Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 239176 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.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#142624 Dec 8, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Aw, you're a fan of mine. Sorry, but autographs are only signed on the second Tuesday of the fifth week of every month. Under the giant golden Darwin statue at the rec center. Be there or be square.
You're gonna slowly start turing Darwin into Buddha.....

When will you start praying to him, I mean "Him"?

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#142625 Dec 8, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
It's "Cro-magnon".
Unless you're talking about a gun specifically for crows.
That would be a "crow-magnum".
Nah, cro-magnum is condoms for crows.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#142626 Dec 8, 2012
I suppose you would say the hundreds of errors as contradictions give the bible character.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
What doesn't need correction will not be corrected.
Think About It

Magalia, CA

#142627 Dec 8, 2012
Givemeliberty wrote:
I suppose you would say the hundreds of errors as contradictions give the bible character.
<quoted text>
I think this is what was said,

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
What doesn't need correction will not be corrected.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#142628 Dec 8, 2012
Givemeliberty wrote:
I suppose you would say the hundreds of errors as contradictions give the bible character.
<quoted text>
Ya, that's what you athiests say but not one of your assertions in valid.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#142629 Dec 8, 2012
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, possibly.
They can hold that it is unconstitutional for a state to deny homosexuals the right to marry.
Homosexuals CAN marry....

So, the states are following the Constitution just fine.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#142630 Dec 8, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>What doesn't need correction will not be corrected.
And, apparently, what does need correction won't be.

No rational person can believe the bible is without error.

Unless he's never read it.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#142631 Dec 8, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>Good girl.
You're confused.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#142632 Dec 8, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>Nah, cro-magnum is condoms for crows.
Probably too big for you.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#142633 Dec 8, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>Ya, that's what you athiests say but not one of your assertions in valid.
True.

But you have an unnecessary space.

And you left out "is".

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#142634 Dec 8, 2012
Think About It wrote:
<quoted text>Didn't know you wore a helmet, my bad!
Only on my Harley.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#142635 Dec 8, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>blacklagoon
Citation, please.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#142636 Dec 8, 2012
Dumb@ss you still to this day argue that Catholics do not believe in Jesus. I mean holy fck if you are unable to grasp that Catholics are Christians you ar certainly unable to understand most of what is posted here.

So again what church do you belong to? Some holy roller idiots yes?
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Ya, that's what you athiests say but not one of your assertions in valid.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#142637 Dec 8, 2012
Givemeliberty wrote:
Dumb@ss you still to this day argue that Catholics do not believe in Jesus. I mean holy fck if you are unable to grasp that Catholics are Christians you ar certainly unable to understand most of what is posted here.
So again what church do you belong to? Some holy roller idiots yes?
<quoted text>
Our Lady of Perpetual Motion

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#142638 Dec 8, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
And, apparently, what does need correction won't be.
No rational person can believe the bible is without error.
Unless he's never read it.
The Bible doesn't need correction & is above your atheistic understanding.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#142639 Dec 8, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Probably too big for you.
I'm hung like a mouse, just not as thick.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#142640 Dec 8, 2012
Givemeliberty wrote:
Dumb@ss you still to this day argue that Catholics do not believe in Jesus. I mean holy fck if you are unable to grasp that Catholics are Christians you ar certainly unable to understand most of what is posted here.
So again what church do you belong to? Some holy roller idiots yes?
<quoted text>
When have I ever once said that Catholics don't believe in Jesus?

Again, I don't go to church...

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#142641 Dec 8, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
True.
But you have an unnecessary space.
And you left out "is".
That's it? That's all you got?

Grammatical errors?

Nice...

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#142642 Dec 8, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Gee poly I thought it was based on observation , evidence or
empirical data ?
Yes, those also. The point is that no general laws are held based on faith. It is always possible that new evidence will require modification or overhaul of the system. Now, if the system has worked well, it is likely that any new system will agree at those points where the old system worked (it would have to).

The strength of the scientific method comes from the fact that scientific hypotheses have to make definite predictions about new observations. if there are two competing ideas, find a place where they make measurably different predictions and go to the real world and see which is wrong and which is right within the error bars. This will allow the rejection of at least one of the competing ideas. As an idea successfully meets more and more challenges, we get more confidence in it. Eventually it gets the status of a theory and not just of a hypothesis.

The key is that a hypothesis must make a prediction *before* the observations and be definite enough to allow rejection of the hypothesis if the prediction is wrong. This is the essence of falsifiability: if the hypothesis is wrong, there is some test that will show it wrong.

So I ask the creationists and IDers out there: make a prediction of an observation that can be made. Make this prediction such that if the observation goes against the prediction, you are willing to give up your viewpoint. Make sure the prediction is not of something that has already been observed.

For added points, make the prediction one that is completely inconsistent with the current standard theories (and that even those holding the standard view will agree is inconsistent with the standard theory).

I will bet that nobody on the creationist/ID side will rise to meet this simple test of being a scientific theory. the reason: creationism and ID are not scientific theories.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#142643 Dec 8, 2012
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, possibly.
They can hold that it is unconstitutional for a state to deny homosexuals the right to marry.
The problem is that even Ginsburg has said it is a bad time to bring the matter up and that even the liberals may not vote the way we might predict.

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) 2 hr Eagle 12 7,407
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 8 hr MikeF 19,043
why Atheists believe in incest,pedophilia and b... 12 hr Thinking 31
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 13 hr Thinking 2,179
News Atheists' problem with the Bible (Sep '09) 23 hr NoahLovesU 7,468
News Phil Robertson talks against Atheists 23 hr thetruth 115
News .com | What hope is there without God? May 20 Kaitlin the Wolf ... 26
More from around the web