Atheism is a false philosophy held by the most arrogant

[wmadoss]

I have. You're not missing anything. I wrote one of my best papers on that topic. :)

Signed: An athiest.

I think youre missing a helluvalot.

Dawkins bokks are truly great so if you have the chance read them..


We need more people like Dawkins in the world...

[UnrepentantSinner]

I'm tempted to start a new thread after reading the Conservapedia article on Atheism (http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism) and see how many others of us it makes want to punch your monitor, but I thought I'd post it here first and see if the comments warrent a seperate thread.

[H'ethetheth]

the Conservapedia article on Atheism (http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism) Crikey!

[UnrepentantSinner]

Crikey!

I'll take that as one vote for starting another thread. :D

[Darat]

Crikey and double crikey!

[Darat]

Folks - if you do not want to debate with someone or even address any of their points/comments/opinions just do not post. Do not decide that you will start to discuss your opinion of their mental health and so on.

[cyborg]

1 2 3

1 3 2

2 1 3

2 3 1

3 1 2

3 2 1

Which of these sequences is ordered and which is not and why?

Can I get an answer to my question please? For Darat's sake.

[H'ethetheth]

Can I get an answer to my question please? For Darat's sake.Yes. Also, can we get an answer to, for example, all the questions?

[UnrepentantSinner]

I'll take that as one vote for starting another thread. :D

Crikey and double crikey!

And that's two. My bandwidth will be compromised for a bit so I'll start it when I have the spare bits.

[Temporal Renegade]

I was an atheist many years before I'd ever heard of Richard Dawkins.

I was an atheist before I'd heard of either Richard Dawkins or Richard Dawson...

[triadboy]

I was an atheist before I'd heard of either Richard Dawkins or Richard Dawson...


I'm was watching Hogans Heroes when I read this. :-O

Look at my arm....it's all goose-bumply.

[Silentknight]

I'm tempted to start a new thread after reading the Conservapedia article on Atheism (http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism) and see how many others of us it makes want to punch your monitor, but I thought I'd post it here first and see if the comments warrent a seperate thread.

Yeah, but while Conservapedia may have started out as serious, a large crowd of editors latched onto it with the intention of retooling the articles into parodies that play the straw political motif for laughs. Guess which side makes up the majority of editors now.

[UnrepentantSinner]

Yeah, but while Conservapedia may have started out as serious, a large crowd of editors latched onto it with the intention of retooling the articles into parodies that play the straw political motif for laughs. Guess which side makes up the majority of editors now.

Are you suggesting Andrew isn't keeping the black sheep out of his flock? ;)

If the Atheism article and most of its content is parody, satire and mockery, then Conservapedia has become the most blatant manifestation of Poe's Law on the Web ever.

[arthwollipot]

Oh, I'm not saying I won't read him. Just that I have not, yet. I haven't read much on atheism, frankly. I've learned to mistrust that smug feeling I get when reading material that tends to agree with my opinions.
It sounds interesting, though. :)You're helping to make a good point. The only one of Dawkins' books that is actually about atheism is The God Delusion. Most of his other books are about biology. I heartily endorse the recommendation of The Ancestor's Tale, and I also suggest The Blind Watchmaker and Unweaving the Rainbow. Both wonderful books, and neither one of them about atheism. :D

[Belz...]

:eek:Silentknight, When you say, "Your God still doesn't exist.", that's like saying
"ninney-ninney-boo-boo". Forget the word God for a moment and simply consider the word INTELLIGENCE, in whatever form.

Intelligence requires molecules, not the other way around. You have no example of existence coming from intelligence.

My argument is and has always been the fact that, logically speaking, the only possible way for ORDER to exist is because some form of INTELLIGENCE produced it. THAT'S IT!!!!!!

Yes, and you are wrong. Ever see a snowflake ?

Now, because people like Dr. Albert Einstein devoted the last 30 years of his life attempting to prove that everything is connected, his UNIFIED FIELD THEORY, along with the Hindu concept of Brahman, the oneness of it all, and the Buddhist concept of Dharmakaya, the oneness of it all, this concept of oneness is not new.

I'm not sure you understand what Einstein did.

You see, my basic argument is and has always been just this: ORDER REQUIRES INTELLIGENT DIRECTION. Atheists, on the other hand, believe that ORDER DOES NOT REQUIRE INTELLIGENT DIRECTION.

Wrong again. Atheists simply DO NOT believe in gods.

Therefore, since YOU exist, my God does exist. So there!

Non Sequitur. YOUR god is the only possible god, even if your premises were true, which they aren't.

[Belz...]

3. Human intelligence may or may not be explainable by physics, including QM, as currently understood. But even in that case, there is no need for QM itself to be intelligent.

In fact, his opinion is anthropocentric in the extreme. Why should intelligence be so special ? I'm reminded of our good old lightcreatedlife@hom.

[Belz...]

:blush:Egg, Just as the title of my thread indicates, most atheists are almost insufferably arrogant.

Since you obviously know very few of them -- as illustrated by your ignorance of their beliefs or lack thereof -- I find this statement quite arrogant, myself.

As most of you probably do not know, The Fabian Society is a socialistic/communistic organization that wants to systematically eliminate organized religion, while promoting atheism.

Oh, so you're one of those.

I just love conspiracy theorists. Fundamentalist conspiracy theorists are the best kind.

Dawkins is far too intelligent to actually believe that complex systems simply develop over billions of years WITHOUT any intelligent direction. His real agenda is to trash organized religion and make millions selling books to his atheistic clones, thereby helping to prove his memetics theory is true.

And there we have it. The logical conclusion of the fundie mind. "Atheists don't really believe there's no god. They're just rebelling against him." What nice projection. You, sir, are incapable of understanding the concept of "no god", and you decide to compensate for your lack of imagination by insulting people who think differently. It is not only immature, but, as I said, arrogant. Perhaps you should learn some humility and then learn some real science before posting here.

[Belz...]

I disagree.

Intelligence evolves from coherence, the other way round is a logical and physical impossibility. Unless you describe an intelligence model based on pure chaos, happenstance, accidental coincidence.

:eye-poppi

Hell, I actually agree with Herz. I guess the end of the world really is coming!

[six7s]

Ever see a snowflake ?Indeed :)

For a thorough yet easy intro to fascinating yet completely natural (cf super natural) whirled of amazing order, see:

Ken Libbrecht's Field Guide To Snowflakes (http://books.google.com/books?id=eOv83aUgOvwC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_summary_r&cad=0)

About this book
Snowflakes are temporary works of art, tiny crystalline masterpieces, each as different from the next as one person is from another. If you would like to look closer at these marvelous creations - and understand their patterns - this handy, pocket-sized book will serve as your introduction to the art and science of the snowflake.

As entertaining as it is informative, this comprehensive field guide describes the many different types of snowflakes, where and how to find them, and what can be learned from their intricate structures and patterns. Also included are handy tips for intrepid snowflake hunters, including what type of snowflakes to expect during certain weather conditions, opportune ways for capturing them (the author prefers the brightly-lit tops of parking garages at night, for example).

Illustrated with Libbrecht's own remarkable microphotographs of real snowflakes, the book is itself a work of art, as delightful to look at as it is to learn from, and as full of wonder as it is rich with answers. An excellent guide for snowflake lovers, classrooms, family fun, as well as the serious or amateur scientist.

books.google.com/books?id=eOv83aUgOvwC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_summary_r&cad=0 (http://books.google.com/books?id=eOv83aUgOvwC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_summary_r&cad=0)

[Tricky]

My argument is and has always been the fact that, logically speaking, the only possible way for ORDER to exist is because some form of INTELLIGENCE produced it. THAT'S IT!!!!!!
That's it?

Well guess what? Your argument is a logical fallacy. Order requires intelligence and intelligence requires order, also known as the "Turtles All The Way Down" fallacy. Before you start making proclamations as to what is and what isn't logical, I highly recommend you make at least a cursory study of logic. It could save your caps-lock key.

[leonAzul]

INTELLIGENCE

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

[leonAzul]

the Conservapedia article on Atheism (http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism)

Good grief!

[six7s]

Anyway, I just want you to think about that little ACORN. Just imagine, one tiny little acorn already knows what that big oak tree inside looks like..AND.. that single little acorn also knows it can be all that's necessary to produce a THOUSAND forests of mighty OAKS. Isn't that an example of some pretty extraordinary intelligent design? Or , would you just attribute this to random, blind luck?

INTELLIGENTYou keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.I'm damn sure the two couldn't be more dissimilar

Anyway, I just want you to think about that little ACORN. Just imagine, one tiny little acorn already knows what that big oak tree inside looks like..AND.. that single little acorn also knows it can be all that's necessary to produce a THOUSAND forests of mighty OAKS. Isn't that an example of some pretty extraordinary intelligent design?Incredibly stupid, literally

[Achán hiNidráne]

Yes, and you are wrong. Ever see a snowflake ?


Next up, bwinwright will claim that his god takes time from this busy schedule to individually create each and every snowflake.

That is, if he hasn't skedaddled already.

[Temporal Renegade]

I'm was watching Hogans Heroes when I read this. :-O

Look at my arm....it's all goose-bumply.

:)

[Herzblut]

:eye-poppi

Hell, I actually agree with Herz. I guess the end of the world really is coming!
Let's make sure this never happens again! ;)