Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 255265 comments on the Webbunny tumblelog story from Jul 18, 2009, titled Atheism requires as much faith as religion?. In it, Webbunny tumblelog reports that:

Atheism requires as much faith as religion? bearvspuma : The only problem with this rationalization is that ita s assuming all athiests are so because theya re intelligent in the ways of science and reasoning and all people that believe in a form of god are unintelligent.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Webbunny tumblelog.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#174955 Aug 18, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> I did go to the theater to see the movie Wolverine yesterday. It was my day off and i was in the area. The movie took place in Japan. Two female actors and the Wolverine against the bad guys. So you should go see that movie. Actually i didn't think it was all that great but it was fun. I found a book for you on line. Won't cost you a thing except your time.
http://www.tro.dk/getFile.aspx...
Uhm...just a couple quick comments:

1 Japanese Zen Buddhists don't believe God is all, so that book misrepresents them. You have to invoke a lot of theology to reach that point and, as I'm sure you already know, theology isn't a Buddhist way of thinking.

2 You may disagree, but when Christians talk of faith they mean something more than "I have faith in the doctor." Your faith in God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit is deeply meaningful to you and moves you in ways that "I'm sure this pill will work, that doctor wears a white suit!" cannot convey. So I have some issues equating the "faith" atheists have to the "faith" Christians have.

I mean, isn't it derogatory to you? Don't you think your faith conveys more than what that book suggests is mine?

3 The book claims that reality is knowable, that objective truth exists and it is found through religion. I disagree on all points.

4 I do agree with him that some (my word, not his) "truth" (his word, not mine) exists regardless of our desires. His conclusion, that Christianity is the one, true religion and that you have to respect other's religious beliefs anyways, is thoughtless, self serving and without merit. His argument here is poor - and grossly oversimplified.

4a. This, in particular, is a ridiculous error in logic:

"truth exists, and it is absolute and undeniable. To say “truth cannot be known” is self-defeating because that very statement claims to be a known, absolute truth." pp. 62, top

It's circular logic and relying on assumptions and claims he made that he didn't support and are false. If anything, all science has demonstrated that "truth" is relative to the observer - quite a long time ago. So he's using outdated and oversimplified philosophy here to support a theological argument.

5 I apologize, I sort of gave up at this point. I find this book quite hard to read - it's clearly aimed at the religions and written in a sort of sermon way.

6. However, I'll keep it. If you wish to discuss any particular paragraph or chapter, bring it up and you and I can banter about it.

Thank you for linking it.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#174956 Aug 18, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
For the life of me, I can't figure out why you and Polymath give Lightbeamrider the time of day.
What do you think you will accomplish?
Isn't it clear that she's hopelessly committed to her imaginary construct and is unable to respond to reason?
I must have some kind of psychosis to come here. Is there a cure, Catcher?

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's teapot

#174957 Aug 18, 2013
<The Dave Nelson> "Blaaa, Blu Bu blaahhr, Bee Buba Bla Bla!... RAMAMAMLALA..."
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll give you some cuddling time if I can have whatever drugs you're on, oh venerable one.
It's called MYOPIC EGO.

Since: Sep 08

Lamar, CO

#174958 Aug 18, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll give you some cuddling time if I can have whatever drugs you're on, oh venerable one.
Godzilla farts more when he stirs in his sleep.

I warned you. But don't let that be the last thing on your mind. Focus on surviving.

I would suggest a long and distant vacation, starting real soon, until the week after the Fall equinox.

You have a SO, so I'm not sharing.

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#174959 Aug 18, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
Every morning I awake. I don't see why I should be persuading you towards my religious beliefs. This is a tread for you to prove yours. In an era of many people giving their beliefs, I don't rank Atheist in the top 10 of likelihood.
This is not a thread to have to prove anyone's belief. This is an atheist forum...it's made for discussions of a non-religious nature to be held amongst people of who are not religious. Of course anyone can discuss what they like to, but this is not a thread or a forum for proof to be provided to anyone.
Anon

Cleveland, OH

#174960 Aug 18, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, in close quarters, Godzilla for sure. Evolution provided him with limbs and claws, and he is a fair boxer. Not to mention his breath.
I think Godzilla has the evolutionary advantage. About the worst Mothra could do to him is ruin his tuxedo. In the closet.
Not so fast there, pardner. Even in her (Mothra is female) larval stage, she could do some serious damage. She's also got the nuclear thing going for her, and it's more refined than 'Zilla's. Her trump card is the ability to fly. Air power gives her a huge advantage, and the ability to shoot some kind of sticky crap while flying, equals one formidable monster. Read it and weep...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mothra
Bongo

Bronx, NY

#174961 Aug 18, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
I must have some kind of psychosis to come here. Is there a cure, Catcher?
Bwhahahahaha he heeee perhaps a little Buck?

Since: Sep 08

Lamar, CO

#174962 Aug 18, 2013
Anon wrote:
<quoted text>
Not so fast there, pardner. Even in her (Mothra is female) larval stage, she could do some serious damage. She's also got the nuclear thing going for her, and it's more refined than 'Zilla's. Her trump card is the ability to fly. Air power gives her a huge advantage, and the ability to shoot some kind of sticky crap while flying, equals one formidable monster. Read it and weep...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mothra
Godzilla drinks nuked water for an energy boost.

Ever see a moth fly into a flame?

Mothra is just a nuisance.

Since: Mar 11

Henderson, KY

#174963 Aug 18, 2013
In Dave's world a math teacher grades some tests and has 20 students score a 95%. The teacher then lectures the class on those 20 averaging a 0%! Only in Dave's world!

SMH

Keep humiliating yourself for our amusement senile old man.

Video of Dave.

Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
"The most notable event of Operation Castle was the Castle Bravo test. " needs a man.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#174964 Aug 18, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
According to Dr Michael Newton what you suggest will happen. I do see Atheist reacting as you suggest. Atheism will remain a unproven faith. You'll prove Orwell correct as you introduce things like 2+2=5. It will be the end of science as we know it, because my original statement is true and you know it. That is Atheism can't be a proven fact, unless man knew everything. We won't know everything but in such a society we would pretend we do, actually more like demand it. Books will be burned and sciences will be forbidden. All because The Universe is gathering so many intelligent beings that not all of them could have intelligent souls. I would predict a cleaner Earth, but when Earth dies so would the Human Race.
The above babble and pack'o'lies is the result of ...

... BRAIN DAMAGE.

Yes, folks, there you have it-- faith DAMAGES YOUR MIND in irrevocable ways such that you can spew such idiotic nonsense as in the above.

It's pretty sad to witness, though.

The above hate-filled nonsense represents another wasted human life.

Since: Mar 11

Henderson, KY

#174965 Aug 18, 2013
Typical Christhole response. Not an expert in anything but demands you be. Oh and then claims you are wanting to be superior to this imaginary friend of his because you don't believe in him. The sheer arrogance.

SMH
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you qualified? Do you have doctorates in physics, astrophysics, or quantum physics?
I have to be honest, and I hope you'll forgive me here. I strongly disagree and am somewhat disappointed that you used this tactic. Normally, I respect most of your statements as sincere dialogue even though my conclusions disagree with your own.
What I find troubling is that the atheist community (in general) seems driven to claim intellectual superiority over those who don't share the same worldview. This sets up an "Us vs. them" dichotomy that degenerates into fanaticism. And yes I'm just as troubled by theists who attempt to do the same thing, and we both know some do. To say otherwise would be naive at best and blatantly dishonest at worst.
My question may seem rhetorical, but I invite you to give it some serious thought even if it challenges you on a very deep and personal level. Here it is:
Is the need to feel intellectually superior driven by an absence or void of something else in your life? Say, God?

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#174966 Aug 18, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Godzilla farts more when he stirs in his sleep.
I warned you. But don't let that be the last thing on your mind. Focus on surviving.
I would suggest a long and distant vacation, starting real soon, until the week after the Fall equinox.
You have a SO, so I'm not sharing.
Looks like you have the fake prediction thing down:
- use vague concepts
- alter them to mean anything
- declare your prophecy fulfilled
Anon

Cleveland, OH

#174967 Aug 18, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Godzilla drinks nuked water for an energy boost.
Ever see a moth fly into a flame?
Mothra is just a nuisance.
Mothra is also a staunch atheist and a firm supporter of abiogenesis....

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#174968 Aug 18, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Not necessarily. it depends on which models you use for the multiverse.
<quoted text>
And these are good questions. The obvious problem is that we do not have any actual evidence for a multiverse. But such always come up when you attempt to merge quantum mechanics and gravity.
I kind of wonder if we'll be able to construct a GUT from inside the universe.
Since most multiverse models allow gravity to work between the universes, there is a possibility of testing the existence of other universes (there was even a controversial claim of observations that support this).
Wow, no kidding! But if gravity works between them...something horrible could start there and chain over to here. That might be bad.

Like, let's say a little universe has a stronger value for gravity than we do. So it collapses tomorrow! What happens here?

Hold on a second. If a Big Crunch were happening, wouldn't that re-create a Big Bang as matter rushes inward and heats up?

If it's in black holes and such, and it's all collapsing in on itself, then why wouldn't the beginning of the Big Bang have done just that?
An analogy might help when discussing the different notions of time in the universe vs with multiverse.
Take a sphere. Imagine the latitude corresponds to time and the longitude corresponds to (one-dimensional) space. On this sphere, time 'begins' at the south pole and 'ends' at the north pole. There is, in essence, a Big Bang at the south pole and a Big Crunch at the north pole.
Now, imagine this sphere embedded in three dimensions (you probably already did that) with the north pole on top. Then, the height above the ground corresponds roughly to the latitude on the sphere. In that sense, the height in three dimensions corresponds to latitude in two dimensions. More accurately, the latitude is a projection of the height onto the sphere.
Now, it is *possible* that the multiverse, which has about 10 dimensions has a time variable (like height) that 'projects' onto time in our particular (four dimensional) universe just like height projects onto latitude. They are not identical, but they certainly are linked. This is, in fact, pretty common in multiverse models.
Uhm...what do you mean by "projects onto"? Is there a causal relationship between the two dimensional representation and the three dimensional one? Aren't they just representations?

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#174969 Aug 18, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
And this is one of the reasons I requested a definition of the term 'cause'. It is a very slippery concept as applied to many situations.
For example, suppose I push on the accelerator pedal of my car. The car goes faster. There is definitely a sense in which my pushing on the pedal is the 'cause' of the car going faster. But, more precisely, pushing on the pedal made a series of levers open up a valve that lets in more fuel, so there is a bigger explosion against the piston, which produces more torque on the drive shaft, which makes the tires spin faster, which makes the friction on the ground produce a force on the car, which makes it accelerate. If there was not fuel in the line, the car would not go faster. If the piston was not connected to the drive shaft, the car would no go faster. If any of the mechanics was stuck, the car would no go faster, etc. So the *actual* cause of the car going faster is the imbalance of the frictional force and the drag force on the car. My pushing the pedal was only one way among many to produce that imbalance. It isn't guaranteed to produce that imbalance (for example if the road is icy). But, if the conditions are right, and the car is built well, pushing the pedal does cause a sequence of events leading to the imbalance of forces.
Now, for radioactivity, the situation is a bit different. Take an atom of, say, uranium-238. The nucleus is unstable (meaning it will decay) in part because the number of neutrons is too high compared to the number of protons (also because the nucleus as a whole is too large). In one sense, that is a cause for the decay. But, an nucleus of U-238 can remain un-decayed for literally billions of years. And, unlike the car or the triggering mechanism for a bomb, there is NOTHING different about a nucleus that decays right now and another nucleus that decays in 3 billion years. There is no 'triggering mechanism' that determines when that nucleus will decay. The decay of a particular nucleus is *completely* undetermined: it is uncaused. Again, nothing is different 'just before' the decay from any other time. A nucleus of U-238 that decays today is absolutely identical to one that decays in a billion years. That is what I mean when I say the time for the decay is uncaused.
Thanks - that makes a lot of sense.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#174970 Aug 18, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
The universe has a clock that started ticking 13.7 billion years ago. Just about everything within the universe has a clock ticking
these clocks can be made to run at different rates, but the universes clock as far as we know does not vary.
Whether there are clocks ticking outside this universe we can't say. Whether this universe's clock is within another clock, we can't say. But it is entirely possible they are.
Whether the universe is aware of the passage of time , is highly controversial , but that too is possible I guess.
I don't think the above explanation fully grasps what time is. Sorry.

Since: Sep 08

Lamar, CO

#174971 Aug 18, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Looks like you have the fake prediction thing down:
- use vague concepts
- alter them to mean anything
- declare your prophecy fulfilled
"According to therapist Reneau Z. Peurifoy, the supposed causes of human sensitivity to earthquakes are similar to the causes of earthquake sensitivity in animals. When pressure builds up prior to an earthquake, the quartz crystal in Earth's interior is deformed and creates an electrical charge. This phenomenon, known as the piezoelectric effect, can send electrical signals to animals. It is theorised that some earthquake sensitives may also be reacting to a change in the electromagnetism of an area caused by rising stresses on geological faults. There is also the possibility that radon is emitted prior to an earthquake, enough to be noticed by sensitive humans.[6]

One earthquake sensitive mentioned in sensitive Cal Orey's The Man Who Predicts Earthquakes: Jim Berkland, maverick geologist suggested that the different crystal makeups of different regions account for distinct sounds from different areas. She thought that pressure also determined sound, and provided an example, saying how granite sounds were different from those of quartz."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthquake_sensi...

The article itself is an attempt to debunk. But the fact is humans are animals, too, right? Some things we used to pay attention to have been civilized out of us.

That piezoelectric effect is also the reason for those hums you hear about.

Those are actual physical phenomenon. Like I said, you are trained to ignore them. Until a professor tells you they exist.

Every thing is a tuned circuit. All tuned circuits are affected by their environment.

Pay more attention to those nagging uneases you get. Saved many of your ancestors. You don't freak, you just let yourself be alerted.

You're not going to outrun Godzilla, anyhow. Just dodge him the best you can.

I'm not getting any fame or fortune for this.

Since: Sep 08

Lamar, CO

#174972 Aug 18, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Godzilla drinks nuked water for an energy boost.
Ever see a moth fly into a flame?
Mothra is just a nuisance.
Anon wrote:
<quoted text>
Mothra is also a staunch atheist and a firm supporter of abiogenesis....
I thought that went without saying. Obvious similarities.

:-)

“Seventh son”

Since: Dec 10

Will Prevail

#174973 Aug 18, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm going to have to go with Poly on this one. 1+1 does not always equal 2, especially when you are adding vectors or liquids.
Math is just a language created by us to quantify reality.
Your last sentences don't make any sense. "Truth is not time dependent." Yes, yes it is.
What constructs? You believe "truth" to be a reified thing?
1 wifey + 1 Husband = BaBy 1 + 1 = 3

“Seventh son”

Since: Dec 10

Will Prevail

#174974 Aug 18, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think the above explanation fully grasps what time is. Sorry.
I dont think there is one of those hiding.
But then again that wasn't my goal either :)

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

NCAA Basketball Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 1 min Truth is might 311,161
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 4 hr Incognito4Ever 1,382,931
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) Tue Evan 32,266
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) Tue IB DaMann 9,635
I got my loan from [email protected] (Jun '13) May 23 Ceren 39
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) May 22 01niner 201,860
Conn's Appliances (Nov '07) May 15 Idiots 285
More from around the web