901. 'Jesus loves you' email

Comment #66138 by Richard Morgan on August 29, 2007 at 2:32 am

Have you noticed how Christian Churches (historically) have only been selling the "jesus loves you" line for a relatively short period of time?
The method works like this - set up a system so that everybody feels riddled with guilt and unworthy of love, let it poison society for a couple of thousand years then at a time when communication systems are working well on a world-wide basis you can tell them :"Sure, you're shits, but Jesus loves you anyway. he will forgive your shittiness, clean you up and take you in to paradise for ever."
In marketing that's called "creating the need." Works every time!

902. Shop targets U.S. hunters with camo Bibles

Comment #66131 by Richard Morgan on August 29, 2007 at 1:42 am

hungarianelephant :

a happy animal tastes better.

Hahahahahahaha!
Hohohohohohoho
Hihihihihihihihihi
That is priceless!
I love it!
You have just given me my next t-shirt slogan!
Keep 'em coming, please.


Make sure your turkey dies smiling.
Superior sausages from placid pigs.
Little lamb never knew what hit him, and YOU can taste the difference.
Rapture rashers of beacon bacon - are your pigs born again?
Mouth-watering steaks from consumer-friendly cows, because friendly cows taste better.
Scrumptious happy-egg omelettes!
How you treat what you eat before it is meat
can make the meat you eat a real treat!

903. Shop targets U.S. hunters with camo Bibles

Comment #66116 by Richard Morgan on August 28, 2007 at 11:30 pm

JesusH :

Sad and disgusting some of the comments on this thread, proves again how most atheists on this board are just as stereotyping, hateful and dogmatic as the people they criticize

Stupid remark. Being an atheist doesn't necessarily make anybody a "nice person". Nobody ever said that it should. Though preferring truth to illusion does improve one's chances of entering into honest relationships.

904. Shop targets U.S. hunters with camo Bibles

Comment #66113 by Richard Morgan on August 28, 2007 at 11:23 pm

At least one religion has beaten everybody else to it with the "camo wife".
A bon entendeur...

905. Fallen Pastor Seeks Aid to Pursue Studies

Comment #66059 by Richard Morgan on August 28, 2007 at 6:36 am

Why is everybody so shock/horror surprised? When has getting money out of people ever had anything to do with being virtuous and honest? Haggard is still doing who he does best - screwing people!

906. A hole lot of nothing found by astronomers

Comment #65816 by Richard Morgan on August 26, 2007 at 9:53 pm

windfall:

Agree to disagree and all that (if we still do, that is).

I can't because we don't. I was wrong - so I now agree with you. Thank you (and Geraint : diolch yn fawr) for this discussion.
And I trust that even "A" and "drakfluga" will grow up one day.

907. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #65613 by Richard Morgan on August 25, 2007 at 6:00 am

Richard Dawkins often says, as he does here in reply to McGrath's ultimate (non)question : "It is such a privilege to be born at all....
We have the privilege of being in this universe for a few decades....
It is an enormous privilege to be able to understand something about the universe in which we live...
I have a problem with his use of the word "privilege" here. And it is most certainly not a nit-picking type of problem. (I'll leave that to roach and other specialists in the "nit" department.)
Do you also have a problem with this word in this context? If not, could you explain it to me, please.
I'll have my rant about all this in a couple of days.
Watch this space. (Unless you have some fresh wet paint handy.)

908. A Matter of Faith

Comment #65445 by Richard Morgan on August 24, 2007 at 8:00 am

AnthInTraining:

How many times must we set it all straight?

As many times as it takes, without counting. I think the truth is worth the effort, and I'm sure you do too.

roach:

A large part of it seems to involve reading books and not understanding them. I can do that!

We'd noticed.

909. Open letter to Michael Shermer in response to his letter...

Comment #65306 by Richard Morgan on August 23, 2007 at 2:39 pm

roach :

Luckily, as sapient points out, you don't have to have perfect spelling, grammar, and syntax in order to produce valid arguments.

You're right, of course. The problem is that imperfect spelling, grammar and syntax could well prevent you from effectively communicating your valid arguments.
And with the best will in the world, I would find it very difficult to take seriously somebody who assures me, in a mocking way, that "sensitive" is a noun in this case.
(The word "sensitive" is used as a noun - by the woo-woos!!!)
Some of us are happy to be corrected, science is permanently self-correcting, but if you prefer watching paint dry, well, I guess the creationists in your part of the world can sleep peacefully tonight.
Where would you like me to send you the other half of my Prozac?

910. Enemies of Reason

Comment #65197 by Richard Morgan on August 23, 2007 at 6:12 am

I found the approach most effective : the "cut your own rope to hang yourself with", "shooting yourself in the foot", "own-goal" technique. Just let them talk and act and their quackery will become self-evident.

A more militant approach would have been like using an AK46 to kill a fly.



Go placidly amid the noise and the haste,
and remember what peace there may be in silence.
As far as possible, without surrender,
be on good terms with all persons.
Speak your truth quietly and clearly;

and listen to others, even to the dull and the ignorant;
they too have their story.

Avoid loud and aggressive persons;
they are vexatious to the spirit.
Reason with gentleness of mind and manner,
Let humility fragrantly perfume your questions,
And take no harsh joy nor solace,
As the quacks and charlatans pitifully shit upon themselves,
In the market place, as in the hidden stench of their consulting rooms.
If music be the food of love,
Then let truth and reason be
The twin suppositories
To the constipated mind
Of the blind and the ignorant...


See what I mean....?


(I suspect that I've improvised a little when quoting Desiderata, but you get my message, don't you?)

911. Open letter to Michael Shermer in response to his letter...

Comment #65156 by Richard Morgan on August 23, 2007 at 3:32 am

roach:

"more perfect"?
"most unique"?
I suppose I could be playing right into the hands of a linguistic joke. It's happened to me in the past.

Yip.
It's just happened to you again, sweety!
And strangely enough, I'm not just playing silly-buggers. Grammar is the protocol of verbal communication, and sloppiness in the use of words can lead to unpleasant problems of communication. This would be highly regrettable in a forum dedicated to truth and reason, since words are all we have for describing truth and demonstrating reason.
Like y'know, yer see what I mean, it's sorta, y'know like, wow and yoopee 24/7 innit?
Innit?
No?
OK - I'll just fetch my coat.

912. Open letter to Michael Shermer in response to his letter...

Comment #65122 by Richard Morgan on August 23, 2007 at 12:31 am

kellyM78 :

Some people are entirely too sensitive.

"entirely too....?"
Oh dear : I'm sure there must be a more perfect way of using the English language. And I'm not suggesting that my perception of the correct use of grammar is the most unique in the world.
"entirely too..."
There are some linguistic memes up with which I will NOT put.

913. I'm gonna be a MOVIE STAR

Comment #65096 by Richard Morgan on August 22, 2007 at 10:20 pm

Somebody once said : "Clearly God hates money. Just look at the people he gives it to!"
Clearly Jesus loves liars and cheats and frauds - because ironically it's always the "Thou-shalt-not-bear-false-witness" born-again faith-heads that feel the need to resort to dissimulation (at best) and downright lies (at worst). Probably doing it in the name of Jesus makes it OK.
OK.
Why am I not surprised?
"You shall know the truth, and the truth will make you... very embarrassed." (Morganic Translation of the New Tasty-Mint)

914. Sikh girl will convert for a place at Catholic school

Comment #64460 by Richard Morgan on August 20, 2007 at 6:04 am

I consider myself to be a person of high principles. I venerate truth, reason and beauty above all things. How loathsomely hypocritical and downright dishonest to trade one's principles for something as paltry as your child's education!
As for me and my house, if I was offered £1,000,000 to convert to Mormonism, I would not hesitate for one second : "Show me to the swimming pool, brothers, I just got that burning in the bosom feeling!"
(lol)

915. Why Richard Dawkins is right on alternative medicine - but not when it comes to religion

Comment #64251 by Richard Morgan on August 19, 2007 at 1:30 am

JohnC

Richard,

I think it is a real measure of your achievement that the issues keep on bubbling up through letters pages of quality broadsheets. You have obviously hit on the correct combination of reason and provocation that has got people's attention.

Congratulations!

Thank you very much.

916. Good luck, Dawkins!

Comment #64222 by Richard Morgan on August 18, 2007 at 5:45 pm

If you wait that long, they'll know you lied to them.

But if they accuse you of having lied to them, you can always tell them that voices in your head ordered you to do so.

If I say : "I lie."
and in so saying, tell a truth,
then I truly lie.
But if I say : "I lie."
and in so saying, tell a lie,
then I tell the truth.

....I'm amazed you're still reading!

917. Good luck, Dawkins!

Comment #64130 by Richard Morgan on August 18, 2007 at 1:04 am

Like so many of you guys, I spent many years being really distressed by the number of people who believe things that are quite clearly false.

As a teacher in France, I campaigned against this dreadful pseudo-educational practice called "grade repetition" or "year repetition". Not only was I constantly witnessing the harmful effects of making a pupil repeat a grade, but also ALL the surveys and studies and analyses that have been carried out on this subject, all over the world, come to the same CONCLUSIONS. Grade repetition is NOT a second chance, can be downright harmful to the child, is frightfully unjust and is always an extremely expensive burden for the state. .

But opinion polls in countries that use "grade repetition" (redoublement in French) consistently and regularly reveal that over 90% of parents AND teachers (!!!) consider that grade repetition is an effective tool for helping slow pupils to catch up. .

It's been proven to be false a thousand times over but people still believe in it. Doesn't that remind you of something, somewhere…?.

Many such beliefs belong to the category called "folk wisdom" or "intuitive reasoning". Like the fact that I can see the sun rise over the mountains and set behind the gasworks, so I "know" the sun revolves around the earth. .

If I give a child an extra year to learn something, logically it's going to facilitate the learning process. .
Well, innit?

In fact, er,no. Quite the opposite.

Then one day I chanced to come across an interesting survey, carried out in Quebec, I believe. After having questioned parents and teachers about their beliefs concerning grade repetition, the analysts identified those parents and teachers who has actually studied the question of grade repetition, who had read the reports and analyses, who really had an idea about what it was all about. Amongst this group, not surprisingly, the proportion of people favourable to grade repetition was almost exactly reversed, over 90% being opposed to it. .

Clearly it all comes down to a question of cognitive dissonance - in other words, does it seem to make sense to me. The idea of the sun wobbling around the earth "makes sense" - but only to my uninformed wisdom and intuitions. .

In other words, knowledge (and thus education) is the key factor here. Which means that Richard Dawkins and others of his ilk (you and I for example) absolutely must continue disseminating simple information, be it via programmes like the "Enemies of Reason" or by writing books like "The God Delusion" or by participating in discussions such as this one or, perhaps more importantly, by bringing up our children with reason-based attitudes and lots of love. .

Susan Blackmore was wrong to despair, though it is perfectly understandable. Richard Dawkins doesn't seem to me to be the depressive, despairing type, so I have no worries there. .

As we read in Isaiah chapter 1 verse 18, "Come now and let us reason together" says the Lord….

Oops, sorry about that, sometimes my previous conditioning rears its ugly head! .

But I presume you've got my message ("gotten my message" for my transatlantic friends).It is worth telling the truth - over and over again. Let me finish with a lovely little anecdote. .

There was a tiny old schoolhouse in one of those country villages where all the children were in the same class. A stranger to the village stopped outside the school and listened through the open window as the jolly old school m'am gave her lesson. .

He was so amazed by what he heard, he waited around to question the school's solitary teacher on her rather surprising teaching techniques. "I listened to you giving that lesson on arithmetic. I noticed you paid particular attention to the sort of dunce of the class, sitting on his own at the back of the classroom. Do you know that there was one long division problem that you explained to him 48 times!!!. Why on earth did you take the time to explain 48 times?".

To which the kindly old lady replied, "Well, I guess it was because 47 times wasn't enough."

Let's carry on explaining. 48 times or more.
You know, in spite of appearances, I think most people now accept that the earth spins around the sun instead of the opposite. Persistence is it's own reward.

918. Good luck, Dawkins!

Comment #64128 by Richard Morgan on August 18, 2007 at 12:04 am

There are some grains of truth in there. Out-of-body experiences happen, even though nothing leaves the body, sleep paralysis happens and is terrifying if you don't know what it is, mystical experiences can change people's lives for the better, and some alternative therapies can be wonderfully relaxing and enjoyable, even if their underlying theories are completely false.

To my mind this is potentially dangerous thinking, because it equates "truth" with subjective experiences. As if the "feel-good" principle had some kind of validity. Which it doesn't.
Reminds me of when I got converted to Mormonism as a teenager in 1961. The missionaries told me that I could "know" that the book of mormon was the word of god by praying and asking god to show me that (not "whether") it was true by giving me a sensation called "a burning in the bosom."
Sure enough, one night as I prayed after having eaten too much chicken curry, I got the required revelation!

Nice feelings and sensations are not "grains of truth" in the context of reason-based research and enquiry. They are grains of......er, feelings and sensations?

919. A Defense of Atheism

Comment #63968 by Richard Morgan on August 17, 2007 at 4:45 am

I do love this expression "consciousness-raising", which generally means "lifting" other people's consciousness to my own level. The superior level, of course.

I have just invented, and therefore prefer, "consciousness-expanding" or "consciousness-widening", because being aware of more does not, hélas, automatically entitle me to any kind of superiority, even though it should, and sometimes does.

920. A Defense of Atheism

Comment #63965 by Richard Morgan on August 17, 2007 at 4:18 am

Accurate nit-picking means never having to say you're sorry. (Love means having to say you're sorry every fifteen minutes - John Lennon) But please be accurate! My dear RAS, we ALL have some belief system, even you! Writing as you did, you have started to reveal a part of your own belief system, surely you must realise that!
In fact nit-picking is generally very useful, sometimes very important and never a real problem, except for nits, of course.

921. Charles Brooker's screen burn

Comment #63278 by Richard Morgan on August 13, 2007 at 7:35 pm

darwin2 - please have the decency to go away and play your stupid games elsewhere.
Your "Look, Mummy, I've got Internet and I can say what I want wherever I want" mentality ceased to be amusing pages back.
And you other guys, how can you be so dumb as to encourage him by replying as if you were taking him seriously?

922. Richard Dawkins, TV evangelist

Comment #62903 by Richard Morgan on August 12, 2007 at 8:51 am

I doubt this will cause these alternative practitioners much loss of sleep.

Sadly true. This just underlines the need for a better understanding of human gullibility, or worse, "theneed to believe".

his public advocacy of atheism is coming to look more and more like media-savvy forms of contemporary religion

So what? Is being "media-savvy" a problem for somebody here? Are we supposed to just stand on a roof somewhere and shout?

This emerging atheist movement may have some way to go before it matches the social and cultural influence of evangelicalism, though: it lacks the social networks that evangelicalism has in congregations and other special-interest organisations (including missionary organisations and NGO's); it lacks the regular rituals and special festivals at which evangelicals gather to rehearse their faith and identity; and it lacks the popular resources of evangelicalism (including the oft-derided practices of contemporary evangelical worship), which offer a powerful cultural technology for shaping mind, body and emotion in line with evangelical perspectives.

Correct. But don't worry, guys, I'm working on it! I've had some wonderful experiences singing with a large crowd - evangelicals, young communists, Man United supporters : different causes but always the same "burning in the bosom" sensation. I just love it. I'm working on some Atheist anthems at the moment.

future conflict between militant atheists and religious conservatives may have the rest of us ducking in the crossfire.

Yep. Sitting on the fence could be a dangerous place to be in certain situations.

"Let us reason together...."
"BOOM!"
"You've deaded me, you rotten..."
(dies)

rise of the atheist movement he symbolises could do more than the alternative spiritualities he disparages to threaten the fragile cohesion of our societies.

Are you suggesting another "Peace for our time" treaty? Didn't work the last time...
(If you don't recognise this quotation, Google it.)

923. Why Richard Dawkins is right on alternative medicine - but not when it comes to religion

Comment #62733 by Richard Morgan on August 11, 2007 at 3:51 am

If Dominic Lawson is machine-washable and comes up to European Safety standards, I'd like to buy one for my grand-daughter to add to her collection of cuddly teddy-bears.
Any info on this,anybody?

924. Why Richard Dawkins is right on alternative medicine - but not when it comes to religion

Comment #62487 by Richard Morgan on August 10, 2007 at 1:12 am

I almost envy Dominic Lawson his good fortune in living in a world where "religion has been forced to become little other than an assembly of ethical opinions."
And I feel it is a clumsy misrepresentation of RD's motivation to suggest that it can be summed up by:

Their refusal to countenance Darwin is, I suspect, what has so enraged Dawkins, an evolutionary biologist by specialisation.

I have the very strong impression that what so enrages Richard Dawkinis has a lot more to do with fanatics aiming planes at sky-scrapers than with silly ideas concerning a subject particularly dear to his heart.
Reading this article gives me the impression that Dominic Lawson is a real nice guy, but he doesn't seem to live in the same world as we agitating atheists.

925. The Gullible Age: Review of 'The Enemies of Reason'

Comment #62041 by Richard Morgan on August 8, 2007 at 2:21 am

…it's equally unscientific to dismiss it without investigating its specific claims

I would like to give a piece of fatherly advice to hungarianelephant and others of his ilk who wish to take part in (relatively) serious forum discussions : "Do your homework before opening your (virtual) mouth."
There is a considerable amount of literature on homeopathic medicine and tests. But perhaps not all of it is available on the Internet, and perhaps some documents are not in English. Ever thought about that?
hungarianelephant reminds me of so many of my 11/12 year-old pupils who quite seriously believe "If you can't Google it, then it doesn't exist."
To which I always reply : "The fact that you can Google it does not prove that it does exist."

Surely the simple contradictory fact that millions of dollars are made by over-the-counter sales of homeopathic remedies, whereas homeopathic treatment is supposed to be based on a thorough knowledge of the "whole" patient by the prescribing practitioner (if we are to believe the inventor of homeopathy, Hahnemann) should be enough to demonstrate the fraud going on here.

I agree that all health carers would be more efficient if they had the time and/or the inclination to include more T.L.C. in their approach. Unfortunately TLC is not as effective in actually saving people's lives as traditional medicine, so it will clearly remain a very secondary aspect of health care. Although it could have an important role to play in the after-sales service department of clinics and hospitals.

hungarianelephant announces himself as a "lawyer of sorts", which perhaps explains his reasoning "of sorts" and superficial skimming of information. Yeah, I like a good laugh, but some subjects are just too darn important to be dismissed in an "…of sorts" way. Would he like his plane to be piloted by a "pilot…of sorts"? Or be operated on by a "surgeon…of sorts"?
(You guessed right, Veronique, I'm getting angry again. Don't worry - I'm doing the deep breathing again…. IN……..out……..IN………out…….. er, what comes next? Oh, yes : IN……….OUT………IN………OUT. There, I'm feeling better now. I'll have to see if my doctor has a treatment for my allergy to crass idiots.)

926. The Gullible Age: Review of 'The Enemies of Reason'

Comment #61836 by Richard Morgan on August 7, 2007 at 4:53 am

I would expect to see the pharmaceutical + homeopathic consultation group do better, whether or not they also receive a homeopathic remedy. But I strongly suspect that these groups will also do significantly better than the comparable groups with no homeopathic consultation.
If that is the result, it will have profound implications for the way we practice medicine. And perhaps that helps to explain the reluctance to do it.

Good reasoning for an elephant (Hungarian or Welsh or whatever) but stupid silliness from a supposedly reasonable human being.

Because there is anecdotal evidence as well as good reason to suppose that the extended consultation brings its own benefits.

Yeah, well, RD already said that, and I already commented on that aspect of the problem.

(Where are you in my hour of need, Veronique, some of these guys are almost causing me to lose my legendary sang froid???)

927. The Gullible Age: Review of 'The Enemies of Reason'

Comment #61482 by Richard Morgan on August 5, 2007 at 10:26 am

discipline:

We secularists need to pick our battles and this new direction just dilutes our efforts.

Dilutes? Or strengthens?

Dilution is usually the result of a futile dispersion of efforts. This is clearly NOT the case here!
New Age lies and illusions harm people, millions of people.Not as dramatically as planes crashing into multi-storey buildings in New York, of course. Not with the same tele-visual psychosis of a divinely-guided state leader, granted. But anything that gets in the way of reason, in any kind of undertaking, sooner or later harms people. Kills people. Poisons societies, handicaps generations. And lots of other very unpleasant things.
So Richard's decision to take on New Age quackery is a perfectly logical development of all his previous and present campaigning.

Vive la vérité!

928. The Gullible Age: Review of 'The Enemies of Reason'

Comment #61412 by Richard Morgan on August 5, 2007 at 4:53 am

The fact that homeopathic doctors and patients do claim there is a benefit he puts down to the human body's power to restore itself when given the psychological boost of someone else's concentrated concern and attention: the average half hour to an hour, rather than the typical eight-minute NHS GP consultation.

Yep.
That says it all.
How can I be so sure?
Well, I spent years studying most of the solutions on offer for overcoming all the various difficulties that people experience when faced with the arduous task of "living".
From psycho-analysis to Primal Scream therapy.
From NLP to hypnotic previous-life regression therapy.
From astrology to numerology.
From shamanism to transcendental meditation.
I've met clairvoyants, spiritual healers, channellers, Reiki-ers and exorcists.
I've looked into evangelical Christianity and Ananda Marga.
I've been exposed to the healing power of crystals, trees, purgatives and positive thinking.
And guess what? They ALL work. To a certain degree. They all have their miracle success stories.
And many years ago I realised that they all have one thing in common :

the human body's power to restore itself when given the psychological boost of someone else's concentrated concern.

"All you need is love!!!"
I'm looking forward to RD's programmes, but I'm not very optimistic about their overall impact on human gullibility.
Let me end with a sad little anecdote.
Way back, when I was still living in the UK, I had a friend who eked out a humble living as a free-lance journalist, selling mainly to those bastions of the British intelligentsia such as The News of the World, The People and , occasionally the Manchester Evening News. He specialised in "exposing" frauds in all sorts of areas - health, religion, pyramid sales etc.
One time he exposed a con-artist who was selling a miracle cure for baldness. Very expensive bottles of magic lotion which contained nothing but perfumed water. So, the scam as exposed. And that was the end of the story.
Well, not quite. A few weeks later my friend was contacted by the would-be saviour of the world's baldies : "Do you think you could expose me again, please? Business has never been better!"
When I was thirteen, a "medium" gave me a message from my grand father on "the other side of the veil". A very touching message. More so, since at the time all four of my grandparents were alive and well.
The medium was still in business twenty years later.
I must give him credit for one thing, though : today I am sixty-one, and yes, my grandparents are dead. Or on the other side of the veil.
The poor guy must have misinterpreted a premonition. Oh well, happens all the time…

929. The Out Campaign

Comment #59828 by Richard Morgan on July 30, 2007 at 6:57 pm

I live in France, where declaring one's atheism doesn't interest anyone. Being opposed to the right to go on strike certainly attracts a lot of hostile reactions, but "not believing" something is just a non-subject for most (if not all) French people.
So, having announced that bit of good luck, like others, I would really like to know how I could help my trans-atlantic friends for whom being an overt atheist causes so many frightful problems. I'd really like to help and encourager y'all - but how?

Send me a personal message if you want, and let's chat about it.

930. Don't eat at the Outback Steakhouse on Route 3...

Comment #59567 by Richard Morgan on July 29, 2007 at 4:55 pm

Alovrin said:

I thought Richard Morgan was having a go at humour, rather badly. But is he serious? He's joking right? He can't be serious.

You're absolutely right - I was having a go at humour, not rather badly, but very badly. Sorry about that.

I used to be a card-carrying born-again believer. I've been a happy atheist now for around ten years. But THEY really do tend to reason in the way I (badly) tried to parody. Which is to say, they don't reason at all.Often it makes me very cross. Sometimes it saddens me. But usually, these days, I've come to the point of, like, "What the hell, there's nothing new, they weren't listening before, they're not listening now, perhaps they never will."

931. Why I Believe Anti-Evangelism Is Wrong

Comment #58178 by Richard Morgan on July 23, 2007 at 9:57 pm

How ever did this article find its way into this forum? Its utter silliness does not merit any sort of attention or comment.
(Before moving on, may I just offer my heart-felt sympathy to anyone unfortunate enough to have to live with this guy. Must be pure hell at the breakfast table!)
Can someone tell me why so many apparently intelligent people (well, intelligent enough to participate in this discussion) feel the need to respond to such bull-shit?
In writing this comment, I'm not expressing my concern over Tyrone's tantrums, but rather the fact that we are giving him the attention he is clearly seeking.
So here's my question to my fellow commentators : Why have you taken the time and trouble to sink to this guy's level by trying to reply to him?
There are so many other interesting, informed, refreshing, stimulating and thought-provoking articles elsewhere that are really worth a good discussion, it's a little sad to see people wasting their time on this one.

"I don't know what cognitive dissonance is, but trying to think about it makes me feel uneasy."

PS The best comment is certainly pewkatchoo's :

What a git!

And even that is a little over-verbose.

932. Atheists: stand up and be counted

Comment #50534 by Richard Morgan on June 18, 2007 at 3:51 pm

MIRI:
Many years ago, during my personal Dark Ages when I was a mormon, there was considerable concern in the church at a certain time with the problems of reverence (or lack of) during the service. Usually harassed mothers unable to control masses of lively toddlers who saw no interest in being reverently silent.
People in charge were reluctant to adress the problem openly for fear ofoffending the noise-makers.
Then the directive came down from on high : "Don't worry about offending those who are irreverent during the service, because they have already offended everybody else by their lack of reverence."
In other words : "Go get the noisy sods!"
Yeah. Why not?
I mean, we don't actually slit the throats of theists do we?
Do we?
Well, I don't.
Also, it's important to be precise in our use of language : we can't offend "beliefs", we can only offend people. There's an important difference.

933. I Don't Believe in Atheists

Comment #44581 by Richard Morgan on May 25, 2007 at 5:03 am

I love music. It is almost vitally important to me.

Music is:

The art of arranging sounds in time so as to produce a continuous, unified, and evocative composition, as through melody, harmony, rhythm, and timbre.

Music is:

Vocal or instrumental sounds possessing a degree of melody, harmony, or rhythm.

Music is:

An aesthetically pleasing or harmonious sound or combination of sounds.

Music is:

an artistic form of auditory communication incorporating instrumental or vocal tones in a structured and continuous manner.

Music is:

My reason for living when all else seems so black and bleak.

Friedrich Nietzsche:

Without music, life would be a mistake.

Shakespeare:

Twelfth Night, I:1
If music be the food of love, play on.

Aldous Huxley:

After silence that which comes nearest to expressing the inexpressible is music.

Plato:

Music is the movement of sound to reach the soul for the education of its virtue.

And music IS so much more.
I can affirm all that quite happily without evoking the mystery of the Trinity, whilst accepting the notion that "music" is a human concept, and WITHOUT feeling that I am shitting on the rules of logic or mis-using the English language (which I do elsewhere, Veronique)
Yes, for me too, Hedges' piece was a breath of fresh air.
I'm still an atheist , but frankly I'd prefer to live in a universe peopled by Hedges and his likes rather than the cranky, nasty-minded, self-important nitwits that pass their time in these columns.
I'm not addressing that remark to everyone, but so often, after having read the comments here, I need to go and play a Chopin Nocturne or a Mozart Sonata in order to bring back a feeling of light (mixed metaphors? What the heck...) into my heart/soul/neurones.

934. The Conversion of the Casual Evolutionist - You can't spell love without evolve

Comment #44265 by Richard Morgan on May 24, 2007 at 12:23 am

Many years ago, when I was a trainee neurotic, I had a good friend who was a psychotherapist.
One day, we were kicking a football around on his lawn, and when he had scored his umpteenth goal against me, I justified my vulnerability by saying, "It's easy to score againt me, as a hopeless neurotic my defence systems aren't working properly."
He came over to where I was lying on the grass, sobbing gently into the ground,and he playfully kicked me in the face and walked on my testicles, and came out with this memorable sentence (memorable because I can remember it, dummy!): " For fuck's sake, Richard, it isn't always therapy! Sometimes it's just fucking life!"

Yeah!
Now, thirty years later, I am a fully qualified, card-carrying neurotic but I can still say: "For fuck's sake, it isn't always evolution! Sometimes it's just fucking life!"

Reductionism is great for the Borneo head-shrinkers and Weight-watchers. But you can be sure that Richard Dawkins doesn't go around spotting evolution in every shop window, in every roll of fair-trade recycled toilet paper, or in the Hitch-hiker's Guide to Creatonist Stupidity.

Most of the time it's just life, chum.
Linda realised that before you did.
Because she was genetically programmed to do so.





errr...




Oh, shit.....

935. Would the World Be Safer Without Religion?

Comment #43538 by Richard Morgan on May 22, 2007 at 12:42 am

The other day while on the stair,
I met a man who wasn't there;
He wasn't there again today!
Oh, how I wish he'd go away!

Personal message to The Wee Flea : Do you want me to send on your copy of Dale Carnegie's -How to Win Friends and Influence people? And can I give your curling tongs to the WVS now? They're getting a bit rusty.


Talking about Winston Churchill, his remark about grammar rules was, in fact, (concerning prepositions) : "This is a rule up with which I will not put."

lol!

936. Would the World Be Safer Without Religion?

Comment #43486 by Richard Morgan on May 21, 2007 at 5:41 pm

Help me! Somebody, anybody, (though Veronique would be a good choice) help me! This is almost driving me crazy!
Why does reading theist arguments and worse, theist replies, remind me of my ex-wife? Unless, of course, "The Wee Flea" is in fact my ex-wife. Yes, that must be it. She's getting back at me through the columns of a debate. I recognise her style.

She : Why haven't you hung out the washing to dry?

Me : Well, the washing machine hasn't stopped yet.

She : I know it hasn't stopped. It's got at least another fifteen minutes to go. Do you think I don't know that? Are you implying that I'm stupid?

Me : But you asked me why I hadn't hung out the washing yet, and I was just explaining...

She : You're always "just explaining". I'm fed up with your explanations. Just answer the question : are you implying that I'm stupid?

Me : Well, I thought you wanted to know why I hadn't hung the....

She : There you go again, changing the subject. If you were a real man.....

Me : ......Yeah, I know. I'd have wrenched the door off the machine while it was spin drying, risking life and limb in order to hang out the washing....

She : You sarcastic bastard, I don't know why I have to put up with all that.



And I see The Wee Flea warming up to use the same basic approach:
I said: Religion has largely fiizzled out in Europe... (nb - "largely)

The Wee Flea replies :Firstly religion has not fizzled out in Europe ...

Now if I tried to remind him/her : "I didn't say it had completely fizzled out, don't misquote me!"
he/she would come back with "So you admit that it hasn't in fact fizzled out."
and that could go on for a very long time.
So, in the event of my having correctly identified The Wee Flea, let me just say to her: " I told you so! You stopped your psycho-analysis too soon."




I don't want to sound unfair, but why is it that it is nearly always (I said "nearly" - I hope you noticed that, TWF!) theists who play silly, smart-ass word games. Somehow, it's rather sad....

937. Would the World Be Safer Without Religion?

Comment #43296 by Richard Morgan on May 21, 2007 at 4:32 am

To find more stupid articles than this, you'd have to turn to Creationist science books.
Other commentators have picked up on most of the rubbish written here, but what about:

Europeans seem to be aware of the bloodshed that faith has cost in the past--...--and to be saying, "To hell with it."

Wrong. Crassly wrong. Religion has largely fizzled out in Europe because it has been replaced by reason. Gregg Easterbrook may know the word "Enlightenment".
But there's more:

Would the world be better off if religion disappeared?
Some people would say yes, and since it's impossible to conduct this experiment, as faith is definitely not going away, we can't be sure.

So he quotes a part of the world where faith is rapidly disappearing, and we find that Europe has been relatively peaceful since World war II. So why talk about "impossible experiments"?
(I live in "faithless France" - the country that refused to murder Iraqi women and children to protect American oil-interests. Why am I not ashamed?)

Also, I want to make a point here that I've been wanting to make for a long time. Obviously, with or without religion(s) people would have problems with living together on this poor ol' planet of ours. But I would like to imagine that whatever the cause for ignorance and violence, rape and genocide, there would be the equivalent of a Sam Harris, a Richard Dawkins or even a Christopher Hitchens to rise up against, to noisily protest and denounce it. WHATEVER the cause.
I am quite sure that if ever atheism were used as an excuse to slaughter people, Richard Dawkins would protest just as vociferously, if not more so, because he happens to be a reasonable man, and would never tolerate so-called "reason" being used in this way.
It's been said before, but I'll say it again : at least ignoramus writers like Gregg Easterbrook are, unwittingly, doing a good job preparing the ground for reason.

938. How dare you call me a fundamentalist

Comment #40756 by Richard Morgan on May 14, 2007 at 10:45 pm

There was 9/11. And then there was Iraq - still is, in fact.

I see real fundamentalists enagaged in mutual destruction. Because they must - according to their fundamentally opposed beliefs.

If, one day, scientists start killing each other because they disagree about what (if anything) happened before the Big Bang, then I will start to worry about "fundamentalist scientists or "evangelical rationalists."

The other day, one of my children bonked another one on the head with my copy of TGD which was lying handy. So, yes, I have seen Dawkins used in a violent way.
I suspect this was an isolated incident....

Apparently, according to psycho-analysts, a person's choice of pseudo can be quite revealing. Don't you agree, "The Wee Flea"?

939. French Muslim women opt for hymen surgical cons

Comment #40227 by Richard Morgan on May 13, 2007 at 11:24 pm

Russell Blackford:

Give me a sexually experienced woman who knows what she's doing any day.

Give you.....?
Err...OK.
Where do you want her delivered?

940. French Muslim women opt for hymen surgical cons

Comment #39837 by Richard Morgan on May 12, 2007 at 4:40 am

Oh dear. Oh deary me.
Haven't any of you guys read Richard Dawkins' other books? Like his stuff on that much ignored subject - "evolution"?
Now, I'm not an expert, but I can see the evolutionary "advantages" for a species where the male is attracted to (apparently) healthy young females, probably capable of being inseminated, giving birth to, and suckling those "enveloppes charnelles" that will have the responsability of being home to his genes.
Also nature is full of ingenious examples where the male has "discovered" methods for preventing "his" female being inseminated by other males. And I would have thought that insisting on virginity is just another of those evolutionary tricks.
Non?
Talking about Cosmopolitan on a Richard Dawkins site is rather missing the point. Or perhaps not - from somebody for whom being "invisible" is a happy state.

941. French Muslim women opt for hymen surgical cons

Comment #39797 by Richard Morgan on May 12, 2007 at 12:50 am

Apparently some western women also resort to surgery to give people (men?) the impression that they have large breasts.And others have the skin on their faces stretched to con people into believing that they are younger than their real age.
Hymens, breasts, buttocks, tummies, noses, eye-lids.....are all these surgical manipulations the result of monotheistic religions?
Don't laugh - perhaps they are, somewhere along the line.
But evolutionary forces are also at work there. Think about it.

942. Atheist offers to send letters post-Rapture

Comment #39078 by Richard Morgan on May 10, 2007 at 12:16 am

My wife has just started learning English, and knows very little about Christian end-times fairy-tales, so when I told her about "post-Rapture" whatever she said that after having experienced "rapture" all she wanted to do was have a cuddle and go to sleep, and she most certainly didn't want to start receiving letters from the more frustrated members of her family.

I guess I'm going to have to work on that one...

943. Richard Dawkins in the Time 100

Comment #37503 by Richard Morgan on May 4, 2007 at 4:38 pm

Interesting bit of hypocrisy here -this article is Behe being......well, lukewarm!

And ID is a way for seething fundamentalists to appear...well, lukewarm.

Check out your Bible (on-line) to see what Jesus intends to do with the "lukewarm".

You don't want to waste your time? OK - here it is: the lukewarm will be spewed out of his mouth.
(Rev. 3:15-16).

So I guess the Westboro Baptist Church and Richard Dawkins are safe from ending up in the divine vomitorium.

In fact, there is only one criterion for usefully judging Behe's article: will it make more people by TGD? If so, Behe can be as delusional as he wants, I'll just thank him warmly, then stand back quickly in order not to get caught up in apocalyptic disgestive tube problems.

944. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #36706 by Richard Morgan on May 2, 2007 at 3:57 am

How sad and senseless all of this.

945. 'The Day They Kicked God out of the Schools' & Rebuttal

Comment #34344 by Richard Morgan on April 23, 2007 at 8:36 pm

(1) Would anyone happen to have a contact address or phone number for the « they » in the title of the first clip? Because if "they" can do that, I'd be open to them giving me some practical suggestions for kicking God out of a few other places.

(2) My heart goes out to all those suffering inconsolable loss as a result of the V.T. shooting.





(1) and (2) are not related in any way.

946. Answers To the Atheists

Comment #30398 by Richard Morgan on April 8, 2007 at 1:57 am

Have you noticed that it's always cherry-pickin' time in Theistland?

As for me...

Each to his own, huh?
Reminds me of a question I asked during my first months in France in 1984, when I was curious about everything.

"How many political parties are there in France?"

The guy added a drop of water to his Ricard, stirred it with his finger, which he then licked with gallic relish, looked me in the eye, winked, and said: "How many political parties in France? At least 50 million, mon ami. Santé!"

So, guys, let's just let them continue dividing their own house.

"As for me and my house..." Hang on!
Haven't I heard that before somewhere?
Darn it!

947. Is this another Sokal Hoax?

Comment #28989 by Richard Morgan on April 1, 2007 at 4:50 am

Shall I fetch your coat?

948. John Paul Sainthood Nun 'Gentle, Simple'

Comment #28575 by Richard Morgan on March 29, 2007 at 11:28 pm

What on earth is the point of publishing this kind of "news" here, of all places? This is just "Business as usual" for the Catholic Church.
I'd be more interested in reading about some atheist miracles.
Here's one to set the ball rolling:
In 2001, after having devoutly NOT prayed for several years, I was miraculously NOT in the vicinity of the AZF factory in Toulouse when it exploded. According to initial studies (though this needs to be verified) a large number of other people (atheists all) were not there either.
Duh.....

949. Atheist banned from committee on religious education

Comment #27948 by Richard Morgan on March 27, 2007 at 11:28 am

JUSTME - Thank you for your remarks which have taught me a lot.

This question of concealing identities could become even more important for us if we decide to take Priapus's advice:

Perhaps it is time to adopt a more dexterous and Machiavellian approach to these matters.

I had thought about trying to get admitted on religious policy-deciding committees as a sort of "infiltrating the enemy" strategy.

Immoral? Apparently not because my Bible tells me that I may need to be "as wily as a fox".
Oh shit, I've given the game away. I confess, I'm a fundie triple agent. But I do truly believe that I don't believe in....
Who's banging on the toilet door?
I'll be out in a minute.
Anybody fancy going out for a pint?

950. Peanut Butter, The Atheist's Nightmare!

Comment #27885 by Richard Morgan on March 27, 2007 at 5:54 am

As a one-time "believer" I was sad to be wrenched away from the comforting promises of religion by the cold hard truth of reality.
But the following year, for my tenth birthday my parents gave me a microscope with a "Discovery Kit", and I've never looked back.
But think how much easier it is to relinquish beliefs that tell you to look for proofs in a jar of (man-made) peanut butter! These guys are making atheism easier, not more difficult!

I've heard some of you describing this kind of film presentation as "shooting oneself in the foot".
As a football fan, I prefer to call them "own goals". Does everybody, both sides of the Atlantic, understand that?
I have invited the whole family, grandchildren included, to watch the Chuck Missler number.
You guys don't know how lucky you are - we only had Rowan'n'Martin, Benny Hill and Charlie Drake. With all these fundies around, you need never have a dull evening again!