1. Add another flea to the list...

Comment #133147 by Beachbum on February 25, 2008 at 5:28 pm

Talk about a head banger, don't try to argue the facts with these authors - "they ain't interested".

2. Religion advances despite science (and thanks to Dawkins)

Comment #73013 by Beachbum on September 23, 2007 at 7:51 pm

Ok, this might be a tad off topic but, anyone who has read that... that attempt at literary commentary above needs a laugh watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svg-RJGa-YQ

Cheers

3. Religion advances despite science (and thanks to Dawkins)

Comment #72946 by Beachbum on September 23, 2007 at 3:52 pm

"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance any day."
- Douglas Adams

Thank You, Richard

Enough Said!

4. The Flea Circus moves to your iPod!

Comment #69222 by Beachbum on September 10, 2007 at 4:00 am

To begin with, Professor Dawkins is not asserting anything in regards to Einstein's beliefs in
his book The God Delusion. The historic validity of Prof. Dawkins writings on Einstein's
beliefs are more than apparent from many sources, not the least of which is Albert Einstein himself.
In the book, Einstein His Life and Universe Walter Isaacson writes:

The final hero of the Olympia Academy was Baruch Spinoza (1632-1677), the Jewish philosopher from Amsterdam. His influence was primarily religious: Einstein embraced his concept of an amorphous God reflected in the awe-inspiring beauty, rationality, and unity of nature's laws. But like Spinoza, Einstein did not believe in a personal God...
In addition, Einstein drew from Spinoza a faith in determinism: a sense that the laws of nature,
once we could fathom them, decreed immutable causes and effects, and that God did not play dice by allowing any events to be random or undetermined. "All things are determined by the
necessity of divine nature," Spinoza declared...

Now, from this it is easy to see that the author of the iPod tutor has no business in interpreting Spinoza's The Ethic, Albert Einstein has done that for himself, and a much better job of it, I might add. But to attack Prof. Dawkins' book our illusioned (must think he knows Albert's mind better than... Albert?) iPod author sets up a straw man in the hopes that his $10 a pop audience does not understand Spinoza's book any better he.

From the ipod tutor:

The following quotes are from Baruch de Spinoza's book The Ethics. Dawkins says that belief in Einstein's God is not Delusional, and Einstein said his God was Spinoza's God. (This is where the intellectual "slide of hand" happens, my interjection. Because that is not all Einstein said on the subject, as I noted above.)
The following quotes will give us a good idea of Spinoza's conception of God. After reading Spinoza's quotes, see if you agree with Dawkin's
(do I have to correct this boneheads spelling too?) assertion that Spinoza's pantheistic belief in God is merely "sexed-up" atheism.

Again from the iPod tutor

...our highest happiness or blessedness is, namely, solely. in the knowledge of God, whereby we are led to act only as love and piety shall bid us. We may thus clearly
understand, how far astray from a true estimate of virtue... (and it continues, see below)

This is the call out from the iPod Tutor
From Ethics Part II: http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext97/2spne10.txt

From the above link:

It remains to point out the advantages of a knowledge of this
doctrine as bearing on conduct, and this may be easily gathered from what has been said. The doctrine is good, (1)

1. Inasmuch as it teaches us to act solely according to the decree of God, and to be partakers in the Divine nature, and so
much the more, as we perform more perfect actions and more and more understand God. Such a doctrine not only completely tranquilizes our spirit, but also shows us where (2) our highest
happiness or blessedness is, namely, solely in the knowledge of God, whereby we are led to act only as love and piety shall bid us. We may thus clearly understand, how far astray from a true estimate of virtue are those who expect to be decorated by God with high rewards for their virtue, and their best actions, as for having endured the direst slavery; as if virtue and the
service of God were not in itself happiness and perfect freedom.

(1) The iPod tutor is talking about the conception of God, but this excerpt is talking about the doctrine, i.e. the iPod has taken the quote out of context. Still Spinoza mentions his Divine nature in the second line.
(2) This is where the iPod tutor starts its quote with the twist of "this is what Spinoza thinks
of God", but ironically this is the sentence where Spinoza starts listing the intolerable side of the doctrine. Out of context?

Furthermore, the entire gist of the book is a complete critique of theistic belief, not exactly
the feeling one gets from the quotes is my guess. But hey, don't believe me, read it for yourself.

http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext03/ethic11.txt

One more thing that's got my nickers in a knot, while I was researching the rules for rhetorical
logic, in conjunction with the generalities put forth by the iPod tutor, I ran across a little
sophism called "poisoning the well", anyway the last thing written in the iPod tutor at the end
of the (and I love this part) "programmed reading" is a boxed in and in bold face type:

Now that you are familiar with the logical fallacies and sophistical devices
sprinkled throughout The God Delusion, open your copy of Dawkins (with your pre-marked flag points) turn to page 1...

And I haven't got warmed up yet!
B

5. Interview with Richard Dawkins and John Cornwell

Comment #68317 by Beachbum on September 6, 2007 at 7:46 pm

Of course, I agree wholeheartedly with all the previous comments, only to add that I found The God Delusion to be a bit soft on some of these very points until I first logged on to this site and read the comments and reasons for the tolerance from what has become my enlightened point of view. Cornball had better be cautious with his ill aimed banter, many of us can stoop to his level with no ill effects.

Coming in after Russell Blackford, I feel like the little sister that kicks the bully in the shins only after the big brother plants a well deserved right hook.

6. The Flea Circus moves to your iPod!

Comment #67833 by Beachbum on September 5, 2007 at 1:18 am

I have managed to get on the site and found a book review on Google books.
For most, this should suffice in an understanding of the plot, that is, hide what "The Intelligent Community" doesn't want anyone to read. Then confuse the iPod instructed with the audio at the flagged points via, interpretations (has anyone else picked up on how often "interpretations" are used in religion).

My goal is to do a very good job of reporting on this, so NO ONE else feels the need to give this joke a Dime, pence, rubble ok, maybe a finger - but just one.

Another goal is to surmise any other info I can glean from this... this cough instructional set and take the fight to them. Maybe I can upload some pictures of Bishops saluting Hitler or a "crock-o-duck" and a Republican in a compromising position... Oh, I know "just enlighten them with empirical evidence".

7. The Flea Circus moves to your iPod!

Comment #67573 by Beachbum on September 3, 2007 at 8:59 pm

Ok, this Penguin jumped, but I have to wait for the Book to show up here before I can get to the web site and download the MP3's.

My understanding of "disinformation" and the power it wields is why I think we should all know the enemies propaganda, pitch, literary revisions or what ever they wish to through up (regurgitate) in defence of their dogma.

I wish I had other options as to avoid giving this "snake oil salesman" a 10 spot, but rest assured that this not the worst investment I have made.
Two days shipping... that's what I'm waiting for.

It is just that all this crap I'm reading from the religious right, neo-con, immoral minority espousing that they are "under attack" and atheists are taking their religion from them, not to mention the Neo Nazi attitude they show toward gays and the general intolerance they push.

Their dumbing down of America, attack on Science, disrespect they show our founding fathers with lies (revisionist history)...

They've done pissed off the wrong red-neck!

Do you really want to know why religion has lasted 2000 (ah hell pick a number). Because it is hard to corner a liar when another liar backs them up.

Ok, ok, the sheep really believe this stuff, that is why they call them sheep, it is the "wolves in shepherds clothing" I'm hostile with, they cannot possibly believe in anything but money and power.

I have struggled with posting this rant, and if any of my contemporaries are offended, I am truly ...

I have been on sites like: http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page
and
http://www.godtube.com/
or
http://www.creationwiki.org/Main_Page
I think it is obvious that they don't want anyone confounding their "truth" with inconvenient facts. The list goes on and on. These people have no understanding of the truth, evidence or even the slightest comprehension of tolerance. Some of them are as bad as a Christian Taliban.

If, the moderator wishes to edit, cut, pull this, I do understand.

P.S. You all know that when I go to this website to get the MP3's, I will get spammed to death, right. Good to have an email address for just such an occasion.

8. Christopher Hitchens on BookTV

Comment #67522 by Beachbum on September 3, 2007 at 5:20 pm

I watched it and recorded the whole 3 hours, twice, to DVD and thought it quite nice, as interviews go. The emails and call-ins ran the full spectrum from amiable to absurd. I have also learned a bit more about Mr. Hitchens and his particular point of view, I was very pleased with the broadcast.

9. The Flea Circus moves to your iPod!

Comment #67518 by Beachbum on September 3, 2007 at 4:55 pm

I want to get to the website, the excerpts (mainly the introduction to the instructions) I have read on Amazon tell the reader to "flag" the points that are to be covered by the MP3's, then read the sections up to the flags then play the recordings, iPod style to teach the reader the concept of Counter facts. This could backfire on them and actually help our aim to get people to think critically, but they use all the same words as rationalists which only adds to the devotees confusion. Also, as anyone who has argued this subject knows, the layman's one dimensional understanding of a term, used as counterpoint, is a difficult barrier to surmount in friendly conversation, my example: this book tells the reader that this is a method of critical thinking... get the fallacy. They are telling the reader that they are thinking critically, by telling the reader what to think...Ouch.

Sorry, got all "light" headed.

10. The Flea Circus moves to your iPod!

Comment #67492 by Beachbum on September 3, 2007 at 3:30 pm

$10.00 bucks, but I have not noticed any of these fleas on the tapes. I have found the brain drain in full force on the MP3 list though. They (who ever "they" are) have put some thought into their own tactics:

...back in the days before the iPod you could pick up a book like The God Delusion (you mean the bible? right? which book are we talking about again?)and be on your own... if there were any logical errors or factual mistakes... they would enter your mind as sound information...

It's ok to read the book as long as we can keep you plugged into our washing machine. No need to do your own research, thinking, rationalizing or anything... "We got you covered". Trust me!

Is this not the most blatant display of programing protection on the web?


Ladies and gentlemen, I will take the hit for the home team, I could not live with myself if I ignored this responsibility. Besides, this crap hasn't a chance to get past the saltwater in my ears.

11. Review of Darwin's Angel: An Angelic Response to the God Delusion

Comment #66881 by Beachbum on August 31, 2007 at 11:47 pm

5. Comment #66870 by Dr Benway

" Might be an allergy to hay or something.

Could you be focusing on the wrong end of the Bull?

One of the books I have been reading lately is Kingdom Coming by Michelle Goldberg.

By Googling everything she writes about, I have found some very disturbing things on the web. But, because of circumstances beyond their control (the godbotherers don't have control, Hehe... sorry), the Religious-right, Moral majority (actually hurts to type that), and the Evangelicals are losing ground. They keep getting caught with their pants down, literally.

It is my humble opinion that our "Neo-cons" may be shooting for Neo-Nazi, in the same way the National Socialist were in pre-Hitler Germany of the 1930's.

So, we better not cut even this type of regurgitated fluff any slack.

Also, I do not care at all for the likes of these people knocking Prof. Dawkins eloquent approach to the fallacies of the bible and religion in general, or for that matter, Christopher Hitchens' "bitch-slap with a book" (my quotes) considering the revisionist Christian literalism and revisionist history being published in the US by the likes of David Barton, D. James Kennedy and many others.

Like Canaries to coalminers, frogs to the environment, when the teachers throughout history have had a problem with teaching "someones truth" bad things are going on.

12. CNN Request for 'I-Reports' on religion

Comment #65134 by Beachbum on August 23, 2007 at 1:55 am

My response to CNN's query.

My answer is a resounding NO!
I resent the implication that anyone can live by faith. People of the modern world can only live by making concessions to their faith and excuses for it. Proof that this patriarchal mythology has out lived its welcome.

From the hijacking of innate human morality and compassion, to bolster rigorous compliance to patriarchal, iron age doctrine. To, forcing the conformity of the masses at the point of a sword, threat of torture or public burning. And let us not forget the atrocities committed by the piously blinded, against the indigenous peoples of the world in the not so distant past.

Because of the Library at Alexandria, the Dark Ages, the destruction of the Aztec codices and a plethora of examples, faith based organizations aim to hold human development in a state of ignorance, where they can flourish in grandeur at expense of the masses.

Every government in history has used religion to support its oppression of the governed. Despite Thomas Jefferson's best efforts along with others of the Enlightenment, his "Wall of Separation" appears to be the first casualty of the dumbing down of the United States. But this is not a new precept, it started in the fear mongering infancy of the cold war.

If faith feels threatened, it should!

13. The age of endarkenment

Comment #64403 by Beachbum on August 20, 2007 at 1:51 am

by Charles Brooker

In the 18th century, a revolution in thought, known as the Enlightenment, dragged us away from the superstition and brutality of the Middle Ages toward a modern age of science, reason and democracy. It changed everything. If it wasn't for the Enlightenment, you wouldn't be reading this right now. You'd be standing in a smock throwing turnips at a witch. Yes, the Enlightenment was one of the most significant developments since the wheel. Which is why we're trying to bollocks it all up.

Could it be that the powers that be, want to see us in smocks again? Is the Endarkenment an actual pursuit? Maybe something to think about.

14. The age of endarkenment

Comment #64395 by Beachbum on August 20, 2007 at 1:01 am

13. Comment #64361 by Cartomancer on August 19, 2007 at 6:46 pm

Thirty per cent? Gaaah! I thought we were safe from this sort of infantile stupidity in England.

Ah! See, now you know how I feel. Not to make light of your bewilderment, but I have walked around on the mainland (US) shaking my head so much that people thought I had a nervous tick.

If I understand this right, by the principles of Homeopathy, my dish water is worth a fortune, and I already know how to do the hula.

Why did I work so hard to stay sane?

15. Charles Brooker's screen burn

Comment #63954 by Beachbum on August 17, 2007 at 2:00 am

In the 18th century, a revolution in thought, known as the Enlightenment, dragged us away from the superstition and brutality of the Middle Ages toward a modern age of science, reason and democracy. It changed everything. If it wasn't for the Enlightenment, you wouldn't be reading this right now. You'd be standing in a smock throwing turnips at a witch. Yes, the Enlightenment was one of the most significant developments since the wheel.

Does anyone else think this should be written on the wall of every school in the US. Better yet, every school everywhere in the world.

16. Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris: The Unholy Trinity ... Thank God.

Comment #63790 by Beachbum on August 15, 2007 at 11:37 pm

When I look out at the World from my sunny lani (patio) on any given Sunday morning I don't see 10% of the populous on the highway. I know, and it is figuratively speaking but, my point is that, what percentage of that 90% is because Mom answered the phone or the door, some form of social pressure, praise god and pass the ammunition types. America is full of hypocrites. So, this outlook from my sunny lani makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. In the vernacular of my compatriots, "most of'em could give a shit".

Statistics: the liars math. No offence, that's what my professor told me. Anyway...

21. Comment #63682 by Dr Benway

Several independent sources are more difficult to ignore than a single source.

We cannot let that happen, if they cite a source make them be specific as to which author and which book by that author. All of these men have written great things (even if they don't know it). We must be respectful of that in our citations and demand that others are as well.

And for the record, I am a member of the ffrf, good luck Hitchens.

17. 'Delusion' Revisits Faith Vs. Reason Debate

Comment #63014 by Beachbum on August 12, 2007 at 11:04 pm

PeterK, I'm with you... as I try to untangle my fingers from my hair.

"Scientism" - Does this show a bias from a liberal arts degree toward a science major, or am I just wincing for nothing, er pun intended.

I live among many, many Asians here in the Islands and I would never presume to speak for them, nor would they for me. But, in my opinion, Prof. Dawkins would be well received there, as will his book. I just do not know what form the reaction to his book will take. Although I am sure that the response will be nothing like the American Evangelical Hysteria we have seen printed of late, they are far more emotionally measured than that breeching of the cannons.

18. Scarlet Letter Campaign Update: A Victory

Comment #62847 by Beachbum on August 11, 2007 at 9:03 pm

When dealing with crazies, one must be careful of what is said, even in jest.

Now I have to go rescue an "only religious" son from his devout Mormon father. The father has disowned his son and used his money to torment the boy because he chooses not to be a Mormon. If it happens tonight it will be the second time the father has physically attacked the son at his place of business.

In the comment that follows the self congratulatory rhetoric, is this line:

We are going 2 make so much money from your stupid idea that your going 2 wish you never thought of it.

Did I miss something?

19. Scarlet Letter Campaign Update: A Victory

Comment #62709 by Beachbum on August 11, 2007 at 12:13 am

HHHHHHuuuuuuuuuwhew, man! I will never get the smell of that crap out of my hair.

Yep! It's legit. A Creationist Wiki. Complete with ambiguous correlations to over simplified, sweeping generalizations of already discredited (or at least weightless) claims of scientific or historical evidence, put forth as substantial findings, unless one digs below the surface.

I've got a spy glass and a Sherlock Holmes outfit (actually just Tabbed Browsing) so I'm going to do more snooping around.

Tiny tablet provides proof for Old Testament. "...a discovery that supports the view that the historical books of the Old Testament are based on fact." The Telegraph. July 13, 2007.

But if one follows the link to the article in the Telegraph (wow, what a newspaper) and reads the article:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/07/11/ntablet111.xml

Noting the holes in the logic, one particular comment stands out:

Before people become too excited, let's examine more carefully the implications of this tablet. I can read cuneiform, and I know Dr.
Irving Finkel, who is an excellent scholar.

This tablet an important find, but it does
not have the more exaggerated biblical
fundamentalist implications that are being
assigned to it by some.

First, it is a mistake to assume that because
one biblical claim mentioned in the Bible is
confirmed by an independent source, then ALL
claims in the Bible are true. This tablet certainly
would confirm nothing about the supernatural
claims in the Bible.

Second, if one is going to assume that
everything is true in the Bible because one claim
is proven true, then one must apply this rationale
to all religions, including the Babylonian
religion.

After all, we could just reverse this rationale and
say that the Babylonian records are confirmed by
the biblical records, and so Babylonian claims
about the supernatural are correct.

Third, we are not completely sure that
"Nabu-sharrusu-ukin, the chief eunuch" is the
very same official mentioned in Jeremiah 39:3,
where the name is vocalized (in English
transcription) as Sarsechim (or Sarsekim).

But note that Sarsekim lacks the "Nabu"
part which we would expect in other names
("Nebu-chadnezzar") has it. Likewise, Nebu-
zaradan (2 Kings 25:8-11) retains the "Nebu"
part of the name, which refers to the god, Nabu
(or Nebo).

The issue is further complicated because in
Jeremiah 39:13 "The Rabsaris" ("the Chief
Eunuch") is named Nebushazban, which is a
different name deriving perhaps from the
Babylonian Nebu-shuzibanni (= "Nabu deliver
me").

Because of these problems, it has been
proposed that the name prior to Sarsekim in
Jeremiah 39:3 be redivided so that the "nebo" of
"Samgar-nebo" be joined with Sarsekim, which
would now yield Nebo-Sarsekim, a name closer
to the name found on the British Museum tablet.

Professor Michael Jursa, therefore, opted for
a re-division of the Hebrew text to get Nebo-
Sarsekim (so does the NIV, but not the KJV or
RSV).

However, this would mean that the biblical
text (or at least the standard Masoretic edition of
the Hebrew text) was WRONG in how it
transcribed the Babylonian name, or that
the text has been corrupted. It would mean that
we had to use Babylonian texts to CORRECT the
biblical mangling of the Babylonian name. That
should not inspire much confidence that biblical
scribes were always accurate.

Note also that the New American Bible
omits Sarsechim altogether in Jeremiah 39:3, and
substitutes Nebushazban (from Jeremiah 39:13).
So now one has to be specific as to WHICH
VERSION of "the Bible" one believes is
"confirmed." The NAB would be proven wrong by
this tablet.

So, yes, thank goodness for Mesopotamian
texts which have helped us immensely to
understand how mythological and how textually
corrupted biblical texts can be.

Posted by Dr. Hector Avalos on July 12, 2007 5:25 PM

My reason for this verbose bushwhacking is that whether satirical, parody, spoof or, for that matter comic strip, some people will read it as the "inspired word of god".

I like Poe's Law (the Internet one).

20. Scarlet Letter Campaign Update: A Victory

Comment #62676 by Beachbum on August 10, 2007 at 8:33 pm

71. Comment #62618 by coretemprising

"Now THIS is scary, and I don't think it's a parody either. Can anyone have a look-see and confirm or deny?"

I think you have found the belly of the Beast.

I have been reading the Talk: Main page and it all looks sincere enough...

Going down again, someone want to hold the lifeline for me? If I don't make it back in one peace, please remember me fondly, or better yet; put me out of my misery.

21. Does the Bible have a place in public schools?

Comment #61794 by Beachbum on August 6, 2007 at 10:50 pm

This is the point of teaching about the Bible:

In the 1490's another Oxford professor, and the personal physician to King Henry the 7th and 8th, Thomas Linacre, decided to learn Greek. After reading the Gospels in Greek, and comparing it to the Latin Vulgate, he wrote in his diary, "Either this (the original Greek) is not the Gospel… or we are not Christians." The Latin had become so corrupt that it no longer even preserved the message of the Gospel… yet the Church still threatened to kill anyone who read the scripture in any language other than Latin… though Latin was not an original language of the scriptures.

http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/

The Bible has only been a book of the people for what (giving the Pope the benefit of doubt) 500 years.

Cultural behemoth at the end of a whip, or worse.

12. Comment #61760 by Cartomancer:

Surely there is an intrinsic skewing of perspective in this endeavour? By focussing specifically on the interpretation of one text, one source, one influence in works of literature there is a very real danger that this influence is privileged and emphasised at the expense of other influences.

Herein lies the hint to the "actual" purpose of the curriculum. Very well stated Cartomancer, thank you.
And to all the comments and commenters, I think this thread reflects very well on us, does anyone else agree?

22. Does the Bible have a place in public schools?

Comment #61780 by Beachbum on August 6, 2007 at 9:30 pm

The comments on LA Times linked site are in agreement with us, for the most part. Well enough that I did not feel the need for additional comment from me.

I know US schools, peer pressure, mob mentality, covert political agendas, the path of least resistance, and god in government only adds validity to the stupidity. But, as a last retort in a discussion that I find myself loosing my audience, I will usually say, "Just read the book, it is its own worst enemy."

Does anyone really think that it would come up in class, in the US, that 200 years ago the mere suggestion that the bible was not inspired word of god, would lead to a "Bar-b-Que".

23. OUT Campaign Launched, 'Scarlet Letter' Shirts Now Available!

Comment #61774 by Beachbum on August 6, 2007 at 9:01 pm

I have had many people that visit Myspace ask about the "scarlet letter". All the proof of its affect I need. And my new T-shirts should be here soon.

24. The Flea Circus Invites a Newcomer!

Comment #60449 by Beachbum on August 2, 2007 at 1:32 am

"To stop a disease, it is paramount to know how it spreads." - Beachbum

Someone mentioned the history of religion, I think this could be a great angle of approach. They keep bringing up the old stuff, maybe we should "stuff" it back.

http://www.mapsofwar.com/ind/history-of-religion.html

This is interesting, but it would be nice to go way back, back to the first act of coercion through mysticism.

25. Rapture Ready: The Unauthorized Christians United for Israel Tour

Comment #59644 by Beachbum on July 30, 2007 at 3:06 am

And to think that until now I thought The Exorcist was a scary movie.

Excuse me sir, I'll take the red pill now.

Corylus eloquent, simply eloquent.

I am at a loss for words. I knew it was bad in this country, I just didn't know how pathetic it could get.

Am I the only one that noticed some familiar faces in the shadows? I think I need to do some video stripping and the research.

26. OUT Campaign Launched, 'Scarlet Letter' Shirts Now Available!

Comment #59596 by Beachbum on July 29, 2007 at 9:23 pm

OK then, great - we're all in agreement. Let's get out there spread the word and be counted. Choose your means to suit your taste, but make some noise. Before the fundies put the cockroach at the top of the food chain.

Oh, and they can say what they like about Atheists, but the one thing I did not see in the great shirt debate was apathy, and that speaks volumes.

CARE

27. Come Out!

Comment #59412 by Beachbum on July 29, 2007 at 1:48 am

After reading the info from the links posted by Rieux, by the way thanks, besides the T-shirts I may get a Tatoo.


Does anyone know who makes Large shipments of Red paint to Hawaii?

28. OUT Campaign Launched, 'Scarlet Letter' Shirts Now Available!

Comment #59399 by Beachbum on July 28, 2007 at 11:53 pm

Come-on people, it's a damn good cause. To show solidarity in the face of Religion, I can't describe (in mixed company) what I would not do for such an ideal.

As for individuality, I assert that I am one of the most individual, individuals... well let's put it this way - How many of the readers of this thread can claim that through the vast majority of their life, on the rare occasion that they did encounter a human, all you did was growl at them?

Some Salvation Army types tried to feed me one time in Alaska, but when they started that "Let us pray" stuff, I shoveled down the food I had and bolted for the door - and some of you can't handle the shirt?

One of those good samaritan types cornered me at a flea market once. She wanted to come to "my house". I said, "Sure, if you would shave my back for me when we get there." She hit the door so hard, she may not have noticed she opened it the wrong way. Yet some of you express concern about the font of the Logo.

Ok, this next one could be a toughie. On the count that we would "look" like another religious group with a big letter "A" in the same place as a fish or a cross or (and this is my favorite) a pair of hands, with nothing in them. When I am feeling confrontational, I sometimes ask if they are tired of coming up empty. Anyway, hold on, hold on - I just had a flash image of a group of us getting off a bus at the gate of a wilderness summer camp, all wearing our brand new T-shirts, oh-oh this isn't real. It can't be, want to know how I know, Too many life styles, too many occupations, choices of acquaintance, the age variations, because unlike the religious, we were not indoctrinated in adolescence and raised with like minded children. Something else that shirt stands in solidarity against. And besides, the reason some of us have picked up on the fact that, "they will treat us like another religion" is because they already do, so what, we know they are wrong and something tells me, so do they.

People this is serious, religious power mongers are using the poor, uneducated, hard working people of the world to further their agendas. How else could a fat cat with the keys to several Mansions in his pocket, beg for more money with a straight face - Greed, Power, Self-serving political aims. Nothing "good" I can ascertain.

When Dawkins, Dennett and the rest of the "Horsemen of the Anti-Apocalypse" speak of the fundies being enabled by the moderates I also think of another group, a far more hideous group that is propped up by the sincere goodwill of genuinely fine people. A group that uses god to justify their political agendas, their wars, their laws and prejudices, even upon their own family members - christ! Oops, did I say that out loud? Religion is not about "love" it's about POWER everything else is a cloak of wool.

So, maybe we should pick up some cotton to battle the wool fleeced from the flocks by the wolves in shepherds clothing. I think it can help.

Oh, if any of you find yourself in the occasion to eat a grub or a slug, just swallow, don't chew - they taste nasty, same goes for grasshoppers.

PZ Myers; Love your stuff, thanx.

29. Richler defends atheism

Comment #59012 by Beachbum on July 27, 2007 at 12:53 am

Oops, let give credit where credit is due. Greybishop, that was a very good comment and quote. Can I use it ALOT.

monoape; please post your response from BK as well, if you like, we can pick'em apart - uh I mean compare them.

You know how us intellectually stunted, Atheists rarely warrant clear concise responses to our questions.

And as for me... I have got to stop laughing and typing at the same time.

30. Richler defends atheism

Comment #59010 by Beachbum on July 27, 2007 at 12:36 am

I can post it, but you're going to need a roll cage for your eyeballs.

That is good, very good.

Damn, more safety equipment - first it was the helmet (prevents damage from banging ones head on the desk), next came the bandanna(so I can keep my hair), then I got myself a bungee cord (rolling desk chair and wood floors) and let us not forget the all important seat belt (sometimes that bungee cord works to well).

Yea, I would be very interested in knowing more about the mind of the opposition, even Barbra Kay.

I know, lets start a forum for posting emails from authors. We can do this in B.K.'s honour and call it "Picking Apart Piety" or PAP Smear for short, uh, too harsh.

31. Don't eat at the Outback Steakhouse on Route 3...

Comment #58992 by Beachbum on July 26, 2007 at 9:44 pm

Holy crap!

Now you all know first hand the type of dialog I have been up against for 40 years. This parrot of a priori is a cookie cutter copy of every bone head I grew up with, but avoided. Unless confronted by the exuberant proselytising of some misguided Bible thumper.

Ok class, what was that video a beautiful exemplification of...?
Right! Cherry picking, very good.

Quote mining! Another good one.

You can quote me on this: Nothing scares this type of person more than a free exchange of ideas, nothing. A dissenting view, is a call to arms.

To show this type that the bible condones slavery is only a mild irritant, secretly they wish slavery would come back to favor, but publicly would only stumble over the concept much like the word "Torah" from the video.

They are typically homophobic to an extreme, but are glad their book doesn't speak clearly and directly to incest.

But most importantly, the two most heinous things this Fundamentalist represents is hypocrisy and illiteracy, I mean, what he "knows" about the bible, he did not read in the bible. He is a tape recorder for his preacher who told him what to think and what he "knows".

Yea, bible-boy, I come from your neck of the woods.

32. All the mistakes of the godly are merely metaphor

Comment #58189 by Beachbum on July 24, 2007 at 1:09 am

Logicel, everyone these are some great comments. So I have a gift for everyone, a T-shirt slogan that I think works on several levels and it is simple and easy to remember:

God in government

only adds validity to the stupidity

and it works both ways.

Please remember that the religious doctrine, "dogma", conditioning, the "mind virus" is the stupid in my "stupidity" not the victims. I knew a second grader that spewed the Catholic dogma and she could not have even known the meanings of the words. I still blame her parents for that gem of religiosity.

Who says Atheists aren't generous. Feel free to use these on T-shirts, billboards, Graffiti (I love British graffiti as Art) or not at all.

33. Can the rest of us have our planet back?

Comment #57999 by Beachbum on July 22, 2007 at 9:51 pm

I got tears in my eyes.

I love British humour. All of his points aside, as good as they are, if he did that shtick for for 15 min. you all would have to remember me fondly as the blue beach dude.

Great, thanks for post.

34. Religion beat became a test of faith

Comment #57881 by Beachbum on July 21, 2007 at 9:30 pm

I was born an atheist, never been converted to or from anything. In fact, at the age of six, I was considered an "Outspoken Atheist". To say I admire his courage for writing about his experience with the loss of his downtrodden faith, would be misleading. I don't have the necessary experience in that regard to fully appreciate his position. On the other hand, I do understand the world that he is walking into and the help he could use on the journey. Might I suggest that we send an email to his address to show that he is by no means alone and maybe some links to some good sites on the web. Books as well, maybe some history; say Biography of Thomas Jefferson

Maybe, instead of railing against our view, he could rally for it.

35. All the mistakes of the godly are merely metaphor

Comment #57754 by Beachbum on July 20, 2007 at 10:41 pm

Logicel, your response to my question once again shows an understanding of the topic, that is a cut above the the fray. Also, in all fairness it shows an intellectual fortitude that seems to be unmatched by the occupants of the Theological camp.

Honestly, through my experience with the conversations of many years of interaction with the religiously mobilized, I have seen examples of your points to the extreme that evangelical zealots are inconsolable on any topic within a rocks throw of religion. Which means the religionists are doing a very good job of convincing the flock that they are experts at whatever they are preaching. So, by association, the flock now know it all.

My point is that we need a tact that appeals to their religious (intellectual) vanity.

Ouch! I think I just burnt a brain cell.

While convincing them that they are smart, can we show them how to be "smarter". Does this show a modicum of understanding of your answer.

In the spirit of the T-shirt slogan type stuff, I submit a few for your review:

The only thing universal about god is in its variations

Even beliefs can use a second opinion

Read the Bible, it is its own worst enemy

In all discourse, consider the source

Ask me about the Final Awakening

Please feel free to morph these into something "good", I just hope to start the fires.

36. All the mistakes of the godly are merely metaphor

Comment #57576 by Beachbum on July 20, 2007 at 1:24 am

I have a sign on my front door that reads:

The most heinous thing about religion is that it replaces ignorance with stupidity!

In line with everything else I write, there is much to be garnered from between the lines.

1. Ignorance, stemming from the dark and hostile time of early man through the Dark ages, when religion, at its peak of power, tried to keep the masses ignorant of everything except the preaching of the pontiff. Even reading the Bible was off limits for the layman.

2. The intellectual gymnastics involved in reverse engineering the known world of say 1600 to 1900 years ago to fit biblical accounts, not to mention what I like to call "copyright infringement" of a multitude of lesser theologies (I try to think of all religions as "pagan" and/or "cults").

3. The wholesale garnishment of innate morality for the supposition that it is god given as opposed to inborn through mutual cohabitation and natural selection.

4. By preaching the "word" every Sunday they lead people to feel they do not need to read the Bible or do their own research. "The preacher said that's what god ment." ,or "The preacher interpreted this verse that way and that's good enough for me."

To me this is wholesale Stupidity.

My question is: When we infer or imply either directly or inadvertently that religious people are stupid, do theologians or apologists, in their heart of hearts, feel this a good thing or a bad one?

37. Islamic Creationist and a Book Sent Round the World

Comment #56946 by Beachbum on July 17, 2007 at 11:59 pm

No, no I do not condone burning books. I do however subscribe to the notion that we are witnessing the death throws of a dying beast, religion, but until now I have been concerned about Islams lack of participation in these mindless convulsions. I feel better now.

38. Islamic Creationist and a Book Sent Round the World

Comment #56941 by Beachbum on July 17, 2007 at 11:32 pm

My house in Alaska has a wood burning stove and a fireplace... where is that UPS guy?

39. Charles Darwin - Legacy

Comment #55390 by Beachbum on July 11, 2007 at 1:13 am

I understand that specialization is a key component of efficient, academic understanding of the information garnered by each of these very capable and astute scientists, but it seems to me that an interdiscipline co-operation is at least at hand for a more complete understanding of the genetic power exerted on society and culture as a whole.

Writing this is someone who has observed man from the woods, as apposed to the other way around. And I have noticed many behavioral similarities in all the species, when their niche and class are considered. I have come to understand some of the behaviors that can be altered by free will for current circumstances; environment or maybe symbiotic relationships, and I have also noticed those behaviors that just cannot be "helped".

My point is that if we have to wait for human "fear of the unknown" to subside. Their rejection of evolutionary theory, religion may bolster their misconception of social status, to be subdued with reason, rational understanding and knowledge, before we can get a handle on this Global Warming dilemma. I am afraid we are in for an education in "punctuated equilibrium".

Does anyone know the number for the selfish gene helpline?

40. Christopher Hitchens - God Is Not Great

Comment #55068 by Beachbum on July 10, 2007 at 12:21 am

Some guy walks into the Betty Crocker school of Broadcasting and Rehab center with a drug (pick your poison) addiction. Wherein, his hook on the aforementioned poison is substantially reduced. Then at the door he turns and asks,"What do I replace it with? I'm lost."

Do we offer another drug or something spiritually related to a drug. OK, Howzabout we offer the bean sprout and tofu diet of Reason as an alternative. "Not me, but I came by it naturally - I love the stuff" (not tofu eww). Remember he was not attracted to rational thought originally, thus his slide into the opiate den.

How do we show him the world through eyes of wonder, instill in him 'a skeptic's ear'. Can we impress upon him that there is nothing "materialistic" about the makeup and majesty of the universe? Should we?

For me, it came from the woods, I mean, how everything fit together; bird, eggs, nest, branch, tree, grass, leaves, pond, tadpoles, frogs, rain, stars, sky, bird and me running around like a cherub (I was very young). In the world of man the pieces of the puzzle did not fit together so well, it was flat out confounding.

After our reformed addict realizes the pieces of the puzzle don't fit and we remind him to stay away from any other "misfits" he might encounter. Might it be enough, to show him the door to enlightenment and let him discover the world anew. May we even hope that he might take a friend?

41. Christopher Hitchens - God Is Not Great

Comment #55048 by Beachbum on July 9, 2007 at 9:45 pm

Got some info for Armory, Guys and Gals. I found a searchable Internet bible:

http://www.biblegateway.com/

Has many different versions, but the big thing is a keyword search.

I've read the damn thing 11 times, and it gets funnier every time I read it, but this is much faster.

keyword search for 'hell'= 14 hits starting with Matthew 5:23

42. Scientific Savvy? In U.S., Not Much

Comment #54416 by Beachbum on July 7, 2007 at 1:54 am

Ignorance is bliss; Religion is just something that makes one feel more important than a cursory analysis of ones past would suggest.

I can understand ignorance when the information is unavailable or even difficult to acquire. In the United States, neither of these points are at all possible. With schools, libraries, bookstores, cable TV, Internet, world news and world views ignorance is completely choice. And, I for one do not buy the argument that it is difficult to assimilate. Books on most science subjects can be found at every reading level, in several languages, not to mention the shows on Nickelodeon at the introductory level.

To choose ignorance is plain Stupidity.
To choose ignorance for your children is Criminal.

43. Science of the Soul? 'I Think, Therefore I Am' Is Losing Force

Comment #52765 by Beachbum on June 28, 2007 at 3:15 am

Humans were and are animals, there is NO difference at any level. If you think there is, I have some porpoises I would like to introduce you to.

I have often thought that the only difference between humans and animals was in the concept of deception. Since the discovery of an octopus that uses mimicry as a form of deception, I have had to let that one go.

I have spent most, no, the vast majority of my life in the wild both above and below the waterline. And I see the separation of humans and animals, at any level, as a vestige of religious divisional-ism.

The concept of a soul is akin to "Santa's Reindeer" a means by which a dead, decaying, carcass can be transported to "heaven". But what ever floats their ghost.

I think this is great news and I learned something I had overlooked in the reasons for the devotee's irrational rejection of evolution; their pedestals are getting hard to hold on to.

I know these are unsubstantiated personal observations and all this coming from a guy who just found out his cat is a Republican.

44. Executive Actions to Promote Religion Ruled Beyond Court Scrutiny

Comment #51987 by Beachbum on June 25, 2007 at 7:46 pm

Is there any hope to be had in the age of the justices? How many years before the current dogmatists are replaced? One step forward and two steps back.

When I first heard the "play by play" on CNN/Lou Dobbs, I got the feeling that the Supreme Court was washing their hands of this type of litigation - passing the buck to the states and Congress. It is a concern to me that it does give the President an Executive Order style window for faith-based initiatives and government programs, that are tax funded, to support faith oriented criteria, but they did not overturn Flast v. Cohen.
This latest decision too, can be overturned and will be I am sure of it.

This is why I feel it is inevitable: Thanks to Daniel Dennett, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and my personal favorite Christopher Hitchens the polite atheist is out and out to stay. I carry the "Imagine" fliers with me almost everywhere I go. Yes, I was one of the, "If they want to remain stupid, it's their prerogative." types. But now they are across the line with both feet and jamming their religion down my throat - my throat. No more Mr. Nice Guy. And I'm sure I am not the only natural born atheist that feels this way. It is past time to raise HELL, so raise it I will.
My second clue to the Religious Rights plan may very well be a wake up call for all of us, when understood for what it truly is; In 1986 the Fairness in Reporting act was overturned and rightfully so, due to the "potential for censorship" properties that were intrinsic in its implementation. A hand full of Republicans are looking to get it reenacted, this time it will cover not only the News Media, but blogs, websites like this one and Youtube, maybe myspace or anywhere that the free exchange of ideas are prevalent. Where have I heard that before, Free exchange of ideas, oh yeah, my countries Founding Fathers - Thomas Jefferson was big on that one, right.

What's that smell... it's? It's theocracy, Damn! Somebody's goin' to have to clean that up.

45. In the name of the Father

Comment #51653 by Beachbum on June 24, 2007 at 12:39 am

Mr. Hitchens is the cleanup batter in this, the latest inning of faithhead baseball. Of course he is a hard hitter, and in my opinion, a very necessary component of this struggle toward a rational atmosphere of unencumbered thought.

Can someone (anyone) explain to me where religious apologist find their definition of the word truth. Not one of the definitions I have found includes the words, "excepted doctrine" or "asserted dogma", not to mention flat out lies just because they are written in some old holy book.

What is that old saying? "What a tangled web we weave, when first we conspire to deceive."

I hold suspect, any conclusion, that is formulated from an argument that uses truth and religion in the same context.

I think the Bishop misses the days when men of power had to kneel and kiss his ring.

46. Bill O'Reilly and Kirk Cameron on Atheism

Comment #51433 by Beachbum on June 22, 2007 at 11:17 pm

Did I see O'really sputter on the "Croc-u-duck intro?

I may need to paddle my Kayak to Australia, can one of you Aussies put me up for a while?

I am truly ashamed! The next time I see a "croc" like that -I'll-"duck". And I know my Mom is watching that moron.

Forget the Kayak, I'll swim.

47. We stand awed at the heights our people have achieved

Comment #50401 by Beachbum on June 17, 2007 at 7:24 pm

32. Comment #49869 by Macque wrote:

The ageing argument of "Atheists just don't understand" is looking more and more desperate and , quite frankly, pathetic.

I am in complete agreement with this statement, but I am afraid it goes much deeper than this mild accusation. I am sure that my experience with being called "closed minded" is not an isolated case.

I feel that ours is a position from which to seek understanding, it's the lazy mind that rests on the doctrine, takes comfort in the dogma then peddles the brand of opiate that is religion.

We simply do not accept the short cut of magical thinking that allows the lazy-minded to follow the path of religious escapism. - PZ Myers

My mother taught me to never spread rumors. This is my youngest perception of religion.

Thank you PZ Myers, an eloquent essay.

48. In the know

Comment #50335 by Beachbum on June 16, 2007 at 11:41 pm

25. Comment #50238 by Corylus
I think you are absolutely correct. Even my icon has trouble with the amount certainty of an apologist (backed by their "unquestionable authority") or maybe it is that the thinly veiled arrogance can even surpass his own, "don't know".

Throughout history, the certainty displayed by the devout is as unmistakable as the smoke from burning flesh, forgive me.

28. Comment #50244 by Logicel
I have always had the highest respect for your input on this site, and again you assail maybe the biggest problem I have with the apologists. That they keep their argument somewhere between an 'ambiguous greased pig' and an "Oh, but that's not what it means", referring to yet another misinterpretation of a mistranslated text that was "undoubtedly" misquoted. Is it ok if I leave my boots on, for what usually comes next?

49. The Great God Debate

Comment #50227 by Beachbum on June 15, 2007 at 10:15 pm

I like delusion: Noun
1. (psychology) an erroneous belief that is held in the face of evidence to the contrary
2. A mistaken or unfounded opinion or idea
3. The act of deluding; deception by creating illusory ideas

illusion:Noun
1. An erroneous mental representation.
2. Something many people believe that is false.
3. The act of deluding; deception by creating illusory ideas.
4. An illusory feat; considered magical by naive observers.

I think the body count makes the difference.

50. A Compass That Can Clash With Modern Life

Comment #50080 by Beachbum on June 14, 2007 at 10:50 pm

And here I thought "fatwa" was What the F*** Anagramed Backwards, sorry.