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)
Sunday, May 27, 2007 | Reason : Commentary | print version Print | Comments

Document Observer Diary 27th May 2007

by Richard Dawkins

A shortened version of this article, with garbled chronology, was published in The Observer on 27th May 2007:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,,2089308,00.html

Richard Galapagos

It's been a time of nonstop travel. I had a long-standing engagement to lecture on a Galapagos cruise ship, but the trip grew and grew. Time Magazine invited me to New York for a posh celebration, and I built the diversion into my route to Galapagos. Then I was offered an unexpected lift to New York in the private jet of the entrepreneur Elon Musk, en route to Los Angeles.

Greatly looking forward to my trip with him and his wife Justine, I discovered a snag. British citizens can enter USA without a visa, but not if they arrive on a private plane. The prospect of queuing for a visa at the Grosvenor Square Embassy drove me to desperate lateral thinking. Canada, of course! Mr Musk might even prefer Toronto to New York as his refuelling stop, it being closer to the Great Circle from England to California. And I could please my Canadian publisher with a day of interviews. Everything fell into place. I could kill at least three birds with one stone.

Elon Musk and his wife Justine turned out to be delightful. One of the most remarkable men I have ever met, he had made his first fortune by devising Paypal. Then he invested it in two other enterprises, both of which made inspired use of his genius as a design engineer. His SpaceX company builds wholly re-usable spacecraft (the NASA Space Shuttle is only partially re-usable). And, coming down to earth, his Tesla company (Teslamotors.com) is about to market affordable electric cars with a running cost of one penny per mile and the potential (I devoutly hope, though Elon is more cautious) to kill the internal combustion engine stone dead. If only he could kill the oil trade too, and hence the undeserved power of infamous countries like Saudi Arabia! The first production model Teslas will be high performance sports cars with an acceleration of 0 to 60 mph in 4 seconds, assembled by Lotus in Britain but available, alas, only in America at first. Later models now in the development stage will broaden the range and the market. I'm putting my name down for one as soon as they appear over here.

My Toronto visit was strenuous: five television interviews and one radio, all in one day beginning before breakfast. I had never really believed in authors' publicity tours, and was astounded to be told that this one day of jetlagged freneticism boosted my book from Number 20 to Number 3 on Canadian Amazon's bestseller list. Next day before breakfast, off again to New York, this time on a commercial plane – no visa.

Time's Gala Dinner was to celebrate their '100 Most Influential People of the Year'. I don't know why I was chosen, because the other 99 were apparently celebs (to judge from the son-et-lumiθre of flashbulbs that greeted us wherever we turned during the evening). But I'm glad I went, and I met some interesting people including the inventor of Wikipedia, the democratically assembled on-line encyclopedia which, by any reasonable standards, ought to be a total failure but somehow, unaccountably, comes through with flying colours whenever you look up something you know about. The dinner tables were arranged on raked indoor terraces overlooking a gigantic picture window. Amplified music precluded conversation, but the view down Broadway was stunning. I left early, still jetlagged and facing yet another before-breakfast start for the airport.


* * * *

Whenever I suffer through an airport these days, I hear the mocking laughter of Osama bin Laden. Murdering three thousand innocent men and women with loved ones to weep for them (Allah be praised) was only the start (swamped by road accidents and domestic murders, 9/11 made no noticeable blip in the USA's violent death statistics for a typical September). No, bin Laden's lasting achievement, the one that has him sniggering daily into his beard, is to have created the Office of Homeland Security, risible monument to belated stable-door closure.

The payoff for bin Laden has been mayhem and chaos, costly delays and maddening inconvenience to millions of travellers, in every hour of every day, in every airport of every country (except some third world ones with the good sense to ignore the whole charade). Those useless plastic knives and forks were nothing but a signal to the home electorate: We're gonna kick some ass, and these plastic knives show it, you better believe it. And did some bearded loon once pack explosives into his shoes? Right then, we'll show those folks we mean business. We'll smoke 'em out and teach those terrists who rules this town, yessirree. From now on nobody – and ah mean nobody – boards a plane without first removing their shoes, whenever they board a plane anywhere – and ah mean anywhere – in God's own country.

And all we like sheep refuse to go astray. We follow the flock because we know that, if we so much as joke about exploding brassieres being the next scare, we risk being summarily locked up until rescued by a harassed British Consul. Better bite our tongue and endure the joke that Osama bin Laden is playing on all of us, through his Keystone-cops-like agents in the Office of Homeland Security.

Not that we here have anything to be proud of. In the Britain presided over by Bush's loyal friend and co-religionist, our security services were surfing the web when they spotted what looked to their fevered imaginations like a plot to make a 'binary' explosion on a plane by mixing two otherwise harmless liquids. For a hilarious explanation that this is, and always was, totally unrealistic (you need large quantities of ingredients and buckets and buckets of ice) see
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/08/17/flying_toilet_terror_labs/. Yet, as a direct consequence of what seems to have been an elementary misunderstanding of chemistry, we all have to dump even the tiniest bottles of liquid on our way through security.

Gateway to Galapagos is the infamous airport of Miami, and I had to pass through it going both ways. You might think a passenger in transit from Ecuador to Britain would be allowed to stay on the airside of the barrier and not formally enter the United States. But no, that would be much too simple and convenient: insufficient chest-beating by Homeland Security. Since 9/11 – universal American pretext for inconveniencing the public (over here, Health and Safety does the job) – the rules have changed. By decree of Homeland Security, the British passenger from Ecuador (me, in this case) has to pick up his luggage along with everybody else, queue to clear it through the Miami Customs, queue to enter the United States (fingerprints, photograph, passport stamp, green form and all), then immediately queue to leave the United States again, queue to remove shoes and laptop . . . and consequently (it happened to me last time I made the journey) miss the connection to London. This time I made it – only just, despite the two and a half hour changeover time.

But enough of moaning. No traveller should moan who has just visited the Galapagos archipelago. This week it was good to be alive as I swam among the marine iguanas and the breathtakingly tame Galapagos sealions, or walked among the flightless cormorants (also unique to Galapagos) hanging their useless stubby wings out to dry. This week I came within touching distance (I did not touch) of nesting Wave Albatrosses, and of Boobies, high-stepping their powder-blue feet in the slow-motion ballet of their surreal courtship. I have watched, spellbound, as the Boobies and Pelicans rained down from on high like arrows into the water, in a feeding frenzy that must strike the fish below with the fishy equivalent of shock and awe.

I went to Galapagos as guest lecturer of the Center for Inquiry (CFI), an admirable American charity devoted to Secular Humanism and critical thinking, whose members paid handsomely to enable the CFI to book a whole ship, the Santa Cruz, and explore Galapagos in Darwin's footsteps. As you'd expect, this was an intelligent crowd, who gave me a lively time in the questions after my three lectures. American atheists today walk with a spring in their step, a new confidence that they have not known since the lights went out on their Enlightened secular foundation. They are coming out of the closet in droves, and I like to credit the series of recent bestselling books, by Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett and others.

For a zoologist, Galapagos is an enchanted, near-sacred place. Partly because Darwin so momentously walked those lava fields in the springtime of his genius. But, too, because we all can see, as if through Darwin's deep-set eyes, life's difference-engine at its simplest. Then there is the ingenuous tameness of the animals, pursuing their evolved business in pre-Fall innocence of the gawping, camera-snapping human traffic in their midst. Mortally threatened by commerce and cheap aviation fuel, how long will it last in its pristine fragility, this Eden of the scientific real world?




Richard Dawkins FRS is the Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford. His latest book, The God Delusion, came out in paperback this week.

Comments 1 - 50 of 78 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #45293 by BAEOZ on May 27, 2007 at 5:45 am

 avatarI just watched the 2nd part of "The root of all evil?" on the ABC here in Oz. Loved it, there were many bits that I recall being in "The God Delusion". A book which I thought was a real eye opener.
Sounds like the Galapagas trip was amazing. Suffering a mild case of envy. I'd love to go there one day, but fear I'd add to the destruction that is probably being visited on the islands and the planet in general by catching a jet there and annoying the wildlife.
Anyway, keep up the good work RD.

Other Comments by BAEOZ

2. Comment #45302 by NewSkeptic on May 27, 2007 at 6:05 am

Ditto, BAEOZ. I've watched Virus Of Faith a number of times now, and am looking to see how many other people are interested in viewing it.

I also noticed that the voice-over, at the end of the presentation, said that the book "The Root Of All Evil?" was available from ABC bookshops. Now, if I know RD's published list, I'd guess that the voice-over was meant to be spruiking TGD instead.

Richard, please come to Australia.

Other Comments by NewSkeptic

3. Comment #45310 by Linda on May 27, 2007 at 6:33 am

Hi Richard,
I did wonder why you were in Toronto and am really grateful that in one short day so many media outlets here took advantage of the opportunity for interviews.

The best TV interview is by Steve Paikin (deist) who seemed completely baffled by your refusal to humour him, well done!
http://richarddawkins.net/article,1041,The-Debate-Can-We-Live-by-Reason-Alone,The-Agenda-with-Steve-Paikin

The one hour radio piece by another Canadian pro-religion media personality is on CBC with Michael Enright. The broadcast is available via Real Player - go to the link and scroll down to 'Michael's Conversation with Richard Dawkins, Author of the God Delusion'
Sunday, May 13, 2007:
http://www.cbc.ca/thesundayedition/audio.html

After reading details of your journey in the Observer and considering jet lag the above two interviews are some of your best. You clearly, carefully and with decorum outline the essential elements of TGL and New Atheism. Why some see this as threatening is beyond me.

Thank you for opening doors at letting some fresh air into our lives. Linda Ward Selbie

Other Comments by Linda

4. Comment #45312 by Roy_H on May 27, 2007 at 6:41 am

"Our impressive Ecuadorian guides told us that Boobies eventually go blind, the consequence of years of repeated high-velocity impacts of their eyes on the water"
Get out of that one, 'Intelligent Designists'!

Other Comments by Roy_H

5. Comment #45313 by Wrought on May 27, 2007 at 6:41 am

American atheists today walk with a spring in their step, a new confidence that they have not known since the lights went out on their Enlightened secular foundation. They are coming out of the closet in droves, and I like to credit the series of recent bestselling books, by Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett and others.


Good news.

Other Comments by Wrought

7. Comment #45318 by cbelt on May 27, 2007 at 6:53 am

As an aside, here's an interesting article about Elon Musk's rocket project http://www.wired.com/science/space/magazine/15-06/ff_space_musk

Other Comments by cbelt

8. Comment #45321 by Will in Aus on May 27, 2007 at 7:07 am

 avatar
Richard, please come to Australia.


Indeed, a visit to Australia would be very much appreciated. I have no doubt you would receive an overwhelming amount of support from the public. It would be wonderful to have the opportunity to hear you speak. You may even consider some guest lectures at Universities - I know the University that I attend regularly holds guest lectures and would be thrilled to have you as a speaker...

Other Comments by Will in Aus

9. Comment #45329 by Jack Rawlinson on May 27, 2007 at 7:40 am

 avatarRichard, you are so right about the irrationality of current airport security restrictions. As someone who needs to make fairly frequent transatlantic flights I too have experienced the frustrations and the need to bite one's tongue when being subjected to the many and various pointless procedures. The one which always drives me crazy is the restriction on any and every sharp object. I've seen tearful little girls have tiny nail clippers confiscated and yet... we can take glass bottles of our precious duty free spirits on board! They worry about nail clippers and small items of cutlery yet they don't care about the truly deadly possibilities of a broken bottle? Insane.

Well, not insane, of course. Just revealing. It reveals that what this nonsense is really about is appearances. They need to be seen to be doing something; never mind whether that something actually makes sense, or is likely to be effective. And of course, they wouldn't want their vital security measures to impact duty free profits, would they?

Aside from that little rant, I am envious of the Galapagos trip. It sounds absolutely fascinating and it's something I hope to do one day.

Other Comments by Jack Rawlinson

10. Comment #45333 by TIKI AL on May 27, 2007 at 7:51 am

There will also be laughter coming from Osama's penthouse if the predicted storms hit the US this season and the Guard is unable to help due to the difficulty of being in two places at the same time.

The blind Boobie explanation has me wondering if Bush dove into the pool repeatedly as a child.

Other Comments by TIKI AL

11. Comment #45334 by Rtambree on May 27, 2007 at 7:52 am

Clearly, RD doesn't enjoy the transit aspect of travelling (who does?), so the prospect of a 60 hour(!!) return trip from Oxford to speak to some uncouth convicts at Gleebooks in Sydney would be discouraging.

Don't forget, Ken Ham and his fellow nutjobs come from Australia. Dawkins also got set up by an Australian crew with the infamous 11-second long PAUSE.

No wonder he hasn't been there since last century.

Some rich Australian millionaire would have to fly him in via private jet? Any takers? James Packer on his Scientology plane? Dick Smith on his hot air balloon?

Other Comments by Rtambree

12. Comment #45335 by SMART on May 27, 2007 at 7:57 am

Aren't we lucky to have someone so engaging and interesting as our chief ambassador for reason in this crazy deluded world!

PS On your way to Australia Richard, please stop over in Vancouver. We missed you on TGD tour!

Sensible Minds Against Religious Teachings

Other Comments by SMART

13. Comment #45337 by Logicel on May 27, 2007 at 8:04 am

 avatarJack Rawlinson wrote: It reveals that what this nonsense is really about is appearances. They need to be seen to be doing something; never mind whether that something actually makes sense, or is likely to be effective.
______

And just as revealing is that many Americans regard such mindless activities as ensuring their safety, rather seeing through their uselessness as RD does. In additon, if these so-called measures for 'security' are lampooned, you are accused of being anti-American and unpatriotic at the very least, or held for questioning at the very worst. Yup, the Christian right wingnuts have made Bin Laden a very happy and fulfilled terrorist.

Other Comments by Logicel

14. Comment #45338 by Logicel on May 27, 2007 at 8:06 am

 avatarPer RDs mentioning that one cannot even joke without anticipating any word or expression being misunderstood as terrorist planning, public airports in many countries are now no longer places of free speech.

Other Comments by Logicel

15. Comment #45340 by pewkatchoo on May 27, 2007 at 8:24 am

 avatarI actually moved house to minimise my air travel within the UK. I used to live in Scotland but worked mostly in London. I got so tired of having to jump through hoops for a bunch of rude airline security wallahs every week that I just up and moved my family to the south of England instead. I sometimes feel that life is pointless as the numpties are in the ascendance.

Eventually I intend to semi-retire to a farm in the west of France and breed horses, chickens, ducks and other fowl. I really wish I could have been with Prof Dawkins to see the pelicans and boobies. I really love to watch the behaviour of birds.

Other Comments by pewkatchoo

16. Comment #45343 by bouwe on May 27, 2007 at 8:47 am

Comment #45302 by NewSkeptic
I also noticed that the voice-over, at the end of the presentation, said that the book "The Root Of All Evil?" was available from ABC bookshops. Now, if I know RD's published list, I'd guess that the voice-over was meant to be spruiking TGD instead.
Yes, I too was puzzled by that voice-over. It may not have been a mistake however. They often come out with a coffee-table book of a documentary. eg. David Attenborough's "The Trials of Life" came out as a book, seemingly based on the documentary series. Then again...if that is the case I would have thought the book would have been plugged on this website by now!

The reaction to the first episode (aired last week) was, overall, surprisingly positive. (That is based on my non-comprehensive guaging by perusing the major publications for reviews and responses). For example, the comment thread on the Sydney Morning Herald article last week was posititve, at least going by the first few hundred comments.

However, I fear that this week you will find more nutjobs coming out of the woodwork to complain. We have already witnessed Prof. Somerville's (albeit pathetic) opening salvo. I think the nutjobs were in stunned silence....they needed about a week to sharpen their knives (for their wits are naturally blunt). Get ready for the onslaught from the god-botherers. I predict a lot more nutbag letters to appear in the Oz papers this week, and more negative feedback on the comment threads in the online versions of the papers.

Let's hope that those who posted the positive comments last week in the opinion/letters sections back it up by hosing down the inevitable backlash. Most people who watch "Compass" on ABC are, I would have thought, people of faith (of some description or another). Hence a show in that timeslot which posits faith as a "virus" will not go down too well with that crowd, I would have thought -- no matter how valid RD's points.

Personally, I enjoyed it immensely...I wonder how many green shirts he had to buy for continuity's sake? I'm sure David Attenborough would have been willing to lend him his entire wardrobe of identical safarit suits.

Other Comments by bouwe

17. Comment #45350 by Donald on May 27, 2007 at 9:40 am

Our impressive Ecuadorian guides told us that Boobies eventually go blind, the consequence of years of repeated high-velocity impacts of their eyes on the water.

Can Richard point us to scientific literature that supports this claim?

[edited] question has been rephrased

Other Comments by Donald

18. Comment #45354 by atkinson on May 27, 2007 at 10:38 am

 avatarlife's difference-engine at its simplest

beautiful!

Other Comments by atkinson

19. Comment #45375 by NMcC on May 27, 2007 at 12:56 pm

How wonderful to see those 'entrepeneurs' (whatever happened to the word 'capitalist'?) and their admirers discuss measures for protecting the environment as they fly about in their private jets. It'll be good to see those electric sports cars roll off the production line. Wonder how much they'll cost? I suppose if you have to ask, you probably can't afford one. I didn't see in the article Professor Dawkins mention the expected cost though, perhaps I just missed it. I wonder also how much of the environment will be left to protect by the time they are mass produced and affordable? What, with capitalists (sorry, entrepeneurs) flying about in their private jets and all that!

I almost forgot to mention how much Dawkins' diary entry reminded me to wonder (more wondering!) how Bonehead Bono is getting on.

Haven't heard much of this pop entrepeneur since he stopped berating Western governments about their spending tax revenues on the welfare of their own poverty stricken people and not sending the money instead to poor Africans long enough to move all his millions out of Ireland into an overseas tax haven.

Other Comments by NMcC

20. Comment #45399 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on May 27, 2007 at 2:58 pm

Jack Rawlinson said... It reveals that what this nonsense is realy about is appearances. They need to be seen to be doing something; never mind whether that something actually makes sense, or is likely to be effective.


This is very true, but it also isn't a new idea. In fact, the majority of any security work is in the appearance of being unbreachable. If a security force can give off the impression of being professional, capable and pro active then they can be surprisingly effective.
The key word here is 'deterent', and that is all that any security opperation is trying to achieve.

You might be surprised at how easy it is to break onto any secure compound completely undetected, past all the armed guards and trained dogs, once you understand the system.

Other Comments by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy

21. Comment #45405 by pewkatchoo on May 27, 2007 at 3:25 pm

 avatarNMcC they will cost around 90000 dollars. More than I would pay for a car.

Donald: I have looked for additional information on the Boobies but have found no reference to their going blind. Gannets also are high speed divers and there is no reference to their going blind either.

Other Comments by pewkatchoo

22. Comment #45407 by Shuggy on May 27, 2007 at 3:38 pm

 avatar
The first production model Teslas will be high performance sports cars with an acceleration of 0 to 60 mph in 4 seconds,

If they're electric, they're only shifting the problem of dwindling energy resources sideways (unless, as here, most of your electricity is from renewable [hydro] sources). But why high performance? More toys for boy racers? What the world needs now is lightweight, fuel-economical transport for one or two people and some luggage: I see an enclosed step-through motorbike with automatic "training wheels".

Other Comments by Shuggy

23. Comment #45412 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on May 27, 2007 at 3:53 pm

I was interested by the professor's claim that 9/11 wasn't even a blip on NY death figures so I had a look. (Couldn't find the one's for September, so I just looked at the year as a whole)

Deaths in New York City
1999: 61,411
2000: 59,737
2001: 60,075
2002: 58,356
2003: 57,917

http://www.health.state.ny.us/nysdoh/vital_statistics/index.htm

Other Comments by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy

24. Comment #45415 by NMcC on May 27, 2007 at 4:34 pm

Pewkatchoo

Thanks for the detail.

That wasn't really the point of my post. You're right there though about it being more than a normal person would pay for a car. It doesn't surprise me that it's a great deal more than a normal person COULD pay for a car. But, of course, they're not meant for normal people.

What I was getting at was the nauseating spectacle of Dawkins fawning over some rich parasite - albeit one who 'devised' the wonderful, socially necessary, we-can't-do-withoutable racket of yet another way of moving money about - while he travels about in his private jet talking about his concern for the environment. As my post above says, it reminds me of that despicable idiot Bonehead of U2.

Other Comments by NMcC

25. Comment #45424 by MorituriMax on May 27, 2007 at 5:20 pm

 avatarHoly sheepdip, a penny a mile? That alone made this whole article worthwhile.. I always wondered what the cost would be when I heard of the Tesla vehicle. I figured my electric bill would shoot up to $5,000 a month to run one.

Come on Tesla!

Other Comments by MorituriMax

26. Comment #45433 by foxfire on May 27, 2007 at 6:06 pm

 avatarThank you Professor D, for sharing your journey with us in a (as always) well written, informative and entertaining way. I could feel your pain, not to mention your frustration, with the ponderous monstrosity of bureaucracy called "Homeland Security". I suppose its next pointless waste of my tax dollars will be to build a fence between the U.S. and Mexico; large, ugly fences being a really great way to piss off the neighbors and thus secure even less cooperation on anything of mutual interest.

Your description of the Galapagos was sheer poetry and the fact that my eyes are watering may have more to do with your closing paragraph than seasonal pollen.

As far as a new spring in my step - it was YOUR book, Professor that made me realize that I was even in a closet. Others you wrote woke me up to the realization of just how much I missed the world of science.

Thank you for sharing and you really *do* need one of those Teslas! Look at the good side of the wait - let us (Yanks) get the bugs worked out before you pay the big bucks for a Brit model

Other Comments by foxfire

27. Comment #45435 by yoursdhruly on May 27, 2007 at 6:42 pm

Professor Dawkins,
Where did you get that nice shirt? :-)

Other Comments by yoursdhruly

28. Comment #45442 by ryanbooker on May 27, 2007 at 7:19 pm

I hope it lasts. One of the things I'd most like to do in this world, is visit the Galapagos Islands.

Other Comments by ryanbooker

29. Comment #45453 by MorituriMax on May 27, 2007 at 9:15 pm

 avatarI think the Bono controversy had something to do with them saying we needed to supply Africa with Refrigerators.. which then sat around because the African people getting them didn't have access to electricity.

Go figure. Like using one square of toilet paper to save the planet.

Other Comments by MorituriMax

30. Comment #45454 by MorituriMax on May 27, 2007 at 9:17 pm

 avatarphilos, I don't know maybe Bill Gates giving 36 billion to charity and setting up foundations might count.. but gee, without a moral compass maybe I shouldn't even be allowed to say 36 billion.

Hmmm? How much have YOU given to charity? How many foundations have you set up? Warren Buffet also gave around 30 billion to charity or so.. wow...

Other Comments by MorituriMax

31. Comment #45457 by Shuggy on May 27, 2007 at 9:53 pm

 avatar
Donald: I have looked for additional information on the Boobies but have found no reference to their going blind. Gannets also are high speed divers and there is no reference to their going blind either.

Couldn't they avert it by blinking at the moment of impact? And wouldn't they evolve to do that because the blindness (if any) would be progressive, and start while they still had reproductive obligations? Might old boobies go blind for some other reason?

Could it be that our Richard has repeated an urban legend because the Ecuadorian guide was "impressive"?

(I really don't claim to know the answers to these questions.)

Other Comments by Shuggy

32. Comment #45463 by foxfire on May 27, 2007 at 11:35 pm

 avatarphilos wrote:
No doubt - it was soooo Leonardo DiCaprioish for Richard to be frolicking about on a private plane bashing internal combustion engines, basically big oil. Gimme a break! Your politics are as confused as a 3rd rate wanna be celeb. Stick to the Science you know; we'll respect you more and you won't appear so foolish.


Oh gee, a sanctimonious know-it-all pops up to chastise Dawkins and expound on who gives what to whom.

I am not familiar with the Bono controversy; anyone?


Here is the link to Bono's website: http://www.data.org/?gclid=CJbJuYucsIwCFSnKggodImi4SA

The controversy is because *some* people think Aids is god's retribution on homosexuals. Ignorent fools that they are, they apparently don't understand that much of Aids in Africa is due to some cultural/evolutionary drive that causes married males to share the disease with their wives, after they have "sported" with other females.


As far as I'm concerned, your obnoxious, self-rightous attitude is only exceeded by your ignorence.

(edited to add):

The other aspect of the controversy (with respect to U.S. aid dollars) is because condoms are not handed out to help prevent the spread of Aids. Apparently the religious right feels the distribution of condoms would encourage promiscuity. Say hallelujah! Another woman dies for the glory of some male god.

Other Comments by foxfire

33. Comment #45472 by Shuggy on May 28, 2007 at 1:05 am

 avatarphilos wrote:
I am annoyed but accept the exercised and mild paranoia that go with security checks.

Not just paranoia, but ridiculous and wasteful excess. Like RD's experience in Miami on the way to Ecuador, on a flight from Auckland to Vancouver, there is a stop at Honolulu that isn't mentioned on the ticket. All passengers have to leave the plane, pass through US security (including questions about why they want to enter the US) into a transit lounge, then through US security again and back on to the plane. Presumably if you have any of the innumerable disqualifications for entering the US, you can't go to Vancouver. I suppose this protects their transit lounges from being blown up, but a bomber would be much more certain of getting the whole planeload by detonating in flight.

Other Comments by Shuggy

34. Comment #45474 by kcjerith on May 28, 2007 at 1:21 am

In terms of security, all i would want the government to do is just make sure known criminals/terrorist/etc don't come in. Besides for that I don't see a point of a visa (maybe to establish your citizenship?) Other wise I would be just as happy to let each airliner decide their own security. This would cause a variety of different security measures, and the consumer could choose which one they liked.

Also, it was government regulation that allowed, at least partially, for the 911 attacks to occur. For years the airline companies wanted to have someone armed on the flight, and the government said no. The government very rarely makes us safer.

Other Comments by kcjerith

35. Comment #45481 by pewkatchoo on May 28, 2007 at 2:09 am

 avatarShuggy, interesting your choice of a motorbike type vehicle. Any particular reason for that (^8? While not dismissing this, I think that on the whole 4 wheels would be safer.

Other Comments by pewkatchoo

36. Comment #45482 by Pantore on May 28, 2007 at 2:11 am

 avatarThe FBI doesn't think Osama was behind the 9/11 attacks or they just 'forgot' to mention it on his CV.

http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm

Other Comments by Pantore

37. Comment #45484 by pewkatchoo on May 28, 2007 at 2:19 am

 avatarNMcC, I understood quite well where you were coming from. My response was meant to be a tacit acknowledgement and agreement. I admire Professor Dawkins very much, but I don't always agree with him like some here seem to do.

Switch on your irony detector mate. (^8

Other Comments by pewkatchoo

38. Comment #45485 by SharrieG on May 28, 2007 at 2:22 am

 avatar
Wikipedia, the democratically assembled on-line encyclopedia which, by any reasonable standards, ought to be a total failure but somehow, unaccountably, comes through with flying colours whenever you look up something you know about.


Eh?! Are we talking about the same Wikipedia here?!!!
Wasn't there a survey not that long ago which compared Wikipedia with, like, truth, and found it a tad wanting?
Partly I'm kidding... I do love it really, but I've seen a fair few gems on there!

Other Comments by SharrieG

39. Comment #45486 by pewkatchoo on May 28, 2007 at 2:23 am

 avatarArre, and in 6th place is:

JESUS OF NAZARETH, by Benedict XVI. (Doubleday, $24.95.) The pope discusses Jesus' identity as revealed in the Gospels.

We are not winning by that much if a boring old man like de papa can come straight into 6th place with a totally subjective piece of nonsense like that.

Other Comments by pewkatchoo

40. Comment #45491 by NMcC on May 28, 2007 at 2:43 am

pewkatchoo

Switched on.

Nope...can't see it....it mustn't be working. Maybe it's because it's petrol driven.

Perhaps one of those 'entrepeneurs' who, according to some, we're all so beholden to, will come up with an electric version?

Seriously, I knew you were being ironic. I just wanted to make another post in which I could call Bono Bonehead since I despise the hypocritical ***ker.

Other Comments by NMcC

41. Comment #45493 by Donald on May 28, 2007 at 2:49 am

The posters criticising RD[bbhn] for this and that seem to have overlooked the most serious matter in his diary.
"I could kill at least three birds with one stone."

This from a biologist! And before he even got to the Galapagos!!!

How he gets away with it I don't know.

Other Comments by Donald

42. Comment #45496 by pewkatchoo on May 28, 2007 at 2:51 am

 avatarre Bono. I don't think you will meet with much disagreement on that score from me. His music sucks too, as does that of his hypocrite buddy Sir Bob Gedoffit.

Other Comments by pewkatchoo

43. Comment #45498 by leodavinci on May 28, 2007 at 2:55 am

 avatarLooks like its that time of the month for a lot of members today,chill out people.
Ps. leave Bono alone,he's a good person,his heart is in the right place but his ideals are not, plus he is any easy target for ridicule.
With regards to his moving his money to another country for tax reasons - i live in Ireland and i see what the government spends my taxes on, if i had the choice i would do likewise,fair play to him.
Good post Richard

Other Comments by leodavinci

44. Comment #45499 by L.Minnik on May 28, 2007 at 2:58 am

As for US Homeland Security - my impression is that they are aiming at collecting as much data about as many people as possible without arousing protests. And that this is only partially pertains to terrorism, judging by how much information and from whom they seek it.

One way to get info is make people go through border security procedures.


Other Comments by L.Minnik

45. Comment #45500 by NMcC on May 28, 2007 at 3:05 am

leodavinci

I'm afraid your post is too stupid to reply to.

Perhaps pewkatchoo can be bothered?

Other Comments by NMcC

46. Comment #45501 by pewkatchoo on May 28, 2007 at 3:13 am

 avatar
Ps. leave Bono alone,he's a good person,his heart is in the right place but his ideals are not, plus he is any easy target for ridicule.


That is quite a contradiction you are setting up there, heart in the right place but his ideals are not, hmmmmmmmm. But in any event why should we leave the self-righteous git alone on your say so? He is always on our tv screens telling us what to do with our money. Agreed, he is an easy target for ridicule, I just wish he would realise that and shut the fuck up. This is a guy who started an expensive court case against one of his past employees just to get a fucking hat back. Don't you think his money would have been better spent on Africa?

With regards to his moving his money to another country for tax reasons - i live in Ireland and i see what the government spends my taxes on,if i had the choice,i would do likewise,fair play to him.

Fair point, clumsily made.

Other Comments by pewkatchoo

47. Comment #45503 by leodavinci on May 28, 2007 at 3:13 am

 avatarI wasn't asking for a reply,i was making a valid statement.
There seems to be a lot of oneupmanship going around this forum lately and it clutters it up with people trying to out do each other for the sake of it.
If you want an argument i'd recommend you go elsewhere,you won't get one here.

Other Comments by leodavinci

48. Comment #45505 by leodavinci on May 28, 2007 at 3:18 am

 avatarHmmm,no it is not a contradiction,he is trying to save peoples lives on a planet that already has too many people on it,i think his time would be better spent on environmental issues,contradiction - no.
With regards to the "fair point clumsily made",get over yourself shakespeare.

Other Comments by leodavinci

49. Comment #45506 by L.Minnik on May 28, 2007 at 3:20 am

Philos wrote: Or how about a homeless shelter or food kitchen for the poor in your neighbourhood, run by you, the moral atheist?

Please take some time to find out about these organizations and I will gladly discuss anything concerning this subject.

Other Comments by L.Minnik

50. Comment #45507 by Fanusi Khiyal on May 28, 2007 at 3:21 am

The fiasco at the airport is just another example of our p.c. elites and government kowtowing to Islam. Because we know who is going to be the next one to blow up an aeroplane. We know it is going to be Muslims, and we know how to look for them.

We also are doing nothing to get rid of the Wahhabi preachers in this island, out of fear of offending.

Honestly, there are times when you can begin to see why the Romanians make a hero out of Vlad Tepes.

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal
Reload Comments | Back to Top

More Comments: 1 2 | Next | Last

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password: