers


The response of the British media was to NOT reproduce them. And it's ironic you raise the cartoons, given that the whole thing was started by a group of Islamic leaders who DELIBERATELY MISREPRESENTED what the cartoons were about in order to instigate riots. They were reprinted as defiance when the cartoonists' lives were threatened. Would you rather we bow to hysterical pressure from Muslims, or try to change their oversensitivity?

As for atheists "inflaming their followers"- where are the atheist riots? Where are the demonstrations calling for the beheading of those who question evolution? In what way can any of their actions be described as inflammatory? And stop using the word FOLLOWERS, you know damn well it is inappropriate.

And I notice yet again you utilised the phrase "fundamentalist atheists" in your post. What is wrong with you? How many times does it have to be explained? I know you only do it to provoke a reaction, and I know I'm falling into that trap, but even so, it has to be said.

1423. Fleabytes

Comment #132610 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 3:30 am

Clearthinker-

In fact overall I am really surprised that Dawkins wishes to be associated with any of the above. There seems to be no self-policing and as a result the whole atheist cause is tainted


Because of an inappropriate comment? Would you consider it reasonable for us to make a similar claim about the "religious cause" if, for instance, a Christian called for all Muslims to be killed? Of course not.

And no self-policing? The poster was criticised by others on the thread.

EDIT- the italicised section of the comment is incorrect. It was made based upon what Clearthinker said that someone else had said. The comment in question was in fact a joke. I apologise for the msunderstanding- please ignore the above.

Another is that I don't think that Richard likes debate with people who do not share his presuppositions


Alastair McGrath anyone?

1424. Physicist Neil Turok: Big Bang Wasn't the Beginning

Comment #132579 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 2:03 am

My understanding is that we are fairly sure that the matter/antimatter collision was not equivalent even though it should have been. That suggest something going on that we don't understand. I wasn't aware that the above was the definition of dark energy.

Off topic- an author named Stephen Baxter tackled the matter/antimatter question by postulating the tinkering of early life in one of his novels- "Exultant" I think it was.

1425. How he was sentenced to die

Comment #132570 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 1:41 am

Afraidtodie-

huh? He's an Afghan. Where else would he be?

1426. How he was sentenced to die

Comment #132563 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 1:33 am

The problem is that the Afghan government's control extends precisely as far as the edges of Kabul. The rest of the country is controlled by warlords, tribal chiefs or the Taliban. This is Karzai's latest way of appeasing the fanatics.

Sarah95- I agree entirely. So far I see very little sign that they are willing to change. At the moment it looks as if once foreign troops leave, things will just slide back to the way they were.

1427. Physicist Neil Turok: Big Bang Wasn't the Beginning

Comment #132555 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 1:25 am

Steve-

since you're around- the article mentions the idea of time changing states and reversing itself. Do you have any idea of how this could theoretically happen, or can you point me in the direction of some reading material? Apologies for using you as an online information resource.

1428. Evidence can't shake your faith if your faith excludes it as evidence

Comment #132545 by Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2008 at 1:01 am

This is such a typical article. And by typical I mean riddled with ad hominems, strawmen, and an overall aroma of shitness.

It's not God's fault that Dawkins doesn't believe in him, it's Dawkins' fault for not wanting to believe. Ridiculous. Yet the religious genuinely seem to have to believe this. Perhaps it's the only way they can "understand" why people do not have faith.

Juxtamonkey-

Green monkeys ate a 6 pack of post-it notes and the water ran down the drain like a pen writes on the roof but it's all silly because we all know the bear and the stars have to watch the falling igloo.


The bear jumped over the moon but was squashed by the falling igloo, and the bald monkey smoked a cigar the wrong way.

1429. Physicist Neil Turok: Big Bang Wasn't the Beginning

Comment #132233 by Quetzalcoatl on February 24, 2008 at 1:49 pm

I'd heard about this theory before, but it's good to finally get some detail on it.

I'd be interested to know on what basis they postulate that the dark energy in this previous universe was unstable, and in fact how the energy could change from stable to unstable.

If this is right, it means that time runs forward for a while. Then there's a random state without an arrow of time, then time runs backwards, and then time runs forward again


Another interesting question would be what provokes this transition in the state of time. If any of the physics contributors have any insights, I'd love to read them.

1430. Fleabytes

Comment #132066 by Quetzalcoatl on February 24, 2008 at 4:43 am

Geoff-

I watched that Dave Allen clip. It's very good, although I must admit that I had never even heard of him before you posted the link.

1431. Fleabytes

Comment #131889 by Quetzalcoatl on February 23, 2008 at 2:29 pm

Well, I took a deep breath and watched the Youtube video. Skipping the blather, and the claims that atheists have their eyes shut to the evidence, I learned something useful. Robertson gave his evidence for God. And here it is. (Drumroll, please).

1) Creation- it exists.
2) Artistic, so there must be an artist.
3) There is purpose and beauty in the Universe.
4) Human mind and spirit- evolution cannot explain consciousness.
5) Morality- how do we know right from wrong? Because we're made in God's image, of course.
6) Evil- without the Bible to explain it, evil would make our world hell on earth.
7) Religion- we all have a sense that death is not the end.
8) Individual experience of God.
9) History- there's no doubt Jesus existed, or that he was resurrected.

So there you go. David just wants to make us think. And the best way to do that is, of course, to read his book. Paula, how did that work out for you?

Oh, and we should pray to God to reveal himself. So much for not testing him.

Hmm. Well, that's me convinced.

1432. Are the 'New Atheists' avoiding the 'real arguments'?

Comment #131823 by Quetzalcoatl on February 23, 2008 at 11:49 am

Sex in God's way is for married couples - male with female, female with male.

Sex outside of marriage is sinful for the homosexual and for the heterosexual


Erm, no it isn't.

Moving on- does the above sentence suggest that you support gay marriage?

The Bible says that Jesus was tempted in all the same ways we are, yet was without sin


And yet we are told that to envy or covet ie to THINK is as bad as committing the act itself. See the problem there?

1433. The coming religious peace

Comment #131820 by Quetzalcoatl on February 23, 2008 at 11:46 am

I sure hope so! But, like I said, I just can't this happening in our lifetimes, let alone "the next few decades."
Opinions people... Agree? Disagree?


While I think things are beginning to change, I think secularisation "taking over the world" is not something that will happen in my lifetime, although I do think it will gain influence.

1434. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!

Comment #131801 by Quetzalcoatl on February 23, 2008 at 10:44 am

Corylus-

Hmm, well I have heard about Wooter frequenting some, um, special interest websites....


Just remembered the link you sent me. It certainly is, erm, interesting reading. But given that I am not female, perhaps some of the subtleties of what was being discussed were lost on me.

1435. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!

Comment #131747 by Quetzalcoatl on February 23, 2008 at 5:51 am

Brian-

Quetz. I feel like I've known you a while, but not in the biblical sense, more the internet sense. Strange that I would feel this. By the way, nice avatar


Strange, I have the same feeling. It's almost enough for me to believe in previous lives, or perhaps "incarnations" might be a better word. Puzzling.

1436. Fleabytes

Comment #131697 by Quetzalcoatl on February 23, 2008 at 3:08 am

Brian-

the question is, do you think BAEOZ is the Queen of England? :)

1437. My Argument With God

Comment #131696 by Quetzalcoatl on February 23, 2008 at 3:07 am

Geoff-

I wonder if any atheists have written negative reviews of the Chronicles of Narnia, criticising them for being peppered with Christian references? Probably not.

The guy probably thinks Harry Potter encourages witchcraft.

1438. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!

Comment #131680 by Quetzalcoatl on February 23, 2008 at 2:17 am

I got this comment on my blog last night:

Hi there. My name is curious. I am just curious? what are you doing here?
a. Trying ot refute logic and accepting a fair tale of Evolution theory .E.T
b.Trying to find out who made the pperfect design from atoms revolving around the nucleous, to the planets revolving around the sun?


I think I've been Wootered.

I feel violated.

1439. Fleabytes

Comment #131679 by Quetzalcoatl on February 23, 2008 at 2:15 am

irate_atheist-

if you restrain yourself too much, you'll get backed up. That will just lead to further problems. So be careful.

1440. Fleabytes

Comment #131542 by Quetzalcoatl on February 22, 2008 at 2:13 pm

Why not the whole book, in fact?


I think I know what the title might be.

I Was Wrong, There Is A God

(David Robertson Is Great)

1441. Fleabytes

Comment #131538 by Quetzalcoatl on February 22, 2008 at 2:09 pm

Appendix?

He would want to write the foreword!

1442. Fleabytes

Comment #131530 by Quetzalcoatl on February 22, 2008 at 1:59 pm

Paula-

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you. I'll be reading his posts with great interest.

1443. Fleabytes

Comment #131518 by Quetzalcoatl on February 22, 2008 at 1:49 pm

Steve-

on that subject. Perhaps he was hoping that previous accounts would get unbanned so he could say on his site or in the Free Church magazine about how important he is, although I'm sure he would have tried to mask it.

Then if he got banned again, it would provide an ideal opportunity for him to play the martyr once more.

1444. Over half of Britons claim no religion

Comment #131517 by Quetzalcoatl on February 22, 2008 at 1:46 pm

Great teapot-

You've got to give Steve time. He's not used to saying dumb things, he has to work up (down?) to it :)

1445. Whale Evolution

Comment #131514 by Quetzalcoatl on February 22, 2008 at 1:42 pm

Double Bass Atheist-

ah, I see I typed the wrong name earlier. I'm sorry about that.

1446. Fleabytes

Comment #131503 by Quetzalcoatl on February 22, 2008 at 1:34 pm

But the crowd loves it.

1447. Fleabytes

Comment #131490 by Quetzalcoatl on February 22, 2008 at 1:25 pm

Di-A-Ca-Nu!!!!!!!!!

1448. Fleabytes

Comment #131481 by Quetzalcoatl on February 22, 2008 at 1:19 pm

al-rawandi-

don't embarrass her! You're mean.

1449. Over half of Britons claim no religion

Comment #131473 by Quetzalcoatl on February 22, 2008 at 1:13 pm

Krisking-

Well, some people will claim that we have a god shaped hole in our beings.........


They would be wrong.

People have all sorts of holes in their beings. None of them are shaped like gods. At least, like no gods I would want to know about.

1450. Over half of Britons claim no religion

Comment #131470 by Quetzalcoatl on February 22, 2008 at 1:10 pm

Epeeist-

Oh, and "what happens to gods when nobody believes in them any more?"


They fade away for a while, then slowly regain their strength. They also learn to use the Internet to post unfunny jokes on discussion threads.

More Pages: Previous | 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 | Next