This would make fundie heads explode................

[Are_grits_groceries]

http://www.myconfinedspace.com/

The Brits are having an atheism vs religion argument using signs on buses.

[WillParkinson]

1. Wow...

Ouch.

[bdamomma]

2. it's the truth.

Brits don't play.

[AB_Positive]

3. I

Can I get that as a bumper sticker?

... then again I'd probably get fired by the principal here.

[Left Coast2020]

76. Go to cafe press and you can make one.

[boobooday]

4. Ouch

That is gonna leave a mark.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

5. Dunno. Buildings are built pretty tough these days.

[ret5hd]

6. I actually think that is from a website that lets you put any message on the bus.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

8. Article about this campaign from the NY Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/07/world/europe/07london.html?em

London Journal
Atheists Send a Message, on 800 British Buses

By SARAH LYALL
Published: January 6, 2009

LONDON — The advertisement on the bus was fairly mild, just a passage from the Bible and the address of a Christian Web site. But when Ariane Sherine, a comedy writer, looked on the Web site in June, she was startled to learn that she and her nonbelieving friends were headed straight to hell, to “spend all eternity in torment.”

This message — except the “probably” — has been approved by Richard Dawkins, scientist and author of “The God Delusion.”

That’s a bit extreme, she thought, as well as hard to prove. “If I wanted to run a bus ad saying ‘Beware — there is a giant lion from London Zoo on the loose!’ or ‘The “bits” in orange juice aren’t orange but plastic — don’t drink them or you’ll die!’ I think I might be asked to show my working and back up my claims,” Ms. Sherine wrote in a commentary on the Web site of The Guardian.

And then she thought, how about putting some atheist messages on the bus, as a corrective to the religious ones?

And so were planted the seeds of the Atheist Bus Campaign, an effort to disseminate a godless message to the greater public. When the organizers announced the effort in October, they said they hoped to raise a modest $8,000 or so.

continued at link

[GoCubsGo]

10. Actually, it's probably...

...part of Richard Dawkins' Atheist Bus campaign: http://tinyurl.com/9uws94

[TheCowsCameHome]

7. Ouch

[The Wizard]

9. Fundamentalist religious perversion flies you into buildings

would be more accurate.
Those who claim to be getting messages from their particular sky hero need to be restrained, under heavy medication, getting 50,000 volts flowing across their frontal lobes or all of the choices mentioned.
We had a president who said God told him to attack Iraq. And there's a guy who would have been helped by electrically induced convulsions.

[pleah]

12. K&R

:rofl:

[SmileyRose]

11. whammo - ooo that's gonna leave a mark...........

can you picture a bus with that on it in the bible belt?

[tridim]

34. These guys tried a similar experiment, with horrifying results.

http://www.topgear.com/us/videos/more/the-great-american-road-trip/#comments_anchor

[Avalux]

13. That is wonderful - and true.

You know what though? I hate that science is pitted against religion; it doesn't need to be one or the other. The word "radical" should preface religion.

[Cabcere]

20. I feel the same way.

:hi: I know plenty of religious people who believe in science and are not rabid about condemning everybody else to hell or whatnot, and although I can certainly understand the motivation for doing so, it bugs me a little when all religious people are lumped into the one category of "insane."

[polmaven]

41. Thank you very much!

I happen to be one of those religious people who believe in science and I do not go around condemning people who are not religious. My faith is my choice, and I don't try to foist it on anyone else.

I wish the atheists, on this site, at least, would give me the same consideration.

[whathehell]

64. You got it. n/t

[deepthought42]

71. We're not all mean...

Just like other people...

:hi:

[pleah]

14. K&R I've seen this before, but still it worth

another look.

[NNN0LHI]

15. Didn't both Bush and Blair pretty much say they got a verbal OK from God before invading Iraq?

We shouldn't forget that either.

Don

[LeftishBrit]

95. Pretty much so.

A big ugh to them!

Blair is still pushing the idea that there is insufficient influence of religion on politics.

The UK, despite lack of official separation of church and state, has less intrusion of religion into politics than the USA does. We've had openly atheist MPs since 1880. My MP Evan Harris is basically everything that Liddy Dole accused her opponent of being(!): a strong atheist and official in the National Secular Society. We have had at least two atheist/agnostic major party leaders recently; and the current Foreign Secretary David Miliband is openly atheist. Nonetheless, there's still a bit too much church/state interaction, and Blair was an extreme and unfortunate example.

[RandomThoughts]

16. I understand people can post what they want on busses.

But the supernatural world has already been proven to exist. So thats something at least.

[NNN0LHI]

17. Do you have a link to evidence that shows the supernatural world has already been proven to exist?

I would really like to peruse it.

Thanks in advance.

Don

[RandomThoughts]

22. I didn't save all the links myself.

But somebody has them all. Someone PM the guy the links if you got them.

[cobalt1999]

30. In other words, I'm making shit up or I'm gullible enough to believe what someone told me

Talk to a creationist and they'll tell you their ideas are scientifically proven too. Ask them to cit the journal the proof was published in and they'll slink away.

Either they were lying about it, or believed it when some other idiot told them it was true and didn't even ask for the proof themselves.

[RandomThoughts]

32. nobody told me anything either.

But don't be upset, I am not saying you are gullible for not believing either, I just don't think you have the same set of experiences as some other people.

But it sounds like you believe if it is written in a science journal then that counts as proof, but I got a hunch you would disregard something if it did not match your belief, or if you could not reproduce it yourself. By reproducing it, you would then have your own experiences to draw on, and would might possibly join the crowd of people that believe.

(also no need to explain scientific method, I understand that concept)

Thats why I was curious what you would consider proof.

But honestly I get a chuckle out of this, and mean no offense whatsoever, I hope it does not upset you, I understand you believe differently and wish you the best. :)

[cobalt1999]

35. It's the difference between a proof and a belief.

If it's scientifically proven, then it will be published.

If it's scientifically proven, it doesn't matter what I believe or not.

If it's not scientifically proven, then don't say the supernatural is proven. Say, I believe in it in the absence of proof.

It's that simple.

[RandomThoughts]

55. it is simple

The supernatural is scientifically proven.

:shrug:

not much more I can say, sorry you missed the published article that explains it.

But again, it really does not matter what I believe(or know to be proven), nor should it, I know you have beliefs also, sort of makes us all a little different and gives people things to talk about. :)

Nice meeting you by the way :hi:

[cobalt1999]

62. "sorry you missed the published article that explains it."

:rofl:

Ya, me and the rest of the world.

Maybe you just stating "The supernatural is scientifically proven." without any backup is something that influences your friends and family. However, the standards for most people are MUCH higher.

Provide some link of this "proof" or I have to conclude you are full of ....

Don't worry, I won't hold my breath, it's obvious you can't actually backup your assertion.

[RandomThoughts]

63. You are allowed to think as you wish.

I agree with the :rofl:

But the most important thing about the conversation is as we speak, we both know we are right even though our ideas are mutually exclusive.

If nothing else, this is important.


"it's obvious you can't actually backup your assertion."
Or I have no reason to prove it to you right now. :)

But again, it has been good talking with you, peace and love to you :)

[DUlover2909]

83. The Lord of the Rings books are based on factual events.

I know this because they were written by the prophet JRR Tolkien. The LoTR books are my religion and if you disrespect my belief system then you are an intolerant bigot.

[RandomThoughts]

100. I like those books also

however I do not know how they would be a religion, and if that is your belief, it is your right to have. I enjoy the metaphors and the way he speaks of the epic battles in his book.

I can not agree with you on them being real, nor can I say JRR Tolkien was a prophet but you have every right to believe that if you want :)

And in the spirit of peace, but without the same sanctity of worship you hold for the books, I offer the sharing of quotes from the books that I also hold in high esteem.

“Do not meddle in the affairs of Wizards, for they are subtle and quick to anger.”

The Road goes ever on and on
Down from the door where it began.
Now far ahead the Road has gone,
And I must follow, if I can,
Pursuing it with eager feet,
Until it joins some larger way
Where many paths and errands meet.
And whither then? I cannot say.

All that is gold does not glitter,
Not all those who wander are lost;
The old that is strong does not wither,
Deep roots are not reached by frost.

From the ashes a fire shall be woken,
A light from the shadows shall spring;
Renewed shall be blade that was broken:
The crownless again shall be king.

He who breaks a thing to find out what it is, has left the path of wisdom.”

“She should not die, so young and beautiful. At least, she should not die alone."

“Let him not vow to walk in the dark, who has not seen the darkness fall.”

"We have sworn, and not lightly. This oath we will keep. We are threatened with many evils, and treason not least; but one thing is not said: that we shall suffer from cowardice, from cravens or the fear of cravens. Therefore I say that we will go on, and this doom I add: the deeds that we shall do shall be the matter of song until the last days of Arda.”

“Sleep! I feel the need of it. Yet my axe is restless in my hand. Give me a row of orc-necks and room to swing and all weariness will fall from me!”

Frodo: I can't do this, Sam.
Sam: I know. It's all wrong. By rights we shouldn't even be here. But we are. It's like in the great stories, Mr. Frodo. The ones that really mattered. Full of darkness and danger, they were. And sometimes you didn't want to know the end. Because how could the end be happy? How could the world go back to the way it was when so much bad had happened? But in the end, it's only a passing thing, this shadow. Even darkness must pass. A new day will come. And when the sun shines it will shine out the clearer. Those were the stories that stayed with you. That meant something, even if you were too small to understand why. But I think, Mr. Frodo, I do understand. I know now. Folk in those stories had lots of chances of turning back, only they didn't. They kept going. Because they were holding on to something.
Frodo: What are we holding onto, Sam?
Sam: That there's some good in this world, Mr. Frodo... and it's worth fighting for.

[Dr.Phool]

91. You should include the planet you live on in your profile.

[RandomThoughts]

101. you make assumptions in your post.

:)

[xenussister]

77. Cool! Does Randi know about that?

Because he'd really be interested.

[Bill McBlueState]

98. If "it" can be proven with science

Then in what way is "it" really supernatural? (Whatever "it" is.)

[whopis01]

40. Here is a link that explains it all:

[RandomThoughts]

53. well I would not take that as proof

not enough levels, and cause and effect is pretty simple to guess at there. There is also no temporal dislocations to show lack of planned intent.

But as a facsimile, or 1 dimensional example, it works.

[immoderate]

21. Kind of like imagination has been proven to exist.

--imm

[NeedleCast]

25. Your definition of proof and mine are probably wildly different

[RandomThoughts]

28. ok

what do you need for proof.

[NeedleCast]

42. What are we talking about, specifically?

What level of proof do I need about what? What sort of woo-woo are you saying has been "proven" to exist?

In terms of the proof that I need, I want something that is scientifically measurable and repeatable.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

44. Evidence.

Preferably conclusive evidence.

Any evidence would be interesting.

Shame there isn't any.

[RandomThoughts]

61. well evidence is an interesting concept.

For example, the systems that most 'scientist' take as evidence, really are just systems that are created to remove certain conditions from being part of the explanation.

law of large numbers.
fraud
perception outside of balance.

for instance, if it is in a lab and can be repeated, then every repetition decreases the odds of event happening because of random chance, secondary causation, or fudged experiment.

But in true science nothing is 100% proven, it is just made sure enough to discount the other possible explanations based on some extreme probability.

People know water boils because heat is applied, why because that occurs every time, it is repeatable in many locations and settings. But then someone puts water in a vacuum, and it boils, so now the proved reason is altered or added to. The original proven event is not completely true.

Scientific proof really is best guess from systems many people agree on.

Newtonian gravity was proven pretty successfully, until it was then proven incomplete by relativistic gravity. So even though best scientific method proved gravity, it still ended up being incomplete because not all circumstances can always be assumed to have been tested, so in this, scientific method is also just best guess, or agreed upon belief using a certain system.

Normal world is like gravity, supernatural is like relativistic gravity, and unless you have seen the light bend around the sun or clocks change on trips to the moon, you doubt relativity. Or since everyone you trust says relativity is real, you choose to believe it based on trust of sources you believe are credible.

[DUlover2909]

86. I never doubted relativity because I saw it proven mathematically.

Then I saw the experimental evidence. Isaac Asimov wrote a great essay called The Relativity of Wrong, which explains that just because earlier scientists may have made mistakes, doesn't mean that we are just as wrong today as they were, but that their mistakes led to a more comprehensive explantion of natural events. Science is an ongoing quest for understanding. Religion and supernaturalism are shortcuts to a faulty explanation of the natural world. There are no ghosts, or ESP, or alien UFO's, or psychics, until verifiable proof is provided that sustains the asertion. Until then, sorry kooks, you lose.

[Lucky Luciano]

99. +0.5!

I would say +1 if it was less condescending to the believers (I am not a believer). Some of those "kooks" are actually good people...and some of them are kooks...or a whole lot worse.

[RandomThoughts]

102. you were able to see it proven mathematically

because you accepted certain rules of math are true.

if a = b b = c then a = c. for example.

without the belief in the rules you started with, your proof would not exist.

what if some of those precepts are actually wrong, but like water boiling, or gravity, you have not seen all of it yet. Maybe all your proofs dissolve down to faith.

I do understand the 'rules' of math the proofs are built on are obvious but so are other things known to be true not using scientific method. Since the base 'rules' are only real because they have been true every time so far.

A fish in a fishbowl knows the world is small with known borders always there always tested and always the same, that fish could build entire systems of math on the dimensions of his bowl, throw him in the ocean and watch his assumptions fade.

What would happen if you found yourself in a world where '1' did not equal '1'? Your claims of mathamatical proof in such a world does not exist.

But I don't mind if you have different views, I don't think you are a kook, and you are probably a nice person, you just have different experiances.

:)

[cobalt1999]

29. I must have missed that article in one of the science journals

Somehow, I doubt you will ever provide any link or proof either.

[FiveGoodMen]

56. "supernatural world has already been proven to exist" -- link, please

[yodermon]

66. If the "supernatural world" (whatever that means) has been proven to exist

Then it is no longer supernatural, by definition.

And glad to hear James Randi's $1,000,000 prize has been claimed. Cool!

[DUlover2909]

82. Proof? Really? Wow! That's a first. Why didn't the MSM report this?

:rofl:

[RandomThoughts]

103. because of the title of the OP

[Veritas_et_Aequitas]

18. Athiests - Fundamentalists of the left.

Not all of them, mind you (most of the atheists I know here and in the meat world are pretty tolerant and reasonable), but there is that virulent strain.

[YOY]

37. There's a couple here alright.

One I know is fast to criticise anything Christian (even harmless things as if the whole religion and all it's branches hinge upon the words of Fred Phelps and similar scum) and never any other religion.

One even like to attack Agnostics, because obviously we just can't accept the "truth", when the "facts" are in nobody's favor...even them.

Obviously, I can't and won't name names.

[NeedleCast]

45. As an Agnostic bordering on Atheism

You're right, there are some on this side that are just as bad. Still, the relgious fundamentalists of the world have been playing this game a long time and are a lot better at it than 99% of Atheists.

[Captain Hilts]

19. That is really funny!

[NeedleCast]

23. Love it

Sometimes you don't need a whole lot of words to profoundly express the truth.

[grace0418]

24. Okay, as a graphic designer I have to mention... there is an extra space between

"you" and "buildings". Someone should've proofed that ad better before it went to print.

Still, hilarious.

[remoulade]

31. There's actually a whole word between them!

:evilgrin:

[grace0418]

46. LOL! I should've proofed my post better!

:)

[whopis01]

39. Is this better?

http://ruletheweb.co.uk/b3ta/bus/

[grace0418]

47. My bad. I thought it was a real bus ad. I wouldn't have said anything if I realized

it was just a funny. :)

[whopis01]

50. Just having a bit of fun at your expense...

actually made me think whoever did the software did a good job if it took a graphic designer to notice the flaw...

[crispini]

26. Ooooo. ZING!

That's pretty funny, and it's gotta sting. Interesting campaign.

[Mad_Dem_X]

27. Whoa.

Can you imagine if someone put up a sign like that HERE? :nuke:

[gratuitous]

33. Oooh, this is fun

Religion gives you Dr. Schweitzer; science gives you Dr. Mengele.

[alfredo]

36. New sig line for my e-mail!!

[anonymous171]

38. The Atomic Bomb was created by religionists. nt

[polmaven]

89. Oh, but how can that be???

Religionists don't BELIEVE in science! Is the Atomic Bomb supernatural?

[HarveyDarkey]

43. That's the best one yet

[WilliamPitt]

48. Snap

BUT anyone who thinks it is just religion motivating terrorism needs to take some classes on economics, geopolitics, the Cold War and general history.

[fascisthunter]

57. that's a really good point

[Maru Kitteh]

49. As a semi-practicing Christian I must say.......

These signs just keep getting funnier and funnier! :rofl:

[BattyDem]

51. Ouch.

And the British Bus Wars continue ... :rofl:

[spanone]

52. i'd like a bumpersticker like that on my car!!!

[deaniac21]

54. Actually, it might make the bus explode. I believe that is photo

shopped.

[Ikonoklast]

75. How about this one?

[xenussister]

78. Ooops, "Fath"? Try again.

These are hilarious.

[Ikonoklast]

79. There are constraints and adjustments must be made.

[mimitabby]

58. just watched "the god who was not there"

Very interesting documentary about Christ and Christians.

[sufrommich]

59. I love it! Short and to the point. nt

[Greyhound]

60. That is fucking brilliant! K&R.

[UpInArms]

65. I want that sign on a bumper sticker

I'd wear it on every car I drive and give them away to others for their wearing too!

(anyone knowing where I could get that, let me know!)

[trthnd4jstc]

67. Yes! Funny! Thanks for the Post!

[quiet.american]

68. That's excellent. (And I'm not even an atheist.) nt

[lonestarnot]

69. Today I saw a bus that said Hop On, and the O's were filled with Obama campaign pic.

:D

[southerncrone]

70. Ahhhhh......the Mother Land.

[StreetKnowledge]

72. Wow, Geez.....

If you did that her some bible-thumping idiot would either sue you or shoot you.

Ballsy, that's for sure.....

[Lucky Luciano]

73. haha...I am an agnostic...close to atheist though and

totally into science and math....that said, science did bring us:

[DUlover2909]

85. Evil emperialism brought us that. If not for Nazis and Japanese attacks

there would be no nuclear weapons. We wouldn't have needed it.

[polmaven]

90. "Evil Imperialism" did it all by itself?

Wow! That is some powerful force! No science needed...just "Evil Imperialism"!

[cobalt1999]

94. Balance it out with all the lives saved by medical research

I think science comes out well ahead in the equation.

On the other hand, religion has lots of blood on their hands, but what do they have to show to balance their equation?

[Lucky Luciano]

97. charities for the poor?

:shrug:

some left leaning religious organizations actually do some good.

[Common Sense Party]

74. One could also say, "Science vaporizes Hiroshima."

Could we not?

[DUlover2909]

84. And emperialism causes sneak attacks.

[veganlush]

80. Awesome!....n/t

[Jeroen]

81. God knows no religion - Gandhi n/t

[Norrin Radd]

87. Weird Science gets you this:

[williesgirl]

88. This is great and earned you a heart! rec'd

[pitchforksandtorches]

92. Believe FSM and eat

As a scientist the more I consider the Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM) theory, the FSM theory has a lot going for it. First, it should satisfy even the most ardent Intelligent Design detractors. Secondly, since everyone needs to eat and to believe in something, the FSM theory fulfills these desires. Finally, FSM neatly ties together the many ideas about the creation of the universe. I plan on exposing my students to the FSM theory over a pasta dinner.
RAmen
http://www.venganza.org/

[OwnedByFerrets]

93. K and R

[WritingIsMyReligion]

96. LOL

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

So true.