Le sigh. Nothing here is a revelation.

(May 23, 2015 at 11:45 pm)Napoléon Wrote: Le sigh. Nothing here is a revelation.

Quite. One fairly solid thing remains - we don't believe in a fucking magic old man.

The closest I get to the atheist community is here, so I can't really comment on whether or not his assessment is valid. If what he says is true, however, I think he makes some good points.

(May 24, 2015 at 12:05 am)Iroscato Wrote:

(May 23, 2015 at 11:45 pm)Napoléon Wrote: Le sigh. Nothing here is a revelation.

Quite. One fairly solid thing remains - we don't believe in a fucking magic old man.

Thats funny because neither do I! Its not about it being a fucking revelation. I came to this site hoping to find reasonable "free thinkers" that could help me logically reason why I don't need to believe in god. Instead I found a bunch of emotional arguments that are always lacking and usually fall short of being logical. Not saying I haven't gotten a lot of good info and resources along with it. But its the dipshits that think they're intellectually superior because they're an ideologue of Richard Dawkins or any other "free thinker" that I get sick of hearing from

If that's all you got, you either didn't understand or you were listening to the wrong person. If you really want your questions answered, wait until you find a poster that you think could help you out and send them a PM asking if they could help.

Trust me. There are plenty of people here capable of answering questions without appealing to emotions or using fallacies.

(May 24, 2015 at 12:22 am)Faith No More Wrote: If that's all you got, you either didn't understand or you were listening to the wrong person.  If you really want your questions answered, wait until you find a poster that you think could help you out and send them a PM asking if they could help.

Trust me.  There are plenty of people here capable of answering questions without appealing to emotions or using fallacies.

I did acknowledge that I have gotten a lot of help here. And it's been greatly appreciated 

(May 24, 2015 at 12:30 am)nicanica123 Wrote: I did acknowledge that I have gotten a lot of help here. And it's been greatly appreciated 

Yeah, you do have to cut through the chaff to find the wheat, though.

Still, you sound like you still have unanswered question.

That's called the tu quoque fallacy. It doesn't make religion any less ridiculous because atheists sometimes fall foul of logical fallacies or emotional reasoning, especially in seperate discussions. Most atheists don't claim to be infallible. If an argument is invalid, then feel free to address it specifically.

It's a common response to criticism, which is worthwhile mentally training yourself out of. It's better to first address the argument at hand, and then later move on to any recipricating arguments if you feel it's necessary. (This is advice for everyone! My first thought when I'm criticised in real life is often to tu quoque, and I have learnt to mentally cross it out as a fallacy. It seems to be some sort of natural defence mechanism.)

So the Amazing Atheist is an asshole and Richard Dawkins sometimes shows strong tendencies in that direction. I knew that already. So some people are annoying. What on earth is your point?