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.

I can read

Edinburgh, UK

#19781 Dec 31, 2013
Some info for the uninformed:

-There was no one second before the big bang. It's when space time started. There is no time before time existed.

-Inflation theory explains why matter seemed to move faster than the speed of light after the big bang

-Inflation theory is based on everything in the universe moving apart at the same rate i.e it isn't just us everything is getting further away from.

- Some things do move faster than the speed of light. Electrons making quantum leaps move infinitely fast.

-It is also possible for things with mass to move at the speed of light without becoming infinately heavy, in fact that's exactly what light itself does. Photons have mass.
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#19782 Dec 31, 2013
I can read wrote:
Some info for the uninformed:
-There was no one second before the big bang. It's when space time started. There is no time before time existed.
-Inflation theory explains why matter seemed to move faster than the speed of light after the big bang
-Inflation theory is based on everything in the universe moving apart at the same rate i.e it isn't just us everything is getting further away from.
- Some things do move faster than the speed of light. Electrons making quantum leaps move infinitely fast.
-It is also possible for things with mass to move at the speed of light without becoming infinately heavy, in fact that's exactly what light itself does. Photons have mass.
Well done, ICR, but even that oversimplifies. For instance, according to some calculations another galaxy will 'one day' collide with ours, so "isn't just us everything is getting further away from" isn't quite right.(Us = the Earth). I think we appear to be nearer the periphery of the known universe than near its origin.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andromeda%E2%80%...

I seem to be in a minority for thinking that things may appear very different from another position in space-time. Some have argued with me that cannot happen.
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#19783 Dec 31, 2013
spider wrote:
<quoted text>
Just in case you thought I was being pedantic Ed, I hadn't noticed your spelling of Hawking until you chose to correct it.
It doesn't help that I know someone called 'Hawkins':-)
LCNin

United States

#19784 Dec 31, 2013
As we pass through this world the number of things we can prove seems small.

I can not prove the existence of God, Love, Friendship or Beauty.

I respect people who have different views on these.
Peace

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#19785 Dec 31, 2013
trandiode wrote:
<quoted text> The violation occurred after the big bang ! Remember Einstein there was nothing before the Big Bang, No time no space NO NOTHING !
I've been reading your posts. Could you do me a favor and start posting directly to the "Dumbest Thing posted by a godbot' thread? I really don't have the time to re-post all of your posts there.

Thanks!
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#19786 Dec 31, 2013
LCNin wrote:
As we pass through this world the number of things we can prove seems small.
I can not prove the existence of God, Love, Friendship or Beauty.
But there's evidence and reason behind all of those but a god - especially one you don't even dare to define.
LCNin wrote:
I respect people who have different views on these.
Who doesn't? It doesn't follow one should respect what people believe.
LCNin wrote:
Peace
Platitude. A secular world without religion, respectful of reason and evidence would be safer.

You are as nutty as a fruit-cake.(How's that for respect, L?:-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_princi...

Of course, we only know what information can be gained through our five senses by using our puny brains. Even sharks have six senses and many birds have far better eyesight and over a wider spectrum - that's without considering life forms elsewhere, or less anthropomorphically.

I could just be a blob travelling through the 'Ether' imagining everything - the Universe, world, other people - everything. Maybe none of you exist unless I'm interacting with you :-)
LCNin

United States

#19787 Dec 31, 2013
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>But there's evidence and reason behind all of those but a god - especially one you don't even dare to define.
<quoted text>Who doesn't? It doesn't follow one should respect what people believe.
<quoted text>Platitude. A secular world without religion, respectful of reason and evidence would be safer.
You are as nutty as a fruit-cake.(How's that for respect, L?:-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_princi...
Of course, we only know what information can be gained through our five senses by using our puny brains. Even sharks have six senses and many birds have far better eyesight and over a wider spectrum - that's without considering life forms elsewhere, or less anthropomorphically.
I could just be a blob travelling through the 'Ether' imagining everything - the Universe, world, other people - everything. Maybe none of you exist unless I'm interacting with you :-)
You have some valid points.
Is there wisdom in non material ideas?
Value in that which we can not prove?
Peace
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#19788 Dec 31, 2013
LCNin wrote:
<quoted text>
You have some valid points.
Is there wisdom in non material ideas?
Value in that which we can not prove?
Peace
Is that what makes you troll the Atheism Forum year-on-year, trying to blame everything from Stalinism to Pol-Pot on atheism - while calling others evangelists. You write 'peace' at the end of your posts as if peace was your motivation. You claim you aren't religious, yet your motive looks more likely to be fear that religion is worthless and might be irrelevant to the modern world.

What's your idea of a 'non-material' idea? We all experience and appreciate love, beauty and peace. Some of us disbelieve in gods and pixies - and other things unproven. That's all.

Joy and happiness.
trandiode

Walkley Heights, Australia

#19790 Dec 31, 2013
The atheists on this thread are really rather ignorant of their own belief system called Science, they are all racing around the internet looking up sites relating to physics and trying desperately to understand the concepts behind what they are reading failing ever so miserably ! And you can see that by the posts that they are posting on this thread, they are mixing theories up all over the joint to try to support their case ! pathetic really, for some reason I expected them to at least know the basics behind the Big Bang Theory, Pity because I also wanted to start debating about the String Theory and what repercussions may emanate from it in relation to this thread , But alas how can I have an intelligent conversation about string theory with people who don't even understand the Big Bang Theory ! So enjoy your new found (so called) scientific wisdom all by yourselves ! I'm out of here :)

“Sweden more democratic thanUSA”

Since: Jun 12

Södertälje, Sweden

#19791 Dec 31, 2013
trandiode wrote:
The atheists on this thread are really rather ignorant of their own belief system called Science, they are all racing around the internet looking up sites relating to physics and trying desperately to understand the concepts behind what they are reading failing ever so miserably ! And you can see that by the posts that they are posting on this thread, they are mixing theories up all over the joint to try to support their case ! pathetic really, for some reason I expected them to at least know the basics behind the Big Bang Theory, Pity because I also wanted to start debating about the String Theory and what repercussions may emanate from it in relation to this thread , But alas how can I have an intelligent conversation about string theory with people who don't even understand the Big Bang Theory ! So enjoy your new found (so called) scientific wisdom all by yourselves ! I'm out of here :)
Wall of lies and errors
trandiode

Walkley Heights, Australia

#19792 Dec 31, 2013
spider wrote:
<quoted text>
ONE SECOND BEFORE THE BIG BANG.
The pressure at the very centre of the collected and compressed matter had built to such a degree as to cause a reaction, exactly one second later. Time exists every where, even if there is no one to measure it.
Nothing existed before the big bang including time! that's why I asked the question ! To see how many gullible pseudo scientists will take the bait, congratulations you are one of them :)
jacktheladat1

Sheffield, UK

#19793 Dec 31, 2013
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>It seems that there is no clear agreement on whether time existed before the Big Bang or not. I don't know that there's a leading scientist who claimed to know the answer to that, though short, individual quotes taken out of context might suggest they did. The Big Bang itself is just a theory based on the evidence (from one point in space-time) that the visible and detectable universe is expanding at an increasing rate. From that principally, if not from that alone, most people tend to deduce that there was a singularity from which it originated.
The main evidence that the universe is expanding is indicated by the red-shift detected, I am told. However, that is observed only from this point in space-time. What if it looked different from another point in space-time? That would surely through a spanner in the works. Perhaps we need to get rovers off of this planet and out of the solar system and go look-see at least before jumping to firm conclusions?
I think the topic is a bit more complicated than this discussion has allowed.
More on-topic though....
<quoted text>Exactly.
The place to start with belief in god(s) is: define god. Abrahamic gods and these...
godchecker.com
are clearly man-made myths..
You are absolutely spot-on citing the Red Shift as the proof that the universe is expanding. It was none other than Edwin Hubble who first produced the evidence.
Logically, if time itself began with the “Big Bang,” then asking what happened prior, has just got to be the pinnacle example of all the most stupid questions ever posed.
Theology = mythology

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#19794 Dec 31, 2013
trandiode wrote:
<quoted text> Gee Bob you certainly can talk a lot shame there is no substance in what you say ! You seem to have time and space mixed up !
You unmigitated moron: time **AND** space are the same.

You demonstrate your total ignorance here, when you attempt to say otherwise.
trandiode wrote:
The only time possible that the speed of light was exceeded was after the big bang when time and space were created !
Nope. You are lying. Space **expanded** at faster than the speed of light-- there was no travel involved---at all. Space itself expanded. This is not violating the speed of light through SPACE rule.

I know this concept is obviously too much for you to grasp-- you still suffer under the idiotic idea of absolutism.

Within that expanding space? All **relative** speeds (if anyone had been there to measure-- unlikely, as space-conditions were ... extreme at the time) were still less than the speed of light.
trandiode wrote:
Without that combo you have nothing, and nothing can not go faster than the speed of light because there is NOTHING ! Zero, Zilch, FSA,
You are 100% of an idiot here-- your bullsh|t words are lined up-- devoid of meaning.

See above.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#19795 Dec 31, 2013
trandiode wrote:
BTW Bob, Stop judging your own posts over and over again ! Its a bit lame mate :)
LMAO!

And **YOU** judge YOUR OWN? One at a time?

That has GOT to have made your mouse-finger really sore...

LMAO!

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#19796 Dec 31, 2013
trandiode wrote:
Stephen Hawkings had a theory . His theory was an attempt to explain the big bang theory and the nothingness that existed prior to the big bang ! He fell on his butt Big time LMAO ! He was actually able to create nothing from something ! To him sadly it made sense , To the rest of the scientific community however it made no sense at all , and I will concur on that ! PMSL
Who is this "hawkings" dude? I GOOGLED and no results.

You are a total moron, here.

Seriously: you are an idiot.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#19797 Dec 31, 2013
EdSed wrote:
Oops - Hawking (not Hawkins! How did I do that??:-)
You used the same misspelled word that the GODBOT did.

LMAO!

(I nearly fell for it too-- then I realized the GODBOT had miss-spelled "Hawking" and decided a joke response was more apropos to his joke post)

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#19798 Dec 31, 2013
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>It seems that there is no clear agreement on whether time existed before the Big Bang or not. I don't know that there's a leading scientist who claimed to know the answer to that, though short, individual quotes taken out of context might suggest they did. The Big Bang itself is just a theory based on the evidence (from one point in space-time) that the visible and detectable universe is expanding at an increasing rate. From that principally, if not from that alone, most people tend to deduce that there was a singularity from which it originated.
The main evidence that the universe is expanding is indicated by the red-shift detected, I am told. However, that is observed only from this point in space-time. What if it looked different from another point in space-time? That would surely through a spanner in the works. Perhaps we need to get rovers off of this planet and out of the solar system and go look-see at least before jumping to firm conclusions?
I think the topic is a bit more complicated than this discussion has allowed.
More on-topic though....
<quoted text>Exactly.
The place to start with belief in god(s) is: define god. Abrahamic gods and these...
godchecker.com
are clearly man-made myths.
Theology = mythology.
Oh, I quite agree-- the subject is far, far more complicated than this silly 4000 char limit medium would allow.

I posted my simplified replies based on comments Polymath has made in the past.

I blighly ignored the possibility of multiple dimensional universes in addition to our own, and concentrated on the GODBOT's belief that our universe is the sole one.

You are correct: if there are multiple universes, as suggested by both string theory and the membrane hypothesis, then time is infinite into the past, having infinite universes in which to manifest.

But if there is but our own universe? Time did not exist until shortly after the initial expansion, as there was no **space** for time to exist **in**....

... but, obviously, our universe started from a singularity of some kind-- from whence that came, it is impossible to tell, looking from within the event itself. Information cannot transition the conditions of the initial expansion phase (before matter and energy condensed from the rapid expansion). Time itself could not even have existed yet-- making for somewhat of a conundrum-- if time could not have existed? How, then could the initial singularity?

Of course-- the GODBOT was too stupid to have asked **that** most interesting of questions.

And equally obvious, a question that is easily solved by multiple universes.

These religious nutters-- they really *are* quite limited, aren't they?

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#19799 Dec 31, 2013
spider wrote:
<quoted text>
Hawkins is a far more common name than Hawking, the relative similarity between the two with one being more common makes for an easy mistake. We all do it :-)
I think there are somewhere in the region of twenty seven ways to spell William Shaksper.
The correct name, obviously, is Hawking. I never let a GODBOT go free from that one-- as they are usually trying to quote-mine something he has said anyway.

They are lying, in other words-- it's what GODBOTs do.

In fact? It is **all** that they do.

LMAO!
LCNin

United States

#19800 Dec 31, 2013
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>Is that what makes you troll the Atheism Forum year-on-year, trying to blame everything from Stalinism to Pol-Pot on atheism - while calling others evangelists. You write 'peace' at the end of your posts as if peace was your motivation. You claim you aren't religious, yet your motive looks more likely to be fear that religion is worthless and might be irrelevant to the modern world.
What's your idea of a 'non-material' idea? We all experience and appreciate love, beauty and peace. Some of us disbelieve in gods and pixies - and other things unproven. That's all.
Joy and happiness.
Loyalty, brotherhood, love, beauty of a rose... seem unprovable.
Do these exist?

God, as we have debated, can not be proven.

Peace

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#19801 Dec 31, 2013
I can read wrote:
Some info for the uninformed:
-There was no one second before the big bang. It's when space time started. There is no time before time existed.
-Inflation theory explains why matter seemed to move faster than the speed of light after the big bang
-Inflation theory is based on everything in the universe moving apart at the same rate i.e it isn't just us everything is getting further away from.
- Some things do move faster than the speed of light. Electrons making quantum leaps move infinitely fast.
-It is also possible for things with mass to move at the speed of light without becoming infinately heavy, in fact that's exactly what light itself does. Photons have mass.
Brilliant summary!

And yes-- spot-on, assuming that there is but one universe (ours, obviously).

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) 6 min Rondo 52,385
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 21 min Ian McFarland 11,462
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 28 min Rosa_Winkel 520
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 50 min Eagle 12 22,192
News Quotes from Famous Freethinkers (Aug '12) 2 hr Eagle 12 1,682
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 2 hr Eagle 12 24,919
News Fox Friends Outraged Over Atheists 'Making Chri... 3 hr Kaarlo 231
More from around the web