6/3/09

The God Delusion is a Funny Book

FYI: this post has been moved here.
Share |

TwitThis

Posted by Ken
Labels: , ,

10 comments:

  1. AnonymousJune 4, 2009 at 2:04 AM

    He really is the Grinch

    ReplyDelete
  2. ReynoldJune 6, 2009 at 5:21 PM

    How stupid. What's "grinch"-like about wanting people to see reality for what it is, instead of through the lenses of false superstition? Especially when the various superstitions have such harmful effects like parents withholding medical treatment from their kids in favour of "prayer"?

    As for Mariano's childish and brainless cartoon depicting Dawkins being afraid of debates...I guess Mariano has forgotten the lesson that was taught to him here.

    Mariano has also neglected to note that every time Dawkins consented to give creationists interviews, his words were twisted and taken out of context ("Expelled"). In the case of the "information challenge", the tape was actually modified to produce a false impression.

    When verbally dealing with bullshit artists like that, withdrawing is the smart move. You want written conflicts, where everyone can see exactly what each side is saying, and they have the time to check out the other side's claims. This is something I elaborated on in my link above.


    For the hell of it, Mariano, you may like to know that when Dawkins went to the Univ of Oklahoma he waived his speaking fee. In contrast, when they cancelled Ben Stein's appearance due to budgetary concerns, he charged them a canellation fee.

    Classy. Sources linked to here.

    ReplyDelete
  3. ReynoldJune 6, 2009 at 5:25 PM

    Mariano's problem, one of them, anyway, is he's relying far too much on poisoning the well and ad-hom attacks against the people, thinking that that will somehow disprove atheism.

    ReplyDelete
  4. kh123June 7, 2009 at 10:41 PM

    Agreed. Atheists are more than capable to display the unquestionable strength of their party ideology via their lucrative publishing deals and PBS specials. And text books - can't leave out those tax-sponsored text books that talk about "neutrality towards religion" on one hand, and then present a godless interpretation of the world on the other via Mr. Gould, Mr. Fuytama, and the several other dwarfs that constitute the hegemony of scientific (read: materialistic) education.

    Internet atheists, of course, don't have recourse from either the education system, One State or Dr. Seuss - they have only their post-Gen X angst and keyboards (since they lack any human contact with the outside world); but they admirably make due.

    ReplyDelete
  5. ReynoldJune 8, 2009 at 1:18 AM

    Agreed. Atheists are more than capable to display the unquestionable strength of their party ideology via their lucrative publishing deals and PBS specials. And text books - can't leave out those tax-sponsored text books that talk about "neutrality towards religion" on one hand, and then present a godless interpretation of the world on the other via Mr. Gould, Mr. Fuytama, and the several other dwarfs that constitute the hegemony of scientific (read: materialistic) education.
     
    Right, and of course, not one word of all the oodles of televangelists getting rich from shearing their flocks, while the "atheists" are getting rich from textbook sales?

    Internet atheists, of course, don't have recourse from either the education system, One State or Dr. Seuss - they have only their post-Gen X angst and keyboards (since they lack any human contact with the outside world); but they admirably make due.
     
    You know, that was so ignorant, I'm not sure I even really need to comment any further on that.

    It seems to me that mr. kh123 has got some anger issues to iron out.

    ReplyDelete
  6. AnonymousJune 9, 2009 at 5:50 AM

    This site is awash will misconceptions & lies!

    If you take the time to read & understand books other than the bible you might realize that all religion are man made make-believe!

    ReplyDelete
  7. kh123June 14, 2009 at 11:32 PM

    "Right, and of course, not one word of all the oodles [you're over 40, right?] "of televangelists getting rich from shearing the flocks, while the "atheists" are getting rich from textbook sales?"


    Fortunately, no - most are about as boring as you when they write.

    "You know, that was so ignorant..."


    Well that wasn't a quote straight out of a high school 80's flick. From the annoying little sister. You are over 40, aren't you.


    "kh123 has got some anger issues to iron out."


    I do, I know. It's just that your mom is such an unreasonable woman at times. I mean, I tell her: "That Reynold needs to cut his damned hair!", and she just goes on about misunderstood of a 40-something librarian you are. There's no reasoning with the woman - and this is while she's making me a sandwich, for god's sake! That woman has no love to give on Saturday nights, I tell you.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Santa CopJune 15, 2009 at 10:01 PM

    There was a time when Dawkinsites would ridicule various Christian groups and individuals for wanting to ban Harry Potter for encouraging belief in witchcraft. I expect they feel a little foolish now.

    Dawkins's failure to understand the importance of myths - of stories in other words - for mental and and spiritual wellbeing is pitiful, considering the vast amount of scholarship there is available in both the humanities and in psychology addressing this point. He is "Reason" in Blake's print of that name, hunched intently over his plans, protractor in hand, at the bottom of the sea. Water appears often in dreams and art as an archetypal signifier of the realm of emotions; emotions which Dawkins seems to think he has conquered, unlike the rest of us.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Santa CopJune 15, 2009 at 10:16 PM

    Sorry, that should have been Blake's "Newton", not "Reason".

    I read once that Newton was so chuffed with his mechanics (with some justification of course), that he believed it made philosophy obsolete. And then I read that it was through reading philosophy (Schopenhauer if I remember right), that Einstein was able to reconsider time and thereby refute Newton.

    Interestingly, I stumbled across both facts on the same day in completely different contexts. A synchronicity? Perhaps not an earth-shattering one, but I'm open to the idea.

    ReplyDelete
  10. ReynoldJune 27, 2009 at 8:52 AM

    I do, I know. It's just that your mom is such an unreasonable woman at times. I mean, I tell her: "That Reynold needs to cut his damned hair!", and she just goes on about misunderstood of a 40-something librarian you are. There's no reasoning with the woman - and this is while she's making me a sandwich, for god's sake! That woman has no love to give on Saturday nights, I tell you.
     
    Huh?

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)