The correlation is entirely due to the severe mental illness of one moldovan schizophrenic which posts on /his/ and calls itself atheist despite being a theist.

Religious delusions themselves are mental illness. But psychology can't say it out loud so that millions don't get offended.

>>18520646
You already know the answers to all of these questions.

But religion is literally psychosis.
Atheists are the only sane people, although that doesn't mean all atheists are sane.

>>18520661
I thought he was Romanian. He also posts on /sci/ and has severe psychotic breakdowns in any thread discussing neuroscience.

>>18520663
>But psychology can't say it out loud so that millions don't get offended.
If that were true, why would psychology care? Facts don't care about feelings. Maybe psychology doesn't make that claim because it's not provable and inviting that challenge would invite unbelievable levels of scrutiny on the field's own ridiculous claims.

>>18520665
>Atheists are the only sane people
Ah yes, the people who believe that 1 came from 0 without cause are the sane ones.

>>18520668
So what's the difference between a schizophrenic believing that his TV is talking to him and a devout religious person hearing the voice of God speaking to him?

>>18520670
>We don't have a complete understanding of the natural world and how we came to being
>Therefore we were made from dust by a Canaanite storm and war god who later incarnated in the world before dying, then resurrecting and flying into the sky

>>18520666
It's moldovan.
See
https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/search/filename/kakokek
https://warosu.org/sci/?task=search&ghost=&search_filename=kakokek

File: mfw4.png (374 KB, 607x577)

374 KB PNG

>atheist mental illness immediately manifests in the thread
What causes this phenomenon?

>>18520668
>would invite unbelievable levels of scrutiny on the field's own ridiculous claims.
Jej what ridiculous claims? Men can be women? Pedophilia is okay because it's just another sexual orientation? Honosexuality isn't a disorder?

>>18520683
>Incredibly generous athiest strawman
>Incredibly disingenuous theist strawman
>I am verysmart and a good arguer.
Good job, anon. You won.

>>18520646
Notice how these atheist are usually deep into the satanic heavy metal scene? They love everything darkness, skulls and demons and witches, and when you press them on it they always say they're being ironic.

>>18520686
There is no "mental illness" in this thread coming from atheists. You're retarded.

>>18520675
If you acknowledge the near mathematical certainty of higher dimensions, they may both be the result of spiritual forces. One is malicious and the other is not and you can tell my the fruits that come from the condition. Of course, if you're a naturalist, there's no point in speculating about higher things than what you can observe as you're locked out of exploring the rest of this thought tree.

>>18520663
Psychology will tell me that I'm a woman if I say I feel like I am one.

>>18520695
>Notice how these atheist are usually deep into the satanic heavy metal scene?
They're not.

>>18520712
I was during my atheist phase.

>>18520712
They are by large metalheads who claim to love Satan ironically.

>>18520719
You never had an "atheist phase"
>>18520726
No, they aren't. Atheists constitute over 1 billion people. The overwhelming majority do not listen to heavy metal.

>>18520708
>locked out of exploring the rest of this thought tree.
Epistemologically speaking, this is why it's important to be careful what you readily believe or accept as fact. Hard to build on a foundation that has no more room for new ideas. Athiests remove the platform of faith and spiritualism and think their knowledge complete just because they've limited their own datasets. Pathetic, really.

>>18520738
>You never had an "atheist phase"
Kek. What a retarded thing to say.

>>18520743
What was your atheist phase?

>>18520692
>theist strawman
But it's not. There's no such thing as shills for "Platonic deism" or anything philosophical. You're all shilling the Abrahamic imaginary friend in the clouds. That's why when pressured about judaism or the Bible, you all fall back on deism as a distraction so you don't have to deal with the reality that there's no such thing as magic flying jews.

It's mental illness. A fully grown adult with a functioning brain does not believe in fairy tales.

>>18520744
About 7 years of being an obnoxious retard parroting the shit famous athiests said in their books and interviews blaming God for bad things existing in this world. I would also blast music like Ghost with overtly satanic lyrics to fuck with the Christians I worked with. I spent time reading the poetic edda and other Norse pagan shit, heavy into bands like Tyr. I still have a tattoo of Huginn and Muninn on my back from those days. After that, I devolved to overt Satanism saying that if God did exist, he must be evil because life is hard and suffering exists (retarded take), and carried on like this until I put a gun in my mouth and pulled the trigger.

>>18520755
>It's not a strawman
>I insist you all believe in magic flying jews!
Nice one, anon. Your discord kitten(male) will be very proud of you.

>>18520774
It's not a strawman for 99.99% of posters.
Did Jesus rise of the dead?

>>18520783
Why would I engage with you in good faith when you've shown yourself to be operating on a bad-faith framework? Fuck off.

>>18520789
He isn't engaging in bad faith. It is a fundamental belief of christianity that jesus flew into the sky after he rose from the dead where he is waiting until the second coming. That isn't a strawman and that isn't in bad faith.

>>18520793
You don't get to reduct ad absurdum (oversimplify in bad faith) then pretend you were arguing in good faith by engaging with the true belief. Fuck off.

>>18520800
but it's what the bible says.

>>18520789
What does the bible say about failing to affirm belief in flying zombie jesus?

1 Corinthians 15:12-17
>12 But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. 15 More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins.

>>18520789
See. You're not a deist. You believe in Yahweh, the imaginary friend from the desert who hungers for foreskins.

>>18520789
>>18520800
Based christian soldier rebuking the demons.

>>18520646
atheists are more likely to admit to having, and seek help for, a mental illness instead of thinking that they just need to pray harder or that their god is punishing them

>>18520810
He'll get really mad at you now because he's really touchy about being called anything else than an agnostic.

>>18520810
This didn't happen btw.

>>18520811
>atheists are more likely to admit to having, and seek help for, a mental illness
This entire thread (including the rest of your post) is evidence to the contrary. Have you sought help?

>>18520800
Mark 16:19 After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and he sat at the right hand of God.
Your own scriptures state that he literally flew to heaven, that not an oversimplification.

>>18520803
>>18520805
>>18520808
See
>>18520800
Then fuck off.

>>18520820
>This verse means it's not reductive to call Jesus a magic flying jew!
Fuck off.

>>18520821
Did Jesus rise from the dead?

Whoopsie I just discovered your kryptonite

>>18520826
Repent for your blasphemy sinner

>>18520827
>Whoopsie I just discovered your kryptonite
You could try discovering the part where I denounced your bad faith framework and told you I wouldn't engage with you in good faith. That might help you here.

>>18520821
I don't understand what your problem is.

>>18520818
>everything that disagrees with me is mental illness: the theist's guide to discourse

>>18520829
You've proven it's not bad faith. Statistically it is not a strawman at all and you are completely unable to denounce a single fairy tale. You believe in fiction. Why are you bitching and moaning about atheists when your brain doesn't function to begin with?

>>18520834
>These obviously mentally ill people are not mentally ill because they're useful to me
Modern psych in a nutshell.

>>18520839
Atheists are not mentally ill. You're a retard who refuses to accept that fairy tales are not real.

>>18520826
So how did he get up into heaven? Did he teleport there? Was he beamed up in a rey of light? Or did an angel come down and pick him up? If an angel did come down, did how did he hold him? Or maybe he had a full horsedrawn chariot? Since no option is given, it's safe to assume that flight was how it happened. Every piece of art from later periods depicted Jesus as flying. So he really was a magical flying rabbi

Can one of the christians explain to me why christianity is so compelling to them? I honestly don't get it. Is it something about how the idea of forming a personal relationship with the creator of the universe (ostensibly) is what is compelling about it?

>>18520670
You don't understand what is meant by the big bang, modern physics doesn't state anywhere that something came from nothing.

>>18520769
>conspicuously without replies
Interesting

>>18520858
It either states that something came from nothing or everything has always existed, both of which are without accepted scientific precedent and require leaps of faith to entertain

>>18520834
Ok, but have you sought mental help or not?

>>18520863
why is saying everything has always existed without precedent?

>>18520863
It states neither of those things.

>>18520859
What's there to reply to. It's obviously a fake story made my someone with a persecution complex. Oh woe is me, I'm a member of a religion that's hated by all because we speak the truth. That story of his was like something the director of God's not dead would make up for the "atheist" character that says he doesn't believe in God, only to say how he hates God because something bad happened to him.

>>18520863
Everything always existing makes sense. There's no reality with nothing. Nothing doesn't exist.

>>18520769
>Now I'm dead
Like a BAWSS.

>>18520863
Downbooted because [obvious implication] isn't stated.

>>18520876
Updooted because things just heckin' ARE and always WERE, it's science.

>>18520856
It is compelling because it is the truth. When you realize the Logos of the universe really is conscious and really is loving at its core, you start to understand how Christianity speaks to those concepts. Remove yourself from the equation and what is the universe? It's still a place where babies are born to loving parents and where even people born with all odds against them can find love for their neighbors and redemption for their own failings. When you recognize that all of us truly are miserable wretches deep down who want nothing more than to eat, fuck, and take at everyone else's expense (and you actually confront what that means for yourself) you learn that we really do need redemption. Then you study the bible and you see the unfurling plan for redemption across human history building on itself, foreshadowing ultimate victory, and then ultimately being fulfilled in Christ, you understand that it was all true.
The truth is, of course, as was said here >>18520739 some people are not playing with a full deck and have not allowed themselves the foundational framework to begin to understand these things. If you have that framework, I hope you might begin to understand, and if you do not have that framework, it's because you deny it to yourself because it's easier to claim a holistic knowledge base if you deny the validity of huge chunks of knowledge.

>>18520891
The predicted singularity wasn't nothing.

>magic flying jew
>imaginary foreskin demon from the bronze age
>schizophrenic middle eastern cult leader who thinks he can split the moon
This kills retards hiding behind the "deist" mask

File: reddit-seethe.png (143 KB, 600x598)

143 KB PNG

>The predicted singularity wasn't nothing.

>>18520865
I've got a psychiatrist's appointment for issues unrelated to this tomorrow, actually! now will you engage with my original point? >>18520811

>>18520879
That should make it clear how it is, without exaggeration, nothing short of a miracle that I survived.

>>18520685
Holy shit, the guy's a complete nutjob.

>>18520892
Nothing you're saying has anything to do with christianity. The bible says that the earth is flat with a dome. None of it is true, and historically it's all been disproved.

>>18520907
>not playing with a full deck
Great. Now go away.

>>18520891
those aren't the only two options, and "things are and always were" is indeed a valid metaphysical and logical stance. Where is you confusion coming from?

>>18520912
I'm more intelligent than you are. You're going to have to try harder than "I like the story and think there are some metaphysical ideas in there therefore it's true".

>>18520915
>things are and always were" is indeed a valid metaphysical and logical stance.
It really isn't from a naturalist perspective, because it denies a start point to existence, which doesn't logically make sense.

>>18520912
>I don't care about facts and truth, I only care about my fart huffing
Glad we've sorted that out

>>18520915
>"things are and always were" is indeed a valid metaphysical stance
At least you don't pretend it's science. Is the principle of cause and effect a fundamental law of nature under your metaphysics?

>>18520922
There is nothing illogical about eternalism.

>>18520918
>I'm more intelligent than you are.
It's clear you think that.

>>18520927
>There is nothing illogical about eternalism.
Except that it requires faith to entertain. Even particles having a finite lifespan provides evidence against it.

>>18520934
Quantum fields don't.

>>18520871
>If I just pretend everything that contradicts my preconceptions is fake, I can continue living in my safe bubble where I'm smarter than everyone else.
Mom finish preparing your tendies yet, anon?

>>18520925
Do you want my full metaphysics and ontology? Because I don't want to write it all out because it will take too long.

>>18520934
Are you literally retarded?

>>18520646
>What causes the correlation between atheism and mental illness and why did atheism stop being predictive of high intelligence?
I don't know, but gr8 b8, OP. They couldn't help but prove your point immediately. You could almost set your watch to it.

>>18520952
There is nothing in this thread "proving that atheists are mentally ill".
Is this all theists have anymore? Why are you all so pathetic and incapable of arguing?

>>18520957
The hit dog hollers
Lmao

>>18520960
>t-the hit d-dog hol-hollers
Cope.
You want to actually make an argument, or just continue to show you're retarded?

>the mexican who calls himself an agnostic literally converted to christianity because he failed to an hero
Lmao you can't make this shit up.

File: 1780751602737385.png (564 KB, 1268x969)

564 KB PNG

>What causes the correlation between atheism and mental illness and why did atheism stop being predictive of high intelligence?

>>18520960-
literally just a reskin of
>oh you acknowledged my bait shitpost in any way? lmao TRIGGERED!!1!
everyone is 12 theory confirmed

>>18520943
>doesn't answer
I accept your concession and note your intellectual insecurity.

>>18520967
>God saves a man's life and the man is justifiably grateful

>>18520738
Accept it, all of you are possessed.

>>18521000
Answer what? There is no such thing as non-temporal causality, if you want a quick answer to your leading question. Thus god can not exist outside of time and then create time, as that is a contradiction. It's just one of many reasons as to why God can not exist. It's also one of the reasons as to why it is a necessary truth that time and nature are eternal, because there can not exist a non-temporal cause whos effect is the creation of temporal causation (that would be a contradiction as well). But this isn't my entire metaphysics.

>>18521102
>Answer what?
Is the principle of cause and effect a fundamental law of nature under your metaphysics?

>There is no such thing as non-temporal causality
Proof? Also this does not answer the question.

>>18521104
I just said, the principle of eternal temporal causation is a necessary truth
There is no such thing as a "cause" and "effect" that are atemporal.

>>18521107
>the principle of eternal temporal causation is a necessary truth
Nonsensical word salad.

>There is no such thing as a "cause" and "effect" that are atemporal.
Proof?

>>18521114
>Nonsensical word salad.
No, it isn't
>Proof?
Causes necessarily precede their effects thus time is a necessary precondition for causality to exist. This is standard metaphysics of causality in modern philosophy btw

@18521117
>being so obviously psychotic

>>18521121
You're an idiot.

>>18521117
>No, it isn't
It is to any rational mind.

>Causes necessarily precede their effects thus time is a necessary precondition for causality to exist.
This is a nonsequitur. Try again.

>>18521131
>This is a nonsequitur.
No, it isn't. To precede is a parameterized arrangement and we call that parameter "time".

>>18521131
>It is to any rational mind.
Also, you don't have one.

@18521135
Do mouth-breathing imbeciles like this even know that A precedes B in the alphabet?

>>18521141
A doesn't cause B, shit for brains. We're talking about causality.

>>18521135
>To precede is a parameterized arrangement and we call that parameter "time".
Schizophasia again.

>>18521141
No, he does not. He's home-schooled.

>>18521117
>Causes necessarily precede their effects
There are a ton of frameworks where this is not true. Eternalism/block universe, backwards causation in relativistic physics, retrocausal quantum mechanics, teleological frameworks, all to say nothing of divine or non-local agent causation.

File: smart_brainlet.jpg (30 KB, 700x567)

30 KB JPG

>A doesn't cause B, shit for brains. We're talking about causality.
Does the mentally ill retard remember its own "argument" and the claim it made about precedence?

>>18521144
>Schizophasia again.
That is not "schizophasia". Time is a parameter. Time is a dimension on whatever manifold it is that is under consideration.
Stop talking to yourself btw, it's pathetic.

>>18521148
>Time is a dimension on whatever manifold it is that is under consideration.
I don't know why it's so funny to watch an obvious schizophrenic straining to sound educated.

>>18521147
My argument was about causation. You can't track basic conversations.

>>18521150
You're actually retarded.
Why is the new meta with you subhuman theist cucks to just pretend you don't understand basic words?

>>18521150
You should see him lose his mind in any of the other threads.

>>18521153
Why do you keep talking to yourself?

>>18521146
Naturalism works only under the very specific framework that enables normal human daily life. Thinking of things in a higher capacity is scary. Do not ask naturalists about the double split experiment.

>>18521158
There is nothing about the double slit experiment that is "anti naturalist", whatever that is even supposed to mean.
You guys are actually braindead

>>18521159
>There is nothing about the double slit experiment that is "anti naturalist"
Except the suggestion that conscious observation has an effect on reality.

File: brainlet12.png (245 KB, 783x742)

245 KB PNG

>The principle of timeless time-dependent causation is true in all possible circumstances and cannot possibly be false. Causes are necessarily parametrized arrangements and we call that parameter a dimension on whatever manifold it is that is under consideration. This is standard metaphysics of causality in modern philosophy btw

The absolute fucking state of this board...

>>18521161
>Except the suggestion that conscious observation has an effect on reality.
This is not a result of the experiment. It also wouldn't be "anti naturalist", as consciousness is a natural thing.

>>18521163
>timeless time-dependent causation
never said anything like that. That would be a contradiction.

File: brainlet.jpg (49 KB, 922x781)

49 KB JPG

>i didn't heckin' say it's timeless and time-dependent
>i said it's eternal and temporal
At least the mentally ill retard didn't try to deny he did say this:
>Causes are necessarily parametrized arrangements and we call that parameter a dimension on whatever manifold it is that is under consideration. This is standard metaphysics of causality in modern philosophy btw

>>18521164
You're almost there. Now ask yourself "Why would consciousness hold such weight in a random universe that should really be governed only by chance?"
Think about this and you might see that, "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God; all things were made through Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made." is a statement of such absolute truth, you could meditate on it all your life and barely scratch the surface of its profundity.

>>18521169
>thinking eternal means timeless
holy shit you can't make this up

>>18521173
Buddy, the bible says the earth is flat with a dome. You're going to need to get over this, Jesus was not the word and was not God. He did not rise and he's never coming back.

File: redditbrained.png (116 KB, 573x597)

116 KB PNG

>holy shit you can't make this up
I can't make this shit up:
>Causes are necessarily parametrized arrangements and we call that parameter a dimension on whatever manifold it is that is under consideration. This is standard metaphysics of causality in modern philosophy btw

>>18521173
This is a pearl thrown before swine. Absolutely wasted ITT

>>18521178
You are far less intelligent than I am. You don't understand the basic meaning of words, swine.

File: Breaking-Bad-Larry-Hankin(...).jpg (84 KB, 1400x700)

84 KB JPG

>>18521180
You don't even believe that. It seems to me, you're just out here fishing.

>>18521180
Come on now, anon. Wise to give ths trolling a break around matters of eternal consequence.

>>18521190
I know it, I don't believe it.
The other guy misunderstood the double slit experiment then just started quoting John 1:1-3.
>>18521192
There is no such thing. I am not trolling

>>18520646
>What causes the correlation between atheism and mental illness and why did atheism stop being predictive of high intelligence?
It appeals to midwits who tie their worth to their intelligence.
>>18520918
>>18521180
Talking down to others gives them an easy way to feel smart without putting in the effort required to be smart.

>>18521177
The schizo just got tangled up in his circular argument a bit. What he's trying to say is that causality requires time because part of his definition of a 'cause' is that it precedes its effects in time. It didn't occur to him in his typical mental patient's solipsism that "precedes" has a more general meaning than the one he was thinking of in that moment.

>>18521202
These guys do not understand the basic meaning of words. You're going to have to stop coping.

>>18521204
Why do you continue to talk to yourself, schizo?

>>18521204
> What he's trying to say is that causality requires time because part of his definition of a 'cause' is that it precedes its effects in time
He's not trying to say anything, he's just drooling and mumbling.

>>18521213
>He's not trying to say anything, he's just drooling and mumbling.
I very clearly stated a very easy to understand point. You have no response to it, so you're talking to yourself like a schizo.
This is why theists lose every conversation on this board, and in general, and why atheism continues to increase faster than any religion.

>>18521214
>I very clearly stated a very easy to understand point.
The most charitable interpretation of your word salad is given here >>18521204 and it's a circular "argument".

>>18520646
Well atheism is pretty irrational. Agnosticism makes sense, but being dedicated that nothing's real? Kinda weird.

>>18521220
Nothing I said is "word salad", lil buddy. You just do not understand the basic meaning of words.

File: dicapriokek.png (799 KB, 848x805)

799 KB PNG

>This is why theists lose every conversation on this board
Mentally ill retards actually think and talk like this...

>>18521227
You lost, moldovan schizo.

>>18521222
Everything you said about causes being parametrized by dimensions on a manifold is low-IQ word salad, but regardless, I accept your concession that your "argument" is circular.

>>18521236
It's not word salad. It's standard metaphycal science vocabulary. The eternal temporal principle of manifold parametrization is multidimensional in T.

>>18521236
The argument is not circular, and nothing I said is word salad. You do not understand the basic meaning of words.

File: brainletpower.jpg (45 KB, 800x800)

45 KB JPG

>It's not word salad. It's standard metaphycal science vocabulary. The eternal temporal principle of manifold parametrization is multidimensional in T.
Holy kek. What forces atheists to talk like this unironically?

>>18521238
>multidimensional
It's not multidimensional. Time is 1 dimension.

>>18521243
It's good that you're no longer denying that you're a christian, moldovan schizo. Keep that up next time you're on /sci/ seething in qualia threads.

File: brainlet15.jpg (22 KB, 460x455)

22 KB JPG

>To precede is a parameterized arrangement and we call that parameter "time"
This verb is a parametrized arrangement, ok? You just don't understand words!!!

>>18521247
NTA you're talking to, but do you really believe you have the clairvoyance to know who is who on this Anonymous Tibetan Yak Husbandry forum? Like do you really believe your intellect has evolved to that actual-psychic level?

>>18520663
There are legitimate and good reasons to be religious and humans may have just evolved to be religious so it’s a sign of good mental health.
Psychology also says you can morph between male and female based on how you feel.

>>18521256
Nothing I said is word salad and I know you're the samefagging moldovan christian schizo. Learn what words mean, retard. You lost this conversation.

File: Screenshot 2026-06-09 at (...).png (10 KB, 734x172)

10 KB PNG

>>18521249
Yes, to precede is parameterized (to come before something in time). That is the definition of the word. You guys literally do not understand the meaning of words.

>>18521256
I know who the moldovan schizo is. For example, I know that you are not him.
>>18521260
You need to stop seething, schizo.

File: time-traveling-ant.jpg (684 KB, 2560x1440)

684 KB JPG

>Time is a dimension on whatever manifold it is that is under consideration
Just where did such braindamaged human garbage even come here from?

>>18521276
You lost, schizo.

>>18521260
>>18521266
I don't even know who I am anymore. Am I the Moldovan Christian schizo or not?

>>18521287
Look up paraconsistent logic, schizo. Sometimes you are and sometimes you're not.

>>18521291
I am actually gonna look that up because it sounds interesting. By the by, have you ever heard the term, "perseveration" or "perseverating"? For no reason in particular, I think you might find it interesting.

>>18521293
Nothing I said was word salad and I wasn't perserverating. You lost the conversation.

>>18521298
>You lost the conversation.
I just got here.

>>18521300
>I just got here.
So you concede that causes and effects are parametricized arrangements in TIME?

>>18521302
Why would I make concessions about an argument I wasn't participating in, my fine perseverating yaksman?

>>18521300
He's breaking down because I showed that to precede is temporal and thus my original argument (that causes must precede events and thus time is a necessary precondition for causality, and thus God could not have created time as that would be a contradiction) is valid and sound, so he's basically just hyperventilating and going insane.

>>18521306
>maybe if i keep pretending everyone will forget that i'm the moldovan schizo

File: brainlet-cube.png (185 KB, 567x502)

185 KB PNG

>I showed that to precede is temporal
Which letter precedes B? Does the mentally ill retard know his alphabet? The alphabet is parametrized by a dimension on the manifold under consideration, clearly.

>>18521308
>>18521314
Aren't you both arguing against theism?

>>18521306
These posters are not me:
>>18521308
>>18521311
It's the moldovan schizo. He's just seething because he lost the discussion. Just thought you should know in case you can't follow.

>>18521319
Yes, but nothing I posted was word salad and everything he posted was.

>>18521325
Well then, at best, I'd say athiests are bad company, huh?

>>18521328
He's not an atheist. He's a christian (plus a schizo and moldovan).

>>18521314
No letter causally precedes B. This was explained already.
>If I equivocate between two definitions of a polysemous word then I can pretend that what the guy was saying doesn't make sense
Why is the modern meta with you guys to pretend you don't know what words mean?

@18521336
>I equivocate between two definitions of a polysemous word
At least he's starting to understand his first and most basic mistake...

>>18521328
>>18521333
He claims to be an atheist but he only ever argues against atheists and defends christians, and he also holds all the same opinions that the christians do and he never makes any argument in favor of why he thinks there is no god

>>18521342
I think there is no god because if there was one subhuman biological abominations like you simply wouldn't exist.

>>18521345
How am I so much better than you if I'm a subhuman biological abomination?

>>18520661
>>18520685
>>18521234
>>18521247
>>18521260
>>18521266
>>18521287
>>18521311
>>18521322
>>18521333
Does atheism naturally cause this kind of obsessive compulsion?

>>18521351
4 dubs out of 10. Is this statistically significant?

>>18521351
For fuck's sake. I don't have schizophrenia. I don't have schizophasia. I don't have word salad. I don't have obsessive compulsions. I don't have any mental illnesses besides my atheism, ok? Stop it already. Jesus Christ, anon...

>>18521351
I don't. I don't. Fuck off.

Why are you all so mentally ill?

>>18521363
My mental illness is just a parametrized arrangement. I'll get well soon.

File: flat,750x,075,f-pad,750x1(...).jpg (91 KB, 750x1000)

91 KB JPG

>>18521355
On both double sided and one sided p tests, this is statistically significant... anomalous. What could this mean?

>>18521350
>How am I so much better than you
Paraconsistent logic allows this to be the case in your mind.

>>18521369
Do you know what "parameterized" means?

>>18521373
I'm this anon
>>18521293
And I actually looked it up. Paraconsistent logic doesn't seem to be logically invalid or problematic in reasoning.

>>18521385
Look up intuitionistic logic as well.

>>18521378
It depends on the context. Do you admit you don't understand what a parametrized mental illness is, christian schizo?

>>18521385
>Paraconsistent logic doesn't seem to be logically invalid or problematic in reasoning.
The fuck is that even supposed to mean? You're having a parametrization moment, anon.

>>18521395
Naw, perseverate about it from the jump next time if you want me to keep looking up the words you get hooked on.

>>18521401
>The fuck is that even supposed to mean?
It's useful (among other applications) in jurisprudence when weighing conflicting evidence or viewpoints. It's not logically invalid.

>>18521402
what?

>>18521405
How can a logic be logically invalid, anon? And I assure you nobody uses paraconsistent logic in court.

>>18521373
I'm not the guy who brought up or said anything about paraconsistent logic.

>>18521414
You should parametrize it and integrate it into your debate arsenal for extra atheist strength.

>>18521410
>How can a logic be logically invalid, anon?
Well, would you consider circular logic valid?
>>18521410
>And I assure you nobody uses paraconsistent logic in court.
They do.

>>18521417
>Well, would you consider circular logic valid?
Circular logic is not a logic.

>They do.
They don't. They just use extra loose defeasible reasoning.

>>18520665
I've often looked at atheists and thought atheism is a literal mass-psychosis. I'm not kidding

>>18521422
Atheism is a developmental disability like aphasia.

>>18521422
>>18521424
that's because you're both retarded. Atheists are more intelligent than theists across all races, and as IQ increases the rate of atheism increases with no point where this trend reverses.

>>18521427
>as IQ increases the rate of atheism increases with no point where this trend reverses.
Proof?

>>18521427
Also I agree I'm retarded. I literally just said atheism is a developmental disability (i.e. a form of retardation) and sadly I have it.

>>18521429
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289613000846
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8836311/

>>18521437
There is no evidence for your claim in your first paper so I'm just gonna assume you didn't read either of them and are being mentally ill again.

>>18521444
aboslute cope

>>18521447
Your claim:
>as IQ increases the rate of atheism increases with no point where this trend reverses.

Your paper:
>We also compute impact curves that show how the effect of intelligence on atheism changes with average intelligence quotients. The impact is stronger at lower intelligence levels, peaks somewhere between 100 and 110, and then weakens

You're too mentally ill to even try to read the abstract.

>>18521449
That's for the average intelligence of a nation. If you actually read the papers, you'd see the trend doesn't change as IQ increases

>>18521455
Most people have average IQs. The most intelligent people are more often atheists.

>>18521427
If you look at atheists and see them intelligent you must be either a complete retard who needs a reality check, or one of them by yourself. Just because you're intelligent doesn't mean you couldn't be retarded and stupid otherwise, a mass murderer could be intelligent. You see my point

>>18521456
>That's for the average intelligence of a nation.
>If you actually read the papers...

Yeah, if you actually read the paper:
>There is thus evidence that religious disbelief is positively correlated with both intelligence and economic development. As a consequence, in order to determine whether there is a statistically significant positive relationship between intelligence and religious disbelief using a cross-country dataset it is important to account for the impact of economic development on atheism. In particular, the question we pose can be stated as follows: Is there a statistically significant relationship between intelligence and religious disbelief after accounting for the impact of economic development on atheism? If such a relationship does exist it is then important to measure it. This is our chief goal. In what follows, we shall use regression analysis to model the impact of intelligence on religious disbelief. In particular, we shall use the class beta regression models introduced by Ferrari and Cribari-Neto (2004) to model the prevalence of atheists in 124 countries. Our results suggest that the positive impact of intelligence on religious disbelief is statistically significant even when we account for the positive impact of economic growth on atheism. Similar results are found when we model the proportion of the population in 84 countries that do not consider religion important in their daily lives.

Look, you're an actual subhuman, there's no question about it at this point.

>>18521457
Intelligence can mean different things. Intelligent in what sense? Not being stupid? Having good scores at a logic test?

File: brainlet-team.png (276 KB, 1066x600)

276 KB PNG

>Just because you're intelligent doesn't mean you couldn't be retarded and stupid otherwise

>Intelligence can mean different things. Intelligent in what sense? Not being stupid? Having good scores at a logic test?

80 IQ atheists false-flagging or what?

>>18521467
Obviously it's scores on Sonic the Hedgehog trivia tests.

>>18521468
I'm a Christian, but I absolutely hold that intelligence and stupidity are entirely separate traits. I've known very intelligent people who were absolutely retarded and very stupid people who were smart.

>>18521467
Generally high IQ scores.
>>18521461
>Our results suggest that the positive impact of intelligence on religious disbelief is statistically significant even when we account for the positive impact of economic growth on atheism. Similar results are found when we model the proportion of the population in 84 countries that do not consider religion important in their daily lives.
Yea, that's what I said. As IQ increases, religious disbelief increases and is statistically significant even when accounting for economic development. you can't read.

>>18521468
No, I'm failing to see atheism as anything other than a mass psychosis without any exaggeration. You have a loser in his mom's basement spending all his time on reddit being angry for people of believing in God, if that's not the most retarded thing ever then call me crazy. You have adults on stages arguing about that stuff like little brats on a sand box.

>makes false claim
>the abstract contradicts him
>denies what the paper is even about
>the paper contradicts him
>y-y-y-yeah that's what I s-s-said

Atheists are mentally ill subhumans.

>>18521477
The abstract does not contradict me, nor does the paper.
Theists just deny basic words, again.

>>18521475
>the retard again makes up a boogeyman in his head and gets angry about it, then says other people are the ones with psychosis
Again, my low IQ lil buddy, I do not live with my mom. I own my own apartment. You're going to have to grow up.

>>18521475
I don't dispute that atheists are generally psychotic. You can see that playing out right in this thread. But your attempt to argue semantics about what 'intelligence' means is pathetic. You know what it means and the average German is indeed smarter than the average Arab just like the paper claims.

>>18521478
>as IQ increases the rate of atheism increases with no point where this trend reverses.

>We also compute impact curves that show how the effect of intelligence on atheism changes with average intelligence quotients. The impact is stronger at lower intelligence levels, peaks somewhere between 100 and 110, and then weakens

>The abstract does not contradict me

Now go ahead and deny again what the paper is about. I just want to see your psychotic loop play out the same way again. :^)

>>18521484
>and then weakens
The trend does not reverse. You do not know what basic words mean.

>>18521486
>The trend does not reverse.
That's not what your paper implies. Take your antipsychotics and try again.

>>18521481
You are literally so pea-brained faggot that you can't see what I'm saying. It doesn't matter if you're the leading expert at Mensa, if you are spending your life on reddit just to mentally pat yourself on the back and have orgasms from your mental masturbation with all the debates and stuff, you're a literal grown ass retard. You're so blinded by your own retardation that you fail to even realize that.

>>18521491
>That's not what your paper implies
There is never a point where higher IQ is not correlated with greater disbelief i.e. the trend doesn't reverse (higher IQ do not suddenly become more religious than less), which is what both papers show. Learn to read

>>18521492
Your imaginary character is intelligent and socially retarded but you're retarded intellectually and probably socially as well.

>>18521494
>There is never a point where higher IQ is not correlated with greater disbelief
This is not what your paper implies. All it actually shows is that your claim starts to fall apart when they get to high IQ white nations. They can't trace it much further because said countries are already at the top with their 110-115 averages, but since you brought up this paper in the context of your claim, I'm just going to acknowledge the pattern the researchers point out and continue it - something your mental retardation prevents you from doing. :^)

>>18521497
The pattern that as IQ increases, religious belief declines, which is what I said.
You're going to have to stop seething, moldovan schizo

>>18521495
You think you're gaining points from a "gotch-ya" moment and being so logically-minded, not realizing that technically it's an appeal to authority fallacy, by using your own language. The highest IQ authority has merit regards to what the truth is. Anyways I'm done with talking with literal goyslop consuming steaming faggots who have brains as much as a pile of excrament.

>>18521258
Half truth. Being religious is just another way to be social with your kin, which grants endorphines, and act accordingly to your kin, which keeps problems away. An atheist in a practising theist village could engage in religious rituals and still get the benefits of being religious without actually believing

File: parabola-soccer-hdr.png (58 KB, 1200x956)

58 KB PNG

>The pattern that as time increases height increases
Imagine having this kind of retard as the sole defender of your ideology's intellectual superiority.

>>18521501
Ok, retard. Seethe harder. You're about on par with the average atheist IQ ITT.

>>18521518
>the average atheist IQ ITT.
150

>150 IQ in the atheist subpopulation = not being able to read the abstract for a paper or reason about anything beyond linear trends

>>18520821
I will fuck off after you definitvely answer the very simple question aimed at you.

So reading through this thread just going from the OP down, the theists have shown:

>they do not know what the big bang is.
They do not have arguments but to call people psychotic, despite them being the only ones who display psychotic behavior.
>they can not stop thinking about trannies despite it having nothing to do with the thread.
>somehow think that atheists all listen to heavy metal and worship Satan despite this being completely untrue.
>somehow think that "higher mathematical dimensions" means God exists
>will lie about being atheists but are actually religious (like the Moldovan schizo)
>claim that atheists are mentally ill, when in reality religious people are mentally ill
>show that they do not understand the basic meaning of words, they just straight up do not understand what basic words mean and try to argue about them, even asking for "proof" of a word definition (showing they don't know what the word "proof" means either) and then just rejecting the basic definition
>do not understand what the double slit experiment is.
>talk to themselves to pat themselves on the back when they lose the engagement with atheists in an extremely psychotic display of cope.
>the Moldovan schizo is VERY mentally ill, as well as a liar
>do not know how to read papers

No wonder atheism continues to increase faster than any religion and religiosity continues to decline around the world. There is simply no justification for religion. Theists lose the debate then throw little temper tantrums where they just impotently insult the atheist interlocutors and storm off. This has been going on since the new atheists, and nothing has changed in the last 15 years since the new atheists fell off. Modern atheism is even stronger and theists are even weaker than they were against the new atheists.

>>18521554
imagine thinking anyone's going to read this

>>18521554
Mandatory are-you-dumber-than-a-bot test:

>The author of Statement 1 is implicitly willing to project the overall positive direction beyond the data, but apparently unwilling to project the trend within the data — namely, that the effect is already weakening — to its logical conclusion.

>That's inconsistent. If you're going to extrapolate at all, the weakening trend is at least as well-supported by the data as the directional claim. In fact it's arguably better supported, because:

>* The weakening is something actually observed in the data, not inferred beyond it
>* The "never reverses" claim is precisely the part that requires extrapolation beyond the data range
>* The most parsimonious projection of an already-declining effect is that it keeps declining — potentially to zero, potentially past it

>The claim "there is no reversal" is actually doing a lot of quiet work here. It's not a conservative claim — it's a strong positive assertion about a region the data doesn't cover, while simultaneously ignoring the directional signal the data does provide about what happens as you move toward that region.

Verdict: you are dumber than a bot.

>>18521586
Do you understand what "reverses" means? It seems neither you nor the bot do.
There is never a point wherein higher IQ is positively correlated with greater religiosity. The trend doesn't reverse. You're going to have to come to terms with this

>>18521603
I like how the chatbot literally spells it all out for you and you still get filtered somehow. Good job representing atheist intellectual prowess.

>>1852161
Your IQ is too low to understand what I am saying. You also didn't even read the second paper that already looks at this very claim and shows that no, the trend does not reverse the way the bot is extrapolating.
Buddy, atheists are generally more intelligent than theists. You really need to get over it.

>mentally ill retard thinks it's just too heckin' hard for other people to understand babby's first crude extrapolation that ignores the weakening of the effect
Poor baby, your little brain worked so hard on "line goes up". You can't fathom someone taking your braindamaged "logic" a step further and applying it to the second derivative. :^)

>>18521636
>retard still seething
You're never going to change reality, Moldovan schizo.
You aren't intelligent
Everyone sees you aren't an atheist and it's pathetic that you won't even be honest about your beliefs. At least the other theists don't lie about themselves, you're such a pathetic sack of shit and so embarrassed about yourself that you won't even own up to your own beliefs.

>>18520646
>>18521258
Reality is just really bad so it's beneficial for people to delude themselves. It's also why atheists are more depressed.
It's not much of a mystery.

File: seething_calmly.jpg (39 KB, 460x663)

39 KB JPG

>Everyone sees you aren't an atheist
Good thing no one saw you failing to read the abstract of the paper you posted, then denying what the paper was about, then getting BTFO by a chatbot. Good thing your imaginary audience isn't real and no one cares.

>>18520675
Why do Enlightenment stooges always have to pathologize shit? Very Jewish behavior.

>>18521669
>Why do Enlightenment stooges always have to pathologize shit?
Because it allows them to instantly dismiss all opposition as illegitimate and therefore not worth entertaining. See this entire thread.

Now now, settle down children. If you want to hear the bedtime story about the jewish wizard who parted the sea and saved the israelites, first brush your teeth and get in bed

>>18520938
>people on an anonymous imageboard always tell the truth

>>18521475
Atheists aren't upset that people are religious. They're upset that people vote on policies that affect their own lives based on fairytales. Like a teacher being forced by the state to teach "alternative theories" to evolution because Karen and the league of christian soccer moms bitched at her local elected official.

>>18521516
In that image, the pattern weakens until reaching the vertex at which point the pattern reverses. In the paper, the pattern weakens but never reverses.
The fact that you didn't get this shows that you're terminally low IQ.

>>18522281
You have profound mental retardation.

>>18522321
You lost lol.

>>18522212
>>18521739
>people on an anonymous imageboard don't always tell the truth
>I selectively apply this awareness just to dismiss things I don't want to engage with and reinforce what I already believe

>>18521650
You're malding, schizo. The papers show that IQ is inversely correlated to religiosity.
>>18522321
The paper doesn't show that the pattern reverses. You're actually just retarded.
Why are religious people so stupid?

File: m2er8xnuyg0e1.jpg (106 KB, 758x957)

106 KB JPG

>nooo you have to believe in the dumbest ideas I can share.
Look, fag, it's ok if you're religious.
I myself have tried several things.
What doesnt fly, however is pretensions that the truth would be the most popular religion relative to a jolly book that shuns popular religion.

>>18522421
Yes anon the more sensasionalist a story is, the greater likelihood it's fake. When I said that it sounded like the backstory of a character from God's not Dead, I meant it, it follows the exact same cliché ideas about what atheism is and what atheists believe.

>>18520646
>why [blatantly untrue claim]?
>many replies
can you guys just not engage retarded trolls?