Atheists on the march in America

Aug 26, 2009 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: TurkishPress.com

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

Comments
64,961 - 64,980 of 70,983 Comments Last updated Tuesday Aug 5
John

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67719
Feb 8, 2013
 
I notice there are links and claims@ from you loons. Nothing knows why. It's clear you have no accountable position or evidence that meets the criteria you hold others to. You are cowards and bigots.

My something vs your nothing? I don't blame you for not taking the challenge.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67720
Feb 8, 2013
 
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Guess who made those laws?
LOL you have no concept on what a creator means.
Yes, of course I have an idea what it means. It's a pretty simplistic idea, after all. But the fact is that you haven't *proven* the existence of a creator. You make claims that some creator made the laws of physics, but you have not shown how that is possible, or whether it actually happened. You have shown no way to distinguish between a universe that simply has natural laws and one that has been created to have laws. In the absence of such a difference, it is simpler to take the known existence of natural laws as fundamental.

And even with your assumptions, your claim that a crystal of salt is designed is false.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67721
Feb 8, 2013
 
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
And scientists thought there were canals on Mars.
Mars is notoriously hard to observe from ground-based observatories. The proposed canals were 'observed' when there was no photography and were at the limit of the resolution of the telescope. They were doubted by the scientific community at the time, but the idea was picked up by the press and became a popular sensation.

Lesson: don't get your science from a sensational popular press.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67722
Feb 8, 2013
 
Givemeliberty wrote:
Science corrects itself and progresses whereas religion does not.
<quoted text>
to be fair...religions have changed the "word of God" many times to suit their needs and to keep from becoming absolutely irrelevent to society...
sickofit

Blooming Prairie, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67723
Feb 8, 2013
 
Time to take this nation back from the uber religous nazi pigs....Time to get this nation back in the hands of WE THE PEOPLE....No more religous control.
Thinking

Gillingham, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67724
Feb 8, 2013
 
Why?
John wrote:
I notice there are links and claims@ from you loons. Nothing knows why. It's clear you have no accountable position or evidence that meets the criteria you hold others to. You are cowards and bigots.
My something vs your nothing? I don't blame you for not taking the challenge.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67725
Feb 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Their god has been reduced to lighting his Farr to create the Big Bang.
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>to be fair...religions have changed the "word of God" many times to suit their needs and to keep from becoming absolutely irrelevent to society...
Henry

Bad Langensalza, Germany

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67726
Feb 8, 2013
 
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
They have and it's called the Bible.
Very funny,how could a manmade scripture proof the existance of a god??

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67727
Feb 8, 2013
 
Henry wrote:
<quoted text>
Very funny,how could a manmade scripture proof the existance of a god??
it works like this...

i created cold fusion.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67728
Feb 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Henry wrote:
<quoted text>
Very funny,how could a manmade scripture proof the existance of a god??
Religious people read 1 book and think they have all the answers. Thinking people read hundreds of book and always have more questions.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67729
Feb 8, 2013
 
if you want proof i created cold fusion, see my previous post that proves it.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67730
Feb 8, 2013
 
Lighting his fart lol! Wtf iPhone!
Givemeliberty wrote:
Their god has been reduced to lighting his Farr to create the Big Bang.
<quoted text>
John

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67731
Feb 8, 2013
 
Are you loons still fighting a God you don't believe in? Fight him! Call him names. No one will notice your insanity. Trust me.

Still no evidence or accountable position in the atheism forum. They have rules, but no evidence lmao.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67732
Feb 8, 2013
 
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>the bible proves that the bible is true? seriously? i know you are not lame...
The Bible is evidence (not proof) that there is a God.

Then there is this.

"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.1 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.2 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,3 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.4

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

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67733
Feb 8, 2013
 
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>the bible proves that the bible is true? seriously? i know you are not lame...
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 10^37 or 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),5 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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67734
Feb 8, 2013
 
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>the bible proves that the bible is true? seriously? i know you are not lame...
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...

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67735
Feb 8, 2013
 
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>The buy-bull is no more evidence of god's existence than the Star Wars movies are evidence of the existence of wookies.
So what is this buy-bull?

Is it a book on evolution?

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67736
Feb 8, 2013
 
Givemeliberty wrote:
<quoted text>Backed up by pictures and videos on my Facebook page of my charity work and as has been stated before you have not offered a shred of reasoning to say it's not true.

Thanks for making me look good and yourself like a jackass.
You have every year documented?

Where did you copy your photo from?

So you take money from Porn and put it in a charity's, well done!

"you have not offered a shred of reasoning to say it's not true."

How's common sense sound?

Baaaaahaaaahaaaa
sickofit

Owatonna, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67737
Feb 8, 2013
 
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
So what is this buy-bull?
Is it a book on evolution?
No it is your cults handbook of hate an dignorance....You know the bible....BUY--BULL..notice how they sound the same...

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67738
Feb 8, 2013
 
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, of course I have an idea what it means. It's a pretty simplistic idea, after all. But the fact is that you haven't *proven* the existence of a creator. You make claims that some creator made the laws of physics, but you have not shown how that is possible, or whether it actually happened. You have shown no way to distinguish between a universe that simply has natural laws and one that has been created to have laws. In the absence of such a difference, it is simpler to take the known existence of natural laws as fundamental.

And even with your assumptions, your claim that a crystal of salt is designed is false.
Yup no proof that's why we use the word Faith! Look it up you'll see why we don't offer proof.

A crystal is designed by the creator.
The laws of physics were created by the creator. I was created by the creator.

It's a pretty simplistic idea you know.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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 that tout free thinking use bully tact... 18 min Patrick 8
Should Uninformed Opinion Be Respected? 18 min Thinking 9
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 20 min Dave Nelson 226,180
Our world came from nothing? 26 min Patrick 398
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 46 min Thinking 899
Atheists forgetting the meaning of freedom 1 hr Jaimie 36
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 2 hr fadu singh 21,492
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Atheism People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••