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 D'Arcy


251. Evolving Mistakes

Comment #134256 by D'Arcy on February 27, 2008 at 1:29 pm

Excellent article especially for a non scientist such as myself. Exactly the sort of thing that should be posted on a site for rational thinking.

I heard a radio programme on BBC's Radio 4 about 15 months ago. "In Our Time", presented by Melvin Bragg. It was about micro-organisms. Whilst we know something about viruses and bacteria, there are whole swathes of other "critters" out there, or in there, about which we know virtually nothing. They can't be kept alive in the lab as yet and are therefore very difficult to investigate. The programme seems to be still available on the BBC web site:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/inourtime/inourtime_20070308.shtml

If you have the odd half hour well worth the listen.

252. Fleabytes

Comment #132216 by D'Arcy on February 24, 2008 at 1:28 pm

I read all of these posts and some, and i just think reverting to 'dickhead' hands him the weapons he desires.


I think mike has a point, especially as the more memorable and colourful language is likely to be copied and pasted elsewhere. Stick to the point and don't be distracted by diversions. Robertson in particular appears to like sneering at the posters here, but what he has got to say of substance is very deficient. From his point of view, we need to be saved from eternal hellfire, so you would think that he would try to be more convincing in his presentation, or maybe like Ann Coulter, he would be happy to see us all fry in Hell.

Robertson's Wee Free church is apparently strongest in the western Highlands and Islands of Scotland. The company (government subsidised), running most of the ferries to these islands is called Caledonian MacBrayne.

When the good lord made the Earth and all that is in it and on it he said: "It is good and it is mine, all excepting the Western Isles, and they shall belong to Caledonian MacBrayne"!

Talking of the west of Scotland, my own impression is that David Robertson is more of a midge than a flea.

253. Fleabytes

Comment #131884 by D'Arcy on February 23, 2008 at 2:15 pm

D'Arcy said "Mussolini was a good Catholic wasn't he? We don't hear his name mentioned in the same tone as the Great Atheist Satans, Hitler and Stalin. I wonder why not?"

BINGO, he was a good god fearing Catholic, whereas Adolf was a lot more ambiguous, as would be expected from the great manipulator that he was.


Yes Hitler was certainly able to manipulate people as was Stalin. They both used whatever methods were available to them to retain their political power. And both had been well trained in their respective versions of Christianity. Whether or not they believed any of it is immaterial, they understood the social power of organised religion.

My point was though that the defenders of religion pick on Hitler and Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, as being equated with a non belief in deities (and therefore without any moral qualms), whereas they leave out other outwardly religious dictators such as Mussolini or Franco who also had no qualms about morals, and were very prepared to murder opponents in large numbers.

How many deaths to date in Iraq since the US/UK invasion? Colin Powell is quoted as saying that the number of deaths is irrelevant. The BMA (British Medical Association) has estimeated the number of deaths at, at least, 500,000. Both Bush and Blair have avowed their Christianity. And they are/were both democratically elected and both "honourable men".

254. Fleabytes

Comment #131836 by D'Arcy on February 23, 2008 at 12:17 pm

Paula says in reply to me re Hitler quotes:

I realise that a reassurance from me isn't any reassurance at all in this context, but all I can say is that I am perfectly happy for anyone to scrutinise The Dawkins Letters as thoroughly as they wish, and I am absolutely certain that they will not find a single quote that reflects the very mixed messages that Hitler gave on the subject of religion.


Paula, I'm not for a moment doubting what you have written, but it would be nice if someone else who has read the book could confirm that our flea is indeed very selective in what he chooses.

I believe "quotemining" has been used on this site for some time and may now qualify as a new word in one the online dictionaries (e.g. Doubled Toungued Dictionary or Urban Dictionary). See New Scientist 2nd Feb 2008.

If a person makes or writes ambiguous statements, then the receptor of these statements is entitled to interpret them in the way they wish. My point about Hitler (he was a politician and "adaptable"), was that whilst he appeared anti clerical and anti religion, he still seemed to believe in God. The objective reality was that the Vatican turned a blind eye to the deportation and extermination of the Jews and others, and the Catholic Church was mostly left alone in Germany. The clergy were probably as anti Jewish and nationalistic as the Nazi Party was.

Mussolini was a good Catholic wasn't he? We don't hear his name mentioned in the same tone as the Great Atheist Satans, Hitler and Stalin. I wonder why not?

255. Fleabytes

Comment #131762 by D'Arcy on February 23, 2008 at 6:49 am

If I misquoted Robertson in a previous post, then it was a genuine mistake on my part and I apologise.

To anyone else out there who has read Robertson's book, I would like to ask this: Paula in her article has stated that Robertson selectively only used quotes which demonstrated that Hitler was anti-religious, and avoids quotes that confirm his religiosity. Dawkins on the other hand uses quotes from Hitler which illustrate both views. Is Paula's summary correct? I know about TGD, but I haven't read The Dawkins Letters.

Either way, there can be no doubt that Hitler was brought up as a Catholic and understood the social power of organised religion, and Christianity's historic hatred of the Jews. The 3rd Reich certainly had an "arrangemnt" with the Vatican whereby they agreed to leave each other alone. Even if Hitler became anti-religious later in his life does not mean that he stopped believing in God. Martin Luther and Calvin were both anti the current religion in their time. They spearheaded the protestant reformation in protest at the excesses of the Catholic Church.

Of course at heart, the Reformation was really a political struggle about real power and wealth, but it was dressed up in clerical robes. Henry VIII in England set up the Church of England, and proceeded to grab the riches of the monasteries and churches for the Crown, much as Stalin did in Russia for the state.

256. Fleabytes

Comment #131583 by D'Arcy on February 22, 2008 at 3:58 pm

Those of you who can't be bothered with Wee Flea's response, just go on to somewhere else. Whenever I see a message from Dianelos, I definitely feel the urge to fast forward.

Give the man enough rope is my attitude and if the webmaster agrees then so be it. Whether he manages to hang himself with the rope or drag us into the pit of organised mysticism remains to be seen.

If the general tone of his replies is going to be that Dawkins doesn't know the Latin for man and woman and other such pissquickery, then he will not earn much repect in my mind.

At least by allowing his reply here, he can no longer play the martyr card. FWIW my own guess is that we will be subject to plenty of words, but not much of substance. I wait to be proved wrong.

Incidentally you logic guys, thanks for explaining the rules of Mornington Crescent!

257. DLD08 - Life: a gene-centric view

Comment #131551 by D'Arcy on February 22, 2008 at 2:39 pm

Did Michael Gilks mention Wittgenstein? His very name makes me angry with the uselessness of his very comfortable life. It makes me want to put flies in bottles.

People like Dawkins and Venter do things to advance human knowledge.

I agree with Michael's point though. There is so much stuff out there to be learned and so little time to do it.

I felt a very interesting discussion, and even better soulless!

258. Revealed: Secrets of the Camouflage Masters

Comment #130906 by D'Arcy on February 21, 2008 at 1:30 pm

Isn't the real world great?
These cephalopods changing their outward appearance to merge into the surroundings, reminds me of the theologians and their tactics to throw predators off the scent.

If the predator gets really too close for comfort, let off a smokescreen and piss off pretty dam quick!

259. Fleabytes

Comment #130897 by D'Arcy on February 21, 2008 at 1:11 pm

D'Arcy, off topic, but is your avatar available on a t-shirt?


I'm afraid my avatar is a freebie snaffled from the internet, (Google, "free avatars", No. 1, about page 15). I may have to change it as we already have FSM Teapot with "anthill inside" and someone else with a similar one.

"Infidel Inside" exactly expresses my attitude, so I am rather loathe to relinquish it.

As far as I'm concerned, feel free to put it on tee shirts, bed sheets, curtains and you will get a gold medal from me, if you can manage to get it put on the Pope's white nightgown that he wears in St. Peter's Square!

260. Missing link found in Sydney Harbour

Comment #130867 by D'Arcy on February 21, 2008 at 12:12 pm

I hope someone will send Dinesh D'Souza (self confessed mosquito) an e-mail to say that the ancestor of his parasite, plasmodium, has been found in Sydney. He believes in evolution, but he also believes in miracles. At least part of what he believes appears to have been confirmed - no not the miracle bit!

261. Fleabytes

Comment #130842 by D'Arcy on February 21, 2008 at 11:39 am

Anyway I am off to the University of Dundee to give a lecture on science and religion. Should be fun...


David I hope you have "serious joy" in your visit. What the hell, you are a human being like me, so why not wish you the best?

I don't know if the above remark has any influence on your view of atheists being something less than Christians, but it was well meant.

For the record:

I have never believed in God.

I am a materialist, worse than that I am a socialist in the original Marxian sense of the word. My viewpoint means that I view religion as a product of the particular society from which it springs. Like Marx, I think religion is "the opium of the people", although nowadays it has competition from pop music, sport, Big Brother and endless other distractions that divert people from thinking about the world they live in; this world, the one and only world, no dress rehearsal.

Now whether I'm strident, militant or any other adjective you want to apply to a non-believer, I really don't care. I just don't believe in your fantasy world, although I agree that the Harry Potter books are fun, and there is also some good stuff to be found in the Bible.

You can compare me to Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot or whoever else you want to, but I do feel that you should say something about the substance of Paula's article without acting the martyr.

262. Fleabytes

Comment #130581 by D'Arcy on February 21, 2008 at 12:37 am

Thanks to BillySands for the link to the Telegrapgh article re Robertson's plea for the Wee Free to lighten up and experience "serious joy". It wasn't the article that I read, but the gist was the same.

Robertson obviously has quite a battle on his hands. From the linked article:

One reader wrote to cancel his subscription and accused Mr Robertson of "endorsing witchcraft".


Don't laugh! That would be ungodly. Voldermort would not be amused.

263. Fleabytes

Comment #130417 by D'Arcy on February 20, 2008 at 1:34 pm

Some of us have a limited amount of time, and so far I have only got to part 4. But I have read all of the comments so far.

Paula has done a lot of work in her fleadom fighting exercise, and rather her than me. We should all be aware that David Robertson (The Wee Flea) is now banished from this site by Josh, although he appeared again briefly under another name, and was again banished.

My own view was that whilst we don't want time wasters, that his contributions weren't that bad to deserve being banished, but then I haven't read all his comments only several of them. Let's just say the milk of human kindness or the "grace of God" was not to be found in the ones that I read.

In the interests of fairness and of hearing the voices of those that disagree with the majority viewpoint here, I feel that Josh should e-mail Robertson and invite his response to this review. I'm sure Josh can limit the great man's contributions to just this thread if Josh feels that he is such a problem everywhere else on this site.

Incidentally, last year Robertson was quoted in a British paper (sorry no source or date, but I did read it!), whilst on a visit to the Hebrides, as saying that the Free Church of Scotland (Wee Free) should basically lighten up a bit as it appeared too devout to outsiders.

What Robertson thinks about the Plymouth Sect can probably be found on anger management courses.

264. The argument from oranges

Comment #128991 by D'Arcy on February 18, 2008 at 12:33 pm

If memory serves, Florida was the crucial state in the 2000 presidential election, with George Bush's brother as governor. Whether Al Gore would have made a better president is really conjecture. The fact that Bush pipped Gore to the presidency didn't a peel to many. "If you don't like it go suck a lemon", is an expression that might be a sour joke.


What is not a joke is the scientific theory of evolution, which is best available explanation for what we see in biology. I have no problem with being related to oranges. If you eat your relations is that cannibalism? Guilty as charged!

265. Archbishop's 8 March centennial message: Let Sharia Law govern women's lives, Amen!

Comment #128627 by D'Arcy on February 17, 2008 at 1:23 pm

If one accepts the role of Islam and Islamic laws in one community, by the same token, they should accept the role of Christianity and the Church of England in the larger community. His defence of Sharia Law is a clever step towards revitalizing the role of Church in the wider society.


A plague on all their houses!

These people have nothing to contribute to humanity except ignorance, fear and distress.

266. Study: Religion colors Americans' views of nanotechnology

Comment #128620 by D'Arcy on February 17, 2008 at 1:01 pm

But every single new technology cannot constitute the end of the world. The world only gets to end once.


I will of course expect to see you all at Milliways, the restaurant at the end of the universe. The great Prophet Zarquon may or may not make an appearance. In view of the impending end of the universe the portions will be nano sized.

Diacanu sounds like a good night out the Big Bang Burger Bar will do him some good!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milliways#Milliway.27s

267. The Search for Truth, God and Braver Scientists in 'Expelled'

Comment #128574 by D'Arcy on February 17, 2008 at 12:13 pm

As usual with these religios we get intelligent sounding questions "how did the cell get to be so complicated?", posed as unanswerables. If it can't be answered therefore seek divine explanation. Same for origin of life. Same for "fine tuning" of nature's constants. Same for Earth orbiting in the "Goldilocks zone" around the sun(i.e. not too hot nor too cold).

It really is lazy thinking to suppose that answers can never be given, but then a fool can ask more questions in 5 minutes than a wise man can answer in 7 years (lifetime?).

The annoying thing is that people like Stein, if they actually believed what they are saying, face eternal punishment for lying about evolution. I suspect they don't actually believe at all but are just cynically playing the "religion" card.

268. The argument from oranges

Comment #128551 by D'Arcy on February 17, 2008 at 11:15 am

I notice that towards the end of Mr. Ellis' remarks, and just around the time of the collision between the garbage and chicken trucks, there was a flurry of "gene pool"s, "evolution", and "big bang". I suppose he was decent or ignorant enough to leave out "mutation".

The fact that this otherwise articulate person, could not be bothered to find out what evolution actually is about is so sad. In his defence he at least quoted (I haven't checked the quote), from Darwin in saying that all livings things are related.

To lump in the Big Bang idea of cosmology with evolution is a typical tactic of YECs. They just don't know any better.

Instead of referring to chickens and eggs, I would like to ask Mr. Ellis "Which came first, the creator or the creator's eggs?"

269. Dumb and Dumber: Are Americans Hostile to Knowledge?

Comment #128535 by D'Arcy on February 17, 2008 at 10:25 am

jonkull says:

Then there are the people that simply have no interest and never leave the town they were born in...at all...ever. That to me is pretty sad. I don't understand these people.


J. S. Bach, arguably the greatest of composers, is thought never to have gone more than 200 miles from where he was born in Eisenach, northern Germany. He was certainly aware of the developments that were ocurring in the music elsewhere in Europe.

The point is not what physical travelling you do, but what your attitude is in finding out about things. IMO it's always healthy to want to learn more. Yes I know it's never ending, in which case you must restrict yourself to smaller topics. By specialising, you will find that your general knowledge has also increased.

With knowledge comes the power to change things.

270. Dumb and Dumber: Are Americans Hostile to Knowledge?

Comment #127580 by D'Arcy on February 15, 2008 at 12:45 pm

Furthermore, I think "openness for everything true" somehow excludes "reverance for god"...



MPhil has it dead right. Richard Dawkins is interested in the truth,as I am, and it doesn't matter to me whether ignoramuses come from USA, UK, Oz, Indonesia or anywhere else in the world. Ignorance is to be combated wherever it rears its head. It could be in the form of a 6004 year old Earth, Iran is the capital of Iraq, or in the lack of knowledge of the rules of Mornington Crescent.

271. Why Darwin matters

Comment #127536 by D'Arcy on February 15, 2008 at 11:35 am

(How do I quote comments? :-P )


First select the text you want to quote and copy it (ctrl c) then you type < blockquote >and paste (ctrl v) the text. you finish the quote by typing < / blockquote > at the end. Make sure there are no spaces as in < blockquote >

See the Comment Posting Guidlines which appears when you log in. Hope this helps.

272. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #127459 by D'Arcy on February 15, 2008 at 10:08 am

Hang out the Bunting. Really she had nothing to say of any significance. To her there are so many levels of "truth", that simplicity insults her intellect. E.g. stony silence when asked if she believed in the virgin birth.

Richard was right when he said that she was interested in human beings, but that he was interested in the truth. Being an intellectual, Bunting may not agree with everything the Pope says, but by the constraints of her own faith she is bound by papal proclamations. Non believers have no such constraints, we assess the evidence, then decide.

Whilst my avatar is similar to FSM Teapot's (26 above), and I agree with the comments he/she posted, I must point out that I am indeed a different person.

273. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #126998 by D'Arcy on February 14, 2008 at 3:52 pm

Hang out the Bunting. Really she had nothing to say of any significance. To her there are so many levels of "truth", that simplicity insults her intellect. E.g. stony silence when asked if she believed in the virgin birth.

Richard was right when he said that she was interested in human beings, but that he was interested in the truth. Being an intellectual, Bunting may not agree with everything the Pope says, but by the constraints of her own faith she is bound by papal proclamations. Non believers have no such constraints, we assess the evidence, then decide.

Whilst my avatar is similar to FSM Teapot's (26 above), and I agree with the comments he/she posted, I must point out that I am indeed a different person.

274. Council pays psychic for exorcism

Comment #126869 by D'Arcy on February 14, 2008 at 11:28 am

Any self respecting poltergeist should be ashamed of itself by being chased away by a bit of salt a charlatan and for £60.00!

If I was a poltergeist I would make the exorcist actually work for its money, scaring them more than the usual inhabitants! Objects would be appearing from all parts of the universe and doing all kinds of nasty things. Any exorcist appearing with a crucifix would be treated with special vehemence. Ectoplasmic frenzy would explode in their faces whilst I chuckled loudly.

£60.00 ... huh! Cheapskate ghost!

275. Why Darwin matters

Comment #126755 by D'Arcy on February 14, 2008 at 6:48 am

F words for our friend wooter:

Sir, Madam, you are fractally false!

276. Why Darwin matters

Comment #126547 by D'Arcy on February 13, 2008 at 2:06 pm

Is a half-man/half monkey possible or desirable?


I am not a scientist so I don't know if it's ever possible, but it's certainly not possible given the current state of scientific knowledge (and technology).

"desirable" is an emotive word and so evokes emotive responses. Would our chimera have the top of Marilyn Monroe and the bottom of King Cong? I don't know.

I suggest to krisking that he/she re-reads the Guardian supplement about Darwin and takes on board the fact that even in Darwin's day it was appreciated that long periods of time were needed for the observed changes to have happened.

Bye bye Bible. It ain't necessarily so!

277. Sharia fiasco

Comment #124950 by D'Arcy on February 10, 2008 at 1:20 pm

I'm quite sure that "given enough time", Islam will be tamed by modern capitalism in much the same way that Christianity was. (Christian values: an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. If your eye offend you pluck it out, same with the arm).

The Saudi state may well be propagating "fundamental" Islam, but it is doing so precisely because it wants to keep itself in power (forever if possible). Religion has long been used as a force for oppression.

In Britain the Labour government has been in favour of "faith" schools not because of the particular flavour of the faith, but because they seemingly provide low cost social control. If people behave themselves because their religion has taught them that way, then it must save the state millions on extra police, courts, prisons etc. to coercively enforce the law.

Rowan Williams has lived up to the name of his position, the Archbishop of Cant.

278. Why Darwin matters

Comment #124927 by D'Arcy on February 10, 2008 at 12:30 pm

Dodger's profound observation:

Precisely the same comment could be made of the blinkered souls who remain unconditionally welded/wedded to natural selection as an omni-explanatory paradigm.


Michael Behe, yes he of the Dover trial and author of "irreducible complexity", is a professor of biology at Lehigh University. His department has this to say about his views:

"The department faculty, then, are unequivocal in their support of evolutionary theory, which has its roots in the seminal work of Charles Darwin and has been supported by findings accumulated over 140 years. The sole dissenter from this position, Prof. Michael Behe, is a well-known proponent of "intelligent design." While we respect Prof. Behe's right to express his views, they are his alone and are in no way endorsed by the department.It is our collective position that intelligent design has no basis in science, has not been tested experimentally, and should not be regarded as scientific."
http://richarddawkins.net/article,1271,The-Great-Mutator,Jerry-Coyne-The-New-Republic

I wonder just who is wearing the blinkers?

279. Why Darwin matters

Comment #124494 by D'Arcy on February 9, 2008 at 4:11 pm

Dodger, 83 above, asks if belief in a religion means a lower level of culture. Allow me to reframe the question: If a religion is stating things which are unprovable, highly unlikely and contrary to all observations, are its believers in a disadvantaged position as regards to science?
IMO a resounding YES!

Apart from Darwin and Wallace, there were other discoveries going on in the 19th century being made by Christians, which provided evidence of an Earth that was far older than what the Bible had stated. Some of the Christians were at least honest enough to admit that the external evidence had altered their literal view of the Bible. Modern creationists at least have the evidence available to them, they just choose to ignore or distort it.

280. The Passion of 'Anonymous'

Comment #124396 by D'Arcy on February 9, 2008 at 10:47 am

Thetans were supposedly released into the atmosphere nearly 100 million years ago, when a galactic tyrant named Xenu exiled billions of beings to Earth's volcanoes and had them vaporized by bombs. All of this is according to Scientology's origin myth, which church officials have previously struggled to keep private and now no longer claim to espouse.


I wonder if the billions of beings exiled to Earth's volcanoes, by Xenu could possibly share the same volcano as John Frum? There could be a conflict of deities here.

http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=788

281. Why Darwin matters

Comment #124381 by D'Arcy on February 9, 2008 at 9:40 am

jimbob, thanks for your post 61 above. This is exactly how the internet should be used; for the dissemination of information. I've known for a long time that Darwin's Christianity "drifted" away from him. I'm not sure how I knew it, but to have the actual words of Darwin and the source put in front of me certainly speeds up the process of investigation.

I know the whole of Darwin's works can now be read online, but it doesn't half help if you get a pointer. Cheers!

282. Why Darwin matters

Comment #124153 by D'Arcy on February 8, 2008 at 1:51 pm

"Nor must we overlook the probability of the constant inculcation in a belief in God on the minds of children producing so strong and perhaps an inherited effect on their brains not yet fully developed, that it would be as difficult for them to throw off their belief in God, as for a monkey to throw off its instinctive fear of a snake." (pp. 77-78).


jimbob, what a great quote! Not only do we have the cultural indoctrination of children into belief, but also the "instinctive fear of the snake". Eve should really have been better primed to resist!

283. Why Darwin matters

Comment #124113 by D'Arcy on February 8, 2008 at 11:49 am

A good article, and I will probably buy tomorrow's (Saturday) Guardian for the freebie. Like Lyell, Hutton and Rev. Buckland in the field of geology, Darwin was a Christian for a significant period of his life. The death of his daughter didn't help reinforce his belief and together with what he and Wallace had discovered (independently), undoubtedly turned him away from his religion. Like Darwin, the early geologists were reluctant to come to conclusions that varied with what was written in the Bible. The empirical observations forced a change of mind upon these people.

IMO Darwin's great discovery was that things have changed, change, and will change in the future, and not in a random manner. "Given enough time" I hope the creationists will come to understand the enormity of Darwin's ideas.

284. Are Darwin's Theories Fact or Faith Issues?

Comment #122060 by D'Arcy on February 4, 2008 at 3:01 pm

The so-called "Discovery Institute", for which Dr. Simmons works is but a paid agent for creationism. It has discovered nothing of use to the human race, but merely exists to give credence to ideas like "teach the controversy", "evolution is only a theory", etc. by using its well known "wedge" tactic.

Those fundamental Christian bloodsuckers, having no ideas of their own to put forward, apart from a magical explanation of nature, resort to picking what they see as holes in a very well established scientific theory.

As Meyers said, Simmons did not put forward his own point of view, but instead chose to play to the Christian gallery, and in the process exposed his own ignorance.

Science will sort these bastards out.

285. God the psycho

Comment #121504 by D'Arcy on February 3, 2008 at 2:03 pm

Good stuff Pat. See you at Milliways, where we will await the great Prophet Zarquon!

286. Pope says some science shatters human dignity

Comment #121474 by D'Arcy on February 3, 2008 at 1:12 pm

But how then does the soul inherit original sin?


My advice to Cartomancer, fwiw, is to avoid such theological questions altogether. First let them show us their God, then we can argue about souls. So far the religios have not succeeded in providing evidence of their supreme being, and they probably never will.

287. Pope says some science shatters human dignity

Comment #120707 by D'Arcy on February 2, 2008 at 11:05 am

You wonder whose human dignity has been shattered by physical and mental bullying carried out by Catholic representatives, including nuns. Let alone the sexual abuse of children.

Also you wonder about those ?40 odd million people in Africa, whose Catholic representatives preach against the use of condoms, and who are now HIV positive. How much dignity does someone dying of AIDs have? The fact that the Pope, who by definition is and has always been celibate, can Pontificate about other people's sexual behaviour would be funny if it weren't so serious.

288. Belief in Belief

Comment #119255 by D'Arcy on January 31, 2008 at 12:33 pm

"Belief in belief" seems to me to be the same thing as "delusion", both self and group type. If you're bankrupt of ideas that explain reality, then resort to the supernatural explanation, (say no more, nudge nudge, wink wink!)

289. The Repeater

Comment #119240 by D'Arcy on January 31, 2008 at 12:24 pm

Come to think of it, since the flood was after creation, how are there any freshwater creatures at all? They'd have all been killed by exposure to salt water, unless Noah had the foresight to build in a lot of little (and separate) aquaria, we gotta keep all those little fishies in their own waters, so they don't get mixed up. Then you have to desalinate all the lakes they are destined to, and walk them all back. Would have been a real bitch of a job, keeping each varaint of stickleback labelled by lake number.


And what about all those snails from Australia? How did they make it to the Ark on time, and how did they get there? Land snails hate salt water.

Whilst the details of evolution continue to be debated in the scientific community, we of the onlookers can be reasonably happy to dismiss creationist nonsense like Noah's flood, without further analysis.

290. What should a scientist think about religion?

Comment #118172 by D'Arcy on January 30, 2008 at 12:47 pm

Many Christians and Muslims are going to squirm uncomfortably


What a nice thought. These would-be thought control police would love to have blind obedience, literally people on their knees. The trouble, from their viewpoint, is that new knowledge keeps undermining their position.

291. Dawkins is third most prolific internet Briton

Comment #118149 by D'Arcy on January 30, 2008 at 12:16 pm

Hmmm? John Cleese only at 37? I shall have to report this back to the Ministry of Silly Walks. The Spanish Inquisition may have interefered with this poll.

292. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #117723 by D'Arcy on January 29, 2008 at 1:12 pm

atheism will never be a widespread phenomenon. Like socialism, it's a parasitic phenomenon that can't survive on its own.


Ignoramuses of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but your chains. You have a world to gain!
Apologies to Marx and Engels. Change "ignoramuses" to "workers" and you have the last words of the Communist Manifesto. Pissquick Christians like Day, really have nothing to teach me about the universe. Whilst Marx and Engels in the Communist Manifesto advocated the abolition of buying and selling, this charlatan is only interested in the selling.

293. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #117655 by D'Arcy on January 29, 2008 at 10:09 am

I assume the Creator Lord of the Universe can defend Himself. He doesn't need my help.


Whilst the supposed almighty can no doubt look after Himself, what about His creation? If He's there, (which He ain't), humanity could do with some help. Fat chance! Useless bastard of a deity!

http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Poverty.asp

Click on link to Causes of Poverty

294. The Science behind the Large Hadron Collider

Comment #117292 by D'Arcy on January 28, 2008 at 2:18 pm

I, for one, would be very interested to know what, if anything, the religious luminaries of this world, like the pope, have to say about such experiments. Hopefully they will keep their mouths shut.

Most likely (the wise ones) will make remarks about science shining light on God's creation. The not so wise ones will make remarks about godless and arrogant scientists trying to claim divine powers for themselves.

I will of course be watching the science far more closely than the pronouncements of those with knowledge "transcending" mere science, it's just when these theological "experts" interefere with the real observation of the universe, they make me angry. Religios have nothing to contribute except ignorance.

295. The Science behind the Large Hadron Collider

Comment #116826 by D'Arcy on January 27, 2008 at 2:43 pm

Like many, I'm not up to the mathematics when it comes to string theory, inflation or just plain relativity. However, unlike the religious, we of the scientific congregation have every avenue to question and doubt the "truths" offered us by science.

Personally, I'm not very happy with "multiverses", more than 3D + time, or the fact that an electron goes through two slits instead of one. Feynman said something like "nobody understands quantum physics".

As long as modern science is rigorously peer reviewed and subjected to experimental tests, then we must regard it as the best available explanation.

We can be sure that there will be no shortage of words emanating from the various theological experts around the world, if the LHC drives yet another nail into the coffin of the divine explanation of the universe.

296. The Science behind the Large Hadron Collider

Comment #116460 by D'Arcy on January 26, 2008 at 2:46 pm

Great stuff! I'm always in favour of increasing humanity's knowledge. SteveZ says this may not give us the TOE (Theory of Everything) and he's probably right. But as sure as shit stinks (can't get more scientific than that), this LHC will come out with some scientific advances that hadn't been thought of. Higgs may be who they are looking for, but it could be D'Souza who turns up!

The whole subject reminds me of a cheesy joke for which I apologise in advance to our north American friends in particular, and to all others.

What do you call a female who likes to party and is in the crew of a nuclear submarine?

A subatomic party girl!

Higgs could have been the boson, but Heisenberg, the first mate was uncertain about it.

297. A Letter From Hell

Comment #116114 by D'Arcy on January 25, 2008 at 2:11 pm

This video reminded me that just a few days ago, I went to see Spamalot. Now I know what I will do on my deathbed. I will make sure that when I "go" , I will have a good supply of Holy Hand Grenades with me. Should rip a few wings of those angels!

298. Banned From Church

Comment #115595 by D'Arcy on January 24, 2008 at 11:33 am

This Pastor Jason Burrick has obviously been born into the wrong century. He would have made an admirable Inquisitor for the Catholics. This guy may have increased the congregation from 12 to 70, but even so the money from the collection would seem to be small fry. Still the fact he is resisting any enquiry into church funds, suggests to me that there may be something to hide. Either that or the sense of power has interfered with his judgment as a human being.

As for Mrs. Caskey, well what else comes to mind but silly old bat.

None of the above comments relates to any persons alive. It is "just a story", right?

299. Darwin Day (Feb 12th) E-Cards

Comment #114632 by D'Arcy on January 22, 2008 at 1:41 pm

How about one of God designing some lethal bacterium, with Behe, Ham et al looking on adoringly.

300. Gigantic fossil rodent discovered

Comment #113106 by D'Arcy on January 18, 2008 at 2:57 pm

Well this rodent may not have been the designer of the Ferrari, but did it have to do battle with Argentinasaurus, bigger than T. Rex by far? Probably not, because of a time span of some 55 million years. Never mind, more gaps in the fossil record for Creationosaurus to fall into.

More Pages: Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 | Next