Religion/Spirituality what's with all the atheists on the coli?

[NoMayo15]

and there are people willing and ready to VOUCH to give you that extraordinary evidence. but guess what you will say "thats bull....."

Okay, so what is this extraordinary evidence??? A book saying it happened is not extraordinary.

so if no one can tell you anything. whats the point? you have your mind made up, no matter what you are told or see. it is what it is. if someone tells you something as simple as i needed 850 for the rent. i only had 500. and out of the blue $350 comes in the mail box on the 31st. the guy didnt ask anyone for help. he just prayed about it. he didnt have a job he's been looking for months now. it ends up being an old pension check from an old job he had when he was in his early 20's, he's 30 and change now. you will call that a coincidence. the guy who prayed about it and got the check will call it extraordinary evidence of GOD and there is nothing that can disprove that belief. and for argument sake what if the guy was right what if that is proof of God. if you refuse to see that as proof. then you refuse to see god.

It IS a coincidence. What about those people who desperately need help, pray, but don't receive anything? What about families, children who pray hard just for food to eat, but end up starving? Are their prayers not worthy of answering to your god? What you're doing is a common thing humans do which we call confirmation bias. You believe theres a god looking out for people, so every time something happens that seems to confirms your belief, you tend to remember that. And when someone needs rent money, prays about it, but doesn't get anything ... that's seen as a non-event, and you don't note it as strongly or as often as it actually happens. You're ignoring the times when people aren't owed money from years ago, and randomly get it in the mail, which is much more common. There have been actual studies to try to remove this type of bias, and when we really investigate prayer, we see it doesn't improve a person's condition in life at all.

I know you believe it, and your mind is set. Mine isn't. I can be convinced a god exists, but it has to be something reasonable. The bigger picture is god is what gave him the money? Maybe it was Satan? If there's no confirmation either way then....... maybe he soul his soul to the devil w/o even knowing it... for $350. Is that not possible?

But if that's the best I'll ever get for proof, then I guess I just hope god understands that I was trying to find the truth of the matter, and I'd hope it wouldn't punish me for simply using the brain it supposedly gave me. Gullibility is how you get conned.

 

[hayesc0]

i'm full grown. and chose on my own to believe. i wasnt forced to walk down that aisle and say the sinners prayer, i wasnt forced to be baptized.thats a choice i made at a young age. i never stop wondering. i'm a wonderer. God made me that way. But with that said, I me.. have personally seen enough thru my life and watching others to believe whats in that book is TRUE.

and for the record what evidence do you have that lincoln was shot? "words in a book" you were not there. for all you know they could be lying.

what do you know about george washington that wasnt taught to you out of a ....BOOK.

at some point you had to have FAITH that what was coming out of those books were true and accurate. you made that choice. some people out there make a choice to not believe a lot of stuff thats 100% true. and they believe stuff that aint true at all. again, thats their choice.

no the evidence about Lincoln and Washington come from more than just a book we had people that where actual living witnesses to it we had news papers we have multiple historical documents death certificates birth certificates Lincolns kids fords theater is still standing to this day I have visited it before Mt Vernon you see my point im not knocking you just saying I cant subscribe to religion as an adult.

 

[Blackout]

So don't get pissy when I toss your guess out the fukking window. Where it belongs.

Stop equating your speculation with substantiated conclusions.



And?



I'm an anti-theist in the sense that I'm open to new information, but as of right now, theres nothing.

NOTHING.

NOTHING.

...beneficial from being remotely religious.

I will defend your right to be a fukking idiot though. I wouldn't want to live in a place where being stupid is illegal.


Its entirely baseless. You're just not used to having someone who doesn't compromise with you.



This sentence makes no sense.



You're not just guessing. You're going further than guessing and trotting your guesses out as proof of something.

Just admit you have no fukking clue and keep it moving. Stop trying to get people to accept your "guesses" as substantiated conclusions.

You're a terrible writer. You keep repeating yourself.

Guessing is bad because it doesn't lead anywhere.

At some point you need to put what you're guessing up for inspection to see if its actually true.

Guessing doesn't get you any closer to learning anything or confirming the validity or legitimacy of anything.

Nope.

This is the problem.

Your guess is not the same as an opinion.

An opinion is such that you're taking your stance to be a legitimate view on something.

A guess is an untested and unproven assertion.

You keep trying to pass your GUESSES off as FACT.

Thats.

fukking.

WRONG.

Stop doing that.



What does that have to do with "god?"



Your guesses on alien life have nothing to do with your views on a deity.




...what?



Read what you just wrote above, then read this.




Guessing isn't bad. Except it doesn't show anything or get you anywhere.

Guessing is pointless if you're trying to learn something.

A guess is a guess. My guess has been up for inspection as a guess and is just what it is a guess. Neither proven to be true or false it stands as it is a guess based on a natural possibility.

I never passed off my guess as truth. I keep on telling you that but you never listen. I call it a guess for a reason. A guess isn't truth, it isn't a conclusion and it isnt holding anybody back from learning anything.

I can guess heads for a coin flip but unless you flip the coin there is no answer. Something that you cannot grasp. You can say I don't know if the coin will flip heads or tails and chose not to guess while I can guess that it will land on heads and both of us wouldn't be wrong or right.

Same shyt here.

A guess isn't supposed to show anything or get you anywhere. Its a guess for crying out loud.

For someone who calls me an idiot you clearly do not understand simple shyt.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

No matter what.... we cannot put the basic building blocks of life together and create life from inanimate material. I guess the initial climate was the only climate in history that could spark shyt?

I don't know why you keep repeating shyt that I'm trying to tell you isn't true.

Read this: Abiogenesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Then take Biology 101.

I'm tired of you fools not understanding basic chemistry.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

A guess is a guess. My guess has been up for inspection as a guess and is just what it is a guess. Neither proven to be true or false it stands as it is a guess based on a natural possibility.

I never passed off my guess as truth. I keep on telling you that but you never listen. I call it a guess for a reason. A guess isn't truth, it isn't a conclusion and it isnt holding anybody back from learning anything.

I can guess heads for a coin flip but unless you flip the coin there is no answer. Something that you cannot grasp. You can say I don't know if the coin will flip heads or tails and chose not to guess while I can guess that it will land on heads and both of us wouldn't be wrong or right.

Same shyt here.

A guess isn't supposed to show anything or get you anywhere. Its a guess for crying out loud.

For someone who calls me an idiot you clearly do not understand simple shyt.

Well even better.

Since all you can do is guess, shut the fukk up when we talk about religion. Because you're not stating anything of value.

Since you want to stay in "guess-land," you don't get to contribute to this discussion, since we're actually interested in confirming statements and assertions.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

and there are people willing and ready to VOUCH to give you that extraordinary evidence. but guess what you will say "thats bull....."

so if no one can tell you anything. whats the point? you have your mind made up, no matter what you are told or see. it is what it is. if someone tells you something as simple as i needed 850 for the rent. i only had 500. and out of the blue $350 comes in the mail box on the 31st. the guy didnt ask anyone for help. he just prayed about it. he didnt have a job he's been looking for months now. it ends up being an old pension check from an old job he had when he was in his early 20's, he's 30 and change now. you will call that a coincidence. the guy who prayed about it and got the check will call it extraordinary evidence of GOD and there is nothing that can disprove that belief. and for argument sake what if the guy was right what if that is proof of God. if you refuse to see that as proof. then you refuse to see god.

I guess it wouldn't be that this guy let other people knew he was broke, right?

 

[Blackout]

Well even better.

Since all you can do is guess, shut the fukk up when we talk about religion. Because you're not stating anything of value.

Since you want to stay in "guess-land," you don't get to contribute to this discussion, since we're actually interested in confirming statements and assertions.

Where do you see me getting into talks about region?

Plus your denying isn't more valid than my guessing anyway.

I came in here and posted:

Nonreligious theists >>>>>

There was no religious talk in that statement whatsoever. Its you who is seeing things that don't exist.

Who said that I was also not interested in confirming statements and assertions.

I am especially interested when antitheism atheists say that a higher power doesn't exist.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Where do you see me getting into talks about region?

Plus your denying isn't more valid than my guessing anyway.

This doesn't make any sense.

You guessing shyt doesn't even mean anything. You're not saying ANYTHING of value. So yes, actually investigating what you're saying and denying it DOES MORE to the conversation than you sitting on your ass tossing random shyt out.

I came in here and posted:

Nonreligious theists >>>>>

Non-religious theists aren't a thing.

There was no religious talk in that statement whatsoever. Its you who is seeing things that don't exist.

Thats the EPITOME of a religious statement.

Who said that I was also not interested in confirming statements and assertions.

You haven't demonstrated that you are interested in doing such a thing.

All you've done is defend your pointless "guesswork"

I am especially interested when antitheism atheists say that a higher power doesn't exist.

I don't say that no higher power exists. I can't prove that. However, of the claims asserted, I don't find the proof to be substantial and it does not meet the burden of proof.

 

[bigDeeOT]

I've never understood this idea that non-racism makes you freer or more enlightened than anyone else.. Prescribing to a school of thought is simply that, prescribing to a school of thought. It seems that many non-racists are a mirror image of the white racist they mock- proselytizing their message to all who will listen. They both espouse the need to preach their message at all costs and that the fate of mankind depends on it. Oh the hypocrisy..

Reread your posts with the changes I made.
Now let me ask you this, do you feel proud to not be a racist? Of course you do! Have you ever gone around "espousing" the need to preach the message that we should treat each other equally and see each other as individuals instead of judging someone by the color of their skin? Of course you have!

You are proud to be a non-racist because it makes sense. Now why don't you call yourself a "non-racist"? Because there's no need to point out the fact that you're not a racist. Its just silly. And one day I wish to say the same about atheism. I hope that we get to a point where it'll be just downright silly for someone to call themselves an atheist. But the reason why I distinguish myself as an atheist is simply because most people are not. It doesn't really define me or anything. I'd say looking at life through a rational point of view defines me more than anything.

Do atheists have a better understanding of the world around them than say me, a Christian? Or a Muslim?

I can't speak for you individually but in general, yes. Religious people will sometimes deny science if it crosses their religious beliefs. I have a muslim friend who absolutely refuses to accept any scientific theories concerning the origin of our species. Religion can make otherwise intelligent people have delusional beliefs.

Here's a novel question.. Are all atheist freethinkers? And furthermore, are all freethinkers atheists? Aren't the means by which one comes to the conclusion of theism vs atheism what determines free thought? I consider myself a freethinker while I hold the Bible to be the infallible Word of God. This was done not by blind faith- "because my Bible says so", but through a bona fide, honest, and consistent attempt to weigh claims and evidence by which I came to a conclusion. No one has all of the answers, but if after an honest evaluation of all available evidence one makes a conclusion that isn't inherited, coerced, or ridden in guilt, then they are thinking freely and should be commended, no?

If you've considered the evidence that's fine. But most theists have not. To be clear, there's not a shred of evidence for the existence of god or the divinity of Jesus.

Afterall, a child growing up in an atheist household and never examining their non-belief is no different than a child growing up in a Christian household never examining their belief.

I agree. And it only takes 5min at most to dismiss christianity or any religion. What you're saying is like saying people should consider the validity of alchemy vs chemistry. Because maybe alchemy can teach us something those darn chemists are too stuborn to learn.

 

[bigDeeOT]

what do you know about george washington that wasnt taught to you out of a ....BOOK.

at some point you had to have FAITH that what was coming out of those books were true and accurate. you made that choice. some people out there make a choice to not believe a lot of stuff thats 100% true. and they believe stuff that aint true at all. again, thats their choice.

Sorry if someone already responded to this but I gotta put in my two cents here. Its funny because this is exactly the example I use against believing in the bible.

We believe george washington was the first president because we trust historians. We believe the weatherman is telling the truth because we trust meteorologists. We believe the atom is composed of electrons encircling a nucleus because we trust physicists and chemists.

Likewise, when the bible says Jesus gave a sermon about how to live a happily life, I believe that. Its a historical account of the past.

But when you say Jesus walks on water, I do not believe that. Why? Where do I draw the line? I draw the line when a book makes claims in which it cannot explain how its possible for such a thing to happen. How is it even possible for someone to walk on water? Because he is god? What evidence is there that a god exist? No amount of historical accounts or eye witness testimony is enough to reasonably believe in the divinity of jesus.

Likewise, if billions of people also believed that george washington was 300 feet tall, I wouldn't believe it. Why? Because there's no evidence for how that's even possible. No amount of historical accounts or eye witness testimony is enough to reasonably believe in a 300 feet tall GW.

 

[Blackking]

I don't know why you keep repeating shyt that I'm trying to tell you isn't true.

Read this: Abiogenesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Then take Biology 101.

I'm tired of you fools not understanding basic chemistry.

How exactly does the varied forms of abiogenesis that are all merely Scientific hypotheses = fact?

Especially when those studies and hypotheses are sparked by a predetermined assumption - aka life forms from chemicals only with no force or consciousness initiating anything. You can only be a "fool" if you deny a fact, like "some dogs bark"/ A person simply having a different opinion isn't the fool.

I've read that wiki article. The Early conditions section is all over the damn place and doesn't conclude much... it just states varying ideas on it and assumptions. After the longest few paragraphs of struggle arguments... it simply states " There is no "standard model" of the origin of life"

No one has yet synthesized a "protocell" using basic components which would have the necessary properties of life (the so-called "bottom-up-approach"). Without such a proof-of-principle, explanations have tended to be focused on chemosynthesis of polymers

In reference to the origin of the organic molecules referred to the in baseless struggle arguments...

1. Terrestrial origins –Some how shock waves or electric sparks flying around created organic material.... OR
2. Extraterrestrial origins - shyt flying around in outer space with organic matter on it, lol... that landed on Earth. I swear they are trolling like crazy - because that would only lead one to say " so ummm how was that matter created from inanimate matter?" And "wouldn't that theory end the life on other planets debate considering the objects weren't even targeting earth.."

Then the rest of the article goes on the state 600K conflicting theories about how life formed--- But transparently ALL with the same end idea/assumption in mind.


We know most life on Earth is carbon based.. the atheist on here were saying it was 100% based in carbon, but I said naw... Anyway, all we really know is that most organic compounds come from already living material. When people say we are all a part of the universe they aren't just being spiritual, they are correct. However, there hasn't been anyone that can come close to showing life coming from inanimate material. Usually science has at least 1 leading and accepted theory.. this has none, just crazy struggle arguments that support the preconceived notion of no consciousness at the start of the universe.

We are discussing the origins of life by studying organic materials. There is a reason that organic doesn't mean life.


so you read scientific America and they state the obvious...

It is virtually impossible to imagine how a cell’s machines, which are mostly protein-base catalysts called enzymes, could have formed spontaneously as life first arose from nonliving matter around 3.7 billion years ago. To be sure, under the right conditions some building blocks of proteins, the amino acids, form easily from simpler chemicals, as Stanley L. Miller and Harold C. Urey of the University of Chicago discovered in pioneering experiments in the 1950s. But going from there to proteins and enzymes is a different matter.

So we just make shyt up to force a point. Make shyt up we don't/can't demonstrate, or prove.

On the other hand, the paradox would disappear if the first organisms did not require proteins at all. Recent experiments suggest it would have been possible for genetic molecules similar to DNA or to its close relative RNA to form spontaneously. The genetic material would encode the traits that each generation handed down to the next, just as DNA does in all things that are alive today. Fortuitous mutations, appearing at random in the copying process, would then propel evolution, enabling these early cells to adapt to their environment, to compete with one another, and eventually to turn into the life-forms we know.
The actual nature of the first organisms and the exact circumstances of the origin of life may be forever lost to science.

The ultimate challenge is to construct an artificial organism that can reproduce and evolve. Creating life anew will certainly help us understand how life can start, how likely it is that it exists on other worlds and, ultimately, what life is.

So we know exactly what life is.... .but reality doesn't fit scientific dogma...... so lets reject the obvious for ideas that we can't prove..... Then clown others for ideas they can't prove.

 

[doct3rdr3]

No matter what.... we cannot put the basic building blocks of life together and create life from inanimate material. I guess the initial climate was the only climate in history that could spark shyt?

Peep from the (15:30-25:30) mark.

 

[Blackking]

Best thing I watched in a long time.

At that recipe.. the probability of that happening on it's own- basically means that all organisms on Earth are sprung from the most unlikely thing that could have ever possibly happened.

 

[Berniewood Hogan]

the probability of that happening on it's own- basically means that all organisms on Earth are sprung from the most unlikely thing that could have ever possibly happened.

CAN YOU SHOW US THE MATH YOU DID TO REACH THIS CONCLUSION, BROTHER?

 

[Blackking]

CAN YOU SHOW US THE MATH YOU DID TO REACH THIS CONCLUSION, BROTHER?

trillions of things having to work together.