Qin Curtis Shi Lemay Huangdi is a FAKE?

The BBQ Pit
181

I’m generally pretty tactful, well considered, and level headed as far as atheists goes. I’m in a pit thread against a hysterical, so this isn’t my best work.

You’re just making unreasonable demands and illogical special pleadings for your personal sacred cow. First, I don’t have an unwavering conviction that I’m right. If God scooped me up into the sky and said HEY, GOD HERE, BELIEVE IN ME, I would. I’d consider that I was insane but at that point I might as well go along with the God thing. It’d be pretty strong evidence.

I would also believe in leprechauns if they suddenly appeared out of the woodwork one day, and everyone else saw them too.

That is the exact opposite of being a true believer - my world view goes where the evidence lies, and I spend quite a bit of mental effort trying to break down my own biases to get a clear world view.

Again, you give absolutely no weight to evidence or being correct. You just assume that if a person believes something, it’s equally valid to whatever else anyone else believes.

As far as this: “The first rule of Humanism is “Proclaim the natural dignity and inherent equality of all human beings.” You are not doing that. You are calling most human beings infantile. Because of that I can not respect you.”

What the hell nonsense is that? Did I sign some sort of pledge to be part of humanism? And even then, the conclusion you take from it is ridiculous. You’re essentially saying I can’t make judgements on anyone else’s belief, no matter what, or I’d be violating the prime directive of humanism. So if I mock people who believe in ghosts, or argue against 9/11 truthers, then I’m not respecting the “inherent equality of all human beings”, because hey, everyone’s view is equal and special, right?

So I trust that you go to every thread in which one person battles a belief that is unsupported by evidence with a believe that is supported by evidence, and yell “YOU AREN’T TREATING YOUR FELLOW HUMAN BEINGS AS EQUAL!!! I CAN’T RESPECT YOU!!”, right?

You’re boring. This is standard stuff. Religious people can’t argue their case on any sort of evidence or merits, so they just demand special treatment that no other belief in magical things gets. We don’t say astrology or conspiracy theories or ghost beliefs are off-limits and sacred and if you dare question them you’re a fanatic, but we do it constantly with religion. Why? Only because it’s more common and has greater social standing. Not on merit or logic.

182

What’s so bad about being insufferable, anyway?

183

I’m pretty sufferable.

184

You’re about on par with Qin.

185

Although he does not cop to it in his autobiography of conversion, Lewis had a reputation as a skilled debater in favor of atheism prior to Prof. Tolkien dominating his mind with pipeweed of power.

186

In what way?

This is typical religious stuff. I’ve given you several outs to make a case, like when I asked you to demonstrate why I should have more respect for your magic than someone else’s magic, or to demonstrate that I’m somehow a true believer when that’s obviously not the case.

Instead, you just keep repeating the same assertions that I already debunked.

Look, I treat all magical beliefs with no evidence the same. Astrology, healing crystals, religion, whatever. You might be right there with me on astrology and healing crystals - just fine when I assume I’m the right one on that - but then when I use the exact same logic against religion, it’s WOAH WOAH WOAH, we have to act like this particular magic has some special status even if you don’t think it’s true. You have to revere this magic, as if the jury is still out, and reasonable people can disagree, and the evidence is conflicted.

You want a special unquestionable status for your magic. Justify it. If you can’t, then it’s pretty silly to get angry at people for dismissing your magic in the same way they dismiss other people’s magic. And further ridiculous to say “people who don’t believe in this magic are way more fanatical and blind believers than people who believe in this magic!”

187

Looks like asking for evidence is rude or something.

188

It’s why we’re on the innertubes and not interacting with real, PHYSICAL people. Some see that as a negative. I see it as being Homo erectus 3.0. :smiley:

189

Do you know who else is a fan of Homo erectus?

190

That movie sucked. :wink:

191

Every other homo?

192

Oh, well then. That’s much better.

193

Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

194

Because it was the reason put out for his behaviour, the one that is supposed to elicit sympathy (and does for you). Hence an explanation put forward to deflect negative judgment - an “excuse”. You didn’t have to explicitly say it was an excuse to offer it as one - excuses aren’t just about completely eliminating responsibility, as you seem to be implying. You can have “an excuse” without that completely “excusing” behaviour - you seem to be meaning only the latter sense, I am meaning the former sense: just having some sympathy for Qin based on his being Aspie is using Asperger’s as an excuse for his behaviour. It is not “excusing his behaviour”, which would mean, to me (and, it sound like, to you), forgiving it, but it is having an excuse for it - a sympathetic reason.

The two senses of “excuse” are slightly different, and the verb form is more often the “forgive, pardon” sense. The noun form is more often the “alleviate negative judgement” sense, and that’s the sense I used it in.

Asperger’s is no excuse for sexual harassment - because nothing is. It’s inexcusable.

tl;dr: version - Are you so anal that you are going with an “I didn’t actually use that word” rebuttal? You said the fact that he was a kid with Aspergers made him sympathetic to you. I said it did no such thing for me. That’s the long and the short of it.

195

False balance or the balance fallacy. Relevant Dinosaur Comic

196

How the fuck is anything I posted here “religious”? I am not arguing the existence of God here. I seriously do not give a shit about that. My point is that you being so damn sure of yourself makes you just as much of a douchebag as Qin. The fact that you continually think that I am arguing for religion just shows your lack of rationality and comprehension.

My point isn’t that you’re wrong, it’s that you are a self important douchebag. There is no way in Hell you, SenorBeef, can argue with religous people in good faith. You just don’t have it in you. You are so damn passionate about your own atheism that you lack the rational detachment in order to do that.

197

Yeah, Beef… stop being so confident.

198

If there’s any false equivalency involved, it’s in giving too much credit to religion. 9-11 being a conspiracy or the moon landings being faked or world leaders secretly being alien lizard people are all much more plausible than the majority of religions.

Reptilians.

A really silly conspiracy theory that is still far more plausible than, say, Christianity. Religion is the bottom of the intellectual barrel, one of the stupidest things you can believe in.

199

Isn’t that SenorBeef’s complaint regarding Qin?

Fucking hypocrites.

200

Is it? Heck, an improper amount of confidence on Qin’s part isn’t even in his top ten list of faults.