From Amazon:
Not to say a book has to be long to be good but three years late and only 176 pages? I suspect the manuscript was much longer and that was all that could be salvaged.The God Delusion, Hardcover: 416 pages
God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything, Hardcover: 307 pages
The End of Faith (Sam Harris), Hardcover: 336 pages
You understand my vision perfectly.Scented Nectar wrote:If it's a cafe with some tables out on the sidewalk, you might be able to hear the conversations too. :)Gefan wrote:I wish he were standing at a intersection trying to pick up person after person, if only because I'd be encouraged to hope I might one day see something like that in person. If I were really lucky there'd be a nice cafe nearby where I could pull up a seat and order a glass of wine while I watched.Scented Nectar wrote: Police? It would have to be some sort of physical assault or at least someone physically blocking my way in attempt to force me to talk to them. However, I could see how people might want to report him as an ordinary street nuisance, like if he's constantly bugging the same women or staying in the same street/intersection approaching person after person. That could probably cause someone to call the police. Just like they would if someone kept trying to sell them used cars by approaching them on the street.
"Gleeful disrespect?"From the author of one of the web's most popular science blogs, The Happy Atheist takes on religious fanaticism with all the gleeful disrespect it deserves. A small, fearless book that takes aim at big, stupid targets--and nails them.
It took him 6 years to write 176 pages. It took him 6 years to write 176 pages that was, according to himself, so filled with errors that when the editors sent it back to him it was "a wall of purple editor’s marks — just page after page of nits picked and wording/grammatical errors hacked into submission." Huh. Just to bury the point home. Richard Dawkins' book, the Selfish Gene, hardcover, is 352 pages. That was the first book he ever published. The book that put him on the map. Richard "the misogynist, sexist, racist, patriarchal white supremacist, 'does not care for my experience as an atheist woman'" Dawkins.ERV wrote:176 pages.Walter Ego wrote:It's already being offered for sale on Amazon so PZ is committed to clean up the manuscript.cunt wrote:At least 3 years too late. I'm surprised the publishers are even bothering at this point.
The Amazon blurb:
Release date: August 13, 2013
From the author of one of the web's most popular science blogs, The Happy Atheist takes on religious fanaticism with all the gleeful disrespect it deserves. A small, fearless book that takes aim at big, stupid targets--and nails them.
For the last several years, PZ Myers, writing the blog Pharyngula, has entertained millions of readers every month with his infectious love of evolutionary science and his equally infectious disdain for creationism, biblical literalism, "intelligent design" theory, and other products of godly illogic. While PZ does not accept the common atheist argument that religion necessarily makes people do evil, violent things, he does think that, most of the time, it makes them believe in the truly ridiculous--which is exactly what he skewers in this riotously funny book. In fact, The Happy Atheist is so outrageous, it's the only book about religion anyone should take seriously.
...
I just bought the 9 year old a 240 page book.
I don't even need to read it. His topic has already been done, by multiple people who are light years better than him. He has missed the "nu-atheist makes fun of religion' book train by a couple of years.Mykeru wrote:Hey, I just thought as I hit submit.
How about we review Peezus's book in video form and Google-bomb the fucker?
Heh, this thread is starting to sound like the (former) fans of GRRM who got tired of the six year gaps between books that turned out to be mostly filler. At least GRRM had already squeezed out a few decent books before the rot set in.30 pages a year, 2 1/2 pages a month. He really had to s-t-r-a-a-a-i-n to squeeze that one out.
I've had Palestinian felafel. It's very good. They put french fries in it!Michael K Gray wrote:What do you think of Palestinian falafel? Baked by left-handed lesbian negresses with surgically repaired cleft-palates, who are on their day off from tearing down anti-rape posters with Stanley-knives that were used to circumcise sperm whales?sKepptiksowat wrote:Argument for edit button?
No back and forth that I can see. I don't agree with everything Novella says, but he makes a polite and well reasoned case in my limited reading of his writing so far. I find him to be well worth considering when he makes a statement. He posted a comment that I think pretty much everyone here would agree with (I think he comes down on Shermer a bit harder than he should given the over context of the conversation cited, but that is just my opinion). The comment was directed at OB's article on Shermer and he makes the points that we are mostly familiar with. I skimmed the entire comment area and find no response from Ophelia. Apparently, she knew she wasn't going to win that one, so only makes comments outside the forum. Novella's comment in its entirety:Altair wrote:Hmm, thanks for pointing it, Aratina's first tweet makes more sense after reading that. Off I go to read Novella's comments!Apples wrote: Is there an article? I was guessing this was about Novella's back-and-forth with Ophelia over at the Harriet Hall thread:
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/ind ... r-so-much/
chirp....chirp....chirp....# Steven Novella on 06 Feb 2013 at 9:56 am
Ophelia – I agree with the apparent consensus here. Michael’s comment was ill considered and pointless, inviting misinterpretation in an already controversial area. But I do think rational discourse requires charity in interpreting the statements of others.
Likewise – your characterization of what Michael said was ill-considered and invited misinterpretation, in my opinion. You say that you only stated that Michael’s statement was sexist, not that Michael himself is sexist. It is true you did not explicitly state that he is a sexist, neither did you explicitly state that you were not saying he is a sexist. The average reasonable person would probably interpret your post as implying that he is sexist.
In other words – you made the same kind and magnitude of error that you are accusing Michael of making.
I do have to also point out that in your post you made a factual error. Michael’s statement was not in response to the question of male/female ratios in the atheist movement (he said he thought it was 50/50), but rather to the host’s statement that she tried to get female atheists for the panel but they all refused. This does not rescue his statement from being clueless, but it puts it into a different context.
If we are being charitable to what he said, it does not come anywhere close to your claim of saying that women don’t do “thinky†work or that “thinky†work is a guy thing. In the right context, he was just referring to the willingness to be publicly confrontational, without any comment as to cause. He still should not have ventured a brief answer to such a complex question, nor taken the host’s anecdotal experience as representative. But it was not fair to say that he was saying women don’t do “thinky†work.
Do you still stand by that characterization, or would you modify it in light of subsequent discussion?
While trying to find out who the hell Megan Phelps is, I found a link in a footnote, written as if it were hot off the press:-ReneeHendricks wrote:Ooo! A mass WBC exodus. That's be something to see :DBourne Skeptic wrote:Good for her. I hope this encourages more of her family to do the same.ReneeHendricks wrote:In other news entirely, it looks like Megan Phelps is no longer part of the WBC (if this is old news, I apologize):
https://medium.com/turning-points/83d2ef8ba4f5
So...this only applies to Ophie but no one else is allowed to criticize her? Criticizing her is "harassment", right?@OpheliaBenson Yes I really am allowed to criticize even "a public figure in his community." Yes. That's permitted. We don't have monarchs.
I believe Libby left like 3 years ago but it's only been more public this past day or so, for some reason.VickyCaramel wrote:While trying to find out who the hell Megan Phelps is, I found a link in a footnote, written as if it were hot off the press:-ReneeHendricks wrote:Ooo! A mass WBC exodus. That's be something to see :DBourne Skeptic wrote:Good for her. I hope this encourages more of her family to do the same.ReneeHendricks wrote:In other news entirely, it looks like Megan Phelps is no longer part of the WBC (if this is old news, I apologize):
https://medium.com/turning-points/83d2ef8ba4f5
http://todaynews.today.com/_news/2013/0 ... ple-to-die
Libby Phelps Alvarez has also left. Forgive me if this is old news.
Atheism Plus. The secret to being a fulfilled, happy atheist.16bitheretic wrote:...Unless this is just a silly little fluff book, I really don't know what PZ could do that hasn't already been done in the last 10 or so years by others....
Not true. The Selfish Gene: 1976, 30 editions (at least); The Blind Watchmaker: 1989Pitchguest wrote:It took him 6 years to write 176 pages. It took him 6 years to write 176 pages that was, according to himself, so filled with errors that when the editors sent it back to him it was "a wall of purple editor’s marks — just page after page of nits picked and wording/grammatical errors hacked into submission." Huh. Just to bury the point home. Richard Dawkins' book, the Selfish Gene, hardcover, is 352 pages. That was the first book he ever published. The book that put him on the map. Richard "the misogynist, sexist, racist, patriarchal white supremacist, 'does not care for my experience as an atheist woman'" Dawkins.
And then we have PZ Myers. Happy Atheist. 176 pages. Oh well.
You, of course, are right. We should just let it hit the floor with a thud and lay there motionless like a stillborn calf.Mr Danksworth wrote:I don't even need to read it. His topic has already been done, by multiple people who are light years better than him. He has missed the "nu-atheist makes fun of religion' book train by a couple of years.Mykeru wrote:Hey, I just thought as I hit submit.
How about we review Peezus's book in video form and Google-bomb the fucker?
OOOOOPS; my mistake .... :oops:Steersman wrote:Not true. The Selfish Gene: 1976, 30 editions (at least); The Blind Watchmaker: 1989Pitchguest wrote:It took him 6 years to write 176 pages. It took him 6 years to write 176 pages that was, according to himself, so filled with errors that when the editors sent it back to him it was "a wall of purple editor’s marks — just page after page of nits picked and wording/grammatical errors hacked into submission." Huh. Just to bury the point home. Richard Dawkins' book, the Selfish Gene, hardcover, is 352 pages. That was the first book he ever published. The book that put him on the map. Richard "the misogynist, sexist, racist, patriarchal white supremacist, 'does not care for my experience as an atheist woman'" Dawkins.
And then we have PZ Myers. Happy Atheist. 176 pages. Oh well.
That blurb tripe is what Watson would be turning out if she had a job she was actually qualified for but it is revealing.Mykeru wrote:"Gleeful disrespect?"From the author of one of the web's most popular science blogs, The Happy Atheist takes on religious fanaticism with all the gleeful disrespect it deserves. A small, fearless book that takes aim at big, stupid targets--and nails them.
I can do that, Peez. Got some actual skeptical vids to do. Longing to do the definitive Dyatlov Pass video. But eventually I will have to get to this disingenuous shit.
Only religious fanatics? Dawkins, Hitichens, Harris went after religious belief itself and most religionists are not fanatics.The Happy Atheist takes on religious fanaticism...
Well small for sure but how hard or fearless is it nail big stupid targets? Fat professor cum blogger nails sitting ducks and we re supposed to pay money to read his book?A small, fearless book that takes aim at big, stupid targets--and nails them.
I'm game but technically I'm limited to talking into the camera videos right now. I do have some ideas and would be happy to script and/or advise anyone who wants to sign up.Mykeru wrote:Hey, I just thought as I hit submit.
How about we review Peezus's book in video form and Google-bomb the fucker?
...then we let it rot in the sun and have happy fun times with the skull!Mykeru wrote:You, of course, are right. We should just let it hit the floor with a thud and lay there motionless like a stillborn calf.Mr Danksworth wrote:I don't even need to read it. His topic has already been done, by multiple people who are light years better than him. He has missed the "nu-atheist makes fun of religion' book train by a couple of years.Mykeru wrote:Hey, I just thought as I hit submit.
How about we review Peezus's book in video form and Google-bomb the fucker?
[youtube]184MD9S69vY[/youtube]DeepInsideYourMind wrote: Yes it is stupid and bollocks - in the UK, most racism (as I think is the same elsewhere) is actually between minorities - africans hate bangladeshis hate indians hate jamaicans hate pakistanis, and so on
Another winner! Love the doctor carrying on in the background of the delusion! :clap: :lol: :clap:Ape+lust wrote:Goddamn, that's brilliant :orocko2466 wrote:Hi guys.
I posted this before but it didn't embed in the thread right - an Ophie dramatic reading.
Winner Winner Chicken DinnerApe+lust wrote:There's already piss-taking in Amazon's forums:
http://i.imgur.com/DlYhXSp.png
http://www.amazon.com/Dont-Read-This/fo ... A6FGXX1/1/
I have seen this more than once over the years.Apples wrote:Bolding mine. I finally poked around their basket of links. The last sentence is a remarkably stupid and revealing statement to put in print, amounting to a license to be an aggressive bigot if you can claim to be "marginalized." Of course, since the poor are obviously marginalized, according to A+ dogma poor white skinheads cannot be guilty of racism. :? Since gay/black people are marginalized, gays and/or blacks can't be guilty of classism/ableism/pick-your-ism. And if atheists are marginalized, white/cis/male/straight upper-class atheists can't be guilty of sexism. Etc. I guess it's just what you'd expect, given the incredible sloppiness and superficiality of everything they've done.The A+ Primer (from basket o' links) wrote:The purpose of these forums being the discussion of social justice issues within the context of atheism, we use the social justice definitions of words like "racism", "sexism", and other -isms. You may have seen the terms "Institutional Racism", Systemic Racism, Institutional/Systemic Sexism, etc. The short version is -isms = prejudice + power. In social justice terms, marginalized groups cannot be guilty of -isms because they don't have the power to institutionalize their prejudices.
http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... 441#p33441
It is a whole different universe that these people inhabit. Attempts to communicate with them are generally exercises in futility, because you do not share the same precepts, never mind that the same words have different meanings to the ones you may be accustomed to.Let’s start from the beginning. Your first step is to accept that “a hatred or intolerance of another race†is not the definition of racism. The dictionary is wrong. Get over it.
Racism is when intolerance in government laws, attitudes and ideals of a society are ingrained in a culture to the point where patterns of discrimination towards a certain race are institutionalized as normal. If you keep this in mind, you’ll understand that reverse racism doesn’t- and can’t- exist.
There is another saying “Racism (or sexism) = prejudice + power. POC (people of color) can be prejudiced against white people. But they can never have power, i.e. a whole system of structured support that backs them. White people often don’t understand how much power they have. Just ONE white person has more power to do actual harm to a black person than one hundred black people do to that white person. A white person can KILL a black person without any consequences, while if the situation was reversed you can bet the killer wouldn’t see the outside of a prison cell for a long, long time.
When white people complain about reverse racism, they are not complaining about losing their RIGHTS. What they are complaining about is losing their PRIVILEGE.
The Hummus WarsCunning Punt wrote:I've had Palestinian felafel. It's very good. They put french fries in it!Michael K Gray wrote:What do you think of Palestinian falafel? Baked by left-handed lesbian negresses with surgically repaired cleft-palates, who are on their day off from tearing down anti-rape posters with Stanley-knives that were used to circumcise sperm whales?sKepptiksowat wrote:Argument for edit button?
Lsuoma wrote:[youtube]184MD9S69vY[/youtube]DeepInsideYourMind wrote: Yes it is stupid and bollocks - in the UK, most racism (as I think is the same elsewhere) is actually between minorities - africans hate bangladeshis hate indians hate jamaicans hate pakistanis, and so on
Having written multiple books, I think that's doubtful. HIGHLY doubtful. If it gets delayed, and it's the publisher, at this point, they'll write off any advance, and be done with him. If HE delays it for some stupid reason from his end, then they have the right, (this is in every contract I've ever signed) to say "Okay. We're done, and, you owe us your advance money back".Pitchguest wrote:Well, it seems PZ apparently wrote like he was on crack or something, considering when the editors returned the book to him to correct it was shock-full of errors, grammatical errors, syntax errors ... content errors ...cunt wrote:At least 3 years too late. I'm surprised the publishers are even bothering at this point.
Who's willing to bet he'll delay the release for another six years?
He's definitely gotten worse, but that's an implementation issue. The behavior itself is not even vaguely new.windy wrote:From the Thunderdome thread that was mentioned earlier: Really, we're just learning that is it? Wasn't that more or less how you ran the old site? At least own up to it before using trolls as an excuse to shit on the idea of unmoderated discussion. This smug revisionist crap pisses me off.
That's part of it, sure. But I think you're doing some retconning of your own here. A few years back there weren't mass bannings of people with wrong opinions (at least none that we knew of!), over-sensitivity about language wasn't encouraged, and the siege mentality hadn't developed yet. Those bits have changed, at least. IMO, it was more of a "frog in a slowly boiling pot" process for many regulars.welch wrote:They have not changed their behavior one fucking bit, the "problem" is that you (collectively) are now the target, not Dinesh D'shitstain.
Wouldn't it be awesome if any of these theoretical jeenyuses actually opened their eyes and went out into the real world, and maybe tried to see if reality actually matched up to all their assumptions?AndrewV69 wrote:I have seen this more than once over the years.Apples wrote:Bolding mine. I finally poked around their basket of links. The last sentence is a remarkably stupid and revealing statement to put in print, amounting to a license to be an aggressive bigot if you can claim to be "marginalized." Of course, since the poor are obviously marginalized, according to A+ dogma poor white skinheads cannot be guilty of racism. :? Since gay/black people are marginalized, gays and/or blacks can't be guilty of classism/ableism/pick-your-ism. And if atheists are marginalized, white/cis/male/straight upper-class atheists can't be guilty of sexism. Etc. I guess it's just what you'd expect, given the incredible sloppiness and superficiality of everything they've done.The A+ Primer (from basket o' links) wrote:The purpose of these forums being the discussion of social justice issues within the context of atheism, we use the social justice definitions of words like "racism", "sexism", and other -isms. You may have seen the terms "Institutional Racism", Systemic Racism, Institutional/Systemic Sexism, etc. The short version is -isms = prejudice + power. In social justice terms, marginalized groups cannot be guilty of -isms because they don't have the power to institutionalize their prejudices.
http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... 441#p33441
It is a tenant of belief within certain circles. Here is an example (picked at random) which delves into this type of reasoning a bit more and explains it so that everyone can understand (the underline is mine). Basically it illustrates the kind of mentality you are dealing with over in A+ and I daresay baboonland.
Why Reverse Racism Doesn’t Exist
It is a whole different universe that these people inhabit. Attempts to communicate with them are generally exercises in futility, because you do not share the same precepts, never mind that the same words have different meanings to the ones you may be accustomed to.Let’s start from the beginning. Your first step is to accept that “a hatred or intolerance of another race†is not the definition of racism. The dictionary is wrong. Get over it.
Racism is when intolerance in government laws, attitudes and ideals of a society are ingrained in a culture to the point where patterns of discrimination towards a certain race are institutionalized as normal. If you keep this in mind, you’ll understand that reverse racism doesn’t- and can’t- exist.
There is another saying “Racism (or sexism) = prejudice + power. POC (people of color) can be prejudiced against white people. But they can never have power, i.e. a whole system of structured support that backs them. White people often don’t understand how much power they have. Just ONE white person has more power to do actual harm to a black person than one hundred black people do to that white person. A white person can KILL a black person without any consequences, while if the situation was reversed you can bet the killer wouldn’t see the outside of a prison cell for a long, long time.
When white people complain about reverse racism, they are not complaining about losing their RIGHTS. What they are complaining about is losing their PRIVILEGE.
Your first step in any attempt to communicate with them is to throw out the dictionary you are using and use theirs, because they have long since abandoned yours.
(I have also heard that some people have issues with "dictionary aethists". I wonder what that means?)
ERV wrote:176 pages.Walter Ego wrote:It's already being offered for sale on Amazon so PZ is committed to clean up the manuscript.cunt wrote:At least 3 years too late. I'm surprised the publishers are even bothering at this point.
The Amazon blurb:
Release date: August 13, 2013
From the author of one of the web's most popular science blogs, The Happy Atheist takes on religious fanaticism with all the gleeful disrespect it deserves. A small, fearless book that takes aim at big, stupid targets--and nails them.
For the last several years, PZ Myers, writing the blog Pharyngula, has entertained millions of readers every month with his infectious love of evolutionary science and his equally infectious disdain for creationism, biblical literalism, "intelligent design" theory, and other products of godly illogic. While PZ does not accept the common atheist argument that religion necessarily makes people do evil, violent things, he does think that, most of the time, it makes them believe in the truly ridiculous--which is exactly what he skewers in this riotously funny book. In fact, The Happy Atheist is so outrageous, it's the only book about religion anyone should take seriously.
...
I just bought the 9 year old a 240 page book.
iOS in the Enterprise. It says 256, they're counting the index. Actual writing and screenshots are 221 or so pages.Walter Ego wrote:From Amazon:
Not to say a book has to be long to be good but three years late and only 176 pages? I suspect the manuscript was much longer and that was all that could be salvaged.The God Delusion, Hardcover: 416 pages
God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything, Hardcover: 307 pages
The End of Faith (Sam Harris), Hardcover: 336 pages
Pitchguest wrote:It took him 6 years to write 176 pages. It took him 6 years to write 176 pages that was, according to himself, so filled with errors that when the editors sent it back to him it was "a wall of purple editor’s marks — just page after page of nits picked and wording/grammatical errors hacked into submission." Huh. Just to bury the point home. Richard Dawkins' book, the Selfish Gene, hardcover, is 352 pages. That was the first book he ever published. The book that put him on the map. Richard "the misogynist, sexist, racist, patriarchal white supremacist, 'does not care for my experience as an atheist woman'" Dawkins.ERV wrote:176 pages.Walter Ego wrote:It's already being offered for sale on Amazon so PZ is committed to clean up the manuscript.cunt wrote:At least 3 years too late. I'm surprised the publishers are even bothering at this point.
The Amazon blurb:
Release date: August 13, 2013
From the author of one of the web's most popular science blogs, The Happy Atheist takes on religious fanaticism with all the gleeful disrespect it deserves. A small, fearless book that takes aim at big, stupid targets--and nails them.
For the last several years, PZ Myers, writing the blog Pharyngula, has entertained millions of readers every month with his infectious love of evolutionary science and his equally infectious disdain for creationism, biblical literalism, "intelligent design" theory, and other products of godly illogic. While PZ does not accept the common atheist argument that religion necessarily makes people do evil, violent things, he does think that, most of the time, it makes them believe in the truly ridiculous--which is exactly what he skewers in this riotously funny book. In fact, The Happy Atheist is so outrageous, it's the only book about religion anyone should take seriously.
...
I just bought the 9 year old a 240 page book.
And then we have PZ Myers. Happy Atheist. 176 pages. Oh well.
and I hear "acephalic idiot with delusions of adequacy"Skeeve wrote:I'm somewhat confused about something, and it's really not that important.
Is everyone mispronouncing Aratina Cage on purpose? Is that something s/h/it doesn't like?
I keep hearing Ara-tina, but it's clearly A-Rat-In-A Cage.
Carry on.
Pity Obama isn't as smart as Zvan.ReneeHendricks wrote:LOL! Dillahunty thinks I'm misrepresenting the other side: http://anr.apartmentj.com/?p=894#comment-561
PZ gets his SJW points in. Can't you just feel his pain...Pitchguest wrote:By jove, Physioproffee (e to infinity) is a moron.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/physioprof/ ... ins-found/
The remains of an historical figure who was allegedly lost is found and what's the reaction? "Why should I give a flying fucke about this?"
Yeah, Comrade, don't you mean "Whye shoulde [youe] givvee aee flyinggee fuckkee aboutee thisee"? Idiot.
And Peezus's comment:Pitchguest wrote:By jove, Physioproffee (e to infinity) is a moron.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/physioprof/ ... ins-found/
The remains of an historical figure who was allegedly lost is found and what's the reaction? "Why should I give a flying fucke about this?"
Yeah, Comrade, don't you mean "Whye shoulde [youe] givvee aee flyinggee fuckkee aboutee thisee"? Idiot.
Yes. Yes he does. Unfortunately it is a clouded lens, unable to see true inequality. Here's how his last sentence could have read:lonesagi wrote:
And Peezus's comment:
Does he view everything through a class/privilege lens these days?
I suppose it might be interesting to compare the health and diet of a dead average 21st Century North American with the similar properties of all the other poor schmucks lying dead in Africa and Asia.
AnonymousCowherd wrote:I just skim those comments.UnbelieveSteve wrote:That last comment was the cream on top.welch wrote:Do you ALWAYS have to milk things?Steersman wrote:That is so udderly bad ....Apples wrote:
Well, we all know 'pitters are inveterate tit-grabbers.
These jokes are getting a little cheesey.welch wrote:It appears we've whipped up a frenzy.
Fucking Reap. Will he stop at nothing with his long distance pranks!?Michael K Gray wrote:Completely off topic, but three nice'n'shiny Fairyland CDs plonked in my postbox just then!
Should I listen to them in any particular order?
Score to a New Beginning.
The Fall of an Empire.
Of Wars in Osyrhia.
Oh, bread vs philosophers. Who would win?
Cunning Punt wrote:These jokes are getting a little cheesey.welch wrote:It appears we've whipped up a frenzy.
Ape+lust wrote:Pity Obama isn't as smart as Zvan.ReneeHendricks wrote:LOL! Dillahunty thinks I'm misrepresenting the other side: http://anr.apartmentj.com/?p=894#comment-561
"Sure Mitt, I'll debate you. Quit the GOP."
Submariner says:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
February 7, 2013 at 3:34 am
Speaking as a common fellow, it seems to me that there are other venues for the promotion of social justice issues. If you want to attend those, more power to you. I do not believe that everyone who attends atheist, secular and skeptical conferences necessarily want to have half of the topics covered be social justice issues and in particular, feminism.
It’s like if I attend a sports memorabilia conference, I don’t want 30-50% of the speakers talking about after market car parts. That’s not why I’m there. I’m interested in separation of church and state, reducing religiosity, and disproving bigfoot. I could care less about your holley carburetor.
lonesagi wrote:And Peezus's comment:Pitchguest wrote:By jove, Physioproffee (e to infinity) is a moron.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/physioprof/ ... ins-found/
The remains of an historical figure who was allegedly lost is found and what's the reaction? "Why should I give a flying fucke about this?"
Yeah, Comrade, don't you mean "Whye shoulde [youe] givvee aee flyinggee fuckkee aboutee thisee"? Idiot.
Does he view everything through a class/privilege lens these days?
AnonymousCowherd wrote:I just skim those comments.UnbelieveSteve wrote:That last comment was the cream on top.welch wrote:Do you ALWAYS have to milk things?Steersman wrote:That is so udderly bad ....Apples wrote:
Well, we all know 'pitters are inveterate tit-grabbers.
We shouldn't let this gag end on a sour note.Cunning Punt wrote:These jokes are getting a little cheesey.welch wrote:It appears we've whipped up a frenzy.
I snickered. To totally rip off Monty Python, her brain is so small, it's like one of those games you try to get the BB in the hole. You can hear it rattling around as she talks.Ape+lust wrote:Goddamn, that's brilliant :orocko2466 wrote:Hi guys.
I posted this before but it didn't embed in the thread right - an Ophie dramatic reading.
I can't fap to that.welch wrote:iOS in the Enterprise. It says 256, they're counting the index. Actual writing and screenshots are 221 or so pages.Walter Ego wrote:From Amazon:
Not to say a book has to be long to be good but three years late and only 176 pages? I suspect the manuscript was much longer and that was all that could be salvaged.The God Delusion, Hardcover: 416 pages
God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything, Hardcover: 307 pages
The End of Faith (Sam Harris), Hardcover: 336 pages
There's an iBooks version and a PDF version available direct from peachpit.
And despite all my rage, s/h/it is just A Rat In A Cage.Skeeve wrote:I'm somewhat confused about something, and it's really not that important.
Is everyone mispronouncing Aratina Cage on purpose? Is that something s/h/it doesn't like?
I keep hearing Ara-tina, but it's clearly A-Rat-In-A Cage.
Carry on.
