Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 256084 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.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#160702 Mar 16, 2013
Hukt on Fonix wrote:
<quoted text>
If I agreed with *your* Star Trek, I'd be wrong.
I'm not.
Yes, you'd be wrong.

Don't argue with RR's Star Trek.

You WILL lose.

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#160704 Mar 16, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
It's funny that everyone always thinks *current* science is correct.
Science used to know that the universe was infinite.
Science used to know that the Milky Way is the universe.
Science used to know that insects come from rotting foods.
And the people of the times knew science was right....
Just like you do today.
We have reached an apex though RR , the details are yet to be fully defined. But the basics aren't going to change much anymore.
There is plenty left to learn though don't get me wrong.
But the jury is still out on the first question you asked.
Science has never been an absolute either though, science may have not known there was anything beyond the milky way, but it was only hypothesized the milky way was a singular island universe. It turned out there are many islands in the universe.

Science never determined insects came from rotten meat though,
that was a single man's hypothesis , which was falsified.

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#160705 Mar 16, 2013
LargeLanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
How did the matter exist and the electrostatic forces exist in the first place? And how did that produce the entire universe in the shape that it is in?

It is easier to know something is a fact, than to know why it is a fact. This is where science ends and philosophy begins.
We will never know "why" some things occur the way they do, just that they "do" occur in this way.

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#160706 Mar 16, 2013
[QUOTE who="*THOR*"]<quo ted text>
Correct!
God is outside of laws (his laws) of the universe. time does not exist where he is so there would be no date.
Jimmy got one right!
[/QUOTE]
But you still can't point to god saying there he is.
Even if the "he" part is correct.
But what makes you think god is a "he" ?

“Spelin 'n' tpyin...”

Since: Feb 08

...are my strong suits!

#160707 Mar 16, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, you'd be wrong.
Don't argue with RR's Star Trek.
You WILL lose.
Kinda like you arguing with me about light's speed through a medium.

You DID lose.

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#160708 Mar 16, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
The stupid is *strong* in this one.
A complete waste of skin. heheheh

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#160709 Mar 16, 2013
Hukt on Fonix wrote:
<quoted text>
There's something to be said for mass-energy equivalence (E=mc^2) as well.
Being able to grasp the basics first is a must.
But I do not trust to hope, there is a willful ignorance there.
But yep you're right!

“Spelin 'n' tpyin...”

Since: Feb 08

...are my strong suits!

#160710 Mar 16, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Being able to grasp the basics first is a must.
But I do not trust to hope, there is a willful ignorance there.
But yep you're right!
Largeluggage has his bags packed full of it, doesn't he?

Good luck with 'em... you'll need it.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#160711 Mar 17, 2013
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>Or in LargeLanguage case on the tracks.
I was referring to the 2 tracks the train would be on.

:)

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#160712 Mar 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>Ok, I understand what you meant about the free oxygen vs the hillbilly pic.

But now you're finally admitting that with our current technology, there's absolutely no way we can know what the universe is doing.
It's expanding.

Unlike your mind.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#160713 Mar 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>Oh, is that whey?

O_o

Not an English teacher, are ya?
He said physics.

English
E-n-g-l-i-s-h

Physics
P-h-y-s-i-c-s

See?

When you use different little squiggly marks, called letters, to make words, they are different words.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#160714 Mar 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>I hope your students don't look up to you.

"This defines the speed of light in vacuum to be exactly 299,792,458 m/s. This provides a very short answer to the question "Is c constant": Yes, c is constant by definition!

However, this is not the end of the matter...."

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativ...

Keep reading, professor.
Yes.

Thank you.

"Finally, we come to the conclusion that the speed of light is not only observed to be constant; in the light of well tested theories of physics, it does not even make any sense to say that it varies."

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#160715 Mar 17, 2013
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>Godbot ploy 999 try and shift the goal posts because you are wrong.

You are trying to bring in relativity which only shows you do not understand relativity.
He apparently didn't "keep reading" himself.

He got to some part that he thought confirmed his view, and stopped.

It's much like the way most christards read the bible.

What's that called.

Confirmation bias?

RR's got it in spades.

Richardfs

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#160716 Mar 17, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
He said physics.
English
E-n-g-l-i-s-h
Physics
P-h-y-s-i-c-s
See?
When you use different little squiggly marks, called letters, to make words, they are different words.
Nobody has ever said he had an over abundance of brains.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#160717 Mar 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>1. Yes.

2. So? Any college professor should be smart enough to not misspell anything, ever.

3. I made no mistake. The velocity if light is not a constant.
Read your own link.

Conclusion:
Finally, we come to the conclusion that the speed of light is not only observed to be constant; in the light of well tested theories of physics, it does not even make any sense to say that it varies.

Please also note that speed and velocity are 2 different things.

I'm not going to explain why.

Your assignment, should you decide to accept it, is to learn the difference.

This post will self destruct in 5 seconds.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#160718 Mar 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry about your luck, chuck. The goal posts are fixed, unlike the speed of light.

The speed of light is independent of the motion of the observer.

The speed of light does not vary with time or place.
You just contradicted yourself.

Remarkable.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#160719 Mar 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, in a vacuum it's fixed.
And underwater it's fixed.
And through paper it's fixed.

But it isn't simply "fixed".

The speed of light has many variables.
Yeah?

So?

And light has been slowed down to 38 mph.
http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/1999/02.1...

It is still constant, c, in a vacuum.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#160720 Mar 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>OMG, dude.....

We barely know anything about Mars.

Hell, we still don't know all there is to know about Earth.

But you're gonna sit here and say that we know, within .1% accuracy what the UNIVERSE is doing?????

HA HA HA !!!!

The atheist ego never ceases to amaze me.
Pot, meet kettle.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#160722 Mar 17, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Yah, I just read back.

I totally misinterpreted something.

Or effed up. Or something.

Hehehe.
Another one of us soulless atheists who can admit a mistake.

Unlike RR.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#160723 Mar 17, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>Basic Newton 2nd law...F=ma

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_laws_...
I don't think Newtonian physics accounts for time dilation or mass change with velocity.

Those didn't come up until Einstein.

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) 4 min Nohweh 56,133
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 12 min atemcowboy 650,536
Why are white people so insecure ? (Feb '10) 15 min Johnny 203
Play "end of the word" part 2 (Dec '15) 29 min WasteWater 2,343
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 47 min Hukt on Fonix 971,855
White gay slaves who like black masters (Nov '14) 53 min blackdick 4
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 1 hr Rider on the Storm 182,965
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 5 hr ChristineM 445,930
More from around the web