Thread: Any Sceptics here annoyed...

Thanks for clearing it up, and just to be the first to say it...ZOMG U R NOT KNO EVRTHING 2! I find alittle criticism ok, just aslong as it's not like "stfu ur wrong and go read a dictionary goof".

Originally Posted by Mark75

Actually, most of the time it is that easy. When someone says "plz respect my buleefs i wil baleev wut i want 2" it sends a very clear message. It is telling me they "believe" it because it seems like it'd be nice if it were true, rather than because they have actually got a valid, rational reason to believe it.

If anyone talks as though they are infallible and never humble themselves, it's you and your condescending posts and endless elitism. I care because idiots are ruining my planet.

There's nothing in your post to think about. Your rant on words was nonsense and your analogy with the moon borderlines insanity.

I have never once said, thought, or found myself infallible so how you could think so is beyond me. How you perceive me is your perception and yours alone, hardly something to be professed as common sense. And to think, this is coming from a snippy, know-it-all such as yourself. I find the irony highly intoxicating and amusing. Although, there is enough irony to go around at any moment in time for everyone.

Also, you think yourself separate from the again vague term 'idiots' how again? Because I don't quite follow. You seem equally stuck in a rut as any other person that finds themselves unable to take criticism, you are just more vocal and in-your-face about it.

It seems like the argument you are about is for overtness as opposed to meekness. Again, who cares?

Originally Posted by SolSkye

Also, you think yourself separate from the again vague term 'idiots' how again?

Because you are stupid whereas I am not stupid.

When in doubt, revert to retardation. In typical Mark75 style.

Originally Posted by SolSkye

When in doubt, revert to retardation. In typical Mark75 style.

And you say my posts are ironic.

The fact of the matter is the irony is everywhere...

It's being comfortable with that paradoxical irony of the cosmos that separates the rational absolutists from the free-thinkers. Toodles.

Yes, that nasty thing called rationality is awfully limiting, isn't it?

Off to play thief deadly shadows, seeya!

Originally Posted by LucidFlanders

Off to play thief deadly shadows, seeya!

Less useless than SolSkye's posts, at least.

Watch it you guys... calling someone's posts 'ironic' is not a personal attack, but calling someone 'stupid', especially with such a troll post, is.
If you guys have no more reasonable discussion in this thread, then please desist from posting.

I dislike making such replies, but I've heard so much of this before, people make the same mistakes.

Originally Posted by Mark75

What annoys me is that people want to hide from the truth to begin with. It annoys me that people seek to sheild their beliefs from criticism in case they're wrong. It's disgusting, really. It sickens me to know that so many actually seek ignorance, and that so many others find it such a crime to point out something is wrong when we see that it is.

It goes both ways, Mark, everybody naturally has their own viewpoint. Acceptance might help calm you.

Originally Posted by Mark75

It's a problem with people, not this forum. If you're one of these people who hides, let me tell you right now, there is something very, very wrong with you. You are a coward and intellectually bankrupt. You are the scum of this world and thought patterns such as yours are the cause of basically every problem humans face and also why it's hard to solve those problems. Stop hiding. For my sake, for yours.

Do you seriously claim to know who and what exactly causes wrong doing in the world?

Originally Posted by Mark75

There's nothing in your post to think about. Your rant on words was nonsense and your analogy with the moon borderlines insanity.

Have you ever heard of ignorance; or for that matter, considered yours? That is the origin of all problems which concern you.

Originally Posted by Mark75

I do think everyone who is not an atheist is wrong about religion. Get over it.

I think many atheists are wrong about religion, but I wouldn't say everyone. Blanket statements as yours are very unwise in this case.

Originally Posted by Mark75

I called them cowards for hiding from criticism.

What makes you think they're hiding? Give me a better example. Have you ever thought people might actually have incredibly powerful and true beliefs, even in the presence of criticism?

Originally Posted by Mark75

Here's a life lesson, you pretentious little children: You don't have all the answers. You aren't right about everything.

That's not a life lesson; nor is everybody with a strong belief, a child.

Originally Posted by Mark75

I don't think your viewpoints should be squelched because you're wrong, I just think you're wrong and should be informed of that because I'd appreciate it if you told me when I was wrong.

What's amusing is that you aren't even sure if they're wrong; you're just assuming.

Originally Posted by Mark75

The only way we can advance intellectually, as individuals and as a society, is if we work to bettering our understanding of things. This includes developing new and better ideas as well as discarding those which are wrong.

Then let's discard the idea of discarding age-old beliefs which aren't understood properly by skeptics.

Originally Posted by Mark75

Yes, that nasty thing called rationality is awfully limiting, isn't it?

Yes it is limiting, if you consider it from a separate view which is soaring miles above it. You could be limited to know even that, if you don't think so.

Tsk Tsk... The ever-ironic irrationality of rationality...

What time is it?

I back Mark both because he is more or less right and because he has the same name as me. But I have to say that aggressive approach never gets anyone anywhere. Now the debate has just turned into an ad hominem war.

I wouldn't call true believers "Scum of the earth". Thats a TAD extreme. The psychics and other fraudsters that knowingly spread woo maybe. But not the credulous people that believe in the woo.

Anyhow, my second point:

Originally Posted by SolSkye

THAT, is where the heart of all real problems lie-- in pressuring people to believe what you believe.

First of all, pressuring is the wrong word to use. You cannot pressure people to change their beliefs. But i think 100% that if you have a strong opinion you should try to persuade people to share the opinion. Even if its your opinion that racism is a very good idea. However nutty your views.

Infact your "pressuring" us to agree with you that we should not pressure other people to agree with us. (oh no, ive gone cross eyed )

Theres no such thing as pushing your views on other people, because everyone is capable of disagreeing. But if you think you have an important idea you should share it with everyone else. Thats the whole point of a forum, to share ideas. Its totally wrong to say "you cant put your idea forward because people will probably disagree with you".

Its totally wrong to say "you cant put your idea forward because people will probably disagree with you".

It's wrong, sure, but people want proof to your belief and why, so if you got no proof, but only a belief, then you can't have an idea because you got nothing to back it up, atleast that's how some people on this forum work. Then again if you have an idea and can back it up some people break it down because their proof it's wrong, but one persons view of something is completly different from someone elses. Some people (me included) look too deep into things, and their belief is kinda...changing what the word really means. Although it makes perfect sense to you, but you've went above and beyond what it was supposed to mean to help with what you're saying. People know what the word means but you go to deep into the meaning and seem to "come out wrong" in your argument, as weird as that sounds....

Originally Posted by LucidFlanders

It's wrong, sure, but people want proof to your belief and why, so if you got no proof, but only a belief, then you can't have an idea because you got nothing to back it up, atleast that's how some people on this forum work. Then again if you have an idea and can back it up some people break it down because their proof it's wrong, but one persons view of something is completly different from someone elses. Some people (me included) look too deep into things, and their belief is kinda...changing what the word really means. Although it makes perfect sense to you, but you've went above and beyond what it was supposed to mean to help with what you're saying. People know what the word means but you go to deep into the meaning and seem to "come out wrong" in your argument, as weird as that sounds....

I'm not following you. Could you rephrase?

Originally Posted by really

I think many atheists are wrong about religion, but I wouldn't say everyone. Blanket statements as yours are very unwise in this case.

It isn't a "blanket statement". I think there is no god, so obviously I think anyone who thinks there is no god is correct on the issue of god. If I didn't think it was true that there was no god, I wouldn't believe that way. There is no blanket statement or generalization occurring here.

Originally Posted by really

What makes you think they're hiding? Give me a better example. Have you ever thought people might actually have incredibly powerful and true beliefs, even in the presence of criticism?

The people I speak of are the ones that offer no defense in the face of criticism except things like "leave me to my beliefs and I'll leave you to yours" or "don't force your beliefs on me" and of course, the ever popular "respect my beliefs". I don't respect beliefs founded on nonsense, so don't ask me to.

Originally Posted by m-mischief

I wouldn't call true believers "Scum of the earth".

Come again? What is a "true believer"?

The thing most of you nay-sayers fail to realize is how you jumped the gun in assuming there isn't a god.

That's exactly the same thing as assuming there is one, just from a more cynical standpoint.

That's the difference between being open-minded and being close-minded.

However, it seems you closed your mind long ago for whatever reason...

It's better to just admit you don't know. Cuz you don't

Sure, SolSkye.

Originally Posted by m-mischief

I'm not following you. Could you rephrase?

Me, and others seem to look to deep into an answer and it somehow becomes "wrong" to everyone else who knows the answer.

Originally Posted by Mark75

Come again? What is a "true believer"?

Someone who believes in things with insufficient evidence to support them. Basically the opposite of sceptics. Rather than the people who pretend to believe in these things to make money eg psychics and faith healers.

Originally Posted by SolSkye

The thing most of you nay-sayers fail to realize is how you jumped the gun in assuming there isn't a god.

That's exactly the same thing as assuming there is one, just from a more cynical standpoint.

That's the difference between being open-minded and being close-minded.

However, it seems you closed your mind long ago for whatever reason...

It's better to just admit you don't know. Cuz you don't

Im going to use this statement to answer a couple of philosophical issues put forth by true believers.

Firstly you are absolutely right when you say that you cannot prove anything or disprove anything for certain. So TECHNICALLY you COULD, if you wanted to be pedantic say that EVERYTHING we think true is a leap of faith.

You can only give evidence to show what is more plausible.

The idea of god being there is unfalsifiable. It really is something that is impossible to prove wrong. But is just as equally impossible to prove me wrong when i say that there is an invisible leprechaun sat on my shoulder giving me advice. When you try to touch the leprechaun it moves out of the way really quickly, so you could never see if it was there or not.

Because there is no evidence to show that there is a leprechaun on my shoulder you should not give the whole idea a second thought because what reason do you have to believe that there IS a leprechaun?

That is why the burden of proof is on ME the leprechaun-on-my-shoulder proponent to give evidence that there is a leprechaun and not you to prove that there isn't.

When making the decision as to whether you are a Leprechaunist, an Aleprechaunist or agnostic about the issue, to say that you are a Leprechaunist is a bigger leap of faith to say that you are an Aleprachaunist.

Saying your agnostic is not a leap of faith but it just means what you do not know what you believe. But, you should go for the atheist standpoint because there is no reason TO believe in a god because of lack of evidence. But at the same time you should admit that there is a TINY chance that there is a god, and in that case if there is ever any good evidence you should change your mind instantly.

Theres nothing more annoying that when people say sceptics are closed minded. We JUST go where the evidence is. If any good sceptic is proven wrong then they should change their mind instantly. And i'd like to think that i'm one of those sceptics. I go where the evidence is, can you fault that? Or should i believe regardless of evidence (or lack of)?

Originally Posted by LucidFlanders

Me, and others seem to look to deep into an answer and it somehow becomes "wrong" to everyone else who knows the answer.

Give an example of looking too deep into something and i will give my explanation of why I say it is wrong.

Originally Posted by SolSkye

The thing most of you nay-sayers fail to realize is how you jumped the gun in assuming there isn't a god.

That's exactly the same thing as assuming there is one, just from a more cynical standpoint.

That's the difference between being open-minded and being close-minded.

However, it seems you closed your mind long ago for whatever reason...

It's better to just admit you don't know. Cuz you don't

What truer irony than when God looks out on what is and says "there is no god."

Truly God will never percieve himself from such a perspective.

Such is the covering which masks infinite potential.

I laugh at myself having been there

Lost to such blind folly

Evoking Compassion

And pity

Give an example of looking too deep into something and i will give my explanation of why I say it is wrong.

I don't know any off the top of my head. It's more of something i do, then something i can explain. But i'll say get an answer, know what it means, and break it down into the most exact things that the answer means, and because i look and go to deep into some answers, people tell me i am wrong, even with the most detailed answer. I can make it complicated, instead of what it should be...simple, and to the point. But just goes to show you even if you know an answer not everyone agree's with your answer, even if it's the same ballpark to you.

edit - Maybe a good one since i can think of 1 now would be my view of the purpose of life, check what i said. Nobody disagree's with me but answers like that looking to deep into an answer.

well whats your view of the purpose of life?

All life ever is, is what you make of it. That's it.

Also, the difference between the flying spaghetti monster style arguments and saying there is a god is simply begging the question of plausibility of intent. It's only for a lack of a better word that people would use the word god, but it really could mean the forger of the chaos of the cosmos, that Demiurge responsible for everything's complex structure and existence as opposed to that of non-existence or a much simpler energy or gas cloud-like existence. As time progresses, you can find that the universe through entropy prefers complexity, which I believe says something.

It would seem more plausible that the universe was intended as opposed to just some constant cosmic rolling of the dice. If you disagree, I just hope you realize that your conclusion is equally unfounded in reality and logic as someone who chooses to see intent.