PDA

View Full Version : Is Religion Dangerous?



Shangri-LIE
11-27-2015, 03:56 AM
Well, yes and no. I'd assert that it's the people who subvert, pervert and misinterpret scriptures/texts, (Not just Biblical ones), as well as the ones who vandalized most of the Temples of Jerusalem and centuries later put together the book known as 'The Holy Bible" who are the biggest dangers to not just global societies but to knowledge itself. So, let's talk about that first. The belief in an anthropomorphic Deity of course is ridiculous. For example "The Book of Alxi" and the Talmud of Palestine and Bablylonia for example were mostly destroyed by the Rabbinic Fraternity. Why is there no real concrete evidence of Jesus? Well, that's because not only was he referred to by MANY names but a lot of transcripts, particularly the Latin Treatise "Mar Yesu", were eliminated along with 6,000 of the Talmud at Salmanca. Before I go into this any further, I am not making a "Case for Christ as the Son of God".Jewish records of the Rabbis are of extreme importance in determining Gospel origins and the value of the Church presentation of the virgin birth story of Jesus Christ. A common appellation for Jesus in the Talmud is Yeshu’a ben Panthera, an allusion to the widespread Jewish belief during the earliest centuries of the Christian era that Jesus was the result of an illegitimate union between his mother and a Roman soldier named Tiberius Julius Abdes Panthera. However, when the name "Mary" in the Gospels was replaced with the original Hebrew version, "Mariamne", an historic aspect arose. Combining the evidence available, the position advanced in this book is that Mary, the mother of Jesus in the Gospels, Stadea of the Jewish writings, and Mariamne (As referred to in the Qu'ran) of the House of Herod were one and the same person. On the other hand there have been other Christian sanctioned vandalism's of Temples and documents. At Alexandria in 389, Bishop Theophilus of Alexandria personally directed the destruction of the temple to the god Serapis, reputedly the largest place of worship in the known world. The statue of the god was chopped up and burned, its head being carried through the town for public ridicule. The temple precinct, or Serapeum, also housed a scientific research institute (a "Museum" named after the nine Muses) and the famous Library of Alexandria - two of the greatest academic buildings in human history. Both buildings were loathed by Christians, who hated scientific research and secular knowledge as much as they hated other people's places of worship. Both Museums and Library were destroyed around this time, probably in the same violent incident in which the bishop destroyed the temple. The destruction of the Serapeum by Patriarch Theophilus was a critical event in the history of persecution of ancient Paganism.Gods were created not out of "stupidity" or "absence of a sense of reality" but to destroy and turn tribes/factions/people against one another. Even temples that Jesus, (Esu, Emmanual, Ben, Josh....whatever you want to call him...LOL), himself had visited, such as the Æskelepium in Jerusalem, were replaced by Christian churches. So, to say that these are all imaginary fairy tales you have to ask yourself two things. 1.) Why and 2.) Why. And not because of delusional mad men, schizophrenics in straw huts or Oracles in Methane Caves who were writing "prophecy" out of total mental misconstructions. It's who have destroyed, improperly translated and tampered with these writings who are the culprits. Most of the Bible, yes, is made up. It was cannonized intentionally by Jewish Councilmen an Anti-Popes as a straw man institution intentionally to be inevitably destroyed. Much like the Smithsonian Museum and their cover ups. If something is discovered that doesn't fit their model/timeline of History, they either destroy it or archive and hide it. Much like the Nazi's did to art, music, literature and relics that were unfavorable and went against their ideologies. Are the ridiculous fables dangerous? No. Secular Jews and Secular Atheists, (Not to be confused with 'Modern Atheists) who have adopted their mentality are. Which brings us to the KABALLAH, and the QU'RAN (Which Muhammad altered to justify his crimes.).

Contrary to Popular belief, The United States of America was not founded by Christians. It was Established by Free Masons. Our Governement operates under the influence of Sufism. And not just in the United States but the Kabbalistic Islamic influence on other Westernized Countries that Muhammad and his army at one time occupied. From an article written by Stephen Scwartz who was a Jewish Convert to Islam "It has been published in a variety of media, including The Wall Street Journal. Schwartz wrote in article in the Huffington Post, “Islamic Sufism and Jewish Kabbalah: Shining a Light on Their Hidden History,” where according to him, "Islamic Sufism and Jewish Kabbalah -- that are so close to one another that the presumption of mutual influence is inescapable'.” If you're not familiar with that, look it up. Centuries after Muhammeds death, “Eastern mystics,” with whom the Knights Templar came into contact during the Crusades, is a reference to the Asiatic Brethren of the tenth century, who despite their outward allegiance to Islam, were highly regarded by Kabbalists over the centuries. The Asiatic Brethren, like much of the occult in Islam, derived their influenced from the so-called Sabians of Harran in southeastern Turkey, who preserved the traditions of Hermeticism and Neoplatonism. The ideas of the Brethren of Sincerity reflected elements of Pythagorean, Neoplatonic and Magian traditions, which they attributed to a common origin, with Jewish roots. ----Perhaps this thread should have been entitled :"Understanding Hitler"?---- LOL

I'm going to leave it here until a discussion starts. So, no. It's not the fables themselves that are dangerous, it's the ones who both control, suppress and have destroyed/altered a lot of History as well as mistranslated it intentionally, again, as I've said to intentionally collapse. Religious is as dangerous to those who follow it as it is to society. And Religion isn't a set of beliefs. It's a lever of control used by almost every Government and Regime around the World.

Even as an Anti-Theist/Anti-Diest/Pantheist I am not afraid to immerse myself in theology, learn about it, the etymology of archaic languages and the origins of parables and what most call myths. There are so many few that either are of faith who do not ardently study it as well as people who are opposed to it who have probably never picked up a "Holy Book" and studied them before either totally embracing them or mocking them.

M Tragedy666
11-27-2015, 02:12 PM
Is religion dangerous? "Yes" (or a very strong) "It has every opportunity to be dangerous and it CAN BE". As far as people who pervert or misinterpret it, you don't even have to misinterpret much of it. Yes, there are metaphors, but much of it is transparent and nefarious all by itself.

I highly recommend a book by evolutionary geneticist Jerry Coyne called, "Faith V.S. Fact: Why Science and Religion are Incompatible". It was released last May, and I'm already halfway through reading it a second time, it was just that good. Unlike other atheist's books arguing that there is no weight in theistic and deistic arguments (such as Dawkins' God Delusion), Coyne has a refreshing take. Instead of attacking any of the old philosophical arguments in favor of a god(s) (such as cosmological constants) the book just strongly shows the difference in methodology and resulting conclusions.

But enough of a book plug. I'll argue ALL "faith" or magical thinking of any kind is dangerous. The ONLY known way to adjudicate truth is through the various scientific methods. Observation, hypothesis, test, repeat. Many children die each year because parents neglect to give them medicine. This is always the result of some sort of specious and unwarranted "belief". It doesn't end at religion. Homeopathy, psychics, ghosts, paranormal, etc.. It's all hogwash. No evidence for any of it. In fact, it's kind of an oxymoron because if there were evidence for the supernatural, it would no longer be supernatural and would fall into the "natural", so it doesn't even make any sense.

Delusional wishful thinking about gods, ghosts, angels, and devils serve nothing but to induce fear into the mindless masses. Poor education contributes to this. It's no coincidence that the elite scientists of the world are all atheists. There is a strong correlation with an increase in atheism the higher up in education.

I think it's obvious how magical thinking of any kind can be very dangerous. When that magical thinking is accommodated by large numbers in a congregation, you have a religion. These people are manipulated to suite the needs and deeds of their pastors or whatever the will is of the guy in charge and they are reading fantasy as reality.

Religion was invented to control the masses, to serve as an explanation for events that were not understood by primitive people, and an attempt at morality, which I must say failed miserably in nearly all faiths. Janism is one example of an innocuous religion, but it's still spurious.

Golden Eel
11-27-2015, 04:58 PM
Yes.

Zimscum
11-28-2015, 12:11 AM
Hey thanks for copy and pasting MY fucking thread bitch.
Zimscum is better than you. :P

Shangri-LIE
11-28-2015, 12:52 AM
Hey thanks for copy and pasting MY fucking thread bitch.
Zimscum is better than you. :P

Who copied and pasted your thread? LOL

TMC
12-01-2015, 12:25 PM
That's a rather hard question.
Reading any of the three major religion's "holy" books, you'll find a lot of misogyny, hate, genocide, murder, rape, acceptance for slavery etc.
At the same time there are many modern versions of those religions, especially Christianity, that take most of such passages as metaphors while whatever they think is acceptable, is true.
So it seems that religious people are either dangerous extremists, fundamentalists and bigots or liberal, hypocritical cherry pickers.
Now, to answer the question: the first group is in fact dangerous, while the second one is just laughable, but it's their problem since they don't hurt anyone in the name of their beliefs.

M Tragedy666
12-03-2015, 04:16 PM
^^ Excellent analysis, TMC! I think you succinctly explained all three variations and the obvious conclusion is that religion needs to die. There is no reason for fantasy and magical thinking and it only leads to nefarious behavior at worst, or delusional behavior at best. There is no need for any of it. Reality is beautiful enough, we don't need to imagine fairies in the forest. Most all religions have basically been disproven anyway. You can't prove anything to 100%, but provisionally, I think it's clear that all of these religions are indeed wrong. And don't get me started on pseudoscience homeopathy, psychics, ESP, UFO enthusiasts, demon possession, astrology, and talking to the dead. Con artists, delusional, and daft -- all of them. You don't need spirituality. There are other ways to find "meaning" in your life in spite of realizing we are all evolved naked apes.

Shangri-LIE
12-03-2015, 06:49 PM
Prepare for a mind bender tomorrow. No, again, not proving or disproving anything. I was just waiting on replies. Thanks. -Not-Shangri-LIE

M Tragedy666
12-03-2015, 08:41 PM
I wrote a rather long caveat to my above post that was accidentally deleted before it saved. It upset me, and I don't know if I have the energy to try and re-write it. But, it sucks. Maybe I too will return tomorrow.

Shangri-LIE
12-04-2015, 01:10 AM
I wrote a rather long caveat to my above post that was accidentally deleted before it saved. It upset me, and I don't know if I have the energy to try and re-write it. But, it sucks. Maybe I too will return tomorrow.

Here in a bit, I am going to write out some stuff just in good fun. About Spirituality and Religion among some other things. I love Science but I love fucking with the naturalist people who hate and reject philosophy which without that we wouldn't have any sciences, but I digress. It's also just a Marilyn Manson message board. I'm actually going to be real, which I have been more and more, so this thread might turn into....quite something after a while. The first post was a set up though. You have to start somewhere, I guess. lol

Shangri-LIE
12-04-2015, 06:54 AM
I'm not going to write an essay. But rather make some statements in the voices, to be read in, of popular figures and see where the discussion goes. I was baking some cookies the other day, no really I was, and was thinking about cosmic inflation. Watching the heat waves in my oven and the dough expanding. They weren't growing further AWAY from each other, but closer together. Towards the CENTER of the tray. Anyway.

Religion CAN be dangerous. Drug use and drinking is dangerous. Driving a car is dangerous. Flying is dangerous. Sex can be dangerous. It's ALL who's "behind the wheel". And these are all things that we all do, for the most part, everyday. Religion is important. It is a DRIVER of economic growth and always has been. People originally developed the idea of “supernatural monitors” - a fear of being punished by an omniscient watcher - at a time when secular institutions either didn’t exist, or might as well not have. I won't even go into "War Profiteering" that is perhaps the most lucrative business that there is. And what is the cause of most wars? Religion! Moving on. However, a lot of people seem to want to move towards an autonomous, secular, anarchist Utopia devoid of God(s). Look how that worked out for The Republic of Minerva, The People of Forlandia, Drop City, Silkville and Soul City! LOL! Perhaps if we all unanimously strum "Imagine" on our guitars we can create a new acoustic waves to change the world for the better! But we're all just naturally occurring, lumbering oddities who have no real purpose in the universe, and matter has no memory......or does it? The fuck really going on here?

*Eddie Griffin* - *Sniff - *Gives the ni-gger eye *Lights a cigarette and takes a sip out of my Gin n Juice. Aight. Now, they say that there is this fourth dimension. And we're some sort of motherfuckin' mirage or computer Matrix type of thing. Let me get this straight. So, our brains send out and receive signals like a black box "dweep dweep dweep" and we're getting ancient echoes back. You meaning to tell me that we aint receiving a motherfucking translation from a source, or our main power source? Maybe, just maybe something is trying to track us or clue us in or is playing hide and go seek at a subatomic level? Then again...you can't identify something that aint supposed to be there in the first fuckin place that's never been seen and you also meaning to tell me that we "naked apes" are smarter that a motherfuckin Cosmic Computer Programmer Hacker?!?!? *Check your limitations Materialists*

*Michio Kaku* - We are a type 0 Civilization and we.literally.know.nothing. ...or very little. It was Lawrence M. Krauss who said. “If we wish to draw philosophical conclusions about our own existence, our significance, and the significance of the universe itself, our conclusions should be based on empirical knowledge. A truly open mind means forcing our imaginations to conform to the evidence of reality, and not vice versa, whether or not we like the implications.”. Of course we can't and shouldn't use Religion to disprove or deny Scientific fact nor should Science seek to prove a mysterious anthropomorphic God or Gods. But both sides have one thing in common. Imagination. It was also said by Archaeologist Steven Mithen “The critical step in the evolution of the modern mind was the switch from a mind designed like a Swiss army knife to one with cognitive fluidity, from a specialized to a generalized type of mentality. This enabled people to design complex tools, to create art and believe in religious ideologies. Moreover, the potential for other types of thought which are critical to the modern world can be laid at the door of cognitive fluidity.”. And now.we.want.to.copy.the personality traits of individual Humans at HUMAI to resurrect the dead and reanimate them as if they never died and never lost any "data". Therefore, as my Brother Eddie Griffin just said, yes. We are living in a very VAST` simulation that we don't have the tools yet to fully comprehend let alone control. Now. Most will say that "Consciousness being an emergent property or that it arises from brain". Well, the stars did die for us and not Jesus. But we are still nonetheless made out of stardust. Just as Christians say they are part of the body of Christ. Which brings up an interesting question. If we are composed of cosmic "debris" with no real idea where it came from, even though there are some very well educated guesses that change every decade or so, who is to say that our consciousness still doesn't resonate with the.....THE UNIVERSE! ...And not just thinking to ourselves. Two atoms 1 billion light years away have a binary correlation with one another. When one "wiggles" so does the other. And we are their brothers and sisters! We are their children! Yes, we are descendants of the 'Heavens"! All of this Matter from nothing yet it interacts with one another, it communicates, it remembers, it can escape into other multiverses! Imagine the consciousness as the same "metaphysical glue" as Quark-Gluon Plasma only we don't know what it is yet nor a way to detect it as, said, we really don't know what a soul is if we have them. But we do know what Quark Gluon Plasma is. And what is escapes from our bodies when we die? HEAT! ENERGY! All right back into the atmosphere. An atmosphere where we can only see/detect 10% of all that is there.

*James Spader* - We've always existed. Just not in our current form. Hence we have no memories prior to our birth, and we shouldn't. It's too painful. But we know from what substances we are consisted of. A quote from one of my TV shows. "In Mexico, there are these fish that have colonized the freshwater caves along Sierra del Abra.They were lost. They found themselves living in complete darkness. But they didn't die. Instead, they thrived. They adapted. They lost their pigmentation, their sight, eventually even their eyes. With survival, they became hideous. I've rarely thought about what I once was. But I wonder if a ray of light were to make it into the cave, would I be able to see it? Or feel it? Would I gravitate to its warmth? And if I did, would I become less hideous?". Religion is just that darkness. That blindfold over the truth. And most sciences growing out of the Dark Ages are still young, developing, still partially adjusting to that "light" minds. We create the measurements and tools for laws, much like our superstitious ancestors did with drawing on tablets, caves and attributing human, physical traits to things they couldn't explain that became God(s)


Religion IS and CAN be dangerous. So can some Sciences. It is a necessary evil as it, even though causes horrible amounts or persecution and casualties, holds societies together. Even in Secular countries. Repressive Governments always thrive better when their citizens, even though oppressed and deluded, are governed by the ....."Supernatural Monitors" that I've mentioned. On the other hand, all in all, we're all still Humans. And Humans, even with or without Deities....are going to self destruct somehow....at some point.

M Tragedy666
12-04-2015, 01:10 PM
I haven't read your epic post above this one yet, but I just wanted to make a quick comment about something you said in your last post on page 1. You said something along the lines of "...the naturalist people who hate philosophy, but the irony is that science wouldn't exist without philosophy". That's like saying science wouldn't have existed without religion. It's total b.s. It's easy to show that the roots of science began in religion. Priests and theologian's started doing science. Newton was religious. And Islam is actually responsible for the creation of Algebra and many early scientific endeavors. The fact is, pre-Darwin, religion provided the only (pseudo)answer to the cosmos for people. EVERYONE just about would have been religious. And the atheists of the time probably didn't have much reason to be atheists. Sure, they could see holes in belief without evidence, but they were still virtually clueless. I think it's a false argument. "If it wasn't for religion, science would never have come about" is similar if not the same to "If it wasn't for philosophy, science would never have come about". I think we would have gotten there..

Also, I happen to enjoy some philosophy. I've read Nietzsche and some Hume. I used to be much more into philosophy until I discovered it is largely what Dr. Neil Degrasse Tyson calls "scientists without a lab". Can you really GAIN knowledge from philosophy? I think not. Philosophy is important and it can teach you how to think more critically and sort through logical arguments, but it can't tell you whether something is true or not. It's speculation and relative. This should not be thought as a bad thing. Moral philosophy has shed much light on how we view the world. It doesn't necessarily mean there are concrete answers. The only absolute answers might come from mathematics. But science gives provisional truths that, in the words of Stephen Jay Gould, it is "enough evidence that you would be perverse to deny it". It is, in many cases, just as good as fact. Theory of germ disease, for example, that infectious pathogens cause disease, not mystical demons and "bad thinking".

I'll respond to your new epic post later. Looking forward to it!

M Tragedy666
12-04-2015, 03:40 PM
Oh boy... Let's get started...

How do you define danger? A surgical operation intended to save one's life is dangerous and could kill the individual. But doing nothing will almost certainly kill the person. "Danger" is a relative term in the spectrum of over all wellbeing. Drugs are dangerous...but only relatively. Most drugs will kill you if you take copious amounts. At the right dosage, they can save you and increase your lifespan. Driving a car is dangerous. Human error is always a possibility at any moment and you could wind up dead in an accident. But we collectively choose to drive because we feel the odds are in our favor and there are clear benefits to driving, like getting to your destination quickly. Worded in the way I've just written it, driving might sound kind of dumb. Isn't your life more important than getting somewhere fast? It certainly increases the happiness of the life we do have though. If you had to walk to every appointment and meeting, you really wouldn't have much time for any fun or luxury. You'd always be trying to get somewhere. So you have a lot of quasi-saved up time since you get to your destination rapidly. Many people think it's worth it. Cars are also not intended to be used for death unlike guns. So, I can see why guns should be outlawed, and it's a false argument to throw in cars in that mix. Guns have no other intention but to make something dead.


I realize that religion is a driver of great profits and a factor for economic growth, but I challenge your statement that religion is important. Could we not replace something so odious as religion with something better? I fucking hate wars and the fact that most wars are religiously motivated is not a point in religion's favor. Please don't bring up the wars conducted by atheists like Stalin or Hitler (who was actually Catholic). It's a tired argument and does not reflect their atheism. Hitchens, Harris, Dennet, and Dawkins have all went over this argument numerous times and with great perspicuous insight. I understand that religion is an important issue in today's world and there is much discussion over it. But I strongly feel that religion is of no value or importance at the end of the day. No fairy tale matters, it only matters when people believe it, because then you have to worry about such people.


You mention an "autonomous, secular, anarchistic Utopia". I don't think anarchy has anything to do with the type of world many of us atheists desire.


My response to Eddie Griffin: I think I understand what you are trying to say. Correct me if I'm wrong, but in a nutshell you are saying that we don't "know" anything and who are we pompous, pretentious naked apes thinking we've figured something out. There are so many mysteries in the universe! We could be wrong about everything! Different dimensions, subatomic particles that seem to pop in and out of existence and also exist in over two places at once! What the FUCK is up with that crazy shiiit?! Maybe those particles on a subatomic level is trying to contact us and tell us something. Maybe they are God(s). If there is a "Cosmic Computer Hacker" i.e. "God", you mean to tell me that we dumb atheist materialists are smarter than he/she/it?


I'll be the first to admit we don't even know a fraction of what is out there. But that certainly isn't a reason to make up answers. It's just a god of the gaps argument. And is it really plausible that these particles are trying to communicate with us? It's possible....you can't rule anything out to a 100%, but I find it enormously unlikely. We are bound by the laws of physics, our genes, our pre-determined behaviors. We truly are the "naked ape". If there is some God or force out there, they surely didn't create us. We know beyond reasonable doubt that we are evolved creatures, and that it happened naturally. Catholics try to superimpose "God" in the process, but it's a dubious claim. It's not how biologists see it. It truly is NATURAL selection. There could have been a god responsible for abiogenesis. I find that unlikely too, but even if it were true, it still doesn't change that evolution happened and that we are naked apes. If there is a God or brain or power out there at all that is personal and theistic, well, again, we are bound by the tools HE gave us in that case and to the best of our rationality and reasoning powers, it certainly looks like there is nothing out there. Take that issue up with God. The best we can do with the tools available make it look like there is Nothing.


The first part of your Michio Kaku response seems to indicate something like "if we are evolved organisms never meant to understand the complexity of the universe, quantum physics, etc.. then why should we trust our materialist brains at all? After all, it's OUR imagination. What is reality, is it subjective to our individual existence, etc..." It's another specious argument because although we may in fact be living in some sort of Matrix alien computer program, and although our imaginations run wild and we can come up with all sorts of false information, the fact is, it works. Cars run, planes fly, this computer I'm typing on is operating. So we can say conclusively that there is something right about what we are doing. We're not just intellectually drifting into an abyss of imagination. We must have evolved with a degree of rationality that really is OBJECTIVELY true. Otherwise we wouldn't have gotten anywhere and no one would give a damn about science. We care about it because it does indeed work and we can (provisionally) *prove* things.


Regarding the second part of the Machio Kaku response, yes all evidence suggests that our consciousness is indeed a product of the brain. You can even manipulate consciousness within the brain, which suggests that no, it does not exist in the vacuum of the cosmos. Our consciousness lives and dies with us. There is a slight stochastic factor with the firing of neurons in the brain. The best neuroscientists are now telling us that Determinism is indeed true, there is no freewill, and we can even manipulate the thoughts of test subjects and predict what they are going to do several seconds before they do it. Technology will only improve this ability and stretch it to far longer lengths, I predict.


Also, you mention that science has some "...educated guesses that change every decade or so". Is this intended to denigrate the methodologies of science? It seems like a subtle jab at science for changing it's mind back and forth throughout the years. This is not a weakness of science. As better technology becomes available and more testing is done, we shape and sculpt our worldview. Science is a great tool for this. We cut the fat, and get closer and closer to the truth. Something that religion can never do. We don't know anything new about god now than we did 500 years ago. If I misunderstood your intention by that sentence, I apologize. But I want to make it clear for all readers that might think, "oh, we can't trust science. It's wishy washy and constantly changing". This is indeed the strength of science that it is willing to change it's mind given new facts and information--something religion will not do.


James Spader misunderstands how evolution works. No, the individual fish would not see the light (although, I'm also aware you are making a metaphor) Evolution happens in populations over time, not in the individual. The fish who has vestigial eyes or no eyes, would never adapt or grow new parts in it's lifetime.


Yes, science is still young, but you are doing a great injustice by comparing it to superstitious thinking of the ancient mythologies. I could not disagree with you more. It's a horrible misrepresentation of science. Science isn't random superstition and pulling "theories" out of their asses on a drunken night with buddies. There is an ABUNDANCE of evidence for a hypothesis to graduate to the level of theory or law. Again, the tools and measurements you seem to be insulting work! They work very well. We know that 2 + 2 = 4. This isn't random guessing or speculation. There are some extrapolation in the sciences but whatever you do, do not compare that to idiotic inventions of gods that didn't exist.


Science is not evil nor good. People can do evil with science, like creating the hydrogen bomb. Science itself is just a highly successful process for accumulating knowledge. Science can inform us of better morality, but it cannot objectively be moral or immoral by nature. So, you'll say, "if science is neutral and it's the PEOPLE that can use it for good or corrupt it's methodologies, isn't religion the same? Isn't religion neutral and PEOPLE do good or bad with it?" No. Science makes absolutely no claims about how anyone should live or what to pray to. Religion does. Religion makes claims about the universe that are testable and most religions you can prove wrong. Religion makes claims about how to behave and about how God created the universe and what is true and false that are in fact falsifiable, and we've proved most religions wrong. The people that do "evil" with religion are generally not behaving out of the realm of what you could plausibly extrapolate from the context of the religious teachings. The Bible, for example makes all sorts of odious rules that Christians will say "you're taking it out of context, that's old testament, it was meant for the Canaanite's" It wasn't good for them, and it's not good for us. It's not outside the boundaries of what some interpretation of scripture could lead to


No, religions do not hold societies together as some kind of social glue. It tears them apart. It promotes a plethora of bad behavior and only serves to further separate us as a species, not unlike the stupidity of sexism, racism, etc.. In fact, many religions condone such sexism and racism. Call me when there is a female Catholic pope.


Humans don't have to self destruct. If we could all get along and be awakened by rationality instead of superstition and evidence instead of mindless faith, the world would be well on it's way to a much better place.

M Tragedy666
12-04-2015, 03:42 PM
Motherfucker! I took extra care in spacing out paragraphs. Why are they all together like that? Mods?

Shangri-LIE
12-04-2015, 05:08 PM
I couldn't agree with you more.

M Tragedy666
12-05-2015, 04:19 PM
I couldn't agree with you more.

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not... :/ But sorry if I went hard on you. I re-read what I wrote and it was intended as a dissection of what I believed your arguments to be, but it wasn't meant to sound hostile if that is how it came across. Also, if I misrepresented a point, I'd love for you to explain it with more clarity.


Much of my family are 6000 yr old Earthers who deny the Big Bang, evolution, quantum physics, radiometric dating....basically all of the sciences. Biology, geology, cosmology, and others. It's frustrating. They are Biblical Literalists. They (even the women) submit to misogyny, are against female rights like abortion, stem cell research, etc. etc.. They aren't dangerous. But I don't think anything good can come from this sort of apocalyptic thinking. They are end times Christians, thinking that the end of the world is near and Jesus is returning and they are going to float up to Heaven. It's not far from the Ken Ham, Kent Hovind, and Frank Turek ilk. You can't discuss facts with them. They've allowed their brains to rot because of religion, and frankly, I don't see how that is very far from the chaos we see in the world today. Again, their totally innocuous (except if you count their votes to overturn Roe Vs Wade, etc) but it's just sad and I see it as a form of mental illness. I see similarities to Heavens Gate cult. I was raised in this and believed it when I was young. But, fortunately, I discovered science and it changed my life for the better. Philosophy, too. When I first read Thus Spake Zarathustra in high school, Nietzsche really changed my life (and gave me a greater appreciation for the concepts in Antichrist Superstar)

FeedYourHead
12-05-2015, 05:17 PM
Delusions that get incorporated into public policy and that are used to justify mass murder are dangerous, yes.

M Tragedy666
12-05-2015, 05:35 PM
FeedYourHead, I agree. What you described is one of the worst possible outcomes when it's incorporated into public policy. But it doesn't make it much less dangerous even if it isn't embraced by government. Crazy idea's, though abandoned by the majority and by the government, can still do much damage and be very dangerous, as we've seen in recent word events.

Shangri-LIE
12-07-2015, 03:55 PM
No, I wasn't being sarcastic. I was just having fun in my "Celebrity Voice' ....whatever in the Hell it was. LOL - And FeedYourHead is absolutely right. I honestly thought that it would bring about more of a chuckle. This isn't a "Science Forum" it's a "Philosophy and Arts Forum". If I were to have made a video doing impressions of those three guys, it probably would have actually come across as more Comedic. I mean, who in the fuck does that anyway and expects to be taken seriously? Man, you have to be able to escape, either externally or introspectively, from reality sometimes.

But if we want to go "There" we will.

1.) Like I said, religion CAN be dangerous. But I don't care if someone prays for me, or prays for something, or prays for other people or gives an invocation before a ceremony or proceeding. Everyone has their own subjective experience on some level. No matter how rational they believe themselves to be. That and that Atheists claim that eradicating Religion will somehow bring about more peaceful societies. I refuse to label myself as anything other than a Pantheist. We may disagree on what it is, but I still encourage you to research it if you wish. That and "Everybody is Wrong about God". Don't let the title deceive you into thinking that it's making a case for "God". LOL - But back to the "An Atheist World would be more Peaceful". Only there is a fallacy to that claim. Estonia, Latvia, North Korea for example. Stalin and Mao's Regimes just to name a couple of examples. There is a long History of mass murder on both the Theistic and Atheistic sides. The belief in an Anthropomorphic God is VERY EASY to debunk and call irrational. What about the French Revolution and also the persecution, rape and murderers by Russian Communists in the Soviet Union as as well as other parts of Europe/Eurasia? Not to mention this new wave of "Superior" Scientifically Intolerant if not racist Generation of Atheists who are....as equally Scientifically Racist and intolerant and Theists are Theologically Racist and intolerant. I'm not condemning Atheism. I am just stating that the World will not be better with or without it. When it comes to it being incorporated into policies and law/codes of conduct, then yes, yes it can be very dangerous. Other than that....No.

As far as "Putting God Behind" to evolve as Humans. Well, yes. It would be a good thing to see people stop either praising or cowering at the feet of Ancient Sky Wardens. At the same time. Science cannot study non physical or non empirical realities as they are outside its purview and the scientific method cannot be applied to "measuring" religion, morality and other realities which are not empirical. *Again - Check out "Everybody is Wrong about God" by James A. Lindsay. Again, it's not making a case for "God'. This is a debate that is both pointless and never going to fully go away, but as Nikola Tesla said "The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the previous centuries of its existence.". Back to subjective reality. As far as consciousness goes, in a Quantum Double Slit Experiment as published in "Physics Essays" which is a peer reviewed journal. Two things stand out. 1.) "Observation not only disturbs what has to be measured, they produce it. We compel the electron to assume a definite position. We ourselves produce the results of the measurement.” and 2.) “A fundamental conclusion of the new physics also acknowledges that the observer creates the reality. As observers, we are personally involved with the creation of our own reality. Physicists are being forced to admit that the universe is a “mental” construction.". Pioneering physicist Sir James Jeans wrote “The stream of knowledge is heading toward a non-mechanical reality; the universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine. Mind no longer appears to be an accidental intruder into the realm of matter, we ought rather hail it as the creator and governor of the realm of matter. Get over it, and accept the inarguable conclusion. The universe is immaterial-mental and spiritual.”. And "The Hard Problem" about Consciousness which has been struggled with for .........EVER will probably never be figured out even if some know it all comes in and says that "Consciousness is just emergent from the physical brain.". If people who have spent almost half of a century at the most trying to figure out/solve "The Hard Problem", then some random commentator surely isn't going to. LOL

A caveman would think a radio makes music, versus just acting a conduit for sounds modulated into radio waves. A lot of these "Superior Minds" are, quite figuratively, just as much Cavemen as People who believe in Ancient Fairy Tales.

M Tragedy666
12-07-2015, 10:38 PM
I knew there was a strong comedic level to what you were trying to say which is precisely why you invoked or wished for it to be read with certain celebrity voices and accents. But, I didn't think that meant that I should take it any less serious. Often times great educators use comedy to identify a common ground (especially on touchy subjects, such as religion) with the person they are communicating with. So, I figured you were trying to make light of a topic that easily causes arguments during family dinner. Duly noted, but I was still going to address it as if you weren't joking or using comedy at all.

I realize that this topic is categorized within "Philosophy and Arts", which by the way, are both very broad terms and can apply to many things. But it would be very hard to try and disclude science from a topic dealing with religion. Philosophy and art both happen to be intrinsically tied with science. Science should not be thought of as the enemy to art, dulling the imagination with boring "facts". Also, science strongly influences the progression of philosophy. They are counterparts. Philosophers are forced to change their thinking based on advances in science. Philosophy also inspires science, but I don't think science can "learn" anything from philosophy. Philosophy on the other had can learn a great deal from science.

Also, when you say you "...have to be able to escape, either externally or introspectively, from reality sometimes" (and I agree with you) but by your very logic, the exit door/delete button/escape possibility is always right at your finger tips if we all craft our own realities anyway. (Agree with that point too). So, in some sense, yes we are all living in an imaginary place, or at least an imaginary state of being. That doesn't stop objective "truths" from existing.

I didn't intend on being THIS nitpicky, but you are fun to dialogue with, so I'll take my time. On whether we should care if someone prays for us or not. There are different ways to look at this question. On one hand, you can interpret it as a "nice" gesture. "Awww, she cares for me, and I'm in her thoughts...thank you for the prayers" even though it's too late to hide that I don't believe in prayer, we good view it as a positive thing. It also could be seen as an offense. "You clearly think something is WRONG with me to the point where I am in NEED of your prayers and interaction from your god". In some ways, it's kind of insulting. It's like a backhanded compliment. "You look really good in that dress, it makes you look much thinner than you really are". That sort of thing. But I'll digress that point. I'm not so crazy and narcissistic to give fucks whether someone mention prayer.

Man..... I told you NOT to bring up Stalin, Mao, etc..!!!!! It's such a bogus argument. I would have thought you to be well versed in why they are bad examples. To paraphrase Nobel Prize winning physicist Steven Weinberg, "Good people will do good things, and evil people will do evil things. But for GOOD people to do EVIL things, it takes religion". Stalin may very have been an atheist. But it wasn't ATHEISM that drove his actions. He was a cruel dictator hungry for power. Many of these dictators demand worship of their people in spite of them being in so-called "atheistic countries". They end up demanding the people to worship them and treat them as gods. They become the new religion. The thing about atheism is, anyone can be one. It's NOT a religion or lifestyle or philosophy, it's a LACK of one. Anyone, smart or dumb, good or evil, short or tall can decide for themselves that there isn't sufficient evidence to grant belief in a god(s). Most all of us, despite whatever religion we may be, are also atheists with respect to Osiris, Horus, Set, Mythras, Vishnu, Dionysus, etc... There is no "philosophy" that comes with atheism. If you happen to be an atheist and are looking for some moral insight, I'd suggest Humanism and Secular Moral Philosophy. Many people behave badly in the name of their religion, and they believe they are doing the RIGHT thing and that they are acting how their god(s) want them to act. For those that behave badly because they feel that there is no god up there judging them, so they might as well run a muck and commit horrid acts, well, they aren't a very bright atheist. No educated and sane atheist would WANT to live in a Darwinian type of world. Survival of the fittest is not a good moral philosophy. Even though it is how we are here today, we probably should intelligently design our morals based object insights in science -- such as, if we wish for an example, to live in a more auspicious society, and one conducive to success, we can rather quickly see benefits of laws against murder and theft for example. More on that later. A Darwinian world would be a closer to a Republican world. The rich get richer and fuck the poor. Every man for himself. Dog eat Dog world. I will argue in favor of an atheistic, humanistic world. And I point you no further than Denmark and Sweden. Largely atheistic and fall much higher on the "successful society chart" that sociologists have plotted based on things like infant mortality, high crime rates, availability to medical treatment, income equality, etc.. USA scored lowest of all first world countries. I'll give references and provide videos upon request.

I think it's a fallacy to call this new "Generation of Atheists" racist, if you are referring to the Dawkins/Sam Harris camp. Criticizing a religion is NOT criticizing a race. If you can convert to it, it's not a race. Criticizing of a culture is also not racist. We can criticize Nazi Germany without saying we fucking hate Germans. It's a very different thing. If we say, "we fucking hate the oppression of women and the religion of Islam", that is not saying we hate brown people. We are talking about ideology here, not a people. So I see no comparison to theists in this regard. Theists will criticize other theists for having the wrong fantasy. Science is universal. Doesn't matter which part of the world you are in, like art and philosophy, it can bring people together. Religion only brings like-minded bigots together and segregates them from the rest of society, depending on their degree of extremity. I think it's only obvious that the world would indeed be a much better place if it was immune to irrational magical superstitious thinking that leads assholes to kill black cats around Halloween, that makes Catholics believe in Transubstantiation, that leads Muslims to think of women as second class citizens and that apostates should be killed. Or if you are certain branches of Christian, believe that you don't need cancer treatment, you can sprinkle Holy Water or have someone like Peter Popoff "bless" you and you can throw your pills away. Would the world be a better place if it were rid of all belief in fantasy? Absolutely. Without a doubt. No belief system should be enforced. Atheism is a lack of beliefs, and you can't FORCE someone not to believe in god either. But if they are a reasonable person and able of being persuaded by evidence, they should abandon their god willingly, not kicking and screaming.


You keep coming back to esoteric physics that are not even yet properly understood. I'm not trying to be shitty here, but serious question: Are you trying to somehow show that EVERYTHING we've come to know is some sort of guess or speculation and that there is no evidence for anything or against anything? I mean, that could be the case, but I find it highly dubious. I don't think it's ever going to change that the consistency of water is two parts hydrogen and 1 part oxygen. 2+2 will always = 4. The ONLY place that it doesn't equal 4 is again....strange, esoteric, waaay out there philosophy. But, as Christopher Hitchens often said, "extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidence.....and that which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence". I'm not going to comment on or speculate what strange phenomenon physicists discover. I'll leave it to them to explain to me. I'm not a physicist. And before you try and draw a comparison between that claim I've just made and the claims theists make about "FAITH" in their god, it is a very different meaning and vernacular of the word "faith". I don't have blind belief of which there is no evidence. I have faith my doctor generally knows what he is doing. He's a certified M.D. presumably he went to school for several years and learned a great deal about medicine and treatment. It's not senseless faith. That would be misconstruing the word. I also have "faith" that the lights will turn on when I flip the switch. But it's worked every other time, and if it doesn't, odds are it's a burnt out bulb or some electrical problem. I won't pray about it.


I hope you aren't painting me as "some know it all" on the internet. But I think you are focusing on the wrong question regarding consciousness. Only those blinded by religion and spiritual thinking imagine that there is some supernatural aspect of consciousness. We may not know exactly how consciousness came about or how it evolved, but that's almost certainly the case... Different animals display higher or lower levels of consciousness, and we happened to evolve very big brains. Our cousins and possible Australopithecus ancestors were probably highly conscious too. And a bit more so was Homo Habilis and Homo Erectus. I see nothing "spiritual" about consciousness. Unless of course you are using the word "spiritual" in a very different sense, much like Einstein and Stephen Hawking referred to "God" in their writings, they were both atheists, and used "God" in a very loose way, kind of a metaphor for the universe itself.

I was sure you made mention of morality again, though my second time reading through your comment, I couldn't seem to find it. I'll mention it only briefly in case. Morality too does not seem like anything that hard to explain. In fact, in only truly makes sense in light of evolution. We see primitive "moral" behavior in other species as well. There is a great video you can find on youtube, and Michael Shermer wrote in great detail about it, about an experiment with monkeys and they, like all of us apes have favorite treats. I think it was grapes that they liked. It's sweet to them. Their "chocolate" if you will. Well, when you give the one monkey a grape and the other gets some boring vegetation repeatedly after they witnessed each other perform the same task, the one that was denied the treat gets pissed! He starts behaving badly and throws stuff at the scientist conducting the experience. This can be interpreted as a comprehension of fair play. The monkey knew he was wronged. I could go on, but altruism has clearly also evolved. See a great video by Dawkins on The Prisoners Dilemma. These are fundamental steps in the direction of our advanced concept of morality. Sam Harris argued in is fabulous "The Moral Landscape" that there can indeed be an "objective morality" in spite of there being no god. Even if he is wrong, science can and has informed us further on what is or is not moral. Even if there is no objective morality, we can all reach and strive for the same "objective" in light of understanding and education.

Shangri-LIE
12-08-2015, 04:25 AM
Yeah. You're right about that. But what I also brought up, not just here as I have observed other places as well, the mindset of "New Wave" Atheists, which to me is a form of fake liberalism and is a mentality that has nothing to do directly with Atheism itself who tend to reject Philosophy. I see a lot of vLoggers and Bloggers straight.up.mock it. And that's why I like to "Muck things the fuck up". That could just be what I am noticing though and the feedback that I've gotten back from a lot of other Atheists. Though I do believe in UFO's and swear to FUCK that I've seen Ghosts. LOL But that's for another conversation. - Anyway, that's why I decided to branch off from them and identify as a Pantheist. As for prayer, again. I agree with you on that. The thing is, a lot of Atheists can now just be as off putting and "intimidating" to speak to without encountering major pejorative discourses aimed at making someone feel stupid instead of asking other people why they think or feel that way or trying/attempting to educate them as theists who try to convert you can be. You know? As for who learns what from who... I just think that it's important to listen to one another. That and people often tend to believe in absolute truths. Or that Science is just "Science" and not realizing that there are multiple Sciences. Also that not all Scientists think the same or agree on the same subjects. While our current Sciences, most of them, provide the best explanations for the objective reality of the Natural Universe/World. It isn't always the "Ultimate Proof". Not to mention the fact that we're on the brink of discovering a 4th dimension to our Universe if not more. That and alternate/real Parallel Universes. The discovery that the Big Bang isn't quite what we thought it was. The discovery of twelve concentric rings of radiation "behind it" etc... It's an imprint, a mirage. Or are we in a Black Hole as some suggest? The stances on it are ever changing. Now, these things are not proven but there is a lot of good "faith" to know that these other dimensions are there. Just like with the Higgs Boson that took how many decades to prove? We knew it was there the whole time. Not to discredit any legitimate Science. We learn new things all of the time. At the same time old theories and laws have been challenged and replaced. Like I've said, even Spooky Action at a Distance was just proven. Einstein HATED Quantum Entanglement. I just think that a lot of people now just want to be right and are full of hubris and who are also committing intellectual suicide in a sense by not allowing for other ideas to influence them or be open to being wrong about something even to the tiniest degree. And I realize that "Islam" is not a race. Come on. But I emphasized more on intolerance than racism. I subscribe to a TON of Channels on Youtube/Pages/Blogs/Groups and even know of some people, both Black Atheists, Asian Atheists, White Atheists (Which most people for some reason seem to think that white people dominate that lol), that use racial slurs to discredit someones argument. Now, that's a minority of people that I've personally seen and heard but I can't stand the Dawkins/Harris Camp. Though I do enjoy their symposiums and literature. As for me thinking that you're a "Know it all". I don't know you. This is actually the first actual conversation we've had. As for me bringing up all of these esoteric "unproven" physics, I'm not really ASSERTING them, but much rather find a lot of curiosity in them and love discussions on "out there" ideas. I like to take everything into consideration even if it is probably just ridiculous, but seemingly very convincing conjecture

*On a quick side note - I've been suffering from a lot of cognitive blunting and neurological problems that both I am not taking care of properly and I have to own that, and also that just aren't being handled properly by the professionals that I entrust and pay thousands of dollars to just basically keep me having a pulse at this current time. Thank you, GABAergics! As for morality and why I brought up Mao and Stalin, as well as the French Crusades, is because Atheists are just as guilty of whitewashing their History as Christians are. And we still have Humanist/Secular or just straight up Communist fucking countries where a lot of sexual, physical and mental abuses occur even if it isn't murder or slaughtering in the name of something. As for Spirituality, I believe in Spirituality on a personal level and in relation to Nature. I know that I tend to come across as using a "God of the Gaps" argument, but it's not in the same way that Christian Scientists use it. There are just so many things that we don't know that interest me, which is why I recommended that book ....which was endorsed on Richard Dawkins Facebook page believe it or not. LOL - I'm much more interested in the subjective than the objective. It's more entertaining to me. I love exploring strange ideas and that which is often considered quackery. I love consciousness studies. I love NDE studies. Not ones where people write books about seeing Jesus or "Heaven is For Real". But I mean the studies at CIIS and the aWARE project at Horizon Research. People that are in Coma's or who have been pronounced clinically dead with no brain activity or any other vital signs for up to 45 minutes etc. There is still so much to be understood. So much that we don't know about even our own human brains, while we know A LOT, there are still some ever elusive pieces of the puzzle that drives these types of studies and research. Now that we have an open discussion going, maybe we can share opinions on certain theories outside of Religion? Even though that may require a whole new thread.

I could go on and on. But I'll leave it here and see where it goes. Take Care

Penance Sentence
12-11-2015, 01:42 PM
I think religion, organized or not, is dangerous. Everything is, so it's hard for me to give too involved of an answer.

I also think Atheists, even though they understand religion better than religious people generally do, do not tend to understand it all that much better. If an atheist thinks religion is holding the world back, then what about Science? All of those technological advancements won't bring the world to its knees? Humans are dangerous. Life is dangerous. Animals are dangerous. Water is, and trees too.

Most forget why they became an atheist to begin with, and their search for reason is just as delusional as a Schizophrenics.
"Everyone accepts their own lies" (paraphrase) - MM LOL

Penance Sentence
12-11-2015, 01:43 PM
Pretty much what you said, Shangs.
Just bumping to keep it alive, really. Good discussion

Shangri-LIE
12-12-2015, 03:26 AM
I think religion, organized or not, is dangerous. Everything is, so it's hard for me to give too involved of an answer.

I also think Atheists, even though they understand religion better than religious people generally do, do not tend to understand it all that much better. If an atheist thinks religion is holding the world back, then what about Science? All of those technological advancements won't bring the world to its knees? Humans are dangerous. Life is dangerous. Animals are dangerous. Water is, and trees too.

Most forget why they became an atheist to begin with, and their search for reason is just as delusional as a Schizophrenics.
"Everyone accepts their own lies" (paraphrase) - MM LOL

Exactly. The reason I create threads like this is to see what people no. We're all Apples and there one was a Garden in the Middle East where it was Lush, Peaceful and then shit got dark, man. But along came a slithering Light Bringer. The one who tricked our greatest Grandparents into consuming forbidden knowledge. Wait, no that never happened but anyway. Why I create these types of threads are for a multitude of reasons. 1.) It's an Arts and Philosophy section on a Marilyn Manson page, Mmkay? LOL 2.) This isn't a schooooooooooooool. This isn't a Lecture Hall. This is where we come to get our brains wet. 3.) It's to throw out as much straw to the men and women who encircle these parts like Buzzards just waiting to snipe a wounded Animal in a magical Forest that is fading away in to a scorched Dreamscape where the mirage of wonder is becoming more and more faint. Yes, buzzkills. People who believe in rationale but abandon imagination. Who abandon the very (fun)damentals of figuring things out. I like to see their opinions and counter arguments because I know EXACTLY where they came from. Most Atheists know that Religion is just bullshit on a surface level just based on the Observations of the Faithful they've encountered or have seen through some medium. That or just buy knowing that all of the Animals in the World can't fit on one boat. But have they ever really studied theology or philosophy? The same with Theists. How many have actually took an objective approach to rationally explaining their faith based on Science?

I know "all of the above", so to speak. Which is why I don't apply it. There is no point in it. I know all of the counter arguments. I know all of the buzzwords. I know that on both sides the same syllogisms are often just parroted and plagiarized recitations of what their author-authority demigods have already used. Science is dangerous because we totally embrace Newtonian Physics. Physics, that if you keep on top of current Scientific Journals, are flawed. Yes. I just said that. And it's not Pseudoscience either nor is it infotainment. People in the Physics and Astrophysics community are pretty nervous. Cosmologists are becoming uneasy at some of our recent discoveries and NO not floating cities and a hyped up Dyson Sphere scenario.

Religion. It is dangerous when used by the mentally handicapped or unstable. It is dangerous when it influences policy and law. Other than that, no. Either way, both sides have no idea exactly how fucking wrong they are ....and we're/we've been finding it out recently. Not totally, but ....I'll leave it at that.

M Tragedy666
12-14-2015, 03:54 AM
I think religion, organized or not, is dangerous. Everything is, so it's hard for me to give too involved of an answer.

I also think Atheists, even though they understand religion better than religious people generally do, do not tend to understand it all that much better. If an atheist thinks religion is holding the world back, then what about Science? All of those technological advancements won't bring the world to its knees? Humans are dangerous. Life is dangerous. Animals are dangerous. Water is, and trees too.

Most forget why they became an atheist to begin with, and their search for reason is just as delusional as a Schizophrenics.
"Everyone accepts their own lies" (paraphrase) - MM LOL


I think I already mentioned how religion holds people back. But as this thread is located under "philosophy", I suppose you have to be very careful and define your terms in a delicate way. I'll happily bring countless examples of why religion holds people back. And I don't mean just held back from scientific advancement, but even held back from enjoying themselves fully (I know, I know, it's all subjective.) Religion clearly represses people and preys on their guilt and shame humans for being...humans. We would culturally be much more sexual for example if it wasn't for the fuckin' Puritans. Instead, masturbation is a sinful taboo and frowned upon. This is a very unhealthy mental state to constantly fear the monster in the sky reading your thoughts and watching your behavior. It's driven me bat shit mad when I was a kid and still believed these things.

I could go on, but I have to ask a very important question: How is science holding the world back? You seemed to flip the question around and indicate that science too holds us back. On what basis do you make that claim? As far as I know, science is the ONLY reputable way for deciphering truth. Science deals with empirical evidence, double blind tests, doubt, scrutiny, etc.. It has a built in system that has been refined over the last 500 years or so that makes it very good at preventing human biases from getting anywhere. As soon as you publish something, you have thousands of others in the same field trying to prove you wrong. The easiest person to fool is yourself. So I ask you, what do you feel science is holding the world back from exactly? As far as I can tell it's the best and only reliable way of knowing anything. Any other method whether faith, dogma, authority, revelation, spiritual affirmation, even personal experience is unreliable. That is why scientists don't care about anecdotes. You could swear that you seen a ghost or whatever but it's no good. Your eyes play tricks on you, we are all impressionable to strong suggestion, etc, etc, etc.. There are a million ways that we are wrong about things we really believe are true. Most of our memories are false or distortions of an objective reality that actually occurred. It's weird. Again, science has methods to protect itself from such influence and suggestion.

Most of all, science WORKS. You can't deny the progress it's made. Otherwise this computer wouldn't work, and Rick and Morty wouldn't be on my television right now. Science has predictive power which is a strong indication that something is true. For example the beautiful Tiktaalik fossil that was discovered. That's an example of putting Darwin's theory on trial. Maybe he was right, maybe he was wrong. If he was right, we have certain things we should expect to see. If animals really did evolve, there should be evidence that we could check. So you find a time in the fossil record before any land animals appear. If you're going to find anything that can be considered evidence, it should be there. That is precisely where Neil Shubin discovered something that wasn't quite a fish and wasn't quite an amphibian. It had a neck, it's fins were slightly more developed to a point where it could crawl briefly, and there are a bunch of other interesting features this thing had if you want to look him up. But the point of that story was to show that you have a hypothesis that you can actually test. It didn't have to be that way. It could have turned out that that these creatures always existed at the same time as mammals, but it just doesn't look to be the case.

Technological advancements bringing the world to it's knees? Well, if you're arguing that science can be used in a bad way to bind us and kill us like the case with the atom bomb, yeah that's a possibility. But you also can't argue that it's increased the lifespan and wellbeing of virtually everyone. It's made life so much easier and better for us all. At any time bad people can do bad things with technology. But I'm just speculating what you meant. Please go into more detail. I'm curious how you might have put science and religion as equals or just as bad as one another. I think knowledge is power and the more we live in a true reality, or as close as one that we can perceive, the better all of our lives get.

Penance Sentence
12-14-2015, 10:58 AM
Good reply, Tragedy.
I will ask only one question, and it isn't one that necessarily needs a response: If one is critiquing the foundations of Science, or even just an aspect of Science (Scientific method e.g.), then why and how would they do so using Scientific methods and approaches?

Science is not a question. It is an answer. Art is a question, and that is what I just gave you.

Also, I agree with everything that you said.

M Tragedy666
12-14-2015, 09:08 PM
I think I understand what you mean. You're saying that if the scientific methods are used to acquire "science" as we know it, how on earth could we ever challenge it's findings using the same method we used to find it in the first place? Seems kind of like circular reasoning, or at best, a strong bias in scientists to continue what they are doing and not look at alternative options.

I get a strong sense that a lot of people today (not necessarily yourself) feel lost or hopeless about science. Like it's a bunch of know-it-alls that refuse to take alternatives in consideration. We shouldn't be afraid of science and think it's esoteric mumbo jumbo. It's pretty neat and we ought to embrace it as it gets us the closest to truth as possible.

That being said, until some other alternative comes along that proves to be successful and not hogwash scams to con people, science happens to just give us the best answers, medicines, etc.. And if something did come along in say, alternative medicine that did end up working and having some true beneficial results, it would instantly become a part of "science" as a whole. It wouldn't exist somewhere outside. It would become a part of the study and research of empiricism that the very best minds can give us. As far as I know, the so-called "scientific method" is the ONLY reputable way to adjudicate evidence because of the strict and almost insane levels of scrutiny and doubt that scientists have for one another. It's not, as many creationists think, a bunch of guys sitting around coming up with bullshit over some drinks to fuck with religion. It's well studied, statistically significant, provisional truths, the closest as we can tell to reality. Philosophy can benefit from science, and science too, might be inspired to ask new questions or to look at problems in a different way outside the box from philosophy, but science can't benefit directly from philosophy or religion which offers absolutely nothing in the realm of empiricism. If all we had was philosophy and religion, we'd have nothing. Philosophy grows as our perspective of reality grows, a scientific endeavor.

In this way, art is similar to philosophy. But obviously science asks questions too. It's in the business of asking questions and actually finding out answers, something that maybe can't be done with art and philosophy alone.

I think above all art is the most important thing, because it makes life worth living. Gadgets and technology wouldn't exist without dreams and initiative. All three work together for the greater good for all of us.

Cat
12-15-2015, 02:31 AM
Yes, religion is dangerous because it divide us instead of unite us!

Shangri-LIE
12-15-2015, 03:35 AM
Science isn't holding the world back. But Scientism can as it's always being reexamined and subject to change. Never clutch on to one explanation and leave out other possibilities. There are only a very few absolute certainties. And Science doesn't deal with absolutes. That's a 101 in any field of Scientific Studies. Again there are multiple "Sciences". I hate saying "Science has proven". Well 1.) Which field of Science? and 2.) Which field of Science? LOL - I'm not Anti-Science(s) nor am I Anti-Religion. As for Science not being a question, that's false. It does provide answers to many things, or the most probable explanation, and again there is a lot more still to be know. Scientists are in the business of questioning things. We aren't going to debate evolution as that's something that has actually been proven, and not through just fossil records. I'll spare the details as I am sure you know about the entire process. I'll elaborate later. But again, as I've said, not a lot but some of which what was and still is considered "Junk Science" is starting to gain more credibility and other long held "Absolutes", which again, Science doesn't deal with, have either come into question again. I made a silly thread in personal discussion about some "shapes" and "things" for a reason to be looked into. Not to be a troll or to be obnoxious/cryptic. But here are some links for you to peruse at your leisure. "Back then" they were engineers, astronomers, (not to be confused with astrologers), and Mathematicians.

Goodbye relativity. You can feel free to cross reference as well.

http://www.science20.com/hammock_physicist/whats_wrong_emc2
http://www.livescience.com/52912-atoms-entangled-at-room-temperature.html
http://www.sciencealert.com/researchers-have-proved-that-a-fundamental-quantum-physics-problem-really-is-unsolvable
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-11/uos-grc112015.php

Now, as far as Religion goes. (Typing with a pretty acute migraine by the way). And you never replied to me. I assume you think I was being ridiculous? But I brought up the very things that are in those articles and have many, many more on many, many other subjects. Anyway, I am against established Religions. But as I've said, I am very into studying theology and Gnostic "Gospels", which once delves into that stuff, you'll find out that they tell a VERY different story. Which is why they are considered dangerous. I'm opposed to Orthodox Religions I suppose you could say. But the reason Religion divides us as People is because we don't understand how it was constructed. The Bible itself when Canonized intentionally took certain writings and records, re-wrote them, altered and even destroyed passages etc... If People were to look at it that way, the real history of Ancient Judea and Sumeria where our primary Religions were developed, we'd have a very different idea of what we call "Faith" or "Spirituality". Even though a lot of Ancient Cultures didn't have the capacities or tools that we do now, they were very, to them, Scientifically minded. The Bible and the Qu'aran/Kaballah do not illustrate that. And there are numerous reasons for it that are purely Political. It's all in how you look at things. Let's talk about "Jesus Christ"? Shall we? Another real LOL - There's a very good reason why we can't find much if any Historical records of his existence. That wasn't "His" name and two the Roman Empire all but destroyed many relics, records, temples and libraries of their time that contradicted Judaism as I've mentioned. But in a lot of older texts, they weren't speaking of a "God in the Sky" or the "God" as we know as told in these books. No, they made "Him". Let's say there was a Nazarene who we do know existed named "Esu". He was Anti-Religion. He was Anti-Worship. He was a pretty dangerous person at the time for many reasons, one of which was that he kept the company of Women. He also instructed his "Disciples" not to Worship him. There's a lot more to it, and thanks to Roman fucking JEWS, they fucked everything up. So we can thank them for it. They were worse than the Nazi's were when it came to doing the exact same thing to Germany's History and Culture. You're Welcome. Edit - Also, whoever this person was, also denied that he was born of a Virgin and also spoke of his siblings, an incident where he killed one of his friends and also used to secretly teach evolution. He denied the books of Moses including Genesis, (Creationism). His symbol was the ichthys or a "Fish". He was speaking about how all things came about from the Heavens, literally meaning the sky into the sea. When he used/uses the word father, or anyone back then, a lot of the time they weren't using it literally as in "The man who created you" but rather "The reason for".

Penance Sentence
12-15-2015, 03:48 PM
Science is not holding the world back. It is too holding the world back. This thread is a joke. This thread is not a joke.
I agree with everything written above, actually. 110%

Penance Sentence
12-15-2015, 03:54 PM
For "All Of The Above" (interesting experiment, indeed):
By questioning everything within a given container, are we really questioning.
True Questions break someone's fucking brain into itty bitty pieces.
Half-questions, or answers, maintain systems.
Join me on your other thread, where I can continue without detracting (the irony, because of this thread LOL)

Penance Sentence
12-15-2015, 05:27 PM
Good replies, again.
The question should have been more keenly stated: Can Science ever admit to something better, and if so, to deny Science, how exactly could Scientific logic be used to question, by first assuming it irrelevant?

On another note, too much art = anarchy.
too much Science = Capitalism, most likely (you can argue Communism. A liberal told me, right?)
Oh, no, that was about psychopaths LOLOLOLOL

M Tragedy666
12-15-2015, 10:13 PM
First of, Penance Sentence, I'm really confused about what you mean with the "all of the above" and how/why this thread is ironic... Was this thread supposed to not been taken seriously? Science doesn't first assume ANYTHING is irrelevant. It's in the business of questioning everything. I don't see how too much art leads to anarchy. I certainly don't see how too much science leads to Capitalism. Many of my favorite scientists seem to favor a more socialistic approach and find Capitalism to be a very "survival of the fittest" mentality, which is a type of world we would NOT like to live in. Ironic because these are the same republicans that deny evolution, but when you try to teach them about evolution and how speciation occurs through a horrible process of death and suffering called natural selection and use phrases like "survival of the fittest" they won't accept that, but morally, they find it just fine. Many scientist that understand evolution realize how awful it is and think we should intelligently design our morals, not let the strongest win, no matter how absurd the his principals are.

Shangri-LIE I want to reply to you more fully when I have time. I haven't ignored your posts on purpose! I find some of what you said about Jesus really interesting and would like to discuss the historicity of "Jesus" with you. It's funny, because just earlier today, I was debating my father who blindly accepts his "dispensationalist" take on the Bible. It's literally true, word for word, evolution is a lie, 6000 year old earth, etc.. He accepts for granted that the Jesus as portrayed in The Bible was a factual character and the basis for all modern Christianity. I'm not a historian and I'm open to hear discussion on whether a "Jesus" existed. "Jesus", or "Joshua" as it may have been translated to, was a common name back then. And there was an abundance of apocalyptic street preachers inundating the public. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a homeless drifter Charles Manson type of guy who lived and was named Jesus/Joshua and had some crazy messages. I find it to be extreme arrogance and pretentiousness that Christians today think they "know" him. They haven't got a clue. If this guy even existed at all (The character of Jesus could very well have been a composite of many people), who he was has certainly gotten lost in translation due in part by what you said -- political leverage. Also the human memory sucks. Reality is not what you seem. Psychologists have done tests on the mind and memory. I saw a good documentary about this. There were a handful of test subjects who were told it was just going to be a hike in the woods, and they take them on a trail with some phony crashed UFO's planted around the scene. There was military or police tape that read something of the effect of "Do Not Cross" and copious Warning signs. It's funny how their imaginations came alive. 6 months later when asked to describe the event, some of them swore that they saw military guards with machine guns yelling things at them. The adrenaline and fear and anxiety was high. Point is, there was no military actors or fake guns or anything like that. This is 6 months after the fact. What happens when it's oral tradition and stories are passed by word of mouth over and over through generations of illiterate bronze age peasants by the campfires? It's easy to realize how most of the Bible stories got fabricated and/or embellished. You've surely played the game "telephone" as a kid. Give a paragraph long description of something to someone and pass it along one by one to twenty people and see what kind of goofy shit comes out on the other side.

I don't know if Jesus ever existed. It wouldn't surprise me, but there is no evidence. Josephus was likely a forgery and there were three other historians of the time that made literally a single mention of the word "Christos". There were at least 120 historians at the time, and you can't exactly use political swing as an excuse why they didn't report on Jesus. In fact, even if they have never come into contact with or heard about this "Jesus" character, they would have at least reported on the miracles or strange natural events that happened at the time of his supposed death such as the entire sky going black in the middle of the afternoon, dead saints rising from the dead, and catastrophic earth quakes. Why is none of this in the historians writings? Especially since some of them took good note on weather and any sort of chaotic events? The Bible and the Jesus story are very interesting works no doubt. Alan Dundes wrote a great short book called "Holy Writ As Oral Lit" that presents the thesis that Jesus is purely a character of folklore. I don't know. Historians tend to think Jesus existed, but based on what evidence? There certainly is no physical evidence. We don't have his body or anything owned by him. Is it merely the fact that Christianity EXISTS that historians blindly assume there really MUST have been a dude that served as inspiration for the faith i.e. Jesus? That would be some rather weak evidence... There are all sorts of ways small cults turn into religions. I have no evidence that Plato lived. I don't know if Mohammed lived. I refuse to blindly believe ANYTHING that there is no evidence for. I'll reserve my judgment.

I haven't heard anything about so-called "junk science" being given another look. I'll check out your links and try to comment on some of the other points you made a little later. The last thing I want to say is that I'm not even sure what "junk science" is? I'm assuming it's synonymous with "pseudo-science" like that of homeopathy or some of the bullshit Deepak Chopra celebrates. If that's not what it is, I have no idea and I'll look into it regardless. It reminds me of "junk dna". And speaking of junk dna, sorry to keep bringing up evolution, it's just something I'm currently studying so it's been on my mind a lot.


EDIT

Message me your freaking phone number, Shangs! Lol We'll have epic 4 hour long debates about the universe and other stupid shit. ha!

Penance Sentence
12-16-2015, 01:16 PM
Would Science assume Anti-Science irrelevant?
I'm genuinely curious, and ready to learn!

mr.svperstar13
12-18-2015, 11:09 PM
Based one the amount of wars and deaths incurred due to it, yes lol

Mercurius
12-19-2015, 02:28 PM
Everything serving as ersatz for identity or granting identity absolution is dangerous. As soon as questioned, existence itself is indirectly questioned.

Penance Sentence
12-20-2015, 02:28 AM
^ That.
And as existence is questioned, existence is something new (It doesn't exist).

Two Faced Egg (23)
02-24-2016, 11:45 PM
Gimme danger, little stranger
And I'll give you a piece
Gimme danger, little stranger
And I'll feel your disease

There's nothing in my dreams
Just some ugly memories
Kiss me like the ocean breeze

(hey!)

Now if you will be my lover
I will shiver insane
But if you can be my master
I will do anything

There's nothing left to life
But a pair glassy eyes
Raze my feelings one more time

(yeah!)

Find a little strip and find a little stranger
Yeah you're gonna feel my hand

Said:
I got a little angel, want a little danger
Honey you're gonna feel my hand
Swear you're gonna feel my hand
Swear you're gonna feel my hand

Gimme danger
Little stranger
Gimme danger
Little stranger
Gimme danger
Little stranger
Gimme danger
Little stranger
Gimme danger
Little stranger
Can you feel me?
You gotta feel me!
You gotta feel this
Little stranger...
Yes. It is dangerous. I wouldn't want it any other way. Strange entities giving prophets false leads? That haPpens more often.. even outside of what We all call "Religio"

Shangri-LIE
02-25-2016, 04:32 AM
Basically I made this thread to make fun of and dismiss both the Religious and Anti-Religious. There's a Social Media/Youtube War going on between just about everyone and everything including this. Me? I'm drinking coffee, smoking weed, taking psych meds and playing with a gun like a Child on a Swingset while everything burns down and the fallout covers and contaminates everything without.giving.a.single.fuck. ...and THAT'S wisdom. LOL

Twiggz
02-25-2016, 05:47 PM
Religion makes me angry...

Ever tried to save somebody's life...and be told you CAN'T because their religion FORBIDS it.

religion is fucking shite. we live in a world where people die every single day needlessly because they believe their "god" will not accept them if they allow doctors to intervene and help them survive...

Brainwashed by narrow minded people who i think are just afraid of the real world and like to surround themselves with make believe and use it as an excuse to make them feel important.

but thats just my opinion, and i can be a twat.

Shangri-LIE
02-26-2016, 04:20 AM
Religion makes me angry...

Ever tried to save somebody's life...and be told you CAN'T because their religion FORBIDS it.

religion is fucking shite. we live in a world where people die every single day needlessly because they believe their "god" will not accept them if they allow doctors to intervene and help them survive...

Brainwashed by narrow minded people who i think are just afraid of the real world and like to surround themselves with make believe and use it as an excuse to make them feel important.

but thats just my opinion, and i can be a twat.

Laws forbid things too, everywhere, even in Space. Doctors only keep you alive for a while but eventually kill you regardless of what your faith is. Life in general is discriminatory. It's selective. It's unfair to People. People who blame us for "Killing the Planet" should blame the Planet for allowing us to evolve. So "it" apparently is suicidal by Nature, no pun intended, (I don't think so anyway), and has said "Fuck it" essentially. So, it created a complex species that can feel its sorrow, malevolence, final contemplations along with glimpses of beauty here and there before utterly terrifying us, and giving us emotions so that we can all become histrionic, psychotic Monsters. The fact that what People call abominations aren't "God's" or even Religions fault, it's our own biochemistry and "Evolutionary Jackpot" curse that are to blame. And yes, I can be a twat as well. Only a Vietnamese whore with a hand grenade, razor blades and chards of glass with sprinkles of AIDS and Chlamydia and I'd like as many people to pay me to fuck them as I can. LOL - You're welcome.

Xenia
02-26-2016, 09:38 PM
Is Religion Dangerous?

Is it not possible for anything to be defined as dangerous, or at least possessing the potential to be so? Even a harmless seeming toothbrush would not appear to be dangerous, unless for instance, someone stabs you in the eye with one. Then you may begin to define a toothbrush as a dangerous utensil. Material objects, thoughts, perceptions, concepts or ideals are all prospective dangers, dependent on how they are used, by whom and under varying circumstances.

“Religion” is broadly defined by mankind, as well. “Organized Religion”, Spirituality, sects and cults, and even adherence to non-religion, some are perceived as dangerous to others, some are not. It may be even defined as dangerous simply because it is “safe” for some. As a man-made concept, based in essence, on diversely defined individual, as well as collective, interpretations and perceptions….I believe the real question is, is mankind dangerous?

Shangri-LIE
03-01-2016, 01:31 PM
Is Religion Dangerous?

Is it not possible for anything to be defined as dangerous, or at least possessing the potential to be so? Even a harmless seeming toothbrush would not appear to be dangerous, unless for instance, someone stabs you in the eye with one. Then you may begin to define a toothbrush as a dangerous utensil. Material objects, thoughts, perceptions, concepts or ideals are all prospective dangers, dependent on how they are used, by whom and under varying circumstances.

“Religion” is broadly defined by mankind, as well. “Organized Religion”, Spirituality, sects and cults, and even adherence to non-religion, some are perceived as dangerous to others, some are not. It may be even defined as dangerous simply because it is “safe” for some. As a man-made concept, based in essence, on diversely defined individual, as well as collective, interpretations and perceptions….I believe the real question is, is mankind dangerous?

Bingo. And that's something that I've touched on in this thread as well as in others.

M Tragedy666
03-01-2016, 07:09 PM
Basically I made this thread to make fun of and dismiss both the Religious and Anti-Religious. There's a Social Media/Youtube War going on between just about everyone and everything including this. Me? I'm drinking coffee, smoking weed, taking psych meds and playing with a gun like a Child on a Swingset while everything burns down and the fallout covers and contaminates everything without.giving.a.single.fuck. ...and THAT'S wisdom. LOL

I still don't understand why you are trying to make fun and dismiss the "anti-religious", as if people who hold that position are equally as absurd. I agree with you that you people sometimes take things too seriously and should chill and stop being so uptight in defense of their ideologies. But as a person who has a deep appreciation for philosophy, and I know you do, you shouldn't try and "dismiss" it. The point is that many hardcore religionists are responsible for a great deal of nefarious behavior. And there is a DIRECT correlation with level of religiosity and bad behavior. Not that that is something unheard of. In fact, it's to be expected. The crazier and more extreme in belief of the delusion, the more extreme the behavior will certainly follow. I'm talking about female genital mutilation in countries with 95% Islamic beliefs and the murder of "apostates" if they so much and try to challenge it. They had BETTER not come out as an atheist or choose not to wear their full body costumes and burkas or rape and death may be punishment. It's of course better here in more privileged countries, but it's still not innocuous. Many Republican candidates right now in the USA would like very much to make this country a theocracy. They want to strip women's rights, abortion, stem cell research, abolish gay marriage, ban pornography, make marijuana illegal....Hell, if they had their way completely, I'm sure they would but bans or restrictions on Marilyn Manson music! Religion is a dangerous cult with no evidence backing it. Period. Now, it's easy to continue on and say "well, with all the unknowns in the universe, we can't or shouldn't really comment on whether there is a god and not believing in one is just as silly as believing in one". Well, that's why most atheists are really just "atheistic agnostics". No one can prove anything's existence to 100% There could be a god(s). And an assortment of other mythological characters. But at the moment, I can see any good reason to believe in one, especially a personal, theistic one. And if you believe in a deistic one, that's just as good as acting as if there is none anyway because you can't exactly interact with this being or know it's desires or anything. You would just carry on as usual sheep in the eyes of this supreme intelligence. I think it's clear that the more rational position and the lesser of two evils is clearly to be a so-called "anti-theist".

Shangri-LIE
03-01-2016, 07:37 PM
I still don't understand why you are trying to make fun and dismiss the "anti-religious", as if people who hold that position are equally as absurd. I agree with you that you people sometimes take things too seriously and should chill and stop being so uptight in defense of their ideologies. But as a person who has a deep appreciation for philosophy, and I know you do, you shouldn't try and "dismiss" it. The point is that many hardcore religionists are responsible for a great deal of nefarious behavior. And there is a DIRECT correlation with level of religiosity and bad behavior. Not that that is something unheard of. In fact, it's to be expected. The crazier and more extreme in belief of the delusion, the more extreme the behavior will certainly follow. I'm talking about female genital mutilation in countries with 95% Islamic beliefs and the murder of "apostates" if they so much and try to challenge it. They had BETTER not come out as an atheist or choose not to wear their full body costumes and burkas or rape and death may be punishment. It's of course better here in more privileged countries, but it's still not innocuous. Many Republican candidates right now in the USA would like very much to make this country a theocracy. They want to strip women's rights, abortion, stem cell research, abolish gay marriage, ban pornography, make marijuana illegal....Hell, if they had their way completely, I'm sure they would but bans or restrictions on Marilyn Manson music! Religion is a dangerous cult with no evidence backing it. Period. Now, it's easy to continue on and say "well, with all the unknowns in the universe, we can't or shouldn't really comment on whether there is a god and not believing in one is just as silly as believing in one". Well, that's why most atheists are really just "atheistic agnostics". No one can prove anything's existence to 100% There could be a god(s). And an assortment of other mythological characters. But at the moment, I can see any good reason to believe in one, especially a personal, theistic one. And if you believe in a deistic one, that's just as good as acting as if there is none anyway because you can't exactly interact with this being or know it's desires or anything. You would just carry on as usual sheep in the eyes of this supreme intelligence. I think it's clear that the more rational position and the lesser of two evils is clearly to be a so-called "anti-theist".

I've already explained that to you outside of the forums as to why I post what I do and why on the forums and certain other places. So, I guess what I don't understand, after coming to an already, what appeared to be an understanding, what further explanation that you're looking for here in a thread such as this?

Penance Sentence
03-01-2016, 09:11 PM
Hahahahahahahahahahahaahahhahahahahahaahhahahahahh ahahahahhahahahahahahahhahahahahhahahahahahahahhah ahahaah

This shit is still going on.

Penance Sentence
03-01-2016, 09:22 PM
"The point is that many hardcore religionists are responsible for a great deal of nefarious behavior. And there is a DIRECT correlation with level of religiosity and bad behavior."

Trag, no offense, but that very pro-social quote makes you sound very much the same from a Christian. So, the only difference is that a Christian believes in a God; is your lack of belief in a God any valid reason to devote a chunk of your life to storming down Christians because the only difference from you and them is that they MAY have ONE delusional belief? As if, Humans have truly 100% logical belief sets, with no fallacies apparent whatsoever...

I like you, Trag, so don't take it the wrong way.
You're pro-human; you're talking about nefarious conduct. It would be different if you were some misanthrope, or something hellbent on destruction, but you're not. I don't even know you, but I know that you're not.

The only difference I see from you and a Christian is they MAY have a delusional belief that you do not have. Okay, is that all it takes to force you on a pro-anti-Christian tirade, smacking down religionists unabashedly? That's Dr. Shangri-LIE's point.

And, I don't want to make this post, as if I'm defending religion, or even the existence of Gods/God, or whatever. Your point here is tied to logical reasoning, so I'm trying to apply some to make a point.

And, personally, Trag, I'd let it slide: I wouldn't go after you to make a point or anything because I think you're cool as f-uck, but I know if I don't step in, this stupid f-ucking post will be dragged on longer if I didn't post anything.

So, you're welcome!

Edit: If we're against single delusions and what not, then hell, why stop with Religious people? F-ucking OCD people! A-ssholes! Jesus f-cuking Christ, OCD people are the biggest a-ssholes on the planet, we should totally create a new social movement and shun all of their retarded belief sets! I mean, god f-ucking damnit, I'm going to write a few best-selling novels to prove why OCD people are illlogical, and all of their claims and habits are unfounded b-ullshit!

Shangri-LIE
03-02-2016, 01:26 AM
Hahahahahahahahahahahaahahhahahahahahaahhahahahahh ahahahahhahahahahahahahhahahahahhahahahahahahahhah ahahaah

This shit is still going on.

That's what *I* keep seeing and just laughing my ass off as well. Want to know what I really think? Well, you won't get the answers on here. And I tell People that CONSTANTLY. LOL

Shangri-LIE
03-02-2016, 03:24 AM
Oh, and M-Trag is cool and intelligent as FUCK. And I mean that. And I talk to/speak to you also, outside of these forum sections, Penance Sentence. But by now, if people haven't realized my methods and how truly stupid and annoying they are a lot of times, then I don't know what else to say. If I have a long, real down to Earth Conversation and point out over and over, in ways that you/other people can follow and make sense out of, then I guess I get confused as to why those same people ask me the same types of questions and/or respond to me the way that they do whenever they either know me, sort of know me, or I've actually taken the time to have a real conversation with them. Wow that was a long sentence. But yeah, if I make something clear, then it shouldn't come back/rebound on here with a 'What in the fuck are you talking about?". Now, there are intelligent People/Users in this thread. But it was obvious fucking bait just to both provoke and evoke something from people too, as well. And it worked. And it just hasn't stopped. LOL

M Tragedy666
03-02-2016, 05:09 AM
I know what you're doing and I applaud it! I'm just ignoring my inside knowledge from talking to you outside the forum. I'm just treating it as if I didn't know any better and...hell, it is a thread on here that was made, so I'll continue to discuss it seriously even if I know it was meant as a joke. So don't take offense or anything. Basically I'm acting as if I'm separating you into two characters, the person on here and the person in real life and I just thought it was fun and is a challenge for me to defend my views and who knows? Maybe some casual reader who doesn't know either of us mind gain a new perspective. Sometimes I don't even look and who it is I'm quoting, I'll just read it and respond to it in whatever fucked up way my brain works at the time. So don't take it the wrong way. I'm just going to continue to treat it seriously lol. I'm not sure if any of this makes sense as it's 6am and I'm going to pass out soon after I post another response to Penance Sentence. Thank you for the compliments too! Likewise. Hope we can chat further soon.

M Tragedy666
03-02-2016, 05:48 AM
"The point is that many hardcore religionists are responsible for a great deal of nefarious behavior. And there is a DIRECT correlation with level of religiosity and bad behavior."

Trag, no offense, but that very pro-social quote makes you sound very much the same from a Christian. So, the only difference is that a Christian believes in a God; is your lack of belief in a God any valid reason to devote a chunk of your life to storming down Christians because the only difference from you and them is that they MAY have ONE delusional belief? As if, Humans have truly 100% logical belief sets, with no fallacies apparent whatsoever...

I like you, Trag, so don't take it the wrong way.
You're pro-human; you're talking about nefarious conduct. It would be different if you were some misanthrope, or something hellbent on destruction, but you're not. I don't even know you, but I know that you're not.

The only difference I see from you and a Christian is they MAY have a delusional belief that you do not have. Okay, is that all it takes to force you on a pro-anti-Christian tirade, smacking down religionists unabashedly? That's Dr. Shangri-LIE's point.

And, I don't want to make this post, as if I'm defending religion, or even the existence of Gods/God, or whatever. Your point here is tied to logical reasoning, so I'm trying to apply some to make a point.

And, personally, Trag, I'd let it slide: I wouldn't go after you to make a point or anything because I think you're cool as f-uck, but I know if I don't step in, this stupid f-ucking post will be dragged on longer if I didn't post anything.

So, you're welcome!

Edit: If we're against single delusions and what not, then hell, why stop with Religious people? F-ucking OCD people! A-ssholes! Jesus f-cuking Christ, OCD people are the biggest a-ssholes on the planet, we should totally create a new social movement and shun all of their retarded belief sets! I mean, god f-ucking damnit, I'm going to write a few best-selling novels to prove why OCD people are illlogical, and all of their claims and habits are unfounded b-ullshit!

I'm going to beat a dead horse and treat this post seriously too! lol and no offense taken at all. I enjoy these talks, despite/regardless of whether the intent was originally mockery. I think I have a more defendable position. I might indeed sound like a Christian to a degree. Really, it's no different than any pro-social group. Take Republicans and Democrats. Both want and seek a better world, right? But they have very opposite views on how to go about it. So I'll accept that it teeters on the brink of what Christians claim with their high horse and pedestal for morality. If I ever dare discuss morality in any way, I'm still playing that ballgame that Christians play (even though I'm right and they're wrong and morality evolved and is not god given!) But I just mean that I accept that we're playing on the same field, not unlike Republicans and Democrats.

My lack of belief may or may not be a valid reason to devote a chunk of life toward storming down Christians. It's not so much my lack of belief that fuels it, but it's education in general. The U.S. is constantly on the lower end of first world test scores. There is a correlation with education and belief in god(s). In general, the top scientists are atheist. That is no coincidence. What does this mean? Does learning science make you more atheistic? Or are atheists for whatever reason drawn to science? I'd say probably a little of both. I'm not a misanthrope. I can be at times and I have put myself in that mental place. The whole, "fuck the world, burn it down, kill everyone" mentality. But the thing is I'm personally affected by the laws of the land and as long as we have lawmakers sticking to ancient texts for morality (ex prostitution is illegal, why? It should not be a "moral" issue, it becomes one in religion sex before marriage is a sin, etc...) These delusions are harmful and often misogynistic. It's not so much that I care they believe in a god. They could believe in the flying spaghetti monster. But deeply held delusions are in fact dangerous. But I agree with what you said earlier. People are dangerous. No idea by itself is dangerous, which is why it's bullshit Germany banned images of swastikas or Mein Kampf for a long time. All art should be out there. Guns generally don't fire on their own, it takes a person to pull the trigger. I don't think any ideas should be banned. It's not only one delusional belief that separates me from Christians or most other religions for that matter, it's a series of many many beliefs. It might only boil down to god's existence, but as I said, there are a lot of caveats and amendments and other little beliefs that often come with it, such as rules to live by and whatnot. You said something about all you see as a difference between me and Christians is that they may "have a delusional belief that I don't have....is that all it takes to force me on an pro anti Christian tirade" I don't care about their belief in a god! lol I care about them not accepting science and not letting me have an abortion if I want one because it is they who force their beliefs on us. They could respectfully disagree but still allow gays to marry, but they want to FORCE their personal beliefs on the world. I shouldn't generalize. I should say MOST of them do. And why shouldn't they want to? They really truly believe they have the key to eternal happiness and they are just trying to help us dirty immoral heathens. That the whole point why it becomes such a bad and radical thing. It doesn't end with a belief or lack of belief in god. It comes with the baggage of an entire worldview and set of beliefs about how government should run and why I can't buy fucking alcohol on Sunday's in my state. Why not? It's just a stupid law. So hopefully I made myself clear that I am NOT against single delusions necessarily. We all have them. I don't claim to be perfectly logical. To paraphrase the physicist Lawrence Krauss, "I have to tell myself 10 delusional lies to get myself out of bed each day". We are largely irrational primates. It's not their fault they're religious, but I do think it's child abuse, personal, feeding children into this horrid fantasy based on nothing. I had nightmares as a kid anyway. OCD people might actually be a mental illness and maybe religion is too. I used to be OCD about germs. Washing my hands constantly and using paper or my jacket to open doors. I've got a lot of retarded beliefs. I don't know if there is a god or not. I won't say there definitely isn't, but it's ignorant to claim knowledge when no one has knowledge so maybe it's the Christians that should be more humble. And I hate that I'm attacking Christians so much. Understand that anytime I used the word "Christian" I'm really included all religions. Hindu, Buhdist, Muslim, Jew, etc... I'm "Against All Gods". Look up the short video of Stephen Fry on God, it's genius.

Shangri-LIE
03-02-2016, 06:30 AM
I'm going to beat a dead horse and treat this post seriously too! lol and no offense taken at all. I enjoy these talks, despite/regardless of whether the intent was originally mockery. I think I have a more defendable position. I might indeed sound like a Christian to a degree. Really, it's no different than any pro-social group. Take Republicans and Democrats. Both want and seek a better world, right? But they have very opposite views on how to go about it. So I'll accept that it teeters on the brink of what Christians claim with their high horse and pedestal for morality. If I ever dare discuss morality in any way, I'm still playing that ballgame that Christians play (even though I'm right and they're wrong and morality evolved and is not god given!) But I just mean that I accept that we're playing on the same field, not unlike Republicans and Democrats.

My lack of belief may or may not be a valid reason to devote a chunk of life toward storming down Christians. It's not so much my lack of belief that fuels it, but it's education in general. The U.S. is constantly on the lower end of first world test scores. There is a correlation with education and belief in god(s). In general, the top scientists are atheist. That is no coincidence. What does this mean? Does learning science make you more atheistic? Or are atheists for whatever reason drawn to science? I'd say probably a little of both. I'm not a misanthrope. I can be at times and I have put myself in that mental place. The whole, "fuck the world, burn it down, kill everyone" mentality. But the thing is I'm personally affected by the laws of the land and as long as we have lawmakers sticking to ancient texts for morality (ex prostitution is illegal, why? It should not be a "moral" issue, it becomes one in religion sex before marriage is a sin, etc...) These delusions are harmful and often misogynistic. It's not so much that I care they believe in a god. They could believe in the flying spaghetti monster. But deeply held delusions are in fact dangerous. But I agree with what you said earlier. People are dangerous. No idea by itself is dangerous, which is why it's bullshit Germany banned images of swastikas or Mein Kampf for a long time. All art should be out there. Guns generally don't fire on their own, it takes a person to pull the trigger. I don't think any ideas should be banned. It's not only one delusional belief that separates me from Christians or most other religions for that matter, it's a series of many many beliefs. It might only boil down to god's existence, but as I said, there are a lot of caveats and amendments and other little beliefs that often come with it, such as rules to live by and whatnot. You said something about all you see as a difference between me and Christians is that they may "have a delusional belief that I don't have....is that all it takes to force me on an pro anti Christian tirade" I don't care about their belief in a god! lol I care about them not accepting science and not letting me have an abortion if I want one because it is they who force their beliefs on us. They could respectfully disagree but still allow gays to marry, but they want to FORCE their personal beliefs on the world. I shouldn't generalize. I should say MOST of them do. And why shouldn't they want to? They really truly believe they have the key to eternal happiness and they are just trying to help us dirty immoral heathens. That the whole point why it becomes such a bad and radical thing. It doesn't end with a belief or lack of belief in god. It comes with the baggage of an entire worldview and set of beliefs about how government should run and why I can't buy fucking alcohol on Sunday's in my state. Why not? It's just a stupid law. So hopefully I made myself clear that I am NOT against single delusions necessarily. We all have them. I don't claim to be perfectly logical. To paraphrase the physicist Lawrence Krauss, "I have to tell myself 10 delusional lies to get myself out of bed each day". We are largely irrational primates. It's not their fault they're religious, but I do think it's child abuse, personal, feeding children into this horrid fantasy based on nothing. I had nightmares as a kid anyway. OCD people might actually be a mental illness and maybe religion is too. I used to be OCD about germs. Washing my hands constantly and using paper or my jacket to open doors. I've got a lot of retarded beliefs. I don't know if there is a god or not. I won't say there definitely isn't, but it's ignorant to claim knowledge when no one has knowledge so maybe it's the Christians that should be more humble. And I hate that I'm attacking Christians so much. Understand that anytime I used the word "Christian" I'm really included all religions. Hindu, Buhdist, Muslim, Jew, etc... I'm "Against All Gods". Look up the short video of Stephen Fry on God, it's genius.

I'll try to hit you up on Skype again later tonight. And while you are about to pass out for the day. I will give an honest answer in this stupid fucking thread. What I do is the Ultimate Straw Man here on these boards, and I actually get a KICK out of people destroying my arguments or "claims'. Why? Well, other than the reason we've discussed, Marilyn Manson forums tend to be hotbeds for relentless antagonists/provocateurs. Especially Atheists. And I don't take an Anti-Theist/Diest/Religious or Anti-Anti-Theist/Atheist stance either. I like to try to "convince" Atheists that their Humanism is a form of, especially, (Again here on a Marilyn Manson forum(s) where a lot of People have had their ideas of Religion formed by some sort of fucked up exposure to Religion as a child), and that they are also using Pascal's Wager.

Everyone is a fucking crusader. And other than different Religions being on a mission to recruit and convert people, I also see this whole Anti-Theist tirade Culture being more or less the same thing. Futile. Pointless. It's comparable to the war on Terrorism if you ask me. Well it is, at least in my books. And it will never end. It's not progressive. It's recursive in nature. And the more that you bash someone, or threaten someones dearly held delusions, faith or whatever else that they believe is real, not just pertaining to God, the more they'll cling onto it. So, telling someone that they're irrational is about as effective as putting chewing gum over a leaking transmission. And I also tend to pick on people that I call "The Parrots" on both sides. I can predict just about any counter point someone is going to make. I have it down to a fucking Science, you know this, (LOL), and believe it or not, I know more about Christianity/Judaism/Hinduism/Islam etc... more than a lot of People who practice those Faiths, as well as Athiests/Agnostics. Which, by the way, MOST Atheists are actually Agnostics even if their sliver of giving the idea of a "God" existing is by a very small Margin. It's actually very hard to find a well educated Atheist who is a total 7 on the Theistic-Atheistic spectrum.

Christians are easy targets, man. I prefer to have fun with people who actually adhere to sound logical thinking. At the same time, there is no "Spectrum" of Logical vs. Illogical unless you have some sort of serious mental illness/disease. And as much as we'd love say that belief is a Mental Disorder, it's not classified as one. But that's a whole other discussion for a later time. We live on a Religious Planet. I just tell People to either "Deal with it" and always have or to just have fun with your life and unless someone is harming you, someone you know and love, or indoctrinating your Child, (Which again doesn't just apply to God), with insane ideas and explanations/what's in their curriculum/proposed or passed as Laws...then who the fuck cares? Just do what you love. Focus on the things that you actually LIKE instead of exhausting so much damn energy on People who will NEVER budge from their deep rooted superstitions and beliefs/ways of life. (This isn't directed at you, M_Trag, btw).

The easiest way that I can explain it....in parable form. LOL -Is that there is more of a percentage of Theists/Diests and people who believe in the Paranormal than there are a percentage of Atheists on this Planet/In this World. Think about that. Lesson? Stay out of the Ocean as Aunt Boo would say. Unless you are Robinson Crusoe, Jacques Cousteu or if you're in the Navy.That's the Sharks House. That, or don't go too far out into it. I go on "Pretend Tirades". Again, why? Because I find people, no matter how much of a whipper snapper or educated that they are/may be, to be wasting their time, and it's stupid. It proves nothing and disproves nothing. If your "Profession" in life, not particularly you M_Trag, is just to "Smack People Down"....then I really pity you/those people. And again, as explained before, that's why I act/behave like an impetuous child like clown on here and on Message Boards of the past/some other parts of the web....Because I see them that way.

M Tragedy666
03-02-2016, 06:07 PM
I don't think it's ever a waste of time though. People can and do change their minds. It takes time and it's hard to reprogram brains or to brainwash in the opposite direction. Statistics and polls in the U.S. show that the 'nones" are the fastest growing "religion", where church goers are decreasing in record amounts. Sweden and Denmark are examples of countries that have broken out of it. I don't think it's futile, though it may seem that way sometimes. But no matter. Whether someone enjoys going into these things or not is personal preference. There could be some kid on this forum right now reading through these things, and whether or not we take it seriously, he or she may read something by one of us that really strikes a chord and could inspire and influence more thought and further research. That's the kid I'd like to help. That obviously parallels many religions that think they are helping kids, the difference is I'm not a homosexual priest.

Shangri-LIE
03-02-2016, 06:57 PM
I don't think it's ever a waste of time though. People can and do change their minds. It takes time and it's hard to reprogram brains or to brainwash in the opposite direction. Statistics and polls in the U.S. show that the 'nones" are the fastest growing "religion", where church goers are decreasing in record amounts. Sweden and Denmark are examples of countries that have broken out of it. I don't think it's futile, though it may seem that way sometimes. But no matter. Whether someone enjoys going into these things or not is personal preference. There could be some kid on this forum right now reading through these things, and whether or not we take it seriously, he or she may read something by one of us that really strikes a chord and could inspire and influence more thought and further research. That's the kid I'd like to help. That obviously parallels many religions that think they are helping kids, the difference is I'm not a homosexual priest.

Alright, I'll add another serious comment, but the LAST ONE and then I'm stepping out of here! LOL - It's inexcusable what the Vatican and Parishes World Wide have gotten away with. I think that goes without saying and most of us can agree with that. I can't speak for everyone because there also might be Predatory Homosexual Pedophile Priests visit the forums. I had to say that just for the chuckle. But no, child rape and molestation within Catholocism is just as rampant as anywhere else you can find it. It extends beyond that and always has socially in various cultures. And it's still rampant even here. There's also that uncomfortable taboo fact that it is is more biological than it is a fetish for Children. But I'm straying off course a bit, and that's another story. The point is, not in defending sexual abusers and/or the Catholic Churches reputation for being full of them, is that you can't stigmatize an establishment because fucked up weirdo's forced into Celibacy and/or are actually Pedophiles by nature drawn to a profession where children are more accessible, happen to rape kids. It happens in every fraternity, community and institution. So, if some "kid" reads this, he won't actually look into why Christianity was established, and it wasn't to spread the word of God, it was for Political reasons, then he or she really isn't going to learn anything other than, "Yeah, fuck Catholics. They're all a bunch or Perverts!" - Anyway, yeah. You can't do that.

And I wouldn't say that Atheism is on the rise as much as Secularism and departing from Organized Religion etc.. is. True Atheism is an absolute refutation of Anything "Paranormal" or a "Higher Power". Like I said, there is a very tiny minority of people who reject the possibility of a "Higher Power", Life After Death, (Even if it isn't as portrayed in "Heaven is for Real"), or any Religious context whatsoever and also who 100% deny that Ghosts aren't real or that Aliens don't exist. I already went into that, so I'll just leave this at that. It's more just departing from Organized Religion and not totally denouncing anything that we can't prove just because we can't prove it. You'll find a lot more of those people who ARE like that have those "absolutely not, you delusional fucking IDIOT" attitudes are ones who would read, hear and/or watch just some guy ranting about his or her own observations of it not really based on anything other than it being "Bullshit" and go on and continue to do the same. And that's not the way to teach People. So, you also can't do that, too, as well.

So, what you're seeing in those percentages, that I just looked up out of curiosity, is 14% of Non Religious People who are part of the Worlds Population. And that is FAR from being 14% of all of Earth's Population becoming Atheists. You also can't teach someone to be an Atheist or "How to be one". And that's just one of my many ways of convincing Anti-Theists, (I'll just start calling Atheists that because there hardly are any 100% deniers of a Higher Power of some sorts, conscious non locality and life after death as well as Paranormal occurrences), that some of their logic is a Straw Man. LOL *Wink *Smile

Shangri-LIE
03-02-2016, 07:06 PM
I had to really edit that. So, refresh before quoting me. I'm only semi-conscious from an outpatient procedure that I had done today still. LOL

M Tragedy666
03-02-2016, 08:00 PM
It's unfair to throw aliens in with the rest of the delusional or paranormal. Not EVERY paranormal case has been debunked. But as I said elsewhere, it's unnecessary and a waste of time to go and TRY to debunk all of them. James Randi and others have done a fabulous job at if not debunking paranormal claims, then at the very least, showing that some of these talents like psychic ability or bending spoons CAN be recreated quite easily with a bit of trickery and deception. So what then is more likely? Most accounts of ghosts and other paranormal phenomenon can at least be explained equally well with alternative options. And that is all science has to do; to show it's possible and plausible and can be done other ways and not relying on supernatural. If there is an equally good explanation, it's as good as debunked in many skeptics eyes. Aliens are another story. We are here on this planet for some reason or "no no no no no reason". When I say "reason", I don't mean mystical wishes of a deity, rather I'm using the word in the context of a scientific reason. Whether or not life has any purpose or meaning, we can't escape the fact that we are here for some reason. Why/How did we get here? If it's a chemical process unguided by any god, then perhaps it's happened elsewhere in our vast universe. This is not the Ancient Aliens loopy view of reality. No, we've likely never made any contact with any other beings out there. If there are any, there is no telling that they are even intelligent in comparison with us. Now get on skype, you rat bastard!

M Tragedy666
03-03-2016, 12:40 AM
I just randomly came across a Daniel Dennet quote that I thought was appropriate "The one thing that I think is really dangerous in many religions is that it gives people a gold plated excuse to stop thinking". I think Dawkins put it another way something about being "satisfied with not knowing". It's not any belief in god or the paranormal that we care about, it's more so the snowball effect.

Shangri-LIE
03-03-2016, 02:37 AM
It's unfair to throw aliens in with the rest of the delusional or paranormal. Not EVERY paranormal case has been debunked. But as I said elsewhere, it's unnecessary and a waste of time to go and TRY to debunk all of them. James Randi and others have done a fabulous job at if not debunking paranormal claims, then at the very least, showing that some of these talents like psychic ability or bending spoons CAN be recreated quite easily with a bit of trickery and deception. So what then is more likely? Most accounts of ghosts and other paranormal phenomenon can at least be explained equally well with alternative options. And that is all science has to do; to show it's possible and plausible and can be done other ways and not relying on supernatural. If there is an equally good explanation, it's as good as debunked in many skeptics eyes. Aliens are another story. We are here on this planet for some reason or "no no no no no reason". When I say "reason", I don't mean mystical wishes of a deity, rather I'm using the word in the context of a scientific reason. Whether or not life has any purpose or meaning, we can't escape the fact that we are here for some reason. Why/How did we get here? If it's a chemical process unguided by any god, then perhaps it's happened elsewhere in our vast universe. This is not the Ancient Aliens loopy view of reality. No, we've likely never made any contact with any other beings out there. If there are any, there is no telling that they are even intelligent in comparison with us. Now get on skype, you rat bastard!

I said I was going to just "Step out". And perhaps you were right about someone actually wanting to learn something even if they come across the mess that is this thread. And I'll give you credit about the Aliens inclusion. But I DO think that it's important to explore everything. Not to necessarily to debunk anything or prove anything. Because if you go into something with a bias, you're going to get your desired results. You won't be surprised. And to me, as much as I study theology, philosophy and History-Religious History. I also think that, and again, this is why I've always thrown out so many quotes and abstract ideas with my own, (Stupid - LOL *) actual Character's twist. Because I base what I believe to either be total bullshit or what may be possible on Science. (Though I've never tried to have a sound Scientific discussion on here.). And I really do, and not to defend what I have always done under this moniker and am again...sort of, is that I also tend to just throw the whole "Book" at people. ...Or all of them in my own distorted apocryphal way. If you want to teach someone about Evolution, educate them on it. If you want to educate someone on something Physics related, educate them on it. But the most important thing is to have a conversation with even people you consider to either be dim or just straight up delusional. You have to, and I mean you HAVE to understand peoples core. Even if it's just a quick read that you get from them based on their arguments and/or claims are coming from. That brings me back to what I've said before. Understanding why Religion was so important for such a long time. Understanding the Religion. Understanding the various languages and what types of Cultures those Doctrine/Philosophies spawned out of. I think that's equally important. But I'm not going to quote anyone, as I often tend to do, because ...well, I covered that in my last post. A lot of Anti-Theists base their Anti-Theism on Authors or what other People have said based primarily on it being "Bullshit". And that's their only axiom. "It's bullshit, therefor it's bullshit". Without really explaining why. And by understanding why, and I know that you and I will continue to disagree on this one particular thing, is by understanding the roots, the History, the writing styles of the people of that time, how things were translated, where certain factions/establishments originated from. And that's why I said, again, that I'm not going to throw quotes around because I've always, outside of here in a serious manner, been one to point out that Anti-Theists use the Philosophies of others just as much as the Religiously Minded do. Even though on that spectrum of there being a "Personal God" I'd put myself at about a 5.5 or a 6 but not whenever it comes to some White Man on a Throne with a beard in the Sky, being a Warden and watching us all on Heavens Central Command security monitors. Another LOL *Actual

But yeah, that's why I Ghost Hunt. But I don't do it to FIND Ghosts. I just want to, like to see what I can find, if anything at all. But then again we live in an age where, yes most of it can be explain, but not all. And to me those cases are ones that are worth further examination. At the same time we live in the age of "Fake". Some are obvious, but people are just automatically dismissive. Ruling out piping issues, electrical disturbances, dust, reflection off of things, audio and video recording device malfunctions, obvious trickery/hoaxes and just mistaking something for a Ghost. So, I don't really care if something thinks that I'm a quack/a loony toon for finding interest in that. Again, I've always had a fascination with this stuff. I don't have a little bit of "Captain" in me, but I do have a bit of "Mulder" in me. And as for your Daniel Dennet quote, again, I find a lot of Anti-Theists to be just satisfied themselves with whatever they don't believe in or know based on what they've read or heard somewhere. And that's where the whole "it's pointless" attitude comes from. And as for Ancient Aliens, yeah. "LOL" -That's all I'll say, but I do still have some questions about the possible interaction with "Aliens" in the past as I do believe that we still do as we can both agree that the possibility of "Aliens" whatever/whoever they are could be a real phenomenon. It's a word that I hate but just had to use it. I just don't think they're from Outer Space. Anyway, yeah. I'll get on Skype tonight. Ttys - Edit -Oh, and where I vary from a lot of other Anti-Religious/Anti-Theists is that I want a lot of this to be real. And not out of a fear of death or needing there to be a God or Ghosts not to feel alone on this Planet that can be really depressing to think about, or even for a feeling of being more significant than being a lumbering organic robot.