Atheism - Shadows of Doubt

[Darius871]

At about what minute does Part 4 kick in?

[Nostromo]

Jesus, your one lazy c0cksucker, aren't you? (Sorry, I've been watching "Sopranos" a lot lately )

The first show, intitled "Shadows of doubt", is divided in 6 parts. Just click on part 4.

[Impaler[WrG]]

I remember watching this whole things some time ago along with several of the interview which were oroginaly hour long and very deep debates, only tiny fragments of which got used in the show. I found these even better then the show.

[GePap]

Just finished all three hours. Thanks for the link, for I would never have seen this fine series of shows without it.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
I watched 7 minutes of that and thought it was stupid.

JM

What turned you off?

[Jon Miller]

Something like "I can only imagine that people who beleive in an afterlife could do such a thing." in reference to 9/11 bombing.

Just stupid.

The previous 7 minutes were boring and pretentious. I am not willing to watch something that is boring, pretentious, and stupid.

JM

[notyoueither]

There's a lot more of that.

[notyoueither]

There's the coffee shop chatter where he demolishes theism to the delighted claps of... God lnows who, but they are supposed to be important and it makes a very nice scene.

[notyoueither]

The overbearing smarminess notwithstanding, there are some interesting points to it. One wishes a debate were exposed, and not simply a polemic.

[ColdWizard]

Originally posted by nostromo
He's French, IRC.
"Shadows of Doubt" is one show (cut in six parts). There are two other shows "Noughts and crosses" and "The final hour".

Originally posted by cronos_qc
it's bad that I have an exams tomorrow morning... otherwise I would be watching the show
@Nostromo
What is the meaning of IRC?

Originally posted by OzzyKP
If i Recall Correctly, IRC

IIRC = If I Recall Correctly.
IRC = Internet Relay Chat.

n00bs

[Peter Triggs]

Originally posted by cronos_qc

Jon
You look pretty old for a 25y old guy...

Playing with nuclear device is actually ruining your body !

Actually he looked better in 1961, when he was 27. Note well the other cast.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by notyoueither
The overbearing smarminess notwithstanding, there are some interesting points to it. One wishes a debate were exposed, and not simply a polemic.

That's because there can be no debate. If there is, then the aethiests are forced to admit their believe that this is no God is based on just as muh faith as religionistas belief that there is. It's better for them to invoke 9/11 and the Crusades and call that logical reasoning.

[Nostromo]

That's because there can be no debate. If there is, then the aethiests are forced to admit their believe that this is no God is based on just as muh faith as religionistas belief that there is. It's better for them to invoke 9/11 and the Crusades and call that logical reasoning.

The show is an history of atheism. The guy only mentions some of the debates, but doesn't go into the details, which is a bit frustrating. And, for your information, some issues can and have been debated.

And I wouldn't say that the atheist's beliefs are as much faith as, for example, the Christian fundamentalist's beliefs. Christian fundamentalists believe in things that we know today are false. Hence an atheist is rationnally justified in rejecting the Christian fundamentalist vision of God.

[loinburger]

Originally posted by DaShi
That's because there can be no debate. If there is, then the aethiests are forced to admit their believe that this is no God is based on just as muh faith as religionistas belief that there is. It's better for them to invoke 9/11 and the Crusades and call that logical reasoning.

It's statements like this that spawn invisible pink unicorns and flying spaghetti monsters.

[DaShi]

Yes, some issues. Not the ones we are discussing, but some issues.

Anyway, if you want a history of aetheism without the boring video, just read my last post.