Absolutely Nothing: Atheists on What They Know About What They Pretend to Discuss

[paddoboy]

Don’t worry about me wegs. I’m having a hootenanny of a time as usual.

Which is why you threatened to report me [and most probably did] when I proved you a liar. Thanks for even more proof!

So I put a test to them, hether or not they believed in God.
It was pathetic.
They are mad as hell at me, They are now in, what I have dubbed “the atheist yee-haw” mode, where they absolutely refuse to have a reasonable discussion with me,
I wish it were just to make them happy, and put a smile on their chubby little faces.
n to between 20000 to 40,000 years old.
But my darwinist chums have happily kept their head in the sand
...Atheist Yee-Hew
It’s hoot. Not to mention great entertainment in this lock down.

I probably won’t be here for much longer.
I have watched the movie “No intelligence allowed”, and we all know what happens to whistle blowers.

The delusional bubble you live in is quite impenetrable Jan, all brought about by the fact that I and others have shown you to be a liar...but as we all know, that is all creationists and IDers have to offer.
ps: It also appears that while wegs has offered some criticism, that criticism also applies to you...or are you dishonestly redefining that to?
Just as an aside, the views of wegs and the Paleontologist Mary Schweitzer, are at least honest, and in that regard would play you off a break...both though are probably too polite and decent to tell you that.

 

[paddoboy]

The Truth.
Would you agree?

As the truth always is, we can deduce what is not the truth. And there are many elements of that explanation that are not true.
The truth, by (proper) definition , cannot have any elements of falsity. It must be absolute.
.

The truth is staring you in the face. Darwinism and the theory of evolution are scientific facts borne out by mountains of irrefutable evidence which you as usual so dishonestly lie about, or redefine and/or misinterpret.

I’m also suspicious of those who invest their emotion in something that is merely regarded as “the best explanation”. That goes for any other type of religion also

The greatest attribute of science is that it can and does change according to the latest data, unlike the deep hole creationist and IDers have dug themselves.

 

[paddoboy]

You ask some weird questions BWS.
What do you mean?

Time for the Pot Kettle Black analogy again Ladies and Gentleman!!
The irony will never end with this bloke!!

 

[Jan Ardena]

Which is why you threatened to report me [and most probably did] when I proved you a liar. Thanks for even more proof!

The delusional bubble you live in is quite impenetrable Jan, all brought about by the fact that I and others have shown you to be a liar...but as we all know, that is all creationists and IDers have to offer.
ps: It also appears that while wegs has offered some criticism, that criticism also applies to you...or are you dishonestly redefining that to?
Just as an aside, the views of wegs and the Paleontologist Mary Schweitzer, are at least honest, and in that regard would play you off a break...both though are probably too polite and decent to tell you that.

Wow! Only one point five insults!

 

[paddoboy]

I feel most comfortable to hold almost identical views to those of Dr Albert Einstein...and most happy to hear that he too said that he was not an atheist, given my recent redefinment of my position, we differ in so far as he preferred to call himself agnostic whereas I have chosen realist... I don't think we are far apart...I leave the door open for a god or gods as a matter of wishful thinking ..imagine a world with a god or gods managing things..I mean other than Donald or Scott...gods certainly but more like those Greek gods who seemed to suffer pretty outrageous flaws.

Great observation and thanks for making it..I like it a lot but I have been handing out so many likes I do not wish to appear favouring anyone so I tell you here..you have so many holding one back wont hurt...I don't know if it was here or someplace else someone was accused of using likes as some sort of ploy...maybe I dreamed it..too many naps these days.
Alex

I'm not real sure what dmoe is trying to convey [yes I am! ] but Einstein's views on religion in general and any mythical afterlife are well known.....
Here is another article complimenting the two previous WIKI articles......
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2008/may/12/peopleinscience.religion
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." So said Albert Einstein, and his famous aphorism has been the source of endless debate between believers and non-believers wanting to claim the greatest scientist of the 20th century as their own.

A little known letter written by him, however, may help to settle the argument - or at least provoke further controversy about his views.

Due to be auctioned this week in London after being in a private collection for more than 50 years, the document leaves no doubt that the theoretical physicist was no supporter of religious beliefs, which he regarded as "childish superstitions".
extract:
"In the letter, he states: "The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this."

"Einstein is best known for his theories of relativity and for the famous E=mc2 equation that describes the equivalence of mass and energy, but his thoughts on religion have long attracted conjecture."
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Einstein mention as per dmoe's link and mine up above that he often got this "cosmic religious feeling". Let's be real clear about that. Who in their right mind, is not in awe at the wonders of the heavens and the awe and mystery yet to be unravelled in our quest for knowledge. Einstein himself rejected the dynamic universe/space/time expansion complex as dictated by his own equations, and applied the cosmological constant to remove that fact...something he later said as his greatest blunder...Einstein also at first rejected that existence of the most awesome of awesome things anyone could ever imagine, Black Holes!!! Yet now e have the evidence to support their existence with gravitational waves.

More on Albert, his philosophy from my above link follows....
"In his later years he referred to a "cosmic religious feeling" that permeated and sustained his scientific work. In 1954, a year before his death, he spoke of wishing to "experience the universe as a single cosmic whole". He was also fond of using religious flourishes, in 1926 declaring that "He [God] does not throw dice" when referring to randomness thrown up by quantum theory.

His position on God has been widely misrepresented by people on both sides of the atheism/religion divide but he always resisted easy stereotyping on the subject.

"Like other great scientists he does not fit the boxes in which popular polemicists like to pigeonhole him," said Brooke. "It is clear for example that he had respect for the religious values enshrined within Judaic and Christian traditions ... but what he understood by religion was something far more subtle than what is usually meant by the word in popular discussion."
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

 

[paddoboy]

Wow! Only one point five insults!

Quite touchy with regards to some facts, are we not?

 

[Jan Ardena]

The truth is staring you in the face. Darwinism and the theory of evolution are scientific facts borne out by mountains of irrefutable evidence which you as usual so dishonestly lie about, or redefine and/or misinterpret.

You sound like a cult member.
If darwinian evolution is true, you should be able to explain it on any level.
You should be able to explain it without the aid of pictures, and assertion that only say it’s true.
Why do you accept whale evolution as true?

The greatest attribute of science is that it can and does change according to the latest data, unlike the deep hole creationist and IDers have dug themselves.

Therefore it isn’t the truth.
Because truth can’t change.
Ta-darrrrr!

 

[Jan Ardena]

I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene." Einstein was then asked if he accepted the historical existence of Jesus, to which he replied, "Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word.

Ta-da!

 

[Beer w/Straw]

You ask some weird questions BWS.
What do you mean?

So, I'm weird.

Fine.

 

[Jan Ardena]

So, I'm weird.

Fine.

So, what By “You workin' hard for the truth?”?

 

[paddoboy]

Since the great man has been dragged into this debacle filled with lies and misinterpretations and redefining of definitions...Einstein once said, "Science without religion is lame: Religion without science is blind"
That quote alone has prompted much discussion. The following article gives imo a good assessment, with I may add, some criticism also of Einstein....
https://newrepublic.com/article/115821/einsteins-famous-quote-science-religion-didnt-mean-taught
Albert Einstein was the most famous scientist of our time, and, because he was so smart, his opinions on non-scientific issues were often seen as incontrovertible. One of the most famous is a pronouncement much quoted by religious people and those claiming comity between science and faith. It comes from Einstein’s essay “Science and religion,” published in 1954.

“Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”
This quote is often used to show both Einstein’s religiosity and his belief in the compatibility—indeed, the mutual interdependence—of science and religion. But the quote is rarely used in context, and when you see the context you’ll find that the quote should give no solace to the faithful. But first let me show you how, in that same essay, Einstein proposes what is essentially Stephen Jay Gould’s version of NOMA (Non-overlapping Magisteria). Gould’s idea (which was clearly not original) was that science and religion were harmonious because they had distinct but complementary tasks: science helps us understand the physical structure of the universe, while religion deals with human values, morals, and meanings. Here’s Einstein’s version (my emphasis):
more at link.......
conclusion extract:
"I have no quarrel with the claimed contribution of science to religion: helping test ways to achieve one’s goals. Einstein, however, neglects another contribution of science to religion: disproving its truth statements. Darwin did a good job of that!"

 

[Beer w/Straw]

So, what By “You workin' hard for the truth?”?

Well, what do you believe to be the truth?

 

[paddoboy]

You sound like a cult member.
If darwinian evolution is true, you should be able to explain it on any level.
You should be able to explain it without the aid of pictures, and assertion that only say it’s true.
Why do you accept whale evolution as true?

Therefore it isn’t the truth.
Because truth can’t change.
Ta-darrrrr!

As we all know Jan, The facts have been put to you by two others in particular...two reasonably professional in their knowledge, James and Billvon.
And the fact still exists that being the liar and dishonest individual that you are [and I believe wegs in her subtle moment also inferred that] whatever explanation I could give would be rejected, because of your apparent dishonest approach to this fact...just as you rejected the details and explanatory data from James and Billvon.
Tadarrr indeed.
Shame though that you continue acting like a child and insist in playing games, then get all uppity when confronted with the truth of you being totally dishonest.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Well, what do you believe to be the truth?

The truth.
I believe that anything that contains falsehood, is not the truth.

 

[Jan Ardena]

As we all know Jan, The facts have been put to you by two others in particular...two reasonably professional in their knowledge, James and Billvon.

Is that evidence that it is true?

And the fact still exists that being the liar and dishonest individual that you are [and I believe wegs in her subtle moment also inferred that] whatever explanation I could give would be rejected, because of your apparent dishonest approach to this fact...just as you rejected the details and explanatory data from James and Billvon. Tadarrr indeed.

Still no explanation of why whale evolution is true.
You can’t offer an explanation. Can you?
Why don’t you just admit it?

 

[paddoboy]

Therefore it isn’t the truth.
Because truth can’t change.
Ta-darrrrr!

I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene." Einstein was then asked if he accepted the historical existence of Jesus, to which he replied, "Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word.

Ta-da!

Look Jan, I'm sorry to have shown you as dishonest, but that is actually your own doing...think about it and try not acting so childish.
With regards to your second quote, just as I have posted...Einstein was a humble man, and was educated as a Catholic, despite his views on religion, creationists and ID myth.
Please read the article at https://newrepublic.com/article/115821/einsteins-famous-quote-science-religion-didnt-mean-taught on the famous quote,
"science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”

 

[Jan Ardena]

because of your apparent dishonest approach to this fact..

The point is, my dear sir, there is no fact.
It is a story, just like the movie, Alex loved so much.
You just don’t know how to deal with somebody who tells you straight out, which is why you call me liar, and dishonest, blah blah!.

You’re like a wounded animal trapped in a corner, reduced to just lashing out.

Pathetic!

 

[Beer w/Straw]

The truth.
I believe that anything that contains falsehood, is not the truth.

Dude!

Seriously, amazing!

Awesome!

 

[paddoboy]

Is that evidence that it is true?

The evidence that it is true is in the science and the discoveries, which you so childishly and stupidly reject. [apologies for putting it so bluntly and truthfully]

Still no explanation of why whale evolution is true.
You can’t offer an explanation. Can you?
Why don’t you just admit it?

I don't need to. My thoughts and understandings are like yours...irrelevant in the greater scheme of things and facts as they stand.
Why don't you just for a change, drop the dishonesty and childish persona [driven no doubt by frustration] and adress the facts of Darwinism and the theory of evolution as they stand, and explain why even the Catholic church have had to grin and bear it and admitting they are factual, despite that making a joke of some biblical text.
I'm waiting.

 

[paddoboy]

The point is, my dear sir, there is no fact.
It is a story, just like the movie, Alex loved so much.
You just don’t know how to deal with somebody who tells you straight out, which is why you call me liar, and dishonest, blah blah!.

I don't really need to deal with your dishonesty or your views. Like the views of the flat Earth society they are at best wrong, and at worst inanely stupid.

You’re like a wounded animal trapped in a corner, reduced to just lashing out.

Pathetic!

yes agreed, pathetic!!