Comment by Zia Dost Muhammad on August 31, 2012 at 3:09am

@ archaeopteryx-

Thanks for the welcome :)

I don't know what made you assume I had a 'religious-induced upbringing'. I wish people, especially atheist, come out of their world of 'assuming' things, then taking them for 'real', and then basing their judgments on that. 

This was my first day on the blog I was hoping to get honest and reasonable responses to my simple arguments, which unfortunately I did not get. 

Comment by archaeopteryx on August 31, 2012 at 3:27am

RE: "I don't know what made you assume I had a 'religious-induced upbringing'." - because, Zia, your theism shows through in your every comment. The percentage of people, who are raised from childhood without religion, then adopt is later, is very, very low, certainly much lower than the number who were raised in religion, but chose to discard it later.

Comment by archaeopteryx on August 31, 2012 at 3:33am

RE: "You don't get something from nothing,...'. Whatever explanation you have, it will just be a theory. We all know nothing has been proved regarding this. And since these are theories, the possibility of a Creator cannot be ruled out."

Not at all true - while there may not be absolute proof of the something from nothing theory, there is at least scientific evidence supporting it - there is absolutely NO scientific evidence supporting an intelligent creator.

As I strongly suggested, view the Lawrence Krause video, then we will be on common ground, otherwise you won't understand any refutation we try to make, and no one is going to bother if it appears it will just fall on deaf ears.

Comment by Heather Spoonheim on August 31, 2012 at 7:19am

@Zia

Yes, supremacy is based on the weight of the argument and your argument, as all theistic arguments, was based on intellectual dishonesty.  An infinite chain of events, by definition, has no starting point - yet your pretended not to understand that when you gave your sniper analogy.

Furthermore, you now state, explicitly, that 'nothing has been proved regarding this', but you will deny that when discussing the lack of evidence for your god.  I am, in fact, agnostic - in that I do not know what exists beyond some point in the chain of events that lead to this moment.  I do know that for what can be seen, no god has been observed, and I therefore have no belief in gods - that is what makes me an atheist.

You as well know that for what has been seen, no god has been observed, and therefore the most accurate stance for you to take would be that lacking belief in a god.  If you are going to believe in that for which there is no evidence, then you should also belief in a god that requires that you draw pictures of Muhammad and spit on them or be burned in fire for eternity after you die...you should also believe in invisible pink unicorns, and four sided triangles...because you have placed no evidentiary requirement on what you believe and therefore have no limit on the silliness that you will let creep into your brain.

Comment by Katrin Schwarz on August 31, 2012 at 8:03am

@Zia - Honesty demands that you answer the question of a first cause as "I don't know".  In claiming that a god was the cause you are knowingly presenting, as the truth, ideas without merit.  You are in other words lying. 

Comment by Unseen on August 31, 2012 at 9:45am

We can conclude that this first cause must be powerful as it bought the whole universe into existence, and it must be intelligent as it caused the ‘laws of science’ which govern the universe. Also, this first cause must be timeless, spaceless and immaterial, because time, space and matter began at the ‘Big Bang’. Finally, since it is uncaused it must have always existed.

All of these attributes of the first cause make up the basic concept of God. God is the uncreated first cause of the universe.

First off, we live in a universe in which everything has a cause, but it doesn't follow that the physics we know existed prior to the universe. In fact, the initial state may have been, as once described, "a state of pure potentiality" (anything could happen). In such a state, no first cause is needed.

But today's cosmological physicists see our universe as one among many in a multiverse, in which universes explode into being all the time, ours but one among many or even perhaps an infinity. Your idea that nothing existed until a bored deity decided to make it happen so that he could have a place in a nondescript corner for humans to exist and be toyed with is very childish and ridiculous.

The magical sorcerer explanation in which a an all-powerful magician conjured up the universe is just plain silly.

Comment by archaeopteryx on August 31, 2012 at 10:45am

The thread seem uncannily idle at the moment, so I just thought I would inject this Dana Carvey "Well isn't that special?" moment:

I just read an article where a dinosaur fossil was found with the remains of an archaeopteryx in what had been its stomach. We always wondered what happened to Uncle Fred, he just went out one day for a quart of milk and was never seen again - he will be missed --

Comment by archaeopteryx on August 31, 2012 at 11:00am

Zia - RE: "This was my first day on the blog I was hoping to get honest and reasonable responses to my simple arguments, which unfortunately I did not get."

Yes, you did, Zia - you just didn't get the ones you wanted. My best contribution to that was to point you in the direction of the Lawrence Krause video, which will answer far more of your questions than we have the time and inclination to do, and to make it easier for you, I've even tracked down the page it's on, so all you have to do is click on the URL, sit back, and learn something you parents neglected to teach you:

http://www.thinkatheist.com/profiles/blogs/so-who-or-what-created-t...

Now you either want to learn something, in which case you'll watch the video and come back to the board for discussion of what you've learned, or you don't, in which case, you will not watch the video and continue believing all that you've been indoctrinated with all of your life, in which case, you would be wasting your time and ours to come back to the board, employing the same, tired rhetoric. The choice is yours.

Comment by archaeopteryx on August 31, 2012 at 11:16am

@Heather - RE: "You'll have to do much better than that, son" - I think that you'll find that "Zia" is a woman's name --

Comment by archaeopteryx on August 31, 2012 at 11:17am

Mic - RE: ""Who is like the Beast and who can make war with it?" - umm, the Incredible Hulk?

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 8
• 9
• 10
• 11
• 12
• …
• 30
• Next ›
• Page