"no, I'm actually an athiest"

Donkey Oaty · 09-10-2010 9:40pm

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

As for the health worker, their obligations as staff should be spelt out to them and if they have a problem with that they should seek employment elsewhere

Under your rule, maybe. But they trained and went into the health service under a different set of rules, and they deserve our respect.

MagicMarker · 09-10-2010 9:40pm

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Many times on boards I've seen athiests argue that they are smarter and more enlightened than believers

Links please.

oppenheimer1 · 09-10-2010 9:41pm

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Until the day that someone can prove the existence of a god, then in terms of evidence it's up there with unicorns and the loch ness monster. I'm not sure how or if it's even necessary to actively disprove the existence of something that cannot be shown to exist...especially when the lack of evidence proffered by the opposition does the job better than any atheist argument ever could.

I'm just pointing out that Mr. Stuffins declared it to be the truth when he has no evidence to back this up. The existence of God(s) have been neither proved nor disproved.

OutlawPete · 09-10-2010 9:41pm

MagicMarker wrote: »

It's been proven beyond all reasonable doubt. Evolution is as much of a fact as the Earth revolving around the Sun.

No it is not, far from it.

It has been proven beyond all reasonable doubt that we are evolving, but that is not even remotely the same thing.

It's called the 'Evolution Theory' for a reason.

When people talk about Evolution and whether or not they believe in it, there are so many different claims that have to be taken into consideration and claims touted as facts, that they have to accept.

For that reason I say that I don't believe in evolution.

NOT because I don't think we have evolved as humans, but that I don't believe EVERYTHING that is claimed.

Science whores regularly get blinded by what science shoves down their throats, a healthy dose of common sense would do most people who participate in the usual circle jerks, the world of good.

Of you go and tell me who our common ancestors were, you know - the species that humans and apes evolved from.

While you're at it, can you tell us were that 'common ancestor' is now.

If they have died out, can you tell us why and how.

Oh and can you include some hard scientific proof of that also.

Cheers.

cypharius · 09-10-2010 9:42pm

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I personally have no problem with athiesim itself.

And I have no problem with non-stamp collecting.

NoQuarter · 09-10-2010 9:42pm

cypharius wrote: »

Lenskis e.coli experiment. Case closed.

Linky??

Turtwig · 09-10-2010 9:42pm

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Can you prove the non-existance of God?

This idea that the supernatural needs to be disproved is a common trait of supernatural belief, and oh so wrong. Let's take a lovely sexy woman who is bare bone naked. If I were to tell you that I won't accept the fact she is naked until you prove to me the non-existence of the supernatural clothes that she is wearing how would you react?

The burden of proof is on the believer, not the person who lacks the belief.
The woman is naked until proven otherwise, not assumed clothed until being clothed is fully and absolutely disproven. Likewise God's existence is unknown or not relevant until proven otherwise.

dvpower · 09-10-2010 9:43pm

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Believe in whatever you want to believe but do not think that gives you that right to look down on and belittle on those who don't share your beliefs.

If they stop shítting in our shoes, we'll stop píssing in their bovril.

Adyx · 09-10-2010 9:44pm

PAULWATSON wrote: »

One thing always bothered me about evolution, according to the theory the people around you are the fittest "best of the best" after two million years of dog eat dog. Now looking at this lot, what must the prototype have been like, a right clown I'd say.

You make it really hard to agree with you when you post shit like this. And I do want to agree with you, even as an atheist myself. You make a good point and then make it null and void by putting in a throwaway comment about something you clearly don't understand. For shame.

MrStuffins · 09-10-2010 9:44pm

Malty_T wrote: »

This idea that the supernatural needs to be disproved is a common trait of supernatural belief, and oh so wrong. Let's take a lovely sexy woman who is bare bone naked. If I were to tell you that I won't accept the fact she is naked until you prove to me the non-existence of the supernatural clothes that she is wearing how would you react?

Pics or GTFO!

MagicMarker · 09-10-2010 9:44pm

OutlawPete wrote: »

No it is not, far from it.

Yes, it has. Just because you don't believe/understand it, doesn't change that fact.

OutlawPete wrote: »

It has been proven beyond all reasonable doubt that we are evolving, but that is not even remotely the same thing.

It's called the 'Evolution Theory' for a reason.

When people talk about Evolution and whether or not they believe in it, there are so many different claims that have to be taken into consideration and claims touted as facts, that they have to accept.

For that reason I say that I don't believe in evolution.

NOT because I don't think we have evolved as humans, but that I don't believe EVERYTHING that is claimed.

Science whores regularly get blinded by what science shoves down their throats, a healthy dose of common sense would do most people who participate in the usual circle jerks, the world of good.

Of you go and tell me who our common ancestors were, you know - the species that humans and apes evolved from.

While you're at it, can you tell us were that 'common ancestor' is now.

If they have died out, can you tell us why and how.

Oh and can you include some hard scientific proof of that also.

Cheers.

You put emphasis on the word theory, even though it was explained to you previously in another thread exactly what a scientific theory is. You seem to have completely ignored that, so why bother wasting time on you now?

MagicMarker · 09-10-2010 9:44pm

NoQuarter wrote: »

Linky??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._coli_long-term_evolution_experiment

Phegasus · 09-10-2010 9:46pm

Fair enough fair enough, but why should religions be tax exempt?

oppenheimer1 · 09-10-2010 9:46pm

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

No impact on my life? I'm not even safe in my own home from religious people trying to peddle their own brand of crazy - and don't get me started on the school system here or theists campaigning against equality legislation! I'd be feckin delighted if everyone kept their opinions to themselves! Let's not forget it wasn't very long ago that atheists would have been deemed heretics and killed for daring to give a descenting voice - I hardly think theists can bleat about atheists sharing their views since the world has had to listen to theists bang on about theirs & demanding a say in how society is run from the days of worshipping thor right up to present day! :pac:

You're not safe, stop with the hyperbole. Again I'm going to make the same point I made earlier, how does someones belief in god affect you? The points you're alluding to above are the Catholic Churchs position, and have nothing to do with believing in God(s)

MrStuffins · 09-10-2010 9:47pm

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

You're not safe, stop with the hyperbole. Again I'm going to make the same point I made earlier, how does someones belief in god affect you? The points you're alluding to above are the Catholic Churchs position, and have nothing to do with believing in God(s)

How does someone's non-belief effect you?

Ickle Magoo · 09-10-2010 9:47pm

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

I'm just pointing out that Mr. Stuffins declared it to be the truth when he has no evidence to back this up. The existence of God(s) have been neither proved nor disproved.

By that logic pink unicorns and the loch ness monster have as much probability of existing as not... I think it's fair to say most atheists are open to the possibility of a god existing but the sheer lack of evidence provided by those puting forward such a hypothesis makes the proposal less and less likely - much like old nessie.

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

You're not safe, stop with the hyperbole. Again I'm going to make the same point I made earlier, how does someones belief in god affect you? The points you're alluding to above are the Catholic Churchs position, and have nothing to do with believing in God(s)

Are you suggesting being a member of a church has nothing to with believing in god? What?

NoQuarter · 09-10-2010 9:47pm

MagicMarker wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._coli_long-term_evolution_experiment

Sorry i did actually good that!

Just thought there might have been a cooler link

MagicMarker · 09-10-2010 9:48pm

NoQuarter wrote: »

Sorry i did actually good that!

Just thought there might have been a cooler link

It's explained in detail in Dawkin's book.

cypharius · 09-10-2010 9:50pm

OutlawPete wrote: »

It's called the 'Evolution Theory' for a reason.

It's called "Germ Theory" for a reason

OutlawPete wrote: »

For that reason I say that I don't believe in evolution.

Really, I could have never guessed.

OutlawPete wrote: »

Science whores

I'm a science pimp actually.

OutlawPete wrote: »

a healthy dose of common sense

Common sense is a primitive form of science.

OutlawPete wrote: »

If they have died out, can you tell us why and how.

Thousands of hypothesis's, many, many theories: Google is your friend.

oppenheimer1 · 09-10-2010 9:51pm

MrStuffins wrote: »

How does someone's non-belief effect you?

It doesn't. Only when they evangelise or condescend to people who do. Thats what annoys me.

oppenheimer1 · 09-10-2010 9:52pm

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Are you suggesting being a member of a church has nothing to with believing in god? What?

No I'm suggesting that believing in God(s) has nothing to do with being a member of a Church.

OutlawPete · 09-10-2010 9:52pm

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

Atheists seem smug because religion is just so f*cking retarded, it baffles any sane person observing it from the outside?

Well, it depends on your definition of atheist.

I believe that 99% of religions are a joke and based on highly embellished fables of one sort or another.

However, some people will say that an atheist means that you can not be spiritual either, so that is why I would never refer to myself as an atheist, as I believe in an afterlife.

Some atheists would say that I can describe myself as an atheist though as I don't have a belief in any deities.

poppyvalley · 09-10-2010 9:52pm

I'm a non-practising atheist.

Jumpy · 09-10-2010 9:53pm

MrStuffins wrote: »

AH HA!!!!!!! GOD DID IT BABY!!! SCREW YOU DARWIN! WWWWOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!"

Xena has already answered this question.

A Wizard did it.

MrStuffins · 09-10-2010 9:53pm

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

It doesn't. Only when they evangelise or condescend to people who do. Thats what annoys me.

Sorry, are you talking about the Church here or Athiests?

Or both?

I'd love to know where this notion of evalgelising and condescending being exclusively athiest traits came from!

MarcusFenix · 09-10-2010 9:54pm

LOL I read first page of this thread and it was all take the p!ss more or less, skipped to last page and everyone's all serious and arguing! same with every AH thread really.

For the record, evolution happened, otherwise....explain the appendix!!:eek::cool:

Turtwig · 09-10-2010 9:55pm

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

It doesn't. Only when they evangelise or condescend to people who do. Thats what annoys me.

But you see, I asked this to a Christian in another thread and he couldn't provide any numbers so perhaps you can. What is the proportion of atheists who evangelise or condescend? I might be sticking my neck out here a bit but reasonably confident if you ask on the Christianity forum I'm not seeing as an evangelising or condescending one. Reason and experience tells me that the proportion who do do what you claim are in a minority. But as with all minorities they are the more vocal bastards.

MrStuffins · 09-10-2010 9:55pm

OutlawPete wrote: »

However, some people will say that an atheist means that you can not be spiritual either, so that is why I would never refer to myself as an atheist, as I believe in an afterlife.

Some atheists would say that I can describe myself as an atheist though as I don't have a belief in any deities.

this isn't necessarily the case though.

And a MAJOR difference here is that if you bring an Athiest evidence, they will examine it and except it if it is sufficient.

But do the same to a Creationist, i'm afraid the vast majority will ignore it if it contradicts their beliefs or "faith"

NoQuarter · 09-10-2010 9:56pm

MagicMarker wrote: »

It's explained in detail in Dawkin's book.

You mean that was a quick summary!?!? My poor lil head...

oppenheimer1 · 09-10-2010 9:57pm

MrStuffins wrote: »

Sorry, are you talking about the Church here or Athiests?

Or both?

I'd love to know where this notion of evalgelising and condescending being exclusively athiest traits came from!

Did I say they were exclusive? I find theists who evangelise and condescend just as annoying.

"no, I'm actually an athiest"

Comments