Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

"Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually satisfied atheist"

Do you agree with Dawkins statement?


  • Total voters
    37
dickface, i wouldn't steal a 10p mix from you nevermind an intellectual argument. I tend to use that lil snippet in relation to post modernism and it's strawman argument against "science" and "objectivity". And there can be no doubting that there are similarities between Darwins theories and the market and no doubting that the social structure Darwin lived in made it possible to see nature as a dynamic, evolving thing, involving lots of competition. But it does not actually debase evolutionary theory itself.

And your not half as smart as you think.
 
gurrier said:
* bows head before bin-god *

Oh shiny one, give me the strength to endure the heretic blasphemers, followers of the great mathematician and the apostates of the GSM. Wrap them in your bottomless embrace and send them to the great landfill in the sky. Praise be to your roundness.

Strewth, when a humorless didactic like Gurrier goes all silly on us, we know things are out of control. I suppose I'll have to go back to work in a minute.
 
phildwyer said:
Word bro, nuff respeck. What subject?

politics and philosophy.

and i don't appreciate you getting arts students a bad name with your cack handed deconstruction of "science".

philosophy at queens was so shit, the most modern fucker we done was Marx ffs.

Politics was all real politik wank eg conflict resolution, ethno nationalism blah blah blah.
 
revol68 said:
dickface, i wouldn't steal a 10p mix from you nevermind an intellectual argument. I tend to use that lil snippet in relation to post modernism and it's strawman argument against "science" and "objectivity". And there can be no doubting that there are similarities between Darwins theories and the market and no doubting that the social structure Darwin lived in made it possible to see nature as a dynamic, evolving thing, involving lots of competition. But it does not actually debase evolutionary theory itself.

Well that's very funny indeed, because I said all that ten years ago, and have often repeated it since. In almost the same words too. You may owe me more than you think, not that I expect any thanks from the likes of youse.
 
revol68 said:
politics and philosophy.

and i don't appreciate you getting arts students a bad name with your cack handed deconstruction of "science".

philosophy at queens was so shit

This last bit is true, for sure. But you should calm down a bit, I think you'll find that we agree. Which, I have to confess, I find extremely worrying.
 
Crispy said:
In amongst all the silliness, there's still some interesting points. Can we get back to them?

Specifically, where is this line drawn between real 'things' and ideas - see the virus question upthread a bit.

Sorry Crispy, I will get back to you regarding the viruses and atoms, but it will be a while. Probably tonight, my time.
 
ming2.GIF


Pathetic earthlings!
 
phildwyer said:
This last bit is true, for sure. But you should calm down a bit, I think you'll find that we agree. Which, I have to confess, I find extremely worrying.

did you go to Queens then?
 
treefrog said:
you're hardly ingratiating yourself with anyone here you know. I've a special hatred of bigots, coming from somewhere that's full of them...

Whoops, almost let this one get past me. I said "Popery," not "Papists." I hate the former, while the latter are some of my best friends.
 
phildwyer said:
Whoops, almost let this one get past me. I said "Popery," not "Papists." I hate the former, while the latter are some of my best friends.
can we have a law like Godwins that dictates that an argument is lost when one side says something along the lines of "Some of my best friends are..." please?
 
treefrog said:
can we have a law like Godwins that dictates that an argument is lost when one side says something along the lines of "Some of my best friends are..." please?

What, you mean like the "Hitler law of argumentation," whereby when anyone compares anything to Adolf, he (or she, of course) is automatically disqualified? Fine by me. I used to have a "Koko the Talking Gorilla" law like that for when I pointed out that only humans can conceptualize. It was honored more in the breach than the observance, however.
 
fuck off, you southern fuckwits don't get the nuances of northern black humour.

I personally refer to people as fenians and huns all the time, it's my way of showing the absurdity of sectarianism.
 
gurrier said:
That's called being a bigot. And it's absolutely <sarcasm>hilarious</sarcasm>.

Wrong. Again. Catholics have every reason to resent their religious leaders, who do nothing but fill their heads with supersitious crap and teach them to reverence the so-called "Pope." You really *do* bite, don't you?
 
revol68 said:
fuck off, you southern fuckwits don't get the nuances of northern black humour.

I personally refer to people as fenians and huns all the time, it's my way of showing the absurdity of sectarianism.
Hilarious 'faux' bigotry jokes in the wee north may be the type of thing that you and your mates think are hilarious, but in public they are as hilarious (and as mature) as teenagers using the word 'gay' as a slag (ironically of course). I also fail to see where you detect the nuance in such a childish, well known and obvious joke.

<analogy>I call people 'nigger' and 'sand nigger' all the time - it's my way of joking about racism. They think it's hilarious.</analogy>
 
I think people are taking this thread far too seriously. I mean come on, if Phil believes in ID and Mystical Idea Dimension Cells and we all want to believe in a material existance hey, what'sit matter?

It's only a message board peeps!
 
gurrier said:
Hilarious 'faux' bigotry jokes in the wee north may be the type of thing that you and your mates think are hilarious, but in public they are as hilarious (and as mature) as teenagers using the word 'gay' as a slag (ironically of course). I also fail to see where you detect the nuance in such a childish, well known and obvious joke.

<analogy>I call people 'nigger' and 'sand nigger' all the time - it's my way of joking about racism. They think it's hilarious.</analogy>

Except it's more like you having a go at Chris Rock for using the word "Nigger", and it's quite obvious when it's being ironic and when it's not. I went to a prod school and as such got very good at decoding when jokes had a jag in them and when they didn't.

And please don't use analogies with the n word as we all know that the experiance of catholics in northern ireland is nowhere near comparable with the violence and brutality that nigger represents to black people.

Also religion is a set of ideas and much more fluid than a skin colour.

Seriously, i love how the WSM like to present themselves as experts on the north when not one of your members lives in it. Fucking gobshites.
 
revol68 said:
Except it's more like you having a go at Chris Rock for using the word "Nigger", and it's quite obvious when it's being ironic and when it's not. I went to a prod school and as such got very good at decoding when jokes had a jag in them and when they didn't.

And please don't use analogies with the n word as we all know that the experiance of catholics in northern ireland is nowhere near comparable with the violence and brutality that nigger represents to black people.

Also religion is a set of ideas and much more fluid than a skin colour.

Seriously, i love how the WSM like to present themselves as experts on the north when not one of your members lives in it. Fucking gobshites.
I think you'll find that not one word of what I wrote amounts to any evidence that I or anybody else thinks they are experts on 'the backward 6'. On the other hand, I did and do claim some expertise in recognising childish and unfunny jokes.

You are actually an unusually extreme example of the genre. Normally children get beyond the 'potty mouth' phase by about 7 or 8. Grow up.
 
Back
Top Bottom