"Responded" implies that someone has actually addressed what I initially wrote. If so, give me a link as I must have missed it.

I get the Stephen Hawking thing. I actually posted about it on the FB page I admin, after watching a video here. I don't get the science at all, or how it concludes that there can't be a god. I don't get how explaining that protons can pop in and out of existence explains how something can come from nothing, either. Where do they pop to, and how can we draw any conclusions from it when we can't observe that place? I know there are theories which attempt to explain it, but then that confused me further because I thought that scientific theories had to be verifiable. Then they started talking about coffee and I was really confused. I went and made coffee. Anyway, I just figured that the science is beyond my current ability to understand. I'm still not down with the explanation, as I understood it. However, I'm not prepared to dismiss it because of that.

(July 3, 2012 at 10:25 pm)Selliedjoup Wrote: "Responded" implies that someone has actually addressed what I initially wrote. If so, give me a link as I must have missed it.

Your decision to reject all attempts to reason with you is your self-fulfilling prophecy. Perhaps we should call you an agnostic solipsist theist.

(July 3, 2012 at 8:13 pm)Selliedjoup Wrote:

(July 3, 2012 at 6:48 pm)Ace Otana Wrote: Science isn't a belief system, it isn't a religion. It's a tool, a method to understand. It uses many principles that have been proven to work time and time again. The scientific method is the most accurate and detail way in understanding and explaining the unknown.
http://www.uic.edu/classes/bios/bios100/...method.htm

That is why I laugh at you. You're talking COMPLETE BOLLOCKS!!!

Yes i understand what science is.

Comparing it to religion, you clearly do not.

Quote:Try not to intertwine what science is and how you use science to justify your belief system.

The above statement betrays that you don't know fuck about science.

Quote: These are two distinct and separate things. Keep laughing if you want, but you're missing the point.

Oh, we've got the point pretty clearly: You are a willfully ignorant troll.

(July 3, 2012 at 10:25 pm)Selliedjoup Wrote: "Responded" implies that someone has actually addressed what I initially wrote. If so, give me a link as I must have missed it.

Nobody here has claimed the issue you are addressing. It's a strawman.

(July 3, 2012 at 10:39 pm)Epimethean Wrote:

(July 3, 2012 at 10:25 pm)Selliedjoup Wrote: "Responded" implies that someone has actually addressed what I initially wrote. If so, give me a link as I must have missed it.

Your decision to reject all attempts to reason with you is your self-fulfilling prophecy. Perhaps we should call you an agnostic solipsist theist.

No link?

You are sooo trollish.

(July 3, 2012 at 10:48 pm)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:

(July 3, 2012 at 8:13 pm)Selliedjoup Wrote: Yes i understand what science is.

Comparing it to religion, you clearly do not.

Quote:Try not to intertwine what science is and how you use science to justify your belief system.

The above statement betrays that you don't know fuck about science.

Quote: These are two distinct and separate things. Keep laughing if you want, but you're missing the point.

Oh, we've got the point pretty clearly: You are a willfully ignorant troll.

I'm not sure if you're aware but you just continue to prove my point.

I have said atheists depend on science on a religious basis. Science is objective your application of science of it is subjective. This is why these are different, if you don't understand just continue with the tourettes.

How does one "know fuck about science"?

---

(July 3, 2012 at 10:55 pm)Epimethean Wrote: You are sooo trollish.

I was a troll before there was a word for them.

---

(July 3, 2012 at 10:48 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:

(July 3, 2012 at 10:25 pm)Selliedjoup Wrote: "Responded" implies that someone has actually addressed what I initially wrote. If so, give me a link as I must have missed it.

Nobody here has claimed the issue you are addressing. It's a strawman.

Really? so everyone here dismisses Stephen Hawking's view that there is no need for a god? Wow, first atheist forum I've come to which doesn't use that as a standard retort for the first cause argument.

(July 3, 2012 at 10:18 pm)Selliedjoup Wrote: 'Taqiyya Mockingbird'

You seem so angry.

Nice projection of your own emotions. I am having a genuine good time, as are all of the other good folk here. It seems to escape you that you are a chew toy here.

Quote: I find your perspective retarded as well, but I'm not going to respond to each of your posts as I'm fully aware of the futility of it.

Indeed. You have been completely rebutted point by point, and there really is nothing left to say in your own defense.

Quote:At least you can get it off your chest so someone in the real world doesn't have to get bear the brunt of it.

How charitable of you, in your deepest delusions.

Quote:

(July 3, 2012 at 10:18 pm)Epimethean Wrote: You. Really. Don't. Get. It.

Unless you tell me what you think, how would I get it?.

The fact that you don't get it is on you.

---

(July 3, 2012 at 10:25 pm)Selliedjoup Wrote: "Responded" implies that someone has actually addressed what I initially wrote. If so, give me a link as I must have missed it.

Hard to see with your head up your ass.

The ole chew toy response. Dude, I used that when I knew what I was talking about. You just rant in-between saying fuck and shit.