1. Church of Scotland mediators to quell disputes

Comment #178252 by gcdavis on May 11, 2008 at 3:01 am

kaharoa Brilliant!

I wonder is Gordon Brown will join the debate, his father was a minister of the Kirk, probably not, he is rather preoccupied at the moment!

2. Pat Condell: Anthology DVD available now!

Comment #172709 by gcdavis on April 30, 2008 at 1:02 am

Recognition at last for a brilliant polemicist and entertainer; many off us have suggested a prominent link on this site to Pat's videos, however RDFRS must have been working behind the scenes to produce this, well done to Pat and RDFRS.

3. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #172135 by gcdavis on April 29, 2008 at 8:59 am

Atheists have not only engaged in suicide bombings, but have pioneered the practice -- specifically, the Marxist Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka

Correct me if I'm wrong but the Tamil Tigers are a nationalist, separatist organisation seeking a Tamil homeland in northern Sri Lanka. They have been responsible for atrocities and suicide attacks but I don't think they are overtly Marxist.

I have to say I don't entirely understand Dawkins's thinking here -- how, after all, could the executions of religious figures not follow logically from the promotion of atheism?

Tyrants dispose of those who threaten or confront them, the Russian Orthodox church was a potential threat. He didn't kill for atheism, he killed to maintain his power, these dolts just don't seem to get it!

4. The science of religion: Where angels no longer fear to tread

Comment #148822 by gcdavis on March 24, 2008 at 2:26 am

You don't need to spend much time trying to find a biological reason for the existence of religion. For most of human history god was the ONLY reasonable explanation for the events that human beings experienced but had no control over. If we had lived 5000 years ago we would have assumed that an electric storm had occurred for a reason, what better explanation than the anger of an unseen diety?

Science has explained the true nature of an electric storm and many other things besides. The reason that so many people still believe in god is that they have been born into cultures where these tired old myths are still peddled by self serving priests whose purpose in life is the continuation of their own brand of the supernatural.

As most of humankind are poorly educated and ignorant of course they do not question religious authority. That religion persists in the developed world is because the religious brainwashing is more sophisticated, but its days are surely numbered. It may take 20, 50, or 100 years for that tipping point to occur, but it surely will, when human beings see belief in god is as ridiculous as belief in santa.

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

Comment #138942 by gcdavis on March 5, 2008 at 1:12 am

If you are an Anglican then yes he is defender of your faith, if you are of another faith he may still be useful as a general advocate in defence of faith based issues, if you are a secularist, then he is an old fart in a dress!

6. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #127353 by gcdavis on February 15, 2008 at 7:24 am

257. Comment #127350
Thanks for the helpful advise, no advice, blast helpful comments

7. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #127347 by gcdavis on February 15, 2008 at 7:11 am

I have managed to track down the origins of WTF?, it is not a new gambit but one that pre-dates even Philip78's Stovold's dramatic tea drinking move, in fact it was first played by Madeline Bunting in 1937. How about that?

8. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #127341 by gcdavis on February 15, 2008 at 7:04 am

I sense that Annabanana is issuing a mild rebuke, or is this a new gambit?

9. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #127333 by gcdavis on February 15, 2008 at 6:58 am

I know I'm not playing any more but can Henri do that?
"popping out to Gloucester Road"

10. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #127329 by gcdavis on February 15, 2008 at 6:51 am

Quetzalcoatl

God moves in mysterious ways

11. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #127322 by gcdavis on February 15, 2008 at 6:45 am

Quetzalcoatl Too late!
http://www.hpmosque.org.au/modules/content/?id=11

irate_atheist
One doesn't like to be a bad looser but I see from the IMCC that you missed two drugs tests during the close season!

12. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #127311 by gcdavis on February 15, 2008 at 6:35 am

No need for (?), I cannot match your double clanger, I will concede.

13. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #127302 by gcdavis on February 15, 2008 at 6:30 am

Hang on, weren't the South Circular Rules banned in 1983?

14. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #127299 by gcdavis on February 15, 2008 at 6:28 am

Good, that's very good!

Tooting Bec

15. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #127296 by gcdavis on February 15, 2008 at 6:26 am

Damm!

16. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #127293 by gcdavis on February 15, 2008 at 6:25 am

Marble Arch

Seems so obvious doesn't it?

17. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #127290 by gcdavis on February 15, 2008 at 6:20 am

May I suggest to Henri if he decides to take up Irate_Atheist's challenge

Theydon Bois

18. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #127217 by gcdavis on February 15, 2008 at 4:05 am

I think I heard RD agree that there is more than one kind of truth and to acknowledge emotional truth. What on earth is emotional truth, emotions are what you feel, no truth can be attributed to a feeling, to feel something is true is meaningless, truth only has meaning if it is objective otherwise anything is true if I think it is and we all know where that thinking ends up!

19. Charles Simonyi Professorship in the Public Understanding of Science

Comment #126695 by gcdavis on February 14, 2008 at 1:23 am

Atticus_of_Amber says that RD ticks all the boxes for elevation to the House of Lords, all except one, he has yet to "donate" £1,000,000 to the Labour Party!

20. Why multiculturalism must be abandoned

Comment #125270 by gcdavis on February 11, 2008 at 6:58 am

The one good thing to come out of all this is the extent to which secular voices have been heard, across the media, politics, blogs and letters pages there has been near unanimous condemnation of archbishop’s comments along with an appreciation that this special pleading is demanded by all faith groups, not just islam.
Hugh Caldwell I’m not sure about Pavlovian, there is a difference between a Pavlovian response that has been conditioned by repetition and a spontaneous response to the obvious threat associated with sharia. I understand where you are coming from though, if Williams had been talking about integrating hindu customs into our law it would have passed with far less comment.

21. Charles Simonyi Professorship in the Public Understanding of Science

Comment #125167 by gcdavis on February 11, 2008 at 3:22 am

I'll second Steve Jones!

and for the Public Misunderstanding of Science, anyone have a candidate?

22. Why multiculturalism must be abandoned

Comment #125162 by gcdavis on February 11, 2008 at 3:18 am

I first wrote this a year ago and have taken a lot of stick here and at other forums for opposing the concept of multiculturalism as practised here in the UK. I thought it worth repeating. I have been misrepresented as a racist usually by lefties for having the temerity of saying that immigrants should be expected to “sign up� to the core values of the host nation even at the expense of their own cultural origins.

If you want to live in the UK your entry ticket should be to share our values and learn our language (quickly), your colour, class, skills are not the issue. At the heart of the problem is of course religion, a moslem immigrant from Pakistan is less likely to assimilate than a Sikh from India because of the greater subjugation that islam demands. Even Poles bring with them a much stronger, more active and devout version of catholicism than our local version.

As a secularist I am alarmed at the creeping expansion of religion into education and government. Although I see no prospect at all of the UK following America’s path, we must fight to keep religious influence at bay and seek always to reign it back.

Multiculturalism’s bed fellow is political correctness and timidity amongst politicians. I long for one of them to stand up and assert their Britishness, this should not be confused with nationalism or mistaken for xenophobia. And before someone says “what is Britishness� it suffices to say that it is a broad “church� and not a narrow monoculturalism, in common with most developed societies it allows for wide range of behaviour and practice, if your are a Brit and don’t know what it is, then open your eyes and ears, it is all around you.

23. Help Build The Reason Project Archive!

Comment #123339 by gcdavis on February 7, 2008 at 2:12 am

Has Sam completed his PHD yet, if not, at this rate he never will?

24. Help Build The Reason Project Archive!

Comment #123324 by gcdavis on February 7, 2008 at 1:06 am

Sounds like RDFRS!

25. Blasphemy

Comment #122478 by gcdavis on February 5, 2008 at 10:22 am

Many of us live in countries who have sent troops to Afghanistan, men and women who are dying on a weekly basis to rid that country of the Taliban and Al Qaeda, in order for civilised, democratic values to take root, some hope!

26. Atheists to celebrate at Darwin Day in Coconut Creek

Comment #121854 by gcdavis on February 4, 2008 at 9:00 am

I'll go with that Mango.

Let's hear it for Reason day!

27. Atheists to celebrate at Darwin Day in Coconut Creek

Comment #121780 by gcdavis on February 4, 2008 at 6:36 am

Atheists celebrating "Darwin’s Day" is just plain stupid!

What it says to the other side is you have your god, we have ours. Darwin, like Newton before and Einstein after, made major contributions to our understanding of what we are and how things work. But to allow Darwin to be singled out and put in the ring to “fight� god is exactly what creationists want, they are ignorant and they want to drag the “debate� down to their level. Don’t oblige them.

Every scientific discipline has a contribution to make in undermining belief in the supernatural, not just biology.

28. God the psycho

Comment #121680 by gcdavis on February 4, 2008 at 1:14 am

Brilliant!!!!

Pat has produced a considerable body of work now, he deserves a permanent headline spot on this site, C'mon Josh lets give this guy the prominence he deserves.

29. The New Theology

Comment #113220 by gcdavis on January 19, 2008 at 2:28 am

The author demonstrates a typically insular view of an American correspondent; he has obviously not travelled to the UK or Europe. Only a handful of christian leaders here believe in creationism, most accept and have done for decades, the Darwinian view of evolution. That is why the christian religion, particularly the anglican variant, is not taken too seriously here and has been in slow decline for generations.

Dawkins is right, either you take the literal biblical view or you regard the whole enterprise as bollocks, to try and steer a middle way, cherry picking the bible, to make it fit your current view is at the very least disingenuous but more like likely a monstrous self deception.

30. George Scales, War Hero and Generous Friend of RDFRS

Comment #112929 by gcdavis on January 18, 2008 at 9:41 am

Comment #111337 by GBile :: Your comment about herding cats was spot on. This is the first time 200 plus atheists have ever agreed about anything! It has taken the news of George's fight against illness to demonstrate that we atheists respond with our hearts as well as our heads. Once again, best wishes George.

31. Huckabee Wants A 'Faith-based' Constitution

Comment #111902 by gcdavis on January 16, 2008 at 1:13 am

Is it really conceivable that America could elect a moron like Huckabee, can they not see what a disaster Bush's two terms have been to America's reputation? Neither men have any understanding of immense responsibility that the office of president involves, they behave (or will behave) like bulls in the china shop thrashing around breaking stuff that has taken centuries to develop, they surround themselves with sycophants and retards rather than subjecting their ideas and policies to objective scrutiny.

When I see Bush on TV I have pinch myself that this man really is the President of the United States of America, can your politics really have sunk this far?

32. George Scales, War Hero and Generous Friend of RDFRS

Comment #111332 by gcdavis on January 14, 2008 at 11:42 am

Good on you George. I hope your op goes well and that you are up and about soon. Best wishes from a fellow East Anglian.

33. Hook, line and rapture

Comment #109126 by gcdavis on January 8, 2008 at 11:58 am

God Bless you Pat

I always look forward to the next Pat Condell vid and this one is a stonker!

34. What have you changed your mind about? Why?

Comment #105926 by gcdavis on January 2, 2008 at 7:01 am

Truth is most of us don't change our mind very often about anything! Perhaps when the evidence is overwhelming we might, but mostly we humans stubbonly cling to existing notions. Of couse the more emotional or intelectual capital we have invested, the less likely we are to change our minds.

On those rare ocassions when I change my mind I feel quite liberated, for example I used to think that tea tasted better when the milk is poured first but now I think it tastes even better if the milk is poured last, of course the resulting brew must always be stirred in a clockwise direction, preferably whilst the stirrer is wearing a kilt, so no change there!

35. The Evangelical Rebellion

Comment #103318 by gcdavis on December 25, 2007 at 4:47 am

During the last 15 or so years I have observed the inexorable rise of Christian fascism and Islamic fundamentalism. Both feed off the fear that each provokes in the other. GW's slip of the tongue when he used the term crusade may turn out to be an accurate description after all. Even if Huckabee is not nominated his influence and that of his ilk, may grow stronger and the threat to the American constitution implied by his views further polarise US public opinion. What we are all longing for is a prominent US politician coming out as an atheist, this could begin the backlash although whoever is brave enough to make that move will be at the expense of his/her career.

36. Do the laws of God trump those of man?

Comment #99522 by gcdavis on December 17, 2007 at 1:19 am

Multiculturalism is a racism of the anti-racists: It chains people to their roots

Like ramses I think this quote stands out. I have taken a lot of stick here and at other forums for opposing the concept of multiculturalism as practised here in the UK. I have been misrepresented as a racist usually by lefties for having the temerity of saying that immigrants should be expected to "sign up" to the core values of the host nation even at the expense of their own cultural origins.

If you want to live in the UK your entry ticket should be to share our values and learn our language (quickly), your colour, class, skills are not the issue. At the heart of the problem is of course religion, a moslem immigrant from Pakistan is less likely to assimilate than a Sikh from India because of the greater subjugation that islam demands. Even Poles bring with them a much stronger, more active and devout version of catholicism than our local version.

As a secularist I am alarmed at the creeping expansion of religion into education and government. Although I see no prospect at all of the UK following America's path, we must fight to keep religious influence at bay and seek always to reign it back.

Multiculturalism's bed fellow is political correctness and timidity amongst politicians. I long for one of them to stand up and assert their Britishness, this should not be confused with nationalism or mistaken for xenophobia. And before someone says "what is Britishness" it suffices to say that it is a broad "church" and not a narrow monoculturalism, in common with most developed societies it allows for wide range of behaviour and practice, if your are a Brit and don't know what it is, then open your eyes and ears, it is all around you.

37. Voyager 2 probe reaches solar system boundary

Comment #98178 by gcdavis on December 13, 2007 at 7:58 am

Nice poems Alkal

38. Believe it or not

Comment #98017 by gcdavis on December 13, 2007 at 1:57 am

Realist has another advantage, it is easy to sloganize:
Get Real!
The Real Me!
The Real Deal!
I'm Real!

39. Believe it or not

Comment #97383 by gcdavis on December 12, 2007 at 2:04 am

The name is a problem, atheist has a negative connotation even amongst the "I don't want to think about it" religiously neutral (there are lots of these here in the UK). Brights is just dumb, too self-congratulatory and as the article says the rest are no better.

When a group is formed to oppose something, like Greenpeace it is usually self evident what it is for, that is not the case with atheism, we are against belief in god and religion but what are we for? Any marketing man will tell you that is not a viable way to advance a proposition any more than it is to sell a soap powder.

Human beings feel special; to tell them they are simply a clump of cells descended from bacteria does not flatter them. To tell them there life has no divine meaning or purpose depresses them. To tell them that when they, die thats it, alarms them!

So what is the positive message? I am afraid it is an intellectual one; personally I feel liberated without god, I feel empowered to construct the moral blueprint for my own life, and yes I feel superior when I ridicule superstition of any kind. I'm not sure how you package that for Middle America.

I guess we just keep slogging away, undermining the edifice of religion in the hope that one day it will crumble, and as for a name, like jroen I favour REALISTS.

40. Laugh at Sudan

Comment #96830 by gcdavis on December 11, 2007 at 1:48 am

Pat's witty and withering comments on religious extemism are priceless. I know that these are perfectly crafted monologues but I would love to see Pat in open debate, my guess is that he could crucify (oops!) any religious apologist that he encountered.

41. Colouring book warns kids of pedophile priests

Comment #94915 by gcdavis on December 7, 2007 at 1:58 am

BEWARE THE HAND OF GOD!

...inside your pants!

42. Mitt Romney's Faith In America address (as prepared for delivery)

Comment #94911 by gcdavis on December 7, 2007 at 1:52 am

Confusing the Tigris and Euphrates for the Mississippi and Missouri is an easy mistake to make; after all they are all rivers.

From: No Man Knows My History: the life of Joseph Smith, by Fawn Brodie
"Shortly after his arrival Joseph rowed up the Grand River to Lyman Wight's ferry to explore land on the north bank in Daviess County [Missouri]. On a high bluff overlooking the river someone in the party discovered the ruins of what seemed to be an altar and excitedly led the prophet to it. After examining it Joseph stood silent, his eyes sweeping over the prairie that rolled away beneath him....The glory of the scene made Joseph heady as with new wine. 'This is the valley of God in which Adam blessed his children,' he said, 'and upon this very altar Adam himself offered up sacrifices to Jehovah....we will lay out a city which shall be called Adam-ondi-Ahman. Here Adam, the Ancient of Days, shall come to visit his people....'

Mormon: moron, more like!

43. Chimps beat humans in memory test

Comment #93712 by gcdavis on December 4, 2007 at 1:33 am

Spoking as a chumpinzee miself I kant sea whot all the fus is aboyt, we hive alwaze bean god at numburs, not so goud at wordzs thow!

44. In the name of God: the Saudi rape victim's tale

Comment #91686 by gcdavis on November 29, 2007 at 1:33 am

My sentiments too toaldingham

There are two E-Petitions that we all should sign:
http://search.petitions.pm.gov.uk/kbroker/number10/petitions/search.lsim?ha=1157&sc=number10&qt=saudi+rape

UK citizens only I'm afraid

45. Onward Christian teachers?

Comment #87739 by gcdavis on November 13, 2007 at 2:18 am

fides_et_ratio
A disappointing article that makes a mockery of what little evidence it presents, and consequently only succeeds in showing the author's bias in carefully avoiding any earnest search for the truth.

Your moniker says it all Faith and Reason, try as you will they will never be reconciled. There is only one way to search for the truth and that is by assembling evidence, when you invoke faith you are lost to reason.

46. A third of adults believe God watches over them

Comment #87733 by gcdavis on November 13, 2007 at 1:56 am

May I suggest that these may have been some of the prayers offered.

"Oh god I feel like shit why did I drink so much last night!.

"God help that little git when I get my hands on him"!

"Oh god would I like to get in her knickers"

"Oh god I think I slept with my girlfiends sister last night"

"God helps those who help themselves but god help those that I catch helping themselves"!

47. A third of adults believe God watches over them

Comment #87732 by gcdavis on November 13, 2007 at 1:49 am

This "poll" flies in the face of every independent survey carried out in the UK in recent years

The reseachers (Taylor Nelson Sofres) seem to be bona fide, we will never know what Tearfund did with the data.

Data processing
After coding and editing the data, weighting was applied to correct for any minor imbalances in the achieved sample profile. The weighting matrix incorporated sex, age, social grade and region. Cross tabulations were produced for each questions against key demographic variables. These data remain confidential to
Tearfund.

Source:
http://www.tearfund.org/webdocs/Website/News/Prayer%20in%20the%20UK%20RESEARCH%20METHODS.pdf

Call me a heartless cynic but praying didn't do the McCann's much good.

48. Dr Bari: Government stoking Muslim tension

Comment #87468 by gcdavis on November 12, 2007 at 7:46 am

I lifted this from the MCB website

Rejecting Terror
Monday 02 July 2007

Muslims everywhere consider all acts of terrorism that aims to murder and maim innocent human beings utterly reprehensible and abhorrent. There is no theological basis whatsoever for such acts in our faith. The very meaning of the word 'Islam' is peace. It rejects terror and promotes peace and harmony.

The words in the Qur'an are clear:

If anyone kills a human being, unless it be (in punishment) for murder, or of spreading corruption in the land, it should be looked upon as though he had slain all mankind, and if anyone saves a life it should be regarded as though he had saved the lives of all mankind.(5:32) ."

Sounds well meaning until you notice the phrase "spreading corruption", I bet that includes anything you want it to mean!

49. Dr Bari: Government stoking Muslim tension

Comment #87454 by gcdavis on November 12, 2007 at 7:10 am

It is amazing how these people can reconcile this...

Sir Salman Rushdie should never have been knighted, he says. "He caused a huge amount of distress and discordance with his book, it should have been pulped."

with this....

"The bookshops are independent businesses," he says. "We can't just go in and tell them what to sell … I will see what books they keep, if they have one book which looks like it is inciting hatred, do they have counter books on the same shelf?"

50. Bill Moyers interviews Jonathan Miller

Comment #87375 by gcdavis on November 12, 2007 at 2:04 am

Miller is a truly Renaissance man and who many of us Brits regard as a national treasure. He is extremely funny as well as being an acclaimed director of film, opera and TV (he did a brilliant TV adaptation of Alice in Wonderland). His book The Body in Question has been reprinted is a fascinating description of how the body works written for a popular audience so even I was able to understand it.