Gawdzilla Sama
Valued Senior Member
How is it we are not done with this foolishness yet?
Scientists discover that atheists might not exist, and that’s not a joke
- Thread starter Jan Ardena
- Start date
- Status
///
I have not jumped to anything & it would not matter anyway & I do not care whether you asked me.
I think your reaction is bullshit.
<>
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Just keep fooling yourself Jan.
As far as you are aware there is no God either. Mathematics is as far as anyone can go and He just spoke to me, didn't you see?
My frustration is not about God, it is about your stubborn insistence that there is a god without any supporting proof of any kind. It seems to me that you are more intelligent and sophisticated, but alas, there is that hopelessly naive clinging to an ancient myth instead of any expression that could be called reasonable, rational or logical.
You see, we can play that game ad infinitum, but I am on much firmer ground that you. Your head is in the clouds.....
.....looking for Thor.
That's what I'd expect, you as an atheist, to say (or something very similar).
What you fail to understand is, the meaning of ''atheist'' (not designer), describes you perfectly, and there's no way you're going to accept theism.
Along with your position, there is another, just as real as atheism. And that is theism.
They are both real, in their own right.
Atheists lack belief, or disbelieve, in God.
Theists accept and believe in God
Why do I need what you regard as ''supporting proof'''? It is obvious to me, and other theists, that God Is.
The atheist tells themselves they need supporting proof, and whatnot. Because they need to maintain their atheism.
They create a strawman, then expect the theist to pluck it out of their head.
It will never happen, because the strawman complies with the atheists mentality, which is denial, and rejection of God.
So your frustration is with God, because you know you deny and reject God, but you also know that is a foolish thing to do.
Do you notice that putting me down, is very much a part of your defence?
It doesn't matter whether or not I believe in God, God Is.
The more you put me down, the more you are in denial.
You see, we can play that game ad infinitum, but I am on much firmer ground that you. Your head is in the clouds.....
I'm not playing any games, but I'm aware of the game you're playing.
jan.
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Being called naive is not an ad hominem. On the contrary, it defines innocence.
Right. Just as it is obvious to him, and other theists, that there is no evidence that God exists.
The theist tells himself he doesn't need supporting proof, and whatnot. Because he needs to maintain his theism at all costs.
They create a strawman, then expect the atheist to pluck it out of their head.
It will never happen, because the strawman complies with the theists mentality, which is blind acceptance, no matter what the facts.
So your frustration is with God, because deep down you realize you blindly accept God without proof - and you also know that is indefensible.
You are no different than any other theist; you just have a different (and equally indefensible) set of beliefs.
Last edited:
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
So you agree that there are atheists who are indeed atheists, and not naive theists?
Thank god, we got that straightened out.....
As far as you're aware, there is no God, so it is understandable why you would think that.
There's no need to maintain theism, as it is natural.
Atheism on the other hand, has to maintain its denial, and rejection of God.
No need to create a strawman. That's what atheists do, to maintain their atheism, otherwise their foolishness will become apparent to them.
No need to create a strawman. The theist accept God, but not blindly. It doesn't match with the definition of theism, which states that a theist is a person who simply believes in God.
Whereas an atheist does not believe in God. If you want to pretend there is no evidence for God, be my guest. But it still amounts to disbelief in God.
An atheist can go no further than, there is no God. Everything regarding God, will be negative, it cannot, under any circumstances be positive. So any remark you say, has to be taken on that basis.
That is your lot, until you stop being an atheist.
From an atheist perspective, it can be anything. Which is why your mimicking is to be taken with a pinch of salt. You have nothing to say past, there is no God as far as you're aware. You present comedy (not very funny), ad Homs, mimicry, mockery, which is basically blasphemy (from theist perspective). Please prove me wrong, if you can?
jan.
Yes. There are people who identify as atheist. That's never been disputed.
I just agree that, you aren't atheist in reality. I don't think it is actually possible.
jan.
I take the opposite view: It isn't actually possible for adults to believe in Santa Claus or fairies or gods.
I didn't say that. I said there was no objective evidence God exists.
If it were natural, then everyone would have a similar, natural view of God. They do not.
If you put a pigeon in a Skinner box, and teach him to peck the switch to get a food pellet, he will learn to peck the switch.
But if you put a pigeon in a Skinner box, and give him food pellets infrequently at random, he will develop all sorts of superstitious behaviors. He will dance in circles. He will peck the switch incessantly. He will crow and strut. Some will spin clockwise; some counterclockwise. He does these because he is wired to believe that you have to do something to get fed. And at one point the pigeon spun in a circle three times and got fed - therefore, he decided that spinning in a circle three times results in getting food. And the superstition is born.
Is that "natural?"
How much effort do you expend to maintain your denial and rejection of Santa Claus?
Completely blindly. For most theists, there is no scientific proof, no evidence no matter how strong, no argument, that would cause them to realize their God doesn't exist. That is the definition of blindness - literally an inability to see something.
And a theist can go no further than, there is God. No matter what evidence says otherwise. Full stop; the end. Blind, in other words.
No doubt I would have been put to death as a heretic in a more "enlightened" theistic time. Fortunately we live in an age where theists are, more often than not, ignored.
Xelasnave.1947
Valued Senior Member
Generally an atheist seeks truth and including superstitious beliefs founded in the bronze age they find unnecessary and unhelpful whereas the theist denies truth if it contradicts their scripture.
An atheist thinks about the world and seeks evidence to support their opinions and the theist thinks about an unevidenced future in which their status as the pets of a mythical being is paramount.
An atheist employs reason and asks questions and a theist throws out reason and follows the party line even if that line is against well evidenced science and accumulated knowledge.
Theists become evasive if they sence their answer confirms their ignorance or exposes flaws in their scripture or in the logic of their story.
There is little effort needed to determine their stories are made up or that their made up God mirrors the accepted immorality of the era when their superstitions considered it moral to kill folk for various crimes where someone failed to tow the party line...and in that era they did not know the Earth was sphere like nor did they know where the Sun went at night.
And the theist maintains these primative folk should be considered authority for their science.
The theist insists on talking about their God yet are unable to point to any action that would indicate that any God exists.
Jan seems like a nice person and even he surcumbs to the failure to provide evidence for his make believe claims and can on the odd occassion become evasive rather than confront the reality that he is unable to provide a rational answer.
He becomes evasive rather than confront the telling issues others find in his superstition.
Theists claim faith as their key to knowledge and of course faith is no more than mere opinion and susceptible to hiding the truth rather than to find it and faith will then slam the door shut if truth happens to knock.
I conclude that the op provided a great opportunity to observe the approach of the theist as to cherry picking to shore up their fear of irrelevance and how they can sort through anything to find hints of their non existent God.
So far after many many pages of discussion all we are left with...God is...simplistic and uninformative which is in keeping with the whole made up God story.
Alex
An atheist thinks about the world and seeks evidence to support their opinions and the theist thinks about an unevidenced future in which their status as the pets of a mythical being is paramount.
An atheist employs reason and asks questions and a theist throws out reason and follows the party line even if that line is against well evidenced science and accumulated knowledge.
Theists become evasive if they sence their answer confirms their ignorance or exposes flaws in their scripture or in the logic of their story.
There is little effort needed to determine their stories are made up or that their made up God mirrors the accepted immorality of the era when their superstitions considered it moral to kill folk for various crimes where someone failed to tow the party line...and in that era they did not know the Earth was sphere like nor did they know where the Sun went at night.
And the theist maintains these primative folk should be considered authority for their science.
The theist insists on talking about their God yet are unable to point to any action that would indicate that any God exists.
Jan seems like a nice person and even he surcumbs to the failure to provide evidence for his make believe claims and can on the odd occassion become evasive rather than confront the reality that he is unable to provide a rational answer.
He becomes evasive rather than confront the telling issues others find in his superstition.
Theists claim faith as their key to knowledge and of course faith is no more than mere opinion and susceptible to hiding the truth rather than to find it and faith will then slam the door shut if truth happens to knock.
I conclude that the op provided a great opportunity to observe the approach of the theist as to cherry picking to shore up their fear of irrelevance and how they can sort through anything to find hints of their non existent God.
So far after many many pages of discussion all we are left with...God is...simplistic and uninformative which is in keeping with the whole made up God story.
Alex
Last edited:
Already repeated often enough.
No scientists have discovered that atheists might not exist. The OP claims they have. That OP claim is false.
In addition, it misrepresents the work of scientists who engaged in honest research and reported their findings with care - misleading the reader about both the scientists and the published research. That, on a science forum, is a bad thing to do.
Ok.
But you then - in that context - posted false claims about scientific research, bearing false witness against apparently honest and honorable scientists, misrepresenting their research and discoveries as they had reported them, on a science forum.
So the following question becomes a fair one: do you actually think atheism of any kind is impossible, or are you falsely reporting your thoughts and misrepresenting the nature of your thinking in this matter?
Last edited:
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
There are Theists who identify as Christ the Saviour. You can find them in the insane asylum.
But you will never find an atheist who identifies as Christ.
Are you disputing that?
Last edited:
Never looked after any of these in the foam lined rooms where I nursed
I did look after jesus christ
Very nice Australian Aboriginal man with kidney problems
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
But was a theist or an atheist?Never looked after any of these in the foam lined rooms where I nursed
I did look after jesus christ
Very nice Australian Aboriginal man with kidney problems
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Scientist discover that "theists tend to resist science, and that's not a joke".
I think the condition is called "Belief perseverance"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belief_perseverance
Last edited:
Pretty sure Catholic
I find (found) it strange (peculiar) Australia Aboriginal people banging on about their culture
How rich it has been for many thousands of years
Along come the Catholics and they are giving their kids Catholic names
Noticed this in other cultures also
Chatting with a girl at the moment who said she studied a few religions to pick the right one for her
Go figure
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
I would hazard a guess that many people seek an orderly structure in their lives. No question, religion does provide that for many. And in some respects the metaphorical messages are based on moral tenets and provide guidance.Pretty sure Catholic
I find (found) it strange (peculiar) Australia Aboriginal people banging on about their culture
How rich it has been for many thousands of years
Along come the Catholics and they are giving their kids Catholic names
Noticed this in other cultures also
Chatting with a girl at the moment who said she studied a few religions to pick the right one for her
Go figure
Problem is the basic falsehood on which Religions are founded. I guess, this is the reason why so many religious people actually have never read the bible in its entirety, but only those passages their preacher or pastor has selected for them.
I find it amusing that religious people cannot accept that humans evolved from a common ancestor of all great apes (hominids). The interesting part is that the chimpanzee already has a rudimentary belief in an "unseen" powerful enemy in the sky, which is responsible for thunderstorms and monsoons.
I am sure this is at least in part responsible for belief perseverance, it's an ancient belief sytem that began long before homo sapiens became strictly bi-pedal.
Last edited:
- Status