Thread: Energy Committee Chairman Candidate Says God Promised no More Catastrophic Climate Ch

Originally Posted by WickedTribe

No, I'm sorry, but saying something stupid or something that you disagree with is way, way different than citing a fairy tail as if it were fact. If you can find even one modern non-religious example of this, I'll be really, really impressed. On the other hand, there are mountains of examples coming from religion. If Pelosi said that she couldn't read the bill because it would raise the evil spirits of Dumbledorf, then you'd have an argument.

Sigh, yet another I am 100% right 100% of the time argument from you, how old and boring this has become. Last I checked you, nor anyone else, has proven the Bible or the existence of God to be incorrect, so until you do his stupid ideas are just as retarded as all of the other stupid ideas, but no more so. The guy saying Guam would tip over, explain to me what factual evidence he is basing that off of? I said the guy is a moron. I could care less why he is a moron, just like I could care less why any of the others are morons. I don't give him a pass because his moronics are founded in religion, and I wouldn't give the others a pass if it were founded in another religion, or nothing, which since YOU claim the Bible is false means that his stupid comments are based in nothing just like theirs.

And to sum up my argument if I say, "I think the world will end in 2012," or "God told me the world will end in 2012," or "the Mayans are right, the world will end in 2012," then I am still making the same outrageous claim. TO me it doesn't matter WHY I think what I think, it still doesn't justify stupidity.

Sure, and so is the guy who said Guam was going to tip over if we put more troops there. My point is stupid = stupid, yet you somehow think stupid based on nothing is smarter than stupid based on religion.

Originally Posted by CivilWars

Sure, and so is the guy who said Guam was going to tip over if we put more troops there. My point is stupid = stupid, yet you somehow think stupid based on nothing is smarter than stupid based on religion.

You're missing my point entirely.

edit: I'll elaborate. I've repeatedly pointed out that this isn't about him being wrong. If he was just wrong, and said that humans couldn't' make the earth uninhabitable, then that would be one thing. The point of the topic is that he's using a fable to justify his incorrect argument, and he's not being laughed at, because the fable is about God. If you want to find a counter example, you'll have to find an example of someone using a non-religious fairy tale as evidence of some argument, and being taken seriously.

And not to derail this into yet another debate on whether God exists, whether the Bible is real, or any of that, but here is my stance, assuming the Bible is truth. No man/woman is supposed to be the link between another man/woman and God. So if God exists, and if God tells me that there is a flood coming (or whatever), then that is between God and myself. If God wanted all of the world to know about it I am sure being omnipotent he could handle it without my help. So, that being said, even if God specifically told this guy to make his best attempt to destroy the world because it wouldn't happen the guy is still a moron for stating it publicly.

Originally Posted by WickedTribe

And Civil, there's no proof that God doesn't exist, but there's also no evidence that he does exist. The same can be said about the Easter bunny, or any other supernatural being that can perform magic. If he had cited statements that the Easter Bunny had made, then would he be taken seriously?

I already agreed with you that the guy is a moron, what more do you want? Where we disagree is that you think he is somehow MORE of a moron because his moronic statements are based on a book instead of NOTHING.

@Civil. This may sound off topic but if someone in the banned forums claimed that God told him where to aim and shoot and that he didn't wall hack, would you believe him? Keep in mind, since it can't be proved that God does not exist, how could he be proved wrong?