Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 255511 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 10

Redondo Beach, CA

#187021 Nov 24, 2013
I_see_you wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sorry. I knew what it stood for. I'm just not sure what the significance of it was to the post that I had made. I couldn't make a connection. Could you explain?
Buck is a character.

One of his traits is to wordsmith posters' names.

Don't pay it any mind.

It's all in humor.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#187023 Nov 24, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Buck is a character.
One of his traits is to wordsmith posters' names.
Don't pay it any mind.
It's all in humor.
Or perhaps OCD.

Judged:

12

12

12

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#187024 Nov 24, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Buck is a character.
One of his traits is to wordsmith posters' names.
Don't pay it any mind.
It's all in humor.
Catch!

Don't be shy now. Day in and day out for a year you have started every day. I never post to you first. That was after following me to 3 rooms. Even today in 2 different rooms you started up. And now you want to get shy just because of your lotion and cucumber baths with men? I can't figure out what it is you want!

Let's be friends again! And as friends I have just one simple question. When you said:

Catcher said:

"Hey, I spent a week at a luxury hotel in Shanghai, with a huge spa--jacuzzi, saunas, Turkish somethingorothers, cold plunge, all sorts of showers, water with cucumbers and limes, towels the size of blankets, lockers, creams, you name it. Nobody wears anything. Great diversity--Asians and Europeans of all sorts. Separate spas for each gender though, unfortunately."

Why was it a point of interest for you to make sure you mentioned there was great diversity among the nude dudes you were bathing with? Hey it makes no difference to me who takes showers with who or whatever people do on their own time. More power to them. But I just found this confusing. Did it add to the ambiance? What difference does it make what ethnicity the other guys were in the showers?

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#187025 Nov 24, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Things that might be proven non-existent if you go strictly literal of very old texts. I am sure you believe in what some Roman and Greeks wrote. I think the issue is you don't want to believe more that their is a lack of evidence.
At age 19 I had an Army GT of 136. That was the equivalent of a Wechsler 136. Either qualified for MENSA. I had an even higher percentile Navy IQ score years later.
I don't think your score would be significantly higher.
I, too have not fared as well in this society as I could if just based on IQ, but the fact is very few do. High IQ's are spread out among the population. There are other factors involved with "success" on the artificial level of civilization.
But the fact is I didn't need anyone to "tell" me most things. I could figure out things on the fly very well once I knew where I was going with it. The rest I just filed away for future use.
You are no dummy, but you have let emotions cloud your concise thinking.
I suspect by those numbers we are somewhat in the same ballpark, however it would seem that emotions tend to get in the way moreso when one is talking of things not proven that they believe rather than when people talk of things that are already proved to be true or false. Belief in a deity, for which there is zero proven evidence, certainly is not a rational thing to do, even if by some strange luck one happened to be correct.

As for the older texts, as to their being literal, I haven't read any since school, so my memory of what was in them would be rather poor at best. Knowing human nature to some extent, and based on how these things work in the present, I would think that old writings of an historical nature would not be literally accurate, especially long ago because the means of obtaining the information would be very minimal compared to today.

In any event, the truth or myth of past history on an earthly basis is in the past and the truth or lies that may have been in it would affect us only if we choose to be affected by them. Where so and so crossed the Rubicon makes absolutely no difference to my life today, as to whether the story is exact, which it could not possibly be, or whether it was totally fabricated. We are not predicting an eternity of horrible torture for those who refuse to believe ancient history. The stakes are not the same. We perhaps get a general idea of how things came about based on old history, but what we do today at the moment is the only thing that can affect us now, which man has any control over.

It really does not matter to me that likely American history shows the War of 1812 as being an American victory, rather than a series of victories and losses on both sides, which eventually led people to decide to come to some sort of a compromise. It would be most likely, had the British put forth all the power they had at their disposal in those days, that the USA would not exist today as we know it. What might have resulted would not likely have been any worse than what you have. Canada seemed to fare pretty well having stuck it out with England for another 90 years or so. Of course, we might have got the boundary to be around the 41st or 42nd parallel rather than the 49th, except for the Great Lakes area and the east. The fact that America came close to self-destructing only 50 or so years later, does not say much for what they were left with after the War of 1812. I kind of doubt that the carnage of the Civil War, being the worst that Americans have ever experienced, can ever be justified logically. As it was, some of what the war allegedly was fought about didn't really change because of the war, anyway, except that the states attempting to break away were stopped. As for the lot of the slaves, that still hasn't been fully fixed.

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#187026 Nov 24, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>Buck is a character.

One of his traits is to wordsmith posters' names.

Don't pay it any mind.

It's all in humor.
Lmao!!! Now I get it! Thank you

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#187027 Nov 25, 2013
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>Ok, forget Lawrence Krauss, in order to have a debate about anything both parties need to DEFINE their subject matter, correct? Either something CAN come from nothing or it CAN'T. In order to even to begin to have a conversation about this we have to define nothing. If you can't do this, and I don't think you can for one moment, then any discussion about something coming from nothing is pointless. What do you believe existed before the singularity?
p.s. notice the lack of any juvenile insults.
Cute.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#187028 Nov 25, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>

My contention is that there are many things that happen that science can't explain or prove.
Emotions are one of them.
God is another.
Another is women.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#187029 Nov 25, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not envious of theft, extortion and other economic abuse.
Mitt the Twitt has been shown to be all of the above and worse.
He does not deserve his ill-gotten wealth; the many people he trampled on to get it, are still suffering from his actions.
But you?
You think that is just peachy-keen.
Because, you know, Jesus was so polite to the super-rich.
Right?
..... riiiiight.
Proving yourself a liar, again. Blob.

Romney has given away more to charity than you will earn in you sorry life.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#187030 Nov 25, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Nah, If I engage you, you'll drag me down to your level and defeat me with your vast experience.
My original post stands, period.
BTW, on an entirely different subject, but worthy of note, on this date in 1859 Charles Darwin published On the Origin of Species.
You left of the subtitle.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#187032 Nov 25, 2013
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>Emotions are a part of the naturalistic realm. Emotions exist in our brains, it is NOT possible to have emotions without a physical brain. The brain can be monitored, examined, emotional responses can be detected, and these emotion are in fact observable, either by our actions or by physical manifestations, as detected by lie detectors. Increases in blood pressure, sudden temperature changes on the surface of the skin. Emotions are real and easy to prove.
Yes, the brain can be monitored.

This is a highly-developed science.

Maybe you would wish to explain, then, how this man's brain shut down with nothing to monitor, yet he emoted, experienced, and manufactured memory.

Proof of Heaven: A Neurosurgeon's Near-Death Experience and Journey into the Afterlife by Dr. Eben Alexander

Take your time.

“Seventh son”

Since: Dec 10

Will Prevail

#187033 Nov 25, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, the brain can be monitored.
This is a highly-developed science.
Maybe you would wish to explain, then, how this man's brain shut down with nothing to monitor, yet he emoted, experienced, and manufactured memory.
Proof of Heaven: A Neurosurgeon's Near-Death Experience and Journey into the Afterlife by Dr. Eben Alexander
Take your time.
Hallucination, even Dr.s are not above traumatic experience that causes the brain to manufacture experiences that conflict with reality.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-23543...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#187034 Nov 25, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope. A big pile of "nope"--not even.
The **facts** are?
Bushy holds the world-record for **deficit** spending.
Likely a record he will drink to until he finally dies of alcohol poisoning.
But Bushy was **your** man, wasn't he?
LMAO!
4-year comparison, Bush and Obama

Bush Deficits:

FY 2008:$458 billion
FY 2007:$161 billion
FY 2006:$248 billion
FY 2005:$318 billion
Total:$1.185 trillion

Obama Deficits:

FY 2012:$1,087 billion
FY 2011:$1,300 billion
FY 2010:$1,294 billion Bush Deficits
FY 2009:$1,413 billion
Total:$5.09 trillion

Obama debt added = 4.3X Bush, or 430% higher over 4 years.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/federalbudgetpr...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#187035 Nov 25, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
You're suspicious where I am not (the above), and vice versa (the Republicans). Who shall we trust?
Three great monoliths have fallen for me in my lifetime and been transformed from institutions of great admiration to the opposite: the Christian church, the American government, and organized medicine. I don't really care what any of them have to say any more. I count it all a loss. I would have preferred that they were what I originally thought they were, and I would have preferred to have been a proud American Christian physician today. It just didn't work out that way, and I have adapted to my new personal reality and moved on.
But I still trust and respect the people and values of secular humanism and academia. I trust Lawrence Krauss' motives and values even if I don't agree with all of his ideas. And I find no evidence of subterfuge, base values, or ulterior motives in blacklagoon, either. You seem to see them as having a devious hidden agenda.
Krauss has an obvious agenda, not hidden, and each can decide if it is devious. He deserves no respect, in my opinion.

BakedLegume? As far as I can tell, he just finds in Krauss a useful place to hang his hat.

I share your loss of respect for those 3 institutions, which may surprise you.

The people most prominent in the various churches are the people who have kicked me the hardest when down.

Whatever their "Jesus" is, it has done them no good, and their faith is not working.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#187036 Nov 25, 2013
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>And you KNOW that there was an "absents" of anything before the big bang how? Cosmologists see energy and mass residing in empty space, so the absence of anything may not be true. Dark energy is a form of something occupying empty space.
You are making my point, while missing it.

If pre-big bang consisted of "something", with energy and mass, then it was not "nothing", and the axiom is true, something does not come from nothing.

But then the something-from-nothing problem is moved one step: From what did the energy and mass come from?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#187037 Nov 25, 2013
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>It take NO faith whatsoever, all it takes is the absence of evidence.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#187038 Nov 25, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
You are so full of shyt, your eyes are brown, and shyt leaks out of your ears.
Seriously.
Bushy 2 still holds the record for deficit spending.
It's a record that will haunt him until he drinks himself to death (and soon, it appears).
Obama has one of the lowest spending records yet.
Go look at the actual... facts...
... and quit listening to the Faux Lies channel.
It'll help your ... ahem... "credibility".
Bush Deficits:

FY 2008:$458 billion
FY 2007:$161 billion
FY 2006:$248 billion
FY 2005:$318 billion
Total:$1.185 trillion

Obama Deficits:

FY 2012:$1,087 billion
FY 2011:$1,300 billion
FY 2010:$1,294 billion
FY 2009:$1,413 billion
Total:$5.09 trillion

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#187039 Nov 25, 2013
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text> It is not my job to disprove your claim, it is YOU how are required to provide proof for your POSITIVE claim. If I assert that I have a dragon in my garage, would I be so stupid as to ask you to prove I do not? Or would you be the one saying, "You have a dragon in your garage? Prove it. In asking me to prove your positive claim you have committed the fallacy of appealing to ignorance. See how that works?
"When debating any issue, there is an implicit burden of proof on the person asserting a claim. "If this responsibility or burden of proof is shifted to a critic, the fallacy of appealing to ignorance is committed".[
True, if you are an agnostic.

False, if you are taking the atheist position.

"Atheism, from the Greek a-theos ("no-god"), is the philosophical position that God doesn't exist. It is distinguished from agnosticism, the argument that it is impossible to know whether God exists or not".-(Academic American Encyclopedia).

Atheism incurs the exact same burden of proof as theism.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#187040 Nov 25, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you'll enjoy the discussion I had with Happy Lesbo, where I speculated on these issues.
And I can't tell you how pleased I am that we can discuss these matters like this. We disagree on a lot. But we can agree that we are not enemies, but really just two people wandering through like that want more or less the same things, and do better as allies debating how that is best done than we do seeing each other as enemies. Oraganized ideologies that don't really care about either of us benefit from that, not you and me.
Well said.

In my clearer moments I regard atheism as a superior position to that of any organized religion, particularly Christianity.

When there are no atheists around, I fight with Christians.

I need to fight. And I don't know why.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#187041 Nov 25, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Buck is a character.
One of his traits is to wordsmith posters' names.
Don't pay it any mind.
It's all in humor.
Right, Cletcher.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#187042 Nov 25, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Hallucination, even Dr.s are not above traumatic experience that causes the brain to manufacture experiences that conflict with reality.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-23543...
Sorry, you're article is bull shit.

"Esquire article on Eben Alexander distorts the facts"

http://iands.org/news/news/front-page-news/97...

"Esquire's cynical article distorts the facts of my 25-year career as a neurosurgeon and is a textbook example of how unsupported assertions and cherry-picked information can be assembled at the expense of the truth".-Dr. Eben Alexander

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) 1 min CHURCHINGALING 646,717
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 3 min Rosa_Winkel 49,006
Play "end of the word" part 2 (Dec '15) 23 min KellyP in Jersey 2,085
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 24 min Rosa_Winkel 445,726
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 1 hr Steve III 44,702
gay at ghaziabad (Jul '14) 1 hr gaurav 13
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 1 hr Rosa_Winkel 105,635
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 2 hr VIKING 971,737
More from around the web