The Like/Hate Thread

[Pinky]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/gunman-enters-d...d=11535128

[Vad]

Hate: Two ER trips in the past two days. Both for over 4 hours. Today's was serious...

[Saz]

Hate: Richard Dawkins. I pretty much subscribe to his views for the most part, but I just find his absolute contempt for religion and anyone who believes in a God really annoying. Fair enough if you think religion is a relic from a time gone by and has no place in modern society, but you don't need to be a pretencious, browbeating prick about it.

Like: Terminator Salvation. WHAT THE FUCK THAT MOVIE WAS FUCKING AWESOME. Even the crappy CGI Arnie had me squealing like a girl in excitement.

[Josh]

Hate: Richard Dawkins. I pretty much subscribe to his views for the most part, but I just find his absolute contempt for religion and anyone who believes in a God really annoying. Fair enough if you think religion is a relic from a time gone by and has no place in modern society, but you don't need to be a pretencious, browbeating prick about it.

Yeah, I felt that way too until I started watching debates with Dawkins in it and I can somehow sympathize with him.

http://www.youtube.com/user/AtheistPlane...FjoEgYOgRo

Seriously, watch this debate he has with an Intelligent Design proponent and tell me you don't die a little inside. And he's been arguing with these guys for years.

[Kaden]

Fair enough if you think religion is a relic from a time gone by and has no place in modern society, but you don't need to be a pretencious, browbeating prick about it.

I 100% agree.

[Saz]

http://www.youtube.com/user/AtheistPlane...FjoEgYOgRo

Seriously, watch this debate he has with an Intelligent Design proponent and tell me you don't die a little inside. And he's been arguing with these guys for years.

I think I've seen that clip before in one of his programmes. I don't know why he even bothers arguing with these people really, he's a smart enough guy he must know that nothing he can say will ever force these people to change their beliefs.

[Josh]

I think I've seen that clip before in one of his programmes. I don't know why he even bothers arguing with these people really, he's a smart enough guy he must know that nothing he can say will ever force these people to change their beliefs.

Because ID is a very dangerous idea, one step towards the dark ages. The moment "We don't know, so god did it", becomes accepted in science, you'll see the downfall of society.

Why Dawkins himself keeps debating these guys, it's fairly simple, the worst thing a human can do is stay silent.

[Jack]

Phone is fucking up and wont recieve or send texts, my roommates are gone so im like here alone as fuck unless i walk to see if someone is home...

goddamn dude, this is isolation I used to be able to bear but fuck this

[Orion]

The moment "We don't know, so god did it", becomes accepted in science, you'll see the downfall of society.

As a science believing Christian, I don't have an issue with ID as a metaphysical argument, but in no way is it and should it ever be considered scientific.

[Ashe]

Here is entirely why Dawkins acts the way he does. He's been studying Biology and other sciences his entire life. He's been personally handling and documenting this shit and has been knee deep in evolution and its information his entire life, with an immersion that only comes from having personally looked at the code of the entire taxonomy list to see first hand all the traits as they pass down, to be involved with it in every way and NOT to just take another's word for it.

Then 70% of a country says "Ur stoopid, the Bible clearly says the things you have tested and retested multiple times with the same end result can't happen, and that's all there is to it. Why you mad at God bro?"

He is pretty much being personally insulted when someone with absolutely no scientific background is writing articles and entire books (Ray Motherfucking Comfort) about how he has no idea what he's talking about and how its obvious that he's just in denial of God. Would you not be insulted for someone to say these things when you've spent your entire life and income to further your study in it? Watch some of his older lectures, where he's just teaching evolutionary biology to classes as a younger man in the 80s. He's not really that indignant and he actually addresses numerous things in his explanations and shows the kids step by step how something like the eye can evolve. Just to have Ray Comfort, Ken Ham, Kirk Cameron, Lee Strobel, or (almost the worst) Kent Hovind (who frequently claims to have been a High School Science Teacher for a number of years) walk up to him and say "Yeah, but how can something like the eye just evolve? Which part of the eye evolved first? The chances of that occurring are the same as a tornado running through a trailer park and a fully formed 747 being left! You are just mad at God!"

Each of them have been corrected on this crap repeatedly and yet still go spout the same crap and write entire books on "how stupid Dawkins is". It wouldn't matter except they are very influential people who have 70% of the country lavishing them like kings to continue this. None of those listed can go five minutes of a debate without saying the words "BUT EVOLUTION IS JUST A THEORY! ITS NOT THE FACT OF EVOLUTION! ITS JUST A THEORY!" despite having been informed the scientific definition for "Theory" multiple times.

Its all bananas with them.

That said, I'll list a related hate.

Hate: The argument of "Teach the Controversy".

[Milk Bubble]

Hate: That I stayed up for over 24 hours, and then got about 4 hours of sleep. Why am I awakeeeee.

[Belle Hibiki]

Hate: The argument of "Teach the Controversy".

Oh god this so much.

What 'controversy?' Our kids shouldn't be required to learn backwards science simply because some religious partisans demand it.

If they started screaming that the Earth was flat, would you 'teach the controversy'? No, because that's fucking wrong. "Intelligent design" is just as fucking wrong, it's just obfuscated behind a lot of fancy fast-talk, misleading interpretation, reliance on a religious text, and other crap.

[Ashe]

Actually, my entire problem is primarily three things. One - You are wanting to teach religion in science class under the disguise of being fair (yet you would be appalled if someone then expected you to teach evolution in Sunday school). However, when mentioning this, only Christianity is considered. What if, in order to be fair and teach of a creation, Islam were to be used in the Science room to show their version of creation? What about the Norse belief? What about Greek mythology? How much hell would be raised if someone were to be teaching these other religions as "alternative theories" and not Christianity? Why is it that teaching Christianity's creation theory in addition to evolution "means a fair and balanced science class" (which isn't science in the first place) and you don't mind excluding all other religions but would be pretty pissed if yours were the excluded?
Two - There is no controversy. The only people who do not agree with it do so for entirely religious reasons.
Three - Which controversy? You know, gravity is also "only a theory". Let's teach that magic spirits hold onto our feet to keep us from floating off the earth as an alternate, for the sake of fairness. What about "Germ Theory"? Should we give equal argument to the previous belief that being sick was simply demonic possession and that scientists are possibly wrong about the existence of germs? Perhaps we discuss the Flat Earth Society's beliefs that the earth is flat? Perhaps (since we love to ignore arguments that are debunked and restate them many years later) we should revisit the heliocentric/geocentric argument? Perhaps we should spend half of Chemistry class NOT teaching Chemistry and instead giving fair time for the discussion of Alchemy instead? Some people like to tell others that the stork delivers kids instead of vaginal birth. Should Astrology be taught alongside Astronomy? Should we teach that perhaps magic is what keeps things running the way they do rather than physics?

Education quickly gets lost in the noise and we have to step back and realize that this isn't about "what's fair and giving both sides" - Its about finding a way to put one culture's specific religion into schools because your specific religion happens to disagree with reality regarding a very specific feature and you absolutely can't stand it. This is precisely WHY America has safeguards in place to not teach things that are not factually and evidentially supported. Believe as you will and no one is walking into your church demanding you teach differently (if so, Westboro Baptist Church would have some problems), but unless it can be tested with the scientific method and repeatedly tested to the same outcome (not a one time occurrence "miracle" that you witnessed in private somewhere that defied physics but DAMMIT it deserves equal time!) then it has no reason to be in schools. End of story.

[Orion]

As much as Dawkins has a right to be infuriated by closed minded indoctrinated people, I'm equally irate with people who use the same line of thinking with religion. The comment I absolutely abhor (sp?) is that Christianity is responsible for the Dark Ages (which it isn't even called anymore), because it is completely the fucking opposite.

[Piper Juunanagou]

Actually, the rise of Christianity did play an important role in destabilizing the late Roman Empire and helping usher it toward its inevitable collapse. >_>;

I like three-day weekends. It makes me happy knowing I can do fuck-all on a Sunday in terms of work and be completely okay when I wake up tomorrow.

[Belle Hibiki]

The only thing that irritates me as much as hardline indoctrinated religious people trying to wield religion in politics is atheists firmly declaring that there is no God and sneering down at everyone that believes in Him/Her/It.

Given that the origin of existence is likely to remain a complete mystery for a very, very long time, stating that there is no God is as much a statement of faith as saying that there is.

[Psyren]

Like- Creationists

Hate- Evolutionist

Question- Muddin, And why for we do it?

[Super Buu]

Hate- Evolutionist

Lots of good posts with intelligent arguments and reasoning ... then I read this and struggle to sit in my zone of safe silence.

[Psyren]

Lots of good posts with intelligent arguments and reasoning ... then I read this and struggle to sit in my zone of safe silence.

Show me a crocaduck that isnt a fake and maybe ill play along.

[Milk Bubble]

Like: Bill Nye. His slogan should be "Provin' everyone wrong with science since <insert when he started>". He's most well known for his kid's show, but all his other stuff I've seen has been totally awesome, too. I mean really, I'm pretty sure he was the only fun part of science in my childhood, and I'm sure plenty of other people agree with me.