351. Would the World Be Safer Without Religion?

Comment #43544 by alovrin on May 22, 2007 at 1:07 am

To Wee Pee

As for your question about negative reviews - what are you wanting to review? If you would like to review my own book or talk about other Christian books then you are very welcome to come on to the Free Church website and do so. www.freechurch.org

If you would kindly point out which is your book, or send me a copy I would be more than happy to review it and post the review on this website.
Looking around the site I could only see wall to wall religiosity, no attempt at providing a balanced outlook. Not even any mention of other religions. But maybe it is there somewhere, maybe a link to the appropriate page might help.
Come on Weepee surely this isnt the best you can do.
I was at least expecting a site that posts criticism of its own religious position. This site has absolutely zilch, zero, nada such criticism. But now that I know of its existence I may go and question a few of its posts.

352. Would the World Be Safer Without Religion?

Comment #43485 by alovrin on May 21, 2007 at 5:37 pm

To Wee Flea?

I can see that you are dumbfounded. I'm like you - II cannot for the life of me see why the same atheist arguments appear in every book and on every thread in atheist websites. Then I had my spaghetti moment. Atheists are so convinced of their total grasp of 'truth' that they don't really pay close attention to counter arguments. They go to their websites read their literature all of which will virtually never post anything that is critical of their position, especially books as strong as those that have come out recently. They have reviewers and commentators who airly attempt to dismiss them with a wave of their 'rationalist' hand. Just claim the high ground and thats it, but the arguments are threadbare and long worn out. Still they trot out the same nonsense that has been trotted out before. And generally it is to tell the atheist populace - don't worry, we are right, all theists are idiots or cowards. That is all they ever do and all they will ever be capable of. Its not minding the flock, its immunising anyone trapped in their tuppenny maze from any outside influence. Is there anything more divisive than fundamentalist atheism?

I see you have distorted what I said. I was praising this website for collecting and posting negative reviews. I have yet to see this done on a theist website. Perhaps you can give us some examples and prove me wrong. I look forward to it.
The I/V of R Dawkins by Ruth Gledhill is a good example of striving for a meeting point. It is on this website.

353. Would the World Be Safer Without Religion?

Comment #43291 by alovrin on May 21, 2007 at 4:26 am

I was, for a long time, dumbfounded, I couldnt for the life of me figure out why the same arguments, in virtually the same language, kept reappearing in reviews of atheistic literature by theists.

Then I had my spaghetti moment, it couldn't be that simple.. could it!

Well any way my reasoning is something like this, theists convinced as they are of their total grasp of "truth" dont really pay close attention to counter arguments. They go to their websites read their literature all of which will virtually never post anything that is critical of their position, especially books as strong as those that have come out recently. They have reviewers and commentators who airly attempt to dismiss them with a wave of their metaphysical hand. Just claim the high ground and thats it, but the arguments are threadbare and long worn out. Still they trot out the same nonsense that has been trotted out before. And generally it is to tell the populace to go back about their business, nothing to see here... move along folks, the commotion is over.

That is all they ever do and all they will ever be capable of. Its not minding the flock, its immunising anyone trapped in their tuppenny maze from any outside influence.

Although I get tired of reading and hearing the same thing over and over in negative reviews of the books on the god subject by Dawkins, Spenger, Dennett, Harris, Onfray, Hitchens and the list is growing all the time. I hope this attempt does not flounder on this blind obedience and mindlessness, I give thanks to the flying spaghetti monster that this website takes the time and has the stomach to keep us all aware of what is being said positive and negative.
And praise them for their work, and hope there is patience to see a shift happen. Faith in any supernatural agency cannot solve the problems we all face, as it is inherently divisive.

354. The Paradoxical Hatred of Christopher Hitchens

Comment #42847 by alovrin on May 20, 2007 at 1:14 am

OH so poor little David feels revolted by Hitchs "abominable behaviour" his "hate"?
Veronique you beat me to it acerbic better describes it.

I wonder how he feels about his dumb brother's abominable behaviour and woeful outbursts, Hmmm. Not a word as far as I can see.This toerag doesnt deserve to be a columnist for anyone.

355. The Cyclic Universe: A Talk With Neil Turok

Comment #42653 by alovrin on May 18, 2007 at 11:31 pm

I rejoice when I see an article such as this, after wading through reviews of antitheist books( A nod to CH) by theists that never rise higher than a Courtiers Reply (Thanks PZ Myers).
Enquiring minds working through problems, proposing ideas, informing us all. Right....Wrong... Well there dont seem to be such definitive terms in use here.
Enquiry goes on, Bravo.

356. Ask Richard!

Comment #41776 by alovrin on May 16, 2007 at 11:58 pm

I have a question for Richard nothing to do with his books.
I hear that there is a new documentary due out soon.
Where Hopefully RD takes on some of the New Age phonies who, so far have got off very lightly, as the focus(quite rightly) so far has been on the big three Abrahamic religions.

When is it due out?

357. Among the Disbelievers

Comment #40786 by alovrin on May 15, 2007 at 1:38 am

Boy oh Boy this is a bad article. The writer makes a large number of presumptions about people he seems to know only in passing (atheists). I sometimes wonder if RD has regrets about publishing TGD when reading article's such as this. Anyway...

united in their resolve to throw the bum out--God, that is--the antireligious forces appear to have given little thought to what to replace Him with should He go. .... But they could end up making even bigger fools of themselves than the theologians they criticize.

I doubt if any one can look more foolish than a pedophile priest.
But as to the first part, I dont think overthrow is on many minds just the chance to require rational scrutiny and some evidence for some very large claims.

And atheism doesnt have to offer any alternatives to god.
None whatsoever.

But if we ever get to the point where such a proposition comes up for consideration anywhere, lets hope there is a lot of measured thought given to the matter. And if a replacement for a supreme deity as a construct is deemed desirable I hope HE is replaced with a flying teapot, or maybe a Pavoni espresso machine, a good bottle of wine perhaps, my favorite biscuit, Im not telling, the name is too precious to say aloud!

358. The Case Against Intelligent Design: The Faith That Dare Not Speak Its Name

Comment #40254 by alovrin on May 14, 2007 at 3:27 am

The Creationists managed to push this one under our noses:

Not sure what you mean. Is there something fishy about the Sloan or MacArthur? Will god make an appearance in the introduction?
I mean I'm not to sure about the point of such an encyclopedia. Compiling it properly is a logistic nightmare, and maybe it will never be finished.

359. The Case Against Intelligent Design: The Faith That Dare Not Speak Its Name

Comment #40238 by alovrin on May 14, 2007 at 1:25 am

I must add my vioce to those who commend this article. It fantastic, well researched, well written and full of information.

As for Devolved, good luck in your efforts to push creationism on this website, I think you have given yourself an impossible task unless you come up with better evidence than the tripe from the redesigned AnswersinGenesis site.
And poor old S Burgess desparately trying to conjure god from a knee joint. I mean, even a cusory examination shows that the knee and elbow are similar joints that have evolved over time because of the different tasks they perform in the body. The knee is not irreducibly complex.. come on!

360. Unintelligent Design

Comment #40217 by alovrin on May 13, 2007 at 10:41 pm

Yes I get what Atran is trying to do, as the influence of religion seemingly against the odds has increase, it should stick to what it does best provide something? for people and not impinge on scence's turf. But is religion on the increase? That is a debatable point I think Dan Dennett has pointed out dont be so sure about that. It could be an illusion created from the amount of coverage there is on the subject.
Certainly in the East there seem to be a blind rallying around the Islamic faith which should be a concern to us in the west.
But all that aside, this is a clumsy article. I mean War can also provide a rallying point for a society which transcends personal self centredness. But do we need more wars?

361. Unintelligent Design

Comment #40067 by alovrin on May 13, 2007 at 1:15 am

mutual faith in an omniscient and omnipotent agent mitigates cheating and the mentality of "every man for himself.

This statement is highly suspect, and coming from someone as qualified as Mr Atran must qualify as one of the dumbest things ever said by a scientist. He may as well have said we are all just sinners and need god to give us morals.
My opinion of Mr Atran :(

362. Unintelligent Design

Comment #40038 by alovrin on May 12, 2007 at 7:15 pm

This article is just weird, I wonder was Mr Atran being paid to write something like this.
It starts off along the lines of non overlapping magisteria religion has a purpose and it has nothing to do with science.
Then via Dover says religion is impinging on science's turf and to keep out. Which is one way of looking at it, I guess.

Its the religion has a purpose and we cant do without it inference, I find strange. Especially from someone who probably does quite well without religion. Not that I know anything about Mr Atran's personal idiosyncrasies in that area. And his bio doesnt offer much
in this respect, but from comments above I see he's an athiest.

363. A conversation with journalist Christopher Hitchens

Comment #38958 by alovrin on May 9, 2007 at 4:19 pm

The last 10 mins when he talks about the book are good. The Iraq quest by CR? Well I disagree with hitchens views apart from the fact that when its over the USA's name will be mud in the Middle East.
So dont plan on travelling thwere on a US passport.
If he wants to go back to 1991 why not go back to 1973? when Saddam was installed or the Baathists were with CIA help. Or back to the creation of Iraq in the post WW2 carve up that makes more sense than drawing a line at 1991.

364. The God Delusion

Comment #36666 by alovrin on May 2, 2007 at 1:28 am

OK I own up I slagged Ayn with out any substance.

This review, while positive, comes with some big caveats at the end.

However, if Richard Dawkins hopes to bury religion once and for all, he will need an ethics every bit as rigorously grounded as his science, and a vision of human purpose and possibility more compelling than that provided by mystics

I specifically remember RD saying on many occasions he was not hoping to bury religion, maybe hoping expose it to some rigorous scrutiny.

Here the reviewer seems to be attempting oneupmanship, it very clumsy.

The God Delusion does not mention that the recent religious resurgence has been in no small part a reaction against the pervasively nihilistic, amoral relativism that so many see as inextricable from atheism. Regrettably, the book does little to refute this falsehood and largely ignores the power—and desirability—of moral clarity.

I would strongly disagree with this assessment of why there has been a resurgence of religion of late. The USA has become something of a moral vacuum into which countless philosophies and spiritual fads has rushed. And I believe that after 20yrs of the New Age, which made believing almost any old nonsense virtually respectable, it was all to obvious that Christianity would surface again. Its like the bastard offspring of the New Age. The supposed nihilistic relativism some see in atheism is a bit player. (A walk on extra on a TV cop show planted to make naive viewers think it's the killer) So why does it need to be refuted? This is easily batted down by moderately intelligent person who is in earshot of anyone uttering such inanity.

This is just to neat and cosy. And is just as device for the reviewer to leverage his own supposedly superior moral sense into the argument. And again I doubt if Richard Dawkins is unaware of the power of moral clarity, he seems to possess it in ample amounts.

OK Objectivism. The only thing I got from reading and attempting to read countless Ayn Rand and others who champion this philosophy. Was the legislating to level the playing field(so to speak) or making obstructive rules and regulations was bad. And the market place would decide on the merits of what was on offer. Just my take on it.
Making a livable society requires more than just logical rules and regulation or a lack there of. It needs to have an large slice of understanding and compassion for the inhabitants. Well that what I believe.

Since the days of Rand there has been a rolling back of social programs in just about all the first world , much of it can be attributed to the rise of this kind of philosophy. And it has, uniformly, had a detrimental effect in those countries. And many of the social ill have reappeared, as the welfare programs(many of which were well thought out) have been scrapped.
Also many Randians have just got jobs in govt whose only purpose is to make legislation and so many rules and regulations I wonder what happened to their youthful zeal for deregulating the world. All we have now is money flowing up the money pyramid and taking very few rest stops on the way.
And the chance of the rise of a meritocracy is looking more and more remote.

I could go on, but it would require research and a few drafts to hone it, And this is after all just a comment on a website.

365. The God Delusion

Comment #36397 by alovrin on May 1, 2007 at 3:33 am

Ah thank goodness I see others have pointed out the Randian connection.
Followers of Ayn seem to have a religious zeal about them(much like this reviewer), which is kinda frightening. I hope en masse they never rise any further that Alan Greenspan. One dotted here or there on the human landscape is quite enough.

the cases of Hitler and Stalin.

Not this again!

Happily, most readers of this magazine will know where to turn for that.

Thats if you are bored rigid(like 99% of the reading audience) by Ayn's tomes. It was a big seller in about 1947.

366. Pundit Christopher Hitchens picks a fight in book, 'God is Not Great'

Comment #36022 by alovrin on April 30, 2007 at 12:12 am

Thanks for the link to earthsgreatestlawsuit, Brian Mac
I will let them know of a few new age phonys that are still luring in the bushes peddling their brand of godish tosh.

I look forward to reading CH's book. Having heard him debate and lecture on the subject recently. I think he definely has something to contribute. I'm a sucker for acerbic wit.
All Hail The Daily Show.

367. Bill Maher - APATHEIST

Comment #35589 by alovrin on April 27, 2007 at 5:43 pm

I'm as bad a comedian as Bill Maher. I should get my own show.

Ok got it, so then maybe your skills as a critic are as lousy as your comedic skill? (This is a rhetorical question no need to answer.)
In which case dont give up your day job. I mean that in a nice way.
Unless you are dissatisfied and are looking for a career change, then I would suggest crossing those two off your list.
So did you get a chance to look at Bill Moyers doco? (This question is not rhetorical.)

368. Bill Maher - APATHEIST

Comment #35560 by alovrin on April 27, 2007 at 3:46 pm

Oh Goody, its gang up on William time.
Now William, I didnt mean to hurt your feelings by using the word cretin. Just in explanation of my use of the word. It was made in reference to you saying BM didnt have a soul. Which is kind of a ridiculous thing to say, don't you agree?

What is a soul William?
The use of this word brings with it all manner of baggage,and your glib use of it doesnt convey any of the intended meaning, you wished to be read into it by us your fellow readers and scribblers.

If you could just extrapolate on what the connection, in your mind, is between BM and the lack of this "soul" is.
Or, in your opinion, is he just a bad comedian and this is your way of saying so.
Or was it because he had sex with Anne Coulter and during this connection he was separated from said "soul", and is now just another souless ghoul strutting the stage of life?

369. Bill Maher - APATHEIST

Comment #35342 by alovrin on April 26, 2007 at 11:36 pm

Now this makes my blood boil...
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/btw/watch.html

370. Bill Maher - APATHEIST

Comment #35340 by alovrin on April 26, 2007 at 11:30 pm

Hey that funny, well kind of, shoot up a school.
No way
You mistake expletives for anger.

371. Bill Maher - APATHEIST

Comment #35337 by alovrin on April 26, 2007 at 11:00 pm

Well I like Bill Maher and I think he is funny, He got to fuck Coulter Wow I wonder if he'll spill the beans on what she's like it the sack, did she blow him? Hey on a dark drunken night I'd do it.

As for all these... he's beneath us arseholes....we dont need him on our side.... go pull your pud.

HE DOESNT HAVE A SOUL... SO WHO THE FUCK DOES.... CRETIN
NOT THE PERSON WHO SAID THAT.

Some times I just wonder and wish there were a few less people on this planet, of all descriptions

372. The God disunion: there is a place for faith in science, insists Winston

Comment #34980 by alovrin on April 25, 2007 at 8:14 pm

What a coincidence this from Mr Winston and PZ Myers posts this on his website. Hm

"Atheists are calm and mild-mannered, even leaders of the New Atheists like Dawkins and Harris and Dennett — no doubt because our oppression is minor compared to that of women, racial minorities, and labor — but we're still getting these ridiculous claims that we're too "rude". They won't stop until we're completely silent, and there's no point in compromise, so these faint-hearted enablers of superstition are going to have to excuse us if we ever so politely request that they go fuck themselves, beg pardon, and please, use a rolled-up copy of the Republican party platform to do it, if you don't mind, thank you in advance."

Go have a read
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/04/we_aim_to_misbehave.php

373. The God disunion: there is a place for faith in science, insists Winston

Comment #34696 by alovrin on April 25, 2007 at 12:24 am

I remember trying to watch some of Lord Winston's documentaries.
I seem to recall Lord Winston as always too overly enthusiastic in his delivery which was very off putting. He came across as kind of unctous and oily, a try hard.
Hes a practicing Jew, so he buy's into the god thing then. No wonder he's a doesnt like criticism of goddyness.

374. Is this another Sokal Hoax?

Comment #28959 by alovrin on March 31, 2007 at 11:25 pm

If you open as many browser windows as you can on your 'puter does that mean your a hypertextualist?

And when the programme crashes is that a "spot of indeterminacy"?a "struggle, a chapter of chances,? a chain of detours,? a series of revealing failures in commitment out of which come the pleasures of the text?" or a "demolition epic"????
This is hilarious I might write my own book about the spatio-temporal perspectiveless subjects and subjectless perspectives.
It will be a narratological construct ..............I cant keep from laughing

375. Dawkins says religion is 'like sucking a dummy'

Comment #28795 by alovrin on March 30, 2007 at 11:44 pm

If I hear another religite like Rabbi Julia say how she used to love going to the synagogue/church whatever as a child and listening to daddy so help me I might start showing signs of unthinking prejudice. No wonder Christopher Hitchens was getting impatient during her suffocatingly sweet speech. If I had been there I would have been throwing things at her.
All the replies had the sound of sycophantic courtiers about them.
This is all ways the same old stuff, look at the fine cut of the INVISIBLE garments, the magnificent embroidery on the NONEXISTENT pantaloons & on & on &on & on & on & on &on & 0n & 0n & on & on & ON & ON & ON & ON &&&&&&&&&...................

376. Debate between Alister McGrath and Peter Atkins

Comment #27070 by alovrin on March 23, 2007 at 4:50 am

Oh shit, crap audio.
Sorry guys this shouldnt be posted the audio is rubbish. They obviously had a PA but relying on the camera mic to pick up the audio is criminal.
For f*^ks sake its 2007 get a feed from the PA, use a radio link, run a long lead, the camera is obviously going to be stationary.
This just annoys the FUCK out of me
it is UNLISTENABLE. For Darwins sake dont be so damn lazy what are you hippies, Technological savages.
Its NOT HARD
FIND AN OUTPUT ON THE PA TO FEED TO THE F*#KING CAMERA. IF YOU NEED ANY HELP ASK SOMEONE BUY A LEAD FROM TANDY BEFORE THE LECTURE, MEASURE THE DISTANCE JUST TO MAKE SURE THE BLOODY THING IS LONG ENOUGH.
IF THE OUTPUT SAYS LINE SWITCH THE INPUT ON THE CAMERA TO LINE IF IT SAYS MIC SWITCH THE INPUT ON THE CAMERA TO MIC BUY SOME BLOODY HEADPHONES IF YOU DONT OWN A PAIR TO LISTEN TO YOUR BLOODY IPOD AND PLUG THEM INTO THE HEADPHONE OUTPUT ON THE CAMERA AND ADJUST THE LEVEL WHILE THE INTRODUCTIONS ARE GOING ON .

SHITTTTTTTTT AGHHHHHH
WHOEVER SHOT THIS SHOULD BE SHOT IDIOT.. MORON....
CRETIN I REFUSE TO LISTEN NO MATTER HOW BLOODY GOOD ANYONES ARGUMENT IS FUCKKKKKKKKKKK.

377. Lonely Atheists of the Global Village

Comment #26325 by alovrin on March 18, 2007 at 5:27 pm

Christianity is not about moral arrogance. It is about moral realism, and moral humility. Wherever you see self-righteous persons condemning others and unaware of their own sins, you are not in the presence of an alert Christian but of a priggish pretender. It was in fact a great revolution in human history when the Jewish and Christian God revealed Himself as one who sees directly into consciences, and is not misled merely by external acts.

Tell that to George Bush & Co. And Tony Blair, while your about it. Isnt this "God Himself" the root of the god of islam?
Anyone who so unthinkingly assigns a gender to god is highly suspect.

This has Courtier's Reply written all over it.

The story of Sharansky, yeah well, I'd probably go mad after so long in the Gulag. I feel sorry for his daughter where did she get "chancey" from, her dorky dad who doesnt seem to know anything about laws of probability. It seems the professors at "Duke " arent familiar with it either according to this, but I'd like to hear their side of the story .
But get a load of his wifes? artwork. My advice sweetie, leave your husband & the church cause your work kinda sucks.

378. Response to Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris

Comment #25003 by alovrin on March 9, 2007 at 3:56 pm

Shakyh ya Moani has a mouth and isnt afraid to use it.

Pity he doesnt have a the intelligence to put that mouth to good use like shutting it, or stop it from uttering complete drivel.

Sit a man in front of a BIG bookcase and it makes him look intelligent?
Didnt work this time

379. Atheist Apostle

Comment #24325 by alovrin on March 6, 2007 at 2:41 am

After reading this type of article, I feel kind of hopeless.

The author, a foreign-policy consultant?, crows his way through his opening paragraphs as if all this is something to be proud of.
I guess to him it is.
Tries to insinuate that Hitlers well documented superstitious nature is a figment of a lot of peoples imagination, including Sam Harris.
Then blunders on throwing Stalin & Mao in for good measure as examples of evil atheist's, in the process glossing over vast swaths of historical literature on the subject of these two men and their motivations.
This will be read by Xtians and taken as gospel, gods honest truth.
Its just depressing!

380. God: The Failed Hypothesis

Comment #24103 by alovrin on March 4, 2007 at 8:10 pm

Whats that sound?

Oh, look another theist crutch flying out the window, bye bye first cause.

381. Darwin's God

Comment #24098 by alovrin on March 4, 2007 at 7:16 pm

So many words expended with so little result.
Virtually all societies developed some kind of god or otherworldly explanation. (I think recently a tribe has been observed that doesnt do this, in the remote Amazon of course)

OK, why?

Look no offense to anyone ancestors intended, but arent some people giving these ancients a bit too much credit when they say they came to an understanding that is beyond anyone's comprehension since.
Look, these were people who lived short brutish lives filled with struggle and fighting, its makes sense that they would hope to have a better life somewhere else even after death. Yes, they had death cults, dying gloriously in battle was something to be strived for in some cultures, still is in Islam(Macho Bullshit). Isnt that just plain dumb.
These are Bronze ages beliefs and yet millenia later still pages and pages of text, hours and hours of thought, study and lectures are poured out. Why?
Look the only way to know for sure is to be able to ask someone who lived back then what these beliefs represented to them. Well until someone invents a time travel machine thats impossible. So the next best thing is to look at their literature, such as it is.
And this is hopelessly muddled, full of contradictions, fairy stories, and just plain weird shit even through multiple translations.

So what can we conclude, they made stuff up all the time.
Has anyone ever been to a country where missionaries thrive, the locals are sweet but incredibly gullible, and boy do they get mean when they're drunk especially at any white face. And that is in my estimation, is what people were like a few thousand years ago.
Despite all the convoluted overlong essays about God since. The last time this being was actually sighted is highly contenious and incredibly dubious, and at least TWO thousand yrs ago.

Except of course for his regular visits to GWB, but we only have his word for that.

Look our ancestors, bless their cotton socks, made stuff up all the time. They made up stories about gods, believing them to be real. No great mystery.
They could survive in the wild, build monuments with some ingenuity, and around the campfires at night they got drunk and told stories some of which got passed on and came to have the semblance of fact to later generations.
Why oh Why dont we get this, it's not hard to comprehend.

382. The return of God?

Comment #23960 by alovrin on March 3, 2007 at 6:52 pm

Every so often a collective madness overtakes a population(the obvious example Germany between the wars) of a country. This present madness (God?) shows scant regard for borders.

And this is ALL this article documents a madness overtaking large swaths of the global population Poor John in Albion see's this as positive, but when has collective madness ever been a force for good.

383. Merkel wants EU to be vocal about Christian roots

Comment #23825 by alovrin on March 3, 2007 at 2:46 am

Interesting thing about Europe virtually all sacred sites predating Xtianity are now occupied by church's
These were Deliberately built on these sites.

Pre Xtians residents of an area would only come together for seasonal festivals you know the equinoxes etc.

Imagine their surprise when they turn up and there is a priest saying.... Repent ye sinners..... The rest as we say is history....

384. Falwell says Christians shouldn't focus on global warming

Comment #23775 by alovrin on March 2, 2007 at 3:59 pm

Oh Dear me
I was in such a rush to make fun of you Bizarro I missed this little gem...

"A Christian Biology major" HUH!
Is that different from Muslim Biology? OR Hindu Biology?
Is this an all encompassing subject?
There isnt Baptist Biology of Catholic Biology is there?
In any case it wouldnt require much study would it
'cause dont you guys think god made everything?

385. Falwell says Christians shouldn't focus on global warming

Comment #23761 by alovrin on March 2, 2007 at 2:14 pm

"He does have a rather rough exterior"

Thats our Jerr just a rough diamond, a man who says what he thinks, a man who shoots from the hip, a man who has the common touch etc etc etc etc...
The media is at fault here not our JERR,

OH PLEEZE!

386. Falwell says Christians shouldn't focus on global warming

Comment #23670 by alovrin on March 2, 2007 at 2:24 am

What I like is the brevity of the article, sorry not the article itself just the amount of words expended in explanation.

"Message understood Obi Wan.... I'll past it along.... you know to.... those other ......Okay I'll shut up Lord"

"Satan blah blah blah trying to REDIRECT blah blah blahGod will maintain the earth till Jesus return's OK Got it."

I kinda like this nut case hangs himself with his own words.

I just hate it when they (You know who Im talking about) get all clever and try to drown me and, possibly others,in their words.
I always feel sorta wet, damp, dont know how to describe it, soggy? after reading people like alvin.

387. The Dawkins Confusion: Naturalism ad absurdum

Comment #23618 by alovrin on March 1, 2007 at 7:45 pm

Aw hell just another god arsehole getting the short end of the schtick and sounding off. S'pose he gotta pay the bills, and I suppose Sanitation Engineer is just to lowly for the likes of him, which is how I see the "three bears of atheism" just cleaning up centuries of crap.
Professor of Pillockosophy how that sound..... ALVIN.
A bit of vitriol in your general direction ......ALVIN
Your logic is screwed...ALVIN

388. Dawkins v. Collins Debate

Comment #23447 by alovrin on February 28, 2007 at 7:45 pm

Well, Another I/v where Prof Dawkins is sort of playing devils advocate. I am getting weary of this kind of thing.

All the Theist gasp OOOWWww he said God doesnt exist.
Sharp intake of breath... How dare he.
Of course the media love it, team an atheist with as theist and sit back. Its a silly game, and as long as there are theist's around atheist's will have to play it until we say no more.
In The God Delusion Prof Dawkins put forward the propostion that religion is a by product of some other mental process. In both Chapters 5 & 10 he, far too briefly, outlined some ideas and works in progress along these lines.
This is the kind of thing I want to see more of, more so than having to watch Prof Dawkins, Sam Harris, or D Dennett demeaning themselves anymore arguing with god botherers over f***ing fairies. STOP IT

389. The joy of changing your mind

Comment #23181 by alovrin on February 26, 2007 at 4:09 pm

"systematically and deliberately disables one of the core human abilities: flexibility: the ability to change our minds."

To me this is the central point of this article. Why in an age when we have so much information at our fingertips, and the ability to implement changes enmasse and reasonably swiftly, doesnt it happen. Why do our leaders think it more feasible to go to another country and impose their will on them with armies than to take food, medical supplies, construction material. Does this just represent the complete failure of the human intelligence. All I see is time running out on a species incapacitated by its own past.

Its been said so many times but bears repeating, we have stone age beliefs with 20th century technology, this is a frightening combination. Yet there are those willing to just exploit this situation(the status quo) for their own ends, which is even more frightening

390. Does Richard Dawkins exist?

Comment #21531 by alovrin on February 9, 2007 at 7:50 pm

Hmmm Not funny, tommyrot should apply to the website it came from

391. 'God Is Not a Moderate'

Comment #18157 by alovrin on January 18, 2007 at 4:22 pm

I think everyone agrees ....

Round 1 to Sam Harris.

This is shaping up to be a very compelling debate, I look forward to the next installment.

392. Discussion of The God Delusion

Comment #17950 by alovrin on January 17, 2007 at 4:56 pm

The only good thing about this is it has given the book some publicity in Australia.

I think nothing short of a visit by RD himself will get this book to a wider audience tho' , Pity.

The discussion itself was pretty pointless, tho' it did expose some personality flaws in these people.

393. Intelligent design is a science, not a faith

Comment #16919 by alovrin on January 9, 2007 at 3:39 pm

Mr Buggs hangs this whole article and his argument around one point, that of IDers saying "junk" DNA has a purpose before it became accepted in the "mainstream".
OK, but what was the basis for this assertion, was it founded in a belief that an Intelligent Designer doesnt make junk?
Im just curious.
I could do some research but this article smacks of nitpicking small mindedness and doesnt inspire me to do so.
Maybe one day when Im bored.
But anyone else is welcome to get to the bottom of the claim if they wish. Was it ID's depth of knowledge that made them claim such or just a way of shoring up their dodgy ideas?

394. If they preach the cause of the poor, they're my people

Comment #15901 by alovrin on January 3, 2007 at 4:44 pm

This is a bizarre argument to forward in the favour of religion. But I think it may be one that will appear more often as the question, If not religion then what? is asked in minds who have a want to fill any emptiness with their witterings.
Hey didnt Hitler stop the rot of the german currency, build Volkswagens (The peoples car) Get people into employment.

Anyway in answer to the question I asked before, If not religion then what?
How about just leaving that space empty for a while... Is it a hole? Does it need to be filled?
If there is injustice and inequality in the world or perhaps in specific areas of humanity maybe WE (You know US humanity) should look at ways of righting those wrongs, it is within our power to do so. How about that as a motivation to do good, to be alive, to feel purpose in one's life.

And maybe this need to appeal to some unknown authority for justice, when none seems to exist can be answered by our action.

395. God's Enemies Are More Honest Than His Friends

Comment #15262 by alovrin on December 30, 2006 at 3:36 am

Oh yes, sorry I forgot to mention the juxtapositioning of use and inference...of said words .HEY I am being serious here. A grip of language construction is so f**king important now. And I am writing somewhat freeform here...... SO WHAT.

Yes, Maybe people could....... or can communicate without speaking. Or maybe it was flight or fight.... If.... I don't get out of here I'll either lose money or my life.
I doubt if complex sometimes bitter human problems have ever been solved with out recourse too some kind of dialogue.
OK A peace pIpe and sweat lodge Oh ..if only they would.
I dont see many present day leaders conversing with some one who they oppose, supposedly.

That would seem to require a lot of mental acuity. Or not.
Any way this is comment 60? So if you make it here.... hello.

396. God's Enemies Are More Honest Than His Friends

Comment #15258 by alovrin on December 30, 2006 at 3:05 am

Well, Im kinda taken by the title of this article. It's the use of the words, friends and enemies.
There is so much in those two words. Just let the mind wander.
Still to me central to the christ story is the challenging of authority,
At that time it was the right response from a group of outsiders. And it has resonated through time. Well.... 2000 ODD years.
And OK I concede through some dark times, Religion has seen humanity through.
But this is not another time.... this is... Well shit I sound like a hippy.
NOW...................... Age old remedies wont work they add to the stagnation of the pond/ planet thingy.
Im on the side of those heeeathan aaaathiissst's.
Your god doesnt exist. Im specifically talking to monotheist's of the deluded persuasion. Not keen on hindu's, either, that caste stuff thats a worry... And Buddhist's and karma oh deary me.

397. The Trouble with Atheism

Comment #13867 by alovrin on December 19, 2006 at 9:23 pm

OK people keep bringing up the USSR and PDRC as examples of atheistic genocides worse than any religion. Well no they are not.
If you want to examine closely both those events. You will find central to the mass murders, a despotic leader with a raging paranoia. What ever cover they and their minions used, it was a power grab plain and simple. If they had been religious it would have been in the cause of their god.

398. The Trouble with Atheism

Comment #13866 by alovrin on December 19, 2006 at 9:11 pm

I really tried to sit through this, thinking he'll get to a point soon. I gave up there is no point to this. Just him the man in black, ponsing about and getting paid for it.
This is a lesson in how to pick a target in this case "Atheism" and with very unsubtle use of metaphors and slanted newspeak language, cobble together a shoddy piece of television as justification for one's salary.
I just hope his employers arent paying him much, cause he isnt worth a lot.