this post was submitted on
1,777 points (59% like it)
5,584 up votes 3,807 down votes

atheism

subscribe1,170,687 readers

1,317 users here now


Help Atheist Organizations!

The Secular Student Alliance, Camp Quest, and Foundation Beyond Belief were all nominated for the Chase Community Giving program, which awards grants based on the votes of the public. Everyone gets 2 votes on Facebook, plus an additional one if they share a CCG page. The links for them are:

SSA | CQ | FBB

Voting runs from September 6-19


Welcome to r/atheism, the web's largest atheist forum. All topics related to atheism, agnosticism and secular living are welcome here. Please read our FAQ.

Please link directly to any images or use imgur to avoid being flagged as blogspam

Recommended reading and viewing

Thank you notes


Related Subreddits <--the big list

GodlessWomen YoungAtheists AtheistParents
BlackAtheism AtheistGems DebateAnAtheist
skeptic agnostic freethought
antitheism humanism Hitchens
a6theism10 tfbd AdviceAtheists

Events
10/5-6 NAPCON2012 - Boston
08/11 Regional Conference - St. Paul MN
Giving
DWB/MSF fundraiser
Kiva lending team
FBB's Appeal to Freethinkers to Fight Cancer
Camp Quest
Ex* Groups
ex-Muslim ex-Catholic ex-Mormon
ex-JW ex-Jew ex-SistersinZion
ex-Bahai ex-Christian ex-Adventist
Assistance
Coming Out
Atheist Havens
Start an Atheist Club at Your School

Chat: #reddit-atheism on irc.freenode.net

Watch: #/r/atheism on reddit.tv

Read The FAQ


Submit Rage Comic

Submit Facebook Chat

Submit Meme

Submit Something Else

Read The FAQ

a community for

reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own! learn more ›

all 151 comments

[–]kentuckyfriedheathen 103 points104 points ago

Why dont I believe in God? No, no no, why do YOU believe in God? Surely the burden of proof is on the believer. You started all this. If I came up to you and said, "Why dont you believe I can fly?" Youd say, "Why would I?" Id reply, "Because its a matter of faith." If I then said, "Prove I cant fly. Prove I cant fly see, see, you cant prove it can you?" Youd probably either walk away, call security or throw me out of the window and shout, "Fucking fly then you lunatic."

Ricky Gervais

[–]hausscha 36 points37 points ago

That's not flying, that's falling with style!

[–]owlsrule143 0 points1 point ago

Then how do you explain the flying spaghetti monster?

[–]verendum 3 points4 points ago

[–]OreoC00kieMonster 0 points1 point ago

To be fair, if you ask him to prove you can't fly, he might push you out a window.

[–]owlsrule143 1 point2 points ago

"I can prove you can't fly. Try it. See you aren't flying" would be what they'd say "nobody can fly duh" lol "there is no god duh" applies too

[–]JimThompson 0 points1 point ago

...and that is once again just another common atheist talking point void of humor or originality or anything that might distinguish it from any of the banal comments you would read here or on any random atheist message board.

You know, you guys should really start charging him.

[–]pascalbrax 49 points50 points ago

I showed this quote to a muslim friend.

She told me "These are not religions, these are philosophies!"

I so want to give her an high five.

In the face.

With a chair.

[–]709 11 points12 points ago

Wouldn't that be a high four, if you used a common chair?

[–]classic__schmosby 14 points15 points ago

Computer chair.

[–]hwagz 1 point2 points ago

High six! Well.. mine's got six. And it spins. Propeller five/six?

[–]takatori 4 points5 points ago

In her defense, any other response might get her beheaded.

[–]pascalbrax 0 points1 point ago

Oh...

[–]BeardedTim 14 points15 points ago

I understand that being a Christian I am a minority in this /r/, but I would like to say that this is something that really makes me think. I have never been one to throw down different religions and otherwise. But this makes it truly odd for me to understand why other people would shun other people for their beliefs or lack there of, because really everyone disbelieves so much more than they actually believe. Thank you for this new (to me) way of thinking.

[–]Kennian 6 points7 points ago

And that's just RECORDED history... There are a lot more we don't even remember anymore

[–]Disagreed 1 point2 points ago

Plus, the number of belief systems that havent't been recorded and the ones that have yet to be thought of. We could really account for an infinite number of beliefs.

[–]DeadlySight 4 points5 points ago

A lot of atheists shun modern religions not because people believe in a God, or afterlife. It's because the religions are trying to influence other things, fighting the acceptance of science and facts, attempting to put God in government, etc.

[–]FSMfan 2 points3 points ago

This is the primary reason atheists are vocal. We aren't trying to belittle or tear down the religion out of spite, we're only doing exactly what Christians and Muslims do .. we're trying to influence people's thinking (as we saw here with BeardedTim), so that in the long run, we see cultural changes (which we are).

[–]BeardedTim 0 points1 point ago

I would like to point out that although the vast majority of religious men/women try to push their beliefs on others there are some of us that keep to ourselves. I personally don't push my beliefs on my friends or family. Really other than not cussing and the fact that I have short hours at work on Sundays so I can go to church in the morning there isn't much outwardly different between myself and the vast majority of people on the earth. Heck I even know a few atheists that are more "Christian" than some people I go to church with by the standards they put on themselves and others. Really I feel like its all about how you are raised and your personality that defines the kind of religious person you end up being.

[–]Dudesan 5 points6 points ago

His math is a little off. Hindus alone believe in about 330,000,000 gods.

[–]jackovasaurusrex 7 points8 points ago

Damn, they must have a god for everything.

Walking across 7th street: Let the god of walking across 7th street help you!

Going in Macy's: Let the goddess of entering Macy's be with you!

[–]TaviRider 2 points3 points ago

[–]vervii 1 point2 points ago

Name them.

[–]Dudesan 3 points4 points ago

Sorry, I have plans this decade. But here's a nice start:

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

[–]PotatoMusicBinge -5 points-4 points ago

Yeah, he just pulled that number out of thin air.

[–]nicenamethereted 11 points12 points ago

This is an exceptional argument. Not because it is logically convincing - it's not. But it is a bit of an emotional appeal, and as we know, logic has no place in religious discourse.

[–]BeFuckingPolite 11 points12 points ago

I'm curious why you don't think pointing out someone's flaw in logic, as in pointing out they're arguing from inconsistent revelations as Gervais does in the quote, doesn't qualify as a logical argument?

It's not an emotional appeal in the slightest. Gervais just delivers it well enough to elicit an emotional response.

[–]nicenamethereted 1 point2 points ago

It doesn't necessarily reason that because other people have formulated incorrect answers to a question that someone else's answer is incorrect. That is not logic.

If Ricky were highlighting that believers do so without evidence, that would be a logical argument.

If it is not logical, I think it is emotional. He is trying to evoke the response of "oh yeah, in the same way I don't believe in thor, atheists don't believe in my god".

I am not a trained logician or anything, this is just how I see it.

[–]Fantasticriss 2 points3 points ago

lol logician.

[–]BeFuckingPolite 1 point2 points ago

If Ricky were highlighting that believers do so without evidence, that would be a logical argument.

That's pretty much what he's doing. The implication is that the difference between the deities is arbitrary.

Though I don't think you need the context to get that implication, this quote is from a Wall Street Journal piece Gervais wrote about being an atheist. His main explanation is that burden of proof is on the one claiming there is a god or gods, and that proof is lacking.

People who believe in God don’t need proof of his existence, and they certainly don’t want evidence to the contrary. They are happy with their belief. They even say things like “it’s true to me” and “it’s faith.”

I still give my logical answer because I feel that not being honest would be patronizing and impolite. It is ironic therefore that “I don’t believe in God because there is absolutely no scientific evidence for his existence and from what I’ve heard the very definition is a logical impossibility in this known universe,” comes across as both patronizing and impolite.

[–]nicenamethereted 1 point2 points ago

I agree that he is 'pretty much' saying that people believe without evidence, and that is an appeal to logic.

[–]davorzdralo 0 points1 point ago

  1. That is not exactly argument from inconsistent revelations. It is very similar, but not exactly the same.

  2. AFIR is not logical argument, it's really a statistical one. It's based on probabilities of being right vs wrong.

[–]ticklemepenis -4 points-3 points ago

That kind of seems like a bogus argument to me. Right now there are several theories attempting to unify general relativity and quantum mechanics, but that doesn't make them ALL wrong since theyre inconsistent.

Perhaps some revelations are better/truer than others.

[–]JStarx 1 point2 points ago

Ricky's point is not that "there's more than one religion and they're different so clearly none of them are right." His point is that to pick one religion and believe it wholeheartedly over all the others is arbitrary. There's no good evidence for any of them.

[–]FSMfan 0 points1 point ago

We can tell them (accurately) that there's no good evidence for any of them, but what good does that do when they point to the bible or Quran and say ... 'yes there is, look it's right there in that book'. or they tell us "he is risen, the tomb is empty", etc.

They believe they do have good evidence, so this argument tends to fall on deaf ears.

[–]ticklemepenis 0 points1 point ago

I wasn't referring to Ricky's statement, but the "argument from inconsistent revelations" linked above, which presents a statistical argument. The argument does not say "There is no good reason to believe any of them", but "There is too many to choose from, so the odds you picked the right one are poor". It doesn't really argue whether or not a god is real, simply that you probably didn't choose the right one.

It's like if you had a million people say they won the same lottery drawing, but you say there is too many to choose from so therefore they are all wrong. But they obviously aren't ALL automatically wrong, someone might have actually won. In order to figure out if anyone won, we need to look at the evidence (in the case, their lotto tickets). Or, if we wish to disprove lotto winners in general, we need to show it is impossible to win (equivalent to disproving god).

[–]thatben 2 points3 points ago

...but it would make them wrong if they each claimed the same truth, to the exclusion of all others, no?

[–]ticklemepenis -2 points-1 points ago

Why wouldn't one still be able to be correct? Perhaps the others really are wrong

[–]treefinker 1 point2 points ago

It does remind us what a non-negotiable religious claim is actually trying to imply.

[–]werddrew 4 points5 points ago

[–]ddam 4 points5 points ago

If I know one thing, it's that people post lies on the internet.

-- Abraham Lincoln

[–]Mopia 1 point2 points ago

This is the quote I'm sure gervais used as a reference.

[–]makkuwata 6 points7 points ago

I genuinely don't mean this to come across as a snarky "repost!" comment, but we should really just make this the subreddit banner and get it over with.

[–]jpcrecom 9 points10 points ago

not even originally a Gervais quote. I am quite sure this is a line of logic that Gervais took originally from Dawkins.

[–]BeFuckingPolite 6 points7 points ago

Technically we can say Voltaire made the same argument. And probably someone before that. And before that guy too.

In fact, I'd argue that most ideas and arguments in this area of human life were probably thought of by many people thousands of years ago. The first guy to think the basic idea Gervais is expressing was probably one among the first guys to be exposed to more than one religion.

Those names were never recorded and will never be known. When it comes to the existence of the supernatural the questions are as old as the arguments we offer as answers, most people just ignore them.

It isn't important who came up with an idea. What's important is who expresses it the best. This is the best terse presentation of that logical argument I've seen, but that's me.

[–]Fantasticriss -1 points0 points ago

Gervais put his own little spin on it and I doubt Dawkins would be too upset to see his famous response to the question "What if you're wrong?" being put forth again

[–]caseyjhol 8 points9 points ago

I am quite sure this is a line of logic that every atheist has.

[–]Splep 2 points3 points ago

The jump from 1 God to 0 Gods is a huge difference though.

[–]SiS-Shadowman 0 points1 point ago

Could you elaborate why?

Not believing in ~2800 gods is not that far from not believing in ~2801 gods.

[–]Splep 1 point2 points ago

Believing in 1 - 2870 gods shows that the person still believes there is a supernatural force out there. Something influencing the universe and their destiny.

Whereas belief in no god means that nothing can be explained by magic and we are completely alone (in the larger sense).

When questions about things like creation or sin come up, both polytheists and monotheists can say "It was a divine force" whereas Atheists would have to find other reasons, having discarded any ideas of the supernatural.

Plus it doesn't help that the Abrahamic god is as powerful as all of the other gods combined.

[–]laalaaa 2 points3 points ago

"I bet r/atheism has never seen a ricky gervais quote before!" You must be new.

[–]InitiallyAnAsshole 2 points3 points ago

Nice quote. I forget who originally said that but Dawkins has quoted him as well. Anyone know?

[–]lucidone 16 points17 points ago

"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

--Stephen F. Roberts

[–]expsranger 1 point2 points ago

2nd this motion. This is a Roberts quote. I can however hear it in Gervais' voice and I like it better that way

[–]thetheist 0 points1 point ago

I've never liked this quote. It's inherently logically flawed. You cannot present this argument to a monotheist because they will say, "I don't believe in Zeus because there is only one God, Yahweh." Well, they won't say "Yahweh", but it's the perfect counter, and every Christian will naturally whip it out. Christians disbelieve in other gods because their religion says that there is only one god. They actually understand why they dismiss all the other possible gods, and it's not the same reason that you or I dismiss those gods.

[–]LS_DJ 0 points1 point ago

I figured Dawkins said it first and Gervais ran with it, but maybe they are both quoting someone else, perhaps Bertrand Russell?

[–]davorzdralo 0 points1 point ago

I think this quote qualifies as "old as dirt", so it's way, way before either of those two.

[–]spaceboundmonkeys -1 points0 points ago

Orange would be a better color for this one.

[–]thatoneguy1243 1 point2 points ago

Great quote, but I want a source for the number of gods and deities. anybody know it?

[–]TaviRider 2 points3 points ago

This article tries to estimate the number and comes up with 28 million. This is based upon very broad assumptions and a lot of handwaving, whereas the Gervais quote is based upon enumerating deities. But the article also makes some good points about the difficulty of counting deities. For instance, do we count Jupiter and Zeus as one deity or two?

[–]TaviRider 0 points1 point ago

Anyone have a source for the number of dieties?

[–]genericwit -1 points0 points ago

Ha! Krishna is just an incarnation of Vishnu, they're not really separate entities! Saying you believe in Krishna but not Vishnu is like saying you believe in Jesus but not God!

What a dummy.

[–]formose -1 points0 points ago

HaHA YEAH that will show my fucking BITCH SKYTHEIST FUNDIE MOM!!!!!!

BITCH wont even buy me a MTN DEW subscription

[–]AgentGinger149 0 points1 point ago

I became atheist about a year and a half ago. But while I was still Catholic, I watched The Invention of Lying and enjoyed it. Now that I'm atheist and understand the Bible better than I ever did as a Christian, I really want to watch it again for the biblical humor. As the entire movie is just one big joke against Christianity.

[–]Smileybomb12345 0 points1 point ago

If all gods existed at one point and had to fight each other, and the winner gets to rule the universe, that would be awesome. But as cool as it sounds, it's as out there as scientology. But Thor just might kick everyone's ass. Just sayin.

[–]youni89 0 points1 point ago

So you have other favorite quotes by Ricky Gervais? Or did you just google this shit up for Karma points?

[–]This_is_an_acronym 0 points1 point ago

Any funny anecdote Gervais gives owns. Theists often praise it- seriously.

[–]EvilPicnic 0 points1 point ago

This is awesome. Rocky Gervais can be truly insightful when he wants to be.

[–]Ginko_Mushi_Master -1 points0 points ago

After a while this guy gets to be as annoying as most theists. Maybe that's just me.

[–]Aaronmcom 0 points1 point ago

My favorite quote from him is "you round-headed lazy bafoon!"

[–]IAmAMagicLion 0 points1 point ago

So the pope is interms of religiousness 1/2870 x 100% religious, so that's 0.000348% religious. I'm agnostic so that's 2870/2870 x 50%= 50%. That means I'm 143678.16 times more religious than the pope. Cool, except now I'm r/atheisms new No. 1 most hated.

[–]rejeremiad 1 point2 points ago

If there are 2870 theories on why the earth's temperature may be rising and you only reject 2869 of them, you are not much more of a climate-change denier than I am aren't you?

[–]superapplekid 1 point2 points ago

Excellent rebuttal. That's the perfect example of why a subreddit that parades logic as its virtue shouldn't spend so much of its time worshipping quippy rhetoric!

[–]Earthtone_Coalition 1 point2 points ago

Those wondering about precursors to this quote (of which I'm sure there are many) may be interested in reading H. L. Mencken's essay, titled "Memorial Service," written in 1922 to eulogize all the "dead" gods no longer worshiped by man. A very wry, entertaining read.

[–]Dukeboy08 0 points1 point ago

+1 Zing

[–]iihatephones 0 points1 point ago

"I'm a unitarian."

"... Well then."

[–]Riov -1 points0 points ago

Am I the only one who thinks Ricky Gervais is a self-absorbed douche.

[–]overhandright 0 points1 point ago

yeah, because this picture hasn't been posted a million times . . .

[–]bad_artist_2000 0 points1 point ago

I've heard this on like every atheist youtube video ever.

[–]godlessexistence 0 points1 point ago

So the next time someone tells me they believe in God, I'll say "Oh, that's cool" and then change the subject.

Honestly, the people in my life that matter - their religious or spiritual beliefs do not matter when it comes to my relationship with them and I realize that's not the case for everyone. But if I'm talking to a complete stranger or acquaintance, why am I trying to incite an argument... because that's exactly what this is doing; trying to elicit an emotional response. When bringing this kind of crap up you really have to consider "to what end?". Chances are you're not Richard Dawkins giving a lecture at a university. You're having/starting a pissant little argument with someone that doesn't matter. If a religious person is asking why you don't believe in a god then state your logical reasoning. IF they give you shit, then defend yourself. Most people come to the no god conclusion on their own and a lot never ever will/do. Make your stance in the settings where it matters like when some type of group or legislation is threatening to violate the separation of church and state or trying to get religion in the classroom.

I'm only saying this from experience of alienating myself from my peers because I had to make the logical stance like I was going to prove to them how they are wrong and they're beliefs don't make sense. I still full heartedly believe their beliefs are lunatic, I just don't give a shit to try and convince them anymore. They aren't walking away with "oh man, I guess he's totally right" they're thinking "that guy is an insensitive asshole, he needs faith in jesus. i will pray for him". People come to these understandings on their own terms and there's a huge difference between attacking beliefs and defending the truth.

[–]ASiteForChumps 0 points1 point ago

Too bad they believe in something that's slowing down humanity's progress.

[–]magicmagininja 0 points1 point ago

what about hindus.

[–]abortionjesus 0 points1 point ago

You know, Gervais stole that from Hitchens.

[–]MeEvilBob 0 points1 point ago

Why do people keep giving Ricky Gervais credit every time he repeats something that people have been saying over and over again since long before he was born?

[–]Faomir 0 points1 point ago

I sweat this is re-posted every god-dammed week.

[–]Chris153 0 points1 point ago

There's a categorical difference between 1 and 0. The distance between 1 and 0, while mathematically equal, is very much different the distance between any other integer and the the subsequent integer.

[–]praisecarcinoma 0 points1 point ago

I've never agreed with that stance, and I do agree with pretty much everything he says in his comedy. But being an atheist means you don't believe in the existence of any god at all. You're not an atheist because there are certain ones you don't believe in. People who believe in just one God, and not the other 2,869 are simply monotheists. More than one? A polytheist. All of them? Someone needs to hear your story.

[–]asldkfououhe 0 points1 point ago

this dude is a giant 14-year-old. his twitter account especially embarrasses me

[–]killerbotmax 0 points1 point ago

I just invented another 50 billion gods right now. Called 1, 2, 3, 4...

[–]QuantumMiner072 -2 points-1 points ago

repost # 4384?

[–]Moleman69 2 points3 points ago

My favourite Ricky Gervais quote:

There's been a rape up there!

[–]calcuwat 0 points1 point ago

What is this supposed to be? Original? Dawkins said this years ago and did it better. I like Ricky Gervais, but this subreddit is a broken record.

[–]homohominilupus 0 points1 point ago

He's such a lad.

[–]tayq1 0 points1 point ago

I saw him on haverstock hill today. True story.

[–]zimbabwe7878 -1 points0 points ago

Another Ricky Gervais quote? wow. truely inspiring.

I don't even need to follow him on twitter.

at least its better than the time users started posting their smug faces and boring quotes.

[–]BobC813 0 points1 point ago

I don't understand why people think this is a good argument. In my opinion, a person who believes in one god is just as close to being an atheist as someone who believes in hundreds, or thousands, of gods. It's their belief that there is some supernatural power that can control their life/determine their fate that makes them completely different than an atheist. I love reading most of the things that Ricky Gervais has to say about religion, but this quote just completely misses the point for me.

[–]tuttlecr 1 point2 points ago

This sounds a lot like Richard Dawkins. Just saying.

[–]iFlick 0 points1 point ago

I saw it first from Sam Harris, actually.

[–]scottlvl73 0 points1 point ago

Wow I've been on reddit long enough to see reports... This is what they were talking about! Still great quote though, Happy to see it again

[–]scottlvl73 0 points1 point ago

Reposts*

[–]SeanDougherty86 0 points1 point ago

I beleive in FSM. I wasnt always a beleiver, but it appeared to me in my dinner last night.

I beleive in same amount of gods as most people on the planet

Good for me

[–]bhoang 0 points1 point ago

Ricky's Twitter account is a gold mine for atheist quotes. And he always posts hilarious responses from idiots.

[–]kabcdef 1 point2 points ago

Was funny in The Office and "kind of" funny in Extras, but doesn't make it as a preacher.

[–]SoShinyRS 0 points1 point ago

To me, it doesn't matter which name God has, it matters that there even is one

[–]sununu_snu_snu 0 points1 point ago

This is a very good point. The Atheist has more in common with the nihilist than the scientist. I believe in them all. I just think they were mortal assholes.

[–]wwt0112 0 points1 point ago

I see this quote on the front page every two weeks...

[–]CraziestSin 0 points1 point ago

Richard Dawkins? Possibly... :3

[–]Soldier4Christ82 1 point2 points ago

Ah, another of Dawkins' minions I see, spouting the "One less god" fallacy.

Debunked here.

[–]ArchangelleOPisAfag 0 points1 point ago

Biased much?

[–]Soldier4Christ82 1 point2 points ago

I could just as easily ask you the same question.

[–]ArchangelleOPisAfag 0 points1 point ago

No you can't, since you linked the website.

[–]Soldier4Christ82 1 point2 points ago

The question is of bias; it has nothing to do with who linked what.

[–]JimThompson 0 points1 point ago

That's your favorite? Isn't that just a common atheist talking point that isn't even worded in a particularly unique or funny way?

I don't know if Ricky Gervais has become a hack or if he just doesn't bring his A game when he's on Twitter or his blog or wherever they hell you guys keep pulling these incredibly trite and pandering quotes. I hope to God you're not getting them from his stand-up act. I really hope that comedy hasn't devolved to the point where comedians are now quoting the users of /r/atheism verbatim and not bothering to add a punchline.

[–]mordocai058 1 point2 points ago

Aha, so that's where the idea for the picture/diagram came from that shows a whole bunch of gods listed. Good to know!

[–]Fetch220 0 points1 point ago

Richard Dawkins made the same point in his book the god delusion

[–]i_got_this -4 points-3 points ago

I made the same point in my head in 1st grade

[–]turnleftdale -1 points0 points ago

My favorite Ricky Gervais quote has nothing to do with atheism because I'm not an annoying cunt.

[–]OnePastafarian -1 points0 points ago

Quotation* not a quote.

[–]RBFesquire -2 points-1 points ago

As much as I am pleased that some one like Gervais is an atheist, aren't his comments just piggy backing on other comments and philosophy. I mean, we all throw quotes out there but he offers nothing original, really?

[–]1000milestare 0 points1 point ago

This quote is amazing.

[–]Mattycore -2 points-1 points ago

This has been reposted so many times....

[–]boredlike 0 points1 point ago

I actually don't really like this quote. They may believe in only one more God than you but that's still a God. So they're not nearly as athiest as you, they're not atheist at all.

[–]iFlick 0 points1 point ago

Sam Harris does this quote better: the way he puts it (in Letter to a Christian Nation, i think) is: you know exactly how it feels to be completely atheistic with regard to all those other gods, we just disagree on that last one.

I think it's a brilliant point, personally. It offers the theist a new perspective.

[–]Atheism_is_religion -1 points0 points ago

So let me get this straight. I am one of ten people in a room. Nine of them are not married. I am married.

Does that mean I am almost not married?

No.

Stupid quote.

Downvoted.

[–]bogan 0 points1 point ago

Are you trying to start a bad analogy contest here? Here's one:

He spoke with the wisdom that can only come from experience, like a guy who went blind because he looked at a solar eclipse without one of those boxes with a pinhole in it and now goes around the country speaking at high schools about the dangers of looking at a solar eclipse without one of those boxes with a pinhole in it.

~ Joseph Romm, Washington (source)

[–]iFlick 0 points1 point ago

Oops... Point already made.

[–]iFlick 0 points1 point ago

No, it means you're not good with analogies.