Comments by D'Arcy

Comment #140986 by D'Arcy on March 9, 2008 at 12:48 pm

Double Bass asks:

How come the UK has an official 'Church of England', but as a nation, is very secular; And yet here in the US we have a constitutional separation of church and state, but we're so much more pious? How did you guys manage that?

Americans are definitely "more pious" when it comes to worshiping the great God of the MARKET. If it sells it must be good! The US churches are the bastions of religious "free market" Christianity. As far as I'm aware, the US style tele-evangelism just doesn't go down too well here. Anyone with that kind of fervour for religion is rightly regarded with some suspicion, (he's after my money). I'm not aware of Pat Robertson type preachers here. The CoE has become a creepy-feely sort of amorphous conscience director, rather than a full blooded soul saver.

For anyone who has not seen Pat Condell's Hook Line and Rapture, I recommend it http://richarddawkins.net/article,2113,Hook-line-and-rapture,Pat-Condell

In the meantime I relish my, newly legal, ability to say "bollocks to the Christian God in particular!" And same to all the others as well including John Frum.

402. Crossing the Divide

Comment #140477 by D'Arcy on March 7, 2008 at 1:55 pm

When I'm buried, I want to to be stuck in a hole in the ground in a nearby forest. No vicars (except for close relations and friends) allowed

As far as I'm concerned, my dead body would be put to good use in feeding the crabs or fish. I hate bluebottles in particular and flys in general, so I wouldn't want them to benefit by my demise. I have no objection to worms or flesh eating beetles, or even vultures.

I have promised those likely to have to deal with the disposal of my dead body, that if there's any holy men or hocus pocus involved, then I will come back and haunt them!

403. Lords Approve Abolition Of Blasphemy

Comment #139790 by D'Arcy on March 6, 2008 at 1:50 pm

So Lord Dolittle and Lady Doless have pontificated, so now it's okay so say "bollocks to all your gods", without fear of prosecution. Well from now on, I must be more forthright with my contributions!

404. Crossing the Divide

Comment #139775 by D'Arcy on March 6, 2008 at 1:33 pm

This sort of story makes me glad that my upbringing never involved any belief in supernatural beings. There are problems enough in growing up, but at least I didn't have to deal with what Godfrey went / is going through.

Religion really does affect people's take on reality. I mean, what is the problem with a 4.5 billion year old Earth? It makes a lot of sense to me.

405. What's the Point of the Archbishop of Canterbury?

Comment #139749 by D'Arcy on March 6, 2008 at 1:06 pm

Who else would wear that ridiculous attire and those preposterous hats?

Vaal, that couldn't possibly be an ad hominem attack could it? Unless of course you're referring to those ridiculous ladies at Royal Ascot!

406. What's the Point of the Archbishop of Canterbury?

Comment #139277 by D'Arcy on March 5, 2008 at 1:21 pm

This particular Archbishop of Cant has definitely had an underwhelming influence on me. He is so erudite that I still don't know what his attitude to British forces joining in the invasion of Iraq was. He didn't seem too keen, but then he wasn't against it either. The Asian tsunami made him question his faith, but God came out on top. The Christmas story is mostly a load of bunk, and now sharia law is to be encouraged in certain circumstances.

The man is so wooly that he really is one of God's sheep.

What's the point of his position? Same as any other religious leader: to perpetuate the myths held by that particular brand of mysticism.

407. Survey shows Non-Religious Outnumber Those of Every Single Faith (But One)

Comment #139225 by D'Arcy on March 5, 2008 at 10:33 am

As an alien looking at the USA from the outside, whatever way you interpret the survey, it appears that religion is loding its grip a bit. (BTW "alien" is what is on the form that foreigners have to fill in before entering the USA).

Any loosening of the grip of mental poison must be good, and 12 million is a lot of people. Those in the USA should remember that religion is run as a big business. Jesus just needs your bucks so much so that (insert name) can carry on spreading his word. Prophets and profits mix happily in the USA. It will change as reality enforces itself.

As for Rod playing the piano:

I would give my left arm to be able to play piano like Liszt.

Don't do it Rod, you won't be able to tackle Ravel's Concerto for Left Hand, written for Wittgenstein's brother who had the limb blown off in WW1.

408. Fleabytes

Comment #137913 by D'Arcy on March 3, 2008 at 3:18 pm

Aw shucks! Missed out on that dinner with McGrath. Maybe dinner with D'Souza next time round?

Still no justification from Robertson for his one sided quotations from Hitler, illustrating Hitler's anti religious viewpoint, but not his religious viewpoint? Well the man is busy in America making converts, and there is no access to the internet in America is there?

I suppose these justifications, if ever, will be forthcoming at the time of the second coming.

Ah well, such is the fleadom of speech.

409. Fleabytes

Comment #137250 by D'Arcy on March 2, 2008 at 2:59 pm

Geoff:

D'Arcy:
apropos a question I asked you some time ago (and apologies for going off-topic in a thread that has stayed so well on-topic for so VERY long...!)

Got the T-shirt!

Thanks Geoff. Must order some for myself!

410. Fleabytes

Comment #137235 by D'Arcy on March 2, 2008 at 2:46 pm

Thanks to SG for Robertson on the Boxing Day tsunami. Robertson has really swallowed the "we are corrupt" line.

How can we explain and more importantly cope with this bent universe and our perverse human natures?

Now I've heard about curved space time and open and closed universes, but never a "bent" universe. Reading the rest of his comments, I can't but help reflect how jaundiced is his view of humanity. Look mate, if we're so "peverse" how come our ancestors survived well enough to produce offspring in generation after generation leading up to ouselves? I'm not an expert, but Home Sapiens, about 100,000 years, other hominids back to about 6 million years? Dawkins will correct me.

We must be doing something right!

411. Fleabytes

Comment #137196 by D'Arcy on March 2, 2008 at 1:56 pm

Hello hello.

Which scientific advance is that, then?

Er Er how about the theory of evolution and the reaction to it by Christians?

Tectonic plates?

13.7 billion year old universe?

Copernicus?

Galileo

There are plenty of others, so feel free to have go at explaining why science didn't undermine the then prevailing religious view.

Religious views merely reflect the societies that they spring from, they offer nothing new or useful.

412. Fleabytes

Comment #137170 by D'Arcy on March 2, 2008 at 1:18 pm

Two Irishmen meet after not seeing each other for a long time.

Paddy: "How ya doin Sean? An what will you be doin' wi' yersell?"

Sean: Oh, I'm Just fine! I'm workin' for Jeyes.

Paddy: Jaysus Christ?

Sean: No! Jeyes toilet cleaners!

(Apologies to those unfamiliar with the firm Jeyes!)

413. Fleabytes

Comment #137166 by D'Arcy on March 2, 2008 at 1:11 pm

I don't care if people like Robertson say that non-believers have "meaningless" lives. Let them have their "silly bromides" about nihilism. Laugh at the egocentric viewpoint they have.

Anyone with the most basic knowledge of science must realise that with every advance in knowledge the kingdom of God is shrunk into ever diminishing shadows.

We can be certain that that IF there were any evidence of any deity, that we would be bombarded with it continuously. Instead, we have "faith". A mental leap into the abyss, which could lead to eternal hellfire or to that great safety net in the sky.

Like Robertson, I too have been on a few bus trips with schoolkids. I was one of the supervising parents. Luckily, in our case, the trips were properly arranged beforehand and the question of money never arose.

Obviously what was Caesar's had been duly rendered unto him. (I never did understand that parable about the coin. Surely according to Jesus, all coins should have been sent back to Rome?)

414. Fleabytes

Comment #137158 by D'Arcy on March 2, 2008 at 12:43 pm

Whilst our midge "Wee Flea" is accross the Pond, let me point out that thanks to the link above provided by RickM, we have the bloodsucker's own words about theological "difficulties":

Yes - there are some very difficult passages in the OT. But then there are many difficult passages in the NT -not least the teaching of Jesus about hell.

If someone like Robertson is having "difficulty" with the teachings of Jesus about hell, then maybe we sinners should ease off on Robertson. The man's a pussy cat after all!

Jesus Christ! Refreshes the parts that other spirits cannot reach!

(Apologies to Heineken.)

415. Fleabytes

Comment #136602 by D'Arcy on March 1, 2008 at 1:40 pm

hello says:

You just don't like our answers.

Liking or hating is not part of the process. Anyway hello, so far you have bugger all to say, like a bluebottle at full speed annoying everyone else. But then that is what you want, I suspect.

If "fucktard" and "Stalinicon" have already been trademarked, I hereby trademark "PISSQUICK" even if my dad used it for years before he died and thereby passed on the meme to me.

By the way pissquick, what answers are you talking about?

goodbye.

416. Fleabytes

Comment #136579 by D'Arcy on March 1, 2008 at 1:03 pm

Robertson the history student may like to read the following from
http://www.roman-empire.net/religion/religion.html

The Beginnings of Christianity
The beginnings of Christianity are very blurry, as far as historical fact is concerned.
The birth date of Jesus himself is uncertain. (The idea of Jesus birth being the year AD 1, is due rather to a judgement made some 500 years after the even took place.)
Many point to the year 4 BC as the most likely date for Christ's birth, and yet that remains very uncertain. The year of his death is also not clearly established. It is assumed it took place between AD 26 and AD 36 (most likely though between AD 30 and AD 36), during the reign of Pontius Pilate as prefect of Judaea.
Historically speaking, Jesus of Nazareth was a charismatic Jewish leader, exorcist and religious teacher.To the Christians however he is the Messiah, the human personification of God.
Evidence of Jesus' life and effect in Palestine is very patchy. He was clearly not one of the militant Jewish zealots, and yet eventually the Roman rulers did perceive him as a security risk.
Roman power appointed the priests who were in charge of the religious sites of Palestine. And Jesus openly denounced these priests, so much is known. This indirect threat to Roman power, together with the Roman perception that Jesus was claiming to be the 'King of the Jews', was the reason for his condemnation. The Roman apparatus saw itself merely dealing with a minor problem which otherwise might have grown into a greater threat to their authority. So in essence, the reason for Jesus' crucifixion was politically motivated. However, his death was hardly noticed by Roman historians.

Jesus' death should have dealt a fatal blow to the memory of his teachings, were it not have been for the determination of his followers.
The most effective of these followers in spreading the new religious teachings was Paul of Tarsus, generally known as Saint Paul.
St Paul, who held Roman citizenship, is famed for his missionary voyages which took him from Palestine into the empire (Syria, Turkey, Greece and Italy) to spread his new religion to the non-Jews (for until then Christianity was generally understood to be a Jewish sect).
Though the actual definite outlines of the new religion of that day is largely unknown. Naturally, the general Christian ideals will have been preached, but few scriptures can possibly have been available.

I think the expression "largely unknown" in the above, whilst often hurled against the scientific viewpoint, is probably more accurate with regards to the world's largest religion.

417. Fleabytes

Comment #136574 by D'Arcy on March 1, 2008 at 12:47 pm

Paula says:

Re charities - atheists, at least, have no difficulty explaining why they're required: the universe is, after all, indifferent.

Sorry Paula, did I misunderstand? Charities exist because the universe is indifferent? What about human beings? We have two legs two arms, a capable brain and hopefully bags of energy. Do we really have to put up with the Christian attitude that "this is the way it is", this vale of tears, humans are sinners made of the dust of the Earth? I, for one, don't accept that current society is the best and final result of human societies. Charity is the safety valve of inequality.

418. Fleabytes

Comment #136563 by D'Arcy on March 1, 2008 at 12:20 pm

hello talks of charitable works as if it's a question of Christians who care and atheists who don't.

My point is (forget God), why do we put up with a world where charity is needed at all? Over the years charities have manifestly failed to solve the problems they were set up for.

419. Fleabytes

Comment #136558 by D'Arcy on March 1, 2008 at 12:08 pm

Earlier I mentioned Constantine being the first Roman Emperor to adopt Christianity. The following site is what British kids are taught about Christianity:
http://www.schoolhistory.co.uk/year7links/romans/christianity.pdf

As it's pdf, I have to quote the interesting bit myself:

"Constantine did not always behave like a Christian. For in AD 326 he killed his wife by having her boiled alive in a bath then killed his son too".

Don't believe me? See for yourself. David Robertson is studying history. Was the first Christian Roman Emperor a Christian or not?

Actually the killing of the son sounds familiar to me. But that poor boy was not a god.

420. Fleabytes

Comment #136547 by D'Arcy on March 1, 2008 at 11:42 am

Plop him into modern America, he'd be David Koresh, or Joseph Smith or L. Ron Hubbard.

Hubbard? Is he the guy safely buried under a volcano on Mars along with John Frum? No figs there!

421. Fleabytes

Comment #136533 by D'Arcy on March 1, 2008 at 11:19 am

Robertson talks of the

the wonderful truths of the Gospel.

Could these include the angry cursing (divine curse = kill) of a fig tree because it was not in fruit out of season? Is one of these wonderful truths the Jesus who comes not in love but with the sword to divide families into the devout and infidels?

Come on David, the gospels are a collection of old folk tales only given respectability, because Christianity was adopted by the Roman Empire in about 312 AD by the emperor Constantine. At that time the Roman Empire was still the most powerful in Europe. Christianity was the religion of the slaves without whom the Empire would have been nothing.

As for the historical veracity of Jesus. This is very much in doubt.

Have a nice visit to the USA and don't talk about bombs, especially holy hand grenades!

422. Fleabytes

Comment #136357 by D'Arcy on March 1, 2008 at 1:23 am

Hell hello! Come to do a bit of atheist baiting, have you?

You poor thing....are you still fuming? haven't you gone into meltdown yet?

Have you got any thing constructive to say about your ideas, like maybe "there is a God" or "Jesus saves"?

Mindless banter bores me.

423. America: slouching towards the Enlightenment

Comment #136354 by D'Arcy on March 1, 2008 at 1:02 am

Hopefully the demise of mysticism of all kinds is in progress. We should remember what happened in Europe in the enlightenment, when everything was up for question including monarchies and religion. This suited the up and coming capitalists very well; they could sweep all the old social powers out of the way to establish their own political supremacy.

However after the French Revolution, the rulers actively encouraged religion as some sort of stabilising force in society, a role it still has in many countries.

My own take on why religion appears still to have a strong hold in the USA, is that it is run as a business using business marketing and advertising methods, much the same as sport is. Whilst the churches in the USA are bankrupt of useful ideas, they have plenty of money a la Pat Robertson.

See Pat Condell on this site, Hook Line and Rapture:

http://richarddawkins.net/article,2113,Hook-line-and-rapture,Pat-Condell

424. Fleabytes

Comment #136262 by D'Arcy on February 29, 2008 at 3:35 pm

Fleabytes or Phlebitis:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phlebitis

Either way something you don't want.

425. Fleabytes

Comment #136246 by D'Arcy on February 29, 2008 at 3:08 pm

I too have learnt a lot especially from SteveZ and Paula, but let's not get too luvvie, "you were wonderful darling" please. A mutual admiration society is not what I want here, but it probably is what the likes of Robertson want.

426. Fleabytes

Comment #136234 by D'Arcy on February 29, 2008 at 2:52 pm

Al-rawandi, you had responded to my comment even before I had a chance to look at it! Such is the pace of this thread. I entirely agree with you being a materialist. I was just pointing out that the religios try to adopt a rational response by asking (often stupid and irrelevant) questions about what non-believers think, rather than being positive about their idealist view of the world.

They say "prove God doesn't exist", I say look at the real shit that is going on in this world. The state of the majority of humanity proves that there is no caring god out there!

427. Fleabytes

Comment #136224 by D'Arcy on February 29, 2008 at 2:35 pm

We are asked the impossible. To prove the non-existence of a god. (insert goblins, orcs, etc. etc. here). True, we are also asking the impossible of the believers to provide evidence of their deity, but then they're the ones making the claims.

However, if the Christians' claims about their god are true, and Robertson is a Christian, then I wonder why such a caring father has allowed His creation to get into the state it is in now. For depressing reading click the link.

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

Click the "Causes of Poverty" button.

428. Fleabytes

Comment #134572 by D'Arcy on February 28, 2008 at 2:15 am

The Bible like Holywood:

The good guys always triumph over the baddies.

Lots of violence and needless killing.

Fantasy world of dreams.

Lots of car chase scenes? (Alright poetic licence, they did have chariots didn't they?)

Much gnashing of perfect teeth.

Plagues of locusts.

All scripts written by Jews.

429. Fleabytes

Comment #134381 by D'Arcy on February 27, 2008 at 4:55 pm

A few hundred posts ago I asked if Paula's review of Robertson's book was correct, in that she said Robertson only quoted Hitler if the quotes showed he was an atheist, whereas Dawkins' TGD gives quotes showing Hitler was both religious and an atheist.

Robertson has conspicuously ignored Paula's criticism of selective quotation. Robertson is not interested in what Hitler's actual beliefs were. He is only interested in proving that atheism equals great evil. The man is ignoring his ninth Commandment. The strongest lie is the one that is never said.

I always hated midges. Kill one and a thousand turn up for the funeral.

430. 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.

431. 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.

432. 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".

433. 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?

434. 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.

435. 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!

436. 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!

437. 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!

438. 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!

439. 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!

440. 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.

441. 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.

442. 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.

443. 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!

444. 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.

445. 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

446. 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.

447. 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?"

448. 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.

449. 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.

450. 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.