Friday, February 6, 2009
Renewed Motivations
I have been struggling to gather motivation to write a book on the subject of atheism. As of late I simply have not felt like doing much productive. That was till this morning when I went on YouTube and watched a video someone had sent me as an “Epic Fail!” candidate by a user named Since33AD with a link on the side to the conservapedia article on atheism. Needless to say, the article was so full of bull shit that I feel a new breath of life come into my desire to write my book. Needless to say, the conservapedia article was nothing more then a totally bias and heavy handed bit of atheist bashing filled with the usual tripe.
Labels:
athism,
book,
conservapedia,
lies,
motivation,
total bull shit,
tripe
Sunday, January 18, 2009
Religulous
So, the other thing which I have been pestered about as of late is whether or not I have seen Bill Maher’s movie Religulous. I can now finally say that I have now seen it. my over-all opinion of it is that it was better then I thought. It was not a heavy handed, in your face, fuck all religious people, sort of movie one might expect it to be. I am still amazed on a daily basis how the faithful can simultaneously constantly be on the retreat when it comes to giving reason and evidence and yet at the same time be on the advance when it comes to asserting their dogma is “truth”. How is it that the human mind can call something “truth” then they cannot even give a valid reason for why it should be believed, let alone for why it actually is the truth. That said, the movie was somewhat of an edifying experience, but over all told me nothing I did not already now, and in some ways only dealt with things on a very surface level.
Labels:
Atheism,
belief,
Bill Maher,
christianity,
dogma,
faith,
god,
islam,
movie,
religion,
Religulous,
theism,
truth
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Venomfangx's site
People keep asking me about Venomfangx’s web site. I have to say that my basic take on it is that he created it as a place where he would be the king of the castle. This is in keeping with his narcissistic and dictatorial personality. As for the content of the site, it is filled with the sort of creationist drivel we have all come to expect from mini-Hovind.
If you are up for some masochistic lulz, the URL is www.venomfangxsite.com
If you are up for some masochistic lulz, the URL is www.venomfangxsite.com
Labels:
Atheism,
belief,
bible,
creationism,
Jesus Christ,
Kent Hovind,
philosophy,
Venomfangx
Friday, December 26, 2008
Daleks
my current preoccupation is a simply yet addicting game called "Daleks" based on the BBC show Doctor Who.
it is free online HERE
basically, you are on a board where you have to avoid the Daleks while tricking them into crashing into each other. you can also teleport to a random location on the board, and you have a sonic screwdriver that kills any Daleks on nearby squares.
it seems simply, but it is addicting.
Try it out.
it is free online HERE
basically, you are on a board where you have to avoid the Daleks while tricking them into crashing into each other. you can also teleport to a random location on the board, and you have a sonic screwdriver that kills any Daleks on nearby squares.
it seems simply, but it is addicting.
Try it out.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Roger Moore Says Bond Is Too Violent!
I Personally am a big fan of James Bond, but I have to say that I was somewhat perplexed by this news article where Roger Moore (a former James Bond himself) said that he thinks the Bond movies have become too violent.
http://movies.yahoo.com/mv/news/va/20081111/122643635200.html
JAMES BOND IS AN ASSASSIN!!!
HE HAS A LICENSE TO KILL!
WTF?! is he supposed to have tea with people?
http://movies.yahoo.com/mv/news/va/20081111/122643635200.html
JAMES BOND IS AN ASSASSIN!!!
HE HAS A LICENSE TO KILL!
WTF?! is he supposed to have tea with people?
Friday, July 25, 2008
Getting Back In The Swing
I really need to get back in the swing of writing in this thing. I opened it for a reason, and that reason was as a sort of supplement to my YouTube account.
Recently, I began a discussion with HumbleOrthodox that wound up placing me in the position of being opposed to what a number of atheist define atheism as, and that atheism would then have a burden of proof placed on it under my definition. The strange thing is, that even when I debate people this issue, and even when I come very close to convincing my self I am right, or I am close to seeing how they are actually correct, I seem to be never arrive at a conclusion. So resolving this has become my current preoccupation. When I have figured it all out, I am sure I will make a video.
Currently thought, still reject the idea that “weak atheism” is a lack of belief in god, because ask the question “do you believe god does not exist?” and they would have to say “No” to that as well. For one thing, I argue that this would be to say they the do not believe that god does not exist, which would be a double negative that lead to the positive that they believe that god exists. Not only would the be absurd, but it would contradict their first claim that they lack that very belief.
So this is a to be continued, but hopefully I will get better about writing in here.
Be sure to RSS.
Peter
Recently, I began a discussion with HumbleOrthodox that wound up placing me in the position of being opposed to what a number of atheist define atheism as, and that atheism would then have a burden of proof placed on it under my definition. The strange thing is, that even when I debate people this issue, and even when I come very close to convincing my self I am right, or I am close to seeing how they are actually correct, I seem to be never arrive at a conclusion. So resolving this has become my current preoccupation. When I have figured it all out, I am sure I will make a video.
Currently thought, still reject the idea that “weak atheism” is a lack of belief in god, because ask the question “do you believe god does not exist?” and they would have to say “No” to that as well. For one thing, I argue that this would be to say they the do not believe that god does not exist, which would be a double negative that lead to the positive that they believe that god exists. Not only would the be absurd, but it would contradict their first claim that they lack that very belief.
So this is a to be continued, but hopefully I will get better about writing in here.
Be sure to RSS.
Peter
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
