Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

[Givemeliberty]

Hey a book on people's hallucinations! Neat! No proof of god or afterlife but great for a laugh.

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B0001I1KN2/ref=...
Read it.

[RiversideRedneck]

Givemeliberty wrote:

I know you theists hate it because the burden of proof is difficult when your god is merely a figment of your imagination, and you know it.

There is no evidence for that, and you know it.

[RiversideRedneck]

Givemeliberty wrote:

The fact that people don't believe in any god is proof for atheism.

No, here's your perfect version of atheism:

"Givemeliberty wrote:
I have no proof or evidence but it's my delusion and I like it!"

(you sum it up nicely.)

[blacklagoon]

Dave Nelson wrote:

<quoted text>
Heh heh.
I have posted about science being just another religion.
Ever notice how it says everything is just perfect? Nice and stable?
Keep those covers over your head. It is nice and safe in your little world there. It is a scary universe out there.

Every time I begin to think you have even a shred of intelligence and understanding, you fire off one of these idiotic posts. You reach around and pull a huge gob of shit out of your ass and smear it all over Topix. RELIGION..."The belief in and worship of a SUPERHUMAN CONTROLLING POWER." Now exactly WHAT superhuman God thing do I worship. What prayers do I say and to whom? In what church is science to be found? Do you real understand just how stupid you appear uttering this bullshit?

You know nothing about music and now you have proven you know nothing about science. Science NEVER says "Everything is just perfect" Nor does it say "Everything is nice and stable." Does the word entropy mean anything to you? Does biology say that the human body is "just perfect?" Our sun will cease to be taking the entire solar system with it, is that "perfect and nice and stable?" With numbing cold, bombarded with radiation, no atmosphere, distances that are unobtainable, yeah, the universe is a scary place. God thing we have science to understand it isn't it.

[KittenKoder]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
There is no evidence for that, and you know it.

Since you have no solid evidence that your god exists, then it is a figment of your imagination.

[Dave Nelson]

blacklagoon wrote:

<quoted text>Every time I begin to think you have even a shred of intelligence and understanding, you fire off one of these idiotic posts. You reach around and pull a huge gob of shit out of your ass and smear it all over Topix. RELIGION..."The belief in and worship of a SUPERHUMAN CONTROLLING POWER." Now exactly WHAT superhuman God thing do I worship. What prayers do I say and to whom? In what church is science to be found? Do you real understand just how stupid you appear uttering this bullshit?
You know nothing about music and now you have proven you know nothing about science. Science NEVER says "Everything is just perfect" Nor does it say "Everything is nice and stable." Does the word entropy mean anything to you? Does biology say that the human body is "just perfect?" Our sun will cease to be taking the entire solar system with it, is that "perfect and nice and stable?" With numbing cold, bombarded with radiation, no atmosphere, distances that are unobtainable, yeah, the universe is a scary place. God thing we have science to understand it isn't it.

Oh, but it won't be in our lifetimes, they assure you. Keep that funding coming in so we can study it, though. Don't want to make any mistakes, eh?

Your belief in science is a substitute. It is an opiate. Science is OK, it is the scientists you have to question.

You will love this one.

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

[Largelanguage]

KittenKoder wrote:

<quoted text>
Since you have no solid evidence that your god exists, then it is a figment of your imagination.

Riverside redneck ignores you, because you are just 7 younger than him, lol.

I bet even if it was 45 year old teaching RR the 46 year old something, he would squeal like a worm!

[Siro]

KittenKoder wrote:

<quoted text>
Since you have no solid evidence that your god exists, then it is a figment of your imagination.

Since you have no solid evidence that your vagina exists, then it is a figment of your imagination.

[KittenKoder]

Siro wrote:

<quoted text>
Since you have no solid evidence that your vagina exists, then it is a figment of your imagination.

Funny thing, I never claimed that existed, you did.

[Dave Nelson]

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

Buckethead even wrote a song about Topix atheists.

[Buck Crick]

blacklagoon wrote:

<quoted text>Put down your holy book, and pick up a science book, anyone will do. "I'm against religion because it teaches you to be satisfied with not understanding the world around you."
Science will teach you to be skeptical, to be a free thinker, to question everything. In doing this you will discover that evidence is what is important. For your imaginary God and this fictitious Jesus you will find NO evidence. Run, don't walk, away from your Church of Christ, it will open your mind to the true majesty of the universe.

Sure. That's how we learned about the Global Cooling Crisis a few years ago. Icebergs, said the HOLY SCIENTISTS, were going to float inland and topple over the NY skyscrapers.

Hey, BlackBuffoon, better buy you a Coleman heater!

[Buck Crick]

Richardfs wrote:

<quoted text>
No thanks, you can keep your myth I for one will stay with reality.

Spirit is reality. What you see as reality is only a projected dream.

“Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists. Herein lies the peace of god.”

-A Course in Miracles

[Aerobatty]

Eagle12 wrote:

<quoted text>
Lot’s of evidence for a “Big Bang.”
All you have to do is hold your ear about 24 inches from the barrel of a 12 gauge shotgun., Be sure to stay clear of the line of fire. Then have someone pull the trigger with a 3” magnum load.

The cosmic Big Bang was silent.

[KittenKoder]

Buck Crick wrote:

<quoted text>
Sure. That's how we learned about the Global Cooling Crisis a few years ago. Icebergs, said the HOLY SCIENTISTS, were going to float inland and topple over the NY skyscrapers.
Hey, BlackBuffoon, better buy you a Coleman heater!

You think too many movies are fact.

[Aerobatty]

Dave Nelson wrote:

<quoted text>
http://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/...
That is how the proton was discovered. More accurately, how it was "deduced" to exist.
This was all based on total electrical charges.
That quantity became an assumed standard.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/pa...
That was the discovery of the neutron. Note how it too was "deduced"
There are issues also about the electron as a "particle".
Noting "observed". All deduced and assumed.
The proton and neutron are about 1836 times the mass of the electron.
Again "deduced" and assumed.
Various other "particles" have been "deduced" that make up the proton and neutron.
Lots of changes over the years resulting in "new particles" to fill in the holes of these "deduced".
The Higg's Boson is about 30-40 times the mass of the proton or neutron.
How could they have missed that?
Because they were wrong to begin with in their assumptions from their deductions.
They ignored how nature flows in the pursuit of a math model. It is quite evident in the technology derived from the applied sciences. As I have tried to point out, they took the physics out of physics and replaced it with math.
Theoretical physics, and disciplines that use their info, are heading down a blind alley. Thankfully, it is the applied physics people that create the stuff we use, and make the important discoveries.

All of these "deduced" particles have been subsequently observed right where they were previously mathematically deduced to be with their deduced masses and charges.

Do you live in a cave?

[Dave Nelson]

Polymath, I have no question about your math skills. Just in how you apply them.

Got a challenge for you. Using numbers to validate the assertions you claim you are learning in fizziks skool. This will be right up your alley. Statistical probabilities.

I posted about this configuration of matter and energy peering out into that great unknown and being absolutely sure there is no possibility of a supernatural force or deity using intelligent design to create us a little earlier.

Since you are in fizziks skoool, you should have access to those percentages I was referring to, plus a whole bunch more variables. You should have the general idea of what I am getting at.

Crunch some numbers and give us the probabilities of that small portion of assumed organized matter looking upon the greater in being right. Since Topix limits us to 4000 characters, perhaps you would post a link to the final numbers we can read? Quite likely those negative exponential numbers will run off the page.

[Aerobatty]

mtimber wrote:

<quoted text>
I agree with you argument.
First of all you have to be able to account for Absolute Truth, before you can make truth claims.
And I can account for it, because the God who Created everything has revealed that account to humanity.
You however, as an atheist, cannot account for Absolute Truth.
So you cannot demand it from another, until you can account for Absolute Truth, from which to argue from...
As you cannot do that, you have no basis to question anything...
Account for Absolute Truth...
No?
Didn't think so...:-)

What absolute truth?

[Siro]

KittenKoder wrote:

<quoted text>
Funny thing, I never claimed that existed, you did.

Youre the one claiming to be female, what does every female have?
But you dont, I was and still am right in pointing out that you are just another poof in a dress.
When I posted your own words in which you said you are 'asexual' you said that it meant you did not desire sex. I said to go without sex meant you are either chaste or celibate, you then farted out that 'asexual' applies to you because it is used 'emotionally'.
You are either male or female? True? Or a hermaphrodite.
You accused me of projecting when I brought the hermaphrodite issue.
You claim not to have a vagina.
That just leaves one possibility left......
You are just another POOF!

[Dave Nelson]

KittenKoder wrote:

<quoted text>
Funny thing, I never claimed that existed, you did.

Possession of such is assumed for the female species of human material construction. In the genetic blueprints or something.

You claim to be a woman, and claimed to be a girl.

[Dave Nelson]

Aerobatty wrote:

<quoted text>
All of these "deduced" particles have been subsequently observed right where they were previously mathematically deduced to be with their deduced masses and charges.
Do you live in a cave?

Got a photo? Not a drawing, a photo.

All of that is based upon charge versus what is assumed as mass.