Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 255571 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.

“Sweden more democratic thanUSA”

Since: Jun 12

Södertälje, Sweden

#181880 Oct 29, 2013
Dave and the team of losers have been down voting atheists and up voting them self
blacklagoon

Boston, MA

#181881 Oct 29, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
Doctor it's ok, calm down, no one is saying you're stupid. I will say your pride can get in the way of learning. You just have a closed mind thats all.
By your definition someone has a "closed mind" if they refuse to believe anything without evidence. Also, if all reason and logic coupled with science, dictates that an event could not possibly have happened, you would call that "close minded?"

You believe that being completely gullible gives you an OPEN mind? Believing in something without supporting evidence means to have an OPEN MIND? Really now!!!

What is your definition of the word Skeptic? What does skepticism mean to you?

Since: Sep 08

Alamosa, CO

#181882 Oct 29, 2013
Mikko wrote:
Dave and the team of losers have been down voting atheists and up voting them self
What can I say? We are realists and objective.

Judged:

12

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Eagle 12

Edwardsville, IL

#181883 Oct 29, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
It was Immanuel Kant who first used the term Enlightenment.
It was also called the Age of Reason, also a most fitting name.
Except for the lack of medical care or even toilets, it would have been a great time to be alive.
Don’t forget the deodorant.

Judged:

11

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Eagle 12

Edwardsville, IL

#181884 Oct 29, 2013
Mikko wrote:
Dave and the team of losers have been down voting atheists and up voting them self
I don’t think anyone really pays attention to those votes on either side.

Judged:

12

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#181885 Oct 29, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Uh huh. Explain how the moons formed. Is accretion involved?
We started out as a Saturn moon. Picked up some weight since then.
Massive dinosaurs would have functioned better in that gravity well.
How well adapted to the harshness of the sun's radiation were dinosaurs as revealed in fossil remains?
"Saturn moon"?

Cite your sorces, you scientific cretin.

The Moon was the result of a major collision with the Earth. Had eff-all to do with Saturn.

Judged:

10

10

8

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#181886 Oct 29, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
There was no National Weather Service in Noah’s day.
But the people did get warnings and they ignored it.
Really? I thought your god stated "I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created". That doesn't sound much like a warning, it sounds like Hitler on steroids.

Your god also supposedly said, "I am going to put an end to all people....". Again, that sounds like a predetermined plan, not a warning.
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
We have seen the same thing in our lifetime when Hurricane warnings go out. An example: Richelieu Apartments after Hurricane Camille in 1969.
There would be no comparison. Hurricane Camille was an act of nature. The flood of Noah wasn't natural, it was specifically created by your god for the intention of killing everyone.
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
“One persistent account about Camille states that a hurricane party was held on the third floor of the Richelieu Manor Apartments in Pass Christian, Mississippi, in the path of the eyewall as it made landfall. The high storm surge flooded and destroyed the building, and there was only one survivor to tell of the story of the others.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Camill...
Would you call that Genocide or just plain stubborn people who refused to evacuate?
I would call it a very piss poor attempt to re-direct from the genocide your god intentionally enacted.
Eagle 12

Edwardsville, IL

#181887 Oct 29, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
So that's what drowned all of humanity and the beasts except Noah's family and assorted pairs of the various kinds, huh? A few feet of water? Incidentally, 15 cubits is approximately 22.5 feet - even less than 28 feet.
If "covered" means around base, "a day" is whatever time period you need it to be, and "soon" can be over two millennia, what does "he died for our sins" really mean? How about if somebody said, "he had a headache because we forgot somebody's birthday"? If you are free to make the pronouncements you just made, on what objective basis could either of you disagree with the other? None, I'd say. You can only offer opinions, and there is no objective standard by which to assert that any one is more valid than another, just faith.
By the way, if the 1940s explanation expired by 2013, how long will this interpretation be good for?
This is what I mean by the slippery slope. Once you go down this road - simply proclaiming that the bible means whatever you want it to mean because you say so - it has no definite meaning at all. The fundamentalists may believe absurd things because of it, but they have the virtue of taking the words at their face value.
I understand your dilemma if you have problems with both camps. So do I.
I’ve addressed this before but I do it again. The generation of the 1940’s was a mostly rural generation. Education didn’t always have a priority. Many kids had to work on the farm or family business just to make it. A lot of these hard working people didn’t finish school.

The Pastors of the local churches were not always educated. Times have changed a lot and most of the baby boomers have advanced further than what their parents did in formal education. We have a better understanding of science and physics then what they did.

This slippery slope as you call it is really advancement in knowledge and understanding. The typical Atheist likes to hold Christianity to the old 1940’s interpretation. Nearly all arguments are to these old interpretations. That 1940’s generation is nearly all gone. A few remain but we are losing them everyday.

So Atheist are stuck in the past with their outdated arguments. And we are not buying it. This is 2013 and soon to be 2014. It’s time that Atheist update themselves with how modern Christianity believes.

Judged:

11

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Cachefly

Södertälje, Sweden

#181888 Oct 29, 2013
cachefly.net sucks stop using them topix!
Eagle 12

Edwardsville, IL

#181889 Oct 29, 2013
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>By your definition someone has a "closed mind" if they refuse to believe anything without evidence. Also, if all reason and logic coupled with science, dictates that an event could not possibly have happened, you would call that "close minded?"
You believe that being completely gullible gives you an OPEN mind? Believing in something without supporting evidence means to have an OPEN MIND? Really now!!!
What is your definition of the word Skeptic? What does skepticism mean to you?
What does skeptic mean to me?

One who views something with doubt.

Now if you trying to tell me that there couldn’t have been a massive flood in Noah’s day. I’m not accepting that as being true. Floods happen today on a massive scale. Rain happens today on a massive scale.

What science and evidence is there that says a massive flood couldn’t have happened in biblical times?

A. None

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Eagle 12

Edwardsville, IL

#181890 Oct 29, 2013
Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Really? I thought your god stated "I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created". That doesn't sound much like a warning, it sounds like Hitler on steroids.
Your god also supposedly said, "I am going to put an end to all people....". Again, that sounds like a predetermined plan, not a warning.
<quoted text>
There would be no comparison. Hurricane Camille was an act of nature. The flood of Noah wasn't natural, it was specifically created by your god for the intention of killing everyone.
<quoted text>
I would call it a very piss poor attempt to re-direct from the genocide your god intentionally enacted.
The Bible describes Noah as a “Preacher of Righteousness.”

Everyone in the world community knew Noah was building a Ark. This was not some super secret stealth project built in Area 51.

It was common knowledge and you can’t hide the fact you’re building a huge vessel. Unlike anything that was ever built.

I’m sure he got it all, laughter, ridicule, jokes. The people of the time knew. They refused to believe. That is until it was too late.

They had plenty of warning. They just chose to ignore it.

Judged:

10

10

9

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Eagle 12

Edwardsville, IL

#181891 Oct 29, 2013
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>Atheists and people who use reason and logic coupled with scientific knowledge don't doubt the story of the ark they KNOW is never happened. There is only one way to know if something is true or not, and that way is SCIENCE. In the case for this mythical ark, science clearly shows any such event to be impossible. Now unless you want to invoke GOD MAGIC, there is no possible way that any such event could have occurred. You may choose to NOT believe in science, but that certainly is a very bad reflection on your intelligence level.
So what you are telling me it couldn't rain in Noah's day?

You are going on the record and saying it could not flood?

I believe that position doesn't support science.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Sep 08

Alamosa, CO

#181892 Oct 29, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>"Saturn moon"?
Cite your sorces, you scientific cretin.
The Moon was the result of a major collision with the Earth. Had eff-all to do with Saturn.
Oh, you were there and watched it?

Now. let me rephrase so perhaps you can understand.

Earth started out as a moon of Saturn. Probably Mars and the other inner rocky planets.

You have rocky moons of Jupiter and Saturn. Gas planets. I believe the other outer planets are, too.

Rocky means denser, like an Irishman's head. Stronger attraction to the sun. Gravitational and magnetic wise.

Those big gas planets spin rocky moons and the sun steals their babies.

Oh, there is a considerable amount of EM involved. Jupiter and Saturn have strong magnetic fields with magnetospheres that slap those moons like we do ours. This induces charge and even current flow, which then creates a magnetic field, and which all planets and component parts thereof are slave to the sun's magnetic field. Hit things right and baby pops out to see Papa.

You really think a rocky planet will accrete this close to the sun?

A little poetic, I know, but that is roughly how it works.

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#181893 Oct 29, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
The Bible describes Noah as a “Preacher of Righteousness.”
Everyone in the world community knew Noah was building a Ark. This was not some super secret stealth project built in Area 51.
It was common knowledge and you can’t hide the fact you’re building a huge vessel. Unlike anything that was ever built.
I’m sure he got it all, laughter, ridicule, jokes. The people of the time knew. They refused to believe. That is until it was too late.
They had plenty of warning. They just chose to ignore it.
"Everyone in the world community knew Noah was building a Ark."

You gotta be effing kidding me with this...
blacklagoon

Boston, MA

#181894 Oct 29, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
I’ve noticed with you Doctor I have to repeat myself two or three times.
The Ark was designed for a one time use only. It was designed for that one time use as a large life boat. In fact if you will bother to look at its design you will see it looks like a modern day life boat found on deep sea ships and oil rigs.
I wouldn’t even call it a ship. It had no sail or rudder. It was more like a barge.
CONCENTRATE, now, really concentrate. A modern day life boat like they use on Oil rigs and large ships are 25-30 feet in length, made for very strong composites or fiberglass. Now to the Ark, over 400 feet in length and made ENTIRELY OF WOOD. Can you or can you NOT see the difference?

Now, take a very long board, lest say 25 feet. Balance it on a saw horse, now put very heavy weights on both ends, whats happens? At the very least the board will BEND, probably break. Now put your 400 plus foot wooden Ark on a large wave, it goes up the face of the wave and at some point it will be as the board on the saw horse, balancing on the wave with the bow and stern unsupported. So maybe it doesn't break, but it will certainly twist, and then the next wave comes, and the ark twists once again, and another wave, and another, a non-stop parade of huge ocean waves, how long before your Ark splits down the middle or twists so repeatedly that she begins to ship water. No bilge pumps, how long before she slips under the waves?

It is exactly why she has no propulsion that she would be in constant danger. Without the ability to face the waves head on she would be like a cork with waves battering her from all sides. You do know that is is not uncommon for ocean waves to reach the height of 70-100 feet in storms. An oil rig of the coast of Newfoundland had its platform 75 feet above the ocean, in an Atlantic storm she simply DISAPPEARED with all hands. No trace of it was ever found. And now you have a 400 foot wooden boat loaded with animals and supplies, bobbing around in Ocean, she would NOT stand a chance against the mighty ocean.

Why do you think EVERY wooden ship over 300 feet, HAD to have steel reenforcement rods and iron brackets? And still they leaked so badly that bilge pumps had a difficult time keeping up with the leaks.

Yes it was designed for a one time use, or so the fable goes, but it supposedly spent a entire year at sea. Do you even have a clue as to how much growth can accumulate on an unprotected hull, its massive.

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's teapot

#181895 Oct 29, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
I’ve noticed with you Doctor I have to repeat myself two or three times.
The Ark was designed for a one time use only. It was designed for that one time use as a large life boat. In fact if you will bother to look at its design you will see it looks like a modern day life boat found on deep sea ships and oil rigs.
I wouldn’t even call it a ship. It had no sail or rudder. It was more like a barge.
The simple physical problems with the construction material alone are but one of the numerous problems that your myth based religion suffers.

"Hogging and sagging"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hogging_and_sagg...

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#181896 Oct 29, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, you were there and watched it?
Now. let me rephrase so perhaps you can understand.
Earth started out as a moon of Saturn. Probably Mars and the other inner rocky planets.
You have rocky moons of Jupiter and Saturn. Gas planets. I believe the other outer planets are, too.
Rocky means denser, like an Irishman's head. Stronger attraction to the sun. Gravitational and magnetic wise.
Those big gas planets spin rocky moons and the sun steals their babies.
Oh, there is a considerable amount of EM involved. Jupiter and Saturn have strong magnetic fields with magnetospheres that slap those moons like we do ours. This induces charge and even current flow, which then creates a magnetic field, and which all planets and component parts thereof are slave to the sun's magnetic field. Hit things right and baby pops out to see Papa.
You really think a rocky planet will accrete this close to the sun?
A little poetic, I know, but that is roughly how it works.
Okay, Dai the Dip, cite your source.

Since: Sep 08

Alamosa, CO

#181897 Oct 29, 2013
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>CONCENTRATE, now, really concentrate. A modern day life boat like they use on Oil rigs and large ships are 25-30 feet in length, made for very strong composites or fiberglass. Now to the Ark, over 400 feet in length and made ENTIRELY OF WOOD. Can you or can you NOT see the difference?
Now, take a very long board, lest say 25 feet. Balance it on a saw horse, now put very heavy weights on both ends, whats happens? At the very least the board will BEND, probably break. Now put your 400 plus foot wooden Ark on a large wave, it goes up the face of the wave and at some point it will be as the board on the saw horse, balancing on the wave with the bow and stern unsupported. So maybe it doesn't break, but it will certainly twist, and then the next wave comes, and the ark twists once again, and another wave, and another, a non-stop parade of huge ocean waves, how long before your Ark splits down the middle or twists so repeatedly that she begins to ship water. No bilge pumps, how long before she slips under the waves?
It is exactly why she has no propulsion that she would be in constant danger. Without the ability to face the waves head on she would be like a cork with waves battering her from all sides. You do know that is is not uncommon for ocean waves to reach the height of 70-100 feet in storms. An oil rig of the coast of Newfoundland had its platform 75 feet above the ocean, in an Atlantic storm she simply DISAPPEARED with all hands. No trace of it was ever found. And now you have a 400 foot wooden boat loaded with animals and supplies, bobbing around in Ocean, she would NOT stand a chance against the mighty ocean.
Why do you think EVERY wooden ship over 300 feet, HAD to have steel reenforcement rods and iron brackets? And still they leaked so badly that bilge pumps had a difficult time keeping up with the leaks.
Yes it was designed for a one time use, or so the fable goes, but it supposedly spent a entire year at sea. Do you even have a clue as to how much growth can accumulate on an unprotected hull, its massive.
Doesn't the ballast and center of gravity determine how much of that midsection will balance on?

The weight will displace water, period. Going up or down a wave. You center the weight over an area long enough to take that strain off the center, which will also help keep from pitching and yawing so much. Of course you need sufficient draft. The difference between a round cork bobber and one of those elongated ones. They probably do something like that in mind when loading large cargo ships. Actually, I am pretty certain they do. You spread your load for maximum stability and less structural stress.

Hey, Shem!!! Make sure to put them elephants and rhinos in the middle, then the lions and tigers, and the birds fore and aft!

OK, Dad!

Loony, go up to the bow and toot your horn. We'll load the boat, OK?

.Jesus, Kibbitzers, what a pain in the ass.
Eagle 12

Edwardsville, IL

#181898 Oct 29, 2013
Just Think wrote:
<quoted text>
"Everyone in the world community knew Noah was building a Ark."
You gotta be effing kidding me with this...
Just how would they keep that a secret?
Eagle 12

Edwardsville, IL

#181899 Oct 29, 2013
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
The simple physical problems with the construction material alone are but one of the numerous problems that your myth based religion suffers.
"Hogging and sagging"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hogging_and_sagg...
Skeptics would have justification had the bible described the Ark being made out of stone and rocks.

But it was wood.

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 Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 4 min thetruth 20,210
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 9 min Richardfs 35,747
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 1 hr thetruth 3,715
News Why I quit atheism 1 hr thetruth 283
News "Being an atheist does not mean being anti-Chri... (Dec '14) 2 hr thetruth 29
Good arguments against Christianity 2 hr thetruth 2
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 2 hr thetruth 15,036
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) 2 hr thetruth 4,515
More from around the web