Typical theists versus typical atheists

[Astonished]

Oh fuck off, the right are the bullshit hyper nationalists here. I have never and will never brag about America being the best at everything, no we are not. Especially with the orange buttface in office. Trump certainly IS NOT the best we can do and the sooner that fucker is out the better.

That has nothing to do with economic systems. And you missed the part where I said BOTH left and right misuse the word "capitalism" because it is NOT a form of government. Every nation both friend and foe worldwide invest in the global market. 

Your OP was nonsense, that had nothing at all to do with how I think America is currently doing. Right now we could be doing way better at a lot of things.

I wonder how many times you will have to tell me that my OP is nonsense
At least, you keep your word. This is a sign that you are not one of the great actors in office.

---

I'm sure there's a name for this dishonest tactic but I can't identify it, moving the goalposts?

My English is rather weak.
I am not sure what 'dishonest tactic' and 'moving the goalposts' are supposed to mean.

Thank you.

Hmm...nice excuse. Is that why you sound like a lying dipshit so much of the time?

[KerimF]

I wonder how many times you will have to tell me that my OP is nonsense
At least, you keep your word. This is a sign that you are not one of the great actors in office.

---

My English is rather weak.
I am not sure what 'dishonest tactic' and 'moving the goalposts' are supposed to mean.

Thank you.

Hmm...nice excuse. Is that why you sound like a lying dipshit so much of the time?

At least, I express clearly what I have in mind about any subject and, on request, I give more details. I do it because I personally have nothing to hide or fear.
But some members here fear to say anything important in their name other than replying with various innovative unfriendly expressions  to prove they are free and civilized. They do it anytime they hear something that they didn't use hearing or don't like (or is not supposed to be heard by the common people in the world).

But, we like it or not, this is how men are created in different nature. And, no one can change his deep nature even if he wants to.
The irony is that most people (sane mature) think they can change some others (also sane mature) while they cannot change themselves in the first place; unless apparently in certain periods of time.

So please feel free to express yourself before me (but I am not sure about others) the way you like.
As I mentioned earlier, I have nothing against anyone even those who have no choice but playing the enemies.

Kerim

[chimp3]

[1]: Darwin kept his theory secret until near his death. It was not received well by the elite. Einstein toiled in obscurity until experiments revealed his genius.

Yeah, not so much. Darwin published 'On The Origin of Species' 23 years before his death (his impetus was mainly that Wallace was going to beat him to it) and Einstein didn't 'toil in obscurity' for very long - he was widely known (among other physicists, at least) by the time he was 26.

Boru
[/quote]

Point being that they did not make their discoveries according to the OP as "certain scientists, privileged by the high class."

[KerimF]

[1]: Darwin kept his theory secret until near his death. It was not received well by the elite. Einstein toiled in obscurity until experiments revealed his genius.

Yeah, not so much. Darwin published 'On The Origin of Species' 23 years before his death (his impetus was mainly that Wallace was going to beat him to it) and Einstein didn't 'toil in obscurity' for very long - he was widely known (among other physicists, at least) by the time he was 26.

Boru

Point being that they did not make their discoveries according to the OP as "certain scientists, privileged by the high class."

Bold mine,

Did I say this?!

May I repeat what I said:
A typical atheist doesn’t mind believing an idea, beyond his personal experience, if said scientific and approved by certain scientists, privileged by the high class.

In other words, does, in general, an atheist (or a theist, actually) believe a new idea (discovery) if not approved worldwide first by certain scientists (other than the discoverers) who are privileged by the high class?

[LostLocke]

In other words, does, in general, an atheist (or a theist, actually) believe a new idea (discovery) if not approved worldwide first by certain scientists (other than the discoverers) who are privileged by the high class?

Depends.
What is the new idea? What hypothesis did they put forth? What observations were made? What data was collected? What experiments were run? What results did they get? Did they then repeat all this over and over? Did they build a working model from the data? Did they make further predictions? Is there concordance? Is there convergence?
Those are the things I will take into consideration when I choose whether or not to "believe" a scientist.

[bennyboy]

In other words, does, in general, an atheist (or a theist, actually) believe a new idea (discovery) if not approved worldwide first by certain scientists (other than the discoverers) who are privileged by the high class?

Science is classless. Those who are most respected, or called great and therefore more easily believed, are so exactly because their ideas up to that point have stood up against all the best efforts of others. Einstein was openly mocked. He openly mocked others, and ended up being proven wrong. It was not his name, or any authority he claimed, that mattered. It was his ideas that mattered, and their ability to predict.

Yes, a lot of people DO believe blindly in science. That's a problem, because when some rogue scientist says stupid shit, like vaccines lead to autism, a percentage of the population is almost guaranteed to believe them only because they are called scientists-- and kids end up dead.

But you have to understand-- people believing blindly in science are NOT scientists. They are not members of the scientific community if they believe on faith alone.
Religion is the exact opposite. Those who question their imams, rabbis or priests will be treated either condescendingly or with outright hostility.

Don't believe me? Look how your ideas are turned over and over here. They are sometimes mocked, sometimes considered, but they are heard and responded to. Now, let one of us go to a religious site, and see how long our questions or arguments are tolerated. I'll bet I can't go to Christian sites in particular, and type the word "evidence" more than 5 times before I'm banned.

To the credit of Islam, I'd say that Islamists DO take the philosophy of their religion seriously-- I suspect I might actually last a fair while at an Islamic site, even as a declared atheist. But even then, I don't think anyone there will be able to give me a clear-cut process for the betterment of my knowledge of reality.

[Astonished]

In other words, does, in general, an atheist (or a theist, actually) believe a new idea (discovery) if not approved worldwide first by certain scientists (other than the discoverers) who are privileged by the high class?

Science is classless.  Those who are most respected, or called great and therefore more easily believed, are so exactly because their ideas up to that point have stood up against all the best efforts of others.  Einstein was openly mocked.  He openly mocked others, and ended up being proven wrong.  It was not his name, or any authority he claimed, that mattered.  It was his ideas that mattered, and their ability to predict.

Yes, a lot of people DO believe blindly in science.  That's a problem, because when some rogue scientist says stupid shit, like vaccines lead to autism, a percentage of the population is almost guaranteed to believe them only because they are called scientists-- and kids end up dead.

But you have to understand-- people believing blindly in science are NOT scientists.  They are not members of the scientific community if they believe on faith alone.
Religion is the exact opposite.  Those who question their imams, rabbis or priests will be treated either condescendingly or with outright hostility.

Don't believe me?  Look how your ideas are turned over and over here.  They are sometimes mocked, sometimes considered, but they are heard and responded to.  Now, let one of us go to a religious site, and see how long our questions or arguments are tolerated.  I'll bet I can't go to Christian sites in particular, and type the word "evidence" more than 5 times before I'm banned.

To the credit of Islam, I'd say that Islamists DO take the philosophy of their religion seriously-- I suspect I might actually last a fair while at an Islamic site, even as a declared atheist.  But even then, I don't think anyone there will be able to give me a clear-cut process for the betterment of my knowledge of reality.

That you have to explain that to him is demonstrative of the inability of KerimF to comprehend reality on reality's terms. Since he seems to prefer to deflect anything that contradicts this worldview rather than saying "I don't understand, what do you mean by saying my preconception is flawed or downright stupid?" So tiresome. Thanks for putting up with him and putting in the effort to give such a detailed explanation, I've about given up.

[KerimF]

In other words, does, in general, an atheist (or a theist, actually) believe a new idea (discovery) if not approved worldwide first by certain scientists (other than the discoverers) who are privileged by the high class?

Depends.
What is the new idea? What hypothesis did they put forth? What observations were made? What data was collected? What experiments were run? What results did they get? Did they then repeat all this over and over? Did they build a working model from the data? Did they make further predictions? Is there concordance? Is there convergence?
Those are the things I will take into consideration when I choose whether or not to "believe" a scientist.

Do you mean that all people you had the chance to meet have enough time to check personally every story, said scientific, they didn't mind to accept and believe?
Truth be said, I focused on scientists to avoid flaming the comments more than they are supposed to be. Could you imagine what will happen if I will also talk about how millions of people believe in their trusted investigators, journalists, non-religious leaders, for a few.
For example, how many people in the world, as I, know that a modern tower cannot be scrolled down completely in less than a minute just by fire? About 15 years ago, even some professional/expert Americans were surprised how I, living too far from America, told them about things for which they had already solid proofs. But they had to keep the truth for themselves because they have families to take care of. I guess you know what I am talking about. In case I am wrong, the world will witness the new method that can destroy completely old towers just by fire if located properly inside the buildings instead of the old conventional complex and costly one. Anyway, thanks to this scientific story approved by all political systems in the world, without even one exception, the high class (around the world) was able investing trillions of dollars in Terrorism (that replaced Communism in less than 24 hours) against men on bottom (in millions; civilians and their various national forces).

In brief, the fake political stories, mainly if made in the name of science, have, on these days, strong effects on people's mind and their life much stronger than the religious ones have. For example, in reality, there are no conflicts among religions, in Middle East in the least; unless Judaism, Christianity and Islam have been joined to form one religion behind my back lately. I mean; one can enjoy this great union (solidarity) at the borders of Jordan (where Christian military officers are training the Islamist groups) and Israel (where many good Jews take care of their injured Islamist brothers). After all, an international noble cause joined these Christian, Jew and Islamist heroes. Could you guess it from where you live 

Kerim

[The Grand Nudger]

Jumped the shark.

[Pat Mustard]

Please help me find a contradiction said by Jesus himself. Thank you.

I would if I were confident that we have a single word said by Yeshua bar Yosef.