751. Even non-believers must recognise the moral necessity of Christianity

Comment #30734 by Veronique on April 9, 2007 at 3:25 pm

Your comment is there Logicel. What a clear video. You are getting very good at this Briancoughlan. Thanks.

Quick comment, have to feed the fish and cats. I just must note that Yorker is in excellent form on this thread. Good night's sleep must help.

Cheers
V

752. Even non-believers must recognise the moral necessity of Christianity

Comment #30616 by Veronique on April 9, 2007 at 3:26 am

Sorry, I got his name wrong. Who cares. Not me.
Just looked at him on Katrina. Couldn't be bothered reading it all. it's New Orleans fault? Get off, Anderson. Has this bloke any understanding of anything at all? I don't think so.

Have you noticed he has an awful negative twist to his mouth? Hmm. I don't think I want to know this guy at all. Tradgico. I know I am making a subjective assessment here. I don't think I am wrong. Unless, of course, the photographer clicked at the wrong time. So sad.

753. Even non-believers must recognise the moral necessity of Christianity

Comment #30607 by Veronique on April 9, 2007 at 2:34 am

God, here we go again. I can't believe these apologists.

I went to the Independent article and couldn't find a way to post a comment. Damn.

So Henderson's friend Steele abhored faith to the end. Well done Steele. Of course the same applies to RD and us noisy acolytes (how insulting is that? as though we bow down on acolytes' knees to a deity? Give me a break).

This article is full of literate tosh. Atheists do not revel in unholy simplicity, they evaluate evidence. Why do we get so sick of repeating the same arguments again and again. I am glad that Henderson sees contemporary Christians as full of doubt. So they ought.

A vast and cultural heritage - no one would question this. I know that Herodotus has been seen in the same light. It doesn't mean that he was writng anything more than what he had been told by whomever he came across in his extensive travels. He is read as literature with the winners writing the script for his musings.

'Theirs (Christians) is a religion of love in which charity is a duty' (so long as we add the fear-based adjunct to that charity - you want food? Not a problem, you just have to be baptised first and then spend all your days praising The Lord. BTW condoms are banned).

People like Henderson get my goat (you must have gathered this in my previous posts). It's hard to start an abuttal of this one (like Charles Moore).

My whole being says 'you, Henderson, are bonkers and trying very hard to expatiate your faith with wrong-headed examples that are of no account and you are using your dead friend to try and give it currency - pretty base tatics'.

Henderson inflames sectarianism while trying to appear eminently reasonable. BS. Read between his lines. So now he wants to play havoc with William Wallace (not Braveheart-a Mel Gibson fiction-he of the most rabid Roman Catholicism extreme variety) who is documented well within hisories.

'...confidence in our own values and traditions. In order for that to occur, as many people as possible ought to believe...' There's that word again - believe. For reason's sake!! No one can resurrect!! It is beyond natural law. And natural law is what governs our world.

Brave Frank Steele? Brave John Diamond? Not on your nelly! These people and countless others have faced their death with courage and their own honour; forget brave.

They didn't give in to societal putsches that wanted them to recant (Good religious words here!!) and accept a fantasy in order to salve their minds with a promised eternity. I applaud them in the same way I applaud my pater who just died as he was supposed to do at the end of his life.

I don't need religious BS or new world wank to think about my pater. I knew him for 54 years and my memories are my safe haven. He never lied, he always answered questions and prefaced his answers 'to the best of my ability' and it was some!!

I miss him. Could some wanker seduce me into a seance to contact him 'on the other side'? I absolutely can say "NO". Death, where is thy sting? Not here, not with me.

Henderson, like Moore, needs to get a life of his own; for which he and he alone is responsible.

Jesus, these guys give me the shits
V

754. Prophets of the new atheism

Comment #30565 by Veronique on April 8, 2007 at 7:25 pm

Dear Everyone,

I am reproducing my letter to Seattle so that whatever we post we can all take different tacks and not double up. You can only write 200 words, difficult for us when we are used to saying lots on these threads.

To the Editor
Re: David Klinghoffer

Atheism is a religion like bald is a hair colour, like not collecting stamps is a hobby, like 'OFF' is a TV channel.

Would you put Bertrand Russell in the old or new variety? He said, 50 years ago 'I am as firmly convinced that religions do harm as I am that they are untrue'. No waffle, deviousness or word play, unlike your sneaking into your article that atheism is a religion and then reiterating the word for all it's worth. Denigrating scientists and philosophers merely indicates the paucity of any real argument you might mount. ID is a wilfully ignorant cousin of creationism: it's not new.

Why do you need some fantastical god and/or bronze-age rebel against the establishment to tell you the purpose of your life? I live an immensely satisfying and (my) purpose driven life without any need to rely on ancient texts. I can only assume you were well indoctrinated from the outset: fear and awe of death has kept you blinkered.

My awe and wonder come from my contemplation of the universe in which we live. No need for superstition or gods for which there is no shred of evidence.

My dear man, you seriously need to get a grip.

Veronica Guy

Thank you, in advance for pinching some of your quotes here. Please don't be pissed off with me. Time was of the essence.

Cheers
V

755. Jesus and Mo: Dummy

Comment #30377 by Veronique on April 7, 2007 at 11:25 pm

I hope this story went everywhere. It was only reported on 29th March. I reckon it could catalyse a whole lot of copy cat type acts. Did you check this site out:

http://www.venganza.org/

Read the hate mail Henderson list as a tab.

You're right, the answer is in the kids. Doesn't it help to give you hope? Though, I suspect they would less worried if an organisatiom where behind them.

It's a matter of getting things like this out into the public. Kids love imitating and they would see it as terrific and rebellious fun. They are much freer than you and I were in the 1950s. And there are more of them. We need someone to start the Celestial Teapot sect. Anything fertile imaginations can come up with!

Hope rises eternal...

Cheers
V

756. Jesus and Mo: Dummy

Comment #30363 by Veronique on April 7, 2007 at 8:37 pm

Great postings on this thread for a lzy Sunday. Very entertaining. Had never heard of Jesus and Mo. Wonderful.

Yorker, Logicel and everyone

This was sent to me yesterday. I don't know whether you have seen it. I can't get the two pictures to work but posted the link below the article.

There will be more of these wonderful bits, I hope.

Student punished for spaghetti beliefs
Thursday, March 29, 2007
The Flying Spaghetti Monster
A student has been suspended from school in America for coming to class dressed as a pirate.
But the disciplinary action has provoked controversy – because the student says that the ban violates his rights, as the pirate costume is part of his religion.
Bryan Killian says that he follows the Pastafarian religion, and that as a crucial part of his faith, he must wear 'full pirate regalia' as prescribed in the holy texts of Pastafarianism.
The school, however, say that his pirate garb was disruptive.

Pastafarians follow the Flying Spaghetti Monster (pictured), and believe that the world was created by the touch of his noodly appendage. Furthermore, they acknowledge pirates as being 'absolute divine beings', and stress that the worldwide decline in the number of pirates has directly led to global warming.
A man in full pirate regalia
Pastafarianism gained wide attention when its key prophet, Bobby Henderson, wrote to the Kansas School Board during the height of the controversy over 'Intelligent Design' being taught in science classes. His letter, also published on his website, demanded equal time be given to the teachings of the Flying Spaghetti Monster as was given to ID and evolutionary theory.
Since then, the Flying Spaghetti Monster has gained countless followers worldwide, although there are those who remain spagnostic.
The school, in North Buncombe, North Carolina, remains adamant that their decision to suspend Killian for a day has nothing to do with his religion, and quite a lot to do with his repeated refusal to heed warnings against wearing pirate outfits.
(From Metro.co.uk)

http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/article.html?in_article_id=43272&in_page_id=2

LOL
V

757. Militant atheists: too clever for their own good

Comment #30343 by Veronique on April 7, 2007 at 5:21 pm

Well, it's morning here, my little alimentary canals are fed and cuppa in hand. I have calmed down after a good night's sleep.

Moore's article didn't distress me with regards to us here. It is the deliberate, patronising thrust to his readership that I abhor because, in my experience, this tack often works.

Yes I think he's arrogant, no I don't believe that he holds the extreme stance of his stated views, no I don't think he's a misogynist particularly. I suspect he's amoralistic, insofar as the end justifies the means. While using intelligence and 'cleverness' to denigrate atheism, he actually lumps himself into this category by pointing out, smugly, that the rest need him to expose such atheistic cant (they won't see it unless he writes about it, because he sees so clearly). It's a sort of comfort to his readership that they can safely dismiss the discussion because he's told them that the atheists are elitist.

Eammon - Sorry for my outburst. I didn't mean to imply that I thought men and women are the same. I do, however believe that education offers the same content to both sexes and both sexes take advantage of it. Since social mores have wobbled, tripped and changed, education for women has become indistinguishable from that for men. While I grant that most of science education is taken up by men and liberal arts more often by women, the alacrity with which women take up education points to an earlier muzzling of women by societies.

Jam007 is right it is a question of good secular education for all.

Logicel - I really like your name and hope you consider changing it to be your real name. It has a good ring to it. I am Veronica Guy, but my brother has always called me Veronique and I like it, not that it has any other meaning. We all had pet names in our family and still tend to use them with each other. It was a throw away line in any case J. And thank you for your instructions. I am writing this in Word. The smiley face came up when I meant :). Fascinating this formatting stuff!

Yorker - Many thanks, your feedback is welcome. One never knows how one's posts are perceived. I'd forgotten that I can be a fiery little toot. Thought I'd left it behind, as I embraced maturity. Seems I was wrong; I'll try to curb it. I enjoy your posts as well. But then, we are of an age with similar circumstances and you live at the top of the world while I live at the bottom. I have taken on a community job as treasurer of the local Neighbourhood Centre which is why I was away for a while. I think I have it under my belt now.

I think that grandmothers and single, elderly ladies seeking companionship in church sponsored events has a lot to do with the generation during the turn of the 19th century where women were caught in the times when education wasn't as available and few had inner resources. And, of course, by the time they were seeking companionship, most of their familiar relations and friends may well have fallen off the perch. Women do tend to live longer and loneliness could well have been a factor.

Mind you, some of these women were pretty amazing. My grandmother hopped on a ship at age 20 and came out to Australia all by herself in 1901. That was gutsy at that time, Australia was an unknown and conditions weren't terrific. Some sense of adventure!! And no education!

Dr Benway - I agree. It is precisely because Moore's sly and nasty insults are effective that prompted my first angry post on this thread. And Zaphod is correct too. Moore actively promotes mediocrity by insulting education. I think it is unforgivable.

Dirtpiggy – A great set of points. I wish I could be as succinct, thank you. It's one of the best wish lists I have seen.

Cheshirecat – If Moore is such a decent chap, why is his article so denigrating? Why does he punch out words intended to demolish the speakers he doesn't like to a readership he wants to influence in the most dishonest way? Sorry, I can't see much decency there at all.

God, ancestor worship, animism, whatever moniker you want to attach has to do with our consciousness. It is that and that alone that tends humans to not want to die. And after that is the indoctrination and cultural conditioning. Given that we can contemplate and recall, learn and imagine, we don't want to lose any of that and we invent ways to keep ourselves alive in some fashion. That does not make it real, just part of our inability to let go. The children of your survey were already thinking beings and most probably indoctrinated anyway into some form of fantasy.

Who did the study, in what age range were the participants, what cultural backgrounds had they and how were the raw results treated. Who made the 'assumptions' that you mention? There are studies upon studies. Were they peer reviewed?

And that is the end for me.
V

758. Militant atheists: too clever for their own good

Comment #30122 by Veronique on April 7, 2007 at 2:18 am

Thank you Logicel oh you of the pseudonym. I will use your instructions in posting. Thank you so much. Maybe we should post by our 'given' names? Who cares.

I have now consumed several glasses of Shiraz and am listening to the news, such as it is.

Thank you RD for you comment to Moore. Without the second 'o' he seems similar to the sainted More in his ability to take whatever he likes (or is told in More's case) and paste it into a history. Pity that it has so much currency.

Cheers
V

759. Militant atheists: too clever for their own good

Comment #30112 by Veronique on April 7, 2007 at 1:52 am

Eamonn Shute,

What the hell do you think you are saying? Your proposition has absolutely zilch to do with males and females. Psychological make-up? Where do you get off?

It has to do with society's understanding of who has to be the breadwinner based on male dominated ego-understanding. Men in positions of power, women as the the help meets. It's archaic, but the residual bumpf is still there.

"Have the kids, honey, I'll look after you and them; stay home and you will be reliant on me and my ability to play hunter-gatherer in the modern world. Whoops, the mortgage rate interest has just gone through the roof. I can't do it all by myself. Will you get a job as a check-out chick (nothing too taxing!) to help? Thanks, sweetheart, just give the kids a latch key; yeah, I know we live in a housing estate and it can be dangerous, but golly, darling, we have no choice."

Women are still told that an education for them is a waste of time and money because they will get married, have children, be homemakers and mummies and, of course, good marital partners and will not be able to use that wasted education.

God, man you live in a different world from mine.

Show me your psychological make-up profiles (you had better have some good parameters and non-biased questions in your surveys that are properly and statistically accounted for in the results). I can tell you now you won't find them.

Get a grip.
V

760. Militant atheists: too clever for their own good

Comment #30094 by Veronique on April 7, 2007 at 12:35 am

OK, I'll bite. Who is Charles Moore? Be kind, I live in the antipodes, have not heard of him and I don't read the Telegraph.

I can't say I blame Matthew Parris for his apoplectic fit. I read that story about John Paul II, dismissed it as utter hogwash and kept on going.

Moore aligns religion's intolerance, dogmatism, righteousness and moral contempt for anything that doesn't adhere to its beliefs with the scientists, philosophers and other rationalists involved in the increasing number of public debates, talks and/or discussions about religion.

He gives a token appreciation of the rational arguments and then goes on to denigrate the arguments by stating that such arguments are "dry and unnourishing...they think that the highest quality is to be clever."

What unbounded rubbish. If Moore's intellect is incapable of understanding what is argued (in normal, publicly accessible content and delivery) then it is he that 'feels' he is not clever (or he is merely playing to his readership "I am with you here, these guys are just too clever by half. But I'll bet they can't put up a straight fence"). Nothing to do with debated reasoning by the rationalists.

RD, Grayling, Hitchens et al do not think that cleverness is what human quality is about. Moore is so subsersive in this article.

He is also insulting in the extreme. I am getting cross just reading this article. It reminds me of the suspicion exhibited by those without specific education towards those who have some education in that specific area.

I learnt early on, when I came to Mullumbimby - a mainly agricultural town - not to talk about myself because of the dismissiveness on the part of the 'locals' toward anyone who had been to higher educational facilities.

On reflection it appeared to me that this suspicious dismissiveness had to do with fear of the unknown. No one knows what goes on inside anyone else's head; the suspicion came from not knowing what someone else might know. I don't know how many of you understand what I am trying to express or whether you have encountered the phenomenon.

Moore is playing on this to his readership; this is a new type of attempt to discredit anyone who has a different point of view and can explain his reasoning in well constructed argument.

This attempt is despicable. I gather Moore is not silly; he certainly doesn't sound it. This is a deliberate ploy to marginalise anyone who thinks differently from him. And Moore is so smarmy that it will work on his readership.

I'm sorry, I have just made an assumption about the Telegraph and its readership. In Australia, we have several state Telegraphs that are broadsheets and not worth reading for their prurient content and extreme right wing views. They are, however, popularist magazines and sell well.

Poor old Parris. I can imagine his frustration with the Pope story and his maybe intemperate remarks. They have certainly been highlighted by Moore.

".. big, bulging brains and I share 'their' admiration for them. They are the mental equivalent of bronzed body-builders on the beach, kicking sand in the face of us seven-stone weaklings." Shit!!! This makes me furious. Logicel, I now need to know how to bold words instead of merely putting them in inverted commas.

This article takes the denigration of rationalism to a different level. This one is hard to argue, simply because any retort or response appears to be on the back foot. This is terrible and effective dirty tactics.

It is all very well to understand that curiosity and the slaking of that curiosity by finding answers is what propels science and reason. To couch it in terms of 'bulging brains' is to denigrate everything that moves towards understanding of us, our world and the universe we are growing up in.

I am getting tongue-tied in angry frustration. I should stop now. Reading back over what I have written, I can see my mood change. I can't even make comments on a lot of the stuff that Moore says.

Someone else needs to pick this up before I explode.

RD how do you combat dirty tricks? You are more able than most of us here to respond to articles like this one. Do you bother, or just let it go? Forgive my anger please.

My immediacy often gets me into trouble. I will have a wine and calm down, contemplate and, hopefully, come back with a better ripost. Don't bank on it though. I feel pretty impotent in the face of this stuff.

Crossly
V

761. U.N. Draft Cites Humans in Recent Climate Shifts

Comment #30068 by Veronique on April 6, 2007 at 4:54 pm

philos - pardon my lack of lingo - what is an oak?

I am glad that you will join in these debates and forswear limiting parameters!:)

I don't think you should discount RD's passion in TGD. I couldn't read the book without being aware of the passion that emanated from the pages in regard to the devastation that is being wrought across the globe in the name of religion (well, I should add that there are other components, like oil, money, resources, territory, power grabs and the like).

As for money made from the book - surely he is allowed to do what he likes with the profits. Certainly no one ever mentioned any constraints on the profits garnered from the publication of any of his other 8 books, all of which sold (and still sell) extraordinarily well.

With a burgeoning amount of accessible material and communication systems, there is the capacity for all of us to be far more informed about a raft of disciplines, opinions and arguments than ever before. I think this is wonderful. The fact that RD's, Harris', Dennett's et al. books sell so well means that more people are accessing available information. That is all to the good.

This web site has stated that the forthcoming DVD sale proceeds will go to RD's Foundation. I see nothing sneaky about that. The disclosure is there. The Foundation is what needs funding, hell, I donated money to it months ago. If you read its charter, it is pretty clear. The dosh I contributed is my post-tax dollars. It will be recorded as income to the Foundation and tax will have to be paid on it. This underlines the advantage of organised religions in that they can exploit the rules pertaining to tax-free income.

Someone (probably many) said that if you want more cash, then start a religion, cult, sect or whatever you want to call these organisations, register the name and organisation as a church and sit back, watch the tithing and donations pour in. It's a little simplistic to put it in such a way, but you get my drift.

Indeed, the proliferation of cults and sects attests to that cynical monetary view.

How on earth do you fund something like the Patrick Henry colleges without private funding? You can't. Same with the Emmanuel Colleges - private plus public funding. How would you set up a college run by the Foundation for Reason and Science? Only by donations, I suspect. A very long haul to even lay the foundation stone for construction.

So don't begrudge the money going to the research arm of RD's organisational structure. You are doing it again; you don't like something that RD is doing, so you want him to change to reflect your yearning. Try to curb this tendency, if you will. It's not germane to anything that I can perceive.

Ghostbuster - I was told by my grandmother not to engage in discussions on religion, politics or sex in polite company.

And I reckon, all three are f*****g up the world. Mis education about sex is driving the AIDS/HIV epidemic in Africa (the old pope is in there too), the infestation of missionaries from all sects in that poor country hand out aid liberally laced with dogma.

Get a copy of the 2005 Massey lectures and listen to Stephen Lewis talking about Africa, HIV/AIDS and weep. There's an article on this site that describes the appalling situation in a particular instance.

Fedler - don't cringe. Politics, public exposure, left and right wing rabid political ideology is and will remain with us. It is wise to be and stay informed. These people are the legislators who do exert control on the lives of their constituencies - us. In Australia, the US and the UK, there are basically only two ideologically opposed political groups (sometimes and on some issues, mainly economics, it can be hard to tell them apart).

We would all agree here (I trust I am not being presumptuous) that education and, in particular, continuing education is the biggest force that we can rely on to keep us informed as to what is happening in this increasingly complicated world.

Time to feed my little alimentary canals and have a cuppa.

All the best
V

762. The Selfish Green

Comment #29999 by Veronique on April 6, 2007 at 3:32 am

Go Logicel!!

Happy I am. And Yorker, I actually understand what you said about Tom Hanks. I am still ambivalent about him, though Castaway I enjoyed.

No, surely Logicel would never try to shut anyone up. Far too outspoken (are you still in France?) and direct. Go!!

Goodnight to all of you
V

763. Creationism debate continues to evolve

Comment #29996 by Veronique on April 6, 2007 at 3:26 am

Oh Philip 1978,

I did come across an article of Francis Collins. You were right, I was gobsmacked. Gosh!! I still can't get his words under my belt.

I don't understand this obession with geocentricity that religion subscribes to. Universality is so much more satisfying and mysterious and, after all we do live in the 21st century not in the bronze age. It is, after all, an enormous space place that our litle blue dot inhabits that the very mediocre writers of spurious histories of 'god' did not understand.

Thank you for your advice; I came across Collins article before I read your post. Sob, I had to make a reply although I doubt that he would have read the comments to his article.

Cheers
V

764. U.N. Draft Cites Humans in Recent Climate Shifts

Comment #29988 by Veronique on April 6, 2007 at 2:00 am

Brian,

Hahahahaha. No, you didn't disappoint!! But you don't necessarily distract!! A world of difference. I hope I don't disappoint you either.

Poor old philos. I really do think he's on the wrong web site, poor bloke. And that goes for his mates as well.

I think that the US is actually 2.5% or thereabouts of global population and emits about 25% of global CO2 emissions. It's interesting that in Australia, we contribute about 1.5% (same as Iran) of global CO2 emissions, but on a per capita basis, we are the highest in the world.

That's a pretty indictment isn't it? And our PM is afraid of making changes to our coal exports, our jobs and the amount of dosh needed to put in coal flue scrubbers (he hasn't worked out how to sequester CO2 either). Poor sod! He's gone in November 2007.

Keep an eye on our federal elections. We should always keep an eye on all 1st world countries' elections. It is such a graph of what is actually happening with these pollies and our countries.

Unabashedly political
Cheers
V

765. Is God a Delusion?

Comment #29986 by Veronique on April 6, 2007 at 1:16 am

Briancoughlan,

The story you quote came to me at my father's knee more than 50 years ago. I don't know its genesis, maybe it's just apocryphal:

'Everyone is mad, save thee and me. I am not so sure about thee.'

Lovely isn't it? I smile when I think about our own particular bees-in-bonnets. We are a very strange lot.

Cheers
V

766. Free Speech

Comment #29985 by Veronique on April 6, 2007 at 12:27 am

This is probably too late for anyone to take any notice - it's nearly a month since anyone posted here.

I don't want to comment so much on Hitchens but on the Iraqi war.

1. US commercial interests have billions if not trillions of US$ tied up in the Caspian area in oil deposits. It's a land locked place except for the Caspian Sea the bottom end of which is Iran's border.

2. Russia has just signed with Turkey and Greece to get its oil out into the Meditteranean rather than the Bosporus.

3. The US needs to put a pipeline through Iraq to control its oil into the Gulf. Even then the US has to go through Azerbaijan, Armenia and Turkey to even get to Iraq. It needs Iraq.

4. The US could go through Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan to get to the Arabian Sea. A little more fraught, but the US is hedging its bets.

5. This war is not so much about oil as the control of the US oil pipelines from the Caspian.

6. This war is not so much a civil religious war between Sunni and Shia, as a war between those who supported the US invasion (the puppet government) and those who resisted. This is a war of political revenge.

I would love someone to comment on this take of mine.

Cheers
V

767. U.N. Draft Cites Humans in Recent Climate Shifts

Comment #29977 by Veronique on April 5, 2007 at 9:39 pm

philos,

I still have a problem understanding why you are here on this thread.

So you are critical of RD's latest public tangent. So what. For 30 years he has been writing about evolutionary biology for the general public, tasked by his fellow scientists to do so. He has done admirably well. At least, you appear to have learnt from his public science writings.

Why on earth do you assume that he is one dimensional? Why shouldn't he have other interests allied to his work? Why shouldn't he write about religion as it impacts the general populous? It certainly doesn't require all that much in the way of study to comment on the factional, sectarian in-fighting that seems to be spreading across the globe. That he (and others, I might add) feels it encumbent upon him to bring this massive issue to the public awareness is all to the good.

So he has more temerity than you and writes well. So what. You want the old Prof. back? Sorry he's a developing human and has a lot more than biology to talk about. Maybe you should find another biologist to admire for a while until maybe he/she decides to also write about some other topic. That's life in the fast lane, baby. Get used to it.

Others also write about the evolution of the eye, you know. You could learn lots by spreading your reading further afield. Could be good for your understanding and tolerance of people who aren't the way you want them to be.

As to most Profs being liberal, here in Australia we call it the 'left'. Every university campus I have ever enjoyed is 'left' leaning. It's part of campus life to my knowledge, at least here in Australia. In my time, campus life produced some of the most outspoken debates, with humour, tolerance and development. They were excellent fun and enlightening.

If there's one thing that I have learnt about 'conservatives' or the 'right' (in Australia) is that humour, tolerance and development seem somewhat stultified.

I guess that's the rub. You will find scepticism, disagreement and downright rudeness on these threads. The comments are often trolled as they get in the way of those of us trying to talk to eachother. They become sooo distracting from our main thrusts.

No one is asking you to admire RD. I doubt whether anyone even gives a damn. It seems, for you, however, the milk has been spilt. So sorry, so sad.

Take care
V

768. U.N. Draft Cites Humans in Recent Climate Shifts

Comment #29965 by Veronique on April 5, 2007 at 7:11 pm

Oh Fedler,

Have a look at this article. This is what I meant about other species Yorker (on a different thread).

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/04/04/296/

If growing vegetation for biofuels means this sort of habitat destruction in some unscrupulous places, then we have to go back to the drawing board. We cannot be party to this, it is so distressing.

Sorrow
V

Oh shit! Found this one as well from Common Dreams.

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/04/04/306/

Double sorrow
V

769. U.N. Draft Cites Humans in Recent Climate Shifts

Comment #29959 by Veronique on April 5, 2007 at 6:29 pm

To:
andyinsdca, Dreamer and philos.

The article that heads this thread is about climate change in case you hadn't noticed. This thread, consequently is commenting, inter alia, about climate change.

In any case, we are also information disseminators and give info to each other. What on earth is wrong with that? How long have you been looking at this site?

The topics are quite far reaching and most of the posters are well versed (much more than I am) in a wide variety of topics. I, personally, am very pleased at what I learn, contribute and otherwise enjoy on this site. Are you sure you are at the right place here? You don't really sound it to me.

Cheers
V

770. U.N. Draft Cites Humans in Recent Climate Shifts

Comment #29958 by Veronique on April 5, 2007 at 6:13 pm

Briancoughlan & Fedler,

I think that the problem with massive monoculture is the need for chemical aids.

I read an article about the mysterious demise of millions of honey bees in the US. In 1997 there was a massive wipe out of the bees in France and the government was petitioned by farmers to ban one of Bayer's pesticides called 'gaucho'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6438373.stm

http://www.celsias.com/blog/2007/02/27/bees-dying-by-the-millions/

I searched further and found imidaclopride as the active ingredient that is a neurotoxin. The bees are paralysed and unable to get back to the hives. Those that do deposit tainted honey.

http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=9741

is worth a look. If we grow so much to produce ethanol (which refining will also contribute to CO2 emissions), biofuels may well end up being a worse problem than the benefits they bestow.

Losing honey bees is distinctly unfunny. It is estimated that they pollinate about a third of our vegetable food stuffs. As the article states (baldly) if the bees die, so do we.

Fedler I am very interested in solar power. Our government won't grant enough tax dollars to any research and the people who had researched took their results overseas and the products are now being imported, value added!

For individuals, it is very expensive. To generate the power my household needs on a daily basis (grid interactive) would cost me $53,000 in capital outlay and the generous federal government will rebate to a maximum of $4,000. Not much incentive for us to make such a massive investment in generating our own power. I hope that I can go ahead and petition out state government to add to the feds and grant its own rebate as well.

Cheers
V

771. The Selfish Green

Comment #29936 by Veronique on April 5, 2007 at 3:09 pm

Thanks Yorker, I know, I know. It's the other species that I feel so bad about; the ones we will take with us for no other reason than our profligacy. I must be going through a sentimental patch!

I just watched Carl Sagan's Blue Dot on youtube and I cried at the wastefulness of our tenure. I miss Sagan, I'm so glad we have his videos and books.

I sent the link to about 30 people in my address book as my reflections on easter.

Logicel, This type of reaction fascinates me. We have a TV program here called Gardening Australia. It is wildly popular. For some 3 years, I couldn't stand the presenter, Peter Cundall. His enthusiasm seemed put on and over the top; I couldn't bear to listen to his voice at all. His mannerisms got to me. Just yuk. None of my acquaintances could understand my reaction to this bloke.

Then our Andrew Denton interviewed him and I decided to watch (well, I like Denton!)

Cundall was exactly the same in that interview as he was on his own show. He talked about his past history (interesting), his TV show etc etc. I found myself warming to him and now his enthusiasm and his presentation is 'just' him. I watch and am delighted with the TV show (which was always good, anyway).

It's my reaction change that gave me pause to consider what was going on in me. He hadn't changed one iota.

I never have had that reaction to Attenborough however. Isn't it weird, those first 7 seconds on meeting someone (either in the flesh or on TV). Good luck to you, I hope you have an epiphany as much as you would like to. Attenborough's shows are wonderful (and, now, so are Cundall's!).

And Jane Goodall. What an amazing woman. That lovely little smile that hovers at the corners of her mouth and lights her eyes. And what has she seen? So much destruction. What did she say, 87 countries, 130 odd children's groups? She is indefatigable and utterly committed. I applaud her.

Cheers
V

772. Postmodernism Disrobed

Comment #29830 by Veronique on April 5, 2007 at 3:57 am

Wow, this has been raging for longer that I thought it would.

Has September been left behind? I sure hope so.

I can't believe that so much oxygen has been devoted to the BS that is perceived, written about (with money made - sob, I bought a couple of these so-called treatises) and marketed as serious works!

Language is a bitch. It can be so manipulated with so many nuances of meaning as to flummox and intrigue the unwary.

I am not as erudite as most of you on this thread. But I used to be an english teacher in a foregone time in my life. I always taught clarity, understanding of etymology and present common usage with specific limitations on that usage. In other words, don't be sloppy.

Post-modernism or pomo as it appears to be called, subverts common usage and ascribes meanings, tortuous to the extreme in interpretation, that are so arcane as to be meaningless, cf. the postmodernism generator - quite hilarious, beautifully constructed and utterly meaningless.

Well! that's post-modernism for you; words upon words, upon words. English is brilliant at supplying the most adept meanings for anything one might want to use to espouse whatever one might want to convey to grapple anyone else to a specific and particular meaning of any particular word.

Maybe this is why post-modernism writings are as wordy as they can are. More words, more undercurrent meanings (English is brilliant at this), more confusion, more feeling that "I must study this, it's very intellectual and I must come up to speed, even if I don't know what it means on my surface reading of this material".

It appears to me that pomo 'meaning', deliberately developed to obfuscate and pretend to erudition, was the raison d'etre for a burgeoning pretend 'intelligentsia' that lived briefly and was then neglected for want of content. Snuffed out, as it were.

So be it. Sleep thee well and forever. Can we please start talking in common language again. Thank you RD for curbing your natural exuberance and somewhat angsty nature by not replying any more to this thread. Well done. I hope to meet you one day in Australia.

Case closed
V

773. Creationism debate continues to evolve

Comment #29822 by Veronique on April 5, 2007 at 2:37 am

The other thing, dirtpiggy, is that if you look at the tiny marsupial baby that emerges from a kangaroo, perfect in every tiny detail, or the wee joey that emerges from our endangered Tasmanian Devil, you are consumed with awe at the most mysterious and miraculous act of generation.

Your religite sees god - what absolute nonsense. It is the growth through stages of evolutionary history that fills me with this awe. Just like us humans.

No god, no sky fairy, no immaculate conception, no nothing, except our whole evolutionary history passing before us during the nine months to birth.

How could anyone want to diminsh that by postulating a sky god as a creator. It is beyond my understanding. It is the most stupid postulate I have ever heard.

It still makes me cross that people can be so indocrinated with religious cant that, in RD's words 'a firewall is erected against scientific endeavour' (or words to that effect; I have paraphrased - sorry RD).

Cheers
V

774. Creationism debate continues to evolve

Comment #29819 by Veronique on April 5, 2007 at 2:07 am

dirtpiggy,

Bremas said on another thread that the religites take the stand that science picks a theory and then proves it.

I suspect Bremas is correct. It means that they are not wanting to teach ID so much as trying to corrupt the understanding of the scientific method. That is even more frightening.

If their aim is to subvert scientific method, then I fear we are in for another dark age.

In Australia within our state school system, we have Parents' and Citizens' Associations attached to each school. They are unable to set curricula because that comes under the aegis of each State Education Department. We seem safer than Canada (for a while).

If the religites hanker to get themselves appointed to the Department then that subversion could well start here. I have no idea what is happening to science in our religiously funded sectarian schools, but I know (like in England) they are proliferating in Aus. And they receive government funding as well. And we have more parents (even atheists et al.) sending their children to these schools in the hope that discipline and controlled study methods will be inculcated (read - I haven't the time to ensure that my kids do what's best for them and the Jesuits or whomever will instil discipline etc).

Admittedly, our state system has had its teeth removed by political correctness and the curricula is burgeoning in content so that students get a smattering of everything and nothing in much depth and teachers are therfore constrained to 'get through' the curriculum in the time allotted.

The last surevey on literacy and numeracy I can remember (about 4 months ago) relating to Australian educational standards put us somewhere about 14th (I think) in OECD countries. I find that pretty appalling in a country that used to churn out some quite amazing scientists and technology whizzes.

Of course, we don't use our public funds to keep our whizzes in Aus. so they and their technology and brains go overseas to where funding is more available and prospects are more exciting. We don't have much in the way of philanthropy in Aus. Or, it seems, much business acumen that isn't based on what "I can get out of it in the short term". Sad and short sighted.

Eureka - I agree in principle. However, while schools can be infiltrated and teachers appear to be becoming more cowardly (job tenure must be a reason), can you imagine any religious institution allowing any rationalist into its confines? And to sprout evolution or critical thinking? I can't see it. It is anathema to religious faith that relies on nothing more than bronze age (incorporating older 'pagan' ceremonial acts and subsuming those to its dogma) myths.

All I have left is my pitiful little front yard blackboard and letters to the editor. I can't (musn't) give up. Every time my blackboard gets rubbed off, I hope that my posts are 'getting' to someone and that it may eventually bear critical fruit! One has to have hope!

I have pre-ordered Dawkins' video for our local High School. Come May after it is released, I will follow it up at the school.

NB. I have just phoned the science teacher, whose name I put on RD's order form, to alert him that I had done this thing. It was somewhat presumptuous of me to buy the video without telling the school; I have rectified that.

He thanked me for my generosity, agreed to take my double copies of RD's earlier books and I will develop a good relationship with him. He hadn't heard of RD - can you believe that? I must be living in a rarified atmosphere here in Mullumbimby, NSW!! I would not have thought it.

Anyway, onward and ever upward. Let's not stop now. Logicel, all we can do is keep on keeping on. I am so grateful for this web site. You all keep all of us going.

Cheers
V

775. Is God a Delusion?

Comment #29815 by Veronique on April 5, 2007 at 1:23 am

Nick, I watched the video on youtube and cried. I watched it again and emailed the link to people I know and cried again.

Thank you for the link. Now, how do you get it to everyone? This small, beautifully narrated 3 and ½ minutes of Sagan is more powerful than anything anyone could say in the heat of a debate.

I miss him too.

V

776. Aids Victims Risk Lives

Comment #29814 by Veronique on April 5, 2007 at 12:56 am

Briancoughlan - the BBC thread is closed or at least I couldn't work out how to post.

I just joined - what a rigmarole! It doesn't look easy at all to post. Damn! I would have.

Have any of you heard the 2005 Massey lectures by Stephen Lewis? The most heart breaking talks about AIDS/HIV in Africa. Lewis is about 67 years old and he is a hell of a powerful speaker who is very angry at the way the world is treating Africa. He was attached to the UN as an envoy for 4 years and these talks relate his experiences. His passion is unmistakeable. It's v. depressing in lots of ways, even when, in his last lecture he talks about what can and should be done.

Damn the infesting missionaries with their dogmas that are attached to aid. It sickens me.

V

777. The Selfish Green

Comment #29770 by Veronique on April 4, 2007 at 3:39 pm

HumanGame - thanks for the link. I will read it; haven't time yet.

I have just had a quick squizz and one thing stood out: that politics cannot and will not solve our global problems. The more anyone listens to these pompous, prancing clowns, the more one must agree. None of them will injure what they see as their re-election chances. That they are totally out of touch with the populous never seems to occur to them, despite polls etc.

Chris - I don't know about carbon and/or nuclear geo-sequestration. There have been a lot of hot words and grandstanding, but I still have not seen a comprehensive, technological, sound and successful model that is able to predict future potential problems.

I know Sweden (?) is burrowing deep down into the tectonic plate to sequester nuclear waste but they are not there yet. I didn't know Japan was contemplating massive sequestration. Pumping waste into the sea worries me a bit. We have just had earthquakes off the Solomon Islands in the South Pacific. There are warning stations throughout the Pacific but Aceh caught everyone by surprise because the Indian ocean was considered stable and there were no warning stations there.

In Australia, there is talk of pumping wastes into our tectonic plate. I don't know the deepest depth of the plate and cracking fissures that will allow escape is a concern. All pollies have been in denial for so long that the technology is not very well advanced and, of course, no one can do anything except model for future tectonic movements.

If you have any info that can be accessed I would appreciate it. It is a massive problem, because, both carbon and nuclear, we produce so much waste that I have difficulty in seeing how this poor planet can cope anyway.

Cheers
V

778. The Most Hated Family in America

Comment #29611 by Veronique on April 3, 2007 at 3:04 pm

It seems to me that America is obsessed with sex.

When Life of Brian was released in 1979 (I think) in New York, John Cleese made a similar comment.

Watching these videos reminded me that both the gay murder and funeral scenes were part of the 1st season of 6' Under. I didn't realise until now that those scenes reflected this Phelps' gay bashing lot.

Phelps is getting old and will die soon, so his wife and children should be safe from the bashings detailed in timelady's link.

Why has this woman had 11 children!!
Chaser's War on Everything is wonderful at highlighting and spoofing all cant and dogma. Thank god their new season has started down here. I think all Aussies have missed this show.

Find more of their clips on

http://abc.net.au/tv/chaser/war/

Thankfully our basic irreverance to everything stops the sort of religious hatred that exists in the US. Let's hope we stay that way.

Cheers
V

779. A History of Violence

Comment #29450 by Veronique on April 3, 2007 at 1:29 am

Logicel

Which version of HTML should I download. The link gave me this mass of links and I have no idea what I should use.

Can you help - I am not very up on anything, as you can guess. I love the idea of being able to block other posters quotes and have no idea how to do that. I also don't know how to bold things so they stand out in the posts.

Treat me gently and I am able to learn with instruction!!

Cheers
V

780. The Selfish Green

Comment #29433 by Veronique on April 2, 2007 at 11:26 pm

Quine,

Have you read Jared Diamond's Collapse? Easter Island wasn't the only place to eat its environment.

With a massive 6.6B we are eating our future at fast rate of knots. And it doesn't look as though we'll stop in time.

There's another book by our Tim Flannery called The Future Eaters that I read a few years ago and gave away as many copies as I could afford. It made a terrific impact on me. It concerns what we are doing to our very fragile antipodean country. Nothing has really changed since I read it. Our pollies are still grandstanding and mouthing platitudes in this election year.

Cheers
V

781. In the Beginning

Comment #29432 by Veronique on April 2, 2007 at 11:18 pm

Hi Yorker,

The reason I bought Davies 'The Goldilocks Enigma' and have yet to read it was because our Science Show, hosted by Robyn Williams, interviewed Davies, Barrow and Dawkins in the week that TGD was released in Australia. I want to give you the link to the interviews. You can't listen to it anymore but there is a transcript.

The idea that perked me up was Davies likening the start of the universe to hardware and the growth after the big bang to developing software, interconnected processes. I hope you find it enjoyable. (It was also the reason that I bought TGD of course. It was released at the end of that week to my joy). Then I found this website. Jolly good.

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/scienceshow/stories/2006/1777528.htm

I wouldn't be so hard on Davies either. He thinks the argument about whether or not a god created the universe and/or physical laws is irrelevant. This is from the interview; I have only dipped into the beginnings of his book. I already know I will enjoy and learn from it. Like Douglas Adams I come from an Arts background and devour books that teach me about science.

This thread really got you going didn't it?

Cheers
V

782. The Fifth Flea!

Comment #29393 by Veronique on April 2, 2007 at 6:37 pm

BillySands:

Cleave this one to your heart:

What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence - Chris Hitchens.

'Nuf said. I am sure you have better things to do with your time than to try to reply to David Robertson. Same here. That's why I won't.

Regards
V

783. Postmodernism Disrobed

Comment #29382 by Veronique on April 2, 2007 at 5:52 pm

September

I have trouble understanding why you are even on this thread. If it's just to have a go at RD why not write to him and leave us all out of it.

We all make ad hominem attacks sometimes, usually when we are riled by something often not even related to the rant we spout. What's riling you? Surely not RD or is it because you don't like the 'clout' he has in the world outside this web site.

I tried reading Bruno Latour on the recommendation of Dr Chris Busby and found it very difficult and not particularly germane to science in general; so the book just sits on one of my bookshelves.

The postmodernism generator is a terrific spoof and well worth a look. It is beautiful, total garbage with all the bells and whistles.

So, the question stands: who are you in real life? Would any of us have heard of you and your work? If not, why not? And maybe that is the real point. We'll not know unless you enlighten us.

Waiting..... and BTW, I am not sure that anyone of us really wants to know so much detail about your looks, your operations &/or your sexuality. Your extraordinary response to someone who put your pseudonym in inverted commas was gob smacking. However, I guess your explanation means you are unlikely to disclose your real identity. Sigh.

V

784. The Selfish Green

Comment #29375 by Veronique on April 2, 2007 at 5:12 pm

That was a marvellous discussion; I had not seen it before. Sometimes I wish I lived in the UK and could attend these forums. It was, however in 2004.

It's now 2007. Consciousness has been raised among the grass roots, the electorate, if you like. Stern and the IPCC are published for all to see. We have just had Stern in Australia having talks with our major political parties' leaders. Our PM Howard still says that he won't do anything that will put our economy and our jobs at risk. Bush is much the same, Blair can say what he likes because he's gone as a political force, so it's just mouthings.

Jane Goodall said: Life is not just about money and stuff.

I have no idea how you get through to politicians, and ultimately they are the ones that make the decisions. Most of them are lawyers who have gone from Uni to politics with nothing in between. I would hazard a guess that none of them is even remotely educated in any of the natural sciences bar maybe, secondary school dabblings in science curricula.

That these people have a 3 or 4 year political view in terms of re-election does not give me hope that we will ever be able to rectify the damage we have perpetrated on this planet and our co-species.

So, unlike the four participants in that discussion, no, I am not optimistic about the future.

While ever we have dry economic rationalists in charge of our 1st world countries; while ever the leaders of 3rd world countries are the Mugabes and his like, there is little to look forward to.

None of us really wants to downgrade his/her life style to a more reasonable, equitable state that helps to lift the state of those who have less than we.

I don't know the answer and I don't know that anyone does. Leakey's idea of an enlightened, platonic world philosopher leader looks not bad on the surface. We are 6.6B in number. Plato never dreamed of that sort of figure when he wrote The Republic. Such a leader would require a massive enabling force to convince all peoples to tow the line. Debate and reason elude us as a species. Sad isn't it.

V

785. The Case for Teaching The Bible

Comment #29193 by Veronique on April 2, 2007 at 3:04 am

I can't read all the posts, however, I think I agree that the Wholly Babble should be R rated. It's just not appropriate for young people. It is too frightening and young minds are so malleable.

I think that children with their youthful, trust all mummies and daddies hard wired responses should not be subject to religious (and political) diatribe until they are old enough to be able to assess on their own abilities whether or not to grapple to their hearts and minds any such dogma.

My guess is, if they were left alone, they would opt for reason above fantasies.

I and both my siblings were left free and we all adhere to scientific reason and testability of theories. Thank you pater familias. A big debt of gratitude, because I do not believe that we would have been able to resist such ideological conditioning had we been subject to it. Even if we had been able to think later on, we would have carried the scars for a long (if not ever) time.

Cheers
V

786. The God Debate

Comment #29179 by Veronique on April 2, 2007 at 2:22 am

Fishpeddler

I agree that the word 'spiritualism' seems difficult for SH.

I would suggest that the word both he and Andrew Sullivan are struggling for is 'mysticism' or 'mystical experience' in their email debate. I don't give much shrift to Warren.

I sort of know what SH is trying to find as a word to describe his experiences. It's difficult in our language to find a word that doesn't have its etymology in religious belief.

But that's our language for you. It will evolve (should we live long enough).

V

787. A History of Violence

Comment #29169 by Veronique on April 2, 2007 at 1:29 am

Well! Thank you again Logicel and Heatnzl. I did lose this one, but had copied it into Word. I got back in to the post a comment and left clicked and pasted. IT WORKED!!

Bolding and blocking quotes will be for another day!

Thank you so much.

V

788. A History of Violence

Comment #29168 by Veronique on April 2, 2007 at 1:23 am

Thank you Logicel and Heatnzl. I'll try your suggestions this time.

Roight, here goes! (Say 'right' for those of you who have never seen "Kath & Kym")

This one is for you Bizarro Dawkins - what an odd moniker for someone like you to use.

The one thing I have never really understood is why humans forget to see themselves as animals. Animals are driven by the greed, hatred and jealousy equivalent of 'get off my patch, leave my females alone and don't pinch our food'.

These behaviours are normal and hard-wired in the mid and lower brains. The difference with humans is the neo-cortex. Not to say we don't operate from the mid and lower brains; we obviously do. The difference is that, with our relatively poorly understood neo-cortex, we are able to dream up the most wonderful rationales for doing what we do.

We have what is called consciousness, the ability to reflect, recall the past, manipulate our behavious and contemplate future scenarios. The biggest manipulation is the fantasy called religion. With that we are able to justify any behaviours we like.

Sorry Bizarro, your precious Christianity is intimately involved in such justifications. As is Islam and Judaism and any number of other cults and sects.

Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot and any other number of leaders you would care to cite fall under similar delusions of grandeur and 'rightness' to justify their behaviours. The hoi poloi, of course, if they know what is good for them, will merely become the canon fodder and lieutenants in the service of the pathological psychotics, be they mad nationalists, empire builders or raving religites.

You say that nowhere does Christ order the killing of infidels. Ah, but when the infidels want to take over a holy site, then the Crusaders come running full of righteous indignation, hell-fire and brimstone. (There were 4 Crusades and untold killings)

The Spanish Inquisition, the witch hunts, the delight in torturing and burning (alive!) of people who were betrayed by a frightened and/or malicious populous, including the mercenary and often self-appointed 'doers of God's will' is legion. All sanctioned by the church. You may continue to say that Christ doesn't condone this behaviour, however all his adherents believe that their behaviours will be sanctioned and they are doing what is right and just. You can't separate Christ from his church (according to the fairly mediocre writers of his 'history'). I have always thought that these gospel mongers were unable to engage in rational enquiry. But that's another post, sometime.

Would you kindly point me to the atheists of this ilk, with proper referencing if you don't mind, so that this issue can be addressed once and for all. Atheism is not interested in killing people, it is not a cult, it has no belief and no reason for fanatical killing fields. It has a vested interest in reason and evidence and, lately, feels it is necessary to be somewhat more vocal than it has been before because of the organised spread of mad fundamentalism among the major religions of the world. We are terrified of the end result of such cultural and religious clashes. In this day and age, leaders are able to annihilate other countries with massive weaponry. You surely can't be unaware of the current state of the growing wars beginning to take place.

If, however, you are talking about pathological psychotics, that is a different kettle of fish. You will find them amongst the religites (of numerous faiths), mad nationalists, would-be kings and ethnic cleansers. All over the world I might add.

I am waiting for communism to be actually tried. As yet it has not been. There have always been the leaders in any pretend attempt at communism.

While ever humans can point to an 'authority' and say - he told me to do it/his 'holy word' decreed it/I was authorised to carry out orders - then you will have people of no moral stature at all.

No one, to my knowledge, has said that Christianity should be shunned due to its violent past. Atheists will tell you that religions should be neglected and disbanded because not one of them has a shred of evidence for the teachings delivered and consequently for the actions taken in religion's name.

The fact that people 'believe' in some religious teaching is what distresses the rest of us. That actions can be undertaken that decimate populations in the name of one god or another is an appalling state of affairs.

Finally, you say that 'history has shown and will continue to show that people will continue to commit detestable acts'. A bit blind, I would say. I try not to anthropomorphise too much. History has shown and will continue to show that animals operate largely from their hard wired brains. Detestable is a word that relates to human subjective thinking. We have a long way to go to evolve. I suspect that we may not make it. And that will be our fault as well. We are poisoning our habitat; a thing no other animal does. We are a pestilence, if you like.

So, my dear, go back to your drawing board and post another comment that is more cogent, thoughtful and doesn't rely on spurious claims of your Christianity.

This isn't as good as the post I lost, but you get my drift.

And hi to you Cheshirecat. My cats don't grin as they disappear, damn them. They are always with me, normal cats, vying with each other to get the first bite of food or the best place on my lap. But you wouldn't hanker for a lap, would you, you are a grin on the branch of a tree.

Cheers
V

789. Is this another Sokal Hoax?

Comment #29105 by Veronique on April 1, 2007 at 4:08 pm

Post modernism is such a wank.

There's a post modernism generator on the web that automatically links 'phrases' together with cited references and footnotes and bibliographies. It is utterly hilarious and total BS.

This article could be replicated by such a generator - it's meaningless to start with. I couldn't get through it - I recognised the style.

www.elsewhere.org has the generator. Worth a look.

V

790. 'Friends of God' Documentary

Comment #29101 by Veronique on April 1, 2007 at 4:01 pm

I couldn't watch these videos. The first video I did watch was the Jesus Camp. I, like the rest of you, felt sick.

Aussie and Will in Aus - isn't it awful that Ken Ham is an export from Australia. His businees set up is still in Q'ld though. So I guess there are a lot of kids undergoing indoctrination and abuse up in the deep North.

It depresses me so much.

V

791. The God Debate

Comment #29096 by Veronique on April 1, 2007 at 3:47 pm

I am so tired of being told that because I am an atheist, my life has no meaning.

I also agree with Yorker that these 'debates' are a waste of everyone's time. Having said that, I suppose the debate with Hitchens, Dawkins and Grayling against the three religites did have some seachange factor. The audience response jumped from 44% in favour of the world being better without religion (before the debate) to 57% (after the debate).

There is no way a proper debate can be held between religious, dogmatic faith and rationality. The two stances are light years apart.

I take my hat off to the rationalists who attempt over and over again to intellectually engage religites. They do it with calm reason despite having to reiterate intellectual honesty with dreary repetition.

Why don't they get sick of it? I feel that a new dark age is on the horizon. Maybe they want to help stem the tide as much as they can. I wouldn't have the patience or the calm to take it on.

North Korea is supposed to be where we should all go! Warren is insulting in the extreme. Harris never is. What a divide!

V

792. A History of Violence

Comment #28968 by Veronique on April 1, 2007 at 12:43 am

I have just lost my post in reply to Bizarro. Can someone please tell me how to save the text in a text editor. You have to give me explicit instructions. I have no idea what Josh means by this warning. I can't reproduce my post. It was an immediate response. I was on a roll. Bugger. It was good!!!

V

793. Dawkins says religion is 'like sucking a dummy'

Comment #28551 by Veronique on March 29, 2007 at 5:17 pm

I am tired of the argument for religion from consolation.

I prefer wine and music.

The argument from artistic endeavour is also pathetic. RD handles in the best possible way - We will never know what Betthoven's Mesozoic Symphony may sound like.

This makes for better listening than Alister McGrath but it still trots out the same old, same old and none of them has anything to do with belief in sky fairies. Peter Atkins is right. One has to be psychologically insecure and away with the fairies to believe in them.

I loved the dummy reference and the firewall is so evocative. Well done RD.

AdrianB - try this site for number and distributions of religions.

http://www.adherents.com/adh_faq.html

Waiting for 2nd podcast to download. BRB.
V

794. A hundred residents of a Russian village have refused to switch to new passports because they believe the documents' bar codes contain satanic symbols

Comment #28367 by Veronique on March 29, 2007 at 1:38 am

Nothing wrong with pedantry Russell.

I read somewhere that Jesus was supposed to have been born 4BC, if anyone actually knows, that is. Did they make a stabbing guess to start AD as his birth year?

I will stop being politically correct (having made a hash of it anyway) and go back to BC & AD. I don't make errors there!

Thanks
V

795. Peanut Butter, The Atheist's Nightmare!

Comment #28363 by Veronique on March 29, 2007 at 1:02 am

Transhuman

Vegemite could have been once. We couldn't keep Kraft in Aussie ownership. Sob.
V

796. Peanut Butter, The Atheist's Nightmare!

Comment #28358 by Veronique on March 29, 2007 at 12:16 am

I just watched the first video of the creation vs evolution series on youtube. Very disturbing.

What's worse!, they have a bloke called Ken Ham speaking. He's a Aussie, now in the US and is the pres. of Answers in Genesis. I looked him up in Wikipedia. I didn't realise we had a liar and nutcase of that calibre who came from the Q'ld Institute of Tech calling himself a 'Bachelor' graduate in 'Applied Science'. I suspect when he graduated he would have been awarded a Diploma.

Appears to have a lot of critics, even wiki calls him egregious. I don't believe that he believes a word of what he says. He's a scammer through and through. And isn't Hovind in jail because of his creationist park arrogance in not applying for a building permit?

I can't decide whether these people are doing heaps of damage or the more they say publicly shows them up as idiots, fraudsters and loonies. I hope it's the latter.
V

797. The Fifth Flea!

Comment #28323 by Veronique on March 28, 2007 at 6:41 pm

Can any of you here tell me how to get a link to Josh for possible inclusion as a re-post?

I came across this today- it's a re-post from Truthdig to Alternet and written by Chris Hedges.

http://www.alternet.org/rights/49811/

I am very unimpressed with the power, money and other resources that allow things like this to happen. To my mind, things appear worse. My natural optimism is severely tested when reading about the advance of ID.

V

798. Believers are away with the fairies

Comment #28092 by Veronique on March 27, 2007 at 11:49 pm

Don't forget to put up blackboards and post quotable quotes designed to make people think. I am starting to get people coming up to me in the street and saying it's a good thing.

My blackboard has only been up for 12 weeks so far, some posts get wiped up - just write them again. Persistence is necessary. I have a feeling it will work in some degree. Helps the frustration levels as well!

I couldn't join an organisation either. I can't be herded. Start a critical thinking group; when it's up and running, approach your local school and offer off-campus electives. It's all worth a try.

Cheers
V

799. A hundred residents of a Russian village have refused to switch to new passports because they believe the documents' bar codes contain satanic symbols

Comment #27758 by Veronique on March 26, 2007 at 3:11 pm

Sorry Russell; of course you are right.

Yes it was Solomon's temple that was destroyed in 70AD or CE. When did BCE and CE come into vogue? It is the first time I have written it and I got it wrong. Damn.

My apologies. I should have checked my post before submitting it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Revelation

records that it isn't really known when it was written.

My education in religion isn't terrific because I always thought it was tosh.

Cheers
V

800. A hundred residents of a Russian village have refused to switch to new passports because they believe the documents' bar codes contain satanic symbols

Comment #27625 by Veronique on March 25, 2007 at 6:10 pm

DistrictSelectman,

Tell 'em not to worry. My license photograph looks nothing like me. They will be able to rationalise that it's not a graven image but a poor misrepresentation due to a flash bulb malfuntion.

I came across a different number some time back that was explained a bit like this:

Nero Caesar, in the original Hebrew after assigning numbers and then performing some sort of addition comes to 666. However, it is not convincing that Nero is the bloke in question when talking about the devil in Revelations. The sack of Rome was 70BCE. Revelations was written somewhere about 65-68BCE or, if you happen to be an endtimer, in the 90sBCE.

Apparently it is more likely that it was his son Gaius Caesar whose dates correspond more to Revelations. Now Gaius Caesar in Hebrew with the same machinations applied comes to 616 and that is proposed as the proper number.

But hey! tradition does stretch back and the same three numbers certainly packs a better punch.

I can't remember where I came across it - maybe the BBC's Doomsday Code or on one of our ABC's Compass - the only quasi-religious show we have in Australia (aren't we lucky! unfortunately our commercial channels import a number of US televangelist shows and show them in the early hours before dawn).

Education is still the only way to combat this stupid stuff.

Cheers
V