patrick.net

Dan8267 says

marcus says

Hard to decide which of those three tweets are the most offensive. They're all so terrible.

Damn atheist.

And this is exactly why religion needs to be eliminated. Do we really want more Marcus's in the world?

Lets start with eliminating the worst religion, Islam. 99% of our problems will be gone.
If I see a bunch of Mullahs coming towards me on the left side, and a bunch of priests coming towards me on the right side, I will be walking on the right side.
Is it discrimination...yes
Is it profiling............yes
Is it racist.................yes
Do I give a damn.......NO

Dan8267 says

This is true. Isaac Newton was born on Dec 25 and he did have a far greater influence on the world than Jesus Christ, who wasn't even born on Dec 25.

Not really. Isaac Newton contributed more towards the progress of the world, while Jesus did more harm to the world by holding back progress. But as far as influence goes, Jesus is clearly way ahead.

Strategist says

I mean somebody walked on water and today we can walk on the moon.

But they didn't create it and place it in space.

P N Dr Lo R says

Strategist says

I mean somebody walked on water and today we can walk on the moon.

But they didn't create it and place it in space.

I don't knowhow it got there. I have no clue.

Strategist says

Lets start with eliminating the worst religion, Islam. 99% of our problems will be gone.

Wrong. All the Muslims would become Christians and Christianity would become like Islam in the Middle East just like it was during the Dark Age.

The problem is religion and superstition itself, not which arbitrary mythology is behind the religion.

Strategist says

Jesus did more harm to the world by holding back progress. But as far as influence goes, Jesus is clearly way ahead.

Again, if it wasn't Jesus, it would have been another false god. I'd vote for Talos so that we'd be safe from pirates and invaders. Or am I thinking of the Dragonborn?

Whenever people choose to believe based on authority, they leave the truth behind. Whether it's Muhammed or Buddha or Neil DeGrass Tyson, nobody is worth abandoning reason and faith to hold slavishly to a dogma.

Quigley says

Whenever people choose to believe based on authority, they leave the truth behind. Whether it's Muhammed or Buddha or Neil DeGrass Tyson, nobody is worth abandoning reason and faith to hold slavishly to a dogma.

There's some serious bullshit in your statement. Neither Neil deGrasse Tyson nor any other scientist in history has EVER asked or demand people to abandon reason or to take anything on faith or to hold slavishly to any dogma. The entire point of science is that all truth is verifiable and can be independently verified any number of times by any number of people.

So no, you don't get to put our rational science up with other people's irrational superstitious beliefs and say it's a wash. It's not. There is nothing wrong with the scientific method. It has accomplished more than any other philosophy of idea in all of human existence. And science is not a religion and anyone who tries to make it out to be is being disingenuous.

Quigley says

Whenever people choose to believe based on authority, they leave the truth behind. Whether it's Muhammed or Buddha or Neil DeGrass Tyson, nobody is worth abandoning reason and faith to hold slavishly to a dogma.

Tyson does not belong in your list. Jesus does.

Dan8267 says

Strategist says

Jesus did more harm to the world by holding back progress. But as far as influence goes, Jesus is clearly way ahead.

Again, if it wasn't Jesus, it would have been another false god. I'd vote for Talos so that we'd be safe from pirates and invaders. Or am I thinking of the Dragonborn?

OK, but that does not change the fact that Jesus is more influential than Newton.
Most people on this planet learn about Gods before they ever learn about Newton, if it all. Why do you think the world is so screwed up?

So you're saying that a scientist can never be wrong? And that we should believe all that one says? I compared people, not the scientific method and religion.

Quigley says

So you're saying that a scientist can never be wrong? And that we should believe all that one says? I compared people, not the scientific method and religion.

Sure scientists can be wrong. The question is.....Can people who claim to be Gods or Prophets ever be right?

CaptainShuddup says

So that Liberal teacher that reached in her hand bag took out a pistol and then emptied it in the room, is what Liberals would do, if they didn't get tenured?

There you go again. Assuming she was a liberal because she had a phd from harvard, and was a professor of biology.

Hey, here's something to gestate with. Maybe the reason she didn't get tenure was because she wasn't a liberal.

Dan8267 says

Do we really want more Marcus's in the world?

I believe you meant "Marcus' in the world."

marcus says

I believe you meant "Marcus' in the world."

Feel free to revel in any grammatical mistake I make. It's the most you'll ever get.

Strategist says

OK, but that does not change the fact that Jesus is more influential than Newton.

As usual, you entirely miss the point. The point is that Jesus Christ didn't make a damn bit of difference. People blinding following Christ or Mohamed or Brahma doesn't make any difference. You can substitute one false god for another just as easily as you can substitute one Caesar for another.

Newton, in contrast, actually did change the course of the world. The world would have been a very different place had he not existed. Had Jesus not existed, Bobitains would be fighting Joeslums in the Middle East and Fox News would be bitching about the War on Bobmas.

So if LIBRULS want to squelch speech contrary to their dogma, that's bad. Then we call it Political Correctness.

But if Fox Newsers do it, they are just being good Christians, nothing to do with Politics.

Tolerant to the core!

Dan8267 says

It's the most you'll ever get

You mean I don't get to count all those times you made a fool out of yourself?

Dan,

I think your wrong about who was more replaceable. If Newton had not been around, we would have ended up in about the same place, because someone else would have made the same discoveries at a later point in time. The march of technical and scientific progress would have just been a bit slower.

With religion, there are less underlying principles. Thus, there are more differences between religions than say the differences between Newton's and Leibnitz's calculus. So, I would say that scientific leaders are more replaceable than religious leaders, despite the scientific leaders also being more correct and immediately useful.

marcus says

Maybe the reason she didn't get tenure was because she wasn't a liberal.

Her marksmanship belies that.

Dan8267 says

Strategist says

OK, but that does not change the fact that Jesus is more influential than Newton.

As usual, you entirely miss the point. The point is that Jesus Christ didn't make a damn bit of difference. People blinding following Christ or Mohamed or Brahma doesn't make any difference. You can substitute one false god for another just as easily as you can substitute one Caesar for another.

Newton, in contrast, actually did change the course of the world. The world would have been a very different place had he not existed. Had Jesus not existed, Bobitains would be fighting Joeslums in the Middle East and Fox News would be bitching about the War on Bobmas.

OK, so you are saying the path of civilization would have been the same regardless of which God led the way, but Newton changed the course of man for ever.
It's a good point, but the argument can go on for ever. I'm just glad we have scientists in this country who need not fear religious persecution. We need lots of people like Newton. I thank them all. :)