Atheist LOL

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Apparently you have SBM and DMC mixed up. DMC had no intention of a constructive discussion, he just wanted a reason to cry "TROLL", and when I didn't give him one, he lost interest.
However SBM will actually discuss things with you and debate in a rational manner.
Unless you resort to insults and ridicule then he will respond in kind. If you don't neither will he.

DMC is not a complete ass unwilling to backup what he says with logic. He will troll you certainly but that is not all he does.

From SA210, I don't see anything but youtubes, meme, misquotes, smilies and comments such as 'liar' or 'obama .' That is literally the entirety of his contribution.

sbm goes to the 'you are,' 'no you are,' 'you are,' 'no you are,' 'you are,' 'no you are,' 'you are,' 'no you are' route. His 'arguments' are almost completely complaints about the behavior of others.

It is a collassal waste of time. DMC is abusive certainly but he is not inane.

[xmas1997]

SBM has claimed spiritual truth as concrete truth.

I've asked for proof. He literally has told me I need to look inside myself to see his truth.

Stating opinion as just your opinion is one thing. Claiming something as fact is completely different.

He'd prefer to cry that I'm being mean for calling bull instead of backing up his claim or using the letters "imo".

You should stop crying on his behalf. There are already too many tears shed in this forum of late.

Actually I understood him pretty well.
If I may clarify a little, he did not say To look inside for HIS PERSONAL Truth, on the contrary, he said for YOU to look inside of YOU , for YOUR personal Truth. And you just might find that both Truths are one and the same.
He also said to lay aside all of your preconceived notions, fears, dogmas, worries, opinions, ego, insignificant knowledge, trivialities, etc. in order to get to the real Truth.
SBM does not have a monopoly on Truth, no one does, but he has a valid su ion of the best way to get to it IMHO.
Does this help? Or does it really matter to you?
This much has been shown by all the great thinkers and doers in mankind's history, that if you seek the Truth, you will eventually find it. But if your mind is stuffed to the brim with pure D crap then it is next to impossible.
Maybe to some this sounds like mysticism or some such BS, but that is just another label that lazy ignorant people use to get out of putting forth the effort. Did Aristotle or Jesus or Einstein or Buddha or any of the other great thinkers give up?
Many thought them to be mystics in their time as well.

[Blake]

Actually I understood him pretty well.
If I may clarify a little, he did not say To look inside for HIS PERSONAL Truth, on the contrary, he said for YOU to look inside of YOU , for YOUR personal Truth. And you just might find that both Truths are one and the same.
He also said to lay aside all of your preconceived notions, fears, dogmas, worries, opinions, ego, insignificant knowledge, trivialities, etc. in order to get to the real Truth.
SBM does not have a monopoly on Truth, no one does, but he has a valid su ion of the best way to get to it IMHO.
Does this help? Or does it really matter to you?
This much has been shown by all the great thinkers and doers in mankind's history, that if you seek the Truth, you will eventually find it. But if your mind is stuffed to the brim with pure D crap then it is next to impossible.
Maybe to some this sounds like mysticism or some such BS, but that is just another label that lazy ignorant people use to get out of putting forth the effort. Did Aristotle or Jesus or Einstein or Buddha or any of the other great thinkers give up?
Many thought them to be mystics in their time as well.

tldr

[FuzzyLumpkins]

There is no point - if you want to be stubbornly dishonest.

If you want to be truthful - just open your eyes and see-

the people that go on about insulting others and acting superior - in any subject -

Are no better and no worse than anyone else - so to hear you and your e-gang go on and on about how (insert poster's name) and (insert poster's name) are nothing but (insert labels) and (insert labels) is the height of hypocrisy because you do so much judging, condescending & insulting and labeling while calling out others.

It is so freeing to be able to admit that you are no better than anyone else. I admit it all the time and I have no baggage to carry - and feel so light that I can go through the eye of a needle. (gratuitous bible content reference intended)

It is wonderful.

An entire post about nothing than other's behavior. Thank you for illustrating my point.

[silverblk mystix]

tldr

Here you are. This is where you are in life.

You whined that I didn't answer in the way that would satisfy you - then you tried to troll xmas into conversing with you respectfully -

Only to resort to the 8th grade insult -"tldr"

Any coincidence that truth only evades you? Any coincidence that unhappiness is what usually comes out in your words?

[silverblk mystix]

An entire post about nothing than other's behavior. Thank you for illustrating my point.

Is this all you really "saw"

And you wonder why I go on and on about "blindness?"

I just gave you a really gigantic clue about how to learn how to "see" by letting go of all your baggage - the way Jesus did -


and all you "saw" was the above garbage?





The sad part is that no matter how many clues you are given or how many truths fall in your lap or slap you in the face - you have to be the one that "sees"

No one can do it for you. Sad. Pathetic.

Ever wonder why you agree and follow the trolls in here? Ever question yourself as to why you are certain that these trolls are the way to go? Ever examine - the things they say? Ever pay attention to the garbage that they spew?

Ever?

It appears that you swallowed their falseness - whole and now you cannot recognize when truth is present.

[xmas1997]

DMC is not a complete ass unwilling to backup what he says with logic. He will troll you certainly but that is not all he does.

From SA210, I don't see anything but youtubes, meme, misquotes, smilies and comments such as 'liar' or 'obama .' That is literally the entirety of his contribution.

sbm goes to the 'you are,' 'no you are,' 'you are,' 'no you are,' 'you are,' 'no you are,' 'you are,' 'no you are' route. His 'arguments' are almost completely complaints about the behavior of others.

It is a collassal waste of time. DMC is abusive certainly but he is not inane.

Unfortunately DMC limits what he can discover by maintaining a closed mind. There are many tools we can use besides logic as I tried to explain to him, but I can only surmise that he got lazy and wanted others to figure things out for him. It doesn't work that way. You have to put in the work yourself. Only then will Truth be revealed to you. Otherwise it is all just hearsay and so much BS.
The logical thinker knows this and leaves no stone unturned. The lazy thinker is willing to take others word for it from either those who he happens to respect, or who he considers an authority. So that type of truth never really sinks in, it isn't owned.

[Clipper Nation]

There is no point - if you want to be stubbornly dishonest.

If you want to be truthful - just open your eyes and see-

the people that go on about insulting others and acting superior - in any subject -

Are no better and no worse than anyone else - so to hear you and your e-gang go on and on about how (insert poster's name) and (insert poster's name) are nothing but (insert labels) and (insert labels) is the height of hypocrisy because you do so much judging, condescending & insulting and labeling while calling out others.

It is so freeing to be able to admit that you are no better than anyone else. I admit it all the time and I have no baggage to carry - and feel so light that I can go through the eye of a needle. (gratuitous bible content reference intended)

It is wonderful.

SBM trying to deflect his constant whining and melting down onto everyone else per the usual....

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Unfortunately DMC limits what he can discover by maintaining a closed mind. There are many tools we can use besides logic as I tried to explain to him, but I can only surmise that he got lazy and wanted others to figure things out for him. It doesn't work that way. You have to put in the work yourself. Only then will Truth be revealed to you. Otherwise it is all just hearsay and so much BS.
The logical thinker knows this and leaves no stone unturned. The lazy thinker is willing to take others word for it from either those who he happens to respect, or who he considers an authority. So that type of truth never really sinks in, it isn't owned.

Your epistemology is weak. I have had arguments with DMC before if you make a credible argument against his bias that he doesn't want to change, he goes away.

You have zero empirical basis for what you are claiming here. None. You can tap dance around this notion of mystical knowledge but there is no compelling reason for any objective observer to accept that. Cliches like stone unturned are bull . I have an open mind; I do not look for excuses to believe something. If there is an objective basis then by all means present one.

[silverblk mystix]

I am someone's troll who was embarrassed by SBM and now I can't stop my butthurt, I am also a sneaky person who reports others for doing the same things I do all the time but I am not a hypocrite- and I am not a snitch. I just report people!

[xmas1997]

Your epistemology is weak. I have had arguments with DMC before if you make a credible argument against his bias that he doesn't want to change, he goes away.

You have zero empirical basis for what you are claiming here. None. You can tap dance around this notion of mystical knowledge but there is no compelling reason for any objective observer to accept that. Cliches like stone unturned are bull . I have an open mind; I do not look for excuses to believe something. If there is an objective basis then by all means present one.

I have always thought that about you. That is another reason I like having you in some of these discussions.
You are right, he did go away, but that was not my intention. I was ready for more discussion. He had some good arguments.
As for my weak epistemology? How is it you find my philosophical leanings weak? I sure as don't try to pawn them off as perfect truths, rather as starting points to discuss ideas leading to truth, nothing more, nothing less. So in that respect, maybe they are weak.

Zero empirical knowledge? That is a strong accusation. Again I am not sure what exactly you are referring to that my empirical observation or experience has zero value of. Are you referring to my discussions concerning truth versus opinion, or truth versus belief, or what exactly.
Can we keep this civil without the attacks or is that how you intend to make your points?

[kamikazi_player]

Why is that?

this is no different than atheist baiting religious people into making stupid comments. At least atheist people are funny when doing this. Robdiaz sounds like a pathetic crybaby that just closes his ears when anyone is talking to him.

[Blake]

Is this all you really "saw"

And you wonder why I go on and on about "blindness?"

I just gave you a really gigantic clue about how to learn how to "see" by letting go of all your baggage - the way Jesus did -


and all you "saw" was the above garbage?





The sad part is that no matter how many clues you are given or how many truths fall in your lap or slap you in the face - you have to be the one that "sees"

No one can do it for you. Sad. Pathetic.

Ever wonder why you agree and follow the trolls in here? Ever question yourself as to why you are certain that these trolls are the way to go? Ever examine - the things they say? Ever pay attention to the garbage that they spew?

Ever?

It appears that you swallowed their falseness - whole and now you cannot recognize when truth is present.

you're a miserable, whiny person here.

That's the truth everyone sees.

[Leetonidas]

sbm still ging up this thread I see

[Blake]

Here you are. This is where you are in life.

You whined that I didn't answer in the way that would satisfy you - then you tried to troll xmas into conversing with you respectfully -

Only to resort to the 8th grade insult -"tldr"

Any coincidence that truth only evades you? Any coincidence that unhappiness is what usually comes out in your words?

I'm not whining. Just explaining to xmas why I call you a ing idiot.

snitches everywhere

i know the secret of true happiness

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I have always thought that about you. That is another reason I like having you in some of these discussions.
You are right, he did go away, but that was not my intention. I was ready for more discussion. He had some good arguments.
As for my weak epistemology? How is it you find my philosophical leanings weak? I sure as don't try to pawn them off as perfect truths, rather as starting points to discuss ideas leading to truth, nothing more, nothing less. So in that respect, maybe they are weak.

Zero empirical knowledge? That is a strong accusation. Again I am not sure what exactly you are referring to that my empirical observation or experience has zero value of. Are you referring to my discussions concerning truth versus opinion, or truth versus belief, or what exactly.
Can we keep this civil without the attacks or is that how you intend to make your points?

Empirical means what it means. Look it up. I repeat there is zero empirical basis for the belief in god much less the christian iteration. That is not an accusation. that is an observation. Provide one empirical basis for the belief in god to counter that.

ideas leading to truth? No, an idea that leads to truth is observing how an electric current creates a EM field. You can take from that empirical truth and can build on it. That is not what you do. You want to believe something without any basis in the objective world and claim that truth can be found from it. I am interested on building on a foundation of truth and not wishful thinking and what I want to believe. The truth no matter how repugnant is still the truth.

[xmas1997]

Empirical means what it means. Look it up. I repeat there is zero empirical basis for the belief in god much less the christian iteration. That is not an accusation. that is an observation. Provide one empirical basis for the belief in god to counter that.

ideas leading to truth? No, an idea that leads to truth is observing how an electric current creates a EM field. You can take from that empirical truth and can build on it. That is not what you do. You want to believe something without any basis in the objective world and claim that truth can be found from it. I am interested on building on a foundation of truth and not wishful thinking and what I want to believe. The truth no matter how repugnant is still the truth.

If you will read my question again, in it was already the knowledge of the meaning of empirical, I know what it means so it isn't necessary for me to look it up.
I was moving beyond that in order to try to understand what specifically you were asking or referring to. Are we on the same page now?
Now I see what you really want me to do is give you empirical proof of God. Am I right? And you seem to want something of a physical nature that you can claim to be an indisputable Truth that you can build more truths upon. Am I right so far?

That is a different discussion than the one I was having which dealt with higher more intransitory truths such as thought or love, or imagination. Of those, we know they exist, but we don't know how or why.

As for giving you empirical proof of God, that I cannot do. At this point in time, I do not think anyone can. But you can also not prove the opposite, anymore than you disprove the existence of love, or thought. God and these other things are subjective, not objective.

Can you prove the existence of dimensions, such as time, or vector space for example? I doubt it, but we theorize.
We can theorize God as well, but can we prove it? No.
We can discuss the ramifications of all of the above, but just as we cannot prove the existence of Truth, we still accept them for what they are and thus dance all around them without ever coming to a concrete conclusion.

You can look at your hand and say with almost a certainty that this sure does look like my hand, it sure does feel like my hand, and maybe it tastes and smells and sounds like my hand, but we are finding out that your hand is much more than that, it is a complex mechanism made up of energy. And when you examine that energy at first you see spaces surrounding molecules. But even the spaces are not really spaces at all, but rather more tinier molecules, until you realize that the space you thought you saw was all an illusion. Everything is connected.

If this is weak then that is the best I can do at this point in time. And time? Another dimension that cannot be given a concrete definition that you can physically sink your teeth into. Science has theorized that time is actually circular in nature rater than linear, much like outer space. How can I prove this? I can't. Can you?
So if these are weak arguments, then they are what they are, but none of this says just because they are, does not mean that they are not Truth.

[DMC]

Is this all you really "saw"

And you wonder why I go on and on about "blindness?"

I just gave you a really gigantic clue about how to learn how to "see" by letting go of all your baggage - the way Jesus did -


and all you "saw" was the above garbage?





The sad part is that no matter how many clues you are given or how many truths fall in your lap or slap you in the face - you have to be the one that "sees"

No one can do it for you. Sad. Pathetic.

Ever wonder why you agree and follow the trolls in here? Ever question yourself as to why you are certain that these trolls are the way to go? Ever examine - the things they say? Ever pay attention to the garbage that they spew?

Ever?

It appears that you swallowed their falseness - whole and now you cannot recognize when truth is present.

This is you not knowing how to post cogent thoughts. Narrow all that down into "nuh uh"

[DMC]

If you will read my question again, in it was already the knowledge of the meaning of empirical, I know what it means so it isn't necessary for me to look it up.
I was moving beyond that in order to try to understand what specifically you were asking or referring to. Are we on the same page now?
Now I see what you really want me to do is give you empirical proof of God. Am I right? And you seem to want something of a physical nature that you can claim to be an indisputable Truth that you can build more truths upon. Am I right so far?

That is a different discussion than the one I was having which dealt with higher more intransitory truths such as thought or love, or imagination. Of those, we know they exist, but we don't know how or why.

As for giving you empirical proof of God, that I cannot do. At this point in time, I do not think anyone can. But you can also not prove the opposite, anymore than you disprove the existence of love, or thought. God and these other things are subjective, not objective.

Can you prove the existence of dimensions, such as time, or vector space for example? I doubt it, but we theorize.
We can theorize God as well, but can we prove it? No.
We can discuss the ramifications of all of the above, but just as we cannot prove the existence of Truth, we still accept them for what they are and thus dance all around them without ever coming to a concrete conclusion.

You can look at your hand and say with almost a certainty that this sure does look like my hand, it sure does feel like my hand, and maybe it tastes and smells and sounds like my hand, but we are finding out that your hand is much more than that, it is a complex mechanism made up of energy. And when you examine that energy at first you see spaces surrounding molecules. But even the spaces are not really spaces at all, but rather more tinier molecules, until you realize that the space you thought you saw was all an illusion. Everything is connected.

If this is weak then that is the best I can do at this point in time. And time? Another dimension that cannot be given a concrete definition that you can physically sink your teeth into. Science has theorized that time is actually circular in nature rater than linear, much like outer space. How can I prove this? I can't. Can you?
So if these are weak arguments, then they are what they are, but none of this says just because they are, does not mean that they are not Truth.

This is a troll, tasked with providing one empirical basis for belief in any god, writing War and Peace and not even coming near the task at hand.

[xmas1997]

This is a troll, tasked with providing one empirical basis for belief in any god, writing War and Peace and not even coming near the task at hand.

And this is another intelligent response?
Is your whole spiel accusing those who disagree with you as being a troll?
Seems like a fruitless venture to me.
But feel free to accuse, because that is apparently all you are capable of doing.
I wonder how far that has gotten you.

[DMC]

And this is another intelligent response?
Is your whole spiel accusing those who disagree with you as being a troll?
Seems like a fruitless venture to me.
But feel free to accuse, because that is apparently all you are capable of doing.
I wonder how far that has gotten you.

What do you mean "how far"?

[xmas1997]

What do you mean "how far"?

No, what do you mean, "what do you mean 'how far'?"
It is what it is.
Why ask a troll?

[silverblk mystix]

No, what do you mean, "what do you mean 'how far'?"
It is what it is.
Why ask a troll?

Baaam!

Troll regulated.

Nice.

[xmas1997]

I guess since now that I've been designated a troll by the "troll authorities" that I should assume the position?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

If you will read my question again, in it was already the knowledge of the meaning of empirical, I know what it means so it isn't necessary for me to look it up.
I was moving beyond that in order to try to understand what specifically you were asking or referring to. Are we on the same page now?
Now I see what you really want me to do is give you empirical proof of God. Am I right? And you seem to want something of a physical nature that you can claim to be an indisputable Truth that you can build more truths upon. Am I right so far?

That is a different discussion than the one I was having which dealt with higher more intransitory truths such as thought or love, or imagination. Of those, we know they exist, but we don't know how or why.

As for giving you empirical proof of God, that I cannot do. At this point in time, I do not think anyone can. But you can also not prove the opposite, anymore than you disprove the existence of love, or thought. God and these other things are subjective, not objective.

Can you prove the existence of dimensions, such as time, or vector space for example? I doubt it, but we theorize.
We can theorize God as well, but can we prove it? No.
We can discuss the ramifications of all of the above, but just as we cannot prove the existence of Truth, we still accept them for what they are and thus dance all around them without ever coming to a concrete conclusion.

You can look at your hand and say with almost a certainty that this sure does look like my hand, it sure does feel like my hand, and maybe it tastes and smells and sounds like my hand, but we are finding out that your hand is much more than that, it is a complex mechanism made up of energy. And when you examine that energy at first you see spaces surrounding molecules. But even the spaces are not really spaces at all, but rather more tinier molecules, until you realize that the space you thought you saw was all an illusion. Everything is connected.

If this is weak then that is the best I can do at this point in time. And time? Another dimension that cannot be given a concrete definition that you can physically sink your teeth into. Science has theorized that time is actually circular in nature rater than linear, much like outer space. How can I prove this? I can't. Can you?
So if these are weak arguments, then they are what they are, but none of this says just because they are, does not mean that they are not Truth.

We experience time. We experience motion through space. there are all manner of experiments in physics that describe this.

You hand can be your hand as a whole and still be reducible. Its called a sense of scale. Again we can recreate all of the above.

I am even fine with rationalism as long as the rationale is based in some verifiable truth and based on proven logic.

Bringing up partially understood topics like the nature of time in cosmology or the infinitesimal nature of matter at the plank scale and trying to equate it to your mystical nonsense is just horse . There is no reason to believe that any of that is true. Instead we consider it possible and do experiments to see whether or not it is true.

The above is nothing like the mystical bull that you are selling. You grant that it is not provable but still maintain its validity regardless. You don't even endeavor to prove it.