[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 24 KB, 228x228, 1281375869919.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2304932 No.2304932 [Reply] [Original]

Believers in religion, science and reality. I want to discuss your irrationality. Atheists too actually.

Stop arguing with each other. You're all stupid. I'm pure agnostic. As agnostic as is humanly possible. I don't believe we can know whether God or for that matter anything exists. Not even reality or logic and reason. Not only am I agnostic, but to all my rational ability I am an AGNOSTIC SOLIPSIST.

According to calculations of the probabilities of the universe springing out of a quantum vacuum as a fluctuation, scientists have shown that it is far, far more likely for a single mind to have formed than an entire universe with many minds. Therefore the most logical standpoint I can gain from this is that of the agnostic (cannot know either way) solipsist (most likely im imagining you all).

Suck on that! And eat you so called logic scifags!

inb4 troll (I'm not trolling, I'm serious)

>> No.2304940

Unoriginal, uninteresting.

>> No.2304939

pasta

0/10

>> No.2304945

>>2304932
The main problem with your argument: The true definition of an omnipotent God is contradictory.

>> No.2304947
File: 145 KB, 600x700, 1289560655357.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2304947

probably a troll, or does not realise that agnosticism and belief in a deity are on 2 seperate scales, agnosticism is NOT the middle ground on belief. you are an atheist, but one who doesnt want to admit it, and want to look more neutral. pic related

>> No.2304958
File: 8 KB, 417x429, 1291541567815.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2304958

>> No.2304962

>>2304947

um... you obviously didn't read my description, because I described exactly why I was agnostic, and used the definition correctly.

>> No.2304972

>>2304947
Wager

>> No.2304984

All scientist know this. What matters is what you do with it. You can either:
A) get on with your life and work with what you got
or
B) continuously dwell on it and call other people idiots for not also dwelling on it.

A = scientist (us)
B = philosopher (you)

>> No.2304997

>>2304947

No, an agnostic is someone who thinks theres something more, some kind of higher something. But they know that the ideas of gods and religion make no fucking sense.

Its like a phobia, someone whos afraid to fly, knows perfectly well that its one of the safest ways to travel, but they cant emotionally get over it. The plane is just way too dangerous.

Yep, thats right, agnosticism is a mental disability.

>> No.2305002

>>2304958
The biggest difference in Atheism and Agnosticism, is agnostics DONT. GIVE. A. FUCK. and are those truly without "religion" for it.

>> No.2305016

>>2304997
No, agnostic simply means that it's impossible to know for sure whether there is a higher power or not. It seems to be the common sense middle to the fanatic fringes of the theists and atheists. Hardcore people on either side are so busy trying to prove the other side wrong, that they fail to realize that it is physically impossible to prove the existence of a god until you die and you then know for sure whether one exists or not. If there were a way to prove the existence of a higher being there would not be a need for anyone to have faith.

>> No.2305030

>>2305002

Thats not being agnostic, thats being apathetic. You can be atheist and also not give a fuck. Agnostisics have an emotional bias, they give many more fucks than atheist do. If they didnt, they would just call themselves atheist, but they cant, their brain tells them that there must be something more, something thats there that the atheist dont see.

The atheist on the other hand, says, well, sure its possible for there to be something more. But theres more than enough evidence to draw my conclusion that theres not.

>> No.2305037

All I know is that Atheists gag on cock.

>> No.2305048

>>2305016

All atheist know this. Thus that cant be agnostic. Agnostic means you havent made up your mind, not that theres no way to prove it. Theres a big difference. Agnostic means that you think theres good arguments for god, and good arguments of atheism. Atheism means you think the arguments are atheism far outweigh the arguments for theism. The fact that it cant be proven and well never know for sure is obvious to anyone regardless where your stance is (well, maybe not theist)

>> No.2305053

>>2304947
Atheism is the ACTIVE BELIEF in the absence of a god, whereas agnosticism is the ACTIVE BELIEF that one can never know.

>> No.2305056

>>2305037
>ad hominem
>typicaltheist.jpg

>> No.2305058

>>2305053

>implying atheist dont know that god cant be disproven

>> No.2305059

>>2305048
No, agnostic means not known. Atheists seem to know somehow that god doesn't exist and they're looking for proof. You can be an agnostic theist or an agnostic atheist, but all it really means is you can't actually know for sure.

>> No.2305072

>>2305058
>implying they still don't belief all religions are færie tales, even with this knowledge

>implying this doesn't make them as bad as religious people

>> No.2305080

>>2305056
I can prove that Atheists are 100% more likely to gag on cocks. U mad?

>> No.2305081

>>2305059

>difference between gnostic atheists (strong atheists, do not believe in a god/gods and believes that a god/gods do not exist)
>and agnostic atheists (weak atheists, do not believe in a god/gods, but does not rule out the possibility of a god/gods)

>> No.2305085

>>atheist
>>believe aliens are visiting earth
>>dont believe in god

>> No.2305091
File: 70 KB, 453x342, troll smart.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2305091

>>2305080
[citation needed]

>> No.2305096

>>2305091
Most gays are atheists because God hates faggots.

Many gays like to gag on cocks.

Therefore atheists are more likely to gag on cocks.

>> No.2305099

>>2304972
Pascal's Wager makes the assumption that:
1.)There's only one hypothesis you could make that would cause you to be exempt from a set of consequences
2.) That believing is a decision that can or should be influenced by a person without delusion.

A god who only lets atheists into heaven is just as plausible as a god who only lets religious people into heaven. In fact, god giving no evidence for his existence is supporting of his not wanting people to believe in him.

In addition, this assumes that the amount of effort you should put into fulfilling the requirements of a hypothesis to avoid or recieve the consequences of having or not having those requirements is proportionate to the consequence rather than the evidence for that hypothesis. In other words, the punishment, the more effort you should put into belief. Does this mean I will alphabetize all written works I own so that any great spirit librarian that exists doesn't send me for an eternity of acid enemas?

No.

>> No.2305113

>>2305085
Sure is terrible troll in here.

I can't actually think of any atheists who believe that aliens have visited earth.....I'm sure they exist, but given the skeptical nature of most atheists, I suspect that it's a much lower percentage than what you see in theists.

>> No.2305118

>>2305096
I...I cannot refute this argument.

Brb sucking some cocks.

>> No.2305122

>>2305113
>>I'm sure they exist.

Any proof?

>> No.2305128

>>2305072

So you think the fact that god cant be disproven is good evidence that religions are correct?

OMG ITS A FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER!!!! O_O
YOU CANT DISPROVE IT!

Incase you didnt get that, the point is, whether something can be proven or not has nothing to do with whether or not its absurd. I could just as easily claim something that cant be disproven that isnt absurd.

>> No.2305136

>>2305096
>denying the existence and extreme homosexuality of numerous catholic priests who molested little boys

Checkmate, faggot.

>> No.2305140

>>2305096

Lol, actually, i bet this is true. When a religion shuns a certain type of people, those people tend to shy away from that religion.

>> No.2305144

>>2305136
>>implying there aren't more dick sucking atheists than boy touching catholics

Are you even trying bro?

>> No.2305152
File: 38 KB, 704x500, just as planned.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2305152

>>2305122
Statistically, atheists who believe that aliens visited earth must exist.

Theists use statistics to 'prove' that evolution didn't happen. Now, you will either submit to my argument, or you will admit that one of the theist's arguments is complete and utter bullshit.

Pic oh so fucking related.

>> No.2305159

>>2305128
You're misunderstanding. Nobody is saying that religion is correct. It is a belief system, one which requires faith as it can't be proven. It is a belief system in the same way that atheism is a belief system. The big bang theory is a belief system, as are the causes of the big bang. They are belief systems because they can't be proven. I, for one, think that the idea that the cause of the big bang was the collision of two vibrating branes is absurd, but you don't see me going to message boards spouting off about it.

>> No.2305161
File: 32 KB, 397x458, 1294246760853.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2305161

>inb4 troll (I'm not trolling, I'm serious)

>> No.2305164

>>2305152

Why dont you gag on some more penises?

Atheists gag on cocks. Thus evolution is false.

>> No.2305165

>>2305128
Not at all, in fact agnostics believe that a god's inability to be proven or disproven renders a belief or disbelief in said god invalid.

May I also complement you on your use of a generic and overused argument.

>> No.2305177

OP here. Seems to be religion discussion now.

So yeah, I think you can't refute gods, but you can refute some, like the CHristian God.

Just read the Bible, look at all the stuff this God is supposed to do and has supposedly done. Now look at the evidence of what this God has done recently? Nothing. So by mere definition of the Christian God (a God that is active and personal in our lives), just looking at our experiences and you can see he doesn't exist. Simples.

Anyway, I'm a Pantheist. So I'm not atheist, or agnostic...

>> No.2305175

>solipsist
fuck off and stop posting then

>> No.2305185
File: 59 KB, 679x516, argument-pyramid.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2305185

>>2305164
>Uhhhh.....FUCK! He's got me beat!
>What do I do, what do I do?
>Oh, yeah, I can just call him a faggot! Yeah, that totally won't make me look some dumbass who's clearly outmatched!

Tsk, tsk. Ad hominem is at that bottom of the argument pyramid.

Now, go ahead, make another stupid argument. I'm sure it will be just as effective as the previous arguments.

>> No.2305199

>>2305185
> thinks taking great pains to point out others' fallacies isn't itself attempting to use the poison well fallacy
stay honest, bro

>> No.2305203
File: 73 KB, 474x600, youmadcheyney.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2305203

>>2305185
lol u buttmad cockgagger? how's that oral herpes bro?

>> No.2305215

>>2305165
> inability to be disproven
logic can disprove impossible beings

a one dimensional cube is by definition impossible

a one-dimensional cube is by definition impossible

all definitions of theistic gods are incoherent (perfect being needs worship, omnipotence free will evil etc)
and deistic gods irrelevant (occams razor)

>> No.2305219

>>2305199
>poison well fallacy
>Poisoning the well (or attempting to poison the well) is a logical fallacy where adverse information about a target is pre-emptively presented to an audience, with the intention of discrediting or ridiculing everything that the target person is about to say.

Of course, all he ever had for an argument was ad hominem, except for
>>2305096
which I'm also sure is also some kind of fallacy as well...... Association fallacy, that might be it.

>> No.2305223

>>2305159

Review:
1) Someone claims agnostics is a belief system that god cant be disproven

2) I say, thats wrong, atheist also know god cant be disproven and is irrelevant to whether or not your atheist or agnostic

3) You claim religions shouldnt be treated as fairy tales if you know god cant be disproven.

4) I say, thats wrong, whether something can be proven or not has nothing to do with how absurd it is (how it should be treated)

5) You claim all beliefs are a form of belief system and that I shouldnt be going on the internet to bitch about beliefs just because I think theyre absurd.

Sorry, was coming up with a reply and realized It had nothing to do with what I was originally argueing so i made a review. I see how 4 and 5 are related, but 5 just does not follow from 4.

no comment...

>> No.2305231
File: 16 KB, 367x266, your wrath amuses me.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2305231

>>2305203
>FUCK! He's not taking the bait!
>Maybe if I troll harder, he'll ragequit or say something stupid!

Silly theist. If I was stupid and weak willed enough to fall for such low-level trolling, I'd have ragequit a long time ago.

>> No.2305236

>>2305223

come to think of it, 3 didnt follow from 2 either. But it was so absurd I couldnt help put reply. I guess when someone makes a really absurd claim, i just cant help put point it out. Hey! thats kind of a response to 5. :D

>> No.2305238
File: 49 KB, 538x873, haters.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2305238

>>2305203

>> No.2305250
File: 282 KB, 800x600, trollpyramid.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2305250

>>2305185
Just because he says he isn't a troll, doesn't mean he actually isn't a troll.

>> No.2305261

>>2304932
>>2304932

Hey just thought I'd drop in and say Solipsism is for faggots.