Atheistic Dogma- Scientific Fundamentalism

[Jacob(smooth)]

It just seems that according to astrophysics, in order for the "scientific fact" of general relativity to be absolute, we need to assume 96% of all reality is unknown and undetectable substances that have been called "dark energy" and "dark matter". It is also claimed that "unknown stuff" is moving around us and through us at all times. How are you so sure that this doesn't influence our genetic expression and has nothing to do with any "god" intelligence that exists? Why so confident?

1. You're confusing science, the method, with things people believe based on the scientific method.
2. Logical falacy "how can you be sure X DOESN'T". You can't draw conclusions based on other peoples willingness to assert a negative. How can you be sure I didn't come into your house last night and use your toilet? You can't, not really SURE.
3. The question is not therefore why we might think it DOESN'T so much as why you think it MIGHT.

[FatAndFaithless]

I'm typing this message on a computer whose design and workings are made possible regardless of the amount of understanding I have of the related industries. The chair I am sitting in, the desk I'm sitting in front of, the electricity that powers my home, the car I use to get around, the plane I fly in to get to faraway destinations, the medical care and medication that I use to get and feel better... all of those show the "truth" of any particular science. I could go on for quite a while, mentioning dozens --nay, hundreds-- of things that we all take for granted because they work regardless of how much we know about the underlying science.

How reliable and repeatable are claims based on religious faith? A ball-point pen will write just as well for a Christian as for a Muslim, and they both rely on science every day with such a fundamental level of faith that they don't even think about it. But ask them any faith-based question and lets see how well their answers align.

I challenge that we could pile all of those computer parts on the floor (matter) and nothing interesting would happen. However, putting the pieces together in a particular order and loading a program that gives it rules to go by, allows it to do amazing things. How is this not relevant to our existence? How is this not relevant to intelligent design?

Oh god..not the junkyard 747 argument..

[Simon Moon]

I challenge that we could pile all of those computer parts on the floor (matter) and nothing interesting would happen. However, putting the pieces together in a particular order and loading a program that gives it rules to go by, allows it do do amazing things. How is this not relevant to our existence? How is this not relevant to intelligent design?

And yet another argument from ignorance fallacy.

Nothing in your conjecture requires an intelligent designer.

All can be explained via physics, chemistry and biology.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

I'm typing this message on a computer whose design and workings are made possible regardless of the amount of understanding I have of the related industries. The chair I am sitting in, the desk I'm sitting in front of, the electricity that powers my home, the car I use to get around, the plane I fly in to get to faraway destinations, the medical care and medication that I use to get and feel better... all of those show the "truth" of any particular science. I could go on for quite a while, mentioning dozens --nay, hundreds-- of things that we all take for granted because they work regardless of how much we know about the underlying science.

How reliable and repeatable are claims based on religious faith? A ball-point pen will write just as well for a Christian as for a Muslim, and they both rely on science every day with such a fundamental level of faith that they don't even think about it. But ask them any faith-based question and lets see how well their answers align.

I challenge that we could pile all of those computer parts on the floor (matter) and nothing interesting would happen. However, putting the pieces together in a particular order and loading a program that gives it rules to go by, allows it to do amazing things. How is this not relevant to our existence? How is this not relevant to intelligent design?

False equivocation, begging the question.

You're not off to a good start. Perhaps try reading up on the concepts you're flinging around before arguing on their behalf? Friendly advice.

[Esquilax]

I challenge that we could pile all of those computer parts on the floor (matter) and nothing interesting would happen. However, putting the pieces together in a particular order and loading a program that gives it rules to go by, allows it to do amazing things. How is this not relevant to our existence? How is this not relevant to intelligent design?

How do you intend to demonstrate that humans require that kind of construction and design, given that we know for a fact, and can observe, how they form naturally?

[Exian]

Let's start here, sswhateverlove, to atheistforums.org. There's an introduction section, if you care to use it. I do hope you decide to stay and add value to our conversations.

I would like to get a baseline on your beliefs if you don't mind. I could read between the lines, but I wouldn't want to make any wrong assumptions.

[sswhateverlove]

I'm just curiuous as to what is our atheist 'dogma'?

Deny God, though you know he is real.
Hate said God.
Be in league with old horny Devil.
Worship Science.
Fornicate daily, preferably not alone.
BBQ at least one Christian baby per month.
Corrupt the youth with above atheist dogma.
Drink coffee, not tea.

How about that there is no possibility there is intelligence to the design of reality?

Or that there is no possibility there is an intelligent influence interacting with our reality?

Seems pretty dogmatic to me.

[FatAndFaithless]

Deny God, though you know he is real.
Hate said God.
Be in league with old horny Devil.
Worship Science.
Fornicate daily, preferably not alone.
BBQ at least one Christian baby per month.
Corrupt the youth with above atheist dogma.
Drink coffee, not tea.

How about that there is no possibility there is intelligence to the design of reality?

Or that there is no possibility there is an intelligent influence interacting with our reality?

Seems pretty dogmatic to me.

Nobody says that. You're the only one saying that. Address us here on the forum, not your fantasy strawman.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Deny God, though you know he is real.
Hate said God.
Be in league with old horny Devil.
Worship Science.
Fornicate daily, preferably not alone.
BBQ at least one Christian baby per month.
Corrupt the youth with above atheist dogma.
Drink coffee, not tea.

How about that there is no possibility there is intelligence to the design of reality?

Or that there is no possibility there is an intelligent influence interacting with our reality?

Seems pretty dogmatic to me.

Strawman.

Take this as friendly advice; engage in conversations with people else face the consequences.

[sswhateverlove]

I challenge that we could pile all of those computer parts on the floor (matter) and nothing interesting would happen. However, putting the pieces together in a particular order and loading a program that gives it rules to go by, allows it do do amazing things. How is this not relevant to our existence? How is this not relevant to intelligent design?

And yet another argument from ignorance fallacy.

Nothing in your conjecture requires an intelligent designer.

All can be explained via physics, chemistry and biology.

I am quite versed in all three of those sciences and what the "facts" are currently saying. Care to elaborate?