Jump to content
Skans

Atheism Is The Religion of God-Haters

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, XavierOnassis said:

sole does not understand sole.

sole is a Black hole of  meaningless gibberish.

merry ole sole is me.  Oh, Black holes are another Albert Einstein social misdirection stemming from his "Relative theory" and were only introduced in 1916...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, leftjohn said:

 

Start believing you don't exist, see where that leads you.

I don't have to believe either way.  I simply can't prove that I exist, that any of this exists.  If I was just a brain in a jar it would look the same to me.

 

My best argument for my existence is that if I was making it all up, I wouldn't have put so many assholes on the planet with me.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, sole result said:

merry ole sole is me.  Oh, Black holes are another Albert Einstein social misdirection.

no, they aren't.

Black holes exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Scout said:

 

That is my 'safe space' (too incomprehensible).  

 

Religion has changed a lot over the years, but is still light years behind intelligent thinkers. 

religion is church dogma dovetailed to fit  political persuasions. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, XavierOnassis said:

no, they aren't.

Black holes exist.

and we will probably soon find out that trump f ucked a few while married to melanomia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, XavierOnassis said:

no, they aren't.

Black holes exist.

As defined in theory for the absence of reflection and shadow anything behind them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Harryhands said:

I don't have to believe either way.  I simply can't prove that I exist, that any of this exists.  If I was just a brain in a jar it would look the same to me.

 

My best argument for my existence is that if I was making it all up, I wouldn't have put so many assholes on the planet with me.

 

That is a good argument.

I would never have created Donald Trump.

I certainly would never have invented all the ignorant trolls in this forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Harryhands said:

I don't have to believe either way.  I simply can't prove that I exist, that any of this exists.  If I was just a brain in a jar it would look the same to me.

 

My best argument for my existence is that if I was making it all up, I wouldn't have put so many assholes on the planet with me.

 

 

I can prove I exist because I can show myself. I can see myself in a mirror and with a camera. Others can see me, I can see others. 

 

Maybe the mirror, camera and myself only exist in someone else's dream but I still exist if only in that dream.

 

I am, therefore, I exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Harryhands said:

Why is that not entirely possible?  I made you, all of you, all of this up or, you did and I exist only in your mind?

 

 

It is entirely possible. But it is a dead end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, leftjohn said:

 

I can prove I exist because I can show myself. I can see myself in a mirror and with a camera. Others can see me, I can see others. 

 

Maybe the mirror, camera and myself only exist in someone else's dream but I still exist if only in that dream.

 

I am, therefore, I exist.

You believe that you exist, but you can prove no such thing.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last night I was watching a Netflix series called "Episodes" about a British couple who write sitcoms and end up in Hollywood with some weird Hollywood types. I fell asleep, and in my dream, I saw myself in my dream as one of the characters. At some point, the writers are in a brainstorming session and each discusses what his particular talent is  and one of the characters asks me, "Who are you? Who let you in? What are you doing here?" and I say "I am an observer, but now I have to leave, because I need to pee."

And of course, I woke up, needing to pee.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nine pages and not one post that actually ponders the question honestly and reasonably. @harryramar came closest to the true nature of the question.

 

No discussion of the existence (or non-existence) of a supreme creative "force" can occur honestly unless such a force is discussed in a supernatural context. Comparisons to pink elephants, dogs, spaghetti monsters and other such temporal examples are nothing but red herrings brought forth to allow the atheist an easy, but hollow "victory."

 

Once you actually begin to discuss an infinitely advanced supernatural creator-force, neither "side" can absolutely prove their position. Opinions and speculation are the only intellectually honest points, and it is through these that honest, intelligent people can consider our origins. My opinion is nature teaches us that there was an outside, supernatural source for our existence. Why? Humans are a singularly unique and very special entity within our universe -- specifically, that we are creative. Further, it is observed that order and purpose do not arise out of accident and chaos, but rather out of design and intent, which facts, coupled with the creativity of humans and the obvious laws of causation, imply that we have a creative source. i.e., there is no such example we can point to where something arose from nothing, or where accident produces purpose and order. This implies that we, too, and our universe, were designed and produced with intent. Of course, it doesn't prove that, but as I said, there will be no proof of this either way.

 

I have yet to hear a good argument for why and how the universe would happen to exist, if nothing else exists beyond the observable boundaries of our reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Harryhands said:

You believe that you exist, but you can prove no such thing.

 

 

Again, a dead end. perhaps true, but so what if it is? It is game over. Where is the fun in that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, XavierOnassis said:

It is entirely possible. But it is a dead end.

Dead end?  If it was true would you not just go along as usual regardless?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, XavierOnassis said:

That is a good argument.

I would never have created Donald Trump.

I certainly would never have invented all the ignorant trolls in this forum.

 

Their assaults on kindness, logic and science indicate the existence of evil and perhaps of demons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Harryhands said:

You believe that you exist, but you can prove no such thing.

 

 

 

I can see myself. If you were standing next to me, you could see me as well. You could touch me, hear me, smell me if I hadn't bathed. What more proof do you need?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, SixShooter said:

Nine pages and not one post that actually ponders the question honestly and reasonably. @harryramar came closest to the true nature of the question.

 

No discussion of the existence (or non-existence) of a supreme creative "force" can occur honestly unless such a force is discussed in a supernatural context. Comparisons to pink elephants, dogs, spaghetti monsters and other such temporal examples are nothing but red herrings brought forth to allow the atheist an easy, but hollow "victory."

 

Once you actually begin to discuss an infinitely advanced supernatural creator-force, neither "side" can absolutely prove their position. Opinions and speculation are the only intellectually honest points, and it is through these that honest, intelligent people can consider our origins. My opinion is nature teaches us that there was an outside, supernatural source for our existence. Why? Humans are a singularly unique and very special entity within our universe -- specifically, that we are creative. Further, it is observed that order and purpose do not arise out of accident and chaos, but rather out of design and intent, which facts, coupled with the creativity of humans and the obvious laws of causation, imply that we have a creative source. i.e., there is no such example we can point to where something arose from nothing, or where accident produces purpose and order. This implies that we, too, and our universe, were designed and produced with intent. Of course, it doesn't prove that, but as I said, there will be no proof of this either way.

 

I have yet to hear a good argument for why and how the universe would happen to exist, if nothing else exists beyond the observable boundaries of our reality.

Why do you think the universe was created instead of it simply being here?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, leftjohn said:

 

I can see myself. If you were standing next to me, you could see me as well. You could touch me, hear me, smell me if I hadn't bathed. What more proof do you need?

Never trust your eyes.  The eyes lie, the mind creates what isn't there.

 

These dots don't change color so how come your mind says they do?

blackballs_1120775i.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Harryhands said:

Why do you think the universe was created instead of it simply being here?

 

The answer to that is in my post you quoted. Did you read it?

 

In fact, it came right after where I asked "Why?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, SixShooter said:

 

The answer to that is in my post you quoted. Did you read it?

I hope it's not, everything has a creator?

 

" This implies that we, too, and our universe, were designed and produced with intent. "

 

False, of course.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Harryhands said:

It's been some time now.  I hope it's not, everything has a creator.

 

Why? Where is the flaw in that notion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SixShooter said:

Nine pages and not one post that actually ponders the question honestly and reasonably. @harryramar came closest to the true nature of the question.

 

No discussion of the existence (or non-existence) of a supreme creative "force" can occur honestly unless such a force is discussed in a supernatural context. Comparisons to pink elephants, dogs, spaghetti monsters and other such temporal examples are nothing but red herrings brought forth to allow the atheist an easy, but hollow "victory."

 

Once you actually begin to discuss an infinitely advanced supernatural creator-force, neither "side" can absolutely prove their position. Opinions and speculation are the only intellectually honest points, and it is through these that honest, intelligent people can consider our origins. My opinion is nature teaches us that there was an outside, supernatural source for our existence. Why? Humans are a singularly unique and very special entity within our universe -- specifically, that we are creative. Further, it is observed that order and purpose do not arise out of accident and chaos, but rather out of design and intent, which facts, coupled with the creativity of humans and the obvious laws of causation, imply that we have a creative source. i.e., there is no such example we can point to where something arose from nothing, or where accident produces purpose and order. This implies that we, too, and our universe, were designed and produced with intent. Of course, it doesn't prove that, but as I said, there will be no proof of this either way.

 

I have yet to hear a good argument for why and how the universe would happen to exist, if nothing else exists beyond the observable boundaries of our reality.

For me, humans being creative is  simply a result of having more creative abilities than we need to survive.  I don't think we have a real purpose other than the purpose(s) we assign to ourselves.

The Universe is far too chaotic to be the work of any Perfect Being. 

If God were in an engineering class at MIT, he would flunk out.

In a perfectly created  universe, the Earth would not have an orbit of 365.2511 days. It would be an EVEN NUMBER. 

The Moon would orbit the Earth a specific number of times in a year. The reality is that the Moon orbits every 29.50588 days, and therefore the lunar calendar and the Solar calendar are out of sync. That is simply sh!tty design. Let's make there 360 days in a year, 12 months of exactly 30 days each.  That is the least a Perfect Creator could do.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"... there is no such example we can point to where something arose from nothing..."

 

So, where did God come from? Who created him.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...