…and this is a 
Can you stand another dose of KKMS?
Category: Godlessness
Posted on: May 23, 2008 5:02 PM, by PZ Myers
Yeah, I know, I already had you listen to our drecky Christian radio station earlier this week, but today at 5pm Central, KKMS-AM will have the president of Minnesota Atheists, August Berkshire, online for an interview titled "Understanding and Responding to Atheist's Beliefs". It could be interesting, just for the experience of seeing how these clowns treat August (I already know that August will be polite to them.)
Comments
Wow! They dont have anyone scheduled to 'debate' him? Jeffs balls are showing!
Posted by: ERV | May 23, 2008 5:10 PM
I can't figure out how to get it to play. All I get is pop-up blocker. Dang.
Posted by: Patricia C. | May 23, 2008 5:12 PM
I'm looking forward to this. I'm still debating about when/where/if I should post my extensive replies to August's "21 Unconvincing Arguments" paper somewhere.
Posted by: buckyball | May 23, 2008 5:18 PM
Their language reveals their inability to grasp the atheist's mindset. "Understanding and Responding to Atheist's Beliefs" conflates an atheist's skeptical worldview with a religious person's unsubstantiated "belief".
Maybe this is the missing link that will let me finally understand those people.
Or, maybe it's just gas.
Posted by: GDad | May 23, 2008 5:18 PM
why do they feel they have to "respond" to atheists? who cares?
do they have a show called:
"Understanding and Responding to Tall People's Beliefs".
or
"Understanding and Responding to 'People-who-dislike-Chocolate-Chip-Cookies' Beliefs".
Posted by: rob | May 23, 2008 5:29 PM
What's 5pm central time in GMT?
Posted by: maxi | May 23, 2008 5:29 PM
This is off topic but I have to vent somewhere.
My university is doing previews for the incoming freshmen. I'm standing in line at the school store and I overhear this conversation between two parents.
Lady 1: He's taking a class called "Age of the Dinosaurs" can you believe it? Imagine when he has to take a humanities!
Lady 2: I know, my son is taking a class on communist secret police KGB or something!
GRAAAAAAAAA! Why can't YECs go to a different, less respectable school?! I hope they're "premeds" so the organic chemists have a chance to rape their puny minds!
Posted by: Che | May 23, 2008 5:33 PM
#6
http://www.timeanddate.com/
11 PM.
Posted by: James F | May 23, 2008 5:36 PM
Ta James!
Posted by: maxi | May 23, 2008 5:43 PM
"I can't figure out how to get it to play. All I get is pop-up blocker. Dang."
Go into preferences, and see if there's a checkbox for "Enable Isanity".
Posted by: Aegis | May 23, 2008 5:43 PM
#4 ...."Understanding and Responding to Atheist's Beliefs" conflates an atheist's skeptical worldview with a religious person's unsubstantiated "belief".
I agree. When I talk to religious groups as a representative of the local atheist group, I always start off with explaining that our membership does not have a belief in god. Beyond that basic statement, we are a diverse group, Some our members may have beliefs of one sort or another, but the commonality is a lack of a belief in god
I always find it funny when the theists expect me to develop a faith based on their certainty in their own belief. I have asked, them, after they give me their best arguments for belief without evidence -- "Do you want me to pretend I now have faith? Would that make you happier". If you don't believe, you don't believe. They seem to think I have some sort of non-evidential belief that can be shifted by special pleading for some other non-evidential belief.
Posted by: Tully Bascomb | May 23, 2008 5:46 PM
I'm wondering if they're following up on you now, since a certain someone pointed out that they had a debate on atheism without an atheist.
I wish August well!
Posted by: Ryan F Stello | May 23, 2008 5:46 PM
80's Sunday? How the HELL is MN going to be warmer than WI? Do you have more atheists up there or what?
Posted by: suspect Device | May 23, 2008 5:51 PM
An atheist's "beliefs" are roughly the equivalent of a cat's opinions on music i.e. even if it did have any, it wouldn't consider them worth mentioning.
Ask any cat!
Posted by: Elwood Herring | May 23, 2008 5:51 PM
Yeah, I always find it interesting how enmeshed religious people tend to be with the very notion of belief itself. I've read a few pieces, and a few websites, where their whole argument is premised upon, or attempting to establish, a redefinition of non-belief into belief, i.e. 'they don't lack belief, they have a belief in nothing'. Conservapedia, that perennial fount of truly "Trustworthy" knowledge and wisdom, has a whole article, I believe, on attempts by atheists to, as they would have it, redefine atheism from a belief in no god into a lack of belief; they call it diluting the definition of atheism and claim we do it in order to avoid having the present evidence for our beliefs. Wow.
Posted by: JM Inc. | May 23, 2008 5:56 PM
Atheism is still a faith. Your faith is based on your so called "lack of evidence" that there is no God.
Lack of evidence can have different meanings. I mean the four first books of the New testament is based on eyewitness evidence that God exists. That is not evidence because you fail to believe in what is written in the Bible.
Another example is NDE experiences. Thousands of people have come back and said that there are beings of light on the other side that are loving and full of joy. However, because you have not experienced this in a lab, this is not evidence.
I have done research on (www.shroud.com) and they still can't find how the image got there on the material. Check here for the latest news: http://www.shroud.com/latebrak.htm
We also have historians from the time of Rome that say that Jesus was God and he was real.
However, if you want to continue to believe in what you believe that is fine. However, evidence is what you make of it. Either you deny it or you embrace it.
Posted by: Kenny | May 23, 2008 5:59 PM
Kenny, I just repented because your adriot testomony! Thank you! I now have Jesus.
Hey one question, I blasphemed the Holy Spirit already. (Mark 3:29) Will Jesus throw me in hell?
Posted by: Suspect Device | May 23, 2008 6:03 PM
Wow... They've got sound effects. Yippee! I hope they have a button that plays toilet flushing sounds.
Posted by: Dan | May 23, 2008 6:04 PM
The "atheist beliefs" problem is a standard logical fallacy that the "faithful" often don't comprehend. You probably have heard a slightly different version used in the form of the "god of the gaps" BS. Of course, you can debunk this easily by pointing out that "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Rephrase this by substituting the word "belief" for "absence" and the relation is clear.
Posted by: Mystyk | May 23, 2008 6:07 PM
Oops. Damn preview. Change "absence" to "evidence" in that last sentence.
Posted by: Mystyk | May 23, 2008 6:09 PM
Mystyk,
Yes it is.
Posted by: amk | May 23, 2008 6:14 PM
>Kenny, I just repented because your adriot testomony!
>Thank you! I now have Jesus.
>Hey one question, I blasphemed the Holy Spirit already.
>(Mark 3:29) Will Jesus throw me in hell?
Mark 28 says that he will forgive you if you ask forgiveness:
"Truly I say to you, All sins shall be forgiven to the sons of men, and blasphemies with which soever they shall blaspheme"
However, if you are an unclean spirit you will not get forgiveness. Mark 29.
Nice try kid. Maybe you should read a little more before trying to throw something into people's faces that you do not understand.
Posted by: Kenny | May 23, 2008 6:19 PM
I'm actually pretty impressed with this interview so far, they seem to be letting him have a fair shake in addressing some misconceptions about atheists. The only thing I can take any kind of offense to is they are trying to stall him a bit with innane chatter. It's pretty obvious they don't understand much about their guests point of view but I can't really fault them for that
Posted by: psychocow | May 23, 2008 6:20 PM
Why don't you take your own advice with regard to the ACLU, evolution, and pretty much everything you spout off on, you lying, homophobic, piece of human filth?
Posted by: Brownian, OM | May 23, 2008 6:22 PM
They are being very cordial to him so far, and I have to say, August is doing excellently. Usually there will be one or two things that I feel I could have said better when I listen to these interviews (granted, I'm not under pressure), but not this time. He's explained his positions very well.
Posted by: Ric | May 23, 2008 6:22 PM
Goddamn, the callers are morons.
Posted by: Ric | May 23, 2008 6:24 PM
I think he is being very patient, but I think he is being too nice. I would be tempted to make a firmer stand.
Posted by: maxi | May 23, 2008 6:29 PM
Kenny said: "We also have historians from the time of Rome that say that Jesus was God and he was real."
Please name them.
And remember, the New Testament wasn't formalized by committee until 325 BC in the Council of Nicaea (where even such things as Christ's divinity was debated and the whole virgin birth story was fabricated) so the apostles don't count.
Posted by: ThirdMonkey | May 23, 2008 6:31 PM
Goddamn but the presenters are morons. Legal evidence, wtf?
Posted by: maxi | May 23, 2008 6:33 PM
On hold...this should be fun.
Posted by: Etha Williams | May 23, 2008 6:34 PM
Kenny dear...you weren't so mean to me last night. You were so nice in sweet as we played Mister and Mister Adam and Steve Hitler. I remember how you said that "when Jesus was coming" put almost as good as a smile on your face as when I was spanking you.
Oh... hey cock..maybe you should solve the dilemma I proposed instead of being all Priest like. So, if you will dickhead, resolve how does one go back to accepting Jesus after he's completely said fuck you to the Holy Casper you ape.
Posted by: suspect Device | May 23, 2008 6:38 PM
Etha!! Was that you?
Posted by: Jack Chastain | May 23, 2008 6:38 PM
Nice, just throw a sentence in there and let them hang themselves Etha :P
Posted by: Dutch Delight | May 23, 2008 6:40 PM
Presenters are nicer than God, apparently.
Posted by: Rich | May 23, 2008 6:40 PM
Kenny @15 "Atheism is still a faith. Your faith is based on your so called "lack of evidence" that there is no God."
It doesn't take any faith to perceive insufficient evidence to convince one of anything. Do you believe in leprechauns? How much "faith" does that take?
"Lack of evidence can have different meanings. I mean the four first books of the New testament is based on eyewitness evidence that God exists."
It's claims made decades after the fact. Do you believe the miracles of Krishna? If not, why not? How about Mohammad, the last and greatest of prophets? They were witnessed by many people. Your books have exactly the same persuasiveness as the tales of the Norse Gods, trips around Jupiter on flying saucers, and junior high locker room tales of sexual exploits. Namely, none. In science, facts have to be verifiable precisely *because we know that humans are fallible. We lie, misremember, are misunderstood, and misperceive. We need many eyes to verify observations. And the wilder the claims, the more important the verification is.
I have three bicycles at my house. Most folks would believe me when I say this; it's not very far-fetched.
I have a per dragon, and my wife is an android from Mars. Believe me now? You should - it's an eyewitness account.
"That is not evidence because you fail to believe in what is written in the Bible."
So, we need to believe in the bible in order to recognize it as persuasive data? Funny, that's what the Muslims say about the Koran.
"Another example is NDE experiences. Thousands of people have come back and said that there are beings of light on the other side that are loving and full of joy. However, because you have not experienced this in a lab, this is not evidence."
Numerous people also report that the world spins if they ingest sufficient ethanol quickly enough. Is that evidence that the world spins wildly, or that human brains tend to respond in the same way to similar brain events?
"I have done research on (www.shroud.com)"
No you haven't; you've read fantastic claims which fly in the face of the evidence, and you read them with an uncritical eye and embraced the claims because they gave you a warm and fuzzy feeling.
"and they still can't find how the image got there on the material. Check here for the latest news: http://www.shroud.com/latebrak.htm"
It was painted on a few centuries ago. Religious artifacts were a lucrative business in medieval Europe.
"We also have historians from the time of Rome that say that Jesus was God and he was real."
No we don't. We have a couple of mentions of the Christian cult in it's early days. This is no more evidence for the divinity of Joshua ben Yahweh than news about Muslims in Iran is evidence for the divine inspiration of Mohammad.
"However, if you want to continue to believe in what you believe that is fine. However, evidence is what you make of it. Either you deny it or you embrace it."
Actually I (and I think most skeptics) *cannot believe what we want. We believe what the evidence shows us. You can present evidence (you haven't) or you can present a new argument (you haven't), and *those might change my mind. But I can't do it by an act of will.
I suspect you can't either, but don't understand how your own mind works. Fundamentalists tend to shy away from introspection.
And evidence is not what we make of it. It is what it is. What a thing to say! I was raised by folks like you, and y'all have baffled me for 45 years and more.
Kermit
Posted by: Kermit | May 23, 2008 6:41 PM
Oh darn - I should refresh first! You were too easy on them, Etha. So was August. I wanted to call in to just say "thank you for representing us" - but couldn't get the opportunity.
My goodness those guys are wafflers.
JC
Posted by: JackC | May 23, 2008 6:42 PM
Arg! Again, with the "choice" to believe. How in the world does one choose to believe or disbelieve something? You're either swayed by the "evidence" or you find the evidence lacking (nor nonexistent).
I find it really telling that believers continue to fall back on this "chose to believe" rhetoric. It's almost as if they're admitting to the fact that find this crap unbelievable, yet they make a conscious choice to ignore their own better judgment.
Posted by: Optimus Primate | May 23, 2008 6:44 PM
@#35 JackC --
Did they air any of my subsequent objections, or did they just air my initial question? I couldn't tell. Either way, it was hilarious to watch them scramble to justify their blatantly immoral and unjust beliefs.
Posted by: Etha Williams | May 23, 2008 6:45 PM
Uh-oh.
Here comes the crap (software) Engineer. With 'Romans'...
Posted by: Rich | May 23, 2008 6:45 PM
Oops! I meant "OR nonexistent."
Posted by: Optimus Primate | May 23, 2008 6:46 PM
Oh, I see. It only sounds like a fantasy because they have limited time to explain it.
Posted by: JM Inc. | May 23, 2008 6:47 PM
These guys are on their best behavior, but you can tell they feel like they are interviewing an Alien and don't want to scare it away.
Generally very polite.
Posted by: dogheaven | May 23, 2008 6:47 PM
At least they had him on.. and they presenters seem nice if a bit, erm, confused. Reach out, people..
Posted by: Rich | May 23, 2008 6:48 PM
I may have spoke too soon, the callers seam to lack even a modicum of intelligence.
As reguarding Kenny in this thread:
He has a fair right to his opinion and I don't think mocking him or attacking him here is the right thing to do I will address you points though. Faith would be defined as belief in something with no possible way to prove that thing. I.E. taking someones word at face value.
Atheists in general do not do this, they have look at the idea of god and know that their is no way to prove in any way that such a god exists. Therefore we simply state that without any proof for the matter we do not know one way or the other. Atheists are much more pragmatic then you are and say we only believe in things that we can know or see or test. I could just as easily say that I can't disprove dragons or unicorns or fairys but you are very disinclined to believe in those just as I am.
Personal experience is just not a reliable method to prove anything so NDE experiences can't be taken as justification for the truth of anything. Not to mention people have had NDE experience that would not varify the christian faith but would more fall in line with other faiths, often faiths that that person believes in. We just feal that this is likely do to natural expression of the brains mechanisms that ocurr with lack of oxygen to the organ.
Most of your historians that you talk about are not contemporaries with Jesus but even so, I won't deny that there is a good case for the existence of the man Jesus, but there is no real case for his divinity outside of the bible. Atheists as a whole would likely convert could you get some corroborative evidence for your assertions of his divinity and supernatural power. If you could significantly test or document a suspension of the laws of physics in the natural world (a miracle) the same would be the case. But the truth is this has never occurred.
I put it to you that you sit there and argument with just the same evidences and proofs christians have always used but there are very very few christians who do active scientific research to back up their beliefs, they just don't want to fight us on even ground. They'ld rather throw beliefs their own ignorance then try and progress their faith.
Posted by: psychocow | May 23, 2008 6:48 PM
I bet those beetles and blind fish are going to be pissed when they find out they weren't perfect anymore because of our sin.
Posted by: Bunk | May 23, 2008 6:48 PM
I onlyheard your initial question/statement (which I thought was quite good) and their attempt to justify their position out of it - I don't think they had anything further. Maybe they were quaking in their respective sandals?
JC
Posted by: JackC | May 23, 2008 6:49 PM
No Etha, they aired your additional comments. I must say you were very well spoken and it was hilarious listening to them scrabbling around for answers!
I think Pascal's Wager is just about worn out now as a reason 'to believe'.
Posted by: maxi | May 23, 2008 6:52 PM
I am listening to it right now. The hosts - Jeff & Lee - are polite enough, but they really don't seem very bright, the poor dears...
I guess I am spoilt, because when I do listen to theocons on the radio I try to listen to their "best" people - Dennis Prager, Albert Mohler etc... ,i.e. those with national exposure. That often really helps me sharpen my own arguments.
But these tow tools?
Complete waste of time - for me, that is. I commend Mr. Berkshire for going on the programm and getting the message out.
Posted by: Marc | May 23, 2008 6:53 PM
INNOCULATE ME WITH YOUR CHEMICAL LOVE!!!!111111one.
Posted by: Rich | May 23, 2008 6:53 PM
*sigh* The "agnostic" accusation. Anyone remotely likable is "really an agnostic".
Posted by: crypticlife | May 23, 2008 6:54 PM
The THIRD time they've mentioned the 'agnostic' thing! Christians seem really shocked by this whole 'we atheists aren't 100% sure about stuff' thing. Maybe they do think we're baby-eating fire-breathers after all...
Posted by: Stuart Ritchie | May 23, 2008 6:54 PM
He's a fucking atheist, get over it people! How many people are refusing to believe (for want of a better word) he is a bona fide atheist! But he is such a nice person, he couldn't possibly be a baby-eating, cross burning atheist!!!111!1
Posted by: maxi | May 23, 2008 6:56 PM
August's answer to the "Challenge to open himself to god" was pretty weak. My response to that is generally "I will if you will do the opposite - admit that no god is requires for any of this - and allow that to reach a level of understanding within yourself that you no longer need this "god" of yours."
Generally, they can't do this.
But then, what motivation do we have (for anyone ho has never been there, of course) to take the challenge against a fictional being?
Thank FSM, I can finally turn that dreck off!
JC
Posted by: JackC | May 23, 2008 6:59 PM
Woohoo! Kenny's back and parroting the same ridiculous, debunked arguments that we mocked him for last time!
Hey Kenny, show us one case in medical literature of a patient coming back from brain death. I searched every medical database I can legally access and didn't find anything, which seems strange, considering that it would be the single most significant phenomenon in all of medical history. Surely some doctor, somewhere, would have written about it in scientific or medical literature.
And if you can't show us an example, then we must conclude that NDEs are proof of nothing except that the brain goes nuts when it thinks it's dying.
Posted by: BoxerShorts | May 23, 2008 6:59 PM
The guy commenting about mass-producing the chemicals in our mind and causing world peace? Maybe I'm just a nerd, but the thing that first came to mind was Equilibrium? I certainly don't equate that idea to anything positive, that's for sure. Either way, he sure was pushy, overall.
Another Note: Their internet radio is terrible. I eventually just had to turn in offline. It stopped working about five times during the first half hour of the interview before I finally gave up. It also took me going back and forth on both of my computers to get it to even up!
Posted by: Felicia | May 23, 2008 7:00 PM
Etha - Maxi says the additional was there, and I had a local call while listening, so I must have missed it. Sorry about the mis-direction. That was one of the reasons I didn't call in myself.
My apologies.
JC
Posted by: JackC | May 23, 2008 7:03 PM
Atheist, agnostic, tomayto, tomahto. Call me whatever you want, I still don't believe in your god.
Posted by: BoxerShorts | May 23, 2008 7:03 PM
My favorite part was after their long ramble about the biblical basis of hell belief, when I repeated the question of how they justify it morally.
Their answer: "We don't."
*headdesk*
You know it's bad when you're more moral than the god you worship....
Posted by: Etha Williams | May 23, 2008 7:06 PM
Etha,
You're awesome.
Wow, just listening to them trying to answer your question was painful...
Of course there is no morality in the "original sin" leads to damnation meme. That is the primary infection hook for the Christianity virus. The concept that you are born "wrong" and the only way to be "right" is to carry the infection with an extreme punishment for refusal.
It's really quite elegant. Since you were born "with sin" it is not possible to argue that you have not performed sin and thus do not need to conform. You must conform because you were born with sin. It's just the way it is.
Then to prevent outright rejection of the "original sin" supposition the punishment clause is introduced. You must conform because if you don't you will go to hell because of your sin. By delaying the punishment until after death the virus does not need to answer a demand of proof of the punishment. And since no one can know for sure what happens at death, doing so allows the virus to answer the rejection of the "hell" supposition by asking "do you really want to take the chance?"
This leaves the victim with two possibilities: conformity in the form of providing a host for the virus or denying both suppositions. But then, of course, the virus has other ways of dealing with those who reject it...
In short, there is no more morality in the "original sin" meme or in the supposed actions of God then there is in a cold virus infecting tonsils.
Posted by: ThirdMonkey | May 23, 2008 7:07 PM
You're pretty much just trolling at this point, Kenny. I'm pretty certain you know what you say is wrong, and this little error in your thinking has been dealt with constantly. So, if you don't understand, it's not for lack of people trying to educate you, I'm sure.
Posted by: Dan | May 23, 2008 7:09 PM
Can anyone post a record of this talk? Please?
Posted by: Alex Besogonov | May 23, 2008 7:16 PM
I got a good laugh when August compared Bigfoot waiting outside to assault him as he leaves to an intervention by their god. The hosts laughed too, but not quite as hard, which I thought was a Freudian slip showing that they are no different than other religious "leaders" who evade deep philosophical questions in public while personally being very baffled as to how to integrate their religious convictions with their own common sense. Could there be a profit motive, I dare say, behind their "faith"?
Posted by: aratina | May 23, 2008 7:24 PM
@ 53
Uh . . . like this?
I'm actually surprised PZ hasn't mentioned it yet. I'm pretty excited about it, life extension and revival being my big interest (transhumanism in general, really). Of course, the godsmacked loons have to bring those God and Jeezus fellas into it.
Posted by: Stephen Couchman | May 23, 2008 7:31 PM
crypticlife wrote
I'm sorry, is there a problem with that?
Posted by: Ian H Spedding FCD | May 23, 2008 7:33 PM
#62
There's only two logical explinations for that story:
1) The doctors were mistaken about her condition or the machines were faulty.
2) ZOMBIE!!!
Posted by: ThirdMonkey | May 23, 2008 7:37 PM
@#60 Alex Besogonov --
KKMS usually posts mp3s of the show here a few business days after the fact. Not sure why they take so long, but it'll probably be up sometime in the middle of next week.
Posted by: Etha Williams | May 23, 2008 7:39 PM
@62
Interesting. Do you have any more info? A cursory googling reveals nothing but that FoxNews story and blogs that link directly to it. Anything in the medical literature? I can finagle my way into most of the major databases. Just tell me where to look.
But for the time being, I must confess to being very, very, very skeptical.
Posted by: BoxerShorts | May 23, 2008 7:41 PM
I'm not locking myself in a mall just yet, but the woman was dead. Did you watch the full video? I actually didn't on that page, I assumed it was the same one I'd seen on Yahoo yesterday, clipped it, and ran back here to post, but my understanding is that she had a FLAT brain and her heart had stopped three times, but that she was kept on basic life support almost a day past declaration of death because of an administrative hiccup over her organ donor status. They finally straightened that out and started yanking out her tubes in preparation for organ harvesting, when she simply wakes up.
I've been Googling hourly for updates, and I haven't read anything about equipment failure yet, which you'd think would be at the top of anyone's list of facts to check on this story. Of course I'm willing to be proven wrong, but in the meantime my inner child is giddily piddling on Francis Fukuyama's press photo.
Posted by: Stephen Couchman | May 23, 2008 7:45 PM
I first encountered the story at:
http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0S00M2nVzdIWQQBddz7w8QF;_ylu=X3oDMTBya3RtdHRnBHBvcwMxNQR2dGlkAwRzbGsDaW1nBHNlYwNzcg--/SIG=14coj7edg/EXP=1211672871/**http%3a//video.search.yahoo.com/video/play%3fp=dead%2bwoman%26n=21%26ei=utf-8%26js=1%26fr2=tab-news%26tnr=20%26vid=2723449
and it's obviously still in the "breaking" (i.e. potentially completely wrong) stage of the news life cycle. Every article I've seen is just a longer or shorter version of what I posted from Faux.
I'm skeptical too, I'm just skeptically optimistic. Call it setting myself up for disappointment. Right NOW I'm dancing on a cloud.
Posted by: Stephen Couchman | May 23, 2008 7:51 PM
Here is another article about the zombie-woman:
http://www.newsnet5.com/health/16363548/detail.html
And isn't "medical miracle" and oxymoron?
Posted by: 5ive | May 23, 2008 7:55 PM
My best guess at this early stage of the zombie-woman story is that it was perfect storm of misinterpreted evidence. Faulty equipment, misreading of physiological symptoms, and who knows what else, all at the same time.
Definitely an interesting story, though. I'll be keeping my eye on it.
(Though regardless of what the news media says, I will remain skeptical until I see something in the scientific literature, which will probably be a while.)
Posted by: BoxerShorts | May 23, 2008 8:09 PM
Ian H Spedding FCD
There's no problem with being an agnostic (as far as I'm concerned) but what they're doing reeks of a No True Scotsman. They get to have their strawman evil atheist, and any counter examples are swept away as "Oh, but he/she is not a REAL atheist. They're really an agnostic, so you can't use them to disprove our generalizations about atheists."
Posted by: mds | May 23, 2008 8:09 PM
#64
Did they check for any leaking chemical storage tanks in the hospital? That can be very dangerous.
(NSFW)
Posted by: Shaden Freud | May 23, 2008 8:15 PM
Uh, you got that about 650 years too early, I think. Either that or a bunch of us have been rather too skeptical about prophecy.
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | May 23, 2008 8:33 PM
So God gave me a winky but then told me not to touch it?
Posted by: Posted by: | May 23, 2008 8:52 PM
Everyone has a belief system or framework and they use it to interprete facts and to organize them.
If it can't be proved that God doesn't exist, Atheist's have a faith based belief. Only an agnostic can say that they don't believe anything about God.
Posted by: Randy Stimpson aka Intelligent Designer | May 23, 2008 8:59 PM
No atheists require evidence, and since there isn't any we don't accept the idea of a god. Period. There's no faith there.
You using that argument shows how little you actually know about Atheists.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | May 23, 2008 9:04 PM
Kenny couldn't care less about truth. He's shown repeatedly in many threads that his goals are only to yell as loud as he can and ignore anything that shows him and his "OPINIONS" to be full of shit.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | May 23, 2008 9:08 PM
Ok my irony meter just went into full core meltdown.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | May 23, 2008 9:10 PM
You using that argument shows how little you actually know about Atheists.
Even less than he knows about the proper use of apostrophes, and that's saying something.
Posted by: BoxerShorts | May 23, 2008 9:10 PM
Rev BDC! Eject it! There's not much time! I Cannae stop it! Take out the Romulans if you can.
Posted by: MIkeG | May 23, 2008 9:23 PM
Ahhh too late. It burned through both floors and into the crawlspace. Time to put it out with Whiskey.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | May 23, 2008 9:25 PM
Use the transporters?
Posted by: MIkeG | May 23, 2008 9:28 PM
AFAIR, there are only 4 even nearly contemporaneous references that are sometimes claimed to refer to Jesus. Three refer only to a self-proclaimed Jewish messiah, and are usually dismissed because they do not specifically name Jesus and could refer to any loony (apparently messiahs were ten-a-penny then as now) or are far too late to be considered reliable; the remaining one, the only one which names Jesus, is the infamous Josephus text, which has long been acknowledged to have been forged by the Vatican in the 9th century.
If anyone can provide credible references to the contrary, I'd like to know about it.
Posted by: Emmet Caulfield | May 23, 2008 9:58 PM
It is interesting to see the response to our conversation with August. He raised some excellent questions and did so with civility. I think many of you could learn from his example.
Posted by: Jeff Shell | May 23, 2008 10:02 PM
Atheism is still a faith. Your faith is based on your so called "lack of evidence" that there is no God.
Yeah but it's not the same thing as religious "faith". That's a different sort of faith. The word "faith" can be used a few different ways. Ask any two year old, or perhaps even a pile of bricks if the two year old is too smart.
However, if you want to continue to believe in what you believe that is fine. However, evidence is what you make of it. Either you deny it or you embrace it.
Yeah but there's all kinds of stuff in between there too. It's not an "either/or" kind of a thang. Ask any pile of brainless dirt, or perhaps a rock if the dirt is too smart for you. Thanks!
Posted by: 386sx | May 23, 2008 10:04 PM
Did you learn anything from August?
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | May 23, 2008 10:06 PM
I'm so sorry, this is completely off topic, but does anyone remember where that video was of the guy casting a 'protective spell' on some circle in the woods.. and then cutting his own arm with a super-sharp sword? (amazingly, the spell didn't work! /sarcasm)
I'm going crazy looking for it!
Posted by: sphex | May 23, 2008 10:09 PM
ON topic, Etha, I'm so bummed I missed you! I'll have to look for it later in the week.
And
video is here here. (friends are good!)
Posted by: sphex | May 23, 2008 10:18 PM
I need to perfect my html. I'll do it the old-fashioned way:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5hCczfGYv0
Posted by: sphex | May 23, 2008 10:19 PM
I actually agree with Jeff on this one. It was refreshing to see such a level-headed and civil discussion. Kudos to both sides of the talk. When it comes to talking to theists, I think that's the approach to take if you want people to actually think about what you have to say. If we're rude and condescending people won't get past the fact that they think we're assholes.
One man's opinion.
Posted by: info_dump | May 23, 2008 10:21 PM
@ 70
I agree - have you seen this article titled "Possible brain hormone may unlock mystery of hibernation"? Science is cool....so much yet to discover!
I saw the faux news story, where everyone immediately jumped on the goddidit bandwagon (it's a miracle, yadda).... sad.
Posted by: fo