Atheists on the march in America

Aug 26, 2009 Full story: TurkishPress.com 70,983

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

Full Story

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#67577 Feb 4, 2013
John wrote:
You make the presupposition that there is no evidence ....
It's not a presupposition so long as you continue to present none, it is fact.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#67578 Feb 4, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>If dinosaurs didn't exist in your 6,000 years, then why do we have the fossils?
LOL

It's always a good time reading you comments. Thanks.
Thinking

Saffron Walden, UK

#67579 Feb 4, 2013
You posted this same sh!t before, back when your ISP appeared to be in Florissant, MO
John wrote:
You make the presupposition that there is no evidence without admitting you do not have the scientifically measurable evidence to support your position of nothing. You have placed limits on what may be limitless. You have placed limits where they need not be. Thus far I have seen no evidence provided by an atheist that would support what is disingenuously called natural mechanisms only. If you think there isn't evidence of design you would be wrong. Admittedly, this can not be proven using your constricting criteria, but nothing in this arena has been proven using this standard. You know this by now. That is why it is so frustrating to the forum when it's pointed out. Judging by the ever-growing anecdotal evidence of this forum overwhelmingly congregated by atheists, atheism is something else entirely. There is a large contingent of antitheists, a portion devoted to secular humanism, and some interplay with other assorted isms. The common denominator is that every single one of these positions is lacking in evidence. The notion that man is the be all end all is flawed in my opinion. Of course you wish to shirk any burden of proof. That's transparent and shows a weak position. Atheism has been co-opted by the new atheist. Much more vocal and commited to breaking down the populace writ large that actually do have a position. I've given more than enough opportunity for atheists to engage in debate that is not circular. The brilliance and weakness of atheism is no accountability. That's why it's not challenging to debate this topic with you loons. Apologies to the few that aren't driven by more than uncertainty. When Reagan debated Gorbachev on our nuclear arsenals each man had a position. If there was a political debate the political atheist would attack the other position and not have to be responsible for one himself. If one football team was atheist and the other was not they would have the ball on offense the whole game. Fumble, and the ball would be returned. This is what you ask for here, but is unacceptable in every other topic. I'm conservative btw. A rational freethinker. I'm sure you are a centrist LOL. What's the mushy middle thought on government size, abortion, tax rates?
If there isn't a position don't bother responding. How is the fence DREW, Curious, Mikey,,,,? You got the post wedged good and deep yet? Stump an antitheist! Ask it what it believes. Still going strong 64,840 plus posts in.
Still nothing about atheism in the atheist forum. No position, no post #. Lies, spin, ad hominem, and boredom.
Waiting for an example of what passes the cut for evidence from atheists. Cowards!

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

#67580 Feb 4, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
You are of the authority to lay down rules that God must follow?
Debate? What this crap? LOL
How Daftly!
IOW, you can't counter my argument.

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

#67581 Feb 4, 2013
John wrote:
Of course this has no evidentiary relevance. My goodness you bigots are hateful. You don't give a damn about evidence.
Nothing again from the illogical, irrational, marchers for nothing.
Provide some evidence of god's existence, and we'll get started.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#67582 Feb 4, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
So he was basically using the argument from authority logical fallacy.
<quoted text>
Yes, but I doubt he's aware if it. To have awareness of such, one needs to be sentient.

He does not qualify.

:D

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#67583 Feb 4, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
As soon as he presents ANY evidence for god, I'm willing to debate him.
Until then...
\

Oh, any number of non-godbots have offered. On the first day he posted, I answered ALL of his inane questions.

I foolishly believed he was sincere, and an actual human being.

Now, my working hypothesis is that he's severely brain-damaged to the point of non-sentience. In an institution somewhere or other, or perhaps just a collection of computer code.

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

#67584 Feb 4, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>\
Oh, any number of non-godbots have offered. On the first day he posted, I answered ALL of his inane questions.
I foolishly believed he was sincere, and an actual human being.
Now, my working hypothesis is that he's severely brain-damaged to the point of non-sentience. In an institution somewhere or other, or perhaps just a collection of computer code.
Could be! But he doesn't seem complex and sophisticated enough to be a collection of computer code.
John

United States

#67585 Feb 4, 2013
Lots of claims from the loons. Still no evidence that meets their own criteria. No accountable position. No intellectual honesty. Just hate for a God they don't believe in. Sad, really.

March,.march, march, march, 4 nothing!
John

United States

#67586 Feb 4, 2013
Provide some evidence of your nothing. If you loons had an ounce of self respect you would have let this forum about nothing die long ago. I don't mind exposing you and making you dance like puppets though. Don't carry on. As you weren't.

Stump an antitheist! Ask them what they believe.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#67587 Feb 4, 2013
They are taught to be sheeplike. Herd mentality waiting to be sheared. Look in their eyes and see a programmed drone.

When you look at us from early tribal people to today you can see we are hunters. Clever, resourceful, doing what we need to do for us and our tribe to survive and progress.

Let them be sheep my friend, we'll be hunters :)
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, but I doubt he's aware if it. To have awareness of such, one needs to be sentient.
He does not qualify.
:D
John

United States

#67588 Feb 5, 2013
Hunt for some evidence that meets the evidentiary standard you hold others to. It just annoys you to know end that man is not the pinnacle of existence LOL. The false hybris you attempt is comical. The great anti 2nd amendment, bigot hunter. You couldn't catch a cold.

Still no evidence or accountable position in an atheism forum. Mine is a prime mover btw.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#67589 Feb 5, 2013
John wrote:
Hunt for some evidence that meets the evidentiary standard you hold others to. It just annoys you to know end that man is not the pinnacle of existence LOL. The false hybris you attempt is comical. The great anti 2nd amendment, bigot hunter. You couldn't catch a cold.
Still no evidence or accountable position in an atheism forum. Mine is a prime mover btw.
Nope, that isn't proof of god either, you can stop lying now. After thousands of years, you shouldn't be surprised that your cult is shrinking.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#67590 Feb 5, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL
It's always a good time reading you comments. Thanks.
Look how quiet the creationists get when they're confronted with the reality that fossils bust their 6000 year old creationist lie wide open for all to see how crazy it actually is.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#67591 Feb 5, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>IOW, you can't counter my argument.
LOL !!

Been doing any LDS lately?

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#67592 Feb 5, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL !!
Been doing any LDS lately?
A pity they don't teach you how to spell properly at your local creationist brainwashing center.
Thinking

Gillingham, UK

#67593 Feb 5, 2013
What is your issue with mormons?
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL !!
Been doing any LDS lately?

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#67594 Feb 5, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>Provide some evidence of god's existence, and we'll get started.
"The best evidence for design can be seen in the nature of the universe and how it came to be. The process of discovery continues, since one of the fundamental properties of the universe, dark energy (or the cosmological constant), was discovered late in the last century. New studies continue to add to our knowledge about the universe and its extremely unlikely makeup.

The Big Bang
The Big Bang theory states that the universe arose from a singularity of virtually no size, which gave rise to the dimensions of space and time, in addition to all matter and energy. At the beginning of the Big Bang, the four fundamental forces began to separate from each other. Early in its history (10^-36 to 10^-32 seconds), the universe underwent a period of short, but dramatic, hyper-inflationary expansion. The cause of this inflation is unknown, but was required for life to be possible in the universe.

Excess quarks
Quarks and antiquarks combined to annihilate each other. Originally, it was expected that the ratio of quarks and antiquarks to be exactly equal to one, since neither would be expected to have been produced in preference to the other. If the ratio were exactly equal to one, the universe would have consisted solely of energy - not very conducive to the existence of life. However, recent research showed that the charge ½parity violation could have resulted naturally given the three known masses of quark families. However, this just pushes fine tuning a level down to ask why quarks display the masses they have. Those masses must be fine tuned in order to achieve a universe that contains any matter at all.

Large, just right-sized universe
Even so, the universe is enormous compared to the size of our Solar System. Isn't the immense size of the universe evidence that humans are really insignificant, contradicting the idea that a God concerned with humanity created the universe? It turns out that the universe could not have been much smaller than it is in order for nuclear fusion to have occurred during the first 3 minutes after the Big Bang. Without this brief period of nucleosynthesis, the early universe would have consisted entirely of hydrogen. Likewise, the universe could not have been much larger than it is, or life would not have been possible. If the universe were just one part in 10^59 larger, the universe would have collapsed before life was possible. Since there are only 10^80 baryons in the universe, this means that an addition of just 10^21 baryons (about the mass of a grain of sand) would have made life impossible. The universe is exactly the size it must be for life to exist at all.

Early evolution of the universe
Cosmologists assume that the universe could have evolved in any of a number of ways, and that the process is entirely random. Based upon this assumption, nearly all possible universes would consist solely of thermal radiation (no matter). Of the tiny subset of universes that would contain matter, a small subset would be similar to ours. A very small subset of those would have originated through inflationary conditions. Therefore, universes that are conducive to life "are almost always created by fluctuations into these 'miraculous' states," according to atheist cosmologist Dr. L. Dyson.

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/is_g...

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#67595 Feb 5, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>Provide some evidence of god's existence, and we'll get started.
Part 2

"Just right laws of physics
The laws of physics must have values very close to those observed or the universe does not work "well enough" to support life. What happens when we vary the constants? The strong nuclear force (which holds atoms together) has a value such that when the two hydrogen atoms fuse, 0.7% of the mass is converted into energy. If the value were 0.6% then a proton could not bond to a neutron, and the universe would consist only of hydrogen. If the value were 0.8%, then fusion would happen so readily that no hydrogen would have survived from the Big Bang. Other constants must be fine-tuned to an even more stringent degree. The cosmic microwave background varies by one part in 100,000. If this factor were slightly smaller, the universe would exist only as a collection of diffuse gas, since no stars or galaxies could ever form. If this factor were slightly larger, the universe would consist solely of large black holes. Likewise, the ratio of electrons to protons cannot vary by more than 1 part in 10^37or else electromagnetic interactions would prevent chemical reactions. In addition, if the ratio of the electromagnetic force constant to the gravitational constant were greater by more than 1 part in 10^40, then electromagnetism would dominate gravity, preventing the formation of stars and galaxies. If the expansion rate of universe were 1 part in 10^55 less than what it is, then the universe would have already collapsed. The most recently discovered physical law, the cosmological constant or dark energy, is the closest to zero of all the physical constants. In fact, a change of only 1 part in 10^120 would completely negate the effect.

Universal probability bounds
"Unlikely things happen all the time." This is the mantra of the anti-design movement. However, there is an absolute physical limit for improbable events to happen in our universe. The universe contains only 10^80 baryons and has only been around for 13.7 billion years (10^18 sec). Since the smallest unit of time is Planck time (10^-45 sec), the lowest probability event that can ever happen in the history of the universe is:

1/1080 x 1/1018 x 1/1045 =1/10143"

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#67596 Feb 5, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>Provide some evidence of god's existence, and we'll get started.
Part 3

"So, although it would be possible that one or two constants might require unusual fine-tuning by chance, it would be virtually impossible that all of them would require such fine-tuning. Some physicists have indicated that any of a number of different physical laws would be compatible with our present universe. However, it is not just the current state of the universe that must be compatible with the physical laws. Even more stringent are the initial conditions of the universe, since even minor deviations would have completely disrupted the process. For example, adding a grain of sand to the weight of the universe now would have no effect. However, adding even this small amount of weight at the beginning of the universe would have resulted in its collapse early in its history.

What do cosmologists say?
Even though many atheists would like to dismiss such evidence of design, cosmologists know better, and have made statements such as the following, which reveal the depth of the problem for the atheistic worldview:

"This type of universe, however, seems to require a degree of fine-tuning of the initial conditions that is in apparent conflict with 'common wisdom'."
"Polarization is predicted. It's been detected and it's in line with theoretical predictions. We're stuck with this preposterous universe."
"In all of these worlds statistically miraculous (but not impossible) events would be necessary to assemble and preserve the fragile nuclei that would ordinarily be destroyed by the higher temperatures. However, although each of the corresponding histories is extremely unlikely, there are so many more of them than those that evolve without "miracles," that they would vastly dominate the livable universes that would be created by Poincare recurrences. We are forced to conclude that in a recurrent world like de Sitter space our universe would be extraordinarily unlikely"

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/is_g...

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
Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 3 min Uncle Sam 2,248
Islam is the Enemy (Sep '12) 10 min Pahu 24
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 15 min polymath257 232,713
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 1 hr Thinking 23,173
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 16 hr _Bad Company 1,437
God' existence 20 hr polymath257 55
A New Kinder, Gentler Atheism 20 hr polymath257 112
Evidence for God! 23 hr ChristineM 366
More from around the web