Atheists on marriage
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-08-2015, 05:44 PM
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 05:34 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Julep, relax! I said to Pi that I would provide citations when I returned, if desired, as our forum social policies stipulate (and which we are glad to demand of our opponents). After I did so and asked if more citations were required, Pi said it was unnecessary, and pointed out that he had already said it agreed with other things he had read in general, and with his own opinion on the subject.

I really don't think this is worth getting hostile about! Sad

RS, my comment (and I think Julep's as well) were more directed at the fact that you are the only one who has actually provided some tangible data on the subject. From the start, he has been making claims without backing them up then chastizes someone for pointing that out. Personally, I am not saying he is wrong. I was just pointing out that he has not provided any evidence beyond "some studies" which is useless information.

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2015, 05:46 PM (This post was last modified: 07-08-2015 05:49 PM by π¶∆.)
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 05:33 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  
(07-08-2015 08:48 AM)π¶∆ Wrote:  Of course citations will be lovely. I do not like to discuss something without having something to back it up. But what you are stating does make sense because I came across a study that marriages are more likely to end around the 6-7 year mark which corresponds with the 4-5 year so-called "infatuation" period you have mentioned.

I would like to point out that you have not provided any citation whatsoever this entire time. You just chastized Julep for saying "So you assert that something that resonates intuitively with you doesn't need more rigorous proof?" but in fact, you have not provided a lick of evidence beyond, "Studies have shown" and other nebulous statements. So I'll ask. What specific studies are you referring to? I would like to know because it will help me understand your position better. I am not being lazy, it is your responsibility to provide a reference for claims to back them up. I am sure you have encountered this guy, goodwithoutgod. He references friggin' everything like he is supposed to.

Here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1...shows.html

It mentions the 7th year "wall"
And mentions 3 year initial period which rocket mentioned
And also mentions that eventually couples can be happy again almost as much as the beginning 3 year period.

And no one say anything to the user who attacked me for accepting rocket's assertions out of "intuition" because all of that was fair and all.

P.S, i can also find the actual study the article is referring to, if some peoples ass is still itching.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2015, 05:46 PM
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 05:41 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Well, that's why it wasn't worth $0.03, I suppose... Tongue

Pennies aren't legal tender in my country either way, so...

5¢ or nothing!

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2015, 05:48 PM
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 05:34 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Julep, relax! I said to Pi that I would provide citations when I returned, if desired, as our forum social policies stipulate (and which we are glad to demand of our opponents). After I did so and asked if more citations were required, Pi said it was unnecessary, and pointed out that he had already said it agreed with other things he had read in general, and with his own opinion on the subject.

I really don't think this is worth getting hostile about! Sad

I love you, RS, I really do. You are a very nice person.

I've also been reading this guy for the past couple of days, and my take is different from yours…I find him condescending and unwilling to admit to honest and rather trivial mistakes (like being corrected by someone else on the difference between translation and interpretation). And I kind of think he may be being extra nasty to me because I'm female, although that's speculation on my part.

So I'll just not engage with him, because it doesn't seem worth it. See you on other threads!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like julep's post
07-08-2015, 05:53 PM (This post was last modified: 07-08-2015 05:59 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 05:46 PM)π¶∆ Wrote:  Here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1...shows.html
...
P.S, i can also find the actual study the article is referring to, if some peoples ass is still itching.

Yes. Please do. All I can find at Slater & Gordon Lawyers is a press release saying they commissioned a study. No reference to who or how it was conducted at all. Where is this study published?

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
07-08-2015, 05:54 PM
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 05:21 PM)julep Wrote:  
(07-08-2015 05:08 PM)π¶∆ Wrote:  My God. I have exhausted ways to call people idiots for today. Are you really going to argue about that? Are we there already?

Anyhow ill entertain you with my answer. It was not because it "resonates intuitively", if you had bothered to go to my response i was referring to, you would see me mention that i came across a study that had findings similar to what he said....Intuition had no part in it....

Well, in your response, which I just looked up, back on page 3 or so, you said that citations would be lovely, and then you say in the following response that citations aren't needed after all because he "makes sense," and then you call me an idiot for remarking on the discrepancy. So fuck you very much. I haven't found anything you've said intellectually compelling or stimulating, so I'll write you off as someone who's not worth the aggravation.

Sorry, i missed this post. I mentioned that citations will be lovely and what he said makes sense IN THE SAME BLOODY POST. Not in different posts. Please at least be honest. In a forum. Where everyone can SEE who said what.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2015, 05:58 PM
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 05:46 PM)π¶∆ Wrote:  PS, i can also find the actual study the article is referring to, if some peoples ass is still itching.

Don't be a smartass. It is not ass itching, it's called due dilligence. You make a claim then get sand in your vagina when someone asks for ehere it came from. If I said that there was concrete proof that the Prophet didn't exist, I am pretty sure you would be asking for something to back that up. Apparently, wanting to know information is ass itching. Don't be so butthurt when someone asks for more information, you look like an asshole.

Edit: apparently, Girly also developed the diaper rash.

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like The Organic Chemist's post
07-08-2015, 05:59 PM (This post was last modified: 07-08-2015 06:13 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 05:58 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  
(07-08-2015 05:46 PM)π¶∆ Wrote:  PS, i can also find the actual study the article is referring to, if some peoples ass is still itching.

Don't be a smartass. It is not ass itching, it's called due dilligence. You make a claim then get sand in your vagina when someone asks for ehere it came from. If I said that there was concrete proof that the Prophet didn't exist, I am pretty sure you would be asking for something to back that up. Apparently, wanting to know information is ass itching. Don't be so butthurt when someone asks for more information, you look like an asshole.


I can't find it. Still looking but it's starting to look like a dead end.

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2015, 06:00 PM
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 05:58 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  
(07-08-2015 05:46 PM)π¶∆ Wrote:  PS, i can also find the actual study the article is referring to, if some peoples ass is still itching.

Don't be a smartass. It is not ass itching, it's called due dilligence. You make a claim then get sand in your vagina when someone asks for ehere it came from. If I said that there was concrete proof that the Prophet didn't exist, I am pretty sure you would be asking for something to back that up. Apparently, wanting to know information is ass itching. Don't be so butthurt when someone asks for more information, you look like an asshole.

There is nothing wrong in asking for a citation. It's how everyone ganged up on me. This user butts in out of nowhere and brings up an irrelevant point that i agreed with rocket out of "intuition". Forgive me if i got offended.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2015, 06:09 PM
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 06:00 PM)π¶∆ Wrote:  
(07-08-2015 05:58 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  Don't be a smartass. It is not ass itching, it's called due dilligence. You make a claim then get sand in your vagina when someone asks for ehere it came from. If I said that there was concrete proof that the Prophet didn't exist, I am pretty sure you would be asking for something to back that up. Apparently, wanting to know information is ass itching. Don't be so butthurt when someone asks for more information, you look like an asshole.

There is nothing wrong in asking for a citation. It's how everyone ganged up on me. This user butts in out of nowhere and brings up an irrelevant point that i agreed with rocket out of "intuition". Forgive me if i got offended.

No problem. Then it may be prudent to provide said links or book references in your first post. That way, we have them immidiately and it doesn't look like you are pulling things out of your butt. It also will give us the context for which your comments are based. If you leave it up to the reader to find the info, they may find a different press release or different study analysis and then think that you are full of it. That is why it is so critical to provide references to claims. The sooner the better. Smile

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: