Don't dictate beliefs

Don't dictate beliefs

There are 11177 comments on the The Star Press story from Sep 5, 2012, titled Don't dictate beliefs. In it, The Star Press reports that:

No one else can say otherwise? That is basically saying those who do "believe in God" are better? Hardly.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Star Press.

sarafina

Denver, CO

#10937 Jan 10, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>
Crystal formations look "designed" I've seen them form, no designer was evident.
Perhaps that has something to do with your limited perception.
sarafina

Denver, CO

#10938 Jan 10, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
Your post doesn't look designed at all.
Perhaps that has something to do with your limited perception.

Science convinces me of magic. To think that we all exist because some elemental dice just happened to fall together right, is magical. Dice thrown by no hand or intent, because neither were invented yet.

If we truly owe our physical existence to the chance conglomeration of certain atoms and molecules in the thickening scum of a primordial pool, then certainly we'll never come this way again in the universe. Moreover, our emotional and intellectual attributes must rest upon the same dubious beginning. Aside from the lack of evidence to back up such scientific speculations, I can't help wondering why atheists would find such a belief system attractive? Before Darwin, man at least felt that God put him on earth for certain purposes no matter how distorted those purposes.

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#10939 Jan 10, 2013
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
“Might well be”?
Lots of “mights” in science, lol.
Lots of "magic" in religion. So what?

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#10940 Jan 10, 2013
sarafina wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps that has something to do with your limited perception.
Or yours. Patterns can emerge from nature with no designer required.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#10941 Jan 10, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
There actually is a whole Topix Forum on science (" http://www.topix.com/science" ;) but he knows he'd be totally out of his league there.
His post aren't really about science per se, he's just showing off how much he hates things he so clearly doesn't understand.
The above is coming from a theology school dropout who couldn't comprehend the Bible, lol.

By the way, it's funny to me that you consider science off topic, since it's very dear to you and your atheist explanation on how we got here (lol) but the Bible, which Christians accept as the creationist explanation of how we got here - you shoot down every day. So you want to have it YOUR way only. You dictate your beliefs, or you try to, but you're not getting away with it in here.
DJ Hewlet

UK

#10942 Jan 10, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>
Or yours. Patterns can emerge from nature with no designer required.
You don't know that and neither does science. Science pays very little attention to philosophical questions about Intelligent Design or why we are here, even while most definitely telling us what is true or not true. And while postulating that life is basically meaningless or goal-less, it fights awfully hard to convince everyone that its right. Science wants only what science believes and so do atheists and Christians.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#10943 Jan 10, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Atheist is a Religion.
Religion
Synonyms: credo, creed, cult, FAITH, persuasion
faith\ˈfāth\
noun
b (1): firm belief in something for which there is no proof
Atheism
Belief that there is no Deity or Deities.
Hence - Atheism = Religion
Posted earlier by derek4
The Atheist's Bible: An Illustrious Collection of Irreverent Thoughts [Hardcover]
Joan Konner (Author)
3.6 out of 5 stars See all reviews (29 customer reviews)
List Price:$16.99
Price:$11.55 & eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25. Details
Deal Price:
You Save:$5.44 (32%)
Only 4 left in stock (more on the way).
http://www.amazon.com/The-Atheists-Bible-Illu...
[Wow – only 4 left – MAN – those atheists love their bibles!!!- get your copy now before they run out!!!!]
Posted else where by derek4
From: The Columbus Dispatch:
February 4, 2011
Church, without God
“Stan Bradley likes Bible stories, admires Martin Luther and uses expressions such as 'heavens, no.'
The Lithopolis man is president of a local congregation and rarely misses a Sunday service. Occasionally, he goes to his wife's church instead.
For these and other reasons, Bradley considers himself religious.”
He is also an atheist.
continued:
“Like Bradley, some atheists participate in organized religion for its social and psychological benefits.”
continued:
“Churches are great places to find friends, support and youth education, so nonbelievers and believers alike join congregations to fill those needs, he said.
He has spoken to elderly and sick people who can no longer go to church and they say they most miss the feeling of community.
Recent research from Harvard University and the University of Wisconsin backs him up. It found that religious people tend to be happier than nonreligious people, not because of belief but because of the friendships found at church.”
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/faith...
“religious people tend to be happier than nonreligious people”[I have said this all along, and my posts are still on the board to confirm it. Now you hear it straight from the atheist, lol.]
Based on the definitions you provided, no it is not a religion. Twist the facts all you want, but the information you get in your email from the creationist website is already debunked millions of times over.

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#10944 Jan 10, 2013
DJ Hewlet wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't know that and neither does science. Science pays very little attention to philosophical questions about Intelligent Design or why we are here, even while most definitely telling us what is true or not true. And while postulating that life is basically meaningless or goal-less, it fights awfully hard to convince everyone that its right. Science wants only what science believes and so do atheists and Christians.
You have no evidence to support the existence of this "designer". All you have is unsupported conjecture ... aka .... nothing.
KJV

United States

#10945 Jan 10, 2013
Thinking wrote:
<quoted text>Another empty threat.
Yup
KJV

United States

#10946 Jan 10, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>.
http://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2012/11/...

"String Theory Now on Life Support
Posted by Tom Hartsfield at Tue, 13 Nov 2012 17:06:32

There are plenty of reasons not to like string theory. Philosophical and logical arguments against the theory have long been apparent. Strong scientific evidence is increasingly joining them. The discovery of the Higgs boson exactly where the Standard Model says it should be last summer at the LHC was a first blow. Now, more evidence is coming in.

This week, LHCb (LHC-B), one of the many huge experiments along the LHC ring, reported a major result. The result itself is very technical, but its implications are general: big trouble for physics theories that involve supersymmetry (SUSY), string theory and many similar theories included. If SUSY is discarded, string theory goes right out with it.

How is the new physics coming out of the LHC closing the window of validity for string theory?

When the LHC smashes its particles together at world record energies, a shower of debris (new particles) is created. Large detectors surround the circumference of the ring itself, like insulation built around a pipe. When a collision happens inside the pipe, the resulting particles get caught by the detector wrapped around it. The detector pours out a massive amount of data, telling where every particle goes.

The data itself is enough to fill a modern computer hard drive every second. To sift through all this information requires a tremendous amount of computer processing. What physicists ultimately want to know is the mass and trajectory of each particle that was created in the smash-up. They try to recreate the entire scene, from the collision through all the debris flying into the detector.

In this case, physicists were looking for a particular particle called the "strange B meson" (Bs) to break into two more particles, called mu particles (μ+ and μ-). These strange B mesons usually only live for roughly just less than one trillionth of a second before breaking apart (called decaying). Here's where the Standard Model (SM) vs. Supersymmetry (SUSY) argument comes in.

If the SM is correct, about once in every 280 million times the Bs decays, the two μ particles should be detected. The number found by the LHC? Roughly once every 310 million times, with some uncertainty. Very close agreement, especially for such a rare and hard to detect decay.

So what does this say about string theory? If supersymmetry is correct, then this decay should occur far more often. In fact, by establishing this number, nearly all reasonable string theory models have failed in a testable prediction.(Unfortunately this prediction is so technical that it would require its own entire essay to explain.)

SUSY supporters had put forth a number for this prediction. Then, as noted by Peter Woit, they changed it when experimental data ruled them out. Then they were shown wrong and changed it again. Now the third prediction has proven wrong. Soon, we will reach a point where further changes in prediction will leave SUSY, and by extension string theory, practically unobservable to us, thus moving them out of the realm of science. String theory is truly being backed into a corner.

Being a popular and respected field, theoretical SUSY and string research will continue on. If more news like this keeps coming out, however, funding may begin to wane in the coming years. Perhaps this will spawn a fresh theory, both more testable and more accountable."
KJV

United States

#10947 Jan 10, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>Based on the definitions you provided, no it is not a religion. Twist the facts all you want, but the information you get in your email from the creationist website is already debunked millions of times over.
You can get this stuff emailed to you?

Great.
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#10949 Jan 11, 2013
No he hasn't. Because you're lying.
derek4 wrote:
“THE MAJORITY of children born into the world tend to inherit the beliefs of their parents, and that to me is one of the most regrettable facts of them all”
Richard Dawkins
Has Mr. Dawkins read the statistics showing us that most children born into atheist households forsake atheism when they grow up?
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#10950 Jan 11, 2013
7+ posts in a row gets you another "Cuntard of the Day" award.

Way to go, cuntard!
derek4 wrote:
Many people have falsely accused Madalyn Murray O'Hair of being an atheist.
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religi...
No copyrighted material was reproduced in this post.
Adam

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#10951 Jan 11, 2013
Lil Ticked wrote:
<quoted text>Actually, I know that is not entirely true. When I first came to Topix I was a full on believer working on becoming a pastor but, my encounters on here with certain posters swayed me considerably. They would post links, hit certain talking points and ask me questions. I listened to what they had to say, read their posted articles, and learned. During that time I also noticed that there are those that do nothing but abuse, from either side.
Interesting. I was also a believer when I first went on topix.
Adam

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#10952 Jan 11, 2013
sarafina wrote:
<quoted text>
Aside from the lack of evidence to back up such scientific speculations, I can't help wondering why atheists would find such a belief system attractive?
Not necessarily attractive. Just a question of chosing REALITY over fanasty.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#10953 Jan 11, 2013
Stop trying to dodge the question. Why should anyone accept god as anything more than a product of someone's imagination?

Your questions are off topic and have nothing to do with atheism so I guess you have ADHD or something. You're excused for that.

Oh and the word you were looking for there was abiogenesis not evolution. But again that has nothing to do with atheism.
DJ Hewlet wrote:
<quoted text>
What do you have if not figments of human imagination, or myths? It takes as much faith to believe that something comes from nothing (big bang) and nonliving matter produces life (evolution) as it does to believe in God.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#10954 Jan 11, 2013
It seems people get all touchy when you question their imaginary friend.
Adam wrote:
<quoted text>
Not necessarily attractive. Just a question of chosing REALITY over fanasty.
Adam

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#10955 Jan 11, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
It seems people get all touchy when you question their imaginary friend.
<quoted text>
I know I used to myself defend imaginary sky people when I was on the kool aid. But you would think instead they would show a little gratitude for helping them out.
Adam

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#10956 Jan 11, 2013
This to me is an important proof of the stupidity of religion, specifically christianity.

Quoting from the hilarious website AIG: Jesus "accepted the Old Testament’s historical accounts as real, and He built His teachings on those facts of history."

In other words, christians cannot throw out the OT.

Jesus believed in and worshiped the monster of the OT, Yahweh, and believed in all those insane laws.
source: http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v...

We all now know the myths of genesis are exactly that myths, and the laws of the OT barbaric and insane. Yet the Jesus character and the writers of the NT did not know this. In no way can the bible be considered even loosely inspired.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#10957 Jan 11, 2013
KJV wrote:
An alternative view:
http://motls.blogspot.com/2012/11/superstring...

" Basically the prediction for supersymmetry based on compactified string/M theories is that any rare decay rate should equal the Standard Model one within an accuracy of a few per cent."

"Although many string/M theory predictions can not yet be made accurately, some can, in particular the prediction for Bs&#8594;&#956;+&# 956;&#8722;. The short summary of the argument is that compactified string/M theories have moduli that describe the shapes and sizes of the small dimensions. The moduli fields have quanta, scalar particles, that decay gravitationally so they have long lifetimes. In order to not destroy the successes of nucleosynthesis the moduli have to be heavier than about 30TeV. One can show that the lightest eigenvalue of the moduli mass matrix is connected to the gravitino mass in theories with softly broken supersymmetry, and in turn that in such theories the squark and slepton (and Higgs scalar) masses are essentially equal to the gravitino masses. Thus the squarks and sleptons are heavier than about 30TeV, and they are predicted to be too heavy to observe at LHC or via the rare decays. The LHCb result agrees with this prediction. While the scalars are too heavy to be seen easily, gluinos and neutralinos and one chargino should be seen at LHC."

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.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Christianity isn't based on... (Feb '10) 31 min Thinking 356
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 59 min ChristineM 21,413
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 1 hr Thinking 20,315
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 1 hr ChristineM 10,363
Evidence for God! (Oct '14) 1 hr ChristineM 555
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 5 hr Eagle 12 257,140
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 6 hr SoE 45,560
More from around the web