Yes, Another Post About Atheism

Posted by on September 28, 2012 in Featured, Thoughts | 120 comments

“Atheism” is a term that ought not exist. It is the state which we are all born into, and would stay in if it weren’t for the constant insistence by our cultures and religions that god does in fact exist. A “the world’s most famous Atheist” Professor Richard Dawkins says in his bestselling book The God Delusion, “A child is not a Christian child, not a Muslim child, but a child of Christian parents or a child of Muslim parents.” The same could be said of a Hindu child, or a Buddhist child; A child is brought into the world not with a belief in a particular god or gods, but with an absence of belief. There is one simple reason why this is true, and that comes down to the definition of the word “atheist”, as boring and as hackneyed as that is. This is a point that atheists tirelessly have to reiterate again and again, as it seems to be very poorly understood.

According to the the dictionary, “atheism” is defined as:

1. the doctrine or belief that there is no God.

2. disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.

There is no act of the denial of a god, nor an act of rebellion against a god. No anger, no hatred, no resentment. There simply is no “belief in” any god or gods. It’s the answer to the question of “Do you believe in god or gods?” The answer to which is “No.” It’s as simple as that. Many claim that atheists are “angry at God”, or were “hurt by God”, and while it’s true many people may be angry or hurt, it certainly is not blamed upon a being or deity for which we see no plausible proof or evidence. I can assure you there are also many Christians, Muslims and Hindus who are angry and hurt in the world, but they are the only ones who could blame this on their god or gods, or in some cases, on Satan. For an atheist, this is simply not part of the equation. “A” means “without”, and “theist” means “belief in god or gods”; “Without belief in god or gods.”

For fear of treading over the worn old “atheism vs agnosticism” debate for too long, I will only mention agnosticism in passing. Agnosticism is the answer to a different question. The question is “Can you know for 100% certain that God does or doesn’t exist?” The answer should be, for every right-minded reasonable person “No, I cannot prove or disprove the existence of God”. This means that every person, when asked this question should answer as an agnostic. In this case “a” means without, and “gnostic” means “knowledge” ; “Without knowledge of the conclusive proof of the existence of a god or gods”. It’s an unanswerable and unknowable question, but this is not the same question as the one atheism answers. So many theists see this as a “checkmate” moment against atheists, as we see time and time again in the case of the Richard Dawkins “7 point scale of belief”. (1 = absolute certainty of the existence of a god, and 7 being absolutely certain there is no god.) [3]

So according to the idea that all children are born atheist (not believing in god or gods), all children are likewise born agnostic (without knowledge of god or gods). In a complete vacuum, without any outside input to the belief in a deity or the divine, it could be imagined that all people could in theory remain atheist agnostics all their lives. But this almost never happens; religion pervades all aspect of life to some degree be it historical, social, cultural, political or financial.

As I say, the term “atheism” ought not exist, but Sam Harris in his 2005 essay “An Atheist Manifesto” puts it much more succinctly than I ever could.

“It is worth noting that no one ever needs to identify himself as a non-astrologer or a non-alchemist. Consequently, we do not have words for people who deny the validity of these pseudo-disciplines. Likewise, atheism is a term that should not even exist. Atheism is nothing more than the noises reasonable people make when in the presence of religious dogma. The atheist is merely a person who believes that the 260 million Americans (87% of the population) who claim to never doubt the existence of God should be obliged to present evidence for his existence and, indeed, for his benevolence, given the relentless destruction of innocent human beings we witness in the world each day. Only the atheist appreciates just how uncanny our situation is: Most of us believe in a God that is every bit as specious as the gods of Mount Olympus; no person, whatever his or her qualifications, can seek public office in the United States without pretending to be certain that such a God exists; and much of what passes for public policy in our country conforms to religious taboos and superstitions appropriate to a medieval theocracy. Our circumstance is abject, indefensible and terrifying. It would be hilarious if the stakes were not so high.”

So often atheists align their godlessness with many issues that are caused or affected by religion and religious belief. This is simply not a hard and fast rule. Atheists, as in any walk of life, are people with many and varying viewpoints about the world. Walk into a room full of atheists and you will see different personalities, different passions, different aims, and different favourite causes. One thing that many atheists seem to hold in common is a distaste for anything they see as unjust, to varying degrees. I see this as an extension of the search for the answers to the big questions of life. The arrival at an answer of “there is no god” often comes from asking and denying what has been taught over a lifetime, and can be an incredibly painful process. Once the floodgates of questioning are opened and the answers point toward religion as the cause, so many other questions come to the fore. So it makes sense that so many atheists are active in not only trying to debunk the myths of religion, but human rights issues, animal rights issues, environmentalism, feminism, disability rights, reproductive rights etc.. The list goes on. In fact it may be safe to say that those who identify themselves as atheists also have an intolerance for misinformation, lies, superstitions and exaggerations.

It is quite apparent that atheism is becoming increasingly popular. We have established atheism as a valid stance in the world, not just a rebellious reaction or a trend; we have been heard by the churches and governments, the larger community knows we exist, and many people are throwing off the shackles and label of religion and faith away daily, in favour of a rationalist and naturalistic view of the universe. In this sense, atheism as a label has been very successful, with the aid of social media and the Internet. Our words spread far and wide, and here in Australia, we even have a female openly atheist prime minister. (Many would conjecture that whether or not Prime Minister Gillard believes in god is irrelevant since she panders to the vocal Christian minority with such abandon. But my point stands, not many other places on earth would have this.) The Australian media is quite open about stories of faith and godlessness, and I’d say, at least here, we have achieved the goal of bringing atheism up out of the dungeon, and making it seen as a position that good and real people hold, and is by-and-large not a position held only baby-eating rapist murderers who worship Satan. There is still a long way to go in other countries; in the USA I doubt we’ll see a female atheist prime minister any time soon, but the voices of the American atheist is being heard loud and clear by their churches and government.

The “shock and awe” campaign of atheism has left its mark, shocking the religious with our numbers, and leaving them in awe of our reasonableness and knowledge. They know we’re here and we aren’t going away. They also know we are gaining support, and the numbers of atheists, freethinkers and rationalists continue to swell. Atheist books are available in almost all bookshops, and in many the philosophy’s and religion sections are increasing in size and filling quickly with books by the irreligious. Atheist characters in television shows are increasing, and movies with atheist characters are also on the rise. I see this trend continuing, and it is only a matter of time before the truly religious are in the minority, and the rest of society either adopts “apatheist” (apathetic atheism) views, or openly atheist philosophical stances. This may be a pipe dream, but I have reasons for thinking this.

The enemy of faith is critical thinking and availability of good information. We are in an age where information is available in many digital forms, and almost anywhere too. We are discovering more about the human brain and body than at any time in history. We are seeing deeper into our universe, and deeper into cells than previously, and the rate at which we are learning is increasing also. According to the Flynn Effect, the average IQ on earth has had to be adjusted to accommodate an increase in intellect among all humans, and the average IQ (100) would have been considered genius only a century ago (approximately 130 by comparison). The exact causes for the increase is not clear, but it seems to me that with a rise in intelligence and in increase in availability of information, faith is eventually doomed.

It would be nice if we could move forward with some of the things that concern us about the world, rather than continually referring to whether a god exists when talking about our world and universe. In fact, better than nice, it would be great if we could stop referring to god at all. It is necessary to continue to hold on strong to our assertions that there is no god, or at at least that the claims of theists and their ideals hold no water, and that all signs point towards a new rationalist ideas. Given the sway that religious influence has on our lives in a destructive way, it is imperative that we continue to criticise the encroachment of religions into our secular lives.

Religion, however, is a powerful beast, and has many allies all over the world. In fact, once could say it is the single most powerful force in the world in terms of numbers, with 84% of people claiming belief in one kind of deity or another. Given the nature of religion, which is to attach itself to a person’s very identity, it is no wonder that the challenges atheists face are tough. And for some, the eventual arrival at an atheistic stance is one of the hardest decisions or realisations a person can come to face.

If we move forward as a global society, as I hope we do, we could in fact see major religions wane in power to a point that they become irrelevant to politics and culture. But in the meantime, we should not rest on our laurels, assuming that this growth in rational thinking will just happen naturally. It takes work, time and patience to make changes in the world. And it is by no means an easy task. In fact, it is draining to have to continually drone on and on about the question of god. I hope, before I eventually run out of steam and tire of talking about it, that I can make a difference to a person’s life on this philosophical playing field, and that they in turn can do the same for others. Remember, this is not about belief, this is about how belief and doctrines affect our cultural and political lives. With that as a focus, I hope to see a day when I no longer have to talk about these issues, and I can concentrate on the more important societal problems we face, such as violence against innocents, abuse against children, the environment and the ways we treat one another.

VN:D [1.9.18_1163]
Rating: 10.0/10 (1 vote cast)
Yes, Another Post About Atheism, 10.0 out of 10 based on 1 rating
Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest
martinspribble 19 pts moderator

 AlbertJ OKAY ALBERT. This is my FINAL WORD on your posts. I gave you the benefit of the doubt in that you may actually be trying to prove something here. Turns out you are nothing but a delusional spammer. You have posted 71 comments on this piece, and are yet to make a point. Because of this, I am BANNING YOU PERMANENTLY for commenting at my blog. Goodbye.

 

skohayes 6 pts

 martinspribble  AlbertJ Probably not a bad idea. I pictured an endless thread with Albert J posting blather day after day.

martinspribble 19 pts moderator

AlbertJ has been unbanned, but only so you could see what he's writing and facepalm along with me. AlbertJ please, you conflate so many unrelated things to suit your notion of a god that it's embarrassing. seriously, yours is the ultimate conspiracy theory, and you're starting to sound like a certain Canadian psychopath I know...

 

AlbertJ 5 pts

On markets and the impossibility of socialism http://bigchieftablets.wordpress.com/2012/10/16/on-markets-and-the-impossibility-of-socialism/ This applies to all theories, not just economics, from science to religion. If you start off with a false premise, you can make anything appear true. Need a Universe with Life? Skip over the part where it get's formed and start in the middle. Come up with a simplistic theory on how things gradually progressed by mutations, and people will buy it. Not only will they buy it, they will only look for facts to reinforce it after awhile. All based on the foundation that by magic, something comes from nothing, even though there is zreo scientific evidnce that this can happen in all of the 14 Billion+ years the Cosmos has been around. Not to mention the statistical impossibility of it, or the many blaring holes in the theory (300 genes separate a human and a mouse, the Canbrian Explosion, complex human parts like cellular pumps that need all the parts at once to work, so it's imp[ossible for them to have 'evolved one part at a time...to mention just a hand full). And things need otherthing to perpetuate. Stars are born from other stars exploding. They don't just appear by magic. Life comes from other life. It doesn't just magically appear. Only by adding God back into the equation, does any of it make sense. otherwise, How else can the Universe be not only still expanding, but also accelerating at the same time? Defying the standard model of physics.

martinspribble 19 pts moderator

 AlbertJ Albert. I banned you from commenting, but you didn't notice. You just kept on posting. So here's the deal. I'm going to let you post whatever you like here. But I will not stand up for you if someone here decides to take you to task for your beliefs and strange interpretations of life, science and the universe.

Roger Ivan Hart 9 pts

 AlbertJ Someone isn't taking his tablets. Tut-tut.

AlbertJ 5 pts

Meanwhile, over at New Scientist : Forget quantum physics, forget relativity. Inklings of an ultimate theory might emerge from an unexpected place - find out where in this week's cover story. Notice it is the theory of everyTHING, not NOthing. Stars come from other stars not NOthing. Babies come from other humans, not NOthing or from corn. Life comes from other life. The Universe come from EveryTHINGness not NOthingness. Albert was right, and Nils Bohr was wrong, there needs to be, accoding to the Uncertainty Principle of physics, an original 'Observer' to start these chain reaction off in the beginning. According to overwhelming scientific evidence. Where is your science showing starts magically appear from No thing? Or life? Show us please!

AlbertJ 5 pts

Aploogis to Nic-and also, can't find your post. as tangent, for a bunch of people rulled by random chaos and magic, there sure is a lot of fundamentalist "Thou shalt not do this or that...." here :) Anyway, be scientists and get away from hiding from the facts. Come out into the light just for a minute. You all can run back into your caves if the light hurts your eyes. Scicnce, physics, randomness, chaos. There is no meaning to 'pourpose' in a random Universe. and there is no meaning. That is the whole point. There would be no point to needing to make up meaning in your lives if there was such a thing as real Atheists. You can't have that vacuum in your lives. If this was a Universe governed by chaos and randomness, you would have no problem with a meaningless pointless life! Now, as a scicntist, ask your selves why your Egos try so hard to convence you that you have meaning in a random Universe, where tomorrow you could wake up a mouse? It's a random Universe, right? No ryhm or reason to it. So what is there to care about? Why in the world would Richard DSawkins have a charity. Howq pointless for a REaL Atheist. You are all just prentending to be Atheists here patting each other on your exitential backs. Be scientists now, use physics, and explain to everyone where how purpose and meaning exisit in randomness. The argument is obvious, first there was randomness, then came coherency, and so now we presto by magic have meaning. Except, I already took that arguement away with physics. Coherency came first, just like light. Because the defeat always, thier Uncertainty twins. Checkmate.

AlbertJ 5 pts

orry Blamer, can't find you post, don't have time to look for it. Funny this blog acts so random, after starting out coherent first. I don't see myself as superior to even the ant, you do apparently. I see myself as the life force that animates you, me and all of life. I am one with it. Your life has no meaning in a random universe, because the randomness dictates it. You are lost in a circular logical philisophical black hole. Use physics. Random by definition can not allow 'meaning'. I didn't design the Cosmos, I'm observing it as it is. SO, I can't help it iof ilight always defeats darkness, and if coherency always defeats randomness. What this means in terms of science, is that before there was randomness, there was always coherency. Meaning God of course. You have free will. That's all you have. You have the free will to run around with that chip on your shoulder (and the handle blamer fit's that perfectly) and BLAME the universe for all your problems, hiding from reality. Or you have the free will to see life's obsticales as opportunities to grow, and to understand who you really are, and the true nature of reality. "I finally figured out the Universe was not out to get me!" ` Phillip K. Dick

AlbertJ 5 pts

What would there be to 'remember' in a Universe dominated by random chaos? A 'memory' would be useless in such a Universe. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/10/121008-brainless-slime-goo-spatial-memory-robot-slime-science-reid/ Is even the slime in the ice machine of higher intellegence than those who insisit on denying the science, the facts in front of them? Of course the scientific method is not possible in a Universe dominated by random chaos either.

AlbertJ 5 pts

Humans differentiate from all other species in that we alone have the Divine gift of realizing we are all interconnected to the source. Only in human form, can we understand the true nature of reality and our personal identification with it. If we can see around the 'little me' shadow produced by the Ego, and exaggerated by Intellectual Elitism. Which creates a self perpetuating shadow chasing black hole that crates the illusion of superiority and the delusion of separation from Oneness and Singularity. What part of Infinity is it that Atheists don't understand? Were social networks humanity's edge over Neandertals? http://blog.chron.com/sciguy/2012/10/were-social-networks-humanitys-edge-over-neandertals/

AlbertJ 5 pts

How to navigate out of relativitavism and the circular logical black hole caused by placing one's self at the center of the Universe. Turn on the light. Light always defeats darkness 100% of the time. 2012 October 10 - Nauset Light Star Trails http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap121010.html

ZachsMind 13 pts

You kinda lost me at this. "The answer should be, for every right-minded reasonable person 'No, I cannot prove or disprove the existence of God'. " I take offense to that, because it IS possible to disprove the existence of a god that is properly defined. A vague Deepak Chopra kinda god is hard to dispel, but the more vague the definition is, the less valid, and the more defined, the easier to prove impossible. 

 

I concur that agnosticism and atheism answer different questions, but we can't just dismiss both questions. We have to answer both questions. An agnostic is someone who thinks that question cannot be answered. I've already proven it can. 

 

The Abrahamic deity described in Jewish, Christian, and Islamic teachings is about as likely as Harry Potter, Darth Vader, or The Gingerbread Man. It's a fictional character. It is the anthropomorphism of that which was unknown to the writers of the dogma at the time. Application of the scientific method, comparative scrutiny to other objective historical evidence, and even a fundamental understanding of how human beings think and lie and manipulate each other leads to the rational and obvious conclusion. Religion is a delusion fostered by ignorance which is perpetuated unknowingly by some and intentionally by others. 

 

The Abrahamic god does not exist. Maybe there's something out there that created the universe. If it happened to be everything the human written dogma claimed it was, that still wouldn't prove anything. Those who made up this dogma had no way of knowing they were right. They were not magically given this information by an omniscient deity cuz an omniscient deity would not have used ignorant goat herders thousands of years ago to make his case. 

 

The odds that is so, are so mathematically remote as to be easily dismissed. The far more likely scenario, is that people were scared and they made up a god so they would feel better about not being able to understand or control the universe in which they lived. 

 

There is no Abrahamic god. This is not a belief. It's a conclusion after following the evidence. 

 

If something like a god did exist, we'd have to invent a new word for it, to differentiate it from what people believe exists, just as we can't call a goat or horse with a single horn a unicorn, if we ever found one. Cuz it wouldn't be the magical creature from myth. It'd be something like that but different, and we'd have to acknowledge both the similarities and the differences. 

 

So there can be no god. Whether you believe this or not, it is so. Whether or not you follow the evidence to its conclusion, the answer is the same. You can put your fingers in your ears and go la la la all you want. That doesn't change the truth. 

 

Another truth is that religion will continue to exist in humanity for a very long time. It's a very powerful force in human culture and society, and it's not going to go away despite the evidence to the contrary, because there is that sliver of a chance that if you believe in a god there is one, and an even slimmer chance that the god in question just happens to fit every detail you've imagined it to be. You are far more likely to win the lottery a dozen times in your lifespan. People love to bet against the odds. That still doesn't change the truth. 

blamer 50 pts

 ZachsMind Very compelling.

 

"They were not magically given this information by an omniscient deity cuz an omniscient deity would not have used ignorant goat herders thousands of years ago to make his case."

 

To the layman I think the odds of deism --if they've ever learnt about it-- must sound exceedingly similar to the odds of a creator that performed subsequent historical miracles. That is, involving prophets, surviving texts & moralizing institutions (imbued with good teachings, as monotheism keeps insisting on).

 

The "good" teaching of their Genesis 1:1-3 fiction seems to be that biblical miracles are --even if unbelievable and incredible-- strictly historical.

 

From there it's hardly a stretch to imagine that miracle-maker character --even if 14.6B years old-- to be still around and inspiring a few famous historical figures, essentially yesterday.

AlbertJ 5 pts

@ZachsMind I have done nothing BUT scientifically prove the scientific phenmomenon of God. God is proven by inference from science. Scicnce can't exist in a random Universe governed by magic. The scicntific methodology involves repeatibility and verifyability. With out a higher intellegence to maintain the laws of nature for 14 + Billion years, the Universe would have collapsed by now into the chaos and randomness you claim spawned the universe. Or is 14 Billion years not long enough for you? There is no, as in zero, scientific proof that something comes from nothing, that life can spontaneously just appear, or that stars can spontaneously appear. You need something to get something. and you need life to begat life. and you need stars exploding to get new stars. Whoops!

AlbertJ 5 pts

Skohayes, actually 2+2 in alternate mathematical dimensions does not equal 4 always. in REM dream state, time is a different velocity than in your newtonian waking state. Neither exists as you think of them in deep sleep. God is just as much a scientific phenomenon as Gravity. We can't exactly explain either. we can measure, quantify and perform repeatable scientific experiments verify both gravity and God = Love = Infinity. skohayes said @AlbertJ No one needs to "believe" in gravity or math, as both are easily proven- you can pretend that gravity doesn't exist, but step out of a 2nd floor window and gravity will prove that it does indeed exist. 2+2 will always equal 4..

AlbertJ 5 pts

Finally something coherent and well stated! Now just ad a sprinkle of scientific and intellectual honesty. It is impossible for Science to exist in a Universe governed by random chaos. it is impossible to start with chaos and go to coherency (because you first need the Intellect to recognize coherency). Just as Light defeats darkness always, coherency defeats chaos. and Caring defeats non-caring. God = Love = Infinity If you still want to say Love and Infinity don't exist, I'm afraid all the sceince in the Universe can't help you. deityshmeity said @AlbertJ Ego may guide our biases and wishful thinking makes it compelling to believe as you do, but our preference doesn't dictate reality. Until I have good reason to believe an all-powerful intellect is behind the universe, I won't believe it.

AlbertJ 5 pts

Skohayes, of course it's obvious, whoo hoo! Why do you think I brought caring up in the first place. Now why is there caring. Not just 'it is, we don'y want to question why, because it blows up our random Universe". Why. If this is a random universe governed by Chaos, there is no reason for caring. or survival. Or meaning. Nothing is repeatable because of chaos and randomness, so Science doesn't exist. You observe but you don't SEE. Spiders and fish care because the Universe if not born from Random Chaos. Be a scientist. It's not 'pretty obvious'. it's really, really obvious. LOL skohayes said @AlbertJ Albert, that's easy- caring is a natural part of survival of the species. Even spiders care for their young once they hatch from the egg sac. And you seem to be avoiding all my replies and instead posting new comments to avoid them. Pretty obvious.

D4M10N 6 pts

I'm just here to watch Albert J get kicked.  *popcorn*

martinspribble 19 pts moderator

 D4M10N Well there it is in black and white

AlbertJ 5 pts

Skohayes, read my lips. Pay attention! Where did I ever say God was 'a being', or a sky fairy? That's you all projecting Fundamentalism on me. I clearly said Go=Love, God = infinity. You clearly have no scientific arguments, so you try to put words in my mouth, which I never, ever said. LOL es said @AlbertJ What if the universe just happened as physicists say, Albert? The laws of science exist without god, and theories like gravity and evolution exist with quantifiable proof without the need of an imaginary being to give them weight

martinspribble 19 pts moderator

 AlbertJ  OKAY ALBERT I'VE WARNED YOU. You are no longer allowed to post here. Please find another place to peddle your wares. Maybe consider getting a blog of your own rather than trolling mine.

 

Consider yourself banned from posting until further notice.

AlbertJ 5 pts

Skohayes, do I have to draw you a picture? I thought I was among fellow scientist? You, by your body language, put your self int eh center of the universe, when you (by your faith) believe the lights will go out when you die. It's physics and perspective. Get a piece of paper and draw it out. Again, Hitch-22 died and the lights did NOT go out. Ergo your faith and belief scientifically is wrong. As is your observation of the Cosmos. You are like Plato's cave dwellers thinking the shadows on the wall are reality. s said @AlbertJ @Dubravko @deityshmeity No one here except you thinks we are the center of the universe, Albert

martinspribble 19 pts moderator

 AlbertJ  Dubravko  deityshmeity  19 posts. LAST CHANCE ALBERT!!!

AlbertJ 5 pts

@martinspribble @Dubravko @deityshmeity t addressing all the complaints I haven't answered the posts, and your blog is acting too random, it doesn't go to the post, so i have to cut and paste into another post. But of course, there has to be a format like Wordpress, designed by a higher Intelligence, before the appearance of randomness 'appears". All yours now, I'm done for the night. Hope there is some scientists out there with real answers. As for respect,k where does that come from in a random Universe governed by Chaos? :)

AlbertJ 5 pts

w Skohayes, you really "CARE" don't you? Why, if this is a random chaotic Universe. Real Atheists can't get their feelings hurt like you. Man up and be a real Atheist. And give me some real science while you are at it. skohayes said @AlbertJ I can't read this post, there's so much straw flying around. Albert, you sound very confused and unsure about your own faith, and you come to this forum to project your insecurities on the atheists who post here. I suggest you spend some time reflecting on why it's so important to you to put other people down to make yourself feel better about your own shortcomings.

martinspribble 19 pts moderator

 AlbertJ  18 posts...

AlbertJ 5 pts

Maybe I'm assuming too much here, i thought this was some advanced think tank. My mistake. Sceince needs repeatability, something which by definition does NOT exist in a random chaotic Universe. If I randomly produce life in a lab, then repeat that process in another lab to scientifically validate it, it ceases to become "random'> Whoops! When massive human focus happens on the same event at the same time due to current events, random number generators become....drum roll please, coherent! "the observer affects the Observed."~ The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, proven not only by the famous double slot experiment, but now also bt the Princeton University Millennium project. Do I still project fear of Science here. or are you all projecting your own fear of Science not fitting your random chaotic Universe? Brin on the science! Science is the best proof of Gd, Divine Intelligence, which is nothing more (or less) than Infinity. Do you still want to say God (= Love, = Infinity) does not exist, when every bit of science proves Love and Infinity exist? You all are trying really hard not to mean anything, and to be worthless and pointless! :) But you 'care', and so you loose, over and over again.

martinspribble 19 pts moderator

. AlbertJ Albert, while I'm quite happy for you to continue your circular reasoning rants here on my blog, can you please keep 2 things in mind? 1. Be respectful to other commenters or you will be banned from posting. 2. You have posted 16 comments in an hour and a half. Try to have some restraint and don't flood the comments or you will be banned from posting.

 

Restraint and respect. Also, maybe try to structure your arguments better. All I see is baseless blind assertions, conflation of unrelated topics, and terrible, terrible grammar and spelling.

 

Personally I'm not going to address the "facts" you bring up, because to tell you the truth I have no idea what you are on about, except that we (atheists) are "wrong" and you are "right".

AlbertJ 5 pts

skohayes said @AlbertJ If scientists want to study the brain, they study the brain, Albert. Your brain is the source of your "transmissions" -a combination of chemicals and electrical impulses , and you can't turn it off because if the brain is not functioning, neither is anything else. Do you all see now how the ego clouds you with blind spots? Nothing scientific in this post addresses the scientific observation, "if you personally are the source of your thoughts, why can't you turn them off at will, like any scientifically observed transmitter can?" Lot's attacks on the messenger, but no substance. why are you all afraid of the science, and of the truth, and the light? Give me some signal processing physics where the transmission can't be stopped at will by shutting down the source transmitter? If you pay attention, you will see, from science, what you really ae. And it's not a tought source transmitter. Ergo, you personally are not the source of thoughts. Simple physics. And by the way, neuro-biologists don't have fast enough technology yet to study the brain. So they study with the existing technology the slower Enteric nervous system and use it for an analogue for the brain. you do understand basic scientific methodology don't you?

AlbertJ 5 pts

Dubravko said @AlbertJ Who ever said 'I' was the center of the universe? No scientist ever said something like that. Quite the opposite, actually. Who I am? I am a single member of Homo sapiens sapiens, a subspecies of an evolved animal, brought about by evolution by natural selection, composed of discarded star stuff, of particles created in the cosmic furnaces that we call stars, inhabiting a tiny little planet in one of the star systems in one of the galaxies in a vast, unimaginably vast universe. Who are you? I am, the same as you a quantized parcel of Divine Consciousness. Unlike you, I don't separate myself in the delusion that the life force that gives me the next breath is some how different than the life force that give you the next breath. Evolution sounds like a plan. What Intelligence wrote the plan? What Intelligence maintains the plan for over 14 Billion years with out one single collapse into chaos? How exactly do you randomly jump from gases and star dust to life again? and the scientific proof of that exists whee now? Talk about faith! Zero evidence in the entire field of Science, every, anywhere, yet you all believe this mythology about random magic making life?

AlbertJ 5 pts

Dubravko said @AlbertJ @deityshmeity It is very egocentric and selfish to think we *must* have a higher purpose. Don't project your selfish, self centered I am the center of the Universe on Me. I'm not the one who thinks the lights will go out when I die, in spite of the fact the lights are still on, and Hitch-22 died. What is really egotistical is to observe the coherency of the Universe daily, minute by minute, and then dismiss it because you are afraid of rules and authority. What is arrogant is to think life has no meaning, and then pretend to care about things, yet have to intellectual dishonesty to ignore the ramifications of society, when you teach children they are pointless, meaningless accidents1 THAt is Egoism my friends! And the height of hypocrisy. Either be an atheist and go hide under a rock and cower until your last breath, or admit you care, due to coherency. Stop hitting out at the messenger, and defend your beliefs. What, that's right, Atheists can't have 'beliefs', because why would they, in a random chaotic governed Universe?

AlbertJ 5 pts

One of the problems with this blog is the 'reply' doesn't always come back to the post. I suppose that is because it's inside a random Universe. :) Skohayes said...AlbertJ You, like many others of the religious sects around the world, are deliberately ignorant of science and therefore it appears magical to you. It's been like this since the beginning of civilization. Break out of that ignorance, Albert, and do some reading. Why are you so afraid? Why do you all insist on projecting your fears on the messenger? Hmmm? science needs coherency to govern the Universe, or it could not exist. I can't believe I have to explain this simple fact to such high and mighty intellects! So why in the world would I be afraid of Science? Science is the Proof of God, for heaven's sake! You confuse me with your confused Sunday school fundamentalists, silly. I am Truth. I am merged in it. I am the light. So are you all. There is one subtle difference between us and god, but it is important to the whole conversation. The Ocean can exist with out the wave, the wave can not exist with out the ocean. yet they are one. You and I, we are quantized Consciousness on the infinite ocean of Divine consciousness Explain scientifically now; 1) How coherence cam fro Chaos/randomness 2) How that coherency is maintained 14+ Billion years with out a break down or gap 3) How the coherency laws are arbitrated minute by minute (if this Universe if governed by Chaos and Chaos came first)? Afaird of the science now are you? WHat part of Infinity don't yo0u Atheists get? Just keep repeating, "Everything that has a beginning, has to have an ending"...over and over, until you disappear, like Mr. Smith in the 3rd Matrix. Just don't be too scientific and study Pi now, 3.1416.........

AlbertJ 5 pts

It hasn't all been a waste, in spite of your fear inspired Intellectual dishonesty. I observed a new Uncertainty pair. Caring and non-caring. Which is dominant, like light and darkness? Can' you tell? Like Coherency dominates (and thus came before) Chaos and randomness, Caring dominates non-caring. Because, as I observe your Egos in denial and hiding from the light, the more you all try to 'not-care', the more you care1 Brilliant! Real Atheists don't care. What is there to care about in a Universe with no meaning? Meaning can only be derived from Coherency. Q. E. D.

AlbertJ 5 pts

As far as I can tell, I answered all your posts. Sorry, I have a day job. But why do any of you care, if this is a random Universe where nothing matters? When you take your last breath the lights go out, yes? So nothing y0u do matters at all. Especially if you map that against the 14+ coherent years we can observe the Cosmos has been here, and round off your life span, as science tends to do, since it doesn't really have the capability to quantify or measure Infinity, by simple definition of Infinity. Let me know if I forgot any of you please. In the meantime, what part of Infinity is it that you Atheists don't get?

AlbertJ 5 pts

Poor biscuit still can't even find himself. Let's see now, which Neuron or molecule or string waveicle is "biscuit" in now? Where in the whirl is biscuit? LOL

AlbertJ 5 pts

is Skohas and his sky ferry the best you all have for Science is the Proof that God is? How sad then. With silly illogic like that you strive to be meaningless and pointless? Now you understand how powerful your Egos are, what powerful pull your desires and attractions have, and how you form your own personal Black Hole of circular logical intellect. Nobody move of the Sheriff get's it!, says the sherrif in Blazing Saddles. That is you all. More scientifically, you are the Algorithm Mr. Smith in The Third Matrix, shouting as loud as you can, so as not to let the Truth in, "everything that has a beginning, has to have an ending, ...until you disappear, LOL! Ever consider the sacred spiral of Pi, the one used to design some important parts of the human body?

AlbertJ 5 pts

Maybe this will help you flatlanders understand the scientific mistake you are making observing the Cosmos detached from it as though you personally are the center of the Universe. 2012 October 7 - The Same Color Illusion http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap121007.html

AlbertJ 5 pts

Let's make this the "Science needs God to exist (or not" post. Cone one, come all, explain to us with your Ego driven intellects how science and the scientific methos work in a random Universe governed by chaos. Please show us o grand intellects. we await the words of random wisdom. Oh wait, random and wisdon can't belong in the same universe, now can they?

skohayes 6 pts

 AlbertJ Albert, the universe, the earth, the sun, all existed before your sky fairy did. Billions of planets, suns, galaxies, billions of years in existence, and you think someone invented by humans that has only been around 6000 years (other deities have been around longer than yours, by the way, but that doesn't make them any more real) created us?

LOL.

Keep writing new posts and ignoring the replies. I'm sure Martin is enjoying the added traffic to his site.

AlbertJ 5 pts

@skohayes Who said anything about 6000 years? I said in 14 Billion + years, the Universe has never collapsed into Chaos? Keeo up silly. Your childish attemps at humor don't equate to being much of a scientist, now do they? Sky ferry? There you go seperating your self from the whole, as though you personally are the center of the Universe. No wonder you can't tell us who your are, where you are or why you were here. The stars and suns and planets? They all conform to the Laws of Nature. What Intellegnce created thos laws, maintians those laws for 14 Billion + years and arbitrates them daily? WHat part of Infinity don't you attheists get. And why do you care? About this post, about anything? When nothing matters in a Random Universe governed by Chaos? Why do you get out of bed each day? For what, when you have no meaning, menaing has nho meaning?

AlbertJ 5 pts

Truth, Reality, is unchanging, absolute and eternally constant. That which changes is Illusion. The illusion is perpetuated by the delusion that one's self is the Center of the Universe (when I die the lights will go out). Science it's self is Proof of God. Science can't exist with out God to create, maintain and arbitrate the laws that allow for science. Science has no context or definition in a random Universe governed by chaos. Neither does the word/concept of "governed".

AlbertJ 5 pts

" I am not interested in the make up of this or that molecule, or the spectrum of this or that element, I want to know how God created this world. I want to know HIS thoughts, the rest are just details." - Albert Einstein "Everything should be as simple as it is, but not simpler." - Albert Einstein

AlbertJ 5 pts

So science is THE proof God is. Bam! Slam! No typos needed in this coherent dominant Universe, hey? If you took a bunch of monkeys on typewriters, typing random letters, it would take more monkeys than there are atoms in the known Universe to type a coherent sentence. The rub is, there would be no Intelligence in a random Universe governed by Chaos to RECOGNIZE it was a coherent sentence, so it would not matter. LOL I't impossible for darkness to beat the Light. It's impossible for Chaos and randomness to have come first. Silly Egos! Climb out of your black holes and stop arguing with one dimensionals about Fundamentalism and three dimensionals about the Universe beyond your two deimensional Flatland, and look around. All three are delusions. Reality is absolute and unchanging. Changes is illusion and delusion. What part of Infinity don't you Atheists understand?

skohayes 6 pts

 AlbertJ You don't seem to understand what science is, Albert. How can a very broad field of study be "proof that God is"?  What proof, other than your undying declarations, exists? 

What do monkeys have to do with anything? Put a bunch of human infants or a bunch of rocks in a room with typewriters and you'd get the same result- nothing. What does that prove? You see, scientists propose hypotheses, and then look for proof that the hypotheses are true.

You have said that god exists, so how will you go about proving it to us?

People like you claimed the sun revolved around the earth  two thousand years ago and when scientists took measurements and proved that it was actually the other way around, the religionists burned them at the stake.

You claim that it is impossible for darkness to beat light, yet even with billions of stars in our galaxy, space is dark and empty. Impossible for randomness and chaos to exist, yet one only has to look at a nebula where new stars are born or a black hole where they go to die to see that is not true.

You're flailing around, throwing words and phrases out that have no meaning. No coherence, one could say.

 

AlbertJ 5 pts

@skohayes You over think it because of the shadow cast by your Ego driven intellect. Explain to us all, oh enlightened one, how science works in a random Universe dominated and governed by Chaos? First comes coherency. Randomness and Chaos only come about secondarily, to define Coherency. I gave you several scientific proofs, like the Princeton Millennium project. Science has to have a coherent Universe, and can't exist in one governed by chaos. Otherwise, to day I measure Oxygen, but tomorrow the same measurement turns up a banana. :) In your version of thew random Cosmos. With no Intelligence providing for the Laws of Nature. Or more importantly, maintaining those COHERENT laws for 14+ billion years. Coherency rules, your chaos drools!

AlbertJ 5 pts

@skohayes Why do we need coherency> I thought, Poof, by magic, from random chaos it all came? Abbrakadabra...

AlbertJ 5 pts

"We can forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of Life is when men are afraid of the Light!" ~ Plato

Trackbacks

  1. [...] Yes, Another Post About Atheism (martinspribble.com) [...]