[Merged]Atheism is a really bogus philosophy

[uk_dave]

It didn't take long to discover that this site is to atheism what the Catholic church is to homosexuals. In my experience, atheists always seem to be people nobody likes very much, so they had to be different by claiming to be an atheist, to justify why nobody likes them.

That's called projection.
Just because nobody likes you doesn't mean you have to bore us with your problems. Get over it and get a life.

I agree with Neale Boortz, the radio talk show host from Atlanta, regarding atheism. He says that no rational person could possibly be an atheist.

Well, if that helps him sleep at night then he's entitled to his opinion. Opinions don't change reality though.

Of course, I can understand labeling yourself an atheist to avoid the perception that you may be associated with an organized religion. Of course, simply telling people how you feel about organized religion should suffice.

So you just proved you have no clue.
Hardly breaking news.

However, this idea that there is no God, or a form of intelligence capable of producing orderliness which dramatically transcends man's demonstrated capabilities, is absolutely ludicrous to me. Why?

Because you get scared

Because to deny the existence of such an intelligence necessarily means one must believe orderliness does not require intelligent direction. This is the primary error in the philosophy of atheism.

If that helps you sleep at night

The problem with claiming to be an atheist, totally rejecting the idea of some transcendent, super-powerful, even ineffable form of intelligence simply because nobody can show you a Polaroid of this being, your PROOF, YOUR FACTS, you are essentially telling this "stuff", whatever it is, that you don't need it or want it at all. Why? Because, to the atheist, this "stuff" doesn't even exist. The ultimate in arrogance comes from the depth of ignorance, doesn't it?

Wow, you really are scared!
Hey, if it floats your boat, knock yourself out.

Outside of what you call NATURE, which the atheist believes just happened as a result of some kind of cosmic luck, can any of you really smart people give me just one example or orderliness that did not require intelligent direction?

There is no god

 

[Par]

The ultimate in arrogance comes from the depth of ignorance, doesn't it?

I am being told that I’m arrogant by someone claiming evidence-free knowledge of the fundamental nature of the universe.

 

[this charming man]

This is a nearly identical post to the post bwinwright made yesterday.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=103807

Why start up again? Why not continue in yesterday's thread?

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Outside of what you call NATURE, which the atheist believes just happened as a result of some kind of cosmic luck, can any of you really smart people give me just one example or orderliness that did not require intelligent direction?

Well, you might try looking in the other thread you started which asked the same question. At least two of the replies in there contain just such examples.

 

[Trifikas]

can any of you really smart people give me just one example or orderliness that did not require intelligent direction?

Piece of cake!

I submit your opening post. Ordered in nice neat paragraphs & sentence structure, and yet completly lacking in...well, I don't really need to go on, do I?

Trifikas

 

[Lisa Simpson]

Just as an FYI, we usually don't like to merge threads when there are multiple responses, as the software merges the thread chronologically instead just adding one thread to the end of the other. It can make for confusing reading.

Now, back to the regularly scheduled arguments.

 

[six7s]

I agree with Neale Boortz, the radio talk show host from Atlanta, regarding atheism. He says that no rational person could possibly be an atheist.

Wow! Thanks for the heads-up!

When you use an appeal to authority, you sure know how to pick 'em!

boortz.com bio

My wife, Donna, doesn't listen to the show. Never has. This is good. My daughter, Laura, uses a fake last name. Another good idea.

With such advanced critical thinking skills, I assume you registered here to teach, rather than learn from us stoopid, irrational atheists

 

[tsg]

Ah, the post and run. The internet version of ringing doorbells and running away.

 

[six7s]

Well, it made me get up off my irrational atheist arse, open the door and see the light!

I will be, hopefully eternally, grateful

 

[bwinwright]

I'm ignorant about many things

I realize most of you think I'm incredibly ignorant and you are correct. , especially when it comes to responding to various comments about my threads. I don't want you to think I'm posting a thread, then running from it. I plead ignorance with regard to the technology I'm using. Hopefully, I'll learn how to do what comes so easy to most of you. I was born in the 40's and am computer-challenged. Sorry.

Anyway, I honestly do not understand how you can demand so much from a human being, intellectually speaking, yet feel NATURE is the result of mindlessness. How can orderliness of such dizzying magnitude exist without any intelligent input?


I wish you guys would stop being such wise guys long enough to seriously attempt to answer this question. You see, I "HONESTLY" feel that order requires intelligent direction.

Simply try to explain why you "believe" this is not true. Give me an example of order without intelligent direction. I just don't think you can. However, if you can, I will convert to atheism, OK?

 

[Hokulele]

Simply try to explain why you "believe" this is not true. Give me an example of order without intelligent direction. I just don't think you can. However, if you can, I will convert to atheism, OK?

http://www.nps.gov/arch/

 

[NewtonTrino]

Natural Selection is the answer. Personally I would start with any of Dawkin's books on the subject.

One you fully understand how it works you won't bother questioning the how part of the complexity displayed before your eyes.

It's really a ruthlessly efficient process and it's the reason you feel pain when kicked in the balls. It's also the reason that you have consciousness (which is just a highly selected stimulus response mechanism).

I don't understand why this is so hard to believe.

 

[alfaniner]

Plinko.

 

[Ryan O'Dine]

I realize most of you think I'm incredibly ignorant and you are correct. , especially when it comes to responding to various comments about my threads. I don't want you to think I'm posting a thread, then running from it. I plead ignorance with regard to the technology I'm using. Hopefully, I'll learn how to do what comes so easy to most of you. I was born in the 40's and am computer-challenged. Sorry.

Anyway, I honestly do not understand how you can demand so much from a human being, intellectually speaking, yet feel NATURE is the result of mindlessness. How can orderliness of such dizzying magnitude exist without any intelligent input?

I wish you guys would stop being such wise guys long enough to seriously attempt to answer this question. You see, I "HONESTLY" feel that order requires intelligent direction.

Simply try to explain why you "believe" this is not true. Give me an example of order without intelligent direction. I just don't think you can. However, if you can, I will convert to atheism, OK?

It's snowing outside my window. Each flake is a highly ordered crystal of ice. Some are quite intricate and complicated.

Each a product of mindless randomness.

What do I win?

 

[RenaissanceBiker]

Outside of what you call NATURE, which the atheist believes just happened as a result of some kind of cosmic luck, can any of you really smart people give me just one example or orderliness that did not require intelligent direction?

Is a snowflake outside of nature?

ETA: Two minutes. I was looking for a picture and Ryan O'Dine beats me to the example.

 

[six7s]

I realize most of you think I'm incredibly ignorant and you are correct. , especially when it comes to responding to various comments about my threads. I don't want you to think I'm posting a thread, then running from it

Simply by replying, you have (perhaps a tad belatedly) shown that you aren't simply a post-and-run troll...

So, welcome!

I plead ignorance with regard to the technology I'm using. Hopefully, I'll learn how to do what comes so easy to most of you. I was born in the 40's and am computer-challenged. Sorry

There is no need to apologise... we all started as newbies

And... if you are seen to apply the same level of honesty to other fields you are 'ignorant' about, I'm sure you will receive loads of sincere and helpful advice, support, etc

I honestly do not understand how you can demand so much from a human being, intellectually speaking, yet feel NATURE is the result of mindlessness. How can orderliness of such dizzying magnitude exist without any intelligent input?

It seems like you have quite a few questions... and, again, we all started as newbies, so don't beat yourself up about it

I suspect that (esp if you slow down a bit) you will soon discover that you are in the right place to receive some very helpful answers

 

[Spindrift]

I realize most of you think I'm incredibly ignorant and you are correct. , especially when it comes to responding to various comments about my threads. I don't want you to think I'm posting a thread, then running from it. I plead ignorance with regard to the technology I'm using. Hopefully, I'll learn how to do what comes so easy to most of you. I was born in the 40's and am computer-challenged. Sorry.

Anyway, I honestly do not understand how you can demand so much from a human being, intellectually speaking, yet feel NATURE is the result of mindlessness. How can orderliness of such dizzying magnitude exist without any intelligent input?


I wish you guys would stop being such wise guys long enough to seriously attempt to answer this question. You see, I "HONESTLY" feel that order requires intelligent direction.

Simply try to explain why you "believe" this is not true. Give me an example of order without intelligent direction. I just don't think you can. However, if you can, I will convert to atheism, OK?

The first sentence was spectacular. Concise and accurate. You should have stopped there.

You have been given examples of order without intelligent direction. How about considering just one. The snowflake is an example.

We really don't care whether or not you "convert" to atheism. Since it's not a religion, you can't really convert to it.

 

[bwinwright]

Sorry. I am an old fart and computer challenged

Clearly, most of you think I am a damned fool for believing order requires intelligent direction.

However, the venomous responses are quite stunning. If you want to be serious about your belief that Nature is Mindless, that the incredible orderliness that Nature exhibits is somehow the product of mindlessness, fine!

However, it just doesn't make sense to me. You agree that every example of orderliness, outside of nature, requires intelligent direction, right?

Then, please stop being such wise guys and attempt to answer the question. How is it possible that so many examples of orderliness exist in nature, examples of orderliness far more complex and sophisticated than anything man has been able to produce, which are all the product of mindlessness?

How is this possible? How do you explain this to your children? Please address me as if I were a retarded child, your retarded child, really trying to understand, OK?

 

[six7s]

We really don't care whether or not you "convert" to atheism. Since it's not a religion, you can't really convert to it.

I agree that atheism is, by definition, not a religion... but you can convert to it; I'm proof

But, Spindrift, waddaya mean 'we'? I for one relish the prospect of wooists from any background converting to reality

 

[six7s]

However, it just doesn't make sense to me. You agree that every example of orderliness, outside of nature, requires intelligent direction, right?

I don't know what you mean, probably cos I can't think of an "example of orderliness, outside of nature"

Please provide an example and I'll try to provide an answer