All aboard the atheist bus

Galvasean

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

I hope you found the missing fossils to fill in the fossil record!

We found one 'missing link' recently only to find out there were two more previously unknown gaps right behind it! My work shall never be finished! :pac:

lostexpectation

how about a message in irish, i like des bishop bit about how it impoosible to say i hope in irhs with mention god, le chunna dea,(phnoetically sort of) or whatever you could go southpark with le chunna science, or le chunna logic?

ah god i can't remember even that word in irish

or anybody have a pic of those yellow religious ads, do a spin on them?

5uspect

Speaking of religious adverts this was in Colbert train station in Limerick for years.



Always gave me a chuckle.

lostexpectation

yes IR staff think their god lol.

Tomk1

Great idea, if religeous ads are deemed ok then Humanit/Atheist ads should equally be accepted, if only to highlight the automatic acceptence of religeous ads, without question.
Also if its costing this amout of money, how can the religions justify spending (donations to them), when the money is suppose to be for indoctrinating "3rd-world countries" maybe the religions now see their losing the 1st world.

what are we going to do today Brain?

PDN

Tomk1 wrote: »

Great idea, if religeous ads are deemed ok then Humanit/Atheist ads should equally be accepted, if only to highlight the automatic acceptence of religeous ads, without question.
Also if its costing this amout of money, how can the religions justify spending (donations to them), when the money is suppose to be for indoctrinating "3rd-world countries" maybe the religions now see their losing the 1st world.

what are we going to do today Brain?

What on earth are you talking about?

The majority of organisations that put ads on buses, billboards etc. do not do work in third world countries. They exist for the purpose of placing such ads and individuals make donations to them for that specific purpose.

I believe such ads are singularly ineffective in achieving their intended purpose, but I see no reason why religious ads should not be accepted by transport companies etc. Religious advertising is already subjected to a discriminatory ban on TV and radio. Why extend the discrimination?

Tomk1

PDN wrote: »

What on earth are you talking about?

The majority of organisations that put ads on buses, billboards etc. do not do work in third world countries. They exist for the purpose of placing such ads and individuals make donations to them for that specific purpose.

I believe such ads are singularly ineffective in achieving their intended purpose, but I see no reason why religious ads should not be accepted by transport companies etc. Religious advertising is already subjected to a discriminatory ban on TV and radio. Why extend the discrimination?

The point was, when someone gives money into the collection plate, do they intend on that money being used for religious ads on buses, or for some "righteous" cause.

I didn't know about Religious advertising not being allowed on TV or Radio, but to call it discrimination is laughable, as religion is the most discriminating force on the planet at the moment. (but that's another debate).

So to put my point more clear, if playboy started advertising on the side of buses, a lot of people would not accept it as normal pratice, some thinking it distasteful others not caring less, even though it is a product not an idealology, yet religeous idealological advertisement is accepted as normal even though there is no actual product to sell.

Also I never said the ads should not be allowed.

Galvasean

PDN wrote: »

Religious advertising is already subjected to a discriminatory ban on TV and radio. Why extend the discrimination?

The Angelus.

Dades

PDN wrote: »

Religious advertising is already subjected to a discriminatory ban on TV and radio.

What's the story there?

PDN

Tomk1 wrote: »

The point was, when someone gives money into the collection plate, do they intend on that money being used for religious ads on buses, or for some "righteous" cause.

You seem to be labouring under a misapprehension that money from church collection plates is used to purchase ads on buses.

The ads on buses are purchased by specific evangelical ministries that exist purely for that purpose. Almost all their income is from bequests - most of it from many years ago. Widows of Victorian and Edwardian businessmen often left large bequests to various charities - including those charities that advertised on the sides of trams and omnibuses. Such bequests, by law, can only be spent on the purpose specifed in the wills concerned. Some charities can no longer fulfill these purposes - for example, there are huge amounts of money earmarked for providing for destitute chimney sweeps! The charities that specialised in tram and omnibus advertising have been able to update to trains and buses without contravening the terms of the bequests. The funny thing is that they pay for advertising just from the interest on the bequests - they don't even touch the capital.

No church with any sense would take money from congregants' donations to post Scripture texts on buses, mainly because it doesn't work! I teach seminary courses on Evangelism and Church Growth, and those kinds of ads on buses and trains are the most ineffective and cost-inefficient type of evangelism imaginable. Only one in a billion people are going to embrace Christianity because they see a poster on the side of a bus. Such advertising is only effective in terms of switching brand loyalty. This is why billboards etc. in the US advertise particular churches rather than Christianmity in general.

So you can imagine my amusement at this thread when people are saying, "Hey! If the Christians can do it then so can we!" You are actually trying to outspend the long-dead widows of Victorian tycoons!

Why try to emulate the least effective form of advertising imaginable. I mean, what are you expecting? I can see it now - a devout Christian is walking along O'Connell Street and see a bus with an atheist ad on it. They fall distraught to their knees, renounce their faith, and arise an atheist?

All these ads will do is cause people who don't normally give God a thought to start wondering whether God actually exists or not. That will be wonderful, because these are the very kind of people that visit my church each week to find the answer to such questions. So, in all seriousness, please let me know when this initiative spreads to Ireland. I will gladly donate 50 euro to an atheist ad on a Dublin bus, but would be even happier if it would happen in my own town.

PDN

Dades wrote: »

What's the story there?

Religions are forbidden from advertising on terrestial television or on radio. It means that any religious broadcasting is instead determined by the governing bodies of RTE etc. This equates to plenty of free publicity for Roman Catholicism, a bit less for the Church of Ireland, and a blackout of minority religions.

Tomk1 wrote:

I didn't know about Religious advertising not being allowed on TV or Radio, but to call it discrimination is laughable, as religion is the most discriminating force on the planet at the moment. (but that's another debate).

I don't want to drag the thread off topic, but can you see the silliness of that comment?

Let's apply it to another area of life to demonstrate its absurdity:
Politics is the most discriminating force on the planet. Therefore it is laughable for pro-democracy movements in Tibet to complain against the Chinese ban on political advertising.

Dave!

PDN wrote: »

All these ads will do is cause people who don't normally give God a thought to start wondering whether God actually exists or not.

I'm sure that's the main intention of it

Certainly it's one of the reasons Richard Dawkins has been supporting the idea. From the website:

With your help, we can brighten people's days on the way to work, help raise awareness of atheism in the UK, and hopefully encourage more people to come out as atheists. We can also counter the religious adverts which are currently running on London buses, and help people think for themselves.

As Richard Dawkins says: "This campaign to put alternative slogans on London buses will make people think - and thinking is anathema to religion."


Dawkins and the likes are trying to break down the taboo surrounding religion and encourage conversation about it too. If it leads to scenes such as:

Person 1: "Heh, wierd slogan..."
Person 2: "Yeah, dunno why they feel it's sensible to say 'there probably is NO god' rather than 'there probably IS a god'. Makes no sense to me that the universe was always just there"
Person 1: "Meh, I don't buy into that"
Person 2: "What, you don't believe in god?!"
Person 1: "Nah not really"
Person 2: "That's mad, Ted!"

...then it'll be seen as a success.

Besides that it's a bit of light-hearted fun.

MrPudding

PDN wrote: »

All these ads will do is cause people who don't normally give God a thought to start wondering whether God actually exists or not. That will be wonderful, because these are the very kind of people that visit my church each week to find the answer to such questions.

I suppose we are optimistic in the sense that when they do start wondering they see the light and realise god probably does not exist. I suppose it depends on where they ask the question really. I they ask it in a place that is designed sell its own version of reality, your church for example, then it is possible they will go down the god route. We can only hope they ask the question somewhere they will get a less biased response.

MrP

Zombrex

PDN wrote: »

You seem to be labouring under a misapprehension that money from church collection plates is used to purchase ads on buses.

The ads on buses are purchased by specific evangelical ministries that exist purely for that purpose. Almost all their income is from bequests - most of it from many years ago. Widows of Victorian and Edwardian businessmen often left large bequests to various charities - including those charities that advertised on the sides of trams and omnibuses. Such bequests, by law, can only be spent on the purpose specifed in the wills concerned. Some charities can no longer fulfill these purposes - for example, there are huge amounts of money earmarked for providing for destitute chimney sweeps! The charities that specialised in tram and omnibus advertising have been able to update to trains and buses without contravening the terms of the bequests. The funny thing is that they pay for advertising just from the interest on the bequests - they don't even touch the capital.

No church with any sense would take money from congregants' donations to post Scripture texts on buses, mainly because it doesn't work! I teach seminary courses on Evangelism and Church Growth, and those kinds of ads on buses and trains are the most ineffective and cost-inefficient type of evangelism imaginable. Only one in a billion people are going to embrace Christianity because they see a poster on the side of a bus. Such advertising is only effective in terms of switching brand loyalty. This is why billboards etc. in the US advertise particular churches rather than Christianmity in general.

So you can imagine my amusement at this thread when people are saying, "Hey! If the Christians can do it then so can we!" You are actually trying to outspend the long-dead widows of Victorian tycoons!

Why try to emulate the least effective form of advertising imaginable. I mean, what are you expecting? I can see it now - a devout Christian is walking along O'Connell Street and see a bus with an atheist ad on it. They fall distraught to their knees, renounce their faith, and arise an atheist?

All these ads will do is cause people who don't normally give God a thought to start wondering whether God actually exists or not. That will be wonderful, because these are the very kind of people that visit my church each week to find the answer to such questions. So, in all seriousness, please let me know when this initiative spreads to Ireland. I will gladly donate 50 euro to an atheist ad on a Dublin bus, but would be even happier if it would happen in my own town.

Interesting, didn't know that

5uspect

Its so that children see it! Get 'em thinking while they're young.

Dave!

Here's a banner in sig-size if anyone wants it



(don't think it will make a difference on boards since apparently most people on here are atheists! But maybe they'll donate money)

Dave!

The border is a bit bogey in that last one, this is better




</spam>

pH

A bit of perspective here as a counterpoint to our apologist friend PDN.

Here are excerpts from Ariane's original blog post:

"Yesterday I walked to work and saw not one, but two London buses with the question: "When the son of man comes, will he find faith on the earth?" (Luke 18:8). It seems you wait ages for a bus with an unsettling Bible quote, then two come along at once."

...

Now, 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. But apparently you don't need evidence to run an ad suggesting we'll all face the ire of the son of man when he comes, then link to a website advocating endless pain for atheists.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jun/20/transport.religion

Here's an example:



Here are we websites it encourages you to visit:

http://jesussaid.org/
http://www.proclaimingtruthinlondon.org/

Both say they are run by
Proclaiming Truth in London, P O Box 408, Twickenham, TW1 9FJ

Now does PDN (or anyone) have any evidence that "Proclaiming truth in London" are funded by the long dead Victorian widows?

PDN

pH wrote: »

A bit of perspective here as a counterpoint to our apologist friend PDN....
Now does PDN (or anyone) have any evidence that "Proclaiming truth in London" are funded by the long dead Victorian widows?

I am certainly no apolgist for those who place Scripture texts on buses as I consider it a waste of money.

I've never heard of 'Proclaiming Truth in London'. I was responding to comments in this thread that refer to advertising on public transport in general, which has historically been carried on by charities such as 'Message on the Move' (founded in 1883 as The Omnibus and Tramcar Scripture Text Mission).

pH

PDN wrote: »

I am certainly no apolgist for those who place Scripture texts on buses as I consider it a waste of money.

I've never heard of 'Proclaiming Truth in London'. I was responding to comments in this thread that refer to advertising on public transport in general, which has historically been carried on by charities such as 'Message on the Move' (founded in 1883 as The Omnibus and Tramcar Scripture Text Mission).

Fine, so you're in agreement that the money paying for the Christian ads (that the atheist bus campaign was primarily started as a reaction to) could be from a rich living donor, money left in wills, or even donations from congregations, you have no facts or knowledge to bring to the table?

and when you say:

PDN wrote:

The ads on buses are purchased by specific evangelical ministries that exist purely for that purpose. Almost all their income is from bequests - most of it from many years ago.

...

So you can imagine my amusement at this thread when people are saying, "Hey! If the Christians can do it then so can we!" You are actually trying to outspend the long-dead widows of Victorian tycoons!

You're just trying to muddy the waters by responding to comments "in general" while ignoring the specifics of the thread? I mean only the extremely stupid could take the phrase "the ads on the buses" to mean "the ads and buses that are the subject of this thread".

Dades

For someone who has repeatedly stated that he views the ads as a waste of space/money, PDN seems to be talking a lot of slack on behalf of the actual perpetrators. :pac:

PDN

pH wrote: »

You're just trying to muddy the waters by responding to comments "in general" while ignoring the specifics of the thread? I mean only the extremely stupid could take the phrase "the ads on the buses" to mean "the ads and buses that are the subject of this thread".

And only the extremely dishonest would insert an extra 'the' into quotation marks so as to falsely represent me as referring to "the ads on the buses" (ie specific ads) instead of "the ads on buses" (ie ads on buses in general).

Galvasean

Ooooh, i just noticed After Hours have noticed our bus!

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055408507

Zillah

Trolling engines to full power. Divert life support.

pH

'Atheist bus' more like a bandwagon on highway to hell

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/atheist-bus-more-like-a-bandwagon--on-highway-to-hell-1550742.html

Wow, such an "opinion piece", anyone got any idea who wrote it?

Galvasean

pH wrote: »

'Atheist bus' more like a bandwagon on highway to hell

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/atheist-bus-more-like-a-bandwagon--on-highway-to-hell-1550742.html

Wow, such an "opinion piece", anyone got any idea who wrote it?

Woah, holy fudgemuffins! associating a bus with an agnostic slogan on the side with the sad case of 'Baby P' is one hell of a leap!
Seriously, where can I lodge a complaint?

Galvasean

an ill informed opinion piece writer for the Independent wrote:

The advertising campaign has cost around stg £100,000. It was all started up by -- predictably -- Professor Richard Dawkins,

That statement is wrong, predictably enough.

pH

On second thoughts, is it a joke or is the Indo trolling atheists?

Read GK Chesterton's great poem 'The Ballad of the Sad Athiest'. It perfectly describes this kind of dreary and austere puritan.

Can't even spell atheist? Google returns zero results for "Ballad of the Sad Atheist", can anyone find any mention of Chesterton's "great poem" online?

Dades

pH wrote: »

'Atheist bus' more like a bandwagon on highway to hell

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/atheist-bus-more-like-a-bandwagon--on-highway-to-hell-1550742.html

That article is f*cking DISGRACE.

A warped opinion that reeks of paranoia, built on incorrect facts, backed up by the personal anecdotes of someone who quivers at the thought of not being handed a meaning to their life.

EDIT: pH - I wish it were an "Onion" type piece!

Galvasean

Dades wrote: »

That article is f*cking DISGRACE.

A warped opinion that reeks of paranoia, built on incorrect facts, backed up by the personal anecdotes of someone who quivers at the thought of not being handed a meaning to their life.

Not to mention afraid to name him/herself.