What is a New Atheist

[kimmy]

I like how earlier in the thread Betsy explained that "New Atheist" referred to Dawkins and his associates, and people in their movement... but now "New Atheist" is basically an ad-hominem attack against anybody Betsy disagrees with.

-k

[CANADIEN]

DISHONEST.

Like in...

betsy:Are you a Christain?

me: I am a Christian

betsy: Answer the question

me: It is answered

betsy: You are not a Christian. Are you a Christian?

me:answered already

betsy: You are not a Christian

OR

betsy: evolution is not a fact

others: it is

betsy: Have I said otherwise?

others: so, you acknowledge the fact of evolution

betsy: evolution is not a fact

¸

Edited September 3, 2011 by CANADIEN

[CANADIEN]

I like how earlier in the thread Betsy explained that "New Atheist" referred to Dawkins and his associates, and people in their movement... but now "New Atheist" is basically an ad-hominem attack against anybody Betsy disagrees with.

-k

Uncanny how attributes she claims belong to others match HER so perfectly.

[betsy]

I like how earlier in the thread Betsy explained that "New Atheist" referred to Dawkins and his associates, and people in their movement... but now "New Atheist" is basically an ad-hominem attack against anybody Betsy disagrees with. -k

Then obviously you don't understand the meaning of adhominem.

Out of curiousity, what is your definition of the word, adhominem?

I hope you don't run off hiding - which seems to become your bad habit - without giving your definition....only to resurface after sometime later - like, now - hoping that nobody noticed nor remembers that you failed to answer key questions that totally annihilated your arguments in other topic(s).

Edited September 3, 2011 by betsy

[CANADIEN]

Then obviously you don't understand the meaning of adhominem.

betsy; People who don't agree with me are this, and this, and that and all kind of bad or silly things. And 1+1=5

others; 1+1=2

betsy: You are this and this and that and all kind of bad and silly things.

others: That's an an ad hominem attack.

betsy: See, you are this and this and that and all kin of bad and silly things. And you don't know what ad hominem means. I am right again.

[betsy]

Hello, Kimmy? Yooooo-hooooooo

<from a cheesy B-movie>

Hello? Is anybody there? Hellooooo?

maybe...gone hiding again?

[betsy]

betsy; People who don't agree with me are this, and this, and that and all kind of bad or silly things. And 1+1=5

others; 1+1=2

betsy: You are this and this and that and all kind of bad and silly things.

others: That's an an ad hominem attack.

betsy: See, you are this and this and that and all kin of bad and silly things. And you don't know what ad hominem means. I am right again.

I'm not asking you to give the definition. I already know you don't know from squat!

I'm so positive about that!

Just by your own post I'm quoting above - it's the very rope you've strung around neatly on your neck!

Be a good boy. Settle down. Don't interrupt.

I'm hunting down Kimmy!

Edited September 3, 2011 by betsy

[cybercoma]

betsy, you're not a very nice person. Thankfully, I've never met any other Christians as snide and rude as you.

[kimmy]

Then obviously you don't understand the meaning of adhominem.

Out of curiousity, what is your definition of the word, adhominem?

I hope you don't run off hiding - which seems to become your bad habit - without giving your definition....only to resurface after sometime later - like, now - hoping that nobody noticed nor remembers that you failed to answer key questions that totally annihilated your arguments in other topic(s).

hmm? Which key arguments?

-k

[CANADIEN]

hmm? Which key arguments?

-k

Be nice to betsy. Yousee, unlike she and I, you have better things to do in life than being here and that, like so many other things, is something she doesn't understand.

[kimmy]

Out of curiousity, what is your definition of the word, adhominem?

First you stated that in using the term "New Atheist" you were referring to Dawkins' movement.

Next you've come up with a list of insulting characteristics that you rather arbitrarily assign to "New Atheists".

And then, completely disregarding your initial premise, you proceed to declare people at your discretion to be "new atheists", thereby assigning them the insulting characteristics you've associated with that term.

So yes, despite your attempts to dress it up, this is just an ad hominem attack on people you disagree with.

-k

[CANADIEN]

Just by your own post I'm quoting above

It is evident to about anyone that I am taking your position and your way of arguing them as the joke they are. It is also evident that you do not, and will never understand that.

betsy: I know everything

others: You don't know everyone is laughing at you

betsy: I am not talking to you. You are not laughing at me. I don't know what you're talking about. I am right again.

Edited September 3, 2011 by CANADIEN

[kimmy]

I hope you don't run off hiding - which seems to become your bad habit

I have a full-time job and a part-time job, as well as hobbies and a busy social life. I'm not always available to tend to your follies.

You, judging from the amount of time you spend posting your inane arguments and watching Dr Craig videos, seem to be a shut-in that has virtually nothing to do other than visit websites. Shouldn't you be out ministering to the homeless or something?

-k

Edited September 3, 2011 by kimmy

[CANADIEN]

Shouldn't you be out ministering to the homeless or something?

-k

A person with no home and who has to go through garbage cans to find something to eat doesn't care whether or not evolution is science. No interest there.

[cybercoma]

In the words of Penn Jillette, I'm a radical atheist. I not only don't believe in God, but I don't think anyone else buys that crap either.

[kimmy]

Atheists and scientists are scared to death of the religious mob thats been persecuting non-believers for thousands of years, burning their books, suppressing their ideas, killing them, and arresting their leaders. So in general they have gotten used to tip-toing around and being very carefull not to offend the religious mob.

In MOST OF THE WORLD, even openly admitting that you are an atheist would put you at risk of harm by the religious mob.

An ongoing story that illustrates the point:

US Army Spiritual Fitness test

No, not religious! "Spiritual!" It's completely different!

And it's completely optional! (that's what we'll tell the judge...)

-k

[betsy]

First you stated that in using the term "New Atheist" you were referring to Dawkins' movement.

Next you've come up with a list of insulting characteristics that you rather arbitrarily assign to "New Atheists".

And then, completely disregarding your initial premise, you proceed to declare people at your discretion to be "new atheists", thereby assigning them the insulting characteristics you've associated with that term.

So yes, despite your attempts to dress it up, this is just an ad hominem attack on people you disagree with.

-k

Never mind the merry-go-round. Just state what to you is the definition of adhominem.

Edited September 3, 2011 by betsy

[betsy]

hmm? Which key arguments?

-k

Are we suffering from selective memory loss now?

It's not like as if you and I have been recently involved in several arguments - that you would lose track which ones I meant! The last recent bout we've had was at the topic, The Bible! Does that sounds familiar to you?

<hint-hint> contradiction of a fact? Does that ring a bell?

<another clue> Barbeque ribs?

[betsy]

Atheists and scientists are scared to death of the religious mob thats been persecuting non-believers for thousands of years, burning their books, suppressing their ideas, killing them, and arresting their leaders. So in general they have gotten used to tip-toing around and being very carefull not to offend the religious mob.

In MOST OF THE WORLD, even openly admitting that you are an atheist would put you at risk of harm by the religious mob.

An ongoing story that illustrates the point:

US Army Spiritual Fitness test

No, not religious! "Spiritual!" It's completely different!

And it's completely optional! (that's what we'll tell the judge...)

-k

Oh boy....

Believers are forced to accept evolution as the truth in school! So there!

Anyways, let's directly address Dre's argument, shall we?

Where?

Where's the religious mob out to harm non-believers? I'm visualizing pitchforked-armed villagers hunting down hiding atheists! I'm visualizing atheists keeping their mouth shut about their belief.

Well the last time I checked, Dawkins is as big-mouthed as ever!

Of course he's also in hiding - but not from a mob!

He's hiding from our Van Helsing!

Which is only one person! Not an angry mob! Anyway, Dawkins created his own monster! His own big-mouth!

And the last time I checked, atheists even took out ads not only to flaunt their belief, but to publicly negate all gods and religions!

Mob indeed. In some parts of the world, it's much dangerous to be a Christian than an atheist or secularist!

All the drama....

Edited September 3, 2011 by betsy

[betsy]

I have a full-time job and a part-time job, as well as hobbies and a busy social life. I'm not always available to tend to your follies.

-k

Fair enough.

Well, since you're here now anyway, and you've spent time looking up three (3) articles - precious time wasted btw, since they did squat with what's being discussed here - obviously you now have time to answer the question in The Bible. So, how about it? Can you stop nextdoor?

And before you go, give your definition of adhominem? Please?

Can I give you a little advice seeing that you don't have enough time to waste?

Deal with the issues directly, my dear.

Don't waste time going off on a merry-go-round.

Edited September 3, 2011 by betsy

[CANADIEN]

Fair enough.

Well, since you're here now anyway, and you've spent time looking up three (3) articles - precious time wasted btw, since they did squat with what's being discussed here - obviously you now have time to answer the question in The Bible. So, how about it? Can you stop nextdoor?

And before you go, give your definition of adhominem? Please?

Can I give you a little advice seeing that you don't have enough time to waste?

Deal with the issues directly, my dear.

Don't waste time going off on a merry-go-round.

kimmy: 1+1 = 2

betsy: define equals

kimmy: here's an example: 1+1 = 2

betsy: See, you go hiding again. 1+1 = 7. I am right again.

[Saipan]

betsy: I know everything

others: You don't know everyone is laughing at you

What makes you speak for "others"?

When did you ask other?

I don't agree with Betsy on many things. But look at yourself. Like a true leftist you're out to speak for "others". If she was a man I'd say he has the balls to speak for himself.

Now say: I, me, myself. And look up, don't be shy.

[Saipan]

betsy: See, you go hiding again. 1+1 = 7. I am right again.

Actually you said that. It's right in your post.

[CANADIEN]

What makes you speak for "others"?

When did you ask other?

I don't agree with Betsy on many things. But look at yourself. Like a true leftist you're out to speak for "others". If she was a man I'd say he has the balls to speak for himself.

Now say: I, me, myself. And look up, don't be shy.

Obviously, betsy is not the only person around here who lacks the capacity to understand it when someone openly mocks her.

Go find out what killed the mammouth, or how toargue something, then come back to tell me how i should make fun of you.

Edited September 3, 2011 by CANADIEN

[kimmy]

Never mind the merry-go-round. Just state what to you is the definition of adhominem.

Read about it here.

Oh boy....

Believers are forced to accept evolution as the truth in school! So there!

Anyways, let's directly address Dre's argument, shall we?

Where?

Where's the religious mob out to harm non-believers? I'm visualizing pitchforked-armed villagers hunting down hiding atheists! I'm visualizing atheists keeping their mouth shut about their belief.

So... your view is that since there are no actual pitchforks involved, the enforced indoctrination is acceptable?

And the last time I checked, atheists even took out ads not only to flaunt their belief, but to publicly negate all gods and religions!

In many communities transit companies refused to carry those ads. In the community I live in, the ads were stolen off the buses before the buses even left the garage, and no suspects were ever charged. Meanwhile advertising for any number of religious groups adorns buses regularly and goes without comment.

Mob indeed. In some parts of the world, it's much dangerous to be a Christian than an atheist or secularist!

All the drama....

In Afghanistan being a Christian might be dangerous, but here in North America Christians are the most coddled faith group there is.

Fair enough.

Well, since you're here now anyway, and you've spent time looking up three (3) articles - precious time wasted btw, since they did squat with what's being discussed here

Time spent reading important articles is not time wasted, it's time well spent. I was already reading those articles and they reminded me of Dre's post so I added them to this thread.

Time spent responding to you is time wasted, and there's a limit to how much time I'm willing to waste.

Can I give you a little advice seeing that you don't have enough time to waste?

Deal with the issues directly, my dear.

Don't waste time going off on a merry-go-round.

Why is it that you insist I deal directly with the questions you ask, but when you yourself always deflect with questions? "w-w-w---- HOW TALL IS ARARAT ANYWAY???"

I don't agree with Betsy on many things. But look at yourself. Like a true leftist you're out to speak for "others". If she was a man I'd say he has the balls to speak for himself.

Betsy has the balls to speak for Dr Craig and some creationist websites she cut-and-pastes from. The times when Betsy actually produces an original idea are few and far between, but when it happens... the result is usually amusing.

-k