Comments by irate_atheist

1501. Christopher Hitchens on Real Time with Bill Maher

Comment #136893 by irate_atheist on March 2, 2008 at 12:45 am

35. Comment #136892 by mmurray -

Or did you mean seeing a woman breastfeed is a personal problem for you ?

Sometimes it's a personal problem for me. But only if she's taken over the whole sofa and there's nowhere for me to sit in front of the telly.

1502. Christopher Hitchens on Real Time with Bill Maher

Comment #136890 by irate_atheist on March 2, 2008 at 12:28 am

33. Comment #136888 by chefmoz22 -

What you are objecting to is not children in 'places they shouldn't be, but badly behaved and badly parented children in these places.

Or parents who are not considerate enough to ask for a corner table, out of the way of others, when they have their baby with them.

1503. Christopher Hitchens on Real Time with Bill Maher

Comment #136887 by irate_atheist on March 2, 2008 at 12:02 am

31. Comment #136884 by Roland_F -

Ah. Now I see.

Nothing like 'John Major - The Underpants Years'.

1504. Christopher Hitchens on Real Time with Bill Maher

Comment #136880 by irate_atheist on March 1, 2008 at 11:33 pm

9. Comment #136826 by 4horsefins -

...magical Mormon underpants...priceless.

Perhaps, more accurately: ...magical Mormon underpants...worthless.

1505. Christopher Hitchens on Real Time with Bill Maher

Comment #136879 by irate_atheist on March 1, 2008 at 11:29 pm

5. Comment #136807 by Steve Zara -

Hitchens is wrong about the birth of Buddha. There is no consistent dogma about how the Buddha was born. There are some Buddhist schools which include supernatural nonsense, but there are others than accept that he was born the normal way.

Could not the same be said about Christians and Jesus? An interesting parallel perhaps? One that we can employ the 'No True Scotsman' on, anyway.

1506. A God blog

Comment #136877 by irate_atheist on March 1, 2008 at 11:19 pm

Not a bad article, but I disagree with:

Not only does he set out to prove that God is a statistical improbability, a pretty ambitious task for any scientist.

I'd say this was a trivial task.

And:

Dawkins spends a lot of time discussing evil acts committed in the name of religion, but little time disentangling religious motivation from political or economic factors, or acknowledging the acts of charity or goodness directly inspired by religion.

If RD did this, all the theists would grasp it like a drowning man grabbing a lifebelt.

1507. Fleabytes

Comment #136873 by irate_atheist on March 1, 2008 at 10:58 pm

2638. Comment #136858 by Russell Blackford -

Well, while we're waiting, maybe someone can explain eliminative materialism in a way that sounds neither incomprehensible nor massively counterintuitive

Hmm. Tricky. Let's get intuitive.

Eliminative? Well, I've got an idea on that.

Materialism? Lots of something, perhaps?

Doing a big turd?

1508. Fleabytes

Comment #136583 by irate_atheist on March 1, 2008 at 1:10 pm

2430. Comment #136579 by D'Arcy -

Interesting link.

Unfortunately does not cite it's sources, which is a shame. Would be a blinder if it did.

1509. Fleabytes

Comment #136580 by irate_atheist on March 1, 2008 at 1:05 pm

2429. Comment #136577 by Frankus1122 -

My soul depends on you.

As you are well aware, first he has to prove you have a soul.

Then he has to prove it continues to exist after you are no longer a living biological entity.

Then he has to prove this soul would suffer(?) if the previously living you did not believe there was a god. This, of course, includes all the pre-requisites for the proof of such a god.

etc
etc
etc

hello. Good luck. You'll need it.

1510. Fleabytes

Comment #136542 by irate_atheist on March 1, 2008 at 11:34 am

2405. Comment #136540 by SRWB -

Perhaps he could have used Miracle Grow(TM)

*-> coat

1511. Fleabytes

Comment #136532 by irate_atheist on March 1, 2008 at 11:12 am

2374. Comment #136505 by Styrer -

I wonder if Robertson is aware, as a slight aside, that it is actually illegal to write a cheque when there are insufficient funds in your account?

Thou shallt not steal, anyone? Thou shallt not bear false witness?

Hypocritical liar.

1512. Fleabytes

Comment #136525 by irate_atheist on March 1, 2008 at 11:04 am

2381. Comment #136513 by Quetzalcoatl -

It is if it ended up in a church's collection plate.

No. Technically, that would be a disaster.

1513. Fleabytes

Comment #136519 by irate_atheist on March 1, 2008 at 10:58 am

2362. Comment #136485 by clearthinker -

Further to 2372. Comment #136502 by Richard Morgan.

What makes your pathetic cash flow problem so important that it warrants a miracle, when a child dies every 30 seconds from malaria. (Source: UNICEF http://www.unicef.org/immunization/index_why.html)

If your god can suspend all reason and natural laws to solve your liquidity problems, why not resolve the latter issue by tweaking a gene to provide immunity to this disease.

What makes you think that you're so fucking special.

What ignorance. What arrogance. What filth.

1514. Fleabytes

Comment #136506 by irate_atheist on March 1, 2008 at 10:48 am

2372. Comment #136502 by Richard Morgan -

I lost a tenner out of my pocket last night. Is this a reverse miracle?

1515. Fleabytes

Comment #136503 by irate_atheist on March 1, 2008 at 10:47 am

2370. Comment #136499 by hello -

I was stating an opinion.

Here's another one: You're either an imbecile or a fraud. I hope for your sake that you're just a fraud.

1516. Fleabytes

Comment #136494 by irate_atheist on March 1, 2008 at 10:34 am

2362. Comment #136485 by clearthinker -

Complete bollocks, end to end.

Please feel free to feel insulted. It's no more than you deserve.

1517. Fleabytes

Comment #136349 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 11:48 pm

Where has that ignorant prick known as 'hello' gone.

I was going to tell him to have an enema to wash all the shit out, but possibly it's too late now.

And as for 'watthe', if you've got a brain, please show us some evidence that you can use it.

And for everything else - whatever Steve Z said is applicable.

1518. Fleabytes

Comment #135841 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 9:41 am

2032. Comment #135827 by Dr Benway -

They're just jealous of your perfect priapism.

1519. Fleabytes

Comment #135808 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 9:25 am

2009. Comment #135801 by hello -

OK.

You were warned.

Don't say you didn't see it coming.

Your inane drivel and breathtaking stupidity have finally done it.

Fucktard.

1520. Fleabytes

Comment #135795 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 9:14 am

1990. Comment #135780 by al-rawandi -

No you haven't. Just you wait until he breaches the outer wall of my irritability.

1521. Fleabytes

Comment #135784 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 9:11 am

1989. Comment #135779 by hello -

I bet they weren't christians before they went into prison!

Where's your evidence for that assertion.

You're getting closer to the magic word every second...

1522. Fleabytes

Comment #135778 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 9:08 am

1979. Comment #135768 by hello -

Can you prove that gravity exists, other than by showing effects which appear to show that it does. After all, you can't see gravity, hear gravity, smell gravity, touch gravity or taste gravity!

Don't provoke me. Regulars will know what sort of response that kind of barely believable stupidity can generate.

1523. Fleabytes

Comment #135769 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 9:03 am

1968. Comment #135756 by kairos -

My background is philosophy, sociology and theology.

No wonder you talk nonsense.

Theology. Not even a subject.

I'm afraid the fact that there may be lots of interpretations of the same phenomenon doesn't make it any les significant in my understanding or life. Holy people will still get me thinking of God.

And, precisely, what phenomenon do you refer to that can be interpreted differently?

1524. Fleabytes

Comment #135760 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 8:58 am

1963. Comment #135751 by al-rawandi -

Heretic. I'm Jesus. Can't you tell from the inane look on my avatar?

1525. Fleabytes

Comment #135753 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 8:51 am

1953. Comment #135739 by kairos -

Oh right - better not to rely on evidence and (sometimes extremely) hard science - but to believe codswallop in an old book of fairy tales.

What's boring is not grasping the above.

Would I be more interesting if I believed in invisible sharks in my bath? Well - I suppose from the perspective of a psychiatrist I would be - but it's hardly a rational belief.

And like a great many others, I am of the opinion that a great deal of philosophical views are complete bunkum. Just because someone posits an idea or hypothesis, does not make the idea or hypothesis valid.

Good grief. It's like wrestling blancmange.

1526. Fleabytes

Comment #135725 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 8:33 am

1936. Comment #135717 by Dr Benway -

Here's the thing: You have a small penis whereas I have one of the longest, thickest, and most beautiful phalluses anyone has ever seen.

Hmm...Who does it belong to (if that's not too personal a question)?

1527. Fleabytes

Comment #135716 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 8:29 am

1932. Comment #135712 by Steve Zara -

So tired,
Tired of waiting,
Tired of waiting for you

As the song goes...

1528. Fleabytes

Comment #135709 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 8:24 am

1916. Comment #135693 by al-rawandi -

Steve has asked you politely, Paula firmly, irate_atheist, humorously, Tyler Durden sarcastically

Thank you for pointing out the error of my ways. I will summon up more bile in future.

1529. Fleabytes

Comment #135687 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 7:54 am

1894. Comment #135665 by epeeist -

Oh, absolutely.

1890. Comment #135660 by al-rawandi -

Or ignorance of the facts. Or childhood inoctrination. Or desperation. Or a combination of these and other factors.

Not all theists are fuckwits - they've just been brought up that way. And it can be very difficult to let go. Imagine if you discovered that your parents has lied to you every day of your life and made you suffer for that lie. Serious denial territory. Serious psychological damage caused by mental child abuse.

And yes - I absolutely stand by the last two words of that last sentence.

1530. Fleabytes

Comment #135657 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 7:28 am

1883. Comment #135651 by epeeist -

But, as you and I are well aware, the book itself is factually incorrect and self-contradictory. Hardly suggests the prior requirements are going to be met, does it?

1531. Fleabytes

Comment #135649 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 7:18 am

1877. Comment #135644 by kairos -

Why is it rational?

You make assertions based on no evidence that you claim explain everything.

Breathtaking inanity.

1532. Fleabytes

Comment #135646 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 7:13 am

Artful_Dodger

Which of the posts above do you not regard as 'engaging in debate'?

1533. Fleabytes

Comment #135640 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 7:07 am

1860. Comment #135624 by al-rawandi -

Spot on, mate. In which vein:

1858. Comment #135622 by Artful_Dodger -

Along with many other Christians I have no problem with theistic evolution.

i.e. making up more crap when people have seen though the old crap.

I do not agree that it drives a coach and horses through the teaching on the Fall

Self-serving rubbish. If there was no literal fall, there was - literally - no fall.

The story of Adam and Eve could be a story, a lierary creation, which illustrates the collective attitude of rebellion against God that humankind fell into with regard to God.

Even before you consider this, you have to prove there is actually a god. A book of perhaps or perhaps not literal stories, made up by primitive men is not even worth considering as evidence.

Nowadays there are lots of stories and plays which illustrate aspects of human nature, where the characters resonate with a significance that transcendes themselves.

So what. They don't purport to be written by - or 'inspired' by - the creator of the entire universe.

I'm not saying that the story is not true. But it may not be true in a literal historical sense.

Postmodernist claptrap. Truth is not a matter of perspective. Facts do not have an agenda. Reality is what it is It's either true or it isn't.

The story of Adam and Eve and the talking serpent are very powerful images, symbols of the state that men and women ar in with respect to their Creator.

No it isn't. It's a myth told by men who had little or no understanding of evolution, cosmology, geology etc etc etc. To believe it is even figuratively true, is to ignore 3,000 years of science and reason.

This figurative Adam (=man) is later mirrored by Christ who also faced temptation but did not fall, and was therefore able to represent and embody redeemed humanity.

Seriously, how much does reality have to be twisted to even come up with this idea. Jesus is supposedly God - not a 'normal man'. Having expensive oil poured on his feet instead of having it sold for the poor? Purportedly persuading grown men to abandon their families and wander with him? Smashing up other peoples property in the temple? Good grief. Hardly admirable behaviour.

I know that David's correspondent would not agree with me hjere and would call me a heretic. That does not worry me. Fortunately there are people like David around who are able to take on board less literalist interpretations of the book of Genesis.

So what. Promulgating a myth as 'truth' or 'figurative truth' is dishonest either way. And to interpret Genesis literally (oh, and by the way, which order of creation of animnals, plants etc would they literally believe? It can't be both orders.) is, to paraphrase Lewis Black "...like watching The Flintstones as if it was a documentary."

1534. Fleabytes

Comment #135619 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 6:34 am

1850. Comment #135611 by Tyler Durden -

As Hitchens says, "Created ill but commanded to be well."

What a sick view of humanity.

1535. Fleabytes

Comment #135609 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 6:17 am

1841. Comment #135601 by Artful_Dodger -

...what Robertson condemns as "heresy" is the unbiblical cookie cutter approach to what constitutes genuine Christianity.

Here we go again. Oblig: No True Scotsman.

1536. Fleabytes

Comment #135580 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 5:30 am

1821. Comment #135577 by Philip1978 -

Hmm.. No.

He regards them as God's flock, not his own.

That way he gets to abdicate his responsibilities by blaming Zeus, or whichever god he's on about.

1537. Fleabytes

Comment #135573 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 5:24 am

1816. Comment #135569 by Artful_Dodger -

What sort of opinion do you have of Christians - that they are all supposed to believe the same thing about everything?

Ah, yes. Belief. The age-old subsititute for evidence and facts.

I rest my case, m'lud.

1538. Fleabytes

Comment #135561 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 5:09 am

1807. Comment #135560 by Artful_Dodger -

H ha ha ha!!!!!!!!!

ROFL!!!!!!!!!!

1539. Fleabytes

Comment #135557 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 5:03 am

1802. Comment #135555 by Artful_Dodger -

Perhaps Brian would use his amazing superpowers to make people see though bullshitters like you.

What do you think, Brian?

1540. Fleabytes

Comment #135553 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 4:56 am

1794. Comment #135547 by Artful_Dodger -

I guess his being called nasty by none other than the great Dawkins himself has driven the wedge even deeper between Dawkins' followers and their capacity for objective appraisal.

Not at all. We can all recognise a turd by the odour it gives off. That you have a peg on your nose - that prevents you identifying the stench - is your problem, not ours.

Please feel free to go back to not posting here, any time you like.

1541. The Salamander's Tale

Comment #135543 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 4:41 am

...sideways, if possible.

1542. The Salamander's Tale

Comment #135535 by irate_atheist on February 29, 2008 at 4:31 am

149. Comment #135514 by epeeist -