A Response to the ‘Top 10 Awkward Facts About the Atheist Monument’

Tom Hoopes, former editor of the National Catholic Register, has an embarrassingly ignorant piece up at the Catholic Voice in which he “rebuts” the atheist monument now up in front of the Bradford County Courthouse:

(via Gamma Atheist)

Let’s go through Hoopes’ “10 awkward facts about the atheist monument”:

1. A quote on it says: “An atheist believes that a hospital should be built instead of a church.” Which is awkward, because we really haven’t seen all those hospitals the atheists were going to build…

Well, you give us the money the Catholic Church has, and let’s see what happens. Not to mention that Catholic hospitals are not exactly known for their medical superiority.

2. The hospital quote is also awkward because it clearly should have said: “An atheist believes that $22,000 monuments to atheism should be built in all 50 states instead of a hospital.”

Actually, it’s the Christian Ten Commandments monument that cost $22,000.

The atheist bench cost $6,000.

Either way, I find it hard to take financial advice from someone whose religious leaders sit on property estimated to be worth tens of billions of dollars (and that was in 1965).

I’ll just leave this here:

But, to your point, the atheist monuments are only being put up in response to Christian ones. If their side stops, our side stops. (I’m sure if the groups putting up these monuments decide to donate money that would’ve been used to make another Ten Commandments monument to charity, atheist donors would follow suit.)

3. A quote on the monument says atheists “Want war eliminated.” Which is awkward because warriors like Stalin and Lenin and Mao and Hoxha and Ceaușescu — were all atheists.

Oh, Christ, this again…

Look, some of them were atheists. But they didn’t kill in order to “spread their atheism.” They were politically-motivated tyrants with actual weapons of mass destruction at their disposal. Incidentally, Hitler, who wasn’t mentioned in Hoopes’ list, was a proud Christian.

4. The monument also mocks the punishments threatened in the Old Testament. Awkward: Far worse brutality was actually committed by the atheist warriors listed above — in our lifetime.

I repeat what I said above.

5. The “We want war eliminated” quote is also awkward because all of the other quotes on the monument are from Founding Fathers known for starting a war with England.

We’re against the Revolution now? Great. Anyone who quotes the Founding Fathers must be pro-war. (Someone tell David Barton!)

The point is not that war is always bad, but that most atheists would like to see a world without it — as would most Christians.

6. It’s awkward that at the dedication, a preacher used the monument to preach Christ, and the free thinkers got mad at his free thinking.

Who got mad? Annoyed, maybe, that a Christian was trying to steal the spotlight. Upset, maybe, that Eric Hovind was standing on the monument before it was properly settled into its foundation. That’s about the extent of it. When loudmouth Christian preachers try to make their case in public, it only helps the atheist cause.

7. It’s awkward that the monument has what looks like a biohazard symbol on it.

… says the person whose religious symbol represents an ancient torture device.

Anyway, here is the biohazard symbol and AA logo side-by-side. See if you can tell the difference:

I can. Not awkward.

8. But the symbol actually shows an atom. J.J. Thomson won the 1906 Nobel Prize in Physics for discovering the electron. He was a churchgoer who read the Bible every night. Which is awkward for atheists.

Niels Bohr discovered the structure of an atom and he was an atheist. Checkmate!

Why would Thomson’s Christianity be awkward, anyway? Science works despite religious beliefs. Isaac Newton was a religious man, but that doesn’t mean atheists find it awkward to do math.

Maybe someone should remind Hoopes that the structure of DNA was discovered by atheists… and he has DNA inside of him… OHMYGOD, SO AWKWARD!

9. A quote on the monument says “An atheist strives for involvement in life and not escape into death.” Awkward: atheists Jack Kevorkian (Dr. Death) and Derek Humphry (founder of the Hemlock Society) would disagree.

Atheists (in general) support living a satisfying life before death since there’s no afterlife. When it comes time to die, we support giving people the choice to die a dignified death on our own terms (if possible). There’s nothing awkward about this.

10. A New Jersey-based group went to Florida to build an atheist monument. That sounds kind of… missionary and proselytizing. Which is awkward for people who are against that kind of thing…

This wasn’t a “mission.” The monument isn’t there as a tool for proselytization. It’s there to counter the Ten Commandments monument, pure and simple. Atheists have conferences in a lot of states, too. That’s not awkward, either.

Just about all the arguments one can make against the atheist bench can also be made against the Ten Commandments monument. As I’ve said before, I’d rather not have any monuments in front of the courthouse, but if city officials are going to allow it, we can’t let Christians be the only ones there.

I think there’s only one thing left to say to Tom Hoopes:

What you’ve just said… is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

(Thanks to Steven for the link)

About Hemant Mehta

Hemant Mehta is the editor of Friendly Atheist, appears on the Atheist Voice channel on YouTube, and co-hosts the uniquely-named Friendly Atheist Podcast. You can read much more about him here.

  • Lefty

    unfortunately, the list on the monument IS awkward, but for none of the reasons this priestor mentioned. atheism is one thing, rejection of another person’s god claim. there is zero reason to tack on extra stuff to it. atheism has nothing to do with war, hospitals, etc.

    • Robert Ray

      The quote was form Madalyn Murray O’Hair. It was added, in part, because she was the founder of the American Atheist.
      Nearly every Atheist I know agrees her statement. I do not see how it could be awkward, unless one is a follower of Ayn Rand style atheism.

      “An atheist believes that a hospital
      should be built instead of a church.
      An atheist believes that deed must
      be done instead of prayer said.
      An atheist strives for involvement in life
      and not escape into death.
      He wants disease conquered,
      poverty vanished, war eliminated.”

      • Katarn

        I don’t see why a follower of “Ayn Rand style atheism” would disagree with this quote. They may prefer a hospital be built by a corporation and not the government but they would certainly rather a hospital be built than a church. And they might have a a different idea about how poverty can be vanquished but would no less desire to see the end of it. Whichever method is most effective towards those goals is irrelevant of how much one might want a strive for them.

        • Robert Ray

          Point well taken.

      • 3lemenope

        I can easily imagine atheist folks having trouble with: “An atheist strives for involvement in life and not escape into death.” As it seems to impugn suicide as morally wrong, which atheists as a group do not have anything even remotely resembling a consensus on.

      • UWIR

        I certainly disagree with the sentiment that one can speak of what atheists do and do not believe and do, as if all atheists think the same way and do the same things.

        • Kodie

          I agree with the sentiment of protest to the other monument that this one stands for.

  • Art_Vandelay

    Re: #4 – Did those guys really kill every husband, wife, child, and pet but keep only the virgin daughters as sex slaves?

    • Dogly

      Yes, if you believe the bible. God tells the Jews to kill everyone in the lands they pass through, except the aforementioned virgins (read ‘little girls’), unless they accept subjugation.

      • Art_Vandelay

        I know…the Amalekites. But this guy is saying that the tyrants of the 20th century were even worse than the tyrants of the OT. That’s my point.

  • C Peterson

    I’d add to #1: it may well be that, viewed per capita, more hospitals have been built by atheists than otherwise. There are many private hospitals, and these are built by smart, rich people, who are overrepresented statistically by atheists. But they don’t advertise their beliefs the way religionists do, so detecting them isn’t easy (it’s the same reason that atheists aren’t usually obvious when helping at disaster sites).

    I’d add to #2: unlike the Commandments monument, a bench is functional. Benches placed in public spaces, intended to last for a century or more, are often made of stone. I’d expect them to cost at least a few thousand dollars. Like the monument, the bench carries a message. But the monument serves no other use at all.

    I’d add to #7/8: the logo looks nothing at all like the biohazard symbol. But it is one of the most horrible logos I’ve seen, and I’d be deeply embarrassed if it represented my organization, showing as it does a grossly inaccurate, completely dated version of the atom suitable only for cartoons. Seriously, that logo has to go! That is unlike the Christian logo, which as a torture device seems completely appropriate.

    • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

      Christians are obsessed with torture. They wear a torture device around their necks (with the option of a crucified corpse adorning it), they threaten non-believers with ETERNAL torture, and they torture us all day on the internet by persisting endlessly with bad arguments.

  • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

    Love ending it with the Billy Madison quote. Perfect. This guy was just taking wild swings that only atheist haters would buy in to.

  • Paul Little

    OK, so my grasp on history may be a little shaky, but my understanding of the American Revolution was that the Americans, who lived here, declared independence, and the British sent ships from all the way across the ocean to fight a war over it.

    • baal

      To be fair to the historical British, they probably wanted the free gifts (taxes, favorable trade concessions) more than subservience. Then again, they were pretty big on empire so the grovel might have been a factor too.

    • bill

      There were no “Americans” before the revolution. There were British citizens living in British colonies in North America. There were already British troops present but after things started to get sketchy, more were sent. Colonists were not taxed that heavily, even with the infamous stamp act,

      • Mary Howerton

        To be fair, the problem was “no taxation without representation”, not just “no taxation”. Despite what the Tea Party wishes…

        • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

          Kind of. As Raising_Rlyeh said below, it’s even more complicated than that. Taxes were raised in part to pay for the debt from the French and Indian War, because wars are expensive and that one was fought for the sole benefit of the colonists in America. The Brits thought it was only fair the colonists pay for their own war, which is not an entirely unreasonable position.

          The Stamp Acts were also repealed just before the start of the war, when the British realized they were causing problems, though by that time sentiments were running so hot it didn’t matter.

  • Jasper

    “3. A quote on the monument says atheists “Want war eliminated.” Which is awkward because warriors like Stalin and Lenin and Mao and Hoxha and Ceaușescu — were all atheists.”

    If were to take all nations of history and categorize them into “bad” and “good”, we’d find a mixed bag between theism and atheism.

    On the other hand, if we categorize them based on “totalitarian/authoritarian” versus “non-totalitarian/authoritarian”, we’d the murderous regimes almost unanimously on the side of totalitarianism/authoritarians.

    The problem with Stalin wasn’t that he was an atheist. He was a totalitarian bastard.

    Atheism is not totalitarian (or not non-totalitarian) in nature. “I don’t believe you” is not authoritarian/totalitarian in any way.

    Christianity, on the other hand, is. God is the tyrant, and you do what he says, or he’ll fuck you up.

    This is how Christianity can be the source of totalitarianism, whereas atheism cannot.

    • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

      atheism is not totalitarian? are you joking? “i don’t believe you” is like saying “you’re opinions are meaningless and to be ignored” – how is this not totalitarian? how is China, the leading population of “atheists” (many of whom are oppressed upon), not a modern example of the totalitarian aspects of atheism as a belief system? or secularism for that matter, a total failure and starting more wars than stopping… sure, works great – tell people there’s no god and then laugh at them like children and omit them from the political body…. you all don’t want peace, or else you would know that this is the most asinine request to ever have been made of humanity. these bodies are connected, you can never separate them.

      • The Other Weirdo

        “I don’t believe you” is code for “I’d like to see evidence of that assertion before I choose consider it seriously.” Therefore the rest of your opinion is meaningless and to be ignored.

        • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

          what kind of evidence? the only evidence i can offer is the kind you can gain by yourself thru mediation. start today and maybe we can debate at some point, otherwise you are useless.

          • wabney

            All mighty and knowing meditation that reveals the TRUTH™ in such clear and unquestionable ways!

            All hail meditation!

            • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

              tm? uh you are thinking of science (monsanto and myriad (btw my brother is a patent lawyer and fought both of them in the supreme court)), and the fact that it uses patents to reduce access to information due to purposes of financial gain.
              you ever tried it? if so how much?

              • The Other Weirdo

                I think I’d like evidence to support your wild assertion that your brother is a patent lawyer and fought both of those companies in the supreme court. And it can’t a product of your meditation.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite
                • The Other Weirdo

                  Oddly, when people provide asked-for evidence for their claims, they don’t usually do it so rudely. Unless, of course, they don’t expect to ever be questioned and want all their claims to be implicitly believed. Strange, that.

                  Technically, all this article says is that a lawyer has been taking these companies to court. I applaud his efforts, of course, and wish him the very best. That does not mean, however, that he is your brother.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  oddly, have you suffered thru the abuse I’ve received for having a viewpoint that challenges those of accepted science? have you any idea of the amount of verbal abuses I’ve suffered to get this far?

                  i have offered my premise many times

                  we need a scientific revolution of model and method, asap.

                  http://ravicher.me/2013/06/18/the-paradigms-of-revolution-pt-1-of-the-scientific/

                • The Other Weirdo

                  As far as I can tell from reading this thread, the abuse you’ve suffered isn’t so much because of your viewpoint, but how you go about presenting it. Your entire MO in this thread has been: “I am right and you’re all wrong and if you don’t believe me, you should meditate on it. And by meditate, I mean only in my prescribed way which I have received from these random books on the subject written by random people, because LOOK! A scientist wrote them. And bite me if you dare ask for evidence.”

                  Had you been able–and willing–to present evidence for why your way is better than all the other scientists in the world, you would have had an easier time of it. (Hint: meditation is not evidence.) Instead, when asked for evidence of a claim you made out of the blue, you reply with bite me and an article about a random lawyer working DNA patent cases.

                  You’ve offered a premise, but no evidence to back it up. Maybe it’s buried in that site you linked, but I certainly don’t propose to read that monstrous wall’o’text. You say you hate capital letters? Well, I despise 100+-line long paragraphs. If you can’t split it up into paragraphs with white space, it means there is no coherence in it.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  you’re too lazy to look, not my deal. btw, you don’t, nor does science get to define evidence, the courts uses many kinds of testimony don’t they….

                • The Other Weirdo

                  If you can’t be bothered to format your text to make it easier for people to read it, I can’t be bothered to slog through it all.

                  Oh, yeah, courts certainly do use many kinds of testimony. Indeed they do. Why don’t you ask your brother the patent lawyer how far evidence derived through meditation will get you in a court of law.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  with scientific eeg readings such it won’t be too hard. btw, i don’t depend on him, but rather am just grateful. are you in support of monsanto and myriad?

                • The Other Weirdo

                  with scientific eeg readings such it won’t be too hard.

                  Complete non sequitur.

                  btw, i don’t depend on him, but rather am just grateful.

                  Reading for comprehension is not your strong suit, either. I never said you depended on him. I suggested you ask him. You know… communicate. With words, punctuation and capitalization.

                  are you in support of monsanto and myriad?

                  “When did you stop beating your wife?”™ alert!

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  eeg’s are used in lie detection. get over it.
                  you suggest i need to ask him.
                  you are indeed a troll at this point.

                • The Other Weirdo

                  Unfortunately for you, and had you asked your brother the patent lawyer you would have known, lie detectors–and thus the eegs–are not really as they are depicted on TV. http://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2013/01/are-lie-detectors-admissible-in-court.html Judges don’t have to accept them, and there are guidelines for their use, they are can be beaten, they are unreliable, and they are not really evidence of anything except whether the person being asked questions is lying or nor or is maybe just anxious.

                  The fact is that just because you honestly believe in something doesn’t mean that what you believe in is actually correct. Though I am no patent lawyer, I’m pretty sure that all judges would disallow evidence gained through meditation.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  fortunately science has used eeg data in support of all kinds of theories regarding altered states such as sleep, and that although the courts have guidelines, they are still used today.
                  the fact is, is that you seem to refuse to want to review facts and make an honest assessment. there is more than enough evidence out there, go fish.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite
                • Vice-President Dink Cheney

                  “the abuse I’ve received for having a viewpoint that challenges those of accepted science?” Oddly enough, I have, because I think computers are made out of green cheese. The reptile men from underground try to shut me up. but I escape every time. I feel your pain, brother. (I’m his other brother Darryl. I’m a Supreme Court Justice or something.)

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  you seem to have some problems my friend, maybe you should review the challenges to the DSM

                  http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/05/21/dsm-5-is-here-what-controversial-new-changes-mean-for-mental-health-care/

                • Vice-President Dink Cheney

                  “have you suffered thru the abuse I’ve received for having a viewpoint that challenges those of accepted science?”
                  Yes, I believe that dogs talk when we aren’t around. Boy, have I ever suffered for my viewpoint. Just like you; it’s like I have a twin!

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  you are making another fine example. thank you for your maturity.

                • Vice-President Dink Cheney

                  “Bite me.”

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  you came at me with a verbal attack from the get go, i have no time for you.

                • Vice-President Dink Cheney

                  Science laughs at my belief that all computer devices are powered by tiny rats running in spinning cages, so I feel your pain.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  rats, try all those video gamers out there that think they’re just playing a game… http://www.businessinsider.com/darpa-military-projects-that-will-change-your-life-2012-7?op=1
                  you don’t think a video gamer can be hacked? what world do you live in?

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  you heard of Frequency Fractal or Negative Resonance? there will be a map by the end of the year for a brain and body – a “parallel” “biological” system that operates along side the old dogmatic and chemical one. Check out the responses of Anirban Bandhyopadhyay – http://www.huffingtonpost.com/deepak-chopra/scientists-and-scholars-i_b_3543037.html?utm_source=Alert-blogger&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Email%2BNotifications

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  good luck those mice! :)

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  you heard of Frequency Fractal or Negative Resonance? there will be a map by the end of the year for a brain and body – a “parallel” “biological” system that operates along side the old dogmatic and chemical one. Check out the responses of Anirban Bandhyopadhyay – http://www.huffingtonpost.com/deepak-chopra/scientists-and-scholars-i_b_3543037.html?utm_source=Alert-blogger&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Email%2BNotifications

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  good luck with the mice- I think DARPA has you beat though. there are a lot of hackable video gamers out there after all …. http://www.businessinsider.com/darpa-military-projects-that-will-change-your-life-2012-7?op=1

                  like it’s all humanitarian… right

                  http://rt.com/usa/darpa-petman-the-robot-515/

                • Kodie

                  5 replies to the same post in 15 minutes. And Deepak Chopra is a quack. You believe nonsense.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  wow, you really don’t read do you!

                • Kodie

                  Gibberish?

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  ignorance of scientific realities and dogmatic fundamentalism in the form of atheism is not attractive at all kodie – you are a troll…living in Plato’s Cave. ciao!

                • Kodie

                  What you’re talking about is pseudo-science. It appeals to undiscerning uneducated fools like you because it sounds a lot like science, but it’s just gibberish… and poppycock! I’m not trolling. What about this bullshit makes you believe it and why do YOU (not a link) think I should believe it too? You can’t speak for yourself, you can only link articles to crap and call names.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  wrong, talk to DARPA & MIT about your accusations of pseudo-science and stop the canned atheist responses and abuse and maybe I will change my tone too.
                  you have offered no evidence to the contrary, so as far as BS and trolling goes, I’m afraid you wind the Caver of the Year Award.

                • Vice-President Dink Cheney

                  I also find the statement that his brother, a patent lawyer, “fought” against those companies in the Supreme Court to be pretty unlikely. Did he meditate between them instead of mediate, and that’s why he lost?

              • wabney

                Non Sequitur Man to the rescue!

                All hail TRUTH™-itation!

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  you tried it, or just talking out your pie hole?

                • spookiewon

                  You realize everyone talks out of his or her “pie hole,” right? The “pie hole” is the hole you would put pie into–the mouth.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  to a degree yes, and to another, no.
                  have you any experience with meditation, if not, you are speaking out of your pie hole. simple.

                • Gus Snarp

                  No, he means that if we were speaking, we would all be speaking out of our pie holes, even you. That’s what “pie hole” means: mouth. As it is, we’re all typing, so unless someone is using dictation software, no one is speaking out of their pie hole.

                • Kodie

                  You are all speaking out of your pie handlers.

                • C.L. Honeycutt

                  You haven’t any experience with scientific research, therefore you are speaking out of your ass.

                  OOPS. Poor little narcissistic hypocrite.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  wrong, i was going to be a geneticist, stopped for moral reasons. simple.

                • wabney

                  Mmmmm… Troll-idiot pie.

                  All hail TRUTH™-itation!

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  wabney, do you have anything of interest to add or just self righteous accusations and pyramid marketing schemes?

                • wabney

                  You are maybe the absolute BESTEST troll I’ve seen in a LOOONG time. Just seein’ how long you’ll keep it up! It’s amazing!

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite
                • aaa

                  “The “pie hole” is the hole you would put pie into–the mouth.”

                  What? No wonder I never really liked pie.

                • wabney

                  Mmmmm… now I want pie.

                  As for your assinine question, whether or not I’ve tried it doesn’t matter. What matters is what is expected of it and if it presents falsifiable results when put through rigorous testing.

                  Secondly, as you’ve done already in other locations in this thread, you’ll simply move the goal posts if I HAVE tried to the “magic” 10,000 hour quip.

                  All hail TRUTH™-itation!

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  weak sauce, you can’t debate regarding an activity that has existed in humanity since – well long before atomism – http://www2.southeastern.edu/Academics/Faculty/mrossano/recentpubs/meditating.pdf

                • wabney

                  Poppycock. I can debate whatever I please. Including self aggrandizing Trolls babbling on about unverifiable nonsense in an attempt to feel superior.

                  Please keep it up – it’s highly entertaining.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  so then, you are ready to debate about meditation? I have enough scientific resources? or would you rather debate the necessity for a scientific revolution? got stuff for that too?
                  or would you rather try to deal with the materialistic paradox I stumbled upon the other day?

                • wabney

                  I’d rather you offer some verifiable evidence of you’re oft repeated claims. Still waiting on that. :)

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  which one? that meditation is more than just stress relief? that normal accepted science is biased?
                  that our current state of moral relativism is due to accepted materialistic beliefs in science and it’s perception of nature as a machine?
                  or maybe you have an intelligent answer for why lose consciousness/control during the transition into sleep?

                • wabney

                  “that meditation is more than just stress relief? that normal accepted science is biased?” – What is it then? “More” doesn’t mean anything specific. Define the “bias” of “normal accepted science”.

                  “that our current state of moral relativism is due to accepted materialistic beliefs in science and it’s perception of nature as a machine?” – citation of verifiable evidence? What is you implication of this statement?

                  “why lose consciousness/control during the transition into sleep?” setting aside the inclusion of “intelligent answer” as your personal bias showing, this is ALMOST a specific claim! I’ll look into this subject when I have time to do more than reply to comments and attempt to tease out what specific claim this is. Until then, please enlighten me as to why you believe we do this (assuming you do believe it – you didn’t offer any verifiable evidence of any of these, and I’m really almost done with attempting to drag out a specific answer to anything you’ve said as you continually shift the burden of proof, or throw out red herrings and straw men when called out).

                  Please be specific in your claims going further. The “heckling” was much more fun. If I’m attempting to have a conversation with you, I’m not going to engage in mental masturbation and playing armchair philosopher.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  meditation in deeper states coveys moral axioms – do a study of those that meditate and the effect it has on morality if you want. no money in it tho :)

                  yeah- get back to me on #2… i am also pointing out the holes in the incomplete scientific picture you use.

                  not using armchairs and am absolutely serious and commited to my belief that we are not only in desparte need of a scientific revolution of model and method, but that we are as of now in the midst of one…

                  http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/04/13/shadow-biosphere-theory-gaining-scientific-support/

                  http://ravicher.me/2013/06/18/the-paradigms-of-revolution-pt-1-of-the-scientific/

                • Kodie

                  You’re not actually pointing out any holes in anything. You just keep spamming about meditation but you provide nothing of substance.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  so you have some conclusive evidence regarding anything or are you just in fact trolling?

                • Kodie

                  It just seems you want to debate something without supporting any of your arguments, and you spam links and you spam the same message over and over again. I’m waiting for the part where you actually debate anything. As of now, you’re just an irritant, and you don’t say anything that’s rocking anyone. For someone who meditates, you’re awfully surly!

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  are you joking, if you had a firmer grasp of science maybe would already know the evidence that I speak of, otherwise, you can go fish on the internet as I am not your instructor.
                  or you can refer to some of my other posts for links, as I don’t very much like to repeat myself.

                • Kodie

                  It might surprise you greatly to realize when you enter into a discussion, it helps if you actually offer something to talk about instead of whining that we’re not discussing what you vaguely allude to. You are just a troll spammer in the meantime.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  i am no troll, i sincerely believe in my stance that science is not only in need of, but actually in a scientific revolution and that the world desperately needs one for the sake of unity.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  this also goes along with my philosophy regarding secularism as an unachievable ideal fostered by Cartesian dualism (which btw was a proof for the soul, not against it), and normal science. Keep in mind that right now the scientist that DARPA contacted to create moral governors for lethal autonomous robots is a devout christian… if i were atheist, i would be concerned about that.

                • Kodie

                  I am guessing you have no self-awareness, because you’ve been nothing but incoherent since you arrived.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  i’ve given you many opportunities to support your beliefs, yet you chose to remain in denial…. check with the new DSM

                  http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/05/21/dsm-5-is-here-what-controversial-new-changes-mean-for-mental-health-care/

                • Kodie

                  Nobody knows what you’re talking about.

              • Gus Snarp

                Yes, I’ve tried science. It works quite well. I even did a bit of graduate research, although ultimately the results were negative.

            • Dogly

              He didn’t say meditation. He said mediation.

              • wabney

                Meditation mediation? LMAO

                Maybe he’ll get Grof involved and it’ll be LSD induced meditation mediation…

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  grof was ahead of his time, like many others in the history of science, those that strove for truth unafraid of peer judgements, there were many others. btw, i have never practiced any of grof’s techniques or gone to esalen. have you tried meditation? do you have anything intelligent to add to the discussion or just abuse?

              • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                meditation does help with mediation.

          • blasphemous_kansan

            I took your advice and meditated. I was advised by the great beyond that you are a condescending troll, not to be taken seriously in any regard.
            You’re right, this meditation shit is awesome!

            • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

              you are also full of BS – so? get 10000+ hours and get back to me….

              • blasphemous_kansan

                You’re belief that I’m full of BS is very amusing. Did you use evidence to get to that conclusion? What evidence did you use? It’s almost like you used scientific rigor, context, and evidence to deduce that my last reply was full of shit.
                *sigh* I guess you’re just another worshipper at the altar of ‘scientism’, after all, aren’t you? You really shouldn’t rely on the scientific method so much, and you seem really angry and wound up in this thread. I recommend you try meditation. It might calm you down. Try it and get back to me, k?

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  if you had meditated properly, you would have never responded. simple.

                  science is not the end all to evidence, and mine comes from experience, curiosity and logic, which predates and is the foundations of science.

                • The Other Weirdo

                  Real Meditation™ alert!

                • blasphemous_kansan

                  Ahh, but that’s the thing, I’m not replying. My astral self is here typing while I’m meditating.

                  Prove me wrong, I dare you. I guess I’m just a better True Meditation expert than you.

                  Your childish exchanges are the result of a non-enlightened soul….one that needs to meditate more. I recommend you leave and practice, and you might get to my level someday.

                • Gus Snarp

                  So tell me, what is it that meditation has given you evidence of? What exactly are we even arguing about? Or is it just that you had your own personal experience and you believe that it told you the origins of the universe and that the only way anyone else can understand it is to have the same experience? Science can at least provide a means to state a principle and explain it and how it is understood to someone else without saying, “Just meditate for 10,000 hours”. Say something. Make some assertion. Anything. Otherwise you’re wasting our time, enjoy believing your personal mental delusion, but shut the hell up about it if you’re just going to repeat the same non sequiturs.

                • RobMcCune

                  Since you’re responding, does that mean you’ve never properly meditated? If that’s the case, why should anyone believe you?

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  no, actually i doubt that sam has a clear idea, i wouldn’t trust him

                • Kodie

                  Everything you want is true in your imagination. Meditation can be productive, stress-reducing, or problem-solving, but if you want to claim you heard from god, that’s pretty much just you in there (possibly your mother, though). You think you are god, since you think your voice was his.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  not into Freud – or into you’re confined definition and experiences with meditation. I never claimed to have heard from your idea of “god”, or mine for that matter. I never claimed to be a god and you have no idea or facts regarding my experiences with meditation… just assumptions.

                • Kodie

                  You can go back to your planet any time now.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  educated response….. not

                  you seem like one of those folks that want get a spot on that trip to mars….

                  http://www2.southeastern.edu/Academics/Faculty/mrossano/recentpubs/meditating.pdf

                • Kodie

                  You keep spamming and not saying anything original or convincing. You have one note. We have heard it.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  glad you speak for “we” – i am speaking to you.

                  heard it and tried it are two different things, if you are scared to try it, i’d understand.

                  you can try sam harris’s video

                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahJl_6rQLBw

              • aaa

                10000+ hours? Not a problem, I’ve got that by a long shot! Oh, wait, you did say masturbation right?

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  you just take your long shot, they’ve got tickets to mars too.

          • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

            OMFG….. Meditation is evidence of nothing.

            • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

              you tried it? if so how much? what experiences etc.

              • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

                I meditate all the time. I control my breathing, clear my thoughts, and develop a sense of calm and clarity. It helps me before a test or before and after rigorous training. It does NOT give me evidence for or against anything, as you claim.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  you do it for how long before going to a test, in what environment and for what reasons. I don’t meditate for relaxation, that is the lowest stage of meditation – that is pretty much cave man.

                • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

                  GET THE FUCK OVER YOURSELF!!!

                • Jules

                  White Apple – You are barely able to write in your own language, which
                  makes you look like a right moron when you attempt to claim any form of
                  spiritual or intellectual superiority over any other. I am only pointing
                  this out because although the above is quite plain to all, you appear
                  to be having difficulties connecting any dots at all.

              • The Other Weirdo

                What does it matter? Meditation is entirely 157.4838185906028437817566333111% subjective. It doesn’t matter what one person experiences since it can’t be evidenced in any way.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  what scientist is not subjective? is it a wave or a particle – where are you standing? it’s all subjective for that matter.
                  there are many scientific studies on meditation, read Zen and the Brain – written by a neurologist and about 800 pages.

            • Mary Howerton

              Meditation is evidence of…boredom? An inability to handle stress in a normal manner? A lack of concern for anyone but yourself? It certainly doesn’t show us anything real outside of the meditator’s mind.

            • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

              what are you? a valley girl? try it and find out.

              • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

                And you blamed me for making assumptions. You’ve done it twice right there. I’ve told you before I DO meditate, and it does not prove anything about anything. It’s relaxing to do sometimes, that’s about it.

              • Kodie

                WHITEAPPLE – you don’t say anything.

          • baal

            hrm, does it violate humanism to suggest a commenter is apparently a Turing test and request the programmer to stop the simulation?

            • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

              humanism? when has meditation ever challenged anything in humanism? you want a war of ideologies in a box or a debate of paradigms?

              • The Other Weirdo

                Why don’t you meditate on that?

              • Katarn

                He wants to know if it would violate his own humanist morals to cause you of being a clever computer program designed to mimic human behavior and then ask that you be shut off. It was a joke about how absurd he thinks you are. Nothing about meditation v humanism.

              • Hat Stealer

                What is wrong with this clown?

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  that constitutes an educated response that is supposed to sound like someone living in plato’s cave?
                  besides you pic looks much more like a clown, and your response reflects that as well.

            • Gus Snarp

              No, I consider myself a humanist, and I’m not 100% sure I’m not a simulation.

          • The Other Weirdo

            Yeah, and I meditated once, too. It came to me, in fulsome colours and stark tones, that I, once in another life long ago as a Chinaman died in some irrelevant battle four hundred years ago. That’s the sort of shit you get when you meditate. It’s completely unfalsifiable and ultimately meaningless to anyone other than myself(hint: it’s meaningless to me, too, now, though I once believed it.)

            If all you have to offer as evidence is what you’ve gained through meditation, then you have absolutely nothing constructive to offer. Your opinion, and that’s all it is, is meaningless and to be ignored. As are all opinions without some reproducible evidence.

            • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

              wrong again, meditation does not always imply past life regression or experiences that aren’t comparable. You ever heard of Sansilov Grof?
              and if all you have is science to back you opinion you are pretty much a monotheist and living in a cave.

              • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

                Science got us out of caves, and into the plush modern homes we enjoy today. So your point is?……

              • The Other Weirdo

                I haven’t. Then again, I’m not much interested in the field of transpersonal psychology.

                And I am not wrong. I meditated, as a result of which I had a subjective experience. Who the fuck are you to judge the validity of MY subjective meditation experience, or to question its veracity? What makes you the final arbiter on the subject of meditation?

            • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

              uh, that’s hinduism you’re referring to.
              do some reading, and practice non focal, non directed meditation…. get over it.

            • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite
          • Gus Snarp

            Offer some kind of actual argument or you are worthless.

          • Gus Snarp

            Let’s start with what you’re even going to give evidence for before we bother with the evidence you offer (which is not evidence in the first place).

          • Carmelita Spats

            White +Apple +Take-a-bite+ Meditation= One Crazy Haircut! Holy crap! You’re one of the followers of Marshall Applewhite! I knew it! Now, I’ve been a member of several cults and I was kicked out of all of them for being mouthy but I gotta tell ya, I always envied Marshall Applewhite’s devotees. Y’all got to wear capes, Nike tennis shoes and had those round, peek-a-boo,haircuts while fixin’ to go on that Hale Bopp comet spaceship piloted by talking, lava eating, sea clams. Way cool. When I was a Catholic, all I got was Jesus in a soggy cracker. I’m so sorry that the mother ship left you behind.

            I always thought it was cool how Marshall Applewhite was referred to as “Bo” and his sidekick was “Peep”. If I’m shopping for a cult and a cult leader says, “My name is Bo and this is Peep,” that would definitely get my attention.Only one of two things would keep me there. Either they would have to provide sheep or Peep would need to be dressed appropriately and that means complete with a bonnet. Bo and Peep told their male followers that if they still had sexual urges, they should alleviate them by castrating themselves. I think castration is a deal breaker when cult shopping, don’t you? If you found yourself in the bathroom, gripping a weed whacker in one hand and your balls in the other, don’t you think a little voice would cry out, “hey, hey, hey, I don’t think this is the cult for us. Isn’t there a Presbyterian church down the street?” Glory!

            • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

              Ok, now it all makes sense. Our latest troll has been saying stuff so bizarre, it could only come from a genital mutilating cult.

              • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                cyrus, you are a dolt.

                • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

                  Lol, whatever you say nutcase.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite
                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  “If we find a generic rule, it will be a new kind of biology operating in
                  parallel with the existing chemical only biology. And it will also be
                  proved that all brain building projects will fail, we require a
                  completely new kind of science, materials and engineering technology to
                  understand basic biology more completely before even we think of
                  replicating brain.”

                  on fractal frequencies and negative resonance – here is some honest science for you….

                  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/deepak-chopra/scientists-and-scholars-i_b_3543037.html?utm_source=Alert-blogger&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Email%2BNotifications

                • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

                  I don’t give a shit about your crazy ass Deepak nonsense from 3 days ago! SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!!!!

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  another great example of how many atheists are actually dogmatic fundamentalists and rampant with immaturity as well as a lack of scientific knowledge – this is science and you refuse to look at it.

                  a) deepak is not the scientist doing this research MIT and others are.
                  b) you are in effect living in Plato’s Cave

            • Spuddie

              GOOD CALL CARMELITA!!!

              It all makes sense. The Mothership missed him. He was in the bathroom at the time trying to pass a bran muffin. When he got out, it was too late. “Aw man, you guys left without me.”

              • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                looks like the ice age missed you.

            • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

              who is marshall applewhite? no, i am not a follower of someone i’ve never heard of. carmelita, try meditation on your own, i am no guru…. chow.

          • Dogly

            Mediation? We may not agree, but I don’t think we need to hire a mediator, do you?

      • blasphemous_kansan

        ” “i don’t believe you” is like saying “you’re opinions are meaningless and to be ignored” – how is this not totalitarian?”

        Maybe because neither of your quotes represent coercive actions by a government entity to control a person’s thoughts or actions? You know, in keeping with what ‘totalitarianism’ actually is.

        “So far, talking to you has been like playing chess with pigeons; No matter how good we are at the game, you just knock over the pieces, shit on the board, and declare that you won.”

        Ardor said this in reply to you below. I thought it should be repeated here, just for decoration.

        • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

          what? are you serious? state mandated philosophy is not tyrannical and oppressive? go talk to the Tibetans about that. and come up with something original btw…. further, i am not playing any games here, i find many of your opinions offensive in nature.

          http://ravicher.me/2013/06/18/the-paradigms-of-revolution-pt-1-of-the-scientific/

          • blasphemous_kansan

            “what? are you serious?”

            For now, but it’s getting harder to keep a straight face reading your comments.

            “state mandated philosophy is not tyrannical and oppressive?”

            Hmm, I don’t remember saying that. You said that telling someone “I don’t believe you” is a totalitarian statement. I was pointing out that you’re incorrect. Please, just learn to use a dictionary.

            “And come up with something original btw….”

            Well, you know the old atheist slogan: If something isn’t broke, then don’t waste 10000 hours of your life meditating to try to make it better! With every comment you make Ardor’s commentary becomes more accurate.

            “i find many of your opinions offensive in nature.”

            Good. What would those opinions be, though? I haven’t shared any of them with you. Or perhaps you meditated on them.

            Please tell whoever wrote that blog screed to use spaces and paragraphs in their writing. And light-shaded text against white is somewhat difficult to read. Especially when missing the aforementioned paragraphs.

            Thanks!

            • The Other Weirdo

              I suspect that what offends him is not so much your opinions, but rather the opinions he imagines you ought to have.

              • blasphemous_kansan

                Ahh, gotcha. Well, for those opinions I can only offer sincere apologies. And those apologies will probably look suspiciously like middle fingers when they get through TakeABite’s meditation filter and spend some time bouncing in his/her echo chamber of new-age bullshit.

              • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                3rd person, cute, and very rude.

                • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

                  The troll calls other ppl rude. Right.

                • blasphemous_kansan

                  “start today and maybe we can debate at some point, otherwise you are useless.”

                  You calling other people rude is simply HILARIOUS!!

                • Thackerie

                  “You calling other people rude is simply HILARIOUS!!”

                  Damn straight. Whatever meditation did for him, it sure didn’t make him a nicer person.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  uneducated doesn’t imply rude. it just means you have a lack of information. simple, you can choose to be offended if you want, or just try meditation and get back to me.

                • The Other Weirdo

                  Uneducated doesn’t even mean one lacks information, it simply means one lacks education.

                • Jules

                  Actually, neither cute nor rude, merely appropriate, since the person likely does not want to talk to you, but about you. For reasons that are obvious to everyone else.

            • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

              get over it, do you have any idea how old materialism is, it started with atomism in india. Descartes implied a soul not dualism. science has no explanation for the foundations of the universe and you’re telling me I’m full of it?

              and further, my point is obvious. “i don’t believe you” can be quite a tool for totalitarianism and despots. you are in effect living in plato’s cave clutching a teddy and telling me you know it all.

              • blasphemous_kansan

                “get over it”

                Going by comment tone alone, I think I’m more ‘over it’ than you. Someone needs to meditate more.

                “do you have any idea how old materialism is,”
                About as old as humanity’s ability to use materials, would be my guess.

                “science has no explanation for the foundations of the universe and you’re telling me I’m full of it?”

                Finally we have reached an understanding!!!!
                Yes. You are full of it, unless you can prove otherwise.

                Your last paragraph makes no sense, and your point is far from obvious, unless your point is that you meditate and you’re great and better at in than everyone (except for me, as I’ve outlined in the other conversation).

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  biased science is your cross
                  you need more education in english and maybe prose
                  you are delusional if you think we have “reached an understanding” – are you afraid of meditation? it’s easier on the body than anti depressants.

                • blasphemous_kansan

                  “biased science is your cross”

                  Mmmmhmmmm. Sure, you betcha.

                  “you need more education in english and maybe prose”

                  Uh huhh. Don’t English sentences start with capital letters? *looks through all of your posts*

                  “are you afraid of meditation?”
                  Please, I know I whoop your ass in meditation. Don’t even step to me on the astral plane or you’re gonna get served!

                  ” it’s easier on the body than anti depressants.”

                  Agreed. Sort of like how sleeping is easier on the body than doing work, right? I told you we had reached an understanding! We can be best meditation buddies (if you ever get to my level)!

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  i don’t know what level i am at, do you? kill the buddha kansan
                  i don’t like capital letters, so what? are you really that offended and anal, or just want to be?
                  we have reached no understanding, how many hours and what are your experiences then? how can you sit there and defend that amorality of scientific knowledge in the form of oppression? you don’t seem to have learned much if you did meditate.

                • blasphemous_kansan

                  “i don’t like capital letters, so what?”

                  Cool with me, but maybe then don’t critique others on their use of written language, you simpleton.

                  “are you really that offended and anal, or just want to be?”
                  Uh, which one of us started with the grammar bee? I think that would be the person who was more offended/anal regarding grammar.

                  In conclusion, I meditated, and I’m totally at a higher level than you, and I’ve learned that you’re wrong, so I guess that’s that.

                  Don’t worry, you’ll get there someday! Peace, my fellow meditation buddy!

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  i refer to content, not grammar.

                  you also seem to be full of bs
                  give me some evidence, please.

                • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

                  How about you follow your own advice and give US some evidence! Of anything! All you’ve proven to us is that you’re an ignorant troll!

                • The Other Weirdo

                  Perhaps, but unlike you, “blasphemous_kansan” has actually used proper sentence capitalization and punctuation. So, of the two of you, which one really needs more education in English?

              • Jules

                Science has nor explanation for the foundations of the universe simply because science is based upon observation. No human, can possibly have an explanation for the creation of the universe based upon observation nor the observation of our forebears. Some day we may, precisely through scientific advances. In the meantime it remains a fact that your religion/cult/dept. of brainwashing also does not know either, they may offer you an explanation yes, i may too, but it will have been and invention created in the mind of man. You parrot what others have written or said in the most haphazard manner, not realising for one moment the amount of moronic statements you have made. Have you considered taking up entertainment duties within your cult, you are a riot.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  science is based upon the biased and subjective observations of scientists, that are swayed by many things.
                  “my cult”? excuse me? no such thing – not brainwashed either, never been a part of a cult or any “religion” other than my very own, at best, you could call me a religious relativist and a scientist.

            • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

              secularism is the effect of “i don’t believe you”

              when you have inconclusive and biased evidence you claim to trust and if that belief is wrong, then how is that belief not oppressive? you lack personal data and unbiased scientific data and an opinion of your own it seems.

              • blasphemous_kansan

                “when you have inconclusive and biased evidence you claim to trust and if that belief is wrong, then how is that belief not oppressive?”

                All you’ve been doing here is judging and demeaning people on this thread, so were you referring to yourself here? And you really, really, don’t know what words like “totalitarian”, and “oppressive” actually mean, do you?

                “you lack personal data and unbiased scientific data and an opinion of your own it seems.”

                I’m not going to expand the energy to argue with your preconceived notions of me. Your projections are simply hilarious, on their own effort. Seriously, as trolls go, you are a real treasure.

              • Gus Snarp

                Do you know what secularism means? Do you think there’s something wrong with it? Do you realize that it’s secularism in government that gives you the freedom to spew your babble to the internet? If you were living in a place ruled by the kind of fundamentalists who support the Ten Commandments monuments, or by Islamic fundamentalists, or by any number of other religions, you could be legally prosecuted for the things you’ve said here. There are places right now where the things you, I, and others have said on this page could get us killed. That’s oppression, and it is the end result of entangling religion and government. Secularism is the opposite of that. It says that the government will take no stance on religion, nor even appear to, and individuals can believe what they wish and express those beliefs, even if that means they tell each other they don’t believe them. That’s freedom, not oppression.

              • The Other Weirdo

                If we are talking about what I think we are talking about, then this discussion is moot. Much of science, past present and future, doesn’t figure into our lives at all, except to make them easier. It doesn’t matter to me what the current scientific model for the beginning of the universe is, it doesn’t affect me, or my life, or anybody else’s life, in the slightest. Instead of a belief in science, I instead trust that the method underlying science will eventually yield the answer scientists seek, or not. Either way, it doesn’t matter.

                Religious beliefs, however, as well as those gained through revelation, mediums, meditation, and other mediocre methods of information-gathering, do affect me, even if i don’t believe in them myself. Their adherents want to write laws that inhibit my life. They also often kill over those beliefs, and that’s the truly insane part of it.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  uh, have you heard of the Nuclear Accord? that doesn’t figure into your life huh? interesting, what planet do you live on?

                • The Other Weirdo

                  Your reading for comprehension skills are sadly lacking. I never said that NO science figured into my life. Obviously, some does, such as my currently using a computer. I didn’t think such infinitesimal detail needed to be spelled out.

                  The planet I live on is Earth, the seat of power of the United Federation of Planets, a real place, real concerns and real solutions to those concerns. I do NOT live in the Q Continuum where meditation is the Ultimate Answer to the Question of Life, Universe and Everything.

                • Gus Snarp

                  Which nuclear accord are you talking about?

                • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

                  Seriously, the internet does not know that that phrase means.

              • Jules

                ¨when you have inconclusive and biased evidence you claim to trust and if
                that belief is wrong, then how is that belief not oppressive? you lack
                personal data and unbiased scientific data and an opinion of your own
                it seems¨ – Touché, you moron.

              • Kodie

                You don’t give anyone a good reason to be more like you. You’re a babbling moron talking about you gotta meditate and meditate, just meditate, repetitive junk and if you know something about anything, you’re not saying it. You’re an actual gnat. You serve no purpose in this discussion and are just a troll. The reason nobody takes your advice is obviously because what happens to people who meditate too much, their brains fall out and they don’t know it.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  have you tried it? if not, you are just full of BS.

                  simple as that.

                  maybe you need to read more…http://www.amazon.com/dp/0262511096

                • wabney

                  All mighty and knowing meditation that reveals the TRUTH™ in such clear and unquestionable ways!

                  All else is BS™!

                  All hail meditation!

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  do you do something other than just heckle? do you actually know how to debate? do you have any facts to support your claims other than biased opinions of others?

                • wabney

                  You’re asking ME that? AWESOME.

                  Still waiting on some of those from you bud.

                  And seriously – PLEASE find some other method of response besides repeating “biased!” over and over. :)

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  prove to me that they aren’t, do you have evidence to support that claim, because I have amassed quite a bit to the contrary as well as Thomas Kuhn, Paul Feyerabend, Grof, many Physicists, cases like Myriad, DARPA – there is bias in the direction of research, bias in what is accepted as evidence (anything that doesn’t support the mechanical model is discarded), research direction and purpose is biased. If you can offer conclusive evidence to the contrary besides just quoting the ideals of an obviously tired and crusty scientific method, then i will gladly listen.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  you call me a troll, but you are showing your true colors.

                • wabney

                  By pointing out the repetitiveness of your vague and non falsifiable nonsense? Yep, you got me there. :)

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  do you live in a cave. there is a plethora of scientific research (although there could be much more), regarding mediation. I am not your librarian or assistant, look it up yourself and take the needle off the broken record.

                • wabney

                  “take the needle off the broken record” – seriously? You’re telling someone else that?

                  Also – sure, there is quite a bit of scientific research about MEDITATION (that’s different than MEDIATION, btw, I included that for dogly if that person is still following this silliness) – but of course, as you’ve stated, “science is full of BS and every scientist is biased” so I’m not sure why all of a sudden you’re relying on it.

                  Define toward what goal the research is you’re telling me to “look it up” and I’ll take a gander.

                  Again, please make a specific claim that isn’t some thing vague and provide evidence if you want to try an actual conversation.

                  Or you could just go back to the good old “try it for a bajillion hours for yourself or you’re full of biased BS” and we’ll all have more good laughs.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  I don’t rely upon it but for the sake of communicating to those who do because of their preferred belief system.

                  Look up EEG/MRI research regarding deep state of transcendental meditation, these state are a combination of REM and Consciousness

                  Then look up research regarding the disorder known as Sleep Paralysis

                  Then look up research in Sleep States and States of Consciousness

                  then read that book Zen and the Brain.

                  Look up theories as to why are brains have shrunk

                  Look up research regarding adventure and personality

                  Look up the status of the current challenges to the DSM

                  Refer to the recent Supreme Court ruling re: patenting the human genome and then research the scientific theories and justifications that make this ruling only applicable to Humans.

                  my main point should be rather obvious, we are in desperate need of a scientific revolution of both model and method.

                  http://ravicher.me/2013/06/18/the-paradigms-of-revolution-pt-1-of-the-scientific/

      • wscp

        “totalitarian aspects of atheism as a belief system” which aspects of China’s totalitarian is based on some “atheistic belief system”? Do you have a concept of causality? Let me quote this article one more time since it seems you ignored parts of it the first time: “…some of [the tyrants] were atheists. But they didn’t kill in order to “spread their atheism.” We don’t have crusades like you Christians, we don’t have a Jihads like the Muslims. People do bad things, but not one of them is in the name of atheism. We don’t have faith to defend that drive us to harm others who believe different. I challenge you to find one (e.g. quote someone/group well-known saying he/she/them is committing crime in the name of atheism).

        “starting more wars than stopping” – Google “list of ongoing military conflicts”. And try to make a list of wars that’s not rooted in religion. Good luck.

        “tell people there’s no god” – Again, you are ignorant sir. For the one-hundred-millionth-something-time, atheism does not make a positive claim that there’s no God. We don’t believe your claim that there is one. Not believing that it’s absolutely going to rain tomorrow is different from believing it’s absolutely not going to rain tomorrow. There are anti-theists who are called atheists, but their philosophical stand is not called atheism.

      • Mary Howerton

        You realize that YOU are the one saying that others’ opinions are meaningless and to be ignored, right? We just don’t believe in deities, and do not care what you believe or not. YOU are the one claiming that we must believe in them, even though all evidence is to the contrary and we still never tried to make you change your beliefs.

        Or were you trying to illustrate the tyranny of religion? If so, well done.

        • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

          did i say i believed in a deity? no.
          you have faith in science, you are of scientific belief, i question that belief system as it has yet to even agree amongst itself like a 7 headed blind mole rat/hydra w/a pot o gold and secret code the heads do battle for, lost in the ductwork of some highrise in Dubai looking for a fresh glass of water..
          tyranny affects all bodies of knowledge (political, scientific, religious, law, morality, etc), the rich and powerful hold sway over most belief systems for a very good reason, control.
          i’d suggest getting to know your own thru meditation instead of borrowing others by default, laziness, and a lack of a sense of adventure and curiosity.

          • Gus Snarp

            I don’t know what you think science disagrees with itself on, but the bald assertion that it has yet to agree with itself is demonstrably false. Most branches of science are entirely in accord on most issues. Physics shows how chemistry works, chemistry shows how biology and geology work, all of the above show how larger earth systems work. It’s all very well corroborated up and down scale.

          • The Other Weirdo

            Meditation is your deity. Or, as I just realized, one simple letter changes it to meditacation. Or lack thereof.

            • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

              better check that deity definition again.
              meditation is tool for truth seekers, much like science could be, but is only a sad approximation of truth, frustrating it would seem.

              • The Other Weirdo

                I did. It still works.

                Meditation is a tool for relaxation. Unless you rub whatever truth you discover during meditation against the real world, it is nothing but mental masturbation without the benefit or enjoyment of the real thing.

              • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

                Are you Amish? You’re obsession with science couldn’t be explained by anything else. Break your computer, burn your house down, drive your car off a cliff, then move into a cave and meditate if science is so flawed.

              • Kodie

                You are full of delusional claims. You are on drugs?

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  we all have bodies, unless you are one of those quantum computers with quantum encryption with access to the world wide web, personality programs, PRISM db, weapons systems…..
                  you got any proof of your humanity? i’ll wait.

      • SecularPatriot

        atheism is not totalitarian? are you joking? “i don’t believe you” is like saying “you’re opinions are meaningless and to be ignored” – how is this not totalitarian?

        Saying someone’s beliefs are wrong is now totalitarian?

        What delusion.

        You sir, confuse totalitarianism with someone using their freedom of speech to disagree with you.

        Totalitarianism, is using the might of the government to crush someone who disagrees with you. Totalitarianism is government force, imprisonment, fines, or other punishment in response to your viewpoints.

      • phantomreader42

        So, rotting piece of diseased, discolored fruit, you actually think you are being oppressed because people do not fall to their knees in mindless worship of your every idiotic utterance? And yet, you think it’s fine for YOU not to believe people, and to babble ridiculous nonsense about them, but the instant someone disagrees with YOU they’re a totalitarian mass murderer. What an arrogant, dishonest, hypocritical, moronic load of horse shit!
        Either this “meditation” you tout makes one incredibly stupid and delusional, or U R DOIN IT RONG!!1

      • Gerry

        “i don’t believe you” is like saying “you’re opinions are meaningless and to be ignored” … No, it’s not.

    • CottonBlimp

      All the Stalinist-style regimes he references were built on a foundation of obedience and dogma. So, really, what is his point, except that religion is still bad even if you worship a man instead of a god?

      • Godless

        All the Stalinist-style regimes he references were built on a foundation of obedience and dogma
        Try “on the ruins” of obedience and dogma. After all, they demolished most of the Churches.

        • The Other Weirdo

          No, they dadn’t. Have you ever actually been to a former communist country like Russia or Ukraine?

          • phantomreader42

            His head’s never even been outside his own ass!

            • Godless

              There’s that friendly atheist response again. How funny. Actually, I have. Are you saying the Communists did not destroy Churches? I’m not sure I understood you…I supposedly have my head in my ass.
              Wow! You’re so much more intelligent than I am.

              • The Other Weirdo

                Well, considering how many churches we had when I lived in the Ukraine in the 60s and 70s, and how active they were, yes, that’s what I’m saying. Certainly there weren’t as many as in, say the U.S., but that’s because in the U.S. churches don’t pay taxes and can afford to build them like shrooms. In the Old Country™, the state would have had to build new ones and they weren’t particularly keen on the idea, given that they didn’t even want to build proper housing for the Proletariat™. They did restore several large churches following the destruction that attended WWII, but not all.

                I think you’re confusing communists with Muslim fanatics.

                • Godless

                  So are you saying that Stalin (or the Communist party) never destroyed any Churches? Catholic or Orthodox?

                • The Other Weirdo

                  But I never said they didn’t destroy any. I said that there were plenty of operational churches left, and they even renovated a few after the war. I suppose some were probably destroyed during the Revolution and the subsequent civil war, but that’s war for you.

                • Gus Snarp

                  Nice goal post shifting. Yes, the Soviet government destroyed at least some churches. But your original comment was “most of the churches”, then “churches”, now you’ve gone all the way down to “any churches”.

                  Of course, it is a bit silly that we’re arguing over this at all, since your original comment entirely missed the entire point of CottonBlimp’s comment, that obedience and dogma are not unique to religion, and that the Soviet system relied on them as well. You missed it so badly, and so utterly failed to rebut it, that it’s almost as if you didn’t read or understand it at all. Try it again, it’s really short and simple.

              • Gus Snarp

                Hemant’s friendly, he doesn’t control whether every comment on his blog is friendly.

                Seems that if the communists of Eastern Europe demolished “most” of the churches, physically speaking, they did a pretty crummy job since they missed so many important ones:

                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Basil%27s_Cathedral

                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Vitus_Cathedral

                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Cathedral

                • Godless

                  My original was not about others. It was directed towards Hemant who claims to be a “friendly atheist” but uses insulting comments that show otherwise.
                  Know, if you’re “friendliness” depends on what others say and do, then by now I should have used some choice words for those who apparently think otherwise…But I let their words speak for themselves. I really believe they are doing a disservice to themselves and to the cause.

              • ShoeUnited

                Are you saying communists didn’t support churches (look at Russian Orthodox Church under Stalin or Poland and the Roman Catholic Church or the former Yugoslavia)?

                Yes, some men did some bad things cultivating a cult of personality around a man/men (some like N. Korea even elevating to godhood) who were not god fearing.

                But we’ve got way more religious persons doing it in the name of God(s). The atheists? Claiming it’s against this group of people or for the good of these other people. People who disagreed only nodded their head in fear of losing it, not because they believed it was true.

                That’s how religion is different. It can make a good person do evil. It can make a good person say “I wish the gays could marry and go to heaven but my god forbids it. God knows best.”

                That’s what’s wrong. People who are good are being held hostage to endorse evil, not because of direct personal threat to themselves or their family, but due to what someone somewhere else says may exist. Religion often doesn’t allow -and in some texts forbids- thinking for yourself.

              • CottonBlimp

                Catholics destroyed churches. Protestants destroyed churches. Muslims destroyed churches. Hindus and Buddhists destroyed Mosques.

                People don’t destroy churches because they’re anti-religion, people destroy churches because they don’t want competition.

    • Godless

      So let me get this straight…Only with God will he f-u up. So, Mr. Snowden is not a dead man, correct? Because we are a secular society, right? And, Mao would never f-up someone because they said whatever they wanted to say.
      It’s not just God that f-u up. It’s also all those people who keep giving the opium of atheism…you know… do whatever you want because you might never get judged for it.

      • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

        You can say fuck. It’s ok, we don’t mind.

      • http://www.facebook.com/Scott.McElhiney Redorblack Nigelbottom

        This is the one that always gets me… Not believing in a God = do whatever the fuck you want because you might never get judged for it. That is just mindless babble… we live in a country with secular laws, we each have a morale code. If you don’t believe in God, but believe that we are evolved creatures (as I do), and understand that nature creates and retries endless options over and over to see if at this moment and this place, those options add up to something that can pass it’s traits on… short term or long term. Mass murdering totalitarian dictators that pillage and burn, raping the women and killing their enemies babies… guess what… a method of passing on your genes. Gathering together as a society to overwhelm such people, thus avoiding being slaughtered… another survival trait. Being kind, generous, helping others… raises the probability that your genes will pass on because others will help you and mate with you. Serial rapist dragging people off into the woods.. raises the probability (at times) of you passing on your genes before a society and science developed to the point where that pregnancy would be terminated. To nature EVERYTHING is a shot at possibly passing on your genes or behaviors that might possibly be a survival trait in the right situation, not just at an individual level, but which forms of society work at the moment. Nature and society by default are judging you always… go rob a few banks and see if you have to wait for the afterlife to be judged. Or go bomb another country… how that gets judged depends a lot more on what society you are part of and who’s country is bombed rather than the act itself. The chaos and fractal theory seem to suggest reality way more accurately than that guy’s meditation or a god.

      • C.L. Honeycutt

        It’s sad that you’re too dishonest to argue against other people’s philosophies without having to ignore what you’ve already been told about those philosophies.

    • Pseudonym

      The problem with Stalin wasn’t that he was an atheist. He was a totalitarian bastard.

      That’s true. Nonetheless, the stupid point in the “10 awkward facts” hides a legitimate point: anyone who says “atheists want X” is lying, regardless of what X is.

  • Tainda

    He’s trying to be funny. Uber fail

  • Charles Raymond Miller

    I am really tired of the “atheists don’t build hospitals” claim, er lie. I live in Alabama, one of the Religiously Benighted States of America. There is not one religious hospital in my county, or the neighboring counties. Not one. We do have hundreds of mega-churches with elaborate campuses here but, to the best of my knowledge, not so much as a walk-in clinic sponsored or supported by a religious body.

    But we do have several fine secular hospitals, both public and private to choose from, and there is a good chance the medical professionals serving there are non-Christian.

    I am also tired of the people who love to post their decalogues everywhere but remain ignorant of the commandments and the penalties. That includes all of the protesters I spoke with at the dedication. None of them wished to kill me despite the fact that I have broken several of the commandments that carry the death penalty. It just proves that they are better than their religion, even if by a slight degree.

    • C Peterson

      Not just that, but really, what good is a hospital? It’s just a building and a bunch of beds and machines and drugs. What’s actually good is health care. And in the U.S., that care comes at huge expense, and often huge personal financial loss. And Catholic hospitals don’t charge a dime less for their services than non-religious hospitals. There is no charity there- those hospitals are as much designed for making money as most of the rest. A Catholic hospital will push an uninsured patient out the door as fast as the law allows, just like most non-religious hospitals.

      If the Catholics made a point of offering free or cheap care to everybody who came through their hospital doors, they’d be in an awfully strong moral position. As it is… not so much.

  • Gus Snarp

    In re number 5: Frankly, I respect many of the founding fathers’ ideas about what makes a good government, including democratic representation, due process, and separation of church and state, but frankly I’m ambivalent at best about the Revolution. Many lives were lost, probably needlessly, and probably not for the best reasons. It’s hard to know whether that revolution led long term to greater democracy, freedom, and secularism throughout Europe and in other British colonies, or if all of that was the trend of the day and would have happened regardless. It’s impossible to really second guess history, but I think we have a white washed impression of the American Revolution here in the states and that America colonists were probably responsible for some reprehensible acts and maybe, just maybe, we’d still have a pretty good secular democracy, along with universal, single payer health care, had we never revolted. And we would have just celebrated Canada Day with the rest of the great nation of Canada, where slavery would have been illegal much sooner.

    • McAtheist

      Hey Gus, thanks for the ‘shout out’ to Canada, and a happy birthday (July 4) to the US of A. Went out to celebrate Canada day, got drunk and fell down, went to hospital where they stitched me up for free because of our communist/anti american universal health care system.

      • Gus Snarp

        I was thinking maybe we could annex each other. You get our 1st amendment mandating separation of church and state, we get people who actually believe in and enforce it, plus health care. I say we adopt your money too, it’s got fun names and no pennies!

        • Kris

          I hope both of you are running for public office in your respective countries. Although, Gus, you should probably keep the ole “we should still be part of the Commonwealth” thing to yourself until after you are elected here, otherwise lynching may be reinstated (limited time only!). I do take your point, but I think we may have had more of an impact than all that… things would have happened eventually in other places (France, Ireland), but the momentum we generated can’t be completely discounted. It was, in some ways, easier for us than others, because it seems the farther away from London you are when you start rebelling, the more chance you have of them giving up and writing you off (Wales was screwed, Scotland fared slightly better but still had an awful time of it, ditto Ireland but at least they achieved independence… this worked better for the U.S. and India).

          • Gus Snarp

            I can’t keep my mouth shut long enough to run for office. Although I have been thinking about running for the school board…..

            In all honesty, the impact of our revolution on the spread of democracy, toppling of monarchies, and independence of other colonies was probably huge.

  • Rain

    Tom’s awkwards are more awkward that the monument’s supposed awkwards but I agree it’s presumptuous for Madalyn to say that all atheists believe this or believe that. It’s just not a credible thing to say however idealistic it might be.

    • Artor

      This. I’d rather not be represented by M.M. O’Hare.

      • http://boldquestions.wordpress.com/ Ubi Dubium

        I think I’d rather future monuments not just be a copy of this one, but have quotes from different sources. As much as I admire the contributions of M. M. O’Hare, she definitely increased the image of atheists as abrasive and angry, an image which I hope we’re trying to dispel. Just mentioning her name tends to raise hackles among the moderately religious, so they won’t even really read what’s written there. I’d rather surprise them by having them realize they agree with the sentiments on the bench, which I think is more likely if the quotes are from less controversial figures.
        Perhaps future benches could have Sagan quotes, or George Carlin’s version of the commandments, or just the simple “Be excellent to each other”.

        • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

          I’d really like a monument with the eight “I’d Really Rather You Didn’ts”. One could even argue it was a religious monument to Pastafarianism, instead of an atheist one :)

          • http://boldquestions.wordpress.com/ Ubi Dubium

            With enough budget, I’d go for that too. There’s already been an FSM monument in the Free Speech Zone at the Cumberland Co, TN Courthouse, so it wouldn’t be the first.
            The only problem is that the “I’d really rather you didn’ts” are a little NSFW, which introduces a whole new element to the discussion that we might not want. But a statue of His Noodliness, I’m right behind that!

            • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

              Eh, the Ten are a little NSFW too. “Though shalt not commit adultery” is explicitly about sex, after all.

              And we could always alter the wording a bit. Pretty sure Pastafarianism is not about the literalism.

  • TnkAgn

    I don’t necessarily want atheists to build hospitals. I want atheist’s hard-earned tax dollars to fund the building of hospitals, instead of subsidizing churches. There’s the difference.

    • randomfactor

      And there are plenty of government-built hospitals, every one of them achieved by a secular organization.

  • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

    i think the monument is absolutely unnecessary, slightly idolatrous, and that the atomic symbol of atheism is still as of yet undefined by physics and science (not to mention gravity, light, consciousness, black holes, dark matter, etc.), and that it is more than glaringly apparent that any honest atheist would call themselves agnostic because of the obvious shortcomings of science.

    • Susanna

      “Glaringly obvious”? I beg to differ. I’m an honest atheist and I call myself an atheist because of the total absence of evidence supporting any claims to a deity. It’s not up to me (or science) to prove that no god exists. On the contrary, it’s 100% up to the theists to prove that their deity(ies) exist(s). Any “obvious shortcomings of science” are irrelevant to my stand.

      Regarding your claim that the monument is “slightly idolatrous,” show me any atheists that are worshiping said monument. Only when it attains the status of an idol, then would your allegation be true. As far as I’m concerned, it’s a pretty bench that happens to have a quote on it. Period.

      • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

        what kind of evidence do you require? scientific materialistic naturalistic? the kind that doesn’t fit string theory and only exists in 4 out of 11 dimensions, the kind that only supports the ancient model of science. or do you prefer personal experience and evidence from things like… meditation?

        you may have to drop biased science and rely upon other means of gathering evidence for yourself, otherwise you have no room to comment on my idea of “god”.
        “Idolatry is a pejorative term for the worship of an idol, a physical
        object such as a cult image, as a god, or practices believed to verge on
        worship, such as giving undue honour and regard to created forms other
        than God.”
        i think that fits the church of Scientism rather well.

        • baal

          “you may have to drop biased science”

          Put down the computer you’re using Whiteapple. It’s based on science!

          • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

            ok then, take those bombs away from the orthodox then too while you’re at it. dork

            • baal

              Bad troll is bad.

              • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                really? you are very one sided.

                • Jasper

                  No I agree.

                  I’m going to give the religious the benefit of the doubt and not say that they’re as breathtakingly uninformed as you.

                  Trolls are typically identified by their firey and purely idiotic ignorant statements that aren’t backed up by any kind of evidence.

                  I’m done with you myself.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  good for you, if you wish not to debate your beliefs and clutch to them like a monotheist, that’s you’re business, you responded to me, remember?

                • Artor

                  When you can offer some rational points and counterpoints, then we will be debating. So far, talking to you has been like playing chess with pigeons; No matter how good we are at the game, you just knock over the pieces, shit on the board, and declare that you won.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  i not playing any games, maybe you are, or think that you are. further, i am no pigeon – you want to do something besides claiming i’m breaking your rules when this is your first reply and we have yet to do anything like debate – save your immaturity for those that care.

                • Gus Snarp

                  Oh, you want a debate about beliefs? Let’s start at the very beginning then, how about you actually make a coherent assertion? What exactly DO you believe, and why?

                • wabney

                  I don’t think baal is a mobius strip. That would make typing on a keyboard difficult.

            • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

              What?

            • Gus Snarp

              Non sequitur. I’d gladly take bombs away from just about anyone, but the orthodox aren’t in here arguing vehemently that the science that produced the bombs is inherently wrong and failed. Man, you are just the worst troll. Enough of this.

              • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                not a troll, just can’t stand watching you all lick eachother’s intellectual butts all the time, makes me ill.

                • Matt D

                  Ah, so you feel inferior to our “intellectual butts” and thus you’re trolling to boost your ego.
                  I guess there’s little else to a guy that crashes our party and complains he doesn’t like the guests. You have a lot of work to do if you want to be a mature adult.

        • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

          Russel’s teapot. The burden of proof is on those who make unfalsifiable claims. Science usefully explains gravity, black holes, and many other phenomenon and the way in which they are explained are falsifiable in nature. Those that haven’t been fully explained are truly interesting BECAUSE we don’t know, which gives science something to do. And the current theories that try to bridge this gap are falsifiable. Your beliefs in god are irrational, because they are unfalsifiable in nature.

          • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

            you sound like a broken record…. science and the nuclear accord have failed. get over it.

            • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

              How has it failed? Do you even know what I just said? Do you know what “falsifiable” means?

        • Amor DeCosmos

          “Worship” you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

          Worship generally means an act of religious devotion directed towards a deity… science is not a religion or church. Science is not based on faith in a deity – that is, belief in the supernatural without any supporting facts.

          If by “worship” you mean a method of inquiry based on empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning… well then I guess you’re right – I worship science…

          • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

            no, i mean the sociopolitical affect scientific theory and conjecture has on humanity. remember, the earth was flat once, and science’s model could very well be wrong since it has yet to fit gravity into the mix without using string theory.

            • Artor

              That’s true, it might. But the point is that science has mechanisms to sort the right from the wrong, and move on when we have new evidence to support better ideas. Religion has none of this, which is why we have people in the 21st century following scripture written by bronze-age goatherds.

        • Susanna

          I know exactly what idolatry means; I’m far from stupid. And I still contend that your allegations of idolatry are dead wrong. In reading some more of your myriad posts on this thread, I have arrived at the conclusion that you’re here for nothing more than to be contentious. You’re not doing anything to contribute to the conversation in general, only jumping at illogical and incorrect conclusions for what is glaringly obviously the sole purpose to cause trouble and gain attention.

    • Jasper

      ” that it is more than glaringly apparent that any honest atheist would call themselves agnostic because of the obvious shortcomings of science.”

      Uh what?

      I’m an agnostic atheist. I don’t know, and I don’t believe. The two aren’t mutually exclusive.

      It’s just that since most theists don’t know either, and are therefore agnostic theists, agnosticism isn’t a very useful distinction.

      • Jasper

        And I say “most theists don’t know” in terms of “absolute certainty”, since technically none of them know, in terms of being demonstrably true.

        • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

          “demonstrably” define that please. never implied that all theist know what they are doing, many are just as scared as atheists. you want a demonstration… meditate.

          • Jasper

            Meditation is only really useful for relaxation.

            Empirical testing is great for demonstrating things are true, though, and an excellent basis for belief.

            If you’d like to understand further about how to demonstrate things as true, I’d suggest doing some reading on some basic of standard epistemology.

            • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

              you are very wrong.

              there, you have belief… thank you

              science is full of BS and every scientist is biased. most of the evidence that doesn’t support the BS model is tossed and laughed at… do you have any idea how much fringe science there is to date…? get real

              • Art_Vandelay

                It’s nice that the acute understanding that scientists have of electromagnetism has provided you with a forum by which you can bash science.

                • Jasper

                  Yes it’s funny that he’s denying that it works, WHILE he’s using it.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  lol – its also funny that our brains have shrunk in the last 20-30,000 years due to our stepping away from nature while relying more and more upon technology. step back.

                • RobMcCune

                  Sorry, that observation comes from materialistic science, which you think can’t be relied upon.

                • aaa

                  What? How could our brains have shrunk from technology in the past 30,000 years when any sort of reasonable technology has only been around for a couple hundred or so?

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  civilization – as we stepped away from nature and stopped using various parts of our senses and other functions that related with nature, those parts left…

                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahJl_6rQLBw

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  so what, the materialistic worm bit it’s own tail and i watched… what would you rather me do, run back into plato’s cave with my materialistic teddy?

              • Jasper

                “you are very wrong.”

                Yes, people are entitled to have beliefs that are incorrect, as you demonstrate. You’re not even bothering to offer anything outside of bald assertion.

                “science is full of BS and every scientist is biased.”

                And all religious people are stupid… you know, as long as we’re just making sweeping generalizations about a group of people based on nothing.

                But yes, they do have a bias – towards discovering the truth about reality.

                “most of the evidence that doesn’t support the BS model is tossed and laughed at”

                Uh yes? That’s how it works. I’m sorry you’re upset that science doesn’t accept spectral evidence. That’s what makes it work.

                “do you have any idea how much fringe science there is to date…? get real”

                Yes, and a significant part of how science works is to curb human error and bogus concepts. That’s why we have things like computers, GPS, advanced medical technologies, etc.

                That’s science in action.

              • Gus Snarp

                Everyone is biased. The modern scientific method is designed to eliminate the effects of these biases. Unlike meditation, which is just whatever the meditating person’s biased report says it is.

            • baal

              “Meditation is only really useful for relaxation.”
              With my brain meditation uses include pulling out all the stops. I volunteered (mostly out of curiosity) in college for a brain scan study (and they paid me!). There were rounds of some word/image task with 5-10 minutes in between. I got bored so I mentally turned on all the lights. Turns out they didn’t shut off the recording between tasks and were annoyed with me for having an over active ‘at rest’ brain.

              • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                that is the most uneducated opinion. meditation may hold the key to our human understanding and most of science has left it untouched, because it doesn’t make $.

                • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

                  Because you know scientists are all about the money and the bitches!

                • Spuddie

                  The lab coat and room full of multi-colored bubbling liquids are a major turn on!

                • wabney

                  Please, please, please use quantum soon. I’m convinced you’re really Deepak.

          • Jasper

            I’m really getting the impression that you don’t know what the word “belief” means.

            Here, let me help you.

            Courtesy, merriam-webster.com… this is the definition we’re using.

            “3: conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence”

            • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

              don’t patronize me. belief is also you’re faith in science and that is has fact and truth as opposed to conjecture and approximations.

              • Jasper

                Incorrect. We’re using #3, as I stated above.

                Faith is belief without evidence (which is why faith cannot be knowledge) – in this way, my utilization of science as the best tool for investigating reality is the exact opposite of faith.

                As others have pointed out, the computer you’re using is not based on conjecture and approximatiions.

                • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

                  and all of scientific evidence is now subject to doubt due to bias of personal natures ($, greed, fame, peer fear, job security, etc.), and bias to the mechanical materialistic model of the universe and everything as the only acceptable model, when in fact it is still glaringly incomplete and the base level. Not to mention the shortcoming of the method as pointed out by Paul Feyerabend.

                  Although science has devised machines that do “work” there has been much that has been done without moral constraints. Consider the current LAR situation, and the fact that the scientist chosen by the NSA/DARPA folks to program moral governors for LARs is also a devout christian and that ENRON’s bible was ‘The Selfish Gene’.

                • Gus Snarp

                  Obviously you’ve never read “The Selfish Gene”.

                  All of scientific evidence is subject to doubt for those reasons and more, from the very beginning, until it is corroborated by multiple experimenters using carefully controlled experiments and proper statistical techniques and preferably validated by other experiments as well. That’s not a failure of science. That is science.

              • Artor

                We’re not patronizing you; we’re talking down to you because you are clearly having a difficult time understanding simple concepts. And grammar & punctuation as well.

            • phantomreader42

              I’m getting the impression that the diseased piece of fruit doesn’t know what ANY words mean, and has no interest whatsoever in learning. Another High Priest of Humpty-Dumpty.

          • wabney

            “you want a demonstration… meditate”

            Oh yes, all mighty and knowing meditation that reveals the TRUTH™ in such clear and unquestionable ways!

            All hail meditation!

      • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

        because you’d rather separate yourself from the “others”? how many distinctions do you need? If you don’t know then you have no room to comment on belief. I’d suggest meditation if you really want to speak about such matters. Scientism is just as dogmatic as the abrahamics and until it can get real and unbiased evidence and not just conjecture censorship based on a corrupt model/method, a science that unites gravity to Strong/Weak/EM forces (such as string theory and 6 other dimensions), then it technically and realistically is flying spaghetti monster.

        • Gus Snarp

          Please surrender your computer now. You don’t believe it works.

          I’ll leave religion alone when it gets the hell out of my government, out of women’s uteri, and stops bullying and killing people for disagreeing with it.

        • Jasper

          “because you’d rather separate yourself from the “others”?”

          If that’s the topic, yes. If we’re talking about people who have hair, versus those who don’t, then of course I’m going to use the word “bald”, and not “short” or “tall”.

          “If you don’t know then you have no room to comment on belief.”

          Why not? The only rational basis for belief is if it’s sufficiently justified by evidence. If I don’t know, then that’s an automatic status of unjustified… therefore, non-belief is automatic as well, rationally speaking.

          ” I’d suggest meditation if you really want to speak about such matters.”

          This makes no sense at all. What are you talking about?

          “Scientism is just as dogmatic as the abrahamics and until it can get real and unbiased evidence and not just conjecture censorship based on a corrupt model/method, a science that unites gravity to Strong/Weak/EM forces (such as string theory and 6 other dimensions), then it technically and realistically is flying spaghetti monster.”

          Okay. I have no idea what this has to do with anything Iv’e said though.

          If I don’t know that aliens exist, then I have no justification for believing they do.. so I don’t.

          The only connection between that, and “scientism” is in your mind.

          • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

            you use “scientific evidence” to support your belief, it is biased by the model and by humanity. simple, you have a bad picture. meditation can afford you a better one.

            • wabney

              All mighty and knowing meditation that reveals the TRUTH™ in such clear and unquestionable ways!

              All hail meditation!

          • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

            probability says they do, as well as many scientists. if you’re belief was the case there wouldn’t be protocols in place already, as well as deep space probes in search of.

        • Artor

          Would you like some dressing for your word salad? I didn’t find a single coherent thought in that screed.

    • Gus Snarp

      Idolatrous? Which monument are we talking about?

    • randomfactor

      Atheism IS a scientific stance. It’s the null hypothesis applied to religion. Prove us wrong.

      • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

        science is biased and without a working model of the universe, just a guess and amounts to sociopathic gambling addiction

        • Spuddie

          Science is biased in favor of what can be objectively and credibly proven, displayed and subjected to criticism.

          Your beliefs are just warmed over witchdoctoring and pseudo-intellectual babbling. Pretending to make an intelligent argument, but failing to do so.

        • Sven2547

          I’m guessing your science education came from homeschooling?

      • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite
        • Spuddie

          You did not read what you linked to or like Otto from A Fish Called Wanda, you did not understand it.

    • baal

      It’s glaringly apparent to me, an honest atheist, that you WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite are worshiping the wrong deity. Cthulhu promises a fate worse than death, unliving life in a world of madness where not only are you subjected to horrors but you get to watch them be done to your loved ones over and over again. The shortcomings of your religion are staggering in light of these faith issues. You must repent and beg to serve the great Cthulhu. That’s the only way to be devoured by him and granted the gift of oblivion that is the only surcease from a fate worse than hell.

      • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

        you don’t know my “religion” cthulhu was made up by lovecraft.
        and as far as death goes, do you know what happens?
        i am not christian btw, or anything you can name, you assumptions are childish and cruel.

        • baal

          Unless it’s Cthulhu, you’re doing it wrong.

      • wabney

        Cthulhu was made up by Lovecraft?!?!? SAY IT ISN’T SO!!!!

        • baal

          Lovecraft was a mere man without a clue. All of the elder Gods took turns (like a cosmic time share) possessing him and using him as their prophet.

          • wabney

            *whew* I almost lost my life compass there for a minute. Thank’ee Lord Baal.

    • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

      And here’s a perfect example of what I just said about Christians torturing us with bad arguments.

      • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

        seen some pretty shabby “atheist” ones as well, big deal.

        • Spuddie

          The major difference being you just displayed to everyone what kind of ridiculous, ignorant banal arguments you are capable of.

          You violated the Twain Principle. Rather than let everyone think you are a fool, you opened up your mouth and proved it.

          • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

            honest and observation is ridiculous? tell that to science spuddle. you have yet to come back with an actual argument as well…. so hold your sand and be happy.

            • Spuddie

              Science is not a thing, it is a method of examination and inquiry. The most credible one we have.

              Don’t try to frighten us with your sorcerers ways. Your sad devotion to that ancient religion has not helped you conjure up the stolen data tapes or given you clairvoyance to find the rebel base.

              • Matt D

                LOL.

          • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite
            • Spuddie

              You did not read said article or you read it but did not understand it.

            • The Other Weirdo

              Why is that article relevant to this discussion?

        • Matt D

          Really? And what would those be? The ones you pretend exist because your just talking out your piehole? Cite some references if you have examples….I doubt it.

        • C.L. Honeycutt

          It’s sad that you either don’t know that your comeback is irrelevant, or do know and are doing a bad job of trying to shift the argument.

      • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

        and btw, not christian, quite making rude antiquated assumptions about me

        • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

          Fine, troll then. That ISN’T an assumption.

        • Mario Strada

          still an annoying troll regardless of who you are. Either come back with a coherent argument or disappear to trollandia.

    • Gus Snarp

      Shortcomings of science? You mean like how the scientific method utterly failed to discover and prove atomic theory, electromagnetism, relativity, and quantum mechanics and put those discoveries to work so that you could have a device that allows you to put your arm chair philosophy into an electronic format, send it around the world, store it in a server, and have tens of people simultaneously pull it into their own devices to read it in a human readable form?

      Or do you mean how it failed to discover and prove the germ theory of disease and the theory of evolution that have made long, healthy lives in which infectious diseases are usually a minor inconvenience instead of a death sentence the norm?

      No, science has been enormously successful and in fact has shown itself to be the only reliable means of obtaining reliable knowledge about the world and the universe that can actually be put to work repeatedly. The fact that there are limits to what our brains and instruments can do, some temporary and some perhaps permanent, is in no way a failure of science, nor is it evidence of a conscious entity that in any way influences our lives. In fact, if such an entity did exist, there would almost certainly be evidence of it that we could find using the scientific method. The absence of such evidence is very strong evidence against the existence of god, certainly the kind of god described in the ancient “holy” books. This makes it entirely unreasonable to say “I don’t know” except in the most abstract philosophical sense in which one says, “it is possible that everything I know about the world outside my own mind is utterly false”, but even then it is much more likely that I am the product of a highly sophisticated computer simulation than that anything like the god of the Bible exists.

      • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

        the method could be changed as well as the corrupt and cracking model. read paul feyerabend and thomas kuhn if you need. and all that stuff you mentioned, is taking its toll as well, you seem one sided and all for technology.
        never said that science didn’t have benefits, but rather that it definitely has costs that far exceed religion. BTW, those discoveries came from nature, not science.
        if it is so reliable why does it still as of yet not have a unified atomic theory, why is gravity not explainable without 6 other unknown dimension…. kinda seems like physics is holding the key, but the rest of science is ignoring it because it doesn’t fit their precious model. sounds like children clutching their materialistic teddys at the back of plato’s cave if you ask me, and more like Scientism than actual fact and truth.

        • Jasper

          “BTW, those discoveries came from nature, not science.”

          You’re bad at definitions.

          Science is the process of learning about nature. There’s no incompatibility here. It’s definitional.

          It’s not like “nature” delivered us booklets of data on a silver platter.

          • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

            science is the process of making nature jump thru hoops, faster and more efficiently, and that is because it’s model for nature is a machine… same as the model for you. But I doubt you even really accept that model for yourself.

            • Sven2547

              science is the process of making nature jump thru hoops

              Science is, as Jasper said, an organized and methodical means of LEARNING about things. Science doesn’t MAKE anything do anything.

            • Matt D

              This conversation is pointless if you don’t even understand what science is.
              It’s better if you learn, then discuss….not the reverse.

              • phantomreader42

                But Whiteapple would sooner kil and eat his own family than learn anything. All he knows, and all he’ll ever know, he got from the voices in his head. Reality is his mortal enemy.

        • Drakk

          Oh look, it’s someone who thinks they’re a philosopher. The type that love to write huge screeds about what science absolutely requires, despite having no training as scientists whatsoever.

          Most of the philosophers who talk about science are full of it, because science has only one rule: observation is king.

          • WHITEAPPLE∞TakeAbite

            did i say that? no.
            i have no training? wrong, went to college to become a geneticist, quit due to moral reasons.
            Daniel Dennet talks about science.

            It’s “objective observation” that is “king” (and why not queen?), and that doesn’t really exist, just a fantasy.

  • Matt Dillahunty

    “A New Jersey-based group went to Florida to build an atheist monument”

    No. A National organization (once based in Austin, now based in New Jersey) supported it’s Florida branch…

    Thinking is so…difficult.

    • sane37

      Facts. They’re only in the Bible.
      /sarcasm

  • randomfactor

    There’s one argument against the ten commandments monstrosity that can’t be leveled against the atheist one. At its installation, it was unlawfully placed. We followed the rules, they didn’t.

    • Art_Vandelay

      Also, that it’s in front of a courthouse…a place that only sentences people that break two of those commandments.

  • Mandy

    I’d like to add, in response to point #4:

    “4. The monument also mocks the punishments threatened in the Old Testament. Awkward: Far worse brutality was actually committed by the atheist warriors listed above — in our lifetime.”

    Even IF the atheist dictators had committed their atrocities in the name of atheism (which they did not), this guy is basically arguing that his god may be a brutal a-hole, but atheist dictators have big bigger a-holes. Not really the best argument in favor of your god.

    • CottonBlimp

      Also, he’s not even right. When exactly did Stalin kill every living thing on the Earth minus a small family and 2-7 of every animal?

    • UWIR

      Awkward: the atheists monument was in response to a monument celebrating the Old Testament brutality. Whether atheists have done worse is irrelevant because we don’t put up monuments celebrating those killings.

      • SomethingAkinToAtheism

        Where was it celebrating it? I saw it just last week, it’s just the Ten Commandments & it’s in the middle of God Country for sure.

        I’d guess those who wanted the statue were ignorant to the punishments of the Ten Commandments. Don’t act as if its a testament to brutality; the Atheist monument is far more vulgar & charged unfortunately…

  • cryofly

    “The atheist bench cost $6,000.” — And every one including the delusional can sit on it with no fear of wrath from non-existing entities.

    “warriors like Stalin and Lenin and Mao and Hoxha and Ceaușescu — were all atheists” — Just as, not all catholic priest are pedophiles.

  • JA

    So many equivocation fails on the part of Christians. I feel that this trope applies here:

    http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BeliefMakesYouStupid

  • Douglas Carlson

    Catholic journalism invariably makes British tabloids look objective and well-researched by comparison.

    • wabney

      Great observation. +1

  • Raising_Rlyeh

    #4

    “Far worse brutality was actually committed by the atheist warriors listed above — in our lifetime.”

    Oh yes, because being stoned to death by large pointing rocks is so much better than being executed by firing squad. Since they didn’t fight to spread atheist “atheist warriors” is a misnomer. Under communism the state becomes god and is all powerful. In that way communism is a religion. Just like in North Korea they are communist, but they have a religion that has the dear leader as god-like.

  • Amy Marie

    Of course if they want the atheist monument taken down all they have to do is remove the 10 commandments!!!!!

  • Mike De Fleuriot

    “What you’ve just said… is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have
    ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you
    even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought.
    Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award
    you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.”

    If the above has not yet made a place in our arsenal, then we should place it there as a means to round off our disdain with the ignorant that we come across in our writings. (Of course we might want to change certain parts, just to prevent the quote mining and wilful ignorance from continuing.)

  • Tom Hoopes

    Thanks for the answer to my “embarrassing ignorance.” I fixed, and noted the $22K error.

    I would only answer on one point, because it’s important.

    Like it or not, there was a 20th century project by atheists to root out the darkness of religion. It ended in piles of body bags. It is crucial that atheists who read this blog learn those lessons and not just shrug them off. http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674076082&content=reviews

    I know and love many atheists … it’s this atheist monument that I found awkward (I didn’t attempt to “rebut” it) and state atheism I have a problem with. Thanks!

    • wabney

      *sigh* nope, communism =/= atheism. Thanks for playing though.

    • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

      More “embarrasing ignorance”. Hitler was a Catholic his whole life. Does “Catholicism = body bags”? Well, it would be a much stronger case than “atheism = body bags” when all the cards have fallen.

    • Matt D

      “Communism” does not represent Atheism anymore than Muslim Terrorists represent Christianity. Stop creating enemies just to bolster your religious outlook!

    • Gus Snarp

      Like it or not, there was a 20th century project by atheists to root out the darkness of religion. It ended in piles of body bags.

      That is not an accurate description of Communism, nor of atheism. Your major premise is false. Even if you were right, that would be no indication that atheism automatically leads to evil acts. Therefore, in addition to being wrong in your premise, your argument is a total non sequitur. You have failed basic logic.

    • Bdole

      “there was a 20th century project by atheists to root out the darkness of religion.”

      Secular government is the aim here. It’s already enshrined in the constitution, we’re just trying to get the real(TM) Americans to follow the law of the country they claim to respect and love.

      An Atheist government, one that pushes atheism on its citizens in their personal lives, would be a very different kind of government and I don’t believe anyone here is trying to “root out” religion in the way you’re implying.

    • Sven2547

      “Atheism = communism” the same way “Christianity = Fascism”. It doesn’t. That’s a foolish and slanderous thing to say.

    • Sven2547

      I fixed, and noted the $22K error.

      Glad to hear it. When are you planning to fix the other errors?

    • C.L. Honeycutt

      You were refuted before you ever posted just on this thread. Beyond this thread, you’ve been refuted longer than you’ve been alive.

      Grow up and stop trying to rewrite your junky premise.

    • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

      [T]here was a 20th century project by atheists Leninists and Stalinists to root out the darkness competing authority of religion. It ended in piles of body bags. It is crucial that atheists potential totalitarians who read this blog learn those lessons and not just shrug them off.

      FTFY

      • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

        Much better.

    • phantomreader42

      Isn’t that imaginary god of yours suppoed to have some sort of problem with bearing false witness? Or did you just forget that rule? Maybe if it were chiseled into a huge stone idol you could remember it? No, I guess not.

    • Sven2547

      I know and love many atheists

      How many of them are communists?

  • Joseph

    Nice Billy Madison reference.

  • Bdole

    You mentioned god in the last sentence – Awwwwkwwwwaaard.
    Obviously everything Hoopes said was a big, bubbling barrel of bullshit.
    The word “awkward” always struck me as awkward itself, what with the “wkw” in the middle.

    • Guest

      Right

  • skizzle

    SNL said it best: For those of you at home, “awkward” is a white people word that can be applied to every situation.

  • Sunny Day

    I’m finding it harder and harder to get worked up about another Lying for Jesus site.

  • McAtheist

    “….. all of scientific evidence is now subject to doubt….”

    Thanks Whiteapple…………………..wtf?

    Where did Whiteapple come from? Is he/she a new troll? And why are we bothering to respond to him/her?

    • baal

      “7 headed blind mole rat/hydra w/a pot o gold and secret code the heads
      do battle for, lost in the ductwork of some highrise in Dubai looking
      for a fresh glass of water..” (Whiteapple)

      I came for the bizarre catholic rantings and stayed for the ESL cultist anti-science activist.

  • WallofSleep

    Alright, I’ll admit it. I am totally just like Stalin, Lenin, Mao, and those other two guys I’ve never heard of. Wait, those are the dude known for sitting around drinking beer and playing video games all day, right? No? Shit, I knew I should have paid more attention in history class.

  • David Mock

    “says the person whose religious symbol represents an ancient torture device.”

    That one gave me a chuckle.

  • Godless

    So, let me get this straight, Hemant. You call yourself a “Friendly Atheist?” I guess we can call ourselves whatever we want, right? Well, after reading post after post at how you attempt to ridicule your opponents or belittle them, I am convinced that the only thing that you do well is show how “embarrassingly ignorant” you are of what it means to be “friendly.” I think you got the atheist part down well. BRAVO! I guess you need “Friendly” because it’s not so obvious the word goes with atheist, correct?
    I would hate to think that that is how you treat your students. Maybe that’s the reason why they suffer so much in the Chicago Public school system. They have teachers like you. Do you say to them, “Look at how embarrassingly ignorant you are!”
    Of course not, you need that little pay check to survive! Thank God for those teachers unions and how they continually protect their people from their performances!

    • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

      He took apart an untrue and unfair assessment of an event. What of it?

      • phantomreader42

        It’s not “friendly” to disagree in any way, not even when someone libels you and millions of others. Uttering a single word of disagreement, no matter how mild, under and circumstances makes you a horrible, mean, militant atheist. And yet, somehow, magically, christians are allowed to disagree without the “friendliness police” batting an eye, even when they bear false witness against atheists, something that I seem to remember they’ve got a rule about, one that is chiseled into a huge fucking stone monument!
        tl;dr, this idiot acts like “friendly” means “absolutely submissive and eager to be beaten”, which shows it is functionally illiterate or lying.

    • Gerry

      Pretty much misses the point.

    • C.L. Honeycutt

      Poor projecting, libelous angrums.

    • Mario Strada

      Does “friendly” now means to accept insults and lies without answering back?

      Friendship is something you earn, it is not bestowed on you based on how nasty and condescending you are to your friends.

      I give credit to Hemant and others here for always being civil to those that sincerely express their beliefs and their ideas without using ad hominems and insults and without coming here assuming that they are going to tell us how we should behave and that’s that.

      But it doesn’t matter how friendly I am. You come to my house and insult my friend or family, your butt is going to hit the sidewalk just as fast.

      If you come to this blog already seeking to refute its title, you are going to have a lot of articles and comments to prop up your position, but unless you follow endless threads you’ll never know what triggered the ‘unfriendly’ responses.

      Take your post. It is clearly polemic and unfriendly. Is there any reason anyone here should be friendly to you? “Offer the other cheek” is not a secular doctrine. It is a christian one and one that has seen very little use lately. How dare you coming here and expect to tell perfect stranger how they should behave.

      Like Hemant, I used to be a lot friendlier and accommodating to Christians. For a very long time. Then I realized that regardless of how friendly and accommodating I was, their reaction didn’t change. They took exception at my very existence and discounted any of my opinion before I uttered them.

      Their definition of “friendly” and the only way they would accept me , involved me agreeing with their interpretation of my beliefs and my opinions.

      If I referred to myself as an “Atheist” some Christian interlocutors would actually vehemently and none too gently insist that I should refer to myself as an “Agnostic”. If I didn’t agree that I was an atheist because wished to sin and disobey God, I was lying or deluded.

      Finally, I realized that when a christian blames me for being less than “friendly and accommodating” what they really mean is I should stop disagreeing with them.

      You can still be friendly and get friendship in return, but first you have to realize that friends don’t tell friends they are going to hell for eternity.

      Friends make an effort to understand each other even when they don’t agree. We have made that effort for decades. You don’t want friendship, you want obedience.

      You are not my friend.

      • Godless

        Ah, yes. That’s it. First you have to be my friend and then I will be your friend. That makes sense.
        Now tell me, could Hemant answer back without telling us how “embarrassingly ignorant Tim Hoopes is? Couldn’t he have done so with his arguments?
        Nice try. But I guess I’ve offended you as well. So, you’re not my friend. Makes sense.

        • Mario Strada

          You are boring and I am not offended. Maybe amused.

          • Godless

            Great! I am too. That’s why I’m on this page. I’m just so amused at how everyone is just feeding each other…like the religious…preaching to the choir and how they can do “no wrong.” Well, actually…there is no wrong. :)

            • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

              That’s not true, because you’ve been wrong this whole time. You’re something of an expert at it apparently.

              • Godless

                Oh, thank you for telling me Cyrus. Can you…maybe…explain yourself??? Give me an idea as to how I can make myself correct?

                • Godless

                  So, did the Communists not destroy churches?
                  If we sold the White House would we not make a ton of money?
                  Will we sell the atheist monument and give the money to the poor in say…2000 years?
                  Or are we becoming just as obnoxious, vulgar and profane as others?

                • phantomreader42

                  Well, you could try not lying through your teeth for once. But I doubt you’re capable of that.

                • Godless

                  Okay phantomreader42….So thank you soooo much for making that clearer…

                • Godless

                  You do realize that people are reading this??

                • baal

                  You do realize that you’re inane? (godless)

                • Godless

                  Hey, I let my words speak for myself. You let your words speak for yourself. We leave it up to those on this atheist sight to either be amused or disgusted.

        • phantomreader42

          What, other than groveling in absolute submission, would you consider a “friendly” response to some ignorant asshat publicly lying about you and your friends? Oh, wait, you don’t actually have any friends, because you think “Friend” means “punching bag”, so they all ran away from you once you beat the first one to death.

          • Godless

            How do you know what I think? Who said Tim Hoopes was friendly? Does he call himself “friendly theist?”
            Take the lead! Show them who we are! We’re better than them! They will know us by the way we love…whoops! I think someone else once said that.

            • phantomreader42

              You said a bunch of incredibly stupid things that only make sense if:
              A: you think “friend” means “punching bag”.
              OR
              B: You are a lying sack of shit.
              Thank you for clearing it up by admitting that “B” is the correct interpretation. Though “all of the above” is still a possibility.
              Also, I notice you didn’t answer the question. Not that I expect an honest answer from an admitted liar such as yourself.

              • Godless

                Again. Just a another “friendly” atheist for you.

      • Godless

        It’s amazing how we will follow someone blindly!!! You’re all just a bunch of sheep! No different from the religious.

        • WallofSleep
        • Mario Strada

          Follow blindly? Who is following anyone blindly? Hemant is a nice guy but other than he provides a news service to us and a forum to discuss things, there is no blind following involved. You must be projecting your religion upon us.

          I am sure Hemant has better things to do than refute the same tired “You are not friendly” argument every couple of days. I also happen to share the same history of coming from an accommodating position and having to realize I was the only one making an effort, so I feel I understand where he comes from with the title of his blog. That means “following blindly” now?

          Don’t be absurd. You are unoriginal and pedantic just like the other 30 idiots that made the same tired point in the last month or so. I just happened to have some free time while waiting for a meeting, so I figured I’d clarify things a bit and let you know that you are far from being the original thinker and pundit you think you are.

          Addio e vaffanculo.

          • Godless

            I had to look that up. Sorry. I know Italian, but I never heard that word before…at least not in the company I’m used to dealing with.
            So, for all my atheist friends…According to the Urban dictionary, the English meaning is Fuck you.
            Again, another example of what it means to be a “friendly” atheist.

            • Godless

              So, now that I think of it, maybe “Friendly” needs to be redefined. You know, to mean vulgar, profane, disturbing and disgusting.
              That should work.

        • Vice-President Dink Cheney

          “We?” You mean the organized church of all-think-alike atheists, right? Yeah, we’ll get around to that one day. Or not. Wait and see.

      • Vice-President Dink Cheney

        The ones I can stand think I’m going to hell when I die, and they are unhappy about it. I see them toss fifty bucks in a bigot’s kitty every Sunday, and I’m unhappy about that.

    • phantomreader42

      What, short of converting on command or falling to his knees and begging christian frauds to beat him as much as they like, could Hemant, or ANY atheist, do that you would consider sufficiently “Friendly”?

      It’s obvious you don’t understand basic English, so I’ll try explaining it to you. “Friendly” does not mean “absolutely submissive and eager to be beaten”. It does not mean “incapable of uttering any disagreement whatsoever”. It does not mean “willing to accept being libeled, threatened, and denied legal rights to avoid upsetting arrogant idiots.” “Friend” does not mean “punching bag”, and since you seem to think it does, I feel sorry for anyone you consider a “Friend”.
      It’s painfully clear that you have no idea at all what the word “friendly” means. You’re operating from some bizarre definition that has no connection to anything in reality. I don’t see how to correct your severe lack of comprehension of the English language without knowing how deep the rot goes.

      Then again, you may be fully aware that your babbling about “friendly” has no meaning under the real-world definition of the word, in which case you’re just lying. Lying is not a very “friendly” thing to do. But, of course, your ilk never even bothers to try living up to the standards you screech at others about.

  • Godless

    So, let me get this straight, Hemant. You call yourself a “Friendly Atheist?” I guess we can call ourselves whatever we want, right? Well, after reading post after post at how you attempt to ridicule your opponents or belittle them, I am convinced that the only thing that you do well is show how “embarrassingly ignorant” you are of what it means to be “friendly.” I think you got the atheist part down well. BRAVO! I guess you need “Friendly” because it’s not so obvious the word goes with atheist, correct?

    I would hate to think that that is how you treat your students. Maybe that’s the reason why they suffer so much in the Chicago Public school system. They have teachers like you. Do you say to them, “Look at how embarrassingly ignorant you are!”

    Of course not, you need that little pay check to survive! Thank God for those teachers unions and how they continually protect their people from their performances!

    • Gerry

      Misses again!

    • Carmelita Spats

      Godless is thanking God. What’s next? May God B. Less? Praise! :D

    • Sven2547

      Is there a reason you copy-pasted your comment and posted it a second time?

      • Guest

        To delete our comments?

    • Guest

      He took apart an untrue and slanderous assessment of an event. What of it?

    • WallofSleep

      The site is called “Friendly Atheist”, not “Fold Over and Take it Like a Punk Atheist”.

      Yes, there is a fucking difference.

      • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

        Yeah, that other site isn’t any fun. Trust me.

    • phantomreader42

      What, short of converting on command or falling to his knees and begging christian frauds to beat him as much as they like, could Hemant, or ANY atheist, do that you would consider sufficiently “Friendly”?
      It’s obvious you don’t understand basic English, so I’ll try explaining it to you. “Friendly” does not mean “absolutely submissive and eager to be beaten”. It does not mean “incapable of uttering any disagreement whatsoever”. It does not mean “willing to accept being libeled, threatened, and denied legal rights to avoid upsetting arrogant idiots.” “Friend” does not mean “punching bag”, and since you seem to think it does, I feel sorry for anyone you consider a “Friend”.
      It’s painfully clear that you have no idea at all what the word “friendly” means. You’re operating from some bizarre definition that has no connection to anything in reality. I don’t see how to correct your severe lack of comprehension of the English language without knowing how deep the rot goes.

      Then again, you may be fully aware that your babbling about “friendly” has no meaning under the real-world definition of the word, in which case you’re just lying. Lying is not a very “friendly” thing to do. But, of course, your ilk never even bothers to try living up to the standards you screech at others about.

    • TCC

      That was “embarrassingly ignorant.” For one, I don’t believe that Hemant is a CPS teacher. For two, I have only seen evidence that Hemant is a qualified and capable teacher. Finally, it is not “unfriendly” to point out ignorance where it exists – like in your above response.

      Regards,
      A “Friendly Atheist”

    • Spuddie

      My irony meter is busted.

    • Vice-President Dink Cheney

      “You call yourself a “Friendly Atheist?” Aw, someone needs a hug! Did the mean old teacher laugh at you?

  • Godless

    Let’s sell the White House as well! We would make more money off of that rather than the Vatican. And once we sold it, then wouldn’t the rich just be richer and the poor just poorer???
    I love Silverman’s thoughts!

    • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

      LOL!!! If you think the White House is worth more than Vatican City, you’re delusional. And you completely missed the point.

    • Mario Strada

      Do you come up with these idiocies yourself or do you have someone else helping out?
      I guess you’ve never been to the vatican, have you?

      • Godless

        Who in the world today would want something dedicated to God??

        • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

          Good question. I ask the same thing every day.

          • Godless

            That’s why so many people were taking pictures in front of the atheist monument…not the 10 Commandments. So the question is, will we sell these things in 2000 years and give the money to the poor???

            • Godless

              I really find this amusing! Honestly.

              • Vice-President Dink Cheney

                You are incredibly easily-amused. I bet a stop sign keeps you busy reading all day.

        • http://boldquestions.wordpress.com/ Ubi Dubium

          I could do with the gold and gems and silks and such. Of course, I’d have to make them into something else first. (But I couldn’t afford to buy such things, unlike the Vatican!)

          • Godless

            I have a feeling they were donated! You know. Gifts. And you’re right. No one could afford such things except the very very very rich…like Silverman. And then she would only be richer because I doubt she would sell them and give her money to the poor.

            • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

              So the Vatican isn’t rich because their money was given to them? By rich people like Sarah silverman? You’re way in left field, even for a troll.

              • Godless

                No, I said that Silverman could probably afford a few pieces from the Vatican. But she’s holding on to her money for bigger things I guess.

                • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

                  …….. I guess so.

                • Godless

                  Yeah. You know…a really nice car, a really nice mansion, a vacation, etc… You know…all those things that make life worth living

                • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

                  Still missing your point. Sarah Silverman’s net worth is about 10 million dollars, not bad for most people but almost nothing compared to most celebrities and professional athletes. Compared to the BILLIONS that the church is worth…

                • Godless

                  So what will she do with her 10 million? Will she give 9 million to the poor? She can make that decision for herself.
                  But I don’t think the Pope owns the Vatican, just like Obama doesn’t own Washington. I think it’s part of the patrimony that belongs to all of us…just like the Vatican and the libraries belong to all Catholics.
                  So….are you still missing my point?

                • Godless

                  Oh…and by the way…there are companies that are worth more money than the Vatican. So why doesn’t Silverman ask shareholders to do the same thing she is asking Catholics (that is, people of another faith other than her sister’s) to do?
                  She is simply insulting others.

                • phantomreader42

                  It’s clear you’re incredibly stupid and dishonest, but did you miss the fact that SARAH SILVERMAN DOES NOT CLAIM TO BE THE EARTHLY REPRESENTATIVE OF A GOD WHO COMMANDED PEOPLE TO SELL ALL THEY OWN AND GIVE IT TO THE POOR, THE CATHOLIC CHURCH MAKES THAT CLAIM!!!

                • Vice-President Dink Cheney

                  Yeah, get back to us about SS when she has a virgin birth. Not before.

                • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

                  Yes, because it was a fucking comedy routine! Are you going to try to poke holes in why the movie Coneheads wouldn’t work? Jesus fucking christ…. She’s just trying to make you THINK for a second about how much money the RCC has and is worth, and what they are actually doing with it.

                • Godless

                  Yeah. You know…a really nice car, a really nice mansion, a vacation, etc… You know…all those things that make life worth living.

        • baal

          Have you seen at least the pictures of it? The vatican is pretty amazing. It also has an immensely old library that they only let a few people look at. I can’t imagine what’s there. To top it off, think of the porn (on second thought, not sure I want to own what they probably have).

          • Godless

            I think you can look at your own downloaded porn. If we are going to assume that’s what’s in the library, then we might as well assume it’s in everyone’s library.

  • WallofSleep

    Quit spamming the same nonsense over and over. Flagged.

  • Anna

    4. The monument also mocks the punishments threatened in the Old Testament. Awkward: Far worse brutality was actually committed by the atheist warriors listed above — in our lifetime.

    Even if that were true, it’s odd to make the argument that horrible brutality is somehow excused because it took place a long time ago. Plus, I don’t think you can get much more brutal than eternal torture. Regular torture ends when the person is dead. Torture carried out by their god will supposedly continue forever.

    • eric

      #4 is completely foolish. True, the OT Jews might not have put as many people to death for taking the lord’s name in vain as Stalin did (for other crimes, or none). But the OT also has this “God” character, whose brutalities include killing everyone on the planet except 7, destroying two cities, ordering his followers to kill whole peoples (but take the young virgin women as slaves), scattering people because he didn’t like how well they were cooperating on building projects, and the icing on the Catch-22 cake: using mental manipulation to get a leader to say “no” to Moses, then killing every non-Jewish male child in that leader’s county because he said no.

  • JWH

    it’s really awkward that the atom was originally conceived (though not discovered) by philosophers in ancient Greece and ancient India.

  • RobMcCune

    You appear to be the only one who is doing very little thinking, since you can’t seem to think up new comments, or any kind of intellectual response for that matter.

  • shane_c

    Im disappointed with this monument now that I have an idea of whats on it. At least one of the quotes makes it seem like atheists are left wing pacifists. Some of the others are weak too.

    They should have just stuck to quotes by The Founders. There’s plenty.

    • Derrik Pates

      So, having opinions, or quoting opinions, that make statements against war is bad? I guess I don’t see the problem. We could do with less war.

      • shane_c

        What does it have to do with atheism? Nothing.

  • DaMaXMaN

    Loved the original blog, as well as this reply. I don’t even bother fishing, or water-skiing, or even playing sports anymore because religious imbeciles on the internet have become the greatest source of entertainment available.

  • Dogly

    I’m so proud that that dumpy lady in the flowered outfit standing ready to sit on our bench is ME!

    • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

      Must have been cool to be there.

      • Dogly

        I wish you, too, could have been there, Cyrus, and all the rest of you who want to retain a secular government. It was exhilarating! We would rather have no religious monuments on tax payed for property, but this bench serves a purpose. All who read the quotes on our bench will learn something about our form of government, and the draconian punishments – death for disrespecting your parents – for example, that the bible requires.

        • http://nomadwarriormonk.blogspot.com/ Cyrus Palmer

          I wish I was there so I could see the bench, but I’m glad I wasn’t because the protesters would have pushed me over the edge.

          • Dogly

            Nah, the protesters were too ignorant to matter. We were too happy to be bothered. One couldn’t really have a discussion with them. How do you discuss secularism, the constitution, or even the bible, with a woman whose hand written sign said, “HOOK for JESES”? Really, how?

  • Secular Advocate

    The Stalin and Hitler argument is nicely undermined by pointing out that Stalin and Hitler were both brought up in devoutly religious environments. Proof that a Christian upbringing is no inoculation against being evil – and where did they get their ideas for a kiss up, kick down culture that included thought crime and a big, nasty, quixotic, inconsistent bully boy at the top?

    Gosh, who knows?

    • Vice-President Dink Cheney

      Hitler’s dad impregnated the maid, then threw her out with little Adolf. Nice guy. Adolf was supposedly a nice fellow until he was nearly gassed to death in WWI, which turned him mean and strange.

  • DougI

    Sheesh, I wrote an article about the hospital myth ages ago. I see these meme is still going around.
    http://www.rationalresponders.com/how_many_hospitals_have_atheists_built

  • Pam

    Bravo! Well said!

  • Justin

    Actually, Hitler was NOT a proud christian. Sorry to disabuse you of this particular popular myth, but though Hitler was born into a Catholic family and raised there, he rejected Catholicism at a young age. The argument can be made that he was an atheist, an agnostic, a pagan…no one is entirely sure but certainly he was NOT a Christian. He did in fact attempt to convince the Lutheran church to go along with his racial superiority doctrine and some did, though others rejected it. This was, however, less out of any religious devotion than it was a way of bringing the people together, something Hitler excelled at.

    • http://www.skeptimusprime.com/ Dylan Walker (Skeptimus Prime)

      Then what exactly to you do with quotes from Hitler like this?

      “I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the
      Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting
      for the work of the Lord.”

      If he didn’t believe this and was only saying them as a way to motivate the populace it still begs the question of why Christianity was such a good motivator for this kind of violence, but I don’t see any way we can actually know for sure if actually believed his own propaganda or not, so saying he was clearly NOT a Christan seems kinda ridiculous.

    • Kodie

      This was, however, less out of any religious devotion than it was a way
      of bringing the people together, something Hitler excelled at.

      You might.. want to rephrase that? In any case, I find it hard to believe that anyone would find Jews to be inferior unless they were Christian.

    • phantomreader42

      Hitler was a publicly professing christian who used christian rhetoric and exploited centuries of christian anti-semitism to convince christians to support him in implementing a plan of genocide proposed by a christian theologian. As desperate as christian apologists are to pretend Hitler was an atheist, there is not a speck of evidence that even comes close to supporting that claim. Even calling him a pagan would be a stretch, and require ignoring many of his documented public statements. But even if christian apologists could get away with pretending Hitler wasn’t one of their fellow death cultists, it wouldn’t make any real difference. Because his followers, the people who did his dirty work, were overwhelmingly christian, and were recruited by the use of their christian beliefs. Hitler could never have gotten anywhere without the anti-semitic libel promoted by catholic and protestant churches, and the submission to authority encouraged by the clergy.

    • Vice-President Dink Cheney

      Hitler was a monster who took advantage of the German people by exploiting their weaknesses. We’ve seen it in a small way with Sarah Palin; her fans would eagerly crown her queen and hand her absolute power because they worship her ‘superiority.’ Religion was involved as well.

  • SeekerLancer

    If they’re going to say the founding fathers were deist warmongers then I never want to hear any crap about this being a Christian nation ever again.

  • Matt

    For those searching for truth and not just a band-aid to cope with the meaninglessness that results with atheism…
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003EUGFY8?ie=UTF8&camp=213733&creative=393177&creativeASIN=B003EUGFY8&linkCode=shr&tag=kellquot-20

  • Anthony Edwards

    This entire argument (not yours, the Christian one) is a to quoque fallacy. Not to say that invalidates it. The fact is, they do fine on their own. All that it means is that they are – in general – admitting that they are pretty horrible.

  • Cat Burns

    “9. A quote on the monument says “An atheist strives for involvement in life and not escape into death.” Awkward: atheists Jack Kevorkian (Dr. Death) and Derek Humphry (founder of the Hemlock Society) would disagree.

    Atheists (in general) support living a satisfying life before death since there’s no afterlife. When it comes time to die, we support giving people the choice to die a dignified death on our own terms (if possible). There’s nothing awkward about this.”

    You can also mention that catholics hospitals keep people alive on machines that their hospitals make a lot of money because of it, often bankrupting families per their greed. Which doesn’t make sense to me considering to them, someone dies they go to heaven. Why prolong suffering if someone is ready to go join their savior?

  • Drew M.

    I’m willing to let them slide for #7. After all, these are the same folks who see Jesus and Mary in tortillas and wall lacquer.

  • Vice-President Dink Cheney

    Um, it’s an easy rebuttal: “Atheism” isn’t a competing religion. The people who put up the bench are having an expensive laugh at people like Hoopes. You can easily find people who disagree with nearly everything on that bench who also don’t believe in God. There is no uniting philosophy among unbelievers, although there are organizations of like-minded atheist activists. Hoopes wasted hours of his time excitedly rebutting people who could care less and have already moved on to the next prank, and he ended up including the kind of feeble lies that make you sorry for poor old God, who clearly just can’t get good help these days.

  • David Leech

    3. A quote on the monument says atheists “Want war eliminated.” Which is awkward because warriors like Stalin and Lenin and Mao and Hoxha and Ceaușescu — were all atheists.

    This used to be easy refuted as Hemant did above, atheism is just a lack of belief in god/s. Though now we have the atheism+ people coming along and claiming you can add politics to atheism. If this is true then the religious are right to link Stalin, Mao etc to atheism otherwise we just look like we want are cake and eat it. We start looking like hypocrites if we try to weasel out of the claim. So what is it to be? Atheism+ Stalin Mao etc or dictionary atheism?

    • A B Holden

      This is some muddled thinking. Atheists can be organised, therefore they are akin to Stalin… You may want to think about that for a bit more valid. Atheism is a non-entity (0! = 1). Any positive belief is other (even if labelled atheism – it’s unsound to equivocate). As religionists are linked to more extreme interpretations of their dogma (fairly, as faith dispels distinction) they’ll always cry that this is unfair. But this cake is cut by rule of logic. To cede part of your portion for sport is flatly irrational and the height of hypocrisy.

  • IlCensore

    “But the symbol actually shows an atom. J.J. Thomson won the 1906 Nobel Prize in Physics for discovering the electron. He was a churchgoer who read the Bible every night. Which is awkward for atheists.”

    Well, the Christian symbol, the cross, was built (according to Christian holy books) by Romans, that is, by Pagans. Does Hoopes, as a Christian, feel awkward?

  • Jhudstone

    I always find it interesting – when atheists want to criticize any religion, they lump together every crime committed by supposedly religious persons in order to paint every religion as evil and oppressive.

    When it is pointed out that any number of atheists have committed vast atrocities of the most horrendous sort, atheists reply that you can’t smear all atheists with what a few atheists have done. It’s utterly hypocritical. The fact is, removing religion from the equation doesn’t change one iota the human tendency to commit violence – atheism is no more rational in this respect then any view.

  • ahmed

    there is nothing friendly about this blog

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1014138 Skyler Patrick

    I’m not going to check all the comments to see if somebody happened to mention…THE CRUSADES! You know, the beginning of the never-ending religious battle over the ‘Holy Land’? The one that’s still going `on to this day? Not to mention that there is not much evidence of specific religious persecution targeting just atheists because throughout A.C.E. history non-believers have been forced to take on their communities religion or be killed/persecuted. Wikepedia’s description of the beginning of THE CRUSADES (11th-13th century war; Christians vs Muslims):

    “The adopted emblem was the cross with the term “crusade” being derived from the French term for taking up the cross. Pope Urban II proclaimed the first crusade in 1095 with the stated goal of restoring Christian access to the holy places in and near Jerusalem which led to an intermittent 200-year struggle to reclaim the Holy Land that ended in failure”

    Tragically funny-cuz-it’s-true that it ended in Christian failure..and still is a failure. Also tragically ironic that Jews now have the holy hand but only got it because they were decimated by the Holocaust and Christian-dominated countries (Allied Nations) gave it to them to make up for tens of thousands, excuse me- millions of Jews being murdered and the survivors having been treated so horridly, but they weren’t giving up THEIR ‘holy land’ b/c after failing in their 200 year attempt to take it for themselves the did the one logical thing to do- make a different area their holy land! Wooo Vatican! So after the war was won and the holocaust’s horrific acts were fully realized, all the Christian nations were so stunned and panicked, it’s like everybody went:

    “Okay, um woah, uh shit let me think here, wtf should we do to help cheer up the Jews, kinda feel bad as Christians that Christians were behind the holocaust since ya know, we’re mostly Christians…awkwaaaard! um, Oo-Oo I know I know; let’s give them their desired holy land area that we don’t really care about since our Christian ancestors failed way back in the day, so now we’ll just give it to the Jewish people b/c it’s an easy solution that they’ll really actually mean a lot to them and it dumps the problem onto a different religion and two wrongs make a right and who gives a rat’s ass who’s living there currently and who might get a weeee bit upset over their holy land being taken without any wrongdoing on their part, and I doubt it will cause warring and conflict in the region for the next 70 years and counting…”

    Hooray for those completely sane religious folk! No matter how little sense organized religion made during their lifetimes, no matter how terrible things get for themselves or for those of different faiths, they keep THEIR faith no matter what and praise the good lord, God is looking out for them! And lucky them, this attitude causes pleasant bliss over things like what’s going to happen to human civilization in the coming generations as climates change with violent repercussion due to humankind’s neglectful abuse of MOTHER EARTH – the REAL source for all that we are provided (along with the sun and kinda the moon what with the tides), so yippee their smiles are benevolent, their stress is lower, their blood pressure is lower, and their progressiveness is much much lower than that of atheists (generally speaking and going off of recent studies). Athiests comprise the current American leading group for progressive causes, and a group of people who still to this day are the most GLOBALLY PERSECUTED GROUP as documented in a report to the U.N. delivered in FEB 2013. It is terrible that so many of my free-thinking human brethren may be prosecuted just for criticizing a religion or even just stating their dis-beliefs, and to this day 7 countries -7!- sentence atheists to the DEATH PENALTY ON GROUNDS OF THEIR BELIEF,

    So yeah, we don’t really like war, or forcing one’s religion onto others, or admonishing religion in front of our faces and not giving atheist persecution its justified acknowledgement. We’re a little bit touchy on the subject, so STFU about some stupid monument religious trivial bullshit. Do you hear me complain every time I gotta stand up at a sports game in honor of the song ‘God Bless America’? No you don’t, cuz we tolerate our country’s majority religion and are used to it being shoved down our throats and socially looked down upon or even reprimanded if we don’t want to participate, or iif we don’t want to say ‘under God’ when we pledge allegience to our country. We really don’t care what you think, cause we know that you are going to die and w/e w/e, it’s not like we’ll be able to say, “Ha! Told you so, nananana, no afterlife you Goddamn idiots!” because we’ll all be dead and no longer feel anything, ever again, cuz were dead. I mean Jesus Christ! Come on now! And most of us atheists don’t bite though we are not ignorant enough to think there are no evil, terrible, or murderous atheists living today or in history books; we just want to be acknowledged as a group with a certain type of belief, and we don’t want our persecution’s history swept under the rug or forgotten like a fading shadow by a prominently placed Star of David, nor disrespectfully treated and looked down upon as non-equals by w/e the hell the other 22 “major” religions demand to be symbolized with.

    All-righty then, I think that was a really productive brain-storming session, refreshing my memory during the last couple hours of research while also receiving new insight unto past and present atheist prejudice and persecution.

    I’ll leave you all with a quoted conclusion most atheists eventually come to accept at some point and even find comfort in, which is that the endless and fruitless arguing with theists is somewhat fruitless, as expressed by the renowned physicist Max Planck when he once said, “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”

    Hoopes will die along with his generation, and the next one will be slightly more educated and slightly more tolerable to others, and slightly/majorly more concerned with the consequences of human’s destruction of our incredible, mind-blowing, life-providing mother earth. But I keep my faith that humans will change our ways, or will be forced to change as we fight for survival while facing nature’s wrath for not preserving it with gratefulness …it’s not like she’ll be mad at us, she’s just gonna react to drastic change with drastic change, and nature can be pretty deadly when it changes really fast. When the shit really starts to hit the fan I have faith that human civilization will have bigger fish no longer to fry (due significant loss of oceanic biomass+biodiversity) than to concern ourselves with something as detrimentally deterrent and pointless as religious intolerance and bickering. What a day of enlightenment that will be for human progress and a sustainable human civilization for eons to come; just kinda sucks that the enlightenment is tragically achieved from unforeseen global pain and suffering.

    BUT..that’s just what I think will happen, I’m no messiah nor fortune teller, just a concerned scientist and human being who thinks it’s getting to the point where we need to join together globally and take earth’s current warning signs a lot more seriously, throwing everything we have towards saving the only provider we have any affect and thus control over, our planet, mother earth.

  • Guest

    It bafles me how atheist such as the atheistic preacher of this blog said..er em… atheist are’nt for war.. but a jersey based group wants to go down to florida to COUNTER a ten commandments tablet? Umm sir that sound like kind of a fight.. just saying you attack me some attack you back? Christians and Catholics are different by way… hitler was not a proud Christian be it… that he killed millions of jews… Christian means follower of Christ and uhhh he was a jew.. to be honest hitler thought him self a god… and was very intolerant of free thought just like… atheist… not all but some of your atheistic pastors are that way Pastor richard dawkins Pastor sam Harris the atheologian peter atkins… to think outside of atheism is to not think at all is there number on command just saying found some useful information thanks belife is belife even if you choose not to believe (go ahead and reread that last part

  • sammy skribblez

    It bafles me how atheist such as the atheistic preacher of this blog said..er em… atheist are’nt for war.. but a jersey based group wants to go down to florida to COUNTER a ten commandments tablet? Umm sir that sounds like kind of a fight.. just saying you attack me some i attack you back? Christians and Catholics are different by way… hitler was not a proud Christian be it… that he killed millions of jews… Christian means follower of Christ and uhhh he was a jew.. to be honest hitler thought him self a god… and was very intolerant of free thought just like… atheist… not all but some of your atheistic pastors are that way Pastor richard dawkins Pastor sam Harris the atheologian peter atkins… to think outside of atheism is to not think at all is there number on command just saying i found some useful information thanks… belife is belife even if you choose not to believe (go ahead and reread that last part again)


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X