51. Stop House Resolution 888

Comment #107866 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on January 5, 2008 at 2:20 pm

"I would like to know in what sense "Christianity" has been able to rewrite history"


How about we start with "001: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." and see where we go from there.

52. Sam Harris debate with Rabbi David Wolpe

Comment #107776 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on January 5, 2008 at 9:33 am

"If I open my fridge and there is absence of evidence for beer, that is evidence for absence of beer."

Now why didn't someone tell me this earlier. Two hours I spent staring at my fridge expecting that beer to turn up and it turns out it probably wasn't there all along!
On the other hand it might have been an intangible beer. Which is reassuring as it means I've always got beer, but is let down by the fact I can never see or taste it.

On another forum I regularly visit one of the mods has "The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence" as their signature.
In my signature I've added "...but it is a bloody good indication."
I don't think she approves.

53. It is possible to be moral without God

Comment #107097 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on January 4, 2008 at 4:10 am

I'll never knock anybody for using a second language, but sometimes the attempts are unreadable. Here's a bit of a clean up of what I think Hihino was trying to say. Please, if I got anything wrong in translation then tell me.

Oh and welcome to the forum - though I think the response to your first post is that people are either going to ignore it or their going to tear apart your rather peculiar little personal religion.


Originaly by Hihino, with editing by Henry (all translation errors are the fault of Henry);

"Hello everyone, i'm new here. I have a mother, who used to be a buddhist but is now a christian, and my father is an atheist. My sister and I are the same as my mother but I will regard myself as half atheist and half christian.

"This week i have studied a lot of Prof R Dawkins' philosophy of atheism. I just have few comments about atheism and religion, for whoever to answer.

"Just put this simple way, why does religion hate or disbelieve those who are atheist, and why are atheists the same way? Is it because of a different perception on life? Well most likely a christian will be christian if they born in the US, a Muslim will be muslim if they were born in the middle east. So they are just influenced by their environment, family, school and friends. And for atheists, they are more likely to use their inteligence to get all the answers of what, why, when and what so ever, so that explains why they are different. From my own opinion, why do most of you hate or disagree with each other? Well we live in an imperfect world (as are humans) do you still expect to get a perfect answer? Let me put this simple. If you as a GOD have seen two kind of people in the world. The first believes in God and does whatever the bible says but they also hate and some of them kill the ones who disbelieve in God. Second are the people who don't believe the existence of God because they couldn't see any evidence but they live peacefully with ethics and good morals and behaviour in the society. Well i'm pretty sure God would prefer to have the second one.

"I'm a christian, but i have never seen or spoke to him directly, but i have a faith and believe that God created two things in this world which are good and evil and the reason is He wanted to ask us to learn both so that we would know what is the difference between them and know which one we want to choose. God wants you to live happily, get experience in your life, love everyone who have different beliefs than yourselves. Why do you make a problem of the existence of a God if they is no true evidence? See what you really need to do, (ask?) is it true to hate those who disbelive God? Will Jesus do the same thing if today he arrived in the world for the second time? Will he punnish or give love to the one who didn't believe in him? The answer is yours to be kept.
(edit - Think they mean that this is a personal question we should all ask ourselves, not sure)

"The next thing I want to comment on is the truthness of all information provided by the holy bible. There are always debate about dinosaurus, noah etc. well the bible is written by human's hand and humans are imperfect creatures but some christians argue that angels personally guide them to write the bible? the answer is "how do you know exactly?" I'm not saying that what all the bible said is wrong or true but what i'm trying to say is take those things in balance so you wont blame or debate with each other over the truthness. The truth is "as long as we live in this imperfect world (as we are imperfect as well?), we won't have any definite answers".
From my own perception, i believe the earth was created 5 billion years ago, but in the same time i also believe that it was created by God 6000 years ago. My belief is the belief to consider things which have different explanations and see that all of them have the possibility of the answer. As i said again there are no definite answers as long as we are still in Earth. There is always something beyond what you can reach.

"Some parts of the bible, im sure to say that almost 100%, i do not believe even though i am a christian. The Bible said that (well is not word by word said but its roughly) every human that has sins or evil followers will be put in hell "forever". lets put it this way, take the most evil men from the 21 century, who are Hitler and the emperor of Japan in WW2. And i want you to think of when the two of them had just been born into this world. How pure the heart of Hitler when he was 1 day old, how innocent he is, did he have an evil mind? Did he have a willing to murder someone? I would like to say he can be evil as you said, because his ideology which come from what he has gone through from his experience. If Hitler was born in Alaska or some tiny part in the world, would he become evil? If no, how can the bible put him to hell for the rest of the time, knowing that for some part he is a compltely innocent. If you want to believe he is in hell for the rest of time, you have to believe that he had an evil heart since the day he was born in the world.

"Gay and lesbian, its a common debate for this century. Let me put this way. If you dont agree with such term, what makes you disagree? Is it because it's disgusting? ethicaly incorect? It just seems wrong? Well what ever the answer is, it is totally up to them who are gay or lesbian to choose the answer because they have their own lives and they know the consequences. For lesbian and gay I have a comment for you. If you are gay and you adopt a child, and when your child becomes an adult and chooses to become gay as well, will you accept that? If you dont, dont be a gay, if yes, you may be a gay. Thats how I put things. If you feel your religion allowed you to kill your enemy in the name of your God, will you accept for your enemy to kill you in the name of their God? If not stop killing them, if yes, you know the consequences.

"For atheism, there are some parts where I disagree with you but of course at the end I can't put the evidence for my beliefs. But i truly understand atheism starting last week. Ad the only reason when i will "hate" them is at the time when they die, and they see God as the whole answers of questions and it would be enough evidence to explain all being and at the same time they still claim they are atheists, that is the time i will hate those believers. But as long as we are in this world, I dont seems have enough explanations to hate or disagree with them and at the same time that goes for all religion in the world.

"Live happily in this world, life is so precious, every single moment of time we spend is precious, love your belonging, love your parents, friends, teacher, even your enemy (i know it's hard but currently i'm dealing with it) and love your existence of human kind in this world. Stop arguing about God when science and religion do not have definite evindence to prove it. I'm pretty sure whether God exists or not, it is the best thing to live your life without regret, do something useful, love each other without any boundaries. Well if you are so desperate to have a God in your life that you can have proof of, then i think the best God in the earth is the earth itself. Where do you stand right know? Who supplies you with food, air, water? Of course the answers is to be kept for you.
(edit - it's that odd sentence again. ?)

"The greatest mysteries of universe and life will be answered when science and religion have come together."

54. Huckabee: Guns, God and rock'n'roll

Comment #106898 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on January 3, 2008 at 4:45 pm

Hey theantitheist,
it's worth knowing that the immaculate conception wasn't the conception of Jesus - it was the conception of Mary (according to Catholic dogma). Them fruitcakes reckon we are all born into sin due to two people in a garden thinking that they might like to better themselves and learn some stuff, but the big bad dog turns around and says "no - I want you to remain ignorant and stupid" and so punishes humankind to be forever with sin.

Due to the immaculate conception Mary was without sin, so when god got her knocked up at a party, after he'd given her a few drinks and slipped some rohipnol in there, Jesus too was without sin.

Don't ask me to explain this stupidity, it's not my make believe friend. I can understand why somebody not of the religion might not know the difference between the immaculate conception and the virgin birth, but the funny thing is that most religious people aren't aware of the difference.

Cheers.

55. Do the laws of God trump those of man?

Comment #99641 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on December 17, 2007 at 8:35 am

Splitter!

56. Synthetic DNA on the Brink of Yielding New Life Forms

Comment #99625 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on December 17, 2007 at 8:04 am

Genuinely makes me bounce up and down with giddiness. But then we shouldn't be surprised, this stuff was a common theme for SF writers in the late 90's/early part of the century. Where SF leads, science isn't too far behind. (Just so long as nobody tries to copy JC Grimwood's idea of a ferrous eating super bacteria)

The deffinitions of what is alive and what isn't just get kicked about when stuff like this crops up.

57. Controversial Anti-Muslim Dutch Film Adds to Already Simmering Tensions

Comment #97566 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on December 12, 2007 at 11:14 am

Ban the Koran - oh dear, this bloke just shot himself in the foot. Plank.

On the other hand I was interested to read;
"The Koran is a matter of interpretation, just like the Bible and the Torah. You need to interpret, not take it literally."

That's possibly the first time I've ever seen that kind of statement. Would be interesting to see the reaction of a number of mosques if they were presented with that idea.

58. Biologist fired for beliefs, suit says

Comment #95869 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on December 9, 2007 at 11:33 am

"(though I think that, to be fair, we should hear the other side of the story)."

What other side of the story, do you mean the university's? Because we've already seen Abraham's version of events and already it doesn't add up.



"What about theistic evolutionists or ID proponents with credentials equivalent to those of Michael Behe?"

Behe has no credentials - he's a joke. No peer reviewed work, ID discredited as the costumed creationism that it is and not a shred of science around. No, he wouldn't get a job because he falls at the first hurdle of being a scientist - that is get the evidence and then use that to construct a conclusion. Behe likes to do it the other way round. ID has no evidence to back it up, despite many years of searching and is about as unscientific as you can get. Any scientist working so closely with evolution who starts spouting ID should get the sack immediatly for being so unscientific.

What about a theistic evolutionist? Well, for the few of them that actualy exist (because quite frankly they are rarer than honest politicians), I can't realy see a problem. Those theistic evolutionists that I've read are very adept at compartmentalising. While at work they are good scientists, following all the good scientific practices and not letting their religion interfere with the science. After all, they are some of the biggest proponents of that old lie "science and faith are compatible".

59. Biologist fired for beliefs, suit says

Comment #95840 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on December 9, 2007 at 10:29 am

"Plaintiff does not acknowledge evolution as an undisputed scientific fact, but rather as a scientific theory."


Wierd, I just don't get this. The plaintiff seems to appreciate what the rest of the scientific community already knows - that it's not a fact but a theory. But then he whines on as though this is a bad thing?! Truely this shows the person is an incompetant plank if he can't understand basic scientific principles.

I smell a rat. It seems very apparent that this was a setup. It would be nice if the plaintiff's recolection of events was true, but some how I get the feeling he's being just a little misleading with his story telling.

Personaly I hope this goes to court - it would be a good opportunity to completely destroy that creationist bullshit about it being "only a theory".

60. 'Secular Believers'

Comment #88516 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on November 17, 2007 at 9:14 am

Just watching through it now. It seems to me the guy in part three is an atheist rather than an agnostic, he just doesn't use the term because he doesn't understand what it realy means and doesn't like the emotional bagage that other people apply to it. Could be because it would piss his wife even more than she already is - could be one truth too many for her and he doesn't want to harm the marriage.

It's interesting to watch Sam Harris talk about not using the term atheist and then seeing someone doing it.

61. Dr Bari: Government stoking Muslim tension

Comment #87236 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on November 11, 2007 at 2:47 pm

Sorry for the double post, but...

"Terrorists are terrorists, they may use religion but we shouldn't say Muslim terrorists, it stigmatises the whole community. We never called the IRA Catholic terrorists."

That would be because the IRA didn't go about claiming that what they were doing was in the name of their god or their religion. The chaps who murder people while blowing themselves up in the process are claiming they do it specificaly because of their religion.

Classic use of the no-true-Scotsman routine with the "That's not my god/religion/faith" excuse.

62. Dr Bari: Government stoking Muslim tension

Comment #87231 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on November 11, 2007 at 2:38 pm

"Sex before marriage is unacceptable..."
"On adultery and living together we should try to go back to the religiously informed style of life"
"Homosexuality is unacceptable"
"It depends what sort of stoning"
"You shouldn't be revealing your body so much that it can be tempting to other people"


And people wonder why there is so much tension in the air - how about because the prat who said these statements is the leader of the Muslim Council of Britain.
These ideas are NOT compatable with the freedoms we enjoy as a democratic country.

Dr Bari ... go fornicate with yourself. (oops, can't do that, the invisible space magicican might see it and send you to hell!)

63. Against the grain: There are questions that science cannot answer

Comment #71992 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on September 20, 2007 at 5:02 am

"Dawkins is very angry with anyone who says there are mysteries, but science cannot answer some questions."

What a load of utter rubbish (aside from not being able to answer everything - at the moment). We know there are things we don't know (uh, oh, I think I did a Bushism with the known unknowns). This silly sentence is the exact thinking that lies behind ever fundie who claims that scientists or atheists are arrogant. They still don't get it.


"We raise all sorts of questions beyond the material world."

Bayond the material world would be where exactly? I think I might have dropped mine down the back of the sofa.


"Then it's understanding we're after rather than information."

No, it's not. It's that warm fuzzy feeling of reassurance you are after. It's the comfy blanket of warmth and the safety net of not having to engage your brain.


"These are not questions like "is there a box on the table?" but questions of inner life, that can't be settled in the lab."

Inner life? Is that in the same location as that beyond the material world place? Damn these wishful realities are hard to keep track of. Any time you think you've got one nailed down, poof, someone invents another one.

64. VOTE on the 'Faith smackdown': Richard Dawkins vs Francis Collins

Comment #71768 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on September 19, 2007 at 3:44 pm

Marshall, oh dear. Calbear77 described a self purpose driven life, a future that you create, a destiny of your own design. What do you want to do today? Do it! Endless possibilities of fulfilment and wonder, whether you be partaking in somthing personaly challenging, shared with the love of others or just to do something for the love of being alive - is that not purpose enough?
And yet you find this depressing?
(Must...resist urge...to mock!!)

Please forgive me for being presumptuous, but I've no doubt that your purpose in life is to lead a good life in the name of your particular invisible space pixie so that you can go to your afterlife to spend eternity bowing and praising.

Sounds like the most depressing thing I can imagine. (OK, so the urge to mock overpowered me)


A thought for others - I've stopped refering to "a god" and I only ever now talk in terms of "gods". With the amount of deities that people have invented over the years I see no reason to highlight an individual god for special treatment, and I'm hoping anyone I talk to about the subject will pick that up. Any thoughts?

65. Larry King Interviews Kathy Griffin

Comment #71345 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on September 18, 2007 at 1:30 pm

Just from that interview she comes across as slightly annoying rather than funny, but then I guess I don't get American humour. As for her speech - was that it? The way it was presented to us, it sounded like she had gone off on a rant and might has well have said "Fuck you Jesus."...

... but she didn't. She had a little giggle, poked fun at all the planks who go up and thank god (because he's obviously more concerned about whether this twat or that twat deserves an award than the suffering of the world) and then walks off.

They're right about cencorship being better than self promotion. Just ask Frankie - he says relax!

66. Airline sacrifices goats to appease sky god

Comment #70918 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on September 17, 2007 at 8:38 am

Actualy we used to keep one of them magic 8-balls around our office for when we had a realy complicated radar snag. It makes about as much sense as anything else when you're dealing with waveguide theory.

67. Airline sacrifices goats to appease sky god

Comment #70785 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on September 16, 2007 at 11:05 pm

Mwahahaha, you wait until I tell this to my lot at work. Don't worry, her majesty's finest shall be held together by araldite, speed tape and a .. err .. dead goat!!

68. The Rise of Atheist America

Comment #69243 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on September 10, 2007 at 6:34 am

"...Somehow, atheism ... is now becoming hip, sophisticated, enlightened, even a badge of honor."

Uh, oh. I guess that means it's time for me to give up on atheism. I've never done anything hip or enlightened in my life. And as for sophisticated ... bugger!

However, it does inspire me with confidence that the reaction we are now getting is more scattershot. Some years ago all someone had to do was call someobdy else an atheist and that was their argument won (similar to the way commie was used as a slander in the US years ago). They can't get away with that anymore. They actualy have to back up their arguments, and the more they do it the deeper the holes they dig themselves into. Chin up, it doesn't look all doom and gloom.

69. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #69230 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on September 10, 2007 at 5:32 am

Phillip, I suppose it depends on who you listen to. Some say that the floods in England this year are down to the decline in morality of the country, Katrina was God's vengance against a Lesbian, the little tykes that managed to survive the christmas tsunami were attributed to god (so long as we ignore all those people god couldn't be arsed to save) and best of all is 9/11, with both sides (muslim and evangelical) declaring that it was an act of god.

That last one has me wondering why evangelicals can be pissed off with the muslims for 9/11. Surely if it was gods divine punishment for the lack of morality in America, then the muslims were only carrying out gods intended plan. So the evangelicals should actualy be thanking the muslims for their efforts. Wierd, no?

Of course, there is a perfectly good explanation for why it would appear that god no longer has that much to do in the world, but there's no religite in the world that would accept it for a moment.

70. Interview with Francis Collins

Comment #68995 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on September 9, 2007 at 12:28 pm

Many thanks for the suggestions. Who knows, maybe one day I might even be able to join in with the intelectual part of the discussions going on around here.

71. Interview with Francis Collins

Comment #68980 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on September 9, 2007 at 11:34 am

Henri, I'd like to get my head around the basics of morality, are there any books you could recomend for a novice?
(and I mean complete novice ... give me two bits of wire and a battery and I can get a fleet of planes in the sky, but what goes on in a persons head is plain wierd to me)
Ta.

72. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63898 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on August 16, 2007 at 3:30 pm

I'll have to disagree with the USA Limey and beg that everyone (especialy darwin2) carries on posting. Collective consciousness, multiple universe and earth being one of the hells we have fallen to - man, if I collect this stuff up I'm gonna write a best seller that'll make Harry Potter look like peanuts.

73. Interview with Richard Dawkins about 'The Enemies of Reason'

Comment #63047 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on August 13, 2007 at 2:48 am

It looked like Judy was hating every minute of it, not because she believes in woo-woo but because she realised that if you're criticizing paranormal bunkum for lack of evidence then the same can be applied to the symbol of torture worn around her neck.

It was good to see RD hammering home the point about evidence - every other sentence contained something along the lines of "show me the proof". Good for getting in the "it's not about what I believe" line in too. A lot of people don't seem to understand that.

Richard seemed to be enjoying himself, as if this whole reason thing was a new enlightening experience (/irony). I hope RD took him aside after the show and explained how that con-man Geller does his spoon bending shenanigans. Any one know if he's a commited xtian?

74. Fossils in Kenya Challenge Linear Evolution

Comment #62332 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on August 9, 2007 at 10:08 am

A better way to look at it would be the more you know, the less you claim to know.

75. Religion beat became a test of faith

Comment #57850 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on July 21, 2007 at 3:36 pm

A good read, it is interesting to see a person of pixieology (sorry... faith) coming to terms with ideas and realisations that many of us take for granted.

I suppose faith can be considered a gift if you are happy being ignorant.

76. Won't anyone stand up for God?

Comment #54515 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on July 7, 2007 at 3:19 pm

"Thinking Christians would no more take every word of either testament literaly"

It was at this point I gave up on the article. When somebody tries to make the case for their side, I'm all for it - but when they try to claim that people on their side don't say the things they do, or don't believe the things they confess to, then all I can think is that they are deluded beyond the point of comprehension.

There are twats who DO take the word of the testaments as literal. And they claim to be the thinking ones. It's the same frigging excuse everytime with the religious, they use the "no true scottsman" excuse every time sombody who claims to be of their religion says something that makes them feel awkward. What a load of crap.

77. Egypt mufti says female circumcision forbidden

Comment #52579 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on June 27, 2007 at 10:32 am

The difference between FGM and circumcision (aside from how much worse one is than the other) comes from our attitudes to the two. On a site like this it would be very surprising to see anybody advocating the butchery of a womans genitals.

There seems to be little to converse about - we almost all agree it is cruel and terrible, and all would like to see it dumped into history as a reminder of how vicious people can be when they want too. With the minds on this site that argument has already been won. It is the other people that choose to conduct this barbaric ritual (and would never consider coming to this site) that need to have their consciousness raised, but posting little messages in a forum where you know everybody feels the same about the subject will not achieve anything.

What we CAN do from this site is raise the consciousness of those who visit here and don't consider circumcision to be inhumane. It is a small matter (in comparisson with female ganital mutilation), but it is something that I think we on this site can have an impact upon.

If you know of some way that we on this site can pool our efforts to raise people's consciousness with regards to FGM then I'm sure we all want to hear it.

78. Egypt mufti says female circumcision forbidden

Comment #52230 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on June 26, 2007 at 2:32 pm

@Spinoza - .....eh?
You compare clothing, bathing and feeding (non of which causes any permanent physical or mental damage) with circumcision (which at least causes physical damage and can cause mental damage)? Please tell me how on earth that comparison makes sense to you?

If you want to cut a bit of your nob off then that's up to you, but a child should not have that decision made for them. There is no debate - there are only humane people on the one side and barbaric idiots who like to cut childrens willies on the other.
And you question whether it is bad?

But back to FGM (which is infinatly worse) - it's relieving to see it outlawed, but I can't see it making a difference. Traditions are hard things to break, whether they are allowed or not.

79. Hamas Kindergarten Graduation Ceremony

Comment #47767 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on June 5, 2007 at 1:13 pm

Off topic I know but ... does anybody else find that the start of the Israeli national anthem reminds them of "I'm a little teapot"?

80. The planet hunters

Comment #47566 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on June 5, 2007 at 1:45 am

@Magetoo - this site was set up around The God Delusion, you should hardly be surprised if the talk is about religion. What you want from peoples comments and what people are free to comment about appear to be two different things.

Hi James, thanks for the answers.
If timing is irrelevant, then what was so special about the time that Jesus decided to come to Earth? What if he needed to be on another planet at exactly the same time? Would that mean that there would have to be another Jesus, would there be one Jesus but spread over two planets, or would the other planet just have to make do whilst Jesus was on this one?

If Jesus "had" to meet a gruesome fate at the hands of the aliens on the other planets (just as he had to meet that fate on Earth), then what does that say about freedom of will?

81. The planet hunters

Comment #47500 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on June 4, 2007 at 6:14 pm

Hi James - what a strange idea, Jesus going to other planets and dieing for them too.

I mean (if the young earth creationists are correct), it took four thousand years for Jesus to make an appearance on this planet, and he's not been seen since. Would he have appeared on those other planets at the same time? Would he have suffered an incredibly coincidental fate on those planets too?

If Jesus was destined to suffer and die on those planets too, then how can the claim of freedom of will be true - surely some meddling must have gone on to ensure on ALL those planets he suffered to save their sins?

Unless he only suffered on this planet for their sins, in which case how would they know on the other planets that he had suffered for their sins? (which would kind of defeat the purpose of the suffering)

The idea of the cross as a symbol of christianity always seemed a bit strange to me. Imagine for a moment that in the first few thousand years humanity became very advance quite quickly. Now imagine Jesus is born into an age when we have electricity and the power to use it. Jesus gets convicted of his crimes and is sentenced to death. But we now have electricity and zzap him to death with an electric chair. Would his disciples feel happy about using 'old sparky' as the symbol to represent their religion?

Don't mind me, I'm rambling now.

82. Religion and Child Abuse

Comment #47498 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on June 4, 2007 at 5:56 pm

The US not signing on board doesn't bother me. Spams have a habit of shouting that their way is the best, and whilst their country has some major issues with humans rights *cough..Guantanamo Bay..cough*, their record in general is good.

What concerns me are those countries that signed up to the convention and are going to blatently ignore it. It's all very well to sign a piece of paper saying you are going to do something, but I hardly doubt that this is going to have any affect on child slavery.

What worries me is that there needs to be something specificaly aimed at children at all. By declaring they need their own separate rights from adults implies that they are not equal to adults in some way - as though they were lesser humans. Surely it would be better to raise the consciousness of these backwards neanderthals that children are people too.

83. Man to die over insult

Comment #47199 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on June 3, 2007 at 12:35 pm

We care because we are human. We care because it is peoples delusions that are driving them to this. We care because we aspire to a future where one humans life is valued as the equal of another. We care because we feel that freedom of speech is a right, and that freedom to think isn't just a right but is essential to being human.

To claim elitism and disregard an individuals life just because you don't agree with them is shallow.

84. What I Think About Evolution

Comment #46789 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on June 1, 2007 at 4:11 pm

darwin2: "I believe scientists, especially physicists, are among the most spiritually evolved beings on our planet."


I think scientists just like to know how things tick - nothing necessarily spiritual about it at all.
And the use of the word evolved in that sentence grinds with me. Enlightened would have been a much better word (though I'd have still disagreed with you).

85. Groundbreaking Research Has Scientists Talking With Apes

Comment #46250 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on May 30, 2007 at 4:49 pm

The video works by clicking the picture in the article, then clicking the upper right picture in the page that opens.

I'd like to be proven wrong, but I see little difference between this research and my Mum's dog going ballistic when I shout "Ball!" at her. So an ape can touch a screen when you give it the right command words? Congratulations - a form of communication (action and reaction) that we see all the time in the animal kingdom.

Is this realy comparable with human conversation? Is this any different to human conversation? I would have been more interested in those questions. This particular article doesn't seem to have anything new to say.

The ape can tell you when it's head hurts. Congratulations - my Mum's older dog can tell you when her bladder hurts and she needs to piss. (The younger one hasn't quite grasped it yet though, even after four years)

86. Diary of a Deserter

Comment #46246 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on May 30, 2007 at 4:41 pm

Wow, that was a very honest read, and for me very moving (which is very surprising for me, for a number of reasons).

I shall be keeping an eye on this one. I'd like to wish all the best and stuff, but something tells me that this particular deconversion is going to be nothing but painful. But then, accepting that everything you have ever been told is a lie, and that the purpose of life you have been given by others is a fraud, is always painful to accept.

87. Observer Diary 27th May 2007

Comment #45676 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on May 28, 2007 at 11:13 pm

Thanks BT Murtagh. I was interested to have a little look, but you've done better than I. I too was interested whether the numbers did justify the comment.

88. Another Christian Science Fair embarrasses itself

Comment #45419 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on May 27, 2007 at 4:56 pm

As soon as D'Arcy asked how we could see the light from stars over 10,000 light years away I instantly put my god-head on and imagined that god put the light there in the beginning. Made that one up all on mny own. Didn't use any sort of scientific method - completely and totaly fabricated.

Read devolved's article and bamm, there's exactly what I was thinking in print.

Which tells me one of two things.
1) I'm a genious whom even Einstein can't compare with, or (more likely)...
2) This faithhead stuff is increadibly easy to make up as you go along. Just say goddidit to every question and you are never wrong.

Just want to say thank you to don malvado - very educational stuff. When I read the previous post about the stalagmite forming quickly over the bat, I hadn't even considered that stalagmites and stalagtites were very specificly formed. It is obviously very easy for someone not in the know (like myself or, dare I say it, devolved) to mistake them for other formations which look similar but aren't.

89. Observer Diary 27th May 2007

Comment #45412 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on May 27, 2007 at 3:53 pm

I was interested by the professor's claim that 9/11 wasn't even a blip on NY death figures so I had a look. (Couldn't find the one's for September, so I just looked at the year as a whole)

Deaths in New York City
1999: 61,411
2000: 59,737
2001: 60,075
2002: 58,356
2003: 57,917

http://www.health.state.ny.us/nysdoh/vital_statistics/index.htm

90. Observer Diary 27th May 2007

Comment #45399 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on May 27, 2007 at 2:58 pm

Jack Rawlinson said... It reveals that what this nonsense is realy about is appearances. They need to be seen to be doing something; never mind whether that something actually makes sense, or is likely to be effective.


This is very true, but it also isn't a new idea. In fact, the majority of any security work is in the appearance of being unbreachable. If a security force can give off the impression of being professional, capable and pro active then they can be surprisingly effective.
The key word here is 'deterent', and that is all that any security opperation is trying to achieve.

You might be surprised at how easy it is to break onto any secure compound completely undetected, past all the armed guards and trained dogs, once you understand the system.

91. Interview with Pierre Rehov

Comment #37830 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on May 5, 2007 at 11:24 pm

Beautiful religion my left testical.

Whilst in Malaysia last year I discovered a copy of the Koran (in English) in my hotel room. Since I'd just started on my journey from an atheist bordering on agnostic to an out and out 9.99999 atheist, I decided I want to fully understand what I would be opposed to. I managed to get through 4 of the little chapters (surahs, or what ever they are called) and promptly threw the book across the room in utter disgust at the vile evilness that man was capable of writing.

It is not a beautiful religion, it is a vile, represive, totalitarian, inhumane abomination.

92. In Ducks, War of the Sexes Plays Out in the Evolution of Genitalia

Comment #36877 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on May 2, 2007 at 3:35 pm

What a bizzare profesion - studying shagging ducks.

I can just see the next big youtube video in response to The Bannana: the atheists nightmare.

"The Ducks Cock: the creationists nightmare!"

93. The Damned

Comment #36874 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on May 2, 2007 at 3:22 pm

Nah, they just stick organic in front of it so they can charge twice as much in the supermarkets.

I think it means a cultural way of thinking (zeitgeist?) which has naturaly moved towards atheism rather than an enforced totalitarian form of atheism, like which Stalin tried (and ultimatly failed for painfuly obvious reasons) to implement.

94. The Damned

Comment #36871 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on May 2, 2007 at 3:10 pm

"SMILE"
"There is no Hell"

... make a good T-shirt that!

95. Just 120 Trillion Miles From Home

Comment #36141 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on April 30, 2007 at 9:22 am

Squinky - while I agree that the colonization of other worlds is highly unlikely to ever happen (not saying that there's no chance it will), the time taken to get to those other planets shouldn't be a problem.

Time is supposed to slow down the faster you get to the speed of light so for anyone making the voyage of 20 lightyears, if they travelled at half the speed of light, it would be 40 years for us on Earth but it would be substantialy less for those making the voyage. (Or at least that's the general idea I got from my very basic understanding of relativity and what I read from a book called the Sparrow - not sure how much was fact and how much was bastardised science).

96. Hubble Celebrates Its Seventeenth Birthday with the Birth of a Star

Comment #35983 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on April 29, 2007 at 5:31 pm

My computer just died at the attempt to get the 500mb version. I think it started laughing and told me to bugger off. The high res is very nice though.

Things have been getting to a head between me and me mum recently as I've become more vocal about her silly religious views. One of the things she asked was how I could find anything beautiful if I only viewed existence in a scientific/physical/chemical way. I originaly used the photos of our Yosemitte holiday to show how silly an argument that was. I'm going to have to show this picture to her next time I visit, it truely is beautiful, especialy when you take into context what it means.

This is creation - it's awesome.

97. Doctors Opposing Circumcision: An Appeal for Misha

Comment #32547 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on April 17, 2007 at 10:58 am

The smegma build up excuse is pure BS. Sure, it happens at the start of puberty (also known as the "WTF is happening to my body?" phase), however during my sex education lessons during schooling good cleaning was emphasised for both boys and girls. So the underneath of the foreskin is regularly cleaned by most all men who are as the Great Invisible Sky Pixie made them - penis intact. (Nowadays they are also taught the practices of searching for testicular cancer and breast cancer too, which is fantastic).

I'm well aware that the effects of Female Genital Mutilation and male circumcision are very different (I read the start of Infidel and nearly threw up). However I can't help but notice the running theme that in both situations the lame ass excuse of "Unclean" gets used as justification for genital mutilation. That's realy screwed up and so incredibly ignorant.

98. Postmodernism Disrobed

Comment #31548 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on April 13, 2007 at 8:09 am

I have to say I've never read a thread before on any forum where a single contributor has posted so many times and at such length about how they aren't going to contribute anything to the discussion.

September, I am in awe.

99. The Great British Literary Census

Comment #31547 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on April 13, 2007 at 8:00 am

I've only read 5 of those - I think I want to cry.

Gibson's Neuromancer? Not read that one, but I've read other stuff by him, and if it's anything like that then there's much better SF out there than his overblown rubbish.

Oh and Small Gods is the best Pratchett book. Closely followed by Pyramids.

100. Dawkins vs Haggard: the Python Edition

Comment #29923 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on April 5, 2007 at 1:51 pm

Haha,
"What's That word?"
"OBEDIENCE!"

"Baaah!!"

Classic.
The Monty Python one's pretty good too.