I'm becoming an atheist

[beowulf 1]

Quote

Quote

I have not seen any evidence of any deity. I think it is very narrow minded and superstitous to think that what we don't understand is the work of some god. By doing so you limit your ability to learn and understand the world around you.

Which also makes it closed minded to disgard the possibility of a deity.

I didn't disregard the possibility. Till there is evidence there is no reason to believe in any deity. Otherwise it's just a superstitious belief.
Show me some solid scientific evidence demonstrating the existence of a deity and I will change my mind on the subject.
Right now there is the same amount of evidence to support the existence of the Christian God, Allah, Vishnu, Odin and the myriad of other gods. Which one you believe in is mostly determined by the culture you grew up in.

[champu 1]

Quote

The most important thing to realize about these arguments:

"But you're using that same tactic to try to feel superior to me, too!"

[rwieder 0]

That's pretty amusing.

-Richard-
"You're Holding The Rope And I'm Taking The Fall"

[billvon 2,400]

>figures...anything but the point, eh.

And what exactly is the point, then? As far as I can tell, it's 278 posts worth of:

Atheists: Christians are dumb
Christians: You just don't get it do you

[beowulf 1]

Yes, but it does entertain for little while.

[stevebabin 0]

Quote

Quote

I have not seen any evidence of any deity. I think it is very narrow minded and superstitous to think that what we don't understand is the work of some god. By doing so you limit your ability to learn and understand the world around you.

Which also makes it closed minded to disgard the possibility of a deity.

Or Unicorns....don't forget about the unicorns.

"Science, logic and reason will fly you to the moon. Religion will fly you into buildings."
"Because figuring things out is always better than making shit up."

[quade 3]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I have not seen any evidence of any deity. I think it is very narrow minded and superstitous to think that what we don't understand is the work of some god. By doing so you limit your ability to learn and understand the world around you.

Which also makes it closed minded to disgard the possibility of a deity.

Or Unicorns....don't forget about the unicorns.

Get real! EVERYBODY knows the unicorns died in the flood.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[dnb 0]

Quote

>figures...anything but the point, eh.

And what exactly is the point, then? As far as I can tell, it's 278 posts worth of:

Atheists: Christians are dumb
Christians: You just don't get it do you

+1

Great job on summing it all up.
Though I have been entertained by all the posts!

drew

[SkyDekker 1,122]

Quote

Or Unicorns....don't forget about the unicorns.

Sure. Find me a concept, widely repeated around the world, of the involvement of a unicorn in the creation of the earth or the universe.

[beowulf 1]

Quote

Quote

Or Unicorns....don't forget about the unicorns.

Sure. Find me a concept, widely repeated around the world, of the involvement of a unicorn in the creation of the earth or the universe.

Wide spread belief does not increase the credibility or make any deity more likely to exist.

[SkyDekker 1,122]

Quote

Wide spread belief does not increase the credibility

Sure it does. One of the main reasons scientist like to publish their work.

[okalb 78]

Quote

Sure. Find me a concept, widely repeated around the world, of the involvement of a unicorn in the creation of the earth or the universe.

So how exactly does it work then? Is the correct religion the one with the most followers? To me it just seems that the one with the most followers is the one with the best sales force.

Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

[SkyDekker 1,122]

Quote

So how exactly does it work then? Is the correct religion the one with the most followers?

I have no idea. Nor have I stated that any religion would be correct in any of my posts. I have just stated that excluding it from the list of posibilities is closed minded. Believing in science and logic does not mean that you cannot also believe in a god. That was my original point.

Most of you have been making assumptions ever since.

[beowulf 1]

Ok, so you think that because lots of people believe in god it makes it more likely that god exists even though there is no evidence?

[okalb 78]

Quote

Quote

So how exactly does it work then? Is the correct religion the one with the most followers?

I have no idea. Nor have I stated that any religion would be correct in any of my posts. I have just stated that excluding it from the list of posibilities is closed minded. Believing in science and logic does not mean that you cannot also believe in a god. That was my original point.

Most of you have been making assumptions ever since.

I made no assumptions. You stated that lots of people all over the world believe it so it shouldn't be ignored and to ignore it would be closed minded. Lots of people believed the world was flat. It made no difference how many believed it, it was still wrong. There is not a single shred of evidence proving the existence of any deity or creator. To believe it just because lots of other people do is silly. I have not ruled out the possibility, but until there is some kind of proof, it is a fairy tale as real as Santa regardless of how many people believe.

Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

[240m3srt 0]

Quote

Quote

Wide spread belief does not increase the credibility

Sure it does. One of the main reasons scientist like to publish their work.

Actually scientist publish their work so that other scientists can try to duplicate or disprove their findings. Thats how a theory becomes a fact. But i suppose it certainly doesnt bother them when some law or principal is named after them, so maybe that plays a roll too.

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

Quote

Sure. Find me a concept, widely repeated around the world, of the involvement of a unicorn in the creation of the earth or the universe.

So how exactly does it work then? Is the correct religion the one with the most followers? To me it just seems that the one with the most followers is the one with the best sales force.

Or the nastiest enforcers (think "Inquisition").

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[RALFFERS 0]

As expected, I'm being 'evangelized' by all my friends from church. I try not to laugh, but it's hard to take these sort of emails seriously.

Dialogue/commentary between Divot, Twardo & myself -

"from your first Oshkosh when the three of us were riding to or from one of

[SkyDekker 1,122]

Quote

There is not a single shred of evidence proving the existence of any deity or creator. To believe it just because lots of other people do is silly.

And I agree that there is some evidence that the "Big Bang Theory" created the earth. There is still much we don't know about it, until science and technology catches up to being able to prove or disprove some of it.

We also don't know much about what was there before the "Big Bang". There is no reason to believe that a power we not yet understand was at work. We might even call that supernatural at this point in time.

We are at the beginning stages of being able to control technology by just thinking about it, controlling it with our brain waves. 50 Years ago that comment alone would have had people laugh at you and declare you insane. 500 years ago, it would have gotten you killed for being "supernatural".

Most of you are caught up in this discussion on organized religion and your own assumptions of what a god or deity would or would not be. All I mentioned was that ruling out a superpower of some sort would be closed minded.

[Tf15 0]

Quote

Quote

There is not a single shred of evidence proving the existence of any deity or creator. To believe it just because lots of other people do is silly.

And I agree that there is some evidence that the "Big Bang Theory" created the earth.

Theories create nothing except attempts to verify or disprove them.

There is a lot of excellent evidence from multiple sources that the universe as we know it came into being with what might be described as a "big bang".

Three times is enemy action

[SkyDekker 1,122]

Quote

There is a lot of excellent evidence from multiple sources that the universe as we know it came into being with what might be described as a "big bang".

And only a very few that truly "understand" the evidence. The rest just believe it to be true, because the select few say it is true.

Wow, that sounds pretty familiar.......

[quade 3]

Quote

And only a very few that truly "understand" the evidence.

I don't understand why that would be. The evidence is fairly simple. There's nothing magical about it at all. If you've ever heard the rising and falling tone of a train whistle as it passes by you, then you have real life experience that explains most of it. If you've ever seen the colors of a rainbow split apart by a prism and if you've ever seen the absorption lines in a spectrogram you're 99.9% of the way there.

The only thing that is even somewhat mysterious is the very first few milliseconds and even that can be explained.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[beowulf 1]

Quote

Quote

There is not a single shred of evidence proving the existence of any deity or creator. To believe it just because lots of other people do is silly.

And I agree that there is some evidence that the "Big Bang Theory" created the earth. There is still much we don't know about it, until science and technology catches up to being able to prove or disprove some of it.

We also don't know much about what was there before the "Big Bang". There is no reason to believe that a power we not yet understand was at work. We might even call that supernatural at this point in time.

We are at the beginning stages of being able to control technology by just thinking about it, controlling it with our brain waves. 50 Years ago that comment alone would have had people laugh at you and declare you insane. 500 years ago, it would have gotten you killed for being "supernatural".

Most of you are caught up in this discussion on organized religion and your own assumptions of what a god or deity would or would not be. All I mentioned was that ruling out a superpower of some sort would be closed minded.

Using your logic then there is no reason to believe that unicorns don't exist and didn't create the universe! No evidence of them just like any deity, but no reason to disbelieve? Right?

Wrong, I require some sort of evidence before I am going to believe in something.

[SkyDekker 1,122]

Quote

I don't understand why that would be. The evidence is fairly simple. There's nothing magical about it at all. If you've ever heard the rising and falling tone of a train whistle as it passes by you, then you have real life experience that explains most of it. If you've ever seen the colors of a rainbow split apart by a prism and if you've ever seen the absorption lines in a spectrogram you're 99.9% of the way there.

The only thing that is even somewhat mysterious is the very first few milliseconds and even that can be explained.

Experience and understanding of a concept or the science behind it are not the same thing.

But since you state that the evidence is fairly simple, feel free to explain the creation of the earth in fairly simple terms to me.

[SkyDekker 1,122]

Quote

Wrong, I require some sort of evidence before I am going to believe in something.

Or do you require somebody else to tell you that the evidence is present? Somebody you trust and believe in?

(I have to say it is somewhat ironic to discuss this with a person who uses beowulf as a nickname.)