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

Comments by epeeist


1301. Fleabytes

Comment #130743 by epeeist on February 21, 2008 at 8:18 am

Comment #130685 by clearthinker


1) It is not difficult to offend the fundamentalist atheists on this website.
Your first post back where you have identified yourself and you immediately start into the mode of dialogue known as "personal quarrel". This, and the fact that you then take the responses to place on your own site was what got you banned.

Incidentally - you still owe me an answer. What are the "tenets" (your word) of atheism over and above the non-belief in gods. To my knowledge I have asked you this at least three times and got no response each time.

1302. Fleabytes

Comment #130622 by epeeist on February 21, 2008 at 2:49 am

Comment #130579 by clearthinker


Why is the Wee Flea not allowed to respond?

There was some discussion on allowing Mr. Robertson to post here, some were for banning him, others wanted his comments moved to an alternative thread.

Much of the discussion came about because of the deliberate tactic by the wee flea of causing offence and hence adverse comments which he then posted on his own site to show how unpleasant and anti-rational we were.

1303. Fleabytes

Comment #130572 by epeeist on February 20, 2008 at 11:33 pm

Comment #130474 by Steve Zara


Relevant to the topic and that post, The Bishop has been posting in the last day or so. I could well be wrong, but the combination of lowbrow reasoning, rudeness, question-dodging, references to the "right kind of Christian", the idea that atheists are going to destroy the world and general word use, suggests Flea-ness to me.
I wasn't sure at first, but all the above plus the fishing for insults (which the flea then used on his website) have made me wonder whether the Bishop is a wee flea in drag.

1304. Why Darwin matters

Comment #130401 by epeeist on February 20, 2008 at 1:05 pm

Comment #130372 by The Bishop

I won't believe in this God person
Let's be honest. Atheism is very facile.

Well it isn't quite lying for Jesus, but quote mining isn't far off.

Of course quote mining something from two posts above isn't exactly bright.

Diacanu asked for some evidence - can you supply some or are you just going to selectively quote him?

I thought Steve Zara was wrong identifying you as the wee flea, now I am not quite so sure.

1305. State Approves Evolution As 'Scientific Theory'

Comment #130366 by epeeist on February 20, 2008 at 12:31 pm

I liked this article in the Miami Herald - http://www.miamiherald.com/news/columnists/carl_hiaasen/story/421075.html

1306. Fleabytes

Comment #130364 by epeeist on February 20, 2008 at 12:20 pm

Comment #130342 by Phoenix42


Well done Paula. You deserve some kind of medal for working through all those fleas!
How about a tub of this - http://www.choiceful.com/choiceful-id-101995-Canac-Household-Flea-Powder-300g.html

1307. Why Darwin matters

Comment #130336 by epeeist on February 20, 2008 at 10:55 am

Comment #130332 by Steve Zara

Just a quick note guys: I note a remarkable similarity between the style of the Bishop and the Wee Flea. Might be worth investigating.
Do they have bishops in the FCoS?

If it is, he is on the wrong thread. He ought to be reading Paula's critique.

1308. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!

Comment #130119 by epeeist on February 20, 2008 at 5:49 am

Comment #130086 by wooter


epeeist, Irate, LorienRyan
When you go up to the level of logic and science from being funny, I promise, I will answer you seriously.
Wooter - if you have any logic it is of the most deviant kind I have ever seen.

As for science - you might want to try criticising this paper - http://www.rsc.org/Publishing/Journals/F2/article.asp?doi=F29757101091

It hasn't got anything to do with evolution or snowflakes (though it has a lot to do with symmetry). I would be interested to know what you think of the scientific credentials of the authors.

1309. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!

Comment #129551 by epeeist on February 19, 2008 at 9:44 am

Comment #129548 by Geoff


Dollis Hill, of course.
Hah - Mornington Crescent. (Wikipedia rules)

1310. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!

Comment #129483 by epeeist on February 19, 2008 at 7:41 am

Comment #129470 by Roland_F

Both the hexagonal heat convection streams in heated up liquids or the honeycomb is first circular and under pressure just naturally forming to the hexagonal shape as first gap free possibility of a flat area. Circles leave gaps, octagons leave small square gaps, and hexagons are the first shape to fill a flat area without gaps.
It doesn't sound too much different to the close packing arrangements you get in crystals.

I might have believed it to be intelligently designed if the arrangement was a Penrose tiling...

1311. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!

Comment #129404 by epeeist on February 19, 2008 at 4:15 am

Comment #129403 by irate_atheist


I'll go for South Kensington - close enough to the Natural History Museum to walk to it.
I already had Cromwell Road!

Never mind, final move before a nice cup of tea. One that I thought you might try - Russell Street.

1312. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!

Comment #129390 by epeeist on February 19, 2008 at 3:49 am

Comment #129385 by irate_atheist


Aha!!!! Cannon Street!

If only, if only...
You missed a tempo there.

Exhibition Road - another place where a wooter will never be seen. I think that only leaves you one move.

1313. Feb 12th: Happy Darwin Day!

Comment #129384 by epeeist on February 19, 2008 at 3:35 am

Comment #129338 by irate_atheist


Ealing Broadway.
Cromwell Road.

No wooter there, guaranteed.

1314. Why Darwin matters

Comment #129317 by epeeist on February 19, 2008 at 1:28 am

Comment #129300 by krisking


I am not convinced that you are right. But in any case, if you believe in evolution, belief in a deity has to have been part of the process.
Steve beat me to it. It is strange for a number of regions:
  1. There is no "belief" in evolution, it is a theory that has been well tested and survived all the tests. That still only makes it contingently valid, it could be proven wrong tomorrow (though this is unlikely)
  2. The second part is simply not connected to the first in any logical way

If you look at the various mythologies you will find that the older ones don't have deities per se, they have (to use a Terry Pratchett phrase) "anthropomorphic personifications". It is only later that gods (and priests) develop.

1315. Why Darwin matters

Comment #129299 by epeeist on February 19, 2008 at 1:13 am

Comment #129293 by Steve Zara

Without their mono-theistic beliefs and well-developed religious systems, they would surely never have survived as an identifiable entity given the hammering they have taken over the centuries.

Sorry, but this is easily shown to be nonsense. Almost without exception the vast amount of hammering that religious people have received over the centures is from each other
Agreed, if you look at, for example, Greek mythology you can see gods disappearing or being assimilated as conquests occurred.

And to make a second point, just because people believe in particular things doesn't make them true. How many people now believe in Eurynome, Uranus, Cronos or Zeus (to give four generations)?

1316. Why Darwin matters

Comment #128956 by epeeist on February 18, 2008 at 11:05 am

Comment #128955 by Cartomancer


Though I generally try to avoid Christchurch for everything but theology lectures.
It tends to be the favourite college for conferences, as Kings is at Cambridge. I have been to a fair number there.

When I did the summer school on theoretical chemistry I was based in Wadham.

1317. Why Darwin matters

Comment #128923 by epeeist on February 18, 2008 at 9:59 am

Comment #126663 by Cartomancer


"Second Intentions" is a very technical part of scholastic psychology.

It is also a term in fencing. It originally meant getting your opponent inside the line of your main weapon and then finishing him off with a second weapon.

These days it means setting your opponent up so that they perform an action to which you have a prepared counter action. Sport fencing is so fast these days (sabre fencers are the fastest human powered athletes over a short distance) that setting up actions with a foreseen outcome are the best way of making a hit.

I have been away at a conference on science and technology in fencing, hence the lack of posting for a while. One of the things that was mentioned is that it is thought that one of the things that allows some level of anticipation of an opponent's actions in combat sports are mirror neurons.


I must say I am stumped by the little green door and the figures in the glass though.

You need to go down to Christchurch. The little green door is the one that Alice looked through into the garden. There are figures from Alice in Wonderland in the stained glass windows of the great hall.

1318. Why Darwin matters

Comment #126364 by epeeist on February 13, 2008 at 4:21 am

Comment #126356 by StephenP


As surreal as wooter? I'm not sure that's possible without surgery!
Hmm, I think I would prefer a free bottle in front of me rather than a pre-frontal lobotomy.

1319. Murder plot against Danish cartoonist

Comment #126339 by epeeist on February 13, 2008 at 3:06 am

Comment #126335 by Henri Bergson


Could someone tell me how to add pictures to posts here?
There used to be a set of posting guidelines that told you how to do it, but I can't find them.

You need to include an "img" tag with the src set to the URL of the image.

1320. Why Darwin matters

Comment #126338 by epeeist on February 13, 2008 at 3:03 am

Comment #126327 by Quetzalcoatl


Uh oh, Epeeist's borogroves are going mimsy. Everyone stand well back!
Scoff all you like. But you have not seen the little green door, nor have you feasted under the figures in the glass.

(Cartomancer may be able to explain the above, I just wanted to see if I could be as surreal as wooter.)

1321. Why Darwin matters

Comment #126320 by epeeist on February 13, 2008 at 1:24 am

Comment #126318 by Quetzalcoatl


but do you not agree that cromulent words can sometimes embiggen a conversation?
That reminds me, wooter never answered my question:
Can chimeras bombinating in a vacuum nourish second intentions?

Personally I find this a totally brillig question, it makes the borogroves go all mimsy and the toves all slithey.

1322. Why Darwin matters

Comment #125809 by epeeist on February 12, 2008 at 5:02 am

Comment #125804 by irate_atheist


It's Professor Dawkins to you, you prick.
But this as nothing to wooter's BA and MA don't you know.

And just to fill out his qualifications they are:

Clinton Richard Dawkins MA, D.Sc. (Oxon), FRS, FRSL, Hon. D.Litt. (Saint Andrews), Hon. D.Litt. (Australian National University, Canberra), Hon. D.Sc. (Westminster), Hon. D.Sc. (Hull), Hon D.Univ. (Open University)

1323. Why multiculturalism must be abandoned

Comment #125754 by epeeist on February 12, 2008 at 1:44 am

Comment #125484 by Ian Bamlett


There are alot of theories but from what I have read it boils down to the religious males fear of the life giving power of the women.
Interesting, was Jewish society matriarchal before Yahweh interfered?

1324. Are the 'New Atheists' avoiding the 'real arguments'?

Comment #124653 by epeeist on February 10, 2008 at 12:45 am

Shrommer - various comments

I am fairly neutral about the existence of Jesus, though sceptical about the miracles. There is no contemporary evidence outside of the writings of his cult that he existed, spoke as he purportedly did or carried out the miracles that he was supposed to have done. Now, given that this was a fairly obscure bit of the Roman empire this may not be surprising.

However, when you get verses out of Matthew like the following


27:51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
27:52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
27:53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

You have to wonder why there are no other reports of this. An earthquake, graves opening and dead people wandering around and nothing gets back to Rome or even appears in documents from neighbouring countries?

As Diacanu sort of indicates - we actually have more evidence for King Arthur than Jesus, from the Gododdin (which was written not long after he may have existed), the Mabinogion, Geoffrey of Monmouth. We also have the Vulgate cycle of books, Malory, Tennyson. Just because we have the documents doesn't mean that he was any more than a post Roman Dux Bellorum though, and the likelihood of him rescuing a cauldron of plenty from Hell and going to Avalon (see the parallels) to have his wounds healed so that he can rescue England in its hour of need seem pretty small.

1325. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #124401 by epeeist on February 9, 2008 at 11:06 am

Comment #124393 by Sleep of Reason


If you think that the Daily Mail is extreme right wing then either you don't get out enough, or you don't read enough newspapers.
It may not be quite as right wing as it used to be when it supported Oswald Mosely and the Black Shirts, but it is still one of the most loathsome newspapers in the UK.

It still seems to have the same editorial policy as it had under Lord Northcliffe, that of giving its readers a "daily hate".

1326. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #124257 by epeeist on February 8, 2008 at 11:40 pm

If Rowan Williams focus is really things like arbitration and family law then it would be good to hear from some of those who will be principally involved.

All the interviews with Muslims I have seen and heard have over the past couple of days have been male. Why have their been no interviews with women who are prominent in the religion?

1327. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #123990 by epeeist on February 8, 2008 at 5:20 am

Just had the Bishop of Hulme on BBC radio 4 claiming that Williams is one of the greatest minds in the nation.

Also essentially saying that we should be looking at possible modifications to the law for the benefits of all faiths in the country.

Lost it, shouted "what about people with no faith you stupid bugger" at the radio.

1328. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #123970 by epeeist on February 8, 2008 at 3:37 am

Comment #123926 by PJG


If I could be bothered, I would love to list the ad hominem attacks made on each of the Horsemen. If you removed those, I think the book would be about 50% shorter!!!
Before you start removing bits that are logical fallacies you need to take out the purely rhetorical sections. I think this might have an effect on your estimate.

1329. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #123954 by epeeist on February 8, 2008 at 2:58 am

Comment #123931 by aleprechaunist


Calm down folks, and actually read the transcript...
Been there, done that - http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,,2254270,00.html

He points out that Sharia law obtains its authority from the "mind of God" and as such there is no renegotiation of the universal claims for such law.

He states that some of the things we associate with Sharia are actually cultural rather than religious, i.e. forced marriages.

He takes side swipes at the Enlightenment, particularly the idea of a social contract, legal universalism and positivism.

He argues for a "market" system of laws, so you could choose which you assent to.

And all of this is tied together with a need for theology and faith schools.

A few asides - there was the usual interesting discussion of Melvyn Bragg's "In Our Time" (never knowingly relevant) last night on the social contract.

I have dropped a message on the Daily Mail article on this pointing out that since we have ratified the European Human Rights act then it wouldn't be possible to implement Sharia law anyway. Couldn't help myself I'm afraid. Just waiting to see if they print it.

I have tried to start a petition on the UK governments petitions site to disestablish the CofE. Will let you know the URL if they allow it.

1330. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #123899 by epeeist on February 8, 2008 at 12:34 am

It was slightly, but only slightly, tongue in cheek.

It actually varies. We have had some thoughtful theists on the site that have provoked some interesting discussions, for example Mark Taunton had a long running thread going on biblical prophecy. Steve and I, amongst others, had an initially enlightening set of discussions with an idealist theist.

We are a target for Biblical literallists and Young Earth Creationists and the like (devolved, Bizarro Dawkins, ADH and the like). The standard dialogue eventually comes down to how "you evilutionists" can't show that evolution, particularly "macro-evolution" happened. So you point them at a site like http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/, which would take the average biologists a couple of weeks to plough through if they checked all the references. They normally come back within 15 minutes or so with a random link, usually to Answers in Genesis or Creation on the Web.

We also get others, like revcort, who simply reject anything that is said if when you point out contradictions in the position.

Finally we get the cherry pickers, those who are happy to discard Leviticus for example, but want to keep Adam and Eve. They point out that you have to read things "in context", but generally can't tell you why you should choose a particular gospel but reject some of Paul, or why their choice is truer than that of other people.

As for your evidence. You claim a being that interferes in the world, but all we ever get is personal revelation. Personal revelation is subjective, what we want is some objective way to your god.

As I have said, I have a working hypothesis that says there are no personal gods. I am willing, as are most people here, to be convinced otherwise. But if all you can bring to the table is a voice in your head then you aren't going to convince many people.

1331. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #123704 by epeeist on February 7, 2008 at 2:21 pm

Does anyone know how to set up a poll on the You-gov site?

Time to press for disestablishment of the Church of England I think.

1332. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #123542 by epeeist on February 7, 2008 at 10:25 am

Comment #123518 by Kardashovel


And Epeeist, I would love to hear your evidence that God does not exist. Do you know any? Or were you talking about another belief of mine besides my God-belief?
Since I can explain large chunks of phenomenological reality without the need for a supernatural being I rather think the burden of proof falls on you to provide evidence for the existence of such a being rather than the other way around.

I suspect most people here know my little syllogism by now, but just for you:

I have the following hypothesis

~(Exists x) G(x)

In other words, the class of personal gods is empty. Call this t. Now there will be predictions from this hypothesis, e.g. there was never a Noachic flood. Call these predictions p

So

t -> p
~p
Therefore ~t

So all you have to do is to find one prediction which is undeniably falsified and you have disproved my hypothesis.

Of course it doesn't mean that the particular supernatural being involved is Jesus, but that's your problem not mine.

So, you know the task. Go for it...

1333. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #123491 by epeeist on February 7, 2008 at 9:02 am

Comment #123476 by Kardashovel


I can dialog with other faiths about our beliefs, but a discussion with Atheists inevitably becomes another episode of "show me some evidence"
Theist arguments seem to follow the pattern:
  1. If there is contrary evidence to evolution then the theory of evolution is wrong

  2. If there is evidence contrary to [insert your personal belief here] then the evidence is wrong

1334. Richard Dawkins talks about The God Delusion

Comment #123146 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 2:03 pm

Comment #122982 by al-rawandi



Post Christian British society:

Guesses from a non-brit:

-Still drink tea
Being gradually replaced by coffee drinking. However Betty's teashops are as popular as ever

-Stuffy sense of humor
From the country that brought you the Goons and Monty Python?

-Play cricket and rugby
And still come second

-A democracy
Corporate Oligarchy, same as the States

-Queen might be gone *fingers crossed*
Replaced by arch-loony Charles

-In tune with the global economy
Lots more billionares, lots more serfs, smaller middle class

-Children with healthier psyches
Hated by virtually the whole of society (well, Daily Mail readers anyway) and accused of being "feral"

-Amy Winehouse will still be alive
The Halle Orchestra celebrates its 200th anniversary and the York Early Music Festival goes from strength to strength. Opera North does a complete "Ring Cycle"

1335. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #123032 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 11:37 am

Comment #122987 by SRWB


Why? We're these ancient cultures incapable of writing fiction? :-)
Choices, choices...

Read the bible or the Illiad...

No contest - "Goddess, sing the wrath of Achilles..."

1336. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #123012 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 11:09 am

Comment #123007 by Storeo


Reading the chapter on Science, wow. Its certainly an insight into how his mind works.
I have skim read through it. It isn't going to win any literary prizes is it?

All the chapters seem to follow a similar structure. Lots of rhetoric up front, to get the punters salivating and then a tiny bit of analysis towards the end. Loads of references, presumably to make him look erudite and most of them irrelevant or wrong.

The science chapter was interesting. A quick reference to Popper with a totally puerile attempt to say what his philosophy is all about then, presumably because it would cause him problems later, a switch to PZ Myers informal definition which he can use more effectively to his advantage.

1337. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122973 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 9:52 am

Comment #122938 by al-rawandi


The place he keeps his wallet when naked.
It is no coincidence that fundament and fundamentalist are so similar.

1338. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122932 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 9:27 am

Comment #122913 by steveroot

You really need to broaden your horizons, my friend. (Eg.: Pi = 3)
As I have posted elsewhere today, a reasonable approximation to Pi is 666/212.

And just to show how backward the Israelites were the Egyptians estimate was 4 * (8/9)**2, i.e. about 3.16, an error of around 0.5%. This is in the Rhind Papyrus from 1650 BC.

1339. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122924 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 9:22 am

Comment #122899 by hes2@usa


By the way, I have never heard a believer in God who was an amputee, pray and ask God to regrow his/her limb, have you, any of you?????
My grandfather damaged his foot in a mining accident. Both he and his wife were Catholic and prayed for it to get better. It developed gangrene and his leg had to be amputated. He accepted this and was looking forward to having an artificial leg fitted when he developed septicaemia which led to his death.

A good friend of mine had a motor cycle accident. His mother was deeply religious and prayed continuously. It didn't improve and they had to amputate. God certainly wasn't answering her prayers.

So take your fucking smarmy posts and the efficacy of prayer and stuff em where the sun don't shine.

1340. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122908 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 9:10 am

Comment #122876 by Tyler Durden


Anecdotal evidence doesn't count. Empirical, double-blind, testable, if you please!
Like this one you mean, from the Templeton foundation no less.

www.templeton.org/pdfs/press_releases/060407STEP_paper.pdf

1341. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122901 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 9:06 am

Comment #122866 by hes2@us


Not to mention, if we accounted for all peoples of the world, those who believe in a god/the God and those who deny a Deity, you are in the minutest of people groups.
Did you study the Trivium in this Ph.D. of yours. If so you must have been absent for the lecture on logic.

How many people read their horoscope in the newspapers on a daily basis? Does it prove that the stars influence your daily life?

1342. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122893 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 9:00 am

Comment #122847 by hes2@usa

and . . .
MORE EVIDENCE OF WALT BROWN
Walt Brown - bugger, I think I just wet myself laughing.

You didn't read the FAQ link I posted did you.

You might want to try the following
http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/6339_issue_25_volume_9_number_1__8_21_2003.asp
http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/9154_issue_26_volume_9_number_2__8_21_2003.asp
http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/2595_issue_27_volume_10_number_2__11_17_2003.asp

and this

http://mypage.direct.ca/w/writer/hydro.html

1343. Blasphemy

Comment #122788 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 4:53 am

Comment #122783 by ghost of numf-el


I feel that you would be better served getting in touch with your MP / Senator / local newspaper
Done in this country in the Independent.

There is an editorial about the case in today's Washington Post. You can leave comments on this if you are registered with the site.

1344. Math Religion Trouble

Comment #122782 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 4:33 am

Just as a matter of interest today (Feb 5) is the 111th anniversary of the Indiana Pi bill.

http://www.agecon.purdue.edu/crd/Localgov/Second Level pages/indiana_pi_bill.htm

EDIT: A reasonable estimate for pi is 666/212. If 666 is the number of the beast, what is 212?

1345. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #122780 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 4:09 am

Comment #122494 by The Reverend Dark


I'll see your fat bastard and raise you one!
I am presuming that is you in action.

To return the complement -
http://www.nw-fencing.org.uk/index.php?option=com_zoom

1346. The Pagan Christ

Comment #122778 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 4:00 am

Comment #122588 by albondigas


I'm not saying it should be believed because a lot of people do. I'm saying that since it's the established belief, the best reason for change is to prove that it's false.
Its established because a lot of people believe it, which still makes it an ad populum fallacy.

Nevertheless, let's look at why we shouldn't accept it as the base position. One of the major problems is actually defining what we are looking for. You will have noticed that we often get "that's not my god you are discussing" kind of responses. You point out, for example, that more than 99.999% of humans were killed by god in Noah's flood, which gets the response that this didn't actually happen, that it is "symbolic", or that you haven't read the account "in context". It is virtually impossible to disprove something that morphs into something different every time you think you have a handle on it.

If you start from the other end, that personal gods do not exist, then all it would take (in theory at least) is a demonstration of something that contradicts this position to disprove the hypothesis. To re-use the above example, one prediction from our no-gods hypothesis would be that a global flood could not have taken place. Definitive evidence that it did would certainly put our hypothesis at risk.

1347. An Altar Beyond Olympus for a Deity Predating Zeus

Comment #122765 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 2:35 am

Comment #122468 by Cartomancer

ctually, "Zeus", "Theos", "Deus" and even Jupiter (Dius-pater) all have the same etymological root - a proto indo-european word simply meaning big sky god.
So, would Yahweh have the same root?

1348. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #122762 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 2:17 am

Comment #122760 by Richard Morgan


On my visits to Brazil I have met some lovely people. Particularly the "maids" of the people I was staying with. Oops - with whom I was staying.
Its OK, Anna doesn't seem to be about at the moment.

Nice story, did you need to send the bottle of water (is this a homoeopathic remedy?)? I think it is debatable. The bunch of flowers? A purely human gesture, no religion required.

A positive book would be difficult but I think it needs doing, there is a need to move beyond polemic. You have raised one element of it, the lack of the need to be prescriptive. There was a series of posts about skin colour on another thread, one of which looked forward to interbreeding between people so that we eventually end up a uniform chocolate colour (To which the inimitable Dr. Z. pointed out that it would make life difficult for such people both in the tropics and at the poles).

Personally I would be sad to lose the diversity, loathsome though racism is. Let us celebrate the variety of cats and the difficulty of herding them, rather than trying to force them into a single, authoritarian mould.

1349. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #122751 by epeeist on February 6, 2008 at 12:30 am

Steve - if you do produce a book then let's have something positive. Dawkins, Harris and the rest have produced necessary polemics about the abominations of religion, what is needed is something that shows the positive side of what life without religion could be like.

Could I also recommend "Writer's Cafe" as a useful program to organise your thoughts. Not Open Source,k but relatively cheap and produced in the UK.

1350. Dusty Clues: Study suggests no dearth of Earths

Comment #122746 by epeeist on February 5, 2008 at 11:47 pm

Comment #122581 by arogop


"There are two kinds of people in the world, those who do the work and those who take the credit. Be one of the former, there is less competition."

Great quote. Is this your creative juices? I want to use it and give credit.
Indhira Gandhi

More Pages: Previous | 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 | Next