Religion

humblebum

(5,881 posts)

85. You have now exposed yourself as totally dishonest.

Wed Feb 15, 2012, 12:04 AM

Feb 2012

You have shown that you are very aware of what has transpired up to this point concerning the subject and yet you claimed, "If you actually gave "example after example" or anything similar, we wouldn't keep going over this," when, in fact, the subject has been discussed in depth, and not only by myself.

Just because you do not understand or not want to, does not mean that OWK don't exist, or that they are not widely used. You are doing nothing but touting the same old radical atheist narrow-minded methodology, and no amount of explanation will change that if indeed you are determined to continue in that mindset.
Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

102 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Archbishop takes on atheist Dawkins [View all] rug Feb 2012 OP

Dawkins: "the time has come for People of Reason to say 'enough is enough'" -nt NAO Feb 2012 #1

Williams: "I value unity because I believe we learn truth from each other in this process." rug Feb 2012 #2

One cannot learn any "truth" from religion. cleanhippie Feb 2012 #5

The "truth" is that religion does exist and many find some very obvious human humblebum Feb 2012 #6

Hi, humblebum. Welcome back from your time-out. cleanhippie Feb 2012 #7

And I must say, neither has yours. We are still allowed to question and humblebum Feb 2012 #11

Yawn. cleanhippie Feb 2012 #12

I've heard that before edhopper Feb 2012 #8

What are you suggesting as alternatives? MarkCharles Feb 2012 #9

"Other ways of knowing" You know, Magic. mr blur Feb 2012 #16

I saw magic once, in my long life MarkCharles Feb 2012 #19

Just be content to exist inside your little box then. nt humblebum Feb 2012 #22

I'll be content to use some "other ways of knowing", darkstar3 Feb 2012 #23

We have been through this time and again, with example after example. humblebum Feb 2012 #24

Your examples were worthless, and your sources lacked rigor. darkstar3 Feb 2012 #26

So do your posts. nt humblebum Feb 2012 #28

How clever. darkstar3 Feb 2012 #29

If you actually gave "example after example" or anything similar, we wouldn't keep going over this. laconicsax Feb 2012 #30

Then you no doubt slept right through it. nt humblebum Feb 2012 #32

So educate me. n/t laconicsax Feb 2012 #33

So do a search and find out for yourself. Not into reliving the past. nt humblebum Feb 2012 #34

You're just desperate to avoid giving the answers, clearly. darkstar3 Feb 2012 #35

You're putting in way more effort dodging the issue than addressing it. laconicsax Feb 2012 #36

Sorry. "Other ways of knowing" has been thoroughly discussed, explained, debated, defined, humblebum Feb 2012 #38

And right on cue, your other typical and oft-repeated skepticscott Feb 2012 #39

Not nearly as "oft-repeated" as what you are displaying here. You know as well, or better humblebum Feb 2012 #40

Hahahaha! Retreat! Retreat! cleanhippie Feb 2012 #42

Truth. nt humblebum Feb 2012 #46

True fail is the truth. cleanhippie Feb 2012 #47

What a surprise! You avoided the issue again! laconicsax Feb 2012 #48

You brought up the subject, you supply the info. All been laid out for you. Start humblebum Feb 2012 #50

Actually, the subject was brought up well before I joined this thread. laconicsax Feb 2012 #51

Must be hidden in there somewhere, cause i don't see it. nt humblebum Feb 2012 #57

LOL! It's your own post! laconicsax Feb 2012 #58

Well, the only thing I see there is myself pointing out how categorically shallow humblebum Feb 2012 #60

Don't play coy, you aren't very good at it. laconicsax Feb 2012 #76

Yeh, uh huh. You humblebum Feb 2012 #78

I do know that the topic has been discussed many times before. laconicsax Feb 2012 #80

You have now exposed yourself as totally dishonest. humblebum Feb 2012 #85

There's this great phrase I read recently...hmm...what was that... darkstar3 Feb 2012 #81

Been there done that. If it is explained to you again, you will deny it ever happened again.nt humblebum Feb 2012 #83

No link. Guess it didn't happen. darkstar3 Feb 2012 #84

Another fine example of radical atheist reasoning. nt humblebum Feb 2012 #86

Another fine example of ignorant theist circular logic. cleanhippie Feb 2012 #94

deleted humblebum Feb 2012 #82

I just came up tama Feb 2012 #55

I think we disagree on the definitions of "good," "sensible," and "answer." laconicsax Feb 2012 #59

The "truth" is: Astrology and Numerology exists, too! MarkCharles Feb 2012 #10

"truth" is limited to what one can see, hear, smell, taste, or touch AlbertCat Feb 2012 #88

Where you see contradiction, he sees confirmation. Thats a direct quote. cleanhippie Feb 2012 #92

You really don't have a clue, do you? humblebum Feb 2012 #98

depends on truth DonCoquixote Feb 2012 #17

Now hold up a sec. cleanhippie Feb 2012 #21

Psychology can do a good job DonCoquixote Feb 2012 #45

He can believe that all he wants, it doesn't make it true. ;) darkstar3 Feb 2012 #14

nor does your saying you don't believe it make it un-true. ;p Bluerthanblue Feb 2012 #101

Two great minds. ForgoTheConsequence Feb 2012 #3

If I find a link to the livestream I'll post it. rug Feb 2012 #4

Please do, and I hope this thread gets kicked right before hand. cbayer Feb 2012 #13

two overrated minds DonCoquixote Feb 2012 #18

you lost all credibility with Penn Gillette. Goblinmonger Feb 2012 #25

Damn right. darkstar3 Feb 2012 #27

But he sure is loud! laconicsax Feb 2012 #31

You forget one point DonCoquixote Feb 2012 #43

Way to move the goal posts. Goblinmonger Feb 2012 #44

half point DonCoquixote Feb 2012 #49

And Dawkins gave us the concept of the meme. Full point. Goblinmonger Feb 2012 #53

possible DonCoquixote Feb 2012 #54

Jillette is clueless about feminism muriel_volestrangler Feb 2012 #63

Jillette may be DonCoquixote Feb 2012 #69

You state an opinion.. rexcat Feb 2012 #64

the dead DonCoquixote Feb 2012 #66

You missed my point entirely... rexcat Feb 2012 #67

You would not understand DonCoquixote Feb 2012 #70

Don't confuse me with a religious person... rexcat Feb 2012 #72

dismissing the educated? DonCoquixote Feb 2012 #68

Thanks for the laugh. ForgoTheConsequence Feb 2012 #37

Might be interesting! LeftishBrit Feb 2012 #15

Dawkins always wins these things Gore1FL Feb 2012 #20

Will it look something like this? jaded_old_cynic Feb 2012 #41

Debates prove nothing. Deep13 Feb 2012 #52

Debates prove tama Feb 2012 #56

Well, debates like this are not really about skepticscott Feb 2012 #61

Excellent point! rexcat Feb 2012 #65

Good point DonCoquixote Feb 2012 #71

That's part of what I mean. Deep13 Feb 2012 #73

While you are quite correct that no minds will probably be changed, cbayer Feb 2012 #75

Science doesn't usually prove anything either. Jim__ Feb 2012 #62

As a practical matter, science has a record of establishing the truth. Deep13 Feb 2012 #74

I was responding to what you said: "Debates prove nothing." Jim__ Feb 2012 #77

Debates, like trials, are momentary events skepticscott Feb 2012 #87

I have no respect for Rowan Williams. kwassa Feb 2012 #79

?!? Dawkins says over and over in the Guardian, he is a "Liberal," not an Atheist! Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #89

He reiterates it here. rug Feb 2012 #90

This supports your earlier point: that atheists need another central word, focus. But "secular"? Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #91

I think it is spot on. Most atheist are not anti-relgious, but just want secular societies. cleanhippie Feb 2012 #93

Yes. But on the other hand? Any compromise will be taken as near-complete capitulation Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #95

Let them be smug, I could care less. Their ideology is no longer resonating with intelligent people cleanhippie Feb 2012 #96

i'm what could be called a 'believer' and i have NO problem with a secular society. Bluerthanblue Feb 2012 #102

No, he explains it clearly muriel_volestrangler Feb 2012 #97

Interesting point/contextualization; thanks Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #99

Brief write-up here: muriel_volestrangler Feb 2012 #100