Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

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. Full Story

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#108529 Jun 28, 2012
Givemeliberty wrote:
Atheism and communism are two differant things but I see your intolerance is so high you want all atheists to leave the US? Well do you realize the majority of inventors and innovators in computer, communications and medical technology are atheists? Trust me you wouldn't like an atheist free America very much. Make a stand start living like an amish person and forsake all these atheist created medications and technology.
<quoted text>
Hey, is there room in that pool for two?

It's gonna be 100 here today.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#108530 Jun 28, 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.
That's called "exaptation" in biological science.

Wings, sexual pleasure and sexuality, the appendix, and a whole host of other ones.

You claimed you had a PhD in Microbiology - LIAR.

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#108531 Jun 28, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
....
You claimed you had a PhD in Microbiology - LIAR.
He *does* have a PhD in BS, with an undergraduate in copper scrolls about Jesus.

I can attest to that.

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#108532 Jun 28, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Then why did a god have to work 6 days and then take a break?
Your belief in "Poof!!, it just happened" would have been more appropriate.
Dave, please remove the ferret, them we'll talk about why BibleGod was all tuckered out after 6 days.

K?

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#108533 Jun 28, 2012
them - then

Dang secretary.

“Live Good, & Feel Good.”

Since: Aug 09

Atl.

#108534 Jun 28, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
No, Boss. Your experiences are a construct of your brain. Your brain has been encultured to a culture and, in your case, trained in a religious way of experiencing the world.
No kidding you are going to have Christian experiences. No one denies your experience.
We deny they are representative of the universe. They are just yours, Boss - like personal delusions or failures to remember everything accurately. Your brain does not exist to provide you with perfect access to reality. It exists to fit you in to your social reality - that involves lots of fictions, lots of cultural ways of experiencing, perceiving, thinking.
Sorry. Your personal experiences are not remotely close to evidence. They are for you. They aren't for anyone else.
To top that off, you're utterly uneducated in science and are committed to an irrational belief system. You don't respect logic and reason and you're therefore incapable of contributing to a rational discussion.
For you the world works one way, Boss's way. That's it, everyone else is wrong no matter what the evidence is. For you, talking to other people is "heads I win, tails you lose."
I find it really funny that you're willing to team up with people who don't share your point of view. I guess that's because people who likewise don't comprehend rational argument take similarly poorly informed and dogmatic stances as you do. You both rely on a lack of evidence and dishonesty about history and science to support your baseless position.
Anyways, good luck with that. I'm not going to bother arguing with you anymore. It's a waste of my time.
?
LOL.

Hiding, you're some messenger board participant that post about science.

You have no credibility and no authority to criticize known scientists whose credentials and accreditation are public.

Yes my subjective experience that Jesus Christ is God, of course its mine...duhhhhhh. I never said its evidence for anyone else.

What matters is what I believe. Not what you think of my beliefs.

Your cultural argument is False. People worship Jesus Christ as God in many cultures not just the western cultures.

And frankly dear, you're uneducated in science as well. You are experienced in a form of Pseudo-Science, or Junk Science. Your discipline is not a legitimate science, if you are even a scientist at all.

“Live Good, & Feel Good.”

Since: Aug 09

Atl.

#108535 Jun 28, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
That's called "exaptation" in biological science.
Wings, sexual pleasure and sexuality, the appendix, and a whole host of other ones.
You claimed you had a PhD in Microbiology - LIAR.
I think you're lying too that you have a degree in Science.

I think you just post from known scientists to back your farce of a religion.

Prove you're a real scientist hiding.

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#108536 Jun 28, 2012
bossdrop wrote:
<quoted text>I think you're lying too that you have a degree in Science.
I think you just post from known scientists to back your farce of a religion.
Prove you're a real scientist hiding.
Prove you're not an idiot.

Oops.

Too late.

“Live Good, & Feel Good.”

Since: Aug 09

Atl.

#108537 Jun 28, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Yes, child, that's called "evolution."
Need it spelled out a billion times for you?
"allelic frequency change in a gene pool"
It was tested. Demonstrated. Repeatedly.
These are tests of evolution - we cannot be more clear for you, nor more simple.
You are just an uneducated man. It's not your fault. What is your fault is your pretension to speak for science. You can't. You're scientifically illiterate and you show this with every single post.
There's no argument in the world that will change your mind. You are committed to irrationality. You're committed to remaining uneducated and immune to learning.
And you wanted me to meet you for coffee? Boss, for me, it would be the most boring and painful conversation of my entire life. Why would I want to talk with a delusional creationist about anything?
It's be like watching reruns of teletubbies over and over. Blach!
Again, claiming evolution within species is the same as evolution claiming that the human being originated from a fish is just desperate delusions and clinical denial. I blame your religion atheism for dumbing you down that way.

Actually could you post that prairie chicken example again. Your mosquito example was a joke after further investigation. I'm sure your prairie chickens example will be a joke too after REAL scientists have looked into the results. I'm sure I can find it :)

Forget the tea, after buck has exposed you for the lying fraud that you are, I have grave doubts that you're even a scientist at all.

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#108538 Jun 28, 2012
bossdrop wrote:
<quoted text>Again, claiming evolution within species is the same as evolution claiming that the human being originated from a fish is just desperate delusions and clinical denial. I blame your religion atheism for dumbing you down that way.
Actually could you post that prairie chicken example again. Your mosquito example was a joke after further investigation. I'm sure your prairie chickens example will be a joke too after REAL scientists have looked into the results. I'm sure I can find it :)
Forget the tea, after buck has exposed you for the lying fraud that you are, I have grave doubts that you're even a scientist at all.
You'll notice I said prove you're *not* an idiot.

You missed that not part, huh?

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#108539 Jun 28, 2012
bossdrop wrote:
<quoted text>Again, claiming evolution within species is the same as evolution claiming that the human being originated from a fish is just desperate delusions and clinical denial. I blame your religion atheism for dumbing you down that way.
Actually could you post that prairie chicken example again. Your mosquito example was a joke after further investigation. I'm sure your prairie chickens example will be a joke too after REAL scientists have looked into the results. I'm sure I can find it :)
Forget the tea, after buck has exposed you for the lying fraud that you are, I have grave doubts that you're even a scientist at all.
So, you ever get around to actually reading Goodacre instead of just thieving from his summary and lying about actually reading him?

'Cuz I have a question about chapter 4.

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#108540 Jun 28, 2012
Chess Jurist wrote:
<quoted text>
So, you ever get around to actually reading Goodacre instead of just thieving from his summary and lying about actually reading him?
'Cuz I have a question about chapter 4.
When thieves scurry off, ever notice they sound just like rats?

Or Christians.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#108541 Jun 28, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Buck, you believe you have the universe figured out – you’ve often outlined you belief system as one of reincarnation with an overseeing deity. Everything you’ve written supports your views. All the posts with Christian-apologetic frauds, fake historians and pretend scientists.
You aren’t a person who is capable of reasoned, rational discussion. You’ve proven this at every turn. Someone disagrees with you; you immediately label them liar and add further insults, clearly demonstrating the gross insecurity you feel. You’re correct in feeling that lack of confidence. Your arguments are hollow, you’re a poor thinker and you don’t comprehend science, are not honest about history even remotely.
Unlike scientists, you “know” you have everything figured out. Pretention and arrogance drives your delusions of grandeur.
You’re a failed intellect, ruined by arrogant theism, not humbled by their lack of knowledge, but conceited by their dogmatic “truths.” That’s why your work will never amount to more than the “self-help/spirituality” section.
You're welcome to respond with all your demonstrations of inferiority and insult. That's about all you're good at - pushing people's buttons.
I'm not going to read it, though. You're beneath me.
If I'm "beneath you", could you move up and down a bit?

You just did what you accused me of, and you do it constantly.

...mis-labeling anything I reference as Christian apologetics and being from pretend scientists - I have never posted either.

Doing the thing you accuse others of doing is being a hypocrite.

You, in truth, or no less a person of theism than me. Your theism is material monism. It is your religion. It colors everything you say.

I understand history better than you - it isn't close. I understand science better than you - not close there either.

What you have is a piling on of rote knowledge without knowing what you are learning, or what its perspective should be in the real world.

Me? I understand people. I understand truth. And I seek it.

Have I arrived at it? No. Your charge is false.

But I have the humility to know that, and be willing to reassess what I think. I have done it two or three times in my life in a major way.

I see nothing from you, or in you, that causes me to doubt in the slightest what I presently hold to be true.

I have seen it all before. It is hollow, lifeless. It is a world propelled by blind indifference.

I like the fact that it is apparently a grand lie.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#108542 Jun 28, 2012
SupaAFC wrote:
<quoted text>
Reality shows otherwise.
<quoted text>
"The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection."
http://www.intelligentdesign.org/whatisid.php
Doesn't look like it. I suppose that pro-ID website is now a liar?
<quoted text>
My ignorance was assuming that of those who oppose evolution are creationists - whole new ball park. Why are you lying, Buck?
<quoted text>
So ID scientists "know" when something is designed? Which organisms/aspects of the universe are now "known" to be designed?
<quoted text>
Yes, it's hard work when I get rock solid rebuttals like "that's wrong!" and "SuperSuck!".
__________

You can't even comprehend your own links.

The statement you pasted says nothing about "knowing". Yet, you mount a rebuttal of the DI "knowing".

You characterize the pasted comment as contradicting something I've said. It does not.

"certain features of living things" and "best explained" corresponds EXACTLY to what I said.

There is no "knowing" there. There is no "life is designed" there.

Now Hiding will applaud your brilliant rebuttal, lacking the intellect, as she does, to recognize it as a total non-sequitur.

You two muffin-minds enjoy.

There is one participant here that you will not fool for one moment. I know what the two of you are going to say before you say it. You are easy.

SuperSuck.

“Live Good, & Feel Good.”

Since: Aug 09

Atl.

#108543 Jun 28, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I can.
Here's a random paper I grabbed that tests evolution:
http://www.prairiegrouse.org/Publications_fil...
Here is where you mentioned the prairie chicken. Which does nothing to support your fish to man theory. Actually these tests are about simple genetic variations in prairie chickens.

No one disputes evolution in species which your source is operating off. What Science disputes is mankind originating from some non life to fish to human being. That is a fairy tale.

But dishonest desperate and overall ignorant people like yourself that will do anything to hang on to your ridiculous Cult want to say all in-species evolution proves the human being evolved form some other entity is clearly delusional and a LIE.

And actually another test on those prairie chickens looks at the effects of Inbreeding, unlike your pseudo-science discipline, an authentic area of evolutionary study.
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol6/iss1/ar...

Now lets examine your example. These sentences actually raised an eyebrow when I read the paper:

"We estimated the harmonic mean effective population size (Ne)over
the last 50 years by comparing allele frequencies from the early 1950s with those from
contemporary samples. Using a PSEUDO-likelihood...."

LOL. Pseudo, get it...kind like the science you base your worldview on <grin>. But I digress.

To summarize, your prairie chicken example was about Genetic Variations:
"Populations of prairie-chickens in Wisconsin have lost
genetic variation as a consequence of genetic drift (Bellinger
et al. 2003; Johnson et al. 2003)."

"Our results clearly demonstrate a change in the genetic
structure of prairie-chicken populations within a relatively
short period of time (i.e. < 50 years), and these changes
coincide with changes in the surrounding landscape."

It does not support your human origination pseudo-theories. You can't use that paper to push forward your fairy tale pseudo-science beliefs that mankind originated from some other entity. You can't even use this paper to say the prairie chickens evolved from something else. Its just a test that even the researches claim they used some Pseudo-likelihood calculations to get their results.
----
You think you're the only one that can do research hiding? You're not pulling the rug over anyone's eyes here. And you can cuss buck me and whoever disagrees with you and refutes you, your petulant foot stomping and long winded personal opinions about the posters here won't accomplish anything.

I don't know you. Your opinions of me is irrelevant Stranger. But as long as you post on topix, your pseudo-science nonsensical fairy tales will be challenged.

I'm not here for you to accept or reject Jesus Christ, that's your business and your right whatever decision you die with. I'm here to refute and mock your religion. Get it straight. Your rejection of the Christ does not hurt or affect me. Your blood won't spill on me in your eternal hellish roast atheist. So lets clear the air of what we are both on the site to do.

Your prairie chicken example is a farce, just like your mosquito example.

“Live Good, & Feel Good.”

Since: Aug 09

Atl.

#108544 Jun 28, 2012
Chess Jurist wrote:
<quoted text>
When thieves scurry off, ever notice they sound just like rats?
Or Christians.
:)
Chess, we had our time dude. I'm not ignoring you because I have anything against you at all. But that was then, this is now. You never really put forward your beliefs on topix even then, so I have less to post to you about now.

This will be my only post to you, but me ignoring your posts is nothing personal, I just want to say that.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#108545 Jun 28, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
He can reference fake journals that were set up by ID people. He can also reference the articles that made it past the editor, b/c the editor was underhanded. There's one he referenced that was presented at an unrelated scientific conference - no peer review. Then there some that are done by one geneticist that never, not once, mention the words "intelligent design" nor test whatever "ID theory" is - provided we ignore that the ID people have called for work done to construct an "ID theory," as they don't have one yet.
Nor can Buck describe the "ID theory" that he claims exists - despite that the ID people themselves admit doesn't exist.
But, no, he cannot present an actual research article that has draws its testable and disprovable hypothesis from a theory of Intelligent Design and performs actual biological research using methodology developed from the ID position. That is, NightSerf, not possible since the ID people do not have a theory and do not do science.
What they have done is base their position on three logical fallacies. These are:
- the argument from ignorance (you can't explain everything, and I'm going to base my beliefs no your ignorance)
- the argument from incredulity (I can imagine probabilities so great that there's no way, gosh, none at all, that natural selection could overcome them!!! Wow! I must be right!)
- confusing correlation with causation (gee, this really, really, really looks designed. And I can test it and it shows high mathematical precision - as long as I don't run the test from the genes and I only include the perfect-looking trait [b/c genes have base-pair noise ID never accounts for in their fake math models]- therefore it must be designed! Nevermind that natural selection produces apparent design, nevermind that!!!)
So...no. ID is an abject failure. That's why the courts declared it religion, that's why every single scientific research institute uses the unifying framework theory of evolution in biological research.
Buck is committed to a a fictional reality he likes a lot. It has a deity that wants us to be wise. So we reincarnate over and over before we get to go elsewhere. He needs ID to work to back up his delusion.
He's not rational. He can't be reasoned with - he doesn't respect or understand scientific evidence or argument. But he's very good at personal attacks. So there's no point in asking him much. But by all means, try :)
:)
:)
btw, I hope you're well! I went to a piano concert today! It was lovely.
I proved you a liar on this over 6 months ago.

Your position is:

No ID peer-reviewed articles...well, but there was something underhanded,....well, but they didn't mention the words "intelligent design"...well, but they did not focus only on intelligent design,...well, but it doesn't use methodology designed to test the theory of intelligent design,...well...and so on.

Two standards - one for "real" science; another for ID.

That is not science; it is advocacy.

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#108546 Jun 28, 2012
bossdrop wrote:
<quoted text>:)
Chess, we had our time dude. I'm not ignoring you because I have anything against you at all. But that was then, this is now. You never really put forward your beliefs on topix even then, so I have less to post to you about now.
This will be my only post to you, but me ignoring your posts is nothing personal, I just want to say that.
I don't take it personally.

I take it for what it is: An attempt to pretend you're not the dishonest person you are.

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#108547 Jun 28, 2012
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
I proved you a liar on this over 6 months ago.
Your position is:
No ID peer-reviewed articles...well, but there was something underhanded,....well, but they didn't mention the words "intelligent design"...well, but they did not focus only on intelligent design,...well, but it doesn't use methodology designed to test the theory of intelligent design,...well...and so on.
Two standards - one for "real" science; another for ID.
That is not science; it is advocacy.
You ever find those copper scrolls about Jesus, dimwit?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#108548 Jun 28, 2012
Chess Jurist wrote:
<quoted text>
He *does* have a PhD in BS, with an undergraduate in copper scrolls about Jesus.
I can attest to that.
The scroll is labeled 3Q15.

Made of a sheet of almost pure copper.

Professor Richard Freund:

"probably the most unique, the most important, and the least understood."

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
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 9 min Lumajuice 793,160
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 9 min Robert F 567,240
Homosexuality isn't just 'sin'......it's AN ABO... 33 min Ninja of Reason 4
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 1 hr Pegasus 267,248
Israel's end is near, Ahmadinejad says (Jun '07) 2 hr Rathore 38,042
Does science disprove biblical teachings??? 2 hr Ninja of Reason 5
Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 4 hr samanthar 97,403
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 5 hr lil whispers 607,025
More from around the web