Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258473 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.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#127716 Oct 5, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
Dave...shocking as this may sound, archaeology relies on evidence based methodologies, not pure speculation by "armchair fantasizers."
Science has shown, again and again, that personal introspection does not produce facts. You're stuck in this mode and, for reasons of insecurity, dislike the people who actually use methodologies to produce knowledge.
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
You are emotional and irrational tonight. More so than usual.
Slaves usually require security to prevent escape, particularly if they look like their masters. That adds a lot of overhead to a budget.
Conscripts and contractors don't. The law catches up with them if they default.
You don't have a very good understanding of how people live together in civilizations. Old and new. Too much stereotyping from reading too many books in lieu of actually thinking.
Ask draftees if they considered they were slaves. They worked right along with the contracted. The government "owned" both of them.
hahahaha, dude, there's no emotion except laughter in my above. It's honestly shocking how ignorant you are.

You are blinded by your own ignorance. You don't know anything outside of Dave's life and you presume it upon peoples from thousands of years ago in your fantasies. Sorry, baby, the world doesn't work like that.

Since: Sep 08

La Veta, CO

#127717 Oct 5, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, it is what makes it more irrelevant over distance.
<quoted text>
key word: eventually. The reason it takes so much time is that the EM force is small here. In fact, it is much, much smaller than gravity. How do you tell? Cut the cords holding them up and see if they fall.
For that matter, take a magnet and drop it. It will fall. And it will fall whether the north pole of that magnet is up or down, and whether you drop it at the equator or the north magnetic pole. While very powerful up close, the EM field decreases quickly with distance and will not be enough to hold the magnet up.
<quoted text>
Again, the amount of force determine how long it takes for this equilibrium to be reached. In your example, it will take a fairly long time because the EM force here is relatively weak.
<quoted text>
Only if you use a magnetic material like steel. Now try it with a non-magnetic material like carbon.
<quoted text>
Nope. And here's why. Take two magnetic and put them side by side with north and south poles together. Compare how much that pair attracts another magnet to how much each individual one does. The pair will attract much less because one will attract and the other repel. Now, if you do four instead of two, the total attraction will be much less again.
In most materials, there is an equal amount of positive charges and negative charges: the net result is the electric field tends to cancel out. The same holds for most materials for magnetic fields: those with magnetic domains tend to have them oriented randomly, which cancels their effects. The only time this is NOT the case is when the charges do not balance out or the magnetic regions are lined up.
<quoted text>
And it will cancel if they are aligned oppositely, not add.
That was pretty weak.

Hang a 100 ton block of rock. Hang a one pound bar of steel perfectly parallel adjacent to it so it just rests against the surface. Approach, you don't even have to contact it, the one pound bar with a refrigerator magnet. It will pull the bar away from the block. The magnetism in that refrigerator will overcome the gravity pull of the block, PLUS the pull of gravity of the earth on the bar, as for it to swing away it has to rise up a bit. The arc of the string.

Iron filings in a flux field line up between the poles. Each filing is a separate magnet. You will get the same effect if you magnetize one filing, the rest will get caught in the filed and start adding up until the total excess of magnetism is used up.

The iron is EM neutral until an external magnetic field affects it, and it tries to pass that excess on.

Over 99% of the matter in the universe is not EM neutral.

I posted a link a few days ago about short bursts of inrafred light being used to change magnetic domains. This was mainstream science research. This was light, EM, introducing an excess of magnetism to an EM neutral material. How far does light travel in this universe? As far as you can see?

Light particles can travel at least 13 billion light years and alter the EM signature of a neutral material, then making it subject to other magnetic fields more local to it. Energy 13 billion years from the past.

Smoke that.

Since: Sep 08

La Veta, CO

#127718 Oct 5, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
hahahaha, dude, there's no emotion except laughter in my above. It's honestly shocking how ignorant you are.
You are blinded by your own ignorance. You don't know anything outside of Dave's life and you presume it upon peoples from thousands of years ago in your fantasies. Sorry, baby, the world doesn't work like that.
No intelligence, either.

You are doing good.

Since: Sep 08

La Veta, CO

#127719 Oct 5, 2012
It can be very cute when the kiddies come running home all excited about something new they learned about in school.

It can be very exasperating and a pain in the ass when they get into arguments with you because they don't understand what they learned. They get these little emotional mental blocks that takes time for them to get over.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#127720 Oct 5, 2012
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>ians is correct, I for one enjoy coming here to see the good posts that pop up once in a while. Dave is mostly spam, but he provokes interesting discussion.
Thank you dear sir!:)

Dave is the ignorant foil we use to answer questions. Honestly, I'd like a somewhat more informed, less insane foil, but this is what we got stuck with. Answering his level is a bit insulting to the readers, since they'd generally have greater education and not be delusional, but oh well. Sorry readers.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#127721 Oct 5, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
No intelligence, either.
I know. Sometimes it just hurts reading your posts. Devoid of knowledge, devoid of intelligence.
You are doing good.
Not a lot to work with, given your posts, but I do ok.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#127722 Oct 5, 2012
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>no, I'm sure the Jews would have made excellent slaves :)
Entirely unlike the Cubans, who had to be exterminated so that hard working slaves be brought. Oh, the trials and tribulations that Catholics went through to get good slaves.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#127723 Oct 5, 2012
G_O_D wrote:
1. The pyraomids were built mikenia before the Hebrews even existed.
2. The Hebrews are the same peole as the Canaanires.
3. There is no record in all of Egypt for slave labor. Rather the archaelogical record and several written records indicates that laborers on the royal building projects were well provided for.
4. Even many Jewish scholars admit that the "Exodus" is more Heroic Legend than History.
5. Jesus never mentions Exodus, Pharoe or Egypt. So as far as Chrisitnaity should be concerned, it is as meaningless as Stonehenge is to Hinduism.
Yup to all.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#127724 Oct 5, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
As far as evidence of slave labor. The evidence stands tall in the form of pyramids.
False. Pyramids are evidence of labor, not slave labor.

Why do you choose to ignore new information, like the article I quoted for you that discussed the findings of an archaeologist?

It's a weak belief system that only seeks to support itself - a lot like Sadam Husein's gov't.

Strong belief systems challenge their beliefs, test the boundaries. Do we really know what we know? How accurate is what we know?

None of you theists do this. Dave is happy to pretend in his delusions that he has it all figured out. You're making the same mistake here and with other knowledge.

I don't. I actively test my knowledge and actively disbelieve it. That keeps my knowledge up to date, secure in a way yours can never be. You'll always be fighting new information whereas I'll be pondering it.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#127725 Oct 5, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
I moved from Houston to Illinois. If you go over the 800 miles between here and there you will find no evidence of my move.
Why?
Because I took everything with me.
Just come out and say what we all know. You have no proof to counter the Exodus story except innuendos and hunches.
False. Tax records would show where you lived before you moved. They would show how you were treated on the job, your pay, benefits, etc.

Egyptians left records behind, too. And these quite clearly demonstrate the laborers of the pyramids were not slaves, no matter what your Hollywood Bible fantasies are.

Richardfs

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#127726 Oct 5, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
It can be very cute when the kiddies come running home all excited about something new they learned about in school.
It can be very exasperating and a pain in the ass when they get into arguments with you because they don't understand what they learned. They get these little emotional mental blocks that takes time for them to get over.
I take it your kids are trying to educate you. Good luck to them.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#127727 Oct 5, 2012
River Tam wrote:
I had sex with a new girl last night. She'd never done a gimp before. Now she has something to talk about.
Gate Keeper 1 wrote:
God wants better than that for you.
River Tam, God wants you to have two new girls.

Since: Sep 08

La Veta, CO

#127728 Oct 5, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you dear sir!:)
Dave is the ignorant foil we use to answer questions. Honestly, I'd like a somewhat more informed, less insane foil, but this is what we got stuck with. Answering his level is a bit insulting to the readers, since they'd generally have greater education and not be delusional, but oh well. Sorry readers.
Amusing.

You use those words informed and educated so much as a basis of intelligence.

You don't understand those words. They both denote being programmed.

Who is programming you, little girl? Do you expect this programming to bear fruit?

You do understand that it would be easier to dump all of that info and logic rules into a computer and get better faster and results than into a confused human head?

No, you don't.

If you had true intelligence, you would examine your programming for errors.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#127729 Oct 5, 2012
Gate Keeper 1 wrote:
<quoted text>Let's put this in perspective, 99% of gay men prefer oral anal sex
You've done a lot of work on this, have you?

One question: what is "oral anal sex"???

You are one seriously talented gay man, if you can do both at the same time. Either that or you've got two johns enjoying your loins, pal.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#127730 Oct 5, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
It can be very cute when the kiddies come running home all excited about something new they learned about in school.
It can be very exasperating and a pain in the ass when they get into arguments with you because they don't understand what they learned. They get these little emotional mental blocks that takes time for them to get over.
Your poor kids! They come home to tell you something new they learned in school, because it was so amazing to them, they just wanted to share. And, delusional, old, embittered, you have to argue and say "no, no! noooooo, it doesn't work like that. I don't care how much research anyone did. I had an NDE, so I am the sole owner of the truth! The trrrrrutfth.' <cough, cough, spittle, spittle>

Get a hold of yourself, Moonbeam. You're coming apart at the seams.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#127731 Oct 5, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
That was pretty weak.
Hang a 100 ton block of rock. Hang a one pound bar of steel perfectly parallel adjacent to it so it just rests against the surface. Approach, you don't even have to contact it, the one pound bar with a refrigerator magnet. It will pull the bar away from the block. The magnetism in that refrigerator will overcome the gravity pull of the block, PLUS the pull of gravity of the earth on the bar, as for it to swing away it has to rise up a bit. The arc of the string.
How close do you have to be for this to happen? yes, the gravity of that rock is small. But that of the earth is larger. If that refrigerator magnet is more than a meter away, its influence can be ignored.
Iron filings in a flux field line up between the poles. Each filing is a separate magnet. You will get the same effect if you magnetize one filing, the rest will get caught in the filed and start adding up until the total excess of magnetism is used up.
Excess magnetism??? You are kidding, aren't you?
The iron is EM neutral until an external magnetic field affects it, and it tries to pass that excess on.
I guess you're not. LMAO
Over 99% of the matter in the universe is not EM neutral.
How about comparing the total EM force on the earth from the sun with the total gravitational force? Which would be larger and by how much?
I posted a link a few days ago about short bursts of inrafred light being used to change magnetic domains. This was mainstream science research. This was light, EM, introducing an excess of magnetism to an EM neutral material.
Yes, under *very* specific circumstances.

[QUOTE] How far does light travel in this universe? As far as you can see?
Light particles can travel at least 13 billion light years and alter the EM signature of a neutral material, then making it subject to other magnetic fields more local to it. Energy 13 billion years from the past.
yes, the EM wave affects the rods and cones in your eyes *if* it is intense enough. Or, it can influence the CD camera *if* it is magnified and intensified by a telescope.
Smoke that.
What's to smoke? Nothing here that isn't very, very well known and part of standard science.

Since: Sep 08

La Veta, CO

#127732 Oct 5, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
How close do you have to be for this to happen? yes, the gravity of that rock is small. But that of the earth is larger. If that refrigerator magnet is more than a meter away, its influence can be ignored.
<quoted text>
Excess magnetism??? You are kidding, aren't you?
<quoted text>
I guess you're not. LMAO
<quoted text>
How about comparing the total EM force on the earth from the sun with the total gravitational force? Which would be larger and by how much?
<quoted text>
yes, the EM wave affects the rods and cones in your eyes *if* it is intense enough. Or, it can influence the CD camera *if* it is magnified and intensified by a telescope.
<quoted text>
What's to smoke? Nothing here that isn't very, very well known and part of standard science.
You are totally full of shit, and totally out of touch with the physical basis of physics. You just have no grasp of physical linkage.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#127733 Oct 5, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
Thank you dear sir!:)
Dave is the ignorant foil we use to answer questions. Honestly, I'd like a somewhat more informed, less insane foil, but this is what we got stuck with. Answering his level is a bit insulting to the readers, since they'd generally have greater education and not be delusional, but oh well. Sorry readers.
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Amusing.
You use those words informed and educated so much as a basis of intelligence.
Hey, no problem. Glad you're taking it well and performing your role to the best of your ability.

Keep up the good work, there's a hero cookie in it for you :)
:)
:)

Since: Mar 11

Latonia, KY

#127734 Oct 5, 2012
Hey you do get something out of that kind of prayer! Lol!
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>A kid walked by his mother's bedroom and saw her on the bed masturbating, saying, "Oh god, I need a man. Oh god, I need a man".

Two nights later, he walked by his mom's room and a naked man walked out, excused himself, went to the bathroom, urinated and walked back into his mom's room and closed the door. The boy immediately went back to his room, started masturbating furiously saying, "Oh god, I need a bicycle. Oh god, I need a bicycle.".

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#127735 Oct 5, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
You are totally full of shit, and totally out of touch with the physical basis of physics. You just have no grasp of physical linkage.
Uh-oh, did someone have a widdle, iddy-biddy meltdown? Who had a meltdown, a widdle, iddy-biddy meltdown? It was you, Moonbeam. Yes it was! Yes it was! Who's a cute widdle meltdown boi? You are! Yes you are! You're such a cute widdle boi!

Don't let the big, bad physicist tell you how physics works! Don't let him bother you like that. One day, one day, without any evidence or rational, you'll prove to him who knows more about physics! Yes you will. Yes you will! And he will learn alllll about EM waves, won't he, won't he?!?

Who's a cute widdle boy? You are, yes you are! And you won't need any mathematical model or anything. No, you won't! No, you won't! No mathematical models, evidence or anything! Just pure imagination, devoid of all facts and reasoning - that's how real physics is made.

You'll show him that you just get it. All by yourself, all on your own. Yaaaaaaaaaaaaay! It's just you!

Now have a warm cookie and forget all about the big, bad physicist.

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 Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 28 min River Tam 28,607
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr Aura Mytha 67,106
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 3 hr Regolith Based Li... 3,523
is it ever right to hate Christians as a group? 23 hr superwilly 21
Atheist Humor (Aug '09) 23 hr superwilly 462
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) Apr 22 IB DaMann 5,975
News Unholy? Atheists should embrace the science of ... Apr 20 Eagle 12 9
More from around the web