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

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#175453 Aug 25, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not childish we all know Boston Sucks. Could you pick a less optimistic belief, than atheism. You're drawn to what....
See?

More of your ugly hate and filthy mouth...

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#175454 Aug 25, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Even a blind pig finds an acorn sometimes.
But if he does it often enough to stay alive he is doing something right.

Plus he isn't wasting time thinking how many virtual particles it will take to make one appear in front of him.

:-)

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#175455 Aug 25, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure a bunch of clowns that spend way too much time online. I am glad you had your result as you did because you all are backwards, and your claim people with beliefs need to prove, while people claiming fats have nothing to prove, proves you're backwards. I insulted clowns every where.
And STILL more of your ugliness for all the world to see.

Your hate is making you into a vile and horrid person.

Sad, really.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#175456 Aug 25, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
You didn't have a death experience.
Although your posts appear to be from a state of brain death, the fact that you are able to make them proves that you did not have a death experience.
Sheesh. I shouldn't have to explain this stuff to you.
Or anybody.
I suspect he suffered some serious brain damage as a result.

Lucky for him, the brain is able to recover quite a bit even from that.

But during the events, when he was at his lowest mental capacity? He was unable to differentiate dreaming/hallucinations from reality.

It's actually quite common-- but most folk, when they *do* recover, recognize the hallucination for what it is: nonsense.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#175457 Aug 25, 2013
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>I worked in some tough places, one night coming out of a joint in the combat zone I was jumped by 5 high steel workers, didn't like the way I was looking at one of their girlfriends. Fortunately my undercover CIA operative training surfaced and when the dust had cleared, 3 had broken arms and two with fractured jaws. Two cops showed up and tried to cuff me, I left them both unconscious on the ground. I decided to test my strength and so they couldn't follow, I lifted the cruiser on its side, then flipped it over on the roof. Went home, had a scotch, and went to bed. BTW, are you sure you're not Buck Crick posting under another name!!!!
Brilliant satire!

Love it. All you left out was Matrix-like slow motion.

:D

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#175458 Aug 25, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
:-)
My story was true.
Doubtful.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#175459 Aug 25, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> That's a blind squirrel there, Einstein.
Due to the tendency for True Believers™ to over-eat?

I think "pig" is the correct animal comparison.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#175460 Aug 25, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Brilliant satire!
Love it. All you left out was Matrix-like slow motion.
:D
Topix atheists have such beautifully simple minds. Not much clutter there except in the emotional area.

Neurologists would do better if they spent more time picking their brains apart. Get the basic structure down and work from there. Normal people are a little too complex to follow as a base for increasing that sort of knowledge.

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#175461 Aug 25, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
Hey, Catcher, have you heard about the revolution in legal work? Electronic searches and collation of case law and ANYTHING related to a case. Software for legal firms. Getting to be a big thing used by very large firms, and even smart smaller ones. Supposed to bring the cost of litigation down many notches, making it much, much more affordable to the small time lawyers. No more needing clerks to pour through books. A few keywords and you have a wealth of info to peruse and use in making your case. Even collates some. Neat, huh?
That good ol' boy network and understandings of the past may be taking a hit. Young guns shooting from all directions. With cheaper bullets.
:-)
Online legal research (Westlaw and Lexis) has been available for over 15 years now, and is used widely. Interestingly, it's the larger firms that take great advantage of this, for various reasons. And yes, it makes searches and analysis far quicker and easier. Of course, many older lawyers have a more difficult time adapting to the new world, and it's the younger lawyers who are in the forefront.

Software has also done much to cut down on use of resources by lawyers, and allows paralegals to do much of the work formerly done by the attorneys.

I'm all for the new technology. We even file briefs electronically now, and paper is becoming obsolete!

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#175462 Aug 25, 2013
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>Not real bright are you. You come to Boston and hang out in bars in the shit part of town, every town has one. I guess you deserve what you got for being so stupid. With all the great places to hang your hat, places of sophistication and elegance, you chose Buddy's beer joint, too funny. A more intelligent person would have gone to the "Top Of The Hub" had a great dinner and listened to some Jazz. Quiet, elegant, civilized, and most likely filled with Atheists, after all we are superior in intelligence. You might have even had the lifer altering experience of listening to me play. I worked at the Top Of The Hub for a number of years. Oh, well, next time your in Town drop by the triple C lounge in Dorchester, the southern part of town, there's a fight there almost every night, and a shooting or two. You seem to like those kinds of places, you'll fit right in. Meanwhile I'll be uptown enjoying the elegance of the Union Oyster House.
Love the Union Oyster House. Legal Seafoods too, I used to eat at the original one in Cambridge.

Have you tried the Salty Dog for seafood, at the Faneuil Hall Marketplace? Wonderful.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#175463 Aug 25, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Doubtful.
It was true. Five of them sitting there drinking, big boys, a couple with beards. Rough looking. One makes a comment about jumping over the bar and raping her and she tells them I would protect her. I have these 5 big guys looking at 135 pound me over their drinks and I am thinking Fran, why in the hell did you say that. Oh, shit.

I couldn't leave then. So I just smiled and carried on a conversation with her until they broke up and left.

I wasn't a big guy, but very alert and unpredictable looking, especially when I grinned. Has come in handy a few times.

I asked her to not make that a habit after it was over.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#175464 Aug 25, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Online legal research (Westlaw and Lexis) has been available for over 15 years now, and is used widely. Interestingly, it's the larger firms that take great advantage of this, for various reasons. And yes, it makes searches and analysis far quicker and easier. Of course, many older lawyers have a more difficult time adapting to the new world, and it's the younger lawyers who are in the forefront.
Software has also done much to cut down on use of resources by lawyers, and allows paralegals to do much of the work formerly done by the attorneys.
I'm all for the new technology. We even file briefs electronically now, and paper is becoming obsolete!
Larger firms are going beyond that, past Westlaw and Lexis. They are building in house research departments to gather and collate automatically. Spending a lot of money doing so. Algorithms rule.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#175465 Aug 25, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Topix atheists have such beautifully simple minds. Not much clutter there except in the emotional area.
Neurologists would do better if they spent more time picking their brains apart. Get the basic structure down and work from there. Normal people are a little too complex to follow as a base for increasing that sort of knowledge.
Your admission that you have no **real** proof of your god is duly noted.

Also noted: you do your best to try to denigrate any criticism of your crapola.

And fail.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#175466 Aug 25, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
It was true.
Doubtful. Still.

You can spin that "fish tale" over and over-- it won't make it any more credible.

The fact is? You have **zero** credibility, here.

You could fix that in one move:

Show us your god is actually **real**.

And **all** of atheism would vanish in an instant.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#175467 Aug 25, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course! You haven't argued a single point YET.
You are 100% incapable of doing so-- you do not even TRY.
You just whine about how "mistreated" you are and then you go on to call people filthy names and demonstrate your ugly hate for everyone.
It's what you do.
Answering your statements and question of above post, or blog.

1. There is nothing to argue. A creator can not be proved or disproved. This is coming from great minds such as Stephen Hawkins, and others I am just too lazy to look up. Your bull headed ways would not change if I did. It would be a complete waste of time.

2. Yes, why try? art of me thinks that if Atheism was in the minority, you would be a theist. You are a denier. You won't accept or even respect another's personal experience. It is why the nickname for you being Quantum is worthy of great satire. You don't see that? REALLY!

3. I never claimed to be capable of proving anything, either way. If I was I'd be a great sage. If such a person did exist or does, you'd just deny his answers any way. This Great Sage would not waste his time exchanging blogs with a person like yourself. That's answering your 100% nonsense.

4. You only mistreat yourself. Again your closed minded perceptions, and lack of respect for others honesty only displays your ways.

You do only know your truth. I respect that you do know yourself. Your beliefs, even if they were facts, which may be so for yourself, as I mentioned. There is no reason to spread them. There is nothing wrong with a good Lutheran gathering or people of common thoughts meeting. The bad religions and religious activity is in the minority. I am not a religious person myself. The people who post here in favor of Atheism are fundamentalist, and as dangerous as any religious fundamentalist, and you don't need to be in a religion to be a fundamentalist. But you, are for the Atheist to be atheist not atheist. And you do have churches.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#175468 Aug 25, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
And STILL more of your ugliness for all the world to see.
Your hate is making you into a vile and horrid person.
Sad, really.
That is your view of someone that beliefs your thoughts become you. I could see why you would think that way. Spreading Atheism is like dropping dog dongs upon all my neighbors yard. There is nothing good about it. Your thoughts, your frame of mind, is best to be positive. I'll take delusions over what YOU claim to be fact every day of the week, and twice on Sunday.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#175469 Aug 25, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Doubtful. Still.
You can spin that "fish tale" over and over-- it won't make it any more credible.
The fact is? You have **zero** credibility, here.
You could fix that in one move:
Show us your god is actually **real**.
And **all** of atheism would vanish in an instant.
Simple minded Bob. He just can't grasp the subtleties in existing.

A normal person is quite aware I am not a fundie, yet you and others believe so to feed your issues. But here I will play one for discussion's sake.

"Proving" that God is real to your material satisfaction is second guessing that God. That is going out of design parameters. You are supposed to prove it to yourself. God realized he made junk, especially when he let it breed and create varied copies of its self. It may be his way of recycling and getting the good stuff out of it. One reason a Jesus was sent with a message and a candle left in the window.

You are on your own, Bobby. In this huge unknown expanse of universe and existence, you are all by yourself unless you make a call.

No one can walk you home, little boy.

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#175470 Aug 25, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Larger firms are going beyond that, past Westlaw and Lexis. They are building in house research departments to gather and collate automatically. Spending a lot of money doing so. Algorithms rule.
Yep.

I wouldn't call it algorithms though.

“YO BOO”

Since: Sep 07

land of BOO

#175471 Aug 25, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
Its because you're a coward that you cannot follow logical convention and prove your god without doubt.
Thats why you have to shout and insult atheists all the time - to cover for your lack of evidence or moral thought patterns that the rest of us already have.
When we want to follow a ridiculous 2005 failed cult run by a bunch of ignorant savage creationist scum we will give the clown a call.
Go back to your tax dodging discovery institute tent and tell them the party's over.
you insult yourself

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#175472 Aug 25, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yep.
I wouldn't call it algorithms though.
They are.

Your whole legal system and thought is built upon case law and precedent. Plug in all the factors, including cost effectiveness, and compute.

You are dreaming if you think you will beat advances in modern computing in chess and statistical analysis. Art will succumb to mathematical reality. Even judges will be entering the data and see what gets kicked out.

Perry Mason, Matlock, and Judge Judy are fictional characters.

You should know that.

You are about to die, you old dinosaur. But you won't even leave any bones to discover.

Ain't math, science, and technology grand?

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
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 7 min Michael 555,082
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 8 min Dally Mama 765,140
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 22 min Epiphany2 603,709
What Is The New World Order? 50 min Ebola Kills Everyone 6
NWO...New And Terrible Masters 58 min Marty Fong 9
Leviathan 666....Started On November 23, 2014 1 hr Marty Fong 7
A Message To All Americans 1 hr Marty Fong 6
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 3 hr AussieBobby 263,625
Hot gays in Abu Dhabi (Nov '13) 15 hr Ayyan 1,187

Top Stories People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE