Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258484 comments on the Webbunny tumblelog story from Jul 18, 2009, titled Atheism requires as much faith as religion?. In it, Webbunny tumblelog reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Webbunny tumblelog.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#157740 Mar 2, 2013
Imhotep wrote:
<quoted text>Yes it is!

I would say religion = organized superstition.
"I would say religion = organized superstition "

There is a general consensus that:

A person who believes in a specific God is a Theist.

A person who actively denies the existence of God is an Atheist.

A person who feels that we have no method by which we can conclude whether a deity exists is an Agnostic.

“The word cult in current popular usage usually refers to a new religious movement or other group whose beliefs or practices are considered abnormal or bizarre.[1] The word originally denoted a system of ritual practices. The word was first used in the early 17th century denoting homage paid to a divinity and derived from the French culte or Latin cultus,‘worship’, from cult-,‘inhabited, cultivated, worshipped,’ from the verb colere,'care, cultivation'.”~ Wikipedia

“Dogma is the official system of belief or doctrine held by a religion, or a particular group or organization”~ Wikipedia.

Organizations of atheists ritually denounce the existence of God. They have become an organization, dedicated to the activity of removing all relic’s of Theism from public places. Their dogma is based entirely on their notion or belief that God does not exist. These organizations work tirelessly towards this effort.

It is no longer possible for an individual to simply state they are an atheist, by reason of personal belief, and not be affiliated, by membership or indirect alignment with these organizations.

These organizations have an official system of belief and their doctrine is to end the belief of theism on this planet.

They are exclusive, ritualistic, and have a belief system which generates activity within and beyond the boundaries of the organization. They are a Cult.

http://www.ted.com/conversations/13943/is_ath...

From: The Columbus Dispatch:

February 4, 2011

Church, without God

“Stan Bradley likes Bible stories, admires Martin Luther and uses expressions such as 'heavens, no.'

The Lithopolis man is president of a local congregation and rarely misses a Sunday service. Occasionally, he goes to his wife's church instead.

For these and other reasons, Bradley considers himself religious.”

He is also an atheist.

continued:

“Like Bradley, some atheists participate in organized religion for its social and psychological benefits.”

continued:

“Churches are great places to find friends, support and youth education, so nonbelievers and believers alike join congregations to fill those needs, he said.

He has spoken to elderly and sick people who can no longer go to church and they say they most miss the feeling of community.

Recent research from Harvard University and the University of Wisconsin backs him up. It found that religious people tend to be happier than nonreligious people, not because of belief but because of the friendships found at church.”

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/faith...

The Atheist's Bible: An Illustrious Collection of Irreverent Thoughts [Hardcover]
Joan Konner (Author)
3.6 out of 5 stars See all reviews (29 customer reviews)

List Price:$16.99
Price:$11.55 & eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25. Details
Deal Price:
You Save:$5.44 (32%)

Only 4 left in stock (more on the way).

http://www.amazon.com/The-Atheists-Bible-Illu...

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#157741 Mar 2, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>No it is space expanding. Virtual real estate of
pure space inserted between stuff. Compliments of General Relativity , now tip the waitress and go home . The parties over, the curtains closed don't go away mad....just go away!
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
So rocks falling out of the sky is space expanding? Really?
The charges of matter will repel them, "expanding space". Not illogical for a seed sprouting.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#157743 Mar 2, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
I answered that question. Please read the answer and move on.
You could've just wrote "No, I haven't done any tests."

That would've been easier.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#157744 Mar 2, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
Fossils.
What fossils?

Care to be specific?

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#157745 Mar 2, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Show me one scientist who has ever said they know everything. Just one.
I told u! Richard dawkins thinks evolution created organisms and that he 100% knows that the universe has no intelligent design. He said he is willing to have an intellectual discussion about a scientific God, but he will not accept the possibility! WHY NOT? How can a scientist say he is not even gonna think of an alternative theory and just stick to one coz he don't want to talk about a God coz he don't care!

James Watson has said so much sh*t without evidence. He said black people r thick cos of genes and he said stupid is a DISEASE of the genes!

I will not support scientists who talk sh*t!!! They r giving a bad name to science! science is about coming up with an hypothesis and testing it and taking into consideration ALL the evidence! Half of science today is people's views/theories stated as facts and it's ridiculous that if anyone speaks out against it, they are called nuts and said to be against science!

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#157746 Mar 2, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
Humans are thought to have started agriculture 12,000 years ago. Modern humans are thought to have started about 50,000 years ago.

Lets's start with agriculture. This allowed them to stay in one place and learn how to exploit the land and resources.

Our modern culture and technology is really only about 300 years advanced beyond the Iron Age.

Same humans, same brain, same intellectual thinking capacity, lots and lots of experience in civilization building and social construction. Yet this didn't explode until a period of 300 years out of 12,000. That is 1/40th of human civilization.

There were some pretty impressive civilizations in ancient times, lasting even longer than our present one. Yet their science and technology didn't explode like ours. They surely weren't dumb. We still read some of their books and wisdom.

What was the factor to cause the sudden explosion of knowledge in our present civilization different from that past, and where did that explosion begin?
I'll admit it was me.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#157747 Mar 2, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O rders_of_magnitude_%28volume%2 9

Look at the last entry on the bottom.

That is an "at least".

Amazing that a few minds on earth can determine how the universe is put together from "observing" such a tiny portion.

Not that you can "prove" them wrong.

They stay in business that way.
"Look at the last entry on the bottom."

"Hide
DesktopMobile
Page by contributors like you
Content available under CC BY-SA 3.0 | Terms of Use"

Not getting it???????

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#157748 Mar 2, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Where's the evidence for this?
That would not have answered your questions at all, it would have been a dishonest answer because your questions were dishonest or lacking in scientific comprehension. I give you the benefit of the doubt and explained why your questions were mostly dubious, then answered "yes" to the one that was not. As I said, read the answers.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#157749 Mar 2, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Calm down, calm down.
Lemme get you a drink, then you can tell me all about it.
What was the lecture on?
Make it a large one!!! Orange juice, i mean!

It was basically 2 hours of; science is the answer to everything, there is no consciousness, we r not real human-beings, coz real is just our imagination, we r just machines! If u think the universe was created u need help!

U can imagine how pissed-off i was!!!! Oh but wait, i'm not real, so my emotions aren't real, so me being pissed-off wasn't real! Man, i should have punched him, coz my punch isn't real either!

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#157750 Mar 2, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
What fossils?
Care to be specific?
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/arti...

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#157751 Mar 2, 2013
Clementia wrote:
<quoted text>Say what? That science knows everything or that evolution created the first organisms?

Silly scientists say it all the time!! It's so shocking that intellectual people can be so dumb and arrogant!!

I'm sure Richard Dawkins said that evolution proves that there is no creator and no intelligent design to the universe! WTF?? HOW?

Also, then u got Stephen Hawking coming up with his theory of everything and attacking other ways of thinking and he thinks his way is the only right way. WFT? WHY?

This is absolutely shocking!! Scientists are turning into fanatic nutty people. They choose to ignore all other evidence and focus on the evidence they want to focus on. They just want to ignore consciousness and focus on matter. Science can't do that, it just can't! U can't be biased if u want to find out the truth!
Yes. Scientist are turning it to nut jobs because they feel the pressure of all there life longs work falling into pieces.
They're falling and can't get up.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#157752 Mar 2, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>First...so what is the Higgs, and why does it give matter mass?

Second, isn't it funny that we are compelled to correct clueless hacks who don't have a clue about the merest detail on which they write?
"Second, isn't it funny that we are compelled to correct clueless hacks who don't have a clue about the merest detail on which they write?"

Yes it is! Why do we bother?

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#157753 Mar 2, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>First...so what is the Higgs, and why does it give matter mass?

Second, isn't it funny that we are compelled to correct clueless hacks who don't have a clue about the merest detail on which they write?
"First...so what is the Higgs"

"Peter Ware Higgs CH FRS FRSE (born 29 May 1929) is a British theoretical physicist and emeritus professor at the University of Edinburgh.[2]

He is best known for his 1960s proposal of broken symmetry in electroweak theory, explaining the origin of mass of elementary particles in general and of the W and Z bosons in particular. This so-called Higgs mechanism, which was proposed by several physicists besides Higgs at about the same time, predicts the existence of a new particle, the Higgs boson (which was often described as "the most sought-after particle in modern physics"[3][4]). CERN announced on 4 July 2012 that they had experimentally established the existence of a Higgs-like boson,[5] but further work is needed to analyse its properties and see if it has the properties expected from the Standard Model Higgs boson.[6] The Higgs mechanism is generally accepted as an important ingredient in the Standard Model of particle physics, without which certain particles would have no mass.[7]

Higgs has been honoured with a number of awards in recognition of his work, including the 1981 Hughes Medal from the Royal Society, the 1984 Rutherford Medal from the Institute of Physics, the 1997 Dirac Medal and Prize for outstanding contributions to theoretical physics from the Institute of Physics, the 1997 High Energy and Particle Physics Prize by the European Physical Society, the 2004 Wolf Prize in Physics, the 2009 Oskar Klein Memorial Lecture medal from the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, the 2010 American Physical Society J. J. Sakurai Prize for Theoretical Particle Physics and a unique Higgs Medal from the Royal Society of Edinburgh in 2012.[8] The recent potential discovery of the Higgs boson prompted fellow physicist Stephen Hawking to note that he thought that Higgs should receive the Nobel Prize in Physics for his work.[9][10]"

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#157754 Mar 2, 2013
Clementia wrote:
<quoted text>
I told u! Richard dawkins thinks evolution created organisms and that he 100% knows that the universe has no intelligent design. He said he is willing to have an intellectual discussion about a scientific God, but he will not accept the possibility! WHY NOT? How can a scientist say he is not even gonna think of an alternative theory and just stick to one coz he don't want to talk about a God coz he don't care!
James Watson has said so much sh*t without evidence. He said black people r thick cos of genes and he said stupid is a DISEASE of the genes!
I will not support scientists who talk sh*t!!! They r giving a bad name to science! science is about coming up with an hypothesis and testing it and taking into consideration ALL the evidence! Half of science today is people's views/theories stated as facts and it's ridiculous that if anyone speaks out against it, they are called nuts and said to be against science!
First, he never said organisms were "created" at all, and he certainly didn't state that evolution answers the beginning of life. Also he has not actually said that there is no god, just that the christian god cannot exist, and I concur with him on that. I don't much like some of his personality traits, but you must be honest when speaking about someone anyone can watch and read on.

You mean this James Watson? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Watson

You will have to be more specific, as in actual references where he said those things, because the way you post it makes you look dishonest. This, combined with your complete misrepresentation of Dawkins, actually makes your entire argument questionable.

Now, you have a bit to learn about scientific theories, they are not some wild guess answer, they are not just "this is how I see it" assertions, they are not assertions at all, actually. They are, in fact, an explanation of how pieces of information fit together. A theory is only accepted after a lot of testing, verification, and evidence is collected. So no, there is no alternate theory to the theory of evolution just as there is no alternate theory to relativity or chemical theory.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#157755 Mar 2, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
"Second, isn't it funny that we are compelled to correct clueless hacks who don't have a clue about the merest detail on which they write?"
Yes it is! Why do we bother?
You bother because you are attempting to convince yourself that your belief is actually reality in spite of having no solid evidence to support or even suggest it.

I bother because it's good brain exercise and actually allows me to show off the cool things I have been learning. Not to mention, it's fun knowing that I know more about the universe than you do.

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#157756 Mar 2, 2013
Why mad scientists are dangerous.

You can try this at home.

Take your computer. It is designed to channel energy in particular ways to achieve a desired function. All of those circuits and materials were arranged deliberately.

Now, get an adapter and plug it into 240v.

The reason it doesn't work anymore is because those materials couldn't handle the extra energy. Molecules and thingies got rearranged and it don't work no more.

Now, let's take Momma Earth. For a long tim eth eold girl has been sitting here catching all of this energy from the universe, and channeling it through her lovely self. It is what made her so beautiful. But not by her own design. That energy pushed and pulled and arranged things to suit itself. It followed the path of least resistance, and if that didn't work, it kicked the shit out of what was in the way made what it could fall in line. This provided a path for later energy to follow. Unless that later energy was in a surge higher, in which it follows th epath of least resistance and then kicks the shit out of what's in the way and makes what it can follow the line. This happens on aperiodic basis.

The poles are antennas and conduits for most of this energy on a day to day basis. Sailing in the solar wind and catching the breeze.

Whether this lovely lady was created by design, or just happened to grow that way, this is how she was shaped, and ultimately us.

We live in the conductors formed. You start playing around too much and you can attract more energy than you want. You may not be able to press a reset button.

Simple example of the process. Throw various materials, conductive or not, between two electrodes. Zap the electrodes with high voltage. It will start pushing conductive materials together. After a while with enough zapping, they will join. Which, BTW, will draw more amps as the resistance lowers.

The nuclear forces and gravity is not what shapes this planet. It is what hits it.
stupidednous

Howell, MI

#157757 Mar 2, 2013
ithere's no god do your job to explain to us how and why..

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#157758 Mar 2, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
"Look at the last entry on the bottom."
"Hide
DesktopMobile
Page by contributors like you
Content available under CC BY-SA 3.0 | Terms of Use"
Not getting it???????
Arrgh.

In the tables. The relative volume of the assumed actual universe versus the observable universe. At least 21 times greater.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#157759 Mar 2, 2013
Clementia wrote:
<quoted text>No, ALL STUPID atheists/religious people think they know-it-all!!

We had this scientist give a lecture at my uni and i'm just so pissed off, don't fuel the fire! i'm warning u! I've had it up to here with stupid atheists/religious retards!
" ALL STUPID atheists/religious people think they know-it-all!! "

This statement kind of puts you in that category. You can't possible know what "All" stupid atheists/religious people think.

That's kind of like the opening statement in a lot of children's dinosaurs books, it goes something like this: "no human has ever seen a real dinosaur."

A rather bold statement seeing as to the fact that the author has in noway asked every human that ever lived if they have ever saw a real dinosaur.

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#157760 Mar 2, 2013
Clementia wrote:
<quoted text>
Make it a large one!!! Orange juice, i mean!
It was basically 2 hours of; science is the answer to everything, there is no consciousness, we r not real human-beings, coz real is just our imagination, we r just machines! If u think the universe was created u need help!
U can imagine how pissed-off i was!!!! Oh but wait, i'm not real, so my emotions aren't real, so me being pissed-off wasn't real! Man, i should have punched him, coz my punch isn't real either!
:-)

You're a trip. A pleasant one.

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
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 2 hr replaytime 58,100
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 3 hr replaytime 27,278
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 10 hr Dogen 1,904
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) 10 hr Eagle 12 5,962
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) 11 hr Eagle 12 4,947
News Quotes from Famous Freethinkers (Aug '12) 12 hr Eagle 12 1,940
Atheist Humor (Aug '09) 15 hr Bob of Quantum-Faith 153
More from around the web