Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 238901 comments on the Webbunny tumblelog story from Jul 18, 2009, titled Atheism requires as much faith as religion?. In it, Webbunny tumblelog reports that:

Atheism requires as much faith as religion? bearvspuma : The only problem with this rationalization is that ita s assuming all athiests are so because theya re intelligent in the ways of science and reasoning and all people that believe in a form of god are unintelligent.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Webbunny tumblelog.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#221052 Mar 24, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
The discussion was of what constitutes a "scientific theory", not what is science.
You lied about that, too, and repeated the lie just now.
Here is another of your lies, when you doctored Behe's quotation:
Dagwood's version:
Q But you are clear, under your definition, the definition that sweeps in intelligent design, astrology is also a scientific theory, correct?
Behe: Yes, that's correct. END QUOTE
Trial Transcript:
Q But you are clear, under your definition, the definition that sweeps in intelligent design, astrology is also a scientific theory, correct?
Behe: Yes, that's correct. And let me explain under my definition of the word "theory," it is -- a sense of the word "theory" does not include the theory being true, it means a proposition based on physical evidence to explain some facts by logical inferences. There have been many theories throughout the history of science which looked good at the time which further progress has shown to be incorrect. Nonetheless, we can't go back and say that because they were incorrect they were not theories. So many many things that we now realized to be incorrect, incorrect theories, are nonetheless theories.
Do these instances of me catching you lying embarrass you?
And here we have Buck being his OCD pedantic self.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#221053 Mar 24, 2014
Catcher1 wrote:
That's how you plaster your name in the annals of history.
Off to the gym.
Don't forget your oversized towels, lemons and cucumbers!

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#221054 Mar 24, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
My case needs no help.
Ah, yes. Because whatever Buck says is true. Without question.[/sarcasm]

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#221055 Mar 24, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
In taking me on, and being such an insulting asshole, your mouth has overloaded your ass.
Thank you for the hate, Buck. I guess my arguments are particularly effective today.
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
I conclude from being on this thread the the quantity of hate people will pour onto a person is directly proportional to his effectiveness at annihilating their arguments.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#221056 Mar 24, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
My case needs no help. Yours obviously does, as you repeat your habit again here, which is to call someone names in substitution for having an argument against them.
I have now caught you lying about Behe (twice), lying about Barton, lying about Casey Luskin, lying about Lonnig.
It's quite a record you're piling up. Are you aware that nobody now can take anything you say as credible?
Even more so than when you argued for the infinite donut.
In taking me on, and being such an insulting asshole, your mouth has overloaded your ass.
Buck's idea of proof...use Barton to prove Barton...

Buck: Mr. Barton, are you lying?

David Barton...Why, no Buck, I am not.

Buck: There you have it. Absolute proof Mr. Barton is not lying.

Hey, Buck, I've got a bridge to sell you!

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#221057 Mar 24, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
That hypothesis has been abandoned.
Stephen Meyer explains why you are wrong:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =yLeWh8Df3k8XX
Meyer???

Oh, Buck, you just keep on quoting crackpots. You are really good at it.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#221058 Mar 24, 2014
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
You disproved ID yourself in that post and either too stupid to realize it or to deceitful to admit it.
You know nothing and are nothing, just like all the religitards here.
God is all around you and all you can do is babble about your magic book.
God is not in your Bible, Buck.
Yeah, I noticed that too. I was going to comment until I saw your post.

Behe...yeah, well, ID is science if you use a different definition of scientific theory.

And Buck doesn't get it. Not at all. He proves himself wrong and keeps on crowing about being right.

Buck: I am never wrong. I though I was wrong once, but it turns out I wasn't.
Thinking

Stockbridge, UK

#221059 Mar 24, 2014
Puck Frick mantra: something that is not peer reviewable and doesn't obey the scientific method can still be called a science
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, I noticed that too. I was going to comment until I saw your post.
Behe...yeah, well, ID is science if you use a different definition of scientific theory.
And Buck doesn't get it. Not at all. He proves himself wrong and keeps on crowing about being right.
Buck: I am never wrong. I though I was wrong once, but it turns out I wasn't.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#221060 Mar 24, 2014
An atheist posts on "When people ask why I have a problem with religion..."

http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2014/03/22/why...

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#221061 Mar 24, 2014
The Rapture is any day now...

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

You really have to wonder if this guy is serious or a Poe.

“The true real is unseen”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#221062 Mar 24, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, but to me, making sh*t up just so you feel good and don't have to face your fears is pretty irrational.
Or could it be you don't want to face your fears so you claim sh*t is made up and is irrational. Maybe to avoid fear, you claim what you fear is made up? Me think so.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#221063 Mar 24, 2014
Phantom2010 wrote:
<quoted text> Or could it be you don't want to face your fears so you claim sh*t is made up and is irrational. Maybe to avoid fear, you claim what you fear is made up? Me think so.
Here we have another example of a believer claiming to be a mind reader.

If you aren't making sh*t up, provide evidence of what you claim. It really is that simple, yet no believer ever does it.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#221064 Mar 24, 2014
Buck claims that ID is a scientific theory, that it has a scientific framework.

And then he posts Behe's testimony where Behe says you need to redefine what a scientific theory is in order for ID to qualify.

ROFLMAO

“The true real is unseen”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#221065 Mar 24, 2014
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
As
Seriously?!
Science can't deal with death?
Our life spans have tripled from just a few hundred years ago. Science is closing in on immortality as we speak.
REAL immortality.
The kind we can enjoy in the here and now. Not some empty promise that is impossible to verify and is, for all intents and purposes, an empty promise that causes people to waste the precious few years they have chasing a foolish dream.
And what makes you think that, even if there IS an afterlife, that your way is the only way to achieve it?
There are hundreds, if not thousands, of different ideologies that include an afterlife, and every one of them is just as sure that THEIR way into the afterlife is the right way-at least for them.
You're nothing special and neither is your religion, whatever the hell it is.
It is impossible for science to achieve immortality. The best science can do is extend days of life. I will die. You will die.

Which afterlife is the real afterlife does not matter. My afterlife is based on what the Prophet Jesus Christ and claimed Son of God of the bible says of the afterlife.

That is not up to me to convince you that the Christian afterlife view is the real afterlife. My claim is we all die, no matter how much you enjoy living. To ignore that you will one day die is naive.

There is only two ways to deal with the reality of death. Believe once you die it's over. Or believe once you die there is an afterlife. That is your only two choices.

If you believe once you die then existence ends, that's ok. I do not believe that.

Neither one of us can verify either claim. You can believe the Christian view of afterlife is made up, but what you believe is irrelevant to the Christian. You think the Christian chasing the afterlife of the bible is wasting their life. The Christian believes you living as if there is no God your whole life is a waste.

So it's about perspective. The only question you need to answer for yourself is are you comfortable dying with whatever your beliefs are about death? and if you're comfortable, that is all that matters. You can't make someone else comfortable with what you believe. They must find that comfort for themselves.

“The true real is unseen”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#221066 Mar 24, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
Here we have another example of a believer claiming to be a mind reader.
If you aren't making sh*t up, provide evidence of what you claim. It really is that simple, yet no believer ever does it.
Because the responsibility for evidence is not with the believer, regardless of the Deity. The Deity is responsible for supplying the proof.

The muslim or the hindu or the christian can point to their holy book. But it is the God of the book that is supposed to provide the evidence.

Psalm 34:8
Taste and see that the LORD is good; blessed is the one who takes refuge in him
--
Clearly the Christian God wants to give you the evidence of his existence. Maybe your time would be better spent asking the Deity for the evidence instead of the believer.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#221067 Mar 24, 2014
Phantom2010 wrote:
<quoted text>It is impossible for science to achieve immortality. The best science can do is extend days of life. I will die. You will die.

Which afterlife is the real afterlife does not matter. My afterlife is based on what the Prophet Jesus Christ and claimed Son of God of the bible says of the afterlife.

That is not up to me to convince you that the Christian afterlife view is the real afterlife. My claim is we all die, no matter how much you enjoy living. To ignore that you will one day die is naive.

There is only two ways to deal with the reality of death. Believe once you die it's over. Or believe once you die there is an afterlife. That is your only two choices.

If you believe once you die then existence ends, that's ok. I do not believe that.

Neither one of us can verify either claim. You can believe the Christian view of afterlife is made up, but what you believe is irrelevant to the Christian. You think the Christian chasing the afterlife of the bible is wasting their life. The Christian believes you living as if there is no God your whole life is a waste.

So it's about perspective. The only question you need to answer for yourself is are you comfortable dying with whatever your beliefs are about death? and if you're comfortable, that is all that matters. You can't make someone else comfortable with what you believe. They must find that comfort for themselves.
You left out reincarnation.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#221068 Mar 24, 2014
Phantom2010 wrote:
<quoted text>Because the responsibility for evidence is not with the believer, regardless of the Deity. The Deity is responsible for supplying the proof.

The muslim or the hindu or the christian can point to their holy book. But it is the God of the book that is supposed to provide the evidence.

Psalm 34:8
Taste and see that the LORD is good; blessed is the one who takes refuge in him
--
Clearly the Christian God wants to give you the evidence of his existence. Maybe your time would be better spent asking the Deity for the evidence instead of the believer.
Just what evidence do you claim for your god to have provided?

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#221069 Mar 24, 2014
Thinking wrote:
Puck Frick mantra: something that is not peer reviewable and doesn't obey the scientific method can still be called a science
<quoted text>
See, you don't get it.

Buck says science is science and scientific theories are scientific theories and never the twain shall meet.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#221070 Mar 24, 2014
Phantom2010 wrote:
<quoted text> Because the responsibility for evidence is not with the believer, regardless of the Deity. The Deity is responsible for supplying the proof.
The muslim or the hindu or the christian can point to their holy book. But it is the God of the book that is supposed to provide the evidence.
Psalm 34:8
Taste and see that the LORD is good; blessed is the one who takes refuge in him
--
Clearly the Christian God wants to give you the evidence of his existence. Maybe your time would be better spent asking the Deity for the evidence instead of the believer.
ROFLMAO!!!

Go on, pull the other.

Sorry, dude, but the BELIEVER is the one making the claim...not the non-believer...not the god...but the believer.

That means the burden of proof is on the believer

What you just said is tantamount to saying "The burden of proof is on Bigfoot, not on the believer in Bigfoot."

“The true real is unseen”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#221071 Mar 24, 2014
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Just what evidence do you claim for your god to have provided?
That is not important.

My evidence for my belief in my God is for me only. There is no reason for you to believe that evidence, because it's for me not you.

That is why no two people are alike. When it comes to faith religion and belief systems, the evidence that convinces me may not have any effect on you. You can't and should not rely on another person experience with a Deity to influence you at all. Because you're not that person. You should only petition God. But if you don't even believe God exist, then frankly you are beyond being able to be convinced that a Deity exist.

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 Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 3 hr DebraE 7,181
News Phil Robertson talks against Atheists 4 hr Richardfs 81
News Atheists' problem with the Bible (Sep '09) 13 hr karl44 7,431
why Atheists believe in incest,pedophilia and b... 14 hr thetruth 29
News .com | What hope is there without God? Wed Kaitlin the Wolf ... 26
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) Wed thetruth 2,171
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) Tue Kathleen 19,031
More from around the web