Alan seemed to insinuate in my last thread that I didn’t explain WHY I think skeptics are full of hot air. So, in order to do so in a manner in which hopefully he can better understand, first I think I should start with a list of who these skeptic mouthpieces are, and then I can perhaps later fill in some of their statements, some of their backgrounds, and some of their beliefs. I hope this will ease Alan’s concerns. So, off the top of my head, here are some of the top ones I can think of. Sort of a Hall of Fame of atheist windbags. Guys who know everything about the universe, because they tell you so. Should be a useful database that we can refer back to later in other conversations. More added later:
In no particular order of annoying windiness.
- Neil Degrasse Tyson
- Sean M. Carroll
- Steven Novella
- Brian Greene
- Brian Cox
- Lawrence Krauss
- Michael Shermer
- Brian Dunning
- Phil Plait
- Jerry Coyne
- James Randi
- Cara Santa Maria
- Seth Shostak
- Richard Dawkins
- Sam Harris
- Robert Sapolsky
- Rebecca Watson
- Eugenie Scott
- Bill Nye
- PZ Myers
- Karen Stollznow
Well, its a good start. These are just sort of the most obvious, but its helpful to see where the tentacles grow from.
While I agree with the sentiment that there’s hot air “skeptics”, though not to the same degree as you, I doubt that a list of organizations proves that they meet in some venue to celebrate their atheism.
It seems keiths knows more than our moderators…
Maybe the time for a change has arrived?
If Lizzy cared, I’d be glad to recommend keiths…
I was thinking of Hitchens but he was a 5 o’clocker; i.e. a happy atheist who drank, and smoked himself to death out of joy, I guess?
I guess he found the real purpose in life or death, or both? 🤔
J-Mac,
You’re too much of an ass-hole.
Agreed. A most pretentious place.
Any advance on “perhaps” or “later”, phoodoo?
These seem mainly to be organisations concerned with debunking pseudoscience. Entropy points out that this is far from your claim to answer my question: Is there any atheist organisation that meets regularly in some venue to celebrate their shared atheism?. This wouldn’t be hot air again, would it phoodoo?
Alan Fox,
Alan, yes, these organizations have actual meetings. They have conventions. They publish magazines for their members. They fund raise. You can’t deny any of that.
Why would he? It is YOUR claim that they are all “atheist organisation[s] that meet[s] regularly in some venue to celebrate their shared atheism”
Let’s go down the list…
First up, the “Vereniging tegen de Kwakzalverij”.
Ooops. Not an atheist organization. That didn’t take long.
🙂
Charles Seife: Decoding the Universe
How the New Science of Information Is Explaining Everything in the Cosmos, from Our Brains to Black Holes
lmao
Did you mistakenly post this here and not in Allan Miller’s thread on Sex?
TSZ is full of boo-boos lately….
Patrick has been resurrected but not really…keiths didn’t recognize him just like Mary Jesus…
Pietruszka questioned his faith but than came back to his senses…
What else? Let’s see…
Is it quantum?
DNA_Jock,
Shockingly, you don’t seem to understand. Alan was suggesting there were no atheist organization that get together and have meetings. So your contention is that one of these organizations might not be exclusively atheist?
And that’s meaningful because?
You are quite familiar with them are you?
phoodoo,
You offered up a list of organizations that you claimed were “atheist organisation[s] that meet[s] regularly in some venue to celebrate their shared atheism”,
writing
I am NOT claiming that such organizations do not exist. I have no opinion on that goofy question. I am merely pointing out your incompetence. The first item on your list is obviously not an “atheist organization”. When you exaggerate and write things that are obviously wrong, you do yourself no favors. This happens waaay too often.
Please try to keep up.
You underestimate the value of the “gotcha!”. It has nothing to do with undertanding.
Can DNA_Jock survive his own definition of incompetence?
How so? Have you been to their meetings? They devote whole articles to Richard Dawkins speeches.
They also gave their 2019 “quack” award to a theologian, because, you know, she was a theologian. What were some of her sins?
Why she had a someone who studied near-death experiences on her program. I do say!
I think you might be the quack Jock. You always quack about things you don’t know.
DNA_Jock,
If it walks like a duck…
it might be named Jock.
Moved a comment to guano.
phoodoo,
The claim was about atheists meeting to celebrate atheism. I see goalposts moving.
Said the guy who uncritically accepts any claim any one makes at all, as long as it’s somehow anti-evolution or anti-fitness.
Given how strongly you believe ‘information’ at the heart of ID I’m surprised you laugh your arse off. But then again, I suppose it’s par for the course with you lot. Laugh at everybody’s attempts except those in your own tent.
I’m still waiting for the Intelligent Design explanation for brains or black holes. But if all you can do is point and laugh then that explanation will never come.
Yes (but Mung’s book take some time getting there). Seth LLoyd’s Programming the Universe is another older one. More modern treatments are Vedral’s Decoding Reality and especially Aguirre’s Cosmic Koans.
Trigger Warning: These are real scientists and they stick to real science (but with some scientific but speculative metaphysics thrown in).
Aguirre has been on some recent podcasts if that’s your preferred medium, eg FLI podcast (twice).
(And of course none of this has anything to do with or supports ID or the various “information” based ideas from the ID sect of hot air skeptics.)
They aren’t allowed to discuss other things also? Is that a new requirement?
You know sometimes at Christian churches they talk about charity.
These days they’ve managed to reverse that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosperity_theology
phoodoo:
keiths:
keiths, later:
phoodoo:
keiths:
Still waiting, phoodoo.
Are we talking about skeptic organisations, of which there appear to be many, generally dedicated to exposing charlatanism, fake medicine, bogus psychics, etc? They don’t appear to have regular gatherings of skeptics to discuss skepticism. We’ve covered this but skepticism is questioning some claim or set of claims. You can be skeptical of anything. Phoodoo appears to be an evolution skeptic. Or are you maintaining that skepticism is synonymous with atheism? That’s an untenable position.
Until you can demonstrate either skeptics and/or atheists gather in venues to discuss skepticism and/or atheism, that question is moot.
They being the preacher, no? Church gatherings I’ve seen and heard of tend not to involve much discussion.
Alan:
Seriously, Alan?
phoodoo seems to have a real problem with exposing all of those things as frauds. I think he thinks debunking liars is a bad thing. I’ll expand on this more in an OP soon.
Yes.
Its synonymous with about ten world beliefs they all share.
Well, there was some outfit called Sunday Assembly which hasn’t really caught on. Other than that?
Then you are just spouting prejudice.
Look forward to it!
Is that what they say at skeptic meetings?
I’ve never been to one. I’m not sure they have social gatherings. There is an organisation, AFIS which I guess would be nearest me (though Paris is 12 hours away by TGV) but there is no indication on their website they hold regular meetings with skeptic members to discuss skepticism or anything else.
Alan:
keiths:
Alan:
So when the New England Skeptical Society (for just one example) holds a meeting, you think no one discusses skepticism or atheism? That’s absurd.
AFIS is on your list of skeptic organisations. The James Randi Foundation is one I have heard of. Do they hold regular meetings to discuss skepticism?
How often do they hold a meeting? What numbers? Is it comparable to Christian church gatherings in intensity? Have you been to one?
Remember, phoodoo was suggesting skepticism equals atheism equals a religion.
You actually accused me of moving goalposts?
You are showing a pattern of arguing one point until it has been shown beyond a doubt to be ridiculous, and then quickly grabbing on to a new objection. keiths sees it, I see it, I don’t think you are even fooling your self with that.
keiths,
When I have time.
We haven’t established that skeptical organisations hold regular meetings to discuss skepticism. I think they are established to debunk pseudoscience and are no kind of club for skeptics as a substitute to belonging to a church. And you conflate skeptics with atheists and claim atheist gatherings occur regularly involving numbers akin to church gatherings. I’m skeptical. Let’s see some examples of how often such meetings occur and what numbers are involved.
Alan,
I was responding to your odd statement:
What do you think they discuss when they hold a meeting? Croquet?
And it is hardly a worry to me if skeptics and/or atheists did gather in social groups regularly or occasionally. Entirely up to them how they spend their time. I remain unconvinced that they happen with any regularity or involve more than a few people.
Who is they and how often is when?
New England Skeptic Society appears to hold an annual conference. Is that what we are calling regular?
What about churches for atheists?
Are they religious organizations? Or, should we let courts to decide?🤗
It is really interesting to consider the twists and turns in linguistic usage that led evidentialism to be labeled “skepticism” in the popular culture.
For what’s worth, ancient skepticism is really fascinating and perplexing.
Alan,
Attempted goalpost move noted.
Again, I am responding to this absurd statement of yours:
Why not retract it and substitute something more reasonable?
PS And yes, I’ve been to such a meeting (at the Skeptics Society). And yes, we discussed skepticism and atheism.