If you’re seeing this, your computer managed to bring you to the right place. That is, the new Unreasonable Faith server. Praise be to Allah, Yahweh, and Baal!
Now back to our regularly scheduled posts with less interruption and downtime!
A reasonable blog on atheism, religion, science and skepticism
Follow Patheos
Atheist:
Subscribe through RSS
Follow Patheos on
Faith Channels
Religion Library
Topics
Resources
Copyright 2008-2012, Patheos. All rights reserved. Terms of Service | Patheos Privacy Policy
Almighty Zeus!
Excellent! Hope you were able to move up from a shared hosting plan. That isn’t going to cut with the volume this site is getting.
/geek
Yeah, I knew that. I thought the VPS would work since it’s a step up from shared, but it wasn’t good enough. The server I’m on now is much better and hopefully we won’t experience any more issues.
The .ico is gone.
Dedicated or Semi-Dedicated?
Semi-dedicated on a server cluster with some other sites.
That oughta do it…
Excitement! Change!
I wholeheartedly thank my deity of the week, the goddess Minerva, for your hard work, Dan.
Hail Xenu!
Hail Bizzaro-Mithras! Oh wait, nevermind…I’m not a Christian anymore.
Today my god of choice is in the shape of a coffee bean and a can of whipped cream. I’m thanking it profusely for your new server and it’s giving me a reciprocal happy feeling as good gods are supposed to do.
Great photo – makes me breathe deeply!
Daniel you forgot to thank the great Magic coconut god. And before you go asking that annoying thing called evidence. Please remember there is so much more to the magic coconut than evidence there is love.
Well I don’t know of any evidence AGAINST the Magic Coconut God, so I guess that means it exists, right?
How else are you going to get your morals? Magic Coconut proves itself. You need to listen to William Coconut Craig debates more, he has never lost.
That is such bull shit. I think Hector Avalos won that debate between him and Craig. I keep hearing that he is a master debater, he isn’t doing anything except pondering on what ifs that are based on circular reasoning.
I think Dan Barker would destroy William Lane Craig.
umm, I was sarcastic there, markbey. I was using Craig’s gibberish lines about morality that he always blabs. Notice how changing ‘god’ to ‘magic coconut’ illustrates how his logic is flawed. I have heard him lose at least 4 debates. I mean he was destroyed, ass handed to him. And his convoluted ‘master debater’ tactics are totally overrated, and over-credited. He just snakes his way through weird subtangents and changes the subject just long enough to appear to score a ‘win’ on a larger topic than he really did, if at all. His arguments are total bullshit, so he loses most debates right there. His TACTICS seem effective, but we both seem to agree that this is not as important as truth.
@ Japanther
The bullshit remark was not directed at you, I knew you were joking. I have read folks at Common sense atheism claiming how they have never seen William Lane Craig lose a debate. http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=50
I think the apologist I dislike the most is John Rankin in one debate with Dan Barker, Barker repeteadly pointed out errors and controdicitions in the bible and the whole time Rankin replied with, well your taking this or that verse out of context or you know this particular chapter in the bible is written as literature and not meant to be taken literal. Ill post the MP3s of one of thier debates below. Actually it is a pretty entertaining debate.
1) http://www.ffrf.org/about/bybarker/bibledebate/opening.mp3
2) http://www.ffrf.org/about/bybarker/bibledebate/debate1.mp3
3)www.ffrf.org/about/bybarker/bibledebate/debate2.mp3
4) http://www.ffrf.org/about/bybarker/bibledebate/questions.mp3
awesome, yeah I’ll listen tonight. Appreciated. And by the way, I was referring to the same blog. I like that they keep track of upcoming debates, but it’s just as you say. They seem to claim that nobody without 3 masters degrees can even ‘break even’. They are totally gay for him. (in god’s way).
Wow. That was frustrating to hear. Most common response was “I’m not familiar with that, I have to do my homework… but here is some drivel about something else” This was very relevant. I think the atheist (and the moderator) should have probably controlled the debate better. Too many interruptions, and refusals to answer questions. ‘Was John Calvin a good person, Yes or no?’ HOW HARD IS IT TO ANSWER lol.
Dan clearly won and held his own in the face of all these interruptions, but this wasn’t even close to an even match. Craig at least knows literature and is familiar with most arguments. It would be a good debate, and I agree Dan would probably win.
You sound like you felt the way I did when Rankin keep pulling the BS. Have noticed that when non believers bring up the immorality in the bible, holy rollers try to question where we get our morality from and insist it comes from god/ or the bible.
This is what Rankin did when Dan Barker asked if John Calvin was a good man. Oh and yes it was 100% exasperating.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts on Dan Barker with me.
Do you mean this is the start of a New Age?
This is the spawning of the cage and aquarium.
Sort of, but better.
My computer actually brought me to the right place?
It is a miracle!