Comments by Quetzalcoatl

2751. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #166392 by Quetzalcoatl on April 23, 2008 at 8:04 am

Fides-

I don't think there's any bashing going on, just disagreement. You'll see from many of the posts that many have expressed the fact that they respect him.

2752. Responses to 'Gods and Earthlings' by Richard Dawkins

Comment #166386 by Quetzalcoatl on April 23, 2008 at 8:02 am

Steve-

perhaps that would be a good idea, if you have the time. I've got TKD tonight, so won't have the time to write a proper post until tomorrow at the earliest.

2753. Responses to 'Gods and Earthlings' by Richard Dawkins

Comment #166383 by Quetzalcoatl on April 23, 2008 at 7:57 am

Steve-

This is interesting, but perhaps best discussed elsewhere...

your blog or mine? :)

If you're serious, we could discuss it on mine.

2754. Responses to 'Gods and Earthlings' by Richard Dawkins

Comment #166371 by Quetzalcoatl on April 23, 2008 at 7:45 am

Steve-

Oh dear. Perhaps my first ever major disagreement with Quetz :)

Uh oh. Better be careful here, or the fundies might start to think this is a site where people actually discuss things rather than worship Dawkins :(

Anway. "An Inconvenient Truth" included so much ridiculous hype that scientists in the IPCC were distancing themselves from it. An obvious example is the bit about those poor old polar bears.

Another factor to consider is that when one of these falsehoods is shown to be such, it reflects badly on the message as a whole.

Plus Al Gore's whole carbon-offsetting business interests strike me as a mite dodgy.

2755. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166361 by Quetzalcoatl on April 23, 2008 at 7:37 am

Everyone-

fot the future: if someone talks about the Flood, first ask them to define what a "kind" is. If time of death doesn't immediately ensue, it will be amusing to watch them flop around struggling to answer.

2756. Responses to 'Gods and Earthlings' by Richard Dawkins

Comment #166353 by Quetzalcoatl on April 23, 2008 at 7:30 am

Lord Lawson is a good example of the dangers of those who aren't experts in a subject making public comments about it

It would be nice if we could use this logic to get Al Gore to shut the hell up.

2757. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #166329 by Quetzalcoatl on April 23, 2008 at 6:32 am

Roland F-

Steve means the physicist Frank Tipler's explanation, not Robert Winston.

2758. Gods and earthlings

Comment #166277 by Quetzalcoatl on April 23, 2008 at 4:37 am

Coolwainy-

In order to disprove God you would need to know everything, so there's no way Dawkins could be almost certain that God doesn't exist.

That's why he said ALMOST certain.

Surely in order for something to be created, its creator must be more probable than the thing it created otherwise it could not have created it in the first place?

Which leaves us with a complex God, raising the question of where such a complex being came from. Saying God has always existed isn't an answer, neither is saying God is actually simple, since that goes against your argument.

2759. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166254 by Quetzalcoatl on April 23, 2008 at 3:51 am

Irate-

God's last words to Noah, immortalised on film by S. Spielberg, were: 'You're gonna need a bigger boat.'

Noah: "But Lord, I built it to your exact specifications!"
God: "Silence! I am the Lord".
Noah: "Yes, I know, but what you said was....aargh!"
(Gets eaten by a Ceratosaurus).
God: "That'll show him".

2760. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #166249 by Quetzalcoatl on April 23, 2008 at 3:46 am

Steve-

I'll see if I can find out his explanation of how Jesus walked on water

Perhaps neutron stars were involved somehow.

2761. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #166219 by Quetzalcoatl on April 23, 2008 at 2:36 am

To see how religion can scramble a scientific mind, one need look no further than the physicist Frank Tipler, who has attempted to explain the resurrection of Jesus in terms of antimatter

He did what? That's just sodding ridiculous!

2762. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #166208 by Quetzalcoatl on April 23, 2008 at 2:12 am

Irate-

I quite like the guy, especially for his stance on stem cell research, plus he does some good TV programmes. But he's a classic example of compartmentalisation in action. Perhaps not quite a 'tard, just confused.

2763. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166206 by Quetzalcoatl on April 23, 2008 at 2:05 am

Nothing wrong with talking snakes.

2764. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #166205 by Quetzalcoatl on April 23, 2008 at 2:04 am

Perhaps he might care to re-read the book of Job. Throughout most of this deeply mysterious and spiritual book

Where's the mystery? Job gets crapped on by God as part of a bet with Satan, then gets yelled at for daring to ask why God's behaving like a bastard.

In reality, both religion and science are expressions of man's uncertainty.

Except that science actually discovers new things and enhances our understanding, whereas religion is mired in the past and attempts to constrain humanity's attempts to better itself.

2765. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166195 by Quetzalcoatl on April 23, 2008 at 1:42 am

Kardashovel-

at the risk of sounding like some kind of parrot, I agree with Steve Zara. You admitted you were wrong about the use of wormholes as a mechanism to return to the time of the Big Bang. That is a good indicator of your honesty!

2766. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166188 by Quetzalcoatl on April 23, 2008 at 1:36 am

However, I am not sure whether I saw her beauty in the same way as a Japanese person would see her

You could say the same thing about two different people within the same culture. There are plenty of people who tend to be more attracted to those of a different ethnicity than their own. I think in this matter biology usually wins over culture.

2767. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166176 by Quetzalcoatl on April 23, 2008 at 1:01 am

Chewmanfoo-

My she's a pretty girl. it is a gift of her creator. He has shown great love toward her.

What does the fact that Anna is attractive have to do with anything?

I also believe that God has set about creation through the laws of physics, through natural selection, through DNA replication and mutation

I believe the principle of parsimony applies here. The additional complexity of a god being behind all you mentioned adds no explanatory value, and therefore can be discarded without substantial evidence to support it.

2768. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166175 by Quetzalcoatl on April 23, 2008 at 12:53 am

Re Remnant's praying-

there's a particular kind of arrogant self-importance around the notion of praying for someone to see "the truth". As if the simple act of Remnant praying will be enough for God to directly intervene and "open our minds" whereas he wouldn't have before. Remnant, you must have a very high opinion of your importance in the eyes of God.

2769. If God Is Dead, Who Gets His House?

Comment #165757 by Quetzalcoatl on April 22, 2008 at 8:49 am

The community effect of religion can't be underestimated, it could be argued that this is something that atheism lacks. The question then becomes, do atheists need that sort of gathering?

A religious friend of mine posted on his blog today about a service he went to last Sunday in which the preacher talked about how special everyone in the congregation was because they all belonged to God. This kind of feel-good message is a powerful one, and one danger of an "atheist church" could be that it would degenerate into sitting around bashing believers and making the congregation feel good, rather than accomplishing something.

PS- is it me, or is this site really slow today?

2770. Gods and earthlings

Comment #165695 by Quetzalcoatl on April 22, 2008 at 3:52 am

Clearmind-

And please tell us where that picture, half human and half monster that describes evolution best takes place in the evolution

I have now officially run out of patience. It is at times like these that I wonder whether you are indeed as ignorant as you appear to be, or whether this is a cunning act by someone having a laugh at our expense. However, having read far too many of your rambling, drivel-laden steaming green splurges that barely deserve the description of posts, I have decided that the former option is most likely to be true.

With that in mind I have decided to spell out for you what the average four-year-old would have been able to grasp with minimal difficulty.

Obviously you did not follow my suggestion of holding the mouse arrow over the picture. Perhaps this was too difficult for you, or perhaps my suggestion could not penetrate the thick fog of methane-laden ignorance surrounding the mouldy grey walnut that you use as a brain.

Let me spell it out. The picture is of a TROLL. You are a TROLL. Your contributions are of less value than the greenish residue in my handkerchief following a particularly vehement nose-blowing.

No doubt you will use this as an opportunity to complain about being insulted and indulge in OVERRUSE OF THE CAPS LOCK FOR NO APPARENT REASon. Perhaps a better idea might be for you to save yourself the trouble, and instead do something more productive, such as mastering your times tables.

Yours sarcastically,
Quetzalcoatl.

2771. If God Is Dead, Who Gets His House?

Comment #165669 by Quetzalcoatl on April 22, 2008 at 2:37 am

Corylus-

there is the reassurance that anyone you pick up is unlikely to boil your pet rabbit.

Unless "God" tells them to.

2772. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165650 by Quetzalcoatl on April 22, 2008 at 1:29 am

Kardashovel-

A worm hole that formed during the time of inflation that has one end inside of our visible universe, and the other outside of it, will connect us to that time because the other end is effectively moving at c, compared to us.

So, all that needs doing is for the conscious observer to drop into our end of that worm hole

"All that needs doing"? There are severe problems with doing this, as I mentioned. How does the conscious observer get around these issues?

In any case, primordial wormholes are not a workable mechanism for continuous meddling by God in the affairs of earth

Never said that they were. All that they would allow (if it weren't impossible) would be for something to travel back to the beginning.

Other problems- why is one end of the wormhole stationery, and another travelling at relativistic speeds? What happened there? Also, travel time is a factor here.

PS- thanks for the link. I'll read it when I get the chance.

PPS- try and lay off criticising Steve Zara, unless you can clearly show that he's wrong.

2773. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165643 by Quetzalcoatl on April 22, 2008 at 1:08 am

Steve-

I thought it was a bit short, personally. But Stephen Baxter is an excellent author for learning about science I think.

While we're on the subject, would you mind casting your eye over my comment 165499 to Kardashovel? If you have the time, it'd be good to know if I'm right or whether I'm miles off the mark.

2774. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165636 by Quetzalcoatl on April 22, 2008 at 1:02 am

Steve-

This is total crap, sorry. Both ends of the wormhole will have aged the same, so even if you could travel through it, it would take you to a part of the universe 13.7 billion years old

Don't know if you've read it, but is this why, in "Timelike Infinity" by Stephen Baxter, they could only travel into the past to the point the wormhole had been created PLUS the travel time for the second end attached to the GUTship?

2775. If God Is Dead, Who Gets His House?

Comment #165629 by Quetzalcoatl on April 22, 2008 at 12:46 am

Artful Dodger said-

It seems that the "atheist faith" meme is alive and well. Soon quasi-religious rituals, Sunday Schools, hymns, discipleship programmes, baptisms, "commandments" and excommunication for lapsed atheists and atheists found fraternising with religious believers. It'll be interesting to see how many childen, so "churched" will continue in the "faith of their fathers". I suspect this will ultimately only serve to empty the pews of these God-less churches and fill those of God-centred churches. "Reason" is wonderful as a servant, but pretty vacuuous as an object of "worship".

I say:

2776. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165513 by Quetzalcoatl on April 21, 2008 at 2:39 pm

David Robertson-

since everyone else has dissected the bulk of your post with remarkable efficiency and the hour is late, I'll confine myself to a few points.

You are of course still struggling to explain where our morality should come from - if it is not a product of evolution.

I think Professor Dawkins has already said a great deal on this. I would not describe it as him "struggling".

However I do know that Dr Dawkins and his followers are most certainly attempting to dupe you

This is a fascinating statement that demands clarification. In what sense are Dawkins' "followers" attempting to dupe Mr J? I think now is a good time for you to state, clearly and concisely, just who these followers are. Name names. I'm sure you have people in mind, and I know that we'll all be fascinated to learn just who they are.

Perhaps they genuinely and sincerely believe it, although other actions by them, which you can read about all over the internet, persuade me that they are fully capable of deliberate and calculated deception

More detail required! I think we need examples of these dubious actions carried out by Dawkins' as-yet-unnamed followers. Otherwise people might think you are just throwing about ad-homs without backing them up.

You have made what might be regarded as some very unpleasant assertions here. I think it only fair that you back them up. I await your clarification with great anticipation.

2777. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165499 by Quetzalcoatl on April 21, 2008 at 2:22 pm

Kardashovel-

I was thinking about your wormhole idea and I think there are some problems with it above and beyond those that Steve Zara has already stated.

Let's assume for the moment that you have a wormhole: one end anchored in or just after the primordial Big Bang, and another end that has been travelling relativistically since the beginning of the Universe, creating at least the possibility of it being used to return to the past. There are still some significant difficulties with this from a practical standpoint.

(Anyone with a background in science will undoubtedly come up with more problems than I have listed).

Firstly, locating the relativistic end of the primoridal wormhole would be nigh on impossible given the speed at which it would be travelling and its size. It will probably be on the Planck scale. The chances of finding something like this out in the Universe are infinitesimally small.

But let us suppose that, using some kind of sophisticated scanning process, the end of the wormhole is located. The next problem is reaching it. If the wormhole has been travelling relativistically since the beginning of the Universe then it will be a long, long, long, long, LONG way away. It will probably have a speed fractionally below that of light, making the chances of catching it extremely slim unless you have a ship with a drive capable of propelling it up to speeds even closer to C. Even then, catching up to it could take billions of years.

Of course this problem can be circumvented if you have a ship that employs some kind of hyperlight drive, but that just raises a whole host of other questions, so we'll leave that for the moment!

Having caught the wormhole end, the next problem is widening it sufficiently to allow something to pass through it. There are several ways we can think of to do this, one of which is widening the throat of the wormhole and securing the end to a framework of exotic matter, matter with negative energy density.

But since at this point you only have access to one end, by widening it you introduce massive instabilities, which may even close the wormhole altogether. The difficulties with this are already monumental.

Then suppose that you widen one end sufficiently enough to allow something to pass through, perhaps a ship, or a god-like being. Surely as you travel the length of the wormhole you have to widen it as you go, damping out the resulting instabilities. All this while you are literally passing through a flaw in spacetime.

Reaching the other end, you would have to construct another exotic matter framework to hold the mouth open, in a primordial time with barely any matter to use.

Now is it me, or does this all seem a little complicated?

Of course, you could say that none of this would be a problem for an evolved future god. But that's just copping out, and raises the question of why God would need to mess around with wormholes like you seem to believe he would.

That's what I think, anyway.

2778. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165476 by Quetzalcoatl on April 21, 2008 at 1:56 pm

Hmm. I see David Robertson has appeared once more.

Annabanana-

why have you been moved to the alternate comment thread? Are you being controversial again?

2779. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165269 by Quetzalcoatl on April 21, 2008 at 9:23 am

Kardashovel-

there's still a problem with the fact that there is a distinction between the end of a primordial wormhole travelling relativistically and it travelling as a consequence of the expansion of spacetime, since in the latter example the wormhole end itself is not actually travelling relativistically.

Steve-

perhaps he's getting muddled with the recent experiments that claim to have successfully "teleported" a photon. But the ideas around quantum mechanics are probably what he is driving at.

2780. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165231 by Quetzalcoatl on April 21, 2008 at 8:37 am

Steve-

wouldn't that fail in any case since both ends of the primordial wormhole would be moving relativistically? Wouldn't one end have to be "anchored" somehow in order for anyone to travel back, not that the other end could be caught in any case.

2781. Mecca should become core to measure time zones: scholars

Comment #165181 by Quetzalcoatl on April 21, 2008 at 7:20 am

The participants recommended the unification of the time in the Arab world to the time in Mecca instead of Greenwich. They also called the Arab governments to abandon the new world maps "because they are forged to serve Western interests."

They also demanded that buildings in the Arab world be directed towards Qibla

Wow, these "scholars" sound like really smart people who are fully comfortable with the world we live in. I like the idea that world maps are forged to serve Western interests. I would have thought they were forged to serve the interests of anyone who wants to know where the hell they're going.

Islam, "unlike other religions, never contradicted science".

Two words. Flying. Horse.

2782. Gods and earthlings

Comment #165155 by Quetzalcoatl on April 21, 2008 at 6:17 am

-Head hits desk-
-Straightens up-

Clearmind-

clearly the picture was too subtle for you. Try this. Hold your cursor over the picture, read the little word that appears. Put the pieces together. This isn't a difficult puzzle.

2783. Expelled Overview

Comment #165153 by Quetzalcoatl on April 21, 2008 at 6:11 am

Wow, you have cars that breed and mutate. That is so fucking cool!

Interesting fact: a lot of cars these days carry the recessive Lada gene. This is why you need to be careful when you buy a second car for your family. The consequences can be ugly and ineffective.

2784. Ben Stein Vs. Sputtering Atheists

Comment #165121 by Quetzalcoatl on April 21, 2008 at 4:59 am

thewhitepearl-

"atheism friendly"?

Where and when?

Details have yet to be organised. Bring a packed lunch.

2785. Gods and earthlings

Comment #165097 by Quetzalcoatl on April 21, 2008 at 4:00 am

Excellent, Clearmind has posted. That gives me an opportunity to use this:

Troll

I think it says all that is needed to be said.

2786. Ben Stein Vs. Sputtering Atheists

Comment #165082 by Quetzalcoatl on April 21, 2008 at 3:39 am

Irate-

I had a choice to make - be saddened or become irate. I took the latter path.

You made the right choice. Saddened_atheist doesn't have the same ring to it.

2787. Ben Stein Vs. Sputtering Atheists

Comment #165040 by Quetzalcoatl on April 21, 2008 at 1:12 am

Wow. This article is really "balanced". I like the mention of gay "rights" and abortion "rights". As in, there shouldn't be any. This guy's a right charmer.

2788. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165037 by Quetzalcoatl on April 21, 2008 at 1:09 am

Frankus1122-

It does make for some interesting science fiction though.
Isn't Quetz or someone into writing that sort of stuff?

I am, yes. But some of Kardashovel's ideas are a little "out there", even for me. :-)

2789. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164567 by Quetzalcoatl on April 20, 2008 at 12:18 pm

Steve-

You would need to construct and maintain that string arrangement... it would have to be held in a very unstable arrangement!

Pah. The Xeelee would have solved that problem easily before enjoying a hearty breakfast of grilled photino bird.

2790. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164562 by Quetzalcoatl on April 20, 2008 at 12:15 pm

Ironically in the blog post I am currently composing, I make mention of the phenomenon of hearing the voice of God. It's not a very favourable assessment, I'm afraid.

Steve-

perhaps they flew closed timelike curves around loops of cosmic string?

2791. Interviews with Richard Dawkins and Michael Shermer

Comment #164521 by Quetzalcoatl on April 20, 2008 at 11:07 am

Steve-

what he did do once was provide a list of "witness statements" that supposedly showed exaggerated claims made by Holocaust survivors. When asked for the source he refused, telling myself, ForestMist and someone else (I can't remember who, sorry if you're reading) that we should go out there and find it for ourselves, and that he was withholding the necessary information "for our benefit". That is when I lost interest in talking to him.

2792. Interviews with Richard Dawkins and Michael Shermer

Comment #164510 by Quetzalcoatl on April 20, 2008 at 10:54 am

ThoughtsonCommonToad-

scan back through his other comments to explain the vitriol. In the past he has provided "evidence" that he refuses to source, telling us instead that we should go out and look for ourselves.

2793. Sex for diploma offer caught on tape

Comment #164339 by Quetzalcoatl on April 20, 2008 at 5:01 am

Clintonjason-

something I would add about the dangers of generalising. I don't know how long you've been around this site, but we get a lot of theists slinging accusations such as "you believe in naturalism and therefore moral relativism" or "you don't believe in absolute morality, so how can you say anything is wrong" or "you atheists think you're so much better than religious people".

By generalising about religious people, we fall into the same trap, and can often provide ammunition for quote-miners (certain theistic posters are expert at that). That's why I advocate caution.

2794. Sex for diploma offer caught on tape

Comment #164335 by Quetzalcoatl on April 20, 2008 at 4:54 am

Clintonjason-

I do think there's a danger in applying this too generally. You're right in that those who claim that their morals and values come from God should perhaps be better behaved, and the fact that they aren't says something about that claim. But calling it "typical" might be a stretch. Everyone is a hypocrite about something, but there are fewer people who would do what the guy on the tape did.

2795. Sex for diploma offer caught on tape

Comment #164332 by Quetzalcoatl on April 20, 2008 at 4:45 am

Saw this on Pharyngula, not entirely sure why it's here though. All it does is illustrate one man's hypocrisy. It's hardly indicative of anything in general. We can do better than this, surely?

2796. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164329 by Quetzalcoatl on April 20, 2008 at 4:40 am

Now that he's quoting scripture instead of providing arguments, I think it is official. Remnant is a

Troll

and should be left alone.

2797. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164119 by Quetzalcoatl on April 19, 2008 at 3:00 pm

Re comment 2713-

That's it. I'm depicting it. Remnant, I have one thing to say to you:

Troll

2798. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164109 by Quetzalcoatl on April 19, 2008 at 2:39 pm

If you like. That's the best image I could find. It'll do.

2799. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164104 by Quetzalcoatl on April 19, 2008 at 2:29 pm

Alan Baylis-

perhaps this then.

What do you think?