Upload
Login or register

MattSwan

Last status update:
-
Gender: male
Date Signed Up:1/30/2010
Last Login:11/27/2015
Location:Athens Georgia
Stats
Content Thumbs: 33 total,  56 ,  23
Comment Thumbs: 3520 total,  4164 ,  644
Content Level Progress: 62.71% (37/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 19% (19/100)
Level 235 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz → Level 236 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz
Subscribers:0
Content Views:1163
Total Comments Made:948
FJ Points:3226

latest user's comments

#398 - Some people turn the pain of being socially ostracized into ar…  [+] (3 replies) 12/16/2012 on If only... +41
#419 - tomnash (12/16/2012) [-]
#415 - foreveralonememe (12/16/2012) [-]
#406 - guidedhandsbitch (12/16/2012) [-]
pure poetry, no joke.
#126 - "B-but they are mutually exclusive." Mutual…  [+] (1 reply) 12/04/2012 on Progress Report 0
User avatar
#128 - cullenatorguy (12/04/2012) [-]
God damn it, I didn't mean to put that, honest. I'm terrible with vocabulary. I haven't changed my argument, I fucked up my wording. Sorry.
#113 - Of course they are entirely different. Thank you for proving m…  [+] (3 replies) 12/04/2012 on Progress Report -1
User avatar
#118 - cullenatorguy (12/04/2012) [-]
That's what I said from the top, asshat. Commas then derogatory words are fun, faggot!
User avatar
#126 - MattSwan (12/04/2012) [-]
"B-but they are mutually exclusive."

Mutually exclusive - adj, being related such that each excludes or precludes the other.

Mutually exclusive means one can't exist while the other does. You've changed your argument over time. What you've ended up arguing for is a subset of my original argument. Learn yourself some rhetoric.
User avatar
#128 - cullenatorguy (12/04/2012) [-]
God damn it, I didn't mean to put that, honest. I'm terrible with vocabulary. I haven't changed my argument, I fucked up my wording. Sorry.
#107 - I can't systematically prove God's existence because it's a *…  [+] (5 replies) 12/04/2012 on Progress Report -1
User avatar
#110 - cullenatorguy (12/04/2012) [-]
Then you understand that faith and science are entirely separate.
"you cannot prove it with a system based on ration, like science." - MattSwan

yep, because they are completely different.
User avatar
#113 - MattSwan (12/04/2012) [-]
Of course they are entirely different. Thank you for proving my thesis, cunt.
User avatar
#118 - cullenatorguy (12/04/2012) [-]
That's what I said from the top, asshat. Commas then derogatory words are fun, faggot!
User avatar
#126 - MattSwan (12/04/2012) [-]
"B-but they are mutually exclusive."

Mutually exclusive - adj, being related such that each excludes or precludes the other.

Mutually exclusive means one can't exist while the other does. You've changed your argument over time. What you've ended up arguing for is a subset of my original argument. Learn yourself some rhetoric.
User avatar
#128 - cullenatorguy (12/04/2012) [-]
God damn it, I didn't mean to put that, honest. I'm terrible with vocabulary. I haven't changed my argument, I fucked up my wording. Sorry.
#99 - That is simply not true. Your definition of science is entirel…  [+] (7 replies) 12/04/2012 on Progress Report 0
User avatar
#103 - cullenatorguy (12/04/2012) [-]
dictionary.reference.com/browse/science

Tell me, good sir, how you can systematically prove god's existence through a series of observations and studies. You can't. And yes, science (we're talking about enlightenment period, Galileo, Newton) was invested in because people didn't like the, "Because god did it" answer. Granted, some pursued to find the existence of god, but all were ventured upon to find an alternative reason for why shit happened.
User avatar
#107 - MattSwan (12/04/2012) [-]
I can't systematically prove God's existence because it's a fucking religion you asshole. You are ignoring my previous points entirely. When you try to take a system based on faith, like religion, you cannot prove it with a system based on ration, like science. For the same reasons that no one believes you when you publish a scientific report because you "felt very strongly of it." Unintelligent people use faith to determine cause and effect and the same dickwads use science to determine purpose.
User avatar
#110 - cullenatorguy (12/04/2012) [-]
Then you understand that faith and science are entirely separate.
"you cannot prove it with a system based on ration, like science." - MattSwan

yep, because they are completely different.
User avatar
#113 - MattSwan (12/04/2012) [-]
Of course they are entirely different. Thank you for proving my thesis, cunt.
User avatar
#118 - cullenatorguy (12/04/2012) [-]
That's what I said from the top, asshat. Commas then derogatory words are fun, faggot!
User avatar
#126 - MattSwan (12/04/2012) [-]
"B-but they are mutually exclusive."

Mutually exclusive - adj, being related such that each excludes or precludes the other.

Mutually exclusive means one can't exist while the other does. You've changed your argument over time. What you've ended up arguing for is a subset of my original argument. Learn yourself some rhetoric.
User avatar
#128 - cullenatorguy (12/04/2012) [-]
God damn it, I didn't mean to put that, honest. I'm terrible with vocabulary. I haven't changed my argument, I fucked up my wording. Sorry.
#94 - Saying that they need to exclude each other simply because the…  [+] (9 replies) 12/04/2012 on Progress Report 0
User avatar
#96 - cullenatorguy (12/04/2012) [-]
The whole point of science is to exclude faith. Can you imagine what would happen if scientists couldn't figure something out for the life of them, so they just said, "God must have done it."? It would be terrible! Religion as no place is science. Science is finding out how the world works in the absence of a deity. Science, however, can be in religion.
User avatar
#99 - MattSwan (12/04/2012) [-]
That is simply not true. Your definition of science is entirely inaccurate. Science is simply the search for a truth and proving it, thereby expanding your grasp of knowledge. Things don't exist to prove others wrong. Man didn't invent fire because some asshole said wood wouldn't burn. He did it because he was fucking cold. I don't ask my surgeon to preach to me for the same reasons I don't ask my pastor to give me a quick appendectomy.
User avatar
#103 - cullenatorguy (12/04/2012) [-]
dictionary.reference.com/browse/science

Tell me, good sir, how you can systematically prove god's existence through a series of observations and studies. You can't. And yes, science (we're talking about enlightenment period, Galileo, Newton) was invested in because people didn't like the, "Because god did it" answer. Granted, some pursued to find the existence of god, but all were ventured upon to find an alternative reason for why shit happened.
User avatar
#107 - MattSwan (12/04/2012) [-]
I can't systematically prove God's existence because it's a fucking religion you asshole. You are ignoring my previous points entirely. When you try to take a system based on faith, like religion, you cannot prove it with a system based on ration, like science. For the same reasons that no one believes you when you publish a scientific report because you "felt very strongly of it." Unintelligent people use faith to determine cause and effect and the same dickwads use science to determine purpose.
User avatar
#110 - cullenatorguy (12/04/2012) [-]
Then you understand that faith and science are entirely separate.
"you cannot prove it with a system based on ration, like science." - MattSwan

yep, because they are completely different.
User avatar
#113 - MattSwan (12/04/2012) [-]
Of course they are entirely different. Thank you for proving my thesis, cunt.
User avatar
#118 - cullenatorguy (12/04/2012) [-]
That's what I said from the top, asshat. Commas then derogatory words are fun, faggot!
User avatar
#126 - MattSwan (12/04/2012) [-]
"B-but they are mutually exclusive."

Mutually exclusive - adj, being related such that each excludes or precludes the other.

Mutually exclusive means one can't exist while the other does. You've changed your argument over time. What you've ended up arguing for is a subset of my original argument. Learn yourself some rhetoric.
User avatar
#128 - cullenatorguy (12/04/2012) [-]
God damn it, I didn't mean to put that, honest. I'm terrible with vocabulary. I haven't changed my argument, I fucked up my wording. Sorry.