Things about atheism that should be self-evident.

[westwall]

Why can I not be an atheist and believe in the laws of physics? I think physics drives everything. Physics -> chemistry -> biology -> life -> man -> religion

You were fine right up until you hit religion. Sorry, physics does not dovetail with religion. So, my question would be when the latter contradicts the former, which do you go with?

I know plenty of scientists who also believe in God. A few are creationists, though with a twist. When i asked them if the world was truly only 6,000 years old in their belief system they responded with " how long is a day in God time?" They fully acknowledge the Laws of physics, that the world operates via cause and effect, etc. etc. etc.

Your assertion that science and religion can't coexist is absurd.

See, that's what I'm talking about. That is an attempt to subvert rational science in order to shoehorn in your religion. "How long is a day in 'God' time?" Same as it is in everyone else time - 24 hours. Unless, of course, you are suggesting that "God" is an alien who lives on another planet whose rotation on its axis is slower than ours. And, even then, "God" time would still exist relative to ours, so when interacting with Earth, it would still be a 24-hour cycle. That's what a day is. It is the amount of time it takes for a planet to make a full rotation on its axis.

I am agnostic silly boy. I am also a scientist (a real one) so have to deal with the religious and the atheists among the scientific community. As a whole i would much rather deal with the religious ones as they are still filled with the wonder of discovery. The atheists generally aren't. The atheists are also in general assholes.

That was a general "you", not you specifically. I was demonstrating the irrational twisting of reason being used by those who ask that silly question to try and reconcile their science with their religion.

They aren't trying to reconcile anything. They understand that the 6000 year nonsense was promulgated by one guy. They are scientists first, and religious second. You are atheist first, last, and always. Based on your incessant threads about the subject it is plain to see that you are obsessed with religious people. That is unhealthy and shows us more about the type of person YOU are, than any of the religious people out there.

 

[Czernobog]

1. Atheists Do not:
   1. Hate God - There is no God.
      
   2. Worship Satan - There is no Satan.
      
   3. Hate Christians - Christians were all born atheists, and then had religion forced upon them.
      
   4. Eat Babies - There are no words for for the kind of deranged and deplorable imagination that thought this up.
      
   5. Lack morals - Every person has a sense of right and wrong regardless of whether they have a book of fairy tales to tell them what right and wrong is.
2. Creationists like to ask, "How do you know the Big Bang happened? Were you there?" Yeah....right. Because I'm sure you were right there picking up shells while toddling along the bottom of the Red Sea, as the water was standing as two walls, waiting for you to cross, right?
   
   
3. “Evolution is just a theory” demonstrates an almost misunderstanding of what a scientific theory actually is. A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation. The non-scientific word theory refers to a guess or conjecture, a contemplation or speculation. In science, this latter definition is actually called a hypothesis. The two terms are not interchangeable.
   
   
4. As is the case with justice, it is the burden of the party making an assertive claim to offer proof of said claim. As in a criminal trial by jury, the prosecution needs to offer objective evidence that events took place a certain way. The job of the defence is to show why the arguments of the prosecution are not valid. In such a court situation, the prosecution could never say “Well, this book says that such and such happened on the night of July 15th, therefore it is true.” The referenced book would immediately be questioned along the lines of who the author was, what their intentions and motivations were, when it was written, whether the writers were credible and in their right minds, etc. Since this horse shit doesn’t work in a trial, why do we suffer it to work for explanations of the entire universe? When science makes a claim, it is substantiated with plenty of objective evidence, yet when a religion claims something, the only justification is “well, there must be a God because we have sunsets.” Ah, of course, why didn’t we silly scientists think of that? And “You can’t prove God doesn’t exist” is the coward’s shifting of the burden of proof.
   
   
5. Science and theism cannot co-exist. At all. They are opposite, nemeses, antonyms, call it whatever you wish. Anyone who claims to live by both is fooling themselves and not truly following either.

These are just a few things that most atheists can agree on. And I, personally, don' think a single one of them is unreasonable.

There is no ‘god’ as perceived by theists – ‘god’ exists as a creation of man, a concept, a metaphor for the good humans are capable of.

And being free from faith is neither a ‘religion’ nor a ‘belief’ – to acknowledge the fact there is no ‘god’ as perceived by theists has nothing to do with ‘faith’ or ‘belief.’

Theism is the aberration, an authoritarian contrivance born of fear and arrogance.

If theism were the aberration there wouldn't be over 10,000 years of recorded history where man pays homage to a God. No, theism is the norm. The atheistic view that anyone who believes in God is stupid is the arrogance of man showing through. Primitive man had no way of describing the wondrous things he witnessed, so he came up with the various Gods to help explain them. It is MAN who twists religion to his own ends.

Religion in general is not responsible for the evils that man does in the "name of religion". Look at the religion that violent asshole claims to represent and they are almost always diametrically opposed.

Really? Slavery, objectification of women, expansionism, genocide, infanticide...these are just a few of things not only found in the Bible, but encouraged, commanded, and perpetrated by the God of that Bible. Shall I cite you the passages?

 

[westwall]

I spend "an inordinate amount of time" arguing against dangerous stupidity.

It's too bad you couldn't have conveyed that to infamous atheists such as Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, the Korean stooges, Castrol, etc., etc., etc. that have murdered tens of MILLIONS in the past century alone. Hitler and the Jihadists can't come anywhere close to the numbers murdered by the aforementioned atheists. Atheism's contribution to humanity in the 20th century was mountains of dead bodies and oceans of blood.

This fails as a guilt by association fallacy, as well as a red herring fallacy.

And theists have just as much blood on their hands, if not more.

Atheist collectivist governments have murdered orders of magnitude more people in only the last 100 years than ALL of the religious murders over the last 2,000 years. It isn't even close.

 

[Czernobog]

You were fine right up until you hit religion. Sorry, physics does not dovetail with religion. So, my question would be when the latter contradicts the former, which do you go with?

I know plenty of scientists who also believe in God. A few are creationists, though with a twist. When i asked them if the world was truly only 6,000 years old in their belief system they responded with " how long is a day in God time?" They fully acknowledge the Laws of physics, that the world operates via cause and effect, etc. etc. etc.

Your assertion that science and religion can't coexist is absurd.

See, that's what I'm talking about. That is an attempt to subvert rational science in order to shoehorn in your religion. "How long is a day in 'God' time?" Same as it is in everyone else time - 24 hours. Unless, of course, you are suggesting that "God" is an alien who lives on another planet whose rotation on its axis is slower than ours. And, even then, "God" time would still exist relative to ours, so when interacting with Earth, it would still be a 24-hour cycle. That's what a day is. It is the amount of time it takes for a planet to make a full rotation on its axis.

I am agnostic silly boy. I am also a scientist (a real one) so have to deal with the religious and the atheists among the scientific community. As a whole i would much rather deal with the religious ones as they are still filled with the wonder of discovery. The atheists generally aren't. The atheists are also in general assholes.

That was a general "you", not you specifically. I was demonstrating the irrational twisting of reason being used by those who ask that silly question to try and reconcile their science with their religion.

They aren't trying to reconcile anything. They understand that the 6000 year nonsense was promulgated by one guy. They are scientists first, and religious second. You are atheist first, last, and always. Based on your incessant threads about the subject it is plain to see that you are obsessed with religious people. That is unhealthy and shows us more about the type of person YOU are, than any of the religious people out there.

Not religious people. Religion, and the harm it does. I am obsessed with exposing a practice that does harm.

 

[westwall]

1. Atheists Do not:
   1. Hate God - There is no God.
      
   2. Worship Satan - There is no Satan.
      
   3. Hate Christians - Christians were all born atheists, and then had religion forced upon them.
      
   4. Eat Babies - There are no words for for the kind of deranged and deplorable imagination that thought this up.
      
   5. Lack morals - Every person has a sense of right and wrong regardless of whether they have a book of fairy tales to tell them what right and wrong is.
2. Creationists like to ask, "How do you know the Big Bang happened? Were you there?" Yeah....right. Because I'm sure you were right there picking up shells while toddling along the bottom of the Red Sea, as the water was standing as two walls, waiting for you to cross, right?
   
   
3. “Evolution is just a theory” demonstrates an almost misunderstanding of what a scientific theory actually is. A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation. The non-scientific word theory refers to a guess or conjecture, a contemplation or speculation. In science, this latter definition is actually called a hypothesis. The two terms are not interchangeable.
   
   
4. As is the case with justice, it is the burden of the party making an assertive claim to offer proof of said claim. As in a criminal trial by jury, the prosecution needs to offer objective evidence that events took place a certain way. The job of the defence is to show why the arguments of the prosecution are not valid. In such a court situation, the prosecution could never say “Well, this book says that such and such happened on the night of July 15th, therefore it is true.” The referenced book would immediately be questioned along the lines of who the author was, what their intentions and motivations were, when it was written, whether the writers were credible and in their right minds, etc. Since this horse shit doesn’t work in a trial, why do we suffer it to work for explanations of the entire universe? When science makes a claim, it is substantiated with plenty of objective evidence, yet when a religion claims something, the only justification is “well, there must be a God because we have sunsets.” Ah, of course, why didn’t we silly scientists think of that? And “You can’t prove God doesn’t exist” is the coward’s shifting of the burden of proof.
   
   
5. Science and theism cannot co-exist. At all. They are opposite, nemeses, antonyms, call it whatever you wish. Anyone who claims to live by both is fooling themselves and not truly following either.

These are just a few things that most atheists can agree on. And I, personally, don' think a single one of them is unreasonable.

There is no ‘god’ as perceived by theists – ‘god’ exists as a creation of man, a concept, a metaphor for the good humans are capable of.

And being free from faith is neither a ‘religion’ nor a ‘belief’ – to acknowledge the fact there is no ‘god’ as perceived by theists has nothing to do with ‘faith’ or ‘belief.’

Theism is the aberration, an authoritarian contrivance born of fear and arrogance.

If theism were the aberration there wouldn't be over 10,000 years of recorded history where man pays homage to a God. No, theism is the norm. The atheistic view that anyone who believes in God is stupid is the arrogance of man showing through. Primitive man had no way of describing the wondrous things he witnessed, so he came up with the various Gods to help explain them. It is MAN who twists religion to his own ends.

Religion in general is not responsible for the evils that man does in the "name of religion". Look at the religion that violent asshole claims to represent and they are almost always diametrically opposed.

Really? Slavery, objectification of women, expansionism, genocide, infanticide...these are just a few of things not only found in the Bible, but encouraged, commanded, and perpetrated by the God of that Bible. Shall I cite you the passages?

Yeah, that was written centuries ago. Show me where those philosophy's are being preached NOW. Theists have grown up. Clearly you haven't.

 

[westwall]

I know plenty of scientists who also believe in God. A few are creationists, though with a twist. When i asked them if the world was truly only 6,000 years old in their belief system they responded with " how long is a day in God time?" They fully acknowledge the Laws of physics, that the world operates via cause and effect, etc. etc. etc.

Your assertion that science and religion can't coexist is absurd.

See, that's what I'm talking about. That is an attempt to subvert rational science in order to shoehorn in your religion. "How long is a day in 'God' time?" Same as it is in everyone else time - 24 hours. Unless, of course, you are suggesting that "God" is an alien who lives on another planet whose rotation on its axis is slower than ours. And, even then, "God" time would still exist relative to ours, so when interacting with Earth, it would still be a 24-hour cycle. That's what a day is. It is the amount of time it takes for a planet to make a full rotation on its axis.

I am agnostic silly boy. I am also a scientist (a real one) so have to deal with the religious and the atheists among the scientific community. As a whole i would much rather deal with the religious ones as they are still filled with the wonder of discovery. The atheists generally aren't. The atheists are also in general assholes.

That was a general "you", not you specifically. I was demonstrating the irrational twisting of reason being used by those who ask that silly question to try and reconcile their science with their religion.

They aren't trying to reconcile anything. They understand that the 6000 year nonsense was promulgated by one guy. They are scientists first, and religious second. You are atheist first, last, and always. Based on your incessant threads about the subject it is plain to see that you are obsessed with religious people. That is unhealthy and shows us more about the type of person YOU are, than any of the religious people out there.

Not religious people. Religion, and the harm it does. I am obsessed with exposing a practice that does harm.

And you ignore the good it does. You are an extremist. Extremists of any ilk are dangerous, and usually vile people.

 

[Czernobog]

I spend "an inordinate amount of time" arguing against dangerous stupidity.

It's too bad you couldn't have conveyed that to infamous atheists such as Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, the Korean stooges, Castrol, etc., etc., etc. that have murdered tens of MILLIONS in the past century alone. Hitler and the Jihadists can't come anywhere close to the numbers murdered by the aforementioned atheists. Atheism's contribution to humanity in the 20th century was mountains of dead bodies and oceans of blood.

This fails as a guilt by association fallacy, as well as a red herring fallacy.

And theists have just as much blood on their hands, if not more.

Atheist collectivist governments have murdered orders of magnitude more people in only the last 100 years than ALL of the religious murders over the last 2,000 years. It isn't even close.

"Guilt by association". You demonstrated the problem in your post. "Atheist collectivist governments". Collectivism/Communism is the problem. Those governments are not atheist. Sure, they denounce traditional theism - Christianity, or any other traditional religion. But, they don't replace it with rational reason, as an enlightened atheist society, like Sweden, for instance, would do. Rather they replace it with the theism of the state - statism. The state became the god of the collectivists. And that is just as bad as traditional theism. It is just another example of how authoritarian theism - whether the god of that theism is a supernatural entity, or the state - leads to all atrocities being forgiven in the name of the deity.

 

[Czernobog]

1. Atheists Do not:
   1. Hate God - There is no God.
      
   2. Worship Satan - There is no Satan.
      
   3. Hate Christians - Christians were all born atheists, and then had religion forced upon them.
      
   4. Eat Babies - There are no words for for the kind of deranged and deplorable imagination that thought this up.
      
   5. Lack morals - Every person has a sense of right and wrong regardless of whether they have a book of fairy tales to tell them what right and wrong is.
2. Creationists like to ask, "How do you know the Big Bang happened? Were you there?" Yeah....right. Because I'm sure you were right there picking up shells while toddling along the bottom of the Red Sea, as the water was standing as two walls, waiting for you to cross, right?
   
   
3. “Evolution is just a theory” demonstrates an almost misunderstanding of what a scientific theory actually is. A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation. The non-scientific word theory refers to a guess or conjecture, a contemplation or speculation. In science, this latter definition is actually called a hypothesis. The two terms are not interchangeable.
   
   
4. As is the case with justice, it is the burden of the party making an assertive claim to offer proof of said claim. As in a criminal trial by jury, the prosecution needs to offer objective evidence that events took place a certain way. The job of the defence is to show why the arguments of the prosecution are not valid. In such a court situation, the prosecution could never say “Well, this book says that such and such happened on the night of July 15th, therefore it is true.” The referenced book would immediately be questioned along the lines of who the author was, what their intentions and motivations were, when it was written, whether the writers were credible and in their right minds, etc. Since this horse shit doesn’t work in a trial, why do we suffer it to work for explanations of the entire universe? When science makes a claim, it is substantiated with plenty of objective evidence, yet when a religion claims something, the only justification is “well, there must be a God because we have sunsets.” Ah, of course, why didn’t we silly scientists think of that? And “You can’t prove God doesn’t exist” is the coward’s shifting of the burden of proof.
   
   
5. Science and theism cannot co-exist. At all. They are opposite, nemeses, antonyms, call it whatever you wish. Anyone who claims to live by both is fooling themselves and not truly following either.

These are just a few things that most atheists can agree on. And I, personally, don' think a single one of them is unreasonable.

There is no ‘god’ as perceived by theists – ‘god’ exists as a creation of man, a concept, a metaphor for the good humans are capable of.

And being free from faith is neither a ‘religion’ nor a ‘belief’ – to acknowledge the fact there is no ‘god’ as perceived by theists has nothing to do with ‘faith’ or ‘belief.’

Theism is the aberration, an authoritarian contrivance born of fear and arrogance.

If theism were the aberration there wouldn't be over 10,000 years of recorded history where man pays homage to a God. No, theism is the norm. The atheistic view that anyone who believes in God is stupid is the arrogance of man showing through. Primitive man had no way of describing the wondrous things he witnessed, so he came up with the various Gods to help explain them. It is MAN who twists religion to his own ends.

Religion in general is not responsible for the evils that man does in the "name of religion". Look at the religion that violent asshole claims to represent and they are almost always diametrically opposed.

Really? Slavery, objectification of women, expansionism, genocide, infanticide...these are just a few of things not only found in the Bible, but encouraged, commanded, and perpetrated by the God of that Bible. Shall I cite you the passages?

Yeah, that was written centuries ago. Show me where those philosophy's are being preached NOW. Theists have grown up. Clearly you haven't.

Really? Westboro baptist? Have you been watching the news about all these men in power objectifying, and using women, and girls? Do you think that kind of morality just springs up out of nowhere? Please. You can't really be this blind to the world around you.

 

[Czernobog]

See, that's what I'm talking about. That is an attempt to subvert rational science in order to shoehorn in your religion. "How long is a day in 'God' time?" Same as it is in everyone else time - 24 hours. Unless, of course, you are suggesting that "God" is an alien who lives on another planet whose rotation on its axis is slower than ours. And, even then, "God" time would still exist relative to ours, so when interacting with Earth, it would still be a 24-hour cycle. That's what a day is. It is the amount of time it takes for a planet to make a full rotation on its axis.

I am agnostic silly boy. I am also a scientist (a real one) so have to deal with the religious and the atheists among the scientific community. As a whole i would much rather deal with the religious ones as they are still filled with the wonder of discovery. The atheists generally aren't. The atheists are also in general assholes.

That was a general "you", not you specifically. I was demonstrating the irrational twisting of reason being used by those who ask that silly question to try and reconcile their science with their religion.

They aren't trying to reconcile anything. They understand that the 6000 year nonsense was promulgated by one guy. They are scientists first, and religious second. You are atheist first, last, and always. Based on your incessant threads about the subject it is plain to see that you are obsessed with religious people. That is unhealthy and shows us more about the type of person YOU are, than any of the religious people out there.

Not religious people. Religion, and the harm it does. I am obsessed with exposing a practice that does harm.

And you ignore the good it does. You are an extremist. Extremists of any ilk are dangerous, and usually vile people.

Sure. I raped your sister, shot your father, and beat your brother senseless. But, hey, I also built homes for vets, and ran a soup kitchen for the poor, so that makes it all okay, right?

 

[rightwinger]

Being an Atheist is no big deal

We just go about our lives without believing all that crap

 

[westwall]

I spend "an inordinate amount of time" arguing against dangerous stupidity.

It's too bad you couldn't have conveyed that to infamous atheists such as Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, the Korean stooges, Castrol, etc., etc., etc. that have murdered tens of MILLIONS in the past century alone. Hitler and the Jihadists can't come anywhere close to the numbers murdered by the aforementioned atheists. Atheism's contribution to humanity in the 20th century was mountains of dead bodies and oceans of blood.

This fails as a guilt by association fallacy, as well as a red herring fallacy.

And theists have just as much blood on their hands, if not more.

Atheist collectivist governments have murdered orders of magnitude more people in only the last 100 years than ALL of the religious murders over the last 2,000 years. It isn't even close.

"Guilt by association". You demonstrated the problem in your post. "Atheist collectivist governments". Collectivism/Communism is the problem. Those governments are not atheist. Sure, they denounce traditional theism - Christianity, or any other traditional religion. But, they don't replace it with rational reason, as an enlightened atheist society, like Sweden, for instance, would do. Rather they replace it with the theism of the state - statism. The state became the god of the collectivists. And that is just as bad as traditional theism. It is just another example of how authoritarian theism - whether the god of that theism is a supernatural entity, or the state - leads to all atrocities being forgiven in the name of the deity.

No, they are atheist. They had made religion, and the observance of ANY religion illegal. Clearly you need to read some more history because you are spectacularly ignorant.

 

[westwall]

1. Atheists Do not:
   1. Hate God - There is no God.
      
   2. Worship Satan - There is no Satan.
      
   3. Hate Christians - Christians were all born atheists, and then had religion forced upon them.
      
   4. Eat Babies - There are no words for for the kind of deranged and deplorable imagination that thought this up.
      
   5. Lack morals - Every person has a sense of right and wrong regardless of whether they have a book of fairy tales to tell them what right and wrong is.
2. Creationists like to ask, "How do you know the Big Bang happened? Were you there?" Yeah....right. Because I'm sure you were right there picking up shells while toddling along the bottom of the Red Sea, as the water was standing as two walls, waiting for you to cross, right?
   
   
3. “Evolution is just a theory” demonstrates an almost misunderstanding of what a scientific theory actually is. A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation. The non-scientific word theory refers to a guess or conjecture, a contemplation or speculation. In science, this latter definition is actually called a hypothesis. The two terms are not interchangeable.
   
   
4. As is the case with justice, it is the burden of the party making an assertive claim to offer proof of said claim. As in a criminal trial by jury, the prosecution needs to offer objective evidence that events took place a certain way. The job of the defence is to show why the arguments of the prosecution are not valid. In such a court situation, the prosecution could never say “Well, this book says that such and such happened on the night of July 15th, therefore it is true.” The referenced book would immediately be questioned along the lines of who the author was, what their intentions and motivations were, when it was written, whether the writers were credible and in their right minds, etc. Since this horse shit doesn’t work in a trial, why do we suffer it to work for explanations of the entire universe? When science makes a claim, it is substantiated with plenty of objective evidence, yet when a religion claims something, the only justification is “well, there must be a God because we have sunsets.” Ah, of course, why didn’t we silly scientists think of that? And “You can’t prove God doesn’t exist” is the coward’s shifting of the burden of proof.
   
   
5. Science and theism cannot co-exist. At all. They are opposite, nemeses, antonyms, call it whatever you wish. Anyone who claims to live by both is fooling themselves and not truly following either.

These are just a few things that most atheists can agree on. And I, personally, don' think a single one of them is unreasonable.

There is no ‘god’ as perceived by theists – ‘god’ exists as a creation of man, a concept, a metaphor for the good humans are capable of.

And being free from faith is neither a ‘religion’ nor a ‘belief’ – to acknowledge the fact there is no ‘god’ as perceived by theists has nothing to do with ‘faith’ or ‘belief.’

Theism is the aberration, an authoritarian contrivance born of fear and arrogance.

If theism were the aberration there wouldn't be over 10,000 years of recorded history where man pays homage to a God. No, theism is the norm. The atheistic view that anyone who believes in God is stupid is the arrogance of man showing through. Primitive man had no way of describing the wondrous things he witnessed, so he came up with the various Gods to help explain them. It is MAN who twists religion to his own ends.

Religion in general is not responsible for the evils that man does in the "name of religion". Look at the religion that violent asshole claims to represent and they are almost always diametrically opposed.

Really? Slavery, objectification of women, expansionism, genocide, infanticide...these are just a few of things not only found in the Bible, but encouraged, commanded, and perpetrated by the God of that Bible. Shall I cite you the passages?

Yeah, that was written centuries ago. Show me where those philosophy's are being preached NOW. Theists have grown up. Clearly you haven't.

Really? Westboro baptist? Have you been watching the news about all these men in power objectifying, and using women, and girls? Do you think that kind of morality just springs up out of nowhere? Please. You can't really be this blind to the world around you.

There are always assholes in any group. Just look at the atheist asshole who just murdered all of those people in Texas. I can't think of a single person that the westboro assholes have murdered. You?

 

[westwall]

I am agnostic silly boy. I am also a scientist (a real one) so have to deal with the religious and the atheists among the scientific community. As a whole i would much rather deal with the religious ones as they are still filled with the wonder of discovery. The atheists generally aren't. The atheists are also in general assholes.

That was a general "you", not you specifically. I was demonstrating the irrational twisting of reason being used by those who ask that silly question to try and reconcile their science with their religion.

They aren't trying to reconcile anything. They understand that the 6000 year nonsense was promulgated by one guy. They are scientists first, and religious second. You are atheist first, last, and always. Based on your incessant threads about the subject it is plain to see that you are obsessed with religious people. That is unhealthy and shows us more about the type of person YOU are, than any of the religious people out there.

Not religious people. Religion, and the harm it does. I am obsessed with exposing a practice that does harm.

And you ignore the good it does. You are an extremist. Extremists of any ilk are dangerous, and usually vile people.

Sure. I raped your sister, shot your father, and beat your brother senseless. But, hey, I also built homes for vets, and ran a soup kitchen for the poor, so that makes it all okay, right?

Ahh typical 12 year old tantrum there. You might want to try again, junior.

 

[westwall]

Being an Atheist is no big deal

We just go about our lives without believing all that crap

And so long as you don't try and impose your belief system on others I agree. Just like I don't care what a theist believes so long as he doesn't try and force it on me. The problem is with the militant theists, and atheists.

 

[jillian]

1. Atheists Do not:
   1. Hate God - There is no God.
      
   2. Worship Satan - There is no Satan.
      
   3. Hate Christians - Christians were all born atheists, and then had religion forced upon them.
      
   4. Eat Babies - There are no words for for the kind of deranged and deplorable imagination that thought this up.
      
   5. Lack morals - Every person has a sense of right and wrong regardless of whether they have a book of fairy tales to tell them what right and wrong is.
2. Creationists like to ask, "How do you know the Big Bang happened? Were you there?" Yeah....right. Because I'm sure you were right there picking up shells while toddling along the bottom of the Red Sea, as the water was standing as two walls, waiting for you to cross, right?
   
   
3. “Evolution is just a theory” demonstrates an almost misunderstanding of what a scientific theory actually is. A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation. The non-scientific word theory refers to a guess or conjecture, a contemplation or speculation. In science, this latter definition is actually called a hypothesis. The two terms are not interchangeable.
   
   
4. As is the case with justice, it is the burden of the party making an assertive claim to offer proof of said claim. As in a criminal trial by jury, the prosecution needs to offer objective evidence that events took place a certain way. The job of the defence is to show why the arguments of the prosecution are not valid. In such a court situation, the prosecution could never say “Well, this book says that such and such happened on the night of July 15th, therefore it is true.” The referenced book would immediately be questioned along the lines of who the author was, what their intentions and motivations were, when it was written, whether the writers were credible and in their right minds, etc. Since this horse shit doesn’t work in a trial, why do we suffer it to work for explanations of the entire universe? When science makes a claim, it is substantiated with plenty of objective evidence, yet when a religion claims something, the only justification is “well, there must be a God because we have sunsets.” Ah, of course, why didn’t we silly scientists think of that? And “You can’t prove God doesn’t exist” is the coward’s shifting of the burden of proof.
   
   
5. Science and theism cannot co-exist. At all. They are opposite, nemeses, antonyms, call it whatever you wish. Anyone who claims to live by both is fooling themselves and not truly following either.

These are just a few things that most atheists can agree on. And I, personally, don' think a single one of them is unreasonable.

Why can I not be an atheist and believe in the laws of physics? I think physics drives everything. Physics -> chemistry -> biology -> life -> man -> religion

you can believe in all those things as I do. (I'm not an atheist either)

but I think the post is directed at the self-righteous ignorant twits who think religion and science aren't compatible.

 

[jillian]

That was a general "you", not you specifically. I was demonstrating the irrational twisting of reason being used by those who ask that silly question to try and reconcile their science with their religion.

They aren't trying to reconcile anything. They understand that the 6000 year nonsense was promulgated by one guy. They are scientists first, and religious second. You are atheist first, last, and always. Based on your incessant threads about the subject it is plain to see that you are obsessed with religious people. That is unhealthy and shows us more about the type of person YOU are, than any of the religious people out there.

Not religious people. Religion, and the harm it does. I am obsessed with exposing a practice that does harm.

And you ignore the good it does. You are an extremist. Extremists of any ilk are dangerous, and usually vile people.

Sure. I raped your sister, shot your father, and beat your brother senseless. But, hey, I also built homes for vets, and ran a soup kitchen for the poor, so that makes it all okay, right?

Ahh typical 12 year old tantrum there. You might want to try again, junior.

I don't see a tantrum there, hon. I think he was making fun of you.

 

[Czernobog]

That was a general "you", not you specifically. I was demonstrating the irrational twisting of reason being used by those who ask that silly question to try and reconcile their science with their religion.

They aren't trying to reconcile anything. They understand that the 6000 year nonsense was promulgated by one guy. They are scientists first, and religious second. You are atheist first, last, and always. Based on your incessant threads about the subject it is plain to see that you are obsessed with religious people. That is unhealthy and shows us more about the type of person YOU are, than any of the religious people out there.

Not religious people. Religion, and the harm it does. I am obsessed with exposing a practice that does harm.

And you ignore the good it does. You are an extremist. Extremists of any ilk are dangerous, and usually vile people.

Sure. I raped your sister, shot your father, and beat your brother senseless. But, hey, I also built homes for vets, and ran a soup kitchen for the poor, so that makes it all okay, right?

Ahh typical 12 year old tantrum there. You might want to try again, junior.

LOL! yeah, mock the exposure of your silly justification.

 

[westwall]

They aren't trying to reconcile anything. They understand that the 6000 year nonsense was promulgated by one guy. They are scientists first, and religious second. You are atheist first, last, and always. Based on your incessant threads about the subject it is plain to see that you are obsessed with religious people. That is unhealthy and shows us more about the type of person YOU are, than any of the religious people out there.

Not religious people. Religion, and the harm it does. I am obsessed with exposing a practice that does harm.

And you ignore the good it does. You are an extremist. Extremists of any ilk are dangerous, and usually vile people.

Sure. I raped your sister, shot your father, and beat your brother senseless. But, hey, I also built homes for vets, and ran a soup kitchen for the poor, so that makes it all okay, right?

Ahh typical 12 year old tantrum there. You might want to try again, junior.

I don't see a tantrum there, hon. I think he was making fun of you.

Then you're not as bright as I thought you were.

 

[westwall]

They aren't trying to reconcile anything. They understand that the 6000 year nonsense was promulgated by one guy. They are scientists first, and religious second. You are atheist first, last, and always. Based on your incessant threads about the subject it is plain to see that you are obsessed with religious people. That is unhealthy and shows us more about the type of person YOU are, than any of the religious people out there.

Not religious people. Religion, and the harm it does. I am obsessed with exposing a practice that does harm.

And you ignore the good it does. You are an extremist. Extremists of any ilk are dangerous, and usually vile people.

Sure. I raped your sister, shot your father, and beat your brother senseless. But, hey, I also built homes for vets, and ran a soup kitchen for the poor, so that makes it all okay, right?

Ahh typical 12 year old tantrum there. You might want to try again, junior.

LOL! yeah, mock the exposure of your silly justification.

Justification? PEOPLE do evil things in the name of religion, their drug habit, their atheism and pretty much any other reason they can think of. The one single common denominator is PEOPLE are the ones doing the evil.

 

[Czernobog]

Not religious people. Religion, and the harm it does. I am obsessed with exposing a practice that does harm.

And you ignore the good it does. You are an extremist. Extremists of any ilk are dangerous, and usually vile people.

Sure. I raped your sister, shot your father, and beat your brother senseless. But, hey, I also built homes for vets, and ran a soup kitchen for the poor, so that makes it all okay, right?

Ahh typical 12 year old tantrum there. You might want to try again, junior.

I don't see a tantrum there, hon. I think he was making fun of you.

Then you're not as bright as I thought you were.

Actually, she's right on. Your the one who ignornatly proposed, "Hey. Ignore all the evil shit they do, because they do nice things, too, " I just simplified it, to demonstrate what a stupid proposal that is.