praying before you eat

[XR-7]

Why exactly don't you mock peoples methods of arguing? That's a pretty profound statement. A stupid statement, but profound nonetheless.

You are not mocking only his methods, but taking it many steps too far insulting his character, grammar, and whatever else he says.

Ray Comfort, a rather famous Christian apologist, made this claim about medicine and health in general:

Now there are several easy ways to refute this, but what about the way he's proposing his argument. Is there nothing you find inherently stupid and moronic about the exact methods by which he's arguing? If this man was president, and he proposed a law with this as his reasoning, would you call him a moron? Would you spend all your time refuting the blatantly obvious fallacies and problems with his argument, and no time at all to attacking his character?

Stupid people need to be told that they're stupid. That way they don't publish 100 books about their stupid idea and their moronic ideals can die with them.

The person themselves are not stupid, their ideas may be stupid though.  No need to cuss the guy out and stuff just because he has different ideas.  You are fully allowed to disagree with him, however.  I don't agree with anything the guy says.  Not going to doctors over cancer is almost considered Self Delete, which is frowned upon by God and most of society anyway.  The IDEA is stupid, but not the guy as a person.

[Ad Bot]

[Blockzillahead]

"well he started it"

but yeah these walls of text are enough to build a house with

Not just that, but they are really annoying to read too. That much effort to tell someone they're stupid across the internet? Sounds like someone needs to re-think their strategy here.

[Stocking]

The person themselves are not stupid, their ideas may be stupid though. 

I have to completely disagree with you there. People can be stupid, and stupid people can have stupid ideas. It's not a difficult concept to understand.

[XR-7]

I have to completely disagree with you there. People can be stupid, and stupid people can have stupid ideas. It's not a difficult concept to understand.

People can be stupid in the way that they think and behave, yes.

[Stocking]

People can be stupid in the way that they think and behave, yes.

In what other ways can you be stupid? If your thoughts are stupid, and your actions are stupid, you're basically Lalam24.

[Lalam24]

I'm attacking a character flaw wherein you try to imitate what you think smart people sound like to give the impression that you're intelligent. I like how you're comma splicing the hell out of your sentences, misspelling the word grammatical and then putting autistic in quotes in one of the most desperate and nonsensical retorts I've ever read.

Based on your perception of what my rhetoric is, not fact.  Autistic was in quotes because you refer to others as being autistic while giving a similar vibe with your pretentious and perfectionist attitude.  It being pathetic is, again, not relevant.

Do you even know the definition of the word mock?

-snip-

Like really. If English is your first language and you have such a loose grasp of it, this makes a profound statement about how stupid you are.
Thanks for defining a word that doesn't define my actions.  You're only helping me out in an argument you're so clearly incapable of understanding.  If you laugh at a show that is nothing but ridiculousness, it doesn't imply that you're mocking the show.  It shouldn't take that much to figure it out.

"Separating the act from [your] argument" makes no sense at all either as a phrase or even just as words in this context. You openly mock religious people in public and then you argue that religion is mathematically wrong, so in what sense are you separating your contempt of religion to your open mockery of it?
I find religion silly, but what I find humorous and what I take as a serious issue are two very different things.  They're two different reactions.  What in the world is so difficult about this for you to understand?

That's not how society works you stupid turd. If someone asks you to pray with them then you either subject yourself to a harmless ritual out of respect or you don't and politely refuse. You don't present yourself as some jackass who openly mocks people for something as mundane as a table prayer.
I've had to go through it, and when the time comes, that's act in the civil manner you're assuming EVERYONE should.  But if I was requested to take it seriously and sit through it with a more humorous mindset, I'd probably chuckle.  Why the forget does this offend you so much?  Holy stuff, it's like no one can harmlessly enjoy something without your approval.  You need to calm down.

Kindly remove your richard from the English language because you are loving it without mercy and it wants you to stop.

I'm an atheist you moronic assbag, and you don't need to put "fedora wearing" in quotes. You're a contemptible psuedo-intellectual piece of horse stuff who in a perfect society wouldn't be allowed to reproduce solely for how god damn offensive your charade is to genuinely intelligent people.
okay sweetheart.  keep trying, I love seeing how annoyed you get.

On what hierarchy? They're two completely separate fields; mathematics being, well mathematics and theology being a derivative of sociology.
Separate as they may be, one's a practice based on human perception while the other is something that's impossible to refute no matter what perspective you display.

But beyond that, the sentence still makes no sense. A "variable to suggest it's real" makes no loving sense in any universe ever. Are you talking about proof? Proof is only 5 letters. It's a word we learn before we're 10. It says exactly what you're trying to say with no effort at all. But that's not good enough for you. You want to sound smart, so you try to find a clever way to say something mundane and you fail so utterly it's both cringe worthy and laughable.
When I say I use mathematics, I refer to equations suggesting things exist or do not.  For example, the assumption that monotheistic ideals can exist when they're based on polytheistic ideals is similar to something like p>m, while p=0.  Why are you bringing up proof being 5 letters?

Don your fedora my good man, you've earned it.

-snip-

That's not mathematics, that's psychology you loving dolt. There's nothing in mathematics that says that people don't have imaginary friends who they think are God.
Holy stuff you're so bad at understanding this.  I'm making a comparison, and I'm stating that it cannot exist based on the fact that there is NOTHING SUGGESTING IT CAN, only the assumption that "well, you can't disprove it, so it CAN be real!" when in reality, until you prove something exists, it can't exist.

I have no qualms about saying my intellect is superior to yours; as pretentious as the word intellect is. But no, people being able to understand your moronic points doesn't excuse you from the habit of trying to sound smart by using words you don't understand.
You're still under the impression that what you assume is fact, and therefore anyone who disagrees with your perception of reality is incorrect.

Newsflash idiot: if you don't understand the words you're using, and someone else does, you're going to look like a handicap. Don't assume other people aren't going to call you out on your nonsensical wording in an argument. Being a handicap has a way of destroying your credibility.
I do, you keep going under the impression that I don't, but then fail to realise that my points have to do with the words I've used, and in turn kind of destroy your argument.  You seem to ignore that often, though.


Exactly how is claiming that someone's argument is mathematically wrong not taking sides?
What side am I taking?

And devil's advocates do take sides, that's kind of what advocate means you moron.
I'm not taking sides in that I'm willing to argue against both concepts, you loving idiot.

Laughing at something is a presumed reaction? Damn right it's presumed in this context, but I doubt you know the definition I'm referring to.


-snip-
"suppose that something is the case on the basis of probability."  A definition you blatantly ignored to try and twist the argument in your favor.  Good job, but when you're wrong, you're wrong.

You're trying to say that it's an understandable and common reaction, which isn't at all true because regular people will simply sit through silly rituals like that out of respect or simply say "no thank you."
No, based on the definition you ignored, I'm giving you my interpretation of what I could've done if the case had actually existed.  It doesn't, and so the word is valid in the situation, and your argument is invalid because you're just so loving bad at understanding such simple things.

There is nothing so humorous about prayer as to illicit a knee-jerk guffaw. It's a ritual we've all grown up seeing in our society and I can't think of a conceivable instance where being asked to pray would cause anything but discomfort in a reasonable secularist.
We've all?  I didn't grow up with it.  I find the preachings funny because I think it's silly to thank imaginary people for food that's, you know, real.  Why do you care, again?

These aren't typos I'm correcting. I'm correcting blatant stupidity and exposing your charade to you. You aren't intelligent, you're below average. Stop lying to yourself.
Yet all you do is attack my rhetoric, and very rarely actually discuss the argument.  Stop and think for a change.

You are worthy of being mocked. You aren't humble and stupid like Honey Boo Boo. You aren't well-intentioned and stupid like George Bush. You're bigoted and stupid. You're arrogant and stupid. You're the worst kind of stupid person. There is literally nothing about you that isn't grounds for mocking.
Hahaha, oh god.  Grow the forget up.

When you talk about how you openly mock religious people in public and how religion is mathematically fallacious you aren't exactly defending yourself at that point.
How aren't I?  Elaborate, please.

No. You moron. No. No. No. No no no no no no no.

The Earth being round isn't a law, it's a fact. It can't be refuted because we can clearly see that the Earth is round. All the astronomy and astromathematics in existence require that the Earth be round for them to function. Every piece of evidence in the universe on the subject proves the Earth is round. It will never be refuted.
It's a law.  Gravity is a law, it is not a fact.  It is observable and cannot be refuted with current knowledge, but the only "absolute" form of proof exists in the present.  Knowledge is a different subject.  You need to learn things before you spew bullstuff about them.

I don't think you understand the definition of retaliate, nor do I think you understand how openly mocking somebody's religion can be taken as an act of aggression.
Well I certainly seem to understand most of the words you say I don't, but whatever you say, honey.  I'm not mocking, as I've proven already.  Stop going on an argument that is not and cannot be true, you loving troll.

Openly mocking people for their beliefs is definitely oppression. There is no argument against that.
There is argument suggesting what you're basing the argument on is false to begin with, so stop ignoring the basics and making stupid ass assumptions what you want to believe is true.

Yeah but you worded it like a handicap because you're hoping that if you use words and phrases you don't understand, nobody else will understand them either and you'll look smart.
No, I word things inappropriately sometimes, but that doesn't mean what I state isn't coherent.  I tend not to read over some portions when I'm refuting points on a forum for building blocks, I apologise for not caring as much as you.

You specifically said that the Earth being round could be refuted, and that it's a theory. Calling something like that a theory requires doubt.
I rephrased it earlier, removing theory from the post.  In fact, you already replied to that.  Nitpicking again?

I'm an atheist. But I'm smarter than you.
Assuming intellectual superiority is usually the result of ignorance.

Though I honestly kind of hope hell is real just so people like you can burn somewhere for eternity.
You're such a miserable person.  I love how you think it's a terrible thing to laugh at someone's religious teachings, yet find it appropriate to burn someone for disagreeing with your views.  I think sociopath is a good catagory to put you in.

People attack you personally because you're a moron. There's no way you're going to refute that by reposting respected atheist work refuting religion.
People were attacking it because they disagreed with the points.  They didn't state nor imply that I was stupid.

I also want to establish that XR-7's heart is certainly in the right place.  I disagree with many of his points but he definitely has more of a clue than I was giving him credit for.  He knows more about some ancient literature than I currently do, and has a better understanding on some diverse perspectives which I cannot personally relate.

On that note, the immense ad hominem is one of the ways Stocking tries to get to people, XR-7.  This is why she's been banned so many times.  She's a terribly disturbed individual with very little happy things to live for.  Try your best to ignore the beast and move on with your life.  I'm finding this entertaining so I'm only continuing to flatter my own personal sense of humor, and to ensure I irritate her some more.

I'll also finish this off by saying that I won't be replying to your silly rebuttals anymore.  When all you can do is insult the opposition, you're of no use to anyone.  Please rethink your actions in the future.

[XR-7]

In what other ways can you be stupid? If your thoughts are stupid, and your actions are stupid, you're basically Lalam24.

Just because someone doesn't agree with your method of thinking doesn't make them stupid.  Everyone is wrong sometimes, even you.

[Harm94]

My post was ignored :(
I cannot into debate

[Lalam24]

My post was ignored :(
I cannot into debate

You're actually more level headed than the majority of the people in this topic.  Take it as a complement, if anything.

[Stocking]

On that note, the immense ad hominem is one of the ways Stocking tries to get to people, XR-7.  This is why she's been banned so many times.

I've been banned twice. Once in a chainban, and once during a fight with Dusty. The funny thing is, most people agree that the people I call out for being stupid are actually stupid.

She's a terribly disturbed individual with very little happy things to live for.

Lolwut? I graduated highschool with a 3.91 GPA, I have a loving boyfriend, I'm on DEP for the Nuclear Program in the US Navy and I'm looking at $41,000/year with full benefits for my first real job with a $33,000 signing bonus. I'm smart, beautiful, creative, and hell I'm even good at video games. What exactly is my life missing?

Try your best to ignore the beast and move on with your life.  I'm finding this entertaining so I'm only continuing to flatter my own personal sense of humor, and to ensure I irritate her some more.

How exactly do you flatter your-

Right, words aren't your strongpoint.

Just because someone doesn't agree with your method of thinking doesn't make them stupid.  Everyone is wrong sometimes, even you.

Are you actually defending his pseudo-intellectual bullstuff? Like, you can take someone seriously who doesn't understand words like outcome and prompt, someone who doesn't know the difference between a fact and a law? Someone who claims to openly mock people in public for prayer? You can seriously take somebody like that and feel that they're actually worthy of having their opinions considered in a real, intellectual debate?

I don't understand you. Did you even read through the last couple posts against him?

[Char]

no, I don't pray before eating

being in a religious area though I do have meals where people pray and I generally just follow along

[XR-7]

Are you actually defending his pseudo-intellectual bullstuff? Like, you can take someone seriously who doesn't understand words like outcome and prompt, someone who doesn't know the difference between a fact and a law? Someone who claims to openly mock people in public for prayer? You can seriously take somebody like that and feel that they're actually worthy of having their opinions considered in a real, intellectual debate?

I don't understand you. Did you even read through the last couple posts against him?

I don't have a right to discriminate about how intelligent someone is.  I'm sure Lalam knows the differences between this stuff, you're just flaming him because he didn't use the perfect dictionary postings like what you keep putting up.  I don't agree with his beliefs either, and that's what the whole argument is about.  I also feel that everyone is "actually worthy of having their opinions considered in a real, intellectual debate" AND is perfectly worthy of having their opinions reasoned with (agreed upon as well as contradicted).

You are not even reasoning with anything anyone puts out there.  You are just flaming it mercilessly and cussing out people who disagree with you.

[Dodger]

Geez Stocking has to be the center of attention

I try to be good...., :(

[Blockzillahead]

It's how Stocking argues, she tries to rattle you up until you lose it. She always did this, she's a troll.

[Crispy_]

trying to have an intellectual debate on the blockland forums the internet is like trying to comment on one of pewdiepie's videos saying that he is horrible and not getting a reaction from his fans whatsoever.