Richard Dawkin Talks to Bill Maher about the God Delusion : RSS 2.0http://www.plime.com/en-usplime.com2009, plime.com.Plime/1http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rssRichard Dawkin Talks to Bill Maher about the God Delusion : RSS 2.0http://www.plime.com/images/logo.gifhttp://www.plime.com/<![CDATA[Richard Dawkin Talks to Bill Maher about the God Delusion]]>http://www.plime.com/entertainment/l/58027/1/http://www.plime.com/entertainment/l/58027/1/plime.com
  comments (38)  share edit history (1)
< 1 2 >
<![CDATA[1thirteen3 @ 4/14/2008 5:46:30 AM]]>« doggylives : I'm not going to start arguing with you on that point as you only seem to have a surface knowledge of the subject so I'm just going to address a couple of simple point.

Are you saying that God magically subdued all the Dinosaurs and all other species of animal (however few or numerous you want to argue they were) to allow Noah to get them all in the ark?

Where did he get enough food from to feed them for a year? Bearing in mind the specific dietry needs of each species.

Is it reasonable to believe that at least one of the species pairs wouldn't have died and therefore render said species incapable of further reproduction?

How did Noah and his small family cope with keeping order between so many different species, cleaning, feeding? Have you any idea how much work would have to go into keeping 2 elephants alive and healthy for a year let alone hundreds of thousands of animals.Like I said before, if He had the capacity to do everything else, why not this small little detail?

Plus, the animals didn't have to be adults. And the flood lasted for 150 days, not an entire year. Nevertheless, that's a moot point.

IF there is a God who could have created the whole world, why was he also not powerful and intelligent enough to not screw it all up? Christs sake, according to the bible God's plans got f**ked up by a talking snake! That doesn't smack of an all powerful God but rather of an inept screw-up.
If he gave us free will to sin, I don't see how it's his fault. I'd blame the humans that sinned.

IF he's so powerful and amazing and benevolent and loving why the crap we see today in the world? (rhetorical question, please don't start preaching to me about God's love and Jesus sacrifice)
I won't preach to you. But, the reason why we see crap today in the world is because of sin. It's because we're allowed to wrong. God gave us a free will, and many use their free will for bad, not good.

If you're talking about natural disasters and stuff, I don't have answer for you, because I am not going to even try and explain why God allowed natural disasters to kill people.

All evidence points to IF there is a God, he's not "all powerful" he's a bit crap.
I wasn't trying to provide evidence, I was just trying to prove empirically the Bible.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q39http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q39plime.com <![CDATA[doggylives @ 4/14/2008 5:04:30 AM]]>« 1thirteen3 : It was an if statement. IF A then B. So I said, IF there was a God that created the entire world, and IF he knew in advance he was going to flood the earth, wouldn't you assume he would have the power to get every animal on the boat?

No, it's not ridiculous.

Everything (ok not everything), but most everything that deals with numbers will be a bell curve. Evolution, actually, works more with a bell curve than Creation.

So, when the world was created, there were a set amount of animals, they started reproducing with each other, and speciation started to occur. It is entirely reasonable to assume that there were many more species of animals 1000 years ago than there are today. It is also entirely reasonable to assume that there were many more species of animals 1000 years ago than there were when the flood happened.I'm not going to start arguing with you on that point as you only seem to have a surface knowledge of the subject so I'm just going to address a couple of simple point.

Are you saying that God magically subdued all the Dinosaurs and all other species of animal (however few or numerous you want to argue they were) to allow Noah to get them all in the ark?

Where did he get enough food from to feed them for a year? Bearing in mind the specific dietry needs of each species.

Is it reasonable to believe that at least one of the species pairs wouldn't have died and therefore render said species incapable of further reproduction?

How did Noah and his small family cope with keeping order between so many different species, cleaning, feeding? Have you any idea how much work would have to go into keeping 2 elephants alive and healthy for a year let alone hundreds of thousands of animals.

It's all based up the IF statements to be honest with you. The Bible is a very self-contained and self-preserved book.
I've heard this one before. It's code for "Cannot be verified, has no basis in reality so best not to even question it. It just is"

IF there is a God that can create the entire world, would you not say that the same God could allow anything to happen that he wanted?
IF there is a God who could have created the whole world, why was he also not powerful and intelligent enough to not screw it all up? Christs sake, according to the bible God's plans got f**ked up by a talking snake! That doesn't smack of an all powerful God but rather of an inept screw-up. IF he's so powerful and amazing and benevolent and loving why the crap we see today in the world? (rhetorical question, please don't start preaching to me about God's love and Jesus sacrifice)

Yeah, you'd have to believe there was a God first, but the idea is that if there is an all powerful God, then he can be all powerful.
All evidence points to IF there is a God, he's not "all powerful" he's a bit crap.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q38http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q38plime.com <![CDATA[1thirteen3 @ 4/14/2008 4:15:46 AM]]>« doggylives : So your reasonable, believable and practical way for explaining how two off all the animals on earth got to Noah's ark is basically "Dunno, magic or sumfing"It was an if statement. IF A then B. So I said, IF there was a God that created the entire world, and IF he knew in advance he was going to flood the earth, wouldn't you assume he would have the power to get every animal on the boat?

This comment is probably one of the most asinine that I've heard you come out with. To verbally shrug off someones questions about the account of Noah's Ark with a comment like this is ridiculous.

Ridiculous on so many levels.
No, it's not ridiculous.

Everything (ok not everything), but most everything that deals with numbers will be a bell curve. Evolution, actually, works more with a bell curve than Creation.

So, when the world was created, there were a set amount of animals, they started reproducing with each other, and speciation started to occur. It is entirely reasonable to assume that there were many more species of animals 1000 years ago than there are today. It is also entirely reasonable to assume that there were many more species of animals 1000 years ago than there were when the flood happened.

It's all based up the IF statements to be honest with you. The Bible is a very self-contained and self-preserved book.

IF there is a God that can create the entire world, would you not say that the same God could allow anything to happen that he wanted?

Yeah, you'd have to believe there was a God first, but the idea is that if there is an all powerful God, then he can be all powerful.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q37http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q37plime.com <![CDATA[doggylives @ 4/14/2008 3:17:29 AM]]>« 1thirteen3 : We see, here's how I can explain it.

IF there is a God, and IF he created the earth, and IF he said he would cause a worldwide flood, don't you think He'd have the power to move every animal to the ark?

Plus, there may not have been as many species back then as speciation has occurred for many years.So your reasonable, believable and practical way for explaining how two off all the animals on earth got to Noah's ark is basically "Dunno, magic or sumfing"

there may not have been as many species back then as speciation has occurred for many years.
This comment is probably one of the most asinine that I've heard you come out with. To verbally shrug off someones questions about the account of Noah's Ark with a comment like this is ridiculous.

Ridiculous on so many levels.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q36http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q36plime.com <![CDATA[1thirteen3 @ 4/13/2008 6:44:07 PM]]>« doggylives : Care to explain in a reasonable, practical and believable way how Noah got 2 of every species of animal into the ark?

Bear in mind that there would have been many more species than there are today due to species becoming extinct over the years and remember that there are still thousands upon thousands of species still likely to be discovered in the future.

I ask because this is one of the major reasons that for me discredits the entire bible.We see, here's how I can explain it.

IF there is a God, and IF he created the earth, and IF he said he would cause a worldwide flood, don't you think He'd have the power to move every animal to the ark?

Plus, there may not have been as many species back then as speciation has occurred for many years.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q35http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q35plime.com <![CDATA[MelgEsevad @ 4/13/2008 5:40:39 PM]]>« Bornbad : Richard Dawkins is my 16 year old son's favorite atheist. My boys went to one of his lectures at UC Berkeley a few weeks ago.Really? My favorite atheist is Douglas Adams.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q34http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q34plime.com <![CDATA[Bornbad @ 4/13/2008 5:19:55 PM]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q33http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q33plime.com <![CDATA[psycmoe @ 4/13/2008 3:27:04 PM]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q32http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q32plime.com <![CDATA[mennufer @ 4/13/2008 3:09:18 PM]]>« xenity7 : *slow clap*

That is completely what atheists believe. It makes religious people too angry if we say it all the time, but if you don't believe in god because of a lack of empirical evidence, you pretty much have to think anyone who does is an idiot in some respect.I am an atheist, and this is not what I believe. Please do not make stereotypical remarks about an entire group of people based on the beliefs of a few people from that group.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q31http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q31plime.com <![CDATA[doggylives @ 4/13/2008 2:27:08 PM]]>« xenity7 : *slow clap*

That is completely what atheists believe. It makes religious people too angry if we say it all the time, but if you don't believe in god because of a lack of empirical evidence, you pretty much have to think anyone who does is an idiot in some respect.I consider myself an Atheist if I had to put a label on what I believe but I just want to distance myself from the comment you just made.

I don't consider anyone who believes in whatever they want, be it fairies, Santa Claus or the man on the moon, to be idiots in any way shape or form. I might consider them naive, ill-informed or gullible if they blindly follow and belive without a good knowledge of what they are putting faith in.

But Idiots? Sorry, no.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q30http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q30plime.com <![CDATA[xenity7 @ 4/13/2008 2:17:01 PM]]>« 1thirteen3

It's more that when you ridicule instead of poke fun. It's like they're saying that just because you believe in God, and the biblical story, you automatically give up any intelligence, when nothing is further from the truth.
*slow clap*

That is completely what atheists believe. It makes religious people too angry if we say it all the time, but if you don't believe in god because of a lack of empirical evidence, you pretty much have to think anyone who does is an idiot in some respect.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q29http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q29plime.com <![CDATA[Hypersapien @ 4/13/2008 1:57:58 PM]]>« doggylives : Holy s**t, I'll try and explain again..

I cannot believe anyone who is at the level where they will be able to edit 1thirteen3's comment would actually edit out a part of it.

OH! Ok, now I understand what you're saying. Yes. I agree.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q28http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q28plime.com <![CDATA[doggylives @ 4/13/2008 1:51:25 PM]]>« chinook : I liked that interview, it was funny!

Dawkins is a smart fellow. I enjoyed his commentary regarding Blair, too.

I have so much respect for the man because he's humble enough to admit he could be wrong and there could be a god(s), though all evidence points towards an absence of any.

6.9 on a scale of 7. That's where I am, too!It's funny because I'm not entirely opposed to the idea of an unseen force that started off the process of life on earth if it could be proven, which is why like you, I leave open the possibility of a creator until it is proven one way or another.

I am however opposed to the idea of God as a caring, loving identity that cares about humans. I'm also opposed to the idea that the bible is a factual, accurate and divinely inspired book.

You only have to look in detail into the bible and it becomes blatantly obvious that it has no scientific, logical groundings at all. If you can discredit portions of the bible as being inaccurate then the rest of it is also spurious, to put it politely.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q27http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q27plime.com <![CDATA[chinook @ 4/13/2008 1:42:46 PM]]>
Dawkins is a smart fellow. I enjoyed his commentary regarding Blair, too.

I have so much respect for the man because he's humble enough to admit he could be wrong and there could be a god(s), though all evidence points towards an absence of any.

6.9 on a scale of 7. That's where I am, too!]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q26http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q26plime.com <![CDATA[chinook @ 4/13/2008 1:40:37 PM]]>« 1thirteen3 : Well, do you know what's under the ocean? Land. We still have pangaea :) Cept, the Pangaea you're talking about removes about 30% of AfricaI have no clue as to what you are talking about.

There is no land under the ocean, there is sea floor. Basalt, to be preicse, which is denser than continental crust so it gets covered by ocean. If it was land, it wouldn't be covered by the ocean.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q25http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q25plime.com <![CDATA[chinook @ 4/13/2008 1:38:49 PM]]>« coldbladed : 6,000 years ago according to biblical historians who don't have a lot of actual evidence on their side. I don't believe in the young earth theory myself. But humans being around 250million years ago might be a bit silly as well. Then again I'm still skeptical of the accuracy of carbon dating. I guess I share skepticism for both sides.Why? Why are you skeptical of carbon dating? It's just as reliable and accurate as most other scientific methods.

As a scientist, one thing that makes me so mad is the fact that everyone assumes that 14C is the ONLY dating method out there. It's great, but it won't work for anything to do with plate tectonics, because tectonic processes generally take millions of years.

Just so you know. No scientist would use carbon dating for something like dating Pangaea.

Also, fun fact for today, Pangaea was not the only supercontinent in the history of Earth. Wilson cycles, it's all Wilson cycles.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q24http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q24plime.com <![CDATA[doggylives @ 4/13/2008 1:32:03 PM]]>« 1thirteen3 : Well, do you know what's under the ocean? Land. We still have pangaea :) Cept, the Pangaea you're talking about removes about 30% of AfricaCare to explain in a reasonable, practical and believable way how Noah got 2 of every species of animal into the ark?

Bear in mind that there would have been many more species than there are today due to species becoming extinct over the years and remember that there are still thousands upon thousands of species still likely to be discovered in the future.

I ask because this is one of the major reasons that for me discredits the entire bible.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q23http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q23plime.com <![CDATA[1thirteen3 @ 4/13/2008 1:21:39 PM]]>« doggylives : The only problem with this is that the bible dates the creation of man back to around 6,000 years ago, the Pangaea is thought to have existed some 250 million years ago.Well, do you know what's under the ocean? Land. We still have pangaea :) Cept, the Pangaea you're talking about removes about 30% of Africa]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q22http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q22plime.com <![CDATA[coldbladed @ 4/13/2008 1:16:02 PM]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q21http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q21plime.com <![CDATA[doggylives @ 4/13/2008 1:12:39 PM]]>« coldbladed :

As for Noah's ark, if Pangaea is real, as some plate tectonic scientists would have us believe...The only problem with this is that the bible dates the creation of man back to around 6,000 years ago, the Pangaea is thought to have existed some 250 million years ago.

If the bible is to be believed the land masses as we know them now were roughly in the same position making the collecting and journeying of every species of animal to Noah's ark highly improbable and bordering on totally impossible.

If you objectively read the bibles creation account and many other of it's stories any reasonable person will conclude that at best it's a collection of mythical stories handed down through generations and at worst a tool for controlling the masses.

Again, all IMHO.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q20http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q20plime.com <![CDATA[coldbladed @ 4/13/2008 12:42:40 PM]]>« doggylives :

All above comments strictly IMHO.Christianity has had its fair share of "I can't get no respect." I guess poking fun is better than throwing us to the lions like in the old times eh? :D There was a period where the Vatican ruled the modern world followed by when England and the Vatican ruled the modern world but that only seems like a lot because it was more recent. It was actually a pretty short period on the world history scale, I think.

I'm not saying that people shouldn't be able to poke fun at Christianity, not at all, but I think its a bit hypocritical to tell Christians not to be bothered by it. As I said before if it was anyone else they'd be screaming bloody murder and a press release apologizing wouldn't be far behind. People lose jobs/lives for offending Islam.

As for organized religion I'm actually with you there. Hasn't been a church I've visited without "holier than thou" a-holes etc etc. But I don't judge my faith based on its followers, people in general are selfish idiots so it stands to reason any faith would have its fair share of bad apples.

As for Noah's ark, if Pangaea is real, as some plate tectonic scientists would have us believe...]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q19http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q19plime.com <![CDATA[1thirteen3 @ 4/13/2008 12:35:24 PM]]>« doggylives : Holy s**t, I'll try and explain again..

I cannot believe anyone who is at the level where they will be able to edit 1thirteen3's comment would actually edit out a part of it.

What I mean by their level is that someone who has a sufficiently higher level than 1thirteen3's and is therefore able to edit his comment, I cannot see them been asinine enough to edit it.

By mentioning the level I mean that someone who is at a level to edit his comment (like yourself) obviously is a regular Plimate and therefore unlikely to be participating in said asshatery.

Please address any further queries about my comment to Ifyoucannotunderstandasimplecommentstoptakingthedrugs@hotmail.com :)Well, it's not the first time my posts have been edited. It's actually the third. That's why I got so pissed about it. Sorry if I made it seem as though you were editing it.

P.s. Crusades was the Catholic Church, and I'm not Catholic :). Either way, though, I don't condone what they did.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q18http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q18plime.com <![CDATA[doggylives @ 4/13/2008 12:09:05 PM]]>« coldbladed : If all those jokes and been directed at Muslims you guys might be singing a different tune.

Christianity is the religion the whole world gets to make fun of. Ah well :)

As for the subject matter I don't think believing in God is any more harmful than Atheism. You can point at history and show tons of travesties done in the name of God but I would contend that they were actually done because someone in power manipulated people and religion was the best scape-goat at the time. Bad things are simply done by bad people.I don't have a problem with anyone believing what they want and voicing that as long as I have equal right to believe what I want and voice that too.

Christianity has had way too much respect, had it's own way and been tip-toed round for too long IMO. People have been persecuted and mocked for years for not believing in God or refusing to bow to organized religion so if someone wants to poke a bit of fun or criticize then so be it.

I DO have a problem with organized religion and I have a problem with the bible, the hate it generates towards certain walks of life being a major bug-bear with me.

If someone chooses to believe in a book written by animal-sacrificing primitives that would have us believe that all the animals in the world were within walking distance of Noah's ark then good on them but I reserve all rights to be able to criticize, disbelieve and disagree with it.

All above comments strictly IMHO.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q17http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q17plime.com <![CDATA[doggylives @ 4/13/2008 11:59:57 AM]]>« Hypersapien : Can you rephrase that bit? I'm not sure I understand it. I'm able to edit his post.Holy s**t, I'll try and explain again..

I cannot believe anyone who is at the level where they will be able to edit 1thirteen3's comment would actually edit out a part of it.

What I mean by their level is that someone who has a sufficiently higher level than 1thirteen3's and is therefore able to edit his comment, I cannot see them been asinine enough to edit it.

By mentioning the level I mean that someone who is at a level to edit his comment (like yourself) obviously is a regular Plimate and therefore unlikely to be participating in said asshatery.

Please address any further queries about my comment to Ifyoucannotunderstandasimplecommentstoptakingthedrugs@hotmail.com :)]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q16http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q16plime.com <![CDATA[coldbladed @ 4/13/2008 11:54:56 AM]]>
Christianity is the religion the whole world gets to make fun of. Ah well :)

As for the subject matter I don't think believing in God is any more harmful than Atheism. You can point at history and show tons of travesties done in the name of God but I would contend that they were actually done because someone in power manipulated people and religion was the best scape-goat at the time. Bad things are simply done by bad people.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q15http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q15plime.com <![CDATA[Hypersapien @ 4/13/2008 11:40:26 AM]]>« doggylives : Yeh, I got that bit. I'll rephrase my comment...

...

I seriously can't see anyone at the level to be able to deleting part of it.
Can you rephrase that bit? I'm not sure I understand it. I'm able to edit his post.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q14http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q14plime.com <![CDATA[tundramonkey @ 4/13/2008 11:35:09 AM]]>« Hypersapien : No one's beliefs are so sacred that they are prohibited from being ridiculed. If it is possible to effectively ridicule them, then there must be something wrong with them.Without ridicule, science wouldn't have advanced at all.

The earth is round? You're an idiot: Prove it! And so we learn the Earth's circumference (sort of).

We live on thin rocky plates floating on a sea of liquid hot magma? You're an idiot: Prove it! And so we have a much better, though by no means thourough, understanding of plate tectonics.

Religions can't hold up to a bit of ridicule? Maybe it's because they're not real and viable?]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q13http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q13plime.com <![CDATA[tundramonkey @ 4/13/2008 11:31:55 AM]]>« 1thirteen3 : Good interview, I think the anti-Christian jokes could've been kept to a minimum, though. Hmm, I thought the anti-Xtian jokes were kept to a minimum.

A talking snake? That is ridiculous. I don't think it would have been considered offensive if he picked a myth from another religion, though.

And yes, whomever edited your post is a moron. I didn't do it.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q12http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q12plime.com <![CDATA[doggylives @ 4/13/2008 10:51:44 AM]]>« Hypersapien : He didn't say that someone deleted his post. He said someone edited it, deleting a few sentences from it.Yeh, I got that bit. I'll rephrase my comment...

I don't know how accurate this is because I've never in all the time I've been on Plime seen anyones post edited for any other reason than Spamming.

Methinks 1thirteen3 maybe just messed his post up and thought someone deleted part of it. I seriously can't see anyone at the level to be able to deleting part of it.
]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q11http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q11plime.com <![CDATA[Hypersapien @ 4/13/2008 10:37:28 AM]]>« doggylives : I don't know how accurate this is because I've never in all the time I've been on Plime seen anyones post edited for any other reason than Spamming.

Methinks 1thirteen3 maybe just messed his post up and thought someone deleted it. I seriously can't see anyone at the level to be able to deleting it.He didn't say that someone deleted his post. He said someone edited it, deleting a few sentences from it.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q10http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q10plime.com <![CDATA[doggylives @ 4/13/2008 10:28:57 AM]]>« Hypersapien :

That being said, not cool editing other people's posts without a damn good reason, people! Someone non-belligerently voicing an opinion you don't agree with is not a good reason.I don't know how accurate this is because I've never in all the time I've been on Plime seen anyones post edited for any other reason than Spamming.

Methinks 1thirteen3 maybe just messed his post up and thought someone deleted it. I seriously can't see anyone at the level to be able to deleting it.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q9http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q9plime.com <![CDATA[Hypersapien @ 4/13/2008 10:23:19 AM]]>
That being said, not cool editing other people's posts without a damn good reason, people! Someone non-belligerently voicing an opinion you don't agree with is not a good reason.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q8http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q8plime.com <![CDATA[doggylives @ 4/13/2008 5:59:38 AM]]>« 1thirteen3 : Kill people if they don't believe in your god? lol
Yeh, because killing people in the name of religion for not believing in God would be unheard of! *cough*crusades*cough*

And you understand the point I was making but like a lot of people feel the need to distract from valid points by highlighting something frivolous and inconsequential.;) I believe it's called the "Ohhh, look over here" syndrome.

*edit*

*cough*Burning Heretics at the stake*cough*]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q7http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q7plime.com <![CDATA[1thirteen3 @ 4/13/2008 5:46:56 AM]]>« doggylives : Please don't ridicule my God. You've just offended thousands of Vikings, way to go!

All jokes aside if you'd have laughed at Thor around a Viking they would have killed you. He's kinda hard to take seriously now though, huh?

Hmmmmm, I wonder if there's a lesson here somewhere?Kill people if they don't believe in your god? lol

I think i'll go the more peaceful route :)]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q6http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q6plime.com <![CDATA[doggylives @ 4/13/2008 5:43:56 AM]]>« 1thirteen3 :

Haha, reminds me of a cartoon show i used to watch.Please don't ridicule my God. You've just offended thousands of Vikings, way to go!

All jokes aside if you'd have laughed at Thor around a Viking they would have killed you. He's kinda hard to take seriously now though, huh?

Hmmmmm, I wonder if there's a lesson here somewhere?]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q5http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q5plime.com <![CDATA[1thirteen3 @ 4/13/2008 5:19:08 AM]]>« doggylives : Why? Just because you believe something means other people can't/shouldn't poke fun of it or make light of it?No, again, for me, it all comes down to the way you do it. You can poke fun at it, and that's fine, I don't mind jokes.

It's more that when you ridicule instead of poke fun. It's like they're saying that just because you believe in God, and the biblical story, you automatically give up any intelligence, when nothing is further from the truth.

How many God's do you believe in btw 1thirteen? Do you believe in the Judai/Christian God?
Yes, I believe in the Trinity.

I'm seriously starting to believe in Thor recently. If it was good enough for the Vikings, eh? Plus I dig his groovy hammer.

Click here to show image
Haha, reminds me of a cartoon show i used to watch.]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q4http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q4plime.com <![CDATA[doggylives @ 4/13/2008 4:46:08 AM]]>« 1thirteen3 : Good interview, I think the anti-Christian jokes could've been kept to a minimum, though.Why? Just because you believe something means other people can't/shouldn't poke fun of it or make light of it?

How many God's do you believe in btw 1thirteen? Do you believe in the Judai/Christian God?

I'm seriously starting to believe in Thor recently. If it was good enough for the Vikings, eh? Plus I dig his groovy hammer.

Click here to show image
]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q3http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q3plime.com <![CDATA[1thirteen3 @ 4/13/2008 4:10:36 AM]]>
Seriously people, don't edit my post. It used to say:

"I thought I would never agree with Richard Dawkins on anything, but I liked what he said about being a 6 out of 7, and not fully *knowing* anything. Just as you can't *know* there is a God, doesn't mean you can't *know* that there is not one"

EDIT: Though, I somewhat wonder why he put his scale on a 7 and not a 10...]]>http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q2http://www.plime.com/l/58027/1/rss2_0.rss#q2plime.com