Something that’s has irked me for some time now is how many people latched onto the Atheist movement as an edgy teen but now look back on it in reverence and not shame. This seems to be a common theme in academia and is prevalent even in communities like this one. The lamentation of the “golden-age” of atheism is peak hubris. Dawkins, Hitchens, and crew were deconstructionists of the critical theory variety. Their lives were consumed by the need to disprove God and religion. However these were the shortsighted desires of pseudo-intellectuals, they accomplished nothing productive, and if anything, opened the door for the screaming children that replaced them. I don’t think Dawkins, in his wildest dreams, ever saw his fall come from his own hubris. The intellectual argument over dismantling religion somehow disproving the existence of a god is what fueled the SJWS and their own brand of hubris in the early 2000’s. BTW Dawkins, this is what happens when you remove the “tumor” of religion, you hack. As you see today, Dawkins was swallowed by the stupidity he helped bring about, the Maximilien Robespierre of the modern era, begging for trannies to not cut off his head.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (111)
sorted by:
Not at all.
Hence mathematicians don't use it as anything but a layman/idiomatic example with all implied restrictions it entails!
I am glad they tried to mock creators of the theorem that explicitly requires infinite amount of time and/or monkeys with very small amount of time and monkeys. Top tier rebuttal if i had seen one in first grade of elementary school, not by someone who would call himself adult man.
In which case your statement does not work because how do you know origin of something which does not yet exist? Or am i talking to a literal time traveler from IRL version of Terminator movies? For all we know, general purpose AI would really develop itself after being given enough hardware, because it does not fucking exist yet and in case of humans probably won't ever exist.
Good rebuttal, not being able to tell the difference between theory and theorem means that you’re not worth pursuing a conversation with. If you had infinite monkeys there would be infinite shit on keyboards, monkeys don’t magically grow sentience retard. You really can’t even grasp baseline philosophy or math, which leads me to again to you being a sperg. So you might be better off with Reddit.
Yes? Since we already have infinite monkeys, finding infinite resources to hire infinite amount of people who would clean it up is not exactly a problem.
Indeed they don't, they do so over millions of years.
But can you? Because i am still not hearing of your "trillions of years" calculation.
Are you really making a pretend argument on an arbitrary concept that is already a joke because monkeys can’t comprehend language? Next are we going to have infinite speech pathologists to teach the infinite monkeys too? I would love to see that equation. Monkeys have been around for over 40 millions years and have not grown sentience, so once again your argument makes you look retarded. So how many more millions of years do we need?
Guess why people chose 'monkeys'.
Yeah, i see why you need God now, abstract thought is absent in your mind. Indeed, religion is mandatory for such people lest they proceed to behave like monkeys, good luck.
Never knew humans did not exist, and we are just 2 chatbots exchanging on reddit copy.