Atheists on the march in America

Atheists on the march in America

There are 70650 comments on the TurkishPress.com story from Aug 26, 2009, titled Atheists on the march in America. In it, TurkishPress.com reports that:

When South Florida atheists held their first meeting, they were just five friends, having a beer at a bar.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at TurkishPress.com.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#66534 Dec 31, 2012
postscriptt wrote:
My five senses tell me a rock is an object, but they can't tell me if it is aware.
Then how do we know that rocks are aware? Merely that they are physical objects that react to chemistry and physics?

We already have a concept for that. It's called "existence".
postscriptt

Santa Fe, NM

#66535 Dec 31, 2012
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
Then how do we know that rocks are aware? Merely that they are physical objects that react to chemistry and physics?
We already have a concept for that. It's called "existence".
Like your five senses, science can never tell you if a rock is aware since its focus is exclusively physical. The only way to know for certain is to rely on your inner senses - your ability to merge your consciousness with that of a rock - to "feel" its reality, otherwise you are confined to speculating endlessly about the awareness of matter or lack thereof based on physical preconceptions entirely.

We live, create, respond, feel, think, dream and do it without trying. From the materialist's point of view, it's all done for us. But where does the information come from that makes these things so effortlessly possible? In order to avoid getting hit by a truck for example, we must be able to react quickly. The inner mechanisms that make such reactions possible are based upon calculations that are not consciously available - do not reside in the brain. If they were, we would never be able to react promptly if we had to stop and consciously work all the muscles involved in motion before we could move. People certainly couldn't communicate if they had to be aware of all the mechanisms involved and manipulate them before a bystander could even utter the words, "Look out!". This information has a source and that source is consciousness which exists independent of the brain and which as awareized energy exists in all matter.

When science decided to concentrate its investigations on objective issues and provable hypothesis only, relying on the physical senses and later, their extensions through instruments, it ended up with a very limited picture of reality. Scientists can categorize things such as types of flowers - give them names - rip them apart petal by petal so that nothing "physical" escapes examination, but by practicing such exclusivity, it loses sight of the fact that some knowledge forever escapes fact's categories - knowledge just as valid and just as demonstrable of nature's true significance reflected in man's subjective experiences - his inner reality.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#66536 Dec 31, 2012
postscriptt wrote:
Like your five senses, science can never tell you if a rock is aware since its focus is exclusively physical. The only way to know for certain is to rely on your inner senses - your ability to merge your consciousness with that of a rock - to "feel" its reality
In other words, it's all a lot of New Age "woo".

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#66537 Dec 31, 2012
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
In other words, it's all a lot of New Age "woo".
New Age woowoo, not the same as the Old Aged woowoo, but still chalked full of nuts.
postscriptt

Santa Fe, NM

#66539 Jan 1, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
New Age woowoo, not the same as the Old Aged woowoo, but still chalked full of nuts.
Science prides itself on separating fact from religious fancy. Instead of delusions, it has given the world a practical picture of reality - a rational picture that has freed the human intellect from the leaden grip of magical myths.

In place of ancient fictions about beginnings, science says the universe was formed by chance from nothing. That dead matter gave rise to a rich and diverse range of mechanized biological forms, and the golden rule of life is survival of the fittest. Instead of fables about immortality, it tells us that one life is all we have; that life being the only game going in all of infinity. It's a game of no particular significance or value however since science tells us that the universe is slowly running down, its energy being dissipated and the whole works gradually disintegrating into chaos.

Science tells us that the human body is a machine with consciousness trapped inside and emotional truths just hallucinations - the result of erratic activity of neurons or chemicals. It says that illness comes from outside sources, from viruses and bacteria that cause our bodily mechanical parts to break down. By simply giving our machines an oil treatment (drugs) or some better parts - all is well in science's land-o-facts.

You have your woo, I have mine. The question is: Whose woo makes more sense?

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#66540 Jan 1, 2013
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
Science prides itself on separating fact from religious fancy. Instead of delusions, it has given the world a practical picture of reality - a rational picture that has freed the human intellect from the leaden grip of magical myths.
In place of ancient fictions about beginnings, science says the universe was formed by chance from nothing. That dead matter gave rise to a rich and diverse range of mechanized biological forms, and the golden rule of life is survival of the fittest. Instead of fables about immortality, it tells us that one life is all we have; that life being the only game going in all of infinity. It's a game of no particular significance or value however since science tells us that the universe is slowly running down, its energy being dissipated and the whole works gradually disintegrating into chaos.
Science tells us that the human body is a machine with consciousness trapped inside and emotional truths just hallucinations - the result of erratic activity of neurons or chemicals. It says that illness comes from outside sources, from viruses and bacteria that cause our bodily mechanical parts to break down. By simply giving our machines an oil treatment (drugs) or some better parts - all is well in science's land-o-facts.
You have your woo, I have mine. The question is: Whose woo makes more sense?
Wow, you didn't just swallow the myth, you swallowed the entire collection. You think viruses don't cause illness? You think medicine doesn't help? I hope you never have children, such ignorance leads to child abuse.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#66541 Jan 1, 2013
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
Science prides itself on separating fact from religious fancy. Instead of delusions, it has given the world a practical picture of reality - a rational picture that has freed the human intellect from the leaden grip of magical myths.
In place of ancient fictions about beginnings, science says the universe was formed by chance from nothing. That dead matter gave rise to a rich and diverse range of mechanized biological forms, and the golden rule of life is survival of the fittest. Instead of fables about immortality, it tells us that one life is all we have; that life being the only game going in all of infinity. It's a game of no particular significance or value however since science tells us that the universe is slowly running down, its energy being dissipated and the whole works gradually disintegrating into chaos.
Science tells us that the human body is a machine with consciousness trapped inside and emotional truths just hallucinations - the result of erratic activity of neurons or chemicals. It says that illness comes from outside sources, from viruses and bacteria that cause our bodily mechanical parts to break down. By simply giving our machines an oil treatment (drugs) or some better parts - all is well in science's land-o-facts.
You have your woo, I have mine. The question is: Whose woo makes more sense?
I'm sorry that you have no proof of god, but please don't take it out on science. After all it is thanks to science that you are able to post this boat load of anti-science horsesh*t propoganda,( that probably came from the discovery institute which wants everyone to believe th eearth is 6000 years old and fossils not being "real"), so hundreds of people can see what a lying ignorant creationist tool you really are.
postscriptt

Santa Fe, NM

#66542 Jan 1, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow, you didn't just swallow the myth, you swallowed the entire collection. You think viruses don't cause illness? You think medicine doesn't help? I hope you never have children, such ignorance leads to child abuse.
In the U.S. children receive 35 vaccinations all told - 48 doses of 14 vaccines by the time they are just six years old. These vaccinations contain 113 different kinds of disease particles, 59 different chemicals, four types of animal cells/DNA from aborted fetal tissue and human albumin and there are 20 more vaccines currently in the Pharma pipeline and yet vaccine efficacy has never been proven! In fact, a common-sense study comparing the health outcomes of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated children has never been done in the U.S. to prove the safety and effectiveness of the childhood vaccine regime. THIS is child abuse.

http://vaccineresistancemovement.org/...

In England, Michel Odent, MD showed in two studies that children having received no Pertussis vaccine had 5-6 times less asthma than those who were vaccinated for it.

The rate of autism in the U.S. is now an unthinkable 1 in 100. Those who are unvaccinated boast numbers that run in shocking contrast to the nation’s statistics i.e. the incredible absence of autism in the unvaccinated Amish communities of Pennsylvania and Ohio.

Two studies done in New Zealand in 1992 and 1995 show that the unvaccinated children clearly have less allergies, less otitis (ear aches), less tonsillitis, less running noses, less epilepsies and less ADHD.

In Japan (1975-1980), a decision was made to begin the first vaccinations at two years of age instead of at two months. The reason was that more and more was discovered linking vaccines and crib-death (SIDS).

http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2010/06/25/...

http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2010/0...
postscriptt

Santa Fe, NM

#66543 Jan 1, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sorry that you have no proof of god, but please don't take it out on science. After all it is thanks to science that you are able to post this boat load of anti-science horsesh*t propoganda,( that probably came from the discovery institute which wants everyone to believe th eearth is 6000 years old and fossils not being "real"), so hundreds of people can see what a lying ignorant creationist tool you really are.
A specious argument used one time too many on this forum. Instead of parroting what has already been stated ad nauseam - try to be original. Think you can manage that?

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#66544 Jan 1, 2013
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
In the U.S. children receive 35 vaccinations all told - 48 doses of 14 vaccines by the time they are just six years old. These vaccinations contain 113 different kinds of disease particles, 59 different chemicals, four types of animal cells/DNA from aborted fetal tissue and human albumin and there are 20 more vaccines currently in the Pharma pipeline and yet vaccine efficacy has never been proven! In fact, a common-sense study comparing the health outcomes of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated children has never been done in the U.S. to prove the safety and effectiveness of the childhood vaccine regime. THIS is child abuse.
http://vaccineresistancemovement.org/...
In England, Michel Odent, MD showed in two studies that children having received no Pertussis vaccine had 5-6 times less asthma than those who were vaccinated for it.
The rate of autism in the U.S. is now an unthinkable 1 in 100. Those who are unvaccinated boast numbers that run in shocking contrast to the nation’s statistics i.e. the incredible absence of autism in the unvaccinated Amish communities of Pennsylvania and Ohio.
Two studies done in New Zealand in 1992 and 1995 show that the unvaccinated children clearly have less allergies, less otitis (ear aches), less tonsillitis, less running noses, less epilepsies and less ADHD.
In Japan (1975-1980), a decision was made to begin the first vaccinations at two years of age instead of at two months. The reason was that more and more was discovered linking vaccines and crib-death (SIDS).
http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2010/06/25/...
http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2010/0...
Full of sh*t creationist with no morals. Posting anti-science propoganda because he's got no proof of god whatsover.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#66545 Jan 1, 2013
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
You are superimposing your "human" perception of reality on a rock's reality. You are obviously not a rock, how could you know how they perceive reality?
This is officially the most retarded thing I've read today.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#66546 Jan 1, 2013
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
My five senses tell me a rock is an object, but they can't tell me if it is aware.
Your five senses don't work correctly - it's why you have such difficulty with understanding science.
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#66547 Jan 1, 2013
http://www.badscience.net/

I recommend reading Bad Science, by Ben Goldacre.

(It probably won't help the superstitious, but its cogent and a good read)

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#66548 Jan 1, 2013
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
In the U.S. children receive 35 vaccinations all told - 48 doses of 14 vaccines by the time they are just six years old. These vaccinations contain 113 different kinds of disease particles, 59 different chemicals, four types of animal cells/DNA from aborted fetal tissue and human albumin and there are 20 more vaccines currently in the Pharma pipeline and yet vaccine efficacy has never been proven! In fact, a common-sense study comparing the health outcomes of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated children has never been done in the U.S. to prove the safety and effectiveness of the childhood vaccine regime. THIS is child abuse.
http://vaccineresistancemovement.org/...
In England, Michel Odent, MD showed in two studies that children having received no Pertussis vaccine had 5-6 times less asthma than those who were vaccinated for it.
The rate of autism in the U.S. is now an unthinkable 1 in 100. Those who are unvaccinated boast numbers that run in shocking contrast to the nation’s statistics i.e. the incredible absence of autism in the unvaccinated Amish communities of Pennsylvania and Ohio.
Two studies done in New Zealand in 1992 and 1995 show that the unvaccinated children clearly have less allergies, less otitis (ear aches), less tonsillitis, less running noses, less epilepsies and less ADHD.
In Japan (1975-1980), a decision was made to begin the first vaccinations at two years of age instead of at two months. The reason was that more and more was discovered linking vaccines and crib-death (SIDS).
http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2010/06/25/...
http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2010/0...
Um, that's what a vaccine is, it's a dead version of the virus. So of course it will contain the disease, that's how it works.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#66549 Jan 1, 2013
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
A specious argument used one time too many on this forum. Instead of parroting what has already been stated ad nauseam - try to be original. Think you can manage that?
No, it's actually an assertion and one with gigabytes of evidence to support it, on this website alone. Tetrabytes likely on just the US servers.
postscriptt

Santa Fe, NM

#66550 Jan 1, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Um, that's what a vaccine is, it's a dead version of the virus. So of course it will contain the disease, that's how it works.
Why do you think science went to "killed" live viruses in the polio vaccine? Because the original version - the "live" virus version caused polio. The live virus vaccine was banned in the U.S. but dumped on third world countries.

New Delhi, Jan. 15: India’s health ministry, celebrating a year of freedom from wild polio, now faces a dilemma that public health experts had predicted years ago: the very vaccine it is using to fight polio is causing more polio paralysis than the wild poliovirus.

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1120116/jsp/fro...

Science is a man made tool for fact finding, but it is by no means infallible. Any claims it makes should never be taken at face value but thoroughly investigated.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#66551 Jan 1, 2013
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you think science went to "killed" live viruses in the polio vaccine? Because the original version - the "live" virus version caused polio. The live virus vaccine was banned in the U.S. but dumped on third world countries.
New Delhi, Jan. 15: India’s health ministry, celebrating a year of freedom from wild polio, now faces a dilemma that public health experts had predicted years ago: the very vaccine it is using to fight polio is causing more polio paralysis than the wild poliovirus.
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1120116/jsp/fro...
Science is a man made tool for fact finding, but it is by no means infallible. Any claims it makes should never be taken at face value but thoroughly investigated.
Yes, and? Those governments are stupid for doing that.

Vaccines work by "training" the immune system to battle the live virus, the chemical receptors which the virus attaches to have to be blocked by an alternate chemical, so the immune system needs to know what chemicals to block, thus you inject a dead version of it and the body does just that. That's literally the only way to prevent viral illnesses from spreading, make the population immune to it.
postscriptt

Santa Fe, NM

#66552 Jan 1, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, and? Those governments are stupid for doing that.
Vaccines work by "training" the immune system to battle the live virus, the chemical receptors which the virus attaches to have to be blocked by an alternate chemical, so the immune system needs to know what chemicals to block, thus you inject a dead version of it and the body does just that. That's literally the only way to prevent viral illnesses from spreading, make the population immune to it.
Like the U.S. was stupid enough to use Corexit (banned in other countries) on the Gulf oil spill? Government imbecility is not confined to third world countries obviously.

Training the immune system is the theory, but not the results. Because science considers the body to be no more than a machine, it wrongly assumes that the body can't tell the difference between a real virus and a counterfeit. The body develops an immunity against the counterfeit, not the real thing hence the continued presence of diseases presumably eradicated. If this isn't bad enought - the litany of chemicals found in vaccines cause other serious problems particularly for children - which is unconscionable to anybody with even a vestige of morality.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#66553 Jan 1, 2013
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
Like the U.S. was stupid enough to use Corexit (banned in other countries) on the Gulf oil spill? Government imbecility is not confined to third world countries obviously.
Training the immune system is the theory, but not the results. Because science considers the body to be no more than a machine, it wrongly assumes that the body can't tell the difference between a real virus and a counterfeit. The body develops an immunity against the counterfeit, not the real thing hence the continued presence of diseases presumably eradicated. If this isn't bad enought - the litany of chemicals found in vaccines cause other serious problems particularly for children - which is unconscionable to anybody with even a vestige of morality.
So now you think I actually think the US government is a better one? You must be joking ... or not paying any attention to anything I post.
postscriptt

Santa Fe, NM

#66554 Jan 1, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
So now you think I actually think the US government is a better one? You must be joking ... or not paying any attention to anything I post.
I think the U.S. government should not allow U.S. Pharma to spread it's failures overseas for profit.

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 In America, atheists are still in the closet (Apr '12) 6 min -Stray Dog 47,929
News As an atheist, how do I maintain my relationshi... 3 hr par five 101
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 3 hr dollarsbill 247,823
Proof of God for the Atheist 4 hr thetruth 136
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 4 hr thetruth 2,371
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 6 hr Critical Eye 20,904
News Atheism, the Bible and sexual orientation 6 hr NoahLikesPi 41
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 6 hr NoahLikesPi 12,988
More from around the web