[Closed] Why are you atheists so angry?

We understand what we have discovered. No doubt there is more to come. So far, the working model matches our discoveries.

No doubt, as Graham S said, we may discover that the rest of the universe is made of cheese, or is a colony for three-headed unicorns, or a god.

But one has to ask - so what?

Although god hasn't turned up yet, of course.....

I would suggest several million Christians world-wide and several million more over the past 2000 years would disagree, not just Elf!

I'm sure God has turned up in your life too Woppit....

Maybe, even, (whispers) a bit un-scientific?

While I see your point I still say "The emperor has no clothes". Its all a load of made up stuff. I don't care how many angels can dance on the head of the pin because they haven't been shown to exist.

Excellent! Concede a point and then go back to the very beginning again We'll surely hit 1000 if you keep it up!

where do we stop accounting for things we have no evidence of ?

just after string theory, or maybe electron orbits

Do you decide or is it the Pope?

Why are you picking on Catholics JY? Shame man...shaaaayyyyymmmmme.

I would suggest several million Christians world-wide and several million more over the past 2000 years would disagree, not just Elf!

How many people believe in something is not an indication of it existing. If there were more, say, Hindus than Christians would that mean that the Christians are wrong and the Hindus are right? If an alien race of trillions turned up believing something else would they then be right?

I don't care how many angels can dance on the head of the pin because they haven't been shown to exist.

Following the logic of this....how do we know things like Love exists? I assume you believe that Love does exist? If so, how do you know?

As it seems to be the bible which is under discussion and being quoted by those seeking an authoritative source on both sides, can I just point out that this tract, written in the bronze age by a society of ignorant sheep-herders who had barely got beyond the invention of the wheel, reads exactly like a fiction. It is inconsistent within itself and contains many obvious impossibilities, many of which have been pointed out in previous discussions, but apparently forgotten by those who find it convenient to aid the repetitive nature of their argument.

Which was also written (New Testament - the really important bit) at an age and society where some of the most celebrated scientists and philosophers lived; is written in a way that is completely and utterly different to fiction of the time in its detail and mention of seemingly benign facts (minor actions of people, singular mentions of names, colours of objects etc); has a large number of extremely accurate (to each other) manuscripts from close to the written period (oldest is only around 50-70 years after the death of Jesus); was transcribed into different manuscripts in a society where information was passed on verbatim and so a very high degree of accuracy was maintained (no "Chinese whispers"); and where the majority of the authors of the new testament were actually executed or exiled for their writings so certain of their truth were they.

Just to add to the mix.

I would suggest several million Christians world-wide and several million more over the past 2000 years would disagree, not just Elf!

How many people believe in something is not an indication of it existing

Totally agree - that wasn't my point. I was simply saying that Woppit suggests God hasn't shown up. Millions would argue otherwise.

Excellent! Concede a point and then go back to the very beginning again We'll surely hit 1000 if you keep it up!

I didn't concede, I tried to get back to the original point. We could nit-pick the words inside any holy book for ever disappearing up our own backsides based on translations from aramaic through greek from the original Welsh.

But yes, we *will* get to 1000, dagnabit!

O.K.

Humanity is not even up to 'ignorant goat-herder' standard,

In what way? None that I can think of. Even the goats are better cared for.

love the way you assume yourself in the 21st century to in any way have a superior imagination to people of bygone times

Love the way you argue by misquotation. I didn't say that.

but in fact could be even less 'evolved' or 'advanced' in universal terms than a single-celled amoeba

You'll have to explain what you mean by "universal terms" in this context. In what way am I less "evolved" than a single-celled amoeba, exactly?

Following the logic of this....how do we know things like Love exists? I assume you believe that Love does exist? If so, how do you know?

Because of chemical reactions inside my brain which include chemicals which can be measured. Next!

(I think Dawkins and others books discuss this. Haven't read them.)

close to the written period (oldest is only around 50-70 years after the death of Jesus)

Well, take for example the writings of Tacitus (written around the same time as the new testament) which are widely regarded as "correct" and "historically accurate" and yet there are only 2 manuscripts of his works and both date from the 11th century. There are hundreds if not thousands of biblical manuscripts, most of which range from 50 to a couple of hundred years after Jesus death. So yes it is very important.

Well, take for example the writings of Tacitus (written around the same time as the new testament) which are widely regarded as "correct" and "historically accurate" and yet there are only 2 manuscripts of his works and both date from the 11th century. There are hundreds if not thousands of biblical manuscripts, most of which range from 50 to a couple of hundred years after Jesus death. So yes it is very important.

Because of chemical reactions inside my brain which include chemicals which can be measured. Next

So love is purely a 'hormonal/chemical' reponse then. Come on....What you have described is a stimulus-response relationship, not love - much in the same way your brain reponds to chocoloate or drugs.

That aside - so what if chemical reaction's occured in my brain when I thought about God?

Sorry, double post!! (stupid iPad....). By the way, I also believe the Tacitus documents are accurate if it came across that I didn't!

You'll have to explain what you mean

I can't actually be bothered, to tell you the truth. If you read my posts carefully, and with an open mind, then the Truth shall reveal itself to you, Woppit.

Because of chemical reactions inside my brain which include chemicals which can be measured. Next!

Why do those chemical reactions take place? And why do such things happen at such times and with such people and not others?

What you have described is a stimulus-response relationship, not love

What he said.

It means you're thinking about a hypothetical imaginary being which has been labelled "god". The thought exists. There is no evidenc to suggest that the "god" itself exists.

This really is so very simple. Can you REALLY not grasp it?

And why do such things happen at such times and with such people and not others?

Because some people are dead fit and some are mingers. Duuuuuuuuuh!

That aside - so what if chemical reaction's occured in my brain when I thought about God?

I can't actually be bothered, to tell you the truth

Well, you seem to have put a lot of effort in so far. Is this your way of saying that you can't, or are you leaving your latest manic phase?

I have read your posts carefully and explained to you why they don't make any sense to me.

If you don't explain to me what you mean, how am I ever going to understand your passionate, emoticon-ridden points of view?

It means you're thinking about a hypothetical imaginary being which has been labelled "god". The thought exists. There is no evidenc to suggest that the "god" itself exists.

But what if the mere [i]thought[/i] of God proved it's 'existence'? Maybe God is within us all, in the form of our thoughts.

Cogito Ergo Sum. Cogito Ergo Deus Est.

Well, I find it an interesting philosophical concept, even if you don't.

What you have described is a stimulus-response relationship, not love

Yes I have, and yes it is. Sorry to be the bearer of what you appear to think of as bad news.

Or would you prefer it if I said that love was an ickle Welsh bunny called Dai who shot your wickle heart wiv fluffy arrows?

Obviously Welsh, as in the original language of the bible. 😀

But what if the mere thought of God proved it's 'existence'? Maybe God is within us all, in the form of our thoughts.

You mean Spinoza's god? Not the same as the christian/muslim/jewish one though. I could agree with that but the phrase does become a bit meaningless.

But what if the mere thought of God proved it's 'existence'?

What if. What if the moon were made of plastic? What if rivers move because the water sprites make them? What if...

Really Elf. This is not a serious argument.

The existence of a tree proves the tree. The existence of a fish proves a fish. The existence of a thought proves a thought.

(28 to go).

Really Elf. This is not a serious argument.

Then why get involved? Why not just ignore it?

Leave it to those who do think it's serious.

See, this is where it gets interesting, for me. When you've dealt with the shouty science-only atheists, when they've gone quiet when you've put it to them that we as a species probbly don't really know very much at all in the Big Scheme Of Things, and we can look beyond what only seeks to explain what can be seen, detected and observed, to concepts beyond that method of investigation.

I want to know what's for supper though, right now. I won't lie.

I would like a sandwich, but there is no bread. Or butter.

Maybe I shall have pasta, tomatoes and Mozzarella.

*Sigh*

But what if the mere thought of God proved it's 'existence'?

"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing"

Magic carpets, Elf. Broomsticks.

Ooh, god, you are so big and well, just huge really.

We're all very impressed down here...

Pfft.

Leave it to those who do think it's serious.

Interesting argument strategy. The ploy you're basically using here is to say something silly, then when somebody points out that what what you've said is silly, tell them they're not taking you seriously, so their POV isn't valid?

we can look beyond what only seeks to explain what can be seen, detected and observed, to concepts beyond that method of investigation.

What we dont find is truth but we do find fantasy.. I am sure you are more comfortable there 😉

Interesting argument strategy. The ploy you're basically using here is to say something silly, then when somebody points out that what what you've said is silly, tell them they're not taking you seriously, so their POV isn't valid?

Thing is though, Woppit's not actually ever interested in a polite and amicable discussion about matters theological and philosophical, instead choosing to constantly push his 'religion is crap and wrong' agenda. Which I just find boring tbh. And seeing as how things between us often descend into silly arguments, I'd quite frankly prefer it if either he showed others a bit more respect, or just left it alone. I don't see what's to be gained from perpetuating ill-feeling and animosity.

And I'm too tired now really to go through all that nonsense with him [i]again[/i].

beyond the method of being observed, seen and detected you have imagination [ ie made up] and you can do anything with it.

No Investigation can start without Imagination.

No Investigation can start without Imagination.

Quite true.

Then you look for evidence which backs up your idea - which is called a hypothesis. If you find backing evidence it may turn eventually into a theory. If not then you chuck it out and start all over again.

Quite fun really.

And we'll soon be 20 away from the magic faaaaaaasaaaaand.

Elf, you really are out of your depth once again. If you have nothing to offer except your usual stupidity please go away and leave the discussion to those who actually have a point of view and wish to express it.

Give over.

You're really rude Crikey, d'you know that? Why shoon't I express my onion same as anyone else on here?

'Out of my depth'. Right. Ok. Whatever.

Funny, cos I jolly well have not seen you post owt enlightening and informative on here yet.

In fact, this seems to be about your level:

Because some people are dead fit and some are mingers. Duuuuuuuuuh!

How insightful. Such wit, and wisdom. 🙄

Please don't be rude to me again. No need for it.

I don't see what's to be gained from perpetuating ill-feeling and animosity.

[img] http://mlkshk.com/r/39QZ [/img]

might as well do two posts just to help
[img] [/img]

...and now you've chosen to have a go at me for daring to suggest that you are out of your depth. Which you are. Way, waaaay out of your depth.

My 'rudeness' is in direct response to your arrogant attitude that seems to suggest that because you are the great elfinsafety, owner of numerous logins, owner of multiple forum personalities, that you should be allowed to spout your usual level of rubbish and get away with it.

NOT.

Allahu Akbar!!

Arrgh! We're less than 20 away from the magic thaaaasaaaaand!

Lets not get angry. Have a cup of tea.

[img] [/img]

Twin attacks apparently targeting Shia Muslims have killed at least 58 people in Afghanistan.

In the deadliest incident, a suspected suicide bomb struck a shrine packed with worshippers in the capital, Kabul, killing at least 54 people.

Another blast struck near a Shia mosque the northern city of Mazar-i-Sharif at about the same time, killing four.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-16047099

And you wonder why atheists are pissed off at the pointless bloodshed and slaughter carried out under religious pretences?

While this, the Middle East, Northern Ireland etc are wider issues than just religion, it's no coincidence that organised religion is behind nearly every major conflict throughout history. Look at the atrocious spread of HIV across Africa thanks to the Catholic church's propaganda campaign against condoms; the jailing of a raped woman for adultery in Afghanistan and then forcing her to give birth in prison - for crying out loud, how can you even pretend to believe in an all-powerful, loving, caring god after this?

This is why atheists are angry. This is why we object to children being indoctrinated into religion. This is why we don't tolerate religious overtones in schools; and THIS IS WHY you get short-shift when you tell me that I will suffer because I choose, on the balance of evidence, to not believe in your [insert deity here].

No doubt that this post will either be ignored or replied to with some pompous and sanctimonious bullshit about life being a test of faith.

[img] [/img]

^^^what he said