Why Atheism Will Replace Religion

Why Atheism Will Replace Religion

There are 14655 comments on the News24 story from Aug 27, 2012, titled Why Atheism Will Replace Religion. In it, News24 reports that:

Please note that for this article "Atheism" also includes agnostics, deists, pagans, wiccans... in other words non-religious.

You will notice this is a statement of fact. And to be fact it is supported by evidence (see references below). Now you can have "faith" that this is not true, but by the very definition of faith, that is just wishful thinking.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at News24.

“Educating the uneducated”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

#7988 Apr 3, 2013
You gotta be kidding wrote:
<quoted text>I don't live in the 'reality' that you do, I live in the true reality, not the fake evolutionary one.
You mean your deluded fantasy-reality.

You keep getting mixed up.
Donkeys don't talk in reality, in your delusional mind they do.

It's funny how you think you live in reality.

“Educating the uneducated”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

#7989 Apr 3, 2013
ezdzit wrote:
<quoted text>If you had actually been following this thread you would know that I didn't ask anyone, atheist or otherwise, for proof of evolution. I never ask atheists about evolution.....ever. Period.

Get it?
Because you realize it's a fact and that there's no point in arguing the facts?

“Liberty & Justice For All”

Since: Aug 11

United States of America

#7990 Apr 3, 2013
Lacez wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean your deluded fantasy-reality.
You keep getting mixed up.
Donkeys don't talk in reality, in your delusional mind they do.
It's funny how you think you live in reality.
A strawman served with a red herring garnished of snarky ad hominems?

Typical atheist wit,,,,,,

“Darwin died for your sins”

Since: Aug 08

Nunya

#7991 Apr 3, 2013
ezdzit wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course it's my post, bubba.
And where in my post, pray tell, do you read any words that even remotely resembles moi posing a question about evolution to an atheist, hmmmmmmm......?
It's implied, f--kwit. You're not very good at plausible deniability.

“Liberty & Justice For All”

Since: Aug 11

United States of America

#7992 Apr 3, 2013
Lacez wrote:
<quoted text>
Because you realize it's a fact and that there's no point in arguing the facts?
No, because there's no point in arguing with someone who erroneously believes opinions unsupported by any scientific evidence are called "facts". Get it?
Jumper The Wise

Owensboro, KY

#7993 Apr 3, 2013
Gravity is a state of mind.

“Darwin died for your sins”

Since: Aug 08

Nunya

#7994 Apr 3, 2013
ezdzit wrote:
<quoted text>
No, because there's no point in arguing with someone who erroneously believes opinions unsupported by any scientific evidence are called "facts". Get it?
The entire field of biology says you're wrong.

If you think it's wrong then you should submit your research for peer review. You don't get to call it wrong and then not propose a replacement theory.

“Liberty & Justice For All”

Since: Aug 11

United States of America

#7995 Apr 3, 2013
madscot wrote:
<quoted text>
It's implied, f--kwit. You're not very good at plausible deniability.
Here's what I posted, bubba:

"Atheists NEVER post any evidence supporting their theology of evolution....because not one scientist has ever published a peer reviewed stand alone theory for them to copy & paste. And all these posers who can barely spell claiming to have PhD status? Horse feathers....or is it dinosaur feathers these days?"

Which words "implied" I was asking or even inclined to ask an atheist anything about evolution?

You're not very good at admitting you're wrong when you're dead wrong, are you? TypicaL atheist....

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

#7996 Apr 3, 2013
Jumper The Wise wrote:
<quoted text>Little wooden dude!
How's things?!
I'll take that as your abject failure to rebuke me.

Bye.
Jumper The Wise

Owensboro, KY

#7997 Apr 3, 2013
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll take that as your abject failure to rebuke me.
Bye.
How can I rebuke a cute little wood chip like you.

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

#7998 Apr 3, 2013
ezdzit wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree. The love of money does indeed corrupt, and there's a mountain of irrefutable empirical evidence extending back over 12 thousand years of civilization for support support that argument which is a standard proverb in all religious texts, not just the "good book".
That said, nothing about Flew's life suggests a love of money influenced his decision to change his religion from atheism to deism. Flew said he came to believe in a Creator God as a result of the scientific evidence and philosophical argument. Maybe he, a philosopher, was finally confronted with real science, i.e. that it's mathematically impossible that the present diversity of life on this planet could have evolved from a random mix of swamp soup by accident in the short span of 4.6 billion years. Ya think?
Maybe we can apply "Occam's Razor" ... which is simpler? He had this amazing philosophical reversal as a result of "scientific evidence" (?) which the rest of us have somehow missed or he wanted to enrich himself by selling his book to a receptive audience?

As for "mathematically impossible" I remind you that we have far too few life-bearing planets in our database to calculate the odds in any meaningful way. We look with a measure of optimism towards Mars, Europa and even tiny Enceladus as possibly supporting life. The Kepler mission is finding hundreds of planets, some of which orbit in their star's "habitable zone" and the latest estimates place literally trillions of planets in our Universe.

4.6 billion years is hardly a "short span" and represents an appreciable chunk of the age of the Universe. At least you concede the Earth is that old ... I congratulate you for that.

“Liberty & Justice For All”

Since: Aug 11

United States of America

#7999 Apr 3, 2013
madscot wrote:
<quoted text>
The entire field of biology says you're wrong.
If you think it's wrong then you should submit your research for peer review. You don't get to call it wrong and then not propose a replacement theory.
LOL Dream on, bubba.

“For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance, he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries”

-- Robert Jastrow, American astronomer, physicist and cosmologist, Noble Laureate, and agnostic, from his book, "God and the Astronomers" ( p. 107)

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

#8000 Apr 3, 2013
Kesla15 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hiya,
I suppose you coud argue it that way.
To me, agnosticism is purely a state of 'not knowing' what there is out there. While I accept the fact that there may or may not be a God, or an afterlife, i'm unable to commit to either idea because I don't have enough evidence to point me either way.
Personally, I think a majority of people who identify as athiests are actually agnostic, because athiesm in itself is a very devout belief that there is nothing afterwards, and I think everyone, no matter how firm they are in their beliefs, always have a nagging feeling at the back of their head; "what if i'm wrong?"
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so sure of themselves, while the wise, so full of doubt." <Bertrand Russel>

“There is no such thing”

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#8001 Apr 3, 2013
Kesla15 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hiya,
I suppose you coud argue it that way.
To me, agnosticism is purely a state of 'not knowing' what there is out there. While I accept the fact that there may or may not be a God, or an afterlife, i'm unable to commit to either idea because I don't have enough evidence to point me either way.
Personally, I think a majority of people who identify as athiests are actually agnostic, because athiesm in itself is a very devout belief that there is nothing afterwards, and I think everyone, no matter how firm they are in their beliefs, always have a nagging feeling at the back of their head; "what if i'm wrong?"
You will notice there are some on here that have to have things black and white. There is either a god or not, an afterlife or not,you are either an athiest or a creationist, there are no room for maybes..according to some.

“Liberty & Justice For All”

Since: Aug 11

United States of America

#8002 Apr 3, 2013
RHill wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe we can apply "Occam's Razor" ... which is simpler? He had this amazing philosophical reversal as a result of "scientific evidence" (?) which the rest of us have somehow missed or he wanted to enrich himself by selling his book to a receptive audience?
As for "mathematically impossible" I remind you that we have far too few life-bearing planets in our database to calculate the odds in any meaningful way. We look with a measure of optimism towards Mars, Europa and even tiny Enceladus as possibly supporting life. The Kepler mission is finding hundreds of planets, some of which orbit in their star's "habitable zone" and the latest estimates place literally trillions of planets in our Universe.
4.6 billion years is hardly a "short span" and represents an appreciable chunk of the age of the Universe. At least you concede the Earth is that old ... I congratulate you for that.
There's certainly no need to speculate about his reasons for reversing his beliefs about God as they are clearly stated and thoroughly explored in his book: "There is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed his Mind."

One might say that Flew simply experienced the "worst fate of philosopher" phenomena which Nietzsche humorously described, i.e. to successful argue your position for decades, finally convert your opponents, and then become aware that you have serious doubts about that very same position

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#8003 Apr 3, 2013
Evolution is factual science with mountains of observable data to back it up.
ezdzit wrote:
<quoted text>Here's what I posted, bubba:

"Atheists NEVER post any evidence supporting their theology of evolution....because not one scientist has ever published a peer reviewed stand alone theory for them to copy & paste. And all these posers who can barely spell claiming to have PhD status? Horse feathers....or is it dinosaur feathers these days?"

Which words "implied" I was asking or even inclined to ask an atheist anything about evolution?

You're not very good at admitting you're wrong when you're dead wrong, are you? TypicaL atheist....

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

#8004 Apr 4, 2013
ezdzit wrote:
<quoted text>
There's certainly no need to speculate about his reasons for reversing his beliefs about God as they are clearly stated and thoroughly explored in his book: "There is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed his Mind."
One might say that Flew simply experienced the "worst fate of philosopher" phenomena which Nietzsche humorously described, i.e. to successful argue your position for decades, finally convert your opponents, and then become aware that you have serious doubts about that very same position
Many Atheists are raised in some church or another and have had similar epiphanies. Lacking Flew's notoriety, these changes in philosophy go unheralded and unnoticed. While these reversals seem 'profound' they usually don't result in gross behavioral changes. Chances are, the person setting next to you in church could be a closet Atheist (albeit a miserable one) suffering their doubts silently and alone, fearing rejection by his or her friends and family. People 'turn' all the time and usually without any kind of lucrative book deals waiting in the wings.

Let's face it, in the matter of the existence of a god or any kind of supernatural realm, volumes have been written, thousands of compelling arguments have been made, billions of heart-strings have been plucked, but (BUT!!) there is and remains NO EVIDENCE. In view of this complete lack of evidence, Atheism is and remains the only real, logical, philosophical conclusion. Agnosticism, fence setters, are awaiting the day someone comes up with an argument one way or the other so compelling as to remove all doubt. Never gonna happen.

Similarly, the poor theist, waiting for some revelation or physical manifestation of their deity. How many have driven themselves mad waiting? Never gonna happen. Too bad the only 'guarantee' of a judgement comes on the 'other side' of life. Reliable reports from that sector are few and far between. LOL

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

#8005 Apr 4, 2013
Kesla15 wrote:
<quoted text>
Agreed,
I also think that all human beings simply push the boundary.
"Oh I don't want to die until i've found love"
"oh I don't want to die until i've reached old age".
We keep pushing the envelope until it falls off the table. We don't do it consciously but unless someone has a pretty miserable existance where they believe death will offer some kind of 'relief' that no one really accepts going into death.
I got ya! For me, it's been "Oh I don't want to die until this or that space mission has sent back results" or "I don't want to die until I've read Stephen King's next novel" or even "If I can just hold out until the next Star Trek movie is released". Life can get pretty miserable (imagine how that traitor, that Flew fellow, must feel) so one best be armed with some kind of highlighter. Highlight the good stuff, forget the bad stuff. At the end, the person with the most used up highlighters wins.

“Educating the uneducated”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

#8006 Apr 4, 2013
ezdzit wrote:
<quoted text>A strawman served with a red herring garnished of snarky ad hominems?

Typical atheist wit,,,,,,
Actually, I've just stopped treating him like a semi sane individual due to the fact that he thinks the Earth is only 6'000 years old, that there are not billions of planets yet he can't say how many there are, the fact that he thinks Pluto is still in debate as a planet when it hasn't been for at least 7 years, and that carbon dating is unreliable...yet his god, without any evidence behind it, trumps all that has massive evidence and proof behind them.

“Educating the uneducated”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

#8007 Apr 4, 2013
ezdzit wrote:
<quoted text>No, because there's no point in arguing with someone who erroneously believes opinions unsupported by any scientific evidence are called "facts". Get it?
Again, the theory of evolution is to explain how the observed fact of evolution works. Just like the theory of gravity is used to explain how the observed fact of gravity works.

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.

Pagan/Wiccan Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Who Is Allah? (Aug '07) 17 min Frank 225,628
News Looking for a Pagan community in Kentucky? (Mar '12) 7 hr Pam 11
News What is Asatru? (Dec '10) 18 hr ex pagan 2
News Sorry Witches, You Won't Be Able to Buy Spells ... Jun 23 Drake_Burrwood 1
News Illogical Religious Positions? Jun 15 Looney Tunes 1
omens of dead animals (Aug '08) Jun 14 Davglix 107
News Iowa woman to make history with nation's first ... Jun 12 MakesUBeGone 2
More from around the web