Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
#26: The closed systemis the universe, thus the second law of thermodynamics dictates that within it, things are tending to break down. The second law applies universally.
#20
So being an atheist and denounce the christian god is arrogant, while you use your holy book and literally believe the atheist is doomed in hell with eternal misery and torture is….. what?
One of my problems with your faith is that it is just one simple religion among numerous. You believe in an old static book with lots of gunk i find totally appalling. Yes, there is love and forgiveness on one side, but there is soooo much more.
So, if I was shopping around for death insurance, which religion should I go for? Most of them are mutually damning the others, so if I choose one, but another is right, I’m screwed. Well. Not really. It just shows how ridiculous religion is.
Christians, believing in such a phenomenon as religion is, shouldn’t be alarmed of criticism from atheists. It’s just the right of free speech being used. Speech. Got it? Nothing to be worried about if you are strong in your faith.
32: The second law applies universally.
Well, duh. UNIVERSALLY entropy is increasing. On Earth, however, entropy is decreasing. But doesn’t this break the 2nd law? Well, no, because the Earth is not a closed system.
Let me explain in more detail. Say our solar system is a closed system (it’s not, but its close enough for the sake of this discussion). The way you can decrease entropy in a system is to add energy, in this case the sun. The sun is giving off a ton of energy which the earth uses to decrease its own entropy. But the decrease is minute compared to the increase the Sun is getting as it burns hydrogen, so overall the system is increasing in entropy while certain parts are decreasing.
Or this can probably explain it a lot better then I ever could.
#22
Nothing beats porn and religion when it comes to Internet traffic. John knows this.
You on the other hand, doesn’t know much about this case, so maybe you should tell yourself to stay low?
But, since you brought up “this guy”, (his name is Haggard) I can’t help commenting your weak reasoning for being a christian.
Being a christian might be OK for some people. Seems like it makes you at least feel at ease.
That is if your choice of belief is right. Then you’re a winner David! Unless you should have been a jew, muslim or something else. Then you are as screwed as I am 😛
Now, that’s the “afterlife” part.
How about the life we know we have? And here is where Haggard’s unfortunate situation comes in. He has lived his life trying his best to bash his own sexual orientation. Why? Hm, maybe because the bible states being and acting gay is a terrible terrible behavior and probably a sure ticket to hell.
Point is, your safety net “just in case” does in fact have terrible impact on many people’s lives. As we all have witnessed for Haggard. Ted Haggard, a totally confused person thorn apart by his own sexuality and the bible.
hahahaha great find this video 😀
“the eye form itself” 😉
“you call my flock animals?” 😀 😀
i have to watch more of this comedy channel 🙂
Hey everyone! BgScryAnml has single handedly discovered that the universe is closed! BgScryAnml is a shoe in for the Nobel Prize for assumption!
I wonder who is the more deserving in the eyes of god (if one actually exists).
1 – The believer who does good works because he believes that if he doesn’t he’ll go to hell.
-or-
2 – The unbeliever that does good works because he believes its the right thing to do.
In the eyes of the Christian nut jobs, the believer would win hands down over the non-believer.
If thats not screwed up, then I don’t know what is!
Seems to me that Agnostic would be a better term than Athiest.
33. And speaking of free speech:
Let me take a wild guess that you (and millions of others) BELIEVE! in homosexuality being an innate human quality . (Stick with me now.)This without the backing of hardly a scrap of scientific evidence – if any. That is… you believe simply based upon what others who have told others who have told you. And you (the group of “yous”) crystallize, solidify, justify and otherwise confirm that belief with myriad song fests, speeches, group sessions, sly marketing and good works. Homosexuals exist, therefore homosexuality must be real.
Sound familiar? Sounds a lot like those people who believe in that “static book of gunk,” the Bible. I submit to you those who study the Bible possess more supporting scientific evidence than those who would believe in homosexuality. Which actually isn’t saying much. So instead, how about this similar parallel: Christians exist, therefore Christ/God must be real.
Note: I have no interest to turn this item into a debate about homosexuality. It’s doubtful you’d learn my actual philosophies on the subject in any case. I’m merely illustrating that there are more people of faith condemning other people of faith than you think. (If I had been clever enough to quickly come up with a different example, I would have.)
RBG
I don’t believe Dawkins would mind being labeled an atheist.
RBG:
I think you’re overgeneralizing a position that, unfortunately, is misunderstood by atheists as frequently as anyone else. For one, it is absolutely unnecessary for anyone to provide a scientific basis for homosexuality to believe that being homosexual does not require anyone to justify the circumstance to anyone.
Whether or not anyone chooses to be homosexual or whether it is a part of their nature is irrelevant; what’s at issue is whether or not anyone else can or should make that choice on their behalf.
Otherwise, to take your proposition at face value, it’s actually very simple. On the assumption that you are straight, try to become gay. The two possible outcomes (provided you are, as I said, straight to begin with and unaware of any fact to the contrary) is that you will either be unable to do so, or discover that you are at least bisexual to some degree (unless the experience causes you to lose interest in women, which would be more of an epiphany than demonstrate a cause effect relationship, since there would be no bisexuals if there were).
While it’s hardly discovering the gay gene, it also stands up to the requirements of the scientific method, being falsifiable (you could merely pretend to be gay, or pretend that you were not if the experience proved agreeable, both of which are easily demonstrated to be false) and supports the hypothesis (that being gay or bisexual is not simply a form of kinky sex but a form of sexual attraction analogous to heterosexuals and differing solely due to both partners sharing the same gender) with a result easily verified and reproducible.
This is also substantially different from asserting that the practice is harmful for reasons that, while they cannot be articulated (and have been refuted endlessly and ad nausium where the effort has been made) are doctrine supported by divine authority. Most people could not create a circuit given a battery, some wire and a light bulb, but could be argued to have faith in the principles that allow bulbs to be lit with electricity.
It remains that, under the best of circumstances, a misguided faith resulting from a misunderstood principle trumps one supported solely by assertion that it represents the “will of God” but then people have been attempting to confuse people into thinking that faith has a single definition and that faith of any kind is therefore equivalent.
The problem is that the real issue is not the product of a philosophical disagreement, but mere solipsism. When someone is not persuaded by the merit of a particular belief, regardless of the reason why it failed is secondary to the fact that it did. You ask me, the attempt to validate one’s faith by attempting to assert it’s values through force says a lot more about the person on the crusade than the one who rejects them.
But the really crummy thing about this whole incident is that Mr. Haggard has two choices; he can either believe that there is some meaning and purpose behind God not curing him of teh gayorz that will justify the humiliation and probable self-loathing he is experiencing right about now (at least if he has a shred of integrity, which, in spite of appearances hugely to the contrary, I suspect he does) or blame himself because some part of his mind over which he had no control turned down the help on his behalf.
Worse, he also has no way to acknowledge that God did not solve his bisexuality.
Of course, nobody can point out the obvious and say “this doesn’t work” without being accused of arrogance by a lot of people more than willing to speak on behalf of a deity whose motives and absolute moral authority are beyond human comprehension.
So some of us atheists do a little end-zone dance when somebody with a little juice screws up so huge, especially when it continues a tradition established by similar figures. Militantly anti-Christian? Damned straight! Spend a few years explaining you’re an atheist and I promise, the hostility will make complete sense.
Meantime? IN YOUR FACE, JESUS!
So many people pretending they understand science. 🙁
Entropy has no relevance to the debate on evolution and does not stand in opposition too it which makes me wonder why religious people keep using it as an argument for their case. Don’t pretend to understand entropy and it’s application in science. It is insulting
It is a FACT that evolution has taken place. There are many theories as to HOW this has happened. Understand this before you go shooting of your mouth about theory and fact.
Scientists do not BELIEVE in homosexuality. They observe it is a factual reality of animal behavior and is backed up by a great deal of scientific evidence So, that argument is faulty from the start and really isn’t valid because science allows for new information to disprove it’s stance and religion does not.
Another big one is….. just because you recognize the fact of evolution somehow that means you don’t believe in god. This is just nonsense. It means you don’t believe that the bible is the word of god and is not a source of scientific proof. It means you don’t believe other men when they say they wrote the word of god. It in no way means you don’t believe in god. The two things are not exclusive. Some respectable scientist believe in god and some do not. It is irrelevant to science as long as they keep those beliefs from affecting the objective nature of their study.
Other deities aside for a moment, who needs Dawkins or scientific evidence to disprove the Yahweh myth? It is thoroughly debunked within the pages of the Bible itself. The Bible claims that Yahweh created man in His own image, and this would also imply that certain innate human qualities, such as our conscience, were also created by Him. It seems completely illogical that He would endow me with a conscience that is sickened and revulsed by His own behavior, yet time and time again, the Bible chronicles acts of Yahweh that I find morally reprehensible. To me, it strongly disproves that Yahweh created my conscience. Scientific evidence that casts further doubt on the Bible’s account of creation is entirely superfluous.
Of course, showing what didn’t happen is only a relatively small purpose compared to the larger, more elusive goal of discovering what actually did happen. Perhaps we should take the easy way out and invent a new god with a more up-to-date and plausible story of creation.
What 42, 43, and 44 said.
Wow. #42, 43,44. Great reads. Thanks 🙂
Now, #40 RBG
On behalf of Haggard, (and the rest of us), thank you very much for bringing this back on the right track.
And also thank you for forcing me to look up homosexuality. What John C. Dvorak doesn’t make me learn! I tell you! Well, for instance @ Wikipedia:
“Homosexual behavior has been observed among 1,500 species, and in 500 of those it is well documented.”
So we’re not the only animals practicing homosexual behavior.
And then there was this sweet story of male penguins mating for life, building nests together. And, here’s the best part: using a stone as a surrogate egg!
I believe christians are instructed in the bible to use stones also, but as in “stone them to death”. Now that’s christian humanism to me.
But back to Haggard. His misfortune was that he was born/molded into the christian faith, taking the bible as serious as I agree it should be (if you believe in it).
He denied his sexuality, fooled a woman into marrying him, built a family around this lie, and lied to all the people who bothered listening to him.
And it was AOK for him until reality kicked in. His sexual reality. It’s probably the strongest force there is. And why not? It’s what makes evolution work 😉 Have sex and replicate! Well, not for the above mentioned penguins, but in the big picture: sex makes evolution possible.
Anyway, the bible is old scriptures, with many many outdated attitudes. And taking those seriously brought Haggard into the misery.
And quite frankly, I’m overjoyed it did. It plugged a disgusting hole in national politics.
And who knows, maybe some readers might realize it’s better to accept who you are rather than put your trust in old books.
Again RBG, thank you for bringing this back on the right track.
#42, 43, 44 & 46
Excellent writing and well argued points. A gold star to each of you.
“J”, just to add something to your last paragraph. It has been my experience that when someone believes strongly enough in what “God” did, they believe in what “their” God did. Any other belief is a false God and therefor not God. You either have to believe exactly what and how they believe or you are naturally wrong. After all, it is in the scriptures right here…
In other words, you can’t win the argument.
Please explain Heaven to me. Since your soul goes to heaven and your body returns to dust, what do any of the Christians here expect in heaven? All the senses associated with your body are dead. You won’t “see” past loved ones, a function of optical nerves and brain tissue. In fact all the functions provided by the body will be gone. Knowledge, feelings (no love if your brain’s dead), no hugging, no touching, no talking or sound. What’s that? You’ll use telepathy? Sorry, no brain. To the Muslims … all those virgins and no dick.
A poster above #20 suggested we become the dark matter of the universe. That sounds like fun. Go to heaven and become part of the big bang… um wait is that possible? You would have to go back in time first, but then you wouldn’t have existed yet……
45, 46 and 47: thank you for complimenting a post that was mostly about being entertaining to write than make a point. I suppose it did in spite of itself, but mostly I wanted to air my thoughts and attempt to order them a little. 😀 43 and 44: 45, 46 & 47 are right and I second their commendations.
46. “And also thank you for forcing me to look up homosexuality. … @ Wikipedia:
“Homosexual behavior has been observed among 1,500 species, and in 500 of those it is well documented.””
And thank you for exactly illustrating my point. The fact that you had to look it up (certainly for the first time) proves your belief was previously baseless. Don’t sweat it, you’re in good company. Further, the information you quote is recognizable as the quote from the Oslo gay museum story less than a month old. That information originally comes from who? With what peer review? That information tells me nothing of the possibility of purely “gay” animals. Do they exist? No one you’ve ever met knows. And if all it takes is an observation then you would also agree with the natural condition of interspecies sex? eg. dogs humping your leg.
42. I agree with you that, like religion, no one needs scientific info to justify gay behavior. Just as long as its practice doesn’t collaterally impair or conflict the healthy sexual maturity of growing children, I say. (Like Foley with his boy.)
People can choose to practice gay behavior if they like. Much like bi-sexual people do. Much like people can practice a lot of strange human behaviors given the right circumstances, like suicide and watching “The View.” (In fact, try to commit suicide right now. If you can’t do it, that doesn’t invalidate the notion that life’s circumstances can lead someone else into committing suicide.)
As for faith in the prosaic lighting of a bulb – there are many reasons light might come out of a bulb. And it might not be for the ones you think.
RBG
RGB, just as an experiment I’d like you to sexually desire another man. I don’t mean for you to pretend, but actually become homosexual for a week to prove your point. God will forgive you because you aren’t intending to stay that way and your intent is to prove to non-believers that homosexuality is a choice. He should approve. Just completely shut down your sexual desire for women and reproduction, find a willing homosexual and engage in sexual activity. There should be no feelings of disgust unless a beautiful naked woman joins you in the shower. Then switch back and let us know if you were successful.
#51
Ditto 😀
“Halls of Shame” — Contemplating Haggard’s situation from a spiritual perspective.
“Halls of Shame” — Contemplating Haggard’s situation from a spiritual perspective.
#51 JimR, perfect exercise, even if RBG stops short of acting on his newly adopted impulses. Choosing to whom you’re attracted is patently absurd, but too many religious devotees are disadvantaged by having their logic switch permanently locked in the “off” position.
The difference is, unlike with homosexuality, I believe that turning off one’s logic functions truly is a choice, although I’ll certainly listen to arguments that they were born that way 😉
18 million dollars for a church.
Jesus would be ticked.
If someone didn’t like the arguments in the above video, this one is done in a better environment:
http://tinyurl.com/y3ny5f
#53 – Your spam has no value, and how I know that is that you wrote this on your God Blog or Glog…
Certainly there are spiritual beings and teachers who very naturally have risen above base lower temptations,
That you believe in the idea of “base” or “lower” temptations negates whatever else you think, and not only that I resent your implications and take them personally.
I like big black women with heaving breasts, and like them to don a strap on and take me to the mat. That’s not for you to judge. That beautiful act of love is strictly between me and Beulah.
51 & 52 etc..
RBG’s point has merit.. But he should have mentioned the fact that you need to be whacked on Crystal Meth and the experiments rate of success will increase dramatically.
Oh.. and don’t forget the massage!
#60. “….and non-erotic as getting a flu shot.” So, small needle, huh ?
(Sorry, you write wonderfully well and I simply couldn’t resist ..)