Jay
@jaydawawi.mastodon.social.ap.brid.gy
Bring me evidence, not just assertions and claims. Agnostic atheist/"none". Methodological naturalist
🌉 bridged from https://mastodon.social/@JayDaWawi on the fediverse by https://fed.brid.gy/
🌉 bridged from https://mastodon.social/@JayDaWawi on the fediverse by https://fed.brid.gy/
With Numbers 11 in mind - and Joseph would most likely have known about it - why would Joseph be concerned about Mary getting pregnant *if he hadn't done the deed*?
February 11, 2026 at 3:11 PM
With Numbers 11 in mind - and Joseph would most likely have known about it - why would Joseph be concerned about Mary getting pregnant *if he hadn't done the deed*?
"The greatest threat against freedom is the absence of criticism."
-Wole Soyinka
“It’s wrong to criticize leaders of the Church, even if the criticism is true."
-Dallin Oaks
-Wole Soyinka
“It’s wrong to criticize leaders of the Church, even if the criticism is true."
-Dallin Oaks
February 5, 2026 at 9:29 PM
"The greatest threat against freedom is the absence of criticism."
-Wole Soyinka
“It’s wrong to criticize leaders of the Church, even if the criticism is true."
-Dallin Oaks
-Wole Soyinka
“It’s wrong to criticize leaders of the Church, even if the criticism is true."
-Dallin Oaks
It is logically impossible for someone to have something not go according to plan to an all-knowing and all-powerful being. I don't have a formal structure handy, but the gist is that being all-knowing includes knowledge of all possible futures, possibly even some impossible futures depending on […]
Original post on mastodon.social
mastodon.social
February 5, 2026 at 2:54 PM
It is logically impossible for someone to have something not go according to plan to an all-knowing and all-powerful being. I don't have a formal structure handy, but the gist is that being all-knowing includes knowledge of all possible futures, possibly even some impossible futures depending on […]
Somebody pointed out an interesting flaw in the watchmaker argument:
We have no natural explanation for watches
We do, however, have natural explanations for stars, planet formation, and evolution.
Complexity does not imply intentionality.
We have no natural explanation for watches
We do, however, have natural explanations for stars, planet formation, and evolution.
Complexity does not imply intentionality.
January 31, 2026 at 4:54 AM
Somebody pointed out an interesting flaw in the watchmaker argument:
We have no natural explanation for watches
We do, however, have natural explanations for stars, planet formation, and evolution.
Complexity does not imply intentionality.
We have no natural explanation for watches
We do, however, have natural explanations for stars, planet formation, and evolution.
Complexity does not imply intentionality.
I am an agnostic apatheist for some god concepts, gnostic antitheist for others.
Basically, some god concepts, I don't care about, such as a god that caused the Big Bang but cannot interact with it, or worthless definitions such as "the universe is God"
However, there are some god concepts […]
Basically, some god concepts, I don't care about, such as a god that caused the Big Bang but cannot interact with it, or worthless definitions such as "the universe is God"
However, there are some god concepts […]
Original post on mastodon.social
mastodon.social
January 14, 2026 at 3:34 AM
I am an agnostic apatheist for some god concepts, gnostic antitheist for others.
Basically, some god concepts, I don't care about, such as a god that caused the Big Bang but cannot interact with it, or worthless definitions such as "the universe is God"
However, there are some god concepts […]
Basically, some god concepts, I don't care about, such as a god that caused the Big Bang but cannot interact with it, or worthless definitions such as "the universe is God"
However, there are some god concepts […]
Religion teaches us to trust our intuitions, and that it's impossible we're wrong.
Science teaches us to keep our intuitions in check, because it's likely possible we're wrong
Science teaches us to keep our intuitions in check, because it's likely possible we're wrong
January 9, 2026 at 5:28 PM
Religion teaches us to trust our intuitions, and that it's impossible we're wrong.
Science teaches us to keep our intuitions in check, because it's likely possible we're wrong
Science teaches us to keep our intuitions in check, because it's likely possible we're wrong
I think that arguments based off of what a particular holy book "doesn't not" say are not good faith arguments
January 7, 2026 at 1:58 AM
I think that arguments based off of what a particular holy book "doesn't not" say are not good faith arguments
Why does God get all of the credit when things go right, but none of the blame when things go wrong, even though God is supposed to be fully sovereign? If God is fully sovereign, then God is completely in control, and the only way things can go wrong is if he lets things go wrong. Ergo, God is evil.
January 6, 2026 at 1:29 PM
Why does God get all of the credit when things go right, but none of the blame when things go wrong, even though God is supposed to be fully sovereign? If God is fully sovereign, then God is completely in control, and the only way things can go wrong is if he lets things go wrong. Ergo, God is evil.
Isn't it interesting that the crowd that's calling trans allies "groomers" is trying to pass laws that allow non-medical-professionals to "inspect" the genitals of children?
January 5, 2026 at 7:03 PM
Isn't it interesting that the crowd that's calling trans allies "groomers" is trying to pass laws that allow non-medical-professionals to "inspect" the genitals of children?
Hang on. Why is it that when a Christian tells a former Christian that "they were never a Christian to begin with" that's reasonable to them, but whenever a trans person that "they were never that gender to begin with", suddenly the Christian loses their mind?
January 3, 2026 at 9:30 PM
Hang on. Why is it that when a Christian tells a former Christian that "they were never a Christian to begin with" that's reasonable to them, but whenever a trans person that "they were never that gender to begin with", suddenly the Christian loses their mind?
If zygotes are people, then riddle me this:
A fire breaks out in an IVF lab you're in, and you hear somebody screaming. A lab technician breaks their leg in the panic, and they're in front of a tray of 100 viable zygotes. You only have the time and energy to save either the tray or the tech […]
A fire breaks out in an IVF lab you're in, and you hear somebody screaming. A lab technician breaks their leg in the panic, and they're in front of a tray of 100 viable zygotes. You only have the time and energy to save either the tray or the tech […]
Original post on mastodon.social
mastodon.social
January 3, 2026 at 5:07 PM
If zygotes are people, then riddle me this:
A fire breaks out in an IVF lab you're in, and you hear somebody screaming. A lab technician breaks their leg in the panic, and they're in front of a tray of 100 viable zygotes. You only have the time and energy to save either the tray or the tech […]
A fire breaks out in an IVF lab you're in, and you hear somebody screaming. A lab technician breaks their leg in the panic, and they're in front of a tray of 100 viable zygotes. You only have the time and energy to save either the tray or the tech […]
Telling kids that it's okay to be gay or trans is not the same thing as convincing a kid that they are gay or trans. Those are wildly different things, and if you think they're the same thing, you need a new outlook on life, and you need to stay away from any kids.
January 1, 2026 at 9:36 PM
Telling kids that it's okay to be gay or trans is not the same thing as convincing a kid that they are gay or trans. Those are wildly different things, and if you think they're the same thing, you need a new outlook on life, and you need to stay away from any kids.
If you own a private jet, you lose all privileges about talking about "humility" and "being humble"
December 31, 2025 at 7:11 PM
If you own a private jet, you lose all privileges about talking about "humility" and "being humble"
If your epistemology is "everything that makes me feel good is objective truth, and everything that makes me feel bad is objectively a lie", please get launched into outer space without any gear.
December 18, 2025 at 12:07 PM
If your epistemology is "everything that makes me feel good is objective truth, and everything that makes me feel bad is objectively a lie", please get launched into outer space without any gear.
I'm no longer a Christian, but I'm pretty sure Jesus didn't say "make my lambs go through mountains of paperwork that requires hours of job hunting so that my lambs can eat only boring food"; I'm pretty sure he just said "feed my lambs"
December 3, 2025 at 7:04 PM
I'm no longer a Christian, but I'm pretty sure Jesus didn't say "make my lambs go through mountains of paperwork that requires hours of job hunting so that my lambs can eat only boring food"; I'm pretty sure he just said "feed my lambs"
It's the time of year where people seem to need to get reminded that nobody, and I mean *nobody*, is offended by the phrase "Merry Christmas". While Christmas means different things to different people, that's not the point of this discussion. However, the notion that people are offended by the […]
Original post on mastodon.social
mastodon.social
November 29, 2025 at 8:03 PM
It's the time of year where people seem to need to get reminded that nobody, and I mean *nobody*, is offended by the phrase "Merry Christmas". While Christmas means different things to different people, that's not the point of this discussion. However, the notion that people are offended by the […]
If your system requires infinite growth with finite constraints, it is guaranteed to inevitably fail. That's basic logic.
November 23, 2025 at 6:09 PM
If your system requires infinite growth with finite constraints, it is guaranteed to inevitably fail. That's basic logic.
The human societal trust paradox:
We are socal creatures. We cannot *not* trust. Society is built off of trust. Yet there are people who thrive off of abusing trust. How do we allow for trust to grow and flourish without allowing others to abuse trust?
We are socal creatures. We cannot *not* trust. Society is built off of trust. Yet there are people who thrive off of abusing trust. How do we allow for trust to grow and flourish without allowing others to abuse trust?
November 20, 2025 at 2:31 AM
The human societal trust paradox:
We are socal creatures. We cannot *not* trust. Society is built off of trust. Yet there are people who thrive off of abusing trust. How do we allow for trust to grow and flourish without allowing others to abuse trust?
We are socal creatures. We cannot *not* trust. Society is built off of trust. Yet there are people who thrive off of abusing trust. How do we allow for trust to grow and flourish without allowing others to abuse trust?
Wages are stagnant, costs are rising, birth control is becoming illegal, abortions are becoming illegal, SNAP is gone, churches aren't being charitable... And all of this is the fault of Jack and Jane who had a ripped condom?
November 19, 2025 at 12:15 PM
Wages are stagnant, costs are rising, birth control is becoming illegal, abortions are becoming illegal, SNAP is gone, churches aren't being charitable... And all of this is the fault of Jack and Jane who had a ripped condom?
Apologetics in a nutshell:
"Science can't answer everything, therefore my interpretation of my denomination of my religion is correct"
"Science can't answer everything, therefore my interpretation of my denomination of my religion is correct"
November 17, 2025 at 8:10 PM
Apologetics in a nutshell:
"Science can't answer everything, therefore my interpretation of my denomination of my religion is correct"
"Science can't answer everything, therefore my interpretation of my denomination of my religion is correct"
I admit, I'm not the best with logic, and I'm absolutely terrible with vocabulary. I'm willing to learn, but I can be slow.
November 16, 2025 at 6:42 PM
I admit, I'm not the best with logic, and I'm absolutely terrible with vocabulary. I'm willing to learn, but I can be slow.
The Big Bang was not the beginning of the universe. That is the critical flaw in the cosmological argument. We don't know yet where the matter and energy came from, however, when you calculate the observed energy in the universe, when you put gravity as negative energy, it comes to exactly a net […]
Original post on mastodon.social
mastodon.social
November 15, 2025 at 4:03 PM
The Big Bang was not the beginning of the universe. That is the critical flaw in the cosmological argument. We don't know yet where the matter and energy came from, however, when you calculate the observed energy in the universe, when you put gravity as negative energy, it comes to exactly a net […]
"Tests" from God are stupid.
It isn't for him; he already knows the outcome. It isn't for the person being tested; they already know their intentions. So like... Who is the test for?
It isn't for him; he already knows the outcome. It isn't for the person being tested; they already know their intentions. So like... Who is the test for?
November 14, 2025 at 11:46 PM
"Tests" from God are stupid.
It isn't for him; he already knows the outcome. It isn't for the person being tested; they already know their intentions. So like... Who is the test for?
It isn't for him; he already knows the outcome. It isn't for the person being tested; they already know their intentions. So like... Who is the test for?
RE: https://mastodon.social/@JayDaWawi/115548671810739576
Huh. I have been informed that the second one is known as "affirming the consequent".
Huh. I have been informed that the second one is known as "affirming the consequent".
The difference between a "Modus Ponens" and question begging is a demonstrable link between X and Y.
"Whenever it rains, the ground gets wet; it's raining, therefore the ground is wet"
Vs
"Wind is caused by unicorns flapping their wings; it's windy, therefore unicorns are flapping their wings […]
"Whenever it rains, the ground gets wet; it's raining, therefore the ground is wet"
Vs
"Wind is caused by unicorns flapping their wings; it's windy, therefore unicorns are flapping their wings […]
Original post on mastodon.social
mastodon.social
November 14, 2025 at 8:20 PM
RE: https://mastodon.social/@JayDaWawi/115548671810739576
Huh. I have been informed that the second one is known as "affirming the consequent".
Huh. I have been informed that the second one is known as "affirming the consequent".
The difference between a "Modus Ponens" and question begging is a demonstrable link between X and Y.
"Whenever it rains, the ground gets wet; it's raining, therefore the ground is wet"
Vs
"Wind is caused by unicorns flapping their wings; it's windy, therefore unicorns are flapping their wings […]
"Whenever it rains, the ground gets wet; it's raining, therefore the ground is wet"
Vs
"Wind is caused by unicorns flapping their wings; it's windy, therefore unicorns are flapping their wings […]
Original post on mastodon.social
mastodon.social
November 14, 2025 at 3:08 PM
The difference between a "Modus Ponens" and question begging is a demonstrable link between X and Y.
"Whenever it rains, the ground gets wet; it's raining, therefore the ground is wet"
Vs
"Wind is caused by unicorns flapping their wings; it's windy, therefore unicorns are flapping their wings […]
"Whenever it rains, the ground gets wet; it's raining, therefore the ground is wet"
Vs
"Wind is caused by unicorns flapping their wings; it's windy, therefore unicorns are flapping their wings […]