Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258515 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.

“Live Good, & Feel Good.”

Since: Aug 09

Atl.

#108318 Jun 27, 2012
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
On falsification, just so we are all clear:
EXAMPLE:
The late Cretaceous, we find Daspletosaurus and Tyrannosaurus Rex. Both very similar, Save for the fact that T-Rex was much larger than Daspletosaurus, they would be nearly identical. Both belong to the Tyrannosaur clan (meaning tyrant reptile). Same shape teeth, skull to body ratio, same wide skulls, same S-shaped neck, same diminished front limbs.
According to dating techniques, Daspletosaurus lived mid to late Cretaceous, while T-Rex lived late Cretacious, right up to the extinction event.
These are all FACTS
Now, the THEORY is that Daspletosaurus evolved into T-Rex during the course of the Cretaceous.
All pretty logical, right? Wrong. We *may* be wrong. What will falsify this theory? Simple - If you can go and find a T-Rex and you can prove that the T-Rex lived long before Daspletosaurus shows up, e.g if we date the T-Rex at 170 million years, our theories on the evolution of the tyrannosauroids would be bust.
Now this is but one example. What happens if I find a modern lion in the early Triassic? That would mean our theories on the evolution of archosaurs to mammals are wrong. What if I find a humanoid and it dates back to the mid-Devonian? Then all our evolutionary theories for the past 400 million years are busted.
THAT is falsification. One single piece of bone can overthrow entire theories. Can you give such examples for either ID or Creationism?
This all fairy tale goobly gook. Story book nonsense:
http://www.pastemagazine.com/blogs/lists/2010...

SCIENCE refutes you. <grin>

“Live Good, & Feel Good.”

Since: Aug 09

Atl.

#108319 Jun 27, 2012
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice try Discovery Institute Creationist. You're a Creationist and nothing else, ID is just another PR term you liars use to confuse people.
At the end of the day, you think the earth is 6000 based on absolutely f*ck all evidence.
All of your lies stem from your cult. Nothing you have to say is original or yours.
It's better if you just f*ck off back your cult and tell them all to rewrite their revisionist history books with something a little more grown up and believable.
grown up and believable? hmm..

how 'bout BANG!..universe...earth..non life to life..marilyn monroe.

That kind of of grownup and believable stance huh? LOL..

Where in the bible did it say the earth is 6000yrs old?

Since: Sep 08

Las Animas, CO

#108320 Jun 27, 2012
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
The idiots are the ones that feel the need to invent god, but don't feel the need to grow a spine and back up their bullsh*t self important lies.
"grow a spine"?

You sound like the ant crawling up the elephant's leg with rape on your mind.

Look beyond yourself.

"Filippenko stressed that such statements are not attacks on the existence of God. Saying the Big Bang — a massive expansion 13.7 billion years ago that blew space up like a gigantic balloon — could have occurred without God is a far cry from saying that God doesn't exist, he said.

"I don't think you can use science to either prove or disprove the existence of God," Filippenko said."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/06/25/big...

"Quantum mechanical fluctuations can produce the cosmos," said panelist Seth Shostak, a senior astronomer at the non-profit Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) Institute. "If you would just, in this room, just twist time and space the right way, you might create an entirely new universe. It's not clear you could get into that universe, but you would create it."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/06/25/big...

I know you didn't read it.

Yeah, all you have to do is just twist time and space, and you might create a universe. Just sitting in your chair watching TV. No causation there, nothing to see, let's move along.

Very scientific.

The significance of what he said as relating to what you call the real and physical world is totally lost upon you.

“Be strong ...”

Since: Nov 10

...I whispered to my coffee

#108321 Jun 27, 2012
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
You cannot rule out ANY god with Revelations; you cannot rule out any god with selective quotes from physicists; and you are lying when you say there is "no" evidence.
Hawking and Leonoard Mladinow, in their most recent book, concede that science cannot tell us if there is a god or not.
Perhaps you have discovered new physics on your own in your bathtub??? Soap bubble studies?
Or maybe you're just lying. Like SuperSuck.
Why don't you change your name to "SuperFuck"?
Then you could be twin liars - SuperSuck/SuperFuck.
Been here with your before, revelations clams omnipotence, i.e, infinite energy. It is a physical impossibility for infinite energy to exist in the same universe as matter. You exist, therefore omnipotent gods don’t, simple logic which may of course be beyond you.

Other than that you cannot rule in any god with the babble or any conviction you may have. We do not know, but the physical probability is against gods.

No I am not lying, and unless you can prove your claim by actually offering evidence of gods then you are lying.

Stephen Hawking although being extremely disabled is still able to communicate and on 15 May 2011 said 'There is no heaven; it's a fairy story'

On 2 Sept 2010 said “There is no place for God in theories on the creation of the Universe,”

In the Hawking – Mlodinow book you cite the actual statement is

“Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going.”

So forget the lying fundy sites as sources try reading the real thing.

So you seem to think sad humour will validate you claims, how pathetic of you. I do not bath, I shower.

What was that about lying – you claim that “Hawking and Leonoard Mladinow, in their most recent book, concede that science cannot tell us if there is a god or not.” Is a lie, see the exact quote above.–

You liar and you are still walking like a duck?

“Be strong ...”

Since: Nov 10

...I whispered to my coffee

#108322 Jun 27, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
The article.
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/06/25/big...
You wind up with a god, or this mysterious quantum physics substitute.
""The 'divine spark' was whatever produced the laws of physics," Filippenko said. "And I don't know what produced that divine spark. So let's just leave it at the laws of physics."
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/06/25/big...
Berkeley scientist. Yeah, let's just leave it as the law of physics. Hardly proof.
You are a real idiot if you claim science proves there is not a god and believe that to be "The Truth".
Fox News – wow such mines of valid information, was there a joke at the end of the articles?

Try the originators of the message you are trying to put across, I did.

Such utter BS, how do you live with your own ignorance.

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#108323 Jun 27, 2012
bossdrop wrote:
<quoted text>
So then after your logic and rationalization that no one can truly find out what scientists positions are that disagree that the universe and the human being originated without the help of a Deity, after your logic and rationalization that any scientist that assumes the hand of a Deity was involved in the origination of the human being and this universe is a fraudulent scientist, and the fact that biologist are now being intimated and fired for rejecting that the human being and this universe came about without the hand of a Deity:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/200...
So then Biologists are threatened with their livelihoods if the disagree about the source of this universe and mankind. Any Scientist that disagree with your worldview is a fake, and no layperson can find out what other scientists that disagree with your worldview are saying.
Between those three positions, you know what you're left with?
A CULT.
uh huh. In fact your views are worse than a religion, you have the views of a Narrow Minded Religious Cult.
naive clueless atheist.
Please direct me to a post where I shot down the possibility of a god.

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#108324 Jun 27, 2012
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes.
(I don't believe in creationism, so I will answer for ID)
A plausible Darwinian pathway whereby more complex structures are formed providing a future urealized function by non-goal-directed selection of parts without the function and do not contain the necessary proteins, or the necessary arrangement of proteins, or the necessary genetic code for producing the proteins or their precursors.
Can you give an example - simplified, if necesarry.

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#108325 Jun 27, 2012
bossdrop wrote:
<quoted text>This all fairy tale goobly gook. Story book nonsense:
http://www.pastemagazine.com/blogs/lists/2010...
SCIENCE refutes you. <grin>
Uhm.

You consider THAT a source? Some blog brought out by a pimply teen?

Have you ever been to any kind of museum, whatsoever?

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#108326 Jun 27, 2012
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
Uhm.
You consider THAT a source? Some blog brought out by a pimply teen?
Have you ever been to any kind of museum, whatsoever?
He may have been here. This still boggles my mind.

Check out the pic of the saddled Triceratops.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#108327 Jun 27, 2012

“Live Good, & Feel Good.”

Since: Aug 09

Atl.

#108328 Jun 27, 2012
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
Please direct me to a post where I shot down the possibility of a god.
So if you're leaving room for the existence of a Deity, what is the whole point of your worldview?

Are you waiting to be convinced there is a God? Seems to me if you're leaving room for the existence of a Deity, why don't you switch your mindset from one of defending origination theories, to one of seeking who the real God might be?

Would not that be a better endeavor for the yrs you have left on this earth? than defending the indefensible of origination theories?

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#108329 Jun 27, 2012
SupaAFC wrote:
<quoted text>
Remind me what the original focus of the debate was? I believe -you- were tryign to back up claims regarding the legitimacy of ID. Evidently you are not up to the task.
<quoted text>
So not only do you think ignorance equals deceit, but you think it equals dishonesty too?
If I ask you on the spot, without letting you consult Google, which English soccer team plays at Old Trafford and give you a list of four teams (Man Utd, Man City, Arsenal and Chelsea), and you take a wild stab and guess Arsenal (answer being Man Utd), does that make you a liar and stupid?
Well, by your logic, yes.
Your statement was not a result of you being asked, or asked to guess.

You volunteered what you presented as superior knowledge on the subject. It was wrong, and you could have known that it was wrong, should have known that it was wrong - which means you might well have known at the time it was wrong.

That makes you a liar.

And I have been doing nothing to back of the legitimacy of my claims, I have been destroying the legitimacy of your claims; to wit, that ID is not science, is creationism, and any objection to neo-Darwinism is creationism.

So far you have failed on all points.

As a bonus, I proved you dishonest, lacking of basic reasoning skills, and ignorant of all but the most superficial atheist street-lingo of ID.

How many ways do you wish to lose to me?

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#108330 Jun 27, 2012
bossdrop wrote:
<quoted text>So if you're leaving room for the existence of a Deity, what is the whole point of your worldview?
Are you waiting to be convinced there is a God? Seems to me if you're leaving room for the existence of a Deity, why don't you switch your mindset from one of defending origination theories, to one of seeking who the real God might be?
Would not that be a better endeavor for the yrs you have left on this earth? than defending the indefensible of origination theories?
I don't leave room for a deity. Science does. Why must I look for a deity? If there is one, good. If there is not one, also good

“Live Good, & Feel Good.”

Since: Aug 09

Atl.

#108331 Jun 27, 2012
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
Uhm.
You consider THAT a source? Some blog brought out by a pimply teen?
Have you ever been to any kind of museum, whatsoever?
well the blog post was more of a jest then a serious source. But not that far from the truth imo.

I have been to museums that show these dinosaur formations. I'm not saying certain dinosaurs did not exist, I'm saying their fossil records shows no evidence of evolution. In fact the fossil records shows a catastrophic event destroyed the dinosaurs. The fossil records shows a catastrophic event happened on the earth to alter the records.

Evolutionist scientists say a meteor hit the earth. I happen to believe that catastrophic event was the flood.

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#108332 Jun 27, 2012
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>He may have been here. This still boggles my mind.
Check out the pic of the saddled Triceratops.
OMG.

My eyes are burning

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#108333 Jun 27, 2012
bossdrop wrote:
<quoted text>well the blog post was more of a jest then a serious source. But not that far from the truth imo.
I have been to museums that show these dinosaur formations. I'm not saying certain dinosaurs did not exist, I'm saying their fossil records shows no evidence of evolution. In fact the fossil records shows a catastrophic event destroyed the dinosaurs. The fossil records shows a catastrophic event happened on the earth to alter the records.
Evolutionist scientists say a meteor hit the earth. I happen to believe that catastrophic event was the flood.
Okay.

Here is the kicker question:

Dinosaurs and modern day mammals' fossils are not found in the same layers. Dinosaurs are found under a black layer, called the K-T boundary.

Can you explain this phenomenon with a flood?

Since: Mar 11

Ft Mitchell, KY

#108334 Jun 27, 2012
Can you provide peer reviewed studies backing up ID by leading credible scientists?

I have yet to see a single one, why is that??
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
"MOTIVE MONGERING"
No evidence, no facts, simple inuendo.
Very scientific, SuperSuck.
When I push you Darwin Worshippers far enough, this is always what you come down to.
No evidence, no facts, simple inuendo.
I predict your next approach will be to claim that Michael Behe said astrology is science.
Let me save you the trouble. I have refuted it at length, and I will make a fool of you for the fourth time in the past 24 hours.

Since: Mar 11

Ft Mitchell, KY

#108335 Jun 27, 2012
The ID rejects need to go to see the creationist museum!



LMFAO
Mikko

Södertälje, Sweden

#108336 Jun 27, 2012
Givemeliberty wrote:
The ID rejects need to go to see the creationist museum!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =Wzjjxi7f0OcXX
LMFAO
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

:)
SupaAFC

Norwich, UK

#108337 Jun 27, 2012
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Your statement was not a result of you being asked, or asked to guess.
That was not the point. The point is that by your standard you think somebody is dishonest and stupid if they make an assumption without knowing that they are wrong.
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
You volunteered what you presented as superior knowledge on the subject. It was wrong, and you could have known that it was wrong, should have known that it was wrong - which means you might well have known at the time it was wrong.
And that is possible that every time somebody is wrong in life. Are you honestly claiming that every time somebody is wrong, they are dishonest purely because they could -potentially- be lying?
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
That makes you a liar.
Then by your own standard -you- are a liar when you claimed that ID does not conflict with natural selection. When I showed you otherwise, you went silent.

I assumed that you were simply ignorant. Do you really want me to play you by your own pedantic game and label you a liar?
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
And I have been doing nothing to back of the legitimacy of my claims, I have been destroying the legitimacy of your claims; to wit, that ID is not science, is creationism, and any objection to neo-Darwinism is creationism.
So far you have failed on all points.
"Your Wiki source is wrong!" sure showed me.
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
As a bonus, I proved you dishonest, lacking of basic reasoning skills, and ignorant of all but the most superficial atheist street-lingo of ID.
By using a definition of liar that constitutes ignorance as deceit and stupidity which you have unwittingly included yourself in as a result of your ignorance that ID -does- conflict with natural selection.
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
How many ways do you wish to lose to me?
Said the Monty Python Black Knight.

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
My mom is getting married again 26 min jaxon66 1
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 39 min Rednek 71,851
I travel a lot and it affects my dating life 39 min lance63 1
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 43 min Michael 699,463
News Ex-Teacher Back in Jail (May '06) 1 hr nutzaplente 4
Are Quadroons and Griffes Considered Mulatto? (Aug '10) 1 hr Johnny 56
"O.J. hit me while he (BLEEPED!) me! 1 hr Johnny 9
James Comey's conflicted TWO FACES 1 hr Johnny 133
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 4 hr Big Al 995,081
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 7 hr Big Al 447,425