2101. 'Atheistic fundamentalism' fears

Comment #102255 by epeeist on December 22, 2007 at 7:48 am

Comment #102247 by Matt7895

This guy loves his thesaurus doesn't he?

It might be the only thing he reads (except perhaps the Daily Mail). The Winterval thing was in Birmingham nearly a decade ago and didn't ban "Christmas" and all its trappings. The woman with the cross was offered another job where she could wear her crucifix without health and safety implications.

Either that or he can't tell the difference between the truth and lying for Jesus.

2102. Do our leaders believe in God?

Comment #102254 by epeeist on December 22, 2007 at 7:44 am

Comment #102238 by Richard Morgan

If religion has one great enemy, it is education. On a global scale, people are getting a better "education" and amongst the educated, religion is receding. But it is a long, slow and often bloody business.

Agreed - but I would go somewhat further than you. Ensure girls and women are educated, and make sure they have access to finance (micro banking systems for example).

As I have said before, SWMBO teaches at Withington Girls' School (http://www.withington.manchester.sch.uk/) in Manchester. The aim of the founders (C.P. Scott was one of them) was to ensure that girls got exactly the same educational opportunities as boys.

The school gets a higher than expected proportion of Muslim, Hong Kong Chinese Catholic and Orthodox Jewish girls. While they may have a strong religious streak when they enter the large majority have it diluted to homoeopathic proportions by the time they leave. In particular the Muslim girls roll their skirt waistbands with the best of them.

2103. Interview with Richard Dawkins: On Christmas

Comment #102201 by epeeist on December 22, 2007 at 1:54 am

Comment #102029 by Dr Benway

Can you produce warm, resonant tones in the right key? Few things are sexier than a man who can sing, regardless of the lyrics (as both science and David Bowie have clearly demonstrated). For the sake of the womenfolk who might be present and feeling a chill, it may be your duty to carol.

I have a reasonably good baritone voice, especially when fortified by a pint of Timothy Taylor's "Landlord" ale before hand.

2104. Do the laws of God trump those of man?

Comment #101934 by epeeist on December 21, 2007 at 7:49 am

Comment #101931 by USA_Limey

I'm with you allan.Why waste your energy on someone you will never convince.

Be we can't know that for sure. Some of our finest posters here have told us they were once believers.

I think actually convincing anyone of our position is going to be pretty rare. Getting them to doubt theirs is another matter...

2105. Interview with Richard Dawkins: On Christmas

Comment #101921 by epeeist on December 21, 2007 at 7:14 am

Comment #101878 by irate_atheist

Never, ever, refuse cake. How could you even pose the hypothetical question!!?

Sounds as though you need to come around to my new house. I have an Aga to play with and made 8 Christmas cakes and the same number of Christmas puddings.

The former will, of course, only be allowed to be eaten with a nice piece of Wensleydale.

Oh - and I have temporarily changed my avatar to blend in with the feelings about Christmas by some folks on the site.

2106. Do the laws of God trump those of man?

Comment #101882 by epeeist on December 21, 2007 at 4:17 am

Comment #101880 by octopus

I think that maths and logic should be obligatory during early education.

A bit like this you mean...

"Anyone who cannot cope with mathematics is not fully human. At best he is a tolerable subhuman who has learned to wear shoes, bathe and not make messes in the house."

2107. This Week's Flea

Comment #101879 by epeeist on December 21, 2007 at 4:10 am

Comment #101092 by yogibear

I was considering giving "god is not great" or "the blind watchmaker" to the fundies who appear on my doorstep from time to time. They would probably hand me one of these fleas in return.

I was accosted by one of these people as I wandered out for lunch the other day.

In the end I offered to go to a church gathering, provided that the woman I was talking to went to a meeting of the British Humanist Association with me. She backed off quite quickly...

Score another method for dealing with these people.

2108. Interview with Richard Dawkins: On Christmas

Comment #101873 by epeeist on December 21, 2007 at 4:01 am

OK, declaration here - I am actually going to a carol service on Christmas Eve. The major reason is that I will be in Hebden Bridge in Yorkshire and there will be a brass band in the square. We are staying with friends and their son plays in the band.

So should I go and betray my atheist outlook, or go and disappoint my hosts. Should I go and not sing?

More importantly, should I refuse Christmas cake at the gathering afterwards? Or should I only refuse it if is covered in marzipan and icing, and not served plain with cheese as they do in god's own county (err, skip that last phrase)?

2109. Do the laws of God trump those of man?

Comment #101844 by epeeist on December 21, 2007 at 2:49 am

Comment #101837 by wooter

Do not refer me to jungles. Can you explain it in your wording like I read all Dawkins books already. What are you talking about? That is why i am writing my questions now? I do. I do not know why i repeat myself? It does not work for you. Forget about it.

I don't see that I am here to educate you. That is your job. You have been given lots of information, lots to read, lots of explanations.

I understand that English isn't your native language which is why I for one have been fairly tolerant about your posts. But until you show that you have actually gone away and done some studying then I don't see why we should waste any effort responding to nonsensical posts.

2110. Do the laws of God trump those of man?

Comment #101824 by epeeist on December 21, 2007 at 2:27 am

Comment #101813 by wooter

WOOTER; I ASKED MANY QUESTIONS. I REPEAT THEM AGAIN WITH BIG LETTERS:

1. WHO ARRANGED THE PERTECT LOCATION OF SUN AND EARTH? A LIITLE FAR AWAY WE WOULD BE FROZEN TO DEATH. VICE VERSA. (PLEASE NO BLIND BLINDWATCHMAKER?

2. WHO ARRANGED THE PERFECT COLLOBORATION, COOPERATION BETWEEN SPECIES, PLANTS, ATMOSPHERE, SUN, GRAVITY ...

3. HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN AN UNBORN BABY'S DEVELOPMENT IN MOTHER'S WOMB?

4. HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN THE BODY AND ITS PERFECT WORKING SYSTEM; BRAIN, BLOOD CELLS, HEART, LUNS, KIDNEY, STOMACH, SENSES, PROTECTION SYSTEM?

5.WHY DID DARWIN COULD NOT MAKE UP ANYTHING ABOUT THE EYES.

First of all - stop shouting, it makes you look ignorant.

Secondly, as has been pointed out before you are begging the question, your first question assumes that someone (and implicitly god) placed the Earth in its position around the Sun. The question is, why are you making that assumption? Why does it require some kind of being to do this?

Your last question about the formation of the eye has been answered many times before, here is one page that deals with it - http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB301.html

Go away and read what has been given to you, otherwise more people are just going to mark you down as another fundamental creationist.

2111. Do the laws of God trump those of man?

Comment #101811 by epeeist on December 21, 2007 at 2:13 am

Comment #101804 by wooter

To: BillySands

You are far far beyond what we are talking about if you call oxygen pollutant. You got to brush up on your biology.

Fairly amusing to ask Billy to brush up on his biology - he has a Ph.D. in biochemistry and is actively working in the field.

Steve Zara has a Ph.D. in physics, as do I.

2112. Do the laws of God trump those of man?

Comment #101809 by epeeist on December 21, 2007 at 2:10 am

Comment #101803 by wooter

I will answer your question. I promise but I asked first and we are discissing about evolution thing not Bible.

You have been given a number of answers about evolution, including mine (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/). You seem to have ignored them all.

Come back when you have done some reading and can argue both logically and rationally.

2113. For the Love of Christ

Comment #101791 by epeeist on December 21, 2007 at 1:38 am

Comment #101769 by Richard Morgan

(Ha! My spell-check didn't recognise the word "wankers"! Among all the words it suggested was "bankers". I'll go for that!)

Having worked in the industry, you do realise that the collective noun for bankers is a "wunch"?

2114. Do the laws of God trump those of man?

Comment #101217 by epeeist on December 20, 2007 at 5:23 am

Comment #101209 by wooter

So answer my questions and my comments i wrote for Zara. Who designed this palace like universe and earth? WHO?

Begging the question again - wooter are you married, or do you have a partner of some kind?

If so, when did you stop beating her? WHEN?

2115. Do the laws of God trump those of man?

Comment #101215 by epeeist on December 20, 2007 at 5:20 am

Comment #101206 by wooter

Could I ask - are you a native English speaker?

No i am not. Do i need to be?

No, it is just that your posts can be difficult to read and make sense of.

2116. Do the laws of God trump those of man?

Comment #101198 by epeeist on December 20, 2007 at 4:57 am

Comment #101194 by wooter

Sorry, but this is the standard creationist technique on this site, simply ignoring questions that have been asked of you and arguments against your position. Instead all you (and other creationists) simply try to move the goalposts by asking more inane questions.

Respond first, then raise some more questions.

Incidentally - as well as bifurcation you are now committing the obvious logical fallacy of "Petitio principii", also known as "Begging the Question"

2117. 'Boycott Worked': Compass Flops - Opening Weekend $26 Million; Narnia $63 Million

Comment #101197 by epeeist on December 20, 2007 at 4:54 am

It doesn't appear to be doing too badly in the UK - http://film.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,,2230142,00.html

2118. Do the laws of God trump those of man?

Comment #101189 by epeeist on December 20, 2007 at 4:36 am

Comment #101188 by wooter

The greatest problem for Darwinism is explaining how new biological structures, how new creatures, come into existence. Darwinism can shed light on how already existing biological structures may undergo small changes.

Ah, the micro/macro argument - have a look here: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/ which shows lots of evidence for macro evolution.

It is impossible for Darwinism to explain these, for each of these is a very complex structure that can function only when complete. The most consistent way to account for their origin is to accept the interference of a Conscious and Omnipotent Power, a supernatural Creator.

This is an example of a logical fallacy known as "Bifurcation". Assuming Darwin's theory of natural selection was falsified does not imply that "goddidit".

Quoted from the writer of Darwin's Black box , Dr Michael J. Behe. His book is as one of the most important 100 books of the 20th century by National Review magazine.

Behe was completely discredited at the Dover trial and has retracted most of what he put forward in terms of "Intelligent Design". Even his University finds him an embarrassment.

Could I ask - are you a native English speaker?

2119. Interview with Richard Dawkins: On Christmas

Comment #101183 by epeeist on December 20, 2007 at 4:15 am

Comment #101114 by Veronique

One reason that I could never bring myself to enjoy singing 'carols' was that even the Wesleyan ones were, at best, 3rd if not 4th rate pieces and didn't resonate with me at all. Serious religious music, crafted by serious and talented composers, is able to transport the listener.

Exactly - Bach, Beethoven et. al were musicians writing religious music, Wesley, Stanley and the like were religionists attempting to write music.

I still reckon if you want to listen to good carols you need to go back to the 15th Century, there are some good examples here: http://www.gimell.com/recording-Christmas-with-the-Tallis-Scholars.aspx

My favourite though is still "The Boars Head Carol" - the only version I can find is http://www.christmas-tree.ca/music/mp3/boar.mp3.
Ignore the bowdlerisation, Christianisation and nasty performance it was the only MP3 I could find. It really needs an Oxford choir to sing it.

2120. This Is Not a Test

Comment #101168 by epeeist on December 20, 2007 at 3:36 am

Comment #101158 by Steve Zara

Such a simplistic statement ignores the fact that in the rest of the Western world, what counts for left in the USA is actually mostly considered right-of-centre.

Indeed, it has been said that all of the UK parties would fit within the Democrats in the States (though I have to wonder about nuLabour).

And of course it ignores the history of real socialism in the States (viz. "The Ballad of Joe Hill" and the Wobblies).

Personally I have never found a hatred of America per se, a loathing of its government yes, but not of America or Americans.

2121. CBC News: Sunday - Richard Dawkins

Comment #100859 by epeeist on December 19, 2007 at 1:13 pm

Comment #100444 by briancoughlanworldcitizen

This is a tricky formulation. Let me put it this way. I have had experiences where I felt connected to something greater than myself, I thought this was Jesus or the Holy Ghost or God at the time. I now don't think I was connected to anything greater, so in that sense the experience was an hallucination.

Have you read any of the existential psychologists, particularly Abraham Maslow? Your description seems very much like his peak experiences. Wordsworth describes the feeling well

"EARTH has not anything to show more fair:
Dull would he be of soul who could pass by
A sight so touching in its majesty:
This City now doth like a garment wear
The beauty of the morning; silent, bare,
Ships, towers, domes, theatres, and temples lie
Open unto the fields, and to the sky;
All bright and glittering in the smokeless air.
Never did sun more beautifully steep
In his first splendour valley, rock, or hill;
Ne'er saw I, never felt, a calm so deep!
The river glideth at his own sweet will:
Dear God! the very houses seem asleep;
And all that mighty heart is lying still!"

2122. Clegg 'does not believe in God'

Comment #100856 by epeeist on December 19, 2007 at 1:03 pm

Comment #100825 by steveroot

...and you grew up to play with sharp things?

Well, not exactly sharp. Otherwise the turnover rate could get fairly high, especially coaches.

2123. Clegg 'does not believe in God'

Comment #100808 by epeeist on December 19, 2007 at 11:21 am

My father was a Catholic, my mother a nominal protestant. They married in a Catholic church and my mother had to commit to bringing children up as Catholics. This may be the case with Nick Clegg.

Incidentally, my mother was not allowed to use the centre aisle in the church since she wasn't Catholic.

And since I am in story telling mode, I may as well finish it off. One of the priests visited us to find out why my brother hadn't been going to church. Seeing just the two children and a dog he told my mother she should get rid of the dog and consider having more children. Both she and the dog took exception to this and chased the priest down the garden path. Closing the gate behind him the priest turned and told me my mother that she would burn in hell. To which she responded that "she wouldn't be able to get near the fires for you buggers stoking it".

2124. God rest you merry atheist

Comment #100621 by epeeist on December 19, 2007 at 2:16 am

Comment #100498 by Goldy

http://www.britarch.ac.uk/ba/ba44/ba44feat.html

Burnt grains are not only associated with Anglo-Saxon burials. I used to live a couple of kilometers away from Lindow Moss, where Lindow Man was found (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindow_man).

Note the presence of burnt grain and mistletoe pollen found in his stomach. Note also that his skin was painted green, which may associate him with the "Green Man", an executed and resurrected fertility god (read "Gawaine and the Green Knight" to get a later story of the same figure).

2125. This Week's Flea

Comment #100594 by epeeist on December 19, 2007 at 12:51 am

Comment #100338 by paceetrate

"a world expert on science and theology"

I think they are using the alternative definition of "expert", i.e. from "ex", meaning "has been" and "spurt", meaning "drip under pressure".

2126. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #100127 by epeeist on December 18, 2007 at 9:19 am

Comment #100125 by muncle

Again I recommend INDEPENDENT study.

Why do you assume we haven't?

Personally I find her tiresome and shallow and her works of the same sort of calibre as those produced by L. Ron Hubbard. Background reading reveals her to be as much a failure as a human being as Margaret Thatcher.

2127. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #100105 by epeeist on December 18, 2007 at 8:44 am

Comment #100096 by muncle

For you, I recommend independent inquiry, instead of just accepting the popular views of the culture.
AYN RAND was a champion of FREEDOM.

Ayn Rand was a second rate novelist, a producer of turgid prose and cardboard characters.

2128. God rest you merry atheist

Comment #99947 by epeeist on December 17, 2007 at 11:54 pm

Comment #99926 by Dr Benway

I rather like Handel's Messiah, especially the bit that goes, "And He shall purify the sons of Levi that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness." The words do nothing for me but the cascading voices are wonderful.

Even better when you are in a choir singing it. One of the great pieces of music, not quite of the sublime nature of the "St. Matthews Passion".

Personally I find most hymns and carols from the 19th century onwards mawkish and sentimental, Christina Rossetti's "In the Bleak Midwinter" is the worst for precipitating the gag reflex.

2129. This Is Not a Test

Comment #99945 by epeeist on December 17, 2007 at 11:39 pm

"Faith, Family, Freedom", follows other three word slogans, "Kinder, Kuche, Kirche" for instance.

2130. Creationists plan British theme park

Comment #99594 by epeeist on December 17, 2007 at 6:30 am

Comment #99589 by Flagellant

I like the idea of adding some zest to sites that, er, don't quite agree with us.

Can anyone remember the URL for Ruhts blog...

2131. An Open Letter to Richard Dawkins

Comment #98954 by epeeist on December 15, 2007 at 2:25 am

Comment #98825 by David Blackwell

Both beside the point surely? The priest, Jonathan Morris, was contrasting religion (of the sort he favours, of course) with atheistic ideologies (e.g. Marxism), and claiming that the atheism per se (not least of Marxism) led to the kinds of horrors we witnessed in the last century.

You and he are getting mixed up with whole/part relationships, essentially committing the fallacy of division.

Atheism is part of the philosophy of Marxism. The dictatorship of the proletariat is also part of Marxism, but you would almost certainly get a curt response if you tried to claim that it was also part of an atheistic philosophy.

2132. Jumbo shrimp, creationist astronomy

Comment #98637 by epeeist on December 14, 2007 at 1:06 am

Comment #98628 by MuNky82

I personally like the open standard of mp4.

I don't think the Fraunhoffer institute would agree with you about the open nature of the mpeg standard.

2133. Why Science Will Triumph Only When Theory Becomes Law

Comment #98625 by epeeist on December 14, 2007 at 12:30 am

Comment #98616 by Ruht

2) Dawkins has the spirit of anti-Christ, and there is no spirit of anti-Mohammed, seeing how Mohammed was anti-Christ himself and therefore not of God.

So we have the "End Times" coming and the claim that Mohammed was the "Anti-Christ".

This effectively means that this particular loony is quite content to condemn every one in the world apart from his particular sect to "eternal damnation". I have marked him "troll".

2134. An Open Letter to Richard Dawkins

Comment #98090 by epeeist on December 13, 2007 at 4:09 am

Comment #98082 by FatherMike

But this is the official Richard Dawkins site and he tries to prove the non existance of god, through reason.

As you have said this is not possible, all one can do is show that the balance of probability is strongly skewed towards non-existence.

2135. An Open Letter to Richard Dawkins

Comment #98059 by epeeist on December 13, 2007 at 3:12 am

Comment #98047 by FatherMike

Is'nt it impossible to prove that God exists... or that he does not exist either.

Agreed, but this does not make the probabilities 50:50.

If your god was active in the world then his actions should be capable of being investigated using standard methods. Such things have been done, people looking for Noah's ark for example, but nothing has been found. This rather lowers the probabilities on your side. Other arguments, such as the problem of evil I would contend also lower the probabilities.

The safest way forward is to make the contingent hypothesis that a personal god does not exist. A single counter example would disprove the hypothesis (though the evidence would have to be strong).

2136. Girl, 16, dies after hijab dispute with father

Comment #98050 by epeeist on December 13, 2007 at 3:02 am

Comment #98040 by Fanusi Khiyal

I am duly chastised, but I wasn't specifically talking about you, when it comes to being light on Islam.

Chastisement wasn't the aim, rather an appeal for circumspection.

Anyway, does anyone seriously want to place a bet against Islam being at the root of this?

No, though it will be claimed to be "cultural" rather than religious.

But once the evidence is in then this is the time to go in with all guns blazing.

2137. Atheists' sign sparks controversy

Comment #97542 by epeeist on December 12, 2007 at 9:48 am

Comment #97537 by steve99

In truth, all most so-called 'militant' atheists seem to want (and I include myself in that group) is for the religious to leave us alone, and to stop allowing unsubstantiated beliefs to influence public attitudes and policy.

The only thing extra that I would want is the elimination of the automatic deference that religion seems to get.

Politicians arguing about the ethos of society, historians writing on the existence and historicity of people and events, and scientists raising theories on the way the universe is put together are all subject to criticism. Religions have pontificated in all of these areas, as such their proclamations should be treated in exactly the same way as any other group.

2138. Girl, 16, dies after hijab dispute with father

Comment #97529 by epeeist on December 12, 2007 at 9:07 am

Comment #97519 by Tyler Durden

Surely if she died because "she tried to knife her father and he was trying to defend himself" wouldn't the title of this report (and many others) be "Girl, 16, dies after she tried to knife her father and he was trying to defend himself."

It was an example, no more.

I don't know where Fanusi lives, but I live in the UK. Given the state of the press in this country I would not take the reporting of any such stories as being anywhere near the truth, especially if the report was in something like the "Daily Mail" or "The Express". I don't know the "National Post", and I may be doing it an injustice but until someone can provide additional material that clarifies the situation I don't think we are in a position to make a definitive judgement. All we have, as I have said, is a likelihood based on previous cases.

Comment #97527 by zoltix

Are you seriously saying that we can't make comments, have opinions, express points of view because this report comes from a newspaper.
Most of the items we discuss in the news section come from newspapers.

Absolutely not. However, I would qualify the said opinions.

2139. Girl, 16, dies after hijab dispute with father

Comment #97514 by epeeist on December 12, 2007 at 8:29 am

Comment #97510 by Fanusi Khiyal

What you ignore is that this ghastly story has, as I said, occured before, in every single country with Islam, and in every single one of these cases, it has been specifically justified by Islam.

I know that but you have no evidence that this is what has happened in this case. All you have is the likelihood based on some a posteriori probabilities and a report in a newspaper.

Slow down, wait for the evidence (which will probably come down the way you are saying) and then criticise. Otherwise you could end up looking like a bloody idiot if, for example, she tried to knife her father and he was trying to defend himself (not likely I know, but still a possibility).

As to your comment about being light on Islam, note that it was I who first raised this story - http://www.tamesideadvertiser.co.uk/news/s/1026293_savage_attack_on_boy_by_imam, in the forums.

2140. Girl, 16, dies after hijab dispute with father

Comment #97448 by epeeist on December 12, 2007 at 5:19 am

Comment #97425 by Styrer

Murder by fathers of their daughters is one of the most unusual and rare events we can encounter in non-Muslim countries.

There are about 50 child murders in the UK each year, nearly 90% of which are done by parents and carers.

I think all the Bonzai, Steve99 and I are saying is, don't make assumptions on the basis of a single newspaper article. If it turns out that indeed there was a cultural/religious basis for the murder then this is the time to criticise. If it turns out to have been a simple domestic disturbance that got out of hand then you undermine the case against the barbarism and misogyny of the religion if you condemn it beforehand.

2141. Girl, 16, dies after hijab dispute with father

Comment #97395 by epeeist on December 12, 2007 at 2:43 am

Comment #97382 by Fanusi Khiyal

Are you serious? This is about a hijab .

No, the article says it was allegedly about the wearing of western clothes rather than the hijab. But it hasn't yet been brought to trial and no evidence has been presented. I hope you accept that articles in a newspaper don't have a particularly high evidential value.

Within a 100m of where I used to live a man murdered his wife then committed suicide. They were both devout Christians, using your hasty generalisation am I committed to blaming Christianity for the murder. Alternatively would it be better to wait for the inquest at which it was shown that the man was schizophrenic?

You might think that there was a strong religious element to this murder (which is what I also think), but until the trial you cannot know this.

2142. Girl, 16, dies after hijab dispute with father

Comment #97362 by epeeist on December 12, 2007 at 12:44 am

I would be slightly careful about this one. There may be a religious element, but it could equally be a domestic argument that got out of hand. Until it goes to trial I certainly wouldn't leap to any conclusions.

What I would expect is that the trial should be conducted under normal criminal law with no deference given to "cultural" or religious factors.

2143. 'Boycott Worked': Compass Flops - Opening Weekend $26 Million; Narnia $63 Million

Comment #96970 by epeeist on December 11, 2007 at 7:23 am

Comment #96967 by Durandal

We're in the midst of a fantasy burnout. People are simply getting tired of all of these fantasy adaptations that continue to offer little more than diminishing returns.

Does this mean we might get less of the Marvel Comics films as well? You can only hope.

2144. This deadly religious resistance to vaccinations

Comment #96888 by epeeist on December 11, 2007 at 4:01 am

Comment #96883 by k1mgy

Dr. Wakefield was vilified and run out of Britain, not for proving conclusively that there was a direct connection between MMR and Autism, but for raising the possibility of it.

This is simply false. Have a look at Brian Deer's site for a fuller explanation - http://briandeer.com/wakefield-deer.htm

2145. This deadly religious resistance to vaccinations

Comment #96851 by epeeist on December 11, 2007 at 2:31 am

Comment #96833 by irate_atheist and #96842 by Tycho the Dog

Agreed - it really is the nastiest rag on the market, though I think the "Express" runs it close. Its late proprietor Lord Northcliffe was supposed to have revealed the secret of its success was that it gave its readers a "daily hate".

2146. Why Science Will Triumph Only When Theory Becomes Law

Comment #96834 by epeeist on December 11, 2007 at 2:01 am

Comment #96831 by Philip1978

I am not usually one to say bad things about people, I always see if I can look for the best in them, but you I will make an exception for, there is nothing good in you at all

Indeed, he hasn't answered my questions directly but reading the rest of his posts it would seem that he has no problems consigning all Hindus, Buddhists, followers of the Great Spirit and (especially?) atheists to damnation when the Rapture comes.

He belongs on this site, but in the "Ugly" part of the "Good, Bad, Ugly" section.

2147. Why Science Will Triumph Only When Theory Becomes Law

Comment #95775 by epeeist on December 9, 2007 at 7:31 am

Comment #95756 by smithyboy

epeeist, so when are you taking up ploughing?

I would say you are making a slight assumption there...

No, actually I can't plough - though I did work on a pig farm for a while.

2148. Why Science Will Triumph Only When Theory Becomes Law

Comment #95750 by epeeist on December 9, 2007 at 5:25 am

Comment #95716 by Ruht

Which is why your types argue amongst yourselves concerning it, and why it is constantly changing. The only thing constantly 'evolving' concerning the theory of evolution is the theory itself.

I have just been re-reading "The Once and Future King" by T.H. White, for various reasons I needed the literary equivalent of a popcorn movie. You probably won't like this passage:

"There is only one thing for it - to learn. That is the only thing which the mind can never exhaust, never alienate, never be tortured by, and never dream of regretting. Look at what a lot of things there are to learn - pure science, the only purity there is. You can learn astronomy in a lifetime, natural history in three, literature in six. And then, after you have exhausted a milliard lifetimes in biology, medicine and theo-criticism and geography and history and economics - why then you can start making a cartwheel out of the appropriate wood, or spend fifty years learning to begin to learn to beat your adversary at fencing. After that you can start again on mathematics, until it is time to learn to plough."

Your religion denies all of this - there is no evolution, god did it, you don't need to know any more. Similarly for the creation of the universe (how long ago was that?) and of the earth

The only authority for morals is god, so don't even think about struggling (as people like Aristotle and Spinoza did) to produce an ethical system.

Of course our theories and ideas change, whether these are in science, philosophy and virtually every other subject. They change because we learn more and hopefully understand more.

There seems to be only one subject that isn't open to change and that is religion. To paraphrase from another thread, I presume you would accept that dentistry has advanced since the 1st century, but you still claim that the writings from an obscure middle eastern tribe are still current.

2149. Why Science Will Triumph Only When Theory Becomes Law

Comment #95709 by epeeist on December 9, 2007 at 2:52 am

Comment #95705 by Ruht

And it's all just supposed to be luck.

You claim to have "disproved" evolution, but you can't even describe the theory correctly.

If you want to be take seriously on a site like this then you need to have some knowledge under your belt - "A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again."

I am still not sure whether followers of the Great Spirit are going to heaven, whether they will be joined by Hindus but not by Buddhists. Do you want to enlighten us on this?

2150. Why Science Will Triumph Only When Theory Becomes Law

Comment #95708 by epeeist on December 9, 2007 at 2:46 am

Comment #95700 and #95702 by Ruht

As well as ignoring books on evolution and science you seem to have also missed out logic as well.

Both of these posts are simple logical fallacies, consequential ad hominem attacks. As such they can be dismissed as being of no value.

Of course logic, like science, wasn't invented by any of the Abrahamic religions which is presumably why it doesn't seem to be part of your education.