Ball State to review atheism course

Ball State to review atheism course

There are 49 comments on the WLFI-TV West Lafayette story from Oct 2, 2013, titled Ball State to review atheism course. In it, WLFI-TV West Lafayette reports that:

Ball State University's president said it is reviewing a course that a group advocating the teaching of intelligent design maintains is promoting atheism.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at WLFI-TV West Lafayette.

The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#21 Oct 9, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
Weak and cowardly liar who resorts to shameless lies when cornered for his illogic. Does not understand the burden of proof lies upon the person that chooses to lie about god being real.
Projection.
-Skeptic- wrote:
Does not understand why scientists are atheists yet tries to speak for both
I am speaking merely for the scientific method. I don't care about atheism so have never claimed to speak on its behalf. Not all scientists are atheists, for example evolutionary biologists Ken Miller and Francis Collins spring to mind. Atheism is not science, at most it is a philosophical, or perhaps intellectual position re: theology, which is not a scientific concept.
-Skeptic- wrote:
you're full of sh*t and your stupid qccusation above is proof.
Not the case. You were given AMPLE opportunity to correct your mistake and you decided not to. In fact you have never been able to retract a single mistake ever. And you've made plenty. So yes, describing you in particular as a fundamentalist I would say is quite appropriate.

I could even dig up the old thread if you like.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#22 Oct 9, 2013
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>I know Skeptic, you've been as obnoxious me in the past.
Sorry you feel it's best to be so rude and unpleasant as I think it tends to discredit and embarrass us as a group (e.g Brits &/or atheists).
It's okay, fundies have no shame. All you need do is simply recognise his fundamentalist bias and disown him. Just because he believes in evolution doesn't mean he's on my side.(shrug)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#23 Oct 9, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
I think you might have problems with reading comprehension.
There's no such thing as god until the liars that choose to lie about it present evidence.
And you love to make the same mistakes over and over again...

There is no such thing as aliens until the liars that choose to lie about it present evidence. Doesn't matter that the potential for alien life is still a very real possibility, despite the complete and total utter lack of evidence.
-Skeptic- wrote:
I'm not claiming there's a god, I'm merely stating the conclusion of the evidence so far - anyone who talks about god being real, is a liar, pure and simple, until evidence is presented that proves it isn't bollocks.
Which as I've demonstrated is not how the scientific method works. Science is perfectly open to the possibility, however it cannot make any determinations either way unless a valid scientific falsifiable definition can be presented.
-Skeptic- wrote:
The very definition of god is flawed because it doesn't refer to anything real in the first place, so its messed up from the beginning.
No, the definition of God is flawed because it's a non-testable non-falsifiable concept. You have already concluded that it does not exist despite performing zero scientific testing or investigation, therefore you are resting on pure assumption. I on the other hand have based my conclusion on the fact that the definition of God is insufficient to make the concept amenable to scientific investigation, therefore it is not scientific.

That is the difference between falsified concepts and non-falsifiable concepts.

You're claiming "God" is scientific. I am not. And you can never, ever address the fallacies of your position.

This is why you're a fundie who doesn't care about science. Your only interest is atheism.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#24 Oct 9, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>

You're claiming "God" is scientific.
No I am not, I'm not claiming anything. Its religious liars who claim god is real, when its not.

God will only be real when religious liars can prove it, because the burden of proof is upon them.

Not on atheists.

Its amazing how stupid and repetitive you are dude, just admit you're wrong and you'll look a lot less stupid.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#25 Oct 9, 2013
The dude, is a person who accused me of denying the moon landings...this is the kind of dishonest asshat we are dealing with here folks.

Trolls come in all shapes and sizes, and this one used to hang around one called Nuggin, who lost his mind and left. Now the dude comes back and an ignorant agnostic to try to pseka for atheists, without realising what the term "burden of proof" means.

Its been two years and he keeps running away from its definition!!!

What a weasel...
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#26 Oct 9, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
No I am not, I'm not claiming anything.
Yes you are. If you have falsified a concept then the concept was at least scientific enough to have had scientific tests performed that falsified it. I want to know what scientific test you performed that enabled you to make that determination.
-Skeptic- wrote:
Its religious liars who claim god is real, when its not.
God will only be real when religious liars can prove it, because the burden of proof is upon them.
Just as the burden of proof is upon those who claim aliens are real. However contrary to your erroneous assertions it is possible that aliens may exist, and if so that means they existed despite your claims that they didn't. But no problem, since in all likelihood we won't get evidence of aliens in our lifetime, or even within Earth's lifetime, so therefore you can continue to smugly claim that aliens definitely do not exist because there's no evidence.
-Skeptic- wrote:
Not on atheists.
Yet you have made a positive claim - that it is DEFINITELY NOT real. You have gone beyond the scientific method. Science is open to the possibility. It WILL point out that there is no evidence as yet. It does NOT take that extra leap you do to assert it straight does not exist period.
-Skeptic- wrote:
Its amazing how stupid and repetitive you are dude, just admit you're wrong and you'll look a lot less stupid.
Projection. You and I both know you won't address the actual content of my posts because you can't. Not only do you lack the skill, but your monumentally massive ego won't even let you admit the tiniest mistake. EXACTLY like a fundie when faced with evolution. That form of thinking is what led you to express "skepticism" towards the moon-landings and the existence of lizards.

So believe you me Skippy, I take your personal insults about as seriously as I do any other fundie's threats of eternal damnation.
-Skeptic- wrote:
The dude, is a person who accused me of denying the moon landings...this is the kind of dishonest asshat we are dealing with here folks.
It's not an accusation, it IS what actually happened. Precisely 1 year, 3 months and 2 weeks ago:

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/TNK...

And unfortunately you NEVER bothered to re-clarify yourself or retract your statements, even right up to the present day. Therefore you are a fundie nutcase who denies the moon-landings and expressed skepticism towards the existence of lizards. Which of course means that lizards, just like the aliens, do not exist until you personally have had evidence, because according to you that's how science works. Despite this, most educated people know that lizards have been around in one form or another for millions of years before you were born.

I DID warn you that your posts were a matter of record.(shrug)
-Skeptic- wrote:
Trolls come in all shapes and sizes, and this one used to hang around one called Nuggin, who lost his mind and left.
Nuggin never left, he just accesses via different forums. Me, I generally post from the evolution forum, which along with many other posters, sometimes has Nuggin post in it too. Oh, and on that same infamous thread were you have a rather Black Knight view of the situation you may notice that YOU left before he did.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#27 Oct 9, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
Now the dude comes back and an ignorant agnostic to try to pseka for atheists
Not even counting all the others, I've posted multiple times in THIS thread that I don't care about atheism and have no interest in speaking for atheists. So your accusations of me lying are quite ironic. The difference between us is I can demonstrate your lies, but you can't demonstrate mine. That's because of the two of us, it's not me who's lied.
-Skeptic- wrote:
without realising what the term "burden of proof" means.
Its been two years and he keeps running away from its definition!!!
What a weasel...
Actually it was on that thread I've linked to where the definition was met and addressed rather directly. YOU were the one who avoided it. Still do. That's why you dance around my posts instead of address them directly. I'd say feel free to have a change of heart and deal with me honestly for once but you're WAY too fundie to do that.(shrug)

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#28 Oct 9, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes you are. If you have falsified a concept then the concept was at least scientific enough to have had scientific tests performed that falsified it. I want to know what scientific test you performed that enabled you to make that determination.
<quoted text>
Just as the burden of proof is upon those who claim aliens are real. However contrary to your erroneous assertions it is possible that aliens may exist, and if so that means they existed despite your claims that they didn't. But no problem, since in all likelihood we won't get evidence of aliens in our lifetime, or even within Earth's lifetime, so therefore you can continue to smugly claim that aliens definitely do not exist because there's no evidence.
<quoted text>
Yet you have made a positive claim - that it is DEFINITELY NOT real. You have gone beyond the scientific method. Science is open to the possibility. It WILL point out that there is no evidence as yet. It does NOT take that extra leap you do to assert it straight does not exist period.
<quoted text>
Projection. You and I both know you won't address the actual content of my posts because you can't. Not only do you lack the skill, but your monumentally massive ego won't even let you admit the tiniest mistake. EXACTLY like a fundie when faced with evolution. That form of thinking is what led you to express "skepticism" towards the moon-landings and the existence of lizards.
So believe you me Skippy, I take your personal insults about as seriously as I do any other fundie's threats of eternal damnation.
<quoted text>
It's not an accusation, it IS what actually happened. Precisely 1 year, 3 months and 2 weeks ago:
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/TNK...
And unfortunately you NEVER bothered to re-clarify yourself or retract your statements, even right up to the present day. Therefore you are a fundie nutcase who denies the moon-landings and expressed skepticism towards the existence of lizards. Which of course means that lizards, just like the aliens, do not exist until you personally have had evidence, because according to you that's how science works. Despite this, most educated people know that lizards have been around in one form or another for millions of years before you were born.
I DID warn you that your posts were a matter of record.(shrug)
<quoted text>
Nuggin never left, he just accesses via different forums. Me, I generally post from the evolution forum, which along with many other posters, sometimes has Nuggin post in it too. Oh, and on that same infamous thread were you have a rather Black Knight view of the situation you may notice that YOU left before he did.
Lots of waste of space and no understanding of the burden of proof.

If you're stupid enough to lie about god, the burden of proof is upon you and nothing can change that.

You could admit that you're wrong, but your ego has got the better of you.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#29 Oct 9, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Not even counting all the others, I've posted multiple times in THIS thread that I don't care about atheism and have no interest in speaking for atheists. So your accusations of me lying are quite ironic. The difference between us is I can demonstrate your lies, but you can't demonstrate mine. That's because of the two of us, it's not me who's lied.
<quoted text>
Actually it was on that thread I've linked to where the definition was met and addressed rather directly. YOU were the one who avoided it. Still do. That's why you dance around my posts instead of address them directly. I'd say feel free to have a change of heart and deal with me honestly for once but you're WAY too fundie to do that.(shrug)
You can post 10,000 times if you like, it won't change the fact that you don't understand the scientific and logical implications of the burden of proof.

When you realise that the burden of proof lies upon theists to prove the god they are scientifically lying about, you will stop being an ignorant and obstinate asshat.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#30 Oct 9, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Just as the burden of proof is upon those who claim aliens are real. However contrary to your erroneous assertions it is possible that aliens may exist, and if so that means they existed despite your claims that they didn't. But no problem, since in all likelihood we won't get evidence of aliens in our lifetime, or even within Earth's lifetime, so therefore you can continue to smugly claim that aliens definitely do not exist because there's no evidence.
You don't understand the difference between a hypothesis and a theory:

Hypothesis - scientifically valid theory

Theory - just a theory.

Aliens = Hypothesis

God = Theory

Aliens = Bacterial evidence, observable, brought back to earth by space missions

God = made up bullsh*t with not even a shred of evidence even after space explorations and space flight? Why? Because its scientifically invalid to begin with and is bollocks.

Are you satisfied dude? or are you going to try to argue against the facts and make yourself looks stupid again?

Your choice dude...

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#31 Oct 9, 2013
Its because agnostics like the dude have not had a thorough education or ego training, that such people are simply are not equipped to apply the brain that nature evolved them to have...
Mugwump

Sunderland, UK

#32 Oct 9, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't understand the difference between a hypothesis and a theory:
Hypothesis - scientifically valid theory
Theory - just a theory.

<....>
Think it through , there is no point explaining the term "theory" in a scientific context , so is easier just to point out the flaws in your own argument.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#33 Oct 9, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
Lots of waste of space and no understanding of the burden of proof.
If you're stupid enough to lie about god, the burden of proof is upon you and nothing can change that.
You could admit that you're wrong, but your ego has got the better of you.

You can post 10,000 times if you like, it won't change the fact that you don't understand the scientific and logical implications of the burden of proof.

When you realise that the burden of proof lies upon theists to prove the god they are scientifically lying about, you will stop being an ignorant and obstinate asshat.

Its because agnostics like the dude have not had a thorough education or ego training, that such people are simply are not equipped to apply the brain that nature evolved them to have...
I see you have again taken the fundamentalist approach by attacking via rhetorical insults rather than addressing post content, while not apologizing for your lies in the process.
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't understand the difference between a hypothesis and a theory:
Hypothesis - scientifically valid theory
Theory - just a theory.
Sorry, all this is wrong.
-Skeptic- wrote:
Aliens = Hypothesis
This is correct.
-Skeptic- wrote:
God = Theory
Wrong.
-Skeptic- wrote:
Aliens = Bacterial evidence, observable, brought back to earth by space missions
These are the building blocks of life, not lifeforms in and of themselves. Alien lifeforms do not exist, period. You said so.
-Skeptic- wrote:
God = made up bullsh*t with not even a shred of evidence even after space explorations and space flight?
How is spaceflight relevant to finding Gods? I was not aware that God's abode was outer space. And if it IS outer space we have hardly searched very far, to be fair.
-Skeptic- wrote:
Why?
Because there is no reason to presume spaceflight is relevant to the discovery of the existence of deities.
-Skeptic- wrote:
Because its scientifically invalid to begin with and is bollocks.
This I agree with. However you went one step too far and made a positive claim you are unable to demonstrate. So two years later and I'm still asking the same questions - how did you manage to change a non-falsifiable non-scientific concept into a scientific and falsifiable one, and what scientific test did you perform to falsify said concept?

Thanks in advance for never answering.
-Skeptic- wrote:
Are you satisfied dude? or are you going to try to argue against the facts and make yourself looks stupid again?
Your choice dude...
Of the two of us, I have not argued against the facts. All these posts testify to that fact.

Keep dancing, Skippy.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#34 Oct 10, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
I see you have again taken the fundamentalist approach by attacking via rhetorical insults rather than addressing post content, while not apologizing for your lies in the process.
<quoted text>
Sorry, all this is wrong.
<quoted text>
This is correct.
<quoted text>
Wrong.
<quoted text>
These are the building blocks of life, not lifeforms in and of themselves. Alien lifeforms do not exist, period. You said so.
<quoted text>
How is spaceflight relevant to finding Gods? I was not aware that God's abode was outer space. And if it IS outer space we have hardly searched very far, to be fair.
<quoted text>
Because there is no reason to presume spaceflight is relevant to the discovery of the existence of deities.
<quoted text>
This I agree with. However you went one step too far and made a positive claim you are unable to demonstrate. So two years later and I'm still asking the same questions - how did you manage to change a non-falsifiable non-scientific concept into a scientific and falsifiable one, and what scientific test did you perform to falsify said concept?
Thanks in advance for never answering.
<quoted text>
Of the two of us, I have not argued against the facts. All these posts testify to that fact.
Keep dancing, Skippy.
The only sentence you need to type right now is:

"Skeptic, I'm sorry, you've been right all along, the burden of proof IS upon the idiots that invented god and not on atheists, I'm sorry for lying about this for the past two years. I'm also sorry for claiming you denied the moon landings & lizards, it was a stupid thing to say, and I only said it because I was losing the argument really really badly, and thought it might make you look mad and I would win, but it didn't work"

Apology accept dude, you may f*ck off now.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#35 Oct 10, 2013
Dude: *smacks himself with his own irony meter*
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#36 Oct 10, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
The only sentence you need to type right now is:
"Skeptic, I'm sorry, you've been right all along
That WOULD be a lie if I typed that.(shrug)
-Skeptic- wrote:
the burden of proof IS upon the idiots that invented god and not on atheists
Normally I would agree, however since you went a step further than what the scientific method does, therefore you have the burden of your own positive claim.
-Skeptic- wrote:
I'm sorry for lying about this for the past two years.
Nope. Of the two of us, I have not lied.
-Skeptic- wrote:
I'm also sorry for claiming you denied the moon landings & lizards, it was a stupid thing to say, and I only said it because I was losing the argument really really badly, and thought it might make you look mad and I would win, but it didn't work"
No, actually I said it because it IS what you did. And furthermore, I presented the evidence right in this thread. Your words are on record right here for all the world to see. You can't get away with saying you haven't took any cookies when you're standing right there with your grubby little hands in the cookie jar.
-Skeptic- wrote:
Apology accept dude, you may f*ck off now.
No apology from me will ever be going your way. I the reverse won't be the same, but that's because one of us is a fundie. And it ain't me.

Thanks for demonstrating once again your fundamentalist nature and your hatred of science education. Take it easy Skip.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#37 Oct 10, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
That WOULD be a lie if I typed that.(shrug)
<quoted text>
Normally I would agree, however since you went a step further than what the scientific method does, therefore you have the burden of your own positive claim.
<quoted text>
Nope. Of the two of us, I have not lied.
<quoted text>
No, actually I said it because it IS what you did. And furthermore, I presented the evidence right in this thread. Your words are on record right here for all the world to see. You can't get away with saying you haven't took any cookies when you're standing right there with your grubby little hands in the cookie jar.
<quoted text>
No apology from me will ever be going your way. I the reverse won't be the same, but that's because one of us is a fundie. And it ain't me.
Thanks for demonstrating once again your fundamentalist nature and your hatred of science education. Take it easy Skip.
It's ok to admit that you are dumb and that you are incapable of honest discussion. It's ok to admit that you do not understand the burden of proof. It's ok to admit that lying about your opponent by claiming he doesn't believe in the moon landings is a dishonest and weak thing to do while losing a debate online.

All of these things are ok, you need to learn to forgive your own stupidity a little.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#38 Oct 10, 2013
Atheists do not make positive claims, it's a shame te dude cannot accept this from atheists,
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#39 Oct 11, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
It's ok to admit that you are dumb and that you are incapable of honest discussion. It's ok to admit that you do not understand the burden of proof. It's ok to admit that lying about your opponent
Indeed, but unfortunately your pride won't allow you to acknowledge your lack of education and lack of honesty due to your fundamentalist nature.
-Skeptic- wrote:
by claiming he doesn't believe in the moon landings is a dishonest and weak thing to do while losing a debate online.
There has never been any debate, I was simply right from the beginning and you have been denying reality, as all good fundies should. As for your denial of the moon-landings, and lizards don't forget, remember that the written evidence of this was written by you, and since been linked to on this very thread for all to see. Since you have never bothered to address it since then there is no reason to portray you as a sane person who accepts man landed on the moon and the existence of lizards.
-Skeptic- wrote:
All of these things are ok, you need to learn to forgive your own stupidity a little.
Projection.
-Skeptic- wrote:
Atheists do not make positive claims, it's a shame te dude cannot accept this from atheists
Of course atheists make positive claims. Everybody makes positive claims. It would be very rare that anybody lives their lives without even once making a positive claim. In your case your particular positive claim was that a theological concept had been falsified. Yet you have yet to demonstrate this. You can either accept that this theological concept is non-falsifiable and therefore not scientific or continue to erroneously claim that the concept has been falsified, lying about myself and numerous other posters as you do so.

Just because you're an atheist doesn't mean you're not a fundie. In the end you're no different from the creationists you claim to oppose.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#40 Oct 11, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Indeed, but unfortunately your pride won't allow you to acknowledge your lack of education and lack of honesty due to your fundamentalist nature.
Repeats the idiot who doesn't understand that the burden of proof lies upon theists to prove their god and not upon atheists to disprove it.
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
There has never been any debate,
This is a stupid lie.
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>I was simply right from the beginning
Spoken like a fundamentalist.
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text> and you have been denying reality, as all good fundies should. As for your denial of the moon-landings, and lizards don't forget, remember that the written evidence of this was written by you, and since been linked to on this very thread for all to see.
This is an entirely unsubstantiated accusation based on no evidence. I don't deny the moon landings and I don't deny that lizards exist, and I never have, and anyone can read your links and work this out.

You are stupid for repeating this claim, based on evidence you've presented to the contrary.
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Since you have never bothered to address it since then there is no reason to portray you as a sane person who accepts man landed on the moon and the existence of lizards.
Once again, this behaviour explains your desperate lack of understanding of the burden of proof:

1. Just because you accuse me of denying the moon landings, does NOT make it true. Because I choose not to reply to your claims does NOT make your claim true.

2. The burden of proof requires YOU to present evidence that I deny the moon landings - and has nothing to do with me NOT REPLYING to your stupid accusations.
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course atheists make positive claims.
Atheists DO NOT make positive claims. Atheism is the conclusion after idiot theists and agnostics like yourself have been EXPOSED for lying about the possibility of god.

You deliberately try not to face up to this fact, because you are dishonest at arguing.
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Everybody makes positive claims. It would be very rare that anybody lives their lives without even once making a positive claim.
Nobody is debating whether or not people* make positive claims. We are debating SPECIFICALLY about the claim of *god*.

This is a classic tactic used by creationist propaganda merchants, to look at a claim RELATIVE to a wider CLAIM -*everyone makes claims - therefore claims are ok* BULLSH*T.
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
In your case your particular positive claim was that a theological concept had been falsified. Yet you have yet to demonstrate this.
Its already falsified you blithering idiot.
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
You can either accept that this theological concept is non-falsifiable and therefore not scientific or continue to erroneously claim that the concept has been falsified, lying about myself and numerous other posters as you do so.
Its been falsified you blithering idiot.
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because you're an atheist doesn't mean you're not a fundie.
Again, nobody is arguing this.
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
In the end you're no different from the creationists you claim to oppose.
You're very good at bringing up topics that nobody is debating, all the while misleading readers away from the main argument you fail at - burden of proof, and you not understanding it in any shape or form.

You've turned "not understanding" the burden of proof into a "way of life" - making accusations, and claiming they are valid - based on the absence of a challenge to the contrary!!!

Just like all the religious liars we see every single day here.

We're not stupid and can see straight through your fallacies bullsh*tting dude.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 1 min Eagle 12 24,640
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 min Into The Night 51,351
News Quotes from Famous Freethinkers (Aug '12) 5 min Eagle 12 1,646
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 54 min Eagle 12 11,399
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 1 hr Eagle 12 22,091
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) 7 hr Richardfs 5,788
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 7 hr Dogen 460
More from around the web