Post
Topic
Board Politics & Society
Re: What's wrong with eating meat?
by
hilariousandco
on 22/04/2014, 21:02:15 UTC
I'm replying to it now but what good is it because you don't deal with facts? Why do you keep going on about the rest of the list? I'm not arguing about that and it has nothing to do with my point. You just keep going back to it to distract and backtrack from your initial mistakes. My point is and always has been that you've included people who are not religious and don't believe in god on a list of people who you claim do. So is it a list of religious people or people who aren't but never officially confirmed or denied? Einstein and Sagan have nothing to do with the list but you've put them on there. You could quote Dawkins out of context and say he's agnostic so he belongs on the list too because he's not ultimately denying that there might be a god.

It has nothing to do with the point? the point was and I clearly repeat my self, "only stupid people believes in religion and that Atheist people has high IQ" and on this thread, "that Atheism + Veg people have higher IQ than Christian + Carni".
Fact one the List presented a list of some of the most proficient scientist and most intelligent people earth even seen that are religious and Fact two more than half of the current scientist are religious. The list has everything to do with the argument, maybe you need to check your facts here. no backtracking just dismantling that argument you are having by trying to nitpick on one or two person and ignore the rest of the list.

How many times do I need to tell you?  Are you really this moronic or just trolling? My point was you put three non-religious people on a list of religious people, but you quite clearly do not have the mental capacity or intelligence to process this or are just infinitely in denial. It's not a 'fact one' because the three I mentioned are not in any way shape or form religious or believe in god. I can give you a list of prominent atheist scientists but what would that have to do with anything? What would that be proof of in itself? Would it be a fact If I added three Christian scientists to my list of atheist ones? If I was claiming Newton was an atheist that would be incorrect and fud. And "fact two"? Give me the sources that over 50% of the current prominent scientists are religious. Where's this figure come from? But not that it matters or has to do with my argument. If 50% are religious then 50% aren't. I am not nitpicking about anything. My initial argument was there's three people on the list who are not religious. Nothing more. What facts do I need to check? My facts are fine. It's yours that you need to check.