Theists and BS assumptions about science
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-04-2016, 07:14 AM
RE: Theists and BS assumptions about science
(28-04-2016 06:44 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(28-04-2016 06:21 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Because people different than me are a constant curiosity. It's like looking at a puzzle, that I want to piece together, so that all the pieces fit. I may not have put it together, but I enjoy trying to put it together.

But it's not as if people here are encouraging of this project, they try and get you to avoid doing so at every turn, like they don't want it to be put together.

And to me that tendency is just another interesting puzzle piece of that mysterious whole I've been working on.

Yeah. I get it. You do *need* your one dimensional "puzzle" to tell yourself how YOU construct reality FOR yourself, (which has almost nothing to do with actual Reality). Your "different than me", (ie read *beneath my superior moral level* self-righteous, judgmental bullshit) is pretty much what all you people do.

You've been "working on" NOTHING. More BS to justify you wasting your time here, being judgmental.

This is a point I meant to emphasize again. I don't know many people who I would call "one dimensional" (if I know anyone who is actually so simple), but you continue to try and collapse atheists (as a whole group) into your one-dimensional straw man of who they are and why and what it means to them. Your simplistic bullshit, doesn't accurately portray the people you continue to insult by projecting such ignorance into your replies to them.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
28-04-2016, 07:50 AM
RE: Theists and BS assumptions about science
I finally finished my puzzle of TommyBoy!

[Image: i_see_stupid_people_puzzle.jpg?height=22...;width=225]

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2016, 07:53 AM
Theists and BS assumptions about science
(28-04-2016 07:11 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Just because I haven't answered in the way you want (or presume I will), does not mean I have given you "non-answers." I have been explicit and forthcoming.

As for me being honest, you seem to be conflating a couple of things. To you, "honesty" is me giving answers that are aligned with your presumptions, instead of actual honest answers.

Just because you respond to a question doesn't mean you honestly and openly answered that question. Politicians respond to a variety of questions, which they deliberately avoid answering honestly and openly.

The most clear example, is when I asked you why you are here, you clearly understood the question, in fact you ask me that question all the time. You know what it is I'm asking you, that when you tell me it's because you don't want to talk about these topics with religious people, that this is not a real answer, even though it's superficially true.

If I answered your questions as to why am I here, I could give you a similar response, that I'm here because I want to talk about certain topics with atheists, full stop.

While superficially true, it goes without saying that I deliberately avoided answering your question with my response.

Most of your responses don't fall into the open and honest camp, at least when it comes to me, they are usually just other ways of telling me to fuck off with my questions, get the fuck out of your face with that shit. Lol.

The last question I asked in my previous post you responded to went completely without an answer, as well. I'm sure you know that.

And as to the answers to questions about baseball players, scientists, and atheists.

Borrowing from your notebook, I'm just gonna answer, yes, to all 3 question.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2016, 07:54 AM
RE: Theists and BS assumptions about science
(28-04-2016 07:14 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(28-04-2016 06:44 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Yeah. I get it. You do *need* your one dimensional "puzzle" to tell yourself how YOU construct reality FOR yourself, (which has almost nothing to do with actual Reality). Your "different than me", (ie read *beneath my superior moral level* self-righteous, judgmental bullshit) is pretty much what all you people do.

You've been "working on" NOTHING. More BS to justify you wasting your time here, being judgmental.

This is a point I meant to emphasize again. I don't know many people who I would call "one dimensional" (if I know anyone who is actually so simple), but you continue to try and collapse atheists (as a whole group) into your one-dimensional straw man of who they are and why and what it means to them. Your simplistic bullshit, doesn't accurately portray the people you continue to insult by projecting such ignorance into your replies to them.
When you look at life through such a flawed and limited filter, this is what you are left with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes skyking's post
28-04-2016, 08:02 AM
RE: Theists and BS assumptions about science
(28-04-2016 07:53 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(28-04-2016 07:11 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Just because I haven't answered in the way you want (or presume I will), does not mean I have given you "non-answers." I have been explicit and forthcoming.

As for me being honest, you seem to be conflating a couple of things. To you, "honesty" is me giving answers that are aligned with your presumptions, instead of actual honest answers.

Just because you respond to a question doesn't mean you honestly and openly answered that question. Politicians respond to a variety of questions, which they deliberately avoid answering honestly and openly.

The most clear example, is when I asked you why you are here, you clearly understood the question, in fact you ask me that question all the time. You know what it is I'm asking you, that when you tell me it's because you don't want to talk about these topics with religious people, that this is not a real answer, even though it's superficially true.

If I answered your questions as to why am I here, I could give you a similar response, that I'm here because I want to talk about certain topics with atheists, full stop.

While superficially true, it goes without saying that I deliberately avoided answering your question with my response.

Most of your responses don't fall into the open and honest camp, at least when it comes to me, they are usually just other ways of telling me to fuck off with my questions, get the fuck out of your face with that shit. Lol.

The last question I asked in my previous post you responded to went completely without an answer, as well. I'm sure you know that.

And as to the answers to questions about baseball players, scientists, and atheists.

Borrowing from your notebook, I'm just gonna answer, yes, to all 3 question.

"Just because you respond to a question doesn't mean you honestly and openly answered that question. Politicians respond to a variety of questions, which they deliberately avoid answering honestly and openly.

The most clear example, is when I asked you why you are here, you clearly understood the question, in fact you ask me that question all the time. You know what it is I'm asking you, that when you tell me it's because you don't want to talk about these topics with religious people, that this is not a real answer, even though it's superficially true. "


It isn't an answer you like, but it is the answer to your question.

Unless you know me better than I do? Go on...tell me why I am here.

"If I answered your questions as to why am I here, I could give you a similar response, that I'm here because I want to talk about certain topics with atheists, full stop. "

Except you don't really talk about certain topics, you spend your time promoting your theistic bullshit on an atheist forum. Even more importantly, you do so in a dishonest manner. If you're here to discuss topics, then stop trying to construct "human puzzles." But you won't or can't do that because it means actually reading responses and engaging with the substance of what someone says. And Gasp admitting if you're wrong about something. Otherwise, you are preaching. And preaching =/= talking or discussing.

"While superficially true, it goes without saying that I deliberately avoided answering your question with my response. "

You always do. Drinking Beverage What's new?

"Most of your responses don't fall into the open and honest camp, at least when it comes to me, they are usually just other ways of telling me to fuck off with my questions, get the fuck out of your face with that shit. Lol. "

It's funny that you take a common criticism of yourself, and start applying it to others, no?

"The last question I asked in my previous post you responded to went completely without an answer, as well. I'm sure you know that."

You mean the question I answered by posting comments that address that very question in other posts I have already made on this very thread?

Here, I'll post the answers again, try to keep up:
That isn't a description of atheists, that is a description of a human. YOU injecting what YOU think it means when someone describes themselves as an atheist, is not dependent upon YOUR presumptions. Some mean "lacks a belief in a god" and literally ascribe nothing else to it, while still readily identifying as an atheist. For instance, that is all I mean.


Once again, no. YOU have no idea what they believe or don't believe or how significant the label "atheist" is to them. YOU assume it has importance and assign it for them, but that is YOUR bullshit.

Just because YOU assign importance to your theistic label to your life, does NOT mean anyone else does. And it sure as hell doesn't mean that atheists do. Some atheists might. Some might not. But you assert that anyone using the title "atheist" as a descriptor or who attends what you consider to be gatherings of "atheists," must mean that the title has some special significance to them. Which is an unfounded bullshit assertion.


If what you want is a fresh response, here you go:
I share many agreements with some atheists, especially those who are also scientists or those who were formerly theist or those from the Southern US. As I have said before (in this very thread in fact), there are also many atheists with whom I do not share many commonalities, and many theists with whom I do. It's funny how people are more complex than you make them out to be Drinking Beverage


"And as to the answers to questions about baseball players, scientists, and atheists.

Borrowing from your notebook, I'm just gonna answer, yes, to all 3 question."


Then you are even more delusional than one might imagine. Once again, you turn people into one-dimensional constructs of your own bias and presumptions (straw men).


But I'll give you an opportunity to live out what must be a wet dream come to life for you. Tell me...about me. Go on. Tell me more about myself than I know. I'll wait, it's very exciting for me to finally find out who I am!

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
28-04-2016, 09:21 AM
Theists and BS assumptions about science
(28-04-2016 08:02 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Just because YOU assign importance to your theistic label to your life, does NOT mean anyone else does. And it sure as hell doesn't mean that atheists do. Some atheists might. Some might not. But you assert that anyone using the title "atheist" as a descriptor or who attends what you consider to be gatherings of "atheists," must mean that the title has some special significance to them. Which is an unfounded bullshit assertion. [/b]

I don't assign importance to my theism, or being brown, gay, etc.... As if this importance is a matter of my own choosing, which it's not. All these aspects are just tied into who I am. How I observe the world around me, how I see my place in it, those that I more easily identify with, etc, those that I see more like myself than others, etc.

People identities are complex, multidimensional, they can't be reduced to you being just an atheist, or me being just a Christian. But they are aspects of our identity, whether we want them to be or not. Nor does it mean that you identify best with those that share just one aspect of your identify. It's likely easier for me to identify more so with a brown Muslim, than white bible belt Christians. But this doesn't mean that these aspects are not important parts of who we are, of our sense of self, our identities. Nor does it mean that people are not complex, and multi-dimensional.

You chose to be a part of an Internet community of non-believers, like yourself? Why? If being a non-believer is not important to you?

Quote:Except you don't really talk about certain topics, you spend your time promoting your theistic bullshit on an atheist forum.

I have a very narrow set of topics I'm interested in, which I almost exclusively reserve myself to.

It's an objective fact that I am here to talk with atheists.

All of which you added whether true or not doesn't negate this. You're just expressing why you think I want to talk with atheists.

But my response to why I'm here, wouldn't be much different than if I were to respond that I'm here because I feel like it, undoubtedly true, but not really an answer to your question.

The reason why you wouldn't be satisfied with such an answer, wouldn't be because it's not the answer you wanted, but because I deliberately avoided giving you an honest response. More so for the sake of deflecting your question than giving you an answer.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2016, 10:00 AM (This post was last modified: 28-04-2016 10:11 AM by TheBeardedDude.)
RE: Theists and BS assumptions about science
(28-04-2016 09:21 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(28-04-2016 08:02 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Just because YOU assign importance to your theistic label to your life, does NOT mean anyone else does. And it sure as hell doesn't mean that atheists do. Some atheists might. Some might not. But you assert that anyone using the title "atheist" as a descriptor or who attends what you consider to be gatherings of "atheists," must mean that the title has some special significance to them. Which is an unfounded bullshit assertion. [/b]

I don't assign importance to my theism, or being brown, gay, etc.... As if this importance is a matter of my own choosing, which it's not. All these aspects are just tied into who I am. How I observe the world around me, how I see my place in it, those that I more easily identify with, etc, those that I see more like myself than others, etc.

People identities are complex, multidimensional, they can't be reduced to you being just an atheist, or me being just a Christian. But they are aspects of our identity, whether we want them to be or not. Nor does it mean that you identify best with those that share just one aspect of your identify. It's likely easier for me to identify more so with a brown Muslim, than white bible belt Christians. But this doesn't mean that these aspects are not important parts of who we are, of our sense of self, our identities. Nor does it mean that people are not complex, and multi-dimensional.

You chose to be a part of an Internet community of non-believers, like yourself? Why? If being a non-believer is not important to you?

Quote:Except you don't really talk about certain topics, you spend your time promoting your theistic bullshit on an atheist forum.

I have a very narrow set of topics I'm interested in, which I almost exclusively reserve myself to.

It's an objective fact that I am here to talk with atheists.

All of which you added whether true or not doesn't negate this. You're just expressing why you think I want to talk with atheists.

But my response to why I'm here, wouldn't be much different than if I were to respond that I'm here because I feel like it, undoubtedly true, but not really an answer to your question.

The reason why you wouldn't be satisfied with such an answer, wouldn't be because it's not the answer you wanted, but because I deliberately avoided giving you an honest response. More so for the sake of deflecting your question than giving you an answer.

"I don't assign importance to my theism, or being brown, gay, etc.... As if this importance is a matter of my own choosing, which it's not. "

So, let me get this straight. You don't assign importance to your theism, but atheists do assign importance to their atheism? You're special, huh?

"People identities are complex, multidimensional, they can't be reduced to you being just an atheist, or me being just a Christian. "

Yet, you make these unidimensional assumptions about atheists based on the knowledge that they are an atheist.

For instance, you believe you can know a person by knowing one thing about them:
"Borrowing from your notebook, I'm just gonna answer, yes, to all 3 question."

"But they are aspects of our identity, whether we want them to be or not. "

Explain how NOT being something, is a description of me. For example, how does NOT being a coral provide a meaningful description of me as a member of the human species?

And once again, just because YOUR theism is tied to your identity, does not mean that "atheism" is tied to the identity of someone who labels themselves as an atheist. This is an assumption you make by extrapolating YOUR life into other people's, and it is not valid.

"Nor does it mean that you identify best with those that share just one aspect of your identify. "

Almost as if trying to reduce an entire group down to a broad and unidimensional generalization, is erroneous, huh? Especially when that group only shares a common LACK of belief and literally no other defining characteristic.

"It's likely easier for me to identify more so with a brown Muslim, than white bible belt Christians."

Once again, this is an assumption YOU make. And it is based on (especially in this case) a LACK of experience and knowledge.

"But this doesn't mean that these aspects are not important parts of who we are, of our sense of self, our identities. Nor does it mean that people are not complex, and multi-dimensional. "

But YOU are the one that keeps trying to reduce people into a single dimension.

"You chose to be a part of an Internet community of non-believers, like yourself? Why? If being a non-believer is not important to you? "

I've already answered this question. Conversations on certain topics (like politics, or science, or religion) with theists, is not something I want out of this forum. I would (and have) join religious forums for that if I wanted. This forum is one I joined to converse with the non-religious.

ONCE AGAIN, my atheism only defines what I lack. It does NOT define who I am or what I believe or why. Nor does it inform my identity. My beliefs and opinions and culture and family, etc, define my identity. Your desire to define my identity from the singular label of "atheist" is your presumption about me. Just because YOU attempt to define me because I am an atheist, doesn't mean my atheist label defines me.

I am a non-baseball player <- tells you literally nothing about me.
I do not believe in a god <- tells you literally nothing about me

And when I say "literally nothing about me," I mean that these words define what I DON'T do or believe. They do NOT tell you what I do believe or do or why. Period. But you continue to presume you know who atheists are and why, simply based on the label "atheist."

"I have a very narrow set of topics I'm interested in, which I almost exclusively reserve myself to. "

And still don't discuss. You preach your opinion, even in the face of being shown when you are demonstrably wrong/incorrect.

"It's an objective fact that I am here to talk with atheists."

It is a demonstrable fact that you do not engage honestly.

"All of which you added whether true or not doesn't negate this. You're just expressing why you think I want to talk with atheists. "

I (and others) list observations (with excerpts from you) about your communications to describe the manner in which you engage. You continue to assert that you are not a preaching theist on this forum, but you are no different than other theists who've employed the same bullshit under the same guise. As you admit, your theism is an integral part of who you are, do you seriously believe that you aren't discussing your religious bullshit when you promote your ignorant opinions and presumptions? Are you the one person on this Earth free of their own personal biases?

"But my response to why I'm here, wouldn't be much different than if I were to respond that I'm here because I feel like it, undoubtedly true, but not really an answer to your question. "

"Because you feel like it" would be a more honest answer than the bullshit you've spewed before. Every theist I have interacted with on this forum (or any other) have been there for the exact same reason. "Because you feel like" promoting your religion to atheists, and try to do so indirectly. That is an easy observation to make, but you deny it. Hence, the label assigned to you of being blatantly dishonest.

"The reason why you wouldn't be satisfied with such an answer, wouldn't be because it's not the answer you wanted, but because I deliberately avoided giving you an honest response. More so for the sake of deflecting your question than giving you an answer."

You give bullshit responses, not answers.



I am still waiting on you to tell me who I am though. I am so very excited to finally learn who I am from you.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
28-04-2016, 12:21 PM
RE: Theists and BS assumptions about science
Is tommyboy ever going to come back and tell me who I am? I've been thinking I already knew who I was for the last 29 years or so, I need clarification from the clairvoyant!

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
29-04-2016, 04:15 PM
RE: Theists and BS assumptions about science
(26-04-2016 08:52 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  In this post, a theist (ol' TommyBoy) made an asinine statement about science that is pretty widely echoed by theists in general.

The explicit statements from genericTheist#1,964,890,234:
"I think people inclined to be atheists are drawn to study the sciences. That there's perhaps some parallel here between why folks on the autistic spectrum are drawn to these fields, and atheists in general.

It's not about reason, science, of evidence per se, but one's chosen identify, how he wants to see himself, and be recognized by others as. And I think this makes it bit more complicated, than any overtly simplistic explanations."



My reply:

Bull and shit. More assertion on your part, with absolutely no reason to believe it other than your desire to.

Why are more well educated people more likely to be atheist (or at the very least, non-religious or less religious)? The straightforward and obvious answer is that reality has a bias towards rational and logical conclusions, neither of which describes religion. But you assert that it has to do with "one's chosen identity," implying that scientists assign themselves the label of atheist so as to feel and be seen as included in the scientific community. Which is a complete load of bullshit. Why? Here, let me list the reasons:
1) it assumes that there is a religious test of some sort for scientists. There isn't. Not at the BA/BS level, or the MS/MA, or MD/PhD.
2) it assumes science cares about religion in the first place. This ignorance indicates you've never taken a science course taught by a scientist.
3) it implies that "atheism" and science are intrinsically linked such that being included as a scientist requires one be less religious or non-religious or an atheist/agnostic. Complete and utter bullshit. While it is true that a larger proportion of the population of scientists are atheist/non-religious than the general population, this does not indicate anything about the field of science as a whole with regard to why those people are atheist/non-religious. More educated tends to correlate with less religious, and scientists are among the most well educated. Fin



You keep injecting your personal bias into these asinine assumptions. You take simple observations and add in complex bullshit and conspiracy.





The point of this thread is to highlight that theists extrapolate complex conspiracies from simple observations, with exactly 0 evidence to support it. Drinking Beverage

Oh boy, that's a rationalization if I've ever heard one! What difference does it make. Theism is still false.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: