User Profile: VoteBushIn12

VoteBushIn12

Member Since: December 20, 2010

CommentsDisplaying VoteBushIn12's 10 most recent comments.

  • @BAD_ASHE

    It’s amazing how you can write so much yet say so little. If there is any fault in my ability to comprehend your position, it stems entirely from your lack of forming a formal position. You’re talking in circles.

    Let me paraphrase where we’re at.

    1) You said It’s obvious that God exists, and obvious Santa does not. To compare the two is stupid
    2) I said, both have 0 evidence favoring their existence and therefore are equally likely to exist. Therefore the comparison is actually fair.
    3) You said there IS evidence to support God’s existence and evidence to disprove Santas
    4) I requested you to provide me with some – you did not.

    If there is no evidence to suggest his existence then it must mean the concept of God is contrived. And, if it is contrived then it becomes just as possible to be true as any other contrived idea – like Santa. Even without knowing exactly who or when it was first thought up like we do with Santa, we can rest assured that it was indeed thought up and, therefore, the details behind it are irrelevant.

    The only way you can argue against the comparison of Santa or the Easter Bunny to God is to prove that there is more evidence favoring one over the other. I’m not talking philosophizing about it, I’m talking empirical evidence. Until that time, they fall in the same imaginary bucket and are no different than any other entity I claim exists, but cannot prove.

    And the comparison holds water.

    I hope that makes sense.

  • @BAD_ASHE
    “There is plenty of sustainable evidence and logical proofs for God’s existence…you are either unaware of them or choose to ignore them”
    Which one of us is doing the hand waving? If there is as much as you claim, you should have no issue supplying me one piece of “evidence” that cannot be explained by a modern scientific theory. I’ll wait…

    I don’t see how can you identify fairness in the comparison, yet still claim it moronic. If there is no evidence for the existence of God AND there is no evidence for the existence of Santa Claus, then – to any reasonably minded person – the likelihood of either of them existing is equal. Is it POSSIBLE one exists and not the other? Yes. But it’s just as likely that, if only one existed, the one is Santa Clause as it is likely it’s God and not Santa Claus. Thus, your argument favoring the scenario of God and NOT Santa Claus carries no weight. It is just as feasible a scenario has Santa and NOT GOD or Space Zombie Unicorns.

    You may think God exists – that’s fine. But keep in mind there is nothing “self evident” about it. There is no reason for me to put greater faith in God’s supposed existence than in Santa’s.

  • @BAD_ASHE

    A person (you) that enters a conversation (this one) is not in a position to change the discussion. I don’t care what you believe we “should” be arguing. Whether or not education translates to intelligence is not the topic we’re covering here. Quite frankly I agree with you, I don’t think education and intelligence form a one to one mapping. However, that’s not the argument we’re having. The question is, “Is Maher educated?”

    My answer is yes. And I cite his degree from Cornell as indicating his ordinal level of formal education. Regardless of whether you think he’s intelligent, you cannot deny that he IS educated.

    Cheers!

  • @BAD_ASHE

    You would have an argument IFF (if and ONLY if) there was evidence – however remote – that would suggest the existence of a God. However, there is none. In fact, even Religion agrees there is no evidence for God, that’s why they call it “Blind Faith”. That is, you have faith in His existence without being able to see or prove his existence. And if there is no proof, there is no substantiable evidence, and therefore, none that is even worth exploring.

    So, please, tell me again how my comparison is unfair; keeping in mind this fact of there being equal amount of evidence for Santa Claus as there is for God. That amount being 0.

    You can toss out big words all you like. They don’t fool me, I know what they mean, and I can decipher what argument you’re making. And, let me tell you, it is a fallacious one.

  • @BAD_ASHE

    I know what you’re trying to say – but you sound ridiculous. Here’s a quick exercise:

    I believe in a deity called “Raffle”. Raffle is the creator of all things (even your “God”). To me – this is self evident, but to you I obviously just made this deity up. Now I am going to make your comment and tell me how it sounds…

    “If one, while speaking of Santa Claus, The Tooth Fairy, and Harvey the Rabbit, doesn’t understand the difference between those clearly imaginary constructs as opposed to the metaphysical necessity of a creator Raffle, then they are simply an idiot.”

    Because, to the Atheist, God IS AN IMAGINARY CONSTRUCT, your comment is laden with irony and down right laughable.

    You may not agree with the atheist, but you should at least understand why your position carries absolutely no sway. It is unconvincing.

  • @BODYBAG
    What point are you making by identifying the education levels of serial killers? Are you trying to draw parallels?

    How about this:
    Albert Einstein, PhD from University of Zurich
    Madam Curie, PhD from University of Paris

    For every correlation you have between education and the negative, I can find 5 that contradict your point.

    And to those inquiring, I have a Masters of Science from Carnegie Mellon.

    @ENDTHEMINDLESSSPENDING
    The originator of this thread wants him to get an education. I am simply pointing our that he already has one. You’re the first to use the term “smart”.

    Try and keep up with the discussion.

    @STONEEZ
    Disagree. Education is the groundwork to grow. If you don’t know what’s been done before you will never be able to create what comes next. It allows you to stand on the shoulders of giants.

    The only people I find that make arguments against the benefits of education are those that have tried it and failed, or never tried it all. Which one are you?

  • Great page design. I love the puke green. And only 20 page errors!

    You should tell Douglas Bowman that he sucks at web page development.

  • Because why the f*** does anyone care if he goes skeet shooting?

    I bet there are literally MILLIONS of pictures of him doing mundane things that aren’t press worthy… until some right wing nuts think it time to make it press worthy.

    You want to see him taking a **** too? Why hasn’t the White house released pictures of him wearing socks yet!? CONSPIRACY!

  • He has a B.A. from Cornell.

    What’s your education level, may I ask?

  • Morality is the term we give to those actions that fit well with societal norms.

    Where do societal norms come from? They are the only sustainable conclusion you can arrive at once you decide to form a society. Anything else is unsustainable and – just like natural selection – die out.

    Why do we form societies? Evolutionary advantage. There is strength in numbers and in order for those numbers to thrive peacefully among one another there must be social order.

    I don’t need an old book to tell me Murder is bad. That logic is ingrained in my genes because my ancestors had to behave that way in order to function in societies. Those that did not were outcast from the pack and died on their own. Those that had the correct social genes – or capacity to learn social behavior – flourished. Which is why MOST HUMANS understand morality without being explicitly taught it.

    Those edge cases that don’t are the exception. In the same way being born with Autism is considered a congenital disorder, so too it is argued that psychopathy has its roots in our genetic code.

    And that, ladies and gentleman, is why I am morally right with – or without – God.