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 Double Bass Atheist


101. Over half of Britons claim no religion

Comment #131450 by Double Bass Atheist on February 22, 2008 at 12:55 pm

there is so much religion in the world. Where did it all come from? Why does it exist at all?

Glad to hear that your copy of TGD has finally arrived. Dawkins addresses your questions regarding the possible origins of religion(s) in the second half of this book.

102. Over half of Britons claim no religion

Comment #131438 by Double Bass Atheist on February 22, 2008 at 12:43 pm

krisking
Here's a well known quote to remedy your point:

"It is an interesting and demonstrable fact that all children are atheists, and were religion not inculcated into their minds, they would remain so."
-Ernestine Rose

See kris, the point is that atheism is the default position! It is only religion that requires indoctrination.

103. Over half of Britons claim no religion

Comment #131285 by Double Bass Atheist on February 22, 2008 at 7:19 am

Now if we could only get this here in America.
It's always impressed me that the Brits have an official Church of England, but have maintained a very rational and secular culture. Yet here in the US, we have a separation of church and state but can't seem to even pass science standards!

104. Whale Evolution

Comment #131276 by Double Bass Atheist on February 22, 2008 at 7:01 am

the theory is that whales started off on land, then returned to the oceans. The same applies to dolphins too, as they're also mammals
.
Quetzalcoatl- I am well aware of these facts. I was just pointing it out to paulwwww, who it appears, is not.

It's always surprised me that, even among supporters of evolution, most people seem to think the evolution of all types of life was this steady progression from the ocean to land. This misunderstanding also includes the thinking the life that is still in the sea has simply always been there; life that never went to land, so to speak.

it's obvious to see once its pointed out, and an incredibly elegant theory - it just takes that bit of insight to 'get it'.

Unfortunately, BNCbright, it's an elegance that most creationists will never be able to see (or should I say 'sea').

This means not only are we evolving, we are transitioning into our next form...NOW!!! and always.

4horsefins - Spot on!!!
I remember watching the debate on Nightline (last summer, I think) between members of the Rational Response Squad vs the IDiots Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort. When the IDiots stated the usual creationist mantra, "There have never been any transitional forms of life found" the RRS came back with "This whole room is filled with 'transitional forms'"... only to greeted with blank stares. The IDiots had absolutely no idea what was meant by that. Sadly, neither did most of the audience.

105. Whale Evolution

Comment #131004 by Double Bass Atheist on February 21, 2008 at 5:09 pm

Since we are in the throes of the Rugby Six nations Tournament, I'm not really in the mood for articles and comments on "the evolution of Wales".

Richard Morgan - That's pretty funny! Even knowing your sharp wit, I had to read your post twice before I even noticed the pun!
And I must admit I also had to look up your Welsh saying at the end.

Ah, the things Americans like me can learn on these boards. :-b
Reason and Culture, all delivered with a biting sense of humor!

sounds dumb, but seems like evolution backwards

paulwwww- by this, do you mean that, as mammals, whales began as land creatures and then moved to the oceans? I know most people seem to think evolution means ALL life began in the ocean then moved onto land, but obviously this is simply not the case.

106. Whale Evolution

Comment #130936 by Double Bass Atheist on February 21, 2008 at 2:06 pm

Actually, the evolution of whales has been very well understood for quite some time. As PZ said in that radio show debate, "It's one of biology's biggest success stories!"

However, I think that this video will be a good one to use the next time a fundie says, "There's never been any transitional fossils found."
Then again, they probably won't watch it anyhow, or if it is viewed, the fundie will just say that it doesn't prove anything.
The real irony here is that if these people applied the same level of criticism to their own 'beliefs', we wouldn't even be having that debate!

107. Cutting Edge: Baby Bible Bashers

Comment #130537 by Double Bass Atheist on February 20, 2008 at 7:44 pm

? When did "bashing" become synonymous with promoting? These aren't Baby Bible Bashers, these are Baby Bible THUMPERS! Baby Bible Bashers presents the unlikely image of a bunch of atheist children insulting the bible.

dloubet and Bonzai
I had the very same thought, but since no one else commented on this, I just assumed that this was a UK usage. You know, more of that 'separated by a common language' thing. Would any of our friends from the other side of the pond care to shed some light on this?

JuxtaMonkey-
comment#110 Excellent post!

108. Why Darwin matters

Comment #130418 by Double Bass Atheist on February 20, 2008 at 1:34 pm

God is Spirit. If you expect to find signs of a physical god, you will be disappointed

Let me fix that for you..
God is Imaginary. If you expect to find signs of a physical god, you will be disappointed

There, that's better!

109. State Approves Evolution As 'Scientific Theory'

Comment #129934 by Double Bass Atheist on February 19, 2008 at 7:25 pm

Excellent, twillyj!
Thanks for posting that Old vs New excerpt. The "new" standard should be sent to every fundie church and painted on 50ft letters in the parking lot of the Creation Museum! Oh, let's not forget to send a copy to Ben Stein, as well!

110. Bart Ehrman, Questioning Religion on Why We Suffer

Comment #129921 by Double Bass Atheist on February 19, 2008 at 6:48 pm

Zakie Chan -
I would agree that, technically, you are correct. However, I don't think that most people who get these various "degrees" are historians. They are theologians who use their so-called education to legitimize their beliefs.
One can get a degree in 'Ancient Greek Mythology', but why is this called 'NT Studies'? Why not 'Ancient Christian Mythology' or 'NT Mythology'?
Obviously, because that would offend the vast majority of theists who would otherwise be taking these courses.
Besides what is someone supposed to do with various degrees in biblical BS? People like Mr Ehrman who use that education to argue against god are very rare indeed.

111. Bart Ehrman, Questioning Religion on Why We Suffer

Comment #129887 by Double Bass Atheist on February 19, 2008 at 6:02 pm

This reminds me of many postings in the Converters Corner on this website, but this guy's written a whole book on losing his faith.
He also wrote "Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why"

Interesting article... the author went all the way from achieving Ph.D. in New Testament studies (why is this even a degree?) to no longer believing in god.
People like Bart Ehrman give me hope that rationality and reason will always win out, if the believer would only spend some critical thinking time with his/her religion.

112. State Approves Evolution As 'Scientific Theory'

Comment #129860 by Double Bass Atheist on February 19, 2008 at 5:06 pm

1859 - Darwin publishes "Origin of Species"

113. State Approves Evolution As 'Scientific Theory'

Comment #129854 by Double Bass Atheist on February 19, 2008 at 4:52 pm

From the ABC News comments:


Common sense tells us that evolution is crap. Really, why would we just quit evolving? i mean its not like we have wings and can stop polluting the earth by flying instead of driving and using buses and planes. Its not like we've evolved new skin so we dont get sunburned.

good gracious people. common sense doesnt even support evolution. God made us perfect the first time, we didnt have to evolve from an animal to what we are now. If evolution made any sense, why have we stoped evolving,

Well the kids in Florida can't spell Monkey, maybe that is where some of them came from. There are no facts to prove evolution,like most things in science it is just theory.

"The arguments always seem to be between biblical fundamentalists who interpret the Bible literally." I always think it's funny to see this type statement. Obvious you hardly read the Bible. Can you show me what parts of Genesis, Exodos, etc. are not literal.

Can anyone prove evolution? No, that's why it's a theory.


And this guy called 'Forgiven sinner' who posts these ridiculously long prayers, one ending with this...

I would suggest doing the next steps: (1)Get a Bible and start reading the book of John (2)Plug-in to a Bible believing Church (3) Share your faith to others and continue walking with the Lord Jesus until He brings you home.


Sometimes I am embarrassed to be an American.

114. Fleabytes

Comment #129833 by Double Bass Atheist on February 19, 2008 at 3:59 pm

Paula-
A while back, on a different thread, I complemented you on one of your posts saying something like "Paula, You are my god", and you came back with "No, I'm afraid that's quite impossible, for I actually exist!" and I laughed my ass off!
Well, after this amazing essay, the title "Lord of the Fleas" comes to mind.
I (like several other posters here have said) could not have stomached reading all 4 of those flea books. Thank you soooo much for 'saving' us, and 'delivering' us from the forces of drivel.

115. A match made on RichardDawkins.net?

Comment #128703 by Double Bass Atheist on February 17, 2008 at 5:50 pm

Congrats V & Y!

May The Invisible Pink Unicorn grant you his horny blessings.

116. Machines 'to match man by 2029'

Comment #128566 by Double Bass Atheist on February 17, 2008 at 11:54 am

Humanity is on the brink of advances that will see tiny robots implanted in people's brains to make them more intelligent

Can religious fundies be the first recipients, please?!?!

Please??!!

117. The Search for Truth, God and Braver Scientists in 'Expelled'

Comment #128194 by Double Bass Atheist on February 16, 2008 at 1:05 pm

Stein is getting his Ferris confused with his Bueller

Priceless! I'm gonna have to remember that one!

Nails-
But the real problem with ID is that they claim conspiracy and get automatic support from the gullible and ignorant majority.

That is spot on!
I've recently found myself in an email debate with a young faith head. Just like Ben Stein, he jumps between evolution, cosmology, abiogenesis, and physics; all while attacking "evolution". Of course, he does not understanding the first thing about ANY of these subjects, or even their names! This is typical of the religious, evolution-denying mind. Their understanding of science is so poor that they actually think all these diverse subjects are all evolutionary biology.
The claims that evolution has been "thoroughly discredited" and that "most scientists don't believe in evolution any more. They're just afraid to say so" have come up in our debate. While hearing this is very typical in any debate with the pious, wait until he sees this movie!
It's only going to confirm the delusion of an already misinformed individual, and the general populous as well.

We have our work cut out for us people!

118. The Passion of 'Anonymous'

Comment #124413 by Double Bass Atheist on February 9, 2008 at 11:41 am

sarah-
Thank you for posting those video links!

You said,

Scientology's about as scientific as Mormonism

And I agree, but at least the mormons don't have their own effing military! Jeez, this is some truly scary stuff.

Anyone who has not checked out sarah95's links, it's recommended.

119. The Passion of 'Anonymous'

Comment #124404 by Double Bass Atheist on February 9, 2008 at 11:09 am

Geoff-
Thanks for your "advice"!

This is a perfect example of just how gullible people can be.
Anyone wants to know how the various religions of the world can continue to florish in 2008 needs to look no further then this example.

Actually, it's really pretty sad.

120. The Passion of 'Anonymous'

Comment #124395 by Double Bass Atheist on February 9, 2008 at 10:37 am

Thetans were supposedly released into the atmosphere nearly 100 million years ago, when a galactic tyrant named Xenu exiled billions of beings to Earth's volcanoes and had them vaporized by bombs

And people believe this?! Waaahahaha!!!

Is there any 'science' at all in scientology?

121. Why Darwin matters

Comment #124371 by Double Bass Atheist on February 9, 2008 at 8:49 am

jimbob-
Nice post!

Can you post here (or send me a PM) the title of that book? ...the uncensored version, of course.
;-D

122. Why Darwin matters

Comment #124359 by Double Bass Atheist on February 9, 2008 at 7:38 am

I think it's far more informative to find out what a leader's followers think he has written to find out what the whole movement is about. After all, they are the ones who are going to do something about it (or not).

Krisking,
We are not 'followers' of Dawkins or anyone else. Most of us simply happen to agree with him on various issues or points. Professor Dawkins is an emanate evolutionary biologist and prolific author, not a prophet.
Why is it so hard for believers to understand that not everyone HAS to be a 'follower' with a 'leader'?
And atheism is not a religion. It is, to paraphrase Sam Harris, "mearly a statement of the obvious."

123. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #123738 by Double Bass Atheist on February 7, 2008 at 3:10 pm

Kardashovel,
Last November and friend and I were alone in a historic, 80-year old theatre. As we neared the stage, there was a rather loud laugh right behind us! We both immediately spun around to see who the heck was behind us, as we thought we were alone... and there was absolutely no one there.
This was a very real experience and both my friend and I heard the same thing. Does this mean I believe in ghosts? ABSOLUTELY NOT!
I searched for a natural explanation for what happened. I did not leap to a supernatural one.
While I did not find a specific cause, that does not mean that there isn't one.

The analogy here to you is that if this happened to you, you would be arguing that this personal experience has convinced you that ghosts exist.

124. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #123725 by Double Bass Atheist on February 7, 2008 at 2:52 pm

Kardashovel,

Just a couple quick questions... why would this amazing being, keeper of all this knowledge, speak to you?
Why are you more important then the other 6 billion people on this planet?

I mean why not just speak to EVERYBODY?

Doesn't it seem just bit more likely that your personal experiences were self-induced?


Aside from those voices in your head (for which I hope you get some professional help), it sounds to me like your entire argument for god's existence boils down to... "We don't really understand every mystery in the universe. Therefore, god exists."
This is the classic 'god of gaps' approach. Unfortunately, one's ignorance does not equate the existence of a god (yours or anyone elses).

125. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #123519 by Double Bass Atheist on February 7, 2008 at 9:51 am

Ka Ka Shovel,

As Steve Zara puts it:

Would you accept the word of a Witch Doctor, or would you prefer evidence-based medicine? Would you accept the word of someone who wanted you to leap off a building if they sprinkled you with "flying dust", or would you prefer to use commercial airlines, based on sound engineering and science?

So why this strange prejudice against evidence when it comes to matters like the the origin of everything?

I think we all would like to see your answer to this point, for this the way a rational mind works on everything!
The fact is that evidence-based thinking is not just about atheism vs religion. It is how we deal with EVERY aspect of our lives. It's what allows us to make informed decisions on a daily basis. It's what keeps us from getting ripped off by some scam artist, and the like.
What would any legal system look like without evidence?

If your car manufacturer announced a recall because there is a flaw in the gas tank and it might explode, would you not return your car to the dealer for the respective repair? How did the manufacturer know this in the first place? Evidence. An you are relying on the that same evidence when you decide to get the car fixed.

Then why, when presented with a lack of, or contrary evidence (the only kind we have for any god), does the believer dismiss/ignore that evidence?

126. The New Atheist Movement

Comment #123231 by Double Bass Atheist on February 6, 2008 at 4:39 pm

Jon Godwin-
I completely agree with you.
Unfortunately, there are just so damn many of those "people." ;-)

For every one of us that thinks this guy's not worth the bandwidth, there are probably ten christians that find him inspirational.

127. Apologetic billboard replaces atheistic sign

Comment #123226 by Double Bass Atheist on February 6, 2008 at 4:29 pm

On another recent thread (A Letter From Hell), people here tried to post non-confrontational messages to "godtube.com" site. We were only trying to suggest a little more rational approach to their 'message'. Every post that did not support their BS was promptly removed.
Now, this sign story...

The irony is that these are the same people who are trying to convince the general public that we all need to be more open minded about evolution, and teach "both sides of the controversy."
Never mind the fact that there is no controversy!

128. Science Debate 2008

Comment #122616 by Double Bass Atheist on February 5, 2008 at 4:21 pm

I agree that it would be best if science and technology questions were just put into the standard, big debates. However, I just don't see the candidates having to face, in any forum, the type of questions WE would like put to them:

Q: If you had to choose between the knowledge of Bronze Age goat herders and a recent discovery that contradicted said herders, which would you choose?

Q: Is the Great Flood a literal historical event? And a follow up, if you answered "Yes" what makes you qualified to make critical decisions involving contemporary science?

Q: Do you accept that life has changed over time on his planet? (notice I didn't use the E word) ;-)

Q: Please define the word "theory" as it is used in science and how that differs from a layperson's understanding.

Q; How old is the Earth?


These are just a quick few off the top of my head. Anybody care to add a few more???

129. Atheists to celebrate at Darwin Day in Coconut Creek

Comment #121871 by Double Bass Atheist on February 4, 2008 at 9:29 am

Richard Morgan-
Nice post! I enjoy your humor and here's a special thanks for keeping all this in the proper perspective.
:-D

Is a "Darwin Day" a good thing? I admit that my knee-jerk reaction was much the same as that of most people here... No, it just gives the fundies another oppurtunity to call atheism a "religion."
However, after reading all the posts and thinking about this a little, what we really want to promote is 'reason' and get people to think (and I mean really think!) about their beliefs. If events like this generate public awareness, then that's a good thing. (well, hopefully!)

130. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #121622 by Double Bass Atheist on February 3, 2008 at 8:40 pm

dlitt-
It's always the same with these people, isn't it?
"I can't possibly understand this stuff, therefore god exists!"

And then there are those who misunderstand just enough science to think that it actually supports their position.

131. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #121618 by Double Bass Atheist on February 3, 2008 at 8:30 pm

Instead of hypotheses for why you want to deny a true Creator and creation, give some genuine facts.

You seem to have a very gross misunderstanding how the rational mind works. First of all, the burden is not upon the skeptic to disprove a claim... the burden of proof is actually upon the person(s) making said claim.
And sorry, but your lack of understanding of the sciences does NOT count as evidence!

There are no transition species

In fact there are hundreds, but you creationists just keep repeating the same lie? Why??? Are you intentionally trying to deceive people or are you really that misinformed? Here's just a couple quick links:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12168265/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_fossil
And you can also google "Evolution of the horse" or "Evolution of cetaceans" for the complete list of their respective transitional fossils.
There is SO much information available. Please, I urge you to simply do a little research.
If you want to deny all this evidence, fine. However, that does not mean that a god (let alone, yours) created everything!

Even the scientists who study the stars have proven over and over by the mathematics involved in them, that the story of creation is true

Ummm... no. Actually, the exact opposite is so.
http://research.amnh.org/~tyson/

As I said out the outset, the burden of proof is not upon the atheist to disprove god. The burden is upon YOU to prove it. The fact remains that all of the evidence that we do have points to the non-existence of such a being.

"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence"
-Christopher Hitchens

132. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119751 by Double Bass Atheist on January 31, 2008 at 7:15 pm

BTA, I noticed your posting style is identical to Kardashovel. Did anyone else notice this?

Yes, and in addition, if you look at their profiles, you'll see that they both joined RDnet yesterday at almost the same time.
Hmmmm...

133. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119740 by Double Bass Atheist on January 31, 2008 at 7:09 pm

Can't "preview" either.
Josh must be at his birthday party!

134. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119734 by Double Bass Atheist on January 31, 2008 at 7:05 pm

Steve -
No apologies necessary, and certainly no reason to delete your post. Your comment was just an honest statement.

You are one of the most highly respected people on these boards.

135. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119721 by Double Bass Atheist on January 31, 2008 at 6:56 pm

mesomodel -
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/nocenter.html

136. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119710 by Double Bass Atheist on January 31, 2008 at 6:49 pm

Steve - I did realize that perceived red shift is due to the fact galaxies are moving away with space, as space itself expands.
I was trying to give a "simple" answer, as requested.
Yes, mesomodel, the balloon analogy holds... I happen to like the "raisins in a baking loaf of bread" one as well, where the raisins are the galaxies.

137. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119702 by Double Bass Atheist on January 31, 2008 at 6:41 pm

Dr Steve is wrong, the universe is not expanding faster than the speed of light

Wrong again, Arrowhead...
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmology_faq.html#FTL

138. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119685 by Double Bass Atheist on January 31, 2008 at 6:27 pm

is the Hubble Law to do with Doppler compression/extension, expanding space or both

The Doppler effect (with sound) is an analogy with light.. it's called "Red Shift". As something is moving away from us, its light is shifted to red the end of the spectrum… and the further away the observation, the greater the red shift. Hubble discovered that the amount of Red Shift is directly proportional to the distance.
Actually, I selected that particular link because it does explain this in a pretty readable manner. Take a few moments and read it

139. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119666 by Double Bass Atheist on January 31, 2008 at 6:12 pm

mesomodel-
I know you directed that question to Steve, but I can tell you that is not correct. The expansion rate is determined by Hubble's Law. Please see this link:
http://archive.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Cyberia/Cosmos/ExpandUni.html

140. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119655 by Double Bass Atheist on January 31, 2008 at 6:02 pm

Steve - ever seen a vampire wincing from a Buddha?

:-D

141. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119634 by Double Bass Atheist on January 31, 2008 at 5:48 pm

Richard - three very funny posts in a row!
Thank you for keeping this rather bizarre thread in perspective.

142. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119606 by Double Bass Atheist on January 31, 2008 at 5:28 pm

Steve, you debating this guy is like killing a ant with a sledgehammer.
Why are you even bothering?
Do you think he has even the remotest chance of understanding your detailed explanations?

143. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119604 by Double Bass Atheist on January 31, 2008 at 5:25 pm

Don't you hate it when you can't fill your empty holes with me?

OK… that's enough. How do we get rid of this guy?!
I know this is the internet, and any child with a computer can be here, but certainly there must be a way stop this??

144. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119589 by Double Bass Atheist on January 31, 2008 at 5:12 pm

Nice post, Steve
(as usual!)

145. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119585 by Double Bass Atheist on January 31, 2008 at 5:09 pm

Thank you, Goldy.
Well said.

Oh, and FINALLY the Nad is going to bed.

146. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119572 by Double Bass Atheist on January 31, 2008 at 5:00 pm

Radesq , Trust me, you didn't miss anything. The same mindless drivel. At least last night was funny (very funny!), but this has now become a complete waste of space of RD's server.

147. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119545 by Double Bass Atheist on January 31, 2008 at 4:49 pm

Becomesafool -
I said "Non-theistic source". Do you know what that means?
You just joined this forum YESTERDAY, and why? Trolling???
Vox lacky???

148. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119534 by Double Bass Atheist on January 31, 2008 at 4:45 pm

It plays as fake as it is, you have no talent whatsoever in the area of acting.

As one who has extensive experience in musical theatre, I would have to agree. Perhaps a Middle School play might be more his speed?

149. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119522 by Double Bass Atheist on January 31, 2008 at 4:40 pm

You are the arrogant one, you pretend to know history and have no clue that the State of Texas when it was executing prisoners was executing more per year that the Spanish inqusition.

Non-theistic source for this, please.

150. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119498 by Double Bass Atheist on January 31, 2008 at 4:30 pm

I have grabbed this from a post I made elsewhere

Just how arrogant do you have to be to quote yourself as the source?

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