PDA

View Full Version : Counter example to Randi's claims


T'ai Chi
9th January 2004, 03:56 PM
From the commentary, Randi wrote:
(bold mine)

"Here in the USA, our president's dependence on faith-based projects and in major political moves based on Biblical "truths" was not quite so evident when we first elected him. In every single speech he makes, he evokes prayer, heaven, or a deity."

First, I seriously doubt he makes all of his own speeches. :p He, like probably every other president, probably has people that write for him.

Second, regardless of that, can anyone find a counter example? That is, can anyone find a speech by Pres. Bush where he doesn't evoke prayer, heaven, or a deity?

Aoidoi
9th January 2004, 04:03 PM
Given the tendency to end with "God Bless America" it'd be a heckuva task to find a counterexample.

I'm not sure which bothers me more, the overt religiousity of his speeches or that I always have the feeling if I look closely enough I could see the hand of his ventriloquist. :D

CERDIP
9th January 2004, 05:05 PM
Since "God Bless America" in a speech by an American President is pretty well standard, maybe one could find a speech where that was the only deist invocation.

Methinks Randi is seeing monsters under his bed.

Kennedy was a devout Catholic, Carter was a very committed Southern Baptist, as was Clinton(though less committed :-)

T'ai Chi
10th January 2004, 06:41 AM
Counterexample:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,791154,00.html

George Bush's speech to the UN general assembly
Thursday September 12, 2002

Kerberos
10th January 2004, 08:29 AM
Originally posted by T'ai Chi
Counterexample:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,791154,00.html

George Bush's speech to the UN general assembly
Thursday September 12, 2002
You might think that Bush doesn’t mention god in this speech, but have you analyzed it for hidden messages using the bible code?

tamiO
10th January 2004, 08:32 AM
wow

I made it into someone's sig file! The Language Award is surely within my grasp now. :)

Mercutio
10th January 2004, 05:11 PM
T'ai--if you have been searching speeches for god references, perhaps you could answer this: Although your counterexample shows that GWB does not refer to god in literally every speech, in what percentage does he refer to a deity? Over 50%? Over 70%? Over 90%?

Then the question becomes "at what point does Randi's claim become unfounded hyperbole?" We hear about such inflation all the time, don't we? (And did anybody really think that by "all the time" in my previous sentence I meant literally every moment of every day?)

T'ai Chi
10th January 2004, 05:41 PM
Originally posted by Mercutio

Then the question becomes "at what point does Randi's claim become unfounded hyperbole?" We hear about such inflation all the time, don't we? (And did anybody really think that by "all the time" in my previous sentence I meant literally every moment of every day?)

That's a little too apologetic for my tastes :P , since then we'd have to treat every claim in that manner, until we'd be at a point where we don't really know the claimant's true intention of his/her statement. Did that person mean every or only the majority? We can only go by what someone says and assume that what they said/wrote is what they meant. They can always correct what they said/wrote though. :)

Kerberos
10th January 2004, 11:38 PM
Originally posted by tamiO
wow

I made it into someone's sig file! The Language Award is surely within my grasp now. :)

Always glad to be of assistance :D

Kerberos
10th January 2004, 11:48 PM
Originally posted by T'ai Chi


That's a little too apologetic for my tastes :P , since then we'd have to treat every claim in that manner, until we'd be at a point where we don't really know the claimant's true intention of his/her statement. Did that person mean every or only the majority? We can only go by what someone says and assume that what they said/wrote is what they meant. They can always correct what they said/wrote though. :)
You know I remember this discussion about an oyster and a pearl :D In any case I noticed that you didn't challenge Mercutio claim that all the time, in his post, didn't actually mean all the time. Why is it that Randis statement must be taken absolutely literal. while Mercutis shouldn’t?

P.S. In the million dollar chalenge it's, in my experience, very common to test people for 90 or 80 % accuracy, even when they claim 100 %.

Hannibal
11th January 2004, 04:33 AM
I am with Kerberos on this T'ai - you are being far too pedantic.

Interesting "claim" of Randi's to focus on. What made you choose it?

T'ai Chi
11th January 2004, 06:50 AM
Originally posted by Kerberos

You know I remember this discussion about an oyster and a pearl :D


I didn't make a claim in that quote of mine, now did I?

Apples and oranges.

Kerberos
11th January 2004, 09:58 AM
Originally posted by T'ai Chi


I didn't make a claim in that quote of mine, now did I?

Apples and oranges. [/B]

"I will never keep a pearl if it means discarding the oyster."
Sounds like a claim:D
In any case you still didn't dispute that all the time, doesn't actually mean all the time.

T'ai Chi
11th January 2004, 11:02 PM
Originally posted by Kerberos

"I will never keep a pearl if it means discarding the oyster."
Sounds like a claim:D


Uh, ok.. I guess if you consider that me saying I'll never do something is a claim.

DrMatt
12th January 2004, 07:21 AM
Originally posted by CERDIP
Since "God Bless America" in a speech by an American President is pretty well standard

It wasn't when I was a kid. We live in really ugly times where the best we have to offer is (ugh) Dean.

Skeptical Greg
12th January 2004, 09:53 AM
Originally posted by T'ai Chi


Uh, ok.. I guess if you consider that me saying I'll never do something is a claim. [/B]

I know I have heard someone around here insisting that ' not ' believing in something, is a claim..


Might have been you....


If it wasn't.... Then, never mind...

T'ai Chi
12th January 2004, 10:52 AM
Originally posted by Diogenes

I know I have heard someone around here insisting that ' not ' believing in something, is a claim..
Might have been you....
If it wasn't.... Then, never mind...

No dude it is saying flat out that something doesn't exist, that is a claim.

Skeptical Greg
12th January 2004, 12:22 PM
Originally posted by T'ai Chi


No dude it is saying flat out that something doesn't exist, that is a claim.

Duuuuude...

hgc
12th January 2004, 01:43 PM
Originally posted by T'ai Chi


No dude it is saying flat out that something doesn't exist, that is a claim. Looks like you caught him. The gig's up. I'm going to the fortune teller as soon as possible.

CERDIP
13th January 2004, 08:33 AM
Kennedy, Inaugural Address, 1961
"And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe--the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God."
"With a good conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of our deeds, let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be our own."

Kennedy, State of the Union, 1961
"In the words of a great President, whose birthday we honor today, closing his final State of the Union Message sixteen years ago, "We pray that we may be worthy of the unlimited opportunities that God has given us.""

Kennedy, State of the Union, 1962
"And in this high endeavor, may God watch over the United States of America."

Kennedy, October 22 (Cuban Missile Crisis speech), 1962
"Our goal is not the victory of might but the vindication of right - not peace at the expense of freedom, but both peace and freedom, here in this Hemisphere and, we hope, around the world. God willing, that goal will be achieved."

Kennedy, State of the Union, 1963
"With thanks to Almighty God for seeing us through a perilous passage, we ask His help anew in guiding the "Good Ship Union.""



Johnson, State of the Union, 1965
"Our Nation was created to help strike away the chains of ignorance and misery and tyranny wherever they keep man less than God means him to be."
"So it shall always be, while God is willing, and we are strong enough to keep the faith."

Johnson, Inaugural Address, 1965
"My fellow countrymen, on this occasion, the oath I have taken before you and before God is not mine alone, but ours together."
"But we have no promise from God that our greatness will endure. We have been allowed by Him to seek greatness with the sweat of our hands and the strength of our spirit."
"If we fail now, we shall have forgotten in abundance what we learned in hardship: that democracy rests on faith, that freedom asks more than it gives, and that the judgment of God is harshest on those who are most favored."

Johnson, State of the Union, 1966
"Scarred by the weaknesses of man, with whatever guidance God may offer us, we must nevertheless and alone with our mortality, strive to ennoble the life of man on earth."



Nixon, Inaugural Address, 1969
"Standing in this same place a third of a century ago, Franklin Delano Roosevelt addressed a Nation ravaged by depression and gripped in fear. He could say in surveying the Nation's troubles: "They concern, thank God, only material things.""
"What remains is to give life to what is in the law: to ensure at last that as all are born equal in dignity before God, all are born equal in dignity before man."
"I have taken an oath today in the presence of God and my countrymen to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. "
"Only a few short weeks ago, we shared the glory of man's first sight of the world as God sees it, as a single sphere reflecting light in the darkness."
"As the Apollo astronauts flew over the moon's gray surface on Christmas Eve, they spoke to us of the beauty of earth--and in that voice so clear across the lunar distance, we heard them invoke God's blessing on its goodness. "
"So let us seize it, not in fear, but in gladness--and, "riders on the earth together," let us go forward, firm in our faith, steadfast in our purpose, cautious of the dangers; but sustained by our confidence in the will of God and the promise of man."


Nixon, Inaugural Address, 1973
"We have the chance today to do more than ever before in our history to make life better in America--to ensure better education, better health, better housing, better transportation, a cleaner environment--to restore respect for law, to make our communities more livable--and to insure the God-given right of every American to full and equal opportunity."
"We shall answer to God, to history, and to our conscience for the way in which we use these years."
"Today, I ask your prayers that in the years ahead I may have God's help in making decisions that are right for America, and I pray for your help so that together we may be worthy of our challenge."
"Let us go forward from here confident in hope, strong in our faith in one another, sustained by our faith in God who created us, and striving always to serve His purpose."

Carter, Inaugural Address, 1977
""He hath showed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God." (Micah 6:8)"


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

I'm tired of copying and pasting, but I think the point is made ?

Suezoled
13th January 2004, 08:42 AM
In every speech to the American people, yes, he does seem to invoke Gawd and Jeebus and stuff...

If I become president, I vow to invoke Cthulu as the protector of our nation!

Markus702
13th January 2004, 10:16 AM
Question for those posting on this thread:
Would you rather have a president who makes frequent references to God in his speeches, yet believes in no deity, and only makes such references to stay in good with the majority of republican voters; or a president who is very devout in his religous beliefs, yet makes no mention of them in speeches or in any public forum?

Skeptical Greg
13th January 2004, 11:17 AM
Originally posted by Markus702
Question for those posting on this thread:
Would you rather have a president who makes frequent references to God in his speeches, yet believes in no deity, and only makes such references to stay in good with the majority of republican voters; or a president who is very devout in his religous beliefs, yet makes no mention of them in speeches or in any public forum?


I have a problem with both, but for different reasons..

I have more of a problem with the latter, for the same reasons I would have problems with a president who makes decisions based on astrology...


Lying goes with the territory, so it is hard to form an opinion based on that..

Leroy
13th January 2004, 11:36 AM
I've missed this place. Since my job duties have changed I only get down in this area a few times a month, which means I only get online a few times a month.

As for Bush and his God speeches. I don't care if he says "In God we trust" "In dog we trust" "In flying purple people eaters we trust" it's all of the other stuff he says that upsets me!:D

davefoc
31st January 2004, 12:50 AM
Markus702 asked:Would you rather have a president who makes frequent references to God in his speeches, yet believes in no deity, and only makes such references to stay in good with the majority of republican voters; or a president who is very devout in his religous beliefs, yet makes no mention of them in speeches or in any public forum?


I think that rikzilla had it right, although he expressed it more bluntly than is common to do, when he said that some lying by guys that we are in sync with is ok, because people have to lie or at least obfuscate determinedly to get elected. Lying for personal gain though is kind of sleazy and we hope our guys don't do it. (sorry for the rough paraphrase there rik, but that's how I took your thoughts on this).

My personal view is a little more extreme: if it's my guy and he has to lie about his atheism to get elected so be it, but if he's not my guy then he's a sleazy opportunist and I hope the media shows him for the hypocrite he is.

Kopji
8th February 2004, 11:39 PM
Generalizations are by definition not completely true.

On the UN speech:
The use of 'wickedness' (or sinfulness) and 'moral law' (or righteousness) are terms that have little real meaning outside religious context. Evidence Bush used a Thesaurus that day?

The irony on this example is pretty thick isn't it? Almost the entire speech turned out to be untrue and yet our actions have been more than once been portrayed as 'right'.

Jeff Corey
9th February 2004, 02:41 AM
Originally posted by T'ai Chi
First, I seriously doubt he makes all of his own speeches.
When we see him moving his lips, who is making the speech?

T'ai Chi
9th February 2004, 01:49 PM
Originally posted by Jeff Corey

When we see him moving his lips, who is making the speech?

makes ie creates ie writes.

afree87
13th February 2004, 01:32 PM
Originally posted by DrMatt


It wasn't when I was a kid. We live in really ugly times where the best we have to offer is (ugh) Dean. Kucinich! :D

T'ai Chi
12th March 2004, 11:26 PM
Originally posted by T'ai Chi
Counterexample:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,791154,00.html

George Bush's speech to the UN general assembly
Thursday September 12, 2002

I thought I'd bump this, given that in the most recent commentary (http://www.randi.org/jr/031204busted.html) Randi again said the "every one" bit:


Listen to our President invoking a deity or prayer in every one of his speeches, and maybe an answer will occur to you...

DrMatt
19th March 2004, 01:20 PM
Originally posted by CERDIP
Since "God Bless America" in a speech by an American President is pretty well standard, maybe one could find a speech where that was the only deist invocation.

Methinks Randi is seeing monsters under his bed.

Kennedy was a devout Catholic, Carter was a very committed Southern Baptist, as was Clinton(though less committed :-)

Actually, the phrase is quite rare.

PS: Monsters under the bed can be fun.

Blue Monk
19th March 2004, 01:34 PM
Originally posted by Markus702
Question for those posting on this thread:
Would you rather have a president who makes frequent references to God in his speeches, yet believes in no deity, and only makes such references to stay in good with the majority of republican voters; or a president who is very devout in his religous beliefs, yet makes no mention of them in speeches or in any public forum?

The first choice is unappealling as I'd rather have someone who is less superficial.

The second choice would be fine with me. I have no problem with anyone's personal believes and the fact that he/she would refrain from conjuring up religious imagery in their official capacity would indicate to me that he/she respects those of us who don't share those beliefs and respects one of the more basic principles of seperation of Church and State.

Of course I'd prefer a third option not mentioned. An individual who does not belief in mythical entities at all and makes no bones about it.

PygmyPlaidGiraffe
19th March 2004, 01:46 PM
Originally posted by Suezoled


If I become president, I vow to invoke Cthulu as the protector of our nation!

yeah yeah,


promises, promises


special interests will get to you, you will sell out like the rest

CFLarsen
19th March 2004, 01:47 PM
Originally posted by T'ai Chi
First, I seriously doubt he makes all of his own speeches. :p He, like probably every other president, probably has people that write for him.

That has to be the most naive comment on politics I have heard in a very long time.

Of course he doesn't write (I noticed that, thank you!) his own speeches. Kerry doesn't, either. No major politician hasn't written any of his own speeches for decades.

You honestly didn't know this?? Under what rock have you been living?