I am an atheist thread 3

[c659smith]

@c659smith

Is the universe a painting? No. Is the universe a building? No. Bringing out examples of things we know to be painted and built have no relevance to ourselves or the universe.

What do you mean by conscience?

You have presented nothing whatsoever here, and “there is no god” is not my position to prove.

Yes, in some version of it.

Forgive me for copying and pasting my response to another poster in this thread:

“Whether or not the unviverse had a cause (and there is no reason to suppose that it did, as our laws of physics break down at the planck time) there is no evidence YET to possibly tell us what that cause was. I have given a couple of examples of natural hypotheses in these threads for the cause of the big bang, which in addition to being potentially falsifiable when the large hadron collider is completed, are also mathematically sound, which is a good start. This is no guarantee that they are correct, and they are of course different hypotheses, so they can’t all be correct! I won’t believe in them until there is sufficient evidence for one of them. Here’s the question and answer part of a short lecture given by Stephen Hawking last year, the part I think you would find interesting starts at around the six minute mark.

”

Source please? Are you simply referring to dark energy? The evidence for the rapid expansion of spacetime is well observed.

How does this possibly relate to your previous sentence? Stars and planets are subject to massive collisions all the time, which can easily knock a star ‘sideways’ or ‘upside down’ without even coming close to raising any eyebrows about the breaking of any physical laws.

Newtons law
I. Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it.

II. The relationship between an object’s mass m, its acceleration a, and the applied force F is F = ma. Acceleration and force are vectors (as indicated by their symbols being displayed in slant bold font); in this law the direction of the force vector is the same as the direction of the acceleration vector.

III. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

In other words the big bang had one force (action) why are the planets so far away from eachother and why do the planets and suns spin in different directions even without gravitational pulls

can definitely with out a doubt state that the planets different rotation and distances from eachother disproves the big bang, That is science.
If you want to use well maybe a planet banged into a burning sun theory and survived well you stick with that. dark energy, lol

Now what I mean by a conscience( Mis-spelled) is knowing without being taught right and wrong no other animal has that ability. We may choose to do wrong but we know why. morals
now where do you suppose that comes from?

 

[c659smith]

Perhaps you should reread the 26 thousand characters I directed at you across about 6 or 7 posts, where you responded with one sentence, which was a reassertion of your false dichotomy.

I will reply to each and every one of your past posts but answer my question prove the Revolutionary war occurred without testimonal evidence or artifacts.

Such as I am doing about God.

 

[phooney]

I will reply to each and every one of your past posts but answer my question prove the Revolutionary war occurred without testimonal evidence or artifacts.

Such as I am doing about God.

I have no desire or reason to engage in a discussion about the revolutionary war, that’s not what I’m here to discuss.

This has nothing to do with anything we are talking about, why are you so fanatical about the revolutionary war?

 

[c659smith]

continued @ c659smith

You’ve spanned many topics, but haven’t actually spoken about the resurrection very much. Please tell me, how does one survive rigor mortis, despite all evidence to the contrary?

Sure according to the bible, which modern scholarship says are non-contemporaneous accounts.

The shroud of turin I have dealt with, the ‘miracle’ at fatima we can’t see today, the ‘miracle’ of the eucharist I would like to read about some more, please provide some sources, are you aware of, and have you read, separate books/articles that argue both sides?

Simply because the evidence you have provided isn’t compelling, and even if some things remain unexplained by science, you still have all your work ahead of you establishing the causual link between a god and the event(s) you describe.

Once again, you are asking me to argue a position that I don’t hold. Why do you find it so difficult to comprehend that just because a person doesn’t believe in something, they don’t have to believe in it’s opposite. This is a false dichotomy you are insisting on, and you are completely ignoring the suspension of judgement/belief while we consider the evidence.

I also think you are being a bit harsh on A here. He has come to an environment where he is absolutely overwhelmingly outnumbered, and you have presented several claims which can and have evoked many many booklength debates, and you are coming down on him like a ton of bricks now that he hasn’t published peer-reviewed articles that easily sweep aside debates that have been going on for centuries or millenia. Just consider the position you would be in engaging in discussions on islamic boards, or atheist boards. We all need to remember that most of us probably aren’t presenting anything new here on these forums, the best we can do is try to provide each other with a different viewpoint, and perhaps guide people towards different evidence for them to consider. Many of the issues we are talking about here are hotly debated still by the relevant experts.

You’ve brought this argument to the wrong debate again.

Who cares? These are completely unrelated topics.

Which is pretty thin on the ground…

Please cite these sources, I am unaware of contemporary accounts of these events, this is not historical data.

Can you clarify who went to the grave, and who was present there?

And nobody thought this would be worth writing down for several decades?

I am likewise unaware of any contemporary accounts or archaeological findings of the apostles, besides Paul claiming to have met… uh… Peter I think. Your sources, please

Soon after the time of death, a body becomes rigid. This stiffening is the result of a biochemical process called Rigor Mortis, Latin for “stiffness of death”. (1) This condition is common to all deceased humans, but is only a temporary state. The slang term “stiff”, used to refer to a dead person, originates from rigor mortis. Within hours of the time of death, every muscle in the body contracts and remains contracted for a period of time. Before I am able to explain the biological cause of this condition, I must first describe the structure of muscles and the process of muscle contraction.

rigor mortis is a temporary state also Jesus was buried in a cool cave immediatrely after death

Rigor mortis usually sets in within four hours, first in the face and generally smaller muscles. The body reaches maximum stiffness within twelve to forty-eight hours. However, this time may vary due to environmental conditions – cooler conditions inhibit rigor mortis.

 

[_A]

Sorry I just butted in on your conversations. Didn’t mean to, but it was too interesting to not say anything. I’ll just lurk in the background and listen and let you all debate stuff.

As far as I am concerned, jump in anytime you want!

 

[_A]

atheists think that they are cool or something by not believing in any religion. But in a fact they do have a religion. A religion of skepticism, deceit and they usually lack morals.

How many atheists have you known personally?

I think you are just insulting because you don’t understand. An infant, EVERY infant is an atheist. They remain that way until they believe in one god or another.

 

[_A]

So atheism follows the preaching of Satan.

Either you are right about this or wrong. Where are the teachings of this ‘Satan’ of yours? If those teachings are not followed by all atheists, then it is clear that you are wrong.

 

[c659smith]

I have no desire or reason to engage in a discussion about the revolutionary war, that’s not what I’m here to discuss.

This has nothing to do with anything we are talking about, why are you so fanatical about the revolutionary war?

So as I see you get to ask questions about proof or facts and how they are achieved.

Yet when one trys to reason with you on the basis of evidence and that the evidence is sound and you deny it as being sound, Iask you to prove anything that occurred without you witnessing it and that bothers you.

The Revolutionary war question everyone gets but you. The evidence to prove or disprove is the same I am giving you in order for you to prove the revolutionary war accurred.

I do not know why you are in this forum other than to act like a fool which does not help other Atheists proving their case or understanding how Christianity is based upon evidence strong enough to be factual as any history book.

 

[_A]

Christianity is based upon evidence strong enough to be factual as any history book.

I would like to know something, do you understand what ‘false dichotomy’ means? Can you give us an example?

 

[c659smith]

How many atheists have you known personally?

I think you are just insulting because you don’t understand. An infant, EVERY infant is an atheist. They remain that way until they believe in one god or another.

A

I think that is a bad correlation on your part as an infant is not at the age of reason and is a selfish creature. me me me.

you are not trying to say that about Atheists are you?

 

[holdencaulfield]

I wouldn’t say that they all lack morals. But it is true that atheism can be a form of polytheism in that men are gods being the highest believed intelligence.

As well as devil worship from a Biblical viewpoint, in that Satan’s first message to Eve was that humans don’t need God anymore, since they can make themselves their own gods. So atheism follows the preaching of Satan.

Thank you. I agree with you on this.

 

[holdencaulfield]

I would like to know something, do you understand what ‘false dichotomy’ means? Can you give us an example?

“In a false dichotomy (also called a false dilemma, either or, black or white, the missing middle) you are presented with two choices, when in fact there are more than two choices. If one choice is discredited, then the reader is forced to accept the other choice. But this is not an adequate argument, the choice favored must be supported by evidence.” (Dictionary.com)

You are either wrong or you are right.

You happen to be wrong.

Therefore

I must be right.

What’s your point?

 

[c659smith]

continued @c659smith

What peer-reviewded articles in which journals might these be?

So Jesus had a face on the back of his head as well??

Again, where do we learn this? And in what way were they ‘flawed’ by three independent measurements? I can refer you to the publication in nature, with the original findings:

nature.com/nature/journal/v337/n6208/abs/337611a0.html

“Very small samples from the Shroud of Turin have been dated by accelerator mass spectrometry in laboratories at Arizona, Oxford and Zurich. As controls, three samples whose ages had been determined independently were also dated. The results provide conclusive evidence that the linen of the Shroud of Turin is mediaeval.”

But I’d like to see your sources, if you don’t mind.

Actually: “There are several reddish stains on the shroud suggesting blood. McCrone (see above) identified these as containing iron oxide, theorizing that its presence was likely due to simple pigment materials used in medieval times.” (taken from the wikipedia page on the shroud, before anybody gets started on wikipedia, yes I know there are much better sources.)

Others have examined the shroud and disagree, claiming to have identified it as type AB blood. Though, there is nothing to indicate WHEN the blood was applied to the shroud.

Also, “Victor V. Tryon, PhD, assistant professor in microbiology and director of the university’s Center for Advanced DNA Technologies, examined the DNA of one so-called “blood glob” from two separate microscopic shroud samples. He reported isolating signals from three different human genes by employing polymerase chain reaction, which can detect pieces of double-stranded DNA.”
uthscsa.edu/mission/spring96/shroud.htm

I’m sure you’ll have fun pointing out that there are three different forms of DNA on there, but I must point out that they are all human.

And in regards to the hypothesis that bacteria has contaminated the shroud, throwing off the radio-carbon dating, skewing the dating towards the present:

"Turin’s Cardinal Giovanni Saldarini has publicly questioned the authenticity of the sample. On Italian television in January, he was quoted as saying: “There is no certainty that the material belongs to the shroud so that the Holy See and the custodian declare that they cannot recognize the results of the claimed experiments.”
uthscsa.edu/mission/spring96/shroud.htm

Also, I notice that you claim the discrepancies about the dating of the shroud begin in 2003, the year after the ‘restoration’ of the shroud. William Meacham, who has studied the shroud for 27 years now describes this as a “disaster for the scientific study” of the relic. He is a theist, and he AGREES with you that the original tests were flawed, but he also thinks that the restoration has destroyed the validity and verifiability of many tests from 2002 onwards. This flies in the face of your claims regarding recent testing, from sources you have not revealed.

The Shroud of tourin is an unexplained artifact that cannot be re-created even today. I do not have enough space on this forum to give you all the facts relating to the shroud but you can as a good Atheist on this site for information I would imagine google it.

Fact are it was retested and scientists agree the original tests were flawed.

Tell me why would the Catholic Church give the Tourin to be tested by scientists outside of the church.

Is it because they have nothing to hide? They are searching the truth? They want that truth shared throughout the world.

 

[c659smith]

I have no desire or reason to engage in a discussion about the revolutionary war, that’s not what I’m here to discuss.

This has nothing to do with anything we are talking about, why are you so fanatical about the revolutionary war?

here is a site for you to get info updated past the ninties
shroudstory.com/

 

[c659smith]

“In a false dichotomy (also called a false dilemma, either or, black or white, the missing middle) you are presented with two choices, when in fact there are more than two choices. If one choice is discredited, then the reader is forced to accept the other choice. But this is not an adequate argument, the choice favored must be supported by evidence.” (Dictionary.com)

You are either wrong or you are right.

You happen to be wrong.

Therefore

I must be right.

What’s your point?

Thanks for the help, I appreciate it.

What I am Trying to get Phooey or A to do is to base their case on evidence or to know what evidence and proof are based on.Their belief is that God does not exist so state their case on fact or evidence whatever you want to call it. If not then it makes no sense for them to be in this forum as their responses are not based on evidence or fact but an unintelligent." because I say so "

 

[_A]

A

I think that is a bad correlation on your part as an infant is not at the age of reason and is a selfish creature. me me me.

you are not trying to say that about Atheists are you?

You seem to still have a lack of understanding, though you have had it explained in every one of phooneys posts.

An infant does not believe in a god. When they are old enough to be inculcated, they can begin to believe, but until then, they don’t believe, so they fit the definition.

 

[_A]

“In a false dichotomy (also called a false dilemma, either or, black or white, the missing middle) you are presented with two choices, when in fact there are more than two choices. If one choice is discredited, then the reader is forced to accept the other choice. But this is not an adequate argument, the choice favored must be supported by evidence.” (Dictionary.com)

You are either wrong or you are right.

You happen to be wrong.

Therefore

I must be right.

What’s your point?

I just wanted to make sure you understood. That was not quite a great example, though. A better one would be…
What is the number?
It must be seven or one, since it is not seven, it must be one.
This is wrong because other answers (six, five, four, thee, two) are possible.

 

[_A]

The Shroud of tourin is an unexplained artifact that cannot be re-created even today.

So are the pyramids.

 

[holdencaulfield]

How many atheists have you known personally?

I think you are just insulting because you don’t understand. An infant, EVERY infant is an atheist. They remain that way until they believe in one god or another.

Honestly, most people I know.

 

[holdencaulfield]

So are the pyramids.

The pyramids can be explained and reproduced. I could build some if I had the money and man power.