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

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#154740 Feb 17, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
It is the connections of those lifeless atoms and maintenance of those connections that produce life.
Place battery, light bulb, wire, and connectors on table.
Get back to me when they assemble themselves and light the room.
Oh, schedule a periodic delivery of fresh batteries until such occurs.
You let me know when you can live for 2 billion years to witness it.

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#154741 Feb 17, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
That is a claim you can make, but there is no evidence for it. And my basic point still remains: that *every* atom is your body is non-alive, yet those 'dead lifeless' atoms still combine to produce life.
<quoted text>
While I am interested in abiogenesis, I don't have the technical knowledge of organic chemistry required to pursue the question in depth.
<quoted text>
We have been working on the question for about 60 years. Less if you also require some knowledge of the genetic code. In that time, we have shown the basic building blocks of life spontaneously form under a variety of conditions. We have produced microspheres that are capable of catalyzing reactions required for life, that grow and divide. Given the the natural process on life took at least a couple of hundred million years, I don't consider that bad progress at all.
Mars has always been a borderline case for life off of Earth: a bit too far from the sun, low gravity (so the atmosphere diffuses away), and no other source of heat. Even if there was life on Mars very early on, I strongly doubt it would still be here OR that we would be likely to find unambiguous evidence of it. That there was running water certainly helps the case, but a lack of nitrogen compounds hurts it. I'd give it about a 20% chance of ever having life and about a 5% chance of our finding it even if it did.
I am much more enthused about Titan. It has a heat source from tidal action, has a wealth of organic compounds and has a decent atmosphere. It is still very cold and running water is an issue (although a ammonia based life might be feasible). I'd give Titan about a 10% chance of having life, although actual detection will still be another issue.
Let's face it. We have barely started to explore other worlds in our own solar system. But I certainly would not be surprised if Earth is the only body in our solar system with life. Even if it isn't, I strongly doubt anything more advanced than bacteria is anywhere circling the sun (other than us).
Now, when we go to other stars, the odds increase dramatically. First, we know that basic building blocks of life are common in the galaxy. We also know that stars with planets are very common (a fact that we did not know even 10 years ago). At this point, our techniques are biased towards finding planets that are close to the parent stars and so are unlikely to have life. But our technology is getting better on this. An oxygen atmosphere on another planet would be an almost sure sign of life there. And it is possible we could detect that even from here. I guess we shall see.
http://www.france24.com/en/20130216-jupiters-...

BTW, do you remember my posts about Saturn and Jupiter being planetary nurseries, and maybe our originating spot?

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#154742 Feb 17, 2013
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
You let me know when you can live for 2 billion years to witness it.
LOL.

You are the one claiming it. Prove it. You sit and watch. We will send you sandwiches and beer every so often.

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

#154743 Feb 17, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
That is a claim you can make, but there is no evidence for it. And my basic point still remains: that *every* atom is your body is non-alive, yet those 'dead lifeless' atoms still combine to produce life.
<quoted text>
While I am interested in abiogenesis, I don't have the technical knowledge of organic chemistry required to pursue the question in depth.
<quoted text>
We have been working on the question for about 60 years. Less if you also require some knowledge of the genetic code. In that time, we have shown the basic building blocks of life spontaneously form under a variety of conditions. We have produced microspheres that are capable of catalyzing reactions required for life, that grow and divide. Given the the natural process on life took at least a couple of hundred million years, I don't consider that bad progress at all.
Mars has always been a borderline case for life off of Earth: a bit too far from the sun, low gravity (so the atmosphere diffuses away), and no other source of heat. Even if there was life on Mars very early on, I strongly doubt it would still be here OR that we would be likely to find unambiguous evidence of it. That there was running water certainly helps the case, but a lack of nitrogen compounds hurts it. I'd give it about a 20% chance of ever having life and about a 5% chance of our finding it even if it did.
I am much more enthused about Titan. It has a heat source from tidal action, has a wealth of organic compounds and has a decent atmosphere. It is still very cold and running water is an issue (although a ammonia based life might be feasible). I'd give Titan about a 10% chance of having life, although actual detection will still be another issue.
Let's face it. We have barely started to explore other worlds in our own solar system. But I certainly would not be surprised if Earth is the only body in our solar system with life. Even if it isn't, I strongly doubt anything more advanced than bacteria is anywhere circling the sun (other than us).
Now, when we go to other stars, the odds increase dramatically. First, we know that basic building blocks of life are common in the galaxy. We also know that stars with planets are very common (a fact that we did not know even 10 years ago). At this point, our techniques are biased towards finding planets that are close to the parent stars and so are unlikely to have life. But our technology is getting better on this. An oxygen atmosphere on another planet would be an almost sure sign of life there. And it is possible we could detect that even from here. I guess we shall see.
Building blocks of life may indeed form in a lab environment with some outside technical interference.

Self creating life from non life forms has not happened, ever.

Remember as a kid those ABC building blocks?
Take all 26 letters and putting them in a large bag and shake them up. Then toss them out onto the floor.

What are the chances these letters will self assemble into complex words lined up from one end to the other in a orderly fashion?

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#154744 Feb 17, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL.
You are the one claiming it. Prove it. You sit and watch. We will send you sandwiches and beer every so often.
OK, I like a good German beer, say Aventinus, and schnitzel sandwiches. Can you manage that?

As you well know, evolution is happening all around us, but in 100,000 of your life times, you will never see on species evolve into another. So you scuff.

You have never seen Pluto, are you sure that it is there? Can its orbit be plotted?

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#154745 Feb 17, 2013
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>Self creating life from non life forms has not happened, ever.
How in the world do you know this?

Truth is, you don't.

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#154746 Feb 17, 2013
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
OK, I like a good German beer, say Aventinus, and schnitzel sandwiches. Can you manage that?
As you well know, evolution is happening all around us, but in 100,000 of your life times, you will never see on species evolve into another. So you scuff.
You have never seen Pluto, are you sure that it is there? Can its orbit be plotted?
You can bump into Pluto, it is so dark out there.

Very true, there is adaptation going on all about us on a continuing basis, but you say we will never see a species evolve into another one. Funny, that, eh? Any explanations why?

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#154747 Feb 17, 2013
http://scitechdaily.com/passenger-mutations-c...

Amazingly complex mechanism developed in such a short time, isn't it?

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

#154748 Feb 17, 2013
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
How in the world do you know this?
Truth is, you don't.
The truth is there has not been a lab experiment where life self created from sterile non living things. That would be big news in the science world if it had.

Since it has not happened in a lab then that is evidence it hasnít happened anywhere and at anytime.

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#154749 Feb 17, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
You can bump into Pluto, it is so dark out there.
Very true, there is adaptation going on all about us on a continuing basis, but you say we will never see a species evolve into another one. Funny, that, eh? Any explanations why?
Let's see. It takes millions of years; one would have to be alive when it was species "A" and then watch it's linage for millions of years watching it transition into Species "B"

Or, you can look at the fossil records and DNA to discover the same thing.

But I know you fundie/trolls. You want to see a dinosaur give birth to a chicken. Or some inanimate objects spring to life.

And all I want is for your god to replace Bethany Hamilton's arm. Wouldn't that bring great glory to the father?

“Nothing can stop, This Pony..”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#154750 Feb 17, 2013
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
You donít believe there was a first man and woman?
How could there not be a first?
Because there had to have been multiples. The fossil record shows it , with direct "physical" evidence.

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#154751 Feb 17, 2013
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
The truth is there has not been a lab experiment where life self created from sterile non living things. That would be big news in the science world if it had.
Since it has not happened in a lab then that is evidence it hasnít happened anywhere and at anytime.
That is stupid. No one has created a star in a lab, yet we have more than we can count.

Up to the 1970's, no one created a baby in a lab! Yet we have billions of them.

Diamonds were not created in a lab until the 1970's, I believe, yet we still had them.

Your logic has failed you.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#154752 Feb 17, 2013
Eagle12 wrote:
The truth is there has not been a lab experiment where life self created from sterile non living things.
They're called protocells you ignorant religitard. Oh wait, you don't know about them because they weren't in the bibull.....LOL...

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#154753 Feb 17, 2013
TheBlackSheep wrote:
No one has created a star in a lab, yet we have more than we can count.
Up to the 1970's, no one created a baby in a lab! Yet we have billions of them.
Diamonds were not created in a lab until the 1970's, I believe, yet we still had them.
Well stated. And now they have created the first artificial bacteria in the lab. Science marches on while religitards live in the dark ages, literally. LOL....

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#154754 Feb 17, 2013
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's see. It takes millions of years; one would have to be alive when it was species "A" and then watch it's linage for millions of years watching it transition into Species "B"
Or, you can look at the fossil records and DNA to discover the same thing.
But I know you fundie/trolls. You want to see a dinosaur give birth to a chicken. Or some inanimate objects spring to life.
And all I want is for your god to replace Bethany Hamilton's arm. Wouldn't that bring great glory to the father?
Amusing.

And all you want to do is believe magic can happen.

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#154755 Feb 17, 2013
Mylan wrote:
<quoted text>Well stated. And now they have created the first artificial bacteria in the lab. Science marches on while religitards live in the dark ages, literally. LOL....
What you have to remember is, this(these) is(are) just trolls. They don't believe in god any more than I do.

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#154757 Feb 17, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Amusing.
And all you want to do is believe magic can happen.
So, again you skipped the real discussion! Amazing!

You claim that your god can do anything. Let's see some magic!

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

#154758 Feb 17, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Because there had to have been multiples. The fossil record shows it , with direct "physical" evidence.
Multiples?

Are you saying the first humans on the earth were like quintuplets?

Several sets of quintuplets born at the same time?

What did all these quintuplets feed on? Saps from trees?

Boy that would take a hell of a lot milk jugs.

Who then changes all them diapers?

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

#154759 Feb 17, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Because there had to have been multiples. The fossil record shows it , with direct "physical" evidence.
Adam and Eve did have twins but one clobbered the sh*t out of the other one.

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#154760 Feb 17, 2013
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
So, again you skipped the real discussion! Amazing!
You claim that your god can do anything. Let's see some magic!
What are you willing to pay to see it?

Your belief that an all powerful entity would be expected to do tricks on your demand is very strong evidence of a severe psychosis.

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) 25 min Denisova 16,719
The Consequences of Atheism 47 min Thinking 759
Is Religion Childish? 55 min Cujo 140
Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 4 hr ChristineM 4,806
Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 7 hr ChristineM 6,034
Richard Dawkins - God is evil, pedophilesa not ... (Sep '13) 7 hr ChristineM 3,036
.com | Why is Atheism on the Rise - Final Response 8 hr thetruth 6
More from around the web