View Full Version : The Enemies Of Reason
Hi Guys,
Hope you lot saw this brilliant programme tonight.
Richard Dawkins debunking and exposing the charlatans who prey on people by purporting to communicate with dead loved ones and ringing in the cash.
Derren Brown was fantastic, as were the pavlovian pigeons.
Next part to come!
karia
I talk to dead people every day......
Oh no, that's Andy & Kerri in the mornings!!
[lol]
Tubthumper
13-Aug-07, 21:28
I talk to daft people every day...
Anybody actually see the programme?
Karia
Anybody actually see the programme?
Karia
Missed it, unfortunately, I had planned on watching it but got distracted :( -don't suppose you've recorded it for me, Karia? ;)
Or will it be repeated?
Hi Angela,
Check out C4 on demand service. ...C4OD, don't know if they have it but they should.
Karia
I talk to daft people every day...
magic it's what makes the world go round:)
Enemies of Reason......hmmm??? Is that not the Female Species[lol]
Hi Angela,
Check out C4 on demand service. ...C4OD, don't know if they have it but they should.
Karia
I'll give that a try.....:) Ooh, scary new technology! :eek:
Enemies of Reason......hmmm??? Is that not the Female Species[lol]
Please catch me before I giggle helplessly into my soup,....:roll:
...I'm guessing from the 'content' of your post that you didn't see it either!?
karia
Please catch me before I giggle helplessly into my soup,....:roll:
...I'm guessing from the 'content' of your post that you didn't see it either!?
karia
Your right Karia, I would not waste my time watching that tripe and balderdash.
the charlatans
13-Aug-07, 23:08
[quote=karia;255524]Hi Guys,
exposing the charlatans who prey on people by purporting to communicate with dead loved ones and ringing in the cash.
(/quote]
Just like to point out that its not me preying on people. :)
i just like the group the Charlatans. i don't think its them either, they are getting ready to play the 'Festival Rock Alaquas 07' and much too busy to prey on poor people.
Your right Karia, I would not waste my time watching that tripe and balderdash.
Golach,
You believe in mystics and soothsayers then?:roll:
I am, to say the least, surprised!
Karia
Golach,
You believe in mystics and soothsayers then?:roll:
I am, to say the least, surprised!
Karia
Aye right, the mystics and soothsayers and pagans are the tripe and balderdash I meant.......I believe in fate, but anything else....no way
Aye right, the mystics and soothsayers and pagans are the tripe and balderdash I meant.......I believe in fate, but anything else....no way
Hi golach,
Totally agree!
That's what the programme was de-bunking!:confused
Karia
Aye right, the mystics and soothsayers and pagans are the tripe and balderdash I meant.......I believe in fate, but anything else....no wayGood grief. You believe in fate but not in soothsayers. Pray, tell me what is the difference between your predetermined fate and a soothsayer relaying that fate to you. Who or what determines your fate? Is it there in the stars, is it hidden in a dimension we cannot yet read, or it is all around us in a cosmic consciousness? If so why can't there be beings or machines that can read the stars or enter the hidden dimension to read what's there or connect with the cosmic consciousness?
[quote=karia;255524]Hi Guys,
exposing the charlatans who prey on people by purporting to communicate with dead loved ones and ringing in the cash.
(/quote]
Just like to point out that its not me preying on people. :)
i just like the group the Charlatans. i don't think its them either, they are getting ready to play the 'Festival Rock Alaquas 07' and much too busy to prey on poor people.
hahah! that had me in stiches:lol:
Richard Dawkins, imo, is probably one of the most sane people around on TV, his points of view are all based in evidence and reason. He is arrogantly dismissive of religion, complementarypseudo-medicine and other spiritual aspects of life, and he has a genuine right and concern to be so. All these spiritual things give people false hope and eventually mislead them to happiness at some eventual payment, iow, they are basically rip-off merchants, the lot of them.
Yes, there have been scientists that have profitted from their research and enterprise but the main difference is that they can usually back up their products with scientific evidence that they work, and good luck to them I say.
Now I am going to give a big 'however' now. I do think that science proves that over millions of years of evolution that we can experience/enjoy what our uneducated ancestors would call religious experiences etc. Evidence shows that emotions and memories all have a chemical nature in the brain and that is what can give us feeling of euphoria, love etc. Even in desperate times, the brain will release endorphins to give us a boost, it is the body's way of helping us through our lives because our species needs us to get us through our lives to propagate the next generation.
When we see a child's face or a flower or a beautiful sunset, we feel good, that is because these are the things around us and we need to be happy to propagate so evolution has made us into appreciaters of nice things. It is nature's self re-enforcing way of getting us to be happy, emotional, self-replicating bags of chemicals.
Can somebody give me a scientific proof of "beauty", please? If they can't then does that mean that it doesn't exist?
helenwyler
14-Aug-07, 19:20
When we see a child's face or a flower or a beautiful sunset, we feel good, that is because these are the things around us and we need to be happy to propagate so evolution has made us into appreciaters of nice things.
Hello Rheghead!
My "uneducated" ancestors must have been happier and more appreciative of sunsets than me then. I have only two children, some of them had eight:~(.
Many third world families too. I'd always thought it was more to do with poverty...
I'm delighted to know that rising teenage pregnancies are due to an aestetic appreciation of flowers[lol].
Agree about brain chemistry in general though! Perhaps I'm on the wrong prescription?
Helen
Can somebody give me a scientific proof of "beauty", please? If they can't then does that mean that it doesn't exist?
1.6180339887 4989484820 4586834365 6381177203 0917980576
2862135448 6227052604 6281890244 9707207204 1893911374
8475408807 5386891752 1266338622 2353693179 3180060766
7263544333 8908659593 9582905638 3226613199 2829026788
0675208766 8925017116 9620703222 1043216269 5486262963
1361443814 9758701220 3408058879 5445474924 6185695364
8644492410 4432077134 4947049565 8467885098 7433944221
2544877066 4780915884 6074998871 2400765217 0575179788
3416625624 9407589069 7040002812 1042762177 1117778053
1531714101 1704666599 1466979873 1761356006 7087480710
1317952368 9427521948 4353056783 0022878569 9782977834
7845878228 9110976250 0302696156 1700250464 3382437764
8610283831 2683303724 2926752631 1653392473 1671112115
8818638513 3162038400 5222165791 2866752946 5490681131
7159934323 5973494985 0904094762 1322298101 7261070596
1164562990 9816290555 2085247903 5240602017 2799747175
3427775927 7862561943 2082750513 1218156285 5122248093
9471234145 1702237358 0577278616 0086883829 5230459264
7878017889 9219902707 7690389532 1968198615 1437803149
9741106926 0886742962 2675756052 3172777520 3536139362
1076738937 6455606060 5921658946 6759551900 4005559089
...
approximately!!
the charlatans
14-Aug-07, 21:10
Scorrie, you are beautiful to me! and you too Jaws, there's some beauty behind those big teethypegs of yours.
i thought 'beauty was in the eye of the beholder'? or in a mother's eye?
1.6180339887 4989484820 4586834365 6381177203 0917980576
2862135448 6227052604 6281890244 9707207204 1893911374
8475408807 5386891752 1266338622 2353693179 3180060766
7263544333 8908659593 9582905638 3226613199 2829026788
0675208766 8925017116 9620703222 1043216269 5486262963
1361443814 9758701220 3408058879 5445474924 6185695364
8644492410 4432077134 4947049565 8467885098 7433944221
2544877066 4780915884 6074998871 2400765217 0575179788
3416625624 9407589069 7040002812 1042762177 1117778053
1531714101 1704666599 1466979873 1761356006 7087480710
1317952368 9427521948 4353056783 0022878569 9782977834
7845878228 9110976250 0302696156 1700250464 3382437764
8610283831 2683303724 2926752631 1653392473 1671112115
8818638513 3162038400 5222165791 2866752946 5490681131
7159934323 5973494985 0904094762 1322298101 7261070596
1164562990 9816290555 2085247903 5240602017 2799747175
3427775927 7862561943 2082750513 1218156285 5122248093
9471234145 1702237358 0577278616 0086883829 5230459264
7878017889 9219902707 7690389532 1968198615 1437803149
9741106926 0886742962 2675756052 3172777520 3536139362
1076738937 6455606060 5921658946 6759551900 4005559089
...
approximately!!
Beautiful explanation, thanks.
Rheg, how can someone be mislead to happiness. If you are happy does it matter the source?:confused
1.6180339887 4989484820 4586834365 6381177203 0917980576
2862135448 6227052604 6281890244 9707207204 1893911374
8475408807 5386891752 1266338622 2353693179 3180060766
7263544333 8908659593 9582905638 3226613199 2829026788
0675208766 8925017116 9620703222 1043216269 5486262963
1361443814 9758701220 3408058879 5445474924 6185695364
8644492410 4432077134 4947049565 8467885098 7433944221
2544877066 4780915884 6074998871 2400765217 0575179788
3416625624 9407589069 7040002812 1042762177 1117778053
1531714101 1704666599 1466979873 1761356006 7087480710
1317952368 9427521948 4353056783 0022878569 9782977834
7845878228 9110976250 0302696156 1700250464 3382437764
8610283831 2683303724 2926752631 1653392473 1671112115
8818638513 3162038400 5222165791 2866752946 5490681131
7159934323 5973494985 0904094762 1322298101 7261070596
1164562990 9816290555 2085247903 5240602017 2799747175
3427775927 7862561943 2082750513 1218156285 5122248093
9471234145 1702237358 0577278616 0086883829 5230459264
7878017889 9219902707 7690389532 1968198615 1437803149
9741106926 0886742962 2675756052 3172777520 3536139362
1076738937 6455606060 5921658946 6759551900 4005559089
...
approximately!!
Hey Scorrie,
You're missing the point![lol][lol]
karia
Hi Guys,
It was really sad to witness the 'cold readings' where upset and traumatised individuals were further exploited by those who purported to help with their grief.
Awful as it was, better to see it exposed and save grieving families the expense and the knowledge that for some their most awful experiences were being manipulated for financial gain.
Amazing that some 'individuals' can plan and scheme such dreadful 'rip-offs' for the bereaved and vulnerable.
Human Kindness??!!:roll:
Sometimes I am so ashamed for us all!
Karia
Lolabelle
15-Aug-07, 07:03
[quote=Rheghead;255894]. All these spiritual things give people false hope and eventually mislead them to happiness quote]
I don't think religion or I should say Christianity give people false hope, but if we get happiness from our our faith, well, nothing wrong with happiness, is there. So how can you be misled to happiness? Sounds like an oxymoron to me. :rolleyes:
Hey Scorrie,
You're missing the point...as usual.
He means
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/images/equations/GoldenRatio/inline19.gif
...
exactly.
Now that is beautiful.
sorry have i missed something ???
thought this was caithness .org
or some sort of secret society
maybe jusT !!!
Anne x, you can google search for the number and find out what it is. It's pretty boring really,
would I need to bother !!!
cannot understand a word oh it
but thanks for taking the time
Hi Crayola,
When I said that Scorrie was missing the point,..it was a 'play on words'..............loads of digits,...missing the point!....145 digits=1.45 trout,..or whatever bargaining tool you choose!:roll:
scorrie and lumberjack are ace fishermen!
I , personally, am awaiting their usual catch which will be delivered with a lot of love and huge amounts of humour!
Karia
Hi Crayola,
When I said that Scorrie was missing the point,..it was a 'play on words'..............loads of digits,...missing the point!....145 digits=1.45 trout,..or whatever bargaining tool you choose!:roll:I know that. It was my point too but you seemed to have missed it. ;)
I know that. It was my point too but you seemed to have missed it. ;)
Yes! Me and them,...we all seem to have missed it!
Wild Eh?!!;)
Karia
Hi Crayola,
scorrie and lumberjack are ace fishermen!
Karia
Aye, Karia but the trouble is that you always end up with the some old wax infested Haddies clogging your net. I should use a bigger mesh to let these troublesome tiddlers wash through and head back to the shallows, where they belong. ;o)
would I need to bother !!!
cannot understand a word oh it
but thanks for taking the time
It is not as complicated as you might think.
Jaws asked for the proof of beauty. The number is Phi and it is a fact that the human face is made up of components in the ratio based on Phi. That is only one example of many occurences of the ratio in life. The Mathematics behind it may be boring to some but the general concept is quite accessible. Don't be put off by the PHIlistines.
helenwyler
16-Aug-07, 13:25
Just a little moral support and interest here scorrie...:Razz
I'm no mathematician[lol] but didn't Leonardo da Vinci base his Anatomy of Man on the proportions of phi? I believe the same proportions can be found flowers, trees, shells, pine cones etc... but might well be wrong!!!
Just a little moral support and interest here scorrie...:Razz
I'm no mathematician[lol] but didn't Leonardo da Vinci base his Anatomy of Man on the proportions of phi? I believe the same proportions can be found flowers, trees, shells, pine cones etc... but might well be wrong!!!
Thanks Helen, you are correct about the proportion being present in many aspects of Nature.
This famous site explores some of the areas:-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
May I quote one particular line:-
"The golden ratio has fascinated intellectuals of diverse interests for at least 2,400 years"
Let us compare that quote with this one:-
"you can google search for the number and find out what it is. It's pretty boring really"
To each their own.
Is it the case that models and film stars are more likely than most of us to have symmetrical faces, which we perceive as more beautiful?
Doesn't mean that "inner beauty" will necessarily follow, of course! ;)
Lolabelle
16-Aug-07, 14:03
...as usual.
He means
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/images/equations/GoldenRatio/inline19.gif
...
exactly.
Now that is beautiful.
I don't understand, and I couldn't google it? Is there any generous, kind and caring orger who will explain to a mathematical dunce??? Please....:confused:
I was going to remove this post, but thought i would just apologise instead, I thought i had read all the posts??? But I hadn't read down far enough. Sorry.
thanks for the link really appreciated :)
This seems an appropriate moment for a re-post:
The Golden Angle
The golden angle is quite the thing,
With all flowers showing its joy in spring.
A spiral so perfect it spoils the eye
How can they design deny?
I’ve seen a forest so full of life,
And I’ve held the hand of my beautiful wife,
I’ve touched the sand on a sunny day,
Whom should I thank for my life today?
“It happened by chance!” the smart folks spout.
“It all came together of that there’s no doubt!
There is no designer of all that you see,
Trust in our science we’ll set you free!”
I looked at their science their bombs and their guns,
And looked at the priests, the clergy and nuns,
It’s all so opposed to the world where we are,
The grass and the wind, the leaf and the flower.
The fine-tuning of life is an art of its own,
Can chance really get blood from a stone?
Can chance create all the creatures we see?
Or is there design in the wings of a bee?
The wings of a plane are based on a bird,
A draftsman gets credit for what has occurred,
But if for that plane a draftsman’s required
How can a bird be uninspired?
Beware of those who say there’s no God,
Does “luck” as creator not seem odd?
Look for yourself and open your eyes,
There’s wisdom and beauty in all of our skies.
Saveman
lovely and oh so true
I looked at their science their bombs and their guns.
You are having a laugh I guess? Religion has been the root cause of more murder than anything else. Atheists are more peace loving than religious people.
You are having a laugh I guess? Religion has been the root cause of more murder than anything else.
Completely agree. (See next line in poem)
Atheists are more peace loving than religious people.
That's an extreme generalization, just what you'd expect from an atheist ;)
Richard Dawkins, imo, is probably one of the most sane people around on TV, his points of view are all based in evidence and reason. He is arrogantly dismissive of religion, complementarypseudo-medicine and other spiritual aspects of life, and he has a genuine right and concern to be so. All these spiritual things give people false hope and eventually mislead them to happiness at some eventual payment, iow, they are basically rip-off merchants, the lot of them.
Yes, there have been scientists that have profitted from their research and enterprise but the main difference is that they can usually back up their products with scientific evidence that they work, and good luck to them I say.
Now I am going to give a big 'however' now. I do think that science proves that over millions of years of evolution that we can experience/enjoy what our uneducated ancestors would call religious experiences etc. Evidence shows that emotions and memories all have a chemical nature in the brain and that is what can give us feeling of euphoria, love etc. Even in desperate times, the brain will release endorphins to give us a boost, it is the body's way of helping us through our lives because our species needs us to get us through our lives to propagate the next generation.
When we see a child's face or a flower or a beautiful sunset, we feel good, that is because these are the things around us and we need to be happy to propagate so evolution has made us into appreciaters of nice things. It is nature's self re-enforcing way of getting us to be happy, emotional, self-replicating bags of chemicals.
3 cheeres for ENDOLPHINS an ya-boo to dip sticks like you who can't see the wood for the trees
Thanks Helen, you are correct about the proportion being present in many aspects of Nature.
This famous site explores some of the areas:-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
May I quote one particular line:-
"The golden ratio has fascinated intellectuals of diverse interests for at least 2,400 years"
Let us compare that quote with this one:-
"you can google search for the number and find out what it is. It's pretty boring really"
To each their own.Actually, it is more boring than it sounds.. The 'present in art, architecture and animals' thing is exaggerated and overplayed and its role in mathematics is fairly minor. My OH's pal is a prof at Uni in Glesga and was interested in starting a research project on the golden ratio last summer. He knew I was into Pagan studies and asked me to look into its significance there and in nature. I found it overplayed in Wiccan traditions and somewhat overplayed in nature, art and architecture too. He was keen to find a use for it in his research because he thought it was underused by mathematicians but he changed his mind after working on it for weeks.
I emailed him and asked him about it again yesterday. He said the golden ratio turns up here and there in geometry not only in 3 dimensions but in N dimensional space too, in something to do with representing algebras. He said it's ubiquitous but it doesn't have any particular significance and it's not of much serious use in advanced maths. It's a 'bit of a plaything they tinker with when they have nothing better to do'. 'We use it to fool the plebs into thinking that maths profs do something sexy in their summer break! He said a boring number like the square root of two is just as interesting and much more use!
I pointed him to the Wiki page but he said it was so sexed up that Alastair Campbell must be writing for them nowadays!
He reminded me that he used to tease me by saying its most interesting property is that it's the most irrational of all the irrational numbers. Is that why you like it scorrie? :lol:
helenwyler
17-Aug-07, 12:00
Hi crayola
Wow! Phi and its associates... Euclidean geometry, Fibonacci numbers, Fermat's Little Theorem, Euler's Formula.... "boring".
Why stop there?
Heroditus, father of history, "boring"...
Aristotle, father of rhetoric, "
Of course mathematical theories are constantly evolving....
...but to label phi "boring" is a act of critical vandalism IMHO:eek:..!
...I suspect, from what I know of your articulacy from previous posts, that you just had a moment of adjectival atrophy there;).
Helen
3 cheeres for ENDOLPHINS an ya-boo to dip sticks like you who can't see the wood for the trees
Insults don't deter the fact that you have just emulated what constitutes the title of this thread.;)
That's an extreme generalization, just what you'd expect from an atheist ;)
It was just a generalisation that is true.
Actually, it is more boring than it sounds.. The 'present in art, architecture and animals' thing is exaggerated and overplayed and its role in mathematics is fairly minor. My OH's pal is a prof at Uni in Glesga and was interested in starting a research project on the golden ratio last summer. He knew I was into Pagan studies and asked me to look into its significance there and in nature. I found it overplayed in Wiccan traditions and somewhat overplayed in nature, art and architecture too. He was keen to find a use for it in his research because he thought it was underused by mathematicians but he changed his mind after working on it for weeks.
I emailed him and asked him about it again yesterday. He said the golden ratio turns up here and there in geometry not only in 3 dimensions but in N dimensional space too, in something to do with representing algebras. He said it's ubiquitous but it doesn't have any particular significance and it's not of much serious use in advanced maths. It's a 'bit of a plaything they tinker with when they have nothing better to do'. 'We use it to fool the plebs into thinking that maths profs do something sexy in their summer break! He said a boring number like the square root of two is just as interesting and much more use!
I pointed him to the Wiki page but he said it was so sexed up that Alastair Campbell must be writing for them nowadays!
He reminded me that he used to tease me by saying its most interesting property is that it's the most irrational of all the irrational numbers. Is that why you like it scorrie? :lol:
Yer Professor man sounds like a real hoot, don't fancy being stuck with him in a lift. These type of guys usually play down everything in the universe, except for themselves of course ;o)
I can't imagine anyone who regards some of the populous as "plebs" doing anything remotely "sexy" in the Summer break or at any other time for that matter. Why don't you get in touch with Alastair Campbell to see if he can "sex up" Professor Plum for you? If he can do the biz for Wickerpedia there may be hope for a man who thinks he knows more than the combined minds of the planet.
I don't remember saying I liked the number, only a saddo could like a number. I find some of the facts about it interesting and many others also do, the history and famous figures involved also bring extra depth to the subject and I think that you will find that, compared to some of these figures, Professor Plum is a jumped up nobody.
It is interesting to note that someone managed to take this "barren" subject and write a 304 page book about it.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Golden-Ratio-Extraordinary-Number-Nature/dp/0747249881/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/203-5322723-9751157?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1187385019&sr=8-1
Please let me see your 304 page rebuttal, and, no, you can't phone a friend ;o)
ps I phoned Stephen Hawking to get his opinion about Phi and he said:-
"It's the Mutts Nuts scorrie"
Good enough for me.
It was just a generalisation that is true.
Ayeee.....it certainly is a "broad road"........
Blind followers of religious doctrine know they are right because they have the truth in their holy scriptures and they are sticking to it, Hell high or low water. The truth in their religious doctrine is an axiom, not the end product of reasonable thought. If any evidence doesn't agree with the notion of a sentient creator then it is rejected as contrary to dogma.
Blind followers of religious doctrine know they are right because they have the truth in their holy scriptures and they are sticking to it, Hell high or low water. The truth in their religious doctrine is an axiom, not the end product of reasonable thought. If any evidence doesn't agree with the notion of a sentient creator then it is rejected as contrary to dogma.
Yeah, blind followers eh? Can't stand 'em! :)
It's hard to understand how they can ignore the evidence.....
thefugitive1993
18-Aug-07, 20:57
Hi Guys,
Hope you lot saw this brilliant programme tonight.
Richard Dawkins debunking and exposing the charlatans who prey on people by purporting to communicate with dead loved ones and ringing in the cash.
Derren Brown was fantastic, as were the pavlovian pigeons.
Next part to come!
karia
Just watched ( a tape) of the prog tonight. Dawkins superb as ever. I love to science triumph over the bunkum I was once naive enough to embrace
Yeah, blind followers eh? Can't stand 'em! :)
It's hard to understand how they can ignore the evidence.....
Well if you ignore the compelling evidence that it is evolution that explains life's complexity and not a supernatural creator, then I can assure you that it is not me that is blind...
All of life's complexity is seen to get simpler and simpler in the fossil record, hence evolution. Of course you can wriggle out of that one by claiming the creator caused it but that is a compromise and an appeasement on scripture which an allegorical explanation will always suffice to back up a believers delusions...
:Razz
Yer Professor man sounds like a real hoot, don't fancy being stuck with him in a lift. These type of guys usually play down everything in the universe, except for themselves of course ;o)
I can't imagine anyone who regards some of the populous as "plebs" doing anything remotely "sexy" in the Summer break or at any other time for that matter. Why don't you get in touch with Alastair Campbell to see if he can "sex up" Professor Plum for you? If he can do the biz for Wickerpedia there may be hope for a man who thinks he knows more than the combined minds of the planet.
I don't remember saying I liked the number, only a saddo could like a number. I find some of the facts about it interesting and many others also do, the history and famous figures involved also bring extra depth to the subject and I think that you will find that, compared to some of these figures, Professor Plum is a jumped up nobody.
It is interesting to note that someone managed to take this "barren" subject and write a 304 page book about it.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Golden-Ratio-Extraordinary-Number-Nature/dp/0747249881/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/203-5322723-9751157?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1187385019&sr=8-1
Please let me see your 304 page rebuttal, and, no, you can't phone a friend ;o)
ps I phoned Stephen Hawking to get his opinion about Phi and he said:-
"It's the Mutts Nuts scorrie"
Good enough for me.Scorrie, I know you're not the most enlightened loon around here but I didn't expect you to fall for the hype that surrounds poor old Mario's book of a few years back. Even funnier is your comment about Stephen (Hawking) because having chatted with him about this a few weeks ago I know exactly what he thinks. If you'd had the brush-off I had you wouldn't be joking about it.
Scorrie, I know you're not the most enlightened loon around here but I didn't expect you to fall for the hype that surrounds poor old Mario's book of a few years back. Even funnier is your comment about Stephen (Hawking) because having chatted with him about this a few weeks ago I know exactly what he thinks. If you'd had the brush-off I had you wouldn't be joking about it.
I didn't realise that you were on first name terms with Mr Hawking. Why don't you reveal who YOU are, so that we can all marvel at your lofty status in the World of the intellectual. Wickerpedia, Mario Livio, Stephen Hawking et al bow down to the Mighty Wax Crayon. Please point us in the direction of your own, best selling, books in order that we may compare with the hyped has-beens.
You come across as totally insecure. You feel the need to call University Professors and decry authors, all to try to prove that something I find interesting is actually boring. What next, a Poll on the matter?
As I said earlier, each to their own. I am secure in my own intelligence, I do not feel intimidated by anyone and your opinion of me carries no weight whatever. Perhaps if you could write your own critique, explaining why Livio's book is hyped, rather than quoting vague mutterings, then perhaps I might have more interest in your opinion. As it is, you strike me as being Pseudo, rather than Coca Cola.
A few people have commented on your obsession with my postings. It is getting a bit embarrassing, so perhaps you could limit your responses to material that actually relates to the thread. I promise to do the same. Too many threads are wandering off into personal tennis matches and the actual subject is often lost. Thanks
Boozeburglar
20-Aug-07, 01:30
There is as little evidence for 'God' as there is against.
Evolution and Creation are not mutually exclusive.
Well if you ignore the compelling evidence that it is evolution that explains life's complexity and not a supernatural creator, then I can assure you that it is not me that is blind...
Compelling? Not blind? Oh right.....well if you say so......
All of life's complexity is seen to get simpler and simpler in the fossil record, hence evolution. Of course you can wriggle out of that one by claiming the creator caused it but that is a compromise and an appeasement on scripture which an allegorical explanation will always suffice to back up a believers delusions...
:Razz
I guess we disagree. But hey...what's new?
Hi Guys,
The second part of this Richard Dawkins programme is on at 8pm Channel 4.
Tonight he looks at homeopathy and faith healing, which I'm sure will interest many orgers.
Karia
I didn't realise that you were on first name terms with Mr Hawking. Why don't you reveal who YOU are, so that we can all marvel at your lofty status in the World of the intellectual. Wickerpedia, Mario Livio, Stephen Hawking et al bow down to the Mighty Wax Crayon. Please point us in the direction of your own, best selling, books in order that we may compare with the hyped has-beens.
You come across as totally insecure. You feel the need to call University Professors and decry authors, all to try to prove that something I find interesting is actually boring. What next, a Poll on the matter?
As I said earlier, each to their own. I am secure in my own intelligence, I do not feel intimidated by anyone and your opinion of me carries no weight whatever. Perhaps if you could write your own critique, explaining why Livio's book is hyped, rather than quoting vague mutterings, then perhaps I might have more interest in your opinion. As it is, you strike me as being Pseudo, rather than Coca Cola.
A few people have commented on your obsession with my postings. It is getting a bit embarrassing, so perhaps you could limit your responses to material that actually relates to the thread. I promise to do the same. Too many threads are wandering off into personal tennis matches and the actual subject is often lost. ThanksYou're welcome sweetie. I tried to put you out of my life a couple of weeks ago but I couldn't resist a golden opportunity to show off my expertise on the number that I thought would be tremendously interesting and even more useful but actually isn't.
Stephen now. Everyone around him calls him Stephen, his surname is never mentioned. Oh yes, I have to admit that I was wrong about one thing, I spoke to him a few months ago, not weeks.
Poor Mario next. Everyone I know calls him that.
Last and most certainly least because I don't want to dwell on it any longer, I note that you've been noticed making personal remarks instead of sticking to the subject on another thread too. Remember what crayola taught you, little men with big ideas shouldn't throw personal remarks in glass houses.
Goodbye Sweetie,
C x
PS Who am I? A little clue: you might have seen me a long time ago on the second inside page of 'red top newspapers' or in glossy advertising campaigns for a famous brand of shampoo or stockings and tights. You might have liked what you saw. ;)
thefugitive1993
25-Aug-07, 00:14
You're welcome sweetie. I tried to put you out of my life a couple of weeks ago but I couldn't resist a golden opportunity to show off my expertise on the number that I thought would be tremendously interesting and even more useful but actually isn't.
Stephen now. Everyone around him calls him Stephen, his surname is never mentioned. Oh yes, I have to admit that I was wrong about one thing, I spoke to him a few months ago, not weeks.
Poor Mario next. Everyone I know calls him that.
Last and most certainly least because I don't want to dwell on it any longer, I note that you've been noticed making personal remarks instead of sticking to the subject on another thread too. Remember what crayola taught you, little men with big ideas shouldn't throw personal remarks in glass houses.
Goodbye Sweetie,
C x
PS Who am I? A little clue: you might have seen me a long time ago on the second inside page of 'red top newspapers' or in glossy advertising campaigns for a famous brand of shampoo or stockings and tights. You might have liked what you saw. ;)
Sorry to butt in Crayola, but just for the record; are you saying that you are an ex page three model, who is on 1st name terms with and exchange ideas with one of the world's greatest minds?
I really need to lose my preconceptions!
A girl has to work her way through uni somehow.
thefugitive1993
25-Aug-07, 08:47
Hi Guys,
The second part of this Richard Dawkins programme is on at 8pm Channel 4.
Tonight he looks at homeopathy and faith healing, which I'm sure will interest many orgers.
Karia
Missed the prog. So disappointed. Was it any good?
thefugitive1993
25-Aug-07, 08:49
A girl has to work her way through uni somehow.
Fair comment
Boozeburglar
25-Aug-07, 12:08
Geez, is this message board nothing more than a TV guide now?
What is wrong with keeping it to one thread?
;)
thefugitive1993
25-Aug-07, 21:37
Geez, is this message board nothing more than a TV guide now?
What is wrong with keeping it to one thread?
;)
Actually we don't have a TV! Occasionally, we get recordings of interesting progs. We are avid readers, and Dawkins is a particular fav of mine; I was only curious to know what he was saying. Sorry if that's a bind.
Actually we don't have a TV! Occasionally, we get recordings of interesting progs. We are avid readers, and Dawkins is a particular fav of mine; I was only curious to know what he was saying. Sorry if that's a bind.
I saw the programme only because I saw the post on caithness.org.
The programme itself was typical Dawkins and although I like Dawkins too, sometimes his fundamentalist position makes me feel uncomfortable.
There's no doubt that followers of Dawkins will have had their opinions reinforced by the programme whilst the faith people still havnt been kicked into touch. :D
Hi Boozeburgler,
The first thread attracted much discussion and at the time the transmission date of the 2nd part was not available,..which is why I posted the alert!
Fugitive...it was an excellent and well constructed programme which will hopefully be repeated...
...I'll put out an alert !;)
karia
I saw the programme only because I saw the post on caithness.org.
The programme itself was typical Dawkins and although I like Dawkins too, sometimes his fundamentalist position makes me feel uncomfortable.
There's no doubt that followers of Dawkins will have had their opinions reinforced by the programme whilst the faith people still havnt been kicked into touch. :D
Thanks gleeber!
Karia
changilass
25-Aug-07, 22:01
Posts now merged as programme has been shown
Changi
Boozeburglar
26-Aug-07, 02:00
Hi Boozeburgler,
The first thread attracted much discussion and at the time the transmission date of the 2nd part was not available,..which is why I posted the alert!
Fugitive...it was an excellent and well constructed programme which will hopefully be repeated...
...I'll put out an alert !;)
karia
Aye fair enuff like, I was only thinkin it would be sufficient to bump the original thread, I had no idea the timings weren't available, and you were thus performing a public service.
Actually we don't have a TV! Occasionally, we get recordings of interesting progs. We are avid readers, and Dawkins is a particular fav of mine; I was only curious to know what he was saying. Sorry if that's a bind.
Why would that be a bind? I have no problem with discussions of programmes, which could be done in the original thread, but if we are going to have new threads each week to advertise the fact that the latest episode is on it would take over the board. I have been put right as to why that happened and it is cool.
I saw the programme only because I saw the post on caithness.org.
The programme itself was typical Dawkins and although I like Dawkins too, sometimes his fundamentalist position makes me feel uncomfortable.
There's no doubt that followers of Dawkins will have had their opinions reinforced by the programme whilst the faith people still havnt been kicked into touch. :D
I don't think he would enjoy being called a fundamentalist, but I hear you. Especially when we watch him trying to score semantic points in conversation with a man he could have learned much from.
I've spoken to Dawkins a couple of times. He's alright, for a nerd, but I don't think he likes me because he wouldn't listen to what I had to say.
Gleeber's right, he's a fundamentalist.
Boozeburglar
26-Aug-07, 02:27
I get that impression too.
I am mainly pissed off course at this time on a Sunday morn, better sober up for church lest they find out I have been in the enemy's compound.
;)
I thought he was a bit self obsessed. Is that an atheist trait?
Boozeburglar
26-Aug-07, 02:43
A predisposition towards grandiosity, along with elements of the narcissistic personality are traits found in most people who elevate their beliefs over others I feel. ;)
He might suffer from grandiosity but I fail to see why he might be narcissistic. :D
Boozeburglar
26-Aug-07, 02:55
He certainly fits the bill for Narcissistic Personality Disorder, babe.
He does? I couldn't be narcissistic if I looked in the mirror and saw what he must see. Maybe he needs new glasses?
Boozeburglar
26-Aug-07, 03:13
Well this is what happens when we float between literal and mythical interpretations.
:)
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.