401. Heath Ledger Death: Baptist Group To Protest At Memorial

Comment #115943 by phasmagigas on January 25, 2008 at 5:19 am

Also from Leviticus: apparently eating shellfish is also an abomination (Lev. 11:10). I wonder how this compares with homosexuality and wonder if we'll see the WBC faith-heads picketing the local sushi bar.

probably not, the difference being that phelps doesnt care for shellfish in the same way that he (probably) cares for gay sex.

402. Heath Ledger Death: Baptist Group To Protest At Memorial

Comment #115742 by phasmagigas on January 24, 2008 at 3:24 pm

interesting how people like missc77 appear now and again, my favourites are the 'how can we be from mokeys, PROVE IT! idiot athists' within a few dozen posts they realise that they have been dwelling in a tiny isolated intellectual bubble of like minded friends and family, they find their ignorant comments thoroughly dissected and swallowed, it at least might give them food for thought.

MissC77 is a classic example, he/she enters the forum feeling thay have someting worthwhile to say without knowing what fallacy even means. the sad thing is these people dont even know their intellectual level, in their defence some of them do admit they dont know all, (rev cort was a good example although rev wasnt intellectually deficient he was just a creationist poor chap), some of us hammered evolution at him and he eventually starting realising that the whole enterprise was way unknown to him and actually intellectually stimulating, he seemed to go away saying he would actually read up on it!!

its fine to have an opinion on homosexuality but what reliogious bigots just dont understand is that the people on this board are WAY past judging people on their sexual preferences, WAY past, people bashing gays now are the types who would have hung black people (or at least supported it)had they lived back when......

403. What Religion's Blind Stranglehold on America Is Doing to Our Democracy

Comment #114029 by phasmagigas on January 21, 2008 at 8:46 am

the US is a strange place. going off on a related tangent here but hear this: a young guy i know went to a probation assessment hearing and amongst the questions relating to his 'improvements' post his minor criminal activities he was asked in effect 'are you straight or homosexual?' 'do you practice safe sex'? and 'what are your religious beliefs?'

i was totally shocked, theres something very, very wrong with that. I wonder how the probation employees would have responded had the guy said im gay, i dont practice safe sex and im an atheist.

404. Evolution Debate Led to Ouster, Official Says

Comment #111611 by phasmagigas on January 15, 2008 at 6:37 am

generally, I would like to ask school officials, school governers and even the present/next US president 'do you accept evolution to be true?' answer yes or no (to avoid the learned answers including words like 'fair' and 'balanced' and 'theory').

If the answer is no then i would continue with 'so you are saying that biology teachers across the USA are teaching children actual lies? answer yes or no.

If their answer is yes (which it has to be at this point) then I would ask them 'so why are you not marching en masse across the USA protesting this teaching of actual lies to children'?


if my child was being taught creationism in science i would join an en masse protest, why dont the creationists do the same? if their convictions are so strong and they are so right just how can they possibly allow the lies of evolution be taught to their children????

I think the initial question should be posed to the next US president, if he/she answered yes then a mass of biol teachers should stand up and ask 'president, when we teach kids evolution, are we telling them lies? yes or no'.

No president would have the fucking balls to say 'yes' to that, thats because they know inside how ridiculous they would look to the rest of the world.

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

Comment #100992 by phasmagigas on December 19, 2007 at 6:13 pm

the vatican is now condemning this film, youd think those old men would have something better to do.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071219/film_nm/compass_vatican_dc_1;_ylt=AvyPGwil3RKzVOI8Al3c.9eEDvII

sad old bastards, they assume that 1)god is there and that 2) without god we are lost, sad and inhumane. well speak for their shrivelled, impotent old selves, i really dont have time for nonsense like this but its worth writing it anway.

406. Way of the Master Radio talks about Dawkins' Christmas Comments

Comment #100693 by phasmagigas on December 19, 2007 at 6:08 am

I was mostly amused by "Todd" in the debate with Barker all the way up until Dan asked him whether he would have prevented the 9/11 attacks had he the power. At that point, Todd and his beliefs no longer seemed to me to be merely misguided, but rather malevolent. For those who -- probably wisely -- did not listen to this debate, Todd replied (in part) that not only did the people who died on 9/11 deserve it, but that furthermore we ALL deserve it.

of all the religites ive heard debating/prosetylising i'll admit tjis man is the hardest to listen to.

Phelps is at least amusing as he just such a silly old ass, dinesh is at least intelligent and knows full well when hes evading answers, an angry screaming muslim mullah is at least showing some primal passion, but this guy is a snake of the highest order, his answers when he gives them are empty, that whining pleading for our souls is so utterly offensive, his thought processes are so diametrically opposite to mine that i cannot empathise with him or those like him, there is no equivalent in my brain to that which makes him a slave to religion.

I find it incredibly frustrating when falsehoods are presented about evolution, his question on bone, muscle tendon is so redundant but as it takes a few seconds to compose a working answer the audience thinks that dan is stumped, one could have described chordates with muscle but no bones, then with time cartilage and then attachment points to muscle. Its the type of qnotion like 'half creatures' that displays perfectly the speakers inability to understand biology, and its not down to misunderstanding, its down to inability, its down to lack of imagination.

Dan did jump into preacher mode a few times and thats when his arguments fell a bit but old habits die hard.

407. Way of the Master Radio talks about Dawkins' Christmas Comments

Comment #100502 by phasmagigas on December 18, 2007 at 6:21 pm

It's hard to tell what goes on inside the minds of such people. Maybe they truly believe that other people's souls are in danger, and so they can't restrain themselves from lying to news reporters, breaking their own rules, misrepresenting science, etc. Or maybe they're just liars and frauds. We'll never know.

by the end i was simply luaghing, todds argument against polytheism redefines for me the way a theist can delude themselves, and then he says that dan makes their blood boil. incredible.

408. Borders Tags Atheist Book with 'O Come All Ye Faithless' Cards

Comment #100480 by phasmagigas on December 18, 2007 at 5:29 pm

im not sure if it was borders or barnes and noble but the other day in the tiny science section the staff pick was behes edge of evo, very sad. i didnt see god is not great on the staff pick of the huge religion/supernatural bokum section, would have been equivalent.

409. Way of the Master Radio talks about Dawkins' Christmas Comments

Comment #100477 by phasmagigas on December 18, 2007 at 5:26 pm

He could've done better on the muscles/bone question, but I think he showed well enough that Todd was basically arguing from personal ignorance.

the problem when an answer isnt explained well the less able theists will be unable to differentiate BS from good arguments. What we hear from this 'debate' is a good attempt from dan to give real explanations but todd gives nothing more than emotional sounding sermons, the weak minded will side with the theist as they will simply go with what they know.

as i tend not to listen to sermons this debate has opened my eyes to just what the human mind can become under religious indoctrination. the way todd keeps litearlly BEGGING that we accept jesus is simply nausea inducing, i can tolerate the ramblings of fred phelps over this guy, fred doesnt pretend to be nice.

listening to todd has given me a new insight into the religious mind and how my mind just cannot do it.

The debate was ultimately flawed as there was basically no debate, it revolved around dan making arguments followed by a bilious sermon of begging and pleading by todd. nasty.

410. Way of the Master Radio talks about Dawkins' Christmas Comments

Comment #100476 by phasmagigas on December 18, 2007 at 5:19 pm

i thought Dan did pretty well on the evolution questions, in general. Todd asked him some dumbass question relating to gender - "which evolved first, male or female?" - and Dan succinctly pointed out that there are many forms of life that reproduce with only one gender, female.

id have thrown the question back and asked, so what is male and female?

411. Way of the Master Radio talks about Dawkins' Christmas Comments

Comment #100457 by phasmagigas on December 18, 2007 at 4:27 pm

Friel also did a radio debate in 2006 with Dan Barker of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, and lost badly - Dan is a member of the Prometheus Society, which means his IQ is equivalent to one in ten thousand. I think if you listen to that debate, you'll have an understanding of why Todd's voice is so broken and desperate in this clip:

http://www.wayofthemasterradio.com/podcast/2006/04/04/friel-barker-debate

holy moses, when todd begins with a little story i thought it was to be used as a catchy introduction, it escalated into a full on preaching session, anybody who falls for this tripe is as far as i can ascertain far more gullible than I.

Dan needs to brush up on evolution a bit so he can answer horrible questions like what came first, the bones, muscles or tendons, ie quuestions that cannot be answered with soundbites but require an explanation that would exceed the mental capacity of someone like todd.

get ready to hear straw men, assertions and general ignorance like never before. indeed id go as far as to say upon listening to todd he sounds like a total psycho and the type of perverted nonsense he spews is what keeps the weak on their knees.

3 mins into teh Q&A todd demonstrates both his inability to answer a question and his deliberate deviousness, he skips the evo question by saying 'waht evidence?' then jumps onto the previous question on morality that was thrown at Dan although its not his question, of course he can preach another sermon here, a despicable individual.

his point that all transitional fossils are 'fully formed' and so not transitional shows that he is only used to preaching to the most uninformed, ill educated sections of society, such a ridiculous statement is a testament to the education the man didnt receive.

412. CBC News: Sunday - Richard Dawkins

Comment #100379 by phasmagigas on December 18, 2007 at 2:38 pm

Sounds like you're talking about the likes of Peter Popoff and Slyvia Browne! That fact that these frauds are still getting away with it is truly depressing.

well they would be good examples, in the giant global village the buffer of religion (giving credibility to superstition) and the sheer number of gullible people makes villany profitable, sylvia browne is a fake of course but society at large wont put her in the stocks for that (because society at large thinks shes real)thats why she can still function.

a hunter gatherer shaman on drugs may well describe future events for tribal members or contact the dead but within the framework of the society he is acting as a totally different agent with a totally different agenda.

413. CBC News: Sunday - Richard Dawkins

Comment #100366 by phasmagigas on December 18, 2007 at 2:28 pm

altrusim certainly pays.

most people are altruistic generally so consider what happens to individuals who do the opposite, those who actively disregard, attack or rob others, there is a social consequence be it ostracisation, imprisonment or even reciprocated attack, in most cases it reduces your social standing.

i suppose there were very few benefits in our darwinian past to misbehaving within the framework of a small group(i propose that the notion of bad behaviour in small traditional societies is way below what we see in modern societies, i cannot imagine teenagers in tribes trashing a hut for the fun of it).

For sure today a very sophisticated villain can swoop amongst the giant village he finds himself in and make some gains but ultimately if hes caught he loses out.

414. CBC News: Sunday - Richard Dawkins

Comment #100319 by phasmagigas on December 18, 2007 at 1:47 pm

part 1. just what on earth has somebody 'feeling' the prescence of jesus got to do with 'fancy darwin talk?'

a great way to get all those brain dead creationists on your side.

the interviewer talks of miracles as if they are real, ie the WAY he talk of them.

the interviewer is a prat, the way he emphasises words would easily persuade an unsophisticated audience, these questions are so old, anybody making brief enquiries into theism/atheism will find these arguments all over the place (net/books) dawkins is indeed patient. The end section is telling, viewing the explanation of altruism with a sexual analogy will totally lose many viewers (simply because they wont 'get it') and indeed althought the interviewer 'got it' he was quite happy to emphasise those parts that my disquiet those who dont. the problem with many creationists/believers is that their view of nature (including our part in it) is ultimately retarded and essentially non existent so a fresh take on altrusim just wont make any sense, which is why people like dawkins are so important as teachers.

that whole altruism from god is bollocks, in nature do we see any examples of creatures utterly unrestrained whirling dervishes of destruction? some may seem that way like an ant army but their are darwinian codes built in there, the ants dont just randomly kill each other and snip and hack at blades of grass and everything that stands i their way.

415. Abstinence Programs Face Rejection

Comment #100194 by phasmagigas on December 18, 2007 at 11:26 am

I know somebody who got married so she could have sex with her then boyfriend and very soon into the marriage things went wrong generally.

The pro abstinence lot are not living in the real world. Evolution simply does not allow for clear thinking during sexual courtship, sex is inevitable and when there is no condom in the back pocket people will simply copulate without one. they think some 16 year old guy is going to stick to his abstinence vows during the heat of the moment, what a joke, its almost like the religious lobby are in denial of our animal instincts.



Just what the hell is it with sex and religion??

416. The Four Horsemen: on Christmas

Comment #100043 by phasmagigas on December 18, 2007 at 6:04 am

I think it would be really good if they could capture the light which was emitted from the earth millions of years ago so that we can see evolution happening.

thats something thats always interested me, there will be some info out in the universe contained in light that was reflected from some dino or giant dragonfly but i guess its now highly fragmented due to interception from dust or planets or stars.

417. The Four Horsemen: on Christmas

Comment #100041 by phasmagigas on December 18, 2007 at 6:00 am

I don't like Christmas. It's a consumer orgy. I hate feeling obligated to buy gifts for people and I hate pretending that other people's gifts aren't (generally) a waste of money. I like a family part but I don't like the whole consumer affair.

our family has got away from the multiple gift thing, thats one thing i absolutely detest.

the buying up of all that shit for everybody is nauseating. We now simply buy one gift each, pop them in a big pile and then on a hat pick of 1-10 #1 gets a gift, opens. then #2 can either grab gift from #1 or choose a new one, it turns into a game which is quite fun as later number fight for the 'best' gift. You leave with but one gift and have saved lots of resources because of it and dont feel like you have accumulated too much junk you honestly didnt want or need AND importantly had some fun with the family.

It works well because you try to buy something that people might actually like, it becomes a bit competetive. Bottles of wine work well, far better than some 'should never have been designed in the first place' electronic belly button cleaner.

418. God rest you merry atheist

Comment #99901 by phasmagigas on December 17, 2007 at 7:32 pm

most secular brits are cultural christians by default, only the most jaded atheist would honestly bear a grudge against those who wished him/her a merry xmas, its so normalised that youd make yourself very unpopular if you didnt return the greetings although if the same person heard you deriding christianity the same day they might well feel you were being reasonable.

This xmas i will be in the UK, its about merry making and making the most of the short days, about seeing my family. i personally dont sing carols but i did go to a carol concert a couple of years ago, a nice tune is a nice tune. one of my favourite hymns from my school days was 'god is love:his the care' I like the melody, reminds me of something i imagine youd hear in the middle ages, the lads in school would always lower their voices (well as far as a 5-9 year old can) with the 'praise him' bit at the end whereas the girls (and am i right in thinking it was boys on the right, girls on the left, hom,ho, ho, how bloody quaint is that??) would sing the line beginnnings in higer pitches (kind of a boy/girl battle) anyway daily hymns and prayers didnt make any difference to me, i never took them as anything more than songs, good job i didnt make anything of the boy/girl divisions too otherwise i could now be a misogynist, conservative bigot.

419. Creationists plan British theme park

Comment #99467 by phasmagigas on December 16, 2007 at 5:51 pm

Then why don't you Brits institute separation of church and state? (Hint: it's tradition)

i went to a CoE primary school in the UK, daily hymns and prayers and then compulsory religious (comparative)education right through to being 16 leaves you taking religion non to seriously, i suspect my exposure to religion is preferable to non atall in school than having it evangelised to me as could happen in the USA. religion in the USA is oprahfied, people are so confident in looking like they are on prozac shouting 'believe' and 'joy', the brits generally just arent into that shit.

420. Creation college seeks state's OK to train teachers

Comment #99351 by phasmagigas on December 16, 2007 at 12:16 pm

double bass.

for sure many do wholeheartedly believe what they say but in many cases i simply refuse to believe that people can be so deluded, eg believing that the grand canyon is from noahs flood despite evidence through the stratigraphic column that suggests anything but, i just cannot understand the mentality so i prefer to imagine they are knowingly lying (maybe im deluding myself!). It must be like being a closet homosexual masturbating frantically to male images and thinking 'im not gay' 'im not gay' 'im not gay' rather than 'i dont want to be gay....'

421. Creationists plan British theme park

Comment #99347 by phasmagigas on December 16, 2007 at 12:05 pm

only the most die hard fundies in the UK would make a trip to a place like this.

the concept of acceptable traveling distances in the UK is nothing like in the USA. I have driven almost an hour in the USA to find a decent asian grocers and not found that considered unreasonable (aside from the CO2 emissions) but in the UK if you did that youd be seen as totally crazy. I personally (in the UK) dont know anybody aside from some muslims who are actual creationists. Most who go to church do so becasue its seen as a bit 'respectable' rather than anything to do with an honest to god faith. If this did open i'd like to see natural selection at work and watch it fail. As a whole the british are just a bit more skeptical, or should i say cynical than people in the USA, that whole clapping/crying/BIG praying thing is seen as somewhat embarrasing and something that puts you in the oddball bracket.

422. Creation college seeks state's OK to train teachers

Comment #99256 by phasmagigas on December 16, 2007 at 5:50 am

In the UK, we shouldn't laugh too much at this sort of thing. There are moves afoot to bring us our very own Creation Theme Park. See here: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2228201,00.html Aaargh!

that artice, the quotes are so full of non sequiters and falsehoods as to almost comical, seems kids in the UK binge drink because theres too much sex and violence on TV. Hopefully such a theme park in the UK will fail dismally. as i said earlier, it doesnt matter how many lies are told, poeple will believe that shit, people cannot differentiate shit at the best of times, many watch pop idol at weekends!!

423. Creation college seeks state's OK to train teachers

Comment #99253 by phasmagigas on December 16, 2007 at 5:43 am

the whole creation movement is a strange animal.

As far as i can tell many proponents knowingly deliver falsehoods, anything from twisting evidence to down right lies and then ideas like 'teach both sides' are insidiously added to make them seem reasonable. At the end of the day no matter how weak their position is through real science showing that their beliefs are not compatible with evidence they will still tell knowing lies.

Why? because they know enough people will believe them to aid them with their poisonous endeavour. At the end of the day the proponents of creation want it there so it makes them feel better about themselves and it always boils down to that, its about status and power, dembski (for eg) isnt interested in truth, hes interested in showing his world view is right, that it gives him an elevated position here and now and that it elevates his 'cosmic status' as it puts man in a priveleged position. I wonder why such individuals have such insecurities??

its all rather like a perversion, these self loving, bloated creationists swamp themselves in technology and the excesses of selective breeding and genetic manipulation (food) and yet deny the foundation that has allowed that to happen.

Its incredible that the greatest flasehood from religion is willingly being inserted into schools. In many ways being in america is no different from being in the middle east, people just own more junk here. edit:well not quite but one wonders what could happen in the next century or so.

424. THE FOUR HORSEMEN - Available Now on DVD!

Comment #99087 by phasmagigas on December 15, 2007 at 1:27 pm

mr grape.

I don't know where in the U.S. you were or what age group you're talking about, but a "hi" to a group of kids would result in funny looks, laughs or a confrontation. Maybe it's just the city.

you misread me, its the kids who will say 'hi' to me, not the other way around.

425. THE FOUR HORSEMEN - Available Now on DVD!

Comment #99025 by phasmagigas on December 15, 2007 at 9:05 am

around the 53 minute mark SH asks if there could be an argument for religious beliefs generally. I wonder this in relation to behaviour of children/adolescents in the UK. After living in the states for a few years ive never met the same type of aggressive behaviour and nihilistic mentality that many kids in the UK possess. Its the type of behaviour that one wouldnt expect in an essentially ordered and safe environment.

I guess that the double control of religion and substantial punishment from parents/techers and neighbours meant that years back you would not be subject to harrassment from kids, today both of those controls have all but vanished and may?? be the cause of the so called 'feral' behaviours that are all to common in the UK, and to be sure you do not need to be in some ghetto to see it. I pass a gang of kids in the USA and i usually get a 'hi' (and it took me a while to actually get used to that), in the UK you either get stared down, a 'what the fuck are you looking at' or a stone or two thrown as you walk away, who here in the UK hasnt experienced that? the point here is that kids in the US seem to have a stronger code of right/wrong and more general respect for people (including older people!).

interestingly after that SH also mentions that US muslims are less radicalised than in europe. From what ive seen in the UK, many muslim youths seem to be persuaded by religion as a backlash to the 'vulgar' behaviour displayed by many of their non islamic peers, be it drinking, revealing clothing or general loutishness. Its interesting to note that I feel less intimidated passing a group of muslim youth in the UK than i am passing a group of non muslim youths. A polite 'hi guys' to the muslim kids is often greeted with a suprised positive response as they otherwise assume you 'dont like them'.

426. How do you explain the lack of transitional forms in nature, the gaps in the fossil record?

Comment #98976 by phasmagigas on December 15, 2007 at 4:47 am

I can explain it by the fact that the vast majority of organisms do not get fossilised. To demonstrate my point see what happens to a chicken body that you leave at a woodland egde, my point will be self evident within a very short time.

The fact that you expect a perfect set of transitional organisms/features demonstartes very well your ignorance of biology and natural processes and a low appreciation that things were not exclusively set out for YOU.

To make you think a bit more deeply you need to appreciate that any organism that leaves descendents (it will of course always had ancestors) is a transitional organism in itself.

427. Why Science Will Triumph Only When Theory Becomes Law

Comment #98873 by phasmagigas on December 14, 2007 at 7:39 pm

The banning of ruht is welcome. As i said before anybody set out to deliberately troll has no business on any forum, that was his intention and its simply good riddance. Now where is that nice chap revcort??? hes welcome to take his place (as long as rev doesnt start hurling scriptures again).

428. THE FOUR HORSEMEN - Available Now on DVD!

Comment #98871 by phasmagigas on December 14, 2007 at 7:35 pm

scotch, maybe, well have to ask those in the know!

429. THE FOUR HORSEMEN - Available Now on DVD!

Comment #98867 by phasmagigas on December 14, 2007 at 7:20 pm

i'll watch this later but the pics of the jolly 4 with drinks and smiles must be enough to make many a fundamentalist turn red with fury. i have to say Mr harris could suit a pair of horns on his head. Wow, thats a large brandy for Mr hitchens!! probably not the first and probably not the last.

unmoderated, sheesh!!

430. Why Science Will Triumph Only When Theory Becomes Law

Comment #98120 by phasmagigas on December 13, 2007 at 5:22 am

i like debating evolution but as soon as i start being told im evil, that somebody is praying for me, that i will eventually bow to jesus I have to leave it there.

It would be the equivalent of me entering an islamic forum (where people can rightly discuss the minutae of islamic doctrine) and have me telling them they are idiots for not accepting evolution, i shouldnt expect to be welcomed or listened to.

Im hoping a few others might join me in ignoring ruht so he can rant alone for a while before being blocked, he might get a better reception on a theistic evolutionist site where they may at least share some sentiments with him, if im not mistaken ruhts first posts were regarding evolution and from there have descended into a display of rabid fundamentalist madness that serves nobody.

431. Why Science Will Triumph Only When Theory Becomes Law

Comment #97891 by phasmagigas on December 12, 2007 at 7:51 pm

post 596, ive flagged that as a troll. ruht, you are seeing your last few posts on this forum.

432. Why Science Will Triumph Only When Theory Becomes Law

Comment #97886 by phasmagigas on December 12, 2007 at 7:37 pm

Yes, and we see this in atheists like Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro, Margaret Sanger, etc., etc., etc.

All great 'humanitarians.'

Save your claptrap, Steve.

do we need dignify this with an answer or get a troll blocked? i personally want ruht blocked. its amazing that we get drawn into posts with fundamentalists, hes entered this board specifically to troll, as such he needs to be blocked. I cannot believe hes not deliberately trolling.

433. Why Science Will Triumph Only When Theory Becomes Law

Comment #97884 by phasmagigas on December 12, 2007 at 7:35 pm

ruht:

Yes, believe it or not there's a whole 'nother world out there besides the very small niche of Dawkins and atheists and darwinists and all of the rest of your closed-minded, dead end little world.

yes, im quite aware of that here in the midwest of the USA, i had another flyer stuck to my door handle tonight asking if i was saved or not!!

434. Why Science Will Triumph Only When Theory Becomes Law

Comment #97498 by phasmagigas on December 12, 2007 at 7:40 am

the prickly pear certainly isnt intelligently designed, not from a fruit gatherers point of view. Imagine falling into a pile of the cactus whilst gathering those ripe red just out of reach fruits!! I was suprised there wasnt an 'eject fruit' button (maybe as quets was saying) at the base of the cactus (where the old leaves have become huge and woodyish) that fired the fruits off into my basket, how inconsiderate.

435. Why Science Will Triumph Only When Theory Becomes Law

Comment #97486 by phasmagigas on December 12, 2007 at 7:22 am

There is a counterargument to creationist nonsense at the smaller size scale. Fruits so small that we can't use them. Wolffia angusta has fruits 0.3mm long.

steve, for sure. it would be interesting to see the data for fruits generally (ie those reproductive structures that are food for something as opposed to being dispersal structures for eg) and see how many have we humans use for consumption. then again, what a silly thing to do, it would mean i was taking the creationist idea seriously (that fruit was made for humans). as a side note i took a prickly pear cactus fruit from the cactus earlier this year in california (and im not sure what structure it actually is)but damn, those evil little spines, thinner than a hair that get into your finger tips, delicious though once peeled, i couldnt find the zipper though so i had to use a knife.

436. Why Science Will Triumph Only When Theory Becomes Law

Comment #97478 by phasmagigas on December 12, 2007 at 6:54 am

Yes, perhaps you can ask yourself why such large vegetables and fruits don't grow in trees, where they could fall onto someone's head and hurt or kill someone.

Once again, evidence of Intelligence Design.

In any event, are any of these ground crawlers too heavy to be lifted by the average human? And I'm not talking about purposely altered and grown prize pumpkins and so forth, but the average, natural size and weight of such specimens.

How did so-called 'evolution' figure out not to allow such foods to grow too big for man to lift? How did it figure out not to allow such things to grow in trees?

Because they were designed and created by a Creator, that's why.

an incredible example of an unitelligently designed brain on display for the worlld to see!

Im beginning to think ruht is maybe 11 or 12 at the most, if you are a child then i can understand your misunderstandings.

Try walking under coconut palms, if one of those (seeds)land on your head youll be lucky if anybody even recognises you.

Ruht, this is honestly one of the most incredible things ive read EVER, i actually wonder if you are an evolutionist trolling just for fun, you manage to say things that are so full of ignorance that i find it hard to believe you are simply misunderstanding evolution, im thinking you say them deliberately, knowing full well how ridiculous they are.

the reason giant fruits dont usually grow on trees is that the tree itself and its thinner branches can only support so much weight, theres an optimum size for fruit anyway as plants can only divert so many resources to 'temptations' for frugivores. YOu are under the infantile notion that fruits were designed just for us, strange then that the majority of fruits are inedible to humans. Then again, there is the pomegranete, i often wonder if that was designed to improve the patience of children, the new atheist nightmare!!

Oh and BTW, vegetables dont grow on trees as such, plants that we eat are called vegetables unless its a reproductive structure and then we specifically call it a fruit (technically the fruit is the ovary of the flower, wow to think adam was chewing on an ovary! although of course not all 'fruits' are ovaries, i digress...). The heart of palm is a good example of unintelligently designed vegetable , try biting out one of those from the growing tip of a palm (no tools allowed)!!

i think we are all wasting our time with this person, its dreadful to think that his thoughts might be sincere.

437. Why Science Will Triumph Only When Theory Becomes Law

Comment #97175 by phasmagigas on December 11, 2007 at 3:07 pm

Ruht

When hitting a dead end in the theory of evolution

"The central finding is that human evolution is happening very fast -- faster than any of us thought," Harpending said in a telephone interview"

Translated: "Since our 'billions and billions of years' thing is being proven to be impossible, then we have to come up with something else."

very strange, i read 'evolution is happening very fast, faster than any of us thought' now to my mind that says that evolution is happening just simply at a faster rate than scientists at first realised. Ruht, until you can get a grip and actually learn a bit of evolution and learn to 'decipher' difficult news text (you misinterpreted that one) you really shouldnt bother trolling this thread.

It never ceases to amaze me how a creationst will read an evolution artice and then assume somehow it disproves it!!!! I recently was talking to a creationist about selective breeding (i had no idea he was one) and only when he said, 'and selective breeding just goes to show what a load of nonsense darwins theory is' I was like 'what?' i explained that it actually demonstrates it, it demostrates it very well, and i quickly mentioned genetic variation>trait selection>genes passed on>gene frequency change in population = evo. Amazingly he didnt say anything more.

Now you might jump to the 'god' stuff again as its obvious you are intellectually incapable of engaging the evolution topics realistically so the god stuff is relatively easy, no proof either way just lots of assertions. Ruht, im sorry but when you post these things (like the first quote at the top) you are displaying not only a poor understanding of evolution but what appears to be a general lack of logic, i dont want to be rude but the first comment is so indicative of poor understanding that im not sure you will ever be able to understand evolution, maybe you just dont want to understand it, if you dont then you have no (useful) business on these threads because at that point you are a troll.

438. The empty myths peddled by evangelists of unbelief

Comment #97059 by phasmagigas on December 11, 2007 at 10:54 am

anybody want to join me in deepest peru to convert a few natives to atheism??

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

Comment #96972 by phasmagigas on December 11, 2007 at 7:26 am

boycott or not, im happy i didnt actively not see narnia because of its supposed christian symbolism. its something i didnt even think about. The religious mind truly can be poison.

i watched narnia as i enjoy the story anyway and i was interested to see a new adaptation of something ive seen on the (small) screen several times. Im not familiar with the pullman stories so just havent felt the inclination to watch the movie, i'll wait to rent on DVD.

that nasty BD only want to say the boycott worked so hes in the news, so hes right, so hes having an effect, as often with the religious their motivations are as selfish as the genes which they seem to be afraid of.

440. Is Infant Male Circumcision An Abuse Of The Rights Of The Child?

Comment #96966 by phasmagigas on December 11, 2007 at 7:18 am

pyota

i'm rather shocked to read all these anti-circumcision posts! weird. i can only suppose its further evidence that atheists are just another herd.

male circumcision is a health operation with about as much 'trauma' as getting a tooth cavity filled. the health benefits are well attested to by the medical community. the fact that jews practice it as a religious ritual has nothing to do with its practice in the secular world.

you talk nonsense, my post circumcision care was a nightmare, it was painful, there was infection, i was in hospital for over a week (im not sure how normal that is). As for being part of another herd, well being opposed to removal of highly sensitive tissue for no good reason be it foreskin or earlobe or tongue or fingertips, or any tissue for that matter is hardly part of being a herd, its the default condition to be intact so to oppose it is hardly showing im in a herd but the reasonable natural default position.

If your culture suggested that you should clip a triangular segment from your lower ear lobe would you accept that? most likely you would.

Your point relating atheism to anticircumcision is absurd, just what the hell has not believing in god got to do with me opposing circumcision, as a teenager i was really unhappy being circumcised, a time when god was something I never thought about, at the end of the day there is no good argument for circumcision and if you suggest that health benefits are one let me suggest you get a testicle removed so you can possibly reduce your chance of testicular cancer by one half.

441. Is Infant Male Circumcision An Abuse Of The Rights Of The Child?

Comment #96964 by phasmagigas on December 11, 2007 at 7:02 am

I think a big reason for the continued prevalence of infant circumcision in the US is the natural desire for people to think of themselves as good parents

I can imagine many american dads have their sons circumcised for no better reason that they can be just like dad, you know a ritual like taking him to his first ball game or drinking his first beer.

442. Is Infant Male Circumcision An Abuse Of The Rights Of The Child?

Comment #96958 by phasmagigas on December 11, 2007 at 6:52 am

i was circumcised as an 8-9 year old in the UK for tight foreskin, something that apparently can be 'fixed' without circumcision.

I absolutely regret that it happened. The aftercare from the operation was painful and i remember vividy having salt baths and having medical gauzes stuck tight onto my glans, yes it fucking hurt and yes i have scarring on my glans as well as the usual stitch marks which i see as ugly.

Being circumcised means that a good sized portion of skin has been removed, remember the foreskin has 2 sides. a circumcised penis is compromised in many ways, the skin on the shaft cannot come far back as it should when the prepuce is retracted, most guys have no idea that the prepuce skin ends up all the way down the bottom of the shaft, so basically we miss out on a lot of sensations and apparently (i can see there being truth in this) the fact that there is litle skin movement over the erect circumcised penis means that during intercourse the inside of the vagina can become easily chaffed as the skin is constantly moving over her inside, in an 'as intended' penis the shaft moves a lot but this is not followed by the loose skin over the penis, chafing is minimised. I read somewhere (im not sure if its true) that an circumcised infant does have neural growth into other tissues in the area but as an older child/adult its already set so the loss of sensation (from the missing several inches square of tissue) is permanent.

I was the only non muslim kid who i knew who was circumcised, thats great fun when you are at school.

The circumcision mentality is so normalised in the US that my wife wonders why i make a fuss about it, she thinks im crazy for even questioning it, i dont take the conversation any further, can you believe that! now if that isnt proof that this thing can piss you off nothing will.

As the saying wisely goes 'better to have and not want than to want and not have'

irrespective of why i had mine done im totally aginst circumcision unless of course there is a valid medical reason, i cannot understand why men (of all creatures) would submit their sons to have part of their penis actually removed, I can almost understand (if you see my point) why a patriarchal society would allow women to have their clitoris's hacked out but to do it to ones self (as such) is crazy. i suspect that most religiously circumcised men havent given the notion any thought, rather like many other topics.

In a nutshell i honestly feel that my sexual pleasure is reduced by circumcision and that fucks me off as we only live once.

Yes, it is an abuse of the childs rights, let the man decide if he wants his prepuce removed.

443. Richard Dawkins on 'Have Your Say'

Comment #96181 by phasmagigas on December 10, 2007 at 5:59 am

Here's an encouraging fact. As the producer was showing me out after the show, he told me that the great majority of callers were on my side. The BBC filterers deliberately choose those who disagree with the guest, for the obvious reason that it makes for more interesting television/radio. So, the English woman from France was actually in the substantial majority of those who phoned in.

Interesting. understandably its more useful to have disagreers on the calls but i wonder if the 'filterers' knew the actual question to be posed before putting them through, my point being, i wonder if the filterers thought that any of these people were asking good questions.

Its funnny how the junkyarders always seem to think they have a good point when its obvious they have totally misunderstood what they have read or believed some misunderstanding that they have been told.

444. Richard Dawkins on 'Have Your Say'

Comment #96003 by phasmagigas on December 9, 2007 at 5:02 pm

RD answered well, concisely and to the point.

I'm not sure how representative the callers were but its quite obvious that some of theists werent really understanding some basic points.

I found the american cleric difficult to listen to (ad hominem), sounded way to confident atacking straw men.

The lady from turkey seemed to be of the school 'freedom of speech, just watch what you say' im not sure she realised she was contradicting herself though.

445. Richard Dawkins on 'Have Your Say'

Comment #95994 by phasmagigas on December 9, 2007 at 4:27 pm

that father marks bloke sounds like the son of dinesh d souza and ted haggard attacking straw men in a frenzy (re stalin etc........)

RD gives a concise answer, he (caller) then says people wont believe you and you are commenting outside your subject.


classic.

446. Richard Dawkins - Science and the New Atheism

Comment #95552 by phasmagigas on December 8, 2007 at 3:11 pm

Thanks for the recipe....I've had tofu till I'm sick of it!! My wife thinks it's great!

cheers

krisking, you could stir fry wood chips in that mix and it would be nice!

447. Richard Dawkins - Science and the New Atheism

Comment #95550 by phasmagigas on December 8, 2007 at 3:09 pm

The most that can be said is that we are wired for empathy with our kin, relatives, tribe etc. The tribe on the other side of the valley, was just as 'alien' to our ancestors - and a possible threat to their survival as any other wild animal.

just think how many cattle rustlers have been shot dead in their tracks only to have the owners get back their dear cattle?? remeber, outside of kin (and i dont know HOW far outside of kin) another human becomes a competitor (and indeed even your own child is a competitor at some level) as they want the exact same resources as do you. A group of hunter gatherers might welcome an influx of game on thsir land but not a new tribe despite being more related to the tribe than the game.

448. Richard Dawkins - Science and the New Atheism

Comment #95545 by phasmagigas on December 8, 2007 at 3:05 pm

mdowe

Let me think about this for a second. If I said I prefer to live in a world where I could savour an occasional Granny stew from a humanely and locally reared Granny that was killed ... you get my point. Clearly the culinary-choice aspects of 'kind of world I would like to live in' doesn't influence the moral question, and even humane and painless killing doesn't get me completely off the hook from a moral perspective. If it is ok to kill the cow, why isn't it ok bump-off Granny? I guess I'm personally just skirting the issue by just leaving the cow (and Grannies) alone .. call it intellectual

acthually instead of beef in my post please insert any given animal flesh, grannies included, theres no reason to suppose that grannies once dead couldnt be ingested, in some cultures im sure they are/were. Its interesting but i wonder just how much more revolting would the average person find eating human flesh be to eating that of any animal they are not used to, fancy a rat, a cat, a fox, a monkey, a chimp?? as we know chimps are widely eaten and we are but 5 million years apart.

449. Richard Dawkins - Science and the New Atheism

Comment #95542 by phasmagigas on December 8, 2007 at 2:56 pm

I tend to agree with you....but I live in a mostly vegetarian household...with a nearly vegan wife.....and I just wish the food were more palatable and that we could get our daughters to eat more variety.....

salt and pepper tofu:

deep fry 1 inch or so cubes tofu until brown.
then stir fry the cubes quickly in the following:good splash sesame oil, crushed garlic (lots), fresh ground black pepper (lots), salt (quite a lot), red chilli flakes and finally throw in some fine chop spring/green onion, the whole dish is quite dry (ie no sauce as such) but incredible to eat with some nice steamed rice, its does make your kitchen a no go area, like a hell of sorts. Its a fantastic dish though, very addictive.

450. Richard Dawkins - Science and the New Atheism

Comment #95495 by phasmagigas on December 8, 2007 at 12:48 pm

i suppose for now any position is better than that of some theists i have known (have being the operative word) and that is that animals are here for mans use, they dont feel anything anyway so they can be treated any way atall, suffering is unknown to them.

that is a friendship breaker if there ever was one.