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. Read more

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#145560 Dec 28, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, thank you for proving my point that science and religion are parallel...
No inversely proportional, the more one learns about science and math the less likely one is going to believe in myths.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#145561 Dec 28, 2012
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>
If you are going to quote me do it properly. I posted:-
<quoted text>
Notice the term "standing water" which the water on the decks which has not had time to run off. It is quite easy to calculate.
Don't take my word for it do the calculations yourself.
You're math isn't adding up.

"At that rate there was 150 tons per second of rain falling on the decks of Noah's ark"

You're implying that there was 150 tons of water falling per second around the world to make up the height of Mt Everest in 40 days & nights.

Somehow you think that all the rainclouds were only above the ark, not around the world....

So which is is? Was there 150 tons of water falling for 40 days & 40 nights or not?

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#145562 Dec 28, 2012
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>
No inversely proportional, the more one learns about science and math the less likely one is going to believe in myths.
True.

Good thing Christians don't believe in myths.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#145563 Dec 28, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
True.
Good thing Christians don't believe in myths.
You are correct, christians do not believe anything is a myth, except reality. But you do believe that myths are real. Unless you have some actual evidence and not just more assertions.

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

#145564 Dec 28, 2012
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>Sigh!!! Galaxies, stars, suns, planets, moons, comets, didn't create themselves, no one ever said such a stupid thing. They all formed naturally, through a process well know by cosmologists. gas, dust, particles attracted to each by gravity creating larger particles which attract more matter, give the process a few billion years and stars are formed, from which planets, moons, and comets are produced. Now if you want to speculate that the matter found in the universe had to be created, then what was the cause? In your extremely narrow vision that would have to be your imaginary God thing. Your problem now is, what created your God thing? You'll undoubtably say, "God is eternal and has always existed." Which now fall under the category of "Special pleading." "Everything that exists needs a creator except my special rue that excludes my God." You really don't see how childish this position is?
No life didn't start with a handful of rocks, mud and lightning, what an ignorant statement. I expected better from you, why I really don't know. I know I'm wasting my time but here:
Life, plant or animal cannot exist without "free oxygen." There was a time when neither life or free oxygen existed on the Earth. Animals can't exist without free oxygen nor can they maintain the oxygen atmosphere, only plant life can do that. The primordial atmosphere (A1) was made up of ammonia, methane, water vapor, and some quantities of hydrogen.
These various compounds water, ammonia, methane, and hydrogen are thermodynamically stable mixtures, which means the molecules won't alter into anything else unless there is energy to present to "kick" them uphill. On primordial earth there was energy. There was heat from volcanic action, the heat and ionizing power of lightning , and the sturdy radiation form the sun.
In 1952 Stanley Lloyd Miller began with a small sample of a mixture similar to the primordial atmosphere, used an electric spark as his energy source, and i the course of a week, found that the simple molecules had combined to form somewhat more COMPLICATED molecules, including a couple of amino acids that form the building blocks out of which those essential LIFE molecules, the proteins, are formed.
Can we say which particular source of energy on the primordial earth was most responsible for the format of life? Consider that, of all the forms, solar radiation is steadiest and most pervasive and it seems logical to give a lions share of credit for our presents here today. In particular, we might thank the especially energetic component of sunlight, its ultraviolet light is energetic enough to interact with chemicals of the primordial atmosphere and set them on their march toward life.
I can't help you with your inability to understand basic science as related to early Earth. Is it out of the question for you to do a little research on the subject? Posting the idiotic statements you just made certainly doesn't help your case.
To say that God didnít create the heavens and the earth. Is like saying Beethoven didnít compose any of his renown pieces.

Iím not a music person my good Doctor. But I know a great Symphony piece must be composed. Beethoven is gone but the evidence of his work remains. The work of others like Gershwin are also remains.

Yet when it comes to the cosmos you give no credit to itís creator. I would say one of the great injustices to artist and composers. Would be to deny them credit for their creation.

You will say God is not real. But his work is on display for the world to see and enjoy. Great works just donít happen. Theyíre created by masterful composers.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#145565 Dec 28, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>To say that God didn’t create the heavens and the earth. Is like saying Beethoven didn’t compose any of his renown pieces.

I’m not a music person my good Doctor. But I know a great Symphony piece must be composed. Beethoven is gone but the evidence of his work remains. The work of others like Gershwin are also remains.

Yet when it comes to the cosmos you give no credit to it’s creator. I would say one of the great injustices to artist and composers. Would be to deny them credit for their creation.

You will say God is not real. But his work is on display for the world to see and enjoy. Great works just don’t happen. They’re created by masterful composers.
Except that we know Beethoven existed.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#145566 Dec 28, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
To say that God didnít create the heavens and the earth. Is like saying Beethoven didnít compose any of his renown pieces.
...
Ironic, because according to christians Beethoven didn't create them, he was "guided" by your god, thus the symphonies were created by your god i your beliefs.

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#145567 Dec 28, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
You're math isn't adding up.
"At that rate there was 150 tons per second of rain falling on the decks of Noah's ark"
You're implying that there was 150 tons of water falling per second around the world to make up the height of Mt Everest in 40 days & nights.
Somehow you think that all the rainclouds were only above the ark, not around the world....
So which is is? Was there 150 tons of water falling for 40 days & 40 nights or not?
No, seriously are you that stupid? Is English a second language for you or are you in the second grade?

I will spell it out and type sslloowwllyy for you:-

Data:-
Mt Everest
H= 29029ft
= 29029 x 12
= 348348 inc

Time 40 days and nights
t= 40 days
There are 60 mins in an hour
therefor
t= 40 x 60
= 57600 mins

hence the average rain fall rate around the world on the surface of the ground is:-
Rf = 348348/57600
= 6.04771 inc/min

thus the rain falling on the decks was falling at the rate of:-
= 6.04771 inc/min

Please note that I do not say all the rain required to flood the world fell on the Ark.

However I made a mistake in remembering the mass rate on the decks (I did the original calculations over 12 months ago) it is in fact:-

Mr = 484tonnes per min.

Notwithstanding that the standing water on the decks remains the same.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#145568 Dec 28, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Explain it to buck.
You two should get along splendently.
Splendidly...

Bleh...

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#145569 Dec 28, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
You're math isn't adding up.
"At that rate there was 150 tons per second of rain falling on the decks of Noah's ark"
You're implying that there was 150 tons of water falling per second around the world to make up the height of Mt Everest in 40 days & nights.
Somehow you think that all the rainclouds were only above the ark, not around the world....
So which is is? Was there 150 tons of water falling for 40 days & 40 nights or not?
You dolt.

That was the rate of rainfall over the whole planet.

Since the ark was supposedly ON the planet, it was receiving that much rainfall.

If it was ANYWHERE on the planet, it was under that much rainfall.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#145570 Dec 28, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
To say that God didnít create the heavens and the earth.
That's not a sentence, Eagle.

Look at it.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#145571 Dec 28, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
To say that God didnít create the heavens and the earth. Is like saying Beethoven didnít compose any of his renown pieces.
Iím not a music person my good Doctor. But I know a great Symphony piece must be composed. Beethoven is gone but the evidence of his work remains. The work of others like Gershwin are also remains.
Yet when it comes to the cosmos you give no credit to itís creator. I would say one of the great injustices to artist and composers. Would be to deny them credit for their creation.
You will say God is not real. But his work is on display for the world to see and enjoy. Great works just donít happen. Theyíre created by masterful composers.
You have no evidence that Beethoven existed!

His works were stolen from....

....uh

.....Pagans!

derpy athitards

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#145572 Dec 28, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
You dolt.
That was the rate of rainfall over the whole planet.
Since the ark was supposedly ON the planet, it was receiving that much rainfall.
If it was ANYWHERE on the planet, it was under that much rainfall.
I have come across doorstops with higher IQs.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#145573 Dec 28, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
You are correct, christians do not believe anything is a myth, except reality. But you do believe that myths are real. Unless you have some actual evidence and not just more assertions.
Christians believe reality is a myth?

You've really got yourself convinced of that, huh?

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#145574 Dec 28, 2012
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>
No, seriously are you that stupid? Is English a second language for you or are you in the second grade?
I will spell it out and type sslloowwllyy for you:-
Data:-
Mt Everest
H= 29029ft
= 29029 x 12
= 348348 inc
Time 40 days and nights
t= 40 days
There are 60 mins in an hour
therefor
t= 40 x 60
= 57600 mins
hence the average rain fall rate around the world on the surface of the ground is:-
Rf = 348348/57600
= 6.04771 inc/min
thus the rain falling on the decks was falling at the rate of:-
= 6.04771 inc/min
Please note that I do not say all the rain required to flood the world fell on the Ark.
However I made a mistake in remembering the mass rate on the decks (I did the original calculations over 12 months ago) it is in fact:-
Mr = 484tonnes per min.
Notwithstanding that the standing water on the decks remains the same.
Try it again, this time where the flood took place, near Mt Ararat, 16,000 ft I think.

Also, don't assume that was a natural event. Remember "the floodgates of the heavens opened".....

Also keep in mind that I don't believe the whole world was covered in water. I think it's a symbolic narrative describing the cleansing of humanity through The Lord.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#145575 Dec 28, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Christians believe reality is a myth?
You've really got yourself convinced of that, huh?
Then where is evidence to support any of the claims made by your bible?

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#145576 Dec 28, 2012
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
Favourite creationist quote:
"I DIN COME FROM NO MOKEYYSS!! PRAISE JEBUS!"
Here's the pic you were looking for: http://www.google.com/imgres...

Since: Apr 09

Elmont, Long Island NY

#145577 Dec 28, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Try it again, this time where the flood took place, near Mt Ararat, 16,000 ft I think.
Also, don't assume that was a natural event. Remember "the floodgates of the heavens opened".....
Also keep in mind that I don't believe the whole world was covered in water. I think it's a symbolic narrative describing the cleansing of humanity through The Lord.
The story of Noah is about as real as the Epic of Gilgamesh

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#145578 Dec 28, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Try it again, this time where the flood took place, near Mt Ararat, 16,000 ft I think.
Also, don't assume that was a natural event. Remember "the floodgates of the heavens opened".....
Also keep in mind that I don't believe the whole world was covered in water. I think it's a symbolic narrative describing the cleansing of humanity through The Lord.
Now that you have realized your mistake you are trying shift the goal posts how very godbot of you.

1. It was supposedly a global flood.
2. You don't know the bibull very well.

Aren't you embarrassed that we atheists know the bibull better than you?

“Thank you GOD for JESUS”

Since: Jul 07

And thank you JESUS for caring

#145580 Dec 28, 2012
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
Scientists update their knowledge according to new evidence and findings.
Meanwhile creationists still believe the earth is 6000 years old and don't want to become more intelligent or knowledgeable about the world or nature.
I suppose its because you don't have any respect for the hard work and curiosity of scientists.
Thank GOD they do....

The Worst Additives [in alphabetical order]
www.mbm.net.au/health/worst_additives.htm
20 Jun 2000 Ė So many references are made to the following additives that they need ... As the additive causes cancer in animals, it is likely to also cause ...
Food Additives ~ CSPI's Food Safety
www.cspinet.org/reports/chemcuisine.htm
Two rat studies suggest that the additive might cause cancer. It was for those reasons that in 1996 the Center for Science in the Public Interest urged the FDA to ...
The truth about food additives: how they threaten your health ...
www.theecologist.org/.../the_truth_about_food... ...
18 Jan 2012 Ė You'll see that a majority are linked to cancer in animals. Yes, I know you're not a lab rat, but when an additive causes cancer in animals, it may ...
12 Dangerous Food Additives: The Dirty Dozen Food Additives You ...
www.sixwise.com õ Newsletters õ 2006 õ April õ 5
5 Apr 2006 Ė With any processed food you run the risk of coming across additives, and ... additives have been found by some studies to cause cancer in rats.
Food Additives to Avoid
www.sweetpoison.com/food-additives-to-avoid.h...
Tests show that the additive causes cancer in animals, which means it may increase cancer in humans. Avoid acesulfame K and products containing it....

E211 additive switches off parts of DNA ę Ant's Roots
aroots.wordpress.com/2007/.../e211-additive-s... ...
28 May 2007 Ė This weekend The Independent newspaper reported on a recent soft drinks research, which reveals some brands may cause serious health ...
Chemical in soft drinks 'can wreck your child's DNA'| Mail Online
www.dailymail.co.uk/.../Chemical-soft-drinks-... ...
28 May 2007 Ė Research shows that E211 - found in drinks such as Fanta and Pepsi Max - can switch off vital parts of DNA, causing serious damage to cells....

Sadly though, it takes a long time for the government to make them takes these additives out of our foods ~ but not sad for the scientists, they get to give us more drugs to cure the damage they have done!!

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 "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 28 min ChristineM 17,997
News The Consequences of Atheism 33 min Thinking 1,128
News Why Atheism Will Replace Religion (Aug '12) 45 min Thinking 14,508
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 1 hr Mr_SKY 6,454
News Who is an atheist? (May '10) 9 hr Freebird USA 9,256
News Confessions of a black atheist 14 hr Cordwainer Trout 20
News In the Search for an Alternative to God, One Ra... (Mar '11) Sun Patrick n Angela 692
More from around the web