charlescarter
chrle
charlescarter

As far as I can tell, this has been a controversy for some time with no sign of a resolution. I've read Diamond enough to know that he's a very smart man with a lot of good ideas, but his theories don't construct such a seamless synthesis as his books attempt to present. I can see why he's accused of bias, but I'm

A: Persian riders wore heeled boots.

Orwellian.

The article is misleading. The strange item was not found in situ. It was found in a bin of processed coal.

Nope: http://doubtfulnews.com/2013/01/come-on-russian-media-a-ufo-tooth-wheel-silly/

Still doesn't beat a tub of lard.

Your cognitive bias is showing.

That was pretty awesome.

Perfect book to read on the bus.

A few categories of troll I can come up with:

analyzing & understanding != justifying & defending.

So why don't they actually throw out the parts of the Bible that are wrong rather than leaving them in so more literal-minded Christians won't use them to commit atrocities? Because they too believe it sacred from cover to cover. Moderate religious are just enablers to the fanatics. What you're saying basically

Unlike the source for the Bible, which is obviously God. (duh)

Now my question to Scientology is: "Why the hell would I want to go through all the crap it takes to get any Scientology powers, when I can enlist in the galactic conspiracy to rule the universe just by becoming a licensed Psychiatrist?"

Nailed it. That's exactly what he/she sounds like.

lucky

So, you admit self-delusion is the best way to live. This explains a lot about religious people.

I believe you are confusing determinism with fatalism. Determinism: all events are predetermined, including my choices. Fatalism: all outcomes are predetermined, regardless of my choices. The second implies powerlessness and futility. The first acknowledges that the efficacy of your choices is still a real part of

An illusion isn't an illusion (by definition) without the presence of a conscious mind that can be fooled by it.

The best way I've heard it explained is that if free will exists, that means that every choice must be a kind of "first cause" in the universe. Your choice can't have arisen out of any prior causes or it isn't a free choice and it isn't yours. There is no evidence for there being any "first causes" in nature, so why