Total Posts:20|Showing Posts:1-20
Jump to topic:

Pseudoscientific Atheists

BigRat
Posts: 465
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 9:53:22 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
If you're an atheist, you are probably guilty of this. You probably know very little about science (I know you won't admit this), but you talk about it all the time.

You use terms that you think make you sound smart. But, in reality, you just read Richard Dawkins and parrot what he says.

The only things you know about science are things that you think will help you in arguments against theists. In other words, you are actually pretty ignorant on science. Just because you say things like "you don't understand physics", doesn't mean that you do.
BigRat
Posts: 465
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 9:58:09 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 9:56:28 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:
Well that was certainly well-thought out and constructive.

Thank you. You were one of my inspirations.
DakotaKrafick
Posts: 1,517
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 9:59:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 9:53:22 PM, BigRat wrote:
If you're an atheist, you are probably guilty of this. You probably know very little about science (I know you won't admit this), but you talk about it all the time.

You use terms that you think make you sound smart. But, in reality, you just read Richard Dawkins and parrot what he says.

The only things you know about science are things that you think will help you in arguments against theists. In other words, you are actually pretty ignorant on science. Just because you say things like "you don't understand physics", doesn't mean that you do.

How could an OP such as this possibly initiate fruitful discourse? Obviously, the entire thing is an over-generalization that ought to be dismissed as is.

(Really, what type of conversation were you hoping to generate with this?)
giraffelover
Posts: 64
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 9:59:28 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 9:53:22 PM, BigRat wrote:
If you're an atheist, you are probably guilty of this. You probably know very little about science (I know you won't admit this), but you talk about it all the time.

You use terms that you think make you sound smart. But, in reality, you just read Richard Dawkins and parrot what he says.

The only things you know about science are things that you think will help you in arguments against theists. In other words, you are actually pretty ignorant on science. Just because you say things like "you don't understand physics", doesn't mean that you do.

I disagree with you. I don't think atheists are dumb. I disagree with their conclusions about Evolution, but I still respect them and his/her intelligence.
BigRat
Posts: 465
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 10:00:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 9:58:09 PM, BigRat wrote:
At 2/23/2013 9:56:28 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:
Well that was certainly well-thought out and constructive.

Thank you. You were one of my inspirations.

Nevermind. I mistook you for someone else.

I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not. But, if you are, I will say that this forum is about discussion and this is an accurate depicton of many atheists.
BigRat
Posts: 465
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 10:01:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 9:59:19 PM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
At 2/23/2013 9:53:22 PM, BigRat wrote:
If you're an atheist, you are probably guilty of this. You probably know very little about science (I know you won't admit this), but you talk about it all the time.

You use terms that you think make you sound smart. But, in reality, you just read Richard Dawkins and parrot what he says.

The only things you know about science are things that you think will help you in arguments against theists. In other words, you are actually pretty ignorant on science. Just because you say things like "you don't understand physics", doesn't mean that you do.

How could an OP such as this possibly initiate fruitful discourse? Obviously, the entire thing is an over-generalization that ought to be dismissed as is.

(Really, what type of conversation were you hoping to generate with this?)

Well, have you ever called Christians or Theists irrational or dumb (be honest here)?

And, "they deserved it" doesn't count.
DakotaKrafick
Posts: 1,517
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 10:07:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 10:01:17 PM, BigRat wrote:
At 2/23/2013 9:59:19 PM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
At 2/23/2013 9:53:22 PM, BigRat wrote:
If you're an atheist, you are probably guilty of this. You probably know very little about science (I know you won't admit this), but you talk about it all the time.

You use terms that you think make you sound smart. But, in reality, you just read Richard Dawkins and parrot what he says.

The only things you know about science are things that you think will help you in arguments against theists. In other words, you are actually pretty ignorant on science. Just because you say things like "you don't understand physics", doesn't mean that you do.

How could an OP such as this possibly initiate fruitful discourse? Obviously, the entire thing is an over-generalization that ought to be dismissed as is.

(Really, what type of conversation were you hoping to generate with this?)


Well, have you ever called Christians or Theists irrational or dumb (be honest here)?

And, "they deserved it" doesn't count.

I have called particular theists irrational, illogical, dumb, stupid, ignorant, etc. I wouldn't say all theists are those things, and if I would say most of them are, I would do so only because I believe most people in general are.

Whether I've done so in the past or not, I can't say for sure. I certainly have in jest and/or frustration but out of completely sober sincerity? I don't think so, but again, I can't say for sure (and I don't see how that's relevant anyway).
johnnyboy54
Posts: 6,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 10:11:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 10:00:03 PM, BigRat wrote:
At 2/23/2013 9:58:09 PM, BigRat wrote:
At 2/23/2013 9:56:28 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:
Well that was certainly well-thought out and constructive.

Thank you. You were one of my inspirations.

Nevermind. I mistook you for someone else.

Yeah I was wondering. I was about to tell you to go look at my religion in my profile.

I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not. But, if you are, I will say that this forum is about discussion and this is an accurate depicton of many atheists.

I was being sarcastic. You are right that many atheists are parrots for Dawkins and the like. Many claim to use science against religion without really understanding either. And just as many Christians, if not more, are self-righteous, close-minded a$$-holes who react with such extreme hostility towards anything that remotely challenges their worldview.

A vast majority of the atheists I've ever met or talked to were very knowledgeable, and most Christians I have met aren't insecure jerks. Just because many members of a group are a$$holes or ignorant doesn't make it right to assume that all are like that. Such prejudice is the exact opposite of how Jesus would want you to act.
I didn't order assholes with my whiskey.
BigRat
Posts: 465
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 10:13:37 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 10:11:23 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:
At 2/23/2013 10:00:03 PM, BigRat wrote:
At 2/23/2013 9:58:09 PM, BigRat wrote:
At 2/23/2013 9:56:28 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:
Well that was certainly well-thought out and constructive.

Thank you. You were one of my inspirations.

Nevermind. I mistook you for someone else.

Yeah I was wondering. I was about to tell you to go look at my religion in my profile.

I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not. But, if you are, I will say that this forum is about discussion and this is an accurate depicton of many atheists.

I was being sarcastic. You are right that many atheists are parrots for Dawkins and the like. Many claim to use science against religion without really understanding either. And just as many Christians, if not more, are self-righteous, close-minded a$$-holes who react with such extreme hostility towards anything that remotely challenges their worldview.

A vast majority of the atheists I've ever met or talked to were very knowledgeable, and most Christians I have met aren't insecure jerks. Just because many members of a group are a$$holes or ignorant doesn't make it right to assume that all are like that. Such prejudice is the exact opposite of how Jesus would want you to act.

I was referring not to atheists in general but to atheists who talk a lot about atheism in general.

The ones that talk a lot about it tend to be guilty of this.
BigRat
Posts: 465
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 10:14:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 10:07:35 PM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
At 2/23/2013 10:01:17 PM, BigRat wrote:
At 2/23/2013 9:59:19 PM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
At 2/23/2013 9:53:22 PM, BigRat wrote:
If you're an atheist, you are probably guilty of this. You probably know very little about science (I know you won't admit this), but you talk about it all the time.

You use terms that you think make you sound smart. But, in reality, you just read Richard Dawkins and parrot what he says.

The only things you know about science are things that you think will help you in arguments against theists. In other words, you are actually pretty ignorant on science. Just because you say things like "you don't understand physics", doesn't mean that you do.

How could an OP such as this possibly initiate fruitful discourse? Obviously, the entire thing is an over-generalization that ought to be dismissed as is.

(Really, what type of conversation were you hoping to generate with this?)


Well, have you ever called Christians or Theists irrational or dumb (be honest here)?

And, "they deserved it" doesn't count.

I have called particular theists irrational, illogical, dumb, stupid, ignorant, etc. I wouldn't say all theists are those things, and if I would say most of them are, I would do so only because I believe most people in general are.

Whether I've done so in the past or not, I can't say for sure. I certainly have in jest and/or frustration but out of completely sober sincerity? I don't think so, but again, I can't say for sure (and I don't see how that's relevant anyway).

I wasn't referring to all atheists or even atheists in general. I was referring to atheists who talk about atheism and Religion a lot in general.

And, it is relevant because you are criticizing someone else for doing the same thing you have done in the past.
DakotaKrafick
Posts: 1,517
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 10:20:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 10:14:38 PM, BigRat wrote:
At 2/23/2013 10:07:35 PM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
At 2/23/2013 10:01:17 PM, BigRat wrote:
At 2/23/2013 9:59:19 PM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
At 2/23/2013 9:53:22 PM, BigRat wrote:
If you're an atheist, you are probably guilty of this. You probably know very little about science (I know you won't admit this), but you talk about it all the time.

You use terms that you think make you sound smart. But, in reality, you just read Richard Dawkins and parrot what he says.

The only things you know about science are things that you think will help you in arguments against theists. In other words, you are actually pretty ignorant on science. Just because you say things like "you don't understand physics", doesn't mean that you do.

How could an OP such as this possibly initiate fruitful discourse? Obviously, the entire thing is an over-generalization that ought to be dismissed as is.

(Really, what type of conversation were you hoping to generate with this?)


Well, have you ever called Christians or Theists irrational or dumb (be honest here)?

And, "they deserved it" doesn't count.

I have called particular theists irrational, illogical, dumb, stupid, ignorant, etc. I wouldn't say all theists are those things, and if I would say most of them are, I would do so only because I believe most people in general are.

Whether I've done so in the past or not, I can't say for sure. I certainly have in jest and/or frustration but out of completely sober sincerity? I don't think so, but again, I can't say for sure (and I don't see how that's relevant anyway).


I wasn't referring to all atheists or even atheists in general. I was referring to atheists who talk about atheism and Religion a lot in general.

Your first sentence was "If you're an atheist, you are probably guilty of this." Either way, it's an over-generalization that ought to be dismissed as is.

And, it is relevant because you are criticizing someone else for doing the same thing you have done in the past.

Tu quoque is considered a logical fallacy for a reason. I've made my share of mistakes; that I've done so and recognize them as such would only encourage me more to criticize others for doing the same.

I'd also warn everyone here willing to listen to NOT buy a 900 dollar used '90 oldsmobile from Craigslist (and it would only be hypocrisy if I was currently doing so or planning on doing so).
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 10:54:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 10:20:40 PM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
it's an over-generalization that ought to be dismissed as is.
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 7:03:50 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
There's plenty of atheists like this. There's plenty of theists like this too. Ignorance exists in almost any group. This thread is stupid.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 7:54:06 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 9:53:22 PM, BigRat wrote:
If you're an atheist, you are probably guilty of this. You probably know very little about science (I know you won't admit this), but you talk about it all the time.

You use terms that you think make you sound smart. But, in reality, you just read Richard Dawkins and parrot what he says.

The only things you know about science are things that you think will help you in arguments against theists. In other words, you are actually pretty ignorant on science. Just because you say things like "you don't understand physics", doesn't mean that you do.

Why must you try to incite anger?
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 8:38:05 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 10:01:17 PM, BigRat wrote:
At 2/23/2013 9:59:19 PM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
At 2/23/2013 9:53:22 PM, BigRat wrote:
If you're an atheist, you are probably guilty of this. You probably know very little about science (I know you won't admit this), but you talk about it all the time.

You use terms that you think make you sound smart. But, in reality, you just read Richard Dawkins and parrot what he says.

The only things you know about science are things that you think will help you in arguments against theists. In other words, you are actually pretty ignorant on science. Just because you say things like "you don't understand physics", doesn't mean that you do.

How could an OP such as this possibly initiate fruitful discourse? Obviously, the entire thing is an over-generalization that ought to be dismissed as is.

(Really, what type of conversation were you hoping to generate with this?)


Well, have you ever called Christians or Theists irrational or dumb (be honest here)?

And, "they deserved it" doesn't count.

Yes, and atheists too. If you haven't, that proves only one of two things: you haven't had a debate, or you suffer from a bias so strong it blinds you.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Slice_O_Pie
Posts: 21
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 9:59:50 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 9:53:22 PM, BigRat wrote:
If you're an atheist, you are probably guilty of this. You probably know very little about science (I know you won't admit this), but you talk about it all the time.

You use terms that you think make you sound smart. But, in reality, you just read Richard Dawkins and parrot what he says.

The only things you know about science are things that you think will help you in arguments against theists. In other words, you are actually pretty ignorant on science. Just because you say things like "you don't understand physics", doesn't mean that you do.

Oh, thanks. I was really trying to figure out what I was doing. Thanks for figuring that out for me... </sarcasm>

As far as parroting anything Dawkins says, in some cases you may be right. But at least we can look up his references and verify what he said. Where can we do that with the bible and Moses? Or Noah? Or even Jesus?

Myself, I love soaking in anything scientific that can teach me more about how nature and the universe works. It is literally insatiable. The fact that I can use some of that knowledge to shine light on your ignorance is merely icing on the cake.

I can fairly easily show many independent sources that can back up Dawkins' (or any other scientists) claims on request.
Where are your numerous archaelogical, biological, observational, and logical claims to back up the claims of Moses, Noah, and Jesus? Where?

If you are going to accuse atheists of ignorance, you darn well better be able to cover your own bases.
At least Dawkins can show scientific claims to back up his evidence. The best evidence you can claim is blind faith in an invisible, non-corporeal, silent Sky God who takes on the character traits of many who came before him, who is literally undetectable by any known means other than self-bias.

Who exactly is ignorant again?
rogue
Posts: 2,325
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 5:10:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 9:53:22 PM, BigRat wrote:
If you're an atheist, you are probably guilty of this. You probably know very little about science (I know you won't admit this), but you talk about it all the time.

You use terms that you think make you sound smart. But, in reality, you just read Richard Dawkins and parrot what he says.

The only things you know about science are things that you think will help you in arguments against theists. In other words, you are actually pretty ignorant on science. Just because you say things like "you don't understand physics", doesn't mean that you do.

You better be a troll or gtfo.