Comments by Peacebeuponme

Comment #163994 by Peacebeuponme on April 19, 2008 at 12:10 pm

Remnant

Sorry Steve, natural selection is not a cause. It can be considered a filter that excludes or includes existing, caused traits. It has no creative power to cause anything.

It is of course coupled with random mutation. Don't be silly.

602. I'm gonna be a MOVIE STAR

Comment #163989 by Peacebeuponme on April 19, 2008 at 12:05 pm

wiley

I don't have hard proof but neither do you about how evolution created life.

What do you mean by "hard proof"? Having never been to the State of New York, I do not have hard proof that it exists. If my friend tells me that there is a sea containing a family of Krakatoa between Pennslyvania and Canada, presumably I should afford this alternative United States Geographical Theory equal weight?

603. I'm gonna be a MOVIE STAR

Comment #163975 by Peacebeuponme on April 19, 2008 at 11:45 am

wiley16350

I don't know how god made life

You are a silly sod aren't you?

You don't know how god made life, but you know that he did?

I generally do one of two things when I don't know something: research the issue and try to find or work out the answer, or defer to those who are experts in the field. You might be wise to do the same.

604. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #163966 by Peacebeuponme on April 19, 2008 at 11:33 am

RD.net laws of theistic interaction.

I really have to go.

Law #1: A theist will always have something pressing to do immediately after presenting a tired and weak theistic proposition.

Okay, one final post...

Law #2: Any theist who claims that they have better things to do, really don't.

605. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #163831 by Peacebeuponme on April 19, 2008 at 6:05 am

Remnant

The points made are about as devoid of meaningful substance as the fossil record is of transitional fossils.

Perhaps you'd like to show Richard the way and add some substance to your argument?

Pick one of the points Richard has made and refute it.

606. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #163824 by Peacebeuponme on April 19, 2008 at 5:53 am

All that is within a living cell could not be placed ther by chance.

Here we go.

607. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #163817 by Peacebeuponme on April 19, 2008 at 5:37 am

Yep

Devastating.

608. I'm gonna be a MOVIE STAR

Comment #163806 by Peacebeuponme on April 19, 2008 at 4:47 am

wiley16350

They just claim that evolution can not adequately explain all aspects of life. Which by Mr. Dawkins own admission nobody can explain the origin of life.

Goedel's incompleteness theorems cannot explain the eletromagnetic force. I think we should reject them.

609. Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss

Comment #163804 by Peacebeuponme on April 19, 2008 at 4:34 am

keith

It's possible that the real driving force behind his campaign is simple exasperation that the truth is being corrupted by an inane idea.

I think Richard has stated pretty explicitly several times that what he cares about is the truth.

610. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #163801 by Peacebeuponme on April 19, 2008 at 4:28 am

cordura5

(Actually, the lemmings purposefully jumping off cliffs is an untrue story. But I will save that for another time.)

You twat. Do you realise you are actually a bit stupid? This site is full of intelligent and interested scientific people, and you think you can tease us by exploding a myth that is well known to be one. How can you think we won't know the truth of the lemmings story?

I measure that at 0.2 Bergsons.

611. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #163263 by Peacebeuponme on April 18, 2008 at 5:41 am

Having read RM's insults yesterday

What's this?

612. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162100 by Peacebeuponme on April 16, 2008 at 6:49 am

Steve

That is far easier. Just accelerate to close to the speed of light, or hover very close to an intense gravitational field, and time will pass slower for you than for others.

Might have a bash on the weekend. Beats jogging.

613. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162097 by Peacebeuponme on April 16, 2008 at 6:48 am

Steve

If you are an ex-believer like me, churches can seem odd and uncomfortable places.

Ok, "buildings" then.

614. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162085 by Peacebeuponme on April 16, 2008 at 6:26 am

Steve

Suppose you move one end around so fast that over a period of a thousand years, it only experiences ten years of duration. There is then a 990 year time difference between the ends!

So what you are saying is that, if we started to move one end of a wormhole around now, and kept doing so, then future generations would theoretically be able to come back to an earlier point depending on how fast we could move the end, but that we can never go further back than now?

What does this mean for time travel in to the future?

615. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162079 by Peacebeuponme on April 16, 2008 at 6:15 am

Steve

It does illustrate a point some rationalist campaigners make: what support or community do you provide if you take away religion from someone's life?

You don't have to take the community elements away from somebody's life thoguh do you? Just the irrational beliefs and moralising. Why shouldn't people congregate in churches? They just don't need to pray.

The gang members in LA could say "yeah, but if I'm not in the crips, where is my community?" People find community in lots of ways. Just that sometimes the extra baggage around them is harmful and should be removed.

616. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162077 by Peacebeuponme on April 16, 2008 at 6:11 am

Steve

Your "crap science" was in the independent today. Is that and the wiki article wrong then when it comes to wormholes? (Just interested, I am not suggesting you are wrong).

617. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161985 by Peacebeuponme on April 16, 2008 at 1:07 am

Quetz / MPhil

Don't get too excited. One thing I've learned is that RM seems to be completely lacking in sincerety. He enjoys making these overblown and self-absorbed statements. It wouldn't surprise me if he got bored of Christianity in a few months and moved on to something else.

We await the inevitable gloating comment on this site from David Robertson.

618. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161980 by Peacebeuponme on April 16, 2008 at 12:18 am

This comment from Strength is making me laugh at the moment

Survival of the fittest @ss hole

Would make a good t-shirt I think.

619. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161422 by Peacebeuponme on April 15, 2008 at 9:28 am

All this talk of voices in the head. Did they come from an external entity? Does it indicate schizophrenia?

To me it just seems like an odd way for God to go about getting things done. Kardashovel seems confused as to exactly what he is supposed to do with these messages. "Walk with me" is not that clear an intruction. Why only two messages in all this time? Why via the head, which means the integrity of the message is at the mercy of our extremely fallible memory. Why not just leave you an answerphone message?

Whenever god reveals himself it seems to be in an unessesarily contrived or trival way.

Curious.

620. For sale: 13-year-old virgin

Comment #161316 by Peacebeuponme on April 15, 2008 at 6:50 am

irate_atheist

Swift application of Occam's razor reveals that, quite simply, Henri is a prick. Anything else just adds superfluously to the length of his member.

Henri just enjoys turning the key. Don't rise to it.

I think we could actually have a new unit of measurement called the 'Henri' used to measure unfounded arrogance. e.g. "Scooternyc's last comment was easily 0.8 Henris"

621. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #160641 by Peacebeuponme on April 14, 2008 at 8:51 am

Seems that thisisme has come on with the fans' favourite, absolute morality, without which we can't have right or wrong and everyone is free to bash others on the head with a log.

Have these people never heard of the police (not the band)?

622. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #160082 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 3:47 pm

Kardashovel has gone, there's a silly person here talking like he or she is in junior school. I'm going to bed. Have fun people.

623. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #160078 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 3:42 pm

csrbm

it would seem the logical thing to do would be to go for a master-race type of thing. If not... why?

Logical how, and for who?

624. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #160074 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 3:38 pm

csrbm

Peacebeuponme

Neither of the titles you listed cover the question why not follow Darwinism to it's logical end. Is it because you feel it is not nice? I really want to know. Why? Why not go for a society like that?

Actually they both explain why Social Darwinism (actually, your argument isn't even as advanced as social darwinism) is wrong. Steve explains this very well. What has what actually happens got to do with what we should do?

625. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #160048 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 3:06 pm

csrbm

In his original post the author stated: "But as a citizen and a human being, I want to construct a society which is about as un-Darwinian as we can make it."

I want to know why would he want that? Why go against Darwinism? Shouldn't we embrace it? Isn't that the way it is going to go anyway? Wouldn't many social ills be taken care of? If you do believe in it why not follow it to it's logical end?

I believe that you don't really believe it. I don't do things because God said not to do some things for my own good. You don't do things because... why?

Why take care of the poor? Why not kill the handicapped? Why not lie, kill and do what ever you want? Why not go for a master race? And which is the master race? Whites? Can we discuss that in school? It is a legitimate question of your theory. Seriously. I want to know why you guys don't.

Go away. Actually, go away and read "The Blind Watchmaker" and "Guns, Germs and Steel". Then you can come back and talk.

626. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #160042 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 2:52 pm

Bonzai

He is not talking to you guys, but talking down to you. He speaks with a smug and condescending tone, writing cryptic one liners

I'm sorry, but if that is his intention, he's doing a pretty shit job.

627. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #160041 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 2:50 pm

Diacanu

Monochromatic would be if my statement were a conclusion rather than an inquiry.

I didn't detect a great deal of doubt-benefiting in the post I picked up on. However, I've realised that I spend far to much of the time I spend on this site critiquing other members' approaches, rather than putting forward a distinctive one of my own, so apologies.

628. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #160037 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 2:40 pm

Kardashovel

With a somewhat open mind, tempered by your own experience and reason

Well, exactly. Using reason, scientific enquiry, evidence and Occam's Razor. And where would that lead?

629. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #160029 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 2:33 pm

Kardashovel

Certainly mathematical truth. But also the type of truth that science is designed to uncover. And, also the subjective truths that satisfy my own standards of proof, though perhaps not yours. For example, I can state that I am truly hungry, even if I can't prove it to you

Well no. You can define hungry as being in need of food (or feeling that you are in need of food). Against that standard you can then call yourself hungry. This is not the same a being somehow cosmically hungry, outside of any reference point. All mathematical proofs are predicated on axioms, and so similarly are not universally true.

630. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #160019 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 2:24 pm

Diacanu

So we're being nice to Ka-Ka Shovel now?

I applaude your supreme ability to chase-cut, but must you always be so monochromatic?

631. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #160015 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 2:21 pm

Kardashovel

You want to snare me into saying that I know what is in your mind. Why on earth would I step into that trap?

Well not quite. I realise you are not stupid. You (and others) make the proposition that you have a personal relationship with god. I'd like to ask how you think another person should evaluate this claim.

632. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #160012 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 2:17 pm

Steve

Martin Rees (who, according to Day, clearly could be a universe designer, as he knows about the parameters needed to get things going)

Isd that Vox's argument?

That would be like me getting hold of the blueprints of the World Trade Centre and then being able to build a copy in my street, on my own.

633. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #160002 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 2:02 pm

Damn! The objective truth line came out and I didn't rise to it! I'm getting slow.

634. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #160001 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 2:00 pm

Kardashovel

Does that really resemble what I said, Peacebeuponme?

How else should I read:

I'm not sure... but I suspect that if you knew Jesus we would not be having this discussion.

Do you think it is important to be honest? If so, why?

Before I can answer that, you need to tell me for what purpose.

635. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #160000 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 1:57 pm

Kardashovel

So nobody wants to discuss reincarnation? That's just as well, I'm getting a craving for sushi.

From where I stand its not a subject worthy of scientific enquiry, much like astrology. But perhaps you have some experimental evidence, or rational speculation you want to share?

636. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #159986 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 1:48 pm

Kardashovel

I'm not sure... but I suspect that if you knew Jesus we would not be having this discussion.

So you are saying I don't know Jesus. How can you know that?

637. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #159976 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 1:41 pm

Kardashovel

I'm not sure we're talking about the same person. Maybe you are confusing him with some of His misguided "followers".

Are you telling me the Jesus I know and understand is not truly there?

638. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #159965 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 1:30 pm

Kardashovel

Jesus seems a bit boring though. Especially once the interest in the Paul Daniels magic tricks wear off. I'd much rather Thor or Pangu came and had a chat with me.

639. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #159958 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 1:17 pm

Kardashovel

But if you think I'm interesting, you should try talking to God.

Which one?

640. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #159947 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 1:08 pm

Kardashovel - you are an interesting character. I'll give you that.

641. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #159940 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 12:37 pm

I hope to have a proper engagement on a thread which really does interest me in a couple of days and will use either.

Can anybody see how elavated David's sense of self-importance is based on his interactions here? He knows that when he arrives, he creates a disturbance and generates a rush on posts. The comment above is designed to make it look like we are eagerly awaiting his next visit. Troubly is, he wont say anything new, how can he?

I think I'm going to try the coventry option, unless he posts something genuinely robust and interesting.

642. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #159937 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 12:31 pm

David

Sorry guys - you should really just read the posts then you would not have to engage in the detective work/conspiracy theories etc. I explained that I was only reinstated as David A. Robertson today. But don't worry clearthinker will return!

Please address individuals. Your "sorry guys" is a catch all, which means it includes people like me who actually read your post about your username. But I know why you address this site in that way.

643. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #159919 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 11:53 am

Epeeist

Now I am really baffled. Posts early in 2007 then a big gap until today. Was the id blocked, was it live and unused, being saved for a rainy day if other id's were blocked?

David explained this in his reply to you. Seems RD.net unblocked him.

644. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #159892 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 11:01 am

Quez-whatever

However anyone who beleive in a talking snake is laughable,I agree with that,however that doesnt make Collins 10x smarter then anyone in here.

Wooterism.

645. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #159842 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 8:28 am

Styrer

It was a fucking travesty. (It was Boyzone, by the way.)

The pedant in me is duty bound to tell you it was Ronan Keating (and not all of Boyzone).

646. Fleabytes

Comment #159829 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 8:03 am

Sargeist

I just have a general feeling that he seems to appeal to people (ok, teenagers) who want to feel a bit "oooh, naughty".

I agree there. I guess you can't help who ends up misinterpreting what you do. That's goth kids for you. They all want to be shocking and different, but are all coy and embarrasse until they congregate with others who dress in exactly the same way as them.

Admittedly, my favourite black metal bands (Burzum, Mayhem, Darkthrone, Dissection - in case anyone missed that) don't exactly have the most moral background... but I seem pretty able to divorce their antics from my enjoyment of their music.

And why not? Listening to them does not make you a church-burner. I think one of the best rap albums ever made was by Geto Boys. The song Mind of a lunatic includes such charming lines as:

"she begged me not to kill her, I gave her a rose. Then slit her throat and watch her shake 'till her eyes close."

But the lyrics are just theatre, deliberately extreme to the point of comedy. Its a bloody good listen as well.

647. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #159814 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 7:41 am

Just to be clear for anybody reading David's wonderfully sneering post (I thought only atheists sneered?):

Sorry for the intrusion... Now I must leave this oasis of clear thinking, freedom,love and reason and return to the cess pool of Christianity....

A few posts amongst thousands are not up to the same intellectual standards of the vast majority. Just bear that in mind. There are many, many examples of wonderful science, philosophy and debate here. This site is a fantastic learning tool.

David can point at a couple of swearwords and laugh all he wants. Don't be fooled.

David's arguments for both the validity of religious truth claims and the personal and social benefits of a religious mindset are extremely poor.

648. Fleabytes

Comment #159809 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 7:30 am

Sargiest

I don't, sadly, have much to contribute except to say that I regard Marilyn Manson as, you know, just a *tinsy* bit, er..., tame. I mean, look at it all, the make-up, the snarling around and acting all dangerous. Dear oh dear. I much prefer a nice heavy dose of black metal. (And this is even on-topic, because Paula mentioned it!)

One of the most interesting things I find about Marilyn Manson is that people think he is going around "acting all dangerous". I've never thought of him in that way. He is more of a showman. He's flamboyant, interested in gothic themes sure, but also a certain amount of homoeroticism, not to mention 1920's Germany more recently. He's heavily influenced by Bowie.

The fact that he has become mainstreams seems to have everyone commentating that he's not as scary as he makes out.

He's also a pretty good atheist champion.

649. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #159792 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 6:59 am

Styrer

My (now seemingly insubstantial) point was that we have a freedom here which Richard Morgan is going to sorely miss.

No, that is a substantial point which we need to remind ourselves of. Its why I and I suspect many others spend a lot of time here. There are not many places like this on the web.

650. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #159785 by Peacebeuponme on April 13, 2008 at 6:39 am

Styrer - for the record, I don't give a fuck about that cunt Robertson. I couldn't care less what idiotic shit he writes on his website. I hope I didn't give you that impression.

I do give a shit about us lot, here, and the discussions we have.