101. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #276149 by JAMCAM87 on November 1, 2008 at 12:15 pm

Styrer,

"Now, where have all the fucking theists gone?"

Good question. D Robertson has recently let his guard down was humiliated by everyone and has not returned since. You should have a look on Atheist bus campaign thread.

102. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #276144 by JAMCAM87 on November 1, 2008 at 12:01 pm

DP

You are right, emotion shouldn't control your argument. This hard-and-fast rule doesn't mean that you need to become a cold emotionless shell in order to be a reasonable person though. "Liberals" are not the emotion-governed fools that you make them out to be.

103. Teaching hate in UK schools

Comment #276047 by JAMCAM87 on November 1, 2008 at 6:27 am

Styrer,

Lol! I was wondering where you were taking me with that!

Don't worry though I do science not politics so even if I did want to ban private language schools your wife's job would be safe.

Best,

J.

EDIT - what exactly do you teach?

104. Teaching hate in UK schools

Comment #276043 by JAMCAM87 on November 1, 2008 at 5:55 am

Styrer

"Thanks - I actually mean nationals of other countries than one's own coming for a language course and then going home again. In other words, tourist learners.

Do you have a problem with that, if the institution which they attend is private?"

No I don't have a problem with that. What you describe sounds like a summer school or extra cirrular actvity though. The assumption I would make is that they attend a state school back at home.

105. Teaching hate in UK schools

Comment #275848 by JAMCAM87 on October 31, 2008 at 6:04 pm

Styrer,

"Do you have a problem with, for example, non-nationals coming to a country to learn that country's language in a private language school which specialises in language tuition for foreigners?"

No but let me ask: are we talking about the education of children or immigrants?

Sorry for not getting back to you - never noticed.

106. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #275846 by JAMCAM87 on October 31, 2008 at 5:59 pm

DP

"No I know exactly what socialism is. Communism is the end game of socialism. You want to give more and more power to government, so that they can some how make everyone equal. When everyone becomes equal, then it becomes communism and government is some how suppose to disappear. What socialist don't seem to understand is that when you give so much power to government, it does not want to hand it over. This is why all the leaders who tried to form communistic societies, never want to participate in them"

Well done this is an excellent point but all you have done is highlight why I am a socialist and not a communist.

"Yes you are so compassionate that you want to take wealth from people and give it to someone else. Who cares that you are taking something someone else earned and giving to someone who didn't. That doesn't matter because you know whats the right thing to do and if that person doesn't like then he can fuck off, right? Better yet, you make government force them to give it up because they don't deserve what they have anyway because everyone doesn't have what they have. So because you feel so compassionate about helping the unfortunate, you are willing to force other people to help. Now what happens if I don't want to? What happens if I refuse to help them? What should be my punishment? "

But if you were ill or in need of financial aid would you hold such a position? I find that very hard to believe. It's credit on my part that I would be happy to pay, via taxes, to support YOU, DP should you be unfortunate in life.

Goodnight. Keep up the fight Titania.

107. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #275839 by JAMCAM87 on October 31, 2008 at 5:47 pm

DP

"Do you not see something wrong with forcing someone to give a little even if they don't want to? Do you not see that as an encroachment of that persons freedoms? Do you even care about freedoms or is the collective more important than the individual to you?"

Finally DP is beginning to understand!!! No and no to your first questions.

108. Teaching hate in UK schools

Comment #275829 by JAMCAM87 on October 31, 2008 at 5:27 pm

DP

"Where exactly does it say I am entitled to have a good education? I ave no problem with people having one and it sounds like a great idea, but where does it say that though. Wheres the rule book that says that?"

The international treaty on human rights. (But you might want to check this as I'm not 100%)

109. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #275828 by JAMCAM87 on October 31, 2008 at 5:25 pm

DP,

"No, no, no. Socialism is the philosophy that GOVERNMENT is so strong that it should take care of everyone, not individuals. Socialism is the belief that personal responsibility should not exist because someone else should be responsible for you. Socialism is the belief that a higher power knows best, which is government. This is why communistic countries get rid of religion. They dont want people looking anywhere else for answers but to the government."

A few things:

You don't really understand what socialism is.
Socialism and communism are not the same.

Hoarding your wealth is precisely the opposite of responsibilty.

Everything you have suggested so far is based on selfishness, greed, the strong becoming stronger and the weak becoming weaker (in essence social darwinism). You have obviously never lived a life of poverty or depravity. Not saying that I have but at least I'm compassionate enough to care about those who do.

110. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #275825 by JAMCAM87 on October 31, 2008 at 5:19 pm

Titania,

Aren't all great minds the minds of socialists? ;)

111. Teaching hate in UK schools

Comment #275821 by JAMCAM87 on October 31, 2008 at 5:15 pm

DP

"If you get rid of faith and private schools then you take choice away from people. Which is pretty much communism because you don't have choices in communism. You can either have X or you can have X. With capitalism, you can have A though Z. Maybe you can't afford Z, but you might be able to afford A though J, etc"

We're not talking about which type of chocolate bar you want or which make of TV you want; we are talking about a good education - the basic right of every individual.

112. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #275816 by JAMCAM87 on October 31, 2008 at 5:07 pm

DP,

"What would also be a great phenomenon to study is the socialist ideas that they think they are entitled to certain things. The phenomenon that other people are responsible for them. I called this mentality the "baby-syndrome" because thats how they want to be treated and taken care of."

And so should society take care of the weak? The disabled? The ill? Are they the "babies" to whom you refer?

You should change your name to "social darwinist pitbull".

EDIT - Socialism is the complete opposite! It's about the strong being so "unbabyish" that they can use their time and resources to take care of those who are less strong. We don't think that WE are entitled to certain things but that EVERYONE is entitled to certain things. Therein lies your misunderstanding of socialism.

113. Teaching hate in UK schools

Comment #275806 by JAMCAM87 on October 31, 2008 at 4:57 pm

DP

"Well I guess no parents care because no one has figured that out yet."

I have just figured it out for them. State controlled well-funded academies for all. NO faith schools and NO private schools.

Did you not benefit from a state school?

114. Teaching hate in UK schools

Comment #275803 by JAMCAM87 on October 31, 2008 at 4:51 pm

DP

"A parent who really cares will find a way to make their kids smarter."

A parent who REALLY cares will find a way to make ALL kids smarter. This involves supporting well-funded state based education.

115. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #275802 by JAMCAM87 on October 31, 2008 at 4:46 pm

DP,

"Its going pretty good. If Obama wins we will get to see socialist economic policies and then we can compare the two."

How can you possibly compare them? Obama will spend his first two years in office repairing the damage done by a republican government. Are socialists forever to be cleaning up the mess of conservatives?

116. Teaching hate in UK schools

Comment #275792 by JAMCAM87 on October 31, 2008 at 4:18 pm

"What if parents take more responsibility over there kids? Like maybe helping them with homework and helping them learn how to read, etc.. But if you want to make public schools better then get rid off teachers unions. Let every teacher be judged on how well their class does. Make it easier to fire teachers, not harder like it is now. You do that and make parents more responsible and some kids will do better. But no matter how how "fair" you try and make it, some kids will always fail and some will succeed. What would you say then if everyone had the same start in life and 20% of kids still failed? What would be the next excuse?"

My parents could never have afforded to send me to private school where I would have had a better education. However I was lucky enough to have a scientist for a father. So you are right it is impossible to give every child EXACTLY the same start in life but school should be one of those places where all children are treated as equals even if this is not the case in the home.

Why should the amount of money your parents have determine whether or not you have the right to a good or a bad education? A decent education is something which I believe is the birth right of every child.

As for firing teachers I actually agree with you for once DP! I think it is a shame that there are so many truly apalling teachers out there. Again I was lucky enough to have some really inspirational ones. I don't know what the solution to this problem is.

117. Teaching hate in UK schools

Comment #275787 by JAMCAM87 on October 31, 2008 at 4:03 pm

Styrer,

"For example, would you be happy to permit the operation of private language schools, or private science schools, whose course completion does not lead necessarily to public examinations."

If these are just specialist schools which are still government run, then yes. I have many friends who went to music schools which were not private - they were just for kids who showed a particular flare for music. That is, ASSUMING they are getting a general education too. But schools which are funded by private money are more likely to be subject to censorship and can be driven by the donor's personal ideology.

118. Teaching hate in UK schools

Comment #275778 by JAMCAM87 on October 31, 2008 at 3:48 pm

Well I have to admit, I dabbled in communism but found it hard to put into practice. :)

p.s. Atheism and communism are seen as synonymous by some. John Lennox seemed quite happy to draw the connection between communism and atheism in his debate with Hitchens in Edinburgh.

119. Teaching hate in UK schools

Comment #275764 by JAMCAM87 on October 31, 2008 at 2:49 pm

Of course I'm sure someone will now accuse me of communism. :)

120. Teaching hate in UK schools

Comment #275761 by JAMCAM87 on October 31, 2008 at 2:42 pm

Beeline said,

"But I have to face the fact that where I live has the worst public secondary education in the country, and faith schools are an alternative. So I need to know the facts as much as anybody."

I think everything you have said is very reasonable. However I don't think there should be CHOICE in the first place. Ideally all schools should be the same (at the same high standard) and every child should have the same start in life. You should go to the school closest to you. I despair of the fact that rich parents get to choose which school their kids get to go to while poor kids are condemned to some run-down inner city dump. Faith schools shouldn't exist and private schools shouldn't exist.

121. Teaching hate in UK schools

Comment #275307 by JAMCAM87 on October 31, 2008 at 4:11 am

Beeline,

Are you saying that we should just let faith schools bee and hope that children emerge as atheists.'

Why don't we let the BNP fund a school then since we just live in a "capatilist democracy" '

There is just no such thing as a compromise when it comes to faith schools I'm afraid.

122. Teaching hate in UK schools

Comment #275299 by JAMCAM87 on October 31, 2008 at 4:05 am

Comment #275239 by Richard Dawkins

I know your questions were mostly rhetorical but here goes anyway:

"Was she unfairly treated'"

Yes that meanie Paxman should never had asked those mean questions! And she should have been given at least a day to learn how to speak english properly!

"Should the school have its government support money withdrawn'"

No, the government should fund a small bulldozer and send it in that direction.

"Should all faith schools have their government support withdrawn'"

No they should all be bulldozed.

EDIT - spelling

123. Teaching hate in UK schools

Comment #275279 by JAMCAM87 on October 31, 2008 at 3:40 am

The government should NEVER have allowed new faith schools to be set up. They should have been gradually phased out like they are beginning to do in scotland.

But you have to ask the question "why have Labour allowed it'" There are a few reasons:

-Tony Blair was religious himself.

-Faith schools often have rich donors and so labour could save money. It's similar to their PFI scheme.

-Faith schools have snuck in the backdoor, hidding under a veil of multiculturalism.

-Parents in the south of england are desperate for places for their kids in good schools.

People are naive if they think this is a one off. This is happening in EVERY faith school to varying degrees. We are letting thousands of children down and letting Labour get away with it.

124. Interview with Richard Dawkins on fairy tales and retirement

Comment #275028 by JAMCAM87 on October 30, 2008 at 4:16 pm

Comment #274436 by isthatclear on October 30, 2008 at 4:23 am
Evolution book for kids.


"Travel in Future

Fairy tales
Long long time ago, while nothing happened, out of nowhere, the universe just popped up. Then there was a big huge sky sieve that strong planets survived and
weak ones were gone. The strong ones came in order by the wizard of luck and chances, and suddenly the sun and all planets are designed in perfect order amazingly. The location of sun, the earth and the moon were so perfect that day and nights and seasons started happening in order. Then the wizard of Luck and chances with his magic stick started sowing chemicals on the planets and those chemicals started raining on the earth. Then another wizard of blindwatcmaker came in. He started using his magical stick, which is using it to find his way as well to find the way, and making Dnas and then DNAS turned into worms and vegetables, fishes which turned into reptiles, birds, lizards, monkeys, zebras and finally human being. ( wizard caught the selfish gene(genie) as well who was trying to run away)The Blindwatcmaker wizard was so tired. He had done hell a lot of job. He tried to hold his stick which was so hot because of over working but he could not and he said, I am able to make the soul; it is not in job description. He changed one of fish into dog and he went home."

This is incredibly ironic wooter. You have attacked evolution by natural selection by using the words "magic" and "wizards". This is precisely what scientific theories don't need. They don't need magic hands which help things along.

Believing that the universe just "popped up" is exactly the kind of thing religious people say. For example, when asked, "How did the universe begin?" A likely reply is "God just created it that way". This is equivalent to saying "it just happened as if by magic"

All you have done in your post is underline your own views on the universe and on life and your too stupid to see the irony.

Steve,

wooter is not scared of evolution - he just doesn't understand it in the slightest.

125. A slow but certain demise

Comment #275008 by JAMCAM87 on October 30, 2008 at 3:54 pm

"(a weird religion of a most unusual kind - but a religion in effect)"

In what way is scientology any more bizarre than the main monotheistic religions?

126. A slow but certain demise

Comment #274998 by JAMCAM87 on October 30, 2008 at 3:43 pm

Comment #274915 by a non e-moose on October 30, 2008 at 2:16 pm
@Jamcam87

"I agree, but that rationalism is better, but I don't think all delusions are equal. Some are actively harmful, while others are merely an obstacle to understanding the world it really is. It's a step in the righ direction at least, don't you think?"

I think it is a step to the side actually. The person who becomes spiritual has obviously learnt nothing. The delusions are not equally harmful to society but they are all equally false.

127. A slow but certain demise

Comment #274905 by JAMCAM87 on October 30, 2008 at 2:01 pm

"The spiritual-but-not-religious brigade represents a creeping disease that can eventually kill religion."

This is no better in my opinion. What's the point of leaving religion only to adopt some other daft idea? I want people to be RATIONALISTS. Spirituality is just religion in a more senescent form.

128. Somalia: Rape Victim Executed

Comment #274883 by JAMCAM87 on October 30, 2008 at 1:38 pm

The BBC report failed to mention that she had been raped while the NY times reported it. How strange.

129. New Simonyi Chair appointed

Comment #274121 by JAMCAM87 on October 29, 2008 at 4:15 pm

Decius,

Great video.

I recommend the story of how Andrew Wiles proved Fermat's last theorem.

a^n = b^n c^n

There are no solutions for n greater than 2.

How on earth do you prove that'''!!!

"I doubt that this situation can be easily corrected."

Maybe Sautoy will correct it.

130. New Simonyi Chair appointed

Comment #274100 by JAMCAM87 on October 29, 2008 at 3:52 pm

Just watched the "story of maths" on bbc iplayer and have to disagree with decius - maths is incredibly interesting and all the more for its abstractness! Marcus du Sautoy is an excellent choice, I just hope he carries on the momentum that Richard worked so hard to create. Science is beginning to become fashionable. With Bill Bryson, Richard Dawkins, Jarod Diamond, Pinker, Dennet (and many more) the time is ripe to start revolutionizing the public understanding of science.

131. Sarah Palin's War on Science

Comment #273295 by JAMCAM87 on October 28, 2008 at 1:18 pm

Reading "God is not Great" at the moment and finding Hitchen's writing hyponotic. It's very powerfully written.

132. Premier debates with Dawkins

Comment #272664 by JAMCAM87 on October 27, 2008 at 5:09 pm

Steve said,

"I think it is a big mistake to hand-wave away what appears to be design on the basis that we may not need to explain it.

The appearance of design is telling us something. It isn't telling us that there really is design, but that we should look for an explanation of some kind.

My feeling is that to dismiss the need for explanation is a mistake sort of like (but opposite to) "Goddidit". Both attitudes close down investigation."

Exactly, that's why I think that an explanation of our apparent improbability is necessary. Lottery explanations are just no good.

133. Premier debates with Dawkins

Comment #272631 by JAMCAM87 on October 27, 2008 at 4:46 pm

"But I've confused myself now. Sorry for misinterpreting you JAMCAM87."

Your thinking too much about it that's all, what I was suggesting is quite simple.

Here's a quote from Dan Dennet from Hume.

"Suppose that matter were thrown into any position, by a blind, unguided force,; it is evident that this first position must in all probability be the most confused and disorderly imaginable, without any resemblance to those works of human contrivance which along with a symmetry of parts, discover an adjustment of means to ends and a tendency to self preservation..thus the universe goes on for many ages in a continued succession of chaos and disorder. But is it not possible that it may settle at last...may this not account for the appearing wisdom and contrivance which is in the universe'"

Apologies for spelling or misquoting.

Hume almost hit upon darwinism, the multiverse thoery, statistcal mechanics all in a couple of paragraphs! A genuis in my opinion.

EDIT- spelling

134. Premier debates with Dawkins

Comment #272616 by JAMCAM87 on October 27, 2008 at 4:32 pm

Comment #272608 by Frankus1122

Yeh that is the gamblers fallacy.

However that is different from what I am suggesting. If the universe was born and reborn infinitely then of course eventually life would be given the right conditons in which to thrive. If you played the lottery an infinite number of times of course you would win eventually.

The problem that everyone has with my train of thought is that I am suggesting we won the lottery in the first place. Maybe the universe is constrained. Which I could accept, I just find statistical explanations much more satisfying.

135. Premier debates with Dawkins

Comment #272607 by JAMCAM87 on October 27, 2008 at 4:24 pm

"I only have a problem with people who elevate their guess or hunch to the level of knowledge and declare that the universe has this or that form of explanation. Which I'm not suggesting you are doing."

You're right that's what I'm trying hard not too do. I was merely speculating and nothing more.

136. Premier debates with Dawkins

Comment #272605 by JAMCAM87 on October 27, 2008 at 4:20 pm

"When talking about it in a sense that says that if certain values were different, then stars would not form and so forth, they assumes that they could be different. We don't know that they could.

As Einstein once asked, "did god have a choice is creating the universe'" I'm not sure that "he" did, and without good evidence, I see no reason to just suppose that the universe could have turned out any ol'way.

I think that the anthropic principle explains away a problem that I'm not confident actually exists"

Yes this fits in with my "winning the lottery" principle that I mentioned in comment 272596. I find it much more likely that you win the lottery when you have played the game 1 billion times, if you get my meaning.

137. Premier debates with Dawkins

Comment #272600 by JAMCAM87 on October 27, 2008 at 4:16 pm

"Argument from incredulity'"

It's not really an argument from personal incredulity because I'm admitting that I'm incredulous. I'm simply guessing that the anthropic principle will be accounted for sometime in the future.

138. Premier debates with Dawkins

Comment #272596 by JAMCAM87 on October 27, 2008 at 4:08 pm

"First, there aren't any singularities (if there where, physics would break down, not result in a bounce), and second, if the physical constants change at random, then they will eventually result in a universe that does not collapse"

Thank you for pointing this out but it does not change the underlying logic which is that the anthropic principle must be explained by something: either by infinite recycling of the universe or by a multiverse theory of some description. Many people use the argument that "if you win the lottery then you win the lottery". I don't buy it. I think there will be a very subtle and probably simple explanation which accounts for our improbable existence. Anyway it's just a hunch and only time will tell.

139. Premier debates with Dawkins

Comment #272592 by JAMCAM87 on October 27, 2008 at 4:01 pm

"For $50 I'll take Quantum theory of gravity thanks."

Do you understand the theory'

140. Premier debates with Dawkins

Comment #272584 by JAMCAM87 on October 27, 2008 at 3:57 pm

""Yup, asking "What was before the Big Bang'" might be as meaningless a question as "What's South of the South Pole'""

My favourite "before the big bang" theory, one which I find incredibly exciting, is that the universe cycles from singularity to an expanded state and then collapses again. This happens infinitely and each time there is a big bang the physical constants change in a random manner. And since it is infinite, from a human perspective we exist ALL the time. Because when we are all dead nobody is around to care and therefore after a long enough period we will arise again, owing to the infinite cyling of the universe. So we are almost always dead but never dead! A truly thrilling thought experiment. Of course, there is no need for god or a "cause" in such a theory. It debunks god and explains the anthropic principle quite nicely. I think Hume was the first to suggest it.

141. Interview with Richard Dawkins on fairy tales and retirement

Comment #272559 by JAMCAM87 on October 27, 2008 at 3:28 pm

Do we get to see his retirement lecture at some point'

142. 'Probably' the best atheist bus campaign ever

Comment #272255 by JAMCAM87 on October 27, 2008 at 6:54 am

Laurie, that's much better. Thanks.

Edit - people will now think I was talking about the avatar with your daughter. If it is indeed your daughter.

143. 'Probably' the best atheist bus campaign ever

Comment #272252 by JAMCAM87 on October 27, 2008 at 6:52 am

Well actually, I was hoping you'd take enough offense to change it, but nevermind. :)

144. 'Probably' the best atheist bus campaign ever

Comment #272247 by JAMCAM87 on October 27, 2008 at 6:46 am

Laurie,

No offense but your avatar is awful.

J.

145. 'Probably' the best atheist bus campaign ever

Comment #272182 by JAMCAM87 on October 27, 2008 at 4:48 am

"I'm less than 2 hours away, so I'll personally help david fit into a more fulfilling and intellectally rewarding lifestyle - dont say we're not nice now david. What ever fears you have about becoming an atheist dave, they are ultimately laughable - take the step - it is your destiny - Dawk is your father (sound of the imperial march)"

I'm also a bus journey away and would be happy to help if and when David has his revelation.

146. 'Probably' the best atheist bus campaign ever

Comment #272165 by JAMCAM87 on October 27, 2008 at 3:56 am

"I was raised a Jehovah's Witness. Defecting wasn't easy, but then again, I was never actually baptised. I stopped going to the meetings when I was 15. "

You are the first Jehova's Witness I have "met" who has deconverted. Well done to you!

147. 'Probably' the best atheist bus campaign ever

Comment #272161 by JAMCAM87 on October 27, 2008 at 3:46 am

Steve,

Thank you for your post underlining some of DR's comments. I really think that DR is on the verge of epiphany. His latest posts and now this letter to the Telegraph are even more inconsistent than usual. Is he losing it perchance?

David, overcoming your delusions will be a rough ride but we're here for you.

148. Children need to be sprinkled with fairy dust

Comment #272129 by JAMCAM87 on October 27, 2008 at 2:51 am

I have been given my fair share of contempt from friends for expressing my contempt for religion. The whole "militant" atheist thing is really catching on.

Atheism is beginning to suffer from bad publicity just like the feminists did and still do.

So where is all this bad publicity coming from? Mainly the newspapers I think. Journalists are so incredibly reactionary and even the more liberal papers constantly attack Richard and atheism. Writers like Madelien Bunting et al. in the guardian are particularly bad.

I think underlying it is also a contempt for Darwinism and for science. In their minds Darwinsm = social darwinism. The fallacy that Darwinism does not give an account of the origin of morality needs to be put right once and for all.

I suspect they feel intimidated by Richard as well. He makes them come across as incredibly stupid.

149. Countdown: Palin Wants To Help Special Needs Kids By Doing Away With Science

Comment #271689 by JAMCAM87 on October 26, 2008 at 12:19 pm

Comment #271685 by Onur Cobanoglu

"I would really like to see if the science of psychology has ever proposed a successful method to reverse the damage done by dogmas."

Why treat people when we can prevent children being indoctrinated in the first place' Nobody would ever agree to be "treated" anyway. They don't think there is anything wrong with them! :)

150. 'Probably' the best atheist bus campaign ever

Comment #271475 by JAMCAM87 on October 25, 2008 at 5:26 pm

David Robertson,

Please seek help. Both in treating your delusions and your obsessions. Seek help immediately before you hit 100 on the delusionometer. Before it's just too late.

Once you have sought help you should see about getting a personality transplant too. You are dishonest, manipulative and cowardly. Although I suspect that once you have had your delusions treated your personality may recover somewhat although it depends how much the faith has rotted your brain.