Hurley's Claim To Intelligence Is Unfounded And Vainglorious

Articles

Hurley's Claim To Intelligence Is Unfounded And Vainglorious

By Thomas Keyes
May 24, 2005

First, of all, though I am an atheist, as all astute people are, and I believe that Christ is probably entirely mythical, it offends me when people, especially self-proclaimed Christians like Patrick Hurley, stoop to such obscenities as “Jesus’s jockstrap”. I don’t want to hear it. If he cannot conduct his argument with dignity, he is not to be taken seriously. Anyway, anyone can say that no one around here can be compared with Jesus, but what is using for facts? He’s just making up nonsense out of thin air, but when somebody presents valid statistics to him, as I know from experience, he lacks the intelligence to comprehend. He’ll compare genuine mathematical calculations concerning the Flood story with people bandying batting averages about around the television set. Doesn’t he realize that aviation, electrical power generation, computer technology and many other wonderful phenomena of the modern age depend on mathematics? Incidentally, the possessive of “Jesus” is “Jesus’” not “Jesus’s”. You’d think someone could spell the forms of the name of his own Messiah.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possessive_of_Jesus

Intelligence is not just a matter of boastfulness. If Hurley isn’t capable of reasoning in a more sophisticated way, he should practise a little more humility about how intelligent he is.

Then Hurley makes the utterly preposterous remark that Einstein possessed 5% of all the knowledge in the Universe. It amazes me the way people deify Einstein. More mathematician than physicist, Einstein propounded some clever theories, using information and techniques originated by others. His IQ was probably around 180. Given that there are 6000 languages spoken in the world, Einstein would have had to know 300 to know 5%. And that’s not counting all the other disciplines.

Then Hurley makes the non sequitur that people who “rip on” Christianity have nothing better to offer. Knowing that Christianity is false doesn’t require that you have something better to offer. However, distinguished scientists, who are around 90% atheists, according to the National Academy of Scientists and Scientific American, do have something better to offer: computers, jet planes, spaceships, satellites, PET and CAT scanners, cell phones, radio, television, oil refineries, electrical power, etc. Compare these benefits with prayer books, nuns´habits and stories about saints. A Boeing 747 will get me across an ocean, but a stack of Bibles is fit only to start a fire.

Hurley tries to involve all sorts of unrelated issues, like George Bush’s stupidity, abortion, Madonna on a cross, etc. Admittedly, all these things are gaudy and garish, but they have nothing to genuine, well-reasoned atheism. One can be for or against abortion, for example, regardless of whether he is a religionist or an atheist.

Then he says that atheists’ trinity is “me, myself and I”. This is like a fifth-grader’s challenge. Then he asks rhetorically whether pride isn’t the number-one sin, and answers by saying, “I thought so,” as if he just proved a point very dramatically, when he hasn’t done anything but make a stupid little remark. This is like someone who argues a completely ridiculous opinion and then says, “Case closed!,” as if he just proved something so finally that there is no answer. Talk about egotism!

Calling his reader “Butthead”, he says, “it ain’t gonna happen”. Can you imagine Christ, as portrayed in the story of the Gospels, saying to one of his followers, “Don’t think you can sin and still go to Heaven, Butthead. It ain’t gonna happen.”?

He accuses atheists of ranting on and on with hate-filled spewings, but I’ve never called anyone “Butthead”. He doesn’t realize that, I anyway, if he is including me in that grouping, have never resorted to obscenities against Christians or even directed any hatred towards Christians. All the hatred and obscenity has been in the other direction. MacCrae called me foul names. Luebbert called me foul names. And now Hurley! Who are the haters anyway? My purpose is to help these intellectual laggards understand things it would be to their benefit to know.

He also suggests, as if he knows anything at all about psychology, that it is a “psychological truth” that one becomes an atheist because of unpleasant childhood experiences, mentioning parental neglect as one possibility. I consider this an insult to my parents, for whom I have a great deal of respect. They did not neglect me at all. They put up with a lot of hardship and poverty, but never let me down. Incidentally, they were Catholics, and though they were good parents, they were only mediocre intellectually. They knew no science, no languages, no history, no philosophy. They never travelled abroad. Their finances would not permit it. So, while I overlook their religious backwardness, I honor them as parents. Is that difficult to understand?

Apparently, if his blurb is correct, Hurley has received awards for writing television comedies. That is definitely where he should apply his “talent”, leaving these more difficult issues to those who have the wit to deal with them.

------------

About the author Thomas Keyes: I have written two books: A SOJOURN IN ASIA (non-fiction) and A TALE OF UNG (fiction), neither published so far.

I have studied languages for years and traveled extensively on five continents.

Email: udikeyes@yahoo.com

Comment on this article here!

------------

All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com and are not allowed to be posted on other websites. ARTICLE THIEVES WILL BE PROSECUTED!