Why I'm an atheist

[BADecker]

The fact that the memory is stored in the area where your brain stores memories instead of where your brain stores make-believe fantasy doesn't mean it's real/legitimate in any way whatsoever

You should quote the text that backs up your point, even if it is not this particular paper

I have already posted the video for you 5 times... I refuse to do so again...

I also linked you at least 5 sources from 5 different websites...

If you cannot be bothered read any of my supporting evidence, you are not worth debating

Feel free to do some research about the subject... I am not going to entertain your ignorance any longer... I'm done with this topic

If you have a question about what non-religious people believe about reality and why, refer yourself to google... google will (hopefully) fix your ignorance

Giving up already? Look at how many times I have had to post the scientific proof that God exists. You really need to be a little more patient.

[Moloch]

For the main reason I am an Atheist, I will defer to Matt Dillahunty:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSHX4RGcUVs

I want to believe as many true things and as few false things as possible

It's important because you need both parts of that

If you want to believe as many true things as possible, you would believe everything... and if you want to believe as few false things as possible, you believe nothing

But, if you have both of them there... what you're really saying is, "I want my internal model of reality to match the actual reality I live in as best as possible"

And it's important because, every belief you have effects many other beliefs you might have... and your beliefs inform your actions... your actions have consequences for yourself and everybody else!

Basically, it's a way of saying, I want to live in a world where as many people as possible are living as rationally as possible, who care about truth, who value each other

[qwik2learn]

proves the Bible to be a miracle of existence that couldn't have come about if God was not guiding it.

According to you, that Bible could be full of horrors, even including the sacrificing of children, and yet you would not declare it to be morally repugnant because you fully believe that there is not even a single phrase that could possibly be wrong in that book. That book was written over a period of 1,500 years and it has forty different authors, as a result it is not as consistent as would be hoped for. Once you closely examine a wide variety of inspired writings, you will get a feel for how the source of the material relates to its content.

[choppork]

You guys should read the book Rael/Raelism. This book made me go in between being a catholic and an atheist. The book is relying on the bible but it explains the happenings in scientific explanation. I haven't finished it yet but if there are people here who struggles to believe god or not, try reading it. It opened my mind but I just don't have time to finish it yet.

PS: Sorry for my bad english.

[Moloch]

proves the Bible to be a miracle of existence that couldn't have come about if God was not guiding it.

According to you, that Bible could be full of horrors, even including the sacrificing of children, and yet you would not declare it to be morally repugnant because you fully believe that there is not even a single phrase that could possibly be wrong in that book. That book was written over a period of 1,500 years and it has forty different authors, as a result it is not as consistent as would be hoped for. Once you closely examine a wide variety of inspired writings, you will get a feel for how the source of the material relates to its content.

I don't think anyone believes the bible doesn't contain any phrases that are wrong... it mentions unicorns, dragons, zombies... talking snakes, talking bushes...

The bible talks about "the four corners of the Earth", as if the Earth was flat and had corners...

The bible says rabbits chew their cud like a cow...

Plenty of incorrect things in the bible, hard to know where I should start the list

http://bibviz.com




Here is a funny video about biblical contradictions:
Quiz Show (Bible Contradictions)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB3g6mXLEKk

[Losvienleg]

proves the Bible to be a miracle of existence that couldn't have come about if God was not guiding it.

According to you, that Bible could be full of horrors, even including the sacrificing of children, and yet you would not declare it to be morally repugnant because you fully believe that there is not even a single phrase that could possibly be wrong in that book. That book was written over a period of 1,500 years and it has forty different authors, as a result it is not as consistent as would be hoped for. Once you closely examine a wide variety of inspired writings, you will get a feel for how the source of the material relates to its content.

What is morally repugnant in that book ? I've seen nothing yet that was. Also, God can make you shoe talk if He wants, so this isn't a problem I think.

[Moloch]

proves the Bible to be a miracle of existence that couldn't have come about if God was not guiding it.

According to you, that Bible could be full of horrors, even including the sacrificing of children, and yet you would not declare it to be morally repugnant because you fully believe that there is not even a single phrase that could possibly be wrong in that book. That book was written over a period of 1,500 years and it has forty different authors, as a result it is not as consistent as would be hoped for. Once you closely examine a wide variety of inspired writings, you will get a feel for how the source of the material relates to its content.

What is morally repugnant in that book? I've seen nothing yet that was. Also, God can make you shoe talk if He wants, so this isn't a problem I think.

A simple google search turns up all sorts of things... you'd be surprised what you find if you ask google... you might even learn something
https://www.google.com/search?q=morally+repugnant+bible

http://web.ccbce.com/multimedia/BLB/faq/nbi/1237.html

One objection to the divine authority of Scripture concerns the morally repugnant stories that are recorded in its pages. These stories are supposedly inconsistent with the idea of a “holy” Bible. It is true that Scripture does record stories that are morally repugnant. These include: the account of Lot’s incest with his daughters, King David’s adultery and murder, and the murder of babies at Bethlehem. Many more could be added to this list. Why are these stories recorded in the Holy Bible?

http://www.debate.org/debates/Given-the-Bible-God-is-Morally-Repugnant-and-Undeserving-of-Praise-./1/

Obviously it would be easiest to start with showing that God is morally repugnant. To this end, I will illustrate several examples of the evils this entity has perpetrated, including infanticide, slavery, genocide, unjust retribution, homocide (killing homosexuals), social dissent and familial destruction, killing of non-believers, filicide (killing of one's children), and condemnation for those who do not believe in God.

Slavery:
"Let peoples serve you, and nations pay you homage; Be master of your brothers, and may your mother's sons bow down to you" (NAB Gn. 27:29a).

Genocide:
"When the LORD, your God, brings you into the land which you are to enter and occupy, and dislodges great nations before you… you shall doom them. Make no covenant with them and show them no mercy" (NAB Dt. 7:1a, 2b).

Unjust Retribution:
"If you are not careful to observe every word of the law which is written in this book, and to revere the glorious and awesome name of the LORD, your God, he will smite you and your descendants with severe and constant blows, malignant and lasting maladies… until you are destroyed" (NAB Dt. 28:58-59, 61b).

Homicide:
"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)

Kill Those Who Do Not Seek God:
They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)

Infanticide:
From there Elisha went up to Bethel. While he was on his way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him. "Go up baldhead," they shouted, "go up baldhead!" The prophet turned and saw them, and he cursed them in the name of the Lord. Then two shebears came out of the woods and tore forty two of the children to pieces. (2 Kings 2:23-24 NAB)

Social Unrest and Familial Destruction:
"Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man's enemies will be the members of his household. He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for My sake will find it." (Matthew 10:34-39 NASB)

Tempting Abraham to Commit Filicide:
"Some time after these events, God put Abraham to the test. He called to him, "Abraham!" "Ready!" he replied. Then God said: "Take your son Isaac, your only one, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah. There you shall offer him up as a holocaust on a height that I will point out to you." Early the next morning Abraham saddled his donkey, took with him his son Isaac, and two of his servants as well, and with the wood that he had cut for the holocaust, set out for the place of which God had told him. On the third day Abraham got sight of the place from afar. Then he said to his servants: "Both of you stay here with the donkey, while the boy and I go on over yonder. We will worship and then come back to you." Thereupon Abraham took the wood for the holocaust and laid it on his son Isaac's shoulders, while he himself carried the fire and the knife. As the two walked on together, Isaac spoke to his father Abraham. "Father!" he said. "Yes, son," he replied. Isaac continued, "Here are the fire and the wood, but where is the sheep for the holocaust?" "Son," Abraham answered, "God himself will provide the sheep for the holocaust." Then the two continued going forward. When they came to the place of which God had told him, Abraham built an altar there and arranged the wood on it. Next he tied up his son Isaac, and put him on top of the wood on the altar. Then he reached out and took the knife to slaughter his son." (Gn 22:1-10 NAB).

God Does Nothing to Prevent Filicide in His Name:
"Jephthah made a vow to the LORD. "If you deliver the Ammonites into my power," he said, "whoever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me when I return in triumph from the Ammonites shall belong to the LORD. I shall offer him up as a holocaust." Jephthah then went on to the Ammonites to fight against them, and the LORD delivered them into his power, so that he inflicted a severe defeat on them, from Aroer to the approach of Minnith (twenty cities in all) and as far as Abel-keramin. Thus were the Ammonites brought into subjection by the Israelites. When Jephthah returned to his house in Mizpah, it was his daughter who came forth, playing the tambourines and dancing. She was an only child: he had neither son nor daughter besides her. When he saw her, he rent his garments and said, "Alas, daughter, you have struck me down and brought calamity upon me. For I have made a vow to the LORD and I cannot retract." "Father," she replied, "you have made a vow to the LORD. Do with me as you have vowed, because the LORD has wrought vengeance for you on your enemies the Ammonites." Then she said to her father, "Let me have this favor. Spare me for two months, that I may go off down the mountains to mourn my virginity with my companions." "Go," he replied, and sent her away for two months. So she departed with her companions and mourned her virginity on the mountains. At the end of the two months she returned to her father, who did to her as he had vowed. She had not been intimate with man. It then became a custom in Israel for Israelite women to go yearly to mourn the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite for four days of the year." (Jg 11:30-40 NAB).

[BADecker]

proves the Bible to be a miracle of existence that couldn't have come about if God was not guiding it.

According to you, that Bible could be full of horrors, even including the sacrificing of children, and yet you would not declare it to be morally repugnant because you fully believe that there is not even a single phrase that could possibly be wrong in that book. That book was written over a period of 1,500 years and it has forty different authors, as a result it is not as consistent as would be hoped for. Once you closely examine a wide variety of inspired writings, you will get a feel for how the source of the material relates to its content.

What is morally repugnant in that book? I've seen nothing yet that was. Also, God can make you shoe talk if He wants, so this isn't a problem I think.

A simple google search turns up all sorts of things... you'd be surprised what you find if you ask google... you might even learn something
https://www.google.com/search?q=morally+repugnant+bible

http://web.ccbce.com/multimedia/BLB/faq/nbi/1237.html

One objection to the divine authority of Scripture concerns the morally repugnant stories that are recorded in its pages. These stories are supposedly inconsistent with the idea of a “holy” Bible. It is true that Scripture does record stories that are morally repugnant. These include: the account of Lot’s incest with his daughters, King David’s adultery and murder, and the murder of babies at Bethlehem. Many more could be added to this list. Why are these stories recorded in the Holy Bible?

http://www.debate.org/debates/Given-the-Bible-God-is-Morally-Repugnant-and-Undeserving-of-Praise-./1/

Obviously it would be easiest to start with showing that God is morally repugnant. To this end, I will illustrate several examples of the evils this entity has perpetrated, including infanticide, slavery, genocide, unjust retribution, homocide (killing homosexuals), social dissent and familial destruction, killing of non-believers, filicide (killing of one's children), and condemnation for those who do not believe in God.

Slavery:
"Let peoples serve you, and nations pay you homage; Be master of your brothers, and may your mother's sons bow down to you" (NAB Gn. 27:29a).

Genocide:
"When the LORD, your God, brings you into the land which you are to enter and occupy, and dislodges great nations before you… you shall doom them. Make no covenant with them and show them no mercy" (NAB Dt. 7:1a, 2b).

Unjust Retribution:
"If you are not careful to observe every word of the law which is written in this book, and to revere the glorious and awesome name of the LORD, your God, he will smite you and your descendants with severe and constant blows, malignant and lasting maladies… until you are destroyed" (NAB Dt. 28:58-59, 61b).

Homicide:
"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)

Kill Those Who Do Not Seek God:
They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)

Infanticide:
From there Elisha went up to Bethel. While he was on his way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him. "Go up baldhead," they shouted, "go up baldhead!" The prophet turned and saw them, and he cursed them in the name of the Lord. Then two shebears came out of the woods and tore forty two of the children to pieces. (2 Kings 2:23-24 NAB)

Social Unrest and Familial Destruction:
"Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man's enemies will be the members of his household. He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for My sake will find it." (Matthew 10:34-39 NASB)

Tempting Abraham to Commit Filicide:
"Some time after these events, God put Abraham to the test. He called to him, "Abraham!" "Ready!" he replied. Then God said: "Take your son Isaac, your only one, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah. There you shall offer him up as a holocaust on a height that I will point out to you." Early the next morning Abraham saddled his donkey, took with him his son Isaac, and two of his servants as well, and with the wood that he had cut for the holocaust, set out for the place of which God had told him. On the third day Abraham got sight of the place from afar. Then he said to his servants: "Both of you stay here with the donkey, while the boy and I go on over yonder. We will worship and then come back to you." Thereupon Abraham took the wood for the holocaust and laid it on his son Isaac's shoulders, while he himself carried the fire and the knife. As the two walked on together, Isaac spoke to his father Abraham. "Father!" he said. "Yes, son," he replied. Isaac continued, "Here are the fire and the wood, but where is the sheep for the holocaust?" "Son," Abraham answered, "God himself will provide the sheep for the holocaust." Then the two continued going forward. When they came to the place of which God had told him, Abraham built an altar there and arranged the wood on it. Next he tied up his son Isaac, and put him on top of the wood on the altar. Then he reached out and took the knife to slaughter his son." (Gn 22:1-10 NAB).

God Does Nothing to Prevent Filicide in His Name:
"Jephthah made a vow to the LORD. "If you deliver the Ammonites into my power," he said, "whoever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me when I return in triumph from the Ammonites shall belong to the LORD. I shall offer him up as a holocaust." Jephthah then went on to the Ammonites to fight against them, and the LORD delivered them into his power, so that he inflicted a severe defeat on them, from Aroer to the approach of Minnith (twenty cities in all) and as far as Abel-keramin. Thus were the Ammonites brought into subjection by the Israelites. When Jephthah returned to his house in Mizpah, it was his daughter who came forth, playing the tambourines and dancing. She was an only child: he had neither son nor daughter besides her. When he saw her, he rent his garments and said, "Alas, daughter, you have struck me down and brought calamity upon me. For I have made a vow to the LORD and I cannot retract." "Father," she replied, "you have made a vow to the LORD. Do with me as you have vowed, because the LORD has wrought vengeance for you on your enemies the Ammonites." Then she said to her father, "Let me have this favor. Spare me for two months, that I may go off down the mountains to mourn my virginity with my companions." "Go," he replied, and sent her away for two months. So she departed with her companions and mourned her virginity on the mountains. At the end of the two months she returned to her father, who did to her as he had vowed. She had not been intimate with man. It then became a custom in Israel for Israelite women to go yearly to mourn the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite for four days of the year." (Jg 11:30-40 NAB).

None of these things is morally repugnant. These are parts of the things necessary in a nation that is being set up as a righteous nation of God.

Rather, it is the things that are against God that are repugnant. Since you seem to have set yourself against God, you seem to be repugnant.

Thank God for the great mercy He is showing you, both for your sake, and so that others can see and recognize the mercy that He is showing us all.

[Buffer Overflow]

Slavery:
Genocide:
Unjust Retribution:
Homicide:
Kill Those Who Do Not Seek God:
Infanticide:
Social Unrest and Familial Destruction:
Tempting Abraham to Commit Filicide:
God Does Nothing to Prevent Filicide in His Name:

None of these things is morally repugnant. These are parts of the things necessary in a nation that is being set up as a righteous nation of God.

Those things weren't necessary at all. An omnipotent God would simply snap it's fingers and create a nation without those morally repugnant things.

Unless of course, your god isn't omnipotent, redendering it a false one.
Which is looking highly likely by the way.

Wake up!!  

[Smoothcoin]

I can't understand how a man is able to think can be atheist.
Life is a miracle, birth is a miracle, eveery living is a miracle and all those happened by coincidence? Go home man!

[Buffer Overflow]

I can't understand how a man is able to think can be atheist.
Life is a miracle, birth is a miracle, eveery living is a miracle and all those happened by coincidence? Go home man!

What's believing in miracles got to do with being atheist or not?

Theists believe life began with a God. Which is a miracle.
Atheists believe life began without a God. Which is a miracle.

Seems to me atheists believe in the greater miracle.
Maybe I'm wrong here?
 

[CoinCube]

Two things that don't fit in the same universe:
1. evolution;
2. homosexuality;
... except if there is corruption of the system, and law-breaking of foundational physics.

That is equivalent to saying that color-blind people don't fit in the same universe... everyone is different in some way... get over yourself asshole

Just because a character trait doesn't increase sperm count or whatever your standard is... does not make it wrong, it only makes you wrong... and a bigot

Humm I usually stay far away from this particular topic. However, I have been reading recently about the beliefs of the Chabad Jews a subgroup of group of Orthodox Jews. They have an interesting approach to the issue.

http://m.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/663504/jewish/Do-Homosexuals-Fit-into-the-Jewish-Community.htm

Do Homosexuals Fit into the Jewish Community?
By Bronya Shaffer

Question:

According to Jewish law, how should a person react to homosexual feelings? Do homosexuals fit into the Jewish community?

Answer:

You ask about feelings and law. But feelings do not fall within the domain of law. A person feels what a person feels. Then he has the power to decide whether he will act upon those feelings or… not. This is the human experience: desire, longing, wanting…and the law. Part of our development from childhood to adulthood is creating for ourselves a moral compass. Something that's internal. That which tells us right from wrong. And that moral compass is comprised of myriad components, but must be firmly grounded, always, in a system of values.

For Jews, the all-encompassing system is Torah law. Torah law governs every single part of living. And from the body of Torah law emerges a system of values - general, societal and personal. Sometimes, it's easy; we feel an affinity, for example, to the laws of tzedaka, or we feel a strong connection to the laws of Shabbat or brit milah. And sometimes, we feel something quite the opposite - we feel estranged or disconnected or personally deeply at odds with a law.

We feel what we feel. Some feelings we can change, and some we can't. Sometimes what we feel is subject to modification, and sometimes it's not. Totally and unequivocally not. And yet, the law is absolute.

As much as we know about human sexuality, we don't yet know enough. We're all, as individuals and as a society, still learning. In the last half century, we've come a long way in our understanding of human sexuality, and in redefining a cultural moral code. Some of what we've come to accept as a society is long, long overdue. And some of what we've come to accept undermines the very dignity of human sexuality. But, we're learning.

We do know this, though: we know that among other sexual behaviours, Torah law expressly forbids the specific act of male homosexuality.

And we do know this: Torah law forbids bigotry; homophobia is prohibited.

And we do know this: too many Jewish girls and boys, Jewish women and men, have suffered too much for too long. And we know that most of that suffering is caused by the environment around them. We do know this: when we become judges of another person, we behave contrary to Torah law.

And we do know this: A Jew belongs in a Jewish environment. Each of us, struggling or not, needs to be in a truly Torah-observant environment. And each of us is responsible for that environment - each of us is responsible for what we bring to that environment. When we bring ignorance, or cruelty or self-righteous judgment of others, we contribute to the sullying of a true Torah environment. When we bring the most ideal principles of ahavat Yisrael, respect for every individual, recognition of each individual's personal relationship with G‑d...when we bring the best of our humanity, as expected by Torah ideals, we contribute to a Torah environment that is healthy and wholesome.

Or perhaps your question is in regard to how we should react to the homosexual feelings of others? Or how we should react to someone who eats on Yom Kippur? Or someone who longs for the relationship with a man other than her husband? On this, the classic work known as the Tanya provides strong advice: Consider what it means to have such burning passions for forbidden fruit. Consider the day to day fierce and relentless battle demanded to conquer such passions. And then ask yourself, "Do I ever fight such a battle on my own ground?"

The Tanya continues to illustrate the many areas in which all of us can improve by waging at least a small battle on our own ground.

On your question concerning community: A Jew belongs within a Jewish community. There are no application forms and no qualification requirements. He's Jewish—that's where he belongs. Period. We all have our challenges, our shortcomings, our feelings...and our failures in battle as well...and with all that, we are a community of Jews.

[Trading]

You are confusing "nothing", as lack of awareness (being dead), with nothing as a physical vacuum with no particles (and I can accept also: with no quantum fields, even if Krauss doesn't accept this).

There is no evidence that our awareness can arise from nothingness. All the evidence??!! points to awareness being cyclical and continuous.

Awareness arises from non-awareness: the fetus clearly isn't aware during most time of the gestation, until at least the central neurological system is built. Then, slowly, develops some basic elements of awareness. And, after being born, acquires full awareness.
If you are talking about how life evolves from simple matter, we still don't now the exact mechanism, even if we are close. But ignorance isn't evidence of god existence.

I wonder if you realize the consequences of the revelation of beliefs like yours. Try to say you believe in reincarnation (it seems what you mean with "Awareness is continuous and cyclical") on a job interview.

There are so many nuts saying they are Napoleon... I guess, for you, their statements are "evidence" of the "continuity of awareness". But even you have to accept that they can't all be Napoleon and,therefore, they are crazy or lying.

You are quoting me cases of personal experiences, that can't be replicated. If I interviewed junkies, I would find much many cases even more impressive than yours. That's not evidence.

 Your statement that the brain can't have any activity once the oxygen flow stops is false. Brain activity measurable on a EGG only disappears after 20-40 seconds (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinical_death). This time is enough to leave memories of hallucinations. Actually, the hallucinations probably start before the complete stop of the supply of oxygen. And in that situation, 40 seconds of hallucinations might seem minutes to the near death individual.

Those hallucinations are purely chemical. I gave sources on that.

You can't compare Asimov's science fiction with scientific theories.

[qwik2learn]

Your statement that the brain can't have any activity once the oxygen flow stops is false. Brain activity measurable on a EGG only disappears after 20-40 seconds (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinical_death). This time is enough to leave memories of hallucinations. Actually, the hallucinations probably start before the complete stop of the supply of oxygen. And in that situation, 40 seconds of hallucinations might seem minutes to the near death individual.

This would not explain cases of longer duration, for example the patient in AWARE had perceptions which lasted at least 2 minutes and were verified by medical staff.

You can't compare Asimov's science fiction with scientific theories.

It was Asimov's non-fiction essay about a "universe from nothing" that I was referring to and it is not much different from what Krauss proposes. I think this essay can be found in the book "The Beginning and the End".

[CoinCube]

Awareness arises from non-awareness: the fetus clearly isn't aware during most time of the gestation, until at least the central neurological system is built. Then, slowly, develops some basic elements of awareness. And, after being born, acquires full awareness.
If you are talking about how life evolves from simple matter, we still don't now the exact mechanism, even if we are close. But ignorance isn't evidence of god existence.

I wonder if you realize the consequences of the revelation of beliefs like yours. Try to say you believe in reincarnation (it seems what you mean with "Awareness is continuous and cyclical") on a job interview.
....

Consequences is one of my interests. Bringing up religion in a job interview is likely a bad as is talking about politics.

I wonder if you realize the consequences of a belief system like yours? I argued elsewhere that the consequences over the long term are far more profound and substantial than many realize.

[qwik2learn]

If you are talking about how life evolves from simple matter, we still don't now the exact mechanism, even if we are close. But ignorance isn't evidence of god existence.

You say that you don't know the exact mechanism; I would like to propose one.

It's time to FIGHT THE STUPIDS by boldly moving to the cutting edge forged by alternative science!

Darwin was in the right place at the right time with the right idea. The facts behind his idea were dubious from the beginning and were recognized as such by most scientists who could grasp what he was proposing. But they equally understood that by placing the mechanism for life’s processes in the hands of nature, it could be removed from God and thereby lift the onerous foot of religion—which they viewed as separate from God—off their necks.

Darwin lifted that foot to allow science to breathe freely at last, and for the fifteen decades since, religion has been spitefully playing catch-up.

 In 1873, only fourteen years after The Origin Of Species, geologist J.W. Dawson, chancellor of McGill University in Montreal, published The Story Of The Earth And Man, as well written and carefully argued as Charles Darwin’s masterpiece. In it Dawson pointed out that Darwin and his cohorts were promoting a theory based on three fallacious “gaps” in reasoning that could not be reconciled with the knowledge of their era. What is so telling about Dawson’s three fallacies is that they remain unchanged to this day.

Intervention theorists believe that alien beings intervened on Earth, terraforming everything from the planet's environment to human beings. They have arrived at that radical assumption by analyzing evidence across a wide range of disciplines, trying to scientifically explain the origin of life on Earth.

Intervention Theory Basics

Wegener’s case relates to the debate about origins because it typifies how science reacts to new ideas that attempt to move the line of knowledge farther than a few inches. Anything significant enough to alter an entrenched paradigm will be vigorously criticized and uniformly rejected unless—and this is important to note—unless there is some overarching need for the new information.

Atheists scoff at people 300 years ago for believing the Earth was flat, but are convinced they could never believe a similar absurdity. Those who ridicule and oppose anything they don't already believe is true, and who will diligently avoid any effort to fairly evaluate new, especially dramatically new ideas, are not rational, by definition. I urge all atheists to read up on the latest science and evaluate the evidence in favor of intervention theory; only a few hours spent searching for information could provide any reader with a profoundly altered world view.

More details explaining Intervention Theory

[organofcorti]

If you are talking about how life evolves from simple matter, we still don't now the exact mechanism, even if we are close. But ignorance isn't evidence of god existence.

You say that you don't know the exact mechanism; I would like to propose one.

It's time to FIGHT THE STUPIDS by boldly moving to the cutting edge forged by alternative science!

Darwin was in the right place at the right time with the right idea. The facts behind his idea were dubious from the beginning and were recognized as such by most scientists who could grasp what he was proposing. But they equally understood that by placing the mechanism for life’s processes in the hands of nature, it could be removed from God and thereby lift the onerous foot of religion—which they viewed as separate from God—off their necks.

Darwin lifted that foot to allow science to breathe freely at last, and for the fifteen decades since, religion has been spitefully playing catch-up.

 In 1873, only fourteen years after The Origin Of Species, geologist J.W. Dawson, chancellor of McGill University in Montreal, published The Story Of The Earth And Man, as well written and carefully argued as Charles Darwin’s masterpiece. In it Dawson pointed out that Darwin and his cohorts were promoting a theory based on three fallacious “gaps” in reasoning that could not be reconciled with the knowledge of their era. What is so telling about Dawson’s three fallacies is that they remain unchanged to this day.

Intervention theorists believe that alien beings intervened on Earth, terraforming everything from the planet's environment to human beings. They have arrived at that radical assumption by analyzing evidence across a wide range of disciplines, trying to scientifically explain the origin of life on Earth.

Intervention Theory Basics

Wegener’s case relates to the debate about origins because it typifies how science reacts to new ideas that attempt to move the line of knowledge farther than a few inches. Anything significant enough to alter an entrenched paradigm will be vigorously criticized and uniformly rejected unless—and this is important to note—unless there is some overarching need for the new information.

Atheists scoff at people 300 years ago for believing the Earth was flat, but are convinced they could never believe a similar absurdity. Those who ridicule and oppose anything they don't already believe is true, and who will diligently avoid any effort to fairly evaluate new, especially dramatically new ideas, are not rational, by definition. I urge all atheists to read up on the latest science and evaluate the evidence in favor of intervention theory; only a few hours spent searching for information could provide any reader with a profoundly altered world view.

More details explaining Intervention Theory

Who cares what the question is? The answer is ALIENS!

[Moloch]

Atheists scoff at people 300 years ago for believing the Earth was flat, but are convinced they could never believe a similar absurdity. Those who ridicule and oppose anything they don't already believe is true, and who will diligently avoid any effort to fairly evaluate new, especially dramatically new ideas, are not rational, by definition. I urge all atheists to read up on the latest science and evaluate the evidence in favor of intervention theory; only a few hours spent searching for information could provide any reader with a profoundly altered world view.

More details explaining Intervention Theory

It's a shame that guy spent so much time writing such a long paper that is completely false

Darwin's "three logical fallacies" are just silly... there are no fallacies... his paper is easily debunked by anyone familiar with evolution... any high school kid could debunk that paper these days

Darwin actually did write a few things into the theory of evolution that turned out to be incorrect, but whoever wrote this paper is not familiar enough to even know what is true or not... he didn't even mention the things which are actually false

I don't understand why you feel the need to put words in the mouths of Atheists...

Just because you feel a certain way, does not mean Atheists feel that way... Please, do not ever claim to know anything about Atheists because you don't

Everyone is different, but Atheists tend to be extremely skeptical people... we take nothing on faith... we are rarely convinced by anything silly like religitards, because we rely on facts and evidence to support our beliefs about reality...

Atheists never claim to be infallible... we are the only ones who admit we can be wrong at all... every religion claims it is perfect and infallible... that's just nonsense... it's provably false

[AzibLala007]

how can you say that you are an atheist.
when any thing or any event happen it has its own reason to be happen.
but there are some things that are have to happenand they have no reasonable logic they just have to happen.

[BADecker]

Atheists scoff at people 300 years ago for believing the Earth was flat, but are convinced they could never believe a similar absurdity. Those who ridicule and oppose anything they don't already believe is true, and who will diligently avoid any effort to fairly evaluate new, especially dramatically new ideas, are not rational, by definition. I urge all atheists to read up on the latest science and evaluate the evidence in favor of intervention theory; only a few hours spent searching for information could provide any reader with a profoundly altered world view.

More details explaining Intervention Theory

It's a shame that guy spent so much time writing such a long paper that is completely false

Darwin's "three logical fallacies" are just silly... there are no fallacies... his paper is easily debunked by anyone familiar with evolution... any high school kid could debunk that paper these days

Darwin actually did write a few things into the theory of evolution that turned out to be incorrect, but whoever wrote this paper is not familiar enough to even know what is true or not... he didn't even mention the things which are actually false

I don't understand why you feel the need to put words in the mouths of Atheists...

Just because you feel a certain way, does not mean Atheists feel that way... Please, do not ever claim to know anything about Atheists because you don't

Everyone is different, but Atheists tend to be extremely skeptical people... we take nothing on faith... we are rarely convinced by anything silly like religitards, because we rely on facts and evidence to support our beliefs about reality...

Atheists never claim to be infallible... we are the only ones who admit we can be wrong at all... every religion claims it is perfect and infallible... that's just nonsense... it's provably false

Just curious. Why do you attempt to set yourself above God, Who has been proven to exist scientifically, thereby becoming an idol, and doing it all by simply saying that you are an atheist, when atheism doesn't really exist, since you are disallowing atheism by your self-god-making?