Comments by Frankus1122

Comment #146875 by Frankus1122 on March 19, 2008 at 2:01 pm

I am so angry (Steve I expect an apology) that homosexuals have stolen pastels, and pink in particular.

I don't think pink belongs to the homosexuals anymore.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WVV3l2nmXk

The Gavin guy is someone I used to plant trees with in Northern Ontario many years ago.

702. God's cure for gays lost in sin

Comment #146864 by Frankus1122 on March 19, 2008 at 1:51 pm

I personally doubt that sexual orientation is genetic

I am just working from some vaguely recalled article I read and I am sure there is someone out there who can correct me... but I think that the same gene can express itself in wildly different ways depending on environmental factors.
What I am trying to say is that there could be a gene or genes that expresses itself/themselves as homosexual preference in one organism and completely differently in another organism in a different environment.
But I really don't know what I am talking about.

703. God's cure for gays lost in sin

Comment #146843 by Frankus1122 on March 19, 2008 at 1:34 pm

Is there any evolutionary advantage? I am curious, I don't understand evolution well enough to know either way.

There was some research suggesting that gay men are good uncles and thus confer advantage to the offspring of siblings and thus confer advantage to some of their genes. However, I think this may have been shown not to be the case in other studies.

It is an interesting question and there is research being done on it.
It seems curious that homosexuality would continue to be present in a population when there does not seem to be any way homosexual genes (if there are such things) would be passed to the next genereation.

704. God's cure for gays lost in sin

Comment #146721 by Frankus1122 on March 19, 2008 at 10:04 am

Zero points and no prize to anyone who gets the movie!

A lot of people have waxed poetic about Carl Sagan and Cosmos which I loved and remember watching with my father. However, what really sticks out in my mind was The Undersea World of Jacques Cousteau. I liked the fact that he got out there and discovered stuff. It really got me interested in science. My ambition as a young child was to be a marine biologist.

I think my percentage gay spikes after almost every Cartomancer post.

705. God's cure for gays lost in sin

Comment #146695 by Frankus1122 on March 19, 2008 at 9:29 am

There is a radio station to which I like listen:
http://radio3.cbc.ca/

They have a segment called "90 Second Egg" where they ask all kinds of questions to musicians.
One of my favourite questions is:

"What percentage gay are you?"

I'm somewhere between 4 and 12% I think.

Anyone else care to share?

I wonder if that percentage of me goes to hell when I die.

706. Fleabytes

Comment #146664 by Frankus1122 on March 19, 2008 at 9:07 am

Ignore him for long enough and eventually he'll go away.

That's what I said long ago.

I also said that about my roof and now I have a bucket in my son's room collecting all the melting snow that is dripping through the ceiling.

But, yes; ignore.

707. Pale Blue Dot

Comment #146511 by Frankus1122 on March 19, 2008 at 6:46 am

Comment #40809 by Veronique

It makes me weep; it is so beautiful. I must be very squishy and thank you guys for loving it as well.

I am a giant of a man (physically), but me too.

708. Two More Fleas

Comment #146500 by Frankus1122 on March 19, 2008 at 6:32 am

I do not think Wooter is real.
I think he is some sort of elaborate joke.
I refuse to believe it.
There is nothing you can say that will make me change my mind.
*Fingers in ears - I can't hear you! Lalalalala*

709. Fleabytes

Comment #146490 by Frankus1122 on March 19, 2008 at 6:18 am

Paula, unfortunately I cannot access sexinchrist.com as I am at work and it has blocked it as inappropriate!

On that note: I have a friend who said the wildest time he ever had was with an evangelical Christian girl who would not do "IT" but EVERYTHING else. He came out of the experience a bit dazed, but smiling.

Quetz: Thank you.

I wonder if outright laughter at some of the claims made by Roberts and the upcoming Ham would not be appropriate.
The table example did it for me.

710. Fleabytes

Comment #146178 by Frankus1122 on March 18, 2008 at 5:56 pm

I want to play more but my children want me to read them a bedtime story. It is late here.

Bye.

No it isn't.

711. Fleabytes

Comment #146157 by Frankus1122 on March 18, 2008 at 5:37 pm

Comment #146154 by Brian English

Yes they are!

No they aren't.
If they were, then you wouldn't say they were.
So, no they aren't.

712. Fleabytes

Comment #146151 by Frankus1122 on March 18, 2008 at 5:22 pm

No they're not.

713. Fleabytes

Comment #146148 by Frankus1122 on March 18, 2008 at 5:16 pm

Comment #146144 by mikejswalker

Good observation.

Was it you that made the gnat/camel comment on an earlier post?

I appreciate a well reasoned argument. Robertson just doesn't provide that.

Sad all around.

714. Writer Arthur C Clarke dies at 90

Comment #146136 by Frankus1122 on March 18, 2008 at 4:47 pm

I liked Arthur C. Clarke.

I am glad he lived for a good 90 years.

A memorial display of his works will be my first task tomorrow morning in the library.

715. Fleabytes

Comment #146125 by Frankus1122 on March 18, 2008 at 4:31 pm

Comment #146120 by Brian English

Ah yes. Monty Python. No it wasn't!

Yes it was.

I think we could easily hit 10,000 this way.

716. Fleabytes

Comment #146029 by Frankus1122 on March 18, 2008 at 1:48 pm

Comment #146013 by MaxD

I don't know about time wasted. I rather enjoyed it.
I like the way he got all worked up at the end and called people who don't believe in God "jerks".
He says God wants all to know him and then he says only those that God draws to Him will know him.
So if I am not drawn to God then whose fault is that?
It's God's fault for not drawing me in.
Thanks God!
And I'm the jerk?

717. Fleabytes

Comment #145915 by Frankus1122 on March 18, 2008 at 9:50 am

THE IT DEPARTMENT UP HERE IS TERRIBLE.

We've all seen God Inc.?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2f4heaG288

718. Fleabytes

Comment #145911 by Frankus1122 on March 18, 2008 at 9:47 am

Damn! Beat me to it, Tyler!

The race is now on for post # 6660!

719. Two More Fleas

Comment #145904 by Frankus1122 on March 18, 2008 at 9:38 am

The joke is on us. We answer seriously what is not to be taken seriously.
Ignore it.
Ignore it and it will go away.
(Although that didn't really work with the small leak in my ceiling).

720. Two More Fleas

Comment #145880 by Frankus1122 on March 18, 2008 at 9:08 am

Comment #145873 by al-rawandi

You are truly the stupidest person I have ever had the misfortune to interact with.

I cannot believe that this person is for real. I suspect that we are being put on.

I am not sure of the point of it however. Obviously s/he is not out to really convince anyone of anything. There are no arguments of any sort. It is all nonsense.

Is there some deeper, mysterious purpose?

Perhaps Wooter/clearmind is GOD HIMSELF, making himself as clear as usual.

I sort of like the ability to sharpen arguments against this rock of a being but beyond that I don't get it.

I am waiting for the penny to drop.

721. Fleabytes

Comment #145730 by Frankus1122 on March 18, 2008 at 4:03 am

still waiting for this evidence of my being a liar.

Another lie!

If you refer to comment #145086 you will see that I said your 'evidence' of god was a lie.

If you pray to God for something specific and you get it, then that constitutes evidence of God.

If you pray to God for something specific and you do not get it, then that constitutes evidence for God as well. (Sometimes the answer is "No").
or maybe:
If you pray to God for a cure for our disease and it isn't cured then God does not exist.

If I pray to Quetz for tea and I get tea, Quetz exists.
If I pray to Quetz for a box of Earl Grey tea and a friend drops by and brings me some because someone gave it to him and he doesn't like it, then Quetz exists.

Your 'answered prayer' is NOT evidence.

I'll repeat myself for the hard of understanding: to suggest this as evidence is either dishonest (a lie) or stupid.

To quote clearthinker:

Blind faith is by definition stupid.

If you say something that is not true then you are a liar (Way of the Master).

You are certainly dishonest.

722. Fleabytes

Comment #145581 by Frankus1122 on March 17, 2008 at 6:21 pm

casting into dubeity

What is "dubeity"?

Is that something to do with doobies?

Pass that one over my friend.

723. Fleabytes

Comment #145552 by Frankus1122 on March 17, 2008 at 5:47 pm

I don't wish to be uncharitable, but your "contribution" to the the precipitous decliine has so far been MOMENTOUS. Christian! The
snake in Eden has nothing on you.

Ooh, I get it. This is the part where clearthinker is revealed as the REAL ANTICHRIST.
Ssshh! I want to know what happens next.

724. Two More Fleas

Comment #145514 by Frankus1122 on March 17, 2008 at 5:02 pm

Comment #145419 by Steve Zara

Stunning post.

Ditto.

Unfortunately the chance of it having any impact of wooter are, I would estimate, zero.

I get so much pleasure out of this site.

725. Fleabytes

Comment #145487 by Frankus1122 on March 17, 2008 at 4:38 pm

I'm glad to see this thread is getting ridiculous again.
Or is that Religulous?

Pathfinder, you cannot be for real. Stop teasing us with your inanities. Know when you are dead man.

726. Fleabytes

Comment #145387 by Frankus1122 on March 17, 2008 at 2:23 pm

Where is Diacanu when you need him?

727. Fleabytes

Comment #145382 by Frankus1122 on March 17, 2008 at 2:18 pm

Pathfinder, why are you deliberately misspelling words? I've noticed this tactic before. I suspect you have logged in under many different names using the 'I-am-sort-of-stoopid-but-I-still-can-defeat-the-atheist-with-my-logic-bombs' tactic.

But you go beyond bad spelling. You just have really, really, really stupid ideas.
I do not believe you are as stupid as you pretend to be.
On the other hand the average IQ is 100. Therefore about half the people are below that. Some are considerably lower....

728. Fleabytes

Comment #145355 by Frankus1122 on March 17, 2008 at 2:01 pm

mixmastergaz:

"straining out gnats and ignoring camels"

Why does everyone here say what I think so much better than me?

David did it again didn't he?
My emotional reaction is changing from irritation to amusement. These guys are seriously unintentionally funny. I am giggling at both David's last post and the latest dimwit to appear.
Are we cats playing with mice?
Mouse you were dead the minute we saw you. We are playing with you.

729. Fleabytes

Comment #145341 by Frankus1122 on March 17, 2008 at 1:49 pm

eepist:

Could I make a suggestion? Use Firefox as your browser and switch on spell checking.

Thanks.

I use Safari at home on my Mac with spellcheck on. I don't have that option at work.

730. Fleabytes

Comment #145336 by Frankus1122 on March 17, 2008 at 1:42 pm

faggotism and lessbianism and comunism. The legacy of ATHEIST'S. Thank's, guys.

ummm...you're welcome?

BTW Thanks for the laugh.

731. Fleabytes

Comment #145320 by Frankus1122 on March 17, 2008 at 1:29 pm

The whole spelling thing is interesting. I am not the world's best speller by any means, but I try my best. When I am really unsure about the spelling of a word I look it up. I think Steve made a comment a while ago about correct spelling being evidence of good manners. For me it is more a sense of shame. I don't want to appear ignorant.
Carelessness in spelling and thought perhaps go hand in hand.

732. Fleabytes

Comment #145164 by Frankus1122 on March 17, 2008 at 10:28 am

I wonder if David Robertson would care to respond to Paula's last response to Mike.
I should say Paula's most wonderful, most exhalted, most excellentest ever post. (We must continue to congratulate ourselves because that is what we do).

I understand Mike's sentiment. I felt it too. But Paula has laid out clearly why I no longer feel that way.

I must repeat my mantra: David is dishonest or really, really not smart.

How else do we explain his behaviour? He certainly can't seem to clear it up. If he were really smart he could make us see the error of our ways. I do not think that most of the people who frequent this site are unintelligent. If you can explain it clearly we will get it. But we don't get that type of clear explanation from David. So I conclude that he does not want to present clear intelligent argument.

But let's try again:
David could you deal with the real issues elucidated by Paula's last post? I mean really deal with the issues she brings up. Don't get bogged down in the pettiness and spiteful taunting. Leave that to the atheists.
(But if you can't I hope you are grateful for the wonderful quotes you can mine).

Love,
Frankus

733. Fleabytes

Comment #145086 by Frankus1122 on March 17, 2008 at 8:29 am

clearthinker:

when I respond on this website with lots of arguments, evidence etc it just gets met with the standard responses

When you suggest that answered prayers is evidence of God what do you honestly expect?

I'll try again:
This is what you profferred as 'evidence':

You pray for 87 pounds and then you receive 87 pounds in the next few days.
Therefore God exists because he answered your prayer.

I tried to point out that this was dishonest of you to suggest as evidence. It was either dishonest, because you should know that it is no evidence at all, or you are, in fact, rather stupid.
Again with the name calling (make sure you fixate on this and not the actual problem presented).

I have friends who grow organic vegetables. They put a crystal on top of a pole in their garden in order to focus healthy energy on their patch of land and to ensure ample rain.
Their vegetables grow and they get rain. Therefore the crystal works.

This is nonsense. As is your 'evidence'.

Are you willing to admit your mistake in this instance?
Maybe it is not a mistake, maybe I am the one who is just too dim to see how this constitutes evidence in the standard sense of the word. By "standard sense of the word" I mean something we can all agree on. You may counter with (as I think you have)'it is evidence to me, but you won't accept it as evidence'.
That won't do. You can't have private evidence. If there is no standard then anything can be evidence if I want it to be.

So, what is it going to be on this one particular point?

734. Fleabytes

Comment #144983 by Frankus1122 on March 17, 2008 at 6:17 am

Cheers

Woody: Hey Mr. Peterson! What's shakin'?

Norm: All four cheeks and a couple of chins.

735. Two More Fleas

Comment #144712 by Frankus1122 on March 16, 2008 at 4:25 pm

Hey Woosters! What's shakin' baby?

Here is one for you:

http://tinyurl.com/2tw6vb

I don't know if this will work for you or not. It is an example of an Active Essay on 'Evolution' created by Alan Kay and Ted Kaehler. It is based on the example on pages 44-49 from "The Blind Watchmaker" by Richard Dawkins.

What is an 'Active Essay'?

"An Active Essay is a new kind of literacy, combining a written essay, live simulations, and the programs that make them work in order to provide a deep explanation of a dynamic system. The reader works directly with multiple ways of representing the concepts under discussion. By playing with the simulations and code, the reader gets some hands-on experience with the topic."

I took this from the Squeakland website.

Alan Kay came to my class a few years back because a colleague was using Squeak and so were my students. It was a pretty big deal for us. (Alan Kay sort of invented Object Oriented Programming and was a pioneer of Graphic User Interface).

The idea behind the Active Essay is to provide a multidimensional understanding of a topic. This might be just the thing for the Wooter as language alone is not his strong point.

The essay on evolution allows you to 'evolve' a sentence.
Random chance has nothing to do with evolution.
It is really a very cool demonstration.

The only problem is that you need to install the Squeak reader program to see it in action.
It is worth it.

736. The Great Tantra Challenge

Comment #144610 by Frankus1122 on March 16, 2008 at 12:13 pm

JamesDB:
I am curious as to what the shaman actually thought as well.
I always thought that at some level these guys knew what they were doing was a scam, but now I am not so sure.

Dowsers and astrologists believe what they are doing as well I suppose.
Curious.

737. Fleabytes

Comment #144590 by Frankus1122 on March 16, 2008 at 11:30 am

Regarding atheist music and wicked guitar players:

Frank Zappa

From Frank:
"The whole foundation of Christianity is based on the idea that intellectualism is the work of the Devil. Remember the apple on the tree? Okay, it was the Tree of Knowledge. "You eat this apple, you're going to be as smart as God. We can't have that."

I got this from here: http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/quotes/zappa.htm

I also came across this site for atheist music: http://www.telemark.net/atheistmusic/alist.dbm

738. Fleabytes

Comment #144499 by Frankus1122 on March 16, 2008 at 8:40 am

Bonzai:

On the one hand believers endow their God with omnipotence and credit him with all creations, insist that he is infinite and beyond space and time. But it would be difficult to believe that a God bigger than the universe itself would give a flying fuck about their petty lives any more than we would care about the lives and happiness of an amoeba.

This is a theme that got me out of religion.
It had to do with headgear. Why would the creator of the universe care what you wore on your head?
Does he actually care if women wear pants?
It is such a ridiculous notion.
But you can get serious discussion on the topic from the religious. It all has to do with sin. The concept of sin is a way of controlling behaviour.
My atheism is, in part, a rejection of that desire for control.

739. Fleabytes

Comment #144495 by Frankus1122 on March 16, 2008 at 8:27 am

I got back from a week long vacation in the wilds of Eastern Ontario yesterday. We've had a bout 4 meters of snow this winter. It is sort of fun if you get into it.
( I may post a link to my flickr page once I upload my photos; we had snow drifts that were about 12 feet high. Fun for the kids).
I had about a thousand posts to read last night and I now have 463 to go. (I am a slow reader).
Congratulations to all on 5000.
Wow again.
There is so much to respond to.
Clearthinker: I am torn between not wanting to respond and trying one more time.
I asked why you objected to being called a liar or stupid. Your response was no one likes to be called those things, obviously.
I suppose no one likes to be called a liar. But I also suppose one shouldn't lie.
No one likes to be called stupid but if you are presented with clear evidence to contradict your views and those views don't change then... what? You are incapable of understanding? You are willfully ignorant?
I provided evidence of lies. (As have others- often). You need to respond to the evidence. You don't.
You are annoying. Like a flea.

I think it was righton that confessed a 'mancrush' on Cartomancer. All I can say to that is: Back off buddy. I fell for him a long time ago. The theatrical synopsis was astoundingly funny and just so good.

To Corylus:

They don't realise that I am actually 6 ft 6in tall, 25 stone and a Peruvian truck driver called Frank.

You have actually described me pretty accurately. Except I'm Canadian.

I think I am obsessed. After reading a few hundred posts last night I actually had dreams related to this thread. I worry about me.

740. Fleabytes

Comment #140414 by Frankus1122 on March 7, 2008 at 9:12 am

Many do just that, but find no experience that can't be explained in more ordinary, psychological, non-supernatural terms.

Oh sure, you can explain it that way but maybe you missed the part where I said that it was, in fact, God who was responsible.
And I know this because I believe it. Because I believe it I can see a greater truth that is evidence of God in the world.

I'm sorry about all this. I guess I just miss the theists and their shitty arguments.

741. Fleabytes

Comment #140394 by Frankus1122 on March 7, 2008 at 8:52 am

Okay. It is subjective experience. But it is real to me. If you would let the Lord into your heart then you too would 'know' the Lord thy God. All you have to do is accept that God exists and then you will be able to see His glory and His hand in His creation all around you.
You need to be able to take the 'leap of faith' and then the truth shall set you free.

Or is that the 'truthiness'?

I suppose my point is that I don't think the argument is winnable.
I'm not saying it isn't fun to try.
I suppose we get back to the emotional aspect of belief.

742. Fleabytes

Comment #140380 by Frankus1122 on March 7, 2008 at 8:22 am

we're never safe from the reply that an all-powerful supernatural being that doesn't want to leave natural evidence because it wants us to believe in it through faith, can intervene naturally WITHOUT leaving evidence, blah blah blah.

I have another take on this:

There is 'natural' evidence left; it is the feeling of contentment and joy that comes from 'knowing' God loves me. It is the filter that God provides that allows me to see His divine intervention in the lives of the people around me.

743. The Salamander's Tale

Comment #140332 by Frankus1122 on March 7, 2008 at 6:32 am

...not to celebrate suffering, but to suggest that atheists are indifferent to it. But the glib exploitation of human suffering and the shocking lack of empathy with the sufferers are precisely the same.

Philip:
I'm a bit late to the party but WELL DONE.

I am trying to express my empathy here. I know prayer doesn't work but there must be some satisfaction on your part to know that so many people here DO CARE about you.
It doesn't help your situation and yet perhaps it does. Hell, I feel good knowing that there is good feeling out there.
And all this without any supernatural intervention.
As I said: WELL DONE.

744. Fleabytes

Comment #139756 by Frankus1122 on March 6, 2008 at 1:12 pm

I posted this Youtube link before. It seems appropriate to post it again with the gay theme this thread has wandered in to.

To me it represents a gradual acceptance and then a .... whatever.
Whatever as in "He's wearing a brown shirt."
"Yeah, whatever."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeahDax24Dg

745. The Salamander's Tale

Comment #139607 by Frankus1122 on March 6, 2008 at 7:52 am

Rev. Dark,
I worship at your altar of causticism.
Love,
Frankus

746. Fleabytes

Comment #139394 by Frankus1122 on March 5, 2008 at 5:53 pm

MPhil, thanks.

If you are in Germany go to bed.

747. Fleabytes

Comment #139389 by Frankus1122 on March 5, 2008 at 5:31 pm

MPhil,
I think I am getting it.

Do you agree that you will never have the experience of anyone else as physical brain structures are unique?

748. Fleabytes

Comment #139387 by Frankus1122 on March 5, 2008 at 5:25 pm

Poor old wooter.
Where have all the theists gone?

hello?

Eternal soul here.

Going straight to hell without saving.
Convince me.
At least try.

749. Fleabytes

Comment #139379 by Frankus1122 on March 5, 2008 at 5:06 pm

those who argue that the qualitative nature of consciousness is not merely another way of categorizing states of the brain or of behaviour, but a genuinely emergent phenomenon.

Or to put it positively:

The qualitative nature of consciousness is another way of categorizing states of the brain or of behaviour.

Can I try to put this in not-so-smart-guy terms?

If a set of neurons in my brain fire off in a particular manner I experience a particular thought. If waves of these patterns occur I experience conscious thought.
(I read somewhere that a critical mass of neural activity has to occur for consciousness - to differentiate from dream states for example).
If the same waves of neural activity could be reproduced in another brain, that brain would have my consciousness. We would experience the same conscious state.

Now because my brain is unique, no one will ever experience exactly my consciousness. So in practical terms my experience, my consciousness is, and will remain uniquely mine.

If it could be the case that a physical structure identical to my brain in every respect were to be created, then it would also share my conscious thought. Except it would be spatially different.

Am I in the ballpark?

750. Fleabytes

Comment #139291 by Frankus1122 on March 5, 2008 at 1:58 pm