[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Search | | Home]

Remember the time when Lisa turned into a raging fedora atheist?

This is a blue board which means that it's for everybody (Safe For Work content only). If you see any adult content, please report it.

Thread replies: 449
Thread images: 37

File: Lisa The Skeptic.jpg (92KB, 578x300px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
Lisa The Skeptic.jpg
92KB, 578x300px
Remember the time when Lisa turned into a raging fedora atheist?
>>
File: 1447410353001.jpg (50KB, 700x525px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1447410353001.jpg
50KB, 700x525px
Wait, so you believed in the angel?
>>
Remember when Stephan Jay Gould died and motherfucking Richard Dawkins was the one who ended up being the household name?
>>
>>77996033
She was 100% right though.

Till the handhold thing anyway, but that proves that she wasn't a raging fedora atheist.
>>
>>77996202
i thought it used to be Carl Sagan.
>>
>>77996584
Carl Sagan was a popular household name and atheist.

Stephen Jay Gould was an atheist and popular with science nerds, the kind who actually know what they were talking about.

Stephen Jay Gould would frequently debate Richard Dawkins and take him to fucking school. He was like the Harlem Globetrotters to Dawkin's Washington Generals.

Stephen Jay Gould died relatively unknown (he had a magazine column and his books used to be in the science section of bookstores). Richard Dawkins, like some kind of weed, his growth unchecked, ended up becoming the famous atheist.
>>
>>77996644
What's bad about Dawkins? I'm not really familiar with him.
>>
>>77996644
And James Randi, although he's old and doesn't do anything much anymore so Penn Jilette kind of replaced him.
>>
>>77996033
>Calls out the town on believing in an angel skeleton
>an angel skeleton
>Angel
>Skeleton
>Skeletal remains of a divine, otherworldly ghost like entity
>Religious figures and followers actually believed such a thing was possible
Fuck anyone who says Lisa was wrong in this situation
>>
>>77996033
I love this episode.

>Message is essentially "don't get swept up in sensationalism and start doing stupid shit in the name of faith, but also don't be an asshole to people who find comfort in something you don't necessarily believe in"

>Oh that's ridiculous, Lisa! Everyone knows leprechauns are extinct!

>Ah, we elected the wrong Carter...

>Smithers, use the Amnesia Ray!
>You mean the revolver, sir?
>Precisely. Be sure to wipe your own memory clear when you're finished.

>Er, you know, I can't afford to pay you.
>I didn't become a scientist for financial gain. Whatever little money you have will be fine.

>GO HOME, SCIENCE GIRL!
>But I am home!
>Good, stay there.

>Hey, she's going to smash the angel!
>Somebody stop her!

>Mom, why are we getting dressed up? Are we going to Black Angus?
>Well sweetie, you might say we're going to the best steakhouse in the whole universe!
>So we're NOT going to Black Angus?

>I'm going to be honest with you, Lisa. I never did those tests.

I love the recurring theme of Simpsons and Futurama getting prominent members of the scientific community to show up, only to portray them as incompetant frauds.
>I call it a Hawking Chamber.
>>
Why do I get the sinking feeling that this is one of those episodes like Lisa the Vegetarian that /co/ is gonna end up shitting on because it has Lisa disagreeing with everyone?

Despite the fact that this one, like Lisa the Vegetarian, has her learn a lesson about tolerating the beliefs of those different from her?
>>
>>77996698
He's OK when he's specifically talking about biology. Those large animal dissections he did on youtube were pretty educational.

He gets really obnoxiously fedora-tipply, for the lack of a better term. I'm an atheist myself, but there are those guys who completely overdo the nonsense, and Dawkins' got that in spades. And lately he's gone full /pol/ with the racism.

Gould was much more of a "why don't we all just get along?" sort of guy. Even when he was clearly the smartest guy in the room.
>>
>>77996644
Nice digits.

What's so bad about Dawkins? He's vocally against SJWs and PC culture.
>>
>>77996700

Is there something about magic that attracts this kind of person?
>>
It's just Lisa The Vegetarian Mk II, being written by the same guy (David S. Cohen) except without any good jokes because of being produced by Mike Scully instead of Dave Mirkin.
>>
File: euphoric.gif (793KB, 360x203px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
euphoric.gif
793KB, 360x203px
>>77996698
Not the anon you asked, I'm no expert on the guy, but to me he comes off as one of those really obnoxious, pop-culture athiests. Like, the atheist equivalent of a Bible Thumper.

I just know that Patton Oswalt has said dudes like Dawkins and Bill Mahr make him feel embarrassed to be an atheist the same way he imagines the Westboro Baptist Church makes people feel embarrassed to be Christian.
>>
>>77996885
Yes. Back in the 1920s, Harry Houdini was obsessed with trying to prove that psychics were all con men.
>>
>>77996837
Thanks
>>
>>77996837
>>77996202
>>77996644
All this Gould promoting makes me want to look the guy up, he sounds like a groovy grape.
I only ever heard of him from this episode, assumed he was just a scientist who was pretty big when the episode was written.
>>
>>77996885
I mean, it makes sense.

The kinda guy who's really frustrated by those who deceive others, even when it's a harmless kinda deception.
>WHAT THIS GUY DOES ISN'T MAGIC.
>LOOK, I'M GONNA DO IT BETTER THAN HE DID AND TELL YOU FLAT OUT, I JUST TRICKED YOU. THERE WAS NO MAGIC INVOLVED.
>HE'S A FRAUD. A TALENTED, CLEVER FRAUD.

Honestly, I get the appeal. I don't believe in magic, but I find magic shows fascinating since it's basically dudes pulling off live special effects with the intent of deceiving the eyes of tons of live audience members.
>>
>>77996917
He reminds me of a less egotistical Carl Sagan but a whole lot wordier. He's not for everybody.

Here's one of my favorite articles:

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1993/08/12/dinomania/

It's an essay on the dinosaur craze that came along with the original Jurassic Park, and a critic on the movie itself. Really takes it to task too, but in a really erudite way.
>>
>>77996858
People think he's mean. He doesn't try to sugar coat the reasons why he doesn't believe in a god. When that reason is something like a persons personal connection to a deity is more likely a delusion, people get upset and they feel insulted. I'm simplifying here, but basically he hurts people's feelings by offering a scientific explanation to spiritual things.
>>
>>77997042
It's more a case of "I have zero knowledge of theology or Christian history beyond my simplistic strawmen."
>>
>>77996962

Yeah I guess. I just feel like with some of these guys Penn Jillette they get this attitude that basically boils down to:

"I'm too clever to fall for slight of hand and special effects; that makes me the smartest man in world!"

One episode of "Bullshit!" was enough for me.
>>
Speaking of pompous blowhards: Christopher Hitchens!
>>
>>77997041
"I was a “dinosaur nut” as a kid growing up in New York during the late Forties and early Fifties. Hardly anyone knew or cared about them, and I was viewed as a nerd and misfit on that ultimate field of vocational decision—the school playground at recess. I was called “fossil face”; the only other like-minded kid in the school became “dino” (I am pleased to report that he also became a professional natural historian). The names weren’t funny, and they hurt."

Those kids who beat up on SJG and his friend in school I bet went onto a rewarding, high-paying career as a janitor or a gas station attendant.
>>
>>77997042
I dunno, I think it's less "people think he's mean because he tells it like it is" and more "he needlessly comes off as a dick because he feels the need to actively mock the beliefs of others rather than simply bolster what he himself believes in".

Like, you can support logic and science and all that without Tweeting jokes about how dumb it is to believe in god.

It'd be like the pope talking about loving your neighbor and all that, but then slipping in "unless he's an atheist, then you should laugh at him cause he's gonna go to hell, lol".

Needless hostility is just kinda un-chill, you know?
>>
>>77997101
To be fair, I really like the episodes of Bullshit where they tackle shit that's REALLY fucked up (like the one about anti-vaccers or 9/11 conspiracies), just because that's generally objectively bad shit, so their "FUCK YOU, WE'RE SMART AND YOU'RE DOGSHIT PAL" attitude feels more vindicated.
>>
>>77997159
They probably didn't have shitty lives, they probably had overall decent lives
I'm sure not everyone made it, but chances are that most of them were successful as far as having a job, house, family, and money to spend on fun stuff goes
>>
>>77997159
Or more accurately, Al Bundy sitting in a bar at 40 and bragging about his high school football accomplishments as he toils along in his pathetic existence as a shoe salesman.
>>
>>77997195
Yeah but I saw the episode about Gun Control, an issue I have no particularly strong feelings about, and was like, "These guys are funny, but there's no way anyone they disagree with is going to get a fair shake."
>>
>>77997298
Oh yeah, that show worked best when it was exposing actual bullshit that would make people say "oh, THAT'S a thing? that's fucked up".

It was most definitely not a platform for debate. Any kind of argument that wasn't a cut-and-dry kind of one-sided would be SUPER biased.
>>
>>77996796
>I call it a Hawking Chamber.

based Vice Presidential Action Rangers
>>
>>77997298
It's like watching Bill Maher's Religulous. You don't watch it as "intellectual" Bill Maher pointing out the flaws with every religious group or individual if you want to enjoy it. You watch it as "smart comedian" Bill Maher poking fun at some of the more absurd and sometimes dangerous member of religious groups and pissing on the idea of sacredness (and also skipping the last 10 minutes)
>>
>>77997429
Not that he'll take on Mudslimes of course instead the low-hanging fruit like Westboro Baptist Church.
>>
>>77996858

He's a raging self-righteous asshole who uses Atheism as a point of conceit. He thinks not believing in a God makes him SUPERIOR to those who do And he can't even CONCIEVE the notion that he might be wrong.
>>
>>77997429
I honestly can't stomach documentaries like that. It just reeks of "WOAH, WATCH OUT, THIS SMART COMEDIAN IS GONNA RATTLE SOME CAGES, ESTABLISHMENT. IF YOU DON'T LAUGH OR AGREE, THEN YOU'RE JUST TOO STUPID TO GET IT."

I mean, the only exception I can think of is Jeff Ross Roasts Prisoners, and that's mostly because it's 90% fucking brilliant standup special with 10% "hey, maybe don't give a mother of two 25 years for smoking pot once".
>>
>>77997472
Nah, the second half (which is much more serious in tone) is pretty much all about muslims and other violent religious groups and there's a lot of jokes against them throughout
>>
>>77997472
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjqXt_wRkS8&ab_channel=sitcomedychannel
>>
>>77997475
>he can't even CONCIEVE the notion that he might be wrong
This is the kinda thing that I find somewhat interesting when it comes to atheism.
Like, when one considers all the insane shit that goes into how the universe works, is it really beyond the realm of possibility that there's something bigger than ourselves out there?

Not to say that God is totally a big bearded guy in white robes and a golden crown, but it always just seemed sorta short-sighted to me to say with absolute certainty "there's NO WAY there's anything that can be defined as a god out there" considering how little we know about the universe.

Humanity's a blip on the cosmic radar, who's to say that something DIDN'T set all this in motion farther back than we could even possibly conceive?

I dunno, just my two cents.
>>
>>77997429
>(and also skipping the last 10 minutes)
Never saw it, what happens?
>>
>>77997594
Up to that point it's pretty much a comedy with some serious moments throughout. And then this happens
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3R1fwrvPM4w&ab_channel=pcgamer999
>>
>>77997578
I believe atheism, despite the nomenclature, is the disbelief that any man made god can be real, or that any god would be magic.
If something lived long enough to acquire godlike technology and create a Universe I don't think atheists would deny it, as they must understand that sufficiently evolved science is indistinguishable from magic.
If we survive we will be gods one day too.
>>
>>77997578

The possibility isn't the problem. The problem is you push it as fact without evidence.

Also, why the fuck are you here?

>>>/pol/
>>>/his/
>>
>>77997608
>Religion must die for mankind to live
Holy shit, the tipping is off the charts.
>>
>>77997042
One issue is he conflates his atheist views and his discourse on evolution. The guy goes into a debate about evolution/creation and ends up just talking shit on religion in general and Christianity in particular, which is unnecessary when it's not the topic.

Also his belief that war wouldn't exist without religion is retarded, and I would think a bit insulting to religious people.

Last but not least he has very little humour about himself. When he was shown in south park his main response was complaining how they had him fuck a tranny and pretending he didn't get the point of the episode.
>>
>>77997649
Easy pal, I'm not pushing anything.
I was just curious about a belief (or lack thereof) that is different from my own and was looking to understand differing viewpoints a little bit better.
>>
>>77996831
Because it is. That's how bad /co/ is at watching cartoons: if a character (even a strawman) expressed things people disapprove of, the character/episode/show is bad.
>>
I want /col/ to leave.
>>
>>77997687
>Last but not least he has very little humour about himself.
I just about piss myself every time someone brings up his bit of honey that got confiscated by the TSA.
>>
>>77996837
Islam isn't a race, brah

He's shit talking a religion that has protected status unlike Christianity
>>
>>77997472
It's less about low hanging fruit and more about not getting slammed by accusations of hatespeech
>>
>>77996698

He has a 0 concept over the very meaning of the ideal he claims to profess, and makes atheists look like a bunch of jihads whose answer to world hunger is purging every Jew, Christfag, and Muddie so there'll be less people to feed.

He's the worst bits of /pol/ and /reddit/ combined into a single caricature.
>>
>>77997578
There's a whole side of the atheist argument that relies on that, interestingly: Russell's teapot (which spawned pastafarianism).
>>
>>77996698
He refutes the god botherers publicly and rather loudly (for an Englishman) when they start spouting off in areas in which they can actually cause harm. Basically he's a product of the British tertiary education system, where saying you are religious is tantamount to declaring your idiocy in public. This doesn't translate well in the US though.

This earns him a lot of hate from the godly crowd of course - and also from the moderate Atheists, most of whom are American - because they've learnt the hard way to tread carefully on these topics in the states.
>>
>>77997748
Care to elaborate?
>>
>>77997708
I think part of the problem is atheism has come to be a singular label for a wide variety of different beliefs. Some are like Dawkins, but some are also much less gung-ho or certain in their beliefs. Agnosticism doesn't help either, in terms of labeling. There are plenty of atheists who would probably get called agnostics were their views explained to others beyond "I don't believe in god."

There's a certain logical conundrum to it too. As a position "I do not believe in any god or religious conception of the world" is not so much an assertion of fact as "there is no god and all religious conceptions of the world are wrong." The former is a negative position, taken in counter point to a positive statement. ie. any religious belief ever. It is a logical default position to take. If no religion can prove itself with an argument on observable, repeatable phenomenon, it is as if the argument was untrue. Otherwise, you'd be able to see evidence of it. The latter causes problems because you can't actually say there is no god logically the same way you could say there is a god. It is precisely because of what you said about "what about the things we don't know?" In an argument, however, you can say "there is not sufficient evidence for this particular positive argument, therefore there is no reason to treat it as true." It's not certainty, or at least it never should be, but doubt.

The universe is a wide and wild place, and it is likely everything we currently know is wrong to some degree or another (not totally, but still missing something). But just because there are still things unknown doesn't mean it's logical to default to a specific god or religion or spiritual reality being true (there's a joke about atheists just believing in one less religion than religious people). You can say some agent set it in motion, and it might even be proven true someday, but until it can be shown, there's no reason to do so outside of faith.
>>
>>77997929
Strong/weak atheism is a distinction that exists for this very reason: I don't believe in God =/= I believe there is no God.

Also apatheism is where it's at.
>>
>>77996033
No, but I remember the time Stephen Jay Gould was the best guest star the Simpsons ever had.
>>
>>77996033
No, but I do remember when it was declared that science and religion must stay 60ft apart at all times.
>>
>>77996796
Stephen Jay Gould came out looking like a saint in that episode. The writers even integrated his idea of non-overlapping magisteria with his character not running scientific tests on the validity of something religion deals with.
>>
>>77996796
Yeah, I can't understand the hate Lisa The Skeptic gets. Its hilarious throughout.
>>
>>77997041
Gould may be wordier, but he wrote the hell out of his articles. Sagan was good, but the best thing he ever wrote is the final three pages or "You Are Here," and that's a lot of people's first contact with the guy.
>>
>>77997263
This. I hate to admit it, but bullies tend to not get comeuppance. Sure, some die of heroin overdoses, but most go on to live decent lives.
>>
I dunno, when I first got into atheism I read the Dawkins book, and the Hitchens book, and the Harris book.
>>
>>77996837
>And lately he's gone full /pol/ with the racism.

Please name one instance of Dawkins being racist, in the actual sense of the word.
>>
>>77998240
Racism is a buzzword

And I'm not being sarcastic
>>
>>77997801
>protected status
Tell that to all those shiites that get killed by sunnis
>>
>>77998355
True but at least white people can't call them names
>>
>>77998490
Honestly I'd be happier with some light banter than getting shot by people who kind of believe in same things but at the same time don't.

Also "most protected status" still belongs to Jews, considering they pretty much get green light and some funds from West so they can bomb Palestinians.
>>
>>77997929

That's sort of the problem of having a disorganized religion: since there aren't any clear barriers between all the little nuances for the average outsider, everyone lumps them together into a single group, moreso than they would with people who call themselves "Sunnis" or "Baptists" or such.
>>
It's good to see that /co/ is practicing being a wholesome christian imageboard!
>>
Isnt she a buddhist? A bit hypocritical.
>>
>>77996962
Penn as far as I remember is fine with psychics and the like just fucking around at parties, it's when they seriously give life advice (like getting people to leave their jobs or move or leave people) or seriously convince people they're speaking to their dead relatives and shit. Or when they're consulted on dying relatives.

Party trick it's fine, if it's seriously fucking with people's sensitive emotional states I could see the problem.
>>
>>77996917
>>77996202
For some reason I want to say I remember reading some Gould stuff when going to a Catholic high school
>>
>>77999383
She's an American Buddhist, they don't have much of a dogma.
>>
> people talking about athiests they like
> how they are athiests
> posting pictures of athiests
> on 4chan, a Christian message board
mfw
Into the trash you all go.
>>
>>77999439
I'm atheist because I don't have a relationship with God but I follow Jesus
So I'm a Christian atheist which is the god tier lifestyle
>>
>>77999425
She is an agnostic suburban girl who found Buddhism and thinks it is neat and calls herself buddhist though has never really practiced it. She also went through a Wicca phase. Reminds me of a girl I dated. I even got her a Lisa as a witch figure once because she herself had made the comparison.
>>
>>77999449
mfw disgusting people are dumb enough to be openly athiest, especially on this Christian prayer board
>>
>>77999493
What really matters is that do you love Jesus
If you don't you're kind of a dick
>>
File: dawkins.jpg (36KB, 460x276px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
dawkins.jpg
36KB, 460x276px
>>77996917
>Gould
Overrated. He was a proponent of the now largely disproved "punctuated equilibrium" hypothesis for evolution. He played Devil's advocate in an effort to annoy fellow scientists, which did little to contribute to our understanding of evolution's history nor of natural selection. To his credit, he was very funny in the Simpsons episode.

Dawkins rubs a lot of people the wrong way, and I think he does that because he's strident and passionate but without much of a sense of humor; he comes off as angry and unrelatable. Sam Harris is more agreeable, in my opinion. James Randi, while not a scientist, is also very engaging.

Dawkins is indisputabley the greatest Biologist alive today, however. He's a living legend who forever changed the way scientists view natural selection.
>>
> its a Simpsons episode with an athiest as a guest "star"
into the trash it goes
>>
>>77999449
I hope you're not serious.
>>
>>77999464

Buddhism and wicca are meme religions
>>
>>77999504
Love?
Listen to that liberal nonsense.
Every good Christian knows what makes you a follower of Jesus is haing other religions and telling thise people how much they will burn in hell for all eternity.
Lisa needs to brace herself for that hellfire.
>>
>>77999570
Mormons like their memes too
dum dum dum dum dum
>>
>>77999587
That is God fearing Christianity, has nothing to do with following Jesus.

Person who follows God = fears and judges everything, follows Old Testament incoherently
Person who follows Jesus = lives as Jesus taught and know God wanted us to enjoy our lives, follows New Testament
>>
>>77999520
>Dawkins is indisputabley the greatest Biologist alive today
This would not reflect well on the field if it were true...
>>
>>77999464
I hate the episode where she converts to Buddhism.

>no Mom, I still believe in God
>converts to Buddhism a day later
>>
>>77999520
>Dawkins is indisputabley the greatest Biologist alive today

People actually believe this.
>>
>>77999587
You're talking about Pharisees, not Jesus
>>
>>77999614
>tfw the Jews really do run America
>>
>>77996962
What Randi focuses on isn't 'harmless kinda deception'. He doesn't expose the average party magician and when he explains a trick it's not to insult other magicians. He exposes the faith healers and indian 'godmen' and conmen psychics who scam desperate people out of millions and sit on massive personal fortunes made out of telling vulnerable people that "yes, I spoke with them and your loved ones are smiling down on them from heaven, and that'll be seven hundred dollars please". Those sort of people do an incredible amount of damage among people in desperation, in exchange for easy money, and absolutely deserve to get their shit pushed in wherever possible.

Penn is a self righteous libertarian prick so it's not surprising that he takes the asshole tack, but don't lump them both in together on that.
>>
>>77997669
It's not wrong though.

It's only a matter of time before someone launches a nuke, because their imaginary friend in the sky told them to.

Superstitious people don't care about/understand the concept of MAD.
>>
>>77999973
The moral views in West are also structured by religion, mostly New Testament, is that bad too?
>>
>>77999985
Morals and Common Sense are interchangeable when you keep in mind that we, as a species, are vengeful assholes.
>>
>>77997298
The biggest problem with Bullshit! is that, besides just being one sided, they're basically ideological nutjobs themselves. It's just instead of crystal therapy or UFO conspiracies, the altar they worship at is the FREE MARKET. So any time that any episode comes up with any sort of relation to the FREE MARKET comes up, they start lying right out of their fucking teeth. They trot out all of their libertarian think tank friends to recite the political talking points under the guise of legitimate scientific opinion. Any time they pull out their CATO friends they end up with episodes like the one where they explain why second hand smoke totally doesn't exist and the only reason why there's taxes on cigarettes and bans on public smoking in certain places is because the GUBERNMINT is stepping on our FREEDOM.
>>
>>77997905
>Basically he's a product of the British tertiary education system, where saying you are religious is tantamount to declaring your idiocy in public.

Tony Blair mentioned how, during his college days at Oxford in the early Seventies, religious believers like he was were the ultimate weirdos and edgemeisters. They'd be referred to as The God Squad and names like that.
>>
>>77998136
>not running scientific tests on the validity of something religion deals with.

A physical skeleton being claimed to be a divine being is most definitely in the scope of science. He was just a mollycoddling appeaser in the episode.
>>
>>77996033
I really didn't like this episode. If there is a character I hate more than Jerkass Homer, its Jerkass Lisa.
>>
>>78000202
Didn't do much for me. It was too weird. One of the worst Lisa episodes.
>>
>>77996033
I remember when she ended up going against her atheist beliefs in the end and buying into the angel like everyone else did.
>>
>>77999449
>implying you can follow Christ without having a relationship with God
>>
LTS is an episode that didn't quite live up to its potential. Homer and Lisa can both be annoying at times; it's not so much of an issue for the former, but the latter comes off hard as a fedora atheist who has the need to belittle others. Much of the episode does a pretty good job satirically although the Springfield mob mentality feels a little formulaic and exaggerated.

The usual Scully ending works better here than later episodes because the writers at this point still bothered giving it a believable setup. It's an episode that might have been brilliant in Season 4.
>>
>>77999973
That's right anon. I imagine a vast, atheist state would never be responsible for nearly a half century long dick measuring contest of nuclear weapons. Nor would such a state ever come within a hairsbreadth of thermonuclear warfare.
>>
>>78000234
I still don't know what to think of this episode. There are some great jokes throughout the episode. However, much of it is too preachy and the ending falls short. I did like the conversation between Lisa and Marge at the end, but something was missing from this episode.
>>
>>78000235
>2015
>still thinking that communist states were atheist
Protip: All they did was substitute the Church for worship of the party and the leader.
>>
This episode has a lot of genuinely funny (and even hilarious) moments, but some of the satire (while often decent) gets too heavy handed and preachy. It's obvious what David S. Cohen's views of organized religion were and the episode lacks any balance except a half-baked ending. Worse, this was one of the early introductions of liberal activist Lisa that would be her dominant characterization through the Scully era.
>>
It's pretty good. Homer capitalizing on the angel was pretty funny, as was the rest of the episode. But Lisa was way too abrasive in this episode, even though I agree with her point of view.

In Lisa the Iconoclast, she had physical evidence to assert her claims, whereas in Lisa the Skeptic, she was actually right, but she took a dump on a lot of people's beliefs, eg. Marge's.
>>
I've seen some really heated debate over this one about whether Lisa is rationally irritable or simply beyond her character. I'm not too concerned over it, honestly, and this is a fairly funny episode on the whole. A little one-sided at times, but they at least somewhat gave some other perspective at the end. Heck, I'd say the little Marge vs. Lisa bitterness was very well-done.
>>
I thought the point was that both "sides" were too stubborn to find a middle ground. It is very much a Lisa versus the ignorant mob episode, as she does stand her ground which is admirable, but the fact she adopted such a vicious me versus everyone else mentality just made her even harder to listen to. I always thought it's an allegory for religion versus science debates. Most of the time they're endless because one side is arguing something that can't be proven or disproven, so if the other side gets a superiority complex and disrespects the other side it just has no end. In the end all the squabbling was over a stupid mall prop. Even if Lisa had the right idea, she was just as guilty of being mindlessly angry over nothing as the mob.

Marge came out looking the best because she just gave it time to explain itself, without getting self important.
>>
It's episodes like this that make me hate Lisa. Lisa's attitude in this episode reminds me of Family Guy's "You're either a super smart left wing atheist or you're a troglodyte idiot" attitude.

I don't like preachy entertainment that go either left or right.
>>
File: le simpsons.jpg (695KB, 1894x2104px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
le simpsons.jpg
695KB, 1894x2104px
In the latest episode Lisa finds a sexist ancient computer that turned a Suffergate house into a titty bar
>>
>>78000402
^You know, I've never conceived this episode as a praise for atheism. Actually Lisa is meant to be more spiritual than several characters, and the object in conflict in this episode is so ridiculous (a fossilized angel) that it only represents the trendy beliefs of a crowd. IMO it's not anything different than the whole town being conned by Lyle Lanley, and if I was in Lisa's position I'd certainly behave as inconsiderately as she does because the situation is so damn wacky that I hardly could think that the topic required any debate.
>>
The fact that this thread is still up is proof the mods are incapable of doing their job.
>>
>>78000260
Worship and dogma doesn't necessarily equal religion anon.
>>
>>78000405
It's not so much praising atheism as it's Lisa's "100% correct" attitude and crapping on many's beliefs (Her mother's included).

Lisa is suppose to be the smart open-minded girl but this episode doesn't show that. It shows her as stubborn and almost a bitch to everyone who holds a different opinion to her. She does raise some valid points in the episode but it's her attitude to those who don't agree with her that ruin the episode.

This episode almost contradicts the smart, sweet, lovable, open-minded girl we have known since the beginning.
>>
>>77998525
>Also "most protected status" still belongs to Jews, considering they pretty much get green light and some funds from West so they can bomb Palestinians.

Dune coons don't count as Homo Sapiens though, more like a side branch of hominid.
>>
>>78000418
But Lisa is smart, sweet, lovable and open-minded before and after this episode. The fact that she is shown once or twice to be as a rather egoistic and unkind girl doesn't mean that we have to blame these episodes; they are just taking a new point of view at her in the same way that Marge Be Not Proud did with Bart. If anything, it enriches the character. And a good proof that it's not really a simple "Lisa's 100% right" is the ending. Lisa was right at saying that the angel was a fake, but in the end she got scared at the first presumably solid proof of his existence. Yes, we know that the Springfieldians are wrong, but this ending proves that this statement is true regardless who defended it. If Lisa wasn't portrayed as the dissident voice, it would still be ridiculous. Was Marge blamed even a single time when she was the only person in Springfield who suspected that Lyle Lanley was a crook?
>>
>>78000418
>as it's Lisa's "100% correct" attitude

But she is correct this episode.
>>
>>78000433
Being "correct" doesn't make you likable, especially when you're a fictional character who can be made to be correct by the writers
>>
>>78000432
I understand Lisa was proven right at the end and that her squeezing Marge's hand opens her mind, I get what you're saying and it's true. Lisa was and still is (most of the times) the same Lisa we all like/love. It's just I believe, everyone's beliefs aside, this is a poor episode and it almost ruined the way I portrayed Lisa. I like Lisa most of the times but episodes like this make me hate her.

I don't like seeing Lisa with that attitude as it reminds me a little too much of Seth McFarlane's attitude on Family Guy and to say the least, I don't like Family Guy.

Like I said before, I hate when shows get preachy/stubborn to the one point. I don't like propaganda in my entertainment (not implying this episode has propaganda in it).
>>
>>77999464
You're just repeating "she's an American Buddhist". Buddhism in the US isn't a religion, it's a " belief system " for wannabe spiritual atheist hippies.
>>
Yeah...Lisa the Skeptic does not enrich Lisa. Too lazy to repost what I said earlier, but being an egocentric young girl in the midst of a mob of people so hyperbolically stupid that Lisa should have been able to understand that her appeal to intellect would have no effect (which kinda shatters the entire episode's believability), coupled with the fact that all characterizations were obviously manipulated for the sake of a by-the-numbers science vs. religion satire that ended with an awfully tacked on 'Marge and Lisa walk off into the sunset' moment intended to magically clean the slate with its sentimentality, all means that this is not a character-enriching episode by any stretch of the imagination.
>>
>>77999587
>Lisa needs to brace
Oy vey, look vat you did.
>>
Yeardley Smith remarked on the DVD commentary that Lisa's line about Marge being wrong is about as mean-spirited as she ever gets on the show. I don't really see this episode as a character profile for Lisa. I can't comment much on how (or if) it is a breach of her character, I see the episode as more of a Simpson version of "A Very Old Man with Enormous Wings". Although, this shows Mike Scully's dismissal of character for the sake of plot conveniences, which returns in full force in his later episodes.
>>
Could it be that Lisa was attention-seeking, like she was in Bart Star when she wanted to join the football team as the only girl, but was disappointed when other girls were already on the team? And she almost seemed disappointed when she couldn't argue about using the skin of an innocent pig on a football (in the same episode).
>>
>>77997927
His jar of honey was too large to carry onto the plane so he had to throw it out and tweeted about how bin Laden won.
>>
>>78000501
I like the comparison to Bart Star. Lisa as becoming a parody of herself, either for the sake of a joke or a plot device, rarely to develop her character.
>>
>>78000509
Note that I said "if anything". I'm not even saying her character is being enriched in this circumstance, but IMO it's closer to this extreme than the one you're blaming. I agree she is more cynical than usual but on the other hand I don't really find the point where her portrayal is being damaged (actually in the situation she is living and even judging by previous traits I think it's a fairly logical response). It happens to me lots of times, for example when I'm watching an episode based on negative opinions and in the end I'm still waiting for the cringeworthy scene that everybody is complaining about, and I guess this situation is likely to be the same. I wouldn't say Lisa was specially great in this episode when compared with the classic standards, but in its context there is nothing that I found overacted or inadequate in her.
>>
I hated that bullshit when Marge says to Lisa "You know Lisa, when that angel started talking you were squeezing my hand pretty tight", as if that meant Lisa had some underlying notion there could something spiritual out there. Yeah no fucking shit she squeezed your hand; she's an eight year old and a fucking statue started talking and floating out of nowhere. Doesn't matter how smart a person is, that sort of thing will take them by surprise or even shock them if they don't see it coming.
>>
>>78000234
I don't understand why Lisa being a know-it-all bitch is supposed to be an issue. That's been a big part of her characterization since for fucking ever.
>>
File: correct right.png (1MB, 1440x810px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
correct right.png
1MB, 1440x810px
>>78000433
>>78000446
>>
>>78000402
Reminder that Brian has been established as a hypocritical pseudo-intelectual closet racist since at least season 5.
I don't understand how you guys can be this bad at watching cartoons.
>>
>>78000446
You can't always worry about likability when people you love are falling for nonsense to their detriment. And same writers who made her correct were the same ones who did the lazy last-minute "squeezing her hand" pull. I always saw it the same as >>78000530

The episode just has a shit message all around.
>>
>>78000418
>Lisa
>open minded
In what fucking universe? She preaches open-mindedness but she never applies it. Ever.
>>
>>78000526
So yes, the Scully era sucks at characterization and everybody seems to be exaggerated. But I wouldn't put this specific example in the statement. She is facing a quite jerky mob (which is not something that this episode invented, in fact a good portion of episodes is based on the Springfield town as a whole making stupid decisions and supporting ridiculous thoughts to the point of radicalism), and in that sense I could easily understand her kind of disrespectful and cynical acts because none of them were hyperbolized. As said before, the fact that I didn't find the straw that broke the camel's back is probably the basic source of my disagreement.
>>
>>78000576
The mob is hyperbolized in the sense that it has always been hyperbolized throughout all of the show's run. My problem with Lisa's behavior is that the intended realism of her response is intended to clash with something so exaggerated that it damages the credibility of the situation.
>>
>>78000446
But what the fuck is /co/'s obsession with liability?
A character being likable doesn't make them good and vice versa.
>>
>>78000585
Although I understand your point, I think the plots in the Simpsons universe don't work because the situations are credible but the reactions to them are relatable. For example: despite Homer going to space was a very cartoony, surreal premise, it worked because his fears and lack of responsibility were well-portrayed; and in the end it could be concluded that, if a guy like Homer had the opportunity to become an astronaut, this (with some humorously exaggerated traits, though) would be what happens. That's what I feel about Lisa here, not even going to analyze which plot line is more or less credible.
>>
>>78000616
think there is a difference. In Deep Space Homer, there's a clash between the outlandish and the realistic, but the latter is meant to ground the former in credibility. We can buy that Homer is an astronaut because the characters react realistically to it. In Lisa the Skeptic, Lisa's repetitious arguments, in addition to her own self-parody ("who wants to complain with me?") does very little to feel natural in response to a mob of people who willingly destroy science museums. This clash of degrees of credibility is ultimately nonsensical. How can an intelligent person like Lisa even react with the pretense of seriousness to such people? I can understand her frustration given she does have to accept the mob as part of her immediate world (thanks to the writers), but given the sheer manipulative nature of the satire that thrives on Lisa's predictable reaction to over-exaggerated fanatics, it feels forced and very much like a plot device, far from natural.
>>
>>78000506
Like, not as a joke?
Cuz that's an alright joke
>>
>>77996885
It's an entire profession which is about realizing how easy it is to get people to believe a complete lie. So yeah, magic is full of hardcore skeptics.
>>
I didn't like the "Who wants to complain with me?" line either, but I could accept it as a joke. The rest was not anything that looked bothering, nor repetitious, nor self-parodic. You make a difference between this episode and Deep Space Homer, and I have to agree with you in the fact that the Season 5 episode is probably working better as a contrast between outlandish and realistic stuff, but it's because both realities are separated and don't influence each other. In Lisa The Skeptic both the wacky (mob) and kind of grounded in reality (Lisa's reaction) situations are not so delimited. I don't see where is the problem there, though. You say that Lisa is not meant to react seriously against the mob, and I think that's not a fair argument just because of that ambiguity in the differences between one and other world. Remember that she is actually facing people who know her and probably have an established relationship; yes, Lisa could simply ignore them but it's more difficult to do that with your fellow men. On the other hand, she is forced to be a main character of the story - not only she discovered the skeleton and tried to make a theory, but Homer decided to benefit economically from the Springfieldians' beliefs and set up the angel in the Simpsons' garage. Lisa could have easily complained about them adoring the angel and I could agree with your statement if they were not having influence on her daily life, but both the fact of being the discoverer and having a merchandising campaign in her own home made a solid connection to the story. And not only that, it added a new reason for her to act: now it's not only for the sake of proving the truth, but also because of moral issues (she's also blaming Homer for using the angel idea to his own advantage).
>>
>>78000509
That's how it is with about everything in the Simpsons, you just take notice here because you don't like that characterization. Which is itself irrelevant to whether it's good for the show or not.
>>
>>78000687
About the satire being manipulative or not...well, I'm not going to contradict you in the fact that it is, but I wouldn't say it is too much or makes a problem in the general enjoyment of the episode. That's a pretty subjective thing.
>>
>>78000662
>>
>>78000558
>don't get caught up in spectacular marketing schemes
>respect other people's beliefs even if you find them stupid, if they are to change their minds they'll do it independently of you
I don't see it.
>>
The point is, I find the idea of a mob that willfully rampages through science museums and are so exaggerated for the sake of satire to inhabit one degree of credibility that rarely clashes with a more realistic world of character emotions and the like. For example, take the various Jon Lovitz and Albert Brooks characters. Usually they're an extreme stereotype, good for humor but rarely would we expect one of the series' main characters to react with a genuine emotional response to someone who is so obviously a one-note comedic construct. Could you imagine if Marge tried to talk to Jacques about her marital relationship the way Homer chooses to do with Lurleen? The former is a one-dimensional stereotype, the latter has depth.
>>
>>77998136
You're full of shit, if you've got a weird skeleton dug up then why shouldn't it be tested? Just because people freak out about it being an angel doesn't make a difference.

Especially because the only reason he didn't test it is because the mall people paid him off to keep up the con.
>>
>>78000727
Even though each has a notable effect on the narrative, there are carefully marked degrees of seriousness. Take Lisa the Iconoclast. It is believable that Lisa might take on people who hold Jebediah Springfield to some ideal; never are his supporters exaggerated to the point that they lose their credibility. I can swallow it that Moe or Apu would turn her flyers away, and the museum curator is 100% believable. But the angel supporters ARE grossly exaggerated to the point that they are obviously plot devices. They are all homogenized as 'the mob.' They are hateful, extreme, etc. This mass of people whose outrageousness might have worked in the context of a light satire or a quick joke (like most mobs in the series), are now meant to be taken dead seriously, Lisa's logical response standing in stark contrast to their manipulation by the script. It's just such a huge disparity between modes of realism. No one expects any character to react seriously and genuinely to Duffman or Disco Stu, even if they did represent a certain side of an issue being dealt with in the episode; I find it ridiculous that the writers force Lisa to react seriously to the equally cartoonish mob of hyper-fundamentalists.
>>
File: 345.jpg (4KB, 378x378px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
345.jpg
4KB, 378x378px
>>78000712

>terrorists fly two planes into buildings
>America starts two unending wars
>Americans gladly welcome Orwellian fascist police state
>Honey given literally same treatment as jews in Poland 1942
>no one says a goddamn thing

bravo burgerland
>>
>>78000666
It really doesn't help that there are people out there who use the same tricks that magicians use, except they try to pass it off as legitimate mental powers or magical ability or connection to god or whatever to con vulnerable or gullible people out of their cash. It'd be pretty fucking irritating to have people misusing your passion and means of living to cheat and steal from people, both because it's a shit thing to do and because it reflects poorly on you.
>>
>>77999383
She became Buddhist in season 13, Lisa the Skeptic was season 9
>>78000072
>second hand smoke totally doesn't exist
I was genuinely shocked when South Park slipped that bullshit into My Future Friend & Me; it's one of the most easily disproven conspiracy theories, with concrete proof that it was started by tobacco companies. The fact that they tried to push this "all of this stuff about drugs is lies from mean ol' liberals!" crap on top of it was just bizarre. Ffs, you guys already did the 'drugs aren't that bad' in "Ike's Wee Wee"!
>>78000403
It spelt Suffragette
>>
>>78000721
>if they are to change their minds they'll do it independently of you

That's not true.
>>
So when exactly did 4chan turn into an un-ironic version of that Landover Baptist Church forum?
>>
>>78000752
>>78000727
It seems we are getting the point of subjectivity here, but whatever.

In first views I really liked this episode just because I felt well supporting Lisa. Why am I saying this? Well, it's obvious that, because of the fact that I've always been biased towards it, what some of you find as annoying and obnoxious in her attitude doesn't bother me and I can easily find a justification and even be able to relate to it.

However, the episodes you bring up like Life On The Fast Lane and Colonel Homer are very unlike Lisa The Skeptic in that they're mostly 100% grounded in realism. The behavior of the mob is exaggerated, I admit it, but not really more than the typical "Springfield as a town" idea from the classic era, which has provided episodes like Marge vs the Monorail or Bart After Dark. To sum it up, I'd say there is a kind of cartoony feeling in the characterization of the mob that I like. Would it be better if they tried a more realistic development of them as a pressure group with at least some differing nuances? I dunno, but it's not that this way bothered me.

On the other hand, Lisa was taking the mob seriously because she was directly related to it (because of close relationship, plot devices). Is it odd to blend the wacky and hyperbolized reaction of a mob with the importance given to their acts by Lisa? Probably, and I understand your point. Why I don't despise it while you do is maybe too much subjective for discussion. I guess that, raising the episode as a "what if" (even if the situation seems grotesque, I appreciate it because it allows IMO to make an accurate portrayal of Lisa facing it), I can forgive the touches of unrealistic behavior way more, and in fact when analyze the episode I'm never even giving the mob the category of character, but a juncture that Lisa finds and has to deal with.
>>
>>77997429
I cant see his name and not think about him being anti-vaccination
>>
>>78000791
When moot resurrected /pol/.
>>
>>77998593
>atheism
>a religion
Stale bait.
>>
>>78000791
Because we had to purposely be the opposite of the liberal hipster atheist-dominated Reddit/Tumblr axis.
>>
>>78000791

When flags were added to /pol/ the userbase fled to /co/ and /tv/ and the mods did nothing about it. /co/ has become very shitty and /tv/ is now almost completely unusable.
>>
>>78000752
The fact that you take them seriously doesn't mean they're meant to be, anon.
>>
File: 4536.png (687KB, 612x612px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
4536.png
687KB, 612x612px
>>78000841

>we
>>
>>78000786
To elaborate, if people never encountered any conflict with their beliefs they will likely never have reason to question them. No, that doesn't mean someone has to actively attack someones beliefs, simply living in a way counter to their beliefs can be enough. But without some external push a change may never be possible.


Also, it's tolerance, not respect. They are two very different things.
>>
Homer: What am I gonna do with 10,000 angel ash trays?
Bart: I could take up smoking.
Homer: You damn well better!

"Why? Why was I programmed to feel pain?"

I think this is an above average season 9 episode. The plot is not that good but it has pretty good gags throughout. 8/10
>>
I think what bothered me more about Lisa in this episode was not that she didn't believe that the skeleton of the angel was real, it was that she stated that angels aren't real. Then she insulted her own mother's beliefs, which were much more reasonable than the mob's.
>>
>>78000785
See? This is a prime example of why I can't take you fags seriously. The whole fucking point of that episode was to show a biased view that entirely pushed tobacco and its industry as a good thing, as a parody of anti-smoking campaigns.
Or was the
>wow without tobacco farmers importing slaves we wouldn't have black friends!
Joke too subtle for you?
>>
>>78000872
see its the little jokes like that why i like The Simpsons in this era.
>>
>>78000791
When fedoras became a meme. Suddenly it wasn't contrarian enough to be an atheist. A large part of 4chan's identity is being "different" for the sake of it; there's a reason why the word hipster gets slung around from time to time.
>>
Well, this one's a bitch for me to review. In fact, I have to say this is one of the episodes I am most conflicted on in the entire series.

For starters, the satire (or lack thereof) in this episode. This would have been far more effective if some of those who believed in the angel had been portrayed as reasonable, intelligent people, but the fact that a character like Dr. Hibbert or pre-Zombie Simpsons Flanders would go along with trashing a science museum is just plain wrong. Those scenes would have been far more effective with characters such as Lenny, Carl, and Moe (although Moe as a religious zealot is a whole different can of worms). Also, this is one of the worst examples of Lisa being a preachy bitch, and quite honestly, if she acted like this all the time I would understand why some people would hate her. Where the fuck is the girl that didn't ruin the Jebediah Springfield myth for the whole town because it brought out the best in everybody? This time, she has to prove she's right so much that she will basically shit on everybody who cares about her, going so far as to estrange herself from her own mother because Marge believes in angels? Now, I disagree with quite a few of Lisa's political views, but the reason I love her character is she always keeps such an open mind about things. The biggest classic era exception, Lisa the Vegetarian, involves as a conflict her learning that she needs to keep an open mind. This isn't Lisa Simpson, this is a psycho activist bitch, and to be honest this starts from the very beginning. I'm sorry, but halting a construction project because some fossils might be buried is rather contrived, and her insistence that there's something there...she brought the whole angel conspiracy on the town by even getting involved.
>>
>>78000786
That's besides the point, stupid. Besides they did get confronted with their beliefs when it was revealed the angel was a fraud. Lisa calling them idiots didn't achieve that.
>>
>>78000920
Against overwhelming odds, I don't outright hate the episode, I just hate the plot. Quite a few of the jokes are great. the boat giveaway is a nice setpiece (and I love the callback to it), Lionel Hutz is gold as always, the honor students and detention students both going on the dig, and Homer forcing Bart to take up smoking are all quite good. Stephen Jay Gould turned in a pretty memorable guest performance and I actually like the ending and resolution to the plot, I just hate the way it gets there. The good in this episode would be like taking a piece of dog shit, and then deep-frying it and slathering it in ketchup. Some bites it would still taste like shit, other times you'd be able to forget how bad it is, and I'm willing to forget its flaws just enough to bump it up to my lowest "pass" score, an 8/15. Note that this makes it the worst of Season 9, and in fact the second worst non-clip show of the classic era (2-9)
>>
Why are a bunch of basement dwelling neets who hate other people and common courtesy talking about something inherently meant as a social experience and a cultural institution.
>>
>>78000234
She's an atheist, so what? Religious people belittle each other's religions all the time, ok you don't say those things out loud but what do Christians think of those hundreds of Hindu gods, pretty crazy eh? And oh yeah, they also think Hindus are all going to Hell forever. They can't say it because it's faith, but they wouldn't be Christians if they thought Hindus weren't hellbound. Lisa did what any sane person should do, speak out their mind and expose idiocy. She was very brave. Replace the angel with a witch and the skeleton with a living human and the "war" against science to a battle against witchcraft and you arrive to Christianity how it used to be.

I think the Smithers-Burns kiss was too much. Burns shouldn't know about Smithers's feelings.
>>
>>78000912
Or maybe people got sick of fifth column assholes sabotaging western culture in a time when the entire western way of life is under assault by pretty much everyone europeans have ever wronged in the past 500 years.
>>
>>78000972
Atheist? I thought Lisa was a Buddhist?

Anyway, I felt the fault fell on both sides with Lisa and the mob. Neither side wanted to hear or embrace what the other(s) believed. Lisa was little more aggressive in wanting the mob and her family particularly her mother to take her stance in the scientific facts of what the skeleton was, but for me it didn't really bother me when she took her stance against the mob, it only started to bother me in the clashes she had with Marge and when she told her she felt sorry for her. Other than that, I thought it was an ok episode and I give it a 3.5/5. A lot of the gags and lines in the episode made it worthwhile.
>>
>>78000992
Anyway, she is far away from literal christian. And I don't think buddhist even have a thing they could call god.
>>
The Simpsons often does a good job of representing both sides of controversial issues equally, but this is one case in which it doesn't. Actually, both sides are portrayed negatively, but Lisa is clearly shown to be the one that is right. The religious people are portrayed as complete yogurt-heads. I don't agree with them, but most religious people I know are just as intelligent as most other people, and I also don't think are anti-science like Ned Flanders, Reverend Lovejoy, Moe, et al. Also, Lisa comes off as incredibly supercilious. Aside from that stuff, this episode is okay (particularly the apocalypse part).
>>
>>78000791
When the contrarian thing became to be religious.
>>
for the longest time this was one of my least favorite episodes of the first 9 seasons. always found the whole science vs. religion thing ham-fisted and forced, and thought lisa was overly dislikable and stubborn.

just rewatched for the first time in years and i really enjoyed it. satire-wise, the whole "religion vs. science" thing feels like a proxy for the wider satire of corporations misleading and exploiting the public in the name of profit. i think this is what saves the episode from a satire point of view and gives it some weight because it's clearly thoughtfully done - they set up the mall at the beginning with lisa trying to get them to do an archaeological survey in the name of science, which turns into them doing one in the name of publicity, which leads to the angel, which loops back to the mall opening at the end. everyone running to the mall at the end, completely forgetting about the angel, because there's 20% off everything is classically simpsonian take on american consumerism. it feels right at home in the classic era.
>>
>>78001050
in fact the whole "religion vs. science" element of the episode isn't so much used as a satire as it is as an exploration of marge and lisa's relationship, and as fuel for (some very funny) jokes throughout the episode. the marge/lisa dinner conversation is the heart of the episode and says all it needs to say really. lisa is stubborn, but this is because she is young, passionate and naive. (she doesn't strike me as "a bitch" (to quote this thread) at all, and to be honest that criticism reeks of sexism) by the end of the episode she learns to be more understanding of those with faith as it doesn't necessarily make them stupid or bad people. it's delicately done, and the episode doesn't really hammer it home too much (not that it's subtle), which is nice. i think the whole "dealing with family members who are religious" is something a lot of people can relate to, and it's quite a complex subject for an episodic half-hour comedy, this episode had exactly the right ambitions.

there are clunky bits... i always find the bit where the mob destroy all the scientific buildings in town a bit cringeworthy and over the top... it all feels a bit lazy and unnecessary to the plot/point of the episode. but even then it delivers a couple of decent gags ("why was i programmed to feel pain" & the news report where brockman reports on the mob burning down scientific buildings, only for the building in the background to be a christian science center, are great).
>>
>>77998212
A lot of them mellow out too, as they get older. I know a lot of reformed bullies.
>>
>>78000920
Moe's a polack, why wouldn't he be religious?
I don't see how stopping a construction because there are likely archeological remains is contrived, it happens all the time.
>>
>>78000944
>this guy has a numeric rating for every Simpsons episode
>it's on 15
That is a unique autism. Cherrish it.
>>
http://www.redkid.net/generator/simpsons/7.php

Oh shit, that MS Paint autist has gotten out of /co/.
>>
>>77997905
This.

In Murricah (aka backwater land), criticising someone's religion and/or their penchant for refusing to adhere to empirical scrutiny is one of the gravest sins one can commit.
>>
>>78000980
What the fuck are you talking about? Challenging the status quo is notoriously western. It's only fitting that you have people who "attack" it.
>>
>>78001005
Buddhism is originally a bastardization of Hinduism, and while Buddha was more into the whole reincarnation thing he never denied gods. After that it gets more complicated the more Buddhism travelled, as some forms treat Buddha himself as a God and others just mixed Buddha in with their previous gods (Shinto Buddhism).
American Buddhism, again, is just new age hippie bullshit.
>>
>>78001063
I used "bitch" as a bit of a hyperbole. She's a child, I understand you're meant to be forgiving to them.
It wasn't sexist in the least, just a gendered insult. If it was a guy I'd have said "dick" (for instance: Dawkins is a dick) and I'm sure you'd have no issue with that.
>>
>>78000260
This anon made my point for me: >>78000415
The problems with organized religion, or even just religion in general, are not exclusive to them. Russia has gone through a slew of charismatic, authoritarian leaders of various political and religious stripes. The common factor isn't any of their ideologies or histories, but the people who accept, justify, or even glorify their rule. The issues some hard atheist seem to think "getting rid" of religion will solve can't actually be solved by getting rid of religion. They originate much deeper in humanity. It's like prohibition and thinking it'll in anyway address the vices of mankind. The problem was never alcohol, and people still want it anyway. It's a remarkable unpractical viewpoint of the world, rooted more in idealism than any sort of conception of how such a world would work.
>>
>>78001362
I didn't say other dogmatic organizations couldn't share the same issues as religious organizations, just that that doesn't make them religious.

And yes, tribalism and conflicts exist outside of religion, only an uneducated or obfuscatingly stupid person would think otherwise.
>>
>>78001429
Oh never mind, you were agreeing with me.
>>
>>78000840
Hard Atheism is a religion no matter how much hard atheists deny it.
>>
>>78001460
It literally isn't.
>>
>>78001460
It may be similarly annoying, but no.
>>
>>77996033
Is that Charles Bronson?
>>
>>78000763
I want to laugh at burgers but sadly France is welcoming the Orwellian nightmare as well: http://motherboard.vice.com/read/after-paris-attacks-proposed-french-law-would-block-tor-and-forbid-free-wi-fi
>>
How come no one is blaming Paul and Linda McCartney for turning Lisa vegan in the first place?
>>
>>78000712
Based Dawkins
>>
>>78000944
How can it rate worse than Trouble With Trillions? That episode felt like the writer was making shit up as he went along with the script, rather than laying out the plot beforehand, and the humour basically disappears by the second half.
>>
>>78000992
Buddhists technically are atheists, as there is no deity in that religion.
>>
>>78002631
Depends on the branch.
>>
>>78002705
Except Buddha himself rejected the very idea of a deity.
>>
>>78001965
No Dice.
>>
>>78002631
There's a shitload of deities in buddhism, you pleb.
>>
>>78002802
No there isn't.
>>
>>78002817
I don't know what your life counselor told you at yoga class but there's a lot about buddhism that you don't understand. I suggest some very basic reading on Buddhism before continuing to discuss the subject. Even a basic encyclopedia article should improve your understanding a lot.

Namaste.
>>
>>78002886
Are you referring to Vajarana? Theravada? Mahayana?
>>
>>78002766
Not exactly. A god is someone who accumulated enough good karma to reincarnate into the godly realm. They are powerful and enjoy a pleasant existence, but can no longer achieve enlightenment so eventually they fall do to a loss of karma and reincarnate as a lower form of life, usually human.
>>
I don't get why she was against the businessman who organised the whole stunt at the end.

They were both out after the same goal. Only the businessman wanted money too.
>>
>>77996560
That doesn't mean she'd gone back on her position.

She was a little girl who would obviously be scared of that. Hell, it's a little creepy to see that skeleton there under a red sky.

Even if she did doubt - briefly - that's completely forgivable anyway because, again, little girl with typical little girl outlook on life.

Wasn't it nice when you could actually defend Lisa as a character in some way?

This show, in particular this episode, taught me to reason a lot for myself as a child. What I just told you, I have held as an opinion from when I saw it onwards.

It taught me to justify my position with arguments.
>>
>>77997042
the reason people think he's mean is because he's grumpy as fuck and quite abrupt.

It's still a pathetic reason to dismiss him, speaking as an atheist, and I'd still say that to anyone who does.

But he still conducts himself poorly, and that's half the time why they dismiss him.

It's not an excuse, but it's important to know that about people and if he did, maybe e'd realise that he's hal his own undoing when trying to convince people.

But he is actually quite nice and softly spoken if you watch closely on his speeches interviews etc.

he just needs to be a bit more polite for his own sake.

Tell peopel they talk shit, yes, but with a tone and manenr that doesn't knowingly offend them. Then, the only offensive thing is the thing you are telling them and if they react like babies to that, that's their decision and they have no excuse like 'But he was meeeaan.'

TLDR Be upfront but don't be a cunt.
>>
>>77997429
Saw it and looked up half his stuff. It's mostly bullsh*t
>>
>>77996704
Could have been one of The Fallen. Or a Nephellim.
>>
File: 1363836574014.jpg (38KB, 640x480px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1363836574014.jpg
38KB, 640x480px
>>78003649
>bullsh*t
Just say bullhonkey you faggot.
>>
>>78000961

Because neets are people too.
>>
>>78002012
Every western country does.
Just as they always did.
>>
>>77999409
I agree.
There's neat parlor tricks ("OOOH, I GUESSED YOUR FAVORITE BAAAND!") and then there's instilling vulnerable people with false hope in exchange for a hefty profit.
>>
File: BEEL BEEL BEEL.png (117KB, 315x397px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
BEEL BEEL BEEL.png
117KB, 315x397px
>>77999973
>Implying that war, conflict, and violence are born purely out of religious tensions and not because it is human nature to engage in competition and fuck with people to take their shit
>>
>>78000383
This guy gets it.
>>
>>78002602
>Mr. BURNS, I think we can trust the PRESIDENT OF CUBA.
>Oh, alright. Okay, now give it back.
>Give what back?
>Oh...
>>
So is "fedora" a substitute for "I'm a brainwashed imbecile who believes in fairy tales in 2016 and the only rebuttal I can offer to atheists is a meme that implies they're uncool fat guys who live in a basement?"
>>
File: 1416090749819.gif (726KB, 300x168px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1416090749819.gif
726KB, 300x168px
>>78005438
Hey there, aptheist here.
Fedora is meant to symbolize how some people deem themselves "euphoric", as in inherently superior to other people because they don't share the simple needs they may have. Most commonly those would be the need to believe and the need to fuck. Some people who profess that are indeed fat neckbearded turds who wear a fedora and are super proud of owning a trench coat.

It's definitely a strawman, but it's not like many atheists can do any better. Just look at yourself.
>>
>>78005438
No, it's a substitute for you getting euphoric from being so much better and more enlightened then all those sheeple who worship a sky wizard.
>>
>>78005534
>aptheist
Apatheist. I certainly am not apt.
>>
>>78005438
Basically, yeah.

They know their shit is retarded, but they get butthurt when people point it out.
>>
>>77996202
Dawkins was always superior though...
>>
File: 1436822119571.png (192KB, 365x359px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1436822119571.png
192KB, 365x359px
>>77997101
>not liking bullshit
>>
>>77996858
He's not a G-d fearing Christian, so naturally 4chan hates him.
>>
File: Exquisite.png (629KB, 556x721px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
Exquisite.png
629KB, 556x721px
>>78000980
I love this. You guys act like atheists are part of some big secular agenda. Please, name for me a single member of congress that's not religious.
>>
>>77997472
>bill maher doesnt go after muslimes

Have you been living under a rock? Just Youtube "Bill Maher Islam" and see how many results you get. Now do the same thing with Christianity (or any other religion for that matter) and count the results.
>>
>>77996837
>>77997905
So his crime is not being politically correct.
Good to know.
>>
>>77997578
If Universe was designed, then who designed the designer? If designer was designed, who designed that one? Are there turtles all the way down or are we going to admit that incredibly complex systems CAN just happen?

It is conceivable that God might exist, but for all intents and purposes he might as well not, because there's no properties to deduce from claim that someone had to create the Universe. And to suggest that there's one book that accurately describes God is plain absurd. If I lower my standards enough for Bible, it will also be low enough for Quaran, whatever Hindus read, Wicca, all the ancient polytheistic religions, Zoroastrianism and whatever cosmology I randomly come up with the next minute because maybe THIS is a divine revelation.
>>
>>77996033
that part really did justify the whole stupid episode
>i didn't do the tests
i love that he was so willing to make fun of himself

the rest of it was irritating. nobody believes angels are wingety people, and certainly nobody believes they can die and leave a corpse.
>>
>>78006407
Nah it's being a dick about it.
It's not a crime, just a reason people may not like you, including people who agree with you.
>>
>>77999864
>that image
>that text

You're one dense motherfucker.
>>
>>78006443
Well, presumably if an entity that predated literally everything else exists, it seems likely it also created and is exempt from things like causality.
>>
>>77999520
>"punctuated equilibrium"
>largely disproved

d'oh ho ho.
>>
>>78000791
After 4chan became more sincerely conservative and religious, it also got a lot dumber.
Coincidence? I think not.
>>
>>78006443
It's entirely possible (by extrapolation) that an incredibly complex system just happened, which lead to intelligent design. The question of whether our universe was created by intelligent design is not null and void simply because you can argue that intelligent design happened by happenstance or was itself created by intelligent design (which itself happened by happenstance). And hey, who's to say it isn't turtles all the way down?

>It is conceivable that God might exist, but for all intents and purposes he might as well not
That's how I personally live my life.

>It is conceivable that God might exist, but for all intents and purposes he might as well not
But absurd is certainly not impossible. There's a definite possibility that, by happenstance, of the religions existing in all of the worlds inhabited by intelligent beings of the universe, one is mostly correct.

Hey don't diss Zoroastrim, it's alright.
>>
>>77999520
>largely disproved "punctuated equilibrium" hypothesis
It's still debated, but not as widely accepted anymore

>Dawkins is indisputabley the greatest Biologist alive today
????????????????
>>
>>78006625
How is he being a dick? He only says his honest opinion that religion is bad. Why do atheists have to pretend that they think religion is good? I don't just not believe in God, I think it's bad that anyone does. Deliberately basing decisions off of superstition is wrong.
>>
>>78006727
Ah see, this guy is clever, I posted a lot of shit and boom, that's the only point that needed to be made.
>>
>>78006820
Incoming fedora maymay retort.
>>
>>78000791
/pol/
>>
>>78006727
>My worldview makes no sense that proves that there's an entity that doesn't have to make sense running the show
Hey, Thomas Aquinas, I thought you were dead.
>>
>>78006793
As I said, effectively lowering my critical standards to accept one religion will mean I have to accept all of them.

It takes huge lack of perspective to be religious. To be unable to even conceive that other worldviews might be right. At best religious arguments, however weak support Deism. Only with shutting down all logic and reason you can come to believe you should pick one.
>>
>>78006820
He comes off as condescending. Whether he's correct that he's smarter than the person he's talking with is irrelevant, he'll still come off as a dick because of it.

You can think what you want, if what you think is that one of your opinions makes you smarter than people with a differing opinion (and you have no shame in affirming so), you'll appear as a dick to your opponents and neutrals alike.
>>
>>78006820
What's it like to be socially retarded?

Anti-theist atheists are like those fundamentalists who might treat you well at first but the moment they find out you're Catholic they'll go on a rant about how you're part of a pagan cult that corrupted Christianity and will go to Hell.

Are you starting to understand why no one likes vocal atheists? It's even worse for you fags because you have no divine instruction to preach your beliefs so any time you need to debate someone it's purely to stroke your own egos like a chronic masturbator.
>>
>>78006748
PE cant explain something like, for example, the human eye. You need gradual change for that.
>>
>>78006903
>As I said, effectively lowering my critical standards to accept one religion will mean I have to accept all of them.
I guess.

I can accept that most any religion can be correct by happenstance without actually believing in any of them.

>To be unable to even conceive that other worldviews might be right.
Well that's an issue that's far from unique to religious beliefs.
>>
>>78006865
Why is something not making sense not conceivable?
>>
>>78000791
It's called "4chan syndrome." Being contrarian for the sake of being contrarian, no matter how stupid it is.
>>
>>78007000
Because poorly constructed arbitrary assumptions you yourself demonstrate to be nonsensical do not prove that logic is left the building.
>>
>>78006940
PE never says that gradual change doesn't happen.

It's just that over the entire fossil record, large scale changes happen comparatively rapidly.
>>
>>78007030
But I didn't ask why it was unproven, I asked why it was inconceivable.
I believe anon's point was precisely that things we consider to be nonsense could conceivably exist.
The classical response to that would be Russell's teapot.

Aquinas was wrong because he said God definitely exists because he could conceivably exist.
>>
>>78007123
It can conceivably exist but it would be giving up on reason. It's a rather odd argument to make.
To make assumptions that contradict themselves and cite as a proof rather then concluding you were wrong in your premises.
>>
Stephen Jay Gould was an atheist, but belonged to a local Church choir because he understood the social and cultural value of religion.
>>
>>78007165
The big problem with religion is that it is in perpetual state of arrested development. Changing secular dogma is hard, but changing dogma that allegly comes from infailable source is nigh impossible until it became so different from reality authority has to admit "Well, uhm, maybe everything we claim we learned from God is bollocks... I mean should not be taken literally"
>>
>>77997733
Maybe because it was written terribly you idiot.
>>
>>78007157
>giving up on reason. It's a rather odd argument to make.
I mean not really when it comes to deity. Hell that's pretty much the whole point of the concept: that there is such a thing that reason can not explain.

I should clarify that I'm not the anon who made the original argument.
>>
>>77996831
>her learn a lesson about tolerating the beliefs of those different from her?
I find this to be a rather wonky lesson. Why should Lisa tolerate those she perceive as murderers?
And I find it really unfortunate that so many people feel entitled to be tolerated no matter how irreconcilable world-views are.
>>
>>78007307
Fine, go fuck yourself.
>>
>>77997578
My 2 cents is adults that literally believe in magic and a book that constantly contradicts itself and take it all literally deserve ridicule. Ancient aliens is more believable than any religion.
>>
>>77996837
>And lately he's gone full /pol/ with the racism.
He hasn't said anything racist though. Islam is not a race
>>
>>78007756
They're arabs, anon. He hates arabs every bit as much as he hates muslims.
>>
>>78007755
Ancient aliens is indeed a stupid thing to believe in. But it's no business of mine if somebody wants to believe in ancient aliens. If you can't say anything nice, etc. etc. It shouldn't stop people from being friendly or at least respectable to each other.

Now if they're the ones to bring it up and they're all stuck-up about it, sure, then put them in their place.

Same with magic invisible sky wizards.
>>
>>78001234

That's because in America, religion is much more personal and individualized than in elsewhere- attacking someone's religion by name, instead of what they believe, is stupid bordering on retarded.
>>
>>77999520
I actually never heared of Dawkins before some other guys told me he used the story of evolution to prove religion is unscientific.

That was a scientific argument I found very unscientific.
>>
>>77999846
Worse is that it was basically a retread of Lisa the Vegetarian.
>>
>>78005622
>They know their shit is retarded, but they get butthurt when people point it out.

You mean like you're doing now?
>>
>>78009436
>story
>>
>>77997041
Fuck, I think I had part of that article for some SAT questions.
>>
>>77998164
Sagan talked to a wider audience. Cosmos ran opposite of professional wrestling and Hee-haw. In some sense it's more admirable because it's more populist. On the other hand, trying to appeal to the masses cost him a tenured position at Harvard.

Gould wrote like the college professor that he was. He expected more out of his audience. There would be times where you might struggle to understand what he was saying, but that's part of being a "student."

Both approaches are fine, they're just different styles. What I liked about Gould is that he didn't think poorly of people if they didn't get it. He's the sort of guy I'd be equally comfortable attending a lecture by him, or going out to a Red Sox game and having a beer with.
>>
>>77997578

Atheism doesn't involve making positive claims about the origins of the universe, it's a skeptical position. Atheism by no definition involves saying anything "with absolutely certainty", it involves saying 'you shouldn't believe in deities without absolute proof'.
>>
>>78007816
My issue is when people try to force their beliefs on people, which usually holds back society, like trying to prevent evolution in school. Many will argue that "they aren't all like that" and that's true but the thing is, the holy books all encourage that behavior so the issue still lies within the faith itself. I'm not one of those idiots who thinks that we would achieve world peace without religion but I do think we would be able to make the world a much better place.

Not saying I want to force people to abandon their religion, I just wish they'd choose too.
>>
>>78010989
>They aren't all like that but their holy books...

Yeah, the holy books are filled with all kinds of crazy shit.

The thing is, it's kind of like atheists. A few committed assholes make the whole group look bad.

Most of the christians who go to church really do it to socialize. Their grandparents are there. Or their elderly parents are there. Or they themselves are elderly and it's just a routine. They'll sit half asleep while some dick sermonizes on and on. Then they'll have a friendly chat and gossip for a bit, milling about. Maybe they'll see an old friend from high school 40 years ago, the one who has a bad knee and doesn't get out very often, but church is a chance to say hi, and see how their kids are doing.

Honestly, I think most of them are probably atheists, in the sense that they don't really believe any of that shit, but just all agree to go to church and go through the paces, and go along to get along. If you conduct surveys of church-going people, piety is inverse proportional to age. "God and spirituality" is for the young, old go for the community. Except, of course, when it comes to the assholes.
>>
>>77996698

South Park got him right. He's convinced his atheism makes him smarter than others, which gives him license to be an absolute dick to others. He finds believers, even benign ones, contemptuous and treats them as such.
>>
>>77999409
You don't have to be an atheist to think those people are the scum of the earth. Them and faith healers....
>>
>>78012450
Indeed.
>>
>>77997041
>>77997159
>But dinosaurs never became a big or truly pervasive cultural icon, and some decades largely ignored them

Man, as an 80s babby I always assumed dinosaurs were big, instead of just happening to be big in my time.
>>
>>78006316
>Please, name for me a single member of congress that's not religious

I'd say probably half the Democrat Party regardless of whatever religion they nominally identify with.
>>
>>78013854
You're joking, right?
>>
>>78014289
>I've never heard of a cultural Christian, cultural Jew, etc
>>
>>78014677
No, don't give me that meme shit. If someone says they're religious, they're religious. I asked you if you could name a single one that's non-religious, which you've yet to do.
>>
File: 1449507011694.png (560KB, 732x555px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1449507011694.png
560KB, 732x555px
Imagine being Dawkins right now

>be Richard Dawkins
>become famous for being the king of atheists
>you and your followers criticize Christianity for years
>abortion is being legalized
>gays are being accepted
>basically bitchslapped Christianity into tolerating new changes
>feel like you are doing good
>now a few years later in comes another religion
>this one is 10 times more sexist, bigoted and hateful than Christianity
>think to yourself "well me and the people who helped me last time will be on this"
>everysingle person who supported you become turncoats because the new religion is a "minority"
>for some reason you are not allowed to criticize anything about them
>you get completely shat on by everyone for keeping with your original beliefs and doing what you always did and sticking with your gun

I don't particularly like Dawkins but he's kept his principals and beliefs despite everyone who liked him hating him now

In a way I pity him
>>
>>78015167
>No, don't give me that meme shit. If someone says they're religious, they're religious

Einstein considered himself a cultural Jew even though he thought the Torah was old silly superstition, same with Isaac Asimov. So...w/e.
>>
>>78003742
technically, aren't fallen angels even more fake than real angels? After falling, Satan basically just became "smoke, mirrors, and lies" and still need people to genuinely believe in him to so much as appear.

Nephilim are a gray area though, I mean Goliath descended from them, didn't he?
>>
>>78015220
>basically bitchslapped Christianity into tolerating new changes

t. I can now go in a church with a transgender minister lylsoprogressive XD
>>
>>78015227
It hardly matters what someone 'thinks', the literal definition of non-religious is not following a religion. How about I rephrase this - can you name a single atheist in Congress? Or the Supreme Court? Or the White House, for that matter?
>>
>>78015352
t. I'm not really an atheist unless I join a Pussy Riot mob and smear menstrual blood on the altar of a church
>>
>>77999973
>Being this retarded

Soviet Union in the past; North Korea today. Both were/are official atheist states.

>imaginary friend in the sky
>Superstitious people

Nice job hitting all the buzz words too.
>>
>>78015220
More like, Dawkins can't accept the fact that he's a human-shaped meme well past his prime. "Keeping his principles and beliefs" thus becomes like a stupid dingus still posting advice dog on /b/.
>>
Religion is a disease, a cancer that retards science, enlightenment, and progress at every turn. Science allows us to be on the Internet having this conversation. Religion allows you to be burned for witchcraft.
>>
>>77996033

probably my favorite episode.
>>
I just have a hard time taking atheists seriously. Why would you spend all your energy raging against something that doesn't exist? I don't spend every waking moment whining about Batman or ponyshit. It's stupid.
>>
>tfw Lisa episodes are somehow still getting worse
>>
>>78016745
No matter how bad it gets, always remind yourself that it can get worse. They used to think All Singing, All Dancing was the show's lowest point.
>>
>>78016598
Batman does not affect politics. Now imagine there would be widespread imitations of Batman beating people they don't like and lobby of legalization of it.
>>
>>78011274
Man maybe it's just where I'm from but the churches around here are not that chill. Granted I'm in southern illinois, which is basically northern kentucky
>>
>>78011274
So why do they claim to believe in sky wizard when they clearly don't? If they did they wouldn't negotiate and put words in his mouth, so why aren't they just accept they are atheists and don't give a shit about their god?
>>
>>78016598
there aren't a lot of people who believe that Batman and MLP are actually real.
>>
>>78017028

Fear of what comes after death, maybe.
>>
>>78017028
because they give a shit about their social life, a good chunk of which revolves around seeing everyone at church once a week
>>
>>78017100
If you trade your consciousness for social life, don't be surprised when someone looks down on you for this.
>>
>>78016598
I'll damn well get pissed when Harry Potter is used an an excuse to pass laws controlling how I use my penis.
>>
>>78016598
It's not the fictional being, its the fan following. Nobody hates Rainbow Dash, but they do hate her fans.
>>
>>78017342
Waahhhh why can't I be a degenerate those mean old Christfags won't let me go in a bathhouse and have anal sex with 450 men a month.
>>
>>78017399
What's wrong with homosexuals aside from your ancient book telling you they're sinners.
>>
>these poor persecuted atheists

Outside of the South and Utah, nobody cares what your religion is.
>>
>>78016598
Why do theists spend all of their energy believing in something that doesn't exist?
>>
>>78017454
Utter rubbish. Polls have consistently shown that atheists are the most mistrusted religious "group" in America after Muslims. Almost half of Americans would not elect an atheist to public office.
>>
>>78016598
I think it's more accurate to say why would you define yourself by a negative? I don't know of a-Harry Potterists or a-Spidermanists.
>>
>>78017476
Probably because all godless heathens do is whine on the internet about how no one respects them.
>>
>>78017502
Kind of good point. I can go to Christian websites and never (or rarely) hear atheists mentioned but sites like the richarddawkins.net forum are nothing but butthurt and whining about Christians.

Obviously one side is more insecure about their beliefs and it sure isn't the religionfags.
>>
File: 1449301195754.png (114KB, 256x256px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1449301195754.png
114KB, 256x256px
>>78017399
>degenerate
>people use this word with an ounce of sincerity
>on 4chan
>>
>>78017539
>insecure about their beliefs

>atheism
>a belief
How do I explain this...
>>
>>78017554
Atheism - the belief there is no supreme being
>>
>>78017502
First of all, you seem to insist each person must have one identity. As an atheist my position is that god isn't real and my political position is that I don't want believe in god which isn't real to inform political discourse (Which happened before, happens right now and will happen in the future, particularly if not opposed). What do I believe and what I oppose is completely irrelevant to the question but don't presume my entire worldview is about what I don't believe.
>>
>>78017471
I consider myself an agnostic personally - I think there is definitely a higher power of some kind but I don't know if it's Jesus or Buddha or Shiva or Odin.
>>
>>78017604
"Agnostics are atheists without balls."

-- Jon Stewart
>>
>>78017622
Well you can't prove there isn't a god and you can't prove there is one. It goes both ways.
>>
>>78017153
Iv been an atheist for years. My family has no idea because they would literally disown me.
Thankfully I don't live at home and thus no longer get dragged to church every Sunday but i always feel awkward when my mom asks me to pray for something
>>
>>78017539
The issue I take is that atheism seems to have nothing to offer its followers except butthurt about the other guy's religion. It doesn't offer any spiritual comfort or any guidelines to live by as Christians do or Muslims or Buddhists or anything. Why would I follow such a pointless system of belief?
>>
>>78017679
facepalm.jpg

Atheists isn't a belief, moron. It's the non-belief in a sky wizard. It's not supposed to have any guidelines except "Live life on your own terms and don't let silly religious dogmas hold you back from having a good time."
>>
>>78017711
t. having nothing to restrain you from being a degenerate
>>
>>78017733
>using ancient storybooks to dictate how I can and cannot use my penis
>>
>>78017733
>I need sky wizard to restrain myself from being a degenerate.
>>
>>78017679
Why do you need an ancient book to guide you through life?
>>
>>78017733
if the only reason you're not a bad person is you don't want to go to hell, you're already a bad person.
>>
>>78017679
Sounds like you're suggesting convenience is the best way to decide what is real.
>>
>>78017641
Prove it
>>
>>78017679
>The issue I take is that atheism seems to have nothing to offer its followers except butthurt about the other guy's religion
You spend way too much time on the internet.
>>
>>78017767
Degeneracy isn't bad because religion said so, religion said it was bad because it is.
>>
>>78017755
Hey, enjoy dying at 40 of a drug OD or AIDS.
>>
>>78017799
Take away the police for a day and see how civil the average person is.
>>
>>78017849
Those are problems BUT science will find cures for them. If you ever saw Star Trek, the 24th century was a world where STDs had all been cured a long time ago and people had no need of religious dogmas.
>>
>>78017875
What's your point?
>>
>>78017875
It might be average to be bad, what's your point?
>>
>>78017875
>>78017931
>>78017933
Most people are not exactly nice at all and need fear of punishment to restrain their more base urges.
>>
>atheists admit their real beef with religion is that it stops them from fucking everything that moves

Move along, nothing more to see here.
>>
>>78018010
There's nothing wrong with sex except the possibility of contracting a disease, but that's what science is for.
>>
>>78018010
If God didn't want us to fuck he wouldn't have made sex feel so good.
>>
>>78018010
My beef is that it holds back science and enlightenment. The Western world only got modern science and education after rejecting Christian fascism. Before the 18th-19th centuries, Europe was like Saudi Arabia. Witch burnings, wars, heretics persecuted.
>>
>>78018070
>>78018010
Sex is like anything else. Healthy if applied properly and in moderation. Neither excessive prudishness or San Francisco gay pride week degeneracy are good for you.
>>
>>78017875
there was a time in history, and there are still civilizations, although small and more hunter-gatherer that dont have police and they arent all inherently shit. People form societies to survive and not being shits helps everyone kin or soon to be kin because you kin may reproduce with them thus passing on your genes is in your best interest. you're just a shit thats looking for an excuse to be a shit and still act like you're better than people by claiming everyone else is shittier than you. you can be assured that there is no one shittier than you, and deep down you know it
>>
>>78018857
You kind of proved that laws are needed in any complex society.
>>
>>78018099
That's quite an oversimplification. If anything, the modern Middle East is way more retrograde than Europe was in the Renaissance except in terms of having modern technology.
>>
>>78018099
>>78018913
Islam is a much more fascistic religion than Christianity desu.
>>
>>78018938
Well...it has a lot more primitive theology. The core doctrine of Islam is just "Do what the Koran says or we'll kill you." That's probably why 90% of Muslims are Third Worlders; it's a religion that's very easy for uneducated people to digest.
>>
We need to abandon primitive religious doctrines entirely and move towards a scientific, secular enlightenment.
>>
>>78019090
Already tried that during the 20th century. Killed 100 million people and produced a bunch of miserable totalitarian shitholes.
>>
>>78010767
You shouldn't believe in dieties for the same reason you shouldn't believe in leprechauns and unicorns. It's incredibly childish and obviously bullshit.
>>
>>78019129
Since when is a bureaucratic communist tyranny "scientific, secular enlightenment".
>>
>>78019185
Define "scientific, secular enlightenment" for us.
>>
>>78019200
You ever seen Star Trek? Something like that where the world of the future is ruled by science and such concepts as religion and marriage have been obsoleted.
>>
File: 1407531595085.jpg (39KB, 478x373px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1407531595085.jpg
39KB, 478x373px
>>78019285
>marriage have been obsoleted
3/10, I barely even believe you to begin with
>>
>>78019285
Don't you know that Gene Roddenberry was a drug addict fedora who died of health problems caused by drug abuse?
>>
>>78019090
Dr. Breen PLZ.
>>
>>78016598

Indeed. One would think one of the main benefits of not belonging to a religion would be having no obligation towards the various little rituals and customs that plague organized faith, not making up new ones on the spot that in perspective are utterly pointless.
>>
Why theists defending God? Is he not powerful enough to argue for himself directly?
>>
>>78019432
I guess their faith isn't as strong as they say it is. Somebody else not believing is enough to throw them into a panic.
>>
>>78019502
Projecting much, fedora boy?
>>
>>78019660
What do you mean.
>>
>>78019695
That it seems to me that atheists are more insecure than any Christian I know because >>78017539
>>
>>78019720
>Dawkins
>the Pope of atheism
If I didn't know better, I'd swear he was trying to make a funny.
>>
>>77999973
Funny how the Soviets came closer to doing as much than any terrorists ever did. They had a, shall we say, religious devotion to the concept of the historical didactic. Meaning glorious communism would inevitably win over corrupt capitalism and by Lenin they had a duty to spread the good word.

Get rid of all religion and people will apply the same mindset to something else. Dawkins reminds me more of an evangelical pastor than a serious intellectual.
>>
>>78020436

pretty much all of this
>>
>>78020436
It's human nature to worship something. Dawkins and his crew have just made science their deity instead of Jesus. They'll deny it, but they have their own gods.
>>
>>78010767
And yet so many act like it even so.
>>
>>78017471
Why do atheists consider themselves superior when they do the exact same thing?
>>
File: 1424072286891.png (122KB, 500x333px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1424072286891.png
122KB, 500x333px
>>77999520
This
Dawkins' contributions to the world cannot be rivaled.
>>
>>78017622
Atheists will always be buttmad that agnostics are their intellectual superiors.
>>
>>78020723
It's not that he's a stupid guy, he's just a guy who tried to fashion himself as an expert on religion when he has minimal knowledge of Christian theology or history beyond a few shallow stereotypes.

A lot of people are geniuses in their particular field, but when they try to venture outside of it, they go over their heads and make asses of themselves. It's no different than Einstein calling nationalism an infantile disease. He may have created the theory of relativity, but his knowledge of history and politics were pretty thin.
>>
>>78017711
Seems like a belief that religious people are wrong. Ergo it makes a statement about the nature of the universe that no appeal to semantics can undo.

Proof: tons of atheists bitching online, Dawkins, etc. No, I don't care if you say they aren't "true" athiests. The No True Scotsman Fallacy works both ways.
>>
File: 1424711831714.jpg (30KB, 600x600px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1424711831714.jpg
30KB, 600x600px
>>77996837
>>77998240

Nothing but slander, huh?

Good job getting your opinions from memes and celebrities, I guess.
>>
>>78020436
>Funny how the Soviets came closer to doing as much than any terrorists ever did. They had a, shall we say, religious devotion to the concept of the historical didactic. Meaning glorious communism would inevitably win over corrupt capitalism and by Lenin they had a duty to spread the good word.

It depends. Stalin seemed to just be interested in his own power and recreating the Russian Empire in a communist wrapping. During WWII, he said "What fool would fight for Marxism-Leninism?"

But then after him came Khrushchev who had this naive, almost messianic belief in the superiority of socialism.
>>
>>77996894
I'm more agnostic than atheist, but regardless, that's exactly how I feel about Mahr. I want to jump in to a religion and throw off all skepticism just to spite him.
>>
"You don't need God. You have us Democrats."

-- Nancy Pelosi
>>
File: otherkin.jpg (239KB, 540x2379px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
otherkin.jpg
239KB, 540x2379px
>>78020745

Agreed. I also give otherkin the benefit of the doubt. There is no way to prove they weren't animals/monsters/fictional characters in another life or dimension and there are so many of them making the same claim that there MUST be something to it - something science can't quite explain.

>inb4 buttmad fedoracore atheists
>>
>>77999520
That quote is fake, right?
>>
>>78020932
Not if you believe it isn't.
>>
>>78020871
Autism is a hell of a drug
>>
>>78005303
Problem with that scene was how out of character Mr Burns was.
>>
>>78016598
For the same reason people spend their energy raging against football (the real kind, not american): it's meaningless bullshit people literally kill eachother over.
>>
File: 3389.jpg (50KB, 557x711px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
3389.jpg
50KB, 557x711px
ITT
>>
>>78017153
>doesn't realize he's talking about social media
>doesn't realize he's on a social image board
>>
>>78021246
Man, the fedora is truly the slut of all memes. First it was used for feminists, then for MRAs, then for atheists, without rhyme or reason.

Funny, considering all of those groups are full of virgins.
>>
>>78020979
eh, Mr Burns has been fairly consistently shown as extremely naive due to how emotionally stunted he is. He has trouble conceiving of people doing bad things because he's spent close to a century getting everything he wants, mostly interacting with people too scared of him to do anything but grovel.
>>
>>78000233
Well apparently you American "Christians"(Jews) can follow God while ignoring everything Jesus said so why not.
>>
>>78021344
>without rhyme or reason
he fallout of the failed atheism+ movement, which was about being a progressive, politically (snrk) active atheist. There was already a good chunk of people in atheist circles that where just in it for the smug superiority, and the conflict between those two quickly devolved into tribal warfare, one tribe being SJW's, and the other being edgelords, and everyone in said atheist communities being told to pick a side or get out, which let said tribes' rhetorics dominate discussion on social media
>>
>>78016598
I think most atheists are against using religion as a thing to justify to your actions. Back in Afghanistan War during Cold War, Americans sided with jihadist "freedom fighters" as they called them and Carter and Reagan called it the right from God for the muslims to fight their holy war(not that I'm saying Soviet Union attacking in Afghanistan was any better). This started the snowball effect, leading to the rise of Taliban in the mid-90's and Afghanistan going back to the middle ages because of the sharia-law. Then later Bush said that God told him to the "end the tyranny in Iraq" which had catastrophic results. Do you not see anything wrong with this kind of behavior? Sane atheists don't hate people believing in things, I think that following Jesus if pretty good and positive thing. Justifying your actions in the name of religion is what tarnished the name of religions.
>>
>>77999973

Wars are motivated by economics. All of them. Every single last one of them. No matter what someone tells you the justification was in the end and in the beginning it was always about resources. War is a very effective means of acquiring them. Always has been always will be. The next war will be fought because someone wants something and the next one after that and the one after that. No matter what anyone tells you it was fought over. Putting religion in the front just makes it look nicer. Taking away religion isn't going to stop wars and its not going to lower the threat of nuclear annihilation. Strip religion away entirely and wars will still be fought just under different banners and causes. Humanitarianism has been a big one in the 21st century. Really religion itself is no likelier to end the world than Harry Potter.
>>
File: 1438256562603.jpg (42KB, 639x480px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1438256562603.jpg
42KB, 639x480px
>>78016598
Do you seriously think that a secular society is the status quo? When creationism is taught in American schools and teenagers off themselves in Gay Conversion camps?
>>
>>78019319
You're right, how else are we gonna legally force men to pay child support?
>>
>>78015220
>>be Richard Dawkins
>>become famous for being the king of atheists

>Be famous for new discoveries in a particular sub-field of biology.
>Writes a shit-ton of books about his field of experise
>Invents the term 'meme'.
>Becomes more famous years later for opposing religious nutjobs in TV debates.
>Writes even more books promoting science for laymen and kids
>Starts trying to communicate via Twitter when it normally takes him over a 100pages to even get started on a topic
>Gets abused for not pandering to the crybullies
>>
>>77996858
yeah, but he's a conspiratard new atheist who does exactly what ISIS wants him to do when he engages in Islamophobia.

> In a striking echo of the former American president's words, Isil – which I will call Daesh – has articulated its own vision of an apocalyptic struggle between good and evil. It claims that “the world today is divided into two camps”: that of kufr, or unbelief, and that of their own warped interpretation of Islam. In between these lies the “grey zone”, inhabited by those who call themselves Muslims yet fail to join Daesh.
>>
>>78021720
>crybullies
that is such a cringy buzzword. People hate dawkins for being a retard with incompetent arguments against religion.
>>
>>78021735
>retard with incompetent arguments against religion

Most "criticism" against him is nothing but slander perpetuated by social media. Weird how that always happens to people who criticize political correctness.
>>
>>78021769
Why do people like you try to turn everything into a PC/PI narrative?
>>
>>78021735
>People hate dawkins for being a retard with incompetent arguments against religion.

My apologies Ms. Wendy Wright. I didn't know you had the brain power to actually work a computer and get on the internet.
>>
>>78021735
Pretty hard to have arguments against a made-up, cherry-picked thing.
>>
>>78021819
I have no idea who that is, but I assume you're calling me a christian because I don't take Dawkins seriously
>>
>>78021780

Polarizing things through rose-colored shades optimizes ad-revenue. Everyone has to take sides, everything must be pigeonholed into two categories for ceaseless argument, only then is the argument sustained and clickbait born. It even keeps war going. We have to eliminate the grey zone. You're with us or with the enemy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE3j_RHkqJc
>>
>>78011274
Reminds me of a poll that was conducted in France: about half of the population identifies as Catholic, but only half of those Catholics declared believing in God. The church-going numbers are obviously lower.
>>
>>78016598
That's a lie. If you didn't you wouldn't be on /co/.
>>
>>78002137
I'll blame him if you want me to.
>>
>>78006264

Yeah well I hate it when people quote George Carlin at me too.
>>
>>78017502
Nobody but douches define themselves as atheists in any other context than when discussing religion. It's a classification related to your opinion on a topic, not an identity.
>>
>>78019285
>>78019346

He died at the right time to save Star Trek. He was becoming a George Lucas and running his baby into the ground with his stupid idealism.

His death saved the Next Generation.
>>
>>78017679
Doubt is not a pleasant position, but certainty is absurd.
You're not supposed to reason via wishful thinking.
>>
>>78017733
Besides, you know, personal morals.
I thought polacks were all about personal responsibility, does that stop being true when you have to give yourself standards?
>>
>>78020764
Exactly.

People assume "Doctor = Smart", without thinking that someone can very well be a genius in their field and have no knowledge of another.

It's the same thing that Dawkins himself calls Christians out on; using a Dawkins argument on theology is like using a theologist's argument on climate change.
>>
>>78017571
Or lack of belief there's a supreme being. Important distinction.
>>
>>78021839
Wendy Wright is one of your religious types who liek totally pwnz0red Dawkins's arguments and made him look incompetent...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AS6rQtiEh8

Dawkins has the patience of one of her saints here - he listened to her for over an hour, without losing his rag, or without his heart leaping up his throat to strangle his brain in a murder/suicide pact to escape teh stoopid.

This is what it's like for him all the time when called upon to debate the science vs religion debates. The current state of all such debates is Science sitting and waiting for Religion to stop talking in circles and actually answer some of the questions - only they won't do so, because they know the next rebuttal from Science will leave only a smoking hole where the religious arguments currently stand.
>>
>>77997263
This. As much as people like to pretend, bullies almost never have bad homelives, and generally have incredibly charmed lives.

The fact that they're in a position to bully in the first place proves they are already a step ahead of others, and the people who are bullied generally have something wrong with them anyway.
>>
>>78021819
*tips fedora*
>>
>>78021723
None of that is islamophobic.
>>
>>78017571
>>78021998
Lack of a belief in a deity is a more accurate definition.

All atheists don't believe in a deity, but not all atheist believe there is no deity. Some atheists are agnostics on the matter, for one thing.
>>
>>78022280
>shoe athiesm
athiesm means disbelief in a god, not lack of belief.
>>
>>78022298
First thing on google

>Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods. Older dictionaries define atheism as "a belief that there is no God.
>>
>>78022298
atheism comes from the greek átheos which just means 'without deities' i.e a godless person, someone who performs no worship
>>
>>78022314
Except the word athiest to everyone except reddit athiest means believing there is no god. Only other athiests would call a shoe or a cat athiests. The dictionary isn't accurate in this case to how {normal} people use the word athiest.
>>78022350
Etymological fallacy
>>
>>78022363
begging the question
>>
>>78022363
>Except the word athiest to everyone except reddit athiest means believing there is no god. Only other athiests would call a shoe or a cat athiests. The dictionary isn't accurate in this case to how {normal} people use the word athiest.
This is 100% false. Do some actual research before making a fool of yourself.
>>
>>78022298
It can be either, and is then properly classified as either hard atheism (affirming there is no God, what apparently every religious person thinks an atheist is) or soft atheism (a lack of belief there is a god, which also comprises agnosticism).
>>
File: 1448181968189.jpg (4KB, 125x115px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1448181968189.jpg
4KB, 125x115px
>>78006820
Because he acts condescending. In my experience people hate being told that they are wrong at the best of times. Thats why you sometimes get people who even when shown clear evidence contrary to their established opinions on something, will doubt it sceptically.

You can't change peoples minds by appearing arrogant in your own opinion. When he debates the existence of God he comes across as though he thinks the people he is speaking to are childlike simpletons. That's what gets people on the defensive.

I myself am an atheist and I think Dawkins is a dick.
>>
>>77999521
Oh irony
>>
>>78022421
>Because he acts condescending
There is nothing wrong with treating trash people like trash. There are 7 billion humans on this planet - I assure you not everyone's life is worth something.

>You can't change peoples minds by appearing arrogant in your own opinion
Explain Donald Trump
>>
>>78022582
I don't think Donald Trump changed any minds, he just radicalised people who were already right wing and played out the big controversies like Muslims and refugees.
>>
>>78022631
Wow, you hit the nail on the fucking head.
>>
>>78006407

It isnt non-PC to disagree. There is a difference between "I believe you don't understand what you are talking about" and "I think you are full of shit". Dawkins tends to be on the being-a-dick side of things
>>
>>78022582
The question isn't whether you think there's something wrong with it, if most people dislike it then it may be a reason they dislike people who behave that way.
>>
>>78022806
I used to love all of Dawkins' stuff a few years ago, but after watching people who are a bit more graceful toward their religious audience I find it difficult to watch videos where he lacks tact and just wants to hear himself vilify religion to the point of masturbation.

Guy's got a soothing voice tbqhfarm.
>>
File: 1447032236381.jpg (24KB, 315x404px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1447032236381.jpg
24KB, 315x404px
>>78022582
>he thinks Donald Trump has changed minds

Well that's a real neat opinion there buddy and you're entitled to it, but "talking to trash like trash" doesn't mean that you aren't being an arrogant prick. Which was my point.
>>
File: 767141726.png (187KB, 500x382px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
767141726.png
187KB, 500x382px
>>77996033

>OP is such a rump-rustled theist he gets triggered by saying something as stupid as an Angel Skeleton isn't real, even though it's made explicit in the episode and common sense.
>>
>>77998240
"Dear Muslima...", while not exactly racist, is redpill enough that anyone not exposed to regular /pol/ack shitposting will be offended
>>
>>78000944
>Look. There's something right here! It appears to be some sort of rock...oh, no, it's just a dirt clod.
>>
>>77996858
Wow, I'm late to the party!
Well, a lot of Atheists aren't too happy with him either. The thing is that he spearheaded this thing called "New Atheism", which is the less intellectual and more militant cousin of the old Atheism (and then there's Atheism 2.0, which is New Atheism's inbred cousin).

What a lot of people detest is that the New Atheists hijack science and reason, while often not being very well-read on the subjects they're discussing. The most notorious example I can think of is Dawkins admitting in the middle of a debate that he doesn't even know what epistimic means. This is more or less the equivalent of entering a scientific debate without knowing the laws of thermodynamics.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2009/nov/02/atheism-dawkins-ruse
Atheists with actual credentials in the field of philosophy don't have much good to say about him. I guess atheist activism is like science, in as far as popularity is by no means an indication of the quality of your work.

But to get back on topic, this is pretty much why Lisa is shit: she's a mouthpiece for the writer. This is why she flipflops between being Protestant, a hippy "Buddhist" and a hardcore atheist.
>>
File: lisa.jpg (21KB, 409x517px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
lisa.jpg
21KB, 409x517px
>>78023347
agreed. last night during the special, Lisa was basically the writers growing up.

they really need to stop creating character to be political mouthpieces.
>>
>>78023504
Not that guy, but she was just the voice of reason. She was the "straight man" to the goofball antics of the rest of the family. So was Marge actually, but whatever. I'm not even going to discuss that all men are morons and all women reasonable, that's a whole different discussion for another day.

The problem is that the voice of reason eventually devolved into a mouthpiece. The logic is "this character is smart, so obviously she would have the same uneducated opinions as me. I r so smart!". This is already insufferable with one author who has a consistent opinion on things, but with multiple writers this becomes borderline schizophrenic in addition to heavy handed.

And since The Simpsons sets the standard for American animated sitcoms, the voices of reason of other programs have started to copy this. Whether it's Brian's progressivism or South Park's "I've learned something today", we just can't avoid heavy handed and ill researched political messages anymore.
>>
>>78009476
At least Lisa the Vegetarian had some funny moments in it, like the flying pig.
>>
>>78023600
Lisa is too smart. She's an 8 year old who seems to have read every book that has ever been written. She hasn't had enough time in her life to be as well read as she is, especially considering the fact she has hobbies like playing the saxophone.
>>
>>78021769
You can be anti-PC and still be an argumentative dumbass. It's not like some kind of binary switch. Remember that racists are pretty anti-PC too.
>>
File: ultronface.jpg (43KB, 677x507px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
ultronface.jpg
43KB, 677x507px
>>78022421
honestly that's the problem with humanity as a whole.
>>
>>78025284
Same. Lisa is fine as long as she's acting like a kid.
>>
>>78003742
>>>/x/
But I still like you
Thread posts: 449
Thread images: 37


[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Top | Home]
Please support this website by donating Bitcoins to 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5
If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's [Report] button and fill out a post removal request
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.