Good Old Professor Dawkins [modified]
-
I cannot help the delusional fools who believe in mumbo jumbo written by bronze age shepherds, I can, however, offer psychological help and deprogramming of the mind washing you have been subjected to. The teaching of religious dogma to children is Child Abuse of the worst kind, it hides under the veneer of respectability and yet inculcates obscenities in the form of acceptable behaviour. All major religions teach that women are less than men. That a belief system treats over half the worlds people as less than human, is obscene. They all teach that theirs is the true way and have killed those who disbelieve. Many teach that certain foods or practices are inherently evil. Dim, very dim! Religion is all about control, but if you are to be truly free you must throw off the shackles of Dogma and wear the mantle of Humanity!
------------------------------------ "October: This is one of the peculiarly dangerous months to speculate in stocks in." - Mark Twain
Dalek Dave wrote:
Many teach that certain foods or practices are inherently evil. Dim, very dim!
That's a bit of an "issue" of mine at the moment - where is PETA when we permit Hallal and Kosher meat to be prepared in the most barbaric method possible, with the insistence that the animal involved must not be anaethetised in any way? Frankly, I don't care if I offend anyone, but Muslims and Jews should be ashamed of themselves for permitting it to continue.
C# has already designed away most of the tedium of C++.
-
The historical fact of the ressurection of Jesus Christ from the dead is the full and final proof. In this he showed his supremecy over sin and death and demonstrated that the power of God is sufficient to save each and every one of us. These are not words of comfort to those who do not believe for if you accepted them it would mean the end of your world and your life as it now is. Those who think 'religion' or more specifically Christianity is a crutch are ignorant to the point of idiocy. Did he not say, 'Take up your cross and follow me'. But the ressurection is comfort indeed to those who do believe. It is the great victory that secures our inheritance. Though we may bear a cross in this life we are gaurenteed an eternity with God. What can separate us from the love of God? Neither height nor depth, not the powers of this world or of heaven or hell, not even sin and death. This is the absolute security of the redeemed, won at the cross. Can science speak to these things? Can it engage with such concepts much less pronounce on them? No, not without ceasing to be science and so denying itself. Let the scientists study what may be observed and propose their theories in the full humility of the knowledge that we at best are only ever thinking God's thoughts after him. A proper perspective will not harm science but God willing will redeem it.
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
The historical fact of the ressurection of Jesus Christ from the dead is the full and final proof.
Codswallop - utter, unabashed, unadulterated codswallop....what a tool...
C# has already designed away most of the tedium of C++.
-
Dalek Dave wrote:
Forum:The Soapbox - off-topic rants Subject:Re: Good Old Professor Dawkins Sender:Dalek Dave Date:Tuesday, October 21, 2008 12:13 PM His signiture states that Happiness is Freedom.
Incorrect, it states that Thucydides said as much.
Dalek Dave wrote:
He cannot be happy, for he is not free,
You speak of what you do not know, having never been free yourself how can you say I am not. What
Dalek Dave wrote:
religious observances
do you think I am bound by? What religious observances was Jesus bound by? Name one if you can. :)
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
What religious observances was Jesus bound by? Name one if you can.
Jesus was a Jew....you need a specific example?
C# has already designed away most of the tedium of C++.
-
You seem to live in a state of persistent confusion Matthew. I'm not arguing for the existence of magikal sky-beings and fairies like you are. Indeed, I'm not arguing the existence of anything. I forgive you for misunderstanding this easily overlooked point because you seem to have a long and established record on that front. You see, it's you that is trying to claim the existence of 'god' - I don't need to argue anything at all. If you are trying to present 'god' as 'truth' than you have to show 'truth' without taking the existence of 'god' a priori. That's what you don't seem to understand. I'm not making an a priori claim for anything. And I don't have to - it's you and you alone that has to make the case in favour of your belief and not me that has to demonstrate that it's false. Invoking fictitious beings as 'truth' and then saying I have to demonstrate their non-existence in order to disprove them is idiocy of the highest order. Sorry, but nice try - unfortunately it's all I've come to expect from you and Ilion.
"If only God would give me some clear sign! Like making a large deposit in my name in a Swiss bank."
73Zeppelin wrote:
I'm not arguing for the existence of magikal sky-beings and fairies like you are.
No, I'm not, read your bible.
73Zeppelin wrote:
it's you that is trying to claim the existence of 'god'
No, It's God who proclaims his own existence, my opinion on the subject is entirely derivative and can as you say be easily dismissed. His on the other hand cannot.
73Zeppelin wrote:
you are trying to present 'god' as 'truth' than you have to show 'truth' without taking the existence of 'god' a priori.
Says who? you state that I must but you lack the authority. God says that you must believe in him first for this is the beginning of wisdom. Then you can understand the rest. His authority trumps yours.
73Zeppelin wrote:
you and you alone that has to make the case in favour of your belief and not me that has to demonstrate that it's false
You'll note that this is contrary to the scientific method, not that that's particularly relevant here.
73Zeppelin wrote:
Invoking fictitious beings
Something you have talked about but I have not done.
73Zeppelin wrote:
I have to demonstrate their non-existence in order to disprove them
Is not what I said. There is no possible disproof of the truth so why would I ask you for one?
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
-
The 'egregious proffessor for the public misunderstanding of science' Richard Dawkins is an idiot interfering in things he knows little and understands nothing about. All this campaign will achieve is to publicize that fact to a larger number of people and bring science as a whole into disrepute as a result.
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
While it certainly is easy to react with a knee-jerk to Prof. Dawkins rhetoric, I think you're doing yourself a disservice by calling him an idiot. It would have been more interesting to hear you pick apart his text or his delivery of said text using reason. I do not understand what you mean by bringing “science” into disrepute. The scientific method is not a movement, and it most certainly does not have prophets or leaders that can tarnish the results and understandings of the universe it has brought us so far. Are you saying that people will start to distrust their microwave ovens or question the validity of the theory of gravity because of this advertisment? If you have the time, I suggest you watch the ‘Beyond Belief’ discussions on the science network[^], they are well worth the time. As a teaser, Prof. Dawkins gets called on for his ‘attacks’ on religion by both Prof. Lawrence Krauss and Prof. Scott Atran. You might enjoy that even though they both use reason in stead of name calling. Cheers!
--- "Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest". -- Denis Diderot
-
Jesus healed Lazarus using supernatural powers. I'm pretty sure that there's a slight rift between science and religion...
Interesting. My Bibles don't say how he did it, only what he did. Do you know more?
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
-
OK I will take your argument. I KNOW there is no god, Prove me wrong.
------------------------------------ "October: This is one of the peculiarly dangerous months to speculate in stocks in." - Mark Twain
You have already proved yourself wrong by claiming knowledge that you cannot have. No further proof or in fact other proof can be obtained. It is impossible to KNOW for certain what is not true.
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
-
73Zeppelin wrote:
I'm not arguing for the existence of magikal sky-beings and fairies like you are.
No, I'm not, read your bible.
73Zeppelin wrote:
it's you that is trying to claim the existence of 'god'
No, It's God who proclaims his own existence, my opinion on the subject is entirely derivative and can as you say be easily dismissed. His on the other hand cannot.
73Zeppelin wrote:
you are trying to present 'god' as 'truth' than you have to show 'truth' without taking the existence of 'god' a priori.
Says who? you state that I must but you lack the authority. God says that you must believe in him first for this is the beginning of wisdom. Then you can understand the rest. His authority trumps yours.
73Zeppelin wrote:
you and you alone that has to make the case in favour of your belief and not me that has to demonstrate that it's false
You'll note that this is contrary to the scientific method, not that that's particularly relevant here.
73Zeppelin wrote:
Invoking fictitious beings
Something you have talked about but I have not done.
73Zeppelin wrote:
I have to demonstrate their non-existence in order to disprove them
Is not what I said. There is no possible disproof of the truth so why would I ask you for one?
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
No, I'm not, read your bible.
I have to STUDY the ridiculous thing! It's compulsory...and probably illegal too. X|
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
No, It's God who proclaims his own existence, my opinion on the subject is entirely derivative and can as you say be easily dismissed. His on the other hand cannot.
My bed-goblin proclaims his own existence. He told me just then.
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
Says who? you state that I must but you lack the authority. God says that you must believe in him first for this is the beginning of wisdom. Then you can understand the rest. His authority trumps yours.
My bed-goblin says that you have to believe in him. He whispered it in my ear, just then. He has a weird raspy voice, it tickles my neck and sends shivers down my spine.
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
You'll note that this is contrary to the scientific method, not that that's particularly relevant here.
Ah, no wonder you have no confidence in the scientific method. You don't understand it.
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
Is not what I said. There is no possible disproof of the truth so why would I ask you for one?
Not good enough.
-
Interesting. My Bibles don't say how he did it, only what he did. Do you know more?
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
He did it through a rock wall when Lazarus was at least four days dead. Either he was a master illusionist, or he used some hitherto unrecognised witchcraft.
-
Yet you believe in the the "unprovable negative" of the non-existence of other gods, which is the view atheists have of your own god.
It's not quite that simple. Many of these other gods definitely exist, they are simply not God or not even gods. Do atheists belive that the ancestors of Shinto believers don't exist, in a 4 dimensional universe, a tough one. Do atheists believe the troll rocks venerated by primitive nordic tribes do not exist, many still do. But yes atheist undoubtedly believe that Uhuru Mazda has no existence and fail to recognize the dangerous invocation of a powerful evil spirit.
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
-
You are so conceited.
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
I'll takes God's opinion over yours
You claim that god is this all powerful entity then claim to know his opinion. Wow, you ARE connected, hotline straight to god's thoughts! You also claim inability to disprove god. OK so you cannot disprove any god? or No god? It makes any further argument on your part, Spurious to say the least.
------------------------------------ "October: This is one of the peculiarly dangerous months to speculate in stocks in." - Mark Twain
There is only one true God and I have no more of hotline than anyone else who reads his words and lives by his spirit.
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
-
Are you in God's good graces?
Yes, thank God. :-D Grace it is indeed, for by grace we are saved, through faith, and this not of ourselves but a gift from God so than that no one can boast and in all things He may have the supremecy.
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
-
Yes, thank God. :-D Grace it is indeed, for by grace we are saved, through faith, and this not of ourselves but a gift from God so than that no one can boast and in all things He may have the supremecy.
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
Congratulations, you've just been burned at the stake for heresy.
-
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
What religious observances was Jesus bound by? Name one if you can.
Jesus was a Jew....you need a specific example?
C# has already designed away most of the tedium of C++.
A Jew who was attacked ceaselessly for challanging the religiousity and redundant practices of his society. Read your New Testament.
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
-
It's not quite that simple. Many of these other gods definitely exist, they are simply not God or not even gods. Do atheists belive that the ancestors of Shinto believers don't exist, in a 4 dimensional universe, a tough one. Do atheists believe the troll rocks venerated by primitive nordic tribes do not exist, many still do. But yes atheist undoubtedly believe that Uhuru Mazda has no existence and fail to recognize the dangerous invocation of a powerful evil spirit.
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
Many of these other gods definitely exist
Uhhh...
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
they are simply not God or not even gods.
Uhhh...
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
Do atheists belive that the ancestors of Shinto believers don't exist, in a 4 dimensional universe, a tough one.
...
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
Do atheists believe the troll rocks venerated by primitive nordic tribes do not exist, many still do.
...
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
But yes atheist undoubtedly believe that Uhuru Mazda has no existence and fail to recognize the dangerous invocation of a powerful evil spirit.
Yeah...
-
It's not quite that simple. Many of these other gods definitely exist, they are simply not God or not even gods. Do atheists belive that the ancestors of Shinto believers don't exist, in a 4 dimensional universe, a tough one. Do atheists believe the troll rocks venerated by primitive nordic tribes do not exist, many still do. But yes atheist undoubtedly believe that Uhuru Mazda has no existence and fail to recognize the dangerous invocation of a powerful evil spirit.
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
You can't worm out of it by shifting away from gods to other mythical beings. Your "unprovable" disbelief in other gods is the same "unprovable" disbelief that atheists have for your god.
-
Jesus healed Lazarus using supernatural powers. I'm pretty sure that there's a slight rift between science and religion...
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
Jesus healed Lazarus using supernatural powers
How do you know that? Were you there? Did you at least read the Greek version of the New Testament? Or are you relying on what you saw in a movie once?
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
It is impossible to prove a negative. And since atheists do not require a god to explain the universe, they merely observe and learn, they do not require a god to be believed in. Only people who lack the ability to think for themselves need a god to do the explaining for them. It is enough to believe that a garden is beautiful, without believing there are fairies at the bottom of it!
------------------------------------ "October: This is one of the peculiarly dangerous months to speculate in stocks in." - Mark Twain
-
While it certainly is easy to react with a knee-jerk to Prof. Dawkins rhetoric, I think you're doing yourself a disservice by calling him an idiot. It would have been more interesting to hear you pick apart his text or his delivery of said text using reason. I do not understand what you mean by bringing “science” into disrepute. The scientific method is not a movement, and it most certainly does not have prophets or leaders that can tarnish the results and understandings of the universe it has brought us so far. Are you saying that people will start to distrust their microwave ovens or question the validity of the theory of gravity because of this advertisment? If you have the time, I suggest you watch the ‘Beyond Belief’ discussions on the science network[^], they are well worth the time. As a teaser, Prof. Dawkins gets called on for his ‘attacks’ on religion by both Prof. Lawrence Krauss and Prof. Scott Atran. You might enjoy that even though they both use reason in stead of name calling. Cheers!
--- "Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest". -- Denis Diderot
I called him an idiot in this thread for the very specific reasons that I gave that he contradicts the entire supposed basis for his position. This is not merely an abstract logical error in an otherwise sound argument. It is a fundamental flaw in what he saying and how he is saying it. This is not the first time he has uttered nonsense or behaved irrationally by his own measure. Hence he is an idiot in the classical sense. The 'egregious professor for the public misunderstanding of science' line is a joke on his title of 'emeritus professor for the public understanding of science', a politically awarded title that gives him a platform for his ideas that he would never have got from his science. My concern about science being brought into disrepute is precisely because of the contradiction between the high official position that the professor holds, his even higher public profile as the 'poster boy' for scientific rationalism and his being repeatedly found to be an idiot on closer examination. Most of the public will not engage in that closer examination, will accept what he says because of his status and will throw the science baby out with the 'gene worshiping, fist shaking at God, wacko' bathwater when he falls on his face as he invitably will, be it during his lifetime or only from a historical perspective. Either way he will damage science in the perception of the public and it cannot at this juncture afford much more damage.
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
-
Ka?l wrote:
Dalek Dave wrote: It is impossible to prove a negative. So it should be considered as the truth?
Of course not, it is merely a fact. Truth should be based on fact, and fact is something religion is short of.
Ka?l wrote:
Dalek Dave wrote: they merely observe and learn, I don't see why religious people are denied the possibility to do the same.
Because anything outside their dogma is considered wrong, mistaken, evil etc. Teach Jews and Muslims about Refridgerators! I understand that pork, in a desert, a thousand years ago was not a good thing to eat. But they haven't learnt much since about hygeine and food preperation. Teach Bible Bashers about Dinosaurs and they say it is a conspiracy to deny them the truth that the Earth was created by a space ghost in 4004bc.
Ka?l wrote:
Dalek Dave wrote: without believing there are fairies at the bottom of it! Without dreams there would be no science.
Dreams are totally explainable in science, they are the mind defragging. Please come up with pertinant arguments based on Fact, Evidence or Proof, do not just act as a mouthpiece for the dimwitted.
------------------------------------ "October: This is one of the peculiarly dangerous months to speculate in stocks in." - Mark Twain
Dalek Dave wrote:
Teach Jews and Muslims about Refridgerators!
Err, I must take exception to this: I can't talk about muslims (though I think Halal is evry close to Kosher) but I have a fridge. My parents had a fridge as did thiers. If there were any fridges before that I can assure you they would have had them.
Dalek Dave wrote:
I understand that pork, in a desert, a thousand years ago was not a good thing to eat. But they haven't learnt much since about hygeine and food preperation.
Again, rubbish: Kosher and Halal is ALL about food hygiene: it's just that fridges have made it a little redundant. I don't keep kosher but those that do still have fridges and freezers, are perfectly clean but simply choose not to eat certain foods and to keep separate others. Bit pointless but certainly no worse than Mr Faithfulls unfounded assertion that god had a son. I mean, where's the evidence? (Sorry, Matthew, couldn't help myself...)