Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 244744 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.

blacklagoon

Hyde Park, MA

#137563 Nov 14, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
The theory of evolution is like clothes made of invisible fabric. Just get all dressed up in those invisible clothes and take a stroll.
Education is the key here. Educating yourself on the FACTS of evolution will help you better understand how the process works. Could it be that you are misinformed about what constitutes evolution. Please don't tell me you belong to that camp of nutbags that hold to the belief that millions of scientists are part of a conspiracy to provide false information to the masses. I'll be very disappointed if thats the case. Do you really believe that hundreds of thousands of biologists, and evolutionary scientists could be so wrong about the process of evolution? You do know that evolution is present in todays medical science. That mainstream science accepts evolution as factual, and you do not, may have a lot to say for the religious blinding that has afflicted you. Its always very sad to see.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#137564 Nov 14, 2012
Sambrotherofnephi wrote:
<quoted text>
What constitutes as "demonstrably reliable evidence"? I find it fascinating to observe how people can couch their language in a way to make things more complicated than they really are. The real test of the ability to articulate one's beliefs is how simple they can be explained. Anyone can make something simple into something complicated. Like this:
I would like to give my example stated in paragraph 1 of this reply as both a demonstration of the complexities that can be found in the semantics and diction of the English language AND as an unqualified statement of reasonable assurance of what I have found to be true based on several substantive tests of details of the subject matter at hand as well as various analytically procedures used to reduce the risk of tolerable misstatement which is not limited to the context of this forum. A book has come into my possession which has presented me with persuasive evidence that there is in fact a God. If you care to inquire about it, I will provide further explanation.
Means it can be shown to consistently function the same way almost every time and have a clear, and well defined, explanation, none of this "it works when it works" garbage.

The sun lighting this planet for something around 12 hours a day is demonstrable evidence. Prayer being answered with the consistency of luck is not demonstrable evidence, unless you are trying to demonstrate that it doesn't work.

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

#137565 Nov 14, 2012
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>How many times are you going to post a summary of that book? You do know that the phrase has entered everyday language and that you can say "the emperor has no clothes" and people will know what you mean, right?
Also, if you would care to educate yourself on evolution, you would see that your analogy makes no sense whatsoever.
I have and what I see is a bunch of smoke being blown up a peoples a**.

It’s going to take more than hype to convince me. A lot of scientist don’t believe it either but in order to keep their jobs they have to accept it. This is what I mean when I say evolution has an enforcement arm.

If you are a scientist and you come out publicly that you don’t believe in macro evolution. You’re suddenly unemployed. But if a scientist questions some theory in physics, that’s ok. Just as long as he doesn’t question evolution.

This is why I love Hans Christian Andersons book. It brings to light the scam that has been pulled on the general public.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#137566 Nov 14, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>God is, humans aren't.

Get a clue.
Then there is no free will.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#137567 Nov 14, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
God is, humans aren't.
Get a clue.
Then humans cannot have free will.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#137568 Nov 14, 2012
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>I think that figure is skewed by infant mortality.
Sure.

All figures are skewed by infant mortality and accidental or non-natural death.

But I'm willing to bet that many adults in pre industrial times succumbed to harsh winters.

That's not nearly as common now.

Heck, people start screaming if the power goes out for a couple of days in the winter.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#137569 Nov 14, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
No I'm not. Prayer does work. I've experienced it working first hand! So whatever "tests" you've offered up, they're obviusly inconclusive.
You are demonstrating confirmation bias on a daily basis, so it is safe to assume that you are doing that same thing when you "think" your prayers work.

It is believers who have never provided conclusive evidence of prayer working, it's one of the most common reasons for believers to become deists, actually. However, your asserting that it does work is dangerous, there are many parents who have allowed their children to suffer agonizing and horrific deaths that could have been prevented with medicine simply because it was "god's will." If you cannot provide solid evidence, then you cannot claim it works at all.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#137570 Nov 14, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
I have and what I see is a bunch of smoke being blown up a peoples a**.
It’s going to take more than hype to convince me. A lot of scientist don’t believe it either but in order to keep their jobs they have to accept it. This is what I mean when I say evolution has an enforcement arm.
If you are a scientist and you come out publicly that you don’t believe in macro evolution. You’re suddenly unemployed. But if a scientist questions some theory in physics, that’s ok. Just as long as he doesn’t question evolution.
This is why I love Hans Christian Andersons book. It brings to light the scam that has been pulled on the general public.
You're nuts. There is no secret cabal of "evolutionists" trying to scam the world. What would their motive be?

List the so called "scientists" who don't "believe" it. List the ones who have been fired for voicing their opinion. If some have been fired for just an opinion, that's wrong, but somewhat understandable. It would be like a scientist declaring that the earth is flat. However, if any have been fired, I would assume it's not just because of their opinion, but probably because they were doing ridiculous things like trying to teach intelligent design in class. This is just speculation, mind you, I don't care enough about your absurd claims to research them.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#137571 Nov 14, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure.
All figures are skewed by infant mortality and accidental or non-natural death.
But I'm willing to bet that many adults in pre industrial times succumbed to harsh winters.
That's not nearly as common now.
Heck, people start screaming if the power goes out for a couple of days in the winter.
Yeah, definitely.

But remember, we are far less prepared for it than they were. We'd be screwed without electricity.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#137572 Nov 14, 2012
That's what I was thinking and while evolution has nothing I do with atheism, no matter how much the godbots scream, we have ample fossil and genetic proof to back evolution. This is trated abd retested daily. What do they have to back god? Huffing and puffing personal feelings and threats of hell.
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
To be honest, what you describe sounds much more like theism.

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

#137573 Nov 14, 2012
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>Education is the key here. Educating yourself on the FACTS of evolution will help you better understand how the process works. Could it be that you are misinformed about what constitutes evolution. Please don't tell me you belong to that camp of nutbags that hold to the belief that millions of scientists are part of a conspiracy to provide false information to the masses. I'll be very disappointed if thats the case. Do you really believe that hundreds of thousands of biologists, and evolutionary scientists could be so wrong about the process of evolution? You do know that evolution is present in todays medical science. That mainstream science accepts evolution as factual, and you do not, may have a lot to say for the religious blinding that has afflicted you. Its always very sad to see.
I don’t think the majority of scientist are involved in some kind of mass conspiracy. Understanding that there are many disciplines of science. Only a very small percentage are evolutionist. These evolutionist truly believe in their discipline.

However, there is a hell of a lot of speculation and imagination in this field. Great spans are missing in their theory. It is and remains a science of the imagination. Full of artist conceptions to convince students and the public that it indeed happened.

It’s an interesting theory. But it lacks any real substance. I have looked at the fossil record. It’s pretty damn scarce for human evolution. A single bone from six million years ago. Another millions later. Here a bone and there a bone. O McDonald had a farm E I - EI - Oooo.

Doctor, I’m going to have to remain a sinner when it comes to macro evolution. I just can’t come down to the alter over a speculation based theory.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#137574 Nov 14, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
This is why I love Hans Christian Andersons book. It brings to light the scam that has been pulled on the general public.
I want to investigate this claim further. I want to plumb the depths of your mind, eagle. Give me a compelling reason why there would exist a secret society of "evolutionists." Why would they want to propagate false knowledge? What would they get out of it? How would the rewards outweigh the risks? How would such a thing be covered up? How could millions of people be in on it?

Purely from a common sense/logistical standpoint, it doesn't make sense. It would be far, far too hard to pull off and there is almost no motive for attempting such a scam, at least not relative to the risks. Seriously, think about what you are claiming without allowing your ideas about god to taint your reasoning - you will see how absurd your claims are.

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

#137575 Nov 14, 2012
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>You're nuts. There is no secret cabal of "evolutionists" trying to scam the world. What would their motive be?
List the so called "scientists" who don't "believe" it. List the ones who have been fired for voicing their opinion. If some have been fired for just an opinion, that's wrong, but somewhat understandable. It would be like a scientist declaring that the earth is flat. However, if any have been fired, I would assume it's not just because of their opinion, but probably because they were doing ridiculous things like trying to teach intelligent design in class. This is just speculation, mind you, I don't care enough about your absurd claims to research them.
Recently a senior NASA scientist involved in Mars exploration was fired because he came out and said he didn’t believe in macro evolution. He as a case pending in court.

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

#137576 Nov 14, 2012
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>You're nuts. There is no secret cabal of "evolutionists" trying to scam the world. What would their motive be?
List the so called "scientists" who don't "believe" it. List the ones who have been fired for voicing their opinion. If some have been fired for just an opinion, that's wrong, but somewhat understandable. It would be like a scientist declaring that the earth is flat. However, if any have been fired, I would assume it's not just because of their opinion, but probably because they were doing ridiculous things like trying to teach intelligent design in class. This is just speculation, mind you, I don't care enough about your absurd claims to research them.
Also in the past few years a number of Medical Doctors have came out against macro evolution.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#137577 Nov 14, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
Recently a senior NASA scientist involved in Mars exploration was fired because he came out and said he didn’t believe in macro evolution. He as a case pending in court.
Well, pretending your conspiracy theory is at all accurate, for anyone who is supposedly educated to use the term "macro evolution" shows that they did not legitimately earn their degrees as that is not a scientific term and only shows a complete and total absence of comprehension of the English language as well as a lack of comprehension of scientific information. Macro/micro evolution was made up by creationists, in other words, there is no distinction.

Now, if one of you creatards could show a distinction then maybe, just maybe, there will be a case to adopt it into scientific data. However, you have shown none, all you do is arbitrarily segregate some things into these two artificial categories and never even once define them.

So here's your chance, DEFINE the boundary and difference between them.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#137578 Nov 14, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
Also in the past few years a number of Medical Doctors have came out against macro evolution.
Then those doctors did not earn their degrees. See my previous post.

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

#137579 Nov 14, 2012
Givemeliberty wrote:
That's what I was thinking and while evolution has nothing I do with atheism, no matter how much the godbots scream, we have ample fossil and genetic proof to back evolution. This is trated abd retested daily. What do they have to back god? Huffing and puffing personal feelings and threats of hell.
<quoted text>
I tell you what, how about you showing me some of that real undeniable proof. I’m not talking about some scientific article written in Greek.

I’m talking about real proof, not speculation, nor could have, maybe, should have, kind of, may haves, suspected, presumed, alleged, assumed, we think, suppositions , hypothesis.

Real proof, you say it’s out there. Let me see it. Don’t send me off to some University web page that has no proof but a pages of professing a theory. I want to see facts and not theory.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#137580 Nov 14, 2012
Does this person have a name or did your creationist website neglect to post that?:))

I wonder if you are babbling about the discovery institute reject?
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
Recently a senior NASA scientist involved in Mars exploration was fired because he came out and said he didn’t believe in macro evolution. He as a case pending in court.

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

#137581 Nov 14, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, pretending your conspiracy theory is at all accurate, for anyone who is supposedly educated to use the term "macro evolution" shows that they did not legitimately earn their degrees as that is not a scientific term and only shows a complete and total absence of comprehension of the English language as well as a lack of comprehension of scientific information. Macro/micro evolution was made up by creationists, in other words, there is no distinction.
Now, if one of you creatards could show a distinction then maybe, just maybe, there will be a case to adopt it into scientific data. However, you have shown none, all you do is arbitrarily segregate some things into these two artificial categories and never even once define them.
So here's your chance, DEFINE the boundary and difference between them.
I can’t believe you would challenge a established scientific term. No wait, I guess I can believe you would. Where’s your sign?

The term macro and micro evolution have origins that go all the way back to 1927. Neither is a recently created term and both are used in biology today.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/macroe...

mac·ro·ev·o·lu·tion
&#8194; &#8194;[mak-roh-ev-uh-loo- shuhn or, especially Brit.,-ee-vuh-] Show IPA
noun Biology . major evolutionary transition from one type of organism to another occurring at the level of the species and higher taxa.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#137583 Nov 14, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
Recently a senior NASA scientist involved in Mars exploration was fired because he came out and said he didn’t believe in macro evolution. He as a case pending in court.
Well, that sucks, and I don't necessarily agree with that - but the fact is, he is a scientist, and as such, he should be able to recognize the difference between a scientific belief and a personal religious belief. If his religious beliefs corrupt his ability to be objective, then maybe he shouldn't be a scientist. He represents NASA, and he makes them look bad by lending credence to psuedoscience. Would you want our scientists to believe the earth was flat?

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
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 6 min June VanDerMark 599,513
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 7 min Aura Mytha 864,130
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 23 min janeebee 6,422
The Christian Atheist debate 24 min ChristineM 1,960
News Teacher back in class after Bush-Hitler comparison (Mar '06) 31 min Burke Devlin 151
Is Obama Really Black? (Jul '09) 37 min Burke Devlin 33
gay bottom in gurgaon (May '14) 48 min rohit 447
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 1 hr Great Day of Arma... 612,898
More from around the web