The B3TA Confessional
With the Pope about to visit the UK, what better time to unburden yourself of anything that's weighing on your mind by posting it on the internet? Pay particular attention to the Seven Deadly Sins of lust, greed, envy, pride, posting puns on the QOTW board and the other ones. Top story gets to kneel before His Holiness's noodly appendage, or something
( , Thu 26 Aug 2010, 12:47)
With the Pope about to visit the UK, what better time to unburden yourself of anything that's weighing on your mind by posting it on the internet? Pay particular attention to the Seven Deadly Sins of lust, greed, envy, pride, posting puns on the QOTW board and the other ones. Top story gets to kneel before His Holiness's noodly appendage, or something
( , Thu 26 Aug 2010, 12:47)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread
No you haven't. You've simply made spurious, non-commital references
For example "their existence can be dismissed via a variety of arguments", but not provided those arguments.
But you were telling me how I'm a shouty wanker.
( , Wed 1 Sep 2010, 13:58, 1 reply)
For example "their existence can be dismissed via a variety of arguments", but not provided those arguments.
But you were telling me how I'm a shouty wanker.
( , Wed 1 Sep 2010, 13:58, 1 reply)
"For example "their existence can be dismissed via a variety of arguments", but not provided those arguments"
I see, so when someone claims belief in a creator god then providing an argument that rules out the possibility of a creator god counts, in your eyes, as "not providing those arguments"? Yessssssssss. I merely meant in the follow-up that there exist other arguments against specific religions and their claims for gods. You now want me to list all these arguments for you, just so your pointy little headed objectionism can be sated? Did you not read (of course you didn't, why am I fucking asking?) above where I mentioned that you risk sounding like the theist going "what about the giraffes neck, eh? eh?" with ever more fervent demands for even more disproofs once one is offered. Well, you've been told where to look, go and educate yourself you silly little ignorant prick. (Cue the "oh you've sworn, clearly you've lost the argument" defence employed by all good ignoramuses online everywhere, ever, in lieu of reason or demonstration.
Still waiting for a reasoned demonstration of why agnosticism is correct from you. So far we've had:
Vagabond: "Agnosticism is sensible, innit? We can't prove nuffink, yeah?"
Others: "Go on"
Vagabond: "Yeah, well, we can't prove nuffink can we? Stands to reason, dunnit?"
Others: "Does it?"
Vagabond: "Yeah, we can't prove nuffink, well, because we can't prove nuffink. All opinions are equal-like"
Others: "Deeply fascinating, now fuck off"
( , Wed 1 Sep 2010, 14:07, closed)
Yes I want you to list AND APPLY those arguments.
Simply informing me there are some is absolute, utter tripe.
If not, I simply dismiss you with "Well there are very good arguments against your case. You lose. Next!" which I'm sure you'll agree is not really arguing at all.
But by all means - insult me in lieu of doing so. It would appear very important that you at least have the last word, despite the fact no one's watching, or that my opinion of your online persona is so, in which case you're going to have to do a whole lot better than simply huffing and puffing about your philosolophy degree and how much better you are than anyone with a different opinion.
( , Wed 1 Sep 2010, 14:14, closed)
Simply informing me there are some is absolute, utter tripe.
If not, I simply dismiss you with "Well there are very good arguments against your case. You lose. Next!" which I'm sure you'll agree is not really arguing at all.
But by all means - insult me in lieu of doing so. It would appear very important that you at least have the last word, despite the fact no one's watching, or that my opinion of your online persona is so, in which case you're going to have to do a whole lot better than simply huffing and puffing about your philosolophy degree and how much better you are than anyone with a different opinion.
( , Wed 1 Sep 2010, 14:14, closed)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread