Why Atheism Will Replace Religion

Aug 27, 2012 Full story: News24 14,477

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. Full Story
You gotta be kidding

Auckland, New Zealand

#8411 Apr 7, 2013
Imhotep wrote:
<quoted text>
There isn't anything to divert dimwit visit the library
You evotwots are so very slow minded, you are diverting my question every time I want you to post that one bit of 100% factual evidence that proves evolution as fact. I do not want a library I want one fact.
You gotta be kidding

Auckland, New Zealand

#8412 Apr 7, 2013
Elise Bagwasher wrote:
<quoted text>
Please don't.
Creation and Intelligent design: 160
evolution myth : NIL
You gotta be kidding

Auckland, New Zealand

#8413 Apr 7, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
What term did you disapprove of then?
<quoted text>
Read the post I will not repeat such profanity.
You gotta be kidding

Auckland, New Zealand

#8414 Apr 7, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
You wish to assert a god did it all yes? Well first you have to prove there is a god and until you can do that you are just humiliating yourself colon.
<quoted text>
Yet another stupid diversion form the evotwots, and what is it with my colon, it is just fine thanks just the way GOD created it.

Now stop diverting post your evidence.
You gotta be kidding

Auckland, New Zealand

#8415 Apr 7, 2013
That should read:

CREATIONISTS: 160
evotwots: NIL

There now that looks far better.

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

#8416 Apr 7, 2013
ezdzit wrote:
<quoted text>
Einstein's point in this letter is that he does not accept any interpretation of the "original texts" that argues Jews are "chosen people". I agree.
What's your point, bubba?
"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses"

That's what the man said.

Since: Dec 10

Orefield, PA

#8417 Apr 8, 2013
You gotta be kidding wrote:
<quoted text>
Once again I guess your post with the 100% factual evidence must have been deleted because it is not here anywhere and I just looked to make sure. So be so kind as to post it again.
You have been given more evidence than you deserve, but have ignored it.
That makes you a troll.
You lose troll. Not only have you failed to prove that your sky-fairy is real, you have failed to acknowledge the proof given to you. Like most godbots, you lack honesty and integrity. Thanks for the demonstration of the dishonesty of the true believers. LOL!!! It's like shooting fish in a barrel with trolls like you. LOL!!

Since: Dec 10

Orefield, PA

#8418 Apr 8, 2013
You gotta be kidding wrote:
<quoted text>
You evotwots are so very slow minded, you are diverting my question every time I want you to post that one bit of 100% factual evidence that proves evolution as fact. I do not want a library I want one fact.
It's been posted to you, and you ignored it.
You lose troll, get back under your bridge.

Since: Dec 10

Orefield, PA

#8419 Apr 8, 2013
You gotta be kidding wrote:
<quoted text>
Creation and Intelligent design: 160
evolution myth : NIL
Only in troll fantasyland.

As I mentioned before... Even if you could somehow prove that evolution is untrue(impossible), it would not make your sky pixie real. Creationism and ID are just silly, unproven myths. When you grow up, maybe you'll understand. Until then, get back under your bridge.

Since: Dec 10

Orefield, PA

#8420 Apr 8, 2013
You gotta be kidding wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet another stupid diversion form the evotwots, and what is it with my colon, it is just fine thanks just the way GOD created it.
Now stop diverting post your evidence.
God... LOL!!!! How childish. Any proof for that god of yours? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Let me help..... The answer is NO!! It is jsut a myth like all the other god myths before it. Face it troll. You believe in a silly little fairytale because you are afraid of the unknown. Your mommy and daddy told you a little god story, just like the Santa story, but forgot to tell both of them are make-believe. You have no more proof for Santa than God. That's why we laugh at you.

Of course, if you want to present some real evidence, I would LOVE to see it.
Go ahead, start will the excuses. LOL!!

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#8421 Apr 8, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Ans.
Thanks for your beautifully written monograph on science and its subject matters.
If I summarise, it in few words , then let me say that basic steps in science is that:
a. First we observe certain phenomenon in nature
b. Then we collect as much data about it as we can.
c. Then we try to formulate laws and rules that can explain these known observations.
d. If they are able to explain most facts, then these rules become laws.
e. But if we observe new facts and now observations, we modify or change our laws to suit the new observations.
f. This slow and step by step procedure is what has contributed to growth of science and human knowledge thru out human civilization.
g. Every nation and every society has contributed some thing to this common pool of human knowledge. And it is not correct to negate contribution of any race or any people, or belittle their efforts.
This is a balanced approach to science and its true position and its strong points as well as its limitations.
Now coming to Theory of Evolution, in my view, this was a very Non Scientific approach from its very beginning!!
1. First of all, there was not sufficient data available to suggest any change from one specie to another. And there was no "pressing need" to make such a theory.
2. Then there was no rule or pattern why some species evolved and some did not evolve.
3. There was zero evidence of seeing this evolution of species in nature.
4. Read the book or Darwin, it is full of assumptions and half truths and saying things about which he had no knowledge.
5. It was a sort of "fictional writing" and not conforming to scientific method. It was "picked up" by Zealot Scientists, only because it gave them "some argument" to answer the religious people that "God created everything in this Universe"
6. So the Theory was formed first and then the data was collected to corroborate that theory.
And every type of trick and "cooking up evidence" and "ignoring evidence not conforming to the theory" was used to present it as a scientific theory.
7. And to say that TOE does not deal with beginning or origin of life is again misleading. Just calling it by a jargon name,(Abiogenesis) would not remove it from purview of TOE.
8. What happens to complex life forms, should also happen to simple life form and how they originated.
Seeing all in all, this TOE is a very non scientific theory and it is strange that majority of scientists call it a scientific theory.
It is illogical, unreasonable and not supported by fossil records.
Fossil records show the arrival of New species and extinction of old species, but NEVER transformation of one specie into another.
And some day these scientists would realize what sort of fools they ever supported such type of non sense.
PS:
I would expect a rejoinder from you. Please start this debate and let us see, what purpose has this TOE achieved from purely scientific point of view.
How many valuable hours and how much efforts have been wasted to justify this TOE and what are real accomplishments.
We can start a debate the moment you deside to learn something about Biology, Physics and Math. Until then we may as well be talking to a brickwall.

“Educating the uneducated”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

#8422 Apr 8, 2013
You gotta be kidding wrote:
<quoted text>Oh dear diversions again, let me use simple language so you might understand.

POST YOUR 100% FACTUAL EVIDENCE TO PROVE EVOLUTION, YOU HAVE NOT YET DONE SO, THAT MEANS I COULD NOT POSSIBLY READ WHAT YOU HAVE NOT POSTED. There do you understand it this time. I am still waiting. You evotwots are ever so stupid constantly claiming that you have facts but never posting them.
I see that I'm just going to have to repeat myself over and over.
You refuse to see the proof, it has been presented and you are ignorant of it.
You do not want to actually see the proof, therefore you don't see it, therefore you don't think it has been posted.

Since: Mar 11

United States

#8424 Apr 8, 2013
It doesn't require proof? In that case there was no reason for Muhammad to claim Allah came to him while he was spanking his little prophet in a cave.

The existence of the universe is only proof for the existence of the universe. Sorry we can observe the universe but not this so called god.

You are correct that believers and non believers can't be pit on the same level. We live by fact and reason while you live by delusion, superstition and advocate chopping off young girls nose and ears if they step out of line and of course child brides being forced to marry against their will.

You admit you see non believers as lower than cattle, and this explains why there is so much Muslim violence to non believers yes?
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>That there is God, does not require any proof. the very existence of this Universe, proves that there is God who created it.
You cannot put believers and non believers on the same footing.

Since: Mar 11

United States

#8425 Apr 8, 2013
I posted no profanity in that post, perhaps you can give a hint at what non profane word upset you so?
You gotta be kidding wrote:
<quoted text>Read the post I will not repeat such profanity.

Since: Mar 11

United States

#8426 Apr 8, 2013
Again you will need to demonstrate a god exists first. If you are unable to you have lost.
You gotta be kidding wrote:
<quoted text>Yet another stupid diversion form the evotwots, and what is it with my colon, it is just fine thanks just the way GOD created it.

Now stop diverting post your evidence.
spudgun

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#8427 Apr 8, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
..advocate chopping off young girls nose and ears if they step out of line and of course child brides being forced to marry against their will.
<quoted text>
Very old testament. Its the same psychology as Christians, Muslims I think pick and chose which bits to believe in, and ignore the stuff which is obviously cruel and barbaric. They then can create a god for themselves which is a projection of their beliefs in their own minds.

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#8428 Apr 8, 2013
You gotta be kidding wrote:
That would be....
Creation and Intelligent Design: 158,
evolution: nil
Need I say more.
Please don't, your ignorance is embarassing.

“Educating the uneducated”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

#8429 Apr 8, 2013
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>Please don't, your ignorance is embarassing.
Do the Stephen Fry thing;
No no no, don't do that, you'll give me an erection.

Since: Mar 11

United States

#8430 Apr 8, 2013
Hard to ignore the nightly news though lol!
spudgun wrote:
<quoted text>Very old testament. Its the same psychology as Christians, Muslims I think pick and chose which bits to believe in, and ignore the stuff which is obviously cruel and barbaric. They then can create a god for themselves which is a projection of their beliefs in their own minds.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#8431 Apr 8, 2013
MUQ wrote:
Now coming to Theory of Evolution, in my view, this was a very Non Scientific approach from its very beginning!!
1. First of all, there was not sufficient data available to suggest any change from one specie to another. And there was no "pressing need" to make such a theory.
This is false. Decades before Darwin, scientists were noticing that species were different was we move back in time in the geological strata. The question wasn't whether evolution occurred, but rather the mechanism of the changes seen.
2. Then there was no rule or pattern why some species evolved and some did not evolve.
Again, a falsehood. It was noticed that species in the past that were similar to those in the present were always geographically close and that for longer periods of time, things like land bridges affected the time of dispersal of new species.
3. There was zero evidence of seeing this evolution of species in nature.
Once again, a falsehood. Adaptation, which is simply evolution over short time periods, was well observed. Larger scale evolution was seen by comparing fossils and modern animals, or fossils from one time with fossils from another.
4. Read the book or Darwin, it is full of assumptions and half truths and saying things about which he had no knowledge.
Of course. Darwin knew nothing about genetics. That flaw in his theory was later corrected when we started to understand the mechanisms of inheritance and the nature of DNA.
5. It was a sort of "fictional writing" and not conforming to scientific method.
Actually, this sort of speculative writing was quite common at the time and necessary because of the lack of data except from small localities. Darwin makes very clear were his observations stop and his speculation begins, as any good scientist would.
It was "picked up" by Zealot Scientists, only because it gave them "some argument" to answer the religious people that "God created everything in this Universe"
Once again, the *fact* of evolution: that species change over geological time, as known long before Darwin and was discovered by scientists who were also religious.
6. So the Theory was formed first and then the data was collected to corroborate that theory.
This is historically inaccurate.
7. And to say that TOE does not deal with beginning or origin of life is again misleading. Just calling it by a jargon name,(Abiogenesis) would not remove it from purview of TOE.
Evolution deals with how biological species change over geological time. It does not address the questions surrounding how life got started. Those, as I have pointed out, are very different questions and it is common in science to separate the two.
8. What happens to complex life forms, should also happen to simple life form and how they originated.
One useful definition of life in the topic of abiogenesis is when evolution gets started.

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
Who Is Allah? (Aug '07) 5 min RIGHT 212,082
Ex-Lawmaker Sued for Religious Discrimination (Jan '11) Feb 19 Hammer 4
'Monotheism inevitable but wasn't a break with ... Feb 12 Joe W 9
A new guard for Asgard: Iceland building first ... Feb 3 freethinkradio do... 1
Pastors agree: Being gay not a sin, Bible says ... (Jun '08) Jan '15 true fact 81
"Juggalos" Speak Out After Arson Arrests (Sep '07) Jan '15 Hillbilly 49
My friendly neighbourhood witches (Jul '08) Jan '15 Kaitlin the Wolf ... 454
More from around the web