701. Six Reasons to be an Atheist

Comment #108336 by Radesq on January 6, 2008 at 2:07 pm

ADH Those three items have a high correlation with atheism but they are not characteristics of atheism or caused by atheism. Steve is right if he is saying that those things are more descriptive of rational inquiry.

702. Six Reasons to be an Atheist

Comment #108004 by Radesq on January 5, 2008 at 8:09 pm

8. Theists

PS Haven't heard the term frelling since they frelling canceled Farscape

703. Sam Harris debate with Rabbi David Wolpe

Comment #107931 by Radesq on January 5, 2008 at 3:26 pm

Krisking: Am I a vegetarian? No, infact I just finished eating my dinner (or maybe I should say supper) in any event for the rest of my answer to your question please see Paula Kirby @ 236.

704. Sam Harris debate with Rabbi David Wolpe

Comment #107911 by Radesq on January 5, 2008 at 3:00 pm

Alright, alright just don't make me say aloo-minny- um!

I find the Noah flood story one of the least credible and most morally reprehensible stories in the whole mess. Where to begin? Where did all the water come from, where did it go, why kill blameless animals, did animals that can swim survive, how did Noah's family repopulate the earth without committing incest, how could they mathematically produce enough offspring in the time allotted by the Bible to repopulate the Earth? Of course it goes on and on -- if you really want to look at a story that fails to pass muster Noah is your man.

705. Sam Harris debate with Rabbi David Wolpe

Comment #107894 by Radesq on January 5, 2008 at 2:47 pm

OK thanks Paula, I thought so. The only time I came to England I flew Northwest Airlines not British Aeroways so it was a little confusing. Wink back atcha.

706. Sam Harris debate with Rabbi David Wolpe

Comment #107883 by Radesq on January 5, 2008 at 2:40 pm

aeroplanes? Is that British for airplanes?

707. Sam Harris debate with Rabbi David Wolpe

Comment #107753 by Radesq on January 5, 2008 at 7:15 am

Summer Seale @ 109 Wow, what it must have been like being in front of those crowds and yelling over and over again "We've got Spirit yes we do! We've got Spirit how 'bout you!?!" I can't imagine. ;)

708. Sam Harris debate with Rabbi David Wolpe

Comment #107750 by Radesq on January 5, 2008 at 6:47 am

Teratornis -- I see you came back to the people don't want to give up their irrational religion because -- they enjoy it (and they don't appreciate a killjoy logician sticking his finger in the birthday cake)explanation (right Summer Seale?). That was sort of my point earlier on in the thread when I also mentioned the similarity to smoking. It relates in a way to the different styles of debate that might be effective, but also that sometimes debate may not be of much use.
L'il Blasphemer reminded me that there is also coercion preventing rational thought from prevailing in cases like this. I think fear of ostracism or causing pain to loved ones would be the issue over fear of eternal punishment (if you've gotten to the point where that's all that's holding you to religion why wouldn't you just choose to drop that too?)

Still, while I agree with the coincidence of the tribal and idolizing aspects of religion and sport -- I think the analogy breaks down after that. Absent my (irrational you would argue) tribal affiliation -- when I watch a sporting event between two away teams I often still enjoy the spectacle and the talent of the players. I just have a difficult time deciding who I would like to see win and why. Again even though there is a team called the Angels -- they are just people playing a game, they are not invisible, all powerful, etc..

709. Sam Harris debate with Rabbi David Wolpe

Comment #107640 by Radesq on January 4, 2008 at 10:02 pm

Summer Seale I suspect that Teratornis would ask you if you are willing to suspend you rational thought for sport why not for religious belief? But then he or she can speak for him or herself on that. It's one in the a.m. here in this part of Red Sox Nation. I'm going to sleep.

710. Sam Harris debate with Rabbi David Wolpe

Comment #107636 by Radesq on January 4, 2008 at 9:52 pm

Teratornis: That's an interesting perspective. I must admit I had not put much thought into it (it appears you have). I think there are some other issues to consider...the sports teams do not simply exist in order to make money for players and owners...that is their function perhaps but like any other form of professional entertainment or any business really -- they exist to provide a service which people are willing to pay for to experience. Now are those reasons irrational? Not entirely I think but you make some insightful points. As to rooting for the furniture company - no. That is not really part of the experience, I can appreciate any person or business that excels in providing their product or service (regardless of the amount of financial gain they receive). Of course part of the enjoyment of watching a professional competition whether a sport like baseball or a chess match is being familiar with the players getting an idea of their strengths and weaknesses of their game etc. and then rooting for them as opposed to the other teams "tribes". This isn't always based on geography but that does assist in the familiarity. The idea that the Red Sox franchise is a representative of the greater Boston area is pretty arbitrary I grant you (they have many fans elsewhere in the world also). In terms of group dynamics is it like organized religion? Yes I suppose in many ways it is. However, I think it is sufficiently different in the ways I mentioned before and perhaps some other ways as well that I will have to sleep on. I will keep in mind however, that to be a fan is perhaps to be a fanatic.

711. Sam Harris debate with Rabbi David Wolpe

Comment #107598 by Radesq on January 4, 2008 at 7:48 pm

Don Quix I agree that Sam always does a really good job every time I see him. Not only seeming reasoned but reasonable; even when he says something like Mormonism is just Christianity plus - a bunch of really stupid ideas.

712. Sam Harris debate with Rabbi David Wolpe

Comment #107583 by Radesq on January 4, 2008 at 7:34 pm

Teratornis: OK, that's helpful thanks. We all act irrationally at times. However, I think the correlation between my rooting for the Red Sox and believing in all powerful invisible deity is a tad weak. There is a team and another team and a competition for me to witness and be entertained by and if I hope that the team I favor is successful -- what is so irrational about that? Now if I thought that Babe Ruth or Ted Williams were going to return from the grave to lead the Sox to another World Series victory next year then maybe it would be apples to apples. Anyway thanks for your input please add to it if you like.

713. Sam Harris debate with Rabbi David Wolpe

Comment #107548 by Radesq on January 4, 2008 at 6:06 pm

LB Yes I do think you may be right in many cases. I need some instruction on these things from those who have been in the flock previously. I see people in church on tv and I assume they are there because they want to be -- not because they are afraid what people or God will think of them if they aren't. They often appear to be having a good time. I'm just trying to understand -- because I have this conflict of knowing that there are a lot (seemingly a majority) of people who believe what I think are ridiculous fairy stories and not even the best ones I have heard. A least a fair proportion of these people are very smart otherwise well adjusted people. I just can't dismiss all of these people as morons (as much as I might like to). But I just don't get it and I would like to do something about it.

714. Sam Harris debate with Rabbi David Wolpe

Comment #107544 by Radesq on January 4, 2008 at 5:52 pm

LB I can believe that, but do they admit that to you or is that just a logical conclusion you come to from thinking through the possible consequences they would face both in this world and the supposed afterlife?

715. Sam Harris debate with Rabbi David Wolpe

Comment #107541 by Radesq on January 4, 2008 at 5:39 pm

notsobad @33-- On the subject of debates like these: It seems to me the intellectual arguments were probably won long ago. Although the debates are worthwhile; it seemingly takes more than logical arguments to get most people to let go of a thought habit they enjoy and don't want to give up. I don't know but I think it takes visibility and peer pressure. Very difficult to do with something people are so defensive about. I don't know how to say it delicately -- but in the USA the best analog I can think of is smoking. Once wildly popular, it is now discouraged and looked upon by many as a weakness and something the poorer and less educated among us do (is that fair or correct? I don't want to give an opinion on that -- but it has been effective)...as such it has decreased smoking substantially. Of course it also involved many laws and ordinances being passed against smoking in public spaces. I wasn't in favor of that tactic for smoking (though also effective, and pleasant for me as a nonsmoker)and I think it was more a product of the peer pressure than a cause of it. That part could not be done for faith in the USA (nor would I advocate it). I'm sure none of this is news to regulars here but I think it might be worth thinking about again.

716. THE FOUR HORSEMEN - Available Now on DVD!

Comment #107520 by Radesq on January 4, 2008 at 4:57 pm

lindajean I obviously don't know Hitchens and I'm not really well versed on his works. I have read some and seen some of his interviews and debates. However, I feel like I recognize in him traits some positive and some negative that are more like me and the people I know than the other three "Horsemen". I think in total he is a definite plus for the group.

717. Sam Harris debate with Rabbi David Wolpe

Comment #107484 by Radesq on January 4, 2008 at 3:48 pm

eXcommunicate at #8 -- That look says to me: in the movie "The Four Horseman" the part of Sam Harris will be played by Ben Stiller.

718. Huckabee: Guns, God and rock'n'roll

Comment #107000 by Radesq on January 3, 2008 at 8:36 pm

No Rtambree it is not circular it is pragmatic. I don't believe in the devil. Bush did not win a majority of the popular vote vs. Al Gore and but for the self important crusade of Mr. Nader GWB would not have become President in 2000. It was not any strategy of mine that failed. It was the failure of glossy eyed true believers who let the "perfect" be the enemy of the "good" and so ended up with neither. IMO

* But I'm not bitter about it.

719. Huckabee: Guns, God and rock'n'roll

Comment #106995 by Radesq on January 3, 2008 at 8:16 pm

If there's only two choices, sure, I agree with you. But we were talking more than two choices.

720. Mother Nature is Not Our Friend

Comment #106989 by Radesq on January 3, 2008 at 7:46 pm

Sent2null -- BLASPHEMY! What an outrageous thing to say! Good beer is like manna fro... oops...nevermind.

721. Huckabee: Guns, God and rock'n'roll

Comment #106979 by Radesq on January 3, 2008 at 7:27 pm

Who? Shall I repeat ...should we just (for all practical purposes)let the Religious right elect the President unopposed?

722. Huckabee: Guns, God and rock'n'roll

Comment #106972 by Radesq on January 3, 2008 at 7:15 pm

Rtambree & Scooter: Many American atheists probably would like to vote for the atheist candidate. But since there isn't one should we just stay home and let the religious right pick the next President with no opposition? A believer can still respect the Constitutional separation of church and state (doesn't mean they all will). There are also other issues beyond theism to consider.

723. Changing my Mind

Comment #106950 by Radesq on January 3, 2008 at 6:23 pm

Not exactly a fair trade -- but I suppose with the paperback out it might at least be an affordable one.

724. Huckabee: Guns, God and rock'n'roll

Comment #106941 by Radesq on January 3, 2008 at 5:55 pm

Iowa Caucus 15% reporting: Huckleberry 36%, The Angel Moroni Guy 23%, Law & Order guy 14%.

725. THE FOUR HORSEMEN - Available Now on DVD!

Comment #106930 by Radesq on January 3, 2008 at 5:44 pm

lindajean -- Perhaps Hitchens just needs to think that there cannot possibly be anything even as close to God as the supernatural or the transcendent or he would have to give theists partial credit for being right. He might be unwilling to do this because of his disrespect for their intelligence or dislike of their methods. Or it is entirely possible and far more likely that I am just projecting my own biases on to Hitch.

726. Mother Nature is Not Our Friend

Comment #106908 by Radesq on January 3, 2008 at 4:56 pm

Oh alright Anna have it your way. It is after all a matter of taste. At least you aren't extolling the virtues of Miller Chill.

727. Mother Nature is Not Our Friend

Comment #106894 by Radesq on January 3, 2008 at 4:40 pm

Mother nature may not be our friend. But a beer in need is a friend indeed! My favorite without a close second is:

SMUTTYNOSE IPA

GOLD MEDAL WINNER - Best American Beer 2004 Great British Beer Festival

Forget all those chocolaty stouts & porters give me hops and lots of 'em.

728. Changing my Mind

Comment #106730 by Radesq on January 3, 2008 at 10:50 am

Richard Morgan @ 84

Am I understanding you correctly to mean one must be sitting down to be hoist be one's own petard then?

729. The Pagan Christ

Comment #106412 by Radesq on January 2, 2008 at 9:19 pm

TonyA - Only because you kind of mention it and you seem like you might have the answer. If new cells are continuously made replacing ones that die -- how come we get old and worn out eventually?

[edit]
So, I went and looked it up after I realized that it probably wouldn't be a question anybody could answer briefly. Very interesting stuff... this link was helpful to me http://haldane.biol.ucl.ac.uk/social.html

730. The OUT Campaign has its own Flea!

Comment #106408 by Radesq on January 2, 2008 at 9:08 pm

What a sinister comment Teapot.

731. Moderates Storm The Religious Battlefield

Comment #106393 by Radesq on January 2, 2008 at 7:44 pm

Who are you going to sell the most magazines to -- Atheists, Fundies or Moderates? Try a little honesty in your journalism; change the name of the rag to Newsweak.

732. Mother Nature is Not Our Friend

Comment #106362 by Radesq on January 2, 2008 at 6:15 pm

dlitt -- Is comparing WWE tournaments to church really fair? I think the majority of WWE fans realize it is fake.

733. The OUT Campaign has its own Flea!

Comment #106346 by Radesq on January 2, 2008 at 5:30 pm

I was excited when I saw Christian OUT pop up in the discussion thread. I thought someone had come up with a new cleaning product. Then I became concerned that maybe atheists were going to try performing exorcisms. The sort of thing it turned out to be hadn't occurred to me.
However, getting Christians to reach out and support fellow Christians will probably do more mischief to their cause than good -- as they all start to compare notes and realize that the other doesn't really get it like I do.

734. Changing my Mind

Comment #106310 by Radesq on January 2, 2008 at 4:22 pm

Paula: I have asked my wife (who is usually home when the evangelizing types come around) to keep all the literature in a little desk we have by the front door. Next time the JW's come by I'm going to ask them if they have heard about the Book of Mormon and give them the pamphlet the last folks left.

735. Changing my Mind

Comment #106183 by Radesq on January 2, 2008 at 1:05 pm

BlaiddDrwg wrote:

I've been called an example of a good christian man many times because I'm polite and helpful, then the same people instantly look at me like I eat babies after I tell them that I'm an atheist.

736. Mother Nature is Not Our Friend

Comment #106116 by Radesq on January 2, 2008 at 11:32 am

I took a well deserved time out, but some observations on the way this thread has progressed:
Janus at 48

Yes, technology is dangerous and humanity might not be "wise" enough to handle what will be invented in the next few decades. Any idiot knows that much, or thinks he does

That immortality is possible is a certainty…Do you think immortality won't sell once it's made available to the public? …Short of an apocalypse, if it can happen, it will happen.

737. Mother Nature is Not Our Friend

Comment #105780 by Radesq on January 1, 2008 at 8:08 pm

Diacanu: What you've just said gives me an idea!

Seacrest out!

738. Mother Nature is Not Our Friend

Comment #105768 by Radesq on January 1, 2008 at 7:38 pm

Many people think this project is fraught with risk. But is it riskier than doing nothing?

739. What have you changed your mind about? Why?

Comment #105740 by Radesq on January 1, 2008 at 5:58 pm

WGR - Thanks for telling a bit of your story. Always interesting to hear how someone puts away these childish things. Sorry, I know that's probably condescending -- it's a flaw I'll work on it.

740. What have you changed your mind about? Why?

Comment #105738 by Radesq on January 1, 2008 at 5:42 pm

AJ your terms need definition. What does it mean to flip flop -- to change one's mind based on new information does not necessarily mean one has abandoned their principles in fact the opposite may be true. If you are condemning people who change their views (seeming to run against their advertised principles) strictly for political gain without proper justification (whatever that may be). I suspect you will find much agreement in the abstract. Where you and I and a wide variety of others will disagree is on when a change is the former and when it is the latter. That is often more a matter of opinion.

Sorry for shortening your title to AJ but I keep writing John instead of Jon out of habit and only notice it later.

741. What have you changed your mind about? Why?

Comment #105728 by Radesq on January 1, 2008 at 5:03 pm

AJ -- I agree there are many justifications for invading Iraq, the legitimacy of them is up for debate. But as to the reasons given to the American public and for that matter anyone else who would listen -- see my post above. I didn't believe the Bush administration before the war and didn't support it. I have changed my mind about what I think the US should do in the aftermath of the invasion more than once. I don't think many politicians covered themselves in glory with their handling of the support for/opposition to the war issue and I don't pretend to know all that they based their decisions on.

742. Debate between Michael Shermer and Dinesh D'Souza

Comment #105719 by Radesq on January 1, 2008 at 4:33 pm

Doh! Now URin4it walk.

743. What have you changed your mind about? Why?

Comment #105718 by Radesq on January 1, 2008 at 4:28 pm

AtheistJohn I wholeheartedly disagree. Not changing your mind when the facts no longer support your original decision is just bullheadedness (on general principle). Now you can say I stand by my decision that I made at the time based on what I knew then -- if I knew then what I know now I would have done it differently. If your little brother came to you and said Billy just beat me up for no reason and you go punch Billy in the face, only to find out it was Billy Miller who beat up your brother and not Billy Smith who you retaliated against -- wouldn't you change your opinion on whether it was wise to take that action against Billy Smith? (disregarding the fact that retribution might not have been called for at all)? Am I misunderstanding you?

744. What have you changed your mind about? Why?

Comment #105713 by Radesq on January 1, 2008 at 4:02 pm

AtheistJohn: As in most things political there is a proper time to stand on principle and a proper time to compromise -- I suppose voters will tell you how well you're doing at striking the balance. On Iraq it is perfectly rational to change your view on the correctness of the Iraq war if your underlying premise for war has been proved false. Let's say you believed Iraq an imminent threat to US national security because of WMD and links between Saddam Hussein and Al Queda. If those reasons evaporate you should change your mind about the wisdom of the war (or change your reasons for war in which case they really become justifications).

745. What have you changed your mind about? Why?

Comment #105679 by Radesq on January 1, 2008 at 2:08 pm

I second Dr. Steve on that WGR. I am a newbie here also but I did not come from a religious background I have always been a heathen. I would like to know what made you change your mind. I don't yet possess the skills or the patience that some here have shown in dealing with what sometimes seems like an impenetrable forcefield of faith.

746. THE FOUR HORSEMEN - Available Now on DVD!

Comment #105670 by Radesq on January 1, 2008 at 1:47 pm

I don't know engineering evilgenius but TonyA sure sounds like he does. What I don't get is that you seem to think a vastly convoluted conspiracy worthy of at least 25 hours of Jack Bauer's time is more believable than what readily appeared to happen.

Appearances aren't everything, but there was an investigation and a report as well. Isn't it exceedingly more likely that your sources are just wrong? To paraphrase Coach Bill Bellichik of the NE Patriots "It is what it is."

747. A War On Science

Comment #105589 by Radesq on January 1, 2008 at 5:54 am

Summer Seale at 39

In the particular post about the Dover case. I warned against Creationists attempting to gain political power -- not Conservatives. Although I am a Liberal I understand Conservatives and Creationists are not the same and that Conservatives are not all fools. I would submit that my belief is however that in the USA Religious Conservatism has just about sucked all the oxygen out of that branch of political thought leaving the more Libertarian or fiscal Conservatives without much say in matters of importance to Republican politics. That is what I allude to further down in the posts and where I get more partisan/ideological about who is at war with science. I think Conservatism has to be wrested from Religious zealots in the US if it is to have any legitimate say in political matters. You are free to disagree of course.

748. A War On Science

Comment #105549 by Radesq on January 1, 2008 at 12:09 am

Happy New Year to you as well. The ivy league are a group of colleges & universities here in the USA that are held to be prestigious -- Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc. So named because of their ivy covered buildings.

749. Could there be a Darwinian Account of Human Creativity?

Comment #105543 by Radesq on December 31, 2007 at 11:31 pm

Congratulations wooter! Your cobbling together of largely irrelevant, likely out of proper context, and probably of dubious origin quotations has completely undermined 150 years of study on evolution. I think we can all agree you've debunked that and we can all move on.

Congratulations are also in order because you have won the first perfect rating for the new year 2008. The bat boy gives you five out of a possible five bats! (otherwise known as a "batshit crazy" rating!) Keep up the good work!

750. A War On Science

Comment #105540 by Radesq on December 31, 2007 at 11:05 pm

Two reasons I think. First our respect for the right to free speech and free religion has created a lot of space for religion to go where it will unchallenged here (it wouldn't be politically correct to call people on their religious nonsense). Second the attack on science is part of a wider "culture war" being fomented by self-identifying Conservatives. It is as much anti-intellectual as anti-secular; this is evidenced by the oft used pejorative "east coast ivy league liberal elite".