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

“Nothing can stop, This Pony..”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#150228 Jan 26, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice deflection.
Lets not talk about God, lets do the IPU....
Wanna get back to my comment or continue ignoring it?
Are you ignoring the IPU?

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#150229 Jan 26, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice deflection.
Lets not talk about God, lets do the IPU....
Wanna get back to my comment or continue ignoring it?
OK, let's do the IPU. How would you establish the non-existence of the IPU?

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#150230 Jan 26, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
I got to thinking about this a bit more. Of *course* absence of evidence is evidence of absence. It may not be *conclusive* evidence of absence, but it certainly is evidence. Furthermore, why is it not conclusive? Because you may not have looked in the correct places, or with the correct means, etc. But if you have looked extensively, and by a variety of means, then the prolonged absence of evidence *is* evidence of absence that increases in quality for each new way of looking and number of times looked.
As an example, there is a law of physics: the law of conservation of mass/energy. The absence of evidence that this law is violated after many and repeated attempts (perpetual motion machines, for example) is, in fact, evidence of absence. Given the number of ways we have looked and the strictness of the law (hence the high degree of testability), the prolonged absence of evidence of violations is very, very good evidence for that law.
So the question then becomes at what point does absence of evidence become strong evidence of absence? Well, we have to have searched in many different way and over a long period of time. We have to have searched in ways that, if the existence was true, we would have found evidence.
So, lets do this: what precise search method that is public and independently verifiable will lead to the detection of a deity? This method should give a different answer if there is no deity than if there is one (or many) and should be such than even an unbeliever will be able to observe the evidence as unambiguous evidence of existence.
If no such method exists, then the default position is the non-existence, just like it would be for Bigfoot, a supersymmetric particle, or an elephant in my room.
But you're missing the point.

There are ways to locate Bigfoot. It has not been discovered even though many many people look for it. All you need is your eyes to see it & any camera to record it.

Same goes for an elephant in your room.

There are no means of analyzing God in the same sense. Your eyes do not see Him. Your ears do not hear Him. Your senses seem to betray you. All known forms of detection fail.

So does that mean God doesn't exist or you simply lacks the means to detect Him?

There have been billions of people around the world (including myself) that claims to have felt, heard or seen God in various different ways.

Until someone comes up with a way of actually detecting the supernatural or detecting God, an atheists opinion of no God is just that - an opinion, not fact.

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's Teapot

#150231 Jan 26, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
A church called "Chapel of Blather".
Obvious photoshopped lie.
hahaahahaahhaa

You're so gullible and ignorant it boggles the mind at times.

It's a parody, humor. HoLy cRap can you be any more obtuse?

Wait, forget answering that question.

Since: Sep 08

La Junta, CO

#150232 Jan 26, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
I got to thinking about this a bit more. Of *course* absence of evidence is evidence of absence. It may not be *conclusive* evidence of absence, but it certainly is evidence. Furthermore, why is it not conclusive? Because you may not have looked in the correct places, or with the correct means, etc. But if you have looked extensively, and by a variety of means, then the prolonged absence of evidence *is* evidence of absence that increases in quality for each new way of looking and number of times looked.
As an example, there is a law of physics: the law of conservation of mass/energy. The absence of evidence that this law is violated after many and repeated attempts (perpetual motion machines, for example) is, in fact, evidence of absence. Given the number of ways we have looked and the strictness of the law (hence the high degree of testability), the prolonged absence of evidence of violations is very, very good evidence for that law.
So the question then becomes at what point does absence of evidence become strong evidence of absence? Well, we have to have searched in many different way and over a long period of time. We have to have searched in ways that, if the existence was true, we would have found evidence.
So, lets do this: what precise search method that is public and independently verifiable will lead to the detection of a deity? This method should give a different answer if there is no deity than if there is one (or many) and should be such than even an unbeliever will be able to observe the evidence as unambiguous evidence of existence.
If no such method exists, then the default position is the non-existence, just like it would be for Bigfoot, a supersymmetric particle, or an elephant in my room.
There is no default position. You are just creating one for yourself.

How would a tuna search for an agave plant? Agave plants don't exist for a tuna. But an agave may see a tuna and knows it exists.

As far as deities go, you have human beings that say they can feel the presence of one, or more. Lots of humans, actually. So there is a link to somewhere beyond what you can physically sense. You just ain't found it.

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's Teapot

#150233 Jan 26, 2013
Lol! Sheer awesomeness! Thanks so much!:)

scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
http://i1246.photobucket.com/albums/gg601/sca...
Givemeliberty wrote:
Lol! Sheer awesomeness! Thanks so much!:)
<quoted text>
Thanks, I've used it a few times over the past year or so.

Ar Ar thinks it was meant to be real.

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's Teapot

#150234 Jan 26, 2013
Correction: In post http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T... I inadvertently C&P'd some text that wasn't mine, "Lol! Sheer awesomeness! Thanks so much!:)" is not part of my writing.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#150235 Jan 26, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
OK, let's do the IPU. How would you establish the non-existence of the IPU?
I wouldn't even bother entertaining the idea of an IPU.

Unlike you so-called atheists, on sites like this day in & day out, discussing a God you claim to not believe in.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#150236 Jan 26, 2013
scaritual wrote:
Lol! Sheer awesomeness! Thanks so much!:)
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
http://i1246.photobucket.com/albums/gg601/sca...
<quoted text>
Thanks, I've used it a few times over the past year or so.
Ar Ar thinks it was meant to be real.
You use it in a real way to denigrate churches.

It's real in your mind.
Imhotep

United States

#150237 Jan 26, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
But you're missing the point.
There are ways to locate Bigfoot. It has not been discovered even though many many people look for it. All you need is your eyes to see it & any camera to record it.
Same goes for an elephant in your room.
There are no means of analyzing God in the same sense. Your eyes do not see Him. Your ears do not hear Him. Your senses seem to betray you. All known forms of detection fail.
So does that mean God doesn't exist or you simply lacks the means to detect Him?
There have been billions of people around the world (including myself) that claims to have felt, heard or seen God in various different ways.
Until someone comes up with a way of actually detecting the supernatural or detecting God, an atheists opinion of no God is just that - an opinion, not fact.
Fact?
Religions are fantasy, and can be entertaining to those that find their various 'followers' a bit absurd.

Wrap your mind around the concept of heaven.
Can you re-marry?
At what age do you imagine those around you to be? Start with your relatives!

Sadly... The promised land is a illusion

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#150238 Jan 26, 2013
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
Question: "What does the Bible say about rape?"
Way to ignore my post and respond with a form-answer from some apologetics site that whitewashes the issue.

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's Teapot

#150239 Jan 26, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
You use it in a real way to denigrate churches.
It's real in your mind.
No, actually I use it in response to Dave. It has nothing to do with churches on my part in an attempt to "denigrate" them.

The part you attribute to churches is in your mind.

Besides, I can denigrate churches all I like as far as that goes, but I needn't do that.

Lets be honest - with the wide spread molestation and abuse of children in both the Protestant and Catholic churches, clown TeeVee evangelists, and the "Ted Haggards" of Christianity, they denigrate themselves with no help from me.

“Nothing can stop, This Pony..”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#150240 Jan 26, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I wouldn't even bother entertaining the idea of an IPU.
Unlike you so-called atheists, on sites like this day in & day out, discussing a God you claim to not believe in.
In football we would call that a dodge. But in reality we call that evasion.
You cannot disprove the IPU any more than I can disprove your god.
Think....why is that?

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#150241 Jan 26, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>

As far as deities go, you have human beings that say they can feel the presence of one, or more. Lots of humans, actually. So there is a link to somewhere beyond what you can physically sense. You just ain't found it.
All that tells me is that there are lots of deluded humans, actually.

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#150242 Jan 26, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> In football we would call that a dodge. But in reality we call that evasion.
You cannot disprove the IPU any more than I can disprove your god.
Think....why is that?
Yes, you can.

The IPU is a single entity. It might be invisible, but you can spray paint it and then see it. The concept of a God is different. It is all encompassing.

Topix atheists lack the ability to understand the difference. They lack the mental vision to see past the physical. Reactive to physical forces only.

They like to beat their mental puds with imagined intellectuality, too.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#150243 Jan 26, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes. YES!
Meet me here in about 3 hours with your hip scarf on.
What? Just the hip scarf? but it's cold outside, what if i get a cold?

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#150244 Jan 26, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
All that tells me is that there are lots of deluded humans, actually.
Fine, if that's how u feel, i'll cut your name off the list....i'm sure u don't wanna see a deluded girl, wearing just a hip scarf, belly dancing!

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#150245 Jan 26, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
But you're missing the point.
There are ways to locate Bigfoot. It has not been discovered even though many many people look for it. All you need is your eyes to see it & any camera to record it.
Same goes for an elephant in your room.
There are no means of analyzing God in the same sense. Your eyes do not see Him. Your ears do not hear Him. Your senses seem to betray you. All known forms of detection fail.
If *all* forms of detection fail, then what does it mean to claim existence?
So does that mean God doesn't exist or you simply lacks the means to detect Him?
if there are *no* methods of detection, then God doesn't exist. Existence *means* there would be some interaction and therefore a method of detection.
There have been billions of people around the world (including myself) that claims to have felt, heard or seen God in various different ways.
Until someone comes up with a way of actually detecting the supernatural or detecting God, an atheists opinion of no God is just that - an opinion, not fact.
But an opinion that is very much supported by the lack of evidence in a supernatural.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#150246 Jan 26, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, you can.
The IPU is a single entity. It might be invisible, but you can spray paint it and then see it. The concept of a God is different. It is all encompassing.
Topix atheists lack the ability to understand the difference. They lack the mental vision to see past the physical. Reactive to physical forces only.
They like to beat their mental puds with imagined intellectuality, too.
You are right, we lack the ability to see past the physical. Seeing *means* there is a physical interaction. Even if it isn't with the eyes or skin or tongue, any form of detection means a physical interaction. A complete lack of such interaction is indistinguishable from non-existence.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#150247 Jan 26, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I wouldn't even bother entertaining the idea of an IPU.
Unlike you so-called atheists, on sites like this day in & day out, discussing a God you claim to not believe in.
And the reason we have to discuss this is that there are so many people around us that call us silly or stupid for not believing. There are so many theists that are attempting to make our schools into churches and government into a theocracy. THAT is the basic problem. If you went away and believed and didn't attempt to control everyone else's life, there would be no problem.

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
The Consequences of Atheism 1 hr Uncle Sam 727
A New Kinder, Gentler Atheism 1 hr EdSed 319
Well that's religitards for you... 1 hr EdSed 2
"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 5 hr Denisova 16,707
Richard Dawkins - God is evil, pedophilesa not ... (Sep '13) 6 hr thetruth 3,035
Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 7 hr thetruth 4,780
Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) Fri Thinking 6,033
More from around the web