Why does this trigger the christfags so much?

Why does this trigger the christfags so much?

Other urls found in this thread:

thesun.co.uk/news/2298142/first-ever-written-mention-of-jesus-confirmed-as-experts-say-2000-year-old-lead-tablets-found-in-remote-cave-are-genuine/
journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1088868313497266
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_affair
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_wars_of_religion
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

truth hurts

*tips fedora*

Do you feel euphoric in this moment?

dark ages aren't related to Christianity but to an economic collapse in the Mediterranean due to pirates (muslims not kidding)

Because scientific documents were preserved by christfags
Otherwise muzzies would have destroyed everything

*Tips torch*

i fucking hate muslims

you realize that mohammed was a christian that thought that roman christianity had moved to far away from the original. So no christian No muslims!

Also, the fall of the Roman empire basically guarenteed that most of europe reverted back to a agricultural society

65% of Nobel Prizes are Christian. Try harder.

Source: Shalev, Baruch Aba (2003). 100 Years of Nobel Prizes. New Delhi : Atlantic Publishers & Distributors.

Try harder.

Heisenberg: "The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you"
:^)

Of course
But Arabs would have fucked ot up regardless, see Crusades actively pushed their influence off the mediterran too

My bad, should have said arabs

And how being christian actively influenced those people to get those nobel prizes?

"Christians have won a total of 78.3% of all the Nobel Prizes in Peace, 72.5% in Chemistry, 65.3% in Physics, 62% in Medicine."


:^D

>2017
>user still thinks this is an actual thing
>everything happens for no reasons whatsoever
Summers early

lol because most people raised in the time that those prizes have existed, are raised catholic. That number is going down indefinitely and you can't deny that.

What does Christianity have to do with econmic collapse and migrant populations?

What? Islam kept science and education going

Being smarter, obviously, and proving the image posted by OP is bullshit. gg no re

>try harder.

OP didn't make the cartoon, idiot.
No Nobel Prize for you, christfag.

>dark ages aren't related to christianity
>byzantine emperors actively persecuted hellenistic schools of thought, burned libraries and countless temples etc
>catholic church killed random epileptics/women because muh witches
>all this condoned by the pope and patriarch
>it had nothing to do with christianity

kek

probably because from a historical standpoint it's full of Eurocentristic bias. It's not the lack of Christianity that's the problem. While Europe was in the "dark ages" science was doing fine elsewhere.

Learn to history.

but it's not. institutional christianity did oppress scientific growth for many years, and it still actively tries to do so in the us.

the fact that someone is smart doesn't mean much, if they were indoctrinated as a kid or have an intense fear of death it's logical to turn to religion, especially in the 20s us

Yeah, people who won a Nobel Prize is really too stupid for trying to think and evaluating Philosophy and logic out of the context of their education...even if atheists (also raised in theists context) has been existing for thousands of years.

[Scarcasm]

Your argument is invalid.

this is true. but saying that christianity didn't oppress scientific growth in europe is historical revisionism

And Christians are just shit at being Jews.

"The tablets suggest that Christ was not starting his own religion, but restoring a thousand year old tradition from the time of King David."

thesun.co.uk/news/2298142/first-ever-written-mention-of-jesus-confirmed-as-experts-say-2000-year-old-lead-tablets-found-in-remote-cave-are-genuine/

>people who won a Nobel Prize is really too stupid for trying to think and evaluating Philosophy and logic out of the context of their education

winning a nobel price in your field doesn't make you automatically an expert in other fields. saying that someone that won a nobel price in chemistry is automatically an authority on philosophy is retarded. among nobel price winners there's the guy that invented lobotomy, there's the guys that stole the dna helix model from another scientist, there's an hiv denialist that's responsible for thousands of deaths in south africa

i could go on, but you get the picture i hope. my own mentoring professor is very very knowledgeable in his field, he knows by heart every paper and ongoing research on his field but he has told me he has never opened a philosophy book in his life, he didn't even know who hegel is

Doesn't bother me, but even now, where religion doesn't have nearly as much control as it did centuries ago, we still don't live in a better world.
Because even without organized religion, people still fight over anything that is different.
Look at this very board for instance, people will argue endlessly over which game console they think is better, for example, and it will stay that way so long as there are people, obviously.
You don't need religion to have a reason to dislike or even hate someone.

>By being smarter

Yeah but nobody's killing each other over which gaming platform is better.

your view of the world is very shallow user

Christianity promoted scientific progress since its birth. That's why the great majority of the fathers of Science are Christian, and so Nobel Prizes winners since ever. But of course in your illogical opinion ignorant fedora tipping atheists are smarter and they succeeded in de-indoctrination BUT the great majority of Nobel Prize winners are too stupid for developing an authentic view of life also after criticizing the Philosophical context in which he has been educated, and they remain indoctrinated for the whole life.

Think harder.

Accept the facts.

I know, that was a simplistic example.
I'm talking about people out there who kill each other out of what they think is damage to their pride, things like that.
Some people take things very personally.
Hell, I could look at someone the wrong way, and because of their fucked up perceptions, they might want to beat the shit out of me.
No religion involved at all.

more like if jews never existed

Yeeeeeeeeahhhhhh.....but....in the pic posted is written that Christianity oppressing Scientific method so.....yeahhhh....maybe you could even read before making a strawman....

Checked.

>Christianity promoted scientific progress since its birth

So I'm wrong to say that people murder each other over petty things, not related to religion, is false?
Religion, specifically organized religion is a problem, but people will kill each other over just about anything.
Does religion dictate that someone might want to kill you and steal your money if they are starving?
What i'm saying is that people can find any reason or excuse not like someone, it can't be pinned on just one thing.

The rulers would have found some other way to repress the people and keep them ignorant. Christianity was just a convenient tool.

The pic just prove the greentext claim right.
Less fedora, more History studies, dude.

>Christianity promoted scientific progress since its birth

that's blatantly untrue. even now, churches try to boycott stem cell research, teaching evolution (a hard scientific fact) in school and genetic therapy in humans. I saw this as a phd student studying neurobiology

>That's why the great majority of the fathers of Science are Christian, and so Nobel Prizes winners since ever

the "fathers of science" were a product of their time, like i said being good in your field doesn't negate the effect the environment around you has on your development. Many nobel winners hold some down right idiotic personal beliefs, deifying a scientist that's good in his field shows you're in awe of academia because you're too stupid to understand it or you just don't want to disrupt your little fairy tale world.

>for developing an authentic view of life also after criticizing the Philosophical context in which he has been educated

there is no "authentic" view of life, only ideology. and chances are that you will absorb the dominant ideology from the place you grew up in. there is a reason hinduists don't grow up in saudi arabia.

>Accept the facts

i do, that's why im an atheist. theism is literally accept non-facts as truths

False. Islam will save the west.

The church suppressed learning in a lot of areas but like any other forbidden thing it flourished underground.

Had they embraced learning who knows what could have happened and when.

He has been literally threatened by the church to interrupt his studies because of the earth-centric theory he was trying to debunk

it did in the middle ages, and still does in the us today. when there's a lobby for teaching creationism, a fairy tale, in schools and not evolution that is a hard fact, you cannot say christianity isn't against the scientific method

>So I'm wrong to say that people murder each other over petty things, not related to religion, is false?
Religion, specifically organized religion is a problem, but people will kill each other over just about anything.
Does religion dictate that someone might want to kill you and steal your money if they are starving?
What i'm saying is that people can find any reason or excuse not like someone, it can't be pinned on just one thing.

You make it sound as if humans have aggression and sadism encoded in their genes user. Humans are just products of the ideology they grow up in, and religion is just another example of ideology. No one kills people over petty things, they kill people because dominant ideology has convinced them that's the moral thing to do or in a fit of rage over some perceived personal injustice that has been done to them.

of course you're gonna kill someone and steal his money if you're starving, but even that can be molded by ideology. an interesting example are some native american tribes that hold the legend of i dont remember it's name, basically saying that if you eat human flesh you'll turn into a monster or a monster will come for you or something like that. Anthropologists concluded that this was probably developed because all the areas those tribes inhabited had frequent droughts and resulting famines, hence they needed an ideological mechanism to deter cannibalism. This is just one example of how ideology can tame even the most basic instinct of survival

well ye, there are many spooks to be used (nations, race etc) to divide the proletariat, but they all stem in idealism (aka shit that's not real).

If you was really studying neurobiology you would know that anecdotal evidence doesn't exist and should know that churches opposition to steam cell research only concerns embryionic steam cells (that have also been considered a failure in scientific research as results providen) due to ethical reasons, not only because "it's written in the Bible".

Try harder.

The vast majority of fathers of Science are Christians, and so the Nobel Prizes winners. And no, it's not because only fedora tipping atheists are able to de-indoctrinate theirselves. It's not only a non proved claim, but also an illogical one.

gg no re.

>That's why the great majority of the fathers of Science are Christian


newton also drank mercury and probably died because of it too. why don't you try that one?

If you value a God...you're part of the philosophical and societal problem that plagues humanity.

you guys should 100% stop what your doing & visit Snapchat z .com as soon as you can lol

...

>you cannot say [...]

"Overall, Christians have won a total of 78.3% of all the Nobel Prizes in Peace, 72.5% in Chemistry, 65.3% in Physics, 62% in Medicine"

>B-but...they are ALL indoctrinated! ONLY ATHEISTS ARE SMART ENOUGH TO CRITICIZE THEIR EDUCATIONAL CONTEXT!!!

kek. Tons of logical fallacies.

>If you was really studying neurobiology you would know that anecdotal evidence doesn't exist

what do you mean by this? evolution is a hard proven fact

>churches opposition to steam cell research only concerns embryionic steam cells

the main source of stem cells, and the one with the biggest research potential

>that have also been considered a failure in scientific research as results providen

see this is just not true. i took an optional course in stem cell research during my b.sc, human embryos are literally the best research model for in vitro experiments. you have no idea what you're talking about

>due to ethical reasons, not only because "it's written in the Bible"

but christian ethics and morality in particular stem from the bible, a book of fairy tales

>The vast majority of fathers of Science are Christians, and so the Nobel Prizes winners

like i said, they were simply the product of their times. scientist are experts in their own field, being a mathematician doesn't make you a philosopher.

You don't seem to grasp that scientists aren't all knowing scholars, but simply experts in their specific fields. I bet you deify them because understanding calculus I looks like a divine feat from your iq 70 point of view

their idea of god propably differs vastly from that of the average christian

...

>Christianity
>scientific repression
choose one

Bored of snapchat? > Snapchat z .com can help you today

Because it's demonstrably untrue? The Irish Christians alone are responsible for insane amount of knowledge surviving to the present day that otherwise would've been lost.

Isaac fucking Newton was a Christian.

Not an argument, just repeating the same thing over and over against logic. Classic.

Are you retarded?
You too

It doesn't I am christian and I love Family Guy, especially this episode.

I'm not Christian and this triggers me because of the cringe of ignorance about history.

>journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1088868313497266

>A meta-analysis of 63 studies showed a significant negative association between intelligence and religiosity

christians btfo, enjoy living in permanent guilt over obeying a set of rules written by goat hoarders 3000 years ago

Lucky me. Galileo certainly wasn't able to choose.

what's not an argument? you're the one posting pngs thinking they constitute valid responses user

He was placed under house arrest for personally attacking the Pope in his writings, not for holding the heliocentric view.

I hate fedora wearing liers so much

not really because the "dark ages" where a result of the total collapse of the roman empire, which throw Europe into a state of total war, with petty kings and warlords waring for power and influence. it was almost unavoidable. Think if Rome was not christian but still pagan would the "dark ages have been any different?

And? We are talking religion as a whole, not single people.

no

The image explicitly refers to Christianity. Not all religion.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_affair
The Galileo affair was a sequence of events, beginning around 1610,[1] culminating with the trial and condemnation of Galileo Galilei by the Roman Catholic Inquisition in 1633 for his support of heliocentrism (Italian: il processo a Galileo Galilei).[2]

In 1610, Galileo published his Sidereus Nuncius (Starry Messenger), describing the surprising observations that he had made with the new telescope, namely the phases of Venus and the Galilean moons of Jupiter. With these observations he promoted the heliocentric theory of Nicolaus Copernicus (published in De revolutionibus orbium coelestium in 1543). Galileo's initial discoveries were met with opposition within the Catholic Church, and in 1616 the Inquisition declared heliocentrism to be formally heretical. Heliocentric books were banned and Galileo was ordered to refrain from holding, teaching or defending heliocentric ideas.[3]

Galileo went on to propose a theory of tides in 1616, and of comets in 1619; he argued that the tides were evidence for the motion of the Earth. In 1632 Galileo, now an old man, published his Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, which implicitly defended heliocentrism, and was immensely popular. Responding to mounting controversy over theology, astronomy and philosophy, the Roman Inquisition tried Galileo in 1633 and found him "vehemently suspect of heresy", sentencing him to indefinite imprisonment. Galileo was kept under house arrest until his death in 1642.

Galileo's championing of heliocentrism and Copernicanism was controversial during his lifetime, when most subscribed to either geocentrism or the Tychonic system.[10] He met with opposition from astronomers, who doubted heliocentrism because of the absence of an observed stellar parallax.[10] The matter was investigated by the Roman Inquisition in 1615, which concluded that heliocentrism was "foolish and absurd in philosophy, and formally heretical since it explicitly contradicts in many places the sense of Holy Scripture."[10][11][12] Galileo later defended his views in Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, which appeared to attack Pope Urban VIII and thus alienated him and the Jesuits, who had both supported Galileo up until this point.[10]

>Wikipedia
>A good historical non biased source

choose one

fuck off godfag

You're going to read the same fucking thing in every other website/history book

I fucking hate kids who throw around fallacies and they have no fucking clue what it actually means. His argument was a direct fucking answer to what you fucking argued, not what the OP posted. Fuck you, fuck your face, fuck your fucking unfunny reference, and fucking kill yourself.

>>Wikipedia
Do you actually have a point to make?

Or are you just engaging in a retarded attack on the author so that you can avoid engaging with the actual facts of the matter?

End of times. Repent, ask for forgiveness from our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

See:

There is unbelievable ignorance of European history in this thread.

I get the impression that a lot of you don't even realise that religious conflicts between Catholics and Protestants quite literally tore Europe apart for centuries. France, Germany and the Baltic countries suffered particularly.

The Thirty Years War killed 8 million people in Germany alone. In some large parts of Germany up to 50% of the population died from the resulting famine.

You are also all retarded to refer to this as the dark ages. The dark ages refers to the period after the Roman Empire fell, about 500-1000 AD. Gallileo was not until 1500 AD.

Read en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_wars_of_religion for starters.

No doubt civilization would be hundreds of years ahead of where it is now if Europe had not been completely fucked up by Catholic retards wanting to kill all Protestants.

"Christians have won a total of 78.3% of all the Nobel Prizes in Peace, 72.5% in Chemistry, 65.3% in Physics, 62% in Medicine."

There's no cherry picked meta-analysis about colleges/behaviour tests about "religiosity" (not necessarily Christian in educated and civilized countries) that can invalidate those facts.

Also, as Heisenberg said: "The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you"

^
Someone who took a gulp of science could appear smarter in IQ Tests (who are absolutely not an exact way to define intelligence, as phsycology is not an exact science by definition) than a religious uneducated guy, maybe in a third world country. But this doesn't change the undeniable fact that majority the top-tier Nobel Laureate Scientists, the ones who got nearest to the bottom of the glass in Heisenberg's quotation, are in fact, not only Theists and Religious, but Christians in particular.

Hell, most of the breakthrough scientific theories are made by Catholics. Protestants and Puritan sects in the US still believe in Creationism while the Catholic Universities developed the theory of the Big Bang.

>Says that there's unbelievable ignorance of History;
>Doesn't know this:

"“Encyclopedia of Wars,” authors Charles Phillips and Alan Axelrod document the history of recorded warfare, and from their list of 1763 wars only 123 have been classified to involve a religious cause, accounting for less than 7 percent of all wars and less than 2 percent of all people killed in warfare."

fail

>Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
>trigger
The kikes killed Jesus so i'd expect much more from them this is actually weak.

Oh, I'm certain there was a reason given for each of the many scientists being repressed. Motive and reason are not the same. If you don't believe science was viewed as a threat, then you have some reading to do. I mean, I'm pretty sure I know where you're coming from. There has been a great deal of exaggeration, because it fits the agenda. This doesn't dismiss the reality.

Probably because it is actually false, and one of those social memes that is actually complete fabrication like, bulldogs being nanny dogs and such rubbish.

also, the dark ages weren't a global event. To pretend like Christianity had that much impact for better or for worse is frankly complete fantasy.

>exaggeration doesn't mean it wasn't the reality
Fucking hell.

And religious cause =/= Christian cause

Ignorant fedora tipper detected

Nah, Galileo just really hated the Pope. Kind of like how you hate vegetables.

Because it doesn't make sense.
The whole world wasn't Christian. So, does he attribute it to Buddhists and everyone else?
There is no reason Christianity would halt the progress of the times. You could still experiment and advance technologies, as they naturally did.

It doesn't. Seth McFarland just tries so hard to be with the it crowd.

That's not what I said. I said it has been exaggerated, but that doesn't dismiss the realitt that there was still real fear of new ideas, and repression that resulted from it.

I love veggies! What slander!

>implying the Muslim hordes wouldnt have conquered the globe had the crusades not happened

Same dif b/ro

The point is, his hatred wasn't exactly based on anything. Sometimes, you just hate people for no reason.

...

>implying they werent more advanced

there was no dark age btw

...

You sound like you're wound up over something you vaguely understand. Before investing so much emotionally into something, I would suggest thoroughly examining the situation. Frankly, the issue you are taking is one, fundamentally, of political corruption.

>not realizing that religion was the equivalent of law for scattered tribal societies
>still giving enough of a shit what other people think to foist your beliefs on them
>still watching Family Guy

Theism/Atheism isn't the problem, it's people who have never read a book and spew memes from trash cartoons shows

How is that the point? The pope literally saved Galileo from the inquisition. The fact that this was necessary is the point.