Forum menu
Fluids are considered a potential threat, due to the possibility of a liquid bomb being assembled. I thought everyone knew this?
Not Richard Dawkins apparently. Too busy bothering God botherers....
Its not like atheism has a doctrine that you can convert from or too. To be agnostic you have to have something to be agnostic about. In this case you would seem to be agnostic about the claim that a god exists, therefore you're still an atheist. Agnosticism and atheism are not mutually exclusive.
Agnosticism and atheism are not mutually exclusive.
I see them as a sliding scale, with radical religion at one extreme, Agnosticism / CoE in the middle and the militant church of Dawkins at the other end. To be honest, it wouldn't surprise me if he started blowing up Mosques and Churches at some point.
Wow, footflaps, you compare someone who writes books and give lectures to someone who murders and blows up people based upon their religion? 😯
They're both radical, just one is a bit more radical. Still both extremes compared to middle of the road, don't really believe in God, but attend Church for the social side CoE stuff....
I had a spoon confiscated at Heathrow security a few months back. My outrage didn't make the papers, sadly.
Welcome to the world of zombies Prof Dawkins.
You have forgotten the power of zombie bureaucrats ... they are most lethal and live amongst us all.
They are bunch of job worth that is in direct rule of your life. Religions? Nahhh ... they are secondary by comparison.
You need to bow down to the almighty zombie bureaucrats.
Zombie bureaucrats ... they eat you alive!!! Fact!
🙄
p/s: Zombie bureaucrat took away my new key chain at Heathrow airport saying that I could use it to strangle the pilots ... he actually wanted it but on the pretext of security and confiscating it. (I was flying out) I did not want to give it to him so I cut the wire and I took it away ... maggot. Next time if he travels to other part of the world he should be taxed for breathing the air and should be given full cavity search.
Not the case footflaps.
Theism is the positive assertion that a god/gods exist.
You have 2 options. You either accept this assertion or you reject it.
By rejecting the assertion you are not denying the existence or even possibility of existence. You are are just not accepting the claim as true. This would however make you an atheist.
"gnosticism" deals with what you know, or claim to know. A Fundamentalists christian "knows" that there is a god, however there will be plenty of religious types who believe yet will say that they do not know for sure, who would be agnostic theists.
By the same token you sound like an agnostic atheist.
someone who doesn't know if there isn't a god, as opposed to someone who doesn't know if there is ?agnostic atheist.
For Bin Laden read Emmanuel Goldstein.
Dawkins should be mad at the CIA, NSA and PNAC, except he's not very bright so he isn't.
A "what is atheism" thread is going to be much less fun without TJ.
Why does Richard Dawkins want to help to perpetuate the myths regarding the the goals of Al-Qaeda ?
Al-Qaeda couldn't give a monkeys about "our democracy", or anything else to do with our way of life. Their goals are very clear and two-fold. Firstly they want western military bases out of Muslim countries, and secondly, they want all Muslim countries to be ruled as strict Islamic states under sharia law. As Takfiris they accuse most Muslims, and all secular governments in Muslim countries, of apostasy.
Pissing us off might well be their strategy but it's certainly not their goal. They haven't "won" because Dawkins has been inconvenienced. They will have won when their stated goals have been achieved.
Although I accept that western governments want to deliberately mislead people as to the aims of Al-Qaeda, for example US governments often claim that Al-Qaeda is purely motivated by a hatred of western democracy, and this sufficiently blurs the picture so that people don't ask too many questions, I fail to understand why Dawkins needs to do so too.
Al-Qaeda is an extremely nasty organisation with an extremely nasty ideology and it needs to be eradicated. Misrepresenting their aims and goals won't help to achieve that.
Flybe?
He's completely right, it's pretty bloody stupid. He has said some unpopular things with the religious lot so of course they go all ad-hominem. I don't find him at all shrill in fact he's not aggressive enough, to say he is not bright is, frankly, ludicrous.
It's a CIA invention, created from the time they funded the Afghans to fight off the Soviets in Afghanistan - that's a fact. Operation Cyclone. They do what their masters tell them, just like how they're helping the US out in Syria.ernie_lynch - Member
Al-Qaeda is an extremely nasty organisation with an extremely nasty ideology and it needs to be eradicated. Misrepresenting their aims and goals won't help to achieve that.
I've read 'The God Delusion'. I found no ranting. Just measured arguments. No 'shrill'-ness either. Perhaps you meant WBC?Grum: could you point to one please? I have a copy on kindle; if you shout I can quickly check.
I've read it too and found virtually the whole thing to be completely pointless intellectual masturbation.
I'm not even slightly religious and I indeed agree with some of the points Dawkins makes, but I have absolutely no time for his pompous, blinkered, prejudiced writing. He does the 'cause' of atheism no favours whatsoever.
He is also a fan of Pat Condell who is quite blatantly a racist.
Big Dawkins fan and I'd agree with him. I have trouble carrying a nasal spray on planes these days.
Dawkins is a bigger fundamentalist than any person of faith I've ever met in my life. And I'm old.
This book is excellent and anyone with a brain will be able to pick holes in Dawkins' dogma
[img] 
[/img]
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Science-Delusion-Rupert-Sheldrake/dp/144472794X/ref=tmm_pap_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=1323970188&sr=1-1-spell
I used to be an Atheist, but he converted me to Agnosticism, as I didn't want to be associated with his deranged ranting....
Dawkins doesn't claim to be Atheist, he says he's Agnostic. Come back to the fold.
He's a hiving a laugh, isn't he ....
Dawkins doesn't claim to be Atheist, he says he's Agnostic. Come back to the fold.
It's too late. I've discovered CoE, nice cup of tea and a biscuit with the neighbours once a week. Barely anyone mentions God and the Vicar is just so charming, plus the gossip is amazing, you'll never guess what the couple at number 17 were up to last week.....
Dawkins is a bigger fundamentalist than any person of faith I've ever met in my life. And I'm old.
Really? You never had someone knocking on your door to tell you about their pet faith, passing out leaflets in the street ect ect. Religious sanctimony and indoctrination is part of everyday life, it has soaked into far too many parts of life it shouldn't touch.
By comparison atheists like Dawkins write for those who want to read, you have to go out and find it, his words are not sung in school assemblies, sworn over in legal proceedings or muttered with bowed heads before officialdom.
Really? You never had someone knocking on your door to tell you about their pet faith, passing out leaflets in the street ect ect
I consider that completely harmless.
Not so sure about Dawkins, he seems one step away from putting bombs in mosques...
Not so sure about Dawkins, he seems one step away from putting bombs in mosques...
Then you have never read anything he has written, but just jumped on the ingrained religious bandwagon, to condemn a man who dares question their medieval superstitions.
This book is excellent and anyone with a brain will be able to pick holes in Dawkins' dogma
That book is just a complete lie from cover to cover, it's attempts to pick holes in science would be laughable if there were not people stupid enough to believe them.
Guy Fawkes has won!
Just the other day I went to parliament to visit the public gallery, and would you believe that they confiscated my [b]harmless[/b] rucksack, in which I was carrying my weekly shopping - flour eggs, paint, bleach, lighter fluid and darts.
Its the security state gone mad, I can tell you!
Or..
Parliment is a high risk high value target.
As opposed to an airplane which is low risk (a low percentage are targeted) and arguably low value.
Interesting article here
[url= http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2011/12/tsa-insanity-201112 ]http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2011/12/tsa-insanity-201112[/url]
ninfan - MemberJust the other day I went to parliament to visit the public gallery, and would you believe that they confiscated my harmless rucksack, in which I was carrying my weekly shopping - flour eggs, paint, bleach, lighter fluid and darts.
You are Eric Joyce and I claim my five pounds.
Then you have never read anything he has written, but just jumped on the ingrained religious bandwagon, to condemn a man who dares question their medieval superstitions.
and you haven't read much of this thread.....
The powers that be want you to believe that Terrorism is the number one enemy in the Western World.
Meanwhile a child dies every 5 seconds from starvation.
Are we not just completely brainwashed by the powers that be to divert attention from the real problems?
just sayin 😕
Dawkins haters baited. Hook, line and sinker...
[b]Are we not just completely brainwashed [/b]by the powers that be to divert attention from the real problems?
just sayin
No.
World hunger is hardly a secret is it.
No governments or "powers that be" are telling us there isn't a problem are they ?
No governments or "powers that be" are telling us there isn't a problem are they ?
No but they are moving it well down the list of problems that are presented as needing to be addressed with any urgency.
When I look at the size of the response to approximately 2,000 USA deaths from terrorism, I look forward to the response to the merchants of death who kill millions world wide each year.
Daily I scan the papers for reports of USA drones being flown into the boardrooms of the tobacco terrorists. Haven't seen anything yet, but it must be soon.
Maybe Dawkins honey was needed for the drones? 🙂
World hunger is hardly a secret is it.No governments or "powers that be" are telling us there isn't a problem are they ?
Occasionally, maybe once every month or two there is a 10 minute feature on the ten o'clock news reminding us all how lucky we are and that there are in fact people starving in the world, and we should do something like red-nose to try and help.
I hear about this or that person from a terrorist organisation almost daily on the news.
So yes, we do know. But no, the exposure isnt anywhere close as it is with Terrorism.
"Dawkins haters baited. Hook, line and sinker..."
So, by pointing out that he'd made a bit of a tit of himself by twittering a whinge about his pot of honey, everyone that's commented on this thread has been made to look foolish in some way? Not sure how that one works, but hey-ho. Nice to see you back in the land of the living by the way 😉
This may be a bit controversial - ignore me if you like.
While on an individual level people dying from hunger or terrorism or whatever is bad. In a World overrun with the human virus losing a few can't surely be a bad thing.
why not start with your family and loved ones then?
we thank you for your sacrifice
a World overrun with the human virus
[img] 
[/img]
You are Agent Smith and I claim my blue pill.
Dawkins haters baited. Hook, line and sinker...
As the OP of this sordid little thread, I would just like to state that was never my intention.