/sci/ - Science & Math

bump. this is /sci/! this must be relevent to the interests of someone.

/sci/ - Science & Math

fuck off to b

Ask her if she has received the grace of her mightiness, Eris. If not, tell her if she doesn't convert, she'll be ever condemned to a netherworld of discordance and chaos for ever more for rejecting Her divine Fruity authority.

Go talk to her about the inquisition.

>>1933213
faggot detected

>epic lulz
fuck off
>>>/b/

ask her if she believes in eternal damnation

basically christianity converted from reincarnation to eternal bullshit in hell because of some western philosophists

Tell her that her god is not worthy of you.

Grow a spine and simply tell her "Thanks, but I'm not interested"

Guys like you (and the one in the pic) are the reason why Atheism is seen as a bunch of whiny 15-year old edgy wannabes.

Tolerance and respect for the stuff we don't share (even if we think it's absurd) are the only ways to be taken seriously.

"Look at me, I'm so mean to religious people, implying I don't believe in what they do, which makes me intelligent and superior"

You suck. Your kind sucks. Stop giving the rest of us non-religious people a sucky name and take Dawkins with you.

>>1933900
It doesn't make you intelligent, it means you USE your intelligence.

you know why buddhism doesn't get a lot of bad rep these days? because this fucking guy is willing to change his whole religion of you can disprove reincarnation. the fact that christfags are insufferable faggots basically cowing everyone into belief by threat of hellfire is reason enough not to give them an ounce of respect for their beliefs. If i told you a tenant of my religion is raping 8 year olds on the solstice you would rightly have contempt for me as well.

>>1933937
fucking internet

never trust a nigerian

or a russian

>>1933937

No. Buddhism doesn't get a lot of bad press because:

1.- It is comparatively small to the other main religions.
2.- It is mainly unitarian, meaning they don't get radicals (which really are the ones that give most of the bad press to other religions).
3.- It has low exposure in the Western World, where most of the bad press comes from.

Zoroastrianism doesn't get any bad press either, and it works pretty much like Abrahamic Religions.

As for the raping, yes, I would not tolerate that. But you need to get some reading on Social Consensus (not in the mood to explain it here) to understand why some things get to be tolerated and others don't.

But none of this changes the fact: People like OP are the imbeciles ruining Non-Religiousness by being childish dicks.

>>1933937

Being a non-religious chilean (a country mostly catholic), I always laugh at guys like these who tend to think everyone acts like US Bible Thumper fanatics, throwing stones at gays and damning everyone to hell.

Sure, I don't believe in what christians believe (because I don't think there is a need for all the mythos they have), but I actually support a lot of the good stuff they do, such as building houses for the poor and giving away free healthcare.

You have to be pretty un/sci/entific to believe every christian (or religious person, for that matter) molds to your biggoted and half-assed idea of what they are.

Being able to be objective and neutral is what should differentiate a /sci/entist from most people. You seem to be neither.

OP is a faggot

lol religion

>>1933951 But you need to get some reading on Social Consensus (not in the mood to explain it here) to understand why some things get to be tolerated and others don't.


>In logic, an argumentum ad populum (Latin: "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or all people believe it; it alleges: "If many believe so, it is so."

>>1933964 giving away free healthcare.

>implying Mother Theresa setting up convents to treat patients using nuns with no medical training who reused needles after washing them in cold water constitutes free healthcare

oh you

Reasonable atheism in /sci/?

People who DON'T hate christfags with a flaming vengeance?

This is too good to be true.

I just hate that that man is trying to build up atheism as a doctrine. No science is being done, just direct attacks and logic bullets. Can't you just ignore religions? Nobody is gonna make half of earth population atheist all of a sudden

>>1933988
Don't be fooled. They're actually just a very subtle troll.

>>1933994Can't you just ignore religions?

When religions all agree to stop passing laws based on their ancient books, atheists can start to ignore religions. Until then it's better to put religious people in their place.

>>1933980

Hm, no, it has nothing to do with ad populum. Nor it implies something is right while something else isn't.

>>1933986

I love how you reinforce my statement with that. Forced generalization is so sad in /sci/, so sad.

I'll just stick to my non-biased, rational non-religiousness. You can remain pretty much a raging fanatic that only differentiates from a religious radical in that you don't visit temples. Or you could do it right and get informed.

>>1933999
nah, atheists can't troll, they hardly understand anything themselves

atheists wish you to believe the laws of nature get bended and shit comes from nothing at a magical moment in time

>>1934010
2/10

>>1934013
ha, didn't hear your argument of it not being so

>>1934002
Agreed. We already ignore most religions. The ones we don't ignore are the ones that get upset when we do ignore them. They don't want to and can't accept being ignored, their goal is to convert the entire world.

I don't want to make everyone on earth atheist, people can believe what they want. But when you try to get creationism in public schools or picket funerals, it becomes my business.

>>1934010
>troll detected

Don't ruin the only slightly civil religion-related thread in the history of /sci/

>U only hv eyes but can't see. U r blind

Though my eyes could see I still was a blind man
Though my mind could think I still was a mad man
I hear the voices when I'm dreaming
I can hear them say....

>>1934018
how is stating the truth trolling?

is this your first visit to 4chan?

>>1934028
it's not the truth to the slaves, only to the free

>>1934017I don't want to make everyone on earth atheist, people can believe what they want.

I would appreciate it if everyone in the world at least thought that reason at least took prescience over "revelation" when the two contradicted. There are plenty of religions that actually teach that reason is dangerous because it damages faith.

>>1934028
>generalization
>several counterexamples in this very thread
>not troll

Is this your first visit to the internets?

>>1934034
Personally I don't mind if other people want to be irrational and superstitious, it doesn't mean they're bad people, or that they aren't useful to society. It usually just means they're stupid.

That's okay though. Stupid people aren't bad people. You can't hate stupid people for being stupid and you can't convert them away from it either.

They just need to shut up about it. Atheists aren't the ones that go around picking fights about belief, the op is a perfect example of the more common situation, that of stupid folk trying to impose their stupidity on everyone else.

I'm pretty sure we'd be perfectly happy to ignore religious people if they would allow us to.

>>1934037
lol several invisible counter examples

and yes, it's my first visit, I basically troll atheists without knowing anything about them, that's why I'm so successful

>>1934048
>I basically troll <group of people> without knowing anything about them, that's why I'm so successful

Nothing new to see here...

enjoy ur meaningless existence.

>>1934044

Stupidity is subjective, some guy can happen to have a PhD in a scientific field and be an evangelist that doesnt accept evolution. If that guy is stupid to your eyes then you should rethink your whole cosmovision, but again thats relative.

>>1933201

Glad to see Dawkins is your hero. This fucker is an embarrassment to intellectual atheism. He's a great biologist, so feel free to use his arguments for evolution. But for disproving a god? He's a worthless sack of trash.

>>1934056
sorry didn't know you got butthurt, I apoligize

atheists don't believe in magic, their view of the world is just contradicting

If you think that science is the alternative to religion then you should just kill yourself. Science is the materialization of human rationality, a tool for predictions. It will tell us about certain origins but never about the first cause

>>1934071
He makes a relatively good argument for why believing in a god is bad, even if said god is real (basically boils down to "religion values arguments of authority over critical thinking" and in the case of the abrahamic religions, all the bad morality in the OT) but for disproving gods, he fails just like everyone else.

By the very nature of how humans define them, no god can be proven or disproven.

>>1934074
shhh, these sfw pages are real faggots about the word butthurt. the mods are permanently butthurt so they ban people for saying butthurt

>>1934091
true
it's just that ignorent people claim that science is the only true religion because you can calculate a lot with it, whereas other religions can't prove anything

>>1934074
lolwut?

also "enjoy ur meaningless existence" is right: you defined yourself as "successful" because you troll people on the internet. It doesn't get more meaningless than that.

Did your mommy not hug you enough when you were little?

>>1933964
grats on living in a good country, with a good president, and a good social security system

and grats for getting those fuckers out of that mine, and for shutting it down

hope the party lasted at least a week

>>1934134
lol if I was a troll, I'd certainly be successful

instead I just name the facts and a shitstorm occurs
get real faggot, also try arguing instead of name calling
this isn't /b/

She's from where? I think it has a double G.

>>1934147
>try arguing instead of name calling
>Yeah, because that's what you're doing.

>from Nigeria
>lulziest response

It seems she is in terrible pain. You should give her your credit card number, to help her out .

>>1934206
don't tell anyone, but i'm about to get 10% of $94,000,000 that their prince was having trouble getting out of their war-torn country.

shhhhhhh.

GOD TIER:
Apatheism, Nihilism

GOOD TIER:
Agnosticism, Ignosticism

MEH TIER:
Skepticism

SHIT TIER:
Atheism, Theism

>>1934044Atheists aren't the ones that go around picking fights about belief, the op is a perfect example of the more common situation, that of stupid folk trying to impose their stupidity on everyone else.

Now if only there was some way of imposing "not-Sharia" on religious people...

>>1934202
so are you afraid of the truth or just implying you're smart by not going into it?
you can only pick one.

>>1934234
>GOD TIER: Apatheism, Nihilism

Does somebody need a hug?

GOD TIER:
Squids

SHIT TIER:
You

>>1934258
Neither. I'm simply pointing out your hipocrisy in demanding that I present arguments against your childish name-calling.

>>1934329
what arguments do you like to recieve for my name calling? that you're an insecure faggot who does not wish to argue but point out I'm wrong nonetheless?

btw how are your invisible counter examples going? still invisible?

/sci/ - Religion and Beliefs

>>1933900

No. We don't have to tolerate their bullshit. Science means refusing dogmatic beliefs in favour of a rational approach. Science is not compatible with religion, agnosticism, or political correctness, because all those ideologies teach people that certain areas of knowledge are "off-limits", and certain beliefs should not be questioned. "Tolerance" is just the first step to accepting the bullshit they're trying to feed us.

>>1934353
And scientific theories aren't mostly the bullshit theories lots of people are feeding us?

>>1934344
How about you give me a few arguments why you can state so certainly that every single atheist in the planet "can't understand anything" and "wish[es] you to believe the laws of nature get bended and shit comes from nothing at a magical moment in time", as stated in >>1934010.

As for counterexamples in this thread, try these:
>>1933900
>>1933951
>>1933964
>>1933994
>>1934002
>>1934007
>>1934017
>>1934034
>>1934044
>>1934066
>>1934071
>>1934101

Ball's in your court, asshat.

>>1934290
Double penis attack

>>1934425
actually took the time to quote lots of posts not even remotely related to what I said about atheists
it's almost pathetic to argue with you

and yes, most of what atheists believe is contradictory
nothing can come into existance by chance
otherwise it's magic

the laws of nature indicate that everything that happens must have an event before it, allowing it to happen
or do you think atheists believe something LIKE god created the laws and first cause? like some fucking programmer or something

>>1934524
>I quote a bunch of reasonable atheists, counterexamples to your claim that atheists can't understand anything
>you think that you can shrug off all those examples by pretending that they don't matter

Nice try.

>"most of what atheists believe is contradictory"
>implying that atheism is a self-affirming belief system, as opposed to a denial of other belief systems
>failure to give any relevant examples of what these contradictory beliefs might be

And finally
>implying that every single atheist believes that the universe came into existence "just because"

Your reasoning is so shallow that it'd make me cry if I gave a fuck.

Bump for faggots

>>1934559
tells me off topic posts magically present counter arguments for my posts but refuses to say why

and grats on not giving a fuck, tough guy
you may now proceed to crawl back into the cavern you came from

>>1934573
I said why, nigger. Learn to read.

And congratulations on not even pretending to give a useful argument.

>>1934579
already said what I had to say about atheists
you're the one attacking the statement without arguments
guess who's the nigger here

>>1934234

Yo, bro, you forgot Existentialism in the God Tier.

>>1934594
You're telling me that an incredibly broad generalization basd on a minuscular sampling, and of which there are counterexamples RIGHT IN THIS THREAD is a statement that holds any water?

Based on that same logic, all christfags are child rapists, all asians are North Korean dictators, all transsexual prostitutes are your father and all plants are tomatoes.

>>1934615
as if you know what atheists believe, you're probably just agnostic, clueless while knowing it

but go on, humor me, what do atheists believe according to you?

That's a good way to get christians to stop being christians. repeat OPs post

>>1934620
I don't believe they all believe the same thing. I believe to claim they all believe the same things is naive, simplistic, and backwards.

>>1934647
yes well you can believe anything you want as far as I'm concerned
doesn't make it less likely for my statements to be untrue though

>>1934615
Oh boy, you're more retarded than I thought.

My entire point is that generalizing from a small sampling is NOT a valid way to draw conclusions, and what you get from that is that I have my own generalization that's different from yours?

Some atheists may believe that the universe appeared due to quantum fluctuations. Some might believe that it's been here all along. Some might believe that it was created by LHC-like experiments performed by some other civilization in another universe. Some atheists might believe that upon the heat death of the universe, it will go back in time and create itself. Some might believe that since the total energy of the universe is zero, it's absolutely pointless to wonder why it exists, because, as it turns out it doesn't exist. Some might believe in some other completely different explanation that I either forgot to mention or never heard about. Some might simply suspend judgement, and some might not have ever stopped to think about it because they don't think it's very relevant to their lives.

Notice my repeated use of the words "some" and "might". Atheism is not a single, verticalized organized doctrine where everybody is forced to have the same opinion on everything. Not even most religions are like that. Most Catholics I have contact with don't believe in the Great Flood or the parting of the Red Sea, and yet they face no danger of excommunication if the Pope finds out.

>>1934659
>doesn't make it less likely for my statements to be untrue though

Correct. The likelihood of your statement being untrue remains unreduced and at the 100% mark.

>>1934660
Not believing in a great flood is stupid. 100s of cultures have written about a great flood and have past down an oral tradition of one but no they choose THAT ONE THING to not believe. fucking idiots lol

>>1934660
oh yea, you assume I just talk for a minority because this is probable in your head
doesn't make it true though

and do you really think lots of atheists don't believe in the big bang theory? if you say the universe and its matter has always existed (which is a more likely theory than the big bang)
no most of them believe in chance, that something can suddenly start out of nothing

>>1934668
yeye and you don't even know why
so why are you even talking, dumb shit?

all you're doing is guessing

"What are you talking about? I haven't been damned, I'm white."

>>1934677
It might make more sense to not believe that a man created a whole bunch of fish from nothing or turned water into wine without causing a nuclear explosion. Anyway, my point was just that they don't abide by the entire dogma of the Bible and aren't penalized by their church for it.

>>1934676
>oh yea, you assume I just talk for a minority because this is probable in your head
Are you claiming to have first-hand knowledge of what the great majority of atheists believe?

The Big Bang theory isn't a theory of random chance. It states that the Big Bang created the universe, but it doesn't say that the Big Bang itself was a random event. Referring you to my previous post, it might have come about due to quantum fluctuations, due to an event in another universe (though that's a slippery slope towards an infinite regression), or that the universe always existed and is in an eternal Big Bang>Expansion>Contraction>Big Crunch>Repeat cycle. Or that crazy fucked-up going back in time thing, or any other non-supernatural cause.

Most atheists probably agree that the Big Bang was the origin of the universe, yes. But jumping from that statement to "every single atheist ever believes that the Big Bang was a random event" isn't just false, it's intellectual dishonesty.

>>1934692
so how would another universe create the big bang, if the universe is everything which exists
this is still simular to a god substance which can create matter and energy without being part of the same natural laws
instead most atheists believe anything is possible in this universe due to chance
so which is it? god or magic?