Comments by notsobad

Comment #107436 by notsobad on January 4, 2008 at 2:03 pm

It's a good reminder about what happens when religious beliefs are allowed to be the law.

Has NJ changed the constitution, or are they just not enforcing this part of it any more?

352. Mother Nature is Not Our Friend

Comment #106892 by notsobad on January 3, 2008 at 4:37 pm

This article smacks of the most absurd grandiosity and the kind of 'perfection of mankind' ideology that made such a mess of the 20th century. Human nature is not, I think, as amenable to rational decision as Harris likes to think - like many techno-utopians, he needs to pick up a history book or two.

It's better to talk about things that will happen. Not talking about it won't make them go away (e.g. Nazism in the 20th century you mentioned).
Not to mention, if done right, human genetic engineering can be very beneficial unlike the 'grand' schemes in the 20th century.

353. Huckabee: Guns, God and rock'n'roll

Comment #106832 by notsobad on January 3, 2008 at 2:37 pm

Chuck Norris is a creationist idiot .. so their cooperation makes sense.

354. The OUT Campaign has its own Flea!

Comment #106771 by notsobad on January 3, 2008 at 12:42 pm

Is this not just a joke? And if it's for real, why pay them any attention?

355. Moderates Storm The Religious Battlefield

Comment #106279 by notsobad on January 2, 2008 at 3:47 pm

Very typical article: all about winning and losing and one tribe fighting each other.

356. Mother Nature is Not Our Friend

Comment #106112 by notsobad on January 2, 2008 at 11:25 am

Where we had a debate about new genetically-modified super-humans at my Critical Thinking course at college, the main topic was how these new people will look at us: their (inferior) creators.

357. Changing my Mind

Comment #106105 by notsobad on January 2, 2008 at 11:12 am

"Oh well," she said, "then we have plenty to talk about, because I believe that every word of the Bible is literally true." My heart sank.

I would burst out laughing. There is nothing more you can do about these people.

358. Mother Nature is Not Our Friend

Comment #105956 by notsobad on January 2, 2008 at 8:05 am

Regarding "nature ain't our friend":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eScDfYzMEEw
George Carlin, "The planet is fine. The people are fucked."

Human genetic engineering, like global climate change, is not a matter of whether it happens but how we react to it happening.

359. Was religion beneficial to the development of society? Is it now?

Comment #105748 by notsobad on January 1, 2008 at 6:46 pm

The beneficial parts can be easily performed by different means, and we can get rid of the many harmful parts.

360. Science owes its origins to Christianity or Religion

Comment #105746 by notsobad on January 1, 2008 at 6:45 pm

Christianity? Certainly not
Religion? Discovery of Penicilin owes its origins to bacterial infections.

361. If you don't have religion, where do you find your sense of community?

Comment #105743 by notsobad on January 1, 2008 at 6:28 pm

family, school, work, interests

362. Monkey, Business

Comment #105272 by notsobad on December 31, 2007 at 3:55 am

All those people dismissing the conclusion should re-read and comprehend the sentence "People and their governments make decisions based on "folk economics intuitions" - intuitions that are often false."

363. Monkey, Business

Comment #105141 by notsobad on December 30, 2007 at 5:17 pm

Also, I hope no one who frequents this site is hypocritical enough to judge this book just from an article about it and instead reads the book and judge for his/herself. Readers of Dawkins/Harris/Hitchens/Dennett should know better than to do such a thing, after seeing these authors so often dismissed from the start.

That's a good point. Already in this thread we can see people dismissing the conclusions of this book just because they don't fit in people's frame of reference.
Who does that remind me of...

364. Monkey, Business

Comment #105077 by notsobad on December 30, 2007 at 2:08 pm

Evolutionary biology supports laissez-faire .. some people here are going to have a hard time accepting this one.

And cola is a shitty drink no matter who makes it.

365. It is possible to be moral without God

Comment #104937 by notsobad on December 30, 2007 at 4:50 am

Yes, Prime Minister:

Jim Hacker: Is there anyone in the church who doesn't believe in God?
Sir Humphrey: Yes, most of the Bishops.
--
Sir Humphrey: The Church is looking for a candidate to maintain the balance.
Master of Baillie College: What balance?
Sir Humphrey: Between those that believe in God and those that don't.

366. The Pagan Christ

Comment #104922 by notsobad on December 30, 2007 at 2:54 am

Downunder,
so basically you are talking about your mind (brain) and the rest of the body functioning together.
Again, that video about prenatal development is very important. Imagine that you started with a sperm cell and egg cell creating a single cell - zygote - from which a full human being is developed. The single cell, just like any other in the body (except for the sperm and egg cells), contains the complete genome, a combination of male's and female's chromosomes. The egg and sperm cell carry half (23) of total amount of chromosomes in a cell.
So an individual's 'life' is a combination of genetic information and learned behaviour.

367. Pope's exorcist squads will wage war on Satan

Comment #104666 by notsobad on December 29, 2007 at 5:17 am

GOOD!

The more ridiculous these people get the better.

I'd send them this instructional video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBgrJKahA90

368. Happy Newton Day!

Comment #104428 by notsobad on December 28, 2007 at 1:20 pm

BJohn,
do you think and speak for yourself too or only parrot the criminal institution known as the Catholic Church?

369. 'Gospel of wealth' facing scrutiny

Comment #104353 by notsobad on December 28, 2007 at 11:10 am

veterinarian?
Was he one of those talking about micro and macro evolution to explain why he used vaccines?

370. 'Gospel of wealth' facing scrutiny

Comment #104349 by notsobad on December 28, 2007 at 11:07 am

There is something about religion, especially in moderation that works on the brain like an anaesthetic.

First of all, brainwashing and indoctrination during childhood play a very important role. My parents are atheists and I have never felt any need to seriously seek supernatural, except for fun (ghost calling was a way to be with attractive females). Nor was I ever satisfied with 'god did it' explanation.
I've had my share of health problems since I was a baby and even though sometimes I would love to have an almighty friend who would make things right, I concluded that focus on reality and support of science are the only things that can actually help me.
This leads to the fact that faith is also very comforting and makes you feel special and privileged. And it's a drug. Once you are used to faith giving you these special thoughts, it's not easy to give up.

371. 'Gospel of wealth' facing scrutiny

Comment #104220 by notsobad on December 28, 2007 at 6:24 am

liddlefeesh,
so you feel sorry for this person because you and your wife were equally stupid once.
Some people need to burn like that it seems.

372. 'Gospel of wealth' facing scrutiny

Comment #104204 by notsobad on December 28, 2007 at 5:24 am

The point is that if I bought any product or service and I was not happy with it I could sue and get everything I invested back.

The evangelists should be sued for false advertising and should pay taxes but the "victims" are still mostly selfish morons.
If she was trying to buy world peace, it would be equally stupid but at least not selfish. She was trying to cheat the system and all of us just to get more than other people.
And you forget about the powerful law of supply and demand. These evangelists exist because there is demand for them.

373. The Pagan Christ

Comment #104202 by notsobad on December 28, 2007 at 5:12 am

krisking, answer my comment 249. and tell us how you know other holy books are false when they are all equally (in)valid - personal testimony (and only reported by others) and no facts.

--Of course, the answer is obvious; you were brought up in Christian culture. If you were born to Muslim parents, you would you use the same defence for Quran.

374. 'Gospel of wealth' facing scrutiny

Comment #104189 by notsobad on December 28, 2007 at 4:03 am

The only victims are this moron's family and tax payers. She is not a victim; she is an idiot. A victim would be a mentally challenged person taken advantage of not an accountant with presumably average intelligence.

These people are stupid enough to give so much money to these charlatans that they can't even feed themselves nor their families. Eventually they'll die and their gullibility genes will die with them.

This is a learned behaviour, not genetic. But the principle stays: if she can't have children, she can't pass her stupid beliefs and memes onto them.

375. The Pagan Christ

Comment #104177 by notsobad on December 28, 2007 at 3:35 am

Why would anyone have made it up? It's not like someone sat down and wrote it on one occasion. If some-one had made it up surely they would have done a better job of ironing out inconsistencies.

There are hundreds of holy books and stories and they all contradict one another. It's only logical that at least all but one were just made up. Of course, the most rational conclusion is that they were all made up.

376. The Pagan Christ

Comment #104175 by notsobad on December 28, 2007 at 3:33 am

A load of bullocks? Any of you who throw that at me should do me the courtesy of posting your explanation of life, putting me on a better path.

Yes, and you don't read what is written in response because last time you wrote something similar, you were advised to start with basics, such as learn about energy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy

We are surrounded by the facts of life; clear and factual evidence of something beyond our dimensions. Life enters all living things at birth and instills different levels of intelligence, ability and responsibility.

What do you mean by 'life'? Are you saying that embryos and foetuses are not alive?
Did you have biology at school? You don't seem to understand basics of fertilization and fetal development.
Basic video explaining it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eelyg_k5iw

377. Why do atheists care about what others believe when it doesn't affect atheists?

Comment #104054 by notsobad on December 27, 2007 at 5:39 pm

I do not care about beliefs that don't affect me or any other people against their freedom and will.

Organized religions do affect me...

378. Atheists are just as dogmatic as theists, and the only reasonable person is an agnostic.

Comment #104052 by notsobad on December 27, 2007 at 5:34 pm

My definition of atheist is a practical agnostic in regards to supernatural in general.

379. Wisdom From The Founding Rationalists

Comment #104039 by notsobad on December 27, 2007 at 4:57 pm

Deism was the way of saying you don't believe in gods without using the a-word.

380. Happy Newton Day!

Comment #104014 by notsobad on December 27, 2007 at 2:42 pm

Because Darwinian evolution requires eons to unfold itself and is therefore beyond the reach of legitimate science

http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/8904/1218doonesburylgnn5.gif

Charles Darwin's transitional fossils, proven!!!!! You most truly do not know your paleontology, do you !!!!!! Why do you think Elredge and Gould felt the need to concoct Punctuated Equilibria? Because these two eminent paleontologists knew the transitional forms do not exist

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils

One cannot prove a negative anyway, you should know that

On the contrary:
http://graveyardofthegods.com/articles/cantprovenegative.html
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/theory.html

381. Happy Newton Day!

Comment #103963 by notsobad on December 27, 2007 at 11:46 am

You are limiting the scope of reason and existence to what is empirically detectable, and that's not legitimate.

Why is it not legitimate? And why should we not limit the scope (in other words, what's the practical point of worshipping the god of the gaps)?

382. Happy Newton Day!

Comment #103955 by notsobad on December 27, 2007 at 11:37 am

However, unlike that analogy, mine did not claim that the complexity of the universe indicates a rational and personal creator, as you seem to think it did, judging by your response (particularly Steve).

So if it doesn't claim it, how did you make the leap to this and immediately contradict yourself?

Notsobad, that's a good question. For starters, I'd say the fact that out of the infinite array of possibilities you have been created is an indication that he has some sort of personal concern you. He could have chosen not to create you; but you do exist and thus he must have selected you out of all the possibilities.

But why??? Why me???

BTW, don't take yourself so seriously. You were born because the sperm representing you won the race (among 100,000,000 - 500,000,000 other sperm cells in a single ejaculation and there may have been unsuccessful ones) and the fertilized egg succeeded. It's an amazing thing, but that doesn't imply any divine interference. Do you know about evolution through natural selection?

And if you believe that god chooses who gets born and who doesn't, you should instead ask why he/she/it allows so many fuck-ups to be born.

383. Happy Newton Day!

Comment #103925 by notsobad on December 27, 2007 at 10:47 am

Mark – I thought that was an excellent and clear post, thank you. I hope it will help me further explain the elements of the argument that I think you (and many others) don't see yet.

I could have been clearer. What you call "proposition 2" is a trait OF THE UNIVERSE that we have never failed to observe. Because of the nature of material being, its opposite has never, and will not ever, be found to be true. The universe could not have existed to create itself before it existed—I don't care how fast, or small the "quantum fluctuations" are operating, in so far as they already exist to create they cannot be created. Steve's contention that we should just "accept that reality does not depend on what we consider rational" (that is a direct quote from post 240) absolutely floors me—especially coming from one who insults without qualification all religious persons for "acting irrational" by having faith.

So yes, you are right in observing that the argument implies that God is capable of creating something out of nothing. But you must also see that the argument implies that he is not the same sort of "being" as the universe, and therefore what we know to be true of the universe (proposition 2) may not necessarily be true of him.

Suppose you are in a "universe" full of people who can only make watches, and that you suddenly discover a T.V. Logically you conclude that there must exist some sort of "T.V. maker." We are in a universe where nothing comes from nothing and we have stumbled upon something—the universe itself. There must be that "universe maker" – a being capable of making something out of nothing.

I hope this clears up your objections "(a)" and "(b)". To try to use your words, "Proposition 2" is an absolute statement ABOUT THE UNIVERSE, not an absolute statement.

We have not seen evidence that ALL beings must have a creator. I did not mean to imply that. What we have observed is that all beings WE HAVE SEEN have a creator (for all we have seen has been in the universe). But what we also know is that, for anything to be, there must be some being—a being whom we have not seen—who does not have a creator. Otherwise we would fall into an infinite regress of causality, which, as you point out, is also irrational.

Take care,

BJohn

Even if there was some kind of creator, how do you or anybody else know he/she/it cares about people or anything else and how it cares? In other words, how does that imply a need for religions?

384. New journal to target education in evolution

Comment #103904 by notsobad on December 27, 2007 at 9:44 am

Having a church eclipse the state in importance is in reference to personal life. He seeks a reduction in the role of government in everyday lives.

Federal government only. He would let state governments pass laws that'd limit basic rights and freedom (religion in public schools, abortion ban,...).
And the constitution is not perfect. Remember, slavery was legal when it was written and many founding fathers were slave owners.

385. Happy Newton Day!

Comment #103884 by notsobad on December 27, 2007 at 7:36 am

Can a universe summon she-bears to maul kids calling you names? No, therefore god.

386. Happy Newton Day!

Comment #103876 by notsobad on December 27, 2007 at 7:17 am

Theist: Everything must have a creator, and something cannot come from nothing, therefore god.

Sceptic: OK, so following YOUR logic, who/what created god and where did he/she/it come from?

Theist: Always existed, lalala...

387. The Pagan Christ

Comment #103851 by notsobad on December 27, 2007 at 5:30 am

krisking wrote:
I've emailed Bishops about their religion, and received some decidedly wishy washy answers.

This reminds me of the episode 'The Bishop's Gambit' of Yes, Prime Minister.

Jim Hacker: Is there anyone in the church who doesn't believe in God?
Sir Humphrey: Yes, most of the Bishops.
--
Sir Humphrey: The Church is looking for a candidate to maintain the balance.
Master of Baillie College: What balance?
Sir Humphrey: Between those that believe in God and those that don't.

388. New journal to target education in evolution

Comment #103772 by notsobad on December 26, 2007 at 6:34 pm

And the latest Republican presidential candidate to REJECT EVOLUTION is creationist RON PAUL.

The funny part is he majored in biology!

389. The Pagan Christ

Comment #103766 by notsobad on December 26, 2007 at 6:21 pm

immorally high incomes

You sound like the religious.
Oh, and communism and planned economy already failed everywhere.

Global Warming man-made; where is the proof?

Read and follow sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Warming
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attribution_of_recent_climate_change
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/44456/story.htm

390. Priest who committed suicide for rebirth cremated

Comment #103765 by notsobad on December 26, 2007 at 6:19 pm

How does this feeling sorry for a name in the newspaper work?
(I am genuinely interested.)

391. Priest who committed suicide for rebirth cremated

Comment #103753 by notsobad on December 26, 2007 at 5:19 pm

If you really have the need to feel sorry for someone, how about the thousands that die everyday needlessly?

392. The Four Horsemen: on Christmas

Comment #103645 by notsobad on December 26, 2007 at 11:52 am

I don't doubt that it might occur in other species

Female penguins without offspring will adopt the young without mother and raise them as their own.
Those are not homosexuals, but it shows that an individual animal has no problem caring for some else's offspring, and it's beneficial for the colony.

393. The Pagan Christ

Comment #103591 by notsobad on December 26, 2007 at 8:46 am

Atheism does not offer solutions because it's not a belief system or philosophy.
However, unlike religion, it lets you think and decide for yourself.

394. The Four Horsemen: on Christmas

Comment #103549 by notsobad on December 26, 2007 at 7:28 am

Paula Kirby wrote:

But is it really so unthinkable that the mechanics of evolution by natural selection would have left a legacy of revulsion about homosexuality - after all, gay relationships are guaranteed to be offspring-free and therefore not in the interests of one's own or the society's survival.

Do these people also fight against infertile men and find them disgusting?
No, I didn't think they did.
What about the irony of priests living in celibate who oppose homosexuals? If their beliefs are somewhat based on evolution, shouldn't they fight against celibacy too and hate themselves?

395. The Four Horsemen: on Christmas

Comment #103515 by notsobad on December 26, 2007 at 3:34 am

notsobad - just to give you an example... my children being with me, would be one instance where I am forced to pay attention to what's going on around me. I find it rather annoying to have gays bragging about being gay in front of my innocent kids (9 years and 5 years old).

Do you consider them kissing 'bragging about being gay?' Are heterosexuals kissing also bragging about being heterosexuals or are they just expressing their love or lust?
Why can't your kids see it?

But is it really so unthinkable that the mechanics of evolution by natural selection would have left a legacy of revulsion about homosexuality - after all, gay relationships are guaranteed to be offspring-free and therefore not in the interests of one's own or the society's survival.

Evolution is not about 'society's survival.'

396. The Four Horsemen: on Christmas

Comment #103458 by notsobad on December 25, 2007 at 5:46 pm

You consider kissing an 'act'? And who forces you to look at them kissing anyway?

And the 'intentional injection of homosexuality (gay parades)' is caused by the other extreme - irrational opposition to homosexuality. If people didn't say they find homosexuality disgusting and immoral like it's self-evident and didn't try to limit homosexuals' freedom and rights, there would be no gay parades.

397. The Four Horsemen: on Christmas

Comment #103451 by notsobad on December 25, 2007 at 5:28 pm

why my body feels disgusted when I am forced to see gay men in the act.

Someone forces you to do that? Or forced Ayn Rand?

Every time someone says that they find homosexuality disgusting I want to ask: Are you imagining homosexuals having sex when you hear that word or what's the deal here?

398. The Evangelical Rebellion

Comment #103375 by notsobad on December 25, 2007 at 10:14 am

I'm in England but I still have a vote, which will proudly go for Ron Paul. As a lover of the Constitution and Individualism (while at the same time opposing government intervention in private lives), he's the only one that I can truly support.

This is a myth. Ron Paul lets religion affect his professional decisions. He says he wouldn't let federal government limit people's freedom but he has no problem with states doing that. And all those things are Christianity-related, e.g. abortion and religion in public schools.
This is like the free will cop-out.

399. Man and God

Comment #103354 by notsobad on December 25, 2007 at 9:03 am

spiritual dimension goes far beyond mere awe at the sublime"

This is just more of the sweet metaphysical bullshit. If anything, religion turns people into shallow simpletons.
http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/1761/036ax7.png

Among Christians, there is no doubt that confusion and disillusion are causing considerable anguish.

...

This, surely, is where the new militant atheism is wrong. It is totalitarian in its prescription for human happiness.

The author and many others use the term 'militant atheist' but I have yet to see a single example of this militancy.
Also, calling atheism ideology or a 'prescription for human happiness' is either lying or severe lack of knowledge.
And how is it totalitarian?

400. 2 fleas for the Christmas week

Comment #103327 by notsobad on December 25, 2007 at 5:37 am