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 (Page 6,619)

Showing posts 132,361 - 132,380 of216,716
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#137587
Nov 14, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
I canít believe you would challenge a established scientific term. No wait, I guess I can believe you would. Whereís your sign?
The term macro and micro evolution have origins that go all the way back to 1927. Neither is a recently created term and both are used in biology today.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/macroe...
mac∑ro∑ev∑o∑lu∑tion
&#8194; &#8194;[mak-roh-ev-uh-loo- shuhn or, especially Brit.,-ee-vuh-] Show IPA
noun Biology . major evolutionary transition from one type of organism to another occurring at the level of the species and higher taxa.
Just because someone makes up a word for something, does not mean that thing exists. Again, provide the mechanism for the boundary and a demonstrable boundary, lest the existence of those terms is meaningless.

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#137588
Nov 14, 2012
 

Judged:

1

timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>Well, that sucks, and I don't necessarily agree with that - but the fact is, he is a scientist, and as such, he should be able to recognize the difference between a scientific belief and a personal religious belief. If his religious beliefs corrupt his ability to be objective, then maybe he shouldn't be a scientist. He represents NASA, and he makes them look bad by lending credence to psuedoscience. Would you want our scientists to believe the earth was flat?
Tim, thereís more to the story. The California Courts have sided with NASA. NASA claims he was let go because of his performance.

A leading scientist placed in charge over a entire team, who had been with NASA 15 years is fired over performance?

He had obviously had some bitter enemies and the working political work environment worked against him. His views on evolution may have been the antecedent that resulted in his deteriorated interpersonal relationships.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#137589
Nov 14, 2012
 
Dave Nelson wrote:
Shit!!!
It's effing cold out here installing this garage door opener!!
LIFE IS AN ILLUSION!!!!
HISTORY IS AN ILLUSION!!
There are no ancient ancestors. There is no evolution.
There is no possible way that my ancestors, mostly north Europeans, could possibly have survived day after day, much less year after year, of freezing cold weather in primitive conditions. Just impossible. No way. Just easier to die than go through that crap.
Life ain't what it appears to be.
You are revealing just how _ussified you have become Daveyboy. Man up soldier , you will march uphill day and night .
But only if you have to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#137590
Nov 14, 2012
 
badsis wrote:
<quoted text>
Strong faith in you God there. I rest my case!
Belief in self is more useful.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#137591
Nov 14, 2012
 
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
Tim, thereís more to the story. The California Courts have sided with NASA. NASA claims he was let go because of his performance.
A leading scientist placed in charge over a entire team, who had been with NASA 15 years is fired over performance?
He had obviously had some bitter enemies and the working political work environment worked against him. His views on evolution may have been the antecedent that resulted in his deteriorated interpersonal relationships.
You love conspiracy theories.

Yes, people who have worked in the same position for decades can perform poorly, it does happen, quite a bit actually.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#137592
Nov 14, 2012
 
NightSerf wrote:
<quoted text>
Maine, where I lived for almost half of my adult life, has a saying: There's not bad weather, just bad clothes. Keep your head and feet warm and the rest of you body will be just fine.

It's a tough life but somebody has to live it.
I'm not ever throwing in the towel.
So it's my will , and I will win!
blacklagoon

Brookline, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#137593
Nov 14, 2012
 
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
I donít think the majority of scientist are involved in some kind of mass conspiracy. Understanding that there are many disciplines of science. Only a very small percentage are evolutionist. These evolutionist truly believe in their discipline.
However, there is a hell of a lot of speculation and imagination in this field. Great spans are missing in their theory. It is and remains a science of the imagination. Full of artist conceptions to convince students and the public that it indeed happened.
Itís an interesting theory. But it lacks any real substance. I have looked at the fossil record. Itís pretty damn scarce for human evolution. A single bone from six million years ago. Another millions later. Here a bone and there a bone. O McDonald had a farm E I - EI - Oooo.
Doctor, Iím going to have to remain a sinner when it comes to macro evolution. I just canít come down to the alter over a speculation based theory.
Here's a link. Surveys were sent to the department head of 158 research university Biological Sciences departments asking:

"Regarding the issue of 'Intelligent Design theory' vs. current biological consensus on the mechanisms of evolution - is there a difference of professional opinion within your department that you feel could be accurately described as a scientific controversy?

Yes/No"

From 158 queries, the author received 73 responses. 71 (97.3%) responded "no", 1 responded "no, but..." (and his comment about why is on the site), and 1 responded "yes."

Frankly, I would say that 97.3% is low, considering that modern biology is predicated on evolution.
posted by The Michael The at 9:27 AM on December 12, 2006

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#137594
Nov 14, 2012
 
Notice he still doesn't want to mention the person's name?

Oops because then we could read the REAL story and facts don't bode well with his opinion. XD
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
You love conspiracy theories.
Yes, people who have worked in the same position for decades can perform poorly, it does happen, quite a bit actually.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#137595
Nov 14, 2012
 
Givemeliberty wrote:
Notice he still doesn't want to mention the person's name?
Oops because then we could read the REAL story and facts don't bode well with his opinion. XD
<quoted text>
Actually, the story he's talking about was posted on Topix recently. It's real, just that not even the Supreme Court found any validity to the claim.

http://www.topix.com/news/evolution/2012/11/j...

“Today we pray”

Since: Jul 12

"tomorrow we win"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#137596
Nov 14, 2012
 
Givemeliberty wrote:
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahah a! What an idiot! No seriously reject you really are dumber than the average Christhole posts on here!
Wow! Lulz wow!
<quoted text>
I don't see what's so funny. I'm Christian, I don't go to Catholic Churches.....

“Today we pray”

Since: Jul 12

"tomorrow we win"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#137597
Nov 14, 2012
 
Givemeliberty wrote:
As you said, Christians don't go to a Catholic Church!
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahah a! Idiot! Brain dead reject! Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahah a!
Pffffftttt bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahah a!
Oh wow you just made Dave and Buck look smarter by comparison and that takes effort! Rotflmfao!
<quoted text>
I hear that weed makes everything funny.....

“Today we pray”

Since: Jul 12

"tomorrow we win"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#137598
Nov 14, 2012
 
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>Ok? You made it seem as if the actual process of evolution was in question. Our knowledge of any past event can never be perfect.
Agreed.

“Today we pray”

Since: Jul 12

"tomorrow we win"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#137599
Nov 14, 2012
 

Judged:

1

timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>Good lord. Ok. This is going no where. The tests were no inconclusive. The results were very clear, the methodology was sound - therefore the only way to explain the results without discounting the power of prayer is to invoke a trickster god. Is your god a trickster?
No, I don't think so. Since I know that prayer works I must conclude that the "testing" being done on prayer is inconclusive. Probably because of the method of testing or the technology used to test.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#137600
Nov 14, 2012
 
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I don't think so. Since I know that prayer works I must conclude that the "testing" being done on prayer is inconclusive. Probably because of the method of testing or the technology used to test.
Presupposition, you should stop making those.

You want prayer to work, so you deny when it fails.

“Today we pray”

Since: Jul 12

"tomorrow we win"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#137601
Nov 14, 2012
 
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>Don't be silly, there is no such thing as "free will" it's an illusion. Your God, or so you say, is all knowing, all powerful, there is nothing this god doesn't know including the future. He knows exactly what choices you are going to make, you have no choice but to choose the pathway God has set for you. Do you think you could choose a different path than the one God has preordained for you? Or don't you think God knows what path you are going to take? If what you say is true about your God thing, then "free will" is simply an illusion.
I hear what you're saying but I disagree.

God knows what we're all gonna do but that doesn't mean it's preordained. WE don't know.

Also, God allows us to make our own decisions in life, otherwise there's be no atheists.

We can all act on our own discretion. THAT is free will.

“Today we pray”

Since: Jul 12

"tomorrow we win"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#137602
Nov 14, 2012
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Then humans cannot have free will.
Because God is omniscient, you think humans have no free will?

“Today we pray”

Since: Jul 12

"tomorrow we win"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#137603
Nov 14, 2012
 

Judged:

1

KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
You are demonstrating confirmation bias on a daily basis, so it is safe to assume that you are doing that same thing when you "think" your prayers work.
It is believers who have never provided conclusive evidence of prayer working, it's one of the most common reasons for believers to become deists, actually. However, your asserting that it does work is dangerous, there are many parents who have allowed their children to suffer agonizing and horrific deaths that could have been prevented with medicine simply because it was "god's will." If you cannot provide solid evidence, then you cannot claim it works at all.
Ugh.. Here's one of many tests that show prayer DOES work:

"1. "Positive Therapeutic Effects of Intercessory Prayer in a Coronary Care Unit Population"

Methods
Cardiac patients from the San Francisco General Medical Center were randomly divided (using a computer-generated list) into two groups. The names of the patients in the "test" group were given to a group of Christians, who prayed for them while they were in the hospital. The intercessory prayer team members were chosen on the following basis:

Born again Christians on the basis of John 3:35
Led an active Christian life on the basis of
daily devotional prayer
fellowship in a local Christian church
The "placebo" group received no prayer. Neither the "test" nor the "placebo" group of patients knew if they were receiving prayer. Likewise, the hospital staff, doctors, or nurses were "blinded" since they did not know which patient belonged to which group.

Results
Statistics were acquired from the prayer and placebo groups both before and after prayer, until the patients were discharged from the hospital. There were no statistical differences between the placebo and the prayer groups before prayer was initiated. The results demonstrated that patients who were prayed for suffered "less congestive heart failure, required less diuretic and antibiotic therapy, had fewer episodes of pneumonia, had fewer cardiac arrests, and were less frequently intubated and ventilated." Statistics demonstrated the the prayer group had a statistically significantly lower severity score based upon the hospital course after entry (p < 0.01). Multivariate analysis of all the parameters measured demonstrated that the outcomes of the two groups were even more statistically significant (p < 0.0001). In science, the standard level of significance is when a "p value" is less than 0.05. A value of 0.01 means that the likelihood the result is because of chance is one in 100. A p value of 0.0001 indicates that in only one study out of 10,000 is the result likely to be due to chance. Table 2 from the study is reproduced below. The remarkable thing which one notices is that nearly every parameter measured is affected by prayer, although individually many categories do not reach the level of statistical significance due to sample size. However, multivariate analysis, which compares all parameters together produces a level of significance seldom reached in any scientific study (p < 0.0001). The author points out that the method used in this study does not produce the maximum effect of prayer, since the study could not control for the effect of outside prayer (i.e., it is likely many of the placebo group were prayed for by persons outside of the study). It is likely that a study which used only atheists (who had no Christian family or friends) would produce an even more dramatic result. However, since atheists make up only 1-2% of the population, it would be difficult to obtain a large enough sample size."

www.godandscience.org/.../pra ...

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#137604
Nov 14, 2012
 
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Because God is omniscient, you think humans have no free will?
If the future is known, then nothing done is choice, it's destined to happen. Destiny is the opposite of free will.

“Don't be so dichotomous.”

Since: Jan 11

Embrace the grey.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#137605
Nov 14, 2012
 
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Because God is omniscient, you think humans have no free will?
We don't have free will whether there are gods or not.

I don't subscribe to the "proof" that an omniscient god can't be in the same universe as free will. I can say that free will is just an illusion, and an omniscient god cannot exist physically/materially.

If we can say that anything is impossible, anything at all, we can also say that omniscient gods are impossible.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#137606
Nov 14, 2012
 
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Ugh.. Here's one of many tests that show prayer DOES work:
"1. "Positive Therapeutic Effects of Intercessory Prayer in a Coronary Care Unit Population"
Methods
Cardiac patients from the San Francisco General Medical Center were randomly divided (using a computer-generated list) into two groups. The names of the patients in the "test" group were given to a group of Christians, who prayed for them while they were in the hospital. The intercessory prayer team members were chosen on the following basis:
Born again Christians on the basis of John 3:35
Led an active Christian life on the basis of
daily devotional prayer
fellowship in a local Christian church
The "placebo" group received no prayer. Neither the "test" nor the "placebo" group of patients knew if they were receiving prayer. Likewise, the hospital staff, doctors, or nurses were "blinded" since they did not know which patient belonged to which group.
Results
Statistics were acquired from the prayer and placebo groups both before and after prayer, until the patients were discharged from the hospital. There were no statistical differences between the placebo and the prayer groups before prayer was initiated. The results demonstrated that patients who were prayed for suffered "less congestive heart failure, required less diuretic and antibiotic therapy, had fewer episodes of pneumonia, had fewer cardiac arrests, and were less frequently intubated and ventilated." Statistics demonstrated the the prayer group had a statistically significantly lower severity score based upon the hospital course after entry (p < 0.01). Multivariate analysis of all the parameters measured demonstrated that the outcomes of the two groups were even more statistically significant (p < 0.0001). In science, the standard level of significance is when a "p value" is less than 0.05. A value of 0.01 means that the likelihood the result is because of chance is one in 100. A p value of 0.0001 indicates that in only one study out of 10,000 is the result likely to be due to chance. Table 2 from the study is reproduced below. The remarkable thing which one notices is that nearly every parameter measured is affected by prayer, although individually many categories do not reach the level of statistical significance due to sample size. However, multivariate analysis, which compares all parameters together produces a level of significance seldom reached in any scientific study (p < 0.0001). The author points out that the method used in this study does not produce the maximum effect of prayer, since the study could not control for the effect of outside prayer (i.e., it is likely many of the placebo group were prayed for by persons outside of the study). It is likely that a study which used only atheists (who had no Christian family or friends) would produce an even more dramatic result. However, since atheists make up only 1-2% of the population, it would be difficult to obtain a large enough sample size."
www.godandscience.org/.../pra ...
That "study" did not make those findings, your source is one of many that manipulated the data.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 132,361 - 132,380 of216,716
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
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.

•••
•••
•••
•••