A few questions for fellow atheists

[St Leo]

What got me off of being atheist was my an examination of evolution and the realization that it was less substantiated than God.

How did you go about doing this examination? I am not aware of anything supporting the idea of the supernatural that's anywhere near as good as a solid fossil (if you want better proof for the age of earth and the universe than that offered by palaeontology, try geology and astronomy).

Personally speaking, religion also lacks the beautiful elegance of the modern laws of evolution. Darwin didn't guess a hundredth of what we know and theorise now.

[Frogman]

from BustaMike
It doesn't matter what the choices are if you don't care about the question. Religion attempts to answer the question. Atheism doesn't care about how we got here

You have got to be kidding. You say atheism doesn't care how we got here. Any group as intellegent as atheists profess themselves to be must at some point ponder their origin, their existance, and the meaning of life and death. Claiming its a stupid question and then criticizing those who attempt to answer it isn't much of a platform to claim intellectual superiority. I really don't think you're speaking for atheists but out on your own thin limb.

Carl Sagan was a great mind, a great atheist, and the question haunted him his whole life. I know you guys don't get together on Sundays to get your beliefs in line, but there are some consistancies to most atheists but I'm interested to know if this don't care philosophy is that common. I think its not but I could be wrong.

[Frogman]

from St Leo

How did you go about doing this examination? I am not aware of anything supporting the idea of the supernatural that's anywhere near as good as a solid fossil (if you want better proof for the age of earth and the universe than that offered by palaeontology, try geology and astronomy).

I don't think the mutation, natural selection model explains the step function we see in the fossil record. Things don't change over time. They appear fully formed, remain as an identifiable species for millions and even hundreds of millions of years, then they disappear. There is some other mechanism at work that is not explained by evolution.

Personally, I think there is more happening at the dna level in some sort of timed and ordered progression. Life, if it exists elsewhere, probably looks a lot like what we have here. There is a lot less left to chance than evolution theory would have you believe.

I don't know the answers, but I don't avoid the questions.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Frogman
I don't think the mutation, natural selection model explains the step function we see in the fossil record. Things don't change over time. They appear fully formed, remain as an identifiable species for millions and even hundreds of millions of years, then they disappear. There is some other mechanism at work that is not explained by evolution.

From where did you get this information?

My suggestion is stop reading bull**** as given out by Duane Gish, Philip Johnson, Michael Behe, Ken Hovind, etc. Get some real information for a change.

Check out what "transitional forms" are.

[NeOmega]

When I was protesting in Seattle some Christians came to save my soul. The conversation was quick.

GIRL: Did you know you are going to hell if you haven't found Jesus?
ME: What? Are all Buddhists going to hell?
GIRL: If they haven't found Jesus.
ME: All Muslims are going to hell?
GIRL: If they haven't found Jesus.
ME: Do you know what I John 4:8 says?
GIRL: I don't know, you tell me.
ME: You are out here preaching and you don't know your Bible?
GIRL: You tell me....
ME: It says God is Love.

I then turned my back and waved to the peole honking in support. She kept talking to my back for about a minute before she gave up. BTW, her and her boyfriend were not there to protest, but to save our souls.

I used to confront Christians, but now only during debates about politics, especially when it comes to victimless crimes, do I bring in the forced Judeo-Christian values thing. I have yet to discuss religion's impact on this war... allthough beleive me, my mom is ultra Christian, and she thinks Islam is evil and that they worship the moon.....

[Elok]

Originally posted by BustaMike
Ever been to a Unitarian Universalist church? It's church for (among others) atheists, but it's the only place where EVERYONE is accepted and no one ever says that your spiritual beliefs are wrong.

Well, what's the point of that?
"God loves you!"
"Who the hell's that?"
"Idunno, but doesn't it sound good?"

I mean, if people are going to believe in nothing, why don't they have the balls to face it head on? Like Nietzsche did-oh. Never mind!

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Elok
I mean, if people are going to believe in nothing, why don't they have the balls to face it head on? Like Nietzsche did-oh. Never mind!

So I can avoid wasting time chowing off the heads of people who try to *cough* convert *cough* me.

[Elok]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
So I can avoid wasting time chowing off the heads of people who try to *cough* convert *cough* me.

I meant specifically, on a personal level, as opposed to claiming vague pantheistic sympathies in public and private. I can't see why you would claim something like "there is no god," without trying to come face to face with what it actually means. By my previous post, I meant only that existentialism is the most rational of atheist philosophies insofar as it confronts the fact that without a solid and present god all values are subjective if not illusory. I wasn't suggesting that you turn militant. I dislike militant atheism rather intensely.

[Master Zen]

Why god probably doesn't exist:

Mankind's own ignorance

People are not born with the concept of god in them. It is tought by someome at a time in which we all believe the lies we are told (Santa Claus ring a bell??). Unfortunately there is no-one to dispell the lie eventually and we end up believing it all our life.

Man has always tried to give an answer to all that he doesn't know, which is really stupid since we are not strong enough to actually admit we may not know something. That's why religions in the past were polytheist as there were many aspects of science we did not understand. What causes lightning? Who knows, probably a deity. What causes feritily? Who knows, some guy up in Mt. Olympus. etc. etc. etc.

Have you ever stopped to think who made these things up? Obviously the men in power. Read my sig, power is molding people's minds. No better way to do it than to claim to know the unknown, as ignorant people will not know better. By claiming the monopoly on knowledge, these people achieved their main purpose: obtaining the monopoly of power. It is no surprise that the religious elite have been in power for most of mankind's existence.

As time passed, people began shelving the polytheim thing and just worshiping one god. We still do. Why? because we may be able to explain many things about nature yet we are unable to understand ourselves, and what better way than to do it than submitting ourselves to a faith, to an ethic and moral code which has already been written and passed on generation to generation. I ask people this, is it possible to be a good person without adhering to any religious code? Yes, absolutely. Can you be happy without holding faith in a deity? Definietely so. Then why do we actually need religion? Beats me... perhaps people are afraid to find another truth, after all, renouncing faith has terrible consequences in most religions, let alone the social aspect if the people around you are very much into it.

I'm really amazed how people claim their religion to be the truth, the sole truth. No matter if you belong to the largest religion (catholic) or the lowest sect, over 80% does not believe what you do. Are we so arrogant as to claim we know the truth when such a great part of the world doesn't? It's silly. Who's right and who's wrong? probably everyone is wrong, but we won't know until we die. I for one do not consider myself a true atheist because there always exists the remote chance of seeing jesus or allah or buddah's face when I die. Not likely but possible, and since I don't know "the truth", I cannot claim 100% that god doesn't exist. 99.99% yes, but not 100%.

Anyway, no matter how much science advances, we are still too far off from knowing the true questions that drive the theologically-inclined: why are we here? where did we come from? who made us? who made the universe? Damn it people, JUST ADMIT YOU DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER AND STOP MAKING IT UP BY BELIEVING THE LIES SOMEONE IN A ROBE TELLS YOU. THINK FOR YOURSELVES. ACCEPT THE FACT THAT WE ARE IGNORANT, THAT WE WON'T KNOW THE TRUTH UNTIL WE DIE, IF AT ALL

Once you accept that fact that you do not know it all will you actually find the truth, or rather, accept that the truth is nowhere to be found. And once you do accept this sad fact, it will be the most relieving moment in your entire life.

"The only way to make a believer lose his faith is if god himself tells him He doesn't exist". - Me

damn, this was one hell of a rant...

[Frogman]

Urban Ranger,

I took a look at some interesting sites having to do with transitional forms.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html

There is some interesting data there and I don't disagree that you can trace a path of lineage through dna comparison. I guess what I'm not satisfied with is evolutions ability to explain the complex functions and even more complex interdependencies between species. The concept of co-evolution, where two or more species must change at the same time starts to stretch the chance mutation model

http://fig.cox.miami.edu/Faculty/Tom/bil160/14_coevolution.html

I think there are other forces at work. Punctuated evolution was not predicted by Darwin. We don't yet know what triggers rapid changes or why these changes always move up the scale of complexity and not down. Seems that Life works against the laws of entropy.

I'm not stuck in any dogma, I'm just trying to apply logic to the data we have. To me the data points to a preordained pattern of change that is not necessarily limited to survival of the fittest, but rather the survival of the fit enough. To me there is a plan at work and not mutation and chance. I don't think these are irrational conclusions but others can look at the same facts and come to different conclusions.

If I didn't want to discuss any of this with intellegent people, I could have gone to a host of other forums. I appreciate the chance to learn something new. It just surprises me that many atheists are dogmatic about evolution and think we have the whole thing figured out.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Elok
By my previous post, I meant only that existentialism is the most rational of atheist philosophies insofar as it confronts the fact that without a solid and present god all values are subjective if not illusory.

Let me quote you Jack the Bodiless:

If it were proved to you that there is no God, which atrocity would you commit first, and why?

As far as I can see, Christian morality is frightening because it requires an external threat to impose the code. All this talks of fear of god and hell as punishment.

[Frogman]

Master Zen is mostly right. But there are plenty of people who are convinced God exists because they've talked to him. Just ask Neale Walsh who wrote the Conversations With God books.

Michael Creighton wrote an interesting autobiography called Travels. Its a true account of some of his life adventures. He has dealt with mediums, seen auras, and even spirits. Many people are convinced of a spiritual realm because of direct contact. I'm not one of them, but there sure are plenty out there. You can agree or disagree with a persons belief in this matter, but have no doubt that they are convinced beyond any doubt in their own minds.

I don't know for sure what goes on with these encounters, but I think there is a whole lot more to us than meets the eye. Just logic to the data, I don't think I'm unreasonable here.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Frogman
I think there are other forces at work. Punctuated evolution was not predicted by Darwin.

AFAIK gradualism is not strictly Darwin's own idea.

Originally posted by Frogman
We don't yet know what triggers rapid changes or why these changes always move up the scale of complexity and not down.

That's not true. Viruses clearly evolved later.

Originally posted by Frogman
Seems that Life works against the laws of entropy.

Have you been reading Creationism dogma lately? This is clearly a gross miscontrution of the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

Originally posted by Frogman
I'm not stuck in any dogma, I'm just trying to apply logic to the data we have. To me the data points to a preordained pattern of change that is not necessarily limited to survival of the fittest, but rather the survival of the fit enough.

"Survival of the fittest" was originated by Spencer, not Darwin. FWIW, it is not wrong, but not exact. You have to remember that evolution works on a species level, not an individual level.

Originally posted by Frogman
To me there is a plan at work and not mutation and chance.

To show that there is a plan you have to provide evidence for said plan.

Originally posted by Frogman
t just surprises me that many atheists are dogmatic about evolution and think we have the whole thing figured out.

How is it dogmatic? What alternatives are there? Creationism doesn't count, not only because of the severe lack of evidence but there's not even a coherent scientific model.

Let me ask you a question. How would transitional forms fit in the supposed plan? I noticed you have completely evaded this issue, what is your position on it?

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Frogman
Master Zen is mostly right. But there are plenty of people who are convinced God exists because they've talked to him. Just ask Neale Walsh who wrote the Conversations With God books.

This is merely hallucinations coupled with socialisation. Have you heard a case where an African bushman had conversations with the Christian god? Me neither.

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


This is merely hallucinations coupled with socialisation. Have you heard a case where an African bushman had conversations with the Christian god? Me neither.

One of my best friends is a die-hard Christian. He argues that people who don't embrace Jesus are never "saved". I argue that what if some African or Southamerican native tribe never hears of jesus in their life they are not saved? It's not their fault that "information" never reached them. He argued that missionaries would find them. I said he had no proof that that would happen. He said that if not then it is said in the Bible that jesus would make his word heard to them someway or another. I said do you really believe that BS? He said yes.

Truly, truly, truly, pathetic.