this post was submitted on 05 Jun 2024
1187 points (97.6% liked)

Atheist Memes

5589 readers
57 users here now

About

A community for the most based memes from atheists, agnostics, antitheists, and skeptics.

Rules

  1. No Pro-Religious or Anti-Atheist Content.

  2. No Unrelated Content. All posts must be memes related to the topic of atheism and/or religion.

  3. No bigotry.

  4. Attack ideas not people.

  5. Spammers and trolls will be instantly banned no exceptions.

  6. No False Reporting

  7. NSFW posts must be marked as such.

Resources

International Suicide Hotlines

Recovering From Religion

Happy Whole Way

Non Religious Organizations

Freedom From Religion Foundation

Atheist Republic

Atheists for Liberty

American Atheists

Ex-theist Communities

!exchristian@lemmy.one

!exmormon@lemmy.world

!exmuslim@lemmy.world

Other Similar Communities

!religiouscringe@midwest.social

!priest_arrested@lemmy.world

!atheism@lemmy.world

!atheism@lemmy.ml

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] GladiusB@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I understand. But if it's isolated it's considered non reactive. (I manage a hazmat DOT fleet)

[–] PapaStevesy@midwest.social 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Ok? That's neat, I just fail to see the relevance I guess. A god would be harmless too, if it was isolated from the rest of the universe.

[–] GladiusB@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm asking how it's going to react with stuff. In like a basic chemistry kind of way.

[–] PapaStevesy@midwest.social 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Seems like something a hazmat DOT fleet manager would already know though, so I guess I just don't know why you're asking that. And truthfully, I don't particularly care, as, again, I fail to see the relevance. I mean like, if it's real chemical kinetic information that you're after, there are innumerable better sources than the comments section of a meme page on a fringe social media platform. If you're trying to make a point about my original tongue-in-cheek comparison, feel free to make it.

[–] GladiusB@lemmy.world -1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Ok. You can just accept you're wrong rather than double downing and sounding less educated than you originally did.

[–] PapaStevesy@midwest.social 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Mmm yes, because "double downing" is a phrase an educated person uses. Got it, lolol.

Look, I would totally accept that I was wrong if I knew what you were referring to, but I literally don't know, you haven't explained your opinion at all. Like, please! Tell me what you mean! What am I wrong about?

[–] GladiusB@lemmy.world -1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Like totally. Because educated people don't know modern lingo or anything. No cap. Your argument is so mid.

[–] PapaStevesy@midwest.social 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

At least I gave one, even if it was sarcastic. Once again, all you offer is non sequiturs and haughty derision. I guess I just want to know what you think this discussion is about, because all I've gotten out of it is vacuous meta-argument trollery.

[–] GladiusB@lemmy.world -1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Blah blah blah. You can't accept that you don't have a single point and just keep yammering on. I'm not even reading your response.

[–] PapaStevesy@midwest.social 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Lololol it started with my single point and then you changed the subject so you could...flex your in-depth chemistry knowledge on me I guess? But without actually making any salient point, so I'm left, as you say, yammering on to what is essentially a brick wall.

[–] GladiusB@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

No. Oxygen doesn't react to itself in a sealed vessel. But I guess you aren't smart enough to put those duplos together on your own. So good luck.

[–] PapaStevesy@midwest.social 1 points 5 months ago

"No" what? I didn't ask you any yes or no questions, I asked you to relate whatever the hell it is you're talking about to what I was talking about, which you have failed to do yet again. And you're a liar, you said you weren't gonna read this.