What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
See the new YouTube feature trailer for Dragon Age: Origins view!
youtube.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
247 Comments
- Araya213, on 10/12/2007, -12/+145I'm totally putting "Time Magazine Person of the Year 2006" on my resume.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -21/+127I usually try to stay away from discussing religion on the Internet to avoid unnecessary conflicts and flame wars but it's a different story here at Digg... It's official -- 95% of digg members are atheists!
- nymphetamine, on 10/12/2007, -8/+105Um...no. According to Time Magazine, I was the 2006 person of the year.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -31/+128Richard is the MAN - Congratulations!!!
- thomasprebble, on 10/12/2007, -13/+110Science is interesting and if you don't agree you can ***** off!
- Mu99ins, on 10/12/2007, -10/+87@ macaddct1984
"...95% of digg members are true intellectuals"? Far from it. - Dimensio, on 10/12/2007, -11/+83"And, quite apart from that, are you aware of just how much real scientific evidence, and highly respected scientists, are now speaking out against evolutionary theory, and against Dawkins?"
Perhaps you could provide actual numbers, rather than asking questions, if you believe that you know the answer.
"It is a dying theory, not something on the up. It has been resoundingly discredited."
Please provide evidence to support this claim. If you believe that merely asserting that evolution is a "dying theory" supports the claim, then you should be aware that you are mistaken.
If you want to know the truth, with NO religion or religious arguments, purely scientific proof, I suggest reading "Darwinism and the rise of degenerate science" by Dr. Paul Back CBE (a visiting professor at Oxford University and a member of the Royal Academy of Engineering), or "Dawkin's God" by Alistair McGrath, a professor at Oxford University with a PhD in molecular biophysics. Or there are plenty of other sources out there."
Please provide some examples of the arguments that you believe show error in the theory of evolution.
" Seriously, at least educate yourself properly, rather than believing dogma. Why blindly believe the religion of Dawkins?....."
Can you demonstrate that all who disagree with you are "blind"? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -28/+95Psychopathic Idiot leaders babbling on about going to war for a mythical anthropomorphic "Bible-God" who impregnated a virgin in order to give birth to himself in order to be sacrificed to himself in order to sit beside himself in order to save the world from himself as some kinda weird experiment in redemption.
Are magical invisible green elephants who control the universe from their homes inside doorknobs any less real in the minds of psychopaths in insane asylums?
Look into any over the top, cruel and want-en atrocity in the world and chances are you will find some scripture spouting Nutbar, judging and condemning and punishing and happy killing the innocent while cloaked in the garb of "faith". They preach love, but they practice exclusion. And they display a toxic intolerance to different views.
Wackjobs have NO interest whatsoever in educating themselves on evidence. All they care about is re-affirming their superstitious beliefs of disturbing stories of hell and damnation and devils and eternal suffering and ramming them down the throats of unsuspecting children. This is tantamount to child abuse. These Nutbags should be ashamed of themselves! Religious fanatics should be criticized harshly every time they open their dumbazz mouths with that senseless drivel.
Building a new church is the same as building a new insane asylum for self-prescribed psychopaths.
I don't know about you, but to me the very definition of arrogance is someone who presumes to know god's will and to speak in her name. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -14/+63Wow you Christians are so persecuted aren't you? You're just the weak little kids cowering at the feet of the big bad Atheists from the way you talk.
But you know what? Christians have had the majority of the political power in the country for the last 6 years and have killed thousands of innocent people in the process, so I think, wait...yes that's correct, you are todays grand prize winners of a lifetime supply of "Shut The ***** Up!"
It goes great with pork and and hot air! - Peebert, on 10/12/2007, -5/+50A cult leader demands we follow him. Dawkins only asks you to follow reason, over which we all reign.
I suggest that you actually read his work a little and come back with some sensible counterpoint instead of blindly bashing him like an ignorant babyfister. - Stonedonkey, on 10/12/2007, -10/+55What's also great is their comments section.
"Richard Dawkins and his blasphemy is hardly worthy of the distinction of the person of the year, there are others who art more worthy. You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies."
And you thought America was split down the middle. - Alphabet, on 10/12/2007, -4/+40damn, you must be stupid. The atheist here have always been atheist. It's just that most of us don't voice concern as loudly as Dawkins. No one here "follows" Dawkins. We were atheist before Dawkins started talking, and we'll still be atheist long after he stops.
- Somniis, on 10/12/2007, -5/+41Congrats on figuring out what the Church has been doing for hundreds of years. :)
- burningbush, on 10/12/2007, -7/+41Woo Hoo! Religion is going the way of the dinosaur. Seriously folks, let religion die, it's only going to hold humanity back.
@Zethris
Atheists are not "following" Dawkins, atheists don't follow anyone. I know it's going to take time for people to grasp this, but atheism isn't about "following" anything. What atheism will do over time is hopefully break down ingrained top-down hierarchical ways of looking at the world as a whole.
Aldus Huxley said "Any significant gain of natural knowledge required the complete rejection of all authority". Sounds good to me. - bjs0, on 10/12/2007, -5/+37I'm an atheist, and I don't verbally attack anyone. Please don't lump me in with others simply because we share religious beliefs. I'll try to treat you the same.
- seco, on 10/12/2007, -8/+39Well, perhaps you don't verbally attack anyone, but a lot of religious people do. Some even come knocking on my door offering their beliefs.
- hooksie, on 10/12/2007, -5/+34And while you're praying, ajck, maybe some of the rest of us will be doing something actually useful.
- veganpa, on 10/12/2007, -2/+30What I don't understand is why so many people hate him. If their faith is real, they don't give a damn [sic] about what Dawkins says, any more than they care about a Buddhist or a Jain, etc.
The strong feelings that Dawkins evokes just shows me that, at some level deep down, many folks realize their belief in God is a Delusion. - 60days, on 10/12/2007, -7/+34hansning - you are a small chihuahua wearing a party hat, orbiting in the kuiper belt. If you don't believe me go do the reading yourself; if you have time to read about richard dawkins, take the time to read the rest too.
- Fafnir43, on 10/12/2007, -2/+26mikesbaker: Saying that something is unprovable is, essentially, meaningless. Science cannot PROVE anything. It cannot prove the theory of evolution, it cannot prove quantum mechanics, it cannot even prove that the sun will rise tomorrow. What it can do is provide vast mountains of evidence in favour of these ideas.
Another example. Consider someone on trial for murder. Eighteen witnesses say he killed the man. He has no alibi. He had blood all over his hands, and the murder weapon had his fingerprints on it. The first words he said when the police took him in were "I'm glad he killed the bastard". Now, while I admit the possibility that the witnesses are all lying, someone planted the fingerprints, the blood was part of an amusing practical joke, and the "bastard" he was referring to was an irritating fly, I wouldn't have much sympathy for someone trying to argue that because of these facts there can be no proof that he committed the murder and so he should be acquitted.
Bottom line: Lack of disproof != likelihood. No, God cannot be disproven. However, there is no evidence for his existence. By a curious coincidence, there is also no evidence for the existence of Baal, Odin, Zeus, Jupiter, Operating Thetans, the Flying Spaghetti Monster or the Invisible Pink Unicorn (Blessed Be Her Holy Hooves). Therefore, while we can't say with absolute certainty that God doesn't exist, we can say - with absolute certainty - that God is exactly as likely to exist as any of the deities I just named. Neither of us believes in Jupiter, because there is no evidence for his existence. Why, then, should we believe in God when there is evidence for his existence either?
And I don't force my views on others. I just respond whenever I see a faulty argument. - robertgilbert86, on 10/12/2007, -13/+37Think of it (the attack) as a plee trying to get you to think properly and not base your life on a very old book from a very different society which is very wrong. Check out these quotes from your religion http://home.earthlink.net/~owl233/biblequotes.htm
- javip, on 10/12/2007, -6/+29"Imagine someone who has no idea what he's talking about, and you have Terry Eaglet"
- javip - Dimensio, on 10/12/2007, -10/+32"actually, ajck is right. go do the reading yourself"
Saying "go do the reading yourself" is not a valid substitute for supporting a claim with evidence. Only a moron or a liar would use such a counter-argument. - Somniis, on 10/12/2007, -14/+36It's not about "attacking" your beliefs - it's about showing how dumbfounded and illogical your beliefs are. :)
- cresswga, on 10/12/2007, -1/+22The guy that wrote that comment is from Northern Ireland (if you check his blog that he links to).
The only religious split in NI is between Protestants and Catholics. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -10/+31atheism is another word for : thinking for yourself. .
(I know . . this is a totally new concept for a few billion people) - infradead, on 10/12/2007, -1/+22I think he does that because he sticks with the facts, and many, many religious people base their beliefs on how they feel, but pretend it's all to do with the facts. I'm talking as someone who was a committed Christian for 10 years but I'm now very happy as an atheist.
Now, despite that, Dawkins used to really annoy me. Whenever I tried reading his books, he seemed very shrill and stridently anti-religion, and I wondered why he had such a thing going. It occurred to me one day that he is very much like a number of academics I've had the privilege of working with: very intelligent, prepared for an argument, and can detect even microscopic quantities of ***** at several hundred paces :) That sometimes makes them seem intolerant but really it means they will tolerate only the things for which you can make a credible case. I just read The God Delusion and I think it's an all-time classic; I'd recommend it to believers and non-believers alike, because it will make you re-assess your views and (afaic) that's always a very fine thing to do. - vertinox, on 10/12/2007, -13/+34@"It's official -- 95% of digg members are atheists!"
I'm not an atheist, but I think Richard Dawkins is right on the money. In fact so much so that chances are God agrees with him on most matters. - Azertyqsdf, on 10/12/2007, -6/+25I don't think anyone is questioning freedom of religion, but why do you want to stop people from criticizing the base of your beliefs ?
What is so special with religion that turns every expressed doubt into an attack in your eyes ? - zcreem, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20Reminds me of a film I know:
Brian: I'm not the Messiah!
Arthur: I say you are, lord, and I should know... I've followed a few.
Followers: Hail Messiah!
Brian: I'm not the Messiah! Will you please listen? I am not the Messiah, do you understand? Honestly!
Girl: Only the true Messiah denies His divinity!
Brian: What?! Well, what sort of chance does that give me? All right... I AM THE MESSIAH!
Followers: HE IS! HE IS THE MESSIAH!
Brian: NOW, ***** OFF!!!!
[there is a long awkward silence.]
Arthur: How shall we ***** off, oh Lord?
Brian: Oh, just go away! Leave me alone. - dclowd9901, on 10/12/2007, -13/+31Yes! Richard Dawkins is BBC Northern Ireland's newspaper's columnist William Crawley's 2006 Man of the Year! This is a huge win for aetheism!
... - Dimensio, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19"atheism is another word for : thinking for yourself. ."
Atheism means without theism. The only implication of atheism is a lack of belief in deities. Any who claim that all atheists are independent free-thinkers or that they are all intellectuals is deluded. Any who claim that atheism is a religion or that Dawkins is a cult leader are deluded and stupid. - mb96net, on 10/12/2007, -11/+28"I usually try to stay away from discussing religion on the Internet to avoid unnecessary conflicts and flame wars but it's a different story here at Digg... It's official -- 95% of digg members are atheists!"
How can that be? only 3% of Americans are atheists..
Here's how we can take a quick pool, digg up if you are atheist, digg down if you are not. - infradead, on 10/12/2007, -6/+23And I thought *I* was a grumpy old bastard. Comment dugg, and I only hope you meant every word of it :)
- CraigB12, on 10/12/2007, -6/+22Too bad he doesn't tell you that he's a life long catholic in his review of the book. He's a bumbling creduless fool.
- thescimitar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14When someone challenges a set of beliefs, practioners of those beliefs feel as though they have been personally attacked. The hatred of Richard Dawkins, a man whom most theists have never met, personally spoken to, and often haven't even read, comes from the same place as the impetus to take over airplanes and smash them into buildings for god. A great many people believe there is a literal war between the righteous and evil, and for many of them, Dawkins embodies all that they have been taught to fear. The name Dawkins could just as easily be substituted for "The United States of America", or "fundamentalist Islam", and a certain subset of believers will feel the immediate need to go to war.
- brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -6/+20It's funny that scripture he quoted was actually about the jewish RELIGIOUS LEADERS of that time.
- brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15"I don't understand why atheists have to verbally attack everyone who doesn't believe like them. I'm a Christian, and I don't recall verbally attacking anyone else because of their beliefs in my life."
You have to admit that other people calling themselves Christian HAVE verbally attacked everyone that doesn't believe like them. The fact that you don't should make you realize that not all "Christians" are the same, so logically, not all Atheists are the same either. - Mushroonaut, on 07/11/2008, -3/+16Richard is THE MAN!
I honor his bravery for trying to wake up the World, especially America from it´s nonsense of religion and how dangerous it is. - beatdown, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Your mom is full of *****. It is called Glossolalia and it has been thoroughly debunked in the scientific community. Accept it and move on.
- spudicus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12@infradead
"Dawkins used to really annoy me. Whenever I tried reading his books, he seemed very shrill and stridently anti-religion, and I wondered why he had such a thing going. It occurred to me one day that he is very much like a number of academics I've had the privilege of working with: very intelligent, prepared for an argument, and can detect even microscopic quantities of ***** at several hundred paces :)"
I agree. As I was reading "The God Delusion" it kept pissing me off. I had to step back and figure out why. It was because what I was reading was questioning my deeply held belief that openly questioning what others believe is intolerant. I can see why Dawkins pisses off so many people but I don't think he is shrill or intolerant. I think he is holding others to the same intellectual rigor he holds himself to. I work with structural engineers. The way he interacts with others strikes me as similar to how engineers interact. It can seem arrogant and abrasive but it is more about a desire for precision and cutting through the BS. It was offputting at first but now I enjoy it for its honesty.
I think of Dawkins as more of a naturalist. He doesn't say the supernatural, including god, can't exist, just that there isn't any evidence that it does. It is a given that there are things that we don't or maybe even can't understand due to our limited perceptions. Dawkins just doesn't jump to the conclusion that things we don't understand have a supernatural nature. I think history bears this out. Things that have been perceived as supernatural have repeatedly turned out to have natural, observable and verifiable explanations. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14Your mother has no idea what she is saying. "Speaking" in tongues is pure babble and it does NOT follow the Christian belief in the Bible. I used to speak in tongues when I was a kid in church, so did my mother. ITs rubbish
How about this,
Why has Bible-God NEVER EVER in the recorded history of humans, healed an amputee?
Does God answer prayers? According to believers, the answer is certainly yes.
For example, at any Christian bookstore you can find hundreds of books about the power of prayer. On the Internet you can find thousands of testimonials to the many ways that God works in our lives today. Even large city newspapers and national magazines run stories about answered prayers. God seems to be interacting with our world and answering millions of prayers on planet Earth every day.
Now we can start adding pieces of new evidence showing us that God does not exist. For example, we have the case of amputees. If God is real, it is apparent that there is something very odd about amputees. God is supposedly answering millions of prayers on earth every day, but he completely ignores amputated limbs and refuses to restore them. That makes no sense according to the Standard Model of God and Jesus' statements in the Bible.
God's treatment of amputees is inexplicable if God exists, but makes a lot of sense if God is imaginary.
GOD MUST LIKE STUMPS, I GUESS
It is not odd to think God does not exist. And the non-evidence certainly couldn't justify burning in hell for eternity for not "believing" in Him.
That is, if you require evidence. We all can pretend all we want. - MiddleOfNowhere, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15If I may say so: Amen. To every word of this, and I even like the grumpy sound.
Christians and other "believers": If you want a better world, if you want peace and people who respect each other - just do it. Don’t promise an afterlife or traumatize children with stories of hell. Fundamentalists, zealots, religious wackos are turning this planet, this world, the only life we have, into a *****, every single day. Enough already. - humanseemer, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15I need no figurehead to exercise free thought, but I applaud Mr. Dawkins for being one to those who do.
- Brad12088, on 10/12/2007, -7/+17Well deserved.
I always find it funny, no matter how hard religious types try to debate with him, he always comes out on top. - venicerocco, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13Thank God we have atheism.
To Hell with religion. - WestDC, on 10/12/2007, -9/+18I love you, Richard Dawkins.
I asked for your book for Christmas, but my parents probably recognized the irony of giving a book about atheism for Christmas. Don't worry, I'll buy it soon.
Congratulations on being totally awesome. - veganpa, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8How does one promote the idea of being rational and acting from reason w/o it seeming like "pushing down throat"? Just because many people believe that their faith cannot be questioned, this doesn't mean that reason and rationality are "preachy."
- vertinox, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9@"It is the extremists on any side of any topic that make the moderate majority look bad, and that is what he is doing."
Can you be a moderate on everything? I mean what if we are talking about cannibalism? If you are a moderate on cannibalism does it mean that it is ok as long as you don't eat too many people in the process? - corser, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7How is it "harsh and self-righteous" for him to not believe in any gods when for many people they deny the existence of any god but the one their religion worships. Isn't it more arrogant to say "Everyone else's sky buddy is wrong, except for mine, my religion has is right" without any proof other than it is what you grew up with and a book written 2000 years ago including mistranslations and ( possible ) editing.
For many atheists it is a matter of proof, the isn't any and thus logic would dictate that we should not accept the existance of God. If proof does come in then many of us will immediately reconsider our position. -
Show 51 - 100 of 248 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is