jakee
-
Content
24,927 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
74 -
Feedback
0%
Everything posted by jakee
-
And the Trump appointee in control of government admin is refusing to give the Biden team access to transition funds and infrastructure because she doesn't think the election result is clear yet. Riiiiight.
-
That uncertainty makes every subsequent thing uncertain. But you can't know them, so you 100% can't. You can't say they're both knowable and unknowable. So again, we're back to the fact that we either have free will or we don't. Everything is either pre-determined or it isn't. If it is, it's pre-determined regardless of your imaginary consciousness realm. If it isn't, you have absolutely no clue whatsoever why it isn't or how it works. Therefore, you either have no evidence for any inconsistency with atheism, or if you insist that you do, you must admit that your own worldview suffers from the exact same inconsistency.
-
You don't know that. There's no basis for suggesting that Republicans who did't vote by mail didn't vote. Biden told supporters to postal vote and they posted their votes. Trump told supporters to in person vote and they went to the polls. If Biden had lost would you say it's because his campaign discouraged people from turning up on the day? It'll take a much more sophisticated analysis to find out if different rates of mail in participation had a significant impact on total votes cast, and taking the simple number as proof that the candidate's attitudes to mail in voting was the deciding factor of the election shows you don't really understand the dynamics of it at all, IMO.
-
It might be my new favourite thing that the Trump campaign clearly tried to book a Four Seasons hotel and accidentally ended up at a run down garden centre. Perfect encapsulation of how they've approached the last four years of governance.
-
Don't be so bloody obtuse. Official backing for baseless allegations and conspiracy theories - and party lawyers advancing them in court is official backing - will not help them go away. That's an absurd suggestion.
-
Then what is it you're actually saying? It's like you've just come out and felt the need to state "I want the sun to come up in the morning." Well, of course the sun will come up in the morning. That's how it works. I mean, what's the alternative? were you suggesting there's a possibility that the courts were going to simply ignore Trump and the GOP's lawyers? Deep state security guards were going to block them at the courthouse doors?
-
Which, again, means that you are in the same boat as the rest of us. Your consciousness realm existing seperate to the material realm is completely and utterly irrelevant. Anything that the self aware, conscious, independent free will part of you thinks about in the consciousness realm would have absolutely zero impact on what the material you thinks, says and does in the material realm. The one has absolutely nothing to do with the other unless the science does not mean that everything has to be pre-determined. So, again, if atheism is incosistent because it doesn't allow for morality, your worldview is equally inconsistent because it doesn't allow for it either. If your worldview does allow for morality, then so does atheism.
-
But why are you saying that when you clearly don't think they have to think that? You think there is a loophole in the physics you are using to prove the above point that would allow your consciousness realm to affect the physical world, breaking the simple chain of mathematical progress. But if it's a loophole for your idea, it's a loophole for everything else as well. Everything is either preditable cause and effect or it isn't. And if it isn't, you don't get to say why it isn't because with all due respect you sure as hell aren't smart enough to figure that out on your own. No-one is.
-
Are you even listening to yourself? If there is a 'consciousness domain' that does not interact with the physical domain then what the fuck do you think it does? If, without a seperate consciousness domain, we would just be two robots acting out this conversation only because it is a predetermined consequence of natural laws then, if there was a consciousness domain that did not interact with the physical domain we would still just be two robots acting out this conversation only because it is a predetermined consequence of natural laws. So its just like I said - it turns out you think the science you are relying on to prove that every physical thing is predetermined does not in fact mean every physical thing is predetermined. Once again, your premise is broken, everything else you are saying is irrelevant.
-
You are saying exactly that. You have offered what you believe to be a solution to the 'inconsistency' you believe you have found in atheist thought. Your solution, however, only works if the science you are using to prove there is an inconsistency in atheism is wrong. This is your logical fallacy.
-
That's a fallacy. It matters if the science is right or wrong. If you're saying it's wrong, there's no problem to solve. If you're saying it's right, your 'solution' is broken.
-
Nope, you can't say that. If the science is perfectly accurate, you cannot argue that your seperate consciousness has any effect on anything your physical brain and body does. If it did the science would be wrong - things would be happening that are not covered by those evolution equations. If your seperate consciousness doesn't have any effect on anything your physical brain and body does then you have an inconsistency problem. See above. You can't allow for a domain where it does exist without admitting you're wrong to say it can't exist in this domain. It either does or it doesn't. Here, there or everywhere.
-
Right. So again - if you think the science is wrong you can't use it to support your position. Everything you've written before and after this is irrelevant. To be clear, this means you think the science you are quoting is wrong.
-
If you believe the science is wrong then you can't use it as evidence to support your point. Everything else you've written after this is therefore irrelevant. Nope, still doesn't help. Any mention of morality remains utterly irrelevant to the point you're trying to make.
-
If you believe that your interpretation of that science is correct then it makes no difference if you believe in god or spirit or anything else - you think morality is an illusion regardless and we're all robots acting out pre-determined pathways. So why single out atheism? Hence why this entire thread is meaningless. There is either free will or there is not. There is either morality or there is not. There is no problem for atheism either way.
-
Because of people like you who think that way. You were concerned about violence coming to your area during Trump's Presidency too. You've been afraid for as long as you've been posting here. The same. The only thing the EC has achieved in this election is giving Trump multiple avenues to spread lies and conspiracy theories about vote counting in close races. Without the EC it wouldn't matter which way the late counted postal votes in Georgia were breaking, for example. Why do you think other Americans are your enemies? Why do you hate America?
-
You lack the ability to think independently and are only able to parrot what your leaders tell you?
-
How convenient. When your dream of a nation secretly united behind Q is shown to be nothing but a fantasy and when voters have gone one and all to the polls to thoroughly reject your vision of the future, you find an excuse to stop posting about it instead of facing the music. What a very great and brave patriot you are.
-
Isn't that what everyone is saying? Deciding who should be accountable to the law on the basis of how it will be seen politically is banana republic. The American people are served by holding their leaders accountable to the law just like everyone else. They are not served by placing successful politicians in a seperate class of uber-privilege that gives them protection from the consequences of illegal actions.
-
How do you know that? Nonsense. Very few Republicans admire Obama, and very few Democrats admire Bush (except in comparison to Trump). Trump will continue to be praised as a godlike figure by vast swathes of his supporters for years to come. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Republican 2024 platform promises a return to the Trump glory days.
-
Well look at that. Q did unite the country in deciding what they wanted, and they elected a President with faith in God who understands that. Where you went one, Ron, you went all... to the polls. And you elected Joe Biden.
-
You mean like it should be in any prosecution? Anyway, I really don’t get this idea that Ex presidents should be left alone for the good of the country. Aside from it being an affront to the ideas of responsibility and accountability in government, in this case it ignores who Trump is. He’s being investigated for corrupt, criminal activities he’s been getting away with for his whole life. If he’s let off the hook this time just because he was President then what do you think he’s gonna do then? He’ll be the same guy, running the same business, perpetrating the same crimes. To advocate for letting him do that just because he once won a single election is nuts. Congress can’t indict. It’s an irrelevant comparison.
-
Yes you were. See, you just explained the insult.
-
Except that it was deliberately gerrymandered almost from the very beginning to hardwire a partisan advantage into the system. The very reason some states are states is so that they can supply Senators, and the reason some US citizens don't live in a state is so that they can't supply any Senators.
-
Because all the other Republican observers have already filled the room.
