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: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#66737 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 -
And what about all of the times you don't? Or think you do, and are wrong?
postscriptt wrote:
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.
How many people are likely to call a typical person?
And my guess is that people tend to remember the times they were right about who is calling, and forget the times they were wrong.
Think about this, one time I was driving with a friend, mentioned a celebrity, looked at the car next to us, and he was in the car. Wow, huh? But think of all the times I mention a celeb, and they aren't in the car next to me.
postscriptt wrote:
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.
People have a tendency to, what I call, "constellationalize" , impose meaning/patterns onto randomness.(Like making constellations and stories out of the random spread of stars in the sky.)
Doing that probably has a survival advantage, and no real survival disadvantage. People who thought a random pattern of leaves was a lion lived to produce more offspring than those who though a lion was a random pattern of leaves.

Since: Mar 11

Chicago, IL

#66738 Jan 6, 2013
Another theist who is unable to answer the question. Get your nothing out of here! Wow that really has them stumped!

Why should anyone accept god as anything more than the product of someone's imagination?
BBSting wrote:
<quoted text>
Do that trick again. The one where you pull your dick out of your pants and pitot into my mouth.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#66739 Jan 6, 2013
It's that the best you can do? Steal excerpts from comments not your own and reword others? You're just taking up space on this forun. Why don't you do the world a favor and crawl back into that hemorroid you came from?

Since: Mar 11

Louisville, KY

#66740 Jan 6, 2013
Hmm let's see. Lame dodge attempt with an even lamer ad hom. I mean you are so upset and trembling that post wasn't even in English. I think ou meant to bray is that the best you can do? And the errors just keep coming after that.

Another day of ineptitude and still the theists are unable to answer my question, why should anyone accept god as anything more than a product of someone's vivid imagination?

Let the nothing continue from the theists who can't even differentiate the difference between god and their imagination!
BBSting wrote:
It's that the best you can do? Steal excerpts from comments not your own and reword others? You're just taking up space on this forun. Why don't you do the world a favor and crawl back into that hemorroid you came from?
postscriptt

Albuquerque, NM

#66741 Jan 7, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
And what about all of the times you don't? Or think you do, and are wrong?
<quoted text>
How many people are likely to call a typical person?
And my guess is that people tend to remember the times they were right about who is calling, and forget the times they were wrong.
Think about this, one time I was driving with a friend, mentioned a celebrity, looked at the car next to us, and he was in the car. Wow, huh? But think of all the times I mention a celeb, and they aren't in the car next to me.
<quoted text>
People have a tendency to, what I call, "constellationalize" , impose meaning/patterns onto randomness.(Like making constellations and stories out of the random spread of stars in the sky.)
Doing that probably has a survival advantage, and no real survival disadvantage. People who thought a random pattern of leaves was a lion lived to produce more offspring than those who though a lion was a random pattern of leaves.
I would agree with you but then we'd both be wrong. You're not challenging the validity of extrasensory perception by attempting to diminish the significance of these events. You are creating obstacles for yourself - webs of assumptions that will prevent you from opening the inner door that leads to the evidence you seek. Don't look to science for assistance. Since it refuses to consider the question of awareized consciousness in any of its calculations, it can't even begin to validate extrasensory experiences. Fortunately, the beauty of self-evident subjective experience is that its meaning is not dependent on the corroboration of science.

Intellectual freedom requires the presence of alternative thoughts. The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity, but the one that "removes" the awareness of other possibilities. Think about it.
postscriptt

Albuquerque, NM

#66742 Jan 7, 2013
Science attempts to create its own breed of humankind - one that fits its version of reality. A breed whose members must ignore their own psychological encounters with life. A breed that cannot trust direct personal experience but can only be comfortable with subjective events when they can be interpreted through the intermediaries of instruments, gadgets and objective measuring devices.

Paradoxically, scientists are quick to expose psychic chalatanism where it exists, yet they are blind to their own scientific nonsense!
postscriptt

Albuquerque, NM

#66743 Jan 7, 2013
BBSting wrote:
<quoted text>
Hilarious! Just goes to show that the common man has more common sense than the educated.
(fist bump)
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#66744 Jan 7, 2013
Sources?
postscriptt wrote:
Science attempts to create its own breed of humankind - one that fits its version of reality. A breed whose members must ignore their own psychological encounters with life. A breed that cannot trust direct personal experience but can only be comfortable with subjective events when they can be interpreted through the intermediaries of instruments, gadgets and objective measuring devices.
Paradoxically, scientists are quick to expose psychic chalatanism where it exists, yet they are blind to their own scientific nonsense!
postscriptt

Albuquerque, NM

#66745 Jan 7, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Sources?
<quoted text>
My direct personal experience.

Since: Jan 13

Largo, FL

#66746 Jan 7, 2013
I find it baffling that belief in God can still continue into the 21st century. It goes to show the power that superstition holds over the human mind.
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#66747 Jan 7, 2013
As you're delusional, that means little to reality.
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
My direct personal experience.
postscriptt

Albuquerque, NM

#66748 Jan 7, 2013
Thinking wrote:
As you're delusional, that means little to reality.
<quoted text>
True reality, or science's reality? The answers you seek are not "out there" or apart from your natural mystical self. They are as close to you as your impulses, premonitions and intuitions are -for your identity lies within your inner reality from which all events in your life emerge. Your natural self knows this - going along with your true nature brings value fulfillment and fortunate events into your physical experience - for your intents, abilities and needs work naturally together. When you believe in impediments - your belief creates them. This is also the result of the nature of our creative awareized consciousness.

Since: Jan 13

Largo, FL

#66749 Jan 7, 2013
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
True reality, or science's reality? The answers you seek are not "out there" or apart from your natural mystical self. They are as close to you as your impulses, premonitions and intuitions are -for your identity lies within your inner reality from which all events in your life emerge. Your natural self knows this - going along with your true nature brings value fulfillment and fortunate events into your physical experience - for your intents, abilities and needs work naturally together. When you believe in impediments - your belief creates them. This is also the result of the nature of our creative awareized consciousness.
Translation: "God is real because I believe God is real."
postscriptt

Albuquerque, NM

#66750 Jan 7, 2013
Calm Liberal wrote:
<quoted text>
Translation: "God is real because I believe God is real."
Much like scientific assumptions, eh? They are real not because they are, but because science says they are.
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#66751 Jan 7, 2013
No.
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
True reality, or science's reality? The answers you seek are not "out there" or apart from your natural mystical self. They are as close to you as your impulses, premonitions and intuitions are -for your identity lies within your inner reality from which all events in your life emerge. Your natural self knows this - going along with your true nature brings value fulfillment and fortunate events into your physical experience - for your intents, abilities and needs work naturally together. When you believe in impediments - your belief creates them. This is also the result of the nature of our creative awareized consciousness.

Since: Apr 10

Location hidden

#66752 Jan 7, 2013
Calm Liberal wrote:
<quoted text>
Translation: "God is real because I believe God is real."
God is real because God exists.

Romans 1:20
"For His invisible attributes, namely, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made."

Job 12:7
“But observe the beasts, and they will teach you; the birds of the heavens and the fish of the sea, and they will tell you. Who among all these does not know that the hand of God has done this? Does not the ear test words as the palate tastes food?"

Since: Jan 13

Largo, FL

#66753 Jan 7, 2013
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
Much like scientific assumptions, eh? They are real not because they are, but because science says they are.
Oh, really? So gravity only exists because science says it exists? The earth is only round because science says it is round?

No, gravity exists because it has been proven to exist. If you don't believe me, then go jump off a tall building.

The earth is not round because science says so. It is round because it has been proven to be round. There is an invention called photography. And this invention was used in outer space to take picutres of the earth, thereby proving the earth is not flat.

Please don't try to argue that your superstition is just as valid and trustworthy as science. That is absurd.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#66754 Jan 7, 2013
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
Much like scientific assumptions, eh? They are real not because they are, but because science says they are.
Actually, what scientists say is real is most often real, and that's because they exhibit the same traits and results for everything. Your god can't even show up the same way to everyone, so your god isn't real.
postscriptt

Albuquerque, NM

#66755 Jan 7, 2013
Calm Liberal wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, really? So gravity only exists because science says it exists? The earth is only round because science says it is round?
No, gravity exists because it has been proven to exist. If you don't believe me, then go jump off a tall building.
The earth is not round because science says so. It is round because it has been proven to be round. There is an invention called photography. And this invention was used in outer space to take picutres of the earth, thereby proving the earth is not flat.
Please don't try to argue that your superstition is just as valid and trustworthy as science. That is absurd.
The earth is round because we can see the reflection of its shape on the moon during a lunar eclispe. This is as true today as it was when Ferdinand Magellan first took notice. And gravity? Well - its currently undergoing scientific reconstruction as do all of science's "theories" eventually. Why should anyone accept science's theories as truthworthy when they change all the time?

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#66756 Jan 7, 2013
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
The earth is round because we can see the reflection of its shape on the moon during a lunar eclispe. This is as true today as it was when Ferdinand Magellan first took notice. And gravity? Well - its currently undergoing scientific reconstruction as do all of science's "theories" eventually. Why should anyone accept science's theories as truthworthy when they change all the time?
Actually, that would just make people think it's circular. Even then, a square object casting a shadow on a spherical object produces a shadow that is almost circular as well. We know it's round because of a primitive version of the scientific method utilized.

Because the theory is being refined doesn't make gravity go away either, does it?

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 Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 1 hr Aura Mytha 243,503
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 2 hr Eagle 12 9,496
News Why Atheism Will Replace Religion (Aug '12) 10 hr TC_Tia 14,656
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 10 hr MikeF 19,806
News Aliens and evolution (Jun '12) Sun thetruth 6,221
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