Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 239322 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.

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#129927 Oct 15, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
Not a problem, come on down. Bring your wheelchair.
WTF does that mean? No wonder you are on here all the time and need to create different names to post under. You are one of the lamest sob's that I have ever talk down to.

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#129928 Oct 15, 2012
Martina Navratilover wrote:
<quoted text>What has theism got to do with one's personal belief....
Back away slow from the keyboard.

It's not your friend.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#129929 Oct 15, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps you missed the point of them being several thousand feet above sea level, having ports and such.
"Tiwanaku appears to have been a port city, as well. However, Lake Titicaca, the only body of water, is almost 20 kilometers distant. There are piers and wharfs in Tiwanaku with long, straight calcium deposits that indicate prehistoric water lines, although they no longer lie in a horizontal plane, they are slanted. There are millions of seashells in the area, as well. Lake Titicaca, itself, is a salt water inland sea that is rapidly shrinking. Its fossilized shorelines are also dramatically tilted. Abundant sea life still thrives in Lake Titicaca, instilling a presumption that it was once part of the ocean."
http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2012/10/07/ti...
3700 years old by mainstream science, 17,000 by others.
How long ago were the Andes supposed to have been formed?
I have no idea what your point is. You have not made a point. You are just making claims. I cannot read your mind dude.

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#129930 Oct 15, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps you missed the point of them being several thousand feet above sea level, having ports and such.
"Tiwanaku appears to have been a port city, as well. However, Lake Titicaca, the only body of water, is almost 20 kilometers distant. There are piers and wharfs in Tiwanaku with long, straight calcium deposits that indicate prehistoric water lines, although they no longer lie in a horizontal plane, they are slanted. There are millions of seashells in the area, as well. Lake Titicaca, itself, is a salt water inland sea that is rapidly shrinking. Its fossilized shorelines are also dramatically tilted. Abundant sea life still thrives in Lake Titicaca, instilling a presumption that it was once part of the ocean."
http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2012/10/07/ti...
3700 years old by mainstream science, 17,000 by others.
How long ago were the Andes supposed to have been formed?
I'm sure you had a point, Dave.

And it was?

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#129931 Oct 15, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
How long does it take for a fish to fry in the sun?
Guess they learned to get a tan while learning to breathe and walk, also, eh?
Of course, you had to have those adventurous fishy souls that even dared to leave their comfort zone in the first place.
Pretty fancy adapting.
Do mud fish fry in the sun? No one is claiming these fish sat on the edge of land long enough to fry.
Scales can change also.
They did not 'learn' to breath, the evolved to breath. Again you are showing cartoon thinking.
Show me a scientist who claims a fish learned to breath? You cannot. So why make the claim that is what I claim?

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#129932 Oct 15, 2012
ChristineM wrote:
For some reason this thread dropped off my watch list so I apologise for the delay
No worries, I figured that we were done.
ChristineM wrote:
I am not defending them for attempting to kill someone (no matter how old), for that they hold responsibility, I am defending everyone’s right to their freedom of expression. They have just as much right to their view as you do to yours.
You don't have to tell me that! Your rights stop, where mine begin. Simple. You have the right to be heard and I have the right not to listen. I do not have the right to harm anyone because I heard you.
ChristineM wrote:
As I said total misunderstanding. Completely expected from one who only wants freedom of expression for his type.
Name one time that I wanted to suppress anyone's freedom of speech!

Name one time that I wanted to suppress anyone's freedom of religion!

I said that they do not have the right to suppress my rights or to harm anyone because their feelings were hurt. Nothing more.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#129933 Oct 15, 2012
Martina Navratilover wrote:
What has theism got to do with one's personal belief.
If you're an American Christian, it probably defines many of your beliefs.
Martina Navratilover wrote:
The Catholic church also believed that Jews and Protestants were heretics and killed over 150 million because of that belief.
That many? For real?
Martina Navratilover wrote:
It is called atheist satanism ...
Satanism is a form of theism. We don't believe in any of the desert gods, including Satan, and we don't worship anything.
Martina Navratilover wrote:
It is called atheist satanism and it infects the church too.
The church is not infected. It infects others. It is a societal parasite. The values it inculcates diminish and hurt people.

“There is no god.”

Since: Jan 12

USA

#129934 Oct 15, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you accept anything that you accept?
What's your point? Proof is not important to you. You are a faith based thinker.
<quoted text>
Actually, the extra stories weaken your argument. They contradict historical fact, scientific fact, and one another. For example, what were Jesus's last words? I can get your four conflicting testimonies from your bible. In court, that's considered a sign of error or lie - unreliable testimony at the least.
<quoted text>
Take a giant step back from this argument and look at it. You seem to be implying that my telling an anecdote about my mother somehow makes your decision to devote your life to worship of a god more reasonable, even though you also seem to be saying that anecdotes and hearsay are unreliable, and should be rejected. Is that right?
Good post.

“Thank you GOD for JESUS”

Since: Jul 07

And thank you JESUS for caring

#129935 Oct 15, 2012
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure it does. That is because you lack the scientific knowledge to interpret any of the relevant facts.
Think of it this way - would you argue about the technical apsects of a new Ferrari with a mechanical engineer?
No; but GOD is inside and within, the big bang theory is exactly that, a theory. A thought, and idea..... by those who don't know GOD :)

“Thank you GOD for JESUS”

Since: Jul 07

And thank you JESUS for caring

#129936 Oct 15, 2012
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes.
Francis Collins openly rejects Creationism, did you know that?
No, he doesn't, he says we are far too miraculous in our makeup to be the result of a fluke.... he does believe we have evolved into what we are today, and of course, we have adapted as such.

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

#129937 Oct 15, 2012
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
WTF does that mean? No wonder you are on here all the time and need to create different names to post under. You are one of the lamest sob's that I have ever talk down to.
It means I'm going to wheel your ass to church and get you saved. We’ll baptize you and the wheelchair together.

How long can you hold your breath underwater.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#129938 Oct 15, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
whatever is opposite of euphoric
Dysphoric.

Dysphoria - an emotional state characterized by anxiety, depression, or unease. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/dysphoric

“Thank you GOD for JESUS”

Since: Jul 07

And thank you JESUS for caring

#129939 Oct 15, 2012
Richardfs wrote:
No no no, you haven't shown us where anyone's DNA takes them back to an ape or chimp..... Show me the link where a person's DNA proves that they are the ancestors of animals; everyone's DNA takes them back to a person.....

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#129940 Oct 15, 2012
Serah wrote:
<quoted text>You better let the scientists know then.... somehow, I don't think your views will have an impact LOL
You're a pathetic dishonest lying idiot lying for your cult. Its a pity you havent yet realised this truth.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#129941 Oct 15, 2012
Martina Navratilover wrote:
<quoted text>Who says; science says and the whole theory of evolution based on survival of the fittest. No, clueless one, many humans engage in sport fishing and hunting. It is sport, and that is why it is called fishing and gaming, since it is a game to catch the game. Animals hunt for food and survival. You will never find a lion hunting just for sport. One clue at a time, take this one and use it.
Did I say humans did not hunt for sport? Nope. So I am not sure who you are debating, but it is not a debate of what I said. And I did not dispute animals hunting for needs. But does that automatically mean they get no pleasure from it? You have not addressed point I actually made.
Evolution is not all based upon survival of the fittest in the sense some feel it is. Most all evolutionary scientists have backed away from the survival of the fittest concept.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#129942 Oct 15, 2012
Serah wrote:
<quoted text>No no no, you haven't shown us where anyone's DNA takes them back to an ape or chimp..... Show me the link where a person's DNA proves that they are the ancestors of animals; everyone's DNA takes them back to a person.....
You need to prove your god before you attempt to talk science. This is cowardly and dishonest behaviour from a Creationist with no evidence that your hallucinations and mental illness have any effect on e real world.

If you want atheists to believe in your ridiculous nonsense you call a faith, you need to up your game and stop lying about science to people who are miles smarter than you, because it makes you look really, really f*cking atupid.

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's Teapot

#129943 Oct 15, 2012
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you Eldon for the meal I am about to skarf down.
I lean towards "Snooky".

Snooky Christ.

"Our Snooky who art in heaven...."

In the name of the Snooky, the Snooky and the holy Snooky..."

I dunno, Herschel is good too, and Eldon, I mean, it's simple and has that instant and classic appeal.

Skipper, Gilligan and the Professor could probably work, but there might be some legal issues with those.

We know who Thurston would be...

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#129944 Oct 15, 2012
Martina Navratilover wrote:
<quoted text>What has theism got to do with one's personal belief. The Catholic church also believed that Jews and Protestants were heretics and killed over 150 million because of that belief. When it is convenient you atheists claim that Hitler was a Catholic, which means that the church believed in gneocide and continuing satan's work of killing Jews.
It is called atheist satanism and it infects the church too.
I am not here defending Catholicism. I am simply showing theists also believe in evolution. You did not dispute that fact.
Again, who are you debating? Are you hearing voices in your head?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#129945 Oct 15, 2012
Mike Duquette wrote:
I have no idea what your point is. You have not made a point.
Hey Mike.

Are you just meeting Dave Nelson? You're in for a treat. Dave thinks you should be creative and come up your own physics rather than copying other people's physics from physics books.

He doesn't think much of book learning, universities, scholarship, or credentials. He calls a formal education "parroting" - just regurgitating what you've been told rather than thinking for yourself. I think Dave would find that description close to his liking.

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#129946 Oct 15, 2012
Serah wrote:
<quoted text>No no no, you haven't shown us where anyone's DNA takes them back to an ape or chimp..... Show me the link where a person's DNA proves that they are the ancestors of animals; everyone's DNA takes them back to a person.....
<sigh>

Darwin stated we came from a "common ancestor". He never claimed we descended from apes. Or chimps.

"The remarkable similarity among the genomes of
humans and the African great apes could warrant
their classification together as a single genus."

http://cmm.ucsd.edu/varki/varkilab/Publicatio...

And there are, of course differences, too.

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 Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 10 min Eagle 12 7,449
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 39 min thetruth 19,061
News Phil Robertson talks against Atheists 41 min Insults Are Easier 119
News Atheists' problem with the Bible (Sep '09) 1 hr thetruth 7,497
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 1 hr thetruth 2,202
News Richard Dawkins insists he's not an angry athei... 3 hr geezerjock 1
Reason is the root of mental illness!!! 10 hr Thinking 3
More from around the web