If you believe in god, you're an idiot...

[Harrison]

IronLikeALionInZion is offline
Banned
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Lulz Sect]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[burkemi5]

ultimate troll thread, over 100 pages. i agree with your point; however, i do not agree with your method for conveying it

[chtulu]

Originally Posted by burkemi5 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

ultimate troll thread, over 100 pages. i agree with your point; however, i do not agree with your method for conveying it

The most honest and reasonable retort in this thread.

[Hasbinlulz]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Hasbinlulz]

This video is really good. I don't usually like Dawkins outside of his work in biology, but he is straight up in this debate. Furthermore, C. Pell has the most astute arguments and public conception of "god" that I have ever seen. If you like Dawkins, you've probably seen this, but here you go.

<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/g4oMfY7q-Uo?version=3&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/g4oMfY7q-Uo?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

[Reptak]

Originally Posted by Hasbinlulz [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This video is really good. I don't usually like Dawkins outside of his work in biology, but he is straight up in this debate. Furthermore, C. Pell has the most astute arguments and public conception of "god" that I have ever seen. If you like Dawkins, you've probably seen this, but here you go.

<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/g4oMfY7q-Uo?version=3&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/g4oMfY7q-Uo?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

Great video. Dawkins needs some work on his interpersonal skills, though. I found it awkward when he kept asking why the audience was laughing. Also, while I understood what he meant when he said something to the effect that asking "why" (I believe he was thinking purpose) is "not a valid question" (I think he meant not scientifically relevant), I thought he could have stated this better. "Why" is obviously a pretty important question to most people.

I also found some of C. Pell's responses to be a bit insincere to appear more moderate (at least not representing the Catholic church's core values). He basically said atheists can get to heaven, we evolved from lower primates (thus allowing for an older earth and acceptance of evolutionary principles), and that much of the old testament isn't necessary litteral. He did, however, say that the wafer/wine at communion DOES transform to the blood and body of Christ, although he admits that physically there is no change. He was almost unintelligible when he described this as metaphysical and refused to say it was symbolic.

Anyway, thanks for the view.

[dragonfists]

everyones got an opinion

mine is that if you do not believe there is something more intelligent than us out in the universe you are close minded.. we are still very primitive, on the cusp of understanding how little we really know

[Alarti0001]

Originally Posted by dragonfists [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

everyones got an opinion

mine is that if you do not believe there is something more intelligent than us out in the universe you are close minded.. we are still very primitive, on the cusp of understanding how little we really know

You need to look at the evolution of technology and the exponential curve that technological evolution progresses on.

Why do you think someone is close-minded when you obviously don't understand all(or even some) of the factors of technological evolution.

Intelligence evolves exponentially. If you know anything about how an exponential curve works you would realize once you get past the knee of the curve, from say a chart that starts with time 0, then those exponents start adding up very, very, very quickly. You basically reach near infinite progression of near to nothing on the timeline. If there was other intelligence out there. It would be made apparent rather quickly.
There is a good chance we are the most intelligent beings out there.

[Hasbinlulz]

Originally Posted by Alarti0001 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You need to look at the evolution of technology and the exponential curve that technological evolution progresses on.

Why do you think someone is close-minded when you obviously don't understand all(or even some) of the factors of technological evolution.

Intelligence evolves exponentially. If you know anything about how an exponential curve works you would realize once you get past the knee of the curve, from say a chart that starts with time 0, then those exponents start adding up very, very, very quickly. You basically reach near infinite progression of near to nothing on the timeline. If there was other intelligence out there. It would be made apparent rather quickly.
There is a good chance we are the most intelligent beings out there.

That a "god of the unknowns" argument Alarti, and you should feel ashamed of yourself for making it.