A Tough Question For Atheists

[tosca1]

The National Academy of Sciences also says:


Science is not the only way of acquiring knowledge about ourselves and the world around us. Humans gain understanding in many other ways, such as through literature, the arts, philosophical reflection,
and religious experience.
Scientific knowledge may enrich aesthetic and moral perceptions, but these subjects extend beyond science's realm, which is to obtain a better understanding of the natural world."


"Scientists, like many others, are touched with awe at the order and complexity of nature. Indeed, many scientists are deeply religious.
But science and religion occupy two separate realms of human experience.
Demanding that they be combined detracts from the glory of each.


Many religious persons, including many scientists, hold that God created the universe and the various processes driving physical and biological evolution and that these processes then
resulted in the creation of galaxies, our solar system, and life on Earth.

This belief, which sometimes is termed 'theistic evolution,' is not in disagreement with scientific explanations of evolution.
Indeed, it reflects the remarkable and inspiring character of the physical universe revealed by cosmology, paleontology, molecular biology, and many other scientific disciplines.

WMAP Site FAQs

Public access site for The Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe and associated information about cosmology.

map.gsfc.nasa.gov

If Science - which you've relied upon to give answers to practically everything - does not rule out the possibility of a GOD-CREATED universe - which means, science doesn't rule out the possibility of GOD -

can you please explain where you base your belief that, GOD DOESN'T EXISTS?



Since your position is in conflict with science - the onus is on you, to provide something as a basis for your belief.



That's all I'm asking.

 

[tosca1]

I look forward to hearing from atheists to give a rational answer.

 

[bongsaway]

The National Academy of Sciences also says:


Science is not the only way of acquiring knowledge about ourselves and the world around us. Humans gain understanding in many other ways, such as through literature, the arts, philosophical reflection,
and religious experience.
Scientific knowledge may enrich aesthetic and moral perceptions, but these subjects extend beyond science's realm, which is to obtain a better understanding of the natural world."


"Scientists, like many others, are touched with awe at the order and complexity of nature. Indeed, many scientists are deeply religious.
But science and religion occupy two separate realms of human experience. Demanding that they be combined detracts from the glory of each.

Many religious persons, including many scientists, hold that God created the universe and the various processes driving physical and biological evolution and that these processes then resulted in the creation of galaxies,
our solar system, and life on Earth. This belief, which sometimes is termed 'theistic evolution,' is not in disagreement with scientific explanations of evolution.
Indeed, it reflects the remarkable and inspiring character of the physical universe revealed by cosmology, paleontology, molecular biology, and many other scientific disciplines.

WMAP Site FAQs

Public access site for The Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe and associated information about cosmology.

map.gsfc.nasa.gov

If Science - which you've relied upon to give answers to practically everything - does not rule out the possibility of a GOD-CREATED universe - which means, science doesn't rule out the possibility of GOD -

can you pleas explain where you base your belief that GOD DOESN'T EXISTS?



Since your position is in conflict with science - the onus is on you, to provide something as a basis for your belief.



That's all I'm asking.

? Why do I need a basis for my beliefs? What's yours, 'the bible'? Which version written by whom? Where is your proof this Jesus/god guy ever existed? Words in books written by people who were super superstitious because they didn't understand much about science at all.

I was 'taught' all about god for ten years of Catholic school, I now find it all to be unbelievable to put it mildly. Look around, many places on earth are literal shitholes, people being abused by their own government, wars, violence, , flood, starvation and on and on and don't give me that free will bullshit.

Why isn't your god doing something constructive to correct his creation? We are still acting like barbarians towards each other, yeah god loves us all.

 

[tosca1]

What we'll see will be most likely a display of the ART of ......................evasion.




DEFLECTIONS.



Folks - kindly try to understand the logic behind the question in the OP.
It's explained why you need to provide your basis for your belief.

 

[bongsaway]

What we'll see will be most likely a display of the ART of ......................evasion.




DEFLECTIONS.



Folks - kindly try to understand the logic behind the question in the OP.
It's explained why you need to provide your basis for your belief.

There is a candidate currently running for president of America who is a pathological liar and many, many people believe his lies. The point, what's the difference where a person gets a belief from? A belief is not necessarily factual, no?

 

[Hari Seldon]

You prove a god does exist. It's not for me to prove a negative.

 

[Michael Cole]

What we'll see will be most likely a display of the ART of ......................evasion.




DEFLECTIONS.



Folks - kindly try to understand the logic behind the question in the OP.
It's explained why you need to provide your basis for your belief.

Atheism is lack of belief. I lack belief in the supernatural because it has never been observed. Science explains the observable. Philosophy explains our minds. Religion is philosophy based on/including the supernatural.

There is no reason to believe in the supernatural. There is no reason to ponder it. I have every reason to trust science, which is a method, not a belief.

Easy peasy.

 

[Hip octogenarian]

The National Academy of Sciences also says:


Science is not the only way of acquiring knowledge about ourselves and the world around us. Humans gain understanding in many other ways, such as through literature, the arts, philosophical reflection,
and religious experience.
Scientific knowledge may enrich aesthetic and moral perceptions, but these subjects extend beyond science's realm, which is to obtain a better understanding of the natural world."


"Scientists, like many others, are touched with awe at the order and complexity of nature. Indeed, many scientists are deeply religious.
But science and religion occupy two separate realms of human experience.
Demanding that they be combined detracts from the glory of each.


Many religious persons, including many scientists, hold that God created the universe and the various processes driving physical and biological evolution and that these processes then
resulted in the creation of galaxies, our solar system, and life on Earth.

This belief, which sometimes is termed 'theistic evolution,' is not in disagreement with scientific explanations of evolution.
Indeed, it reflects the remarkable and inspiring character of the physical universe revealed by cosmology, paleontology, molecular biology, and many other scientific disciplines.

WMAP Site FAQs

Public access site for The Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe and associated information about cosmology.

map.gsfc.nasa.gov

If Science - which you've relied upon to give answers to practically everything - does not rule out the possibility of a GOD-CREATED universe - which means, science doesn't rule out the possibility of GOD -

can you please explain where you base your belief that, GOD DOESN'T EXISTS?



Since your position is in conflict with science - the onus is on you, to provide something as a basis for your belief.



That's all I'm asking.

Science, according to what you present, does not say that God exists, just that He/She might exist. My conclusion is that God does not exist. That is in no way in conflict with science.

 

[tosca1]

There is a candidate currently running for president of America who is a pathological liar and many, many people believe his lies. The point, what's the difference where a person gets a belief from? A belief is not necessarily factual, no?

Irrelevant.


Stick to the issue.

 

[tosca1]

Science, according to what you present, does not say that God exists, just that He/She might exist. My conclusion is that God does not exist. That is in no way in conflict with science.

I didn't say science says God exists.


READ AGAIN!

 

[bongsaway]

Irrelevant.


Stick to the issue.

The issue as I see it, you will reject anything negative about your god or you just do what you do, call everything irrelevant. Your beliefs were taught to you. I have found not a single soul on this earth who can prove any god exists. I don't have to prove my belief that no gods exist. If I'm wrong, I'm willing to have any of them come and correct me in person.

 

[tosca1]

Atheism is lack of belief. I lack belief in the supernatural because it has never been observed. Science explains the observable. Philosophy explains our minds. Religion is philosophy based on/including the supernatural.

There is no reason to believe in the supernatural. There is no reason to ponder it. I have every reason to trust science, which is a method, not a belief.

Easy peasy.

Deflection.

Oh please.

You wouldn't be so robust arguing and ridiculing Christian beliefs about the existence of their GOD, if all you have is just this simple, so-called, "lack of belief."

 

[tosca1]

The issue as I see it, you will reject anything negative about your god or you just do what you do, call everything irrelevant. Your beliefs were taught to you. I have found not a single soul on this earth who can prove any god exists. I don't have to prove my belief that no gods exist. If I'm wrong, I'm willing to have any of them come and correct me in person.

You don't have anything!
Face it.
Admit it like a big boy.

You're running on.................BLIND FAITH.

 

[tosca1]

Dear atheist friends.....................surely..................you do have a basis for your belief?

I just want to know what that is, that's all.

 

[Michael Cole]

Deflection.

No, it's not. I don't care if you don't like the response. In typical projecting fashion, you are deflecting from answering by screaming "deflection." Weak.

Oh please.

Gag me with a spoon.

You wouldn't be so robust arguing and ridiculing Christian beliefs about the existence of their GOD, if all you have is just this simple, so-called, "lack of belief."

Yes, you're catching on. I disbelieve in the god of Abraham like you disbelieve in Nyx. Think on that. You'll catch on.

Hint: If you were born in 12th century South America, you wouldn't believe in the god of Abraham.

​

 

[Argent]

If Science - which you've relied upon to give answers to practically everything - does not rule out the possibility of a GOD-CREATED universe - which means, science doesn't rule out the possibility of GOD -

Science provides evidence of what currently exists and that is the crux of the matter. If/when science proves a god exists, the debate will end.

 

[NatMorton]

The National Academy of Sciences also says:


Science is not the only way of acquiring knowledge about ourselves and the world around us. Humans gain understanding in many other ways, such as through literature, the arts, philosophical reflection,
and religious experience.
Scientific knowledge may enrich aesthetic and moral perceptions, but these subjects extend beyond science's realm, which is to obtain a better understanding of the natural world."


"Scientists, like many others, are touched with awe at the order and complexity of nature. Indeed, many scientists are deeply religious.
But science and religion occupy two separate realms of human experience.
Demanding that they be combined detracts from the glory of each.


Many religious persons, including many scientists, hold that God created the universe and the various processes driving physical and biological evolution and that these processes then
resulted in the creation of galaxies, our solar system, and life on Earth.

This belief, which sometimes is termed 'theistic evolution,' is not in disagreement with scientific explanations of evolution.
Indeed, it reflects the remarkable and inspiring character of the physical universe revealed by cosmology, paleontology, molecular biology, and many other scientific disciplines.

WMAP Site FAQs

Public access site for The Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe and associated information about cosmology.

map.gsfc.nasa.gov

If Science - which you've relied upon to give answers to practically everything - does not rule out the possibility of a GOD-CREATED universe - which means, science doesn't rule out the possibility of GOD -

can you please explain where you base your belief that, GOD DOESN'T EXISTS?



Since your position is in conflict with science - the onus is on you, to provide something as a basis for your belief.



That's all I'm asking.

Science doesn't rule out the possibility of a Kamala-created universe, either.

So, is Kamala God? That's all I'm asking.

 

[Michael Cole]

Science provides evidence of what currently exists and that is the crux of the matter. If/when science proves a god exists, the debate will end.

The hypothesis "god(s) exist" must be falsifiable to be scientific. There has to be a (hypothetical) test that would disprove their existence.

Something that hasn't been observed or theoretically proven cannot be falsified. There are no mathematical proofs for the supernatural. There is no "existence" to compare when attempting a falsification. Mixing gods and science stretches logic to beyond its breaking point.

If the supernatural ever becomes observable, it will cease to be supernatural. I don't expect any surprises.

 

[tosca1]

Science provides evidence of what currently exists and that is the crux of the matter. If/when science proves a god exists, the debate will end.

That's not the issue.

Read the OP.

 

[bongsaway]

Another failed, you atheists are dirt threads for not believing what I do. The harder folks like him try to make their point, the sillier they look to me for believing what they do.

 

[tosca1]

Science doesn't rule out the possibility of a Kamala-created universe, either.

So, is Kamala God? That's all I'm asking.

That doesn't make sense.


Show me where science talks about Kamala Harris in that sense.


Read the OP again, and what I quoted from the NAS.

 

[tosca1]

I'm waiting..........................for an atheist..................to come up with a basis for atheism.

 

[Michael Cole]

I'm waiting..........................for an atheist..................to come up with a basis for atheism.

Humans are born atheists. It's the default mode. A child raised in isolation (as millions are today) will grow up believing in his culture's gods. A child raised in isolation from religious belief will grow up never thinking about gods. Religion is taught.

So, an atheist needs no basis. It is you who need a reason to believe. An ancient book don't cut it.

 

[NatMorton]

That doesn't make sense.


Show me where science talks about Kamala Harris in that sense.


Read the OP again, and what I quoted from the NAS.

Neither does science disprove a NatMorton-created universe, and curiously enough, my pronouns are Yahweh/Zeus.

Just sayin'.

 

[Jkca1]

The National Academy of Sciences also says:


Science is not the only way of acquiring knowledge about ourselves and the world around us. Humans gain understanding in many other ways, such as through literature, the arts, philosophical reflection,
and religious experience.
Scientific knowledge may enrich aesthetic and moral perceptions, but these subjects extend beyond science's realm, which is to obtain a better understanding of the natural world."


"Scientists, like many others, are touched with awe at the order and complexity of nature. Indeed, many scientists are deeply religious.
But science and religion occupy two separate realms of human experience.
Demanding that they be combined detracts from the glory of each.


Many religious persons, including many scientists, hold that God created the universe and the various processes driving physical and biological evolution and that these processes then
resulted in the creation of galaxies, our solar system, and life on Earth.

This belief, which sometimes is termed 'theistic evolution,' is not in disagreement with scientific explanations of evolution.
Indeed, it reflects the remarkable and inspiring character of the physical universe revealed by cosmology, paleontology, molecular biology, and many other scientific disciplines.

WMAP Site FAQs

Public access site for The Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe and associated information about cosmology.

map.gsfc.nasa.gov

If Science - which you've relied upon to give answers to practically everything - does not rule out the possibility of a GOD-CREATED universe - which means, science doesn't rule out the possibility of GOD -

can you please explain where you base your belief that, GOD DOESN'T EXISTS?



Since your position is in conflict with science - the onus is on you, to provide something as a basis for your belief.



That's all I'm asking.

Who is this Science that you refer to, and when did he/she/them/they make this pronouncement? If, instead, you mean some scientists believe there is no God, let me inform you that there are also many scientists who think God does exist: https://www.famousscientists.org/25-famous-scientists-who-believed-in-god