Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 256624 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.

Patrick

United States

#233217 Jul 21, 2014
Inflammatory as it's been, the debate over unaccompanied Central American children crossing the U.S. border is only the warm-up for an approaching immigration confrontation with even greater stakes.

Regardless of how Congress handles his request for more border resources, President Obama is moving toward a historic—and explosive—executive order that will provide legal status to a significant number of the estimated 11.7 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S. One senior White House official says that while "what's happening at the border will provide atmospherics for the [president's] decision," it won't stop him from acting on the undocumented—probably before the midterm elections. The resulting collision over Obama's expected action could lastingly define both the Democratic and Republican parties for the burgeoning Hispanic population.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#233218 Jul 21, 2014
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps you don't understand how those observations and logic are created on an initial arbitrary basis. One man makes the model others follow and are obliged to use in trying to build upon it, or translate their own interpretations. It is s tangled web we weave in the pursuit of knowledge snd understanding.
So, have you decided which part of you gets the plastic first?
I hope it's her brain. She'll never miss that part.

“let's do this thang!”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#233219 Jul 21, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
I'd have to say that the metaphor doesn't quite work since we can all touch - and therefore measure - soccer.
But it's not clear to me that Chris hates soccer, that he so reviles it, he spends every waking moment letting that dominate his thinking. It sort of sounds like he just doesn't want to include it in his life and we're pestering him. I mean, what kind of friends are we that he feels so pressured, he needs to find a bunch of people to stand up to us?
umm...why would 'chris' even come to a thread devoted to discussing soccer unless he was a demon possesed 'soccer' hater?;-)
Patrick

United States

#233220 Jul 21, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
I hope it's her brain. She'll never miss that part.
QUOTE who="Buck Crick"]<quoted text>
It has nothing to do with whether a god exists.
LOL

“let's do this thang!”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#233221 Jul 21, 2014
Proxy Queen wrote:
<quoted text>
It's just a screen name, Davie. It doesn't mean anything.
Maybe next time I should come back as "Invisible Unicorn" so people know I exist.....
i hope you're not suggesting that it's impossible for invisible unicorns to exist, because if you are, you're ignorantly trespassing into areas that you cannnot possibly know;-)

i'm certain that an invisible 4-headed creature exists with 1 head resembling a man, 1 an eagle, 1 and ox and 1 a lion:-)

“let's do this thang!”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#233222 Jul 21, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Inability to measure something does not make it infinite.
Physical infinity is impossible.
Like married bachelors.
there's a lot of bachelors planning to marry each other and lots of excited divorce lawyers handing out their cards.....;-)

Since: Sep 08

United States

#233224 Jul 21, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
I hope it's her brain. She'll never miss that part.
LOL!!!!

That was really good.
Cujo

Regina, Canada

#233225 Jul 21, 2014
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
You are under belief this is a social club for atheists only, and not a discussion board bandying varying thoughts on the matter about?
I quite agree about the manmade description of heaven being illogical. As I pointed out a few times, God made sheep before man. He would have stopped there if that is what he wanted.
God wanted intelligent company to spend eternity with. It can get very boring.
I have no problem with people expressing views, but when they are false, or baseless claims, I am going to let them know exactly that.

Kind of like FOX news claiming that the supporters of marriage equality are intollerant to ones religious beliefs, which is completely false. It is the religious being intollerant of others rights, because of their religious beliefs. Those opposed to marriage equality get to still have their religious views, right or wrong, they just cannot legislate based on those beliefs.

p.s. if God was real, he didn't have combanny for the 1st 13.7 billion years, since the universe began, why in the last 6000 years did he decide he needed company?
Cujo

Regina, Canada

#233226 Jul 21, 2014
Correction "company" - JHC my typing is awful.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#233227 Jul 21, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
How can "power" be exerted without expending energy?
1. Mutually assured destruction - having nuclear weapons held Soviet agression in check without firing a shot.
ChristineM wrote:
1/ Are you now claiming that nuclear weapons do not require energy?
Ahahahahahaaaaa!!!!

*cough*

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#233228 Jul 21, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
Four of nine justices voted against free-speech in Citizens United.
They are consistent, as they voted against religious freedom in Hobby Lobby.
Those four apparently want to repeal the entirety of the First Amendment. Actually, they have proven they don't recognize the U.S. Constitution at all.
Interestingly, they overturned recent precedent - 2003 McConnell v. FEC, and 1990 Austin v. Chamber of Commerce, proving once again that precedent is important except when it isn't.
Fortunately, 5 justices still recognize the Constitution. They say, rightly, protecting the New York Times Company spending millions of dollars to distribute an election editorial and not protecting Koch Industries doing the same thing is not upholding free speech.
Imagine when. 5-4 becomes 4-5.

We'll be on that one particular creek and will have to hope that the government will be good enough to give us a paddle.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#233229 Jul 21, 2014
Cujo wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no problem with people expressing views, but when they are false, or baseless claims, I am going to let them know exactly that.
Kind of like FOX news claiming that the supporters of marriage equality are intollerant to ones religious beliefs, which is completely false. It is the religious being intollerant of others rights, because of their religious beliefs. Those opposed to marriage equality get to still have their religious views, right or wrong, they just cannot legislate based on those beliefs.
p.s. if God was real, he didn't have combanny for the 1st 13.7 billion years, since the universe began, why in the last 6000 years did he decide he needed company?
We already had marriage equality. Heterosexuals could not marry the same sex, and neither could homosexuals.

Same for everyone. Equality.
__________

What makes you think God needed company? He could have had the universe under his fingernail and flung it out. He could have already been in the company of a billion universes.

You are really stupid, aren't you Peugot?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#233230 Jul 21, 2014
Cujo wrote:
Correction "company" - JHC my typing is awful.
It's even worse when you spell it right.

Since: Sep 10

Fremont, CA

#233231 Jul 21, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
We already had marriage equality. Heterosexuals could not marry the same sex, and neither could homosexuals.
Same for everyone. Equality.
That's why I believe you'd like to go back to the Dred Scott days of segregation.

You can make the same argument that, under anti-miscegenation laws, we had marriage equality. A white person could marry a white person, and a black person could marry a black person. But no race mixing.

Same for everyone. Equality.

Marriage equality a la Crick.
Cujo

Regina, Canada

#233232 Jul 21, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
We already had marriage equality. Heterosexuals could not marry the same sex, and neither could homosexuals.
Same for everyone. Equality.
__________
What makes you think God needed company? He could have had the universe under his fingernail and flung it out. He could have already been in the company of a billion universes.
You are really stupid, aren't you Peugot?
You are the one who claimed God created humans for intelligent conversation, another baseless claim. Prove your god even exists before making such ridiculous assurtions.

Your view on equality is just plain wrong, and ignorant. Before mixed race marriages were legal, did you use the argument that whites could not marry blacks and blacks could not marry whites, therefore it was equal?

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#233233 Jul 21, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Good one, Dave.
Did you catch the genesis of this discussion?
Christine uses e=mc^2 to prove non-existence of God, since God is "all-powerful".
Taking a conceptual, metaphysical term and applying it to a physical quantity.
It's dumb - and not unlike the insistence on the universe having "infinite distance".
I admit I have not pinned down the reason atheists do exercise this fallacy in such consistent fashion.
Is it a need to prove they know "all there is"?
Don't know. Maybe you have some ideas.
You are confused here, while E=MC2 has a meaning in Mass–energy equivalence. the argument she presents is not one of science.
Where the space/time continuum and GR is concerned. it is very relevant and a sound determination by the mathematical certainty of infinite space/time in a event horizon.
Where the expansion of space/time is accelerated beyond the speed of light.

There is no equivocation between these concepts. nor any connection, and one is not related to the other , nor does one falsify the other. In short the truth is any alterations to the space/time continuum from extreme gravity or extreme acceleration causes paradoxes and due to Lorentz transformations can cause infinite sums to be realized.

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#233234 Jul 21, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Your comparison was between energy and a biblical concept.
You chose the context - not me. Then you lift the term from the context, try to insert it into a context of scientific quantity, which is one of the dumbest assertions I have ever seen from a person more than 3 years old.
The sign, the law, I referred to exert power AFTER printed and hung, while no energy is being expended.
You are a laughingstock.
The basis of Christine's argument here is philosophical.
A all powerful being that cannot alter the rock solid effects of the limitations of space/time is less than omnipotent, rendering it subject to "iron chariots" and less than omnipotent and all powerful. So you see the systemic problem with the idea an "all power being" actually exists that is limited by the forces of nature effectively rendering it, less than omnipotent.

Bite down on that infinite doh nut.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#233235 Jul 21, 2014
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
That's why I believe you'd like to go back to the Dred Scott days of segregation.
You can make the same argument that, under anti-miscegenation laws, we had marriage equality. A white person could marry a white person, and a black person could marry a black person. But no race mixing.
Same for everyone. Equality.
Marriage equality a la Crick.
Wrong, Counselor.

Anti-miscegenation was not equal for everyone. If you were white, you could marry a white. If you were black you could not. If you were black, you could marry a black. If you were white, you could not.

That's not equality.

With prohibition of same sex marriage, it's the same standard for all persons.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#233236 Jul 21, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> The basis of Christine's argument here is philosophical.
A all powerful being that cannot alter the rock solid effects of the limitations of space/time is less than omnipotent, rendering it subject to "iron chariots" and less than omnipotent and all powerful. So you see the systemic problem with the idea an "all power being" actually exists that is limited by the forces of nature effectively rendering it, less than omnipotent.
Bite down on that infinite doh nut.
That was not remotely her argument.

But it is equally stupid.

Congratulations.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#233237 Jul 21, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
You are confused here, while E=MC2 has a meaning in Mass–energy equivalence. the argument she presents is not one of science.
Where the space/time continuum and GR is concerned. it is very relevant and a sound determination by the mathematical certainty of infinite space/time in a event horizon.
Where the expansion of space/time is accelerated beyond the speed of light.
There is no equivocation between these concepts. nor any connection, and one is not related to the other , nor does one falsify the other. In short the truth is any alterations to the space/time continuum from extreme gravity or extreme acceleration causes paradoxes and due to Lorentz transformations can cause infinite sums to be realized.
"Infinite sums"?

And married bachelors.

Infinite means there is no sum.

Any time you encounter an "infinite sum", you can be certain you are not dealing with a physical reality.

Infinite sum. That encapsulates your error. That "sums" up your stupidity.

You are hilarious.

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
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 40 min Chazofsaints 3,847
News Why I quit atheism 1 hr Thinking 720
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr Aura Mytha 43,374
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 2 hr Bob of Quantum-Faith 18,682
For Atheists: Why do You Call Theories "Scient... 3 hr thetruth 785
News Atheism vs. Theism: Knowns and Unknowns (Sep '14) 4 hr thetruth 354
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) 7 hr thetruth 4,833
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 7 hr thetruth 21,236
A Universe from Nothing? 12 hr Insults Are Easier 602
More from around the web