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 Jiten


151. Richard Dawkins and the New Age fakers

Comment #62803 by Jiten on August 11, 2007 at 1:40 pm

What about those other charlatans the stock market analysts and their fellow travellers?Isn't Dawkins going after them?Are they safe to peddle their snake oil because they wear ties and suits?

152. Richard Dawkins and the New Age fakers

Comment #62727 by Jiten on August 11, 2007 at 3:13 am

The lack of scientific education means that people are not armed, not equipped to see through irrationality."

This is the key requirement (a scientific education) to live in this scientific age and to be innoculated against irrationality.

[A belief in all this nonsense is]"a betrayal of what it is to be human, when the human species has achieved so much in understanding the universe."

Absolutely!

153. Why Richard Dawkins is right on alternative medicine - but not when it comes to religion

Comment #62621 by Jiten on August 10, 2007 at 12:10 pm

He loathes the idea of Hell, but the notion of torture by eternal sulphurous flames is as dead as Hieronymus Bosch

So has some new scripture been found then saying DOG got it wrong first time round and here is his new idea for Hell?

154. Atheist 'Metaphysics' and Religious Equivocation

Comment #62370 by Jiten on August 9, 2007 at 12:30 pm

Bonzai:

if my purpose is some kind of ways to makes sense of personal experience and build a personal narrative in what sense should I worry about "reliablity"?

In this sense:Your personal narrative will be based on what you already know about the world and believe it to be true.If you tell yourself that your depression is caused by a witch's spell then this narrative will not correspond with reality.
I don't know how you would subject "the brothers Karamazov" to a "scientific study" to find out how "reliable" it is. Please elaborate.

You misunderstand me.How can we tell that Dostoevsky's view of human nature corresponds with reality?What we read in The Brothers Karamazov may ring true to us but until we test it against reality we cannot be sure.
Secondly, how reliable is the knowledge you gain from "evidence" in the humanities?

How reliable are our answers judged to be by our optician when he asks us if it is better with this lens or that lens?Evidence in the humanities can be reliable if the experiment is designed well and enough data are collected.

155. Atheist 'Metaphysics' and Religious Equivocation

Comment #62328 by Jiten on August 9, 2007 at 9:52 am

Bonzai:

I find it astonishing that some of you actually try to argue that literature, poetry and art serve absolutely no function in understanding the human condition and that science is all there is

The thing is only science can give us RELIABLE knowledge about the world as it is backed up by EVIDENCE.Sure when you read a novel by Dostoevsky you might think you've learned something about the human condition but you have to take Dostoevsky's word for it.How does he know? Did he do any research?It may just seem right to you but unless you check it against reality then you can't be sure.

156. Atheist 'Metaphysics' and Religious Equivocation

Comment #62156 by Jiten on August 8, 2007 at 12:05 pm

stag,Bonzai I think it boils down to understanding conciousness.Your position seems to be that we'll never understand it.Why? How do you know what marvels of understanding will not be brought to us by science in the future? Of course we may never understand conciousness but we haven't finished yet.

157. Atheist 'Metaphysics' and Religious Equivocation

Comment #62155 by Jiten on August 8, 2007 at 11:56 am

epeeist You wrote:

Like Newton's theory of gravity you mean ;-)


Whoever said Newton's theory is no longer true? It's still as true today as it was in Newton's time.NASA uses it to send humans to the moon! It's just that it is an approximation to reality and has been superceded and incorporated by a better approximation-Eienstein's theory of Relativity.

158. Atheist 'Metaphysics' and Religious Equivocation

Comment #62042 by Jiten on August 8, 2007 at 2:26 am

stag You forgot the word yet at the end of your last sentence.

159. Arrogance, dogma and why science - not faith - is the new enemy of reason

Comment #61806 by Jiten on August 7, 2007 at 1:18 am

german-atheist That comment is not a joke but is made by a deeply ignorant person in all seriousness.

He is also confusing Dawkins for Hawking.

160. OUT Campaign Launched, 'Scarlet Letter' Shirts Now Available!

Comment #59702 by Jiten on July 30, 2007 at 10:00 am

As this a T shirt for the OUT campaign it is only for those who are "IN" and who want to come OUT.There are many of us who were never IN and others who've been OUT a long time already.I've always been OUT ever since I read The Selfish Gene about 17 years ago.

I'd rather I didn't have to make my position known on this at all as it is topsy-turvy.The default position is non-belief.It is the believers who should be identifying themselves! I just want to be left alone as I am on for example my position on the existence of fairies.

161. Proboscidean Mitogenomics: Chronology and Mode of Elephant Evolution Using Mastodon as Outgroup

Comment #58877 by Jiten on July 26, 2007 at 1:49 pm

We're living in such interesting times when science is just exploding and it's impossible for any one person to keep up with all the advances in all the fields.

In biology we've got the final theory-now we're just filling in the details."just" filling in the details!! This endevour will occupy whole working lives of countless scientists.

162. Red Mosque Fueled Islamic Fire in Young Women

Comment #58630 by Jiten on July 25, 2007 at 1:09 pm

To the 6 new worshippers of Quetzalcoatl : do as you please but just don't label your children as his followers too.

163. Susan Blackmore interviews Dan Dennett

Comment #58215 by Jiten on July 24, 2007 at 3:36 am

I liked the phrase at the end:"vacuum philosophy".Dennett has a gift for saying in a few words where others need whole sentences.Science is much more interesting.

Consciousness is just so hard a problem.It is not even easy to talk about.As far as natural selection is concerned we are here to survive and reproduce and having consciousness makes no difference to that.What good can come of "enjoying" strawberry ice-cream,or the smell of a rose?

164. PZ Myers on Blogging Heads

Comment #57947 by Jiten on July 22, 2007 at 2:47 pm

John Horgan is a likeable guy but a bit of a windbag.I know it's a question of taste and I prefer a straight forward serious interview to a casual,matey exchange.Cf Robert Wright who has interviewed many scientists whom I prefer.

165. Interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #57234 by Jiten on July 18, 2007 at 4:02 pm

Fanusi writes:

I don't want to see millions of innocents die.


Well,exactly! Already 650,000 dead in Iraq according to the figures of British Medical Journal,and a strike on Iran will no doubt add to this.All that death and destruction (including women and children) and you don't want to see millions die.Perhaps you don't consider them "innocents".

How about trying to block the Saudi funding of madrassas all over the world? This will go a long way to save the minds of millions of children being poisoned.

We don't have to fight an actual war.We can battle to save young men's minds from being radicalised and infected with the virus of this death cult.

166. Preventing More Lal Masjids

Comment #57213 by Jiten on July 18, 2007 at 2:58 pm

one must not minimize the danger posed by madrassas


This is where the virus enters their minds.Nothing to do exclusively with socio-economic factors,although these play contributory role.

167. Is there an Artificial God?

Comment #57200 by Jiten on July 18, 2007 at 2:17 pm

At last something good about religion-it helps the Balinese to grow rice.

168. Interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #57191 by Jiten on July 18, 2007 at 2:06 pm

The moderate Al-Sistani's website talks about us being kafirs.Well fan my brow and blow me down with a feather! What's new? He's just being true to the Koran. After all,all religions have a us-them classification-however repugnant it may be to our sensibilities.

Fanusi,what exactly are you trying to convince us of here?That Islam is bad? That muslims commit the most appalling of atrocities in its name?

The issue is how to deal with it.You say bomb them.But isn't this just continuing the cycle of violence? Islam and especially the Wahabi sect is a death cult.How exactly is your prescription for violence different?

169. Don't Mince Words: The London Car-Bomb Plot Was Designed to Kill Women

Comment #57115 by Jiten on July 18, 2007 at 10:00 am

Goatboy you say that all Xenocratic keeps saying is that America is a terrorist state.Well all you are saying is that Islam is bad.Now this is not news.No one in their right mind is going to disagree with you that our morality is better than theirs.But these two statements are not mutually exclusive.Both are true.

The key point of dispute is the cause of terrorism.What is not disputed is the barbaric violence against ...well you know.

170. Interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #57080 by Jiten on July 18, 2007 at 8:50 am

Henri,I agree to most of the items on your list.But I saw no bombs on that list.

171. Interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #57078 by Jiten on July 18, 2007 at 8:48 am

So Henri are you writing this from Basra?

172. Interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #57074 by Jiten on July 18, 2007 at 8:45 am

For the nth time : I'm not an apologist.Calling someone an apologist just because he disagrees with you about how to deal with a problem is a cheap shot.We're agreed that we need to deal with Islam.But how? You say bombs,I say first we stop bombing them.They're really pissed off about that.

173. Interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #57066 by Jiten on July 18, 2007 at 8:25 am

So Henri,you're all for bombing the muslims.What about the muslims in Scandinavia? When do you think bombing will begin there?

174. Interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #57026 by Jiten on July 18, 2007 at 7:17 am

Boy you're deluded Henri.No amount of facts or arguments will convince you that you are wrong.Why this accusation of being "apologists"? I'm no apologist.I'm disgusted by Islam as much as you.As Rtambree has said repeating over and over that Islam is bad is not news to anybody.

175. Interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #57021 by Jiten on July 18, 2007 at 7:07 am

Henri Bergson you write that

"The only way to reduce the threat of militant islam is invasion of islamic countries"

Have you not learnt anything from history or from current affairs? You also write "Islam must be destroyed". How? By killing its believers? Remember once Christianity was just as bad.And yet today it's nowhere like what Islam is like.What caused this?Can we not do the same for Islam? Mind you there will be no quick solutions.

176. Fears Grow Over 'Mega Mosque'

Comment #56798 by Jiten on July 17, 2007 at 9:16 am

I don't know on what grounds we can prevent this from happening.Perhaps only on planning issues such as parking and traffic consequences.

Certainly not on grounds that it'll be likely that hate speech will be espoused there.How can the authorities know that? And anyway there are already plenty of mosques.It's not as if they're lacking in places where they can brainwash and radicalise young men.

177. Kenya: The Death of Religion And Rise of Atheism in the West

Comment #56591 by Jiten on July 16, 2007 at 1:40 pm

My mistake.

178. Kenya: The Death of Religion And Rise of Atheism in the West

Comment #56585 by Jiten on July 16, 2007 at 1:32 pm

Richard Dawkins "was a well-known communist sympathiser".

Does anyone know if this is true?

179. Believing the Unbelievable: The Clash Between Faith and Reason in the Modern World

Comment #56398 by Jiten on July 15, 2007 at 3:35 pm

Bonzai,I think he means moderates v fundamentalists.But as Dawkins and others have pointed out moderates enable fundamentalists to exist.I think it would be very hard to convert all fundamentalists into moderates,just as hard I imagine as to convert them into atheists directly.So I think reformation will not work.Although Christianity has had a reformation you've still got the fundamentalists around today.Nuclear armed!

180. Believing the Unbelievable: The Clash Between Faith and Reason in the Modern World

Comment #56385 by Jiten on July 15, 2007 at 2:34 pm

Excellent posts by ungodlyatheist and Rtambree (as usual).I just want to take up ungoldyatheist on one point.You say religion is here to stay and that the Koran should be reformed.But why reform? Why not just repudiate it altogether? After all atheism is good enough for us,so why not for all?

181. Christians disrupt Hindu Prayer at Senate Invocation

Comment #56066 by Jiten on July 13, 2007 at 3:08 pm

Has an atheist ever been invited? He could use up his time playing a 3min jazz record for example.

182. Borehamwood eruv granted planning permission

Comment #56062 by Jiten on July 13, 2007 at 3:00 pm

Come on you guys no cheating allowed! God knows ALL the tricks cos he's god.

183. Don't Mince Words: The London Car-Bomb Plot Was Designed to Kill Women

Comment #56058 by Jiten on July 13, 2007 at 2:53 pm

I think the real problem is our instinct for searching for a single cause of things in human affairs.Some say the cause is Islam because they see that those doing the terrorism are muslims.Others say the terrorism is a consequence of state terrorism and discount the fact that muslims are doing it.

I think we should move to a poly-causal view where complex things like human affairs are concerned.

184. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #55966 by Jiten on July 13, 2007 at 3:49 am

I totally agree with USA Limey.A believer with vocabulary is just as deluded as an ordinary believer.

185. Don't Mince Words: The London Car-Bomb Plot Was Designed to Kill Women

Comment #55947 by Jiten on July 13, 2007 at 2:32 am

xeno kind of creeps me out with his apparent WORSHIP of chomsky


This is a facile comment which is also frequently applied to those who admire Richard Dawkins' work.We are called his disciples by the theists.You must have come across that too proud atheist surely?

Comment on what Chomsky actually has said or written.And critizise his points.See if you can do that.

186. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #55941 by Jiten on July 13, 2007 at 1:58 am

It's over! Well it couldn't carry on for ever could it? No amount of blather will make god exist when he doesn't.'Intelligent' believers have their own private versions of god not shared by the ordinary grandmother,nor by other 'intelligent' believers.We non-believers do not have our own versions of science.

187. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #55707 by Jiten on July 12, 2007 at 3:42 am

The lightbulb will come on.Extend the 3 doors to 1000 doors.You pick a door.The probability that the prize is there is 1/1000.The probability that the prize is elsewhere behind any one of the other doors is 999/1000.Now the host opens 998 doors to reveal goats.The probability that the prize is elswhere is still 999/1000.So you improve your chances by 999 times if you switch.

188. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #55625 by Jiten on July 11, 2007 at 6:26 pm

Teapot,you'd be surprised how probability works! I did not mention anything to do with hindsight.

The probability that the prize is behind your door is 1/3.The probability that it's not behind your door is 2/3.Not behind your door means it has to be behind ONE of the other doors.So the probability that it is behind ONE of the other doors is 2/3.So switch and double your chances of winning.Easy!

189. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #55613 by Jiten on July 11, 2007 at 5:26 pm

Re the Monty Hall problem: The probability that the prize is behind your door is 1/3.The probability the the prize is behind ONE of the other doors is 2/3.So always switch and you'll double your chances of winning!

190. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #55484 by Jiten on July 11, 2007 at 8:53 am

Umbrella is already the plural,don't you know that guys? The singular is umbrellum.

191. Brainwashed children plead to die as martyrs in Red Mosque siege

Comment #54693 by Jiten on July 8, 2007 at 1:52 pm

I agree with post 16 by Bonzai.

Islam is a toxic religion.It's a very bad idea that is very good at spreading itself.It's had 1500 years to perfect its spreadability.

192. Don't Mince Words: The London Car-Bomb Plot Was Designed to Kill Women

Comment #54684 by Jiten on July 8, 2007 at 1:13 pm

Fanusi asks:

And finally, could Jiten and the rest explain to me how they can ignore statistics such as the number of British Moslems who support the introduction of Shariah law (40% of all young Moslems, according to study cited in the Telegraph)?


So what? I'm surprised it's not 100% of muslims who support Shariah law.After all, all true bleievers should want to be governed by the one true law,shouldn't they?

But it's not going to happen.About as likely as a snowball in hell.

193. Don't Mince Words: The London Car-Bomb Plot Was Designed to Kill Women

Comment #54652 by Jiten on July 8, 2007 at 11:13 am

Xenocratic, wow what a way to go!! That was the knockout punch! Absolutely brilliant.Hope to see you in other threads.

194. For Muslim Extremists, Religion Matters

Comment #54338 by Jiten on July 6, 2007 at 12:32 pm

I'm with Friend on this one too.

195. Don't Mince Words: The London Car-Bomb Plot Was Designed to Kill Women

Comment #54330 by Jiten on July 6, 2007 at 11:49 am

GoatBoy36 thanks for your formal reasoning.Point taken.But in the case of an actual real world situation one does not have to start with a conditional premise.You can go straight to the facts and see if it fits the definition or not.

196. Don't Mince Words: The London Car-Bomb Plot Was Designed to Kill Women

Comment #54325 by Jiten on July 6, 2007 at 11:31 am

Benjamin Michael you complain of ad hominem and yet what is this but an ad hominem?

Chomsky is one of the most racist, bigoted, evil crooks the modern world has produced. He is utter filth and a despicable human, only surpassed in his contemptibleness by his loathsome holocaust denying disciple, Finkelstein. Chomsky's affinity with bare-faced lies and insatiable prejudices only serves as evidence of psychosis.


You bring nothing to the debate.You are a despicable human being.

197. Don't Mince Words: The London Car-Bomb Plot Was Designed to Kill Women

Comment #54314 by Jiten on July 6, 2007 at 10:48 am

Fanusi,I find it hard to believe that in the face of overwhelming evidence you deny that the US is a terrorist state.You tell us what the US would do if it were a terrorist state and so because it hasn't done those things then it's not a terrorist state.This is funny reasoning indeed.Why not look at what it actually has done then see if it's still not a terrorist state.Ample evidence has been mentioned at lenght by Xenocratic but you don't have to trust him,the evidence is available for all to find out there.

You also write:

Returning to Xenocratic, his whinging isn't for any positive purpose, or to form an honest and just verdict, but to satisfy his own malice and the howling moral and intellectual vacuum within. It is precisely because of this kind of self-gratificatory nature of his writing that I refer to this as mental masturbation.


This is simply not true.He's provided overwhelming evidence in a vigorous debate with you and to characterise that as"satisfy(ing) his own malice and the howling moral and intellectual vacuum within" is simply false.You as an admirer of Orwell should know better.Even if you have differing opinions you should still nevertheless maintain intellectual honesty in a debate.

198. Don't Mince Words: The London Car-Bomb Plot Was Designed to Kill Women

Comment #54236 by Jiten on July 6, 2007 at 5:15 am

Thanks Xenocratic,another great post.Fanusi,if I may presume to condense all the questions Xenocratic has put to you and which you've failed to address to one single one: Do you believe the US is a terrorist state? Although the evidence is overwhelming I anticipate that you don't so believe.You can't believe because you're wedded to the idea of the US as your saviour,protecting you from the barbaric muslim hordes.

To see the US as your protector is naive and I'm surprised that as a person your intelligence cannot see that.The only way you'll be protected by the US is as a side-effect of its own agenda.It's not out to protect anyone.It's out to benefit US capital.It does what suits it.One minute it arms and trains the mujahadin(and bin Laden) in the 1980s,the next (currently) it fights them.

199. Don't Mince Words: The London Car-Bomb Plot Was Designed to Kill Women

Comment #54148 by Jiten on July 5, 2007 at 4:11 pm

This is turning out to be an excellent thread.There have been excellent posts by Bonzai,Xenocratic and Fanusi.But why can't we have a vigorous exchange of views without the name calling?

You might not see how Xenocratic but I agree with both what you say about US foreign policy and what Fanusi says about Islam.His emphasis is on the evils perpertrated and being perpertrated by Muslims and how it's the US between him and them that's going to protect him.Of course he's deluded about this as the US is not out to save anyone.It's out to benefit US capital.

Your emphasis is on US as a terrorist state,which I entirely agree with.I too read the acceptance speech of Pinter and I've read bits of Chomsky.But you've got to agree that Islam itself is evil.I know you've said that you loath Islam but you've got to go further and agree that these terrorist actions commited by muslims are done in the name of Islam and not simply and soley as a criticism of US policy in Iraq.

200. God, Dawkins, and Paris Hilton

Comment #51896 by Jiten on June 25, 2007 at 1:54 pm

Why don't you Temporary Aura?Who says you can't?

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