Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 256043 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.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#176532 Sep 6, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
We all have beliefs and most often because we buy into theories of a book. am assuming you are assuming my book of lies is The Bible. If so you are very wrong. If you respond to enough of my logs or post, and continue to insist I am a Christian. I have to mock your reading comprehension. I don't frown upon Christianity a you do, and I don't call anyone's book a book of lies. It is the book that is meant for THEM. In my opinion prior o the internet Atheism was a sort of religion of Philosophy. That was in their own admission, and in books of Philosophy. Great fans of Nietzsche, they took his words and perhaps found them inspiring. I could go on but why, I know you'll deny. You'd deny me my thoughts how could I believe you if you tell me that you don't have such thoughts. I can't see why Dave Nelson waste his time posting such long thought filled post.
Why would **anyone** believe you are **not** a Genuine Christhole™?

You have **all** the trappings of the severely-brain damaged.

You cannot muster up ONE (1) argument in support of your raving insanity.

You do not even TRY. You admit you cannot find ONE (1) argument.

Thus, you admit you are just a raving lunatic-- among too many just like you to count.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#176533 Sep 6, 2013
EXPERT wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no reason for an atheist to have a funeral either, right?
Actually? There is--- only an **atheist** would have an **honest** mourning at the death of a loved one.

For you Genuine Christholes™? Do not you believe that the dead corpse is in **heaven**?

For a Genuine Christhole™ such as yourself, ALL FUNERALS SHOULD BE A PARTY--CELEBRATING THE NEW HEAVENLY TENANT.

Is this the case? No!

At **all** Genuine Christhole™ funerals there is MUCH wailing and MUCH bawling and whining and complaining "Oh, Why!" as anyone could imagine.

Proof?

Proof to 100% that THEY DO NOT BELIEVE FOR A SECOND IN HEAVEN.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#176534 Sep 6, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
The United States has found it does meet the criteria. Congratulations Atheist Church. Let me now paste the online answer to your question. Using Bing this was the first answer.
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2.
a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3.
the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
4.
the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.
5.
the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
I agree with the United States, as I just about all ways do. Again congratulations Atheist Church.
Who gives a shyt?

There were a group of non-believers who wanted the SAME RIGHTS that True Believers™ get under our government hand-outs.

That lovely-lovely TAX EXEMPT FREE RIDE thing.

More power to'em, says I-- why not?

Tax exemption of religion is evil, really-- I'd as soon abolish the whole thing myself.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#176535 Sep 6, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
I do have my disagreements, but I do think America is a wonderful country. I sometimes ponder if Atheist are just never ending complainers. As I read here they don't respect the good of the message of Jesus Christ. Yes, all are entitled to their opinion, but there comes a point that one becomes a folded armed pouting jerk.
Damn betcha we do not respect your "good message of jewsus crispy"

Why?

BECAUSE OF HATE-FILLED BIGOTS SUCH AS YOURSELF.

That's why.

If this "good message" begats the LIKES OF YOU?

Then it's worthless.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#176536 Sep 6, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> It ignores evidence from history, for one. When push comes to shove. That is why the problem is not with the evidence. The idea atheists are open to actual evidence is a scam. They are among the most closed minded and dogmatic anyone wants to meet.
<quoted text> If advancement on knowledge leads to atheism then they are down the wrong road. Wrong roads do not advance knowledge.
<quoted text> Not really. They had more power. A king, for example could clear up black on black crime in major cities in a heartbeat. Obama is impotent and buys bullets so people have to scramble around to try to purchase a pack of .22 shells to go squirrel hunting. Can't buy bullets. Bring back prohibition. Maybe it will work this time! <quoted text> They believed keeping careful records was important as far as genealogy. You just can't deal with history. It's pathetic.
<quoted text> A lot of females go for alpha male types. Many will drop their drawers for a politician who is married with children no problem. Forfeit their modesty and expose their behinds for filthy lucre, that happens all the time. <quoted text> All i am seeing is you marginalizing everyone who disagrees with you in order to protect your atheism.
<quoted text> Has not happened in two thousand tears. The young leave and come back all the time after they marry and have children and realize the futility of unbelief. How it really answers nothing and goes no where. The gates of hell will not prevail against the Church! Your prediction is nothing more than wishful thinking.
Speaking of HATE-FILLED JEWSUS CRISPY worshipers!

... uggg.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#176537 Sep 6, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
You are under delusion thinking you are thinking totally rational. Which is why you get so upset when others see things in a different light than you.
Space doesn't get "compressed", as in getting reduced in volume, but it does get moved around. It is a volume within the created universe that shifts position within that universe, and it can also get shaped.
OK, then come up with a *test* to see who is correct. Find a prediction of your viewpoint that is not a prediction of mine and let's go and test to see what actually happens.

What predictions can be made from space 'moving around' that could actually be tested? A distortion of light passing by, perhaps?

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#176538 Sep 6, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
And I conclude contrary. I now present you with what is most likely, regardless of either one of our conclusions. The human race was made in a lab, by another form of being. Did they look like us? Maybe. More likely they viewed us as a perfect appearance. they might or might not have the answer of creator of Universe. The fact we are not the slaves of a superior elder race of intelligent beings supports my theory. I don't agree with Ufologist but, many details of the debate I do have to concede to them as being the more likely.
You have PROOF for this "creator of the universe"?

No?

Then you are full of your usual batshit.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#176539 Sep 6, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
Westbrook Baptist, is what I call a noisy minority. I think they have done more harm than good towards the thoughts they champion.
Perhaps.

But they are 100% more **HONEST**, when it comes to the evil bible, than 99% of the rest of Genuine Christianity™.

The rest are just Salad Bar Christians™-- picking here and there as they see fit.

Hypocrites, in other words.

The Westbouroh bunch are far less hypocritical.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#176540 Sep 6, 2013
CatholicHolyGhost wrote:
<quoted text>Has anyone ever told you that you are full of kaka.
Life has no meaning without GOD. If you love, learn, teach, read, listen, laugh,dance, explore it only means that within you there is a belief in a deity. Its just that you don't understand what's going on and as said before 'lack Faith' which is everything.
Hate speech noted from the Pedophile Enabler.

Thanks for playing.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#176541 Sep 6, 2013
CatholicHolyGhost wrote:
<quoted text>Your postings only confirm that there's more brains in a bottle of water.
More hate speech from a Pedophile Enabler.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#176542 Sep 6, 2013
CatholicHolyGhost wrote:
<quoted text>A person is given Life to honor and love and obey GOD.
To kill onself is a sin in the eyes of GOD.
So how do you explain the PEDOPHILIA rampant in your hideous Bastion Of Child Abuse?(cat'lick church)

Hmmmm?

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#176543 Sep 6, 2013
CatholicHolyGhost wrote:
<quoted text>Don't pay attention to the other idiots Dave. They are just jealous that you know more than they do.
LOL!

How do you explain the cowardly ducking of your PREVIOUS Pedophile-in-Chief?

He cowardly ducked out, just before the Nets Of Justice were about to close in-- to reveal him for the child-abusing MONSTER we all know he is.

Hmmm?

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#176544 Sep 6, 2013
CatholicHolyGhost wrote:
<quoted text>This poster 'bob of quantum faith' is known within Topix to be a very hateful member.
I am **forced** to use the word "hate", every time I'm describing the likes of **you** and people **like** you.

Of course you hate that-- this is why you project your own seething hatred onto me.

But you cannot explain your Pedophile-In-Chief (pope), can you?
False Religion

Jackson, TN

#176545 Sep 6, 2013
If your god is real because we have no evidence that he does not exist, then I can say that I have no evidence that my dog can fly, and you have no evidence that my dog can not fly; therefore, I am justified in believing that my dog can fly.

This is because a flying dog is the sort of thing that can be supported with evidence (if a dog could fly, we would expect to find evidence of the dog zooming through the skies, for example), whereas one would actually expect a non-existent thing to produce no evidence whatsoever. Thus, in the case of non-existence, the absence of evidence is exactly what we would expect to observe.

If God wants humans to believe in him and to follow his will, then he would deliver his message directly, and not leave it up to fallible, sinful humans to deliver an endless plethora of confused and contradictory messages. If God is in fact a supremely powerful being who wants us to set things right and wants to prevent us from getting things even more wrong, then he should have made his views eminently clear to us all. If he has not given the strong evidence required by his desire to have us believe in him, then he clearly does not exist

There should therefore be no more confusion about which religion or doctrine is true than there is about the fundamentals of medicine, engineering, physics, chemistry, etc. But that is manifestly not the case, and even believers in God cannot agree on the content of God's message. Therefore, either God is telling them different things (either deliberately or otherwise), which seems unlikely, or there is no God.

Since: Sep 08

Las Animas, CO

#176546 Sep 6, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
OK, then come up with a *test* to see who is correct. Find a prediction of your viewpoint that is not a prediction of mine and let's go and test to see what actually happens.
What predictions can be made from space 'moving around' that could actually be tested? A distortion of light passing by, perhaps?
An expanding universe? Objects have the same relative positions but the distance increases?

But maybe this one.

Find a material object that can "block" a magnetic flow or flux. Not shunt or redirect, but block. Then find why flux lines can't cross each other. Then find a magnetic "particle".

What would you have left?

Magnetic fields can do some serious work. Ask your vacuum cleaner.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#176547 Sep 6, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
An expanding universe? Objects have the same relative positions but the distance increases?
That is a common 'prediction'. No help.
But maybe this one.
Find a material object that can "block" a magnetic flow or flux. Not shunt or redirect, but block. Then find why flux lines can't cross each other. Then find a magnetic "particle".
How would this test whether space is moved or not?
What would you have left?
Magnetic fields can do some serious work. Ask your vacuum cleaner.
No doubts.

OK, I have an idea. Suppose an object is moving and goes in from of a distant star. According to you, space is moving around that object, bunching up in front and rarefied in back. So the light passing through should be distorted in different ways ahead of and behind the object. My prediction is that the distortions will be the same in front and back.

Do you agree this is a fair test distinguishing our viewpoints? Shall we look at real life data to see what happens?

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#176548 Sep 6, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
Find a material object that can "block" a magnetic flow or flux. Not shunt or redirect, but block.
Be more clear about the distinction. If you want the magnetic field lines to *stop* at the object, then there will be no such object because magnetic field lines have no sources or sinks.

No valid test.

Find an actual *real world* test that will distinguish the two viewpoints. I proposed one. Do you agree it is a fair test?

Since: Sep 08

Las Animas, CO

#176549 Sep 6, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
That is a common 'prediction'. No help.
<quoted text>
How would this test whether space is moved or not?
<quoted text>
No doubts.
OK, I have an idea. Suppose an object is moving and goes in from of a distant star. According to you, space is moving around that object, bunching up in front and rarefied in back. So the light passing through should be distorted in different ways ahead of and behind the object. My prediction is that the distortions will be the same in front and back.
Do you agree this is a fair test distinguishing our viewpoints? Shall we look at real life data to see what happens?
Why are you picking stars? They are way past what you can measure and your measuring via light is assuming the same conditions between here and there.

Why not the magnetic field as I suggested? You have some on your refrigerator, you also have one passing through you right now.

Is that a flow of "particles? If so, why don't they stick to your eyelids?

That flow can only be created within matter itself. It is a stress or gating of the atomic structure resulting in a force that will go through space in a stream. Unless you can find those "particles". That flow will transverse the deepest space, or the lowest absolute vacuum we know of.

This is a balancing act of that material trying to regain equilibrium. It is a push and a pull. Drop a particle that can be stressed or gated like the source of that flow in it, and it will follow that flow. In addition, a particle passing through that flow will get a charge induced into it that can then wrap around itself and produce one of those flows of its own. Something got displaced on the way through.

Something is moving. What can it be?

A stream of virtual particles? Fancy terms don't work. It has to be something. Let's call it space because nothing else is left except magic.

Since: Sep 08

Las Animas, CO

#176550 Sep 6, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Be more clear about the distinction. If you want the magnetic field lines to *stop* at the object, then there will be no such object because magnetic field lines have no sources or sinks.
No valid test.
Find an actual *real world* test that will distinguish the two viewpoints. I proposed one. Do you agree it is a fair test?
All magnetic field lines have a source. Those lines pass through everything. You can only offer paths of least resistance to bypass an object. I am not aware of being able to drain a magnet, a source of the flow, by the load put on it. Remove the load and it goes back to strength. You have to alter the structure within the magnet itself to do that.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#176551 Sep 6, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
Why not the magnetic field as I suggested? You have some on your refrigerator, you also have one passing through you right now.
because there is no material that *blocks* instead of diverting magnetic fields. So there is no possible test. it is also not clear how that would test whether space is moving around an object or not.
Is that a flow of "particles? If so, why don't they stick to your eyelids?
Huh? Really? How about because the eyelids don't interact with the particles?
That flow can only be created within matter itself. It is a stress or gating of the atomic structure resulting in a force that will go through space in a stream. Unless you can find those "particles". That flow will transverse the deepest space, or the lowest absolute vacuum we know of.
EM is carried by photons. Well known particles. Some types (radio, microwave) go through eyelids. And how this is relevant to your claim that space moves around an object is very unclear.
This is a balancing act of that material trying to regain equilibrium. It is a push and a pull. Drop a particle that can be stressed or gated like the source of that flow in it, and it will follow that flow.
Please at least attempt to be specific and coherent. How is any of this testable? Give a specific experiment.
In addition, a particle passing through that flow will get a charge induced into it that can then wrap around itself and produce one of those flows of its own.
Charges do not 'wrap'. Why there should be one is unclear anyway.
Something got displaced on the way through.
Something is moving. What can it be?
be more specifc about your claims. Why you think there is anything displaced is unclear.
A stream of virtual particles? Fancy terms don't work. It has to be something. Let's call it space because nothing else is left except magic.
Let's not. How about finding an experiment that is actually possible that will distinguish your ideas from the standard ones?

So, if you don't like a distant star, how about some other motion in a vacuum? Don't want air messing up the data.

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 Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 3 hr Yeah 1,405,041
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 5 hr Trojan 32,308
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 5 hr ThomasA 311,496
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 21 hr IB DaMann 9,991
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Jul 25 NotInPotatoQuality 201,878
legitimate loan lender (Oct '13) Jul 21 Ceren 7
What Ever Happen To Niagara Basketball (May '15) Jul 17 Disappointed PE 3
More from around the web