Why do Atheists Hate Religion?

[mOgliE]

I don't hate religion as much as I hate the extremists in said religion... But I'll be honest, yeah, I'm not that fond of religion. It doesn't mean I don't like the more sane people following it, my whole family is Christian, afterall, but religion has caused so much hate and fear in this world already it'd be better without it.

Why be hateful at all.

You can find hateful people in religion. But you can find loving people in religion, as well. It's the same with the religion of atheism.

You keep saying that atheism is a religion, and yet everyone I've asked IRL thinks atheism is *not* a religion. I'm pretty sure your definition of religion is very much a minority opinion, possibly even a minority of one in one billion.

Or even of one in the world.

Religion is an English word, so I'm estimating one billion total English speakers (native plus ESL). One in a billion is effectively one in the world.

The very base of a religion is to believe in one or more gods. The very point of atheism is to refuse the existence of any god...

Seems rather obvious who's right here.

True, but BADecker has a developed an entire system of illogic designed to bamboozle in order to prove that it is so.

So, very time he baits someone by saying "btdubs, atheism ⊂ religion", I post here to encourage him to produce new arguments. Maybe he'll eventually realise his "Atheism is a religion, and if it isn't it is anyway" aren't logical arguments, just self-contained contradictions.

Since you don't want to believe what the dictionary says, nobody knows what you are saying with the English words you use. You might be talking about something that is extremely different than you mean by the words you use.

You never used the dictionary definition, clearly.
"The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods"
Here is the Oxford definition. Sounds like religion needs a God... OH MY GOD WHO WOULD HAVE BELIEVED THAT? RELIGION IS LINKED TO GOD? Oo

Idiot.

[1713505088]

1713505088

[BADecker]

I don't hate religion as much as I hate the extremists in said religion... But I'll be honest, yeah, I'm not that fond of religion. It doesn't mean I don't like the more sane people following it, my whole family is Christian, afterall, but religion has caused so much hate and fear in this world already it'd be better without it.

Why be hateful at all.

You can find hateful people in religion. But you can find loving people in religion, as well. It's the same with the religion of atheism.

You keep saying that atheism is a religion, and yet everyone I've asked IRL thinks atheism is *not* a religion. I'm pretty sure your definition of religion is very much a minority opinion, possibly even a minority of one in one billion.

I want to thank you for your post, here. I was wondering why the people of the world have been floundering for the lase 5 decades. Now I see.

People can't even look a word up in a dictionary anymore. But when they do, some of them want to ignore the parts of the meaning that they don't want to see. And if you want to consider that I do this, I do... once in awhile. But rather than make a blanket statement, I point out the ways that the definitions fit.

Do we really have to do this again? Are you never going to see that by the dictionary definitions, atheism is a religion? And if the simple words of the dictionary are difficult for you to understand, do you still not realize that there are some simple websites out there that help you understand that atheism is a religion, even after I have pointed them out to you?

Oh dear, nothing new? You pointed out one definition amongst many, and claimed that it is definitive. That's not how definitions work.

For example, Dictionary.com lists several definitions of "God", one of which is:

"Any deified person or object"

Since that is *one* of the definitions, by your logic I can say that any God is just a "deified person or object", because that is one of its dictionary definitions.

Do you understand now?

Your treachery and deceit are evident to any who look.

The definition you supplied above^, is preceded by the word "lowercase." Then, following the definition you cited, you apply the "God" in uppercase to that definition.

The good thing about it is that you are displaying to everyone your deceit, so that people can be warned about the deceitful kind of person you are.

[BADecker]

I don't hate religion as much as I hate the extremists in said religion... But I'll be honest, yeah, I'm not that fond of religion. It doesn't mean I don't like the more sane people following it, my whole family is Christian, afterall, but religion has caused so much hate and fear in this world already it'd be better without it.

Why be hateful at all.

You can find hateful people in religion. But you can find loving people in religion, as well. It's the same with the religion of atheism.

You keep saying that atheism is a religion, and yet everyone I've asked IRL thinks atheism is *not* a religion. I'm pretty sure your definition of religion is very much a minority opinion, possibly even a minority of one in one billion.

Or even of one in the world.

Religion is an English word, so I'm estimating one billion total English speakers (native plus ESL). One in a billion is effectively one in the world.

The very base of a religion is to believe in one or more gods. The very point of atheism is to refuse the existence of any god...

Seems rather obvious who's right here.

True, but BADecker has a developed an entire system of illogic designed to bamboozle in order to prove that it is so.

So, very time he baits someone by saying "btdubs, atheism ⊂ religion", I post here to encourage him to produce new arguments. Maybe he'll eventually realise his "Atheism is a religion, and if it isn't it is anyway" aren't logical arguments, just self-contained contradictions.

Since you don't want to believe what the dictionary says, nobody knows what you are saying with the English words you use. You might be talking about something that is extremely different than you mean by the words you use.

You never used the dictionary definition, clearly.
"The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods"
Here is the Oxford definition. Sounds like religion needs a God... OH MY GOD WHO WOULD HAVE BELIEVED THAT? RELIGION IS LINKED TO GOD? Oo

Idiot.

And you are deceitful, because that isn't all that there is to the definition in the Oxford dictionary. If it were, you would have supplied the link. Since you didn't supply the link, you show that you are hiding the rest of it as best you can. You deceiver.

[mOgliE]

I don't hate religion as much as I hate the extremists in said religion... But I'll be honest, yeah, I'm not that fond of religion. It doesn't mean I don't like the more sane people following it, my whole family is Christian, afterall, but religion has caused so much hate and fear in this world already it'd be better without it.

Why be hateful at all.

You can find hateful people in religion. But you can find loving people in religion, as well. It's the same with the religion of atheism.

You keep saying that atheism is a religion, and yet everyone I've asked IRL thinks atheism is *not* a religion. I'm pretty sure your definition of religion is very much a minority opinion, possibly even a minority of one in one billion.

Or even of one in the world.

Religion is an English word, so I'm estimating one billion total English speakers (native plus ESL). One in a billion is effectively one in the world.

The very base of a religion is to believe in one or more gods. The very point of atheism is to refuse the existence of any god...

Seems rather obvious who's right here.

True, but BADecker has a developed an entire system of illogic designed to bamboozle in order to prove that it is so.

So, very time he baits someone by saying "btdubs, atheism ⊂ religion", I post here to encourage him to produce new arguments. Maybe he'll eventually realise his "Atheism is a religion, and if it isn't it is anyway" aren't logical arguments, just self-contained contradictions.

Since you don't want to believe what the dictionary says, nobody knows what you are saying with the English words you use. You might be talking about something that is extremely different than you mean by the words you use.

You never used the dictionary definition, clearly.
"The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods"
Here is the Oxford definition. Sounds like religion needs a God... OH MY GOD WHO WOULD HAVE BELIEVED THAT? RELIGION IS LINKED TO GOD? Oo

Idiot.

And you are deceitful, because that isn't all that there is to the definition in the Oxford dictionary. If it were, you would have supplied the link. Since you didn't supply the link, you show that you are hiding the rest of it as best you can. You deceiver.

Dude I didn't provide the link because even the most stupid dumbass is able to type "oxford dictionnary" on google...
Here is the link as you're too lazy: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/religion

[organofcorti]

I don't hate religion as much as I hate the extremists in said religion... But I'll be honest, yeah, I'm not that fond of religion. It doesn't mean I don't like the more sane people following it, my whole family is Christian, afterall, but religion has caused so much hate and fear in this world already it'd be better without it.

Why be hateful at all.

You can find hateful people in religion. But you can find loving people in religion, as well. It's the same with the religion of atheism.

You keep saying that atheism is a religion, and yet everyone I've asked IRL thinks atheism is *not* a religion. I'm pretty sure your definition of religion is very much a minority opinion, possibly even a minority of one in one billion.

I want to thank you for your post, here. I was wondering why the people of the world have been floundering for the lase 5 decades. Now I see.

People can't even look a word up in a dictionary anymore. But when they do, some of them want to ignore the parts of the meaning that they don't want to see. And if you want to consider that I do this, I do... once in awhile. But rather than make a blanket statement, I point out the ways that the definitions fit.

Do we really have to do this again? Are you never going to see that by the dictionary definitions, atheism is a religion? And if the simple words of the dictionary are difficult for you to understand, do you still not realize that there are some simple websites out there that help you understand that atheism is a religion, even after I have pointed them out to you?

Oh dear, nothing new? You pointed out one definition amongst many, and claimed that it is definitive. That's not how definitions work.

For example, Dictionary.com lists several definitions of "God", one of which is:

"Any deified person or object"

Since that is *one* of the definitions, by your logic I can say that any God is just a "deified person or object", because that is one of its dictionary definitions.

Do you understand now?

Your treachery and deceit are evident to any who look.

The definition you supplied above^, is preceded by the word "lowercase." Then, following the definition you cited, you apply the "God" in uppercase to that definition.

The good thing about it is that you are displaying to everyone your deceit, so that people can be warned about the deceitful kind of person you are.

We are arguing about script now? Upper vs lower case? What's the difference? To me, your god *is* a lower case god.

While we're on the subject, how am I "treacherous"? Treachery implies a betrayal of trust, trust which you have never placed in me. Unless your definition of treachery is also different from everyone else's?

[BADecker]

I don't hate religion as much as I hate the extremists in said religion... But I'll be honest, yeah, I'm not that fond of religion. It doesn't mean I don't like the more sane people following it, my whole family is Christian, afterall, but religion has caused so much hate and fear in this world already it'd be better without it.

Why be hateful at all.

You can find hateful people in religion. But you can find loving people in religion, as well. It's the same with the religion of atheism.

You keep saying that atheism is a religion, and yet everyone I've asked IRL thinks atheism is *not* a religion. I'm pretty sure your definition of religion is very much a minority opinion, possibly even a minority of one in one billion.

Or even of one in the world.

Religion is an English word, so I'm estimating one billion total English speakers (native plus ESL). One in a billion is effectively one in the world.

The very base of a religion is to believe in one or more gods. The very point of atheism is to refuse the existence of any god...

Seems rather obvious who's right here.

True, but BADecker has a developed an entire system of illogic designed to bamboozle in order to prove that it is so.

So, very time he baits someone by saying "btdubs, atheism ⊂ religion", I post here to encourage him to produce new arguments. Maybe he'll eventually realise his "Atheism is a religion, and if it isn't it is anyway" aren't logical arguments, just self-contained contradictions.

Since you don't want to believe what the dictionary says, nobody knows what you are saying with the English words you use. You might be talking about something that is extremely different than you mean by the words you use.

You never used the dictionary definition, clearly.
"The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods"
Here is the Oxford definition. Sounds like religion needs a God... OH MY GOD WHO WOULD HAVE BELIEVED THAT? RELIGION IS LINKED TO GOD? Oo

Idiot.

And you are deceitful, because that isn't all that there is to the definition in the Oxford dictionary. If it were, you would have supplied the link. Since you didn't supply the link, you show that you are hiding the rest of it as best you can. You deceiver.

Dude I didn't provide the link because even the most stupid dumbass is able to type "oxford dictionnary" on google...
Here is the link as you're too lazy: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/religion

The question doesn't have anything to do with looking up the Oxford dictionary. The question has to do with where you, a deceitful person, got the info you supplied. I mean, we don't know that it was really the Oxford dictionary. Even if it is exactly the same as what the Oxford dictionary says, we still don't know where you got it, because there might be other sites that use the same wording as the Oxford dictionary.

In other words, we would like to know what your level of deceit is, rather than only your stupidity.

[BADecker]

I don't hate religion as much as I hate the extremists in said religion... But I'll be honest, yeah, I'm not that fond of religion. It doesn't mean I don't like the more sane people following it, my whole family is Christian, afterall, but religion has caused so much hate and fear in this world already it'd be better without it.

Why be hateful at all.

You can find hateful people in religion. But you can find loving people in religion, as well. It's the same with the religion of atheism.

You keep saying that atheism is a religion, and yet everyone I've asked IRL thinks atheism is *not* a religion. I'm pretty sure your definition of religion is very much a minority opinion, possibly even a minority of one in one billion.

I want to thank you for your post, here. I was wondering why the people of the world have been floundering for the lase 5 decades. Now I see.

People can't even look a word up in a dictionary anymore. But when they do, some of them want to ignore the parts of the meaning that they don't want to see. And if you want to consider that I do this, I do... once in awhile. But rather than make a blanket statement, I point out the ways that the definitions fit.

Do we really have to do this again? Are you never going to see that by the dictionary definitions, atheism is a religion? And if the simple words of the dictionary are difficult for you to understand, do you still not realize that there are some simple websites out there that help you understand that atheism is a religion, even after I have pointed them out to you?

Oh dear, nothing new? You pointed out one definition amongst many, and claimed that it is definitive. That's not how definitions work.

For example, Dictionary.com lists several definitions of "God", one of which is:

"Any deified person or object"

Since that is *one* of the definitions, by your logic I can say that any God is just a "deified person or object", because that is one of its dictionary definitions.

Do you understand now?

Your treachery and deceit are evident to any who look.

The definition you supplied above^, is preceded by the word "lowercase." Then, following the definition you cited, you apply the "God" in uppercase to that definition.

The good thing about it is that you are displaying to everyone your deceit, so that people can be warned about the deceitful kind of person you are.

We are arguing about script now? Upper vs lower case? What's the difference? To me, your god *is* a lower case god.

While we're on the subject, how am I "treacherous"? Treachery implies a betrayal of trust, trust which you have never placed in me. Unless your definition of treachery is also different from everyone else's?

Thank you for admitting your treachery. However, if you are simply ignorant, I apologize.

The term "lowercase" is in the definition. Since you try to hide the significance of this, rather than admitting to having missed it, your treachery becomes all the more evident.

[organofcorti]

I don't hate religion as much as I hate the extremists in said religion... But I'll be honest, yeah, I'm not that fond of religion. It doesn't mean I don't like the more sane people following it, my whole family is Christian, afterall, but religion has caused so much hate and fear in this world already it'd be better without it.

Why be hateful at all.

You can find hateful people in religion. But you can find loving people in religion, as well. It's the same with the religion of atheism.

You keep saying that atheism is a religion, and yet everyone I've asked IRL thinks atheism is *not* a religion. I'm pretty sure your definition of religion is very much a minority opinion, possibly even a minority of one in one billion.

I want to thank you for your post, here. I was wondering why the people of the world have been floundering for the lase 5 decades. Now I see.

People can't even look a word up in a dictionary anymore. But when they do, some of them want to ignore the parts of the meaning that they don't want to see. And if you want to consider that I do this, I do... once in awhile. But rather than make a blanket statement, I point out the ways that the definitions fit.

Do we really have to do this again? Are you never going to see that by the dictionary definitions, atheism is a religion? And if the simple words of the dictionary are difficult for you to understand, do you still not realize that there are some simple websites out there that help you understand that atheism is a religion, even after I have pointed them out to you?

Oh dear, nothing new? You pointed out one definition amongst many, and claimed that it is definitive. That's not how definitions work.

For example, Dictionary.com lists several definitions of "God", one of which is:

"Any deified person or object"

Since that is *one* of the definitions, by your logic I can say that any God is just a "deified person or object", because that is one of its dictionary definitions.

Do you understand now?

Your treachery and deceit are evident to any who look.

The definition you supplied above^, is preceded by the word "lowercase." Then, following the definition you cited, you apply the "God" in uppercase to that definition.

The good thing about it is that you are displaying to everyone your deceit, so that people can be warned about the deceitful kind of person you are.

We are arguing about script now? Upper vs lower case? What's the difference? To me, your god *is* a lower case god.

While we're on the subject, how am I "treacherous"? Treachery implies a betrayal of trust, trust which you have never placed in me. Unless your definition of treachery is also different from everyone else's?

Thank you for admitting your treachery. However, if you are simply ignorant, I apologize.

The term "lowercase" is in the definition. Since you try to hide the significance of this, rather than admitting to having missed it, your treachery becomes all the more evident.

Treachery. You keep using that word. I don't it means what you think it means.

[BADecker]

We are arguing about script now? Upper vs lower case? What's the difference? To me, your god *is* a lower case god.

While we're on the subject, how am I "treacherous"? Treachery implies a betrayal of trust, trust which you have never placed in me. Unless your definition of treachery is also different from everyone else's?

Thank you for admitting your treachery. However, if you are simply ignorant, I apologize.

The term "lowercase" is in the definition. Since you try to hide the significance of this, rather than admitting to having missed it, your treachery becomes all the more evident.

Treachery. You keep using that word. I don't it means what you think it means.

You have said, above, that "treachery" implies a betrayal of trust. When you look at the profile of anyone in this forum, you can find, near the bottom of the first page of their profile, their trust rating. The whole operation of living life with other people has to do with a level of trust.

Why do you keep on attempting to move into more treachery? Some of the greatest treachery is found among government people. Are you in, or do you work for, government?

[organofcorti]

We are arguing about script now? Upper vs lower case? What's the difference? To me, your god *is* a lower case god.

While we're on the subject, how am I "treacherous"? Treachery implies a betrayal of trust, trust which you have never placed in me. Unless your definition of treachery is also different from everyone else's?

Thank you for admitting your treachery. However, if you are simply ignorant, I apologize.

The term "lowercase" is in the definition. Since you try to hide the significance of this, rather than admitting to having missed it, your treachery becomes all the more evident.

Treachery. You keep using that word. I don't it means what you think it means.

You have said, above, that "treachery" implies a betrayal of trust. When you look at the profile of anyone in this forum, you can find, near the bottom of the first page of their profile, their trust rating. The whole operation of living life with other people has to do with a level of trust.

Why do you keep on attempting to move into more treachery? Some of the greatest treachery is found among government people. Are you in, or do you work for, government?

You still haven't mentioned why you think you should trust me. You've mentioned that there is a trust system, but you haven't told me how that affected your decision to trust me enough for me to "betray" you.

[mOgliE]

I don't hate religion as much as I hate the extremists in said religion... But I'll be honest, yeah, I'm not that fond of religion. It doesn't mean I don't like the more sane people following it, my whole family is Christian, afterall, but religion has caused so much hate and fear in this world already it'd be better without it.

Why be hateful at all.

You can find hateful people in religion. But you can find loving people in religion, as well. It's the same with the religion of atheism.

You keep saying that atheism is a religion, and yet everyone I've asked IRL thinks atheism is *not* a religion. I'm pretty sure your definition of religion is very much a minority opinion, possibly even a minority of one in one billion.

Or even of one in the world.

Religion is an English word, so I'm estimating one billion total English speakers (native plus ESL). One in a billion is effectively one in the world.

The very base of a religion is to believe in one or more gods. The very point of atheism is to refuse the existence of any god...

Seems rather obvious who's right here.

True, but BADecker has a developed an entire system of illogic designed to bamboozle in order to prove that it is so.

So, very time he baits someone by saying "btdubs, atheism ⊂ religion", I post here to encourage him to produce new arguments. Maybe he'll eventually realise his "Atheism is a religion, and if it isn't it is anyway" aren't logical arguments, just self-contained contradictions.

Since you don't want to believe what the dictionary says, nobody knows what you are saying with the English words you use. You might be talking about something that is extremely different than you mean by the words you use.

You never used the dictionary definition, clearly.
"The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods"
Here is the Oxford definition. Sounds like religion needs a God... OH MY GOD WHO WOULD HAVE BELIEVED THAT? RELIGION IS LINKED TO GOD? Oo

Idiot.

And you are deceitful, because that isn't all that there is to the definition in the Oxford dictionary. If it were, you would have supplied the link. Since you didn't supply the link, you show that you are hiding the rest of it as best you can. You deceiver.

Dude I didn't provide the link because even the most stupid dumbass is able to type "oxford dictionnary" on google...
Here is the link as you're too lazy: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/religion

The question doesn't have anything to do with looking up the Oxford dictionary. The question has to do with where you, a deceitful person, got the info you supplied. I mean, we don't know that it was really the Oxford dictionary. Even if it is exactly the same as what the Oxford dictionary says, we still don't know where you got it, because there might be other sites that use the same wording as the Oxford dictionary.

In other words, we would like to know what your level of deceit is, rather than only your stupidity.

Daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaamn....
That is such a nonsense xD

Ok I'll be clear. I got the definition on Oxford dictionary. What could it change that I had it here on there as long as it's the official definition? And how the fact that I provide the ling to the oxford dictionary website would change anything? I could have taken the link after having found the definition elsewhere...

And it doesn't change the fact that this definition proves you wrong. That you're a dumbass trying to fool people with your fucking smile face that I would like top slap on the ground right now.

[BADecker]

We are arguing about script now? Upper vs lower case? What's the difference? To me, your god *is* a lower case god.

While we're on the subject, how am I "treacherous"? Treachery implies a betrayal of trust, trust which you have never placed in me. Unless your definition of treachery is also different from everyone else's?

Thank you for admitting your treachery. However, if you are simply ignorant, I apologize.

The term "lowercase" is in the definition. Since you try to hide the significance of this, rather than admitting to having missed it, your treachery becomes all the more evident.

Treachery. You keep using that word. I don't it means what you think it means.

You have said, above, that "treachery" implies a betrayal of trust. When you look at the profile of anyone in this forum, you can find, near the bottom of the first page of their profile, their trust rating. The whole operation of living life with other people has to do with a level of trust.

Why do you keep on attempting to move into more treachery? Some of the greatest treachery is found among government people. Are you in, or do you work for, government?

You still haven't mentioned why you think you should trust me. You've mentioned that there is a trust system, but you haven't told me how that affected your decision to trust me enough for me to "betray" you.

When you walk down the sidewalk, and you pass another person on the same sidewalk going the opposite direction, do you trust him? Generally we do trust in this situation, to some extent. But if the person starts fighting with you, suddenly your trust changes.

Now, I understand that people don't realize how big a thing trust is in life. So, I will give you the benefit of the doubt. But you are pushing it.

[mOgliE]

We are arguing about script now? Upper vs lower case? What's the difference? To me, your god *is* a lower case god.

While we're on the subject, how am I "treacherous"? Treachery implies a betrayal of trust, trust which you have never placed in me. Unless your definition of treachery is also different from everyone else's?

Thank you for admitting your treachery. However, if you are simply ignorant, I apologize.

The term "lowercase" is in the definition. Since you try to hide the significance of this, rather than admitting to having missed it, your treachery becomes all the more evident.

Treachery. You keep using that word. I don't it means what you think it means.

You have said, above, that "treachery" implies a betrayal of trust. When you look at the profile of anyone in this forum, you can find, near the bottom of the first page of their profile, their trust rating. The whole operation of living life with other people has to do with a level of trust.

Why do you keep on attempting to move into more treachery? Some of the greatest treachery is found among government people. Are you in, or do you work for, government?

Why do you keep avoiding the fact that your definition of religion is wrong and that atheism is not a religion according to the definition of everyone else?

[BADecker]

Dude I didn't provide the link because even the most stupid dumbass is able to type "oxford dictionnary" on google...
Here is the link as you're too lazy: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/religion

The question doesn't have anything to do with looking up the Oxford dictionary. The question has to do with where you, a deceitful person, got the info you supplied. I mean, we don't know that it was really the Oxford dictionary. Even if it is exactly the same as what the Oxford dictionary says, we still don't know where you got it, because there might be other sites that use the same wording as the Oxford dictionary.

In other words, we would like to know what your level of deceit is, rather than only your stupidity.

Daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaamn....
That is such a nonsense xD

Ok I'll be clear. I got the definition on Oxford dictionary. What could it change that I had it here on there as long as it's the official definition? And how the fact that I provide the ling to the oxford dictionary website would change anything? I could have taken the link after having found the definition elsewhere...

And it doesn't change the fact that this definition proves you wrong. That you're a dumbass trying to fool people with your fucking smile face that I would like top slap on the ground right now.

That little section of the definition might suggest that I could be wrong. But when you look at the whole definition, you see that I am not wrong.

What's the matter? Having troubles today? Perhaps if you closed your mouth and started to think a little, some of your troubles would dissipate a little.   

[BADecker]

We are arguing about script now? Upper vs lower case? What's the difference? To me, your god *is* a lower case god.

While we're on the subject, how am I "treacherous"? Treachery implies a betrayal of trust, trust which you have never placed in me. Unless your definition of treachery is also different from everyone else's?

Thank you for admitting your treachery. However, if you are simply ignorant, I apologize.

The term "lowercase" is in the definition. Since you try to hide the significance of this, rather than admitting to having missed it, your treachery becomes all the more evident.

Treachery. You keep using that word. I don't it means what you think it means.

You have said, above, that "treachery" implies a betrayal of trust. When you look at the profile of anyone in this forum, you can find, near the bottom of the first page of their profile, their trust rating. The whole operation of living life with other people has to do with a level of trust.

Why do you keep on attempting to move into more treachery? Some of the greatest treachery is found among government people. Are you in, or do you work for, government?

Why do you keep avoiding the fact that your definition of religion is wrong and that atheism is not a religion according to the definition of everyone else?

Why do you keep trying to tell us that people don't use the dictionary definition of religion?

[mOgliE]

Military training is that at close quarters, an edged weapon is equal to a gun, reason is reaction times.  Reminds me of the three Afgan soldiers, each with AK47, who holed up in a cave for the night, even though it smelled a bit funny.  Then the bear came in.

Next.  Three dead soldiers.

Yeah but it requires incredible training, so it doesn't concern the vast majority of people ^^

Now you are trying to tell us that people don't get killed by bears, because most bears haven't had enough training? It's more like bears don't usually have enough incentive. If bears aren't baby bears, they instinctively have all the training that they need.

Dude, your stupidity reaches the sky well done.
I was talking about the fact that "at close quarters, an edged weapon is equal to a gun". Not about the bear...

My stupidity hasn't matched yours by a long shot (pun intended). Haven't you ever heard of close-range guns?

Your point being?

Thank you for making my point.  

I suspect you wanted to explain that guns can supplant cold weapons, but as you seem too lazy to read above, that was not my claim to say that guns are weaker on close ranged combat... So you're just arguing for my point of view... Which was clearly not your intent.

How do you know that the weapons the bear used were "cold weapons?" After all, if the AK-47s were used, they wouldn't have been cold.

What does your claim or non-claim have to do even with the idea that we are arguing?

Though it comes from another thread, I believe it's the proof that BADecker is either incredibly stupid, either a troll. I'd bet he's both though. So I put him on my ignore list and I invite you to do the same.

[BADecker]

Military training is that at close quarters, an edged weapon is equal to a gun, reason is reaction times.  Reminds me of the three Afgan soldiers, each with AK47, who holed up in a cave for the night, even though it smelled a bit funny.  Then the bear came in.

Next.  Three dead soldiers.

Yeah but it requires incredible training, so it doesn't concern the vast majority of people ^^

Now you are trying to tell us that people don't get killed by bears, because most bears haven't had enough training? It's more like bears don't usually have enough incentive. If bears aren't baby bears, they instinctively have all the training that they need.

Dude, your stupidity reaches the sky well done.
I was talking about the fact that "at close quarters, an edged weapon is equal to a gun". Not about the bear...

My stupidity hasn't matched yours by a long shot (pun intended). Haven't you ever heard of close-range guns?

Your point being?

Thank you for making my point.  

I suspect you wanted to explain that guns can supplant cold weapons, but as you seem too lazy to read above, that was not my claim to say that guns are weaker on close ranged combat... So you're just arguing for my point of view... Which was clearly not your intent.

How do you know that the weapons the bear used were "cold weapons?" After all, if the AK-47s were used, they wouldn't have been cold.

What does your claim or non-claim have to do even with the idea that we are arguing?

Though it comes from another thread, I believe it's the proof that BADecker is either incredibly stupid, either a troll. I'd bet he's both though. So I put him on my ignore list and I invite you to do the same.

All right! Almost done with this obstinate ignoramus.   

[organofcorti]

We are arguing about script now? Upper vs lower case? What's the difference? To me, your god *is* a lower case god.

While we're on the subject, how am I "treacherous"? Treachery implies a betrayal of trust, trust which you have never placed in me. Unless your definition of treachery is also different from everyone else's?

Thank you for admitting your treachery. However, if you are simply ignorant, I apologize.

The term "lowercase" is in the definition. Since you try to hide the significance of this, rather than admitting to having missed it, your treachery becomes all the more evident.

Treachery. You keep using that word. I don't it means what you think it means.

You have said, above, that "treachery" implies a betrayal of trust. When you look at the profile of anyone in this forum, you can find, near the bottom of the first page of their profile, their trust rating. The whole operation of living life with other people has to do with a level of trust.

Why do you keep on attempting to move into more treachery? Some of the greatest treachery is found among government people. Are you in, or do you work for, government?

You still haven't mentioned why you think you should trust me. You've mentioned that there is a trust system, but you haven't told me how that affected your decision to trust me enough for me to "betray" you.

When you walk down the sidewalk, and you pass another person on the same sidewalk going the opposite direction, do you trust him? Generally we do trust in this situation, to some extent. But if the person starts fighting with you, suddenly your trust changes.

Now, I understand that people don't realize how big a thing trust is in life. So, I will give you the benefit of the doubt. But you are pushing it.

So when this person - who I assume is a complete stranger to you - starts fighting, you feel "betrayed"? Honestly? You're on a forum devoted to cryptocurrencies and cryptography generally, and for whom the holy grail is to have "trustless" transactions - and yet in your everyday life you trust complete strangers to the point that you feel betrayed when they act against you?

[organofcorti]

Though it comes from another thread, I believe it's the proof that BADecker is either incredibly stupid, either a troll. I'd bet he's both though. So I put him on my ignore list and I invite you to do the same.

Awesome! That quote made my night.

No, there'll be no ignore list for BADecker anytime soon. It's just too much fun. If I stop posting here, you'll know it got boring for me. Until then, Hahahaha! Sigh.

[mOgliE]

Though it comes from another thread, I believe it's the proof that BADecker is either incredibly stupid, either a troll. I'd bet he's both though. So I put him on my ignore list and I invite you to do the same.

Awesome! That quote made my night.

No, there'll be no ignore list for BADecker anytime soon. It's just too much fun. If I stop posting here, you'll know it got boring for me. Until then, Hahahaha! Sigh.

Good point is that I had no trouble to reach my daily limit on the sig campaign while making excellent quality posts xD

But it seems to be totally useless and I'm a bit tired of this unilateral debate!

Good luck though ^^