Are all atheists this ill-informed about religion?

[IATIA]

If we where to believe these stories, with no evidence, then we might as well believe in people turning into pumpkins at midnight,and a Martian who is looking for an earth shattering kaboom.

(my bolding)

And yet you believe in an invisible non-existent sky-daddy with "no evidence".

[Delicate]

There is no god, ergo, religion is a waste of time and effort.  Religion is and has always been nothing more than a medium for control of the populace.

Anyone got a microscope? Couldn't find evidence for his claims the first time around, but I'm sure it must be there somewhere.

[Delicate]

Do you not know how to post something relevant to the actual discussion? 


Sorry, I shouldn't be mean.

Whoa! Great post! You're the king of posts!

You asked for core doctrinal disagreements between sects, you got it, then you blew it off. Your intellectual dishonesty is hanging out for all to see.

Are you sure you're not called SnakeOilWarrior because of a lifetime spent defending SnakeOil salesmen?

If I dismiss something, I always provide a reason for it. If you can't engage with my reasoning, you will absolutely fail to connect with my reasons in any way, and resort to calling me intellectually dishonest.

And what do you know, that's what you've done!

You're not shaping up to look like the sharpest tool in this shed, buddy. Start by engaging with what I've said, and what reasons I've laid out for them.

[Ravenshire]

There is no god, ergo, religion is a waste of time and effort.  Religion is and has always been nothing more than a medium for control of the populace.

Best post you've made yet.

[Delicate]

I want to humbly suggest that the evidence based on posts I've seen suggest just that. Very few of the posts I've seen here so far contain a rational basis for rejecting religion. Where they do, they are inept or incomplete.

You mean that lack of: demonstrable evidence, reasoned argument, and valid and sound logic is not enough to disbelieve the god claim?

Please elaborate. 

And while you are at it, please elaborate on the rational basis you utilize to explain why you disbelieve in: alien abductions, dowsing, crystal healing, ancient aliens, Tarot card reading, etc, etc. Assuming you disbelieve in some or all of he above, of course.

Glad to elaborate.

You see, what you just did there? "You mean that lack of: demonstrable evidence, reasoned argument, and valid and sound logic is not enough to disbelieve the god claim?" That's called a baseless assertion. Or atheist dogma. The kind of thing atheists believe on blind faith.

You see what I said in my post? "Very few of the posts I've seen here so far contain a rational basis for rejecting religion."

That was me, predicting exactly the kind of atheist fairy tales you and your ilk like to spew.

Now go ahead, substantiate your claim with reasons and evidence. Show me you're smarter than the average bear. Steal my picnic basket, Yogi.

[Ravenshire]

Perhaps God was originally just trying to grow some weed in his universe but his parents found out and took his heat lamp so he decided to go legit make a sun and grow some people and animals to fuck with instead...
Maybe in reality we are just the cover universe so god's mom won't find out about his hidden weed universe

Nah. Gawd is one of them "go big or go home" types. He's either growing poppy or coca...

[Ravenshire]

That would be fantastic.  I'm pretty well read, but I'm not aware of any cult that believes this.  Is this what they preach at your local church?

Nope...Dawkins

Yeah.... No. Dawkins doesn't believe this either. If you really believe he does, your understanding of evolution is as weak as GC's.

[Ravenshire]

You forgot in your list, fish deciding to grow legs to come out of the sea, to eat and have sex.  Some people will believe anything!

Are all theists this ill-informed about Evolution?

Only the ignorant ones, willful or otherwise.

[Ravenshire]

This is where I have trouble with Poe's Law.

Do they really think that about evolution? Do they really think that scientists just missed or ignored such simple insights as "cats don't give birth to dogs" and "second law of thermodynamics"? Do they really picture a global conspiracy by which we get Australian, Chinese, Italian, Japanese, Indian, and Russian scientists to agree with the science of the Western Powers, while only pretending that scientists are all in cutthroat competition with one another? Can they honestly look at the "too complex! so Jesus!" arguments of the other side, even after they have been systematically picked apart by a judge who should have been on the ID/IC crowd's side, as a still-viable competitor for 150+ years of scientific research? Can they honestly overlook the overwhelming, utter acceptance of scientific theories and focus on the minutae of actual discussions over new finds and interpretations of data?

I honestly don't get it. I can't understand how a person can operate an automobile and still not have the brain power to put 2 + 2 together about the purpose of the Wedge Document, and what its implications mean for the ID/IC movement. I can't understand what's so hard to understand about basic population genetics (beyond the Punnett Square, which seems as far as most people go). I can't understand why they don't see how lunatic the actual story is by modern understandings of the world, and cling instead to the words of a people who didn't know that the earth goes around the sun or that our earth is not flat with a firmament overhead, or know that putting stripe-cut sticks in front of your sheep when they mate so they'll "adapt" to the environment, allowing you to grow wealthy off your brilliant insight, is bullshit?

It's called willful ignorance and many of them indulge heavily in it.

[Ravenshire]

You asked for core doctrinal disagreements between sects, you got it, then you blew it off. Your intellectual dishonesty is hanging out for all to see.

Are you sure you're not called SnakeOilWarrior because of a lifetime spent defending SnakeOil salesmen?

If I dismiss something, I always provide a reason for it. If you can't engage with my reasoning, you will absolutely fail to connect with my reasons in any way, and resort to calling me intellectually dishonest.

And what do you know, that's what you've done!

You're not shaping up to look like the sharpest tool in this shed, buddy. Start by engaging with what I've said, and what reasons I've laid out for them.

Use some sound reasoning and I'll try to engage. So far, you've show a dearth of it...