101. 1996 Richard Dimbleby Lecture

Comment #73143 by Yorker on September 24, 2007 at 9:07 am

25. Comment #73130 by Veronique

Ah Veronique, would that the world was full of positive types like yourself, what a much improved place it would be. The "bring-out-your-dead" types just never seem to realise the only time anything EVER gets done whether good or not, is done by positive enthusiastic people.

Well, I don't know what more to say; your list extends past mine, I can only salute you and hope you live for many more years and certainly long enough to say "I told you so" to all the (new coinage coming up) 'negatites' here!

102. 1996 Richard Dimbleby Lecture

Comment #73121 by Yorker on September 24, 2007 at 7:15 am

Programs for gay people, programs for atheists.

They sound impractical but I think an educational series about avoiding HIV would be very useful to all, but especially gay people since they are still most at risk.

What's wrong with a short weekly "Atheist News" program?

It would need to pander to lovers of celebrity, so each episode could feature such a person explaining how they came to atheism. It could report on the weekly increase in our numbers and give ongoing worldwide statistical analyses. It could show "as they happened" news items of atheists doing good things. It could screen short interviews with atheistic politicians and even non-atheist politicians, talk about the rise of atheistic political power which has already begun. I could think of many more things and they'd be suitable for general, not just atheist viewers, fence-sitters would probably love such a show. A program like this would kick the arse of any boring, stuck-in-the-past, repetitive bullshit program for religites, indeed, it would give religious shows a shot in the arm – something real to slaver about for a change!

There is too much negativity here; we need to buck up and brainstorm some new ideas; sure, some of them will be crap but that's the point of brainstorming. Most beautifully, positivism makes you feel good!

103. 1996 Richard Dimbleby Lecture

Comment #73077 by Yorker on September 24, 2007 at 3:44 am

9. Comment #73014 by paulwwww

"The first book of Dawkins that I read was 'The Devils Advocate'"

Never heard of that one, do you mean "A Devil's Chaplain"?


5. Comment #73004 by home8896

I'm glad you're looking for a science appreciation class but I'm more concerned about your health. Are you feeling OK? You look all faded and worn out. :)

104. Out of Thin Air

Comment #72955 by Yorker on September 23, 2007 at 4:03 pm

5. Comment #72929 by _J_

Web pages are put together by people who use packages that create the web sites. So don't be overly impressed by fundie 'package users' J, the coding involved, if any, is minimal.

105. New Rules: A Religious Test

Comment #72768 by Yorker on September 22, 2007 at 8:59 pm

19. Comment #72676 by oxytocin

I think you're correct that many don't understand the term "atheism", but it's time they fucking did! It's up to us to make them understand, I'm not going to rename myself because some people are uneducated!

106. Row Brews Over DUP Call for Schools to Teach Creationism

Comment #72766 by Yorker on September 22, 2007 at 8:36 pm

50. Comment #72764 by captain underpants

"Actually if the Devolveds of this world had their way they wouldn't be patient enough to wait for their loving God to send scientists to hell, they'd simply burn them."

Probably.

Unless they waited for a fire to start via lightning, they'd have make one themselves and isn't it beautiful that they would need applied science to do it?

107. Row Brews Over DUP Call for Schools to Teach Creationism

Comment #72765 by Yorker on September 22, 2007 at 8:26 pm

49. Comment #72743 by Corylus

"Do you believe:-

1) That the moon landings were real?
2) That islamic terrorists were responsible for 9/11?
3) That Diana's death was ordered by the Royal family?"

How does that test? Even Devolved isn't going to get these wrong is he? The answer to the first two is "yes" because the evidence is convincing, the answer to the third is "no" because the evidence is non-existent.

Possibly a better test of how people think would be to ask if the McCann's are innocent.

108. New Rules: A Religious Test

Comment #72658 by Yorker on September 22, 2007 at 5:22 am

14. Comment #72657 by alexanjc

As long as religites are the majority, politicians will espouse religion; they have to. Of course they will try to appease both groups but that's old hat for them, they do it all the time. As for unintelligibility, they're already there, do I have to mention Bush?

Ah well, enough from me for now, more important and pleasurable things to do.

109. New Rules: A Religious Test

Comment #72656 by Yorker on September 22, 2007 at 5:01 am

10. Comment #72652 by alexanjc

All it needs is for atheists to become more vociferous and obviously numerous, then you will see the magical change that comes over politicians. All of them will start saying similar things like:

"Well, I'm a believer in Jesus myself but I have the greatest respect for those good citizens who don't; they are entitled to believe whatever they like; that's what makes our country great! I think we all need to understand that"

Totally predictable bullshit from people who spend their lives lying to others.

110. New Rules: A Religious Test

Comment #72653 by Yorker on September 22, 2007 at 4:48 am

5. Comment #72627 by Richard Morgan

When you do I think you will notice the following: they laugh at the drop of a hat and they cry at the drop of a hat.

Incidentally, I thought Maher was funny and accurate here.

111. New Rules: A Religious Test

Comment #72646 by Yorker on September 22, 2007 at 4:21 am

3. Comment #72615 by Veronique

Good on you there Veronique! Keep plugging away at the most important point: atheists, go forth and multiply!

...I just had an exciting thought, this site has a "Converts Corner", maybe it should have a "Breeders Corner" also. Where atheistic men and women confess their shagging status and announce the impending arrival of a mini-atheist!

112. Row Brews Over DUP Call for Schools to Teach Creationism

Comment #72640 by Yorker on September 22, 2007 at 4:07 am

10. Comment #72600 by dannywalk

Nice touch of reality there Danny. Whilst I agree with everyone on the stupidity of the proposal, I know from experience that most people in NI are not a bunch of religion-crazed loonies.

113. Critical Analysis of Case for a Creator

Comment #72308 by Yorker on September 20, 2007 at 5:50 pm

"Life adapts to it's environment. The Universe does not adapt in response to life."

This is Victor Stenger's argument and one that seems more likely to me than any other, it renders the "fine-tuning" argument unnecessary and has the virtue of being simple. Although some physicists don't like it, they never give a convincing argument why it can't be so, perhaps jealousy they never thought of such a simple and beautiful answer is the reason. I've seen scientific jealousy first-hand, it's actually a good thing - makes everyone double check and re-verify.

114. Critical Analysis of Case for a Creator

Comment #72300 by Yorker on September 20, 2007 at 5:31 pm

9. Comment #72278 by Crazymalc

The Big Bang created time, therefore "moments of time" can only happen after the Bang. "Before" did not exist.

Edit (forgot you asked)
Stephen Hawking, Roger Penrose, Kip Thorne and many others have written about the BB in depth in an easily understood way. Books too numerous to mention.

But the gist of it is that the BB brought space and time into being, the common lay person's mistake is to think of a pre-existing void for space to expand into.

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

Comment #72141 by Yorker on September 20, 2007 at 12:30 pm

73. Comment #72064 by pewkatchoo

Although the defacer was quite witty, your version was a bit smarter than average so you're off the hook. :)

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

Comment #72045 by Yorker on September 20, 2007 at 7:56 am

13. Comment #71924 by Veronique

"My religi-board quote was partially wiped off again on the weekend"

Veronique, after I retuned from my stratospheric trip I mentioned the other day, I saw that my "Religites by appointment only" sign had been defaced. Had I not been pissed off I might have laughed, it was altered in typical Scottish style which involved the replacing of "Relig" with "Sh".

Perhaps we have a Mach 3 defacer zipping around continents!

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

Comment #72042 by Yorker on September 20, 2007 at 7:42 am

Mary Midgely has a very suitable name for a person who whines around annoying and biting people!

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

Comment #72040 by Yorker on September 20, 2007 at 7:37 am

56. Comment #72031 by Mudskipper

That reminds me of the Simpsons episode where a town placard says: "Even philosophers can get a job here" :)

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

Comment #72037 by Yorker on September 20, 2007 at 7:33 am

9. Comment #71919 by irate_atheist

Yes indeed. I've had three careers in my life and in each case someone in print or TV regulary blethers nonsense about them. The worst examples are those who talk nonsense directly to me without even bothering to find out my background.

120. God Talk on 'The View'

Comment #71634 by Yorker on September 19, 2007 at 11:38 am

I saw this show once or twice when I lived in the USA but didn't realise Barbara Walters was such an idiot. Actually, there was one of the foursome who was quite physically attractive (although not mentally) who's evidently been replaced, (I never learned her name).

As a younger and slightly more virile man, I remember thinking at the time she wasn't a complete waste - I could've probably fucked some sense into her. :)

121. Larry King Interviews Kathy Griffin

Comment #71627 by Yorker on September 19, 2007 at 11:24 am

34. Comment #71596 by Fanusi Khiyal

"Explaining the obvious to fools is my job."

I already figured you for an elitist asshole - no need to prove it!

"And _this_ isn't it."

Yes it is! It's the final straw, anyone who uses space-wasting, non-informational, non-emphatical underscores is simply stupid!

122. Larry King Interviews Kathy Griffin

Comment #71493 by Yorker on September 18, 2007 at 11:23 pm

To all you wankers out there (you know who you are) who think that atheism is being damaged by some people of lesser intellect, I make the following blunt and simple statement.

Take your heads out of the clouds, your arses, or wherever they're buried and get a grip on reality.

WE NEED MORE ATHEISTS OF AVERAGE OR EVEN BELOW AVERAGE INTELLIGENCE; WE HAVE ENOUGH CLEVER PEOPLE ALREADY!

People will NOT see us in a bad light, they WILL see we represent a WIDE cross-section of humanity, the average Joe Sixpack as one of you dumb-asses called them doesn't give a shit about pseudo-intellectual arseholes who look down their noses at them. It is YOUR kind that turn them off; they want to feel there are people like THEM who are atheistic. I know this from meetings I've held with people off the street in my local community. These are their thoughts not mine!

Explaining God's non-existence to the person-in-the-street via philosophical or historical examples from figures they've never heard of is worse than useless, they think you're showing off your knowledge and they end up disliking you! It is the simple true examples that strike home, e.g. why would a loving God allow the death of your baby? The common people are not stupid but most are not well-educated; Prof. Peter Atkinson calls Edinburgh "the home of rationality" (because of Hume and the Enlightenment) but most people in Edinburgh don't know who Hume was!

So stop this pathetic crap masquerading as intelligent comment, we will win public support by wooing the public, not the intellectuals, we have them in abundance. People like Griffin and Sapient are worth a hundred times more than any of you nay-sayers out there, whether you dislike them, or think you're smarter is of no FUCKING IMPORTANCE WHATEVER! You need to grasp that simple fact.

123. Larry King Interviews Kathy Griffin

Comment #71420 by Yorker on September 18, 2007 at 6:15 pm

8. Comment #71351 by skyhook0

There are some weird people here. Your mistaken if you think everyone supports the RRS. Some, like myself, support them but a minority don't.

124. Larry King Interviews Kathy Griffin

Comment #71418 by Yorker on September 18, 2007 at 6:11 pm

21. Comment #71396 by robonstormymonday

You must be new here.

125. Larry King Interviews Kathy Griffin

Comment #71416 by Yorker on September 18, 2007 at 6:07 pm

First time I've heard this girl speak and while I don't find her terrifically funny, she veils her intelligence well. The main thing is she's an atheist doing the right thing and that makes her OK in my eyes.

126. Radical Christians in Iraq

Comment #71405 by Yorker on September 18, 2007 at 5:33 pm

7. Comment #71397 by Bremas

Unfortunately there are plenty more just like him as that article on religion in the Pentagon showed. American forces personnel are being systematically forced into religiosity, it's beginning to look like the big plan is Christian world domination. We unbelievers will be stamped out no matter who wins, Allah or Jesus. If we have no political voice we'll have to fight individually and of course we'll lose.

127. Radical Christians in Iraq

Comment #71400 by Yorker on September 18, 2007 at 5:20 pm

I kinda feel like you BAEOZ, maybe Bush should offer all fundies a sizeable financial incentive to go to Iraq but none under the age of 16 say.

Imagine what will happen when America has to withdraw from Iraq, a whole shit-load of beheadings might be on the cards. I envisage the possibility of thousands of headless fundies and not a single convert, but God didn't forsake them, as usual, he just worked in a mysterious way.

Let's hope it gets settled before Iran goes nuclear and does some crusading in the name of Allah. I can't help wondering if the destruction of a large American city would cause the sane citizens to rise up against this Christian insanity.

128. State Senator Ernie Chambers Sues God

Comment #71279 by Yorker on September 18, 2007 at 9:25 am

23. Comment #71248 by bamafreethinker

Been a long time since I was in church - funeral a few years back I think. When I was younger I went to wedding and funeral church events and had good fun singing harmony to the hymns excessively loud. It was hard not to crack up watching the faces! Like many, I like some religious music but of course it was written in the days when the only way a musician could eat was to write for the religites.

129. Religious education

Comment #71272 by Yorker on September 18, 2007 at 9:14 am

5. Comment #71180 by pewkatchoo

I think I saw in a past thread that you were a Scot, was that a Scottish school you refer to? If so, I'd like to know which one.

130. Youtube hater, I respect your right to free speech.

Comment #71224 by Yorker on September 18, 2007 at 4:59 am

153. Comment #71081 by Veronique

While I didn't agree with all of that article, the central message of the danger posed by religious infiltration in the armed forces is certainly true, and of course all the more reason politically empowered atheism is a good idea. Even if we only succeed in educating Americans that atheism is not inherently bad, it will combat the evil pentagon bosses who indoctrinate the "grunts" against it. In addition, political atheism will prevent America trying to rule the world and militarize space in the name of Jesus.

I only hope we can get it together before it's too late, in that case we'd have to rely on a solo effort by Spinoza to teach America the error of its ways and save us all. :)

I'm fired up, some of my avionics software is being tested today so I have to blast off into the wide blue yonder and see how it goes. I'll reply to your email when I get back.

131. Youtube hater, I respect your right to free speech.

Comment #70921 by Yorker on September 17, 2007 at 8:52 am

141. Comment #70898 by Bonzai

You clearly are a waste of time, calling atheism a religion has been dealt with long ago. You simply cannot accept defeat of your indefensible position. I shall waste no more of my precious life dealing with your adolescent prattlings, when you grow up perhaps you'll get it.

I've just realized a mistake I made at the start; I assumed I was dealing with adults, silly me.

Now go away, there's a good boy.

132. Youtube hater, I respect your right to free speech.

Comment #70878 by Yorker on September 17, 2007 at 6:24 am

105. Comment #70742 by Bonzai

What the hell are you talking about? Nobody dumbed-down anything! You are simply incapable of realizing that people who are fed up with religious influence have come to understand the need for unity if we are to wield the political power necessary to effect change! What part of that simple thing is giving you a problem? Or do you in reality, fully understand but like your chimp-group buddies are incapable of accepting that your chance for pop-stardom as a proud independent atheist is going out the window?

Are you still at school? I hope so because you badly need some history lessons and some knowledge of how humanity overcame the social injustices that needed correcting. No single person has the power or ability to get rid of religious influence and it's certainly not going to be you or any of your group; as I said at the start of this thread, only the people at large can make that happen. People like Richard Dawkins can be elected leaders of a group but it's the group that wields the hammer.

The glaring truth about you who dislike the rise of united atheism, is your simple inability to offer a better alternative, all you do is complain weakly, negatively and ineffectively.

Your choice is simple, you can join this embryonic atheistic movement or you can get out of the way, if you stand still you will be trampled by the multiple feet of those non-elites you despise, they won't even know you were there before they'd crushed you.

133. Youtube hater, I respect your right to free speech.

Comment #70870 by Yorker on September 17, 2007 at 5:42 am

Going over the posts in this thread had me laughing my head off at the behaviour of these wise stand-alone elitists, namely:

Spinoza
Gilks
Zaphod
Bonzai

Apologies to anyone I've missed, please add yourself to the list if appropriate.

Look at how they pat each other on the back comment by comment, even when the comment is clearly weak or wrong! It's striking how they've formed themselves into a delightfully chimp-like GROUP, exactly like the GROUPS they so despise! Indeed, their behaviour is exactly like the territorial rituals displayed by chimps when defending against a more powerful GROUP! The only thing missing is the genital-handling part, difficult I admit, under these circumstances.

An anthropologist would be proud!

Did I say group? I meant GROUP!

134. Youtube hater, I respect your right to free speech.

Comment #70858 by Yorker on September 17, 2007 at 5:08 am

134. Comment #70819 by Philip1978

Philip, I know and you know you're not a thickie and I'd guess that 90% of people here would know it also.

Spinoza and those who agree with his incredibly stupid attitude towards others, are simply a bunch of ego-maniacal arseholes who so far have no life experience. If they're lucky, life will teach them the error of their ways if not, some "idiot" will and it may result in permanent physical as well as mental adjustment! But I admit that's unlikely because people like Spinoza are generally cowards who don't have the cujones to spout their crap in a real situation. If Spinoza hasn't realised by now that he fucked up royally then he really is stupid as well as astronomically arrogant. Look at the arse-kicking he's had on this thread and now I see another great first post by kellym78 doing likewise.

A man of experience and courage would simply admit his error and apologise to me the "moron" and all you "idiots" here, but not him. Earlier I suggested a new name would be appropriate; looking over his stuff again, I think "Walter Mitty" would suit him just fine.

135. Youtube hater, I respect your right to free speech.

Comment #70700 by Yorker on September 16, 2007 at 4:31 pm

Fuck it! You made me break my promise.

Spinoza

"To operate on the pretense that atheism isn't elitist is silly. Of course it is... and it damned-well should be!"

This from a fucking balloon who called me a moron! I know people who never graduated from high school who are atheists, you wanker! They might be pleased you labelled them elites but I don't think so if I point them to your posts.

You need another nickname for two reasons: this one doesn't suit you and you just lost any credibility you had under it. You weren't clever enough to choose a name that didn't need living up to! LOL!

136. Youtube hater, I respect your right to free speech.

Comment #70698 by Yorker on September 16, 2007 at 4:16 pm

70. Comment #70681 by BlazingArrow74

I'd be amazed if RD took sides on this my friend, that would be very unwise. He may post but would almost be forced to side with militant united atheism since that's what he advocated on TED some time ago and that's the direction this site is going in.

137. Youtube hater, I respect your right to free speech.

Comment #70694 by Yorker on September 16, 2007 at 4:08 pm

Hey Veronique, I was starting to worry about not have heard from you in a while, I almost emailed you but then you said you were half drunk so I guess all is well. H'mm, perhaps I'd better stop here in case some people think I'm a group former. :)

138. Youtube hater, I respect your right to free speech.

Comment #70689 by Yorker on September 16, 2007 at 3:55 pm

74. Comment #70687 by Jack Rawlinson

"I also think there's a potential value in provocation: these people have been granted undeserved respect for so long it's arguably useful to subject them to its opposite. Sometimes really shaking someone rattles them out of an easy complacency. It challenges them. It makes them realise the extent to which their precious beliefs are despised, in certain quarters. And if it doesn't? If it just reinforces their idiocy? No loss: such people are probably lost causes anyway. I'm certainly willing to take the chance.

Also, it feels right to me. Also, it's fun. :-)"

Well said Jack! I said something very similar on another thread a day or so ago, but you've said it better here.

Experience has shown that logic and reason is lost on them, ridicule, mockery and insult is the way to go.

139. Youtube hater, I respect your right to free speech.

Comment #70688 by Yorker on September 16, 2007 at 3:50 pm

Sapient

I'm not sure about Hovind's description.

I'd say; lying, morally bankrupt, deluded and criminal fucktard, is slightly better. :)

140. Youtube hater, I respect your right to free speech.

Comment #70686 by Yorker on September 16, 2007 at 3:42 pm

64. Comment #70674 by oxytocin

I wasn't getting at you, I know you were adopting an ameliorating tone, perhaps I didn't adjust my phrasing or paragraphing well.

I just felt the nonsense about groups being bad, needed another kick up the arse.

Even the world's smartest people belong to groups e.g. the NAS, Royal Society etc. That doesn't mean that groups are always good, Feynman resigned from the NAS because he didn't like the elitism he saw. Groups are a natural human state without which we would never have made it thus far and if we abandoned groups it doesn't need much brain-power to forsee the outcome. Assholes who over-emphasise their personal independance don't realise they'd be dead without groups, some of them wouldn't even be able to feed themselves, they annoy me as you can see :)

141. Youtube hater, I respect your right to free speech.

Comment #70669 by Yorker on September 16, 2007 at 2:40 pm

42. Comment #70634 by oxytocin

"I would humbly suggest, however, that we need to consider that the battle will be won only with the combined views and methods of ALL the people here. We all agree with the fundamental assertion [as stated by Bertrand Russell]: that it is undesirable to believe in something for which there is no evidence. We're all in the same fight, let's not turn on each other."

In principle I would agree with you but that's a doomed ideal I'm afraid. History shows over and over that things are achieved by people that have had to weed out dissenters; the agreement of the majority is the best we can hope for, that's why I would have no interest in being part of any kind of elite group. But a group formed in order to gain strength I'd happily join, those who scorn groups are simply detached from human reality. To them I say this: perhaps you've heard of political parties, you know, those people who control our lives, I hate to remind you, but they come in GROUPS!

142. Youtube hater, I respect your right to free speech.

Comment #70667 by Yorker on September 16, 2007 at 2:19 pm

55. Comment #70659 by Ultraviolet G

Who are you, the "insult" policeman? I reserve the right to insult whomever I like, as yet, I have no need to insult you.

Sapient

I, and many others here support you, please be assured of that. The admirable thing about you guys is not TBC or your methods but the simple fact is you got off your ass and did something positive. An example that many here would do well to emulate but probably never will. I'd never thought about religites posing as atheists but now you have me thinking.

143. Youtube hater, I respect your right to free speech.

Comment #70630 by Yorker on September 16, 2007 at 11:32 am

There are clearly two camps:

To those who see themselves as independent, superior-to-most atheists who ruthlessly criticise others who try to break the stranglehold of religion in their own way, I ask this.

Why other than for selfish reasons, do you behave like this, do you have a better way forward? Or are you simply to prideful to align yourselves with young people who are the future of humankind?

I don't think you have a better way; you have no way at all. The passive independant-minded way is a proven non-starter, but I suppose it could be that you don't want a way forward, perhaps you need the status quo because you'd otherwise have nothing to rail against. Personally, I want no part of such stagnation.

So, I am for supporting ALL people who want to reason to prevail and who understand that we must unite to be successful. I want to see yea's or nay's; if the nay's win I shall come here no more. I would wish to distance myself from any kind of special or elite bunch who wish to remain an isolated cadre and attack the methods of others fighting religion in their own way.

At the BB conference Sam Harris said that we must win the war against religious oppression, I agree and know that wars are never won by isolated soldiers.

Let's hear from you.

144. Youtube hater, I respect your right to free speech.

Comment #70625 by Yorker on September 16, 2007 at 10:53 am

35. Comment #70614 by Spinoza

Aha, the angry pangs of the defeated minority.

I'm not going to waste time arguing your weak points, you're one of those "unherdable" atheists who can't understand that your high-horse pseudo-intellectualism means nothing to the average person; you are and will remain, powerless. Some of us have realised that we need to gain political power if we are to defeat the forces of unreason, this site understands this; if you don't, I suggest you piss off!

Incidentally, calling me a moron is simply and clearly false; not to be immodest, but I know I'm not and it doesn't anger me because the vacuuity of your blethering is laughable. Please consider yourself non-existent as far as I'm concerned, I will reply to no more of your crap on this thread.

145. Youtube hater, I respect your right to free speech.

Comment #70612 by Yorker on September 16, 2007 at 9:59 am

30. Comment #70605 by BlazingArrow74

"Maybe it's high-time for more common representatives: ones who don't hold any college degrees or come from financially stable backgrounds"

Yes indeed! Many times I've personally been written off by those I've tried to convince simply because they think I'm an elitist, even though I'm from the same backgound they are! Ordinary people are suspicious of clever people, perhaps because they're being continually fucked over. We need to dispel this fear and assure others that being educated is nothing to be feared, nor is it something by itself, to be in awe of. As Sagan said, being educated is no guarantee against being an asshole!

146. Youtube hater, I respect your right to free speech.

Comment #70608 by Yorker on September 16, 2007 at 9:43 am

29. Comment #70603 by brake

"If atheists want to become a group you are in or out of ( marginalized atheist, gimme a break ), rather than just being "a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings", count me out."

OK, we shall.

I think you miss the point, we have moved on. There's no problem with persons like yourself, but your kind is clearly the kind of atheist willing to accept religion-based control of your lives, most responders here encouragingly think otherwise.

147. Youtube hater, I respect your right to free speech.

Comment #70599 by Yorker on September 16, 2007 at 8:39 am

I forgot to add the RRS has my support also. I hope that's true of at least most atheists here.

148. Youtube hater, I respect your right to free speech.

Comment #70597 by Yorker on September 16, 2007 at 8:30 am

23. Comment #70594 by Spinoza

"Feel free to castigate me now."

I don't need to - you're doing a fine job yourself, such as:

"Idiots annoy me, and I really wish no atheists were idiots."

They annoy me too, but I'll refrain from calling you one...

"But it seems more and more likely that there is a phenomenon of bandwagon atheism that The God Delusion has started... and it's not even clear that some of the "converted" even know what concepts they're disbelieving in."

You don't get it do you? Your statement is irrelevant.

"I just happen to be one atheist who doesn't like it."

Then you'll be one of the marginalized atheists, you'll have to get yourself another differentiating name; "anti-atheist" perhaps?

"...I think that's silly."

Spinoza, if trying to unite humanity in support of reason is silly, then I'm glad I don't think like you. I hope you're old, you won't win many young friends with this philosophy!

149. Youtube hater, I respect your right to free speech.

Comment #70589 by Yorker on September 16, 2007 at 7:32 am

Thanks flobear, glad to see I'm not alone and of course, what you say about young people is clearly correct.

TGD is a best seller, it didn't get to be one through the efforts of just intellectuals, no-one will be more aware of that than Richard Dawkins so I'm certain he'll also be strongly in support of the need to involve young people. Far from editing or suppressing certain items or modes of behaviour as some suggest, I'm sure he has the wisdom to see the necessity of them.

Richard, please correct me if I'm wrong.

150. Youtube hater, I respect your right to free speech.

Comment #70576 by Yorker on September 16, 2007 at 6:16 am

Worth pointing out that in the days when smoking was not unfashionable and the health dangers understood, the world's most intelligent people did it.