Scientific Atheists

[Surtr]

Although, as party's go I think the Norse Valhalla has it all over the xtian heaven.

Too bad they got their asses kicked by me on Ragnarok.

[Minimalist]

So far, the results have been fascinating. For though a majority of you chose option 2, the percentage who chose option 1 is certainly magnitudes higher than the population at large. Scientists or aspiring scientists certainly do not make up anywhere near that portion of the population. This may not be a scientific poll, but I think it has, in whatever limited way, shed some light on atheism-related internet trends.

I once had some fundie asshole ( okay - that's redundant ) claim that my acceptance of the Big Bang Theory was faith based because I did not have a degree in astrophysics. Now, two things on this. One even without a degree a man like Neil De Grasse Tyson can explain his position and the evidence in such a way as it make a convincing argument...whereas some of these creatards can only mumble on about fucking god or jesus or some such other shit.

The second thing is that I know were I not too lazy I could get off my ass and go back to a university to get a degree which would enable me to evaluate the Big Bang without having to rely on evidence supplied by other scholars. Now, I could also get off my ass and get a theology degree which would enable me to study an ancient book of iron age superstitions and pretend that there are answers to actual questions therein.

I choose not to waste my time with either but that does not degrade Tyson's evidence to the point where the bible becomes any less of a pile of total shit.

[Cato]

In other words, I don't have to be a properly trained chef to differentiate between filet mignon and elephant turd on my palate.

[Minimalist]

The filet mignon tends to be smaller.

[Cato]

True; however, I've only seen a shit sweeper employed in a parade or circus, and not at the back door of a steakhouse.

[Creed of Heresy]

I wanted to become a chemical engineer a few years ago but the problem is that I have an extremely terrible time trying to hold my attention on a single subject for very long...devoting my life to something so complex is simply beyond my abilities. I would, and did, lose interest.

[Polaris]

Even though I am a Christian now, I planned on becoming an aerospace engineer, but changed fields when NASA started to fuck up all the time. The ironic thing is I did much better in biology than I did in physics...went from being a complete science freak in high school to a complete political science/history freak in college just because of the Space Shuttle disasters.

I don't think I was looking for answers, I just wanted to explore the unknown for curiosity's sake.

[mr.atheist]

No I am not a scientist nor do I have a career involving it.

[Esquilax]

I once had some fundie asshole ( okay - that's redundant ) claim that my acceptance of the Big Bang Theory was faith based because I did not have a degree in astrophysics. Now, two things on this. One even without a degree a man like Neil De Grasse Tyson can explain his position and the evidence in such a way as it make a convincing argument...whereas some of these creatards can only mumble on about fucking god or jesus or some such other shit.

The second thing is that I know were I not too lazy I could get off my ass and go back to a university to get a degree which would enable me to evaluate the Big Bang without having to rely on evidence supplied by other scholars. Now, I could also get off my ass and get a theology degree which would enable me to study an ancient book of iron age superstitions and pretend that there are answers to actual questions therein.

I choose not to waste my time with either but that does not degrade Tyson's evidence to the point where the bible becomes any less of a pile of total shit.

The other interesting thing to note here is, to the creationists that make this claim about 'faith' in the Big Bang, how one would go about eliminating this faith and become knowledgeable enough to know:

To remove one's faith in the Big Bang, one must go to a reputable university, study hard for years, and get a very labor intensive degree in a highly complex and technical field. In other words, the path to accepting the Big Bang theory, according to this creationist logic, is rigorous study and intellectual betterment. Implicitly, one must be very smart to 'know' the Big Bang is a compelling theory.

I could talk forever about the double standard here; about how faith is considered sufficient to believe in creation, but the scientific alternative somehow requires more, but I don't really have to. I just like the implication that the path away from creationism is knowledge.

Sometimes I wonder if apologists and creationists actually think about their arguments before they use them, or if they just talk based on what sounds good at first thought.