Yog Sothoth

Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry

it looks like people are seeing through Acacia's charade.

♘Evolution vs. Creationism☼

Kadaeux said
A significant part of philosophy isn't just learning it, it's the ability to understand it and CONVEY it to other people. Your complete lack of ability to do so means that if you ARE a philosopher you should give it up and take a career more suited to your natural talents. Like Janitor. I would have said McDonalds Burger Flipper, but I'm not sure you'd be able to convey the customers orders adequately.I'm not "using bad tactics to win an argument" I'm pointing out your inability to form a coherent and easily understood sentence means you don't HAVE an argument.

nice way of showing how much of an asshole you are. you're just proving my point about how atheist like you are ignorant dicks like the religious extremists. you sir are sad and pathetic

♘Evolution vs. Creationism☼

Kadaeux said
A significant part of philosophy isn't just learning it, it's the ability to understand it and CONVEY it to other people. Your complete lack of ability to do so means that if you ARE a philosopher you should give it up and take a career more suited to your natural talents. Like Janitor. I would have said McDonalds Burger Flipper, but I'm not sure you'd be able to convey the customers orders adequately.I'm not "using bad tactics to win an argument" I'm pointing out your inability to form a coherent and easily understood sentence means you don't HAVE an argument.

nice way of showing how much of an asshole you are. you're just proving my point about how atheist like you are ignorant dicks like the religious extremists. you sir are sad and pathetic

♘Evolution vs. Creationism☼

Kadaeux said
A significant part of philosophy isn't just learning it, it's the ability to understand it and CONVEY it to other people. Your complete lack of ability to do so means that if you ARE a philosopher you should give it up and take a career more suited to your natural talents. Like Janitor. I would have said McDonalds Burger Flipper, but I'm not sure you'd be able to convey the customers orders adequately.I'm not "using bad tactics to win an argument" I'm pointing out your inability to form a coherent and easily understood sentence means you don't HAVE an argument.

nice way of showing how much of an asshole you are. you're just proving my point about how atheist like you are ignorant dicks like the religious extremists.

♘Evolution vs. Creationism☼

Kadaeux said
A significant part of philosophy isn't just learning it, it's the ability to understand it and CONVEY it to other people. Your complete lack of ability to do so means that if you ARE a philosopher you should give it up and take a career more suited to your natural talents. Like Janitor. I would have said McDonalds Burger Flipper, but I'm not sure you'd be able to convey the customers orders adequately.I'm not "using bad tactics to win an argument" I'm pointing out your inability to form a coherent and easily understood sentence means you don't HAVE an argument.

nice way of showing how much of an asshole you are. you're just proving my point about how atheist like you are ignorant dicks like the religious extremists.

♘Evolution vs. Creationism☼

Kadaeux said
A significant part of philosophy isn't just learning it, it's the ability to understand it and CONVEY it to other people. Your complete lack of ability to do so means that if you ARE a philosopher you should give it up and take a career more suited to your natural talents. Like Janitor. I would have said McDonalds Burger Flipper, but I'm not sure you'd be able to convey the customers orders adequately.I'm not "using bad tactics to win an argument" I'm pointing out your inability to form a coherent and easily understood sentence means you don't HAVE an argument.

nice way of showing how much of an asshole you are. you're just proving my point about how atheist like you are ignorant dicks like the religious extremists.

♘Evolution vs. Creationism☼

Kadaeux said
A significant part of philosophy isn't just learning it, it's the ability to understand it and CONVEY it to other people. Your complete lack of ability to do so means that if you ARE a philosopher you should give it up and take a career more suited to your natural talents. Like Janitor. I would have said McDonalds Burger Flipper, but I'm not sure you'd be able to convey the customers orders adequately.I'm not "using bad tactics to win an argument" I'm pointing out your inability to form a coherent and easily understood sentence means you don't HAVE an argument.

nice job with showing how much of an asshole you are. like i said, atheists like you are the reason why people get pissed at atheism. keep responding like that and you're just proving my point.

♘Evolution vs. Creationism☼

Kadaeux said
No. A philosopher is someone who studies philosophy and can articulate themselves clearly enough to others. You clearly cannot articulate yourself clearly. You accuse others of conducting personal attacks, and yet you're the first to do so.I'm not saying you're not a philosopher. I'm saying that if you are, which I doubt, you're so painfully terrible at conveying information that you should give it up, sooner than later.

being articulate applies more to talking in real life, and I don't think be absolutely grammatically correct makes you a better philosopher, just the same as you don't have to be a J.R.R Tolken to be a writer, it is called having your own style.

♘Evolution vs. Creationism☼

Brovo said
He didn't suggest anything of the sort Yog. He just said you don't really understand science, and that's not a crime, or an insult. He's just stating you likely don't understand how something works. That's fine. There are plenty of things I don't understand, there are plenty of things he doesn't understand, plenty of things that people all over the planet don't understand. There is nothing wrong with not knowing something. Nobody is doing that in this thread. Gwazi may have overreacted but he by no means wants to dehumanize religious people. He was one once, he's just angry about it. That's all. There's nothing wrong with anger and he came to his senses and pulled back when it was explained to him what he was doing wrong.As for science... The scientific method at its core is really and truly this: To find physical evidence (as defined as being something observable, verifiable, repeatable, etc) and create a theory based upon that evidence. We found the fossils of dinosaurs, so we know they probably existed. The fine details may be out of our grasp, but we can get the crude idea of what they were like. The T-Rex for example has rows of sharp teeth: That's customary for a predatory animal. Ergo, the T-Rex was probably a carnivore.Which is why Creationism is not a science and Paleotology is. Paleotology finds evidence and attempts to fit that into the puzzle to create a greater understanding of the world around us. Creationism starts with a premise, and tries to prove it... .

i would like to point out that in today's world people are treated as inferior because they lack understanding, which is why I make criticisms of ignorant atheists. also in my opinion, being angry does not give one the right to be ignorant, that is called double standards and is why it is harder to break down prejudices. bullies are the way they are usually because they themselves have been bullied, does that give them the right to hurt other people? no it doesn't. there should never be an excuse for ignorance. as for science, i understand the purpose of science, but i am going to mention that not all scientist except new theories and ideas on how things are done. hell i have friends who a total science nuts who almost extremely believe in Einstein's laws of physics and consider it infallible. but remember Einstein was fervently ridiculed and insulted by his German peers for his theory of relativity which was a scientific model different from the traditional Newton model. the same thing goes for the first people to get an idea that the earth was round and not flat, and that our planet orbited around the sun. they had no true way of proving it but they made educated guesses. our sciences exist today because of observation and educated guesswork. our skepticism and opinions exist because these individuals took a leap of faith with their theory and it turned out to be accurate. in a sense religion is created out of observation, people saw the world around them and made their own ideas on how these things came to be.

♘Evolution vs. Creationism☼

Brovo said
He didn't suggest anything of the sort Yog. He just said you don't really understand science, and that's not a crime, or an insult. He's just stating you likely don't understand how something works. That's fine. There are plenty of things I don't understand, there are plenty of things he doesn't understand, plenty of things that people all over the planet don't understand. There is nothing wrong with not knowing something.Nobody is doing that in this thread. Gwazi may have overreacted but he by no means wants to dehumanize religious people. He was one once, he's just angry about it. That's all. There's nothing wrong with anger and he came to his senses and pulled back when it was explained to him what he was doing wrong.As for science... The scientific method at its core is really and truly this: To find physical evidence (as defined as being something observable, verifiable, repeatable, etc) and create a theory based upon that evidence. We found the fossils of dinosaurs, so we know they probably existed. The fine details may be out of our grasp, but we can get the crude idea of what they were like. The T-Rex for example has rows of sharp teeth: That's customary for a predatory animal. Ergo, the T-Rex was probably a carnivore.Which is why Creationism is not a science and Paleotology is. Paleotology finds evidence and attempts to fit that into the puzzle to create a greater understanding of the world around us. Creationism starts with a premise, and tries to prove it... .

i would like to point out that in today's world people are treated as inferior because they lack understanding, which is why I make criticisms of ignorant atheists. also in my opinion, being angry does not give one the right to be ignorant, that is called double standards and is why it is harder to break down prejudices. bullies are the way they are usually because they themselves have been bullied, does that give them the right to hurt other people? no it doesn't. there should never be an excuse for ignorance.