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.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#15252 May 3, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
You gotta say what you gotta say. We have never had such an atheist friendly president. He also has several atheists and non believers on his staff.
I look at his actions and they certainly are not in line with the Religious organizations.
<quoted text>
I like Obama as a person, and I respect him as a President, even though he did not achieve some of his campaign promises that I wanted him to. Oh well.

I was really voting AGAINST Mittins--who would have been a near-total disaster.]

The US could not afford 4 more years of Bush-type economic disaster....

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#15253 May 4, 2013
The storming Mormon didn't have a chance lol :))

Obama hasn't been perfect and he has done some things that pissed me off to be sure. On the other hand he has done much to help us progressives so it's a mixed bag. Even Bill Clinton messed up but at least he like Obama tried.

Unlike any GOP president.
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>I like Obama as a person, and I respect him as a President, even though he did not achieve some of his campaign promises that I wanted him to. Oh well.

I was really voting AGAINST Mittins--who would have been a near-total disaster.]

The US could not afford 4 more years of Bush-type economic disaster....

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#15254 May 4, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
The storming Mormon didn't have a chance lol :))
Obama hasn't been perfect and he has done some things that pissed me off to be sure. On the other hand he has done much to help us progressives so it's a mixed bag. Even Bill Clinton messed up but at least he like Obama tried.
Unlike any GOP president.
<quoted text>
There's one thing about Bill Clinton and that is, you can't help but like the guy.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#15255 May 4, 2013
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
There's one thing about Bill Clinton and that is, you can't help but like the guy.
I don't like his wife though, she's a monster.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#15256 May 4, 2013
Many People wished he could have run for a 3rd term.
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>There's one thing about Bill Clinton and that is, you can't help but like the guy.
henry

Gotha, Germany

#15258 May 4, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
What irritates me about nuclear programs in the US, is all the waste-- if they would simply re-process the "spent" fuel rods next to working nuclear piles, it could be reused several times, before all the useful isotopes are gone.
By the time it decays into lighter elements, there is not all that much leftover for deep-crust burial.
The majority of "waste" is really low-level stuff anyway (like tools, clothing, protective gear, etc). That could be handled in a very different way than at present, where it's treated as if it were made of "super kooties" or something-- if it were incinerated, and the exhaust carefully collected, you'd have 1/100th of the mass/volume or better--sure, it'd be higher level radiation, but much-much smaller to dispose of. Cheaper, too.
The whole thing is fraught with arbitrary silliness, and hampered by morons who are afraid of their shadows-- if the "nuclear" word is attached? They are against it--even if it was "nuclear medicine".
Idiots.
A properly engineered and properly >>maintained<< reactor NOT located on a fault line or in a hurricane zone is safer than houses-- certainly MUCH safer than damns are.
The key is oversight-- NOT from the company profiting from the endeavor, but by an interested, but unbiased 3rd party.
Typically this would be government-- but alas, our government is too easy to corrupt these days.
For proof? The ReThuglican Party-- who allowed itself to be bought off by gun manufacturers, instead of enacting REASONABLE protections for the citizenry.
... ugg.
CapitaLISM HAS ONLY ONE TARGET: superprofit. The Society has no other Goal. This means the end in a nuclear Age!
henry

Gotha, Germany

#15259 May 4, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Hydrogen is very different from water.
:D
I like hydrogen-- but the problem of storage density remains-- there is no real efficient method of storing that stuff in sufficiently dense containers suitable for autos-- if you want a reasonable range, that is.
If you are willing to limit your range to 100 miles or less? Then, yeah, hydrogen is the way to go.
Maybe we need to look for ways to refuel the cars more efficiently--say every time you park, a robot automatically connects your car to an electrical charging device-- it either generates more hydrogen (from on-board water tanks) or it recharges the batteries.
For city-to-city roads? It is technically feasable to have in-road induction charging sections-- that is, as you drive along, the in-road induction coils re-charge your batteries (or generate hydrogen from on-board water).
This would enable cars to have very limited ranges-- and still be quite workable with the present cityscapes.
I am quite shure: Fukushima was not the last affaire. There are hundreds of AKWs and we will witness more gaus. Radiation is a silent killer and it is going around the whole world.
Imhotep

Silver Springs, FL

#15260 May 4, 2013
henry wrote:
<quoted text>
CapitaLISM HAS ONLY ONE TARGET: superprofit. The Society has no other Goal. This means the end in a nuclear Age!
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch...
henry

Gotha, Germany

#15261 May 4, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Hydrogen is very different from water.
:D
I like hydrogen-- but the problem of storage density remains-- there is no real efficient method of storing that stuff in sufficiently dense containers suitable for autos-- if you want a reasonable range, that is.
If you are willing to limit your range to 100 miles or less? Then, yeah, hydrogen is the way to go.
Maybe we need to look for ways to refuel the cars more efficiently--say every time you park, a robot automatically connects your car to an electrical charging device-- it either generates more hydrogen (from on-board water tanks) or it recharges the batteries.
For city-to-city roads? It is technically feasable to have in-road induction charging sections-- that is, as you drive along, the in-road induction coils re-charge your batteries (or generate hydrogen from on-board water).
This would enable cars to have very limited ranges-- and still be quite workable with the present cityscapes.
The final run is for superprofits. This is the Goal of all capitalists and finally the end of this Society.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#15262 May 4, 2013
henry wrote:
<quoted text>
I am quite shure: Fukushima was not the last affaire. There are hundreds of AKWs and we will witness more gaus. Radiation is a silent killer and it is going around the whole world.
You religious nuts are so funny sometimes.
henry

Gotha, Germany

#15263 May 4, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Look at the US Navy's record of Nuclear Power-- it's literally spotless.
They don't mess around with "super customized" installations-- all of the US Navy's nuclear power piles follow essentially the same design-- such that, anyone trained on one, is automatically trained on them all. And they are rigid with their safety protocols.
As such? They have a spotless record.
I say: expand the US Navy into power production-- just at COST, too-- they could build their version of the reactors all across the US, even on Navy/Army/Air-force bases. This could have strategic use as well as national usefulness.
They put in sufficient power piles to power the base, plus about double or triple excess-- for military redundancy, of course.
But during peacetime? They sell the excess power-- at the same as the local rates-- which funds the plants, and helps fund the US Military budget too.
Everybody wins!
The US gets lots and lots of lovely power-- pollution free.
The military gets power for their bases that THEY control, very strategically useful in times of crisis.
They military BUDGET gets partially funded by the project too.
An added benefit? Those plucky US Navy personnel get lots of training.
It's a WIN-WIN!
Alas-- nobody is going to become SUPER-MEGA-RICH over it, though.
... so the Republicans would be against it, I'd bet...
You are soo right as I often notice with you.
henry

Gotha, Germany

#15264 May 4, 2013
Wat the Tyler wrote:
Religion will cease to exist sometime in the 21st century.
May be but humanity may end by a final nuclear Occasion very soon too.
henry

Gotha, Germany

#15265 May 4, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
I like Obama as a person, and I respect him as a President, even though he did not achieve some of his campaign promises that I wanted him to. Oh well.
I was really voting AGAINST Mittins--who would have been a near-total disaster.]
The US could not afford 4 more years of Bush-type economic disaster....
All US-presidents are puppets of the (super-) big Money or they may not survive.
henry

Gotha, Germany

#15266 May 4, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't like his wife though, she's a monster.
All US-presidents Play the tune of of the billionairs or they live in great danger.
Imhotep

Silver Springs, FL

#15267 May 4, 2013
henry wrote:
<quoted text>
May be but humanity may end by a final nuclear Occasion very soon too.
Henry, you are akin to Han Solo dumping cargo to make the jump to light speed... At the first sign of Imperial cruisers Carrying those dreaded FACTS!
henry

Gotha, Germany

#15268 May 4, 2013
Primula wrote:
my hypothesis is that gods are created from human search of meanings during ancient times, several countries even deem their rulers divine or an appointed of the divine.
trying to think of how people think god is, why are there so many religions and several other factors the conclusion I made is that god can't exist in the real world. Humans in the first place control this world anyhow. o3o
it is safe to shorten my hypothesis as god is a product of human artistry.
All gods are created by man and mostly in the interest of the mighty and rich ones.
henry

Gotha, Germany

#15269 May 4, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
What irritates me about nuclear programs in the US, is all the waste-- if they would simply re-process the "spent" fuel rods next to working nuclear piles, it could be reused several times, before all the useful isotopes are gone.
By the time it decays into lighter elements, there is not all that much leftover for deep-crust burial.
The majority of "waste" is really low-level stuff anyway (like tools, clothing, protective gear, etc). That could be handled in a very different way than at present, where it's treated as if it were made of "super kooties" or something-- if it were incinerated, and the exhaust carefully collected, you'd have 1/100th of the mass/volume or better--sure, it'd be higher level radiation, but much-much smaller to dispose of. Cheaper, too.
The whole thing is fraught with arbitrary silliness, and hampered by morons who are afraid of their shadows-- if the "nuclear" word is attached? They are against it--even if it was "nuclear medicine".
Idiots.
A properly engineered and properly >>maintained<< reactor NOT located on a fault line or in a hurricane zone is safer than houses-- certainly MUCH safer than damns are.
The key is oversight-- NOT from the company profiting from the endeavor, but by an interested, but unbiased 3rd party.
Typically this would be government-- but alas, our government is too easy to corrupt these days.
For proof? The ReThuglican Party-- who allowed itself to be bought off by gun manufacturers, instead of enacting REASONABLE protections for the citizenry.
... ugg.
Capitalism has only the one purpose to create superprofits and this in a nuclear Society is suicidal.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#15271 May 4, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
The storming Mormon didn't have a chance lol :))
Obama hasn't been perfect and he has done some things that pissed me off to be sure. On the other hand he has done much to help us progressives so it's a mixed bag. Even Bill Clinton messed up but at least he like Obama tried.
Unlike any GOP president.
<quoted text>
Exactly right-- mixed bag, but near-infinitely superior to the Party Of Getting Rich-Quick (republicans).

Look up the net worth of your random republican when he STARTED office, and when he retired or was forced-out-- ALWAYS WENT UP-UP-UP.

The ReThugs see political office as a way to GET FILTHY RICH.

Sickening.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#15272 May 4, 2013
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
There's one thing about Bill Clinton and that is, you can't help but like the guy.
There's that. I also feel the same about Obama-- he's humble enough to get on the floor and play with a little kid, but astute enough to give speeches that appeal to educated people.

The sort of person a mom would point to, and be proud of.

In 100% contrast to the ReThugs of modern times, who have universally been uneducated, idiotic and in at least one case-- so mentally deficit they could not remember anything important to the office.

... ugg.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#15273 May 4, 2013
henry wrote:
<quoted text>
CapitaLISM HAS ONLY ONE TARGET: superprofit. The Society has no other Goal. This means the end in a nuclear Age!
Which is why I'm in favor of a limited capitalistic society-- one where there are strict limits on the excesses of capitalism.

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 "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr Another Damn Liberal 48,530
Athetists' best bet is that there is a God. 2 hr Uncle Sam 15
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 2 hr Into The Night 23,503
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 4 hr New Age Spiritual... 258,040
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 14 hr Rosa_Winkel 21,866
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) Dec 3 Eagle 12 4,907
Why you need to make sure you are saved before ... Dec 2 Scaritual 14
More from around the web