Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

Full story: Webbunny tumblelog

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.
Comments
223,401 - 223,420 of 224,053 Comments Last updated 45 min ago

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#232747
Wednesday Jul 16
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
A few millimeters according to dingaling's experts.
You also doing buckisms? I didn’t think you were that stupid, perhaps you absence really has screwed you mind.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#232748
Wednesday Jul 16
 
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Whoopee!!!
It's the ice cream truck!
Oops. My mistake, it is just Christine.
She sells infinite ice cream cones which made themselves.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#232749
Wednesday Jul 16
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
The question is not how old the universe is.
The question is how the universe, or anything, creates itself from nothing.
Or, how a thing goes from non-being to being - all on its own.
That's the big question. Physicists like Hawking and Mlodinow fake answers to it.
And Believers like you are so eager to believe, you swallow it.
One creation myth is as good as another.
There are many questions – don’t get confused by limiting yourself to only what suites your sensibilities

Nope, the creation myth of god dunitwiv magic is based on bronze age guesswork

The premise of the universe came from nothing is based on E=MC^2 (which is proven to be valid), and hundreds of thousands of man hours of research, observation and measurement.

So no, not as good as each o0ther at all.

It seems that you are asking me to believe a bronze age guess with absolutely no evidence to back it up in opposition to scientific understanding based on the universe as we perceive it?

I do find it amazing that intelligent godbots (oxymoron true but really they do exist) choose to hold faith in mythology without any evidence whatsoever while condemning others for having faith in hard facts and deductions made from those hard facts.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#232750
Wednesday Jul 16
 
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Buck stomps his foot again while his other one is stick in his mouth.
1. Garbage, the no boundaries condition is not guessed at, it is a direct observation of the WMAP experiment, as we have argued for the last week or so and you have denied its findings, not my problem. But of course funnymentalist creatard delusionist’s will always deny anything that does not conform to god dunitwiv magic – won’t you? WMAP data exist, the calculation that allows this discussion is correct to 0.4% accuracy. It really does not matter how hard you stomp your foot and scream “I win ‘cos I said so”
2/ are you saying gravity is not a factual? Take a pen, hold it at arms length and let go – what happens? Gravity in action.
On this last you are correct, nothingness as in complete absence of everything nothingness is not the point, however complete lack of particles in that vacuum is. We have discussed what denoted ‘nothing’ in the past and as I remember Michio Kaku had more take on the matter than you.
Got it. "Nothing is something" And gravity was present absent the universe.

So the universe came from something, but the something is nothing.

What is the nothing? Answer: "Something".

But I thought it was nothing? Answer: Right. It's nothing.

But you said nothing is something? Answer: Right. Nothing is something.

But you said it was nothing? Answer: Right. It's nothing.

But you said nothing is something? Answer: Right. It's something.

But you said it was nothing? Answer: Right. It's something.

Got it.

Hawking and Mlodinow PRESUPPOSE the existence of space, energy, and gravity, and call it..., wait for it,...wait for it,...wait for it,...

...wait for it,...

...wait for it,...

NOTHING!!

Chrisinemc^2, jump off your roof and see if gravity and energy are...NOTHING.

Bwahahahahahahahhahahahaha....

I just love science!!!

Bwahaahahahahahahahhahahhah...

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#232751
Wednesday Jul 16
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
She sells infinite ice cream cones which made themselves.
Do they have infinite apple flavouring or are they youtube ice creams prove god?

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#232752
Wednesday Jul 16
 

Judged:

2

2

2

ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
You also doing buckisms? I didn’t think you were that stupid, perhaps you absence really has screwed you mind.
Check NASA and the Big Bang. A few millimeters. One helluva rate of expansion, eh?

You take math speculative math models as a reality. You are a pew warmer.

Do some math and real physics and educate yourself.

Won't be here much. Have to tether the laptop to post. The smartphone gets froze up posting.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#232753
Wednesday Jul 16
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
A few millimeters according to dingaling's experts.
I see.

You are a smart guy, Dave. Maybe you can tell me how expanding at a finite speed (distance per unit of time) for 13.7 billion years results in infinite distance.

We can use the formula:

(13.7 billion years) X (Distance per year)= Infinite Distance

Dividing both sides of the equation by "years", we arrive at:

13.7 X = Infinite

What is X?

Patrick

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#232754
Wednesday Jul 16
 
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes a person decides whether to believe in scientific fact or guesswork that no one can evidence, it is entirely up to the individual.
However when those trolls make claims like god is fact or the babble is true because the babble tells me that god is fact and the babble and the babble would not lie because the babble won’t lie to me because the babble is true, despite all the lack of evidence and the contrary evidence is when the arguments start. What would save all the arguments is prefixing their statement with the simple words,“I have no proof but I believe”
Good luck with this.
Note: Charter schools in Texas are teaching slavery was beneficial.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#232755
Wednesday Jul 16
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Check NASA and the Big Bang. A few millimeters. One helluva rate of expansion, eh?
You take math speculative math models as a reality. You are a pew warmer.
Do some math and real physics and educate yourself.
Won't be here much. Have to tether the laptop to post. The smartphone gets froze up posting.
Links please – what.... oh, you don’t have any – ok

E=MC^2 is not speculative the very proof of that resides in the fact that you can post on topix using electronic equipment, that the sun shines and the real biggy, that you actually exist at all

Yup I have that problem with my phone – and they call them smart – jees, smart as buck and should be locked away for as long. Clever how they work by magic though isn’t it, where would we be without that speculative E=MC^2?

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#232756
Wednesday Jul 16
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
I see.
You are a smart guy, Dave. Maybe you can tell me how expanding at a finite speed (distance per unit of time) for 13.7 billion years results in infinite distance.
We can use the formula:
(13.7 billion years) X (Distance per year)= Infinite Distance
Dividing both sides of the equation by "years", we arrive at:
13.7 X = Infinite
What is X?
You are limiting your mind to what you can see, it is a fatal flaw of dumbos

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#232757
Wednesday Jul 16
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Patrick wrote:
<quoted text>
Good luck with this.
Note: Charter schools in Texas are teaching slavery was beneficial.
I have no delusions; I know that godbots will never tell the truth
Bloody good job I am not a Texan , I would be ashamed to admit it

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#232758
Wednesday Jul 16
 
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>

The premise of the universe came from nothing is based on E=MC^2 (which is proven to be valid), and hundreds of thousands of man hours of research, observation and measurement.
Oh. It did? Really?

Then why did world-renowned mathematical physicist, Roger Penrose, say THIS about it:

"What is referred to isn’t even a theory. It’s a collection of ideas, hopes, aspirations. It’s not even a theory and I think the book is a bit misleading in that respect. It gives you the impression that here is this new theory which is going to explain everything. It is nothing of the sort. It is not even a theory and certainly has no observational evidence,,, I think the book suffers rather more strongly than many. It’s not an uncommon thing in popular descriptions of science to latch onto some idea, particularly things to do with string theory, which have absolutely no support from observations.,,, They are very far from any kind of observational testability. Yes, they are hardly even science.”

Keywords: "misleading"; "no observational evidence"; "absolutely no support from observations"; "hardly even science"

But wait,...there are others:

Peter Woit, PhD. in theoretical physics and a lecturer in mathematics at Columbia,

"... despite its two decades of dominance, is just a hunch aspiring to be a theory. It hasn't predicted anything, as theories are required to do, and its practitioners have become so desperate that they're willing to redefine what doing science means in order to justify their labors."

"The multiverse idea rests on assumptions that would be laughed out of town if they came from a religious text.”-Gregg Easterbrook

I'm willing to laugh it out of town anyways...

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ahahahahahahahhahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahhahahah ahahahahah...

There it goes.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#232759
Wednesday Jul 16
 
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
You are limiting your mind to what you can see, it is a fatal flaw of dumbos
No, I can't see 13.7 billion years.

You are not even correct in your insults.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#232760
Wednesday Jul 16
 
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no delusions; I know that godbots will never tell the truth
Bloody good job I am not a Texan , I would be ashamed to admit it
...Bwahahahahahahahahahahahah. ..

Oh,...I didn't see anything funny here, Christine.

I'm still laughing at you for your previous posts.

Where was I,...

Bwhahahahahahahahahahahahahahh hahahahahhahahha...

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#232761
Wednesday Jul 16
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh. It did? Really?
Then why did world-renowned mathematical physicist, Roger Penrose, say THIS about it:
"What is referred to isn’t even a theory. It’s a collection of ideas, hopes, aspirations. It’s not even a theory and I think the book is a bit misleading in that respect. It gives you the impression that here is this new theory which is going to explain everything. It is nothing of the sort. It is not even a theory and certainly has no observational evidence,,, I think the book suffers rather more strongly than many. It’s not an uncommon thing in popular descriptions of science to latch onto some idea, particularly things to do with string theory, which have absolutely no support from observations.,,, They are very far from any kind of observational testability. Yes, they are hardly even science.”
Keywords: "misleading"; "no observational evidence"; "absolutely no support from observations"; "hardly even science"
But wait,...there are others:
Peter Woit, PhD. in theoretical physics and a lecturer in mathematics at Columbia,
"... despite its two decades of dominance, is just a hunch aspiring to be a theory. It hasn't predicted anything, as theories are required to do, and its practitioners have become so desperate that they're willing to redefine what doing science means in order to justify their labors."
"The multiverse idea rests on assumptions that would be laughed out of town if they came from a religious text.”-Gregg Easterbrook
I'm willing to laugh it out of town anyways...
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ahahahahahahahhahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahhahahah ahahahahah...
There it goes.
When did Penrose write that? For some strange reason you give no dates, I wonder why??? Could it be that he has reconsidered based on resent research and has now become a leading speaker for the perimeter institute and vocal proponent of pre big bang

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#232762
Wednesday Jul 16
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I can't see 13.7 billion years.
You are not even correct in your insults.
Who said 13.7 (or even 13.8) billion years?

You can’t see further than you next meal.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#232763
Wednesday Jul 16
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
...Bwahahahahahahahahahahahah. ..
Oh,...I didn't see anything funny here, Christine.
I'm still laughing at you for your previous posts.
Where was I,...
Bwhahahahahahahahahahahahahahh hahahahahhahahha...
I told you, be careful of a seizure.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#232764
Wednesday Jul 16
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Time to go home –

So sorry you don’t have that option buck – actually no I’m not, I couldn’t really care less.

Bye. Until next time...

“In God we trust”

Since: Dec 12

Nothing creates... Nothing

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#232765
Wednesday Jul 16
 
Nothing creates nothing. That's a fact Atheists must learn.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#232766
Wednesday Jul 16
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi, Dave.
I'm learning new things.
From the Topix Scientists, I have now learned that matter created itself, and then expanded an infinite distance.
The expanse of the universe has reached an unreachable magnitude.
Can you tell me, Dave, what the distance was immediately preceding the infinite distance?
What speed and elapsed time does it take to reach an infinite distance?
How many football fields is that?(putting it into terms I can understand)
I apologize in advance for my ignorance on this.
There aren't any explanation in words a baboon can understand...apparently.

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.

6 Users are viewing the Atheism Forum right now

Search the Atheism Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Our world came from nothing? 3 hr Patrick 186
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 4 hr Patrick 832
The numbers are in: America still distrusts ath... 4 hr Patrick 16
Of Interest InTheNews 4 hr Patrick 3
20+ Questions for Theists (Apr '13) 4 hr Patrick 359
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 4 hr Patrick 21,382
Atheism Destroyed At Last! - The Debate Of The ... Wed Patrick 1,285
•••
•••