The best in arts & entertainment, news, pop culture, and your mom since 2002.

[Total: 87    Average: 3.3/5]
166 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 22606
Rating: 3.3
Category: Funny
Date: 06/12/11 12:50 PM

166 Responses to Top 10 Creationist Arguments, Part 2

  1. Profile photo of Yap71
    Yap71 Male 30-39
    150 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 12:52 pm
    Link: Top 10 Creationist Arguments, Part 2 - The Thinking Atheist returns with his next top 10 Creationist excuses.
  2. Profile photo of Seem
    Seem Female 18-29
    118 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 1:09 pm
    inb4 more whining.
  3. Profile photo of AbiElectric
    AbiElectric Female 18-29
    171 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 1:13 pm
    Haha! Loved this, so funny and clever.
  4. Profile photo of MikeyNiv
    MikeyNiv Male 18-29
    697 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 1:16 pm
    Not as much to do with creation this time. In fact, nothing to do with it. Still a good watch though, sure feels good up here.
  5. Profile photo of Sheraf
    Sheraf Male 18-29
    78 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 1:19 pm
    Haha I like that actually.

    This debate has no real end, but it`s still important to speak out.
  6. Profile photo of sbeelz
    sbeelz Male 30-39
    2868 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 1:19 pm
    @Seem- lol.
  7. Profile photo of BlankTom
    BlankTom Male 30-39
    1674 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 1:20 pm
    Haha! Loved this, so funny and clever.
    I wouldn`t call it clever, each of these points have been brought up thousands of time just on this board alone.
  8. Profile photo of sbeelz
    sbeelz Male 30-39
    2868 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 1:21 pm
    Also, I`m gonna start worshiping Ted.
  9. Profile photo of Tubby12370
    Tubby12370 Male 18-29
    1440 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 1:25 pm
    Without religion, comedy won`t survive...and without proof, it means nothing to me.





    Family guy
    FuturamaSouth park
    Misc parody
    Shirt
    And my personal favorite
  10. Profile photo of wtmac
    wtmac Male 30-39
    436 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 1:25 pm
    All hail Ted.
  11. Profile photo of LazyMe484
    LazyMe484 Male 18-29
    10441 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 1:45 pm
    These are arguments used by creationists, not arguments about creation, so stop complaining that it`s not relevant, because it is.

    We need to make fun of islam, to keep things balanced.
  12. Profile photo of Fatninja01
    Fatninja01 Male 30-39
    25420 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 1:48 pm
    ok then
  13. Profile photo of memoryburner
    memoryburner Male 13-17
    132 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 1:48 pm
    Being an athiest doesnt mean you have to try to disprove others beliefs....or that you have to be a total dick...I`m an athiest and I cant stand other athiests that think it means that they have to get on their damn high-horse and be like "Jesus is fake and you`re a dumbass for believing in him! The bible is just a really long fairy tale!" Creationists have the right to believe in whatever they want...just like we have the right not to believe...and we should both respect that.
  14. Profile photo of Tubby12370
    Tubby12370 Male 18-29
    1440 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 2:04 pm
    My comment with all the (comedy) related religion wasn`t me claiming to be an atheist or religious, I remarked on the fact that Comedy tends to make fun of religious people/icons. ( just to clear it up )
  15. Profile photo of Birdfather
    Birdfather Male 18-29
    346 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 2:11 pm
    I didn`t make it past the second point...
  16. Profile photo of Beardofzeus
    Beardofzeus Male 30-39
    670 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 2:11 pm
    Haven`t we just done the `religion vs science` debate? Let`s talk about sex, baby...
  17. Profile photo of Ontario
    Ontario Male 18-29
    229 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 2:12 pm
    All hail barbara strisane :P
  18. Profile photo of paperduck
    paperduck Male 18-29
    1745 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 2:18 pm
    Nothing original here, notice how the vast majority of both the religious and atheist camps just repeat what others already said. So imo these folks are not that different from one another, and certainly not what I would call "thinking".

    Every once in awhile I come across a real thinker, and they are also from both camps... but no one really listens to them.
  19. Profile photo of Tekinette
    Tekinette Male 30-39
    273 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 2:23 pm
    I don`t mind other beliefs either but trying to change a belief into a reality backed up by erroneous facts and illogical thinking is something different.. Not only is it stupid but very hypocritical when you know the history between religion and science.
  20. Profile photo of Zombiemike
    Zombiemike Male 18-29
    552 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 2:25 pm
    This is amazingly presumptuous.
  21. Profile photo of Scuzoid
    Scuzoid Male 30-39
    1268 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 2:30 pm
    Better Off Ted was such a great show. Portia de Rossi is such a fox. I`ve been worshiping Ted for close to two years now.
  22. Profile photo of the_phantom
    the_phantom Male 18-29
    510 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 2:33 pm
    while i dont disagree with what this video has to say, i feel that they are being total dicks about it.

    I find it almost laughable that science and religion can`t coexist peacefully. My family consists mostl of scientists, but we are all religious as well. In our belief, there is an omnipotent entity, but it isnt as directly active as traditional religion likes us to believe. If it did anythign at all, it created a situation in which a bang could occur to begin life and allow it to evolve naturally. we belive that god works through these small acts of chance and chain reaction, not through direct intervention.

    why is the union of science and religion so hard to conceive?
  23. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 2:43 pm
    Creationists have the right to believe in whatever they want...just like we have the right not to believe...and we should both respect that.

    If scientists ever start a determined campaign to infiltrate Christian churchs and force them to corrupt Christianity in order to serve science, then it would be time to start treating them similarly.

    It`s not just about believing or not believing in things. It`s more importantly about what people do as a result of those beliefs or lack thereof. Christian creationism requires the destruction of science and Christian creationists are going all out for it by corrupting science into a tool to give their faith false authority. Hence, for example, the attempts to try to get Christian creationism (usually under the name "Intelligent Design") taught as science.
  24. Profile photo of Kalon
    Kalon Male 13-17
    369 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 2:51 pm
    Wow, this just blew my mind... I have to convert to Cowism imediatly!!!
  25. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 2:55 pm
    why is the union of science and religion so hard to conceive?

    Because they are fundamentally seperate and different, and mutually exclusive whenever religion enters the real world. Science requires that evidence has total priority and belief has none. Religion requires that belief has total priority and evidence has none.

    Because religion has consistently attacked science and continues to do so.

    It`s possible to be a theist and a scientist, but not if you follow a religion that contains any explanation for anything that happens. For example, you have to reject the idea that thunder is the noise of Thor`s chariot.

    You can reconcile the two for some forms of religion. You can even view science as holy work. But you can`t unify science and religion.
  26. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 3:04 pm
    Viewing science as holy work might seem an odd idea, so I`ll elaborate.

    If you are a theist in a religion that includes creator(s) of the universe (or even just this part of it) then you can view science as holy work in two ways:

    1) An ongoing attempt to gain a ever more thorough and accurate understanding of the work of your god(s) and thus a route to a more profound appreciation of it.

    2) You could believe that your god(s) made humans with intelligence and curiosity so that humans would develop through gaining knowledge.

    3) Similarly to (2), if your faith has parental god(s), you could view the universe as a learning area they made for humans, like those activity play mat things for babies.
  27. Profile photo of MikeyNiv
    MikeyNiv Male 18-29
    697 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 3:22 pm
    It`s not like atheists are actively going around campaigning at churches (or mosques and synagogues etc) and trying to convert people. These videos are for the entertainment of other atheists. Why can`t they gather and laugh at others` beliefs? I`m serious. It`s actually fun to take the piss outta the fact some people seriously believe some of the stuff they do.
  28. Profile photo of metalm0rgan
    metalm0rgan Male 18-29
    110 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 3:22 pm
    I am bored of this now.

    If god exists he will prove it. If he doesn`t we`re all screwed anyway.
  29. Profile photo of hatface
    hatface Male 18-29
    605 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 3:30 pm
    God, The Thinking Atheists are such up-themselves assh*les.
  30. Profile photo of Cruddup
    Cruddup Male 30-39
    56 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 3:33 pm
    Atheists take the soul out of everything. They`re like those green-blooded, pointy-eared, hobgoblin Vulcans.
  31. Profile photo of Rick_S
    Rick_S Male 40-49
    3291 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 3:39 pm
    None of these were arguments against or for Creationism. They were all theological arguments that have nothing to do with evolution v creation.
  32. Profile photo of splurbyburbl
    splurbyburbl Male 30-39
    2798 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 3:46 pm
    I love this stuff because it pisses off all the zealots. You can pick them out in the thread.
  33. Profile photo of hatface
    hatface Male 18-29
    605 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 3:56 pm
    @splurbyburbl It can piss off more than zealots or theists, I`ll tell you that.
  34. Profile photo of IceDragon77
    IceDragon77 Male 18-29
    490 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 4:02 pm
    This sort of crap irritates me, and even i`m open minded. -.=.-;
  35. Profile photo of kingpong
    kingpong Male 18-29
    639 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 4:12 pm
    Streisandtarianism, totally know the kids that started that religion. They often conflicted with the Winfrenites. All parties involved smoked a lot.

    And Angillion, science requires faith that your observations are repeatable, yet I can provide examples of any situation that will have varying results. Religion and science can go together, for example the "clockwork god". If you build your religion on science, as most deists did, then the two are perfectly reconcilable.

    Anyway, I could easily refute all of these arguments even though I agree.
  36. Profile photo of BlankTom
    BlankTom Male 30-39
    1674 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 4:18 pm
    Does anyone think that *one* thing this person said was based on an original thought? To me this just sounds like someone regurgitating what he was told about how *atheists* should view christianity. He probably first heard this on some youtube video lecture by one of his profits (Richard Dawkins I bet) and just blindly following along (Hey, he even brought up the flying spaghetti monster, er Ted)
  37. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 4:21 pm
    And Angillion, science requires faith that your observations are repeatable

    No it doesn`t, because the observations will be repeated.

    At most, you could say that science requires faith that fundamental laws of the universe don`t spontaneously change.

    Religion and science can go together, for example the "clockwork god".

    One person can do both, but that doesn`t mean the two go together and it certainly doesn`t mean they are unified.
  38. Profile photo of Wildcats2008
    Wildcats2008 Male 18-29
    237 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 4:23 pm
    First off, why do some atheists have to bash on people who believe in God? I can understand it if they were pushing their faith on them but still.

    Second, how about this argument. God CREATED science to EXPLAIN what he created...hmm?
  39. Profile photo of Aeladil
    Aeladil Female 18-29
    513 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 4:46 pm
    I believe in God.
    And I believe in evolution and science.

    Evolution does not disprove the existence of God. It merely explains how things happened. Oh no, it`s not how a 2000 year old book translated many times by imperfect humans living in the Dark Ages said it would be. Shocker!
  40. Profile photo of Kodyo
    Kodyo Male 18-29
    226 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 4:51 pm
    THIS QUESTIONS EVERYTHING I`VE LIVED FOR!!!
    MUST. TRY. TO. DISCREDIT.....
  41. Profile photo of kingpong
    kingpong Male 18-29
    639 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 4:58 pm
    Angillion

    1. We have an entire branch of science dedicated to events that won`t repeat with 100% certainty, so to say all experiments are repeatable is ignorant.

    2. Under certain conditions all laws break down, this has been observed. We do not know the exact conditions at which these events occur but we assume we will not encounter these events in our day to day routines.

    3. Modern science operates under the assumption that these laws are, always have been, and always will be constant everywhere. We have existed for a brief period of time and cannot truly know that constants are constant throughout time. Nobody can prove that G has been constant for the past 14 billion years at all points in the universe, yet our current understanding of the universe is entirely based on the assumption that it is. I`m curious as to how science and faith are incompatible when our current scientific understanding of nature requires us to have untestable assumptions.
  42. Profile photo of bigwill6709
    bigwill6709 Male 18-29
    59 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 5:24 pm
    There is only one argument against God needed. Omniscience and Omnibenevolence, as promised by the bible are mutually exclusive.
  43. Profile photo of Pooptart19
    Pooptart19 Male 18-29
    2441 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 5:41 pm
    There is only one argument against God needed. Omniscience and Omnibenevolence, as promised by the bible are mutually exclusive.
    Let`s not forget the problem of divine foreknowledge.
  44. Profile photo of KeePay
    KeePay Male 18-29
    494 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 5:43 pm
    Plain and simple, this is even worse than the first one.
  45. Profile photo of leeann591
    leeann591 Female 18-29
    19 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 5:50 pm
    Lots of people are complaining about how rude these mean old atheists are being about their assertions. Why should they be nice about it? The nut-jobs, who are trying to force creationism and religious propaganda into schools, obviously have no respect for all the extremely substantial evidence that evolution provides, so why should they show respect for fairy tales that the zealots are trying to pass of as science?
  46. Profile photo of vorpalsword
    vorpalsword Male 18-29
    1452 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 5:53 pm
    aww both posts don`t have a hilariously stupid comment by crakrjak, I`m disappointed :(
  47. Profile photo of Fleaman1797
    Fleaman1797 Male 18-29
    718 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 6:31 pm
    God im so sick of this Atheist bullpoo.. i mean im not a christian.. its a silly thing to believe in, but this douche bag is openly trying to ruin peoples lives, what the hell does it matter if the stupider, none important people are christian? they are not gonna find the cure to cancer! and JUST because you dont believe in god doesnt mean your some sort of drating genius! it doesnt make you look smart. it makes you look like the cynical non-nice individual for always trying to ruin peoples beliefs. its a BELIEF! EVERYONE GETS THAT! NOW SHUT UP (thinking) Atheist
  48. Profile photo of i-am-ninja
    i-am-ninja Male 18-29
    142 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 7:04 pm
    @Fleaman1797

    more stupid
  49. Profile photo of bedbugsbite
    bedbugsbite Female 18-29
    41 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 7:18 pm
    I agree with leeann. Personally, I think no one should be silenced in their beliefs, whether they are atheist or religous. We should all be free to voice our opinions and try to prove/justify our views.
  50. Profile photo of Justin9235
    Justin9235 Male 18-29
    1582 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 7:35 pm
    @Fleaman1797 Why is he being an outspoken human being after thousands of years of religious oppression? Oh I don`t know, maybe because after so many people are so outspoken about their religion, and about how "all atheists are wrong, and retarded for not believing", someone stood up and said "drat you, and shut the hell up", with actual proof, and was roostery about it.

    I`ve been called a "drating idiot" at my place of work for not believing in god, and I`ve got to tell you, that poo is infuriating. To hold your tongue when someone is outspokenly belittling you, is not easy. I would love to say these exact same things to this guy, so kudos to the man who made this video for not holding back.
  51. Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 7:42 pm
    I have no problem with people being religious. Yes, I do genuinely believe that the world would be better off without it (growing up in Northern Ireland will do that do you), but I would never push that belief on anyone.

    But this series of vids is directly countering Creationists, not religious people*. I know plenty of religious people who also accept scientific facts such as the age of the universe, evolution, etc. No beef there. But Creationism positions itself directly opposed to science and the scientific method. Look, when people start to retard children by telling them that science is wrong, and that the Bible has all the answers regarding science, then that is disgusting, even a form of child abuse.

    Religious folks, you`re welcome to your religion. Just don`t try to force it down my neck, and I`ll return the mutual respect. But once you try to encroach on science, we`re going to go to the f*cking mattresses.
  52. Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 7:43 pm
    * with limited success. Not all their points are against Creationism specifically, but against religion in general. I think their message would have been more meaningful without the general anti-religious points.
  53. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 7:57 pm
    Even worse than last time.

    In particular #9. I didn`t used to have belief in God before I became a theist. The number of times I`ve been told "Oh then you weren`t a real Atheist" is astounding.

    It`s almost as if being Atheist hasn`t fixed the flaws in their logic, made them scientists, improved their education, taught them logical flow, increased their intelligence, decreased their confirmation bias, or strengthened their argumentation.

    One of the many many many many many reasons the superiority complex of non-nice individuals like this guy get on my nerves.
  54. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 8:10 pm
    "There is only one argument against God needed. Omniscience and Omnibenevolence, as promised by the bible are mutually exclusive."

    Agreed. This problem of evil was first posed somewhere around 300BC. It has had an easy refute since about 50 years after that.

    Assumption you`re making: Good and Evil are fixed mathematical concepts in opposition to one another.

    They are not. Killing Hitler could be considered evil, but it would be to prevent a greater evil, therefore the act could be considered a little evil, and a lot good.

    In a greater example: Eliminating free will could easily prevent all war. God clearly allows evil as a reaction to the greater good of free will.

    Ergo, mutually exclusive they are not.

    See last thread for secondary explanation of the PoE.
  55. Profile photo of Blatto
    Blatto Male 18-29
    358 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 8:13 pm
    We`re still talking about this? I think we get it.

    The first group hates the second because they are despicable sinners bound for hell. The second hates the first because they are ignorant fools who are blind to scientific evidence.

    Everyone sucks.
  56. Profile photo of Schr0dinger
    Schr0dinger Male 50-59
    359 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 8:17 pm
    This was boring.
  57. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 8:18 pm
    The number of times I`ve been told "Oh then you weren`t a real Atheist" is astounding.


    Fair enough, but don`t believe it when anyone (especially people like al Qaeda/Wahhabayists) tells you weren`t a true Muslim.
  58. Profile photo of inaria
    inaria Female 18-29
    1515 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 8:50 pm
    @davymid who said "don`t encroach on science", those are my thoughts exactly! Which is why I`ll never live in Texas.

    But yeah I feel like these videos aren`t really explaning their arguments properly. For example the thermodynamics one in the last one...

    And it bothers me that the subtitles and what the person is speaking are different.
  59. Profile photo of PUDDING1961
    PUDDING1961 Female 40-49
    446 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 9:13 pm
    Give the gift of love. Do not kill unless self defense. Help the weak. Learn to forgive. Be amazed by all that is on this earth and in the heavens. May everyday be an oportunity to better yourself. May the day that you take your last breath be a time of peace, knowing that you`ve done your best here on earth. This, in a nutshell is what i believe in... religion or not.

    Not easy to live by that as life is a jumble of duties and work and play and anger and joy and trials and errors and unfairness and envy and missunderstandings.

    I choose not to argue about my neighbours beliefs. They belong to them and they have their reasons. And i have mine. I don`t feel compelled to prove any of my beliefs because, it, *the arguing*, becomes a bottomless pit of frustration and judgements.

    Peace!
  60. Profile photo of antagonizer
    antagonizer Male 18-29
    508 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 9:17 pm
    Christian: You`re evil and you`re going to hell unless you repent. This country was founded on christianity.

    Atheist: I don`t believe in god, therefore I don`t believe in hell. I think god has no place in politics.

    Christian: How dare you attack my faith and infringe on my right to believe?

    Atheist: I`m not attacking your faith, I`m just saying that I don`t believe as you do, and don`t think I should have to pledge allegiance to a deity that I don`t feel exists.

    Christian: If you don`t like America then feel free to leave it!

    Atheist: 3==>
  61. Profile photo of Rawrg
    Rawrg Male 18-29
    934 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 9:19 pm
    If you`re religious, you`re deluding yourself. Wake the drat up and join reality.
  62. Profile photo of Keegan31
    Keegan31 Male 18-29
    228 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 9:49 pm
    Baal: God is Omniscient. He know what we will do before we ever do it. If God knows what we will do before we even do it, how do we have free will?
  63. Profile photo of xCYBERDYNEx
    xCYBERDYNEx Male 18-29
    4903 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 10:14 pm
    @inaria/ have you ever been to Texas? Turn off the tv and go outside.
  64. Profile photo of IceDragon77
    IceDragon77 Male 18-29
    490 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 10:26 pm
    @Keegan31 I like to think of it in the terms of possibility. Think of your life as a giant tree diagram of choices. God can think of everything you possibly CAN do at one given point in time, but it would all be probability. He does not know what choice you make, but he knows what ones you can. At least that is the way I think of it, hope you understand what I am saying.

    Also, @leeann591, why should scientists shove their beliefs down students throats? Honestly, I am one of those people that would want students to see both sides of it all, and make the decision for themselves (and yes, for those who will bug me about it, say that evolution has more evidence or whatever). Course you wouldnt want that, as you wouldnt want your child having the chance to be `indoctrinated,` as any creationist wouldnt want their child to be either..
  65. Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 10:42 pm
    Also, @leeann591, why should scientists shove their beliefs down students throats? Honestly, I am one of those people that would want students to see both sides of it all, and make the decision for themselves
    True dat, give it equal time in the classroom, Let the children decide for themselves!

    We should teach both Alchemy and Chemistry. We should teach both Heliocentricity and Geocentricity. We should teach both Radiometric decay and Noah`s Ark.

    I mean, seriously, who do these so-called scientists a.k.a. "teachers" think they are, shoving their beliefs down students throats?

    IceDragon77, seriously, you speak of indoctrination? I sincerely hope you`re not a parent.
  66. Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 10:45 pm
    To close, I`ll post one my favourite things ever. Click it if you like. http://www.i-am-bored.com/bored_link.cfm?link_id=34934
  67. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 10:45 pm
    Which is why I`ll never live in Texas


    I`ve lived in Texas for almost 22 yrs and it is not the worst place on the planet to live. I`ll bet real estate here is cheaper here than where you live.

    Also we`re not as big on that creationist or abstinence crap like our neighbors to the East of us are.
  68. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 11:01 pm
    "Baal: God is Omniscient. He know what we will do before we ever do it. If God knows what we will do before we even do it, how do we have free will?"

    I`ve been through this on IAB before with Angillion I think.

    Super short oversimplistic but still totally workable answer: God lives in the future.

    You have free will to make a choice, but you still make a choice at some point. Doc Brown still knows what you`ll do, because he saw you do it.
  69. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 11:05 pm
    @Antagonizer

    Theist: Hello
    Antagonizer: You said you believe in God because of your elbow injury. You`re an idiot.
    Theist: ... I just said hello.
    Antagonizer: I WIN!

    P.S. If we can paraphrase that badly, arguing becomes a lot easier.
  70. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 11:08 pm
    @Cajun:

    Hey, I`m not sure what you mean by your post. I try to argue that someone is unIslamic, but I try to never tell anyone they`re not Muslim.

    That includes the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. To do otherwise is the no true scotsman fallacy.

    The one exception of course being if they don`t... you know believe in God or something. There are conditions, but they`re pretty lax.

    I`m even ok with them not following all 5 pillars even though that`s the standard very much agreed upon definition of a Muslim, just because it`s also an interpretive construct.
  71. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 11:12 pm
    @Cajun again:

    In fact, I even apologized on Infidels.org sometime around September 11 when people were making the claim that those who committed the acts "had no religion".

    I thought it was unfair to Atheists.

    I`ve tried to be consistent in stating they`re Muslim, but clearly doing it wrong.
  72. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 11:29 pm
    @Baal

    There`s a lot BS in any religion and ergo and the BS-ers. My thought is that people who tend to leave or choose to no longer affiliate themselves with a certain group did so probably because they were simply surrounded by people of said group who could not provide a good rationale as to why they should continue to do so. That is one of a few big reasons anyway.

    I used to consider myself christian and liberal.
    I consider myself libertarian now because of Bush Jr. and my college macroeconomics course.

    I consider myself agnostic because I thought about a lot of other different religions and their views on life and spiritually, and I was never really commited to the faith (which is ironic because I`m an Eagle Scout).

    Ultimately I chose to no longer affiliate myself with said groups as there was no solid rationale to do so.
  73. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 11:35 pm
    So you could say John Doe who was part of group A heard/knew of better reasons to be a part of group B then there were to be in group A. Therefore John Doe left group A to join group B.
  74. Profile photo of 8BitHero
    8BitHero Male 18-29
    5414 posts
    June 12, 2011 at 11:40 pm
    Good stuff.
  75. Profile photo of cuthere2
    cuthere2 Male 30-39
    317 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 2:01 am
    "Assumption you`re making: Good and Evil are fixed mathematical concepts in opposition to one another.

    They are not. Killing Hitler could be considered evil, but it would be to prevent a greater evil, therefore the act could be considered a little evil, and a lot good.

    In a greater example: Eliminating free will could easily prevent all war. God clearly allows evil as a reaction to the greater good of free will.

    Ergo, mutually exclusive they are not. "

    Baal, just as you did in the previous thread, you are ignoring what the Bible itself says in an attempt to rationalize, and explain away the logical fallacies of religion.

    Sorry, but you are now contradicting Biblical claims at this stage in order to make your point.

    Amazing the lengths people will go to, and the mental gymnastics they`ll engage in to hold onto an ancient belief system.
  76. Profile photo of cuthere2
    cuthere2 Male 30-39
    317 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 2:06 am
    For those who claim it`s "mean" and "ridiculous" for Atheists to be so outspoken against the religious folks ignore the fact that because of religion, medical technology and scientific progress has been held back by hundreds of years. Remember the dark ages?

    Recall that the birth of medical understanding was held back by hundreds of years because it was considered a "sin" to experiment on a cadaver! It was "evil" as what goes on inside the human body is the work of God, and not for us to know.

    Scientists did their work quietly, and risked life imprisonment, or even torture and death by religious leaders if caught.

    Same with Astronomy, and nearly every other facet of science that flies in the face of current religious belief. Imprisonment, torture, death.

    Imagine the BILLIONS of lives that could have been saved if not for this ancient belief system getting in the way of FACTS.
  77. Profile photo of apedrana
    apedrana Male 18-29
    144 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 2:18 am
    The problem isn`t religion, at its basis is fairly good willed. The problem has always been PEOPLE! PEOPLE SUCK!!
  78. Profile photo of cuthere2
    cuthere2 Male 30-39
    317 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 2:54 am
    `The problem isn`t religion, at its basis is fairly good willed."

    I`m going to have to disagree with you there. Look at history. The very nature of using a belief system to control the actions of a large group of people never, NEVER turns into something good in the long run. (Don`t misunderstand my meaning here. I`m not saying that people never do good in the name of religion)

    The reason? Because you are taking large groups of people, and telling them to believe something illogical, without a shred of evidence or proof.

    Once you turn people into "sheeple" in this manner, then these people are now armed with the built-in rationalization to do things they normally would not in the name of serving a higher power.

    Murder your son because "god said so?" Check. Are there people who never go to this extreme? Of course, but look around the world. Making a VIRTUE out of being gullible never turns into good.
  79. Profile photo of Beardofzeus
    Beardofzeus Male 30-39
    670 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 3:09 am
    @cuthere2 - I completely agree with your arguments, and many many others that can be called upon. Unfortunately, no matter how many rational arguments are placed in front of believers the act of faith itself is irrational and so it is impossible to convince a `believer` otherwise. They will hold on to blind faith until the bitter end. The fear is too strong. The best chance for humanity is to educate the new generations and to let them make up their own minds without imposing fear from an early age. Fat chance.
  80. Profile photo of DutchWeed
    DutchWeed Male 18-29
    92 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 3:20 am
    why are there still religions?

    that something for Middle Ages

  81. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 3:55 am
    Never once have I ever heard a Christian imply that someone was an idiot for not believing.

    This, and the other video, is just filled with hate and bullying.

    Why even make it?
  82. Profile photo of tedgp
    tedgp Male 30-39
    3287 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 3:55 am
    We would be exploring the galaxy now if religion hadnt of held us back for hundreds of years through the middle ages.
  83. Profile photo of tsiemens
    tsiemens Male 30-39
    515 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 3:56 am
    so the proof against god is that you didn`t eat the right junk food? This guy is a master of non facts to prove his points, its nonsense
  84. Profile photo of tedgp
    tedgp Male 30-39
    3287 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 3:57 am
    You call it hate and bullying... Have you ever heard a religious argument? Theyre blidnly led like sheep, and refuse to look at or even consider the possibility that they are wrong. As the saying goes, we lock up "crazy people" who hear voices, why not lock up the religious people as well?
  85. Profile photo of tedgp
    tedgp Male 30-39
    3287 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 3:58 am
    @tsiemens Typical religious believer arent you. You focus on one thing he said ( which you took entirely out of context to the videos meaning) and choase to focus solely on that, ignoring the other perfectly valid objections/opinions he made.
  86. Profile photo of davidildo123
    davidildo123 Male 40-49
    143 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 4:03 am
    I liked the first one better. This version was mostly ridicule, straw man arguements, and fallacious logic.
  87. Profile photo of Uthrax
    Uthrax Male 30-39
    77 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 4:48 am
    All hail TED, creator of the universe and exploding beer
  88. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 4:59 am
    @Ted:
    "You call it hate and bullying... Have you ever heard a religious argument?"

    Many, the bad ones sound like this:
    "Theyre blidnly led like sheep, and refuse to look at or even consider the possibility that they are wrong. "

    @Cuthere:
    1) I`m not Christian, so really, the biblical definitions of things don`t apply... however it`s possible I`ve imposed my understanding of definitions on top of biblical definitions.

    2) I doubt it though, and I`d like a little evidence of your claims please.
  89. Profile photo of Deviros
    Deviros Male 18-29
    535 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 5:00 am
    The first one was far more fun to pick at, this one is mostly conjecture and opinion.

    However - this is still far from humble, and "Habitat for Humanity" is far from a secular organization =D

    And I quote from HFH "A nonprofit, ecumenical Christian housing organization building simple, decent, affordable housing in partnership with people in need."

    Seriously - first the monkeys, now inaccuracies in the organizations that they list as secular... these are just laughable.
  90. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 5:04 am
    Incidentally, no, we would not be exploring the stars. During the dark ages scientific progress was still being made outside of Europe.

    Sparked in part by mandatory literacy that was encouraged by religion. Irrespective of if you agree with religion or not, this is pretty straightforward here.

    The reason we explore the solar-system at all now is:
    Islamic Scholars in the 700 to 1200s paving the way for the renaissance.
    Jewish scientists escaping Nazi Germany in ~1920-40s. Look up the Amerika Bomber.
    The Cold War.
  91. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 5:07 am
    Baal. I don`t often agree with you, but on this I gotta say HUZZAH!

    They gots pwned.
  92. Profile photo of GRadde
    GRadde Male 18-29
    2556 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 5:08 am
    The first round had rather decent points, but this one doesn`t seem to ring as true. I still don`t understand what`s wrong with Pascal`s Wager. Isn`t a little faith better than rejected little faith, rejected only because it was little?
  93. Profile photo of Deviros
    Deviros Male 18-29
    535 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 5:13 am
    @tedgp: No, that`s just plain wrong - the dark ages have been found to be not that dark after all...

    http://bit.ly/mLOIAu "Abacus and the Cross"
    "In fact, the Church considered mathematics the highest form of worship. Before you were allowed to study theology, you had to study the seven liberal arts—grammar, rhetoric and dialectic , and then the quadrivium."

    http://bit.ly/mLkop9 "Archaeology News Network"
    http://bit.ly/lFG0VV "James Hannam"
    http://bit.ly/kFMLL5 "10 reasons the Dark Ages Were not Dark"

    http://bit.ly/iPuxwf "Wikipedia: Dark Ages (historiography)"
    "The rise of archaeology and other specialties in the 20th century has shed much light on the period and offered a more nuanced understanding of its positive developments. Other terms of periodization have come to the fore..."


    Research is your friend.
  94. Profile photo of tedgp
    tedgp Male 30-39
    3287 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 5:16 am
    scientific progress hmm. Guess those chinese had computers back them. Guess the native americans in the undiscovered US were advancing cybernetic systems. And those cheeky spanish, trying to turn their sea armada into rocket ships.

    We know you are religious through and through, but take a step back and put forth a valid arguments to the athiest counter. Instead of either focusing on one piece which you take out of context, or blindly ignoring what has been put forward and choosing to go off on a tangent.
  95. Profile photo of Deviros
    Deviros Male 18-29
    535 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 5:23 am
    @tedgp "scientific progress hmm. Guess those chinese had computers back them. Guess the native americans in the undiscovered US were advancing cybernetic systems. And those cheeky spanish, trying to turn their sea armada into rocket ships. "

    WTF are you talking about? Do you even pay attention to what you write?

    science does not mean computers or cybernetics. Science includes studying the physical world, positing theories, exploring what is around us, and running experiments and tests. The wheel is science, basic mechanics is science, proper growing of crops and meteorology is science! UNDERSTANDING is science! Math! Exploring the natural world! It`s science - and awesome!

    Geez, atheists can be thick.
  96. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 5:40 am
    @Ted: Wtf are you talking about, and wtf are you talking to?

    @AJ: Ta. :)

    @Gradde:
    Many things are wrong with Pascal`s Wager.
    1) Assumes only options are belief/disbelief. Discards different beliefs (Islam vs Christianity, vs Judaism vs Hinduism etc).
    2) You don`t choose belief, ergo, you can`t choose which box you fall in, making it pointless.
    3) It is faith based, not works based. (Though this is in line with much of Christian doctrine, it is not in line with many believers).
    ...
    and I feel like I`m missing one....

    Oh yes, the mathematical counter.

    PW assumes only the afterlife is valuable, because it is infinite. One could argue that the finite nature of life increases its value to infinity too.

  97. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 5:44 am
    Ok, it does actually seem like you were talking to me Ted.

    Your point was "religion bad looky".
    Mine was "religion good looky".
    That`s a fairly valid counter.

    "Look at the progress lost" by you, vs "Look at the progress created" by me, is similarly valid.

    Or are you just trolling here?
  98. Profile photo of ryannn24
    ryannn24 Male 18-29
    83 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 6:02 am
    @Deviros, You just took research from wikipedia and used it as fact.

    YOU LOSE.
  99. Profile photo of Deviros
    Deviros Male 18-29
    535 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 6:06 am
    @ryann24: not really. It was the final point, and that source, as of the time of my writing, is well documented on their site. It provides a rather concise and documented collection of facts. If you can`t be assed to follow the links and read the documentation for yourself, and thereby take my links as fact, then you, to use your poorly constructed vernacular, LOSE.

    The fact that you choose that one point, and disregard the others, proves that you didn`t bother to read anything, and just focused on that one point, which has zero substance. Good day to you.
  100. Profile photo of Beardofzeus
    Beardofzeus Male 30-39
    670 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 6:16 am
    @Baalthazaq - you seem to relish shooting down the weaker arguments with your infinite wisdom. You fail to make a convincing argument for yourself. Unfortunately, you will fail in converting non-believers, just as I will fail in converting believers. I do not try. You, like all believers, have no evidence that you are correct, and although you may be correct, I highly doubt it. You fail when you say that `You don`t choose belief, ergo, you can`t choose which box you fall in` - this supports the main flaw in belief, which is that it is forced upon us through childhood or cultural fear and pressure. If we were given all the information and asked to choose for ourselves I reckon most would choose a form of agnosticism or antitheism (look it up).
  101. Profile photo of TKD_Master
    TKD_Master Male 18-29
    4794 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 6:23 am
    Silly religious people, stop wasting your time and brain power worshiping fairy tales. If you MUST worship a fairy tale, there are much better ones out there vs. the bible.
  102. Profile photo of dang007
    dang007 Male 30-39
    599 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 6:54 am
    What makes an act "good" or "bad"?
  103. Profile photo of MikeyNiv
    MikeyNiv Male 18-29
    697 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 7:00 am
    Eskimo: "If I didn`t know about God and sin, would I go to hell?"
    Priest: "No, not if you did not know."
    Eskimo: "Then why did you tell me?"
  104. Profile photo of bophus
    bophus Male 30-39
    474 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 7:02 am
    @Baalthazaq
    "The reason we explore the solar-system at all now is:
    Islamic Scholars in the 700 to 1200s paving the way for the renaissance.
    Jewish scientists escaping Nazi Germany in ~1920-40s. Look up the Amerika Bomber.
    The Cold War."

    I think you have this a little skewed in your direction.

    They didnt expore the solar system because they were islamic or jewish. They were islamic and jewish and expolored the solar system. Their religion had nothing to do with the solar system.

    "One could argue that the finite nature of life increases its value to infinity too. "

    I could also argue that tree are staplers.

  105. Profile photo of apedrana
    apedrana Male 18-29
    144 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 8:46 am
    Believing in a God never hurt anyone. religion on its own is harmless, but religion in the hands of the wrong people = disaster, no difference to religion in the right hands = Win. But you can say this about anything when it comes to the Human race. Atheist, Christian or Buddhist, we all have the abilities for Good or Evil. Now I`m not religious at all, but the way some atheists and this video talk down and belittle religion is a little hypocritical. you have to realize that religion has been around a loooong time, so its not going to disappear straight away, but times are changing and things are progressing, will it ever disappear? prob not, but it will not hold the same values or power that it once had. but believe me when i say, the world will still have its fair share of problems! Atheism will not magically save the human race and its problems.
  106. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 9:15 am
    Beard of Zeus:
    You assume of course that I`m trying to convert anyone. I don`t argue against anti-black content in the hopes that everyone will become black. I do it because it`s bullpoo, and it being exposed as bullpoo is easy and fun.

    Also, I don`t need to look up anti-theism, or agnosticism, nor the aspect of calculation vs choice in belief.

    Now, disbelieve in the computer for 10 minutes. Go on. Choose not to believe, without changing any of the surrounding evidence.

    Don`t imagine. That`s different. That`s pretending the computer isn`t there. Genuinely make your mind not believe the computer is there.

    When you do that, I`ll have a discussion with you on the choice in belief. Until then feel free to claim my statement "fails".
  107. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 9:23 am
    Bophus:

    1) The reason I tied Islam to the progress at the time is entirely secular, requires 0 faith in Allah, and in my last post: Mandatory literacy.

    2) I could itemize some examples for you where that`s certainly not the case, but I hate that tactic so I won`t.

    3) "I could also argue that tree are staplers". You could.
    Here`s a logical argument for the mathematical counter to Pascal.

    Priori A) The scarcity of a commodity often determines the value of an individual unit. (The rarer the more valuable).
    Priori B) An individual`s lifetime, when compared to infinity, is infinitely scarce.

    Ergo: Conclusion: Life is infinitely valuable.

    That`s the argument. I`m not sure I agree 100% with the prioris, but they`re reasonable.

    Now, you do it with "Tree are staplers".
  108. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 9:32 am
    One point, it`s not comparing it simply to infinity, but the infinity expressed in the wager itself.

    Basically making the 4 sections.

    Believe + Wrong = Waste the only (infinitely valuable) life you have. Gain nothing.

    Believe + Right = Gain infinite reward, waste (immaterial) lifetime.

    Disbelieve + Wrong = Lose infinite reward for infinite punishment. Gain immaterial lifetime.

    Disbelieve + Right = Gain fulfilled (infinitely valuable) life. Lose nothing.
  109. Profile photo of davidildo123
    davidildo123 Male 40-49
    143 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 9:36 am
    >>>Priori A) The scarcity of a commodity often determines the value of an individual unit. (The rarer the more valuable).
    Priori B) An individual`s lifetime, when compared to infinity, is infinitely scarce.
    Ergo: Conclusion: Life is infinitely valuable<<<

    Your statement is not valid. You first Priori is "often times", yet your conclusion is a definate. If Priori A is "Often", then your Priori B does not support the conclusion.

    Priori A - yadda yadda yadda
    Priori B -Rabies are scarce in Illinois
    Conclusion: Rabies are valuable! Get top dollar and get yerself some rabies today! We will throw in some Leporacy for no additonal cost.
  110. Profile photo of davidildo123
    davidildo123 Male 40-49
    143 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 9:39 am
    Ideology is the real killer, not religion. If we didn`t have religion, the demagogues and dictators will just find anything else to control people with. Religion is relatively harmless and the pathetic arguements that try to amplify the horrors caused by religion pale in comparision to just the things man do to obtain power. We are just looking at one of the causes when we blame religion.
  111. Profile photo of IceDragon77
    IceDragon77 Male 18-29
    490 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 9:46 am
    @davymid You hope I am not a parent because I would want my children to know all sides of everything, and to know why they believe what they do? Wow, you really are a bigot arent you?
  112. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 9:57 am
    David:
    It`s not my argument. It is an existing argument. It is deductive, and therefore, as all deductive arguments, built on the acceptance of the premise.

    Ergo, I put it forward.

    I did double down on the first priori though. I included the word often to basically add another unnecessary "if you agree with this".

    However, I would add that diseases, as well as poisons, can be quite valuable due to their rarity. They are used in vaccines. The rarer, the more valuable.

    Feel free to argue however that life has no inherent value or desirability enhanced by scarcity when compared to an infinite version of itself. That`s you not accepting the priori.

    They`re still fairly reasonable though.
  113. Profile photo of Beardofzeus
    Beardofzeus Male 30-39
    670 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 10:11 am
    @Baalthazaq the fact that you claim to be able to `truly believe that there is no computer` is in some way meant to impress me as to your superior mind? This isn`t the matrix, this is the real world. You essentially argue Pascal`s Wager (which is the most likely explanation for most believers` faith), yet you proclaim that you truly believe. If you are to be believed then your strength of faith is to be admired. Personally, I prefer to struggle with my own reality of existence. All your posturing about infinity, value, and your overuse of the word `ergo` is starting to get a little old. Let`s just agree to disagree, but agree that life is beautiful, valuable, and we should all strive to do better for ourselves and each other!

    BOZ
  114. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 10:17 am
    Beard of Zeus:

    I`ve just spent at least 4 posts discussing that Pascal`s wager is invalid.

    "You essentially argue Pascal`s Wager"

    You`re essentially illiterate.
    someone asked what was wrong with the wager.
    I`ve been pointing it out.

    Also, unless you`re arguing there *isn`t* choice in belief, then you also misinterpreted that statement I made too.

    My argument was that as you cannot choose to believe, pascal`s wager is invalid.

    Anything else?
  115. Profile photo of cuthere2
    cuthere2 Male 30-39
    317 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 10:17 am
    "@Cuthere:
    1) I`m not Christian, so really, the biblical definitions of things don`t apply... however it`s possible I`ve imposed my understanding of definitions on top of biblical definitions.

    2) I doubt it though, and I`d like a little evidence of your claims please."


    What claims? Please be more specific.
  116. Profile photo of bophus
    bophus Male 30-39
    474 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 10:19 am
    @Baalthazaq

    "Now, you do it with "Tree are staplers"."

    trees are a solid
    staplers are a solid

    therefore trees are staplers.

  117. Profile photo of cuthere2
    cuthere2 Male 30-39
    317 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 10:20 am
    "Ideology is the real killer, not religion. If we didn`t have religion, the demagogues and dictators will just find anything else to control people with. Religion is relatively harmless and the pathetic arguements that try to amplify the horrors caused by religion pale in comparision to just the things man do to obtain power. We are just looking at one of the causes when we blame religion."


    Well of course we`re only looking at one of the causes - Seeing as how that particular cause (religion) happens to be at the center of this debate! Why would we deviate from the subject at hand?
  118. Profile photo of Malakamike
    Malakamike Male 18-29
    52 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 10:22 am
    Hey david you know more people have been killed and genocide has been declared in the name of god then anything else right. If you need a book telling you that killing and stealing is wrong then you are probably a retard.
  119. Profile photo of cuthere2
    cuthere2 Male 30-39
    317 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 10:26 am
    "@Baalthazaq
    "The reason we explore the solar-system at all now is:
    Islamic Scholars in the 700 to 1200s paving the way for the renaissance.
    Jewish scientists escaping Nazi Germany in ~1920-40s. Look up the Amerika Bomber.
    The Cold War."

    Talk about drawing the wrong conclusion! The only reason a large portion of the life saving medical procedures we enjoy today exist is because of Nazi scientists experimenting on live human subjects.

    Using your logic, I suppose I could use this as an argument to support Nazi agenda?

    Was it the fact that these doctors and surgeons were Nazi`s that moved medical science forward?

    No, it was their MEDICAL training, and the fact they were using the deductive reasoning process taught to all scientists regardless of discipline.

    Albeit their experiments were carried about in horrible ways, it was the scientific process that brought about the progress, NOT the Nazi agenda.

  • Profile photo of cuthere2
    cuthere2 Male 30-39
    317 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 10:29 am
    "The reason we explore the solar-system at all now is:
    Islamic Scholars in the 700 to 1200s paving the way for the renaissance.

    Your argument is misdirected. Remove the fact they were Islamic, and could they still make the observations and "progress?" Remove their powers of deductive reasoning and the scientific process - And leave them with their Islamic faith and see what you get? No progress.

    Your reasoning attempts to make a shell-game of the very simple and unrelated facts.
  • Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 10:41 am
    Angry, already refuted diatribe Cuthere.

    1) This claim: "because of religion, medical technology and scientific progress has been held back by hundreds of years."

    I gave a reason for including Islam as the cause of the Islamic Golden Age. It requires, as I said before, 0 faith in Allah, acceptance of Islam, or accordance with Islam.

    It is in no way a justification.

    So when you say you could use the same method to justify Nazis, your logical failings are not my problem.

    All it does is address your initial flaw in reasoning. That claim up there at the beginning of the post: It`s bullpoo.

    As is your second claim: "More genocide due to religion than anything else." (Look up genocide committed by China and Russia. It outstrips all others combined.)
  • Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 10:49 am
    The reason we explore the solar-system at all now is:
    Islamic Scholars in the 700 to 1200s paving the way for the renaissance.

    Arabic rather than Islamic. A high level of scholarship in that area dates back to trade with ancient Greece and thus hugely predates Islam. Unlike in Europe, it didn`t collapse after the fall of the Roman empire and that lack of collapse also predates Islam.

    It`s fair to say that early Islam didn`t suppress learning as much as late medieval Christianity did, but it`s not fair to credit it with the centuries of work of various Arabic philosophers who built strongly on the foundation of ancient Greek philosophy. They didn`t make that progress because they were Muslims. They made it because they were philosophers.

    Jewish scientists escaping Nazi Germany in ~1920-40s. Look up the Amerika Bomber.

    Same as above - it was their science, not their religion.
  • Profile photo of Beardofzeus
    Beardofzeus Male 30-39
    670 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 10:51 am
    @Ballthazaq - you are not a very good debater, are you? I am clearly not illiterate, and despite your best attempts at being more knowledgeable and superior to EVERY single IAB user, you argue both FOR and AGAINST Pascal`s Wager. Bye for now. See you in Heaven.
  • Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 10:52 am
    Off on a tangent of curiousity that`s sort of relevant:

    Was Marian Rejewski Jewish?

    I`m thinking that a lot of people fled Nazism for reasons other than religion.
  • Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 10:54 am
    "Trees are a solid"
    "Staplers are a solid"
    "Therefore Trees are Staplers".

    So you`re going on the basis of it sounding like an argument? It`s not a haiku.
  • Profile photo of cuthere2
    cuthere2 Male 30-39
    317 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 10:59 am
    Baal - It appears you`re confused about many things, most notably, who you are debating. Please show me where I have said:

    "As is your second claim: "More genocide due to religion than anything else." (Look up genocide committed by China and Russia. It outstrips all others combined.)"

    Either you are greatly confused, or putting words in my mouth, which would demonstrate your intellectual dishonesty. Please due try to keep your facts straight?

    "Angry Diatribe?" lol! I smile as I type this. :) <<< See?
  • Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 11:00 am
    @tedgp: No, that`s just plain wrong - the dark ages have been found to be not that dark after all...

    True, but consider the reason why they were called the dark ages in the first place - an almost total lack of written records of anything as a result of the massive drop in literacy following the collapse of the Roman empire.

    I live in a country that`s an excellent example. The Romans withdrew the army in 410 and by 450 the entire system had gone. No government, no civil service, no building above wattle and daub roundhouses, no schools, no maths, nothing. Total reversion to Iron age in less than a single lifetime.

    It wasn`t a dark age in social terms, but it certainly was in terms of education, scholarship and technology.

    The Christian church was beneficial to knowledge during those times - it was the only large-scale organisation promoting any sort of non-trade education.
  • Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 11:08 am
    @davymid You hope I am not a parent because I would want my children to know all sides of everything, and to know why they believe what they do?

    That isn`t what you said.

    You said that you wanted children to be taught that faith in Christian creationism (and it`s ONLY Christian creationism, not creationism of any other religion) has the same scholarly weight as science and should be taught to all children in your country as such.

    In short, you`re advocating that science should be made into a host for Christianity to be a parasite to, which corrupts and kills science. And then you`re making false statements about what you`re doing.
  • Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 11:09 am
    Angilion:

    Do me a favor. Reread my post, including the people it answers, without presuming my motivations.

    I said neither that "It was because they were Muslims" nor "It was because they were Jewish". This should be demonstrated by the fact that I also mentioned the cold war.

    How many times do I have to repeat, that the reason I included the first one, was because of the encouragement of literacy.

    "They didn`t make that progress because they were Muslims. They made it because they were philosophers."

    True. Now. Keep going. Don`t just stop before you get to the only point I was making:
    Why were they philosophers? Because they were educated.
    Why were they educated/literate? Islam encouraged it.
  • Profile photo of cuthere2
    cuthere2 Male 30-39
    317 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 11:21 am
    "Why were they educated/literate? Islam encouraged it."

    And yet the very same belief system goes so far as to imprison, torture, and murder when said education reveals something that disagree`s with their narrow world view.
  • Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 11:27 am
    Cuthere:

    Sorry apparently the second claim was @Malakamike
    "Hey david you know more people have been killed and genocide has been declared in the name of god then anything else right."

    The second point... now if you`ll address the first we`ll be well on our way.

    ""Angry Diatribe?" lol! I smile as I type this. :) <<< See?"

    Excellent, smile as you address my point.
  • Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 11:35 am
    Baalthazaq:

    I did read your post and the posts you were replying to and my reply covers that.

    If you were just making a counter-argument to the claim made in the post you replied to, i.e. you were arguing that Islam didn`t hold scientific (and the resulting technological) advances back for centuries, I`d agree.

    You`re going much further than that and putting Arabic scholarship forward as Islamic scholarship, i.e. putting forward the argument that Islam advanced scientific progress.

    That`s a different argument and it`s that different argument that I`m making a counter-argument against.

    My position, as I stated and supported in my posts, is
    It`s fair to say that early Islam didn`t suppress learning as much as late medieval Christianity did.

    But it did suppress learning wherever it might conflict with Islamic ideas. Anatomy is the best known example, but not the only one.
  • Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 11:41 am
    Why were they philosophers? Because they were educated.
    Why were they educated/literate? Islam encouraged it.

    I very much doubt if early Islam included the time travel necessary to make that true.

    A relatively high level of literacy and education existed in that area long before Islam existed and was already well established when Islam was founded. Arabs were trading with Greeks a thousand years earlier and it wasn`t just goods being traded.

    Islam thus had two choices - destroy this well established tradition of scholarship or control it. It went with the latter, which is not at all the same as creating it.
  • Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 11:42 am
    Angilion:
    I`ve wanted a formal debate with you for a while, though I`ve never openly challenged you like I have certain other people.

    Would you like to make this it? It feels like a topic we could both sink our teeth into.

    We could make it official, and move it to a proper debate forum.

    My points will be however that it isn`t fair to:
    Minimize the impact of the religion on the age.
    Reterm the whole thing as Arabic scholarship rather than Muslim.

    Thought we can discuss the exact debate question. Feel free to email me. Or just go "No" in the forums.
  • Profile photo of davidildo123
    davidildo123 Male 40-49
    143 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 11:45 am
    >>>Hey david you know more people have been killed and genocide has been declared in the name of god then anything else right. If you need a book telling you that killing and stealing is wrong then you are probably a retard<<<

    That is factually incorrect. There were over 60 million casualties in WW2 alone. Add another 16 million for ww1, brings the conservative total of those two wars to 76 million. Neither war was in the name of God.

    Now, please give me some totals that equal over 76 million that were "in the name of God".
  • Profile photo of davidildo123
    davidildo123 Male 40-49
    143 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 11:57 am
    >>David:
    It`s not my argument. It is an existing argument. It is deductive, and therefore, as all deductive arguments, built on the acceptance of the premise<<<

    Fine and dandy, but it does not hold up to Logic, therefore it is an invalid syllogism. An argument is valid if it is impossible for its premises to be true while its conclusion is false. The premise of your arguement contains a modifier, `often` to make it true. That means that any conclusion drawn against it is open to interpretation as to whether or not it is a fact or not. "Often" valuable or "less than often" not valuable.

    The fact is, your original statement with the word "often" in it, is correct, but useless to draw a logical equation against, and if you omitted the word "often", then it is not a correct statement.

    I do not argue your conclusion, but point out that your arguement does not support it.
  • Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 12:17 pm
    Actually I`m not sure I agree with you David.

    I`m not sure that without the often the statement needs to be changed. Can you actually give me an example of a case where scarcity != increased value?

    Diseases, as stated do become more valuable with rarity.

    Maybe something in the energy industry when yield goes below a profitable boundary? Would that count, or would the fact that the value lies elsewhere invalidate that argument?
  • Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 12:34 pm
    Ok;

    Lets look at the original statement and see if we can avoid those pitfalls. I guess we could make it absolutely explicit.

    Priori: A lifetime is more valuable the scarcer that lifetime is.
    Priori: An individual`s lifetime is infinitely scarce in an infinite system.

    ... well I think that`s a better representation, only now I disagree with it more. It also offers a slightly differently worded conclusion, but leads to the same 4 boxes I used to describe the amended wager.

    Conclusion: A finite lifetime is infinitely valuable when compared to an infinite system.

    (System here not being the best word though admittedly).
  • Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 12:35 pm
    Aaaand sleep.
  • Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 12:36 pm
    Baalthazaq: No.

    It`s a topic I don`t mind spending a few minutes on here at IAB, but I`m not involved enough to spend the hours required for a formal debate.

    Besides, our positions probably aren`t greatly different if we get down to it in more detail than is possible in the terse posts imposed here by the tiny character limit. For example, I don`t think you actually completely dismiss the strong tradition of Arabic scholarship dating back into the iron age. I think it`s more that you can`t fit it into ~950 characters when arguing about the effects of religion a thousand and more years later.

    Also, is it practical to seperate a new religion from pre-existing culture anyway? They must affect each other, even when religion openly wars against it (e.g. Christianity and ancient Rome).
  • Profile photo of davidildo123
    davidildo123 Male 40-49
    143 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 12:49 pm
    >>>I`m not sure that without the often the statement needs to be changed. Can you actually give me an example of a case where scarcity != increased value?<<<

    I have an old Scrooge Mc Duck magazine that is prety rare, but nobody wants it. When my neighbors beagle got pregant by my Bassett Hound, more rare than either the Bassett or Beagle, but not as valuable as either of them. Atari 2600 are declining in availability and value. Radon is relatively rare, but I do not know of any uses for it or places that would purchase any. I am sure there are dozens of rare plants that have no use or value, we just dont hear about them because there is no reason to.
  • Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 1:10 pm
    Ok, well, in that case I accept the points of Angilion and David thus far. Now really sleep time.
  • Profile photo of elkingo
    elkingo Male 30-39
    5471 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 1:28 pm
    The problem is, I have no need to use any of the 21 arguments they posted thus far.
  • Profile photo of LuckyDave
    LuckyDave Male 18-29
    675 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 2:35 pm
    A belief in God is just that, a belief. While there are many religious people who literally go by the metaphor of sheep following a shepherd, people today try and take an entity that is supposed to have created the universe, and expect that being to be fully understood within the confines of a ~2500 page book (written by man, -not- God); when all the scientific research and progress that has been made in history, probably couldn`t fit in the Library of Alexandria. So if there is a greater being out there, how is the Holy Bible a sufficient enough text for us to understand him?

    If you are an Atheist, that`s okay, really, its alright. You are a logical, sane human capable of making your own decisions. I respect that as I respect you as being a fellow man. All I say is that not all of us religious folk are close minded, dogmatic, pretentious pricks who think that they are the savior of man.
  • Profile photo of Buck176
    Buck176 Male 30-39
    379 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 3:43 pm
    The atheists are getting as bad as the creationists. Its like being in 2nd grade listening to a "no, you`re the idiot!" fight between the two kids who eat their own boogers. And their fighting over who would win a fight, Snarf from the Thunder Cats or Curly from the Three Stooges.
  • Profile photo of idiotfilter
    idiotfilter Male 18-29
    3916 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 4:15 pm
    lol this was pretty good...

    gave me a good laugh
  • Profile photo of Yap71
    Yap71 Male 30-39
    150 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 4:52 pm
    Wow, i cant believe all this controversy started with something i posted.
  • Profile photo of Gr1ill3d
    Gr1ill3d Male 18-29
    34 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 5:40 pm
    Have your faith, believe what you want. just keep the creation bull**** out of text books and science classes. That is what was science class is there for to do, science not make random guesses about why something is or isn`t. As said in the video people seem to use God more and more as a cop-out as to why something is or isn`t.
    I guess ignorance is truly bliss. And to all those that have a level headed mind about science and god... well thank you for proving that not everyone who is religious is blissfully retarded
  • Profile photo of IceDragon77
    IceDragon77 Male 18-29
    490 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 9:49 pm
    @Angilion Where in the following statement did I say the christian view of creationism?

    "Also, @leeann591, why should scientists shove their beliefs down students throats? Honestly, I am one of those people that would want students to see both sides of it all, and make the decision for themselves (and yes, for those who will bug me about it, say that evolution has more evidence or whatever). Course you wouldnt want that, as you wouldnt want your child having the chance to be `indoctrinated,` as any creationist wouldnt want their child to be either.."

    You are trying to make it seem like I am implying that I would only want the christian version taught, but instead I were referring to mainstream creationism beliefs, SUCH AS christian, hindu, etc. You also make it seem like the teachers would have to teach it like a pastor or something, which would most likely be false. However I cannot expect much from someone whom I see to have a fairly closed and narrow
  • Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 11:30 pm
    Icedragon, I know you addressed your question to Angilion, and I`m sure he`ll answer in time, but if I may venture a few points:

    1) Scientists are not trying to "shove their belief down students throats". They`re trying to share the accumulated knowledge of science over millenia of scientific advancement with the next generation. I think you`re confusing the terms "indoctrination" and "education".

    2) Children already do learn about creationism, in Religious Education class (at least, when I went to school), encompassing many different versions of creation. Why bring it into the Science classroom?
  • Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 11:30 pm
    3) I applaud that you want to teach children Christian, Hindu etc creation myths, but then were do you draw the line? Kids only have a certain amount of time to spend at school, to gain an education. So, you advocate teaching the Christian and Hindu versions of creation, fine. Let`s throw in the Islam and Judiasm creation stories, as a freebie. Now you start getting into murky territory. Where do we stop taking up classroom time by teaching creation myths? Shintoism? Chinese animism? Central African tribal religions? Zoroastrianism? Aboriginal Australian creation myths of the Dreamtime? Native American myths of creation with the feathered serpents? Norse mythology? The Celts? The Romans? Ancient Greek? Heck, to bring it back to the present, Scientology? And if not, why not? Where and how do you draw the line, using what criteria?
  • Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    June 13, 2011 at 11:30 pm
    Look, all of those various belief systems have a Creation story, but that`s all they are, stories. There`s not a single shred of observable evidence to back ANY SINGLE ONE of them up. Heck, I could go and write a creation story right now in 5 minutes, and it would have exactly as much evidence to support it as any of those others mentioned above.

    Science deals with facts. You know, things like evidence, empirical enquiry, repeatable experimentation, observable reality and all that. Those are the things which should be taught in the science classroom. Not religion, which peddles the opposite: blind faith, belief without evidence. There`s religious studies classes for that. Keep it out of the science classroom, please, for the sake of the advancement of our goddam species.
  • Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    June 14, 2011 at 1:35 am
    @Angilion Where in the following statement did I say the christian view of creationism?

    When you advocated teaching creationism in schools in the USA as science. That`s the whole point of that idea.
  • Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    June 14, 2011 at 1:37 am
    Davymid`s 3 posts saved me having to type any more in reply. Just read those and treat them as my reply, since it`s what I would have written.
  • Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    June 14, 2011 at 1:41 am
    Heck, I could go and write a creation story right now in 5 minutes, and it would have exactly as much evidence to support it as any of those others mentioned above.

    Tolkien did exactly that with Ainulindale (the creation of the world) and Valaquenta (the shaping of the world). Not his best known work, but it`s an excellent creation story. It`s the best creation story I`ve read and seems more plausible than the others I`ve read.
  • Profile photo of Musuko42
    Musuko42 Male 18-29
    2850 posts
    June 14, 2011 at 3:57 am
    @Buck176

    "And their fighting over who would win a fight, Snarf from the Thunder Cats or Curly from the Three Stooges."

    The difference is that Thunder Cats and Three Stooges fans aren`t out there slaughtering and oppressing in the name of their favourite fictional characters.

    It`s a big deal because the religious ARE.
  • Profile photo of Musuko42
    Musuko42 Male 18-29
    2850 posts
    June 14, 2011 at 4:13 am
    "Now, please give me some totals that equal over 76 million that were "in the name of God"."

    Why does the number of deaths have to be more than that for any number of deaths caused for religious reasons to be unacceptable?
  • Profile photo of SarahofBorg
    SarahofBorg Female 18-29
    3564 posts
    June 14, 2011 at 12:02 pm
    "no amount of belief make something a fact"
    Same could be said for science, which is why I`m agnostic, not atheist.
  • Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    June 14, 2011 at 4:07 pm
    "no amount of belief make something a fact"
    Same could be said for science, which is why I`m agnostic, not atheist.

    Would you explain what you meant, because I`m not seeing any sense in that statement.

    You don`t think science is about believing things against evidence, do you?
  • Profile photo of SuperOnion
    SuperOnion Male 18-29
    151 posts
    June 14, 2011 at 8:13 pm
    For the record: I`m not sold on God, I`d rather let Science figure that out. We`ll see what happens.

    I hardly think that these videos really do anything for atheists here. In fact, the atheists here come off just as biased as anyone who is religious. Both make the point that they have all the answers and both claim adamantly that the other is wrong. They even come off as smug non-nice individuals who only pander to people that agree with them. Just let people have their own opinions. If someone doesn`t agree with you on something that doesn`t mean they`re wrong. The only way to get a decent conclusion is to be arguing over something that is PROVABLE and that you can provide evidence for that. At least then someone gets to act like the smug jerk who has all the answers because... you know... they actually HAVE THEM.

    Ok, rant over.
  • Profile photo of Moosh
    Moosh Female 18-29
    196 posts
    June 14, 2011 at 8:56 pm
    I know this post wasn’t directed towards me but I wanted to put my opinion on here. Cause I can do that.

    Angilion--you have to believe in your perception of evidence. If science has taught me anything, it`s that nothing can be proven. I could be one of those delusional people who think aliens are coming to get me, but instead I think that gravity is affecting me. I can`t say with certainty that my reality is everyone else`s. Or that we can`t learn something that changes our realities.

    Compared to science, the vulnerability of my brain makes it untrustworthy. I act on things that I see supporting evidence for, but I never believe them to be infallibly true. That`s why I am also agnostic.
  • Profile photo of esmifra
    esmifra Male 18-29
    34 posts
    June 15, 2011 at 3:37 am
    @Angilion:

    Many of "science facts" are unproven theorems with only a mathematic basis assumed true.

    And our current knowledge has deep gaps in them where we don`t know the "truth".

    Astronomy is specially rich in this department and so is quantum theory.

    So SarahofBorg has a point.

    I think its funny how many people think about science without knowing much about its history and current development, almost as it was a religion and then criticize religious people.

    I`m also agnostic by the way. Just in case some wacko assumes i`m a religious fanatic or something like that...
  • Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    June 15, 2011 at 7:47 am
    Moosh, esmifra:

    The points in question were:

    i) Why does the fact that belief is not fact means that science is the same as or similar to religion?

    ii) Why does that lead to a rejection of atheism?

    I`m still hoping that SarahofBorg will answer.


    Incidentally, I am well aware that science is not necessarily about absolutely proven facts and I`ve never claimed otherwise. Science covers everything from "the maths works but we`ve no physical evidence" to "this has been tested a billion times and always comes out the same way".

    Science allows for degrees of confidence in the accuracy of an explanation and allows for any explanation, no matter how well it`s held up so far, to be wrong.

    That`s sometimes portrayed as a weakness by people who don`t understand it and prefer a system in which an arbritary explanation made up without any evidence is claimed as absolute fact.
  • Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    June 15, 2011 at 7:53 am
    The media doesn`t help much here. This is what normally happens:

    Scientist: It`s possible that <x> is true. There`s some evidence to support it.

    Media: Scientists prove <x>! Will change the world!
  • Profile photo of esmifra
    esmifra Male 18-29
    34 posts
    June 15, 2011 at 9:56 am
    @Angilion

    I`ve seen that you reply in alot IAB threads, maybe you should get a hobby or something...

    Also, instead of stating your opinion so much maybe it would be a good idea to improve your reading skills on what other`s write...

    You seem to completely miss what I and others are trying to say.

    Congratz.

  • Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    June 15, 2011 at 12:18 pm
    I don`t find it time-consuming to write posts that are restricted to about 950 characters, so this doesn`t take up much of my time.

    I find it amusing that you have made a very basic error in English while praising the clarity of your own posts.

    Would you like to explain what point you were trying to make that you think I`ve missed?

    In particular, I`d like to see you explain why science is like religion. I`m just not seeing how "this is the best explanation we have based on the available evidence" is so similar to "this is the truth because someone wrote it down centuries ago, no evidence is needed."
  • Leave a Reply