The Athiest Thread

[Synraii]

The argument is based on that the events listed happened, not the accuracy of the articles. If he links the Holocaust for the sake of mentioning the Holocaust you don't need to address credibility because he linked the Wikipedia article.

Yes, but look at what I just did to it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731

Read the first sentence.
The point I'm trying to make is never reference unreliable sources.

 

[UnseenWombat]

The point I'm trying to make is never reference unreliable sources.

I'll keep that in mind when I'm writing my next research paper, thanks. But for simply mentioning two historical events and giving a brief synopsis to people who may not know about them, I think Wikipedia is fine.

 

[Synraii]

I think referencing events we all know about already was a little patronising myself, lol.

 

[JDub]

Rock God's lyrics + video.

Awesome! I also think you could have chosen pretty much any song from Opiate though my fave on that album is prolly "Opiate/The Gaping Lotus Experience". "Judith" from "A Perfect Circle" is a good one too. But I'm going a different direction musically.

NOFX - The Idiots are Taking Over
Lyrics:

Spoiler

It's not the right time to be sober
Now the idiots have taken over
Spreading like a social cancer, is there an answer?

Mensa membership conceding
Tell me why and how are all the stupid people breeding
Watson, it's really elementary
The industrial revolution
Has flipped the bitch on evolution
The benevolent and wise are being thwarted, ostracized, what a bummer
The world keeps getting dumber
Insensitivity is standard and faith is being fancied over reason

Darwin's rolling over in his coffin
The fittest are surviving much less often
Now everything seems to be reversing, and it's worsening
Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool
Now angry mob mentality's no longer the exception, it's the rule
And I'm starting to feel a lot like Charlton Heston
Stranded on a primate planet
Apes and orangutans that ran it to the ground
With generals and the armies that obeyed them
Followers following fables
Philosophies that enable them to rule without regard

There's no point for democracy when ignorance is celebrated
Political scientists get the same one vote as some Arkansas inbred
Majority rule, don't work in mental institutions
Sometimes the smallest softest voice carries the grand biggest solutions

What are we left with?
A nation of god-fearing pregnant nationalists
Who feel it's their duty to populate the homeland
Pass on traditions
How to get ahead religions
And prosperity via simpleton culture

The idiots are taking over

Youtube vid:

Spoiler

Bonus: You're Wrong

Spoiler

 

[Wandrian]

How about free will? Is our every thought and decision nothing more than a bunch of electrochemical reactions inside a lump of fats and sugars? Yeah sure, we can see what areas of the brain are being used and all via MRI, MSI, and various other tools but will we see a meaningful scientific explanation of exactly how free will works in the next cenutry? Like, what about decisions that have no emotion involved where only the more advanced parts of the brain are used and habits do not come into play? What kind of gray area in the gray matter is that?

 

[Synraii]

How about free will? Is our every thought and decision nothing more than a bunch of electrochemical reactions inside a lump of fats and sugars?

That is correct, though the human body is made up of more than fats and sugars, lol.

 

[MONEYMUFFINS]

yet you talk like you were raised by wolves.

THAT'S THE JOKE.


ONCE AGAIN, IT'S ASTONISHING YOU DON'T EVEN MENTION MY MAIN POINT. "DURR, EVIDENCE, THAT'S FOR SUCKERS. I LIKE TO MAKE WEAK ASSUMPTIONS INSTEAD. THEN I CALL IT REASONABLE FAITH."

 

[Wandrian]

That is correct, though the human body is made up of more than fats and sugars, lol.

Well, maybe your body isn't a lump of fats and sugars but I was refering to the brain.

 

[JDub]

Well, maybe your body isn't a lump of fats and sugars but I was refering to the brain.

Like a study that I cited earlier in this thread, turns out our body is only really about 1/10th actually ours. Scientists did an audit of cells in/on the human body and found that we have ten times more microbes/bacteria cells than actual human cells. But anyway, as far as the brain goes when a part of it is dead or damaged there's no evidence that information is retained through some "upload" to a spiritual plane. Stroke victims have to relearn speech and motor functions. The damaged tissue doesn't get repaired. New pathways are formed in other parts of the brain if the victim's lucky. If information was part of the soul and the person's still alive, then they would still have their soul and that information right ? If they still had their soul they should be able to identify loved ones but that's not the case.

 

[ArcticKomodo]

One of my Muslim friends said that our souls want to be born in this existence. Too bad for those North Korean souls.

 

[UnseenWombat]

I think referencing events we all know about already was a little patronising myself, lol.

It might have been if someone hadn't asserted that no one had ever killed in the name of science.

THAT'S THE JOKE.

I'm sorry then that I mistook you for someone who wanted to have an intelligent discussion. I won't make the mistake again.

ONCE AGAIN, IT'S ASTONISHING YOU DON'T EVEN MENTION MY MAIN POINT. "DURR, EVIDENCE, THAT'S FOR SUCKERS. I LIKE TO MAKE WEAK ASSUMPTIONS INSTEAD. THEN I CALL IT REASONABLE FAITH."

Already addressed it. There is plenty of historical evidence for the tenets of the Christian faith if you're willing to look outside of Infidels.org to find it. Not only that, but Christianity is philosophically defensible, as has been demonstrated for 2 millenia now by people much smarter than either of us, despite all your bluster and blather about it not being so.

Like a study that I cited earlier in this thread, turns out our body is only really about 1/10th actually ours. Scientists did an audit of cells in/on the human body and found that we have ten times more microbes/bacteria cells than actual human cells. But anyway, as far as the brain goes when a part of it is dead or damaged there's no evidence that information is retained through some "upload" to a spiritual plane. Stroke victims have to relearn speech and motor functions. The damaged tissue doesn't get repaired. New pathways are formed in other parts of the brain if the victim's lucky. If information was part of the soul and the person's still alive, then they would still have their soul and that information right ? If they still had their soul they should be able to identify loved ones but that's not the case.

Christianity asserts that we are spirit and flesh. If either one is damaged, the other will suffer. You mentioned an example of the process going in one direction. I'm sure if you think about it, you can imagine examples of the other.

 

[damn-I-Suck]

Explain to me how evolution disapproves God? You can have your way with the Religious folk. But bring it over here, against someone how has absolutely no problem with Science, yet still affirms God.

That is a perfectly reasonable philosophy. The problem is that 9/10 people are referring GOD to a certain religion.

 

[TerminatorCortez]

In the bible, it says that we do not know God because we don't know the World. By knowing how the world works its easy to conclude that someone is behind everything.

 

[damn-I-Suck]

Look, I understand that wikipedia is not 100% reliable.

However, for the purpose of this discussion: Heart surgery wasn't invented until around 1850-ish. You can back that up with anything credible.

And besides, if something in Wikipedia isn't correct, they get scrutinized and someone comes along and corrects it. At best, there may be some wrong information in there for a week or so.

 

[damn-I-Suck]

In the bible, it says that we do not know God because we don't know the World. By knowing how the world works its easy to conclude that someone is behind everything.

The irony in that statement is that, as knowledge has advanced, less and less people believe in god.

People like to use the concept "GOD" to fill in the gaps of knowledge, or to attempt to explain something unknown.

Does this sound familiar? "Why is the world this way?", "Because GOD did it and we will never understand his reasons". Sure sounds like a cop-out to me.

 

[damn-I-Suck]

@UnseenWombat.

About that "new direction" you're referring to in evolution.

What if.... (and this is a big what-if).....The next stage of evolution was human beings manipulating their own genetics to get a more desired result? I can just imagine rich parents telling their doctor "We want him to have blue eyes, and we want him smart!". This replaces natural selection for intelligent selection.

OR.........(and this is an even bigger what-if)... The next phase in evolution is artificial intelligence.. You know, computers who have free will and can think independently, or straight up robots like in TERMINATOR?

I have thought a lot about this, and I fear either of these fates.

 

[Lasercakes]

What if.... (and this is a big what-if).....The next stage of evolution was human beings manipulating their own genetics to get a more desired result? I can just imagine rich parents telling their doctor "We want him to have blue eyes, and we want him smart!". This replaces natural selection for intelligent selection.

What's wrong with that?

 

[MONEYMUFFINS]

There is plenty of historical evidence for the tenets of the Christian faith

OH, REALLY? PLEASE SHOW ME THE CONSENSUS ON ALL THESE GROUPS OF HISTORIANS AND SCIENTISTS CITING THAT THE RESURRECTION WAS AN HISTORICAL EVENT.

 

[MONEYMUFFINS]

YOU'VE HAD 16 PAGES TO CONVINCE ME. YOU CONTINUE TO BEAT AROUND THE BUSH. LET'S SEE WHAT THE MAJORITY OF EXPERTS HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THIS "REASONABLE" EVIDENCE.

 

[Wandrian]

Like a study that I cited earlier in this thread, turns out our body is only really about 1/10th actually ours. Scientists did an audit of cells in/on the human body and found that we have ten times more microbes/bacteria cells than actual human cells. But anyway, as far as the brain goes when a part of it is dead or damaged there's no evidence that information is retained through some "upload" to a spiritual plane. Stroke victims have to relearn speech and motor functions. The damaged tissue doesn't get repaired. New pathways are formed in other parts of the brain if the victim's lucky. If information was part of the soul and the person's still alive, then they would still have their soul and that information right ? If they still had their soul they should be able to identify loved ones but that's not the case.

Right, but all those other organisms like mitochondria are, at this stage in evolution, essentially part of the singular organism that is a person right? Maybe it's just my baseless opinion, but I think what constitutes a person is equal parts the sum of their parts(by all implications of the word; body, thoughts, symbiotic organisms, et cetera) and their whole. Even though it's just ego and failure of logic, I much prefer believing humans are special.

On the whole soul/afterlife part here? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure no credible religion has ever clarified what a soul specificly is and no one that believes in souls can generally agree with how they work either right? Sounds good to me at least.


@ Lasercakes: Well, it's kind of unfair. What gives someone that's inherited a metric fuckton of money more right to fuck around with genetics to be better physically than some starving teenager in India who's literally whoring herself out to feed her siblings? Why can't the poor get as many chances as the rich? Such as a thing as dIS is speaking of would be something very very much exclusive to top 0.001% of people that haven't really earned their keep by comparison(like actors, CEOs, and royalty).