[ 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: 34 KB, 500x429, atheist_chart.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
937122 No.937122 [Reply] [Original]

Agnostics are pretentious idiots.

I don't mean the really indecisive ones, like the theist agnostics. More like, those that go around saying "LOLs, neither side is proven! Evolution isn't proven but that doesn't mean it's not true!"

No shit.

What's the point of always pointing out that something could be wrong? I go about my day believing whole heartedly that what I believe is true. if something comes along and disproves something I know, I change my world view. I've used my deduction capabilities to accept evolution as fact and I act as such because going around saying "LOLOLOL I DONT KNOW WHICH WAY TO GO" is utterly useless.

Point is, stick to something. If you're wrong, you're wrong and you have an opportunity to change. Stop trying so hard to be "not wrong" insofar that you basically contribute NOTHING.

>> No.937167

agnosticism is fundamentally an assertion of uncertainty.

and since the world itself is fundamentally uncertain, it is ultimately the most logical of all stances.

nobody really knows. agnostics are just honest about it.

also...not science

>> No.937209

>>937167

I know. But when I say "evolution is true/there is no God," I go about doing further experiments/assertions based on this being true. So it's a form of belief, but I believe it's about practicality since agnostics would cease to make further claims before obtaining proof for either side? Seems to me that agnostocism is just more explicit, not more logical.

>> No.937221

inb4 godfags rage

>> No.937259

>>937209

first, science is filled with examples of theories that were thought to be true but turned out not to be. agnosticism is highly valuable in science as it keeps one from getting too married to beliefs which might compromise judgment in the face of contradictory evidence.

second, there is nothing that prevents an agnostic from forming scientific hypotheses and testing them.

third, do you mean to tell me that you PERSONALLY conduct experiments to attempt to further the theory of evolution? or do you just troll /sci/ with non-scientific threads?

>> No.937271

>>937259

The latter.

Question:
Do agnostics believe in things that are not possible?

>> No.937347

>>937167
>agnosticism is fundamentally an assertion of uncertainty [about Zeus]

>and since the world itself is fundamentally uncertain, it is ultimately the most logical of all stances.

>nobody really knows [about Zeus]. agnostics are just honest about it.

>> No.937416

>>937167

Would you say that the cycle of day and night is uncertain?

>> No.937432

>>937271
question: do you know what is possible and what not?

>> No.937438
File: 128 KB, 656x1613, 1232885689555.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
937438

>> No.937444

>>937416

wow ur so clever...

>> No.937448

>>937416
would you say your mother is uncertain?

>> No.937447

>>937432

I know what is possible as far as how we experience it, which is all that really matters (since anything out of the observable realm cannot be observed/known anyways.)

>> No.937457

Agnostics are retards.
They don't know for certain if my anus is a supernatural deity.
(It's the most logical position, fo sho lulz)

>> No.937462

>>937447
then give me your theory of everything, because, you know, physicists have been looking for it and i could use a nobel prize

>> No.937474

The problem with agnostics is that they think they're the only one's who "realize" that you can't prove shit about the real world.
Which is of course arrogant and completely false.

>> No.937481

>>937474
>>937457
Haha, agnostics don't know for sure if this noko-fail is a samefag or not.

>> No.937487

>>937462

I don't know everything. I know some things. Agnostics know nothing.

>> No.937488

>>937438
>>937438
>>937438
>>937438
>>937438
>>937438
>>937438
fucking this.
Agnostics are hypocrite-faggots who don't have the balls to stand up to religious idiots.

>> No.937496

>>937487
>Agnostics know nothing.
if their views were actually consistent. but in reality, self-proclaimed "agnostics" are just hypocrites

>> No.937503

Agnostics don't know for sure if jumping in front of a train will kill them, or if cutting of their genitalia will hurt.
Still they won't try, because they *believe* in those things.
They're just too much of a pussy to admit it and prefer to cop-out behind a logically-correct looking irrelevant pseudo-argument.

>> No.937511
File: 30 KB, 410x347, 1273092914797.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
937511

>>937438
haha, very good one

>> No.938803

There is strong evidence for evolution.
God is an abstract concept, which is beyond the realm of science. You either believe in it or not. But if you claim that evolution somehow disproves the existence of God, then you are a retard. You can only disprove what is written bible, but you can't disprove the concept of God itself. What if God somehow initiated the big bang? You can't know and probably never will know.