Scientism - The Belief System of Atheists

No, it's the nature of religion. Religion has no accepted methodology for resolving issues, so what happens is bifercation, over and over again. With science, the entire world says quite unified on issues of science through having methodologies for resolving issues.

Paganism IS religion - it's the religion of all those who don't believe as YOU do.

 

The rules of logic are the consequence, not the cause, of the reasoning process. An erroneous conclusion is the result of faulty premises and arguments, not of flaws of the rules of logic themselves.

Let's take your example. The premise is obviously wrong - there's plenty of empirical evidence for that. Therefore the premise in your example should be "If a person is born with Y chromosome, there's a high probability that the person will be a male". Or "If a person is born with Y chromosome, the person will be a male provided that there's no other known or unknown factor that could have a significant influence on the gender".

We don't have absolute knowledge, therefore we should choose our premises carefully.

 

Let's put it this way: IF they use it at all, they use their rational brain to rationalize their emotionally-driven decisions.

 

I don't have one. What I'm trying to convey to atheists is that their failure to see any evidence of the supernatural doesn't rule it out. Plenty of other people see evidence of the supernatural all the time. So your failure to see it is not an argument. That's like saying you can't see a 3D image in one of those stereoscopic images. Your failure to see it is not evidence that it isn't there.

 

What a simplistic load of pablum that only a theist would be gullible enough to swallow without question.

Is there any 'geographical corroboration' for Santa Claus? Of course there is because everyone "knows" that Santa lives at the North Pole. Then we have NORAD tracking Santa on Xmas Eve as further "evidences". We can find Santa in every shopping mall and we have the "evidences" of the presents that he leaves and the disappearance of the milk and cookies. Then there are the tales of martyrs like Tiny Tim pitted against the evil Scrooge in Dicken's Christmas Carol. The Spirits of the Past, Present and Future were a morality tale that ultimately lead to "saving" the "soul" of Scrooge and there is no denying that this elicits "strong consideration".

In essence that 'consideration' establishes that Dickens must have been a biblical prophet of great powers to come up with such a convincing superstition about an imaginary being.

So Santa is a very good PARALLEL to the inane superstitions in the bible rather than a "strawman".

 

Where is your credible substantiation for that utterly false allegation of yours?

 

BWAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHHHA!

Your own "fart gas" sources just proved me to be RIGHT!

In essence no one outside of the military was using transistors and integrated circuit boards were considered to have no useful purpose until the government sponsored Apollo space program DEMONSTRATED the value to the COMMERCIAL market. Furthermore it is patently OBVIOUS that you never bothered to read your own sources.

Gotta love it when the "fart gas" blows right back at the person who "farted"!

 

No it isn't. If I had prefaced my original comment that prompted your ire with 'I believe...', there would be no onus of anything on anyone. I didn't because I thought reasonable folks would understand I wasn't trying to convince them to accept a fact, but rather motivate inquisitive minds to look into it for themselves. I maintain that is still the more reasonable understanding. I've obviously failed to motivate you to look into it, but that isn't surprising in the least. I'm sure you have plenty of peer reviewed and officially authorized textbooks to keep you content.



Sure

I think we've hit an impasse.[/QUOTE]

This is how ALL conspiracy nonsense ends with the irrefutable facts being presented that debunk the absurd conspiracy drivel so the conspiracy believers just illogically deny the facts because they violate their conspiracy confirmation bias.

Sad!

 

Omnipotence is a logical paradox.

 

Irrational simplistic twaddle that fails to address the full complexity of the problem is illogical.

 

Paganism refers to ALL RELIGIONS that are NOT monotheistic but they are still RELIGIONS by the same definition that applies to monotheism!

Secondly there is ZERO EVIDENCE that pagan religions are "worse" as far as morality goes. Here are the basic moral tenets of the Norse pagans.

https://www.patheos.com/library/pag...munity/principles-of-moral-thought-and-action

How is any of that pagan morality "far worse" than your Christian morality?

 

That is just rewording the asinine absence of evidence is not evidence of absence illogicality. In essence it is an Argument from Ignorance Fallacy and has zero validity when it comes to logic.

Ironic that you claim to be both logical and an atheist and yet you defend Christianity while putting down Atheism and you consistently use the same logical fallacies that theists always use.

That says volumes!

 

Yes its evidence of their failure.

Any kid can tell you where Santa Claus is from—the North Pole. But his historical journey is even longer and more fantastic than his annual, one-night circumnavigation of the globe.

For several hundred years, circa 1200 to 1500, St. Nicholas was the unchallenged bringer of gifts and the toast of celebrations centered around his feast day, December 6. The strict saint took on some aspects of earlier European deities, like the Roman Saturn or the Norse Odin, who appeared as white-bearded men and had magical powers like flight. He also ensured that kids toed the line by saying their prayers and practicing good behavior.

Santa is the celebration of St Nicholas a real Bishop cant you post anything that is correct?

have you read any of your posts?

Texas Instruments had demonstrated all-transistor AM radios as early as 1952,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_transistor

further more transistors and integrated circuits are entirely different things.

further more there is no such thing as an integrated circuit board, in the industry board refers to copper laminate, integrated circuits are built on a wafer or chip.

So your claim is that conspiracies dont exist?

You dont think that position would be highly delusional?

More knee jerk emotional drivel, doesnt take a rocket scientist to see XS is defending information accuracy.

If I were him Id be embarrassed to cal myself atheist due to all the loonercee we see out here from the enlightened logical brilliant [neo] atheists.


You know a person could have a full time job correcting all the bullshit disinformation you post.

 

yes

 

Emotional detachment is one of the symptoms of psychopathy.

It doesn't matter to what purpose is the rational brain used, the reasoning process still takes place. Poor decisions are a result of flawed or incomplete thinking, not the absence of thinking.

Anyway, it seems that most of our thought processes take place in the nonconscious mind, our conscious thinking, perceiving, and learning accounts for only a small fraction of our total mental activity. Absolute statements about thinking and decision making processes are simply not sustainable.

 

I did read it. It directly contradicted your claim that the transistor was developed with government money. You didn't mention the integrated circuit, but that, too, was developed without government money. The government was the first purchaser, but that didn't make them the financier of the research that brought it about. Your inability to see plain facts astounds me, as always.

 

I prefer the term "subconscious", but the result is the same. The subconscious doesn't think, it matches the situation up with whatever situations it has encountered in the past and chooses the option that will lead to the best or least worst outcome, based on fear, hope, anger, bigotry, and whatever other subconscious biases people have. This is not using the rational brain but making decisions based on emotions, and then using the rational brain to explain the emotionally made decision.

There was a fascinating study of people whose corpus callosum, the band of fibers that connect the left & right hemispheres of the brain, had been cut, either deliberately or accidentally. Separating the vision between the left eye and the right eye, the subconscious mind could still identify objects on both sides, as indicated by hand motions, but the conscious mind could only identify objects on one side. But the person would still explain why he chose a particular object and not another on the other side, even though the explanations were ludicrous.

The left's ability to rationalize away the repeated failures of socialism throughout history is another example. They use their rational brain not to reach a conclusion but to come up with excuses.

 

Are you dizzy yet from all the spinning that you are doing? Just try the actual truth for once, it may help you somewhat recover.

 

I have agreed many times that nothing we can observe rules out the possibility of the supernatural. In fact, there could be nature that we can't observe. String theory postulates structures that are too small to detect with current technology. There could be more dimensions than space-time. Nobody is ruling out the possibility of the currently indetectable.

I'll have to add that I don't accept that what other people have observed is evidence of a supreme intelligence that is having or has had a direct impact on Earth. But, people have different beliefs, and I accept that.

I'm not interested in refuting your religious beliefs - or the religious beliefs of anyone else. You can look back at my posts.

 

anyone who calls them selves atheists have ruled it out.

 

Well, there could be parts of nature that are indetectable to us today. There could be other dimensions, stuff like string particles that are two tiny for us to detect, whatever came "before" our universe, etc. We see weird stuff with quantum mechanics that appears supernatural.

The religious aspect has to do with an intelligence. Finding no evidence of that super intelligence doesn't imply that humans understand all other aspects of this and other possible universes. Obviously, we don't

If you want to find evidence of god, you actually have to find evidence of god.

 

Yes, problem 1

Yes, problem 2

Yes, problem 3

Yes, problem 4

we dont know but Id say thats a good assumption.

On a universe scale our intelligence wouldnt even register on the meter

Problem 5) If you want to find evidence of G/god people need to first recognize the dividing line between natural and supernatural. No one will be able to find dry land looking under the ocean any more than anyone will find an ocean in the middle of a desert, any more than you can measure electricity with a scale or weight with a voltmeter.

 

The subconscious uses patterns formed by processing information with the rational brain. Language, for instance, is such a pattern. The faith in the infallibility of the communist ideology in certain circles is a pattern. Many patterns - especially those pertaining to social skills - are formed by inhibiting emotions and instincts at an early age. No, the subconscious is not about emotions alone, and many of the thinking processes taking place within are the result of previous thinking processes in the rational conscious brain.

We don't have to go through the whole process of learning a word, or a concept, over and over again in order to be able to use it. We also don't have to rationalize every aspect of reality over and over again in order to be able to deal with it. Using patterns definitively offers a survival advantage. The downside is obviously the tendency to dismiss information and reject behaviors that contradict the patterns.

 

Wrong. What atheists have ruled out is not the existence of the indetectable, but the validity of the claims of various religions to have thorough knowledge of indetectable entities called gods and an indetectable reality called supernatural.

 

And so YOU ATHEISTS are the ultimate arbiters of what is valid and what is not? Oh the hubris... the hubris...….