Why atheism is irrational

[Faith No More]

It's possible this is simply a reflection of a new approach on his part. The repercussions from a trollish post or behavior reverberate long after the initial behavior. If one wants to maximize one's efficiency at it, it's useful to realize that one only needs to initiate the reaction and not necessarily stick around to see the results. Intermittent trolls, repeated at intervals, without any actual attention to the result is probably a more efficient approach than loitering in the area, as the maximum effect is realized in creating the disturbance, and later contributions have a much lesser impact per event than those pregnant first few.

(Or perhaps I've simply been doing this too long. "Shields up! Go to red alert!")

I think you're ignoring the psychology of the troll, which is similar to that of an arsonist but differs in the sense that the troll feels compelled to let everyone know who's responsible. There is no need for maximum efficiency if one doesn't get to revel in the results. Effectiveness is ignored due to the uncontrollable desire to rub everyone's nose in it. The troll has a compulsion to return to the scene that cannot be disregarded.

[Vincenzo Vinny G.]

Most of the responses here just go to prove my hypothesis.

And the funniest thing about it is that in making all these irrational posts, they are trying to deny my conclusion, ie trying to convince us their atheism is rational.

I love it!

Let's do a summary of the responses
Maelstrom: Irrational.
pineapplebunnybounce: Confused. Kinda sorta was trying to make a point...but no. When atheists talk about religion, they're almost always hating or whining. Even if they're not hating and whining when talking about movies or anime. Overall, just confused.
artistriley: Surprisingly rational. Have to actually agree with her, it was unfair of me to generalize all atheists as being that way. But I'd say the vast majority of atheists are.
Captain Colostomy: Meh. Claims I don't understand atheism but commits a "No True Scotsman" while trying to show atheism is rational. Lawl.
Minimalist: Does not even manage a minimally rational response.
Walking Void: At first I thought to myself "Hey, look a rational atheist, I need an autograph." But then I looked at what he was quoting and laughed. He missed the point totally, obsessing about the numbers when the numbers are not even the point. I think honest reflection on his part will make it clear to him. I mean, just looking at his own forum will prove it. Let's see if he's capable.
Dragonetti: His avatar was cute. And he's right that my statements were too general.

--What is that, two rational responses out of seven so far? About 29% of atheists are capable of being rational when asked to be? All the data isn't in yet, however. That number could shift dramatically lower.

Ryantology: Ooh, good point! Rational response #3! It doesn't prove atheism is itself rational, you're right. But I think it shows that for the vast majority of atheists, their atheism is irrational.
The Germans are coming: LOL. Nice to see you too, Fritz. Another hateful, sad post. And as predictable as the sun rising, zero rationality.
whateverist: Makes an interesting comparison to religious people. But the comparison fails, because with most atheists, their atheism is a shift from theism to atheism, which assumes they have good rational reasons to be atheists. Being raised atheist, or even being raised religious does not need rational justification. It's just a matter of circumstance. But for making such a valiant effort, rational response #4. He's also wrong about people in general whining on forums. I've been on a number of them, and it's not the case. Also what's with all the crying about me trying to intimidate people on here? That's a laugh. I can't really call your response rational #4 given the heaping helping of ridiculous claims you're making on the side. That and he thinks Anthony Flew is John Searle. LOL all going downhill for you buddy.
Kayenneh: Doesn't seem to have learned to use words yet, let alone use them well. Remedial, but made me laugh. Thanks for entertaining.
pocaras: No, it doesn't. Think about other possible explanations whose mere possibility rules out your conclusion. Good try though.
Stimbo: Actually one might lead to the other. Hating religious people so much just might lead to learning more about them, with the goal of attacking them. But kudos on trying to think rationally.
gall: Just outright nonsense. If you've been to Christian forums, you will see so little whining about atheists it's almost embarrassing how it makes atheists look. Guess my intelligence is the limiting factor in my acceptance of your belief, gall? lul I guess it does swing both ways. But the nail in his coffin is the claim that people on both sides would be offended. Tell them to stop being so butthurt. We have no problem calling Christianity irrational, do we?
Faith No More: Bwah, nice!

3/15 so far, more or less. That's 20% of atheists who can be rational when asked to be.

Good job guys. Wonder what page 3 and 4 will have in store.

[Faith No More]

---

It's possible this is simply a reflection of a new approach on his part. The repercussions from a trollish post or behavior reverberate long after the initial behavior. If one wants to maximize one's efficiency at it, it's useful to realize that one only needs to initiate the reaction and not necessarily stick around to see the results. Intermittent trolls, repeated at intervals, without any actual attention to the result is probably a more efficient approach than loitering in the area, as the maximum effect is realized in creating the disturbance, and later contributions have a much lesser impact per event than those pregnant first few.

(Or perhaps I've simply been doing this too long. "Shields up! Go to red alert!")

I think you're ignoring the psychology of the troll, which is similar to that of an arsonist but differs in the sense that the troll feels compelled to let everyone know who's responsible. There is no need for maximum efficiency if one doesn't get to revel in the results. Effectiveness is ignored due to the uncontrollable desire to rub everyone's nose in it. The troll has a compulsion to return to the scene that cannot be disregarded.

---

Told you.

[Bad Wolf]

The stupidity I can tolerate, but the arrogance.....

[Something completely different]

Most of the responses here just go to prove my hypothesis.

Your thread starter does not deserve to be called "hypothesis".

Before you even dare to make another statement in which you judge over an entire group of people based on nothing but "assumptions" which dont even deserve to be called assumtions you and every new member who joinedt this forum since you disapeared should read through the post which made you disapear:

Just kidding. I hope you consume fecal matter and lose your life to a long, drawn-out battle with a painful cancer. Since you claim to be a woman (I have my doubts), I hope it involves your breasts (or your ovaries, if you even have a pair). But yeah, a double mastectomy sounds good.

And look on the plus side- you'll have finally lost some of that weight you've been dying to lose given your constant yo-yo dieting and self-esteem issues. Chop about ten pounds of uneven saggy tits off just like that.

Too bad losing it in such a way would not exactly have the effect of making you attractive.

But you'll save money on lingerie. "No, just the panties please. I lost my breasts to cancer and now I can't feed my own infant or take care of my boyfriend."

Maybe you can use the concave cups hollowed out of your chest to store miscellany in. Car keys, joke books. Perhaps cole slaw in one, mashed potatoes in another, so you can be a lazy susan.

You'll be invited to all the parties!

Now if all this seems needlessly longwinded, it's because I never actually said Hitler was an atheist. Or imply as much.

And you shouldn't have made that false assumption.

http://atheistforums.org/thread-15925-po...#pid370125

All's fair in love and war until you can't handle the heat in the kitchen. Yeah, I mixed 'em.

Listen, I don't do things for people very often. I was waxing poetic because *I* was bored and wanted to try *my* creative muscles at something different. I don't know you from Marilyn Monroe and don't have a vested interest in saying anything of import to your person. Nothing you've said or done carries enough consequence for me to write more than "Happy Kwanzaa" to you.

Even your name, which is very...dramatic and congruently promoted in your signature, is just pleasant in passing to me, not eye-catchingly intriguing. I've never much cared about how you got to your throne, where your kingdom is located, whether there is a king, and why you are only queen in the summer. And who the hell is the fall queen, and which of the queens are cuter, and what will happen when global warming hits your kingdom and summer is all year round

I'm not curious about these things. Well okay just a little, but I don't care enough to show interest to you about it.

Or anybody here for that matter. Except Shell B, to whom I want to point out that one of the literary quotes from her website was spoken by one of the most devoutly and openly religious theists, one whose fame and legacy rests in large part on his theological leanings. Teehee.

But that's not even properly two lines, is it?

I don't wish those things on you. But you making things up, and then telling me to fuck off for your mistake? That was like dabbing the quill and putting it in my hand.

That was not a positive impression to make. And you didn't help yourself with the Hitler catcalling.

And you are braindead enought to call others "irrational"!!!

What kind of a disgusting person choses to hurt and insult a woman by attacking her femininity??????

And then even blame such a disgusting and low attack on the person you attacked!

Seriously! Leave this forum!!!

[max-greece]

Aren't you supposed to let God do the judging?

Your thread is titled "why Atheism is irrational" but I am yet to see a single reason given. Atheists may be rational or irrational but that doesn't really support your title.

[Gilgamesh]

"Because some people are irrational in some regards, and some of said people are atheists, atheism is irrational in itself."

u srs m8?

[Ryantology]

Ryantology: Ooh, good point! Rational response #3! It doesn't prove atheism is itself rational, you're right. But I think it shows that for the vast majority of atheists, their atheism is irrational.

The way that we interact with Christians doesn't really say anything about the rationality of our lack of belief which, for the majority of us, is based upon entirely sound reasoning: we don't accept the claim as true because there's no evidence compelling enough to make it acceptable.

Just because an atheist acts irrational doesn't mean that their atheism is irrational.

[Bad Wolf]

Why isn't this guy banned. Like permanently banned, seriously? Disgusting.

[Gilgamesh]

Ryantology: Ooh, good point! Rational response #3! It doesn't prove atheism is itself rational, you're right. But I think it shows that for the vast majority of atheists, their atheism is irrational.

It doesn't. It shows that they're irrational about whatever they're irrational about. Their lack of belief in an unsupported claim doesn't become any less rational on the basis that they hold irrationalities on other topics.