The War on Religion

[tttppp]

I bet you're one of only a handful of atheists that believe that the big bang theory is a biproduct of religion suppressing thought. That's really just insane.

Are you delusional? The big bang theory is being used by religion to support their beliefs. I've seen religious experts use the big bang theory as proof that God exists.

 

[jmdrake]

Are you delusional?

Asks the guy who thinks he knows more about infinity than Stephen Hawking?

The big bang theory is being used by religion to support their beliefs. I've seen religious experts use the big bang theory as proof that God exists.

Sure. An effective debating technique is to start with a belief your opponent accepts. It's sort of like Ron Paul using the 9/11 commission report against Guiliani. But you'd have to be daft to think the 9/11 commission report was written as it was for the purpose of supporting non interventionism.

 

[tttppp]

Asks the guy who thinks he knows more about infinity than Stephen Hawking?



Sure. An effective debating technique is to start with a belief your opponent accepts. It's sort of like Ron Paul using the 9/11 commission report against Guiliani. But you'd have to be daft to think the 9/11 commission report was written as it was for the purpose of supporting non interventionism.

You're the one who brought up the big bang theory. And you didn't address my point. You just made up nonsense.

Please tell me what Hawking's theory of everything is.

 

[jmdrake]

You're the one who brought up the big bang theory. And you didn't address my point. You just made up nonsense.

Wrong! You brought up the big bang theory. I responded to you about it.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...-on-Religion&p=4579536&viewfull=1#post4579536

So again, who's the one that's delusional?

Edit: To be totally precise ElfShadow initially brought up the big bang.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...-on-Religion&p=4577128&viewfull=1#post4577128

But he did it to argue against the particular Christian perspective being advanced by PaulConventionWV. So you still fail.

Please tell me what Hawking's theory of everything is.

Hey, you're the one who seems to think he knows everything (even though you didn't know who brought up the big bang theory in this thread). You tell me.

 

[tttppp]

Wrong! You brought up the big bang theory. I responded to you about it.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...-on-Religion&p=4579536&viewfull=1#post4579536

So again, who's the one that's delusional?

Edit: To be totally precise ElfShadow initially brought up the big bang.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...-on-Religion&p=4577128&viewfull=1#post4577128

But he did it to argue against the particular Christian perspective being advanced by PaulConventionWV. So you still fail.



Hey, you're the one who seems to think he knows everything (even though you didn't know who brought up the big bang theory in this thread). You tell me.

Great job pointing out where I mention the big bang theory 13 pages ago to someone else. You're the one who brought it up in out discussion. That said, you still didn't address my point. You just wrote some gibberish to avoid the topic.

Same goes for your response to what I said about Hawking. You chose to write gibberish instead of addressing the point.

 

[jmdrake]

Great job pointing out where I mention the big bang theory 13 pages ago to someone else. You're the one who brought it up in out discussion.

Bollocks. When I first mentioned the big bang theory it was in direct response to you. You ignored my question to you, then I mentioned it again.

That said, you still didn't address my point. You just wrote some gibberish to avoid the topic.

I have addressed your point. Your are the one spouting gibberish. Your idea that the big bang is some part of a conspiracy to validate God is what is gibberish.

Same goes for your response to what I said about Hawking. You chose to write gibberish instead of addressing the point.

What point? You have none.

 

[tttppp]

Bollocks. When I first mentioned the big bang theory it was in direct response to you. You ignored my question to you, then I mentioned it again.



I have addressed your point. Your are the one spouting gibberish. Your idea that the big bang is some part of a conspiracy to validate God is what is gibberish.



What point? You have none.

You are just trolling right now. Your arguments are complete bullshit. You ignore my points, try to turn it back on me saying I didn't address your points when I did, then say I had no point. Total bullshit.

 

[jmdrake]

You are just trolling right now. Your arguments are complete bullshit. You ignore my points, try to turn it back on me saying I didn't address your points when I did, then say I had no point. Total bullshit.

You've been trolling or crazy for most of this thread. You jumped shark a long time ago.

 

[tttppp]

You've been trolling or crazy for most of this thread. You jumped shark a long time ago.

Disagreeing with some people is not trolling when you are stating your opinions and adequately addressing other peoples points. You were completly trolling. You were just making bullshit arguments for the sake of argument.

 

[Muwahid]

You don't seem to have a complete grasp on infinity. You do realize that infinity includes every possible outcome or reality including our reality. So if infinity exists, we exist. Otherwise its not infinity you are talking about. If we exist, we wouldn't need God to create us.

does that mean everything exists?

 

[tttppp]

does that mean everything exists?

Aside from a God that created the universe, everything that I can think of exists.

 

[bolil]

If there is a god, and it is benovolent one thing can be sure and that is it does not like our species very much.

 

[KingNothing]

does that mean everything exists?

Yes, the implication is that everything exists, and that everything exists infinity times.

Eternal Recurrence is a pretty badass concept:

Nietzsche calls the idea "horrifying and paralyzing",[citation needed] referring to it as a burden of the "heaviest weight" ("das schwerste Gewicht")[11] imaginable. He honestly professes that the wish for the eternal return of all events would mark the ultimate affirmation of life:
What, if some day or night a demon were to steal after you into your loneliest loneliness and say to you: 'This life as you now live it and have lived it, you will have to live once more and innumerable times more' ... Would you not throw yourself down and gnash your teeth and curse the demon who spoke thus? Or have you once experienced a tremendous moment when you would have answered him: 'You are a god and never have I heard anything more divine.' [The Gay Science, §341]
To comprehend eternal recurrence in his thought, and to not merely come to peace with it but to embrace it, requires amor fati, "love of fate":[12]
My formula for human greatness is amor fati: that one wants to have nothing different, not forward, not backward, not in all eternity. Not merely to bear the necessary, still less to conceal it—all idealism is mendaciousness before the necessary—but to love it

 

[jmdrake]

Disagreeing with some people is not trolling when you are stating your opinions and adequately addressing other peoples points. You were completly trolling. You were just making bullshit arguments for the sake of argument.

You're projecting your inadequacies on me. I addressed your points. Only you haven't really made any. You have nothing to back up your arguments that you know more than Stephen Hawking about infinity and that there's some "conspiracy" to push the big bang as a straw man that creationists can knock to in order to prove God. Your insisting over and over again that you are "right" isn't a point that can really be responded to. At the end of the day, you and your committee of 1 will still declare yourself "right" no matter what anyone else says. You can't even be honest about who brought up the big bang in this thread. That said, you want the last word you can have it. Even other atheists aren't backing you up in your lunacy at this point. I even got a +rep from someone who would otherwise be on your side of the argument for pointing out how ridiculous you're being.

 

[tttppp]

You're projecting your inadequacies on me. I addressed your points. Only you haven't really made any. You have nothing to back up your arguments that you know more than Stephen Hawking about infinity and that there's some "conspiracy" to push the big bang as a straw man that creationists can knock to in order to prove God. Your insisting over and over again that you are "right" isn't a point that can really be responded to. At the end of the day, you and your committee of 1 will still declare yourself "right" no matter what anyone else says. You can't even be honest about who brought up the big bang in this thread. That said, you want the last word you can have it. Even other atheists aren't backing you up in your lunacy at this point. I even got a +rep from someone who would otherwise be on your side of the argument for pointing out how ridiculous you're being.

Then why can't you name Hawking's theory of everything? You have already ignored that several times.

I mentioned the big bang theory to someone else over 13 pages ago. If you want to claim victory over that issue, fine you win. But you still haven't addressed the point I was making about the big bang theory. You just obsessed over the pointless issue of who brought it up, and ignored the point I was making. Go back and read my post on that issue and address it. Enough with your petty bullshit.

 

[jmdrake]

Then why can't you name Hawking's theory of everything? You have already ignored that several times.

Again. I'm not the one claiming to know more than Steven Hawking. If you're making such a bold claim the burden is on you to prove it.

I mentioned the big bang theory to someone else over 13 pages ago. If you want to claim victory over that issue, fine you win. But you still haven't addressed the point I was making about the big bang theory. You just obsessed over the pointless issue of who brought it up, and ignored the point I was making. Go back and read my post on that issue and address it. Enough with your petty bullshit.

I did address that stupid point. Here it is again.

Sure. An effective debating technique is to start with a belief your opponent accepts. It's sort of like Ron Paul using the 9/11 commission report against Guiliani. But you'd have to be daft to think the 9/11 commission report was written as it was for the purpose of supporting non interventionism.

I addressed it by analogy. You're too full of yourself to get it. You called that "gibberish". Well all you've proven is that you don't understand reasoning by analogy.

/thread.

 

[tttppp]

Again. I'm not the one claiming to know more than Steven Hawking. If you're making such a bold claim the burden is on you to prove it.



I did address that stupid point. Here it is again.



I addressed it by analogy. You're too full of yourself to get it. You called that "gibberish". Well all you've proven is that you don't understand reasoning by analogy.

/thread.

To my knoweledge, Hawking doesn't have a theory of everything, and I do. So its pointless for you to bash me for saying Hawking doesn't understand infinity as well as me. If you think Hawking is better than me, then show me a theory of his that explains the universe as a whole.

Your analogy about the big bang theory and 9/11 is idiotic. Find a better way to get your point across.

 

[jmdrake]

To my knoweledge, Hawking doesn't have a theory of everything, and I do. So its pointless for you to bash me for saying Hawking doesn't understand infinity as well as me. If you think Hawking is better than me, then show me a theory of his that explains the universe as a whole.

Just because you've said around in your basement and come up with some cockamamie theory doesn't mean that it's right. Perhaps Hawkings thought of your theory and realize it was stupid. Did you think of that? The "I have a theory that nobody else has so it must be better" argument is ridiculous.

Your analogy about the big bang theory and 9/11 is idiotic. Find a better way to get your point across.

There's no way to get my point across to someone who lacks the mental capacity to understand it so I'll quit trying.

 

[tttppp]

Just because you've said around in your basement and come up with some cockamamie theory doesn't mean that it's right. Perhaps Hawkings thought of your theory and realize it was stupid. Did you think of that? The "I have a theory that nobody else has so it must be better" argument is ridiculous.



There's no way to get my point across to someone who lacks the mental capacity to understand it so I'll quit trying.

I don't know how you've ever gotten any reps if this is what you do in every thread. If you think my theory is stupid, you could actually critique it and state why. That's genarally what most people do in forums. Just throwing out insults without any explanation is completely pointless. I can only hope a moderator reads your bs in this thread and ban your ass.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Aside from a God that created the universe, everything that I can think of exists.

So now you're the one making up special rules. All of a sudden everything can exist EXCEPT for God.