Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

There are 24182 comments on the Psychology Today story from Apr 25, 2012, titled Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038. In it, Psychology Today reports that:

My blog posts on religion have attracted a lot of controversy. Religious people are annoyed by my claim that belief in God will go the way of horse transportation, and for much the same reason, specifically an improved standard of living.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Psychology Today.

Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#10632 Jan 17, 2013
That was actually the religious consensus in christianity and islam in years gone by. Of course they didn't call it child abuse, they just thought it was normal. Thank f**k we can ignore religitards today.
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
So if the consensus was that child abuse was ok, you would go with that?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10633 Jan 17, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
I assume no such thing. I "insist" on no such thing.
I await evidence and testable results. Got any?
You will not get any evidence or testable results to prove a rock did it.

How long are you prepared to wait for it?

You see, you claim you only believe that which is testable and observable.

Yet abiogenesis is not testable and observable, but you openly claim your accept it.

These inconsistencies in your worldview are mounting up.

If you are going to be an atheist, at least be honest and say that you cannot account for life and you cannot account for morality.

And we haven't even begun on logic itself yet...

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10634 Jan 17, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
And there the resort to ad hominem. A clear admission that you have no argument on point.
You even took it to the next level and made a bigoted slur against a whole group of people. Should I assume that this is a typical representation of Christianity?
Why would you care or appeal to an absolute moral standard that bigotry is wrong?

I thought you were an atheist?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10635 Jan 17, 2013
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
I asked a question.
You can't answer it.
That's all there is to it.
You asked a question in a certain way as to allow only two conclusions or limited conclusions.

It is called the fallacy of bifurcation...
DJ Hewlet

UK

#10636 Jan 17, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
Faith is belief in something without evidence.
There is evidence for abiogenesis as a working hypothesis.
My confidence in the finding of science is in direct proportion to the amount of available independent verification and amount of testable predictive results available.
So, have you got ANY independently verifiable evidence for something other than abiogenesis? Anything at all to consider?
The production of amino acids under laboratory conditions is touted as proof of abiogenesis, but there's a hitch. All experiments producing some amino acids, do so only as a result of using an atmosphere specifically engineered to yield amino acids. Instead of searching for existing evidence that would support the idea of abiogenesis, researchers manufacture it. This is not science. This is called rigging the results

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10638 Jan 17, 2013
Thinking wrote:
That was actually the religious consensus in christianity and islam in years gone by. Of course they didn't call it child abuse, they just thought it was normal. Thank f**k we can ignore religitards today.
<quoted text>
That is a sweeping fallacious presumption you have indulged in here.

Again, arbitrary and illogical, notwithstanding emotionally laden with unsubstantiated rhetoric.
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#10637 Jan 17, 2013
If you can't do the right thing without a religion you are a sad and evil f*ck.
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would you care or appeal to an absolute moral standard that bigotry is wrong?
I thought you were an atheist?

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#10639 Jan 17, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
You will not get any evidence or testable results to prove a rock did it.
How long are you prepared to wait for it?
You see, you claim you only believe that which is testable and observable.
Yet abiogenesis is not testable and observable, but you openly claim your accept it.
These inconsistencies in your worldview are mounting up.
If you are going to be an atheist, at least be honest and say that you cannot account for life and you cannot account for morality.
And we haven't even begun on logic itself yet...
No, I didn't. I tacitly accept the biochemistry hypothesis only to the extent there is real evidence.

Whine all you want about "a rock did it". That's a straw man fallacy which has nothing to do with what the science says. Every time you spout this nonsense you are showing everybody how much you don't know.
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#10641 Jan 17, 2013
So why are there "child abuse is normal" stories in the bible?
Why did mohammed f**k an under ten?

Substantiated.
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
That is a sweeping fallacious presumption you have indulged in here.
Again, arbitrary and illogical, notwithstanding emotionally laden with unsubstantiated rhetoric.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#10640 Jan 17, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would you care or appeal to an absolute moral standard that bigotry is wrong?
I thought you were an atheist?
You apparently don't understand what atheism is (or is not). But it seems to scare you.

I'm a Humanist.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10642 Jan 17, 2013
Thinking wrote:
If you can't do the right thing without a religion you are a sad and evil f*ck.
<quoted text>
And the basis for your absolute moral standard here is what?

Your own arbitrary opinion?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10643 Jan 17, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I didn't. I tacitly accept the biochemistry hypothesis only to the extent there is real evidence.
Whine all you want about "a rock did it". That's a straw man fallacy which has nothing to do with what the science says. Every time you spout this nonsense you are showing everybody how much you don't know.
So non life didn't spontaneously create life then?

A rock didn't do it?

And this evidence you keep pointing to, can you produce it?

Empirical evidence of course, as that is the only evidence that really accounts according to your own standards.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10644 Jan 17, 2013
Thinking wrote:
So why are there "child abuse is normal" stories in the bible?
Why did mohammed f**k an under ten?
Substantiated.
<quoted text>
I am sorry, upon what basis are you claiming these acts are absolutely wrong?

As an atheist, there is no absolute moral standard, so I am not sure why you are appealing to absolute moral standards over and over again to support your arguments.

I have assumed you are, but maybe you are not a atheist?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10645 Jan 17, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
You apparently don't understand what atheism is (or is not). But it seems to scare you.
I'm a Humanist.
I am not sure why you would think atheism would scare someone, especially when they understand it is a bankrupt philosophical viewpoint that cannot account for morality, logic and scientific law.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#10646 Jan 17, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would you care or appeal to an absolute moral standard that bigotry is wrong?
I thought you were an atheist?
And exactly how do you know that this is an "absolute moral standard"? Are you claiming to be the keeper of the "approved list" of these "absolute moral standards"?

Where do you get this list of "absolute morals"? The just come to you in a dream or did you hear a voice dictate them to you or what?

In the Abrahamic mythology Jehovah commanded his followers to kill all witches. Do you accept that witches are real and it is your moral responsibility to kill them?

Do you follow all the laws and commandments as documented in your holy scripture? If not, how do you decide which commandments to follow and which to ignore?

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#10647 Jan 17, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
So non life didn't spontaneously create life then?
A rock didn't do it?
And this evidence you keep pointing to, can you produce it?
Empirical evidence of course, as that is the only evidence that really accounts according to your own standards.
It is not my job to teach you science. I'm just pointing out that you don't understand any of it.

How many times have I suggested that you should go to the Evolution Forum if you want to discuss biology or biochemistry. Scared they'd laugh at you too much?

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#10648 Jan 17, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not sure why you would think atheism would scare someone, especially when they understand it is a bankrupt philosophical viewpoint that cannot account for morality, logic and scientific law.
But it is NOT a philosophical view. It is nothing but a general category to define any and all people who are not in the category theism.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10649 Jan 17, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
And exactly how do you know that this is an "absolute moral standard"? Are you claiming to be the keeper of the "approved list" of these "absolute moral standards"?
Where do you get this list of "absolute morals"? The just come to you in a dream or did you hear a voice dictate them to you or what?
In the Abrahamic mythology Jehovah commanded his followers to kill all witches. Do you accept that witches are real and it is your moral responsibility to kill them?
Do you follow all the laws and commandments as documented in your holy scripture? If not, how do you decide which commandments to follow and which to ignore?
I know that there are absolute moral standards, just as you do.

As God has revealed them to humanity, through our conscience and through the Scriptures.

I can prove you know they exist as whilst you deny them, you keep picking them up and using them.

And when I point that out to you, you drop them as a guilty child would drop a stolen toy.

If you do not believe in absolute moral standards, why do you keep appealing to them and using them?

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#10650 Jan 17, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
You asked a question in a certain way as to allow only two conclusions or limited conclusions.
It is called the fallacy of bifurcation...
You were the one talking about moral absolutes.

I just pointed out that they're not as perfect as you seem to think they are.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10651 Jan 17, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
It is not my job to teach you science. I'm just pointing out that you don't understand any of it.
How many times have I suggested that you should go to the Evolution Forum if you want to discuss biology or biochemistry. Scared they'd laugh at you too much?
I reject your arbitrary claim of having superior scientific comprehension.

Why?

Because you still assert a "rock did it" without being able to supply any empirical evidence for it.

Why would I accept your authority if you cannot rationally establish a basis for your claim to greater knowledge on such a simple matter as this.

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
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 4 min ChristineM 21,878
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 11 min scientia potentia... 23,517
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 15 min Into The Night 48,676
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) 16 min Into The Night 5,705
Athetists' best bet is that there is a God. 2 hr Igor Trip 69
News Louisiana Christians reclaim safe space by runn... 4 hr Amused 3
What are the best arguments against religion? 8 hr Igor Trip 2
More from around the web