Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/god?

[Engimo]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

I'm not on some ego trip thinking that us humans are so great? I'm just saying that there is a lot of evidence pointing to the supernatural as a possible explanation.

No, there's not. Seriously, I'm not joking here - there's none.

Jesus,

Whose existence and divinity is confirmed only by the Bible.

the bible,

Which is a single, unconfirmed, historically inaccurate (and highly edited) set of books. Not a basis for anything.

and the difference between us and animals.

Which is easily understood in the context of Evolutionary Theory.

Need I remind you of Ockham's Razor?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

 

[realist]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

...Because it keeps us warm and allows us to not be nude - society has developed to frown upon public nudity.

Rather arrogant of society to think that we can't walk around nude and take dumps when ever we feel like it. Joking.

My point is that we are very different from animals, and it points to the supernatural.

 

[Engimo]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

Rather arrogant of society to think that we can't walk around nude and take dumps when ever we feel like it. Joking.

My point is that we are very different from animals, and it points to the supernatural.

No, it really doesn't. It is a massive display of ignorance about science that you would think so. There is no way to "point to the supernatural".

 

[Axismaster]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

No, it really doesn't. It is a massive display of ignorance about science that you would think so. There is no way to "point to the supernatural".

Hey Enigmo, look at it this way. He worships God, you worship Darwin, we all need to worship something. It is human nature, human nature put into us by GOD himself.

 

[HU-210]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

Hey Enigmo, look at it this way. He worships God, you worship Darwin, we all need to worship something. It is human nature, human nature put into us by GOD himself.

Please provide behavioural research for that hypothesis, or remove it on the basis of it being a falsehood. There is no psychological evidence to support such a concept. Your observations, believe it or not, do not count as scientific evidence. :roll:

Mr U

 

[realist]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

No, it really doesn't. It is a massive display of ignorance about science that you would think so. There is no way to "point to the supernatural".

I just read about the razor. I guess all religion is, is people not following the KISS principle, and making too many assumptions leading to grandiose stories about why we are here from the athiest point of view.

Right, I am ignorant about science, but science can't explain a lot of things like how the earth was created, how we are different than animals. Well evolution has it's theories, but they aren't proven. They are all theories. and your right, I can't proove to you the creator God I believe in. It's a faith belief from Jesus's story.

 

[Engimo]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

Hey Enigmo, look at it this way. He worships God, you worship Darwin, we all need to worship something. It is human nature, human nature put into us by GOD himself.

Except I don't worship Darwin. The idea is nonsensical. If the Theory of Evolution were to be overturned tomorrow, it would be of little consequence to me (and it would only take a single misplaced fossil to do so) and my life. No one worships science, because there is no supernatural aspect to it, there's nothing to worship. No deity.

 

[Engimo]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

.
Right, I am ignorant about science, but science can't explain a lot of things like how the earth was created, how we are different than animals. Well evolution has it's theories, but they aren't proven.

If you are self-admittedly ignorant about science, how are you in any position to claim what science can and cannot explain?

As someone who is not ignorant about science, let me tell you that science can easily explain all of those things in very simple, common-sense ways.

And, you also do not know what a scientific theory is. A scientific theory is different from what we usually refer to as a theory. It does not mean something that is "unproven" or "just a guess" - in reality it is a much stronger statement.

In scientific usage, a theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it does in other contexts. Neither is a scientific theory a fact. Scientific theories are never proven to be true, but can be disproven. All scientific understanding takes the form of hypotheses, theories, or laws.
Theories are typically ways of explaining why things happen, often, but not always after their occurrence is no longer in scientific dispute. In referring to the "theory of global warming" for example, the worldwide temperatures have been measured and seem to be increasing. The "theory of global warming" refers instead to scientific work that attempts to explain how and why this could be happening.
In various sciences, a theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a certain natural or social phenomenon, thus either originating from or supported by experimental evidence (see scientific method). In this sense, a theory is a systematic and formalized expression of all previous observations made that is predictive, logical, testable, and has never been falsified.

 

[steen]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

I'm not on some ego trip thinking that us humans are so great? I'm just saying that there is a lot of evidence pointing to the supernatural as a possible explanation. Jesus, the bible, and the difference between us and animals.

But much more pointing towards evolution. Like all the scientific data, the actual evidence (rather than your provided list of pure speculation).

 

[steen]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

My point is that we are very different from animals, and it points to the supernatural.

And your point is nonsense. We are NOT that different, only in some minor areas of specialization.

As such, there is no pointing towards anything supernatural.

 

[steen]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

Hey Enigmo, look at it this way. He worships God, you worship Darwin,

There is no evidence that Enigmo worships Darwin. Why the need for dfasle claims, for bearing false witness about others?

we all need to worship something.

Please provide evidence for your claim.

It is human nature, human nature put into us by GOD himself.

Please provide evidence for your claim.

 

[steen]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

Right, I am ignorant about science, but science can't explain a lot of things like how the earth was created, how we are different than animals.

And you know this because you are ignorant of science, right? What a silly claim.

And yes, science has found evidence in these areas and have been able to generate explanations. So your ignorant claim is also false. I would suggest that instead of making false claims per ignorance, that you start learning the stuff you are trying to debate so you show an inkling of knowing what you are talking about.

Well evolution has it's theories, but they aren't proven. They are all theories.

NOT a**%$#%**gain!!!
Please read up on the Scientific Method and on what a Scientific Theory is.

WHY:roll: Why is it that creationists are always eager to show their incredible ignorance even of the very most basic parts of science?

and your right, I can't proove to you the creator God I believe in. It's a faith belief from Jesus's story.

So at all talking about evidence would be dishonest and hypocritical, right; it would be bearing false witness.

 

[Axismaster]

I don't see why science replaces religion for some people. Now, I thought religion was boring, but science?!?!?!

 

[Engimo]

I don't see why science replaces religion for some people. Now, I thought religion was boring, but science?!?!?!

Science doesn't replace religion. Perhaps it can be said that scientific, rational thinking can make religion logically inconsistent, but it is not a replacement.

Also, what does the boring-ness of something have to do with its validity?

 

[LeftyHenry]

I don't see why science replaces religion for some people. Now, I thought religion was boring, but science?!?!?!

Are you kidding? All they do in mass is talk about how great jesus is and how non-believers will burn in hell

 

[kal-el]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

Ah, but does "truth" mean "literal"? Or is it a different kind of truth we are looking for here, one not of physical existence?

I'd be lying if I said truth meant literal, it clearly dosen't. But why not take the bible literally? IMO it's only when the bible is shown erroneous that Christians claim it's not supposed to be taken literally. A child's fable usually starts with the words, "once upon a time"- that is cleary suggesting that is isn't to be taken literally. It seems to me that the "holy book" goes to great lenghts to try and convince the masses that it's infallible and the word of god.

 

[steen]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

I'd be lying if I said truth meant literal, it clearly dosen't. But why not take the bible literally? IMO it's only when the bible is shown erroneous that Christians claim it's not supposed to be taken literally.

That would be the case for the literalists (or the wannabees, actually; the literalists will deny your facts). The Christians I know are aware that the Bible is not a science textbook or a history textbook. The Bible doesn't try to explain this physical world at all.

Which is where the literalists get into trouble. They insist that every word is factually true, getting stuck seeking "evidence" for God as a tangible presense. They see creationism and other lietralist ideas as the 'evidence" for God. They use this as their own version of the Golden Calf.

A child's fable usually starts with the words, "once upon a time"- that is cleary suggesting that is isn't to be taken literally. It seems to me that the "holy book" goes to great lenghts to try and convince the masses that it's infallible and the word of god.

I would say that it is those who TRANSLATE for the "masses" who does that, possibly per their own added power and self-importance in doing so. The moment you have somebody hinting at "I am a better Christian than..." then you have one of them.

I see them as the false preachers, those who USE God for their own sake (and yes, creationists rank big in that group). That is why I have no problem whatsoever siding with the skeptics, atheists and agnostics when it comes to science or the "proof" of the Bible.

 

[Vandeervecken]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

I'm not on some ego trip thinking that us humans are so great? I'm just saying that there is a lot of evidence pointing to the supernatural as a possible explanation. Jesus, the bible, and the difference between us and animals.

What evidecne would that be? Please be specific.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

WHY:roll: Why is it that creationists are always eager to show their incredible ignorance even of the very most basic parts of science?

I always find it amusing when they pull the "it's just a theory" gag. Nothing like arguing from utter ignorance to make the duck hunting easier.

 

[steen]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

I always find it amusing when they pull the "it's just a theory" gag. Nothing like arguing from utter ignorance to make the duck hunting easier.

And I don't get it why they don't know this. Now, my education was in Denmark, where the Scientific Method was introduced in 7-8th grade as far as I remember.

Perhaps it is different in the US, and this may be why these people just don't get it how inanely silly these claims are and how stupid it makes them look, but when IS the Scientific Method introduced in the US?

Is it a college thing and therefore many people just don't learn what it is? Why do so many insist on exposing serious ignorance about science with the "only a theory" crap?

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

And I don't get it why they don't know this. Now, my education was in Denmark, where the Scientific Method was introduced in 7-8th grade as far as I remember.

Perhaps it is different in the US, and this may be why these people just don't get it how inanely silly these claims are and how stupid it makes them look, but when IS the Scientific Method introduced in the US?

Is it a college thing and therefore many people just don't learn what it is? Why do so many insist on exposing serious ignorance about science with the "only a theory" crap?

There's two reasons why the US is falling to the bottom in world education:

1) Most teachers are dumber than the average population. Why a person thinking third grade level science is difficult would be permitted anywhere near the education of children at any level is a mystery.

2) The curriculum is driven by politics, with the children's minds tugged and pulled in all directions, at the whim of special interests. The parents should be demanding an intelligent syllabus that will lead their child to competency in the fields of knowledge they'll need to be successful in the future.


The parents are torn between making sure their kids know the difference between peppermint and strawberry flavored condoms and if they're aware that some fools think a sky-pixie created life on this planet.

They're not learning anywhere near enough mathematics, but most of them have enough time for soccer practice.

They're not learning the fine writing skills that also hone thinking skills, but they know how to shop.

The average student can recite song lyrics till you puke, but they don't know what the H in H20 stands for.

They're not learning history, they're studying "social". So we're the only nation on Earth who's citizens are no longer learning the history of their own country. I suspect most kids in Britain or New Zealand would score better on a US history test than your average American.

All in all, the US is training it's kids to be eloi, and we all know what happens to eloi, don't we? They get invited over for dinner.

Which isn't to say they don't teach the Scientific Method, though they didn't when I was going to school. Science then was taught like history: remember this facts, shut up and don't ask why. Nowadays my girl is getting an introduction in the first grade. Not that it matters for her. As the child of an engineer, she's certain to have her mind honed as sharp as I can make it.

 

[steen]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

Hmm, it will unfortunately lead to a have-have not society, where the parents who care that their kids learn the science will make sure this happens at home, and everybody else end up ignorant and shut out from the jobs requiring science. So once the last factory jjob goes to China or India, then there are the doctors, engineers and chemists on one hand and the burger flippers and road-kill collectors on the other hand.

This will harm our nation; we need to put good science back in the classroom; we need to make our own scientists. Otherwise, we rapidly will become an un-leading nation, a 3rd rank power of mainly ignorant yahoos.

 

[hipsterdufus]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

There's two reasons why the US is falling to the bottom in world education:

1) Most teachers are dumber than the average population. Why a person thinking third grade level science is difficult would be permitted anywhere near the education of children at any level is a mystery.

Do you have any sources for this or are you just pulling it out of your a-whole?

2) The curriculum is driven by politics, with the children's minds tugged and pulled in all directions, at the whim of special interests. The parents should be demanding an intelligent syllabus that will lead their child to competency in the fields of knowledge they'll need to be successful in the future.

Agreed- parent input is vital. On the other hand. Parents should not set the curriculm. That's how we got ID into the schools in Dover and Kansas and the tremendous failure of NCLB.

They're not learning anywhere near enough mathematics, but most of them have enough time for soccer practice.

Would you mind your taxes going up to pay teachers to work longer hours or more days. Also - obesity is a huge problem amongst our children. Teaching physical fitness through sports is important too.

They're not learning the fine writing skills that also hone thinking skills, but they know how to shop.

What are you talking about?

The average student can recite song lyrics till you puke, but they don't know what the H in H20 stands for.

ibid

They're not learning history, they're studying "social". So we're the only nation on Earth who's citizens are no longer learning the history of their own country. I suspect most kids in Britain or New Zealand would score better on a US history test than your average American.

Blame that more recently on NCLB. History and the Arts aren't part of that piece of crap legislation.

All in all, the US is training it's kids to be eloi, and we all know what happens to eloi, don't we? They get invited over for dinner.

Which isn't to say they don't teach the Scientific Method, though they didn't when I was going to school. Science then was taught like history: remember this facts, shut up and don't ask why. Nowadays my girl is getting an introduction in the first grade. Not that it matters for her. As the child of an engineer, she's certain to have her mind honed as sharp as I can make it.

eloi? are you talking about the language eloi? What's your point?

Facts aren't as important in the information age. You can google almost anything. What is important is leading children out of ignorance, getting them to the point where they can reason on their own, and developing their emotional intelligence, which I think is a far greater barometer of future success then SAT scores. The question "why" is of paramount importance in education.

Students aren't little empty pitchers and educators aren't supposed to fill the little empty pitchers with useless info that the students can spill back out on a test.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

Do you have any sources for this or are you just pulling it out of your a-whole?

Observed empirical fact.

Agreed- parent input is vital. On the other hand. Parents should not set the curriculm. That's how we got ID into the schools in Dover and Kansas and the tremendous failure of NCLB.

Parents are the only ones with the responsibility to raise their children. The only caveat to that is the standard American caveat that the mob can't run over the minority. Since ID is NOT science, it has no business being taught to children in a science class as a science, regardless whether or not the majority of parents in that district thumb their bibles before thumping their wives. The minority of children from sane households need to be protected, in that case.

Would you mind your taxes going up to pay teachers to work longer hours or more days. Also - obesity is a huge problem amongst our children. Teaching physical fitness through sports is important too.

Obesity is a problem easily solved by parents. Schools don't have that responsibility. Yes, I would mind my taxes going up to pay for more of the same. Before you jump up and start raising taxes, it's clear the problem should be analyzed and the 50% of money spent on waste should be rescued.

Some people always think throwing money at problems is the only solution, which means only that they don't understand the problem.

What are you talking about?

How writing ability and thinking ability are connected and should be taught.

ibid

Did you cite a reference somewhere? Did I miss a foot note?

Blame that more recently on NCLB. History and the Arts aren't part of that piece of crap legislation.

Well, it was a Teddy Kennedy bill. But I'd rather blame the problem on the presumption that education is a federal government responsibility. It clearly is not.

eloi? are you talking about the language eloi? What's your point?

Eloi. They were the food supply of the Morlocks, or at least a delicacy.

My point is that if more children were taught literature and writing, you'd recognize the reference to HG Wells's "Time Machine" instantly.

Facts aren't as important in the information age.

Yeah, having facts on hand, right inside your own head, saves one from having to think "eloi" in the context used was a language.

You do realize that having facts in one's head vastly improves efficiency, right?

You can google almost anything. What is important is leading children out of ignorance, getting them to the point where they can reason on their own, and developing their emotional intelligence, which I think is a far greater barometer of future success then SAT scores. The question "why" is of paramount importance in education.

Actually, asking "how" was more conducive to generating today's technological society.

Students aren't little empty pitchers and educators aren't supposed to fill the little empty pitchers with useless info that the students can spill back out on a test.

Yeah, I know. That's what I was saying. Better bone up on your literature. All those useless facts by those dead authors actually come in handy when one's trying to understand the world.

 

[hipsterdufus]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

Observed empirical fact.

I'm sorry that you haven't observed intelligent educators in your travels. I was talking yesterday about some bigoted 3rd grade Catholic school teachers in Iowa that were happy when Martin Luther King was assassinated, so I know what you mean.

But in general, your statement "observed empirical fact." is an oxymoron.

Parents are the only ones with the responsibility to raise their children. The only caveat to that is the standard American caveat that the mob can't run over the minority. Since ID is NOT science, it has no business being taught to children in a science class as a science, regardless whether or not the majority of parents in that district thumb their bibles before thumping their wives. The minority of children from sane households need to be protected, in that case.

I would argue that educators combined with the family have the responsibilty to raise children. Certainly the greater responsibility comes down on the parental side, but not all children have parents that care about educating their children.

Obesity is a problem easily solved by parents. Schools don't have that responsibility. Yes, I would mind my taxes going up to pay for more of the same. Before you jump up and start raising taxes, it's clear the problem should be analyzed and the 50% of money spent on waste should be rescued.

Sure schools play a big part in fighting obesity. When you have Pepsi-Coke donating money to schools in exchange for providing exclusive rights to sell their products at schools, obesity is the school's problem. Some students eat breakfast lunch and sometimes dinner at school 5 day a week, 180 days a year.

I have a better solution. How about properly funding the education of the future of America so Pepsi - Coke can stay at McDonalds/Burger King/Pizza Hut/KFC.

Some people always think throwing money at problems is the only solution, which means only that they don't understand the problem.

Can we say that about Iraq too? or the war on terror? "Throwing money at the problem" is an argument to use when you don't have an argument.

Throwing money is the wrong term. Gutting education, like Bush is doing, is ceretainly not the answer.

Well, it was a Teddy Kennedy bill. But I'd rather blame the problem on the presumption that education is a federal government responsibility. It clearly is not.

Ted's bill sucks - not funding it makes it even worse. So you're against Federal funding of Public Education? Well, one good thing that has happened from NCLB is that many schools are opting out of the Federal funding so they don't have to be handcuffed by this ridicoulous legislation.

Eloi. They were the food supply of the Morlocks, or at least a delicacy.

My point is that if more children were taught literature and writing, you'd recognize the reference to HG Wells's "Time Machine" instantly.

My school does a great job of teaching writing and literature - Time Machine is in the curriculum. It's not my subject , though. I did read Time Machine when I was a kid. Couldn't pull up the reference.

Yeah, having facts on hand, right inside your own head, saves one from having to think "eloi" in the context used was a language.

You do realize that having facts in one's head vastly improves efficiency, right?

Of course I understand the importance of knowing pertinent information. Eloi came and went a long time ago. The rote memorisation of useless facts is pointless in today's society. In the information age, data is being produced far faster than we can assimilate it.

Actually, asking "how" was more conducive to generating today's technological society.

Yeah, I know. That's what I was saying. Better bone up on your literature. All those useless facts by those dead authors actually come in handy when one's trying to understand the world.

I have nothing against literature. I'm an avid reader and have a Masters in Music Education. NCLB does nothing to promote the study of literature, the Arts, or History. I'm more interested in students understanding the concepts behind the novels, than trivial details, that's all I'm trying to say.