151. Atheists Take On Religion

Comment #24235 by CruciFiction on March 5, 2007 at 12:37 pm

Rydrum2112,

A "margin of error" is a calculation applied differently to different types and means of statistical analysis.

In our case, a poll, the +-3% margin of error provided does indeed mean that statistically, based on the number of people participating in the poll, the given percentage (2% atheists) could fluctuate either 3% up, or 3% down, with a greater sampling of people in a similar poll. And so a greater sampling would better reflect a more accurate representation of the actual percentage (in this particular poll that margin of error predicts a greater sampling would put the number somewhere in a range from 5% to -1%). And the fact that it extends a range into negative territory only demonstrates how tiny their sampling must have been -- and likely very far off as well.

Being a statistician yourself, I'm surprised you are not aware of this. The explanation of margin of error as applied to polls can be found here:

http://www.stats.org/in_depth/faq/margin_of_error.htm

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"If people are selected randomly and some basic statistical assumptions are made, there is a mathematical formula for the margin of error. The way to understand a poll result such as "49 percent of American voters prefer Bush to Kerry, with a margin of error of three percent" is that 49 percent of those questioned prefer Bush to Kerry. If the poll were conducted again (with a different sample of the population), the percentage of those questioned preferring Bush over Kerry is likely to be a value from 46 (49 minus 3) to 52 (49 plus 3). How likely? The margin of error is calculated so that a new poll's result is 95 percent likely to lie within the margin of error. If a hundred similar polls were conducted, we would expect that in 95 of them, 46 to 52 percent of people would support Bush over Kerry."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

152. Atheists Take On Religion

Comment #24192 by CruciFiction on March 5, 2007 at 8:01 am

Using the two different sources in the report are like mixing apples with oranges.

The 14% number of Americans without religion is from a 2001 study by U. of Chicago.

The 2% atheist/agnostic number is from an internal 2007 ABC News poll that showed an error range of (+-) 3%. That would mean they estimate the actual number of atheists to be anywhere from 5% atheist/agnostic to -1%! How the hell can anyone consider it an even near accurate poll with such a ridiculous range of error?

153. 'God Is Not a Moderate'

Comment #22924 by CruciFiction on February 24, 2007 at 3:29 pm

"Oh, brother", is right!

Sullivan got on this "soul" kick of his in agreeing with a comment by another Andrew who also can't seem to think logically:

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/02/the_heart_the_s.html

154. 'God Is Not a Moderate'

Comment #22782 by CruciFiction on February 22, 2007 at 7:58 am

Sancus wrote:

"Objective truth is true even when there are no minds present. At least, that's the definition of objective truth that I learned in my philosophy courses. So, every human could die tomorrow and what is objectively true would still be objectively true. It does not need consensus.

So, even if the claim "truth demands consensus" were objectively true, it would still be true without consensus!"
_______________
This does not make sense in respect to the phrase you're addressing.

For what you call "objective truth" which you're chasing in error here (even if every human were dead), not only doesn't it need consensus, but in a humanless universe consensus is not even possible.

So as the phrase you disagreed with is dealing only with truth insofar as we humans can know it, to the extent of our understanding, this truth indeed requires consensus.

155. Memo: Stop teaching evolution

Comment #22476 by CruciFiction on February 19, 2007 at 9:33 am

Watch this Rep. Warren Chisum nutjob play the part on the Texas house floor:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaUl6x1YXpg&eurl=

156. 'God Is Not a Moderate'

Comment #22332 by CruciFiction on February 14, 2007 at 10:09 pm

I was struck by Sullivan's points where he speaks of "the worst atrocities" and "darkness" that religion has produced throughout history and that a world with an otherwise clean glass "has never, ever existed, and never, ever will."

While he's indirectly echoing that poisonous [self-]degradation and indignity (sinfulness) of human beings which is inculcated into the Christian, he's also acknowledging the tragic and violent history of humankind.

But then he says, "No human society has ever functioned without the large faith that underpins all the little faiths: religion.", and, "No civilization has ever been atheist at its core. No polity has ever been constructed in the absence of faith, or in the absence of a tradition of faith that makes belief in the present possible at all."

Where he says, "Earth to Sam: Does this not tell you something?", I had to laugh out loud at his faith-based blindness to the obvious. Earth to Andrew: Doesn't the fact that history is replete with human atrocities and darkness all the while under the spell and control of religion tell YOU something? We are well aware of our sad past with religion, but we do not know anything of what that past would've been without it. Isn't it about time we try to break out of those dark ancient chains of religion and see if we couldn't realize a future for humankind which is bright and harmonious -- that "brotherhood of man"?

As Joseph Lewis once said: "Man's inhumanity to man will continue as long as man loves God more than he loves his fellow man."

But as for most of his latest writing, I couldn't help but wonder if he was under the influence of an hallucinogenic at the time, or if his brain was actually in the process of exploding. I mean, for the most part, I thought much of it was nearly incomprehensible. And I counted no fewer than 28 occurrences of "contingent" and "contingency" that continued throughout the piece. WTF is that about? For these reasons I wouldn't doubt that Sam may want to end this thing soon. It's gotten to the point now where it's like beating a dead horse to death.

157. Debate between Sam Harris and Reza Aslan

Comment #22316 by CruciFiction on February 14, 2007 at 4:47 pm

Here's a treat for Sam Harris fans. Sam speaking at the FFRF convention in San Francisco, 10/7/06.

http://www.filecrunch.com/file/~7ed4jk

158. Richard Dawkins interview with Paula Zahn

Comment #22203 by CruciFiction on February 13, 2007 at 12:37 pm

I understand that Richard's interview was 20 minutes long, but that it was cut down to only 4 minutes.

It would be great if Richard and/or CNN could arrange to make the entire interview available to us.

159. Debate between Sam Harris and Reza Aslan

Comment #22187 by CruciFiction on February 13, 2007 at 7:03 am

It was a terribly unfair debate to begin with. Aslan and the moderator are on the exact same page when it comes to their extreme respect and [nauseating] sentimental feelings for religion. They effectively admitted to this within the discussion.

As for the moderator, Sam was twice not permitted to respond to Aslan's long diatribes that were filled with strawmen and other nonsense. First was when the moderator suddenly called an end to the debate portion, and then he cut Sam off for a second time by abruptly bringing the Q&A portion to an end. This of course gave some the [mistaken] perception that Aslan made valid points where Sam could/should have refuted them if only given the opportunity.

I thought Sam, as usual, had the best arguments by far -- rooted deep in his broad knowledge and coupled with the use of sound reason, common sense, and being reflective of today's reality. And how he always remains so calm and lucid in the face of false accusations and strawmen being thrown all over the place is truely an amazing thing to observe.

Aslan cannot seem to even grasp Sam's points at times. I think his being raised in the thick religious environment (Islam) as he did is primarily responsible for this mental barrier. His claim that people will have religion (worshipping gods) for thousands of years to come, is complete nonsensical poppycock! Beyond the fact that nobody can reasonably (or sanely) make any certainty claim about anything to be true of society in millennia to come, it best demonstrates his deep and irrational passion for people to hold onto religion. To borrow from Dawkins, he suffers from a deep "faith in faith", beyond which he simply cannot contemplate nor fathom an alternative to a world filled to the hilt with god delusion.

160. The Blasphemy Challenge

Comment #21853 by CruciFiction on February 11, 2007 at 8:06 am

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

The president of Jerry Falwell's Liberty University (Ergun Caner) has issued, via the media, a debate invitation to the hundreds of blasphemy challengers and more specifically, to the Rational Response Squad team, which launched the effort on YouTube.

Text:
http://www.liberty.edu/academics/religion/seminary/index.cfm?PID=13278

The video of this sick and twisted brainwashing session of Caner speaking to students on this is here:
http://boss.streamos.com/wmedia/liberty/cpo/campuschurch/20070207_cc_ec.wvx

The Rational Response Squad replies to Caner:
http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/the_rational_response_squad_radio_show/4703

161. Panel discussion on atheism where no atheists are included

Comment #21635 by CruciFiction on February 10, 2007 at 8:31 am

Monday's show

No kids, no marriage? Find out about an initiative to end childless marriages. Paula brings it "Out in the Open." Tune in Monday at 8 p.m. ET.

http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/paula.zahn.now/

Be prepared for only but a few minutes of "damage control" on Monday.

162. 'God Is Not a Moderate'

Comment #21526 by CruciFiction on February 9, 2007 at 7:09 pm

Sam Harris and Reza Aslan participated in a debate on "Reason and Religion", 1/25/2007, at Los Angeles.

C-Span BookTV video:
http://www.booktv.org/ram/feature/0207/btv020407_4.ram

Info:
http://www.booktv.org/feature/index.asp?segID=7890&schedID=475

163. Panel discussion on atheism where no atheists are included

Comment #21494 by CruciFiction on February 9, 2007 at 12:55 pm

And in the same week as this perverse Paula Zahn program, an atheist on YouTube has had his entire account deleted, including all his videos, SOLELY on the basis that he recently posted one video that showed actual verses from the Quran in illustrating the violence it contains -- no additiional commentary whatsoever!

His story:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=fRPVsamLaKk

Digg it here:
http://digg.com/videos/people/Popular_YouTube_atheist_BANNED_for_posting_video_critical_of_the_Koran#c5164694

He has reposted the "offending" video at another account here:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=NEHAn36Hq9w

(See it before they delete that account too!)

164. 'God Is Not a Moderate'

Comment #21359 by CruciFiction on February 8, 2007 at 10:22 pm

Sam is playing rougher now (which is great). After Sullivan's last piece, I wondered how Sam might counter such a heap of inane nonsense. And I'm delighted with how he did. As far as I'm concerned, this last one is filled of the stuff that makes Sam the master he is.

I found his last 2 paragraphs to be just exceptionally profound. Just, wow! If only people would seriously contemplate such a world. Like John Lennon, I wonder if they can.

165. Panel discussion on atheism where no atheists are included

Comment #21334 by CruciFiction on February 8, 2007 at 7:30 pm

CNN has rescheduled the Dawkins piece for Monday, 2/12.

Heh, Darwin Day!

166. Panel discussion on atheism where no atheists are included

Comment #21305 by CruciFiction on February 8, 2007 at 3:35 pm

Hopefully the piece is only postponed to another evening. Anyway, it could prove to be best that way because in the same timeslot as Zahn tonight is the season premiere of Survivor, which always draws in the most viewers and gets huge ratings.

167. Panel discussion on atheism where no atheists are included

Comment #21252 by CruciFiction on February 8, 2007 at 8:56 am

In my opinion, there is no better qualified and astute person in the world to represent atheists, their plight and their cause, than is Richard Dawkins.

168. Panel discussion on atheism where no atheists are included

Comment #21163 by CruciFiction on February 7, 2007 at 8:29 pm

At the end of Paula Zahn's show tonight, she said that in response to the MANY THOUSANDS of letters they've received regarding last week's show on discrimination against atheists, that they will be covering it again tomorrow (Thursday) with "possibly the world's most famous atheist, Richard Dawkins". She also said last week's show has turned out to be "the most controversial program we ever did".

169. Panel discussion on atheism where no atheists are included

Comment #21063 by CruciFiction on February 7, 2007 at 1:19 pm

Many of us who emailed complaints about this program have received this unassociated reply from CNN:

=================================================
Dear I-Reporter,

On behalf of CNN, please accept our sincere thanks for your I-Report submission during our memorial coverage of the tragic death of Crocodile Hunter Steve Irwin. Thanks to the many submissions from our viewers, our coverage carried the personal touch that came from his vast and personal outreach to his many fans. Our programming effort was a huge success, and you are part of the reason for that.

Again, we sincerely thank you and hope you will continue to send relevant submissions to us at http://www.cnn.com/exchange/ireports/topics/

Best wishes,

CNN Public Information
=================================================

So what's up with that?!?

170. Panel discussion on atheism where no atheists are included

Comment #20815 by CruciFiction on February 6, 2007 at 5:17 pm

Damn it! We've been "SHUT UP" for decades now. But no longer. They WILL hear us.

171. Atheist Rap: Extian, The Verse from Atheist Nation Pt III

Comment #20687 by CruciFiction on February 5, 2007 at 7:17 pm

Very exciting to see rational thought breaking into yet another segment of US society. Much more is needed for this superstitious nation of fantasy-loving nitwits.

172. 'God Is Not a Moderate'

Comment #20625 by CruciFiction on February 5, 2007 at 7:23 am

Update 2/5:

Andrew Sullivan's reply:

http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2007/02/faith_unchosen.html

173. 'God Is Not a Moderate'

Comment #20473 by CruciFiction on February 2, 2007 at 9:15 pm

Sullivan to post reply on Monday (2/5).

http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2007/02/responding_to_s.html

174. Neil deGrasse Tyson - Death by Black Hole

Comment #20070 by CruciFiction on January 31, 2007 at 8:38 am

The Daily Show segment with Dr. Tyson can be viewed here:

http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/index.jhtml?ml_video=81508

(following an advertisement)

175. Blashpemy Challenge Interview

Comment #20060 by CruciFiction on January 31, 2007 at 7:29 am

There are many ongoing debates now taking place at the ABC Nightline forum for this program that could use more valuable input.

http://forums.go.com/abcnews/Nightline/forum?start=0&forumID=15&byThread=true

176. Blashpemy Challenge Interview

Comment #20056 by CruciFiction on January 31, 2007 at 7:22 am

["This is such a petty project, it does little but undermine the intellectual argument for atheism." ~ toaldingham]

It's going to require assaults of EVERY kind in order to inflict real and significant damage on these dangerous and ancient superstitious beliefs. "Intellectual arguments" alone are no more effective than pissing on a fire.

"It is impossible to reason someone out of something that he did not reason himself into in the first place." — Jonathan Swift

Ridicule does indeed have its place in this global fight, as to which many living and dead intellectuals themselves have attested:

"Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus."-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Francis Adrian Van der Kemp July 30, 1816

177. 'God Is Not a Moderate'

Comment #19908 by CruciFiction on January 30, 2007 at 3:39 pm

re: Sam's response of 1/29

While I too, had wanted to see Sam tear some particulars of Sullivan's ridiculous arguments to shreds, he seems to have taken an alternate track. He's delivered to Sullivan, a kind of primer on critical thinking and that which actually constitutes reality. In this vein, I don't think of his reply as being weak at all. Perhaps Sam feels this approach will yield better results (understanding) than the typical back-and-forth nitpicking at particulars. While I remain doubtful of his approach, I'm prepared to be pleasantly surprised by Sullivan's next reply. It will be interesting. We shall see.

178. 'God Is Not a Moderate'

Comment #19315 by CruciFiction on January 26, 2007 at 7:48 am

On his continuing tirade over "truth", inasmuch as he sees it, Sullivan tries to take another swipe at Harris from outside the debate:

http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2007/01/in_my_own_langu.html

However, I don't know what the hell he's trying to say here -- that is, something rational within the realm of reason. ???

179. 'God Is Not a Moderate'

Comment #19237 by CruciFiction on January 25, 2007 at 5:24 pm

"Similarly, mathematics can achieve a proof that has no interaction with the physical world. It may even be the closest to divine truth that human beings can achieve." ~ Sullivan

WTF?!?! What kind of "mathematics" is that? Because mathematics has demonstrated, for example, that a multi-universe is plausible, how does that make it "closest to divine truth" as opposed to just opening a new door to what may indeed prove to be physical reality? What happened to the revelation of divine truth that the earth is at the center of the universe? Heh, divine truth indeed. Sullivan needs a checkup, from the neck, up.

180. 12 Year Old Girl Prodigy Paints Pictures of God

Comment #18752 by CruciFiction on January 22, 2007 at 6:48 pm

Does resemble the 'real' Jesus here:

http://www.mrdeity.com

181. Evangelical Scientists Refute Gravity With New 'Intelligent Falling' Theory

Comment #17979 by CruciFiction on January 17, 2007 at 8:14 pm

Still a funny spoof more than two years later.

182. Discussion of The God Delusion

Comment #17970 by CruciFiction on January 17, 2007 at 7:03 pm

Audio of the November 26, 2006 "Background Briefing" program is available here:

http://odeo.com/audio/3719393/play

183. Open Letter to Rev. John Auer

Comment #16846 by CruciFiction on January 9, 2007 at 7:02 am

Oh, BTW, religious institutions now own more than 20% of the privately owned land area in the whole of the US. A tremendous strain on the American people who must subsidize this shortfall of billions of dollars in tax revenue.

184. Open Letter to Rev. John Auer

Comment #16845 by CruciFiction on January 9, 2007 at 6:57 am

Beth:

You said "...he sought to ban religious organisations from having to pay property tax..".

Religious institutions have been exempt from paying taxes in the US since 1913. I suspect you meant to say that he sought to repeal the exemption religious organisations now enjoy.

185. Open Letter to Rev. John Auer

Comment #16798 by CruciFiction on January 8, 2007 at 8:53 pm

"In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own." - Thomas Jefferson

186. The Nodder

Comment #16772 by CruciFiction on January 8, 2007 at 3:31 pm

What kind of bastard god is it who "intelligently designs" the human body in such a deficient and shabby fashion that simply reading a superb and enlightening book causes such horrific pain and agony?

187. Atheists challenge the religious right

Comment #16110 by CruciFiction on January 4, 2007 at 4:19 pm

In "The Rights of Man" Thomas Paine spoke on the mythology of "tolerance" that is worthy of consideration:

"Toleration is not the opposite of intoleration, but it is the counterfeit of it. Both are despotisms. The one assumes to itself the right of withholding liberty of conscience, and the other of granting it. The one is the pope, armed with fire and fagot, and the other is the pope selling or granting indulgences."

Then there's this quote:

"Toleration is a good thing in its place, but you cannot tolerate what will not tolerate you, and is trying to cut your throat." ~ Froude, James Anthony

188. Pat Robertson: God told me of 'mass killing' in 2007

Comment #16034 by CruciFiction on January 4, 2007 at 8:24 am

>>"God also said, [Robertson] claims, that major cities and possibly millions of people will be affected by the attack, which should take place sometime after September."<<

Well then, I suppose we already have our leading suspect.

189. The Atheist Delusion: a pisspoor presentation

Comment #12231 by CruciFiction on December 11, 2006 at 11:16 am

"BRAVO!", Edward Current.

Brilliant production! And quite the humorous piece for irreligious people of reason who actually feel no great joy that we receive it this way because of the overarching sad state of delusional humanity that underlies it.

190. Richard Dawkins on The Late Late Show with Pat Kenny

Comment #12201 by CruciFiction on December 11, 2006 at 8:20 am

Among one of Richard's great quotes is this:

'It worries me about religion in that it teaches people to be satisfied with not understanding.' ~ Richard Dawkins, [God Under the Microscope]

The audience for that program clearly supports this notion that religionists simply do not want to know and understand the truth. They much rather prefer to remain wrapped in their comforting delusion and utter ignorance. This spreading mindset does not bode well for the future of humankind.