|
Post by lowtacks86 on Sept 9, 2020 2:42:05 GMT
Do you know what he was banned for? He said a lot of dumb right wing shit, but usually it was just mainstream neoconservative Christian fundamentalist nonsense, no worse than what I would hear on Fox News. Or did he let something really bad slip? ("You ever notice how there's a lot of jews in the media...") He posted a lot of covid misinformation, sadly. What a moron. Do you know if he was ever warned to stop?
|
|
|
Post by onethreetwo on Sept 9, 2020 2:42:57 GMT
He posted a lot of covid misinformation, sadly. What a moron. Do you know if he was ever warned to stop? I'm not sure, but I would think so.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Sept 9, 2020 3:08:07 GMT
That is just one example, Goz. That's what I said. What are the other examples of what you claimed? Why not go through the entire forum & check them for yourself. I'm not about to go through every damn topic thread that has barely anything to do with religion.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Sept 9, 2020 3:14:23 GMT
Boards are only as good as the number of participants or the variety of thought. Politics Board, which while repetitive, is at least fast paced. This board is dead by comparison.I pretty much switch over to Reddit for religious stuff because the board is huge. It's still largely a bunch of atheists whining about religion or turning it into a fake philosophical quandary of heavy rocks being lifted, but there are some original spins on topics and having nearly 60,000 people in that group means it never gets too terribly personal. Not as bad as this board: moviechat.org/bd0000108/Religion-Faith-and-Spirituality Theres a lot of boards that are worse but I don’t visit those. I come on this one every once in a while, but reddit is preferred. It’s good for just lurking The atheist subreddit is like a million users and its bonkers how much they despise religion. I would never post there, but its good reading.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Sept 9, 2020 3:15:11 GMT
That's what I said. What are the other examples of what you claimed? Why not go through the entire forum & check them for yourself. I'm not about to go through every damn topic thread that has barely anything to do with religion. OK, just checking that you don't see ' an absence of religion' as a theme on here that is not suitable for this forum! Many religious people do.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Sept 9, 2020 6:47:24 GMT
May be it's because of too much work and I like to spend most of my leisure time on watching sports or discussing sports on sports board. Or may be there's simply not much interest remaining in religion for me or the topics here are getting repeated. I know CoolJGS☺ has also kind of lost interest on this religion (even if he probably posts on religion board at reddit). Has anyone else lost interest in RFS? Atheism had been growing in response to the gradual realization that educational systems were at last leaning toward recognizing intelligent design. That is something long overdue. Atheism was trying to fight back. In Kitzmiller v. Dover it was the school system that took the side of intelligent design, if however not correctly. That is important to note. It had to happen eventually. In the past it had been the school systems that took the side of "evolution," if however not correctly either. So in 2007 the "school system" took the side of intelligent design and lost the court case. I put "school system" in parentheses because it was obviously not a qualified presentation of the latest arguments, rather the artificially forced repetition of mistaken "creationism" arguments used during the Scopes trial. Atheists had been and continued "coming out," forming "clubs," holding public meetings and rallies such as not seen in the past. That peaked in 2012 at a March 24 rally on the National Mall in Washington D.C. with a very large crowd, a giant television screen, musical guests, and famous comedians. Another rally was held in 2016 at the Lincoln Memorial with considerable less fanfare. Meanwhile the old IMDB board was jumping with atheists who of course did not have to "come out" publicly with their atheism. This board has their dwindling remnants. The obvious problem with maintaining the enthusiasm of atheists after 2012 is that atheism develops away from society by people inadequately socialized, with poor reading skills, and a severely pedestrian world view. After leaving their "mother's basement" and holding more public meetings quite many atheists probably noticed that they were not the great scholars they had imagined themselves to be. In 2012 I was a journalist at Examiner.com and made the two hour drive to D.C. to attend the rally and report on it. I was rather dismissive in tone in my article. One sentence that cut to the chase was, "The funnier question more widely asked and likely on many minds attending was about the difference between an atheist, an anarchist, a nihilist and a typical child of thirteen." I'm sure that upset some people, but they could not bring themselves to mention it. That might have helped some people begin thinking about things in earnest for the first time in their lives. I did meet more intelligent atheists at the rally and I have mentioned here how they were interested in developing a set of "commandments" like the theist sets, but without the requirement of believing in a "god." I wrote later articles with their cooperation. For the most part though atheism really is the product of inadequately socialized individuals with poor reading skills and a severely pedestrian world view. That of course continued to flourish on these virtually anonymous computer discussion boards. No, they are not good at any science. No, they are not logical. No, they cannot make a sensible argument. What they cannot win by argument they take by making up silly "rules" they imagine award them anything. They very much believe they can argue though, or at least they did. This board is dying because they were its main draw and they are being defeated.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2020 15:14:24 GMT
There are some good topics once in a while, but there is a point where you run out of things to say about the same topics.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Sept 9, 2020 17:46:03 GMT
Not only do a lot of the topics have nothing to do with religion, but, also nothing to do with faith or spirituality at all. ...in your Catholic opinion, so that narrows the field considerably! Why would Clusium start a thread about Zoroastrianism if she were only interested in the narrow Catholic field?
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Sept 9, 2020 18:47:26 GMT
May be it's because of too much work and I like to spend most of my leisure time on watching sports or discussing sports on sports board. Or may be there's simply not much interest remaining in religion for me or the topics here are getting repeated. I know CoolJGS☺ has also kind of lost interest on this religion (even if he probably posts on religion board at reddit). Has anyone else lost interest in RFS? Atheism had been growing in response to the gradual realization that educational systems were at last leaning toward recognizing intelligent design. That is something long overdue. Atheism was trying to fight back. In Kitzmiller v. Dover it was the school system that took the side of intelligent design, if however not correctly. That is important to note. It had to happen eventually. In the past it had been the school systems that took the side of "evolution," if however not correctly either. So in 2007 the "school system" took the side of intelligent design and lost the court case. I put "school system" in parentheses because it was obviously not a qualified presentation of the latest arguments, rather the artificially forced repetition of mistaken "creationism" arguments used during the Scopes trial. Atheists had been and continued "coming out," forming "clubs," holding public meetings and rallies such as not seen in the past. That peaked in 2012 at a March 24 rally on the National Mall in Washington D.C. with a very large crowd, a giant television screen, musical guests, and famous comedians. Another rally was held in 2016 at the Lincoln Memorial with considerable less fanfare. Meanwhile the old IMDB board was jumping with atheists who of course did not have to "come out" publicly with their atheism. This board has their dwindling remnants. The obvious problem with maintaining the enthusiasm of atheists after 2012 is that atheism develops away from society by people inadequately socialized, with poor reading skills, and a severely pedestrian world view. After leaving their "mother's basement" and holding more public meetings quite many atheists probably noticed that they were not the great scholars they had imagined themselves to be. In 2012 I was a journalist at Examiner.com and made the two hour drive to D.C. to attend the rally and report on it. I was rather dismissive in tone in my article. One sentence that cut to the chase was, "The funnier question more widely asked and likely on many minds attending was about the difference between an atheist, an anarchist, a nihilist and a typical child of thirteen." I'm sure that upset some people, but they could not bring themselves to mention it. That might have helped some people begin thinking about things in earnest for the first time in their lives. I did meet more intelligent atheists at the rally and I have mentioned here how they were interested in developing a set of "commandments" like the theist sets, but without the requirement of believing in a "god." I wrote later articles with their cooperation. For the most part though atheism really is the product of inadequately socialized individuals with poor reading skills and a severely pedestrian world view. That of course continued to flourish on these virtually anonymous computer discussion boards. No, they are not good at any science. No, they are not logical. No, they cannot make a sensible argument. What they cannot win by argument they take by making up silly "rules" they imagine award them anything. They very much believe they can argue though, or at least they did. This board is dying because they were its main draw and they are being defeated. "Atheism had been growing in response to the gradual realization that educational systems were at last leaning toward recognizing intelligent design." Uh no, atheism/irreligiosity has been increasing for several decades, long before Kitzmiller v. Dover: "Atheists had been and continued "coming out," forming "clubs," holding public meetings and rallies such as not seen in the past. That peaked in 2012 at a March 24 rally on the National Mall in Washington D.C. with a very large crowd, a giant television screen, musical guests, and famous comedians. Another rally was held in 2016 at the Lincoln Memorial with considerable less fanfare." So you're standards for engaging for how "atheistic" society is comparing a couple of rallies rather than polling data and statistics? "The obvious problem with maintaining the enthusiasm of atheists after 2012 is that atheism develops away from society by people inadequately socialized, with poor reading skills, and a severely pedestrian world view" What data do you actually have for this? "No, they are not good at any science. No, they are not logical. No, they cannot make a sensible argument." Then why are so many scientists, professors, and academics atheist/nonreligious? "This board is dying because they were its main draw and they are being defeated." Uh no, this board is dying because it has no where near the same traffic as IMDB did, so it's much more difficult to get new members.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Sept 9, 2020 22:26:41 GMT
lowtacks86 said: [ full text here] < clips >
- Uh no, atheism/irreligiosity has been increasing for several decades, long before Kitzmiller v. Dover
- So you're standards for engaging for how "atheistic" society is comparing a couple of rallies rather than polling data and statistics?
- why are so many scientists, professors, and academics atheist/nonreligious?
- I already went over how the wording of polls can dramatically influence the result with others here and their polls. I have no dispute with the poll you listed though. I did not say that Kitzmiller V. Dover began the rise in atheism. I said it peaked only five years later because people "came out" as atheists. Atheists were successful against the school system in that case because their numbers had been rising for decades before.
- Uh, no.
- Once upon a time atheists cited polling data that suggested "religious" people were less well educated and earned less income. I showed that was only true if you count "Christians" as "religious." Christians are however not at all typical of religious people and some "Christians" are more atheist than declared atheists. If you separate people by denomination Christians (most kinds) and atheists are less well educated and earn less income then Hindus, Jews, and until recently Muslims. Because so many "newbies" are turning to Islam, that group as slipped down to tie with some Christian and atheist groups. It was narrowly above them before. Those private schools are turning out top scientists, deal with it.
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Sept 9, 2020 22:33:47 GMT
lowtacks86 said: [ full text here] < clips >
- Uh no, atheism/irreligiosity has been increasing for several decades, long before Kitzmiller v. Dover
- So you're standards for engaging for how "atheistic" society is comparing a couple of rallies rather than polling data and statistics?
- why are so many scientists, professors, and academics atheist/nonreligious?
- I already went over how the wording of polls can dramatically influence the result with others here and their polls. I have no dispute with the poll you listed though. I did not say that Kitzmiller V. Dover began the rise in atheism. I said it peaked only five years later because people "came out" as atheists. Atheists were successful against the school system in that case because their numbers had been rising for decades before.
- Uh, no.
- Once upon a time atheists cited polling data that suggested "religious" people were less well educated and earned less income. I showed that was only true if you count "Christians" as "religious." Christians are however not at all typical of religious people and some "Christians" are more atheist than declared atheists. If you separate people by denomination Christians (most kinds) and atheists are less well educated and earn less income then Hindus, Jews, and until recently Muslims. Because so many "newbies" are turning to Islam, that group as slipped down to tie with some Christian and atheist groups. It was narrowly above them before. Those private schools are turning out top scientists, deal with it.
1. How did it "peak" if the chart shows it's clearly still going up? 2. That's exactly what you did, so uh yes. 3." I showed that was only true if you count "Christians" as "religious" No True Scottsman. Your bag of tricks is getting old. "Hindus, Jews, and until recently Muslims." That's typically only true for Hindus and Muslims that immigrate here (they already have the money to come here, and therefore access to better education). As for "jews", that's a very tricky one, really depends on what you mean by that. You do realize ethnic jews are overwhelmingly nonreligious right? "Those private schools are turning out top scientists, deal with it." What "private schools"? What are you babbling on about?
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Sept 9, 2020 22:46:54 GMT
lowtacks86 said: [ full text here] - I already went over how the wording of polls can dramatically influence the result with others here and their polls. I have no dispute with the poll you listed though. I did not say that Kitzmiller V. Dover began the rise in atheism. I said it peaked only five years later because people "came out" as atheists. Atheists were successful against the school system in that case because their numbers had been rising for decades before.
- Uh, no.
- Once upon a time atheists cited polling data that suggested "religious" people were less well educated and earned less income. I showed that was only true if you count "Christians" as "religious." Christians are however not at all typical of religious people and some "Christians" are more atheist than declared atheists. If you separate people by denomination Christians (most kinds) and atheists are less well educated and earn less income then Hindus, Jews, and until recently Muslims. Because so many "newbies" are turning to Islam, that group as slipped down to tie with some Christian and atheist groups. It was narrowly above them before. Those private schools are turning out top scientists, deal with it.
1. How did it "peak" if the chart shows it's clearly still going up? 2. That's exactly what you did, so uh yes. 3." I showed that was only true if you count "Christians" as "religious" No True Scottsman. Your bag of tricks is getting old. "Hindus, Jews, and until recently Muslims." That's typically only true for Hindus and Muslims that immigrate here (they already have the money to come here, and therefore access to better education). As for "jews", that's a very tricky one, really depends on what you mean by that. You do realize ethnic jews are overwhelmingly nonreligious right? "Those private schools are turning out top scientists, deal with it." What "private schools"? What are you babbling on about? 1. Your chart only goes to 2010 2. Uh, no. 3. That would be so much more meaningful if atheists made much money. Also where is your data that immigrants are wealthy? Why would people established in their own country want to uproot?
|
|
|
Post by goz on Sept 9, 2020 22:46:55 GMT
Atheism had been growing in response to the gradual realization that educational systems were at last leaning toward recognizing intelligent design. That is something long overdue. Atheism was trying to fight back. In Kitzmiller v. Dover it was the school system that took the side of intelligent design, if however not correctly. That is important to note. It had to happen eventually. In the past it had been the school systems that took the side of "evolution," if however not correctly either. So in 2007 the "school system" took the side of intelligent design and lost the court case. I put "school system" in parentheses because it was obviously not a qualified presentation of the latest arguments, rather the artificially forced repetition of mistaken "creationism" arguments used during the Scopes trial. Atheists had been and continued "coming out," forming "clubs," holding public meetings and rallies such as not seen in the past. That peaked in 2012 at a March 24 rally on the National Mall in Washington D.C. with a very large crowd, a giant television screen, musical guests, and famous comedians. Another rally was held in 2016 at the Lincoln Memorial with considerable less fanfare. Meanwhile the old IMDB board was jumping with atheists who of course did not have to "come out" publicly with their atheism. This board has their dwindling remnants. The obvious problem with maintaining the enthusiasm of atheists after 2012 is that atheism develops away from society by people inadequately socialized, with poor reading skills, and a severely pedestrian world view. After leaving their "mother's basement" and holding more public meetings quite many atheists probably noticed that they were not the great scholars they had imagined themselves to be. In 2012 I was a journalist at Examiner.com and made the two hour drive to D.C. to attend the rally and report on it. I was rather dismissive in tone in my article. One sentence that cut to the chase was, "The funnier question more widely asked and likely on many minds attending was about the difference between an atheist, an anarchist, a nihilist and a typical child of thirteen." I'm sure that upset some people, but they could not bring themselves to mention it. That might have helped some people begin thinking about things in earnest for the first time in their lives. I did meet more intelligent atheists at the rally and I have mentioned here how they were interested in developing a set of "commandments" like the theist sets, but without the requirement of believing in a "god." I wrote later articles with their cooperation. For the most part though atheism really is the product of inadequately socialized individuals with poor reading skills and a severely pedestrian world view. That of course continued to flourish on these virtually anonymous computer discussion boards. No, they are not good at any science. No, they are not logical. No, they cannot make a sensible argument. What they cannot win by argument they take by making up silly "rules" they imagine award them anything. They very much believe they can argue though, or at least they did. This board is dying because they were its main draw and they are being defeated. "Atheism had been growing in response to the gradual realization that educational systems were at last leaning toward recognizing intelligent design." Uh no, atheism/irreligiosity has been increasing for several decades, long before Kitzmiller v. Dover: "Atheists had been and continued "coming out," forming "clubs," holding public meetings and rallies such as not seen in the past. That peaked in 2012 at a March 24 rally on the National Mall in Washington D.C. with a very large crowd, a giant television screen, musical guests, and famous comedians. Another rally was held in 2016 at the Lincoln Memorial with considerable less fanfare." So you're standards for engaging for how "atheistic" society is comparing a couple of rallies rather than polling data and statistics? "The obvious problem with maintaining the enthusiasm of atheists after 2012 is that atheism develops away from society by people inadequately socialized, with poor reading skills, and a severely pedestrian world view" What data do you actually have for this? "No, they are not good at any science. No, they are not logical. No, they cannot make a sensible argument." Then why are so many scientists, professors, and academics atheist/nonreligious? "This board is dying because they were its main draw and they are being defeated."Uh no, this board is dying because it has no where near the same traffic as IMDB did, so it's much more difficult to get new members. LOL Arlon thinks he is winning this Board! Good old Dunning Kruger raises its ugly head again!
|
|
|
Post by goz on Sept 9, 2020 22:48:26 GMT
lowtacks86 said: [ full text here] < clips >
- Uh no, atheism/irreligiosity has been increasing for several decades, long before Kitzmiller v. Dover
- So you're standards for engaging for how "atheistic" society is comparing a couple of rallies rather than polling data and statistics?
- why are so many scientists, professors, and academics atheist/nonreligious?
- I already went over how the wording of polls can dramatically influence the result with others here and their polls. I have no dispute with the poll you listed though. I did not say that Kitzmiller V. Dover began the rise in atheism. I said it peaked only five years later because people "came out" as atheists. Atheists were successful against the school system in that case because their numbers had been rising for decades before.
- Uh, no.
- Once upon a time atheists cited polling data that suggested "religious" people were less well educated and earned less income. I showed that was only true if you count "Christians" as "religious." Christians are however not at all typical of religious people and some "Christians" are more atheist than declared atheists. If you separate people by denomination Christians (most kinds) and atheists are less well educated and earn less income then Hindus, Jews, and until recently Muslims. Because so many "newbies" are turning to Islam, that group as slipped down to tie with some Christian and atheist groups. It was narrowly above them before. Those private schools are turning out top scientists, deal with it.
What is a 'newbie'?
|
|
|
Post by thefleetsin on Sept 9, 2020 22:54:27 GMT
i'm hanging around for the second coming.
tick tock tick tock
|
|
|
Post by thefleetsin on Sept 9, 2020 22:55:24 GMT
May be it's because of too much work and I like to spend most of my leisure time on watching sports or discussing sports on sports board. Or may be there's simply not much interest remaining in religion for me or the topics here are getting repeated. I know CoolJGS☺ has also kind of lost interest on this religion (even if he probably posts on religion board at reddit). Has anyone else lost interest in RFS? Atheism had been growing in response to the gradual realization that educational systems were at last leaning toward recognizing intelligent design. That is something long overdue. Atheism was trying to fight back. In Kitzmiller v. Dover it was the school system that took the side of intelligent design, if however not correctly. That is important to note. It had to happen eventually. In the past it had been the school systems that took the side of "evolution," if however not correctly either. So in 2007 the "school system" took the side of intelligent design and lost the court case. I put "school system" in parentheses because it was obviously not a qualified presentation of the latest arguments, rather the artificially forced repetition of mistaken "creationism" arguments used during the Scopes trial. Atheists had been and continued "coming out," forming "clubs," holding public meetings and rallies such as not seen in the past. That peaked in 2012 at a March 24 rally on the National Mall in Washington D.C. with a very large crowd, a giant television screen, musical guests, and famous comedians. Another rally was held in 2016 at the Lincoln Memorial with considerable less fanfare. Meanwhile the old IMDB board was jumping with atheists who of course did not have to "come out" publicly with their atheism. This board has their dwindling remnants. The obvious problem with maintaining the enthusiasm of atheists after 2012 is that atheism develops away from society by people inadequately socialized, with poor reading skills, and a severely pedestrian world view. After leaving their "mother's basement" and holding more public meetings quite many atheists probably noticed that they were not the great scholars they had imagined themselves to be. In 2012 I was a journalist at Examiner.com and made the two hour drive to D.C. to attend the rally and report on it. I was rather dismissive in tone in my article. One sentence that cut to the chase was, "The funnier question more widely asked and likely on many minds attending was about the difference between an atheist, an anarchist, a nihilist and a typical child of thirteen." I'm sure that upset some people, but they could not bring themselves to mention it. That might have helped some people begin thinking about things in earnest for the first time in their lives. I did meet more intelligent atheists at the rally and I have mentioned here how they were interested in developing a set of "commandments" like the theist sets, but without the requirement of believing in a "god." I wrote later articles with their cooperation. For the most part though atheism really is the product of inadequately socialized individuals with poor reading skills and a severely pedestrian world view. That of course continued to flourish on these virtually anonymous computer discussion boards. No, they are not good at any science. No, they are not logical. No, they cannot make a sensible argument. What they cannot win by argument they take by making up silly "rules" they imagine award them anything. They very much believe they can argue though, or at least they did. This board is dying because they were its main draw and they are being defeated.
|
|
|
Post by thefleetsin on Sept 9, 2020 22:56:56 GMT
"For the most part though atheism really is the product of inadequately socialized individuals with poor reading skills and a severely pedestrian world view."
oh arlon, you've outdone yourself.
this is now the funniest thing i've ever read, not just on the internet but anywhere.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Sept 9, 2020 23:11:32 GMT
lowtacks86 said: [ full text here] - I already went over how the wording of polls can dramatically influence the result with others here and their polls. I have no dispute with the poll you listed though. I did not say that Kitzmiller V. Dover began the rise in atheism. I said it peaked only five years later because people "came out" as atheists. Atheists were successful against the school system in that case because their numbers had been rising for decades before.
- Uh, no.
- Once upon a time atheists cited polling data that suggested "religious" people were less well educated and earned less income. I showed that was only true if you count "Christians" as "religious." Christians are however not at all typical of religious people and some "Christians" are more atheist than declared atheists. If you separate people by denomination Christians (most kinds) and atheists are less well educated and earn less income then Hindus, Jews, and until recently Muslims. Because so many "newbies" are turning to Islam, that group as slipped down to tie with some Christian and atheist groups. It was narrowly above them before. Those private schools are turning out top scientists, deal with it.
What is a 'newbie'? A person whose parents have no traditions or education.
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Sept 9, 2020 23:13:29 GMT
1. How did it "peak" if the chart shows it's clearly still going up? 2. That's exactly what you did, so uh yes. 3." I showed that was only true if you count "Christians" as "religious" No True Scottsman. Your bag of tricks is getting old. "Hindus, Jews, and until recently Muslims." That's typically only true for Hindus and Muslims that immigrate here (they already have the money to come here, and therefore access to better education). As for "jews", that's a very tricky one, really depends on what you mean by that. You do realize ethnic jews are overwhelmingly nonreligious right? "Those private schools are turning out top scientists, deal with it." What "private schools"? What are you babbling on about? 1. Your chart only goes to 2010 2. Uh, no. 3. That would be so much more meaningful if atheists made much money. Also where is your data that immigrants are wealthy? Why would people established in their own country want to uproot? 1. Here you goes, here's one that still shows a decline into 2013: liberalbias.com/images/content/Religious-Decline.png2. That's literally all you did, it's there for anyone to go back and read. 3. "That would be so much more meaningful if atheists made much money." I dunno how that adressed what I said. I'll just label that a nonargument. "Also where is your data that immigrants are wealthy?" I didn't say "wealthy" but generally have more money than the people in their country, traveling to the US, becoming a US citizen, and finding a home can be a very costly endeavor that most people from India and Muslim majority countries are not gonna be able to afford: www.supermoney.com/immigration-help-legal-costs-immigrating-us-pay/"Why would people established in their own country want to uproot?" Typically because this country has better education and job oppurtunities. Why do you think our colleges are full of some many Chinese, Indians, and Nigerians?
|
|
|
Post by goz on Sept 9, 2020 23:27:11 GMT
A person whose parents have no traditions or education. That doesn't make sense. Nothing new to add here then. LOL
|
|