How do you explain self organisation in nature?

[tonea2003]

I see you are at the blessed omega point of our species' evolution

but of Cedric Rhoades - a figure shrouded in mystery and intrigue - I fear I can bring no further illumination. My trusties have been despatched in search of insights into his genius but so far they only bring me scraps about Cedric Hardwicke.

I can often be found in the Rod Hull Memorial Library perusing copies of the Angling Times. I prefer the intellectual rigour of disbelieving everything unless it is printed in this organ of piscine truth and how well this policy has served me in these days of Twatter and Wikipedapedagoguery. Your mention of Cedric Hardwicke brings to mind his 1942 epic, 'Commando Strike At Dawn,' a timeless account of that much neglected field of wartime industrial relations.

is the ghost of spike milligan writing for you?

 

[johnny crossan]

In an impulsive attack on the Saracens, 200 Christian knights,
led by Baldwin, attack 20,000 Saracens and are surrounded and vanquished.

it's a bit like following Baldwin on here sometimes

 

[sweynforkbeard]

In an impulsive attack on the Saracens, 200 Christian knights,
led by Baldwin, attack 20,000 Saracens and are surrounded and vanquished.

it's a bit like following Baldwin on here sometimes

I hadn't realised that Stanley Baldwin had so taken against Indian restaurants. The illustration is highly reminiscent of the third Test in Karachi in 1963 when the spin of Fred Titmus really started to bite.

 

[johnny crossan]

In an impulsive attack on the Saracens, 200 Christian knights,
led by Baldwin, attack 20,000 Saracens and are surrounded and vanquished.

it's a bit like following Baldwin on here sometimes

I hadn't realised that Stanley Baldwin had so taken against Indian restaurants. The illustration is highly reminiscent of the third Test in Karachi in 1963 when the spin of Fred Titmus really started to bite.

wonderful

 

[tonea2003]

In an impulsive attack on the Saracens, 200 Christian knights,
led by Baldwin, attack 20,000 Saracens and are surrounded and vanquished.

it's a bit like following Baldwin on here sometimes

I hadn't realised that Stanley Baldwin had so taken against Indian restaurants. The illustration is highly reminiscent of the third Test in Karachi in 1963 when the spin of Fred Titmus really started to bite.

now i know, you are a member of half man half biscuit

 

[sweynforkbeard]

I hadn't realised that Stanley Baldwin had so taken against Indian restaurants. The illustration is highly reminiscent of the third Test in Karachi in 1963 when the spin of Fred Titmus really started to bite.

now i know, you are a member of half man half biscuit

Family rumour has it that I am related to Garibaldi on my mothers side.

 

[tonea2003]

now i know, you are a member of half man half biscuit

Family rumour has it that I am related to Garibaldi on my mothers side.

loved the analagy but unfortunately factually incorrect, freds spin never bit!!

 

[sweynforkbeard]

Family rumour has it that I am related to Garibaldi on my mothers side.

loved the analagy but unfortunately factually incorrect, freds spin never bit!!

I refer you to Wisden 1965, 'And for Middlesex versus Yorkshire yet again Titmus's deceivingly gentle loop concealed a vicious kick.' Of course, like many other right thinking men, he always had it in for Boycott. The suspended sentence at Uxbridge Magistrates seemed to calm him and after the unfortunate toe loss when playing forward defensive to a speed boat his kick was never the same.

 

[tonea2003]

loved the analagy but unfortunately factually incorrect, freds spin never bit!!

I refer you to Wisden 1965, 'And for Middlesex versus Yorkshire yet again Titmus's deceivingly gentle loop concealed a vicious kick.' Of course, like many other right thinking men, he always had it in for Boycott. The suspended sentence at Uxbridge Magistrates seemed to calm him and after the unfortunate toe loss when playing forward defensive to a speed boat his kick was never the same.

and in the immortal words of paul daniels "that's magic"

 

[ElanJo]

I don't think you'll find that the 'vocal' atheists, as you put it, are any different in that regard.

"I wander back and forth between atheism and agnosticism"
I don't think that makes sense. If you don't believe in a god then you're an atheist.

Like I said, people like Dawkins do. He talks of organising atheist political power to counter religious political power. To me any pro-secularist is welcome aboard the train of secularism, theist or not whereas Dawkins probably wouldn't make such allowances, him being on record as saying he prefers the fundamentalist of the opposition. That kind of shit is why I think he and others of his ilk are unreasonable.

So you don't believe there's such a thing as agnosticism?

But Dawkins doesn't.
"You can believe there is a creator without having any further beliefs whatsoever." He acknowledges this.

As for him helping out atheist and secular groups counter religious encroachment on the state (mostly in the US) I applaud him. What's wrong with that?
I have never seen Dawkins try to exclude religious secularists from the train of secularism. He may criticise them on the the veracity of their beliefs but that is a seperate issue.

With regards to agnosticism, if at no time do you wander into a belief in god you are at all times an atheist. You can be an agnostic atheist or a gnostic atheist just as you can be an agnostic theist or gnostic theist. A/gnosticism deals with knowledge. A/Theism deals with belief.
For instance, using my self as an example, I'm an agnostic atheist with regards to the notion that the universe was created by a deity. I don't actively believe that the universe was created by a deity but I don't claim to know that the universe was not created by a deity.
With regards to specific gods, such as the greek gods or the biblical god/s, and their descriptions, I am alot closer to a gnostic atheist, in that I claim to know that these gods do not exist.*


*of course it depends how people describe their God. My basis for claiming knowledge here is the logical contradictory nature of many descriptions of god.