Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
Here's the Billboard: Being positive won't make any difference, the radical theists will be outraged Fumesucker Jan 2013 #1
It won't just be the radical theists outraged. trotsky Jan 2013 #3
I'm not offended--more like bemused zazen Jan 2013 #5
That's quite a stretch. trotsky Jan 2013 #7
Don't forget the "I'm an atheist, but..." crowd. Iggo Jan 2013 #14
Maybe it would make you feel warm and fuzzy Thats my opinion Feb 2013 #72
My post was actually a tongue-in-cheek response to this: trotsky Feb 2013 #77
Passive-aggressive, rancorous posts are OK when you make them for GAWD. 2ndAmForComputers Feb 2013 #112
one of the prettiest billboards I've ever seen Viva_La_Revolution Jan 2013 #11
How can one have a personal relationship with something inanimate? rug Jan 2013 #2
The same way you can have a personal relationship with someone who may or may not have lived... Fumesucker Jan 2013 #4
Winner! cleanhippie Jan 2013 #6
There's more sense to that that communing with a rock. rug Jan 2013 #8
Is that all you think there is to reality? Fumesucker Jan 2013 #9
Reality is more than human beings. Everyone has personal relationships with people. rug Jan 2013 #10
Do you believe that Jesus is/was just another human being? Fumesucker Jan 2013 #12
No. Are you aware of the concept of the hypostatic union? rug Jan 2013 #13
That's a strong foundation you've got there. mr blur Jan 2013 #15
Sounds more like rationalization for disregarding reality. cleanhippie Jan 2013 #16
If you have something to say to or about me, say so directly. rug Jan 2013 #18
If I have something to say to you you will know it. cleanhippie Jan 2013 #21
Good. Make sure you're looking at me when you say it. rug Jan 2013 #22
Are we playing "Things a priest might say" now? cleanhippie Jan 2013 #23
No, we're playing "Things cleanhippie doesn't like to get called on." rug Jan 2013 #24
Only in your mind. cleanhippie Jan 2013 #40
Ok, go look for some more cartoons now. rug Jan 2013 #43
Feel better now? cleanhippie Jan 2013 #44
Yes, the word is indeed sad. rug Jan 2013 #45
Cool story, bro. cleanhippie Jan 2013 #46
I think you're told old for that phrase. rug Jan 2013 #47
You mad, bro? cleanhippie Jan 2013 #48
No, engaging stupidity amuses me. rug Jan 2013 #49
Then by all means, continue talking with yourself. cleanhippie Feb 2013 #55
It would be far more productive. rug Feb 2013 #56
Then go be productive. The only one stopping you is you. cleanhippie Feb 2013 #57
Fortunately, you only take a few seconds. rug Feb 2013 #58
As with many things you say, it's just plain wrong. It's been a day now... cleanhippie Feb 2013 #59
Thare's a quick three seconds. rug Feb 2013 #83
Do you hear that alot? cleanhippie Feb 2013 #85
Now it's two. rug Feb 2013 #86
but does it fascinate you? Warren Stupidity Feb 2013 #63
Not as much as watching a toile flush. rug Feb 2013 #82
Feel free to try to deconstruct it. rug Jan 2013 #17
Don't think I've heard the term but the concept is indeed familiar Fumesucker Jan 2013 #19
That's a good way to put it: "unscrew the unscrutable". rug Jan 2013 #20
There's no evidence that Jesus existed. Outside of the bible, PDJane Feb 2013 #152
animists and pantheists might disagree. Phillip McCleod Jan 2013 #25
Animists by nature believe everything has a soul, an anima. rug Jan 2013 #28
thanks for the clarifying definitions Phillip McCleod Jan 2013 #30
Patronized comes from pater, son. rug Jan 2013 #31
here i though it came from 'patron'. the booze. yuk. Phillip McCleod Jan 2013 #39
I don't rhink that picture is meant to imply okasha Jan 2013 #29
He had, tama Jan 2013 #33
Good one! okasha Jan 2013 #35
Even if there is no god, and I don't think there is one, ZombieHorde Jan 2013 #26
I love it... Kalidurga Jan 2013 #27
Splitting hairs seeking underlying reality...Sat... sanatanadharma Jan 2013 #32
If you cannot see it, hear it, taste it, smell it, or touch it - then it doesn't exist. Now that's humblebum Jan 2013 #34
If you can't explain something... Act_of_Reparation Jan 2013 #37
You can try to explain tama Jan 2013 #38
"Real experience" is anecdotal... Act_of_Reparation Feb 2013 #89
Useless or usefull tama Feb 2013 #92
Decidedly Useless Act_of_Reparation Feb 2013 #96
Just to make sure tama Feb 2013 #97
Is there a point to all of this? Act_of_Reparation Feb 2013 #105
It was not rhetorical but genuine question tama Feb 2013 #107
That's his usual schtick. cleanhippie Jan 2013 #41
But my "usual schtick" isn't used nearly as often as your "usual schtick" humblebum Feb 2013 #53
Sounds fallacious to me Act_of_Reparation Feb 2013 #91
Perhaps you should make more effort then... gcomeau Feb 2013 #60
Perhaps I should have identified it as sarcasm. It was meant humblebum Feb 2013 #62
I recognized what it was. gcomeau Feb 2013 #66
It can also be reasoned that there is a high certainty that God is real. In any case, humblebum Feb 2013 #67
I dare you to even begin to so reason. gcomeau Feb 2013 #68
Well. if you insist on being technical, then I will change the term "proof" to "evidence." humblebum Feb 2013 #69
"However, there is plenty of subjective evidence to suggest the existence of God. " gcomeau Feb 2013 #73
Your argument, I believe, was for any evidence for the existence of God. One could use humblebum Feb 2013 #74
Wrong. gcomeau Feb 2013 #76
Actually, they are arguments, but they are not arguments that you accept. And yes, we are discussing humblebum Feb 2013 #78
No, they aren't. They're names. Titles. gcomeau Feb 2013 #80
You and I both know that these arguments can never be won. But you are more than welcome humblebum Feb 2013 #81
Don't tell me what I know. gcomeau Feb 2013 #84
Actually people like me realize that subjective evidence very much exists and we also realize humblebum Feb 2013 #87
And yet appear incapable of examining or explaining it. Interesting no? gcomeau Feb 2013 #90
Have you ever had an orgasm? nt tama Feb 2013 #93
I must say no. rug Feb 2013 #95
"evaluating evidence in a supernatural framework is an impossibility" - well, considering your humblebum Feb 2013 #94
Uh-huh... gcomeau Feb 2013 #99
Yes, you did mention that there is a difference between proof and evidence, but you failed to humblebum Feb 2013 #100
You babble on... gcomeau Feb 2013 #103
It's quite obvious that you don't know how to evaluate it either. humblebum Feb 2013 #106
Evaluating evidence in a natural framework is straightforward. gcomeau Feb 2013 #108
No one is debating your methodology and it is very straight forward. What is being debated now humblebum Feb 2013 #109
And what you are avoiding dealing with... gcomeau Feb 2013 #110
I still say you don't know everything about evaluating evidence. And I have dodged nothing. humblebum Feb 2013 #111
What you have dodged tama Feb 2013 #131
Well in that case, I guess I dodged commenting on the weather and revealing humblebum Feb 2013 #133
Yup tama Feb 2013 #136
Good grief. gcomeau Feb 2013 #143
You have received very sufficient explanations of methodologies used to determine humblebum Feb 2013 #144
I have not received ANY explanation of methodology... gcomeau Feb 2013 #145
Good night, Gracie! nt humblebum Feb 2013 #146
Sure, run along now. Don't trip over the tail between your legs. -nt gcomeau Feb 2013 #147
Completely wrong. Zoeisright Feb 2013 #155
"...the universe looks exactly as it does as if there were no God." Really? And humblebum Feb 2013 #157
where exactly did you get that from? Warren Stupidity Feb 2013 #64
Get what from? humblebum Feb 2013 #65
Tell me: 2ndAmForComputers Feb 2013 #113
Probably because after the existence of neutrinos was first postulated, evidence for humblebum Feb 2013 #114
Thanks for admitting your post 34 is a straw man. 2ndAmForComputers Feb 2013 #115
Just how do you figure that that post is a straw man? nt humblebum Feb 2013 #116
Wow, you can see, hear, taste, smell, or touch neutrinos? 2ndAmForComputers Feb 2013 #117
So are you saying that the existence of neutrinos was not empirically proven humblebum Feb 2013 #118
Once again, you demolish your own original post in this subthread. 2ndAmForComputers Feb 2013 #119
You are making a lot of noise but no music. Explain yourself. humblebum Feb 2013 #120
I am intelligible to those that have the ability to understand. 2ndAmForComputers Feb 2013 #121
In that case, I will stand by my original post. nt humblebum Feb 2013 #122
So you're decreeing I don't believe in neutrinos. 2ndAmForComputers Feb 2013 #123
It's more as if you are decreeing that you do not believe in the evidence of neutrinos, humblebum Feb 2013 #124
Incorrect. Act_of_Reparation Feb 2013 #125
I never said that you could see gravity or taste an electromagnetic field, nor implied such, humblebum Feb 2013 #127
Detecting gravity tama Feb 2013 #130
No Act_of_Reparation Feb 2013 #134
If you say so tama Feb 2013 #137
Will do Act_of_Reparation Feb 2013 #139
Minor nitpick tama Feb 2013 #140
Do you not understand, or are you deliberately obstreporous? Act_of_Reparation Feb 2013 #138
"scientists were able to predict the existence of black holes" - so then they did not observe data, humblebum Feb 2013 #141
Wrong again, slick. Act_of_Reparation Feb 2013 #148
So you have now plainly stated that empiricism (or logical empiricism) were not used humblebum Feb 2013 #150
Atheists tama Feb 2013 #142
I sincerely doubt that Act_of_Reparation Feb 2013 #149
"including those which do not rely on direct observation." - so who is talking about humblebum Feb 2013 #151
You say well tama Feb 2013 #153
That was beautifully put. I too feel that human experience is much more complex than humblebum Feb 2013 #154
I would not consider that foolish tama Feb 2013 #128
Agree. humblebum Feb 2013 #129
Flashes of light tama Feb 2013 #126
It's rather teling that an ad for atheism okasha Jan 2013 #36
Yeah, a curtain, books, and landscape is biblical imagery. cleanhippie Jan 2013 #42
So the Amazing Kreskin is still with us. okasha Feb 2013 #70
Or option number three... cleanhippie Feb 2013 #71
Your option three okasha Feb 2013 #98
you mean someone is seeing jesus in a pancake again? Phillip McCleod Feb 2013 #101
Something like that. cleanhippie Feb 2013 #104
It's directed at the religious, why wouldn't it be? gcomeau Feb 2013 #61
that's not the intent of these billboard campaigns Phillip McCleod Feb 2013 #102
or as glenn beck's 'the blaze' puts it in their headline.. Phillip McCleod Jan 2013 #50
I can't understand why something someone (atheists) don't believe in upsets them so much. There must demosincebirth Jan 2013 #51
That you don't understand the issue at all is quite obvious. cleanhippie Feb 2013 #54
Try living... gcomeau Feb 2013 #75
In my experience tama Feb 2013 #88
Deepens? I watched Prop. 8 pass, watched gays and lesbians lose their civil rights... Moonwalk Feb 2013 #132
Oh boy tama Feb 2013 #135
I know the area, and will be out there in April - too late, but I would have liked to see it lunasun Jan 2013 #52
Cool! sdfernando Feb 2013 #79
This is exactly right. Zoeisright Feb 2013 #156
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»"Atheism: A personal...»Reply #52