• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

How to spot the fundie atheists

FireGarden

Philosopher
Joined
Aug 13, 2002
Messages
5,047
I just came across this in a google search, having seen it before when PotatoStew posted it for a laugh -- years ago.

http://www.tektonics.org/af/fundyath.html
If they'd spent more time quoting us than writing about us, they could have made it into FASTDT

It's been updated (with a useful colour code!). But it is in need of correction:

"You can make the existence of pink unicorns the center-piece of a philosophical critique."

It's INVISIBLE pink unicorn. INVISIBLE! (and pink). And there's only one. What would be the point in having two?

We try to understand you. Please try to understand us.

:D
 
What a silly site.

I think it speaks volumes, as FireGarden mentioned, that these are monsters from the imagination of theists, rather than actual quotes that show a pattern of behavior.
 
Last edited:
Heh, now _that's_ a fine collection of strawmen and plain stupidity in one place.
 
Hmm.

138. You think that Josh McDowell represents the apex of Christian scholarly apologetical thinking.

The next time someone someone quotes him to me I must point out that this makes him a fundamental atheist. :boggled:
 
That list is very helpful in one respect. It confirms my suspicion that "fundamentalist atheist" is another way of saying "an atheist who says or does something with which I disagree."
 
I used to love that website, and especially that list. Now, I can't look at it without seeing all the flawed, holey reasoning I missed before.
 
I didn't even have to read past the first one:

You became an atheist when you were 10 years old, based on ideas of God that you learned in Sunday School. Your ideas about God haven't changed since.

So I'm not sure if the claim would to be

-"we lied about God when you were 10 years old, but really, we're telling the truth now."

or

-"God is eternal and unchanging (what I heard when I was 10), but he's changed since you were 10."

or

-"God is so screwed up that we'd rather lie about him when you're 10 and lose a few people than tell the truth when you're 10 and lose a lot more people."

But I read further and it's all downhill from there.
 
You know, even when I was a dedicated follower of Tektonics, I still could see the flaws in this one:

You're convinced that people only believe in God because they're afraid of going to hell...despite the fact that if there is no God, then there's probably no hell either.
 
You believe the movie Dogma gives the most accurate portrayal of Christian theology.

Funny--I was just watching that last night, thinking how great it would be if it really was an accurate portrayal of Christian theology.
 
One or two of their points are well made - but only one or two.
 
The trouble with list like that is not that they are almost entirely wrong, but that there always seems to be a small kernal of truth (e.g., at least one supporting example) behind every bigotted statement.
 
One or two of their points are well made - but only one or two.
They would have done better if they'd stuck to quotations ala FSTDT. Some of the implied quotations would be pretty funny (assuming they aren't invented).

But it comes across as defensive and lame in this format, and some of it, like the Origins section, is just laughable.
 
-"we lied about God when you were 10 years old, but really, we're telling the truth now."

To fair we pretty much lie about everything to 10 year olds.

Do you seriously explain schrodinger's equations, wave particle duality and S,P and D orbitals when asked about electron behavior or do you stick to the solar system model?
 
To fair we pretty much lie about everything to 10 year olds.

Do you seriously explain schrodinger's equations, wave particle duality and S,P and D orbitals when asked about electron behavior or do you stick to the solar system model?

What you say is :

simplification = lie.
 
The trouble with list like that is not that they are almost entirely wrong, but that there always seems to be a small kernal of truth (e.g., at least one supporting example) behind every bigotted statement.

I don't think so.

Can you provide an example from an internet forum to at least... lets say 4 (from 423)?
 
You are infuriated that a school in Pennsylvania would issue a statement to its students about intelligent design and direct them to the library for more information, citing the separation of church and state, but you have no problem with a school in California having kids "act out" one of the five Muslim pillars of faith.

Huh??? :confused:

You can quote from the bible better than most missionaries...at least the parts where someone dies.

Yes. Please stop it. We're not supposed to talk about those bits.

You think that Isaac Asimov was a world-class authority in Biblical Studies.

He was, in some ways. An awesomly learned layman. I guess that makes me a fundy atheist :)
 
Last edited:
Ok, towards the end there it just got insane...

You go out of your way to advertise yourself in allegiance with Satan (a mythical being) and making a short video clip with you saying "I deny the Holy Spirit" when God is clearly a myth and does not exist.

:confused:

Wouldn't that make you a Satanist, not an atheist?

You say that Hitler was a devout Christian, even though there are many other possibilities. e.g. God and Darwinism weren't separate ideas during the time of Hitler and Woodrow Wilson, but one entity.

This one confused me. No idea what they're trying to say here.
 
Last edited:
Do you seriously explain schrodinger's equations, wave particle duality and S,P and D orbitals when asked about electron behavior or do you stick to the solar system model?


Do you seriously teach 10 year olds the rules of football when they're learning to play basketball?
 

Back
Top Bottom