Anchor ads are not supported on this page.
Archives
Classifieds
Stories
Events
Contests
Music
Movies
Theater
Food
Legal Guide
February 12, 2025
February 5, 2025
January 29, 2025
January 22, 2025
January 15, 2025
January 8, 2025
January 1, 2025
December 25, 2024
December 18, 2024
December 11, 2024
December 4, 2024
Close
February 12, 2025
February 5, 2025
January 29, 2025
January 22, 2025
January 15, 2025
January 8, 2025
January 1, 2025
December 25, 2024
December 18, 2024
December 11, 2024
December 4, 2024
February 12, 2025
February 5, 2025
January 29, 2025
January 22, 2025
January 15, 2025
January 8, 2025
January 1, 2025
December 25, 2024
December 18, 2024
December 11, 2024
December 4, 2024
Close
Anchor ads are not supported on this page.
San Diego Coalition of Reason
Anti, we know that there is no such thing as a brain...there is only the holy lizard spirit that animates us all and gives us life. Amen. :-)— November 19, 2009 10:11 p.m.
San Diego Coalition of Reason
Refried, read again. If you want to say there is some deity, the burden of proof is on YOU. Go ahead. Try it. You'll fail. Are you honest enough to admit that you cannot ever prove the existence of God? The best minds throughout the ages have all tried and failed. The best Pascal could come up with was a "wager" that concluded he didn't have much to lose from believing in nonsense. Nothing better has yet emerged. So what proof do you offer? None? You cannot prove the non-existence of invisible brain lizards. I cannot prove the non-existence of "God". But both of them are so wildly improbable that they don't deserve respect. ...unless you have some proof of brain lizards or God, there's no point depending on the existence of either.— November 19, 2009 10:03 p.m.
San Diego Coalition of Reason
Refried, you don't understand the term "science" or you'd know that it's NOT interchangeable with "religion". Science is a process. A tedius but fruitful way of arriving at knowledge. Religion is about believing, a lazy "short cut" to false knowledge. I can see you're trying for the "science is a religion too" angle. Won't work. Sorry. Try again.— November 19, 2009 9:57 p.m.
San Diego Coalition of Reason
Lickona, didn't your invisible friend in the sky preordain that swine flu would come into existence at this time in his devine plan? Didn't He create this new deadly threat to His "beloved" creations? It's because he loves us, right? If I understand you correctly, swine flu is your God's way of telling you that believing in the supernatural is really, really, stupid. Because if you actually did believe in the supernatural, you would get some hands laid on you to make you all better. Or you should run out and find someone with symptoms, embrace them, and hope you'll be rushed directly to a meeting with your maker. You certainly wouldn't avoid church. Lickona, you better watch out. You've revealed your lack of faith. Now that you've been exposed as a non-believer, someone who is ungrateful for God's divine gift of swine flu, so unfaithful that you abandon church attendance out of fear of mere worldly tribulations, will the true believers ever welcome you again? You cannot simultaneously believe in microbes, viruses, and other microscopic phenomenon and also believe in the literal truth of the bible or any other religion that includes an all-powerful deity. Lickona, by your acts you are known. Your swine flu fear shows you as unworthy in the sight of God. O ye of little faith... Or it proves you're actually an atheist who doesn't believe in God's divine plan, has accepted the theories of the biologists, and follows scientific understanding in living his life rather than the path of the deity. Either way, you're trapped...unless you agree that the whole religion business is really rather stupid.— November 19, 2009 9:54 p.m.
Save the Lifeguards
When the city is finally forced to cut something out of its bloated budget, they always target the beaches first. Why? Because then everyone gets up in arms and concerned. Then the politicians can say they tried to cut something, but the public wouldn't allow it. It's a game played again and again in San Diego. It's dishonest and should stop. But it works so well, so predictably, that it's pulled out year after year. Instead of cutting $3 million from lifeguards, how about getting CCDC to pay back the hundreds of millions it "borrowed" from the city? How about ending the $11 million annual payments for John Moores ballpark? How about stopping spending over $25 million on Qualcomm and the Chargers? Nope. It's always the beaches that are targetted. Predictable. Disgusting.— November 19, 2009 9:41 p.m.
San Diego Coalition of Reason
Still my ball? Okay then... Josh, it comes down to burden of proof. The theory of a God has NO proof whatsoever. None. Zero. Zilch. Nada. The theory of evolution has a LOT of proof. Tons. Gobs. Indisputable evidence, case closed. If proof doesn't sway a person, that person is rightfully labeled "crazy". People who believe in "God" are crazy and deserve no respect.— November 19, 2009 9:37 p.m.
Obama taps Alan Bersin to oversee the border
Calreb1, hiding behind a pseudonym, first claims that Matt makes unsubstantiated allegations and lists how Bersin has complied with the disclosure requirements. Then he makes himself (it could only be a male) look really stupid by conflating the Reader with the UT. He then goes on to attack the advertisements in the publication. Uh huh. Guess that makes everything a-okay now, huh? I'm so happy to see there's no possible problem and that we can all go back to ignoring what our so-called leaders do to augment their private interests while serving in a public office. Yep. Calrep1, you sure did tell off Matt Potter. I'm sure he's shivering in a dark corner someplace, tears rolling down his cheeks, gulping down cheap wine and smoking heroic amounts of crack. Or maybe we could make another stab at it...San Diego is a cess pool of corruption, and Matt Potter is one of the few who both has the skills and cares enough to try to expose some of the hidden machinations. (BTW: Since I read the Reader online, I don't have the pleasure of seeing those boob implantation ads nearly enough...is there some way the Reader can display those advertisements more prominently on its website?)— November 19, 2009 9:31 p.m.
San Diego Coalition of Reason
Again, just to be sure that Josh, Refried and all the children at home can follow along: A premise is NOT true if its only proof is that it cannot be proven false. Otherwise you would have to believe me when I tell you that there is a tiny invisible and absolutely undetectable lizard eating your brains and that's why you are reading this article online right this moment. Since I've stipulated that it's "undetectable", just like this "God" entity some people believe in, then by definition it cannot be disproven... ...which proves NOTHING. Thereby any claim to respect is forfeit. If you cannot back up your "theory" with any kind of proof except a well known logical fallacy...well, you don't deserve much respect. Otherwise, again, I could demand your respect for my theory of invisible brain lizards. But we all know that you'd only laugh and tell me it's a stupid idea, even if it's something that could never be formally "disproved".— November 19, 2009 9:22 p.m.
San Diego Coalition of Reason
Refried, you are correct. The evidence for God is just as strong as the evidence for flying saucers, vampires, and invisible unicorns. The reasonable answer is, "I don't know". Yet that must be followed with, "But the evidence against the existence of such a fantastical notion is so weak, while the evidence for it not existing is so strong, that it's unreasonable and childish to believe in them." This is the essense. Just because something cannot be disproved (For example, I am convinced that there is a microscopic invisible undetectable lizard eating your brain, and you can NEVER prove that I'm wrong) doesn't mean it has to be believed. On the contrary, believing in things so wildly improbable is irresponsible. Building a life around these ridiculous beliefs is even more foolish and worthy of society's contempt.— November 19, 2009 9:11 p.m.
San Diego Coalition of Reason
Josh, to now directly address your comment: I'm sure I belong to the group you label "hardcare atheist": "They are SO SURE that there is no God, and they think it's crazy that religious people believe in a God. They go on about science not proving it and this and that. Yet, they are SO POSITIVE there is no God, yet there's no proof of that." Josh, you cannot disprove a negative. Have you ever studied logic? They offer the introductory class at Mesa, Miramar, and City College. It could change your life. Here's a good summary of the logical fallacy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignora… A funny version that results in some great parties (one of which you should crash some day, my friend) is the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Josh, you cannot disprove that a Flying Spaghetti Monster created the universe. Try it. Show me that there is no such thing as a Flying Spaghetti Monster...on an Invisible Pink Unicorn...or leprechauns...or this thing some people call "God". So I hope that answers your question. The reason we're as certain as it's humanly possible to be is because we took that college class a long time ago and learned about those impediments to understanding the world around us known as logical fallacies. Take the time to take the course. Mesa College offers the clas here: http://www.sdmesa.edu/academic-programs/course-de…— November 19, 2009 8:35 p.m.