13 Questions

[Gawdzilla]

Ok, so I have written up a questionnaire for you all. You do not have to answer each of the questions, but I am interested in knowing what the different opinions of atheists are on these questions. It would be helpful if you explained your answers too, simple “yes” or “no” answers don’t really add much to the discussion. Thanks for filling this out!

P.S. Theists, feel free to answer these questions as well.


1. What evidence would convince you of God’s existence?

"Dear God, put a billion dollars in my checking account right now. OR heal all the amputees in the world right now. You pick."

2. You see the words, “I love you” written in the sand at the beach. Is this man-made? If so, how do you know?

Why would I think it was anything other than man-made. (Unless there was this honey in a bikini holding a stick nearby.)

3. If the God of the Bible were real, would He set the rules or would man set the rules?

Silly question.

4. Do moral laws exist? If so, do they exist independent of humans? How do you know what they are?

Morals exists before we had language. As for "laws", define "moral laws".

5. If everyone on earth believed that rape were morally right, would it still be morally wrong?

6. What is the most dangerous religion on Earth?

Any religion that forces itself on other people.

11. Do you believe that God does not exist?

I have no reason to believe it exists.

12. Do you think that God does not exist?

See 11.

13. How do you think life began on Earth?

Hundreds of millions of years, vast bodies of water laden with all the chemicals needed to construct life. It would be hard for it not to start. [/quote]

[Girlysprite]

It's a rock formation on Mars. So?

http://www.britannica.com/bps/media-view/70989/1/0/0

I made a woopsie there - it was meant for question 2.
And I know where the 'words in the sand' leads to - it is an old argument that if something looks 'created/designed' it is designed. This is a nice example of something that looks 'created', but came into exsistence by unintelligent natural forces.

[Cinjin]

It's a rock formation on Mars. So?

I made a woopsie there - it was meant for question 2.
And I know where the 'words in the sand' leads to - it is an old argument that if something looks 'created/designed' it is designed. This is a nice example of something that looks 'created', but came into exsistence by unintelligent natural forces.

ohh k .... that actually does make a lot more sense now. clarification good.

[Statler Waldorf]

---

It's a rock formation on Mars. So?

http://www.britannica.com/bps/media-view/70989/1/0/0

I made a woopsie there - it was meant for question 2.
And I know where the 'words in the sand' leads to - it is an old argument that if something looks 'created/designed' it is designed. This is a nice example of something that looks 'created', but came into exsistence by unintelligent natural forces.

---

G-sprite,

Are you suggesting that you would not infer that the "I Love You" in the sand was man-made? This seems to be the best answer to me, if not, then what would you infer? That natural processes of erosion created the words "I Love You" in the sand? I see your point, but the "face" on mars is more akin to finding animals in clouds. (Although there are lots of groups who believe it was created by aliens, so to say you "know" it was created by natural forces is begging the question a bit). Your thoughts?

[Doubting Thomas]

I think it's fairly obvious that she's trying to say that not everything that looks like it was designed by a higher intelligence was designed by a higher intelligence.

I admit though, I didn't see that question coming as an Intelligent Design question. But the analogy is bad, because if we see words written in sand and we understand that they are words and their meaning, we know that a human must have written them. But we don't see such definite proof that anything in nature was designed by an intelligent being or beings. Lots of people look at how complexly life evolved and ascribe design to it, but there's no definite evidence which shows that any life at all on earth was designed, except maybe for breeding larger & better livestock or plants to eat.

[Strongbad]

Ok, so I have written up a questionnaire for you all. You do not have to answer each of the questions, but I am interested in knowing what the different opinions of atheists are on these questions. It would be helpful if you explained your answers too, simple “yes” or “no” answers don’t really add much to the discussion. Thanks for filling this out!

P.S. Theists, feel free to answer these questions as well.


1. What evidence would convince you of God’s existence? An actual revelation to me from God. Not a dream, not a face on a piece of toast, but an actual, physical visitation while I was conscious and sober. A revelation made to someone else, which is what you rely on, would not be acceptable to me, nor would any form of hearsay, which is 100% of the bible.

2. You see the words, “I love you” written in the sand at the beach. Is this man-made? If so, how do you know? With a high degree of certainty, the answer is yes, because only man is capable of writing sentences in the sand.

3. If the God of the Bible were real, would He set the rules or would man set the rules? What rules?

4. Do moral laws exist? If so, do they exist independent of humans? How do you know what they are? Any laws that exist that apply to humans are entirely dependant on humans for their construction.

5. If everyone on earth believed that rape were morally right, would it still be morally wrong? This is an absurd question. Human nature would not allow everyone on earth to believe that rape was right, morally or otherwise.

6. What is the most dangerous religion on Earth? Islam

7. Where did the laws of logic come from? They were conceived by thinking men and women.

8. How did non-rational events and processes lead to a rational human mind? When did you stop beating your wife?

9. Why do some atheists such as Carl Wieland and Alister McGrath become Christians? Some humans are more gullible, malleable, and susceptible to superstition than others are.

10. How do beliefs and thoughts differ? A belief is a thought.

11. Do you believe that God does not exist? I do not believe that God exists.

12. Do you think that God does not exist? I do not think that God exists.

13. How do you think life began on Earth? I believe it was magic.

[SleepingDemon]

When we observe something, and claim intelligent design behind it, we have to attribute it to some form of intelligence that has been established to exist. If you are in the desert and stumble upon a Volvo, you aren't going to attribute it to aliens, nor will you say that the volvo has always existed there. While that last bit seems like an argument for creationism, it isn't. You go with the most likely scenario in regards to what you know. We know humans exist, and manufacture volvos, and it is safe to assume that cars do not pop into existence. If someone could attribute the car in the desert to a diety, then anyone could make an outrageous claim with the same merit. As sensible, rational adults we must make the judgement using what we know to be true, and what is most likely. My belief that life was created by BOB, the interdimensional, all powerful toaster has the same merit as life being created by a space god with superpowers.

[Doubting Thomas]

The thing is that we know what Volvos and other cars are, we know how they're made, and we know that they have to have been designed and created by humans. Where the analogy falls apart is that we also know what plants and animals are and how they reproduce, and know how evolution happened. There's nothing in plant or animal DNA which says that life has to have had a creator. Same goes for our planet. There's just no evidence that it had to have been created and couldn't have come about by natural means.

[SleepingDemon]

Exactly. The point I was trying to make is that you cannot claim that anything can only be attributed to something, without first confirming that the entity exists. Otherwise any and all origins theories have the same merit. Creationists claims that the abrahamic god is the creator have no more merit than my claim that BOB is the creator.

[Statler Waldorf]

---

I think it's fairly obvious that she's trying to say that not everything that looks like it was designed by a higher intelligence was designed by a higher intelligence.

I admit though, I didn't see that question coming as an Intelligent Design question. But the analogy is bad, because if we see words written in sand and we understand that they are words and their meaning, we know that a human must have written them. But we don't see such definite proof that anything in nature was designed by an intelligent being or beings. Lots of people look at how complexly life evolved and ascribe design to it, but there's no definite evidence which shows that any life at all on earth was designed, except maybe for breeding larger & better livestock or plants to eat.

---

I can't say I really agree with your reasons as to why you can say the words were created by man. I think even if they were in a language you didn't understand, or even if it was just the drawing of the sun you would still infer they were created by men. This is because all of these things contain information, and we know that information only originates from a mind. So I think applying this to DNA, the greatest information message we have ever seen is completely legitimate. Your thoughts?

---

---

When we observe something, and claim intelligent design behind it, we have to attribute it to some form of intelligence that has been established to exist. If you are in the desert and stumble upon a Volvo, you aren't going to attribute it to aliens, nor will you say that the volvo has always existed there. While that last bit seems like an argument for creationism, it isn't. You go with the most likely scenario in regards to what you know. We know humans exist, and manufacture volvos, and it is safe to assume that cars do not pop into existence. If someone could attribute the car in the desert to a diety, then anyone could make an outrageous claim with the same merit. As sensible, rational adults we must make the judgement using what we know to be true, and what is most likely. My belief that life was created by BOB, the interdimensional, all powerful toaster has the same merit as life being created by a space god with superpowers.

---

I actually think you can use the message itself to infer the existence of the messenger and apparently so does NASA. We have never scientifically observed extra terrestrial life, however the former SETL program was all based on inferring the existence of E.T.L. simply by receiving a message that may have been sent by an E.T.L. mind. They (NASA) even said that a message highlighting all the prime numbers would have been considered positive proof of E.T.L. - but now think about if something as amazingly complex as the DNA-RNA system was transmitted through numbers, the guys at NASA would have gone crazy with joy because they would have realized its implications
As to your second point about Bob- you will find that once you give Bob all the necessary attributes in order to be able to create the universe and life you will find that he quickly becomes the God of the Bible just by a different name and not a toaster at all.

---

---

The thing is that we know what Volvos and other cars are, we know how they're made, and we know that they have to have been designed and created by humans. Where the analogy falls apart is that we also know what plants and animals are and how they reproduce, and know how evolution happened. There's nothing in plant or animal DNA which says that life has to have had a creator. Same goes for our planet. There's just no evidence that it had to have been created and couldn't have come about by natural means.

---

I feel you got onto pretty shaky ground when you said we know where DNA came from and how life evolved on Earth, seems to be begging the question a bit. Seeing some mutations and changes in computer code as it is replicated is not nearly enough evidence for me to affirm that Windows 7 arose by natural means even if I didn't know anything about computers. Information always comes from a mind.