5th July 2011

“A lot of my peers range from indifferent to agnostic to atheists, but every now and then I'll encounter somebody who grimaces when I tell them I'm an atheist.”

Andy Harris

31 Responses to “5th July 2011”

  1. solomon Says:

    Yeah….they apt to grimace at you, stunned at your choice. Of all things why you chose !!HELL!!.

  2. Dan Says:

    Yes Andy, most people are decent and open-minded.

  3. solomon Says:

    Yeah…open minded with a closed heart

  4. Dan Says:

    Solly, your ignorance and intolerance are showing…

  5. solomon Says:

    Ahhh….only lame accusations.

  6. solomon Says:

    Points to ponder.

    #1. Saying that God did not exist is like thinking the universe has an end. If the universe has an end, what lies beyond its end.Our reasoning will tell us theres no end, there should be something outside its boundary.Then again the question arise, for how far more it goes? Then the mind tells us, it will go on forever, its endless.How can endless be described?
    See the brain is a very weak instrument.It can’t even think what our minds tells us.The brain is allways searching for a certain limit.This analogy applies to the Atheists way of thinking,allways rely in the need of a solid proof, recognize by sight or can be measured by some outdated lousy tools.

    #2. The brain comes together with all of the other organs of our body. How can an internal party(organs) explain its own existence.Its existence should be told by some other external party ie. the Creator.Lets put it this way…A toy is manufactured in a factory. Will the toy have the authority to claim of its origin or the manufacturer?

  7. Dan Says:

    #1 – There’s no evidence for gods or the finiteness of the universe. So actually, saying that gods don’t exist is like thinking that the universe has no end.

    #2 – So you’re saying that it’s impossible for us to recognize our own existence? Think about it.

    Try again Sol…

  8. solomon Says:

    Try to refute my doctrine first Dan….

  9. Dan Says:

    “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” (Hitchens)

  10. archaeopteryx Says:

    Solomon’s argument seems to be – our reasoning is imperfect, therefore god exists.

  11. Atheist MC Says:

    It seems to be an assumption generally that because something is unexplained or maybe even unexplainable the answer is god by definition.

    To the quote though, in England I have never encountered a grimace when I mention I’m an atheist. More often than not the response is “who isn’t?”

  12. solomon Says:

    There can’t be other more appropriate than God..
    What else?
    The bloody “nature” you presume.

  13. solomon Says:

    I would like to repeat yesterday’s post.

    You and the atheists lots idiotly just rely on your silly evidence base ranting.
    You can’t deny that the chair you sit on is not without someone who built it even though you did’nt see who built it don’t you? The same concept it must be to other creations. You can’t deny that someone must have created it.

  14. solomon Says:

    Points to ponder;

    Science is actually tiny bits & pieces of knowledge bestowed by God to humans which in turn is being misused by atheists to refute God.

  15. solomon Says:

    Science is the property of believers.

  16. Dan Says:

    Science is actually tiny bits & pieces of knowledge bestowed by God to humans which in turn is being misused by atheists to refute God.

    *facepalm*

    Go look up the word “experiment.” Sheesh.

  17. Atheist MC Says:

    Science is actually tiny bits & pieces of knowledge bestowed by God to humans which in turn is being misused by atheists to refute God.

    Science isn’t knowledge at all, it is an epistemological approach to explaining observed phenomena by a process of induction, deduction, prediction, observation and experiment. The singnificant characteristic of the scientific approach to explaining the universe is that it works and works spectacularly well. The theistic approach to explaining observed phenomena is to say “god did it”, the significant characteristic of which is that it is spectacularly useless at explaining anything.

  18. R J Says:

    reference to soloman reply #7 today………………..

    ” IDIOTLY ” ??????????????????

    sol…..why dont you apply a little of your unshakable faith
    to a DICTIONARY ?????

  19. solomon Says:

    Sometimes I just like to express in broken English.

  20. solomon Says:

    Atheists MC,

    You don’t have to use complicated words to express your opinion. Your lame description of science can simply be summed up into a processed carefully & neatly organized by God for the benefit of mankind.

  21. Atheist MC Says:

    Sorry if it’s too hard for you Sol, if you can’t play with the big boys go away.

  22. solomon Says:

    Typical atheists tactics when they can’t challenge believers.

  23. Dan Says:

    Your lame description of science can simply be summed up into a processed carefully & neatly organized by God for the benefit of mankind.

    http://www.plognark.com/Art/Sketches/Blogsketches/2008/thestupiditburns.jpg

  24. Dan Says:

    Or if you prefer:

    http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2010/1/5/129072015098724953.jpg

  25. Edmond Says:

    Nature is the only explanation for the complexity of the universe. If gods were in charge, the universe would run on magic, and complexity would not need to exist. Humans could be the animated dust as described in creation myths. We would not need circulatory systems, nervous systems, gastrointestinal systems, endocrine systems, brains, organs, any of it. We’d operate purely on the will of the gods, with no discernable functioning parts. Only nature requires this complex interconnected network of systems to keep us alive. Gods would balk at such requirements.

    Only nature explains life’s drive to consume other life to survive and spread. What god would come up with this system of barbarism and predation? Why should the sustenance of life be borne in violent, painful death?

    Only nature explains the vast, emptiness of the universe, and the coalescence of matter into stars and planets, governed by gravity. Gods would have no need of gravity, nor be limited to operating on the surface of only a tiny fraction of globes in the universe. If the universe was created for us, it should not be so empty and unreachable. If the universe is only for us, it should be just big enough for our needs.

    Gods would not do things in the “natural” way. As magical, supernatural beings, they would supercede nature, and work without the need for the laws of physics. Nature shows her mechanism in her complexity. Gods would exhibit magic, but none is found. The existence of gods is unlikely, unsupported by any evidence, and contradicted by nature herself.

  26. archaeopteryx Says:

    Edmond, that is an highly informative, reasoned post. Thank you.

  27. holysmokes Says:

    I can’t complain about the quote. I grimace when someone tells me they are a believer. I guess fair is fair. Of course they get real irritated when I am forced to point that all the evidence is on my side.

  28. solomon Says:

    Edmond,

    If nature is the only explanation for the complexity of the universe, then what about free will. Could nature control that? Nature is only a word created by atheists. It could hardly explain many other phenomenons of life. They could’nt even describe what sort of a medium nature is. Plain guessing.

  29. Dan Says:

    Solly,
    Learn some science (and particular neuroscience). There are entire textbooks full of examples that refute this last comment.

  30. solomon Says:

    Don’t try to scare me with those chicken feed subjects.

  31. Dan Says:

    Well yeah, we know – you’re too good for a silly thing like knowledge.