Atheism is a faith.

Bill Thompson said:
There are no gods in plumbing or geology either as I said before.

Are people supposed to be looking for gods in these places?
Click to expand...
Astronomy (and geology to some extent) include some study of the creation of the world and cosmos. This is also a field in which God's hand is frequently invoked. Thus, to find that there is no such evidence of divine interaction in these fields is somewhat more important to the question of God's existence than his absence from your pipes.
 
cgordon said:
For once, I have to agree with Ken. :D

Cosmological studies, including the discipline of astronomy, all point to the fallacy of mythology as a source for creation ... as an educated, degreed astronomer and skeptic, Plait has far better claim to talking about the scientific and skeptical basis of creation cosmology than most of us, especially the largely uneducated (by any conventional definition) Biblical creationists.
Click to expand...
Your very last bit is correct, creationists are easy to rebut, but most christians aren't actually creationists and the ones I converse with most assuredly aren't. For non-creationist christians, astronomy is as likely to rebut them as is astrology.

I'm having this exact discussion in the other thread - or at least trying to. At present, unter still hasn't figured out whether he's in The Matrix or not!
 
Tricky said:
Astronomy (and geology to some extent) include some study of the creation of the world and cosmos. This is also a field in which God's hand is frequently invoked. Thus, to find that there is no such evidence of divine interaction in these fields is somewhat more important to the question of God's existence than his absence from your pipes.
Click to expand...
Are you saying these pipes are clean?
 
Ginarley said:
Last I heard from the grand Taniwha, we were purging not recruiting ;) And the code behind W-AB scorelines is clearly a secret much too shocking for anywhere but youtube...
Click to expand...
The purge is on and nobody told me? I've been looking forward to it. I can't believe I wasn't told. Talk about a breakdown in communications :rolleyes: . Tiamat's going to hear about this.

Hang on ... Taniwha? Oh crap ... Look, can you just get them to wait until after the match? And not in the face, please. It was nothing personal, I just picked the wrong Dragon.
 
joobz said:
I am much better at taking icy civility than downright hostility. Unfortunately, it can sometimes be hard to tell the difference in text.
Click to expand...
I feel no hostility towards you, and I'm pretty sure my hostility is unmistakable when it crops up. T'ai Chi must have noticed it - he rubs me up the wrong way, somehow.

You're all right, kid :) .
 
CapelDodger said:
I feel no hostility towards you, and I'm pretty sure my hostility is unmistakable when it crops up. T'ai Chi must have noticed it - he rubs me up the wrong way, somehow.

You're all right, kid :) .
Click to expand...
The sad thing is, Unless you checked my profile, I guarantee I'm older than what you think I am.

The only thing that gets to me is that T'ai NEVER answers a question I pose to him. Oh well.
 
joobz said:
The only thing that gets to me is that T'ai NEVER answers a question I pose to him. Oh well.
Click to expand...
That's just T'ai. He makes threads, but never contributes to them in any meaningful way. I think it is a power-trip thingie and he believe we are performing for him while he sits back in royal aloofness.
 
CapelDodger said:
I feel no hostility towards you, and I'm pretty sure my hostility is unmistakable when it crops up. T'ai Chi must have noticed it - he rubs me up the wrong way, somehow.

You're all right, kid :) .
Click to expand...

Joobz,

I know my posts on this thread and another where you brought up atheism as a faith weren't the most polite. I feel no hostility towards you either, and I'd like to apologize for my rudeness.
 
Bill Thompson said:
His home page does not claim that by being an astronomer gives him special insight into religion but his home page promotes and supports his beliefs on this subject as perhaps a personal home page would. Ironically, that really is bad astronomy.
Click to expand...
Ironically? You were doing well up to the last sentence. This is Phil Plait's home-page, not an Observatory's. In the latter case anything to do with religion - except perhaps regarding the religious assault on science in schools - would be bad astronomy. Phil Plait's an astronomer who's also an outspoken atheist so his home page, as you say, would likely reflect both. Whence the bad astronomy?
 
Bill Thompson said:
There are no gods in plumbing or geology either as I said before.

Are people supposed to be looking for gods in these places?
Click to expand...

So what, exactly, is your complaint? You don't think Phil Plait should talk about religious topics in his own blog? Do you think Phil Plait is trying to convince people that there isn't a god based solely on his authority as an astronomer? Are you just complaining because you don't like atheists?
 
joobz said:
The only thing that gets to me is that T'ai NEVER answers a question I pose to him. Oh well.
Click to expand...

Don't take it personally, T'ai doesn't answer ANY questions posed to him that challenge his position. He's just a troll that snipes a post now and then and thinks he's a genius because of it.
 
joobz said:
The sad thing is, Unless you checked my profile, I guarantee I'm older than what you think I am.
Click to expand...
Profiles are cheating. I started at "adolescent" and I'm working up till the protests stop :) . I guarantee you're younger than me in years, and I had this accelerated decade-ish around 25 to 30. Hey, we all did it! I got out with my teeth and sanity, which is more than some, but I digress.

The only thing that gets to me is that T'ai NEVER answers a question I pose to him. Oh well.
Click to expand...
He needs ignoring but he's so egregious you just can't. You have to slap him and then he's off on some other thread. I try not to bring my rough Politics Forum ways with me but T'ai Chi? It would take a frickin' saint.
 
Tricky said:
That's just T'ai. He makes threads, but never contributes to them in any meaningful way. I think it is a power-trip thingie and he believe we are performing for him while he sits back in royal aloofness.
Click to expand...
This thread in Science is a classic.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1965490#post1965490

You may have been there, it's pages long. Started by T'ai Chi and the fourth post is his "Brodski, you should email the author or write a counter-article." The non-brodski response was from CFLarsen : "Why is it interesting?" (For those not in the know, "interesting" is T'ai Chi's verbal tic.)

Fourth post, one substantive response (brodski, respect) and all he's got is that?

I responded "You should just give it up" and walked away. What else can you do? That's how I remember it anyway, I was drunk at the time.
 
The Atheist said:
Your very last bit is correct, creationists are easy to rebut, but most christians aren't actually creationists and the ones I converse with most assuredly aren't. For non-creationist christians, astronomy is as likely to rebut them as is astrology.

I'm having this exact discussion in the other thread - or at least trying to. At present, unter still hasn't figured out whether he's in The Matrix or not!
Click to expand...

That depends by what one means by the word creationism. I understand that what you mean is "a young-earth biblical literalist creationist". I see creationists as "anyone who believes that the universe as we know it was created by god". Ofcourse that's a definition that I choose to use because I can't see a difference between someone who believes that the world was created in 10k years or in 13.7 billion years (well ofcourse I can but the point is that they both believe in creation)... it's still "created by god". Thus anyone who believes in god is a creationist to me. I know it's a broad definition albeit I don't think it's incorrect.
 
Last edited:
LaPalida said:
That depends by what one means by the word creationism. I understand that what you mean is "a young-earth biblical literalist creationist". I see creationists as "anyone who believes that the universe as we know it was created by god". Ofcourse that's a definition that I choose to use because I can't see a difference between someone who believes that the world was created in 10k years or in 13.7 billion years (well ofcourse I can but the point is that they both believe in creation)... it's still "created by god". Thus anyone who believes in god is a creationist to me. I know it's a broad definition albeit I don't think it's incorrect.
Click to expand...
Fair point - and really on the cruxes of these debates - definitions differ. While you're using it broadly, I'm referring to, as you suggest, bible-literalist creationists in the 6010 year timeline vein.
 
LaPalida said:
That depends by what one means by the word creationism. I understand that what you mean is "a young-earth biblical literalist creationist". I see creationists as "anyone who believes that the universe as we know it was created by god". Ofcourse that's a definition that I choose to use because I can't see a difference between someone who believes that the world was created in 10k years or in 13.7 billion years (well ofcourse I can but the point is that they both believe in creation)... it's still "created by god". Thus anyone who believes in god is a creationist to me. I know it's a broad definition albeit I don't think it's incorrect.
Click to expand...
In the limited Christian context, and why not, it's more "absolute" than "broad". I like it. The Christian position on creationism can only be asymptotic to yours; however woolly it gets it can't reduce godly intervention in life as we know it to zero, or what's left of the god? An opportunist from a "higher dimension".

It's applicable in a wider contect, of course, I was just covering my flanks against Philosophers. You can't give them an opening or chance of diversion - and they hate absolutes for just that reason. I love absolutes when they're justified. There's enough we're not sure about that we don't need to be deliberately unsure about the bleedin' obvious.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom