Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

vZ-xK_PEDgc

vs

bba2Dqaw6SI

I dunno, Atheism seems boring as hell.

They are both "boring as hell".

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
They are both "boring as hell".

You didn't watch the video

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
You didn't watch the video

I can't. Youtube is blocked.

However, both Christianity and Atheism bore me to death. There is a god vs there is no god is boring beyond belief (pun intended).

I would rather talk (read) about things that matter in real life.

So what's the point of this thread? To further polarize people that were never going to agree in the first place?

And to make generalizations using a single Youtube video per faction.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I can't. Youtube is blocked.

However, both Christianity and Atheism bore me to death. There is a god vs there is no god is boring beyond belief (pun intended).

I would rather talk (read) about things that matter in real life.

Ok well in one video I wanted to fall asleep, in the other I was encouraged. The same way those people were. I didn't see any thing that was actually going to change my life, however in the evangelism one. I feel encouraged.

Validity =/= sense of encouragement.

Originally posted by Digi
So what's the point of this thread? To further polarize people that were never going to agree in the first place?

Showing the difference between beliefs. Look at the people in the frist video, very dull and dreary, no spark or life in them, nothing to really live for but their own idea's. Seems sad.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Showing the difference between beliefs. Look at the people in the frist video, very dull and dreary, no spark or life in them, nothing to really live for but their own idea's. Seems sad.

1. Small sample size. These people aren't chronically depressed because there's no God. They could be serious or somber individuals in an intelligent discussion and show happiness or levity outside of it. Also, forced enthusiasm is a huge part of evangelist gatherings.

2. This is clearly a bait thread.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
1. Small sample size. These people aren't chronically depressed because there's no God. They could be serious or somber individuals in an intelligent discussion and show happiness or levity outside of it. Also, forced enthusiasm is a huge part of evangelist gatherings.

2. This is clearly a bait thread.

Jail bait lol, Digi posted a video about that and made me think, what does evangelism look like in a video. The people in one video seem full of life and have had some sort of change in their lives. They might not sound as smart or intelligent as the first but they seem happier?

Just from looking from the two videos one appears to have happiness and the other seems to just be depressing. I could barley get through the first video even listening too it in the background and I was able to listen to the second one much easier and was happier at the of it then I was from the first video.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Showing the difference between beliefs. Look at the people in the frist video, very dull and dreary, no spark or life in them, nothing to really live for but their own idea's. Seems sad.

This is an unbelievably stupid statement.

Originally posted by Digi
This is an unbelievably stupid statement.

Since when was it stupid to express how you feel, was I critiquing your statements?

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Since when was it stupid to express how you feel, was I critiquing your statements?

No, but you're welcome to. I can handle it.

It's not stupid to express how you feel. It's stupid to conflate an entire philosophy with a subjective interpretation of the inner workings of four people having a brief conversation. It's also stupid and counterproductive to create a "this vs. that" mentality where it's not needed.

The two different videos show the difference in beliefs but its more then beliefs, the men appear to be really smart and intelligent but it lacks any sort of life changing stories of how a belief in God changed a life.

Was anything said in that video going to help someone get off drugs, change their life, change the way they live. Does it give them any hope of a better life?

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
The two different videos show the difference in beliefs but its more then beliefs, the men appear to be really smart and intelligent but it lacks any sort of life changing stories of how a belief in God changed a life.

Was anything said in that video going to help someone get off drugs, change their life, change the way they live. Does it give them any hope of a better life?

I see that both sides can help and hinder.

Help:
Understanding drug addiction in a very clear scientific way can lead to better treatment for drug addicts. While the addict's belief in a supreme being can help that person get through the worst parts of recovery.

Hinder:
The rejection of the unprovable can lead to a type of scientific tunnel vision that can discourage out of the box thinking. While self delusion can lead to another type of tunnel vision that can make a person ignore the truth right in front of their eyes.

Originally posted by Digi
No, but you're welcome to. I can handle it.

It's not stupid to express how you feel. It's stupid to conflate an entire philosophy with a subjective interpretation of the inner workings of four people having a brief conversation. It's also stupid and counterproductive to create a "this vs. that" mentality where it's not needed.

New KMC drinking game: Every time 'conflate' is appropriately used, take a drink.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
The two different videos show the difference in beliefs but its more then beliefs, the men appear to be really smart and intelligent but it lacks any sort of life changing stories of how a belief in God changed a life.

Was anything said in that video going to help someone get off drugs, change their life, change the way they live. Does it give them any hope of a better life?

And one video should do all of that? Even when it's not the goal of the video to provide it? I'm pretty sure there are people better qualified to give such advice than evolutionary biologists and philosophers.

Anyway, the Christian video doesn't give me practical advice on picking a graduate school. What the hell is it good for? Actually, neither of them do, and it's some life help I could really use. So what's the use of Evangelism OR Atheism?

Grasp the point of that last paragraph or I'm done responding to you.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
New KMC drinking game: Every time 'conflate' is appropriately used, take a drink.

Ha. It's a good word.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
New KMC drinking game: Every time 'conflate' is appropriately used, take a drink. On top of, do a line every time buffalo is used correctly.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
On top of, do a line every time buffalo is used correctly.

Are you buffaloing me?

Originally posted by Digi


the Christian video doesn't give me practical advice on picking a graduate school. What the hell is it good for? Actually, neither of them do, and it's some life help I could really use. So what's the use of Evangelism OR Atheism?




TI's Evangelism video features Billy Graham.

Your mention of graduate school got me to Google "Billy Graham" and "graduate school".

Within a few seconds, I discovered Billy Graham actually has scholarships for graduate students.

So now I have a link to share with you that can potentially provide you with money for graduate school. If money is a major consideration for you, that may be a great deal of help.

I wouldn't have been inspired to do that except I'd seen the video and thought

"Wow ... Billy Graham is still alive? Hmm. Here's Digi asking for help with graduate school. I'll bet Billy Graham has something for that ..."


So that (among a great many other things) is what evangelism is useful for.

Here's the link:



http://www.internationalscholarships.com/1842/International-Graduates-&-Post-Graduate-Scholarships-|-Billy-Graham-Foundation

That's more an example what the human minds capabilities for association and Google are good for really.

Originally posted by Bardock42
That's more an example what the human minds capabilities for association and Google are good for really.


I'd agree except you need the motivation to use them positively on behalf of another.
I'm not yet convinced Google and mind association all on their own are sufficient to produce that, and certainly not to the extent Evangelism has proven to.


Presumably this and related inclinations could be tested by getting demographic breakdowns on charitable donations worldwide, or some such, for a start.


I started doing that a few minutes ago on a lark.

Getting conflicting data regarding who is more charitable between Muslims and Christians, but atheists seem less helpful than members of either religion so far, regardless of who's doing the polling.

To be fair, though, I've only gone through a handful of Google hits.
Might be interesting to see what turned up after reading, say, the first 20 or 30 articles. Might even make for a good thread.

Here's what I've seen so far, though:



http://www.nbcnews.com/news/other/muslims-give-more-charity-others-uk-poll-says-f6C10703224


http://www.jihadwatch.org/2008/05/us-most-charitable-nation-oil-rich-muslim-countries-give-almost-nothing
http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/donorsprevious.pdf


http://grisham.newsvine.com/_news/2011/11/08/8691971-are-religious-people-more-charitable-than-atheists

I suppose the question is what is considered charitable donations. Say if religious people consider any donation to their church charitable I could see an issue there.

The point was that TI created an arbitrary criteria for the videos and determined that it was enough to condemn one and praise the other, without actually considering the point of the videos. BWR, per his norm, whiffed spectacularly on the comprehension.

I'm not looking for a grad school. It was a f---ing example.

But, I did say I was done responding to TI if he failed to grasp the point of the example. He never responded, but I may be able to extend that courtesy to BWR.

I don't understand why you are so angry. Thanks to BWR and Billy Graham you can now get a scholarship and go to any grad school you want!!!

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
1. Small sample size. These people aren't chronically depressed because there's no God. They could be serious or somber individuals in an intelligent discussion and show happiness or levity outside of it. Also, forced enthusiasm is a huge part of evangelist gatherings.

2. This is clearly a bait thread.

2. I would note that any threads about atheism would be the same was a bait thread by your logic.

This forum needs more comments and posts like Time Immemorial's.

Originally posted by dadudemon
2. I would note that any threads about atheism would be the same was a bait thread by your logic.

That's probably not true.

Originally posted by dadudemon
This forum needs more comments and posts like Time Immemorial's.

That's definitely not true. Other opinions, I can abide. Abject stupidity mixed with needless antagonism, not as much.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I don't understand why you are so angry. Thanks to BWR and Billy Graham you can now get a scholarship and go to any grad school you want!!!

You're right. How was I such a fool to see that atheism can't provide everything that Billy Graham can.

Originally posted by Digi
That's probably not true.



That's definitely not true. Other opinions, I can abide. Abject stupidity mixed with needless antagonism, not as much.

Okay, I'll make some very anti-atheist threads when I feel like it.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Okay, I'll make some very anti-atheist threads when I feel like it.

Gonna have to be a bit more clear here. Is this sarcasm? If not, what is positive or productive about this thread and how it's presented?

Originally posted by dadudemon
2. I would note that any threads about atheism would be the same was a bait thread by your logic.

This forum needs more comments and posts like Time Immemorial's.

I haven't seen an atheist thread yet using Youtube videos to say "Lol one looks moar borink dan da other so must not be legit". That is literally the entire point of TI's original post and subsequent posts as well. If you think this is constructive on any level, you're daft.

Originally posted by Digi
Gonna have to be a bit more clear here. Is this sarcasm? If not, what is positive or productive about this thread and how it's presented?

I really don't know how to make it more clear: I'll make some anti-atheistic threads when I get more time.


I have explained this to you, before, in depth.

Basically, "new atheists" are much like Mormons were when they first came on the scene (except the Mormons were not nearly as smug and pretentious about it). Just simply preaching your gospel and the way you go about doing it is enough to be considered baiting (not "Digi" you, ambiguous "you". Mormons position was essentially, "No churches have the fullness of the Gospel and no churches have the authority to officiate in God's name." That is very offensive to others.

The new atheists' position is very similar: "No churches are correct because God doesn't exist and your religions are lies."


It's fundamentally bait-y. There is no avoiding that.

So positing a position which is anti-theistic will automatically be bait-y. When I read Time Immemorial's posts in this thread, I don't see bait, I see another position that just happens to be anti-theistic. Maybe you don't like the way he goes about posting his ideas?

If you wish to have some dialogue about the weaknesses and strengths of atheism, allow shit that seems "bait-y" even if you think it shits up the forums. The worst case scenario is you'll just be more content with your perceived sense of intellectual superiority. If that's the worst outcome for low-quality threads in a mostly dead sub-forum, I welcome it.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
I haven't seen an atheist thread yet using Youtube videos to say "Lol one looks moar borink dan da other so must not be legit". That is literally the entire point of TI's original post and subsequent posts as well.

Do you honestly think you've properly represented his position?

If you do, you're daft.



Originally posted by Stealth Moose
If you think this is constructive on any level, you're daft.

If you think whining about opposing opinions, even if they do not fit your personal beliefs on how those opinions regarding religion should work, is going to change anything*, you're daft.


Also, you're daft.


Daft.

Daft.


*What's the real point? He's trying to show you why you're logic is flawed. Your logic doesn't work the way his does but you dismiss him as stupid/rude/offensive. Instead of acknowledging that, you get ragey and dismissive. I am pretty sure I do not believe as TI believes but it doesn't mean I'm going to pretend to be better and smug about those beliefs.

I think I'm better than TI. And all you other people too

Originally posted by dadudemon
Do you honestly think you've properly represented his position.

To be fair, neither has TI.

Originally posted by dadudemon
If you think whining about opposing opinions, even if they do not fit your personal beliefs on how those opinions regarding religion should work, is going to change anything*, you're daft.

Also, you're daft.

Daft.

Daft.

*What's the real point? He's trying to show you why you're logic is flawed. Your logic doesn't work the way his does but you dismiss him as stupid/rude/offensive. Instead of acknowledging that, you get ragey and dismissive. I am pretty sure I do not believe as TI believes but it doesn't mean I'm going to pretend to be better and smug about those beliefs.

Bitter, no. Smug, no. I think his opinion is shallow and stupid. I'm going to tell people when I think that. It's disingenuous not to.

You're much more eloquent in your opinions. TI is not. If his points can be refuted by grade school logic, he's not worth treating as a peer. I wish him luck in life and leave him to his beliefs. But dignifying them with a response is a waste of time, much like this thread as a whole.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I really don't know how to make it more clear: I'll make some anti-atheistic threads when I get more time.


I have explained this to you, before, in depth.

Basically, "new atheists" are much like Mormons were when they first came on the scene (except the Mormons were not nearly as smug and pretentious about it). Just simply preaching your gospel and the way you go about doing it is enough to be considered baiting (not "Digi" you, ambiguous "you". Mormons position was essentially, "No churches have the fullness of the Gospel and no churches have the authority to officiate in God's name." That is very offensive to others.

The new atheists' position is very similar: "No churches are correct because God doesn't exist and your religions are lies."


It's fundamentally bait-y. There is no avoiding that.

So positing a position which is anti-theistic will automatically be bait-y. When I read Time Immemorial's posts in this thread, I don't see bait, I see another position that just happens to be anti-theistic. Maybe you don't like the way he goes about posting his ideas?

If you wish to have some dialogue about the weaknesses and strengths of atheism, allow shit that seems "bait-y" even if you think it shits up the forums. The worst case scenario is you'll just be more content with your perceived sense of intellectual superiority. If that's the worst outcome for low-quality threads in a mostly dead sub-forum, I welcome it.

Lol. I'm not trying to make statements about atheism vs. Christianity. I'm only - only - talking about this sh*tty, half-baked thread. You're talking about the New Atheist movement for some reason, and all I thought you were defending was TI's lame OP. If he wants to have a cogent debate on New Atheism, cool. If he wants to watch a video, say they look sad, then proclaim Christianity's superiority, he's going to incur my indifference and/or derision. Simple as that.

If you want to make threads, cool, we'll probably debate. Just don't do it out of a desire to spite me or others. It'll probably lead to more diatribes like these, which are unproductive, though often interesting.

Originally posted by Digi
To be fair, neither has TI.



Bitter, no. Smug, no. I think his opinion is shallow and stupid. I'm going to tell people when I think that. It's disingenuous not to.

You're much more eloquent in your opinions. TI is not. If his points can be refuted by grade school logic, he's not worth treating as a peer. I wish him luck in life and leave him to his beliefs. But dignifying them with a response is a waste of time, much like this thread as a whole.



Lol. I'm not trying to make statements about atheism vs. Christianity. I'm only - only - talking about this sh*tty, half-baked thread. You're talking about the New Atheist movement for some reason, and all I thought you were defending was TI's lame OP. If he wants to have a cogent debate on New Atheism, cool. If he wants to watch a video, say they look sad, then proclaim Christianity's superiority, he's going to incur my indifference and/or derision. Simple as that.

If you want to make threads, cool, we'll probably debate. Just don't do it out of a desire to spite me or others. It'll probably lead to more diatribes like these, which are unproductive, though often interesting.

The goal with creating those threads would not be to polarize or make fun of people but to demonstrate how offensive/stupid they are to others. KMC is very agnostic-atheist compared to most places. It's just the wrong place to post stuff like that. It is not welcome.

No matter how eloquently I phrase my ideas, it will rustle jimmies. That was my point. But sense I've talked about it, it will probably have the opposite effect making the entire thing stupid.



I have been wanting to do it for a while, anyway.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I think I'm better than TI. And all you other people too

I value humans based on their intelligence, kindness, wisdom, education, and depth of thought.


You are probably better than most of us (by my measure), if we're being honest.

Originally posted by dadudemon
The goal with creating those threads would not be to polarize or make fun of people but to demonstrate how offensive/stupid they are to others. KMC is very agnostic-atheist compared to most places. It's just the wrong place to post stuff like that. It is not welcome.

No matter how eloquently I phrase my ideas, it will rustle jimmies. That was my point. But sense I've talked about it, it will probably have the opposite effect making the entire thing stupid.

I have been wanting to do it for a while, anyway.

I think people would be surprised about what does and doesn't rustle jimmies. I demand intellectual rigor in my opponents, not compliance. And however stereotypically atheist this next comment makes me seem, I find that far too few Christian apologists or atheist detractors come anywhere near the standards I hold myself to.

Take my general atheism thread. Read the OP. It's not condescending, but it is thorough and methodical. Now go back and read TI's OP. It's not the same level of rigor, and when it's quite obviously as shallow as this, it doesn't command my attention or respect.

However, if it's a thread that is deliberately offensive to make a point, there's probably no need. We can all understand your point without such illustrations.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I value humans based on their intelligence, kindness, wisdom, education, and depth of thought.


You are probably better than most of us (by my measure), if we're being honest.

Are you coming on to me?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Are you coming on to me?

Only if you squeeze those boobs together.

Originally posted by Digi
I think people would be surprised about what does and doesn't rustle jimmies. I demand intellectual rigor in my opponents, not compliance. And however stereotypically atheist this next comment makes me seem, I find that far too few Christian apologists or atheist detractors come anywhere near the standards I hold myself to.

Take my general atheism thread. Read the OP. It's not condescending, but it is thorough and methodical. Now go back and read TI's OP. It's not the same level of rigor, and when it's quite obviously as shallow as this, it doesn't command my attention or respect.

However, if it's a thread that is deliberately offensive to make a point, there's probably no need. We can all understand your point without such illustrations.

I saw some jimmy rustling in this very thread (and it was not TI's...lol). Often, the "be open-minded" is meant "think the way I think". Not from you, of course...but it seems to happen a lot on KMC. Conservatives are hated, here. I don't really worry about that because, politically, I am probably more socially liberal than you are.

I hold atheists to a lower standard than I do myself because pretty much none of them can live up to my standards. estahuh

I keeeeed I keeeed! Some Mormons are actually like that...


Originally posted by Bardock42
Are you coming on to me?

No. But when you're rich, my kind words and affection will be useful.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I saw some jimmy rustling in this very thread (and it was TI's...lol). Often, the "be open-minded" is meant "think the way I think". Not from you, of course...but it seems to happen a lot on KMC. Conservatives are hated, here. I don't really worry about that because, politically, I am probably more socially liberal than you are.

My liberal cock is bigger than yours!

I'm practically a fiscal libertarian, and think the government should be completely removed from some social issues that liberals would have us legislate, so you can have that crown. I happily concede it. What was it Penn Jillette said: "I'm against gay marriage. But I'm also against straight marriage."

"Be more open minded" is one of the worst phrases ever. Usually, once invoked, it's a sure sign the interesting debate is over. I'll go on record as saying that only times I've ever been told to be more open-minded in my life, it was synonymous with "think like me." Both sides seem to love accusing the other of using it that way, which is what makes it such a boring device.

Being open minded means being open to all possibilities, including the potential falsehood of an idea. Most people leave that one out. It also means that if we're truly open to more than one possibility, we go with the one that makes the most rational/logical sense, which gets back to the idea of evidence. I'm "open" to belief in God. That openness is what led to me becoming an atheist when I was a devout Christian. So now that I'm open to it...what reason is there to believe it?

When asked "What would change your mind?" Bill Nye said "Evidence." Ken Ham said "Nothing." That's not an indictment of all theists, but it is of a f*ckton of them.

Regarding gay marriage, to me the practicality of helping real people lead happy and fulfilling lives trumps my libertarian ideal that there shouldn't be an institution such as marriage.

I don't get this video, could you delineate what it has to do with my post?

Originally posted by Bardock42
I don't get this video, could you delineate what it has to do with my post?

When you said "ascertain", it's what my encyclopedic mind on film/video thought of.

Originally posted by dadudemon
However, if I were to be frank, no, I do not think anyone can ever know that except for God. I would exercise caution against believing every person that said they have seen God and God told them to do something.

It's always a curious amusement to me that most people - even very tunnel-visioned fundamentalists - are extremely capable of the proper skepticism toward supernatural claims. Just not the supernatural claims they happen to believe in.

For another great example, the "THEY ACTUALLY BELIEVE THIS" jab that's often leveled at Scientology is very true...it's absurd. Yet the only thing separating that and most religions is societal acceptance. Of course, it doesn't help that Scientology displays more cultish tendencies than your average religion, but in terms of believability of the origin mythos, I'd say it's no better or worse off than any other.

Originally posted by Digi
It's always a curious amusement to me that most people - even very tunnel-visioned fundamentalists - are extremely capable of the proper skepticism toward supernatural claims. Just not the supernatural claims they happen to believe in.

For another great example, the "THEY ACTUALLY BELIEVE THIS" jab that's often leveled at Scientology is very true...it's absurd. Yet the only thing separating that and most religions is societal acceptance. Of course, it doesn't help that Scientology displays more cultish tendencies than your average religion, but in terms of believability of the origin mythos, I'd say it's no better or worse off than any other.

I agree. I defend Scientology* when people make fun of it.

That's because I'm making up for all the bad-karma I brought on myself because I used to make fun of Scientology when I was a kid.


*Also to Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Shintoism, Pentecostal, witchcraft, Satanism, atheism, nihilism, uhh...pretty much any religious beliefs (even if that is a lack of beliefs) that people like to make fun of. Of course, a Mormon WOULD do that because we believe almost all religions have something in them that was probably inspired by God. So making fun of other religions is considered a "no-no" in my Church. But not multiple wives. BRB, got dates.

Amidst your defense of said beliefs/religions (beliegions?), do you also acknowledge the flaws and negative aspects of them?

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Amidst your defense of said beliefs/religions (beliegions?), do you also acknowledge the flaws and negative aspects of them?

Yes. I am especially critical of my own religion.

Edit - Sorry, was playing Tetris. Basically, all are flawed (because they are mostly by man for man) but they each have good, too. Well, not ALL...some belief systems are purposefully negative.

Originally posted by Digi
And one video should do all of that? Even when it's not the goal of the video to provide it? I'm pretty sure there are people better qualified to give such advice than evolutionary biologists and philosophers.

Anyway, the Christian video doesn't give me practical advice on picking a graduate school. What the hell is it good for? Actually, neither of them do, and it's some life help I could really use. So what's the use of Evangelism OR Atheism?

Grasp the point of that last paragraph or I'm done responding to you.



Ha. It's a good word.
What type of graduate school?

Originally posted by Digi
The point was that TI created an arbitrary criteria for the videos and determined that it was enough to condemn one and praise the other, without actually considering the point of the videos. BWR, per his norm, whiffed spectacularly on the comprehension.

I'm not looking for a grad school. It was a f---ing example.

But, I did say I was done responding to TI if he failed to grasp the point of the example. He never responded, but I may be able to extend that courtesy to BWR.

I never responded to you because you have a chip on your shoulder and are very un uncouth. Debating with you would be pointless, if you can post your beliefs so can I.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
I never responded to you because you have a chip on your shoulder and are very un uncouth. Debating with you would be pointless, if you can post your beliefs so can I.

Very true. We can both post our beliefs. Blue is also a color.

But you also shouldn't expect to have smooth sailing when you express an opinion on the internet. Nor can you expect people to hold back when they think your opinions are in the wrong. Your "uncouth" is "honest" to me. Criticism is part of any of this. And debating wouldn't be pointless, but you have yet to engage in debate with me (i.e. addressing criticisms and responding to them). So I can only assume that your initial, hopelessly shallow interpretation of two videos is all you have to offer here.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
What type of graduate school?

It was an example. I'm not searching for a graduate school. Sorry if it misled.