Nick Seldon - A Quotation
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-08-2015, 06:02 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(28-08-2015 09:48 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(28-08-2015 09:43 AM)cjlr Wrote:  Sanctimony isn't exactly helping your case, mate.

I'd rather be occasionally sanctimonious than vile, rude, self-serving and distasteful. I urge you to deal with the real Q, the one who is honestly debating you, not the parody you believe all people like me are.

so talk to a fictional character isn't of talking to some stranger who prefers to create a persona based off of a group entity? I'd rather not spend time trying to talk to a star trek character thank you.

And if you'd rather just say something without support than actually support a claim. you don't have any perception of honest to the claim. Maybe you could learn a thing about seeking the academic method or journalistic method of making claims and your issue wouldn't exist anymore.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-08-2015, 07:26 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
I do enjoy the irony:

All you atheists hate believers, so you create a fake version of believers to hate!

(Fails to realize he just made a false version of us and of why we can't stand his sanctimonious BS, rather than admitting it's sanctimonious BS, and the BS itself, that we hate, not the Believers.)

[Image: th?id=JN.Fiw3D6vOgMPphNwUNIpzyg&...;amp;h=300]

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
28-08-2015, 11:14 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(28-08-2015 09:48 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  I'd rather be occasionally sanctimonious than vile, rude, self-serving and distasteful.
And yet you are all those things so that's an extra hilarious sentence.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
28-08-2015, 11:15 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(28-08-2015 09:40 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(27-08-2015 10:59 PM)cjlr Wrote:  The apologists's dilemma: which is it?

Either outright lying for Jesus, or just rock-chewing dumbfuck: YOU decide!

Can I possibly pay you to attend my public debates about Christ, so that all assembled can better understand the depths of the depravity of those who oppose the gospel?

"the depths of the depravity of those who oppose the gospel" Seriously? Oppose the gospel? Rejection of myth is not opposition.

You are a self-satisfied, sanctimonious asshole. You have no capacity to understand anything but your unsupported, delusional beliefs.
You view others through a warped lens of fantasy and lack any true empathy. You do not deserve any respect here as you have flung
block-headed judgments and insults that demonstrate your inability to understand fact, reason, or critical thinking.

You accomplish nothing here except to display the damage that religious belief does to people.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Chas's post
29-08-2015, 01:42 AM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(28-08-2015 11:15 PM)Chas Wrote:  You are a self-satisfied, sanctimonious asshole. You have no capacity to understand anything but your unsupported, delusional beliefs.
You view others through a warped lens of fantasy and lack any true empathy. You do not deserve any respect here as you have flung
block-headed judgments and insults that demonstrate your inability to understand fact, reason, or critical thinking.

You accomplish nothing here except to display the damage that religious belief does to people.

Let's not forget that he barely has an elementary understanding of math and logic. I like it when he tries though.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-09-2015, 01:37 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(28-08-2015 10:54 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  
(28-08-2015 09:39 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  I'm neither dishonest nor stupid. I see clearly that you are taking neuroscience, which admits to a phenomenal level of complexity in emotional reactions in the human brain (and body) and admits to knowing less about the brain than we know about the depths of the deepest oceans, and confusing the wonder that is science with a gap filler for everything.

If your claims regarding neuroscience were even fractionally true, we could pop pills to control anger the way we control diabetes or erectile dysfunction. I call baloney.

Just because we don't know everything doesn't mean we know nothing.

We are well-aware that the things we feel are based on endocrine system reactions in the brain. You proposed magic, essentially. It is not magic, it is hormones and evolved sytems for pair-bonding for the purpose of mating as it exists in our species.

And I specifically stated that our brains are composed of several systems that compete with one another and react differently to various stimuli, resulting in complex behaviors.

But that does not make our feelings magical or transcendental, which was your original contention and which I addressed. Your second answer is a dishonest dodge that fails in any way to address what I stated, ironically answering my first question.

Yes, our feelings are neither mystical nor transcendent nor magical, however, love, hate, empathy, etc. still defy the making of empirical measurements. Nor can brain chemistry and neurology sufficiently explain why ten people will make ten different emotional states responding to the same stimuli.

Again, empiricism sounds VERY rational, but works very poorly in vital human relationships.

Please restate your question so I'm sure to address it. Sorry if I missed something.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-09-2015, 01:38 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(28-08-2015 11:24 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(28-08-2015 09:39 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  I'm neither dishonest nor stupid. I see clearly that you are taking neuroscience, which admits to a phenomenal level of complexity in emotional reactions in the human brain (and body) and admits to knowing less about the brain than we know about the depths of the deepest oceans, and confusing the wonder that is science with a gap filler for everything.

If your claims regarding neuroscience were even fractionally true, we could pop pills to control anger the way we control diabetes or erectile dysfunction. I call baloney.

Ha. I missed this nonsense earlier.

All the established science regarding the neurochemical basis for emotions, pair bonding, and so on aside, we have exactly those pills. Thousands of clinically depressed persons around the world take them daily, in fact.

It seems that we must add "the entire field of medical psychiatry" to the list of things that do not exist in your universe.

If you are that unaware of the lack of efficacy of such pills, the total horror of side effects, the mass movement to use alternative (natural, created, god-made) treatments for all these disorders... you cannot possibly be that clueless. Please continue to try to address me on factual bases rather than demonizing my positions. One can pop a pill to get an erection, but not to create love or 1,000 other vital states of being.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-09-2015, 01:40 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
PS. If you missed my "sheer nonsense earlier" you are guilty of what you accused me of--not reading posts carefully.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-09-2015, 01:41 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(28-08-2015 06:02 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(28-08-2015 09:48 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  I'd rather be occasionally sanctimonious than vile, rude, self-serving and distasteful. I urge you to deal with the real Q, the one who is honestly debating you, not the parody you believe all people like me are.

so talk to a fictional character isn't of talking to some stranger who prefers to create a persona based off of a group entity? I'd rather not spend time trying to talk to a star trek character thank you.

And if you'd rather just say something without support than actually support a claim. you don't have any perception of honest to the claim. Maybe you could learn a thing about seeking the academic method or journalistic method of making claims and your issue wouldn't exist anymore.

I know atheists adore the academic method, but this is not a formal debate site. Moreover, there are neither academic claims proving the existence of god and miracles nor academic claims disproving the existence of god and miracles, so if you are a strict academic, you have no business at an atheist website IMHO.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-09-2015, 01:43 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(28-08-2015 11:15 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(28-08-2015 09:40 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Can I possibly pay you to attend my public debates about Christ, so that all assembled can better understand the depths of the depravity of those who oppose the gospel?

"the depths of the depravity of those who oppose the gospel" Seriously? Oppose the gospel? Rejection of myth is not opposition.

You are a self-satisfied, sanctimonious asshole. You have no capacity to understand anything but your unsupported, delusional beliefs.
You view others through a warped lens of fantasy and lack any true empathy. You do not deserve any respect here as you have flung
block-headed judgments and insults that demonstrate your inability to understand fact, reason, or critical thinking.

You accomplish nothing here except to display the damage that religious belief does to people.

Based on your posts, you offer little of substantive value other than one-liners to mock my views and those of your fellow atheists, too. I would call pot and kettle here. You are even unable to confine your remarks to those that people would use in polite society. I bet you cannot go one month without using curse words at TTA.

Can you do so?

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: