Fake "Theist defeats atheist" stories.

[BrainBlow]

So quite simple.
Do you know of more stories like this(that are obviously fabricated by theist)?

 

[Mapp]

Most professional religious hucksters have stories like this. Christian literature, AHAHAHAH (sorry, putting those two words together just brings out the maniacal laughter) is absolute leaden with huge strings of dialogue between believers and fake non-believers. It's the theist attempt at the Socratic method, and I always feel a pang when I read them. The atheists in these false dialogues are always sub-morons, who have never heard Pascal's Wager before in their life. Thus half of the conversation is always them saying, "Why didn't anyone tell me this before?" or "What should I do?" I always think about the poor little Christian who has read these books and tries to pull this conversation involved. It's got to be a terrible experience for everyone involved.

 

[Squawk]

http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/19012

Seen that one a few times

 

[RichardMNixon]

Conservapedia loudly and repeatedly proclaims that atheists and evolutionists always lose debates.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism_and_Debate

 

[australopithecus]

Didn't watch the video because, frankly, TAA makes me want to self harm, but surely most creationists ever have claimed to have won a debate with someone who holds an opposing view? We just have to look at the pages of this forum. Neph vs DonExodus springs to mind.

 

[BrainBlow]

Conservapedia loudly and repeatedly proclaims that atheists and evolutionists always lose debates.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism_and_Debate

I won't even click that link. I feel the bile in my throat already. :x

 

[ImprobableJoe]

This is related to the deal where Creationists are always liars, isn't it? They are so used to making up stories, and believing stories that are obviously made up, that the entire concept of "honesty" has a different meaning to them.

 

[Laurens]

Cock of God seems to think he's managed to defeat all the atheists in the world...

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Cock of God seems to think he's managed to defeat all the atheists in the world...

Yeah, but he also thinks there's a magic dude in the air watching him disapprovingly while he masturbates to photos of livestock.

 

[BrainBlow]

livestock?

 

[ImprobableJoe]

livestock?

Or whatever... it is the underlying "truth" that counts, not the actual factual truth. I'm trying to get into the head of a theist here. :lol:

 

[nemesiss]

http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/19012

Seen that one a few times

only in the eyes of a muslim and an illiterate does it look like the muslim boy won.
i'd give the lad a dictionairy to point out his faulty logic.

livestock?

Or whatever... it is the underlying "truth" that counts, not the actual factual truth. I'm trying to get into the head of a theist here. :lol:

i'd advise a scalpel for optimal results

 

[RichardMNixon]

http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/19012

Seen that one a few times

I've seen that with a Christian substituted for the Muslim as well, it's really pitiful. The most egregious misconception is this silly (and oft-repeated) idea that science only deals with what we can see, hear, taste, smell, touch. No, we don't see the professor's brain, but if we genuinely doubted its existence we could take a fucking CT scan.

 

[nemesiss]

http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/19012

Seen that one a few times

I've seen that with a Christian substituted for the Muslim as well, it's really pitiful. The most egregious misconception is this silly (and oft-repeated) idea that science only deals with what we can see, hear, taste, smell, touch. No, we don't see the professor's brain, but if we genuinely doubted its existence we could take a fucking CT scan.

i think demonstrates how little they understand the term "observe" and are limited by their own perception, which might explain their behavior as "moral" beings.

 

[DepricatedZero]

http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/19012

Seen that one a few times

My favorite part of this was the dismissal of definitions, and the blatant misunderstanding of some. That alone would have made me facepalm at the student and walk away after his first couple sentences. I can't imagine any self-respecting professor who would have sat through it either.

 

[borrofburi]

I've seen that with a Christian substituted for the Muslim as well, it's really pitiful. The most egregious misconception is this silly (and oft-repeated) idea that science only deals with what we can see, hear, taste, smell, touch. No, we don't see the professor's brain, but if we genuinely doubted its existence we could take a fucking CT scan.

i think demonstrates how little they understand the term "observe" and are limited by their own perception, which might explain their behavior as "moral" beings.

This problem of failing to understand the meaning of "observe" is not limited to religious people, it crops up in woo all the time. Especially in the "quantum" bullshit... You see science shows to us that matter needs an observer, so the universe didn't exist before humans existed, and your chair doesn't exist unless you or someone else is looking at it, so if you truly believe it changes when you're not looking, then it will actually change.

Or something like that...

 

[nemesiss]

This problem of failing to understand the meaning of "observe" is not limited to religious people, it crops up in woo all the time. Especially in the "quantum" bullshit... You see science shows to us that matter needs an observer, so the universe didn't exist before humans existed, and your chair doesn't exist unless you or someone else is looking at it, so if you truly believe it changes when you're not looking, then it will actually change.

Or something like that...

you mean this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_effect_(physics)#Quantum_mechanics

A commonly debated use of the term refers to quantum mechanics, where, if the outcome of an event has not been observed, it exists in a state of 'superposition', which is akin to being in all possible states at once. In the famous thought experiment known as Schrà¶dinger's cat the cat is supposedly neither alive nor dead until observed. However, most quantum physicists, in resolving Schrà¶dinger's seeming paradox, now understand that the acts of 'observation' and 'measurement' must also be defined in quantum terms before the question makes sense. From this point of view, there is no 'observer effect', only one vastly entangled quantum system. A significant minority still find the equations point to an observer; Wheeler, who probably worked more deeply on this subject than any physicist thus far[citation needed], devised a graphic in which the universe was represented by a "U" with an eye on one end, turned around and viewing itself, to describe his understanding.


As for the whole schodingers cat thing, the answer isn't alive or dead but unknown.
probably a failure on most people (including my own) to only choose from 2 options, while in fact a 3rd option is right your face. however, if you wait a week you are certain the cat is dead, cause it will die from starvation if it didn't sufficate first.

 

[AdmiralPeacock]

As for the whole schodingers cat thing, the answer isn't alive or dead but unknown.
probably a failure on most people (including my own) to only choose from 2 options, while in fact a 3rd option is right your face. however, if you wait a week you are certain the cat is dead, cause it will die from starvation if it didn't sufficate first.

I used to post on pagan site (which I was recently perma-banned from, for some hypocritical bullshit) - they had an interesting take on schodinger's cat - basically if you were to use their logic and how they applied it, you could open and close your cupboard over and over again - and eventually you'd open it to find an elephant packed into the cupboard instead of your dishes.

 

[Duvelthehobbit666]

I once told an atheist beer is proof god loves you. Now he is a devout pastafarien eating ramen everyday and playing the good old pirate. The day he converted, there was a large snowstorm.

 

[BrainBlow]

I once told an atheist beer is proof god loves you. Now he is a devout pastafarien eating ramen everyday and playing the good old pirate. The day he converted, there was a large snowstorm.

I believe that Thomas Jefferson was the first person on record to say that.