"Atheist Life Vs. Religious Life" [video]

A swing and a miss.

Basically: The entire effort of attempting to present logic and evidence to theists is a waste of time, as they don't base their beliefs on logic and evidence.

Thus threads like this are about as serious as me going to Fox news and posting Obama 2012! Theists here aren't going to suddenly start considering evidence and peer reviewed data. Atheists here aren't going to suddenly lose a few hundred IQ points (unless they take these threads too seriously).

It's all intellectual masturbation.

You must love to masturbate.
It's only masturbation when you think of things in a finite sense..
Just because a conversation doesn't have an end doesn't mean it's a waste of time.
If you enter a conversation such as this only expecting to "tell people things" you aren't having a conversation and at that point, sure it's masturbation.
You would be arguing for the sake of arguing.
But if you go into a conversation with intent to elaborate upon your ideas and expand upon the way you see the world, saying such things would be fruitless is quite pessimistic.
Taking a conversation on like this with intent to mold others to your worldview only is only going to produce friction, the said friction would be where the "masturbation occurs", I'm not saying such friction is unnecessary, it can keep a thread alive for sure. But writing off a conversation as pointless just because you didn't convert anybody is silly.
If this conversation for you, you need to calm down on jerking yourself off.
;)

Would you say discussing Greek mythology is masturbation?
Let's say you are discussing this with some batshit guy who knows a good deal about greek mythology, but the catch is he believes it.
Would you discuss how stupid he is and how he should explain his ways?
Or just talk about all the interesting things about his belief-set and naturally coming upon iterating what you believe at some point int he conversation?

Fools will be fools regardless if you tell them they are fools, so if you regard so many people around you as fools, trying to convince them to not be foolish is a foolish endeavor in itself.
But the tricky part is you can be a fool in one aspect, and a scholar/genius in another.
Ruling someone out as mentally deficient and incapable of logical discussion is an overassumption and is what would put you in the mind set that discussions such as this=masutrbation.

/sigh

"Converting" someone is a rather aggressive goal, and most certainly was not my intent by posting this video in the OP.

However, if someone were to be "converted" by the message in the OP, I feel fairly confident that someone wouldn't feel the need to reply/post about it in the thread.

It's hard, but it's important to remember that the large majority of people who read these threads do not reply/post.


What's with all the sighing of late, Krizz?

Oh I wasn't meaning your article was with that intent, I was aware it was meant as a conversational piece if anything.
You even started off the rip saying you weren't an atheist and didn't promote christianity so that kind of took you off the table in the first place.
Krizz is having a life crisis.

no

I'm not saying it's pointless because no one will be converted.

I'm saying it's pointless because neither side is interested in growing (theists have nothing to offer atheists, and atheistic/scientific concepts are lost upon theists).

I'd be satisfied if people just walked away with a greater understanding of evolution/big bang cosmology/human psychology, but unfortunately the people didn't already adhere to those concepts are not interested learning about them, as they don't fit with their dogma.

Obviously I'm being overly pessimistic and I wouldn't continue these conversations if I believed that 100%, but it's more true than you'd like to admit.

No.

Point proven.

We've done this with him for about 4 years now. He's always right, anyone with a differing opinion is wrong. There is no agreement to disagree.

Those aren't burdens of proof. It is relatively easy to prove/disprove of a dragon in a closet, because we can easily look in it at the scale needed. We can't, however, look at the cosmos from the scale needed.

An example would be an earth worm. They know not that we exist (ignore their lack of cognitive function) because they can't see beyond the existence they know. Even with telescopes and rovers, we are still looking at the universe from a infinitely small perspective.

You crush no one. But whatever helps you sleep at night

maybe one of the most profound and constructive things I've seen from Elana (or anyone for that matter).

Is it ok that I brag on you here? Bravo, +1

If you think that it would be easy to prove either of them then you probably don't understand the concepts they address.

The burden of proof when somebody is claiming something is real, is the person doing the claiming, not the disbeliever.

However I'm going to assume this crack is made at trying to infer that I made the claim that "there is no god" which I've never, nor until it can be proven will ever make such a claim.

As for Daemun, I haven't posted here for even 2 years, much less 4.

Maybe you're too busy being delusional to be able to tell the proper passage of time.

As for the "he's always right" crack, be able to prove me wrong (very few can or have, and I've conceded when they do).

I didn't exactly look at either of them, maybe I'm thinking of something different?

Sorry for the quadruple post. Again, foolishly playing catch-up

I have a pet dragon that goes invisible when you look in his direction and then if you try to touch him he moves to an alternate dimension until you move your hand or whatever out the way. Prove me wrong.

The burden of proof, always lies in the prosecution. As far as these threads are concerned, that would be the atheists here. I'm not making the threads with videos/articles trying to prove to everyone here that God exists. I am merely defending my beliefs. Until that scenario changes, it is up to you (collective) to prove otherwise.

EDIT for Jeta: I say 'he' as there is always 1 forum-goer that defaults to the 'your insane' argument when in disagreement. It used to be Korpg, now it's you. I've seen you concede when proven wrong, but your favorite clause is that anyone with a differing opinion can't be in their right mind. I honestly wonder what type of profession you are in, because in most of the business world I see, that is an attitude that won't get you very far. (Usually out the door)

I have neither the time nor the drive.

you hurt Puff the Magic Dragons feelings

That's the dragon in garage summery, really tl;dr version lol.

Disappointed when I was told all of these HELP I AM TRAPPED IN 2006 PLEASE SEND A TIME MACHINE songs were thought up because the people writing them were on drugs 24/7.

Growing up I always thought the hippie era was a revolt against the 'man' and a green lifestyle push. It was even more lackluster than that, as the dress code was a by product of their inability to be cognizant, and their rage to government was angst at the threat of going to jail for said illegal activities.

Bet you weren't expecting that response.

Breast milk is healthy?

Forgot about the arguments that it's invisible, and moves away from you and such. It's a valid point, it still isn't comparing apples to apples. At no time have I (I say I because there are nutcases out there that have gone to extremes I'm sure) claimed that Jesus or God are tangible and in the same existence as us, then magically change. A deity is different in the fact that it is believed to always be in a place you can't look, in a 'dimension' you don't exist. The mere fact that it is believed you won't see Him face to face until you leave this existence brings up more questions than could ever be answered beyond a reasonable doubt.


On a side note, if anyone follows Disturbed, check the interview about 'Inside the Fire'. He adamantly believes the Devil tried to talk him into committing suicide. Rather interesting.

Lost me sorry

What on earth would have made you think burden of proof lies in prosecution?

An idea isn't "right until proved wrong", it's quite the opposite. You're confusing the scientific method with civil liberties. My idea that pink elephants pissed out the universe is not "right" until you can prove it wrong. It's nonsense until I can provide evidence to support it.

Good grief.

If you are making a claim you need to provide evidence to back that up.

That is who the burden of proof lies with.

Atheism means lack of belief. Those who say for 100% that there is no god as a certainty are just being dishonest. However for those religious people who for the most part hang it all out there for everyone to see - they are the ones trying to make us believe that there is this invisible man in the sky.

I want proof of this invisible man. Or im not gonna take it seriously.

It isn't just civil liberties. So quick to be on the offensive, and haven't even done any homework.

Let's take an example: Fred is color blind. He believes he is seeing the color purple. What he is actually seeing is green. Tom comes up to him and tells him he is wrong. The burden of proof does not lie in Fred, but in Tom.

When you are trying to change someones ideas, therein lies the burden of proof. If I was at your doorstep telling you that you would go to hell if you didn't find Jesus (which I don't do fyi, I think that is wrong on many levels), then it is up to me to show you reasons why I'm right.

Atheists are continually making threads claiming God doesn't exist on these forums. It is up to you to prove beyond a reasonable doubt your claim. Until you have done so, it is (here's some of ya'lls favorite word) illogical and unmerited to call theists crazy, dumb etc.