Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

Full story: Webbunny tumblelog

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.

Comments (Page 7,473)

Showing posts 149,441 - 149,460 of223,215
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#155495
Feb 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

http://www.weather.com/news/science/massive-s...

Pay no attention. It is only EM. Totally insignificant.

Ignore the fact it is growing so rapidly, which kinda means it is very energetic. Just mass in a higher acceleration rate. Ignorable perturbation.

Gravity is the basis of your life and existence. And virtual particles. Ask Polymath.

However, until it decides what it wants to do, keep track so you can schedule phone calls and avoid various other minor inconveniences.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#155496
Feb 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>You can be a critical thinker and avoid complacency and settling for mediocrity. It has NOTHING to do with being a pain is the ass, unless you are the one being criticized for accepting mediocrity. For following the "herd," accepting what is the popular stance and conforming to the norm.
The true creative mind is a skeptical one, a mind that values NOT being sucked into what is considered the norm. The creative mind seeks higher levels in all aspects of life including Art forms. It abhors anything lacking in substance especially if it is trying to be passed off as truly creative and of the highest standers. The simple mind follows the crowd as you apparently do, as demonstrated by you being totally impressed with numbers and popularity. "He's sold 40 CD's and has appeared on youtube." "He's more "popular" so I guess that means-----to you anyway, that he must be really good!!!
Yes, anyone believing is anything for NO good reason is WRONG!!! Our beliefs inform our actions, believing in anything without evidence or for NO reason is not only WRONG, its dangerous.
"Yes, anyone believing is anything for NO good reason is WRONG!!! Our beliefs inform our actions, believing in anything without evidence or for NO reason is not only WRONG, its dangerous."

So, I take it that is what you believe?

I believe myself and others may believe you have a wrong perspective on which you are basing your beliefs that you believe in so strongly, which is in essence believing without good evidence as your belief that believing in anything can be based upon no good reason is really beyond logic. Everyone has a reason to justify their belief to themselves.

Or something like that. I believe.

Oh, Enigma is another of my favorites. Do you believe my belief Michael Cretu is good is illusional? Feel the music.

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#155497
Feb 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Or nothing at all like that.
Poor Poly. Your virtual particles are blinding you. They are warping your perspective. Random little buggers are good at that.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#155498
Feb 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Kitten and Poly remind me of little Johnny getting home from school one day.

He runs into the kitchen while Mommy is fixing dinner hollering "Mom, guess what I learned in school today?".

"What was that, dear?", says Mommy.

"How babies are made!", gushes Johnny.

Then, as she slowly and deliberately picks up the pot she just dropped, Mommy says "Oh?".

Little Johnny then gushes out "Yeah, they have these things called zygotes that make them!".

Mom says, as she let's out a deep breath, "Oh, very good dear." "Now, let's go wash your hands".

A God would just smile.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#155499
Feb 21, 2013
 
Dave Nelson wrote:
http://www.weather.com/news/sc ience/massive-sunspot-forms-20 130220
Pay no attention. It is only EM. Totally insignificant.
Ignore the fact it is growing so rapidly, which kinda means it is very energetic. Just mass in a higher acceleration rate. Ignorable perturbation.
Gravity is the basis of your life and existence. And virtual particles. Ask Polymath.
However, until it decides what it wants to do, keep track so you can schedule phone calls and avoid various other minor inconveniences.
Did I ever say that EM was irrelevant? In some situations, it can be very relevant. But not *all* situations. Also, it is important to be precise about exactly what is going on. You tend to confuse things like polarity, electricity, electric fields, electric potentials, not to mention magnetic fields, magnets, and magnetism. Without precise use of language, understanding is impossible.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#155500
Feb 21, 2013
 
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong.
1) Populations evolve, not individuals.
2) The definitions of 'fish, mammal, T-Rex, etc' are fuzzy. There isn't a precise line separating T-Rex from 'not-T-Rex'.
3) The amount of time it takes a changing population to cross that fuzzy boundary is measured in hundreds, if not thousands, of generations.
These together mean that no single individual can be labeled the 'first' of any species. Nor, for that matter, can any single generation.
There has to be a precise line separating T-Rex from 'not-T-Rex'. We just haven't found it yet & likely never will.

T-Rex was a living animal, there had to be a first & a last.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#155501
Feb 21, 2013
 
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
I specifically told you WHY you were wrong: populations evolve, not individuals.
I never said that populations don't evolve. But at some point a population of something gradually became a population of Tyrannosaurus Rex, meaning that there had to be a first T-Rex, just like there had to be a last T-Rex.
Thinking

Yeovil, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#155502
Feb 21, 2013
 
Why?
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
There has to be a precise line separating T-Rex from 'not-T-Rex'
CunningLinguist

Tavares, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#155503
Feb 21, 2013
 
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
How long have you been in the bible bashing business?
Seems a complete waste of time to bash something you claim to not believe in...
The conundrum is that there isn't anything to bash - it is written down for anyone to read! The Bible is its own enemy and the perfect path to atheism if properly read.(Asimov)

Lots of scripture is offensive, even to the Bible banger types - so they ignore those that are disgusting and excuse their Gods indiscretions which include slavery, murder, genocide, talking livestock and reptiles, witches and demons.

We do not require another person to 'explain' the contents for us.

Your Bible speaks for itself as do all 'holy books'.
Myth only - copy/pasted from even older myths.

The "Word of God", far from being inerrant, has always been a work in progress.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#155504
Feb 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Did I ever say that EM was irrelevant? In some situations, it can be very relevant. But not *all* situations. Also, it is important to be precise about exactly what is going on. You tend to confuse things like polarity, electricity, electric fields, electric potentials, not to mention magnetic fields, magnets, and magnetism. Without precise use of language, understanding is impossible.
You tend to not being able to put those things into a cogent systemic pattern that can then show a relationship between far distant objects. It is also very difficult to translate into the very, very overly nouned language you learned for you to understand those coarser and less educated terms.

Oh, look, off in the distance! A half mile it appears. A big headlight. Oh, and a loud noise of intermittent emission! Oddly, it appears to be in a continuum straddling those rails you are sitting between. Let me get out my spectrometer and rangefinder to see if it is approaching or moving away, or perhaps transversing the horizon. No I am sorry, it is well below the horizon now. Let me get a fix on it here and give you an accurate account of it's speed, composition, and probable path. I do wish there was a gravity field nearby I could plot any deviation from the projected path that may occur. We may discover a black hole.

Just have to calibrate this..

RUMBLE.RUMBLERUMBLERUMBLERUMBL ERUMBLE

Wow, the acoustic energy level of that was very high. I did manage to note it was an Amtrak, which does 90 MPH in this area. Two engines, too. 21 coaches.

Cool, huh, Poly?

Poly?

Poly?

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#155505
Feb 21, 2013
 
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I never said that populations don't evolve. But at some point a population of something gradually became a population of Tyrannosaurus Rex, meaning that there had to be a first T-Rex, just like there had to be a last T-Rex.
No, there doesn't have to be a first T-Rex.

Let's say you have a group of 200 S-Rexes (just making this species up). The herd is getting too big, 100 of them stay in the area (group A), 100 of them migrate to a new area (group B).

Group B's area has different types of prey, a different environment, and different selective pressures. That population gradually evolves to meet its new challenges.

Eventually, the sum of genetic changes that have occurred in Group B will cause them to be a distinct species from Group A. We can call them T-Rex. But, there is no single individual we point to as the "first T-Rex".

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#155506
Feb 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
No, there doesn't have to be a first T-Rex.
Let's say you have a group of 200 S-Rexes (just making this species up). The herd is getting too big, 100 of them stay in the area (group A), 100 of them migrate to a new area (group B).
Group B's area has different types of prey, a different environment, and different selective pressures. That population gradually evolves to meet its new challenges.
Eventually, the sum of genetic changes that have occurred in Group B will cause them to be a distinct species from Group A. We can call them T-Rex. But, there is no single individual we point to as the "first T-Rex".
How long does it take a S Rex to starve to death? Or how long before it adjusts to different species that have discovered its eggs are delicious and nutritious? Or even something that finds it to be delicious and nutritious and it best be avoided? Were there education classes available for those emigrants?
Anon

Lakewood, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#155507
Feb 21, 2013
 
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
"Yes, anyone believing is anything for NO good reason is WRONG!!! Our beliefs inform our actions, believing in anything without evidence or for NO reason is not only WRONG, its dangerous."
So, I take it that is what you believe?
I believe myself and others may believe you have a wrong perspective on which you are basing your beliefs that you believe in so strongly, which is in essence believing without good evidence as your belief that believing in anything can be based upon no good reason is really beyond logic. Everyone has a reason to justify their belief to themselves.
Or something like that. I believe.
Oh, Enigma is another of my favorites. Do you believe my belief Michael Cretu is good is illusional? Feel the music.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Oh wow man, it's so cosmic. Are you stuck in the sixties or something? I'd like to poke you in your Third Eye.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#155508
Feb 21, 2013
 
Anon wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh wow man, it's so cosmic. Are you stuck in the sixties or something? I'd like to poke you in your Third Eye.
Another music critic.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#155509
Feb 21, 2013
 
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
How long does it take a S Rex to starve to death? Or how long before it adjusts to different species that have discovered its eggs are delicious and nutritious? Or even something that finds it to be delicious and nutritious and it best be avoided? Were there education classes available for those emigrants?
Creationist tw*t with no morals.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#155510
Feb 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

CunningLinguist wrote:
<quoted text>
The conundrum is that there isn't anything to bash - it is written down for anyone to read! The Bible is its own enemy and the perfect path to atheism if properly read.(Asimov)
Lots of scripture is offensive, even to the Bible banger types - so they ignore those that are disgusting and excuse their Gods indiscretions which include slavery, murder, genocide, talking livestock and reptiles, witches and demons.
We do not require another person to 'explain' the contents for us.
Your Bible speaks for itself as do all 'holy books'.
Myth only - copy/pasted from even older myths.
The "Word of God", far from being inerrant, has always been a work in progress.
Spoken like a bible basher that is truly ignorant if the bible.

Well done.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#155511
Feb 21, 2013
 
Dave Nelson wrote:
http://www.weather.com/news/sc ience/massive-sunspot-forms-20 130220
Pay no attention. It is only EM. Totally insignificant.
Ignore the fact it is growing so rapidly, which kinda means it is very energetic. Just mass in a higher acceleration rate. Ignorable perturbation.
Gravity is the basis of your life and existence. And virtual particles. Ask Polymath.
However, until it decides what it wants to do, keep track so you can schedule phone calls and avoid various other minor inconveniences.
You ignored the entire article quite well.

"Sun activity goes through cycles that stretch about 11 years. Currently the sun is moving toward the peak of a very energetic cycle which scientists expect to last through the middle of this year."

I have lived through 3 of these already, and nope, it's not something to worry about.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#155512
Feb 21, 2013
 
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
No, there doesn't have to be a first T-Rex.
Let's say you have a group of 200 S-Rexes (just making this species up). The herd is getting too big, 100 of them stay in the area (group A), 100 of them migrate to a new area (group B).
Group B's area has different types of prey, a different environment, and different selective pressures. That population gradually evolves to meet its new challenges.
Eventually, the sum of genetic changes that have occurred in Group B will cause them to be a distinct species from Group A. We can call them T-Rex. But, there is no single individual we point to as the "first T-Rex".
Exactly. At some point, "S-Rex" becomes a T-Rex, meaning there was a first T-Rex...

Unless you're gonna assume that more than one was born at the exact same time....

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#155513
Feb 21, 2013
 
Thinking wrote:
We separate out rubbish into a couple of categories. The council collects it, recycles about 80% of it and landfills the rest.
The cost of landfill to the council is increasing and so the council is motivated to get better at recycling.
Other countries on the continent do a better job of recycling than the UK, it's a work in progress.
<quoted text>
80% recycling is pretty good. Itís surprising you have any land available for land fill in the UK. Iím glad to hear that you guys donít do ocean dumping.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#155514
Feb 21, 2013
 
Thinking wrote:
Why?
<quoted text>
Because at one point in history there were no T-Rex's, then there were T-Rex's.

Did they all just evolve at once? No.

That would suggest that at some point in history, the first T-Rex was born, which spawned millions of others.

Then of course, I guess nature said that history's best killing machine isn't good enough & they all died.......

ugh

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 149,441 - 149,460 of223,215
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••