Comments by WilliamP

1. Science can't explain the big bang - there is still scope for a creator

Comment #314948 by WilliamP on January 7, 2009 at 7:06 pm

Well, that is poor reasoning. Let's not dismiss Creationism because it explains something that science doesn't. It follows that any explanation for something that science can't explain shouldn't be dismissed, and possibly taught in the classroom; nevermind evidence for that explanation since the author overlooks the issue. Though the author sugggests that only a bit of time would be given to Creationism, there are potentially thousands of other theories that would deserve the same short explanation.

2. Teen trained to be suicide bomber feels tricked

Comment #310879 by WilliamP on January 2, 2009 at 10:30 am

It amazes me that more people don't realize that they are being duped. It seems quite suspicious when people ask me to give money to their invisible man in the sky. I would be even more skeptical if they asked me to give my life for him.

3. Many Americans Say Other Faiths Can Lead to Eternal Life

Comment #303935 by WilliamP on December 19, 2008 at 7:19 pm

Many faiths can lead to salvation? Even when each faith denies the truth of all other faiths? Well, once one accepts belief in some nonsense about an invisible man up in the sky, I guess anything follows.

4. The Latest Face of Creationism in the Classroom

Comment #302267 by WilliamP on December 16, 2008 at 8:22 pm

The history of the development of Creationism into Intelligent Design exposes its lack of scientific merit. It changed solely to fit the legal environment that was created to preserve science education by keeping it out of schools.

Evolutionary theory, on the other hand, has changed as the result of observations and experiments. I doubt that the Scopes trial changed the theory of evolution at all. If experimentation has resulted in any changes to Creationism/ID, those changes are far out-weighed by the changes made to adapt it to the court decisions issued against it.

Science is an attempt to explain nature through observation. There is no science in a "theory" that is formed only to exploit loopholes in the laws against teaching it.

5. Warning: A Truckload of Stupid

Comment #301791 by WilliamP on December 15, 2008 at 7:55 pm

Dhamma,
Yeah, you would think that god's infinite wisdom would at least have guided him to find some better human writers. Jesus was a contemporary of the Roman philosopher Seneca. Why not preach to him' Or why not wait a few years to come to earth and get Plutarch to write his biography'

6. Warning: A Truckload of Stupid

Comment #301775 by WilliamP on December 15, 2008 at 7:08 pm

Splink said:

replacing Dawkins with God. A bit creepy that's all I'm saying.

It'll never happen. Dawkins' writing is too clear and too well organized for him to be equated with god. Holy books that are purported to be written by god are always a bunch of obscure, disjointed nonsense. One would think that an omnipotent being would be able to write more clearly.

7. Warning: A Truckload of Stupid

Comment #301753 by WilliamP on December 15, 2008 at 5:59 pm

This is yet another fallacy of attributing meaning to the word "atheist" that Dawkins never intended. Dawk clearly and repeatedly defines his version of "atheism" as the belief that there is probably no god. If his critics would just flip through 'The God Delusion', they would see that one of the main chapters is entitled 'Why there almost certainly is no god".

It's just so funny that people write garbage like this article not realizing that Dawkins anticipated this sort of simplistic response decades ago and addressed this sort of argument in various books.

8. If you want to know why our public schools are screwed up, here's one reason

Comment #298420 by WilliamP on December 7, 2008 at 3:59 pm

The US is often criticized for being anti-intellectual. I guess we've crossed the line into anti-educationalism as well.

What a stupid point of view this woman has. Public education has such a positive impact on society that it is cldearly something that should be provided and required by the government.

9. What's Old Is New: 12 Living Fossils

Comment #298082 by WilliamP on December 6, 2008 at 5:31 pm

More evidence for those creationists who say that fossilized creatures don't differ from their modern counterparts...

...which doesn't mean anything since they ignore the mountain of evidence to the contrary.

10. The Religion of Peace Strikes Again

Comment #294044 by WilliamP on November 30, 2008 at 2:31 pm

Trautwein calls Islam “bi-polar” because it contains two totally opposite beliefs and sets of behavior.

Muslims beleive that the Koran is the word of god. Shouldn't a perfect, omnipotent being be able to put together a more clear, organized set of thoughts'

11. Children of God?

Comment #293876 by WilliamP on November 30, 2008 at 10:29 am

...spending money on "showing" in the end that the beliefs of ancient goatherds are as good as modern physics.

I thought this was the Templeton Foundation's slogan.

12. Anti-terror law requires God be acknowledged

Comment #293424 by WilliamP on November 28, 2008 at 10:56 pm

If we're going to have a plaque asking for god's protection, let's at least make it honest:

God, please protect us from the terrorists whom you created and whom you told to kill us.

13. The Religious Support Behind Proposition 8

Comment #288935 by WilliamP on November 22, 2008 at 7:46 pm

Gay marriage bans provide no benefit for anyone, and bring great harm to homosexuals, who make up about 10% of the population. If the law does no good for anyone and does harm to some, then it is irrational to support it. Is it any surprise that something as irrational as religion was behind the irrational support for this law'

14. Is Obama the Antichrist?

Comment #287107 by WilliamP on November 19, 2008 at 6:58 pm

Some scholars say that 666 was a reference to the Roman emperor Nero. One could make a stronger case that Bush is an incarnation of him:
1. Both were part of political dynasties.
2. Both are believed to have come to power under suspicious circumstances.
3. Both fought insurgencies in the Middle East.
4. Both spent well beyond their government's means.
5. Nero was known for punishing Christian zealots, Bush is known for punishing Muslim zealots.
6. Nero did nothing while Rome burned, Bush did nothing while New Orleans drowned.

That list of vague connections is at least as good as the evidence for Obama being the anti-christ.

15. God Trumps

Comment #286543 by WilliamP on November 18, 2008 at 7:02 pm

Anyone of you guys know the 'Illuminati' card game'

Most of the people on this site spend a lot of their time online talking about atheism. I'd assume that a lot of them aren't particularly sociable, and spend a lot of time playing nerdy games like 'Illuminati.'
That being said, yes, I know and love that game.

16. Educated Catholics have sown dissent and confusion in the Church, claims bishop

Comment #285250 by WilliamP on November 16, 2008 at 11:34 pm

To be a member of the Catholic Church one must believe that:
1. Humans can give birth without having sex.
2. A dead person can come back life.
3. Bread and wine can turn into the body and blood of a man who died nearly 2000 years ago.
4. There is both only one god, and at the same time, three.
5. Snakes can talk.

Are they really surprised that they their educated members are giving them trouble' Then again, anyone dumb enough to believe this crap might be.

17. Uncertain times for US Religious Right

Comment #285062 by WilliamP on November 16, 2008 at 4:31 pm

Alaska Governor Sarah Palin certainly helped to enthuse and ignite her fellow Christian conservatives in a way that John McCain could not. Many are already backing her for a run in 2012.

Obama's victory tore down racial barriers to the US presidency. I hope it also put up new barriers to keep out incompetent morons like Sarah Palin.

18. SC priest: No communion for Obama supporters

Comment #284529 by WilliamP on November 15, 2008 at 11:48 am

Yet the government lets these people get away with not paying taxes as they clearly discriminate against people for their political leanings.

19. Anti-religion agenda among social media users

Comment #280546 by WilliamP on November 7, 2008 at 6:25 pm

Comment #2, Toddaa said:

More evidence that any idiot can be an expert in religion.

And here I thought being an idiot was only a necessary condition for being a expert on religion. Or was that a religious expert'

20. Bad Faith Awards 2008: Vote now

Comment #280083 by WilliamP on November 6, 2008 at 10:17 pm

I'll vote for Palin because she's a hockey mom who has accepted Jesus as her savior. She supports teaching the creationism "debate" in schools, opposes "wasteful" science spending, and questions global warming.
She is one of us "real" Americans. The type that doesn't know whether Africa is a country. The type who can't name any major news publications when asked. The type that can't form a coherent sentence.
I'll cast my vote for Palin because this is a position that she is actually qualified for.

21. Gay Marriage Outlawed in California

Comment #279239 by WilliamP on November 5, 2008 at 6:23 pm

To Sizzle1:

With a name like "Sizzle," you sure don't sound like the type who would oppose gay marriage.

22. Gay Marriage Outlawed in California

Comment #279223 by WilliamP on November 5, 2008 at 5:45 pm

It seems a bit hypocritical. Christian men adamently oppose two men loving each other, just to show how much they love Jesus Christ-
who was a man.

23. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278451 by WilliamP on November 4, 2008 at 8:10 pm

Damn. I just saw on TV that McCain is the projected election winner. Oh wait, that's Fox News. Nevermind.

24. For many evangelicals, it will be the end of the world if Obama wins

Comment #276903 by WilliamP on November 2, 2008 at 6:06 pm

it is frustrating to see somebody become president who is a blatant liar

What a great quote from someone who is not only a follower of James Dobson, but also probably voted for Bush.

25. Swatting attacks on fruit flies and science

Comment #276140 by WilliamP on November 1, 2008 at 11:47 am

Roger Stanyard said:

Sarah Palin claim - ""In a conservative radio interview that aired in Washington, D.C. Friday morning, Republican vice presidential nominee Gov. Sarah Palin said she fears her First Amendment rights may be threatened by "attacks" from reporters who suggest she is engaging in a negative campaign against Barack Obama.""

I just saw this as I was putting up my last post. This is such a tremendously stupid comment by Pailin thatI feel compelled to comment again.
The first amemendment of the US constitution protects the individual right of citizens to free expression. It prevents the government from abridging the right to free expression (of course, this is not absolute). It doesn't mean that one's rights are violated when his or her expression is criticised, a Palin apparently believes.
Her claim that her right to free speech could have been violated isn't even logically consistant. She seems to think that she has the right to cirticise (Obama) without herself being criticised. Yet the reporters attacking her would then in turn have no right criticise in the first place. Thus, the first amendment grants the right of free expression to all, and at the same time gives Palin the right to speak, but does not grant that right to reporters.

26. Swatting attacks on fruit flies and science

Comment #276128 by WilliamP on November 1, 2008 at 11:28 am

I agreee that the US electoral college system is a bad idea. One of the reasons is because I think that the system along with media poles create a disincentive to voting in some states. One's vote will only be determinative if it helps get a candidate over 50% of votes for one's state. If news poles tell voters that their state has already made up it's mind and it's electoral votes have already been allocated, then why vote'
I'm a US citizen, and I haven't voted in the last election and I won't be voting in this one. I was registered to vote states that were, according to news poles, clearly going to be won by the Democratic candidate in both elections. In such a situation, some pro-Democrat voters will simply reason that their candidate is safe. Why bother voting' What good will one more vote do' This is especially true for those who don't know or care much about local or state elections either.
Similar reasoning applies to Republican voters in this situation. This year, for example, McCain voters Illinois (which Obama will win by a large margin) might see it as a waste of time to get out and vote. Their votes will clearly be a wasted effort unless there is a local/state election that they are interested in.

And here in the US, it seems that very few people are interested in getting out to vote in local elections. Voter interest tends to be higher during presidential elections.

Of course, not everyone is discouraged from voting, even if their state's electoral votes have already been won. There still are a lot of die-hard voters that go out to secure victory for one side in every election. They may value exercising their right to vote, or supporting their party. Maybe that is enough incentive for them. but they make up the critical mass of voters in some states that determines the likely outcome before election day. If one is outside of that group of voters, and your state has been on the media's electoral maps colored in blue or red for weeks before the election, then why bother'

27. Atheist Bus Campaign Comic

Comment #274978 by WilliamP on October 30, 2008 at 3:16 pm

I don't see why a supposedly omnipotent being would want to ride the bus.

28. Dole Ad Fabricates Audio Of Opponent Yelling 'There Is No God'

Comment #274212 by WilliamP on October 29, 2008 at 6:31 pm

This is outrageous. The ad is meant to at least tie Hagan to an atheist group, and likely imply that she is an atheist. Why is that okay' Let's assume that the ad is only trying to tie Hagan to an atheist group. What if Dole ran an attack ad alleging that she has ties to a Muslim group' Muslims would be furious and people would be disgusted.

Hagan was quick to disassociate herself from atheism and praise faith in god. What would she have said if she was associated with a Muslim group' She would have spewed some platitude about understanding the differences between our religions. No understanding for atheists, though.

Maybe we have to start whining like the religous folks do when people insult their beliefs.

29. Richard Dawkins embarrassed after death and subsequent resurrection

Comment #274195 by WilliamP on October 29, 2008 at 6:01 pm

I can't really imagine a more perfect atheist than Dawkins. But then, by the reasoning of the ontological argument, he would be an atheist god. I guess the article was right.

30. Sarah Palin's War on Science

Comment #273525 by WilliamP on October 28, 2008 at 8:18 pm

williamp, that's uncalled for. Mom may be shrewdly playing the "aw shucks" card, but there's no reason to insult the poor child.

On second thought, what I said is quite harsh. My statement implied that the child resembles its mother. In this case the mother is Sarah Palin.
There is no worse insult than saying that one is similar to Sarah Palin.

I should have remembered how bad I felt for pitbulls after Palin was likened to one.

31. Sarah Palin's War on Science

Comment #273456 by WilliamP on October 28, 2008 at 5:44 pm

I hear Palin's child has Down Syndrome. That apple didn't fall too far from the tree.

32. 'People say I'm strident'

Comment #271549 by WilliamP on October 25, 2008 at 11:59 pm

David Robertson said:

I think he has either actually helped us (unwittingly) or does not understand what causes people to turn to God.

I find it amusing. This comes from someone who likes to argue with atheists, but doesn't seem to understand what makes people atheists. The complexity of the universe can't be explained by positing a pre-existing complex creator.

33. Countdown: Palin Wants To Help Special Needs Kids By Doing Away With Science

Comment #271222 by WilliamP on October 25, 2008 at 12:05 pm

Bonzai and Steve Zara,
I can just picture her staring at the computer screen in confusion, trying to sound it out. It would be much like the time she got stuck on the word "Doctrine" as in "Bush Doctrine."

34. Countdown: Palin Wants To Help Special Needs Kids By Doing Away With Science

Comment #271213 by WilliamP on October 25, 2008 at 12:00 pm

Dr. Dawkins said:

Sarah Palin's Drosophilistinism is just one small manifestation of a larger and very worrying phenomenon, potentially fatal in a democracy: ignorant stupidity has become a proud badge of in-group solidarity.

I'd love to hear Palin's response to that comment, but I don't think she could get beyond the word "Drosophilistinism."

35. Creationists declare war over the brain

Comment #269153 by WilliamP on October 22, 2008 at 5:10 pm

I thought they had declared war ON the brain.

Comment #269061 by WilliamP on October 22, 2008 at 3:08 pm

I used to live in Japan, which is one of the safest, most stable, and least religious countries in the world. It has less crime than most other countries, and people are more courteous than they are in other countries.

What this proves is that religion is not a necessary condition for a society in which people are civil to each other. Of course, this doesn't suffice to say that less religion means more civility. This just means that society doesn't need religion to function.

37. All aboard the atheist bus campaign

Comment #268286 by WilliamP on October 21, 2008 at 4:20 pm

I've seen ads for Islam and Christianity on buses and trains here in the US that offer information about these religions. I think the ads are good if they raise awareness. They may be even better if they tell people how to find more information about atheism.

38. Legal case against God dismissed

Comment #265461 by WilliamP on October 16, 2008 at 7:22 pm

This court decision is a crock. God is omnipresent, and thus one can serve process to God, in person, anywhere and anytime. That includes Nebraska. God is omniscient, so He knows that He is being served. He is also omnipotent, and thus capable of accepting service.
If God doesn't show up in court for the trial, then too bad for Him. The court should enter a default decision in favor of the plaintiff.

39. Scientists confirm shark's 'virgin birth'

Comment #263360 by WilliamP on October 10, 2008 at 5:39 pm

Maybe this is the second coming of Christ; but this time he's Hindu.

40. The camp that 'cures' homosexuality

Comment #262511 by WilliamP on October 8, 2008 at 6:20 pm

A bunch of Christians sitting around the campfire, singing "Row Your Boat Ashore"? Now THAT sounds gay.
The bad kind of gay, that is, not the homosexual kind.

41. Dawkins: a theologian's perspective

Comment #261394 by WilliamP on October 6, 2008 at 6:55 pm

If God is the creator of this physical world and yet occasionally acts within it, through ordinary (or perhaps extraordinary) people, according to a different order of things, then we would expect to see occasional events and experiences within oour [sic] world which are hard to explain under natural terms.

The opening point just affirms the consequent. We're meant to believe that there are miracles, but this is the revrese of a valid syllogism.
This is like saying "If Rex is a dog, Rex must have fur" and concluding that he is a dog after petting a seeing petting a furry rabbit named Rex.
I couldn't read beyond part one.

42. Two new fleas are discovered!

Comment #261353 by WilliamP on October 6, 2008 at 5:45 pm

Gumbel uses his legal training to address issues such as "Has Science Disproved God?" and whether faith is 'irrational'.

Oh this will be great! I wonder if it will be like that book "The Case for Christ," in which a legal scholar tries to determine the "credibility" of the "witnesses" to Christ. The only miracle it proves is that famous legal scholars can fall victim to an appeal to authority fallacy.

If this book uses a "legal reasoning" approach too, then it's almost certainly crap from the begining. I'm a law student, and I have little respect for the type of reasoning used in law. Concepts and definitions are typically murky, and lawyers are often poorly trained in logic. Even supreme court judges make formal logic errors that an undergraduate could catch. Smart people do science.

43. Atheist group sues Bush over national prayer day

Comment #260351 by WilliamP on October 5, 2008 at 11:09 am

Comment 38 by GBile:

Well, it seems your prayer has been answered.

Mission accomplished.

44. Atheist group sues Bush over national prayer day

Comment #260153 by WilliamP on October 4, 2008 at 7:02 pm

president's mandated proclamations calling on Americans to pray violates a constitutional ban on government officials endorsing religion.

Of course Bush is going to ask Americans to pray-he has no idea what he's doing and needs all the help he thinks he can get.
I wonder when Operation Finger Cross will begin.

45. The God Delusion's cameo in season premiere of 'Family Guy'

Comment #257523 by WilliamP on September 30, 2008 at 2:49 pm

I hope the book makes a cameo on House MD.
I'd love to see Dr. House reading "The God Delusion" in the hospital's chapel as he snacks on communion wafers dipped in nacho cheese.

46. Why There Almost Certainly Is a God, By Keith Ward

Comment #255824 by WilliamP on September 28, 2008 at 10:36 am

Ward uses one of science's finest achievements ?quot; the discovery of the bizarre quantum world ?quot; as a weapon with which to undermine the materialist world-view championed by Dawkins. The appealing simplicity of the latter evaporates when you look at the building blocks of the universe closely enough: "What is the point of being a materialist when we are not sure exactly what matter is?

I'm sure he fails to apply this principle to his own reasoning:

What is the point of being a theist when we don't even know what god is?

47. The world according to Hitchens

Comment #255576 by WilliamP on September 28, 2008 at 12:41 am

Hitchens still refusing to mock Palin's fundamentalism.

Who would mock her fundamentalism when her stupidity is so much more of an attractive target?

48. Ministers to Defy I.R.S. by Endorsing Candidates

Comment #255011 by WilliamP on September 26, 2008 at 3:21 pm

Isn't it enough that churches are exempt from tax laws in the first place?
Or that they're exempt from laws against lying to people to bilk them out of their money?

49. Russian woman put on trial in Dubai for drinking juice in public

Comment #254541 by WilliamP on September 25, 2008 at 9:35 pm

I see people here are debating the validity of laws such as the one mentioned above. Rationality is certainly a requisite in considering whether a law is good or bad.

Laws such as this are irrational. No one is harmed when someone drinks juice in public during Ramadan. In fact, more people are harmed by the enforcement of such a law than are helped. God certainly is not helped by the law because he doesn't exist. Maybe some people feel a bit of joy in seeing others hauled off to jail for drinking juice. But there is large cost to those who are arrested for this harmless activity. From a utilitarian perspective, this law is a negative.

From a societal cost/benefit standpoint this law simply shouldn't exist. There are many other laws like this- gay marriage bans, for example- and all such laws are a foolish waste of time and effort.

50. Russian woman put on trial in Dubai for drinking juice in public

Comment #254477 by WilliamP on September 25, 2008 at 6:18 pm

If Dubai wants to be the tourist destination it aims to be, it should be more liberal.
Fewer tourists are going to be attracted to all those luxury hotels if they can't even have the luxury of a cold drink in hot sun.

More Pages: 1 2 3 4 | Next