Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)

Comments by BAEOZ


551. I am creating artificial life, declares US gene pioneer

Comment #76465 by BAEOZ on October 6, 2007 at 12:28 am

Will Mr. Venter receive a cease and desist letter from god's attorneys anytime soon for infringement of patents and IP?

552. The Problem with Atheism

Comment #75865 by BAEOZ on October 3, 2007 at 11:05 pm

Whoops, did I just Godwin the thread? Sorry.

553. The Problem with Atheism

Comment #75864 by BAEOZ on October 3, 2007 at 11:04 pm

Russell:

...and can lead to condemning things just because they have some association with the "enemy".

I won't buy a Volkswagon because Hitler was involved in their development. In fact, I don't breath air now as I've learnt the Nazis engaged in respiration to gain oxygen for cellular purposes......
Is this an argumentum ad stupidity?

554. The Problem with Atheism

Comment #75857 by BAEOZ on October 3, 2007 at 10:23 pm

All's not lost in oz just yet:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/court-hears-religion-no-excuse/2007/10/04/1191091257466.html

555. Researchers devise way to calculate rates of evolution

Comment #75855 by BAEOZ on October 3, 2007 at 10:01 pm

This seems to have been reported with a misconception. Natural selection only works if there are mutations. The mutations are necessary for natural selection to do it's bit. If there were no mutations, natural selection would kill off the whole species the moment it got past the point where it couldn't handle the new environmental conditions.

556. A Face-Off Over Faith

Comment #75839 by BAEOZ on October 3, 2007 at 8:12 pm

I think it's time to start another round of "Let's get Richard Dawkins to come to Australia."
C'mon Richard, surely there's a dickknob ozzie fundy you can debate down here. I'll come along and cheer!

557. The Problem with Atheism

Comment #75508 by BAEOZ on October 2, 2007 at 9:59 pm

First comment!
I agree about calling ourselves atheists just opens up the same old arguments that believers throw at atheists. After all, believer coined the term as a negative or at the very least non affirmative of their positive belief. So, start negative, stay negative.........Better terms....Humanist, reasonableist....
Sam still hasn't convinced me that transcendence is anymore useful or real than snorting cocaine and going "wow, the universe is so huge". But then what do I know?

558. Logical Path from Religious Beliefs to Evil Deeds

Comment #75486 by BAEOZ on October 2, 2007 at 7:27 pm

Dr. Benway, you seem to be trying to make a statement, but I haven't quite got it yet. What has to go?

559. A Face-Off Over Faith

Comment #75452 by BAEOZ on October 2, 2007 at 5:21 pm

Will the intrepid Richard Dawkins get out alive after debating Rick & Bubba and John Lennox in Alabama? Won't they string 'im up for being a god hater?
Stay tuned.....

560. Why Christians should take Richard Dawkins seriously

Comment #75199 by BAEOZ on October 2, 2007 at 2:59 am

Danielos:

My, the similarities to fundamentalism just keep growing.

I see it's not only useless verbosity you excel at. It's also wishful thinking. Oh wait, you demonstrated that about page 10 of the Alistair McGrath thread. Grow up Danielos! This world is all you have evidence of. How long have you been a paid up courtier?

561. Dawkins - what can't he be blamed for?

Comment #75193 by BAEOZ on October 2, 2007 at 2:38 am

IceFreak2000:

Why is it that theological contains the word logical when it clearly isn't?

Uhm, because Logos means word, theory, explanation..... Thus logic is an "explanation" of how to think. Biology is the "theory" of life, and Jesus is the "logos" (word).....Yada, yada.
Sorry, beer is working.

562. Dawkins - what can't he be blamed for?

Comment #75177 by BAEOZ on October 2, 2007 at 1:45 am

Quetz:

He also kills puppies.

He's apuppaeist? He hates dolls? Sorry, bad attempt at a joke based the latin word (puppa = doll, also the source for the word puppet) from which puppy is derived......It makes sense, dolls were once just little models of adults (still are if you think of Barbie, but not if you think of baby alive), thus a puppy dog would be a little model of an adult dog.....
OK, I'll have a beer and be quiet.
[EDIT] OK Barbie is a ridiculous guy fantasy of a woman. So is Pam Anderson if you think about it. Then again, let's not.

563. Dawkins - what can't he be blamed for?

Comment #75173 by BAEOZ on October 2, 2007 at 1:38 am

drive1, Dawkins' has infected Pratchet?
IJM, yes I do think. But then I may be paranoid, doesn't mean RD isn't the atheist antichrist. He's certainly an iconoclast and a naughty boy.

564. Dawkins - what can't he be blamed for?

Comment #75153 by BAEOZ on October 1, 2007 at 11:45 pm

Was that against those poor Cathars? Dawkins' evil knows no bounds I tell you.

565. Dawkins - what can't he be blamed for?

Comment #75152 by BAEOZ on October 1, 2007 at 11:44 pm

Caedite eos! Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius"
Kill them! ....truly the Lord who are his? (my latin sucks)
Kill them (all)! The Lord will know his own?(a guess )

566. Dawkins - what can't he be blamed for?

Comment #75148 by BAEOZ on October 1, 2007 at 11:34 pm

Dawkins was seen near Mt. Vesuvius in A.D. 79. If only the inhabitants of Pompeii and Heracleum had taken note of this man.

567. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #75145 by BAEOZ on October 1, 2007 at 11:16 pm

Russell, I like the idea of a drink with you guys. In fact V asked if I wanted to catch up with her when she was down this way. I'm not sure of what I'm doing that day, and seeing I didn't catch up with you the last time when I said I would, I feel it's probably better to wait and see how things pan out before committing.....

568. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #75133 by BAEOZ on October 1, 2007 at 10:18 pm

Russell, You're not dead yet! I'd volunteer but I'm not the type to commit to anything like a life vocation. I like to chop and change and experience many different things, especially as this is most likely the only crack I'll get at it. :)

[EDIT] OK, I'm really just bone lazy to undertake anything for a period of many years or decades.

How's CAPAC going Russell?

569. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #75128 by BAEOZ on October 1, 2007 at 9:55 pm

Bonzai, you may be right about Russell's talents. But when I read his works (History of Western Philosophy, Principles of Mathematics), I understand without great mental gymnastics. With a lot of philosophers, it seems they want to make comprehension hard to impress you with their genius or something. Guess that makes my intelligence mediocre and suitable for BR's writings. :)

570. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #75121 by BAEOZ on October 1, 2007 at 9:33 pm

Quine, I think with ontological arguments it's best to substitute "banana split" for god.

571. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #75118 by BAEOZ on October 1, 2007 at 9:17 pm

Your opinion is noted and just as quickly discarded.

Dogmatist.

572. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #75116 by BAEOZ on October 1, 2007 at 9:15 pm

Ontological arguments aren't proof of anything but word play.

573. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #75114 by BAEOZ on October 1, 2007 at 9:14 pm

Quine, Bertrand Russell was great. I think perhaps that we need another Bertrand Russell to debunk all the "restated" proofs of god.

574. Dawkins - what can't he be blamed for?

Comment #75106 by BAEOZ on October 1, 2007 at 8:45 pm

perhaps Professor Dawkins can be held responsible only for the arguments he's actually put his name to, rather than those he's done everything to repudiate.

Here, here.
[EDIT] That was meant to be "Hear, hear". Brain fade.

575. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #75100 by BAEOZ on October 1, 2007 at 7:49 pm

Russell, are you inclined to do some philosophical grunt work against god touting philosophers? I can understand why a lot of philosophers would see it as just warming up old, dead arguments.

576. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #75091 by BAEOZ on October 1, 2007 at 6:46 pm

Russell Blackford:

Why can't there be rational disagreement and discussion without insults and expressions of anger?

I think, and this is just my opinion based on a little introspection, that people take their arguments personally, like an integral part of who they are. I know I have at times.
If someone has the temerity to disagree, they take it as a personal attack or slight on their person/identity. Either that or we are all just cats who don't wish to be herded nor share the spotlight with other narcissistic felines that frequent the area.

577. Religion as a Force for Good

Comment #74863 by BAEOZ on October 1, 2007 at 12:00 am

GSP:

But I am saying it is possible that an atheist believes that atheism entails there is no morality.

Well, if he believes there's no morality, he's nasty, but that doesn't have anything to do with atheism. You seem to want to confound atheism with nihilism (belief in nothing of some kind).
Anyway, I'm sorry, but I do have to go. Cheers.

578. Religion as a Force for Good

Comment #74861 by BAEOZ on September 30, 2007 at 11:57 pm

Anyway, if you can't see that atheism = lack of belief in god(s) and belief in Nietschean ethics = belief in Nietschean ethics then there's not much more to say. Atheism isn't Nietschean ethics anymore than christianity is.
I have to go home, it's the end of my work day here. I'm sure you'll find someone else to oblige you in a discussion. Enjoy.

579. Religion as a Force for Good

Comment #74860 by BAEOZ on September 30, 2007 at 11:54 pm

GSP:

This atheist could be Nietzschean in the sense of morality and thus do evil things in the name of atheism.

Whether he did it it in the name of atheism has no more to do with atheism as if he did it in your name. If I kill 10 people and say I did it because I believe in GSP does that mean anything about you? You are not a belief system are you?

580. Religion as a Force for Good

Comment #74858 by BAEOZ on September 30, 2007 at 11:44 pm

I didn't say an atheist couldn't have positive beliefs. I'm saying that to be an atheist you don't believe in the existence of god(s). You may believe in economic rationalist, or social democracy and be an atheist. But you lack belief in god(s) existence.
You are saying atheism is "I believe in no god" whereas I'd say it's "I don't believe in god". They are not the same. Do you believe in aliens? No, why? because you probably don't see the point in believing in something that there's no evidence for. You operate as if they don't exist, because as far as you know they don't. This is how I view god. There's no evidence, so need to believe. I'm not saying I believe there is no god, I just operate on that assumption until there is a reason to believe.

581. Religion as a Force for Good

Comment #74855 by BAEOZ on September 30, 2007 at 11:31 pm

GSP:

I don't agree that an atheist has no positive beliefs. I think that an atheist can believe in no morals and thus act upon the assumption that there are no morals.

Just to be clear. A positive belief is a statment like: I belief in X. Atheism is the lack of belief in god(s). So it has no positive belief statement. That is what it means. You don't choose whether it has or doesn't have postitive beliefs. It has nothing to do with morals, because they don't come from any belief as such, although morals can be twisted by beliefs. We have as good as moral sense as any other sample of humans. Because morals are inate to social creatures like humans.

582. Religion as a Force for Good

Comment #74852 by BAEOZ on September 30, 2007 at 11:14 pm

GSP, who has said there's never been a secular tyrant? Sadam Hussein, Stalin, whoever were secular tyrants. I think you're trying to equate secular with atheist. They are not the same thing. Besides, An atheist can be just as nasty as a believer. Stalin was an atheist, but he didn't do nasty things because of atheism.
A believer who thinks it's ok to be evil for his beliefs is not the same as an atheist who's evil. Because atheism has no positive belief to inspire evil actions. Evil atheists do nasty stuff because they're evil, not because they're atheist.
But this is just a content argument. Religion is false because there's no evidence of supernatural gods.

583. AAI Convention webcam

Comment #74848 by BAEOZ on September 30, 2007 at 10:23 pm

You sound pretty disillusioned bayareadude. Bummer.

584. AAI Convention webcam

Comment #74597 by BAEOZ on September 29, 2007 at 4:30 pm

ILoveLucy:

cant believe that this has descended from an engaging debate about the usefulness of the RRS to atheist causes to a spate of petty pimping for myspace profiles.

I must beg pardon for my shameless pimping. My only excuse is I was pissed. I'd been watching the footy grand final and drinking a ton of home made Sangria. If it makes you feel better, I had a great day. I feel a little ill today oddly enough....

585. Religion as a Force for Good

Comment #74590 by BAEOZ on September 29, 2007 at 4:16 pm

If I recall correctly, our esteemed Dr. Benway once said that "It's about the basis, not the content." Yes, sometimes people of faith or religion can do good, and lots of times bad. That doesn't make their god or whatever real. It's based on lie. These people could do good without faith too. Couldn't they?

586. AAI Convention webcam

Comment #74477 by BAEOZ on September 29, 2007 at 4:14 am

Richard Morgan:

You youngsters - go have a listen:
http://www.myspace.com/frenchmixers2

And when you're done with that I have it officially from Richard Morgan that I can't sing, thus all you people who want to punish yourself...
www.myspace.com/wearethecrap

587. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #74476 by BAEOZ on September 29, 2007 at 4:09 am

Brother John:

.if anything in the Bible contradicts what Jesus Christ taught

Have you ever got stuck in a mess and no matter how you tried it was still messy?
Matthew 10:34 "I came not to send peace but a sword"

Of course, Jesus lied in this phrase, because he was Platonic about loving thy enemy. But why would a perfect being lie? Oh I get it, nothing Jesus said is real....

588. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #74400 by BAEOZ on September 28, 2007 at 2:49 pm

Richard, you be evil and hilarious! Pastoptic gospels written in tomato sauce! Are you a member of the secret tortellini sect formed after the durum schism? Whoops, that's a secret, have to kill you now.

589. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #74399 by BAEOZ on September 28, 2007 at 2:48 pm

Brother John, If you say "Christ teaches to be good to each other and love thy enemy." I have no problem with that. It's a common enough, invaluable teaching, see: Plato, Hinduism, Budhism, etc. To me it seeks to bring the best out in people. Whether is makes people act better or whether it just enshrines an ethics that communities had to develop over thousands of years I don't know.
If you say that Jesus taught this and stands alone in teaching this or this shows he's divine, then we disagree.

590. Genes Tied to Bad Reactions to Antidepressant Drug

Comment #74381 by BAEOZ on September 28, 2007 at 11:06 am

Great post oxytcyn. Very informative. I wonder if the good Dr. has some thoughts on this as well....

It is common knowledge within mental health that people with depression are at greater risk for suicide when one starts to experience an alleviation of symptoms.

It's a quirk of history that revolutions occur when times start getting better. As conditions alleviate, people start to demand more, if they don't get it, they revolt. Weird species humans. (That parallel strangely popped into my sleep deprived brain at 4:05 am AEST :)

591. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #74310 by BAEOZ on September 28, 2007 at 4:58 am

Revcort:

You had me laughing for sure.

Cool. Song did it's job done then.

On the other hand, some individual posts (I won't name names, but you can guess) around here present more errors about the Bible than the whole of Hitchens' book, so everything's relative.

That would've been me. Or not, I think I just butchered Plato.....

592. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #74239 by BAEOZ on September 27, 2007 at 11:18 pm

And how did I get italics in my last post? I blame Russell.

593. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #74238 by BAEOZ on September 27, 2007 at 11:17 pm

Now now Quine. Can't you understand that the dualist assumption implies that the mind/soul exists but can't be ever measured? Which makes me ask how do they know it exists? Revelation of course! Or Plato just assumed it.
And whilst chemical processes and physiological brain structures can or will explain the mind, it ruins the whole god afterlife carrot/stick argument if you can demonstrate there's no need for duality. And that's just being plain nasty.

594. Polygamist Leader Convicted in Utah

Comment #74231 by BAEOZ on September 27, 2007 at 9:22 pm

Thanks Russell. Good points. Psychoanalysis is pretty much a niche idea in psychology. I think CBT is the mainstream these days.
Thanks again. I'll keep reading my philosophy books to see what I like and then maybe decide whether to change/enrol in a course. I've just read a collection of Plato's dialogs, am now reading Aristotle all the while looking at other stuff on the web and in books by Bertrand Russell (History of Western Philosophy, etc). It'd be great if there was a book that said "here's how it all works, the rest is bunk" but then there'd be nothing to argue about. :)

595. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #74229 by BAEOZ on September 27, 2007 at 8:49 pm

Revcort, if you're bored and can spare the time. Here's a tune I wrote a lil' while back about insane thoughts or ideas (i.e. guilt, or just a lame pop tune) that keep repeating in one's head....
www.myspace.com/wearethecrap
click on the song "get outta my head" if it doesn't start by itself.
Enjoy, it's just a bit of fun.
(And yes, I'm a crap singer/songwriter/guitarist/bassist/arranger and proud of it.)

596. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #74224 by BAEOZ on September 27, 2007 at 7:59 pm

Obviously a heretical Christian Uni that the venerable CHeard teaches at...;)
Don't get upset people Heresy is Greek for choice, as I understand it, and a Heretic is someone who exercised a choice. It was only later that the choice was deemed bad as it didn't agree with some orthodoxy. Anyway, that's neither here nor there. I'm going mad with all this brotherly love.
Tell me CHeard. Do christian scholars (or did they) think that Plato was an honarary christian? His dialogue Crito talks about souls, heaven and hell (sort of) and immortality. If he'd only said christ once it'd be completely christian philosophy I reckon...Phaido gives reasoning on why suicide is bad in a very similar way as christianity (i.e. that we are owned by god, and therefore we have no business dispatching ourselves.)

597. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #74221 by BAEOZ on September 27, 2007 at 6:52 pm

Revcort:

Come on BAEOZ! We were just about to start singing Kumbaya around the campfire. Seriously, why not disagree agreeably?

Because I'm an infantile prat? Oh ok, I'll be nice. Kishy? Give me a big revcort hug.

598. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #74205 by BAEOZ on September 27, 2007 at 4:46 pm

OK. Who stole all the evil atheists and replaced them with cuddly unbelievers? For Zeus's sake, we an image to uphold. How will WeeFlea and the like characterize us as evil immoral prats if we don't give them juicy quotes?!?
Lift your game guys!

599. Teacher: I was fired, said Bible isn't literal

Comment #73976 by BAEOZ on September 27, 2007 at 1:18 am

Another fine post Northern Bright. There's some quality thinking and argumentative skill, including yourself, amongst the unbelieving brigade. The only theist I've noticed who so far has been honest and of a high intellectual standard has been CHeard (There may have been others, but I've not noticed.)
Keep up the good work.

600. There Go The Dinosaurs

Comment #73947 by BAEOZ on September 26, 2007 at 6:16 pm

_J_

Will Dr Benway ever say something that I don't wholeheartedly agree with? Is Dr Benway capable of stooping to trite, boring or pointless observations? What is Dr Benway's halo made of? How many Dr Benways can you fit on a pinhead? Why does Dr Benway allow earthquakes to happen? How does Dr Benway deliver all those presents?

I think Quetz has competition as the preffered deity of RichardDawkins.net.

More Pages: Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 | Next