Which Child Tells the World Her Life Has Been Stolen?

[miketx]

In this country really evil are school shooters. If only Republicans would stop arming them.

In this country, you soulless bastards are what is evil.

 

[miketx]

In this country really evil are school shooters. If only Republicans would stop arming them.

I wish you’d stop telling them there’s no God.

Just not the Republican God. Today’s Republicans are not like traditional Christians that used to believe in taking care of children and helping the sick and the poor.
Today’s Republicans follow a cult leader who is serial adulterer.
All the terrible thing Republicans do. Accepting child abuse at the border and attacking poor people. Trying to deny millions healthcare.
The traditional Jesus would never approve of today’s republican party. And I suspect if he did come back he would be very angry that they’re using his name to spread terrible policies.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Well, for me it doesn't come down to belief, it comes down to properly forming your beliefs. Whereas, when you say "there is no absolute proof one way or the other," to me, if one wants to be rational after admitting that - then their "belief" is not believing either way at all. Many call that Agnosticism, or soft atheism. I call it honesty.

When we don't have proof of something, to me, that's reason enough not to form a belief around said thing and I call that proper skepticism.

That gets one nowhere. In my view you haven't "properly formed your belief" and I'm certain you feel the same way about mine. I think the billions upon billions of stars and planets in the vast unending universe all conforming to universal laws is proof positive of a creator though I'm certain you disagree. It all comes down to beliefs.

 

[Ame®icano]

How creepy is it that poor kid was trained like an animal and sent out to perform for a breathless lefty media who just couldn't get enough?

She has mental and emotional issues and undoubtedly her handlers have capitalized on that to to increase her sense of paranoia and impending doom.
Meet Greta Thunberg's Handler, Luisa Marie-Nuebauer

 

[G.T.]

Well, for me it doesn't come down to belief, it comes down to properly forming your beliefs. Whereas, when you say "there is no absolute proof one way or the other," to me, if one wants to be rational after admitting that - then their "belief" is not believing either way at all. Many call that Agnosticism, or soft atheism. I call it honesty.

When we don't have proof of something, to me, that's reason enough not to form a belief around said thing and I call that proper skepticism.

That gets one nowhere. In my view you haven't "properly formed your belief" and I'm certain you feel the same way about mine. I think the billions upon billions of stars and planets in the vast unending universe all conforming to universal laws is proof positive of a creator though I'm certain you disagree. It all comes down to beliefs.

You're incoherent, and thus not in a position to tell me how to form a belief.

I said, it comes down to properly forming a belief. You then said I haven't "properly formed my belief," when I HAVE NO BELIEF, on the matter. It's an "I dont know," not a belief.

You, in your last post, said there's no proof...and in this post, said that there is. That's the incoherence I mentioned in my first sentence here. That's indicative of a lack of deep thought, and it's not the 1st indicator - the 1st indicator is an inability to say "I don't know" about something we clearly don't know...but instead, asserting there's a "creator."

"that gets one nowhere" is an argument from incredulity. It's actually ass-backwards, or back asswards - - forming a belief based on "guessing," which you've admitted to having no proof....is what "gets us nowhere," and leads us to incorrect data and pretending we know something that we don't.... In fact, proper skepticism is the ONLY thing that "gets us somewhere," because it's the underlying incentive to keep on learning.

Acting like one "knows" that there's a creator "gets us nowhere."

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

You're incoherent, and thus not in a position to tell me how to form a belief.

I said, it comes down to properly forming a belief. You then said I haven't "properly formed my belief," when I HAVE NO BELIEF, on the matter. It's an "I dont know," not a belief.

I'm not telling you how to form a belief or what to believe.


This sort of rhetoric "Was sky daddy a christian when she killed all but two of every living thing on earth, Poe?" leads one to believe you're not agnostic (might be, might not be...I just don't know) but you've clearly picked a side in this fight.

Maybe you've confused your own self but you have to be honest with yourself before you can be honest with others.
Do I "know" there is a creator? I know everything that has ever been created has a source
or reason for being. I think it's logically disingenuous to pretend the universe just happens to be and there is no source when we have no logical reason to believe such a thing is even possible. Belief that the universe just magically exists is the real
belief in nonsense.

 

[G.T.]

You're incoherent, and thus not in a position to tell me how to form a belief.

I said, it comes down to properly forming a belief. You then said I haven't "properly formed my belief," when I HAVE NO BELIEF, on the matter. It's an "I dont know," not a belief.

I'm not telling you how to form a belief or what to believe.


This sort of rhetoric "Was sky daddy a christian when she killed all but two of every living thing on earth, Poe?" leads one to believe you're not agnostic (might be, might not be...I just don't know) but you've clearly picked a side in this fight.

Maybe you've confused your own self but you have to be honest with yourself before you can be honest with others.

Your inability to discern meaning isn't a me problem...and jumping right into an accusation of dishonesty is kinda gross and undisciplined but I don't actually give a shit what you wanna believe about me.

There's several things going on in that dynamic there. Are you able to learn... because I'm not so sure at this point...

I don't know if a creator exists, or existed - I also contend that nobody knows, and I can ascertain that contention by being presented with ample failed arguments, as well as my own study of their Religious texts.

So, I mock the man made Religions, because I'm not agnostic about them. I straight up know that they're incoherent bullshit.

Do you understand how one can separate a "belief" with regard to Religious texts, with a "null hypothesis" on a general creator?

Further, I find it rather disgusting for you to feel the urge to "attack my attack" on him - - when he believes his God mass-murdered everything on earth except for 2 of every kind...but he wants to lay mere mortal school shooters at the belief in atheism and act like he now magically has some problem with mass-murder? while he literally WORSHIPS the greatest mass murderer of all time? You let that sorta hypocirsy slide, to make some invisible non-point about dishonesty. That's kinda gross, actually.

I would surely hope so!

Your beliefs lack discipline. There's holes in the complexity argument, there's holes in the watchmaker argument...and you've personally admitted to having no proof...and after all of that, you still find perfectly fit to allow yourself a belief on the matter. That's a belief based on really shaky ground, from where I sit it's undisciplined skepticism.

 

[G.T.]

You're incoherent, and thus not in a position to tell me how to form a belief.

I said, it comes down to properly forming a belief. You then said I haven't "properly formed my belief," when I HAVE NO BELIEF, on the matter. It's an "I dont know," not a belief.

I'm not telling you how to form a belief or what to believe.


This sort of rhetoric "Was sky daddy a christian when she killed all but two of every living thing on earth, Poe?" leads one to believe you're not agnostic (might be, might not be...I just don't know) but you've clearly picked a side in this fight.

Maybe you've confused your own self but you have to be honest with yourself before you can be honest with others.
Do I "know" there is a creator? I know everything that has ever been created has a source
or reason for being. I think it's logically disingenuous to pretend the universe just happens to be and there is no source when we have no logical reason to believe such a thing is even possible. Belief that the universe just magically exists is the real
belief in nonsense.

I see you added to your post. You've made many critical thinking errors, here.

1. "i know everything that has ever been created has a source."

You already smuggled in the conclusion that the Universe was "created," you begged the question...you're trying to say that everything that was created has a creator....to prove the universe had a creator...without first proving the universe was created. That's a logical fallacy. Pretty incoherent.

2. "i know everything that has ever been created has a source."If the Universe was everything, and it has no source which... we all don't have the answer to....then literally everything has no source...and here you're already asserting that everything has a source, based on your experience living inside of "everything," which we.........

you got it! DONT KNOW IF IT HAS A SOURCE.

That's circular reasoning.

3. "Belief that the universe just magically exists is the real
belief in nonsense."You're invoking some magical belief in the universe and then mocking said belief that nobody even posited. That's a strawman fallacy. Also worthy of note, belief that a "creator" magically exists, by this same logic, is the "real belief in nonsense..." if you're being consistent in thought. (it's okay, you haven't thought these things through)


you really lack discipline in forming your beliefs - and I just showed you how that's true - and I said from the beginning that it's not all about beliefs....it's about properly forming them. You're proving me right.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Your inability to discern meaning isn't a me problem...and jumping right into an accusation of dishonesty is kinda gross and undisciplined but I don't actually give a shit what you wanna believe about me.

There's several things going on in that dynamic there. Are you able to learn... because I'm not so sure at this point...

I don't know if a creator exists, or existed - I also contend that nobody knows, and I can ascertain that contention by being presented with ample failed arguments, as well as my own study of their Religious texts.

So, I mock the man made Religions, because I'm not agnostic about them. I straight up know that they're incoherent bullshit.

Do you understand how one can separate a "belief" with regard to Religious texts, with a "null hypothesis" on a general creator?

You got me. I said myself that religion is a man made device and therefore inherently filled with all sorts of problems.
So you can reject stories from the Old Testament without necessarily rejecting God, per se.
However talk of a "sky daddy" doesn't give me any faith that you are merely agnostic about the concept of God but clearly
you reject the notion and mock it with zeal.

Further, I find it rather disgusting for you to feel the urge to "attack my attack" on him - - when he believes his God mass-murdered everything on earth except for 2 of every kind...but he wants to lay mere mortal school shooters at the belief in atheism and act like he now magically has some problem with mass-murder? You let that sorta hypocirsy slide, to make some invisible non-point about dishonesty. That's kinda gross, actually.

I would surely hope so!

Your beliefs lack discipline. There's holes in the complexity argument, there's holes in the watchmaker argument...and you've personally admitted to having no proof...and after all of that, you still find perfectly fit to allow yourself a belief on the matter. That's a belief based on really shaky ground, from where I sit it's undisciplined skepticism.

There are holes in the watchmaker argument and I've pointed them out. Let me repeat that the watchmaker rests
to a large degree on Darwin's theory of evolution and science has now poked all sorts of holes in that theory.
Darwin himself said that his theory would be disproved if certain facts could be established. Well, they have.

But look at me...going down an endless rabbit hole doing what I said I would not do. My beliefs where God is concerned are absolutely rational and firmly established in my mind. That's all I have to be concerned with and all I should be concerned with. I doubt anything I could possibly say would move you.

Kaku, Einstein, DeGrasse Tyson (to name a very few)...all rational men of science who have a belief in God. I trust what I lack in scientific knowledge they fill the gaps and I am quite confident
my beliefs are reasonable and rational.

 

[G.T.]

Your inability to discern meaning isn't a me problem...and jumping right into an accusation of dishonesty is kinda gross and undisciplined but I don't actually give a shit what you wanna believe about me.

There's several things going on in that dynamic there. Are you able to learn... because I'm not so sure at this point...

I don't know if a creator exists, or existed - I also contend that nobody knows, and I can ascertain that contention by being presented with ample failed arguments, as well as my own study of their Religious texts.

So, I mock the man made Religions, because I'm not agnostic about them. I straight up know that they're incoherent bullshit.

Do you understand how one can separate a "belief" with regard to Religious texts, with a "null hypothesis" on a general creator?

You got me. I said myself that religion is a man made device and therefore inherently filled with all sorts of problems.
So you can reject stories from the Old Testament without necessarily rejecting God, per se.
However talk of a "sky daddy" doesn't give me any faith that you are merely agnostic about the concept of God but clearly
you reject the notion and mock it with zeal.

Further, I find it rather disgusting for you to feel the urge to "attack my attack" on him - - when he believes his God mass-murdered everything on earth except for 2 of every kind...but he wants to lay mere mortal school shooters at the belief in atheism and act like he now magically has some problem with mass-murder? You let that sorta hypocirsy slide, to make some invisible non-point about dishonesty. That's kinda gross, actually.

I would surely hope so!

Your beliefs lack discipline. There's holes in the complexity argument, there's holes in the watchmaker argument...and you've personally admitted to having no proof...and after all of that, you still find perfectly fit to allow yourself a belief on the matter. That's a belief based on really shaky ground, from where I sit it's undisciplined skepticism.

There are holes in the watchmaker argument and I've pointed them out. Let me repeat that the watchmaker rests
to a large degree on Darwin's theory of evolution and science has now poked all sorts of holes in that theory.
Darwin himself said that his theory would be disproved if certain facts could be established. Well, they have.

But look at me...going down an endless rabbit hole doing what I said I would not do. My beliefs where God is concerned
are absolutely rational and firmly established in my mind. That's all I have to be concerned with and all I should be
concerned with. I doubt anything I could possibly say would move you.

Correct, you couldn't move me...

and uhh, DUDE...the Watchmaker is an argument FOR God.

lol!

 

[G.T.]

Your inability to discern meaning isn't a me problem...and jumping right into an accusation of dishonesty is kinda gross and undisciplined but I don't actually give a shit what you wanna believe about me.

There's several things going on in that dynamic there. Are you able to learn... because I'm not so sure at this point...

I don't know if a creator exists, or existed - I also contend that nobody knows, and I can ascertain that contention by being presented with ample failed arguments, as well as my own study of their Religious texts.

So, I mock the man made Religions, because I'm not agnostic about them. I straight up know that they're incoherent bullshit.

Do you understand how one can separate a "belief" with regard to Religious texts, with a "null hypothesis" on a general creator?

You got me. I said myself that religion is a man made device and therefore inherently filled with all sorts of problems.
So you can reject stories from the Old Testament without necessarily rejecting God, per se.
However talk of a "sky daddy" doesn't give me any faith that you are merely agnostic about the concept of God but clearly
you reject the notion and mock it with zeal.

Further, I find it rather disgusting for you to feel the urge to "attack my attack" on him - - when he believes his God mass-murdered everything on earth except for 2 of every kind...but he wants to lay mere mortal school shooters at the belief in atheism and act like he now magically has some problem with mass-murder? You let that sorta hypocirsy slide, to make some invisible non-point about dishonesty. That's kinda gross, actually.

I would surely hope so!

Your beliefs lack discipline. There's holes in the complexity argument, there's holes in the watchmaker argument...and you've personally admitted to having no proof...and after all of that, you still find perfectly fit to allow yourself a belief on the matter. That's a belief based on really shaky ground, from where I sit it's undisciplined skepticism.

There are holes in the watchmaker argument and I've pointed them out. Let me repeat that the watchmaker rests
to a large degree on Darwin's theory of evolution and science has now poked all sorts of holes in that theory.
Darwin himself said that his theory would be disproved if certain facts could be established. Well, they have.

But look at me...going down an endless rabbit hole doing what I said I would not do. My beliefs where God is concerned are absolutely rational and firmly established in my mind. That's all I have to be concerned with and all I should be concerned with. I doubt anything I could possibly say would move you.

Kaku, Einstein, DeGrasse Tyson (to name a very few)...all rational men of science who have a belief in God. I trust what I lack in scientific knowledge they fill the gaps and I am quite confident
my beliefs are reasonable and rational.

tyson, kaku and einstein dont have a belief in god

they kicked the idea back and forth in interviews, had their clips taken out of context (aside from einstein), and later clarified what they had meant

quit arguing from authorities, especially if youre not even going to do your due fuckin dilligence because they dont deserve it

 

[G.T.]

"I have concluded that we are in a world made by rules created by an intelligence. To me, it is clear that we exist in a plan which is governed by rules that were created, shaped by a universal intelligence and not by chance."



Reacting to that public comment, Kaku said: "That’s one of the drawbacks of being in a public sphere: Sometimes you get quoted incorrectly. My own point of view is that you can neither prove nor disprove the existence of God."

Michio Kaku

 

[Papageorgio]

In this country really evil are school shooters. If only Republicans would stop arming them.

You are free to work to change the 2nd Amendment, however you will just continue to sit on your ass and do nothing, proving that you don't really give a damn.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

2. "i know everything that has ever been created has a source."If the Universe was everything, and it has no source which... we all don't have the answer to....then literally everything has no source...and here you're already asserting that everything has a source, based on your experience living inside of "everything," which we.........

you got it! DONT KNOW IF IT HAS A SOURCE.

I'm assuming the universe was created, just as we see in the Big Bang singularity, because I know of nothing that has ever NOT had a source, reason for being, a progenitor, etc.
It is totally alien to my being. Therefore should I assume our universe, the billions and billions of stars, planets, etc.
just happens to have always been here with no beginning or end (even though science has predicted an end to it all)?

Why would I make that assumption?

 

[G.T.]

2. "i know everything that has ever been created has a source."If the Universe was everything, and it has no source which... we all don't have the answer to....then literally everything has no source...and here you're already asserting that everything has a source, based on your experience living inside of "everything," which we.........

you got it! DONT KNOW IF IT HAS A SOURCE.

I'm assuming the universe was created, just as we see in the Big Bang singularity, because I know of nothing that has ever NOT had a source, reason for being, a progenitor, etc.
It is totally alien to my being. Therefore should I assume our universe, the billions and billions of stars, planets, etc.
just happens to have always been here with no beginning or end (even though science has predicted an end to it all)?

Why would I make that assumption?

The point is you dont make assumptions, and there's an old tale as to why. You merely admit (to YOURSELF!!) that you dont know.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

I have concluded that we are in a world made by rules created by an intelligence. To me, it is clear that we exist in a plan which is governed by rules that were created, shaped by a universal intelligence and not by chance."



Reacting to that public comment, Kaku said: "That’s one of the drawbacks of being in a public sphere: Sometimes you get quoted incorrectly. My own point of view is that you can neither prove nor disprove the existence of God."

Michio Kaku

"Personally, I think there’s much wisdom in the God of Einstein. Einstein basically said that there are two types of gods. One god is a personal god, the god that you pray to, the god that smites the Philistines, the god that walks on water. That’s the first god. But there’s another god, and that’s the god of Spinoza. That’s the god of beauty, harmony, simplicity."

Also Michio Kaku.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

tyson, kaku and einstein dont have a belief in god

They all say they do. But I guess you know better.

 

[G.T.]

tyson, kaku and einstein dont have a belief in god

They all say they do. But I guess you know better.

uhh, no

let alone, naturalistic pantheism is not "creator/personal" god.

aye yaye yaye

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

The point is you dont make assumptions, and there's an old tale as to why. You merely admit (to YOURSELF!!) that you dont know.

I'm not going to disregard all the collective wisdom of mankind since the beginning of time to fit your argument.
Nothing is uncaused. Everything has a source. I literally cannot conceive of something that just "happens to be".
Especially something like the cosmos.

 

[G.T.]

The point is you dont make assumptions, and there's an old tale as to why. You merely admit (to YOURSELF!!) that you dont know.

I'm not going to disregard all the collective wisdom of mankind since the beginning of time to fit your argument.
Nothing is uncaused. Everything has a source. I literally cannot conceive of something that just "happens to be".
Especially something like the cosmos.

Those are assertions ^ and it's also special pleading ...main assertion being all wisdom in mankind means there's a god....completely fucktarded