Atheists who love Science!


Atheists who love Science!

A group for science enthusiasts of all types -- professionals, amateurs, students, anybody who loves science.

Members: 930
Latest Activity: Sep 5

Discussion Forum

Where does increased complexity come from in evolution?

Started by Anthony Blair. Last reply by Reg The Fronkey Farmer Sep 5. 206 Replies

3.7-billion-year-old fossils

Started by JadeBlackOlive. Last reply by JadeBlackOlive Sep 1. 2 Replies

A Dark Milky Way?

Started by JadeBlackOlive. Last reply by TJ Aug 29. 3 Replies

Atheists Think about What We Believe, Don't We?

Started by Tom Sarbeck. Last reply by Tom Sarbeck Aug 12. 4 Replies

CuriosityStream, anyone?

Started by Pope Beanie. Last reply by TJ Jul 13. 2 Replies

Neanderthals used fire in caves:

Started by JadeBlackOlive. Last reply by TJ Jun 29. 9 Replies

Fossil Dog

Started by JadeBlackOlive. Last reply by Unseen Jun 8. 13 Replies

Pre-Clovis civilization in Florida

Started by JadeBlackOlive. Last reply by Belle Rose May 15. 4 Replies

Teeth vs. Tools

Started by JadeBlackOlive. Last reply by JadeBlackOlive Apr 28. 2 Replies

‘Trickle of food’

Started by JadeBlackOlive Apr 15. 0 Replies

Diet affects the evolution of birds

Started by JadeBlackOlive Apr 14. 0 Replies

How Dinosaurs Grew From Hatchlings to Adults

Started by JadeBlackOlive. Last reply by JadeBlackOlive Apr 6. 18 Replies

Think your DNA is all human?

Started by JadeBlackOlive. Last reply by SteveInCO Mar 27. 9 Replies

Comment Wall


You need to be a member of Atheists who love Science! to add comments!

Comment by Free Thought Monk on February 6, 2011 at 5:06pm
Great! Thanks - I will definitely link them here from now on.  Your links are much appreciated!!! Luv your stuff and so do FB friends I will be adding to your audience! Grin.
Comment by Free Thought Monk on February 6, 2011 at 4:50pm
Yo, Dune, et alia - I have a question as a relative newbie who is also basically blind. Dune,  I love your links and often go to them and share them on Facebook but would like to give you credit by directing folks here.  However, if I do link them here directly to your posts  - and they are not already members - where will my link on FB take them on Think Atheist?  Thanks.
Comment by Chuck G on February 3, 2011 at 11:47am
Mind boggling and Mind numbing.  The stooopid, it hurts!
Comment by RockyTIJ on February 3, 2011 at 11:32am
Wow.  The man's mind-bogglingly ignorant.  And proud of it.
Comment by Jaume on February 2, 2011 at 11:23am

- Look at these poor girls' feet, Samantha. How sad. They couldn't even figure out what a high heel designer shoe is for if they ever saw one.

- On the other hand, Carrie, I'm sure the boys must be very dextrous with their funny toes. Hmmm...

Comment by Pope Beanie on January 30, 2011 at 2:17am

Meh, color me skeptical. As in Michio Goes To Hollywood.

Besides, I think they're using the wrong frequencies.

Comment by Sydni Moser on January 29, 2011 at 10:12pm

Obsessed and Scientific - Documentary

Is time travel possible? In this fascinating short documentary, director Jay Cheel explores the real-life theories behind the science of time travel and the strange subculture of enthusiasts who are obessed with it.

Meet Michio Kaku, world-renowned theoretical physicist and author of the book Hyperspace.

Meet Rob Niosi, a hobbyist building his own full-scale home replica of H.G. Wells’ time machine.

Meet Larry Haber, the entertainment lawyer representing the family of John Titor, an alleged time traveller from the year 2036.

Do these people know something about the world that the rest of us don’t? Obsessed and Scientific is a quirky look at the intersection of science-fact and science-fiction.


Watch this for FREE HERE:

Comment by Free Thought Monk on January 26, 2011 at 3:09pm
I thought we were all deposits of star-stuff, resulting from some sort of vacuum fluctuation creating something from nothing.  You are suggesting  we merely began in Africa?  Back to my science books I guess. lol
Comment by Don on January 20, 2011 at 8:54am

Paul writes: "The dictionary I use most often says denies the existence of God, but now I see another def using lack." 

Let's keep in mind that the word we're defining is "atheism," not "atheist" (which is another reason why Rocky's suggestion doesn't work). 

Yes, some sources may define atheism as the denial of the existence of God, but that construction, too, looks at the word from the theist's stubborn perspective.   First, it presupposes God's existence; second, it casts the atheist's position as contrarian, which, in its simplest and purest form, it certainly is not.  The "denial" definition places the atheist in the position of saying, "No, he does not!" to the theist's claim, "God exists."  But that's mistaken, because the essence of atheism is belief; or rather, that is, its absence.  The atheist does not necessarily assert that gods do not exist.  Indeed, whether gods exist or not is beside the point.  The atheist may be indifferent to the question of whether gods exist.  He is simply without theistic belief.  That's it.

Michel, "shortage" doesn't work for the same reason "lack" doesn't work.  What's more, a shortage of something is merely an insufficiency.  By definition, when a shortage of a thing exists, there is usually some of it, but not enough. 

I realize this is a small point, but it is not an insignificant one.  When we atheists define atheism as "the lack of belief in gods," we are unwittingly admitting that something necessary is missing in us.  A lack is a deficiency


When we say that atheism is "the lack of belief in gods," we are accepting the theists' pitying view of our attitude.  Atheists are too often hesitant and apologetic about their views, but when it comes to defining the essence of our outlook on existence we should not compromise.  We are not deficient in theistic belief.  We are without theistic belief. 

George Smith (below) advocates the phrase "absence of belief," but that phrase does not belong to him, of course, and it predates his book by decades.  As the language evolves, all dictionaries revise their entries periodically.  Eventually, I'm sure, atheists sitting on dictionaries' usage panels will correct the obdurate and mistaken notion that many dictionaries persist in advancing when defining "atheism."    

Comment by Pope Beanie on January 20, 2011 at 1:59am
Aha, I did not know this. The dictionary I use most often says denies the existence of God, but now I see another def using lack. Frack!

Members (927)


© 2016   Created by umar.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service