51. Opiate of the masses - and evolutionary aid

Comment #260278 by AfraidToDie on October 5, 2008 at 5:03 am

21. Comment #260152 by ImagineAZ Another theory: it was all about power.

I believe this posts "nails it"! I believe religion evolved because it gave an otherwise weak tribal member a share of the power he might not gain otherwise. The "medicine man", the tribesman who could somehow communicate with the supernatural, could gain some power within the tribe that they could not gain from strength alone. They tailored it into a cooperative sharing of power with the chieftains, and over the centuries this ability to connive and perpetuate lies has evolved into the current power sharing religions of today.

52. 'Space elevator' would take humans into orbit

Comment #259743 by AfraidToDie on October 3, 2008 at 8:16 pm

Who's lifetime? I doubt mine! Regardless, they've been talking about it for quite some time. Check out this article in Scientific American back in 2000:

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=going-up

First, they would need to build a base tower approximately 50 kilometers tall, out of the wind for stability and near the equator for alignment with the geostationary Earth orbit (GEO). The elevator itself would be a long cable tethered to the base tower such that its center of mass was at GEO, some 35,786 kilometers above Earth's surface. Four to six tracks would run up the outside of the tower and cable, carrying electromagnetic vehicles at speeds reaching thousands of kilometers per hour to platforms at various levels. The illustration shows the view from one such platform, looking back towards Earth..... scientists at the workshop estimated the elevator to cost about $1.50 to GEO, compared with the space shuttle's $22,000

53. It Takes Just One Village to Save a Species

Comment #253829 by AfraidToDie on September 25, 2008 at 12:32 am

We are the only species who have the intelligence to recognize we can overpopulate our planet and eventually overrun and destroy our forests and wild animal life. Yet we continue with individual nations having the economic philosophy that we can only prosper by continually increasing our gross national product (consumption). Has there been any really serious national effort by any country to support zero population growth before it is too late?

54. It's Time for Science and Reason

Comment #250618 by AfraidToDie on September 20, 2008 at 2:22 am

If you think about it, all children are secular humanists until they are brainwashed. Even so, I agree that we shouldn't put labels on children of any kind.

I wish an organization like this could put together a nationally syndicated Sunday morning show intended to promote secular humanists. The format might be hard to agree on, but just having an alternative broadcast in the same time slots that you have scores of religious shows would be wonderful, and perhaps go a long way to show those "on the fence" there are many others who don't accept all that religious crap they are bombarded with.

55. YouTube Removes Viral Video on Palin's Churches For Inappropriate Content

Comment #248708 by AfraidToDie on September 16, 2008 at 5:01 pm

67. Comment #248416 by rejohnsonil: take this video with a grain of salt. we should have a lot of questions about it. are all those nuts really from the same church? has palin done the whole insane "speaking in tongues" crap? or...is she just a shrewd politician that, while believing in religious nonsense, isn't ridiculously extreme. that said, she's still not going to get my vote.

69. Comment #248423 by Gregg Townsend: Ah, a skeptical voice of reason. Thank you rejohnsonil! In my mind there are many reasons to not vote for McCain or Obama... and certainly Palin's relationship with Pentecostalism should be a weight around McCain's neck but is hardly the worst of it

Yes indeed, voices of reason. It is so easy to get so wrapped up in fear because all your emotions and reasons tell you McCain / Palin might very well win. Maybe it's just my own adjustment mechanisms "kicking in" for now, but what if McCain wins. Odds are, he'll make it four years, although even a less than fifty percent chance that he won't is scary. What if he croaks and Palin takes over (Allah forbid)? Maybe it will be for only 1 or 2 years. Regardless, we really do have some very good "checks and balances", and odds are great the Dems will hold the legislative branch.

One thing I've learned over the many trips around the sun is that things often get worse before they get better. I had hoped that the Bush doctrine would be the end of that pendulum swing, but maybe it has to swing a bit more (4 more years, oh, I'm feeling bad again). Meanwhile, the Brits, Aussies, and French (and many others) can help balance out to a sane world while we suffer through this terrible learning period. We've been there for you; it's your turn!

Why I think McCain will win: a) first, the vast majority of the rich will vote R and they'll ALL show up, b) we have a lot of people that don't believe in any taxes at all, and don't buy into letting the rich pay more of the burden (they equate it to socialism and call it redistribution of wealth), c) religious rightwing nuts �quot; I don't have to mention there's shitload of'm, d) there's a lot of anti-gay marriage people who care about no other issue (same as anti-abortion), e) pent-up racism that still exists even though we've come a long way, and f) idealists who really believe either not voting or voting for an independent such as Nader is "the right" thing to do.

I think in Freudian psychology it is called "sweet lemon", and that's the only way I can stay calm about this. I keep reminding myself that McCain will be the President, not Palin, and although I am diametrically opposed to "trickle down" economics, he has shown some ethical behavior and would be much better than Bush. I think he'll be more centrist if he becomes President, but that won't happen with my vote. Now, everyone take a deep breath and calm down and quit making me so damn nervous…please.

56. Sharia courts operating in Britain

Comment #247940 by AfraidToDie on September 15, 2008 at 10:01 am

47. Comment #247686 by aznxscorpion517

Did everyone else miss this post (avatar) or am I the only male sexist pig that can't keep my mind off of it (show us more). I think McCain ought to change Palin for aznxscorpion517 for even more votes! :-) ok, just kidding (mostly)

Back on subject.. We do need good lawyers to get us some answers here. I thought we (USA) have laws in place that nobody can make laws that conflict with our governing laws. Just making them should bring prosecution down on them without waiting for them to try and use them. Take an extreme case where they imposed "their" law of a death sentence. Should they be allowed to carry it out before we can prosecute, or wait for someone else to bring them to court. I think not. I think we have laws in place to go after them. But, I'm waiting to hear from someone familiar with relavant national laws. And Al, the only thing wrong with your analogy of the bar room was that you should have punched the guy after his first comment, because you knew you were going to have to do it eventually. I think there's a current advertisement (Royal Bank of Scotland?) running here that shows the guy in the quicksand and one guy wants to form a committee, etc., while the RBS guy takes action before it is too late. I say push your legislators (prosecutors) to take action now, as there should be no way Sharia law could be allowed to supercede British law.

57. Pope condemns 'pagan' love of money, power

Comment #247651 by AfraidToDie on September 14, 2008 at 5:54 pm

Benedict blasted modern society's thirst for these new "pagan" idols as a "scandal, a real plague." ….. The late-morning Mass ended peacefully, with followers pressing for a chance to touch the pontiff's robes or clutch his hand as he left the field

Seems to me that desiring to touch the pope's robe is an act of pagan idol.

58. Robert Winston criticises dangerous 'science delusion'

Comment #247531 by AfraidToDie on September 14, 2008 at 2:37 pm

: 39. Comment #247483 by Dhamma: Anyway, I'm not positive he's used the best method, and I fear some MAY have been more alienated from science due to him, BUT it could've happened anyway.

Dhamma, I liked you better with your (avatar) hat on. You made more sense as a party animal. :-) I think most of us believe RD to be meek and mild (at least compared to Hitch), and presents a very logical, softspoken approach, faced with answering the same questions over and over by so many irrational (often ignorant) people. By the way, what the hell happened to Hitch? I miss seeing him destroy creationists!

59. Our scientists must nail the creationists

Comment #247526 by AfraidToDie on September 14, 2008 at 2:22 pm

: 47. Comment #247208 by Ian H Spedding FCD: All Reiss was proposing was that science teachers practice what science preaches and I would have expected those scientists who have criticized him to have discovered that...
… If a student raises a question about the theory of evolution - or any other aspect of science - it should be answered as honestly and as openly as possible. They should also be told that if they submit for discussion a religious claim about the world, it will be evaluated by science in the same way as any other, which is on the basis of evidence and argument. Religious claims have no special privilege in science.

Responding and discussion is fine, if brought up by the student. As would discussion of Thor if a student brings up mythology. However, it has no merit as part of the curriculum…. NONE! If brought up by the student, it is merely a distraction from the facts, but an opportunity to discuss scientific methodology versus "god did it".

41. Comment #247189 by thewhitepearl: it is also possible to hold dissatisfaction in both parties. You seem to imply that one has to be either or. That is all.

It is quite obvious that it is possible to hold dissatisfaction with both parties. I do, and believe all have plusses and minuses that make us lean one way or another. I don't think I was "implying one has to be either or", just that some factors may have so much more relevance than others that they often are the determining factor.

66. Comment #247338 by s.k.graham: re #50. The "wasted vote" argument against voting independent or 3rd party is an oft repeated fallacy. How you vote sends a message to politicians

Not voting sends a message as well. It's called apathy. Are you making the case that voting 3rd party is an idealistic way to be pragmatic (the message)? Sorry, I believe the facts are in, and statistics have shown that without Nader, Forida would have been won by Gore, who would have been President instead of Bush. Your message was heard just as loud and clear as all those who didn't vote. Please don't do that this time?

60. Our scientists must nail the creationists

Comment #247170 by AfraidToDie on September 14, 2008 at 4:35 am

32. Comment #247143 by thewhitepearl: The comment you made is a wee bit ridiculous

Which part or all of it? I am genuinely curious as to why, but if you are speaking for Robo, maybe you can explain?

61. Our scientists must nail the creationists

Comment #247127 by AfraidToDie on September 14, 2008 at 2:31 am

2. Comment #247052 by robotaholic: the last few articles put up on this website have taken jabbs at Palin and McCain...ha ha, If they win, ha ha is all I have to say- she may believe in jebus but at least she doesn't THINK she's jebus ha ha

What happened to you robo, or is your strong right lean just recently showing itself? I've noticed what I think is some Palin protectionism in your latest posts. Is that because you like McCain so much, or is there some other reason you are a McCain supporter (or is it Palin)? I'm especially intrigued by anyone gay who supports current Republican administrations and sympathizers, and what reasons they could possibly have for such a conservative group? I have a few gay friends that all are very liberal, and given the crap they've had to put up with Republican views on that issue alone, I just can't see what the connection you have with them? Do you have a relative high up in the Republican party, or other connection than just being conservative?

62. Christian Couple Staying Together For Sake Of God

Comment #246679 by AfraidToDie on September 12, 2008 at 7:24 pm

19. Comment #246638 by Aidan86: So the rational thing to do is to get a divorce when you are going through a rough patch? I think one of the biggest dangers we face when we get rid of religion is that of throwing the baby out with the bathwater and not taking things like marriage seriously.

Aidan86, I knew the article from the onion was satire, but if yours is satire, you've fooled me. If you are a "fundie", then I understand why you don't understand even after all the posts in front of yours talks about it. It also makes helps me understand why the theists who play around here keep on making ridiculous statements and rarely attempt to answer specific questions â€" because they don't read what others have written!

63. Sleek Probe To Map Earth's Gravity

Comment #245495 by AfraidToDie on September 11, 2008 at 1:11 am

"GOCE will yield details of the Earth's gravity field to an accuracy and resolution that is simply unobtainable by existing terrestrial and space techniques," says Professor Philip Moore from Newcastle University, who specialises in gravity research

Haven't they heard of the Farmer's Almanac? Between that and the bible, no other reference is needed.

Laurie, Al's making you look cool!

64. 'Big Bang' experiment starts well

Comment #245445 by AfraidToDie on September 10, 2008 at 7:27 pm

35. Comment #245430 by Aquambulus hirsutus on September 10, 2008 at 6:19 pm http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=350097273277 (in case anyone here hasn't seen it yet)

That's some funny shtuff! "Smaller than Sara Palin's foreign policy experience". Thanks for the link.

65. 'Big Bang' experiment starts well

Comment #245422 by AfraidToDie on September 10, 2008 at 5:06 pm

4. Comment #245259 by clodhopper: Blimey...I hope he's wearing long johns when e materializes.

If he's wearing long johns, I bet he's also wearing a hat like Dhamma's? I left a snide remark about Dhamma's avatar reminding me of "Blue" in Old School, but it was at the end of a thread that was about dead, so I doubt he saw it. Blue, I mean Dhamma, I would like to know if that lid you wear is cultural, or if it is just something you wear to parties? And please, I am joking with you in a friendly way as I always enjoy your thoughtful and intelligent responses.

9. Comment #245300 by Stafford Gordon: Tragically a young girl committed suicide because she believed the world would come to an end due to the experiment; I wonder where she got that idea from. .

Perhaps she'll qualify for a Darwin Award? The tragedy is the ignorance. If it wasn't the fear of being swallowed by a man made black hole, it could have just as easily been the Heaven's Gate group convincing her that Hale Bop has a spaceship following it they could board if they shed their earthly bodies.

66. Opening minds

Comment #243534 by AfraidToDie on September 6, 2008 at 5:38 am

23. Comment #242912 by Dhamma: Edited for some badly chosen words, and grammar. Again.. Maybe I should get some sleep instead. Or learn English

Dhamma, I've always been fascinated with that brain cover. Is it a regional thing, or just what you party in? If you party in that hat, I bet they call you "Blue". Old guys rule!

67. Origins - The BIG Questions: 2008 Skeptics Society Conference

Comment #243521 by AfraidToDie on September 6, 2008 at 5:02 am

Don't you think it does more to promote our cause to get our point of view out to theists, than for theists to get their point of view out to atheists? I doubt there is one atheist converted to theism, but having the chance to promote rational thinking to some theists who may have doubts would be to our benefit. Theists rarely open rational thinking to their flocks for good reason. We need to sponsor a Rational Thinker's TV program on Sunday mornings on local stations everywhere in the US and continually play debates and lectures from RD and others just to let it be known that there is another logical, rational way to look at things. As it stands, theists and their flocks wallow in isolation from the truth.

68. 'Rare' mammoth skull discovered

Comment #242442 by AfraidToDie on September 3, 2008 at 5:30 pm

31. Comment #241614 by Broshiesq on September 2, 2008 at 9:58 pm Um, yeah Andrew, I'm glad you said that, cause I was beginning to think it was just me, and that maybe I shouldn't have had that last hit.

Sorry I made you think you took one too many "hits". Maybe it looks more like me taking too many? Anyway, just trying to equate IDers saying there are not enough transitional fossils to a simple series of numbers that have a few missing. I should have used a much simpler series like 2, 4, 6, 10, 12, 16. The missing transitional fossils in this analogy are 8 and 14. My analogy is that we don't have to actually have the missing numbers to be able to accurately deduce the series. We don't have to have all the missing fossils (we have enough) to know that evolution is a fact. However, the more we find just continues to verify what we already know to be fact.

69. 'Rare' mammoth skull discovered

Comment #241602 by AfraidToDie on September 2, 2008 at 6:55 pm

However, Dick Mol takes a different view

In science it is healthy to have an alternate view, and let everyone try a hand at proving or disproving them. Perhaps with the two scientific views we should be required to entertain others, such as intelligent design? For those of you who have had problems perceiving sarcasm in other posts, please note this is sarcasm.

Every time I hear there is another transitional fossil discovered, I keep envisioning a simple series of 1,000 numbers like 1,5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 25, . . . , 3993, 3997. And if those thousand numbers represented all the fossils needed to cover an entire evolutionary branch, just how many have we found so far? If it was like 5, 13, 17, 25, 29, 197, 205, etc., how many more would it take for ID'ers to actually accept the obvious fact that this series can easily be defined as 4n minus 3? Although the trail continues to get colder with time, we have sufficient numbers of fossils already to prove the theorem. As long as there is one missing number, ID'ers will claim our formula to be wrong.

70. Theocratic Sect Prays for Real Armageddon

Comment #241595 by AfraidToDie on September 2, 2008 at 5:55 pm

I know the AFT botched Waco, but I can't help but be glad we have an organization that can investigate and take action where needed. We have government enforcement agencies to do the job the citizens are ill prepared to do on their own (nor should we). I don't know why they can't get him for assault on his bragging about kicking an elderly lady in the face. Nobody had the guts to boo him during that story because he rightfully scares the shit out of them. I wonder how many whackos have enough sense to just not ever come back after hearing that? "You know, Mildred, that guys a little far out for me. Maybe we should stay home from now on" :-)

71. Theocratic Sect Prays for Real Armageddon

Comment #241174 by AfraidToDie on September 2, 2008 at 1:00 am

What a paranoid crowd of followers. First, religion attracts those afraid to die, and afraid to go to hell, and adds a touch of "afraid of this macho tattoo 'kicking women in the face' asshole". It's all about fear. They are afraid NOT to follow him.

72. God Only SEEMS Nonexistent!

Comment #240816 by AfraidToDie on September 1, 2008 at 5:05 am

26. Comment #240638 by Shuggy: Why 3.14926... looks like a pretty irrational number to choose. (and 0.766... more than pi...?)

I give it a .666 out of 2/3! That was fantastic. It so illogically put together a logical case for atheist's obvious irrationality. Maybe as the theist sees this satire about how difficult it is to believe in something that makes no sense, they'll come away with an appreciation as to why atheists don't believe. And then, maybe a little light will come on in their poor little indoctrinated heads?

73. McCain's VP Wants Creationism Taught in School

Comment #240229 by AfraidToDie on August 31, 2008 at 5:49 am

129. Comment #240125 by Broshiesq: This is known as the "redistribution" of wealth, which is a euphemism for "take my shit and give it to the the other guy.

Why is it that right-wingers always insult those who lean left by trying to label them as "socialists"? Perhaps the extreme right would have no tax at all, let the infrastructure go to hell, and let big business use a scorched earth policy to rake in profits no matter the environmental cost? Oh, that's right, we've been going down that path over the last eight years. To have the extreme wealthy taxed at a higher rate than the middle class (or poor) is not even close to socialism or redistribution of wealth. The wealthy will still be wealthy. I'm not for taxing businesses for redistribution, but for playing a stronger role in funding the services we need to maintain our infrastructure and to give a helping hand to those who need it. That helping hand is what the right calls "welfare", and all they see are the cases where people are taking advantage of it. Big government is less efficient than even big business, but the cure is to continually work toward fixing it (granted, a never ending battle), not to throw the baby out with the bath water.

137. Comment #240154 by Mitchell Gilks: I think that, at least for this election, it is of paramount importance that all secularist americans (I'm not american, so I don't get a vote) vote democrat. You cannot afford to risk having the supreme court judge that is in his later eighties die or retire with a republican president in power, and have and have another right wing conservative christian in the supreme court. Giving them a 5/4 majority. If this happens then it is going to be damn hard, if not impossible to continue to keep religion out of schools, and secular life.

For secular atheists, this IS the most important point to be made for this election. Whether McCain is religious or not, he will follow his constituent's desires when appointing the next supreme court justice. He's proven that he's not that much of a maverick.

74. McCain's VP Wants Creationism Taught in School

Comment #239970 by AfraidToDie on August 30, 2008 at 4:38 pm

With IDiot logic so evident, I can't wait for the debate between her and Biden!

Has anyone ever asked those wanting to "Teach both" for the material they wish to use? I have a funny feeling it will look very much like "Of Pandas and People" and easily expose them as ID'ers. They should NOT be allowed to propose teaching both unless they provide the material they are proposing. Besides "Of Pandas.." and the bible, it would be interesting if they had anything else in mind.

75. A Teacher on the Front Line as Faith and Science Clash

Comment #236484 by AfraidToDie on August 24, 2008 at 5:22 pm

13. Comment #236414 by ingodwerust The poor man - and the poor kids. I don't think this is a purely American problem either. The article i thought was very good but not very encouraging

Believe it or not, this is progress. You are talking Florida here, land of Jeb Bush, hanging chads, Anita Bryant (anybody remember her?). To get evolution taught in the classroom is such a positive (albeit small) step. Maybe when they get to college they'll have a jump start on thinking for themselves. Teach evolution and leave the religious debate for philosophy.

TheAnittheist.. about that avatar. Are you trying to make me doubt my atheism? I can't help myself.. yes, there must be a god!

76. Why Dawkins is right and his critics are wrong

Comment #235523 by AfraidToDie on August 23, 2008 at 7:11 am

This IS the point, and I concur completely. That is why RD's intro proclaiming "It's one reason why I don't believe in God" has no place in the classroom. I am not trying to protect Meadon's sensational comments, nor do I believe RD was trying to promote atheism. If I was a biology teacher, and teaching an intro to evolution to high school students, this series would be at the top of my list to play to them. However, that comment would make it questionable as to whether it could be shown in high school or elementary classes. OK, I'm done mentioning this since I am the only one that thinks it could possibly detract from the otherwise fantastic presentation.

Edit: this is the second time I've tried to correct my post as it was missing the quote I was referring to when I started this comment by "This IS the point…"

282. Comment #235480 by phasmagigas: science teachers ideally would have no mention of religion/creator in a science lesson, why should it? they should simply present the evidence for evolution and if teh question arises that could be something for a discussion with interested kids extra to the lesson.

77. Why Dawkins is right and his critics are wrong

Comment #235335 by AfraidToDie on August 22, 2008 at 7:48 pm

I have some theist friends who really don't trust the idea of evolution, probably because their religion has indoctrinated them. And, since our schools in the US haven't been required to teach it for many years, they really don't know enough about it to think critically about the rubbish the church is feeding them. I have enjoyed sending them links to several of RD's lectures on evolution, knowing it was a great introductory. But with his early comment of "It's one reason why I don't believe in God", I don't feel like sending them the link as they'll think there might be a hidden agenda I'm promoting besides promoting knowledge about evolution (I guess that would be true). So be it. It was a great piece of work and I enjoyed it. RD even said he wouldn't make a good witness for the trials involving the teaching of ID, or am I misquoting that as well?

78. Why Dawkins is right and his critics are wrong

Comment #235310 by AfraidToDie on August 22, 2008 at 5:37 pm

I think you are all too quick to throw Meadon under the bus. In the intro, RD says "It's one reason why I don't believe in God". Was that a necessary conclusion he hopes others to come away with? Not necessarily, but I can see how one might infer that as promoting atheism. So it brought the ire of RD and PK who called his conclusion a lie. Wow, my two heros just got a little testy, and calling a fellow atheist a liar might be a little strong. Everybody was sure ready to jump on the bandwagon. Anybody else see this comment as a personal conclusion (albeit mine as well) that should not be part of a class on evolution?

79. Q&A with Richard Dawkins after lecture at UC Berkeley

Comment #234912 by AfraidToDie on August 22, 2008 at 7:31 am

isthatclear: "Child farms
He does not understand with his limited knowledge and perception and conception that how God hears the prayers so he concludes god does not exists"

"limited knowledge"? what knowledge do you personally feel you have that others do not, that supports your belief. Is it just a very strong feeling. Our conclusions that God does not exist are not based merely on the sole fact that he/she/it does not hear (or answer) prayers. That is just one of many pieces to the puzzle that makes it obvious an intervening god does not exist. So, again, what is your special knowledge you have that the rest of us don't? Maybe if you could impart that wisdom on us, we could consider switching sides? Our experience and understanding tells us otherwise.

80. No credit for creationism

Comment #232855 by AfraidToDie on August 18, 2008 at 6:22 pm

5. Comment #232566 by Lucas: The blonde girl was priceless. Did you see the vacant look in her eyes as she said that crap? Kinda like a parrot on GHB. I've got a good guess about her future career, but I'll keep that to myself out of politeness.

But there's a lot of people lined up to help propagate her DNA ! Being blonde and dancing for money doesn't always signify stupidity. Interview most of the students from that school, and you'll probably see much of the same indoctrination. That's what we have to fight. Sounds like "JHJEFFREY" has a great idea and willing to use his law degree to attack. I haven't heard anyone trying to force religious schools to teach evolution, but it sounds like a great approach. With evolution now part of the Florida curriculum, perhaps theist schools will be required to teach it anyway?

81. Richard Dawkins Lecture at UC Berkeley

Comment #231363 by AfraidToDie on August 16, 2008 at 7:21 am

LaurieB - love your avatar...at least the place. Been there too! The view is almost enough to make me a pantheist :-)

82. Richard Dawkins Lecture at UC Berkeley

Comment #231237 by AfraidToDie on August 16, 2008 at 3:41 am

I never tire of reinforcing my consciousness awareness. I'll pass this link on to others who need a jumpstart.

83. Poll: Should the motto 'In God We Trust' be removed from U.S. currency?

Comment #230509 by AfraidToDie on August 14, 2008 at 6:56 pm

Who cares, we'll all be using pesos before much longer anyway. I've gotten so used to thinking of the word God in the same light as the word Nature, that it just doesn't bother me anymore. For me, it is a non issue, and I agree with the post that mentioned focusing on science and promoting reason and don't sweat the small stuff. I made my vote for removing it, and it is now 40 pct for removing it...bigger fish to fry. And Diacanu, before you beat me to the punch... fuck you too

84. Congresswoman Slams Religious Right's Assault on Science's 'Edgier' Side

Comment #226381 by AfraidToDie on August 8, 2008 at 3:07 am

11. Comment #225944 by Border Collie ..
Americans aren't just against, afraid of, resentful of 'science' ... they are afraid of any thought, question, reason

Whoaaa there Collie. Or should we call you "mad dog". You just lumped a whole bunch of thoughtful, questioning, and reasonable people in with an asshole who is about to be out of office soon. It's a cycle we evidently (unfortunately) had to go thru, and the majority didn't even vote for him (granted, enough to be embarrassing). Besides the idiots and right wing nutcases, there are a lot of just plain conservatives that voted for him just because he came to the top of a party they align themselves to. They fucked up, but don't label all of us as "resentful of science". Apologies accepted when you get around to it.

85. Interview with Paula Kirby on 'The Right Hook'

Comment #224920 by AfraidToDie on August 6, 2008 at 2:57 am

Father McVerry: Nice man, does social good, but has lived his whole life following a well orchestrated fairy tale! What can be going through someone's conscious or subconscious that allows them to follow nonsensical teachings over 2,000 years old. But then again, he's placed himself in a position where he gets "looked up to" by those who claim to believe. He can't quit living the lie or his life would no longer have meaning. It is very sad.

86. Evangelically Serious Science

Comment #223850 by AfraidToDie on August 3, 2008 at 2:15 pm

12. Comment #223656 by Aley: Charlie Brooker also wrote a brilliant and typically hilarious review in The Guide yesterday

Thanks for posting the link to this review. This is one of my favorite comments in that review:

"If the Bible had contained a passage that claimed gravity is caused by God pulling objects toward the ground with magic invisible threads, we'd still be debating Newton with idiots too"

87. What's wrong with science as religion

Comment #222845 by AfraidToDie on August 1, 2008 at 1:59 am

Giberson: But I want to believe that, through the eyes of my faith, this is how God created the world and that God cares about that world. Does this belief, shared by so many of our species, make me dangerous?

No, it makes you delusional. I want to believe all people are good. I want to believe I will never die. But, I know the facts are irrefutable and I can "want" all I want, but it won't make it happen. So, I accept the facts, and Giberson doesn't seem to "want" to do that!

76. Comment #222794 by Old Sarum : Fine, but you might have noticed that many other people out there are indeed religious, & would certainly feel impoverished if you took their religious sensibilities away from them.

A few million dillusional people does not make it so! If I could, I'd "take their religios sensibilities away from them" even though the poor souls might feel impoverished.

we just have to accept that different people value different kinds of engagement with the world :)

"We" don't have to accept any such nonsense, especially when you are asking for a new religion. You won't find any followers at this site! And I don't believe for a minute your claim to be an atheist .

88. Richard Dawkins interviewed about 'The Genius of Charles Darwin'

Comment #222697 by AfraidToDie on July 31, 2008 at 6:13 pm

150 years ago, Darwin admitting to being atheist would be like being in Iran today and writing a book about being gay. Do any of us have any doubt that Darwin would have been an outspoken atheist today? I have no doubt whatsoevr.

89. Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Thinking about Morality

Comment #222254 by AfraidToDie on July 31, 2008 at 3:45 am

I'm not trying to say the study has no value, just pointing out what I think are pertinent factors. First, we are "cognitively" puting ourselves in the moral delimma, not the real thing. It is very much like trying to predict how we would react to a home invader when we possess a gun. Many claim they would "blow them away", but if you haven't been in that situation, you really don't know how you would react. There is the "shock value" of real life situations that cannot be simulated very well by cognitive thought choices. I could easily guess that in a real situation, the shock value of having to make such a judgement could let your mind believe that death to all might not really happen, or maybe the baby might not be heard, or other subconscience alternatives, realistic or not. I think they need to study people placed in real life and death situations where their choice of action determined the outcome. Asking people what they think they would do is interesting, but probably not what they might actually do. And yes, just my opinion.

90. Breeding for God

Comment #221533 by AfraidToDie on July 29, 2008 at 6:03 pm

Its Nature vs Nurture, and I don't believe anyone knows which has the stronger influence. There seems to be a correlation between intelligence and secularism, but perhaps that is only in the field of science. I hope it is Nature that dominates, and that education will hold the key to reducing the number of supernaturalists. But, I'm not totally convinced that is the case. I know many very intelligent people who are extremely religious. Perhaps it is only the upper tier of intelligent people where secularism is dominant? Perhaps the true relationship is between those who are extremely logical versus those who are more abstract thinkers? The logical appear to be more skeptical, don't they? But even if that is the case, is logic learned or is it more strongly related to a person's genetic code? Perhaps exposure to many individual's opinions can override demographics, and if so, the Internet may be the turning point to enlightenment? So many questions; so few answers.

91. VOICES OF SCIENCE: PZ Myers - Buy it now on DVD

Comment #218179 by AfraidToDie on July 25, 2008 at 3:15 am

16. Comment #217825 by christianapologetic: ...because maybe this creator (obviously a creator), want to keep a secret.

Wants to keep a secret? Why, is he/she "playing" with us. Santa and the tooth fairy f with us as well. Better be good "cause he's watch'n us"... u don't put that tooth under the pillow and she won't replace it with money. But don't worry, he's keeping the secret really well.

92. France rejects Muslim woman over radical practice of Islam

Comment #209752 by AfraidToDie on July 13, 2008 at 7:11 am

63. Comment #209717 by Matt7895 .. If you want to live in a closed, intolerant, church-driven, male-dominated society that is run by Islamic values, go home.

Right on! The point many appear to be missing is that she is NOT a citizen, and is applying for citizenship. I do not believe she has the right (yet) to do anything subjectively considered anti-France. If I want to move to another country (and there have been many times I have not been proud of my USA's actions), I would expect to act in such a manner to at least appear to be an asset to that country. And vice versa.

I say kick her ass out and check the citizenship of everyone around her, and try and verify if they are really doing these things to this woman. Any doubt, kick their asses out as well. Citizenship should be earned; don't give me all this "rights" crap. Because after you earn it, then you have the right to wear a burka all you want (well, maybe not into a bank?). Until then, Matt7895, I'm with you!

93. The Boundaries of Belief

Comment #205140 by AfraidToDie on July 6, 2008 at 4:37 pm

WTF! Most of u r reading way too much in this. The survey obviously has flaws. They should have been able to weed out the idiots. Or better yet, once it was obvious they didn't understand, it would have been nice to figure out what percent of idiots are atheists vs. what percentage are theists, agnostic, etc. Now that would be interesting!

94. When too much Rapture is barely enough

Comment #204780 by AfraidToDie on July 5, 2008 at 6:26 pm

13. Comment #204600 by MorituriMax: Is this guy insane?

I think everyone is missing a very important part to this guy's video. Did you see one of the tabs for his website was "Donation"? Crazy like a fox, or a Jimmy Swaggart, or an Oral Roberts. At best he's an idiot, at worst he's a con man.

95. PZ Myers - Expelled from Expelled

Comment #201123 by AfraidToDie on June 29, 2008 at 5:16 am

It's all about overlapping conflict. As long as religious people let scientists investigate and educate, then there can be coexistence. When the "born agains" want to argue with science or impede it in any way, then they deservedly bring on "the battle". You can believe in ghosts all you want, and we can coexist and even debate it, but don't interject it in the classroom and push it on the public. Just live your delusional life without impacting others. When you start pushing irrational beliefs, you should expect (and deserve) a battle. RD, Hitch, PZ, and a host of other rationals were inevitable champions that were bound to emerge. It started out as defensive, and has rightfully shifted to an offense. Charge on!

96. Should Strident British Atheist Richard Dawkins Dictate Education Policy to US States? Barbara Forrest Apparently Thinks So

Comment #197194 by AfraidToDie on June 21, 2008 at 10:19 am

I went to the link and sent him the following comment:

"I hope by now that you've heard a lot about what constitutes a scientific theory, and appreciate the many years of research that backs evolution. God did it, is NOT a scientific theory and evolution is the only strong theory of the origin of species that is backed by scientific research. Religion belongs in a philosophy class, not science. Please support our founding fathers and continue to keep church and state separate."

I may not be as eloquent or as educated as many of you, but I hope many of you register your opinion too. You'll have to fill out the "Parish" as well, but the last selection is "Out of state".

97. Divine Impulses: Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #192851 by AfraidToDie on June 14, 2008 at 4:06 am

Without knowing much about Ayaan, other than watching several videos and reading various posts on RDW over that last year or so, it appears her message is one of enlightenment. Being anti-Islam (and atheist) does not alone make her a right wing neo-con, or else we'd all share that label. Her message could not be more clear.

98. A word for nonbelievers

Comment #189784 by AfraidToDie on June 7, 2008 at 9:13 am

Comment #189658 by mordacious1: Free Thought Radio has a nice "Imagine No Religion" billboard that they've designed and is available to anyone who wants to pay for the placement.

What is great about Rade's message is that it is just trying to bring atheists together, or just letting them know they are not alone. That message should not resonate negatively with theists at all; it is not directed to or about them. The "Imagine No Religion", which is just fine, is much more in your face. The approach should be Rade's first, then as you organize, "Imagine" next. Brilliant!

16. Comment #189668 by sb84: What's next? Study groups for The Selfish Gene? I thought atheism was all about making up your own mind. I think this interpretation of atheism is, at its core, religious

The fact that you read and post to this site says that you are not a total loner and appreciate open minded people. That is what the billboard is offering. Even "free thinkers" still like to associate with others. Bringing "free thinkers" together does not make them "non free thinkers".

24. Comment #189686 by clearthinker: "atheists come from many different backgrounds and have many different beliefs so that the only thing that unites you is the lack of belief?"

Wrong! There is a small group of us that associate because we are free (rational) thinkers (aka atheists) that believe our minority group is the most obvious sane group. People who believe in the supernatural (the vast majority) are delusional in varying degrees. We don't band together because of lack of belief, it's because we think rational people are more trustworthy, interesting, and in general, more intelligent and well rounded. After I wrote this, I noticed several posts said it much "better" (especially 189747 SPS).

99. Physicist Claims First Real Demonstration of Cold Fusion

Comment #187791 by AfraidToDie on June 2, 2008 at 4:53 pm

Oh my god, what will Teratornis do if he hears about this. Is there such a thing as Peak Fusion? Sorry Mr T, hope u have a good sense of humor to match your intellect? To "thewhitepearl", my wife just walked in and saw your avatar, and now don't believe me anymore when I say I'm surfing a "clear thinking oasis". I think she saw your phalanges :-)

100. Louisiana's latest creationism bill moves to House floor

Comment #186878 by AfraidToDie on May 31, 2008 at 3:03 pm

I don't think RD is "consumed" by the atheism topic. I've heard entire lectures by him on biology and science without mentioning the supernatural. However, his experiece in biology and evolution now blended with his newly found popularity with the growing number of atheists, is making him very rich. Groups seek him out to discuss the god delusion and buy those books, because of his unique style and expertiece. Yet, he still makes a stong effort to devote time to science. No, he's not consumed; myself and many posters here are consumed with atheism for various reasons. For me, it's a great place for us "cats" to get together often to discuss why we don't like to be part of the herd.