Comments on: Marker In The Sand http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/marker-in-the-sand A skeptic blog that shows you why not to believe everything you're told. Wed, 08 Sep 2010 00:43:40 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: JAZ http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/marker-in-the-sand/comment-page-1#comment-613 JAZ Wed, 02 Sep 2009 02:23:28 +0000 http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/?p=78#comment-613 Apologize, I did not read any of the other posts. Religion is a cause and effect. That is all. The Crusades as far as history seems to tell us (as I see it) was Religion against religion against the same religion. They all stem from a simple belief in some kind of Super Being. My mind says ridiculous. As was mentioned "But if we didn’t have religious belief, would we have something else that we would be just as passionate about?" Of course we would. We are thinkers, meat eaters and survivors by nature. We didn't just become who we are because some powerful being said "Let it be so!". All that aside. If religion never existed. I would (mind you thinking in a more primitive way) would kill you for food. If in fact you threatened my resources. That is a quasi-religion correct? Survival in my mind. To say this quickly "The Crusades were a paranoid thought... that if this religion overcame their religion that religions resources would suffer." I really hate it when I wake up looking forward to a bowl of Cheerios and there is not any milk! The question is should I fight my neighbor because he has a full gallon of said milk. Back then the answer was Yes! Apologize, I did not read any of the other posts. Religion is a cause and effect. That is all. The Crusades as far as history seems to tell us (as I see it) was Religion against religion against the same religion. They all stem from a simple belief in some kind of Super Being. My mind says ridiculous. As was mentioned “But if we didn’t have religious belief, would we have something else that we would be just as passionate about?”
Of course we would. We are thinkers, meat eaters and survivors by nature. We didn’t just become who we are because some powerful being said “Let it be so!”.
All that aside. If religion never existed. I would (mind you thinking in a more primitive way) would kill you for food. If in fact you threatened my resources. That is a quasi-religion correct? Survival in my mind.
To say this quickly “The Crusades were a paranoid thought… that if this religion overcame their religion that religions resources would suffer.” I really hate it when I wake up looking forward to a bowl of Cheerios and there is not any milk! The question is should I fight my neighbor because he has a full gallon of said milk. Back then the answer was Yes!

]]> By: ckitching http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/marker-in-the-sand/comment-page-1#comment-493 ckitching Mon, 13 Apr 2009 00:53:59 +0000 http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/?p=78#comment-493 I don't believe religion is the cause of all (or even most) wars, but I do believe it can lengthen them by making certain reasons for the wars beyond criticism. I don’t believe religion is the cause of all (or even most) wars, but I do believe it can lengthen them by making certain reasons for the wars beyond criticism.

]]> By: Evis T http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/marker-in-the-sand/comment-page-1#comment-492 Evis T Tue, 07 Apr 2009 12:15:45 +0000 http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/?p=78#comment-492 I'd just like to say thanks you both for linking to my article. It's refreshing to see atheists who do not have the 'RAAGH HATE' mentality I've seen in so many who share your mindset. I have various other articles and skits that you might find interesting on various websites around the internet. Here are a couple you may like: http://www.newsflavor.com/Opinions/Nukes-Are-Good.633011 http://www.socyberty.com/Issues/Drugs-Yay-or-Nay.570961 Thanks again, and keep questioning everything :P I’d just like to say thanks you both for linking to my article. It’s refreshing to see atheists who do not have the ‘RAAGH HATE’ mentality I’ve seen in so many who share your mindset. I have various other articles and skits that you might find interesting on various websites around the internet. Here are a couple you may like:
http://www.newsflavor.com/Opinions/Nukes-Are-Good.633011
http://www.socyberty.com/Issues/Drugs-Yay-or-Nay.570961

Thanks again, and keep questioning everything :P

]]> By: Alan Clarke http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/marker-in-the-sand/comment-page-1#comment-471 Alan Clarke Tue, 13 Jan 2009 01:02:10 +0000 http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/?p=78#comment-471 Ted quote: “Thus it garners a bit more urgency than a 60 year lifetime running out.” Ted, you have so many assumptions built into your thinking that it scares me. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think ANYONE is guaranteed a certain amount of time. Where on earth are you getting 60 years? For a 30-year-old person, 60 years may not be afforded. The original topic, “Does Religion Kill People”, makes one think that there could be even less time in lieu of the current state of affairs in Israel and the U.S. government leadership transition. <a href="http://www.google.com/search?&q=teen+found+dead" rel="nofollow">Click here</a> to find out how much time we are guaranteed. Ted quote: “Thus it garners a bit more urgency than a 60 year lifetime running out.”

Ted, you have so many assumptions built into your thinking that it scares me. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think ANYONE is guaranteed a certain amount of time. Where on earth are you getting 60 years? For a 30-year-old person, 60 years may not be afforded. The original topic, “Does Religion Kill People”, makes one think that there could be even less time in lieu of the current state of affairs in Israel and the U.S. government leadership transition. Click here to find out how much time we are guaranteed.

]]> By: The Monkey http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/marker-in-the-sand/comment-page-1#comment-469 The Monkey Mon, 12 Jan 2009 21:26:00 +0000 http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/?p=78#comment-469 Legacy? I fear we've gotten way off topic again. Perhaps this is a topic for another time. You're correct in saying a lifetime and sinking boat are both limited periods of time. When I left my comment I assumed a boat takes a few minutes, or even hours, to sink. Thus it garners a bit more urgency than a 60 year lifetime running out. But yes, I agree with your closing comments. Legacy? I fear we’ve gotten way off topic again. Perhaps this is a topic for another time.

You’re correct in saying a lifetime and sinking boat are both limited periods of time. When I left my comment I assumed a boat takes a few minutes, or even hours, to sink. Thus it garners a bit more urgency than a 60 year lifetime running out. But yes, I agree with your closing comments.

]]> By: Alan Clarke http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/marker-in-the-sand/comment-page-1#comment-467 Alan Clarke Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:32:11 +0000 http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/?p=78#comment-467 Ted quote: “… a sinking boat might not give someone more than one chance to make a decision. I guess I was referring to evolutionism, uniformitarianism, and atheism. We can revisit those many times.” One is afforded a limited amount of time in a sinking boat. By the same token, there is a limited amount of time afforded to each individual in this life. Much can be learned by observing those who wish they had more time or had chosen differently. And of course we observe daily those who are taken by “surprise”. Ted quote: “… a sinking boat might not give someone more than one chance to make a decision. I guess I was referring to evolutionism, uniformitarianism, and atheism. We can revisit those many times.”

One is afforded a limited amount of time in a sinking boat. By the same token, there is a limited amount of time afforded to each individual in this life. Much can be learned by observing those who wish they had more time or had chosen differently. And of course we observe daily those who are taken by “surprise”.

]]> By: Alan Clarke http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/marker-in-the-sand/comment-page-1#comment-466 Alan Clarke Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:26:05 +0000 http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/?p=78#comment-466 Also, “skepticism” is not what one can pass to their offspring as a legacy. Legacies are built upon what one believes, not what one does not believe. I could write a book entitled, “1001 Ways to Fail at Business”. Can my book become the foundation for Wall Street? Will it sell? Barak Obama was elected by those whose beliefs coincided with his beliefs, or by people who had no belief and were persuaded to believe as he does. There are a *few* who voted against him by selecting the opposite candidate, justifying their decision as a “lesser of two evils”. A country cannot last for long if this is the modus operandi for each successive election. In the same way, a person intending to build a “science” or adherence to a religious belief system cannot straddle a fence indefinitely. If one were to revisit a “fence straddle” after 10-20 years and discover he is still perched in the same precarious position, one might think that person has a serious deficiency. Consider three types of women. Two types have made a “decision”. The third remains undecided or “skeptical”: 1) Celibate (Mother Theresa, Condoleezza Rice, etc.) 2) Married with children (Susanna Wesley, Sara Palin, etc.) 3) Old Maid Skeptical “old maids” don’t really leave a legacy as do the other two. They are generally pitied. Also, “skepticism” is not what one can pass to their offspring as a legacy. Legacies are built upon what one believes, not what one does not believe. I could write a book entitled, “1001 Ways to Fail at Business”. Can my book become the foundation for Wall Street? Will it sell? Barak Obama was elected by those whose beliefs coincided with his beliefs, or by people who had no belief and were persuaded to believe as he does. There are a *few* who voted against him by selecting the opposite candidate, justifying their decision as a “lesser of two evils”. A country cannot last for long if this is the modus operandi for each successive election. In the same way, a person intending to build a “science” or adherence to a religious belief system cannot straddle a fence indefinitely. If one were to revisit a “fence straddle” after 10-20 years and discover he is still perched in the same precarious position, one might think that person has a serious deficiency. Consider three types of women. Two types have made a “decision”. The third remains undecided or “skeptical”:

1) Celibate (Mother Theresa, Condoleezza Rice, etc.)
2) Married with children (Susanna Wesley, Sara Palin, etc.)
3) Old Maid

Skeptical “old maids” don’t really leave a legacy as do the other two. They are generally pitied.

]]> By: The Monkey http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/marker-in-the-sand/comment-page-1#comment-465 The Monkey Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:15:09 +0000 http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/?p=78#comment-465 Right, a sinking boat might not give someone more than one chance to make a decision. I guess I was referring to evolutionism, uniformitarianism, and atheism. We can revisit those many times. Right, a sinking boat might not give someone more than one chance to make a decision. I guess I was referring to evolutionism, uniformitarianism, and atheism. We can revisit those many times.

]]> By: Alan Clarke http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/marker-in-the-sand/comment-page-1#comment-464 Alan Clarke Mon, 12 Jan 2009 17:47:06 +0000 http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/?p=78#comment-464 Ted quote: "Skepticism is an approach, not a stance. A good skeptic will continually revisit concepts…" As applied to the sinking boat analogy, a good skeptic may not have the opportunity to revisit anything. Decisions have consequences. Ted quote: “Skepticism is an approach, not a stance. A good skeptic will continually revisit concepts…”

As applied to the sinking boat analogy, a good skeptic may not have the opportunity to revisit anything. Decisions have consequences.

]]> By: The Monkey http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/marker-in-the-sand/comment-page-1#comment-463 The Monkey Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:28:55 +0000 http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/?p=78#comment-463 Hi Alan, I’m sure Shermer’s official statement will claim he’s not entrenched in a single stance, though I’ll readily admit it sometimes seems like he’s made up his mind when it comes to God and religion. But to be fair, Shermer CURRENTLY embraces evolutionism, uniformitarianism, and atheism. That can change. Skepticism is an approach, not a stance. A good skeptic will continually revisit concepts like this and reanalyze their own stance. Hi Alan, I’m sure Shermer’s official statement will claim he’s not entrenched in a single stance, though I’ll readily admit it sometimes seems like he’s made up his mind when it comes to God and religion.

But to be fair, Shermer CURRENTLY embraces evolutionism, uniformitarianism, and atheism. That can change. Skepticism is an approach, not a stance. A good skeptic will continually revisit concepts like this and reanalyze their own stance.

]]>