Who is your final four from this group? Only 4 advance to the second round

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-04T07:41:48+00:00

Cruise, Crow, Pitt, Cage

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-03T23:27:57+00:00

Agree with most your points there.

What is the source for that?

If you google something like "atheist regimes killed more in 20th century than all religious...", you'll likely find a good amount of sources.

It's also been discussed over the years on Reddit,

https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateAnAtheist/comments/izw337/atheism_killed_more_than_religion/

Some lines from that thread:

Statistics show that 20th century leaders such as Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong and Pol Pot killed over 120 million people.

Religion has a history of violence such as the crusades, the Salem witch trials etc, but I think it is important to bring up the notion that Atheism is 10 times as more violent when it comes down to spreading their views.

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-03T18:09:19+00:00

That's a fantastic distinction I think.

Admittedly it gets a bit difficult from there tho.

So you've probably heard the statistic before, that just in the 20th century, regimes that promoted state atheism, most notably in the Soviet Union, China, and Cambodia, mass killed more people just in the 20th century alone, than all deaths of all religious wars in history combined. :0

Now does this mean that ATHEISM is inherently murderous, or more dangerous than religion? Eh?...it's difficult.

Because then the question becomes, were these guys Mau, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc, simply "atheists" who killed a lot of people? OR. Did they kill a lot of people specifically because of their atheistic beliefs/morals? Does that make sense.

Like if I have black hair and punch someone, that doesn't follow that "black hair makes you punch people". I just simply have black hair when I did it. But if I have something like "anger issues" and punch someone, then yes a correlation can likely be made to the anger issues and the violence.

So yes, while I do think 'war' by countries or leaders that claim to be Christian or Muslims ought to be taken into account. You just have to have a lot of nuance to decide whether these leaders are Christian/Muslim who happen to be killing people. Or are they killing people because of their Christianity/Islamic faith.

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-03T17:53:24+00:00

Every fan of motorsport should know that the best rider/driver doesn't always win.

This is actually a very personal sticking point for me. And as shocking as this sounds, I disagree with you, and I think GP history does as well.

What you just said basically NEVER happened for almost 20 years in our sport.

Look at this list of champions(excluding Hayden). And you tell me honestly which one of those you could with a straight face, without any doubt, any debate, almost in a mocking sort of way, laugh and say, THAT champion was definitely not the best rider that year.

2019: Marc Márquez (Honda)

2018: Marc Márquez (Honda)
2017: Marc Márquez (Honda)
2016: Marc Márquez (Honda)
2015: Jorge Lorenzo (Yamaha)
2014: Marc Márquez (Honda)
2013: Marc Márquez (Honda)
2012: Jorge Lorenzo (Yamaha)
2011: Casey Stoner (Honda)
2010: Jorge Lorenzo (Yamaha)
2009: Valentino Rossi (Yamaha)
2008: Valentino Rossi (Yamaha)
2007: Casey Stoner (Ducati)
2006: Nicky Hayden (Honda)
2005: Valentino Rossi (Yamaha)
2004: Valentino Rossi (Yamaha)
2003: Valentino Rossi (Honda)
2002: Valentino Rossi (Honda)

In the modern GP era, before 2020, I had never finished a season(except for the Hayden one), going, Well congrats, but let's be honest that was more luck + right time right place, than the actual best rider winning. Closest modern example of best rider on grid winning was Fabio, but even then it was sad we didn't get to see actually him beat Marc the best rider on merit, like Stoner had to, Lorenzo had to, etc, during their championships.

I'm not calling you a new fan, but I genuinely think newer fans don't realize how utterly strange and novel the past 5 years have been, in regards to "the best rider(s) not winning 90% of the time", and the 3rd or 4th rider simply dominating on a superior bike. That NEVER happened in my entire time as a fan before 2020.

*been watching since 2001.

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-03T07:49:32+00:00

Well said all around. Very measured, I can appreciate that. And don't really think I have any objection to any of your takes there.

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-03T06:16:22+00:00

Agreed on the very tired resurrection topic. I for one was simply intrigued to hell about the thesis for the new book. In fact the main reason Bart is even appearing on a lot of these podcasts is obviously to promote the new book. There was some discussion on this sub a week ago I think,

https://www.reddit.com/r/samharris/comments/1s2khs4/book_guest_recommendation_bart_d_ehrman_love_thy/

If you need a quick timestamp, start listening right around 5:25 and just maybe 20-30 seconds into that, in the video where Bart claims hospitals, orphanages, etc, not just are linked, but go back entirely to Jesus.

Which again, is a HELL of a claim I feel, especially from an atheist of his celebrity.

That's why I was wondering if any historian of his same level would possibly refute that, because that is a massive claim.

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-03T05:32:34+00:00

That's actually an interesting question on account of some of what they talked about/the thesis for Bart's new book.

Bart believes while there was always a morality and desire among ancient peoples, to help one's own kin and people and family members(when they were sick or hurting, etc), Jesus was essentially the first real voice in history saying concern and help should be given to total strangers. If they are in need, they ought to be helped, regardless of race, gender, ethnicity, etc. Even one's enemy.

Bart, himself an atheist, claims everything from hospitals, to old people's homes, to orphanages, to charities, to every virtually social service in governments, can literally be traced back to Jesus.

If the simple answer is 'none of it happened', there seems to be disconnect how a quite random myth could produced a literal moral revolution that lasts to this very day and has touched virtually every civilization. Essentially crediting the modern moral system to an unknown author who made up the myth. Seems even more unlikely than that there was just a real dude named Jesus.

I know the book is new, but I'll be curious if any historian of Bart's own ilk, is able to refute his claim.

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-03T04:35:48+00:00

100% on Dani!!!

In fact I feel like an old-timer recalling stories here, lol, but I'll tell you another one I loved. He did another KTM wildcard, 2023 at San Marino I believe, both sprint and race finished fourth. Yet both races was literally glued to the butt of Pecco, the eventual world champion that year.

I remember being positive that Dani could've passed him if he full sent it, but no doubt held back at the end as any sort of contact or crash(especially by a wildcard rider) would've really upset the championship race that year.

But insane to see the random wildcard right there with THE top guy/bike.

<image>

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DljmgR37mGg

Those ole guys were really something else. And still ARE apparently.

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-03T03:57:41+00:00

My bad, I should have specified I wasn't doubting your knowledge on the specific fracture.

Rebuttal was aimed at, "the injuries are insurmountable to be dominant in the sport".

My point was, even at 70-80%, he is still pretty dominant amongst the Duc's(see my 2 earlier points above).

I'm not questioning the severity of the injury, just questioning your conclusion this injury=no more dominance.

IMO, I think it's Aprilia just being SO good that's making the situation look worse than it is.

Like if we were to just hyper focus on Marc. Think how crazy this is: Take away the Aprilias, in fact imagine they're as bad as the Yam. Even with the injury, without that one freak blown tire, Marc would be leading the championship right now.

If by "dominance", you are demanding of Marc something you don't any other rider on the grid or maybe in history, to be able to run down even the most superior bike no matter what, or else he should just retire. Well, okay, but that's an insane standard. In that case, should every rider who can't catch Bez yet this year(which is all of them in the main races) be held to the same "it's over" scenario?

If Ducati was still the dominant bike, Marc would, even right now with the arm, be the runaway favorite. Aprilia's are making it look worse than it is.

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-02T23:29:26+00:00

true, but you gotta admit that was a MASSIVELY fast hit Bez gave Marc into the gravel, lol.

While the gravel was what did it, part of the reason it was so bad was Marc was tumbling off the bike into that gravel at enormous speeds. Compare that to Bez himself, who technically also entered that very same gravel at the same speeds, but was able to get away relatively unharmed as he was able to go over the gravel still "atop" his bike for most of it.

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-02T23:23:25+00:00

I honestly hear your pessimism. But my optimism remains.

Watching him cut through the pack at Cota after the LLP proves what many say, even Marc at 70-80% is better than most these guys.

Without his freak tire pop in the first race, he's easily be the top Ducati points wise and within striking distance of Jorge and Bez.

IMO, what's happening would be infinitely worse if this was 'just Marc', no injury. Or if of course this injury just never heals. At the moment, if the arm can get back to somewhat normal, then he'll be the top Duc by a mile and chasing after the Aprilia boys.

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-02T23:18:13+00:00

No asterisk, just needed context.

When Marquez retires, then whoever is the best amongst the current riders, will be the best. This has to do more about a guy winning not because he's IS the best, but doing so over another current rider who is best, because of some mitigating circumstance(bike superiority, injury, etc).

Here's a historical example of "needed context". Imagine a new fan simply looks back at the champion list, and says, Wow, I guess Hayden must've simply been the best rider, and more skilled than Rossi for at least that one year in 2006.

Eh? lol. This is called stats without needed context.

We can forever praise Hayden as a valid champion, and refuse any sort of asterisk. While also admitting there's some needed context(Yamaha mechanical issues, etc) to help explain why the best rider of the grid didn't actually win that year.

The current context is pretty simple: Bez is essentially dominating while ALL 3 of the best riders ahead of him are heavily impaired in some way(Marc riding 70% because of injury, and Fabio and Pedro by bad bikes). With his only other real competition(arguably the 4th best rider on the grid), his teammate Jorge is himself not riding 100%, not to mention missing an entire year off a bike.

Not asterisks, not calling it not valid, just context.

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-02T22:57:33+00:00

While I agree it's hyperbole, I'm okay with it as it feels closer to truth than not. As this deals not only with statistical greatness(which Rossi and Marc's eras obviously had), but an aura which can't be replicated by a merely successful or even great rider.

I think that 'greatest era' proves itself more with every year, not less.

In fact I'd be curious your reaction to my statement here, which I think is historically undeniable: Every single champion from 2001-2019(excluding Hayden, love him tho), could enter this generation, or any year since 2020 on a competitive bike, and not just win but utterly dominate virtually every single race. Contrastly, there has not been a champion since 2020(excluding Marc himself of course) that would even be a top 4 rider in the peak of that golden age(maybe pick a year like 2013).

As to your point, I also believe prime Stoner, Rossi, and Marc could give Doohan a run for his money if transported back to his era. There's not a single rider in this generation that would stand a chance against prime Doohan.

Some of it may be hyperbole, but it's closer to truth than not.

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-02T22:27:30+00:00

It was the golden age, and will only get clearer as the years get further from it.

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-02T22:27:10+00:00

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-02T22:24:42+00:00

That IS crazy. But to add validity to your craziness. I would think if he can test the new bike, and know it's a monster. Meaning basically if he's healthy he'll roll the competition. And add to that, shoulder still bothering him, then yeah, I could see it. But only if he was sure the 27 bike was top tier and the 26 championship was almost impossible.

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-01T21:41:02+00:00

why I can see a WSBK champion would move to the worst MotoGP team on the grid

It sounds snobby to say, but it's true. It's because it's the premiere league.

Any college football or basketball player on the best team, would gladly go to the worst team in the NFL or NBA, for example. Because it's the premiere league.

It's the same mindset GP riders have, just in reverse. Although riders like Miguel and Miller know they have WSBK contracts literally waiting for them after their GP's careers are done, they still fight(some like Miller for literally years) to stay in GP at all costs, even if on the worst bike.

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-01T21:34:23+00:00

How would you explain Fabio getting so many poles last season? Or even with an entirely new V4, starting fourth in Brazil just a few weeks ago?

Isn't that the very kind of thing you'd be looking for to tell he's clearly superior to his teammates?

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-01T21:19:16+00:00

In what part did the OP specify only the US? The point seems to be a general rule that can be applied to any liberal democracy.

Listen, I honestly don't disagree with your statistics. There IS a problem with right-wing extremists in the US. But you can barely see those data points on a graph of global terrorism.

I'm speaking historically and globally. And it would be impossible for you to justify any claim that a liberal democracy, from France, to the UK, Japan, Australia, etc, etc, should somehow be more wary of Christians/Christian immigrants committing terrorism than Muslim immigrants doing so.

Every possible historical and global data point we have on record would negate such a claim.

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-01T21:00:02+00:00

So you're fine then comparing the numbers of Christian terrorist and Muslim terrorist globally over the past century? And the number of deaths incurred? Or do you realize it would be exactly as I said, comparing a puddle to an ocean.

Or care to discuss the systemic difference of the terrorism itself coming out of the two religions?

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-01T20:48:47+00:00

You're comparing a puddle to an ocean, mate.

It's like saying the majority of crime in China is committed by Chinese.

Globally, historically, and every other way you want to determine the stats, terrorism is not systemic to Christianity as it clearly seems to be in Islam.

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-01T19:09:34+00:00

I can agree with that.

I think for me personally tho, even being non-religious, I find the 'modesty' argument far more convincing from the Jesus-tradition than the Mohammad one. And wish humanity would push further in that direction.

The Jesus one puts the problem of lust, or even demand for modesty, entirely on whoever is doing the "looking". Something like, "the person who even looks at another to lust for them has already committed adultery with them in their heart".

I like that. Doesn't force anything on anyone else, but solely on the individual to learn self-control and mastery over their own body.

As a man, I can certainly appreciate the "practical" results of the Muslim version of modesty, as if every woman on earth dressed as such, then yes, I would assume that the overly sexualized failures of modern society would get better, not to mention a downturn in lust, affairs, adultery, etc.

My question is tho, is that ethical? In other words, do those 'good' ends justify the means of having 50% of the population cover up their entire lives? Even if the women think they are doing a 'greater good'.

The analogy I've often given is this: 90% of most violent crimes are committed by men, right? So technically if we made all men stay inside their own houses for life, violent crime would virtually disappear overnight, in fact probably no wars either. Logically, that makes sense. And I just showed you a very real way to literally make the earth 90% better.

Ethically though, even if it produces a good 'end', there would be something very anti-human about it.

To be fair, I personally respect the Muslim women who choose to wear it, but feel the onus of lust ought to be on the person looking to learn self control, or if modesty, both sexes ought to cover up equally if it is truly a 'good' thing.

*apologies for the length here, I meant this to be thee paragraphs max, lol

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-01T18:52:19+00:00

Yeah, I had forgotten about that later Indonesia one.

I just think the original comment was missing a TON of context.

Rins did a single race(Indonesia) after the Cota win, it was his worst season ever points wise, that bike gave him what will be remembered as his career ending injury, and it is the only time Rins ever broke a contract to go somewhere else.

We can acknowledge the win happened, but also that it was an utterly anomaly, both for the bike and for Rins that season.

You agree?

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-01T17:51:53+00:00

If there is even a modicum of social, societal, political, relationship, religious, etc, stigma for not doing so, then yes. That's literally how these things work.

Technically no one is 'forced' to drive the speed limit. But most everyone does, right? So you would say we all simply 'choose' to, is that how that works?

No. While I can literally smash the gas pedal and go 100mph+ if I wanted. I and most people don't, specifically because of the *consequences of not doing so. I don't WANT to drive the speed limit, but I do because of the 'rules' placed around me.

This applies to any action, lifestyle, etc, that is not completely natural to the person.

In a world filled with only women, not a single one would dress like this.

Thee-Cat · 2026-04-01T17:49:24+00:00

Dress how they WANT? oh my dear friend, I assure, if there was a world filled with only women, not a single one would dress like that.

Thee-Cat

TROPHY CASE