451. Ask Richard!

Comment #41744 by USA_Limey on May 16, 2007 at 7:59 pm

Hitch does a number on Falwell:


http://kevinmccullough.townhall.com/g/9764c788-1dcb-4aff-a1aa-46266d27eddc

Enjoy!

452. Why Christopher Hitchens is not Great

Comment #41743 by USA_Limey on May 16, 2007 at 7:55 pm

Hitch really does a number on Falwell in this interview:

http://kevinmccullough.townhall.com/g/9764c788-1dcb-4aff-a1aa-46266d27eddc

Also, he was on Hannity tonight; does any one have it; I'd love to see that!

453. Brazil's Indians Offended by Pope Comments

Comment #41707 by USA_Limey on May 16, 2007 at 4:10 pm

Comment #41437 by Luthien wrote:

"Seriously though, what do you expect from a Nazi?"

... I don't like the pope and I don't like Catholicism, but that's unfair. He was 14 when he joined the Hitler youth and membership was cumpulsory under that regime. Towards the very end of the war he served in the German army and actually deserted; for which had he been caught he would have been shot at the side of the road -no trial, no argument.

Sorry, just an amateur historian doing some nitpicking.

__________________________________________________

Carousel is a lie! There is no renewal!

~ Logan

454. How dare you call me a fundamentalist

Comment #41602 by USA_Limey on May 16, 2007 at 11:38 am

Comment #41599 by Dianelos Georgoudis wrote:

"For example, here Dawkins claims that religious fundamentalists never change their minds, but this is trivially wrong as evidenced by the many atheist posters in Dawkins's own website who state that they have been fundamentalist Christians before. So, obviously, many religious fundamentalists do change their minds."

... That is a good point. Thanks for raising my consciousness a notch there. I would love to see a portion of this site dedicated to hearing the stories of those regular contributors to our forum who are ex-believers now athiests. They have something very valuable to teach us. I just don't know what it is, and I want to know.
__________________________________________________
Carousel is a lie! There is no renewal!

~ Logan

455. How dare you call me a fundamentalist

Comment #41598 by USA_Limey on May 16, 2007 at 11:32 am

Mr O'Brien cannot, will not, ever get the point that he is as big an unbeliever, and therefore as "wrong" as RD is about every other set of superstitious nonsense except his.

It should be such a crystal clear point - why don't the faith heads get it? I really do think they are mentally ill.

456. How dare you call me a fundamentalist

Comment #41573 by USA_Limey on May 16, 2007 at 10:22 am

50. Comment #41240 by Robert O'Brien on May 15, 2007 at 5:03 pm

"Professor Dawkins:

You are a fundamentalist in that you are fundamentally wrong."

... But about what is he MOST wrong Mr. O'Brien? The divinity of Christ? The final revelation of Mohammed? The teachings os Joseph Smith or the Hindu's? If he is fundamentally wrong that all of them are false, are they all true? I doubt that is your position. In your mind he is of course only fundamentally wrong about your silly little cult: you agree with him about all the rest I take it?

Please clarify.

__________________________________________________

Christianity: 2000 years of bullshit and counting.

457. Hitchens vs. Hannity on Religion and God

Comment #41251 by USA_Limey on May 15, 2007 at 5:21 pm

Not Hitch's best performance, he looked like he'd just rolled out of bed after two hours sleep and an all night bender.

Still love him though.

:-)

__________________________________________________
Carousel is a lie! There is no renewal!

~ Logan

458. The Creation Museum: Prepare to believe

Comment #41061 by USA_Limey on May 15, 2007 at 12:50 pm

This gem from the answers in genesis gift shop blurb:

"The Geologic Column captures the current range of opinion about the Flood and the geological column, informing the reader about the nature of the disagreements between young-earth creationists over the details"

I wonder if they have peer reviewed papers to discuss those disagreements over the details of young earth creation? Can't wait for them to resolve those arguments overt he details though...

__________________________________________________

Carousel is a lie! There is no renewal!

~ Logan

459. Facing Off on Evolution

Comment #40616 by USA_Limey on May 14, 2007 at 3:33 pm

Comment #40601 by Aaron SF on May 14, 2007 at 3:06 pm

"Hey... stop parading your heterosexuality around in front of me. God I'm not judging you know. I mean live and let live, but could you just keep that sort of thing in the bedroom instead of shoving it in my face. :P"

LOL, nice one Aaron. No need for the spoiler though I'm English my satire detector is fully functional.

Anyway who says I was talking about the red head with that dark smoldering hunk sat next to her?
Oh ok... I was talking about the red head. As for shoving it in your face; hey I didn't start it! If that dress isn't shoving things in your face what is? :P

460. Facing Off on Evolution

Comment #40539 by USA_Limey on May 14, 2007 at 12:40 pm

"Yo, Teapot, the name of the thread is "Facing Off on Evolution".

...It is? Why yes so it is! Wow isn't the brain amazing: I just looked at the still shot and thought it said, "Fronting off for evolution" all this time!

461. Facing Off on Evolution

Comment #40516 by USA_Limey on May 14, 2007 at 11:49 am

Come on people lets stay on topic here... the last few comments have actually been about the debate.

:-)


Forgive me father!

462. Facing Off on Evolution

Comment #40456 by USA_Limey on May 14, 2007 at 10:07 am

Oh sweet Lord! Oh Jesus!

Lead me not into temptation, give the strength oh Lord to resist sin.

Tempt not me Satan with the sins of the flesh... oh Great God...

oh.. oh....

Oh Shit I'm an athiest. out of excuses then.

WOWZERS!

463. How dare you call me a fundamentalist

Comment #40435 by USA_Limey on May 14, 2007 at 9:43 am

"Dawkins fits every characteristic of the fundamentalist believer. He knows he is right."

...No... I think he believes he is right based on the available EVIDENCE, (or lack of)

"He knows that he and his followers have evolved to a higher consciousness."

... A single human being cannot evolve in its own lifetime. I think. I am not an evolutionist. I know I don't think I have transcended into some higher plane anyway.

He knows with absolute certainty that if only people follow his way (which is THE scientific, rational way) they will be able to lead 'intellectually fulfilled and emotionally liberated lives'."

...I don't think he knows any such thing. And I know that there are plenty of atheists who are pretty miserable and not very happy - but at least they are brave enough to refuse the mental crutch of religion.


"He refuses to engage in any meaningful discussion with those whom he is railing against and yet still manages to demonize his opponents"

... What would a "meaningful" discussion be? Presumably from your perspective one that gives due respect and deference to your beliefs without evidence. No, sorry - those days are over for so many of us.


"The most dangerous thing about the New Atheism is that it does not realize just how intolerant, oppressive and fundamentalist it is."

Richard has said consistently he would change his mind TODAY if new data presented itself that in any way even BEGAN to verify the claims of religion. And just who are we atheists oppressing? When a person disagrees with someone else over a matter of economics or even the relative merits of competing football teams are they 'oppressing' that person? Sounds to me you are just feeling oppressed because it's getting uncomfortable in that duality of mind and self deception you maintain.
__________________________________________________

Carousel is a lie! There is no renewal!

~ Logan

464. How dare you call me a fundamentalist

Comment #40375 by USA_Limey on May 14, 2007 at 7:35 am

An excellent point by point refutation of most of the simpering critics of Richard. Not the criticisms of the arguments inside his book mind you; but his right to say it all in the first place.

If I have taken one thing away from the last 6 months or so it is my own personal 'conversion' to the view that we MUST stop being cowed into silence. Where before I would have politely kept quiet when encountering a religious view in my life I now, (politely), offer an alternative view. I have found overwhelmingly that my responses are met with disbelief and mild shock that I am saying what I am saying. Most of the people I respond to have simply NEVER had their beliefs questioned before. I am convinced that for most of them it can only be a good thing.

Thanks Richard for all you do; I am doing my best in my own small way in my own obscure life to follow your shining example.


__________________________________________________

Carousel is a lie! There is no renewal!

~ Logan

465. Let us pray for the soul of Richard Dawkins

Comment #40270 by USA_Limey on May 14, 2007 at 4:11 am

Dawkins is a secular extremist eh? What because he won't sit down and shut up but has the temerity to ask a few polite, (always polite from Richard), questions about the voracity of certain claims?

What an insult to the victims of the Gulag under Stalin - now that's secular extremism.

What an idiot.

__________________________________________________

Carousel is a lie! There is no renewal!

~ Logan

466. The Case Against Intelligent Design: The Faith That Dare Not Speak Its Name

Comment #40186 by USA_Limey on May 13, 2007 at 4:28 pm

Devolved: Why do you need it, (creation "theory"), to be true so much? That's what fascinates me.

__________________________________________________

Carousel is a lie! There is no renewal!

~ Logan

467. The Case Against Intelligent Design: The Faith That Dare Not Speak Its Name

Comment #40182 by USA_Limey on May 13, 2007 at 3:32 pm

Wow. What a superb article. As a non scientist who haunts this site I am occasionally made to feel a bit inferior by the many obvious professional scientists who hold forth here. But as an amateur interested in science and by extension evolution to read such a clear and persuasive refutation of all things creationist reminds me why I have come to love this site as a "go to" destination for gems like this. I have printed this article out and will be re-reading it with a marker pen as soon as time allows. To my non scientist brethren, (I know you are out there), please give this article the time it deserves it was well worth it!

__________________________________________________

Carousel is a lie! There is no renewal!

~ Logan

468. Unintelligent Design

Comment #40120 by USA_Limey on May 13, 2007 at 7:43 am

"Religion endures and thrives because it addresses people's deepest emotional yearnings and society's foundational moral needs"

No, religion endures beause people in power have found it convenient throughout history to use it for their purposes. And not just religion with a supernatural component. The personality cults of Stalin and Kim Jong Il are religions in my opinion just without god.

As for moral needs that's been dealt with so often on this site we must all get bored of having to make the same points so I won't now.

_____________________________________

"Carousel is a lie! There is no renewal!"

~ Logan

469. Hell is real and eternal: Pope

Comment #27973 by USA_Limey on March 27, 2007 at 1:15 pm

Crazy of course, but I have to say I do have more respect in many ways for the religious conservatives of any faith like Ratzinger than the wishy washy liberal types. Let me clarify; I believe the steadfast conservative types who really belief in the absolutes of their particular faith are a much smaller minority than we would suppose; but as others far more eloquent than I have pointed out they are sheilded and supported from criticism by the 'moderate' religious types who probably don't believe in hell but go along with the rituals and all that crap. What it comes down to for me is I WANT the pope to say hell is a real place just like I want Jerry Falwell to say the rapture is imminent. Their lunacy must make the moderates squirm and it is they we must shake loose of their cosy and complacent addiction to the warm fuzzy feeling of their religion.

470. If only gay sex caused global warming

Comment #27095 by USA_Limey on March 23, 2007 at 6:08 am

Comment #27085 by boblin:

"I also don't really see a problem with it being a 'commentary on the authors perceptions of our reasons for failing to respond to global warming'. Is that kind of thing banned around here??"

... No Boblin of course not. I too don't have a problem with the article, I found it a good read. I was merely responding to Mark1958's post that this article makes an effective argument in the global warming debate. I don't think it does. It's just a bit of hyperbole with the whole "If global warming was caused by gay sex" thing thrown right out there to hook us in. Nothing wrong with that, it just doesn't add anything significant to our understanding of global warming is all I am saying.

471. If only gay sex caused global warming

Comment #27062 by USA_Limey on March 23, 2007 at 4:10 am

Comment #27019 by mark1958:

"This is a fantastic article. It is just so true. I think it should be given to all the Republicans who deny that Global warming is a real entity"

... Really? Why? The article is a commentary on the authors perceptions of our reasons for failing to respond to global warming, NOT a substantive piece on the evidence of global warming. Do you see the difference?
I might say, "The reason we have not dealt with our rampaging pink unicorn problem is that most of our leaders are color blind". Have I now proven that pink unicorns exist? Please be more careful. Again, the article tells me NOTHING about the facts of global warming. Another time and place for that debte perhaps...

Ian

472. Chimpanzees 'hunt using spears'

Comment #26267 by USA_Limey on March 18, 2007 at 7:03 am

Comment #26252 by denoir:

"Actually we are no more or less evolved than other living primates - we just evolved in a different direction."

... You are right of course. My bad.

I should have said what I really meant which is we are merely a more intelligent and technologically advanced form of primate.

Thanks for the correction.

473. Yanoconodon, a transitional fossil

Comment #26223 by USA_Limey on March 17, 2007 at 7:31 pm

Oh Fishpeddler....

That was so teapotdamn funny but I don't know whether to love you or hate you being as I almost choked to death on my cookie when I read your post: teapotdamn could you give us a warning next time!!!

Brilliant.

474. Chimpanzees 'hunt using spears'

Comment #26221 by USA_Limey on March 17, 2007 at 7:25 pm

This is facinating and hugely important. We are merely a more evolved form of primate, pure and simple.

Gods special creation my ass.

When are we going to give rights to chimpanzees? Don't laugh I am serious; aren't they as deserving as some of our more disadvantaged fellow humans? What's so sacred about our DNA? Answer: nothing.

475. Kissing Hank's Ass

Comment #26203 by USA_Limey on March 17, 2007 at 4:36 pm

Comment #26151 by J. J. Ramsey: "I wouldn't go that far. It has about nothing to say about Judaism, for example. "Karl" is obviously a stand-in for Jesus."

Can't really add anything to what Luthien and kingasaurus had to say here; except that was my take as well obviously. What consistently amazes me though is the duality of mind of certain sections of the religious types. By this I mean, their ability to see the absurdity of some other religions 'letter from Hank' and it's version of 'Karl' and yet their complete inability to apply the same thought processes to their own 'Karl' and 'Hanks letter'. A complete duality of mind. Both facinating and terrifying at the same time!

476. Kissing Hank's Ass

Comment #26138 by USA_Limey on March 17, 2007 at 7:05 am

Saw this a few months back on UT, still excellent to watch! Pushes all the right buttons and makes all the salient points about why organized religion, (in particular), is such a crock.

IMHO this is how you chip away at the big three monothestic religions; don't waste your time debating the finer points of evolutionary theory with them that's just giving them ground and letting them fight on our turf. Take it to them and riducule every chance you get the absurdities of their particular version of 'Hanks letter'

Great job!!

477. When They Came for the Homosexuals...

Comment #25705 by USA_Limey on March 14, 2007 at 7:02 pm

3. Comment #25698 by BaronOchs on March 14, 2007 at 6:46 pm

".... What a cretinous remark."


I thought it summed the whole thing up quite well.

Oh... I wasn't referring to the article. Sorry, just a spill over from a previous topic; shouldn't hve done it really.

:-)

478. Non-believers can be bigoted too

Comment #25703 by USA_Limey on March 14, 2007 at 6:59 pm

Re my comment above, sorry one t in "Mit" not two.

My over eager typing again.

479. Non-believers can be bigoted too

Comment #25701 by USA_Limey on March 14, 2007 at 6:56 pm

38. Comment #25696 by cheshirecat on March 14, 2007 at 6:42 pm

Because

1. I don't believe him. Prove it.

2. If some allied soldiers did see this it just proves how rare it was that it goes undocumented except by anecdote.

Your points 3, 4, 5 and 6 are your opinion of course but you look an idiot with 1 and 2 as 30 seconds of online research would have proved to you that you were wrong. For goodness sake just google, "gott mitt uns" and click on images for all the proof you want. These belt buckles were standard issue. I've personally seen dozens in museums.

That's why i didn't like your remark.

480. When They Came for the Homosexuals...

Comment #25693 by USA_Limey on March 14, 2007 at 6:23 pm

1. Comment #25682 by cheshirecat on March 14, 2007 at 5:34 pm

Thats horrible.



.... What a cretinous remark.

481. Non-believers can be bigoted too

Comment #25690 by USA_Limey on March 14, 2007 at 6:16 pm

34. Comment #25678 by cheshirecat on March 14, 2007 at 5:29 pm

"Of interest you might find"

No actually. I find your anecdote cretinous in the extreme.

...Huh? What am I missing here. What exactly did HappyPrimate say that elicited such a personal attack?

If you are going to attack someone on this site Cheshirecat please have the decency to at least say why.

482. Response to Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris

Comment #25021 by USA_Limey on March 9, 2007 at 6:08 pm

I am glad that this forum is adult enough not to censor swearing:

FUCKING IDIOT!

Thanks, I feel better now.

483. Falwell says Christians shouldn't focus on global warming

Comment #23972 by USA_Limey on March 3, 2007 at 9:03 pm

Yorker,

In response to your comments, (45, 47, 50) I would ask you to consider this: all you describe are the EFFECTS of a rise in global temperatures, (retreating glaciers, vanishing vanuati etc.)

Does this mean human activity is CAUSING them? NO!

Please do a little more research on the debate about actual CAUSES rather than just Al Gore scare mongering.

I am convinced by the evidence that global warming IS occuring but I am NOT convinced that human activity has anything to do with it. I think we are in for an 'interesting' time in the forseeable future as the earth / sun goes through their respective cycles and there is not a damn thing we can do about it.

Ian

484. Presentation on Atheism

Comment #22747 by USA_Limey on February 21, 2007 at 5:26 pm

A pretty good summation of some of the key arguments for atheism.

Well done Hillbilly.

I hope you are reading this, let's see you post on here sometime. :-)

485. Does Richard Dawkins exist?

Comment #21327 by USA_Limey on February 8, 2007 at 5:20 pm

To all the Brits out there; who is the other voice supposed to me? I recognize it as a mimick of someone, but I can't quite place it and it's driving me nuts!

486. Interview with Alister McGrath, author of 'The Dawkins Delusion?'

Comment #21137 by USA_Limey on February 7, 2007 at 5:37 pm

My favourite part of the whole piece was:

"For the gullible and credulous, it is the confidence with which something is said that persuades, rather than the evidence offered in its support."

Anybody else get a laugh out of that!


Ian

487. Neil deGrasse Tyson - Death by Black Hole

Comment #20237 by USA_Limey on February 1, 2007 at 8:15 am

Comment #20208 by eccles on February 1, 2007 at 4:10 am Said:

"I also believe Geo. W. Bush would even ban science if his fundamentalist religious right supporters told him to"

No Mate, they need science to build those hi-tech weapons remember? It's another example of the duality of mind of these people.

Off topic but today (Feb 1st) was national day of prayer in the USA. I am paraphrasing but Bush said the following:

"The most important thing people can do for their elected representatives is to pray for them"

This country is in real trouble as long as the highest levels of government say crap like that.

488. Former exec in Irvine says he was fired over religion

Comment #19194 by USA_Limey on January 25, 2007 at 2:10 pm

13. Comment #19072 by Old Coppernose on January 24, 2007 at 4:24 pm writes:


"The above comment suggests you are a USAnian living in Britain rather than the other way round - it is very rare to hear such view from native Brits."

Very rare? Come on that stretches credibility and I think reflects your wishes rather than fact. Perhaps you missed the 80's and the Thatcher years. Britain is arguably the country closest to the USA in its approach to the operation of free markets when compared to the rest of Europe. Is there a division of opinion, of course, but again I don't think there is anything "rare" about what I have said coming from a Brit.

I don't want to pick a fight with you on the rest of your points since this is not an economics forum so we'll leave it there, I think I just got your socialist hackles up and that's fine. Good luck to you sir!

All the Best,

Ian, (Brit, living in USA)

489. Former exec in Irvine says he was fired over religion

Comment #19002 by USA_Limey on January 24, 2007 at 9:42 am

I believe in the free market so from my perspective just let the free market decide. A company that consistently passes over people because they are not, (in this case), practicing Xians in favor of the lesser qualified who are will over time loose out to it's competitors and hopefully go out of business. I only see a problem where such market forces and competition cannot function; in other words in government which is why it's so important to keep it out of those institutions. But in the world of private companies and free enterprise... nothing decides better than the market! (IMO)

490. Atheist Richard Dawkins on 'The God Delusion'

Comment #18320 by USA_Limey on January 19, 2007 at 5:30 pm

So you think there is a god that created the whole universe but still takes an active interest in your life?

Please see this:

http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=-3974466981713172831&q=uk

Still think so?

What Idiots those religious narcissists are.

491. Lil' Markie live, part 2

Comment #17589 by USA_Limey on January 15, 2007 at 3:51 am

I can't see anyone who frequents this site making it all the way through this travesty. I made it a little less than half way through.

Please keep this man at least three states away from my children.

492. Judge: Men can seek damages from church

Comment #17296 by USA_Limey on January 12, 2007 at 6:46 pm

Hey, briancoughlanworldcitizen, God, Inc. Hilarious, thanks for pointing me toward it.

:-)

493. Secular fundamentalists are the new totalitarians

Comment #16329 by USA_Limey on January 6, 2007 at 6:01 am

The author may as well have written, "I hate atheists guts" and be done with it. Credit where credit is due though I thought it was a skillful attack in terms of its target audience and brilliantly ignores the vital questions:

Does God exist or not? Do the tenants of your religion stand up to any kind of rational or historical scrutiny?

Still, given the premise that the best defense is a good offense this wasn't bad I suppose. This is why I urge all my fellow atheists never to get bogged down with arguments about evolution or the big bang with faith heads; you are letting them take the war on to your territory. Always go straight for the throat: in the case of Xianity its logical absurdities, the glaring inconsistencies and its historically dubious provenance are always great places to start.

Put a bug up there behind. Attack, attack, attack!

I feel better now though I probably should have written this after my morning coffee...

494. Dawkins's version of the deity does not exist

Comment #7723 by USA_Limey on November 19, 2006 at 7:05 am

Kingasaurus wrote: (Comment #7598)

"Keep in mind:

God and his nature are inscrutable, and his essence is far beyond human understanding. He is beyond space and time, and we cannot hope to understand him no matter how hard we try...

...but remember, he doesn't want you to masturbate."


...Damn you Kingasaurus! I laughed so hard I choked on my morning bagel. But you are spot on of course. The very notion of a god/being/entity transcendent of the physical universe yet at the same time wanting to police what we do in our bedroom is utterly ridiculous. It deserves nothing but my utter contempt IMHO.