"We Should be Able to Tell Them to Get Fucked!"

Sarahon06 in his response to ThirdProverb concerning the two-week suspension of TheAmazingAtheist articulates better than I ever could the point about the futility of trying to be polite with religious fundie fucktard wankers. I hope more rational people will pay heed to this message.
There is indeed no point trying to have rational conversation with religious bigots who don't give a flying fuck about reality. Every bit of mockery that comes towards them is well deserved. They will see politeness as weakness and will try to take advantage of that to condescend over you at best, murder you at worst(The latter being mostly true about religious fundamentalists of the Islamic kind).

Sarahon's video about NightVisionPhantom:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6zfaF1TJBU

Original, uncut video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3zm-C0PWfE

Category:

Education

Tags:

• sarahon06
• theamazingatheist
• thethirdproverb
• apologetics
• apoIogetics
• nightvisionphantom
• bigjerre
• venomfangx
• pcs
• lacigreen
• gogreen18
• fundie
• fucktards
• are
• fucking
• stupid
• brainless
• dumbasses
• we
• should
• be
• able
• to
• tell
• them
• get
• fucked
• christians
• muslims
• religious
• dogma

[krunk1980]

"cast their line out of stupidity into the retard ocean"

haha, i love that line.

[Akatam0t0ma]

In order to sustain your belief in your irrational superstition you are basing it on 3 very shaky premises:

1) That there is a creator of the universe

2) That such creator communicates with humans

3) That it's the creator of the specific book of mythology in which you believe ONLY by accident of birth, while all other books of mythology, into which you were lucky not to be indoctrinated into, must be dismissed as fairytales for no other reason but the fact that you believe it to be so.

[Akatam0t0ma]

"God can make what you call "Super-Mario" leaps by the definition of who He is."

That's exactly the problem. The concept of god is by definition unfalsifiable, and as such, unscientific. It's an arguement that purports to explain all, and as Chris Hitchens put it, "arguments that explain everything, explain nothing". So now, it's not me who fails, it's your bronze age superstition that does.

[Akatam0t0ma]

"He has revealed himself, through history, the written Word AND creation."

Which word? The Quran? The Egyptian Book of the Dead? The Iliad? The Vedas?

"That alot more to go on than your "super-mario" pseudoscience leaps of imagination that has been proven by experimentation & knowledge, NOT to be true."

Again, like the typical religionist drone, you are making statements of "fact" completely contradicted by reality.

[sablechicken]

I'm not making up a god of my design. He has revealed himself, through history, the written Word AND creation. This is the foundation of my knowing who He is and how the world came to be. God can make what you call "Super-Mario" leaps by the definition of who He is. That alot more to go on than your "super-mario" pseudoscience leaps of imagination that has been proven by experimentation & knowledge, NOT to be true. But you still hold on it thinking you have a reason to reject God. You FAIL.

[Akatam0t0ma]

"That even though I have given you evidence that shows the Theory of Evolution could not happen"

Even if that were true(Which it isn't), that would still not prove the existence of a creator, nevermind giving you the intellectual right to claim to know that such a creator wrote books, in which you believe only by accident of birth. Since you can't demonstrate that your beloved skyhooks even exist, your attempt to use them as explanation for anything is completely invalid.

[Akatam0t0ma]

"So what you are saying is that you are leaving absolutely NO possibility of God."

Errr, no, I'm just not leaving you an option to make Super-Mario leaps from asserting that there is a creator(Which you are yet to demonstrate) to asserting to know all sorts of things about what he/she/it loves and hates, what makes him/her/it sad in the pants or what I should or shouldn't do on this basis. That's a game you religious drones love to play, and you were allowed to get away with it for too long.

[sablechicken]

So what you are saying is that you are leaving absolutely NO possibility of God. That even though I have given you evidence that shows the Theory of Evolution could not happen, because of what we now know about DNA and here are not good mutation, you still refuse to be open to the possibility of God. You are dogmatic in that position.

What is the other options? Aliens? Do you have evidence for that or are you ruling that out because lack of evidence?

[Akatam0t0ma]

And yes, you are correct, science was not designed to be dogmatic, and it isn't. It is YOU who is dogmatic here. It is YOU who is so immersed in your precious religious dogma that you believe that the entire scientific community is involved in some big conspiracy against your fairy-tale.

If you can present a better explanation for the diversity of life on this planet that does not involve invoking "godidit" skyhooks when something is not understood, by all means, bring it up.

[Akatam0t0ma]

Actually, I AM open to new insights, such as the one you brought about the T-Rex soft tissue. However, there is no evidence that people ever lived with T-Rex, and even if they did...heck, even if we had a living T-Rex today, that would in no way, shape or form disprove evolution.