Recovery from atheist abuse
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-03-2017, 07:02 AM (This post was last modified: 03-03-2017 07:07 AM by Robvalue.)
RE: Recovery from atheist abuse
(03-03-2017 06:53 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  
(03-03-2017 06:45 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  Agreed, some things can't be backed because they contradict facts. But, technically speaking, we can't be certain what those facts are. It's always possible our current models are wrong somehow. Maybe someone has something crucial which would alter how we look at things.

Technically speaking we can't be certain that our civilization isn't controlled by unicorns as it is always possible that everything we see and experience is illusion made by them to hide their dominion over us.

I find such technicalities to be meaningless. Someone don't like the facts? Tough shit.

Quote:Of course, for subjects like creationism, the probability of this seems to be negligible. The fact that no one has produced anything vaguely representing a case in 2,000 years means that there probably is nothing to present. But I'm always willing to hear someone out, within reason, if they think they have something new. If it turns out to be the same old shit, then there's no need to continue the discussion of course.

But realistically speaking, I agree, creationism deserves to be mocked. I don't consider that I'm validating it by being willing to consider "new evidence", I just see it as part of being open minded.

Entertaining the absurd ideas does not make to my definition of open-mindedness. Some people just have problem with accepting facts and in my opinion that does not make them worth listening for the sake of above mentioned open-mindedness.

Fair enough.

Of course, if someone just doesn't like the facts as we see them, then that is tough shit. They need to show why those facts are wrong. The probability of some dildo presenting this ground-breaking evidence on an atheist forum, rather than actually submitting it for scientific scrutiny in order to receive amazing prestige, is of course negligible.

If I was Dawkins, I would have to agree that I wouldn't just book a debate with a creationist. I'd want to know what evidence they have, that is different to every other creationist nonsense that has been presented. If they don't have anything new for me to consider, then no debate. So I am with him there. The same goes for anyone disputing concrete science, or backing seemingly ludicrous positions. I wouldn't believe they're going to present this amazing stuff this during the debate, if they won't let me see it beforehand.

I'm sure I'd have a secretary that would do all this for me and go through all my mail, so I didn't even have to see most of the shit, once I was that famous Big Grin

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-03-2017, 07:13 AM
RE: Recovery from atheist abuse
(03-03-2017 07:02 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  
(03-03-2017 06:53 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  Technically speaking we can't be certain that our civilization isn't controlled by unicorns as it is always possible that everything we see and experience is illusion made by them to hide their dominion over us.

I find such technicalities to be meaningless. Someone don't like the facts? Tough shit.


Entertaining the absurd ideas does not make to my definition of open-mindedness. Some people just have problem with accepting facts and in my opinion that does not make them worth listening for the sake of above mentioned open-mindedness.

Fair enough.

Of course, if someone just doesn't like the facts as we see them, then that is tough shit. They need to show why those facts are wrong. The probability of some dildo presenting this ground-breaking evidence on an atheist forum, rather than actually submitting it for scientific scrutiny in order to receive amazing prestige, is of course negligible.

In some cases it isn't even negligible - Shoah happened, Earth isn't flat.

Quote:If I was Dawkins, I would have to agree that I wouldn't just book a debate with a creationist. I'd want to know what evidence they have, that is different to every other creationist nonsense that has been presented. If they don't have anything new for me to consider, then no debate. So I am with him there. The same goes for anyone disputing concrete science, or backing seemingly ludicrous positions. I wouldn't believe they're going to present this amazing stuff this during the debate, if they won't let me see it beforehand.

I'm sure I'd have a secretary that would do all this for me and go through all my mail, so I didn't even have to see most of the shit, once I was that famous Big Grin

Don't creationism hinge on assumption that god is eternal/can come from nothing? If so there is nothing to debate cause if it is possible for god then it is possible for universe.

Real problem I see with audience thinking that refusal to debate means crank is right, but on the other hand in the age of information ignorance is a choice, so if audience is willing to be ignorant then it can go fuck itself.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Szuchow's post
03-03-2017, 07:16 AM
RE: Recovery from atheist abuse
Sure, if that's all someone is going to present, an unfounded assumption, then there is nothing to debate. That's why I'd need to see something new.

Yeah, dickweeds are always going to see refusal as a concession. But really, it's just a matter of prioritizing time. I have loads of time and not many people presenting things to me, so it's easy for me to read however many posts on a forum. But Dawkins will have probably thousands of people all wanting his attention, and he simply won't have the time to debate them all. So if they can't produce a reason why this debate will be any different to the last time the subject was debated, then there's no reason for him to participate.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-03-2017, 07:24 AM
RE: Recovery from atheist abuse
(03-03-2017 07:16 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  Sure, if that's all someone is going to present, an unfounded assumption, then there is nothing to debate. That's why I'd need to see something new.

Yeah, dickweeds are always going to see refusal as a concession. But really, it's just a matter of prioritizing time. I have loads of time and not many people presenting things to me, so it's easy for me to read however many posts on a forum. But Dawkins will have probably thousands of people all wanting his attention, and he simply won't have the time to debate them all. So if they can't produce a reason why this debate will be any different to the last time the subject was debated, then there's no reason for him to participate.

I think that Dawkins stance (assuming that I remember it correctly) isn't about not having time, it's about some things not being worthy of dispute. There is no sense in engaging with someone who knows shit and whose only chance of having someone to discuss is to cry about fairness.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Szuchow's post
03-03-2017, 07:28 AM
RE: Recovery from atheist abuse
Oh right, well that's fair enough too.

Indeed, who gives a shit about what people think is fair, when it comes to science? No one is stopping them believing whatever crap they want. We're just demanding that the science we teach is science, and not the ramblings of any random person.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-03-2017, 07:35 AM
RE: Recovery from atheist abuse
(03-03-2017 07:28 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  Oh right, well that's fair enough too.

Indeed, who gives a shit about what people think is fair, when it comes to science? No one is stopping them believing whatever crap they want. We're just demanding that the science we teach is science, and not the ramblings of any random person.

Exactly.

Still, while I see reason for refusing the dispute and merit in them I'm kinda torn. Sure, ignorance in this age is choice and discussing with some crank means giving him publicity, but there always are some who aren't sure who may be worth reaching.

In the end I side more with refusal option. Sometimes there is nothing to debate and doing it means only 5 minutes of fame for fools.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Szuchow's post
03-03-2017, 07:38 AM
RE: Recovery from atheist abuse
(01-03-2017 11:57 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  I don't block people, because I never shy away from criticism. Look in your user CP options (top left, right under your forum account name), there you should find what you need to hide from uncomfortable truth. Drinking Beverage
I block a very few people (probably 1 or 2 a year) because they consistently post such incomprehensible word salad or are so deeply trollish or intellectually dishonest that filtering out their content causes me to lose zero context in a conversational thread.

And I say "consistently" because the OP would have qualified based on a sample of one, but does not based on subsequent posts. I actually have a pretty low bar concerning who I'll engage with. The OP is clearly young and agnst-y and makes it all about himself, but take me at 19 (if there had even been an Internet back then), subtract good grammar and add weed, and you've got the OP.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-03-2017, 07:46 AM
RE: Recovery from atheist abuse
(02-03-2017 05:47 AM)Geekgroupie Wrote:  would you like to hear me recite blasphemy? That's what the witch hunting Atheists have me do. JC can get a rim job by satan while sucking angel cock and the holy ghost can spew his cum all over the orgy.

there. is that good enough?
This is a classic case of "wherever you go, there you are". You are blaming the natural consequences of your own rigid and self-centered thinking on atheism.

When I came into this forum I experienced no witch hunts or shibboleths that I had to pass. I daresay that's very representative of others in this conversation as well. I've found this a welcoming place.

It's a fine line between being frank and being a dick, and you can't find that line. The solution is not reconversion, but just growing up. We'll still be here when you're done.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like mordant's post
03-03-2017, 08:14 AM
RE: Recovery from atheist abuse
(03-03-2017 07:35 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  
(03-03-2017 07:28 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  Oh right, well that's fair enough too.

Indeed, who gives a shit about what people think is fair, when it comes to science? No one is stopping them believing whatever crap they want. We're just demanding that the science we teach is science, and not the ramblings of any random person.

Exactly.

Still, while I see reason for refusing the dispute and merit in them I'm kinda torn. Sure, ignorance in this age is choice and discussing with some crank means giving him publicity, but there always are some who aren't sure who may be worth reaching.

In the end I side more with refusal option. Sometimes there is nothing to debate and doing it means only 5 minutes of fame for fools.

Yeah, I guess the point is that there needs to be a subject with some controversy for it to be worth having a formal debate. There is no controversy over creationism. So if someone has something amazing and new to present to the scientific community, then they should just present it. No need to waste Dawkin's time with it.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-03-2017, 08:20 AM
RE: Recovery from atheist abuse
(03-03-2017 08:14 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  
(03-03-2017 07:35 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  Exactly.

Still, while I see reason for refusing the dispute and merit in them I'm kinda torn. Sure, ignorance in this age is choice and discussing with some crank means giving him publicity, but there always are some who aren't sure who may be worth reaching.

In the end I side more with refusal option. Sometimes there is nothing to debate and doing it means only 5 minutes of fame for fools.

Yeah, I guess the point is that there needs to be a subject with some controversy for it to be worth having a formal debate. There is no controversy over creationism. So if someone has something amazing and new to present to the scientific community, then they should just present it. No need to waste Dawkin's time with it.

I think that your post would look better without last sentence.

I used Dawkins only as example of stance, cause I remember (correctly I hope) that he refuse to debate some people.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: