Atheism; An Intellectual Dead End

[sealybobo]

No one has ever suggested that God can't exist. Only that the default presumption is that God doesn't exist until such time as objective evidence proves otherwise.

Making you like me, an agnostic.

Which way do you lean? If you lean towards disbelief then you're an agnostic atheist. Not just an undecided agnostic.

Are all agnostics equally unsure?

The reason we aren't agnostics is because then theists think they can convince us. What do you call an unconvincable agnostic?

So are you saying there are only two types of people? Theists and agnostics? Because no one can say for sure there is no God. In that case there are no theists either because they aren't sure either. They think they are sure but so do we.

I am smack right in the middle, I see no proof either way, as well as not taking any side, and the first side to show me actual proof will get my vote.

Bullshit! You aren't even close to believing in God.

You don't see how and why we made it up? Watch The Cosmos. They explain it

I said I'm in the middle, I don't believe a god has been proven and I don't believe that a god has been disproven either.

Neither has my pink dragon. Are you agnostic about her?

 

[Iceweasel]

Atheists are just as deluded as theists as there's no proof that a god can't exist.

No one has ever suggested that God can't exist. Only that the default presumption is that God doesn't exist until such time as objective evidence proves otherwise.

That's correct, that's why atheists are insane. Their belief is that god doesn't exist yet they cannot say with any credibility he can't. That's a statement of faith yet they claim they only believe in science. That is not the thinking of a rational individual.

 

[sealybobo]

What's to be afraid of? Do you remember what things were like 4u before you were born? That's what things will be like 4u after you die.

Oh you mean dying? Yes, I'm afraid of dying. I hope i don't suffer and it will be sad for my life to be over but I'm not scared of what happens after the lights go out.

And for you and your religion to say you know what happens is laughable to me.

Again Professor Knee Jerk, to what religion do you refer? I haven't mentioned anything about God anywhere in this entire thread.
Afraid of dying but not afraid of death? Why are you afraid of dying?

Because it might hurt and because my time is over

Let's suppose your death is painless. What do you have to worry about? Your time is over? How would you know that? How could you when your death results in a black void of nothingness? It's certain that no form of consciousness will exist for you then.....right?

Right

And how would you like to go about substantiating the existence of nothing? Or the non existence of nothing as the case may be.

How do you substantiate the opposite?

How do you know? First let's establish that because I admit I know nothing other than what makes sense to me. You aren't making sense. Fact is I'm not afraid of after death. You are and you seem to be trying to scare me. Stop it. Lol

 

[sealybobo]

What's to be afraid of? Do you remember what things were like 4u before you were born? That's what things will be like 4u after you die.

Oh you mean dying? Yes, I'm afraid of dying. I hope i don't suffer and it will be sad for my life to be over but I'm not scared of what happens after the lights go out.

And for you and your religion to say you know what happens is laughable to me.

Again Professor Knee Jerk, to what religion do you refer? I haven't mentioned anything about God anywhere in this entire thread.
Afraid of dying but not afraid of death? Why are you afraid of dying?

Because it might hurt and because my time is over

Let's suppose your death is painless. What do you have to worry about? Your time is over? How would you know that? How could you when your death results in a black void of nothingness? It's certain that no form of consciousness will exist for you then.....right?

Right

And how would you like to go about substantiating the existence of nothing? Or the non existence of nothing as the case may be.

What happens to your pet turtle when it's time here is up? How do you substantiate your answer?

 

[Mudda]

Making you like me, an agnostic.

Which way do you lean? If you lean towards disbelief then you're an agnostic atheist. Not just an undecided agnostic.

Are all agnostics equally unsure?

The reason we aren't agnostics is because then theists think they can convince us. What do you call an unconvincable agnostic?

So are you saying there are only two types of people? Theists and agnostics? Because no one can say for sure there is no God. In that case there are no theists either because they aren't sure either. They think they are sure but so do we.

I am smack right in the middle, I see no proof either way, as well as not taking any side, and the first side to show me actual proof will get my vote.

Bullshit! You aren't even close to believing in God.

You don't see how and why we made it up? Watch The Cosmos. They explain it

I said I'm in the middle, I don't believe a god has been proven and I don't believe that a god has been disproven either.

Neither has my pink dragon. Are you agnostic about her?

That's just proof that you're drunk.

 

[ding]

Atheists are just as deluded as theists as there's no proof that a god can't exist.

That's why I'm an agnostic atheist

No. You are not.

Why are you so jealous of agnostics all the time? You secretly are one?

I'm not. I don't see any agnostics here.

 

[Constructive Anarchy]

Again Professor Knee Jerk, to what religion do you refer? I haven't mentioned anything about God anywhere in this entire thread.
Afraid of dying but not afraid of death? Why are you afraid of dying?

Because it might hurt and because my time is over

Let's suppose your death is painless. What do you have to worry about? Your time is over? How would you know that? How could you when your death results in a black void of nothingness? It's certain that no form of consciousness will exist for you then.....right?

Right

And how would you like to go about substantiating the existence of nothing? Or the non existence of nothing as the case may be.

What happens to your pet turtle when it's time here is up? How do you substantiate your answer?

The depth of your responses typifies the intellectual dead end of pop culture atheists. Hence the thread title.

 

[sealybobo]

Atheists are just as deluded as theists as there's no proof that a god can't exist.

No one has ever suggested that God can't exist. Only that the default presumption is that God doesn't exist until such time as objective evidence proves otherwise.

That's correct, that's why atheists are insane. Their belief is that god doesn't exist yet they cannot say with any credibility he can't. That's a statement of faith yet they claim they only believe in science. That is not the thinking of a rational individual.

What do you want from us? Do you want us to insist we know or be honest your claim is unfalsafiable and unknowable?

Most atheist are referring to Jesus, moses, Mohammad and Joseph smith when we say we know God doesn't exist. We are atheist about these god stories. You can relate to us on at least 2 of these stories, right?

I'm agnostic atheist on generic God because it Seems like we made it up but talking snakes and virgin births???

Let's say we are atheist enough to risk our eternal souls. That's pretty sure. You don't get more sure than that.

 

[Constructive Anarchy]

Which way do you lean? If you lean towards disbelief then you're an agnostic atheist. Not just an undecided agnostic.

Are all agnostics equally unsure?

The reason we aren't agnostics is because then theists think they can convince us. What do you call an unconvincable agnostic?

So are you saying there are only two types of people? Theists and agnostics? Because no one can say for sure there is no God. In that case there are no theists either because they aren't sure either. They think they are sure but so do we.

I am smack right in the middle, I see no proof either way, as well as not taking any side, and the first side to show me actual proof will get my vote.

Bullshit! You aren't even close to believing in God.

You don't see how and why we made it up? Watch The Cosmos. They explain it

I said I'm in the middle, I don't believe a god has been proven and I don't believe that a god has been disproven either.

Neither has my pink dragon. Are you agnostic about her?

That's just proof that you're drunk.

People shouldn't drink and post. That's how accidents happen.

 

[sealybobo]

Atheists are just as deluded as theists as there's no proof that a god can't exist.

That's why I'm an agnostic atheist

No. You are not.

Why are you so jealous of agnostics all the time? You secretly are one?

I'm not. I don't see any agnostics here.

He's atheist sure enough that he's denying Jesus is the Messiah.

That he isn't agnostic about because agnostics still burn in hell.

Or does mudda think God will treat agnostics differently than atheists? Maybe that's why he insists hes not a disbeliever

 

[sealybobo]

I am smack right in the middle, I see no proof either way, as well as not taking any side, and the first side to show me actual proof will get my vote.

Bullshit! You aren't even close to believing in God.

You don't see how and why we made it up? Watch The Cosmos. They explain it

I said I'm in the middle, I don't believe a god has been proven and I don't believe that a god has been disproven either.

Neither has my pink dragon. Are you agnostic about her?

That's just proof that you're drunk.

People shouldn't drink and post. That's how accidents happen.

Have you ever met a militant agnostic?

 

[hobelim]

Your logic is impeccable except you haven't included in your speculations that for a living being to qualify as God it would have to be incorporeal. Microscopes, telescopes, test tubes and beakers are consequently worthless.

For a human being to accurately perceive that which is incorporeal he would have to purify what is incorporeal in him, the conscious mind.

For everyone to have hold of objective evidence everyone would just have to stop screwing up each others minds.

Its a jungle out there.....Get real.

There's another word for what you are descibing - imagined. Gracvity is "incorporeal" as you put it. There is nothing to see, touch,taste, or smell. Yet, it is possible to observe gravity in action. It is posible to test for the existence of gravity, and to repeat the effects of gravity, and no "purity of spirit" necessary. Either a thing exists, or it doesn't. If it only exists for those "in the right mind-set" then it isn't real; it is the product of one's imagination.

No, gravity is not incorporeal. Gravity is a force directly related and connected to matter.

Let me put it this way. If a person wants to understand calculous, they must apply their mind to learn it. If a person does not do what is necessary to learn, they will never understand calculous.

Only those who do, will. Its as simple as that.


In the same way I told you the way to prepare your mind in order to be capable of seeing God.. If you do not take the steps necessary God will remain hidden from you,not because he is not there, but because you have chosen to remain blind.

But for so many gullible sheep they don't have to do anything they simply believe.

So no, there are no steps to finding God. You think you found God because you wanted to.

Mindless sheep who do nothing but believe have never seen or heard a single word from God in their entire life. They expect to be rewarded after they die.

Thats not what I said. Purify and refine your mind and you will see God before you die.

WTF.. What could possibly be yours or anyones objection to purifying and cleansing their own mind?

Good reply

Thank you.

I know that you already know that people who say they found God just because they have adopted an unsubstantiated belief have only latched on to hope.

Thats not good enough for you, so you are already half way there...

If you want to go all the way and stand in the presence of the living God just act on what I said.

Then it will be impossible for you to not believe.


.

 

[Tuatara]

You mean like all religious people having a structured philosophy, oh wait, there are over 1000 different religions. Well at least all Christians have a structured philosophy, oh wait there are hundreds of different types of Christianity, in fact some of these differences have been fought over to the death. Not really a unified belief system. The only unified system atheists have is they don't believe in God/gods. It's really that simple.

Perhaps you're simply unfamiliar with the term "unified belief system". Obviously there are many different unified belief systems, religious and otherwise. Atheism simply doesn't happen to be one of them. Atheism, if it can even be considered a philosophical model of any kind, comprises no actual beliefs. They only know what they don't believe. Is that clear enough for you? Or can I expect yet another round of knee jerks?

Many of your com-padres would disagree. There was a thread here about Atheism being a belief and a religion. To state an atheist only knows what they don't believe is a ridiculous statement. It first implies that an atheists knows nothing about anything else. I'm sure you don't believe the moon is made out of cheese. If there was a name for people not believing the moon was made out of cheese (let's call them noncasiests) then a statement like A Noncasiest only knows what they don't believe would be wrong and ridiculous. I know you are only trying to poke subtle jabs and insults because you actually have no argument. You also said to Czernobog that you are not obliged to call him anything right after you called him a pop culture atheist. Another little jab. How about staying away from ridiculous labels and argue the points.

Wrong again. Atheism isn't like religion. But the human behaviors of blind dogmatic faith are remarkably the same for both atheists and religious fundamentalists.

I didn't claim Atheism was a religion. That claim was made by Christians in this forum. Please provide some sort of evidence for blind dogmatic faith by atheists. I will be waiting.

Yes. I was one of those people, but let me clarify that. Atheism in and of itself is not a religion. It only manifests itself as a religion when it becomes dogmatic like a religion and its adherents act like it is a religion. That does not apply to the vast majority of atheists most of whom have no interest in God or religion at all, but it does apply to militant atheists who attack other religions like a rival religion attacks a fellow rival religion. Protestants and Catholics come to mind as well as Sunnis and Shiites. I have posted the dogmatic faith of these militant atheists. It is listed at the bottom of every one of my posts. It is not something new. It is not something I made up. It has been observed and discussed for over 100 years.

Well for starters your little blog at the bottom is completely wrong. Also this thread and thousands of others are an attack on Atheism. Do you feel it is wrong for atheists to defend their position.Funny how you bring up the term "militant" atheists and compare them to the the attacks between Protestants and Catholics & Sunnis and Shiites. These groups actually killed each other while the "militant" atheists are merely having internet discussions and public lectures. No wonder you believe in God. You have no base in reality.

 

[BreezeWood]

.Practically speaking, the universe had a beginning. Unless of course you don't see anymore usable energy in the closed system.

You really do need to quit basing your understanding of the universe on outdated models. This is why your conclusions keep falling short. With the Quantum Gravity Loop, there is no beginning, or end to the universe, and this is accomplished without loss of available energy. With no beginning, there is no "Primary Source" - no God necessary.


Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics says otherwise. It's that whole usable energy thingee.

Nope. Quantum mechanics proves this to be inaccurate.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

So from what we know our current universe started 14 billion years ago but what was before that? My guess is the universe before ours was contracting after it first expanded for about 25 billion years.

The point is we don't know for sure and I'm open to all scientific theories.

The good thing about not believing a scientific theory is you won't burn in hell for eternity if you are wrong.

.

So from what we know our current universe started 14 billion years ago but what was before that? My guess is the universe before ours was contracting after it first expanded for about 25 billion years.

The point is we don't know for sure and I'm open to all scientific theories.

was contracting after it first expanded ...


matter en-mass expanding at a finite angle in vacuum is a loop that re-converges back to its origin - BB is a loop, there never is contraction.

.

 

[Tuatara]

Actually, I have many, many better things to do. You make my point for me. What you are promising is reduced to a simple formula: "Just accept that God exists with no evidence whatsoever, and God will 'reveal' himself to you". It is the same promise that was given by every preacher I heard as a child, and every teacher I listened to in seminary.

Well, guess what? I spent 20 years ignoring logic, and reason, and never did I find a single shred of objective evidence of the existence of God. Did I, at times, feel good? Yes. Did good things happen that I could claim God did? Sure. But, you see, that's the scam, isn't it?

When I get a good grade on an assignment, thank God, because God led me to that grade, right? Let's just ignore all of the effort, and hours of studying that I put in to achieve that grade. It was God's will that I get that grade. And if I get a bad grade? Well...that's just me being tested. It couldn't possibly have anything to do with my not taking the time to prepare, right?

That's the problem with your promise of "evidence". It's an empty promise. It's a promise of feeling, and emotion, not of actual objective evidence. It's a promise of confirmation bias, where, because I insist that God exists, then everything I see, I find a way to make fit with my preconceived assumptions.

Sorry. I will not be convinced that way. I will never believe in God, absent evidence; you are going to have to show me evidence of the existence of God. I do not work on faith; I work on what I observe.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

No, whatever preacher influenced you as a child told you to just believe. Thats not what I am suggesting.

I am not saying for you to just believe in God and then you will feel good. I am not suggesting that you must join a religion or accept the existence of God without any evidence. That would be a scam.

Obviously your mind has been affected by your experiences with religion. You say you will never believe in God absent of evidence. I wouldn't either. You say you work on what you observe but then dismiss my suggestion to purify your thoughts so that you might actually be capable of observing evidence of God.


As a scientist would you conduct an experiment to determine the truth of something without first sterilizing and calibrating the instruments that will be used to test the theory and measure the results?

Can a scientist rely on any conclusion based on what was seen through a filthy lens?


Purify your mind and you will see God, not as a figment of an unrestrained imagination but as a living being whose existence is absolute.

That's just it; evidence either exists, or it doesn't. It doesn't require a pure heart to be seen. I don't need a pure heart, or mind, to see the evidence of gravity. I need only drop a ball. I can be as pure as a saint, or as vile as a paedophile, and the evidence will be exactly the same.

Nothing that requires the "right mind-set" to experience is real, nor objective. Guess what? If I take the right drugs I'll hear God's voice. That isn't real, either.

Either God exists, and there is objective evidence to support that claim, or he doesn't, and there isn't.

And if such objective evidence exists, that means, by definition, that it is observable by everyone, period. Full stop. Not just the "pure of heart", but everyone.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

Your logic is impeccable except you haven't included in your speculations that for a living being to qualify as God it would have to be incorporeal. Microscopes, telescopes, test tubes and beakers are consequently worthless.

For a human being to accurately perceive that which is incorporeal he would have to purify what is incorporeal in him, the conscious mind.

For everyone to have hold of objective evidence everyone would just have to stop screwing up each others minds.

Its a jungle out there.....Get real.

There's another word for what you are descibing - imagined. Gracvity is "incorporeal" as you put it. There is nothing to see, touch,taste, or smell. Yet, it is possible to observe gravity in action. It is posible to test for the existence of gravity, and to repeat the effects of gravity, and no "purity of spirit" necessary. Either a thing exists, or it doesn't. If it only exists for those "in the right mind-set" then it isn't real; it is the product of one's imagination.

No, gravity is not incorporeal. Gravity is a force directly related and connected to matter in the material universe.

Let me put it this way. If a person wants to understand calculous, they must apply their mind to learn it. If a person does not do what is necessary to learn, they will never understand calculous.

Only those who do, will. Its as simple as that.


In the same way I told you the way to prepare your mind in order to be capable of seeing God.. If you do not take the steps necessary God will remain hidden from you,not because he is not there, but because you have chosen to remain blind.

I see this all the time from theists. It complete BS. Most atheists were at one time religious. Some of them believed in God for many years. So now tell me, especially after you know now this, who has chosen to remain blind?

 

[BreezeWood]

Are Atheists able to use rational thought, deductive reasoning, and scrupulous logic to substantiate and legitimize their perceptions? Or are they simply lacking a perception that most people experience without the need for rationalization? Are they spiritually dumb?

Yes I'm dumber than the sheep who believe because they want to believe, have been threatened with hell and have been brainwashed since birth.

If you were raised on an island by people who didn't believe in God what age do you think you would come up with the God concept? I don't think God is something that is naturally concluded. You may contemplate a creator but at what point would you decide a heaven was logical and not wishful thinking?

In fact the person raised by non religious people might not even give this any thought. They might instead focus all their energy on living and learning things that are knowable.

You'd better stick to things that are knowable. The unknowable frightens atheists.

Wrong! Im not afraid of death or hell you are. I laugh at such nonsense and go about living my life.

Now you can come up with reasons why you think I don't believe or why I deny God exists but you'll probably miss the mark. It's not Satan, im not angry and Its not because I want to be able to live in sin without consequences. I think belief holds us back, makes us dumb and is how they control us. I think it's made up.

So maybe, just maybe, I don't believe because it isn't true

You're not afraid of death? That would make you a singularly unique human being.

.

You're not afraid of death? That would make you a singularly unique human being.

not if an individual reaches the Apex of Knowledge before their physiology expires and is able to release their Spirit before that final event. what your religion ignores as the appropriate goal.

.

 

[BreezeWood]

Atheists are just as deluded as theists as there's no proof that a god can't exist.

No one has ever suggested that God can't exist. Only that the default presumption is that God doesn't exist until such time as objective evidence proves otherwise.

Making you like me, an agnostic.

Which way do you lean? If you lean towards disbelief then you're an agnostic atheist. Not just an undecided agnostic.

Are all agnostics equally unsure?

The reason we aren't agnostics is because then theists think they can convince us. What do you call an unconvincable agnostic?

So are you saying there are only two types of people? Theists and agnostics? Because no one can say for sure there is no God. In that case there are no theists either because they aren't sure either. They think they are sure but so do we.

I am smack right in the middle, I see no proof either way, as well as not taking any side, and the first side to show me actual proof will get my vote.

.

I am smack right in the middle, I see no proof either way, as well as not taking any side, and the first side to show me actual proof will get my vote.

are you a releasable Spirit from your physiology .... if so are there others, might there not be an Almighty or a committee of the same and the origin of the genome of life that is managed within that dimension including physicality.

.

 

[Czernobog]

Are Atheists able to use rational thought, deductive reasoning, and scrupulous logic to substantiate and legitimize their perceptions? Or are they simply lacking a perception that most people experience without the need for rationalization? Are they spiritually dumb?

Yes I'm dumber than the sheep who believe because they want to believe, have been threatened with hell and have been brainwashed since birth.

If you were raised on an island by people who didn't believe in God what age do you think you would come up with the God concept? I don't think God is something that is naturally concluded. You may contemplate a creator but at what point would you decide a heaven was logical and not wishful thinking?

In fact the person raised by non religious people might not even give this any thought. They might instead focus all their energy on living and learning things that are knowable.

You'd better stick to things that are knowable. The unknowable frightens atheists.

Wrong! Im not afraid of death or hell you are. I laugh at such nonsense and go about living my life.

Now you can come up with reasons why you think I don't believe or why I deny God exists but you'll probably miss the mark. It's not Satan, im not angry and Its not because I want to be able to live in sin without consequences. I think belief holds us back, makes us dumb and is how they control us. I think it's made up.

So maybe, just maybe, I don't believe because it isn't true

You're not afraid of death? That would make you a singularly unique human being.

Not entirely. I'm not afraid of death, either. I'm afraid of dying, but that's rather because there are so many painful ways to do, and I have a rather healthy aversion to pain. But being dead? Nah. I look at it this way, either we're right, or you are. Either way, I've made my choice, and made my peace with that choice. Worrying about the consequences of a choice already made is rather a waste of time, don't you think?

 

[Czernobog]

Quantum mechanics indicates you're on the right track.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

And the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics says he's not. Do you have any evidence that tells us what happened in the 1st trillionth of a billionth of a second?

Once again you demonstrate your complete ignorance of quantum physics. You should really stop embarrassing yourself.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

http://phys.org/news/2016-10-quantum-violate-law-thermodynamics.html

The likelihood of seeing quantum systems violating the second law of thermodynamics has been calculated by UCL scientists.

In two papers, published in this week's issue of Physical Review X and funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, the team determined a more precise version of a basic law of physics - which says that disorder tends to increase with time unless acted on by an outside force - and applied it to the smallest quantum systems.

"The vast majority of the time, the second law of thermodynamics is obeyed. It says that a cup of hot coffee in a cold room will cool down rather than heat up, and a collection of coins all initially heads up will likely produce a mixture of heads and tails when given a shake. In fact, it is thanks to the second law of thermodynamics that we instantly recognise when we are watching a movie backwards," explained PhD student Alvaro M. Alhambra (UCL Physics & Astronomy).

The team say that situations which break the second law of thermodynamics are not ruled out in principle, but are rare.

Precisely. Rare. Which means that the quantum gravity loop is well within the parameters set by physics, and a quantum loop does not lose energy, does not have end points, and does not need your mythical Primary Source, or Cause.

Checkmate.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

Again, you refer to "theoretical" quantum physics.

Well, when discussing things like cosmic beginnings, it's rather all theoretical isn't it? Quantum mechanics, Gracvity Loop, the Big Bang; it's all theoretical. And God? That's not even a theory; it's just a hypothosis, and a rather poorly crafted one at that.

 

[Czernobog]

Atheists are just as deluded as theists as there's no proof that a god can't exist.

No one has ever suggested that God can't exist. Only that the default presumption is that God doesn't exist until such time as objective evidence proves otherwise.

Making you like me, an agnostic.

Again, that is just a diplomatic term used to not offend theists. Either you believe that there is a God or you don't. One is theist, or atheist. If one is atheist, one is a strong atheist - confident in their position - or they are not. You are not confidentin your position, so you don't eant to offend anyone. Thus you call yourslef an agnostic. But the fact remains that you believe in the existence of deity no more than I do. I am just more confident in my position than you.