Comments by "Paddle Duck" (@paddleduck5328) on "Fundamentalists Say Stephen Hawking Isn't An Atheist Anymore" video.

  1. That argument is also flawed because scientists were recently able to grow a brainlike network of neurons in a gel medium.
    4
  2. Sounds like climate change. And there’s a wealth of evidence for that.
    2
  3. Hold it! That never happened. Take that!
    2
  4. Is it really that simple? Maybe I wasn’t missing anything after all. I guess I just reject the idea that I must fall on one side or the other. Neither would feel right to me. I’d be neither a UFOist (open to being proven wrong) nor an aUFOist (open to future proof). I’d really stay in limbo, saying “they both have pros and cons, so I’ve taken no position. I just don’t know.” And I could hold that middle ground until I leaned hard one way or the other, or maybe I’d keep that middle ground forever. But you helped me understand where you guys were coming from, thanks much for your replies.
    2
  5. Blasphemous rumors -Depeche Mode
    1
  6. I don’t understand why someone can’t simply be an agnostic. I think our brains are capable of holding issues up in the air and not know enough to decide one way or the other. If I’m not sure UFO’s are real, I don’t see myself as being pro-UFO or anti-UFO. I can be agnostic about UFOs. (Obviously meaning aliens, not just unidentified phenomena or experimental military aircraft.)
    1
  7. I still don’t get it. (Maybe it’s my brain on Friday. Lol.) Lets say I’m not sure alien UFOs are real, I haven’t made up my mind one way or the other, what would I be called? Say a person believing in UFOs could be called a “UFOist” (choice A) and a disbeliever were called an “aUFOist”. (choice B) I couldn’t see calling myself either of those. Those two terms wouldn’t apply to me, because I neither have a belief nor a disbelief, right? I’d be in the “I don’t know” camp, and I’d be fine with that. (But it seems using one of those two terms A or B are the only choices people are telling me I have to make? When I’m obviously neither...I’m in the middle or on the outside or whatever unnamed choice C is.) Somebody help break it down for me in layman’s terms, please.
    1
  8. I wasn’t getting it last night about knowledge vs. belief. So I used the wrong words in my explanation. I guess there’s just no simple term to describe a person who has neither a belief nor a disbelief. There’s no term for option C. I see now what you were saying about being agnostic. Thanks for your patience.
    1
  9. This may help: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-are-planets-round/
    1
  10. That’s nonsense? Then I guess you have a better education than the professor of cosmochemistry at the University of Arkansas. And will provide your more informed explanation. I’m sure there are more detailed explanations elsewhere if you disagree with any of these details. But this was a nice concise explanation, by one of the most respected publications, ScientificAmerican. Or maybe you’re just a religious person who doesn’t believe in science? Which I would find very sad, if one’s beliefs are so weak that education and facts are looked at as a threat.
    1
  11. Cool, now if you really wanna get rich, pull an L Ron Hubbard: drop a bunch of acid, write your shit down in several books, send spies into the government, get a church tax exemption stays, and sell increasingly expensive treatments so your followers can attain your level!
    1