51. Ben Stein Vs. Sputtering Atheists

Comment #165157 by Incredulous on April 21, 2008 at 6:22 am

I only have to read clearmind's posts and I get completely down. I don't know how long he's been posting here, but his argument is exactly the same today as it was all that time ago.

He still makes no sense and he hasn't even bothered to get his facts straight.

He may be typical of those faith bound people who are so strong in their faith that evidence is irrelevant. These champions of faith seem to revel in the need to be seen to be strong in their belief irrespective of any kind of rebuttal or refutation which renders their favourite neurosis completely mad.

The thing that concerns me most, though, is that we seem to be playing a pointless zero-sum game where the truth of things is simply ignored or trampled over.

This isn't about winning and losing, this is about creating models of the universe and ourselves which are accurate and realistic.

We are talking to people who wont see or trust anything which to us are trustworthy; certainly these people are convinced they already have the truth even if all evidence mitigates against it.

It seems pointless to give them thinking tools - critical or creative - as these tools are simply remoulded to convince themselves and the gullible that it was always to be found in ancient texts.

The more I read the postings on this site the more it seems probable to me that after we have given enough support and information to those people who are cultural believers and really don't believe any of the nonsense they have been fed, we will be left with a large number of those people who will fight to the death for ideas which are really not worth fighting for. Their ideas are just wrong. Their beliefs unjustifiable.

What next? I guess there comes a point where we just have to be satisfied with being sane and continue to do our little bit to forward reason by simply being reasonable and scientific.

52. Interviews with Richard Dawkins and Michael Shermer

Comment #165138 by Incredulous on April 21, 2008 at 5:45 am

Circle of Reason and logic is surrounded by the circle of faith

How do you know this, clearmind.

When the reason's border is finished, the border of faith starts and ends in heaven.

Are you prepared to show this phenomena in public?

In other words, reason and logic is the initial step to have faith in God's creation Otherwise whatever you pray will not go further an exercise or body tiredness.

So the only way to faith is through logic? You are prepared to publicly demonstrate this, yes?

Some people in any religion have the faith as a custom, and some people have the faith deeply.

I take it this is the difference between cultural religion and true faith. I guess what you are saying is that if your prayers are not answered then clearly you do not have true faith. Yes?

So this explains why amputees cannot grow back their lost limbs, because they simply do not have enough faith. Is this what you are saying?

Why are you here?

Layla can answer this herself, but I think reading your post then if there are any more like you I certainly wouldn't be where they are.

Then question is boggling my mind; why is Dawkins overreacting?

Don't you need a mind in order for it to be boggled? Sounds to me that you are doing an absolutely wonderful job of completely boggling it yourself.

What's boggling my mind is that you actually have the capacity to operate a computer!

53. Flea of the week

Comment #163795 by Incredulous on April 19, 2008 at 3:22 am

Yet, despite our humble position in the universe, able to love and care and empathise and take joy in our existence.

This is especially lost on theists as they seem to believe they hold some kind of copyright on compassion and empathy - not that I have seen so much evidence of these qualities from our faithful counterparts.

An excellent observation as usual Paula. Real people don't need to be bullied by imaginary friends to ACTUALLY give a shit!

54. Fleabytes

Comment #163393 by Incredulous on April 18, 2008 at 9:37 am

Comment #162655 by lievemebe

Beliefs appear to be essential in keeping our lives in order and luckily much of it is done unconsciously. Beliefs of this nature are probably accumulated in the same way as knowledge.

I find this statement quite interesting. For me much of what we do and understand is a belief. Sam Harris has a take on this which I think has room for exploration.

Could it be that religious belief is really no different from any other belief?

As Sam Harris suggests it may be we act on our true beliefs - in fact it is difficult for me to see that a belief actually exists unless there is a sequence of actions supporting it.

This would explain why Sam, Richard, Daniel and Christopher are so earnest in their criticism of faith.

Simply put, if what you believe is not supported by evidence and is therefore immaturely ignorant or prejudiced then the subsequent actions must surely have danger written all over them.

As Sam Harris states, this means that belief can no longer be seen as a private matter as public action must follow as a result of your beliefs.

Needless to say I have some sympathy for this view. It fits quite nicely with my experience which is whenever what I believe or am led to believe is true things work and when they are not then things don't work.

Delusions can never work!

A belated thanks to MPhil for the reference to the fundamentals of human neurophysiology. I've found a site which acts as a good synopsis of the book and will be buying it as early as possible.

55. Sexpelled: No Intercourse Allowed

Comment #163387 by Incredulous on April 18, 2008 at 9:22 am

I ignore Clearmind simply to preserve my sanity. I have never read such a constant flow of absolute drivel from anyone.

First of all the one who criticize must be fair and SANE and his critique should be based on finding out the truth and proving it rather than trying to save his PRIDE BY CLOWNING AROUND.

It might be an idea for him to take his own advice. So typical of these faith-heads; Someone needs to tell them to face it and not displace it.

56. Richard Dawkins' secular army must be stopped. God is behind some of our greatest art

Comment #162149 by Incredulous on April 16, 2008 at 8:30 am

Comment #162117 by scottiedawg

I've just had a look at this and at first glance it seems as though the article has very few supporters. If I was editor of the guardian I would hide this from world view as well. While it created a lot of interest, it seems to have done nothing but inspired ridicule.

I can't believe all of the comments came from contributors to RD.Net!!

57. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162142 by Incredulous on April 16, 2008 at 8:15 am

We are held in utter contempt by the credulous fucktards, I don't see why we owe them any kindness.
Just remember they think you are going to burn for all eternity. Calling one of them an "ass hole" is mild by comparison.

I don't think I'm quite as emphatic as al-rawandi, but I do agree with the sentiment. I made my mind up a while ago to simply do away with superstition, ignorance - I'll always suffer from it but I have to try, prejudice and arrogance. Religion or a belief in a supernatural creator drags me down this road and I don't want to go.

I'm not too sure why what is happening to Richard Morgan is particularly interesting.

My atheism is still only based on the fact that there are no gods. The only role religion can play is as a a moral guide and as far as I'm concerned god and his book are not sophisticated enough to oversee moral codes in the 21st century: a case of thanks for all you've done but your services are no longer required.

For me, Richard M's situation is personal. I have no interest in him on that level. As long as his newly found belief does not lead to actions which disturb or impose on others then fine.

The moment he tries to convince me that his subjective reality - we all have one - explains anything objective or commonly experienced there will be a problem. Until then I feel no animosity towards him at all.

Is David Robertson's impression of Faust's mephosiphilis waiting to capture fallen souls any different to any of those other proselytising empty heads? I think not.

Richard Morgan is just a bloke like any other bloke and his internal landscape is his to create any how he feels.

But he vomits that anywhere that he is not invited to vomit it then ...

58. Richard Dawkins' secular army must be stopped. God is behind some of our greatest art

Comment #161288 by Incredulous on April 15, 2008 at 5:55 am

Clearmind:

Have you considered therapy? You talk complete shit!

59. The simple falsehood at the heart of Expelled

Comment #161178 by Incredulous on April 15, 2008 at 2:20 am

AllanW

No need to rise to the bait. PZ is an intelligent man and will form his views. In fact, I would imagine he already has opinions Mr Robertson's arguments and ideas which are less than complimentary.

Better to ignore Mr Robertson until he goes away.

Your time is far more valuable and shouldn't be wasted on nothing at all.

60. The simple falsehood at the heart of Expelled

Comment #161159 by Incredulous on April 15, 2008 at 1:21 am

Comment #161155 by AllanW

Ditto

61. Religious education as a part of literary culture

Comment #160680 by Incredulous on April 14, 2008 at 9:18 am

Now I wish everyone would just shut up about atheism and its supposed drive to derive the world of its literary or artistic heritage. This just aint so!

As a lover of the classics and the arts generally myself, I find it a real insult for someone to infer I'm some kind of destructive philistine because I expect evidence for my beliefs.

Oh please, give it a rest.

62. A New Flea

Comment #160427 by Incredulous on April 14, 2008 at 4:52 am

Comment #160151 by Grantaire of JC

And as for all those books trying to refute Dawkins, keep them coming.

I think this is the point that disturbs me most about these fleas. They're all trying to refute Richard and I really don't see that there is an awful lot to refute.

Surely the point is that these fleas are simply avoiding the fact that there is no rational evidence to support god and prolonging us in pointless debate about evidenceless ideas merely attests to this sad state of affairs.

These people continually accuse us, especially those of us who contribute regularly to this site, of the ridiculous 'crime' of hero-worshipping Richard Dawkins.

To me it seems that it is these flea authors who are absolutely obsessed with Richard and seek to target him and not the fact that he has simply exposed the lack of observed evidence, the poor logic, the infantile mania and the negative consequences behind the idea of god and religion.

Rather than waste time picking on Richard, maybe it would be better that they stopped making exaggerated and untestable claims for their invisible father and started providing the evidence for their belief.

While I'm here, I'd like to add that it might be an idea for them to stop lying about Richard or indeed anyone else's atheism.

This nonsense about religion, god and art being attacked by atheism is such bullshit and no-one in their right minds who has listened to the arguments put forward by Richard, Christopher, Sam and Daniel, would believe that is what atheism is all about.

How repetitive, boring, deaf or simply plain thick headed are these people?

I would definitely prefer they stopped keeping it coming.

Enough already!

63. Richard Dawkins' secular army must be stopped. God is behind some of our greatest art

Comment #160420 by Incredulous on April 14, 2008 at 4:30 am

The Bible - as literature, if nothing else - should be an essential part of every child's experience. And children should study the great Christian art of the past, too. We often have a revisionist view of this great legacy of paintings, music and literature.

Now where have I heard this before? And who was it described himself as a cultural christian, much to the amusement and disdain of the fart-brained theists who then seized upon this revelation as a repressed longing to join one of their deluded throng.

What a non-article, what a waste of time. People get paid for this?

64. Rep. Davis: The Worst Person in the World

Comment #158281 by Incredulous on April 10, 2008 at 9:30 am

kjmastaw

I'm not a scientist, but I did my first degree in Computer Science, work as a consultant/developer, after some time as a reporter in Shropshire/West Mids.

I know a little about the scientific method, but am not nearly as practiced as the big boys here.

I know enough to suggest that you should maybe not attack some of the smartest guys and girls I know.

Luckily, education is an ongoing process you too can enjoy. Do the work before you talk, buddy and you will be ok.

By the way, even the arty people and the not so qualified, but pretty clued up on here don't take shit, either.

65. Fleabytes

Comment #158080 by Incredulous on April 10, 2008 at 3:57 am

Comment #158077 by Quetzalcoatl

I think he's left a post this morning - well it's just about morning here in the UK. It's on the lava lizard thread.

66. Fleabytes

Comment #158075 by Incredulous on April 10, 2008 at 3:47 am

Comment #158066 by epeeist

Spot on epeeist and not only the questioner in the UHI.

Typical proselytising shit!

They second guess our concerns and then find some mumbo jumbo in that work of fiction they follow to tell their quarry that it was predicted.

Sometimes I could spit on the floor when I think of these people.

These people will be found anywhere there are vulnerable people. People from mental institutions, young offenders, homeless people, battered women, etc.

Anyone who seems to lurk on the edges of society is sidled up to by one of these clap happy loonies ready to take advantage of any misfortune you may suffer for the sake of their deluded leader and beliefs.

They're not even subtle about it. The same old same old.

I personally don't care a fig what Richard Morgan does. He's a grown man who makes his own mind up about things.

Yah! what's the point in getting upset about it!

67. Richard Dawkins on The Big Questions

Comment #157634 by Incredulous on April 9, 2008 at 11:01 am

Comment #157603 by hungarianelephant

This is a great post.

This ought to lead us to question the capacity of lots of people to do, for want of a better word, evil. We'd all like to blame it on the top guy, but that choice may not be appropriate.

Stanley Milgram comes to mind. I remember something about the Stanford Prison experiment as well.

Maybe a little off topic, but a German friend of mine once told me about the complicity of many ordinary Germans in rounding up Jews. They did this, she says, because of fear of authority and because everyone else was doing it: a kind of way of letting everyone know you were batting on the same side.

She asked me what I would do if I was caught up in Nazi Germany at the time. Note, she didn't say what would I like to think I would have done, but what would I actually do. Hypothetical I know, but ....

Comment #157621 by al-rawandi

free speech is paramount, but racist bigots should be denounced at every turn.

hear hear.

Excellent posts

68. Fleabytes

Comment #157592 by Incredulous on April 9, 2008 at 10:04 am

Comment #157518 by keith

a collection of pretty coarse individuals from within and a group to which you neither feel, nor want to feel, attached: it's still the rest of the world, plus you, just like it always is. Quite disappointing, really.

Of course this is true. What you say here is rational, sane and reflects the reality of the situation.

So what??

Cold reality is what people try to escape from. Cold reality owes and gives us nothing. Disappointing cold reality doesn't satisfy that longing for something which fuels their need and this discussion.

In reality, I understand and agree with what you say, but it is a simple step to see why some people behave and believe as they do.

You and I stopped wishing for the impossible to be true, but there are many who really, really want this feeling of being alone not to be true.

You're right, cold reality can't always give us the inspiration we seek, unless we learn to appreciate its wondrous secrets, as Richard Dawkins et al. are trying to show everyone.

However, that appreciation can seem soulless and difficult for many, especially, those who have sought meaning through spiritual means.

It is not always helpful to be so clinical when dealing with how people feel about things, however delusional it may appear to us.

The cognitive webs people have built up didn't just appear. For many, they were a lifetime in building. They're part of their way of looking at and dealing with the world. Strange to us, but to them comforting, reassuring, satisfying.

I know, it doesn't make it true, but to them it doesn't matter - it works for them.

It's not so easy to change patterns of a lifetime. To do so would take brainwashing techniques the CIA and MI5 would be very interested in, but don't yet exist.

People will respond to you - in the 3-D world - if you at least attempt to see things through their eyes and walk in their shoes a little while. They will listen to you, if you listen to them, but change won't happen overnight.

Calling someone an idiot, while possibly technically, scientifically correct, doesn't really help matters.

Sometimes it's just not our call and sometimes the need for human warmth and a sense of belonging are so strong people give in to it.

Please don't think I'm having a go at you. I'm still trying to work through a lot of ideas.

69. Fleabytes

Comment #157578 by Incredulous on April 9, 2008 at 9:36 am

Comment #157518 by keith

I have walked home from football matches hundreds of times and the overwhelming feeling amongst fans is neither joy nor misery but a burning desire to get to your car, get away from the crowds and get home.

You maybe right, but I still stand by what I say.

I used to play semi-professional football, and as an ex-journalist had to report on local football teams. For my sins, I also support West Bromwich Albion.

My parents live on an estate where cars are parked every home game. My early adulthood social life was spent in local pubs with football fans.

It goes without saying people want to get home, but they also feel an attachment to their local football team on a level you would not believe.

Try listening to the Welsh sing their National Anthem at a home rugby international without feeling anything.

I drink with ex-Villa player, Gary Shaw, if you want to know what a silly game like football means to people then come out with us and see how people fall over themselves to talk to him. His peak was 25 years ago.

It has been suggested that if a football team wins, productivity in the area actually increases.

Never underestimate the human need to belong.

70. Fleabytes

Comment #157499 by Incredulous on April 9, 2008 at 7:33 am

Someone shreds the evidence and tells you that you're not remembering things correctly when in fact you are? Someone who encourages you to doubt the testimony of your own eyes and ears?

Yes but I tend to deal with things that don't feel right and if someone is trying to undermine, intimidate or bully me, they soon learn not to.

Self confidence is easily destroyed and I am aware that even the strongest of us can be emotionally destroyed by a malevolent, though probably socially adept bully.

If someone wants to delete their posts because they regret them, I'd rather they say this up front and point out what they're deleting, so we have a sense why it's happening.

I agree.

71. Fleabytes

Comment #157474 by Incredulous on April 9, 2008 at 6:23 am

Thanks for the compliment Steve. I only understand because I've had similar feelings in the past, about different things, of course, as I've never been been or could be religious in the accepted sense.

There have been times when I've not had a person close to me of the opposite sex and I immediately get nostalgic and remember all the past relationships - through rose-tinted glasses naturally.

Then someone new comes along and the past disappears.

We are all human, and yes to feel loved and wanted is something we crave. I'm sure someone will give me a biochemical reason for that, but that's missing the point a bit.

It's just what we are.

It isn't like social groups elsewhere, where you can reasonably expect words to mean the same thing and intentions to be reasonably similar.

How true this is. I'm much nicer in person than I am over the net, which is why I only chat on this site.

For me, this is a site, which while remarkably friendly for what it is, where I get ideas and read what people have to say to understand things.

Politically, I shy away from discussing contentious issues in my 3-D world because I am aware of the fragility of relationships and appreciate the effect of upsetting myself and people with whom I do real life things.

On here, I'm not afraid to say what I mean, however hamfistedly. I expect to be misunderstood on here simply because there is no body language to help the communication process, but I have an opportunity to correct myself in a thoughtful way at some point.

Real life does not offer such opportunities. A broken relationship tends to stay broken, wwhether profesional or personal.

I like most of the people here for what they appear to be and that is enough. Most certainly, I have a lot of respect for everyone here - intellectually.

Mind you, this is one of the friendliest places I have visited on the net.

No Steve, you are one of the friendliest people I have met over the net.

If anyone has cemented the fact that homosexuality is wrong for me, but it's right for homosexuals, it's you. You're a credit to peopleness.

72. Fleabytes

Comment #157451 by Incredulous on April 9, 2008 at 5:45 am

And as Sam Harris (and probably others) freely point out, one thing churches are good for is building communities, where one can go along and join in and feel accepted among like-minded people.

It's either a hoax - a pointless one at that - or he's simply lonely. The above quote points out a number of things we are all aware of. Atheism does not mean you stop being human.

The need to belong is a very powerful force. I've walked home when a crowd from a football match have been leaving a football ground and the urge to go with their flow and join their joy or misery - depending on the result - was overwhelming.

Internet forums are not really a place to create the intimate relationships people need. This is a forum for clearthinking after all.

For him, there is more to his existence than merely arguing the toss about concrete issues.

From where I'm sitting, there is nothing sad about what Richard is thinking or going through. There's more to all of us than meets the eye and he's simply making up his own mind about stuff.

I personally think the vast majority of people are like Richard in that they don't really believe all the father in the sky nonsense, or even in life after death.

They don't care whether our moral code comes from ancient texts or whether we should be constantly evolving stuff as new evidence appears.

People like being with and relating to other people.

Sometimes, there are other unfulfillable longings which no matter how irrational they appear, still exist to the individual.

This is why religion appears to score over us every time. Of course it is wrong, but it obviously satisfies something in some people not yet identified, scientifically - it will be.

Sometimes, it is not about being right, it is about simply being human, whatever that means and whoever it applies to.

As far as I'm concerned Richard M is an atheist - because he says so, we are simply not speaking to his human needs and in the end, that's what atheism appears not to do.

Good luck to Richard. Sometimes, it is the rebel who forces us to assess things. The issue with a group is mostly identified by who leaves it or by who is missing.

73. Richard Dawkins on The Big Questions

Comment #157386 by Incredulous on April 9, 2008 at 3:14 am

Comment #157085 by MorituriMax

I thought we were back in Medieval Times there for a sec.

There are too many who have never left. I have never felt so embarrassed by some of the things said by supposedly intelligent, well-educated and articulated people.

Richard was like a beacon of reason and humanity shining through a fog of bullshit, delusions and nonsense.

It's this inability to distinguish between what is an opinion - we all have them - and objective evidence - we need those for reasoning - that astonished me about the vast majority of that audience.

The black woman is amongst one of the most confused and imposing people I have ever seen on television. How she could not see the nonsense in what she was saying was beyond me.

How she couldn't see the connection between the mother of the abused lad and herself through the completely mad belief in horned influences, is something I cannot begin to understand.

Not only does faith take away the joys of being human, preferring to hold a deity responsible for them, but it also makes us completely irresponsible when we, individually or collectively, mess up.

It just won't do.

74. Cult leader Pyotr Kuznetsov tries suicide after realising he was wrong about doomsday

Comment #156833 by Incredulous on April 8, 2008 at 10:01 am

An interesting post. I have to hold my hands up and admit that I assumed the times assertion the guy was a clinical schizophrenic was true.

I still stand by my belief that compassion and empathy are valuable human traits which should be given to those who are maybe not as healthy or fortunate as they should be.

This comes from years in sport where I always sought and trained for healthy competition but avoided bullying.

However, If what ZekeCDN is true then maybe my disappointment at some of the attitudes shown were a little premature and possibly mistaken.

75. Richard Dawkins: 'Growth in creationist beliefs a problem for schools'

Comment #156797 by Incredulous on April 8, 2008 at 9:15 am

The imagination, for my money, is the defining feature that makes us human. It lets us enjoy every aspect of the world - and heightens, rather than masking, our experience of it.

I think we can take this escapism thing way too far that we do forget that imagination is what makes us human. I just like having fun and playing I guess.

It seems to me we have no choice but to interact with reality, anyway. The laws of physics don't change because I'm hitting or kicking a ball, do they?

As far as I am concerned there are only activities that harm self and harm others, or, are not consented to, the rest is people being people.

I enjoy fiction, music, sport, learning etc. All of the things that show us humans in our glory.

Just don't tell me that goddidit; because then I start to froth at the mouth. We people are ok and imagination is us.

76. Get out of here, atheists!

Comment #156626 by Incredulous on April 8, 2008 at 4:29 am

Embarrassing! Unfair! Idiotic! Untrue!

It's difficult, if not impossible to reason with people like this; they're so used to wallowing in their own ignorance.

This kind of attitude has already found its way across the atlantic. I've been called far worse by people filled with the spirit - actually I believe them to be a little crazy.

In certain communities atheism is seen as an unpleasant to be rejected. For some people - especially the faithful - it seems that it is their strength that is their weakness. The strength in this case is the strength of belief.

They may have been taught that weakness in faith is tantamount to weakness as people and as a community.

It really is sad to think how much harm this brutal arrogance has caused and will cause.

What amazes me most is the ability of the faithful to displace their own destructive tendencies and inadequacies.

77. Fleabytes

Comment #156200 by Incredulous on April 7, 2008 at 4:48 am

If robertson has gone, then I say good riddance. I'm only interested in the theist/deist argument if it is supported by evidence.

I am not interested in someone who is simply defending his point of view with little more than rhetoric, metaphor and psuedo-intelligent ramblings, not devoid of debating skill but completely lacking substance.

A gnat's fart would blow all of his posturing out of his self aggrandised court.

If robertson wants his views to be respected then he is going to have ensure his views are worthy of respect.

Demanding respect for subjective views without the slightest bit of objective evidence is not just presumptuous but absolutely unwarranted and inappropriate.

It's not just religion that's been getting a free pass, but so have the robertsons of this world. They're going to have to earn my respect, and in that they are failing miserably.

His cover has been blown and his wordy but empty defences of the theist position shown to be laughable and timewasting empty words.

This guy wanted to debate Richard?

It would be an improvement for a theist to appear on this site who was actually interested in actually learning something about what he was debating.

After robertson this is one atheist who will not be praising any lord of his, not while there is a hole in my bottom and certainly not until some evidence is provided for their claims.

78. Dawkins warns of human extinction

Comment #155333 by Incredulous on April 4, 2008 at 10:41 am

al-rawandi

I hear you. I really only want to hear from artful dodger. Maybe, I'm asking the wrong questions in the wrong way. I only want to know what he knows that I don't without the fluff and opinion. I can do opinion on my own.

79. Dawkins warns of human extinction

Comment #155320 by Incredulous on April 4, 2008 at 10:21 am

Based on a growing awareness of the reality of God, a call. If I still it is because, apart from the inward awareness of this reality, the gospels ring true

And this is what you call evidence?

I'm growing aware of the reality that I am going to sleep with Jennifer Lopez - well, sleeping is the last thing I would want to do. The inner reality of this reality does not ring true no matter how much I try to believe it.

Jesus, as reflected in the gospels, could not have been invented, and the bodily resurrection is the most plausible explanation for the events of the Sunday after his burial.

What evidence do you have to say that Jesus could not have been invented?

How do you know the events of the Sunday after his burial actually happened? aside from ancient text that is

80. Dawkins warns of human extinction

Comment #155175 by Incredulous on April 4, 2008 at 8:09 am

Try to weigh up his arguments against those of his opponents a bit more objectively.

Can someone clear my mind as to whether objective is the same as unbiased?

My understanding is that objective simply means pertaining to facts and observed evidence. Unbiased obviously refers to a lack of personal prejudice and subjectivity in decision making.

I can't for the life of me see how it is possible to have objectivity without facts and evidence.

Of course, I can see both sides of an argument, but that argument can be as content free as theology - oops, I'm letting my jaundiced approach in favour of evidence laden thought colour my thoughts again.

So why is artful dodger asking me to be more objective when I am seeking only to be objective?

I've never seen such bowing and scraping as before the name of Richard Dawkins on this site. OK, he's a first class evolutionary biologist who as written some ground-breaking scientific books and papers. But when will you face up to the fact that on theology, Biblical criticism and philosophy he is out of his depth.

The fact that he is a first rate evolutionary biologist does actually mean something to me. I have seen or can infer no bowing and scraping. In fact, I would imagine many here would jump on any inaccuracy he made pretty damn quick. I've noticed there are some pretty well qualified and very smart people contributing to this site and like tends to listen to like.

The fact that he is also out of his depth on biblical criticism and philosophy is quite reasuring for me. But is it possible to drown in a shallow murky pond? There is no depth to the bible. Just cobbled together tales of yore; works of the imagination.

Why don't you all cut the "Dawkins is God" crap.

I think everyone on here thinks that Richard is simply a good bloke; and we like good blokes who talk about things we can trust. You're right, he isn't god which is precisely why I appreciate what he does and says.

He's a tried and trusted exponent of that thing we should all aspire to - reasoning with evidence.

Mmm.

81. Cult leader Pyotr Kuznetsov tries suicide after realising he was wrong about doomsday

Comment #155021 by Incredulous on April 4, 2008 at 4:42 am

Laughing at someone's silliness does not, in itself, indicate that we think any less of them.

I couldn't agree more. I laugh at my own silliness all the time and yes, my first instinct was something like derision when I first read this article. It didn't last long though and any laughter from me after that was nervous and guilty - and I'm not one that usually feels guilty about anything. However, how can I laugh at someone who admits he is wrong. Many of his sane, Ygern I hear you, and palpably ridiulous followers or peers may take a leaf from this poor man, who at least admitted his belief was wrong. His response was tragic and worthy of compassion not derision.

I feel strongly about this point. Evolution is true, but nature red in tooth and claw is not the ideal we want to follow in our behaviour or our societies.

It does not follow for me that we need to gloat simply because the truth is true.

82. Cult leader Pyotr Kuznetsov tries suicide after realising he was wrong about doomsday

Comment #154952 by Incredulous on April 4, 2008 at 3:02 am

I think that without compassion there can be no end to hateful behaviours and this is true of atheist and believers.

Of course the ideas that drive this poor man to believe what he believed and then to try to kill himself are absurd.

But he is not an absurdity; he is human like all of us. Like, Richard M. I am a bit disappointed at people who see this as a result for the atheist movement. It isn't.

In fact, I would hope it would make each and everyone of us aware of the responsibility we have to pick our fights carefully and appropriately.

People like Robertson should be remorselessly shamed and and his ideas humorously dispatched; but the mentally ill? Easy guys; that guy could be any one of us.

This man did not choose to be a schizophrenic and I for one would pay exhorbitant taxes to ensure people like this were cared for and protected from any harm, whether it comes from atheists or believers.

Remember Einstein and Bertrand Russell once said we should never forget our humanity.

That's all of us.

83. Fleabytes

Comment #154368 by Incredulous on April 3, 2008 at 6:26 am

People of normal honesty are aware that others will want independent corroboration for unusual claims or claims associated with some risk. ... In contrast, sociopaths behave as though they've got the independent corroboration right there with them.

I wish I could say truthful and perceptive things as easily as Dr. Benway.

"I can prove it to you. Yesterday while praying, the Lord told me I'd meet you today. And here you are!"

The number of people who have asked me to help them on some task and then trotted this out. It gets very difficult to refrain from telling them to simply go forth and multiply.

Still, I guess it is best to be polite even to those who are: "aware that promoting an extrordinary claim is an imposition upon their listeners."

84. Fleabytes

Comment #154351 by Incredulous on April 3, 2008 at 6:03 am

Comment #154066 by Corylus

Thanks for the words and good advice, Corylus. I too hate bullies. I think your analysis is very reasonable. Of course, like all the good people on this site I am capable of looking after myself.

I simply hate to see some of life's more clear thinking people waste their time and brain power on people like Robertson, who even wants to claim the mantle of clearthinker without any kind of reasonable support. What a strange man!

I am not anti-religion or anti-anything in particular. I simply do not believe a god is necessary to explain anything we experience.

As far as I'm concerned there is no intellectual case to answer on the existence of god; he simply doesn't.

I believe that many people do not really believe in such an entity, but have not been given a good enough reason to simply discard it as the ludicrous baggage it is.

That is why this site is a good site. Theists come on, say their stuff and invariably leave again with their favourite beliefs, at least intellectually challenged and in man cases found wanting.

I have seen no-one try to convert anyone to atheism as there is precisely nothing, nada, zilch, zip, to convert to.

The quest it seems, and I may be wrong about this, is simply to encourage people to reclaim their minds and, hence, their lives.

The quest is to have people question their beliefs and the effects of the beliefs on themselves and others in the light of evidence.

There are many psuedo believers out there who would really respond to Paula, Steve, MPhil et al., but I simply cannot see someone like Robertson even beginning to play on any other terms than his own stubborn and deluded ones.

Wooter is simply as mad as balloon and can safely be ignored, but I think Robertson is dangerous, because he comes across as plausible.

He is not!! Windy, deceitful, manipulative and almost inhuman in his defence of his anti human god, yes, plausible, no way.

How many people have been seduced by his verbose attempts at joined up thinking I do not want to guess at, and how much time and effort wasted by those capable of planting seeds of rational wisdom on such an odious point of view is disquieting for me.

And yes, it is only a point of view. Steve, if he is not careful, will simply repeat himself ad nauseum to someone who isn't even concerned at how much time he wastes ignoring the simple, and yes, sometimes subtle requests made by those patient enough to give him the respect he does not deserve.

Humour is based on acknowledging and responding to absurdity. Reason and logic are not enough to deal with this kind of guy. Yet, humour is precisely the tool that belief encourages us to use, simply because of its inherent absurdity.

I say we should spend more time taking the piss out of the robertson's of the world.

85. Fleabytes

Comment #153838 by Incredulous on April 2, 2008 at 6:32 am

Clearthinker:

Do you really think my life is that empty?!

Don't flatter yourself that you or your life mean anything to me! It's your IDEAS that are vacuous; YOU simply don't register at all with me. And I repeat: You are not the CENTRE of the universe; there do exist a number of other people on this site whose opinions and ideas mean far more to me than yours ever will. I comment for their benefit not so that you can attempt to drown us out with your egocentric and unverified - nay unverifiable - mutterings.

86. Police: Girl Dies After Parents Pray for Healing Instead of Seeking Medical Help

Comment #152452 by Incredulous on March 31, 2008 at 4:34 am

Comment Geoff #162448

Harrowing. Geoff, are there any more recent statistics on this abominable practice?

Does christian doctrine say suffer little children or make little children suffer?

I get completely confused by these people; more and more I simply find it difficult to engage with the few people who truly believe this faith stuff has any relevance in 21st Century life.

87. Fleabytes

Comment #150072 by Incredulous on March 26, 2008 at 12:40 pm

Well, I finally read the past four days posts and will probably need the next four days to recover from the effort.

I'm disappointed that clearthinker is still afforded the respect of responses from us. I'm convinced that, like a lot of theists, his aim is simply to win out attention and therefore engage us in his vacuous games.

I'm disappointed he actually believes I am any of my remarks at him or am replying to him about anything he writes. He's simply not on my radar.

There's a whole site I address anything and everything to. My world and my universe do not revolve around his fossilised opinions.

To mix metaphors, I am not interested in grappling with his ghosts or imagined deities.

The guy is not interested at all in providing any evidence in the form so wonderfully outlined by Dr Benway - happy birthday to your husband, by the way - in the interests of providing viable explanations for commonly observed reality.

He can't win if we don't play!

Happy birthday Steve. Gotto go!

88. Happy Birthday, Richard Dawkins!

Comment #149926 by Incredulous on March 26, 2008 at 10:37 am

Happy Birthday, Richard.

Might I also sneak in here birthday wishes for Steve Zara??

Kept quiet on this one Steve. Is it your birthday?

89. God's cure for gays lost in sin

Comment #146612 by Incredulous on March 19, 2008 at 8:15 am

"As soon as I came out my entire social network decided the best way to deal with the situation was to stop all communication with me.

I can't think of a better thing that could happen to this person, in the long term anyway. Of course, it is painful and completely inhuman such a thing to happen to anyone, but there are much better social networks to develop and more genuine friendships to form.

An amoeba like me would simply say 'you don't like me I don't like you; bye'.

People deserve far better than this false friendship with false worshippers of false gods.

Merciless institutions like Mercy Ministries make me want to spit!

90. Fleabytes

Comment #145937 by Incredulous on March 18, 2008 at 10:52 am

I couldn't help replying, "Oh, wasn't that nice of him? Just think - he could have called you to Tipton."

(For those outside the UK, Tipton is an incredibly grim, run-down, deprived town in the Midlands of England.)

It's not that bad. My dad worked in Tipton for 40 years with a subsidiary of British Leyland. Ok, I was born in Yorkshire, but grew up in the Sandwell area not far from Tipton.

My parents still live in the area. I don't think you'd describe where they live as grim, run-down, deprived and they certainly wouldn't like you referring to the area in such dismissive, disparaging tones, however worthy the cause.

91. They prayed to cast Satan from my body

Comment #145822 by Incredulous on March 18, 2008 at 7:22 am

Religion has always touted itself as the experts on the mind. There are far too many examples of this and other abuses of vulnerable people for this assertion to be taken at all seriously.

Tom Cruise has recently stated that his religion know the human mind. He is a celebrity and therefore has kudos and influence amongst those who are credulous and lazy.

There must be a concerted effort made to ensure these crazies are not allowed anywhere near those who have needs except in a very basic way.

It is clear the faithful, far from being the solution to mental health problems, are a cause and further exacerbate these issues.

These people must not be allowed to get away with the ignorant nonsense any longer; it may also be time for those political leaders and movers and shakers who so like to peddle their psuedo moral credentials to be encouraged to promote rational, qualified and experience solution providers.

It's an absolute shame and indictment of the world we live in that first century mumbo jumbo is being proferred when 21st century solutions are available.

92. Fleabytes

Comment #145268 by Incredulous on March 17, 2008 at 12:41 pm

Well, I wasn't going to, but I think the rapid approach of the 6K mark, and the hope of 10K, is a good motivation.

As good a reason as any I guess :)

93. Fleabytes

Comment #145176 by Incredulous on March 17, 2008 at 10:40 am

I'll repeat: Why do the good and the great people on this site even bother to waste time and effort debating with this person?

We have many, many other things, ideas and theories to debate, fall out over, get annoyed about, garner agreement, correct each other, laugh and joke about, and of course enjoy Richard M's musical treats.

Many other theists will provide much more civilised and less personal, trite and generally ignorant comments.

Some of these theists will become friends of some of us atheists, and will willingly accept what we do here as having validity for express our wish to merely discuss that that is observed and leads somewhere.

This man merely wants to proselytise, demonise, and dominate others. Mr Robertson and clear thinking in the same sentence is bad grammar, and, like many of his posts make no sense at all when you take out all the unevidenced logical fallacies.

He flatters himself that it is a personal vendetta and that we will not listen to his 'Truth'.

I won't listen to anyone's truth, but I'll debate evidence and ideas - when I get the ****ing time.

Believe, Mr Robertson, the last thing it is is anything personal.

94. I don't believe in atheists

Comment #145073 by Incredulous on March 17, 2008 at 8:17 am

I only have a few minutes; people keep asking me to work. :)

If I repeat anything anyone else has said please forgive me, but this thread moves so fast and I just have no time to read everything.

I am an unashamed fan of Sam Harris, simply because of his straightforward logic. The issue of collateral damage is a moot one for me.

First of all let me say I concur completely with Christopher Hitchens statement that he does not love his enemies.



A love of life, for me, means fighting tooth and nail to defend that life from any attack or threat of attack.

The whole idea of passive resistance seems suicidal. Non violent opposition works only if your enemy knows there others waiting in the wings who will get violent if need be.

Passive resistance to Hitler would lead where?

Now imagine you have evidence to believe you can prevent the death of millions by targetting a small handful of people by torturing them.

You know that if these people are allowed to carry out their dastardly plans and hurt and kill a huge number of people, you will strike back causing more death and destruction to many more innocent victims.

What do you do? Do you allow the immediacy of your disgust at harming singular, individual humans to interfere with the necessary duty of preserving life? Do you political war games with hundreds of thousands of lives to justify your inability to stomach the intimacy of torture?

The point of Sam Harris's argument is that not only does the rational response entail sometimes overriding our natural revulsion at physically harming known targets, but it also means simply solving problems by clarifying what the problem is you are trying to solve.

This is true whether it is trying to unify quantum mechanics with relativity, assert the truth of evolution over creationism or stop a group of people destroying people and their lives by proactively identifying and disabling those who would do so.

If there was a nice way of doing this which included a nice sensible chat over toast and tea, then I am sure this is what would be done.

But in a black and white world you have to do black and white things; sometimes that means that the unthinkable has to be thought and maybe acted upon.

This is meant to be a provocative comment; I too find the idea of torture horrendous, but then again if it prevents the need for collateral damage costing millions of lives, does that not mean I have to explore all possibilities?

95. Fleabytes

Comment #143771 by Incredulous on March 14, 2008 at 11:32 am

"In the beginning was the word..."

Exactly, Steve. Words can be a museum of ignorance. They can be used to describe, but often do not have the quality of instigating perception.

Humans are perceptual animals, of that I am quite convinced. We need words, but we also need to invent words to describe perceptions not already covered by our existing dictionary.

Words tend to direct rather than generate thought, it seems to me.

96. Fleabytes

Comment #143769 by Incredulous on March 14, 2008 at 11:25 am

I think many would agree that Einstein is a pretty smart guy. I've heard it reported that his brain had more glial cells in the areas of the brain which dealt with visualisation and mathematical reasoning than was usual. I guess this may suggest the visual cortex and the parietal lobe et al.

Allegedly, he was taciturn as a young boy, not readily expressing himself verbally on many occasions.

Richard Feynmann expressed horror at the mechanical way in which mathematics was taught, suggesting his own mathematical development revolved around simply hunting the unknown.

Recent work done on chess players suggest the visual cortex, used also to recognise faces, is used a lot to recognise patterns of vital. A master will instantly recall something like 100,000 of these positions.

It seems language is very good at storing and passing on social knowledge, but in the more fluid kind of intelligence we would associate with, for want of a better word, prodigies and language independent thinkers, there appears, for me, to be a more sensual, quality.

I'm not very good at introspection so I can't verify any of this from my own experience.

Very interesting, indeed

97. Fleabytes

Comment #143757 by Incredulous on March 14, 2008 at 11:01 am

Many's the time I've laughed at her complete and utter lack of need for spoken language: in many ways she's more articulate than I am.

How could she express such emotions if she weren't experiencing them?

I used to be able to tell whether an ex-girlfriend was stressed with me simply by her dog's attitude to me.

If I was in we were pals; if I was out, it would let me know.

If accidently knocked, it would yelp, circle the room, offer itself for patting to everyone, who by now were expressing regret and concern and then accept the apology and act as though nothing had happened.

I had so much to learn from that dog, especially about how to stay on the right side of my ex.

98. Fleabytes

Comment #143732 by Incredulous on March 14, 2008 at 10:29 am

There was a documentary recently in the Uk, on either channel four or five, which showed a group of dolphins protecting humans from a white shark by circling them.

I don't know if this is an example of feeling, but for me, it suggests a sense of protection and awareness of danger for species other than themselves.

I'm on shaky ground with this stuff about animals, emotions and their relative cognitive superiority/inferiority to humans in that respect.

I can't help but feel we are a little premature in declaring ourselves a morally superior species without a lot more investigation into the neurophysical underpinnings of cognitive processes.

I'm tempted to go with the idea that evolution has granted us sophisticated tools like words understood and generated by the broca and wernicke regions in the temporal lobe and motor cortex, I think, someone who has a surer understanding of this will correct me, I'm sure.

While words definitely influence our behaviour, I don't accept that someohow it means we are so substantially different to our animal relatives, in that I believe we will find more similarities in underlying proceses than we subconsciously would like to admit.

These are just opinions, mind, please don't think my rambling has any kind of valid scientific accuracy.

Fascinating subject though.

99. Fleabytes

Comment #143616 by Incredulous on March 14, 2008 at 8:50 am

And surprise me by actually saying something of substance...er, no, wait...

lol. Waiting for Godot. Forgive me if I don't wait, Styrer, I've enjoyed the first half of my few decades in the sun and I'm too busy making sure I have big fun in the second half. Far too much to play hide and seek with shy guy and I really don't care about passing, failing or taking his tests.

Your remark made me laugh!

100. Fleabytes

Comment #143597 by Incredulous on March 14, 2008 at 8:32 am

Annabanana,

You make a very interesting point about Harry Potter and Jesus Christ. The important thing for me is that they are both fictional characters as far as we are concerned. They are both vehicles, as far as I am concerned, for issues and concerns of the writers.

The major difference is that J.K. Rowling would never get away with describing herself as a witness for a imaginary superdaddy, what with all the media coverage, marketing schemes and general real life sanity around now that maybe wasn't around then.

What I don't understand, though, is why would god allow JK Rowling to be a more popular and, yes, better writer, than his celestial self?