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 7,870)

Showing posts 157,381 - 157,400 of217,373
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163771
Apr 20, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
First, nothing is free, there is always a cost that must be paid. Second, you are selling, you want blind agreement in exchange for your "gift." Not to mention that .... what if you're wrong and the Aztecs were right? Replace Aztecs with any of the other millions of religions and billions of gods.
Not to mention that his "gift" requires absolutely nothing from him.

It's kind of like bringing your trash to a neighbor and saying, "Here. This is my gift to you. No need to thank me."

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163772
Apr 20, 2013
 
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
I've been a math professor for the last 27 years. Answering stupid questions is an essential part of my job.

Welcome back!
Expert in all Things

Redding, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163773
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Not to mention that his "gift" requires absolutely nothing from him.
It's kind of like bringing your trash to a neighbor and saying, "Here. This is my gift to you. No need to thank me."
Anyone want to defend this post as being a rational, logical or a scientific statement of fact?

or maybe it is just ignorant mockery?

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163774
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Expert in all Things wrote:
<quoted text>
Anyone want to defend this post as being a rational, logical or a scientific statement of fact?
or maybe it is just ignorant mockery?

GASP! You may assume that, the opinion of your opinion will vary.
Expert in all Things

Redding, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163775
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
GASP! You may assume that, the opinion of your opinion will vary.
Well, let's wait a few minutes to see if someone is going back up your BS claim.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163776
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Expert in all Things wrote:
<quoted text>
So as a math professor, do you believe that infinity exists in reality?
As a math professor, I have no position. Math is an abstract study whose contact with reality is not required.

As a *physics* student, the answer depends a bit on what you mean. It is *possible*, for example, that space is infinite. It is also possible that time is infinite into the past. Neither of these possibilities are known to be true and there is at least some evidence that time may be finite into the past. The flatness of space suggests that it is infinite in extent, but we do not know that for certain as yet.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163777
Apr 20, 2013
 
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
As a math professor, I have no position. Math is an abstract study whose contact with reality is not required.
As a *physics* student, the answer depends a bit on what you mean. It is *possible*, for example, that space is infinite. It is also possible that time is infinite into the past. Neither of these possibilities are known to be true and there is at least some evidence that time may be finite into the past. The flatness of space suggests that it is infinite in extent, but we do not know that for certain as yet.
When one thinks of the known existing, or previously existing, "things" that exist(ed), but some of them are billions of light years apart (which to me is way too big to even attempt to get my brain to see), it would seem unlikely that if it were possible to get to where the very furthest away item is, that after that would be nothing. I can't even imagine what that would look like, if it were possible to see, but because the edge of it would be many billions of light years apart (one item from the next) it would likely not be possible to see the edge anyway in any manner that humans could see it.

If space too is flat, then it must have an upper and a lower limit. But how would that be? If there is nothing above or below that flatness, what does nothing look like, if one could describe it?

Even though the numbers, distances, and times are just way too big for a human mind to conceive of, I feel most comfortable with thinking that there is no beginning and no end of 'something', though each individual, for example, human or other animals, definitely has a beginning and an end, though the basic elements making up those entities were likely always existing in some form.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163778
Apr 20, 2013
 
Bongo wrote:
<quoted text> Listen porky, you cant do better than the strawman argumaent? Take up your faithlessness with your creator, youre a smart gal, right?
Erm, straw man? Do you know what a straw man is? It seems not. Your chances of being correct are far less than mine, because I'm not buying anyone's junk without evidence first. Imagine you die and face the god you actually chose and say "I said I believed just so I wouldn't be punished even though I didn't actually believe you existed." Yeah, that will make it happy.
Expert in all Things

Redding, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163779
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

1

polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
As a math professor, I have no position. Math is an abstract study whose contact with reality is not required.
As a *physics* student, the answer depends a bit on what you mean. It is *possible*, for example, that space is infinite. It is also possible that time is infinite into the past. Neither of these possibilities are known to be true and there is at least some evidence that time may be finite into the past. The flatness of space suggests that it is infinite in extent, but we do not know that for certain as yet.
Why are you digging yourself a deeper hole?

First you claimed to be a math professor so I asked the question directed that title and you default, take no position. I did not ask you to define what math is, I am well aware being an Expert in all things.

Next, can you name one law if physics that supports an infinite universe. Bet it is not going to be the 2nd Law of thermodynamics nor will you want to discuss the implications of red shift.

In case you also want to claim to be a philosophy student to your extensive list of academic achievements, try this one on for size.

If you claim an infinite regression of past events, then we would never reach a point in the present.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163780
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Expert in all Things wrote:
<quoted text> Why are you digging yourself a deeper hole?
First you claimed to be a math professor so I asked the question directed that title and you default, take no position. I did not ask you to define what math is, I am well aware being an Expert in all things.
Next, can you name one law if physics that supports an infinite universe. Bet it is not going to be the 2nd Law of thermodynamics nor will you want to discuss the implications of red shift.
In case you also want to claim to be a philosophy student to your extensive list of academic achievements, try this one on for size.
If you claim an infinite regression of past events, then we would never reach a point in the present.
Why do you lie?
Expert in all Things

Redding, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163781
Apr 20, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you lie?
Why do you molest hamsters?

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163782
Apr 20, 2013
 
Expert in all Things wrote:
<quoted text> Why do you molest hamsters?
Oh, wait, I get it, great comeback, almost made me giggle ... almost.

For an "expert" in all things, you suck at almost everything.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163784
Apr 20, 2013
 
Good job rainman
zander714 wrote:
four posted.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163785
Apr 20, 2013
 
The low IQ chump has nothing to say and is attempting to set up a god of the gaps argument.
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>Oh, wait, I get it, great comeback, almost made me giggle ... almost.

For an "expert" in all things, you suck at almost everything.
Expert in all Things

Redding, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163786
Apr 20, 2013
 
Givemeliberty wrote:
The low IQ chump has nothing to say and is attempting to set up a god of the gaps argument.
<quoted text>
Yet no one in here has the balls to challenge me!
IRYW

Berwyn, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163787
Apr 20, 2013
 
Expert in all Things wrote:
<quoted text>Yet no one in here has the balls to challenge me!
Why bother. Definition of an 'Expert': "X" = an unknown quantity and a 'spurt' is a drip under pressure.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163788
Apr 20, 2013
 
In what? A retard contest? Sorry drool on half wit.

:flush:
Expert in all Things wrote:
<quoted text>Yet no one in here has the balls to challenge me!

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163789
Apr 20, 2013
 
Expert in all Things wrote:
<quoted text>Yet no one in here has the balls to challenge me!
OK trolly you win, here it is you asked for it.

The second law only applies to the observable universe. Since we cannot ever see past the particle horizon it will never be known the exact condition of the universe, whether it is open , closed or isolated. However the latest findings show it is consistent with the open infinite flat model. Which means it is possibly spatially infinite with no boundary.

The 2nd law of thermodynamics applies only to isolated system or closed system. In an open system an influx of new or an outflow of energy is possible. But since we absolutely do not know the extent we cannot say. So the jury is out when applying the second law to the universe it itself, but works for everything in it.

You don't want to go up against poly and redshift, he practically wrote the book on the subject.

Infinite regression is possible within finite space , as matter fact it. Because that is exactly what the the universe does in opposite , infinite progression. If you went to the particle horizon and proceeded the speed of light back to Earth, you would never reach it, Because it has will infinitely regress away from you.

I'll wait for the background noise to report.

“Today we pray”

Since: Jul 12

"tomorrow we win"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163790
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Givemeliberty wrote:
She still got an @ss don't she? Lol!
So upon your lies about her having cancer and now has no breasts... We will conduct the test with her @ss and yes you did claim to have a daughter a while back. Unable to keep up with your own lies I see.
This test will conclude for all conducting it that I do indeed have hands. I will even let her pop every one of my fingers in her mouth counting off each one of them to ten.
Now present a test for observable proof for god.
<quoted text>
OK, here's God. See? Now you can see Him and test Him.

There, I've proven God to you just as much as you've proven you have hands.

Now, present atheist for observable evidence for your hands.

If you can't, we'll just assume they're a myth.

“Today we pray”

Since: Jul 12

"tomorrow we win"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163791
Apr 20, 2013
 
Givemeliberty wrote:
I have already laid out the framework for a test proving I have hands. If that's not enough we can take a bet on it and have a doctor verify if I have them or not, care to go a few thousand on it?
If not your hand argument is soundly destroyed, now observable proof for god?
<quoted text>
Laying out framework for a test is not proving observable evidence that you have hands.

So what if a doctor confirms you have hands? You'll have to find a way to let me see the data.

What if I'm blind and can't see the data?
What if I'm deaf and can't hear anything you say?
What if I've lost all sense of feeling?

How you gonna prove you have hands?

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 157,381 - 157,400 of217,373
|
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.

•••
•••
•••
•••