What do you think of fellow forumgoers

[OLD ACCOUNT]

This is the trend they are speaking of.

Obviously, all atheists are the same, just like all religious people are the same. Screw diversity.

 

[Retsu]

I like learning about religions. :3

Why? ?_? I've always been curious as to why people are fascinated by stuff like that. Unless you're in it for the historical stuff...

 

[surskitty]

They're quite frequently intricate and have an entire worldview centered around them. Religions also -- of course -- influence quite a lot of things, and knowledge for knowledge's sake is good too.

Why wouldn't I want to learn about things a sizable number of people believe?

 

[Mirry]

Agreeing with surskitty -- I think that learning about religions is really interesting even if I think it's all BS. I'm taking a course in Hinduism this semester and I love it so far. I suppose it's just curiosity, really -- you see/hear of people behaving a certain way due to their religious beliefs, and you wonder why, so you investigate.

 

[Abwayax]

That's not what I meant. Science isn't for everything, but your trend treats like it does.

Please get over the assumption that science and religion are polar opposites. There are scientists that believe in a God; the exact percentage is disputed because statistics are prone to skewering, but a science teacher at my school is a very devout Christian.

On another note, I have a grudge against whoever fucked up the exclamation mark - an already-good punctuation mark in its own right. The tilde wasn't good enough for you, was it, punctuation!murderer~~? >_>

 

[Retsu]

Bang notation can be quite useful, but people (see: Cirrus) misuse it and don't give a damn.

 

[Abwayax]

The only possible use of a bang that I can see, besides ending an exclamation statement, is as a shorthand for logical "not". Used anywhere else, I just think to myself that it would have looked better had there simply been a space there.

 

[Minish]

Bang notation can be quite useful, but people (see: Cirrus) misuse it and don't give a damn.

No, I didn't misuse it~

I agree with Number 100 on that religion and science aren't polar opposites. I don't like narrow-minded atheists either, just like how I don't like narrow-minded religious people. But science and religion are not opposites, it's not as black and white as that.

 

[The Darksmith Legacy]

Hahah. Lets see what you think about me....

why do all the mods and scary people hang around here anyway?

 

[Music Dragon]

Scout is obviously pretty judgemental and narrow-minded him/herself. Hrrm... Still - you have to forgive those who know not what they do!

 

[Scout]

Please get over the assumption that science and religion are polar opposites. There are scientists that believe in a God; the exact percentage is disputed because statistics are prone to skewering, but a science teacher at my school is a very devout Christian.

Let me make this more clear.

My point here is not based on that assumption nor should it imply that assumption. It also doesn't lead to something like "If you use science or a scientist, that means you're atheist!" because that's not the point. It's about how science is treated in the way of "it's all about truth" -- how science is treated by collective of individuals sharing that point of view; usually it's of the stereotypical atheist and because of that they believe it's necessary to abolish religion. They're doing no better than placing science in the gold light.

Let me elaborate more about the "trend" I was talking about. Religion and the supernatural are totally different matters. When Watershed stated about preferring not to believe anything supernatural..

Here are some reasons why people alike would rather not believe in anything supernatural:

1.) You lack the experience or observations to correlate any of those.
2.) You do not know any other friend or families... others that share any experiences to correlate to any of those.
3.) No scientific explanation ( Though does this mean it's not real? It's just unproven. )
4.) Supernatural claims have been ignored and when it's brought up, people tend to deny such any claims would be true. That kind of reputation is known for being ignored and ridiculed.

I expect "we could try to disprove it" but these things been here for a long time, I expect you to get nowhere in doing so.

I'm pretty sure the list can go on, but those are some common reasons I could think of so far.

 

[OLD ACCOUNT]

Here are some reasons why people alike would rather not believe in anything supernatural:

1.) You lack the experience or observations to correlate any of those.
2.) You do not know any other friend or families... others that share any experiences to correlate to any of those.
3.) No scientific explanation ( Though does this mean it's not real? It's just unproven. )
4.) Supernatural claims have been ignored and when it's brought up, people tend to deny such any claims would be true. That kind of reputation is known for being ignored and ridiculed.

You really do like to assume things, don't you? Do you for even a moment think that atheists could have been born into religious families and simply made up their own mind about religion? Why should we believe in something that can't be proven? Of course supernatural claims are ignored and ridiculed - there's no proof to them. If they had proof then they wouldn't just be claims.

 

[Music Dragon]

Maybe this is just me, but I'm having a hard time understanding what exactly you're trying to say, Scout. Your posts feel a little... confused and unclear.

 

[Scout]

You really do like to assume things, don't you?

It's better to be wrong about my assumption rather than not state it at all. If this assumption I believe is wrong, then I'll just get over it for the better.

Do you for even a moment think that atheists could have been born into religious families and simply made up their own mind about religion?

Not unless they start to join another kind of collective.

Of course supernatural claims are ignored and ridiculed - there's no proof to them. If they had proof then they wouldn't just be claims.

Why do the supernatural is the supernatural in the first place? Why there are claims? Because there is evidence among them, not hardcore evidence or proof - but there is evidence. But don't ask me for them - find those yourself.

Why should we believe in something that can't be proven?

Because faith is what that actually gets you somewhere, not the blind faith you would see in religious mainstream.

This is something that doesn't fit in binary logic and not in the method of science, because it's another way of how to find knowledge.

How I do things is more intuitive, intuitive thinking. But you know what? That's the kind of thing that is mostly forgotten in conventional thinking nowadays.


Whatever, there's no need for me to continue.

Maybe this is just me, but I'm having a hard time understanding what exactly you're trying to say, Scout. Your posts feel a little... confused and unclear.

Usually what lies in confusion means that there's great truth that exists inside, if you may - please ponder about my perspective.

 

[surskitty]

The only possible use of a bang that I can see, besides ending an exclamation statement, is as a shorthand for logical "not". Used anywhere else, I just think to myself that it would have looked better had there simply been a space there.

Indeed!

 

[OLD ACCOUNT]

It's better to be wrong about my assumption rather than not state it at all. If this assumption I believe is wrong, then I'll just get over it for the better.

How about you just don't assume things?

Not unless they start to join another kind of collective.

Atheism; lack of religion. So technically, no.

What is it with you and 'trends' or whatever? Why does everyone have to fit a stereotype?

Why do the supernatural is the supernatural in the first place? Why there are claims? Because there is evidence among them, not hardcore evidence or proof - but there is evidence. But don't ask me for them - find those yourself.

'Hardcore evidence' wtf. There's no such thing as 'hardcore evidence'. There's just evidence, proof. And clearly, if you want me to go 'find it myself' there isn't any proof to be found.

And don't think I haven't looked. I watch the Discovery channel all the time; they have plenty of documentaries about those things. It's all bullshit.

Because faith is what that actually gets you somewhere, not the blind faith you would see in religious mainstream.

Generally, I think your feet get you places. Your feet and motor vehicles.

 

[Vladimir Putin's LJ]

Usually what lies in confusion means that there's great truth that exists inside, if you may - please ponder about my perspective.

hahahaha
the messiah! the messiah!

 

[Music Dragon]

Because faith is what that actually gets you somewhere, not the blind faith you would see in religious mainstream.

This is something that doesn't fit in binary logic and not in the method of science, because it's another way of how to find knowledge.

How I do things is more intuitive, intuitive thinking. But you know what? That's the kind of thing that is mostly forgotten in conventional thinking nowadays.

If "faith" is defined as "belief in something that has no evidence to support it", then no, that's not what gets you somewhere. In fact, I think that's the main thing preventing you from getting anywhere, Scout.

Usually what lies in confusion means that there's great truth that exists inside, if you may - please ponder about my perspective.

This sentence sounds slightly babelfished.

Confusion usually means that it's confusing, not that it's secretly very sensible.

 

[octobr]

I hear verne is a cocky, uptight ass.

If you get my drift.

 

[Espeon]

But everyone loves Verne for being a cocky, uptight ass! We all get his drift.