Is Atheismseriousbusiness a Troll or Annoying?
Offline I'm getting pretty fed up with this kind of visitor. The kind who comes onto the boards and says, in so many words, 'I'm an atheist, but...'. Invariably these people turn out to be ignorant twits and rather juvenile. Their posts are often riddled with numerous grammatical errors and have a tendency to be virtually meaningless. Their attitude usually degrades quickly and they can often be found performing trollish behaviour.
In the spirit of the muddy slope down which this type of visitor slides, I've decided to dirty myself up and partake in some trolling myself. A poll, even a bullshit poll:
Do you think that Atheismseriousbusiness is a TROLL, ANNOYING or BOTH. To participate merely write any one of TROLL, ANNOYING or BOTH.
BigUniverse wrote,
"Well the things that happen less often are more likely to be the result of the supper natural. A thing like loosing my keys in the morning is not likely supper natural, but finding a thousand dollars or meeting a celebrity might be."
- Login to post comments
Do I have a write in choice? How about a neither? Or an I don't care? I find most people to be annoying and, as such, I've become numb to it. By the way, grammatical is spelled with two M's.
UPDATE -->OK.... there was ONE M there when I look at it a moment ago! LOL. At least you proofed it afterwards. I need an editor to take care of that dirty work!
god -- I tried you on for size.... you were a little long in the crotch, loose in the waist, short in the length and you made my butt look extra flat. I had to take you back for an exchange.
I find him amusing actually. He believes in a "higher power" but is an atheist LOL. Then proceeds to call himself an agnostic (even funnier) as he apparently did not read Rook's suggested reading. I think he must be a pantheist or a deist of some type myself, but in such a state of denial it's hilarious. I personally want to see him stick around if he could just come to accept that he is an agnostic theist of some sort.
"Always seek out the truth, but avoid at all costs those that claim to have found it" ANONYMOUS
Ya,but seriously, I am an atheist,but you guys are doing it all wrong.(Insert giant block of text)
Eh,why the bother, he'll disapear sooner or later, like that person who made half a dozen accounts to start threads about the debate. Which all started,'I'm an atheist,but'
And it's already been established he's not a atheist, so I suppose that's trolling,but again,I really don't care. Let him be..everyone else will have their go at him.
Psalm 14:1 "the fool hath said in his heart there is a God"-From a 1763 misprinted edition of the bible
Argument from Sadism: Theist presents argument in a wall of text with no punctuation and wrong spelling. Atheist cannot read and is forced to concede.
If you did not want to participate in my informal poll, why did you bother posting at all? Start a new thread if you want to answer the question. I don't want my fun jacked.
Edit: Ah. Who am I kidding? Do what you like.
BigUniverse wrote,
"Well the things that happen less often are more likely to be the result of the supper natural. A thing like loosing my keys in the morning is not likely supper natural, but finding a thousand dollars or meeting a celebrity might be."
Both.
Funny thing, I often find that the fastest way to determine if somebody is worth my time is if they care enough about their arguments to fact-check me and read a source I give them. More than normal a theist will ignore sources and self-delusion prevails over logical dialog.
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)
This is SOP for theists. While I was married to a fundamentalist, she would often suggest reading "scientific" books that often brought up such brilliant thoughts as, "Evolution goes against the second law of thermodynamics!"
Near the end, after I discovered she thought most scientists were in on a huge conspiracy to disprove God, I made her an offer. I told her to select three books, and I would read them; and I would select three books for her to read. She selected her three books (very much along the lines of, "Second law of thermodynamics!" ), and I selected one, instead of three: "The Blind Watchmaker."
She refused to read my single suggestion. Instead, she told me she would "research evolution" using her own sources.
It was at this point I realized I could no longer live with her, though I still loved her and cared about her.
Not to make this about me, or anything. I'm mostly just saying, "Yeah, that's how theists often behave."
[edit addendum] I say, "Annoying." I don't think they mean to troll, mostly. I think they have some conceited idea that they know more than we do. Basically, it comes down to: "Atheism. U R doin it wrong."
"Yes, I seriously believe that consciousness is a product of a natural process. I find that the neuroscientists, psychologists, and philosophers who proceed from that premise are the ones who are actually making useful contributions to our understanding of the mind." - PZ Myers
I implied that he was annoying, wasn't that fun?
Long live Thomathy, he's fun and makes a mighty fine looking lego (or is that claymation) boy?
god -- I tried you on for size.... you were a little long in the crotch, loose in the waist, short in the length and you made my butt look extra flat. I had to take you back for an exchange.
BigUniverse wrote,
"Well the things that happen less often are more likely to be the result of the supper natural. A thing like loosing my keys in the morning is not likely supper natural, but finding a thousand dollars or meeting a celebrity might be."
Had to read back through a few of his comments....
At the very least, annoying.
Annoying. just reading his full name is annoying, and I wish him a fast journey to his life ever lasting. ASAP.
"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."
VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"
If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?
Annoying, trolling and ignorantly stupid.
Annoying, but not at all unusual. "Believe in god (of abe), we can fix that." How? Push the fools away, back to the preying vulture voodoo priests? Nay, love, understand, the enemy.
Yeah I've sometimes cussed to much at them, but it's partly because of my odd pen name, which is surly confusing to many new comers. I will use my atheist jesus tricks, and say they are Satan, as jesus called peter, etc. It's fun being god !
We can all work at our communication style as to being helpful, as educators and healers, while not being appeasing.
Atheism Books.
The trouble is technical rightness isn't the currency of everyday philosophy. I think I outlined my view in a blog post somewhere, but I think most of it really does come down to a game of different definitions for a spicy ceviche of abstract concepts, mythological propositions, and moral edicts; each part with an imagined interdependency on another. Or, failing that, at least an openness to the possibility of an interdependency. Like the rituals and superstitions of a person with OCD; they are compelled to think a certain way, and are afraid that good, real things will go away if they diss the goofy, made up things. To the average person, atheism is still only strong atheism, and agnosticism is a coy, optimistic uncertainty.
Unless you work in the natural sciences, there is only one book you ever need read to get a perfect overview of modern evolutionary biology. Evolution by Douglas J. Futuyma.
"Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.
-Me
Books about atheism
How could a theist's arguments ever be broken down into anything but illogical drivel? unless he/she left their state of denial, that is the only way the conversation can end up. But at the same time Atheismseriousbusiness is like Luminion and Eloise where the bullshit just flows like a river and that does make them a bit more irritating and impossible for me to read their complete post.
mohammed, I suggest you "track" cool Eloise and read much more from her. She's an interesting and helpful QM science/philosophy teacher despite her sometimes difficult presentation style. The more seriously I tried reading her, the more I appreciated her. Me , (god) is hard core 100% atheist, an anti traditional theism dense rock
, but that Eloise can roll.
Atheism, pantheism .... makes for good rock and roll .... (well yeah, depending)
Atheism Books.
Lumping Eloise in with Luminon just isn't fair.
Luminon is pure wingnut, with no saving graces at all.
Eloise can and does bring evidence to the table for most everything she says. I'd say that there's only one quibble I have with her, and that's an assumption about consciousness on which her pantheistic view appears to hinge.
"Anyone can repress a woman, but you need 'dictated' scriptures to feel you're really right in repressing her. In the same way, homophobes thrive everywhere. But you must feel you've got scripture on your side to come up with the tedious 'Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve' style arguments instead of just recognising that some people are different." - Douglas Murray
Jill the Swift
Yeah, this being somewhat "conscious" gets us in a heap of trouble!
That's true she is rational except for the theism thing - and more rational than the majority of theists in that. Luminon, on the other hand, though he claims to be an atheist believes virtually every other irrational idea that's out there other than theism.
Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team
100% Pure Wingnut.
"Anyone can repress a woman, but you need 'dictated' scriptures to feel you're really right in repressing her. In the same way, homophobes thrive everywhere. But you must feel you've got scripture on your side to come up with the tedious 'Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve' style arguments instead of just recognising that some people are different." - Douglas Murray
...Really?
Because I must've missed the part where she provided evidence for either:
A) Her claim that consciousness most certainly isn't a natural, physical neurological process.
B) Her claim that emergent behavior / systems are psuedoscience.
- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940
(B) She doesn't claim emergence is pseudoscience, just that emergence, while true, is trivial to the idea of consciousness. This is really part of (A).
thus "most everything she says". Which still makes her better off than Luminon by many orders of magnitude.
"Anyone can repress a woman, but you need 'dictated' scriptures to feel you're really right in repressing her. In the same way, homophobes thrive everywhere. But you must feel you've got scripture on your side to come up with the tedious 'Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve' style arguments instead of just recognising that some people are different." - Douglas Murray
Technically you don't have to believe in a god(s), however you can still believe in any other irrational idea, ghosts, paranormal events, ESP, Telekinesis, Loch Ness Monster, Bigfoot, Yeti's, various conspiracies. Nothing states that Atheism HAS to be rational and logical, just that you don't believe in a god/deity.
Word knots. Logical P-antheists? I've written elsewhere that pantheism seems to hold a non dogmatic scientific hypothethis hunch regarding consciousness. This can get pretty deep. Seems that traditionally we A-theists generally assume that C is the result of energy matter material. Both P's and A's will and do say energy matter always existed. C is an energy reaction to stimuli. So I ask is an electron and nucleus conscious of the other, and are all particles of the cosmos therefore technically conscious of the others? In this this sense C becomes a definition of degree, or at what point we might scientifically say something posesses consciousness. (???)
Gets me laughing and wondering. A pantheist might say, is the earth conscious of the sun? Is a tree? In a "reactive" sense we can continue all way the down to the most sub atomic particles. We then might say all is connected in an energy reactive "glue" of consciousness of connectiveness of all energy matter. Seems the definition of C is the problem of non agreement. ???????? ( so I simply say all is one )
Geezz, my tongue is now in knots. Maybe cool Eloise can untie my mess !
Sexy atheists, them pantheists can be, ie Dawkins ....
NO MASTER , no beginning , the cosmos is ATHEIST ....
Atheism Books.