• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Atheism channel coming soon! American Atheist

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
BoberFett said:
Nope, and except for idiotic threads like this, I don't go around preaching my lack of belief like the neckbeards in here.
Click to expand...

then you're an atheist, though it seems like you may as well be religious, for all the good it's doing you
 
Ugh.

I'm technically an atheist by all literal and implied societal definitions, but it's almost embarrassing to admit when such a vociferous and bombastic swath are proselytizing, zealotous twats about it.
In this thread alone.
 
Sulaco said:
Ugh.

I'm technically an atheist by all literal and implied societal definitions, but it's almost embarrassing to admit when such a vociferous and bombastic swath are proselytizing, zealotous twats about it.
In this thread alone.
Click to expand...

Nah. One of the implications could be that you wouldn't be susceptible to making the same kind of stupid assertion about the proselytizing, since you should know better, but, yes, technically, as merely an absence of faith, you would qualify as an atheist.

It's also unreasonable to be embarrassed about it (or even almost embarrassed), since the fact that I or anyone else on the thread are also atheists is about as relevant to you as whether we use amd or intel, or have mustaches, since there are no prescriptions in atheism.

You and bober are obviously not very thoughtful about your atheism, but at least you don't believe in gods, so you guys are still aight.
 
justoh said:
Nah. One of the implications could be that you wouldn't be susceptible to making the same kind of stupid assertion about the proselytizing, since you should know better, but, yes, technically, as merely an absence of faith, you would qualify as an atheist.

It's also unreasonable to be embarrassed about it (or even almost embarrassed), since the fact that I or anyone else on the thread are also atheists is about as relevant to you as whether we use amd or intel, or have mustaches, since there are no prescriptions in atheism.

You and bober are obviously not very thoughtful about your atheism, but at least you don't believe in gods, so you guys are still aight.
Click to expand...

"You are not very thoughtful in your absence of belief"

🙄

Thanks for highlighting the douchebaggery I was referring to. It's always easier to make these points when you provide the visual aid.

But you highlight it exactly what I'm talking about very well, and precisely what is so obnoxious in this entire discussion, and that is the "are you with us or against us?!?" bombast that is all too often on display in these types of discussions.

I don't know if English is your first language, and judging by your struggles to pick up on subtlety in past posts I wouldn't be surprised if not, but when mentioning "proselytizing", obviously, the inference should be obvious that it is not the literal definition, but a uncomfortable and uncanny similarity in the style of approach and the methodology used, for the same ends: "I will beat you over the head with and trumpet my views over you because I'm right, this is why, and it helps allay my own insecurities."

I have zero interest in that. Obviously a religious person did not become religious based on scientific data and empirical evidence. Beating them over the head with internet pseudo-intellectualism is not going to change minds who are clearly not swayed by that data to begin with.
 
Sulaco said:
"You are not very thoughtful in your absence of belief"

🙄

Thanks for highlighting the douchebaggery I was referring to. It's always easier to make these points when you provide the visual aid.

But you highlight it exactly what I'm talking about very well, and precisely what is so obnoxious in this entire discussion, and that is the "are you with us or against us?!?" bombast that is all too often on display in these types of discussions.

I don't know if English is your first language, and judging by your struggles to pick up on subtlety in past posts I wouldn't be surprised if not, but when mentioning "proselytizing", obviously, the inference should be obvious that it is not the literal definition, but a uncomfortable and uncanny similarity in the style of approach and the methodology used, for the same ends: "I will beat you over the head with and trumpet my views over you because I'm right, this is why, and it helps allay my own insecurities."

I have zero interest in that. Obviously a religious person did not become religious based on scientific data and empirical evidence. Beating them over the head with internet pseudo-intellectualism is not going to change minds who are clearly not swayed by that data to begin with.
Click to expand...

Did you mean implication? I'm still learning, as you point out, and that seems wrong. Did you mean there's an obvious inference that should have been made? Because that's different to what you just stated. Or isn't it?
 
justoh said:
then you're an atheist, though it seems like you may as well be religious, for all the good it's doing you
Click to expand...

Atheism doesn't mean you go around preaching your "non-beliefs" to others. It just means you don't believe. Bober and I are on the same page, neither of us believes in some bearded old guy in the clouds passing out judgement, it's absurd. However, also like him, I don't give two shits what others believe, so long as they personally leave me the hell alone. This is actually "Anti-theism", a growing movement that even Richard Dawkins (whom I respect) has distanced himself from.

In reality, looking at the producers, isn't this supposed channel simply Air America 2.0? It'll last what, 6 months (less if it gets challenged as hate speech in certain states and they have to start spending $millions on legal expenses).
 
MagickMan said:
Atheism doesn't mean you go around preaching your "non-beliefs" to others. It just means you don't believe. Bober and I are on the same page, neither of us believes in some bearded old guy in the clouds passing out judgement, it's absurd. However, also like him, I don't give two shits what others believe, so long as they personally leave me the hell alone. This is actually "Anti-theism", a growing movement that even Richard Dawkins (whom I respect) has distanced himself from.

In reality, looking at the producers, isn't this supposed channel simply Air America 2.0? It'll last what, 6 months (less if it gets challenged as hate speech in certain states and they have to start spending $millions on legal expenses).
Click to expand...

Bolded is correct. What one does from there is their prerogative.
 
MagickMan said:
Atheism doesn't mean you go around preaching your "non-beliefs" to others. It just means you don't believe. Bober and I are on the same page, neither of us believes in some bearded old guy in the clouds passing out judgement, it's absurd. However, also like him, I don't give two shits what others believe, so long as they personally leave me the hell alone. This is actually "Anti-theism", a growing movement that even Richard Dawkins (whom I respect) has distanced himself from.

In reality, looking at the producers, isn't this supposed channel simply Air America 2.0? It'll last what, 6 months (less if it gets challenged as hate speech in certain states and they have to start spending $millions on legal expenses).
Click to expand...

I'm glad we agree on that.
 
eskimospy said:
I am unaware of any attempt ever by atheists in America to attempt to do away with creationism. I am, however, aware of many attempts by Christians to enforce teaching of creationism. It seems if anyone should be worried around here its us atheists.

It seems odd to be worried that Christians will be persecuted in America, considering the fact that when there has been persecuting done based on religion in America it has been almost exclusively Christians doing the persecuting.
Click to expand...

Well, there are the attempts, and court cases to have it removed from schools, which Christians probably see not as what it is, not teaching children insanity, but as persecution of their beliefs. This is also, IMO, one of the primary causes in the rise of "militant" atheism as of the last decade. The religious right thought they'd be slick and get their doctrine back into schools under the cover of creationist" trying to say, "Oh, it is't based on religion, oh nooooo" They got caught.

Thebobo said:
So?

So? Have all the fun with your religion but don't try and change the world to you beliefs.

And as far as mobilizing against creationism where can I sign up. Creationism is a blight upon this society I have no patience for people who believe this because unlike god and spirituality there is actually scientific proof that Creationism is wrong.

Creationism -
tumblr_m72ct3TAYj1rnxsmao1_500.jpg

you.

.
Click to expand...

Exactly. If I ever get a whiff that my son's school is teaching that lunacy he will be pulled out with a quickness. Creationism is a terrible leap backwards as society, better left to back when people thought that diseases brought on by germs were gods wrath.

Retro Rob said:
Just following the evidence. It went from simple to complex in about 100 years, that's clear.

It's probably an evolutionary defense mechanism against religious indoctrination.
Click to expand...

No, you're just making shit up as you go along. Sandorski had you nailed from the git.
 
Last edited:
alzan said:
Those of us who read your posts already know what it means when someone talks about nothing.
Click to expand...

lol

Atheism is a negation, which leaves very little to talk about in and of itself. The topics will hover so much on religion and/or the "evils" of it that it may as well be more religious programming.

Lol "Atheist TV".
 
Retro Rob said:
lol

Atheism is a negation, which leaves very little to talk about in and of itself. The topics will hover so much on religion and/or the "evils" of it that it may as well be more religious programming.

Lol "Atheist TV".
Click to expand...

Physicists talk about antimatter all the time. Are you saying that antimatter should not be discussed because its simply a negation of matter?

😎()🙂
 
Retro Rob said:
lol

Atheism is a negation, which leaves very little to talk about in and of itself. The topics will hover so much on religion and/or the "evils" of it that it may as well be more religious programming.

Lol "Atheist TV".
Click to expand...

Atheism is the starting point for everyone when they're born. No one believes in a God until they're taught too.

And you're right, religions are everywhere, and it's ok for people to talk about the negative aspects of it. Also known as "evils" like you say. Of course, those evils are also wrought by man, so it's worth discussing.
 
When will scientists come out and confess the universe is trillions of years old or more. The elemental creation process, based on theory, and the distribution required is mind blowing.
 
Retro Rob said:
Do physicists "lack belief" in antimatter?
Click to expand...

I imagine some do, however, it was a joke.

I do find one thing a little ironic. If atheism were so void of content, then how is it possible that you find something to comment on as much as you do in these forums?

A quick search of the posts shows that your posts are almost always in response to atheism. So I can see only 2 conclusions from what you are doing. There is a whole lot to talk about and you are wrong about the depth of substance. There is not much to talk about, and yet you comment, thus making most of your comments redundant and vapid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top