151. For Human Eyes Only

Comment #17602 by Vadjong on January 15, 2007 at 4:51 am

8. Comment #17401 by Sancus (on making eyecontact)

A clear case of sexual selection, then (like the peacock's tail). Men who are polite leave more offspring.
I wonder what went wrong with this picture.

152. Federal Way schools restrict Gore film

Comment #17599 by Vadjong on January 15, 2007 at 4:31 am

Thanks for responding to the quote from "An Inconvenient Truth".
I get the impression most agree with comment #17367 by briancoughlanworldcitizen : Odds are he knows it's crap and is indulging in some unavoidable pandering.

I never believed for a second that such a clear-thinking, straight-talking man in the rest of his book, could possibly mean such an obviously incoherent remark.
Elsewhere he is far more articulate and outspoken in his disgust for the Bush administration's anti-science policies.

In view of the importance of his message and the targeted audience, however, can he afford to "come out of the closet" ?

153. Federal Way schools restrict Gore film

Comment #17352 by Vadjong on January 13, 2007 at 2:27 am

Quote from "An Inconvenient Truth" p.160/161

"I believe that when God created us (and I do believe evolution was part of the process God used), He shaped us, breathed life and a soul into us, and then set us free within nature, not seperate from it, giving us intimate connections to all aspects of it. The relationship we have to the natural world is not a relationship between "us" and "it." It is us, and we are of it."

Al Gore, 2006

154. Richard Dawkins' Report Card

Comment #17049 by Vadjong on January 10, 2007 at 12:36 pm

Well, a fair lake of ink is still being spilt by and over our Richard, so not much has changed, then.

Inky, Dinky, Dawkinky. Na nana na naaa !

155. Intelligent design is a science, not a faith

Comment #17048 by Vadjong on January 10, 2007 at 12:19 pm

So we have established that humans are lousely designed. But what about ORCA's ? They're brilliant ! What grade would you pass them, G Bile and wundergeist ?
What other creature(-s) might pass the designer exams in your opinions ? 4 Billion years of evolution and crap to show for it doesn't make darwinism look like much, now does it ?

156. The Nodder

Comment #16887 by Vadjong on January 9, 2007 at 11:50 am

Really funny, but please spare a thought for all the children forced to learn a Holy Book by heart, often resulting in eyesore and RSI symptoms, if not actual physical punishment for making mistakes.

157. Dawkins Delusion (3rd article, Same Stupid Title)

Comment #16680 by Vadjong on January 8, 2007 at 2:55 am

845. Comment #16671 by David A Robertson on January 8, 2007 at 2:08 am

- Atheism is a lack of belief based upon certain beliefs (presuppositons). These presuppositions are not allowed to be questioned.

And I would abandon these beliefs tomorrow if new evidence arose to disprove them. So that makes us even?

158. Dawkins Delusion (3rd article, Same Stupid Title)

Comment #16676 by Vadjong on January 8, 2007 at 2:37 am

845. Comment #16671 by David A Robertson on January 8, 2007 at 2:08 am

I would suggest that science has a much more limited role.

159. Consciousness Without Faith

Comment #16670 by Vadjong on January 8, 2007 at 2:02 am

As I said in the thread about Sam Schulman :
Without-God-Gall-Is-Permitted,Sam-Schulman

58. Comment #16350 by Vadjong on January 6, 2007 at 7:46 am
Comment #16344 by Hamlet1950 on January 6, 2007 at 7:11 am

Hello, Sam !

Thanks for joining us.
Question : What "oceanic feeling" runs deeper ?
The true story of 13 odd billion years of matter, 4 billion years of life, 7 million years of humans, or some creation myth by people* a long time ago and far far away ?

160. Consciousness Without Faith

Comment #16612 by Vadjong on January 7, 2007 at 3:14 pm

11. Comment #16610 by kfrancist on January 7, 2007 at 3:01 pm

True.
Also Dawkins' own meme-theory as explained by Susan Blackmore in "The Meme Machine" may come into it. It's probably a Zeitgeist idea.

161. Consciousness Without Faith

Comment #16596 by Vadjong on January 7, 2007 at 2:22 pm

Comment #16577 by 601 on January 7, 2007 at 12:33
My favourite theory of consciousness (I can't think of the source) ...
Look up William H. Calvin "How Brains Think"

162. Without God, Gall Is Permitted

Comment #16353 by Vadjong on January 6, 2007 at 8:04 am

Comment #16351 by Hamlet1950 on January 6, 2007 at 8:00 am

Well, well, we're back at the God of the Gaps. And so soon already.
There is indeed no progress in these debates. But whose fault is that ?

163. Without God, Gall Is Permitted

Comment #16350 by Vadjong on January 6, 2007 at 7:46 am

Comment #16344 by Hamlet1950 on January 6, 2007 at 7:11 am

Hello, Sam !

Thanks for joining us.
Question : What "oceanic feeling" runs deeper ?
The true story of 13 odd billion years of matter, 4 billion years of life, 7 million years of humans, or some creation myth by people* a long time ago and far far away ? (These people were anything but stupid, but alas, no god ever revealed a smidgen of scientific accuracy.)

*) Not just Middle-Eastern Israelites, but any ancient civilization, however civilized and advanced.

Oh, btw,
all of human history, art & achievements is naturally included as part of our human story. I am fascinated by history and admire the ancients, ancestors of all world citizens. However, their Holy Books belong on a shelf near Tolkien, J.K. Rowling, and yes, C.S. Lewis.

164. Without God, Gall Is Permitted

Comment #16339 by Vadjong on January 6, 2007 at 7:04 am

"OK, but you have not understood the deeper meaning."
"Yes, this attempt at rationalizing BS is still BS."
"OK, but you have not understood the deeper meaning."
"Yes, this attempt at rationalizing BS is still BS."
"OK, but you have not understood ... (repeat ad nauseam)

It doesn't matter if there are no significant new arguments, the old ones have always been valid enough. (Still, Schulman & co. will refuse to get it anyway.)

165. Pat Robertson: God told me of 'mass killing' in 2007

Comment #16071 by Vadjong on January 4, 2007 at 12:32 pm

I miss the predictions that the Pope will die this year. Not that I wish death on anybody, but I was getting used to the tradition.

166. Executing Saddam Hussein was an Act of Vandalism

Comment #15875 by Vadjong on January 3, 2007 at 12:53 pm

O dear,

I think we may have a big problem here soon.
Irrelevant of whether RD is right or wrong in this case or whether I, you or the pope agree on this or not, people who already believe science is amoral and easily subverted for evil uses will see their worst fears confirmed.
Scientists want to study EVERYthing, so keeping evil-doers in a lab will be associated with releasing chemical weapons & deadly viruses unto some unsuspecting populace, or dumping radioactive waste in ponds to study mutations, and other B-movie mad-scientist plotdevices.
I fear RD will be made to look like Dr. Mengele by avid irrationalists.

167. Not Yet The Majority But No Longer Silent

Comment #15753 by Vadjong on January 2, 2007 at 1:30 pm

Dear Sailnsouth,

Please, not yet another splintergroup !
Stop making up new names for ourselves, especially unpronouncable mystifiers. You mean well, and obviously have thought hard about it, but it comes across as something from a postmodern manifest.
It's not assertive, because the words are difficult to grasp at a glance, it's not modern, post-modernity is sóóó 1968 and people are certainly not willing to read about it because it is 'unknown enough' (that's not what people do).
Sorry to burst your bubble.
As I said before : all this namecalling is not helping anybody. (Getting blue in the face.)

168. Left Behind: Eternal Forces on The Daily Show

Comment #15531 by Vadjong on January 1, 2007 at 5:28 am

When will I be able to play "Total War : The Fourth Crusade" ?

169. Not Yet The Majority But No Longer Silent

Comment #15528 by Vadjong on January 1, 2007 at 4:13 am

Have a bright New Year, everybody !
Let's clear our planet from stupidity, superstition and (foremost) pollution.

Bright was a bit of a lump to swallow, but I did.
However, a god is the very epitome of anything supernatural, so allowing 'belief' (Qua?) in a naturalistic deity (whadde?) has left me in the dark again.
I hope they see sanity again soon at Brights Central, because all this strife about namecalling is making atheists/humanists/skeptics/brights/clears/frees/enlighteneds/etc. look like so many splintercults.

Added : As I have (sort of) come to understand now, Brights don't want to be defined by atheism. The purpose is to sell 'a naturalistic worldview' so God or no God is really as secundary as celestial teapot or no celestial teapot. You don't have to be an atheist to become a Bright, although I suspect most (if not all) Brights happen not to believe in gods. A matter of political perspective that is easily misunderstood.
The Brights movement wants to be a positive force, supporting the home team, not picking a fight with supporters of other teams. Atheists, on the other hand, are by definition "against" theists.
So, I consider myself a Bright, AND ALSO an atheist besides.

170. How Old is the Grand Canyon? Park Service Won't Say

Comment #15345 by Vadjong on December 30, 2006 at 2:07 pm

John P,

Thanx for your comment.
I certainly did not think 'just geologists'.
I myself am offended, I hope that's clear.

(Apart from a very few highly peculiar cases, all people are blessed with a brain, it's how they use it, ne c'est pas ?)

171. Ghosts in the Machine

Comment #15331 by Vadjong on December 30, 2006 at 1:00 pm

willful scientific blindness ???

willful blindness to science, more like !

172. How Old is the Grand Canyon? Park Service Won't Say

Comment #15286 by Vadjong on December 30, 2006 at 6:48 am

What will the park guides of Valles Marineris tell their punters ?
A lot of bigfooted Martians walking up and down for a long time ? (The fact that they saw the Earth turn a brighter shade of blue for forty days and nights freaked them out.)

173. How Old is the Grand Canyon? Park Service Won't Say

Comment #15281 by Vadjong on December 30, 2006 at 6:27 am

"In order to avoid offending religious fundamentalists, our National Park Service is under orders to suspend its belief in geology,"

How about offending geologists ?

174. Woman beaten on Jerusalem bus for refusing to move to rear seat

Comment #15277 by Vadjong on December 30, 2006 at 5:48 am

These Haredi are getting soft round the edges.
Shouldn't they have stoned Miriam to death according to scripture ?

175. The Only One in Step

Comment #14451 by Vadjong on December 22, 2006 at 1:42 pm

2nd law fundamentalists don't realize they refute their own argument everytime they take a breath to utter it.

176. 7 monks injured in clash over monastery

Comment #14212 by Vadjong on December 21, 2006 at 1:49 pm

StephenH,

Yeah, go girls ! Strafebomb Athos with used sanitary towels !
That'll stop the fighting sharpishly.

It's a dirty job, but a gal's gotta do what a gal's gotta do.

177. China's white dolphin called extinct after 20 million years

Comment #14201 by Vadjong on December 21, 2006 at 1:14 pm

Think about this for a while : which animal is the better 'designed' , us humans, or dolphins ?
I think God is an orca.

178. 7 monks injured in clash over monastery

Comment #14192 by Vadjong on December 21, 2006 at 12:40 pm

These monks must be living proof for ID.

179. The Grinch Delusion: An Atheist Can Believe in Christmas

Comment #13515 by Vadjong on December 18, 2006 at 3:59 am

I don't remember the precise historical details, but wasn't Jesus' birthday simply picked out by some monk a couple of centuries later, because the bible had no date attached to the legends, yet the pope at the time wanted to have a holiday ? The last day of the old roman feast for Saturn was conveniently choosen. It might as well have been May 15th or August 8th.
Also the year 0 Common Era was a sort of re-edited compromise between conflicting historical dates from the gospels (before the death of Herod (year 4), yet at the time of a census (year 6).

Furthermore, my father (a yoga teacher) receives almost 500 christmas cards every year (and replies to all), but less than 10 actually depict angels or bethlehem stables (generous estimate).

So much for a christian holiday.

180. In case you didn't know I'm a fool, here's an article to prove it.

Comment #13104 by Vadjong on December 15, 2006 at 12:29 pm

(Great discussions here !)

Has nobody noticed that Dr. Dooley clearly states that religion is a failure of the imagination ?!

About the meaning of A-theism : an atheist really is somebody who has never heard of any God or gods and is (blissfully) unaware of the concept. So none here can be true atheists anymore. Most here lean toward a stronger or lesser form of anti-theism, which often gets abbreviated to atheism, hence the confusion (compare : social, a-social, antisocial).

181. Book a Day

Comment #12065 by Vadjong on December 10, 2006 at 4:55 am

11. Sign me up…….. Hopefully we can fire-up the ovens again…..

No, no, no Spaghetti monster. Not the ovens, the purpose is to fire up minds (yours included) with Bright Enlightenment and realistic truth [note : no capitals]. You should understand evangelism and conversion, but all you can come up with is mass murder like a jealous god flooding the entire world. What does that say about your think-ability ? Can you be 'saved' ?
Go sit in a shitbox apartment for a while and you'll realize it's religion that's doomed. The choice is whether humanity will survive God's demise. If I must believe something it has to be that every world citizen has enough brainpower and free will to become potty trained.
We got over Osiris, Zeus, Odin, Augustus and many, many other gods worldwide, so Jahweh and Allah are just the last gods standing in a thin bloody line.
And it will be science and education that will put them in their place on the fantasy fiction shelf.

182. Atheism, not religion, is the real force behind the mass murders of history

Comment #11105 by Vadjong on December 3, 2006 at 5:52 am

Let's stop attacking religion for the number of people killed by religious people (not abstract religion), most of the killee's where themselves religious, just of a different denomination. Slaughtering each other because of xenofobia or expansionism is as old as evolution.

The wasted deaths are just a fraction of the wasted lives. Who wants to try to compute the hours in history spent praying, studying a holy book, attending rituals and ceremonies by every human being who has ever lived ?

How much more advanced could the human race have been by now if maybe only a fraction of all that effort had been devoted (sic) to the pursuit of science and understanding ?

Luckily we seem to have made a start.

183. The faithful have departed

Comment #10931 by Vadjong on December 1, 2006 at 12:09 pm

PS: RD himself is an enthusiastic Bright.

184. The faithful have departed

Comment #10929 by Vadjong on December 1, 2006 at 3:06 pm

This is precisely what the Bright's movement is all about : giving people with a naturalistic outlook a platform, without telling them what to think.

Check www.the-brights.net

"Bright", although (emphatically) not a religion or cult, should be an option in surveys.

185. Our Teapot, which art in heaven

Comment #10059 by Vadjong on November 27, 2006 at 1:39 am

Yet another one insisting on playing with an invisible pingpong bat, not hitting a single ball and still claiming victory for the love of God.
Next !

186. Why Are Atheists So Angry? A Debate with Dennis Prager

Comment #9914 by Vadjong on November 26, 2006 at 11:55 am

David Mathews
As to the question of humankind's extinction: You know that Homo sapiens are inevitably fated to go extinct. 600 million years of evolution conclusively prove that extinction is the fate of all species.

Homo sapiens are not exempt. Don't you agree?

Don't you concede that Homo sapiens is an animal species inevitably fated to go extinct?


I do agree Homo Sapiens will become extinct, and maybe sooner than we think. We're still part of something called EVOLUTION, so hopefully our children's children's children will become Homo Galacticus. Maybe we'll have enough scientific understanding of genetics to help speed this process along a bit, or we can wait for God to do it for us (it's supposed to be his job after all).
Will Homo Galacticus believe that Jesus died for their sins and all that stuff ? Somehow I sincerely doubt it.

187. Why Are Atheists So Angry? A Debate with Dennis Prager

Comment #9905 by Vadjong on November 26, 2006 at 11:30 am

"Can you name one thing that does not exist but is essential to human survival?"

What a totally weird!! question !
If something doesn't exist and it would be essential for human survival, what the hell are we doing here ?!
Is he talking about God ? It's probably that I'm not conversant in theological reasoning, but I just don't get this point. Does he mean God is essential and/or that He doesn't exist ?
My answer would be peace, goodwill and understanding between all world citizens. (Or is that more than one thing?)

188. To be Read at my Funeral

Comment #9342 by Vadjong on November 24, 2006 at 2:17 pm

Richard, if you're reading this : you should step to the Natural History Dept. of the BBC and propose to make "Carl Sagan's COSMOS" for the 21st century in HDTV. Make it simple, beautiful and heartfelt. Ask people like Dan Dennett, William Calvin, E.O. Wilson, Ian Stewart & Jack Cohen, Michael Shermer, Michio Kaku, Pen & Teller, Antonio Damasio, Derren Brown, Stuart Kauffman, Douglas Hofstadter and others you can think of to bring idea's. With beauty-shots from space telescopes and nature and some next-gen computer graphics. Music by the likes of George Fenton, Hans Zimmer and Philip Glass.
We'll re-watch that at your funeral and be moved to tears (because it's so ... well, moving and inspiring, ofcourse). Call it "Credo", er ... no, make that "Cognosco" or something like that (I know no Latin).
Forget the hopeless zealots and make it for bright children. Convert them (and their parents) to Bright-ianity.

189. To be Read at my Funeral

Comment #9325 by Vadjong on November 24, 2006 at 1:04 pm

*note : "Star Stuff" is really nuclear fall-out from immense atomic explosions eons ago. (Well, at least it beats being some flimsy eternal soul.)

190. BEYOND REDUCTIONISM: Reinventing The Sacred

Comment #8509 by Vadjong on November 21, 2006 at 12:54 pm

I enjoyed reading "At Home in the Universe" tremendously, and learned a lot, But ... I don't know about the language of this article.
Don't get me wrong, emergence is an 'awe-inspiring' and deeply basic (or basically deep) phenomenon, but why put it as some sort of 'antidote' for reductionism ? Why does reductionism have such a bad rep ? It's just a tool to gain knowledge, to further understanding (Unweaving the Rainbow and all that). It doesn't add or subtract value judgements. Couldn't you say we 'found' the principle of emergence by using (mostly mathematical) reductionism on complex systems ? I mean, we are thinking in different, yet non-exclusive categories here.
To me, although I feel the underlying intentions of Mr. Kauffman are noble and correct, the WAY it is said can easily be misconstrued as dreadful New Age PAP. Sorry.

191. I'm an atheist, BUT . . .

Comment #7428 by Vadjong on November 18, 2006 at 2:11 pm

Comment 7410

Why are you afraid to call a spade a spade?
A theory is just that, a theory. How do you people in your right minds manage to magically convert it to a 'fact'?

Interesting, Think!, I can recommend you (and everybody else) "Just a Theory" by Moti Ben-Ari
(ISBN 1-59102-285-1)

192. I'm an atheist, BUT . . .

Comment #7413 by Vadjong on November 18, 2006 at 1:50 pm

I am an atheist, but also an adeist, apantheist, apandeist (huh?), a-astrologist, aparanormalist, a-alienabducteeist, aspaghettimonsterist and so much more my brain starts to hurt. (Man, such negative vibes ! Chill, bro.)

I am an atheist, but only because some other people choose to be theists, so don't blame ME, and don't BLAME me !

I am an atheist, but thank God for that. (One for Doug Hofstadter.)

I am an atheist AND happy, lucky, decent, loving, discerning, goodwilling, balanced, easygoing, evenhanded, honest, enriched by reading more than one book, mindfully openminded, protective of the weak, inquisitive about life's wonderments, not-too-humble perhaps, but .... should I go on ?

193. God vs. science: Can religion stand up to the test?

Comment #5120 by Vadjong on November 7, 2006 at 1:16 pm

Please don't waste your real life bothering with some or other imaginary afterlife.

Science can tell you just how special this-here life is. Enjoy it while you can and don't ruin it for fellow lifeforms (no further Commandments needed).

Everything you are, your body and mind, dreams and fears, intelligence and emotions, morals and customs, hardfought knowledge and inspired revelations, all this and everything around you, is evolved from stardust by spontaneous complexity emerging between the edges of chaos and order.
That is the wonderful "Truth" no religion ever imagined and no omnipotent God could have created.

Amen.

(And before you nitpick : yes, science understands where-stardust-ultimately-comes-from a little better each day, because scientific knowledge itself is ever-evolving, exorcizing supernatural ignorance with every step. And, no, I am not religious about science, there is no Ultimate Answer, just better questions.)