Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

There are 23583 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

Saffron Walden, UK

#12119 Feb 4, 2013
I don't see your point. Worldwide, most christians also believe in Evolution.
01Justsayin wrote:
<quoted text>
And? Just because I believe in Jesus doesn't mean I can't also see the common sense in evolution? Again, labels schmabels.

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#12120 Feb 4, 2013
01Justsayin wrote:
<quoted text>
Cool pentagram by the way. You into witchcraft? Or a satanist? Freemason? You know the pentagram was originally used as a sign of Christianity. It was used to represent the five wounds of Christ.
None of the above. It is album cover art/logo from my favorite band.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#12121 Feb 4, 2013
scaritual wrote:
Ahhh...not a fan of Rush. Cool.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#12122 Feb 4, 2013
TerryL wrote:
<quoted text>None of the above. It is album cover art/logo from my favorite band.
So I see. Cool.
insidesecrets

Albuquerque, NM

#12123 Feb 4, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Prove it.
<quoted text>
Can we trust science?

"Cases of scientific misconduct tend to hit the headlines precisely because scientists are supposed to occupy a moral high ground when it comes to the search for truth about nature. The scientific method developed as a way to weed out human bias. But scientists, like anyone else, can be prone to bias in their bid for a place in the history books."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/sep/13...
insidesecrets

Albuquerque, NM

#12124 Feb 4, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Garbage. If that were true, why is it that scientists are surprised so often? You also forget that scientists are a varied group of people that have different biases and different 'results they want'. That is why peer review is so important: if the data convinces even those who have a bias the other way, you can have some confidence in the results. Finally, the way science works is we attempt to show our theories to be *wrong*. That is, by far, the quickest way to get status in the scientific community. If the ideas survive in spite of many attempts to show them wrong, we can again have increased confidence in them.
That's the theory, but not the practice.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#12125 Feb 4, 2013
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
That's the theory, but not the practice.
You really enjoy making bold and baseless claims. Where is your evidence of this one?

Since: Mar 11

United States

#12126 Feb 4, 2013
Wrong as usual.
01Justsayin wrote:
<quoted text>
Cool pentagram by the way. You into witchcraft? Or a satanist? Freemason? You know the pentagram was originally used as a sign of Christianity. It was used to represent the five wounds of Christ.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#12127 Feb 4, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
<quoted text>Wrong as usual.
Whatever you say, Captain Atheisthole.

Since: Mar 11

United States

#12128 Feb 4, 2013
Yet you were the one bashing evolution and using the term evolutionist. It seems you are having trouble keeping up with your own Bullsht.
01Justsayin wrote:
<quoted text>
And? Just because I believe in Jesus doesn't mean I can't also see the common sense in evolution? Again, labels schmabels.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#12129 Feb 4, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
<quoted text>Yet you were the one bashing evolution and using the term evolutionist. It seems you are having trouble keeping up with your own Bullsht.
Nothing bullshit about that...at all. You're the one with all the labels. I am
perfectly capable of believing in God as well as the concepts of evolution, as pointed out by Charles Darwin. Who also, by the way, believed wholeheartedly in God until later in life when his personal conviction was more of that of an agnostic. As amazing a scientist as he was, the man wrestled with his faith his whole life and still wasn't entirely sure in the end. I have nothing but the deepest respect for his work as well as the man himself.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#12130 Feb 4, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
<quoted text>Yet you were the one bashing evolution and using the term evolutionist. It seems you are having trouble keeping up with your own Bullsht.
Seriously. Your ability to misquote or manipulate a person in a pathetic attempt to prove your own point is uncanny. Are you sure you aren't a politician? Because it is quite obvious that you are a textbook narcissist.

Since: Mar 11

United States

#12131 Feb 4, 2013
You said it originated with Jewsus. But it didn't hence you were wrong, as usual. Now your preacher will be waiting for his BJ from you. Swallow like he had you do back in the day per your own admission.
01Justsayin wrote:
<quoted text>
Whatever you say, Captain Atheisthole.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#12132 Feb 4, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
<quoted text>You said it originated with Jewsus. But it didn't hence you were wrong, as usual. Now your preacher will be waiting for his BJ from you. Swallow like he had you do back in the day per your own admission.
I never said evolution originated with Jesus. Seriously. It's like you think I've never read a book that wasn't the Bible. Are you even reading what I write before you misquote me? Don't you have a truck driver to go service, narciatheist?

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#12133 Feb 4, 2013
Who cares what Darwin's beliefs were? What does that have to do with anything?

Ohhhhhh wait. You were trying to say accepting the fact of evolution = atheism and Darwin was a pioneer in the field. So you were using an appeal to authority logical fallacy.

A really ignorant one because evolution has nothing to do with atheism and you after you spoke negatively of people you labeled evolutionists, admitted you accept evolution.

Hmmm I think you need to find a smarter preacher to suck off and swallow spunk from. That one obviously has you looking thick as pig sht.
01Justsayin wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing bullshit about that...at all. You're the one with all the labels. I am
perfectly capable of believing in God as well as the concepts of evolution, as pointed out by Charles Darwin. Who also, by the way, believed wholeheartedly in God until later in life when his personal conviction was more of that of an agnostic. As amazing a scientist as he was, the man wrestled with his faith his whole life and still wasn't entirely sure in the end. I have nothing but the deepest respect for his work as well as the man himself.

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

#12134 Feb 4, 2013
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
Can we trust science?
"Cases of scientific misconduct tend to hit the headlines precisely because scientists are supposed to occupy a moral high ground when it comes to the search for truth about nature. The scientific method developed as a way to weed out human bias. But scientists, like anyone else, can be prone to bias in their bid for a place in the history books."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/sep/13...
Of course we can.

How do you think the frauds are eventually exposed?

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#12135 Feb 4, 2013
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
Can we trust science?
"Cases of scientific misconduct tend to hit the headlines precisely because scientists are supposed to occupy a moral high ground when it comes to the search for truth about nature. The scientific method developed as a way to weed out human bias. But scientists, like anyone else, can be prone to bias in their bid for a place in the history books."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/sep/13...
You do realize that is still science that discovers and brings the fraud to light, don't you?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#12136 Feb 4, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
<quoted text>Who cares what Darwin's beliefs were? What does that have to do with anything?

Ohhhhhh wait. You were trying to say accepting the fact of evolution = atheism and Darwin was a pioneer in the field. So you were using an appeal to authority logical fallacy.

A really ignorant one because evolution has nothing to do with atheism and you after you spoke negatively of people you labeled evolutionists, admitted you accept evolution.

Hmmm I think you need to find a smarter preacher to suck off and swallow spunk from. That one obviously has you looking thick as pig sht.
Pig shit is what you reek of. The only one sucking anyone off is you with your truckers at the truck stop. On your knees, boy!
I said just because I believe in God doesn't mean that I cannot also understand the basic concepts of evolution. Especially seeing as how Charles Darwin himself believed in God in the beginning of his life. Even toward the end he was more along the lines of being agnostic. He was not an atheist. Nor did I say that atheism has anything at all to do with evolution. I didn't say one negative word about evolutionists. I simply choose not to label myself or my own personal beliefs. Why put myself in a box like that? In true narcissistic fashion, you flipped that shit in another pathetic attempt to prove your own point. You, sir, are a grade A atheisthole.
Thinking

Saffron Walden, UK

#12137 Feb 4, 2013
Did you read all the retractions at the end of the article? The trend is clear: scientists are trying to improve honesty all the time, whilst priestophiles still get aircover from their church.
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
Can we trust science?
"Cases of scientific misconduct tend to hit the headlines precisely because scientists are supposed to occupy a moral high ground when it comes to the search for truth about nature. The scientific method developed as a way to weed out human bias. But scientists, like anyone else, can be prone to bias in their bid for a place in the history books."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/sep/13...

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#12138 Feb 4, 2013
You said the pentagram preacher gulper. Actually pentacle is the proper term for it and it was used thousands of years before the myth of Jewsus started.

You just keep digging yourself deeper eh? But you are a case example of believers having lower IQs than atheists.

Perhaps you can find a smarter preacher to give BJs to?
01Justsayin wrote:
<quoted text>
I never said evolution originated with Jesus. Seriously. It's like you think I've never read a book that wasn't the Bible. Are you even reading what I write before you misquote me? Don't you have a truck driver to go service, narciatheist?

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 Aliens and evolution (Jun '12) 54 min Paul Porter1 6,223
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 1 hr ChristineM 243,507
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 1 hr ChristineM 9,498
News Why Atheism Will Replace Religion (Aug '12) 15 hr TC_Tia 14,656
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 15 hr MikeF 19,806
News Atheism must be about more than just not believ... Jul 4 Amused 2
Should atheists have the burden of proof? Jul 4 thetruth 38
More from around the web