Tag Archives: fundamentalists

FSTDT Lives

Posted on by

I’ve been away for a while, so it was with shock, horror and sadness I realised that FSTDT had died, but it was joy when I realised it had been resurrected.

The posts can now be found at FSTDT.net, although it is still very rough and ready. As you can see, the look and feel has remained, but the new system means there are a lot less quotes getting through. IMHO this is both good and bad, in the past some pretty un-fundie quotes were being approved, but at least you were getting a lot of comedy. Now it seems like there is only going to be a quote or two each day. With the restrictions placed on moderation, there is also a good chance that only quotes from known-regular-fundies will make it though – everyone else is scared of approving non-fundie, non-funny stuff. Hopefully none of this will transpire and my pathetic attempts at prediction will remain pathetic.

A few other things I don’t like about the changes are – the lack of any ability to edit your own posts; the difficulty in getting back to the post index/archives after you have viewed a comment and the lack of apparent monthly threading. It is possible that Distind is going to address these points, so time will tell.

For now, however, it remains a fantastic source of idiocy and witty comments. It also remains pretty much the only source of online comedy images I have:

Skepticism

(hat tip: FSTDT Refugee Forum)

Unwelcome party

Posted on by

Yuk. Argh. etc. Riding on the back seat of the international interest in the atheist bus campaign, “christians” are trying to take some advantage. Here was the deeply unpleasant committed “christian” George Hargreaves in the Guardian.

(I put “christians” in quotes because I don’t recognise any of the positive aspects of the traditional christian denominations in these ranting zealots. I still cling to a wishful-thinking belief that christianity isn’t always just about being a twat. )

Hargreaves toned down his message for his audience, of course. So he only exposed Guardian readers to a criticism of the money spent on bus ads. He failed to spot that it was shooting himself in the foot to then say that the “christian party” were about to do the same. Plus, he got in a jibe at the BNP, knowing full well that any Guardian reader will be spitting blood at their very existence, so he tries to trade on the “enemy of my enemy is my friend” effect.

The christian party, huh? Who are these christian politicos? Followers of Martin Luther King, Philip Berryman, Pastor Niemoller, Paolo Freire, maybe?

I think you’ve maybe already guessed it, no.

It turns out that their politics is as subtly nuanced and intelligent as their concept of christianity (*heavy sarcasm alert*) Look at how they greeted Obama’s election for instance:

But the greatest black politician the world may YET see – or the greatest black scientist, greatest black artist or the greatest black sportsperson – could under Obama’s presidency never have the chance to be seen – because Barack Obama would have had them aborted before they ever had the chance to be born (from http://-insertedcrap- www.christianparty.org.uk/cmsparty/ website)

Wtf? There’s plenty more.

…Within days of the election, his welcome statements … are already making way for the vicious anti-life agenda of Washington’s abortionist elite.

I have the sensation of being in a room where everyone else present is living in an alternate reality, where the inconvenient real world never intrudes. But this maniac – who somehow thinks it’s totally reasonable to say that Obama plans to abort all future foetuses, at the behest of some secret elite annihilation cadre – was giving “an English perspective” on Obama’s election for CBS..

I have spent most of the past four weeks in the USA following and filming the historic US presidential election for my TV programme, The Politics Programme on Revelation TV. I was there on election day giving an English perspective on the election to the CBS Channel 7 News.

Wtf, again.

Revelation tv, lol. I bet the combined IQ of its all viewers wouldn’t reach triple figures. But CBS? Isn’t that supposed to be a real channel? Obviously not.

Revelation TV. Blimey it’s a Sky channel, apparently. (Another good reason for sticking with cable only.) They portray Obama as a threat to the unborn and to marriage.
(Doesn’t extending the boundaries of who can marry whom imply the exact opposite of a thretat to marriage. Outlawing marriage would be a “threat to marriage”. Maybe I’m just being too literal here. 😀 )

This is good to read …..

Will the Republican Party decide that conservative Christians are just too troublesome for the party and see the pro-life movement as a liability?

One can but hope.

Darwin and the Tree of Life

Posted on by

Possibly the best “educational” program I have seen on television in as long as I can remember. Better than Michio Kaku, better than all the discovery channel shows, better than all the rest.

I am talking about a wonderful BBC1 program – Charles Darwin and the Tree of Life – which has just finished. If you missed it, I cant stress how much you really should watch this on iPlayer. It is a part-Open University funded education program, supported by an interesting BBC Darwin website, where you can catch a glimpse of the program if it isnt on the iPlayer yet.

In a nutshell, David Attenborough shows his fantastic qualities as a presenter and takes the viewer on a tour through the history of the theory of evolution. He is genuinely enthusiastic about the science and has a presentational style that is unmatched. I was actually saddened at one point in the program, when I realised that 30 years ago people were more accepting of evolution and our place in the world than they are today. Thanks to the idiocy of fundamentalist religion we really are going back in time.

Attenborough calmly and politely mocks the ideas that all species were created as they are with no change and gives a wonderful (if brief) example of how the eye is a good example of evolution at work. It is all well done and while the hardened scientist may object at some simplification, this is a program which explains evolution in an hour for the general public. To that end some abbreviation of the tree of life is understandable.

Sadly, the BBC website sort of undermines Attenborough’s fantastic work with this line:

David shares his personal view on Darwin’s controversial idea.

Now, while it was indeed controversial in the 1860’s it is now valid science with solid evidential backing. The controversy is not real. Implying it is still there plays into the hands of the idiots and anti-educationalists. Shame really.

This program shows that, despite its faults, the BBC really can pull it out of the bag when it comes to “important” programs.