[On "militant atheists"]
Roam through the science section of a book store. There are quite a few out there. Multiple books on the subject. Which amuses me that they would waste so much of their lives dedicated to proving a negative that, according to them, has absolutely no impact on their lives anyways. The most amusing piece for me is that aside from that whole proving a negative problem, they fail their own logic. The very definition of an omnipotent force existing outside of the rules of science pretty much kills science ever being able to prove or disprove its existence. So, they "disprove" the existence of their own concocted definition of God.
Similar to this concept. I can prove right at this moment that I do not have a wizbanglefrat in my hand. Since I get to define what a wizbanglefrat is and it doesn't have to match anyone elses definition of a wizbanglefrat I can indeed state that there is not one in my hand. Then I can proceed to make outlandish statements about anyone who has a differing definition of wizbanglefrat and write numerous books on the subject rather than doing anything actually productive. :)
46 comments
Which amuses me that they would waste so much of their lives dedicated to proving a negative that, according to them, has absolutely no impact on their lives anyways.
Of course it impacts their lives. Who's trying to ban abortion? Who's trying to inject prayer and the Ten Commandments into schools and government? Who's trying to stop the teaching of evolution? Who's trying to stop homosexuals from gaining the right to adopt children or inherit property or be covered by spousal medical insurance? Who's made the candidate's stand on abortion the entire basis of their Presidential vote? Who wants to see the Supreme Court packed with religious fundamentalists?
So, they "disprove" the existence of their own concocted definition of God.
Whereas you believe in the existence of your own concocted definition of God...
LIAR!!
Anybody denying the holding of a genuine wizbanglefrat, no matter how you spell or define it, is obviously holding one as he speaks. Hah hah! Just what in hell do you think they're for, db32, if that's your real name?
First: Why the hell does everyone who writes a pro-atheism book count as militant?
Second: People are being killed in the name of something that doesn't exist. That impacts my life.
Third: We don't have to prove a negative, we just have to disprove your positive assumption. Actually, we don't have to do a damn thing. The burden of proof is on you.
Fourth: If this god ever interacts with the universe, whether by creating it or intervening because of prayer, it instantly allows itself to be used in a scientific explanation. If there's no interaction, why assume existence?
Fifth: Christianity is actually one giant wizbanglefrat issue. See Russel's Teapot.
"according to them, has absolutely no impact on their lives anyways"
It only does because you guys believe it to be true.
"The very definition of an omnipotent force existing outside of the rules of science pretty much kills science ever being able to prove or disprove its existence."
Which is why the Celestial Teapot MUST be omnipotent!
lolwut? How is science "proving a negative", o' simple one?
Also: having an intentionally unknowable and unverifiable entity who you claim to know the traits of is NOT A GOOD THING.
Review your second paragraph. If you still don't get it, review it again.
Does it remind you of any dogma about deities?
the irony is that there are FAR more books on Christianity then on atheism, and you don't see us screaming about how everybody that writes a pro-Christian book is an evil militant.
And when you people are trying to remove MY right to have abortions and use birth control, and trying to force your fake "scientific" bullsht (it's not even psuedoscience, it's just religious nonsense) into the public school systems, then that is impacting on MY life.
Then I can proceed to make outlandish statements about anyone who has a differing definition of wizbanglefrat and write numerous books on the subject rather than doing anything actually productive. :)
You should spend more time on your knees with your eyes closed, motionless and mumbling to yourself in faux 16th century English. That'll solve your problems.
Omphalos hypothesis, eh?
Edit: Of course I didn't read the previous comments. anonymous_troy and Funnyguts beat me to it.
"Then I can proceed to make outlandish statements about anyone who has a differing definition of wizbanglefrat and write numerous books on the subject rather than doing anything actually productive"
Actually, freeing people's minds from the destructive evil that is religious indocrination is a extremely productive.
No, db 32 you cannot prove you don't have a wizbanglefrat in your hand any more than Science can disprove that you have God in your hand.
We wish is had no negative impact on our lives, but the truth is, there are just too many religious nuts in a position of power to ignore the issue.
Similar to this concept. I can prove right at this moment that I do not have a wizbanglefrat in my hand. Since I get to define what a wizbanglefrat is and it doesn't have to match anyone elses definition of a wizbanglefrat I can indeed state that there is not one in my hand.
No, you can't disprove that you don't have a wizbanglefrat in your hand. It's just like Rissel's teapot and Sagan's Garage Dragon. You can't prove a negative.
What in world is this moron babbling about? Must be a one-of-a-kind science section. Or he's just kind of hovering near it, afraid to actually look in case it damns him, and making huge assumptions. Want to bet which it is?
"The very definition of an omnipotent force existing outside of the rules of science pretty much kills science ever being able to prove or disprove its existence."
Science studies reality. Things, which are not real, are outside of the realm of science. They cannot be studied, because they do not interact with reality in any way. Do I need to explain where your definition shoots itself in the foot?
"Roam through the science section of a book store. There are quite a few out there."
What? Book stores or science sections? And as for your wizbanglefrat, KEEP IT IN YOUR PANTS!
How the hell does a book on theoretical physics attempt to 'disprove' an invisible diety?(which as you said, couldn't be done anyway)
OH wait, it doesn't. You fail.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
