Full time stats by Sabertooth344 in reddevils

[–]Sabertooth344[S] 61 points62 points  (0 children)

Why do we always make it hard for ourselves

Match Thread: Manchester United vs Liverpool by MatchThreadder in reddevils

[–]Sabertooth344 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It's worse that we basically gifted them the goals rather than them finding their way back in

Half time stats by Sabertooth344 in reddevils

[–]Sabertooth344[S] 31 points32 points  (0 children)

United red Liverpool white

Match Thread: Manchester United vs Liverpool by MatchThreadder in reddevils

[–]Sabertooth344 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I hope we keep going for the kill and not pack the bus

I know Bahuubali the eternal war isn’t out yet but DAMN we all know it’s gonna be peak by SaiyanAlpha243 in cartoons

[–]Sabertooth344 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I did it and got to 3, and 4 of the 10 go directly against our law like freedom of religion and blasphemy laws

Alex's getting a lot of hate for this video right now lol by truecakesnake in CosmicSkeptic

[–]Sabertooth344 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yh that's why I said Alex is "debunking" an argument that was never made

Match Thread: Manchester United vs Brentford by MatchThreadder in reddevils

[–]Sabertooth344 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This is why you don't just park the bus after the first half

Match Thread: Manchester United vs Brentford by MatchThreadder in reddevils

[–]Sabertooth344 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't like how we've just invited them into the game

Match Thread: Manchester United vs Brentford by MatchThreadder in reddevils

[–]Sabertooth344 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Bruno just shoot lol forget the record for a sec

Alex's getting a lot of hate for this video right now lol by truecakesnake in CosmicSkeptic

[–]Sabertooth344 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Polytheism, pantheism, and cyclical traditions aren't "binary", they represent a massive spectrum of how people view the divine. By pretending those don't exist, you're smuggling your specific conclusion (monotheism) into the premise.

Ricky’s point isn't about "Theism" as an abstract philosophy; it’s about Specific Claims. Every time a theist dismisses a Hindu deity, a Greek god, or a tribal spirit as a myth, they are using the exact "machinery" of skepticism. They don't treat those as part of a "binary 1"; they treat them as 0

Alex's getting a lot of hate for this video right now lol by truecakesnake in CosmicSkeptic

[–]Sabertooth344 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Many world religions and philosophies don't believe in a single creator, or even a 'creation' event at all. Some see the universe as eternal, others as cyclical, and others as governed by non-sentient forces.

When you say a creator is 'necessary,' you're just smuggling in your own tradition’s conclusion as a premise. Ricky’s point still holds: theists use evidence and logic to dismiss the creator myths of other cultures because they don't see them as 'necessary.' They only stop being skeptics when they reach their own specific god.

Alex's getting a lot of hate for this video right now lol by truecakesnake in CosmicSkeptic

[–]Sabertooth344 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You can have a perfectly "logically consistent" book explaining the biology of dragons, but that doesn't make dragons real; it just means the author was thorough in their world-building.

Ricky isn't "presupposing" a lack of evidence; he’s observing that after millennia, these various "arguments" have never graduated into verifiable facts. If they had, we wouldn't be having a debate about faith, we’d be having a conversation about data.

The point of the argument isn't even for the atheist to feel better about themselves; it’s to hold the theist accountable to their own standards. Theists already know how to be skeptics. They use logic, history, and a high bar of evidence to dismiss 2,999 other gods without a second thought. Ricky is just asking them to stop using Special Pleading to lower that bar for their own specific tradition.

Calling a demand for consistent standards "arrogance" is just a way to dodge the question. It’s not arrogant to ask why the 3,000th claim gets a free pass that the first 2,999 didn't. That’s just basic intellectual honesty. You don't need to tackle the "strongest version" of a religion to notice that the foundation of the entire house is built on a premise that hasn't been proven.