Posts by Abaddon

You would have two groups of people; those who pretended to be ill and those who were ill, as classified by medical doctors beforehand.Each group would have even numbers of believers, cynics and agnostics. They would be healed by two groups of people, one group of actors peteding to heal, another of claimed real healers.

The people oberving would not know if the people were ill or the healers were real. The healers would not know if the peope were ill, the people would not know if their healer was real.

You would collate the statistics and perform a longitudinal (over time) study of the people to see if they got better. It is an astoundingly simple experiment to design, and it is down to the believers to put experimental data where their mouths are if they want to be taken seriously.

So, no one testirng god but nasty scientists who do that anyway. The belivers would be genuine in their belief and expectations.

52

Have/Do you 'fake' orgasms?

by AK - Jeff in

the theme of last nites 'seinfeld' rerun.

it was a hoot!.

well.... do you fake them?.

Abaddon

Easy, you just teach it to spit on command...

Seriously? Running dry happens, multiple male orgasms (where only the last one is wet) happen, but they are still orgasms.

I have heard guys claim they faked it (whilst wearing a condom) so they could go to sleep, but have never had sex quite that bad.

It is also far harder for women to fake orgasms than often thought, if you know your sexual female physiology.

Noise is no indication; some girls are silent as the grave until the moment of truth (a little off-putting the first time you sleep with them), others make loads of noise until they come and then not only stop making noise but also stop breathing for what seems like ages (again, a little off-putting the first time, especially for them when you start CPR), I don't know any way a man or woman (yes women can too) can fake ejaculation short of camera tricks, but you can normally feel the pelvic contractions, and the strength and regularity is just different to when it is deliberate.

Re.spam. Okay, I can understand the Viagra et. el spam; problems in that area can not be nice. I can understand the attraction of claims for pills that make you longer (although like the rest of male humanity would deny any need) - and if I responded to every lengthening spam I got (do they know something I don't?) I could make love to female members of JWD in New York without leaving my desk in Holland.

But what is it with these spams that offer to double the volume of your ejaculate? Never, ever has any woman said "oh, that was nice, but I'd like you to have more sperm". At least not to me... and I don't think this is due to me having nuts like a chimpanzee.

Any guys had complaints or girls made complaints about the volume of sperm?

30

What's your take on "faith healing" ...

by Frequent_Fader_Miles in

jw
friends

does it really happen, or is it a fake?.

know anyone personally who was cured by a faith healer?.

Abaddon

In view of the past failure of those who believe in it to ever demonstrate it in a manner that a science journal or court of law would aoccept as satisfactory proof

In view of the failure of those who believe in it to set up a simple double-blind test that woul determine whether it had any beneficial effect

In view of the proven fact people are able to feel better or worse according to how they think they should feel, even down to the level of measurable physiological responses

... I "take it" as wishful thinking, that despite being 100% moonshine actually seems to work for some people sometimes because they believe it will.

I'm quite happy for those who believe in it to believe in it, but won't patronise them by lying to them that I do too. I hope I get afforded the same latitude.

28

Marijuana may increase psychosis risk, analysis says

by ithinkisee in

(article link)

marijuana may increase psychosis risk, analysis says.

london, england (ap) -- using marijuana seems to increase the chance of becoming psychotic, researchers report in an analysis of past research that reignites the issue of whether pot is dangerous.

Abaddon

It isn't really news that recreational psychoactive drugs should be avoided by those with a history of mental instability, or that persons using psychoactive drugs should seriously reconsider their recreational drug use if they have any contraindications. It has definitely become clearer in the past decade that teenagers should avoid heavy pot usage, as they seem especially susceptible to cannabis-linked psychosis.

Of course, there is the old correlation is not causation thing.

It may be that people with certain psychological traits (and therefore weaknesses) are drawn to psychoactive drugs. Do people who go to certain websites (say geeks to Slashdot) go because of internal factors or because of eating lots of M&M's? Statistically one could show correlation between eating M&M's (or other typical 'sat in front of a computer all day' snack) and reading techie websites.

Anecdotally I feel there is causation, but that it only effects some - just like some people are especially susceptible to contracting lung cancer if they smoke cigarettes, or some people are more susceptible to alcoholism.

Equally of course, whilst it may be true those experiencing contraindications SHOULD stop, it could well be they are in the group least able to do so.

What is untrue is that cannabis is getting stronger to any significant level.

What is true is that moving it from class B to C has made supply easier and heavy use easier.

What is not true is that there has been a large increase in users as a result of moving it from B to C.

What is true is that people being admitted for treatment are more frequently diagnosed as probably needing treatment due to cannabis use.

This leaves us with a drug that has been used for thousands of years, that causes far less damage to non-users than alcohol, and that damages the health of users to a greater or lesser extent than other recreational drugs (including nicotine or alcohol), and that may be especially damaging to some more than others, just like other recreational drugs, and that represents an equal risk overall as some commonly accepted and played sports.

But, of course, viewed like that doesn't make for column inches...

71

Has Islam lead to an increase in Atheism?

by nicolaou in

ever since 911 and the subsequent attacks in bali, madrid, and london it seems that everyone feels they have a licence to criticise islam (they do).

fundamentalist and many mainstream christians deride the backwardness of a religion that creates suicide bombers and 'honour' killers.

of course, it was only a small group of hardcore islamist extremists that carried out these attacks but the whole community has been tarred by them, and perhaps in some sense it is only right that the majority of 'reasonable' and peaceful muslims do accept the part they play in providing the soil for these people to grow in.

Abaddon

Illyrian

I started that with;

And are they looking at the same table in making their summary?

Are you a they? I think not. I called them liars. Not you.

71

Has Islam lead to an increase in Atheism?

by nicolaou in

ever since 911 and the subsequent attacks in bali, madrid, and london it seems that everyone feels they have a licence to criticise islam (they do).

fundamentalist and many mainstream christians deride the backwardness of a religion that creates suicide bombers and 'honour' killers.

of course, it was only a small group of hardcore islamist extremists that carried out these attacks but the whole community has been tarred by them, and perhaps in some sense it is only right that the majority of 'reasonable' and peaceful muslims do accept the part they play in providing the soil for these people to grow in.

Abaddon

I agree that % atheism can only be answered with statistics, but those statistics aren't granular enough to reveal that '45% of people becoming atheists in the last 7 years have done so because of Islamic fundamentalism', so they don't answer the questiosn either.

And are they looking at the same table in making their summary?

If we compare the results of surveys in 1991 with those of 1997-98, we can see that the "religious fall" has been stopped
and even reversed, above all in many Eastern countries, and in these, the believers' numbers increase spectacularly, but it
is necessary to say that many are converted not in Christianity but New Age or somewhat difficult to describe.

This is a lie; if you know anything about statistics you can see the ONLY cases of a drop in atheism are cases where the drop would fall within a normal margin-of-error. All the others are clear increases in atheism beyond any possible statistical effect.

But the Data table the source refers to I headed 'SECULARIZED COUNTRIES'. Which is my point.

The ONLY major countries that have de-securised are Iran and Afghanistan. Even Russia, which was atheistic for years in law, now only has a 2% church attendence.

I think that secularism could be best measured by the following yardsticks;

Church/Mosque/whatever attendence
% population agreeing with abortion is a right
% population agreeing homosexuality is not wrong
% population agreeing pre-martial sex is not wrong

... which means most of Europe is secular, and America is almost secular...

71

Has Islam lead to an increase in Atheism?

by nicolaou in

ever since 911 and the subsequent attacks in bali, madrid, and london it seems that everyone feels they have a licence to criticise islam (they do).

fundamentalist and many mainstream christians deride the backwardness of a religion that creates suicide bombers and 'honour' killers.

of course, it was only a small group of hardcore islamist extremists that carried out these attacks but the whole community has been tarred by them, and perhaps in some sense it is only right that the majority of 'reasonable' and peaceful muslims do accept the part they play in providing the soil for these people to grow in.

Abaddon

metatron

As to European societies being more peaceful, I would say that , given what we're seeing develop as to home grown terrorism there, the matter is still up for debate,

Not really. Go to Nationmaster.com and play with the statistics. The US's population is 298,444,215 and the number of murders is 12,658. Totting up Western European countries until I got to a population of 305,678,958 I only have 4,893 murders in those same countries.

Our Islamic terrorists could kill over twice as many people each year as died on 9/11 ON TOP OF CURRENT MURDER RATESand Europe would still be a more peaceful place.

in that regard the high unemployment rates in much of Europe are suspect

Only Italy, Finland, France, Germany, Belgium and the UK have greater unemployment %'s than the USA. If you look at the populations of those countries you find that 276 million people in Europe live in countries with higher unemployment rates and 217 million live in countries with lower unemplyment rates than the US.

I think you are using what statistics you know to support a pre-conceived notion. You are linking uemployment with Islamic immigrants yet fail to consider that Islamic immigrants are a minority of the unemployed and therefore cannot be responsible for unemployment rates in exesss of what you amusingly seem to use as a standard of perfection (the USA).

along with emboldening their ideas of 'dhimmi-tude'.

For Pete's sake; how can a minority impose dhimmi on a majority? It is fundmental Muslims who have the rule of secular law and equality of rights imposed upon them. They have to face secularitude. The facts don't support anything else and the vocal complaints of a sub-set of Muslims are no more meaningful than other non-Islamic religious lobby groups who want to restrict non-believers rights on the grounds of their beliefs.

71

Has Islam lead to an increase in Atheism?

by nicolaou in

ever since 911 and the subsequent attacks in bali, madrid, and london it seems that everyone feels they have a licence to criticise islam (they do).

fundamentalist and many mainstream christians deride the backwardness of a religion that creates suicide bombers and 'honour' killers.

of course, it was only a small group of hardcore islamist extremists that carried out these attacks but the whole community has been tarred by them, and perhaps in some sense it is only right that the majority of 'reasonable' and peaceful muslims do accept the part they play in providing the soil for these people to grow in.

Abaddon

Whilst the arguments about global warming and the evidence that may support it will rage for some time, I think one could reach an easier consensus on the evidence supporting 'global atheisming' and 'global secularising'.

Plot the trend. Consider the factors causing this trend; outside of cult-like thinking and totalitarian religious regimes, it can only become more pronounced.

Look also at how secularism is also increasing outside of those same areas.

The percentage of population who are in cult-like thinking and totalitarian religious regimes is quite small.

In the rest of the world, secularisation and increasing atheism are givens.

Of course cult-like thinking and totalitarian religious regimes will resist this, are resisting this. Be it through driving explosive-filled Jeeps into airports or by seeking to impose their own faith-based beliefs on others.

It will pass. We don't burn witches much anymore, we are getting better, "the slow curve of humanity IS towards justice". And the slow extinction of religion is not the end of spirituality or good.

I think licencing religions is a great idea, but a bit like teaching your cat to use the a toilet. Okay, it's possible, but...

I think a much better idea is to make sure education is such that the harmful effects of religious belief are moderated, helping the move towards secularism.

done4good

In the USA, it is still easier to really become succussful, (in the monetary sense), if one takes the initiative.

Actually, in Europe, a greater percentage of people own 20% of the wealth. So one could say in Europe it is easier to become wealthy, as more people do, and in the US it is easier to become extremely rich, as there are fewer sharing the 20% of wealth.

Now, which society do you want to live in?

metatron

Doing something that leads to societal benefits is still a good idea even if some people impose their agenda upon it. If welfare states tend to better distribution of wealth (fact), reduction of intrasocietal tensions and a correspondingly more peaceful society (fact) and a reduction of poverty and harm caused by poverty (fact), why stop it because some idiots think they deserve it? There's lots of white 'Christian' welfare scroungers (those who could work but don't) who think they deserve it. Why stop because some of them are Muslim?