Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258476 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.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#173870 Aug 8, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> Start with human history disappearing post 5000 years ago.
Lie.

Chinese history, for example, goes unbroken back several thousand years beyond your mythical "5000" year cut-off.

Meanwhile, in Europe, there are human-made cave paintings dating 10,000 years, 15,000 years and older.

So you are simply lying as per your habit.

Sad.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#173871 Aug 8, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> Lets say Christianity is false and another religion is true.
Possible. Unlikely, but possible--

-- what is MORE likely? THEY ARE BOTH FALSE.

That's the most probable scenario...

.... meaning?

Athiesm is still valid.
lightbeamrider wrote:
Either way atheism is still false.
See above-- both are false-- likely ALL religion is false too.

Religion--all religion-- is just too arrogant, for starters.
lightbeamrider wrote:
If atheism is true then what difference does truth or origins make anyway?
Because it's **interesting**.

Because it answers the question, "where did humans come from".

Because we can.
lightbeamrider wrote:
Is there any money in it?
Oh YES-- most certainly there's money to be made, to answer that question definitively!
lightbeamrider wrote:
Will it get me in the sack with any female i want?
WTF? You hypocrite! You are not supposed to be having sex outside of marriage!
lightbeamrider wrote:
Can you take it to the bank with you? Have a good day folks.
Yes-- if you know the right people.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#173872 Aug 8, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
I assume Jesus Christ resurrected from the dead,
So.

You worship a ...

... ZOMBIE, then?

That's disgusting!

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#173873 Aug 8, 2013
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>
This is false Bob. Dante's 'Divine Comedy' presumes a round earth that revolves around the sun. Aristotle knew that the earth revolves around the sun. And so did the ancient Jews.
Bullshit. The bible clearly describes the sun orbiting a flat earth.

In no uncertain terms, too.

So... bullshit.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#173874 Aug 8, 2013
Roman Apologist wrote:
But the question is, just how wide are those differences?
Radical enough that they cannot get along with each other.

These are self-identified **different** brands of "christian".

40,000.... so far.

The number keeps going up and up, as time marches forward.

This is the **opposite** we would expect, if there was a GOD behind ANY OF IT.

For a GOD would GUIDE people into the SAME PATH.

And we'd see a gradual CONVERGENCE-- not what we actually see-- divergence.

But--if there is NO GOD to guide religion?

Then, naturally, divergence is to be expected.

As what we see in the world.

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#173875 Aug 8, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes.
DNA proves beyond any doubt, that humans did NOT originate from just two people.
Repeat: DNA analysis proves-- BEYOND ANY DOUBT-- that humans did NOT come from just two people, at any time in history.
That means? Neither Adam nor Eve are possible as written in your fictional bible.....
Actually it does doesn't it?
M-Eve and Y-Adam but they were not the first , just the first of all living, and they lived some years in time apart from each other.
But it does in saying this, falsify the creation myth, and does in other ways also.

Since: Mar 11

Henderson, KY

#173876 Aug 9, 2013
An unmoving flat earth that is square and rests on top of pillars.
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>Bullshit. The bible clearly describes the sun orbiting a flat earth.

In no uncertain terms, too.

So... bullshit.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#173877 Aug 9, 2013
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
This well worth viewing
Evolution vs God
http://m.youtube.com/watch... #
Given the title, it's not about science, but religion.

No biological scientist thinks that evolution didn't happen and that special creation did. That was over and done with 160 years ago.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#173878 Aug 9, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
So.
You worship a ...
... ZOMBIE, then?
That's disgusting!
I think we scared LB away. Can't handle a normal discussion. Gets angry and says extremely strange things like "evolution didn't do anything for Einstein's theory of relativity!"

hahaha, I will never forget that.

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#173879 Aug 9, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
An unmoving flat earth that is square and rests on top of pillars.
<quoted text>
Sounds like a good way to start building a house. lol
Thinking

Royston, UK

#173880 Aug 9, 2013
I'm long "past" clicking on your links.
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
This well worth viewing
Evolution vs God
http://m.youtube.com/watch... #

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#173881 Aug 9, 2013
Roman Holding to the dogma of empiricism is really self-refuting and circular reasoning. So let me ask you a few questions about empirical science. If only empirical evidence is the only indicator of truth, how do we measure that statement? How do we scientifically prove that statement? Is there a scientific test we can apply to that statement? No. Therefore it's only a philosophy **about** physical science that can't prove itself using the empirical method.
----------
polymath257 wrote:
For the sciences, the procedure is to find an experiment or observation that the two viewpoints predict different results from. Then, the experiment is done. While it may not determine who is correct, it can determine who is *wrong*. If no such experiment or observation is possible, then the two viewpoints are considered to be identical.
So, what procedure do you have to determine which among two viewpoints of the supernatural is wrong? In what way can a challenge be made if I disagree with your conclusions? What dispute resolution process is there for the supernatural?
So, for example, suppose we have two people. One says that there are 5 spiritual beings in my apartment and the other says there are only 3. How do we determine which one is wrong?
If there is no such process, there is no indicator of truth.
This was an interesting exchange and i think your answer is insufficient to say the least. The competition must be getting a little stiff for you, thus i note you are posting less. Perhaps you are busy but methinks you really got your behind handed to you on this one and Hiding is nowhere to be found! You assume the laws of physics and existence of all forms of life. The Earth is sufficient to support all forms given its position etc. yet do not be able to reasonable explain, the origin or source of either. You just assume it has nothing to do with God because God is not subject to the laws of physics! Can anyone see the circle? All one has to do is take a look at what is and juxtapose atheism against Theism, since atheism explains nothing and Theism explains everything, at least in a broad stroke, atheism is eliminated. It like eliminating 1+1=3 as opposed to 1+1=2. The latter explains things and the former is therefore wrong.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#173882 Aug 9, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text>
----------
<quoted text> This was an interesting exchange and i think your answer is insufficient to say the least. The competition must be getting a little stiff for you, thus i note you are posting less. Perhaps you are busy but methinks you really got your behind handed to you on this one and Hiding is nowhere to be found! You assume the laws of physics and existence of all forms of life. The Earth is sufficient to support all forms given its position etc. yet do not be able to reasonable explain, the origin or source of either. You just assume it has nothing to do with God because God is not subject to the laws of physics! Can anyone see the circle? All one has to do is take a look at what is and juxtapose atheism against Theism, since atheism explains nothing and Theism explains everything, at least in a broad stroke, atheism is eliminated. It like eliminating 1+1=3 as opposed to 1+1=2. The latter explains things and the former is therefore wrong.
Idiot coward with no proof of god admitting defeat. When you grow up and learn that lying about god is no way to live, contact an atheist.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#173883 Aug 9, 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.
How convincing is your atheism? What does atheism explain?

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#173884 Aug 9, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
But modern standards *should* be applied to beliefs.
Including atheism.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#173885 Aug 9, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> How convincing is your atheism? What does atheism explain?
Face the fact that you're an idiot with no proof of god whatsoever, trying to take up space in the forum that has defeated you over and over again.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#173886 Aug 9, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> Including atheism.
Atheism is a disbelieve in any stupid unsubstantiated bullsh*t invented by theists ie human beings who refuse to think logically.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#173887 Aug 9, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text>
----------
<quoted text> This was an interesting exchange and i think your answer is insufficient to say the least. The competition must be getting a little stiff for you, thus i note you are posting less. Perhaps you are busy but methinks you really got your behind handed to you on this one and Hiding is nowhere to be found! You assume the laws of physics and existence of all forms of life. The Earth is sufficient to support all forms given its position etc. yet do not be able to reasonable explain, the origin or source of either. You just assume it has nothing to do with God because God is not subject to the laws of physics! Can anyone see the circle? All one has to do is take a look at what is and juxtapose atheism against Theism, since atheism explains nothing and Theism explains everything, at least in a broad stroke, atheism is eliminated. It like eliminating 1+1=3 as opposed to 1+1=2. The latter explains things and the former is therefore wrong.
Yes, I have been busy lately. it is the end of the summer semester and I had final exams to make, and now grade.

No, I assume that life originated from natural processes because it *is* a natural process and the basic chemicals are common in the universe. We have several different lines of investigation on the issue which look promising and no obvious reason to think the laws of physics and chemistry were violated in any way.

For the beginning of the universe, there are three main physical possibilities (there are others, but these are the main ones):

1) Time started at the Big Bang. Because there is no time prior to that, there is no causality prior to that. It is literally meaningless to have a cause for the Big Bang. This is the claim for standard general relativity.

2) There was a prior contraction phase with the Big Bang actually a type of Big Bounce. This is the claim for loop quantum gravity. In this case, matter, energy, and time continue infinitely into the past.

3) There is a multiverse and multiple 'Big Bangs', one of which gives the universe we see. This is the claim for most versions of string theory. In this, each different Big Bang has different vacuum solutions and therefore different specific laws of physics.

The main problem with 1 is that it does not include quantum mechanics, which we know is fundamental to how our universe works. The problem with 2 and 3 is that we do not, at this time, have the means to test between them.

Now, why would I have to introduce a supernatural with unknown laws, with unknown characteristics, with unknown beings (angels, gods, etc) and unknown connection to what we see around us merely to explain two puzzles that known physics and chemistry seem likely to solve?

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#173888 Aug 9, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> Including atheism.
Yes, of course. One needs to examine the evidence on all sides. Do you have any actual evidence for a supernatural?

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#173889 Aug 9, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> How convincing is your atheism? What does atheism explain?
Atheism (the lack of belief) is the default position. It takes evidence that something exists to produce belief.

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 Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 4 hr Regolith Based Li... 32,169
hell is a real place. so.. ahtiesm is a faux li... 5 hr Eagle 12 - 12
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... 5 hr Eagle 12 - 760
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 6 hr Science 76,945
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... (Jan '17) 10 hr Dogen 4,309
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) Jul 18 John 4,952
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) Jul 17 Eagle 12 - 6,123
More from around the web