Talk:Atheist

Butthurt atheists

Have fucked this page up again. I had to remake my old account because this page keeps getting vandalized with minor "innocuous" edits. Attention atheists: If you feel the need to edit this page to make it A: Less inflammatory to atheists or B: Also inflammatory to other religions (Yes, atheism is a religion), then this article has done its job, YHBT, please make your way to the offended page.

Welcome to encyclopedia fucking dramatica.Juggerbot 02:36, 9 November 2011 (CET)

Thank you for stating what is needed. Save the whales! Breed them so we can eat whale jerky! 22:55, 24 November 2012 (EST)

Anyone know why the first four sentences were added to this article? They aren't very lulzy at all and the first two create an atmosphere that doesn't seem to flow with the rest of the article. An atmosphere in which there is hope for Atheists by introducing the words myth and insinuating whichever religion they choose to detest is nothing more then a phenomena of the human psyche which of course in an idea that does not follow through with the path this article is going down. I'm not sure if it was a subtle change some butthurt Atheist didn't think someone would notice or if someone thought it would be a worthwhile addition. Reeses 00:49, 8 August 2013 (EDT)

It doesn't even speak well for atheists, it is just stupid. Atomicnumber27 02:02, 8 August 2013 (EDT)

Haven't read it, but generally if it's not amusing or inciting some level of buttmad/frustration then it's not effective/relevant and should likely be rewritten/improved upon (or if all else fails removal). You should usually try rewriting it though first, outright removal should be a "last resort" option, normally if it's just completely incoherent/irrelevant and can't be improved much. Above all else whatever you add should at least attempt to incite drama (or document it), although in some cases documentation is okay even if it's not all that funny/drama oriented, so long as it's an "Internet thing". In some respects we're kind of like the Wikipedia of Internet culture, with a primary focus on drama/comedy. --Onideus 02:11, 8 August 2013 (EDT)

"They believe calling people they don't agree with 'retarded sheeple' constitutes as logic and reason. They discredit faith and yet expect to get laid before they die. If they can't be Christfags, nobody can be Christfags. They demand the burden of proof be honored and yet spout pseudo-statistic bullshit pulled from an image macros. They are the atheists, cancer to philosophy and sociology." Would it be better if it was changed to something like this? Save the whales! Adoph-in Hitler needs an army! 13:52, 8 August 2013 (EDT)

Im an atheist

But I am tolerant of other people believing in a god. WHAT AM I??????? David1544 21:16, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Annoying. Equivamp 06:20, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

KTHXBAI!!!! David1544 05:13, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Truth is only our conviction when there is nothing left to be milked, then we simply act as an archive of the relevant drama. This article has bait set forward to lure out more drama, and in effect contributions to the article itself.  — Preceding comment added by Duster (talk • contribs), who is too much of a fucking retard to sign their own posts. IT'S FOUR TILDES (~~~~), NOT ROCKET SCIENCE!

Arguably

Atheists, the more intelligent ones can better quote (and understand) the bible than most christians. It makes it easier to disprove the source material when ones knows it. I mean, if you really think about it, the god of the old testament was a ball breaking bastard, but he loves you and wants to save you from hell? Sure. Whatev.

The bible, god, and all that has to do with religion should be throw out with santa claus and the easter bunny, because it's another fairy tale designed to give comfort to those who are afraid of the dark. Sadly, most adults haven't grown up to think for themselves.

MyBallsAreLarge 18:59, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Cool story bro. Equivamp^{talk(Troll me here)} 19:04, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing, but I think you missed the point of the article. I'll ask that you reread it twice and talk to us again once you've comprehended.

There will be a brief quiz second period tomorrow. DeCaffinatedPlease 15:20, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

yhbt. Juggerbot 04:06, 9 November 2011 (CET)

Wow, if anyone actually cared, your entire post could be quoted in the "Atheist Quotes" section. It'd be a perfect fit. You (naturally) sound exactly like the people being identified in this article. --Reeses 00:13, 8 January 2012 (CET)

Trollin' Deviantart atheists

Should I get creative, or just stick to the basics as outlined by the article?

I wouldn't really get into specific sites on this article, the DeviantART article is probably a better place for that. 02:48, 8 September 2011 (CEST)

Unfunny edits

Some butthurt atheist fagged up the 'Some Ways to Confuse An Atheist' by adding links to sentences making them unfunny --Arif 15:47, 7 November 2011 (CET)

Behold! The anti-atheist mobile!

This newspaper clipping showcasing this vehicle should be put in this article. This car is just what I needed to keep my brain from being fried by those stupid atheists. JohnathanNiggers 03:16, 7 December 2011 (CET)

Does anyone else find it humorous that the description of the vehicle includes the adjectives "queer" and "closeted"? Juggerbot 08:09, 12 December 2011 (CET)

Best possible Final Solution

I must contend in the best way possible with these "Atheists", which are arguably the same species as a "Nigger". Reading this article, I was pleasantly surprised. I generally hold no qualms with religious personnel or these "Atheists", but I've come into contact with this species on more than one occasion. The article perfectly describes them, though content wise the article could be increased. I've come to ask, which sections of the article should be sanctioned into the ultimate trolling exercise against this species. Every single creature that's derived from this species has acted exactly as described, it's incredible. They often refute Hitler being atheist, consistently use "Pen & Teller" and "Richard Fagkins" as excuses, notably referencing Santa or the Tooth Fairy. I believe that they don't understand the fact that these entities can be proven to be man made, whereas most religions rely on testaments of various assortments, which the species will generally ignore, as its belief of disbelief is completely right according to them.

To paraphrase, what is the best way to produce lulz in combining proof and idiocy that Hitler was indeed an atheist, Pen & Teller are delusional like fagkins and that Santa can be proven wrong, etc. I've found similar methods in trolling Muslims and Christians, generally verbally, the difference is, I've noticed them to accept when they're wrong, which is never in compliance to that of a Nigger or Atheist. ElvisTroll 18:43, 2 May 2012 (EDT)

The fact that you created account just to get to post TL;DR rant on ED has some unfortunate implications. Zyklon 18:48, 2 May 2012 (EDT)

He's like wanting to help, idk? That section is pretty much huge as fuck and nobody cares about it. Mike the Great (talk) 19:28, 2 May 2012 (EDT)

TLDR: More and funnier shit. You got it. User:TheHatenaCritic 16:24, 10 May 2012 (EDT)

Still a classic article with the proper reaction from butthurt Atheists who don't want to admit that their (lack of) beliefs tend to be manipulable with ease. My faith in lulz will never die. Hitmonchan 19:26, 20 May 2012 (EDT)

Rhetoric

This article speaks more truth then the entirety of the internet combined. Codegenepool 10:59, 2 September 2012 (EDT)Codegenepool

fuck you.   Andrés    talk    contribs   11:00, 2 September 2012 (EDT)

It's true, let's have e-war all way though the ED Galaxy, join the dark sid- I mean light side, yes, light side *looks suspicious* The kid hasn't got it right, maybe he's left handed.Lazarus

TektonTV

...that is all. ZetaSonic 01:40, 27 December, 2012 (EST)

Extending The Atheist list

I was just wondering if we should extent the list to cover some of the people with an ED article as well, who also be atheists, but not necessarily makes it the focus of their channel, or would that be too cumbersome? I mean that for instance Razorfist, Asalieri and TheArchfiend are atheists. Atomicnumber27 11:14, 13 August 2013 (EDT)

heads up

the article is starting to break from the sheer amount of quotes and video galleries, please dont add anymore unless youre replacing something. - DL | _^talk | _^contribs 12:30, 26 September 2013 (EDT)

--ZetaSonic 02:15, 7 January 2014 (EST)

Remember that one South Park episode?

Y'know, where the world's gone atheist and its factions fight each other and called each other stupid?

Well... http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2014/01/06/A-Schism-in-the-Atheist-Church#comment-1190054774

ZetaSonic 02:15, 7 January 2014 (EST)

Guess South Park was right again. -GeneralFaggoteer 14:59, 11 February 2014 (EST)

Hell even buzzfeed gets something right

There is this saying about a broken clock. I think it is the clockmaker arguement. CobaltCat 15:24, 11 February 2014 (EST)

The butthurt is strong in that comment section. Guess they hit the nail on the irritated anus head. -GeneralFaggoteer 19:25, 11 February 2014 (EST)

The entire thing seemed like bad satire and rhetoric.

If atheists are so smart, then why are they so easily trolled? Save the whales! Adoph-in Hitler needs an army! 16:02, 14 February 2014 (EST)

This is the most offensive article on this website. No, /Offended does not compare. That's full of gore and medical conditions, but this one cuts deep. Skycaptain95 11:22, 8 April 2014 (EDT)

Aw gee, that's too bad. Maybe this will cheer you up --> *Follow the Magical Link!* - GeneralFaggoteer 21:14, 17 April 2014 (EDT)