Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

The atheist crusades must stop!

Page 7 of 35 [ 547 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 35  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

22 Aug 2008, 7:21 pm

Scott_R92 wrote:
Allow me to reword my post. By life, while I didn't make it clear, I meant intelligent life, or at least multi-cellular life. My apologies.


there'd still be demands to back up the claims with evidence and proofs.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,939
Location:      

22 Aug 2008, 7:28 pm

skafather84 wrote:
Fnord wrote:
Scott_R92 wrote:
If someone proposed in a paper, the radical idea that there is life on, say, Dione, (a moon of a planet, which planet exactly has escaped me). Many would likely call such ideas crackpot, insane, illogical, because it seems to defy human logic.

Actually, the logical response would be more like, "Perhaps, but what kind of life?" rather than an outright dismissal.

Dione is a moon of Saturn. It was discovered by Giovanni Cassini in 1684, and is named after the titan Dione of Greek mythology. It is also designated Saturn IV. Dione is composed primarily of water ice and has little or no atmosphere or observable tectonic activity.

So while life on Dione may be possible, it is unlikely to be anything more complex than the simplest of single-celled organisms.

actually the first response would be "show evidence". there'd most likely still be skeptics afterwards until more conclusive proof was given...but the demand for evidence would be first...not an outright dismissal of the claim.

Right, but only if an outright claim was made. Scott_R92 said, "If someone proposed ... life on ... Dione ..."

A proposal is not a claim.



skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

22 Aug 2008, 7:30 pm

Fnord wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Fnord wrote:
Scott_R92 wrote:
If someone proposed in a paper, the radical idea that there is life on, say, Dione, (a moon of a planet, which planet exactly has escaped me). Many would likely call such ideas crackpot, insane, illogical, because it seems to defy human logic.

Actually, the logical response would be more like, "Perhaps, but what kind of life?" rather than an outright dismissal.

Dione is a moon of Saturn. It was discovered by Giovanni Cassini in 1684, and is named after the titan Dione of Greek mythology. It is also designated Saturn IV. Dione is composed primarily of water ice and has little or no atmosphere or observable tectonic activity.

So while life on Dione may be possible, it is unlikely to be anything more complex than the simplest of single-celled organisms.

actually the first response would be "show evidence". there'd most likely still be skeptics afterwards until more conclusive proof was given...but the demand for evidence would be first...not an outright dismissal of the claim.

Right, but only if an outright claim was made. Scott_R92 said, "If someone proposed ... life on ... Dione ..."

A proposal is not a claim.


what? like just throwing out whatever just for s**ts and giggles?



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,939
Location:      

22 Aug 2008, 7:55 pm

skafather84 wrote:
Fnord wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Fnord wrote:
Scott_R92 wrote:
If someone proposed in a paper, the radical idea that there is life on, say, Dione, (a moon of a planet, which planet exactly has escaped me). Many would likely call such ideas crackpot, insane, illogical, because it seems to defy human logic.

Actually, the logical response would be more like, "Perhaps, but what kind of life?" rather than an outright dismissal.

Dione is a moon of Saturn. It was discovered by Giovanni Cassini in 1684, and is named after the titan Dione of Greek mythology. It is also designated Saturn IV. Dione is composed primarily of water ice and has little or no atmosphere or observable tectonic activity.

So while life on Dione may be possible, it is unlikely to be anything more complex than the simplest of single-celled organisms.

actually the first response would be "show evidence". there'd most likely still be skeptics afterwards until more conclusive proof was given...but the demand for evidence would be first...not an outright dismissal of the claim.

Right, but only if an outright claim was made. Scott_R92 said, "If someone proposed ... life on ... Dione ..."

A proposal is not a claim.

what? like just throwing out whatever just for s**ts and giggles?

Or expressing an opinion, like saying, "Maybe doing away with art classes in public schools would promote better performance in math and science."

Making a claim is like saying, "Art classes are a waste of time, because they keep people from doing well in math and science."

The first statement is speculative (a proposal), while the second one is declarative (a claim).



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

22 Aug 2008, 8:11 pm

CelticRose wrote:
I'm curious as to why atheists seem to be so threatened by religion/religious beliefs. Why would anybody be threatened by something they don't even believe in? I would think that for an atheist the logical response to religion would be to simply ignore it. Why waste your time debating something that you think doesn't exist? And why bother trying to convert others to your beliefs or lack thereof?


I dislike the people who are constantly nagging at me to find salvation in their personal religion in exactly the same way that I dislike telemarketers calling me exactly as I sit down to dinner to get me to switch long-distance plans.

I'm happy with my current long distance, thank you very much. I do not need Jesus Long Distance. Would you please stop calling me.

I dislike evangelical christians ramming their beliefs into politics because it has real-world effects that limit my freedoms and those of people I care about.
If christians kept it to themselves and were content to live and let live, I wouldn't have a problem with them; unfortunately, that is not the case for a very large and very vocal contingent of christianity.



greenblue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,896
Location: Home

22 Aug 2008, 8:19 pm

This might be one reason: http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt74925.html :P


_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?


Scott_R92
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 36
Location: Ohio, in the depths of despair and the pits of hell. Charming, isn't it?

22 Aug 2008, 8:34 pm

Quote:
Edit: Also, this is not my point. My point is that while Aspies like myself find logic as the ultimate rule, logic can change; drastically and quickly. So using logic as a basis for belief is, under this circumstance, inevitably flawed.


Either you can't read edits, or are nowhere near as observant as you make yourselves seem. Putting it simply, you can't put logic in something beyond known logic. The result is a biased and snide remark. If you wish to make a point, take action and make a way for logic to get to this subject. Right now, nobody can prove or disprove something to this scale, because we have only had written accounts of history for 5000 years, far longer than the earth and life on it has existed. Anything beyond this is a mere calculated guess.


_________________
Yes, My MSNM is the same as my e-mail, letter for letter, including the @yahoo.com

Where are you on the spectrum?


DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

22 Aug 2008, 8:39 pm

CelticRose wrote:
I'm curious as to why atheists seem to be so threatened by religion/religious beliefs. Why would anybody be threatened by something they don't even believe in? I would think that for an atheist the logical response to religion would be to simply ignore it. Why waste your time debating something that you think doesn't exist? And why bother trying to convert others to your beliefs or lack thereof?


Its not their beliefs that threaten me its what they do with those beliefs

LKL wrote:
I dislike evangelical christians ramming their beliefs into politics because it has real-world effects that limit my freedoms and those of people I care about.
If christians kept it to themselves and were content to live and let live, I wouldn't have a problem with them; unfortunately, that is not the case for a very large and very vocal contingent of christianity.


My view exactly, trouble is this sort of christian does not get it and then becomes upset when their interfering beliefs are questioned with rational arguments. Stop interfering and a lots of atheists will back off


_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams

"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx


Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

22 Aug 2008, 8:52 pm

LKL wrote:
If christians kept it to themselves and were content to live and let live, I wouldn't have a problem with them; unfortunately, that is not the case for a very large and very vocal contingent of christianity.

The obnoxious evangelicals are not nearly so large a portion as most people believe them to be. You're falling prey to the availability heuristic by thinking that those people constitute a large portion of the population that considers itself Christian.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


Scott_R92
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 36
Location: Ohio, in the depths of despair and the pits of hell. Charming, isn't it?

22 Aug 2008, 9:07 pm

Little more than 20% of the Christian population is evangelical. Over 60% of America is Christian, (by my last check of the U.S. survey) and therefore only (approximately) 22 million of America's 300 million or so inhabitants are those people who attempt to subject their religion on you (which, if you actually understood the New Testament, is every Christian's job while on earth).


_________________
Yes, My MSNM is the same as my e-mail, letter for letter, including the @yahoo.com

Where are you on the spectrum?


skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

22 Aug 2008, 9:10 pm

Fnord wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Fnord wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Fnord wrote:
Scott_R92 wrote:
If someone proposed in a paper, the radical idea that there is life on, say, Dione, (a moon of a planet, which planet exactly has escaped me). Many would likely call such ideas crackpot, insane, illogical, because it seems to defy human logic.

Actually, the logical response would be more like, "Perhaps, but what kind of life?" rather than an outright dismissal.

Dione is a moon of Saturn. It was discovered by Giovanni Cassini in 1684, and is named after the titan Dione of Greek mythology. It is also designated Saturn IV. Dione is composed primarily of water ice and has little or no atmosphere or observable tectonic activity.

So while life on Dione may be possible, it is unlikely to be anything more complex than the simplest of single-celled organisms.

actually the first response would be "show evidence". there'd most likely still be skeptics afterwards until more conclusive proof was given...but the demand for evidence would be first...not an outright dismissal of the claim.

Right, but only if an outright claim was made. Scott_R92 said, "If someone proposed ... life on ... Dione ..."

A proposal is not a claim.

what? like just throwing out whatever just for s**ts and giggles?

Or expressing an opinion, like saying, "Maybe doing away with art classes in public schools would promote better performance in math and science."

Making a claim is like saying, "Art classes are a waste of time, because they keep people from doing well in math and science."

The first statement is speculative (a proposal), while the second one is declarative (a claim).


stupid semantics.



skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

22 Aug 2008, 9:11 pm

Orwell wrote:
LKL wrote:
If christians kept it to themselves and were content to live and let live, I wouldn't have a problem with them; unfortunately, that is not the case for a very large and very vocal contingent of christianity.

The obnoxious evangelicals are not nearly so large a portion as most people believe them to be. You're falling prey to the availability heuristic by thinking that those people constitute a large portion of the population that considers itself Christian.


so you're saying the "moral majority", as those degenerates like to be called, is a myth?



Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

22 Aug 2008, 9:13 pm

skafather84 wrote:
Orwell wrote:
LKL wrote:
If christians kept it to themselves and were content to live and let live, I wouldn't have a problem with them; unfortunately, that is not the case for a very large and very vocal contingent of christianity.

The obnoxious evangelicals are not nearly so large a portion as most people believe them to be. You're falling prey to the availability heuristic by thinking that those people constitute a large portion of the population that considers itself Christian.


so you're saying the "moral majority", as those degenerates like to be called, is a myth?

If by "moral majority" you mean right-wing Republicans who believe the ravings of televangelists, then yes.

[rhetorical question] If it weren't a myth, would the Democrats have control of Congress right now? [/rhetorical question]


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


Scott_R92
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 36
Location: Ohio, in the depths of despair and the pits of hell. Charming, isn't it?

22 Aug 2008, 9:19 pm

skafather84 wrote:
Orwell wrote:
LKL wrote:
If christians kept it to themselves and were content to live and let live, I wouldn't have a problem with them; unfortunately, that is not the case for a very large and very vocal contingent of christianity.

The obnoxious evangelicals are not nearly so large a portion as most people believe them to be. You're falling prey to the availability heuristic by thinking that those people constitute a large portion of the population that considers itself Christian.


so you're saying the "moral majority", as those degenerates like to be called, is a myth?


I don't want to speak for Orwell, but yes, a complete myth. Many people who consider themselves christian don't even attend Church. The average Joe on the street, bouncing to the s**t they call rap and smoking pot may have (and perhaps does) consider himself a Christian. I know many Christians who are by appearance not Christian at all. The whole point of Christianity is to return to God after a sin, not to be completely "sinless", as the Bible states that no one can be sinless.


_________________
Yes, My MSNM is the same as my e-mail, letter for letter, including the @yahoo.com

Where are you on the spectrum?


skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

22 Aug 2008, 9:25 pm

Orwell wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Orwell wrote:
LKL wrote:
If christians kept it to themselves and were content to live and let live, I wouldn't have a problem with them; unfortunately, that is not the case for a very large and very vocal contingent of christianity.

The obnoxious evangelicals are not nearly so large a portion as most people believe them to be. You're falling prey to the availability heuristic by thinking that those people constitute a large portion of the population that considers itself Christian.


so you're saying the "moral majority", as those degenerates like to be called, is a myth?

If by "moral majority" you mean right-wing Republicans who believe the ravings of televangelists, then yes.

[rhetorical question] If it weren't a myth, would the Democrats have control of Congress right now? [/rhetorical question]


yes, that's what i'm refering to.

you say that about the democrats but what about reagan, bush, bush 1.37, et all? that stuff is always chalked up to the moral majority being mobilized and i think when the dems won, wasn't rove also on the outs with many of the evangelists because they finally wised up to how he used them and how he views them as just pawns to be manipulated?



benjimanbreeg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,515

22 Aug 2008, 9:30 pm

well, it won't, i'm sure, as long as the die hard christians keep coming into the thread and put up a pointless drawn out argument, it'll go on and on. If you believe in God, thats up to you. Just don't tell people they're stupid if they question it, why wouldn't they? And if you stop rambling, people who keep starting the anti-God threads will get bored.