Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

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. Full Story

“MEET ROSEMARY-She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

#184506 Nov 15, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
It has been said that Happy Lesbo = Catcher1 and
Catcher1 = Happy Lesbo
When you talk to one you are talking to the other?
Could one person be both?
.. are you unable to sense male and female energy through someone's writing ??..

.. there's a subtle difference ..

.. do you want to be my friend ??..

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184507 Nov 15, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
It was all about how abiogenesis could be started according to the laws of physics and maintained after it started.
Thank you for that.
Dave Nelson wrote:
Just point out a random pattern that could happen and then replicate itself in the swirl of those energies. But you won't.
What would be the relevance?

This, by the way, is the value of knowing what your thesis is - where you are going. Now that I know that you are questioning the possibility of abiogenesis occurring, I know how to answer your questions. Abiogenesis was not necessarily a random process. In fact, it is likely inevitable given the proper conditions.

You seem ready to argue that the complexity of a cell means that it could not exist undesigned. That is where you are going, right? If so, we need to resolve what appears to be special pleading. I need you to explain to me why you believe that a god could exist undesigned and uncreated, but not a cell.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#184508 Nov 15, 2013
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. are you unable to sense male and female energy through someone's writing ??..
.. there's a subtle difference ..
.. do you want to be my friend ??..
Hi, I'm RR.

Have we met?

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#184509 Nov 15, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
NO. It is evidence; not proof.
Sorry to pull word meanings on you again.
If you mean "evidence", maybe you should say "evidence" instead of "proof".
I know that's asking a lot, but the difference has huge ramifications.
A guy goes to jail on proof. The prosecution can fail with evidence.
Oh, but what the hell. We're among friends.
Let's just change it today - evidence is proof.
As you were.
We in the law make judgments on the basis of evidence, for proof.

We have different standards in different situations, but we call it proof nevertheless:

There is proof by a preponderance of the evidence (50+%).

We "prove" things, on the basis of evidence. If what you're looking for is some sort of absolute proof, don't mess with the law; stick to "religious truth".
There is proof by clear and convincing evidence (a high probability).
There is proof beyond a reasonable doubt--requires the highest standard of evidence. This, in fact, is the proof that landed you in the Greybar Hotel.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#184510 Nov 15, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for that.
<quoted text>
What would be the relevance?
This, by the way, is the value of knowing what your thesis is - where you are going. Now that I know that you are questioning the possibility of abiogenesis occurring, I know how to answer your questions. Abiogenesis was not necessarily a random process. In fact, it is likely inevitable given the proper conditions.
You seem ready to argue that the complexity of a cell means that it could not exist undesigned. That is where you are going, right? If so, we need to resolve what appears to be special pleading. I need you to explain to me why you believe that a god could exist undesigned and uncreated, but not a cell.
+

We do?

Not really.

You must have loved dodgeball in school. Still playing it.

BTW, you have never heard me say a god was undesigned and uncreated. All I have said is there is a higher intelligent force behind this scenario. There is that self centeredness of you at work again.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184511 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Providing evidence that a person is at a particular location is incomparable to providing evidence for God.
Why is that relevant to this discussion?
RiversideRedneck wrote:
So the possibility that your car might've been stolen since you last saw it is an example of skepticism?!
O_o
No.

This stuff isn't really for you. You don't seem to be making any progress with the fundamentals.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184512 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
See what I mean? You haven't freethought about spirituality 'properly' until you've freethought about it exactly like Ken did. You're not freethinking for yourself, you're using Ken's freethoughts and assuming he's correct. That's just sad.
You also are making no progress with your understanding of what freethought means. You should probably stop trying. You're not a man of ideas.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184513 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
How is it that you misunderstood that I was merely pointing out his bullshit?
There is ZERO evidence for dreams.
There is ZERO evidence for emotion.
There is ZERO evidence for a gut feeling.
IF you believe they exist, you're not following your own rules that you must only believe what has "compelling evidence".
There is zero evidence for dreams? You are also stuck on the meaning of evidence. Most people consider the existence of dreams a fact based on evidence. Every dream is evidence that they exist.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184514 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Suppose you're talking to a person that (for whatever reason) cannot dream. Try to convince him that dreams are real. G'head.
It's probably about as hard as convincing blind people that there is such a thing as light.

I'll bet that if you can find a person that has never dreamed, his belief will be that dreams occur rather than that everybody is conspiring in a lie to deceive him. You probably agree. Why do you suppose he is able to make that decision, and feel fairly certain that he is correct? He couldn't do that without evidence of some sort to guide his choice.

You are not good at this kind of thing. With insight, you would recognize that, and soften your dogmatic language about these matters.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184515 Nov 15, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
Why is secular government better than theocracy?
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Who says it is?
We really have no basis for discussion - no common ground or shared assumptions.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#184516 Nov 15, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
You also are making no progress with your understanding of what freethought means. You should probably stop trying. You're not a man of ideas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freethought

"Regarding religion, freethinkers hold that there is insufficient evidence to support the existence of supernatural phenomena.[5]

A line from "Clifford's Credo" by the 19th-century British mathematician and philosopher William Kingdon Clifford perhaps best describes the premise of freethought: "It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.""

Another word for that is closemindedness. And these statements fit, also.

I exist, therefore nothing else does unless it presents itself to me, and I approve of it.

My lack of knowledge and imagination is the extent of my intellectual abilities.

Living in a box.

You pseudo intellectuals are so amusing.

Wait until something comes along and kicks your box.:-)

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#184517 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh.
Prove that dreams are real.
If you can't, they must not exist huh?
You **are** a moron--- dreams only exist within your fevered imagination.

Just like your myth-god.

Silly.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#184518 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Baseless, ignorant assertions.
Besides, you're confusing a theocracy with a ecclesiocracy.
Look it up.
Nope-- I base my comment on HISTORY.

In all of history-- without a SINGLE exception?

Whenever **religion** is also **government**?

Anyone daring to question **anything** government-related, is killed as a "heretic".

You **are** a low-grade moron-- you do not even know history.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#184519 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
What do you mean by 'in charge'?
It is **your** claim; **you** are the idiots claiming your monster-god is "in charge of everything".

Silly billy.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#184520 Nov 15, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
There is zero evidence for dreams? You are also stuck on the meaning of evidence. Most people consider the existence of dreams a fact based on evidence. Every dream is evidence that they exist.
Not if you just think you had a dream.

You can only be aware of dreams if you are conscious in some fashion. Those are high level thoughts. Takes imagination to have a dream.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#184521 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you believe Plato existed?
If so, why?
No. Belief is a statement of faith.

I think it is **likely** someone called "plato" existed-- we have tons of stuff he wrote.

In direct contrast to your Jewsus-- of which we have zip, nada, nothing that he wrote.

Obviously, your Jewsus was ... illiterate.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#184522 Nov 15, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:

Why is that relevant to this discussion?
You brought it up, or do you not remember the whole landline phone call as evidence of a location comment?
No.
This stuff isn't really for you. You don't seem to be making any progress with the fundamentals.
You're concession is noted.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#184523 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
HA HA!!
Oh boy, you're a riot.
\

So. You have no counter-argument? Good.

I accept your admission of guilt.

It's only because you hate-theists keep passing your hideous and bigoted religion into **law**.
**Forcing** people to comply with your ugly bigotry.
And the final insult?
Your ugly superstitions are SUPPORTED BY TAXES.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#184524 Nov 15, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
There is zero evidence for dreams? You are also stuck on the meaning of evidence. Most people consider the existence of dreams a fact based on evidence. Every dream is evidence that they exist.
I agree.

Then you understand that every person that has had a personal experience with God knows that's evidence of His existence.

(Without empirical evidence, just like dreams)

Thank you.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#184525 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
You, uh.... Didn't finish your sentence.
Your ugly religion? Your ugly beliefs? Your ugly bigotry?

Your ugly oppression of women?

Your ugly abuse of children?

Shall I continue?
RiversideRedneck wrote:
SSM infringes on my rights. Does that bother you?
How,**exactly**? Financially? Are you **financially** harmed by same sex couples getting hitched?

No?

Hmmmm... I suppose it "offends" your ugly god?

So what-- your god is not real, for absolutely no proof.

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
Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 4 hr Eagle 12 2,275
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 4 hr EXPERT 23,181
A New Kinder, Gentler Atheism 7 hr _Bad Company 120
Islam is the Enemy (Sep '12) 10 hr Thinking 28
God' existence 10 hr Thinking 57
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 12 hr thetruth 1,442
Atheism does not exist at all 12 hr thetruth 4
More from around the web