*** Official Atheist Thread ***

[AKR]

Hopefully, Fitnessman will sticky this for us again. I will transfer the FAQ's if he does.

Ok, I'm going to go ahead and start adding stuff, starting with a description from LordDarwin, and then some FAQ's I wrote up in the other thread.

Atheism verses Agnosticism
Agnosticism is the belief that something in unknowable and therefore cannot be proved or disproved.
Atheism is a simply a lack of belief in a theistic god, or (many) theistic gods.

The two are not mutually exclusive, you can get both agnostic atheists and agnostic theists.

Q: Why do some of you hate god if you don't believe in him? Isn't it true you actually believe but are just angry with him?

A: First off, let me say that not every atheist is passionate about religious topics, or about disprove/condemning any religion in particular. Some really do not care, while some of us are quite passionate about it.

I'm sure many of you religious folks hate other religions. Is this because you believe them to be true or just the opposite? Does an idea have to be true for you to hate it? Do you not all hate the flying spaghetti monster? That certainly doesn't make it real or mean you think it's real, does it? Don't some atheist hate multiple religions and the gods of those religions? If hating a god means we think that god exists, how can that be possible when we hate multiple gods of multiple religions?

Some atheist are angry about certain religions because they are bothered by what they think are lies; they are bothered by ideologies that seem offensive and illogical, and they are bothered by those who follow those religious ideologies and push them on others. No one wants to live in a society where they feel their lives or the lives of others are being unjustly intruded upon.

In the US, Christianity has long dominated society, and many Christians use the government to push their morals on others. This goes far beyond what some consider to be petty instances, such as statements about their god on everyone's money or in everyone's pledge. Although, rarely used, there have been state laws passed banning atheists from holding public office. President George Bush JR has stated that atheists should not be president, and George Bush SR has gone so far as to say that atheists should not be citizens. Government funds for failed sex "education" programs have been appropriated to Christian groups, as well as funding for jails that indoctrinate prisoners but fail to lower repeat offenders. Christians have fought hard to push evolution out of schools, or at least, include unscientific ideas related to creationism in science classes. They have tried to enforce teacher-lead school prayer, and demand children to say a pledge with religious statements. At one time or another, they have outlawed gay sex, and in some areas, they still have laws against sex toys. They have made laws that allow them to freely abuse children in the name of their religion, while others would be committing illegal acts for doing the same things. They also are fighting hard to keep bigotry alive, by not allowing homosexual couples the same rights as them.

There is also a matter of the holidays and the fact that many of them are unaware of the origins and are offended when people try to celebrate for purposes other than what they claim is the true purpose. When people try to acknowledge all holidays by saying "happy holidays" instead of "merry Christmas," they claim people are trying to take Christmas away from them. This act of trying to suppress and exclude others while claiming to be persecuted causes many to be upset, beyond just atheists. Some Christians often run around complaining about being oppressed every time someone stands up against the unconstitutional laws Christians are trying to enact. On another level, some of them also indoctrinate their children with their religion, giving them a false education, keeping them in ignorance. This is bad for the children and society as a whole as it creates more citizens that are not properly educated, who will often hold back science and the advancement of society in general. One could also argue that some forms of religious indoctrination do mental harm to children.

http://www.atheists.org/flash.line/dildo2.htm
http://www.religioustolerance.org/texas.htm
http://www.religioustolerance.org/istook98.htm
http://www.au.org/site/PageServer?pa..._publicschools
http://www.treas.gov/education/fact-...-we-trust.html
http://www.cnn.com/US/9908/12/kansas.evolution.flap/
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...3/ai_n13452478
http://www.sodomy.org/laws/
http://www.robsherman.com/advocacy/060401a.htm



This is not about hating all religious people, nor is it necessarily about hating an actual religion (although, some of us do hate certain religions). Many of us will leave religions alone that leave us and others alone. But when a religion is trying to dominate a society, and is having negative affects, there will be a strong resistance, and for good reason. This does not mean that we all hate everyone of a particular religion. There are people within probably every religion that are not hostile or aggressively trying to dominate those around them.

While we respect some people of many religions, we cannot help that we disagree with the teachings or the overall behavior of those in their religion, and some of us feel we must speak out against them. It has nothing to do with us grudgingly believing these gods are true and everything to do with the actions of those who do.


Again, it should be restated that some atheists are fairly uninterested in religion. Others, aren't so bothered by religion or it's consequences, but are simply interested in discussing theological and philosophical topics. They want to learn about different people's beliefs and engage them in intellectually stimulating conversations about those beliefs.

Q: What's the point in living if you don't believe in an afterlife?

A: First off, god and an afterlife are not necessarily dependent on each other. Who's to say that beings do not transfer some of their energy to another dimension? Whether or not this can be explained is irrelevant to the fact that some atheists believe it at least may be possible.

However, if it is not, fear of death does not create an alternative. Wanting the facts of life to be different does not manipulate them in anyway. Some of us are bothered by not being able to pay our bills; some of us are bothered by having to work for a living; some of us are bothered by starving to death; some of us are bothered by the laws we have to follow to keep out of jail. Does this resentment or fear make them any less true? Does a desire negate their consequences and create an alternative we enjoy? No, desire is simply an emotion; it does not change facts.

As for the point of living, every answer will be somewhat different. People live to enjoy the different activities that this world offers. Some of us live to understand this world; to learn more and unravel great mysteries; some of us live to enjoy nature and to protect it; some of us live to create all different forms of art; some of us live to enjoy sex and to party with others; some of us live to have families and/or to create fulfilling relationships with other people and animals; some of us live to make the world better for others, or any combination of things.

Some of us have a hard time under standing the concept of "well, if it doesn't last forever, what's the point?" Why do you go watch your favorite sport? Or why do you hang out with your closest friends? Why do you partake in your favorite activity? Why do you listen to the music you love? Friends don't last forever; Often, romantic relationships do not last forever, regardless of religion. Animal friends don't last forever. Songs don't last forever. Yet, we involve ourselves with all of those finite things. Sometimes, we do not do things for the memories or for the hopes of doing them again in the future. We do them because we are living right now and enjoy them in the moment, however long that lasts. Sure, we all enjoy the memories and the hopes of doing them again, but what really matters is the moment we are doing them. Everything else pails in comparison. If some of us lost our memory and our ability to look to the future, we would still do those things.

If you do not see any reason to live in this world for the sake of this existence, you should seek immediate psychological help. Maybe some medication and therapy would do you good. Maybe, those of you who think all atheists are angry, miserable people are really just projecting your own view of how the world would be if your religion was not true.

Just sayin'.



Q: Do you believe in aliens, and ghosts, and other paranormal activity?

A: Some atheists do and some do not. Atheism is a lack of belief as it relates to god; it does not cover the things mentioned, as they do not necessarily relate to any sort of a god. Some people confuse atheism with nihilism. Atheism itself does not deny the possibility of a god or "paranormal" activity. Through out history, people have thought that certain things were related to spiritual, religious entities, when really, they were physical, explainable, normal things. Hopefully, as science progresses, we will be able to answer some of these questions better.



Q: How can the universe exist without a creator?

(I'm not as scientifically educated as some of you, so help me out if you see a problem here, or a better way to say things.

PS Wasn't there some fairly recent news about subatomic particles appearing out of nothing? I'm having a hard time finding a good source on that)


A: How can your creator exist without a creator? It really makes no sense to say that the universe must come from a creator, as if everything needs to be created, but your god doesn't. If it's possible for the most intelligent, powerful being to simply poof into existence or exist eternally, then why is the same thing not possible for the matter that became the universe? You can say that energy cannot be created or destroyed, but there are problems with this:

That is only an assumption relevant to the laws within this universe, but is not necessarily true for things outside of the universe. Some people will argue that because of this, god can create energy out of nothing, since he is outside of the universe. If that is true, then one must also acknowledge that the matter that the universe came from was not within the universe either, as it had not yet been created, therefore, it has the same freedom as a supposed god.

Secondly, "something cannot come from nothing" isn't exactly accurate. TalkOrigins address this in a discussion about the Big Bang Theory.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/astronomy/bigbang.html


BTW, here is a link to a another good site:

www.atheisttoolbox.com


Here is a big evolution thread:

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...=evolution+FAQ

Again, not all atheists believe in evolution or the big bang. Atheism itself does not rely on these ideas, even though some become atheists because of them. Atheism has been around a lot longer than these theories have. It is a false dichotomy to say that either evolution/big bang are right or your god or some other god is real.

[DaCougarMech]

1st

edit:

u admirin "I am"?

This is the official atheist/agnostic thread.

All are welcome.

Atheism is not a belief, rather, it is a lack of belief in god(s).

Agnosticism is a lack of belief in god(s), while open to the possibility of god(s) existing.


Evolution FAQ II Turbo: Championship Edition
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?p=154268531

Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens 2 hour chat*VID*
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=6109401

The young earth creationists nightmare post
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=1005500

"Instant Conversion"-Power of suggestion can lead to insane beliefs. *VID*
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=6049931

Hell Doesn't Exist, Revisited
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...4251&highlight



Moderator note: As with all debates, please stay civil!

[LunicaAshes]

We need to plan the OP of this one better than the last one, so it serves a purpose other than socializing. The other one was good info among like 4 pages of "it's about time"s. The biggest thing in the first post should be WHY we address the issues that we do, since that's probably the single most tiring thing that gets brought up constantly.

EDIT: F*ck you, Cougar!

[LordDarwin]

Daniel Dennett: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon
A basic overview of religion and its evolution.

---
Andy Thomson: Why We Believe in Gods
Tackling the psychology behind the belief in a god.

---
The Four Horsemen - Hour 1

---
The Four Horsemen - Hour 2

---
Lawrence Krauss: A Universe from Nothing
"Something can't come from nothing," debunked.

---
The Ultimate Rube Goldberg Machine

[AKR]

Q: Isn't guilt and a sense of morality proof that God exists?

A: Guilt and morality are evolutionary mechanisms. Many other animals display a sense of morality, which is key to forming a social structure.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/wil...rom-wrong.html

Scientists studying animal behaviour believe they have growing evidence that species ranging from mice to primates are governed by moral codes of conduct in the same way as humans.

Until recently, humans were thought to be the only species to experience complex emotions and have a sense of morality.

But Prof Marc Bekoff, an ecologist at University of Colorado, Boulder, believes that morals are "hard-wired" into the brains of all mammals and provide the "social glue" that allow often aggressive and competitive animals to live together in groups.

While a basic sense of morality might be universal to a species on some level, not everyone feels guilty for the same things. You'd have an extremely hard time arguing that people universally feel guilty for all the sins found in the Bible or other holy books. Guilt is a social mechanism which is shaped by the culture that one is exposed to. You are conditioned to feel guilty for certain things. If a species has no sense of guilt, how can it form a society? Everyone doing their own thing, pissing everyone else off. In order to work together, a group needs to share a certain number of common rules. The more people understand what is unacceptable to others and adhere to that, the more successful the group is likely to be, which will give them the evolutionary advantage over others.

Back to the idea of morality being shaped by culture, take a female from some tribe, and ask her if she feels guilty for not covering up her breasts. She will probably look confused and laugh at you. Many people in Europe would probably do the same, especially if you're own a beach. Take a person who grow up in the Western culture, and stick them at a table with a Middle Eastern family. Chances are, he's going to upset them with his eating habits. In their culture, eating with the left hand is bad. Do you think the Westerner feels guilty when he's at home, eating with his left hand?

You can also take a dog, and teach it to be guilty for just about anything. Take a dog off the street, and it won't feel guilty for jumping on your couch, but walk into the room with your well trained dog that you never let on the couch, and you will see the guilt in his/her eyes. Dogs are not genetically predisposed to feeling guilty for jumping on your couch. Although, if you kill enough dogs for it, it will probably show up in the species at some point. They are, however, predisposed to pleasing humans and will feel guilty for what you condition them to feel guilty for. You could screw a kid up and raise him to think the same thing. Beat him for getting on the couch. He's simply conditioned to feel guilty for something that there is no reason to feel guilty for.

It's often not about absolutes, but about what's right and wrong in that culture. If you are raised by parents of a particular religion, you will be more likely to feel guilty for breaking the rules of the religion that they raise you with. Ask a Christian child if s/he feels guilty for not following all of the laws of a Muslim; or ask a Hindu child if s/he feels guilty for not following the laws of a Jew. People are socialized to feel guilty for different things, and most people grow up to feel guilty according to how they were trained by their parents, and often to a lesser extent, the rest of their broader culture.

Even within one religion, there is no absolute agreement on morality. There are various sects of different religions, and the fact that they cannot agree should lead one to understand that either god is really confused, or he is not relevant to guilt and morality.

Now, some things are innate in healthy humans. There are certain things that most people feel guilty about, regardless of culture. Each innate sense of guilt has it's own evolutionary purpose. The fact that you can teach animals and humans to feel guilty various things shows that it is not a matter of some god internally scolding you. The fact that most people feel guilty for certain things can be explained away as an evolutionary trait, and the fact that people can be made to feel guilty for things that differ among cultures is more evidence of an evolutionary process.


Q: Since you all seem to worship evolution, shouldn't your morals be strictly based on evolution?


A: We do not worship evolution, nor do we all look to it for morality. Some don't even agree with evolution. I, myself, became an atheist while still under the impression that evolution was false. That's what happens when you are home-schooled by fundy parents or you to go a private Christian school.

While we can look to evolution to understand why many humans have developed certain morals, it only explains what is beneficial in terms of how it can advance the species. Evolution is a process-not a moral authority. Evolution does not"know" anything or command anything, as it is not a living entity. Saying that it is good to do what advances one's self or one's species is simply putting one's own opinion of morality onto what is nothing more than a process. The value of evolutionary advancement is a subjective value. You are the conscious entity making a judgment. Processes do no such thing.


Q: How can atheists have morals if they have no god to get their morals from? Shouldn't you all be out raping and pillaging if there is no god to stop you?

A: If you take the stance that god dictates what is right and wrong, and he can change it whenever he sees fit, then it's meaningless, because it's really just what god feels like he wants people to do at any point in time. What's the point a morality that's simply dictated at the whim of another? If god wants you to kill your family and rape the dog, then you would call that moral, because it's what god considers good? If he's really the source of morality, then he can dictate morality in anyway he sees fit. If he cannot do this, then he is not the ultimate moral authority, and therefore, irrelevant anyway.

Atheist don't need heavenly rewards or hellish punishment in order to behave or form a sense of morality. Some of us don't do it because we have to in order to avoid punishment (from society) - we do it because we believe in respecting others. The fact that many religious people say they would be free of restraint if there was no god is quite frightening, and also very telling. If religious people are incapable respecting others without rewards or threats from a god, then that shows their negative traits and not ours. If you're only doing it to get to a reward or to keep from being punished, then it's not even about doing "right" for the sake of right, so much as it is for completely selfish reasons. If you would do anything to anyone if your god told you to, then it has nothing to do with actually caring about other people or other forms of life. It means you have no morals - only orders. We will pass on that kind of "morality," if you can even call it that.

Atheists follow laws and morals for different reasons. We do not all live by the same morality or obey all of the same laws. You could say that some rules are followed by some atheists because they simply don't want to face the punishments of society. While others are followed simply because they believe they are good rules to live by, regardless of society's laws.

One can get away with quite a lot without breaking the laws of a society, but many atheists choose not to do so anyway. Apparently, some of you religious folks cannot say the same. Regardless of whether atheists follow some of the rules out of fear of punishment, or whether they abide by morals not enforced by society, the fact is societies can be orderly and can contain many morals found in religion without a god to enforce such things. If this was not possible, it would be detrimental to our society. A species is much more likely to survive if it can work together. Advanced species have complex social structures and work as groups to survive. If they did not follow some sort of morality as whole, this would not be possible.

Q: In religious debates, why do you guys refer to mythical beings like the Flying Spaghetti Monster, The Invisible Pink Unicorn, Santa Clause and others?


Even though you may find it offensive to have your god compared to these entities, they are properly analogous. The arguments used for believing in a theist's religion can quite often be used for these beings as well: "It's called faith." "The FSM doesn't have to make sense. He's above logic." "Science is just another religion and it's changing all the time. The Invisible Pink Unicorn is unchanging and is above science." "You simply choose to not believe in Santa Clause because you don't want to follow his rules. You'd rather be bad." Most of the arguments used for someone's religion are pretty generic and can be applied to the most ridiculous mythical entity.

So, the next time you laugh at the idea of one of these things existing, think about how we feel and think about he the same arguments can be used against you and used for another religion or myth.

[LunicaAshes]

3rd.


I was just in the process of making a new one, which involved a proper explanation of what an Atheist and an Agnostic is; just so I never have to see someone claim they're an Agnostic and therefore superior to Theists and Atheists!

My thread came first.

It wasn't meant to be the new sticky, though. Just bitching about the old one.

In before both are deleted.

[AKR]

Q: If you choose my god and nothing happens when you die, you lost nothing. If you choose atheism and it turns out god is real, you'll be sorry. Shouldn't you believe in god anyways, just to be safe? (Pascal's Wager)



A: There are multiple problems with this. First, is the idea of doxastic voluntarism, which claims that you are able to choose your beliefs. This is false. If I hold out both of my hands and I have a rock in my right hand in plain site and I ask you to believe that the rock is actually in the left hand, can you ignore what your senses are telling you and believe the rock is in the left hand? Can you do anything but believe what your senses are showing you? If I present to you a closed hand and tell you that I have an adult, full sized Blue Whale inside, will you believe me? Can you choose to believe what you see no evidence for? Can you choose to believe what seems illogical and impossible to you? So how can we choose our beliefs? There is a difference between hope and actual belief. Even then, you can't choose what you hope to be true. Can you choose to hope that your religion is false? That your god is a horrible, horrible god who is going to torture you for eternity? You can't choose these hopes or beliefs. So the idea of choosing to believe in god is dead in the water at this point, but why let's keep stabbing it, shall we?

Even if we could choose to believe in god, which god to we choose? If we choose your god, what if we're wrong? There are how many other possible gods? What if your god isn't real and the real god punishes you for choosing a false god? What if he would rather you be an atheist than believe in another god? How are you any better off then?

Then, there is the false claim that if we die and there is nothing, we've lost nothing. Well, that is basically saying that if it isn't eternal, it is neither good nor bad, but let's apply that in other areas. If life is not eternal, is it ok if I torture you or your loved ones? Can we torture animals that won't live for ever? Is their experience any less traumatic while they're alive because at some point, they'll be dead forever? Of course not, therefore, this life matters, so why would we want to waste it? Most of us do not want to spend our Sundays in boring church services, or reading dusty old books with crazy stuff in it, which brings me to another point.

Various religions preach misogynistic, homophobic, violent, narrow minded, anti-scientific, petty, ridiculous ideas and many of us would rather not perpetuate those ideas. They result in oppression, unjustified hatred, violence, physical/sexual/mental abuse. Children are wed to dirty old men who molest them in the name of their religion; others are murdered for their sexual behavior; planes are flown into buildings, doctors are murdered, clinics are bombed, people are treated as second class citizens, religious people are oppressed by other religious people and atheists are oppressed by all groups. The list goes on. Many of us don't want to have anything to do with that and whether or not this life is the only one is irrelevant.

There is also the issue of feeling guilty for harmless things or personal decisions which should be dictated by no one else. Should a kid feel guilty for masturbating? For thinking lustful thoughts about others? Should a gay person be miserable their entire lives, hiding in shame and/or hating who they are? This warps reality for people, giving them a complex, which sometimes drives them to suicide, drug abuse, or other harmful things. All of that guilt, all of that self-hate and shame for what? For the off chance that some religion with no evidence and no sense is real? What a waste.

Furthermore, the idea that you should have to force your self to believe in god is absolutely ridiculous. If god wants us to believe in him, he would make himself known. Many theists will say that he has, but deep down, they know they rely on faith. If we deconstruct their claims of evidence, they all fall back on faith. Maybe they've experience something that really makes them truly believe, but how many can say that everyone actually has enough evidence to believe? A real god is not going to play hide and seek games and then punish people because they didn't believe in that which they saw no evidence for. What kind of a god would do that? How can something intelligent enough to create the universe be so stupid? Pascals Wager fails in all areas.

The Bible even says that we do not choose whether we believe or not. God makes some of us atheists:

Romans 9:16 It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy. 17For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth."[g] 18Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.

19One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" 20But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?' "[h] 21Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?

22What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? 23What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory.

The Quran says the same (thanks Large_Emu):

(Crow, 2:6) As for the Disbelievers, Whether thou warn them or thou warn them not it is all one for them; they believe not.
(Crow, 2:7) Allah hath sealed their hearing and their hearts, and on their eyes there is a covering. Theirs will be an awful doom.

He whom Allah causeth to go astray, thou (O Muhammad) wilt not find a way for him: O ye who believe! Choose not disbelievers for (your) friends in place of believers. Would ye give Allah a clear warrant against you? (4:143-144)

[LunicaAshes]

Just try to keep that out of this one so we can sticky this.

Yes sir.

EDIT: Can Fitnessman edit your post after the 24 hours if need be?

[LordDarwin]

You're not an "Agnostic!"
There are four types of people in this world...


Agnostic Atheists:
A person who doesn't believe in a god + doesn't believe a god's existence can be proved or disproved.

Gnostic Atheists:
A person who doesn't believe in a god + believes they know a god doesn't exist for a fact.
---
Agnostic Theist:
A person who believes in a god + doesn't believe their god's existence can be proved or disproved.

Gnostic Theists:
A person who believes in a god + believes they know this god exists for a fact.



Remember, there is no such thing as an "agnostic." There are both agnostic atheists and agnostic theists, just no outright "agnostics" so to speak. It doesn't make sense when mentioned on its own, due to the fact that it's very definition is reliant on it being used in conjunction with a paired term.
.

[AKR]

I'd be up for a new sticky since the last few pages of the A/A thread seemed to unravel into a bit of a monkey sh*t fight. Might as well start with a new slate.

---

If you do transfer the stickies AKR, do ya reckon you could replace Germanic's explanation with mine, as it might be a bit clearer:

.

Thanks.

Sure, screw him.

Yes sir.

EDIT: Can Fitnessman edit your post after the 24 hours if need be?

Fitnessman can do whatever the f*ck he wants.

[Infusco]

In for the new atheist thread.

[Tiffany Wantsmore]

I'm also in.

[TheDukeUSMC]

This is the official atheist/agnostic thread.

All are welcome.

Atheism is not a belief, rather, it is a lack of belief in god(s).

Agnosticism is a lack of belief in god(s), while open to the possibility of god(s) existing.


Evolution FAQ II Turbo: Championship Edition
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?p=154268531

Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens 2 hour chat*VID*
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=6109401

The young earth creationists nightmare post
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=1005500

"Instant Conversion"-Power of suggestion can lead to insane beliefs. *VID*
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=6049931

Hell Doesn't Exist, Revisited
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...4251&highlight



Moderator note: As with all debates, please stay civil!

[LordDarwin]

Bon Appetit!

[AKR]

Just trying to get another post in on the first page so I can transfer stuff.

[Harbinger]

in on page one

[LunicaAshes]

Just trying to get another post in on the first page so I can transfer stuff.

You can give me something I can stick in my post, since it's #3.

[AKR]

I'm editing some of my FAQ's and I think I'll edit one of Germanic's as well. Please browse through the first few pages of the old sticky, guys, and let me know if anything should be changed or added. Edit your posts and add in any new stuff you felt was missing from the old thread or let me know if I should add a something onto my old FAQ's.

[pikeamus]

Some good youtube channels for page one:

QualiaSoup - logic and critical thinking


NonStampCollector - humour and biblical silliness


Thunderf00t - creator of the epic "Why do people laugh at creationists" series


Theramin Trees - psychological knowledge and general good thinking

[AKR]

Some good youtube channels for page one:

Oh good, you're back online. Do you want to handle writing up #3 from your post LunicaAshes thread?

I don't remember who it was, but someone made a thread a while ago, explaining evolution in extremely easy to understand terms. Does anyone remember that? I might have it saved in a notepad at home.

[pikeamus]

Don't think I'll have time to do it justice today, supposed to be heading out again in a couple of minutes.

If someone else wants to do it here is what AKR is referring to:

snip
3. A statement of what most of us believe about the beginning of the universe. Shouldn't be much in this one, a bit of what we know from science, some emphasis that there is no consistently accepted theory for "before" the big bang among atheists and a note that not knowing does not justify proposing that god must have done it.

Otherwise I'll get something done this evening/tomorrow.

[AKR]

Edit. Oops. Don't know what I'm doing here. I'll add something else here in a minute.

[BTI]

AKR, neonhypoxia could maybe write something about the subatomic particles appearing out of nothingness that you talked about in the OP.

[AKR]

AKR, neonhypoxia could maybe write something about the subatomic particles appearing out of nothingness that you talked about in the OP.

That'd be cool. We need our resident scientist up in this bish.

[LunicaAshes]

We should address Pascal's Wager and Occam's Razor.

[AKR]

We should address Pascal's Wager and Occam's Razor.

I should undress you. Oh, wait. Address. Yeah. That. I've got a few more hours at work, so I'll try to keep adding crap on this page before we have to ask a mod to edit our posts. Not that any of this crap will be read by 99% of people in this forum. *sigh*

[jf1]

in!

[Large_Emu]

The Evidence for Evolution

[Large_Emu]

[Queequeg]

You're not an "Agnostic!"
There are four types of people in this world...


Agnostic Atheists:
A person who doesn't believe in a god + doesn't believe a god's existence can be proved or disproved.

Gnostic Atheists:
A person who doesn't believe in a god + believes they know a god doesn't exist for a fact.
---
Agnostic Theist:
A person who believes in a god + doesn't believe their god's existence can be proved or disproved.

Gnostic Theists:
A person who believes in a god + believes they know this god exists for a fact.

Actually I would consider myself an agnostic transtheist, although by the definition used on this forum this also makes me atheist.

What happen to the religious stickies btw? Too large?