"Stupidity is also a gift of God, but one mustn't misuse it." - Pope John Paul II

Sorry Popey! The theists are too late on that one!

Well, they would be if a God existed to give them that gift. It's not a gift, we all share it at least somewhat

EvF

Back on topic again of

"HILARIOUS QUOTES BY THEISTS"..

Actually guys/gals I have the best one yet..

Arcanus and Jon Paul debate you all into the ground

Author: Fr0d0....

This one had me roaring out load with laughter......

There's this thing called the 'Postmodernist Generator', that I found about an hour ago on the net, that is a computer program that generators an entirely bullshit article made of pseudo-intellectual, postmodernist, metatwaddlistic psychobabble (not entirely unlike how I'm writing right here right now) - and I find it quite entertaining...:and I just wondered if Jon Paul used a theistic equivalent! ( (ish)).

Here's the program: http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo/

Each time you click on it, the article will automatically change to some other bullshit twaddle.

Dawkins used it as an example of postmodernistic nonsense that is all for 'style' rather than quality, in one of his articles on his forums back in 1998, I noticed.

EvF

This is from facebook; a reply to a single line post of, "Jesus" to which I replied, "wept."

Quote:cry for joy. cry cause Jesus wraps His arms around me. cry cause He loves so intensely, cry cause His heart is so beautiful, cry cause His mercy stretches endlessly. I'm just a happy mess! hahaha! And I like see other happy messes. Like my bro said this morning. "I don't care what people say against Jesus, I know Him. They don't." And we both just cried. Was beautiful...

Um, what? Gnostic theists scare me,
Rhizo

Haha - indeed *pukes*

(August 30, 2009 at 4:05 pm)LukeMC Wrote: "My contention then is that since the actuality of causality is itself contingent upon its own actuality, it doesn't account for its own actuality, because that would be a circuar argument and infinite regress. We cannot account for the actuality of causality by invoking an actualised potentiality (such as the actuality of causality itself), because actualised potentiality implies causality. Actualised potentiality implies the actualisation of potential, and that is the impure actuality which is the foundation of causality. So it is necessary for causality to be actual, that it derives it actuality from something that has nothing of potentiality (that is, that it derives its actuality not just from another actualised potential, since that would be causality again).

This is where pure actuality comes in."

Jon Paul, Atheist Forums.

Argument from verbosity at its finest.

JP was a riot, where'd he go?

---

(September 4, 2009 at 12:00 am)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: There's this thing called the 'Postmodernist Generator', that I found about an hour ago on the net, that is a computer program that generators an entirely bullshit article made of pseudo-intellectual, postmodernist, metatwaddlistic psychobabble (not entirely unlike how I'm writing right here right now) - and I find it quite entertaining...:and I just wondered if Jon Paul used a theistic equivalent! ( (ish)).

Here's the program: http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo/

Each time you click on it, the article will automatically change to some other bullshit twaddle.

Dawkins used it as an example of postmodernistic nonsense that is all for 'style' rather than quality, in one of his articles on his forums back in 1998, I noticed.

EvF

You mean this article in Nature 1998? It's damn brilliant

(September 10, 2009 at 5:51 am)theVOID Wrote: You mean this article in Nature 1998? It's damn brilliant

And this quote Dawkins gives from Peter Medawar, "Style has become an object of first importance, and what a style it is! For me it has a prancing, high-stepping quality, full of self-importance; elevated indeed, but in the balletic manner, and stopping from time to time in studied attitudes, as if awaiting an outburst of applause. It has had a deplorable influence on the quality of modern thought..." sums it up perfectly!

In short it is mental masturbation or as Luke brilliantly put it, intellectual wankery.

And this (from Dawkins himself) is genius:

As is now rather well known, in 1996 Sokal submitted to the US journal Social Text a paper called "Transgressing the boundaries: towards a transformative hermeneutics of quantum gravity". From start to finish the paper was nonsense. It was a carefully crafted parody of postmodern metatwaddle.

I am unsurprised that Jon Paul, Arcanus & Frodo so love this kind of bollocks!

Thank you posting the link Void,.

Kyu

Yes thanks void.

EvF

Have you all heard of the website fundies say the darndest things? Comedy gold.