Why Atheism Will Replace Religion

Aug 27, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: News24

Please note that for this article "Atheism" also includes agnostics, deists, pagans, wiccans... in other words non-religious.

You will notice this is a statement of fact. And to be fact it is supported by evidence (see references below). Now you can have "faith" that this is not true, but by the very definition of faith, that is just wishful thinking.
Comments
12,581 - 12,600 of 14,385 Comments Last updated Nov 23, 2013

“Engaged to the love of my life”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13112
Jul 10, 2013
 
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>"All sexual relations of people older than 18, with people younger than 16 are wrong."

Can you say it? Could you mean it, if you did say it?

Repeat after me >>>> "All sexual relations of people older than 18, with people younger than 16 are wrong."
She won't say it.
It goes against her beliefs to reject that which she believes is right.

I've tried 5 times, I've tried to give her a chance to bring this whole argument to an end. Yet she has proven she does not want to stop being called a pedophile. Probably because she is one.
Thinking

Todmorden, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13113
Jul 10, 2013
 
Then how come, unlike your god, time exists?
ezdzit wrote:
<quoted text>
All that proves is you've used the mental construct of "time" to describe the interval between the launch and the (crash) landing of your jump.
One mississippi, two mississippi, three....splat!
Time isn't real. It isn't energy, matter, or a force that can be manipulated or controlled to avoid the inevitability of splat! after launch. Time is just a mental construct used by humans for measurements and predictions. That's all it is.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13114
Jul 10, 2013
 
ezdzit wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL
Question: Is time quantized? In other words, is there a fundamental unit of time that could not be divided into a briefer unit?
John Baez is a member of the mathematics faculty at the University of California at Riverside and one of the moderators of the on-line sci.physics.research newsgroup. He responds:
"The brief answer to this question is,'Nobody knows.' Certainly there is no experimental evidence in favor of such a minimal unit. On the other hand, there is no evidence against it, except that we have not yet found it. There are no well-worked-out physics theories incorporating a fundamental unit of time, and there are substantial obstacles to doing so in a way that is compatible with the principles of General Relativity. Recent work on a theory of quantum gravity in which gravity is represented using loops in space suggests that there might be a way to do something roughly along these lines--not involving a minimum unit of time but rather a minimum amount of area for any two-dimensional surface, a minimum volume for any three-dimensional region in space and perhaps also a minimum 'hypervolume' for any four-dimensional region of space-time."
William G. Unruh is a professor in the department of physics and astronomy at the University of British Columbia. He offers this reply:
"There is certainly no experimental evidence that time--or space for that matter--is quantized, so the question becomes one of whether there exists a theory in which time is quantized. Although researchers have considered some theories in which there is a strict quantization of time (meaning that all times are an integer multiple of some smallest unit), none that I know of has ever been seriously regarded as a viable theory of reality--at least, not by more people that the original proponent of the theory.
"One could, however, ask the question in a slightly different way. By putting together G (Newton's constant of gravity), h (Planck's constant) and c (the velocity of light), one can derive a minimum meaningful amount of time, about 10-44 second. At this temporal scale, one would expect quantum effects to dominate gravity and hence, because Einstein's theory links gravity and time, to dominate the ordinary notion of time. In other words, for time intervals smaller than this one, the whole notion of 'time' would be expected to lose its meaning.
"The biggest obstacle to answering the question definitively is that there exists no really believable theory to describe this regime where quantum mechanics and gravity come together. Over the past 10 years, a branch of theoretical physics called string theory has held forth the greatest hope, but it is as yet far from a state where one could use it to describe the nature of time in such a brief interval."
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm...
Ok now prove the god you're lying to us about then.
MUQ

Jubail, Saudi Arabia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13115
Jul 10, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

R Hill wrote:
01. Hmmmmm. Must have been "Great and True" Creationist Scientists, which, sorry to say, are not Scientists at all.

02. I don't recall 'boasting' about anything. Perhaps you don't know, but 'blue collar'(as in my moniker) places me firmly in with the great unwashed, the general masses, the Proletariat, the worker bees, the lowest of the low.

03. Very few people raised in America, or Western Civilization for that matter, obtain the intensity of religious indoctrination you Muslims get. Catholics might be close ... some of them, my wife for instance ... are pretty far gone.

04. I just want to know the true nature of the Universe. I want to understand reality. I may be stepping outside my bounds with such lofty goals, but I believe that in my 60 years of existence I've learned enough science to make this an achievable quest. I'm as interested in Archeology as Zoology and (boasting again) may know more 'general science' than some specialists!. Sorry.
Ans.

01. Branding people has been a specialty of you people. The moment you fix a label on him, all his arguments and thinking are put into dustbin.

02. I did not comment on your personal status, only on your thinking process.

03. You are right brother, very few people in Western Country receive any religious information.

What they receive is faulty information based on Bible and that is why they loose interest in what they get.

Media and work style, leave no room for "religion" in work place, this is another reason of people loosing contact with religion.

It is just a name and a few rituals and some annual feasts and celebrations (which have become too commercialized).

04. There is no hindrance on you gaining as much knowledge about the Universe as you can.

60 or 70 years are not sufficient to gather all the info out there, but one should gather as much as we can.

This info is good, but it should not sidetrack you from knowing what is actual purpose of your life!!

If you start with a right frame of mind, every thing in this Universe will bring you closer to your Merciful Creator, with wrong frame of mind the same info will take you away and away from your Creator.

It is only the matter of outlook, like positive and negatives of the same picture!!

We are not enemies, we have different purpose.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13116
Jul 10, 2013
 
ezdzit wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL
Question: Is time quantized? In other words, is there a fundamental unit of time that could not be divided into a briefer unit?
As all of your quotes say, we do not know. The reason we do not know? because the quantum of time, if it exists, is incredibly small, probably around 10^{-43} second. We have, at this point, no way to measure times this small.

That does not mean time is a figment of the mind. It means it is physical, but we do not fully understand it.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13117
Jul 10, 2013
 
ezdzit wrote:
Yet as natural as this way of thinking is, you will not find it reflected in science. The equations of physics do not tell us which events are occurring right now—they are like a map without the “you are here” symbol. The present moment does not exist in them, and therefore neither does the flow of time. Additionally, Albert Einstein’s theories of relativity suggest not only that there is no single special present but also that all moments are equally real [see “That Mysterious Flow,” by Paul Davies; Scientific American, September 2002]. Fundamentally, the future is no more open than the past.
First of all, Scientific American is not nearly the quality science magazine it once was. While it once had articles written by the actual scientists and was directed to giving accurate information, it is now a popular science magazine that is written primarily by journalists. In the goal to make money, it destroyed itself.

More to the point. In modern physics, space and time together become part of the dynamic geometry of the universe. Both space and time are affected by and affect matter and energy, so they become real quantities that have to be addressed. But, spacetime comes as a whole: all of space and all of time are together in this geometry. No 'right now', as your article says.

This does not mean that time is merely a construct of our minds. In fact, the evidence says that time and space are quite physical things that are crucial parts of our universe.

If you really want to continue this discussion, you should learn some actual physics. You will find that time is a fundamental part of our universe. Even those who think that space and time are emergent from other phenomena (suggested by the first part of your post), see time as a physical thing whose properties need to be explained.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13118
Jul 10, 2013
 
RHill wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmmmmmm. Okay. What does that have to do with the question of rather time is 'real' or merely a human concept? If they can 'quantize' it, it must be real, otherwise ... why bother. This article does not support your original contention ... quite the opposite. Are we not 'quantizing' time when we break it up into our own arbitrary units? I guess if something exists less than 10-44 seconds we can safely say that it never existed? Not sure I could go along with that. You, Polymath and SciAm work it out.
The problem is that for very short times and very small distances, quantum effects become significant. So, the quantum fluctuations can become large enough to produce small black holes. These are geometrical changes in spacetime. In other words, the geometry of spacetime is *also* governed by quantum effects. That is one of the arguments that *suggests* that time is quantized at the 10^{-43} second level.

The problem, as it is with many of these discussions, is that we do not have a fully quantum theory of gravity that can be tested. We now have several candidate theories, but they give different answers to basic questions and almost all the differences are way beyond our ability to measure.

Since: Mar 11

Louisville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13119
Jul 10, 2013
 
1: Beheading people has been a specialty of you people. The moment you label him an infidel he is marked for death.

2: You did not comment on questions asked of you because your Allah could not guide you to the answers.

3: Yes very few people in your country receive a proper education.

4: You continue to shame Islam with each and every post you make.
MUQ wrote:
Ans.

01. Branding people has been a specialty of you people. The moment you fix a label on him, all his arguments and thinking are put into dustbin.

02. I did not comment on your personal status, only on your thinking process.

03. You are right brother, very few people in Western Country receive any religious information.

What they receive is faulty information based on Bible and that is why they loose interest in what they get.

Media and work style, leave no room for "religion" in work place, this is another reason of people loosing contact with religion.

It is just a name and a few rituals and some annual feasts and celebrations (which have become too commercialized).

04. There is no hindrance on you gaining as much knowledge about the Universe as you can.

60 or 70 years are not sufficient to gather all the info out there, but one should gather as much as we can.

This info is good, but it should not sidetrack you from knowing what is actual purpose of your life!!

If you start with a right frame of mind, every thing in this Universe will bring you closer to your Merciful Creator, with wrong frame of mind the same info will take you away and away from your Creator.

It is only the matter of outlook, like positive and negatives of the same picture!!

We are not enemies, we have different purpose.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13120
Jul 10, 2013
 
ezdzit wrote:
<quoted text>
You said:
"....the duration from birth to death, or simply between intervals is denoted by the descriptor 'time'."
And you said it all right there in that sentence. Time is indeed a "discriptor". It's a communication tool like an adjective or adverb. It's a measuring tool like a yardstick or a sextant. It's a very useful tool, perhaps one of the most useful tools humans ever invented but it's usefulness doesn't change the fact that it's only a mental construct invented by humans. It doesn't exist outside the human mind.
You are confusing the measuring tool (clocks, saying 'one mississippi, two mississippi,...') with the thing being measured (time). The measuring tools are very useful *because* they measure something real: time.

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13121
Jul 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Ans.
01. Branding people has been a specialty of you people. The moment you fix a label on him, all his arguments and thinking are put into dustbin.
02. I did not comment on your personal status, only on your thinking process.
03. You are right brother, very few people in Western Country receive any religious information.
What they receive is faulty information based on Bible and that is why they loose interest in what they get.
Media and work style, leave no room for "religion" in work place, this is another reason of people loosing contact with religion.
It is just a name and a few rituals and some annual feasts and celebrations (which have become too commercialized).
04. There is no hindrance on you gaining as much knowledge about the Universe as you can.
60 or 70 years are not sufficient to gather all the info out there, but one should gather as much as we can.
This info is good, but it should not sidetrack you from knowing what is actual purpose of your life!!
If you start with a right frame of mind, every thing in this Universe will bring you closer to your Merciful Creator, with wrong frame of mind the same info will take you away and away from your Creator.
It is only the matter of outlook, like positive and negatives of the same picture!!
We are not enemies, we have different purpose.
01 Well, we are here to discuss and share opinions. It is my opinion that Creationist opinions belong in the dustbin.

02 You brought the term 'boast' or 'boasting' into the equation, not I.

03 It is this fact (relatively moderate religious indoctrination) which has helped our civilization to flourish. It is logical to extrapolate that even less religion would result in even more flourishing.

04 A lifetime is not enough. About the time we start to get it figured out, old age addles our brains and tightens it's hands around our throats. It gives us the aspect of dottering fools and what wisdom we try to pass falls on deaf ears. Thus ignorance and superstition survives and reverberates down the generations.

We're making progress though. Barring some catastrophe, the Internet has made 'free thinking' accessible to (almost) the whole world. It has given a voice to those who, in olden times, would have remained forever muted. Pandora's box has been thrown open and it is full of knowledge. The world is intoxicated upon it and who knows where it's going to stop.

'Enemies' was too strong a word. We are and will remain adversarial as long as our relationship to a mythical "Creator" remains our yardstick for measuring each other. We need a new measuring stick like 'how much suffering can we ease'. In that, we all fall short.

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13122
Jul 10, 2013
 
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem is that for very short times and very small distances, quantum effects become significant. So, the quantum fluctuations can become large enough to produce small black holes. These are geometrical changes in spacetime. In other words, the geometry of spacetime is *also* governed by quantum effects. That is one of the arguments that *suggests* that time is quantized at the 10^{-43} second level.
The problem, as it is with many of these discussions, is that we do not have a fully quantum theory of gravity that can be tested. We now have several candidate theories, but they give different answers to basic questions and almost all the differences are way beyond our ability to measure.
Why do we feel compelled to 'quantize' everything? What could be more fluid or 'analog' than the flow of time or the curvature of space-time. Must everything be packetized to fit into a GUT?

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13123
Jul 10, 2013
 
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Ans.
01. Branding people has been a specialty of you people. The moment you fix a label on him, all his arguments and thinking are put into dustbin.
02. I did not comment on your personal status, only on your thinking process.
03. You are right brother, very few people in Western Country receive any religious information.
What they receive is faulty information based on Bible and that is why they loose interest in what they get.
Media and work style, leave no room for "religion" in work place, this is another reason of people loosing contact with religion.
It is just a name and a few rituals and some annual feasts and celebrations (which have become too commercialized).
04. There is no hindrance on you gaining as much knowledge about the Universe as you can.
60 or 70 years are not sufficient to gather all the info out there, but one should gather as much as we can.
This info is good, but it should not sidetrack you from knowing what is actual purpose of your life!!
If you start with a right frame of mind, every thing in this Universe will bring you closer to your Merciful Creator, with wrong frame of mind the same info will take you away and away from your Creator.
It is only the matter of outlook, like positive and negatives of the same picture!!
We are not enemies, we have different purpose.
Simple coward with no proof of god, who lies about god as much as he can to spread his fearful cult of ignorants

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13124
Jul 10, 2013
 
DNF wrote:
oops. my bad.
"Your posts remind me of trying find the clean end of a turd!" was directed at the haters, not all the people on this thread.
Well, that's a relief! BTW, there always seems to be a pointy end and a round end. Pretty easy to spot!

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13126
Jul 10, 2013
 
RHill wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do we feel compelled to 'quantize' everything? What could be more fluid or 'analog' than the flow of time or the curvature of space-time. Must everything be packetized to fit into a GUT?
The easiest way to see the necessity in this situation is to imagine a particle in a superposition of two elementary states. We *know* this type of thing is possible and, in fact, it is done in the lab all the time.

But, masses produce gravity and gravity is a curvature of spacetime. So the gravity produced by a particle in a superposition will also be in a superposition of two states. That alone means that quantum effects are relevant.

Once we have that, the basic observables, like space and time, have to become quantum operators for consistency. But this means that the measured values of those observables (which are the eigenvalues of those operators) will be quantized.

Now, this is very general and there are several ways this reasoning could go wrong. But once you accept that particles are quantum objects, and once you see that they can affect space and time (this is gravity), then space and time also become quantum objects. So, even if they are not quantized (not discrete values), there is still the requirement to have them be quantum objects (described by non-commuting operators).

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13127
Jul 10, 2013
 
Lacez wrote:
<quoted text>
That is rather interesting, though we already feel that way with Zit because it's become so popular of a tell these days. Especially when someone is so hooked on a belief, they will not denounce it in any way.
I followed that link right back to some of the original stuff. It doesn't look like they've made much progress. Of course, once they 'went public' with their techniques they kind of invalidated themselves. I'm sure every Tom, Dick and Hairy criminal on the planet knows to say "I didn't do it" by now.

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13128
Jul 10, 2013
 
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
The easiest way to see the necessity in this situation is to imagine a particle in a superposition of two elementary states. We *know* this type of thing is possible and, in fact, it is done in the lab all the time.
But, masses produce gravity and gravity is a curvature of spacetime. So the gravity produced by a particle in a superposition will also be in a superposition of two states. That alone means that quantum effects are relevant.
Once we have that, the basic observables, like space and time, have to become quantum operators for consistency. But this means that the measured values of those observables (which are the eigenvalues of those operators) will be quantized.
Now, this is very general and there are several ways this reasoning could go wrong. But once you accept that particles are quantum objects, and once you see that they can affect space and time (this is gravity), then space and time also become quantum objects. So, even if they are not quantized (not discrete values), there is still the requirement to have them be quantum objects (described by non-commuting operators).
Thanks! I can see that. You must be a very good teacher. Thank you for that as well! I was kind of visualizing it like how we 'digitize' everything to ease computation or make it compatible with the binary world of computers, like we've done with our music and video. Something is always lost in the process though. Purist Audiophiles still insist upon vinyl and vacuum tubes!

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13129
Jul 10, 2013
 
RHill wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks! I can see that. You must be a very good teacher. Thank you for that as well! I was kind of visualizing it like how we 'digitize' everything to ease computation or make it compatible with the binary world of computers, like we've done with our music and video. Something is always lost in the process though. Purist Audiophiles still insist upon vinyl and vacuum tubes!
One of the common misunderstandings about quantum mechanics is that 'quantized' means the same as 'having chunks of the same size'. As an example, the quantum states of the hydrogen atom are 'quantized' in the sense of only having very specific discrete values. But these values made up of things of the same size! In fact, the energy levels (in appropriate units) have values 1, 1/4, 1/9, 1/16,....

Now, with photons of a given frequency, the energy states are even placed: 1,2,3,4,.... But this does not happen in all quantum systems. In particular, even if time is quantized, it does not follow that there is a smallest unit of time.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13130
Jul 10, 2013
 
aaargh:...'these values *are not* made up'

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13131
Jul 10, 2013
 
Lacez wrote:
<quoted text>
She won't say it.
It goes against her beliefs to reject that which she believes is right.
I've tried 5 times, I've tried to give her a chance to bring this whole argument to an end. Yet she has proven she does not want to stop being called a pedophile. Probably because she is one.
That would be my take on it too, still by trying you are outing the hiprocrasy in her postings.
spudgun

Stoke-on-trent, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13132
Jul 10, 2013
 
RHill wrote:
<quoted text>
Barring some catastrophe, the Internet has made 'free thinking' accessible to (almost) the whole world. It has given a voice to those who, in olden times, would have remained forever muted. Pandora's box has been thrown open and it is full of knowledge. The world is intoxicated upon it and who knows where it's going to stop.
Yes the internet can be a force for good, consigning myths and legends to the trash bin of history. At least in the developed world.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

8 Users are viewing the Atheism Forum right now

Search the Atheism Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 33 min Catcher1 224,351
Our world came from nothing? 54 min NightSerf 240
20+ Questions for Theists (Apr '13) 4 hr Patrick 385
What does "Atheism" mean? 5 hr Reason Personified 10
Introducing The Universal Religion 6 hr Reason Personified 733
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 11 hr DonPanic 21,400
Talking some sense into you people... 12 hr religionisillness 24
•••
•••