Scientism - The Belief System of Atheists

Your posts prove otherwise. Hint: Try reading the sentence you quoted and try, or at least pretend to try, to understand its context. Functional illiteracy is not an argument.

 

you are the one who has the problem with it not me, if you cant explain your problem I cant help you.

 

You don't have to checkmate yourself. A few examples that would have occurred to any remotely honest and informed person: ghosts, reincarnation, souls, spirits, the afterlife, luck, psychics, magic, etc. Try thinking about it before posting.

 

My problem is you are presenting a fake "argument" based on the terrible misreading of a wiki article. You took one sentence from the article and posted it as if it were incontrovertible fact. That's illiteracy, not an argument. If you can't actually read and understand the wiki article you posted yourself, I can't help you.

 

We here at the 2nd Reformation of the Reformation, PC(USA) the (We Did its) as opposed to the Presbyterian Church in America (the Nowhere close to got its), as opposed to the illegal (Southern Presby*$$#%) , we believe in free agency! Just check out this line graph of how people have spoken.

Here's in 1953 Eisenhower Proclaiming Presbyterianism equivalent to promotion of southern Slavery. Doing good at 7 million. Here's the United Presbyterian Church, like hey you might want to catch a ride, it was 4 million ,in 1965 it was 4 million, we finally got them all, dead, its now <2 million. Now you know they're old, they are sad. We're healing. we all need to focus on healing. Here's government drawing a gradual sort of, irrelevant declining line of free agency.

 

So by definition neoatheists dont believe in God but they may believe in ghosts huh?

So by definition neoatheists dont believe in God but they may believe in reincarnation huh?

So by definition neoatheists dont believe in God but they may believe in souls huh?

So by definition neoatheists dont believe in God but they may believe in spirits huh?

So by definition neoatheists dont believe in God but they may believe in afterlife huh?

So by definition neoatheists dont believe in God but they may believe in luck huh?

So by definition neoatheists dont believe in God but they may believe in psychics huh?

So by definition neoatheists dont believe in God but they may believe in magic huh?

Its difficult because I am laughing so hard I have tears in my eyes!

So that is atheists logical rational thinking at its finest I presume?

Hell theists dont even believe in most of that juju!

Neoatheists cant prove not so much as one of those things exist yet those same neoatheists are going to continue to call themselves atheists? Seriously?

This ranks right up there with the grandaddy of all irrational atheist contradictions I have heard to date?

the faithful

 

false you read it as an incontrovertible fact, it was a quote from marx himself whom knows a hell of a lot more about marxism than you since he identified the 'ism' and coined it. You presented a fake counter argument since you failed to argue a contrary point, on point. I am not the argument

I underlined and crayola' it, hope that helps clear things up.

 

I'm not a leftist.

How is the supernatural detectable?

 

My opinion is that the indetectable stuff those gifted people are able to sense exists only in their own minds, being part of the real world only insofar as their minds are part of the real world.

 

yep, and until something more substantial is brought to the table thats as far as it will ever get.

I dont know about you but I certainly am not going to be the one who implies billions of people are nuts.

On the other hand neither am I going to jump on the 'faith' band wagon like both the theists and atheists [neo]atheists or otherwise have chosen to do by substituting 'faith' for logic and reason which is why I am agnostic.

'Show me'

 

I never had any NDE but I reached the conclusion that a Cyclical Model of the Universe was the logical solution to some of the questions regarding the Big Bang and what preceded it given our knowledge of the Laws of Physics and our existing observations of the Universe.

I had reached this conclusion of mine at least a decade prior to it becoming a mainstream hypothesis but since I could not provide the mathematical proof I needed I just considered it an exercise in logic and left it at that. It is always a pleasure when something that one has conceived is recognized as being worthy of serious scientific study. Certain evidence supporting the hypothesis has been found and the math holds up so far. Naysayers have yet to provide any evidence to disprove the hypothesis but that could still occur.

So there is nothing profound about an NDE nor any insight that someone might have into any issue. Just thinking about an issue can result in approaching it from a different POV and that can sometimes reveal something that was otherwise not considered.

 

Sure you did

 

Ok fair enough, but what evidence have you examined to get to that conclusion?

 

what evidence do you think there is to examine?

I see the sun exists, does that prove there is a Sun God?

 

You failed to respond, so then are we to conclude you have not examined anything, no claim of existence, testimony, statements all of which are evidence and simply declared yourself an atheist?

 

I think the question is:

How do YOU decide which of mankind's gigantic number of gods are real and which are false?

That should be an answeralble question for you.

And, it would be incredibly helpful to all who discuss issues related to this question of whether there are gods, as it would give a window into what you see as valid evidence, logic, etc.

 

You sure talk exactly like one. How is anybody to differentiate you from a Leftist anyway?

Whatever is presented in answer to your question you will undoubtedly reject, but for the benefit of others I will answer anyway.

There were countless historical witnesses to supernatural events as recorded in the Holy Bible. It is the most popular book of all time and has been studied more than any other book of all time, no doubt. It demonstrates historical and scientific validity in many, many areas.

Scientists continue to uncover evidence of Nature's God in intelligent design, for example the Anthropic Principle, and in biochemical design which is so profound we are just beginning to scratch the surface.

A medical doctor interviewed patients who returned from death and categorically stated that nobody could convince her these people made up their stories about events they could not possibly have known through normal senses. She wrote a book, Life after Life I believe it is titled.

A little boy had an experience in death and was interviewed by a psychiatrist who was unable to convince the boy he simply hallucinated.
The boy patted the M.D. on the hand and said, "You'll see, doctor, you'll see."

So who was teaching who there, Miss or Mister Leftist?

 

Some say that intelligent design doesn’t make predictions but it does. It predicts that scientists will continue to find design in biological systems. In 1998, Bill Dembski predicted the demise of junk DNA:


“…Thus on an evolutionary view, we expect a lot of useless DNA. If, on the other hand, organisms are designed, we expect DNA, as much as possible, to exhibit function.”




… In September 2012, four hundred and fifty scientists worldwide worked on a project to map the human genome … “were able to assign biochemical functions for 80% of the genome. It’s likely that 80% will go to 100 percent.” – Counting to God, by Douglas Ell, p 155

Intelligent design is, by definition, supernatural. That you and others continue to deny the logical, rational, and common sense interpretation of empirical scientific facts does not make them go away.​

 

David Copperfield made the statue of liberty dissappear on live TV for all to see.

People have fabulous and vivid dreams. It's not even slightly convincing that someone would have fabulous and vivid dreams from a brain under duress, fed by a similarly failing collection of sensory organs.

I'm not that impressed by the fact that early authors of the Bible were reasonably accurate concerning historic events. And, that isn't evidence that all they wrote about the supernatural is factual.

 

Before the ENCODE project, Richard Dawkins stated that the vast majority of the human genome had no useful function and this is exactly what a Darwinist would predict.

Three years later, after the ENCODE project released its findings, Dawkins did an about-face and said the results were "exactly what a Darwinist would predict" - which is exactly the opposite of what he said earlier. So evolution *explains* everything. Just ask any Darwinist. (wink, nudge)

 

Regardless of whether it's true, youur story certinly does NOT suggest anything about the validity of evolution.

Of coruse, it does suggest that Dawkins can be convinced by scientific informaion. Did that surprise you?

 

Although I made the mistake of speaking in the name of all atheists (and probably will again), when it was pointed out in the thread that nobody can speak for all atheists I had to right that wrong. Therefore, I can only offer my opinion.

For the sake of accuracy, the words "in the observable universe, as far as we know" should accompany every statement about objective reality.

 

I lean left on some issues, right on others. Basically I'm dancing around the center. I care about people, not ideologies.

Something very important is missing from all the stories about those near death experiences. Something that defines near death.

Canola oil used for home cooking is a perfect example of intelligent design that is not supernatural. It's made from a genetically modified rapeseed plant.

I'm not a fan of the "supernatural intelligent design", obviously. Maybe you can explain the many flaws in this supposedly intelligent design, from flat feet to CP children fed by a tube into the stomach because they can't eat normally.

 

The Dover, PA court case exposed the fallacies of "intelligent design" as being an EVOLUTION of the DEBUNKED "creation science" that was banned from school rooms.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/video/judgment-day-intelligent-design-on-trial

Well worth watching because the Federal judge, who was appointed by a Republican president ,rendered a landmark ruling that has never been subsequently challenged and is cited nationwide whenever theists attempt to use "intelligent design" to impose their agenda on We the People.

 

You obviously care a great deal more about godless Leftist ideologies than any others.

Why don't you talk to a medical doctor about the wondrous human body, hmmm? I've spoken to a dozen or so of them. They're utterly amazed by it and they know more than you or I ever will. Meanwhile since you're such an expert on "flaws," why don't you specify changes in the DNA that will eliminate all these "flaws."
That should be easy since you know so very much.