If you believe in god, you're an idiot...

[chtulu]

Originally Posted by Harrison [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

And how exactly would you know that out of 6billion+ alive now, and however many dead since, someone hasn't in that time frame?

You wouldn't.

You're way out of your league little boy. I'd go back to Dr. Seuss so you can at least tell your friends you read books written by a doctor.

Because he'd have to exist for that to happen.

Out of all those people, why wouldn't there have been proof yet?

Your argument is also your down fall.

[chtulu]

Originally Posted by chtulu [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Because he'd have to exist for that to happen.

Out of all those people, why wouldn't there have been proof yet?

Your argument is also your down fall.

double post fail

[Daldolma]

Originally Posted by Beauregard [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

to illustrate the title of this thread i've constructed a basic chart of the grand debate.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Best part of this is that psychology is misspelled. If you're going to be a condescending dick, at least catch up on junior high vocabulary.

There are a lot of very intelligent atheists. None of them have posted in this thread.

I find it interesting that nobody will address this point: many atheists claim they do not believe in God because there is no scientific evidence of any God's existence. At the same time, many atheists do believe in extraterrestrial life. My question is why? What's the difference? There is absolutely no scientific evidence of extraterrestrial life at this point in time. It's entirely theoretical. It's a belief. How can you condemn one, while subscribing to another? Do you take a scientific approach to these kind of questions, or not?

And as a side-note, the belief in God is far more logical and necessary than a belief in extraterrestrial life. As far as Man can comprehend the Universe, everything has a beginning. Everything was created, at some point or another. God is a logical extension of this. Something has to have been eternal. Whether it was a pair of atoms or a sentient Creator, it's so far beyond our grasp that it's ridiculous for any one person to act certain in one way or the other. When you talk about "all evidence" pointing against a God, you just sound ignorant. There is no evidence. On the other hand, it's very easy to imagine other planets devoid of life -- we've already found many of them. There's no evidence of life anywhere else, and there never has been. It's possible that there's life throughout the universe, but there's no scientific reason to believe there is. It'd be easy to imagine Earth as the only planet in the universe where life exists.

Now if you want to discuss religious doctrine, knock your socks off. There's plenty of evidence that points against many elements of many religions. But that's like poking holes in the movie Independence Day in order to disprove extraterrestrial life. Even if the Bible turns out to be a 2000 year old version of Beowulf, it doesn't mean you've disproven the existence of any God.

[Harrison]

Daldolma, you put too much effort in shooting down utter morons.

It's not going to change their point of view. Their minds are closed entirely. To them, they are more intelligent because they don't believe in one thing that someone else does. It's a crutch they cling to as a result of massive insecurities. You see it everywhere.

[Lill-Leif]

Harrison, you put too much effort in shooting down utter morons.

It's not going to change their point of view. Their minds are closed entirely. To them, they are more intelligent because they believe in one thing that someone else doesn't. It's a crutch they cling to as a result of massive insecurities. You see it everywhere.

[chtulu]

Originally Posted by Daldolma [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

There are a lot of very intelligent atheists. None of them have posted in this thread.

I find it interesting that nobody will address this point: many atheists claim they do not believe in God because there is no scientific evidence of any God's existence. At the same time, many atheists do believe in extraterrestrial life. My question is why? What's the difference? There is absolutely no scientific evidence of extraterrestrial life at this point in time. It's entirely theoretical. It's a belief. How can you condemn one, while subscribing to another? Do you take a scientific approach to these kind of questions, or not?

And as a side-note, the belief in God is far more logical and necessary than a belief in extraterrestrial life. As far as Man can comprehend the Universe, everything has a beginning. Everything was created, at some point or another. God is a logical extension of this. Something has to have been eternal. Whether it was a pair of atoms or a sentient Creator, it's so far beyond our grasp that it's ridiculous for any one person to act certain in one way or the other. When you talk about "all evidence" pointing against a God, you just sound ignorant. There is no evidence. On the other hand, it's very easy to imagine other planets devoid of life -- we've already found many of them. There's no evidence of life anywhere else, and there never has been. It's possible that there's life throughout the universe, but there's no scientific reason to believe there is. It'd be easy to imagine Earth as the only planet in the universe where life exists.

Now if you want to discuss religious doctrine, knock your socks off. There's plenty of evidence that points against many elements of many religions. But that's like poking holes in the movie Independence Day in order to disprove extraterrestrial life. Even if the Bible turns out to be a 2000 year old version of Beowulf, it doesn't mean you've disproven the existence of any God.

We explain our existence by a combination of the anthropic principle and Darwin's principle of natural selection. That combination provides a complete and deeply satisfying explanation for everything that we see and know. Not only is the god hypothesis unnecessary. It is spectacularly unparsimonious. Not only do we need no God to explain the universe and life. God stands out in the universe as the most glaring of all superfluous sore thumbs.

We cannot, of course, disprove God, just as we can't disprove Thor, fairies, leprechauns and the Flying Spaghetti Monster. But, like those other fantasies that we can't disprove, we can say that God is very very improbable.

Like I've said, it is not up to secularists to disprove God, it is up to people who believe in such imaginary entities to give us reasons why we SHOULD believe in their delusions.

Also, there is evidence of why Our universe does not require a God to function (aka, evidence). Newtonian Laws explain phenomenons that were only explained through metaphors and stories based on God. Physics in general as solved many mysteries that we once chalked up to just "God's work". Evolution is another huge scientific understanding that further shows that God was not required to have animals live and change. Let's not also forget genetics and astronomy that have played their roles. You don't here people explaining that the Sky is blue because it's God's favorite color, or that we have droughts because he's angry with us. No, it is explained in ways humans understand, and that require no divine intervention.

What really confuses me is that you some how equate life outside of this planet to a divine entity that is omnipotent and omission. We are proof that it is capable to have life on a planet, why would we think that life couldn't happen any where else? We have an example of why it's plausible that there can be life elsewhere, we don't, however, have an example of super natural beings that have existed to postulate the existence of other divine creatures.

But it's ok, you're just like any other typical Theist. No real argument, just ad homniems and absurd, invalid logic. But thanks for being a condescending dick.

[chtulu]

It's also interesting that not of these theists have actually given a reasoning to why they insist on insulting me, like that some how invalidates anything I say.

I'm ignorant because?

I'm an asshole because?

I'm an idiot because?


Feel free to enlighten everyone.

[quellren]

Originally Posted by Daldolma [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I find it interesting that nobody will address this point: many atheists claim they do not believe in God because there is no scientific evidence of any God's existence. At the same time, many atheists do believe in extraterrestrial life. My question is why? What's the difference? There is absolutely no scientific evidence of extraterrestrial life at this point in time. It's entirely theoretical. It's a belief. How can you condemn one, while subscribing to another? Do you take a scientific approach to these kind of questions, or not?

Likely one one wants to touch this because God and aliens are two different, questions.

Science has provided a plausible (if incomplete) theory about how Earth's life evolved, and has outlined theories as to what is needed for this to happen elsewhere, even picked out other locations with the highest odds.
God has offered ZERO proof that he exists, and in fact has had claims made for his existence that were later proven impossible, or untruths.
That's the difference.

Life exists here on earth, there are other planets in our own solar system that at one time had environments that look as though they could have been similar to earth. If, for instance Mars, was at one time much like earth, with an atmosphere and liquid-state surface water, then it is probable that carbon-based life could have arisen there as well. Maybe not proliferation or much complexity, but it's plausible. Extrapolate the probability that this happened not once, but TWICE just in the same solar system across the whole of the known universe and its statistically ignorant to say that life developed NOWHERE else. It's not faith. Its fucking math. No, we don't have proof because we don't YET have the tools to observe it elsewhere. If it happened once, it CAN happen again.
If God is responsible for creating earth and all things on it, why didn't he hop next door to Mars and do it again? Doesn't it seem odd that he created this HUGE universe, and then chose a SINGLE chunk of rock to play with?

[chtulu]

Originally Posted by quellren [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Likely one one wants to touch this because God and aliens are two different, questions.


If God is responsible for creating earth and all things on it, why didn't he hop next door to Mars and do it again? Doesn't it seem odd that he created this HUGE universe, and then chose a SINGLE chunk of rock to play with?

Also,for trying to educate us and equate to living beings to THE CREATOR, The guy above us sure doesn't know a whole lot about astronomy and the extent of the universe ( that is forever expanding, by the way, which, also totally contradicts any kind of "fiery apocalypse" for judgment day).

[chtulu]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This is a photograph of a very small region of our night sky ( the large picture of all these galaxies are all found within that red box in the lower hand corner). In this photo is over thousands of galaxies.

I'm trying to paint a picture of how obscenely fast and magnificent the universe is, and when you see it this way, you really can't doubt that there IS life else where, be it single cell organisms or intelligent beings.

Now who comes off as the arrogant one? The Atheist who believes it is very plausible there is life else where, or the Theist who, despite knowing how vast and amazing this universe is, still think we are SO special and that "God" created us, and all the animals, on just one rock in a very AVERAGE galaxy in a small solar system.