^^hahahahaha. Nice try Mr. Expert. Goddam what a dumbass

Quote :

"Description of Appeal to Authority An Appeal to Authority is a fallacy with the following form: Person A is (claimed to be) an authority on subject S. Person A makes claim C about subject S. Therefore, C is true. This fallacy is committed when the person in question is not a legitimate authority on the subject. More formally, if person A is not qualified to make reliable claims in subject S, then the argument will be fallacious. This sort of reasoning is fallacious when the person in question is not an expert. In such cases the reasoning is flawed because the fact that an unqualified person makes a claim does not provide any justification for the claim. The claim could be true, but the fact that an unqualified person made the claim does not provide any rational reason to accept the claim as true."

[Edited on December 23, 2008 at 12:34 PM. Reason : It doesn't feel right cherry picking the dumbest post in the thread.]

12/23/2008 12:33:31 PM

You know nastoute

you can only pretend to be knowledgeable only so often without actually posting any content before your gig is up and you look like an assmonkey repeating wikipedia summaries.

[Edited on December 23, 2008 at 12:36 PM. Reason : >.<]

12/23/2008 12:35:12 PM

Quote :

"^^hahahahaha. Nice try Mr. Expert. Goddam what a dumbass"

Hmm yase, asking people who talk about logic and reason to know something about logic and reason is a "appeal to authority" fallacy.

Sounds like you don't know anything about logic or reason either.

12/23/2008 12:37:17 PM

^^

you want me to sully myself and waste my time coming up with real coherent responses for the gibbering assholes in this thread

you can think again..

like I'm going to lower myself to someone who basic response is OMG, TAKE A STATISTICS COURSE...

pfft...

...

and if your talking about the "joke thread" I made... I was shocked it wasn't locked and deleted

It was funny to me because everyone seemed to be scratching their heads at what was obviously a nonsense thread...

[Edited on December 23, 2008 at 12:39 PM. Reason : .]

12/23/2008 12:37:55 PM

Its not that you 'don't want to sully yourself' so much as you lack the depth to actually sustain an argument with anyone on any topic in TSB really.

Its so obvious to us that I initially thought you were trolling. Unfortunately I see now that is not the case.

[Edited on December 23, 2008 at 12:39 PM. Reason : >.<]

12/23/2008 12:39:13 PM

LOGIC AND REASON ARE THE ONLY TOOLS THAT LEAD US TO THE TRUTH...

*knows nothing about either subject*

*is an atheist who read Dawkins and spends the rest of his time playing EVE Online instead of educating himself*

12/23/2008 12:39:56 PM

Quote :

"will the people in the marines get all evangelical and up in your face about God I would imagine that the over all temper would be to not be a dick and rock the boat, either way"

I'm not quite sure what you're getting at.

12/23/2008 12:39:56 PM

^^^

this is a very nice troll

i'll give you that

and it's logic that can apply to just about everyone... but it does work very well against someone who does think them self very much better than most

clap clap clap

[Edited on December 23, 2008 at 12:41 PM. Reason : .]

12/23/2008 12:41:16 PM

Quote :

"hahahahaha. Nice try Mr. Expert. Goddam what a dumbass"

Exactly. I don't think he even read this thread. I think he just assumed what atheists might be arguing here... that one can use logic to conclude that there is no god. Is anyone even arguing that?

[Edited on December 23, 2008 at 12:44 PM. Reason : ]

12/23/2008 12:42:18 PM

Quote :

"Exactly. I don't think he has even read this thread. I think he just assumed what atheists might be arguing here... that one can use logic to conclude that there is no god. Is anyone even doing that?"

So i'm going to assume you don't know anything about the shit I posted

Bravo

12/23/2008 12:42:42 PM

Quote :

"100 years ago people would have called me crazy if I said that I could project a live image of myself cross the entire world, complete with sound and interactivity, instantaneously, while floating in the heavens, yet this is easily a reality today. Who's to say what our knowledge, logic, and reason can't find the answers to?"

Quote :

"So according to all of your statements how would you define someone who simply states (as I always have) reason and logic are the only accurate tools to understanding the universe. and that reason and logic strongly supports the idea that there is no god (cannot be proven) just as it strongly supports that there is no flying spaghetti monster. Oh and my original point still stands atheists and agnostics seem to be the most pc group to attack. This country is a great example. There are people who still try and force intelligent design as an alternative to evolution in public schools. That is such a stupid fucking idea (because the theory is incredibly stupid) it should simply be dismissed. On the other hand you try and remove Christian objects from government buildings and there are massive accusations of lawless atheists trying to destroy the US."

Quote :

"f you asked me this question: "Do you believe God exists?" A. Yes B. No C. I don't know I would answer B. I believe the answer is No. Try answering these questions: "Do you believe aliens have landed on earth?" A. Yes B. No C. I don't know "Do you believe ghosts exist?" A. Yes B. No C. I don't know "Do you believe in telekenesis?" A. Yes B. No C. I don't know Did you answer "No" for any of those? Because I can guarantee that you can't be 100% sure of the answer to any of them. Does that mean that your answer of "No" is misguided? Does that mean someone is actually "agnostic" about the existence of ghosts? "

I don't actually believe any of you know what you're really arguing other then the fact that you are arguing something and intend on winning.

[Edited on December 23, 2008 at 12:51 PM. Reason : >.<]

12/23/2008 12:50:11 PM

Quote :

"dude, I'm agnostic, myself"

can you be this at work?

12/23/2008 12:50:20 PM

Quote :

"I agree that Atheists are very discriminated against and will continue to be. They are obviously rejected by religious folk who find them to be attention-seeking naysayers, and they are equally rejected by the intellectual community for their faith-based assertion of God(s) not existing. The only rational approach to God is uncertainty. Anything else is simply crazy."

With this stance, how can you ever definitively know anything? Like I mentioned earlier, there has to be a certain limit where you say, "Okay, I've seen enough where I can confidently make a statement about _____."

For example, did dinosaurs exist?

Sure, we have plenty of evidence, but can you prove it 100% absolutely? If not, I guess "the jury is still out on dinosaurs" since we can't prove it 100%, am I correct?

Quote :

"A bunch of logic from Str8Foolish"

Yes, yes, yes. I've read a lot on this.

And everyone just ignore adder. He's quite angry and it's making the rest of us look bad.

I want to state that I don't agree with his original statement in the OP. I don't feel like Atheists are the most discriminated minority.

I do stand by my statement that they're the last unprotected minority that it is still socially acceptable to ridicule and burn at the stake (pun intended), aside from the general pariahs minorities (pedophiles, furries, etc).



And I don't know what you're getting at, SandSanta. Let me know if I'm not making sense.

12/23/2008 12:51:26 PM

Quote :

"So i'm going to assume you don't know anything about the shit I posted Bravo"

What?!!!?!?!
Listen: I don't think anyone in this thread is arguing that logic can be used to conclude that "there is no god". You posted a bunch of crap about logic and reason, seemingly assuming that people in this thread were making such an argument. I could be wrong, but I don't remember anyone making that argument in this thread. Am I wrong? Has someone said that?

You sir, are therefore presenting a straw man. You are telling someone what their position is (that they think that logic can be used to conclude that "there is no god",) and then you argue against that. The problem is, that is not the position. You are arguing against a point that no one has made! (Again, did I miss where someone made this argument?)

So, not only are you, then, an intellectual douche, but you've failed to be logical, when that was the drum you were beating in the first place. You are truly fucking stupid.

[Edited on December 23, 2008 at 12:56 PM. Reason : ]

12/23/2008 12:51:49 PM

Quote :

"LOGIC AND REASON ARE THE ONLY TOOLS THAT LEAD US TO THE TRUTH... *knows nothing about either subject* *is an atheist who read Dawkins and spends the rest of his time playing EVE Online instead of educating himself* 12/23/2008 12:39:56 PM"

How do you know what he knows?

12/23/2008 12:52:27 PM

Quote :

"I don't think anyone in this thread is arguing that logic can be used to conclude that "there is no god". You posted a bunch of crap about logic and reason, seemingly assuming that people in this thread were making such an argument. I could be wrong, but I don't remember anyone making that argument in this thread. Am I wrong? Has someone said that?"

I was. In the sense of "I can be reasonably sure there isn't one, given the lack of any evidence ever in the history of the entire universe."

[Edited on December 23, 2008 at 12:55 PM. Reason : ]

12/23/2008 12:54:16 PM

Quote :

" How do you know what he knows?"

Easy enough to infer when I see them stumble over both words.

Quote :

" You sir, are therefore presenting a straw man. You are telling us what our position is (that we think that logic can be used to conclude that "there is no god",) and then you argue against that. The problem is, that is not our position. You are arguing against a point that no one has made! (Again, did I miss where someone made this argument?) So, not only are you, then, an intellectual douche, but you've fail to be logical, when that was the drum you were beating in the first place. You are truly fucking stupid."

In fact I haven't said anything about your position on the existence/non-existence/epsilon-probable existence of God. All I did was ask you how much you know about logic and reason, which your side touts as the "WAY TO THE TRUTH."

You know what I do when Christians crow to me about Jesus being the way to the truth? I get into a conversation with them about the scriptures. Usually they realize they need to read more of them to understand what they were even saying.

You know what I do when atheists crow about logic and reason? Ask them how much they actually know about them. Here's the funny thing: whenever I do, they turn anti-intellectual on me. Oh the delicious irony.

12/23/2008 12:56:52 PM

I think you're just talking to stupid people on both sides.

12/23/2008 12:58:51 PM

Prime example: this thread.

12/23/2008 12:59:22 PM

Hah. Okay. I don't think I've seen any rebuttals to anything I've said other than, "You don't know anything! Here's a list of logic theories."

12/23/2008 1:03:04 PM

^^

ok player

where is your insightful response

other than "go read a book"

this is a "the world discriminates against atheists" thread

should we re-bring up the Bush thing

how about how a vast majority of the world believes in God

what about how polling shows how athiests are the most distrusted group...

BUT THIS HAS DEGENERATED into a "does god exist" thread... something no one has ever talked about ever

[Edited on December 23, 2008 at 1:04 PM. Reason : .]

12/23/2008 1:03:33 PM

Quote :

"I was. In the sense of "I can be reasonably sure there isn't one, given the lack of any evidence ever in the history of the entire universe.""

You were saying logic gets you "close enough", but not actually to a proof, right?. That's different than saying with certainty that logic can be used to conclude that "there is no god".

Quote :

""which your side touts as the "WAY TO THE TRUTH."""

Excuse me, but you just proved my point. I am not on a "side". I am an individual. You are acting as though you can just group people however you want to suit your point. You can't. You can't put me in some camp that I'm not in.

Quote :

"You know what I do when atheists crow about logic and reason?"

If you'd read the thread, you'd have realized that you are referring to agnostics, and not atheists. If an agnostic calls themself an atheist, and presents a stupid attempted logical proof of godlessness (which they can't,) you can't just assume that everyone that calls themselves an atheist is the same. In fact, I view atheism as a faith. I don't claim that logic can prove it. Agnostics, "agnostic-atheists", "weak atheists" and other non-theists are making those claims. (some of them, at least.)

[Edited on December 23, 2008 at 1:07 PM. Reason : ]

12/23/2008 1:03:46 PM

Quote :

"can you be this at work?"

Uhh, sure. Why wouldn't I be able to?

12/23/2008 1:05:01 PM

^because of the issue a while back with the Air Force

http://www.sptimes.com/2005/05/29/Columns/The_Air_Force_Academy.shtml

I don't know what's the overall culture in the Marine Corps

...

also the military has a serious Right leaning political bias

so...

[Edited on December 23, 2008 at 1:08 PM. Reason : .]

12/23/2008 1:07:30 PM

Quote :

"In fact, I view atheism as a faith."

WTF? It doesn't take faith to not believe in something.

12/23/2008 1:07:41 PM

I don't "not believe in something", I believe in godlessness. (faith)

12/23/2008 1:08:40 PM

Quote :

"Hah. Okay. I don't think I've seen any rebuttals to anything I've said other than, "You don't know anything! Here's a list of logic theories.""

If I felt like arguing with Dawkins I'd reread his book instead of arguing with a parrot.

Quote :

"^^ ok player where is your insightful response"

You are nastoute.

Quote :

"Excuse me, but you just proved my point. I am not on a "side". I am an individual. You are acting as though you can just group people however you want to suit your point. You can't. You can't put me in some camp that I'm not in."

From two pages ago:

Quote :

"So according to all of your statements how would you define someone who simply states (as I always have) reason and logic are the only accurate tools to understanding the universe."

If you disagree with this, then fine. If you agree with it then you should know something about what the fuck reason and logic are, and what the developments in them and discussions about them entail.

You're not an individual, btw. Somebody else has your opinions. Same with me. You're not some unique little snowflake. You fall into a camp. Sorry.

Quote :

"If you'd read the thread, you'd have realized that you are referring to agnostics, and not atheists. If an agnostic calls themself an atheist, and presents a stupid attempted logical proof of godlessness (which they can't,) you can't just assume that everyone that calls themselves an atheist is the same. In fact, I view atheism as a faith. I don't claim that logic can prove it. Agnostics, "agnostic-atheists", "weak atheists" and other non-theists are making those claims. (some of them, at least.)"

You're entering me into an argument I didn't set foot into. I haven't said a thing about the positions. I'm just examining some of the empty (demonstrably so) rhetoric about LOGIC AND REASONNNNN

12/23/2008 1:10:40 PM

This is retarded semantics.

No one knows anything for sure.

I have faith that I won't spontaneous combust in the next ten seconds. Sure, there's no evidence for it, but do I have proof? Of course not. I guess you can say I have faith in that regard. I have faith in the natural laws of the universe and that they will play out according to what science tells me.

Quote :

"If I felt like arguing with Dawkins I'd reread his book instead of arguing with a parrot."

Another dodge. Third time's a charm, eh?

[Edited on December 23, 2008 at 1:11 PM. Reason : ]

12/23/2008 1:11:04 PM

Quote :

"Quote : "^^ ok player where is your insightful response" You are nastoute."

that's what I thought

not so easy... is it mr. quote bomb

...

i'm actually kind of flattered that I've got singled out a bit

I feel a bit special...

[Edited on December 23, 2008 at 1:15 PM. Reason : .]

12/23/2008 1:11:36 PM

It's like I'm not participating in the same discussion you guys are. I'm not talking at all about the existence/non-existence/epsilon-probable existence arguments. Go back, reread what I said, and then examine how foolish you look.

12/23/2008 1:15:38 PM

GO READ A FUCKING BOOK, PEOPLE

12/23/2008 1:16:12 PM

Looks like you could use it. Gotta love it when the high-and-mighty "intellectuals" adopt anti-intellectualism to argue against a guy who actually knows something about their pet subjects.

12/23/2008 1:16:48 PM

ahh yes, but what do you have to offer?

where is the insight

please, enlighten us

...

and I'm not being an anti-intellectual

I'm saying that's your whole point... just belittling others and telling them to "GO READ A BOOK"

which is fine I guess... I don't know

[Edited on December 23, 2008 at 1:18 PM. Reason : .]

12/23/2008 1:17:27 PM

Expecting people to know about the club they wield against the "unwashed masses" is ... snobby? Maybe, but fuck.

12/23/2008 1:21:24 PM

that's what I thought

12/23/2008 1:21:45 PM

I am not at all angry. I just am stating what I see about the world around me and of course this thread has devolved into a pissing contest. I may have been embellishing by stating the most discriminated (that is a pretty difficult thing to prove). My opinion that there is very little popular protection for atheists/agnostic (insert as you see fit) belief because our government is steeped in christianity still seems very supported by the comments in this thread. I am not here to protect or debate my personal views and beliefs just like I am not here to attack anyone else for what they believe. If my comments came off as arrogant and hurt your feelings sorry it wasn't intended. Back on topic.

12/23/2008 1:23:29 PM

Quote :

"In fact I haven't said anything about your position on the existence/non-existence/epsilon-probable existence of God. All I did was ask you how much you know about logic and reason, which your side touts as the "WAY TO THE TRUTH." You know what I do when Christians crow to me about Jesus being the way to the truth? I get into a conversation with them about the scriptures. Usually they realize they need to read more of them to understand what they were even saying. You know what I do when atheists crow about logic and reason? Ask them how much they actually know about them. Here's the funny thing: whenever I do, they turn anti-intellectual on me. Oh the delicious irony."

lol

You didn't actually ask anyone anything. You told people what they know, and told them to go STFU.

Are you surprised by the reaction?

A: trolling
B: negative reactions
A -> B

12/23/2008 1:35:43 PM

Discussion is more fun when you can just make shit up and parrot other people.

Back to atheist-chat, where we discuss Dawkinz

12/23/2008 1:38:27 PM

That's true that there aren't any protections for freedom from religion, but as far as discrimination goes, we're pretty low on the totem pole. At least until we start making some noise. Then we can be featured on Fox News in wonderful segments like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mK6tzT39o_Q

12/23/2008 1:38:52 PM

Your posts are illogical.

I'm not sure of this thread's current direction, but I foresee that Atheists will persist as a secluded demographic from the rest society (Assuming Evidence Never Arrives). These individuals tend to reject religious folk for their blind faith, meanwhile they discount the intellectual community for their stubborn rationality. Unfortunately, you cannot have it both ways. You cannot wield logic and reason while ignoring the same very weapons in your hand. Atheists disingenuously drink the same faith-based Kool-Aid that is required to trust that God(s) does or does not exist, with conviction. Agnostics indisputably suspend judgment of either conclusion, which is evidently the sanest of stances.

12/23/2008 2:02:46 PM

I don't think atheists of your definition exist. That is more of a myth spawned by the religious to make people who don't believe in god seem just as close minded as they are (I can't find an non-inflammatory way to state this sorry) Until there is proof of a god atheists will continue to believe that there is not one however none would be willing to say there is NO WAY this proof will ever be found.

[Edited on December 23, 2008 at 2:12 PM. Reason : Clarify to keep heads from exploding.]

12/23/2008 2:05:36 PM

12/23/2008 2:08:55 PM

Quote :

"I don't think atheists of your definition exist"

Has anyone read my posts? Hello?

Quote :

"Unfortunately, you cannot have it both ways."

You're right. It's just that you're talking about two different groups. Real atheists are the faith-based ones. Some refer to these as "strong atheists". Agnostics are logic-based. They often [incorrectly] call themselves atheists. They are also called "weak atheists" or "agnostic-atheists".

[Edited on December 23, 2008 at 2:19 PM. Reason : ]

12/23/2008 2:15:38 PM

It is still a semantic argument. If not the most persecuted I think atheist/agnostics are the most unprotected minority.
^I don't think you would find many strong atheists who weren't unhinged.

[Edited on December 23, 2008 at 2:20 PM. Reason : Asfad]

12/23/2008 2:19:06 PM

Quote :

"The slapfight is getting hung up on whether atheists a) believe in the most probable explanation for things or b) whether atheists say without qualification that there cannot be a god I don't know any atheist of type b, and I suspect it is a strawman. Every atheist I know is of type a, where they don't believe in a god because there simply is no good reason to do so."

Quote :

"Type a are agnostic atheists, aka agnostics. Type b are faith-based atheists ("real" atheists). Many people who are one type incorrectly label themselves the other. Also, while type b may be a strawman that monotheists (whom think all atheists are type a) use to attack the type a people, there are actually type b people. They are a minority and are upset over agnostic atheists (a type of non-theist,) claiming the general term "atheist" as their own. They are not real atheists. (like me)"

Quote :

"It is still a semantic argument."

Sure... but it's always good if people are talking about the same things....

Quote :

"^I don't think you would find many strong atheists who weren't unhinged"

That may be the case, but that's still a stereotype.

[Edited on December 23, 2008 at 2:25 PM. Reason : ]

12/23/2008 2:21:39 PM

All very true and in principle I agree but I hate to see the thread get lost in the inevitable pissing contests. How about we just call it "a" from now on in and that could mean either atheist or agnostic whichever term you like.

Yes it is a stereotype of a group that probably doesn't exist.

[Edited on December 23, 2008 at 2:28 PM. Reason : stereotype]

12/23/2008 2:26:12 PM

Quote :

"How about we just call it "a" from now on"

That's just giving up. Different "camps" will continue to use their terms, so neutral parties should be those that choose the "proper" terms(the same way with abortion: "pro-life & pro-abortion" vs. "anti-choice & pro-choice" camps, but the neutral media uses: "pro-life & pro-choice")

We could discontinue using the term "agnostic", have agnostics call themselves "atheists", and then [real] atheists could call themselves something new, like "zerotheists".

Or, agnostics could realize themselves for who they are, and be called "agnostics", while real atheists would be called "atheists".

Quote :

"it is a stereotype of a group that probably doesn't exist."

It does. I am in that group. (I guess you're free to not believe me.)

12/23/2008 2:56:13 PM

Quote :

"It does. I am in that group. (I guess you're free to not believe me.)"

Quote :

"I am not on a "side". I am an individual."

12/23/2008 3:01:18 PM

I don't believe I can eliminate the possibility of God, but the probability of him existing is extremely low. There's a possibility that Peter Cottontail was real, and there's a chance he could be our true Lord and Eternal Savior. There's the exact same amount of evidence for that scenario as there is for God. In the end, my belief is almost the same as a true atheist. The true atheist is just willing to say, "the possibility of God existing is so low that it might as well be zero."

12/23/2008 3:07:30 PM

THe possibility of God existing the way most Christians imagine him/her/it to exist IS zero.

12/23/2008 3:10:56 PM