Comments
421 - 437 of 437 Comments Last updated Sep 15, 2012
First Prev
of 22
Next Last
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#449
Sep 12, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

And the truth is you are an atheist fundie.

“There is no god!”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#450
Sep 12, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

The Dude wrote:
And the truth is you are an atheist fundie.
impossible there is no foundation in atheism

“There are other issues.”

Since: May 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#451
Sep 12, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

3

The Dude wrote:
And the truth is you are an atheist fundie.

I totally agree!

“There are other issues.”

Since: May 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#452
Sep 12, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>Asking a Creationist godbot for facts is like asking a catholic priest to stop being attracted to children. It's impossible and ineffective and the person will continue to think they are in the right.
Ok let's put your money where your mouth is.

Prove that I said I believe in people riding dinosaurs. You know a claim you made.

Prove that I said the world was 6000 years old. Your claim.

Prove that I said the sun revolves around the earth. Your claim

Let's see what a great person you are.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#454
Sep 12, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Mikko wrote:
<quoted text>
impossible there is no foundation in atheism
Ah yes, but his foundation isn't in atheism. His foundation is in anti-theism.

I was on the Dawkins forum a long time ago, and someone explained it beautifully - that just because someone takes a certain position on a particular concept (theism, in this particular case Skippy's non-belief of a God) does that automatically render them immune to psychological flaws that any other human being can have? Of course Skippy being Skippy, his ego will cry out "YES!" But I have found him to be the kind of person who wouldn't even own up to a typo, much less admit to something as drastic as any kind of psychological flaw. So in the meantime we can all enjoy the fruits of his education at charm school.

:-)

“There are other issues.”

Since: May 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#455
Sep 12, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>Ah yes, but his foundation isn't in atheism. His foundation is in anti-theism.

I was on the Dawkins forum a long time ago, and someone explained it beautifully - that just because someone takes a certain position on a particular concept (theism, in this particular case Skippy's non-belief of a God) does that automatically render them immune to psychological flaws that any other human being can have? Of course Skippy being Skippy, his ego will cry out "YES!" But I have found him to be the kind of person who wouldn't even own up to a typo, much less admit to something as drastic as any kind of psychological flaw. So in the meantime we can all enjoy the fruits of his education at charm school.

:-)
Awesome post! I would love to hear that explanation.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#456
Sep 13, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah yes, but his foundation isn't in atheism. His foundation is in anti-theism.
I was on the Dawkins forum a long time ago, and someone explained it beautifully - that just because someone takes a certain position on a particular concept (theism, in this particular case Skippy's non-belief of a God) does that automatically render them immune to psychological flaws that any other human being can have? Of course Skippy being Skippy, his ego will cry out "YES!" But I have found him to be the kind of person who wouldn't even own up to a typo, much less admit to something as drastic as any kind of psychological flaw. So in the meantime we can all enjoy the fruits of his education at charm school.
:-)
1. You have no evidence that "god is possible". YOu haven't provided any evidence of your claim

2. You still and I repeat still (almost half a year) have not provided any example of an item that is both real and unfalsifiable. You tried, to your credit, but failed.

3. When Nuggin got slaughtered for his ridiculous logic, you ducked out to avoid a beating, and now still cower behind him like a wuss.

4. You still haven't looked up the burden of proof, which lies upon the idiot who invents bullsh*t ie. you, to provide it.

So provide it or f*ck off you waste of forum space.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#457
Sep 13, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The Dude wrote:
And the truth is you are an atheist fundie.
The truth is that you're frustrated that I'm not a fundie and that everyone has defeated your arguments here.

False ad-hominem are all you've got left after being caught out.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#458
Sep 13, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
1. You have no evidence that "god is possible". YOu haven't provided any evidence of your claim
2. You still and I repeat still (almost half a year) have not provided any example of an item that is both real and unfalsifiable. You tried, to your credit, but failed.
3. When Nuggin got slaughtered for his ridiculous logic, you ducked out to avoid a beating, and now still cower behind him like a wuss.
4. You still haven't looked up the burden of proof, which lies upon the idiot who invents bullsh*t ie. you, to provide it.
So provide it or f*ck off you waste of forum space.
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
The truth is that you're frustrated that I'm not a fundie and that everyone has defeated your arguments here.
False ad-hominem are all you've got left after being caught out.
You misunderstand. I've never been frustrated with you at all. No-one has "caught me out" on anything so far. And no, it's not ad-hom - your attitude towards NettieBelle for example. She's cool and a nice lady. She IS a theist, but not a reality-denying fundie creationist dingbat. Yet you treat both the same. You may not be aware of this, but over in the evolution forums we have many long-time established posters all involved with deconstructing the usual creationist bollox, and we do it very well. But not all of them are atheists.

Atheism may be the most important thing in YOUR book, but it's not relevant to science. Sorry if you don't like it.
Skeptic

Edgware, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#459
Sep 13, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

Educated What wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok let's put your money where your mouth is.
Prove that I said I believe in people riding dinosaurs. You know a claim you made.
Prove that I said the world was 6000 years old. Your claim.
Prove that I said the sun revolves around the earth. Your claim
Let's see what a great person you are.
Why do I need to prove something you've been saying for the last two years?

Nobody is going make an effort for your Creationist troll.

Nobody here believes that the earth is 6000 years old. Your cult of lies has failed.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#460
Sep 13, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...
<quoted text>
You misunderstand. I've never been frustrated with you at all. No-one has "caught me out" on anything so far. And no, it's not ad-hom - your attitude towards NettieBelle for example. She's cool and a nice lady. She IS a theist, but not a reality-denying fundie creationist dingbat. Yet you treat both the same. You may not be aware of this, but over in the evolution forums we have many long-time established posters all involved with deconstructing the usual creationist bollox, and we do it very well. But not all of them are atheists.
Atheism may be the most important thing in YOUR book, but it's not relevant to science. Sorry if you don't like it.
1. You have no evidence that "god is possible". YOu haven't provided any evidence of your claim

2. You still and I repeat still (almost half a year) have not provided any example of an item that is both real and unfalsifiable. You tried, to your credit, but failed.

3. When Nuggin got slaughtered for his ridiculous logic, you ducked out to avoid a beating, and now still cower behind him like a wuss.

4. You still haven't looked up the burden of proof, which lies upon the idiot who invents bullsh*t ie. you, to provide it.

So provide it or f*ck off you waste of forum space.

“There are other issues.”

Since: May 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#461
Sep 13, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Skeptic wrote:
<quoted text>Why do I need to prove something you've been saying for the last two years?

Nobody is going make an effort for your Creationist troll.

Nobody here believes that the earth is 6000 years old. Your cult of lies has failed.
Prove I have been saying that. Lol! So how are your Final Solution plans?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#462
Sep 13, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Hey Skip, I notice you're repeating stuff I've already addressed. You do know how debate format works, yes? Post, counter post, counter post, counter post, counter post, etc.

Do you have fun judging your own posts? Or you still got all those groupies you told us about?
Monkey's Paw

Chicago Ridge, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#463
Sep 14, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

The Dude wrote:
Hey Skip, I notice you're repeating stuff I've already addressed. You do know how debate format works, yes? Post, counter post, counter post, counter post, counter post, etc.

Do you have fun judging your own posts? Or you still got all those groupies you told us about?
don't you mean Christian post,atheist nasty comment, Christian post, atheist nasty comment, etc.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#464
Sep 15, 2012
 

Judged:

2

1

1

[QUOTE who="Monkey's Paw "]<quoted text>
don't you mean Christian post,atheist nasty comment, Christian post, atheist nasty comment, etc.[/QUOTE]

No, I meant exactly what I said.

Especially as I was referring to a disagreement between me and Skip, and you would consider both of us to be 'atheists'.

Besides, many on Topix who consider themselves Christians are also very fond of nasty comments, so your post is a non-sequitor.

“There are other issues.”

Since: May 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#465
Sep 15, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The Dude wrote:
Hey Skip, I notice you're repeating stuff I've already addressed. You do know how debate format works, yes? Post, counter post, counter post, counter post, counter post, etc.

Do you have fun judging your own posts? Or you still got all those groupies you told us about?
Lol
KJV

Sioux City, IA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#466
Sep 15, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The Dude wrote:
[QUOTE who="Monkey's Paw "]<quoted text>
don't you mean Christian post,atheist nasty comment, Christian post, atheist nasty comment, etc. "

No, I meant exactly what I said.

Especially as I was referring to a disagreement between me and Skip, and you would consider both of us to be 'atheists'.

Besides, many on Topix who consider themselves Christians are also very fond of nasty comments, so your post is a non-sequitor.
Yes we are!

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 22
Next Last
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••