Poll: Do you believe the atheist sex survey is legitimate, or a ploy?
it's legit
yea, this is a scheme
[Show Results]
 
Over ten thousand atheists surveyed???
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-05-2011, 08:11 PM
RE: Over ten thousand atheists surveyed???
Fine .I accept your authority on the subject. In fact, I hereby appoint you "King of all things useless and trivial". That and a token will get you a ride on the subway. I suggest you take the 7 so you can go see the Mets.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-05-2011, 08:52 PM
RE: Over ten thousand atheists surveyed???
Mets lost today...

Mets lost yesterday...

I... I had money on the Phillies too.

Quite... quite a team you got there in New York.

"Ain't got no last words to say, yellow streak right up my spine. The gun in my mouth was real and the taste blew my mind."

"We see you cry. We turn your head. Then we slap your face. We see you try. We see you fail. Some things never change."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-05-2011, 07:23 AM
RE: Over ten thousand atheists surveyed???
You ain't seen nothing yet. Wait until they dump Reyes and Beltran. I made a bet with a friend in March on the over/under for the Mets total wins this season. We set it at 75 and I took the under. I'm fairly confident I'm winning that bet. Things are going to have to get worse before they get better. Dickey is now out, who knows for how long. Santana probably won't pitch this year, and Jason Bay is to hitting what Trainwreck is to social graces.

Getting back on track, one other point I want to make here: aside from my profound disappointment no one, and really you Buddy, commented on the "faking it" for a sex survey, the other thing that bothered me about this thread is no one has yet made the obvious counter (or if they did then I missed it). The idea that this survey was faked as a "recruiting" technique is about as stupid a position as I've seen on this forum. People who believe in god are not going to now not believe in god to improve their sex lives. If they believe in him and that belief makes them hung up on sex, then that's what they believe. They will have to come to a position on god and atheism independent of the benefits for this to work. I have no idea if this study is accurate or not. I know just enough about studies to know they are easy to manipulate or honestly screw up and get an erroneous conclusion. But, the idea if was faked to recruit theists away from theism? Really?

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-05-2011, 01:33 PM
RE: Over ten thousand atheists surveyed???
(28-05-2011 07:23 AM)BnW Wrote:  Getting back on track, one other point I want to make here: aside from my profound disappointment no one, and really you Buddy, commented on the "faking it" for a sex survey, the other thing that bothered me about this thread is no one has yet made the obvious counter (or if they did then I missed it). The idea that this survey was faked as a "recruiting" technique is about as stupid a position as I've seen on this forum. People who believe in god are not going to now not believe in god to improve their sex lives. If they believe in him and that belief makes them hung up on sex, then that's what they believe. They will have to come to a position on god and atheism independent of the benefits for this to work. I have no idea if this study is accurate or not. I know just enough about studies to know they are easy to manipulate or honestly screw up and get an erroneous conclusion. But, the idea if was faked to recruit theists away from theism? Really?


(21-05-2011 06:54 AM)UnderTheMicroscope Wrote:  
(20-05-2011 09:50 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  
(19-05-2011 11:24 AM)bird Wrote:  Call me ignorant, but what would be the purpose of a survey like this?

To encourage people to become atheists, because the sex is better.

You're retarded.

Does that about cover it?

Hey brother christian, with your high and mighty errand, your actions speak so loud, I can't hear a word you're saying.

"This machine kills fascists..."

"Well this machine kills commies!"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-05-2011, 02:49 PM
RE: Over ten thousand atheists surveyed???
(28-05-2011 01:33 PM)UnderTheMicroscope Wrote:  
(28-05-2011 07:23 AM)BnW Wrote:  Getting back on track, one other point I want to make here: aside from my profound disappointment no one, and really you Buddy, commented on the "faking it" for a sex survey, the other thing that bothered me about this thread is no one has yet made the obvious counter (or if they did then I missed it). The idea that this survey was faked as a "recruiting" technique is about as stupid a position as I've seen on this forum. People who believe in god are not going to now not believe in god to improve their sex lives. If they believe in him and that belief makes them hung up on sex, then that's what they believe. They will have to come to a position on god and atheism independent of the benefits for this to work. I have no idea if this study is accurate or not. I know just enough about studies to know they are easy to manipulate or honestly screw up and get an erroneous conclusion. But, the idea if was faked to recruit theists away from theism? Really?


(21-05-2011 06:54 AM)UnderTheMicroscope Wrote:  
(20-05-2011 09:50 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  
(19-05-2011 11:24 AM)bird Wrote:  Call me ignorant, but what would be the purpose of a survey like this?

To encourage people to become atheists, because the sex is better.

You're retarded.

Does that about cover it?

I'd say so.

I want to rip off your superstitions and make passionate sense to you
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-05-2011, 03:56 PM
RE: Over ten thousand atheists surveyed???
Yes, I guess it does.

My bad.

Carry on.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-06-2011, 12:54 PM (This post was last modified: 03-06-2011 12:35 PM by TrainWreck.)
RE: Over ten thousand atheists surveyed???
(26-05-2011 09:41 PM)Stark Raving Wrote:  All of what you said comes down to one simple point Trainwreck. You say I, as well as my fellow atheists are not qualified to judge your classification system. That it is complex and beyond my understanding. Basically, you are saying I just don't get it.
I only said, if I did say, "you are not qualified;" only because there is no qualification standard - you are expected to understand classification systems, because there is no tutorial, except for the one I am building. And I am going beyond that, I am saying that most atheists do not understand classification, as well as should be expected, yet it is a skill that we all use in our communications, and it is very relative to critical thinking, as library classification is supposed to present knowledge in a logical ordering - meaning you should be able to understand it. The problem is obvious - nobody understands the logic, not even librarians; otherwise there would be essays and articles written about how accurate Dewey is, or isn't.

Yeah, I definitely would not claim that my system is complex beyond average intelligence - I would however claim that the DDC and LCC are complex beyond average intelligence, otherwise the subject listing would be apart of our reference repertoire. The purpose of my system is to present knowledge in the simplest systematics, it just happens to be that it involves learning something that was neglected - the most significant aspects of reality as perceived by people, which makes up the collation order of my system.

Consider that statement - wouldn't you expect Christians and Muslims to have a different perception of the significant aspects of reality then that of the atheists? Wouldn't you expect atheists to have a more accurate presentation of the most significant aspects of reality then the theists?

(26-05-2011 09:41 PM)Stark Raving Wrote:  . . . why the heck would you ever expect me to support it???? First you say we should be championing your system, then you tell us we can't judge it.
Did I say you cannot judge it, or did I say you have demonstrated that you cannot judge it because of your lack of descriptive analysis? I expect atheists to support it because atheists should be searching for technology that will present a better representation of scientific ordering of knowledge, which would basically be a map of reasoning, and any opposition to the 100 year-old Dewey and LCC is a first step in understanding that it is possible to devise a "new" classification system.

(26-05-2011 09:41 PM)Stark Raving Wrote:  If your system was as good as you say, we COULD understand it. And even if we couldn't, asking us to support it is pretty much the worst logic I've ever heard.
No, . . . I want to put the least amount of effort in to promoting it, with the greatest amount of profit in return - that is the logic you are neglecting to consider. If you were to do the research you might be surprised to learn that there is no detailed descriptions of the logic of the DDC and LCC, which is what you are asking me to describe about the system I have devised, and I have described it repeatedly as being scientific. If a thinking atheist were to devise a classification system of all of knowledge, wouldn't you expect it to be in a scientific ordering - why don't you give it a try?

The system I have devised is dedicated to a scientific ordering of subjects. My presentation is faulty, and that is aggravated by the implication that we are not accustomed to understanding and analyzing such broad classification systems of all of knowledge. We only know to go find the call number, and unwittingly do not care what the subject is, or what subjects are around it, which would provide the person with a better understanding of the subject for critical thinking.

(26-05-2011 09:41 PM)Stark Raving Wrote:  You are correct when you say I am not in a position to fully understand classification. For that very reason, for me to support it, I need you, or someone willing to vouch for you, that can SHOW ME WHY THEY ARE QUALIFIED TO ASSES THIS SYSTEM. Otherwise, you should neither expect, nor ask for, my support.
It will probably be the Christians who will be in the positions that will meet your expectation of qualified to approve of its validity, because there is no quality control regulations; and it will be the Christians who will impose it on their communities, because atheists are unwittingly unconcerned. What I am saying is that this is a tremendous opportunity for atheists to take advantage - this is the technology that dismantles theism. Atheists should be searching for the most accurate classification system, because classification is the part of ontology that is significant to reasoning the existence of a supernatural. Further more, classification would seemingly be very similar to the Darwin ideas of understanding the order of things.
(25-05-2011 04:58 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  
(24-05-2011 11:42 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  I do not listen to creationists/intelligent designers talk about biology because the information they present is false.
Would you consider their opinion about anything to be valid, and worth listening to?I wouldn't.
(25-05-2011 05:49 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Yet they have devised a system that explains it, so by your reasoning they are qualified.
They are qualified experts of the system they have rendered, but they have opposition, and I am qualified to decide which system is more practical, or valid.

When it comes to classification there is no precedent by which to judge ontological accuracy, and atheists should be skeptical of the systems devised in the era of high Victorian religious social control, and any system offered in opposition to them, especially a system devised by an atheist, should be considered at least a starting point for understanding classification with a modernist perspective with the highly acclaimed critical analysis skills acquired by atheists.

Find a description of the Dewey Decimal System that you would use to teach someone what it is? It should be a description of the logic used in the ordering of the subjects - looking up the title in the card catalog and then go finding the call number, is not a description of the logic.

Find a description of the Library of Congress system that you would use to teach someone what it is, and how it benefits them, as compared to the US Congress workers?

The description of the Secular Library Classification system is that it is scientific - it is based on the convenient ordering of the most significant aspects of reality perceived by human beings: Communication, (Natural) Systems, Technology, Individuals, Organizations, Abstraction, and (Time) Change. it will benefit people, because it places subjects in an order that is accurate of a scientific logic.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-06-2011, 02:59 PM
RE: Over ten thousand atheists surveyed???
(28-05-2011 07:23 AM)BnW Wrote:  The idea that this survey was faked as a "recruiting" technique is about as stupid a position as I've seen on this forum. People who believe in god are not going to now not believe in god to improve their sex lives. If they believe in him and that belief makes them hung up on sex, then that's what they believe. They will have to come to a position on god and atheism independent of the benefits for this to work.
Very good reasoning for the precept of strong theists, but what about the considerable amount of people who are less religious (hypocrites, immoral), who claim belief in god just to go along with the crowd because they are not familiar with atheist organization?

I would submit that such survey results may entice them to consider trying an atheist community. The problem being atheist communities are poorly organized to pick up the ball from there.

(28-05-2011 07:23 AM)BnW Wrote:  I have no idea if this study is accurate or not. I know just enough about studies to know they are easy to manipulate or honestly screw up and get an erroneous conclusion. But, the idea if was faked to recruit theists away from theism? Really?
Yeah, really, because as the survey revealed it only surveyed atheists - who are the only ones capable of noticing a difference.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: