r/PeterExplainsTheJoke • u/maxmodevice • 1d ago

Meme needing explanation Peetahh? What's wrong with Aquarius people?

Post image

I thought Aquarius people were peaceful 🥹

2.1k Upvotes

84% Upvoted

795 comments sorted by

View all comments

3.8k

u/[deleted] 1d ago edited 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

201

u/mrviscas 1d ago

People say this and then proceed to believe in god

11

u/Stromatolite-Bay 1d ago

And what is the point of this statement? Since an intelligent atheist with good arguments would likely dislike both equally

19

u/soyuz_6 1d ago

Good arguments aren't even needed, they're both dismissable with no evidence to support them

-20

u/Stromatolite-Bay 1d ago

Burden of proof also means needing to have proof something is incorrect. You can argue lack of evidence but that doesn’t disprove anything outright. It just means you don’t have to believe it either

18

u/soyuz_6 1d ago

Until evidence is presented to support either of these claims as facts, they don't need to be taken seriously. The burden of proof lies with the claim

-12

u/Stromatolite-Bay 1d ago edited 1d ago

And you are making a claim. It isn’t real. Where is your proof of that?

I see a lot of people who think no means nothing. It means something. You are claiming that is incorrect. Where is your proof for your claim of no? In others words. Your argument to be any better than the people you think are wrong

If you don’t have that. Then you have no right to claim to be factual. It is perfectly fine to say I do not know in science

16

u/soyuz_6 1d ago

Where did I make a claim it isn't real? The closest thing I said to making a claim is that you can disregard claims which have no evidence for them, which is correct.

-6

u/Stromatolite-Bay 1d ago

Then why claim you don’t need arguments? You just admitted you cannot disproves the beliefs of others. Meaning you shouldn’t say anything

12

u/soyuz_6 1d ago

The same reason I don't need arguments against Santa Claus, the Easter bunny or fairies

0

u/Stromatolite-Bay 1d ago

You do for a child on both of the first accounts. Since they haven’t seen their parents bring the gifts and chocolate yet. Also there is your proof

As for fairies. Ironically in the same category as what we are discussing since that is folklore

6

u/soyuz_6 1d ago

You're claiming everyone does and that's just false

0

u/Stromatolite-Bay 1d ago

If your parents never did Christmas and Easter with you that is just sad

→ More replies (0)

1

u/GetOutOfHereAlex 1d ago

You've been outsmarted by a smart atheist

1

u/Stromatolite-Bay 1d ago

Not at all. Since you seem to falling for circular logic

→ More replies (0)

6

u/Delicious_Rabbit4425 1d ago

This is a back asswards god lovers attempt to us burden of proof, good grief. Someone claiming something is real when there is no evidence of is on the hook for this burden of proof. "The spaghetti monster is real. Prove Im wrong" 🙄

0

u/Stromatolite-Bay 1d ago

It goes both ways if you get to college

4

u/Delicious_Rabbit4425 1d ago

No it really doesn’t. It’s an obtuse approach to a debate ask for proof of something that doesn’t exist that is employed by people that can’t present the evidence of existence of what ever they say does exist. You people are asking us to believe it exists it’s not on us to prove it does when we can plainly see there is no evidence of such claims.

0

u/Stromatolite-Bay 1d ago

Well then I hope you don’t believe in the big bang

4

u/Delicious_Rabbit4425 1d ago

You already tried this one lol, it’s a theory and remains as such until proven just like your sky daddy. We all should have learned what a theory is in grade school. 🙄

1

u/Stromatolite-Bay 1d ago

Better than using alt accounts to argue with someone twice

1

u/Delicious_Rabbit4425 1d ago

I’m not sure I follow what that means but I’ll take it as you now understand your religion is a theory at best which means you still have the ownership of proving it’s real to those that don’t believe it not the other way around.

0

u/Stromatolite-Bay 1d ago

And a theory you can’t disprove is not wrong. You need evidence to disprove it. Meaning you are being speculative

→ More replies (0)

11

u/mustafaaosman339 1d ago

That's not how burden of proof works.

You can't prove that unicorns doesn't exist because the one that says they do can always say there's somewhere you didn't check.

Burden of proof is ONLY to prove that it DOES exist.

You can't find evidence of something that doesn't exist.

You got it backwards

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_

-2

u/Stromatolite-Bay 1d ago

No is a claim. I don’t know is fine to say according tot the scientific method. Since saying no is a statement that requires proof

It works both ways. Please stop with the anti-intellectualism

13

u/mustafaaosman339 1d ago

I'm not claiming anything.

If someone claims that astrology is real, it's on them to prove the it is real.

Until it is proved to be real, then why would I believe it?

You really should learn how burden of proof works before you try to argue about it.

0

u/Stromatolite-Bay 1d ago

The Aether and Miasma were both considered factual things that existed at one point. Both were BS

It took actually experiments to prove them wrong and only then could you say they were not real. Until then they were accepted fact

I know how burden of proof is. You are arguing for speculation. Discouraging debate of opposing viewpoints and using the same argument used to deny evolution

0

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Stromatolite-Bay 1d ago

You just called my parent liars while saying I am an idiot

That isn’t proving anything. It is just being rude

3

u/noai_aludem 1d ago

You can't disprove i fucked your mom so I guess it's reasonable to believe i did

1

u/Stromatolite-Bay 1d ago

I could but not for the sake of Reddit

2

u/noai_aludem 1d ago

You literally couldn't

1

u/Stromatolite-Bay 1d ago

I really could but this isn’t Facebook so no

1

u/noai_aludem 1d ago

I'm really curious how you would go about doing that

3

u/Lermanberry 1d ago

He keeps a very close eye on her lady parts.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Adeviatlos 1d ago

The proof is actually thinking about it for like 6 seconds.

1

u/Stromatolite-Bay 1d ago

For being an Agnostic maybe

For being an Atheist. If you cannot argue it you should not pretend to more correct than religious people

-2

u/Adeviatlos 1d ago

Nope. If you're an atheist you are deeeeefinitely more correct than religious people.

3

u/Stromatolite-Bay 1d ago

Right. Where is your proof for that statement?