Atheist knowledge

[bexrbetter]

I love jazz

Ewww, it's just a group of people playing different tunes in different keys, very badly.

 

Only beaten, and I mean in the wrong direction, by scat.

 

 

[dutchroll]

I note the fundamental atheists here have been stung by the article but not one has posted counter arguments to any of the writers five points, they are just upset with me for bringing it up as like all religious folk they object to critical scrutiny of their faith.

The guy does not even make "arguments" so how can you make a "counter-argument"? He just makes a series of loose statements and accusations he asserts to be true. They don't even really follow on from each other. Very clever tactic though - write a loosely concocted essay of gibberish then pump your fists in the air proclaiming how no-one will counter your arguments. Maybe if you condense one or two of what you feel are his "stronger" arguments into a few logical and concise points, I might give it a shot. Other than that, simply reading it made my eye sockets hurt from the continuous eye-rolling.

 

I, for one, am not upset about you bringing it up. Mildly amused, yes. Upset, no.

 

".....object to critical scrutiny of their faith". Lol. I wouldn't agree for a start that atheism is a "faith". Faith is a belief (generally without supporting evidence). The absence of a belief, which is essentially what atheism is, cannot therefore also be called "faith". Calling atheism a "faith" seems to have originated in religious circles in an attempt to show it as a belief without evidence, and thus a position of equal weakness to the religious one. That's not a point of view which makes much sense.

 

However go ahead and critically scrutinise, but make the argument clear and concise. Don't just quote bible verses.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

This was supposed to be amusing . . .

 

[ATTACH]47629._xfImport[/ATTACH]

 

[DonRamsay]

And an even better one . . .

 

[ATTACH]47630._xfImport[/ATTACH]

 

[facthunter]

Calling atheism a faith is ridiculous, but doing it relegates it to the general condition of "other faiths" and people of FAITH" have faith only in the ONE they profess to believe in. ALL the others are wrong. ( according to most of them). It's a bit like saying "I'M the RIGHT eous one and anyone different to me is stupid misguided unworthy, a threat to truth Going to hell Ha Ha, etc etc.

 

Atheism QUESTIONS ALL religions but they are more at threat from OTHER religions as well as different parts of their own. Look at the catholics v/s protestant fights over 100's of years in Europe plus the Crusades"and the muslim sunni wahabi, shiite and any revisionist movements in the middle east. Little tolerence there . There is at times a complete absence of tolerence , and just about any atrocity gets perpetuated in the name of some religion.Claiming your god is with you and I'm killing you because you don't believe in MY version of him/her/it, is atrocious. Your attempt to ridicule is no less abominable, GG in essence. You haven;t been a good example of what I would call a "decent person of god". I have many believers as friends but they aren't like you. Your current rubbish is no better than what was coming from you at the onset of this tedious , illogical non productive contest. Nev

 

 

[nomadpete]

Lighten up, FT, no need to get personal. We're only on about a Humorous light hearted debate. It's not the end of the world.

 

If you can't keep a smile through all this, and the thought provoking fun is gone, then it's time to stop reading here - and go to another thread.

 

Try this one.......

 

And God Looked Down...

 

Most seniors never get enough exercise. In His wisdom God decreed that seniors become forgetful so they would have to search for their glasses, keys and other things thus doing more walking.

 

And God looked down and saw that it was good.

 

Then God saw there was another need. In His wisdom He made seniors losecoordination so they would drop things requiring them to bend, reach & stretch.

 

And God looked down and saw that it was good.

 

Then God considered the function of bladders and decided seniors would have additionalcalls of nature requiring more trips to the bathroom, thus providing more exercise.

 

God looked down and saw that it was good.

 

So if you find as you age, you are getting up and down more, remember it's Gods will. It is all in your best interest even though you mutter under your breath.

 

 

[Gnarly Gnu]

Calling atheism a faith is ridiculous

Not at all. You believe in the theory of Darwinian evolution (and most likely also abiogenesis) by faith. Fundamental atheists now hold Sunday meetings and have their own 'ten commandments'. It is a faith you hold to.

 

Look at the catholics v/s protestant fights over 100's of years in Europe plus the Crusades"and the muslim sunni wahabi, shiite and any revisionist movements in the middle east. Little tolerence there . There is at times a complete absence of tolerence , and just about any atrocity gets perpetuated in the name of some religion.

Any religious inspired wars are awful of course but it needs to be pointed out the death toll and sheer human suffering and misery pale beneath that many tens of millions killed and hundreds of millions oppresses by governmental atheism, the most intolerant of all faiths.

 

Claiming your god is with you and I'm killing you because you don't believe in MY version of him/her/it, is atrocious.

That is the Moslem and Atheism faiths - instructed in the Koran and also by atheist leaders Marx, Lenin, Castro, Kim etc. You like to try and paint that on every other faith but your own don't you Nev.

 

 

[turboplanner]

There is at times a complete absence of tolerence , and just about any atrocity gets perpetuated in the name of some religion.Claiming your god is with you and I'm killing you because you don't believe in MY version of him/her/it, is atrocious.

Your attempt to ridicule is no less abominable, GG in essence. You haven;t been a good example of what I would call a "decent person of god".

Really?, you are equating posting on this forum with atrocities and killing?

 

 

[turboplanner]

stuff written by goat herders several thousand years ago

I know you're mesmerised by the way these words of yours roll off the tongue, but we've covered this in detail.

 

There is ample evidence of skills of civilizations who could measure the diameter of the earth and achieve architectural accuracy which we can't do to day, and who could communicate in written languages, but goat herders are unlikely to have been allowed anywhere near the chisels.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

I was thinking that GG might be wetting his pants laughing as he baits people of reason with taunts from someone who has no regard for reason or evidence and prefers to believe something somebody told him. But, that clever tactic might involve overestimating his MPA (mental processing ability).

 

The hypocrisy of asking for "counter arguments" is breathtaking in its lack of cogent thought. How do you argue against unsubstantiated assertions that are patent nonsense? That sort of rubbish deserves summary dismissal not counter arguments.

 

I have lost count of the number of times GG has attempted to assign atheism to the status of a "belief". How brain dead do you have to be, how closed down does your mind have to be to not be able to see that gods exist only in the minds of people of faith?

 

If there were real evidence for the existence of god(s) you would not need faith and there would be zero atheists.

 

Why would a god create the human race and give people intelligence and require them to use that intelligence to physically survive and prosper but not to use it in connection with their creator? Why is it smart to query everything you are taught except the bit about gods? If our forbears had not questioned religious doctrine, we would have attempted to fly to the Moon believing that the Earth was stationary and the moon revolved around the Earth but was otherwise stationary. How would that have worked?

 

When I was a child, if a Catholic ate meat on a Friday it was a mortal sin and you would burn in hell for all eternity. Then one day Christ's representative on Earth, reiterating the divine will said, "Nah, that's crap, it's OK to eat meat on Friday if you want to."

 

Was the original rule put in place because JC and the majority of the disciples were Galilean fishermen and they were trying to boost fish sales on Fridays?

 

GG - last time - have a look at the Oxford dictionary and you will see a Christian centric view of atheism as it defines an atheist as "A person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods". "Disbelieves and lacks belief" are quite different things. one is active the other passive. The word "lacks" is pejorative in the sense that something is missing. I wonder when they added the "or gods" (in lower case) at the end? I bet it was relatively recently. This Christian centric view is explained by the origins of Oxford as a christian college.

 

A more correct, secular definition would be "a person who lives their life without reference to any form of religious doctrine".

 

Whereas a religious person has a "belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods", an atheist is untroubled by such superstition.

 

Superstition: "a widely held but irrational belief in supernatural influences". How is that different to Religion? There is one word that separates religion from superstition - "irrational". So, it is irrational to believe that walking under a ladder is bad luck but it is perfectly rational to believe that a man rose from the dead and 40 days later ascended into Heaven? There is some rational credence to not walking under a ladder but no substantiated evidence at all for even the existence of JC, let alone his crucifixion, let alone rising from the dead or ascending into heaven.

 

GG, can you now see the fundamental difference between an atheist and a religious person. An atheist lives their life without reference to anything supernatural whereas a religious person lives their life based on a belief system. Atheists do not see themselves a believer that god(s) don't exist. It is not a religion it is living life without reference to religious doctrine a.k.a. superstition.

 

Now, I guarantee that GG will not attempt to answer with "counter arguments" anything written above because, on past form, he lacks the capacity to do that, especially with his own words. Instead he'll just ignore all of the above or perhaps counter with some gems of inscrutable wisdom from the antiquities written by god only knows who and edited and translated with the accuracy of god only knows what.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

I know you're mesmerised by the way these words of yours roll off the tongue

"mesmerised" is a little hyperbolic but they do have a ring to them.

 

There is ample evidence of skills of civilizations who could measure the diameter of the earth and achieve architectural accuracy which we can't do today

I sincerely doubt that. How would we know they were more accurate if we can't match their accuracy. How would we know they were right?

 

. . . and who could communicate in written languages . . .

That's not such a big deal even if achieved a very long time ago. Translating it into something I can read with confidence is a much greater achievement. Giving credit to those who came before us is something we do now but back then the goat herders borrowed from tradition with no crediting the source.

 

. . but goat herders are unlikely to have been allowed anywhere near the chisels.

No doubt they carried some fat prophets around the desert with them in circles for 40 years before they took up raping and pillaging in the land of milk and honey - but doesn't look like they had too many good navigators in their flock.

 

 

[dutchroll]

Not at all. You believe in the theory of Darwinian evolution (and most likely also abiogenesis) by faith.

1. It's not the theory of "Darwinian" evolution. It's simply the theory of evolution.

 

2. The demonstrable fact that bacteria evolve resistance to antibiotics without any divine intervention is absolutely unshakeable evidence that evolution happens. Of course there is no reason to think it can't happen on larger scales too (albeit the larger the living organism, the longer time scale it requires to evolve). There is abundant evidence of this from multiple scientific disciplines right up to and including Genetics, where DNA analysis shows clear evidence of evolution occurring.

 

Any religious inspired wars are awful of course but it needs to be pointed out the death toll and sheer human suffering and misery pale beneath that many tens of millions killed and hundreds of millions oppresses by governmental atheism, the most intolerant of all faiths.

1. Which governmental atheism are you talking about exactly? Stalin is the main one who springs to mind, but he didn't kill people simply because he was an atheist. He killed because he was a ruthless dictator hungry to retain absolute power and it didn't matter what you believed in when it came to Stalin. He murdered a great many atheists and fellow communist party members as well as the religious. Simply put he got rid of anyone who threatened his power. Thus you can see this trait is independent of religious views. And just for interest, how many people do you think Stalin is estimated to have killed in the purges between 1933 and 1945? "Many tens of millions"? Is that your historical contention? Because it would be wrong by a pretty large factor.

 

2. "The most intolerant of all faiths". Yes, because ISIS - the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria - haven't shown any substantial level of religious intolerance at all, have they? Well......aside from cutting off your head or shooting you if you don't conform to their religious manifesto. I think I'd rather spend 10 years in a Gulag than be decapitated.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

Not at all. You believe in the theory of Darwinian evolution (and most likely also abiogenesis) by faith. Fundamental atheists now hold Sunday meetings and have their own 'ten commandments'. It is a faith you hold to.

"Belief" and "scientific theory" are polar opposites. Evolutions is a Scientific Theory based on testing evidence whereas religions are based on supposition and superstition. Grasp that fact and you will be on your way out of the darkness and into the brightness of enlightenment. Blatting on about Evolution being a belief system is something only you and a very few fundamentalist christians do whereas Scientific Method holds sway in the thinking part of the human race and guides the way the world operates. Believers are entitled to believe black is white but it is of no relevance to science and the real world.

 

Any religious inspired wars are awful of course but it needs to be pointed out the death toll and sheer human suffering and misery pale beneath that many tens of millions killed and hundreds of millions oppresses by governmental atheism, the most intolerant of all faiths.

Governmental Atheism? Like the USA that has a constitution that frees the State from any interference from religion? Certainly not like the UK or Iran with their head of State also the Head of the State religion.

 

The greatest crime ever committed against humanity would no doubt have been committed by Adolf Hitler a person of the Christian faith who was a strong supporter of christian churches and was, I believe, backed by the christian churches - particularly in regard to anti semitism.

 

The difference between wars fought in defence of religion, or in aggression for religion (crusades) is that the whole point was religious supremacy. Murder of "infidels" and seizing their holy sites was the aim. Whereas wars and atrocities committed by atheists like Stalin were not done as pro-atheism or anti-religion they were just a ruthless grab for megalomaniacal power and has no relationship to their atheism. Stalin did not kill 20 million Russians because he disagreed with their religion, he killed them because he disagreed with their politics. The Gulags were not full of religious martyrs they were full of people who objected to the abuse of an economic theory to maintain dictatorial powers.

 

If godless Communism set out to rid Russia of religion, it didn't try very hard and failed miserably. Their may have been pogroms against the Russian jews but they had pogroms under the Tsars as well who were devout christians. Russians just didn't like Jews. The Tsarists did Jews in because they didn't like the religion (and money lending debts) but the godless Communists did them in because they saw them as free enterprise advocates who were therefore a threat to the Communist revolution.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

Evolution threatens radical fundamentalists like GG because it requires the Earth to be billions of years old. That conflicts with what GG believes is the inspired word of his God that the Earth is just a few thousand years old. Evolution could not work in that time frame.

 

Scientific theory dates the Earth old enough for evolution to have had time to work. Therefore, fundamentalist christians must reject evolution because to accept it would be to accept that the Bible is wrong about how old the Earth is. And if Scientific theory is wrong about evolution, it must be wrong about all science.

 

A fundamentalist's literal interpretation of the Bible and Science can not co-exist at the same time. So, fundamentalist christians like fundamentalist muslims and jews reject intelligent thought in favour of superstition and belief. That's their call and all I ask is to be free from the influences of such people.

 

Tony Abbott can have his christian beliefs but he has no right to inflict them on people who want to get married just because it doesn't fit his particular religious beliefs. All religions argue for religious freedom. All atheists ask for is freedom from all religions. We no more want to be ruled by the fanciful beliefs of scientologists or Daoists, zoroatorists* than the fanciful beliefs of any of the Judeo/Christian/Islamic religions.

 

*Zoroaster was a Persian prophet who at the age of 30 believed he had seen visions of God, whom he called Ahura Mazda.

 

 

[dazza 38]

And an even better one . . .[ATTACH=full]35825[/ATTACH]

Yeah that's the conman I mentioned in post 2168

 

 

[dazza 38]

I woke up this morning and saw the light, I then found God.

 

 

[dazza 38]

I woke up this morning and saw the light, I then found God.

Shite, I mean dog I woke up and found a bloody dog.

 

 

[octave]

Well certainly not to me, it is to be expected and pitied: 1 Corinthians 1v18 "For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God." As for the reference to David Phelps trying to sing (a very successful and highly regarded tenor) this suggests jealousy, again to be pitied. I note the fundamental atheists here have been stung by the article but not one has posted counter arguments to any of the writers five points, they are just upset with me for bringing it up as like all religious folk they object to critical scrutiny of their faith.

 

 

#5 - The first assertion that Hill makes is that non-believers actually have leaders. Although the likes of Dawkins, Harris et al write about atheism or non-belief in the supernatural this does not mean they are the leaders of a movement, they are no more leaders of non-belief than Don Burke is a leader of the gardening movement. It is not up to Hill to assert that atheist follow a leadership and to decide who those leaders are any more than for me to assert that the pope or the archbishop of Canterberry are the leaders of the Christian movement.

 

Hill says of Dawkins "But then, slowly but surely, he revealed himself to be an asshole." this is purely subjective and is hardly a worthy debating point.

 

Hill says that " and he went off on that weird tangent about watching dogs have oral sex." The implication here is that Dawkins is somehow perverted or obsessed with animal sex, however, the context of these remarks is important. These remarks were an answer to a question on twitter -

 

Lucy Wainwright ‏@Whoozley 24 Mar 2014

 

...I can't quite believe I'm asking this, but do any other species have oral sex? (Tenner on bonobos and/ or dolphins.)

 

Although many people may find a discussion of sexual behaviour in animals to be distasteful it must be remembered that Dawkins IS a BIOLOGIST. The tactic here is quite transparent, first connect group A with person B, suggest that person B is bad therefore people in group A must also be bad.

 

Hill goes on to say - "Stephen Hawking? He's too busy inventing black holes." I would suggest anyone who wants to bag a scientists work must first have at least some understanding of that work. Besides trivialising Hawking's work, Hill is just factually wrong, Hawking did not "invent black holes" but rather predicted the existence of so-called Hawking radiation. This is just a shoddy argument and neither indicates that Hawking is a terrible person or a leader of atheists.

 

#4 - "It's become tied to awful ideas"

 

The main criticism here seems to be the suggestion atheism is anti-feminist and or anti-woman. Again atheism is not a club with a book of principles, I have met bigoted atheists as well as open-minded christians. Pointing out that a particular atheist is sexist tells you nothing about atheists per se. It seems to me that this argument is disingenuous. The notion that atheism is not feminist enough whilst christianity............

 

#3 - "Arrogance to it" as a nonbeliever, I know I will die sometime between right now or sometime in the next 40 years. My family and friends will mourn me but they too will eventually die. The molecules of my body will break down and be incorporated in other things. With time, the ripples of my existence will dissipate, anyone whos life I have influenced will be gone. This certainly seems less arrogant than thinking that I was created in the image of a perfect god and that I am so special that I should have life after death for eternity.

 

In terms of how atheists debate believers, I do not think that atheists or more arrogant than believers. I am sure it is quite easy to find arrogant atheists ranting on youtube but is is very easy to find ranty arrogant christians also.

 

# 2- "it's become too defensive" - Also, atheists have a tendency to insert themselves into conversations where they aren't invited or even relevant." - I have never ever had an atheist knock on my door, I have never been stopped in the street by an atheist.

 

I really don't care what people believe, if believing in a god makes your life better than go for it, as long as you don't impose it on me.

 

# 1 - "focused on the wrong goals " - "But the few leaders atheism has have become famous not for making scientific discoveries " Hawking???? - no scientific discoveries???? Dawkins is known as an atheist but has had a long career in biology with many published papers.

 

The fact that many christians think that I will burn eternally in hell (oooh scary lol) is fine (along with people of other faiths and those who believe in god but do not accept christ!), I get it, I have been forwarned. If people find their life is better with belief then I am happy for them but I am not convinced so perhaps it is best to go on with your happy life and look forward to your eternal reward.

 

 

[dutchroll]

Yeah the statement of #3 alleging arrogance, coupled with the assertion in #1 that no prominent atheists (because that's effectively who he is calling "atheist leaders") have made scientific discoveries or fought for social change made me spit yet another mouthful of coffee all over my keyboard.

 

Christopher Hitchens - a vocal advocate for the empowerment of women.

 

Dawkins - introduced into evolutionary biology several ground-breaking concepts such as the role of phenotypes, etc.

 

Stephen Hawking - not even worth commenting on lumping him in there.

 

then among other prominent/famous atheists are:

 

Alan Turing - famous for contributions to mathematics and computer science.

 

Linus Pauling - the Nobel Prize for Chemistry, and then the Nobel Peace Prize for fighting against atmospheric nuclear testing.

 

Subrahmanyan Chandresehkar - Nobel Prize for Physics, space based orbiting X-ray observatory named after him.

 

Richard Feynman - Nobel Prize for Physics, developed quantum electrodynamics.

 

Carl Sagan - major contributions to the early robotic space exploration missions such as Pioneer and Voyager, designed experiments carried to the moon on the Apollo missions. Major contribution to humanist ideals.

 

So the list goes on but to list them all would require listing the majority of the Nobel Laureates throughout history.

 

And screw this guy. I'm refusing to omit Dave Gilmour, lead guitarist for Pink Floyd who is legendary for his philanthropy towards charities like Oxfam, various homeless charities and so on, and is a legendary musician!

 

 

[turboplanner]

There you go

 

That conflicts with what GG believes is the inspired word of his God that the Earth is just a few thousand years old.

Here you go again Don - you not feeling well?

 

You've been told several times and have the opportunity to do your own research to confirm that civilizations have believed in God for thousands of years.

 

You've been told the while there is definitely a link in the Old Testament to belief in God, not all the stories are provable, or realistic, just as in real life.

 

It's interesting that some atheists on this thread are clinging to every word in the Bible, while out in the flying world are ridiculing the written word in relation to news and history.

 

Poor mixed up souls; nothing to believe in; no faith structure to build on; just endlessly repeating the same old cliches like mice on wheels.

 

 

[rgmwa]

My faith structure is intact, but my head hurts.

 

rgmwa

 

 

[DonRamsay]

. . .There you go Here you go again Don - you not feeling well?

Never felt better, thanks for asking. Well, to be less than completely polite, feeling a little aggravated at your tone, but I'll get over it.

 

You've been told several times and have the opportunity to do your own research to confirm that civilizations have believed in God for thousands of years.

That was not in question here, and I have no doubt that homo sapiens have had belief in supernaturals since they climbed down from the trees. Believing in Santa for more than 50 years has not made him any more or less unreal.

 

You've been told the while there is definitely a link in the Old Testament to belief in God, not all the stories are provable, or realistic, just as in real life.

True, I've been told that and accept that in all probability some of the Old Testament is meant to be fact and some fable and some parable. That always provokes the question as to what is which. And, anyhow, I was arguing not with you but with somebody who is utterly convinced that every word is literally true as the inspired word of his, the Jews and the Muslims GOD.

 

It's interesting that some atheists on this thread are clinging to every word in the Bible, while out in the flying world are ridiculing the written word in relation to news and history.

On the contrary, we make no claim as to the veracity of the Bible other than to say it lacks provenance and therefore authority.

 

Poor mixed up souls; nothing to believe in; no faith structure to build on; just endlessly repeating the same old cliches like mice on wheels.

On the contrary, there are plenty of things that I believe in. I believe that all mankind should have equal rights regardless of race, creed, nobility, etc.

 

I believe that mankind is overwhelmingly made up of good and decent people. Pretty well anything that comes under the heading of ethics has more appeal to me than anything written in the Old Testament. I have a wonderful life that is not a dress rehearsal and I'm living every bit of it in the expectation that you only get one go at it and that the earned respect of people you admire is very important.

 

 

[bexrbetter]

You've been told several times ... believed in God for thousands of years.

And you TP have been told Gods (plural), and through your investigations and knowledge, you are well aware that includes spirits and animals and other animate objects, not "God" as a singular.

 

But nasty, self absorbed, jealous Jehovah doesn't actually like that there's others ...

 

 

[dutchroll]

Poor mixed up souls; nothing to believe in; no faith structure to build on.......

Seriously? Because someone doesn't believe there is a supreme deity casting their judgemental eye over everyone and condemning anyone at all who doesn't "follow" their word to a horrible death and eternal torture, they therefore don't believe in anything at all? Is that how the logic goes?

 

 

[facthunter]

Bit of attacking the messenger and not the substantive argument. I tend to think we lose it if we go down that road. I can't see the atheists as having any monkey on their back. They have had to work hard to get it off IF they are coming from a religious indoctrinated upbringing.

 

Being able to look at things without fear of some reprisal from heaven,for even daring to think of such things . "How do I know?. The bible tells me so". cannot be the answer. I don't trust anyone who had anything to do with it's compilation enough to believe it's the absolute anything except an insight on some of the attitudes and antics going on in the region of the mediterranean around 4,000 years ago, which is even just yesterday, for modern man let alone the incomprehensible age of the universe.

 

I arrived at atheism from a very strict protestant upbringing over about 30 years . I was frequently mistreated and discriminated against by Catholics. This may have happened in reverse as well but it's all bull$#it folks. It's made up by people who seek control over you. There is no church of atheism. It's a private journey needing NO supporting from others. Humanism ( we are ALL in this together) appeals . Me good, you bad Humbug totally.