Whats that? o_O

Well, that's how they taught me it. So I guess even the big bang has different perspectives on how it occurred :D Much like religion.

I would beg to differ. That's not a legitimate perspective since it literally makes zero sense. So whoever taught you it didn't know what they were talking about. That's like saying me sneezing out the universe counts as another perspective to the big bang. Sure, I can say it, but that doesn't mean it stands as a legitimate theory that helps scientists understand how the universe functions and operates. Science does have different theories for almost everything though. But its not like religion in any sense. These theories literally serve no allegiance to a specific person as everyone is trying to understand how the universe works. The most reliable and specific answers based on the most concrete evidence at the time are the ones that the generally community eventually accepts until the next theory is proposed. So I don't know why you are comparing it to religion. Religion has no base on reality besides a lack of definite answers (not theories) and coincidences, it literally REQUIRES loyalty to something for people to believe it. I know because that's what faith stands for by definition, and that's what I lived by for the first 14 years of my life.

I'm pretty sure someone certified to teach on the subject would know what they're talking about lol. And by religion and different perspectives I was comparing it to how it's like Judadism to Islam. They both believe there's a God, but they have their own perspectives on him.

Honestly, no they do not. I dont care if they are certified. It inherently is not a viable answer and they are misinformed. Please make sure you have a few sources on an argument before coming here and saying something ridiculous like the big bang exploded. And you didn't get my point about different religions and their perspectives on a god. There is no basis on reality for the concept of a god, its outside of the universe so the very concept of having faith requires a devout allegiance to, say, the Torah or the Qur'an based on your perspective. That's not how it is with science, no one has an allegiance to anything besides finding concrete evidence to the origin of the universe, regardless of how many theories it takes to get it right. I would gladly convert to one of these religions if someone provided specific concrete evidence that one of them is correct, but its allegiance to these things that separates religion and science.

I have a quick question for you. A personal perspective question. Would you consider yourself as a follower of Confucious? Some people consider Confucism as a religion, but since there is no diety or talk of afterlife others do not. Yet like other relgions, has an ethics system. There's something that just "athesiem" doesn't teach (other than beliefs in Scientology and belief in no diety), morals and ethics. If we truly are just animals, why not act like them? This is why I believe humans must be superior for a reason. There are tons of animals that have been deemed to be very intelligent and think faster than humans yet they aren't capable of what we've done throughout time.

When the term Athiesm is used, the first thing one wouldn't think about is ethics.

While we're still on topic here, I'm going to add in another tidbit. Another thing I believe separates science and religion is purpose. The problem I see with religion is that it already provides a finite answer, or a destination with no journey. You see, religion already tries to preach its teachings as the true, ultimate solution to the question of mankind. On the other spectrum, science provides us that journey, the quest to find out why we're here and what we're doing. If religion gave us the one, true answer, then the whole universe would be a pointless exercise. If you're at your destination, why make the journey? If you know the answer, why ask the question?

Why would you assume that I'm atheist? Thats an allegiance to an idea. That is irrational. Morals and ethics are thought to come from cultural practices around the world to keep people in line and obey their leaders and not just kill everyone. Its necessary for survival since we are a weak species. With humanity, unlike any other species, working together in a very complex fashion is a VITAL advantage. And morals precisely create the mental help to get people to work together. Again this is not a fact. Its a theory and I do not have allegiance to it. Just because you don't know for sure whats happening behind a brick wall doesn't mean there isn't something there. You're just proving my point of allegiance. Since there isn't a concrete, factual answer to that question (we cant observe the history of the earth directly) a god from some religion must have had something to do with it. To me directly jumping to that conclusion for some reason with no concrete evidence rooted in facts is a form of irrationality.

You bring up a good point. Thing is, ever since the dawns of time man has always believed different things. Like how each religion claims it to be true. As if there were multiple pathways leading to a forest and each said something awaited them at the end, but each told how if you should choose the other, you will not have the outcome you wanted or expected. While science, is not choosing any of the paths, but is working around the forest to see if they can uncover anything about it.

My apologizes if I insulted you by jumping to conclusions about your personal beliefs. There is something more special about humanity than other species. There are probably nameless amounts of weak, intelegent species out there. But why us? Why are we the only ones to have a unifying force? If octopi learned to communicate with each other, they could easily be the most dominant species. They can take down sharks easily. But there's no push for them to work together. Why are we the only species with culture and ethics? It can't possibly be for no reason if none other couldn't.

Bit off topic, but I still don't see why people widely consider humans to be a weak species. A weak species in relative to who, exactly? The droid army of the Empire? The random sea slug that can somehow photosynthesize?

Pff, the Droid Army was for the Confederation and the Empire had storm troopers. And Jar Jar Binx is an amazing specimen!

Physically we are not very strong. No shells, no massive strength, no poison.

The Pluffy God makes you very strong, and very attractive.

The Pluffy devil makes you even stronger and even more attractive. You should see the color of pus that comes out of my eyes.

We are superior because we have a much higher level of intelligence, communication, and thought proccess than other animals. Morals and ethics have nothing to do with it.
Why would anyone think about ethics when they think of Atheism anyway? I personally don't need a religion to tell me how to act like a rational human being. I don't need a book to tell me not to murder or steal.

There are evil people in every religion.Can we all agree on that?

The difference between Atheism and Religion is Religious people do good deeds in the hope of being rewarded.

I disagree with that completely. Buddhism (though sometimes not referred to as a religion at all) is about finding enlightenment. Is that for self gratification? No, it's to simply feel peace with the planet.

Now as for other religions, the majority of them realise that doing good feels good. The Bible teaches people to do good without expecting "treasures". That doesn't really seem like someone hoping to be rewarded.

Regardless of your belief, doing good makes you feel good. It's not selfish to want that.

x.x that's not true at all

I'm aware, but about half of the posts in this thread have been complete bs so I thought I'd join in.

Intresting theories...not.

I can confirm. People in my church do this all the time. I'm not a Christian, but I go there to help when their computers go haywire or something like that. Not to mention it turned my parents from awesome ones to 'I deserve a reward' type of people.

I wasn't being serious Dragon, but part of the argument for atheism is that you don't need validation from some made up omnipresent deity to justify doing good things.

I didn't contradict myself anywhere there, which shows how clueless you are. The Universe isn't expanding IN space, it's expanding SPACE ITSELF. Furthermore, unlike religion, the Big Bang theory can be proven or disproven while supernatural beings, such as the God Christians/Jews/Muslims believe in, can't be proven or disproven. Thus far, there is plenty of evidence to support the Big Bang theory as opposed to disproving it. Don't bring up things like "miracles" or "unexplained" things. That's all pseudoscience. You can go on YouTube and find plenty of unexplained and bizarre things, it doesn't mean a thing. 2100 years ago mankind thought Gods were the reason that it rained, thundered, etc. Hope that puts things into perspective.

Pass high-school physics, blaze through a course we had called "Theory of Knowledge", and take some courses in general + special relativity then come back at me. You're well out of your depth.

See, I don't like statements like this. Atheism is simply the lack of belief in a supernatural being. Two atheists have only that in common. They don't share the same beliefs, ways of life, etc. I know it's only human to look for the most common dominator in two people and stereotype them based off of that, but with atheism that doesn't really hold up. For example, some atheists will do good for the sake of doing good (this is a whole different subject but to be honest, whether we like it or not, people who do good are actually being selfish. I can debate this but it doesn't belong here) while others, such as Stalin, do bad for the sake of being assholes.

You should try visiting this place and see how far you can get to them. :blush:

http://www.landoverbaptist.net/

(or for that matter)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/

I am so tempted to go on there and troll the hell out of all of them xD

Both of those sites are actually full of very good debaters. If you're good at debating, you can prove almost anyone wrong no matter how ridiculous the concept is (flat earth society), especially on a forum.

I'm pretty sure flatearthsociety is satrical. Not sure about the other, probably filled with stereotypical ******s.

Actually I think its not, or at least its to the point where they are so serious and so dedicated that its almost impossible to tell. I read that site four years ago and some people still post there actively to this day. They have their own complex theories and terminology. Its interesting to debate with them. They aren't your average jokesters.

I cannot tell whether this forum is satrical, ******ed, or perhaps both. Read this, it's ridiculous.

http://www.landoverbaptist.net/showthread.php?t=45427/

that was a good laugh

it can't be real, the signatures, the everything, amazing. "Powered by Jesus" in the footer.

yeah it's not: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendl...hurch-exposed/

Feel free to not do so next time.

I've read some more stuff on that site and they are seriously brainwashed or of extremely low intelligence, probably both. Sorry Pimpsy but I don't see how you think these sites are serious for debates.
the people on that site make me sick.

Rev.James Osborne obviously hasn't seen a picture of the earth. He's fat to.

I don't like extremists.

lol'd at this last experiment on the link Talon posted.


3) Get High! <-FAIL!!
Ok, this one you really can't do at home, but you can do it out in the world. Stand on the ground and look around you. What's the farthest you can see? Maybe it's a building, tree, or mountain. Now, find some place very close to it where you can get a much higher vantage point. (This also works if you're on a jet and about to take off.) Notice how in the higher place you can see much farther? You can see more of the world the higher you get. This shows the world is flat because the higher you go, the easier it is to see over obstacles. At the same time, it shows the world cannot be spherical. Because if the world was curved, the far distance would forever remain out of view because of the Earth's curvature. It would eternally be over the horizon.

If the Earth was a sphere, it would not matter how high you went, you would still see the same thing. Since this is not the case, the Earth is flat.

I was talking about the flat earth society.

There's two popular "flat earth" believing websites, can't remember the name of the other but it is definitely satirical, not entirely sure about the Flat Earth Society.

Thanks, I needed a nice daily laugh.

LAWL!
Theyre both parodies. 10/10

Even if those sites were just satire, who's to say some random person found it, and joined in believing the discussions were serious and dedicated? There's definitely some people on those forums that are legitimate believers of those 'experiments' and the flat earth theory.

Even I'm smart enough to stay out of this one.
....*sigh* fine..


Some people just don't want to learn, I don't blame them, the religions paint a much more inspiring outlook at life, even if they are not scientifically true. Religions show humans as great important beings being cared after by a guiding deity... Science explains and proves but in the end makes you realize you are just one organism on a small rock orbiting one of the millions and millions of stars in just one of the millions of galaxy's in a infinite galaxy.
Religion says you will go to a good place if you support the religion and continue it, science shows why humans make religions to cope and explain and unite and shows how what we are is just the workings of the brain and on death we simply cease being able to think and rot away and decompose...

They won't change, it's very hard to change their beliefs, same with political views. I don't even bother now unless they try to spew their nonsense near me.

As long as the cults stay out of laws and our lives then okay. They can huddle in their places of worship and live how they want if it makes them feel better. They are brought into it from a young age. Converting them would be like convincing them that blue is really red, or that they really live In the matrix.


All in all, it makes for fights, hard feelings, and furthers the intolerance for each others beliefs/facts.

Also as for the water into wine, not that hard, dehydrated grape powder, put a handfull into water, looks and smells like wine,

I did it as a party trick and really ticked a few people off.

This. This is why it's hard to tell sometimes.

This just in! 10 more pages added to the religious debate thread!
But yeah I agree with most of that. Besides the idea that science makes us feel insignificant. Neil degrasse tyson's star quote is a food example.

I know flatearth is a satire, haven't looked at the other one but I'm sure that one is also satrical based on the link provided here.

They both are.

Lol now I got there for my daily laugh. This site wants to ban Diablo 3. Over my dead body.

You act as if every religious person is a cultist who denounces science and praises the lord in all his holy glory.

I understand your statement but to be fair when I went to my Lutheran private school my science teacher saw a statement in our text book saying deer have been around for hundereds of thousands of years and she freaked out and made all of us all read an article claiming the earth is only 6000 years old. I'm not stereotyping or anything, but its easy for people that have never been religious to assume things like that because of people like this. Same goes vise versa.

Faith.