Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: September 26, 2024, 10:24 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
A challenge to Statler Waldorf
#41
RE: A challenge to Statler Waldorf
(April 20, 2011 at 6:48 am)lilphil1989 Wrote: But Einstein said that "god doesn't play dice".

There, see, he said god, that proves it huurrrr duuurrrr

Quote mining real scientists is a popular cretinist past time.

They think it gives them credibility.
[Image: mybannerglitter06eee094.gif]
If you're not supposed to ride faster than your guardian angel can fly then mine had better get a bloody SR-71.
Reply
#42
RE: A challenge to Statler Waldorf
Quote:They think it gives them credibility.
Anything they can grab to help back their beliefs up.
Creationists attack carbon dating methods, I bet they'd be in full support of it if it actually backed their beliefs. They'll attack anything that may threaten their beliefs and would be more than happy to grab anything that may support their beliefs. Or even if it doesn't support any religious belief, they'll twist and turn it in a hopeless attempt to gain support. Like creation science. Which isn't science.

Grab and distort so to gain support and attack anything that may contradict their beliefs. Like ants attacking a child poking their ant hill with a stick.

Religion is completely unsupported. Fact. Tongue
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - Carl Sagan

Mankind's intelligence walks hand in hand with it's stupidity.

Being an atheist says nothing about your overall intelligence, it just means you don't believe in god. Atheists can be as bright as any scientist and as stupid as any creationist.

You never really know just how stupid someone is, until you've argued with them.
Reply
#43
RE: A challenge to Statler Waldorf
Most points have already been thoroughly made, though you seem to fail to understand them, so I will just say this. Despite you having set in your head what you believe atheism to be, you are in no position to tell other people what they think or believe.
For me personally, I am an atheist in that I lack a belief in god as there is insufficient evidence for it. I follow no rituals, I have no dogma, I preach no doctrine and I subscribe to no philosophy in respect to atheism. Now I do have moral views, opinions on reality and thoughts about philosophy, but none of them have any direct relation to the label atheist.
Signature pending...
Reply
#44
RE: A challenge to Statler Waldorf
PS - just for all the Christians out there clutching onto Einstein:

We can fight all you want about the finer points of his belief, but stop trying to claim him for your side. Even if he did believe in a personal god, he was Jewish. Get the fuck over it.
[Image: Untitled2_zpswaosccbr.png]
Reply
#45
RE: A challenge to Statler Waldorf
I've just been through the thread, and I'll go against the grain here; Statler makes some good points and some good observations. When looking at the 'core atheists', the people who speak in public, the ones who enter the debates, those who post on forums, you'll often see the same lines arise, the same arguments spoken out, the same people quoted. I have visited several atheist and secular forums, and as much as Christians re-use the same arguments, many quotes are re-used by atheists. Of course this has a logical cause - if religious people keep rehashing the same arguments, the answers will always be the same. However, this does give a sense of uniformity that is also encountered within religious groups.

And atheism in it's current form (new atheism?) is rather new. Some people have published works that have been a wakeup call for many to see things in a different light. Because of this effect, these people fall into a sort of 'leader role'. Because it is new and against the grain of the old, people are still debating it, and being very engaged about it. This kind of looks like spreading the word like religions do. However, I do want to add that not all people support the notions proposed by these 'figureheads'.

So in short; in it's behavior and appearance, the core group does resemble the behaviours of religious groups.

Btw, I must add that I find atheists who try to make 'rituals' and festive days of their own outright silly. I mean, sure, Dawkins is a nice guy, but I see no reason to celebrate his birthday.

Anyways, having some appearances in common with religion, does that make atheism a religion? I think not.

First of all, atheism has no central dogma. I know you refered to how life came to be stories, but it is not a central thesis on which atheism relies. All religions I know of have central stories and rules that are part of being of that religion. Christians, regardless of denomination, find the bible to be important. Buddhists have the rules as made by Buddah, and so on. Atheism has no such thing.
On to the origins of the universe and life; the reason that most atheists have this in common is because this issue is a breakingpoint between religion and science. This is the point where people stumble upon science, look at religion, and find that there is no bridge between the two. The theory of how gravity works, math, and other sciences are generally accepted by everyone - but I think you wouldn't say that these things are somehow part of either a religion or atheism because all members believe these facts to be true.

Also, if we look into the 'does behavior make it a religion' idea - if you are a republican, are you a...republicanist? I am not from the US, but how people seem to engage in political discussions there, and how they seem to experience political issues has a lot in common with religion too. Kids, while not allowed to vote yet, are clearly marked either republican or democrat by their parents. When political leaders speak, the whole experience and enthousiasm of the crowd resembles that of people listening to a preacher. The way that those people villify each other resembles how different religions can attack each other.

Anyways, for me it is a grey area. Atheism has no central tennets - if one was brought up without coming in touch with religion and has no idea of the concept of a deity, that person is an atheist too; atheist being a person who is simply not religious. However, many vocal atheists' behavior does resemble it much, and sadly, the vocal hostility sometimes as well (though at least they dont oppress and kill people, so thats a huge leap forward). And because many of the debate topics and regular talks center around religion topics and it is activly trying to carve its own niche in...yes, well what? and as what?
I get how you came to your conclusions.

Reply
#46
RE: A challenge to Statler Waldorf
(April 20, 2011 at 8:22 am)thesummerqueen Wrote: PS - just for all the Christians out there clutching onto Einstein:

We can fight all you want about the finer points of his belief, but stop trying to claim him for your side. Even if he did believe in a personal god, he was Jewish. Get the fuck over it.

Thats just it, he has written several times that he did not believe in a personal god, but that doesnt stop Christians from claiming that when he said "god doesnt play dice..yadda yadda" that he was talking about their God, and because of that, Jesus also.

Talk about a stretch. I wonder what they would do if he said "Allah didnt play dice". You would probably se a lot of fundies, who other wise would not do it, claim that Allah is the same as Jesus just so they can get Einsteins stamp of approval.

Then again, these fundies have a hard time understanding that Jewish people can still be Jewish and atheist at the same time...it blows their freaking minds.
Reply
#47
RE: A challenge to Statler Waldorf
I bet statler does not believe in Thor, does that make his religion athorism?



You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.

Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.




 








Reply
#48
RE: A challenge to Statler Waldorf
After seeing the preview, I can be convinced to believe in Thor. But only if he's naked in front of me.
[Image: Untitled2_zpswaosccbr.png]
Reply
#49
RE: A challenge to Statler Waldorf
(April 20, 2011 at 1:51 pm)thesummerqueen Wrote: After seeing the preview, I can be convinced to believe in Thor. But only if he's naked in front of me.

You seem to be horny all the time.
What is causing it and how can I get my wife to take it?Big Grin



You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.

Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.




 








Reply
#50
RE: A challenge to Statler Waldorf
(April 20, 2011 at 1:59 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: What is causing it and how can I get my wife to take it?Big Grin

It's very difficult, but I shall resist out of concern for atheist solidarity. Big Grin

Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  a challenge All atheists There is inevitably a Creator. Logic says that suni_muslim 65 16218 November 28, 2017 at 5:02 pm
Last Post: Fidel_Castronaut
  A challenge for any Atheist who been here for a long time! Mystic 36 5562 January 11, 2017 at 8:16 pm
Last Post: comet
  A challenge! Mystic 87 10373 January 10, 2017 at 1:43 am
Last Post: Astonished
  A challenge! Mystic 3 1016 January 3, 2017 at 12:27 am
Last Post: Cyberman
  A Challenge to You All: Prove I'm not God FebruaryOfReason 40 6928 February 21, 2016 at 1:59 pm
Last Post: FebruaryOfReason
  Please help me with this personal challenge accidental creation 11 3872 April 28, 2014 at 4:16 am
Last Post: BrianSoddingBoru4
  A Challenge for the Atheist eeeeeee7 37 10413 January 11, 2014 at 1:44 am
Last Post: Bad Writer
  The Moral Challenge GodsRevolt 22 9280 November 5, 2013 at 8:13 am
Last Post: T.J.
  How we won the James Randi $1,000,000 Paranormal Challenge deltoidmachine 24 8767 August 22, 2013 at 12:04 pm
Last Post: gall
  Formal debate challenge - Taqiyya Mockingbird Jeffonthenet 11 6923 July 14, 2012 at 9:09 pm
Last Post: Shell B



Users browsing this thread: 10 Guest(s)