I assumed from "Wtf ever" that he didn't know what Scientology is. But I don't know why you would bring that up, since a Scientologist (If it were a real word) would be the advanced study of Science, but since Science has many branch offs, a Scientist is anyone who is well-understanding of more than one science.

lol... So you're pretty much both stupid as fuck.

__________________
██â€-█████████▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓██████▓▓▓▓██████████████████ ██↑
██‡████████▒▓▓█████▓▓██████▓▓▓█████████████▓▓▓██ ██|
██‡███████▒▓▓██████▓▓▓███████▓▓███████████▓▓█▓▓█ ██|
██‡███████████████▓▓▓▒███▌████▓▓█████████▓▓███▓▓ ██|
██‡█████████████▓▓▓▒████▌▌▌████▓▓███████▓▓████▓█ ██|
██‡███████████▓▓▓▒█████▌▌▌▌▌▄███▓▓█████▓▓███████ ██|
██‡█████████▓▓▓▒█████████████████▓▓███▓▓████████ ██|
██‡███████▓▓▓▓▒███████████████████▓▓█▓▓█████████ ██|
██‡███████▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌████████████▓▓▓██████████ ██|

yeah.









was an abstract sarcastic response.

__________________

do your research.

Scientology is a false religion written by a fucking science fiction writer. It's about alien souls escaping from an evil lord and possessing humans.

I don't know where the fuck you get your information from buddy. But you're wayyyyy off.

lmaooo

http://www.scientology.org/

__________________
██â€-█████████▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓██████▓▓▓▓██████████████████ ██↑
██‡████████▒▓▓█████▓▓██████▓▓▓█████████████▓▓▓██ ██|
██‡███████▒▓▓██████▓▓▓███████▓▓███████████▓▓█▓▓█ ██|
██‡███████████████▓▓▓▒███▌████▓▓█████████▓▓███▓▓ ██|
██‡█████████████▓▓▓▒████▌▌▌████▓▓███████▓▓████▓█ ██|
██‡███████████▓▓▓▒█████▌▌▌▌▌▄███▓▓█████▓▓███████ ██|
██‡█████████▓▓▓▒█████████████████▓▓███▓▓████████ ██|
██‡███████▓▓▓▓▒███████████████████▓▓█▓▓█████████ ██|
██‡███████▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌████████████▓▓▓██████████ ██|

South Park, son.

its more or less true though, L.Ron hubbard was a sci-fi writer. A person is an immortal spiritual being or a thetan who possesses a mind and a bod that has lived many lives. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology

read it, i haven't actually been to the scientoloy website but after reading the wikipedia it seems soooo ridiculous

And your welcome to try again with your response in a less rhetorical mannor where you actually tell me why you dissagree instead of acting like a child with a fucking "i didnt do it" excuse leading onto a "no your wrong and im right so ner" high horse low achiever reply to what I said..

Why make a thread if you dont have the balls to back up your opinions...

__________________
RIP jono, peace out bboy.
Pardon Canada Criminal Record Pardons Services Toronto

What opinions? Bitch you came at me with insults and didn't even QUESTION/GIVE INPUT. I've backed up my opinions, you just insulted my view.

__________________
██â€-█████████▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓██████▓▓▓▓██████████████████ ██↑
██‡████████▒▓▓█████▓▓██████▓▓▓█████████████▓▓▓██ ██|
██‡███████▒▓▓██████▓▓▓███████▓▓███████████▓▓█▓▓█ ██|
██‡███████████████▓▓▓▒███▌████▓▓█████████▓▓███▓▓ ██|
██‡█████████████▓▓▓▒████▌▌▌████▓▓███████▓▓████▓█ ██|
██‡███████████▓▓▓▒█████▌▌▌▌▌▄███▓▓█████▓▓███████ ██|
██‡█████████▓▓▓▒█████████████████▓▓███▓▓████████ ██|
██‡███████▓▓▓▓▒███████████████████▓▓█▓▓█████████ ██|
██‡███████▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌████████████▓▓▓██████████ ██|

Dude... What did you expect?

Your innitial post simplified was like "GUYS, GUYS.. dont read this book! richard dawkins is a bitter fuckwhit athiest whose just read a lot and made some friends in the science community... Hes just some rich kid guys dont pay him any attention, hes just trying to trick you"

You havnt backed up your opinions cause the only opinions your comming out with are that this guy is a moron and we should keep mainstream religion as a big part of human culture.. All while his book is largly about the suffering and bullshit it perpectuates in our society and the obvious holes religion has when logic is applied. You gave absolutly nothing in the way of rejecting or rebutting against any points he actually made in his book (Hence showing the dead accuracy of my simplification of your post).


I did give imput........I told you your being an idiot and your arguments are massivly immature.. And all you came back with was rhetoric..

The reason I'm being insulting is because I really cant sugar coat my objective in this kind of argument. Imagine if you tried to push this bullshit in a more public forum?.. Imagine if you had the chance to talk this kind of shit to richard dawkins himself?

How embarrasing for you....

I dont mind arguing the validity of religion or the credibility of a book.. But you really need to up your game... Tell me something that an intelligent 13 year old couldnt tell me.. please

__________________
RIP jono, peace out bboy.
Pardon Canada Criminal Record Pardons Services Toronto

I love your anus, Nostra. Gimme.

I can't do that last bit... Because an intelligent 13 year old would tell you that you're wrong.

Embarrassing*, Massively*, Input*, Initial*, Fuck.. whit? Lmfao. Learn how to spell G.

anyway..

I didn't go against the points he made in his book, I went against how he went about presenting it. I went against how he opened his book, I went about how he's a hypocrite to using black people as an example, and gays "Coming Out Of The Closet", when the mother fucker's family grew up in Africa owning slaves. You have everything wrong about me and you're really making yourself look stupid with continuation of the subject you think exists.

And by the way, I've done more than just read his books, I've looked up his speeches, his backround, his history, his intentions. This mother fucker is not in any fucking place to preach to us about certain shit, and I used his family slave ownership, as my example, to BACK THAT UP. Pull the cock out of your brain before you get a sexual thinking disease.

__________________
██â€-█████████▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓██████▓▓▓▓██████████████████ ██↑
██‡████████▒▓▓█████▓▓██████▓▓▓█████████████▓▓▓██ ██|
██‡███████▒▓▓██████▓▓▓███████▓▓███████████▓▓█▓▓█ ██|
██‡███████████████▓▓▓▒███▌████▓▓█████████▓▓███▓▓ ██|
██‡█████████████▓▓▓▒████▌▌▌████▓▓███████▓▓████▓█ ██|
██‡███████████▓▓▓▒█████▌▌▌▌▌▄███▓▓█████▓▓███████ ██|
██‡█████████▓▓▓▒█████████████████▓▓███▓▓████████ ██|
██‡███████▓▓▓▓▒███████████████████▓▓█▓▓█████████ ██|
██‡███████▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌████████████▓▓▓██████████ ██|

Ok, to get away from the bickering match and onto an actual discussion let's try something.

See, I want to say I agree with 2v but he made his argument all wrong. He did sound like a 4 year old arguing about why their parent is a "stupid poopy monster" for not letting them play in the mud.

Well, I'd like to take this down a different route but with the same viewpoint.
After seeing this book mentioned on a lot of message boards I decided to pick it up and tear through it. I get to the end and I have a pile of tissues used to wipe the tears of laughter from my eyes. Good for Dawkins, standing up for his opinion and saying that God doesn't exist and he is "improbable" in a sense. But I don't think the argument he tried to make really said much at all, except to the creationism believers (and everyone knows how lost a person is if they believed dinosaurs were on the Arc ).

Well what about those that believe in a god, but do not believe in creationism, or as I like to call them, the "not-so-crazies". Dawkins argument falls apart at that point.

You can't flip a theist's argumentative strategy against them to support a argument if they don't believe in the strategy to begin with (using a creationism believers strategy to prove god exists against a plain old believer in god.)

He says that if believers think that since the world is so complex then it needed a creator, and since existence is complex then god himself must be intelligent. Because of the intelligence then we must also assume (key word) that God is complex. If God is complex then he/she/it/whatever must also need a creator of some sort of intelligence, etc etc.

Now, this works very well against those who believe in the creationism, hardcore, "by the book" beliefs. But there are many theists out there that do not hold the same beliefs as this, and see creationism as improbable and just some cooked bologna with a nice fried egg named "faith" on top of it.

I believe this is a good argument if you are facing one type of believer. But this is not a good argument to take on all believers. The battlefield is too vast....

And lastly... For Dawkins to pick on the men/women/children who believe in the insanity that is creationism is a weak move. I don't know what he is trying to prove.
I'm expecting his next book to be "The Mole Men Delusion".

So, if you guys could really continue this debate with some sort of structure I'm just gonna mosey on out.

__________________

do your research.

Spelling......dawkins background....

I think weve all heard enough from you... thanks... bye...


I was a bit dissapointed in the way dawkins deals almost exclusivly with christians and jewish religions... But on the subject of christians, I kind of dissagree with people who will label themselves that after simply picking and choosing what they want and dont want to believe..

A car isnt really a car without an engine..

Just like a christian isnt really a christian if their missing fundemental sections of the christian belief system..

Religion is crazy dude... Simplyfied its more or less a denomination of people who allow themselves to be lead into belief's without any form of proof.. I see where your getting at when you say that dawkins is mainly dealing with extreme cases, but given the opportunity what belief's exactly would you remove from the christian religion in order to make it all seem any more logical and scientific than what it currantly is?

What parts of the bible do you dissagree with that make what you believe any more feasable than the weird and wonderful belief's of creationists?

Do you dissagree that jesus was an avatar and the sole son of god, aspect of the deity that created the entire universe and existance itself? Do you dissagree that the bible was inspired and recited to those who wrote it by god himself? Do you dissagree with the genesis creation story? Would you be such a heretic to admit there is substantial plausability behind the theory of evolution?

And if you actually can bring yourself to take elements away from the bible and discredit them, can you actually safly call yourself a christian? Or is your philosophy on life more personal and not really adapt to that of mainstream christianity?

I mean, granted dawkins does generalise quite a bit on the belief's of those hes arguing against, hes taking it all straight from the fundemental belief's of the religion you guys are still claiming to be a part of and also what weve all heard religious people and theologons say time and time again.. To be a christian, you should believe that existance was designed by an exterior being.. And this is literally what the book is arguing against..

So my overall question to you is, what is it youve changed about christianity in your own mind thats a whole lot more probable than the creationist philosophy?

__________________
RIP jono, peace out bboy.
Pardon Canada Criminal Record Pardons Services Toronto

Ok. First thing is first.

I should've stated the fact that the point of view I was arguing from was that of a group I was debating with at the catholic church down the road from me. We weren't talking about Dawkins in particular, but I was bringing up "the insanity of religion" topic. They went on to tell me, which I believe is a weak but commonly used Theological debate strategy, that there are different sects of christianity and therefore my argument does not apply. I started to mention the whole "basis of christianity" thing with the divine and perfect creator, and they just started crackin' off about nothing. My eyes began to glaze over and I started to drool a little bit.

Now I am not a christian in any form. I don't recognize the fable of Jesus, the divine son of god himself, walking the earth (I don't think I even need to get into why). I decided to try out religion at one point because, why the hell not? But as I got into it and as I read about other religions it made me realize something. Each religion, given the certain aspects and guidelines each has, can be believed over each. You can't have a muslim and a christian argue and one convert the other, unless of course one is really weak minded. Christianity and the Islamic faith, if perceived by the books and through the guidelines they lay out, can both be argued to no end (well, until the crash of civilization). That is why we are faced with the religious genocide (caused by christianity mainly) that no one recognizes (Crusades, Missionaries, Wiping out of the Indians, Wiping out of almost every indigenous culture and religion on the planet).

Religion has this tendency to run itself in circles and into walls occasionally. I believe that the people that I was defending don't like to be grouped with the creationist idea of "no evolution, 10,000 year old earth, dinos on the arc" crap. Then when they are faced with a good argument, they take the religion cop out by saying something like "you gotta have faith" or they make some quote out of the bible. Yes, because when I am looking for a debate that may really teach me something, I want to hear quotes out of a book of hearsay chinese telephone bull shit. Yes, please tell me about the man (men*) named Jesus and about his "miracles" and his parables (which I do believe are good to use to teach lessons).

So to sum that post up, I am on your side Nostra.... I just wanted to post up the defense I was given when taking the Atheist (or even Gnostic) side of the argument. So, if we could get someone who actually BELIEVED in this stuff to argue, maybe this would get interesting. Because there ain't nothing like trying to make a blind man read text.

__________________

do your research.