Max was asking if we should take it more seriously then something made up off the top of the head.

Islam is taken more seriously then the church of the flying speghetti monster without even considering which one is more likely to be true.

So christians who claim that they have logical reasons that allows them to believe they are correct with probability greater than 95% are wrong in your opinion? (Or of course lying)

Yes, in fact Islam is taken more seriously than the flying spaghetti monster.

Max asked if you think there are good reasons for taking Islam, or christianity, more seriously than the flying spaghetti monster.

You then replied with [well, a lot of people have believed it for a long time] which, again, has zero bearing on whether it's true or not. So you have actually, so far, implicitly agreed with Max that there are in fact no reasons for taking it more seriously than any random idea, since [people have believed it for a while] isn't a good reason for thinking something is true.

Stu was included from the beginning and it was only a matter of time before he showed up and dialogue could start. You, in the meantime, decided to go berserk and tell me how pointless it was. Foot in mouth.

You got worked up. You took it too seriously.

ZOMG JIBBINATOR IS COMING TO CLOSE THIS ZOMG THIS IS POINTLESS ZOMG THERE'S NO REASON FOR THIS

Time for the diazepam again? Not to beat a dead horse, but the point is there's nothing here that couldn't have happened in the original thread.

BAHAHAHAHA

In which case the OP of the aliens/religion thread would have been more justified in telling me to take my hijack somewhere else than you are to tell me to have stayed in there.

Time for your valium?

If you have nothing to say about the substance of the thread please leave, since you've already deemed it worthless yet both of you keep coming back for some reason.

Also, LOL at people other than RGT's moderators deeply caring about whether this needed a new thread or not.

Get a ****ing life.

I wouldn't have seen this if it wasn't a new thread. Perfectly standard to start a new thread in this situation imo

Even if it wasn't standard, what kind of person really cares enough to drag it out and complain this much?

What complete nits.

What do you care? You're not here to make friends. Regardless of your views or arguments, how do you expect people to respond to you when you are gruff or rude with them?

That being said, the thread has turned out very interesting, and I don't know what thread it is a spin-off of, so I'm glad you made it. Dicknose.

LOL?

I was "gruff or rude" to the nits before they started their non-new-thread creation crusade?

You're never anything else. To anyone. Ever, that I've seen.

Before I would take the position they are wrong I would like to hear their "logical reasons".

Someone could say its logical to believe simply on the basis it is what they have been taught. Most things a person is taught are true(like it's wise to look both ways before crossing the street or brushing your teeth prevents cavities, etc.).

I believe the mass of a proton is 1.67262158 × 10-27 kilograms. I believe that simply because I was taught the mass of a proton is 1.67262158 × 10-27 kilograms. I personally haven't gone out and weighed any protons. Is my reason for believing the mass of a proton is 1.67262158 × 10-27 kilograms not a logical one?

I don't get why Rize is so angry. I'm not competing against you or anything buddy.

Pretty sure rize will respond angrily to this completely non-threatening post for some reason

he's an atheist, all atheists are angry, all the time, especially at God.

Atheists are just angry at themselves for being losers in the eternal life game.

come on someone has to say it

All I know is that the scientific community claim that's the mass of a proton. Given that they're pretty transparent, unbiased and open, I'm assuming they're probably a reliable source.

Of course, I don't actually care, since it has no impact on me at all. I'm also assuming that they do themselves have good evidence for their claim. If I cared enough to look into it and found it lacking, then I'd change my mind.

You have obv heard many of their logical reasons. Do you reject all of the logical reasons that you have heard?

I really haven't paid much attention to the reason why some believe. I think I remember bunny claiming he believes because of a deeply personal spiritual experience. I would not reject something like that as a valid reason to believe.

Maybe you can list some reasons to believe you think are illogical and I will tell you if I concur.

On the whole of it your parents are a pretty reliable source too. The world is a pretty dangerous place and you seemed to have learned to navigate it pretty well. Did someone teach you those skills or did you learn them on your own?

Would you say that if your parents taught you something most likely it was beneficial for you to believe and accept it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

My parents teach me reaaaaaaaaaaally dumb stuff all the time. My dad tries to peddle this book a lot: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural..._to_Know_About. He doesn't want to get an HDTV because "apparently" they emit dangerous levels of radiation. According to Mr. Kevin Trudeau anyway.

But in general, anybody's parents would be much much much much less reliable than a lot of science. Humans are fallible, and the checks and methods that are supposed to make science reliable are not present in your parents teachings. It's not like they have a big parents association which peer reviews each other's work and sticks to strict standards of evidence.

There would be a lot of things you could take as being reliable from your parents though (depending on their character).

oh that rize...he's just so damn MILITANT!

O.M.G.