b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » B3ta Christmas Cards » Message 10284846

[challenge entry] Perhaps I should have done this last compo too...

From the B3ta Christmas Cards challenge. See all 372 entries (closed)

(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 10:55, archived)
# ahaha
Dawkins and Assange - hey - they look quite similar!
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 10:58, archived)
# ...and you never see them in the same room together
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 11:05, archived)
# And they're both determined to kill the magic in everything.
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 11:10, archived)
# What a fucking killjoy
Scientist and atheist Richard Dawkins has admitted he does celebrate Christmas - and enjoys singing traditional Christmas carols each festive season.

The writer and evolutionary biologist told singer Jarvis Cocker that he happily wishes everyone a Merry Christmas - and used to have a tree when his daughter was younger.

Dawkins, one of the most famous atheists in the world, was interviewed by Sheffield born Cocker when he stepped in as a Christmas guest editor on Radio Four's Today programme.

'I am perfectly happy on Christmas day to say Merry Christmas to everybody,' Dawkins said. 'I might sing Christmas carols - once I was privileged to be invited to Kings College, Cambridge, for their Christmas carols and loved it.

'I actually love most of the genuine Christmas carols. I can't bear Jingle Bells and Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer and you might think from that that I was religious, that I can't bear the ones that make no mention of religion. But I just think they are dreadful tunes and even more dreadful words. I like the traditional Christmas carols.'


Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1100842/Why-I-celebrate-Christmas-worlds-famous-atheist.html#ixzz18GwCFITj
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 11:13, archived)
# same as most of the rest of us then?
except for perhaps the carols
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 11:18, archived)
# ^ Words
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 11:22, archived)
# Yes.
A word is the smallest free form (an item that may be uttered in isolation with semantic or pragmatic content) in a language, in contrast to a morpheme, which is the smallest unit of meaning. A word may consist of only one morpheme (e.g. so, very), but a single morpheme may not be able to exist as a free form (e.g. the English plural morpheme -s).
Typically, a word will include a root or stem, and it may also include one or more affixes. Words can be combined to create other units of language, such as phrases, clauses, and/or sentences. A word consisting of two or more stems joined together form a compound.

Word may refer to a spoken word or a written word, or sometimes, the abstract concept behind either. Spoken words are made up of phonemes, and written words of graphemes.
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 11:29, archived)
# ^ Would
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 11:51, archived)
# Phwoar!
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 12:03, archived)
# As has been said
Just like the rest of us
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 11:24, archived)
# Not me.
I happily sit on the fence, happy that we won't know until we're dead.
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 11:35, archived)
# I'm not generally a fan of ignorance.
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 11:37, archived)
# You're just determined to kill the magic in everything.
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 11:38, archived)
# yup,
but not the wonder.
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 11:39, archived)
# Good response!
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 11:42, archived)
# ^
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 11:52, archived)
# Me neither.
Nor preposterous, arrogant claims about knowing the unknowable.
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 11:42, archived)
# They should never have let that Galileo out of jail.
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 11:47, archived)
# And who makes such preposterous, arrogant claims?
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 11:55, archived)
# Ah yes Dawkins is famous for making preposterous claims about knowing the unknowable
what with his evidence-based, scientific approach
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 11:56, archived)
# How in the name of Geoff can one state "There is no god"
Infinite regression is infinite.
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 12:04, archived)
# Dawkins never states that there is no god
Even in The God Delusion, you know, his book on the subject, he describes himself as a 6.9 on the atheist scale (with 7 being certain there is no god) as it would completely unscientific to outright claim "there is no god"

Please, please try reading his books instead of spouting tabloidesque knee-jerk reactions...you'll be telling us "they're trying to ban Christmas and replace it with Winterval" next
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 12:09, archived)
# I didn't say he did claim there is no god.
Please try reading my posts instead of spouting hysterical defensive knee-jerk reactions - you'll be telling us everybody's equal and world peace is in our grasp next.
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 12:13, archived)
# Whatever, yeah you're right Dawkins is a pantomime atheist villain who just wants to spoil it for everyone
well done, your superior debating skills have won the day again
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 12:28, archived)
# He's certainly an attention whore
I mean "The God Delusion" - why not just be honest and call it "Aren't religious people stewpid? They're all thickies and I'm reeelly clever - look at how clever I am; I can write polysyllables and everything."

It's the intellectual equivalent of Nelson from the Simpsons.

He's an antagonistic, arrogant, pretentious prick - like the best of us, and deliberately feeds on the vulnerability of those desperate to feel righteous.
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 12:38, archived)
# So is there a Zeus or an Odin or a Ra or a Ganesh?
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 12:37, archived)
# I've no idea.
As I stated in the first place.
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 12:42, archived)
# So is there a teapot orbiting Jupiter
or a flying spaghetti monster?
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 12:53, archived)
# I've no idea.
As I stated in the first place.
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 13:00, archived)
# I'm pretty sure that what he says is "there is almost certainly no god"
just as some say there is almost certainly no flying spaghetti monster.

And all the art and architecture that's been created since the first nerf herder was scared off some other bloke's missus by the hellfire pronouncements of a local priest (coincidentally a friend of the other bloke), just demonstrates the power of fear.

If you want *my* opinion but (come on, who wouldn't), agnosticism is for bedwetters and closeted atheists married to theists.
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 12:47, archived)
# Not really. It's the only viable option.
Both theism and atheism are statements of faith. It's just a wordy version of the linguistic paradox of being unable to prove a negative. CF Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq.
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 12:56, archived)
# or cell
(, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 11:10, archived)