Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 239086 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.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#129967 Oct 15, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
You have shown no evidence.
You've only spouted your opinion.
There are all sorts of evidence for evolution. Just read a science book to see some.

There is no evidence for a god. Do you dispute this?

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#129968 Oct 15, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
lol. Mudfish are real, they aren't hypothetical fishies that are used to fill in the evolutionary blanks.
You said in an earlier post that you see fossils.
Where's the fossil of all the millions of years in evolution of a fish mutating into a land animal?
Do you se that fossil? Or is it just in your mind?
Their is not many of that change. There is some. It was four hundred million years ago. Kind of hard to find fossils of all the slow changes. A fossil is rare. More rare than you creationists seems to think.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiktaalik
Here is the most famous one found to date.

And what does mud fish being real and alive have to do with dismissing my points? It shows fish can come on land and not fry. I see you completely avoided that debate.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#129969 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 know.

This is more Thornhill-style gobbledigook.

Power surges in the sun and all that.

Religion.

“What's left to defend?”

Since: Jan 11

Freedom

#129970 Oct 15, 2012
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Ignorance means you are not understanding of some information. You showed a lack of understanding of the information. Thus you were ignorant of the information.
It is not always an insult to be ignorant of some information. Everyone is ignorant of some information.
So shed the thin skin or educate yourself.
Theists tend to dismiss a lot of science. Psychology is one of those sciences theists tend to dismiss. This is likely why they do not study psychology. Thus they tend to be ignorant of what psychology says.
I think it's worth noting the difference between ignorance and willful ignorance.

It's also worth pointing out the inherent dishonesty in speaking with authority on matters in which you are ignorant.

As far as theistic universals, we see both willful ignorance and dishonest claims of authority. Religion simply could not exist in the absence of these two things.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#129971 Oct 15, 2012
Chess Jurist wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sure you had a point, Dave.
And it was?
Give Dave a break.

His brain was fried by electromagnetic forces.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#129972 Oct 15, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Where's the fossil of all the millions of years in evolution of a fish mutating into a land animal? Do you se that fossil? Or is it just in your mind?
It was right where it was predicted it would be, in Devonian strata :

"Tiktaalik is a monospecific genus of extinct sarcopterygian (lobe-finned "fish") from the late Devonian period, with many features akin to those of tetrapods (four-legged animals).

"It is an example from several lines of ancient sarcopterygian "fish" developing adaptations to the oxygen-poor shallow-water habitats of its time, which led to the evolution of tetrapods."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiktaalik

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#129973 Oct 15, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Charles Darwin had the same name as Darwin Stevens on Bewitched, who worked for Larry Tate, who had the same last name as Manson victim Sharon Tate, who was Married to Roman Polanski, who directed Kevin Bacon in "Stir of Echoes / The Ninth Gate"
Charles Darwin set sail from Plymouth. Kevin Bacon was offered the lead role in a movie called "Christine" about a demonic 1958 Plymouth Fury.

I like this game.

:-)

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#129974 Oct 15, 2012
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Do you mean Richard Dawkins?
Yes.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#129975 Oct 15, 2012
Martina Navratilover wrote:
<quoted text> You have not proven that the story is true or that you even ahve a mother.
Just because your mother flew away after dropping her eggs in the mouth of the bloated, decaying Opossum on the side of the road doesn't mean every ones did.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#129976 Oct 15, 2012
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>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.
Mike, you're treating the troll as if it's a legitimate poster. Have you met Sir Doctor before?

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#129977 Oct 15, 2012
"why are creationists so ignorant?"
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
God did it.
baahahahahahah!

You summed that up in one go!

“What's left to defend?”

Since: Jan 11

Freedom

#129978 Oct 15, 2012
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
Charles Darwin set sail from Plymouth. Kevin Bacon was offered the lead role in a movie called "Christine" about a demonic 1958 Plymouth Fury.
I like this game.
:-)
The character in X-Men First Class, Darwin, was killed by Kevin Bacon's character.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#129979 Oct 15, 2012
lightbeamrider wrote:
Atheism is a negative which cannot be proven and an appeal to ignorance.
Quite the opposite. I don't think you understand what "appeal to ignorance" means.

When you claim that "you cannot know X, therefore God exists" that is an appeal to ignorance. You do it all the time - you fail to understand how species change, so you claim it's god (your ignorance here). You fail to understand how the universe came about, so you claim it's your religion's god - your ignorance again, substituted by pretend knowledge.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#129980 Oct 15, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
If you had to live with, "We Trust In No Gods" on your money, you'd understand why "In God We Trust" is objectionable to those of us deliberately and indifferently excluded by the sentiment.
If you had to live with, "In Smurfs We Trust" on the currency, you'd understand the embarrassment to those of us who have outgrown such things as Smurfs and gods.
We know that Christians are aware of this, but don't care. You don't either, and you seem more caring than most Christians. How shall we take that? How about when a Christian is offended by what he considers blasphemy or disrespect for his beliefs? Should I care?
Well said!

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#129981 Oct 15, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Except get on here and rail against religion.
I see you changed your tagline after I brought up it doing such a few days ago.
I hadn't noticed that you said anything about my tagline. But now that you have, and arrogantly think my changing it had anything to do with you, I'll change it back.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#129982 Oct 15, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
If God is outside of nature, then science can neither prove nor disprove his existence. Atheism itself must therefore be considered a form of blind faith, in that it adopts a belief system that cannot be defended on the basis of pure reason.(Collins, 2006, p.165)
Interesting.....
Totally silly. Let's just rewrite:

"If Odin is outside of nature, then science can neither prove nor disprove his existence.

If Vishnu is outside of nature, then science can neither prove nor disprove his existence."

Collins, in his religion, is making the same logical error you guys always make - ethnocentric, inability to understand the nature of human enculturation, arguments based on belief rather than evidence.

Prove Vishnu doesn't exist as a deity.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#129983 Oct 15, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>You left this on the table.
Oh! My keys. How thoughtful of you.

Don't forget your wallet.

Oh, I won't.

Thanks, the sex was great.

Uhm...I thought it was only so-so.

Why? What was wrong?

It was no different than masturbating.

But I used my left hand!

Yeah...

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#129984 Oct 15, 2012
Serah wrote:
<quoted text>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.
Collins believes that God Created the universe to produce humans. He believes that God uses the tool of evolution to produce us - that everything is determined, so that we got here. God, Collins believes, is omniscient so that this is possible.

It's a silly, teenager kind of logic that is easily trashed.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#129985 Oct 15, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Then why are there fish today living in shallow waters? It obviously works for them.
Speciation doesn't work like you pretend it does. Species evolve to take advantage of available resources. An overly simplistic way to say this is that species evolve to take advantage of available niches.

When lobe-finned fish moved into shallow water, there were no land vertebrates. That niche was open for them. Some populations in those species did their best to catch food close to the shore, sometimes on the shore. This caused selection pressure for some populations and not others to evolve adaptations for getting better at eating food near the shoreline.

But that doesn't mean that the intertidal niche disappeared. Where do you get that nonsensical idea from?

Like the other stupid idea that creationists always talk about "why are there monkeys?!?" Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh, because there are still monkey niches available. It's not like those went anywhere.

When amphibians evolved, the intertidal zone didn't vanish. Why on earth would you think it would?

It's like evolution is some kind of powerful tornado for you, pulling everything along - "well, water didn't work, let's try land!" Oh, there's no more fish because we all moved up here!

Please. Your scenarios are so amazingly uninformed and thoughtless, it's hard for me not to laugh my head off reading them.

I still think you're ok, though, RR :p
:p
:-p

/hug

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#129986 Oct 15, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh my. Again & again.
Athitards say "you are so ignorant of it" countless times.
Why?
Because your lack of education in the sciences leads you to ask nonsensical questions and produce crazy straw men scenarios that have nothing whatsoever to do with science.

From our point of view, it's like you're arguing that Jesus was a woman.
Because whomever doesn't believe in what they believe in MUST be ignorant...
"ignorance" means "lacking knowledge"

When you create ridiculous ideas and tell us that's what we believe, you are demonstrating ignorance. If you used well-informed scenarios and actually produced good argument, you wouldn't get called ignorant.

So, study your biology and try again.
I say you are ignorant because you can't open your tiny mind enough to even consider the possibility that God is real.
It's quite sad.
No, Buddha! No, Vishnu! Oh, no, which one do we chose?!?

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' problem with the Bible (Sep '09) 1 hr NoahLovesU 7,457
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 1 hr NoahLovesU 7,359
News Phil Robertson talks against Atheists 2 hr Rosa_Winkel 104
why Atheists believe in incest,pedophilia and b... 15 hr hpcaban 30
News .com | What hope is there without God? May 20 Kaitlin the Wolf ... 26
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) May 20 thetruth 2,171
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) May 19 Kathleen 19,031
More from around the web