Argument against atheism

[thesummerqueen]

Straight from wiki:

The Big Bang theory is the prevailing cosmological model that explains the early development of the Universe.[1]

The Big Bang is a well-tested scientific theory which is widely accepted within the scientific community because it is the most accurate and comprehensive explanation for the full range of phenomena astronomers observe.

A scientific theory comprises a collection of concepts, including abstractions of observable phenomena expressed as quantifiable properties, together with rules (called scientific laws) that express relationships between observations of such concepts. A scientific theory is constructed to conform to available empirical data about such observations, and is put forth as a principle or body of principles for explaining a class of phenomena.[1]

[Erinome]

ugh the big bang is not a theory... man this was obviously the wrong forum.

Yeah, it is. You're looking for the We'll believe any old bullshit forum. This isn't it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang

[Faith No More]

I believe you're looking for a forum that let's you redefine terms as you deem necessary.

[thesummerqueen]

He wanted a mental masturbation forum. This ain't it.

[amkerman]

change the dictionary? is the dictionary where you look to find truth?

Faith no more: I still have not attacked atheism. I simply stated weak minded people and cowards argue that they have no position. I defined in my argument that atheism is a belief that no God or gods exist.

---

i wanted to talk to someone who was intellectually honest, actually.

[Jackalope]

ugh the big bang is not a theory... man this was obviously the wrong forum.

Plonk.

[amkerman]

do you see the irony of your last simple statement faith? The fact that you believe atheism even has a real definition outside of human consciousness and subjective perception can not be possible without consciousness being a primary property of the universe, which would most correctly be termed a belief in "God". If you believe that any of this is actually real outside of your mind you necessarily believe in God. Having a belief in one but not the other is illogical.

---

know that when I say God I am not talking about what you believe God is... of course people can't understand what I mean by this.

---

I mean that is all I have been saying this whole time. Still, no one has attempted to show my logically how that isn't the case. People now want to talk about whether or not the big bang is a hypothesis or a theory, try ascertain some hidden agenda that I do not have. Make each other seem smart by putting me down. A bunch of bullies to anyone who don't share your views, even if in the end it turns out your views were wrong in the first place. Stay strong in your defense of atheism without actually ever using logic to defend it, it sure makes you guys look great...

All we have are our minds people. Use yours.

[KichigaiNeko]

I am to understand Akerman that you are the one at odds here with definitions.

Atheism is a lack of belief. I am to understand that many here "lack belief" in ANYTHING until it has been proven.

All you seem to have presented so far is mental masturbation and verbal diahorrea in an attempt to attack atheism and support your own belief system.

[thesummerqueen]

No one is putting a hidden agenda on you - you've made yours quite clear. No one's making themselves seem smart by putting you down, we're just scoffing at yet another person who scoffed at the Big Bang Theory not being a theory. This board is made up of many people with opposing views who have heated debates with each other and still remain quite loving outside of it. I don't have to defend atheism, it just is. How I became an atheist might be a different matter.

I'm about to go use my mind to imagine I'm getting a body massage from Gerard Butler. I promise it'll come to more useful ends than this discussion.

[The Grand Nudger]

Rhythm, for the hundredth time...

Could be up to the thousandth time. Repetition does nothing to strengthen a statement.

a belief in any sort of objective truth outside of human perception necessitates consciousness as a primary function of the universe.

Because you keep saying that it does? Does the world disappear when you're dreaming? How exactly are you drawing conclusions about the cosmos based on whether or not a person believes in a thing called "objective truth"? The problem with this statement has been explained to you multiple times by multiple posters.

A belief that consciousness as a primary function of the universe would most correctly be termed as a belief in a monotheistic deity.

No, it wouldn't. It would be a belief that consciousness is a primary function of the universe. This is on top of going from your garbage above into this without taking a breath.

It is illogical to claim that one believes iin any sort of objective morality or truth and also claim that one doesn't believe in "God".

Beliefs and logic never seem to mix very well. We're three levels of garbage down and you just keep rolling with it. Objective morality and truth are not a God, you can believe in both, either, neither, no god, many gods, or one god, all at once. No logic required.

Therefor, any belef that some things are inherently good or bad can not exist in a truly atheistic worldview.

Therefore nothing. You're jumping the gun. You haven't established anything you've said before this moment as anything more than you ranting.

I have never claimed or told anyone what to believe,

why bother with that when you can just tell them what they actually believe..Mr. "Would be most correctly termed a belief in a monotheistic deity"

I have never stated that consciousness is infact a primary function of the universe. It seems to me that since humanity and science for the most part agrees that things actually exist and are true and real independent of human perception, consciousness is a primary function of the universe.

Really, you just made the claim again, modifiers like "it seems to me" are all fine and dandy. It doesn't seem like it to me, and you can't demonstrate that this is the case. You're shit out of luck on that count eh?

Therefore, atheism is incorrect.

Why bother with all of the word salad. You know you could've just said "I believe atheism is incorrect, I don't have anything resembling an argument, but I have my beliefs." You'd still get giggles, but I think some of us would be absolutely awestruck at the lack of pretense. Hell, you might've made some friends.

It is entirely possible that I am wrong, that consciousness is in fact not a primary function of the universe but rather an emergent function of complex systems such as the brain. If that is the case, however, then things are not inherently good or bad, nothing has any "real" value besides the subjective value that humanity ascribes them. It may be that feelings and morality are purely human constructs and that nothing has any value at all.

"Entirely possible" is one way of putting it......

If someone has some different analysis or an argument for how objective morality or truth can exist without consciousness I would love to hear it, not to try to insult it, but to come to some deeper understanding of the question.

Word games and modifiers. If you're interested in any of this in earnest you should probably drop all the baggage you're carrying around and sign up for some credit hours.

I haven't shown anyone on here to be holding illogical or contrary beliefs Rythem. I can't. I have never asked anyone what they believe in. I don't really care what anyone believes.

No you haven't. No...you can't. Again, why would you? Too busy telling them what they believe to ask. I can tell you absolutely don't care, what with the lengths you're going to attempting to "disprove" their lack of belief and subsequently making both a fool and an ass of yourself.

All I am doing is making an observation. Many of you are wrongly perceiving that I am somehow attacking atheism.

You are? You're letting loose at the mouth with no observations whatsoever. How could you possibly attack atheism? Speaking of which.....are you going to present that argument against atheism or what? We're a few pages in and it's really becoming a drag.