Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

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. Full Story

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#129512 Oct 14, 2012
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
You can't have her!
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Grrr! Grrrrrr!
Here, try this.

*12-gauge*

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#129513 Oct 14, 2012
timn17 wrote:
1) You demand that for us to accept naturalistic explanations for the universe, that we must literally, physically observe every single event for which we are making a claim.
Believe it is what actual Science requires.
Why don't you apply these same ridiculous standards to your own beliefs?
Actual Science demands are ridiculous? Never mind that. I have repeatedly stated evidence for physical resurrection is in historical accounts and church history. The claim has been the same for close to 2000 years. Christ resurrected.
2) Oh, wait, that's why. You automatically and categorically rule out any opinion or statement of fact if it does not first acknowledge the "truth" of your beliefs. That is a horribly ignorant way to think.
As it relates to resurrection of Christ. Methinks you are projecting your ignorance of historic Christianity on me. Persons who deny the resurrection of Christ are simply not Christian. That is basic historical Christianity. Your statement is akin to equating a counterfeit 20 dollar bill to an actual 20 dollar bill. Both of equal value and if not then it is a ''horribly ignorant way to think.''
3) This is yet another shining example of the lengths you go to trick yourself into belief. Sad.
This little gem is in response to my statement, they (atheists) will go to absurd extremes to explain it all absent intelligence. It all happened naturally...'' Your statement is more of an assertion than an argument. Another example of the way atheists validation has to do with (ECREE) Extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidence. This is more rhetorical than a rule of logic. It allows atheist to raise the bar for Christian claims while lowering the bar for themselves.

http://religiousapriori.blogspot.com/2010/01/...

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#129514 Oct 14, 2012
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> Believe it is what actual Science requires. <quoted text> Actual Science demands are ridiculous? Never mind that. I have repeatedly stated evidence for physical resurrection is in historical accounts and church history. The claim has been the same for close to 2000 years. Christ resurrected.
<quoted text> As it relates to resurrection of Christ. Methinks you are projecting your ignorance of historic Christianity on me. Persons who deny the resurrection of Christ are simply not Christian. That is basic historical Christianity. Your statement is akin to equating a counterfeit 20 dollar bill to an actual 20 dollar bill. Both of equal value and if not then it is a ''horribly ignorant way to think.''
<quoted text> This little gem is in response to my statement, they (atheists) will go to absurd extremes to explain it all absent intelligence. It all happened naturally...'' Your statement is more of an assertion than an argument. Another example of the way atheists validation has to do with (ECREE) Extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidence. This is more rhetorical than a rule of logic. It allows atheist to raise the bar for Christian claims while lowering the bar for themselves.
http://religiousapriori.blogspot.com/2010/01/...
Still living in never never land. Don't worry one day you will grow up.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#129515 Oct 14, 2012
Gate Keeper 1 wrote:
<quoted text>Well, confession time, I have a gay prison crush on boooots. He just bores me into deep sexual feelings.
GK, SD, Viking, Lie-person, whatever, we all know that. Boooots doesn't feel the same way toward you, though, but I'm sure he's flattered all the same.

:)

Don't feel bad. There is a man out there for you. You just have to learn how to pick them up - something we can all help you with. Here's Hiding's how to attract men. Advice #1:

- Look pretty. It works for both straights and gays. Good luck!

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#129516 Oct 14, 2012
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> Believe it is what actual Science requires.
This has the potential for an interesting discussion - the trick is to do so without succumbing to religious nonsense.

Ok, so how does science require belief?

(and I'm not goading you here - I've written about that subject on this very forum.)

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#129517 Oct 14, 2012
lightbeamrider wrote:
Actual Science demands are ridiculous? Never mind that. I have repeatedly stated evidence for physical resurrection is in historical accounts and church history. The claim has been the same for close to 2000 years. Christ resurrected.
No, he didn't. You just have a fairy tale. All religions have their miracles. It's convenient of you to believe in yours, but no one elses.

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#129518 Oct 14, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
This has the potential for an interesting discussion - the trick is to do so without succumbing to religious nonsense.
Ok, so how does science require belief?
(and I'm not goading you here - I've written about that subject on this very forum.)
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
Arthur C. Clarke, "Profiles of The Future", 1961 (Clarke's third law)

lightbeamrider is so ignorant and befuddled by all branches of science that it is all magic to her.

Consequently she can only conclude that those of us who actually work in the field do so out religious conviction.

But ALL godbots make the same assumption. To them trying to teach them anything is like asking them to convert to a new religion.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#129519 Oct 14, 2012
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
Arthur C. Clarke, "Profiles of The Future", 1961 (Clarke's third law)
lightbeamrider is so ignorant and befuddled by all branches of science that it is all magic to her.
Consequently she can only conclude that those of us who actually work in the field do so out religious conviction.
But ALL godbots make the same assumption. To them trying to teach them anything is like asking them to convert to a new religion.
Your last sentence totally sums up almost every conversation I've had with creationists. They're impossibly ignorant and unable to learn.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#129523 Oct 14, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
What was I supposed to say? You wanted to conjecture. Go right ahead.
I asked "what part of humanity is under selection pressure?" By selection pressure, I mean where people are so stressed, biologically, perhaps because of social factors, that they cannot reproduce. Or that reproduction is very difficult and only a few can. If you find this zone, in any species, that is where evolution is taking place, where genes (in individuals) are actively being removed - "selected against."
Criticism:
- Are the wealthy actually less able to have children?
- You're "tend to run in herds" is kind of silly. Humans are a social species who, basically, don't mind "gene flow" with any other human group, given the opportunity.
- Uh...your "excess EM" is too vague. Do you have any idea how it can affect the human body?
I do
:p
:P
:P
You sure can ramble.

Guess I answered your question without understanding what you were looking for.

I said more affluent. That can be middle class and above.

Those that are striving for an elevated position in life will be putting having children in the background, and while not abstaining will exercise more discretion and ingest chemicals, some of which the long term effects on the body are not known. They will also tend to have children later in life, where those effects may show up. The pollutants of modern life have more time to work on them before breeding.

But you have others breeding like crazy. One reason for baby Mommas and Daddies in this society. Some children damaged by drug use.

Then you have the emergence of homosexuality on such a large scale.

The intelligence of humans will survive, but the schools of thought they have produced will fade away. You are looking at a collapse of civilization unless some strong religion emerges to keep order.

Cellphones at the ear put your brain right in the maximum magnetic flow of them, which induces electrical currents that work directly on neurons in the brain. They can and will rearrange the circuitry. Such is picked up from all around, but those are really concentrated. Talk about random chance for mutations. However, the risk of that EM is more to the brain circuitry than the body. You are affecting the processor more than the parts.

Funny, texting is safer than talking with those things.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#129524 Oct 14, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
You sure can ramble.
Total projection.
Guess I answered your question without understanding what you were looking for.
Yes, on some accounts.
I said more affluent. That can be middle class and above.
Those that are striving for an elevated position in life will be putting having children in the background, and while not abstaining will exercise more discretion and ingest chemicals, some of which the long term effects on the body are not known. They will also tend to have children later in life, where those effects may show up. The pollutants of modern life have more time to work on them before breeding.
If:

1. populations were isolated by class and
2. if middle class and higher were universally having children at older ages and
3. if this continued for hundreds to thousands of years then the average lifespan would increase among these populations (well, that part of it due to genetic factors).

If chemicals are having an additive effect on people (and they are), then we shall see selective pressures against those who are genetically vulnerable to industrial pollution - provided their vulnerability leads them to have increased difficulties reproducing relative to others.
But you have others breeding like crazy. One reason for baby Mommas and Daddies in this society. Some children damaged by drug use.
These confounding factors, and gene flow, make it difficult to comment on all but the extremes of human society. You haven't gotten there yet in your speculation.
Then you have the emergence of homosexuality on such a large scale.
It's likely insignificant. For it to have a selective effect, it would have to be 1) long lasting (thousands of years), 2) due to genetics (and more strongly if fewer genes were involved) and, importantly, 3) impair the ability of the individuals to reproduce.

Since homosexuals aren't necessarily exclusive in their sexual behavior, since it's a sexual identity and therefore a culturally expressed behavior, it likely won't last long enough or prevent individuals from having children. Let's say that 100% of homosexuals didn't reproduce - and then the culture changes along with the sexual identity in, just making this up for example, 200 years. It would have had almost no effect on human evolution.
The intelligence of humans will survive, but the schools of thought they have produced will fade away. You are looking at a collapse of civilization unless some strong religion emerges to keep order.
I strongly disagree here. Religion has already bowed out to organized civil society. Strong government is a better choice for your above scenario.
Cellphones at the ear put your brain right in the maximum magnetic flow of them, which induces electrical currents that work directly on neurons in the brain. They can and will rearrange the circuitry. Such is picked up from all around, but those are really concentrated. Talk about random chance for mutations. However, the risk of that EM is more to the brain circuitry than the body. You are affecting the processor more than the parts.
Funny, texting is safer than talking with those things.
You are so close here, Dave! The EM from the cell phone use doesn't (seem to) alter the circuitry. What it alters is the seal of the blood brain barrier (BBB). The BBB prevents large molecules, and the immune system, from entering the brain. Thus, almost no pathogen species can enter. It's an immunologically secure area - testicles, too.

However, if you subject the brain to a strong magnetic field, the BBB opens.

People develop cancer relatively often. It is almost always killed b/c their immune systems (IS) work well. But, if the BBB just happens to be open when a cancerous cell is floating in the blood stream before it gets destroyed by the IS, it can get into the brain and enjoy immunological freedom. It can subsequently fully develop.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#129525 Oct 14, 2012
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
God and some middle eastern man are going around touching men!?!? WTF?
heh.

"touching" only means one thing to an atheist, huh?

Since: Oct 12

Belfast, UK

#129526 Oct 14, 2012
What rubbish, Athiests don't spend time NOT believing, they just don't. The bible is seriously flawed, as it mentions Dragons and stuff like that, plus, i could 'prove' that Sovngarde exists as you go there in The Elder srolls V: Skyrim. So don't take the oldest fantasy novel too literally. A FACT about the bible is that it was written by Romans who wanted to control the population, after the executed the Buddhist preacher, Jesus Christ. So they invented all these stories to put fear in the population, so they wouldn't question the church. For example, if you (insert crime here) you go to hell, but if you confess, we'll execute you, but you get to live forever in paradise. Also, I never understood that if God is all forgiving, why does he lock you up in a firey proson cell with Satan/Lucifer?

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#129527 Oct 14, 2012
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>So I guess I am just debating someone who is going to be a smartass and use childish cliches. And yet you wish for us to take you seriously?


I don't care if you take me seriously. In fact, because I'm no big fan of the way science had "figured out" evolution, most people hear think I'm ignorant. When I say the ignorant one is the blind follower. Science has been wrong countless times. They may be wrong this time, too.
I do not think anyone in the scientific community claims a fully formed leg came from a species that has no legs.


Then why do they think all life came from the sea. ONE of them would've had to sprout legs.... The thing is, the scientific community swears by evolution even theough they can't explain it.
The way you explain this shows you have a cartoon version of evolution in your mind.
No. The way I explain it is an accurate depiction of the way evolution is spelled out by the general concensus of the scientific community.

One cell turned into fish that grew legs
but not all grew legs, some stayed as fish
and the one that grew legs mated with itself & populated land
then some decided to frow fur
while others decided to keep the scales
then some with scales decided to grow to a massive size
while others stayed small
then the earth got very cold
and the ones that kept scales died off
and the ones that grew fur sruvived but were small
so some decided to get bigger
while others remained small
then some decided to walk on 2 legs
while others thought 4 legs were better
then some decided to start talking & drawing
while others kept to instinct only
oh, and there were still some that kept scales and/or wings.
then McDonalds opened & the furry mammals started to get fat.

whew!

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#129528 Oct 14, 2012
?

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#129529 Oct 14, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
edited fro reply space.

If:
1. populations were isolated by class and
2. if middle class and higher were universally having children at older ages and
3. if this continued for hundreds to thousands of years then the average lifespan would increase among these populations (well, that part of it due to genetic factors).
If chemicals are having an additive effect on people (and they are), then we shall see selective pressures against those who are genetically vulnerable to industrial pollution - provided their vulnerability leads them to have increased difficulties reproducing relative to others.
<quoted text>
These confounding factors, and gene flow, make it difficult to comment on all but the extremes of human society. You haven't gotten there yet in your speculation.
<quoted text>
It's likely insignificant. For it to have a selective effect, it would have to be 1) long lasting (thousands of years), 2) due to genetics (and more strongly if fewer genes were involved) and, importantly, 3) impair the ability of the individuals to reproduce.
Since homosexuals aren't necessarily exclusive in their sexual behavior, since it's a sexual identity and therefore a culturally expressed behavior, it likely won't last long enough or prevent individuals from having children. Let's say that 100% of homosexuals didn't reproduce - and then the culture changes along with the sexual identity in, just making this up for example, 200 years. It would have had almost no effect on human evolution.
<quoted text>
I strongly disagree here. Religion has already bowed out to organized civil society. Strong government is a better choice for your above scenario.
<quoted text>
You are so close here, Dave! The EM from the cell phone use doesn't (seem to) alter the circuitry. What it alters is the seal of the blood brain barrier (BBB). The BBB prevents large molecules, and the immune system, from entering the brain. Thus, almost no pathogen species can enter. It's an immunologically secure area - testicles, too.
However, if you subject the brain to a strong magnetic field, the BBB opens.
People develop cancer relatively often. It is almost always killed b/c their immune systems (IS) work well. But, if the BBB just happens to be open when a cancerous cell is floating in the blood stream before it gets destroyed by the IS, it can get into the brain and enjoy immunological freedom. It can subsequently fully develop.
http://www.lloyds.com/~/media/Lloyds/Reports/...

Go to page 6.

The studies are based upon causing cancer. Plus the studies are limited in scope and short term. Economic considerations may be the reason.

The simple fact is as referenced in that is you have that magnetic field passing through your head. It is a closed field and full strength. You are in the flow, and not catching the waves like you do from radio and other sources. An analogy would be your being the object being struck by light rays, catching the full force of its energies, versus catching the reduced reflections and heat. Reflected light is dispersed over a greater area, thus weaker.

This EMF, which gain is full force for the device, works on a frequency, which means the magnetic field builds and falls, which induces electrical currents in the salts and other conductive portions of your body, and a static charge in the non-conductive portions. These will have an effect on the electrical balance of all matter within the body coming into contact. You are setting up potentials that can rearrange molecules. This is basic physics. It happens. You are putting stress on the original design. You are greatly increasing the chance of random mutations.

What I am trying to point out is the increased stress on the mental processes brought about by the increased variation of frequencies and strength of magnetic fields that did not exist until recent times.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#129530 Oct 14, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
I don't care if you take me seriously. In fact, because I'm no big fan of the way science had "figured out" evolution, most people hear think I'm ignorant. When I say the ignorant one is the blind follower. Science has been wrong countless times. They may be wrong this time, too.
Riverside, you don't even understand how evolution works, let alone the evidence for it. You've got this imagined vision of biological science that isn't even close to what it is.

Second, the religious are the blind followers. Rather than learn, you prefer the intellectually lazy "god did it" formula. It's the opposite of knowledge - if any scientist succumbed to that, their ability to produce new knowledge and technology would cease.

Religion did everything it could to stop science - religion does not have a mechanism of knowledge or technological production (outside of torture devices).

Science does. Of course it gets answers wrong - then improves upon it. Religion gets answers wrong and then insists their correct, often for centuries.

Well I, for one, am glad that medical researchers didn't listen to religion about the sin-theory of disease.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#129531 Oct 14, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.lloyds.com/~/media/Lloyds/Reports/...
Go to page 6.
The studies are based upon causing cancer. Plus the studies are limited in scope and short term. Economic considerations may be the reason.
The simple fact is as referenced in that is you have that magnetic field passing through your head. It is a closed field and full strength. You are in the flow, and not catching the waves like you do from radio and other sources. An analogy would be your being the object being struck by light rays, catching the full force of its energies, versus catching the reduced reflections and heat. Reflected light is dispersed over a greater area, thus weaker.
This EMF, which gain is full force for the device, works on a frequency, which means the magnetic field builds and falls, which induces electrical currents in the salts and other conductive portions of your body, and a static charge in the non-conductive portions. These will have an effect on the electrical balance of all matter within the body coming into contact. You are setting up potentials that can rearrange molecules. This is basic physics. It happens. You are putting stress on the original design. You are greatly increasing the chance of random mutations.
What I am trying to point out is the increased stress on the mental processes brought about by the increased variation of frequencies and strength of magnetic fields that did not exist until recent times.
Your last comment is correct.

The paper suggests that risk of damage damage is low to undetectable, and that better, long term studies are needed.

If I were designing this - I mean, other than using Asia as your example, since everyone uses cell phones here - I'd want to compare individual's kinds of cancer too. Did they develop cancer in other parts of their body, or just their head?

The study mentions comparing ipsilateral versus contralateral cancers/phone use, which is also necessary. But...I'd guess that a fair number of people switch back and forth - I do.

Interesting, though, thanks :)

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#129532 Oct 14, 2012
I'm going to sleep, g'night.

Since: Sep 10

Gonzales, CA

#129533 Oct 14, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>

The intelligence of humans will survive, but the schools of thought they have produced will fade away. You are looking at a collapse of civilization unless some strong religion emerges to keep order.
.
Great, Dave.

You want a theocracy.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#129534 Oct 14, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Your last comment is correct.
The paper suggests that risk of damage damage is low to undetectable, and that better, long term studies are needed.
If I were designing this - I mean, other than using Asia as your example, since everyone uses cell phones here - I'd want to compare individual's kinds of cancer too. Did they develop cancer in other parts of their body, or just their head?
The study mentions comparing ipsilateral versus contralateral cancers/phone use, which is also necessary. But...I'd guess that a fair number of people switch back and forth - I do.
Interesting, though, thanks :)
Cancer is the least of it. We are talking noise on the elemental level in the mind.

Do you find it hard to study or think when there is a lot of noise outside? The same is happening on the molecular level with EMF. Instead of ears and pressure waves, you have EM noise working on the very electrons powering your very consciousness.

Can warp your head.

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
Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 4 hr Even Steven 1,049
Why Atheism Will Replace Religion (Aug '12) 5 hr Ooogah Boogah 14,456
A New Kinder, Gentler Atheism 16 hr thetruth 29
Young atheists: The political leaders of tomorrow 16 hr thetruth 6
Why Christians should stick up for atheists 16 hr thetruth 8
Can Atheists Know God Does Not Exist When They ... Thu QUITTNER Nov 27 2014 31
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) Wed Richardfs 1,423

Atheism People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE