Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Wryetui Wrote:I asked a basical question: "How did this earth come into existence?" and absolutely no one answered me.
We don't know but you don't know either, you just think you do. It's fine with it being a mystery. I understand you think that not only must there be an explanation but it must be God, but you only think that, you don't know it, you think that you know it but you don't know it you just think that you know it. I only think that you don't, but as much as you think you can prove me wrong, you can't, you just think you can. I am not on my high horse but I think you are on yours so I think it's best you get off it. The rewards for your own increase in humility will be huge and make you a lot more rational and less distressed. Good luck.
Wryetui Wrote:Besides the poster that came after me, no one really answered anything, well, anything besides unbased mockery which I am getting used to.
Now, I have read this claim "The Earth is thought to have been formed about 4.6 billion years ago by collisions in the giant disc-shaped cloud of material that also formed the Sun. Gravity slowly gathered this gas and dust together into clumps that became asteroids and small early planets called planetesimals. These objects collided repeatedly and gradually got bigger, building up the planets in the Solar System, including the Earth.
The details of how the Earth formed are still being worked out. Scientists study meteorites and the oldest rocks on Earth to understand what happened in these earliest times in the Solar System. They also observe other solar systems in our galaxy, the Milky Way." but you are not better than any theist by just stating it so, if you read this claim without any further information it looks like a beautiful tale. I need, as you, evidence for this claim. What is the evidence behind this?
You said I could read the internet but that is not my point. This is a debate forum and if we would search the internet everytime we have a doubt there would be no forum at all, I want you guys to explain this to me.
You're making a category error. The only claim atheists make as atheists is that they don't believe in any God or god. The only claim theists make as theists is that they believe in at least one God or god. An atheist is someone who doesn't believe in God. There are no other 'atheist' claims, not even a claim that there is no God; only that we don't believe there is, we don't hold it to be true that any deities are real. Some atheists might claim that, or assert some versions of God don't exist while remaining agnostic about others; which only goes to show we only have the one claim in common.
You seem to be conceding the entirety of science to us, which is flattering, and a high percentage of scientists ARE atheists compared to the general population, but around half of American scientists are Christian. most of whom have no problem following the evidence wherever it goes. It's not our job, as atheists, to defend science; if you went to a general science forum, you'd find plenty of Christians defending science.
Maybe you're ready for the 'varieties of atheists' talk. I think for this thread you want to take on the 'rational skeptics' or 'scientific skeptics'. Lots of atheists in America fall into that category. We tend to be careful and precise in how we use words when debating, and are known for a tendency to be grammar and spelling Nazis; and to be agnostic atheists (because we're reluctant to make blanket assertions, it comes with the territory).
Hmmm, hmmmm, whoooo, whooooooo, whooooooo.
Here a short list of atheists unsupported blanket assertions.
1) The consciousness is a product of the brain.
2) We got this consciousness thanks to previous generation (evolution of the specie)
3) When we die is all over even the consciousness die.
4) The universe does not need any God.
And so on and on.
Sorry mate but it doesn't seem that you know what you are talking about.
"Atheists of this forum, prove to me how earth came to be!"
"Okay, here you go."
"...could you dumb it down for me? I have virtually no intellectual curiosity and using a search engine on terms I don't understand is so hard."
"I was thirsty for everything, but blood wasn't my style" - Live, "Voodoo Lady"
(May 3, 2016 at 10:35 am)Mister Agenda Wrote: You're making a category error. The only claim atheists make as atheists is that they don't believe in any God or god. The only claim theists make as theists is that they believe in at least one God or god. An atheist is someone who doesn't believe in God. There are no other 'atheist' claims, not even a claim that there is no God; only that we don't believe there is, we don't hold it to be true that any deities are real. Some atheists might claim that, or assert some versions of God don't exist while remaining agnostic about others; which only goes to show we only have the one claim in common.
You seem to be conceding the entirety of science to us, which is flattering, and a high percentage of scientists ARE atheists compared to the general population, but around half of American scientists are Christian. most of whom have no problem following the evidence wherever it goes. It's not our job, as atheists, to defend science; if you went to a general science forum, you'd find plenty of Christians defending science.
Maybe you're ready for the 'varieties of atheists' talk. I think for this thread you want to take on the 'rational skeptics' or 'scientific skeptics'. Lots of atheists in America fall into that category. We tend to be careful and precise in how we use words when debating, and are known for a tendency to be grammar and spelling Nazis; and to be agnostic atheists (because we're reluctant to make blanket assertions, it comes with the territory).
Hmmm, hmmmm, whoooo, whooooooo, whooooooo.
Here a short list of atheists unsupported blanket assertions.
1) The consciousness is a product of the brain.
2) We got this consciousness thanks to previous generation (evolution of the specie)
3) When we die is all over even the consciousness die.
4) The universe does not need any God.
And so on and on.
Sorry mate but it doesn't seem that you know what you are talking about.
I think we should have a thread with just Wryetui and Little Rik responding to each other back and forth forever and ever and ever
How will we know, when the morning comes, we are still human? - 2D
Don't worry, my friend. If this be the end, then so shall it be.
May 3, 2016 at 11:03 am (This post was last modified: May 3, 2016 at 11:05 am by Edwardo Piet.)
(May 3, 2016 at 10:49 am)KevinM1 Wrote: "Atheists of this forum, prove to me how earth came to be!"
"Okay, here you go."
"...could you dumb it down for me? I have virtually no intellectual curiosity[...]
Okay, I was almost laughing too hard at that point to even read this part:
Quote:[...] and using a search engine on terms I don't understand is so hard."
I love the flippiant, dismissive self-paraodying ironic style humor lol!
"Please help me. I am having trouble understanding you, sweet atheists. I understand you struggle with not believing in God. It's okay. Please help me understand for I virtually have no brain cells."
Besides the poster that came after me, no one really answered anything, well, anything besides unbased mockery which I am getting used to.
Now, I have read this claim "The Earth is thought to have been formed about 4.6 billion years ago by collisions in the giant disc-shaped cloud of material that also formed the Sun. Gravity slowly gathered this gas and dust together into clumps that became asteroids and small early planets called planetesimals. These objects collided repeatedly and gradually got bigger, building up the planets in the Solar System, including the Earth.
The details of how the Earth formed are still being worked out. Scientists study meteorites and the oldest rocks on Earth to understand what happened in these earliest times in the Solar System. They also observe other solar systems in our galaxy, the Milky Way." but you are not better than any theist by just stating it so, if you read this claim without any further information it looks like a beautiful tale. I need, as you, evidence for this claim. What is the evidence behind this?
You said I could read the internet but that is not my point. This is a debate forum and if we would search the internet everytime we have a doubt there would be no forum at all,
I want you guys to explain this to me.
If you claim god exists, the one making the claim has to provide data supporting the claim. (Hint: it's not an old book full of fables)
You started out with the argument from ignorance - again.
It's not our job to educate you. Do some of your own research. You obviously need to practice that. Grab some science books.
"The family that prays together...is brainwashing their children."- Albert Einstein
May 3, 2016 at 11:15 am (This post was last modified: May 3, 2016 at 12:11 pm by Mister Agenda.)
Wryetui Wrote:
Quote:I am starting this post because, so far, no atheist ever showed me evidence for their beliefs (or as you say, "lack of beliefs") and I am curious.
This deserves a bit of specific attention. We don't have a lack of beliefs. We lack one particular belief, that any deity is actually real. We can and do have all kinds of other beliefs. The evidence for our lack of that belief is that we say we lack that belief; which should be good enough for any reasonable person as a report on another person's internal state. If a particular atheist makes a stronger statement, then they have a burden of proof.
For instance, I consider myself an agnostic atheist. I don't know there is no God, I highly doubt it, but I'm aware that I might be wrong on my estimation of the odds. However, the God of theodicy doesn't exist because of contradictory attributes; and the God that stopped the sun in the sky and flooded the earth to the mountaintops doesn't exist because the physical evidence indicates those things never happened. The jury is out on the God of Deism and the God of Providence; and probably always will be; their only problem is lack of any concrete reason to think they're real; but at least they aren't self-contradictory nor in direct conflict with what we know.
May 3, 2016 at 11:21 am (This post was last modified: May 3, 2016 at 11:22 am by Mister Agenda.)
Wryetui Wrote:Alright, you did not offer me any answer. Would you be satisfied if I told you exactly the same? "It sounds to me like you could do with getting yourself a good theology textbook. It's good that you're showing an interest in learning. If you're serious, you really need to drop the preconceptions and start from the ground up. As long as you hang on to pre-drawn magical conclusions, you will find it hard to learn about actual theology."
"I can't say I know offhand how to find the evidence supporting the current model. It's probably online somewhere, but I can't find it at the moment. Maybe someone will help me out with that.", well I need to know it. I am not interested about the age of the earth because it is not something that goes against christianity anyhow. I am interested in the things that supposedly go against the christian doctrine. What is the evidence that says that the earth was not formed by God? Yes, you can back this question to me: "What is the evidence that shows that God created the earth?" but I am a "uncultured redneck" (no offense to any rednecks reading this), right? So, how was the earth formed if not by the act of God and on what do you rely to believe so?
There's lots of different theologies but only one science. You're making an entirely different request of us than is being made of you. You're asking us to make a thorough study of your religion, we're asking you to get a basic education in science.
You might have a point if you were talking to someone who came to your Orthodox Christian Forum, demanding they answer questions about their beliefs, though. In that situation, it's not out of line to refer them to available information rather than spoon feed them information they could easily find out on their own. Really, they should have done that already before they came to beard the Orthodox Christians in their den.
