The Forum > Article Comments > Post-2012 Global Atheist Convention: a celebration of reason > Comments
Post-2012 Global Atheist Convention: a celebration of reason : Comments
By David Nicholls, published 18/5/2012For most attendees at the GAC it was a time of being reborn into the rational.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 31
- 32
- 33
- Page 34
- 35
- 36
-
- All
Posted by Atheist Foundation of Australia Inc, Monday, 25 June 2012 11:22:30 AM
| |
ohhh good
its finally over [my hands are sore from clapping] life has taught me..to fight evil if futile[to david] you note the vile in religion...presume that others have made the same judgments but rejecting a concept..isnt the same as activly fighting against followers..of the [to thyne eyes]..not even concieve-able good [god] how to say that lovers of fighting love to fight[dogs have fleas[god has religious lice] nevertheless..there is a huge difference between saying there is no dog..[to hating/fighting/riddiculing us knowing not only a dog.. but able to concieve infinite DOGS.. so ye with no dog in the race..resist the concepts of the dogs fleas..YOUR PROOF OF NO DOG..says look at..the act's...lol..*of fleas] where there is a flea fighter is a likelyhood of fleas fleas often mean dogs but dogs dont need fleas..the fleas need the dog..[or equ-vilent the @dog]..every action has its re-action..[some say every*action..is a re-action] no dog gone host no fleas. Posted by one under god, Tuesday, 26 June 2012 8:07:08 AM
| |
The Atheist Foundation of Australia has just released onto Youtube, Professor Richard Dawkins speaking at the 2012 Global Atheist Convention – A Celebration of Reason.
The video is Number 12 on this page: http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7C0CA45F60FD44C7&feature=plcp David Posted by Atheist Foundation of Australia Inc, Thursday, 28 June 2012 8:08:51 PM
| |
how come you dont talk about memes david
you know the so called packets genes underpinning the selfish gene theory just watched '\did darwin kill god'[bbc] and its clear that no the selfish gene theory is refuted so called packet memes...[includes religion] or any other concept[meam..[like @theo-ism] dic dorkings thunk it apparently[how come you lot dont talk about it?] thats why your diss/belief system dont present transcripts the absurdities that flow..isnt designed to inform the main thesis]..no theo.. just to shroud the mystery from the prophets proffit.. who's wholy holy texts are for sale ..in the lobby.. Posted by one under god, Saturday, 30 June 2012 3:58:48 PM
| |
OUG,
"....from the prophets proffit.. Whose wholy holy texts are for sale ..in the lobby.." Amen to that. Posted by Poirot, Sunday, 1 July 2012 9:13:09 AM
| |
The Atheist Foundation of Australia has just released onto Youtube, Stella Young, comedian at the 2012 Global Atheist Convention – A Celebration of Reason.
The video is Number 13 on this page: http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7C0CA45F60FD44C7&feature=plcp More videos will follow. If you want to view them, keep an eye out on that URL. David Posted by Atheist Foundation of Australia Inc, Sunday, 1 July 2012 11:32:18 AM
|
That is a very poor attempt at trying to look like a reasonable person.
“The extent of Mr Nicholls' self-delusion is becoming more evident each time he posts.”
And previously.
“Global Convention of Pretentious Tossers.”
Here is a good example of real delusion for you.
Opposition to the idea of an atheist convention leading to attacking it and anyone involved with it relentlessly. Not seeing that is what is happening.
“Being "opposed to religion" does not, by itself, justify the existence of AFA. Actually doing something constructive should surely be the objective of any organization, otherwise it will lay itself wide open to the charge that it is just a pointless confection, designed and conducted for the personal gratification of its Führer.”
Well, yes it does. The same as people join all kinds of organisations to be against particular injustices. And yes, the AFA is very constructive in helping people have a focal-point, in donating money to charities in trying to bring equality to those without it. How much more positive can we be?
The Hitler-ism is just another example of manipulation of language. If I were you, I would be thinking why I do that.
“The "strawman" in question was, presumably, his florid happy-clappy description of the Convention. That he still considers this to be "unimportant minutia" is significant.”
Yes, that is one of them and you calling it significant is a word and not a proof. It wouldn’t matter what I wrote about the convention or how I wrote it, your prejudice as mentioned above, would have you reacting the same way.
“But I think I have said all that I need to.”
Yes, I agree even though you have engaged mainly in jingoistic repetition. Still, I have found it most interesting :))
David