Comments on: Nailed It http://unreasonablefaith.com/2010/03/09/nailed-it/ Reasonable Thoughts on Religion, Science, Skepticism, and Atheism Mon, 06 Sep 2010 13:43:04 -0400 hourly 1 By: busterggi http://unreasonablefaith.com/2010/03/09/nailed-it/#comment-86748 busterggi Wed, 10 Mar 2010 18:44:19 +0000 http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=9815#comment-86748 Drat! i was going to say the same thing! Or maybe that means our nails compliment one another. Drat! i was going to say the same thing!

Or maybe that means our nails compliment one another.

]]> By: I Am The Blog http://unreasonablefaith.com/2010/03/09/nailed-it/#comment-86721 I Am The Blog Wed, 10 Mar 2010 16:00:08 +0000 http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=9815#comment-86721 It used to be that journalists actually analyzed information instead of just passing it on. Facts used to be checked. If there were serious doubts about the veracity of a claim, (other) experts would be consulted. If the claim were found to be untrue or highly questionable, the story would either be killed or dissenting viewpoints would be presented to debunk seemingly false information, or to at least challenge it. Now I think you can claim pretty much anything and, if they think people would read it, news agencies will publish it pretty much as-is in many cases (don't want someone else to get the scoop before you do!). If they do bother to present a critical voice, they make it seem like the claim and counterclaim are on equal footing, not matter how preposterous or demonstratably false the original claim is. So now I'm sure some people are thinking "Hey, with that nail, Christianity has been proven right yet again! Take that, Dawkins!" whereas if they had been presented with more information about the dodgy nature of the find, they'd at least have a chance of thinking critically. It used to be that journalists actually analyzed information instead of just passing it on. Facts used to be checked. If there were serious doubts about the veracity of a claim, (other) experts would be consulted. If the claim were found to be untrue or highly questionable, the story would either be killed or dissenting viewpoints would be presented to debunk seemingly false information, or to at least challenge it.

Now I think you can claim pretty much anything and, if they think people would read it, news agencies will publish it pretty much as-is in many cases (don’t want someone else to get the scoop before you do!). If they do bother to present a critical voice, they make it seem like the claim and counterclaim are on equal footing, not matter how preposterous or demonstratably false the original claim is.

So now I’m sure some people are thinking “Hey, with that nail, Christianity has been proven right yet again! Take that, Dawkins!” whereas if they had been presented with more information about the dodgy nature of the find, they’d at least have a chance of thinking critically.

]]> By: Nail from Christ’s crucifixion *NOT* found - Lone Wolfs Den http://unreasonablefaith.com/2010/03/09/nailed-it/#comment-86655 Nail from Christ’s crucifixion *NOT* found - Lone Wolfs Den Wed, 10 Mar 2010 02:35:17 +0000 http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=9815#comment-86655 [...] at Unreasonable Faith VN:F [1.8.4_1055]Rating: 0 (from 0 votes) :crucifixion, idiot news, jesus, Knights Templar, nail, [...] [...] at Unreasonable Faith VN:F [1.8.4_1055]Rating: 0 (from 0 votes) :crucifixion, idiot news, jesus, Knights Templar, nail, [...]

]]> By: PsiCop http://unreasonablefaith.com/2010/03/09/nailed-it/#comment-86624 PsiCop Tue, 09 Mar 2010 23:25:08 +0000 http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=9815#comment-86624 It's both. The thing is, however, that the media have no excuse for not investigating the possibility of fraud. Not to mention, when they couch claims in terms of a question -- rather than a statement -- this reveals right at the outset that they are not sure of it. But that, apparently, is not enough to prevent them from reporting it, anyway. Ethical journalists do not report things they have not bothered to confirm. Thus the Telegraph has no excuse ... even if this turns out to have been a hoax. It’s both. The thing is, however, that the media have no excuse for not investigating the possibility of fraud. Not to mention, when they couch claims in terms of a question — rather than a statement — this reveals right at the outset that they are not sure of it.

But that, apparently, is not enough to prevent them from reporting it, anyway.

Ethical journalists do not report things they have not bothered to confirm. Thus the Telegraph has no excuse … even if this turns out to have been a hoax.

]]> By: claidheamh mor http://unreasonablefaith.com/2010/03/09/nailed-it/#comment-86604 claidheamh mor Tue, 09 Mar 2010 22:41:00 +0000 http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=9815#comment-86604 Lots of people have been down with that method. If the accused manages to survive a dunking and near-drowning, she was a witch and they kill her. If she sinks and dies, she was innocent and they send regrets to the family blah, blah. Better way to use the method: Throw the contents of the church collection plate up as high as possible. Any money that stays up, God gets to keep. Any money that comes down, you get to keep. Lots of people have been down with that method. If the accused manages to survive a dunking and near-drowning, she was a witch and they kill her. If she sinks and dies, she was innocent and they send regrets to the family blah, blah.

Better way to use the method: Throw the contents of the church collection plate up as high as possible. Any money that stays up, God gets to keep. Any money that comes down, you get to keep.

]]> By: claidheamh mor http://unreasonablefaith.com/2010/03/09/nailed-it/#comment-86600 claidheamh mor Tue, 09 Mar 2010 22:35:30 +0000 http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=9815#comment-86600 Jeeeeezus, what a headache. It doesn't have to be a fabrication; even if it's real, the ASSumptions start flying. A death shroud with a face imprint on it of a bearded dude <i>must</i> have been Jesus' shroud. An old nail just oooh, <i> must</i> be one that was driven through Christ's hands. See just a mite, just a tad of a pattern here? Yeah, wooden crosses were used for capital punishment back in certain times and places. Can you even imagine the furor and foofaraw if one had managed to stay preserved? Oooh, especially it came from near <i>the very place</i>. Sheeeesh. Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeezus! Jeeeeezus, what a headache. It doesn’t have to be a fabrication; even if it’s real, the ASSumptions start flying. A death shroud with a face imprint on it of a bearded dude must have been Jesus’ shroud. An old nail just oooh, must be one that was driven through Christ’s hands.

See just a mite, just a tad of a pattern here?

Yeah, wooden crosses were used for capital punishment back in certain times and places. Can you even imagine the furor and foofaraw if one had managed to stay preserved? Oooh, especially it came from near the very place. Sheeeesh.

Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeezus!

]]> By: Revyloution http://unreasonablefaith.com/2010/03/09/nailed-it/#comment-86571 Revyloution Tue, 09 Mar 2010 21:44:56 +0000 http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=9815#comment-86571 For a follow up, here is a great take on a classic joke: It had been raining for days and days, and a terrible flood had come over the land. The waters rose so high that one man was forced to climb onto the roof of his house. As the waters rose higher and higher, a man in a rowboat appeared, and told him to get in. “No,” replied the man on the roof. “I have faith in the Lord, the Lord will save me.” So the man in the rowboat went away. The man on the roof prayed for God to save him. The waters rose higher and higher, and suddenly a speedboat appeared. “Climb in!” shouted a man in the boat. “No,” replied the man on the roof. “I have faith in the Lord; the Lord will save me.” So the man in the speedboat went away. The man on the roof prayed for God to save him. The waters continued to rise. A helicopter appeared and over the loudspeaker, the pilot announced he would lower a rope to the man on the roof. “No,” replied the man on the roof. “I have faith in the Lord, the Lord will save me.” So the helicopter went away. The man on the roof prayed for God to save him. The waters rose higher and higher, and eventually they rose so high that the man on the roof was washed away, and alas, the poor man drowned. The End. For a follow up, here is a great take on a classic joke:

It had been raining for days and days, and a terrible flood had come over the land. The waters rose so high that one man was forced to climb onto the roof of his house.

As the waters rose higher and higher, a man in a rowboat appeared, and told him to get in. “No,” replied the man on the roof. “I have faith in the Lord, the Lord will save me.” So the man in the rowboat went away. The man on the roof prayed for God to save him.

The waters rose higher and higher, and suddenly a speedboat appeared. “Climb in!” shouted a man in the boat. “No,” replied the man on the roof. “I have faith in the Lord; the Lord will save me.” So the man in the speedboat went away. The man on the roof prayed for God to save him.

The waters continued to rise. A helicopter appeared and over the loudspeaker, the pilot announced he would lower a rope to the man on the roof. “No,” replied the man on the roof. “I have faith in the Lord, the Lord will save me.” So the helicopter went away. The man on the roof prayed for God to save him.

The waters rose higher and higher, and eventually they rose so high that the man on the roof was washed away, and alas, the poor man drowned.

The End.

]]> By: Ty http://unreasonablefaith.com/2010/03/09/nailed-it/#comment-86567 Ty Tue, 09 Mar 2010 21:38:16 +0000 http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=9815#comment-86567 Were you aiming that comment at Hedwig? It seems out of place where it is. If so, sadly the song 'Nailed' isn't in the movie. It was in the stage play, and is also on the soundtrack for the movie. Were you aiming that comment at Hedwig? It seems out of place where it is.

If so, sadly the song ‘Nailed’ isn’t in the movie. It was in the stage play, and is also on the soundtrack for the movie.

]]> By: Elemenope http://unreasonablefaith.com/2010/03/09/nailed-it/#comment-86547 Elemenope Tue, 09 Mar 2010 20:45:07 +0000 http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=9815#comment-86547 Good film. Good film.

]]> By: tea http://unreasonablefaith.com/2010/03/09/nailed-it/#comment-86528 tea Tue, 09 Mar 2010 19:53:10 +0000 http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=9815#comment-86528 Yeah, I will tell my Aunt. Her house was built on holiest of holy. Yeah, I will tell my Aunt. Her house was built on holiest of holy.

]]> By: Nelly http://unreasonablefaith.com/2010/03/09/nailed-it/#comment-86519 Nelly Tue, 09 Mar 2010 19:40:56 +0000 http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=9815#comment-86519 that made me imagine little miniature Jesus's (would that be pronounced Jesi?) running around..........zapping evil it's a slow day that made me imagine little miniature Jesus’s (would that be pronounced Jesi?) running around……….zapping evil

it’s a slow day

]]> By: bigjohn756 http://unreasonablefaith.com/2010/03/09/nailed-it/#comment-86518 bigjohn756 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 19:37:26 +0000 http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=9815#comment-86518 Get serious! Jesus is God. He doesn't have nor would he need DNA. If he wanted another Him, he would simply create Him. Hey! maybe that's how He did the Resurrection. Get serious! Jesus is God. He doesn’t have nor would he need DNA. If he wanted another Him, he would simply create Him. Hey! maybe that’s how He did the Resurrection.

]]> By: Tabbie http://unreasonablefaith.com/2010/03/09/nailed-it/#comment-86493 Tabbie Tue, 09 Mar 2010 19:07:01 +0000 http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=9815#comment-86493 ROFLMFAO! (Hint: you might make a LOT of money by contacting the Latter Day <em>Aints</em> with your find...they might want to dip it in gold and place it on their <em>Holey</em> of Holies.) ^_^ ROFLMFAO! (Hint: you might make a LOT of money by contacting the Latter Day Aints with your find…they might want to dip it in gold and place it on their Holey of Holies.) ^_^

]]> By: Daniel Florien http://unreasonablefaith.com/2010/03/09/nailed-it/#comment-86489 Daniel Florien Tue, 09 Mar 2010 18:58:10 +0000 http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=9815#comment-86489 For some reason I never thought about the ability to <em>clone</em> Jesus. We could make little Son of Gods running around doing miracles! Then I'd definitely be a believer! For some reason I never thought about the ability to clone Jesus. We could make little Son of Gods running around doing miracles! Then I’d definitely be a believer!

]]> By: burpy http://unreasonablefaith.com/2010/03/09/nailed-it/#comment-86488 burpy Tue, 09 Mar 2010 18:52:10 +0000 http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=9815#comment-86488 Since Jesus was half human and half god, the potential for cloning sort sort of super being to do our bidding is irresistible. We just have to make sure the results don´t turn evil and somehow get out of control. I vote for mixing Jesus´ DNA with that of a great white shark, and possibly adding laser capability. Since Jesus was half human and half god, the potential for cloning sort sort of super being to do our bidding is irresistible. We just have to make sure the results don´t turn evil and somehow get out of control. I vote for mixing Jesus´ DNA with that of a great white shark, and possibly adding laser capability.

]]>