RE: Would you be an atheist if science and reason wasn't supportive of atheism?
December 5, 2012 at 10:44 am
(December 5, 2012 at 1:17 am)Vincenzo "Vinny" G. Wrote: Simple question.
This will weed out the realists and the rationalists from the rest.
If if's and butts were candy and nuts we'd all have a party.
If science lead to the discovery of unicorns, DUH, I would be forced to accept it.
But we are not playing "lets pretend" and I do dispise mental masterbation after the scientific jury on facts is already in.
There is no need for a cognition for any part of evolution to have started, nor is there a need for an invisiable cognition to have started the universe. I hate this "lets be open minded" that allows the door of credulity and superstition to pervaid mass society.
Once you know the earth is a globe and not flat there is not reason to suggest that it "might be" a square".
This is mere speculation based on some childish emotinal sense of "fairness". All claims are not equal when it comes to science, and it is perfectly ok to discard bullshit claims.
"The sun is a god", that was once claimed and believe, and utterly false.
"The sun is a burning ball of gas". FACT of science.
It is not closed minded to give up on bad claims and bad data. It is closed minded to cling to the idea that just because someone can physically make sound waves come out of their mouth means others have an obligation to entertain a naked assertion.
If our species never questioned social norms our species never would have left the caves. So when you say we as atheists should be opened minded, that is bullshit. Openmindedness is what flies humans to the moon. Closed mindedness is what flies planes into buildings.
