Are you an Atheist? What Promted Your Choice?

[larrydavidswag]

regardless of how UNLIKELY life on this planet is, ITS HERE....

so to say "its just so unlikely, it's more likely a make-believe god physically and literally made everything" is ridiculous....because unlikely or not, it happened....

you're saying if we tried to "replicate" the "expirament" we would 'fail"....

lets replicate the experiment of god....opps. can't do that, cause its god....so there isnt even a likelyhood, there's absolutely ZERO chance of discovering or "copying" god, right?

right.

now we're arguing the likelyhood of two very ridiculously unlikely things...replicating life on a planet other than earth

in fact, we're arguing which is MORE unlikely, reality, which is, reality....or a secondary reality where some unknown being created everything....

there's actually more evidence that it's random, than that it was created.

but cute, tho.

(if everything was created with intelligent design why are things born ******ed and deformed? why are there collisions in space which destroy things? lemme guess, "only god knows that answer", right?)



"check it, i cant dunk, but its more likely than you jumping 400 feet in the air, off vertical, tho..."

both have zero percent chance in happening....god creating everything is just as unlikely as everything beign an accident....thing is, it happened....you belive in SOMETHING, that god did it, which we both LOGICALLY agree has a zero chance to "reoccur" or "be duplicated"....athiests believe in "i really dont know", or "nothing", which is open to accept the possibilities of a wide-range of things that are all very unlikely...however, they don't commit to ONE "end-all-be-all" explaination.....for the most part, athiests admit they don't really know....they're just sure that they dont believe in something that has absolutely NO EVIDENCE of existing....

put it like this, saying that "random chance" is less likely than intelligent design is silly, to me....

because "random chance" included an infinite amount of varibles and different explainations....literally an infinite amount of factors could or couldnt be included in "random chance" or "nature" scenario....for example, coulda been asteroids which gave us water, coulda been aliens, coulda been a BILLION scenarios.....but it's still 'random nature", whereas, you think that a SPECIFIC scenario where a being, without any shread of evidence this being exists, literally created everything is MORE LIKELY than the INFINITE possibilities of "nature"?

alright.

that's called faith.

you haz it.

i do not.

 

[solecity]

Ended Well, This has not...

 

[solecity]

Ended Well, This has not...

 

[mo matik]

I'm not familiar with the evidence that supports life is random. Post it please.

The topic of suffering on Earth has been discussed over and over and over again. If you really want to examine this question, you'll research it.

because "random chance" included an infinite amount of varibles and different explainations....literally an infinite amount of factors could or couldnt be included in "random chance" or "nature" scenario....for example, coulda been asteroids which gave us water, coulda been aliens, coulda been a BILLION scenarios.....but it's still 'random nature", whereas, you think that a SPECIFIC scenario where a being, without any shread of evidence this being exists, literally created everything is MORE LIKELY than the INFINITE possibilities of "nature"?

Hmm, are you looking at the odds as if it can be played more than once?  Those are the odds that life arose by chance over billions and billions of years, not like in each isolated plausible moment over time. It's the combined odds.  It's the infinite number of variables that actually makes the odds so near impossibility.

 

[mo matik]

I'm not familiar with the evidence that supports life is random. Post it please.

The topic of suffering on Earth has been discussed over and over and over again. If you really want to examine this question, you'll research it.

because "random chance" included an infinite amount of varibles and different explainations....literally an infinite amount of factors could or couldnt be included in "random chance" or "nature" scenario....for example, coulda been asteroids which gave us water, coulda been aliens, coulda been a BILLION scenarios.....but it's still 'random nature", whereas, you think that a SPECIFIC scenario where a being, without any shread of evidence this being exists, literally created everything is MORE LIKELY than the INFINITE possibilities of "nature"?

Hmm, are you looking at the odds as if it can be played more than once?  Those are the odds that life arose by chance over billions and billions of years, not like in each isolated plausible moment over time. It's the combined odds.  It's the infinite number of variables that actually makes the odds so near impossibility.

 

[larrydavidswag]

who said suffering? im saying "accidents" in development....

nobody said anything about suffering. Christianity convieniently explains suffering as 'free will" that god granted humans...well, which we took, when we ate from the tree of knowledge, absolving God from any blame for the ills and evil that men do....

now, you believe and have faith in an intelligent design scenario, im asking you, where do developmentally ******ed and deformed animals and humans come into that belief....you tell me that "suffering has been discussed"....this isnt suffering, nor is it a free will issue...its actually your god making MISTAKES...since everything is designed by the man, himself, right? right.

moving on, you're asking for evidence of the random nature of the universe? did i not just ask you about deformed and ******ed animals and humans? how about all the millions and billions of random impacts that occur in the vast universe every second? that's not evidence of randomness?

how about this, flip a quarter. you come up with a pattern for predicting it, sir.....maybe if you pray, god will reveil the secret to the "not-so-random" coinflip he designed, huh?

the burden of providing evidence doesnt lie on the "i have no idea how it happened" side....it lays on the side of "god literally and physically created everything"....cause, see, randomness is evident in every aspect of your existance; you could get mowed down walking to the corner store, whereas "intelligent design" is really not present anywhere in our existance, a thought which is actually supported by christianity's idea of free will....

thanks for playing, tho.

 

[larrydavidswag]

who said suffering? im saying "accidents" in development....

nobody said anything about suffering. Christianity convieniently explains suffering as 'free will" that god granted humans...well, which we took, when we ate from the tree of knowledge, absolving God from any blame for the ills and evil that men do....

now, you believe and have faith in an intelligent design scenario, im asking you, where do developmentally ******ed and deformed animals and humans come into that belief....you tell me that "suffering has been discussed"....this isnt suffering, nor is it a free will issue...its actually your god making MISTAKES...since everything is designed by the man, himself, right? right.

moving on, you're asking for evidence of the random nature of the universe? did i not just ask you about deformed and ******ed animals and humans? how about all the millions and billions of random impacts that occur in the vast universe every second? that's not evidence of randomness?

how about this, flip a quarter. you come up with a pattern for predicting it, sir.....maybe if you pray, god will reveil the secret to the "not-so-random" coinflip he designed, huh?

the burden of providing evidence doesnt lie on the "i have no idea how it happened" side....it lays on the side of "god literally and physically created everything"....cause, see, randomness is evident in every aspect of your existance; you could get mowed down walking to the corner store, whereas "intelligent design" is really not present anywhere in our existance, a thought which is actually supported by christianity's idea of free will....

thanks for playing, tho.

 

[mo matik]

Accidents in development? Your DNA is crazy efficient at replicating. The numbers are staggering. The error rate in DNA replication is 1 in 50 million. And your body has enzymes in place that can go back, find the errors, stop replication, fix the error, and continue.

Even then, I don't see how developmental errors disproves the existence of God? I'm not familiar with any claims of perfection in man. Perfection is pretty much isolated to the divine realm in most religious theology.

the burden of providing evidence doesnt lie on the "i have no idea how it happened" side....it lays on the side of "god literally and physically created everything"....cause, see, randomness is evident in every aspect of your existance; you could get mowed down walking to the corner store, whereas "intelligent design" is really not present anywhere in our existance, a thought which is actually supported by christianity's idea of free will....



I understand this point. But, religion doesn't have a 'burden' of proof because if one were to prove God's existence, then many of the constructs of religion would cease to serve a purpose. In fact, religions would make LESS sense if you can prove God's existence than if you can't.

 

[mo matik]

Accidents in development? Your DNA is crazy efficient at replicating. The numbers are staggering. The error rate in DNA replication is 1 in 50 million. And your body has enzymes in place that can go back, find the errors, stop replication, fix the error, and continue.

Even then, I don't see how developmental errors disproves the existence of God? I'm not familiar with any claims of perfection in man. Perfection is pretty much isolated to the divine realm in most religious theology.

the burden of providing evidence doesnt lie on the "i have no idea how it happened" side....it lays on the side of "god literally and physically created everything"....cause, see, randomness is evident in every aspect of your existance; you could get mowed down walking to the corner store, whereas "intelligent design" is really not present anywhere in our existance, a thought which is actually supported by christianity's idea of free will....



I understand this point. But, religion doesn't have a 'burden' of proof because if one were to prove God's existence, then many of the constructs of religion would cease to serve a purpose. In fact, religions would make LESS sense if you can prove God's existence than if you can't.

 

[larrydavidswag]

Accidents in development? Your DNA is crazy efficient at replicating. The numbers are staggering. The error rate in DNA replication is 1 in 50 million. And your body has enzymes in place that can go back, find the errors, stop replication, fix the error, and continue.

Even then, I don't see how developmental errors disproves the existence of God? I'm not familiar with any claims of perfection in man. Perfection is pretty much isolated to the divine realm in most religious theology.
....still avoiding the question of ******ed and deformed development. if it's "intelligent design" how do these deformities and ******ations RANDOMLY occur? 1 in 50 million? whatever you say, bro. that 1 shouldnt exist if "god" is on the sticks, running the show...

the mere fact that something like down syndrome or cerebral palsy exists DESTROYS your entire line of "intelligent design is more likely than random nature" reasoning....

moreso, the very GENDER of a human being is "random".....there is an equal chance of both a boy or girl being born......

, its random...its nature....which is the reality we live in...

you can BELIEVE whatever you want.....this is proof that the universe is random....

either that, or your God makes a buncha mistakes, which is blasphemous to even say, right?

right.

 

[larrydavidswag]

Accidents in development? Your DNA is crazy efficient at replicating. The numbers are staggering. The error rate in DNA replication is 1 in 50 million. And your body has enzymes in place that can go back, find the errors, stop replication, fix the error, and continue.

Even then, I don't see how developmental errors disproves the existence of God? I'm not familiar with any claims of perfection in man. Perfection is pretty much isolated to the divine realm in most religious theology.
....still avoiding the question of ******ed and deformed development. if it's "intelligent design" how do these deformities and ******ations RANDOMLY occur? 1 in 50 million? whatever you say, bro. that 1 shouldnt exist if "god" is on the sticks, running the show...

the mere fact that something like down syndrome or cerebral palsy exists DESTROYS your entire line of "intelligent design is more likely than random nature" reasoning....

moreso, the very GENDER of a human being is "random".....there is an equal chance of both a boy or girl being born......

, its random...its nature....which is the reality we live in...

you can BELIEVE whatever you want.....this is proof that the universe is random....

either that, or your God makes a buncha mistakes, which is blasphemous to even say, right?

right.

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by LarryDavidSwag

Accidents in development? Your DNA is crazy efficient at replicating. The numbers are staggering. The error rate in DNA replication is 1 in 50 million. And your body has enzymes in place that can go back, find the errors, stop replication, fix the error, and continue.

Even then, I don't see how developmental errors disproves the existence of God? I'm not familiar with any claims of perfection in man. Perfection is pretty much isolated to the divine realm in most religious theology.

....still avoiding the question of ******ed and deformed development. if it's "intelligent design" how do these deformities and ******ations RANDOMLY occur? 1 in 50 million? whatever you say, bro. that 1 shouldnt exist if "god" is on the sticks, running the show...

the mere fact that something like down syndrome or cerebral palsy exists DESTROYS your entire line of "intelligent design is more likely than random nature" reasoning....

moreso, the very GENDER of a human being is "random".....there is an equal chance of both a boy or girl being born......

, its random...its nature....which is the reality we live in...

you can BELIEVE whatever you want.....this is proof that the universe is random....

either that, or your God makes a buncha mistakes, which is blasphemous to even say, right?

right.

Pick up any pathology book for proof of unintelligent design. Human ignorance is proof of unintelligent design.

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by LarryDavidSwag

Accidents in development? Your DNA is crazy efficient at replicating. The numbers are staggering. The error rate in DNA replication is 1 in 50 million. And your body has enzymes in place that can go back, find the errors, stop replication, fix the error, and continue.

Even then, I don't see how developmental errors disproves the existence of God? I'm not familiar with any claims of perfection in man. Perfection is pretty much isolated to the divine realm in most religious theology.

....still avoiding the question of ******ed and deformed development. if it's "intelligent design" how do these deformities and ******ations RANDOMLY occur? 1 in 50 million? whatever you say, bro. that 1 shouldnt exist if "god" is on the sticks, running the show...

the mere fact that something like down syndrome or cerebral palsy exists DESTROYS your entire line of "intelligent design is more likely than random nature" reasoning....

moreso, the very GENDER of a human being is "random".....there is an equal chance of both a boy or girl being born......

, its random...its nature....which is the reality we live in...

you can BELIEVE whatever you want.....this is proof that the universe is random....

either that, or your God makes a buncha mistakes, which is blasphemous to even say, right?

right.

Pick up any pathology book for proof of unintelligent design. Human ignorance is proof of unintelligent design.

 

[lobotomybeats]

Originally Posted by Mo Matik

I understand this point. But, religion doesn't have a 'burden' of proof because if one were to prove God's existence, then many of the constructs of religion would cease to serve a purpose. In fact, religions would make LESS sense if you can prove God's existence than if you can't.

By me continuing to be a good person, yet an staunch atheist, I can contend that religion on serves a purpose to those that NEED it.

 

[lobotomybeats]

Originally Posted by Mo Matik

I understand this point. But, religion doesn't have a 'burden' of proof because if one were to prove God's existence, then many of the constructs of religion would cease to serve a purpose. In fact, religions would make LESS sense if you can prove God's existence than if you can't.

By me continuing to be a good person, yet an staunch atheist, I can contend that religion on serves a purpose to those that NEED it.

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by lobotomybeats

Originally Posted by Mo Matik

I understand this point. But, religion doesn't have a 'burden' of proof because if one were to prove God's existence, then many of the constructs of religion would cease to serve a purpose. In fact, religions would make LESS sense if you can prove God's existence than if you can't.

By me continuing to be a good person, yet an staunch atheist, I can contend that religion on serves a purpose to those that NEED it.

What does a confabulating alcoholic and a schizophrenic? No religious person is ever allowed to ask proof of such people's delusions and confabulations it would be hypocrisy.




The difference between a child who believes in santa and a religious person, is that santa is unlearned as one gets older. If your parents helped you unlearn your religion at a young age in the same way they tell their kids that santa isn't real, you would not be religious

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by lobotomybeats

Originally Posted by Mo Matik

I understand this point. But, religion doesn't have a 'burden' of proof because if one were to prove God's existence, then many of the constructs of religion would cease to serve a purpose. In fact, religions would make LESS sense if you can prove God's existence than if you can't.

By me continuing to be a good person, yet an staunch atheist, I can contend that religion on serves a purpose to those that NEED it.

What does a confabulating alcoholic and a schizophrenic? No religious person is ever allowed to ask proof of such people's delusions and confabulations it would be hypocrisy.




The difference between a child who believes in santa and a religious person, is that santa is unlearned as one gets older. If your parents helped you unlearn your religion at a young age in the same way they tell their kids that santa isn't real, you would not be religious

 

[mo matik]

Originally Posted by LarryDavidSwag

Accidents in development? Your DNA is crazy efficient at replicating. The numbers are staggering. The error rate in DNA replication is 1 in 50 million. And your body has enzymes in place that can go back, find the errors, stop replication, fix the error, and continue.

Even then, I don't see how developmental errors disproves the existence of God? I'm not familiar with any claims of perfection in man. Perfection is pretty much isolated to the divine realm in most religious theology.

....still avoiding the question of ******ed and deformed development. if it's "intelligent design" how do these deformities and ******ations RANDOMLY occur? 1 in 50 million? whatever you say, bro. that 1 shouldnt exist if "god" is on the sticks, running the show...

the mere fact that something like down syndrome or cerebral palsy exists DESTROYS your entire line of "intelligent design is more likely than random nature" reasoning....

moreso, the very GENDER of a human being is "random".....there is an equal chance of both a boy or girl being born......

, its random...its nature....which is the reality we live in...

you can BELIEVE whatever you want.....this is proof that the universe is random....

either that, or your God makes a buncha mistakes, which is blasphemous to even say, right?

right.

******ation and genetic defects come as a result of errors in DNA replication (the vast majority of them).  This is the point I was making with DNA replication odds.  I don't like the term intelligent design.  I'm not saying man is perfect.  I'm saying we didn't come here by chance.

I don't mean to come off as offensive, but I don't think you understand what I mean by odds in terms of the development of man vs. random genetic mutation.  There is a 1 in trillion odds life began by chance.  Period.  1 in 50 mill chance of a DNA replication error, but there are billions of people people pro-creating. 

By your line of reasoning, life would have to be perfect for the existence of a higher being. 

No religious person is ever allowed to ask proof of such people's delusions and confabulations it would be hypocrisy.


Atheists are right when they say the burden of proof lies on the theist, but again only in the argument of "proof for God's existence."  What I am saying is that there is no burden of proof in general, because religion is a faith based construct.  Science has the burden in general, because it's position is everything can and will be explained, when it has no explanation other than the improbable odds.

 

[mo matik]

Originally Posted by LarryDavidSwag

Accidents in development? Your DNA is crazy efficient at replicating. The numbers are staggering. The error rate in DNA replication is 1 in 50 million. And your body has enzymes in place that can go back, find the errors, stop replication, fix the error, and continue.

Even then, I don't see how developmental errors disproves the existence of God? I'm not familiar with any claims of perfection in man. Perfection is pretty much isolated to the divine realm in most religious theology.

....still avoiding the question of ******ed and deformed development. if it's "intelligent design" how do these deformities and ******ations RANDOMLY occur? 1 in 50 million? whatever you say, bro. that 1 shouldnt exist if "god" is on the sticks, running the show...

the mere fact that something like down syndrome or cerebral palsy exists DESTROYS your entire line of "intelligent design is more likely than random nature" reasoning....

moreso, the very GENDER of a human being is "random".....there is an equal chance of both a boy or girl being born......

, its random...its nature....which is the reality we live in...

you can BELIEVE whatever you want.....this is proof that the universe is random....

either that, or your God makes a buncha mistakes, which is blasphemous to even say, right?

right.

******ation and genetic defects come as a result of errors in DNA replication (the vast majority of them).  This is the point I was making with DNA replication odds.  I don't like the term intelligent design.  I'm not saying man is perfect.  I'm saying we didn't come here by chance.

I don't mean to come off as offensive, but I don't think you understand what I mean by odds in terms of the development of man vs. random genetic mutation.  There is a 1 in trillion odds life began by chance.  Period.  1 in 50 mill chance of a DNA replication error, but there are billions of people people pro-creating. 

By your line of reasoning, life would have to be perfect for the existence of a higher being. 

No religious person is ever allowed to ask proof of such people's delusions and confabulations it would be hypocrisy.


Atheists are right when they say the burden of proof lies on the theist, but again only in the argument of "proof for God's existence."  What I am saying is that there is no burden of proof in general, because religion is a faith based construct.  Science has the burden in general, because it's position is everything can and will be explained, when it has no explanation other than the improbable odds.

 

[larrydavidswag]

Originally Posted by Mo Matik

Originally Posted by LarryDavidSwag

Accidents in development? Your DNA is crazy efficient at replicating. The numbers are staggering. The error rate in DNA replication is 1 in 50 million. And your body has enzymes in place that can go back, find the errors, stop replication, fix the error, and continue.

Even then, I don't see how developmental errors disproves the existence of God? I'm not familiar with any claims of perfection in man. Perfection is pretty much isolated to the divine realm in most religious theology.

....still avoiding the question of ******ed and deformed development. if it's "intelligent design" how do these deformities and ******ations RANDOMLY occur? 1 in 50 million? whatever you say, bro. that 1 shouldnt exist if "god" is on the sticks, running the show...

the mere fact that something like down syndrome or cerebral palsy exists DESTROYS your entire line of "intelligent design is more likely than random nature" reasoning....

moreso, the very GENDER of a human being is "random".....there is an equal chance of both a boy or girl being born......

, its random...its nature....which is the reality we live in...

you can BELIEVE whatever you want.....this is proof that the universe is random....

either that, or your God makes a buncha mistakes, which is blasphemous to even say, right?

right.

******ation and genetic defects come as a result of errors in DNA replication (the vast majority of them).  This is the point I was making with DNA replication odds. 
look, bro, you can't have it both ways.

either these "errors" are RANDOM CHANCE

OR

GOD IS COMMITTING ERRORS

you can't admit to the randomness of it, because you'll be admitting to UNLIKELY RANDOM EVENTS ACTUALLY TAKING PLACE ALL THE TIME....

its unlikely your child will be born with cerebral palsy...BUT THERE ARE PLENTY OF PEOPLE BORN WITH IT

now, you won't say that its random chance these occurances happened...but you ALSO wont say it's god's error...

im kinda done with this....i made my point.

  

 

[larrydavidswag]

Originally Posted by Mo Matik

Originally Posted by LarryDavidSwag

Accidents in development? Your DNA is crazy efficient at replicating. The numbers are staggering. The error rate in DNA replication is 1 in 50 million. And your body has enzymes in place that can go back, find the errors, stop replication, fix the error, and continue.

Even then, I don't see how developmental errors disproves the existence of God? I'm not familiar with any claims of perfection in man. Perfection is pretty much isolated to the divine realm in most religious theology.

....still avoiding the question of ******ed and deformed development. if it's "intelligent design" how do these deformities and ******ations RANDOMLY occur? 1 in 50 million? whatever you say, bro. that 1 shouldnt exist if "god" is on the sticks, running the show...

the mere fact that something like down syndrome or cerebral palsy exists DESTROYS your entire line of "intelligent design is more likely than random nature" reasoning....

moreso, the very GENDER of a human being is "random".....there is an equal chance of both a boy or girl being born......

, its random...its nature....which is the reality we live in...

you can BELIEVE whatever you want.....this is proof that the universe is random....

either that, or your God makes a buncha mistakes, which is blasphemous to even say, right?

right.

******ation and genetic defects come as a result of errors in DNA replication (the vast majority of them).  This is the point I was making with DNA replication odds. 
look, bro, you can't have it both ways.

either these "errors" are RANDOM CHANCE

OR

GOD IS COMMITTING ERRORS

you can't admit to the randomness of it, because you'll be admitting to UNLIKELY RANDOM EVENTS ACTUALLY TAKING PLACE ALL THE TIME....

its unlikely your child will be born with cerebral palsy...BUT THERE ARE PLENTY OF PEOPLE BORN WITH IT

now, you won't say that its random chance these occurances happened...but you ALSO wont say it's god's error...

im kinda done with this....i made my point.

  

 

[onlysomejordans]

In HS.

-Learning about how corrupt religion is/was.

-Realizing that good and bad people die everyday, so why would "God" kill good people.

-Saying to myself even if a higher power put us here, do it really want us praising it.

-My family in general thinking any good accomplishment wasn't done by ones self but because "God allowed it."

-My families overall ignorance towards any other religion.


Just a simple summary, there's a lot more that made me lose faith in any deity but those are the easiest ones I can put into words.

 

[onlysomejordans]

In HS.

-Learning about how corrupt religion is/was.

-Realizing that good and bad people die everyday, so why would "God" kill good people.

-Saying to myself even if a higher power put us here, do it really want us praising it.

-My family in general thinking any good accomplishment wasn't done by ones self but because "God allowed it."

-My families overall ignorance towards any other religion.


Just a simple summary, there's a lot more that made me lose faith in any deity but those are the easiest ones I can put into words.

 

[mo matik]

Honestly man I really didn't know that was the point you were trying to make.

This kinda leaves the discussion of theism vs. atheism and goes into specific religious theology. Islamically, God created everything, and therefore has a hand in everything. So yes, God made suffering and ******ation a reality just as he made proper development, and advanced consciousness a reality.

This boils down to what I said a while ago; the idea of suffering on Earth. Different faiths have different perspectives.

 

[mo matik]

Honestly man I really didn't know that was the point you were trying to make.

This kinda leaves the discussion of theism vs. atheism and goes into specific religious theology. Islamically, God created everything, and therefore has a hand in everything. So yes, God made suffering and ******ation a reality just as he made proper development, and advanced consciousness a reality.

This boils down to what I said a while ago; the idea of suffering on Earth. Different faiths have different perspectives.