Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

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. Full Story

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#177903 Sep 21, 2013
I_see_you wrote:
<quoted text>Yet your ego is so large that you come here every day to argue with people who you seem to think have no intelligence and who you think should not have a right to have a different thought than yourself... I personally do not see how I am egotistical and you are not.
Read my post again, all humanity would include myself I hope.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#177904 Sep 21, 2013
I_see_you wrote:
<quoted text>The answer to that would be... It is a fixed notion that there is no god because there has been no satisfactory evidence to carry the notion of a god.
What do you use to examine the evidence with?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#177905 Sep 21, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>Multiple agreement from repeat experiment and across the board consensus.
What do YOU use to measure this information?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#177906 Sep 21, 2013
I_see_you wrote:
<quoted text>You think that because someone is an atheist they want to "be" a god??? Please please please explain to me the evidence that there is for a god.
Are you in charge of your own life?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#177907 Sep 21, 2013
I_see_you wrote:
<quoted text>I do not need a strong incentive to love my life with a purpose and to die and have my life cycle come to an end. I understand that my life has an end. My body will over time just simply cease to function.

I think it's strange that you do not want to take the responsibility for your own life and it's quite self serving and selfish to have to have an incentive to do so.
You talk about selfishness in a moral sense, what is your absolute moral standard that you appeal to when making such moral statements?

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#177908 Sep 21, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
So you have a women as the first cause of humanity, a woman from whom the whole of humanity came from?
Yeah here she is...

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-UPe-6J5MzlM/UVHbR9K...

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#177909 Sep 21, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>Yeah here she is...

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-UPe-6J5MzlM/UVHbR9K...
Some people will believe anything...

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#177910 Sep 21, 2013
I_see_you wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would you present the idea that the universe has to have a designer?
What facts do you have that prove this theory?
Design indicates Designer. There is philosophical evidence. Also atheism has no explanatory power to explain anything. It is simply a no God assumption in spite of the evidence. It does not explain our sense of justice or right or wrong. It logically leads to futility, despair for people raised in poverty, for example. Take this article.
http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/blog/inde...
So what’s the source of the problem? As Publius notes, the problem is not among the black population as a whole; rather, it is due to a “small sub-culture that glorifies violence and lives and dies by the gun.” It is the gang culture, characterized by widespread criminality, tribalistic warfare, through-the-roof unemployment, extremely high rates of out-of-wedlock births (72.1 percent among blacks in 2010), widespread welfare dependency, and nihilistic art typified by “gangster rap.”

Of course the left will cry “racism” at anyone stating such facts, but such cries are ridiculous. Although skin color and genetic makeup obviously have no causal connection to this problem, a tragically large number of blacks in America (and many whites and Hispanics as well) choose the gang “lifestyle” or at least the broader culture that supports it. And leftist intellectuals feed this culture by promoting anti-value “art,” moral relativism, the entitlement mentality, and welfare dependency—all funded by forced wealth transfers.
The Richard Dawkins quote.
“The total amount of suffering per year in the natural world is beyond all decent contemplation. During the minute that it takes me to compose this sentence, thousands of animals are being eaten alive, many others are running for their lives, whimpering with fear, others are slowly being devoured from within by rasping parasites, thousands of all kinds are dying of starvation, thirst, and disease. It must be so. If there ever is a time of plenty, this very fact will automatically lead to an increase in the population until the natural state of starvation and misery is restored. In a universe of electrons and selfish genes, blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won't find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference.”
&#8213; Richard Dawkins, River Out of Eden: A Darwinian View of Life
Why not a 71% out of wedlock birth rate if there is no God and there is only selfish genes and blind physical forces? Why not join a gang for protection even if it means making bones or proving loyalty by killing another human being, an enemy of my gang. It is all glorified in films and music and there is plenty of history to back it all up. If they escape human justice and many do. They do not catch everybody. They suffer the same consequences as their victims ultimately---death and nothingness. No accountability. Bad ideas have bad consequences.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#177911 Sep 21, 2013
Aura, you didn't answer my question, what do YOU use to examine the evidence?

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#177912 Sep 21, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
What do YOU use to measure this information?
Personal intuitive reasoning skills, developed from scholastic achievements and further study to acquire a sizable knowledge base.
From which we draw conclusion from evidences collected and presented by trained professionals in academia. I might add are the things which gives us a high degree of confidence in the scientific method and it's precision that make the investigative determinations of many scientists a endeavor of human excellence in discovery of the natural world. The encyclopedia and text book are much better tools for understanding, than the damn bible you clutch and taunt it's mythology as proof of things.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#177914 Sep 21, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>Personal intuitive reasoning skills, developed from scholastic achievements and further study to acquire a sizable knowledge base.
From which we draw conclusion from evidences collected and presented by trained professionals in academia. I might add are the things which gives us a high degree of confidence in the scientific method and it's precision that make the investigative determinations of many scientists a endeavor of human excellence in discovery of the natural world. The encyclopedia and text book are much better tools for understanding, than the damn bible you clutch and taunt it's mythology as proof of things.
So you would agree that you use your reason to examine the evidence and come to conclusions.

Is your reasoning infallible?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#177915 Sep 21, 2013
ILUVSATAN wrote:
<quoted text>philosophical evidence???? wtf is that ... are you retarded?... philosophy is not a science and utilizes no evidence, and as there 6 billion people, there are 6 billion philosophies...

when there is problem in our nation to be resolved, the President calls on the National Academy of Science... there is no philosophy department.. wise up dolt..

atheism has not explanatory power??? that is even more stupid than your first statement...
Is truth objective or subjective?

“There is no god!”

Since: Jun 12

Södertälje, Sweden

#177916 Sep 21, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
To jump to the conclusion that a mechanism does not have a designer, makes your rationalisation superior?
Show us a mechanism that you absolutely know doesn't have a designer.:-)
Show us the designer where is it?

“There is no god!”

Since: Jun 12

Södertälje, Sweden

#177917 Sep 21, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
After going over the comments of the post here, I no longer believe these bloggers are atheist. They belong to a deranged cult that has a goal of convincing people that they do not have any soul. Western atheist are more intelligent than this group here are, and would not post on this inferior level. Atheist education/knowledge is most often hovering around an (X) amount. The comprehension skills of this group is no where near that (X). If you previously chatted with atheist, or watch their video blogs you will see this.
You are a hateful lying bigot

“There is no god!”

Since: Jun 12

Södertälje, Sweden

#177918 Sep 21, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> Under a hopelessly fixed assumption which is not deterred by the facts.
ID/Creationists have nothing! no evidence for a designer!

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#177922 Sep 21, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
So you would agree that you use your reason to examine the evidence and come to conclusions.
Is your reasoning infallible?
Of course not, but peer review and at a consensus of minds with multiple independent lines of converging evidences AKA: Consilience brings a high degree of confidence in the reasoning of these conclusions.
I mean I haven't gone out on a limb with any dynamic new paradigm shaking theory here. Though that is within possibility.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#177923 Sep 21, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Personal intuitive reasoning skills, developed from scholastic achievements and further study to acquire a sizable knowledge base.
From which we draw conclusion from evidences collected and presented by trained professionals in academia. I might add are the things which gives us a high degree of confidence in the scientific method and it's precision that make the investigative determinations of many scientists a endeavor of human excellence in discovery of the natural world. The encyclopedia and text book are much better tools for understanding, than the damn bible you clutch and taunt it's mythology as proof of things.
LOL!!

You would make a great pew warmer.

Trust those with more scholastic knowledge than you.

Dumb ass. The scientific method that produces something, technology, applied sciences, is worthwhile, and has always been around. You worship theorists who turn it into a religion.

BTW, intuition doesn't come from scholastic knowledge. That is an indoctrination is a particular way of looking at things. Intuition comes from personal experience and logic.

I swear, sometimes you show glimmers of intelligence, then you go blow it. You always fall back on your Holy Book of Theoretical Physics Scriptures.

Free thinker. Yeah, didn't cost them a cent.

Turkey brain, if there is an afterlife you won't be taking that knowledge you got here with you. If you ain't making money with it now it will do you no good whatsoever.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#177924 Sep 21, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>Of course not, but peer review and at a consensus of minds with multiple independent lines of converging evidences AKA: Consilience brings a high degree of confidence in the reasoning of these conclusions.
I mean I haven't gone out on a limb with any dynamic new paradigm shaking theory here. Though that is within possibility.
Could your reasoning be faulty, could it rest on false assumptions?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#177925 Sep 21, 2013
ILUVSATAN wrote:
"mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
To jump to the conclusion that a mechanism does not have a designer, makes your rationalisation superior?
Show us a mechanism that you absolutely know doesn't have a designer.:-)"

the universe...matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed...fundamental law of physics...

and don't ask for proof of negatives...
So the universe is eternal? How do you know that?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#177926 Sep 21, 2013
ILUVSATAN wrote:
<quoted text>truth is dependent on facts..aka credible evidence that can be demonstrated and validated, hence it is objective...

scientific method is how truth is determined...it never fails..
So you accept the notion of absolute truth?

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
What role do you think humans play in global wa... 45 min IBdaMann 2,189
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 hr John Galt 1,144,008
UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 3 hr Bruin For Life 28,242
Should child beauty pageants be banned? 6 hr Star On 47 646
Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 11 hr Kathwynn 306,595
Pat Summitt files for divorce after 27 years of... (Aug '07) Tue Mr bobo 145
Haas Leads Purdue Past Grambling State, 82-30 Nov 22 ngzcaz 1

NCAA Basketball People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE