Jealous, that fucker has a whole bunch of the good kittens.
(grey cat master race)

I always wondered what the leader would look like.

(January 18, 2017 at 8:57 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote:Where did "kill them all and let god sort it out" come from?

A.  Arnaud Amalric, Abbot of Citeaux, at the massacre of Beziers....  you know, one of those non-crimes that catholic fucktards think was inspired by atheists!

I was going to use "Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius." myself, but decided to keep it in reserve. Amauric probably didn't say those exact words, but they do reveal his sentiments during the sack of Beziers that it was better to let a hundred innocents die horribly than have one "guilty" person go free.

And it also cuts right to the heart of christian behaviour to those who think differently. For a religion with pretensions of universalism, it sure is quick to whip out the thumbscrews.

---

(January 18, 2017 at 9:01 pm)Simon Moon Wrote:

(January 18, 2017 at 8:19 pm)Pulse Wrote: Anyway, back to my original post, why do so many of you who are atheists, disbelieve R. Dawkins who said good and evil 

don't even exist, are you dissenting from this "great" atheist thinker??? Why is killing wrong for an atheist in view of the 

teaching of the "greatest apostle of Atheism" in our time??? If you just say "Good and evil are constructs in our minds we choose to follow, even though they don't objectively

exist"; isn't that living a delusion???

I don't care what Dawkins says about atheism. I agree with some things he says, and not with others.

There is no such thing as an 'atheist apostle'. And certainly, Dawkins would not be it, if there were such a thing.

People act in 'good' and/or 'evil' ways, but evil or good do not exist as a force. If people did not exist, evil and good would not exist.



We all live in the same physical universe, subject to the same physical laws, with the same (more or less) physical bodies.

My well being is extremely important to me. I prefer: life over death, health over disease, freedom over slavery, comfort over torture, etc.

From that, I can easily extrapolate that the vast majority of my fellow humans want the same for their own lives.

Since I don't want to live in a society were my well being is threatened or compromised, I will not threaten of compromise other's well being. And I want laws in place that will assist in this outcome.

There, the basis for a moral system, no gods required.

The worst of it is, is that Pulse isn't even giving us what Dawkins says. He's quote mining Dawkins in a lying attempt to make it look like Dawkins is saying something other than he actually is. Pulse is making a strawman because he cannot refute the actual arguments yet is too intellectually bankrupt and immoral to admit that.

Tazzycorn, you seem to be STRETCHING the truth somewhat (Atheism has no rock solid basis for morality so i am not surprised) ok Ill quote more from Dawkins and see if you can by some miracle extract from this fuller quotation that I was wrong and Dawkins in fact believes there is Good and Evil in the Universe

"In a universe of electrons and selfish genes, blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won't find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference.” Richard Dawkins, River Out of Eden: A Darwinian View of Life

(January 18, 2017 at 11:49 pm)The Gentleman Bastard Wrote:

(January 18, 2017 at 11:06 pm)Pulse Wrote: The BBT is still full of fudge factors 13 years later,

So, go prove it wrong and collect your Nobel Prize.

Or, keep cherry picking what you read for the tiny morsels that seem to prop up your beliefs. No skin off my ass either way.

(January 18, 2017 at 11:06 pm)Pulse Wrote: and the Neurosurgeon in question would beg to differ that he was imagining things, but what would he know, he's just a Neurosurgeon, not to mention all the other thousands of people from all walks of life who have experienced inexplicable Paranormal Activity.

As has already bee pointed out, appeal to authority. Unless your Neurosurgeon (or any of those other thousands of people) also has a PhD in the supernatural?

You gonna bring any actual evidence or are you gonna keep flinging anecdotes and testimonials like an orangutan flinging shit?!?

---

(January 18, 2017 at 11:44 pm)ignoramus Wrote: What if he swore from the bottom of his pancreas?

So far he only seems to be able to bring arguments from the bottom of his colon.

Even the Eben Alexander case is bad for Pulse, because Alexander had a motive for telling lies about his "NDE" and writing a book based on lies. The doctor had lost malpractise cases recently and was facing into more, meaning more and bigger payouts. An easy out would be to write a lying book talking about heaven that he knew would sell like hotcakes in the bible belt.
The same goes of the father who conditioned his six year old son into dreaming about "heaven" including giving him data about a miscarriage the boy "couldn't have known".

---

(January 19, 2017 at 4:35 am)Pulse Wrote: Tazzycorn, you seem to be STRETCHING the truth somewhat (Atheism has no rock solid basis for morality so i am not surprised)

Well would you look at that. The lying piece of shit is accusing me of lying. Going into panic mode now that your bodyguard of lies has been ripped to shreds Pulse?

Ah ok we are resorting to abuse, yes that's typical of Atheists, seen it all before, nothing wrong with abuse in a Universe with No good or evil right?

And as for Eben Alexander his response is "I wrote a truthful account of my experiences in Proof of Heaven

and have acknowledged in the book both my professional and personal accomplishments and my setbacks. I stand by every word in this book and have made its message the purpose of my

life. Esquire's cynical article distorts the facts of my 25-year career as a neurosurgeon and is a textbook example of how unsupported assertions and cherry-picked information can be

assembled at the expense of the truth."

He seems sincere to me, and there seems a campaign of misinformation about him, but hey, even if I am wrong, the NDE Research Foundation has THOUSANDS of cases and growing

daily, even if one single one is genuine, Materialistic Atheism falls. Go ahead, research NDE's with an open mind and see for yourself.......... yeah I'm pretty sure you couldn't be bothered, but you

certainly cannot in Conscience assert you are sincere in your search for Truth.

Ah, here we go with the "stop persecuting me" crap again. You've been acting like an ass for a while now, so people are treating you like an ass. I feel no sympathy for you. Maybe treat atheists better next time and atheists will react more positively to you.

oh, Pulse.... I'll be so disappointed if you don't turn out to be a poe.

But just in case, can you stop spewing creatard's skewed view of science and actually acknowledge real science?
No, you can't, can you?
Well then, just try to think for yourself. Why is it that you believe what you believe?
Why do you call it belief, instead of knowledge?
Sure, you sometimes sugar-coat it and call it knowledge - knowing in your heart - but down deep... in your gut, you know it's just belief. unjustified, baseless belief. My question to you is if you can trace the origins of your belief.
From conception in your mother's womb to this present state, what was the psychological path that has led you to believe in what you believe?

Compare your path to that of other believers, particularly, believers in other deities, other religions.

Then explain to those other believers why your belief is worthy of more attention than theirs.

And only then explain why your belief is worthy of more attention that all the justified belief, commonly known as knowledge, that science has gathered since its inception.
And neurosurgeons commenting on cosmology make no more of a compelling case than a photographer commenting on nuclear fusion.

Your gotcha arguments from ignorance are not convincing to anyone. Try to understand why that is, instead of hammering on the same soundless key.

(January 19, 2017 at 5:10 am)Jesster Wrote: Ah, here we go with the "stop persecuting me" crap again. You've been acting like an ass for a while now, so people are treating you like an ass. I feel no sympathy for you. Maybe treat atheists better next time and atheists will react more positively to you.

I am Falsely accused of lying and quoting Dawkins out of context, then verbally abused, and it's all my fault? Really?

---

(January 19, 2017 at 5:49 am)pocaracas Wrote: oh, Pulse.... I'll be so disappointed if you don't turn out to be a poe.

But just in case, can you stop spewing creatard's skewed view of science and actually acknowledge real science?
No, you can't, can you?
Well then, just try to think for yourself. Why is it that you believe what you believe?
Why do you call it belief, instead of knowledge?
Sure, you sometimes sugar-coat it and call it knowledge - knowing in your heart - but down deep... in your gut, you know it's just belief. unjustified, baseless belief. My question to you is if you can trace the origins of your belief.
From conception in your mother's womb to this present state, what was the psychological path that has led you to believe in what you believe?

Compare your path to that of other believers, particularly, believers in other deities, other religions.

Then explain to those other believers why your belief is worthy of more attention than theirs.

And only then explain why your belief is worthy of more attention that all the justified belief, commonly known as knowledge, that science has gathered since its inception.
And neurosurgeons commenting on cosmology make no more of a compelling case than a photographer commenting on nuclear fusion.

Your gotcha arguments from ignorance are not convincing to anyone. Try to understand why that is, instead of hammering on the same soundless key.

I explained why I believe what I believe, and copiously quote scientists, including a neurosurgeon, and even atheists themselves to prove that Materialistic Atheism is on shaky foundations which 

makes Theism more plausible, Science is based on preconceived Ideas, on funding the Scientific Dogmas endlessly and not letting "a Divine foot in the Door" , I am suggesting that's an insincere search for Truth. 

Please see; "Dogmatism in Science and Medicine: How Dominant Theories Monopolize Research and Stifle the Search for Truth" by Henry H. Bauer.

I'll quote another scientist, so its obvious my concerns are shared by other scientists;

“People need to be aware that there is a range of models that

could explain the observations” Ellis argues. “For instance, I can
construct you a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its
centre, and you cannot disprove it based on observations.” Ellis has
published a paper on this. “You can only exclude it on philosophical
grounds. In my view there is absolutely nothing wrong in that.
What I want to bring into the open is the fact that we are using
philosophical criteria in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology
tries to hide that.” (Emphasis mine) Gibbs, W.W., Profile: George F.R. Ellis; Thinking Globally, Acting Universally, Scientific
American 273(4):50–55, 1995.