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

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#138396 Nov 17, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
James Woods is invisible to me...
wooohoooooooooo!

I'm going to sneak into your house and replace all your Bud with Coors lite!

Ha!

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#138397 Nov 17, 2012
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
It's best to just scroll past ole Bob.
I'm watching the Disney movie called Brave.
Have you seen it?
ok, lol!

no, is it good?

i think i'm going to watch the new films at christmas time, when i got 1 month off uni!

have u seen new spiderman? oooooooooooooooooooomg it was tooooo good, i'm just waiting to see if batman is going to beat it! i really hope it does!!

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#138398 Nov 17, 2012
Thinking wrote:
You may be right. But having seen someone suffer from Crohn's I'd use worms when the steroids and immunosuppressants stop working.
<quoted text>
I'd recommend you start with the worms, to be honest. That would increase the window with which you have to use the other medicines and possibly even erase the need.

Uh...I'm not a medical doctor. Don't take advice from me. But if I was in that situation, given what I've read, I'd convince my doctor to look at the literature so she could properly monitor me while I take the worms.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#138399 Nov 17, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Ya, right, sure. Science has tapped into the supernatural effects of prayer & deemed them useless...
<<^^COUGH^^>> BULLSHIT!
You've got it backwards. Believers like you believe that prayer has supernatural effects.

They don't. They're not useless, though. They're a means of social communication - i.e., placebo.

All double blind studies have found the same results: no effect. You have to know you're being prayed to for a small effect and that makes it a social effect - placebo.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#138400 Nov 17, 2012
Xyzhoturutsmail wrote:
<quoted text>Happy Lesbo, the female wannabe lesbian, would be her name.
that's tooo long, u need something catchy!

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#138401 Nov 17, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, the studies. I forgot about the studies.... The link also says: "There are, of course, also certain types of prayer whose efficacy can not be measured in the physical world"
.
Right. Like the kind where, in Buddhist societies, once your family member dies, and if you love them a lot, you buy them a really expensive name so they can go to a super nice heaven? If you only buy them the average name, they get an average heaven - maybe even have to be a servant.
.
That's true. We can't test that kind of bullshit, because we can't ask the dead people "did giving all of my money to the Buddhist temple help you out there?"
.
But you know what? Those practices do have testable, measurable results on this planet - we can show, for example, that the bereaved loses a certain amount of cash, that they feel some easing of conscience, perhaps, that they have a purchased status item to show off to others that only the church can provide.

“Don't be so dichotomous.”

Since: Jan 11

Embrace the grey.

#138402 Nov 17, 2012
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>
What's it like? I have got but have not seen it yet.
Tis Irish.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#138403 Nov 17, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
HA! Oh, ha HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!
"somewhere between 2 & 6 million years ago....
What a load!
Did you follow the discussion at all? He's asking about a genetic change that happened in humans. We only have genetic evidence for extant Pan and Homo and extinct Homo. Thus, my window period has to be large.
.
When we get DNA evidence from Australopithecines, I'll narrow down the window period for you.
.
You also have to remember that Eagle was trying to claim that the first 46 chromosome hominin was "Adam." Compared to me, he's making up children's stories. I'm using the available evidence to the best of my honest ability. That's very different then saying "ah-ha! I have this belief that I will now superimpose on your evidence because I want it to back up my religion!"

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#138404 Nov 17, 2012
Serah wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, I understand.... bacteria and how it is important to all of us.
Awesome. I'm pretty sure that all of us here on the "Faith" thread in the atheist forum do. I recommend, if you want to post that stuff, to start a thread on Food Safety in the Modern world - there, it would be on topic and you'd have lots and lots of people interested in your ideas.

I guarantee it.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#138405 Nov 17, 2012
Serah wrote:
<quoted text>Other way around, according to the experts;
*** Like the plants, animals evolved in the sea. And that is where they remained for at least 600 million years. This is because, in the absence of a protective ozone layer, the land was bathed in lethal levels of UV radiation. Once photosynthesis had raised atmospheric oxygen levels high enough, the ozone layer formed, meaning that it was then possible for living things to venture onto the land.
The oldest fossil evidence of multicellular animals, or metazoans, is burrows that appear to have been made by smooth, wormlike organisms. Such trace fossils have been found in rocks from China, Canada, and India, but they tell us little about the animals that made them apart from their basic shape.
http://sci.waikato.ac.nz/evolution/AnimalEvol... ***
Everything came from the sea......... if you believe it!!
Yes. And the whales went back.

The reason land animals are shaped the way we are - flat ventral to dorsal, the opposite of most fish - is b/c the immediate ancestors who lived in the tidal zone, before the evolution to terestrial living, were shaped flat. They had to be, it's the most efficient way to locomote, get food, hide, etc., in areas of low water and muddy ground.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#138406 Nov 17, 2012
_BobLoblah_ wrote:
<quoted text>18Nov12.....
Dear 'Ditz'....cementia...
.....Your Heeengliish, grammmar, and centence stuctures are atrocious.
Ps:....How did you ever manage an 'E' in grades!!!
Love..
Forever and Ever
BobLoblah
i got A's and even one A star, i don't need to act clever for no reason, i only do it to get good grades in exams and get a good job, who cares otherwise!! i don't!!!!!!

Also, i'm most likely going to marry a rich guy, who likes hot dumb girls, so whats the point of acting clever when i have found out that men don't like it??? there isn't one, it don't work for me!!!

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#138407 Nov 17, 2012
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>Then by your logic the Whale should still move its tail from side to side. Deers and other animals with tails do not use it for locomotion. You know about the transitional fossils, you posted them a few posts ago. The transitional fossils show the gradual movement of the nostrils toward the top of the head, obviously a much more efficient position to an animal that will spend its life in the sea. You people are famous for that traditional fossil game. You see two fossils and you say "OPPS, there is a gap between fossil one and two, you have no transitional fossils." You really should stop paying attention the the conscience of creationist web sites.
BTW I'm not trying to "win you over" I could care less that you chose to ignore the mountain of evidence available. I'm just curious how anyone with a fair amount of intelligence can do that.
He's mistaken, anyways. White tailed deer move their tails up and down.

“Don't be so dichotomous.”

Since: Jan 11

Embrace the grey.

#138408 Nov 17, 2012
Clementia wrote:
<quoted text>
ok, lol!
no, is it good?
i think i'm going to watch the new films at christmas time, when i got 1 month off uni!
have u seen new spiderman? oooooooooooooooooooomg it was tooooo good, i'm just waiting to see if batman is going to beat it! i really hope it does!!
I like it.

I haven't seen the newest Batman yet. I think the Batman movies are better than the Spiderman movies.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#138409 Nov 17, 2012
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>I comment on the horrible design of Whales and you respond by telling me how magnificent they are and what a wonderful song they have, too funny. Why not address the comment directly? Do you agree that Whales fare a terribly flawed design?
Yes there could have been designed better, I could have designed them much better here:
1.) I would have given them gills so hunting for food and giving birth would have been much easier. This would also cut down on the number of newborns that drowned before MOM could push them to the surface.
2.)I would have given them a dorsal fin like all other fish, including Dolphins, to make swimming more efficient.
3.) I would have given them a spine more like a fish and sharks were the side to side motion is more efficient.
And they are NOT the elite of the sea Sharks are. Unlike the Whales that have evolved from a land mammal, the shark is so well designed his characteristic have no change in millions of years. Sharks eat Whales, especially baby Whales. The slightest sign of weakness or blood and the sharks amass and tear the whale to bits.
You know what's interesting is that whales aren't the first land animals into the ocean. Prior to them were the lizards.

So these animals aren't necessarily competing with fish - they're competing for the "niche" that is occupied by large bodied predators of fish.
turkey

Oswego, NY

#138410 Nov 17, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Awesome. I'm pretty sure that all of us here on the "Faith" thread in the atheist forum do. I recommend, if you want to post that stuff, to start a thread on Food Safety in the Modern world - there, it would be on topic and you'd have lots and lots of people interested in your ideas.
I guarantee it.
Hi carcass lady, whats your specialty?

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#138413 Nov 17, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
I see whales completely different Doctor. I donít see a flawed design. If they had gills we wouldnít get the chance to see them come up to the surface in all their grander.
Not to mention these mammals are extremely intelligent with their own language.
Sharks are preprogrammed biological robots. At sea world you donít see sharks doing tricks. Theyíre just not trainable. Dolphins and whales are the opposite. Theyíre capable of doing a lot of things including communicating with humans.
How many sharks have you seen play basketball? Iíve see dolphins play it at sea world. Iíve never seen a shark do that.
You're both mistaken. Whales are very well adapted, but have "evolutionary baggage" because of where they came from. That's what Blacklagoon is talking about. It's not poor adaptation, though, it's a phylogenetic history that, as time goes on, will continue to be selected against (although it's more accurate to say that mutations that damage the genes that produce these ancestral traits, like the hind limb buds, will not be selected against - I'm probably writing above your level here, Eagle, sorry).

Sharks are not machines. They are organic, intelligent creatures, too. They have been observed engaged in sophisticated pack hunting. A group of sharks will surround a school of fish in the same manner that dolphins do. They keep them schooling, trapped, in the middle. Then, one by one, the sharks will swim in to eat their fill and then return to the line.

Whales and sharks do not normally compete for the same food. So they're not in direct competition all that often. Each has created a niche, a way of exploiting the environment for energy and each does this so well that they remain extant, surviving and reproducing. It's true that sharks attack whales for their babies and weak, but it's also true that whales attack sharks and that whales have complex solutions to ward off the predation of sharks.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#138415 Nov 17, 2012
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
I like it.
I haven't seen the newest Batman yet. I think the Batman movies are better than the Spiderman movies.
That's what I thought before I saw the 'amazing spider man' movie. I think it's ALOT better then the older ones, I really didn't like Tobey maguire!!!!!!!!!

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#138418 Nov 17, 2012
Xyzhoturutsmail wrote:
<quoted text>No, they are not.
Only the recent Batman movies and that is only since they changed them from dark to light movies.
Yh only the one's with sexy Mr Bale in them, the older ones were bad!!

they changed dark to light??

“Don't be so dichotomous.”

Since: Jan 11

Embrace the grey.

#138421 Nov 17, 2012
Clementia wrote:
<quoted text>
Yh only the one's with sexy Mr Bale in them, the older ones were bad!!
they changed dark to light??
I wouldn't pay any attention to the Troll of Many Names. Hit him with a rolled up newspaper if he humps your leg.

The new ones are collectively called the Dark Knight Saga.

Most of the older ones were not very good, especially Batman Forever and Batman & Robin. They were yuck.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#138423 Nov 17, 2012
Xyzhoturutsmail wrote:
<quoted text>No, the problem with the old ones had to do with the fact that they were made into dark movies.
Dark and light has to do with lighting.
i didn't like them coz they weren't serious, dangerous and they weren't mature, if u get what i'm saying? it's like, if i want to watch something like that, i could watch a hindi film!

i didn't pay attention to the lighting, i will now tho.

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
Heaven 2 hr Reason Personified 44
Our world came from nothing? 3 hr Reason Personified 1,107
Man center of the universe. 3 hr Reason Personified 159
Evidence for God! 4 hr Uncle Sam 51
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 16 hr fadu singh 23,043
Former Atheist Academic Who Rejected God and Be... 23 hr Hooogle It 77
Why Atheism Will Replace Religion (Aug '12) Thu Ooogah Boogah 14,391

Atheism People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE