Can there be an Atheist forum?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Do you mean the person who presented scholarly archeological evidence that does not support Exodus or the person who railed against him?

Either way, seems to me that that people of different religions - or even the same religion - disagree about things all the time and that these forums are not about just about supporting certain beliefs but discussing religious issues in general.

I mean the highly disengenous person who posted purported "scholarly archeological evidence" from 2000 and pretended to ignore more recent archeological evidence that debunked those theories and the several other scholars who compared the guy from 2000 getting a grant for science to Saddam Hussein winning the nobel peace prize. Not to mention, why was that disruptive poster talking about Exodus on a thread about Jesus. That's the highly disengenous and disruptive poster I'm referring to.

Watch out -- you don't want to derail this thread the same way, do you?

Could be some people will go back to that thread , see the evidence and start believing things you think no decent person should believe. actually there is no new evidence presented there since 2000 -- just evidence of academicians squabbling with each other. but if you bring too much attention to it, people might click on those links, read the research results and the commentary and come to different conclusions. If you think what they said was dumb, perhaps it's better to let it die down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Reposting for format:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I might be on board, mainly because there are some very disruptive atheists here. Many atheists on DCUM are thoughtful and interesting to talk to. Unfortunately, all it takes is one bad egg, acting in bad faith so to speak, to disrupt the entire thread (see the Get to Know Jesus thread). I don't mind the mockery, it's when some disruptive person derails an entire thread and the conversation shrieks to a halt.

I doubt, however, that creating a new Atheist forum would solve this problem. It isn't going to stop people like that Jesus thread derailer from coming over to the Religion forum to continue with the derailments.

Do you mean the person who presented scholarly archeological evidence that does not support Exodus or the person who railed against him?

Either way, seems to me that that people of different religions - or even the same religion - disagree about things all the time and that these forums are not about just about supporting certain beliefs but discussing religious issues in general.

I mean the highly disengenous person who posted purported "scholarly archeological evidence" from 2000 and pretended to ignore more recent archeological evidence that debunked those theories and the several other scholars who compared the guy from 2000 getting a grant for science to Saddam Hussein winning the nobel peace prize. Not to mention, why was that disruptive poster talking about Exodus on a thread about Jesus. That's the highly disengenous and disruptive poster I'm referring to.

perhaps there could be some sort of cyber-punishment for anyone who changes the subject from NT to OT. We could comb the discussions to see how often that happens, then hunt the people down and set up a new forum for NT/OT switchers or anything else that offends us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Do you mean the person who presented scholarly archeological evidence that does not support Exodus or the person who railed against him?

Either way, seems to me that that people of different religions - or even the same religion - disagree about things all the time and that these forums are not about just about supporting certain beliefs but discussing religious issues in general.

I mean the highly disengenous person who posted purported "scholarly archeological evidence" from 2000 and pretended to ignore more recent archeological evidence that debunked those theories and the several other scholars who compared the guy from 2000 getting a grant for science to Saddam Hussein winning the nobel peace prize. Not to mention, why was that disruptive poster talking about Exodus on a thread about Jesus. That's the highly disengenous and disruptive poster I'm referring to.

Watch out -- you don't want to derail this thread the same way, do you?

Could be some people will go back to that thread , see the evidence and start believing things you think no decent person should believe. actually there is no new evidence presented there since 2000 -- just evidence of academicians squabbling with each other. but if you bring too much attention to it, people might click on those links, read the research results and the commentary and come to different conclusions. If you think what they said was dumb, perhaps it's better to let it die down.

m

Anybody who opens that thread would read the multiple quotes referring to new evidence and they might even click on the National Geographic link. Then they would realize that you not only lie about the state of research, you also lie about what happens in threads here.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Do you mean the person who presented scholarly archeological evidence that does not support Exodus or the person who railed against him?

Either way, seems to me that that people of different religions - or even the same religion - disagree about things all the time and that these forums are not about just about supporting certain beliefs but discussing religious issues in general.

I mean the highly disengenous person who posted purported "scholarly archeological evidence" from 2000 and pretended to ignore more recent archeological evidence that debunked those theories and the several other scholars who compared the guy from 2000 getting a grant for science to Saddam Hussein winning the nobel peace prize. Not to mention, why was that disruptive poster talking about Exodus on a thread about Jesus. That's the highly disengenous and disruptive poster I'm referring to.

Watch out -- you don't want to derail this thread the same way, do you?

Could be some people will go back to that thread , see the evidence and start believing things you think no decent person should believe. actually there is no new evidence presented there since 2000 -- just evidence of academicians squabbling with each other. but if you bring too much attention to it, people might click on those links, read the research results and the commentary and come to different conclusions. If you think what they said was dumb, perhaps it's better to let it die down.

m

Anybody who opens that thread would read the multiple quotes referring to new evidence and they might even click on the National Geographic link. Then they would realize that you not only lie about the state of research, you also lie about what happens in threads here.

Well, that sounds like a real dare -- but maybe most people won't want to get involved in a petty internet quarrel.

However, those interested in actual information, can go to a synagogue and check out page 1343 of Etz Hayim - it means Tree of Life and it's a big book found in the pews of many synagogues. I saw it in a conservative synagogue. It gives the full story on biblical archeology.

[Anonymous]

Again, what's the harm in making this a support forum? Else call it Debate For/Against Religion, or Religion Or Lack Thereof.

Every other specialized forum here is along the lines of support and not to debate the validity of the forum topic. The animosity here is pathetic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Again, what's the harm in making this a support forum? Else call it Debate For/Against Religion, or Religion Or Lack Thereof.

Every other specialized forum here is along the lines of support and not to debate the validity of the forum topic. The animosity here is pathetic.

Nice idea, but there's no point. Posters like 17:05 would still try to trash the Believers' forum. They can't help themselves. It's just too hard to resist ad hominems and the rush that comes from spouting some half-truth or lie and waiting to see if anybody knows enough to refute it (oh, the irony, you'd think an atheist would really care about the truth).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, what's the harm in making this a support forum? Else call it Debate For/Against Religion, or Religion Or Lack Thereof.

Every other specialized forum here is along the lines of support and not to debate the validity of the forum topic. The animosity here is pathetic.

Nice idea, but there's no point. Posters like 17:05 would still try to trash the Believers' forum. They can't help themselves. It's just too hard to resist ad hominems and the rush that comes from spouting some half-truth or lie and waiting to see if anybody knows enough to refute it (oh, the irony, you'd think an atheist would really care about the truth).[/quote

Irony indeed. No wonder Darwin waited 25 years before publishing his research on Evolution. It's been refuted and disputed and disparaged and trashed, but it's still science.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Look at what happened when Jeff finally agreed to an AAP forum.

The mocking and fighting just got worse. Every single thread, even the most innocent gets derailed by conscious and mocking vitrol.

This will not fix the problem.

Thoughtful athiests shutti g down the zealot atheists might. But I doubt it.

I wish this would happen. I hardly ever see it even in real life situations where atheists are being huge bigots and saying incredibly offensive things. I encounter much more open hate speech from atheists toward religious people than from people of any sect against another.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look at what happened when Jeff finally agreed to an AAP forum.

The mocking and fighting just got worse. Every single thread, even the most innocent gets derailed by conscious and mocking vitrol.

This will not fix the problem.

Thoughtful athiests shutti g down the zealot atheists might. But I doubt it.

I wish this would happen. I hardly ever see it even in real life situations where atheists are being huge bigots and saying incredibly offensive things. I encounter much more open hate speech from atheists toward religious people than from people of any sect against another.

Could you provide a few examples of a hate speech from atheists?

[Anonymous]

Militant atheists are ruining discussions of religion everywhere, not just on DCUM.

This was a great article on the Druze faith and then you get to the comments.

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/06/looking-for-love-at-a-convention/371998/

[Anonymous]

You probably don't need to worry so much about atheists since more violence and crimes have been and will continue to be committed by so called religious people in the name of their beliefs.

[Anonymous]

I don't agree there's a need for a separate forum, but I think there are some militant/rude atheists here in the same way that there are mommy battles in other DCUM forums.

I happen to be Catholic, but value open discussions of thought. Unfortunately, there are one or more posters who are deliberately insulting - saying things like "god is just like santa claus or the easter bunny or a flying unicorn" in a way that comes across as derisive and deliberately offensive. It's the difference between a thoughtful discussion between individuals who, while they may not change each other's minds, are open to understanding the others way of thinking, and an argument between two name-calling idiots.

A separate forum won't fix that since no one is blocked from participating in any forum. I'm not TTC but nothing stops me from posting there if I want. People that want to be mean or cause trouble under the cloak of anonymity will.

[Anonymous]

Penguin Six and Takoma were both thoughtful athiests that were interesting to discuss and debate religion with. But they haven't been around for a while.

One of them, I think Takoma, would actually take on the militant evangelical atheists.

Too bad for the athiests that they are gone. They were good ambassadors for you in presenting you as reasonable and respectful people of science and ideas, ane not the crazy, mean spirited radical zealots that the current crop of athiests appear to be.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look at what happened when Jeff finally agreed to an AAP forum.

The mocking and fighting just got worse. Every single thread, even the most innocent gets derailed by conscious and mocking vitrol.

This will not fix the problem.

Thoughtful athiests shutti g down the zealot atheists might. But I doubt it.

I wish this would happen. I hardly ever see it even in real life situations where atheists are being huge bigots and saying incredibly offensive things. I encounter much more open hate speech from atheists toward religious people than from people of any sect against another.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Penguin Six and Takoma were both thoughtful athiests that were interesting to discuss and debate religion with. But they haven't been around for a while.

One of them, I think Takoma, would actually take on the militant evangelical atheists.

Too bad for the athiests that they are gone. They were good ambassadors for you in presenting you as reasonable and respectful people of science and ideas, ane not the crazy, mean spirited radical zealots that the current crop of athiests appear to be.

I'm Catholic and fairly devout, but I definitely enjoy the company of and even debate with the reasonable and respectful people of science and ideas. It's the people who insult my intelligence because I am a believer and assume that I am filled with hate for people of another religion (or no religion) that weary me.