whywontgodhealamputees.com

Main Discussion Zone => Formal Debates => Topic started by: HAL on February 25, 2012, 05:42:00 PM

Title: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: HAL on February 25, 2012, 05:42:00 PM
All comments on the debate are welcome in this thread.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Ambassador Pony on February 25, 2012, 05:53:22 PM
Bm
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 25, 2012, 05:59:10 PM
Well, it looks like we are off to a good start. Augusto left the forum. I think it is his strategy to bore his opponent into submission.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: RNS on February 25, 2012, 06:00:48 PM
BM
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: The Wannabe on February 25, 2012, 06:10:53 PM
Man, this debate is taking more deliberations than the US Senate.  Is this thang happenin'?
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: kin hell on February 25, 2012, 06:12:49 PM
bm
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Devils Advocate on February 25, 2012, 06:13:13 PM
Monkeymind - LOL. i think you are right. his strategy is something along the lines of getting his opponent so frustrated with the procedural aspects of the debate that the opponent cannot think straight on the substantive aspects (not that i am suggesting this would work with Lucifer, but Augusto has yet to impress me with his cognitive ability).
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Ambassador Pony on February 25, 2012, 07:06:42 PM
The woo ship has arrived, and it's loaded with crazy.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 25, 2012, 07:16:23 PM
Okay, both of us already posted, Lucifer first, then me, as promised with arguments and answering his first argument. I will be checking this topic as well. To get your opinions on the matter.

I want to thank the administrators and moderators for making this possible, and all the comunity for their interest.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: ParkingPlaces on February 25, 2012, 07:18:12 PM
So "Wow!" is proof of a god.

What we humans consider complex may be so simple even the universe can do it.  On it's own.

I'm disappointed. Astreja should have been in on this. She's been there, done that.

What is the original source of all this "omni" stuff. It would help to know how legit that first list of four items is.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Alzael on February 25, 2012, 07:18:52 PM
Wow, he sure didn't waste any time. He goes right to several unproven and unsupported assumptions within the first few sentences.

I don't think I've ever seen a theist abandon any pretense of making a logical argument quite that quickly. It's almost impressive.

I knew he wouldn't last long, but he pretty much lost in the first two sentences.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: HAL on February 25, 2012, 07:25:07 PM
I will be checking this topic as well. To get your opinions on the matter.

If you want to check here that's fine, but I hope you have a thick skin. Just be aware that you might not like what you read.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 25, 2012, 07:26:54 PM
Yeap, I'm okay with that, maybe I'll also find some serious posts too (I hope).
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Alzael on February 25, 2012, 07:30:11 PM
Yeap, I'm okay with that, maybe I'll also find some serious posts too (I hope).

My post was entirely serious. Your argument failed epically right from the get go.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 25, 2012, 07:31:58 PM
Okay, let's see how it can be proven that my argument failed.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Alzael on February 25, 2012, 07:38:58 PM
Okay, let's see how it can be proven that my argument failed.

I already did. Read the post.

Your entire argument is based on an assumption. You have done nothing to show that those four attributes are valid. Thus they can be easily discarded.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 25, 2012, 07:41:08 PM
So, you accept they're valid? cool ;)

I have several more, and also I invalidated Lucifer's arguments. So I dont see how we are losing (God and I) because according to the rules he MUST:
1) Disprove my argument (if he can).
2) Offer a new argument for the atheist side.
3) Refute my argument against his.

If he cannot disprove my argument, and he cannot reinforce his argument (which was disproved by me), I have one argument on favor that God is likely to exist and he have zero, then he will have to come up with another argument... hopefully it wont be as easy to destroy as this first one.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: bertatberts on February 25, 2012, 07:45:55 PM
Okay, let's see how it can be proven that my argument failed.
It might not be proven beyond a doubt, but it most certainly can be shown to be logically inconsistent, or just simply special pleading.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: ParkingPlaces on February 25, 2012, 07:48:26 PM
I assume we won't be hearing from Lucifer any more today, given that it is almost 2:00 AM where he lives. That'll give us all time to take this in.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Alzael on February 25, 2012, 07:49:30 PM
So, you accept they're valid? cool ;)

I have several more, and also I invalidated Lucifer's arguments. So I dont see how we are losing (God and I) because according to the rules he MUST:
1) Disprove my argument (if he can).
2) Offer a new argument for the atheist side.
3) Refute my argument against his.

If he cannot disprove my argument, and he cannot reinforce his argument (which was disproved by me), I have one argument on favor that God is likely to exist and he have zero, then he will have to come up with another argument... hopefully it wont be as easy to destroy as this first one.

No. You have yet to make a logically consistent argument. Unless you can provide a valid reason for your usage of those four attributes your argument fails right out the gate.

There's nothing for him to disprove because the entire foundation of your argument is a fallacy. You have to make a valid case first for him to disprove or argue against.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Tero on February 25, 2012, 07:50:31 PM
Augusto says the Bible is not to be taken as the proof. If the Bible is not the proof, then each person should be able to sense God. Yet very few people can describe this and most say they have a "feeling." Feelings are not proof as far as I know. No messages came either, bringing us useful facts from God.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Grogs on February 25, 2012, 07:51:04 PM
I notice that large portions of Augusto's arguments seem to be a cut and paste job. See here (http://www.zimbio.com/Quantum+Mechanics/articles/M4S2kk7xYMu/There+four+primary+attributes+desribes+GOD) for example. Even if he's the person that wrote that originally, he should at least acknowledge that he's copying something that he previously posted. If it's not his, that's what we call plagiarism. :police:
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 25, 2012, 07:54:05 PM
No. You have yet to make a logically consistent argument. Unless you can provide a valid reason for your usage of those four attributes your argument fails right out the gate.

There's nothing for him to disprove because the entire foundation of your argument is a fallacy. You have to make a valid case first for him to disprove or argue against.

If there is "something" with such properties, one can also conclude that God's existence is totally possible.

About some content taken from other sources, I had a mess of links, probably forgot to include that one link, I already fixed that, now what's that post in the debate room that is not from Lucifer but from kin hell?
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: kin hell on February 25, 2012, 07:58:06 PM
I notice that large portions of Augusto's arguments seem to be a cut and paste job. See here (http://www.zimbio.com/Quantum+Mechanics/articles/M4S2kk7xYMu/There+four+primary+attributes+desribes+GOD) for example. Even if he's the person that wrote that originally, he should at least acknowledge that he's copying something that he previously posted. If it's not his, that's what we call plagiarism. :police:


Just found this Grogs    I had just posted an example straight to the debate thread (as indication to all concerned) not realising that you were here commenting on the same observation.

Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 25, 2012, 08:01:55 PM
Maybe you should just post in here, doesn't it look hypocrite to point at a minor flaw in my post by irrupting in the debate? please don't do that. There's no need, there are several moderators online, there is PM and there is this topic.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Grogs on February 25, 2012, 08:05:54 PM
No. You have yet to make a logically consistent argument. Unless you can provide a valid reason for your usage of those four attributes your argument fails right out the gate.

There's nothing for him to disprove because the entire foundation of your argument is a fallacy. You have to make a valid case first for him to disprove or argue against.

If there is "something" with such properties, one can also conclude that God's existence is totally possible.

About some content taken from other sources, I had a mess of links, probably forgot to include that one link, I already fixed that, now what's that post in the debate room that is not from Lucifer but from kin hell?

That's your whole argument, dude! You just cut and paste it in there. It sounds like maybe we should just get "Lord Anthony Horton" in here to do the debate since you're just presenting his ideas rather than your own.


Just found this Grogs    I had just posted an example straight to the debate thread (as indication to all concerned) not realising that you were here commenting on the same observation.

I was surprised nobody else had noticed when I posted, actually.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Emily on February 25, 2012, 08:10:33 PM
It looks like he did cite his sources, but not well. There are two links in his debate towards the middle of the thread to where he got his info from (at least what I've seen).

Augusto, how about using the footnote function to better clarify that you used a link or idea from an external source.

EDIt: Shit, turns out he might've edited those links in after he got busted for plagiarizing.

But whatever, the footnote button is this, (http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/Themes/default/images/bbc/nb.gif). If you could use it in the future it will make this a lot easier for you.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 25, 2012, 08:14:05 PM
So Grog, you're implying Lucifer discovered his argument by himself? cool... let's see what else he discovered, and good luck on bringing Lord Anthony Horton in here, and good luck at disproving him, while so far neither of you seem able to disprove my very first argument.

Also, a note for those who want to meditate: This is not supposed to be your war, more likely atheists should be critical, and driven to follow reason instead of a religious group.

What if I destroy all of Lucifer's arguments? would you still be atheists? would you deny the weight of any argument to sustain yours? honor the atheist position by following reason, because without that, you're a religion without god(s) and without rules, that is the worst religion ever.

The point of the debate is to expose all the reasons we know of to support both positions, and to determine which one have more weight. Atheists should, by concept, follow the position with more weight. This is the logical thing to do, otherwise you're a fanatic, and I should be posting on a forum of whatever religion to explain them why it is false (and would get the same hate and bashing I'm getting here).

The invitation is to THINK. No brainwashing here, just reason.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Emily on February 25, 2012, 08:19:56 PM
For some reason I thought the debate was going to be about a specific god, not some generic dipshit who might exist somewhere in the universe.

Which god are you going to try to prove to exist, Augusto?
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 25, 2012, 08:22:35 PM
For some reason I thought the debate was going to be about a specific god, not some generic dipshit who might exist somewhere in the universe.

Which god are you going to try to prove to exist, Augusto?

YHWH (Christian God)

I guess Lucifer might "try" to offer an argument that this God could also be Zeus, and I will enjoy destroying that argument as well. It cannot be any God but YHWH and I can argument my position (If Lucifer is willing to lose another point).

Note: Remember it have been impossible to prove God's existence as well as his non-existence. The point of the debate is to determine which position have more weight, and as a result, rational people should follow the position with more weight. Also, there is no formal conclusion on this, everyone should make his choice.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Emily on February 25, 2012, 08:26:21 PM

YHWH (Christian God)

I guess Lucifer might "try" to offer an argument that this God could also be Zeus, and I will enjoy destroying that argument as well. It cannot be any God but YHWH and I can argument my position (If Lucifer is willing to lose another point).

OK, well so far you just made a copy/pasta attempt at proving some generic dipshit god. If you are trying to prove YHWH then so far you've done a poor job. I know it's your first post in the debate, but hopefully you will post something biblical and show how that biblical god has all those qualities. Which, he might, no doubt. But from your first post you've not proven your argument yet.

But based on your first argument we can go ahead and declare the background radiation left over from the big bang as god and leave it at all.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: shnozzola on February 25, 2012, 08:27:27 PM
It seems Lucifer  expects a Biblical debate and gets a "string theory connects everything and must be god" debate.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Emily on February 25, 2012, 08:34:32 PM
Note: Remember it have been impossible to prove God's existence as well as his non-existence. The point of the debate is to determine which position have more weight, and as a result, rational people should follow the position with more weight. Also, there is no formal conclusion on this, everyone should make his choice.

I agree that it is impossible to disprove a generic god, BUT it's pretty easy to disprove certain gods given what we know about their attributes that are found in those god's holybooks.

So I think you are going to just try prove the god the deists believe in, and honestly when it comes to a belief in god they are the closest to being correct.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 25, 2012, 08:35:07 PM
There will be all kind of arguments (at least by my side), but the ammount of them is too big, I just preffer to go point by point, so everyone reads, otherwise you would be reading a whole book in one post and nobody wants that right?

So far the point is pretty good:

There is something that have the basic qualities of God, therefore, God can exist. The first point is so important that it might actually be part of God. Just see... this freed particle is basically light, and it have intelligence, it is infinite, it is pretty much all powerful (understanding that such word is a mistake by itself, but it is enough to understand what it means) and it is everywhere.

This point directly toward the existence of God, and even if we cannot say it is God, we can at least have a reasonable base to consider believing.

It seemed impossible 100 years ago that such thing could be possible... something "infinite", something "eternal" something intelligent... just THINK.

Its not an empty point for those who are open-minded. THINK: If atheism is pretty much like a religion (and you have seen my reasons to claim that), couldn't it be possible that some members of the atheist-religion are already brain-washed, and are fighting to protect their beliefs, just like any other religion, against all reason and logic?
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: ParkingPlaces on February 25, 2012, 08:49:21 PM
Its not an empty point for those who are open-minded. THINK: If atheism is pretty much like a religion (and you have seen my reasons to claim that), couldn't it be possible that some members of the atheist-religion are already brain-washed, and are fighting to protect their beliefs, just like any other religion, against all reason and logic?

I would advise you stay away from this subject in this thread. It will take over. People who misunderstand what atheism is say it all the time. They are wrong too. If you want to start a different thread in an effort to get raked over the coals twice as much, go ahead. But I hope we can keep away from it here.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: voodoo child on February 25, 2012, 08:51:15 PM

 If atheism is pretty much like a religion (and you have seen my reasons to claim that), couldn't it be possible that some members of the atheist-religion are already brain-washed, and are fighting to protect their beliefs, just like any other religion, against all reason and logic?

nope, not at all.

 http://youtu.be/A41WZBcmnfc
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: kin hell on February 25, 2012, 08:51:39 PM
Maybe you should just post in here, doesn't it look hypocrite to point at a minor flaw in my post by irrupting in the debate? please don't do that. There's no need, there are several moderators online, there is PM and there is this topic.

Augusto    I posted in your debate thread interrupting your debate purely because while you were busy copying and pasting chunks of supposedly "your" argument you seemed completely unconcerned about attributing, and by definition if you do not attribute your sources you are presenting the arguments as your own.

As I had previously read your exact arguments elsewhere, I posted the evidence of your disingenuousness  to the debate thread as the most direct method of exposing that less than honest behaviour to those most involved, namely your opponent, and the mods.

Post engineering a compliance to site requirements by scurrying around late posting attribution does not give you an automatic honourable behaviour badge of merit, nor does attempting to minimise the (possibly accidental) deceitfulness of the act by calling it a "minor flaw".

You might like to argue that Lucifer's arguments are not his own, but again this is you engineering a reality that suits your needs of the moment.

Lucifer will present his arguments in his own words no doubt, and when he chooses to introduce slabs of others' text into his posts, he will no doubt post attribution so you will know whom you are actually addressing at all times.

Elsewhere, it seems a shame that you are unable to recognise the act of poor attribution as being anything more than a minor flaw when your entire defence,
of the idea that idiotic contradictions within the "word of god" bible are not indication of the non-existence your 3O god, relies on the argument of "poor attribution".
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 25, 2012, 10:03:20 PM
There are 4 primary attribute that describe what a Great Over-competent Debator (God) would be. If any of these attributes are found in one post, then we can continue on, to see if God is real.

4 Primary attributes are:

Eternally optimistic - in the face of defeat
Omnipresentation- all over the place
Impotent- shooting blanks
Niscience- Combination of Christianity and New Age spirituality (YAWEY & Quantum woo)
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jetson on February 25, 2012, 10:24:15 PM
So, Augusto is trying to argue that YHWH is more likely possible, because of those four attributes?  Really?

Is there anything outside of the OT or NT that supports YHWH as the one and only almighty creator?  Or is this just an attempt at claiming that such a god is possible, and that the Bible just happened to nail it?  (I guess it nailed Jesus, but not so much YHWH).

I would have to end my reply with "Anything is possible when you don't know what you're talking about".  Don't know who said that, but it's brilliant. 
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: ParkingPlaces on February 25, 2012, 10:49:45 PM
Omnipleasant. If he's so great, why isn't he omnipleasant.

Just askin'.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jetson on February 25, 2012, 11:11:14 PM
Omnipleasant. If he's so great, why isn't he omnipleasant.

Just askin'.

Bwa ha ha ha ha ha ha .... there goes another freakin' monitor.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: sun_king on February 25, 2012, 11:12:52 PM
I am still blinking after reading the statement that something is "proven to be eternal" by a species whose average lifespan is around 65 years!

I really wish Lucifer goes with Zeus and Augusto. There is an eternal quantum force linking these two gods (all gods), if one is blown away, the other gets it too.

Boring to death needs to be abolished, it is inhuman. It makes this forum unsafe.

Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Add Homonym on February 26, 2012, 12:13:55 AM
http://www.quantumbalancing.com/news/russian_dna.htm

Augusto, if you are going to post this type of stuff, you might as well be posting conspiracy theories. It's New Ager waffle, not science.  How is Lucifer supposed to demonstrate that the author of "Vernetzte Intelligenz" isn't a fruitcake? (Besides the obvious) If you are going to quote science, there needs to be a hope of finding peer reviews for it, or someone else who believes it, beside the author of a book.

If you are to convince us that God exists, you need to post information or logic that doesn't create embarrassment.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: MadBunny on February 26, 2012, 12:19:29 AM
I'm almost glad I wasn't the chosen for this particular debate.
It looks like right from the get go, to be an exercise in logical fallacies. 

Lets take a look at the initial comment though.  This appears to be the bullet points concept, that was latter appended with a DaveMabus sized spread of cheese.

Quote
Okay, I'll start.

There are 4 primary attribute that describe what God would be. If any of these attributes are found in one force, then we can continue on, to see if God is real.

These 4 primary attributes are:

1) Eternal, not involved with the flow of our time.
2) Omnipresent, found everywhere.
3) Omnipotent, all powerful.
4) Omniscient, having all knowledge.

If God is proven to exist, then we must find a force that is eternal. If such force cannot be found, then God's existence cannot be proven. If all primary atributes are found in one force it might help to prove God CAN exist.

Here in a nutshell is the non-argument presented;
First, it does not posit that there is actually a god, only that if there were, it would contain XYZ attributes.
Then, we see a bunch of un-provable attributes, that apparently describe the generic 'omnimax' diety.
*THEN* we see that he does not posit that this god actually exists, only that if it did, it would be the god that he described, maybe.

Augusto has not presented an argument.
Having not presented an argument, the debate flounders since there is nothing to rebut.

I could go on, but ultimately the post never really reaches a coherent point or presentation beyond this.

Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: sun_king on February 26, 2012, 12:33:59 AM
I finally had the patience to go through the first link Augusto provided (http://www.quantumbalancing.com/news/russian_dna.htm) I actually read it to the end and the ending is something like this:

"The full article can be viewed - in English - on the Kontext website below.

All information is from the book "Vernetzte Intelligenz" von Grazyna Fosar und Franz Bludorf, ISBN 3930243237, summarized and commented by Baerbel. The book is unfortunately only available in German so far. You can reach the authors here:

Kontext - Forum for Border Science http://www.fosar-bludorf.com"

The name "Pjotr Garjajev" pops up only in obscure blogs and creationist websites. It would be great is Augusto could point to some recognized journals or publications that have accepted Garjajev's efforts.

"Appeal to authority" should at least have an authority!
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: BaalServant on February 26, 2012, 01:47:49 AM
Okay, both of us already posted, Lucifer first, then me, as promised with arguments and answering his first argument. I will be checking this topic as well. To get your opinions on the matter.

This is actually factual point, not opinion, but whatever -

First, you did nothing to answer any aspect of Lucifer's post.  You simply disagreed with it and presented unrelated claims. 

Second, your opening argument is just plain silly.  You make a decree that since you can say one thing, that means you can say another, and they both are true. 

If I say, "since Ba'al makes it rain,  if I can prove that there is rain, then that proves that Ba'al exists," will you drop your god and start praising the lord almighty Ba'al?

When you say, "Since God is everywhere, if I can prove that everywhere is there, then that proves that God exists," you are making the same fallacious  argument.

If what I have said constitutes opinion and not fact, then feel free to point out how.

 
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on February 26, 2012, 03:52:46 AM
Alright, I posted my rebuttal.
kin hell, don't worry about plagiarism. I'm willing to concede that, as a creationist, Augusto can't argue in his own words.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Azdgari on February 26, 2012, 04:19:43 AM
A "force" eh?  Force can be broken down.  F = ma (mass times acceleration), where the 'm' can be measured in kilograms.  The 'a' is acceleration, which can be accurately represented in metres per second squared: a = m/s^2.  Without the concept of time, you can't have the concept of a force.  So Augusto, Luci is entirely correct when he said that "a force outside of time" is meaningless.  If you don't mean "force" then you should probably avoid using the word "force".
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: sun_king on February 26, 2012, 04:22:02 AM
Expect special pleading.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on February 26, 2012, 05:36:36 AM
I don't think I've ever seen a theist abandon any pretense of making a logical argument quite that quickly. It's almost impressive.

He didn't. To abandon something one must first have it.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: RNS on February 26, 2012, 06:34:57 AM
couldn't it be possible that some members of the atheist-religion are already brain-washed, and are fighting to protect their beliefs
I find this somewhat ironic when you are trying to fit fairly recently discovered "science" to support a belief that was formed thousands of years ago. Surely if it were logical to have that belief (since, as you put it, their side would have more weight to their arguments) all you would need is the information available at the time when that belief was discovered/formed.
Now.. it seems like which side does has already decided that they know what is right and then go on to try and make any information available after that point fit in with their belief?? Oh yes, that's right.. it must be the one that doesn't even have a belief to protect.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Emily on February 26, 2012, 07:29:19 AM
There will be all kind of arguments (at least by my side), but the ammount of them is too big, I just preffer to go point by point, so everyone reads, otherwise you would be reading a whole book in one post and nobody wants that right?

Wow, are you ever arrogant. I'd just love to read this 'whole book' that you claim. And believe me when I say that there would be a whole book, and more so, for the arguments supporting your side. Enough books to fill the shelves of the world's largest library.

But these books aint gonna be Shakespeare in quality. They'd be more like what would happen if Dr. Suess and Walt Disney sat down and wrote books together, with William Hannah and Joseph Barbera proof reading, and Mel Blanc being that goofball making cool voices dictating what was written into some stone-aged dictaphone.

The reason for so many arguments 'supporting' your side of the debate is because the supporters of your side of the debate are just good at coming up with lame excuses to when your side is faced with a sound rebuttal. Excuses like special pleading, god of the gaps, irreducible complexity, and a dozen non-sequiturs for  equal measure.

Whenever your side is faced with a rebuttal it is quick to turn that rebuttal into one phrase: it's god, he can do anything! And following that phrase with pages upon pages of special pleading, which is a tactic I am expecting you to take. This god character has so many attributes that theists use as artillery to fire off at atheist debaters it's easy to see how you could provide arguments that would amount to a whole book.

But your arguments, aren't always correct. Not by logic, or by nature anyways. And sometimes not by the books that describe certain deities. And luckily for us we have holy books that list that god's actions in the universe and its attributes that it's easy to call specific holy books bluff. Personally speaking, I find that if a holy book is wrong about god's action in one sense then that holy book can be discarded in its entirety because I believe holy books are supposed to be inerrant. And luckily for our side the holy book of the god you propose exists is completely full of bullshit when it comes to evidence to support it, it's easy to discard your god as non-existent

But then again, go ahead. You are right, sort of. The arguments you can toss our would take up a whole book, and more! But if I were to find one of those books of arguments at the book store they would be in the 'Religious' section, and (at least in the book story I shop at) the religion section is completely separate from the Non-Fiction section.
 
Quote
There is something that have the basic qualities of God, therefore, God can exist. The first point is so important that it might actually be part of God. Just see... this freed particle is basically light, and it have intelligence, it is infinite, it is pretty much all powerful (understanding that such word is a mistake by itself, but it is enough to understand what it means) and it is everywhere.

If light was everywhere they why do we have darkness. Or, if god is everywhere, and god is good, why do we have evil?
 
It can be argued that your god gave us free will, and that it is omniscience, omnipotent,and omnipresent. If so, then this god character your support is definitely not worthy of any worship, and it's definitly not worthy of anyone trying to make a claim that it exists. If it is so perfect then it totally fucked up this universe on purpose to make its creation suffer, turn to it to try to make it better, give its creation an excuse for it not to make this world better[1], and walks away.

And if it's all powerful then it hasn't shown the best it can do. To quote George Carlin:

So, if there is a God, I think most reasonable people might agree that he's at least incompetent, and maybe, just maybe, doesn't give a shit. Doesn't give a shit, which I admire in a person, and which would explain a lot of these bad results.


http://www.rense.com/general69/obj.htm

So, yeah. I guess it can be added that this omnipotent, omniscience, omnipresent god is also omni-incompetent too.

Quote
This point directly toward the existence of God, and even if we cannot say it is God, we can at least have a reasonable base to consider believing.

Well, until this god (or its fanboys) can prove it exists, then we don't have a reason for believing. It gave us no reason too consider its existence.

Personally, I am an agnostic atheist: I cannot prove god doesn't exist, but I don't believe one does. With that comes the idea that if a god does exist then it doesn't really give a shit if I do believe it exists or not. Personally, I'd rather not be bullied into believing in something where there is a more natural reason for our existence that doesn't include the mention of its name that than to believe in something blindly and without evidence.

Quote
A reasonable base for believing in what?
It seemed impossible 100 years ago that such thing could be possible... something "infinite", something "eternal" something intelligent... just THINK.

But who cares in just believing. You need to specify believing in what. You need to give it a specific name. You chose the name YHWH. And honestly, this YHWH character seems to go against it's own qualities that its believers give it. 

Quote
Its not an empty point for those who are open-minded. THINK: If atheism is pretty much like a religion (and you have seen my reasons to claim that), couldn't it be possible that some members of the atheist-religion are already brain-washed, and are fighting to protect their beliefs, just like any other religion, against all reason and logic?

Wow, dude. So atheism is a religion in the non-belief in a deity? That just sounds stupid. Atheists are brain-washed and are fighting to protect their own beliefs? That sounds stupid too. All atheists demand is physical evidence. Is that so hard? Let me apologize for the atheist community: Sorry our standards are set so high. Actually, wait. Demanding physical evidence is the best way to go. When demanding physical evidence at least it gives a good reason to believe in {whatever} based on our senses.

It's just wrong to believe in something blindly, because at the end you'll probably look like a fool, a smuck, and just completely wrong.

 
 1. the excuse being a blissful afterlife
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: naemhni on February 26, 2012, 07:33:59 AM
http://www.quantumbalancing.com/news/russian_dna.htm

Augusto, if you are going to post this type of stuff, you might as well be posting conspiracy theories. It's New Ager waffle, not science.

Yeah, pretty much.  Here's a good rule of thumb regarding matters of medicine, religion, philosophy, and... well, pretty much most areas (if not all areas) other than physics: if you see the word "quantum", then what you're reading is almost certainly crap.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: ungod on February 26, 2012, 10:22:51 AM
http://www.quantumbalancing.com/news/russian_dna.htm

Augusto, if you are going to post this type of stuff, you might as well be posting conspiracy theories. It's New Ager waffle, not science.

Yeah, pretty much.  Here's a good rule of thumb regarding matters of medicine, religion, philosophy, and... well, pretty much most areas (if not all areas) other than physics: if you see the word "quantum", then what you're reading is almost certainly crap.

WHAT! You mean my shampoo is crap???  :'(

(http://www.fabove.ca/mm5/images/quantum/header.jpg)
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 26, 2012, 10:45:51 AM

 If atheism is pretty much like a religion (and you have seen my reasons to claim that), couldn't it be possible that some members of the atheist-religion are already brain-washed, and are fighting to protect their beliefs, just like any other religion, against all reason and logic?

nope, not at all.

 http://youtu.be/A41WZBcmnfc

I'm just going to point at this video. Why can't I post videos and this guy can? please stop the arbitrarity, this is the same I've been seeing with the unfair negative Darwings and unappropiate comments I've got since I came here. What are the rules for? If for me only, let me know.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: HAL on February 26, 2012, 10:54:01 AM
Why can't I post videos and this guy can? please stop the arbitrarity, ...

Neither side is going to be allowed to post videos in a formal debate. Outside of the debate, you can post videos. We aren't interested in the opinion of people in videos - we are interested in YOUR opinion in the debate. What's the point of the debate if you are simply going to point to other people's opinions in videos? The answer is that there is no point in the debate if that's what you are going to do. Those are the rules - no videos. That's a lazy way to debate someone.

Now please debate Lucifer with your OWN knowledge and thoughts, backed up with an occasional reference to outside sources appropriately cited.

Quote
... this is the same I've been seeing with the unfair negative Darwings and unappropiate comments I've got since I came here.

Darwins can be given out as members please as long as they give a reason for the Darwin point. Is that news to you?
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jetson on February 26, 2012, 11:06:01 AM
I'm just going to point at this video. Why can't I post videos and this guy can? please stop the arbitrarity, this is the same I've been seeing with the unfair negative Darwings and unappropiate comments I've got since I came here. What are the rules for? If for me only, let me know.

This thread is a commentary thread separate from the debate thread.  You are free to ignore it or participate, but if you join into this thread, you cannot connect it to your actual debate thread and ask for adjustments to the discussion.

Yours is a debate, with only you and Lucifer, this is a commentary thread where everyone is allowed to comment - and specific debate rules do not apply.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: HAL on February 26, 2012, 11:14:39 AM
HAL: I ask you to act with justice, the rules shouldn't apply only to me, and I don't mean only the video. I have no problem in not posting videos (even when that is not in the forum rules), but if you keep trying to put me (and only me) in a jacket force, I can just make your life easier and leave the community.

Ridiculous sir. If you cannot debate a person without posting videos then so be it. It's up to you - can you stand on your own two feet or not?

Quote
Lucifer: First of all you did not offer a second argument; neither had you defended your first argument. Therefore, if I win this argument, or the next one I'm going to post you should, by rule (because it was specified before the debate started), lose.

If this is not the case, and you do have more arguments and/or something to say about my refute to your initial argument you should pay more attention to the rules we should be following. That includes using an appropriated, civil language, which you also ignored.

Directed to Lucifer, he can read it here.

Quote
This, along with HAL's arbitrary actions (of removing my youtube videos) should be more than enough for me to quit from this debate. Not to mention he asked me what the name of this debate should be only to come up with his own name, mocking of me.

Again ridiculous. I still left the link so people could reference them. No videos are allowed because WE ARE NOT INTERESTED IN JOE BLOW'S OPINIONS IN A VIDEO.

Quote
Therefore, I will wait for you to edit your response and fix whatever you need to fix before answering, as well as the pertinent apologize, because you both broke the rules of this debate. This shouldn't be a very difficult or unfair request, since I have already apologized to Monkeymind for example, and to everyone who might have been offended by my posts, so I'm not asking for what I haven't done, and I'm not asking for anything but respect.

This, because I believe it should be possible to continue with the debate instead of just move away from the hostility of this community, for I have been invited by others. The only reason I'm staying, even when rules have been broken is because I don't want anyone to think I'm quitting because of "fear". Truth is, I can respond to your arguments, but I refuse to do so unless some things are fixed. Do I deserve less respect than any other member just because I have different opinions than those of the majority?

Thanks in advance.

I'll let others make some comments now, I'm going to get another cup of coffee.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 26, 2012, 11:18:57 AM
Not that I "need" to post any video, the problem is: this have not been specified when setting the rules for the debate, and it seems to me like you are looking for any chance to provoque me, and to undermine my arguments based on arbitrary rules fitting your needs. Hopefully this is not the case. Such as this removal of my post in the debate zone, when it was clearly on topic.

Also, about the Darwins, Monkeymind's negative Darwin was removed, on which base my arbitrary negative Darwins are not removed?

I didn't come here to be less than any other member, don't hold your hopes that I will be accepting everything you want to do with me, to mock and ridicule without defending my rights. And I will not take part in this joke as long as it keeps like this, for I have the right to reclaim dignity, equality and respect, just as everyone else in the comunity. If you cannot offer me this, not even on a private debate, well, it's over.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on February 26, 2012, 11:22:21 AM
Not that I "need" to post any video, the problem is: this have not been specified when setting the rules for the debate, and it seems to me like you are looking for any chance to provoque me, and to undermine my arguments based on arbitrary rules fitting your needs. Hopefully this is not the case. Such as this removal of my post in the debate zone, when it was clearly on topic.

You should check the rest of the forum every once in a while. Posting videos (AKA: letting other people make your arguments for you) is considered poor debate etiquette.
EDIT: Also note that only one small piece of your post (the one related to me) was actually relevant.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 26, 2012, 11:24:44 AM
ADDED: Augusto (so you know this was addressed to you)

The moderators are fair and treat everyone equally.

Members are pretty quick to jump on bad arguments no matter where they come from. I have been set straight more than once and it is not always nice or pleasant.

Notice that I gave you  a Darwin for your apology and Rickmooston plus one'd you for your effort.
So I appreciate honesty and Ricky is an encourager (although I almost gave Ricky a negative Darwin for encouraging what I consider bad arguments).
 
People may not always be nice. It is not a requirement.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: HAL on February 26, 2012, 11:26:14 AM
Not that I "need" to post any video, the problem is: this have not been specified when setting the rules for the debate,

As debate mod, I set rules as needed - they apply to both you and Lucifer the same. I don't see him complaining, because he doesn't need videos to help him.


Quote
... and it seems to me like you are looking for any chance to provoque me, and to undermine my arguments based on arbitrary rules fitting your needs. Hopefully this is not the case.

If I wanted to do that, I assure you I could easily make your life here miserable. Stop whining about the debate rules and DEBATE.


Quote
Also, about the Darwins, Monkeymind's negative Darwin was removed, on which base my arbitrary negative Darwins are not removed?

I have no idea what on Earth you are talking about.

Now stop whining and debate Lucifer. The rules apply equally to both sides.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 26, 2012, 11:28:15 AM
So I have a poor debating etiquette, and you're just fine. That sounds good. Excepting this:

"First of all, that entire article is BS. DNA is not language any more than my farts are classical music. DNA is a molecule. It's as simple as that. Second of all, what you said is not even present in the article. Third, the very notion that what you said is true is retarded. Photons don't stop moving; not even in very low temperatures. And finally, that article is... well, it's retarded.[2] "Vacuum domains are self-radiant balls of ionized gas that contain considerable amounts of energy"? Seriously? Vacuum has nothing even resembling atoms or ions. Whoever wrote that article needs to go back to school. Or go to school in the first place. I know of no student who would even suggest the existence of something even close to a gas in vacuum. It's oxymoronic.
Come back with a new source. One with less idiocy and more facts."

List:
BS: Bullshit
Farts
Retarded (2 times)
Needs to go back to school (2 times in different ways)
Oxymoronic
Idiocy

Okay, that's a nice example of etiquette.

Monkeymind: I saw your possitive Darwing, and I respect you for that, but your negative Darwin was removed and all my unfair negative Darwins stay.

HAL: You cannot create new rules to sentence my posts as you see fit, for I haven't seen you sentencing Lucifer's break of the STABLISHED RULES, so I will not accept you or the comunity members to mock at me.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on February 26, 2012, 11:32:12 AM
BS: Bullshit

Related to the article, which is essential to... nothing. As I pointed out, your claim was nowhere to be found in that article.

Farts

It was an analogy. I like analogies, but if you'd prefer, I could use a different word. Replace fart with screech, for example.

Retarded (2 times)
Needs to go back to school (2 times in different ways)

Related to the article and the person who wrote the article, respectively.

Oxymoronic

That's not an insult. It means "contradictory".

Idiocy

Also related to the article.

Okay, that's a nice example of etiquette.

I'll refrain from insulting websites that have nothing to do with your claims if you stop posting links to them and claiming that they do have something to do with your claims. Deal?
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 26, 2012, 11:34:47 AM
BS: Bullshit

Related to the article, which is essential to... nothing. As I pointed out, your claim was nowhere to be found in that article.

Farts

It was an analogy. I like analogies, but if you'd prefer, I could use a different word. Replace fart with screech, for example.

Retarded (2 times)
Needs to go back to school (2 times in different ways)

Related to the article and the person who wrote the article, respectively.

Oxymoronic

That's not an insult. It means "contradictory".

Idiocy

Also related to the article.

Okay, that's a nice example of etiquette.

I'll refrain from insulting websites that have nothing to do with your claims if you stop posting links to them and claiming that they do have something to do with your claims. Deal?

The rules we agree to this debate imply a civil debate, you cannot undermine my arguments by describing them as trash. You must prove them to be false or accept them.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: HAL on February 26, 2012, 11:35:09 AM
Augusto,

Do you understand what a debate really is? If you want to waste time in the commentary thread - be my guest. However, I'd suggest you concentrate on the other thread - you know - the actual debate.

Think about what is being said to you and formulate a response based on your own opinions and knowledge, and not someone else's off the internets. That's not what the debate is for. If we want opinions off the internets we can all just Google them and close the debate down.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 26, 2012, 11:37:54 AM
[chalenge]
I challenge Augusto to a debate about debates in debate commentary threads!   :)

Wait! I forgot the white glove slap.

SLAP!

There, it is official!

[/challenge]
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Grogs on February 26, 2012, 11:38:12 AM
So Grog, you're implying Lucifer discovered his argument by himself? cool... let's see what else he discovered, and good luck on bringing Lord Anthony Horton in here, and good luck at disproving him, while so far neither of you seem able to disprove my very first argument.

I'm not implying anything. Lucifer presented his original argument. He's not the first person to ever come up with the individual points in the argument I'm sure, but he's almost certainly the first person to synthesize them into that exact form. That's the whole point of a debate - presenting your argument. Lucifer presented his argument, and you presented somebody else's. If you don't think that's wrong, then the next time you have a paper or a report wrong, just copy somebody else's, put a cite at the bottom, i.e., "I copied this verbatim from http://whatever," and see what grade you get for the work.

As for "your" argument, it appears to be nothing more than a god of the gaps argument. In short, "we can't explain how X works (yet!), therefore god!" People have been making this argument for thousands of years, and in every case where the cause for X has been explained, the answer has been "not god." The author of the arguments also shows a poor grasp of physics, and several of his points are incorrect. His explanation of the uncertainty principle is incomplete at best; The statement about the 1st law has been shown to be incorrect; There is no indication at this point that quantum entanglement transfers any information; We do see hot gas at the beginning of the universe - it's called the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation; A 12.8 billion year old galaxy is still 1 billion years after the Big Bang. My favorite bit is that after going on and on about "freed electrons" is a computer based on the decay of Am-241, which is an alpha emitter.

As for your reply to Lucifer, you admit (practically gloat) that there are errors throughout the Bible, and in many cases things were changed intentionally, but then you assert without a shred of evidence that it still contains the path to salvation.If I had a physics book that was constantly telling me things like E=mc3, F=mb, or V=IR2, I would determine that it was crap and throw it in the garbage. The Bible tells us that the Earth was created in 6 days, snakes and donkeys talk, a flood once covered the entire world and killed everything, bats are birds, mating goats in front of a striped pole produces striped offspring, demons cause sickness, Pi=3, and all sorts of nonsense that has been shown to be wrong. Therefore, if you can't explain why we should trust the other parts of it, it should rightfully be thrown in the garbage pail of history, along with all mentions of the ancient bronze-age tribal god YHWH.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on February 26, 2012, 11:39:22 AM
The rules we agree to this debate imply a civil debate, you cannot undermine my arguments by describing them as trash. You must prove them to be false or accept them.

As I said right at the beginning of my post, that website was in no way related to your argument. I used my browser's search function to look for "photon" and didn't what you claimed. Then, just to be safe, I read it. Gave me a headache, but I managed to finish it. There were some claims that sonic vibrations had resulted in DNA manipulation, but nothing even remotely resembling your claim.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 26, 2012, 11:40:23 AM
I am in my right to leave the debate right now, for all rules where broken. I asked for Lucifer and you to apologize, also Lucifer must edit his post to fit the rules. He have not offered a second evidence, neither argue to defend his first argument. He broke the rules of a civil debate and you asked me for the title of the debate just to come up with your own title and new rules, also ignoring Lucifer's actions.

So, let me know if you're willing to act accordingly or close the debate, for I said I'm not less than any other member and I will not accept less.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on February 26, 2012, 11:41:25 AM
Thanks for finally using your own words, even if only to admit defeat. May the Fail be With You.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: lotanddaughters on February 26, 2012, 11:43:16 AM
I am aware of a huge amount of evil things written in the bible, not to mention errors and contradictions. The bible also says the Jews were evildoers, people who several times turned their hearts to other gods, people who ignored God's commands and so on. So I believe (and this is corroborated) the bible have been manipulated and its content changed over the years, furthermore I consider even when it was written, a lot of things were included for human / particular reasons, and those things were not part of God's actions or will.

This bullshit has been embarrassingly debunked countless times from just about every possible angle. But as long as dishonest assholes retreat to this non-retreat, people who are sick and tired of this shit will continue to call "Bullshit!" on these idiots.

The reason for the occurrence of the Human Biblical Alteration ArgumentTM can be reasonably explained like this:

The Bible is a collection of ancient[1] human writings. There have been many humans who have contributed to the Bible's content. The amount of originality of each individual's contribution varies from one contributor to the next. Some human contributions were verbal, some were written. Some people have noticed the ignorance and inconsistency of the Bible and have properly dismissed the Bible as just another bullshit man-made story. Other people have noticed this same ignorance and inconsistency and have concluded that the ignorant and inconsistent parts must have been created by men. These people fail to notice that even the most brilliant parts of the Bible have been surpassed in knowledge and wisdom by other writings of humans. They also fail to realize that an extremely capable being would never communicate in this fashion. These people are trying to salvage as much of "The Word of God" as they possibly can. "The Word of God" is defined by what they are currently comfortably accepting as being "The Word of God".



The Human Biblical Alteration ArgumentTM is an obviously extremely weak argument, whether it comes from a Christian or a Muslim. At least there is a term for it in mainstream Islam. It is called "Tahrif". You see, if you are a Muslim using this argument, it is accepted common "knowledge" throughout your religion that the Bible has been corrupted by men. At least Allah gave a reissue of the Original Word of GodTM to The Prophet Mohammad[2]. The Christian god, on the other hand, never corrected what Man has done. YHWH just leaves it up to the Christians to decipher what is His Word and what isn't. It's funny how these Christians of the Corrupted WordTM can't come to an agreement on what is God's Word and what isn't. As a matter of fact, mainstream Christianity accepts the entire Bible as "The True Word of God".

This bullshit is weak on so many fronts.

You, Augusto, are no different than any other religious lunatic. You just keep making up the bullshit as you go along.

 1. Depending on which version of the Bible you are referring to, some of the content might have been added at a later-than-ancient time(depending on how you define the word "ancient").
 2. Peace be upon Him. Well, on further thought, fuck him.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 26, 2012, 11:50:20 AM
Thanks for finally using your own words, even if only to admit defeat. May the Fail be With You.

Dude, you know your refutal is flawed. And I can totally debate it, I'm just not willing to keep under your game (and by this I mean more than just you). Also, if someone is to lose, it should be you, for breaking the rules and trying to undermine my argument with low words and little reason.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: ParkingPlaces on February 26, 2012, 11:50:59 AM
I am in my right to leave the debate right now, for all rules where broken. I asked for Lucifer and you to apologize, also Lucifer must edit his post to fit the rules. He have not offered a second evidence, neither argue to defend his first argument. He broke the rules of a civil debate and you asked me for the title of the debate just to come up with your own title and new rules, also ignoring Lucifer's actions.

So, let me know if you're willing to act accordingly or close the debate, for I said I'm not less than any other member and I will not accept less.

I quote myself from yesterday (bold added for obvious reasons):
Quote
2. Your little march through negative karmaville this morning was not well received. As a member who has never given negative karma to anyone, no matter how much I disliked or disagreed with them, I find it hard to understand why you felt it necessary to zap a few folks. Obviously others did the same to you, and I'm not accusing you of being unfair, but it leads me to think that you might not have the ability to debate without having your feelings hurt. Can you prove me wrong?

I'm usually not this prescient. But I'm patting myself on my back right now. It's taking awhile to type this one handed. There. Done.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: HAL on February 26, 2012, 11:53:05 AM
Looks like the debate has shifted to this thread.

I need to go out to Home Depot and get some wire for my Model Railroad. If anyone else would like to try and help Augusto understand what a formal debate is, I'd be much obliged, even give out some +1's.

Thanks.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on February 26, 2012, 11:55:42 AM
Dude, you know your refutal is flawed.

I know it might be. If I thought it was flawed I probably wouldn't have posted it in the first place.

And I can totally debate it,

Then do so. I can also claim many things, but without evidence, they're meaningless.

Also, if someone is to lose, it should be you, for breaking the rules and trying to undermine my argument with low words and little reason.

Show me where my reason is flawed and we'll talk then.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Grogs on February 26, 2012, 11:57:00 AM
I'm usually not this prescient. But I'm patting myself on my back right now. It's taking awhile to type this one handed. There. Done.

Admit it, you have one of those STI computers in your house, don't you? It was the global consciousness that told you this was going to happen.  ;)
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 26, 2012, 11:58:39 AM
I am in my right to leave the debate right now, for all rules where broken. I asked for Lucifer and you to apologize, also Lucifer must edit his post to fit the rules. He have not offered a second evidence, neither argue to defend his first argument. He broke the rules of a civil debate and you asked me for the title of the debate just to come up with your own title and new rules, also ignoring Lucifer's actions.

So, let me know if you're willing to act accordingly or close the debate, for I said I'm not less than any other member and I will not accept less.

I quote myself from yesterday (bold added for obvious reasons):
Quote
2. Your little march through negative karmaville this morning was not well received. As a member who has never given negative karma to anyone, no matter how much I disliked or disagreed with them, I find it hard to understand why you felt it necessary to zap a few folks. Obviously others did the same to you, and I'm not accusing you of being unfair, but it leads me to think that you might not have the ability to debate without having your feelings hurt. Can you prove me wrong?

I'm usually not this prescient. But I'm patting myself on my back right now. It's taking awhile to type this one handed. There. Done.

Not my feelings, but each one can understand my words as they see fit to their belief.

Lucifer: Read my previous posts and fix your post, then I can answer. But this shall be the last time I will return after you break the stablished rules, and also the last time I will accept new rules. Whenever HAL or anyone else feels the urge to create more rules against me, he better close the debate.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on February 26, 2012, 11:59:54 AM
Lucifer: Read my previous posts and fix your post, then I can answer.

There is a time limit to editing posts. IIRC it's 2 hours. I can't edit my posts anymore. However, even if I could, I would do no such thing unless I found something I wanted to fix and/or was instructed to by a staff member.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 26, 2012, 12:02:06 PM
Mmm, okay. Then at least face what you did and apologize like a man, then I shall continue the debate (and read my previous post).
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on February 26, 2012, 12:08:12 PM
Then at least face what you did

I already acknowledged what I did.

and apologize like a man

I have nothing to apologize for. I explained why my insults were unrelated to your argument and yourself. In short, my insults were irrelevant to the discussion.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 26, 2012, 12:10:09 PM
So debate is over.

And for the record what you said TODAY, after I pointed the nature of your response:

"bird crap" reffering to the arguments, "Trust me, it's not gonna be pretty." bullying me, and "I called your arguments what they were - stupid. You yourself were left out of my comments." Yes, I was blown away by the low quality of by opponent.

This is why I didn't wanted you to debate me, because your true, obsene nature was pretty clear to me since I first exchange a few words with you. So, if you represent this community, I have nothing else to say. Well, actually yes: You're all fanatics, and your rules are an excuse, for this comunity, as well as your "religion" have no rules at all.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 26, 2012, 12:12:38 PM
So debate is over.

The debate was over from the beginning. Get a clue!
Sounds like a little child. Are you about to throw a temper tantrum, next? Geesh dude get some huveos!

Adios, Adeu, fairwell, arivederci, bon voyage, see ya! Take it Easy, later dude, sayonara!
Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out!

Luv,
Monkeymind
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on February 26, 2012, 12:13:27 PM
So debate is over.

Look, even if I were to say "I'm sorry", I wouldn't mean it. There's just no way. So continue debate by acknowledging the fact that my insults had nothing to do with your argument, "like a man".
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: RNS on February 26, 2012, 12:19:31 PM
Augusto why are you taking things so personally? Most of the negativity is directed towards the content, not you. The information is judged by its own merit, not who it is coming from.

You've written a lot about not having the same rights as the rest of the community or not being welcome etc. but I'm finding it hard to see where you are getting this impression from.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 26, 2012, 12:23:32 PM
Augusto why are you taking things so personally? Most of the negativity is directed towards the content, not you. The information is judged by its own merit, not who it is coming from.

You've written a lot about not having the same rights as the rest of the community or not being welcome etc. but I'm finding it hard to see where you are getting this impression from.

Read from the previous page, as I already have exposed all my reasons.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: ParkingPlaces on February 26, 2012, 12:28:02 PM
I'm usually not this prescient. But I'm patting myself on my back right now. It's taking awhile to type this one handed. There. Done.

Admit it, you have one of those STI computers in your house, don't you? It was the global consciousness that told you this was going to happen.  ;)
I don't need one. I AM the force.  ;D

Oh, and I guess it's bye-bye to Augusto.

I assume he'll run around telling everyone what horrible, maniacal fanatics we are, even though we aren't. I'd love to have a shriveled mind and stuff so I could act that way, but I have to work with what I've got. Drats.

(If you happen to read this Augusto, the above says that i wish that I could act like a horrible manic, not that you are one. Just wanted that to be clear. You're apparently easy to confuse.)

Lucifer, can you keep posting stuff in the thread for our continued entertainment? You did good. And cuss all you want. It turns some of us on.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on February 26, 2012, 12:32:19 PM
Lucifer, can you keep posting stuff in the thread for our continued entertainment?

I see no reason to. Eventually I'd run out of mistakes to find.

And cuss all you want. It turns some of us on.

Well, when you put it like that... :P
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: RNS on February 26, 2012, 12:33:15 PM
I have been following this closely. Your two main points seem to be that videos aren't allowed and that lucifer used certain words that you weren't happy with.

1) both of you have to follow the video rule. It's not like HAL thinks this is some clever ruse to discredit your arguments in favour of atheism.
no one is going to watch an hour long documentary anyway. Do you not see that posting your interpretations of the videos will be much more effective than just posting a video anway?
2) these words were not directed at you and in my opinion were not unwarranted. If he believes a source to be *insert word here* then should he not have the right to express that? If you have a problem with it, you should address that in your next post in the debate, explaining why that source isn't *insert word here*

It just kind of seems to me as if you have built us up in your head as some kind of alliance that is conspiring against you. This is not the case at all.
I think parkingplaces was spot on earlier and to be honest I didn't really understand your response:
Quote
Not my feelings, but each one can understand my words as they see fit to their belief.
can you explain this please?

EDIT: if i was mistaken/missed something and it is actually something else, or stuff in addition to this, that was bothering you, please let me know.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: sun_king on February 26, 2012, 12:48:26 PM
It is always prudent to verify the sources before you present them. Not all folks are awed by the "science" presented and some of us have always taken the extra step of actually evaluating a claim. IMHO, Lucifer went easy on that website. Any attempts to sneak in BS in the world of knowledge should be handled with even more severity.

So a website is abused and the one defender of god is quitting? That's all after this mega-build up?

Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 26, 2012, 12:50:39 PM
I have been following this closely. Your two main points seem to be that videos aren't allowed and that lucifer used certain words that you weren't happy with.

1) both of you have to follow the video rule. It's not like HAL thinks this is some clever ruse to discredit your arguments in favour of atheism.
no one is going to watch an hour long documentary anyway. Do you not see that posting your interpretations of the videos will be much more effective than just posting a video anway?
2) these words were not directed at you and in my opinion were not unwarranted. If he believes a source to be *insert word here* then should he not have the right to express that? If you have a problem with it, you should address that in your next post in the debate, explaining why that source isn't *insert word here*

It just kind of seems to me as if you have built us up in your head as some kind of alliance that is conspiring against you. This is not the case at all.
I think parkingplaces was spot on earlier and to be honest I didn't really understand your response:
Quote
Not my feelings, but each one can understand my words as they see fit to their belief.
can you explain this please?

Well, I came here trying to debate with the comunity about my reasons to believe in God, but people started bashing, insulting, spamming and flamming me, not only with words, but also with negative Darwings, you can check this topic, and reasons why I got in 2 days 10 negative Darwins:

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,21563.0.html

Now, I asked for a debate with one person and since the very beginning people took it as a joke, regardless of the arguments I gave to explain the importance of such debate, you can see how people react on this topic:

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,21579.0.html

So, between the bully posts and rush I was forced to pick someone, even against my opinion I choose Lucifer because most people were supporting him to represent them, also certain basic rules were set, those rules were the same as those this comunity "should" follow, and those of a civil debate.

You can also see what was going to be the name of the debate, which I was asked to determine more than once, then the name was arbitrary set, just to mock me. Nevertheless I ignored that and came to reply Lucifer.

After that, a lot of members started bashing in this topic in every single page, nothing was done about it. They critize that I didn't wrote my argument as a "legit" way to dismiss it, and so new rules were born:
- I "shouldn't" post anything that I dont create.
- If I post something from another source I should post a link (even when Lucifer didn't do the same in his first post).
- I cannot post youtube videos (even when this is not in the rules.

On top of that, Lucifer's response was not following the simple rules we set, and he was not penalized for that, when I responded to those facts, my post was deleted, "because it was offtopic" such thing follows an invisible rule, and my post was not offtopic.

What I asked was merely for equality but it was too much to ask.

Why do I say this atheism is like a religion?

Because in this forum, just like in any religious forum, people bash with hate those who hold a different belief, and they're mercilesly undermined with hate and mock. Because they twist rules or logic in favor of their beliefs, and even because there are some people who "advice" not to listen those who think differently.

At the end, people choose to follow atheism, for the most part, based not in reason but in emotions, just like in any religion. And so, my words sound empty and stupid to them, just like christian words can seem just the same to a muslim or a jew. No room for reason, no respect, no decency when comes to protect your beliefs.

Therefore, I consider this to be the worst religion ever, because it have no god and no rules whatsoever, not even rules to break, no room for regret, no nothing but wild actions driven by emotional, brainwashed people.

People have the ability to believe, to follow, and no atheist can avoid being like that. It is present since the beginning of humanity, in every culture. People just "believe in something", so what do I have to say to your beliefs, to your faith? if such "religion" were to take over, world would become anarchy. That's what I think. We need a moral code, and atheists cannot offer that, they cannot even make people free from believing, they will, instead, turn to atheism as their new faith and find it have no system, therefore, anarchy will reign.

Basically, believers think they're superior to others because their religion is true and they will go to heaven, plus, they're not just animals, they're the offpring of God. By the other side, atheist believe they are superior to others because they're smarter, they hold the truth, and the rest are just stupid lambs. Truth is, people is people, and atheists are no different from theists, well, theists have moral codes and try hard to be good.

Moreover, just think of the meaning of Lucifer and I. Think if that's what you want for you and your loved ones. A nick that represents everything that is evil and dirty, no matter what the bible says, Lucifer means evil, and this person uses that nick because atheists have NO RULES, no moral stablished and accepted, and it's not just his nick, but also the way he thinks and acts. To him I am trash, my arguments are trash, and we, believers are inferior.

This is not only supported by him, but pretty much everyone in the comunity agrees with him and acts just the same. This proves my point, turning this "comunity" into a very dangerous one, even more dangerous than muslims. Also, this fits pretty good with prophecies of God. That's right, there are no proofs of God's existence, therefore, follow insanity and ruin your life, but remember: there are no proofs of God's non-existence either.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: ungod on February 26, 2012, 01:01:39 PM
Quote
Okay, I'll start.

There are 4 primary attribute that describe what God would be. If any of these attributes are found in one force, then we can continue on, to see if God is real.

These 4 primary attributes are:

1) Eternal, not involved with the flow of our time.
2) Omnipresent, found everywhere.

If God is " not involved with the flow of our time", i.e. not present in our universe, then He is NOT
" Omnipresent, found everywhere"!

End of debate.

 :P
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 26, 2012, 01:04:59 PM
Quote
Okay, I'll start.

There are 4 primary attribute that describe what God would be. If any of these attributes are found in one force, then we can continue on, to see if God is real.

These 4 primary attributes are:

1) Eternal, not involved with the flow of our time.
2) Omnipresent, found everywhere.

If God is " not involved with the flow of our time", i.e. not present in our universe, then He is NOT
" Omnipresent, found everywhere"!

End of debate.

 :P

Clearly you didn't understood the full argument. This "infinite" particle IS present in our timeline.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Ivellios on February 26, 2012, 01:11:30 PM
Gravity exists. Gravity has always existed. So therefore Gravity = God.

They both start with 'G!' God's hand at work!

It's a force. Oh, wait, you meant that force... sorry, I'm not a Jedi.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 26, 2012, 01:17:08 PM
Thanks for further proving my point and desgrace your nick "TruthSeeker". You're no more lamb than I am.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on February 26, 2012, 01:18:38 PM
Gravity exists. Gravity has always existed. So therefore Gravity = God.

They both start with 'G!' God's hand at work!

It's a force. Oh, wait, you meant that force... sorry, I'm not a Jedi.

Gravity is not a force, per se. Gravity is a side-effect of spacetime distortions caused by particles with mass.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: RNS on February 26, 2012, 01:38:24 PM
Well, I came here trying to debate with the comunity about my reasons to believe in God, but people started bashing, insulting, spamming and flamming me, not only with words, but also with negative Darwings, you can check this topic, and reasons why I got in 2 days 10 negative Darwins:

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,21563.0.html
I'll skim through this later

Quote
Now, I asked for a debate with one person and since the very beginning people took it as a joke, regardless of the arguments I gave to explain the importance of such debate, you can see how people react on this topic
This thread I actually followed from the beginning. Where are you getting this idea that people took it as a joke etc.? Just because people have a sense of humour and make jokes doesn't mean that they are treating the debate as a joke. If you could give specific examples that would be useful, since I can't find any.

Quote
So, between the bully posts and rush I was forced to pick someone, even against my opinion I choose Lucifer because most people were supporting him to represent them
Again, I'd really love to see which posts you are referring to as "bully posts", because I'm not sure which ones you are referring to.
We just wanted to get the debate started! Personally I would have no idea who to choose anyway, the poll would have been a waste of time. Spent so long talking about the debate rather than debating.

Quote
You can also see what was going to be the name of the debate, which I was asked to determine more than once, then the name was arbitrary set, just to mock me.
I REALLY don't think that was meant to mock you. The title is in no way mocking.
I'm pretty sure it was chosen just so that you could get started. Although I didn't mention anything, I remember getting a little annoyed about how long everything was taking. I think you were given the opportunity to pick a person and title numerous times before you did either. I'm assuming since you didn't pick one, that is why it was done for you.

Quote
After that, a lot of members started bashing in this topic in every single page, nothing was done about it. They critize that I didn't wrote my argument as a "legit" way to dismiss it, and so new rules were born:
- I "shouldn't" post anything that I dont create.
- If I post something from another source I should post a link (even when Lucifer didn't do the same in his first post).
- I cannot post youtube videos (even when this is not in the rules.
There will always be bashing, but people are free to write as they choose here (to a certain extent). If you can't handle it, I would suggest just sticking to the debate thread itself. Just to emphasize, you were not being bashed, it was your arguments and sources. So maybe don't take it so personally, and if you disagree with what they have written, explain exactly why rather than just getting upset about it- that helps neither you nor the person who said those things.

In regards to the posting what you didn't create etc.- It's ok to use other peoples ideas, as long as they are in your own words.
Copying and pasting stuff from the internet is a no no. Didn't you have these rules in school? I thought this was normal.
In the scientific community these rules are even stricter.

Quote
Because in this forum, just like in any religious forum, people bash with hate those who hold a different belief, and they're mercilesly undermined with hate and mock.
I'd say it's mainly mock, very little hate. I have seen no hateful responses in this thread or the debate thread. If you could point me to specific examples that would be helpful.

Quote
At the end, people choose to follow atheism, for the most part, based not in reason but in emotions, just like in any religion. And so, my words sound empty and stupid to them, just like christian words can seem just the same to a muslim or a jew. No room for reason, no respect, no decency when comes to protect your beliefs.
This is off topic but- Actually this isn't really how it works. I didn't choose to follow atheism, like with religion. My brain simply won't allow me to believe in the gods described in mainstream religions. It's not a concious choice. Just like no matter how hard I try, I can't make myself believe that if I jump off a building I will fly. Did you know that babies are atheists? Because they lack the belief in theistic religion.

Quote
Therefore, I consider this to be the worst religion ever, because it have no god and no rules whatsoever, not even rules to break, no room for regret, no nothing but wild actions driven by emotional, brainwashed people.
You really have got it all wrong, mate. Honestly. I have no reason to lie to you. I don't care what you believe in, but you have got us all wrong.

Quote
if such "religion" were to take over, world would become anarchy. That's what I think. We need a moral code, and atheists cannot offer that, they cannot even make people free from believing, they will, instead, turn to atheism as their new faith and find it have no system, therefore, anarchy will reign.
Erm... you know there exist things such as the legal system, which have little to do with religion. How did we (as humanity) come up with these rules and regulations? We didn't look to the bible/quran to help us out, that's for sure. Animals have morality systems- did Jesus teach them this?

Quote
Moreover, just think of the meaning of Lucifer and I. Think if that's what you want for you and your loved ones. A nick that represents everything that is evil and dirty, no matter what the bible says, Lucifer means evil, and this person uses that nick because atheists have NO RULES, no moral stablished and accepted, and it's not just his nick, but also the way he thinks and acts. To him I am trash, my arguments are trash, and we, believers are inferior.

This is not only supported by him, but pretty much everyone in the comunity agrees with him and acts just the same. This proves my point, turning this "comunity" into a very dangerous one, even more dangerous than muslims. Also, this fits pretty good with prophecies of God. That's right, there are no proofs of God's existence, therefore, follow insanity and ruin your life, but remember: there are no proofs of God's non-existence either.
Wow! These are some pretty full-on claims! Just because we don't believe in your god doesn't make us savages. If you actually bothered to ask us what we (individually, since we don't all believe the same things, because atheism is NOT a religion) believe, then you would realise that actually we don't promote anarchy.

Quote
even more dangerous than muslims
...seriously??!
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: sun_king on February 26, 2012, 01:40:37 PM

People have the ability to believe, to follow, and no atheist can avoid being like that. It is present since the beginning of humanity, in every culture. People just "believe in something", so what do I have to say to your beliefs, to your faith? if such "religion" were to take over, world would become anarchy. That's what I think. We need a moral code, and atheists cannot offer that, they cannot even make people free from believing, they will, instead, turn to atheism as their new faith and find it have no system, therefore, anarchy will reign.


Just out of interest, did this forum ever get a good apologist who had something on his/her own?

Is Augusto speaking of the moral code that defines how to treat your slaves, how to punish them, when to sell your daughters, when to trade the virginity of your daughters to protect two strangers?
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jaimehlers on February 26, 2012, 01:45:55 PM
Augusto, you need to stop using Lucifer's language and the fact that you took offense at some things as an excuse to quit the debate.  People do swear at each other sometimes.  I'm sometimes the recipient of some pretty nasty language from people here.  So what?  You don't encourage civility in others by complaining about its lack, unless you have the power to enforce it.  And even if you somehow did, all you'd accomplish would be for them to figure out how to be uncivil under the pretense of civil language.  Your best bet, in fact, the only bet, is to be civil back, whether or not you feel they deserve it.  If you're always civil in return, it reflects well on you, and it illustrates the difference without ever actually pointing it out.

Same thing with getting upset at the treatment you're getting here.  You have to recognize that this is a community, and you're a stranger to it.  Humans react to strangers with suspicion and the equivalent of puffing up their chests to look tough.  It's not especially fair, but you won't make it so by complaining about it and demanding that your idea of fair is what should apply.  Even if you're a respected and well-known member of the community, such behavior is not going to go over well.  For someone who's been here all of three days and has already managed to irritate several people, you couldn't have made it worse for yourself if you'd seriously wanted to.

As it stands, whether you think it's fair or not, you have something of a reputation to live down now.  You won't succeed in that if all you do is demand that you don't deserve the reputation in the first place.  What you do is you show by your actions that the reputation was unfair to begin with.  We've had a few people who started off poorly, but managed to recover from it by rising above it.  It's your choice, either way.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 26, 2012, 01:50:19 PM
RNS: Find your own examples man, if you like.

sun_king: Old argument, no christian follows that, and even muslims have a code, no matter how bad it is, they at least have one.

jaimehlers: Is there a believer in this comunity? just tell me that. And I disagree, I can also leave.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: ungod on February 26, 2012, 01:51:11 PM
Quote
Okay, I'll start.

There are 4 primary attribute that describe what God would be. If any of these attributes are found in one force, then we can continue on, to see if God is real.

These 4 primary attributes are:

1) Eternal, not involved with the flow of our time.
2) Omnipresent, found everywhere.

If God is " not involved with the flow of our time", i.e. not present in our universe, then He is NOT
" Omnipresent, found everywhere"!

End of debate.

 :P

Clearly you didn't understood the full argument. This "infinite" particle IS present in our timeline.

So is the neutrino. I thought you were going to prove the existence of God, but now you've changed the goalposts to particle physics? ROTFLMAO!

Show us where "Infinite particle" is mentioned  ANYWHERE in the quoted part of your claim!

Quote
These 4 primary attributes are:

1) Eternal, not involved with the flow of our time.
2) Omnipresent, found everywhere.

SHOW US! SHOW US! I don't give a rat's ass about your grand "full argument". The logical contradiction in your  statement, quoted above, shows your pants are on fire.

Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: HAL on February 26, 2012, 01:51:45 PM
OK, I got my wire and I'm back,. Now let's see ...

You can also see what was going to be the name of the debate, which I was asked to determine more than once, then the name was arbitrary set, just to mock me.

Let me get this straight. You, Augusto, think that the initial name I set for the debate -

A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer

was done to mock you. Do I have that just about right?

I posted on these fora for at least 4 or 5 years, and I got pretty good at mocking people I wanted to mock. If that's a mocking title, I must have lost every mocking skill I ever learned.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 26, 2012, 01:53:29 PM
So why did you asked me to choose the title of the debate more than once and then come up with your own title? Simple enough question.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: HAL on February 26, 2012, 01:54:00 PM
So why did you asked me to choose the title of the debate more than once and then come up with your own title? Simple enough question.

What do you want the title to be?
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Ivellios on February 26, 2012, 01:55:52 PM
Gravity is not a force, per se. Gravity is a side-effect of spacetime distortions caused by particles with mass.

I thought they were:

Weakest to strongest

1) Gravity
2) Electromagnetism
3) Weak Nuclear Force
4) Strong Nuclear Force

Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jetson on February 26, 2012, 01:57:56 PM
Augusto, I will tell you that I am very disappointed in your behavior, and your misrepresentation of the long time members of this forum.  If you have a position on the existence of God, and you can back that position up with facts and evidence, then no amount of consideration for how you are treated can be used against your argument.

You entered a forum where the title is "Why Won't God Heal Amputees".  The forum has a lot of people who simply have no reason to believe a god is real, and the forum has seen hundreds, if not thousands of "believers" come and go.  Not a single one has provided any reason that God would not heal an amputee.  The reason is obvious to many members, there is no god.

You entered this group, now all you need to do is show that you deserve the respect you seem to think you are not getting.  I can tell you that we have had plenty of believers who earned the respect of the members here.  A part of their approach was getting to know the people, as opposed to thinking you know the group.

Atheism is NOT a religion.  And no matter how many times you say it, you are wrong.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 26, 2012, 02:00:38 PM
So why did you asked me to choose the title of the debate more than once and then come up with your own title? Simple enough question.

What do you want the title to be?

I posted it as you requested, also no longer the problem since your candidate insulted yet again after his second post in the debate, breaking the most basic rule of any debate: civility. While you also ignored the stablished rules and Lucifer had no penalization by the administration, on the contrary, I have had several in only two days, most of them based in arbitrarity.

Also both of you refused to offer an apology and plan to keep playing around with me, as if I were some inferior trash to have fun with. I already started my debate in another forum (this time, I was invited).

Jetson: Just point me at ONE member who have not been dragged to your beliefs and have some good reputation and activity for a decent time and I'll accept you're not an agressive, hostile, arbitrary comunity and apologize, otherwise, stop making up lies.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jetson on February 26, 2012, 02:01:47 PM
...otherwise, stop making up lies.

Can you see how this might be taken when you enter a forum as a new member?
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Ivellios on February 26, 2012, 02:03:53 PM
Agusto, did you watch the Atheism video in this thread, or did you only whine about it?

Bill Maher - Atheism is a religion, like Abstinence is a sex position.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jetson on February 26, 2012, 02:03:59 PM

Jetson: Just point me at ONE member who have not been dragged to your beliefs and have some good reputation and activity for a decent time and I'll accept you're not an agressive, hostile, arbitrary comunity and apologize, otherwise, stop making up lies.

Go read this member's posts and replies, as far back as you want.  He's not the only one either...

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php?action=profile;u=1579 (http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php?action=profile;u=1579)
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 26, 2012, 02:04:14 PM
...otherwise, stop making up lies.

Can you see how this might be taken when you enter a forum as a new member?

Just saying what I think, so I broke another rule right? punishment demanded...! shut me, erase my posts, bann me, or just bash me, as other mods have done already.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: HAL on February 26, 2012, 02:05:00 PM
Also both of you refused to offer an apology and plan to keep playing around with me, as if I were some inferior trash to have fun with. I already started my debate in another forum (this time, I was invited).

OK, you lose the debate.

Thank you for your participation.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jetson on February 26, 2012, 02:05:14 PM
...otherwise, stop making up lies.

Can you see how this might be taken when you enter a forum as a new member?

Just saying what I think, so I broke another rule right? punishment demanded...! shut me, erase my posts, bann me, or just bash me, as other mods have done already.

No rules broken from where I stand.  Just condescending behavior.  That is your right, but don't expect everyone to embrace it.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: sun_king on February 26, 2012, 02:05:22 PM
RNS: Find your own examples man, if you like.

sun_king: Old argument, no christian follows that, and even muslims have a code, no matter how bad it is, they at least have one.

jaimehlers: Is there a believer in this comunity? just tell me that. And I disagree, I can also leave.

Hey!!! Its in the book and the book is inerrant. If it is not followed anymore, why is it in the book? We can resume this conversation when the book is trimmed down to the stuff which people can actually follow. That particular version may be shorter than "An Engineer's Guide to Fashion".

And having a code need not really make you moral. Pimps have their codes, loan sharks have their codes...
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: ParkingPlaces on February 26, 2012, 02:06:07 PM
Why do I say this atheism is like a religion?

Because in this forum, just like in any religious forum, people bash with hate those who hold a different belief, and they're mercilesly undermined with hate and mock. Because they twist rules or logic in favor of their beliefs, and even because there are some people who "advice" not to listen those who think differently.

You may find this hard to believe, but there is a big difference between disagreeing with someone and hate, unless you're a republican, in which case it means the same thing.

To think that it makes sense for you to show up dissing the bible and yet agreeing that the biblical god is the right one, that's fine. To think we're all going to go gaga over your "new" way of looking at an old god is naive. And when you defend yourself so poorly, using reasoning that none of us would ever accept, even from an atheist, you sort of doomed yourself. We are not going to apologize for your inability to think critically about new age stuff. There is a reason there isn't a "New Age" section in my local university's science library.

Quote
At the end, people choose to follow atheism, for the most part, based not in reason but in emotions, just like in any religion. And so, my words sound empty and stupid to them, just like christian words can seem just the same to a muslim or a jew. No room for reason, no respect, no decency when comes to protect your beliefs.

See, you have it exactly backwards. The religious are emotional, yes, but my reasons, and I daresay the reasons virtually every other atheist on this site disbelieves is because of our rational assessment of reality. I don't get the least bit teary eyed over fossils or radiometric testing data or DNA samples. I do look at such things as evidence that forces besides the alleged intelligent ones could bring the universe and life into being. When unknowns confront us, like dark matter and whether or not string theory is legitimate, we wait patiently while those who know how investigate and research study such questions. Emotional people don't like not having answers. Rational people understand that we don't know everything and that we never will. But we try. And what we do know we accept as the best current description of reality, because nobody else, and especially not the religious, can do any better.

Quote
Therefore, I consider this to be the worst religion ever, because it have no god and no rules whatsoever, not even rules to break, no room for regret, no nothing but wild actions driven by emotional, brainwashed people.

No, wild emotional brainwashed people fly planes into the world trade center and burn children as witches in africa in 2012 and get excited whenever Rick Santorum opens his mouth. Those of us who question the stories of gods can't help but notice that we are far, far kinder and caring and loving than any description of the christian god ever conveys. I, for instance, am not so frickin' egotistical that I would give thought one to punishing every single generation of people I created over one measly broken rule. But you guys are into sinning big time, and rules and covenants and following your god, even as you blow each other up for not agreeing with you.

This year will make my 50th anniversary as an atheist, and I have yet get shot at by police. I recently walked back into the grocery store and paid for some ice cream that the checker forgot to charge me for. How is that a "no rules whatsoever, not even rules to break, no room for regret" type of action?"
 
Quote
People have the ability to believe, to follow, and no atheist can avoid being like that. It is present since the beginning of humanity, in every culture. People just "believe in something", so what do I have to say to your beliefs, to your faith? if such "religion" were to take over, world would become anarchy. That's what I think. We need a moral code, and atheists cannot offer that, they cannot even make people free from believing, they will, instead, turn to atheism as their new faith and find it have no system, therefore, anarchy will reign.

I of course cannot dissuade you from thinking this, because apparently it is important for you to have some sense of superiority over those who you disagree with. But I can tell you that you are wrong, so you can no longer say nobody ever told you. I repeat. You are wrong. Do I have beliefs? Yep. Are they religious in nature? Nope. Live with it. Or at least know that you've been told. That you are wrong.

Quote
Basically, believers think they're superior to others because their religion is true and they will go to heaven, plus, they're not just animals, they're the offpring of God. By the other side, atheist believe they are superior to others because they're smarter, they hold the truth, and the rest are just stupid lambs. Truth is, people is people, and atheists are no different from theists, well, theists have moral codes and try hard to be good.

You know, of course, that 70% of people think they have above average intelligence. That includes atheists as well as theists. So a lot of people are wrong about stuff like that. I don't consider myself all that intelligent. My strong point is sarcasm, not brilliance. And just like theists, I try to be good. And by the way, I have moral codes. Successfully taught to me by the society I grew up in. I must. I've not yet robbed a bank or torn the tags off my mattress. Why aren't you impressed?

Quote
Moreover, just think of the meaning of Lucifer and I. Think if that's what you want for you and your loved ones. A nick that represents everything that is evil and dirty, no matter what the bible says, Lucifer means evil, and this person uses that nick because atheists have NO RULES, no moral stablished and accepted, and it's not just his nick, but also the way he thinks and acts. To him I am trash, my arguments are trash, and we, believers are inferior.

Its a joke! Of course, atheists aren't the least bit concerned about the legitimacy of any Lucifer fella. You guys are. And why shouldn't we make fun of theists. You used to burn us at the stake. Give us a little leeway.

By the way, since you're not big on the bible anyway, why is the name Lucifer a problem? How do you know which parts to listen to and which not? Until you tell us the specifics of your belief system, we're likely to offend you in multiple ways. I hope the muppets aren't involved. I love quoting Kermit.

Quote
This is not only supported by him, but pretty much everyone in the comunity agrees with him and acts just the same. This proves my point, turning this "comunity" into a very dangerous one, even more dangerous than muslims. Also, this fits pretty good with prophecies of God. That's right, there are no proofs of God's existence, therefore, follow insanity and ruin your life, but remember: there are no proofs of God's non-existence either.

Dangerous? Are my words, when they show up on your screen, all sharp and pointy or something?

Here is a description of one event that took Place on "Bloody Friday" in Northern Ireland in 1972, because of the conflict between protestants and catholics:

Quote
A car-bomb exploded outside the Ulsterbus depot on Oxford Street, the busiest bus station in Northern Ireland. An Austin 1100 saloon car containing explosives had been driven to the rear of the depot. The consequent explosion resulted in the greatest loss of life and the greatest number of casualties. Some of the victims were virtually blown to pieces which led authorities to give an initial estimate of 11 deaths.[10] The area was being cleared but was still crowded when the bomb exploded. Two British Army soldiers, Stephen Cooper (19) and Philip Price (27), were close to the car bomb at the moment of detonation and died instantly. Three Protestant civilians who worked for Ulsterbus were killed: William Crothers (15), Thomas Killops (39) and Jackie Gibson (45). One other Protestant Ulsterbus employee, who was a member of the Ulster Defence Association, was also killed in the blast: William Irvine (18).[11] Close to 40 people were injured.

Read more at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloody_Friday_(1972) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloody_Friday_(1972)) if this turns you on.

Show me a case where one single atheist on this site has done or even threatened to do anything similar to you. Before you go tossing out charges like "dangerous", keep in mind that you and yours invented the term, or at least caused it to be needed. Atheists didn't charge into Jerusalem and make the streets knee deep in blood during the crusades. We're frickin' milquetoasts in comparison. If our words wound you, your sensitivity is a bit too high. But I can assure you that none of us are after your blood.

You're sensitive. That's not a bad thing. Until you use it to excuse your actions and call us bad. I daresay that virtually all of us could be a good friend of yours were we to meet elsewhere, if we could avoid feuding over our religious differences.

There will never be a time when everybody in the world agrees. If something horrible happens and suddenly there are only two people left, they will still not agree on god if both of them are religious. Even we atheists would squabble over who had the coolest looking belly wound. To expect to get along with people because you can make them agree with you will make every day of your life more difficult than it needs to be. Here at WWGHA you had a chance to learn how people who disagree with you think. Instead you had to make the claim that you are an innocent victim.

That will never serve you well.

You've just been told that too.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Asmoday on February 26, 2012, 02:09:39 PM
After that, a lot of members started bashing in this topic in every single page, nothing was done about it. They critize that I didn't wrote my argument as a "legit" way to dismiss it, and so new rules were born:
- I "shouldn't" post anything that I dont create.
- If I post something from another source I should post a link (even when Lucifer didn't do the same in his first post).
- I cannot post youtube videos (even when this is not in the rules.
Augusto, have you ever had an actual debate before? From both your behavior here and in the actual debate thread, I guess not.

1) The first point is not that you shouldn't post anything you did not create. You were asked not to copy&paste large parts of other people's work without making it known it was copy&paste and, more importantly, the point of a debate is for the participants to debate and not just create posts that are for the most part info-dumps made out of snippets from other text and links to videos.

There is no use calling it a debate if you copy&paste for the most part. That has always been the enforced rule in debates. If you have a point, say it in your own words (references are allowed of course, but that was not what you were doing).

2) As said in point 1, copy&paste of large chunks out of other people's works without marking them as such is a no-no. This is not some arbitrary rule created to harass you, it is enforced on the whole forum for everyone and it's also common on practically all serious discussion forums on the internet.

Besides, you were asked for a link specifically because you posted things in such a way that they looked as if you had written them even though it was a full copy&paste from some other source.

3) You were asked not to post youtube videos anymore because just like I mentioned in point 1, you were using those videos to make your point for you instead of actually debating yourself. Not to mention that these youtube videos were not small but rather lengthy. Why this is a no-no in a debate is not rocket science; this is basic debate culture.

If I were to have a debate with someone in rl and I'd go there, tell him "Well, my point is XYZ" and without further ado plonk several books and DVDs on the table in front of him so he should do the work himself, then the other person would be correct to question my "debating" style.
Because, quite simply, that is not debating. To debate means to present your point of view in your own words and then also defend it in your own words.

Quote
On top of that, Lucifer's response was not following the simple rules we set, and he was not penalized for that, when I responded to those facts, my post was deleted, "because it was offtopic" such thing follows an invisible rule, and my post was not offtopic.
Your post was removed not because of an "invisible rule" but because despite being told not to post in a certain way (creating info-dump posts in the style of your first post) you did it anyway.

Quote
What I asked was merely for equality but it was too much to ask.
If Lucifer's post had contained lenghty videos and unmarked copy&paste from other sources, he would have been told the same as you have been.

Quote
Why do I say this atheism is like a religion?

Because in this forum, just like in any religious forum, people bash with hate those who hold a different belief, and they're mercilesly undermined with hate and mock. Because they twist rules or logic in favor of their beliefs, and even because there are some people who "advice" not to listen those who think differently.

At the end, people choose to follow atheism, for the most part, based not in reason but in emotions, just like in any religion. And so, my words sound empty and stupid to them, just like christian words can seem just the same to a muslim or a jew. No room for reason, no respect, no decency when comes to protect your beliefs.
I fear you mix something up here.

Following something solely based on emotion is the field of religion, that much is true. But that#s not what atheism is about. You'll be hard pressed to find a single atheist on here to say that they do not believe in gods because they merely feel that way. We don't believe in God because there is no evidence for such an entity.

Besides, people do not "choose" to follow atheism. It's the same way in which you can't "choose" to realize that Santa Claus is not real after you find out that Santa is a fictional figure and that it's your parents who are putting the gifts under the Christmas tree.

Quote
Therefore, I consider this to be the worst religion ever, because it have no god and no rules whatsoever, not even rules to break, no room for regret, no nothing but wild actions driven by emotional, brainwashed people.
There's no gods and no rules to break because atheism is not a religion.

Atheism is the non-belief in deities. That's all.

Your argument here is the same as if you were to say "Not playing games is the worst game ever because there are no rules and no way to win."

Quote
People have the ability to believe, to follow, and no atheist can avoid being like that. It is present since the beginning of humanity, in every culture. People just "believe in something", so what do I have to say to your beliefs, to your faith? if such "religion" were to take over, world would become anarchy. That's what I think.
People have the ability to believe but that doesn't mean all people believe in something. Not believing in gods is not a belief itself.
Being bald is also not a hair colour.

Quote
We need a moral code, and atheists cannot offer that, they cannot even make people free from believing, they will, instead, turn to atheism as their new faith and find it have no system, therefore, anarchy will reign.
You should take note that your moral code does not stem from religion.

You judge your own religious text, the bible, with the moral code that has been ingrained to you by society, culture and parenting. If your moral code came from religion and their "holy" texts (in your case the bible) it would be unchanging. If we look at history, we find that this is not the case. Religion is always a step behind cultural morality. Cultural morality changes and after (fruitlessly) stemming against it for a while, religion adapts to it by re-interpreting their holy texts to fit the moral standard of that time. Not the other way round.

Quote
Moreover, just think of the meaning of Lucifer and I. Think if that's what you want for you and your loved ones. A nick that represents everything that is evil and dirty, no matter what the bible says, Lucifer means evil, and this person uses that nick because atheists have NO RULES, no moral stablished and accepted, and it's not just his nick, but also the way he thinks and acts. To him I am trash, my arguments are trash, and we, believers are inferior.
The name Lucifer simply stands for morning star or Lightbringer. You perceive it as evil simply because in the context of your mythical religion Lucifer is supposed to be the evil villain of the story.

Fun fact: The word "Lucifer" is a later addition to the bible when in 382 AD the pope Damasus commissioned a revision of the old latin translation of the bible.

Food for thought (for Augusto): In the New Testament Lucifer ( light bringer and morning star) refers to Jesus and not to "everything that is evil and dirty."

Quote
That's right, there are no proofs of God's existence, therefore, follow insanity and ruin your life, but remember: there are no proofs of God's non-existence either.
There is no definite "proofs of the non-existence" of faeries, Cthulhu, the Kraken, a mirror earth, the Jain universal entity, the galactic emperor Xenu or of the monster hiding under your bed either.

So, no evidence for faeries but also not evidence for the non-existence of faeries either. Does that mean it is logical to believe in faeries?


It is impossible to prove a negative. For example you can not prove that there is not an invisible, undetectable pet dragon in my house. Of course your inability to do so does not make it resonable to believe there is an invisible, undetectable pet dragon in my house unless I show evidence to the contrary.
If I fail to produce evidence of my pet dragon, the reasonable thing is to not believe any of it.

It's the same with your God. You say there is a god, so it's your job to produce actual evidence. Simply saying that nobody can produce evidence God doesn#t exist is not enough to validate belief in the notion of God's existence.

It's merely a rhetorical parlour trick you're trying. and we're not buying it.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: RNS on February 26, 2012, 02:10:31 PM
RNS: Find your own examples man, if you like.

I asked you to give me the examples because the reactions you had to the posts are subjective, i.e. you interpret them differently to how I do. So basically what I'm getting at is that I've already read all of the posts and found none that matched your description. I wanted you to point out what parts are offending you/making you feel bullied or excluded so that I could gain some (of your) perspective. I'm just trying to help you, but if you don't want it, that's fine.


I just read half of the first page of that other thread you pointed me to and I stopped there because I have to say, I'm not surprised you got so much negative karma. Lucifer gave a perfectly acceptable, civil response to the OP and then you just got mad and lashed out because it wasn't going the way you wanted or expected.
I wish I read that thread first, then I wouldn't have invested so much time into this one. I should have know you'd never finish the debate.
Here you seemed fairly reasonable, that you had the goal of coming to some kind of mutual conclusion in search for the truth- something I can relate to and respect.
From the other thread I have learned that clearly you are unable to accept and process new information. Rather than addressing the issues raised you just sulked, crossed your arms and said this isn't what I wanted to talk about. TOUGH. If you want to come to a mutual conclusions you can't both start on different premises. Just because you believe something and take it for granted doesn't mean others do. I think you have been guilty of many of the things you have accused others of.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jaimehlers on February 26, 2012, 02:10:45 PM
jaimehlers: Is there a believer in this comunity? just tell me that. And I disagree, I can also leave.
OldChurchGuy, riley2112, possibly TruthOT (I know he was a believer, I'm not sure what his status is now).  I'm sure there's others, but I don't know more than a couple dozen or so members from John Doe.

And yes.  You can leave.  I'm sure there's quite a few people here who wouldn't mind seeing your backside either.  I don't care that much either way.  My advice was for your benefit.  Life is about dealing with people who you may not much like, and you're not going to succeed in it if you insist on getting offended at people who aren't as civil to you as you think they should be, or if you insist that any problems must be because of other people, rather than because things you did which provoked them.

To paraphrase something I read a while back, most people are accustomed to thinking well of themselves because their lives are pretty predictable, so they can polish their reactions well.  It's how they react when they're taken out of that comfort zone that really determines their measure.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: bertatberts on February 26, 2012, 02:12:23 PM
Quote from: Augusto
Okay, I'll start.

There are 4 primary attribute that describe what God would be. If any of these attributes are found in one force, then we can continue on, to see if God is real.

These 4 primary attributes are:

1) Eternal, not involved with the flow of our time.
2) Omnipresent, found everywhere.
3) Omnipotent, all powerful.
4) Omniscient, having all knowledge.
Augusto, you have refuted your own argument in the first paragraph, it's not that we don't understand your arguments, but that you don't understand the rebuttals.

"Eternal, not involved with the flow of our time." if it is not involved with the flow of time then you are saying it doesn't exist.
If you cannot present evidence of something existing outside of time you are special pleading.

What evidence do you have of omnipresent, if you cannot provide evidence that such a thing exists you are special pleading.

What evidence do you have of omnipotent, if you cannot provide evidence that such a thing exists you are special pleading.

What evidence do you have of omniscient, if you cannot provide evidence that such a thing exists you are special pleading.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 26, 2012, 02:15:09 PM
So Augusto is having the same debate with Ricky on IGI and the title of the debate is "Spiritual atheist moose debates Augusto." Not crying about the title tho, so maybe it will go better than this one. And here at the same time.

Good Luck! Augusto!
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: bgb on February 26, 2012, 02:18:21 PM
When you don't show evidence why your position is correct we can't believe you.  Very simple.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: wright on February 26, 2012, 02:23:48 PM
Augusto, you were so lost I almost felt sorry for you. Your religion and other life experiences have clearly not prepared you very well for dealing with reality.

One lesson you might try to take from this experience is that how you've felt on this forum is how a lot of atheists feel in everyday life. We are confronted on a daily basis (at least in the US) with beliefs that make no sense to us and that permeate social venues, education, politics and even civil law.

This forum is a new thing to you: a community where atheists are the majority. I know you don't believe it, but this place is a pretty level playing field. The same rules apply to all, though the mods are human, not gods, and therefore not omniscient and omnipresent.

That said, there is an inherent advantage in atheism vs. theism that is most apparent here: there is, at present, no evidence of a god or gods. And here, the basic forum rules insist on backing up your claims with evidence if you want them accepted.

You failed to do so, as has every other theist here, even the ones that are accepted and respected.

Jetson: Just point me at ONE member who have not been dragged to your beliefs and have some good reputation and activity for a decent time and I'll accept you're not an agressive, hostile, arbitrary comunity and apologize, otherwise, stop making up lies.

OldChurchGuy, riley2112, even magicmiles; all believers. I often don't agree with them, but they do have my respect.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: RNS on February 26, 2012, 02:30:37 PM
So Augusto is having the same debate with Ricky on IGI and the title of the debate is "Spiritual atheist moose debates Augusto." Not crying about the title tho, so maybe it will go better than this one. And here at the same time.

Good Luck! Augusto!

Yeah, good luck!
Can you link this new debate please? I'm very curious to see how much debating he manages to get done there.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 26, 2012, 02:31:58 PM
So Augusto is having the same debate with Ricky on IGI and the title of the debate is "Spiritual atheist moose debates Augusto." Not crying about the title tho, so maybe it will go better than this one. And here at the same time.

Good Luck! Augusto!

Yeah, good luck!
Can you link this new debate please? I'm very curious to see how much debating he manages to get done there.

http://isgodimaginary.com/forum/index.php/topic,50279.0.html#top (http://isgodimaginary.com/forum/index.php/topic,50279.0.html#top)
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: sun_king on February 26, 2012, 02:34:22 PM
SSDF[1]


[1] Same Sh** Different Forum
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: shnozzola on February 26, 2012, 02:36:10 PM
Actually, Augusto, we lost the debate.  If our purpose is to (and it must be) change the way people on this planet judge each other, so we stop shitting on each others views, I'm worried that we haven't stopped you from disrespecting ours, so we lost.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jetson on February 26, 2012, 02:36:25 PM
http://isgodimaginary.com/forum/index.php/topic,50279.msg546195.html#msg546195 (http://isgodimaginary.com/forum/index.php/topic,50279.msg546195.html#msg546195)
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Grogs on February 26, 2012, 02:38:28 PM
Seeing as how it's a word-for-word copy and paste of his argument here, I suspect it won't go well. He'll be complaining that his opponent didn't reply in exactly the manner that he was supposed to, or that the font size on the forum is somehow mocking him before too long.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on February 26, 2012, 02:38:46 PM
Moreover, just think of the meaning of Lucifer and I. Think if that's what you want for you and your loved ones. A nick that represents everything that is evil and dirty, no matter what the bible says, Lucifer means evil, and this person uses that nick because atheists have NO RULES, no moral stablished and accepted, and it's not just his nick, but also the way he thinks and acts.

You don't know the meaning of my nickname[1], so don't even try to understand it. The only one who knows it is me and me alone.
EDIT: Asmoday already explained what the name "Lucifer" means, so I didn't feel the need to point it out a second time.

To him I am trash, my arguments are trash, and we, believers are inferior.

No life form is trash to me. Your arguments are, but not you. And don't even get me started on believers. I'll have you know that three of my former romantic partners were believers, and I loved each and every one of them more than you can comprehend. Believers are not trash or inferior because of their beliefs. It's their actions and intentions that dictate who they are.
 1. Id est: Why I chose it.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 26, 2012, 02:41:14 PM
Actually, Augusto, we lost the debate.  If our purpose is to (and it must be) change the way people on this planet judge each other, so we stop shitting on each others views, I'm worried that we haven't stopped you from disrespecting ours, so we lost.

Who is "our?"
I'm not sure where you are coming from. If you are referring to this forum, I don't think that is the purpose at all. Could you point to a mission statement or something that states this is the purpose?
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: MadBunny on February 26, 2012, 02:49:21 PM

People have the ability to believe, to follow, and no atheist can avoid being like that. It is present since the beginning of humanity, in every culture. People just "believe in something", so what do I have to say to your beliefs, to your faith? if such "religion" were to take over, world would become anarchy. That's what I think. We need a moral code, and atheists cannot offer that, they cannot even make people free from believing, they will, instead, turn to atheism as their new faith and find it have no system, therefore, anarchy will reign.


Just out of interest, did this forum ever get a good apologist who had something on his/her own?

Is Augusto speaking of the moral code that defines how to treat your slaves, how to punish them, when to sell your daughters, when to trade the virginity of your daughters to protect two strangers?

Every now and then we get somebody who's reasonably able to follow a coherent argument.
Generally speaking though, we tend to get a repetition of various ontological and teleological arguments.

It looks like Augustus was rather ham-fistedly trying to make use of the Kalaam Cosmological Argument (KCA).

I don't remember when it was, but a while back Kcrady had a debate on the topic of the KCA, it's well worth reading.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 26, 2012, 03:02:44 PM
Augusto:

I have to disagree with Shnozzola. I'm sure that people have their own reasons for being here. However, atheists are not an organized group, therefore there is no "our" purpose for atheists. We simply do not believe in a God or gods.

While it may be some persons goal to not want people shitting on others beliefs, I do not think it is the purpose of this forum to get that message across. I do not presume to speak for anyone but myself when I say this. This is my interpretation based upon the following:


What does the forum say about its purpose?

Members should consider the primary focus of the Forum, which is to provide a discussion area
for the site owner's book "Why Won't God Heal Amputees?" and tailor their suggestions accordingly.
http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,17162.0.html (http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,17162.0.html)

The main site says this:

Since we are intelligent human beings living in the 21st century, we should take the time to
look at some data. That is what we are doing when we ask, "Why won't God heal amputees?"
http://www.whywontgodhealamputees.com/ (http://www.whywontgodhealamputees.com/)

The main site asks this question:
 
This prompts a question: What if rational, intelligent human beings begin uniting together to
help heal the delusion and make our world a better place? It is an intriguing thought. There
would be many benefits.
http://www.whywontgodhealamputees.com/join-us.htm (http://www.whywontgodhealamputees.com/join-us.htm)

Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: changeling on February 26, 2012, 03:23:30 PM
There should be some way to verify that a poster is over ten years old before
setting up a debate with them.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Ate The Ism on February 26, 2012, 03:38:02 PM
If there were any evidence for Christianity, or any decent arguments, or even a mediocre chance that god exists, I would not be a gnostic atheist. The current understanding of the world far outweighs any theist explanation.

This is a direct reference to the arguments of Augusto asking atheists if he were to destroy atheist claims would we then believe or abandon our current belief system. My answer is, for me personally, yes. However, the reality is that Augusto cannot destroy claims made by Lucifer or several other atheists on this forum.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: shnozzola on February 26, 2012, 04:58:18 PM
Who is "our?"
I'm not sure where you are coming from. If you are referring to this forum, I don't think that is the purpose at all. Could you point to a mission statement or something that states this is the purpose?

Sorry, Monkeymind, I should not have intended my statement to mean this forum.  I meant that we all lose in general if a debate fails to bring people closer.  After what continues to go on around the world, maybe I'm too depressed , hoping that civilization progresses, I’m trying to say people in general need to stand in each other’s shoes and realize how many different  views we have concerning so many things.  I may be too much of an idealist.
You said it better with :
Quote
What if rational, intelligent human beings begin uniting together to
help heal the delusion and make our world a better place? It is an intriguing thought. There
would be many benefits.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 26, 2012, 05:08:22 PM
Who is "our?"
I'm not sure where you are coming from. If you are referring to this forum, I don't think that is the purpose at all. Could you point to a mission statement or something that states this is the purpose?

Sorry, Monkeymind, I should not have intended my statement to mean this forum.  I meant that we all lose in general if a debate fails to bring people closer.  After what continues to go on around the world, maybe I'm too depressed , hoping that civilization progresses, I’m trying to say people in general need to stand in each other’s shoes and realize how many different  views we have concerning so many things.  I may be too much of an idealist.
You said it better with :
Quote
What if rational, intelligent human beings begin uniting together to
help heal the delusion and make our world a better place? It is an intriguing thought. There
would be many benefits.

No need to apologize. I feel you, There are times when I wonder if I am talking to my own brother or someone that I love. It really makes me sad at times, even sick to my stomach when I say harsh things to another person in the forum. I try to say it in a funny way, and I feel chastising is warranted, but at the same time, I don't really like it. Early in this thread when talking to Augusto, I asked if he was Persian because he said "thanks God." My Persian friend says that a lot.

Healing the delusion is my ultimate goal in getting into these discussions.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 26, 2012, 05:25:18 PM
OK, maybe a little house cleaning is in order. Or maybe I'm just taking this wrong... But I got to say something and get it off of my chest.

IGI has members that go back and forth between the forum there and the forum here. I'm a member of both, but I don't participate or even check out the "other guys" very often. I just recognized one member here and suspected some courting going on with Augusto. (You know me getting questioned (and smited about my interaction with Augusto) and Augusto getting plused for his first debate post. I went over yonder to see what was going on when Augusto said " I'm invited to another forum where people play nice so if you won't be nice, I'm  leaving." I noticed Augusto got 10 Plus ones at the other place.

Did Augusto get played by Mooston? Is this some kind of tag team debate scheme, or did Lucifer get his opponent pulled out from underneath him unfairly? I mean they can have him if they want him that bad, but geesh seems pretty desperate to come cull our flock. Couldn't it have at least waited until the debate was over.
 
I don't like it. But that's just me. [/gripe]



Edit name
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Azdgari on February 26, 2012, 05:28:19 PM
I noticed that, too, but since I don't visit IGI I had no idea that he'd moved over there.  WTF is wrong with those folks?
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Tero on February 26, 2012, 05:34:42 PM
Anyone ever meet this elusive "good apologist" (theist)?
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Ate The Ism on February 26, 2012, 05:42:11 PM
Anyone ever meet this elusive "good apologist" (theist)?
No
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 26, 2012, 05:45:49 PM
I noticed that, too, but since I don't visit IGI I had no idea that he'd moved over there.  WTF is wrong with those folks?

Yeah they have a few of our "rejects." I only set up an account over there because I was asked to by PM a year or two ago. I didn't mind being asked, but I just don't feel at home over there. Different strokes for different folks, I guess.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jetson on February 26, 2012, 06:09:43 PM
I noticed that, too, but since I don't visit IGI I had no idea that he'd moved over there.  WTF is wrong with those folks?

New posters typically get +1's for joining.  It's the forums way of welcoming newcomers, although they assume positive intent without knowing the new member.  That's not inherently bad, but I don't see the value in using the Karma system that way.  To me, it should be used for quality posts, as well as to point out posts that don't cut the mustard.

I know that ricky invited Augusto to IGI for a debate, but I don't think there was any ill intent, other than to possibly show Augusto they have a friendlier membership.  I would argue though, that Augusto burst onto the WWGHA scene and immediately played the persecution card, before getting to know the members, and getting a feel for how things are done.  If Augusto gets a better vibe at IGI, perhaps he is better off over there.

Our general policy of backing up assertions that go beyond opinion is not an easy pill to swallow for many theists.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: voodoo child on February 26, 2012, 06:19:08 PM
To be perfectly honest with you Augusto. I posted a video out sheer laziness much like you did, I knew it would be a waste of time to reason with you. As other forum members have taken a great deal of time to converse with you. kudos for the patients they have taken, but you are not interested in listening to reason. I am willing to bet that you did not watch it anyway.

 you're wishful thinking does not belong on the shelf with my reason, it belongs on the other shelf next to peter pan.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 26, 2012, 07:09:47 PM
OK, maybe a little house cleaning is in order. Or maybe I'm just taking this wrong... But I got to say something and get it off of my chest.

IGI has members that go back and forth between the forum there and the forum here. I'm a member of both, but I don't participate or even check out the "other guys" very often. I just recognized one member here and suspected some courting going on with Augusto. (You know me getting questioned (and smited about my interaction with Augusto) and Augusto getting plused for his first debate post. I went over yonder to see what was going on when Augusto said " I'm invited to another forum where people play nice so if you won't be nice, I'm  leaving." I noticed Augusto got 10 Plus ones at the other place.

Did Augusto get played by Mooston? Is this some kind of tag team debate scheme, or did Lucifer get his opponent pulled out from underneath him unfairly? I mean they can have him if they want him that bad, but geesh seems pretty desperate to come cull our flock. Couldn't it have at least waited until the debate was over.
 
I don't like it. But that's just me. [/gripe]



Edit name

I started the debate in there right after this one was over, as I promised. So far I've got nothing but positive Karmas and I've been there the same person I've been here. You do the maths 12 positive Karma points vs zero negative karma points. It should give you something to think of. Because intolerance only hurts the very thing you're promoting in your post. Same for the way you're addresing to the other community.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: HAL on February 26, 2012, 07:13:20 PM
Augusto,

We have Darwins here. They aren't equivalent to Karmas. 1 Darwin is equal to ~17 Karmas on other forums.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Asmoday on February 26, 2012, 07:53:54 PM
Well, if they want to have Augusto that badly, let them have him. I think it is safe to say to say that people on this forum won't be in tears over the loss.

It's their own choice to add him to their rooster of theists. One more reason to stay clear of that forum. I look at it once every now and again and it usually takes me 10 minutes of reading theists' post the most outlandish preachy claims of whatever tickles them while mods stand idly by or one post of QuestionMark (whichever happens first) to remember why I don't like the place.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 26, 2012, 08:01:54 PM
I started the debate in there right after this one was over, as I promised. So far I've got nothing but positive Karmas and I've been there the same person I've been here. You do the maths 12 positive Karma points vs zero negative karma points. It should give you something to think of. Because intolerance only hurts the very thing you're promoting in your post. Same for the way you're addresing to the other community.

Yea, it makes me think that you should be over there where you get positive strokes. I for one, prefer the hard honest truth. What the math tells me is that Karma at IGI and Darwins at WWGHA are nothing alike.

If by intolerance you are referring to me chastising stupidity, you don't have a clue what I am promoting. As for "addressing to the community" what the fuck are you talking about?

If you like other people kissing your ass. Go for it. I predict you won't learn a thing, but will continue to demand people respect your stupid ideas. I hope I'm wrong, but all the kindness in the world won't make you any smarter. If you don't learn critical thinking skills, you're doomed to a life of stupid. I for one am gonna call it as I see it. No candy coating.

Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 26, 2012, 08:13:15 PM
So you're angry and you're gonna say whatever you like and nobody will stop you, is that it?
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 26, 2012, 08:19:03 PM
So you're angry and you're gonna say whatever you like and nobody will stop you, is that it?

No not angry at all. However, freedom of speech is very dear to Americans, so you sure as hell don't have anything to say about it.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: ParkingPlaces on February 26, 2012, 08:19:27 PM
So you're angry and you're gonna say whatever you like and nobody will stop you, is that it?

Note that we didn't stop you when you were angry and saying whatever you like. We would like to have, and had a civilized discussion, but your version of civilized differed from ours, so we couldn't do it.

You can take your ball and go home now.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Ate The Ism on February 26, 2012, 08:22:44 PM
So you're angry and you're gonna say whatever you like and nobody will stop you, is that it?
We should be asking you this question. The member have simply asked that if you make an assertion, back it up. I agree with what several members have posted; you have not taken the time to greet your audience or even learn the mutual respect that the active members of this forum share.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 26, 2012, 08:27:53 PM
Glad to know you're not angry monkeymind (don't take it as an insult, I'm just using your nick). Debate is over people (at least here), face it and move on.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 26, 2012, 08:32:38 PM
Glad to know you're not angry monkeymind (don't take it as an insult, I'm just using your nick). Debate is over people (at least here), face it and move on.

Debate is not over people, but ideas. The sooner you get that, the better off you will be. If the Academy Awards wasn't on, I would have already moved on....
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Grogs on February 26, 2012, 08:59:42 PM
Glad to know you're not angry monkeymind (don't take it as an insult, I'm just using your nick). Debate is over people (at least here), face it and move on.

Yes, you've told us that about 7 times now. I haven't seen anyone begging you to stay or tying you down here, and yet, here you are, back in the discussion thread for the debate you're not participating in anymore. I wish you well over at IGI, and I hope you're able to fit in there much better than you did here.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jetson on February 26, 2012, 09:21:13 PM
Well, if they want to have Augusto that badly, let them have him. I think it is safe to say to say that people on this forum won't be in tears over the loss.

It's their own choice to add him to their rooster of theists. One more reason to stay clear of that forum. I look at it once every now and again and it usually takes me 10 minutes of reading theists' post the most outlandish preachy claims of whatever tickles them while mods stand idly by or one post of QuestionMark (whichever happens first) to remember why I don't like the place.

Damn, you just reminded me of why I left IGI back in the day.  They seem to be going through an evolution, but I don't see it being anything dramatic enough to make it as fun as it could be.  I went back and started rolling with QM again, and when the subject of abortion came up, he went full loopy on me...

Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 26, 2012, 09:29:50 PM
Actually Jetson... you just lose a simple argument in there against me and another member. I suspect you like this comunity because in here you're free to do as you please, and to out-number believers, "winning" because of the agressive tactics.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: ParkingPlaces on February 26, 2012, 09:35:03 PM
Augusto, you'd do well to quit here while you're behind.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: MadBunny on February 26, 2012, 10:01:21 PM
I would like to take this moment to thank Augustus for not choosing me as the counterpart in this farce of a debate.
While I enjoy a good argument, I do not enjoy spending all my time wading through fallacies and hamfisted rewrites of better arguments.

As for the complaints that I see about being picked on, I suppose it probably feels that way, but it bears remembering that empirical evidence goes a long way.
So too does understanding what the term 'atheist' means in the first place.  Perhaps the smart way to start something like this debate would have been approaching it from an ignostic point of view, so as to define what the actual topic was to be about rather than a spamwall of re-postings.

As for my opinion of the debate proper:

(http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k150/madbunny_2006/fked.jpg)

If you'd like to discuss an actual topic, feel free to start one in the forums proper.  That, or feel free to move on to another forum where they have 'different' standards.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Add Homonym on February 26, 2012, 10:43:04 PM
I do agree part of the claim might not be as strong as it should, this is the best argument I was able to find to argue on favor of God's existence and I decided to post it all. Reason is, that I am not familiar with those fields, and I am not the right person to determine how strong they are. I hope we can get back to them at some point (both of us) and determine the validity of them individually; I say this because it is of my interest to come up to an honest result.

This is a quote from Augusto on IGI. As I said earlier, Augusto's refs were New Age waffle that nobody can argue against, because it has no meaning. His response to Moose is that he doesn't understand it either, so he then dumps it and proceeds onto philosophy.

Moose was more polite about saying it was complete garbage.

Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jetson on February 26, 2012, 10:46:57 PM
Actually Jetson... you just lose a simple argument in there against me and another member. I suspect you like this comunity because in here you're free to do as you please, and to out-number believers, "winning" because of the agressive tactics.

No Augusto, I did not lose anything at all.  I have been a member of both forums for many years.  And no, I do not get to "do as I please" at this forum.  You are completely misinformed, and no matter how many times you claim some victory, the membership can see it for what it is.

The most aggressive tactic I have seen since your arrival has been you, claiming that you are being persecuted.  Again, you came to an established forum, and started making demands.  That is not appropriate in most social settings, including online forums.  And as you can see, in my replies to you on both forums, I am not being aggressive at all.

This forum is different.  You cannot post unsupported assertions and expect members to accept it.  It's that simple.

Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jaimehlers on February 26, 2012, 11:28:33 PM
Actually Jetson... you just lose a simple argument in there against me and another member. I suspect you like this comunity because in here you're free to do as you please, and to out-number believers, "winning" because of the agressive tactics.
First off, people aren't free to do as they please here.  Your biggest problem is that you chose really ineffective and immature ways to express your dissatisfaction with the treatment you were receiving here.  Because of those methods, you confirmed the attitudes of other people, creating a situation that fed on itself.  I won't say that you were completely wrong, but I will say that you bear much of the blame for the way things turned out here.

It'd be nice if everyone were perfectly civil.  But I know, for a fact, that you will not cause people to be civil to you by demanding it.  You can only convince them to be civil by showing that you're civil yourself, and thus deserving of being treated civilly.  It's not fair, but complaining about that won't change anything and it generally makes the situation worse.  I've gotten in some pretty rough arguments with people here, but so far I have only received two negative Darwins.  One of which was from you, for being "off-topic", and the other was from joebbowers for a "strawman argument".  Neither were justified in my opinion, but I did not complain about getting them (nor am I now, because I don't have the right to dictate other people's opinions of me).  Aside from that, I've earned 73 positive Darwins.  This despite the fact that I have gotten in numerous disagreements and even a few knock-down, drag-out fights with people.  And the reason is because I support what I say, write it in my own words, and always, always treat others with the kind of civility I expect from them.  If I get told that I'm doing something wrong, I will at least go think about it.  And if I come to the conclusion that they're right, I'm not ashamed to admit it and try to modify my behavior in the future.

People here don't expect perfection.  They just expect you to be a decent human being who doesn't complain and whine because you aren't treated with kid gloves, who considers what people say, and who can make your own arguments in your own words.  It's no more complicated than that.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: bertatberts on February 27, 2012, 05:25:37 AM
Glad to know you're not angry monkeymind (don't take it as an insult, I'm just using your nick). Debate is over people (at least here), face it and move on.
So Lucifer won, you've backed down. Well we did know you were bound to lose. So ok bye.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on February 27, 2012, 05:47:47 AM
So Lucifer won, you've backed down. Well we did know you were bound to lose. So ok bye.

No, no, no! I lost, because I said that a website (completely unrelated to his argument) was stupid! That completely invalidates any and all counter-arguments I put forth!!!
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: bertatberts on February 27, 2012, 07:49:40 AM
So Lucifer won, you've backed down. Well we did know you were bound to lose. So ok bye.

No, no, no! I lost, because I said that a website (completely unrelated to his argument) was stupid! That completely invalidates any and all counter-arguments I put forth!!!
Yeh, I can relate to that, if you had said one of mine was stupid, I would have crucified you.(I'm kidding, I'm kidding, I'd need to be religious to kill you.) 
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Quesi on February 27, 2012, 08:30:00 AM
I just continue to be flabbergasted that Augusto challenged someone to a debate, and then PLAGIARIZED his opening statement.  I have seen ID advocates copy and paste, or refer to links or suggest reading lists in the past, because few of them seem to be able to regurgitate this pseudo scientific drivel in their own words.  Beyond the “nothing can come from nothing (except for God)” and “look at how complex and beautiful nature is” arguments, and an occasional head-scratching reference to Occam’s razor, no one, it seems can successfully paraphrase this foolishness. 

But that doesn’t seem important to followers of the ID movement.  You don’t need to understand it.  An authority has claimed that it is true, using big words and arguments that only the scientifically literate could challenge.  So it must be true!  And quoting the words of that authority is an easy next step.  They have already learned to quote the words of another set of “authorities’ who wrote the words set forth in the scriptures. 

I guess Augusto doesn’t even think he was being intellectually dishonest by copying and pasting the words of an “authority.”  Learning to quote words that you don’t really understand it part of any religious education.   

When confronted with his own plagiarism, it seems that Augusto wasn’t even embarrassed, or aware that he had done anything intellectually dishonest.  In fact, he countered by sarcastically asking if Lucifer “discovered his arguments by himself,” implying that each was using an equally valid methodology.   
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: changeling on February 27, 2012, 10:29:08 AM
Quote
Learning to quote words that you don’t really understand it part of any religious education.

Augusto hasn't even learned how to do that. He did not know any specific verses in the bible because he said that
he read it as a harmonious flowing book, or something like that.   

Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: HAL on February 27, 2012, 01:29:42 PM
Augusto

    Student
    **
    Posts: 71
    Darwins +2/-10


I'm willing to do a Dawin/Karma exchange with any forum that wants him. He's earned +2 and -10 Darwins. Since our Darwins are worth ~17 of any other forum's Karma, I can transfer +34 and -170 to his other forum account. All he had to do is get the other forum Admin to ask for them.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jaimehlers on February 27, 2012, 02:33:55 PM
Somehow, I don't think he'll be all that interested in asking.  Never know, though.  It might be a good way for him to "prove" how awfully we were persecuting him.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 27, 2012, 02:44:48 PM
If you like other people kissing your ass. Go for it. I predict you won't learn a thing, but will continue to demand people respect your stupid ideas. I hope I'm wrong, but all the kindness in the world won't make you any smarter.

Wow! was I wrong!

Quote
Re: Moose vs Augusto On God Comment thread
« Reply #48 on: Today at 02:08:20 PM »
Okay, I've read more and I believe evolution to be enough to explain everything related to life. Nevertheless, my point about human nature being driven to the supernatural is still pending.

I'll edit my response in the debate. Thanks Argyle.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 27, 2012, 03:31:46 PM
Actually the debate ended, this member Argyle, sort of took the place and refused my arguments. Under the simplest rules of civility I was able to understand theists have no weight at all to sustain their claims, and that believing in God is absurd.

Not thanks to this community however, you should learn some education.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jaimehlers on February 27, 2012, 03:41:19 PM
If it was that simple, Augusto, religion would have died out a long, long time ago.

If you take nothing else away from your experience here, understand this at least:  Civility goes both ways.  The fact that you aren't treated civilly is no excuse to treat others with incivility (and while you weren't actively rude, you certainly were irritatingly uncivil in how you came across), or to complain because you aren't (as you did, a number of times).  You are not responsible for the actions of others, but you are responsible for your own, and you need to understand that your own actions were not above reproach.

Take how you just posted.  "Not thanks to this community however, you should learn some education."  How is anyone supposed to take that but a taunting comment, akin to "see, I told you so?"  That is not civil.  If you had acted here with the same sort of civility you expected from others, instead of demanding it as your right and then getting upset when you didn't get it, then things would have turned out differently.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: HAL on February 27, 2012, 04:01:25 PM
Actually the debate ended, this member Argyle, sort of took the place and refused my arguments. Under the simplest rules of civility I was able to understand theists have no weight at all to sustain their claims, and that believing in God is absurd.

So now you are an atheist. Just like that.

I'd like to see this person called Argyle go into a Christian forum and perform his magic. Let us know which Christian forum he joins so I can read along, I'd like to learn his techniques.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 27, 2012, 04:13:18 PM
Actually the debate ended, this member Argyle, sort of took the place and refused my arguments. Under the simplest rules of civility I was able to understand theists have no weight at all to sustain their claims, and that believing in God is absurd.

Not thanks to this community however, you should learn some education.
Or, maybe good cop, bad cop really is a good strategy. We tag-teamed ya! Auggy!

Now that I think about it. Augusto has this need to be accepted, and so being an atheist or a theist doesn't really matter at all.

Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 27, 2012, 04:24:16 PM
Actually the debate ended, this member Argyle, sort of took the place and refused my arguments. Under the simplest rules of civility I was able to understand theists have no weight at all to sustain their claims, and that believing in God is absurd.

So now you are an atheist. Just like that.

I'd like to see this person called Argyle go into a Christian forum and perform his magic. Let us know which Christian forum he joins so I can read along, I'd like to learn his techniques.

After asking two or three questions about morality of Argyle, Augusto is writing/reading? 2 books and...

Augusto:
Quote
I'm going to do some work in the construction of a universal moral code, after I finish my two first books. It shouldn't be hard.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on February 27, 2012, 04:35:19 PM
Augusto:
Quote
I'm going to do some work in the construction of a universal moral code, after I finish my two first books. It shouldn't be hard.

I hope he doesn't mean "objective" moral code. Otherwise he's gonna fail completely.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 27, 2012, 04:40:55 PM
^^^I hope he doesn't mean finish writing his first two books! :)

Re: Moose vs Augusto On God Comment thread
« Reply #55 on: Today at 02:35:22 PM »
Okay, then I accept I lose the debate, you win (even if you were not in the official debate topic).

ADDED:
I already have the explanation to humans being driven to believe, it's going to be published sometime around this year. And with that being said, I have nothing left and the weight of atheist arguments is pretty much absolute as far as I know, unless anyone in here have some arguments, reason would dictate we shouldn't believe in God.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: The Wannabe on February 27, 2012, 05:27:00 PM



Augusto:
Quote
I'm going to do some work in the construction of a universal moral code, after I finish my two first books. It shouldn't be hard.

Is he going to try and connect his "universal moral code" to string theory?  Are you, Augusto?  .....  ;D
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Azdgari on February 27, 2012, 05:45:52 PM
If you have to construct it, then it's not a universal moral code.

Sorry.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jynnan tonnix on February 27, 2012, 09:07:49 PM
Am I the only one whose head is spinning here? What just happened? I even went over and read the "debate" at IGI, most of which seemed pretty incomprehensible (and I don't think I'm THAT dense)...and all of a sudden, with what seemed like virtually no real argument, Augusto concedes that the theist position is indefensible? WTF?
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on February 27, 2012, 09:17:22 PM
Gravity is not a force, per se. Gravity is a side-effect of spacetime distortions caused by particles with mass.

I thought they were:

Weakest to strongest

1) Gravity
2) Electromagnetism
3) Weak Nuclear Force
4) Strong Nuclear Force

True. I was speaking purely from the PoV of a layman (which I thought was fair, given the level of... intelligence Augusto has displayed). When a layman thinks of "force", it's usually an object attracting or repelling another (or pushing/pulling another object). Gravity doesn't actually work that way, although it might seem like it.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Azdgari on February 27, 2012, 09:33:43 PM
Force is simply the acceleration of a mass.  Gravity does that.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jetson on February 27, 2012, 09:35:45 PM
Poe?  A plant from IGI!!! Say it ain't so!
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on February 27, 2012, 09:36:39 PM
Force is simply the acceleration of a mass.  Gravity does that.

Layman's PoV. I know what force is. F=ma
Can you honestly tell me that laymen know that formula or even what it means?

Poe?  A plant from IGI!!! Say it ain't so!

Totally isn't either one.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Azdgari on February 27, 2012, 09:48:33 PM
Force is simply the acceleration of a mass.  Gravity does that.

Layman's PoV. I know what force is. F=ma
Can you honestly tell me that laymen know that formula or even what it means?

They may not be familiar with the formula, but "accelerating a mass" is a pretty simple concept.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on February 27, 2012, 09:50:58 PM
They may not be familiar with the formula, but "accelerating a mass" is a pretty simple concept.

And do you think they're aware of this concept?
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Azdgari on February 27, 2012, 10:08:53 PM
Maybe, maybe not.  But I doubt it would be hard to explain.  And it can be easily demonstrated with some simple objects.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on February 28, 2012, 03:02:34 AM
Maybe, maybe not.  But I doubt it would be hard to explain.  And it can be easily demonstrated with some simple objects.

True. Now read Augusto's posts, come back, and tell me you think he's aware of that concept.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 28, 2012, 03:26:21 AM
Would you ever get over it...? seriously.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on February 28, 2012, 03:29:06 AM
Would you ever get over it...? seriously.

Who? We're just having fun now. Nobody is actually interested in addressing you (AFAIK).
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Ate The Ism on February 28, 2012, 04:08:06 AM
Would you ever get over it...? seriously.

Who? We're just having fun now. Nobody is actually interested in addressing you (AFAIK).

BURRRN
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Ivellios on February 28, 2012, 04:18:13 AM
True. I was speaking purely from the PoV of a layman (which I thought was fair, given the level of... intelligence Augusto has displayed). When a layman thinks of "force", it's usually an object attracting or repelling another (or pushing/pulling another object). Gravity doesn't actually work that way, although it might seem like it.

I see where you were going now. No need to pull out the rubber mat and the balls of different sizes and weights.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 28, 2012, 10:26:03 AM
Am I the only one whose head is spinning here? What just happened? I even went over and read the "debate" at IGI, most of which seemed pretty incomprehensible (and I don't think I'm THAT dense)...and all of a sudden, with what seemed like virtually no real argument, Augusto concedes that the theist position is indefensible? WTF?

I'm discussing this with Augusto right now in the debate commentary thread, if you are interested.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: ParkingPlaces on February 28, 2012, 01:59:18 PM
Not thanks to this community however, you should learn some education.

I had no idea. Augusto is George Bush II!

I could never have voted for you under any set of circumstances, but welcome anyway, Mr. President!
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: sun_king on February 28, 2012, 09:46:18 PM
Am I the only one whose head is spinning here? What just happened? I even went over and read the "debate" at IGI, most of which seemed pretty incomprehensible (and I don't think I'm THAT dense)...and all of a sudden, with what seemed like virtually no real argument, Augusto concedes that the theist position is indefensible? WTF?

The head-spinning can stop now. Augusto is a theist again with a gusto!

"I am sorry for my latest post, I do want to continue with the debate, if possible. I've found tons of evidence I would like to submit, not to argue the possibility of God's existence, but to PROVE His existence...!"

The pulsar PSR B1509-58 seems to be latest fad (http://chandra.harvard.edu/photo/2009/b1509/)
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 28, 2012, 10:06:22 PM
No Sun king, you're mistaken. That was a bunch of joking arguments.

Nevertheless, since you're browsing the other forum, I would like to get some opinions on this: http://isgodimaginary.com/forum/index.php/topic,50325.0.html

It is some information of a book I'm working in.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: MadBunny on February 28, 2012, 11:51:52 PM
A book you're working on?
Pardon me if I don't take you entirely seriously on this.

Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 29, 2012, 09:17:35 AM
I am, it's going to be published this year (in Spanish first, later in other languages).
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 29, 2012, 09:23:43 AM
And based upon all you've said in the other forum...it'll be a doozey!

I especially liked the part that said:

The memory is not a pendrive, it is alive.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 29, 2012, 09:40:14 AM
Maybe we were too hasty in asking you to go away!

Quote
I am not joking, you're taking to one of the most important persons of this century, and since I'm being honest, I'll say it all: by artificial intelligence I mean machines with the ability to think and feel emotions just like any human being... I know how "the soul" works.

This is the biggest humanistic work since the beggining of humanity, and I am bigger than Descartes, Freud, Aristotle or any other.

Now let me say it all: I am pointing at changing the world as a whole in so many aspects that you wouldn't be able to digest, and I'm weird enought to come to this forum and say it, and explain part of the escence of my work to everyone before publishing my book.

There is a language barrier Monkeymind :( but read it all carefully and ask whatever you like.

*Waiting for the rain of negative Karma from everyone*
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 29, 2012, 10:10:24 AM
Did I said human brain? I meant memory...! *Gonna check and fix*

Edit: I said memory, you miss-read.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jynnan tonnix on February 29, 2012, 11:50:31 AM

looking forward to the book. I'm sure I won't have to go searching too hard to find it, seeing as how it will change the face of the world and all...
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Quesi on February 29, 2012, 12:53:11 PM

looking forward to the book. I'm sure I won't have to go searching too hard to find it, seeing as how it will change the face of the world and all...

It is coming out in Spanish first.  I'd be delighted to read it in Spanish, and offer a synopsis for the forum in English. 
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 29, 2012, 01:00:41 PM
Nice of you to offer, but I think I'll wait for the movie to come out.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on February 29, 2012, 01:05:00 PM
Movie? It's gonna start a whole new religious movement!!! After all, Augusto is bigger than all of the past philosophers put together, as he clearly demonstrated with his perfect arguments. Not one claim was unsupported. Not one fallacy was used. Perfectly perfect arguments!!!
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: The Gawd on February 29, 2012, 03:34:21 PM
Somehow, I don't think he'll be all that interested in asking.  Never know, though.  It might be a good way for him to "prove" how awfully we were persecuting him.
Stigmata
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Historicity on February 29, 2012, 04:28:05 PM
Nice of you to offer, but I think I'll wait for the movie to come out.

Are you also waiting for parts 2 and 3 to come out of Atlas Shrugged.

I still contend that film should have been made as a CGI cartoon.  Real people can't breathe reality into Rand's idealizations and simplifications.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: monkeymind on February 29, 2012, 04:44:03 PM
No, because good fiction (in my view) has to be based on fact.

But in Augusto's case.... I always enjoy a comedy/fantasy.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 29, 2012, 05:06:38 PM
how about if its true? and when you realize of this, I'll be already a public, unreachable figure? :) it could be... Elvis was nobody, suddently he changed the world of mussic.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Emily on February 29, 2012, 05:12:36 PM
Has anyone ever read those create your own fantasy book, or something like that, where as you read the book allows you to jump to a different section to give the character different plots and stuff. Do those sound familiar to anyone, I remember reading them when I was a little girl and I loved them.

Will the book be like that, augusto? You know, kind of like spagging your own god, or whatever you book will be about. Kind of like the bible (opps)

Start with a good, strong first chapter, then based on what the first chapter is about allow the reader to select the direction he/she wishes to go, and instruct the read to just to a specific chapter, based on their desires and wishes of the main character in your book.

I think it would be perfect.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Emily on February 29, 2012, 05:17:22 PM
how about if its true? and when you realize of this, I'll be already a public, unreachable figure?

What is the truth in your world anyways, augusto? What are some of the truth's components in your eyes?
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 29, 2012, 05:51:42 PM
That it can be proved, if you mean about the content of my book, I already provided some information in the link when I informed about it.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Ambassador Pony on February 29, 2012, 07:35:00 PM
how about if its true? and when you realize of this, I'll be already a public, unreachable figure? :) it could be... Elvis was nobody, suddently he changed the world of mussic.

Let's make it interesting.

If we make some sort of wager, what kind of time frame and evidence are we looking for to determine who wins the spoils?
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 29, 2012, 09:49:01 PM
So far I decided to explain just that in my latests posts in the topic, you'll need to find classification of emotions, structure of memory and / or other things, well... basically you cannot prove me wrong, you'll just have to wait until you see me on TV / Wikipedia, whatever... I must finish my book and publish it.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: ParkingPlaces on February 29, 2012, 10:55:30 PM
So far I decided to explain just that in my latests posts in the topic, you'll need to find classification of emotions, structure of memory and / or other things, well... basically you cannot prove me wrong, you'll just have to wait until you see me on TV / Wikipedia, whatever... I must finish my book and publish it.

To quote Mark Twain:

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.

Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on February 29, 2012, 11:08:19 PM
Yeap, I have a problem to remain silent, seriously. What kind of guy would publish material from a not yet published book? but since I am the way I am and I did what I did, let me know if you can refute what I said. It would be interesting as a way to kill the time.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Ambassador Pony on March 01, 2012, 07:21:44 AM
So far I decided to explain just that in my latests posts in the topic, you'll need to find classification of emotions, structure of memory and / or other things, well... basically you cannot prove me wrong, you'll just have to wait until you see me on TV / Wikipedia, whatever... I must finish my book and publish it.

Grand! I have a degree in psychology. I did my senior thesis on emotion and memory.

Give me an overview of the current research that prompted your work/research. Make any inroads?
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: MadBunny on March 01, 2012, 10:50:19 AM
Yeap, I have a problem to remain silent, seriously. What kind of guy would publish material from a not yet published book? but since I am the way I am and I did what I did, let me know if you can refute what I said. It would be interesting as a way to kill the time.

(http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k150/madbunny_2006/schrod-cat.jpg)
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on March 01, 2012, 12:48:32 PM
A quick explanation of what thinking is:

3 processes:
Abstraction: Taking information from memory or from our senses (example, vision, audition and so on)
Asimilation: Understanding the information.
Saving: Saving the information in memory.

Now, memory is not a pendrive, it's a "living" stuff in your brain, it works, it have organization, it changes and it moves so to speak.

Structure of memory:
Self image: This is the image of you, it is build to simulate you in psichic reality, it changes, it have values and it's complex.
Surounding: This is, so to speak a representation of the fisical enviroment, it constantly changes, it have rules.
Taste: I'm not going to explain this, not even a little bit, but I might adress it, so I wrote it it so you know there's more in the structure of memory.

Basically, memory emulates reality by having this "self image" and the surrounding. So whenever you get hit, insulted, kissed, promoted, degraded, or whatever, it will happen something similar in your brain. From the learning of such experiences (understand yourself as a laboratory rat subject of punishment and rewards) you will create "taste" which will help you to prevent intuitively negative events, and will help you to LIE to yourself to benefict your self image.

Now, self image is divided in parts, like appealing, strenght, age, intelligence and so on... each part and self image as a whole have levels. Imagine a recipient that can be filled with self-steem. This is extremely vulnerable to changes.

Finally, whenever you receive good or bad stimuli, self image is affected, and its values change, it is affected by the emotional system, which is basically like this:

Constructive/Destructive: It rises or lowest self steem levels.
Positive/Negative: Impulses you to act, it can be to approach to a source, or to go away from something that is negative to your self image.

Now, this 2 types of emotions can mix, and work along with "taste" as a psychic structure. So all emotions have a porpouse, I'm gonna stop now and leave room for questions. Then I'll go on.

NOTE: This is from my not yet published book, and I will not offer more information that what I want, nevertheless I'll try to answer every single question.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: ParkingPlaces on March 01, 2012, 02:13:51 PM
Augusto

I assume that, in your research, you have read at least the works of other brain researchers who write for the general public, like Gazzaniga, Deacon, Churchland, Murphey and Brown, Uttal and others.

However, I can't help but notice you're big on self esteem. We here in the US have already learned about that subject by reading "Peanuts" and watching Charlie Brown suffer. What more could you possibly have to say?
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on March 01, 2012, 04:03:51 PM
Well man, only the truth, and I invite you to read the entire topic, my book covers EVERYTHING and proposes a re-estructuration of pretty much all humanistic sciences.

Obviously, I will not reveal my book in detail before the release, in a few months (this year), neither I will reveal all the other mechanisms or evidence. I just posted some of it because I wanted to stablish my reasons to argue about tradition.

Here's the link:

http://isgodimaginary.com/forum/index.php/topic,50325.0.html

You'll have to read it carefully, cause English is not my first language.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Ambassador Pony on March 01, 2012, 04:46:28 PM
Augusto, I neglected to ask you to provide citations.

What specific area did you study in university? Cognitive neuroscience? Developmental psych? ...etc
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on March 01, 2012, 04:49:36 PM
None, I'm just a genious and studied my own mind. I just want to add you're in no possition to refuse my words, and my work proves itself, for it works in every single aspect of life and even in animals and society, by this I mean every thing a person can do or think in general.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on March 01, 2012, 04:57:27 PM
None, I'm just a genious

LOL
EDIT: Augusto, you deserved that +1. Seriously, man, you should be a comedian.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Ambassador Pony on March 01, 2012, 04:58:59 PM
None, I'm just a genious and studied my own mind. I just want to add you're in no possition to refuse my words, and my work proves itself, for it works in every single aspect of life and even in animals and society, by this I mean every thing a person can do or think in general.

Bwahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on March 01, 2012, 05:08:30 PM
That's exactly what I wanted...! thanks a lot, I am also bigger than Aristotle, Freud, Descartes and any other guy...!!! And I'm being serious. :D
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: ParkingPlaces on March 01, 2012, 05:22:20 PM
And so modest too...
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on March 01, 2012, 05:27:11 PM
That's exactly what I wanted...! thanks a lot, I am also bigger than Aristotle, Freud, Descartes and any other guy...!!! And I'm being serious. :D

Repeating a joke makes it less funny, especially when you say it twice in like ten minutes.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on March 01, 2012, 05:30:49 PM
Modest is something unreal, you can separate this like this:
- Lying about oneself to appear less and get the approval of others
- Having a low oppinion of oneself, which can be almost the same as having a low self-esteem.

Now, I am like this:
- I do not like to lie, and almost never do no matter what, yet try to be constructive and respectful as much as I can.
- I know who I am, but that doesn't make me feel superior in comparison with other people, actually I am a humble person.

I'm bad at jokes Lucifer, you'll see I was not joking when you see me on TV and you wont be able to contact me anyomore because becoming a public figure implies too many people writing letters and stuff.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on March 01, 2012, 05:32:28 PM
I'm bad at jokes Lucifer, you'll see I was not joking when you see me on TV and you wont be able to contact me anyomore because becoming a public figure implies too many people writing letters and stuff.

I'm sure you'll become a public figure, just not for the reasons you think... If you know what I mean...
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on March 01, 2012, 05:37:42 PM
Actually, I don't know how I can become a public figure if not because what I said. I believe it should be impossible...! :P

See... this is me and my wife:

(http://www.iaza.com/work/120301C/iaza15821855152200.jpg)
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Historicity on March 01, 2012, 06:05:59 PM
To quote Steely Dan:

You've been telling me you're a genius since you were seventeen.
In all the time I've known you, I still don't know what you mean.
The weekend at the college didn't turn out like you planned.
The things that pass for knowledge, I can't understand.


I've seen you cite so much ridiculous material like the Russian experiment in which (according to you) photons in the pattern of a DNA molecule remained in place for 22 minutes.  Photons can't remain anywhere.  They either move at the speed of light or they are absorbed.  I checked your source, Quantum Balancing (http://www.quantumbalancing.com/news/russian_dna.htm),  and it did not mention 22 minutes.

Also the source was a mass of silly babble.  It talked about the alkalines that are components of a DNA molecule.  DNA is an acid.  I googled to see what the connection was, if any.  I found that caustic alkalines are used to break DNA into small segments.

It said that DNA has endogenous laser light.  That would mean DNA is a laser.

It said that DNA is a code.  And language is a code.  So it said linguistics applies to DNA.  It said that the lasers produce sound.  So they used human language (Russian, I suppose) to talk to the DNA.  It finally said that by talking to the DNA they:
Quote
They even captured information patterns of a particular DNA and transmitted it onto another, thus reprogramming cells to another genome. So they successfully transformed, for example, frog embryos to salamander embryos simply by transmitting the DNA information patterns!

So I clicked the Home button and found the main page, http://www.quantumbalancing.com/ (http://www.quantumbalancing.com/).  For $1700 to $2600 they will sell you an oscillator that produces a 3.1 Mhz signal.  They will also sell you an ancient Tibetan water energizer if you don't want the other one which makes, "structured, energized water for pennies!"

Now AM radio is .620 to 1.620 Mhz and VHF TV starts at 54 Mhz and FM radio is 98 to 108 Mhz.  What is at 3.1 Mhz.  I checked the FCC.  That's a band for calibrating aircraft on a runway.  I also found a petition to the FCC from a company that wanted to use it as a communication device.  They assured the FCC that it would only go 22 mm.  For such a weak signal the FCC allowed it.

A radio frequency oscillator won't take more than $15 of parts to build.  They toss around "bio-photon"  and "experiment" and "research" and "professional" to imply this has a medical use without coming out and saying it. 

They have a pyramid power pendant too. 

And you think this is a valid source.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on March 01, 2012, 06:13:05 PM
I just took an article and copy pasted it. Also, I was not well informed on that particular matter.

You know? I am surprised by the huge attention I've got since I came here, it is the same in real life, also, mostly I get rejected pretty fast by people.

Man, pardon me if this reply is not serious enough, I'm bored and not interested in "proving" anything. Rather than that, I would consider more interesting that you use your knowledge on psychology to argue about the brief post you asked me for.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on March 01, 2012, 06:17:44 PM
Actually, I don't know how I can become a public figure if not because what I said. I believe it should be impossible...! :P

Trust me, you will always be remembered as an egocentric idiot.
Or maybe not. I could be wrong. But your idiocy will remain on this forum for as long as the forum itself remains here.

See... this is me and my wife:

<snip>

...And?

I just took an article and copy pasted it.

Did you know that plagiarism is a crime?

Also, I was not well informed on that particular matter.

Noshit. Creationists are never well informed. Otherwise they wouldn't be creationists.

You know? I am surprised by the huge attention I've got since I came here,

It's not every day we get people with your combo of idiocy and egocentrism. Interestingly enough, I think that when we do get people like you, they're always theists.

it is the same in real life, also, mostly I get rejected pretty fast by people.

I wonder why...

Man, pardon me if this reply is not serious enough, I'm bored and not interested in "proving" anything.

We know that. You've made it pretty clear since post #1.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Ambassador Pony on March 01, 2012, 06:23:40 PM
Augusto, I feel sad. 

I think IGI is a good fit for you. I think you're time will be better spent sharing your vast knowledge and genius with them. It will just be our loss. And, years from now, we will lament having sent you off. We (from the athiest religion) will wail and beat our breasts at our inability to grasp your genius.

A clean break is the best. One parthian shot, one last chance to glimpse your genius, then off you go. Never to bless us again with your mighty intellect.

It is a sad day.


Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on March 01, 2012, 06:27:12 PM
Lucy... were you laughting when you wrote that? :D

If so, I'm glad cause it's super funny...! hopefully you wont be angry at me right? it wouldn't make sense to get angry at someone you're sure is a combo of stupidity.

Point of showing the picture was to stablish I am brown, from a sub-developed country, and have no study of psychology or philosophy, as possible "arguments" that would prove it's impossible that I can come up and destroy pretty much all of the humanistic tradition regarding sciences.

As I said, I would like Ambassator Pony to argue objetively, since he asked me for some arguments to debate. Internet can be bored as hell if one can't find a way to waste time right?
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on March 01, 2012, 06:33:23 PM
If so, I'm glad cause it's super funny...! hopefully you wont be angry at me right? it wouldn't make sense to get angry at someone you're sure is a combo of stupidity.

Nope. I pity you for your lack of knowledge.

Point of showing the picture was to stablish I am brown,

The color of your skin is irrelevant.

as possible "arguments" that would prove it's impossible that I can come up and destroy pretty much all of the humanistic tradition regarding sciences.

...I don't even understand what you mean by "humanistic tradition regarding sciences".
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Ambassador Pony on March 01, 2012, 06:36:27 PM
Can you quote where I said debate?

I asked a question about the study that preceded your research. I discovered you don't even know what research is. That's the end of it, sweetheart. There's nothing after that.

It's time for you to move on to IGI. Please, parthian shot to sate your ego, then off you go. You can do it, little buddy.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: MadBunny on March 01, 2012, 06:59:20 PM
Quote from: Augusto
<snip>

snipped for brevity.

(http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k150/madbunny_2006/troll_detected.png)
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Ambassador Pony on March 01, 2012, 07:25:48 PM
*egg on face*

I can't believe it, after all this time a troll can troll me for a few minutes.

Keeps me humble. Keeps me humble.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jetson on March 01, 2012, 07:28:08 PM
*egg on face*

I can't believe it, after all this time a troll can troll me for a few minutes.

Keeps me humble. Keeps me humble.

Shall I smite you for posterity?
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on March 01, 2012, 07:30:24 PM
Hadn't someone already pointed out that Augusto was a troll? :S
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jetson on March 01, 2012, 07:44:57 PM
Hadn't someone already pointed out that Augusto was a troll? :S

We need your spidey senses!
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: One Above All on March 01, 2012, 07:46:39 PM
Hadn't someone already pointed out that Augusto was a troll? :S

We need your spidey senses!

...I wasn't referring to me. I remember quoting someone who suggested that he was either someone from IGI in "disguise" or a troll. I replied sarcastically, saying that he was clearly none of those things.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: shnozzola on March 01, 2012, 08:40:39 PM
I don't remember when it was, but a while back Kcrady had a debate on the topic of the KCA, it's well worth reading.

Can anyone find this debate?
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jetson on March 01, 2012, 08:48:17 PM
Hadn't someone already pointed out that Augusto was a troll? :S

We need your spidey senses!

...I wasn't referring to me. I remember quoting someone who suggested that he was either someone from IGI in "disguise" or a troll. I replied sarcastically, saying that he was clearly none of those things.

oops!  i need to pay attention.   :o
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Gnu Ordure on March 01, 2012, 08:58:24 PM
Augusto:
Quote
I am not joking, you're taking to one of the most important persons of this century, and since I'm being honest, I'll say it all: by artificial intelligence I mean machines with the ability to think and feel emotions just like any human being... I know how "the soul" works.

This is the biggest humanistic work since the beggining of humanity, and I am bigger than Descartes, Freud, Aristotle or any other.

Now let me say it all: I am pointing at changing the world as a whole in so many aspects that you wouldn't be able to digest, and I'm weird enought to come to this forum and say it, and explain part of the escence of my work to everyone before publishing my book.



Wiki, check-list from DSM-IV, Narcissistic Personality Disorder:

A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:

1. Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
2. Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
3. Believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
4. Requires excessive admiration
5. Has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations
6. Is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
7. Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others
8. Is often envious of others or believes others are envious of him or her
9. Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes



Do the math, people.

Then please be gentle.

It's not his fault he's like this.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: kin hell on March 01, 2012, 10:02:29 PM
Augusto:
Quote
I am not joking, you're taking to one of the most important persons of this century, and since I'm being honest, I'll say it all: by artificial intelligence I mean machines with the ability to think and feel emotions just like any human being... I know how "the soul" works.

This is the biggest humanistic work since the beggining of humanity, and I am bigger than Descartes, Freud, Aristotle or any other.

Now let me say it all: I am pointing at changing the world as a whole in so many aspects that you wouldn't be able to digest, and I'm weird enought to come to this forum and say it, and explain part of the escence of my work to everyone before publishing my book.



Wiki, check-list from DSM-IV, Narcissistic Personality Disorder: Wanker

fixed



EDIT removed irritated bile   



gentle Gnu?   as in lambs to the-s laughter



Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jynnan tonnix on March 01, 2012, 10:30:32 PM

1. Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
2. Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
3. Believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
4. Requires excessive admiration
5. Has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations
6. Is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
7. Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others
8. Is often envious of others or believes others are envious of him or her
9. Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes[/i]


Wow...it's like he read the narcissist's handbook. I suppose that's a good starting point if you are planning on trolling. Pick a personality disorder and see how long it takes you to display every characteristic.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on March 01, 2012, 11:05:10 PM
:) You got a negative Darwing already Gnu. :police:
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: jaimehlers on March 01, 2012, 11:20:04 PM
Yes, because he's a serious psychologist giving a serious diagnosis over the internet.  *eyeroll*
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Historicity on March 01, 2012, 11:36:44 PM
I just took an article and copy pasted it. Also, I was not well informed on that particular matter.

Actually I like some of your writing.

Your English is rather good.  You have a large vocabulary.  (St. Paul by contrast seemed to use the same 500 words over and over in 20 years of writing.)

Peer review does not mean being straitjacketed into a party line.  It means some outside reader points out really glaring errors like that electrified homeopathic woo site.

It was interesting for me to follow my curiosity on some of the statements.  I didn't know DNA is cut to fragments by caustic alkalies, for instance.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Augusto on March 01, 2012, 11:46:16 PM
Nobody knows enough of every field, thanks for the compliment, I'm surprised...! :O
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Emily on March 01, 2012, 11:59:59 PM
Wiki, check-list from DSM-IV, Narcissistic Personality Disorder:

A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:

1. Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
2. Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
3. Believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
4. Requires excessive admiration
5. Has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations
6. Is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
7. Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others
8. Is often envious of others or believes others are envious of him or her
9. Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes



Do the math, people.

Then please be gentle.

It's not his fault he's like this.

(pretty old reference coming up)

VenomFangX, is that you? For some reason I just couldn't resist.
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: voodoo child on March 02, 2012, 12:30:59 AM
Big head syndrome  or shitloads of cocaine.  &)
Title: Re: A Debate: Augusto vs. Lucifer - Commentary Thread
Post by: Ivellios on March 02, 2012, 08:42:37 AM
...I wasn't referring to me. I remember quoting someone who suggested that he was either someone from IGI in "disguise" or a troll. I replied sarcastically, saying that he was clearly none of those things.

I remember that... don't remember which thread/page though.