Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258482 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.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#188678 Nov 30, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
This is something the scientific community calls falsifiability.
Absence of evidence is evidence of absence. Perhaps the wording confuses you.
Is there a kitten in the box?
Lack of kitten observation is demonstration of kitten missing.
I know you just like to argue but this is getting ridiculous.
It's only ridiculous because you keep trying to prove something you can't.

Your observation of the box in question is evidence.

So it is not absence of evidence.

Your evidence cannot be both absent and present.

The scientific community, you say?

“The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.”

&#8213; Carl Sagan; "Cosmos"

It's only getting uglier for you.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#188679 Nov 30, 2013
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text> Not really as smart as you think you are. Notice the symptom called "Cognitive disturbances" One of the results is delirium, delirium is always accompanied by.........yep you guessed it dumbass....HALLUCINATIONS.
The brain requires approximately 3.3 ml of oxygen per 100 g of brain tissue per minute. Initially the body responds to lowered blood oxygen by redirecting blood to the brain and increasing cerebral blood flow. Blood flow may increase up to twice the normal flow but no more. If the increased blood flow is sufficient to supply the brain’s oxygen needs then no symptoms will result.[19]
However, if blood flow cannot be increased or if doubled blood flow does not correct the problem, symptoms of cerebral hypoxia will begin to appear. Mild symptoms include difficulties with complex learning tasks and reductions in short-term memory. If oxygen deprivation continues, cognitive disturbances and decreased motor control will result.[19] The skin may also appear bluish (cyanosis) and heart rate increases. Continued oxygen deprivation results in fainting, long term loss of consciousness, coma, seizures, cessation of brain stem reflexes, and brain death.[20]
That's impressive.

You can copy and paste.

Too bad you don't understand one word of it.

Since: Sep 08

Rocky Ford, CO

#188680 Nov 30, 2013
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
You old hoot owl...
I lived in a place in central Florida that had birds up the ying yang and lots of trees right up next to the house. One night I was sitting by a window reading when this owl let out this blood curdling screech. He was perched on a branch about 5 foot away. Heard them hoot many a time, but this one must have wanted to see me shit in my pants, which didn't quite happen.

I have some stories about owls.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#188681 Nov 30, 2013
ATTENTION! ATTENTION!


Buck is now going into MINIMALIST MODE.

For newcomers, and idiots, which about covers the thread, this means Buck will be refuting all atheist posts in 10 words or less.

This is to avoid unnecessary burning of brain power.

Buck will notify viewers when switching back to regular mode, and may do so if any post reflects enough intelligence to justify the switch.

Thank you.

(Sent from the Buck Institute)

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#188682 Nov 30, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
You seriously want to claim Dave as an ally?
Rofl!
Wow.
Dave is second smartest guy on Topix.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#188683 Nov 30, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>I apologize if I'm wrong, but that's the general impression I get. Your insistence, in stark contrast to your current attitude, that you will become an EM ghost and muck about possessing people at will has that effect.
You made this up.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#188684 Nov 30, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>Where did you get the idea that I was criticizing intuition? I wasn't. It's a good tool.
And intuition isn't inexplicable or magical. I'm not sure if that's what you were suggesting.
Explain intuition.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#188685 Nov 30, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Have you happened to read any of the latest studies on concussions?
Yes. I had several. No lasting effects.

Since: Sep 08

Rocky Ford, CO

#188686 Nov 30, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>I apologize if I'm wrong, but that's the general impression I get. Your insistence, in stark contrast to your current attitude, that you will become an EM ghost and muck about possessing people at will has that effect.
I had the power for a very short period of time. Once you get inserted there is no leaving, though. You meld and get trapped like the official property holder. I seemed to know that at that time.

It was EM like, but not necessarily EM. Reading about the Higg's lately I could describe it as an EM entity with the Higg's turned off, which removes it from interacting with mass. There was visible form and orientation of here, but no connection to it.

You'll find out on your own.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#188687 Nov 30, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
This isn't a healthy position. It sounds pretty Christian in origin.
It dates hundreds of years B.C.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#188688 Nov 30, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
It's always amusing to catch a believer off guard with something as simple as asking, "Exactly what does that mean?"
Most of the time, they're just filling space with flowery nonsense hoping nobody presses them for a commitment.
What does that mean?

...did it work?

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#188689 Nov 30, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
That's synthesis.
It's not synthesis of DNA.

Since: Sep 08

Rocky Ford, CO

#188690 Nov 30, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
You made this up.
His interpretation of what I said is wrong. More of his projecting his thoughts to others.

I explained it a bit more in my previous post. Dave can be quite ferocious when confronted with something unknown. Took a higher authority to make him behave. The only flash of light in the experience.

I did play with it a bit with a poster or two. The explanation why they would suddenly get this urge to be flaming fags after I left next time. I think GML was the one I did that to.

Not my bod or identity.

I would have laughed like a hyena.
Doctor REALITY

Mabelvale, AR

#188691 Nov 30, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Dave is second smartest guy on Topix.
Will the Lord Jesus Christ accept your soul, when you meet Him on Judgment Day?

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#188692 Nov 30, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
That's synthesis.
SWITCHING TO REGULAR BUCK MODE*

No, it is not.

Venter read the DNA sequence of a fully-functioning, existing chromosome, copied the sequence into a computer, and switched sequences in a way they thought would still convey information necessary for the cell to replicate, then inserted it into a cell, and it replicated.

They altered existing DNA; they did not sythesize anything.

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#188693 Nov 30, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
ATTENTION! ATTENTION!
Buck is now going into MINIMALIST MODE.
For newcomers, and idiots, which about covers the thread, this means Buck will be refuting all atheist posts in 10 words or less.
This is to avoid unnecessary burning of brain power.
Buck will notify viewers when switching back to regular mode, and may do so if any post reflects enough intelligence to justify the switch.
Thank you.
(Sent from the Buck Institute)
Good. Your blather was approaching idiot status.
blacklagoon

Brookline, MA

#188694 Nov 30, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
You changed your story, but still didn't get it right.
As far as science before DNA was discovered, they did not know, or could not demonstrate its existence.
They did not conclude nonexistence.
You can't even get it right when I help you.
My story has NEVER changed, your inability to comprehend seems NEVER changing.

You really do love to play with words to suit your argument, in this case it's a way for you to cover your reading comprehension error. Nice, dishonest, but nice try.

"They could NOt demonstrate its existence so they DID NOT conclude it was nonexistent" Is this the same way science does NOT conclude that pixie dust is nonexistent? Or that "Never Neverland is also nonexistent?

I do believe you have won the topix prize for having the most posts where adding and deleting words gives YOU and only YOU the impression of wining your point. First prize........You get to strap on a pair of hockey skates and see if you can last 60 seconds with an enforcer, you can even pick the team. LOL

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#188695 Nov 30, 2013
Doctor REALITY wrote:
<quoted text>Will the Lord Jesus Christ accept your soul, when you meet Him on Judgment Day?
Jesus, I, and the Father are One.

Nothing to accept.
blacklagoon

Brookline, MA

#188696 Nov 30, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
That's impressive.
You can copy and paste.
Too bad you don't understand one word of it.
AHHHHH, you got your ass kicked and are not man enough to admit it.

And am I supposed to understand that you have NEVER copied and pasted information? Hypocrite!!!!!

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#188697 Nov 30, 2013
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>My story has NEVER changed, your inability to comprehend seems NEVER changing.
You really do love to play with words to suit your argument, in this case it's a way for you to cover your reading comprehension error. Nice, dishonest, but nice try.
"They could NOt demonstrate its existence so they DID NOT conclude it was nonexistent" Is this the same way science does NOT conclude that pixie dust is nonexistent? Or that "Never Neverland is also nonexistent?
I do believe you have won the topix prize for having the most posts where adding and deleting words gives YOU and only YOU the impression of wining your point. First prize........You get to strap on a pair of hockey skates and see if you can last 60 seconds with an enforcer, you can even pick the team. LOL
Is the skating rink infinite?

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 Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 58 min Impeach 46,818
Why are Europeans a race of savages, thieves, a... (Jun '15) 2 hr Paul really is dead 441
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 2 hr ffj 990,699
TWA Flight 800 (Jul '13) 2 hr Doctor REALITY 4
LeBron James: Should he STAY or should he GO?? 2 hr Doctor REALITY 6
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 4 hr kent 692,071
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 9 hr Exposing Devil Lies 619,843
More from around the web