b3ta.com qotw
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Question of the Week » Books » Post 1491673 | Search
This is a question Books

We love books. Tell us about your favourite books and authors, and why they are so good. And while you're at it - having dined out for years on the time I threw Dan Brown out of a train window - tell us who to avoid.

(, Thu 5 Jan 2012, 13:40)
Pages: Latest, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, ... 1

« Go Back | See The Full Thread

atheism = a lack of belief in the supernatural generally or specifically in deities
They can't tell you over and over about their religious beliefs because they don't have any. Is everybody in your family as thick as you?
(, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 17:11, 1 reply)
Finally!
A-theism - quite correct.
Atheists dont have beliefs - nonsense. They have different beliefs but they do not have "No" belief.
The point being made, but rather poorly articulated, is that Dawkins is a religious zealot. He is a zealot for the religion of a-theism. Dawkins is a first rate scientist and has done significant work in the field of evolutionary biology but constantly fails to understand his very own subject when addressing the world in regard of religion. We have an innate need for religion: be it: sex, capitalism,internet, atheism or church etc. Evolution has simply not got far enough to get away from this and is unlikely to do so within the short lifespan of one human being. As soon as well all realise this the better. Far more helpful was the Atheist bus campaign which did a lot more to raise the debate and stimulate proper thought.
(, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 18:13, closed)
Fucking hell. And people accuse Dawkins of being a pompous bore.

(, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 18:16, closed)
You see
Quite often, people give themselves the label "atheist" in a vain attempt to confer an air of "intellectual" about themselves. This is very sad and unfortunately most of those who class themselves as "atheist" fall into this camp and are anything but intellectual.
(, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 18:22, closed)
Why does someone have to be an "intellectual" to not believe in a supreme being?

(, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 18:28, closed)
If I understand it right,
the people referred to by gearanach use their non-belief in a supreme being as evidence of their supposed intellectual superiority, even if they are severely lacking in other areas.

Also, the plebs need religion so that they can be happy with what they've got and never try to achieve anything greater.
(, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 18:59, closed)
Why are you keeping up with the feeble attempt at condescension when your first post already revealed you to be barely literate?
Just ... you know ... out of idle curiosity.
(, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 18:57, closed)
"intellectual" atheist
found. spp exists.


Im a scientist not a fucking english student. I can spell, but the rest of it eludes me.
(, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 19:45, closed)
You're a pisspoor excuse for a scientist, chum.
I said that atheists don't have religious beliefs. You wanked yourself off for a paragraph. Which part of that did you think demonstrated your intellect in a good light?
(, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 20:00, closed)
If he's a post-normal scientist, that would explain a lot.

(, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 20:11, closed)
For the really fucking thick
religion = ties that bind.
atheists - bound by a common a-theism

I never claimed to be intellectual - thats something you have placed upon me.

Scientist - better than you fuckwit.
(, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 20:23, closed)
Yep, DEFINITELY a post-normal scientist.

(, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 20:26, closed)
I'd bet my left testicle that he's barely scraped a GCSE in general science.

(, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 20:31, closed)
That's not a dictionary definition, petal.
That's you desperately trying to wriggle out of the pit of nonsense you've dug for yourself.

dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion

And I am a scientist and an intellectual. I have a doctorate in a scientific discipline, I worked as a researcher in a university and I now work as a consultant. And you're a prat.
(, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 20:30, closed)

Now.. Im going to grant you "prat" because I continued to plough this furrow.

You wont win on the "religion" definition though and you are wrong on that one:
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/religion#Etymology

I've touched a nerve with the "intellectual atheist" thing tho.

"barely scraped GCSE in science" - I don't have a GCSE in science.
(, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 20:38, closed)
Yes. The definition of all words in current usage derives directly and unbendingly from their classical roots.
You total fucking bell end.

That's "bell" from the Germanic for "shout" and "end" from the proto-european for "opposite". Therefore meaning "one who should talk very quietly so that nobody hears".
(, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 20:46, closed)
tee hee
poke poke....
(, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 20:52, closed)
Of course.
The inevitable "ha ha I'm only trolling you" defence. The last refuge of the internet fail.
(, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 20:53, closed)
nah - just bored now
your smugness is only outweighed slightly by the overbearing need to get the last word in.
(, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 22:06, closed)
Shambles the only discipline I can see you partaking in is
a good whipping from Nanny when you've been a naughty little boy again.
(, Mon 9 Jan 2012, 6:39, closed)
This calls for some kind of science-off with bunsen burners and test tubes and stuff.

(, Mon 9 Jan 2012, 11:09, closed)
you'd better explain what you mean by 'religeon' and 'belief'
becuase you're not making any sense.
(, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 19:21, closed)
Im using
dictionary definitions so have no need of explanation. I didnt want to waste any more words than I had to. It doesnt make sense if you dont want it to.
(, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 19:44, closed)
Ah right
I didn't realise you were the source of fundamental truths of human existence.

Carry on.
(, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 19:49, closed)
Are you using Humpty Dumpty's dictionary?
If you're asserting that atheism can be considered as a type of religion then you're a retard. I bet you're not even a fucking biologist.
(, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 20:03, closed)

« Go Back | See The Full Thread

Pages: Latest, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, ... 1