South Africa Flag logo

South African Skeptics

July 04, 2020, 01:57:49 AM
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
Go to mobile page.
News: Please read the posting guidelines before posting.
   
   Skeptic Forum Board Index   Help Forum Rules Search GoogleTagged Login Register Chat Blogroll  
Pages: 1 2 [All]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic:

The hitch on having cancer.

 (Read 4613 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
BoogieMonster
NP complete
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 3230



« on: August 20, 2010, 17:20:43 PM »

So, I'm sure most of you know by now that C. Hitchens has cancer. Here's a link of him (now hairless), having a talk about his own mortality, prayer, and death bed conversions:

http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2010/08/05/hitchens-on-cancer-diagnosis-why-not-me/

It's so incredibly sad that we may have to see him go at the height of his influence. He's a powerful mouthpiece for our kind and I don't much cherish the thought of losing one of our loudest voices in the world. (Besides the fact that seeing a human being die like that is just incredibly sad, especially since we may someday soon actually "cure" cancer.)
Logged
StevoMuso
Stevo Muso
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +4/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 654



« Reply #1 on: August 22, 2010, 09:49:44 AM »

I too am deeply saddened by the Hitch's cancer. I am a HUGE fan of his and LOVE his almost pompous British mannerisms. I recently read his book God Is Not Great - awesome. Pity I can't watch the video due to my pathetic internet cap  Cry
Logged
Peter Grant
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +5/-9
Offline Offline

Posts: 845


a fully caused agent


AtheistStoned AtheistStoned
WWW
« Reply #2 on: August 22, 2010, 12:55:43 PM »

This makes me sad, I don't even want to talk about it. Angry

This letter from Mr Deity cheered me up a bit though. Grin

Steve, which Hitchens movie are you looking for? Is it Collision, the one will Douglas Wilson? I've got a good quality version that's about 1GB. I've also got most of his other stuff too.
Logged
Peter Grant
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +5/-9
Offline Offline

Posts: 845


a fully caused agent


AtheistStoned AtheistStoned
WWW
« Reply #3 on: August 22, 2010, 13:16:26 PM »

Oh, wait, you meant the Anderson Cooper interview. It's only 19MB, I can upload the file somewhere if you like.
Logged
StevoMuso
Stevo Muso
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +4/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 654



« Reply #4 on: August 23, 2010, 09:23:02 AM »

Oh, wait, you meant the Anderson Cooper interview. It's only 19MB, I can upload the file somewhere if you like.

Oooooh yummy. Me thinks I need to come and see you with me external hard-drive.

My son came to visit this weekend and when I opened my internet this morning it said: "Warning: your cap is 500,000 mb and you have used 800,000 mb". I'm gonna kill him!!! I was only up to about 200 and still being careful. Taking the kids out for my birthday tonight - so now I'm seriously gonna take him out. Aaargh. This means I can't even download a 19mb video. If you are somewhere in Jhb or Pta I would LOVE to swap videos with you (I have about 4 seasons of Penn and Teller's Bullshit, plenty of TEDs, Richard Dawkins etc).
Logged
StevoMuso
Stevo Muso
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +4/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 654



« Reply #5 on: August 23, 2010, 09:34:22 AM »

This letter from Mr Deity cheered me up a bit though. Grin

Steve, which Hitchens movie are you looking for? Is it Collision, the one will Douglas Wilson? I've got a good quality version that's about 1GB. I've also got most of his other stuff too.


Brilliant link - read the whole thing. Thanks. I don't have any Hitch vid's - wannem all.
Logged
Michael Meadon
Full Member
***

Skeptical ability: +1/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 121



michaelmeadon
WWW
« Reply #6 on: September 11, 2010, 11:20:17 AM »

A bunch of us think the best way to respond to "Pray for Hitchens Day" is to 'hold' a counter event, "Blaspheme for Hitchens Day". Check it out on FB
Logged
Teleological
Moderate Realist
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +2/-28
Offline Offline

Posts: 980

Ex Nihilo Nihil Fit


« Reply #7 on: September 11, 2010, 11:56:11 AM »

A bunch of us think the best way to respond to "Pray for Hitchens Day" is to 'hold' a counter event, "Blaspheme for Hitchens Day". Check it out on FB

So the best way according you is to stoop to their level (in your mind anyway) and swear at entities you believe do not exist all just to get some attention or to irritate people or whatever? Bit childish, but to each his own I guess.

I am still trying to figure out the logic behind a person that shouts and moans and swears at something they believe does not exist. It's a bit like someone blaming square triangles for the geometry problems of the world and then swearing at it. Fun to watch it must be said (these blasphemy events), yet sad, and many of these people like to refer to themselves as rationalists (with 99% of them probably having no clue as to the difference between a rationalist, empiricist and a realist  Shocked)Huh?...

At least Hitch seems to make a meal out of his mortality. Good show I guess.
Logged
Hermes
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +18/-2
Offline Offline

Posts: 1137



« Reply #8 on: September 11, 2010, 15:03:02 PM »

"Pray for Hitchens Day"

Ah, that familiar smug smile of deluded virtue again!   Hark the holy revelling in leedvermaak!


A bunch of us think the best way to respond to "Pray for Hitchens Day" is to 'hold' a counter event, "Blaspheme for Hitchens Day". Check it out on FB

So the best way according you is to stoop to their level (in your mind anyway) and swear at entities you believe do not exist all just to get some attention or to irritate people or whatever? Bit childish, but to each his own I guess.

I am still trying to figure out the logic behind a person that shouts and moans and swears at something they believe does not exist. It's a bit like someone blaming square triangles for the geometry problems of the world and then swearing at it. Fun to watch it must be said (these blasphemy events), yet sad, and many of these people like to refer to themselves as rationalists (with 99% of them probably having no clue as to the difference between a rationalist, empiricist and a realist  Shocked)Huh?...

At least Hitch seems to make a meal out of his mortality. Good show I guess.


Are you going to pray for him, Tele?
Logged
Michael Meadon
Full Member
***

Skeptical ability: +1/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 121



michaelmeadon
WWW
« Reply #9 on: September 11, 2010, 21:54:09 PM »

Quote
So the best way according you is to stoop to their level (in your mind anyway) and swear at entities you believe do not exist all just to get some attention or to irritate people or whatever? Bit childish, but to each his own I guess.

If you took the trouble to (1) look up the word "blaspheme", (2) pay attention to the world around you, and (3) not make unreasonable assumptions, you might just notice how idiotic that sentence is.
Logged
Michael Meadon
Full Member
***

Skeptical ability: +1/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 121



michaelmeadon
WWW
« Reply #10 on: September 11, 2010, 22:08:10 PM »

Quote
(with 99% of them probably having no clue as to the difference between a rationalist, empiricist and a realist)

The arrogance of ignorance on display here is astounding. The person who created the event? Full professor of philosophy. The other admins? One has an MA in philosophy, the other a Ph.D. As for the last two, she has an MA in science journalism and he (i.e. me) has a honors in philosophy. On a random scroll through the people 'attending' I see a Ph.D in cosmology, and a bunch more grad students / MAs. And those are the people I know.

But, hey. It's better to just assume people I disagree with are uneducated idiots!!
Logged
Teleological
Moderate Realist
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +2/-28
Offline Offline

Posts: 980

Ex Nihilo Nihil Fit


« Reply #11 on: September 12, 2010, 08:18:42 AM »

Quote
So the best way according you is to stoop to their level (in your mind anyway) and swear at entities you believe do not exist all just to get some attention or to irritate people or whatever? Bit childish, but to each his own I guess.


If you took the trouble to (1) look up the word "blaspheme", (2) pay attention to the world around you, and (3) not make unreasonable assumptions, you might just notice how idiotic that sentence is.

1) Perhaps you should look it up? Here: Blaspheme, blaspheme, blaspheme
2) Looks at the world around me, sees people who tries to speak of entities that they don't believe in in an irreverent, impious manner. Asks for the logic behind it... can't get a logical answer. Waits...
3) Assumption 1: People are trying to organise a "Blaspheme for Hitchens Day" in response to "Pray for Hitchens Day" as some sort of counter event.
Assumption 2: These people are doing it for some unknown reason. Possible reasons are a) a counter event for some attention seeking, b) a counter event at an attempt to irritate people, c) no particular rational reason... d) insert whatever here (hopefully we can get a rational reason soon).

Quote
(with 99% of them probably having no clue as to the difference between a rationalist, empiricist and a realist)


The arrogance of ignorance on display here is astounding. The person who created the event? Full professor of philosophy. The other admins? One has an MA in philosophy, the other a Ph.D. As for the last two, she has an MA in science journalism and he (i.e. me) has a honors in philosophy. On a random scroll through the people 'attending' I see a Ph.D in cosmology, and a bunch more grad students / MAs. And those are the people I know.

But, hey. It's better to just assume people I disagree with are uneducated idiots!!

A full professor of philosophy created the event  Huh? ? That's it, there must be some rational reason for it. Do you think we will read about it some day?

BTW, many educated idiots (not saying any of you are btw) are oblivious of the differences between a rationalist, empiricist and realists. But now you have interested me, what do you think you are if any (and perhaps the other educated folk, what do you think they are)?

Are you going to pray for him, Tele?

Naw...
« Last Edit: September 12, 2010, 17:06:52 PM by Teleological » Logged
Julian
Full Member
***

Skeptical ability: +2/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 151


« Reply #12 on: September 12, 2010, 11:28:06 AM »



BTW, many educated idiots (not saying any of you are btw) are oblivious of the differences between a rationalist, empiricist and realists. But now you have interested me, what do you think you are if any (and perhaps the other educated folk, what do you think they are)?



Telly you really love to take surveys of people's philosophical beliefs. Are you a sociologist perhaps?
Logged
Julian
Full Member
***

Skeptical ability: +2/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 151


« Reply #13 on: September 12, 2010, 11:30:01 AM »

people's or peoples'? damn this spelling thing is a challenge sometimes.
Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +63/-9
Offline Offline

Posts: 3782


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #14 on: September 12, 2010, 11:52:03 AM »

It’s “people’s” if you’re talking of something all people generally possess, for example “people’s legs.”  If you mean something possessed by or belonging to the people of two or more different tribes, cultures, countries, lines of descent, etc. – i.e. where it is legitimate to speak of “peoples” (plural) – then it’s “peoples’,” for example “South America’s indigenous peoples’ art and culture…”

The way to sort this out is to decide whether the noun is singular or plural for which a possessive is to be indicated; if the noun itself is already a plural form then it’s treated as if it was singular.  So, for example, it would be “children’s stories.”

'Luthon64
Logged
Julian
Full Member
***

Skeptical ability: +2/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 151


« Reply #15 on: September 12, 2010, 12:46:58 PM »

Thanks, I thought it was something like that. This forum sure is educational at times.
Logged
Michael Meadon
Full Member
***

Skeptical ability: +1/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 121



michaelmeadon
WWW
« Reply #16 on: September 12, 2010, 18:46:38 PM »

@Teleological: Fail to understand the posts of others, much?
Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +63/-9
Offline Offline

Posts: 3782


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #17 on: September 12, 2010, 19:43:22 PM »

@Teleological: Fail to understand the posts of others, much?
Not just their posts.  Teleological is the archetype pathological ignoramus concerning anything that does not conform to his archaic worldview.  Nor is he in any way open to anything that challenges it.  Nor is he able (or willing) to mount anything besides third-hand sophistry and incoherent contrivance in its support.  Nor does he actually respect honest, open inquiry or the epistemological foundations of science, which, when applied in everyday practice, constitute the foundations of modern scepticism.  Nor does he often respect the norms of debate such as answering legitimate questions.  His only “defence” is unwarranted haughtiness disguised in transparent, agenda-laden, put-on, pseudo-penetrating questions lifted from the writings of far more prominent minds (or the slick clichés appearing as space fillers at the end of Reader’s Digest articles – take your pick).  All he wants, in brief, is a soapbox, not the truth.  The following are illustrative cases in point:
I am still trying to figure out the logic behind a person that shouts and moans and swears at something they believe does not exist.
and
Looks at the world around me, sees people who tries to speak of entities that they don't believe in in an irreverent, impious manner. Asks for the logic behind it... can't get a logical answer. Waits...
These are the inane questions of one who hasn’t spent even a minute in earnest contemplation of the issues at hand.

I have little but disdainful chuckles and an occasional ad hominem for such ongoing pretence and artifice.  He knows the conditions for civilised debate.  They have been put to him often enough here, as they have elsewhere.

'Luthon64
Logged
Teleological
Moderate Realist
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +2/-28
Offline Offline

Posts: 980

Ex Nihilo Nihil Fit


« Reply #18 on: September 13, 2010, 07:41:02 AM »

@Teleological: Fail to understand the posts of others, much?

No, not really. Though I fail to see you or any other person person providing a rational reason for having a blasphemy event. Oh well, there is hope.

@ muffles, shame, and you accuse others of wanting a soapbox while running your sad little personal soapbox. Get over it, get over me and try to be a bit more positive and constructive. How about you spend a little earnest contemplation about the issue at hand. So far... trolling (which you admit to many times, shamelessly at that as well), hand waving and ad hominems are all you have. Unimpressive really. Perhaps saying nothing is better than trolling for you?
Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +63/-9
Offline Offline

Posts: 3782


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #19 on: September 13, 2010, 08:17:38 AM »

There, you see what I mean?  Instead of actually addressing what few points I made in my previous post, Teleological immediately scrabbles to the top of his soapbox and shouts a churlishly petulant, “Tu quoque!”

What else is new?

'Luthon64
Logged
Teleological
Moderate Realist
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +2/-28
Offline Offline

Posts: 980

Ex Nihilo Nihil Fit


« Reply #20 on: September 13, 2010, 08:28:24 AM »

There, you see what I mean?  Instead of actually addressing what few points I made in my previous post, Teleological immediately scrabbles to the top of his soapbox and shouts a churlishly petulant, “Tu quoque!”

What else is new?

'Luthon64
You had point in your little melodramatic ad hominem laden prose? Don't make me laugh.
Logged
cyghost
Skeptically yours
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +12/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 1421


Carpe diem


« Reply #21 on: September 13, 2010, 08:42:06 AM »

You had point in your little melodramatic ad hominem laden prose? Don't make me laugh.
I saw the point. I think may others did. Perhaps the problem lies with you?
Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +63/-9
Offline Offline

Posts: 3782


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #22 on: September 13, 2010, 10:03:13 AM »

Get over it, get over me…
But I am all over you!  That’s what irks you so, isn’t it?



Don't make me laugh.
Oh, I would never presume to make unwarranted inferences where the evidence is so scant – in this case that you have a sense of humour.

'Luthon64
Logged
Teleological
Moderate Realist
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +2/-28
Offline Offline

Posts: 980

Ex Nihilo Nihil Fit


« Reply #23 on: September 13, 2010, 10:11:39 AM »

Get over it, get over me…
But I am all over you!  That’s what irks you so, isn’t it?
I am irked by you? Errr.. more like bored. As cute as your personal, ad hominem laden prose is sometimes, it really gets a bit boring. Self-admitted trolls are predictably boring you know. But hey, assume whatever you want, I'll continue to assume that you are a shameless troll. Actually, I don't have to, you have admitted it.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2010, 19:49:10 PM by Teleological » Logged
Pages: 1 2 [All]   Go Up
  Print  

 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Page created in 0.897 seconds with 23 sceptic queries.
Google visited last this page July 28, 2017, 01:33:31 AM
Privacy Policy