Tym
Well-Known Member
I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything. I'm standing up for reason and logic, and calling bullshit lies when I see them.
The 10 Idiocies of Atheism
- Thread starter weed4cash
- Start date
upthearsenal
Well-Known Member
Did you actually watch that? Do you actually think like that?
Are you actually presenting this vid as something valid? That guys is speaking from his own point of view, just because an atheist world can be described as bleak doesn't mean that god is the answer, I mean, seriously...
I don't know what you personally gathered from that fine video, especially though all his regurgitation of other's quotes... So what? They universe is bleak, empty, and cold, and because of that, because I think that sucks, so I'm going to believe in some little god.
HAHAH! Yeah, the universe is empty and cold, bleak maybe, but my life certainly isn't, I don't see why it would be. My life is full is rich experiences and many good times, and it is also absent of god. I live my days under a warm sun and enjoy things just as much as someone who thinks some god created it...
It's always such a weird experience when people say things like that guy, why would any atheist be depressed because of what they believe in? "You don't believe in heaven, isn't that depressing?" NO! why would it be?
Obviously if you're a jesus freak, imagining a world other than the one you've created for yourself might seem depressing, but why project such a pansy attitude on others? Waaahh it's cold and empty in this universe, let me google "evolution is false" so I can feel better about myself.
Does he really think that the atheists of this world are sulking because of our beliefs, or the statement that this universe is empty is enough of a premise to dismiss atheism, or that it's enough to promote the belief in god?
People don't commit suicide because they are atheists... He mentions that antidepressants are the most popular pharmaceutical, yet according to basic stats, it's safe to say more bible thumpers are on that shit as opposed to atheists... Is it not that obvious?
and btw, that guy looks like a Rick Martin wannabe.
GreenGurl
Well-Known Member
I'm ignoring the debate completely. 
But I will add that once on two hits of liquid (lsd) I achieved absorption (my body expanded to the reaches of the universe, and like some crazy orgasmic constellation, all of my chakras pulsed with everything else that was in existence at that moment). It was likely the most awesome experience of my life and if you ask me, THAT is heaven. (It certainly beats meeting up with your crotchety old ancestors in some fluffy cloud house!)
But I will add that once on two hits of liquid (lsd) I achieved absorption (my body expanded to the reaches of the universe, and like some crazy orgasmic constellation, all of my chakras pulsed with everything else that was in existence at that moment). It was likely the most awesome experience of my life and if you ask me, THAT is heaven. (It certainly beats meeting up with your crotchety old ancestors in some fluffy cloud house!)
Tym
Well-Known Member
Yeah, but just like religion, none of it was real.. lolI'm ignoring the debate completely.
Tym
Well-Known Member
Are you telling me that you have no practical way to discerning what is real and what is not?I doubt I'll ever know what real is, so I can't disagree completely.
Tym
Well-Known Member
That is ignoring my question 
I was going to say, that if you have no practical way to tell what is real and what is not. I would suggest seeing a psychiatrist.
I will assume that you know how to tell the difference between what is real and what is not. I know it's fun to entertain certain ideas, but you know how to tell the difference between reality and fiction. Many people just don't subject every belief to the process. Some even refuse to subject certain beliefs to the process because the belief is a comforting one, and they know it can't stand the test. This is fine, but when you try to pass it off as reality, you have to understand that not everyone is going to refrain from testing it. When it doesn't hold up and it falls apart, people like me will be there to remind other people that we have this process of discerning reality from fiction, and this claim does not pass the test..
I was going to say, that if you have no practical way to tell what is real and what is not. I would suggest seeing a psychiatrist.
I will assume that you know how to tell the difference between what is real and what is not. I know it's fun to entertain certain ideas, but you know how to tell the difference between reality and fiction. Many people just don't subject every belief to the process. Some even refuse to subject certain beliefs to the process because the belief is a comforting one, and they know it can't stand the test. This is fine, but when you try to pass it off as reality, you have to understand that not everyone is going to refrain from testing it. When it doesn't hold up and it falls apart, people like me will be there to remind other people that we have this process of discerning reality from fiction, and this claim does not pass the test..
baaamalaaam
Well-Known Member
These threads are really irritating.
FOR THE LOVE AND BENEFIT OF MANKIND AND FUTURE GENERATIONS, PLEASE READ: Food of the Gods, by Terence McKenna.
FOR THE LOVE AND BENEFIT OF MANKIND AND FUTURE GENERATIONS, PLEASE READ: Food of the Gods, by Terence McKenna.
lvnv
Member
One of the most common fallacies religious folks make is the god of gaps. If science can't explain something, god must be responsible for it. Unfortunately (for religious folk), is that as science keeps developing, this god of gaps continues to shrink. God "explains" less and less, science more and more. Eventually theists will be stuck with only a handful of arguments to "prove" there must be a god. Science keeps progressing. We will continue to learn more and more about the universe until god is completely redundant, if it isn't already. There will be no reason to believe in god, at least to explain the physical world; if one wishes to put blind faith in the metaphysical, fine. Ultimately, science can't answer all of the perplexing questions in the universe, but it is trying, and steadily progressing. Religion is the exact opposite. It started explaining everything, and is answering less and less as time goes by.
I feel it is important to point out that we (atheists) don't just reject the Christian god, we reject all gods. Don't think this is all about you lot.
So tell me, Christians, why have you rejected the Islam faith? Or Buddhism? Or Hinduism? Why does YOUR religion have it right? How do you KNOW? I assume you gave these religions their due diligence considering BILLIONS of people subscribe to these faiths, right? Or maybe you didn't considering one's religious beliefs are, more often than not, derived from one's family and community. Surely if you were born in any of the countries that predominately practice those religions, you wouldn't be a Christian, right? What happens to all of those people who don't believe in YOUR god?
Perhaps the only thing more entertaining (frustrating?) than seeing a Christian and an atheist debate is two theists of different religions debate. "But, but, my religion is based on HISTORY.... and, and, teh facts. They KNEW "insert mythical being" so it must be true..." Round in circles we go.
I feel it is important to point out that we (atheists) don't just reject the Christian god, we reject all gods. Don't think this is all about you lot.
So tell me, Christians, why have you rejected the Islam faith? Or Buddhism? Or Hinduism? Why does YOUR religion have it right? How do you KNOW? I assume you gave these religions their due diligence considering BILLIONS of people subscribe to these faiths, right? Or maybe you didn't considering one's religious beliefs are, more often than not, derived from one's family and community. Surely if you were born in any of the countries that predominately practice those religions, you wouldn't be a Christian, right? What happens to all of those people who don't believe in YOUR god?
Perhaps the only thing more entertaining (frustrating?) than seeing a Christian and an atheist debate is two theists of different religions debate. "But, but, my religion is based on HISTORY.... and, and, teh facts. They KNEW "insert mythical being" so it must be true..." Round in circles we go.
crackerboy
Active Member
[video=youtube;k-j5kKSk_6U]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-j5kKSk_6U&feature=related[/video]
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
You say religion is never perfect. You are wrong. Mans interpretation of religion is and always will be wrong. But God and all his prophets speak the perfect religion of God. For us to follow Gods word imperfectly does not qualify GOD as imperfect.
What is the "perfect interpretation" of God?
As far as disease goes, would we spread disease if we where monogamous?
Would disease be as bad as it is if we all weren't cheating?
Yes, there are many ways to spread diseases other than sexually. WTF?
Besides, the question asked was "why would your God design these diseases?". Answer that.
And think about this, if evolution is so perfect to design the EYE then why can't evolution design your body to be immortal? Strange that evolution missed that one loop hole in it's perfection.....
WTF? Because evolution doesn't work that way. Evolution is not perfect and does not seek perfection.
You say evolution is beautiful, I say, ever look at how other animals are like each other but Humans are only one kind of species. No other species with our thought capabilities look different then us. Ever think of why if evolution was true there are NO other species with higher thinking besides us.....
Well, you should probably look again. Chimps and Dolphins show intelligence levels of humans at 3-5 years old.
Birds are better at flight than humans.
Cats/Dogs/Horses... any four legged animal in fact can run faster AND longer than humans..
Intelligence happens to be our species niche, it's what got us to where we are, other species have their own niche's, as listed, that's what works for them, this is what works for us. Evolution is not a conscious process, it is a natural one that seeks what works, what fits, what solves the problem at hand. Sometimes appendages that were once used for something are now used for something completely different, ex. reptiles front limbs into wings, fish fins into limbs.
Kind of odd considering every other animal thinks alike in the kingdom but we have advances abilities.
You're kidding yourself, we do not have "advanced abilities".
One of a kind species. That would that make us EVOLUTION FREAKS
We're far from one of a kind.
What is the "perfect interpretation" of God?
As far as disease goes, would we spread disease if we where monogamous?
Would disease be as bad as it is if we all weren't cheating?
Yes, there are many ways to spread diseases other than sexually. WTF?
Besides, the question asked was "why would your God design these diseases?". Answer that.
And think about this, if evolution is so perfect to design the EYE then why can't evolution design your body to be immortal? Strange that evolution missed that one loop hole in it's perfection.....
WTF? Because evolution doesn't work that way. Evolution is not perfect and does not seek perfection.
You say evolution is beautiful, I say, ever look at how other animals are like each other but Humans are only one kind of species. No other species with our thought capabilities look different then us. Ever think of why if evolution was true there are NO other species with higher thinking besides us.....
Well, you should probably look again. Chimps and Dolphins show intelligence levels of humans at 3-5 years old.
Birds are better at flight than humans.
Cats/Dogs/Horses... any four legged animal in fact can run faster AND longer than humans..
Intelligence happens to be our species niche, it's what got us to where we are, other species have their own niche's, as listed, that's what works for them, this is what works for us. Evolution is not a conscious process, it is a natural one that seeks what works, what fits, what solves the problem at hand. Sometimes appendages that were once used for something are now used for something completely different, ex. reptiles front limbs into wings, fish fins into limbs.
Kind of odd considering every other animal thinks alike in the kingdom but we have advances abilities.
You're kidding yourself, we do not have "advanced abilities".
One of a kind species. That would that make us EVOLUTION FREAKS
We're far from one of a kind.
crackerboy
Active Member
[video=youtube;6OTLfnQsO7Y]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OTLfnQsO7Y&feature=related[/video]
upthearsenal
Well-Known Member
Do you have the capacity to actually rebut any of our claims with your own words, or are you only capable of finding clips based on your preconceived notions?
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
Wow. You obviously haven't read a single thing what wrote in your other thread. I even asked you to ask me questions to clarify anything. You won't answer my direct questions either, which makes me think you are avoiding them because they challenge you too much and you are unable to answer them.
I pointed out that modern bacteria are highly evolved organisms. They had a few billion year head start on us. Assuming that modern flagellated bacteria are the simplest organisms that exists is just stupid when there are currently other organisms that are much simpler. This doesn't even matter because any modern day bacteria will be more evolved than the ones that gave rise to eukaryotes. Look to the stromalites or Archaea species if you want a better idea of what simple life looks like.
So science is making a claim that bacteria flagella evolved. The null hypothesis that must be tested than is that bacteria flagellum could not have evolved. Showing any way that the bacteria flagella COULD have evolved, whether it was exactly how it did evolve is all that is necessary to falsify the null hypothesis.
[video=youtube;SdwTwNPyR9w]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdwTwNPyR9w[/video]
lvnv
Member
@upthearsenal (I assume you're an Arsenal fan. Nobody's perfect Your avatar is brilliant. Wasn't sure that was him at first!)
Ha. Agreed. If you can take away any bias towards religion it really isn't depressing at all. We have THIS LIFE to live to its fullest. Some people's lives are harder. That is a fact that we have to live with. Some people's lives are ridiculously easy too. Gee, thanks GOD! The funny thing to me is that the guy in the video talks about how people turn to prescription drugs basically because it is an easy way out; that you're not addressing the underlying problems when taking prescription drugs. Well guess what? Religion is the exact same thing. Instead of solving your problems on a personal level, people just pave over them with religion. Surely one can see the irony in him making this argument, but people gobble this shit up.
PEOPLE DON'T NEED RELIGION TO LEAD RICH AND FULFILLING LIVES! It just isn't necessary. The man in the video appeals to people who are either desperate or naive: people who have never thought about life's questions or those who are so down on their luck that they turn to religion to explain why times are so tough and to tell them how things will get better. Through JESUS of course! Please.
Your avatar is brilliant. Wasn't sure that was him at first!)Ha. Agreed. If you can take away any bias towards religion it really isn't depressing at all. We have THIS LIFE to live to its fullest. Some people's lives are harder. That is a fact that we have to live with. Some people's lives are ridiculously easy too. Gee, thanks GOD! The funny thing to me is that the guy in the video talks about how people turn to prescription drugs basically because it is an easy way out; that you're not addressing the underlying problems when taking prescription drugs. Well guess what? Religion is the exact same thing. Instead of solving your problems on a personal level, people just pave over them with religion. Surely one can see the irony in him making this argument, but people gobble this shit up.
PEOPLE DON'T NEED RELIGION TO LEAD RICH AND FULFILLING LIVES! It just isn't necessary. The man in the video appeals to people who are either desperate or naive: people who have never thought about life's questions or those who are so down on their luck that they turn to religion to explain why times are so tough and to tell them how things will get better. Through JESUS of course! Please.
upthearsenal
Well-Known Member
haha! Yes, AFC for ever... To be honest, I've had it for a while and you're the only person who seems to know anything about it... haha "nobody's perfect" what's that supposed to mean?! 
Either way, you hit the nail on the head with your post, well said.
I saw a church sign near my house the other day, and it said "Let God fight your battles" as I drove by I thought to myself just what type of person thinks like that... it makes no sense.
Either way, you hit the nail on the head with your post, well said.
I saw a church sign near my house the other day, and it said "Let God fight your battles" as I drove by I thought to myself just what type of person thinks like that... it makes no sense.
Tym
Well-Known Member
Irreducible complexity
From Iron Chariots Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Irreducible complexity, as defined by Michael Behe in Darwin's Black Box is a property of a system such that if any part is removed, the system ceases to function. Irreducible complexity is often used as an argument for Intelligent design.
The classic illustration of an irreducibly complex system is a mousetrap: it consists of a base, hammer, spring, catch (or trigger), and fasteners to hold the pieces together. If any of those parts is removed, the mousetrap no longer works.
The argument, then, is that since evolution proceeds by adding parts to an existing system one by one, the precursors of an irreducibly complex system would have been useless, and would not have been selected for. Ergo, all of the pieces had to be put together by an intelligent designer.
Contents
[hide]
[edit]
Counter-arguments
[edit]
Scaffolding
The argument that evolution always proceeds by adding parts is false. Natural selection can remove parts as well as add them. For instance, whales have no hind legs, but retain vestigial pelvises where their ancestors' legs were attached.
Another example of an irreducibly complex system is a gothic arch: if any stone is removed, the arch falls down. The way to build such a system is to install a scaffold, build the arch, then remove the scaffolding. Similarly, biological mechanisms do not have to co-exist with the structures that allowed them to evolve the way they did. There is therefore no reason to accept the claim that if a system is irreducibly complex that it cannot be built gradually.
[edit]
Incomplete systems can still have a function
While it is true that an irreducibly complex system with a missing part loses its original function, it may still have some other function. For instance, a mousetrap without a catch can still work as a tie clip, or a paperweight. A mousetrap without a base can be nailed to the floor. Such a mousetrap would not be as useful, but would still function.
For a biological example, consider the bacterial flagellum, a long spinning hair that functions as an "outboard motor" for bacteria. It is often cited as an example of an irreducibly complex system. But if some of its parts are removed, the resulting system bears a striking similarity to the Type Three Secretory System, a "syringe" that allows bacteria to infect other cells.
[edit]
Argumentum ad Ignorantiam
No potential example of a supposed irreducibly complex system can, even in theory, demonstrate that it did not evolve from less complex components. One can only demonstrate how a system can be reduced, or claim ignorance as to how it can be. Irreducible complexity is therefore an argument from ignorance and, more specifically, a God of the gaps argument.
[edit]
Falsifiability
Irreducible complexity is not falsifiable. Demonstrating how a complex system can be reduced to less complex components only shows the apologist to be wrong on that particular example. Each 'reduced' component is, in turn, another system susceptible to the same claim of being irreducibly complex, ad infinitum.
[edit]
See also
[edit]
External links
[video=youtube;SdwTwNPyR9w]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdwTwNPyR9w[/video]
|3laze
Member
The ignorant love being ignorant. Nothing will change that. When you have no concept of logic, then facts are meaningless. It would almost be funny it it wasn't so sad how the only argument on this thread against atheism is random BS clips from the internet. I saw it on you-tube, it must be true!
lvnv
Member
@mindphuk
Man I am glad there are people like you to explain things like that. The thing that makes me laugh though is that you are having to answer questions today that theists would have never dreamed of 100 years ago. The really funny thing is that science and religion are really asking the same questions! Of science that is. The problem is that the answers only come from one side.
Aside though, I keep seeing the watchmaker fallacy being brought up. Things people create obviously require someone to plan them, otherwise they would already exist in nature. What's so hard about that? I can understand why it is comfortable, familiar. People can look at a NASA space shuttle and say, "Gee, that rocket ship looks complicated and it was planned. Look at that (insert complicated thing in nature). It must have been planned as well." Brilliant, people. I often wonder what we would be left with if there were no science, just religion. Actually, I know what that would be like, ancient civilizations who used religion to explain the world around them because they didn't understand all of the complexities that today's science provides us with.
Also, taking a step back real quick, why is there a religion debate going on in a pot forum? Is there something I missed?
I would also like to add a personal experience. I was watching the news with a very religious cousin and they briefly brought up Darwin for some reason. My cousin quipped that Darwin renounced his theory on his death bed. I took it upon myself to read about this since I had never heard such a thing and guess what? The overwhelming consensus, even among accountable Christain websites, is that it is a lie. Yet if my cousin believes this, be assured that there are 1000s more that believe the same lie. Is it so hard to believe that an entire faith could be based on lies, or less sinister, heresy, when these people WANT to believe this stuff so bad? That in some cases their entire existence depends on their religious story being true, when in fact their story would be completely different if they were born in a country that practices another religion. Mind-boggling.
Man I am glad there are people like you to explain things like that. The thing that makes me laugh though is that you are having to answer questions today that theists would have never dreamed of 100 years ago. The really funny thing is that science and religion are really asking the same questions! Of science that is. The problem is that the answers only come from one side.
Aside though, I keep seeing the watchmaker fallacy being brought up. Things people create obviously require someone to plan them, otherwise they would already exist in nature. What's so hard about that? I can understand why it is comfortable, familiar. People can look at a NASA space shuttle and say, "Gee, that rocket ship looks complicated and it was planned. Look at that (insert complicated thing in nature). It must have been planned as well." Brilliant, people. I often wonder what we would be left with if there were no science, just religion. Actually, I know what that would be like, ancient civilizations who used religion to explain the world around them because they didn't understand all of the complexities that today's science provides us with.
Also, taking a step back real quick, why is there a religion debate going on in a pot forum? Is there something I missed?
I would also like to add a personal experience. I was watching the news with a very religious cousin and they briefly brought up Darwin for some reason. My cousin quipped that Darwin renounced his theory on his death bed. I took it upon myself to read about this since I had never heard such a thing and guess what? The overwhelming consensus, even among accountable Christain websites, is that it is a lie. Yet if my cousin believes this, be assured that there are 1000s more that believe the same lie. Is it so hard to believe that an entire faith could be based on lies, or less sinister, heresy, when these people WANT to believe this stuff so bad? That in some cases their entire existence depends on their religious story being true, when in fact their story would be completely different if they were born in a country that practices another religion. Mind-boggling.