Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

[Eagle12]

Aura Mytha wrote:

<quoted text>
Biogenesis is a truth yes , but it does not explain everything.
Thought it is a truth that nonliving matter does not spring to life, it does not explain origin. Nor does it refute it's having an origin
from nonliving matter. It only explains it is not a continual process. This law was to counter the idea of spontaneous generation,
when it was thought rotten meat generated flies.
So very misused by scientifically challenged individuals who would even deny evolution, which is also a part of biogenesis. Which does encompass these concepts,
Evolution
Mutation
Genetic code
Metabolism
Photosynthesis
Respiration
Carbon cycle
Oxygen cycle
Limiting factor
Ecosystem
.

I would have a much harder time rejecting evolution if our mail man was an orangutan. Or the New York Cap drivers were baboons. We have similarities to these primates but intellectually we are light years ahead of them.

We are so much different than any species because of our intellect. We can build and create. Beavers can build dams but nothing like Hoover Dam.

Science has yet to answer how life began on the earth and self assembled. RNA and DNA doesn’t self assemble these complicated codes to life. Self creation from sterile material is impossible. It takes a designer or engineer to put the codes together.

If I was an atheist I would be asking how did it all start in the beginning without outside interference. Lots is said about science. But science has not even came close to answering this question.

[trekx]

Eagle12 wrote:

<quoted text>
The majority of wars were over territorial disputes. It even happens between neighbors when one puts up a fence. One side claims the fence is extended onto their side of the property. Next thing you know there is a dispute that leads to war.
{to be religious (any religion) you first have to be taught that religion}.
If this is true then Helen Keller (1880-1968) would have been an atheist. She was both deaf and blind but never drifted to atheism. Living in complete isolation from the world she acknowledged she always knew God was there even before she could communicate.

First off read a non bias non religions history book. and second Helen Keller was 19 Months or a year and a half be she contracted an illness that left her deaf and blind. plenty of time for some brainwashing.. And she was able to communicate somewhat with Martha Washington, the six year old daughter of the family cook, who understood her signs; and by the age of seven, Helen had more than 60 home signs to communicate with her family. So your argument is completely invalid, Yes read more than one book you can learn alot ...

[River Tam]

Eagle12 wrote:

<quoted text>
The majority of wars were over territorial disputes. It even happens between neighbors when one puts up a fence. One side claims the fence is extended onto their side of the property. Next thing you know there is a dispute that leads to war.
{to be religious (any religion) you first have to be taught that religion}.
If this is true then Helen Keller (1880-1968) would have been an atheist. She was both deaf and blind but never drifted to atheism. Living in complete isolation from the world she acknowledged she always knew God was there even before she could communicate.

Eagle12 wrote:

<quoted text>

If this is true then Helen Keller (1880-1968) would have been an atheist. She was both deaf and blind but never drifted to atheism. Living in complete isolation from the world she acknowledged she always knew God was there even before she could communicate.

BS

[macumazahn]

It aint necessarily so wrote:

<quoted text>
Gomer. That's a beautiful name. The bible has many:
Nimrod
Dorcas
Jehu
Jethro
Gomer
Gad
Ham
Dodo

I still like Jehu, son of Nimshi.

Earliest citation I know for dangerous driving.

[Adam]

Is it ok to rubbish comforting myths? Is it easier to believe in a comforting myth than harsh reality? Just raising the Q for debate.

[River Tam]

Adam wrote:

Is it ok to rubbish comforting myths? Is it easier to believe in a comforting myth than harsh reality? Just raising the Q for debate.

It depends on how old you are.

[Mikko]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
Lies.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows...

[Adam]

River Tam wrote:

<quoted text>
It depends on how old you are.

Agree. I think as adults we dont need a security blanket any more.

[-Skeptic-]

Eagle12 wrote:

<quoted text>
The majority of wars were over territorial disputes. It even happens between neighbors when one puts up a fence. One side claims the fence is extended onto their side of the property. Next thing you know there is a dispute that leads to war.
{to be religious (any religion) you first have to be taught that religion}.
If this is true then Helen Keller (1880-1968) would have been an atheist. She was both deaf and blind but never drifted to atheism. Living in complete isolation from the world she acknowledged she always knew God was there even before she could communicate.

This anecdote proves nothing - you have no proof of god but you don't even have the decency to stop lying about it to everyone...

[Thinking]

Jehu- product of a jumping Jehoshaphat.

macumazahn wrote:

<quoted text>I still like Jehu, son of Nimshi.
Earliest citation I know for dangerous driving.

[-Skeptic-]

Eagle12 wrote:

<quoted text>
I would have a much harder time rejecting evolution if our mail man was an orangutan. Or the New York Cap drivers were baboons. We have similarities to these primates but intellectually we are light years ahead of them.
We are so much different than any species because of our intellect. We can build and create. Beavers can build dams but nothing like Hoover Dam.
Science has yet to answer how life began on the earth and self assembled. RNA and DNA doesn’t self assemble these complicated codes to life. Self creation from sterile material is impossible. It takes a designer or engineer to put the codes together.
If I was an atheist I would be asking how did it all start in the beginning without outside interference. Lots is said about science. But science has not even came close to answering this question.

"If I was an atheist..."

...You're not even close...

[River Tam]

Adam wrote:

<quoted text>
Agree. I think as adults we dont need a security blanket any more.

471 days from now I'll be old enough to legally buy alcohol in my state of residence.

105 days from now I can no longer be called a teenager.

I still sleep with my stuffed rabbit.

[Adam]

River Tam wrote:

<quoted text>
471 days from now I'll be old enough to legally buy alcohol in my state of residence.

I think that just encourages illegal drinking. Here you are legally an adult at 18 and can buy alcohol from then. In fact 16 and 17 year olds can drink at a restuarant if accompanied by an adult.

[Thinking]

When did you first successfully illegally buy? I was 15, but I got refused several times.

We used to get female friends to buy for all of us as no one seemed to care if they were 18 or not.

River Tam wrote:

<quoted text>
471 days from now I'll be old enough to legally buy alcohol in my state of residence.
105 days from now I can no longer be called a teenager.
I still sleep with my stuffed rabbit.

[River Tam]

Thinking wrote:

When did you first successfully illegally buy? I was 15, but I got refused several times.
We used to get female friends to buy for all of us as no one seemed to care if they were 18 or not.
<quoted text>

I don't drink alcohol but I think it's extremely stupid to consider me an adult but make it illegal for me to engage in adult vices.

I agree with Adam when he says it just encourages teenagers to break the law.

It's all about........Christianity..... .shhhhhhhhh......blue laws don't exist in America.

[Thinking]

I don't really drink alcohol either. It's just that independent brewers and vineyards keep putting loads of it into my beers and wines.

River Tam wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't drink alcohol but I think it's extremely stupid to consider me an adult but make it illegal for me to engage in adult vices.
I agree with Adam when he says it just encourages teenagers to break the law.
It's all about........Christianity..... .shhhhhhhhh......blue laws don't exist in America.

[Aerobatty]

Eagle12 wrote:

<quoted text>I would have a much harder time rejecting evolution if our mail man was an orangutan. Or the New York Cap drivers were baboons. We have similarities to these primates but intellectually we are light years ahead of them.

We are so much different than any species because of our intellect. We can build and create. Beavers can build dams but nothing like Hoover Dam.

Science has yet to answer how life began on the earth and self assembled. RNA and DNA doesnÂ’t self assemble these complicated codes to life. Self creation from sterile material is impossible. It takes a designer or engineer to put the codes together.

If I was an atheist I would be asking how did it all start in the beginning without outside interference. Lots is said about science. But science has not even came close to answering this question.

Bullshit.

Science is coming closer to that answer every day.

That you are too cowardly to look at the research is your problem.

[Thinking]

That's a very odd form of contraception.

Eagle12 wrote:

<quoted text>
...New York Cap drivers...

[River Tam]

Thinking wrote:

I don't really drink alcohol either. It's just that independent brewers and vineyards keep putting loads of it into my beers and wines.
<quoted text>

I have nothing against alcohol consumption. I have great fun with drunk people. Here's my favourite morning sentence:

"Anybody seen my wallet?"

"Why is there a check mark on my forehead?"

"Who was that Chinese girl?"

[Thinking]

Whoever this foot fits, I shall marry... sh*t! Where's my wallet?

River Tam wrote:

<quoted text>
I have nothing against alcohol consumption. I have great fun with drunk people. Here's my favourite morning sentence:
"Anybody seen my wallet?"
"Why is there a check mark on my forehead?"
"Who was that Chinese girl?"