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
scientist

Des Plaines, IL

#142703 Dec 9, 2012
Educating the Idiots wrote:
<quoted text>
First, I never mentioned the bible as a part of my argument, snack shack!
Next, like all the others you pop off with false claims and are unable to back them up.
you are just another fool lacking knowledge...
Another infant intellect exposed!
I am a well known scientist and have many degrees hanging on my wall.I have researched the bible for many years and found it to be no better than a sears catalog hanging in a out house.
Educating the Idiots

Magalia, CA

#142704 Dec 9, 2012
scientist wrote:
<quoted text> I am a well known scientist and have many degrees hanging on my wall.I have researched the bible for many years and found it to be no better than a sears catalog hanging in a out house.
Sure pumpkin! Is that celsius or fahrenheit?

No doubt you have certain test to apply to verify the historical accuracy of such documents, yes?

Thought so, get back on the porch with the puppies.

This lesson was free...you are welcome.
top scientist

Des Plaines, IL

#142705 Dec 9, 2012
Educating the Idiots wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure pumpkin! Is that celsius or fahrenheit?
No doubt you have certain test to apply to verify the historical accuracy of such documents, yes?
Thought so, get back on the porch with the puppies.
This lesson was free...you are welcome.
In my professional opinion of you.I have come to the conclusion that you are a numskull and were picked on as a child.
Educating the Idiots

Magalia, CA

#142706 Dec 9, 2012
top scientist wrote:
<quoted text> In my professional opinion of you.I have come to the conclusion that you are a numskull and were picked on as a child.
Bet thats worth a nickel...

“God of War”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#142707 Dec 9, 2012
Serah wrote:
<quoted text>LOL.... apparently all people with blue eyes are related ***More than meets the blue eye: You may all be related - USATODAY ...
usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/health/2008-02-0...
5 Feb 2008 Ė Researchers in Denmark have found that every person with blue eyes descends from ... More than meets the blue eye: You may all be related ***
But, they keep changing their minds about many things, as we know, but one thing we do know for sure ~ they have never traced a human back to an ape LOL!!
One question....How do you trace an ape to an ape? Look in the mirror or something? Gasp ....Since all humans are related to Mt. Eve and Y Chromosome Adam , it's a pretty safe bet all blue eyes are related to all brown eyed people as well and a few green eyes and hazel.

“God of War”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#142708 Dec 9, 2012
top scientist wrote:
<quoted text> In my professional opinion of you.I have come to the conclusion that you are a numskull and were picked on as a child.
Yes and your evidence for a tenth planet were the annaduki and the nephphlim trained your grandpa how to act less ape and more like a minor , is a bit sketchy. Or was that a miner? Nope Anna Nuki taught him to be a minor you say.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#142709 Dec 9, 2012
Serah wrote:
<quoted text>Well..... aren't the red roses different from the yellow ones, after all, they are both under the same amount of light in the same garden?(for example)
They have different chemistry.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#142710 Dec 9, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
You seem good with math.
What does "5 is an abstract concept in a formal system" mean, in Redneck terms?
Well, a formal axiom system starts with undefined concepts (in geometry, for example, the concept of a point is undefined). It then makes assumptions (axioms) about those undefined concepts and has rules of deduction that allow us to get from one statement to new statements. This process of using the axioms and rules of deduction is called proof within that system.

So, for example, in geometry, the concepts of points and lines are typically undefined. Basic axioms are things like 'between any two points there is exactly one line'. Then we can form proofs just like in high school geometry.

Similarly, arithmetic takes the concepts of number, zero, and successor as undefined and assumes some basic properties of numbers (the successor of a number is a number).

Finally, almost all of mathematics has been brought into set theory, which makes the concept of a set as undefined. Typically, the axioms are those of Zormelo-Fraenkl set theory.

The statement I made is that '5' is an object in the formal axiom system about numbers (and, in a different sense, in that for set theory).

Now, formal systems may or may not say anything about *reality*. They are simply internally consistent systems. What a scientist may do, though, is construct a mathematical *model* of some real situation. Whether the model actually works is determined by testing and observation. So, when we count rocks, we are using the formal system about numbers and we have found that system to work in most cases when counting rocks (there are exceptions, of course). But there are other situations where even a basic mathematical result such as 2+2=4 simply gives wrong results in reality.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#142711 Dec 9, 2012
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
A christian is someone who professes belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ.
Typically, the term is restricted to those that believe in the *divinity* of Jesus Christ. Whether that is a part of his teachings is a point at issue for some.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#142712 Dec 9, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
The point is, both are concepts, as you say, are are not provable by science.
Yet both exist.
Emotions 'can be proved by science'. Simple observations can determine many emotions. Others can be detected by brain scans. Numbers are abstract things and do not exist in any real sense.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#142713 Dec 9, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
Faith in Science.
Alan Sokal, a physics professor at New York University. In 1996, Sokal submitted an article to Social Text, an academic journal of postmodern cultural studies.
The article "Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity", published in the Social Text Spring/Summer 1996 "Science Wars" issue, proposed that quantum gravity is a social and linguistic construct.
Sokal wrote "Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity", an article proposing that quantum gravity has progressive political implications, and that the "morphogenetic field" (characterized by Sokal as "a bizarre New Age concept due to Rupert Sheldrake"[2]) could be a cutting-edge theory of quantum gravity.
He concluded that, since "physical reality" is, at bottom, a social and linguistic construct, a "liberatory science" and an "emancipatory mathematics", spurning "the elite caste canon of 'high science'", must be established for a "postmodern science [that] provide[s] powerful intellectual support for the progressive political project".
The above material came from Wiki:
Like many other scientists, I was amused by news of the prank played by the NYU mathematical physicist Alan Sokal. Late in 1994 he submitted a sham article to the cultural studies journal Social Text, in which he reviewed some current topics in physics and mathematics, and with tongue in cheek drew various cultural, philosophical and political morals that he felt would appeal to fashionable academic commentators on science who question the claims of science to objectivity.
The editors of Social Text did not detect that Sokal's article was a hoax, and they published it in the journal's Spring/Summer 1996 issue.1 The hoax was revealed by Sokal in an article for another journal, Lingua Franca;2 he explained that his Social Text article had been "liberally salted with nonsense," and in his opinion was accepted only because "(a) it sounded good and (b) it flattered the editors' ideological preconceptions."
Newspapers and newsmagazines throughout the U.S. and Britain carried the story. Sokal's hoax may join the small company of legendary academic hoaxes, along with the pseudo-fossils of Piltdown man planted by Charles Dawson and the pseudo-Celtic epic Ossian written by James Macpherson.
The difference is that Sokal's hoax served a public purpose, to attract attention to what Sokal saw as a decline of standards of rigor in the academic community, and for that reason it was unmasked immediately by the author himself.
http://www.physics.nyu.edu/sokal/weinberg.htm...
Eagle 12
How many other hoaxes have been printed in Scientific Journals and publications that have gone unclaimed? Alan Sokal proved that the Scientific community can be hoaxed. And thatís not saying much for the general population.
How about this one? The Emperors New Clothes, by Hans Christian Anderson.
Sokal's point, more precisely, is that academic standards are way, way too low in the *social sciences*. The problem is that in the vast majority of situations, the social sciences are not true sciences. They are more like philosophy (and bad philosophy at that). His little prank showed that quite well. By taking plausible sounding bull, he was able to get published in a top social science journal. That wouldn't happen in math physics, or even biology.
top scientist

Des Plaines, IL

#142714 Dec 9, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes and your evidence for a tenth planet were the annaduki and the nephphlim trained your grandpa how to act less ape and more like a minor , is a bit sketchy. Or was that a miner? Nope Anna Nuki taught him to be a minor you say.
Its rather strange how the sumerians had a layout of our sloar system showing the twelth planet that we cant see as of yet.That was way before the telescope was invented.We now can see a faint image of the tenth planet .I am indeed smarter than you.

“God of War”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#142715 Dec 9, 2012
top scientist wrote:
<quoted text> Its rather strange how the sumerians had a layout of our sloar system showing the twelth planet that we cant see as of yet.That was way before the telescope was invented.We now can see a faint image of the tenth planet .I am indeed smarter than you.
Okay Yogi , but don't you have to go get some picnic baskets from Jellystone Park? Don't let us Park Rangers stop you Yogi!

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

#142716 Dec 9, 2012
scientist wrote:
<quoted text> I am a well known scientist and have many degrees hanging on my wall.I have researched the bible for many years and found it to be no better than a sears catalog hanging in a out house.
I bet you do have many degrees hanging on your wall. Itís called a thermometer.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#142717 Dec 9, 2012
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
The motorcycles have a better power to weight ratio among other factors that allow them to be quick.
Most motorcycles are less than 1600cc. 500cc would be about entry level for a street moto, though you can find them smaller.
Oh ok, thanks!

@Kitten...lol, I hope not coz that means I drive like a tortoise!

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

#142718 Dec 9, 2012
Givemeliberty wrote:
Yes Catholics are Christians. If someone of another faith becomes a Christian then guess what? They are now a Christian. It seems this concept is beyond your meager IQ.
As far as your other word salad goes, you as usual are wrong.
<quoted text>
Thereís a lot of wonderful, kind and generous people in the Catholic Church. They would take offense by being considered as Non-Christians. From my view here on topix they believe in God.

We at topix fall into two categories. Believers and non believers (Atheist). Catholics are believers in Christ. I donít believe in their particular religious doctrine. But I do support the individuals right to believe as they desire.

Freedom of religion is something all of us believers have in common. We embrace our freedoms and oppose those who desire to suppress our right to choose.

“What's left to defend?”

Since: Jan 11

Freedom

#142719 Dec 9, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
Thereís a lot of wonderful, kind and generous people in the Catholic Church. They would take offense by being considered as Non-Christians. From my view here on topix they believe in God.
We at topix fall into two categories. Believers and non believers (Atheist). Catholics are believers in Christ. I donít believe in their particular religious doctrine. But I do support the individuals right to believe as they desire.
Freedom of religion is something all of us believers have in common. We embrace our freedoms and oppose those who desire to suppress our right to choose.
I'm sorry, but many believers would prefer to take away freedom of religion in the USA. You can't speak for all of them.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#142720 Dec 9, 2012
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sorry, but many believers would prefer to take away freedom of religion in the USA. You can't speak for all of them.
But you can speak for most of them!

“What's left to defend?”

Since: Jan 11

Freedom

#142721 Dec 9, 2012
Clementia wrote:
<quoted text>
But you can speak for most of them!
Nor "for" but "about".

I'm speaking about a large portion of American Christians who support certain politicized agendas.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#142722 Dec 9, 2012
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
Nor "for" but "about".
I'm speaking about a large portion of American Christians who support certain politicized agendas.
Oh sh*t, lol, thanks!!
That's what I meant.:-)

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
"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 10 min One way or another 16,831
The Consequences of Atheism 17 min polymath257 804
Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 32 min ChristineM 6,052
Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 47 min ChristineM 4,869
Turkey blocks website of its first atheist asso... 1 hr Thinking 1
Richard Dawkins - God is evil, pedophilesa not ... (Sep '13) 4 hr ChristineM 3,047
Is Religion Childish? Tue ChristineM 143
More from around the web