Religion

gcomeau

(5,764 posts)

18. I hold all obvious bullshit open for ridicule

Fri May 16, 2014, 05:02 PM

May 2014

...so your question is irrelevant to me.

And we can prove it for any definition of "prove" that has any meaning. The only way to claim we can't prove it is to deny proof of anything whatsoever is even a possibility... at which point you have ended all basis for meaningful discussion of that or any other topic.

And I'm not questioning anything's omnipotence, I'm just questioning the credibility of some bunch of ignorant yahoos who claim there's this omnipotent thing that exists in the first place. Asking who we are to question that things's omnipotence is begging the question of it's existence.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

61 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Neil de Grasse Tyson presentation about intelligent design [View all] arely staircase May 2014 OP

Ok, I'll be the first to Rec this. BootinUp May 2014 #1

Not hardly. AtheistCrusader May 2014 #2

Well its never too late then. nt BootinUp May 2014 #3

It is quality material, hopefully anyone who hasnt already watched it will give it a go AtheistCrusader May 2014 #4

I agree that it's excellent. He is a natural treasure and a personal hero. cbayer May 2014 #9

Well, once actually, and not here. cbayer May 2014 #8

Bull fucking shit. AtheistCrusader May 2014 #10

Thats in A/A. If I misunderstood your "here" to mean this group, then I apologize. cbayer May 2014 #11

By 'here' I actually meant DU itself. AtheistCrusader May 2014 #12

it is a great lecture. nt arely staircase May 2014 #7

Interesting. R&K nt longship May 2014 #5

From an article in the Guardian concerning Tyson and The Discovery Institute (creationism group) djean111 May 2014 #6

I'm confused. Shouldn't we be working to find common cause with these people? Warren Stupidity May 2014 #13

We can absolutely prove that. gcomeau May 2014 #14

the omnipotent diety has just put all that "physical evidence' there to confuse you. Warren Stupidity May 2014 #15

Like I said... gcomeau May 2014 #16

yes I need to understand why this obvious bullshit is suitable for ridicule but not other obvious Warren Stupidity May 2014 #17

I hold all obvious bullshit open for ridicule gcomeau May 2014 #18

Um...no...we can't skepticscott May 2014 #28

Ahem... gcomeau May 2014 #35

Try again skepticscott May 2014 #37

No, don't think I will. gcomeau May 2014 #40

This message was self-deleted by its author skepticscott May 2014 #43

Good talk daleo May 2014 #19

My basic problem with ID is the dishonesty that lies at its heart Fortinbras Armstrong May 2014 #20

No disagreement edhopper May 2014 #21

"...that is bullshit counter to all scientific knowledge" cleanhippie May 2014 #25

I know I'm not supposed to call you a bigot Fortinbras Armstrong May 2014 #30

This message was self-deleted by its author cleanhippie May 2014 #34

It's worse, when the "actual bigotry" you're denouncing skepticscott May 2014 #44

That too Fortinbras Armstrong May 2014 #26

Yes, and the host and wine in Catholic communion skepticscott May 2014 #27

Thank you for demonstrating your ignorance of Catholic theology Fortinbras Armstrong May 2014 #31

Ah, I see..Catholic theology has proven skepticscott May 2014 #32

At what point do organic chemicals become a body? rug May 2014 #33

At what point do organic chemicals become a body? AlbertCat May 2014 #39

Any body. Can you answer the questions? rug May 2014 #41

Of course, that is not what the Church says Fortinbras Armstrong May 2014 #36

Here is what the Church says skepticscott May 2014 #38

Since you ostensibly view life through a microscope that is an unsurprising reaction. rug May 2014 #42

You admit that you don't understand it Fortinbras Armstrong May 2014 #45

If he doesn't understand it, it must not exist. rug May 2014 #46

So this: edhopper May 2014 #47

There is an article on Transubstantiation in Wikipedia Fortinbras Armstrong May 2014 #48

Okay edhopper May 2014 #49

No, it's not a "definition that cannot be defined", it's a definition that complicated. Fortinbras Armstrong May 2014 #50

No, we're prepared to smear at Transubstantiation because it makes no sense skepticscott May 2014 #51

If you accept Aristotle, which, AS I SAID, was philosophically acceptable in the 13th century Fortinbras Armstrong May 2014 #57

So, if we simply discard everything we've learned about the universe in the last 800 years... trotsky May 2014 #53

As I said at least four times Fortinbras Armstrong May 2014 #56

Yes, I read it edhopper May 2014 #54

The mystery is just how the transformation takes place Fortinbras Armstrong May 2014 #55

For clarification; edhopper May 2014 #58

When? AtheistCrusader May 2014 #59

No, there's no mystery. trotsky May 2014 #60

When does it cease to be bread? rug May 2014 #61

Too true edhopper May 2014 #29

Some of Tyson's history is flat-out wrong struggle4progress May 2014 #22

Yes, and Tyson is quoting from the General Scholium which did not appear in the first edition. Jim__ May 2014 #23

The Dover Trial WovenGems May 2014 #24

Dr. Miller on Intelligent Design librarylu May 2014 #52