Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 256544 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.

IPSEC

Oglesby, TX

#222764 Apr 3, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>Sure it is. Just look at all the global warming.
Aerobatty wrote:
I have.
You should.
__________
Right. And don't forget the global cooling, too.
And the global status quo.
Science is always right, either way.
Sure.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predi...

In the thirty years leading up to the 1970s, available temperature recordings suggested that there was a cooling trend. As a result some scientists suggested that the current inter-glacial period could rapidly draw to a close, which might result in the Earth plunging into a new ice age over the next few centuries. This idea could have been reinforced by the knowledge that the smog that climatologists call ‘aerosols’– emitted by human activities into the atmosphere – also caused cooling. In fact, as temperature recording has improved in coverage, it’s become apparent that the cooling trend was most pronounced in northern land areas and that global temperature trends were in fact relatively steady during the period prior to 1970.

At the same time as some scientists were suggesting we might be facing another ice age, a greater number published contradicting studies. Their papers showed that the growing amount of greenhouse gasses that humans were putting into the atmosphere would cause much greater warming – warming that would a much greater influence on global temperature than any possible natural or human-caused cooling effects.

By 1980 the predictions about ice ages had ceased, due to the overwhelming evidence contained in an increasing number of reports that warned of global warming. Unfortunately, the small number of predictions of an ice age appeared to be much more interesting than those of global warming, so it was those sensational 'Ice Age' stories in the press that so many people tend to remember.
IPSEC

Oglesby, TX

#222765 Apr 3, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Drought? It's raining here right now, and it's been a colder than normal winter.
Neither is evidence for anything.
The world extends apart her than your nose.
IPSEC

Oglesby, TX

#222766 Apr 3, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
We have design engineers who are very intelligent.
Do their designs exceed the human body? The human brain?
Learn about design constraints. You don't know what you're talking about.
There is no evidence of design of the body or brain.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#222767 Apr 3, 2014
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
What value would ID have and what predictions would it make?
It predicts that junk DNA is not really junk.

It was right. Darwinists were wrong. As indicated below:

Skeptic Magazine, 2006; Michael Shermer:

"We have to wonder why the Intelligent Designer added to our genome junk DNA, repeated copies of useless DNA, orphan genes, gene fragments, tandem repeats, and pseudo­genes, none of which are involved directly in the making of a human being. In fact, of the entire human genome, it appears that only a tiny percentage is actively involved in useful protein production. Rather than being intelligently designed, the human genome looks more and more like a mosaic of mutations, fragment copies, borrowed sequences, and discarded strings of DNA that were jerry-built over millions of years of evolution." (Why Darwin Matters, pp. 74–75)

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#222768 Apr 3, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>Drought? It's raining here right now, and it's been a colder than normal winter.

Neither is evidence for anything.
Do you know the difference between weather and climate?
IPSEC

Oglesby, TX

#222769 Apr 3, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Totally wrong, Dumbass.
Creationist groups oppose it because it is not creationism - it does not require an interventionist god.
You oppose it because you don't know what it is, and because you are stupid.
Nope, they oppose it for monetary reasons. They don't want to lose tithers. It is absolutely just another form of creationism. cdesign propentionists, after all. Your ad hominem is as ignorant as your argument from ignorance. There is no science in ID when, at the end, you can plug in whatever god or teapot you want to as a designer. It is non-falsifiable and not predicative. It is as useless as your brain.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#222770 Apr 3, 2014
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Good for you. Seriously.
Now, what value does ID present?
A better understanding of the origins and evolution of all life.

Is that important?
IPSEC

Oglesby, TX

#222771 Apr 3, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
If you think prosperity results from giving more to the government, you are free to give them everything you have.
Go ahead. Show us your faith.
I think it is more prosperous for money to be utilized in the private sector with its multiplier effect.
Ask a poor person to create a job for you.
So, more logical fallacies. Can you create a post without them? Show where I made any of the assertions you claim I made here. None of those things you assert are the opposite of trickle down which is demonstrably ineffective.

Getting money into the hands of the middle class stimulates the environment, but your "job creators" are ensuring that no longer happens by opposing every economic reform that made that possible.

You're living a lie, nitwit. Every assertion you make, on every topic on Topix, is without evidence.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#222773 Apr 3, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>A better understanding of the origins and evolution of all life.

Is that important?
If we're to assume that life was the work of an intelligent being and not a natural process, how would we research that?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#222774 Apr 3, 2014
IPSEC wrote:
<quoted text>There is no evidence of design of the body or brain.
In your case, probably true.

“When you treat people as they ”

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#222775 Apr 3, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
ID is the pursuit of valid science. It rises or falls on the science.
Nobody should be against that.
Incidentally, the largest creationist organizations vehemently oppose ID.
I just fired my tea all over my desk

God made it all by magic is not science

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#222776 Apr 3, 2014
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
If we're to assume that life was the work of an intelligent being and not a natural process, how would we research that?
We don't assume, we follow the evidence.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#222777 Apr 3, 2014
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
I just fired my tea all over my desk
God made it all by magic is not science
I'm not interested in your dull-minded cliches.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#222778 Apr 3, 2014
IPSEC wrote:
<quoted text>So, more logical fallacies. Can you create a post without them? Show where I made any of the assertions you claim I made here. None of those things you assert are the opposite of trickle down which is demonstrably ineffective.
Getting money into the hands of the middle class stimulates the environment, but your "job creators" are ensuring that no longer happens by opposing every economic reform that made that possible.
You're living a lie, nitwit. Every assertion you make, on every topic on Topix, is without evidence.
Your post is gibberish.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#222779 Apr 3, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>We don't assume, we follow the evidence.
And the evidence we gather is the evidence we can detect from natural processes.

How would ID based research into the origins of life differ from the natural processes based research?

“Credulity is not a virtue”

Since: Apr 09

San Francisco

#222780 Apr 3, 2014
sweets2360 wrote:
<quoted text>
The last numbers I saw quoted was 47% was family and up to 74% family and family friends. People the child knows.
I've heard that before. Soooooo very creepy! Eeeew.

“Credulity is not a virtue”

Since: Apr 09

San Francisco

#222781 Apr 3, 2014
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
I gave you the Amplified version three times already. It's easy to understand what the scripture means.
Please delineate how that version is a more accurate translation from the oldest texts than all the other versions. I.e., what is the veracity of that particular version?

“Credulity is not a virtue”

Since: Apr 09

San Francisco

#222782 Apr 3, 2014
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
You just called someone a coward and a liar. Holy freaking cow cheese Wildride.
Yeah, I did. Because they are. And I'm not the only one to point that out to the same person either, you might have noticed.

“Credulity is not a virtue”

Since: Apr 09

San Francisco

#222783 Apr 3, 2014
number four wrote:
<quoted text>....It's not equal to real marriage ....
Look , if homosexuals stopped forming unions today ...big whup ..
If , heterosexuals stopped forming unions .....civilization would perish ..
What is at the core of real marriage ...Is , it that you want the very best for your spouse ..
.......( I realize this is purely ...theistic ).....
This means the very best , you could hope to do for your spouse ..is , the salvation of their souls ..
Men and Women ...are created for each other ...this , is just plain to see ...
and , finally ....yes , I do have a sister .....and , shes all yours ...I'm driving her to the bus station ..right now ...!!
I see. So heterosexuals who can't or don't want to have children should not marry?

Thanks for offering me your sister as if she were an object to be disposed of BTW. I'm sure she'd appreciate that.

“Credulity is not a virtue”

Since: Apr 09

San Francisco

#222784 Apr 3, 2014
number four wrote:
<quoted text>...Well , I don't really know bout' all that ...maybe , God gets gassy ....
but , you seem like an intelligent bloke ....homosexual sex ..is the very most dangerous sex anybody can be exposed to ....and , just the sheer number of partners ....
..you guys ...make straight people jealous ....
I'm afraid you've mistaken porn films for documentaries.

As for sex being dangerous, just have safe sex. Everyone should. There ya go.

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 8 min Steve III 45,229
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 19 min Steve III 618,754
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 31 min Thinking 63,446
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 58 min DebraE 106,479
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 1 hr karl44 973,685
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 1 hr Steve III 653,698
Play "end of the word" part 2 (Dec '15) 1 hr ImFree2Choose 2,569
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 9 hr Pegasus 281,841
More from around the web