
Too srs? Eh, it's under 7 mins, and I think he makes some great arguments. It's time we started treating belief in God like belief in Flat Earth; it has just as much evidence, and makes just as much sense.
If you rant about alien lizard presidents and chemtrails, you get a nice padded jacket, but an invisible being that controls the world, walking on water, virgin birth, coming back to life -fine, teach it to kids.
( , Thu 16 Aug 2018, 19:23, Reply)

Jesus loves you, but if you don't love him back, he'll make you burn for all eternity.
( , Thu 16 Aug 2018, 19:47, Reply)

You see and feel his warmth every day from dawn to dusk (except when the evil moon blocks it out).......read the Bible substituting "the Sun" in place of "God" and it all makes sense!
( , Thu 16 Aug 2018, 20:51, Reply)

And 12 of Murdoch’s other rags as the apostles?
( , Fri 17 Aug 2018, 10:11, Reply)

Im not religious, its all man made tosh. But I do believe humanity needs something to establish some kind of balance. Otherwise you just end up with anarchy
( , Thu 16 Aug 2018, 21:23, Reply)

Christians don't kill, because they think that God will punish them.
Atheists don't kill, because they think it's immoral.
Guess who has killed a billion times more?
( , Thu 16 Aug 2018, 21:48, Reply)

( , Thu 16 Aug 2018, 22:06, Reply)

NWOT
Oddly wonky captions, especially after 2.06, movement compensation problem?
m.youtube.com/watch?v=raeq0fzdqoE
Beautiful Abyssinian cat anyway.
( , Thu 16 Aug 2018, 22:48, Reply)

this was decided in a recent joint-session of Argumentative Ploy Rankers. It's now considered intellectually lower than saying "nah-a" as a rebuttal.
( , Thu 16 Aug 2018, 22:42, Reply)

they are all worded poorly. Contradiction with supporting evidence is refutation. name-calling is an ad hominen attack. "Explicitly" is a redundant adverb, you would hardly refute something implicitly. "using quotes" is just stupid. Does it mean citation? The point of an argument is to establish truth so there is no additional merit as to whether you dispute the "central point" rather than a peripheral one. You oppose what you feel is false.
If you're making an "opposing case", it is more than contradiction, which only needs a claim that your opponent is wrong. The use of "case" implies substance.
All in all it's just a banal, poorly thought-out gif of the type somebody might post on facebook and feel unmeritted smugness, and the act of posting it as a riposte makes the poster guilty of the very sin that this inessential pyramid failing attempts to condemn; that of bad, shallow argument
( , Fri 17 Aug 2018, 6:37, Reply)

you asked me what was wrong with your gif. it turns out to be quite a lot, I'd consider not using it again.
( , Fri 17 Aug 2018, 7:57, Reply)

still, I really hate that gif. Also people saying things like "strawman fallacy", usually misapplied. both these things are enough to prod me out of my stupor
( , Fri 17 Aug 2018, 12:33, Reply)

Ad Hom isn't name-calling. A lot of people seem to think it is, but there's other ways to argue based on the person. For example, I guess it's understandable that you don't understand this because you've not studied Latin.
Responding to the person's argument is clearly not ad hom, by definition, so not interchangeable, as you claimed.
"Contradiction with supporting evidence is refutation" - I'm not sure what point you're trying to make there, because the pyramid talks about contradiction withOUT supporting evidence. And that, BTW, was an example of using quotes; it's not so stupid.
( , Fri 17 Aug 2018, 14:54, Reply)

ad hominen means "to the person", so for example, calling somebody "a thick pretentious fuckwit who thinks that his public school latin gives him some sort of intellectual gravitas inevident in his discourse" would be both name calling and also an ad homoinen attack directed "to the person". to put them in seperate categories is redundant
As to your second point, I was refering to the definition for counter argument above which states "contraction with supporting evidence" which is also a good description of Refutation, as I said. It's a pointless pyramid designed only to impress the intellectually bereft
( , Fri 17 Aug 2018, 15:40, Reply)

( , Fri 17 Aug 2018, 16:03, Reply)

An ad hominem attack is not quite as weak as name-calling. It might actually carry some weight. For example, if a Boris Johnson wrote an article saying MP salaries should be increased, you could respond "Of course he would say that. He's an MP."
That wouldn't refute his argument, but it is at least relevant.
( , Fri 17 Aug 2018, 16:04, Reply)

And is probably the weakest form.
( , Fri 17 Aug 2018, 18:28, Reply)

"Attacks the character of the writer without addressing the substance of the argument."
Learn how to link.
Yes, I used a personal attack on a different thread, ie "cockwomble". B3ta wouldn't be b3ta without that stuff, but still - I shouldn't have stooped to an insult. I stand by the substance of my argument there, but it was not justified to call names. Sadly, the b3ta mentality normalises it. I'll reconsider in the future, and I'm sorry.
How is your glass house holding up? "You're a fucking moron" (above) doesn't sound very Christian.
( , Thu 16 Aug 2018, 23:01, Reply)

"You're a fucking moron" (above) doesn't sound very Christian.
Possibly unchristian but acceptably punctuated. That puts it in the top 5% of internet comments whether you agree with it or not.
( , Thu 16 Aug 2018, 23:42, Reply)

Also we have ample documentation suggesting that it may actually be true.
( , Fri 17 Aug 2018, 14:39, Reply)

Finding an alternative to those, often supportive, belief systems seems to be the difficult task. Particularly for the less critical people who want something to believe in, something to follow.
Wait a sec, this isn't funny.
( , Thu 16 Aug 2018, 23:57, Reply)

Firstly, imagine that you are floating in space looking down at the world. Now imagine in your space ship next to you in the cabin there is a beaver. If you are having difficulty imagining a beaver, then imagine another furry woodland creature of approximately similar dimensions. Now, a beaver, if it is a beaver that you're imagining, needs a diet of green leafy vegetables and high-calcium starch meal if you're to keep it as a pet. One of the most important things to do is to look around your home and identify areas that the beaver could chew with his well developed incisors, and either paint them with a heavy pine lacquer that the beaver won't feel inclined to bite, or to simply remove those objects from within the beavers reach. Have him checked by a vet regularly, and remember: beavers love water. I wish you many years of enjoyable beaver ownership.
( , Thu 16 Aug 2018, 22:56, Reply)

b3ta.com/users/profile.php?id=3
( , Fri 17 Aug 2018, 22:28, Reply)

He's omnipotent, right? So why does he starve 3 million children to death every year?
Where's your evidence for this God? Why should I believe it more than Santa Claus?
Maybe you've spoken to "Flat Earthers", and know how frustrating it is. They have zero evidence for their claims, they just bullshit you, spam nonsense, they change subject, they get abusive.
Well, guess what. So do Christians.
No logic, no proof, no evidence, no credibility, utter bullshit.
( , Thu 16 Aug 2018, 23:25, Reply)

no doubt one now exists in some sort of multi dimensional parallel universe according to some of the currently touted theories so how do you feel about invoking those poor innocent unsuspecting souls into possible existence in such a universe you inconsiderate cunt? why don't you try and imagine something nicer, eh?
( , Thu 16 Aug 2018, 23:37, Reply)

You must have the two otherwise your argument fails and you're a smelly poo face.
( , Thu 16 Aug 2018, 23:42, Reply)

Because they are a cunt.
Imagine the world a bored cunt would make.
Here we are. It is exact to the finest detail
This reality is proof of God.
And that they are a cunt. And they hate every single one of us.
( , Fri 17 Aug 2018, 0:01, Reply)

Are the worst of all the cunts.
Government is your god. And you put yourself above everything.
Your problem is you haven't enough near-death experiences to sense spiritual reality. So dazzled by physical reality there cannot be anything else beyond it.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2018, 1:44, Reply)