Atheists on the march in America

There are 20 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.

postscriptt

Placitas, NM

#66709 Jan 5, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
I think Penn tells it best:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =tIvNopv9Pa8XX
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Warning, they have experts for and against in their shows. You may not want to watch it if you don't like facts.
Penn and Teller - really? They are entertainers who like Randi are in the business of debunking. They are apt to do anything to boost ratings. In fact, they did. They faked a big foot video in an effort to disprove the big foot phenomena.

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/hoaxes/sonom...
postscriptt

Placitas, NM

#66710 Jan 5, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
2000 years ago lifespans were about 30, and that was with soap and water. There were wars across the globe. People starved so much that no one even noticed. You really want to go back to that?
Stop exaggerating! Nobody knows how long humans lived 2000 years ago. Sketchy historical records are generally unreliable sources of statistics - not to mention notoriously unrepresentative graveyard epitaphs and samples.

Life expectancy is a figure dramatically influenced by infant mortality often pegged as high as 30% in some scientific studies. This does not mean that the average person living 2000 years ago, died at the age of 30. Rather it suggests that for every child that died in infancy, another person could have lived to be 70. Based on what documentation is available, particulally among the more elite - many Greeks and Romans lived into their late 60s to 80s, not unlike today's human crop.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#66711 Jan 5, 2013
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
Penn and Teller - really? They are entertainers who like Randi are in the business of debunking. They are apt to do anything to boost ratings. In fact, they did. They faked a big foot video in an effort to disprove the big foot phenomena.
http://www.bigfootencounters.com/hoaxes/sonom...
In other words, you avoided watching the videos because you know they'll make learning too much fun for you to handle. As I said, they have experts on there, they also give the crackpots like you equal time, which never fails to entertain.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#66712 Jan 5, 2013
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
Stop exaggerating! Nobody knows how long humans lived 2000 years ago. Sketchy historical records are generally unreliable sources of statistics - not to mention notoriously unrepresentative graveyard epitaphs and samples.
Life expectancy is a figure dramatically influenced by infant mortality often pegged as high as 30% in some scientific studies. This does not mean that the average person living 2000 years ago, died at the age of 30. Rather it suggests that for every child that died in infancy, another person could have lived to be 70. Based on what documentation is available, particulally among the more elite - many Greeks and Romans lived into their late 60s to 80s, not unlike today's human crop.
Actually, if we can tell how old a person was when they died by their skeleton. So yes, we do know.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#66713 Jan 5, 2013
Oh, and a few people living a long time does not change the life expectancy of that era. The majority died well before 30, thus the life expectancy was 30. Some people live to 108 today, but life expectancy is still 80 years, because the majority of humans today live to 80 years. Life expectancy also has infant mortality factored into it.

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#66714 Jan 5, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
In other words, you avoided watching the videos because you know they'll make learning too much fun for you to handle. As I said, they have experts on there, they also give the crackpots like you equal time, which never fails to entertain.
I got through a couple of the videos. I think Penn and Teller have more fun duping the viewer with their sensationalized crackpot psychotic twists.

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#66715 Jan 5, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, if we can tell how old a person was when they died by their skeleton. So yes, we do know.
Actually, the most accurate method in determining the age of skeletal remains is to examine the dentition.
Lincoln

United States

#66717 Jan 5, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Hostler was a devout catholic you are an idiot.
<quoted text>
Hostler :-)

Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, Zinoviev, Castro, Trotsky, Mao, Himler, Eichmann, Ho all were atheists
Lincoln

United States

#66718 Jan 5, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Hostler was a devout catholic you are an idiot.
<quoted text>
Hostler :-)
Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, Castro, Zinoviev, Trotsky, Mao, Himler, Eichmann all were atheists

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#66719 Jan 5, 2013
Wrathbone wrote:
<quoted text>
I got through a couple of the videos. I think Penn and Teller have more fun duping the viewer with their sensationalized crackpot psychotic twists.
"Duping the viewer?" So you don't think they present facts? How rather blind you are.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#66720 Jan 6, 2013
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
Stop exaggerating! Nobody knows how long humans lived 2000 years ago. Sketchy historical records are generally unreliable sources of statistics - not to mention notoriously unrepresentative graveyard epitaphs and samples.
Life expectancy is a figure dramatically influenced by infant mortality often pegged as high as 30% in some scientific studies. This does not mean that the average person living 2000 years ago, died at the age of 30. Rather it suggests that for every child that died in infancy, another person could have lived to be 70. Based on what documentation is available, particulally among the more elite - many Greeks and Romans lived into their late 60s to 80s, not unlike today's human crop.
No proof of god - and no arguments whatsoever. You need to prove your god before your criticize science.
postscriptt

Albuquerque, NM

#66721 Jan 6, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
No proof of god - and no arguments whatsoever. You need to prove your god before your criticize science.
Science, like religion, is fair game. The only prerequisite necessary is doubt. And while I'm on the subject - you atheists have a loooooog march ahead of you.

A recent Gallop poll (June-2012) found that "forty-six percent of Americans believe in the creationist view that God created humans in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years. The prevalence of this creationist view of the origin of humans is essentially unchanged from 30 years ago, when Gallup first asked the question. About a third of Americans believe that humans evolved, but with God's guidance; 15% say humans evolved, but that God had no part in the process."

"More broadly, some 78% of Americans today believe that God had a hand in the development of humans in some way, just slightly less than the percentage who felt this way 30 years ago."

http://www.gallup.com/poll/155003/Hold-Creati...

So much for the credulity of science's version of creation, eh? In order to swallow science's schtick about origins completely - that the universe happened by accident - that something comes from nothing - that dead matter gives rise to life - you have to have a postgraduate degree. LOL!

"Americans with postgraduate education are most likely of all the educational groups to say humans evolved without God's guidance, and least likely to say God created humans in their present form within the last 10,000 years."
postscriptt

Albuquerque, NM

#66722 Jan 6, 2013
Tis coincidence, and nothing more - or so science says. If you know whose on the phone before you answer it - if you experience a DeJa-Vu - if you follow an impuilse that proves beneficial - if you experience a premonition about someone that comes true - if something tells you not to board a plane that later crashes - rack it all up as coicidence.

Think of the millions of events like this that occur daily all over the world, and then think of all those brainwashed scientific schlubs who chose to ignore this widespread evidence of human extrasensory experience - experiences that shouldn't happen at all according to them.

Each precognition no matter how small is self-evident proof that the world has a meaning never found by Darwinian or Freudian thought - that the self has access to an inner system of communication and perception demonstated in the evidence of experience.
postscriptt

Albuquerque, NM

#66723 Jan 6, 2013
Wrathbone wrote:
<quoted text>
I got through a couple of the videos. I think Penn and Teller have more fun duping the viewer with their sensationalized crackpot psychotic twists.
(Fist bump)

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#66724 Jan 6, 2013
postscriptt wrote:
Tis coincidence, and nothing more - or so science says. If you know whose on the phone before you answer it - if you experience a DeJa-Vu - if you follow an impuilse that proves beneficial - if you experience a premonition about someone that comes true - if something tells you not to board a plane that later crashes - rack it all up as coicidence.
Think of the millions of events like this that occur daily all over the world, and then think of all those brainwashed scientific schlubs who chose to ignore this widespread evidence of human extrasensory experience - experiences that shouldn't happen at all according to them.
Each precognition no matter how small is self-evident proof that the world has a meaning never found by Darwinian or Freudian thought - that the self has access to an inner system of communication and perception demonstated in the evidence of experience.
Yet none of what you mention has any more reliability than sheer chance. Odd that.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#66725 Jan 6, 2013
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
Science, like religion, is fair game. The only prerequisite necessary is doubt. And while I'm on the subject - you atheists have a loooooog march ahead of you.
A recent Gallop poll (June-2012) found that "forty-six percent of Americans believe in the creationist view that God created humans in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years. The prevalence of this creationist view of the origin of humans is essentially unchanged from 30 years ago, when Gallup first asked the question. About a third of Americans believe that humans evolved, but with God's guidance; 15% say humans evolved, but that God had no part in the process."
"More broadly, some 78% of Americans today believe that God had a hand in the development of humans in some way, just slightly less than the percentage who felt this way 30 years ago."
http://www.gallup.com/poll/155003/Hold-Creati...
So much for the credulity of science's version of creation, eh? In order to swallow science's schtick about origins completely - that the universe happened by accident - that something comes from nothing - that dead matter gives rise to life - you have to have a postgraduate degree. LOL!
"Americans with postgraduate education are most likely of all the educational groups to say humans evolved without God's guidance, and least likely to say God created humans in their present form within the last 10,000 years."
Ah yes, the appeal to popularity. You do realize that historically, the majority has been wrong more often than correct, right? I mean, this little fact can't have escaped your lack of logic.
Lincoln

United States

#66726 Jan 6, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah yes, the appeal to popularity. You do realize that historically, the majority has been wrong more often than correct, right? I mean, this little fact can't have escaped your lack of logic.
Agree!
Seems a popular belief that morality and truth are best decided by the Gallup Poll.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#66727 Jan 6, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
<quoted text>
Agree!
Seems a popular belief that morality and truth are best decided by the Gallup Poll.
It's a fallacy often employed by the desperate. Popularity has little to no actual impact on the validity of anything, but due to historical trends it is wise not to base anything on popularity until the trends shift to the majority choosing more wisely more often.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#66728 Jan 6, 2013
So anyways believers tell me.

Why should anyone believe that god is anything more than the product of someone's imagination?

Another day and another show of ineptitude by the theists. They are terrified of this question and have nothing.

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#66729 Jan 6, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Even some of the greats had delusions.
KitttenKoder

You are right....I should just let it go....Intellectual curiosity still kills the cat.

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) 29 min Zog Has-fallen 18,827
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 4 hr thetruth 6,124
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 4 hr thetruth 2,094
News Confessions of a black atheist 4 hr thetruth 456
News The Consequences of Atheism 4 hr thetruth 1,341
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 4 hr thetruth 238,298
News Gary Gutting and Alvin Plantinga "Is Atheism Ir... 20 hr geezerjock 1
More from around the web