101. Charles Brooker's screen burn

Comment #63021 by Damien White on August 13, 2007 at 12:02 am

Seems to me that darwin2 doesn't realise the difference between hope and faith.

I hope my 'consciousness' continues after death. But I have no proof that it will, and I am unwilling to be a part of the wish-fulfillment that faith offers.

If religites more carefully examined their own motives for beliving in the multitude of gods currently available, perhaps they would decide to stop decieving themselves. As the author of this article says: "You want comfort, suck your thumb."

102. Arrogance, dogma and why science - not faith - is the new enemy of reason

Comment #61790 by Damien White on August 6, 2007 at 10:19 pm

The author certainly hasn't read TGD very well, has she?
Science does not lay claim to knowing how the universe was created. That information is still unknown. The difference between science and religion is that science admits to gaps in its knowledge. Religion does not.
Science is searching for truth. Religion claims to have found it, but doesn't like us asking how.

103. Ducking the God Question

Comment #60671 by Damien White on August 2, 2007 at 4:26 pm

The platypus is a truly unique animal and one that baffled biologists for years, as they didn't believe the platypus could possibly exist.

I recommend that everyone from overseas come out into the bush to have a look at one, but you'll have to watch out for the drop bears.

104. The Out Campaign

Comment #59792 by Damien White on July 30, 2007 at 4:42 pm

I've got a t-shirt winging it's way to me down here in Adelaide, The City Of Churches, and once it's arrived i'll be wearing it, and eagerly looking out for others!
United we stand, divided we fall.

105. How could God allow 26 pilgrims to die in a crash?

Comment #58975 by Damien White on July 26, 2007 at 8:24 pm

Christian grief makes a mockery of their entire belief system. If they truly believed in their religion, they would celebrate death as the moment upon which the deceased achieved that which they had worked towards their whole lives.

This article is yet another example of the total hypocracy of christianity.

106. In defense of dangerous ideas

Comment #58656 by Damien White on July 25, 2007 at 4:30 pm

jonecc,

have you ever actually heard of anything that Enoch Powell did other than his massively misquoted and misnamed 'rivers of blood' speech?
If he was a bigot, please explain why he a) supported asian immigration of skilled healthcare professionals to bolster the NHS; and b) why he voted in support of the Legalisation of Homosexuality act.
Not the traits of a bigot, sir.

107. In defense of dangerous ideas

Comment #58176 by Damien White on July 23, 2007 at 9:55 pm

jonecc, as it was not my intention to start an argument, but rather to point out a 'dangerous idea' which might be worthy of discussion on an atheist's forum, i'll perhaps word my comment a little better.
Enoch Powell suggested that a large amount of Asian immigration into Britain might not be a good idea as it would bring two cultures into close proximity, and that the inability of those cultures to adapt to each other would cause tensions and violence.
And this is precisely what has occurred. Islamic fundamentalists are now killing people. How was Enoch wrong?

108. In defense of dangerous ideas

Comment #58141 by Damien White on July 23, 2007 at 4:21 pm

Some years ago in Britain Enoch Powell was pilloried for asking questions about the validity of Asian immigration into the UK. Today, it seems to be a dangerous idea to even acknowledge that he may have been proven right.

109. Convict sues God for broken contract

Comment #57290 by Damien White on July 18, 2007 at 7:12 pm

I think the movie to look for is "The Man Who Sued God", an Australian movie from several years ago, starring Billy Connolly as a fisherman whose boat gets destroyed in a storm, but the insurance company won't pay as it was an 'act of god'. Billy then sues god via his representatives on earth, the combined churches.

110. Religion - our maelstrom of ignorance

Comment #49373 by Damien White on June 11, 2007 at 4:54 pm

"Yeah, being a Republican may not be causal, but going to church every week since childhood probably induces brain damage."

Preach it, brother!
A baptist minister once quoted the bible at me in an attempt to deconvince me of my atheism. i'll try to remember the conversation word for word:

Him: And Jesus said unto Thomas, "Blessed are you for you have seen me and believe, but more blessed are those who have not seen me and believe, for their's is the kingdom of heaven."
Me: The kingdom of heaven and a home for the retarded sound awfully similar.

111. Should Science Speak to Faith? A dialog between Lawrence Krauss and Richard Dawkins

Comment #47235 by Damien White on June 3, 2007 at 4:41 pm

"Science will destroy religion within the next 15 years'.

Unfortunately, I don't think it will. Religious people are fundamentaly irrational. If gods really existed, no religious person would wish to be immortal. Yet they clearly do. How do I know this? Because most churches are non-smoking.

112. It came like yesterday

Comment #45421 by Damien White on May 27, 2007 at 5:12 pm

Many years ago, I became interested in the theory of Atlantis, and decided to find out whether it may have been possible (the evidence presented by Jurgen Spanuth in his book 'Atlantis Of The North' seemed to me to be the most credible in the end, but that's beside the point i'm trying to make here). My point is that this 'new' theory of extinction 13000 years ago by meteor impact in North America was loudly propogated by Professor Otto Muck way back in the 60s. He was ridiculed then. Pity no-one remembers him now.

113. Shark virgin birth mystery is solved

Comment #44208 by Damien White on May 23, 2007 at 4:12 pm

This shark is obviously the Messiah, or it is the one who will bring Balance to The Force. Has anyone tested it's midichlorian count?

114. Prayer can improve physical health

Comment #43837 by Damien White on May 22, 2007 at 11:12 pm

As an outspoken atheist from The City Of Churches, i'd like to point out that we're not all backward down here. Some of us still have our faculties...

115. Dinesh D'Souza says I don't exist: an atheist at Virginia Tech

Comment #33327 by Damien White on April 19, 2007 at 9:51 pm

Mr D'souza's political grandstanding is a disgrace, not least of all because it will increase the length of the healing period.

But it begs the question: who are the religious, to prey on people in their moment of weakness? Is it morally just that religion seeks to give consolation with the added hook of required belief, at the time when people are at their most addled and vulnerable.

116. Christians at Bible publishers have their throats cut

Comment #32905 by Damien White on April 18, 2007 at 4:35 pm

"Thou Shalt Not Kill". It's apalling what happens when two movements who live by this creed get together. Utter hypocracy.
My condolences go to the victims. No-one should be killed for their beliefs, whatever they are.

117. Atheism isn't the final word

Comment #32344 by Damien White on April 16, 2007 at 11:14 pm

This guy has, like most other godbotherers, neglected to give any thought to the issue. Just off the top of my head, a secular version of Mother Teresa would be Florence Nightingale.
Who else but the Jews have retained their cultural identity through 2000 years of constant persecution? Try the Gypsies.
When will these people learn that morality does not come from a book? To claim that it does cheapens it enormously.

118. Activation Of Brain Region Predicts Altruism

Comment #18898 by Damien White on January 23, 2007 at 2:20 pm

This study would seem to devalue the religious claim that altruism stems from religion.

Of course, I also wonder what Ayn Rand would have to say...

119. Deliver us from the god delusion that imperils our humanity

Comment #18138 by Damien White on January 18, 2007 at 2:41 pm

At least some of the Australian media. The Adelaide Advertiser seemed to be trying to stir up the ID debate recently, probably because The God Delusion was a bestseller here over christmas and they want to sell some papers.

120. False piety when Christianity claims the high moral ground

Comment #17918 by Damien White on January 17, 2007 at 2:16 pm

As far as i'm aware, both of the political parties in Australia are secular, at least in that they do not have a stated religious agenda. Perhaps it's time that these parties realised that religious beliefs may compromise the abilities of their representatives to carry out the policies of the parties. To give a rather extreme example, it's a bit like Adolf Hitler also belonging to the Communist Party, but he only goes on Sunday...

121. Copy of The God Delusion Purchased for $20,000

Comment #17529 by Damien White on January 14, 2007 at 2:36 pm

The recent upsurge in atheistic support has been nothing short of wonderful, but we (by which I mean my fellow atheists) must be mindful of not faling into the trap of religious-style organisation. Atheism is the renunciation of religion, it is not a religion in itself. Were we to band together under a symbol it would simply give the religious nutcases a category to lump us all in. We are diverse, they are insular. United we certainly must stand, but do I really need to point out the religious-style herd-mentality of following a symbol? (My apologies if that came across as a bit harsh to those who suggested it, it wasn't meant that way.) The best way to identify fellow-atheists is to talk and communicate. Incidentally, this is the best way to break down the walls of religious claptrap too.

122. Intelligent design is a science, not a faith

Comment #16923 by Damien White on January 9, 2007 at 3:57 pm

Well done Richard Buggs. Evolutionary research has moved forward since Darwin. Perhaps you would care to address some modern findings?

123. The God Delusion? Part 1

Comment #7019 by Damien White on November 16, 2006 at 5:15 pm

Mr Chopra seems to be arguing from a platform already addressed in The God Delusion: namely "the God that Richard Dawkins is against is not my God". DC asks 'what of the god of this' and 'what of the god of that' without telling us why any of these gods should escape critisism or are any more valid than any others.