Alright all you athiests
- Thread starter freestyle_rich
- Start date
switchskier88
Active member
I'm not a total atheist, but here is my take on things
I was raised a Roman Catholic and went to sunday school and all that good stuff, but as I got older and a bit more educated I started to have certain doubts. My major problem stems from religious texts (bible, torah, koran, ive read bits of em all some more than others) which are pretty much the foundations of all faiths. The one thing that bothers me about them is that it's so easy to see each writers bias's and incosistancies. The old testament and new testament are both full of contradictions, you can search through them and on one page find a passage glorifying god's frogiveness and love and then 20 pages later you can find a passage that justifies killing in god's name, or states that if you behave in a certain way you will be cast down with satan. This leads me to my next problem which is that as far as organized relgion goes I just can't support it, because it is a creation of man, used to justify control or a means to an end. If there exists this higher all powerful being don't you think he/she/whatever would be beyond such imperfect human emotions as hatred, jealousy, and all the other characteristics that all religions seem to brand him with. People claim that god cares about how and when you worship, or hates and will punish people because of there sexual orientation or practices. The list goes on and its pathetic. I still have trouble beleiving in god for many other reasons, but if there is a higher power I refuse to beleive that any of the religions on earth have it right
I was raised a Roman Catholic and went to sunday school and all that good stuff, but as I got older and a bit more educated I started to have certain doubts. My major problem stems from religious texts (bible, torah, koran, ive read bits of em all some more than others) which are pretty much the foundations of all faiths. The one thing that bothers me about them is that it's so easy to see each writers bias's and incosistancies. The old testament and new testament are both full of contradictions, you can search through them and on one page find a passage glorifying god's frogiveness and love and then 20 pages later you can find a passage that justifies killing in god's name, or states that if you behave in a certain way you will be cast down with satan. This leads me to my next problem which is that as far as organized relgion goes I just can't support it, because it is a creation of man, used to justify control or a means to an end. If there exists this higher all powerful being don't you think he/she/whatever would be beyond such imperfect human emotions as hatred, jealousy, and all the other characteristics that all religions seem to brand him with. People claim that god cares about how and when you worship, or hates and will punish people because of there sexual orientation or practices. The list goes on and its pathetic. I still have trouble beleiving in god for many other reasons, but if there is a higher power I refuse to beleive that any of the religions on earth have it right
drewishish
Active member
i think its a completly ludicris idea of one person(not even a person) creating the whole world.
Wrong. Science is based off of theories that builds on and from observed facts. Yes, some science is theory, but it is correctly labled that most of the time. The vast majority of scientific knowledge is not based off of theories anymore, as numerous experiments and tests have been done that always prove the origional theory right. When such a vast amount of evidence is collected, theories become facts.
While science may use theories to explain what we cannot currently understand, remember that all thing started off as theroies before they could be definetively proven, such as the theory of gravity. Shit hasnt suddenly started floating around in your house anytime has it? Thus, the theory of gravity really isnt a theory anymore, its an accepted fact.
Religion however, has no basis that it is founded upon. While many people cite the bible to be one such proof, nobody knows where it originally came from, or how it ended up in its current form. Theres also no direct evidence in the existence of some higher power. Because of the lack of evidence in that religion is a theory, and only that. While science uses theories to transition knowledge into factual evidence, this is lacking in religion. They really arent the same at all.
While science may use theories to explain what we cannot currently understand, remember that all thing started off as theroies before they could be definetively proven, such as the theory of gravity. Shit hasnt suddenly started floating around in your house anytime has it? Thus, the theory of gravity really isnt a theory anymore, its an accepted fact.
Religion however, has no basis that it is founded upon. While many people cite the bible to be one such proof, nobody knows where it originally came from, or how it ended up in its current form. Theres also no direct evidence in the existence of some higher power. Because of the lack of evidence in that religion is a theory, and only that. While science uses theories to transition knowledge into factual evidence, this is lacking in religion. They really arent the same at all.
DaysToCome
Active member
This is a great reason to believe because it explains what we dont/ever will know for sure how it was created.
its mind boggling but seriously is it more likely that an omnipresent supernatural being just created the world or the universe exploded and crunched due to gravity thousands of times berfore the perfect explosion happened. Well really neither anre more likely. But for a second use ur logic and just think. How crazy is it that we believe that a person figue who see's and knows all can create vast amounts of matter and then sprout life. Now really if you told someone that there was a man that they couldnt see standing next to them and that he is creating objects from nothing, they would think you are crazy but since a couple peolpe liked the idea and passed it on, crazy has become normal. Of course these are just my opinion and i cant prove that either is right and who know maybe judgement day will come and ill be fucked. I mean religions a real good idea because it explains everything we cant. Like how did we come to be, why are we here, why do we exist, why am i me, what am i supposed to be doing in life. its prefect, almost flawless. Except that if you take a second and really use common sense it just seems plain....ridiculous
its mind boggling but seriously is it more likely that an omnipresent supernatural being just created the world or the universe exploded and crunched due to gravity thousands of times berfore the perfect explosion happened. Well really neither anre more likely. But for a second use ur logic and just think. How crazy is it that we believe that a person figue who see's and knows all can create vast amounts of matter and then sprout life. Now really if you told someone that there was a man that they couldnt see standing next to them and that he is creating objects from nothing, they would think you are crazy but since a couple peolpe liked the idea and passed it on, crazy has become normal. Of course these are just my opinion and i cant prove that either is right and who know maybe judgement day will come and ill be fucked. I mean religions a real good idea because it explains everything we cant. Like how did we come to be, why are we here, why do we exist, why am i me, what am i supposed to be doing in life. its prefect, almost flawless. Except that if you take a second and really use common sense it just seems plain....ridiculous
RKF
Active member
well as much as i hate to defend religion there is definately some basis that it was founded on. you forget how new scientifc study is in relation to human existance. thousands of years ago the easiest way to explain something was to say it was made by a higher power. every feeling, every natural phenomenon that has now been explained by science was once unknown and it took a great advance in technology to allow science to really take off. so because of the lack of technological ability to create a scientific explaination, religions were made to explain things, then later once people were begining to understand and learn the people in charge changed the religions in order to maintain power. now that we have the ability to explain everything through science it is silly to continue to believe in religion, however it has been a part of human history for so long that it is difficult or some to give up. so as wrong as i feel following a religion is, it is also wrong to say religion has no basis.
RKF
Active member
read one of my posts a page or two so back.. it explains the big bang in a slightly more understandable way.
but basically its fact fact that energy has no mass and therefore an immesureable amount can exist in any quantity of space no matter how small.
i also explained that entropy (all transfers of energy will loose some as heat), will eventually turn every piece of matter back into energy and after more time it will everntually expand and contract as you say untill that right balance was hit and mass was formed again. there is alot more to it than that if you are interested you can look it up.
but yeah i agree, i just figured sonce you seem to know what you are talking about that you may be interested in hearing more.
but basically its fact fact that energy has no mass and therefore an immesureable amount can exist in any quantity of space no matter how small.
i also explained that entropy (all transfers of energy will loose some as heat), will eventually turn every piece of matter back into energy and after more time it will everntually expand and contract as you say untill that right balance was hit and mass was formed again. there is alot more to it than that if you are interested you can look it up.
but yeah i agree, i just figured sonce you seem to know what you are talking about that you may be interested in hearing more.
DaysToCome
Active member
there is no purpose at all none. we make purposes for ourselves like religion or a job but really that is just covering up the fact that there is none. we just dissapear and we are not there. no concious thought nothing. its hard to believe and it sucks but frankly i believ this is the most likely situation
traer
Member
"In 1953 Stanley Miller and Harold Urey decided to test the "Oparin-Haldane" hypothesis by "zapping" methane and ammonia gas with electric charges.9 They obtain various amino acids, and the experiment was hailed as "proof" of the origin of life! This same year, Watson and Crick discover the double-helix structure of DNA.1 I want to note that it is a common, though given what many classes teach, forgivable misconception that the natural chemical origin of life has been proven because these experiments created life in the lab. This is mistaken, for not only has life nothing close to life ever been produced in lab experiments, but even if true life were one day created, it still wouldn't prove anything about what actually took place when the first life-forms came into existence"
http://acs.ucsd.edu/~idea/origlife.htm
http://acs.ucsd.edu/~idea/origlife.htm
pmills
Active member
DaysToCome
Active member
ya ive kinda been thinking about it for a couple years. and we just saw a stephen hawking movie on how the universe might have been (and probably was created) and what the matter we know of is made up of. im not sure of the name but u shud check it out. it brings up interesting ideas
RKF
Active member
i might know the one you are talking about i think it was in my school library.. it was like 4 DVDs so i didnt get to watch all of it, but it was pretty interesting, it could be a different one though... stwphen hawking doesnt do much these days other than write books and make movies.
DaysToCome
Active member
ya
was it like the suprestring theory one?
and there are a bunch of shots of stephen roling down hallways and paths and talking?
was it like the suprestring theory one?
and there are a bunch of shots of stephen roling down hallways and paths and talking?
DaysToCome
Active member
well thats just them talking their ways out of a flaw in their ideas
DaysToCome
Active member
the bible wasnt even written by god it was written by a bunch of people who though they knew god and ivisible man who rules anything and everything and were PRETTY sure that this invisible being was talking to them and telling them to hate all people who didnt act like them. like the homosexuals. really in my opinion the bible is the biggest peice of bullshit ever written
DaysToCome
Active member
not true genisis says that god molded adam in his appearence. so there fore that makes god a person. maybe not a human but a supernatural person
traer
Member
According to evolutionary teaching, the "Geologic Column" is a map of evolutionary history. Supposedly all fossils fit into a specific order, simple to complex. Recently, fish scales were found in the "Cambrian layer" when according to the "column", fish did not appear until much later.
The theory contradicts many laws of science. The second Law of Thermodynamics is clearly violated as evolution says that everything began as simple forms and gradually evolved into more complex ones. But as that law states, everything tends to disorder.
Next one is from a website:
Previous genetic studies have shown that chimpanzee and humans DNA differs by about 1.5%. However, this difference was determined by examining the base pair sequence by another nucleotide or replacement of one amino acid in a protein by another amino acid.">substitutions within certain sequenced genes. Recently, the human genome was completely sequenced and sequencing of the chimpanzee genome is well on its way. Preliminary results confirm previous results regarding base pair substitutions (estimated at 1.4%). However, sequencing reveals that insertions and deletions result in another 3.4% difference between human and chimp DNA. Therefore, the overall difference between chimp and human DNA is nearly 5%, which represents an almost insurmountable amount of rapid evolution.
The fossil record, our only documentation of whether evolution actually occurred in the past, lacks any transitional forms, and all types appear fully-formed when first present. The evidence that "pre-men" (ape type men) existed is doubtful at best. So called pre-man fossils turn out to be those of apes, extinct apes, fully man, or historical frauds.
The theory contradicts many laws of science. The second Law of Thermodynamics is clearly violated as evolution says that everything began as simple forms and gradually evolved into more complex ones. But as that law states, everything tends to disorder.
Next one is from a website:
Previous genetic studies have shown that chimpanzee and humans DNA differs by about 1.5%. However, this difference was determined by examining the base pair sequence by another nucleotide or replacement of one amino acid in a protein by another amino acid.">substitutions within certain sequenced genes. Recently, the human genome was completely sequenced and sequencing of the chimpanzee genome is well on its way. Preliminary results confirm previous results regarding base pair substitutions (estimated at 1.4%). However, sequencing reveals that insertions and deletions result in another 3.4% difference between human and chimp DNA. Therefore, the overall difference between chimp and human DNA is nearly 5%, which represents an almost insurmountable amount of rapid evolution.
The fossil record, our only documentation of whether evolution actually occurred in the past, lacks any transitional forms, and all types appear fully-formed when first present. The evidence that "pre-men" (ape type men) existed is doubtful at best. So called pre-man fossils turn out to be those of apes, extinct apes, fully man, or historical frauds.
traer
Member
One other thing I found interesting from a website was the chances of this happening:
Some arguments for evolution is that if you give it enough time anything could happen. But unbeknownst to most, evolution doesn't have enough time. Billions or trillions of years is not even close to how much time would be needed. Rick Ramashing and Sir Fred Hoyle calculated the probability for one cell to evolve by chance. The atheist/agnostic team found to their disbelief that it is 1 chance in 10 to the 40,000th power years just for one cell to evolve. Hoyle said, "The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way is comparable with the chance that 'a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein.' "[3] Does evolution have enough time?
Some arguments for evolution is that if you give it enough time anything could happen. But unbeknownst to most, evolution doesn't have enough time. Billions or trillions of years is not even close to how much time would be needed. Rick Ramashing and Sir Fred Hoyle calculated the probability for one cell to evolve by chance. The atheist/agnostic team found to their disbelief that it is 1 chance in 10 to the 40,000th power years just for one cell to evolve. Hoyle said, "The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way is comparable with the chance that 'a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein.' "[3] Does evolution have enough time?
RKF
Active member
I would like to see a link to the study or an article relating to the fossils found untill then i find it hard to believe and should you provide the link i am sure there will be a logical reason behind it.
you havent studied much physics if you think evolution disobeys the second law of thermodynamics.. what the second law of thermodynamics states is that every transfer of energy creates entropy (waste energy) aka heat, this is called disorder because it is basically useless energy that once release cannot be reabsorbed. every reaction both physical and chemical releases heat.
there is most definately not true, and i expect the website is mor than biased on this issue, if you have done much research into the human genome project completed by celera genomics coreration, you would know that the majority of our DNA almost 95% does not have a known or noticable perpose, this DNA can be up to 7 or 8 percent in even siblings, so when they refer to less than 1.5% difference between humans and chimpanzhees they refer to the 5-10% of dna that has a known code and is not considered, "junk DNA"
I take it you have never actually read Darwins "the origin of species" becuase there are documented cases of evolution in living organisms such as on the galapaogs islands where many examples occur, where some populations were once joined but became separated by rivers, and each population is now very different. and there are lots of bones of "ape-men" that hve been found throughout africa all the way up to the netherlands where in a bog remains were found that have been carbon dated to be almost as far back as the time of neandertals.
you havent studied much physics if you think evolution disobeys the second law of thermodynamics.. what the second law of thermodynamics states is that every transfer of energy creates entropy (waste energy) aka heat, this is called disorder because it is basically useless energy that once release cannot be reabsorbed. every reaction both physical and chemical releases heat.
there is most definately not true, and i expect the website is mor than biased on this issue, if you have done much research into the human genome project completed by celera genomics coreration, you would know that the majority of our DNA almost 95% does not have a known or noticable perpose, this DNA can be up to 7 or 8 percent in even siblings, so when they refer to less than 1.5% difference between humans and chimpanzhees they refer to the 5-10% of dna that has a known code and is not considered, "junk DNA"
I take it you have never actually read Darwins "the origin of species" becuase there are documented cases of evolution in living organisms such as on the galapaogs islands where many examples occur, where some populations were once joined but became separated by rivers, and each population is now very different. and there are lots of bones of "ape-men" that hve been found throughout africa all the way up to the netherlands where in a bog remains were found that have been carbon dated to be almost as far back as the time of neandertals.
I stopped reading this thread on page two. Bullet points for a minute:
1. I believe in God. That's a disclaimer. I'm not an atheist... I don't, however, understand the pressing need for PROOF of God's existence. As I see it the point of having faith in the divine is to believe something in spite of a lack of proof.
2. Intelligent design has always been and remains an awful, abysmal argument for the existence of God only used by amateurs and people who want a simple "proof" to toss out on TV shows to others who don't really want to think. It's on roughly the same level as that hackneyed "God isn't all powerful because he can't make a rock so heavy he can't lift it" piece of trash.
3. You utterly failed to rebuke the problem of evil. Everyone seems to think that going "Free will lol" will solve it, but it's a LOGICAL problem. Yeah, free will is a good point, but it doesn't make that set any less inconsistent. For a good response to the problem of evil, read some of John Hick.
4. Please pick up a copy of "Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion" by David Hume. Hell, read it online as an e-text. If you're too lazy for that, at least read the sparknotes summaries. Suddenly you'll be smarter. Reading does that!
1. I believe in God. That's a disclaimer. I'm not an atheist... I don't, however, understand the pressing need for PROOF of God's existence. As I see it the point of having faith in the divine is to believe something in spite of a lack of proof.
2. Intelligent design has always been and remains an awful, abysmal argument for the existence of God only used by amateurs and people who want a simple "proof" to toss out on TV shows to others who don't really want to think. It's on roughly the same level as that hackneyed "God isn't all powerful because he can't make a rock so heavy he can't lift it" piece of trash.
3. You utterly failed to rebuke the problem of evil. Everyone seems to think that going "Free will lol" will solve it, but it's a LOGICAL problem. Yeah, free will is a good point, but it doesn't make that set any less inconsistent. For a good response to the problem of evil, read some of John Hick.
4. Please pick up a copy of "Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion" by David Hume. Hell, read it online as an e-text. If you're too lazy for that, at least read the sparknotes summaries. Suddenly you'll be smarter. Reading does that!
traer
Member
I also thought this thread from awhile ago provided some great info on the missing link stuff ect.
https://www.newschoolers.com/ns3/web/forums/readthread.php?thread_id=210768&
https://www.newschoolers.com/ns3/web/forums/readthread.php?thread_id=210768&
RKF
Active member
if you read back in this thread you will see some references to experiments that created very elaborate molecules that are essential for life. as for not enough time, i have stidied this for my grade 12 biology ISU in depth, and the rates of evolution of life would in fact be exponential due to the fact that as more evolution occured there would be more diversity for evolution to occur from.
Schoening
Active member
i have a hard time believing all the stories and what not in the bible.....like moses spreading the red sea with his cane. I just have to call bullshit on that type of crap. Im not sure what i believe in, im not really trying to figure it out either. but after taking biology this year i think evolution is how things started, theres so much evidence for it
traer
Member
Those are deffinetly some awesome points made. As far as the quote from the website it would be from something people would consider slightly biased. So it could also be said that alot of my beliefs on the subjects and their origination are biased. Although I would say the same thing about many of the opposing sources (whether that be class room teachers, certain books, or whatever it may be) although some are valid too. Many have their own agenda and will stretch, manipulate, or discard certain facts to fit this (both sides). Plus I'm sure I'm not changing your mind nor you changing mind.
SteezePatrol
Active member
the point to the dumbass whoever made this thread is that no one can prove or disprove the existence of a "god".
HEY, SOMEONE TELL ME WHY THERE ISN'T AN ANGRY UNICORN ON THE DARK SIDE OF THE MOON?
well...because we haven't seen it and have no reason to believe it other than you telling me.
YEA BUT HE RUNS REAL FAST AND ALWAYS STAYS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE MOON.
orly?
O'RLY!
okay I guess you're right then.
HEY, SOMEONE TELL ME WHY THERE ISN'T AN ANGRY UNICORN ON THE DARK SIDE OF THE MOON?
well...because we haven't seen it and have no reason to believe it other than you telling me.
YEA BUT HE RUNS REAL FAST AND ALWAYS STAYS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE MOON.
orly?
O'RLY!
okay I guess you're right then.
ATLskier
Active member
I believe it's around 65 million years ago ate the end of the cretaceous period when the dinosaurs became extinct, so no 1 mil year old dinosaur bones. maybe your thinking about the earliest humans, cause that would be around the right time. i don' t see how this disproves God. the whole creation story is just symbolism. science and religion work hand in hand together. Religion explains that it happened and that God did it and asks why. science explains how.
ATLskier
Active member
sorry for the multiple posts. I dont want to read through the whole thread, and I just wanted to debate those first issues i saw on the first page.
Anyways, for all the atheists, I have a question for you(even if it's hypothetical and cheesy, I don't care)?
You are flying on a plane, and the pilot and co pilot are gone, and they are replaced by monkeys. they will fly the plane. they have to randomly push the right instruments at the right time or else you die. the question is do you trust them with your life?
Or do you think it is possible for a group of monkeys to randomly hit the right letters on a type writer to create one of shakespeare's plays(Think about it, they have to type out peoples names like banquo and hamlet and then the line. So they have to type out banquo and hamlet many times Perfectly).
The questions explain how God did in fact create the earth. If God didn't create the earth then it is exactly like the monkeys in the plane and the monkeys with the typewriters. The chances or the earth comign from northing without define intervention are the same as the monkeys flying the plane safely down or producing one of shakespeares plays. So would you really trust monkeys with your life, or your soul?
Also, Im not saying to all atheists, "YOU NEED TO BELIEVE WHAT I BELIEVE. ATHEISTS ARE ALL STUPID AND GOING TO HELL, SO I NEED TO CONVERT YOU ALL" All I ask is that you give a really good effort to find the truth and see whether there is a God or not. You have absolutely nothing to lose and everything to gain. You do what to know exactly what the truth is, do you?
Anyways, for all the atheists, I have a question for you(even if it's hypothetical and cheesy, I don't care)?
You are flying on a plane, and the pilot and co pilot are gone, and they are replaced by monkeys. they will fly the plane. they have to randomly push the right instruments at the right time or else you die. the question is do you trust them with your life?
Or do you think it is possible for a group of monkeys to randomly hit the right letters on a type writer to create one of shakespeare's plays(Think about it, they have to type out peoples names like banquo and hamlet and then the line. So they have to type out banquo and hamlet many times Perfectly).
The questions explain how God did in fact create the earth. If God didn't create the earth then it is exactly like the monkeys in the plane and the monkeys with the typewriters. The chances or the earth comign from northing without define intervention are the same as the monkeys flying the plane safely down or producing one of shakespeares plays. So would you really trust monkeys with your life, or your soul?
Also, Im not saying to all atheists, "YOU NEED TO BELIEVE WHAT I BELIEVE. ATHEISTS ARE ALL STUPID AND GOING TO HELL, SO I NEED TO CONVERT YOU ALL" All I ask is that you give a really good effort to find the truth and see whether there is a God or not. You have absolutely nothing to lose and everything to gain. You do what to know exactly what the truth is, do you?
RiverRipper
Member
If your arguement hinges on the universe couldnt exist without some sort of God to create it...then my question is who created God? Cause thats the same logic.
ATLskier
Active member
Not really, cause God transcends time, he always was, so no one had to create him. Think about it, if someone had to create God, the god that would create our God would be the real God, but if our God had to be created then the second god that created our God would have had to be created too, so it goes on and on for eternity. So there can only be one true God.