Question for all the atheists on here

[ChristineM]

So?

Do you believe in Raelism? Or ancestor worship?
Do you even think that such beliefs might be accurate reflections of reality?

I don't. I believe that they are fiction.
Tom

Nothing to do with atheism that only concerns itself with the lack of gods

 

[Polymath257]

Then that nitrogen magically changed to c14 while leaving the atmosphere mostly nitrogen.

Well, that *is* what happens. but it happens in the upper atmosphere, where cosmic rays hitting the nitrogen produce C14 via the reaction

N14 + n --> C14 + p

Now, what that has to do with a 'clean atmosphere' is anyone's guess.

 

[SomeRandom]

If you lift your hand up and put it into the air.You will notice there is nothing inside of the air your hand is touching.So how can everything come from nothing when talking about the milky way galaxy?And by the way I am not trying to offend you with my question.Just curious is all.

Nothing in air? You might want to retake basic chemistry class there, buddy.

 

[Audie]

Nothing in air? You might want to retake basic chemistry class there, buddy.

might want to return to the scene of his thread too.

And wonder why he bothers breathing ifn there is
nothing there.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

This is of corse, "Atheism has nothing to do with the start of the universe...", what atheists tells other people to sort of lead the origins of the universe away from the atheistic viewpoint.
They hope one will perceive the atheist seperate from "atheist scientific models" on the origins of the universe.
Well, lets be straight forward.
The whole excercise of discussing the origins of the Universe, is an atheist domain where everyting will be done to prove it spontaniously came into existance.
However, the Atheist will not like the Christian claim of, Yes, God made it out of nothing, and we knew it 2 000 years ago!

Nope, they have to give the most silliest explanations on how it came into existance without creation.
Just like Stephen Hawkins claimed that everything spontaniously errupted due to Gravity!
Therefore, even hawkins had to create a creator to create everything. gravity in the place of God.
I loved it when John Lennox said of Stephen's theory:
"Nonsense remains nonsense, even if spoken by a genius!"

This story about a spontanious erruption from monopoles and false bubbles in other bubbles originates from Zeeya Merali who composed her writings by combining different scientists' work.
Create your own universe - Popular Mechanics
The full document can be found here.
Creating a Universe in the Lab? The Idea Is No Joke - The Crux

Now, she took studies from Andraie Linde and Sakai and other theoretical phycisists, and showed us what the scientists nou came up with.

• We should form a vacum in space.
• inside this vacum false vacums will appear.
• Then we must build very large colliders and get a monopole.
• in this false vacum, the monopole will now increase in size.
• We dont know how long it will take, but if we sit and wait a long time, it might happen.
• Oh, but it might fall into itself, therefore we need a cosmic string.
• Well, if we can get one, this bubble will inflate indefinately.
• But the funny thing is, it will remain the same size from the outside, but if you are on the inside, it will grow as big as our universe.
• This Universe will be connected with ours, through a wormholw, and eventually will sever itself.
• AAAWWWW, but damn, this whole event will happen so fast that we will not even see it happen.

it ends off with the following words:
"Just imagine if we can do this, then we will be god!"

Now, if any person can believe in the above fools fibb, then I can understand why intelligent people believes in other fairytales such as evolution.

Please dont try to tell me Atheism has nothing to do with explanations of the origins of the Universe!
they have attempted to find an alternative to God for 200 years without success.

Atheism is not a 'Christianity replacement'. It does not provide atheists with moral guidance. It does not provide atheists with heirarchical leadership. It does not have agreed doctrines.

And it doesn't tell us how the universe starts. It's simply an identifier for people who don't believe in God(s).

The rest we have to work out for ourselves. There is a lot we don't yet know.

That's it. Nothing more complex than that.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I believe that religion is fiction, deities are just one fairly common aspect of religious beliefs.

Religion was a set of rules created by the society, which the propagators of religions plagiarized claiming it as their own.

 

[Aupmanyav]

That's why we can't fly... it's all pressing down on us.

Not just air, gravity is a bigger culprit. It presses down air too.

Do you even think that such beliefs might be accurate reflections of reality? I don't. I believe that they are fiction.

Some may be closer to reality than the other wild guesses.

It does not provide atheists with moral guidance. It does not provide atheists with heirarchical leadership. The rest we have to work out for ourselves.

So, where there is no Christianity, there is no morality? And why is heirarchial leadership necessary? Why do you think that you are no better than sheep and need a dog? Yeah, we can work it out ourselves (with the help of the society).

 

[ratiocinator]

Not knowing is not atheism. That is agnosticism.

Atheism is lacking a belief in any gods - agnosticism is about knowledge rather than belief.

In any case you're confusing subject matter, atheism is specifically about gods, so you could strongly disbelieve in gods and still know absolutely nothing about the origin of the universe.

There is a general principle here that one can reject a hypothesis or conjecture on the grounds that it has insufficient supporting evidence (or for whatever other reason), without having to offer an alternative. We don't know this (yet) is a perfectly legitimate stance - and unless the subject is god(s) it has nothing to do with atheism or agnosticism.

Perhaps I can explain my belief, though not the nitty-gritty. That is something for future. Space creates energy. Energy creates the universe.When the reverse happens, universe folds into 'nothing'. All this according to principle of uncertainty.

Let's say this is correct - there are still unanswered questions as to why things work like that; why is there an uncertainty principle, and so on. These questions compare directly with asking theists why their gods just happen to exist. Nobody has a complete set of answers.

 

[SA Huguenot]

I can do far better. My God said that on this day I would have a packet of crisps and an apple for lunch, and that in the future I am destined to be King of Earth and live in a space mansion on the back of a trans-dimensional whale.

See, friend, we can ALL just make stuff up.

Now, why would you think I made it all up?
What I wrote is fact!
Didnt you read the Bible yet?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Now, why would you think I made it all up?

Because you obviously did.

Can you prove I made up my God? Because what they claimed was vastly more impressive than yours.

My God wins, easily.

 

[SA Huguenot]

Nope, that is not the case. Many scientists believe there is a multiverse from which our universe arose.

• Once again, not all scientists think this to be the case. Actually, of course, the Bible says nothing of the sort.

An incorrect statement of what happened.
Nope.

• And, of course, it neither says that (no description of nuclear reactions) and that isn't how it actually happened.

Actually, no it doesn't. The sun starting to shine would have had no effect on the visibility of the stars.
It also says the Earth has corners. The only time it mentions being round is in later texts where it was well-known to be round.

• Huh? Where in the Bible does it describe light as being a mixture of colors? Where does it describe *universal* gravitation (as opposed to gravity only on Earth)? Newton's gravitation and study of light had nothing to do with his mysticism.

Sorry, but your strained interpretation of both scripture and of science goes well beyond what is written in the Bible or what is claimed by science.


The main value that Christianity gave to science is the notion that the universe works under natural laws that can potentially be understood by us humans. That *was* a huge breakthrough, but it wasn't because of Biblical descriptions that *anything* in science was actually discovered.

Science was the realization that we should not take things on faith. it is the realization that we should require all of our notions to be testable and that observation is the ultimate judge of truth. That was not the result of religious thinking, but of skepticism and the ability to go beyond faith and actually test ideas.

Obviously you also never read the Bible, else you would have known about those points.
You see, this is how I determine if any critisizer of the Bible actually took the time to see what the Bible says.
And I got you solid on this point.
if I were to critisize the theory of Relativity without first studying what Einstein wrote, I will be an idiot.
Now why do you make yoyurself guilty of such behaviour?

 

[SA Huguenot]

Someone who lacks belief because they have not been convinced is an atheist.

No, that is an Agnostic.
Atheists believe there is no God.
They have no evidence to prove otherwize, therefore they believe.
Atheism is a religion, dawkins is your priest, and Marx your philosophy and darwin your god.

 

[ratiocinator]

• My God explained 3 400 years ago already that He made everything from nothing. Somethin all scientists agree with today.

• He explained that time started, and before Time, there was no time. Science agrees to this also.

• He said everything was spread out in space, and developed into proto planets, and explains the earth was a formless collection of water, solids and gasses.

• Science also discovered this to be true.

• He said the gasses percipitated out of this wet muddy sphere, and formed an atmosphere. A scientific principal.

• Then the solids and liquids seperated, also a scientific principal.

• He said that the Sun shone very dim in the beginning, and lateron errupted into a full blown Nuclear fusion and cleared the space in the solar system, a scientific fact.

• He said that once the sun shon as bright as it did then, the earth saw the planets and stars shining on the atmosphere for the first time. makes scientific sense.

• He also say that the Sun is the source of light, but the moon reflects light. Now, who would have known.

• He also said the Earth is round and hangs on nothing. This in ancient times?

• He also allowed Newton to discover through His scripture that white light is a mixture of all colors, that Genesis described Gravity, remember, newton...apple...falling on his head... apple Genesis...fruit?

• He also said the Earth was covered in wated during its creation, and science discovered zircon crystals attesting to that too, destroying the atheist le Matre's hadean theory.

• He also said everything is made up of smaller things we can not see, well, untill we discovered the microscope.

• He also said we can not measure the cosmos, can we?

OK, so you don't read your bible to see what it says, you read things into it that you want it to say.

 

[SA Huguenot]

Wow. So much wrong and so little understanding.

Why?
Do you even know that C14 is the best evidence that the Biblical description of long life?
Do you know it actually prove that the Atmosphere was very moist less than 4 000 years ago?
Do you know that the equlibrium of the Atmosphere in Biblical dating is 100% in sink with dating C14 / C13 ratios and is evidence that charcoal findings, and other organic material dated to 10 000 to 40 000 years actualy give dates of 4 to 5 thousand years?

 

[SA Huguenot]

Interesting illogical jumps, first show evidence of god, then that god god speaks. Then that people lived to be 1000. Then that there has ever been enough water on earth to produce a flood as described in the bible, then any evidence whatsoever of said world flood.

Then that nitrogen magically changed to c14 while leaving the atmosphere mostly nitrogen.

See my avatar. Human skull (cro magnon) 22,000 years old what does that say about your 10,000 year limit

C14 comprises roughly 1 part per trillion of all carbon. Short term (human lifespan) effects are negligible.

Now where did I hear this silly argument before?
Oh yes!
It is the old one where Atheists claim science proved there was not enough water to cover the Earth 15 feet deep!
it is actually another strawman made up by Atheists to prove nothing.
It goes like this.
Everest is 8 800 meters high.
if the world was covered with 8 800 meters of water, where did this water come from, and where did it go too?
Silly Atheists, Everest did not exist before the flood, the earth was much flatter and rounder and the oceans much shallower before the flood.
The huge catastrophe created Upheavels, and sinking.
Everest was non existant before the flood.
The water of the flood came from a wet atmosphere, and from below the earths surface, and was squashed out to eventually fill the oceans as we see today.
Much of this water was caught up on continents in ice plates, as evidence of lake Misoolah and the scab lands shows.
Looking at light House reef blue hole, the water over 3 000 tears rose at least 300 meters in its level.
Do you know how much 300 meters sircumfence on the oceans of the worls is that drained from the continents?
All the continents of the world dried up over 4 000 years, and is still doing so.
North Africa and the sahara was a lush green savannah with huge fresh water lakes, now desert.
So where did the water go?

 

[SA Huguenot]

See my avatar. Human skull (cro magnon) 22,000 years old what does that say about your 10,000 year limit

C14 comprises roughly 1 part per trillion of all carbon. Short term (human lifespan) effects are negligible.

Again, C14 depends totally upon the equlibrium of the creation of C14 from N14.
If the Atmosphere was not yet in equlibrium, due to huge ammounts of moisture in the Atmosphere, C14 would be non existant, or very shallow.
If somethin occured and the Atmosphere cleared this water moisture, N14 will be exposed, and C14 production would incease untill the ammounts of C14 / C13 ratios in plants equals the atmosphere.
Now, if the Bible say the atmosphere did not have a rainbow untill 4 500 years ago, it would give me the answer that equlibrium was only reached about 500 years after the flood.
This supplies us with a scientific fact, atheists dont want to know about, that C14 / C13 tests will show something that lived 4 500 years ago as having an age of excess of 20 000 years.
Something living 3 000 years ago will test very close to that date because of, yes, equlibrium.
Now why do I say C14 is important?
Because if not for this radiation, one will live very long.
If you can reduce your C14 intake, you can live to be 200 years old with a very healthy body.
funny that the Bible chronology corresponds with the graph if considering C14/C13 ratios.

 

[SA Huguenot]

There is evidence of one: the universe, but none for this god.

Again, why do anyone think God had a beginning?
God exists in a timeless, non spacial, and non material entity.
I find it ridicilous when people tells me they have evidence that the Universe spontaniously developed from nothing, but demand that God can not!
First, I do not agree that God had a beginning, time is just something by accident we experience as the Earth travells around the Sun, and we age.
before there was a solar system, there was no measurable time in Earth years.
So, how the heck does science measure time with out a solarsystem for 8 billion years from the Big Bang to the event of our Sun?
They simply use imaginary Time.
So, what was before the Big Bang?
No time, matter and space.
Now, I dont believe in this God you ascribe as one that came into existance.
I cant, because such a god will be a created god,
Mine is prior to time, free of any created matter, space.

My God is one that is without Cause, but caused the universe.
Your religious view is that the universe caused itself!
But!!!
You deny that a divine being could caus itself.
I taste a bit of hypocricy.

 

[SA Huguenot]

It does seem that our theo-friends are so
stuck with their way of thinking that they
are incapable of grasping a pov that does
include god.

What?
Are you saying God does exist?
or is this a typo?
It does seem that our theo-friends are so
stuck with their way of thinking that they
are incapable of grasping a pov that does (not???)
include god.

 

[SA Huguenot]

Uh, no.

Really, you owe it to yourself to know better.

Ok, so...
Do believe there is no God?
Or do you know there is no God?
The religion of Atheism is self explanitory.

 

[SA Huguenot]

Do you also think that all of theism is one religion?

I said Atheism is a religion for believing God does not exist.
Theism is a religion for believing God does exist.
and obviously Theism is a collective word including all different religions.