Why Atheism?

[PrinceLink]

Heh I like the way you put your last post.

Perhaps I haven't addressed myself properly before the chat, but I am being ambiguous for a reason, so that the thread will go smoothly for now. I suppose it's time to reveal that I am, Alhamdulilah, A MUSLIM. I like to point out the similarities and commonalities between religions before debating them, so if that's going to be the case, let us agree on things before going our own ways. The first thing we three (for now) have in common is that we are all theists, people of religion, and all believe in ONE God.

We three can discuss the actual impact of religion in general and be honest as to what it has led to, the good and the bad. Almost never does the "bad" that happens from people of a certain religion is not from that religion, but rather a bad apple from that group of people.

Any other input is just as welcome.

Wait What??? Your a Muslim, and Turk hmmmmm makes sense lol

But wait I'm having some flashbacks...... Wait your from May 2006

Does the name TLC ring anything? Or is it LC? I forget. It was just a cannon that was loose.

Some serious Deja vuh there.

 

[RPGMasterTurk91]

Heh I like the way you put your last post.

Perhaps I haven't addressed myself properly before the chat, but I am being ambiguous for a reason, so that the thread will go smoothly for now. I suppose it's time to reveal that I am, Alhamdulilah, A MUSLIM. I like to point out the similarities and commonalities between religions before debating them, so if that's going to be the case, let us agree on things before going our own ways. The first thing we three (for now) have in common is that we are all theists, people of religion, and all believe in ONE God.

We three can discuss the actual impact of religion in general and be honest as to what it has led to, the good and the bad. Almost never does the "bad" that happens from people of a certain religion is not from that religion, but rather a bad apple from that group of people.

Any other input is just as welcome.

Wait What??? Your a Muslim, and Turk hmmmmm makes sense lol

But wait I'm having some flashbacks...... Wait your from May 2006

Does the name TLC ring anything? Or is it LC? I forget. It was just a cannon that was loose.

Some serious Deja vuh there.

Now that you're not under the illusion of dejavu, can you explain what you were trying to say?

Yes, I'm one of the first people to register on this site, I just haven't been on as steadily as others have. Do you remember me from before, or in a past life? (I don't believe in reincarnation =P).

Oh and you might be thinking of Ottoman, he hasn't been on in a while, but he's also a Turkish Muslim (99.8% of Turkey is considered Muslim, where only 20% are practicing Muslims)

 

[PrinceLink]

Heh I like the way you put your last post.

Perhaps I haven't addressed myself properly before the chat, but I am being ambiguous for a reason, so that the thread will go smoothly for now. I suppose it's time to reveal that I am, Alhamdulilah, A MUSLIM. I like to point out the similarities and commonalities between religions before debating them, so if that's going to be the case, let us agree on things before going our own ways. The first thing we three (for now) have in common is that we are all theists, people of religion, and all believe in ONE God.

We three can discuss the actual impact of religion in general and be honest as to what it has led to, the good and the bad. Almost never does the "bad" that happens from people of a certain religion is not from that religion, but rather a bad apple from that group of people.

Any other input is just as welcome.

Wait What??? Your a Muslim, and Turk hmmmmm makes sense lol

But wait I'm having some flashbacks...... Wait your from May 2006

Does the name TLC ring anything? Or is it LC? I forget. It was just a cannon that was loose.

Some serious Deja vuh there.

Now that you're not under the illusion of dejavu, can you explain what you were trying to say?

Yes, I'm one of the first people to register on this site, I just haven't been on as steadily as others have. Do you remember me from before, or in a past life? (I don't believe in reincarnation =P).

Oh and you might be thinking of Ottoman, he hasn't been on in a while, but he's also a Turkish Muslim (99.8% of Turkey is considered Muslim, where only 20% are practicing Muslims)

O ya ya ya. It was Ottoman who I was thinking of. Yep there is a good story about that....


Okay back on topic!!

What are we exactly discussing now anyways?

 

[Napalmbrain]

Okay back on topic!!

What are we exactly discussing now anyways?

Err... atheism, I think.

 

[PrinceLink]

Okay back on topic!!

What are we exactly discussing now anyways?

Err... atheism, I think.

O yes!!

So baby eaten. You guys like them baked or fried?

 

[Napalmbrain]

I like 'em fried, with a bit of Worcestershire sauce to add some extra flavour.

 

[DBloke]

Does the name TLC ring anything? Or is it LC? I forget. It was just a cannon that was loose.

Or Jill to those hat knew her better


If I remember rightly she was Jewish

 

[RPGMasterTurk91]

Ok so basically I was wondering what led atheists to atheism, that is anything from being brought up without a religion, to "not finding any clear evidence".

Personally, nature in the way it goes about is proof enough that a single, intelligent creator and designer exists. You cannot have a design without a designer. If you see a spider web, you don't assume that it just put itself there, and you don't assume that it was just there by accident. You KNOW that a spider using its instincts has formed it, but where does its knowledge come from? Such an organized system we see from all living things.

 

[The Storm]

Hmmm... Very good point... but I still do no see the knowledge from that comiong from one single creator. A valid contradction to your statement is called evolution and adaptation. As with all things, through trial and error, eventually we find the right way to do things. This goes with two examples used nowadays. Even a blind squirrel can find the nut if it takes enough time. This is to say, adaptation is inevitable. We fail, and fail, and fail, until we succeed.

Like the saying goes, if at first you dont succeed, try, try again.

 

[Shadow*91]

there's also that 'genetic memory' thing scientists say. for example some fish go back to where they were born to lay eggs. how exactly do they know where to go when they can be thousands of miles away? genetiv memory. same thing with sea turtles. the go right back to the exact beach they were born on despite only being there for about half an hour of thier life. spiders spin there webs that way.

i see no reason to think there is some higher power designing things. like storm said about evolution. it was just try, try, try until success then over time that success became part of thier genetics through evolution.

 

[RPGMasterTurk91]

there's also that 'genetic memory' thing scientists say. for example some fish go back to where they were born to lay eggs. how exactly do they know where to go when they can be thousands of miles away? genetiv memory. same thing with sea turtles. the go right back to the exact beach they were born on despite only being there for about half an hour of thier life. spiders spin there webs that way.

i see no reason to think there is some higher power designing things. like storm said about evolution. it was just try, try, try until success then over time that success became part of thier genetics through evolution.

Do you believe that if you throw a glob of paint at a wall trillions of times, you will eventually form the exact Mona Lisa? Or will you never form the exact Mona Lisa as was originally painted?

Also, who gave these fish this "genetic memory", creatures that have low attention spans and an even smaller brain capacity. They're not the only one's who have it, many types of fish have it. Termites and ants and especially bees have a very complex yet precise way of doing things, coincidence? I don't think so. If there is a design, there must have been a designer.

 

[Napalmbrain]

Ok so basically I was wondering what led atheists to atheism, that is anything from being brought up without a religion, to "not finding any clear evidence".

Personally, nature in the way it goes about is proof enough that a single, intelligent creator and designer exists. You cannot have a design without a designer. If you see a spider web, you don't assume that it just put itself there, and you don't assume that it was just there by accident. You KNOW that a spider using its instincts has formed it, but where does its knowledge come from? Such an organized system we see from all living things.

I was waiting for this to come up...

Things may 'look' designed, but looks can be decieving. Take a snowflake, for example:

Looks designed, doesn't it? It's not. It got that way through natural processes.

To me, the argument from design is a god-of-the-gaps fallacy, where you simply invoke God to explain something you don't understand. For example, a few thousand years ago people didn't know where things like thunderstorms or diseases came from, so they assumed it must have been their gods getting angry at them for some reason. Later we discovered thunderstorms and diseases are perfectly natural occurences. What's to say we won't eventually understand how the Universe works without needing a God to explain it?

Moreover, if you look at organisms at nature, you can see many errors and redundencies. Why do whales have leg bones? Why do cavefish have eyes? Why do we grow more teeth than can fit in our own mouth? In the theory of evolution these things make sense (organisms continually adapt to their environment, but still often retain old features which are no longer helpful to them), but I don't understand how an omnipotent, omniscient designer could make such blatant slip-ups.

 

[RPGMasterTurk91]

Ok so basically I was wondering what led atheists to atheism, that is anything from being brought up without a religion, to "not finding any clear evidence".

Personally, nature in the way it goes about is proof enough that a single, intelligent creator and designer exists. You cannot have a design without a designer. If you see a spider web, you don't assume that it just put itself there, and you don't assume that it was just there by accident. You KNOW that a spider using its instincts has formed it, but where does its knowledge come from? Such an organized system we see from all living things.

I was waiting for this to come up...

Things may 'look' designed, but looks can be decieving. Take a snowflake, for example:

Looks designed, doesn't it? It's not. It got that way through natural processes.

To me, the argument from design is a god-of-the-gaps fallacy, where you simply invoke God to explain something you don't understand. For example, a few thousand years ago people didn't know where things like thunderstorms or diseases came from, so they assumed it must have been their gods getting angry at them for some reason. Later we discovered thunderstorms and diseases are perfectly natural occurences. What's to say we won't eventually understand how the Universe works without needing a God to explain it?

Moreover, if you look at organisms at nature, you can see many errors and redundencies. Why do whales have leg bones? Why do cavefish have eyes? Why do we grow more teeth than can fit in our own mouth? In the theory of evolution these things make sense (organisms continually adapt to their environment, but still often retain old features which are no longer helpful to them), but I don't understand how an omnipotent, omniscient designer could make such blatant slip-ups.

You could easily argue the opposite. Why do humans have fingers? Or arms for that matter? What about the eyes? If the appendix is no longer useful, why is it still there (shouldn't evolution have gotten rid of it over time)? They aren't "blatant slip-ups". You can point out these so-called "flaws" in anything, the point is they all have their purposes that without these things (why don't we try to remove the leg bone in the whales and see just how they function). Why do we have two kidneys instead of one? Surely, one can live with only one, but two are there and have been placed there by an intelligent being who has created them.

Air, water, food, shelter--all human necessities are fulfilled, this "coincidence" of a world didn't forget about any of them.

 

[Napalmbrain]

You could easily argue the opposite. Why do humans have fingers? Or arms for that matter? What about the eyes? If the appendix is no longer useful, why is it still there (shouldn't evolution have gotten rid of it over time)?

One of the many misconceptions about evolution. It allows organisms to adapt to changing environments, but it doesn't necessarily iron out mistakes or things that are no longer needed, unless they inhibit a species' ability to survive.

They aren't "blatant slip-ups". You can point out these so-called "flaws" in anything, the point is they all have their purposes that without these things (why don't we try to remove the leg bone in the whales and see just how they function). Why do we have two kidneys instead of one? Surely, one can live with only one, but two are there and have been placed there by an intelligent being who has created them.

Two kidneys are indeed better than one. But that's as much an argument for evolution as it is for God.

Here's something you might want to consider about the "intelligent designer": most animals are able to synthesise their own vitamin C in their bodies, but primates (including humans) lack this ability. We still have the gene for it, but it's not "switched on". So is this intelligent designer being mean or just incompetent?

Air, water, food, shelter--all human necessities are fulfilled, this "coincidence" of a world didn't forget about any of them.

You've got it a bit backwards. It's not that the world is perfectly suited for us, but rather, it is we who are adapted to survive in this world. We evolved to breathe Earth's air. If the air had been different, then evolution would have thrown up creatures that could survive in that kind of atmosphere instead. And of course, if there wasn't any water and energy, then we would never evolved in the first place, but it's not like they're uncommon- all you need is a star to supply energy and the right temperature for liquid water to exist. Given that pretty much every star is likely to have at least one planet in orbit, that gives plenty of chances.

 

[RPGMasterTurk91]

You could easily argue the opposite. Why do humans have fingers? Or arms for that matter? What about the eyes? If the appendix is no longer useful, why is it still there (shouldn't evolution have gotten rid of it over time)?

One of the many misconceptions about evolution. It allows organisms to adapt to changing environments, but it doesn't necessarily iron out mistakes or things that are no longer needed, unless they inhibit a species' ability to survive.

They aren't "blatant slip-ups". You can point out these so-called "flaws" in anything, the point is they all have their purposes that without these things (why don't we try to remove the leg bone in the whales and see just how they function). Why do we have two kidneys instead of one? Surely, one can live with only one, but two are there and have been placed there by an intelligent being who has created them.

Two kidneys are indeed better than one. But that's as much an argument for evolution as it is for God.

Here's something you might want to consider about the "intelligent designer": most animals are able to synthesise their own vitamin C in their bodies, but primates (including humans) lack this ability. We still have the gene for it, but it's not "switched on". So is this intelligent designer being mean or just incompetent?

Air, water, food, shelter--all human necessities are fulfilled, this "coincidence" of a world didn't forget about any of them.

You've got it a bit backwards. It's not that the world is perfectly suited for us, but rather, it is we who are adapted to survive in this world. We evolved to breathe Earth's air. If the air had been different, then evolution would have thrown up creatures that could survive in that kind of atmosphere instead. And of course, if there wasn't any water and energy, then we would never evolved in the first place, but it's not like they're uncommon- all you need is a star to supply energy and the right temperature for liquid water to exist. Given that pretty much every star is likely to have at least one planet in orbit, that gives plenty of chances.

Oh? How come we haven't had any more stars getting the exact amount of energy at the right temperature spashing water on earth? The earth has its own water cycle, perfectly suited for human beings. Human beings did not invent this convenient system, especially since it's IMpossible.

Are there any organisms living on other planets that we know of for sure? Life is only suitable on Earth for humans and anything living for that matter. If we find something living on another planet, it would grow due to its capability to obtain the oxygen from its surroundings, not because it has evolved so that it can absorb the gases in which it is surrounded by. Not to mention, the first organisms in these types of environments, having not gone through evolution, would have died out due to failure to breathe. Let's talk about the earth while we're on this topic:

The earth rotates on its axis at one thousand miles an hour; if it turned at one hundred miles an hour, our days and nights would be ten times as long as now, and the hot sun would then burn up our vegetation during each long day, while in the long night any surviving sprout would freeze.

Again, the sun, source of our life, has a surface temperature of 12,000 degrees Fahrenheit, and our earth is, just far enough away so that this 'eternal fire" warms us just enough and not too much! If the sun gave off only one-half its present radiation, we would freeze, and if it gave half as much more, we would roast.

The slant of the earth, tilted at an angle of 23 degrees, gives us our seasons; if it had not been so tilted, vapours from the ocean would move north and south, piling up for us continents of ice. If our moon was, say, only 50 thousand miles away instead of its actual distance, our tides would be so enormous that twice a day all continents would be submerged; even the mountains would soon be eroded away.

If the crust of the earth had been only ten feet thicker, there would be no oxygen without which animal life must die. Had the ocean been a few feet deeper, carbon dioxide and oxygen would have been absorbed and no vegetable life could exist. Or if our atmosphere had been thinner, some of the meteors, now burned in space by the million every day would be striking all parts of the earth, starting fires everywhere.

Because of these, and a host of other examples, there is not one chance in millions that life on our planet is an accident.