Atheism the unscientific belief (part one, two, and three)

[AtheistAspie]

Little Rik, you claim that, because all small things eventually merge into big ones, that is evidence that atheism is unscientific, but I ask you: why does your heaven and your god have to be the only big thing into which the dead merge upon the ending of their life?  Dead organisms do merge into a greater whole, by decomposing into the soil and feeding plants and animals which will live on for generations.  That still fits your definition of science without assuming that a magic man in the sky must be the only way for a small thing to become part of a larger whole.

[robvalue]

He still doesn't understand the difference between atheism and all the other things he assumes all atheists believe such as naturalism. How someone can be on a forum for so long and learn nothing about the subject matter of the forum is astounding. He's far from the only one though.

I explained it again right away in reply to his opening post. To no avail.

[JesusHChrist]

In nature the small merge into the big.
A drop of water will sooner or later merge into the creek.
The creek will merge into the river and the river will merge into the big ocean.
A cell is composed of matter and consciousness.
This consciousness can be tiny as much as you want but nevertheless there is a minute tiny amount of consciousness.
When we eat we absorb these cells.
The physical side of these cells build our body but what happen to the consciousness side of the cells?
Will it die or will enter or better say merge into our bigger consciousness?
According an Atheist point of view when the body die also the consciousness die so there is nothing left there other than
the physical side that build up our body.
Does this belief make any sense?
If it does make sense than why carnivorous people are more aggressive while vegetarians are more relaxed?
It seems that what we eat determine the way we act and think and therefore make sense to say that the consciousness of the
cells in the food that we are eating merge into our consciousness.
If we follow this line of thinking then we also have to consider what happen when our body die.
Will our consciousness die when our body die or will carry on and merge into what our feelings wish to take us?
Why would our consciousness die when as we can see in nature nothing die?
The small always merge into the big so to me it is totally UNSCIENTIFIC to say that with the physical death everything die. 

Moon? Seventh house.
Jupiter? Aligned with Mars.
Peace? Ruling planets.
Love? Steering stars.

Conscious love muffin eats tender rhino breakfast not! Dweezil says yay!

Die to live. Love to die. Circle remains outside and yet within itself and unbroken? Yes and no! See? Clear as a weasel!

How much you bet? My chicklets are all-a-tingle! My thighs EXPLODE with delight!

[Longhorn]

Thank lawd, we have someone who speaks his language!

[JesusHChrist]

Thank lawd, we have someone who speaks his language!

Yes, with help of input from my sweet sheep Goober (pats sheep on hindquarters), I can translate for y'all.

I speak several dialects of woo, including lower Choprick.

[Easy Guns]

Nope.

I was done reading when you said a cell is conscious.

[Little Rik]

Little Rik, you claim that, because all small things eventually merge into big ones, that is evidence that atheism is unscientific, but I ask you: why does your heaven and your god have to be the only big thing into which the dead merge upon the ending of their life?  Dead organisms do merge into a greater whole, by decomposing into the soil and feeding plants and animals which will live on for generations.  That still fits your definition of science without assuming that a magic man in the sky must be the only way for a small thing to become part of a larger whole.

If you read the OP you would have understood that a certain type of cell determine a certain type of behaviour 
like eating meat lead the person to be aggressive while eating veg. food lead to peace of mind.
By eating certain food we follow a line of behaviour given to us from certain cells.
Why then would this line of behaviour change in us?
Why the consciousness in us would change once our body die?
According to a scientific point of view the line follow the same behaviour in the good or in the bad.
What then is good and what is bad?
We have to consider that nothing stay the same.
Everything move and change but this change follow the same line of behaviour so from good you follow the good and from the bad you follow the bad.
Peace of mind lead to expansion while aggressivity lead to narrowness.
Expansion is limitless or infinity which in yoga terms is better known as cosmic consciousness or God.
But of course according to an atheist point of view everything is relegated to matter and matter is narrowness. 

[Little Rik]

In nature the small merge into the big.
A drop of water will sooner or later merge into the creek.
The creek will merge into the river and the river will merge into the big ocean.
A cell is composed of matter and consciousness.
This consciousness can be tiny as much as you want but nevertheless there is a minute tiny amount of consciousness.
When we eat we absorb these cells.
The physical side of these cells build our body but what happen to the consciousness side of the cells?
Will it die or will enter or better say merge into our bigger consciousness?
According an Atheist point of view when the body die also the consciousness die so there is nothing left there other than
the physical side that build up our body.
Does this belief make any sense?
If it does make sense than why carnivorous people are more aggressive while vegetarians are more relaxed?
It seems that what we eat determine the way we act and think and therefore make sense to say that the consciousness of the
cells in the food that we are eating merge into our consciousness.
If we follow this line of thinking then we also have to consider what happen when our body die.
Will our consciousness die when our body die or will carry on and merge into what our feelings wish to take us?
Why would our consciousness die when as we can see in nature nothing die?
The small always merge into the big so to me it is totally UNSCIENTIFIC to say that with the physical death everything die. 

What? Who says cells have consciousness? I kind of agree with what you say in "the small always merges into something bigger than itself, but I think you have the meaning behind that all wrong... No "immortal consciousness" will turn into something bigger... Energy is neither created nor destroyed... just transferred. when we die, our bodies will give up that energy and give it back to the earth, so in that sense, yes, the small (us) "merges" into something bigger....  energy, not consciousness....

You presume that the earth or matter is something sort of solid that will always be what it is now.
According to yoga matter is the solidification of something much more subtle like God thoughts so what
goes down must soon or later come back up.
Uranium is on the way up, plants too, animals too and so man.
Everything change and move.
What we give back to earth is not us.
The consciousness is not made of matter.
We surely evolved from matter but the consciousness within the matter wake up long long time ago and now
that we evolved to the human stage our consciousness doesn't really want to go back to the stage of matter
and start the journey from small to big once again.
No thanks.
Unless of course you strongly believe in matter.
In that case the chances to go back to matter are a real possibility.
But no, anyone with a tiny amount of brain matter would avoid that stage as ebola. 

[Little Rik]

Everything in this universe is temporary.
What make sense today tomorrow will be discarded in the rubbish bin of history so what we think it is perfect today will be found
wrong tomorrow.
Physical science can not possibly found permanent solution to the main human problem which is to find permanent peace of mind but by 
following mother nature way of acting it is possible to find solutions to a lot of material-physical-mental problems.
Now let me give an example of bias and incompetence and the arrogance in refusing to follow mother nature example.
By using a tiny bit of intellect we can draw the conclusion that cells must be alive in order to deliver us the nutrients.
Dead substances are not able to feed us so we would be dead by now or as a matter of fact never existed.
If cells are alive then we can easy deduce that the cells got to be conscious.
As the small merge in the big by nature we can also deduce that the cells consciousness merge in us.
From here we can also deduce that the cycle of merging goes on and on leading to some goal.
Atheism is therefore full of arrogance into believing that the cycle end without a goal.
Why the cycle of merging into something big should end all of a sudden when in fact mother nature show us that 
the cycle goes on and on? 

None of that answered my question. Want to try again? You've been working on something, and come to conclusions. What can you do to minimize your own bias and errors? This has nothing to do with atheism, so it's irrelevant to randomly slag it off. But by all means do it again.

You know what you remind me Rob?
Those students that after listening to the teacher they still can't get it so they need private tutoring
to get the message clear in their mind.
The thing is that a tutor get paid while i am here doing all this for free.
Is not fair.
Anyway i try to put it in a slight different way hoping that you finally get the message.
I did show you that if you understand how mother nature works and if you follow her line of logic you have 
a very good chance of not doing mistakes.
The problem is however not so simple as to understand mother nature require an open mind.
A dogmatic person that fence off his mind prevent the challenge and therefore the possibility to
change for the better.
Religious people are such people.
Anyone who think that with the physical death everything is over are also such type of people.
So to summarise i say to you that the best way to minimize errors is to go with an open mind and
to expect the unexpected. 

[robvalue]

Actually, I was trying to get you to realize the important step missing from your "scientific method". But it seems it's not going to happen.

I'll fill you in: getting others to reproduce your method and test your results.