Comments by madpatriot

Comment #69250 by madpatriot on September 10, 2007 at 6:59 am

Never forget, there was a lot of heavy propaganda (and worse) for a geocentric universe going around in the catholic church for years after Galileo's heretical claims of a heliocentric "solar system".
So who won on that on?

At the rate things are going here in the U.S., I'm not so sure that one is over.

I genuinely though the article was a parody !

WorldNetDaily tends to have that effect on sane people. They are the sort of wackos that make Poe's Law work.

2. In Google Earth, a Service for Scanning the Heavens

Comment #64866 by madpatriot on August 22, 2007 at 5:53 am

Sounds cool, but it won't replace Celestia. Not yet, anyway.

3. Supreme Court nixes suit over faith-based plan

Comment #51892 by madpatriot on June 25, 2007 at 1:39 pm

Waitaminute....

So taxpayers opposed to their money being funnelled to religious organizations have no right to complain, says the administration.

Meanwhile, Bush vetoes increased Federal funding of stem cell research. One reason he has given for this is Christian taxpayers don't want their money used for the destruction of embryos.

So, the lesson here is that... taxpayers' opinions only count if they are Christian.

4. 'Purity' ring case in High Court

Comment #51276 by madpatriot on June 22, 2007 at 7:35 am

I dunno, I'm torn here. I can't see the point of forbidding someone to wear a ring, even if I disagree with what it symbolizes. On the other hand, by attending the school she agreed to foloow the dress code. Pointing out the exceptions made for other students, and violations by other students, does not absolve her of her responsibility to follow the rules.

The whole 'purity' thing, especially the bizarre father/daughter purity dance phenomenon here in the states, really creeps me out. Isn't it enough for the girls who want to abstain to just abstain? Do they have to make such a public show of it? I don't think that's WJWD.

That said, it's somewhat a shame - ehe's kinda cute. If she was of age, and there wasn't an ocean and her creepy pastor dad and her archaic beliefs in the way, I'd totally hit that. ;)

5. Dawkins v. Collins Debate

Comment #23363 by madpatriot on February 28, 2007 at 6:23 am

Mind_Rebel, it sounds like you're advocating some sort of thought police guarding the gates to the scientific community. A big problem with this would be the ammunition it would provide to creationists. They already try to insinuate that scientists are all anti-Christian, and now you want to give them proof?

Not to mention that you'd be elimininating large numbers of scientists who might make valuable contributions to their fields. Turning the scientific community into a perfect monoculture of rationalists and atheists would probably weaken it.

Besides, peer review exists for precisely this reason. If a scientist's work is invalid because of their irrational worldview, it shouldn't get very far. If the work is valid, it shouldn't matter if the scientist himself believes in nonsense.

6. Pope speaks out against 'designer babies'

Comment #23116 by madpatriot on February 26, 2007 at 12:35 pm

As is typical for the Catholic Church, apparently quantity is more important than quality when it comes to life.

Just look at how well that mentality is working in Africa!

7. Review of 'The Quotable Atheist'

Comment #22474 by madpatriot on February 19, 2007 at 7:39 am

Verses 4-10 of any Psalm would be a much longer text than that quote. It's definitely not any part of Psalm 5. Or any Psalm. In fact, I've searched several translations of the entire Bible (thanks to biblegateway.com) and can't find anything like that quote. I even tried Googling some of the phrases, and get no hits.

8. Believing In Things Unseen Is Not Delusion

Comment #20739 by madpatriot on February 6, 2007 at 7:43 am

Eh, this guy's not so bad, as far as the believers go. Richard is doing well to have even moderate Episcopalians worrying about his book. :)

Pride, we are taught, goeth before a fall, and pride begins, I believe, when we start to think that we, and we alone, have it all figured out.

This is something that both the religious and non-religious could stand to keep in mind. However, I think the scientific world-view is much more conducive to the realization that we don't have it all figured out. Scientific knowledge is always subject to falsification. Divine revelation is not.

Fanciful? Perhaps, but we have no more reason to question the historicity of the major events of Jesus' life than we do, say, Agincourt.

I call bullshit here. We have basically one account of Jesus' life, written and compiled by biased Christians after the fact. There are all kinds of historical records pertaining to Agincourt, from French and English financial records to eyewitness accounts (many probably just as biased as the Gospels, but from more than one point of view).

I do not want to live an unexamined faith. I want to question and poke and prod, to doubt like Saint Thomas—but, in the presence of convincing evidence, to fall with Thomas to my knees, and be thankful.

That's fine, as long as you are willing to recognize that some of us do not find your evidence convincing... and as long as you are willing to restrain your fellow believers if they decide to start burning us at the stake again.

9. Morals do not conquer all in decision making

Comment #20063 by madpatriot on January 31, 2007 at 7:49 am

A convoy of food trucks is on its way to a refugee camp during a famine in Africa. (Airplanes cannot be used). You find that a second camp has even more refugees. If you tell the convoy to go to the second camp instead of the first, you will save 1,000 people from death, but 100 people in the first camp will die as a result.

This is a silly puzzle. If I'm only carrying enough food for 100 people, I can't save all of the 1,000 from starving anyway. If I have enough for 1,000 or more, why not split it up and send one of the trucks to the original camp with enough for 100 while the rest go to the second camp?

I prefer the one where the passenger train is about to crash into a parked freight train, likely killing everyone on board, but you can save it by switching it onto a side track, where it will run over a railroad worker.

10. [Warning: Graphic] Children's foreheads slashed in Muslim saint's name

Comment #20043 by madpatriot on January 31, 2007 at 6:16 am

Very true, Mango.

How many of these children will one day be walking around with explosives strapped to their bodies? They've already been taught the first lesson of the suicide bomber - that "Allah's will" is more important than their health, or their life.

11. A Middle Ground for Stem Cells

Comment #18266 by madpatriot on January 19, 2007 at 7:48 am

If the Bush administration really believes that the destruction of embryos left over from in vitro fertilization is tantamount to murder, they should shut down all the in vitro clinics. The fact that they have not done so exposes them as hypocrites.

The article writer also ignores the fact that an embryo at this stage has not yet developed a brain. A person whose brain has ceased functioning is legally dead, so why should a person whose brain has not yet formed be considered legally alive?

It seems reasonable that the biological parents would be the ultimate arbiters of what can be done with the embryo, just as they would be for any deceased minor child. If they wish to turn the embryos over for research, there is no logical reason to deny federal funding to the researchers.

12. Radical cleric sparks fury in Australia

Comment #18264 by madpatriot on January 19, 2007 at 7:35 am

It's not the mosques that are the problem, CodeCrack, it's the insanity of the people inside. Mosques, like cathedrals or religiously-inspired music, can be beautiful works of art, if you can overlook the bizarro belief systems of their builders.

Although I'm a proud citizen of the USA and believe in free speech, I think there is an argument to be made that you've crossed a line once you start comparing a group of people to pigs and calling for suicide bombings. At that point, perhaps society has the right to stop you from speaking, or at least to isolate you where no one can hear your speech.

That should go for intolerant muslim clerics, and for windbags like Bill O'Reilly and Ann Coulter as well.

13. A deadly certitude

Comment #18066 by madpatriot on January 18, 2007 at 6:25 am

I can go one better on ontological proofs.

Imagine a being than which something more yellow, absorbent, and porous cannot be conceived. This being must be Spongebob Squarepants. A being which exists is obviously more yellow, absorbent, and porous than a being which does not exist*. If Spongebob Squarepants does not exist, then it is possible to conceive of an existent being more yellow, absorbent, and porous. Therefore, Spongebob Squarepants does exist.

Please visit nick.com, where you can purchase the entire documentary series exploring the life of our yellow, absorbent, and porous Lord and Savior, Spongebob Squarepants.

* - notice that these adjectives, unlike "great", actually do make sense in the context. An existent sponge can absorb water, a nonexistent sponge cannot, thus an existent sponge is truly more absorbent than a nonexistent one. "Great" doesn't work like that... is an existent Adolf Hitler "greater" than an nonexistent Adolf Hitler? I think not.

14. Christian Shrine Needs Two Exits, Israel Says

Comment #17872 by madpatriot on January 17, 2007 at 6:02 am

You know, at one time in the past there was no church there. So the building of the church itself was a "violation of the status quo". Let's tear it down!

Living in Alabama, I've seen many churches completely destroyed by tornadoes. Including one destroyed on Palm Sunday (one week before Easter) while the congregation was inside. We also had about a dozen churches hit by arsonists about two years ago - none were destroyed if I remember correctly, but still... It certainly doesn't show God as having a very good track record of protecting his worshippers' investments.

15. Wash. school board restricts Gore's global-warming film

Comment #17773 by madpatriot on January 16, 2007 at 6:46 am

Hey, I've got a new game we can play. The idea is to come up with sentences that are logically equivalent and equally nonsensical to this:

Condoms don't belong in school, and neither does Al Gore. He's not a schoolteacher.

I'll start:
Nuclear weapons don't belong in the zoo, and neither does the train. It's not an animal.

16. Send a Message to God: He has gone too far this time

Comment #17619 by madpatriot on January 15, 2007 at 6:19 am

NoLongerHaveBelief,

7/11? Why, if it weren't for 7/11, where would I get my Slurpees?

17. Conservative Atheists

Comment #17618 by madpatriot on January 15, 2007 at 6:10 am

Yes, I'm embarrassed by the religious right in my party, but I'm certainly not going to vote for a party that doesn't believe in national sovereignty, but does believe in confiscating my paycheck so they can socialize medicine and further expand the welfare state.

So, you prefer the party that confiscates your paycheck a bit less AND runs up a massive debt that our children will have to pay later, so they can wage pointless wars and subsidize oil companies (the most profitable corporations on earth)? Yes, I just constructed a strawman, but yours looked lonely and I thought he needed a friend.

After 8 years of Condi as president...

This should be a terrifying thought. The fact that it isn't is a testament to how much 8 years of G.W. Bush has lowered expectations.

I don't care who someone has sex with as long as they want to see good strict constructionists sitting on the Supreme Court.

Um, looking at the current justices who would classify themselves as strict constructionists, I can't imagine anyone who cares about any sort of sexual liberty wanting more of them on the Court. Now if you refer to justices who actually ARE strict constructionists, rather than those that just claim to be when it leads to the same conclusion as their kapitalism uber alles dogma, then I might agree with you.

18. Readers Write: Atheist Sam Harris on Torture and Faith

Comment #17143 by madpatriot on January 11, 2007 at 7:21 am

My infant child is abducted and will be mutilated and killed at zero hour. I have an individual in my custody who has information relevant to this event and the outcome. This person will not give up the information. I torture this individual until he/she tells me where my child is and I rescue it.

I had somewhat the same thoughts when I was pondering the torture question. Of course, I didn't think this was a policy that I'd like to see actually codified into law - I'd prefer that it remain illegal, and if someone ever did save thousands of lives by doing, we'd sort of look the other way and not prosecute. Heck, we've done that plenty of times for people who haven't saved lives (just ask Oliie North).

The thing that bugs me, though, is the simple fact that someone being tortured will say anything to make it stop. When the person you're torturing gives you bad information, and you fail to rescue your child, then what do you do?

19. Pat Robertson: God told me of 'mass killing' in 2007

Comment #15995 by madpatriot on January 4, 2007 at 5:51 am

LOL, Tinky Winky.

OK, so Pat says "I have a relatively good track record. Sometimes I miss."

If God is speaking to him, why does Pat take credit for the track record? And if God is making the predictions, how could they ever be wrong?

Obviously Pat is not just a liar, but a bad one. He should not have made the statement above, which makes it obvious that these are his predictions and not God's. He should have said something like "These predictions have a relatively good track record. Sometimes I misinterpret what the Lord is telling me."

I suppose by now, though, the people who are still listening to him are so devoid of reason that they wouldn't know the difference.

20. How Old is the Grand Canyon? Park Service Won't Say

Comment #15714 by madpatriot on January 2, 2007 at 8:18 am

Veronique,
I think your brother's friends may be a bit on the paranoid side. I used a credit card to purchase The God Delusion without thinking twice. I'm pretty sure the only records tying the book to me are held at Barnes and Noble - the only data that goes to the bank is the dollar amount of the total purchase.

I think the biggest fear atheists reasonably have here is their job security. Many states have so-called 'right to work' laws that allow employers to terminate employees without cause, and the burden of proof in discrimnination cases rests on the employee. And, our vaunted "freedom of expression" means that many companies are run by fundamentalist wackos who have no problem making it clear that they only want fellow believers working for them.

21. Talk in Class Turns to God, Setting Off Public Debate on Rights

Comment #13709 by madpatriot on December 19, 2006 at 6:52 am

I went to a Catholic high school in Alabama, and we learned about evolution in biology class. I can't once remember a history teacher talking about people going to hell. Yes, there was a required "theology" course, but it included comparative religion, ethics and morals, and other good stuff in addition to the obvious Bible study (which of course was approached from the official Catholic view that the Bible is a book of spiritual truths inspired by the Holy Spirit, not a book of literal truth dictated directly by God).

We actually had a surprisingly diverse group of students, because the school was academically superior to pretty much any of the public schools, and everyone's point of view was considered worthy of civilized discussion - even the pro-choice atheist girl who loved the Dead Kennedys.

It's a bit weird to think that a teacher at a public school is stepping over boundaries that the nuns and priests at my Catholic school wouldn't dream of crossing.

22. The Milk of Evolution

Comment #12892 by madpatriot on December 14, 2006 at 8:16 am

Cool... perhaps in the "near" future our descendants' genetic makeup might shift enough so that they can tolerate the high-fructose corn syrup, trans fat, and other junk in the modern food supply. Oh, and the hormones in milk, pesticides on produce, antibiotics in chicken, the mercury in the fish, and so forth.

23. In case you didn't know I'm a fool, here's an article to prove it.

Comment #12878 by madpatriot on December 14, 2006 at 6:36 am

aidanjt,
You are (probably) right that directly observing a string will be impossible. But, if string theory predicts different behaviors of particles than the Standard Model, or predicts the existence of currently unknown particles that we later detect, then it can be verified at least provisionally.

Remember, no scientific theory can really be proven true. An observation made tomorrow might poke a hole in the theory, at which time it will be falsified, and a new theory will be needed that not only explains the new data, but also explains why the old theory worked in every other case.

24. Atheists' bleak alternative

Comment #12875 by madpatriot on December 14, 2006 at 6:14 am

Writing in the Telegraph, editor-at-large Jeff Randall -- who describes himself as "somewhere between an agnostic and a mild believer" -- announces that any Christmas card he receives that doesn't at least mention the word "Christmas" goes straight into the trash. "Jettisoning Christmas-less cards is my tiny, almost certainly futile, gesture against the dark forces of political correctness," he writes.

What a jerk. I don't know if he has any Jewish friends, but if he does, he's probably throwing out their Chanukkah cards without looking at them. It would serve him right if one of them had had some money in it! And, could someone explain to me when political correctness (an unfortunately unweildy term for respect and tolerance) became a 'dark force'?

And it isn't only in December that this anti-Christian animus rears its head. British Airways triggered a furor when it ordered an employee to hide the tiny cross she wears around her neck. At the BBC, senior executives agreed that they would not air a program showing a Koran being thrown in the garbage -- but that the trashing of a Bible would be acceptable.

Okay, I'd agree here that British Airways is out of bounds in trying to control their employees' dress. Now, if she were also witnessing on the job... but no Christian would do that. (chuckle)

I'm also not a big fan of the idea that we should show more respect to the Koran than the Bible. Frankly, I'd rather see both of them trashed, and anyone who threatens human lives to retaliate for 'disrespect' shown to a BOOK needs to be locked up in the looney bin.

A "tyrannical minority" of intolerant secularists is openly contemptuous of traditional moral norms. "The teachings and guidance of old-fashioned Christianity offend them, so they seek to remove all traces of it from public life."

As well they should. Old-fashioned Christianity gave us the Inquisition and the Crusades. The Bible demands that unruly children be stoned to death, as well as heretics, adulterers, homosexuals, and even rape victims in certain circumstances.

Secular absolutists demand that schools and government venues be cleansed of any hint of religious expression -- be it a cross on the Los Angeles County seal, a courthouse display of the Ten Commandments, or the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance.

As does the Constitution of the United States.

25. Faith's Last Gasp

Comment #12530 by madpatriot on December 12, 2006 at 12:20 pm