Philosophy Now Forum

To deny what we have learned about our origins and place in the Universe is to deny our humanity.

Think about it. If an advanced alien species were to observe us they would probably have a check-list of discoveries to determine how advanced we are.

Understands evolution, tick.
Knows about the Big Bang, tick.
Knows about gravity, tick.
Knows the speed of light, tick.
Knows the age of the Universe, tick.
Understands multiverse theory, nearly.
And so on...

They are not going to bother themselves with creationist retards whose brains are stuck in a 5000 year old time warp. They are only going to concern themselves with what the cream of humanity has discovered, and what rational thinkers know to be true.
Creationists cannot, in all honesty, claim the title of 'human'.

Human is not always a glorious tag to wear.

I can also think of countless "advancements" that we as humans have much to be ashamed of.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:To deny what we have learned about our origins and place in the Universe is to deny our humanity.

Think about it. If an advanced alien species were to observe us they would probably have a check-list of discoveries to determine how advanced we are.

Understands evolution, tick.
Knows about the Big Bang, tick.
Knows about gravity, tick.
Knows the speed of light, tick.
Knows the age of the Universe, tick.
Understands multiverse theory, nearly.
And so on...

They are not going to bother themselves with creationist retards whose brains are stuck in a 5000 year old time warp. They are only going to concern themselves with what the cream of humanity has discovered, and what rational thinkers know to be true.
Creationists cannot, in all honesty, claim the title of 'human'.

They may just want to know if we could sexually gratify them. Their list may be:

Knows how to give head, tick.
Knows how to give anal, tick
Knows how to give oral, tick
Knows how to do three-way, tick

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:To deny what we have learned about our origins and place in the Universe is to deny our humanity.

Think about it. If an advanced alien species were to observe us they would probably have a check-list of discoveries to determine how advanced we are.

Understands evolution, tick.
Knows about the Big Bang, tick.
Knows about gravity, tick.
Knows the speed of light, tick.
Knows the age of the Universe, tick.
Understands multiverse theory, nearly.
And so on...

They are not going to bother themselves with creationist retards whose brains are stuck in a 5000 year old time warp. They are only going to concern themselves with what the cream of humanity has discovered, and what rational thinkers know to be true.
Creationists cannot, in all honesty, claim the title of 'human'.

Science is a continually story of improvement.
For all you know most of these theories will be superseded by better ones by aliens who have been doing science longer than us.

chaz wyman wrote:

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:To deny what we have learned about our origins and place in the Universe is to deny our humanity.

Think about it. If an advanced alien species were to observe us they would probably have a check-list of discoveries to determine how advanced we are.

Understands evolution, tick.
Knows about the Big Bang, tick.
Knows about gravity, tick.
Knows the speed of light, tick.
Knows the age of the Universe, tick.
Understands multiverse theory, nearly.
And so on...

They are not going to bother themselves with creationist retards whose brains are stuck in a 5000 year old time warp. They are only going to concern themselves with what the cream of humanity has discovered, and what rational thinkers know to be true.
Creationists cannot, in all honesty, claim the title of 'human'.

Science is a continually story of improvement.
For all you know most of these theories will be superseded by better ones by aliens who have been doing science longer than us.

Actually, that's not true. Science has this tendency to build upon itself, not to completely reverse direction and suddenly declare, "Damn, them flat-earther boys out in the O'Zarks knew their shit, alright. Fuckin earth is flatter than a pancake after all." Nope, not likely to happen.

SecularCauses wrote: Am I winning the argument... Nope, not likely to happen.

PLONK!

Weasel (you know who you are).

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:To deny what we have learned about our origins and place in the Universe is to deny our humanity.

Think about it. If an advanced alien species were to observe us they would probably have a check-list of discoveries to determine how advanced we are.

Understands evolution, tick.
Knows about the Big Bang, tick.
Knows about gravity, tick.
Knows the speed of light, tick.
Knows the age of the Universe, tick.
Understands multiverse theory, nearly.
And so on...

They are not going to bother themselves with creationist retards whose brains are stuck in a 5000 year old time warp. They are only going to concern themselves with what the cream of humanity has discovered, and what rational thinkers know to be true.
Creationists cannot, in all honesty, claim the title of 'human'.

Define 'Human', apart from your rather incomplete check list.

secularcauses, veggy, allemotion, cheeze wineman,
All these examples of what it means to be "human", make me very pleased, and content, to know that I am not what they call human. I would never wish to be human, and I will never be human. I will never mediocre, bland, stupid, and subservient to Judeo-Christian dogma and metaphysics. I will never accept their monist mentality, and their monotheistic dogma. I will always fight this scum, preaching "human equality" and "human rights". I will never be equal with them. I will never accept anything other than superior/inferior.
I am pro-discrimination, pro-hate, pro-difference, pro-individual, pro-segregation for all.

I encourage all young men of the world to set yourselves apart, to compete, violently if necessary, to become the best, and to never accept anything except the best. And if these Judeo-Christians preach otherwise, then strike them down at every opportunity, as this nihilistic, perverted philosophy, is strictly anti-life, anti-human, and anti-mankind.

thedoc wrote:

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:To deny what we have learned about our origins and place in the Universe is to deny our humanity.

Think about it. If an advanced alien species were to observe us they would probably have a check-list of discoveries to determine how advanced we are.

Understands evolution, tick.
Knows about the Big Bang, tick.
Knows about gravity, tick.
Knows the speed of light, tick.
Knows the age of the Universe, tick.
Understands multiverse theory, nearly.
And so on...

They are not going to bother themselves with creationist retards whose brains are stuck in a 5000 year old time warp. They are only going to concern themselves with what the cream of humanity has discovered, and what rational thinkers know to be true.
Creationists cannot, in all honesty, claim the title of 'human'.

Define 'Human', apart from your rather incomplete check list.

Define "apart". Define "rather". Define "check". Define "list". It's amazing how people on here think that by asking people to define this word and that word that they are being clever. A child can play that game. Yes, people, we know, we get it, language is imprecise. BFD.

SecularCauses wrote:

thedoc wrote:

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:To deny what we have learned about our origins and place in the Universe is to deny our humanity.

Think about it. If an advanced alien species were to observe us they would probably have a check-list of discoveries to determine how advanced we are.

Understands evolution, tick.
Knows about the Big Bang, tick.
Knows about gravity, tick.
Knows the speed of light, tick.
Knows the age of the Universe, tick.
Understands multiverse theory, nearly.
And so on...

They are not going to bother themselves with creationist retards whose brains are stuck in a 5000 year old time warp. They are only going to concern themselves with what the cream of humanity has discovered, and what rational thinkers know to be true.
Creationists cannot, in all honesty, claim the title of 'human'.

Define 'Human', apart from your rather incomplete check list.

Define "apart". Define "rather". Define "check". Define "list". It's amazing how people on here think that by asking people to define this word and that word that they are being clever. A child can play that game. Yes, people, we know, we get it, language is imprecise. BFD.

Fucking Dah! This is not an issue about "precision" in language.
As the poster is drawing a distinction between one sort of person and another, denying them their humanity whilst bestowing it on themselves, I thought with your obsession about (non-existent) anti-semitism, that you would offer your support against a person that thinks some people are less than human.
Am I going too fast for you?

The more you write the more stupid you appear.

chaz wyman wrote:

Define "apart". Define "rather". Define "check". Define "list". It's amazing how people on here think that by asking people to define this word and that word that they are being clever. A child can play that game. Yes, people, we know, we get it, language is imprecise. BFD.

Fucking Dah! This is not an issue about "precision" in language.
As the poster is drawing a distinction between one sort of person and another, denying them their humanity whilst bestowing it on themselves, I thought with your obsession about (non-existent) anti-semitism, that you would offer your support against a person that thinks some people are less than human.
Am I going too fast for you?

The more you write the more stupid you appear.[/quote]

The argument you trailer trash assclowns use, "define this... define that...," is just a lame-ass one. You can understand what is being said, and you can keep asking a person to define something as nauseum, but it adds nothing of substance. I'm just exposing one of the more overused weak arguments people like you make.

Have you gone up to an economics professor yet with your theory of how the Jews run the US economy? Have you gotten your theory published yet in a reputable econ journal? I wish I could be there as you go up to a professor at explain your neo-nai crap to him/her. Just to see the expression on the professor's face asit dawns on him/her that you are a complete whackjob just standing feet away would be priceless.

SecularCauses wrote:

chaz wyman wrote:

Fucking Dah! This is not an issue about "precision" in language.
As the poster is drawing a distinction between one sort of person and another, denying them their humanity whilst bestowing it on themselves, I thought with your obsession about (non-existent) anti-semitism, that you would offer your support against a person that thinks some people are less than human.
Am I going too fast for you?

The more you write the more stupid you appear.

The argument you trailer trash assclowns use, "define this... define that...," is just a lame-ass one. You can understand what is being said, and you can keep asking a person to define something as nauseum, but it adds nothing of substance. I'm just exposing one of the more overused weak arguments people like you make.

Have you gone up to an economics professor yet with your theory of how the Jews run the US economy? Have you gotten your theory published yet in a reputable econ journal? I wish I could be there as you go up to a professor at explain your neo-nai crap to him/her. Just to see the expression on the professor's face asit dawns on him/her that you are a complete whackjob just standing feet away would be priceless.

So, tell me then if, in this case, it is such a stupid argument, then where do you stand on who gets to be called human and who does not? Do you think religious people are inhuman, unhuman, subhuman, pseudohuman?

chaz wyman wrote:

SecularCauses wrote:

chaz wyman wrote:

Fucking Dah! This is not an issue about "precision" in language.
As the poster is drawing a distinction between one sort of person and another, denying them their humanity whilst bestowing it on themselves, I thought with your obsession about (non-existent) anti-semitism, that you would offer your support against a person that thinks some people are less than human.
Am I going too fast for you?

The more you write the more stupid you appear.

The argument you trailer trash assclowns use, "define this... define that...," is just a lame-ass one. You can understand what is being said, and you can keep asking a person to define something as nauseum, but it adds nothing of substance. I'm just exposing one of the more overused weak arguments people like you make.

Have you gone up to an economics professor yet with your theory of how the Jews run the US economy? Have you gotten your theory published yet in a reputable econ journal? I wish I could be there as you go up to a professor at explain your neo-nai crap to him/her. Just to see the expression on the professor's face asit dawns on him/her that you are a complete whackjob just standing feet away would be priceless.

So, tell me then if, in this case, it is such a stupid argument, then where do you stand on who gets to be called human and who does not? Do you think religious people are inhuman, unhuman, subhuman, pseudohuman?

The original post is clearly too deep for your shallow brain. I'm not sure if you even read it.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:

chaz wyman wrote:

So, tell me then if, in this case, it is such a stupid argument, then where do you stand on who gets to be called human and who does not? Do you think religious people are inhuman, unhuman, subhuman, pseudohuman?

The original post is clearly too deep for your shallow brain. I'm not sure if you even read it.

So you say religious people are not human, but that you are.
So what do YOU mean by human?