Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 254897 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.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#173779 Aug 7, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Uhm...she's listed as a graduate student in the faculty of religious studies.
Of Mark, she writes "Critical biblical scholars have known for a long time that this story is not literally true."
Of her, one of the commenters writes "I’m even disappointed by the quality of your ballyhooed “research”. What you call research is a compilation of quick pickings from the Web, without any additional outside checking."
You'll pardon me, but I won't accept a blogger's angry paper, especially if it apparently can't get published in an academic source.
The reference is cited. If you want to find out more then do your own research or hire me as a research assistant. It's not all that difficult and i am not in the mood to play your obedient servant this evening.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#173780 Aug 7, 2013
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>
That's the problem with your hypothesis Bob. It's your level of expectation that is limiting you. You're super-imposing your modern ideals onto an ancient culture.
So are **you**-- you are limiting what your god was capable of, to what is possible in an ancient culture!

I expect better from...

... a god.

Apparently, you are content with a god who's no better than bronze age sheep-herders....

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#173781 Aug 7, 2013
Roman Apologist wrote:
You say you would love the idea of an all powerful, loving God. If that's the case, why not accept the evidence we do have?
Avoidable evil.

That trumps the entire "god is good" meme-- proving beyond a doubt there isn't any such.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#173782 Aug 7, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
I wouldn’t go that far, poly and hiding are far more scholarly than I am. My time looking at the period was mostly in pre elective history, taken to fill up my hours.
It did hook me though and have spent several holidays as an enthusiastic hobbyist before getting into the Cro-Magnon period
:)

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#173783 Aug 7, 2013
spudgun wrote:
<quoted text>
I liked his posts too. Maybe topix took up too much of his time as he posted a lot. Just a guess, but think he may have moved to another forum.
I hope so-- I don't have a link to his Topix profile.

... just a sec:

... okay, here's his profile:

" http://www.topix.com/member/profile/itaintnec... ;

He posted 12 hours ago.

*whew*

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#173785 Aug 7, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
And in layman's terms, we call this "safe."
Americium in smoke detectors is safe.

It's a beta particle emitter (I think)-- that's just energetic electrons.

You can easily stop these with some metal.

So the slug of americium is housed in an aluminum box, with carefully slotted holes-in. They are double-slotted, such that there is no direct line from the slug to the outside. Smoke will follow the twisty passages, becoming ionized by the radiation inside.

Okay, so **some** radiation gets out-- sufficient to trigger sensitive Geiger counters.

But less radiation than a few minutes under the sun.

:)

It's all in the intensity, and length of exposure.

But I would not recommend **eating** a smoke detector...
Imhotep

United States

#173786 Aug 7, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh-oh.... that's not good. He was an old guy, and not in the most supreme of health.
I just hope he's on a hiatus or vacation somewhere.
I think I have his FB name somewhere or other-- it'd be hard to figure out, though.
Let me see... dammit, I cannot find a FB entry. I do recall speaking to him via PM in the past, but Topix deletes those after 30 days or so.
Others responded to that and gave me info.

He is currently playing on this thread

Why Should Jesus Love Me?

http://m.topix.com/forum/topstories/T0N0LORUM...

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#173787 Aug 7, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
How about 'because it isn't convincing'? And since it won't get any better, it won't ever get any more convincing.
<quoted text>
But the reason it isn't convincing is that the quality of evidence isn't enough to demonstrate the most important points. It isn't even a question of a little bit more evidence would be sufficient. It isn't enough *by far* to demonstrate that there is a God and that Jesus was divine.
And if the lack of evidence is such that the existing evidence isn't convincing on such an important point, and if the evidence isn't going to get better, then the best thing to do is admit the proposition isn't proved and continue with a *lack of belief*, which is atheism.
Yes.

This.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#173788 Aug 7, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> The reference is cited. If you want to find out more then do your own research or hire me as a research assistant. It's not all that difficult and i am not in the mood to play your obedient servant this evening.
I wasn't commanding you to do anything, Sir LB. I'm pointing out that your blogger has serious limitations that prevent me from accepting her claims as evidence. After all, that's not a published academic source. She comes across as quite angry - was accused of uncritically using sources from the internet.

Sorry, it just isn't a serious, informed paper.

Sadly, I don't have any money for you. Unless you can transcribe from Japanese to English (it's really time consuming to do this). Even then, I'd have to get a grant somewhere to pay for that... Unless you accept sincere thanks and oregano as payment? I have lots and lots of oregano!

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#173789 Aug 7, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Americium in smoke detectors is safe.
It's a beta particle emitter (I think)-- that's just energetic electrons.
You can easily stop these with some metal.
So the slug of americium is housed in an aluminum box, with carefully slotted holes-in. They are double-slotted, such that there is no direct line from the slug to the outside. Smoke will follow the twisty passages, becoming ionized by the radiation inside.
Okay, so **some** radiation gets out-- sufficient to trigger sensitive Geiger counters.
But less radiation than a few minutes under the sun.
:)
It's all in the intensity, and length of exposure.
But I would not recommend **eating** a smoke detector...
hahaha. I was just making a joke :)

Where I live, we make sure our water sits through one half-life of iodine-131. And we call this safe...

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#173790 Aug 7, 2013
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>
And here I hope you understand that my following comments are not a personal attack even though I will call your reasoning into question.
1) The evidence has been convincing to millions around the world through the span of 2,000 years.
Argument from popularity is easily refuted by remembering that not that long ago?

Everyone just **knew** that the sun went around the earth...

But the trump card?

Is that, presently, there are more than 40,000 **different** flavors of christianity, world-wide.

Forty thousand **different** versions of "the truth".

..WTF?

If there **was** a god behind it all, guiding humans?

THERE WOULD BE BUT ONE, BY NOW!

What can compare to **divine** guidance?

The fact that there is 40,000 and counting DIFFERENT brands?

Proves that there is no divinity behind **any**

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#173791 Aug 7, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
Uhm...she's listed as a graduate student in the faculty of religious studies.
Of Mark, she writes "Critical biblical scholars have known for a long time that this story is not literally true."
Of her, one of the commenters writes "I’m even disappointed by the quality of your ballyhooed “research”. What you call research is a compilation of quick pickings from the Web, without any additional outside checking."
You'll pardon me, but I won't accept a blogger's angry paper, especially if it apparently can't get published in an academic source.
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> The reference is cited. If you want to find out more then do your own research or hire me as a research assistant. It's not all that difficult and i am not in the mood to play your obedient servant this evening.
I'd, uhm, also want better research if I was paying. Only academic papers, please!

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#173792 Aug 7, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> You don't know that.
Yes... yes we do.

For if **you** are an example of "God's Ambassador"?

Then god is seriously a moron, for trusting such a **important** job to ...

... you.

Thanks for playing!

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#173793 Aug 7, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
hahahaha!!!
I never thought of it like that. Totally!
He even has the classic hippy look: beard, long hair and sandals.

:D

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#173794 Aug 7, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
hahaha. I was just making a joke :)
Where I live, we make sure our water sits through one half-life of iodine-131. And we call this safe...
:)

It probably is-- iodine in small doses is harmless--even radioactive iodine.

You have radioactive potassium inside you right now-- one of the most common isotopes of potassium is radioactive.

But it's of a very low intensity, and we evolved to have it there, so it's harmless.

... well...

... mostly harmless.

:)

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#173795 Aug 7, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
:)
It probably is-- iodine in small doses is harmless--even radioactive iodine.
You have radioactive potassium inside you right now-- one of the most common isotopes of potassium is radioactive.
But it's of a very low intensity, and we evolved to have it there, so it's harmless.
... well...
... mostly harmless.
:)
Tokyo still has radiation left over from 3/11, which is why we age the water 8 days.

I'm sure I'm too old to be adversely affected, and I'm hoping the radiation targets all the bad stuff inside of me.

Mostly harmless! Don't panic!

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#173796 Aug 7, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
I wasn't commanding you to do anything, Sir LB. I'm pointing out that your blogger has serious limitations that prevent me from accepting her claims as evidence. After all, that's not a published academic source. She comes across as quite angry - was accused of uncritically using sources from the internet.
Sorry, it just isn't a serious, informed paper.
Sadly, I don't have any money for you. Unless you can transcribe from Japanese to English (it's really time consuming to do this). Even then, I'd have to get a grant somewhere to pay for that... Unless you accept sincere thanks and oregano as payment? I have lots and lots of oregano!
I don't know why you require an academic source on Topix. You must enjoy slumming it. Like i said her claim is cited and it should be easy enough to find. I do go through work to present material. I do research just like you do although probably not as much. I have no idea if it makes any impact at all or is simply ignored and only the easy points of contention are answered. Seculars are noted for late dating the Gospels and early dating writings like Go Thomas which must impress the hell out of Poly in spite of some of the bizarre quotations from those writings. Poly indicated earlier Mark used Go Thomas a source material for his Gospel. I about fell to the floor laughing. I do know there a libs out there who early date Thomas. All you have to do is find it and read it carefully to know it contains a lot of whack job quotations and is of little real value.

What do you do with oregano? Are you one of them students or graduates who are in debt up to their ears? We have a lot of them in the U.S. They go to College and go into debt and cannot find a job after college. I just read about a female who is 100K in debt for a four year degree. 100K is about 30 or so years of easy monthly payments. Them monthly payments will not be small.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#173797 Aug 7, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
I'd, uhm, also want better research if I was paying. Only academic papers, please!
You can always demand your money back.

“Seventh son”

Since: Dec 10

Will Prevail

#173798 Aug 7, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Americium in smoke detectors is safe.
It's a beta particle emitter (I think)-- that's just energetic electrons.
You can easily stop these with some metal.
So the slug of americium is housed in an aluminum box, with carefully slotted holes-in. They are double-slotted, such that there is no direct line from the slug to the outside. Smoke will follow the twisty passages, becoming ionized by the radiation inside.
Okay, so **some** radiation gets out-- sufficient to trigger sensitive Geiger counters.
But less radiation than a few minutes under the sun.
:)
It's all in the intensity, and length of exposure.
But I would not recommend **eating** a smoke detector...
Nah too tuff. lol

Since: Mar 11

Louisville, KY

#173799 Aug 7, 2013
I wonder if with a time machine and a 12 pack of Bud lite a guy could score with some Egyptian princesses?
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>No kidding! It's quite true: the builders of the temple were provided with daily rations of beer and meat. It was recorded by the Egyptians - and we have their bones and storehouses.

The beer contained an antibiotic called tetracycline. The first ever used by people!(that we have discovered). This beer was also given to children, so archaeologists believe it was used as a medicine.

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 Speaking for God 4 min Old Jew 550
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 14 min Brian_G 29,431
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 35 min Richardfs 11,323
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 42 min Richardfs 9,593
News In America, atheists are still in the closet (Apr '12) 2 hr Cheshire smile 50,932
News Richard Dawkins - God is evil, pedophilesa not ... (Sep '13) 7 hr Richard 3,154
News Revered Artist Was an Atheist Who Rejected God.... 13 hr nanoanomaly 40
More from around the web