Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 253351 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.

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#179512 Oct 9, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
How could anyone that post under a hidden location call someone a coward....
Why don't you post your real name, address and phone number ?

Goddam Hypocrite!

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#179513 Oct 9, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks, Silky Pants.
How 'bout that Crimson Tide, huh?
Hope we get to sacrifice some west coast team in the championship game.
Fresh sausage.
They are some kind of good.

But it's playoffs now for the national championship.

We shall see.
Eagle 12

Troy, IL

#179514 Oct 9, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
If your god is only doing the "big picture"?
Then there is absolutely zero reason for you to pray.
None at all-- as your god really doesn't give a shyt about little old insignificant you.
But.
You did claim that your god was ... what did you say? Oh yes, "good to you".
In short?
You think your god **micromanaged** your fate, personally.
Your inconsistency is showing.
It shant not matter what thee thinkth oh little one of the forrest. For thine words have already been tossed thru yonders window. Out into the abyss from where they come.

For I shant not be fooled by your foolery. So I do bid thee to jump thru yonders window to catch thy own pitiful words you poor inconsequential creature.
Eagle 12

Troy, IL

#179515 Oct 9, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
To address a point you made earlier:
Not all christians are the same.
Interesting.
So your god isn't the same for each different brand of "christian"?
Right?
Why?
Is it some sort of "big picture" uncaring game he's playing at?
Or?
Is it that your god simply isn't real.
That is the **only** explanation for the fractured nature of all of christianity....
... that there is no actual god behind any of it.
For thy mind is misaligned and has been radically skewed. Such a pity that thy thoughts are so full of fecal stoppage. Take some strong laxatives and eat a big bowl of pinto beans that was not pre soaked. That should clear your mind.
Eagle 12

Troy, IL

#179516 Oct 9, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
Why don't you post your real name, address and phone number ?
Goddam Hypocrite!
You first ole ye brave one in the forrest hidding among the trees.
Bongo

Greenlawn, NY

#179517 Oct 9, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
"Lard ass".
Bwahahahaaa...I like that.
Nice touch, Bono.
Hows life treating you renown indigo child?

“Is that all you've got?”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#179518 Oct 9, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know about all that, Charcoal King.
But I know it's my ex-wife's fault I like to be whipped while having sex.
Just sayin'.
Now you sound like Al Bundy! xD

Was your ex a peggy, too.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#179519 Oct 9, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
The poor dear. She really can't help it. She was overeducated beyond her abilities and is dependent on her "enlightenment" and intelligence provided by her social network, discussing the intricacies of existence over a cup of tea.
You think she really has a lard ass? A shame if true. I would hope she had one socially redeeming value. I confess I have been a bit mesmerized watching her display it on here so much. I just thought her head was fat.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#179520 Oct 10, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Lovey, the whole basis of the BBT is based upon physical phenomenon we understand. One is you don't get heat unless you have a load on an energy source. Friction is one method, which is something on the atomic level. It is even caused within the atomic level by charge displacement, which is caused by motion. The dense hot singularity? Heat is motion, though not what we call in a coherent manner. Basically it is a vibration caused by stress on atomic structure. The singularity got hot. Whatever it was got stressed out and blew a fuse. There is a circular logic to the theory.
You have the vaguest notion of what energy is. Just words you heard. Your "education" is just indoctrination by someone who stared up into the sky and told you what they think, not by your reasoning for yourself based upon what you DO know.
Define energy for us in your own words. What it is and how it came to be.
Nope you are again confused, what you are should be claiming is the BB caused energy to expand which generated heat

At the BB stage of the universe atoms did not exist so you atom analogy is irrelevant.

What gives you the impression that a singularity it hot? There is no evidence, nor given current technology can there any evidence either way. So you are guessing.

There may be a circular logic you your interpretation of the theory but not to cosmological theories.

And again you are guessing about my education because you are clueless of my education, This is a very bad habit you have, it may if course consolidate your davesworld dream but actually bares no resemblance to reality

You have asked this before and I have responded by stating that you are requesting the contents of a 3 year university course on topix. Such godbot simplistic (mis)understanding explains your confusion.

So define which energy? There are several sorts (14 that I know of) and sources (millions, billions, trillions, who knows), this appears to be where you fall down, its a concept that you are incapable of understanding.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#179521 Oct 10, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not Christian but "all will be forgiving".
You certainly come across as a lying christian but hey, sorry if I misunderstood your ignorance.

Wrong, until you apologise publicly for telling godbot lies in public then you will not be forgiven

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#179522 Oct 10, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
The real reason you are not going away is because you have no life. I know you could do this forever and will, as if you would ever have something better to do. You have no clue how stupid someone would be to take you seriously.
How wrong and yet another godbot lie, truly expected.

You are the one who LIED, you are the one who insulted the memory of my grandfather for no other selfish and cowardly reason than the hope of gaining yourself extra god points

Do you actually realise how STUPID and deliberately ignorant making such lies in public reflects on you?

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#179523 Oct 10, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
How could anyone that post under a hidden location call someone a coward. I doubt very much that is your real name. You have to be without a soul.
My location is not hidden if you care avert you’re your eyes from your deliberately ignorant blindness you would see that my avatar tells you Leyland (or close enough). I live literally just outside Leyland, Leyland is the closest town.

And what you doubt is irrelevant. Who actually cares what you doubt, we know you are a guess merchant and liar anyway.

When you finally grow a set of balls and admit that you repeated a godbot lie for no other reasons than your own deliberate ignorance and belief that you would earn extra god points (how pathetic) that coward brand may even begin to dissipate.

You are too cowardly to apologise for your abuse of the many atheists who gave there lives so that you could lie about them because you don’t actually see you LIE as wrong, as immoral. That is the mark of true christian fundamentalism even if you claim not to be a christian

Of course I am without a mythical soul, that black magic is your belief however I consider myself to be far more moral than you could ever be, for example unlike you, I would never lie. And if you blame lying for your god on a soul that is just pathetic.

Long live your god crutch, you will need it

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#179524 Oct 10, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope you are again confused, what you are should be claiming is the BB caused energy to expand which generated heat
At the BB stage of the universe atoms did not exist so you atom analogy is irrelevant.
What gives you the impression that a singularity it hot? There is no evidence, nor given current technology can there any evidence either way. So you are guessing.
There may be a circular logic you your interpretation of the theory but not to cosmological theories.
And again you are guessing about my education because you are clueless of my education, This is a very bad habit you have, it may if course consolidate your davesworld dream but actually bares no resemblance to reality
You have asked this before and I have responded by stating that you are requesting the contents of a 3 year university course on topix. Such godbot simplistic (mis)understanding explains your confusion.
So define which energy? There are several sorts (14 that I know of) and sources (millions, billions, trillions, who knows), this appears to be where you fall down, its a concept that you are incapable of understanding.
?

Total evasion. Reflecting total lack of understanding of what you claim to know.

Just like a woman.

Which of those 14 you know of is the E in your favorite formula?

As I asked, define energy.

The singularity that expanded is always represented as being extremely hot and dense. That is a math model used to "explain" the distribution of energy throughout the ubiverse. If NASA comes back online after the shutdown, check their description.

Basically, according to modern physics, a creation event occured very, very suddenly. A magic poof. You have posted references to it repeatedly.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#179525 Oct 10, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
You bring up a good point. Christianity has grown in Africa since the 1900‘s. Lumping in Christians in the same category as Muslims works for Atheist. In reality it’s like trying to mix oil and water.
Africa today has 54 countries. Most of the continent remains unstable due to terrorism by radical extremist particularly of the Muslim Faith. We have had our share of radical terrorism right here in the United States. But Africa is a hot bed of terrorism which seems to be growing because governments aren’t able to keep them in check.
Rest assure that Atheist are no safer in these countries than visiting Christian Missionaries. The only difference is they may use a dull knife cutting the head off an Atheist versus using a sharp one on a Christian.
But to the question Bob asked. God is not a micro-manager. He allows mankind to govern himself and that goes all the way from major governments to each of us individuals. So why does God allow this to happen and that to happen?
If you ever get the chance to work for a micro manager on your job you should at least one time. Micro managers are terribly inefficient and end up costing companies in the bottom line.
Why are you sick a sick minded moron? You dream of beheading atheist with a dull knife, that is so sad, it’s sick and is a definite indictor of your intolerance taught to you by the babble. Tell me are those nails in your wrist and ankles a real christian joy?

Wrong, your god, one of over 3700 claimed gods does not exist, has never existed. However if you want to believe in the godmagic of bronze age goat herders and escaped slaves because it satisfies your blood lust then that’s fine.

I have more business acumen than to employ a micro manager however since when did world governance come under the heading of micromanagement. Oh I get it, you are attempting to make a metaphorical link between the real world and your faith and failing

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#179527 Oct 10, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
?
Total evasion. Reflecting total lack of understanding of what you claim to know.
Just like a woman.
Which of those 14 you know of is the E in your favorite formula?
As I asked, define energy.
The singularity that expanded is always represented as being extremely hot and dense. That is a math model used to "explain" the distribution of energy throughout the ubiverse. If NASA comes back online after the shutdown, check their description.
Basically, according to modern physics, a creation event occured very, very suddenly. A magic poof. You have posted references to it repeatedly.
Say what, are you saying that there is only one form of energy?

Are you saying it can be explained in a topix post?

Wow, how limited your intellect… And then to vomit a sexist, even misogynistic comment to hide behind your ignorance is really quite pathetic.

Here, educate yourself
http://www.nmsea.org/Curriculum/Primer/what_i...
http://www.nmsea.org/Curriculum/Primer/forms_...
http://www.nmsea.org/Curriculum/Primer/proper...
Actually this simple 101 explanation goes on for several pages, just hit the “Next Section” link at the bottom of the page

Nope, consider the word “expanded” your wording here and the key to your error/misunderstanding - whatever. Expanded, therefore not a singularity. The math of Param Singh do not need or use heat and that is the ONLY math that can be used to describe a singularity. And the mathematical model of the universe is relevant from after 10^-34th of a second after the event, sure a tiny fraction of a second after the point of singularity but certainly not at the point of singularity.

As I have said before - now and then - are two different concepts, unfortunately you do not even seem to comprehend there is a difference. Here try spending a few hours reading the research at http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/ . The worlds leading authority on everything BB, all research areas are relevant

Yes, well done, perhaps you are capable of educating yourself, pretty soon you may even comprehend that no heat was required to trigger the BB

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#179529 Oct 10, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Say what, are you saying that there is only one form of energy?
Are you saying it can be explained in a topix post?
Wow, how limited your intellect… And then to vomit a sexist, even misogynistic comment to hide behind your ignorance is really quite pathetic.
Here, educate yourself
http://www.nmsea.org/Curriculum/Primer/what_i...
http://www.nmsea.org/Curriculum/Primer/forms_...
http://www.nmsea.org/Curriculum/Primer/proper...
Actually this simple 101 explanation goes on for several pages, just hit the “Next Section” link at the bottom of the page
Nope, consider the word “expanded” your wording here and the key to your error/misunderstanding - whatever. Expanded, therefore not a singularity. The math of Param Singh do not need or use heat and that is the ONLY math that can be used to describe a singularity. And the mathematical model of the universe is relevant from after 10^-34th of a second after the event, sure a tiny fraction of a second after the point of singularity but certainly not at the point of singularity.
As I have said before - now and then - are two different concepts, unfortunately you do not even seem to comprehend there is a difference. Here try spending a few hours reading the research at http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/ . The worlds leading authority on everything BB, all research areas are relevant
Yes, well done, perhaps you are capable of educating yourself, pretty soon you may even comprehend that no heat was required to trigger the BB
You are so FOS.

Your "energy" is your God, and you can't explain or describe it.

Hiding behind complexity, not knowing what you know, just to argue. Just like a woman.

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#179530 Oct 10, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Say what, are you saying that there is only one form of energy?
Are you saying it can be explained in a topix post?
Wow, how limited your intellect… And then to vomit a sexist, even misogynistic comment to hide behind your ignorance is really quite pathetic.
Here, educate yourself
http://www.nmsea.org/Curriculum/Primer/what_i...
http://www.nmsea.org/Curriculum/Primer/forms_...
http://www.nmsea.org/Curriculum/Primer/proper...
Actually this simple 101 explanation goes on for several pages, just hit the “Next Section” link at the bottom of the page
Nope, consider the word “expanded” your wording here and the key to your error/misunderstanding - whatever. Expanded, therefore not a singularity. The math of Param Singh do not need or use heat and that is the ONLY math that can be used to describe a singularity. And the mathematical model of the universe is relevant from after 10^-34th of a second after the event, sure a tiny fraction of a second after the point of singularity but certainly not at the point of singularity.
As I have said before - now and then - are two different concepts, unfortunately you do not even seem to comprehend there is a difference. Here try spending a few hours reading the research at http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/ . The worlds leading authority on everything BB, all research areas are relevant
Yes, well done, perhaps you are capable of educating yourself, pretty soon you may even comprehend that no heat was required to trigger the BB
Oh, forgot.

"At this time, the Universe was in an extremely hot and dense state and began expanding rapidly."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang

You will find that same description everywhere.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#179532 Oct 10, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
One more thing. Let's get back to what is this message tread "Atheism requires as much faith as religion?" When you ask me for prove you are going off topic. The truth is you can not prove that the universe had no creator. You can not prove mankind had no creator. You have faith in your beliefs not fact, and when I say you can't prove it. it is not you personally. With the knowledge mankind no has, it can't be proven. You can't even prove how The universe started. Sure there was a big bang, but was the the first. Was there energy before time? If you had these answers and proven, it would be more valuable than the winning mega ball ticket. Ok continue now, let's jump off topic again.
You cannot prove anything to a person not willing and able to be convinced by a proof. It is necessary that you be able to understand the proof, which is why I could not prove the Pythagorean theorem to toddler, and that you be willing to be convinced by compelling evidence supported by a compelling argument, which is why Christians reject proofs of their god's nonexistence.

For example, it's easy to demonstrate to an open mind that no omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent god exists to watch over us and protect us. The human condition rules out that possibility. If there are gods, they either don't know us, can't help us, or don't care enough to do so. Only people committed to believing otherwise reject such an argument.

Want more? Of course you don't. But here it is anyway:

Perfection doesn't allow for change, since either the before or after state would have been less than perfect. You cant change the shape of a perfectly straight line or perfect circle without making it imperfect. Likewise, a perfect god couldn't create anything or even think anything without losing perfection.

Here's more evidence of your god's nonexistence:

If your god existed, it wouldn't tolerate blasphemy, its church wouldn't be withering away, it couldn't have been expelled from grade schools, its intelligent designs would be unmistakeable, the bible's creation myth wouldn't have been so incorrect, and there would be only one religion, which wouldn't even be recognized as religion - just more science.

Don't you think that it's a little insincere for faith based thinkers to argue about proof since evidence and proof are of little interest to them? They don't require it of the things they believe, and when the evidence contradicts those faith based beliefs, they ignore it. What else do we have to offer to prove anything apart from evidence and reason to which the closed mind is as impervious as Superman is to bullets? How can even that which is provable be proven to such a mind?

"Humanity's first sin was faith; the first virtue was doubt.”- Mike Huben

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#179533 Oct 10, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
He really should seek help for why he hates believers. He'd suggest I hate atheist. Not at all.
Is this one of your gifts or fruits of the spirit - the ability to discern what motivates people that you suggest are unable to do the same regarding your motivations?
Robert Stevens wrote:
The North American atheist are clowns, because they are so political, they have became very much like the groups they are against. I really don't think they should be called atheist.
Why do you hate atheists?

[I think that I must just have gotten the gift myself.]

“Seventh son”

Since: Dec 10

Will Prevail

#179534 Oct 10, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, forgot.
"At this time, the Universe was in an extremely hot and dense state and began expanding rapidly."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang
You will find that same description everywhere.

Yeah but what was it before that instant?
Notice your description starts....

At this time.........

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
Guaranteed Trading Signals – Automatic Binary O... (May '13) 27 min DamianStein 2
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 27 min Double Fine 950,250
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 42 min ChristineM 14,170
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 1 hr Brian_G 615,724
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 1 hr Brian_G 627,240
"Bad News: 71% of Women do NOT Reach An Orgasm... 2 hr dethmetalchick 2
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 2 hr MUQ2 42,229
More from around the web