Is Faith In God Reasonable? Faith is Foolish Debate

[Hasbinbad]

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

Anti-Theist are against organized religion. They can be believers or non-believers.

I am an Atheist Anti-Theist.

But that doesn't fit the mass movement branding scheme..

[stonez138]

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

I like when stupid atheists are like where's the proof for God's existence I'm like any fix your brain to recognize any of your senses because existence of anything is existence of God and is proof DUh

The funny part about this post is he actually begins by calling other people stupid.

[Hasbinbad]

Some of us have figured out how to shake our heads and let the idiot kids bicker. I just do my best to hold my hand out to any adults or kids that want a hand up to leave this oubliette of a question behind.

[JurisDictum]

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

But that doesn't fit the mass movement branding scheme..

The internet religious apologists are reluctant to let up their definition for atheist. How else are they going to make their straw man arguments? Personally I find the definition self identified atheists give themselves (the one much more closer the latin roots of the word), much more useful than the one posters like the above try to foist on people.
I haven't heard of any major atheist organization or popular writer that defines their believes as the above poster does, but apparently we're expected to accept the definition of those openly hostile to non-believers regardless.
I am atheist because I don't believe any God claims. There is no good reason to. And there is no good reason for anyone else to ether.

[Hasbinbad]

I also don't believe any "God claims." That is not the basis by which I claim agnosticism springs. The question of agnosticism is not "which of mankinds claims about deities" is correct: the question is that of ultimate cause, prime mover, whatever you want to call it; the question is "given what we can - ever - know, what caused that?" The idea is that this is a valid question, but we, either now or at some point in the very near future, will reach an event horizon beyond which our ability to "know" a thing no longer functions, and THEREFORE it's stupid. Shut up about it. Both of you. All of you.

In my opinion, many people who listen to modern atheists like Dawkins and Hitchens rightly are swayed against religion, but I do think that they trespass in hubris when they intimate - as they sometimes have (though they are careful about it, and Dawkins, at least, has hedged into de facto agnosticism on several occasions), that the existence of a deity is impossible or even highly improbable. The fact is that there is absolutely no data available for such a non-question, shut up. This is what scientists will actually say. Try it: go outside a lab and find a scientist (in a lab coat, stupid) on their way back from lunch, and ask them to comment on whether or not god exists: they will look at you and laugh at you and go back to work testing shit on animals and/or (increasingly) lab-grown human cells.

[Hasbinbad]

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

but I do think that modern atheists trespass in hubris

edited for clarity.

[Hasbinbad]

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

The assumption that all scientists are atheists.

lawl

from the horses mouth, so to speak:
National Academy of Science is Godless to the Core


http://www.answersingenesis.org/arti...cademy-godless

[Hasbinbad]

From the study:
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html

<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="2"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#d0d0d0">Belief in personal God</td> <td align="Center" bgcolor="#F0f0f0">1914</td> <td align="Center" bgcolor="#F0f0f0">1933</td> <td align="Center" bgcolor="#F0f0f0">1998</td></tr> <tr><td bgcolor="#Fcfcfc">Personal belief</td> <td> 27.7</td> <td> 15</td> <td> 7.0</td></tr> <tr><td bgcolor="#Fcfcfc">Personal disbelief</td> <td> 52.7</td> <td> 68</td> <td> 72.2</td></tr> <tr><td bgcolor="#Fcfcfc">Doubt or agnosticism</td> <td> 20.9</td> <td> 17</td> <td> 20.8</td></tr> <tr><td>
</td></tr> <tr><td bgcolor="#d0d0d0">Belief in human immortality </td> <td align="Center" bgcolor="#F0f0f0">1914</td> <td align="Center" bgcolor="#F0f0f0">1933</td> <td align="Center" bgcolor="#F0f0f0">1998</td></tr> <tr><td bgcolor="#Fcfcfc">Personal belief</td> <td> 35.2</td> <td> 18</td> <td> 7.9</td></tr> <tr><td bgcolor="#Fcfcfc">Personal disbelief</td> <td> 25.4</td> <td> 53</td> <td> 76.7</td></tr> <tr><td bgcolor="#Fcfcfc">Doubt or agnosticism</td> <td> 43.7</td> <td> 29</td> <td> 23.3</td></tr></tbody></table>

[Lojik]

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

From the study:
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html

<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="2"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#d0d0d0">Belief in personal God</td> <td align="Center" bgcolor="#F0f0f0">1914</td> <td align="Center" bgcolor="#F0f0f0">1933</td> <td align="Center" bgcolor="#F0f0f0">1998</td></tr> <tr><td bgcolor="#Fcfcfc">Personal belief</td> <td> 27.7</td> <td> 15</td> <td> 7.0</td></tr> <tr><td bgcolor="#Fcfcfc">Personal disbelief</td> <td> 52.7</td> <td> 68</td> <td> 72.2</td></tr> <tr><td bgcolor="#Fcfcfc">Doubt or agnosticism</td> <td> 20.9</td> <td> 17</td> <td> 20.8</td></tr> <tr><td>
</td></tr> <tr><td bgcolor="#d0d0d0">Belief in human immortality </td> <td align="Center" bgcolor="#F0f0f0">1914</td> <td align="Center" bgcolor="#F0f0f0">1933</td> <td align="Center" bgcolor="#F0f0f0">1998</td></tr> <tr><td bgcolor="#Fcfcfc">Personal belief</td> <td> 35.2</td> <td> 18</td> <td> 7.9</td></tr> <tr><td bgcolor="#Fcfcfc">Personal disbelief</td> <td> 25.4</td> <td> 53</td> <td> 76.7</td></tr> <tr><td bgcolor="#Fcfcfc">Doubt or agnosticism</td> <td> 43.7</td> <td> 29</td> <td> 23.3</td></tr></tbody></table>

Those scientists better check their hypotenuses.

[Daldolma]

studies show that 75% of scientists will burn in hellfire