The Satanic quality of the Internet

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

The human mind wants to know the answers, and when there are none to be had turns to speculation. If there is no countering evidence spectulation becomes ingrained and becomes belief, which in turn becomes "fact". There is a long history of science having to wage an uphill battle against people in authority who already "know" the answers and do anything to stop that changing.

Long eons ago, religion and science lay in the same hands, and the priests tried to understand the stars in order to learn their god'S will or future fate or whatever. Astronomy is probably the olderst scientific branch of all. Probably even caveman occasionally looked at the moon and the sun and by his intellectual means tried to figure what they were.

It took the "Greek revolution", the implementation of the Greek understanding of scientific methodology that explicitly ruled out the validty of referring to the supernatural as an explanation for phenomenal observations, to make "science" what it is today and what we refer to when using this label, "science".

And faith claims that the universe has already been defined and explained, and we must make scientific discoveries fit into whatever viewpoint that particular faith subscribes to.

An effort strongly revived by the current pope, and also by creationism, of course. Also the Tea Party-kind of America's right, and the Tony Blair clones in Europe.

Isn't it funny that in recent years, Catholicism and Islam work hand in hand to bring a fundament of believing in the deity back to Europe, and that creationsim has been translated into the cultural context of Islam and is blossoming marvellously in the Islamic world, spreading from Turkey mainly? The church time and again acts on behalf of Islam'S sprad in Europe, and preists time and again preach for emebracing Islam as if it were just an oriental version of the curch'S dogma, and Muhammad and Jesus were preaching the same. Every difference, especially the unwelcomed ones, is rejected, ignored.

Mian thing is that people shall believe in a theistic dogma. For the church dogmatists hope to benefit from that in getting a rennaissance of Catholic influence, power, and growing submissiveness and obedience of the devout believers. And many christians with bleeding hearts and praying minds seem to buy it, and celebrate when another church is turned into a mosque, which happens several times per week in some place in europe nowadays. That's when I think of myself as living alone amongst sheep.

Imagine if somebody would dare to turn a mosque into a church! Global crisis, collective mass hysteria! Red faces over alleged hate crimes against humanity!

These christians I mentioned above are cattle that smiles and wags its tail while being led to the butcher. They cannot wait to get there. Stupid people. Kind maybe, well-meaning maybe, but hopelessly stupid, naive, disconnected from reality. Die dümmsten Kälber wählen sich ihre Metzger selber.

[MH]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

And faith claims that the universe has already been defined and explained, and we must make scientific discoveries fit into whatever viewpoint that particular faith subscribes to.
.

No...maybe it was like 700 years ago.
Nowadays the religion tries to deal with what is at hand updating or stretching theology from literal texts.
Which is good i think because it usually comes with acceptance of some other humane values.

I find it rather funny when atheist try to preach on how wrong it is...the departure from stereotyped believers.
They do it better than Khomeini.
If one don't fit in to the stereotype of medieval believer he must be atheist or idiot in denial...great philosophy.

I sure the audience might feel better in particular if they pay for the tickets to this circus....atheist conventions lol

.................

[joegrundman]

Originally Posted by MH

No...maybe it was like 700 years ago.
Nowadays the religion tries to deal with what is at hand updating or stretching theology from literal texts.
Which is good i think because it usually comes with acceptance of some other humane values.

I find it rather funny when atheist try to preach on how wrong it is...the departure from stereotyped believers.
They do it better than Khomeini.
If one don't fit in to the stereotype of medieval believer he must be atheist or idiot in denial...great philosophy.

I sure the audience might feel better in particular if they pay for the tickets to this circus....atheist conventions lol

.................

you find the idea of an atheist convention funny? why? did you actually listen to the talk, or are you satisfied with your own conclusions from guesswork alone?

[MH]

Originally Posted by joegrundman

you find the idea of an atheist convention funny? why? did you actually listen to the talk, or are you satisfied with your own conclusions from guesswork alone?

I did listen and it was funny and shadow....are you offended?

[joegrundman]

Originally Posted by MH

I did listen and it was funny and shadow....are you offended?

you mean shallow, right?

it was funny and light-hearted, but i do not agree that it was shallow. In there was some serious content.

[MH]

Originally Posted by joegrundman

you mean shallow, right?

it was funny and light-hearted, but i do not agree that it was shallow. In there was some serious content.

The bit about Catholics priest was interesting.
It is similar in orthodox communities.
Problem is admitting the truth or living families and everything behind and get on with life.
For some it means complete reprogramming from all the strict rules.

Atheist conventions? I am not aware we have that over here, and if it happens, it is happening outside the reach of my radar screen. But beside the conspirating Catholic church and the dummy protestants, we only have Islam sabotaging our society, but no radical militant Christian fundamentalists and evangelicals, so there might be a difference between Europe/Germany and the US here.

The projects are worldwide affairs, if you look beyond your strange "catholic conspiracy" you warned us of you will see that one of the "catholic" leaders of that german conspiracy is part of a German group of atheists pushing these discussions, but hey don't let facts disturb your faith

Dictionaries - in the end are about spelling only, not about encyclopedic definition.

No, that would be a concise dictionary which is brief, a proper dictionary not only explores all the meanings and definitions it also goes into depth about the origins and evolution of the words.
Why wriggle so much instead of accepting what was said?


joeg

i came across this very interesting talk by Daniel Dennet, titled "How to tell you are an atheist"

I like his cow one better.

SS

Beliefs are fine. It's when the believer insists that he knows the answer that trouble begins. This also includes those who insist on 'unbelief'. There aren't as many of those as the believers would have us believe, but there are a few and they tend to be voluable.

Yes, and those believing unbelievers can apply for special tax status to spread their message just like a church can.

[Skybird]

Another pastor calls for gay genocide

Just the latest in a longer line.

Here is the quiz - will this moron be brought to trial and sent to prison for hate crime, or will he be given the benefit of doubt again, since he is religious like the many religious bloodthirsty basterds before him?

Note that he bases - correctly - on the bible. The problem is less the man, but the ideology that has infested and poisened man'S mind. He porbbaly was not boren stupid. But he got an education and a brainwashing that turned him stupid, dangerous and unscrupulous.

[Skybird]

And while I have a run currently: here is the latest entry for a Darwin Award!

I assum he now is speaking in split tongues.

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

On the other hand the whole argument diverts attention from the question of whether there is any evidence. "You're just as bad as I am!" doesn't make you any better. Firm belief seems to be a part of human nature. Whether this belief is a "gift from God" or just a particular of how the mind works is certainly debatable, but it always comes back to the same problem, which is whether there is a God to grant said gift.

So rather than toss out accusations of one side being as bad or worse than the other, how about showing something concrete.

I sincerely hope that you are not suggesting that I have said "You're just as bad as I am!" or made accusations of one side being as bad or worse than the other. If you read every post I have made on this thread you will see that I have said nothing disparaging about atheists or Atheism. That is not my style. If I have please point it out an I will apologize.

What I have made is an attempt to show that Atheism is a competing world view or with various religions and other world views. This is simply an opinion and not an original idea on my part.

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

The bottom line here is that science investigates, examines, and creates theories. Faith does none of those. The theories may end up being true or false, but they are the best that can be proposed based on the available evidence. Skybird made a good argument for the nature of scientific theory, and no one has countered it yet.

I am in complete agreement with this. I personally see no conflict between science and belief in God. I am sure I am not the only person who believes this.

As to the burden of proof mentioned earlier I believe it belongs to the ones who are most insistent in their belief. I am not. Again it is my own personal conviction. I feel no obligation to convince others of this fact.

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

It's like the Sherlock Holmes conundrum. Science attempts to make theories that fit the facts. Faith attempts to make the facts fit predetermined beliefs. If you have a belief, for or against God, let's see some facts.

Good point Steve. If I come up with any thing I'll let you know.

Originally Posted by u crank

Probably. I didn't want to be too obvious, but yes Dawkins is certainly one of the most well known of the prophets of Atheism.

Originally Posted by Skybird

Defamation of science and reason this claim is.

A prophet is somebody who claims to deliver the message of a supernatural entity, whose will is revelead to the prophet in visions or intuitions.

I do not find the word offensive but if you do I retract it. My apologies to both you and Mr. Dawkins.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by MH

No...maybe it was like 700 years ago.

I didn't say religion, I said faith. Faith requires that you believe in absolutes, or else you're not a believer.

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Yes, and those believing unbelievers can apply for special tax status to spread their message just like a church can.

Only if they start a church.

Only if they start a church.

So those atheists run church then?
Do the big ones count as a cathedaral?

In your country they slot into (c) which is the same category as religious groups, it works pretty much the same in most countries, the only real difference being in those countries with a state church where the official church has a different tax set up.

[Skybird]

u_crank,

you did not accept when I said atheism is not a belief, atheists do not have a dogma they beolieve in and want to spread.

Half an hour ago I got a mail by a board-member, and he sent me a . By combining exerpts from several interviews and TV docus, by going from Carl Sagan over David Attenborough to Sam Harris and several others whose names were unknown to me, it sends spotlights from different directions at what atheists are about. There are many remarkable sentences being said, many of them worth to be picked and get quoted, but why should I do that when you can have it all.

Calm and reasonable. And right on the mark.

Now tell me, u_crank or anyone else, that atheism is a "belief", is dogmatic, is a religion, or whatever!

There is a bitter Irish joke, I read. A man gets stopped by a street patrol and asked: "Are you catholic or protestant?" The man says: "I am atheist." The patrol asks: "Okay, but are you a catholic or a protestant atheist?"



Consider how many cosmologic and creation myths and cults there are, how many religions, gods and goddesses, mythologies, traditions. Obviously, since there are so many and all claiming infallability, some of them must be wrong. Do you, do I, do we believe in most or even just some of them? - "We are all atheists. Some of us just go one god further."


P.S. And a random find, when watching that video I stumbled over which adresses the often made claim, also in this forum, that without religion there is no morality, and that only religion can be the source of absolute morality. - Absolute morality? Think twice before wanting that.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by u crank

I sincerely hope that you are not suggesting that I have said "You're just as bad as I am!" or made accusations of one side being as bad or worse than the other. If you read every post I have made on this thread you will see that I have said nothing disparaging about atheists or Atheism. That is not my style. If I have please point it out an I will apologize.

I apologize. I spoke poorly, and was wrong to reference your post directly. I was basically refering to the idea of Christians pointing at non-believers and accusing them of being just like religious fanatics. While some certainly do that they are a minority. Most atheists simply don't believe, and that seems to be a concept that some believers apparently can't comprehend.

What I have made is an attempt to show that Atheism is a competing world view or with various religions and other world views. This is simply an opinion and not an original idea on my part.

Got it.

[u crank]

Thank you for clearing that up Steve.

Regards.