17-Question test to see if your beliefs are logically defensible

[FUCK THE POLICE]

the faith that you're right

the faith that your belief that god doesn't exist is right

the faith that it is only religions who have faith and bigotry

I do not lean on faith, I lean on evidence.

 

[/MSG/]

I do not lean on faith, I lean on evidence.

And the faith you put in that evidence it what gives credence to it. Think about it. For thousands of years it was a fact that our sun revolved around the Earth. But now our current evidence says otherwise. What will happen in the next thousand years to all your evidence in a lack of god?

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

And the faith you put in that evidence it what gives credence to it. Think about it. For thousands of years it was a fact that our sun revolved around the Earth. But now our current evidence says otherwise.

For thousands of years people believed that the sun revolved around the earth without evidence. For thousands of years people have believed in god without evidence.

What will happen in the next thousand years to all your evidence in a lack of god?

There is no evidence for a lack of god.

 

[/MSG/]

For thousands of years people believed that the sun revolved around the earth without evidence. For thousands of years people have believed in god without evidence.

No, just all evidence and logical measure pointed to their conclusion. Change is as much a part of science and logic and reasoning as it is anything else. Why 60 years ago to think that there were parts of matter smaller than an atom was lunacy. But low and behold, all the world was wrong.

Everything we know is built on very specific models with an utterly limited pool of data, based solely on our own ability to perceive.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

No, just all evidence and logical measure pointed to their conclusion. Change is as much a part of science and logic and reasoning as it is anything else. Why 60 years ago to think that there were parts of matter smaller than an atom was lunacy. But low and behold, all the world was wrong.

Everything we know is built on very specific models with an utterly limited pool of data, based solely on our own ability to perceive.

Yes. And there's no reason to pollute that already limited pool of data. There's no reason to add imaginary perceptions to our already limited perceptions.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

No, just all evidence and logical measure pointed to their conclusion.

What evidence pointed to a sun that revolves around the earth more than an earth the revolves around the sun? What would the sun have looked like if it had looked like the earth was revolving around the sun?

There were actual mathematical models predicting the the sun was much larger than the earth back in ancient times. The ancients chose to ignore the evidence because their philosophical and religious beliefs held that the universe should be earth and human centered.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

And what are you trying to say here? Is the solution to having a limited amount of data to just make shit up? No, you get more data, you get more evidence, you construct better models. Our perceptions are limited but they're all we have. You don't go "this is unexplainable, let's make shit up to fill in the gap."

The evidence constantly changes, things are constantly being proven wrong, and science evolves to make up for that. Religion doesn't. It holds onto what it believes forever. And there is something inherently disturbing, depressing, and anti-human about that.

Thank god there are so many things out there waiting to be known! What a boring, dull existence it would be if god really did existence.

 

[Minister of Truth]

I got the third place prize.

I think it liked me for saying that atheism is a rational conclusion and that we should be able to discount the Lochness Monster despite lack of evidence, but it hated me for calling bullshit on its suffering questions by saying that there is not necessarily anything special about someone dying a horrible death, because it thinks religion is all about suffering. I hate suffering - it hurts.

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

And what are you trying to say here? Is the solution to having a limited amount of data to just make shit up? No, you get more data, you get more evidence, you construct better models. Our perceptions are limited but they're all we have. You don't go "this is unexplainable, let's make shit up to fill in the gap."

The evidence constantly changes, things are constantly being proven wrong, and science evolves to make up for that. Religion doesn't. It holds onto what it believes forever. And there is something inherently disturbing, depressing, and anti-human about that.

Thank god there are so many things out there waiting to be known! What a boring, dull existence it would be if god really did existence.

Religion tries to evolve, it's zealots learn a new discourse to pervert with their stupidity, and we wind up with incoherent rantings of people like Dinesh D'Souza, fascist sellout extraordinaire.

 

[Lowaicue]

Religion tries to evolve, it's zealots learn a new discourse to pervert with their stupidity, and we wind up with incoherent rantings of people like Dinesh D'Souza, fascist sellout extraordinaire.

I wouldn't call changing your sales story to suit changing conditions (or improved knowledge) evolution. Spin? Yes. Desperation? Yes. Defending obscene income and riches? Abso-bloody-lutely.

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

I wouldn't call changing your sales story to suit changing conditions (or improved knowledge) evolution. Spin? Yes. Desperation? Yes. Defending obscene income and riches? Abso-bloody-lutely.

I would, it's the same as making your claws sharper or your legs faster.

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

Don't get me wrong, it's still an ugly and ineffective beast.

Let's see if the green fascists resort to religion after their "science" is debunked.

 

[Minister of Truth]

No.

WIN.