Only in that if they have ESL issues we might go easier on them with complex phrases or big words and be less likely to be grammar Nazis. However … that is a good approach to use with anyone really. If we assume any poster is doing their best to express themselves, that is all we can legitimately require.
Zionism has a particular nasty history of terrorism in the region.
1 Like
In fact, the terrorism of the Zionists was so successful, that many of the techniques of modern terrorists organizations (in the region and even outside) are based on them (like the PLO in the past, and Hamas more recently).
1 Like
Because of how Godness writes, Get_off_my_lawn.
He claims to be a medical doctor - a career path the require a high level of intelligence, good communication skills and a high standard of education.
And yet what do we see?
Godness doesn’t use paragraphs and doesn’t use punctuation properly.
”Why would he [God] create a world and us to play?” Mangled sentence construction.
He “have” education. Which should read, he has an education.
He writes the word ‘religious’ when he means religions.
He writes ‘Jewish’ when he means Judaism.
budism instead of Buddhism.
He has read the Bibel, not the Bible.
The old and the new testimony (singular) and not the old an new testaments (plural).
He has read the Quaran, not the Quran.
No, something doesn’t add up here, Get_off_my_lawn. If English weren’t his first language that might explain these errors. But if he were smart enough to qualify as a medical doctor then he should also be smart enough to use AI to correct to find and then correct his mistakes.
That hasn’t happened. So my suspicions are aroused by the WAY Godness writes. And I’ve seen this kind of thing before in another forum. Where someone purported to be something special, but betrayed themselves with their grammatical errors, spelling mistakes and similar.
I have my doubts about Godness.
Walter.
I notice your opinion. But I have worked with extremely intelligent people with PhDs in diverse sciences who were absolutely garbage at writing. I cringed whenever I read their textual output. But that did not take away from their analytical, mathematical, or scientific abilities. So while crap writing can be an indicator, you should be very careful about drawing conclusions too fast.
Oh indeed!
I haven’t drawn any conclusions yet.
My suspicions are aroused - but I haven’t yet reached a conclusion.
I have my doubts - but no conclusions yet.
I watch and I wait to see what happens next.
Perhaps Godness will reply to my question about whether English is his first language?
We shall see.
Walter.
Excellent. It is a good thing to be critical and suspicious. It is also a good thing to wait with the conclusion until you have enough data. Which — in the light of previous experience — is what I’m doing right now.
In any case, one of the big problems with Teh Internets is that nobody knows you’re a dog.
We are on the same page, Get_off_my_lawn.
English is definitely not my first language. So if you find my texts strange that’s why. But I know a lot about holy books and shit around us. I have read bible, Quran, old, new testimony, can every line and word of it. If you believe them, I am the right person to confront with my poor English! Sorry for inconvenient.
I’m a Raelian Jew so I don’t disprove anything.
This reasoning is dog shit.
Please consider a recessive genetic mutation that causes a form of dwarfism called Laron syndrome.
People with Laron syndrome are little people who are (like most little people) at a disadvantage in the modern world.
Yet they very rarely (if ever) get any kind of cancer, and they also seem largely immune to diabetes . . . yet a eugenicist would consider them unfit to reproduce because they are “inferior.”
Laron syndrome demonstrates that mutations can sometimes be very beneficial even if we think the resulting organism is–somehow–inferior or substandard just because of the appearence. In the Star Trek science fiction franchise, this is called “shape prejudice” . . . although my take on shape prejudice is that this form of bias has a lot in common with the “Uncanny Valley” (which was discovered by Silicon Valley computer engineers who design robots) and/or the “Frankenstein Complex” of Isaac Asimov’s robot stories, which is essentially a prediction of the Uncanny Valley that was made decades before it was actually discovered.
I seem to have digressed, but I have the idea that there is a relationship between the uncanny valley and peoples’ rejection of mutation and evolution, and organized religion takes advantage of this to further an agenda.
Please see below:
1 Like
Not so much IMO because of various forms of bigotry / ableism but because there is so much evidence for evolution that it is not dismissible as conjecture or wishful thinking. It is just the writer’s desire to mount an argument from incredulity and/or ignorance (which, ironically, IS dismissible).
Like all scientific theories, evolution is heavily vetted and confirmed, as much as gravitation / electromagnetism, germ theory of disease, or any number of others. It is just not as obvious to most laypersons how many practical applications rely on it. It’s harder to dismiss that cell phones work, that people invariably die when jumping off 10 story buildings, etc., than to understand the less overtly consumer technological benefits of evolutionary theory.
1 Like
The more I read the author’s argument the more I ask the question
“is this guy trying to prove that there’s a big cosmic narcissist homophobe out there?”
Because Leviticus and other texts written by ancient jewish people have claimed to serve under a higher power who happens to be very homophobic.
P.S
I am not Jewish so i don’t think the author is inviting me to “tear apart his thesis”. I’m basically an outsider to this thread.
1 Like
I highly doubt it.as I do many things.
1 Like
Yep, and I’d go further to suggest that the believer themself is that cosmic homophobe (that god somehow always seems to have the same exact views as the believer).
1 Like
Exactly, the simpler explanation is that humans imagine / create a deity, and then give that deity the same ignorance and prejudices they have, Occam’s razor.
2 Likes
Oh and here I thought you merely abstained from believing in God. I didn’t know you also offer up explanations for why He is “made up” / “doesn’t exist”.
I made no claim that anything was made up. I just subjected two opposing claims to Occam’s razor.
And what was your conclusion?
One explanation was simpler and required no unevidenced assumptions, as I explained here:
We already know that humans exhibit bigotry and homophobia, that they have imagined a deity that has the exact same prejudices and ignorance they favour, is the simpler explanation, that requires no unevidenced assumptions about reality or what is possible.