• Atheists least charitable group in UK, Muslims and Jews among most charitable
    114 replies, posted
[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;41852962]Quit being bitter.[/QUOTE] I am not bitter? This thread is just full of the worst examples of hypocritical arrogant atheists that make everyone else look bad
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41853016]The forum is hardly anti-athiest. But for some reason the atheists that tend to post a lot seem to think they aren't and that any atheists that are causing "problems" are just assholes.[/QUOTE] The forum is hardly ANYWAY. I fucking hate reading anyone say "well the forums a bit like this so that's to be expected". no. it isn't. This forum is filled with individual people. There's some desire amongst everyone to group, everyone else into a group to justify their beliefs. In this case, it's you acting like, yes, the majority of atheists are assholes because of what? your persecution? I've seen enough posts from every side of the argument to say everyones in the wrong acting persecuted here. [editline]15th August 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Venezuelan;41853052]I am not bitter? This thread is just full of the worst examples of hypocritical arrogant atheists that make everyone else look bad[/QUOTE] is it? How so? Would you like to explain why everyone here is an arrogant, assholish atheist rather than just keep grand standing and acting "oh so above it" while posting with the same level of pig headed arrogance. [editline]15th August 2013[/editline] it's just one post after another of everyone acting superior to each other. it's pathetic.
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;41852873]lmfao okay [URL="http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1271524"]it's literally 50% atheists[/URL][/QUOTE] they're not like those OTHER atheists though
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;41853085] is it? How so? Would you like to explain why everyone here is an arrogant, assholish atheist rather than just keep grand standing and acting "oh so above it" while posting with the same level of pig headed arrogance.[/QUOTE] no I would not like to explain why everyone here is one. Because I [I]never fucking said that.[/I] and I've been doing that the entire time if you'd read but since I'm apparently responsible for recapping this every page for those who don't want to keep up: -study is posted! -the golden denounces study by attributing a reason to the figures. This [I]somehow [/I]completely invalidates the empirical data and therefore the study is deemed "horseshit". This coming from one who, I assume, is an atheist and should probably understand a little bit about empirical data. -pointing this out gets me called dumb. Such is life on Facepunch. -I attempt to address the claim that age has skewed the data, therefore making atheists as a whole poorer, by showing data that incomes of Atheists are above average in America. However I note it may be different in the UK, but for now, since American data was all I had, I figured it was a fair parallel. -the golden claims that my somewhat founded retort to his entirely unfounded claim doesn't count due the an assumption being made. this despite the fact that his entire argument is assumptions -I invite him to introduce competing data, since, after all, he's the one questioning a study and should be prepared to back it up, being a proponent of science and logic and all -he refuses -I get called dumb for doing the same thing to his unfounded claims as he did to the initial study that good enough for ya buddy boy
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;41853233]no I would not like to explain why everyone here is one. Because I [I]never fucking said that.[/I] and I've been doing that the entire time if you'd read but since I'm apparently responsible for recapping this every page for those who don't want to keep up: -study is posted! -the golden denounces study by attributing a reason to the figures. This [I]somehow [/I]completely invalidates the empirical data and therefore the study is deemed "horseshit". This coming from one who, I assume, is an atheist and should probably understand a little bit about empirical data. -pointing this out gets me called dumb. Such is life on Facepunch. -I attempt to address the claim that age has skewed the data, therefore making atheists as a whole poorer, by showing data that incomes of Atheists are above average in America. However I note it may be different in the UK, but for now, since American data was all I had, I figured it was a fair parallel. -the golden claims that my somewhat founded retort to his entirely unfounded claim doesn't count due the an assumption being made. this despite the fact that his entire argument is assumptions -I invite him to introduce competing data, since, after all, he's the one questioning a study and should be prepared to back it up, being a proponent of science and logic and all -he refuses -I get called dumb for doing the same thing to his unfounded claims as he did to the initial study that good enough for ya buddy boy[/QUOTE] UH well just based on how much of a child you're acting like, it is enough for me, buddy boy. by the way, how are a generation of young people who have more likelyhood of being atheists and too young to be a significant part of the work force going to on average have more money than another group? I get that you posted evidence, but not everything in life has the level of records that we need to have a discussion where it is pure data. There might not be solid evidence that there's a young generation of 18-22 year olds that are atheist and, young so therefore poor, but that not existing means hey buddy boy, you're right and get to act like almost all atheists on this site are pricks, arrogant, and assholes? No it doesn't.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;41853276]you're right and get to act like almost all atheists on this site are pricks, arrogant, and assholes? [/QUOTE] stop please I'm choking on all these words you're putting in my mouth I've literally only been addressing the golden and his rating circlejerk club this whole time
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;41853052]I am not bitter? This thread is just full of the worst examples of hypocritical arrogant atheists that make everyone else look bad[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Venezuelan;41853289]stop please I'm choking on all these words you're putting in my mouth[/QUOTE] I'm not though. it's too late to snip that shit too
full of != the majority are
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;41853316]full of != the majority are[/QUOTE] oh so you can just generally say "most of this thread is full of idiots" but anyone who says "well there's a lot of theist posters here being rude" and that's not okay? DO you not see how arrogant you yourself have acted every post of yours this whole thread? I read the thing, and rather than discuss it you shit out a set of bullet points like I haven't comprehended the thread.
[QUOTE=The golden;41853309]I think people can read the past 2 pages and make the call for themselves rather than reading your little "abridged" version if it. It's very difficult to argue with you when you keep making attacks against claims I never made.[/QUOTE] I'm sorry do you or do you not think that this study is legitimate because you called it horseshit does horseshit mean "it's valid but I don't like it!!!!"? were you only addressing the implication that religiosity is directly related to charitably because that has fuck all to do with the study itself. The implication wasn't even made in the article. It was just a presentation of figures, no explanation attributed.
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;41853316]full of != the majority are[/QUOTE] Getting mad like this doesn't help any argument
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;41853335]oh so you can just generally say "most of this thread is full of idiots" but anyone who says "well there's a lot of theist posters here being rude" and that's not okay? DO you not see how arrogant you yourself have acted every post of yours this whole thread? I read the thing, and rather than discuss it you shit out a set of bullet points like I haven't comprehended the thread.[/QUOTE] 1.Never said or implied most of, just that a significant number was present. A significant number is not necessarily a majority. 2.No one really said that 3.I'm not even theist bro.
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;41853355]I'm sorry do you or do you not think that this study is legitimate because you called it horseshit does horseshit mean "it's valid but I don't like it!!!!"? were you only addressing the implication that religiosity is directly related to charitably because that has fuck all to do with the study itself. The implication wasn't even made in the article. It was just a presentation of figures, no explanation attributed.[/QUOTE] So someone doubting the validity of a study(HOW CAN YOU DOUBT PURE AND UNTAMPERED SCIENCE HOW DARE YOU!) is just outright wrong in ALL cases and has no right or reason to feel that a study that claims their behavior and the behavior of many other people is maybe misguided or missing elements of the argument?
[QUOTE=Greenen72;41853363]Getting mad like this doesn't help any argument[/QUOTE] why do I always come across as mad if I got mad at Facepunch arguments I'd never come to SH lol
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;41853372]1.Never said or implied most of, just that a significant number was present. A significant number is not necessarily a majority. 2.No one really said that 3.I'm not even theist bro.[/QUOTE] it doesn't matter. you've been arrogant in your posts whilst calling everyone else who dares discuss this with you arrogant. there really hasn't been more shitty atheist posts here than shitty theist posts. No one has any right to act "better".
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;41853377]So someone doubting the validity of a study(HOW CAN YOU DOUBT PURE AND UNTAMPERED SCIENCE HOW DARE YOU!) is just outright wrong in ALL cases and has no right or reason to feel that a study that claims their behavior and the behavior of many other people is maybe misguided or missing elements of the argument?[/QUOTE] doubting validity is fine but his doubt is unfounded and he has literally refused to do any intellectual legwork to back himself up.
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;41853384]why do I always come across as mad if I got mad at Facepunch arguments I'd never come to SH lol[/QUOTE] well rather than assume that I've read an entire thread, you gave me a largely childish sounding rant of what happened in the thread. I didn't need you to explain the thread. I asked you to explain why atheists(you should and easily could have just said "TheGolden" in this case as that's ALL it was) were being arrogant and stupid [editline]15th August 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Venezuelan;41853397]doubting validity is fine but his doubt is unfounded and he has literally refused to do any intellectual legwork to back himself up.[/QUOTE] He was posting. Not trying to have a statistically backed argument. How does he have no foundations to his doubt? you don't even really understand where his doubt of this study comes from. you just assumed he was personally and morally outraged that a study wouldn't be nice to him and atheists.
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;41853384]why do I always come across as mad if I got mad at Facepunch arguments I'd never come to SH lol[/QUOTE] Mad, rude, arrogant, all the same when it comes to giving credibility to an argument, or even getting people to give a thought-out reply
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;41853401]well rather than assume that I've read an entire thread, you gave me a largely childish sounding rant of what happened in the thread. I didn't need you to explain the thread. I asked you to explain why atheists(you should and easily could have just said "TheGolden" in this case as that's ALL it was) were being arrogant and stupid[/QUOTE] the rest are speaking with ratings but I guess I overstated the presence (but considering he was about the only one still engaging in discussion it was a big presence regardless) but like I said, hypocritical in that they refuse to accept empirical data when it works against them, arrogant in that they refuse to accept that Atheists might not be the best at everything, and that anyone who disagrees with them is dumb [editline]15th August 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;41853401] How does he have no foundations to his doubt?[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]the golden denounces study by attributing a reason to the figures. This somehow completely invalidates the empirical data and therefore the study is deemed "horseshit".[/QUOTE] this is all in my recap man I'm just rewording stuff over and over here his stated doubt stems entirely from the children argument and the argument that churches are tied to charities (though this, as previously stated, and is no doubt undeniable, has absolutely no bearing on the statistics)
[QUOTE=Vasili;41852961]Lol Lamar this thread is such a thinly veiled attack towards Atheists. So what if they're not as charitable? What possible motive do you have to keep making such a remark? Donating to charities does not make you a morally superior being.[/QUOTE] Its more of a criticism really, I'm an atheist myself. It won't stop me from making atheists look silly though, especially when they keep making excuse after excuse instead of just conceding, "Hey maybe we should be more charitable, what gives?".
[QUOTE=Greenen72;41853421]Mad, rude, arrogant, all the same when it comes to giving credibility to an argument, or even getting people to give a thought-out reply[/QUOTE] I'm sorry it's kind of hard to have an emotionless debate on a forum that practically revolves around an automatic ad hominem button
[QUOTE=Fourm Shark;41849655]Atheism isn't an organized religion though.[/QUOTE] Agreed, but some sure as hell act like it is
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;41853450]the rest are speaking with ratings but I guess I overstated the presence (but considering he was about the only one still engaging in discussion it was a big presence regardless) but like I said, hypocritical in that they refuse to accept empirical data when it works against them, arrogant in that they refuse to accept that Atheists might not be the best at everything, and that anyone who disagrees with them is dumb [editline]15th August 2013[/editline] this is all in my recap man I'm just rewording stuff over and over here his stated doubt stems entirely from the children argument and the argument that churches are tied to charities (though this, as previously stated, and is no doubt undeniable, has absolutely no bearing on the statistics)[/QUOTE] You calling this Empirical data that has fully taken into account all of the factors, and you drawing conclusions from that are what's wrong though. explain that he "denounced empirical data"? Doubt of studys and data being complete are again, in your view, wrong and impermissible. What's a "valid" doubt to you, you have awfully high standards for that. [editline]15th August 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Lamar;41853495]Its more of a criticism really, I'm an atheist myself. It won't stop me from making atheists look silly though, especially when they keep making excuse after excuse instead of just conceding, "Hey maybe we should be more charitable, what gives?".[/QUOTE] I don't donate to charity because I've seen proof that more than a handful of large and "charitable" organizations are anything but that. Why would I want to donate to them? It's a terrible criticism when you say "nope you can't defend yourself from this" [editline]15th August 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Venezuelan;41853499]I'm sorry it's kind of hard to have an emotionless debate on a forum that practically revolves around an automatic ad hominem button[/QUOTE] ratings don't matter. don't act like they do and you won't be compelled to shit posts out.
how pathetic is bragging about giving to charity? [editline]16th August 2013[/editline] HA HA my religion gives more to charity than yours!!!
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;41853613]how pathetic is bragging about giving to charity? [editline]16th August 2013[/editline] HA HA my religion gives more to charity than yours!!![/QUOTE] Where are the Muslims or Jews in this thread bragging about giving to charity?
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;41853539]You calling this Empirical data that has fully taken into account all of the factors, and you drawing conclusions from that are what's wrong though. explain that he "denounced empirical data"? Doubt of studys and data being complete are again, in your view, wrong and impermissible. What's a "valid" doubt to you, you have awfully high standards for that.[/QUOTE] I have drawn absolutely no conclusions whatsoever. I just want a good logical reason to doubt it? They gave the kids thing and I think I've refuted it fairly well. The other reasons are just non sequiturs. If someone can give an actual good reason go right ahead. [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;41853539] ratings don't matter. don't act like they do and you won't be compelled to shit posts out.[/QUOTE] it's a shortcut to flame someone, it's no different from a post that says the same thing. It's a symbol that conveys a message. It's just another form of communication. [editline]15th August 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=The golden;41853492]I wasn't aware that donating was a competition that was objectively "good". I always thought it was a personal choice which many people held differing opinions on and that they were not bad people for having doubts.[/QUOTE] then why are you so invested in this
[QUOTE=Lamar;41853650]Where are the Muslims or Jews in this thread bragging about giving to charity?[/QUOTE] you bagging on a group for not charitizing as much as yours is just the same as bragging
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;41853675]you bagging on a group for not charitizing as much as yours is just the same as bragging[/QUOTE] no one is doing that just atheists getting riled up over perceived (but in actuality non-existant) attacks
does this include stuff like volunteering? how about giving blood?
yeah fair enough
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.