Creationism and Ignorance

[I_am_not_mafia]

Wow GC what steaming pile .

And also totally irrelevant to what I posted earlier in #247 even though it was in response to it. My point still stands that there is no way to tell the difference between a believer who claims to experience Jesus and a schizophrenic who hears voices. In both cases the simplest explanation is that they are both delusional.

All GC did was to tell us a story about someone who is mentally challenged and schizophrenic who is on medication and was prayed for by him and who now doesn't hear voices any more.

Yay for medication which unlike prayer has been experimentally shown to improve symptoms (which is why it's now considered medication)

[robvalue]

The fact that Jesus/God/Whoever isn't consistent when "talking" to different people suggests that it isn't coming from the same source (or that source is fucking with everyone). Not even people from the same sect of the same religion can agree on what God "says".

This is one area where religion is really dangerous, as symptoms of mental illness can be abused and encouraged by others.

[I_am_not_mafia]

You are one of the most uncivil people here and do your best to derail conversations

I very rarely use bad language to insult people. I certainly haven't been insulting as you in this thread. And I do not derail conversations but counter-act what the christians are saying.

But it's true that I do not give christians the respect that they think that they deserve. That's very different from being uncivil.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

"I do not have to be the smartest kid on the block to see through fallible science." But you do have to be honest and sapient.

[SaStrike]

You are one of the most uncivil people here and do your best to derail conversations

I very rarely use bad language to insult people. I certainly haven't been insulting as you in this thread. And I do not derail conversations but counter-act what the christians are saying.

But it's true that I do not give christians the respect that they think that they deserve. That's very different from being uncivil.

You are uncivil, but in a civilized way.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

You are one of the most uncivil people here and do your best to derail conversations

I very rarely use bad language to insult people. I certainly haven't been insulting as you in this thread. And I do not derail conversations but counter-act what the christians are saying.

But it's true that I do not give christians the respect that they think that they deserve. That's very different from being uncivil.

Short version: "I do not suffer fools gladly."

[I_am_not_mafia]

I very rarely use bad language to insult people. I certainly haven't been insulting as you in this thread. And I do not derail conversations but counter-act what the christians are saying.

But it's true that I do not give christians the respect that they think that they deserve. That's very different from being uncivil.

Short version: "I do not suffer fools gladly."

... but said in a civil way

[Edwardo Piet]

I am ashamed to say that I have creationist stepbrothers. But I am glad to say that they are no relation to me. There doesn't appear to be any creationist idiocy in my close family's DNA at all.

My cousins are creationists, enough to fill 8-9 large churches in this area alone. Boss Lady says I must have been adopted. 

Pfffft. My cousins are chimpanzees and they don't believe in any kind of God at all.

---

I've seen the same out of atheist when they were clearly defeated. Not me but we have Christians here who can stand their ground and do a fine job of leaving an atheist in the dust.

GC

Sure, atheists are equally capable of having no idea what they're talking about and claiming victory repeatedly.

"Clearly defeated" is very subjective though, it's kind of my point.

In my experience atheists tend to not feel the need to declare victory outright. They tend to just refute the stupid theistic arguments so easily (it's not rocket science, even vaguely dumb atheists can defeat them because all the arguments for theism are such poor quality) . . . and it's just blindingly obvious to anyone even the slightest bit logical that the theist got owned. Not declaration of victory required.

Some theists can recognize that some or even most arguments for God fail. Although most of them buy into at least one godawful one.

This is why my favorite theists are the ones that think there are no successful arguments for God and say they have to take it on faith. Sure, they're basically admitting they're so irrational they prioritize faith over logic but at least they're not so stupid to not notice that all the arguments for theism fail.

One of my biggest pet peeves, though, is when a theist not only fails to argue for theism but their argument only argues for deism. So even if we accept their invalid argument's conclusion it still, at most, only proves deism (and sometimes not even that! Sometimes it's just a first cause which is even more pathetic!)... and then they go ahead and add in all that crap about their particular religion afterwards.

---

Clearly defeated isn't subjective as long as one takes the facts and reasons with them.

GC

You shouldn't take the facts and "reason with" them... you should reason to the facts. Methinks that what you call "facts" is probably just you starting from your own theistic conclusions. Talk about cart before horse.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Short version: "I do not suffer fools gladly."

... but said in a civil way

As civil as I get with some people.

[Godscreated]

You are one of the most uncivil people here and do your best to derail conversations

I very rarely use bad language to insult people. I certainly haven't been insulting as you in this thread. And I do not derail conversations but counter-act what the christians are saying.

But it's true that I do not give christians the respect that they think that they deserve. That's very different from being uncivil.

You have no idea do you, don't know what else to say when someone denies everything to justify their actions.

GC