|
zZZz
jesus


Registered: 12/28/07
Posts: 33,478
|
Re: 10,000 if you can provide proof of god or supernatural? [Re: Bill_Oreilly]
#18967976 - 10/12/13 11:32 AM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
yea seriously, i hear about this flying spaghetti monster so much that im starting to think they actually believe in a flying spaghetti monster in the sky that grants wishes or whatever.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,053
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 23 seconds
|
Re: 10,000 if you can provide proof of god or supernatural? [Re: zZZz] 3
#18968018 - 10/12/13 11:43 AM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
I understand how some one wouldn't believe in God based upon how they are raised by their parents, it's okay. But to be so ignorant as to not consider how other people were raised and how they do believe in God is just foolish.
You're agreeing with Dawk's fabricated conversation with a fabricated atheist. You believers fabricate too much shit.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,053
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 23 seconds
|
Re: 10,000 if you can provide proof of god or supernatural? [Re: zZZz] 4
#18968020 - 10/12/13 11:45 AM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zZZz said: yea seriously, i hear about this flying spaghetti monster so much that im starting to think they actually believe in a flying spaghetti monster in the sky that grants wishes or whatever.
Yes, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is rather a silly idea isn't it?
Hint: That's the point.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
shivas.wisdom
בּ



Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,429
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 8 minutes, 18 seconds
|
Re: 10,000 if you can provide proof of god or supernatural? [Re: zZZz]
#18968060 - 10/12/13 12:03 PM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
flying spaghetti monster is a pretty funny satire, made in response to creationists wanting their dogma taught alongside evolution is schools--under the concept of fairness or inclusion or something.
the concept was that pastafarianism has just as much scientific credibility as creationism does--so if intelligent design can demand equal time in a science class, why not anything else?
it's more a critique on logical fallacies, shifting the burden of proof (you can't disprove a giant invisible spaghetti monster exists), and assuming correlation equals causation (global warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking numbers of pirates since the 1800s), than it is a blanket critique on theism
least, this is how i've always seen it
--------------------
|
zZZz
jesus


Registered: 12/28/07
Posts: 33,478
|
Re: 10,000 if you can provide proof of god or supernatural? [Re: koods]
#18968063 - 10/12/13 12:04 PM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
well yea its a silly idea, just as silly as believing that people actually believe in a flying spaghetti monster.
|
LuSiD enthusiast
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/13
Posts: 4,325
Last seen: 4 years, 9 months
|
Re: 10,000 if you can provide proof of god or supernatural? [Re: shivas.wisdom]
#18968068 - 10/12/13 12:08 PM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: flying spaghetti monster is a pretty funny satire, made in response to creationists wanting their dogma taught alongside evolution is schools--under the concept of fairness or inclusion or something.
the concept was that pastafarianism has just as much scientific credibility as creationism does--so if intelligent design can demand equal time in a science class, why not anything else?
it's more a critique on logical fallacies, shifting the burden of proof (you can't disprove a giant invisible spaghetti monster exists), and assuming correlation equals causation (global warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking numbers of pirates since the 1800s), than it is a blanket critique on theism
least, this is how i've always seen it
We should teach evolution in a science class, and push philosophy more so all explanations can have a free range.
-------------------- I'm addicted to coke, weed, booze, ludes and speed. Not LSD, you can't get addicted to LSD, it was built by scientists. I ain't got no demons that gonna get woke. In erowid we trust. Just take your damn pills and don't ask any questions, you'll be fine.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,053
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 23 seconds
|
Re: 10,000 if you can provide proof of god or supernatural? [Re: zZZz]
#18968105 - 10/12/13 12:21 PM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zZZz said: well yea its a silly idea, just as silly as believing that people actually believe in a flying spaghetti monster.
You just said "im starting to think they actually believe in a flying spaghetti monster in the sky that grants wishes or whatever."
You're becoming silly.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
zZZz
jesus


Registered: 12/28/07
Posts: 33,478
|
Re: 10,000 if you can provide proof of god or supernatural? [Re: koods]
#18968165 - 10/12/13 12:37 PM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,053
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 23 seconds
|
Re: 10,000 if you can provide proof of god or supernatural? [Re: zZZz]
#18968636 - 10/12/13 02:46 PM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zZZz said:

She needs the healing touch of his noodleness.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
millzy


Registered: 05/12/10
Posts: 12,404
|
Re: 10,000 if you can provide proof of god or supernatural? [Re: koods] 1
#18969649 - 10/12/13 07:46 PM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: I wish people who are convinced they know what atheists think would actually read what they write. I don't know any atheist that says religion only does bad things. Atheists freely admit that religious organizations do good deeds all the time. What we would say is that people could do good deeds without being forced to do so to gain favor with the dictator in the sky.
And even if your premise were true, why is the job of an atheist to argue the good that religion does? No doubt, in a debate, the other side is spending most of their time arguing such things.
And I gotta say this comment is so rich with a lack of self-awareness I lolled big time:
Quote:
but do us all a favor and try not to base your beliefs on bullshit and then cram those beliefs down everyone's throat who doesn't think like you do
i've read dawkins and dennett. i've also read freud and dostoevsky, who i would say make better arguments for atheism, especially dostoevsky. but since you seem to be speaking for all new atheists, i'll point out that my premise is true because reducing all of religion down to monotheism, or your "invisible dictator in the sky", distinctly shows the tenuous grasp you have on the subject of religion as well as the sloppy conclusions that you derive from that. obviously you aren't aware that there is an entire universe of religious concepts east of the suez canal that aren't monotheistic or even theistic in some cases (see buddhism and confucianism). i'm no apologist. i'm not even religious. but i do think that religion should be represented fairly in discussions like this and new atheism seems to fall short in that department. junk science.
also, it should be obvious that my statement made in "total lack of self-awareness" is applicable to anyone on any side of this issue. it's rich that you missed it, but nonetheless unsurprising seeing that your clan is unable to keep up with the conversation to begin with.
-------------------- I'm up to my ears in unwritten words. - J.D. Salinger
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,053
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 23 seconds
|
Re: 10,000 if you can provide proof of god or supernatural? [Re: millzy]
#18971000 - 10/13/13 03:14 AM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Th entire point of atheism is to not be bothered with all these silly ideas that people invent without any evidence
Don't you find it somewhat ironic that you seem to be demanding that the one group defined by their lack of religious belief be required to be educated about all the religions of the world. If they are based on supernatural beliefs, they are all bunk. I don't need to know the specifics of their bunkery.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
zZZz
jesus


Registered: 12/28/07
Posts: 33,478
|
Re: 10,000 if you can provide proof of god or supernatural? [Re: koods]
#18971070 - 10/13/13 04:19 AM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Atheism also carries it's own silly ideas. To think that the supernatural is bunk, or that there isn't some special force in the sky that watches over people is silly. You keep saying religious folk accept their beliefs without evidence, but that is far from the truth, there is tons of evidence. I however have yet to see evidence that disapproves these 'bunk' theories. If they can't be disapproved how can one say with certainty that they are false?. Atheism is a reflection of religion and vice versa. They are both based on beliefs, whether there is evidence or not it doesn't make any less of a belief. A true atheist is not an atheist, because that would require one to believe in something regardless of it's authenticity.
|
Everlong
King of the Neckbeards


Registered: 03/24/08
Posts: 9,087
Loc: Poconos
|
Re: 10,000 if you can provide proof of god or supernatural? [Re: millzy]
#18971080 - 10/13/13 04:28 AM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
millzy said: i'll point out that my premise is true because reducing all of religion down to monotheism, or your "invisible dictator in the sky", distinctly shows the tenuous grasp you have on the subject of religion as well as the sloppy conclusions that you derive from that. obviously you aren't aware that there is an entire universe of religious concepts east of the suez canal that aren't monotheistic or even theistic in some cases (see buddhism and confucianism).
I'm sure koods is well aware there are a multitude of different religions and their own specific views.
What kind of bullshit response was that? You basically said "You don't know about religion because you use monotheism, specifically Christianity, as your example." No shit, it happens that most religious people are in fact followers of the bible (at least the western demography that comes to this website, I'm not talking about the world).
--------------------
|
MorphinTime
Tulpa



Registered: 09/05/11
Posts: 7,151
Loc: Angel Grove
Last seen: 17 hours, 27 minutes
|
Re: 10,000 if you can provide proof of god or supernatural? [Re: zZZz]
#18971082 - 10/13/13 04:31 AM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zZZz said: You keep saying religious folk accept their beliefs without evidence, but that is far from the truth, there is tons of evidence.
To what evidence are you referring?
|
zZZz
jesus


Registered: 12/28/07
Posts: 33,478
|
Re: 10,000 if you can provide proof of god or supernatural? [Re: MorphinTime]
#18971105 - 10/13/13 04:51 AM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Is that a rhetorical question?
|
MorphinTime
Tulpa



Registered: 09/05/11
Posts: 7,151
Loc: Angel Grove
Last seen: 17 hours, 27 minutes
|
Re: 10,000 if you can provide proof of god or supernatural? [Re: zZZz]
#18971123 - 10/13/13 05:06 AM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
No.
|
shivas.wisdom
בּ



Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,429
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 8 minutes, 18 seconds
|
Re: 10,000 if you can provide proof of god or supernatural? [Re: MorphinTime]
#18971129 - 10/13/13 05:11 AM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Is that a rhetorical answer?
--------------------
|
MorphinTime
Tulpa



Registered: 09/05/11
Posts: 7,151
Loc: Angel Grove
Last seen: 17 hours, 27 minutes
|
Re: 10,000 if you can provide proof of god or supernatural? [Re: shivas.wisdom]
#18971135 - 10/13/13 05:19 AM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
No?
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 2 days, 1 hour
|
Re: 10,000 if you can provide proof of god or supernatural? [Re: MorphinTime]
#18971323 - 10/13/13 07:49 AM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
MorphinTime said:
Quote:
zZZz said: You keep saying religious folk accept their beliefs without evidence, but that is far from the truth, there is tons of evidence.
To what evidence are you referring?

Yes, we are all waiting.
|
millzy


Registered: 05/12/10
Posts: 12,404
|
Re: 10,000 if you can provide proof of god or supernatural? [Re: koods]
#18972230 - 10/13/13 01:45 PM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: Th entire point of atheism is to not be bothered with all these silly ideas that people invent without any evidence
Don't you find it somewhat ironic that you seem to be demanding that the one group defined by their lack of religious belief be required to be educated about all the religions of the world. If they are based on supernatural beliefs, they are all bunk. I don't need to know the specifics of their bunkery.
ironic? no. but i find it funny that there is a rather loud voice in the religious conversation that is represented by people who know very little, if anything, about religion. let me ask you this: how seriously do you take young-earth creationists who espouse disbelief towards evolution in the scientific conversation? my answer to that question is not at all, and the reason is because young-earth creationists' rejection of evolution is drawn from a belief system that fosters ignorance of evolution (and science in general). and like young-earth creationism, the tenets of new atheism are drawn from a belief system that fosters ignorance of religion. in both conversations both camps are charging into battle with their helmets on backwards, blindly hacking at anything that gets in their way. while science and religion are different games with different sets of rules and goals, a finer point i might add that is missed by both young-earthers and new atheists, ignorance equals ignorance in both cases.
knowing specifics about any given subject helps us formulate more nuanced and generally better opinions about that subject. the problem here is not disagreement but rather baseless disagreement. new atheism presupposes that religion is bullshit but it fails to demonstrate why. in fact, by conceding that religion is indeed a force for good in the world, new atheism contradicts itself. if religion shall be ultimately judged by its effects, as new atheism seems to be primarily concerned with, and those effects - bad and good - are fairly weighed, then religion cannot be proven to be bullshit as new atheism presupposes, even if those effects stem from beliefs that are downright silly.
koods, i like you even though we disagree on this subject. and because i like you, i'd like to recommend this book to you. prosthero argues from a comparative rather than devotee standpoint. it's well written, accessible and balanced unlike dawkins' and dennett's propaganda. read it. you just might learn something.
-------------------- I'm up to my ears in unwritten words. - J.D. Salinger
Edited by millzy (10/13/13 02:07 PM)
|
|