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
124,921 - 124,940 of 224,164 Comments Last updated 13 min ago

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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.

“You have blue shoes”

Since: Mar 11

Please change them

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#129530
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

1

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.

“You have blue shoes”

Since: Mar 11

Please change them

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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 :)

“You have blue shoes”

Since: Mar 11

Please change them

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#129532
Oct 14, 2012
 
I'm going to sleep, g'night.

Since: Sep 10

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#129534
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

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.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#129535
Oct 14, 2012
 
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Great, Dave.
You want a theocracy.
It is headed your way,

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#129536
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

RiversideRedneck wrote:
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!
An absolutely perfect example of your *complete* lack of understanding of what the science says.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#129537
Oct 14, 2012
 
Hidingfromyou wrote:
I'm going to sleep, g'night.
G'night , want me to wake you up later? lol

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#129538
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

1

polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
An absolutely perfect example of your *complete* lack of understanding of what the science says.
ya, right. Of course I edited for space, but that's about the jist of it.

Strange that one fish (or a species) would somehow grow legs because "life is better on land" while at the same time learn how to breathe air instead of water.

Meanwhile, other fishies thought it was better to stay in the water...

Since: Sep 10

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#129539
Oct 14, 2012
 
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
It is headed your way,
I'm safe.

I hear cowards will be the first to burn.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#129540
Oct 14, 2012
 
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
It is headed your way,
The best you can conjure up would me mediocrity , but you can call it what you like:)

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's Teapot

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#129541
Oct 14, 2012
 
lightbeamrider wrote:
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/...
Thanks for the laugh.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#129542
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
Yes, I do. You just don't like how I dumb it down to a cartoon-like story of bullshit.

Evolution has been proven that it can happen, but it hasn't and probably can't be proven that it happened the way the evolutionary theorists have desribed.

I'm sorry that your mind is so closed that you can't fathom any other possibility...

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#129543
Oct 14, 2012
 
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm safe.
I hear cowards will be the first to burn.
The ones hiding in the bushes and shadows and hurling insults and vitriol and posing as elitists working for the betterment of their lesser brothers and sisters?

Get your fireproof suit on, Catcher.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#129544
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
ya, right. Of course I edited for space, but that's about the jist of it.
Strange that one fish (or a species) would somehow grow legs because "life is better on land" while at the same time learn how to breathe air instead of water.
Meanwhile, other fishies thought it was better to stay in the water...
Your very first line shows the basic lack of understanding:

"One cell turned into fish that grew legs
but not all grew legs, some stayed as fish"

There were many, many stages between the single cell stage and the stage of fish.

As to some fish evolving into land animals and others staying in the ocean, do you really think all fish experience the same environment? Do you really think that the selection pressures on fish in swamps is the same as for fish in rivers or in the open ocean?
Loren Eberly

Mansfield, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#129545
Oct 14, 2012
 
Pay property tax on state appraised value of their American Dream. Pay bank interest on purchase price of American Dream for 30 years. Pay interest on lottery winners winnings Legislators invest in school bonds, Pay for all stimulus packages, tax abatements, tax incentives, tax refunds, tax credit, and tax exemptions.

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#129546
Oct 14, 2012
 
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
heh.
"touching" only means one thing to an atheist, huh?
When used as evidence, Yeah!

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#129547
Oct 14, 2012
 
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I do. You just don't like how I dumb it down to a cartoon-like story of bullshit.
Evolution has been proven that it can happen, but it hasn't and probably can't be proven that it happened the way the evolutionary theorists have desribed.
I'm sorry that your mind is so closed that you can't fathom any other possibility...
So closed? What evidence have you provided to the contrary? Goddidit? I know 'cause he touched Me! That is not evidence.

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#129548
Oct 14, 2012
 
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>
For all your childish bleating you can still not produce a single post where I lied.
What in the hell is wrong with you?

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.

7 Users are viewing the Atheism Forum right now

Search the Atheism Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Our world came from nothing? 49 min Patrick 217
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 2 hr Growupchildren 21,392
Atheism Destroyed At Last! - The Debate Of The ... 11 hr DonPanic 1,285
HELL real or not? (Sep '13) 14 hr religionisillness 271
20+ Questions for Theists (Apr '13) 14 hr religionisillness 370
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) Thu religionisillness 834
The numbers are in: America still distrusts ath... Thu Patrick 16
•••
•••