It's seriously like Dinesh is lobbing softballs on a lot of his responses; sadly, I've seen dozens of these debates, the only ones that I felt were even were with his brother, and another with Galloway (which was brutal and loud, and occasionally too politically obscure to be interesting).

"O shit, they had climatologists in the 300,000BC"

LOL...you've got to be fucking kidding me. Let's throw out carbon dating too. It's unverifiable! You weren't there ! And how do they know what stars are made of ? They can't verify it !

I don't get the defensiveness here. No debate corporations will use this data for profit. They will use ANYTHING for profit. And governments will always want to tax more of their citizenry. It has no import/relevance on the scientific facts being given. And if the science is bogus, then it will be disproven. PERIOD. That's just how it works. Just because you're spoiled and think the scientific community has to give you a day, a time, and detailed description of what will happen, isn't a reason to dismiss it. If you want that, go back to church.

It weirds me out that people go to great lengths to show how it is all a conspiracy to instill fear and get money; just look at the facts, and make up your own goddamn mind. And if you choose to be willfully ignorant, then do people a favor and stay out of the debate. Some of us actually want to understand what's going on.

Lol, " Global warming isn't necessarily bad or good."

Your info is woefully outdated. See:

http://www.videosift.com/video/TED-Talks-Time-lapse-proof-of-extreme-ice-loss

Go to 7:15.

Look at that chart, and think how irrelevant talking about farming in medieval England is.

Love it.

I like Postal Service, and I like Phil Collins...together, it seems really shitty. This seems like someone threw this song together in like an hour.

I never know how to feel about these stories; I feel like it diminishes someone with DS who might be able to achieve this without having the other team just let them do it. Seems demeaning in a way. Maybe I'm just a douche.

What kind of dog is that ?

I'd wager religious folks run the far greater risk of being 'jerky'; at least a rational argument has a semblance of rules to adhere to which can be mutually agreed on.

Getting a bit tired of persistent attempts to say atheists are on level ground with theists when it comes to debate. It sounds noble, but it just simply isn't true. The burden of proof is quite the load to carry.

And seriously, Pennypacker, I've seen your posts elsewhere, and they are always lengthy and difficult to understand the point. And you actually try to drown out the person who was present at the recording, who appears to have valid/interesting information. You offer anecdotal evidence to counter other peoples anecdotal evidence, and then denounce the use of anecdotal evidence. I struggle to see the value in your arguments; it seems like you just prefer to be as contrary as possible, but emotionally neutral, which is really boring to read through.

As a born and raised Mormon, now atheist, I can say this is appears pretty accurate for a fast and testimony, and the whole point of the meeting (since the church's early days) is to allow the congregation their opportunity to be heard. There is a distinct desire in the church to have it appear 'democratic', when it's really just a token gesture ("All who approve say 'aye'" to confirm member positions; in my 15 years no dissenters). While it is uncommon to see someone comment politically, it's a perfectly valid platform for addressing his concerns to his fellow congregants. He was respectful and spoke of his personal feelings towards the actions of the church as an organization.

That said, the bishop for the congregation is 'elected' on a volunteer basis, and it's an unpaid position. The church documents on their responsibilities are pretty bland, and essentially are concerned chiefly with getting tithing and making sure the money is accounted for. It's entirely possible the bishop is just a douche and non-representative, but that really comes down to where you church is. Mormon churches in California are a whole different animal than churches in Utah, and I'm sure that's true elsewhere.

The best I can surmise it, the altruism and goodwill of church members as more to do with the local community and individuals than the actual church itself. The church only provides a venue and a general structure. My impression of the church after leaving was that it would be great if it wasn't for all the mystical Jesus/Joseph Smith nonsense. But alas, that's the one crazy thread that binds it all together.

So here's my beef with that:

Person A: I believe there is a magical pony that I can pray to and he makes my life better and has a plan for me ! The first magical pony wrote it in this old book thousands of years ago; it's true !

Person B: I have no evidence that expressly disproves the existence of a magical pony, so I must be agnostic when it comes to the magical pony.

It just seems like intellectual cowardice to say "by definition I have to be agnostic" when confronted with ridiculous belief systems. It's perfectly rational to see the multitude of contradictory and idiotic notions of a whole range of beliefs, their obvious relevance to their historical period, and the laundry list of similiarities in their mythologies, and come to the conclusion that God is a man-made fiction. It simply is not equally rational to just pick one of those said beliefs and expect to be treated on equal footing.

That said, I know there are plenty of reasonable, intelligent, religious folks out there who get angry as well. However, like atheists, I think they are in a vast minority, and unlike atheists, they have something to lose when arguing against it.

The phrase 'ethnically pure' should not pass your lips without some moment of hesitation.

Hmm, seems like you have to the right to free speech, but everyone else has the right to ignore you. If someone came to my work and stood on a soapbox, and everyone was irritated, it's fair to say that we can ask you to leave. If you refuse and force us to call the cops, that's just being a dick.

And harassing some patrol cop like that is just plain shitty. I used to be a cashier as a teenager, and it reminded me of people who would complain about store policies to me. Talk to someone who is actually in charge; when you're at the bottom rung, the last thing you want to deal with is someone who wants you to 'change the system'.

...that, and instead of engaging people and talking about it, it's just ranting loudly to a room. What a jackass.

>> ^burdturgler:
>> ^NetRunner:
^ I would hope most of us are still edjumicated enough to know a Bible reference when we hear it.
If not, the Google gods will provide the bounteous knowledge we seek.

It was never meant as a slight on the intelligence or education of anyone here. I think VS is full of very smart people.
Simply stating that the vast majority of Atheists (which the Sift feels heavily slanted towards) have never actually read the bible. Phrases and pieces for sure. Whatever. I'm sure you're right .. most people will google a topic and get themselves educated before firing off on an internet forum.


I would opine that most atheists have actually read the bible (as much or more than an average Christian), and likely investigated other faiths as well to arrive at their point of view. It might seem like they only have read certain phrases, because there are so many that Christians simply choose to overlook which boggle the mind, and we're still waiting for a good answer

Lol, I wish there was a pretty channel, so this could be moved out of it.

BURN!

mind=blown