Re: The Atheist Origin "ALIENS DONE DID IT!"

[twistanz]

by the way yr vid sux. dont wasteyrtime repping dork loser . he is wrong

[twistanz]

Dorkins sux why beleave him?  its jsut hi=s opinion.. wats yr point?"

[dataloreforever]

Please fell free to go back and answer the last question I asked you.

[dataloreforever]

Yes well I have seen bother the original movie and Brock's video and I do not thing he did that successfully. It is called an opinion.

I agree it may not have been intentional, but it could have been as well. Only Brock knows for sure.

[dataloreforever]

Are you claiming that removing content from a argument or debate does not changes the meaning of what is trying to be convey by either side?

Also that if it is done with intent it is not dishonest?

Are you also trying to claim atheism is a complete world view or not?

Are these your arguements? These where your original arguements as I see them and this is why I did not and do not agree with you.

[dataloreforever]

So is atheism a complete world view? No. Of course neither is Christianity. In fact we will find if we look at the world that no one has an identical world view. More evidence a world view is personal and not dictated. As I see it thought this debate is over what is and is not a complete world view and you have not provided any evidence that atheism is a complete world view. Hopefully this clears up my position a little.

[dataloreforever]

You have show that yes atheism could be considered part of a world view, however it is not a world view as world view is defined or atheism is defined. Brock wants to make claims that atheists must borrow from Christianity to complete their world view, however this is not the case. Morality is adopted from society and adjusted to a personal view, just as it is in Christianity.  If you need more proof morality is personal I am sure I could provide it.

[dataloreforever]

Now as for your and Brock's claim that atheism is a world view. This view seems to be that atheist should only have one source for there world view, as Christians do, however this is not the case even in Christianity. We know this to be true because not all Christians agree on what is right and what is wrong. So logically they must get their world view from multiple sources. This is the same with atheism.

[dataloreforever]

Back to the original arguement. You say it does not matter if the question to the answer is removed from the clip, it holds the same meaning. By you logic then I should be able to remove all my comments and anyone reading yours should be able to fill in my part of the conversation. This is what you are saying? Content does not change meaning?

[dataloreforever]

Regardless of what you might think neither of us has won one thing. I still think the way I do and you still think the way you do. I have enjoyed our conversation, even tough you seemed to get a little miffed a time or two. I still think Brock is being willfully dishonest to further his agenda, however, I could be wrong. As for a world view, yes I am sure most atheists have a world view, however disbelief in someone else's world view is not a world view, and that is all atheism is.

[dataloreforever]

I am unsure why you think I hate Christianity. It is just another religion to me. I do just fine debating this subject. I have not lost one yet, including this debate. The fact is neither of us is right or wrong. I have my opinion and you have yours. Live with it.

[dataloreforever]

I did not say it, I quoted you a definition of a world view, there is a difference.

[dataloreforever]

Is that the best you can come up with "You uh... you really aren't good at this are you lol?", pathetic.

[dataloreforever]

Disbelieving a claim is not a world view. A world view is suppose to answer questions about the world around you, atheism does not due this, so it is not a world view. Yes it is a view I hold, but not of how the world works. Or am I misunderstanding the definition of world view?

I never suggested that nobody can have a world view anymore, did I? I do not remember saying that, would that be a lie from you?

[dataloreforever]

Actually I said if asked that would be my view, however that is not natural philosophy (the study of nature and the physical universe before the advent of modern science). We live in a time after the advent of modern science, in case you did not know this.

You have failed one more time.

[dataloreforever]

If you believe lying and false accusations violate a Universal moral law and are consequently unhelpful, disruptive, and, conversely, then why do you do it?

[dataloreforever]

There is no such thing as a universal moral law. As for lying it is a personal choice, personally I see not benefit in it.

[dataloreforever]

I could give a crap what Brock things either, I just happen to believe he is wrong. You may believe I am wrong but you have yet to prove I am wrong.

[dataloreforever]

I am unclear what existentialism has to do with this conversation.

I am not looking for god in the world around me, but I would say, if asked, no I do not. However that still is not a world view. It does not encompass natural philosophy, fundamental existential and normative postulates or themes, values, emotions, or ethics.

So again how is it a world view?

[dataloreforever]

How exactly is atheism a world view?

A worldview is the fundamental cognitive orientation of an individual or society encompassing natural philosophy, fundamental existential and normative postulates or themes, values, emotions, and ethics. Atheism is none of this.

[dataloreforever]

I could give a crap less what you think, so why would you care what I think?

[dataloreforever]

He also talks about an atheistic world view. Atheism is not a world view, another dishonest moment on his part.

Again why does my opinion matter so much to you?

[dataloreforever]

I encourage you to do the same.

[dataloreforever]

I am interest what the difference is if I think he is dishonest? What difference does it make? It seem to hold some barring here, I just can't seem to figure out what that would be. He is dishonest in a lot of his videos.

"after all.. perhaps the best best atheistic world view can be summed up as 'Aliens done did it'"

Unfortunately your have proven my claim. He says this in the hope we will believe atheists, and Dawkins, believe this to be true.

[dataloreforever]

I must be a liar then.

[dataloreforever]

I find it odd that you do not believe an admission that is clearly meant to change the meaning of what was said is not considered a lie to you. Admission with intent is a lie.

[dataloreforever]

How many times do I need to tell you this before you comprehend it? Being dishonest is the definition of lying.

To lie = to make a false statement with the intention to deceive. This is exactly what Brock did. He even drew a conclusion at the end that Dawkins believes aliens seeded the planet, clearly form the original film not what Dawkins was saying. This would be lying would it not?

[dataloreforever]

It was re cut in a dishonest manner so Brock could prove a point. However, if you have to lie to prove your point it is not a valid point. Yes I believe Brock did this on purpose and intentionally. It may have been a summary of what he said, but without the questions that went with the answers it leads the viewer to different conclusion. So no it is not accurate.

I am not trying to make any accusation and yes I do believe Brock was intentionally being dishonest.

[dataloreforever]

If I did not believe it was a dishonest edit I would not say it was a dishonest edit. There is nothing worse than someone who lies.

If you have watched expelled and Brock's video both together then you know he cut Ben's question, so you are being dishonest as well in your comment.

I hate liars.

[dataloreforever]

I saw the movie and yes he chopped out what Ben said right before Dawkins said what he said. Ben asked "What do you think is the possibility that Intelligent Design might turn out to be the answer to some issues in genetics or in evolution?" This question was admitted from his video. This changes the dynamic of the answer. You obviously did not watch the movie very closely.  You should watch both again I guess.

[lc237]

Brock presented a dishonest vid? No! You cant mean it. Not the Brock. He is upright, honest and decent  NOT!

[Danmill23]

Yeah good points