|
|
|
Hawks
SFN Regular
Canada
1383 Posts |
 Posted - 08/26/2011 : 08:08:45 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by marfknox
..so arguing with him seems a waste of time.
|
Yeah, but we're having fun (at least I am). Besides, Officiant is a good reminder that it's not just creationists, conspiracy theorists and homeopaths that leave some of their reasoning capabilities behind when trying to make "arguments". But yeah, our time is wasted on him; the saying "you can't reason someone out of a position he didn't reason himself into" was invented for people like Officiant. |
METHINKS IT IS LIKE A WEASEL
It's a small, off-duty czechoslovakian traffic warden! |
 |
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2011 : 08:49:36 [Permalink]
|
Officiant:
Under appeal to popularity I found this: It is clearly fallacious to accept the approval of the majority as evidence for a claim. |
Sigh... An appeal to popularity would be if I said something like "Lots of people believe astrology, therefore astrology works." Pointing out things like a consensus in science is not an appeal to popularity. Any appeal to a majority has to be taken in context. If an overwhelming number of climatologists say that man made global warming is happening, and they have evidence to support that claim because they are expert in the field, pointing that out is not an appeal to popularity. It is also not an appeal to popularity if we acknowledge that there is a consensus on this forum about what the word "agnostic' means. We have, again, provided you with much evidence (which you chose to ignore). We are not saying that it's true just because we are in agreement. We have supplied you with evidence that debunks your claim.
And really, you misuse logical fallacies because you don't grap them. Sorry. Not my fault. Funny thing is that you posted the rules from the CSI and then immediately broke those rules.
Just for fun, I'll let you in on something. I'm a member if the CFI which is the parant organization of the CSI. And as a skeptical activist for more than 25 years now, I am well aware of the "rules." You would do well to learn how to use them rather than to just quote from them with little knowledge about how they apply science and empiricism. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Officiant
Skeptic Friend
166 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2011 : 09:19:06 [Permalink]
|
Dear Dude and Hawks, You guys are aware it is impossible to prove a negative so you are not asking me to do the impossible are you?
THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD RELIES UPON DATA
The scientific method uses some type of measurement to analyze results, feeding these findings back into theories of what we know about the world. There are two major ways of obtaining data, through measurement and observation. These are generally referred to as quantitative and qualitative measurements.
Read more: http://www.experiment-resources.com/what-is-the-scientific-method.html#ixzz1W9SeXcKV
Please supply the extraordinary evidence for data and we will begin the experiment forthwith. Unless you offer something better than the scientific method I win the bet Dude
Praying is putting your hands together, making a face like you are having a bowel movement and communicating telepathically with an imaginary entity. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2011 : 09:26:21 [Permalink]
|
Officiant:
Dear Dude and Hawks, You guys are aware it is impossible to prove a negative so you are not asking me to do the impossible are you?
THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD RELIES UPON DATA
The scientific method uses some type of measurement to analyze results, feeding these findings back into theories of what we know about the world. There are two major ways of obtaining data, through measurement and observation. These are generally referred to as quantitative and qualitative measurements. |
Oh. So you agree that there are claims that science can't test for. You have been denying that since the beginning of this thread.
Officiant:
Please supply the extraordinary evidence for data and we will begin the experiment forthwith. Unless you offer something better than the scientific method I win the bet Dude. |
Lots of religious claims have been tested and been found to not hold water. I don't know what bet you you think you won because it was you who said that science can test anything.
Officiant:
Science can examine anything. |
| Officiant:If any of you brave enough can tell us anything about their imaginary god we can put it to the test right now. |
Your words... Your claim...
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Officiant
Skeptic Friend
166 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2011 : 11:34:16 [Permalink]
|
Dear Kil, There are no practical real world claims science can't test for but it is the claimant who must show up with the evidence. Where is the evidence to support the supernatural?
How long are you going to pretend we need better scientific apparatus? I have made my decision based the best scientific knowledge that exists in the real practical world. The second meaning of agnostic according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary is a person who is unwilling to commit to an opinion about something. Your picture was right beside it.
Are you a Dawkins category four agnostic? The Catholic Church loves you agnostics. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2011 : 11:46:02 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Officiant
It has been quite vicious just like Muslims reacting to cartoons in Denmark.
|
Insulting Straw-man. We have strongly objected to your gross mis-characterizations of us. And you're comparing us to rioting religious fanatics?
You need a serious reality check.
| I'm sure with the anger expressed you all would gladly have me burnt at the stake as an unbeliever in your precious pseudo intellectual agnosticism. |
If we ever were to burn you at the stake (perish the thought*1) we would do so because you are a True Believer (in the non-existence of God rather than the existence of God), not the other way around.
*1) We value the freedom of expression, and freedom of thought. We would never burn anyone at the stake for disagreeing with us. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2011 : 11:54:31 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Officiant
Dear Dude and Hawks, You guys are aware it is impossible to prove a negative so you are not asking me to do the impossible are you? |
How do you prove the non-existence of gods, then?| THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD RELIES UPON DATA |
Yes, where is the data that says, "gods do not exist?"| The scientific method uses some type of measurement to analyze results... |
Yes, how do you measure the gods' non-existence?| ...feeding these findings back into theories of what we know about the world. |
What theory do we have about the world in which the non-existence of any gods plays a part?| Please supply the extraordinary evidence for data and we will begin the experiment forthwith. |
Again: you must provide the evidence for your claim, "Agnostic atheists are cowardly pseudo-intellectual dilettantes," first. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2011 : 11:58:17 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Officiant
Dear Kil, There are no practical real world claims science can't test for but it is the claimant who must show up with the evidence. |
Yes, so where is the evidence that you must supply to support your claim, "Agnostic atheists are cowardly pseudo-intellectual dilettantes"?| Where is the evidence to support the supernatural? |
Nobody here is supporting the supernatural. Go ask someone who is making such claims.| I have made my decision based the best scientific knowledge that exists in the real practical world. |
No you haven't, because there isn't any evidence for the non-existence of all possible gods.| The second meaning of agnostic according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary is a person who is unwilling to commit to an opinion about something. |
Why not pay attention to the primary meaning?Your picture was right beside it.
Are you a Dawkins category four agnostic? The Catholic Church loves you agnostics. |
More hypocritical insults. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2011 : 11:59:53 [Permalink]
|
Officiant:
Dear Kil, There are no practical real world claims science can't test for but it is the claimant who must show up with the evidence. |
You changed the meaning of what you said. In the context it was written, you claimed that science could test for anything. Why don’t you just admit that you were wrong?
Officiant:
Where is the evidence to support the supernatural? |
I do not accept supernatural claims on several grounds. One of those grounds is that they lack any empirical evidence. But we have been though all of this. You will never get it.
Officiant:
How long are you going to pretend we need better scientific apparatus? |
I’m not pretending anything. The above statement is something that you have pulled out of your ass. And that’s because you have not and probably never will understand what it is I have said.
Officiant:
I have made my decision based the best scientific knowledge that exists in the real practical world. The second meaning of agnostic according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary is a person who is unwilling to commit to an opinion about something. Your picture was right beside it. |
I’m an atheist, you dimwit. How many times do I have to say it? I do not believe that there is any such thing as god or gods.
Officiant:
Are you a Dawkins category four agnostic? The Catholic Church loves you agnostics. |
No. I’m actually a six. But you will never get that as long as you insist on your very own interpretation of what it means to be an agnostic atheist. Just like creationists will never admit that there are transitional fossils, because if they do that, their argument is toast.
Also, I don’t give a flying fuck about what the Catholic Church thinks. You are much closer to them than any atheist I know, because you accept their definition.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Officiant
Skeptic Friend
166 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2011 : 12:30:25 [Permalink]
|
ear Valiant Dancer, For your information the following bylaws were broken by the agnostics at Humanist Canada. I did not break any values nor was I accused of that.
Agnostics, like Christians, are not above breaking the law and wrong doing if it is for a greater good.
From HAC bylaws:
3 Individual membership in the Humanist Association of Canada, hereinafter called the HAC, shall commence on the date that payment of dues is received
by the national office, and shall be for a period of twelve (12) months, life, or for any period as defined by the board of
directors in setting the schedule of dues. Membership in the HAC shall cease ten (10) days after the third renewal letter sent by the HAC office.
In the by-laws under:
2. Conditions of Membership, item #5, it states:
Any member may be required to resign by a vote of two-thirds of
the members at a GMM or by a postal ballot |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2011 : 12:40:41 [Permalink]
|
Officiant:
Agnostics, like Christians, are not above breaking the law and wrong doing if it is for a greater good. |
You've got to be freaking kidding me. You really are a bigot. Big time! And speaking of the greater good, was that the reason they broke their bylaws? I can see that.
 |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2011 : 12:53:12 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Officiant
You guys are aware it is impossible to prove a negative so you are not asking me to do the impossible are you?
THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD RELIES UPON DATA |
How do you collect data for "There is no God!"???
| The scientific method uses some type of measurement to analyze results, feeding these findings back into theories of what we know about the world. |
Which kind of metric do you use to determine the non-existence of God?
Please supply the extraordinary evidence for data and we will begin the experiment forthwith. Unless you offer something better than the scientific method I win the bet Dude |
We haven't made any extraordinary claims, so we don't have any obligation to produce evidence. Can you please explain to us why you think we do?
Praying is putting your hands together, making a face like you are having a bowel movement and communicating telepathically with an imaginary entity.
|
So I've been told. Why do you think this is relevant?
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Officiant
Skeptic Friend
166 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2011 : 12:56:15 [Permalink]
|
Dear marfknox, Great to see another strong atheist on this forum. We are rare. Not so good that you slagged me. As you well know it is impossible to be just a little bit pregnant.
That's what these hyphenated agnostics seem to want. They say they are atheists but they are are still a little bit agnostic and afraid to completely say goodbye to the SkyDaddy.
I was also an agnostic until I found out the Catholic Church likes them. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2011 : 13:05:49 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Officiant
I was also an agnostic until I found out the Catholic Church likes them.
|
Another piece of admission as evidence that Officiant is more an anti-theist than he is an atheist: He's an atheist for the wrong reasons.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2011 : 13:07:04 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Officiant
ear Valiant Dancer, For your information the following bylaws were broken by the agnostics at Humanist Canada. I did not break any values nor was I accused of that.
Agnostics, like Christians, are not above breaking the law and wrong doing if it is for a greater good.
From HAC bylaws:
3 Individual membership in the Humanist Association of Canada, hereinafter called the HAC, shall commence on the date that payment of dues is received
by the national office, and shall be for a period of twelve (12) months, life, or for any period as defined by the board of
directors in setting the schedule of dues. Membership in the HAC shall cease ten (10) days after the third renewal letter sent by the HAC office. |
You're forgetting By-Law #2A,Membership in the corporation, hereinafter called the Association shall be limited to persons interested in furthering the goals and activities of the Association, as set forth in the Letters Patent. And I think it's obvious that you fail to meet that limitation. From the Letters Patent:Section B. Declaration of Humanist Principles:
...
3] Humanists advocate an approach based on science to distinguish fact from fiction, and promote the beneficial and creative uses of science and technology.
...
5] Humanists acknowledge human interdependence, the need for mutual respect and the kinship of all humanity.
...
7] Humanists support the development and extension of fundamental human freedoms, as expressed in the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights and supplemented by UN International Covenants comprising the United Nations’ Bill of Human Rights.
...
9] Humanists encourage conduct based on a sense of responsibility to oneself and to society.
10] Humanists reject beliefs held in the absence of verifiable evidence, such as beliefs based solely on dogma, revelation, mysticism or appeals to the supernatural... So given that you cannot follow five of the twelve principles, it seems natural that you shouldn't have been offered membership in HAC in the first place. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
 |
|
Cowardly Agnostics
Topic Locked
