[ 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: 611 KB, 692x1044, 1296000087720.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2450307 No.2450307 [Reply] [Original]

Why Atheists?

>> No.2450319
File: 210 KB, 616x431, _picture you here (flamethrower) - meme 1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2450319

>>2450307

why not?

>> No.2450316

Because babies taste so good.

>> No.2450320
File: 51 KB, 469x462, 1266121175017.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2450320

Why not?

>> No.2450323
File: 84 KB, 640x480, 4chandump_abby12.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

Because Jesus can suck my small dick.

>> No.2450328
File: 41 KB, 799x626, sciencevsfaith.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2450328

because it is logical to not believe in a supernatural concept, if there is no evidence for it being true.

>> No.2450334

>>2450320

as sensible a question as 'why atheists', don't you tink?

>> No.2450345

If evidence is likely to exist regardless of whether or not the hypothesis that it claims to support is true or not, is it still evidence? Presumably not; it is weakened significantly, at the least.

Tada. Evidence against God logically dismissed.

>> No.2450347
File: 109 KB, 640x480, 4chandump_abby22.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2450347

>> No.2450350
File: 69 KB, 900x675, 4chandump_abby9.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2450350

>> No.2450348

>>2450345
You are of course correct. The strength of evidence is evaluated in terms of likelihood rations: The probability of the evidence given a hypothesis divided by the probability of the evidence given the negation of that hypothesis.

>> No.2450352
File: 65 KB, 400x400, philosoraptor.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2450352

>

>> No.2450363
File: 32 KB, 386x412, OpisaFag.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2450363

>>2450307

Pic related

>> No.2450368

I wonder how the cp poster is. As far as I know, /sci/ is the only board suffering from such a destranged individual at the moment.

Using a likelihood ratio to express my belief regarding the identity of that poster:
P(CP in /sci/ given Deep&Edgy is online)/P(CP in /sci/ given Deep&Edgy is offline)>9000

>> No.2450369

why aeruists?

>> No.2450376
File: 7 KB, 251x250, 1280071756621.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2450376

>>2450307

Because I live in hungary not in soviet russia

>> No.2450383

>>2450376
I thought religion was repressed in the soviet society? Wouldn't it be more accurate to play this one straight and say "in Soviet Russia, man created God?"

You'd be making a bible joke and a political joke. And a Soviet Russia joke, which speaks for itself.

>> No.2450386

>>2450383
You're obviously deluded from Reaganist propaganda.
May another Stalin raises and cleans the world of all the reactionist scum.

>> No.2450388

>>2450383

well.... no. This way you can actually hope that every other part of he world is sane

>> No.2450387

btw OPs drawing if from a guy named nelves,he is ninja

>> No.2450398 [DELETED] 

>>2450383
Religion wasn't repressed, but they didn't receive any state-funded money.

>> No.2450396
File: 38 KB, 762x236, athiests.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2450396

>>2450345

hahahahahahahahahaha - you need to consult your crystals for the logical answer...

>> No.2450407

Sometimes, when I'm lying in my bed getting ready to go to sleep, I sometimes wonder what it would be like to fuck Jesus's hand holes.

>> No.2450408

Destiny of the unevangelized

>> No.2450417

>>2450407

consider it was a nail...

consider the size of your weenie...

interesting.

>> No.2450427

>>2450407
It'd probably be an awful lot like fucking wrist-holes.

>> No.2450428

>>2450417
The blood would probably act as a good lubricant. TALK ABOUT A HAND JOB LOL

>> No.2450436

>>2450396
?
It's a valid argument, and you have to accept the conclusion if you accept the premise - that the "evidence" is not related to the hypothesis, i.e., it is equally likely to be present whether the hypothesis is true or false. That is, the null hypothesis cannot be rejected.

How long did you spend on that? It shows stunning ignorance.

>> No.2450432

>>2450396

Everything is based on 'if's. I am simply not deluded enough to think that my own reasoning is 100% correct.

Also, do you actually disagree with the hypothetical statement there? I'd think not, if you understand how evidence and analysis actually work.

tl;dr: you failed to understand my use of the word "if".

>> No.2450458

>>2450432

no, everything is not based on ifs.

run full speed head first into a concrete wall - no if there - the wall doesn't move.

run full speed head first into god... wait! you can't find god to perform the experiment with?

you have to have faith?

so in effect we have reality<> god, or vice-versa?

and whoever mentioned earlier about starting a philosophy channel to purge /sci/ of the smoke and mirrors crowd has an EXCELLENT idea.

>> No.2450461

>>2450432
>>2450436

He's a troll, nevermind.

Unfortunately for him, Bayes' theorem does actually prove what you've said. So let's try a double conditional to startle him.

If we identify the confirmation of a claim as an increase of its probability in light of evidence, then if the probability of the evidence given a hypothesis is higher than the probability of the evidence if that hypothesis were false, then the hypothesis is confirmed.

>> No.2450481

>>2450432

>>Also, do you actually disagree with the hypothetical statement there? I'd think not

you're the IF guys, aren't you? I see you not only ask vague unformulated questions about mythical things on a /sci/ence channel, but you presume to ask me a question and then answer it as if you have the magical power to know my thoughts!!!

i guess "trollin' fer jebus" goes hand-in-hand with "psychic mind powers from beyond"...

good luck with that. you might want to consider being a business major; that, like religion, requires faith in a lot of stuff that has a 50/50 chance of working.

>> No.2450495

>run full speed head first into a concrete wall - no if there - the wall doesn't move.

You don't know that this is true. Firstly, go read up on the Method of Doubt. Then look into the flaws of inductive reasoning. Then try quantum tunnelling.

Not sure if troll.

>> No.2450507

no evidence for jesus

i have never heard a coherent definition for god in my life. never.

i can't reconcile this. i can't believe in a thing you can't define that doesn't exist for no reason. it's absurd.

>> No.2450539

>>2450495

i DO know this is true - go try it then get back with me once YOU know it's true.

>> No.2450548

>>2450495

>>Not sure if troll.

am sure, you are troll.

>> No.2450551

>>2450539

You may know it beyond reasonable doubt, but you simply cannot know anything beyond doubt. It is a logical impossibility. If absolute truth exists, then you can be correct - but you cannot know that you are correct.

>> No.2452223
File: 127 KB, 336x336, Picture 4.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2452223

Hey guys, real quick question I have for my philosophy class. I need some outside input for this. In March Wilt Chamberlain offers you a job working as his driver. If you don’t take the job, you’ll have no rent money and so no apartment. If you try to sleep in an apartment without the owner’s permission, you’ll be thrown in jail.
In April the government taxes the money Chamberlain earns playing basketball, threatening to throw him in jail if he doesn’t pay. It uses the tax for payments to people who don’t have jobs. By collecting some of this money you can pay rent on an apartment even if you don’t take the job with Chamberlain.

Defend or criticize: you are forced to work for the benefit of Chamberlain in March. Defend or criticize: Chamberlain is forced to work for your benefit in April.