Thursday, August 1, 2013

Craig Meme (Plus Bonus)




OK I cannot resist anymore. Memes are addictive. Here's my first official meme above. Please tell me what you think. It's making fun of my most hated apologist. Use it as you like, spread it, memify it. 

P.S. Here's a bonus below:



15 comments:

  1. I think you dilute your effectiveness as an advocate for Atheism when you stoop to ridiculing your opponents. Just a thought, since you asked. It may be more effective to create some Atheist memes that are impersonal.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good point. I'm generally not a meme guy and this blog is not really a place for low-brow humor, but the idea popped in my head and I simply couldn't resist.

      Delete
    2. Some ideas (and the people who promote them as serious) deserve ridicule.

      Take Ray "banana man" comfort - his "banana's prove god" and similar idiotic statements deserve to be ridiculed, as does Ray for continuing to promote them.

      Delete
  2. I don't think people deserve ridicule for their sincerely held religious beliefs. If you're trying to change somebody's mind about the existence of God, ridicule is not likely to be successful.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Frank, people like ray Comfort sincerely believe that banana's prove the truth of Christianity. Such people are unlikely to change their mind about the existence of God, since their reasons for believing in the first place are not in the least based upon evidence.

      Such people and their ideas deserve ridicule, not just for themselves so that perhaps they'll be a little less stupid in the future, but so that others, perhaps like yourself, will see how ridiculous these people and their ideas are, and possibly look at their own beliefs to see if they're also being ridiculous.

      After all, it's not much more ridiculous than Ray's banana argument, to believe on the basis of personal feelings and psychological experiences (as I think you've explained your belief in the existence of God previously on this blog), that a human 2000 years ago had no father, walked on water, raised people from the dead, and was resurrected and flew into the sky on the way to heaven.

      Delete
  3. Haven't heard the banana argument before. It does sound ridiculous. I guess it is also rather ridiculous to accept literally the events in the bible that defy scientific explanation. I believe there are some ridiculous sounding events or miracles in the bible that could be described as natural phenomena. The people who witnessed these events, having no knowledge of science, described what they saw in miraculous terms. Perhaps. There are phenomena that occur, and have no scientific explanation. The spiritual experiences that many people have, for example. I don't think that people who profess faith, based on their experience should be ridiculed. Do you agree?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Haven't heard the banana argument before. It does sound ridiculous.
    Have a search for it - it is truly mind bogglingly stupid. It amounts to bananas fitting human hands, therefore God & Christianity (never mind selective breeding, and variation in current bananas).

    I guess it is also rather ridiculous to accept literally the events in the bible that defy scientific explanation.
    Like walking on water, and the resurrection?

    I believe there are some ridiculous sounding events or miracles in the bible that could be described as natural phenomena. The people who witnessed these events, having no knowledge of science, described what they saw in miraculous terms. Perhaps.
    Perhaps. But we also can't discount "making shit up" - it's a time honoured tradition :-)

    There are phenomena that occur, and have no scientific explanation.
    Such as?

    The spiritual experiences that many people have, for example.
    These have neurological and psychological explanations. For instance, many/most of the features of religious experiences can be induced by manipulating the brain. As can out of body and near death experiences.
    Though these explanations may be incomplete as yet, surely we're better off accepting these far more reasonable explanations?

    I don't think that people who profess faith, based on their experience should be ridiculed. Do you agree?
    It depends on what they're professing.
    Ray Comfort (and many many others) professes profoundly stupid and ridiculous things, and their followers lap them up as if they were reasonable and legitimate, and they appear to profess these articles of faith based upon their experience (they have no reasonable evidence or arguments for their position, after all), and yet they definitely deserve ridicule.
    Do you agree?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Frank, do you think people like muslim creationist Harun Yahya, who put pictures of fishing lures in a book on muslim creationism, and presented them as living insects, deserves to be ridiculed for such a gaff?
    http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/weblog/permalink/the_fishing_lures_of_faith/

    ReplyDelete
  6. I'm not sure anybody who is really being honest deserves ridicule. If they are being disingenuous, then yes, they deserve ridicule.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why does honesty matter?
      As far as I can tell, Ray Comfort is being honest in his claims - he truly believes them. He's also being wilfully ignorant, as he maintains his claims in the face of repeated explanation as to why and how he is mistaken.

      Surely wilful ignorance can also render ridicule appropriate?

      Delete
    2. And for wilful ignorance, we can add the leaders of the ID movement, as well as basically every single prominent young earth creationist.

      Delete
  7. Frank, I'm trying to point out that ridicule can be an effective technique. You're right that it doesn't often lead to changing the beliefs of the person being ridiculed (at least not directly), but it can certainly help to marginalise their ridiculous claims, and help others to take them less seriously (and also to see and change some of their own beliefs which are ridiculous).
    It's probably not the first tactic which should be used, but if a person has shown a complete disregard for dialogue, evidence, and reality in general, there seems little else to do other than point out just how ridiculous they are.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Agreed, ridicule has utility, and can be effective, and has its place in debates.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your admission Frank.

      Delete

Share

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...