and what compels racial prejudice? let me guess. religion?
non-christians: who has read the bible?
- Thread starter malaki
- Start date
oh great. another artful dodger.
man if u dont gtfoh...
Good god u are truly an idiot. M theory? Flat universe?
M-theory! That shit must sound so fucking cool and sophisticated to u huh? Moron. Idiots like u fail to realize that M-"theory" or whatever the fuck its called these days is not a physical theory. Its a mathematical theory and has no place in the scientific method until it can be empirically verified or make useful predictions. The universe is flat huh? So what gives it it's shape? Dunce. Dark matter exists. So wtf is it? Describe it. Fuck does it look like? Legos exist. An autistic 3 yr old could describe his box of Legos and then show it to u. So. Professor idiot, describe dark matter.
Ok nitwit. Pay close attention. I expect this to go over ur vacuous head anyway but whatever. It is not only irrational but also exceedingly gay to believe in the surreptitious appearance of matter in zero time. A rational person asks how da fuck is this possible. An irrational zombie, like urself, just accepts it because it sounds cool. Applying ur camps standards of rationality, it's irrational and gay to believe in a self-induced event. Elementary school science: matter can't be created or destroyed. BBT says the universe, aka, space and time was CREATED at the big bang. A rational person asks, isn't this a contradiction? and WTF was encapsulating this spacetime to begin with? The answer can't be space because space couldn't have preexisted and spacetime already includes space. Irrational livestock, such as urself, don't bother asking these questions. Some morons claim that this question is irrelevant but what these dumb-asses fail to realize is that this is an integral part of the theory that goes to it's very roots. Until u address this, the theory is bunk. But just like the religious zealot, the idea of BBT being a load of crap scares the shit outta u.
Goat.
Last edited:
Sayeth the obnoxiously ignorant man who chooses Bible-belief over science.
The loony bin is that >>> way. Check yourself in.
Racial prejudice? I would say ignorance.
But again, I want to know what crazy shit us non-believers have substituted for religion? Sleeping in on Sundays?
Where are the groups of non-believers doing all kinds of crazy shit in the name of non-belief? I tried to google non-believers attacking other groups of non-believers over non-belief issues and I can't find shit. I can't find any violent scientific jihads. I can't find any group of non-believers calling for the death of Steven Hawking because they don't like his theories. What have us non-believers replaced the poison of religion with? Nobody is going batshit over non-belief, that doesn't mean a non-believer won't get mad and kill somebody. That doesn't mean a non-believer won't steal. Etc. It just means we don't do it in the name of non-belief. People do fucked up shit in the name of religion everyday. You can't find anything to replace that religon reason gap. NOTHING.
We ain't holding books by Stephen Hawking like
"Get those muthafuckas that read Michio Kaku!!!!! Kill'em!!!" It's simply not happening. Non-believers haven't invented anything that brings the level of madness that religion brings and has brought. Also, what in the flying fuck are religious people even doing on BGOL? Like I always said, it's like having vegans in a steakhouse. Muthafuckas got a mouth full of New York Strip talking about how good it is to be a vegan.
Sayeth the obnoxiously ignorant man who chooses Bible-belief over science.
The loony bin is that >>> way. Check yourself in.
w0w
when the fuck did i ever c/s Bible belief? it discombobulates u idiots when u hear shit that goes against convention u goats have been conditioned to deep throat huh? kill urself . lol.Sayeth the obnoxiously ignorant man who chooses Bible-belief over science.
The loony bin is that >>> way. Check yourself in.
u stupid moron. fuck u know about science other than what theu force feed u on TLC and Discovery channel dummy. ur stupid ass is incappable of synthesizing a sound rational argument so in ur frustration u yell Bible Thumper like a retarded child. gtfoh with that weak predictable bullshit u senile old man.
Sayeth the obnoxiously ignorant man who chooses Bible-belief over science.
The loony bin is that >>> way. Check yourself in.
that is all. thank you.
better ask some religious zealot these questions because frankly I don't give a fuck.But again, I want to know what crazy shit us non-believers have substituted for religion? Sleeping in on Sundays?
Nobody is going batshit over non-belief, that doesn't mean a non-believer won't get mad and kill somebody. That doesn't mean a non-believer won't steal. Etc. It just means we don't do it in the name of non-belief. People do fucked up shit in the name of religion everyday. You can't find anything to replace that religon reason gap. NOTHING.
We ain't holding books by Stephen Hawking like
Also, what in the flying fuck are religious people even doing on BGOL? Like I always said, it's like having vegans in a steakhouse. Muthafuckas got a mouth full of New York Strip talking about how good it is to be a vegan.
If ur searching for some kind of justification for ur "non-belief" (whatever the fuck that means) ur gonna find it. Funny how that works huh? Look, i'm not about to play the "show me ur inquisition i'll show u my holocaust" game. I'm good.
At least i'm glad we've reached common ground on the fact that ur atheism doesn't make u any more rational than Bin Laden. Glad we cleared that up.
You're an ass clown who attends Youtube U. and you obviously have a "miseducation" agenda. You're stuck on 8th grade science because that's all you're capable of understanding, and I'm being generous. You need to log off and take your meds Oswald.
There goes the artful dodging dunce again.
WTF else have u said all throughout this thread? NOTHING. Not a damn thing. U can always tell when someone's struggling through the ether fumes trying to save face. Funny how u idiots wana go in on some science shit then u go ghost. JDummy Walker, ur the retarded idiot that we'd to routinely clown at seminars and journal club in grad school. The dumb ass whose mouth runs at a faster rate than his brain. You have nothing and it just eats u up doesn't it. It's a fucked up feeling i know. U might wana commit suicide. It works like a charm. Going to college must have been a major accomplishment for u and ur family. lol.
Probably some old 50+ year old man who's trying to relive his fake ass glory days online thinking he's droppin knowledge everytime he posts.
dodging what? You're an idiot who makes now sense and who just argues for the sake of arguing. You line of logic is as follows: if sean69 doesn't understand it, then it must not exist. You're one of these wannabe pseudo intellectuals who's last avenue os the internet, because no one offline in their right mind will entertain the nonsense you spew.
Dodger! LOL. That shit is played out. It's quite simple. In an argument someone brings up a point, u think it's bullshit, u counter it with a superior argument. If u lack the ability to arrive at a rational conclusion, the jury decides. This is how science is done bitch. There's no whining and crying u moron. Ur overly happy excited ass said 1+1=2 is a scientific fact. This is a typical argument i hear from idiots. Ethered that. Shit went over ur head. U started crying and talking bout metaphysics and shit.
WTF?Then u bring up the generic played out Russell's Teapot argument which has been shitted on for years. Ethered that. U post pics to change the subject like the leprous faggot u are. U stupidly ask how is BBT irrational. I give my points. Again, u dodge that like a pussy. I'm starting to think ur really a bitch.
No u piece of shit. My line of logic is to question bullshit. U post pics of celebrities and deep-throat pop-knowledge. And u claim to have a "college education". Give it up old man. Until u actually come through with shit to say, GTFO.
y'all some funny mofos.....
Dodger! LOL. That shit is played out. It's quite simple. In an argument someone brings up a point, u think it's bullshit, u counter it with a superior argument. If u lack the ability to arrive at a rational conclusion, the jury decides. This is how science is done bitch. There's no whining and crying u moron. Ur overly happy excited ass said 1+1=2 is a scientific fact. This is a typical argument i hear from idiots. Ethered that. Shit went over ur head. U started crying and talking bout metaphysics and shit.
Then u bring up the generic played out Russell's Teapot argument which has been shitted on for years. Ethered that. U post pics to change the subject like the leprous faggot u are. U stupidly ask how is BBT irrational. I give my points. Again, u dodge that like a pussy. I'm starting to think ur really a bitch.
No u piece of shit. My line of logic is to question bullshit. U post pics of celebrities and deep-throat pop-knowledge. And u claim to have a "college education". Give it up old man. Until u actually come through with shit to say, GTFO.
What is this "ethering" you speak of? Is this what played out in that pea brain of yours? Not once did you EVER ether any of my arguments. According to you every single astrophysicist is wrong, and you are right. So all I asked was for you to explain your methodology. You couldn't. Therefore you're an idiot. NOBODY is going to take your word over experts in the field. NO ONE. You like to read yourself type, and nothing more.
]
They are talking about you.
No such bullshit was co-signed... (And I suspect you know it.)The funny thing is that name you chose-- bin Laden-- is meant as the most extreme and irrational representation possible when he is no less rational than the general religious population. Ironically, he is easily argued as among the more rational.
However, atheism is generally more rational than religion because the rejection of theism is generally founded upon reasonable grounds (meaning on the basis of reason and logic). Of course, atheism is not reached or expressed uniformly and it is perfectly possible for an atheist to be irrational and unreasonable in conclusions they reach about life and reality which extend beyond simple atheism. Being an atheist does not mean you have to be a proponent or detractor of the Big Bang theory. And being an atheist does not make you immune to intellectual laziness, either. But there is an inherent difference between atheists as a group and the "faithful," with their blatant disregard and sometimes even contempt for reason. The latter group has checked out on the matter of rationality.
Sarah Palin: Religion in Politics
......../
......../
However, atheism is generally more rational than religion because the rejection of theism is generally founded upon reasonable grounds (meaning on the basis of reason and logic). Of course, atheism is not reached or expressed uniformly and it is perfectly possible for an atheist to be irrational and unreasonable in conclusions they reach about life and reality which extend beyond simple atheism. Being an atheist does not mean you have to be a proponent or detractor of the Big Bang theory. And being an atheist does not make you immune to intellectual laziness, either. But there is an inherent difference between atheists as a group and the "faithful," with their blatant disregard and sometimes even contempt for reason. The latter group has checked out on the matter of rationality.
very succinctly put
@bolded; thatswhatiwassayin
could we scale back the ad hominem people? it's gettin kinda redundant now
not saying it does. but 99.9% of the time it's the default mode. don't act like u don't know. nature abhors a vacuum. people will find something to fill the gap
The funny thing is that name you chose-- bin Laden-- is meant as the most extreme and irrational representation possible when he is no less rational than the general religious population. Ironically, he is easily argued as among the more rational.
However, atheism is generally more rational than religion because the rejection of theism is generally founded upon reasonable grounds (meaning on the basis of reason and logic). Of course, atheism is not reached or expressed uniformly and it is perfectly possible for an atheist to be irrational and unreasonable in conclusions they reach about life and reality which extend beyond simple atheism. Being an atheist does not mean you have to be a proponent or detractor of the Big Bang theory. And being an atheist does not make you immune to intellectual laziness, either. But there is an inherent difference between atheists as a group and the "faithful," with their blatant disregard and sometimes even contempt for reason. The latter group has checked out on the matter of rationality.
.............................
What? Atheists are calling on people to blow themselves up so they can live in a paradise in the after life? Yeah, that Bin Laden and his followers are some rational cats. That belief system is a lot more rational than Atheism.
And I didn't expect you to show me any examples. That would be a mission of failure for you even if you had time and willingness to undertake it.
Even then, there is a huge difference between filling the gap with the general theories or consensus of the scientific community which, while perhaps beyond the understanding of a layman, are the products of others reasoned efforts-- received knowledge-- and blind faith or reliance on faith as principle. Each side is filling a vacuum but the default modes are not at all equal in terms of rationality.
Also, as we've discussed before, many atheists are agnostics and can actually accept the vacuum. I sincerely doubt that 99.9% of atheists are in default gap-filling mode.
"...consensus of the scientific community which, while perhaps beyond the understanding of a layman, are the products of others reasoned efforts..."
^^^
do u not see the irony of this statement?
Blind faith = when u accept shit without thinking for urself. Period.
What's the irony?
There's a difference between not thinking and not thinking in-depth. No man is an expert on every subject but there's something to be said for how one fills in the gaps. Plenty of people accept the theory of evolution, for instance, without fully understanding it but have a respect for scientific principles and are at ease throwing their lot in with that set of explanations rather than the Noah's Ark story.
I'm not advocating this as the optimum level of thinking. But it's very different from "I believe it because I've always believed it and everyone in my family believes it and I'd be sad if Grandma isn't in heaven." Barack Obama "having faith in," say, Tim Geithner and deferring to his superior knowledge in his area of expertise is not blind faith. There's nothing blind about it and the "faith" or trust is based upon a demonstrated track record-- reason. If George Bush, on the other hand, believed God was with him in his efforts in Iraq and the mission was destined to succeed because a God nobody can see is on our side... That's blind faith. It's a TOTALLY different way of filling in the gaps. Not all gap-filling is equal.
!!!@bolded
reaching a rational conclusion about nature based on our experience doesn't require any in-depth nothing. ur right, no man is an expert in every subject but does it really take a rocket scientist brain to see the irrationality in stuff like sizeless matter with finite mass, particles whose mass is less than the mass of constituent sub-particles, matter appearing outta no where, etc. I dare anyone of y'all to rationalize this shit. You can't. The establishment has conditioned u to accept, without question, that science and common sense are incompatible. Shit's just weird like that.
Nope. It's not respect, it's blind faith. Respect is a privilege u give to something based on ur subjective judgement.
But it's very different from "I believe it because I've always believed it and everyone in my family believes it and I'd be sad if Grandma isn't in heaven."
It's EXACTLY the same. Tell a religious zealot that his faith isn't founded on demonstrated track record and consensus. And there is absolutely nothing scientific about Obama having faith or trust in Geithner's abilities. Dude makes a call based on his judgment. Bad analogy.
Not once have I argued that religious beliefs aren't irrational. But ur gonna have to find some objective criteria or metric for calibrating degree of difference in rationality or craziness between, for example, an empirically unverifiable "theory" that suggests that you'd shrink in size or completely vanish as u approach the speed of light and a story about a bearded man who can walk on water in sandals. Until u can come up with this, ur inequality of gaps argument is just an opinion. which is fine.
Last edited:
dude, really?
why don't u go ahead and answer the question urself so u can feel better. Or better yet, what are my options?
I read it all the time.
But you have to read it from an intellectual standpoint.
Find out what words and phrases mean and why they meant what they meant at that time.
If you don't it will engulf you.
The way its written you fully understand how folk get hypnotized by it.
But you have to read it from an intellectual standpoint.
Find out what words and phrases mean and why they meant what they meant at that time.
If you don't it will engulf you.
The way its written you fully understand how folk get hypnotized by it.
Similar threads
