What the name of God is.

[Brian37]

I don't speak for every atheist, nor do they speak for me. I think you should treat us as individuals.

Some atheists do say there there is no way to know. I hate those atheists putting it that way when what they really mean is that god/God claims cannot be falsified through scientific method.

I disagree. I am only "technically" and semantically only agnostic about the future. Currently though, my "God switch" is in the position of "off" as far as all past and present claims.

I don't like my fellow atheists claiming god claims cannot be falsified through scientific method. Victor Stenger in his book "The New Atheism" says that science DOES have something to say about god claims. I agree.

Not being able to see something directly is a fallacy. We can see the unseen indirectly through the sciences. It is why we know that black holes exist. It is why even a layperson knows wind exists even though it seems invisible we do see the effects it has on trees and bushes and leaves. 

I employ several factors in saying "God does not exist" and stand by that claim.

1. Ocham's Razor says that out of all claims people can make to attempt to fill in a gap, the postulated answer with the least baggage is going to be your most likely answer.

So, our species history has produced tons of dead myths and god claims nobody believes today, just like all the other god claims you rightfully reject. Ochams razor says to me that it is infinitely far more likely humans make them up.

2. Evolution PROVES that life evolved to gap fill. Life does not always have time to slow down to observe. Our fight and flight evolution lead our species to make bad guesses. We ended up projecting our own qualities on the world around us as a false perception as a placebo coping mechanism. By giving human qualities to say, volcanos, weather, animals, we created superstitions as a way to falsely "bargain" with the world around us. That did create groups and those groups grew larger even based on totally false claims. That in turn gave our species safety in numbers and more opportunity at resources and creating offspring.

3. We can detect the "unseen" through scientific method. It is why we have discovered black holes and particles smaller than an atom, like the Higgs/Bolson particle and neutrinos. It is because those unseen particles have an effect on the things we can see. Just like we can see a leaf blow across the road without seeing every individual molecule of our atmosphere which appears clear, which we call wind. 

I don't agree with my fellow atheists that we cant know. I'd only say that if the one claiming a god/God/deity/super natural is unwilling to test and falsify that claim in a neutral lab, it is a claim that is not worthy of consideration. But I wont back down off of the attitude, even if one is willing to try that, it will fail, for all the reasons I stated above.

NO I don't know the future. But I also wont waste my time on a claim if someone were claiming an invisible pink unicorn farted us into existence. i wont lose any sleep ditching that claim either.

I am going to make a thread of sciencetism. I will see you there. But in a couple of days since I have assignments due soon!

Knock it off Mystic. That slur is the same false attempt to demonize scientific method Christians use. 

Scientific method is not a religion. If it were it would be exclusive to one religion. If it were a religion there would be a religious test to use it. We have Christians on this website too. I rarely if ever see two people of different religions debatw who got it right on an atheist website. I most of the time Christians and Muslims, mostly simply stick to trying to convince atheists.

Ok so you think science is a religion? Which religion does it prop up, because I have seen threads here started by Christians arguing that science points to their bible. And I have seen you and Atlas argue that science points to the Koran. 

So if you stupidly want to call scientific method "scientism" then that would also make Christians dogmatic too when they claim science proves "fine tuning". 

I am the outsider that is telling you BOTH that science is a tool, not a religion. The hammer is a tool, it does not care about the personal bias of the person using it. 

Christians pull this horrible argument too. When you cant prove your position you try to demonize scientific method trying to equate it to being a religion itself.

---

Dude, it's career advice, not a prescription for the world, and the more religious division within Islam, the better I think. If MK comes up with his own Islamic sect, all the better.

The Quran commands all men and woman to be Sages that teach the knowledge of the book to others just as they learned it. To be learned and free of attachment to this world, sincerely worship God, and teach the book to others and learn the knowledge themselves.

I don't believe in clergy class division of this labor.

All holy books/writings make claims, make calls and have "demands". So? Still circular reasoning no matter who is pointing to whatever club's writings.