1. Plan to exhume cardinal is 'homophobic'

Comment #237182 by carbonman on August 26, 2008 at 7:00 am

Nothing at all can be gained by moving this man's remains. The proposal to move them seems to be an act of arrant selfishness on the part of the church: in their self-centred eyes, their meaningless rituals trump the man's last wishes.

That said, if I were the man buried, I wouldn't give a hoot where they put my bones, as long as they didn't cause my descendants unnecessary grief by moving them.

2. Prayer refusal pupils 'disciplined'

Comment #204859 by carbonman on July 6, 2008 at 1:17 am

Please can I go into detention too? The prophet was a self-interested pervert. He doesn't get any respect from me.

Used to live near Alsager. Had a girlfriend who went to that school. Brings it all close to home.

There is rampant religious indoctrination (usually Christian) in British state schools. Daily, children are subjected to sermons and brainwashing, and it's all perfectly legal, sadly. But anyone standing up and promoting atheism as a viewpoint risks dismissal. That is one reason why I shall never return to teach in my home country.

3. Darwin still causing waves after 150 years

Comment #188730 by carbonman on June 4, 2008 at 12:30 pm

JLD:

Anyone know of a really good book that thoroughly explains evolution from top to bottom?

4. Repulsive but right

Comment #184748 by carbonman on May 26, 2008 at 5:29 am

Kettle's spouting is based on a misguided (but massively popular) assumption that both sides of the debate deserve equal credence. People lose sight of the fact (yes, fact) that theism is ridiculous, mind-amputating, corrosive garbage.

The Bishop knows he hasn't a leg to stand on so he goes for the popularity vote. He might be the nicest guy in the world but that doesn't prove his religion made him that way.

Hitchens justifiably tears into theist arguments. He has to, because they're blindly accepted by so many who have become inured to their obvious falsehood. Moderate theists need to be snapped out of their comfortable conviction that religion is all about people being nice. If it takes tough guys like Hitch to wake them up, then so be it. Medicine that's good for you might taste nasty.

Kettle's ad hominem drivel is nothing but steam.

5. Lab agrees to test Shroud of Turin for new theory

Comment #183160 by carbonman on May 21, 2008 at 1:20 pm

I met David Rolfe thirty years ago and saw a private screening of the original 'Silent Witness'. Even through my naive (then fifteen-years-old) eyes it was obviously a very biased piece, with theist 'scientists' narrating in hushed, awed tones, claiming that the image had been formed by a 'burst of radiation' which 'probably also caused the resurrection'.

The latest fuss is just another manifestation of the childish impulse to keep repeating the question until they get the answer they want.

6. Teenager faces prosecution for calling Scientology 'cult'

Comment #182742 by carbonman on May 20, 2008 at 11:25 pm

I guess all those who call Star Trek and Dr Who followings 'cults' should be prosecuted too?

This issue is extremely silly and illustrates what happens when morons with no forethought are put in positions where they can dictate law.

7. Richard Dawkins Interview on TVOntario

Comment #182240 by carbonman on May 19, 2008 at 1:26 pm

Unorfadox,

Assuming one subscribes to a (more or less) evolutionary basis for morality - something like the idea that morality became engrained in humanity because societies inclined to be moral towards others in their social group tended to survive better than societies without the cohesion that morality brings* - there would seem to be a more obvious rebuttal for the idea that 'God did it' than he currently seems to use.

8. Richard Dawkins Interview on TVOntario

Comment #181855 by carbonman on May 18, 2008 at 12:57 pm

Watching the vid now, on part 6 out of 7. Funny how I can manage to listen to the theists and type at the same time, while missing nothing of their 'arguments' (just been back to check). These three seem to believe what they're saying, blind to their own blatant misrepresentations and misquotation of RD. The lady is a rampant dualist, a bit like Sam Harris's description of his simultaneous quests to get near and far away from the US Consulate. She wants to have her cake and eat it: "I agree with a lot of what Dawkins says but I still believe in God, so there." What did Bertrand Russell say... People generally would sooner die than think, and most in fact do. Or something like that.

edit: These 3 theists' speeches seem to drag on way longer than RD's, yet the clips are the same length. [yawn] Oh no, Imam Shillbilly has just launched into a diatribe on the magisteria of science and religion... RD debunked this years ago... [yawns again]

Second edit: made it to the end. The three theists are classic cloud-cuckoo-land dwellers who've convinced themselves they're arguing rationally.

Final thought: RD performed brilliantly and it's always easy for viewers like me to be wise after the event, but I'd like to think I'd have responded to Paikin's 'respect' kick like this. By describing the OT God as a "...malevolent, capricious, (&c.) bully" RD is not being disrespectful toward any person. He is being, quite rightly, disrespectful toward a belief system. Therefore, he has not violated the (admittedly, as RD correctly says, not very important to the point at issue) atheist commandment that Paikin quotes from TGD. To summarise: we should of course be respectful toward people when we debate. We can systematically tear into people's beliefs and opinions, because that's what debate is.

This post is too long.

9. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #181678 by carbonman on May 17, 2008 at 10:55 pm

Yes, of course we shouldn't liken the rabbi to Hitler. Hitler sanctioned barbarous acts, believing he was right to do so. That makes Hitler nothing like the rabbi at all. After all, no rabbi would approve of attacking a defenceless baby and cutting off part of his genitalia, would he? That would be the sort of thing a cruel monster like Hitler would have done, nothing like what civilized rabbis do, right?

10. The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing, ed. Richard Dawkins

Comment #181551 by carbonman on May 17, 2008 at 12:21 pm

Great Teapot said

You asked them to recharge you?Where do you get such moral values from?
You been reading the buybull on the sly?

11. The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing, ed. Richard Dawkins

Comment #181149 by carbonman on May 16, 2008 at 1:23 pm

Took 6 weeks for Amazon to get the book past customs in this crazy place. They'd refunded me when it finally got here, and I've just asked them to re-charge me. About to start reading.

12. On Fitna, the Movie

Comment #178677 by carbonman on May 11, 2008 at 10:23 pm

When so-called 'nice' theists huff and puff about being lumped in with 'nasty' ones, we see the religious mind virus at work in its most insidious way: it makes people (moderate theists) defend a baseless belief system while appearing to attack aspects of it. That, in turn, propagates the belief system and allows extremism to flourish. I suppose it's a bit like alcoholics in denial. They form a nice cosy group and ignore the underlying problem.

13. Richard Dawkins interviewed by John Humphrys on Cardinal Murphy O'Connor

Comment #178299 by carbonman on May 11, 2008 at 5:45 am

The cardinal is trying, rather ineptly, to appeal to the old nod-provoking pseudo-argument that says people of faith are nicer, warmer, more genuine and more human than those who follow only cold, logical reason. It's a bit like Dr McCoy looking down his nose at Mr Spock, but less well scripted.

If that's the best line the theists can offer, they're desperate.

14. My Response to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #177549 by carbonman on May 9, 2008 at 9:27 am

There must be at least some atheists who have Jewish ancestry, and for whom the holocaust is an exruciatingly painful and recent memory. Therefore, when theists use the tired old 'Hitler was an atheist' tack, why don't they get all affronted and upset like Shmuley does? Probably because they would rather respond rationally, and calmly refute the silly 'point' the theists think they have made.

Richard's comparison of Shmuley's ranting to that of Hitler is accurate. While I see the point some posters in this thread have made (i.e. that using Hitler's name gave Shmuley ammunition), I think drawing the rabbi's fire in this way caused him to show his true colours, which he might not otherwise have done.

Shmuley is 100% emotion-driven. He has made that abundantly clear.

15. My Response to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #177441 by carbonman on May 9, 2008 at 5:22 am

Five minutes of Boteach's brainless noise and I'd had enough. RD is right about his shrieking tactics. Boteach is simply trying to whip up mob hysteria. In that sense he is directly comparable with other mob-shriekers, probably the most notorious of whom is Hitler.

16. Investigating Atheism

Comment #166905 by carbonman on April 23, 2008 at 1:35 pm

The thinly veiled knee-jerk defensiveness of the site suggests the Faculty of Divinity sees atheism as a threat. I guess the smallpox virus, had it possessed the power of reason, may have felt the same way about the vaccination program.

17. Mecca should become core to measure time zones: scholars

Comment #165790 by carbonman on April 22, 2008 at 10:29 am

Yeah, great idea. Let's put 0 degrees longitude in Mecca. Then the International Date Line will run right through the Yukon, and it'll be Monday in Alaska when it's Sunday in Canada.

Back to the drawing board, guys.

18. Richard Dawkins' secular army must be stopped. God is behind some of our greatest art

Comment #160795 by carbonman on April 14, 2008 at 11:50 am

Incredibly arrogant and condescending article. Yes, Christianity is a myth, but some simple people need to believe in it so they can paint nice pictures or write music with f-words in it for me to enjoy. Grrrr.

19. Biologists Take Evolution Beyond Darwin Way Beyond

Comment #156128 by carbonman on April 6, 2008 at 11:23 pm

#28: The genes for better communication will be selected in the environment of other communicators. Think of other group members as part of the environment in which the gene operates; don't get distracted by lumping the whole group together as one.

20. Biologists Take Evolution Beyond Darwin Way Beyond

Comment #155949 by carbonman on April 6, 2008 at 12:06 pm

"Microbes make up much of Earth's biomass, and they also cast into relief the shortcomings of neo-Darwinian evolution. A bucket of seawater can contain 60,000 bacterial species, and to Woese, these must be seen as a collective rather than as disparate units.

At the collective level, said Woese, bacteria exhibit patterns of organization and behavior that emerge suddenly, at tipping points of population variation and density called "saltations." Natural selection still favors -- or disfavors -- the ultimate outcome of these jumps, but the jumps themselves seem to defy explanation solely through genetic changes or individual properties."

Whoa! First paragraph is based on a wrong assumption in the final few words. Whoever said a species was a disparate unit?

Second paragraph compounds the same mistake. Populations are not copied into competing daughter-populations, then to be targeted by selection.

The content of the article is old hat. 'Tis nothing more than a huge cloudy symbol of a high romance.

21. Sue Blackmore debates Alister McGrath

Comment #155725 by carbonman on April 5, 2008 at 11:43 am

McGrath has no arguments. He has been spouting the same speech for years, saying that Christianity 'makes the world make sense' but failing to explain HOW it makes sense. He gets away with this because he complacently relies on the support of the sober, traditional Christian moderate movement which is still disturbingly real in the UK. Without that tacit underpinning of pseudo-intellectual support he would deflate like a farting balloon.