In America, atheists are still in the...

In America, atheists are still in the closet

There are 51428 comments on the Spiked story from Apr 11, 2012, titled In America, atheists are still in the closet. In it, Spiked reports that:

So do many other interest and identity groups. Complaint is our political lingua franca: it's what Occupiers, Tea Partiers, Wall Street titans, religious and irreligious people share.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Spiked.

Thinking

Cirencester, UK

#43382 Nov 20, 2012
Boeing would've gone bust without US military orders, so thanks for subsidising my 747 flights.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
The Concorde was built and flown on the backs of British and French taxpayers.
I haven't flown in the F-3 you?
My taxes didn't go to building the jets that American companies fly and my tax money doesn't subsidize the tickets- as taxes did in the UK & France for the Concorde.
The Concorde was not a commercial success, no matter how hard you stomp your feet.
Thinking

Cirencester, UK

#43383 Nov 20, 2012
Tell me where I said Concorde was a financial success, muppet?
But I got to fly it... you can't make me unfly it, no matter how had you stomp your clubbed foot.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
The Concorde was built and flown on the backs of British and French taxpayers.
I haven't flown in the F-3 you?
My taxes didn't go to building the jets that American companies fly and my tax money doesn't subsidize the tickets- as taxes did in the UK & France for the Concorde.
The Concorde was not a commercial success, no matter how hard you stomp your feet.

“Proud Member”

Since: Dec 10

The Basket of Deplorables

#43384 Nov 20, 2012
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Frank Whittle registered the patent in 1930 and had the first successful bench test April 1937. Hans von Ohain’s design first ran in September 1937. However Ohain’s engine was the first to fly in 1939. They are jointly accredited with inventing the Jet engine.
Christian Huelsmeyer was the first to discover the effect of radar in 1904, but radar was invented by three British scientists, Sir Robert Watson-Watt, A F Wilkins and H E Wimperis in 1935. Sir Henry Tizard put it to use in the War
Commercial flop? 27 years flying? Forget the US media hype. The ongoing benefits of Anglo French co-operation that started with Concorde are immeasurable and far outweigh the development costs. Certainly the BA Concorde’s were operationally profitable. http://www.concordesst.com/retire/faq_r.html

The Concorde was a flop the same way the shuttle was for us.
It was not economically viable as planned.
It never turned a profit , and was a prestige symbol more than anything. It was however the most awesome public transportation
ever assembled.

“Proud Member”

Since: Dec 10

The Basket of Deplorables

#43385 Nov 20, 2012
Double Fine wrote:
Hey peeps. Can anyone here help me with a debate I am having in the office.
"Killer" and "Murderer" can sometimes be used as synonyms (e.g. the man's killer/murderer was his wife - both words work)... But they are not always the same thing, am I right?
Murder is unlawful killing of a human by a human. So if there are "lawful" killings, then it means that in some cases a killer and a murderer would not be the same thing?
Hunters are killers , but murder is breaking the law.
Seal team six are really good killers , but not usually considered murderers. Though they may murderlize the enemy.

Murder is unlawful killing, when a person is executed legally it's not murder.

“Proud Member”

Since: Dec 10

The Basket of Deplorables

#43386 Nov 20, 2012
Thinking wrote:
Murder is premeditated.
Are you getting US law definitions confused with reality?
<quoted text>
Are you confused that they are not? lol j/k
but we have proven it a couple times it is.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#43387 Nov 20, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
The Concorde was a flop the same way the shuttle was for us.
The shuttle wasn't a flop, moron.

Have you heard of the Hubble?

The Concorde was to governments interfering in a commercial enterprise that ended up FAILING.
Thinking

Cirencester, UK

#43388 Nov 20, 2012
I miss the Shuttle flights. Very poignant seeing it move at a snails pace to its resting place as opposed to 17000mph.
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
The Concorde was a flop the same way the shuttle was for us.
It was not economically viable as planned.
It never turned a profit , and was a prestige symbol more than anything. It was however the most awesome public transportation
ever assembled.
Thinking

Cirencester, UK

#43389 Nov 20, 2012
Of course the Shuttle was a flop.

It didn't make half the flights it was meant to.
It was vastly more expensive than projected.
There is a gap in its succession planning.

It was originally meant to be slimmer, which should've made it a safer reentry vehicle. The SRBs were meant to be one piece. Then the committees got to it. I also saw a design where the manned, reusable Shuttle was much smaller and the payload was to be sent up on cheap automated rockets to meet the astronauts. I believe that was vetoed by the military satellite requirements. Government intervention, eh?

I still miss the Shuttle and Concorde but at least they existed.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
The shuttle wasn't a flop, moron.
Have you heard of the Hubble?
The Concorde was to governments interfering in a commercial enterprise that ended up FAILING.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#43390 Nov 20, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
It was not economically viable as planned.
The shuttle was NEVER planned to be "economically viable" commercial product- it was designed to be a multiple use space vehicle. There were 135 flights and if you look up in the sky a a dark night, you can see the space station that was built using shuttle.

The Concorde was funded by the governments of UK and France for the express purpose of making money.

It failed.
Thinking

Cirencester, UK

#43391 Nov 20, 2012
No, not the legal definition. Just the definition, angry one.

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/engl...
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
How parochial of you to insist on the British legal definition, spooge breath.
Thinking

Cirencester, UK

#43392 Nov 20, 2012
Wrong.
If you miss your targets, you're a flop.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
The shuttle was NEVER planned to be "economically viable" commercial product- it was designed to be a multiple use space vehicle. There were 135 flights and if you look up in the sky a a dark night, you can see the space station that was built using shuttle.
The Concorde was funded by the governments of UK and France for the express purpose of making money.
It failed.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#43393 Nov 20, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
Been married to a woman or ten , for more my life
than not. Always had one , or two.
But I do know exactly what you mean.
Marriage is like playing cards:

You start off with two hearts and a diamond.

You end up wanting a club and a spade.
Thinking

Cirencester, UK

#43394 Nov 20, 2012
That makes my flight on Concorde even more special to me.

PS Boeing has been supported by the US taxpayer.
barefoot2626 wrote:
737's built without tax funding = 7,000+
Concordes built without tax funding = ZERO.
Including those built with British & French taxes (total)= 20.

“Proud Member”

Since: Dec 10

The Basket of Deplorables

#43395 Nov 20, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
The shuttle wasn't a flop, moron.
Have you heard of the Hubble?
The Concorde was to governments interfering in a commercial enterprise that ended up FAILING.
The shuttle was a great tool with redeeming qualities , but was a flop in the economically viable department . Same as concord.
The shuttle was built on the premise it would be cheaper to refurbish reusable parts to make a continual space launch system to launch systems into low orbit. It proved to be false.
That's why it has been canned.

It's cheaper to build expendable hardware, and toss it .
But also in a way , like the Concorde it was the most awesome space launch system ever sassembled.

“Proud Member”

Since: Dec 10

The Basket of Deplorables

#43396 Nov 20, 2012
Thinking wrote:
Of course the Shuttle was a flop.
It didn't make half the flights it was meant to.
It was vastly more expensive than projected.
There is a gap in its succession planning.
It was originally meant to be slimmer, which should've made it a safer reentry vehicle. The SRBs were meant to be one piece. Then the committees got to it. I also saw a design where the manned, reusable Shuttle was much smaller and the payload was to be sent up on cheap automated rockets to meet the astronauts. I believe that was vetoed by the military satellite requirements. Government intervention, eh?
I still miss the Shuttle and Concorde but at least they existed.
<quoted text>
Yeah man ^^
But the next generation by NASA will demand attention also.
Your country is involved also.

http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/

It will be the most powerful rocket system yet devised, and designed to take men to Mars and beyond.
Thinking

Cirencester, UK

#43397 Nov 20, 2012
I'm also really excited by the Skylon engines being tested near me- now that could bring reusable spaceplanes back to our skies.

Too many useless wars eating up space research money!
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Yeah man ^^
But the next generation by NASA will demand attention also.
Your country is involved also.
http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/
It will be the most powerful rocket system yet devised, and designed to take men to Mars and beyond.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#43398 Nov 20, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> The shuttle was a great tool with redeeming qualities , but was a flop in the economically viable department .
Repeating the same nonsense ad nauseum doesn't make true.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#43399 Nov 20, 2012
Thinking wrote:
That makes my flight on Concorde even more special to me.
PS Boeing has been supported by the US taxpayer.
Nope.

“Proud Member”

Since: Dec 10

The Basket of Deplorables

#43400 Nov 20, 2012
Thinking wrote:
I'm also really excited by the Skylon engines being tested near me- now that could bring reusable spaceplanes back to our skies.
Too many useless wars eating up space research money!
<quoted text>
War is sadly the death of us all , dreams included.

“Proud Member”

Since: Dec 10

The Basket of Deplorables

#43401 Nov 20, 2012
And it seems they are determined we must wage this war with Iran.

They will decide our fate without a vote , but I can only hope humanity can resolve it's differences without the much anticipated hostilities .
In general we as a species have bigger worries than our inherit inability to co-exist peacefully. Hopefully we can overcome this shortfall before too late.

Some think it will take the discovery we are not alone in the universe to form any unity.

If that's the case ...then praise be to the ufo conspirators.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 3 min Richardfs 45,471
Christianity isn't based on... (Feb '10) 18 min Paul WV-Uncle Sam 287
Evidence for God! (Oct '14) 1 hr ChristineM 540
There are no such things as gods or fairies 2 hr u196533dm 188
What is of greater value for humanity: Chrisita... 4 hr Thinking 427
News Atheist Rev. Gretta Vosper should be terminated... 5 hr Amused 6
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 5 hr karl44 20,239
More from around the web