Stymied by syntax and lies in debate
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-10-2014, 02:21 AM
RE: Stymied by syntax and lies in debate
(23-10-2014 02:19 AM)Rahn127 Wrote:  You could say "there are hundreds of god's that you don't believe in. That makes you 99.9% atheist "

Post this.

[Image: meh.ro5802.jpg]

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like EvolutionKills's post
23-10-2014, 06:11 AM
RE: Stymied by syntax and lies in debate
(22-10-2014 09:06 PM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  So I signed up to the Worthy Christian Forums in an attempt to broaden the types of people I talk to about things. I had intended to hang out in the non-religion, non-science sections and bullshit about movies with a different, more uptight, group of people.

...

I'm after help for the conversation/ debate in this thread: http://www.worthychristianforums.com/top...it-wrong/.

No, for two reasons.

1) Worthy is a fucking hole. 90% of what you will learn there is how creepy the group-think of fundies is. There are a few good people there (AlphaParticle would be worth talking to), but there are plenty of others who are just terrible. Back when I used to post there about a year ago, there were two members who didn't believe in gravity so they could maintain geocentrism.

2) Even if I wanted to help, I can't without making a sock. I have a somewhat soft ban, where I'm not allowed to post. I never had any actual infractions. I basically upset a lot of people by what I said, but I didn't break any rules. One of the mods actually PMed me to say that polite, well-worded criticisms were far more damaging and dangerous than the overt and rude kind. They also got creative in how they reinterpreted their ToS, so they could say that I wasn't posting withing the site's purpose (despite me not actually breaking any rules). I was literally told that I was not allowed to discuss apologetics in the apologetics forum.

So, my sin was disagreeing too politely for them to actually do anything about it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like RobbyPants's post
23-10-2014, 06:48 AM
RE: Stymied by syntax and lies in debate
(23-10-2014 06:11 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  One of the mods actually PMed me to say that polite, well-worded criticisms were far more damaging and dangerous than the overt and rude kind.

Damaging to... their ability to maintain a ludicrous delusion?

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-10-2014, 06:50 AM
RE: Stymied by syntax and lies in debate
(23-10-2014 06:48 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(23-10-2014 06:11 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  One of the mods actually PMed me to say that polite, well-worded criticisms were far more damaging and dangerous than the overt and rude kind.

Damaging to... their ability to maintain a ludicrous delusion?

Presumably, yes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-10-2014, 07:00 AM
RE: Stymied by syntax and lies in debate
I'd just like to thank all the above respondents to the OP for saving me from going there.

[Image: falling.jpg]

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like DLJ's post
23-10-2014, 07:16 AM
RE: Stymied by syntax and lies in debate
(23-10-2014 06:11 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  
(22-10-2014 09:06 PM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  So I signed up to the Worthy Christian Forums in an attempt to broaden the types of people I talk to about things. I had intended to hang out in the non-religion, non-science sections and bullshit about movies with a different, more uptight, group of people.

...

I'm after help for the conversation/ debate in this thread: http://www.worthychristianforums.com/top...it-wrong/.

No, for two reasons.

1) Worthy is a fucking hole. 90% of what you will learn there is how creepy the group-think of fundies is. There are a few good people there (AlphaParticle would be worth talking to), but there are plenty of others who are just terrible. Back when I used to post there about a year ago, there were two members who didn't believe in gravity so they could maintain geocentrism.

2) Even if I wanted to help, I can't without making a sock. I have a somewhat soft ban, where I'm not allowed to post. I never had any actual infractions. I basically upset a lot of people by what I said, but I didn't break any rules. One of the mods actually PMed me to say that polite, well-worded criticisms were far more damaging and dangerous than the overt and rude kind. They also got creative in how they reinterpreted their ToS, so they could say that I wasn't posting withing the site's purpose (despite me not actually breaking any rules). I was literally told that I was not allowed to discuss apologetics in the apologetics forum.

So, my sin was disagreeing too politely for them to actually do anything about it.

I hear that this is a common problem; on those forums if you don't fit the atheist stereotype, they seek to shut you up and if you do, they shut you up as a matter of course.

I'd say that we in this forum tend to be a little insular, given the community and the nature of its existence it is perfectly understandable, but those forums take it to an almost Jonestownian degree.

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-10-2014, 07:34 AM
RE: Stymied by syntax and lies in debate
Damn if you do; damned if ya don't.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-10-2014, 09:02 AM
RE: Stymied by syntax and lies in debate
(22-10-2014 09:06 PM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  
Quote:According to General Relativity, "Time" will move slower the the closer and you are to Earth or a Body due to Gravity. Ok, Lets use a Gravitational Clock... Two Sand Filled Hour Glasses, which function by GRAVITY; apples to apples, as it were. We'll keep one and set it on the ground @ the base of Mount Everest then take the other to the top. We then turn them over @ the same "Time"....which one drains faster?
Technically the one at the base of the mountain, though you'd either need a huge 'hour glass' or inhuman levels of accuracy to detect this, and the effect has to do with velocity, not gravity. At least that's my understanding. Not that it would matter as others have said.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-10-2014, 02:05 PM
RE: Stymied by syntax and lies in debate
(23-10-2014 09:02 AM)OddGamer Wrote:  
(22-10-2014 09:06 PM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  
Technically the one at the base of the mountain, though you'd either need a huge 'hour glass' or inhuman levels of accuracy to detect this, and the effect has to do with velocity, not gravity. At least that's my understanding. Not that it would matter as others have said.

The effect is due to gravity and the same effect can be achieved through velocity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitation...e_dilation

Clocks that are closer to a source of gravity will operate slower.
A clock moving in an airplane at a high velocity will also operate slower.
But in the case of the hour glass clocks, we are talking about falling grains of sand.
The person on that forum site picked this way of inaccurately telling time because they knew that objects in a weaker gravitational field (high in the mountains) will fall slower than objects at sea level, under a higher gravitational field.

And as far as them saying time is a concept and concepts can't dilate.
Tell them, speed is a concept and this concept can move faster or slower.

Time is a measurement, a measurement of what is happening in the physical world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time

I hope I have all of that somewhat right. There are lots details when it comes to relativity but hopefully I've pointed you in a direction where you can learn more about it.

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-10-2014, 02:26 PM
RE: Stymied by syntax and lies in debate
(23-10-2014 02:05 PM)Rahn127 Wrote:  
(23-10-2014 09:02 AM)OddGamer Wrote:  Technically the one at the base of the mountain, though you'd either need a huge 'hour glass' or inhuman levels of accuracy to detect this, and the effect has to do with velocity, not gravity. At least that's my understanding. Not that it would matter as others have said.

The effect is due to gravity and the same effect can be achieved through velocity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitation...e_dilation

Clocks that are closer to a source of gravity will operate slower.
A clock moving in an airplane at a high velocity will also operate slower.
But in the case of the hour glass clocks, we are talking about falling grains of sand.
The person on that forum site picked this way of inaccurately telling time because they knew that objects in a weaker gravitational field (high in the mountains) will fall slower than objects at sea level, under a higher gravitational field.

And as far as them saying time is a concept and concepts can't dilate.
Tell them, speed is a concept and this concept can move faster or slower.

Time is a measurement, a measurement of what is happening in the physical world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time

I hope I have all of that somewhat right. There are lots details when it comes to relativity but hopefully I've pointed you in a direction where you can learn more about it.

Well; the gravitational effect is rather due to relative acceleration, not velocity (that's strictly special relativity only).

Relativity is demonstrable. And has been experimentally confirmed countless times.
(see: GPS, gravitational lensing, gravitational redshift, orbital motion, the aurora...)

If you've got two identical watches and some plane tickets you can test it yourself.

What I ask people who can't see the trees for their colon is why, if they're so brilliant, doesn't anyone take them seriously? It'd be the surest Nobel prize since its inception.

The answer is invariably "lol conspiracy", at which point they're accusing millions of people over centuries of instituting, disseminating, and perpetuating some incredibly vast and powerful conspiracy because... reasons.

It's not worth the waste of time to engage with.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: