Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)

Comments by walk


51. THE FOUR HORSEMEN - Available Now on DVD!

Comment #110499 by walk on January 11, 2008 at 11:31 am

IMHO, Citizen Hitch is a refreshing blast of fresh air in an overly politically correct world. I love his style and rhetoric. His command of literature, history and politics is astounding. We NEED a scrappy rabble rouser like him on the side of atheism. Sure he rubs some people the wrong way, but after the undue respect shown to faith-heads for so long, I say Go Hitch! (Again, just my humble opinion).

52. Six Reasons to be an Atheist

Comment #110177 by walk on January 10, 2008 at 3:20 pm

Cue the "waiting" music from the US TV show Jeopardy.

53. Six Reasons to be an Atheist

Comment #110175 by walk on January 10, 2008 at 3:17 pm

Annatar (336),

Well, this HAS been productive, hasn't it? :P
Hah! Good one.

54. Six Reasons to be an Atheist

Comment #110174 by walk on January 10, 2008 at 3:14 pm

Steve (335),

Sorry, but that is just isn't so. You don't believe God is entirely external to the universe, as you believe he interferes with it. Therefore, by definition, he must at times interact with material objects. Any interaction with material objects is subject to scientific investigation.
Your patience is remarkable. This question is so well put, but you'll notice that ADH just stepped right around it. He seems to only answer the questions that he can give a "fuzzy" answer to. He totally avoided my questions: "Would you be moral without god?", and "What is it you need to be healed of?" Frustrating

55. Richard Dawkins on The Late Edition with Marcus Brigstocke

Comment #110166 by walk on January 10, 2008 at 3:02 pm

Paceetrate, "Stupidity" definitely would fit. I believe "insanity" is the actual word that I was looking for!

56. Six Reasons to be an Atheist

Comment #110158 by walk on January 10, 2008 at 2:52 pm

epeeist (347),

FX: Pulls up chair, opens popcorn. Waits for Steve to arrive too.
May I share your popcorn, this is starting to get good!

57. Six Reasons to be an Atheist

Comment #110149 by walk on January 10, 2008 at 2:44 pm

ADH (327),

Walk, you have got Christian morality completely wrong. The stick and carrot approach was that of the Pharisees, for example. I admit that it has been "adopted", quite wrongly, by many individual Christian churches.
Okay, so you don't subscribe to the "carrot, stick" thing. So as a believing Christian, do you believe you'll go to heaven if you kill someone for no reason?

58. Six Reasons to be an Atheist

Comment #110140 by walk on January 10, 2008 at 2:35 pm

Okay, ADH, I'll bite. Exactly WHAT affliction do you feel you need to be healed of?

And you still haven't answered if you would be moral without god?

59. Richard Dawkins on The Late Edition with Marcus Brigstocke

Comment #110116 by walk on January 10, 2008 at 2:00 pm

What is that word whose definition is: A state of mind which causes someone to keep posting the same thing over and over expecting a different reply?

60. Six Reasons to be an Atheist

Comment #110114 by walk on January 10, 2008 at 1:54 pm

ADH, also, you didn't answer the question would you be moral without god?

61. Six Reasons to be an Atheist

Comment #110109 by walk on January 10, 2008 at 1:50 pm

ADH,

I asked for a definitive source. Christians differ so radically from one another, how do you know which are right? I love my fellow man, but don't need a 2000 year old book to tell me that.

BTW, I don't need to be healed - - I'm not "sick".

62. Six Reasons to be an Atheist

Comment #110094 by walk on January 10, 2008 at 1:26 pm

ADH,

Just curious, if you didn't have your divine parental figure giving you (almost undecipherable) rules to live by, and threatening you with the ultimate punishment, would you act morally? From everything you've said, I would expect the answer is NO.

63. Six Reasons to be an Atheist

Comment #110074 by walk on January 10, 2008 at 12:53 pm

ADH (301),

if morality is a product of the nervous system then there is no external yardstick whereby my or your moral behaviour can be measured.
This is so obvious I'm amazed you made this statement. Society is the external yardstick.
How is anyone then to decide what constitutes acceptable behaviour and what sort of behaviour is unacceptable?
Again, society. Break the law - - go to jail. Treat people cruelly - - get ostracized. Rational humans don't need a divine dictator standing over them with a switch.

What definitive source do YOU suggest we get our morals from?

64. Changing my Mind

Comment #110036 by walk on January 10, 2008 at 11:07 am

Roland_F (188),

Yes, everything I can find (testing wise) on acupuncture seems to show that there is zero clinical proof of efficacy. Like you say, it doesn't seem to matter if the treatment is done according to tradition, or alternatively if the needles are placed randomly, or if they don't even puncture the skin (!), the results are the same. Nothing beyond placebo effect, and nothing but anecdotal evidence.

My mother-in-law is currently taking her DOG for treatments! She's spending money she can't afford (barely making it on US social security). But because her niece believes (and has used acupuncture for years), I'm not allowed to say anything. Sad. (And the dog refuses to comment!!!)

 

65. The Pagan Christ

Comment #110030 by walk on January 10, 2008 at 10:52 am

Tyler,

Here's a couple ...


For I am come to SET A MAN AT VARIANCE AGAINST HIS FATHER, AND THE DAUGHTER AGAINST HER MOTHER, AND THE DAUGHTER IN LAW AGAINST HER MOTHER IN LAW. And a MAN'S FOES SHALL BE THEY OF HIS OWN HOUSEHOLD.
-Matthew 10:35-36
If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
-Luke 14:26
 
 
Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
-Luke 12:51-53
 
And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them...
-Mark 16:17-18
These are from the site: http://www.nobeliefs.com/jesus.htm

 

66. Six Reasons to be an Atheist

Comment #110011 by walk on January 10, 2008 at 9:37 am

Tyler,

Thanks, the Dunham/Achmed video is hilarious! You have to hand it to Dunham, it takes quite a bit of courage to slam the Islamo-fascists so mercilessly. It was probably a wise decision NOT to name the puppet Mohammed!

67. Changing my Mind

Comment #109788 by walk on January 9, 2008 at 5:46 pm

qster,

Sorry I misunderstood you. Now that I realize you don't advocate prescribing ineffective medicines or treatments just for the placebo effect, I see we're pretty much in agreement.

And, no, I don't think all naturopaths are liars, I know some good people in the field.

I do, however, suspect many people may tend to believe in unsubstaniated treatments because of wishful thinking, or just a tendency to trust the practictioner.

I know naturopaths use many different therapies.

I know people who have been cured by "alternative" means. I being one, my drummer being another.

Also, thanks for the tip on the health benefits of water, although I try not to overdo it because of the negative effects that may occur due to over-straining the kidneys. I've seen this reported in extreme cases. I believe that the 2 liters a day you mentioned is generally considered to be safe.

Thanks for putting up with my questions.

68. Changing my Mind

Comment #109769 by walk on January 9, 2008 at 4:33 pm

Well, you don't have to get nasty.

Do you advocate "fooling" people as treatment for health problems or not?

69. Changing my Mind

Comment #109758 by walk on January 9, 2008 at 4:09 pm

qster (171),

But lets talk about the 'Placebo effect'. What does the pacebo effect indicate? to me it means that by a process of suggestion and without any active component, patients are capable of 'curing' themselves. Hmmmm. If one person is capable of doing this why not everyone given the right treatment.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but what you seem to be saying here is that naturopaths should routinely sell products that have no active ingredient to as many people as possible, telling them that the product does have an active ingredient that will cure their illness, and then hope that the patient will be fooled enough to "cure themselves". And you seem to be indicating that this would be a good thing.

70. Six Reasons to be an Atheist

Comment #109213 by walk on January 8, 2008 at 3:20 pm

Ahhhh! - - - Forgot about The Code !

71. Changing my Mind

Comment #109190 by walk on January 8, 2008 at 2:38 pm

Thanks!

72. Changing my Mind

Comment #109170 by walk on January 8, 2008 at 1:32 pm

Epinephrine, agreed. I wasn't taking your post to mean "all". BTW, have you heard anything negative concerning fish oil? This is one of the few supplements I take. I only use a product approved by the IFOS (International Fish Oil Standards). Thank you.

PJG, sorry if I misrepresented your comments. I see we're on the same page.

73. Six Reasons to be an Atheist

Comment #109165 by walk on January 8, 2008 at 1:09 pm

A bit off topic here, but I've always wondered why bible-believers don't see that their book doesn't contain one word that could not come from the minds of first century writers. Shouldn't the "word of God" contain something a bit beyond 2,000 year old thinking?

74. Debate between Michael Shermer and Dinesh D'Souza

Comment #109160 by walk on January 8, 2008 at 1:03 pm

Gosh, I wonder what happened to urin4it? All I did was ask for a little proof of his statements and - - - ?

75. Changing my Mind

Comment #109145 by walk on January 8, 2008 at 12:38 pm

Epinephrine,

Thanks for pointing out these dangers in "natural" medicine. (Eye-opening links). This firmly debunk's qster's

At least with Natural therapy, the side effects will be negligible.
And PJG's (less troubling)
placebos can also have negative "side" effects but I believe they are less likely and not so nasty
There are obviously many seriously harmful consequences of putting these unregulated products into your system.

76. Changing my Mind

Comment #109107 by walk on January 8, 2008 at 10:53 am

PJG,

The problem here (as Steve points out) is there's a lot more going on here than "prescribing a sugar pill". By using any one of these so-called therapies, the patient is being encouraged to believe in completely false supernatural assumptions. The last thing we need these days is more and more people subscribing to a belief in "chi" or "spiritual healing" or "impressions left in water molecules" or "the power of your thoughts manipulating the universe to your benefit", etc,. etc.

We can't be wishy-washy about this.

77. Changing my Mind

Comment #109094 by walk on January 8, 2008 at 10:03 am

qster (155),

I apologise if I seem to be going after you, but when you mention "Reiki", and say

used by a huge number of people with great success - not all are gullible and docile faith freaks.
I can only wonder if you realize that 'reiki' means spirit life force, and that practitioners channel this so-called force (from the universe) through their hands, and 'heal' the patient without touching them. Are you saying that you believe that this is real medicine, and that it has scientifically based efficacy?

Again, I'm sorry if I seem to be targeting you, but when you make these woo-woo claims in passing, I feel I'd be neglecting the purpose of this website if I didn't (respectfully) disagree.

78. THE FOUR HORSEMEN - Available Now on DVD!

Comment #109079 by walk on January 8, 2008 at 9:34 am

hugovdm (445),

Getting through The God Delusion (...) too many things to disagree with.
When you finish I'm sure we'd love to hear your disagreements. The posters here don't consider TGD to be, well - - - scripture (clears throat), and some here have some differences of opinion here and there with certain points in the book. I believe that most of the posters are here because they believe wholeheartedly with the premise, and the major points in the book. Please let us know where you disagree, and I'm sure you'll inspire some lively, and (mostly) respectful discussion. Welcome aboard!

79. Changing my Mind

Comment #109071 by walk on January 8, 2008 at 9:12 am

qster,

Sorry to belabor this point, but I'd like to clarify my position.

I read the first "Conversations" book twice, and the second book once. This was while I still believed in some supernatural phenomena, so I didn't realize at the time it was a lie. Years later, after much research, I was finally convinced that ALL claims of the paranormal had been thoroughly debunked by science.

If you read a bit deeper into the text I think it is quite clear that Walsch is really responding to his own questions but the book is marketed quite differently.
Simply reread the introduction to book 1, and you'll see that Walsch is VERY clear.
He says "This book was not written by me, it happened to me". (Italics in original text). "I knew that I was talking to God. Directly, personally. Irrefutably."

I don't know how you could come up with the opinion you expressed above. "As you read a bit deeper - -", you'll see that he NEVER backs off from this claim. His entire worldwide organization of CWG groups is based on the veracity of his claim that God talks to him directly.

If you can provide a quote and page number to back up your statement, I'll gladly reconsider. Thank you.

80. Changing my Mind

Comment #108821 by walk on January 7, 2008 at 5:03 pm

Thank you, Allan,

I guess I misunderstood when you said "The most useful sort of naturopath" that you were somehow condoning the prescribing of homeopathic medicine. Unless I'm also wrong about qster's comments, I believe he was condoning the sale of these useless products. I see that you and I are actually on the same page.

I agree that the "personal" sort of attention that naturopath's offer, along with a holistic approach of diet, exercise, mental attitude, etc. is a desirable thing. Certainly preferable to mere to "pill pushing". The unscrupulous practice that should be exposed is the myriad of bogus, unproven "alternative" methods that have been shown medically ineffective.

81. Changing my Mind

Comment #108799 by walk on January 7, 2008 at 3:52 pm

qster,

Herbal medicines are one thing. At least there is an active ingredient involved. Traditional medicines are many times just super-concentrated versions of the active chemicals found in herbs. But when you say "alternative medicines" what exactly are you talking about? It's just very interesting that there has never been a successful result in the many double-blind tests of homeopathic medicines, outside of the placebo effect.

AllanW (148)

The most useful sort of naturopath offers exactly the treatments you mention; water-based, non-aggressive, non-invasive and wholly without effect other than as a placebo. That is not demeaning the treatments.
So what you're saying is that it's not demeaning to "fool" your patients into thinking you're giving them real medicine, when in fact, you're charging them good money to sell them a fraudulent product?

82. Changing my Mind

Comment #108731 by walk on January 7, 2008 at 1:40 pm

qster (110),

Walk,
In answer to your first question, No i dont believe that Walsch was receiving messages from a supernatural being (a God per se). More that he found himself able to respond to his own questions in a way that is similar to humans experiencing moments of great clarity.
Ah, but therein lies the problem, Walsch CLAIMS to be talking directly to God through automatic writing. Therefore, his whole series of books are based on one, initial, outrageous LIE!

When I was still trying to believe in some kind of supernatural creator, the "Conversations With God" books were like a breath of fresh air. No hell, no Satan, all good people go to heaven, all religions are partially correct, God always forgives his children if they ask, God has a sense of humor, etc. As with many people, my reaction was, "Now here's a God I can believe in!" But upon finally realizing Walsch's entire spiel was based on a lie, and after reading TGD, etc., I realized that Walsch was just another (well meaning perhaps?) New Age quack. "Great moments of clarity" are no proof of the improbable.

83. Changing my Mind

Comment #107008 by walk on January 3, 2008 at 9:06 pm

qster,

Until recently I kept looking for evidence of non-local communication. This brief article by Susan Blackmore was an eye-opener for me.

http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/Chapters/Kurtz.htm

84. Changing my Mind

Comment #106959 by walk on January 3, 2008 at 6:43 pm

Definitely the paperback! Of course they get the better deal all the way around!

85. Mother Nature is Not Our Friend

Comment #106958 by walk on January 3, 2008 at 6:41 pm

Then I look at the shitty shows on TV, the shitty fiction novels that sell the most, the shitty propaganda that turds out of cable news, and listen to the shitty substandard zombie noise on FM radio, and my hopes get dashed all over again.
Tell me about it!

Thanks, I think I have a better understanding of where you're coming from, and, as usual, I tend to agree with most of your points.

86. THE FOUR HORSEMEN - Available Now on DVD!

Comment #106953 by walk on January 3, 2008 at 6:30 pm

82abhilash,

Thank you for the answer. If your explanations of these experiences are purely natural ones, we're all on the same page. While not trying to label you, I was curious if you were somehow heading in a non-rational direction. In my search for a glimpse into the "spirit" world I actually tried using the shaman drug "sativa divinorum" to induce a so-called out-of-body experience. (I believe it affects the pineal gland). While I did have a very bizarre "trip", it scared the crap out of me, and out of respect for the marvelous (and sometimes) delicate brain system we have, I never tried it again. I realized I was just hallucinating, and there was nothing supernatural about it.

All she hopes is that, that option of happiness does not remain closed to me.
I'm a strong atheist, and I experience great happiness almost everyday (being 62 has something to do with it).

Best of luck in your endeavors.

87. Changing my Mind

Comment #106946 by walk on January 3, 2008 at 6:15 pm

My method would be to always keep a copy of Richard's TGD by the door. "Okay, guys, I'll graciously accept your copy of 'The Watchtower' if you graciously accept my gift of 'The God Delusion'. Have a wonderful day!"

88. Mother Nature is Not Our Friend

Comment #106942 by walk on January 3, 2008 at 6:00 pm

Diacanu, I'm sorry oh Dark and Mysterious one, you ARE the CHOSEN one!!

I said,

I don't quite understand why he's so sure that humanity will completely screw up this promising reasearch.
and you replied
Looking at the world around me is enough.
You seem to have a very dark outlook on our world.

Do you believe that research in human genetic manipulation should be stopped? Also, what are you views on stem cell research?

Do you believe there have more positive or negative results from our nuclear program?

(Boy, aren't I the nosey one?)

89. THE FOUR HORSEMEN - Available Now on DVD!

Comment #106934 by walk on January 3, 2008 at 5:48 pm

82abhilash,

Have you ever had a transcendent experience that you believe showed you the window to a reality beyond the natural world?

90. Mother Nature is Not Our Friend

Comment #106900 by walk on January 3, 2008 at 4:48 pm

True.

91. THE FOUR HORSEMEN - Available Now on DVD!

Comment #106891 by walk on January 3, 2008 at 4:35 pm

Thank you.

I guess I don't quite understand how his position denies him the chance to find natural explanations for his transcendent experiences.

92. THE FOUR HORSEMEN - Available Now on DVD!

Comment #106880 by walk on January 3, 2008 at 4:21 pm

82abhilash (406)

He does not want there to be a God.
Just one small point. I believe that Hitchens is referring to the Abrahamic god when he expresses this opinion. He (and I) find it repugnant to think there might be an all powerful dictator in the sky that we will be forced to worship through eternity. I think he (and I) would be fine if it was ever shown that a creative force (or being) somehow created the universe and then never interferred.
Such a position has a lot of weaknesses, the most obvious being that you deny yourself the chance to find natural explanations for the 'transcendent experiences' which the religious claim to have monopoly on.
I don't think I understand. Are you saying that there are some transcendent experiences (of which Hitchens says he wouldn't want to live without) that you believe are supernatural? I think I'm missing your point here.

93. Mother Nature is Not Our Friend

Comment #106871 by walk on January 3, 2008 at 3:57 pm

BigginHillbilly,

So are you saying we should halt any progress in the field of genetic manipulation and deny ourselves the scientific advancements it may provide, i.e. the lessening of human suffering?

94. Changing my Mind

Comment #106853 by walk on January 3, 2008 at 3:28 pm

qster,

Upon reading your earlier posts, I see you are a fan of Neale Donald Walsch. Is it your belief that his claim to be having a "Conversation With God" (not us as God, but a supreme being) through the supernatural method called "automatic writing" is factual?

Also, I believe you alluded to the fact that you believe that all consciousness is somehow connected by some mysterious method unknown to modern science. You gave some examples. Dogs anticipating the return of their owners has been explained, birds flying in flocks has been explained, and I believe that Deepak Chopra is considered by most here to be a total wackjob. I'm willing to elaborate if you're interested.

95. Mother Nature is Not Our Friend

Comment #106798 by walk on January 3, 2008 at 1:21 pm

This has been a pretty amazing conversation, all the way from Serdan's optimism to Diacanu's extreme pessimism.

What I took Sam to be saying is that we should try to solve existing problems (disease, etc.) with research into gene manipulation. This would be a natural step beyond stem-cell research. I don't believe he was implying anything like creating super human perfecto-bots.

While I usually agree with Diacanu's verbal onslaughts against the more irritating faith-heads, I don't quite understand why he's so sure that humanity will completely screw up this promising reasearch. I wonder how and at what point Diacanu would halt further progress in this area.

I realize humans are capable of screwing up almost anything, I just think the positive results of genetic problem solving will outweigh the possible negatives.

96. The Pagan Christ

Comment #106743 by walk on January 3, 2008 at 11:39 am

Downunder,

I agree with TonyA here. With all due respect, as Tony said:

The 'life force,' or spirit, is the last imaginary fairy tale to dispense with
You've invented a complicated explanation employing "invisible dimensions", etc., to somehow hold on to the new age spiritual belief that we have a life force that goes somewhere after we die. I realize it's very tempting to want to believe this, but like the god-belief, there is zero evidence and no logical reason to believe this is true.

97. The Pagan Christ

Comment #106134 by walk on January 2, 2008 at 12:04 pm

I believe you nailed it, Steve (as usual!).

al-rawandi, Sign me up!

98. The Pagan Christ

Comment #106125 by walk on January 2, 2008 at 11:48 am

Downunder,

The reason I asked you about this initially is along the lines of what Steve is saying. When you say, at death where does the life "go", and you said you're not implying anything supernatural, then the simple answer (IMO) is that the "life" in your body doesn't "go" anywhere, it just ceases to exist. Perhaps a dead battery would be a good analogy. Am I missing something here?

Similarly, when we become alive, the "life" didn't come from anywhere, it's simply a property of the processes involved. I agree this is a hard thing to describe.

99. Debate between Michael Shermer and Dinesh D'Souza

Comment #105717 by walk on January 1, 2008 at 4:25 pm

urin4it (294)

I will always hold to my faith in God because I can't deny what I know is the truth.
This is a pretty bold statement. How in the world could you possibly know it's true?

If you could show us how you know it, perhaps you could change some minds here.

100. The Pagan Christ

Comment #105668 by walk on January 1, 2008 at 1:36 pm

Comment #104089 by Downunder

I'm not sure I understand your discussion about "life". Are you saying you suspect that life comes from somewhere and goes somewhere in a supernatural sense? That it's not just a product of biology, but has some existence of it's own?

More Pages: Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 | Next