I didn’t bother with Paolo’s message.  Looked like it was disorganized drivel.  Nevertheless, in reading through the comments, this struck me as familiar:

Another mental subtlety issue.  Communism, as practiced by Lenin, Stalin, Mao, et. al. put religion in the crosshairs as a means to an end, *not* the end in itself.  Just like the French Revolution did.

The idea in both cases was to replace Christianity (among with any number of other things) with a competing philosophy.  NOT to encourage healthy skepticism or freethinking, certainly.  It’s just that the philosophy wasn’t supported by God, but rather by a self-serving, self-congratulatory concept of fulfilling the manifest destiny of history. 

I got it.  Here is what it sounds like:

Some Jehovah’s Witnesses stopped by last night. I got to talking about Ted Haggard and Becky Fischer and all these others and they said “this is the coming of false religion”

Yep, there is a similar line of reasoning being used there that even a farm boy can see.  The atheists wanting to distance themselves from those meanies do so by saying in effect: those are the false atheists, not the real freethinking cool cats that we are.  Go figure.

Hmmmm..Have I missed something? .. We all know you’re a cool cat Consigliere but I was under the impression you were NOT a freethinking athiest...That sounds a bit harsh - I guess a free thinking christian is’nt out of the question

the real freethinking cool cats

encourage healthy scepticism [and]/or freethinking

That can’t be bad, can it?
It has to be more psychologically healthy than having blind faith in invisible teapots and some supernatural beings but not others. 

a free thinking christian

Wouldn’t that be an oxymoron. 

Yep, there is a similar line of reasoning being used there that even a farm boy can see.

I’d agree with you if I saw those statements alone, Consi.

However, in the case of the French Revolution we saw “freethinkers” in elite sects of society who tried to manipulate masses of people (and to a certain extent, they succeeded). Although it would be incorrect to place the blame on freethinking, it would be much more reasonable to place blame on the amount of power they held over their fellow countrymen. My emphasis here is that if free-thinking had been exercised by the general populous (although, obviously, that was not possible, and those wise men knew it), such catastrophies as those groups committed might have been avoided entirely.

I can’t say the same for a number of religions (although I hold out for Buddhism - the idea of an extreme Buddhist is quite funny). Power corrupts - but it’s easier to lord that power over people who won’t think independently of your mandates.

Very, very close, Consi. Not quite the same.

Consigliere, I can not say that Mao and the other had not been atheist, as they were, in essence. But we do not have to excuse what their actions, otherwise you must justify Hitler, but that is not my point. Atheism only dictates that one dose not believe in a god, nothing else, you do not kill for atheism. The argument you must put forward is if Mao had been religious would history be different.

(Sorry for the drivvle, I only have a few seconds to post but I think you can get it ^.^)

Very, very close, Consi. Not quite the same.

I’m talking about the comparison of the defense, not the comparison initially.  Making an argument that old dead French dudes really aren’t true atheists (or freethinkers, whatever the hell that is) such as you all here, that is in the same boat.  Spit polish up your defense all you want doesn’t mater.  It’s the making of the defense that is close enough to the Jehovah’s witness response that a Christian best known for getting some adulterous man love from a hooker after snorting crank off his ass is not representative of a true Jehovah’s Witness.  Close enough that it works anyway. 

As a note, the guy you were using was a Christian not a Jehovah’s Witness.  Jehovah’s Witnesses are not considered Christians. The Witnesses differ markedly with Christians in that its members deny the deity of Christ, His resurrection and also salvation by grace.  You started with apples and oranges.  If you are going to play with them, get jiggy with their actual theology.  It’s more fun because they think you are interested.

It’s a shame I can never seem to put my own thoughts into words like you guys....

Making an argument that old dead French dudes really aren’t true atheists (or freethinkers, whatever the hell that is) such as you all here, that is in the same boat.

I’m talking about the promotion of rationality. If you want to talk about the promotion of a god-free state by the likes of the Jacobins and others, cubiclegrrl already made clear mention of the fact that was an externality. The Jacobins intended to remove all aspects of royalty, or at least that’s how the claim went.

As a conjecture, if the royalty hadn’t asserted that their power was a matter of divine mandate, then it’s even possible that religion itself would have pervaded France post-revolution. I’m sure it would have served the Jacobins just as well in that alternate history. It was about power, after all. Atheism schmatheism.

As a note, the guy you were using was a Christian not a Jehovah’s Witness.

I’m well aware of the distinction, but thanks for the follow up. I mentioned myself as quite unreligious, and they asked why. I brought up Ted the Tool and others. It also serves to use a Christian example because they treated this “false religion” as a recent development and a sign of end times when it is, to be gracious, a few centuries old. I like their “actual” theology; at least in the sense that it’s more practically minded and simple than other God-religions. It’s probably a large part of the reason that I make conversation better with them than with the Mormons and other groups who target the immigrants in my neighborhood.

I read an interesting bit about the new Hubble Telescope Wide Depth photos. I leave it up for you guys to decide, but it goes like this:

Christians always argue that God created light, the heavens, firmament, earth, etc and man all in 6 days and rested on the 7th. They also argue that man is only 6,000 years old, thus the earth is only about the same age.

Well, these latest photos from the Hubble call shennanigans on the entire argument they put forth.

Some photographs were taken of a wide area of stars in our galaxy. Everyone knows about the speed of light, etc. etc. and that our closest neighbour is Alpha Centari, which is several lightyears away (I believe a bit over 4). Well, these scientists and other people got curious as to what occupied all of the “empty” black space in between these brightly shining stars. So what do they do? They instruct the Hubble to take time-lapse photos of the “empty” spaces between the stars. Several hundred thousand as a matter of fact.

Guess what they found? Some really, REALLY bright objects occupied those “empty” spaces. What they found were not more stars, but entire galaxies, BILLIONS of light-years away from the earth.

Now, you just might think, that given knowledge of the speed of light, and of how long it takes such light to reach the earth for it to be recorded, that the universe and everything is QUITE a bit older than the nonsense “facts” about the age of the universe and the earth these people try to argue us with.

If the creation story in the Bible is 100% fact like these people claim, then these galaxies can’t possibly exist, nor is the speed of light a fact. But if creation in the Bible is just a myth, well…

Does it disprove the existance of God? You decide. At least the Muslims acknowledge The Big Bang (albeit with the caveat that Allah caused it to happen).

Now, you just might think, that given knowledge of the speed of light, and of how long it takes such light to reach the earth for it to be recorded, that the universe and everything is QUITE a bit older than the nonsense “facts” about the age of the universe and the earth these people try to argue us with.

Jynxed, you just might think this, and I just might think this, but don’t underestimate the ingenuity of fundies in concocting stories that squoosh the speed of light and the Bible into a shotgun marriage.  The old standard, of course, is the same that was proposed by Philip Henry Gosse in Omphalos: namely, that the Universe was created recently with the appearance of being older: ready-made fossils, canyons, etc.  In the case of the galaxies, they were created with their light already underway towards Earth.  But as this is too silly an idea even for most fundies, when you consider that God would have to have created the light for distant objects that never even existed in the Biblical timescale (supernovas, for instance), other stories have more recently been spun out of the whole cloth.

Currently, for instance, Answers in Genesis is touting the theory that the speed of light is not constant, but is slowing down exponentially.  To support this, they quote measurements going back to 1675(!).  I guess if all those galaxies are so close to us, we’ll have to do some work on the gravitational constant as well…

My favorite story, though, is unfortunately no longer online: a creationist mathematician claimed there must be an ectoplasmic sphere surrounding the Earth, which slows down light going through it by a factor of around million.  Unfortunately for this lovely theory, as skeptics pointed out, the ectoplasm would have to have lots of local ripples to account for things like variable stars.  Pretty soon the mathematician was plugging in formulae willy-nilly to achieve the necessary jiggles in the ectoplasm.  He never did get a coherent model together, but it was a heroic effort.

Of course, there’s no independent evidence for any of these models: they are merely generated, ad hoc, by the intersection of some cherry-picked observation with the Absolute Truth of the Bible.  Very creative, but information-free.

Zilch- I’ve read that before- Brilliant Science, in the same way that Bobby thingy who revealed the truth about the Flying Spaggetti Monster was Brilliant when he proved global warming is due to lack of pirates.

Most telling remark is

The decay curve is quite sensitive to its date of origin. If this is set too early, the curve comes in below the early clusters of points. If the date is too late, it comes in above the observed values.

i.e you have to measuer it just right for it to work.  Sort of like saying all cars at Monte Carlo go 150mph, but insisting all measurements only be done on the day of the Grand Prix.  I wonder if any measurements recently have showed further slowing, or does it reach final velocity in ‘76- i.e. about the time (co-incidentally) we were able to accurately measure C.  Those guys in 1675 didn’t do bad- they were in 0.5003% of an accurate answer.

The other reason given by ID’ers is that gravity has changed in the past, so has slowed light.

Bobby thingy who revealed the truth about the Flying Spaggetti Monster was Brilliant when he proved global warming is due to lack of pirates.

Does “Talk Like a Pirate Day” help to slow global warming at all.  Just wondering.

Jynxed asks…

Does it disprove the existance of God? You decide.

The problem with that line of argument, and with arguing about the existence of Gods at all, is the simple fact that there’s nothing that says God (assuming he is all powerful) didn’t create the universe two minutes ago with everything just as it is including your false memories of the past. Given that it’s an easy step to argue that God created the universe only 6,000 years ago and just placed some stuff really far away.

Does “Talk Like a Pirate Day” help to slow global warming at all.  Just wondering.

Hmmm… does being cool stop global warming?

does being cool stop global warming?

Cool. 

Why Pirates?

They just Arrrr (you have to do the voice)

“Talk like a pirate day” - the only religious holiday I follow

Try the holiday in Congo. They have national masturbation week

“Talk like a pirate day” - the only religious holiday I follow :wink:

Well met! This year’s was special for me, in that I went through a public dedication ritual of sorts.

Cool pics, OB. I bet you had an arrr full time.

Cute as the dickens, OB.

National masturbation week? - Lol! - thats every week I thought
Hehe Brock ^^ .. but actually tattoo enthusiasts (like myself) will tell you tatts are strangely addictive and not as painful as one might think.The most painful part is the tattooist constantly rubbing and stretching the skin to get a smooth “canvas”..after 3 hours of that it feels like the worst sunburn you’ve ever had.

National masturbation week? - Lol! - thats every week I thought

Week? I celebrate every day.

Hank’s WOSIJMU:

“Tattoos are for people who want to get noticed, but can’t be bothered to actually become interesting.”

“Getting a tattoo is a way of saying ‘Mommy, look at me! Look Mommy, I got a tattoo! Mommy! Mommy, look, I’m cool! Mommy!!’ “

People who get tattoos are dimwits. Everybody knows THAT.

The only reason I haven’t gotten a tatoo is because I can’t settle on what I want it to be.

Call me a dimwit.