Why do Atheists Hate Religion?

[Safebit.io]

Once, religion had an important place in society: It served a few important roles, primarily teaching moral values and creating tight-knit communities.

Modernity changed the equation a bit - you no longer need the Bible or the Quoran to tell you how to behave since those all-important values have become an inherent part of our culture today.

The primary reason people reject religion is science - or, in other words, if you embrace a scientific outlook and approach to life then religion usually doesn't make any sense.

But, "Religion" can have many definitions, and does not have to include a "god". For example, I believe Bitcoin is a type of religion (some call it Satoshism, or other such names) for the modern age. If you look at various local Bitcoin communities, you can see all the hallmarks of a cult.

There's also dataism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dataism) but I will let you explore that yourself.

In this context, religion can be something even atheists can subscribe to.

[notbatman]

^^^ Your questions here just serve to muddy the waters; you're strawmaning my explanations.

1. The air is displaced by objects and it reacts by pushing the objects up or down depending on the objects density relative to the air. A PSI meter adjacent to an object can't measure the force created by the displacement; there's no correlation. Think about a helium balloon, what's pushing it up if not pressure from displaced air?

2. Trick question; weight is calculated using gravity. The force pushing your mother down could be converted to lbs but your intent to goad me into affirming gravity is clear.

3. See answer #1.

4. How does a helium balloon (let's pretend it's rectangular the size of the other bricks) know to go up? For the same reason the other bricks have different amounts of pressure on them; it's their density. The more dense a material is the higher the density of field lines entering its surface is.

[notbatman]

^^^ Your questions here just serve to muddy the waters; you're strawmaning my explanations.

1. The air is displaced by objects and it reacts by pushing the objects up or down depending on the objects density relative to the air. A PSI meter adjacent to an object can't measure the force created by the displacement; there's no correlation. Think about a helium balloon, what's pushing it up if not pressure from displaced air?

2. Trick question; weight is calculated using gravity. The force pushing your mother down could be converted to lbs but your intent to goad me into affirming gravity is clear.

3. See answer #1.

4. How does a helium balloon (let's pretend it's rectangular the size of the other bricks) know to go up? For the same reason the other bricks have different amounts of pressure on them; it's their density. The more dense a material is the higher the density of field lines entering its surface is.

1. Please report the measured PSI above the objects with different densities.

2. You don't have to use gravity, you can use a spring to hang heavy objects and record their weight using your scale and units.  Why
more dense objects exert more force on the ground?  Why the air pressure is pushing denser objects more than less denser objects?  What causes air to detect heavier objects?

3. You did not answered the question.  You said that the table down will be pushed by the air pressure, but air pressure will also exert force on the table bottom, so unless there is a pressure differential between table top and table bottom, the weight (the force exerted by the table on the floor) will be zero.  But in reality there are no tables with zero weight.

4. What field are you talking about now? You said the air pressure pushes objects down to the ground.

Be careful what you say next.  You said air is causing the force exerted on the ground, now you are saying the density is the cause.
 

1. You fail to understand the concept of force vectors, you're asking for a scalar quantity. This means you have no clue what you're asking or arguing about.

2. a) If we don't have to use gravity then what then where's argument? Gravity is literally an unproven theory required for the heliocentric model, the globe and ultimately atheism. b) I've answered the density question, it's the density of field lines entering the surface of the object.

3. I did, you're asking the wrong question; you need to check your assumptions.

4. OMG dude, the fucking electric field that's polarizing the air. I'm sorry but you're either being dishonest or your cognitive abilities are too weak to tackle this issue. I suspect dissonance is at play here.

I'm trying to explain (carefully) something that requires basic knowledge of calculus and vectors at the very least, you need to understand that some things have multiple qualities and causes. A basic vector for example has two quantities; magnitude and direction. You're asking for an explanation on running and jumping without an understanding of how walking works.

...

Uhh, no more complex answers, huh? Did your source run out of bullshit answers? Seems to me like you are giving up now.

As you can see above there seems to be an issue with the more complex answers...

[Astargath]

^^^ Your questions here just serve to muddy the waters; you're strawmaning my explanations.

1. The air is displaced by objects and it reacts by pushing the objects up or down depending on the objects density relative to the air. A PSI meter adjacent to an object can't measure the force created by the displacement; there's no correlation. Think about a helium balloon, what's pushing it up if not pressure from displaced air?

2. Trick question; weight is calculated using gravity. The force pushing your mother down could be converted to lbs but your intent to goad me into affirming gravity is clear.

3. See answer #1.

4. How does a helium balloon (let's pretend it's rectangular the size of the other bricks) know to go up? For the same reason the other bricks have different amounts of pressure on them; it's their density. The more dense a material is the higher the density of field lines entering its surface is.

1. Please report the measured PSI above the objects with different densities.

2. You don't have to use gravity, you can use a spring to hang heavy objects and record their weight using your scale and units.  Why
more dense objects exert more force on the ground?  Why the air pressure is pushing denser objects more than less denser objects?  What causes air to detect heavier objects?

3. You did not answered the question.  You said that the table down will be pushed by the air pressure, but air pressure will also exert force on the table bottom, so unless there is a pressure differential between table top and table bottom, the weight (the force exerted by the table on the floor) will be zero.  But in reality there are no tables with zero weight.

4. What field are you talking about now? You said the air pressure pushes objects down to the ground.

Be careful what you say next.  You said air is causing the force exerted on the ground, now you are saying the density is the cause.
 

1. You fail to understand the concept of force vectors, you're asking for a scalar quantity. This means you have no clue what you're asking or arguing about.

2. a) If we don't have to use gravity then what then where's argument? Gravity is literally an unproven theory required for the heliocentric model, the globe and ultimately atheism. b) I've answered the density question, it's the density of field lines entering the surface of the object.

3. I did, you're asking the wrong question; you need to check your assumptions.

4. OMG dude, the fucking electric field that's polarizing the air. I'm sorry but you're either being dishonest or your cognitive abilities are too weak to tackle this issue. I suspect dissonance is at play here.

I'm trying to explain (carefully) something that requires basic knowledge of calculus and vectors at the very least, you need to understand that some things have multiple qualities and causes. A basic vector for example has two quantities; magnitude and direction. You're asking for an explanation on running and jumping without an understanding of how walking works.

...

Uhh, no more complex answers, huh? Did your source run out of bullshit answers? Seems to me like you are giving up now.

As you can see above there seems to be an issue with the more complex answers...

Electric field has nothing to do with density of the object.  If you are saying that the force on the object is due to the electric field, we can stop right there.  Electric field would have no effect on the brick made out of plastic, and yet the object does have weight and is exerting force on the ground.

Your argument that the density of the object is influencing air pressure to act on the object is just not true.  Air pressure is the same around a heavy object and a lighter one.  Same pressure is all around us.  It is measurable.

What is responsible for the force the object exerts on the ground? Air pressure or the electric field between the dome and the ground?

BTW, if the electric field is responsible for all the forces heavy objects exert on the ground, you would have to have extreme electric field strength and that field would have to be stronger around heavy objects and go to almost to zero around an ant walking on the ground.  Actually, ants would not be able to walk, as everything else would be under extreme forces of attraction.

Do you even understand what you are proposing?  All objects would have to be positively charged to be under any force due to the electric field you describe. At the ground level they would be very heavy according to Coulomb's law.  You would be simply ripped apart. Never mind that all the electronics and the computer on which you write your nonsense would simply not work.  

If only air is positively charged, then air molecules would be attracted to the ground and you would not see a penny dropped in a glass of water drop to the bottom of it.  Again walking around on such a planet would be impossible, never mind breathing or pumping blood to your organs.

PS. I'm just being entertained.  I feel like I am talking to a small child, but I'm being sincere to point out the fallacies in you logic to lead you out of your madness.  I tried to do the same thing with CoinCube and BADecker with a limited success.

You gonna have less success with notbatman, if you thought badecker has a wild imagination wait for notbatman to tell you all about his conspiracies about giants and how space is fake, he could be a science fiction writer for sure.

[Poorman80]

People have different stories and who could blame them if they have good, bad or may have experienced miracle that to others are just mere coincidences. The belief in the existence of a creator had roots thousands of years ago. Even during the times when men are so primitive. Now there are so many religions that I myself would ask why is it so? I don't hate religions. i just let them be. For as long as it didn't create any harm on anybody there is no need to worry about them. I am not an atheist though but I could tell you that in our locality we have athiest who studies the bible not to like it but to discredit it. It is fun hearing arguments in a debate because those atheist are really making their efforts to question any religion. But you know none of them hated any religion. It was just a peaceful exchange of ideas. Just let peace surrounds us all. No need to hate to each other and their religions.

[CoinCube]

PS. I'm just being entertained.  I feel like I am talking to a small child, but I'm being sincere to point out the fallacies in you logic to lead you out of your madness.  I tried to do the same thing with CoinCube...

If you want to spend time debating with flat earth advocates kindly leave me out of it. I am very much on record as opposing this ideology and have no further interest in the matter.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1009045.msg16144860#msg16144860
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1009045.msg16145645#msg16145645
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1009045.msg16146486#msg16146486
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1009045.msg16187200#msg16187200
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1009045.msg16188408#msg16188408
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1009045.msg16201212#msg16201212

For my efforts a flat earth advocate made me this little souvenir picture.

Don't be a CoinCube. Research flat earth.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=%22flat+earth%22

[notbatman]

Atheism is a conspiracy, liars who hate God because they're criminals convincing gullible and weak minds that nothing exploded one day and created everything. They hate being judged for their crimes so they hate any group that has any kind of moral code. This hate gets instilled in the Atheist by the liar who hates God for being judged.

Being critical of the atheist doesn't get at the root of the problem, the liar who hates God and who is waging a war on God needs to be dealt with.

[notbatman]

So we've got sombody (af_newbie) who claims to be an engineer yet doesn't understand vectors or the concept of polarization nor can he conceive that air pressure pushes a helium balloon up. Yet this master of electrical forces wants you to believe the unproven theory of gravity is an undisputable fact.

Is he a member of the tribe of liars who wage war on God or is he just a child confused by their lies?

[Flying Hellfish]

Mod's Note:

Flat Earth has it's own thread, please use it gentlemen!

[popcorn1]

Because they think the earth is flat .

The polar night occurs in the northernmost and southernmost regions of the Earth when the night lasts for more than 24 hours. This occurs only inside the polar circles. The opposite phenomenon, the polar day, or midnight sun, occurs when the Sun stays above the horizon ... While it is day in the Arctic Circle it is night in the Antarctic Circle..

How does this happen if the earth is flat Religious peoples? .
I suppose it can't unless the earth is a globe.
notabatman i think he knows the earth is a globe BUT is some mad full stop

JUST SOME MAD what ever his agenda is it's just some mad  ..

Those countries like china who get rid of religion they will thrive ..
Those peoples will dream of space and new technologies that the earth will want to buy so good luck to china
for coming into the 21st century ..

Just the Chinese need to be free and they cracked it a universal income for all then the world will be better..
Hope and praying don't pay the bills ..

Getting off our butts pays the bills ..

Universal income is not the same as Universal credit   <Credit they take it away <Income you keep it no matter what ..

When they say universal credit if you find work they take that money away ..
When i say INCOME you keep it even if your worth billions ..

Your human right for a life  NOT praying for a life  but an actual income for life ..

[notbatman]

So we've got sombody (af_newbie) who claims to be an engineer yet doesn't understand vectors or the concept of polarization nor can he conceive that air pressure pushes a helium balloon up. Yet this master of electrical forces wants you to believe the unproven theory of gravity is an undisputable fact.

Is he a member of the tribe of liars who wage war on God or is he just a child confused by their lies?

Let's stick to the ground shall we.  You said that electric field lines go straight down to push objects to the ground, right?  They would have point straight down in your model otherwise a 200 lbs person in Argentina and would weigh more when he traveled to Canada.

Why there are more electric field lines going through more dense objects than through lighter ones?  Gold vs steel, red oak vs pine blocks.

What happens when the objects move to other places does the electric field moves with the object?

Your car weighs the same as you drive it, so electric field would have to follow it to keep the pinning down force (weight) the same, no?

Does this make sense to you?  What causes the electric field to be non-uniform, constantly changing as people move around objects on the ground.  The charges on the dome and the ground would have to be constantly adjusted to maintain the pinning down forces the same everywhere on the disk, all in real-time.  Who would be doing the adjustments?  God?

Why a negatively charged object placed on the ground (that you said is negatively charged) does not weigh less?

PS. Moved this discussion to
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1009045.11500

You keep strawmaning my statements i.e. I stated the displaced atmosphere pushes objects down and the electric field dictates the magnitude (density of field lines) and direction (orientation of field lines).

My point being the foundations of atheism are based on questionable science i.e. the unproven theory of gravity being one tenant and that religion isn't involved in a science vs. religion debate, but is a group of criminals conspiring to suppress any group that openly promotes any kind of morality. Atheism is pseudo-theism and falls apart under scrutiny.

This discussion is getting off-topic so before our mod de jure births a live cow, I'll do my best to answer any questions about why helium balloons are pushed up or bars of gold are pushed down in the off-topic/Flat Earth thread. The physics involved most definitely requires a flat & motionless Earth with an electrified dome.

[CoinCube]

I did not mean to say that you are a flat Earther.  You are "an infinite Entity that influences everything on Earth" believer.  Just as irrational as
the flat Earther.  Sorry about the confusion.

All of your hyperbole implying the people you are debating with belong in insane asylums, your misuse of the world child abuse, and your attempts to strawman arguments by associating them with positions they are on the record as arguing vociferously against might sway a few shallow thinkers but they actually undermine your debate credibility.

I don't take offence when people choose to take a stick to a strawman. I also don't think you need to resort to such gimmicks to win your argument with notbatman.

Here is an article that will help you improve your debate skills.

Utilize the "Steel Man" Tactic to Argue More Effectively
https://lifehacker.com/utilize-the-steel-man-tactic-to-argue-more-effectivel-1632402742

"Straw man arguments" are utilized in debates to undermine the opposition. If you want to take the high road–and debate more effectively in the process–utilize the "steel man" argument.

Contrary to some common misinterpretations, a straw man is employed when one side on an argument creates a false narrative and then argues with that, instead of the point a person actually made.
...
The "steel man" is the opposite approach. As writer Robin Sloan explains, the steel man requires a debater to find the best form of her opponent's argument and then argue with this. Explain what you think your opponent means to them, ask them if they agree this is what they mean, and then argue with that. This is a tougher debate tactic because it allows for fewer shady arguments, but the result is a stance that holds up to scrutiny:

[Astargath]

Atheism is a conspiracy, liars who hate God because they're criminals convincing gullible and weak minds that nothing exploded one day and created everything. They hate being judged for their crimes so they hate any group that has any kind of moral code. This hate gets instilled in the Atheist by the liar who hates God for being judged.

Being critical of the atheist doesn't get at the root of the problem, the liar who hates God and who is waging a war on God needs to be dealt with.

Mate, you realize that 99.99% of religious people also know the earth is not flat? This is not a matter of belief or not and while I agree that most religious people are quite gullible, they are not this gullible.

[notbatman]

^^^ One day nothing exploded for no particular reason and the shit from the explosion condensed into a ball due to the magic of gravity. The ball of shit then formed life for no particular reason that then evolved into monkeys who birthed humans.

This is the official atheist narrative and anybody who belives it is a gullible fool.

[TooQik]

^^^ One day nothing exploded for no particular reason and the shit from the explosion condensed into a ball due to the magic of gravity. The ball of shit then formed life for no particular reason that then evolved into monkeys who birthed humans.

This is the official atheist narrative and anybody who belives it is a gullible fool.

Yes, it's much better to believe that nothing made everything in six or seven days than to believe nothing exploded and the Universe, Earth and life formed over millions of years. 

[BADecker]

^^^ One day nothing exploded for no particular reason and the shit from the explosion condensed into a ball due to the magic of gravity. The ball of shit then formed life for no particular reason that then evolved into monkeys who birthed humans.

This is the official atheist narrative and anybody who belives it is a gullible fool.

Yes, it's much better to believe that nothing made everything in six or seven days than to believe nothing exploded and the Universe, Earth and life formed over millions of years. 

Big bang is absence of nothing as well as all the stuff that supposedly came into being. Consider it well. What do you have when you don't have anything and you don't have nothing. That's essentially what big bang is all about. Is that what is easy to believe?

Isn't it a lot easier to believe that God lives in something like a universe that is way different than anything in our universe, and that He made our universe and everything in it, all in 6 days because of how much power He has?

But here is the really big question. WHY do you believe it one way or the other? Even Hawking just before he died expressed essentially that the "place" that big bang came from is completely unknown and not even knowable.

[TooQik]

^^^ One day nothing exploded for no particular reason and the shit from the explosion condensed into a ball due to the magic of gravity. The ball of shit then formed life for no particular reason that then evolved into monkeys who birthed humans.

This is the official atheist narrative and anybody who belives it is a gullible fool.

Yes, it's much better to believe that nothing made everything in six or seven days than to believe nothing exploded and the Universe, Earth and life formed over millions of years. 

Big bang is absence of nothing as well as all the stuff that supposedly came into being. Consider it well. What do you have when you don't have anything and you don't have nothing. That's essentially what big bang is all about. Is that what is easy to believe?

Isn't it a lot easier to believe that God lives in something like a universe that is way different than anything in our universe, and that He made our universe and everything in it, all in 6 days because of how much power He has?

But here is the really big question. WHY do you believe it one way or the other? Even Hawking just before he died expressed essentially that the "place" that big bang came from is completely unknown and not even knowable.

I used the word nothing in both cases in an attempt to highlight the flaw in notbatman's attempt to ridicule Atheists; the key point is not the word nothing.

It doesn't matter whether you believe in a Creator or the Big Bang, both require the existence of something outside of our known universe. The choice past the point of our universe's creation as to whether to believe in a Creator or Big Bang then becomes one of evidence. I personally fail to see any evidence of a supreme being's hand in anything that occurs around me in day to day life. On the other hand, I use humankind's collective knowledge on a day to day basis to understand, explain and interact with the things going on around me.

Now, you ask "Isn't it a lot easier to believe that God...". This is the fundamental issue I have with any religious faith, instead of using the words "I don't know" to explain a gap in their knowledge they replace it with "God/Allah/Jesus/<insert deity name here> did it". Imagine what the world we live in today would be like if no-one had searched for answers outside of religious texts.

[Astargath]

^^^ One day nothing exploded for no particular reason and the shit from the explosion condensed into a ball due to the magic of gravity. The ball of shit then formed life for no particular reason that then evolved into monkeys who birthed humans.

This is the official atheist narrative and anybody who belives it is a gullible fool.

You realize that your narrative is far crazier right? Your narrative is that a supernatural being magically created everything from nothing and now observes us.

[BitNow]

The phrase "atheists hate gods (AHG) is a fallacious anti-atheist argument which attempts to label atheism as a mere emotional opposition to gods, rather than a reasoned denial of the existence of said gods. Atheists do not deny the existence of god(s) because they "hate god(s)" or "want to live in sin", because atheists don't believe in these things, any more than Christians hate, say, the gods of Hinduism. If they're mad, generally they're pissed at something a religious person or group has done

That is the first rational explanation I read since August 2015 I'm following this thread.


Have a productive day.

[notbatman]

In answer to the bit about religious leaders, let's try a thought experiment. Let's suppose your church is absolutely right, in every feature and detail. That means you and I can agree that all those OTHER believers--everyone who has viewed God differently than you do--has been mistaken. That's over 6 of the 7 billion alive today, and tens of billions through history believing in false gods.

Who could be behind all these false gods?