Sunday School

Sunday School November 4th 2018

This topic contains 16 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by  _Robert_ 10 months, 2 weeks ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 17 total)
  • Author
  • #24522

    The best and worst countries for atheists to live in. (Downloadable PDF report linked within and see also the first video at the end of this post).

    Poor Ken Ham now thinks secular hatred is the cause of his Ark in the Park problems. This is unfair. It has been an excellent source of amusement for us and an aid to the re-education of Creationists. It is so easy to poke holes in it as I am sure the 48 species of woodpecker on board would agree.

    This would be Fake News if it were untrue that religious fundamentalists are delusional.

    The Religious Liberty Task Force is gaining momentum.

    Apparently nobody has done more for Religion than President Trump.

    I find the argument that “Science can’t replace Religion” tedious because Science is not concerned with religion and religion does not need to be replaced with anything. Do you agree?

    The good news is that Asia Bibi has been acquitted of the imaginary crime of blasphemy but that is not good enough for members of the Religion of Peace who are in a frenzy and demanding she be put to death.

    As a citizen of the EU I might still be finally able to get myself arrested for blasphemy.

    This weeks’ Woo: The belief that alternative remedies can cure cancer.

    Climate Change: There is hope that we can do something to fight back.

    The neuroscience of hate speech. Are “safe spaces” at universities a threat to free speech?

    A project to sequence the genomes of all complex life on Earth is underway.

    First support for a physics Theory of Life.

    Do our Chimpanzee cousins like bananas as much as we humans do?

    Investigating the legend of Einstein’s “biggest blunder”.

    Why did Shamanism evolve in societies all around the globe?

    This week I am reading this book: Vaccines did not cause Rachel’s autism.

    Some photographs taken last week.

    We pause to remember: The legacy the Kepler Telescope leaves behind.

    While you are waiting for the kettle to boil…..

    Coffee Break Video:  Michael Nugent radio interview on atheist rights. How CRISPR lets us edit our DNA. Bill Maher, New Rule: Win or Go Home.


    Have a great week everyone!!

    “Religion: a daughter of Hope and Fear, explaining to ignorance the nature of the Unknowable.”

    Ambrose Bierce.



    Thanks, Reg!



    Thanks for the Sunday School Reg!

    Keppler: Well??? Oh Science? How do I love thee, let me count the ways… I guess religion knows that if there are other worlds like this one out there then their whole exclusive to this world argument is out the window.

    Ken Ham: Can suck it! The “Ark” isn’t failing because of disinformation from atheist. All those christians are just not interested in the hocus pocus he’s selling.

    Election Day is in two day’s all you American atheist at!!! Get your science loving butts out there and Vote!

    • This reply was modified 10 months, 2 weeks ago by  Noel.


    Wanted to add my conversation with the evangelical who runs the freight elevator at my job. He visited the Ark and was telling me how marvelous it was and how the real ark had been found and how it’s all true. I’ve told this guy on more than one occasion that I don’t believe in this hocus pocus and yet he persists. Not being able to formulate a response that didn’t include the phrase “fuck off” I smiled and told him how much fun I had at Disney World and how realistic the new Star Wars exhibit was.


    Hi Noel,

    I tend to ask Creationists “profound” questions when the Ark story is floated;

    I don’t think Noah would be allowed to build the Ark today as Health and Safety would be all over his plans to house 48 species of woodpecker in a wooden boat.

    How did Noah, at the age of 500, have time to get to the Antarctic to collect the penguins and then the Arctic to collect the polar bears? Did he also discover Australia when he stopped to collect the Kangaroos?

    Did he have a refrigeration system on board to keep them in similar conditions to the North and South Poles? Did he have a heating system for the all the African animals?

    How did he manage to get them all home again to their natural environments? What did the large carnivores eat when they got back to the Savannah as there were no prey left? They would have starved to death before other species had time to breed and become their food supply?

    Was there bamboo growing in China when he delivered the Panda bears back home?

    How do you explain the differences between the Australian aborigines and the Norwegians if they are also descended from Noah’s100 year old children? I mean they look so different, don’t you think? No really, I mean “don’t you think”?

    What’s a fronkey?



    What’s a Fronkey?

    Good question. So I looked it up and the only hit was from the

    Portmanteau of ‘front’ and ‘monkey’, combined to form a colloquial term for one who works at the front counter of a business. Normally a descriptive noun, or an informal address to be followed by shouting or threats. Shortened to ‘fronkey’ for ease of pronunciation.

    Individuals are called so because they normally operate near the front entrance of the business, habitually smell of/consume otherwise unpalatable foods, make unreasonable amounts of noise, and willfully disorganize their work area while doing nothing of particular skill or value.

    Pronounced ‘FRUN-kee’.

    This is the best part: “Normally a descriptive noun, or an informal address to be followed by shouting or threats. “

    So “Reg the Fronkey Farmer” is an in your face farmer? Works the front of the farm? Works the counter at the farm? Always thought it was a form of the word “Funky”. Reg the Funky Farmer. Nahhh! Stick with Fronkey. It would just confuse the crap out of me.


    Actually Noel this explanation might help….or not 🙂



    LMAO! You know, I can imagine the look on their poor demented faces when you fed them that shit with a straight face….PT Barnum… every minute…LOL



    Are “safe spaces” at universities a threat to free speech?

    I suppose the flip side to the same conversation is, “Is populism at universities a threat to academic advancement?”

    On balance, I think the answer to both questions ends up being ‘no’, but it feels like much of the ‘free speech’ discussion in my neck of the woods has been centred on dragging certain topics on forever.

    Should universities invite speakers who perpetuate a flat Earth model? I’d think ordinarily, no. Some would claim refusing such speakers is about silencing dissenting views, but I’d wager most could agree there is limited academic value to rehashing this topic absent any new evidence or discoveries. Certainly having laypeople wax philosophical on the matter (again, absent new evidence) serves little purpose toward advancing discourse and our knowledge of the universe. I am not saying such a speaker should be barred; just maybe it’s more part of the entertainment budget rather than guest lecturer material.

    When we get to social issues, it seems it’s far easier to obscure discussion by claiming opinions are barred because they are controversial, or topics are taboo because they are sensitive. Between ‘free speech’ and ‘safe spaces’, I don’t know how much they are actually in conflict in practice. Regardless, I’m not sure how much I would prioritize either. My concern for universities is more that speakers given elevated and legitimized academic platform have some measure of academic merit/ value to their position/ content.

    As I’ve encountered it in Canada, the free speech debate doesn’t seem to have much to do with free speech. It’s more about opening up every forum to populism.



    Who keeps slipping “The Origin of Species” onto Hams’ boat-shaped building? Right into Noah’s own library. You are making Ken very upset.

    I didn’t notice a rudder on that thing. Who the hell designs a boat you can’t steer. God does. What an idiot.


    @kristina  – I would agree with you. I will read or watch posts or videos that I think I will disagree with. This is not to fuel some sense of outrage but rather to challenge the validity of my own views and to try to understand the views of those I disagree with. As humans we tend to be unaware of how confirmation bias works unless we make the effort to remain aware of how we come to hold the views and opinions that we hold.

    I would completely disagree with W.L. Craig but have paid to hear him argue his “Kalem Cosmological Argument”. After posting this “Sunday School” I went to a lecture by Steven Pinker and found I agreed with the majority of what he said. It strengthened my views on the correlation between economic progress and human enlightenment.

    If I believe a speaker will give me something to think about I will go to hear him or her speak. If somebody believes they will dislike what they might hear or read, then don’t engage with it or get up and walk out in protest. That is more effective than de-platforming a speaker or burning a book.

    Here is a related TedTalk.



    @robert, I mentioned before that I “always” move a few of Hitchens or Dawkins books to the religious book section of any book shop I browse.

    You could put warning stickers on some others?




    Giving people doctorate degrees a field of study that has yet to prove it is nonfiction (in it’s entirety) is mind numbing.

    A PhD in “theology” issued by a faith-based institution should be renamed as a doctorate in cognitive bias or a CBPhD. This way there would be no confusion between them and someone who actually has a meaningful education.



    If I believe a speaker will give me something to think about I will go to hear him or her speak.

    To me it’s not about whether I will hear a speaker or not. It’s not about agreement. It’s about whether academic institutions can preserve some minimal threshold between what is academic content, and what is largely just entertainment. So if we recycle Ken Ham out of other parts of the thread, perhaps if you are hosting an academic forum on biblical literalism, he has a place in that conversation.

    But if it’s about the extent to which h. sapiens sapiens and h. neanderthalensis are related, bringing Ham into an academic discussion on the matter because of fabricated controversy seems rather counterproductive. I would say that sort of talk/ debate would be better suited for a different setting.

    For me it’s a bit like why can’t Stephen Fry play for the Three Lions? I would definitely watch that. I could make a fuss and claim it’s due to homophobia, but the simpler reality is, he doesn’t have the right qualifications.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 17 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.