Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

The Democrats Are the Threat to Democracy


OldBrownsFan

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, OldBrownsFan said:

If the article is not "legit" then you should point out where it is lying. Since you brought up studies on the "religious brain":

Atheists embarrassed: study proves atheism uses less brain function

https://americanvision.org/12630/atheists-embarrassed-study-proves-atheism-uses-less-brain-function/

 

 

were u homeschooled by people who were also homeschooled? are these things u beleive the result generational homeschooling?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OldBrownsFan said:

Believe what you want but to explain the existence of the universe and to assume it invented itself or created itself is rather odd...

 

It's only odd if you been told your entire life that is it odd. Your thinking it's more likely a magic wizard, doesn't more it's more likely a magic wizard.

 

Thou shalt not commit logical fallacies
personal incredulity

Because you found something difficult to understand, or are unaware of how it works, you made out like it's probably not true.

Complex subjects like biological evolution through natural selection require some amount of understanding before one is able to make an informed judgement about the subject at hand; this fallacy is usually used in place of that understanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, cccjwh said:

It's only odd if you been told your entire life that is it odd. Your thinking it's more likely a magic wizard, doesn't more it's more likely a magic wizard.

 

Thou shalt not commit logical fallacies
personal incredulity

Because you found something difficult to understand, or are unaware of how it works, you made out like it's probably not true.

Complex subjects like biological evolution through natural selection require some amount of understanding before one is able to make an informed judgement about the subject at hand; this fallacy is usually used in place of that understanding.

Believe what you want but to explain the existence of the universe and to assume it invented itself or created itself is rather odd...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, OldBrownsFan said:

Believe what you want but to explain the existence of the universe and to assume it invented itself or created itself is rather odd...

I have no idea, nor do I going around saying I do. Explain how a magic wizard created the universe?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, OldBrownsFan said:

So you are agnostic and not atheist...

 

2 hours ago, cccjwh said:

Ah the labeling game.

a·the·ist
a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.
 
It gets tiring when the religious try to make a negative an assertion. When do we get to the part where you telling me what I believe? 🙂
 
 
 

Called it!

What part of the phrase "lacks belief in the existence of God or gods", do you not understand. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, cccjwh said:

 

Called it!

What part of the phrase "lacks belief in the existence of God or gods", do you not understand. 

 

LOL...I don't care what you believe or don't believe. I only asked because it seemed like more of an agnostic view but whatever you wish to believe. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OldBrownsFan said:

Catholic School, Public school, college and bible college...but I learned to spell believe in elementary school.

ur becoming more and more of a thoughtless babbling monkey with every passing week. That wasnt the case a few years ago. You used to have more of a rational sense about you. Sadly tgat is gone and you'll splash every piece of boiler plated hystrionic nonsense up on this board like you've decided finally that cal shall not "hogg" (😁)  all the fun

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Clevfan4life said:

ur becoming more and more of a thoughtless babbling monkey with every passing week. That wasnt the case a few years ago. You used to have more of a rational sense about you. Sadly tgat is gone and you'll splash every piece of boiler plated hystrionic nonsense up on this board like you've decided finally that cal shall not "hogg" (😁)  all the fun

The title of the thread I posted seems like "boiler plated histrionics" on it's face but if you read the article it is making a good point against those on the left who are hurling the same type of charges at Trump. Many times what the left does is "projection" with some of the accusations they accuse conservatives of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, cccjwh said:

No, I do a bias check on sources. I don't read the far left garbage either. There are a lot less far left sources, I wonder why? 

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/search/

It hard to fact check a piece that is all opinion. If you read the garbage article and can't tell how bias it is, you might be a Trump supporter.  If a "news" sources use "the left" or "the right" a lot it probably a garbage source.

Here you go..

https://www.wikihow.com/Recognize-Bias-in-a-Newspaper-Article

 

What does your name stand for again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, OldBrownsFan said:

If the article is not "legit" then you should point out where it is lying. Since you brought up studies on the "religious brain":

Atheists embarrassed: study proves atheism uses less brain function

https://americanvision.org/12630/atheists-embarrassed-study-proves-atheism-uses-less-brain-function/

 

 

Yes it does require less brain function to debunk God, Santa Claus, Easter Bunny, so on unless some indoctrination takes over the mix and muddles the process. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, LogicIsForSquares said:

Yes it does require less brain function to debunk God, Santa Claus, Easter Bunny, so on unless some indoctrination takes over the mix and muddles the process. 

I should have used the pink font when I posted that. It was just meant as a humorous response to Woody's study on the "religious brain". When I googled studie on the atheists brain that was the first thing that popped up and I laughed at the header and posted it without even reading it. My point was when it comes to scientific studies you see on the news many times they are not credible. I have seen numerous studies on drinking coffee for example and one year it is bad for your health and the next year studies show it to be good for your health,

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the same here now, the left are shutting down everything and anything in the name of "hate crimes". Either that or they are demanding land grabs, second referendums or people being arrested because of what they put on their bonfires on Guy Fawkes night.

They have become the real fascists in the UK, it's very worrying for the future.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, LondonBrown said:

It's the same here now, the left are shutting down everything and anything in the name of "hate crimes". Either that or they are demanding land grabs, second referendums or people being arrested because of what they put on their bonfires on Guy Fawkes night.

They have become the real fascists in the UK, it's very worrying for the future.

 

You can go to jail for saying mean things in the UK, correct? That seems wild to my American brain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although I am critical of liberal policies in general one thing i always thought they got right in the past was the free speech issue. Their motto years ago used to be "I might not agree with what you say but I will fight for your right to say it". Their answer to offensive speech was not to shut it down but to counter it with more speech. It is sad to see so many liberals today abandon this philosophy to one of trying to shut down speech they don't like or agree with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, OldBrownsFan said:

Although I am critical of liberal policies in general one thing i always thought they got right in the past was the free speech issue. Their motto years ago used to be "I might not agree with what you say but I will fight for your right to say it". Their answer to offensive speech was not to shut it down but to counter it with more speech. It is sad to seen so many liberals today abandon this philosophy to one of trying to shut down speech they don't like or agree with.

Seems to me both sides are pro free speech, or were, depending on Whose Ox is being gored. 

The restrictions upon that are becoming more and more weighted against the right.

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LogicIsForSquares said:

You can go to jail for saying mean things in the UK, correct? That seems wild to my American brain.

Yes absolutely. It’s wild to my British brain and yet it’s the reality. 

Blasphemy laws are basically in effect now the courts just ruled freedom of speech laws don’t apply if it’s insulting Islam. Europe is falling. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LondonBrown said:

Yes absolutely. It’s wild to my British brain and yet it’s the reality. 

Blasphemy laws are basically in effect now the courts just ruled freedom of speech laws don’t apply if it’s insulting Islam. Europe is falling. 

Barak Obama:

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam."

"I didn't like this at the time, because I saw it as a capitulation to Islamic terrorists. Less than a month after his own ambassador was murdered, the president of the United States told the whole world: "Hey, free speech is great and everything, but if you hurt the feelings of these guys, you deserve whatever you get." He lied about the reasons for the Benghazi attack, blaming it on a stupid YouTube video that had nothing to do with it, and then he doubled down in the most shameless way imaginable. He betrayed American ideals because he couldn't or wouldn't admit he was wrong.

But as it turned out, my concerns were unfounded. Obama didn't strike a blow against liberty that day. He didn't embolden tyrants and terrorists. Free speech is just fine, everybody!

Claire Corkery, The National (UAE):

An Austrian woman who was convicted for insulting the Prophet Mohammed did not have her right to freedom of speech violated, a European court has ruled.

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled that courts in Austria, where the woman was found guilty, had balanced the "right to freedom of expression with the right of others to have their religious feelings protected, and served the legitimate aim of preserving religious peace in Austria".

The woman, who has been named only as ES, held seminars in 2009 for Austria’s far right Freedom Party in which she made defamatory remarks relating to the Prophet Mohammed’s marriage to Aisha, which is usually misrepresented as being to an underage girl.

In other words: In 2018 Europe, you can't say that Mohammed was a pedophile or the law will come after you. Punishing you for insulting a man who's been dead for 1,400 years isn't a violation of your human rights, because you've offended a protected class. You've pissed off the wrong people, and now you'll pay.

Think about this phrase: "The right of others to have their religious feelings protected." Isn't that wonderful? You'd better watch what you say, because other people have religious feelings and they have the right to be protected from your harmful words. They have the right to "religious peace," so you'd better not disturb it by saying something you shouldn't.

Who decides what's offensive? Who decides which opinions can't be expressed publicly? Not you. These matters will be decided for you, and you'd better comply or else.

https://pjmedia.com/trending/insulting-islam-now-illegal-in-europe/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, OldBrownsFan said:

I should have used the pink font when I posted that. It was just meant as a humorous response to Woody's study on the "religious brain". When I googled studie on the atheists brain that was the first thing that popped up and I laughed at the header and posted it without even reading it. My point was when it comes to scientific studies you see on the news many times they are not credible. I have seen numerous studies on drinking coffee for example and one year it is bad for your health and the next year studies show it to be good for your health,

 

And if you have a base level of scientific understanding you can look into these studies and determine how legitimate they all are. But you also think an old book is the end all be all source so I may be asking too much.

 

Don't let attention grabbing headlines on day time news discredit everything that is the scientific community, experts, and their work. The attack on expertise is all too common, unfortunately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, MLD Woody said:

And if you have a base level of scientific understanding you can look into these studies and determine how legitimate they all are. But you also think an old book is the end all be all source so I may be asking too much.

 

Don't let attention grabbing headlines on day time news discredit everything that is the scientific community, experts, and their work. The attack on expertise is all too common, unfortunately.

I can say with certainty that decades ago searching out those scriptures in that old book and taking in the wisdom it holds has been the best decision I ever made. There is a difference between wisdom and knowledge and the bible is a book of wisdom. The bible is not a science book although I see science confirming scriptures time after time. Thousands of years before scientists discovered the universe had a beginning (the belief was the universe itself was eternal) the scriptures called it, the universe had a beginning. 

*A 2009 Pew Survey found that 41% of scientists don’t believe in a higher power. while 51% do. (One can be a scientist and believe in God).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, OldBrownsFan said:

I can say with certainty that decades ago searching out those scriptures in that old book and taking in the wisdom it holds has been the best decision I ever made. There is a difference between wisdom and knowledge and the bible is a book of wisdom. The bible is not a science book although I see science confirming scriptures time after time. Thousands of years before scientists discovered the universe had a beginning (the belief was the universe itself was eternal) the scriptures called it, the universe had a beginning. 

*A 2009 Pew Survey found that 41% of scientists don’t believe in a higher power. while 51% do. (One can be a scientist and believe in God).

I agree with that the Bible isn't a book of knowledge

 

You read the study wrong. It said 51% believe in a higher power. Only 33% believed in God compared to the 83% of the general public that believed in God. Also 41% of scientists said they don't believe in God or a higher power while only 4% of the public did. Of course, that study is almost 10 years old. 

It shouldn't be surprised that increased education and a better understanding of the physical world around you lowers the belief in God and the need to have supernatural answers to things 

Of course, no one ever said you can't be a scientist if you believe in God. That doesn't change the desperate attempts to discredit experts we see on here all of the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MLD Woody said:

I agree with that the Bible isn't a book of knowledge

 

You read the study wrong. It said 51% believe in a higher power. Only 33% believed in God compared to the 83% of the general public that believed in God. Also 41% of scientists said they don't believe in God or a higher power while only 4% of the public did. Of course, that study is almost 10 years old. 

It shouldn't be surprised that increased education and a better understanding of the physical world around you lowers the belief in God and the need to have supernatural answers to things 

Of course, no one ever said you can't be a scientist if you believe in God. That doesn't change the desperate attempts to discredit experts we see on here all of the time.

 

"It shouldn't be surprised that increased education and a better understanding of the physical world around you lowers the belief in God and the need to have supernatural answers to things "

That is not necessarily so...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, LondonBrown said:

Yes absolutely. It’s wild to my British brain and yet it’s the reality. 

Blasphemy laws are basically in effect now the courts just ruled freedom of speech laws don’t apply if it’s insulting Islam. Europe is falling. 

 

Change the date a decade or two and it could be accurate.

Image result for Future map of Europe with muslims

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, OldBrownsFan said:

 

"It shouldn't be surprised that increased education and a better understanding of the physical world around you lowers the belief in God and the need to have supernatural answers to things "

That is not necessarily so...

Leading reason to lack of belief is not being indoctrinated in the first place. Now when a child goes to church hears something unbelievable, they just on the internet and research it.

Generational Replacement and the Rise of the Unaffiliated

Thanks to Evangelistic cult following of Trump. Hypocrisy is one of the leading reason Gen Z (and others) are walking away from religion. Great job getting your judges, but you lost the next generation. 

For Gen Z, “atheist” is no longer a dirty word: The percentage of teens who identify as such is double that of the general population (13% vs. 6% of all adults).

https://www.barna.com/research/atheism-doubles-among-generation-z/z-02.jpg?auto=compress

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...