Comments by Richard Morgan

Comment #130697 by Richard Morgan on February 21, 2008 at 7:06 am

David Robertson

If you would like me to reply to Paula...

Any takers?
(I can't see how his reply would be of any interest, but others could I suppose.)

Comment #130684 by Richard Morgan on February 21, 2008 at 6:41 am

PJG :

It isn't the non-belief that is increased, you are right in saying that you can't "REALLY-not-believe" but I think you can become more aware of the strength of your own disbelief.

AllanW :

"I didn't believe before but now I can better understand and justify my non-belief."

Thank you both for these explanations (and the other posters who have responded to my query.)
You have confirmed my impressions, and expressed them more clearly than I could have done.
I am particularly interested in the whole process of moving from theism to atheism. (Not as simple an issue as it may appear to some.)

When Paula affirms

If religion loses followers in a secular society it will be because a) it is no longer being actively forced on children by the State and b) because former believers will have lost their belief. Not through force, not through coercion, not through oppression, not through extermination (it's embarrassing to even have to refute such patent nonsense), but through debate and explanation.

I wonder to what extent "former believers lose their beliefs"..."through debate and explanation". I will continue to investigate that one.
Just a side comment here. I couldn't avoid giving a guiltily embarrassed chuckle when I re-read

..given that his book is most likely to be read by Christians who don't want to read TGD for themselves but want to know how to argue against it,

You see, to be quite honest (something I do at least once a week) I value Paula's article for precisely the same reasons.
I don't want to read the Fleas but...etc

503. Fleabytes

Comment #130625 by Richard Morgan on February 21, 2008 at 3:17 am

my atheism has strengthened considerably as a result.

This remark of Paula's raises a point that I, personally, find particularly interesting.
The idea that there can be a "strong" and a "weak" atheism.
It's almost as if Paula is saying, "I didn't believe in gods before, but now I really don't believe in the existence of gods."
Or is it more a question of, "I didn't believe before, but now I can better justify my non-belief."?
Now, I know that this is not exactly what she is saying, and it is the language of one who has previously espoused a faith which weakened and then disappeared.
Is there a critical mass of "knowledge" that can replace "faith" with reason? Or are different mental processes involved?
Are there different degrees of belief and non-belief?
What personal references do people use to decide where they place themselves on the "theist-atheist" scale... if such a thing exists?
Many stories in the Converts Corner contain a version of "I never really believed anyway, but...". Are they true converts?
I have heard about "faith-strengthening" experiences all my life. But, what, exactly is "atheism strengthening"? Or is it a question of non-overlapping magisteria?
My personal jury is still out on this one.
Can any of you guys help bring it back in?

504. Why do we believe in God? 2m study prays for answer

Comment #129763 by Richard Morgan on February 19, 2008 at 2:51 pm

Comment #129458 by Tyler Durden

Because our parents told us to. Can I have my money now?

For this one-generation answer, you have just earned 5p. Where should I send it it?
The other £1,899,99.95 will be spent on the study of all the other generations way back to the beginning.
If that's all right with you...?

505. Machines 'to match man by 2029'

Comment #129035 by Richard Morgan on February 18, 2008 at 2:21 pm

Machines to match man by 2029.

To match man?
I can't believe this!
Why would people want to start making dumb machines in 2029?
I thought AI was supposed to be an improvement.

506. Bill Moyers Interviews Susan Jacoby

Comment #129033 by Richard Morgan on February 18, 2008 at 2:16 pm

And we've heard it over and over in the primaries from candidates who supported the war and changed their minds. "We were lied to," they said. If we'd known then what we know now we wouldn't have done it. And they say to the public, "You were lied to."

How come everybody in France knew that the WMD story was a bunch of lies, and y'all stopped drinking good Burgundy because France refused to go and slaughter innocent Iraqis on a false pretext?
So - the Brits have Richard Dawkins, the Americans have this remarkable woman Susan Jacoby, and here in France we have, well...er... good Burgundy.

507. Machines 'to match man by 2029'

Comment #128802 by Richard Morgan on February 18, 2008 at 1:59 am

Humans and machines would eventually merge

This makes me so angry!
I mean, has anyone consulted the nanobots on this proposed merger? Do they have a say in the matter?
This is so typical of human pride, isn't it?

508. A match made on RichardDawkins.net?

Comment #128698 by Richard Morgan on February 17, 2008 at 5:00 pm

To end on a lighter note, we hope that our fellows on this site may recognise others with whom a strong connection might be made; let them unite and join that special RDF club founded by Veronique and Yorker, who found each other here and discovered the persistence of love.

A wonderful idea!
I am wondering why my wife doesn't share my enthusiasm...

509. A match made on RichardDawkins.net?

Comment #128692 by Richard Morgan on February 17, 2008 at 4:36 pm

They had in short, fallen in love.

Evidence, please.
Peer-reviewed papers on the evolutionary advantages, for example?
Punctuation problems : They had >,< in short, fallen in love.
Aw, fuck, it ain't always rational thinking and evolution, fercrissakes, SOMETIMES IT'S JUST LIFE
I am so thrilled about this. Thank you for sharing your happiness with us. I almost forgot to be cantankerous there for a moment...
What's love got to do with it?
There, now I feel better. ;-)

............(...(`.-``'´´-.´)...)..........
..............)......--.......--....(...........
............./......(o..._...o)..............
......................(..0..)......./..........
..........__.`.-._...'='.._.-.´.__.......
......./.......'#.'#.,.--.,.#'.#.'.........
.......\__))..........'#'......... ((__/.....
__xxxxxxxxxxx______xxxxxxxxxx
_xxxxxxxxxxxxxx___xxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx_xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
__xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
____xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_______xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_________xxxxxxxxxxxx
___________xxxxxxxxx
_____________xxxxx
______________xxxx
______________xxx

510. Dumb and Dumber: Are Americans Hostile to Knowledge?

Comment #128572 by Richard Morgan on February 17, 2008 at 12:12 pm

Juxta Monkey :

Jesus, you should see me walking down the hallways! It is one humorous sight. ;)

You can walk down my hallway any time you want. But stop calling me "Jesus" - it makes ne nervous on this site.

511. Dumb and Dumber: Are Americans Hostile to Knowledge?

Comment #128558 by Richard Morgan on February 17, 2008 at 11:36 am

Juxta Monkey :

BTW, I think I nust be misunderstanding the last bit about "mother tongue". English is my only language =)

*Blushes*
*Looks for a hole in the ground in order to be swallowed up and disappear forever.*
*Covers himself with sack cloth and ashes.*
*Rends garments.*
*Realises he is making himself even more ridiculous and decides to simply apologise."
JuxtaMonkey - "I am so sorry. please forgive me."

annabanana :

185. Comment #101502 by Richard Morgan on December 20, 2007 at 12:59 pm
If you don't belong to the enemy camp, don't wear their uniform and don't perpetuate their rituals. If you ignore this advice, don't expect to be taken seriously - however lovely, innocent (and naïve) you may be.

Comment #101512 by annabanana on December 20, 2007 at 1:13 pm
Richard Morgan,
Thanks for the assumption that I am naive. I will take that as a compliment as I am young still, and am enjoying being so.

171. Comment #128391 by annabanana on February 16, 2008 at 10:29 pm
It is sometimes frustrating when I feel that I try to make well thought-out, rational arguments and someone just retorts with "you're just naive". It's also something I've been battling my whole life, not just on the site.

Perhaps you just need to be a little humble on this one, and try to understand what is coming from you that provokes others to call you "naive".
Take an example from my own experience.
After only about fifteen years, and some 3524 women calling me "patronising", I was able to question my personality and realise that I was, in fact, insufferably patronising with women... of all ages.
I immediately set about correcting this, and was able to find a perfect solution.
I stopped listening to what women said about me.
Seriously, though, whatever your reaction, whatever you decide to do, DON'T GO AWAY!!
What would Diacanu and I do without you?

P.S. annabanana :

Comment #126756 by annabanana on February 14, 2008 at 6:54 am
this site has come to represent quite an important aspect of my life at the moment.

I'll simply say...me too...I shall send you a pm later. :)

I'm still waiting...

512. Ben Stein Wins Intelligent Design Money

Comment #128028 by Richard Morgan on February 15, 2008 at 10:07 pm

dkv

There is a possibility that all the religion bashers will get roasted in hell like insects...they will might get subjected to inhumane torture by the devil who will throw their half conscious body in boiling oil.

I showed this to a very young nephew. He asked me which video game was being described and was a Gameboy version available.
Well, over to you, dkv

513. Ben Stein Wins Intelligent Design Money

Comment #128019 by Richard Morgan on February 15, 2008 at 9:48 pm

82abhilash :

Americans are more smarter than the mainstream media gives them credit for.

*Groan.*
Grammar groan.
A special prize for the first person to re-write this sentence in correct English. (Please mention your mother tongue. If you are a native Welsh speaker, the prize value will be doubled.)

514. Dumb and Dumber: Are Americans Hostile to Knowledge?

Comment #128000 by Richard Morgan on February 15, 2008 at 9:15 pm

JuxtaMonkey - you're going to have to be understanding with tooltroll - it's not always easy being green AND ugly.
You don't need to apologise to anybody about your English or your grammar. I wish I could express myself as well as you do in a language which is not my mother tongue.
Without being able to find the exact wikipedia reference, I can assure y'all that serious and thorough studies have shown that there are dumb people in every country on the earth. The bell curve is a constant.
Before criticising Americans (as if there were such a thing as "an" Amercian!) remember you're on a site dedicated to reason

515. Dumb and Dumber: Are Americans Hostile to Knowledge?

Comment #127996 by Richard Morgan on February 15, 2008 at 9:04 pm

Why does it worry me that for so many questions great and small, I get hyper-linked to wikipedia?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegemony

Is it only because you guys think that I don't know how to use Google and Wikipedia? Or is this the "only way of knowing" for you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desposyni

D'oh....

516. Ben Stein Wins Intelligent Design Money

Comment #127990 by Richard Morgan on February 15, 2008 at 8:43 pm

"Sexual desire, perhaps (only "perhaps", mind you) mixed with immorality, gave us rape and sexual abuse of children."

I'm beginning to think that Stein's reasoning is flawed...

517. Ben Stein Wins Intelligent Design Money

Comment #127972 by Richard Morgan on February 15, 2008 at 8:18 pm

dlitt :

the majority of Americans are going to flock to the theatre in search of something (mistakenly perceived as intellectual)

I find this notion surprising but, in some ways encouraging, since I've just finished reading the thread "Dum and Dumber : Are Americans hostile to knowledge."
This seems to contradict the notion that a majority are going to flock to see a film because of it's (apparently) intellectual appeal.
Doesn't it?

518. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #127964 by Richard Morgan on February 15, 2008 at 8:02 pm

Teratornis :

Temporary alliances have proved useful throughout history.

If we adopt the confused-narrator model of self, then hypocrisy begins to make some sense.

Speaking of fetishes, it would be easy to develop one for our own brainy, fun, flirty, and apparently hot annabanana.

Not that I could necessarily get it straight with book length.

OK, I think I'm beginning to understand how you reason. But in spite of that I can easily imagine that you're a very nice person and you help old ladies to cross the road, and young ones to stay on the same side as you.

519. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #127087 by Richard Morgan on February 15, 2008 at 12:12 am

Teratornis

The self-conscious religious person certainly is not convinced that having a religion is as unambiguously good as having a billion dollars.

I sense that you have made a rather unfortunate comparison here, where both propositions are somewhat questionable.
On what basis do you affirm that "The self-conscious religious person certainly is not convinced etc etc "? Do you actually, personally know self-conscious religious people who consider that owning millions is morally preferable spending eternity in heaven?
Also I am far from convinced that having a billion dollars is unambiguously "good" for everyone. When I was a (false) "true believer", we had a joke : "It's obvious that God doesn't like money. Just look at the people He gives it to!"
Without forgetting that a Bible-based believer is programmed to consider that mockery and scorn are to be expected and that "the wisdom of God is folly to man" etc etc (yawns, falls asleep next to a snoring Diacanu).
Ridicule, however, remains a useful tool of enlightenment in dealing with people who are uncertain, or better, worried about their beliefs.
Some psycho-analysts talk about the salutary effects of coming to the realisation the "absurdity" of neurotic constructs. And yes, it is a happy day when a person realizes and is able to accept the idea, "Man, that's just so crazy." before moving onto the "How-could-I-ever-have-believed-that?" phase.
For the true believer (whatever that is) open ridicule will provoke a defensive reaction and strengthen, not his belief system, but his attachment to his beliefs. But we all know that, don't we?
Don't we?

520. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #127021 by Richard Morgan on February 14, 2008 at 5:16 pm

Cartomancer : before you go any further (with your highly interesting exposition) I think the time has come for you to define your use of the words "appropriate" and "level". I suspect that when you do so, many of us will find that we are on common ground.

521. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #127018 by Richard Morgan on February 14, 2008 at 5:07 pm

Sweet is the lore which Nature brings;
Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:--
We murder to dissect.

Enough of Science and of Art;
Close up those barren leaves;
Come forth, and bring with you a heart
That watches and receives.

Doesn't exactly have the same ring about it in 2008 as it did in 1798...

522. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #126936 by Richard Morgan on February 14, 2008 at 2:21 pm

Richard admits that he is "not trying to be a good politician".
What do you guys think about that?
Does it matter?
Do "we" need good politicians?
If so, are there any volunteers here?
(Diancanu and I would most certainly not be in the running!!!!)

523. Murder plot against Danish cartoonist

Comment #126934 by Richard Morgan on February 14, 2008 at 2:18 pm

I agree with you, Steve Z. Sometimes we need to vote with our feet. Sometimes we must walk away from certain "debates".

524. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #126929 by Richard Morgan on February 14, 2008 at 2:08 pm

I am willing to believe that Madeline Bunting is a well-educated, cultivated, intelligent person. This means, then, that in the absence of any verifiable evidence (during this debate), I am a Buntingist.
Like many of you, I positively cringed with embarrassment for her when she came out with things like "there is some truth here which is not about "evidence", not about "fact" ".
One last thing, at last we can be clear about what Richard is referring to when he uses the expression "child abuse" : it is both the labelling of children as Christian or Hindu AND teaching them about hell fire.
EDIT : Richard admits that he is "not trying to be a good politician". What do you guys think about that?
Does it matter?
Do "we" need good politicians?
If so, are there any volunteers here?
(Diancanu and I would most certainly not be in the running!!!!)

525. Murder plot against Danish cartoonist

Comment #126914 by Richard Morgan on February 14, 2008 at 1:31 pm

Epinephrine : thank you for this linguistic clarification. As I have mentioned before, I fear I am losing my grip on the English language.
I'm afraid that I also tend to have an allergic reaction to the word "should".

People shouldn't be committing crimes (or misbehaving) because of the implications of what consequences their actions will have on other people, and because of our evolved sense of empathy we should innately not want to cause others harm.

annabanana - With my highlighting, is this a correct reading of what you were saying?

526. Murder plot against Danish cartoonist

Comment #126838 by Richard Morgan on February 14, 2008 at 10:29 am

annabanana :

we should innately not want to cause others harm.

Are we opening the "nature versus nurture" debate here?
Does this mean that "morals" are innate? The Golden Rule is innate?
Hm - very interesting.
This affirmation causes me some problems. Does it mean that some people "innately" (are "born" that way) want to cause harm to others?
We "should"... according to what criteria?
What you say is very interesting, but I would like a few more of the nitty-gritty details of your reasoning here.
Also your talk of "consequences" throws us right back into the old behaviourist debates - positive and negative reinforcement and all that. (Oh, the joys of being one of Skinner's pigeons.)

527. A Tyrannical Romance

Comment #126754 by Richard Morgan on February 14, 2008 at 6:43 am

annabanana

Richard, many times you make me laugh, and then other times I'm just frightened.

All the girls end up saying that to me sooner or later...
But you need to know that while I may, many times, make some comments just for the sake of some light relief, in fact this site has come to represent quite an important aspect of my life at the moment.
More details if you ask for them in a personal message...

528. Why Darwin matters

Comment #126751 by Richard Morgan on February 14, 2008 at 6:27 am

Catsyk :

People like Rowan Williams are essentially good and highly intelligent, but why do they persist in such nonsense?

Whatever you may be doing at the moment, you must immediately purchase this book:
Why People Believe Weird Things: Pseudoscience, Superstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time Michael Shermer.
You'll love it!

529. A Tyrannical Romance

Comment #126748 by Richard Morgan on February 14, 2008 at 6:17 am

LorienRyan:

Richard, You really do have a one tracked mind, my friend.

Absolutely!
Why else would I feel in such good company here among the immoral atheists?
"Love is the answer, but while you are waiting for the answer sex raises some pretty good questions." - Woody Allen

530. A Tyrannical Romance

Comment #126645 by Richard Morgan on February 13, 2008 at 5:34 pm

Geoff - if you knew what the slang meaning of "queue" was in French...!!!

531. Murder plot against Danish cartoonist

Comment #126644 by Richard Morgan on February 13, 2008 at 5:33 pm

Murder plot against Danish cartoonist

Mint tea and marmalade.

???????

Oh, well, I guess I'm going to have to plough through all 156 comments to get the gist of this thread....

532. A Tyrannical Romance

Comment #126640 by Richard Morgan on February 13, 2008 at 5:24 pm

For the first time, I enjoyed the Notes more than the article!!!

For the penis of crocodiles see the extended version

But my favourite has to be:

For the distribution of the penis in birds,... and for the measurements of various ducks

I have clearly missed my vocation in life. But at least now I know what to do with my retirement.
This is...priceless!

533. Conservative Rabbis to Vote on Resolution Criticizing Pope's Revision of Prayer

Comment #125763 by Richard Morgan on February 12, 2008 at 1:56 am

oriole :

So by all means, Richard Morgan, go on describing people as stupid when you think the adjective fits, but then don't start wailing and rending your garment when they do the same.

Thank you for giving me permission to do something that I don't do : I describe the stupidity of acts, not people.
And as for wailing and rending garments, I had actually been planning a knees-up one evening on this precise theme - you're invited. Rending garments is for consenting adults etc etc

534. Charles Simonyi Professorship in the Public Understanding of Science

Comment #125387 by Richard Morgan on February 11, 2008 at 9:56 am

I'd much rather be "Richard" to you lot.

Moi aussi.

535. Charles Simonyi Professorship in the Public Understanding of Science

Comment #125211 by Richard Morgan on February 11, 2008 at 4:23 am

Good suggestion but Baroness Greenfield already holds a chair at Oxford.

So what? I change chairs at least 15 times a day! What's so special about Oxford chairs?
Or am I missing the point?
(Hehe)

536. Charles Simonyi Professorship in the Public Understanding of Science

Comment #125204 by Richard Morgan on February 11, 2008 at 4:12 am

Here are instructions for being a pigeon:

1. Walk around aimlessly for a while, pecking at cigarette butts and other inappropriate items.
2. Take fright at someone walking along the platform and fly off to a girder.
3. Have a shit.
4. Repeat.
-- (Notes from a Small Island,Bill Bryson 1995)

Not even Skinner had this depth of understanding of pigeons. LOL

Bill Bryson? Why not? I can handle science at this level.
Seriously though, I go with Steve Zara here - Baroness Susan Greenfield.

537. Why Darwin matters

Comment #125109 by Richard Morgan on February 11, 2008 at 1:37 am

Steve Zara, you tease!!!!
I'm going to answer for Wooter:

Muffled voice comes from behind the toilet door: "Yes, as a matter of fact, I do own a satellite navigation system. So what?"

Now, Steve, will you end the suspense, please?

538. Conservative Rabbis to Vote on Resolution Criticizing Pope's Revision of Prayer

Comment #125004 by Richard Morgan on February 10, 2008 at 4:41 pm

Martin S :

Calling people stupid for calling people stupid doesn't quite sound sound - if you know what I mean.

I fully agree with you.
But I maintain that the kind of comment I referred to was an act of stupidity.

"... but it takes debates over religion for intelligent people to say stupid things."

539. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #125001 by Richard Morgan on February 10, 2008 at 4:22 pm

Hey, you guys think you have problems with the Arch Bish?
Look at what's happening in my beloved France.

http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/sarkozy_and_god

I am weeping into my Armagnac as I type this...
Fortunately, Sarkozy's popularity is diminishing rapidly.
I think the secular state is safe in France.
But I'm looking at property in New Zealand just in case...

540. Sharia fiasco

Comment #124999 by Richard Morgan on February 10, 2008 at 4:17 pm

Hey - you guys think you've got problems with the Arch-Bish?
Look at what's happening in my beloved France.

http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/sarkozy_and_god

I am weeping into my Armagnac as I type this...

541. Sharia fiasco

Comment #124897 by Richard Morgan on February 10, 2008 at 11:58 am

Paine :

post-colonial guilt does not mean compromising on right and wrong.

Ah, if only things were as simple as that...

542. Sharia fiasco

Comment #124881 by Richard Morgan on February 10, 2008 at 11:43 am

Paula!
You're back!
Hallelujah!
And just when I was getting used to the idea that resurrection is a myth!!!
Back to the drawing board.
(Very, very happy to see you again, incidentally.)
(Well, very happy, at least.)

543. Sharia fiasco

Comment #124873 by Richard Morgan on February 10, 2008 at 11:37 am

Diacanu

That's what it is, empire guilt?

Not guilt, my fine transatlantic friend, (though I must admit it might look like that!) but just a way of pointing out to simplistic posters that certain problems could be more complex than they appear. Often the solutions are not as simple as some might think them to be.
As a teacher, I am well used to receiving complaints from angry parents about the "trouble-makers" in their children's classes. "Can't you just expel them, or make them stay at home or flog them in public?" they ask.
The answer is "No, we can't" and the reasons for refusing sharp, swift methods are usually too complicated for the angry parents.
I can understand them perfectly well, they have my sympathy, but....

544. Sharia fiasco

Comment #124861 by Richard Morgan on February 10, 2008 at 11:26 am

Negasta :

Why can't the British (and the European people in general) just tell the Muslims to piss off and go back to Arabia if they want Sharia?!

Rule Britannia, Britannia rules the waves...
Land of hope and glory...
And did those feet in ancient times..
Oops, excuse me, just felt like a little sing-song.
Hope my choice of songs didn't make anybody feel too uncomfortable.
The sun never sets on the British Empire...well, perhaps it does now. I'm referring to the "good" old days.
Of course, Pat makes valid points in a direct and simple manner. The solutions, Negasta, are urgently needed, but they cannot be simple, I'm afraid.

545. Conservative Rabbis to Vote on Resolution Criticizing Pope's Revision of Prayer

Comment #124848 by Richard Morgan on February 10, 2008 at 11:11 am

terradea :

There may be good reasons people believe in religion (e.g., because they do not possess the ability to engage in critical thinking), but there is no good reason for religion belief.

dhudson00! :

in speaking of "good reasons" to believe in religion, I'm pretty sure PZ Myers was speaking broadly.

I quoted PZ Myers from a lecture he gave entitled "There are no ghosts in your brain."
Please have the intelligence to listen to it before deciding for yourselves what he meant.

546. Conservative Rabbis to Vote on Resolution Criticizing Pope's Revision of Prayer

Comment #124806 by Richard Morgan on February 10, 2008 at 9:58 am

ronfac :

So much time, effort and emotion concerning who says what, and how they say it, to an imaginary sky fairy. Is there no limit to the stupidity of these people?

This kind of comment is typical of the kind of stupidity and childishness we could well do without on this site.
Deeply held religious beliefs have nothing to do with "stupidity".
PZ Myers himself has said: "It's not idiotic to be religious... There are good reasons people believe in religion."
Calling religious people "stupid" will not incite them to look for better reasons to renounce their beliefs.

547. The challenge of finding peace in Lourdes

Comment #124799 by Richard Morgan on February 10, 2008 at 9:43 am

scottishgeologist :

the "amputee argument" AFAIAC, this is the "killer" argument against faith healing. At a stroke, if this were to happen and to be independently verified, and REPEATED, it would kill atheism stone dead.

I fail to see the connection between the inexplicable appearance of an amputated limb and the existence of a God or gods.
I hope we have grown out of the argument from ignorance!!!

Wonder if anyone has ever had a miracle cure for impotence.... :-))))))

Change partners! ;-)

548. The challenge of finding peace in Lourdes

Comment #124650 by Richard Morgan on February 10, 2008 at 12:12 am

"I need to get better. I need the miracle."

I live in the South of France not too far from Lourdes.
I have often been there, because members of the family who come to visit expect to be taken to the Pyrenees, the Mediterranean and... Lourdes, all three are about ninety minutes from where I live.

"I need to get better. I need the miracle."

This cri du coeur is what Lourdes is all about, isn't it? Isn't this what religion is all about?
The existence of the thousands of tacky souvenir shops is no more surprising than the grotto itself - because all are aspects of the human condition : doing business in this life (selling plastic Virgins and striking desperate bargains with God) and getting guarantees for the next.

"I need to get better. I need the miracle."

Don't we all?

549. Richard Dawkins talks about The God Delusion

Comment #124322 by Richard Morgan on February 9, 2008 at 5:10 am

Steve Zara :

God isn't impossible. Just very, very, very, very, very, very unlikely.

I've always been a little unhappy about this kind of affirmation. Mostly because what is referred to as "God" is not clear.
What is clear to me is that there is no evidence to prove the existence of any of the Gods described in religious writings. These Gods are not just "very, very, very, very, very, very unlikely." They are impossible.

550. Are Darwin's Theories Fact or Faith Issues?

Comment #123909 by Richard Morgan on February 8, 2008 at 1:30 am

Steve Zara : I was was very touched to learn that your avatar is, in fact, a photo of your husband.
I have just mentioned this to my wife. Alas, she doesn't want to have her face associated with my opinions.
I guess I've gotta accept and respect that.