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
179,981 - 180,000 of 224,358 Comments Last updated 10 min ago

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187589
Nov 27, 2013
 
Bongo wrote:
<quoted text> Would that be baited breath? Have you been sated yet this morning?
She sates herself.

Or forces an illegal mexican to do it.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187590
Nov 27, 2013
 
Buck Crick wrote:
What I observe in people like Dawkins is a readiness to attribute anything and everything in life to mutation and natural selection.
That's an overstatement. He readily acknowledges a cultural component to behavior. Did you read the two-part article of his I posted links for recently? He alluded to non-Darwinian mechanisms in that such as nongenetic Darwinian selection and nongenetic epidemiology:

"My specific hypothesis is about children. More than any other species, we survive by the accumulated experience of previous generations ... Darwinian selection sets up childhood brains with a tendency to believe their elders. It sets up brains with a tendency to imitate, hence indirectly to spread rumors, spread urban legends, and believe religions.

"But given that genetic selection has set up brains of this kind, they then provide the equivalent of a new kind of nongenetic heredity, which might form the basis for a new kind of epidemiology, and perhaps even a new kind of nongenetic Darwinian selection.

"I believe that religion is one of a group of phenomena explained by this kind of nongenetic epidemiology, with the possible admixture of nongenetic Darwinian selection. If I am right, religion has no survival value for individual human beings, nor for the benefit of their genes. The benefit, if there is any, is to religion itself."

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187591
Nov 27, 2013
 
Buck Crick wrote:
This seems unscientific to me, and it leads, at times, to bizarre constructions, filling in blanks with whatever can be imagined - a fantasizing of sorts. One that comes to mind is Dawkins' speculative description of development of winged flight. It is comical.
As always, if you choose not to source your claims, expect them to be disregarded. Simply claiming that Dawkins has given us what you consider a bizarre and comical treatment does nothing to diminish my respect for or confidence in the man. A link to what I agree is a bizarre and comical opinion might.

Aren't we here to share information other than just our opinions, which are of little value to anybody but ourselves? We should be sharing the information that led to those opinions along with the opinions themselves if we wish to persuade mature thinkers to come to similar conclusions, just as I did when I contradicted your opinion above with a counterexample of your claim.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187592
Nov 27, 2013
 
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>And again, a pointless ad-hom.
The guy's a registered nutter, and you know it.
Thanks for avoiding the ad hom.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187593
Nov 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Bongo wrote:
<quoted text> Would that be baited breath? Have you been sated yet this morning?
“Bated” breath but no, not really, bated implies anticipation and it’s one of the things for which I hold no expectation

A couple of times, I had a very satisfying coffee mid morning and it is no longer morning here so I will include the wonderful lunch of chicken in mustard and honey sauce with a salad.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187594
Nov 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Demonstrating one is not the imperative, sweet love. Your finding one yourself is.
You're on a cruise ship, sweetness. You WILL be falling overboard at some time in the journey. All alone as that ship keeps sailing off into the distance.
How can you even convince yourself if you are unable to demonstrate the concept. Ahh I get it, faith is the answer, right, what you believe, not what is fact, fair enough it does explain a lot about people like you

I don’t do cruises so there is no way your guess at a simile is relevant.

“MEET ROSEMARY-She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187595
Nov 27, 2013
 
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm fine with the interconnectedness.
But that doesn't mean we have to make up a crisis in order to feel connected.
We could be connected to the planet and be making it cooler, not warmer.
Or neither, which is what the evidence suggests.
.. if you find interconnectedness true, you must also concede that the profound, extensive and very real interconnections between humans and our delicate ecosystem are true ..

.. although nature can wrought far greater harm than humans, you must concede that nature can and will respond to the damage caused by any species because of this interconnectedness ..

.. since this is the incorrect forum for this debate, just concede the illegitimacy of your position or I'll tell your physician to prescribe estrogen therapy ..

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187596
Nov 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Cool.
Explain it to us.
Define the terms. Explain the reason for the squared.
Turn it into a process and not just a term.
You can't.
I am not here as your teacher, try educating yourself, look it up, there are plenty of explanation on the internet

Here let me help you – http://scholar.google.co.uk/

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187597
Nov 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
No, actually it's physics.
Are you aware of this one?
pi x r^2?
It represents the circumference of a circle.
But it also proves Shakespeare was not the author of his plays.
It's science, Saltines. Don't argue with science.
Say what? May I make a suggestion? Go see your psychiatrist, you delusions are getting dangerous

“MEET ROSEMARY-She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187598
Nov 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
It is a fact that I love my wife.
Teach me how I can share that with you.
.. put her on a plane to Vegas? I can pick her up at the airport ..

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187599
Nov 27, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Dean Radin? I'd actually heard of him.
Another off-the-scope nutter. Probably an Art Bell fan, too...
"Radin's books have received negative reviews from skeptics and scientists. A critical review of The Conscious Universe was published by the British mathematician I. J. Good in Nature. Good discovered flaws in Radin's method for evaluating the file-drawer effect and wrote the book avoided to mention evidence of fraud in parapsychology. Victor J. Stenger also made a criticism of the book reflecting Good's arguments, arguing that Radin did not perform the file-drawer analysis correctly, made fundamental errors in his calculations and ignored possible, non-paranormal explanations for the data."- Wiki.
You do know that "parapsychology" is another word for "Bullshit", right?
You found someone who disagrees?

I'm shocked!

MacMucous, you are an idiot. Nobody takes your claims seriously, nor should they.

You are a smear-merchant, just like the Amazing Randi.

Are you also, like him, 5 feet tall and gay?

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187600
Nov 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
She sates herself.
Or forces an illegal mexican to do it.
Has been known that I “sate” myself occasionally, and we know you do, why else would people call you a wanker?

However because you have an illegal Mexican ramming your butt does not mean that we have illegal Mexicans this side of the Atlantic puddle

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187601
Nov 27, 2013
 
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
“Bated” breath but no, not really, bated implies anticipation and it’s one of the things for which I hold no expectation
A couple of times, I had a very satisfying coffee mid morning and it is no longer morning here so I will include the wonderful lunch of chicken in mustard and honey sauce with a salad.
Chicken in mustard and honey sauce?

Who did you eat it off of?

“MEET ROSEMARY-She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187602
Nov 27, 2013
 
Buck Crick wrote:
THE MYTH OF THE RANDI PRIZE"*PORTIONS SNIPPED*
.. another spam marathon? Please, please, please, tell me it's not true, OK ??..

.. here's the tricky part: I agree with you about The Amazing Randi ..

.. perhaps humans lost their ESP ability and we're rediscovering it? Or, it's always been there and we're finally recognizing the untapped resources within our astonishing brain. Or, it's all caca ..

.. either way, it's a fascinating topic ..
Thinking

Chard, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187603
Nov 27, 2013
 
As the guy actually is a nutter, that is not an ad hom.

You don't know what an ad hom is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for avoiding the ad hom.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187604
Nov 27, 2013
 
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. if you find interconnectedness true, you must also concede that the profound, extensive and very real interconnections between humans and our delicate ecosystem are true ..
.. although nature can wrought far greater harm than humans, you must concede that nature can and will respond to the damage caused by any species because of this interconnectedness ..
.. since this is the incorrect forum for this debate, just concede the illegitimacy of your position or I'll tell your physician to prescribe estrogen therapy ..
HL, the climate change stuff is a hoax.

The planet is not fragile, and the climate changes in cycles unrelated to the activity of man.

"Climate Change" used to go by the moniker "Global Warming", until the evidence that the globe is not warming became insurmountable, then they changed it to "Climate Change" so they will be covered either way.

A few years ago, the same scientist were predicting a global cooling crisis. There was cover story, I think it was Newsweek, about the "Coming Ice Age".

Apparently, by now glaciers are supposed to be toppling over skyscrapers in New York.

The Climate Change movement is the last bastion of communism.

They want a collective global society wearing cardboard sandals and hemp shirts.

"We have to spread the wealth around".

Global warming has been detected on Mars, by the way.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187605
Nov 27, 2013
 
It aint necessarily so wrote:
Remember, unsupported claims mean little with skeptics. If you want to be believed by evidence based thinkers, you need to give them a reason.
Buck Crick wrote:
First I would like to address your insult. I have little problem being believed by "evidence-based thinkers".
Insult? Sorry that you feel offended, but the comment is valid and appropriate here. You have beliefs that skeptics reject. And you continually offer unsupported claims and judgments as if they are facts.

Incidentally, by "evidence based thinker" I do NOT mean people who sift through potential evidence looking for that which supports a faith based premise and offer that as evidence. If what is being offered as evidence is only accepted by people with similar faith based beliefs, then it's not convincing evidence. I just posted these:

"Subjective Validation ... refers to a process by which people accept some claim or phenomenon as valid based solely upon a few personal experiences and/or subjective perception ... because of that person’s prior beliefs, expectations or hypotheses about the world."

"Confirmation bias is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses."

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187606
Nov 27, 2013
 
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Chicken in mustard and honey sauce?
Who did you eat it off of?
Don’t know about what you use but here in England we use a thing called plates

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187607
Nov 27, 2013
 
Buck Crick wrote:
I have significant problems being believed by the likes of my critics on these pages, who, when faced with a piece of evidence or research, immediately turn to some tidbit they can dig out to use for ad hominem.
You are famous for doing that yourself, Buck. Remember Amanda Marcotte, who you rebutted by calling an idiot?
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...

Your also rebutted comments by Harris, Maher and Krauss with similar ad hominem comments.
Buck Crick wrote:
Example - the latest is the charge leveled that a researcher "is a gardener".
You had let one controversial man do the ad hominem dirty work for you against another in that case:

"He is the Amazing Randi. In the words of Dr. Sheldrake: "The man is a liar". "He is a deceiver by profession and he is a deceiver by nature".
Buck Crick wrote:
The reason Sheldrake can publicly say this to an audience without fear of being sued for slander? He has proof - ironclad, documented proof that Randi is a fraud.
This is your defense that Sheldrake's claim was a fact. I can't judge the significance of either Sheldrake's claim or yours without knowing the history and context that led to those comments, nor are most of us able to judge the significance of the absence of a lawsuit, such as Randi's reasons for not suing, or what barriers there might be to bringing a suit if he were so inclined.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187608
Nov 27, 2013
 
Buck Crick wrote:
Another example is an Esquire Magazine article using innuendo to impugn the truthfulness of Dr. Eben Alexander, where the author uses a variety of sources, but neglects any attempt to interview the subjects of his article.
How is that relevant to our discussion, even if true? Once again, we are asked to trust your judgment. The author need not be interviewed to critique his claims, his book, or the Newsweek story about him.
Buck Crick wrote:
Another is the use of anything Sam Harris says about an NDE. Harris had advocated killing people for their beliefs, before they have a chance to commit harmful acts. No word whether he thinks the same preemptive exterminators should be used on him for his beliefs. Any scientific criticism he offers on the subject of NDEs would be rejected out of hand by an "evidence-based thinker".
What does this have to do with evidence based thought? If you want to challenge Harris' ethical judgments, it's a separate discussion.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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.

9 Users are viewing the Atheism Forum right now

Search the Atheism Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Our world came from nothing? 11 hr NightSerf 240
20+ Questions for Theists (Apr '13) 15 hr Patrick 385
What does "Atheism" mean? 16 hr Reason Personified 10
Introducing The Universal Religion 17 hr Reason Personified 733
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 22 hr DonPanic 21,400
Talking some sense into you people... 23 hr religionisillness 24
The numbers are in: America still distrusts ath... 23 hr religionisillness 19
•••
•••