Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258038 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.

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#157901 Mar 2, 2013
Imhotep wrote:
<quoted text>
Buck y Dave son bastante tonto hacer comprender esta?
Perdidos en el dogma.
Hecho alérgica y la realidad desafiado!
How far are you away from that sinkhole?

Helluva way to go. I understand the concrete floor just collapsed in that room.

Get some fat women over for exercise classes. Jumping jacks. Monitor for vibrations. Shouldn't vibrate.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#157902 Mar 2, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>Got hit by a truck. Multiple head trauma, but didn't pass out until shortly after, hanging by seat belt upside down in van. Realized something serious just occurred. Lot of pain. Had to get up to see what happened and that is when I went through a black tunnel and emerged looking to the back of the van. At first it was a bit hazy like a lot of dust had been raised, or a heat shimmer, but settled down after a few seconds. Went wandering around the back of the van surveying damages when I noticed a green smoky trail coming over the cargo divider I just went through, following it with my eyes and seeing it turn into me. Was like I just got bit by a snake. I wrestled with it for several seconds and collapsed exhausted. Realizing I was dead. It was all over because of a stupid traffic accident. Not a thought about my body, or regrets other than the way I died, or any of that sort of thing. It was strictly the here and now, and I just got kicked out of this movie. I had the power to insert myself in others around me, but none had roles I wanted to get involved in, except for a bonded couple. I still don;t know if it was something I just couldn't do consciencewise, or it was the only bright light in the whole experience saying no. I was then totally resigned and started to move off to wherever I was going. I then woke up someplace else. Where I did not want to be. There were changes of consciousness during that phase. You could liken them to shutdowns of the different brain levels. I became very, very basic. With emotional aspects through the whole event. A curious mix of sadness and cold blooded existence. That may be because of the transition going on. After the wakeup, there was a fuzzy period in my memory, but I emerged and was still in the van and moving to a side window, where I looked out where I was going next. There was a used trail heading off to a stream in an arid landscape I was going to step onto, with some large flying creatures above that were going to give me a hassle, which I was not looking forward to. I really didn't want to go. Be advised that conflict would have been similar to Godzilla and two Rodans. I sensed I was a pretty powerful beast, but I was going to stay there until I was kicked out. I felt that power since the initial wakeup. Yet my core self was more like a snake. I was curled up ready to spring out that window as whatever I was going to be when something alerted me that I was still viable. I then dove through a steel divider, and several seconds later heard a ragged breath. Mine. This was about 15 minutes or so after the accident. They had to cut the doors open.

There were stranger aspects of the event, both before and after.

This is a dream. A pleasure cruise. A playground.

It was a most impressive hallucination. But as I mentioned, there were other events leading up to it and afterwards that were very strange.
Thank you for sharing that. I'm curious to learn more about it and the beast above you.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#157903 Mar 2, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Clementine my dear.
Have you met my old friend Buck Crick?
He used to be my friend anyway.
O my prince charming Catcher!

I'm sure I have! I'm sure u were the one who told me to 'attack' him!

U talking about that one, right?

Richardfs

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#157904 Mar 2, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Organisms evolve & change is a FACT.
2. The theory of evolution (maybe how it works) is still being worked on. So stop preaching it like its fact.
1. Mass produces gravity is a FACT.
2. The theory of gravity (maybe how it works) is still being worked on. So stop preaching it like its fact.

Thus according to you there is no such thing as gravity, when do you publish?

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#157905 Mar 2, 2013
Imhotep wrote:
<quoted text>
Kudos
Dare to think for yourself!
Question everything that you feel needs more evidence.
You can understand why theists believe this, after being told this over and over by their preachers.
This belief is reinforced by the fact that believers must be bound by much more than a simple belief in God.
For example, Catholics must also have the same stances on abortion, contraception, and homosexuality in order to be called a "good Catholic." It only goes to follow that atheism must be similar.
However, atheism is not a religion, rather the absence of religion. As such, we are bound only by our atheism. We are republicans and democrats, men and women, gays and straights, blacks and whites.
We accept every person as they are as equals, and delight in our diversity (not many religions can say that).
We disagree with each other on many issues, and discussion is encouraged and common. Above all, atheists demand the right to disagree, even if it means with each other.
Thank you!:-)

That's what i'm saying. We should all have pleasant, intellectual, fun discussions! We need to try to understand each other, if we really know what's good for us!

We can't say all atheists r good and all religious people r bad or vice versa. We gotta understand good and bad people can be from any race, culture, country, belief etc...

Richardfs

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#157906 Mar 2, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
All of them? All?!
You butted in our of context.
You're saying that all fossils explain why a squirrel used to not have a skin flap on its leg but now does.
Where do you want to start to prove that?
You first.
Just because you do not understand something does not make it false.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#157907 Mar 2, 2013
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Mass produces gravity is a FACT.
2. The theory of gravity (maybe how it works) is still being worked on. So stop preaching it like its fact.
Thus according to you there is no such thing as gravity, when do you publish?
1. There is a Theory of Gravity and a Law of Gravity, there are very different.

Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation:
"Every point mass attracts every single point mass by a force pointing along the line intersecting both points. The force is directly proportional to the product of the two masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the point masses."

That formula will let us calculate the gravitational pull between the Earth and the object you drop, between the Sun and Mars, or between me and a bowl of ice cream.

That law only tells us what happens, but not why it happens, THAT'S the Theory of Gravity.

Laws don't change, theories change frequently as new evidence is discovered.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#157908 Mar 2, 2013
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because you do not understand something does not make it false.
There it is!

The good ole atheist comeback: "You just don't understand!"

O_o

Richardfs

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#157909 Mar 2, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
There it is!
The good ole atheist comeback: "You just don't understand!"
O_o
Because it is true, you haven't a clue and to compound the problem you refuse to learn. In short you choose to be ignorant and wish to drag everybody down to your level.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#157910 Mar 2, 2013
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>Just because you do not understand something does not make it false.
If it did then you would be gone.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#157911 Mar 2, 2013
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>
Because it is true, you haven't a clue and to compound the problem you refuse to learn. In short you choose to be ignorant and wish to drag everybody down to your level.
Lol.

I just don't accept unproven theories as fact like you do.

I'm not a closed-minded follower like you. I have the ability to think for myself, think outside the box and I'm a true critical thinker.

You're a sheep.

Aero will love you.

Richardfs

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#157912 Mar 2, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
If it did then you would be gone.
You are gone.

Richardfs

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#157913 Mar 2, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Lol.
I just don't accept unproven theories as fact like you do.
I'm not a closed-minded follower like you. I have the ability to think for myself, think outside the box and I'm a true critical thinker.
You're a sheep.
Aero will love you.
ToE is not unproven.
oldman75

Columbus, IN

#157914 Mar 2, 2013
Atheism requires as much faith as organized religion. I am neither smart enough,or opininated enough to discern the existance or non existance of a supreme diety. IMHO if there is one I doubt his anthropormhic attributes -perhaps universal thought might be piossible .I am,and will always be an agnostic because I do not know and neither does any other human being .

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#157915 Mar 2, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
"First...so what is the Higgs"
"Peter Ware Higgs CH FRS FRSE (born 29 May 1929) is a British theoretical physicist and emeritus professor at the University of Edinburgh.[2]
He is best known for his 1960s proposal of broken symmetry in electroweak theory, explaining the origin of mass of elementary particles in general and of the W and Z bosons in particular. This so-called Higgs mechanism, which was proposed by several physicists besides Higgs at about the same time, predicts the existence of a new particle, the Higgs boson (which was often described as "the most sought-after particle in modern physics"[3][4]). CERN announced on 4 July 2012 that they had experimentally established the existence of a Higgs-like boson,[5] but further work is needed to analyse its properties and see if it has the properties expected from the Standard Model Higgs boson.[6] The Higgs mechanism is generally accepted as an important ingredient in the Standard Model of particle physics, without which certain particles would have no mass.[7]
Higgs has been honoured with a number of awards in recognition of his work, including the 1981 Hughes Medal from the Royal Society, the 1984 Rutherford Medal from the Institute of Physics, the 1997 Dirac Medal and Prize for outstanding contributions to theoretical physics from the Institute of Physics, the 1997 High Energy and Particle Physics Prize by the European Physical Society, the 2004 Wolf Prize in Physics, the 2009 Oskar Klein Memorial Lecture medal from the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, the 2010 American Physical Society J. J. Sakurai Prize for Theoretical Particle Physics and a unique Higgs Medal from the Royal Society of Edinburgh in 2012.[8] The recent potential discovery of the Higgs boson prompted fellow physicist Stephen Hawking to note that he thought that Higgs should receive the Nobel Prize in Physics for his work.[9][10]"
Ok...so what is the Higgs-boson particle? That, uh, was my original question.
christianity is EVIL

West Pubnico, Canada

#157916 Mar 2, 2013
oldman75 wrote:
Atheism requires as much faith as organized religion. I am neither smart enough,or opininated enough to discern the existance or non existance of a supreme diety. IMHO if there is one I doubt his anthropormhic attributes -perhaps universal thought might be piossible .I am,and will always be an agnostic because I do not know and neither does any other human being .
once you define this diety youll realize its logicaly Impossible to exist

www.evilbible.com/Impossible.htm

Anyways what difference does it make if one is atheist or agnostic?

I dont worship any god so that makes me atheist...can some god exist?

www.godchecker.com . whatcha think

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#157917 Mar 2, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I had it correct.
Current evolutionary theory relies inextricably on abiogenesis.
You admitted so yourself - you just didn't know it, when you said, "only abiogenesis makes sense from the perspective of our contemporary sciences"
You could have just as correctly worded your statement "ONLY ABIOGENESIS makes sense with our contemporary evolution theory".
I'm not sure why you're not understanding this - abiogenesis is the necessary prediction of our sciences, including but not limited to evolutionary theory.

(I wrote the word "necessary" on purpose, so that you could nitpick it)

However, abiogenesis doesn't form the basis for any of our sciences, for multiple reasons:

1. It's not been demonstrated
2. The processes, if any, are not fully understood.

That's simply not enough to form a foundation for contemporary theories of science. Hence, our theories predict abiogenesis and not the other way around.
So then, what if abiogenesis does not make sense, i.e., is not true? What happens to the paradigm without it?
We'd have to rethink our sciences to include how abiogenesis is not true. If it turns out there's some kind of divinity/non-material agent involved, every framework theory would need to be fully remade.
The Darwinian paradigm collapses and must be reconstructed because ANY ALTERNATIVE TO ABIOGENESIS REQUIRES EXTERNAL AGENCY.
Thus and then, it can no longer be assumed that random variation and natural selection is the sole mechanism of biologic diversity.
You mean "unpredictable variation," but "random" will suffice for shorthand.
Also, out goes the assumption of universal common descent.
Not necessarily - it would depend on how the external agent designed life. Perhaps it chose "random" variation and evolution to do its creating.
Out goes the assumption, even, that life evolved through orderly sequence, instead of multiple life forms arising at different times. Out goes the assumption that multicellular organisms arose from unicellular organisms. Out goes the assumption that life arose in its most simple form and progressed ALWAYS to more complex.
I don't think you could give up any assumption w/out knowing what the designer wanted, how the designer designed. Unless you have some insight into "it," we really wouldn't be able to make any claim - any claim. We would have great difficulties narrowing down causes for any phenomena.
Abiogenesis is inextricably linked with the large-scale views of evolutionary theory.
It was so in Darwin's day; it is so now. Darwin was greatly distressed by this, and so began the tricky campaign in science for bifurcating the two concepts.
It works very well, at least among the non-skeptical.
Sorry, you haven't convinced me. How does evolution require abiogenesis?

It's quite clear how it predicts it - no creators involved in any of our sciences.

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#157918 Mar 2, 2013
christianity is EVIL wrote:
<quoted text>
once you define this diety youll realize its logicaly Impossible to exist
www.evilbible.com/Impossible.htm
Anyways what difference does it make if one is atheist or agnostic?
I dont worship any god so that makes me atheist...can some god exist?
www.godchecker.com . whatcha think
I always thought n atheist says there is no god. That is just as presumptuious as jesus,allah,buddh,the flying spaghetti monster is god . Ain't no proof for any >

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's teapot

#157919 Mar 2, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
1. There is a Theory of Gravity and a Law of Gravity, there are very different.
Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation:
"Every point mass attracts every single point mass by a force pointing along the line intersecting both points. The force is directly proportional to the product of the two masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the point masses."
That formula will let us calculate the gravitational pull between the Earth and the object you drop, between the Sun and Mars, or between me and a bowl of ice cream.
That law only tells us what happens, but not why it happens, THAT'S the Theory of Gravity.
Laws don't change, theories change frequently as new evidence is discovered.
http://thehappyscientist.com/s cience-experiment/gravity-theo ry-or-law

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#157920 Mar 2, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok...so what is the Higgs-boson particle? That, uh, was my original question.
It's another mathematical construct, a virtual reality, to explain the math model based upon misinterpretation of the forces arising from use of EM devices to measure, which introduces a polarity and charge issue they are totally ignoring, and which gives them a cheesy model they just keep patching and going in circles on. Some Christian guy named Faraday stated the ball rolling on those EM devices. Actually they would do better just from scratch math. The approach of how something can work and then testing, versus observing and assuming, and then testing designed to confirm the assuming, and add patches when it don't work.

A school girl with a large caliber revolver between her legs? I am glad to see it is pointed away from her.

Since matter is actually created from th eoutside in and not inside out as commonly thought, how would that change the theory of evolution?

Kinda missed you.

Smooch.

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
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 11 min Say no to stupid 87,865
The Future of Politics in America 29 min It aint necessari... 173
Christians cannot debate with ATHEISTS 43 min Truth-be-Told 446
Why east indians buy all the motels (Sep '09) 1 hr Enough is enough 42
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 1 hr kent 665,112
News The 'Fake News' Con: A Case Study 1 hr Caesar 5
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 4 hr Pegasus 284,467
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 18 hr nanoanomaly 977,190
More from around the web