Comments on: Atheism – Getting Up Early Sucks

By: confined

confined — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 03:43:50 +0000

yes you could build (hadron collider) and or do any scientific experiment you wanted and prove or disprove science. But a priest can’t show me god, nor can he/she make me believe or not to believe.

By: Shopper

Shopper — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 08:32:08 +0000

I personally think it is shopped, look at the angles and contrast, and it is also very pixelated. Def Shopped.

By: hellb0y666

hellb0y666 — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 21:22:30 +0000

dog|god

By: Ben1605

Ben1605 — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 11:52:14 +0000

@Microwaveb: Actually, it should be Big Bang Theory: In the beginning there was everything, which exploded.

By: Microwaveb

Microwaveb — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 11:47:12 +0000

@Jas3n_bla

“Creationism: In the beginning higher being who knows everything created us.

Big Bang Theory: In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.”

actually that should read:

Creationism Myth: In the beginning there was nothing, then there was a higher being who knew everything, despite there being nothing, which created us.

Big Bang Theory: In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

By: Ando

Ando — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 10:07:00 +0000

@ dieAntagonista
That story is not been proven. Even if it was it would just be proof of any form of deity, just of a neurotoxin.

By: Puulaahi

Puulaahi — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 04:20:41 +0000

WORSHIP ZEUS!

By: nyokki

nyokki — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 03:16:13 +0000

Scientific truth differs from religious/revelation truth precisely because scientific truth is verifiable by anyone should they want to. Repeatable and verifiable testing is the guard of truth for science.

By: thelotuseater725

thelotuseater725 — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 03:04:21 +0000

Stop by in half an hour paul. I’m going to start quoting bible verses and admonishing people.

By: Jas3n_bla

Jas3n_bla — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 03:03:33 +0000

I think there was a picture on this site that tiki put up that said something like this.

Creationism: In the beginning higher being who knows everything created us.

Big Bang Theory: In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

As far as overdressing, only Presbyterians do that I think. And apologizing for being human, I’m pretty sure you’re automatically forgiven, you just need to admit you’re wrong to someone to keep you accountable.

What I don’t understand is why can’t everybody just get along? Isn’t calling christians ignorant or telling atheists they’re going to hell really just another form of prejudice?

That being said, I spot a TROLL!

By: Paul_Is_Drunk

Paul_Is_Drunk — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 02:59:29 +0000

*munches on popcorn*

Did I miss anything? Let’s see… taking weakest part of any argument and attacking that instead of debate. Okay. Some reasonable discourse. Huh. People commenting just to say that won’t comment. Good. That seems like a normal one of these threads. Now to comment in the next one and see where that one takes us.

Oh, overall I give this one a 6/10. Good, but not great.

By: Brevity Truta

Brevity Truta — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 02:53:13 +0000

@AlecDalek:

Agnosticism I would call the edge of the coin. The parallel I drew does make sense, look at the macro again. “I’d rather trust in …” Isn’t that putting *faith* in something? And look at the fervour with which atheists flock together and engage in proclaiming their dis-belief in God. Seems to me the religious impulse isn’t so easily lost in humans.

I wasn’t saying that Satanism = Atheism, I was saying that they’re both rebellions against the same thing, which provokes an amusing observation – true disavowal of something produces disengagement and finding a new way, not a perverse reflection of that system.

By: thelotuseater725

thelotuseater725 — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 02:33:26 +0000

@Namelis1:

Science celebrates contradiction?

I dunno some guys get really pissed off when a hypothesis is shot down. Have you seen the debate on global warming? In discover magazine a few years back a guy came up with a pure mathematical explanation that that global warming was more or less a product of nature and was not out of the ordinary. Well he was more or less kicked out of the “Scientific Community” and began regularly receiving death threats from the Opposing side.

Long story short it is absolutely childish to think that the study of science is objective. And it is even more dumb to assume that a scientist who had devoted his whole life to learning about and proving a hypothesis/theory would be anything but welcoming of contradictory evidence. People never have and never will work that way.

By: AlecDalek

AlecDalek — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 02:10:46 +0000

@Brevity Truta: It's not a coin, idiot, there are more than two sides! You need two sides so you can say Satanism = Atheism, rather than thinking.

By: Brevity Truta

Brevity Truta — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 01:15:00 +0000

Sometimes I think atheism is the new Satanism, still obsessed with rebelling against the other side of the exact same coin.

Guilt is a huge and lamentable part of Christianity. It’s not part of all religions, though.

By: thelotuseater725

thelotuseater725 — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 01:10:16 +0000

Goddamnit didn’t we have one of these threads yesterday?

By: dieAntagonista

dieAntagonista — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 23:37:47 +0000

@reboot:
“Clairvius Narcisse. He was a Haitian guy who was declared dead by two doctors and buried in 1962. They found him wandering around the village 18 years later. It turned out the local voodoo priests had been using naturally occurring chemicals to basically zombify people and putting them to work on the sugar plantations.”

You can strike ‘rise from the dead’ from the list.

By: RSIxidor

RSIxidor — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 23:36:09 +0000

Yeah, wasn’t trying to compare or prove the underlying infrastructure. Just comparing the “you can be a scientist, too!” part.

By: reboot

reboot — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 23:31:08 +0000

@RSIxidor: I do detect the sarcasm, but being a minister doesn't prove religion. If anyone could walk on water or rise from the dead or part the Red Sea, then you might be able to compare science with religion.

By: RSIxidor

RSIxidor — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 23:22:05 +0000

@reboot: And everyone can be an ordained minister (free online!).

By: dieAntagonista

dieAntagonista — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 23:16:35 +0000

Never mind then.

By: reboot

reboot — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 23:09:00 +0000

I wasn’t intentionally jumping on everything you say. It really was directed more towards DasMaus and one.

By: reboot

reboot — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 23:05:54 +0000

@dieAntagonista: That wasn't particularly directed at you, but at the idea that science is just a "set of beliefs" or that people blindly trust science the same way that they trust religion. But, yeah, everyone can be a scientist! That's the really great thing about it. You can't replicate every experiment ever done, but its entirely feasible to replicate the most fundamental ones.

By: dieAntagonista

dieAntagonista — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 23:02:03 +0000

Also, you seem to be ridiculously angry at me. I don’t like what Dawkins does, and that’s my opinion.
I know there’s not much to be gained from religion, and it’s not comparable to what science has done for humanity.
Scientists are the closest to being some kind of gods, out of all delusions and non delusions people have. So. Stop jumping on everything I say, or whatever else it is that you’re doing.
You’re a determinist like me, I consider you a friend just because of that. Don’t you know I have no choice in not liking Dawkins?

By: MonkeyHitman

MonkeyHitman — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 23:01:22 +0000

internet is too serious