Tooth Fairy Bullshit

[Edwardo Piet]

Huggy is a buttfucking twatface.

/thread

[Huggy Bear]

Huggy is a buttfucking twatface.

/thread

I never took you to be a homophobe...

[Cyberman]

Straights can buttfuck as well. I never took you for a heterophobe.

[Huggy Bear]

But used in that context it's not insulting, is it?

[Cyberman]

You probably should ask Ham what context he was using. I'm more interested that you objected to the buttfucking qualifier, but not the opinion of your being a twatface.

[Ravenshire]

(emphasis is mine)

Put those goalposts back you fucking troglodyte. My knowledge (or lack there of) about any alleged creator is absolutely irrelevant to to the argument that you made and I refuted. You simply can't handle the fact that your pathetic argument got refuted sooooo fucking easily so you have to try to make it about something else. No matter how much you want to deflect, knowing the answer is not a prerequisite for knowing what the wrong answers are.

Look you fool, my argument was if your position is 'I don't know how the universe began' then you can't state that there wasn't a creator, you disagreed  you freaking muppet.

The point you were making, pinhead, the one I replied to, and the one you can't support was that we must know the correct answer before we can know the wrong ones. So sorry I spoiled your "Quest to be Right." We all know that's more important to you than any fucking thing else.

It is possible to know what the answer isn't even if you don't know what the answer is.

So again, Is it your position that you know  a creator doesn't exist?

This time answer the question.

Sorry, I never introduced knowledge of any alleged creators into the argument. It's your projection and is, again, irrelevant to the point. Guess what. You don't get to dictate the red herring.

Here's the quote (as you soooooooo love to do to others). The point I argued in bold:

Wrong.

On what basis can you rule anything out if you don't know?

Say you haven't learn the concept of math, on what basis can you say 2+2= 4 is right or wrong if you don't know?

Here's a little better analogy than the crap you just spewed...

Let's say some guys wife is getting boned on the side. He can rule out huge numbers of people his wife might be fucking without ever figuring out who it really is. After all, King Henry the 8th isn't available for any afternoon delight. Neither is Winston Churchill or Ronald Reagan swinging by to poke her pussy. He can scratch Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump and President Obama from the list since they've never had the opportunity to dance the horizontal mambo with her. In fact, he can rule out quite literally billions of people with absolute certainty (or something so close as to make no difference) without even trying...

It is possible to know what the answer isn't even if you don't know what the answer is.

Besides, you give me four of something and I can certainly tell you I don't have ten of them (or 20, or 100, or 2048, or 243,985,243) without ever figuring 2+2=4.

Please show me where I introduced knowledge of alleged gawds or go kindly fuck yourself with a chainsaw.

I know the only objection you could make to the argument was that it was too "convoluted." Would you like me to dumb it down to your hard-at-thinking level?

[Huggy Bear]

Look you fool, my argument was if your position is 'I don't know how the universe began' then you can't state that there wasn't a creator, you disagreed  you freaking muppet.

The point you were making, pinhead, the one I replied to, and the one you can't support was that we must know the correct answer before we can know the wrong ones. So sorry I spoiled your "Quest to be Right." We all know that's more important to you than any fucking thing else.

So again, Is it your position that you know  a creator doesn't exist?

This time answer the question.

Sorry, I never introduced knowledge of any alleged creators into the argument. It's your projection and is, again, irrelevant to the point. Guess what. You don't get to dictate the red herring.

Here's the quote (as you soooooooo love to do to others). The point I argued in bold:

Here's a little better analogy than the crap you just spewed...

Let's say some guys wife is getting boned on the side. He can rule out huge numbers of people his wife might be fucking without ever figuring out who it really is. After all, King Henry the 8th isn't available for any afternoon delight. Neither is Winston Churchill or Ronald Reagan swinging by to poke her pussy. He can scratch Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump and President Obama from the list since they've never had the opportunity to dance the horizontal mambo with her. In fact, he can rule out quite literally billions of people with absolute certainty (or something so close as to make no difference) without even trying...

It is possible to know what the answer isn't even if you don't know what the answer is.

Besides, you give me four of something and I can certainly tell you I don't have ten of them (or 20, or 100, or 2048, or 243,985,243) without ever figuring 2+2=4.

Please show me where I introduced knowledge of alleged gawds or go kindly fuck yourself with a chainsaw.

I know the only objection you could make to the argument was that it was too "convoluted." Would you like me to dumb it down to your hard-at-thinking level?

*emphasis mine*
What the hell do you think this discussion is about you imbecile?

Sorry, but not knowing the exact cause of the universe, does not mean we can't know, and rule out, what ancient myths are.

How does he seem to understand the topic but you don't?

The point is, if it's your position that you 'don't know' how the universe came to exist, then you can't argue against a God... Got it? So either you agree or disagree.

You apparently disagree, So again, Is it your position that you know  a creator doesn't exist?

Stop being a coward and answer the question.

[Aroura]

So if you are interacting with the spiritual realm while existing in this reality, it's part of this reality. Just like Wow is part of our reality.

But then again you have no evidence for communing with the so called spiritual realm. It's even more imaginative than wow, which at least actually exists.

You also assume I've never had a "supernatural" experience. I actually have. I've told the story before. When I was about 10, my brother was shot in the eye with a bba gun. Makes A CHRISTMAS Story a little more real for my family. Anyway, his retina was dislodged and the doctor told my folks that he would probably lose the sight in that eye. Still, on the off chance it might heal, the bandaged him up and sent him home where he had to lay in bed and not move his head hardly at all for ages.

That first night, well I had never seen my mother so distraught. I was Catholic, went to a private school and at that time honestly thought I might chose to be a nun when I grew up in loved them so much, I stayed up half the night praying and crying. I begged God not to take my brothers eye in the sincere way only a child can.
When I finally fell asleep I left my body and roamed the house. It was very, very real. There was a bright light as I rose up, and I thought God had sent an angel to take me in exchange for my brothers eye. I was so frightened, but I knew God was doing what was right. I floated through my house and saw my mom. I cried out to her, I wanted her to know how much I loved her before I was taken up to heaven. I was followed her around, both of us crying, but she couldn't hear my spirit.

The next morning I woke up, and thought God had decided my willingNess to sacrifice for my brother was enough, so let me stay. Still, I was more than a little frightened he'd change his mind. After about a week, the doc informed us my brothers retina had healed, and there was relief. I told my mom about my experience.....and she told me about sleep paralysis, she'd had more than one trauma or stress induced episode of it in her life, and knew what it was.

Aaanyway, I really did assume my experience was a real spiritual one when it happened, and if my mother had enabled that kind of thinking, I might still cling to that misunderstanding of my experience today. But I've had dozens more of these, along with other horrendous things religious folk often think are spiritual, including exploding head syndromeast.

All of these sorts of experiences can and do have rational, natural explanations. Some people just cling to their childhood myths harder than others.

[Astonished]

The point you were making, pinhead, the one I replied to, and the one you can't support was that we must know the correct answer before we can know the wrong ones. So sorry I spoiled your "Quest to be Right." We all know that's more important to you than any fucking thing else.

Sorry, I never introduced knowledge of any alleged creators into the argument. It's your projection and is, again, irrelevant to the point. Guess what. You don't get to dictate the red herring.

Here's the quote (as you soooooooo love to do to others). The point I argued in bold:

Please show me where I introduced knowledge of alleged gawds or go kindly fuck yourself with a chainsaw.

I know the only objection you could make to the argument was that it was too "convoluted." Would you like me to dumb it down to your hard-at-thinking level?

What the hell do you think this discussion is about you imbecile?

Sorry, but not knowing the exact cause of the universe, does not mean we can't know, and rule out, what ancient myths are.

How does he seem to understand the topic but you don't?

The point is, if it's your position that you 'don't know' how the universe came to exist, then you can't argue against a God... Got it? So either you agree or disagree.

You apparently disagree, So again, Is it your position that you know  a creator doesn't exist?

Stop being a coward and answer the question.

You clearly don't understand the concept of the null hypothesis. Proving a negative is a bullshit idea. What we can do is point out every flaw, inconsistency, contradiction, and just plain wrong assertion made in myths and use those to assign a probability to the likelihood of one or all of its claims or aspects. So while it can't logically be put down as an absolutely zero probability (it could be right in some ways completely by accident, just like the Flying Spaghetti Monster), it's near enough zero right now that continued belief in it should warrant medicating and extreme psychotherapy.

[Cato]

We perceive our world as "reality" even though 99.9 percent of it is empty space. As the saying goes, if you remove all that empty space, you would be able to compress all of humanity into the size of a sugar cube...

Huggy,
Please don't ever repeat this. It's simply bullshit. This is by no means a theist/atheist issue. In fact there are plenty of atheists mesmerized by the thought. It is however a science literacy issue.

People enamored by this apparent quandary should brush up on their knowledge of electromagnetism. Coulomb repulsion will satisfy most inquiries. Those delving deeper and wanting to know what happens as we try to squeeze two atoms together will then have to address Pauli's exclusion principle.

This of course ignores that matter is not mostly empty space to begin with. Some of this stems from the fact that many people still cling to how the Bohr model is used to teach young children the structure of the atom leaving the impression of electrons existing as tiny satellites orbiting the nucleus and all that empty space. In "reality", as you put it, that empty space is filled with electron wave functions.

I always love the sugar cube or teaspoon references when providing estimates for the total space occupied when only the actual partical dimensions are considered. Mildly amusing, no doubt, but then I'm quickly left with trying to comprehend the energy required to remove all the so called "empty space". For me, that's the real mind fuck.