Answers for Atheists

a reply to: Prezbo369

The claimed existence of gods has yet to be demonstrated, and until it has there is no reason to suspect they do.

So you are assuming that because something can't be proven makes it a fact that it can't exist despite only having limited information available to you?

My point is that in reality we can't factually say one way or another, whether a God exist or not with our limited knowledge and scientific tools, if we want to be factually correct? The correct answer using publicly available scientific tools , is we don't know.

We can make some better educated guess than others, but in the end its a guess.

originally posted by: WhiteHat
Maybe there is no atheist agenda. Maybe people are just tired to wait for 2000 years for a God to come and make things right so they just stopped believing.
Ever wonder why all the great miracles happened only in the far far past and none recently? No burning bushes, no pillars of fire, no new comandments to fit the modern times. Nothing, just an old book rehashed ad nauseaum.
Maybe the absence of God's presence is what makes people atheists, or at least it makes them wonder.

Are you an atheist? I'm not familiar with you around here.
But that is one of the best rationales for chosing to be atheist
I've ever heard. It isn't complex, but instead it's straight forward
and honest about a grievence with God. I don't have all the answers
and often wonder if have any at all. I've just always seen that the
existence of God is much more rational than his non existence. And like I
mentioned in the OP. You have a right to judge him. Or not.

originally posted by: flyingfish
Randy, you speak as if we are conscious authors of our actions or beliefs. We have no more free will than a box of rocks.
Our thoughts and actions are and have been proven to be pre-determined, even before we are consciously aware of it. Not by magic deities, but rather your very brain, created on the spot from prior causes.
The magic man in your head is just a distraction from the true nature of existence.

Has anyone else noticed most of the responses are really smooth.
I'm so proud of this thread not because of the OP or anything
I've written. But because of the great many decent responses
our members are giving. Including this one and I have to applaud
you guys. The rhetoric is at one of it's lowest points ever.
Thank you all.

originally posted by: interupt42
a reply to: Prezbo369

So you are assuming that because something can't be proven makes it a fact that it can't exist despite only having limited information available to you?

No that's not what I said, I didn't come close to even implying that.

You claimed both theists and non theists (atheists) harbour 'faith' on whether or not gods exist and I was explaining to you that the rejection of that claim is not an act of faith as the claimed existence of gods has yet to be demonstrated..

My point is that in reality we can't factually say one way or another, whether a God exist or not with our limited knowledge and scientific tools, if we want to be factually correct? The correct answer using publicly available scientific tools , is we don't know.

We can't factually say that seahorse riding leprechauns don't exist either, but i'm assuming you would say that they don't?

a reply to: randyvs

that is one of the best rationales for chosing to be atheist
I've ever heard

Being an atheist isn't a choice, it's a realisation.

a reply to: Prezbo369

Alright, I'll give you that one.

originally posted by: JackReyes

originally posted by: Jonjonj
a reply to: JackReyes

Welp, you just gone an done it! You turned your god into a mad scientist with no intention of sharing his toys.

Well done!

His mind is beyond our comprehension. Why would he share his "toys" with someone that can't even use logic to deduct that he exists?

He gave you a mind. The human brain is the most complex thing known in the known universe. And you have one. We know this because you can read.

Imagine the numbers, of you existing. And then imagine that you do. And then understand that you are conscious and can reason and think. And although you were given a body that does 99.9% all by itself, without your help, it was already programmed to do all the necessary things of life to keep you alive, aside from eating and sleeping, you are sentient.

And you can think and reason.

Now know how rare it is to have such a gift.

What do you do with it? Do you search for the one who gave it to you, or do you squander it?

Now if only you had actual evidence that it was a gift from god instead of just arbitrarily stating it like it's true. Because I have evidence that the brain slowly evolved over millions of years gradually increasing in size throughout the history of human evolution based on hard evidence. What hard evidence do you have to suggest the bible is accurate or that god is real?

There's nothing wrong with believing, it's just how you guys have this NEED to be right about it and don't treat your faith like it's actually faith, you act like it's proven. Your faith is not fact, and your logic is nonexistent. Nothing about what you said in either post is a logical reason to believe in a god.

None of us knows how rare intelligent life is in the universe so assuming it's rare is just that... an assumption. Also you're telling me that the human brain is more complex than the universe as a whole? Sorry not buying it.

You don't want proof. And if you are given it, you just ignore it and will attack the person giving it to you.

False. We DO want proof. We've been asking for it for years, yet nobody can provide anything beyond subjective interpretations of ancient texts. The problem is your sense of logic is warped and you don't understand what the word proof means. In order to suggest the existence of anything, there must be first be objective evidence of whatever it is. This simply does not exist for god. Maybe one day we will find scientific evidence of god, but until we do, atheists and agnostics have every right to be skeptical of your claims.

Athiests have no more agenda with regards disproving god (any or all of them) than Christians have an agenda with regards disproving Peter Pan.

originally posted by: dismanrc
And you can't prove he is not.

Burden of proof is on the folks who claim he exists, not the ones that call them out on their BS.

Also science is not fact.

Correct. Science is a method that leads us to facts and understanding about how things work.

It is a system of ideas people BELIEVE are facts.

Nope. That statement is laughably wrong.

A tabletop is solid right? At a macroscopic view your right, at a microscopic view it is not and other object can pass though with no issues. Newtonian Physics are the law? Nope only to a certain point then Eisenstein physics take over. Then don't forget that Quantum physics trump both of those in certain areas

It doesn't trump them, it operates on a completely different level of existence. Newtonian physics (laws)still apply today to objects at MOST velocities, it just doesn't tell the whole story.

I believe in science, but don't make the mistake that just because it is in a science book it it true. Many times we have had to rewrite these books because what we thought was true is in fact just fraction of the truth.

There is also no reason to assume it's wrong. Science builds upon new data and new discoveries, which improves our understanding of certain things. Nobody claims science is infallible or gets everything right on the first try. Quite often, It takes years of rigorous studies and trials. The scientific method gets us to the answers, sometimes it just takes a while.

I don't know how the real ateist can explain creation or suffering, but ateist are seldom ateists, they are often even more spiritual than others, but against religions. In my opinion why for example children in Africa suffer without food can be explained by reincarnation. They simply did in their past life something that created negative karma, which makes them to suffer at present life. Should we then help them? Surely because we don't know when their karma suppose to finish, and besides if we don't help we create karma for ourself to go through either in this life or next.

There is also way to go through karma without necessary suffering, but that is something which needs longer explanation, which I dont want now to go into.

a reply to: Suanna

.....so then do you think that children who are raped.....deserved to be raped?

originally posted by: flyingfish
Randy, you speak as if we are conscious authors of our actions or beliefs. We have no more free will than a box of rocks.
Our thoughts and actions are and have been proven to be pre-determined, even before we are consciously aware of it. Not by magic deities, but rather your very brain, created on the spot from prior causes.
The magic man in your head is just a distraction from the true nature of existence.

I agree with this, mostly. I think if more people realized this we would have a better world. Of course this viewpoint is self-defeating, in philosophy. But very useful in everyday life, achieving world peace and so on.

originally posted by: randyvs
Has anyone else noticed most of the responses are really smooth.
I'm so proud of this thread not because of the OP or anything
I've written. But because of the great many decent responses
our members are giving. Including this one and I have to applaud
you guys. The rhetoric is at one of it's lowest points ever.
Thank you all.

I'm confused by this post. Why are you proud if the rhetoric is at a low point?

originally posted by: Suanna
I don't know how the real ateist can explain creation or suffering, but ateist are seldom ateists, they are often even more spiritual than others, but against religions. In my opinion why for example children in Africa suffer without food can be explained by reincarnation. They simply did in their past life something that created negative karma, which makes them to suffer at present life. Should we then help them? Surely because we don't know when their karma suppose to finish, and besides if we don't help we create karma for ourself to go through either in this life or next.

There is also way to go through karma without necessary suffering, but that is something which needs longer explanation, which I dont want now to go into.

There is so much wrong in the above that I barely know where to start. No. Just.... no.

a reply to: Prezbo369

that the rejection of that claim is not an act of faith as the claimed existence of gods has yet to be demonstrated..

Definition of faith:
: strong belief or trust in someone or something

A atheists has a strong [belief or trust** ] that a God doesn't exist , based on the lack of evidence to support that God Exist.

[ ** belief or trust = faith]

nothing more nothing less . I just find it comical when atheist look down on those that believe the opposite when both have no evidence or leg to stand on to fully know the answer.

We can't factually say that seahorse riding leprechauns don't exist either, but i'm assuming you would say that they don't?

Agreed, but I couldn't factually say that they don't exist in another universe if multi-verses exists or if we are just a computer simulation?

Most would also think that it would be impossible to walk through a wall but based on quantum tunnelling it might be theoretically possible.

a reply to: Subnatural

I'm confused by this post. Why are you proud if the rhetoric is at a low point?

You're kidding right? My good man have you seen any of my
previous threads in this forum? If not, what I mean is
this thread is by far the most mellow thread I've ever put
up on this topic. Imagine this in just about every thread I've
posted with this subject matter.



Something like that. Warnings, off topics, post bans you get the picture.

Definition of faith:
: strong belief or trust in someone or something


A atheists has a strong [belief or trust** ] that a God doesn't exist , based on the lack of evidence to support that God Exist.

[ ** belief or trust = faith]

nothing more nothing less . I just find it comical when atheist look down on those that believe the opposite when both have no evidence or leg to stand on to fully know the answer.

You would be right except non-belief /= belief and you don't have to have trust in something you don't believe in.

I don't believe in god, I just don't. I don't pray or hope that I am right. I just don't believe.

originally posted by: JackReyes
a reply to: Klassified

Thank you, kind sir, for at least acknowledging ans answering the logic given.

So if one is walking through a burning desert and sees a house and approaches it, and enters and finds it air-conditioned, with full power, and stocked full of food, elegantly designed, with books of all sorts, and many different living spaces, would it be logical to conclude that it popped up out of nothing?

No. You would reason that it had a designer, and a builder.

If the universe is far far far more complex, beyond imagining, it is a leap of faith to assume it too must have had a designer and a builder? Really?

Obviously there are people that must think that way. But there are people that can reason logically, that if a house had a designer and a builder, the far grander things in life, like a human body also did. And that would not be a leap of faith, but a logical deduction based on reasoning.

Let us go a little further. That house that had many books? Well earth does it not house many types of life forms and have food for all of the?

Now all of those life-forms are patterned after their DNA.

And DNA is a book in digital format. Many types of books are available on earth are there not?

Now here is something to ponder on. The human DNA needs both proteins and RNA to replicate. So you do not only have a book in digital format (which would fill volumes the size of the grand canyon), it can copy itself.

And also look a little further, the human cell contains about 50,000 different types of proteins. Now for one protein to fold upon itself correctly is 1 in a billion billion billion. That is, if you had a primordial soup, not the size of the earth, but of the entire known universe, the chances of it folding upon itself correctly is many many many many times greater than that of the time of the known universe, a more 13.8 billion years.

If 1 single protein out of the 50,000 takes all of that, and you expect all the rest of the other 50,000 to have the same odds, mixed in with the fact that the entire book of the DNA had to be already complete, and functioning at the exact same time that RNA came into existence.

We can go on and on and on.

The Chance atheists believe in is really just another name for God. It is quite shameful, if they really really knew what they were talking about.

Wow the intelligent design straw man this argument is an oldie. First off finding out habitable zone wouldn't be like finding an amazing awesome air condition place in the desert. Our habitable zone on earth is a tiny tiny space. Of the matter of earth we can only use something like 20%. Under the crust too hot ect too high not enough atmosphere ect. Looking at our solar system well yeah that just lowers the ratio. Just about everything around where we live can and will kill us. if our solar system was designed for us the designer did a pretty terrible job. Second portion no I don't think anything is designed. Unless the designer did all his work with chemistry. Again the universe realy isn't all that complicated on how everything formed. The sticking point most i.e. People jab at is the very beginning after that everything else fall into place very nicely with the laws of physics and chemistry. Next statement if a house is designed a person must be too. No not at all a house is designed well because it is manufactured. We know it was designed can go to the court house and see the blue prints of who did it even. A person sorry isnt designed and again if your God is omnipresent and omniscient, he/she is terrible at that job of designer. Going all the way down to Dna end ect on a cellure level it isn't designed it's chemistry peptides and sugars ect. How the electrons want to bind to form other elements for stronger bonds. Not a design. All the defects in this design would be terrible if it was designed too. Think of the recalls man! Next section of mis quoted bill gates segment about rna ect just proves you are bad statistics. In pure data form sure your one in a billion billion billion might work out. The problem lies in you guessed it chemistry and physics. See the universe governed by rules that matter follows when that is taken into acount the odds aren't that drastic they didn't fold them selfs by chance the followed physics and chemistry. Lastly almost your entire argument has been stated and founded by a liar and convict who is currently serving a 10 year sentence.

I forgot to add one more thing I'm not feeling up to battling all these same old tiered intellegent design arguments today but if you want all of the same old logically ill firing arguments answered I highly suggest you watch the video series on you tube by thunderf00t why do creationist get laughed at. Here's the whole the thing is long but it's broken up if you want to take your time. m.youtube.com...

a reply to: randyvs
God help me, but I actually laughed at that video you linked, and I appreciated your post.

Maybe there is something to this forum after all.

Or maybe I'm going soft in my head. Did star you though.

a reply to: Subnatural

And now I have this for all of you.

a reply to: whargoul

I don't believe in god, I just don't. I don't pray or hope that I am right. I just don't believe.

belief is not only associated with praying:

belief:
belief: conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence

Based on your examination of evidence you are choosing to belief that GOD doesn't exist, because you can't factually say that he doesn't exist.


FWIW, I'm not religious and think all religion is B$ and when I refer to GOD I'm thinking more creator than some religious entity. I was also an atheist for many years , but eventually concluded that at the end of the day, I have no clue.

Hence If I want to be completely honest with myself , I have to accept that we don't have enough information to really know what is beyond our universe or what caused that initial action and reaction.