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 epeeist


651. Responses to 'Gods and Earthlings' by Richard Dawkins

Comment #166323 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 6:21 am

Comment #166318 by dj2baduk


It's true science does seem to get this A LOT, but then it does encompass so many different subjects which are hard to understand/explain and have been simplified to try to engage the public.
The difficulty is that if you are stuck trying to do something with surface spherical harmonics you rarely get people coming up to you and saying "Well, if you separate it then you can normalise the Legendre polynomial with a metric covariant tensor".

What you are more likely to get is someone saying that electrons go round the nucleus like planets go round the sun, or that you don't even have evidence for electrons.

652. Responses to 'Gods and Earthlings' by Richard Dawkins

Comment #166309 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 5:45 am

Comment #166300 by Steve Zara


I think only people who speculate with certainty should be ridiculed. But I still feel uneasy about the lack of humility and recognition of ignorance shown by people who feel that they are in a position to speculate. Imagination is a good thing, and to be encouraged, but surely it has to be based on education.

I am just expressing feelings here. I may be way off-base.
You aren't.

I suspect that I may have knowledge of a wider number of areas than you. However, this is obviously shallower than yours in particular fields. As such I have no problems in asking for information, or being wrong and subject to correction.

Ignorance I can cope with, ignorance and arrogance coupled with absolute certainty is something that needs to be stomped upon.

I came across a thing called "Right Man Syndrome" originally put forward by Colin Wilson and A.E. Van Vogt (yeah, right). It is described here - http://www.rightmansyndrome.com/

I am no psychologist, so don't know whether this fits into the mainstream or not. However, a lot of the behaviours seem to reflect those that have been brought here of late.

653. Responses to 'Gods and Earthlings' by Richard Dawkins

Comment #166295 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 5:19 am

Comment #166283 by phatbat

My point was that you were critisising an 'elitist' attitude in defence of arrogant attitudes. I think we should be arrogant back, and elitist back at them when they do this so they can learn to treat their own knowledge about science or what ever the subject with the caution it deserves.
This was essentially the point I was making last weekend.

There are a number of people on this site who try to explain things, Steve Zara and MPhil would be good examples. It isn't the right tactic with those who don't want to listen.

Instead of trying to defend evolution (for example) we should be pressing for explanations as to what alternative theories the theists have, and what evidence they have for them. Sites like AiG have lots of criticisms of the ToE that can just be fired at the likes of Steve, Billy Sands and MaxD and keep them permanently bogged down in trying to respond. However, they have nothing which shows why ID is a science, any evidence for it, any predictions for it, or any tests of those predictions.

We should be insisting on a critical dialogue, we politely answer their initial questions (assuming they make any), then insist on them answering ours. And we don't accept evasions, attempts to change the subject or simple assertions without evidence. And especially we don't allow them to disappear once the questioning becomes hard for them and then come back another day and pretend that they have nothing to answer for.

654. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166276 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 4:36 am

Comment #166272 by Philip1978


Though Eddie Izzard was right about how the Flying things and the swimming things get out due to a loophole! (Said in the voice of James Mason, who was playing God) Did Noah really have to collect them as well?
Well yes, because salt water fish can't live in fresh water and vice versa (in general, there are some that can live in both). So he would have to have had some stonking great aquariums on board as well.

The one that gets me is the fact that while he could take only two (or seven) animals on board then how come these were enough to feed the other animals that need live food.

655. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166274 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 4:32 am

In the holidays during 6th form I worked on a pig farm. Not a particularly big farm, but the amount of shit we had to shovel each day was significant.

You have to feel sorry for Noah and his few companions having to heave dinosaur turds over the side on a daily basis. Given that he seems to have only sailed around a limited area you would expect to find a significant number of coprolites...

656. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #166260 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 4:16 am

Comment #166253 by irate_atheist

More evidence for the prosecution, perhaps?

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/posted/archive/2008/04/22/brazil-priest-flying-party-balloons-lost-at-sea.aspx
Cue boy scout song:

"Oh you'll never get to heaven in an old Ford car"

657. Responses to 'Gods and Earthlings' by Richard Dawkins

Comment #166259 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 4:10 am

Comment #166239 by Steve Zara


What I am after is a greater respect for science and scientists. It is my impression that in some countries (the UK is a good example of this), there is actually an anti-intellectual attitude. If you state, truthfully, that you know far more about a science subject than the average person you are considered elitist and putting an inappropriate distance between you and them. This does not seem happen in other areas where skill is required.
Yes, but it is more generic than that. Even claims that you know rather more than the average about music, literature, history or philosophy (as noted by MPhil) gets you tarred with the brush of elitism. Even an interest in cricket (of the non tip-and-run variety) is becoming regarded this way.

Quite honestly if something isn't in "Hello", the Sun (page 3 and back page) then it might as well not exist for many people (yes, I know this is hyperbole).

We need better educators, who can engender an enjoyment of learning. As a corollary this probably means getting rid of the bean counters who regard the aim of school as passing exams and going on to be a productive bean counter.

658. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166251 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 3:47 am

Comment #166245 by BillySands

Whenever I am on an apologetic web site (or directed to one) the first thing I do is check out what it says about dinosaurs.
My approach is a little more gradual. Lure them in to start with by mentioning the varves in Lake Suigetsu (40,000 counted, one per year). They usually respond with something like Mt. St. Helens laying down multiple varves per year. Then you point out that there are thin and thick varves corresponding to known weather patterns and catastrophic events such as Krakatoa. And how this matches with tree rings. And how it all fits together with ice cores.

They always want to tell me about the unreliability of C14 dating, so I stick to the stuff you can do by simple counting and emphasise the consilience between them. Not only do they have to show why each of the dating methods is wrong, but why they are all wrong by the same amount.

659. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166243 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 3:25 am

Comment #166238 by BillySands

That means a total of 1 billion species have ever existed (I said it was conservative). Noah is given a week (604800 seconds) to round them up. He is therefore rounding up and placing 1 species on the ark every 600 micro seconds
That is one seriously large boat. Built out of wood wasn't it? That would make it a bit larger than this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyoming_(Schooner)

Of course Noah would have been a better boat builder, the Wyoming sank in heavy seas because of its flexure. Wasn't there something about heavy seas during "The Flood"?

And of course, with that much wood one would expect to find some remnants on Mt. Ararat. I know people have looked for them. It isn't as though wood of this age hasn't been found, for example in the Forbidden City in China. I know this isn't particularly good evidence, since China isn't mentioned in the bible.

Oh, I posted this the other day:

The Bible: Because all the works of science are as nothing to the wisdom of a set of cattle-sacrificing primitives who thought all the species of the world lived within walking distance of Noah's house.

660. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166204 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 2:01 am

Comment #166196 by Philip1978

I suspect you prefer stories of talking snakes
Please sir, please sir. I like stories about talking snakes. There was this one called Ningizzida in a book called "The Epic of Gilgamesh". He ate from the tree of life and became immortal. He did it when Gilgamesh wasn't looking. Its a very old story, the book I've got said it was written about 2000BC on tablets of stone. Does that make it older than the bible sir?

661. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166194 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 1:39 am

Comment #166174 by alovrin

You equating yourself to some kind of progressive and Steve Z as a frothing at the mouth luddite is really weird.
Is Bonzai about? I'll whisper it then. I see Steve as a constructionist, in the same mould as L.E.J. Brouwer.

662. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #166187 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 1:35 am

Comment #166172 by MartinSGill

Having recently read Viktor Frankl's book (Man's Search for Meaning) I drew the conclusion that he was either agnostic/atheist or possibly a deist, despite his Jewish heritage.
I can't find the quotation. But wasn't it Frankl who said the biggest lift in the morale of camp inmates was being moved to a new camp where there were no chimneys?

EDIT: Just waiting for A S Marques to come along and tell me none of the camps had chimneys.

663. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166181 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 1:24 am

Comment #165844 by chewmanfoo

I look at your avatar and think, "My she's a pretty girl.
I don't buy this notion of Anna being pretty. Pretty is a little girl going to a party in a pink frock. Anna is beautiful.

Now I don't have too much problem with some of the invariant triggers, such as glossy hair, clear skin and good teeth being indicators of health, size and shape being indicators of child bearing ability.

However, I do wonder about cultural differences. We had a Japanese girl stay with us from a time who was very good looking. However, I am not sure whether I saw her beauty in the same way as a Japanese person would see her.

664. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165884 by epeeist on April 22, 2008 at 2:08 pm

Comment #165839 by Remnant


A little reading material regarding genetics, mutations,and the implausibility of macro-evolution.
It is never too late to pry open volitionally closed minds...
All cretinists do is whine about the ToE.

So, in the interest of fairness I would like to invite you to present some features of ID. Specifically:
    What makes ID science?
  1. What predictions does it make?
  2. How can these predictions be tested and falsified
  3. What tests have been made and what were the results?
Now this is a dialogue, so you should really follow the rules that are normally accepted by participants.

I have given a list of things to be avoided here - http://www.richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2484,Interviews-with-Richard-Dawkins-and-Michael-Shermer,Skepticality-The-Official-Skeptic-Podcast,page3#165735

665. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165869 by epeeist on April 22, 2008 at 1:45 pm

Comment #165865 by chewmanfoo

geeze you'd think with all the powers of Satan, principalities and powers, Dawkins could get a bigger pipe and more servers.
Unless of course he is being DDoSed by all the "Expelled" groupies.

666. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165782 by epeeist on April 22, 2008 at 10:05 am

Comment #165772 by TheTruthID

I find it funny that Dawkins, when caught off guard, admitted to ID in the movie "Expelled".
Well, I was nice to you yesterday. However you have exhausted the patience I had.

You were asked to provide evidence that ID is science. You didn't do it.

You were asked to show what predictions ID makes. You didn't do that either.

You were asked to show how any predictions that ID makes could be tested. Did you answer? That would be no.

Finally, you were asked to tell us what tests had been conducted on ID and what results had been found. Anything? Well apart from an echo that is. Zilch.

In this post - http://www.richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2484,Interviews-with-Richard-Dawkins-and-Michael-Shermer,Skepticality-The-Official-Skeptic-Podcast,page3#165735 I give some of the things one should not do in a critical dialogue. Included there are things like changing the agenda, not fulfilling the burden of proof or attempting to shift it, failing to reply to questions and being evasive.

All of these describe what you do here. The question is why you do it. It is very simple.You are an ignorant and gullible fool. There is no evidence for ID, no tests have ever been done, no results have ever been produced. In short, ID has the same empirical strength as extispicy.

So as clodhopper says - you might as well get the scriptural quotes and threats in now, that is what all theists like you descend to. It is all you have got, you certainly haven't got any valid arguments or you would have shown them to us by now.

667. If God Is Dead, Who Gets His House?

Comment #165771 by epeeist on April 22, 2008 at 9:37 am

Comment #165763 by irate_atheist

Outrageously slow. Slower than a badgers arse.
I wonder whether the site is being DDoSed. My innate sense of conspiracy blames the infestation of theists that we have had from the "Expelled" site.

668. Interviews with Richard Dawkins and Michael Shermer

Comment #165735 by epeeist on April 22, 2008 at 7:29 am

Comment #165715 by Incredulous

**** him! I wouldn't wait around for a sensible reply from clearmind if I were you, epeeist.
I am not expecting a great deal. We have had a series of cut-and-run theists of late, at least one of whom was directed here from the "Expelled" site. All of them doing exactly the same, coming here with maximum braggadocio and minimum knowledge and attempting to generate quarrel dialogue.

We have been too nice to these people, trying to explain things and expecting them to be reasonable and actually read the explanations. The best they can do is provide a link to a random page on AiG that shows our explanations are "wrong".

The time has come to make them provide some answers. If ID is science then let them tell us how it works.

All I am asking for is for them to follow the rules for an informal, critical dialogue. To paraphrase from Douglas Walton's "Informal Logic"
  1. Unlicenced attempts to change the agenda are not allowed
  2. Not making a serious attempt to fulfill an obligation is a bad strategy. Notable here are failures to meet a burden of proof or to defend a commitment when challenged.
  3. Trying to shift the burden of proof or alter the burden of proof is illicitly is not allowed.
  4. Purporting to carry out an internal proof using premises that have not been conceded is not allowed.
  5. Appealing to external sources of proof without backing up your argument properly can be subject to objection.
  6. Failures of relevance including providing the wrong thesis, wandering away from the point to be proved or answering the wrong question in a dialogue are not allowed
  7. Failing to ask questions that are appropriate for a given stage of dialogue should be prohibited, along with asking questions that are inappropriate.
  8. Failing to reply appropriately to questions should not be allowed, including replies that are unduly evasive.
  9. Failing to define, clarify or justify the meaning of a definition in accord with standards of precision appropriate to the discussion is a violation if the use is challenged by another participant
  10. A participant must not try to force the premature closure of a dialogue until it is properly closed, either by mutual consent or by fulfillment of the goal of the dialogue.

669. Interviews with Richard Dawkins and Michael Shermer

Comment #165709 by epeeist on April 22, 2008 at 4:53 am

Comment #165704 by clearmind

84 per cent of world population stick to their faith because they are rational and see the things through logic and reach the conclusion that perfect things require perfect design and a designer.
Argumentum ad Populum. A master logician like you should know this.

Wooter - it is extremely rude to leave a thread without answering the questions that were asked of you. Anyone would think you were unable to reply.

Could you please answer the questions I raised here
http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2480,Gods-and-earthlings,Richard-Dawkins,page4#165692

670. Gods and earthlings

Comment #165692 by epeeist on April 22, 2008 at 3:46 am

Comment #165689 by clearmind

EEPIST
How do explain the earth and other planets' rotation and spinning around themselves, their relation between them and the creatures on the earth by sky evolution? (Sky evolution ?) Or again unexplained CHANCES?
No, this isn't how dialogue works. You have asked some questions, we gave you some answers. Now it is time for you to give us some answers to our questions.

Here are mine
  1. why is "Intelligent Design" science?
  2. What are its basic hypotheses?
  3. hat predictions does it make?
  4. How can these be tested?
  5. How can it be falsified?
  6. What tests have been made and what were the results?
Until you answer these questions I don't think you have the right to ask any more questions.

Oh, and I want rather better answers than you gave to Frankus "things cannot be questioned" is to admit your ignorance and bigotry.

671. If God Is Dead, Who Gets His House?

Comment #165676 by epeeist on April 22, 2008 at 3:11 am

Talk about a sign

The Folio Society have just offered me "Great Cathedrals of the Middle Ages". I think I will have Chartres.

672. If God Is Dead, Who Gets His House?

Comment #165626 by epeeist on April 22, 2008 at 12:24 am

Comment #165620 by Artful_Dodger

It seems that the "atheist faith" meme is alive and well.
You are David Robertson and I claim my £5.

673. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165495 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 2:18 pm

Comment #165491 by The Reverend Dark

(Nice way of saying my arse would be kicked so hard that it would end up as a set of hairy Canadian earmuffs.)
Total aside. I had some lessons off the former Canadian national coach (he was the British national coach at the time). A guy named Bob Anderson, he did one or two other things as well ;-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Anderson_(fencer)

674. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165493 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 2:15 pm

Comment #165488 by clodhopper

epee: you're a bit chuffed about that, aren't you?
Just a bit :-D

My hated rival from another club looked grimmer and grimmer as it became obvious my two pupils would be the two finalists.

The guy on the left fences for Ireland (as you can tell from his breeches) and is due to spend some time training with the Spanish squad. The guy on the right is on the British Olympic Pathway looking to qualify for 2012. Shall we say there is a certain amount of resentment at my (indirect) success.

675. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165486 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 2:04 pm

Comment #165480 by The Reverend Dark

Epeeist thrust thusly
Hey, want to see my body guards

http://www.nw-fencing.org.uk/index.php?option=com_zoom&Itemid=73&page=view&catid=8&PageNo=1&key=0&hit=1

676. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165481 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 2:01 pm

Comment #165474 by TheTruthID


I will look into the Spartina grass species you recommened. You seem like the only one who will have respectful dialouge. Is there any way I can e-mail you privately in order to continue this dialouge?
We didn't have a dialogue. You asked some questions, we gave you some answers.

We asked you some questions and got nothing, zilch, nada in return. Why do you think that was?

Here is some free information. ID is not science. It is not a theory, it doesn't even rank as a conjecture. It is creationism in another guise as the Wedge document indicates - http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Wedge_document

Just look in "Pandas and People" and compare it with "Creation Biology" - http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2005/11/missing_link_cd.html

677. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165475 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 1:55 pm

Comment #165470 by The Reverend Dark


No laughing boy, you started by making inflammatory statements, coupled with assertions that would be laughable coming from a grade school child, let alone and adult.
We are knocking 10 points off his estimated IQ every time he refuses to come up with any answers.

At the moment I think it is down to about the level of a very small beetle.

678. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165459 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 1:43 pm

Comment #165456 by TheTruthID

I have done my reading and sought out the mountains of information available thus came to my belief in ID.
Then share it with us. You constantly avoid giving answers. It really is very simple. Scientific theories have evidence to back them up, they make predictions, the predictions can be tested and failures in the tests falsify the theory.

You have shown us nothing. No evidence, no predictions, no tests, no results. You claim to have mountains of information, show it to us.

679. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165449 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 1:36 pm

Comment #165442 by TheTruthID

Why I accept ID.
If you accept ID then you can tell us how it works. We want the process. How do organisms get designed? Who or what does the design? How can this be tested and falsified. Show us some of the tests that have been made and what the results were.

Please don't tell me to read a book or go to some gibberish website. You explain to me the process.
If you won't read a book then how are you going to learn? The Theobald paper on the link I gave you gives a whole stack of evidence for evolution by natural selection, how it can be tested and how it can be falsified. That explains the process.

We are not here to educate you. That is your responsibility.

All we want is for you to show us what makes ID a theory in the Popperian sense. Just get on with it.

680. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165444 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 1:30 pm

Comment #165439 by al-rawandi

Another deduction and we will have a garden salad.... Fat free dressing.
I suggested a tactical switch this weekend. Stop being nice and explaining stuff and ask for answers from them. I think you need to add another cause of death to the canonical list - "I am not coming back because they asked me hard questions for which there are no answers on the AiG website".

681. Resentment Over Darwin Evolves Into a Documentary

Comment #165438 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 1:21 pm

Comment #165375 by black wolf

Current IMDB score 3.6 out of ten.
Current score on Rotten Tomatoes is 13% - http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/expelled_no_intelligence_allowed/

682. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165433 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 1:15 pm

Comment #165425 by TheTruthID

I don't understand something. Please inform me of what I do not understand?
No, you don't have a free pass.

Answer the questions that have been put to you. What makes ID science, what predictions does it make, how can it be tested, what tests have been made and what were the results.

Don't forget - every time you make a post that doesn't answer the questions an angel loses its wings.

More importantly - every time you fail to answer marks you out to be a complete no-nothing and we deduct another 10 from your estimated IQ. Not long before you are down to negative numbers.

683. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165423 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 1:06 pm

Comment #165419 by TheTruthID

Your question of the Bird Flu. I agree, I want the scientists to use their ideas of MICRO-evolution to try and trace the origin of the infection, not Macro-evolution. I assume you know the difference?
Since Steve has a Ph.D. in biology then I guess he might.

I seen you still haven't answered any questions that have been asked of you. Why does that not surprise me. Come on, why is it taking so long?

Show us why ID is a better theory than Darwin's. In fact, show us why it is a theory rather than just creationism in a fancy vocabulary.

684. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165415 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 12:58 pm

Comment #165403 by TheTruthID


You ask, what does ID predict? How has MACRO-evolution predictions been tested and whether it can be falsified and misrepresented? I want to know what tests were cunducted and what the results were. I challenge you to show me one shred of scientific evidence that proves MACRO-evolution?
Oh that one is easy - http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

Now - get with the show. Answer the questions that have been put to you. How is ID science, what does it predict, how can it be tested and falsified, what tests have been done and what were the results?

Prevaricate once more and we will know that you actually don't have any answers.

685. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165407 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 12:53 pm

Comment #165399 by BillySands

Shame David Robertson is not here to see the tolerant love of christians.
Oh, he is. Look on the Open Letter thread. The most despicable post I have ever seen from him. So loathsome that it even got Steve Z. seriously pissed.

Well dished by MPhil though.

686. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165400 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 12:47 pm

Comment #165393 by Diacanu

So, was that shit a death threat, or what?
Remember the guy who came across from Vox Day's site with the penis replacement as an avatar.

Anyway, do you want to borrow my bodyguards - http://www.nw-fencing.org.uk/index.php?option=com_zoom&Itemid=73&page=view&catid=8&PageNo=1&key=0&hit=1

687. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165394 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 12:38 pm

Comment #165387 by TheTruthID

I would love to see how evolution is recorded in the fossil record?
No, that isn't the way it works. You came, raised a point and got some answers.

Now it is your turn to answer questions.

Here are my questions - I want to know what makes ID (that stands for Intelligent Design by the way, not Ignorant Deism) science. I want to know what it predicts, how its predictions can be tested and whether it can be falsified. I want to know what tests have been conducted and what the results were.

688. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165365 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 11:49 am

Comment #165350 by navyjake95

Furthermore, it's culture warriors that are flocking to see this movie - I suggest you think about that.
If you can provide some evidence that this is so, then I might just do that.

Mind you, you are going to have to convince me the New York Times hasn't got a clue what it is talking about - http://movies.nytimes.com/2008/04/18/movies/18expe.html?scp=1&sq=expelled review&st=nyt

The guys from Scientific American don't seem to enthused either - http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=ben-steins-expelled-review-john-rennie

689. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165357 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 11:42 am

Comment #165336 by righton


Expelled came in 8th or ninth in box office earnings. Considering there is usually about eight to ten different movies playing at a given movie theater this is not a good showing at all.
I note that it came in just below another fantasy movie "Horton Hears a Who".

690. Ben Stein Vs. Sputtering Atheists

Comment #165164 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 6:44 am

Comment #165157 by Incredulous

What next? I guess there comes a point where we just have to be satisfied with being sane and continue to do our little bit to forward reason by simply being reasonable and scientific.
There was a time I would have agreed with you. However, I think that time is past. See my post - http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2394,Lying-for-Jesus,Richard-Dawkins,page51#163736

In a follow-up post I suggest that at best we should treat the likes of remnant with polite ruthlessness. It must have struck a chord since Steve Zara has now gone on the offensive (though he still adds "please" after demanding evidence).

691. Gods and earthlings

Comment #165156 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 6:18 am

Comment #165151 by clearmind

wOW THE PICTURE IS THE EVOLUTION OR BEFORE MONKEY OR AFTER MONKEY
Your caps lock is stuck.

Are you going to make an attempt at answering my post #165107?

692. Expelled Overview

Comment #165148 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 6:04 am

Comment #165145 by HaveEngngDegreeHeHe

Suppose you look under the hood of two different model cars from the same manufacturer. You may notice some similarities. The obvious explanation for this is "design and manufacturing efficiency"
Wow, you have cars that breed and mutate. That is so fucking cool!

693. Gods and earthlings

Comment #165107 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 4:21 am

Comment #165093 by clearmind

This is where atheists or evolinn get stuck. They do not want to deal with logic or reason while they put their evolution idea forward, or they go with Dawkins' UNEXPLAINED DODGING.
Clearmind (sic). You are very active in shouting about the problems of evolution.

What you have never provided is an alternative theory. Now when I say theory I mean something that actually predicts something. I also want something that can be tested and falsified if it is wrong.

Here for example is an article in the Washington Post that gives some information on how Darwins theory can predict things - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/25/AR2005092501177.html

You will note that the predictions are testable

So give it your best shot, use "Intelligent Design" if you like since you appear to think it trashes the theory of evolution. What predictions does ID make, how can these predictions be tested and falsified? If they have been tested then what were the results?

694. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165058 by epeeist on April 21, 2008 at 2:10 am

Comment #165020 by jonwes

(3.1 million last I saw)
I heard 3.2, but I wouldn't want to worry about the difference.

What I did want to ask is, what is the average price of a cinema ticket in the US? This should give us a rough count of the number who went to see it.

The one thing that it isn't going to be possible to estimate is how many of these were Christian groups who were being bribed to attend.

695. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164685 by epeeist on April 20, 2008 at 2:07 pm

Comment #164674 by Frankus1122


That is why Tolkien's series of stories and writings are all so interesting. To me, at any rate
Myth-index. He uses just about every entry in the catalogue. Bound to hit you somewhere.

696. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164682 by epeeist on April 20, 2008 at 2:05 pm

Comment #164675 by MPhil

well, Berkley's idealism was almost "theistic" - he said that matter doesn't exist, only minds and ideas
Sorry, in joke. We had a user Dianelos Georgoudis who was the bane of Steve and I (and several others) over a period of months. He started off interesting but we got nowhere with him. Mind you Steve and I were young and naive then. I think we would do a better job now, thanks to you and others on this site.

697. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164672 by epeeist on April 20, 2008 at 1:58 pm

Comment #164670 by stew99


Great news! Expelled did a lousy $3.2 million at the box office this weekend, despite its huge media push.
Evidence please.

Err, sorry. Could you give us a link.

EDIT: sorted - http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iTFVPukHHFXxfTOmpSb22BHpnJeQ

I see it comes just behind another fantasy movie "Dr. Seuss' Horton Hears a Who!"

698. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164671 by epeeist on April 20, 2008 at 1:56 pm

Comment #164664 by Steve Zara

Oh yes! I have used the "D-word" here in the last few days.
Seems to be getting to MPhil too. He is talking about solipsism, Berkley-idealism and brains in vats. I am just waiting for him to put "theistic" in front of the hyphen.

We're doomed I tell you, doomed...

699. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164665 by epeeist on April 20, 2008 at 1:53 pm

Karda - as someone who suggested we be polite but ruthless with theists I am happy for you to stick around. The banter is fun too, keep with it.

Just knock off the faux humility, okay?

700. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164653 by epeeist on April 20, 2008 at 1:43 pm

Comment #164648 by Kardashovel


ThoughtsonCommonToad, based on your last post to me, you might find this site/article interesting:
http://www.simulation-argument.com/
Steve, are you getting the feeling of deja vu?

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 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 | Next