Progress Update
2.02.10 | simon | 
Email This Post
This is a brief announcement to say that we’re still here, and we’re still committed to getting atheist ads on buses!
We are currently in negotiations with the bus and ad companies, and the administrative side of things is taking longer than expected. We hope to be able to tell you more details in the near future and provide a solid time frame for the buses.
Thank you again for your ongoing support. The many positive messages we have received from New Zealanders have been a great confirmation of the worth of this project. We can’t wait to get the actual ads out there!
Stay tuned…
February 9th, 2010 at 4:44 am
When do you expect the ads to begin appearing?
February 18th, 2010 at 12:45 pm
Still eagerly looking forward to this.
February 20th, 2010 at 12:40 am
Wouldn’t that be a lark: if this entire thing was a scam run by a christian. I would laugh, then I’d cry.
February 24th, 2010 at 8:00 pm
Hi, as a firm believer in God I am really sorry that you have been stopped. Free speech is only fair, this is not hate speech, and it opens up a dialogue.
February 24th, 2010 at 9:40 pm
Sorry to hear that the bus company declined to display your adverts. I am a Christian and think your adverts do heaps to encourage intelligent. I for one don’t want to believe a lie whether it be regarding God’s existance or otherwise. I must say that the fact that the statement includes the word “probably” is somewaht ironic and places your supporters in the camp of agnosticism and shows up atheism for the irrational, bigoted, philosophy that it is. Keep up the good work, you are doing the Lord s favour!
One other thing, some of you may wonder why God doesn’t make himself more visible. If he were to do so, we would have no alternative but to believe and would thereby be deprived of the very thing that makes us fullyy human, – our freedom and autonomy. In my view, if you want to find evidence to support God’s existance, you will find sufficient to convince you of the truth of your position. If you chose not to believe, you will find evidence which seems to support your position. As for me and my house, we choose to believe in and serve the Lord. Have been doing so for 38 year and it is the best decision I ever made. I still have doubts, but hey, that goes with the territory, and to be honest, I don’t have enough faith to be an agnostic little alone and athiest.
July 13th, 2010 at 4:50 pm
“probably” is the joke man. There probably is no tea pot in orbit around mars. There probably is no giant turtle roaming the universe. There probably is no weirdo in the sky watching/threatening/curing cancer but not restoring wasted limbs. 38 years spent sucking up to some figment of insecure man’s imagination. I could almost say that’s probably a waste. But I won’t. It definitely is!
July 13th, 2010 at 5:25 pm
@Richard Goodwin
On top of what Stephen has said – I’m pretty sure that if God was shown to exist, my very first reaction would be to blush for a while, because that’s how my traitorous body reacts whenever I’m proven wrong about something.
After this, I’d pretty much carry along. Business as usual. The existence of God would have some profound effects on my ontology – but as for my daily grind? Not so much.
So I struggle a bit with the theological proposition that God hides his existence to preserve our autonomy. I don’t think it’s necessary. It’s just more of the same tired old petitio principii rubbish that theologians have been churning out since the birth of their profession.
Step 1: Assert the existence of God (P1)
Step 2: Find something that at some level contradicts (or seems to contradict) the existence of God (P2)
Step 3: Use logical-sounding rhetoric to connect P1 to P2 in a way that seems superficially plausible (P3 – Pn)
Step 4: Conclude P2
Step 5: Deflect or dismiss any accusations of petitio principii with your fallacy of choice:
* Ad Hominem: You’re an arrogant, closed-minded atheist, and the Bible said that atheists are fools, so I don’t have to listen to you.
* Red Herring: Yes, but you haven’t considered that all the charitable works that are done by religious people. You don’t want them to stop, do you? Wanting them to stop is clearly wrong, and since I’m wanting them to keep going, I must be right.
* Fallacious Argument from Authority: You don’t have training as a theologian, so you obviously can’t be expected to understand the refined nuance of my argument – so I don’t have to listen to you.
* Or whatever suits your fancy.
Step 6: Publish and get your position adopted and repeated by believers that don’t know how to recognize ‘begging the question’ or why they should care if they could. Encourage them to use your work as an example of why P2 ‘actually proves the existence of God, contrary to what mean-spirited, angry, closed-minded atheists say!’
Step 7: Keep a straight face as whilst greasing up to Universities and religious organizations to try and get tenure.
Step 8: Repeat Steps 1 to 5 until retirement.
August 7th, 2010 at 5:53 pm
I am neither religious nor atheist, I am sort of in the in between, and I do think what Simon Fisher is doing is great and keep up the good work you are getting people thinking!
However there are a few things that people have said on this page that I fundamentally disagree with. Like those of you that are focused on god and the bible being literal. Of course there are those strong believers who think that the world was made in seven days and that Moses actually did part the red sea with a cane and that’s fine (but in its own way ignorant of science and the advances made in today’s world) but there are also those atheists out there who are ignorant to the fact that religion does not have to be taken literally and proved with equations and science, no for some of us religion is the life lessons you learn from the bible. Religion also eases the pain when you are alone and something terrible has happened to you, because even though there may not be a god out there who will solve all your problems and help ease your suffering you can still fill up the emptiness with this ‘invisible’ thread that links you to the possibility of his existence. So you can feel that there is some form of hope, and this in itself is why religion is a good thing because it gives humans the ability to carry through the struggles they have in life with hope. So all this talk about religion providing answers for why we are here, how did we get here, in some sense you could look at it that way and for some atheists this is the only way they see religion, as an encyclopaedia of false answers to our origins and the origins of the universe. However this is not the only way to look at religion (in specifics Christianity), as there are deeper meanings to the bible it just all depends on the way you look at it, how you decipher what it says and wether you take a story in the bible to be literal or wether you delve deeper and as with the story with David and Goliath realise that the subtext of David and Goliath could really be telling you that in life no matter what size, colour or type of person you are that with courage you can overcome your problems etc. And just another titbit, religion is also an important cultural aspect. New Zealand is a relatively new country and has not as such, had time to develop a culture but in some parts of the world religion like Christianity has been embedded into society and is an important aspect of everyday life. So becoming atheist in some sense would seem like, shed your heritage, values and culture. This shows religion goes way deeper than choosing wether you believe in the existence of god or not and for some people being religious can very well signifies their history, heritage and can even give them a sense of cultural pride. So the next time you think about those lines that say There’s probably no god. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life maybe think that for some, god is a part of their life and culture and has been for hundreds of years and that he provides more than an explanation of creation (wether true or not, believed or not) but that maybe he is the basis for traditions that have been passed down for generations that cannot be forgotten or discarded just as a New Zealander maybe will never forget the taste of fish and chips or forget/ discard their values of living in a democratic country.
August 8th, 2010 at 10:49 pm
@Rae
1) … paragraphs…
2) “Like those of you that are focused on god and the bible being literal.”
If scripture is to be considered metaphor, it follows that scripture is fiction – the central claim of the atheist campaign. (Alleged) believers can insist that it is an uplifting fiction of salvation – but so was Darth Vader’s rebellion against Palpatine in the final moments.
So: No. I don’t believe you. If believers were content to assert that the scriptural foundation of their faith is fiction entire, then I doubt they would self-identify as believers in the first place.
Instead, I’ve noticed a pattern in the stance of believers towards scripture. That which a believer can accept with a straight face is considered truth (or near enough as makes no difference). On the other hand, that which makes a believer blush – that’s metaphor.
They are entitled to believe as they wish – but I am entitled to smirk at their obvious discomfort.
3) “Religion also eases the pain when you are alone and something terrible has happened to you…”
I’ve been told heroin has a similar effect.
Or as George Bernard Shaw once wrote:
is a work of fiction – this is the central claim of the atheist bus campaign.
3) Whatever you say, believers don’t think faith and scripture is entirely fiction – otherwise, they would hardly qualify as believers, would they?
4) That which a believer can accept with a straight face – that’s considered true, or near enough that it makes no difference.
5) It seems that anything that makes a believer blush automatically becomes ‘metaphor’ to that believer – while that which they can accept with a straight face is considered truth.
4) “So becoming atheist in some sense would seem like, shed your heritage, values and culture.”
‘In some sense’ you’re probably correct. However, it’s not a sense that matters.
To the contrary. I can’s speak for everyone. But myself? I would be very pleased if religion was stripped of its metaphysical claims and reduced to a simple issue of cultural identity.
The problem in my view is that this has not yet happened.
5) “This shows religion goes way deeper than choosing wether you believe in the existence of god or not and for some people being religious can very well signifies their history, heritage and can even give them a sense of cultural pride.”
I trace my cultural heritage back to ancient Greece. I take much away from Socrates that others might describe as ‘spiritual’. Yet I consider it no insult when historians suggest that all our accounts of Socrates are nothing more than Plato’s rhetorical playthings. It may well be true that Socrates never existed in the flesh – I wouldn’t mind in the least. It hardly matters.
How different your own claims: That the believers don’t actually believe, that it is more an issue of ethnic or cultural heritage and identity. Maybe so – but if that’s all it is, then what harm is done in pointing out that that’s all it is? My cultural heritage is not harmed by the assertion that Socrates did not exist. Why should a believer be any more threatened by the assertion that God or Jesus did not exist? What makes them so special, if not the fact that they actually believe, and draw their world-view from the foundation of that belief?
August 8th, 2010 at 10:51 pm
Damn – editing fail. Missed an entire two or three paragraphs.
Ignore the following section:
September 3rd, 2010 at 12:48 pm
Favourite Quotations
There’s probably no God.
Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.
Which stands to reason the ten commandments are false.
Which means all our laws are false.
Which means we can do what ever the f*%k we like!
Which means chaos.
Woo Hoo great idea!
The Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:2-17 NKJV)
1 “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before Me.
2 “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My Commandments.
3 “You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain.
4 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.
5 “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you.
6 “You shall not murder.
7 “You shall not commit adultery.
8 “You shall not steal.
9 “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
10 “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.”
September 3rd, 2010 at 1:51 pm
Spam filter is giving me gyp, so I’m gonna try submitting this in several parts. Sorry.
New vocabulary term: Non-sequitur.
The nonexistence of God doesn’t render a law ‘false’, because laws are not a question of truth or falsehood. Laws are a matter of social contract. Also, laws existed well before the ten commandments were… *ahem*… ‘delivered’. So I don’t know where you get the peculiar notion that taking away the ten commandments will undermine undermine the concept of a legal system.
Additionally, even in the absence of laws it follows that we can’t just do anything we like. Reality is comprised of trade-offs. If our culture and society is permissive of violence, then we will all individually be subject to violence regularly, all the time. That sucks for all of us. So we can collectively decide that engaging in violence is fucked up, and we’ll come down on anyone who gets started into violence like a ton of bricks. So we write down anti-violence laws, like assault and battery criminal charges. It’s as simple, and as profound, as that.
September 3rd, 2010 at 1:53 pm
Spam filter is giving me gyp, so I’m gonna try submitting this in several parts. Sorry.
Besides… The ten commandments aren’t actually all that great. There’s a whole lot of stuff missing. Examples:
11. “Thou shalt not commit slavery.”
12. “Thou shalt not consider women the property of men.”
13. “Thou shalt not suffer inequality between peoples on the basis of gender, race, religion, ideology, politics, or sexual orientation.”
14. “Thou shalt not harbor pedophiles, but turn them over to the lawmakers for due processing.”
15. “Thou shalt not demonize sexuality for sexuality’s sake.”
15. “Thou shalt not rape.”
16. “Thou shalt not burn books.”
17. “Thou shalt not violate freedom of speech.”
19. “Thou shalt not commit genocide.”
20. “Thou shalt not withhold valueable and important medical knowledge – including knowledge about sexuality and contraception – from thy children.”
September 3rd, 2010 at 1:54 pm
Spam filter is giving me gyp, so I’m gonna try submitting this in several parts. Sorry.
Yeah. The ten commandments? Fuck ‘em. What’s good in them, we can work out for ourselves. The rest is pretty much a wash.
1-3 are pointless.
4 is okay from a worker’s rights perspective, I guess – but it’s been implemented stupidly all throughout history.
Regarding 5, it rather depends on the father and mother, doesn’t it? If someone has a sexually abusive parent, should they ‘respect’ that parent?
Every country in the world – including civilizations from *before* the ten commandments – had 6 on the books.
7 is fiddly one. Cheating on a partner is a very dickish thing to do. But I don’t think it should be a matter of civil law outside of a divorce court. Also, the definition of ‘adultery’ throughout history has been largely messed-up, including premarital sex as an example of ‘adultery’. 7 has some fucking issues.
Like 6, every country in the world has 8 on the books.
9 is interesting, given the number of times Christians lie for Jesus when they claim “There are no transitional fossils!” even though they know better.
10 is essentially condemning thought-crime – the wellspring of totalitarianism. I reject 10 outright on those grounds alone.
Indeed, that can be another one that was left out!
21: “Thou shalt not create laws in condemnation of thought crime – for freedom of thought is sacrosanct unto Me, and no being shall be condemned for what takes place in the privacy of their own thoughts.”
Fuck the ten commandments! *jazz hands*
Seriously! With the exception of 6 and 8, they’re either not a big deal or come with so much baggage as to make their inclusion from that particular source more trouble than it’s worth. Some of them – in particular 10 – are downright immoral to any reasonable reader.
Fuck ‘em.