35 posts / 0 new
Last post
imnutsinmt's picture

I have so much to say about this photo but I want to hear what you guys think. This photo was posted on Facebook by my own father and how he feels about me and my "science."



Subscription Note: 

Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.

Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.

Mad Mac's picture
I love it when liberal

I love it when liberal agendas collide.

Sheldon's picture
You have my sympathies, but

You have my sympathies, but sadly when people think faith based beliefs trump emprical science they have lost touch with reality and are delusional. You just have to smile to yourself and just keep setting proper standards of evidence for what you believe is true.

Morality is of course based on subjective viewpoints, so religious morality is certainly no more objective than atheistic or secular morality, and I'd argue that blindly cherry picking bronze age rules from a single book you want to follow isn't moral at all. "Good" Nazis mastered following the rules, morality requires careful reasoning, objective evidence and empathy. If you ditch all that to become a slave to a barbaric sadistic megalomaniacal genocidal deity, then you have entirely negated the moral process.

Anyone who thinks crying over a blastocyst, but laughing at the suffering of a fully formed human who has gender dysphoria is just proving that point as well. Evolution and global warming are not views you choose to believe in the way religions are, science is not a smorgasbord you pick what you like from, despite what Breezy thinks. These are scientific facts, as much as gravity and the rotundity of the earth.

Again you have my sympathies that your father is so antagonistic towards your lack of belief, but all you can do is think for yourself and try and steer clear of topics that will create enmity. Though if he is openly hostile to you and refuse to respect your lack of belief then you may have to live a life entirely separate from him.

NewSkeptic's picture
Some people are just better

Some people are just better off in their make-believe worlds than in the real one.

Tin-Man's picture
Interesting to me how people

Interesting to me how people like that are soooooo anti-science, yet they don't seem to mind enjoying all the benefits it has produced. You think your dad would be willing to give up his car or his air conditioning or cable tv in protest to science? Maybe he would toss out his microwave oven, or perhaps absolutely refuse to go to the doctor to take advantage of modern medical advancements? Heck, for that matter, how does he think he is able to post memes and comments on the internet? Certainly it couldn't possibly have anything to do with the cell phone and/or computer he used. Naaaah.... He must have prayed his posts into being. It's a miracle!

Ramo Mpq's picture
After finding it a little

After finding it a little funny I think people need to stop assuming just because your this it automatically means you're that. For example, just because someone is a theist does not mean they deny science. Just because someone is gay does not mean they can't be religious or belong to a certain faith. Just because someone is an atheist it does not mean they are automatically immoral or unethical. The picture seems to want to say that anyone who believes in global warming automatically agrees with evolution and many genders

Sheldon's picture
"just because someone is a

"just because someone is a theist does not mean they deny science."

Except it isn't assumed, it's stated plainly and unambiguously in the OP that her father denies science.

". The picture seems to want to say that anyone who believes in global warming automatically agrees with evolution and many genders"

Global warming and evolution are objective facts, whether anyone chooses to believe them or not. I don't now what you mean by multiple genders, if you're referring to gender dysphoria however this is again an objective fact.

"Just because someone is an atheist it does not mean they are automatically immoral or unethical."

That's because it's a nonsequitur, atheism is the absence or lack of belief in a deity, it has nothing to do with morality or ethics.

mickron88's picture
i bet his dad failed his

i bet his dad failed his science lessons...i'm not saying....just saying...

and he has a bad choice for posting this low graphic photo....

LogicFTW's picture
@Orignal post

@Orignal post

TLDR: in short, anyone that post and likes a picture like the linked picture in the original post is ignorant to reality and spouting nonsense that reflects poorly on them and their level of understanding of reality.

Okay let's break down this picture your dad posted:

A super majority of all scientist (even if it is not their direct field of study!) agree evolution and global warming are well established real things, to say they are not real is to be against basic, very well supported scientific findings.

There are at least 4 different genders, male, female, genderless, or multi gender. Gender is not: "specific reproduction sex organs one is born with" but instead the thought express of what one person considers them self. The correct word this picture should use, is how many human sexes their are. Which while 99% of us fall in the category of 2 sexes at birth, biologically, we also rarely have people that are both sexes or lacking major or all sex organs of either sex. There is no confusion here except the picture trying to conflate the term gender with the term sex.

Strictly speaking no one thinks a pregnant woman can be a man. Again the word change that uses a different definition. Now we are talking sex instead of gender. It is absolutely possible for a pregnant born as female sex, to consider their gender male. It is a thought expression that while related has no requirement that they cannot be pregnant. I can consider myself a unicorn, even tho I do not have 4 hooves, not look like a horse and do not have a horn on my forehead.

Determining what is or is not a human being is a matter of opinion. Scientifically, there is plenty that seperates a zygote, or even a fetus from a human being, the easiest is this zygote/fetus has not been born yet, another easy one is a zygote has a cell count that numbers less than a million, where even a newborn (9 months from fertilization of egg) baby has over a trillion cells, (an average adult has 37 trillion give or take a couple trillion.) I challenge any person to define a human being, where that definition can include a zygote in the definition with out using the word "human" or homo sapiens or any other word used to define humans in its definition.

People that say a zygote is a human being will quickly find themselves with a definition of human that is much too broad to be even be usable as a definition as it will include many other forms of life.

"I think I will pass on your so called *science*"
So the person that agrees with this, agrees on science, but not any form of science that do not agree with. That is much the same as someone saying: "I agree with you, except on anything I do not agree with you on." Which is just an empty, vapid statement that is only meant to antagonize and weakly attempt to grand stand. To bad the final statement is completely NOT supported by the previous statement.

Peurii's picture

About the unicorn part.
We are in a weird position today where instead of finding identity without, we are searching it within. It can't come to it that we should accept otherkin rights. That's just too insane, I'm sorry. Maybe I'm a regressive old geezer, but otherkinism is pushing it way too far.

If we go that deep into subjectivism, what is to say that the god of their choise does not exist to people?

LogicFTW's picture
I think it is safe to say

I think it is safe to say otherkinism is a very rare phenomenon and even rare when those people think they somehow deserve special rights above and beyond anyone else's rights. A key point being that compared to say skin color or sexual organs, people can easily as a thought or a simple costume change the outward otherkin appearance. I have a limited life experience of only meeting 1 otherkin person (that I knew of) and she described it more as a hobby, and like I said in a previous post has a high powered very well paying professional job, no one would ever guess her free time hobby based on her job.

The_Quieter's picture
Let's correct it.

Let's correct it.

"Science that I don't understand and haven't studied must be wrong because my guy on the radio said so and what he thinks must be right because he says things I understand and agree with"

algebe's picture
I always hated the Jerry

I always hated the Jerry Lewis brand of slapstick funny face "comedy". He seemed to specialize in mocking nerdy people and scientists. I found him untalented and witless. The Xtians responsible for this image have chosen an appropriate figurehead for their prejudices. He's also a great model for Xtian family values.

Terminal Dogma's picture
Gender is not a scientific

Gender is not a scientific thing, it's a social construct.

Sapporo's picture
Arguments about gender tend

Arguments about gender tend to be about definitions, rather than facts. The sort of person who would equate sex with gender are the sort of people who would complain about the use of grammatical genders including neuter in order to refer to inanimate things.

Terminal Dogma's picture
Gender is only constructed by

Gender is only constructed by definitions New genders get defined all the time. It has nothing to do with science.

arakish's picture
I have to agree with what TIn

I have to agree with what TIn-Man said. Everybody else also, but mostly his spiel.

I also just love these Absolutists who poopoo the hell out of science, yet they are the first ones to go grabbing for it to benefit from its products. Now here is something funny. I am a scientist. Yet I am also old school.

My computer is over 20 years old, yet it can do many of the things modern built computers can do, and then some. Why? Because it is a Linux system. The one thing I love about Linux is that you can download the latest Kernel, follow its upgrade steps, and it builds itself specifically for your system unit. This makes it so much faster and powerful than any other OS.

My old cell phone, before my dumb-ass self dropped it in a lake while fishing was over 15 years old. Yet it performed perfectly for what I wanted it for. Nothing more than a phone. Period.

The two newest pieces of technology I have are my PADD and new cell phone. Hell, my TV is over 10 years old, maybe over 15. My Blue Ray Player is over 10 years old. I have a DVD player I bought back in 1998. And it still runs perfectly fine.

My surround sound system is a Sound Blaster 9.3.1 system. And I ain't seen Sound Blaster anywhere in the last ?what? 15, 20 years. And it still works so well I have had to go into the hardware setup and turn DOWN the max volume the speakers are capable of producing. Reason: Even on the lowest software setting, the main bass blaster speaker, what is it called a woofer?, was still so powerful it literally blew the hair off my head. Yes, a little exaggeration, but you should get the picture.

Anyway, enough babbling. It is easy to say science is bogus, yet rape it for everything you need to fill in that Narcissistic Personality Disorder, Schizophrenic Delusion Disorder, and Inferiority Complex Disorder ALL Absolutists suffer.

Just remember that. If a person is a die-hard Absolutist, then they are also mentally deranged. Perhaps not as dangerous as a true psychopath or sociopath, but they are still dangerous.

As far as I am concerned, the only fields science has done any REAL progress is in the Bio-genetics, Earth Sciences and Astrophysics. Otherwise, it ain't gone nowhere in the last 20 to 30 years. Yes electronics have improved, but that is not due to improvement in science. It is just an improvement in mechanical and manufacturing processes.

For clarification: the science of electronics have not improved since the first transistorized device was built. The only thing that has improved is the processes in which we can cram more and more of those transistors into a CPU chip. Make sense? The PROCESSES have improved, not the underlying science.

In summation, Absolutists are the first to rape science of all the benefits it has to offer. However, they are also the first ones to poopoo it. Funny huh...?


LogicFTW's picture


I am sort of the opposite. I love tech and typically on the forefront of using new hardware tech. I have a car that can very nearly drive it self, I mess around with drones, I bought a high end VR system back when it launched around 2 years ago. I am fully aware these tech's need more maturing to become mainstream, but when they do, the implications are enormous and will change the way of most all of our lives. If they can build augmented reality glasses to the size/comfort/weight of ski goggles or less, and get the price to that of smartphones or less, the AR tech device could be even more profound than the launch of the smartphone, it is looking for it's "original iphone" moment where it is a combination of timing of tech, price, usability and ease of use.

I am also a big movie buff, watching a movie on a old lcd tv feels like a trip back to the dinosaur age to me, With oled TV's already available on special sales for less than 1000 dollars, a new tech that really has a noticeable visual impact. (All about the high contrast, not resolution folks!)

But yeah anyone using social media to read or post a picture like that are being rather hilariously hypocritical.

arakish's picture
Yeah. I agree with you. I

Yeah. I agree with you. I do use some of the latest, greatest technology for studying volcanoes/calderas. I have even played with some of our drones.

At home, I am more or less a firm believer of: "If it ain't broke, why fix or replace it?" For me, as long as something works for what I want, I ain't gonna keep going out and wasting my money on the latest-greatest thing. If it works...

Hell, most of my time is spent doing what I love to do: Writing. Don't need the latest-greatest to do that.

Yes, I am also a big movie buff. Especially movies that have some really great and spectacular "eye-candy." And when I say "eye-candy" I mean SFX/CGI. But I do not need the super-uber-ultra-mega-extremist visual impactive, high contrast, must seem real visual toys.

Basically, I have better things to spend my money on than the latest-greatest tech toys. Just recently, I had to spend over $1000 to have the AC repaired, only to find I am going to have to eventually replace the unit. Some of that $1000 was a service fee since the technician had to travel so far out into the boonies to get here.

anyway, I am starting to babble. Let me end there.


LogicFTW's picture
Yikes on that AC repair bill.

Yikes on that AC repair bill. I had to replace the AC two summers back, yeah that set me back a couple of grand. Hooray for large unexpected bills.

I am curious if you have any special knowledable insights on Kilauea that is not covered in the news.

arakish's picture
"...any special knowledgeable

"...any special knowledgeable insights on Kilauea...?"

Besides the fact that it sits on a massive hot spot that is over a mantle mega-plume?

Not really. Look back at when Kilauea first started erupting back in 1983? 1984? And it has been in a variably constant state of eruption ever since...

That is 34. 35 years. However, I do have an idea.

This latest eruption is perhaps simply due to the fresh infusion of a massive amount of magma into the chamber of the hot spot. As to how long this infusion will feed the eruption, well your guess is actually as good as any I could give.

I remember going to Hawai'i with my wife to look at Kilauea back in 1984? 1985? and watching as it shot hot lava about 100 meters into the air. It was witnessing that lava fountain that made me forever fascinated by volcanoes. And, yes, watching that lava fountain was so... so... can't find any words to describe it. One of those things you just have to witness live.

Just looked it up in one of my volcano textbooks. Kilauea started in January 1983. That is 35 years of eruption! Gee, 35 years! If my daughters were still alive, that would be almost as long as they would have been alive.

We do receive some data from the USGS on Hawai'i, but only what they are willing to let us have. Yes, there is still some rivalry, but not as bad as the civilian world. However, unless they release that information to the public, we are under a gag order not to. Then again, I do not have any more information than what they release several times a day to the Hawai'i public. The pressure inside the Fissure 8 eruption goes up and down which is evident by how high the lava fountain is, which is only natural.

The temperatures of the lava seems to be increasing. The latest I heard was 2100° Fahrenheit, compared to about 1500 to 1600°F when this latest eruption began. The increasing temperatures means the magma is coming from very deep within the Earth, and is flowing very fast to get to surface. Usually, the higher the temperatures of the lava, the deeper from within the mantle it began as magma. At 2100°, that lava is almost as fluid as water.

And another pointer. Due to the high temperatures of that lava, some of what appears to be steam, is actually some of the magmatic rocky material vaporizing once it reaches the surface and the pressure is low enough. Of course, a lot of it is CO2, and water vapor, forming from the dissolved hydroxyls within the magma.

If wondering, magma is the molten material while it is still underground. Lava is when it reaches and flows on the surface.

When that lava hits the surface, it immediately begins cooling, thus the viscosity increases and the slower it will flow. However, I have heard it was flowing some 1.8 to 2 meters per second at the fissure opening, which is faster than the average walking speed of a person. But when it reaches the ocean entry point, it has slowed to about 0.2 to 0.25 meters per second. FYI: average walking speed = 1.34 meters per second.

As for how long this major eruption event will continue? As said, your guess is as good as mine. However, I can say this. When the lava coming from the opening begins to cool, then that would be indicative of the magma slowing down, and perhaps, the eruption is slowing down and may end. How long it would take, well...

Otherwise, you need to be more specific in what you mean by "any special knowledgeable insights on Kilauea."


LogicFTW's picture
Thanks for typing out some of

Thanks for typing out some of your insights, learned some cool stuff.

I witnessed the full solar eclipse for the first time ~a year ago, so I definitely understand the: you need to see it for yourself, it can not be properly described on natural phenomena.

Sheldon's picture
I'm after an OLED screen

I'm after an OLED screen myself. I own a Sony Bravia 40" screen, and it has been excellent I must say. Like Arakish I generally hate replacing things that are working fine, but I have my heart set on a 60" OLED either LG or a Sony Bravia again, but the Sony is 50% more expensive and there's not a lot of difference to justify the extra cash. It'll be later in the year as the lease is up on my car, and I'm starting a new one in a few weeks.

LogicFTW's picture
Yeah I am considering getting

Yeah I am considering getting an OLED if it drops enough in price around black friday/cyber monday. Heard rumours of a possible 55" OLED for under 1000 dollars from LG.

Seeing those panels in action at a local dying Best Buy had me very impressed. (Never bought into the whole 4k thing, stupid waste of money/tech there.)

David Killens's picture
The picture posted by the OP

The picture posted by the OP is one very confused and mixed up bag of confusion and nonsense. It is attempting to a lot of the social confusion with "science". You may as well get down to the brass tacks and call it what they fear, progress.
Yes, this world is a rapidly changing place, and yes, things can get a little confusing on the social front with LGBTQC naming and social warrior crap. But if the OP's father is confusing all these together, then there's really little hope for such a backwards mind.

curtisabass's picture
I would say the person who

I would say the person who posted the picture is just not ready for the 21st century. My dad was much the same way before he died 2 years ago. I realized I could not change him so I just smiled and said lets go for a walk. This way I was able to talk with him and truly enjoy our last years together. I did have to play the nuclear option a couple of times:" if Mom was still alive she wouldn't let you say that". Enjoy time with your dad if you can. He won't always be here.

Sheldon's picture
Damn good post. My dad was an

Damn good post. My dad was an atheist but an indifferent one, my mother believes but it is so obviously a crutch I don't try and take it away as long as she doesn't try to beat me with it, and she is a fairly indifferent theist. I've just about forgiven her for Sunday school, I am in my fifties after all, and as you say one day she'll be gone.

arakish's picture
Agreed. Affirmative. Ain't

Agreed. Affirmative. Ain't that the truth.

I am in same boat. My dad died 15 years ago. Only me mom still lives. She may have been, I don't know the word, but she may have beaten the Hell of me when I was a kid and messed up at church, but I still loved her. Still do. Would lay my life down to save hers. Even asked someone, "If that ain't unconditional love, then what is?"

Even though she was very abusive because I was a pagan godless heathen (as the pastor put it), she now does not care. It is mostly my other family members who make fun of me at the family gatherings. They did not at the July 4th one because I led off with my burning of an American Flag after stating, "This is what I think of what America has become because of you Absolutists." Then I left. Never gave them the chance to humiliate or belittle me. My mom understands why I won't come to family get-togethers anymore. She knows the accident has left me unable to "think quickly" and defend myself. She knows I have the ability and intelligence to completely destroy all theist arguments they can throw. I think that is why she just accepts my atheism. It is the others that won't.

My dad was also an indifferent atheist. However, his one tradition that saved me was the tradition that children are able to decide for themselves whether to attend church when they are 13. In his traditions, he called this the Age of Minority. Then you spend five years getting to the Age of Majority.

As you have done, I have long forgiven my mom for forcing me to go to church. It was just her traditions. The ones I do NOT forgive are the Absolutists who heinously and abhorrently abused me. Only because I was a "pagan godless heathen." When I finally capitulated and "play pretended" to be saved and a believer, then they left me alone. When my dad said I could chose at 13, I immediately jumped on it and said, "I ain't going to church no more." I know, double negative, but that is how they spoke in SENCland, and it kind of rubbed off onto me. You know, the bad habit thing.


ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
I disagree with the picture

I disagree with the picture because its putting the expectations of a scientists on the non-scientists. I do not expect the average person to know all the nuances and details of things its taken me years to study. I also think that non-scientists are free to think for themselves, disagree and agree with whatever they want, and also "specialize" on their topics of interest. I have no issues with someone that supports evolution, but is skeptical of global warming.

JazzTheist's picture
I can relate to this. My

I can relate to this. My father used to deny evolution with a passion too, for religious reasons (it was a semi-cult known as Falun Gong). When it came to evolution he just chuckled and appealed to incredulity even when presented with evidence.

He abandoned his religion over time, but I have a feeling that he still doesn't trust science. He recently said that ''it doesn't matter if evolution is right or wrong''.

arakish's picture
Hey Mr. Squid,

Hey Mr. Squid,

Welcome and have fun browsing about.

Glad you could join.

And, yeah, in our short time here, I guess it kind of does not matter if evolution is right or wrong.

Although not as adamant about science as I am (he was more mechanical), he definitely distrusted religion more.



Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.