/sci/ - Science & Math

>>3877966
>It's even worse when the more intelligent individual is also better looking than you and more skilled socially.
Hi. I'm that guy.

>>3531033
>doesn't realise gravity caused momentum and is cancelling it out to undo the energy of separation of mass at the big bang

>>3491389
Well obviously it is science. But that's beside the point. The point is where do you draw the line for which things are reasonable to be agnostic about? Such as FSM and god. Why is it wrong to be agnostic about FSM but not god? The line is drawn subjectively and therefore agnostics have no standard of agnosticism. Plus, under agnosticism, things which are unfalsifiable (eg god) are required to be entertained and taken seriously, which goes against the very principle of science.

Because I have a trust fund and don't need a six-figure career to be rich.

>>2800746
Your claim is that it's perfectly reasonable to take seriously the idea that a god exists despite there being no logical or factual reason to hold such a belief.

It's logically no different to believing in leprechauns. If you think otherwise, state how.

>>2290281

>>2278970

>>1910882
Misanthropes are predisposed to anathematize