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 BaronOchs


351. The torture of the grave Islam and the afterlife

Comment #38140 by BaronOchs on May 7, 2007 at 5:36 am

Logicel that last post[24] sounds just a wee bit sinister to me.

Engage in indoctrination the mainstream religions may well do but there are still vast differences between them and cults. I think it is a mistake to regard them as the same.

352. Martin Amis reviews The Islamist: Why I Joined Radical Islam in Britain, What I Saw Inside and Why I Left by Ed Hussain

Comment #38001 by BaronOchs on May 6, 2007 at 3:49 pm

That sort of nihilistic terror stems not from atheism but from the psychological addiction to religious faith that our theistically drenched society has imbued us with."


I have found personally passing through nihilism to be an important part of growing up.

I would also suggest the atheism advocated by Richard Dawkins and others is only meaningful as part of a wider call to find a rationally coherent worldview with a good empirical base.

I think if we acheive that we might be robust against all kinds of delusions and ideologies (i.e. try searching nazism for either rational consistency or any empirical grounding).

No one is suggesting it is impossible to both not believe in god and commit atrocious acts, and for me little more needs to be said on the matter.

Maybe religious believers can bring their own insights to a reasoned discussion of the questions facing humanity at the beginning of the C21st. I hope they can, it would entail of course refraining from arguments based on the authority of a religious text etc. As well as refraining from bickering over irrelevancies.

353. The moment a teenage girl was stoned to death for loving the wrong boy

Comment #37885 by BaronOchs on May 6, 2007 at 5:25 am

Roger Stanyard [Comment #37880] that is dreadful.

Well done though for whistle-blowing. These people should be continually exposed and robbed of respectability.

354. God Exists. A Formula Proves it.

Comment #37788 by BaronOchs on May 5, 2007 at 5:35 pm

Hitler will live a life in which he is Jewish.
Bill Clinton will be President over and over again until he
finally gets it right.


Presumably this Omega point god will create versions of everyone to live both all the various possible desirable lives but also every possible life that is filled with suffering?

Does Tipler have an answer to this in the book I wonder?

355. Republican candidates range from ignorant to dishonest

Comment #37785 by BaronOchs on May 5, 2007 at 5:15 pm

Tukka LMAO!

356. The moment a teenage girl was stoned to death for loving the wrong boy

Comment #37751 by BaronOchs on May 5, 2007 at 3:34 pm

Also is knox a reference to John Knox who blew his trumpet against "the monstrous regiment of women" or whatever?

357. The moment a teenage girl was stoned to death for loving the wrong boy

Comment #37750 by BaronOchs on May 5, 2007 at 3:33 pm

That post by weefree did not need to be trollised.

Why are we being so hypersensitive?

358. Martin Amis reviews The Islamist: Why I Joined Radical Islam in Britain, What I Saw Inside and Why I Left by Ed Hussain

Comment #37716 by BaronOchs on May 5, 2007 at 2:19 pm

The Tigers may be called secular, but they aren't mostly atheist, they're mostly Hindu. Secular and atheist are not the same thing.


The fact that the Tamils are Hindu and the rest of Sri Lanka is predominantly Buddhist is relevant, the situation would be at least less ferocious without the religious divide.

The rules and customs provided by a traditional religion make it key to maintaining a tribal identity today when geographical or cultural isolation can no longer be relied on.

When I look at the horrible violence between Sunnis and Shias etc in Iraq for instance, the idea that here we have a selection of mind-viruses struggling for survival at the expense of their hosts seems surprisingly credible.

359. God Exists. A Formula Proves it.

Comment #37709 by BaronOchs on May 5, 2007 at 1:53 pm

arthursanford, well I did wonder it might be so. What are you going to tell me next! That Noah's Ark never existed?

Also Vardu I've always said I'm a self-made man and I worship my creator.

360. God Exists. A Formula Proves it.

Comment #37661 by BaronOchs on May 5, 2007 at 12:34 pm

I heard the story once that Catherine the Great asked Euler to refute Diderot, after he'd been claiming God didn't exist.

So Euler said x=(a+b^n)/n therefore God exists.

And Diderot didn't know much algebra so he didn't call Euler's bluff!

[Edit: I'm told this isn't actually true, but nice story wasn't it?]

361. Lou Dobbs Interviews Christopher Hitchens

Comment #37505 by BaronOchs on May 4, 2007 at 4:44 pm

His cheap shot (and I know he'll say it was not his intent) on that show that believers are rather like chimpanzees doesn't help the debate and is a problem with Dawkins and Dennett.


Do you think people will draw that meaning? He said all humans are only half a chromosome away from chimpanzees, and religion very much seems like it is man-made.

Really there's only so far you can go to avoid misunderstanding from those who don't want to understand.

362. For Motherly X Chromosome, Gender Is Only the Beginning

Comment #37426 by BaronOchs on May 4, 2007 at 12:27 pm

"the X is a rich repository of genes vital to brain development and could hold the key to the evolution of our particularly corrugated cortex."


The genes for the brain are on the lady chromosome lol. I always guessed as much . . .

363. Lou Dobbs Interviews Christopher Hitchens

Comment #37425 by BaronOchs on May 4, 2007 at 12:24 pm

CruciFiction you shall receive your reward in heaven.

...oh crap

364. Your favorite book in the last 25 years?

Comment #37353 by BaronOchs on May 4, 2007 at 6:56 am

As for science - did anyone ever read the Ascent of Man? I don't remember the author's name but it was written to accompany a BBC series of the same name screened in the early 80s. My father leant me his copy when I was in my teens and I remember reading it from cover to cover in a week (it's a big book!)


It's by Jacob Bronowski, I've got it but haven't read it all yet. Also good clip from the documentaries here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mIfatdNqBA

365. Science and fiction

Comment #37332 by BaronOchs on May 4, 2007 at 5:42 am

"If I notice creationism becoming the mainstream of the education system in this country then that's the time to start worrying." Most scientists would rightly be horrified if the debate reached that stage before the prime minister decided to take notice.


Yes, don't start worrying till the barbarians are at the gate, great idea.

366. Richard Dawkins in the Time 100

Comment #37132 by BaronOchs on May 3, 2007 at 12:50 pm

waxwings said, "Look for his upcoming book to flop and flop hard," but it may not turn out that way at all.


Indeed, he might as well have called it "Book criticising evolution by someone with real scientific credentials" and it would have a market.

367. Christians and Atheists to Debate Existence of God in First-Ever 'NIGHTLINE FACE OFF'

Comment #37127 by BaronOchs on May 3, 2007 at 12:40 pm

It seems there are two questions rolled into one debate here, and that is always a bad thing.

i.e: Atheism/faith in general but also the Blasphemy Challenge.

The RRS should be expected to win hands down over the first one, but the danger is Comfort and Cameron will gain ground with the audience over the second and make that look like there overall position is stronger. I'm not against it but the BC is not exactly atheism's finest expression and it may be a burden not a blessing in this debate.

Trivial fact: Nightline is also the name of a telephone counselling service at most UK universities. Don't know if they have it in the US?

368. An atheist's call to arms

Comment #37088 by BaronOchs on May 3, 2007 at 11:06 am

Well oao perhaps I could say Allah is a more recent and local name for god than Yahweh. For instance I imagine (correct me if I'm wrong) Ishmael, from whom Arabs claim descent would have reffered to God as Yahweh. So Yahweh is more appropriate.

But that is far too boring a response so instead I'll accept your challenge and try to improve my knowledge of the ME and the arab-israeli conflict.

369. Richard Dawkins in the Time 100

Comment #37081 by BaronOchs on May 3, 2007 at 10:49 am

Well there's a good dissection of Behe's last book here:

http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/dawkins/WorldOfDawkins-archive/Catalano/box/behe.shtml

and here:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/behe/review.html

His arguments were basically around "irreducible complexity". One of the best examples of an irreducibly complexity was reckoned to be the propellor-like bacterial flagella. This was very well refuted in a paper by Kenneth Miller which Dawkins discusses in The Ancestor's Tale.

Also info on that here:

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB200_1_1.html

So has Michael Behe got some new arguments I wonder?

370. Richard Dawkins in the Time 100

Comment #37074 by BaronOchs on May 3, 2007 at 10:36 am

The edge of Evolution . .."buy this with The Dawkins Delusion for just £16:57"

yippee lol!

371. An atheist's call to arms

Comment #37057 by BaronOchs on May 3, 2007 at 9:49 am

I noticed he tends to use judaism/yahweh as a specific reference more often than other two major religions/gods.


I agree with the others who have said Yahweh just means the God of Abraham, and since Islam, Christianity and Judaism all use the Abraham story as a sort of baseline it is acceptable to use Yahweh to refer to the deity of all those three.

Given the seriousness of it it is unfair to say anything that might appear to insinuate anti-semitism even if only in an ambivalent fashion.

I recall Alister McGrath makes such an insinuation about Richard Dawkins quite clearly towards the end of this talk:

http://www.richarddawkins.net/article,636,Is-God-a-Delusion-Atheism-and-the-Meaning-of-Life,Alister-McGrath-Open-Forum

372. Why the Gods Are Not Winning

Comment #37042 by BaronOchs on May 3, 2007 at 8:43 am

I would really like to see an end to the interminable and irrelevant debate over Hitler that appears on so many threads, including this one.

Hitler never expressed a disbelief in God. Neither is there any evidence he had a care for the teachings of Christ or the Church.

And how many reputable historians are of the view that key to the rise of National Socialism in Germany was a decline of religious faith?

The Nazis devastating expression of anti-semitism was way-paved for by the centuries of persecution of the Jews by the church. But that is only one factor among many in the background to Nazism's success. Most of which are not relevant to faith/atheism or the current debate.

The ideas presented on this site do appeal to believers to reconsider their position, on the quite reasonable presupposition that they will not become fascist despots the moment they quit going to church. So please lets talk about something more interesting and relevant.

And I would also ask briancoughlanworldcitizen to be more polite!

End of sermon lol.

373. An atheist's call to arms

Comment #36944 by BaronOchs on May 2, 2007 at 9:36 pm

oao For the most part Richard Dawkins reaches a western audience who never suspected Islam might be true anyway. If TGD went on sale in any muslim countries then perhaps an extra chapter specifically on Islam could be included.

[sorry about the bold! although if anyone does that it is possible to close the tag in your own post]

374. How multiculturalism is betraying women

Comment #36941 by BaronOchs on May 2, 2007 at 9:21 pm

I've always thought that religion is dealing itself a deadly blow with its continuing opposition to women's rights.

But perhaps you think I'm an optimist?

375. 4 Sermon for Matins: 'Dawkins and The God Delusion'

Comment #36596 by BaronOchs on May 1, 2007 at 5:29 pm

In religious ritual what is being enacted is a whole way of experiencing the world. It is enacted symbolically - often with the use of dance, chanting, music, and readings from sacred texts.


And the response of Christians (and of poets and painters and musicians) is, time and again: 'If you don't talk in terms of spirit or of God, how well can you say you have understood or entered into the richness and complexity of the world?'


He seems to view religion as a means of understanding our world and giving meaning to life. Religious language, he suggests is a way of entering into the richness and complexity of the world.

If that was the case there'd be no problem. Of course there is a problem. Namely that he is still defending the view religion communicates facts about the denizens of a world outside of this one to which it alone has access.

The religious people I know would use a word more like 'affirmation' or 'performance' to describe the link between religion and morality. In our liturgy, especially the liturgy of the eucharist, we enact symbolically the story that lies at the heart of the Gospel narrative, and in doing so we affirm the Gospel values by which we seek to live.


Once again in this passage nothing he says would require the actual existence of a deity. A community of people choose some values to live by, namely those in the gospel, and enter into its narrative through the liturgy. So if religion is really just moral literature why can't he just scrap the supernaturalist dogmas and we can all live happily ever after?

He contorts over the word "supernatural" in the last piece but he is still arguing that to understand or fully appreciate this world we have to accept some deeper divine reality behind it, to which it points. I just don't think he backs this up, and I don't think he has all the poets, artists and musicians on his side either.

376. The God Delusion

Comment #36595 by BaronOchs on May 1, 2007 at 4:58 pm

A "mystic" is someone who believes in the supernatural. I don't think anyone on this forum qualifies.


Probably perhaps. An interesting alternative view of the mystics though is proposed by Don Cupitt in "Mysticism after modernity". His argument is basically that according to orthodox religion happiness was only possible in an heavenly world above this one, which a few lucky souls may attain to after suffering long in this life and purgatory. Mystics like Meister Eckhardt and The Cloud Writer for example used religious language in clever ways to show the possibility of happiness in this life rather than in some heavenly realm. Most controversially perhaps Cupitt claims such mystical writing need not imply any objectively existing god at all. Important to his argument is the fact that mystics were often persecuted or treated with suspicion by the church. Only in recent times have they been retrospectively brought on side as an act of desperation.

The idea is worth consideration I feel anyhow.

377. Now Muslims Get Their Own Laws In Britian

Comment #36589 by BaronOchs on May 1, 2007 at 4:42 pm

Needless to say these courts will doubtlessly acquire their own little gangs of thugs to enforce their wise decisions, if they haven't done so already.

378. Now Muslims Get Their Own Laws In Britian

Comment #36587 by BaronOchs on May 1, 2007 at 4:36 pm

The last cleric who tried to keep his own courts (Thomas Becket) got his head split open in his own Cathedral.

Dewsbury turned out the highest vote for the ludicrous british nationalist party at the last general election, with them gaining over 6000 votes. Admittedly there were incidental reasons for this (the conservative and labour candidates were both asian, there was no UKIP or Veritas candidate to split up the right wing vote and the BNP concentrated their campaigning there). Of course activity like this will be exploited as much as possible by the bnp and their ilk.

But this is a dangerous and subversive gesture. The article says it may provide a window of help for Muslim women (for instance) who will not use the public courts. The Muslim community should work to remove the obstacles people feel in doing so, i.e. lessening segregation not increasing it, and furthering ghettoisation. Also I recall (though I may be wrong) Sharia demands about four witnesses to substantiate a woman's claims compared to just one for a man.

Which idiot for that matter gave this court charity status?

379. Interview with Christopher Hitchens

Comment #36547 by BaronOchs on May 1, 2007 at 1:39 pm

Will all the temperance society bores give over?!

[inane comment]Churchill drank and he won the war[/inane comment]

Hitchens has acheived more in life than a fair few sober people I daresay and I'm not going to judge.

380. Why the Gods Are Not Winning

Comment #36543 by BaronOchs on May 1, 2007 at 1:19 pm

Yep - back to the good old capitalist ethic. Mammon is God.


I'm under the impression (may well be wrong I haven't checked it rigorously) that Jesus' misapprobation was greater regarding money (the rich young man, eye of a needle, don't store your treasure on earth where moth and rust decay etc) than sex. With the church (which only ever based its teachings loosely on those of its supposed founder) the exact opposite to say the least is the case. And there are not a few churches mainly in America I think where it is preached that god will make you rich etc.

I'm interested what you think about that weefree?

I hope I can say honestly that money isn't my god. Unless just desiring enough to get by in the society I live makes it so. Your comment reminds of an argument I've heard elsewhere that people who don't believe in God merely fill the gap with more inadequate and idolatrous substitutes. Of course I very much disagree. I would add that if there actually is a god atheism may well be less prone to idolatry than theism, which would really consist of subscribing to some inadequate and idolatrous notions of god, the true nature of which is beyond our grasp. Therefore atheism would still be a more suitable position.

So with what might a non-believer fill the "top spot" from which they've removed god? Life itself will do for me.

381. An atheist's call to arms

Comment #36508 by BaronOchs on May 1, 2007 at 11:19 am

He remarked that the Pope supports evolution, though I personally find the pope at best very ambivalent on the subject. I think there was an article on the matter on this site . . .

382. Religion & Culture Panel

Comment #36428 by BaronOchs on May 1, 2007 at 5:14 am

That argument about the problems with the Hubble Telescope was the most irrelevant thing I have ever heard.

383. Pope abolishes limbo

Comment #36034 by BaronOchs on April 30, 2007 at 2:46 am

I wonder the creator isn't a little embarassed that the false evolutionary account is both far more plausible and greatly more interesting than the actual true version involving himself?

384. Huge rally for Turkish secularism

Comment #35978 by BaronOchs on April 29, 2007 at 4:47 pm

Adolf Hitler got elected democratically?

Ir should be taken into account they garnered some extra necessary votes by joining with the smaller nationalist party at the last minute, and then only got the enabling law passed by using the SA to round up opponents on the day of the vote.

they did receive necessary support in the elections but they were not properly elected to the position they actually assumed.

385. Two idiots get a forum

Comment #35729 by BaronOchs on April 28, 2007 at 3:22 pm

Do we even know yet if the Virginia Tech Shooter was an atheist? Does the University of Virginia have a chapel?



"You have vandalized my heart, raped my soul and torched my conscience. You thought it was one pathetic boy's life you were extinguishing. Thanks to you, I die like Jesus Christ, to inspire generations of the weak and the defenceless people."

from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6570369.stm

Good mass-murderer style logic, unless they left the bit about Jesus' killing spree out of the bible. . .

But it suggests he was not an atheist.

386. Atheism's Big Night In Little Rock

Comment #35727 by BaronOchs on April 28, 2007 at 3:14 pm

One speculation concerning the comparative irreligiousity of Britain is religious decisions were made for the people from above. When successive Monarchs demand catholicism then protestantism and back again from the nation and people end up with the church of england that's not unlikely to breed a little scepticism.

Interestingly the catholic faith has wained slower in Poland and Ireland than in other countries, which may be because they both had non-catholic oppressors which made the faith a source of solidarity.

387. Mormonism: A Racket Becomes a Religion

Comment #35533 by BaronOchs on April 27, 2007 at 2:02 pm

Lordie Mormonism couldn't be parodied. This is really worrying, they opened a new church near me recently as well. How are people so stupid? The importance of secularism cannot be underestimated.

388. Reply to a Christian

Comment #35408 by BaronOchs on April 27, 2007 at 4:40 am

coolwainy I recall the theologian William Barclay suggested that rather than being a feat of physics, numerous of the 5000 had food in their possesion from the beginning. But only at Jesus' inspiration did they become willing to share it with the others, upon doing which it turned out there was in any case a surplus of food.

I've no idea whether it is true or not but I think this non-miraculous account is of greater significance than the notion of loaves and fishes popping out of thin air.

If their had been some maths or science in the bible it might have greatly helped the status of these in medieval europe, where knowledge fell well below that of the greeks. And I think that would have been beneficial for humanity.

Intelligence is not the highest virtue (I don't know that there is any "highest virtue") but it is a virtue, and one that the bible could do with giving a bit more time.

389. Reply to a Christian

Comment #35385 by BaronOchs on April 27, 2007 at 3:38 am

I see your point coolwainy. But the bible is willing to use miracles to demonstrate (or attempt to demonstrate) its truth. I think I recall when Jesus heals a paralysed man he forgives his sins first then just to show he has the necessary powers also allows him to walk.

Given the fact that even if those miracles did happen they are extremely trivial events (whats 5000 people fed for one meal when uncountably many have and are starving to death) might he not as well have showed his worth by proving Fermat's last theorem (Jesus' last theorem rather!) or something?

390. Pope abolishes limbo

Comment #35379 by BaronOchs on April 27, 2007 at 3:02 am

If creationists find it hard to accept an algorithmic process given a few billion years could create the complexity of life, how can they convince themselves a simple deluge of water given merely 40 days could account for such a multitude of geological intricacies? Not least massacring all those creatures and arranging their bones (or fossils, and please explain how they fossilised in such a short space of time!) into neat strata!

391. Einstein & Faith

Comment #31519 by BaronOchs on April 13, 2007 at 5:01 am

Rtambree If Einstein hadn't come up with special relativity how much longer might we have waited? Only a year or two I think. But what about General Relativity? It might have been a very long time, a decade or two even.

He was at odds with how quantum physics developed but the fact is quantum physics was greatly strengthened by having to resist Einstein's assaults on it.

I think his contribution was quite significant.

392. Pope says science too narrow to explain creation

Comment #31315 by BaronOchs on April 12, 2007 at 2:11 am

dying people; erysipelas; Europe; farm workers

It's all the same lol

just like

Germany; inflammatory diseases; Italian architects; kidney disease; monks; nettle rash;

393. Pope says science too narrow to explain creation

Comment #31304 by BaronOchs on April 12, 2007 at 1:32 am

"I would not depend on faith alone to explain the whole picture,"



best not to eh your holiness . . .

394. John Paul Sainthood Nun 'Gentle, Simple'

Comment #28566 by BaronOchs on March 29, 2007 at 7:50 pm

With Parkinson's was she thus afflicted, that God thereby might glorify his servant John Paul . . .

who will probably become patron saint of parkinsons sufferers.

What? that's four star religious logic!

Anyhow they want to get him sainted as soon as poss to make it more difficult for catholics to dissent over any of the issues he took a strong stance on like birth control, women priests, married priests abortion and so forth.

395. Richard Dawkins Explains 'The God Delusion'

Comment #28550 by BaronOchs on March 29, 2007 at 5:16 pm

In answer to 10 "Evolution" is quite broad, it could include Lamarckism for instance. The mechanism by which it proceeds is the one Darwin proposed and Darwinism is worth keeping despite what people might throw.

Any how good questions, particularly 1,3,7 and 9.

It might be a bit presumptuous for him to give a clear answer to 6, also strong biological determinist ideas lurking beneath 4 and 5 though it would be interesting to see how he'd respond.

396. The Fifth Flea!

Comment #28469 by BaronOchs on March 29, 2007 at 9:49 am

The God Delusion wins awards. Have these fleas won anything...?


How much d'you want to bet McGrath has a Templeton Prize heading in his direction?

397. Hell is real and eternal: Pope

Comment #28455 by BaronOchs on March 29, 2007 at 8:54 am

A lot of believers do find difficulty with Hell, one way around it I've come across is "Hell does exist but most probably no one goes there."

decide for yourselves if that's too much of a dodge!

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

Comment #28409 by BaronOchs on March 29, 2007 at 5:15 am

"Plato found ordinary humanity to be a profound disappointment, as do most of the speakers of the other side"

Manifestly false.

It's religions that have said this life is unsatisfactory and only a heavenly afterlife can provide true happiness (for the few blessed souls who attain it).

Of course that great religious thinker Augustine completely agreed with Plato.

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

Comment #28404 by BaronOchs on March 29, 2007 at 4:45 am

Damn it I'm already irritated. Nigel Spivey says we need religion and is citing Van Gogh as an example of what he means.

Frankly I'd say fine have religion just throw out all the supernatural stuff. Dawkins says in TGD that he's no problem with non-supernatural Einsteinian religion. As for the "religion" in Van Gogh's work I'd say it expresses a great love of life and the world. Which is fine, what's that got to do with virgin births and afterlifes and petitionary prayer?

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

Comment #28391 by BaronOchs on March 29, 2007 at 4:05 am

Allright I'm listening to the podcast now . . .

More Pages: Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 | Next