this is what it will look like. That is if you ever get over your religion issues.
Watch the video of Tyson.
http://bigthink.com/think-tank/neil-degrasse-tyson-atheist-or-agnostic
Atheist Fanatics; If you ever get over your issues,...
By marcus Follow Mon, 4 Jun 2012, 6:42pm 15,525 views 259 comments
In Glendale CA 91206
Watch (3) Share
Quote
Permalink Like Dislike (1) Viewing Comments 1-40 of 259 Next » Last » See most liked comments
|
marcus is moderator of this thread. |
Follow
Befriend (13)
49 threads
2,625 comments
Premium
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,674 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
Marcus just can't handled all the times he lost on this issue, so he's starting a new thread.
The one thing that the Tyson video shows is that some atheists are just so fed up with the stupidity of the religious that they will just willing stop discussing the issues. Well, that and the fact that Wikipedia sucks ass.
The point is that the religious fuck up government so much, especially ours. And that's why we're vocal. Get religion out of government and stop letting Jesus freaks in Texas decide the textbooks for everyone and then we'll be less vocal.
Atheist vocalization is the response to the violation of separation of church and state and the very real, material harm done by the religious by starting wars, suppressing human and civil rights, and generally passing bad or even evil legislation that the rest of us have to put up with.
But Tyson is right in that no atheist would talk about the non-existence of god anymore than the non-existence of pink unicorns making rainbows in your ass if it weren't for the vocalization of the religious and their indoctrination of children and their takeover of government. The day that everybody is an atheist is the day every atheist shuts up. I'm doing my part to make that day come as soon as possible.
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,674 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
The three things that the religious always hate: gays, atheists, and people of other religions. All three groups have always been attacked by the majority religion, and heck, even other minority religions. But there's a message that applies to all three.
Follow
Befriend (23)
55 threads
3,765 comments
Scottsdale, AZ
robertoaribas's website
Allah Akbar!
Follow
Befriend (5)
166 threads
5,054 comments
A secularist who argues for separation of church and state and who is critical of the religious right or of radical fundamentalists in general, is a far cry from the fanatical atheist who mocks religious belief and who generalizes that all religious belief and spirituality is bad.
The reason I have Dan on ignore, and I assume its the reason so many do is because of his intellectual dishonesty and his online personality (arrogant ahole).
He has on several occasions argued against all religion and all spiritual belief. He thinks he knows there is no God and thinks he can prove it. I assume he has no job, which is why you might expect him to write a couple thousand words restating these absurd "proofs" here.
Even though he has made these generalizations which he knows are what I react to, he then says its my job to explain why his (recent) emphasis on radical fundamentalists who I apparently support since I won't explicitly denounce what every civilized person would, are not proof of his more generalized claims (which he has temporarily forgotten).
(Note: I have enough experience dealing with children to know that the reaction is what Dan wants).
In a nutshell this is Dan's motif in religious arguments with me:
1) Say crazy provocative things and arrogantly claim he can prove them to be true (he believes it when he is in his manic tantrum), even procede to "prove" this in his mind, and embarrassingly highlighting his entire sordid "rationale" when all he really wants is infinite engagement in argument.
2) Once he has me on the hook (trolling reference) arguing with his idiotic rant, he changes the subject and makes far more rational moderate (basically secular) claims and builds a straw man against me, that my position is in opposition to the newer more reasonable claims.
Follow
Befriend (5)
166 threads
5,054 comments
Dan8267 says
Great. Now he thinks all atheists are just as arrogant as he and that they all have the exact same emotional and psychological baggage that he does.
When you look up arrogant in the dictionary, they have Dan's picture as an illustration.
(Yes I unignored, yet again - so I could see half of comments in the thread)
Follow
Befriend (1)
246 threads
4,658 comments
Dan8267 says
You say "religion" but you don't mean religion.
Here's what you mean...
"If we can just rewire those Texan Jesus freaks, to think like us, then we can realize our dream of Amerifornia. "
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,674 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
marcus says
Oh Marcus, you are so full of shit. First, you don't have me on ignore as you keep quoting me every single day. If anything, you're my online stalker. Please, put me on ignore so I don't have to listen to your inane dribble constantly.
Second, only a few people have me on ignore, and I'm probably glad they do since they probably just don't like my politics, you know, criticizing Obama for things other than being a black secret Muslim from Kenya.
Third, I'm in second place for more "likes" on this site closely trailing iwog, who has posted over twice as many times as I have. So, I'm pretty well liked on this site.
Fourth, to call me intellectually dishonest is just moronic. It would make sense to criticize me for being anal retentive about correctness, but intellectual dishonesty? That's like accusing the pope of being an atheist. In contrast, every single accusation you make, Marcus, is clearly an intentional deception. You are one of the most dishonest and disingenuous writers on this site.
Finally, there's nothing wrong with arrogance if you can back it up with performance. The fact is that you are an idiot, Marcus, and if admitting that truth makes me arrogant, than I'll gladly be arrogant. I'd rather be an arrogant crusader for truth than a self-pitying asswipe who has to attack others to defend his own fragile ego.
Although I never got why you pulled the arrogant thing out of your ass. I've always held the philosophy that the messenger is irrelevant and arguments stand or fall on their own merits. This is the most non-ego-centered philosophy one can have. Hell, I don't think that all of mankind is that significant in a universe as large and spectacular as ours. We're just tiny, short-lived creatures on a tiny rock orbiting a small star out of 400 billion stars in a galaxy that's just one of quadrillions upon quadrillions of galaxies. A creature that possesses no soul, no immortality, and no significance past the tiny bubble of radio waves we've sent out into space. But I guess that's an arrogant view to you.
marcus says
Yes, and quite successfully. If you disagree with my arguments against spirituality, a.k.a. superstition, then man up and present a coherent counterargument. So far, you have never even tried this approach.
marcus says
Depending on the definition of "god", I know there is no god and I know that I have proved it. I already went into exquisite detail about when and how this is possible and when it is not. But, of course, you always choose to ignore any information that contradicts your political and social agendas.
Again, you could always try to reason against my arguments, but you never even try. Instead of addressing the various proofs I have offered against Standard Monotheist God or other classes of gods, you simply whine like a spoiled child who's been told they can't eat candy before dinner.
I would actually welcome an intelligent debate on the existence of god. The problem is that no intelligent person today actually believes in a god. The closest you get are closeted atheists who say they have some vague notion of "something more" or they are agnostic. But, of course, these individuals don't actually believe in a god, particularly in the ridiculous god of Abraham, but they don't want to go against cultural acceptance. I find cultural acceptance to be a poor justification for evil. It was a bad reason to prevent interracial marriages and advocate segregation. Today, it's still a bad reason to prevent gay marriages and advocate superstition.
But hey, why would we possibly want to debate the truth of fairytales that are the basis of legislation that prohibit gay marriage, forces women to have transvaginal ultrasounds, removes birth control from health care, and determines what textbooks our children read in school. After all, none of those issues are important or relevant to this year's election. So, this whole religion thing is purely an academic issue just like it was when god told George Bush to invade Iraq and he did. Nothing bad came from that, other than a million dead men, women, and children.
marcus says
I assure you that I make ample more money than you do. And since you are suggesting that earning potential is the determination of a person's worth as a human being, I'm a better human being than you are by your own standards.
And if you want to call my hand, I'd love to sign a legally binding contract with you which states that which ever one of us has made the most money in the past 5 years as indicated on tax forms gets $1 million from the other payable immediately and with 7% interest on any unpaided amount with wages garnished at 50% until the debt is paid off.
Also, when you are literate, writing a few pages of text isn't that hard. For someone who claims to be a teacher, you sure don't seem to know what students do on a weekly basis at every freaking school in the western world. I understand that Herman Cain wants everything to be written on a sticky note, but for a teacher to hold that philosophy is quite disturbing.
marcus says
Wow, you really shouldn't be a teacher of any subject. Disproving a specific class of god like SMG is hardly a generalization. Not that generalization is necessary a bad thing. Without generalization, no book would have ever been written. Solving a general problem rather than a more specific one is not only a noble goal, it is quite pragmatic as illustrated by just about any well-written software. How the fuck could something like a Google search work without a general solution to the problem of indexing radically different types and contexts of information?
Your narrow worldview makes me claustrophobic.
marcus says
Ironically, that is exactly the reaction a child would have. You assume to understand my thoughts and intent, yet you never do because you never listen.
What I actually want is for you to grow the fuck up and mature in your discussions of issues. I want you to learn from all the factual and logical mistakes you have made, stop asserting shit you pulled out of your ass, and become a competitor I could actually respect. And remember, I actually held out the olive branch to you the time you faked making nice. Yet, you doubled down on your childishness.
And no, you didn't fool me back then. I estimated a 99% chance that you were faking it, but wrote back in such a way that you could prove your sincerity or your childishness.
The fact is that your massive, yet fragile, ego simply cannot admit that you have been both wrong and a major dick about it. And so you will never bury the hatchet with me. The best option that your bruised ego might accept is simply shutting the fuck up from now on. And I would gladly welcome that option as you are, unfortunately, beyond hope or redemption. Whatever bug you have has crawled so far up your ass that it's never coming out.
marcus says
Wow, that's a pretty soft grip on reality even for you. Again, if you have any rational, adult argument against any of my proofs then simply provide them. All those writings are available to anyone on the Internet to rebut. So far, no one has even attempted to rebut them. This is a testimony to how solid the arguments are in support the specific scope of their conclusions. The fact that these arguments came from me rather than someone else is irrelevant. All arguments stand or fall on their own merits. For an alleged math teacher, you sure don't seem to understand this.
And quite frankly, the only interest -- and I use that term lightly -- I have in rebutting your nonsense is to make sure that your poisonous thoughts don't infect other people. The world is fucked up enough without you adding to it.
marcus says
Typical Marcus argument: proof by assertion. You got anything, anything at all, to back up that claim that I have made a single Straw Man argument? You see, when I claim someone has made a Straw Man argument, I quote exactly what the argument was and exactly how it fits the definition of a Straw Man including how it is not the real argument his opposition made. That's the difference between my arguments and yours. My arguments use evidence and yours are simply childish accusations unfounded by reality, which is why you never, ever get into specifics.
marcus says
Ah, the standard personal attack of Marcus. At least when I call you an idiot, I have plenty of your writings to demonstrate exactly why you are an idiot. For someone who is so found of poisoning the well, you sure don't seem found of presenting any evidence of my alleged emotional/psychological baggage or even a specific statement of what that baggage is.
Have you noticed that I include a link to the Poisoning the Well fallacy in the above paragraph? I've done this many times for this very fallacy and others you routinely commit. I do this because I'm trying to get you to learn something and not repeat the mistakes. Yet, you repeat the mistakes right away while responding to the posting in which I point out the mistake. And that is exactly why you are an idiot, Marcus. You are utterly incapable of learning even the most basic concepts when they are handed to you on a silver platter. I've known Meerkats that learn quicker than you.
marcus says
My picture is also under the composite word well-endowed, however, you can't see my face.
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,674 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
CaptainShuddup says
No, I mean Jesus freaks.
I'm not particularly found of California, which is what you are implying. In fact, it's one of my least favorite states, but that's a whole different story.
But the important thing is that Texas should not be deciding what books are read in schools. Massachusetts or Vermont should. And if you have to wonder why...
http://www.morganquitno.com/edrank.htm
In fact, all of the top five are godless, liberal states.
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,674 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
A great example of why confronting religion is important particularly right now.
The important segment is from 05:25 to 08:00 in the video.
Do you really want that guy to have his finger on the button?
Also, a nice bit about Facebook and insider trading by senators at 09:00.
Oh, and the Onion article that Paul Krugman reference is Voice Of God Revealed To Be Cheney On Intercom.
Follow
Befriend (4)
328 threads
913 comments
If Tyson is a scientist his best answer would be, there is NO SCIENTIFIC PROOF of the existence of god.
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,674 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
OK, seriously, who are the eight assholes who thumbs down the following picture? How can you dislike that?
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,674 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
HEY YOU says
I don't need a scientific proof when a mathematical one works.
Follow
Befriend (5)
166 threads
5,054 comments
Dan8267 says
9
Dan8267
Dan8267 says
Dan8267 says
Dan8267 says
Dan8267 says
Dan8267 says
Dan8267 says
Dan8267 says
Dan8267 says
Dan8267 says
Dan8267 says
Dan8267 says
Dan8267 says
From
Dan8267
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
marcus says
That sounds awfully similar to Islamic expansionism stopping when the entire world worships Allah...
Follow
Befriend (5)
166 threads
5,054 comments
I respect Einstein and Tyson and the countless other agnostics such as Albert Camus, Mark Twain, Kafka, Charles Darwin, Enrico Fermi, David Hilbert, J.M. Keynes, Joseph Lagrange, Alexander Graham Bell, Noam Chomsky and of course Bertrand Russell.
There are so many others.
And then there are all of the countless atheists who are atheists, but don't EVER proselytize, and are not vocally condemning of those who have religious faith.
As I think of it I can not think of a single atheist who does mock the religious who I have the slightest respect for. Well I take it back. I do like a lot of the work of Bill Maher, but this is very much in spite of some of his overzealous comments about religion. (Btw,I agree about how messed up the fundamentalists are - but I also have the common sense to know that arguing against ALL religion is not the cure for fundamentalist extremism - not that I would agree with condemning all religion anyway).
In general I still maintain that Dan and others such as TL, who go out of their way to put down religion are showing unnatractive reflections of their own inner conflicts. It's okay, but it's just not very attractive nor is it worthy of respect (at least from me).
Then again, viva la difference. We can't all be together and balanced in every way. For that matter we all have our issues.
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,674 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
marcus says
Funny, I feel the same way about you for assuming that you know what goes on in my life.
But here's a damn good reason that atheists should be vocal and should hold pride parades like gays do.
That's right, seven states ban atheists from holding office in clear violation of the United States Constitution. And their all dumb states, too. Pennsylvania is basically Philadelphia and Pittsburgh with Alabama in between.
With statues like
Just to quote a few of the statues.
The religious are violating my Constitutional rights. That's a damn good reason to be vocally opposed to religious superstition and intrusion into the state.
There are no laws banning African Americans from holding public office, but there are still laws banning atheists from holding public office. But I guess a bigot like Marcus is okay with that. Hey Marcus, why don't you just call me a nigger and tell me to go to the back of the bus. The parallels in western history regarding gays, blacks, and atheists are amazing.
And if that wasn't enough, Poverty Higher In States That Ban Atheists From Public Office.
So, you know what, I'm proud to be a flaming atheist. We're here, we're rational, get use to it. Ok, we're still working on the rhyme, but the costumes are coming out fabulous!
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,674 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
uppity nigger
How is that any different from Marcus accusing me of being an uppity atheist? Bigotry is bigotry, and Marcus is an anti-atheist bigot, a athephobe.
Follow
Befriend (13)
49 threads
2,625 comments
Premium
marcus says
I'm evangelical about anti-superstition just like you are evangelical about your experiences.
But spare us the pop psychology.
High levels of atheism are associated with peaceful, prosperous societies with low violence and high levels of education. High levels of religious belief are associated with mass inequity, poverty, high violence, and low levels of education.
It's far more arrogant to believe the universe is centered around humans and that an individual receives messages and assistance from the Boss of the Universe personally.
Follow
Befriend (1)
246 threads
4,658 comments
Dan8267 says
You mean besides they take it in the can?
Follow
Befriend (4)
328 threads
913 comments
If everyone here doesn't behave, you are going to be placed in
TIME OUT!!
Follow
Befriend (12)
10 threads
3,516 comments
Oakland, CA
leo707's website
Premium
wthrfrk80 says
All the big judeo-christian-islamic monotheistic religions believe that world peace will be achieved when god finally helps everyone one to realize the truth of [insert sect here], and the world joins hands and celebrates as one.
I think that Dan is wrong about this. I think that the atheists shut-up when they stop getting treated like shit, and legislation is not used as a tool go get others to conform to a particular religions code. Not when everyone becomes an atheist.
Follow
Befriend (5)
166 threads
5,054 comments
wthrfrk80 says
Yep. Once again, Dan showing us why atheism really is a religion (for some).
leoj707 says
I don't know. It is true they are not respected by fundies and the extremely religious types. But then the vocal ones are expressing their
being stuck at an adolescent stage where there is still such an intense internal argument going on about god that they just can't get beyond it.
I say this because I was the same way (long ago). Pointing out the absurdity of many literal beliefs. Let's face it, any moron can come up with arguments against a sky daddy or virgin birth or human sacrifice or whatever. It's too easy. And I'm sorry, I believe that most of the people you hear mocking religion on the internet are morons, or at least as I say "stuck" at an adolescent stage in their spiritual growth.(not to say they are adolescents in every domain of their lives).
Yes of course that perception comes from my perspective and my ego, or arrogance if you prefer.
But the arrogance that I am always referring to in these discussions isn't about what you believe.
The kind of arrogance I have a problem with is someone knowing (for sure) what others should believe, and thinking they have access to the highest spiritual truths and that they need to teach everyone else what these are. The vocal atheists are indeed just like the worst evangelical fundies in this regard.
Follow
Befriend
7 comments
You have to have greater faith to be an atheist than believe in Jesus Christ. The "rational" choice based upon the evidence would lead one to belief in Jesus Christ.
Being the only ancient text to have foretold countless events, you'd be a fool to dismiss it. The events foretold continue to unfold as we speak.
I mean, what, somehow believing in God is more absurd than believing we are monkeys that came from some magical big bang? There isn't a shred of evidence for "macro-evolution" upon which the shaky foundations of atheism are built.
You talk about how many people "religion" has killed? How about atheism? Between atheist/evolutionists Mao, Lenin, Stalin and others, it's well over 100 million.
Countless archeological evidence continues to come out confirming the ancient events described in the Bible.
It is easier to say that God doesn't exist because most would rather continue to live in their sins than hold account, repent and live the correct lifestyle. Admit it. They have made their own gods in their minds. Then there is cognitive dissonance.
You overlook the brainwashing you underwent since 1st grade regarding evolution (atheism).
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
thunderlips11 says
Are you referring to Russia and China?
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,674 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
leoj707 says
Yeah, I concede that point. If all the religious simply performed their stupid rituals as a social club thing and it didn't affect important things like wars, legislation, education, then I'd spend as much time pointing out their follies as I do bitching about astrology, tarot card readers, palm readers, fortune tellers, psychic hotlines, etc., i.e., no time at all.
Of course, if astrology was influencing the presidents decisions, like it did with that whole Nancy Reagan thing, then I'd be concerned about that.
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,674 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
savethepopulation says
Dude, the whole Jesus Christ myth was stolen from other myths, particularly the Egyptian god of Horus. The early Christians plagiarized the hell out of Egyptian myths and totally violated the Analog Millennium Zero Copyright Act passed by emperor Bush in 1 A.D.
So how exactly is it rational to believe in a poor repackaging of older myths? Is the rational choice to worship Horus and look to him for moral guidance?
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,674 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
Way too many precisely the same stories for the truth to be anything else but that Jesus is a total fucking ripoff of Horus. How much more evidence you could possible ask?
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,674 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
And here's another classic video showing how Christianity is nothing but plagiarized Egyptian myths.
Carbon dating doesn't lie.
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,674 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
And if that's not enough to nail this coffin...
Follow
Befriend (12)
10 threads
3,516 comments
Oakland, CA
leo707's website
Premium
savethepopulation says
Clearly you do not understand the nature of faith, the scientific process or what constitutes evidence.
Evidence by nature is an objective shared experience that we can all identify, i.e., we all can observe gravity or feel that water is wet. There is a great book that explains the scientific process very well: "Evaluating Scientific Research: Separating Fact from Fiction" I highly suggest it if you are acutally interested in how the scientific method works not the creationist straw man explanation of science.
Faith on the other hand, by nature, is irrational and completely lacking in physical evidence; all the "evidence" comes from internal feelings that can not be "shared" with others.
savethepopulation says
As a result of being in a predominately christian culture I have read rather extensively about claims on biblical prophesy coming true. I have yet to see any line of reasoning "proving" biblical prophecy (FYI, most are circular) that could not also be used to prove non-christian prophesy as well. I remain unconvinced.
savethepopulation says
First, you are doing something very common for anti-science christians and that is mixing two entirely separate theories as if they are one.
From a rational point of view, yes believing in god is more absurd because both evolution (more so) and the big bang (less so) have large amounts of scientific evidence supporting them. The idea of god(s) at all let alone the christian god has zero scientific evidence and by definition irrational.
However, with faith -- true faith -- you don't need any scientific evidence to believe god(s) is/are real. This feeling of truth and belief is part of the nature of humanity. If you held down Dan and strapped a god helmet on him even he would begin to know what true faith feels like.
savethepopulation says
Wow, I have not heard the whole macro/micro evolution excuse in a long time. It is a great example of the god of the gaps. There are mountains of evidence in support of evolution and accepting "microevolution" is just another example of how religion has "lost ground" to an ever increasing body of scientific knowledge.
Anyway, the point is somewhat moot. Evolution is not a "foundation" of atheism and is not mutually exclusive with religious belief. Many religious people smoothly integrate evolution in with their belief in god(s).
savethepopulation says
Cudos for not bringing up Hitler.
savethepopulation says
Yes, and using the same criteria for proof of the supernatural, archaeological evidence could also prove that the events and gods in the Odyssey and Iliad are also "real".
savethepopulation says
Ahhh... yes, here it is. The fundamental misunderstanding of why people don't believe. Not understanding the actual reasons why people don't believe is the biggest stumbling block to actually converting others. If you honestly want others to believe you first need to understand whey they don't believe your particular brand of "correct lifestyle".
... and then there is...
savethepopulation says
Yes, this is the reason why you search and study, then study and search to justify what you already know through your faith. Right?
Let go... accept it... reason and faith are mutually exclusive. If god(s) could be proven then there would be no need for faith and Dan would be the first one in line to get baptized. You will feel a burden lifted when you realize that you can stop trying to prove god, and that your faith is enough on its own.
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,674 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
leoj707 says
True
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
leoj707 says
What about historical evidence? I can't share the experience of the American Civil War but I believe it occurred nonetheless.
Follow
Befriend (13)
49 threads
2,625 comments
Premium
wthrfrk80 says
Hmmm. Good point. However, there are other historical forces at play in those countries.
In the West, the King and Pope are separate offices.
In the East, the King chooses the Patriarch.
In the Far East, the Emperor is the go-between for Heaven and Earth.
Russia and China also started the 20th Century far more backward than Sweden or France, so we have to give them more time. Russia was probably 200-300 years behind Western Europe in 1920. It's also a multiethnic state of vast expanse. Comparative countries in Europe are far smaller and far more homogenous.
Ditto for China.
I suspect in a century, we'll see China and Russia continuing to catch up. They've already made massive strides just in the last 100 years. Think of it. In 1970, almost all electronics had to be imported to China. In 2010, they produce most of the worlds electronics.
Russia had next to no industry in 1901, next to no railroads, and east of the Urals there are only game tracks. Countries a tiny fraction of Russia's size like Czechoslovakia were industrial superpowers in comparison. 60 years later, the country is well connected, there's power in all the major cities, they churn out steel like nobody's business, and pump oil like mad.
They're beating the world's most industrialized nation that had 100-year head start on their own industrialization by putting the first satellite in space, the first animal in space, the first man into space, the first probe on the moon, the first woman in space, and the first Space Walk. Not to mention the fastest, deepest diving subs in which they still have the lead.
No doubt Russia of 2012 has problems, but Russia of 1901 was hicksville. Outside of Saint Petersburg, you'd have never known you were in the 20th Century, and it wasn't on par technologically (or socially, or artistically) with other European cities. Russians are leaders in all fields, but they still have internal problems from 1000 years of tyranny and underdevelopment to work out.
I think this rule certainly applies to Western Countries, and probably generally. Where it doesn't apply, other forces are at work.
For example, Brunei and Kuwait have tiny populations sitting on massive amounts of oil.
Follow
Befriend (2)
15 threads
428 comments
Reston, VA
Technically, I'm an agnostic, but for expediency, I say atheist in conversation. For the most part, this is because in my years of experience, saying you are agnostic just opens the door for some religious person to try and convert you. As a generally non-religious person, you have to deal with a lot of people trying to save you at family or extended-family functions.
In non-family affairs, they come to your door. I work from home and have had probably 30 religious nuts come to my door over the last 5 years. WTF is that about? Not once in my life has an atheist knocked on my door to convince me to be an atheist. The asymmetry is high it is ridiculous for religious people to complain about the atheists. If you put up a no-soliciting sign, the religious people somehow think they are not soliciting.
Follow
Befriend (13)
49 threads
2,625 comments
Premium
Toe jam says
You mean anybody with the last name "Herschel" who writes a textbook? That's like saying anybody with the last name "Ferraro" must be writing from a Catholic point of view.
If you mean that the media and congress are ludicrously pro-Israel, even when it kills US interests elsewhere, then I agree.
Follow
Befriend (12)
10 threads
3,516 comments
Oakland, CA
leo707's website
Premium
YesYNot says
*ahem*
Follow
Befriend (12)
10 threads
3,516 comments
Oakland, CA
leo707's website
Premium
wthrfrk80 says
Sure you can there is a lot of physical evidence concerning the civil war.
We can know a lot about what happened in history and how people lived through writings and physical evidence that corroborate with each other. The civil war is easy because it was not that long ago and the evidence that it happened is mountainous.
The book of mormon is a good example of when physical evidence exposes a work as having a high probability of being fabricated.
Follow
Befriend (13)
49 threads
2,625 comments
Premium
There is no evidence that there was a Jesus, not even a wholly mortal, hippie preacher Jesus. None. The only thing we have is religious writings that come decades after Jesus allegedly lived, and even with 200 years of pious interpolations, their stories don't match, and they contradict not only each other, but other, non-religious historical writings of Josephus and Philo, as well as Roman Records, and archeology.
1500 years of Bias is hard to overcome, but most already agree that Moses, Joshua, etc. were myths. Jesus is the last stumbling block, and will be the hardest because liberal Christians and even agnostics and some atheists (who are steeped in the Western Tradition) will fight hard to keep some kind of historical Jesus alive.
Tradition is a bitch.
Follow
Befriend (13)
49 threads
2,625 comments
Premium
For your enjoyment:
"We didn't rip off Mithra, the Devil anticipated Jesus and invented a Religion with a similar communal meal, so as to head off Christianity and mislead mankind!"
Which is a variation we still hear today in the form of:
