Why Atheism is Not Logical or Rational (no bible thumping)

1131415161719»

Comments

  • zombie
    zombie Members Posts: 13,450 ✭✭✭✭✭
    lol at smart people posting here I can count on one hand how many clearly intelligent people post here. including the people I disagree with the number is five.
  • LUClEN
    LUClEN Members Posts: 20,559 ✭✭✭✭✭
    You think correlation is causation
  • zombie
    zombie Members Posts: 13,450 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Trashboat wrote: »
    You think correlation is causation

    actually no I don't but sometimes correlation is enough
  • Jabu_Rule
    Jabu_Rule Members Posts: 5,993 ✭✭✭✭✭
    zombie wrote: »
    lol pink is not mentioned as one of those unseen colors so one again fail. ? atheists in an attempt to smart prove themselves to be dumb one again.

    Did you not watch video? Impossible colors laid the foundation for what was presented in the video. Basically, there are colors within the spectrum that we can't see even when we think we're supposed to, and there are colors that our eyes can't see regardless and we don't know what to call them but they exist within the spectrum. So basically, there could be a variation of pink that can't be seen. I'm showing you the known limitations of the human eye. This is more evidence to support the pink unicorn because by your rules, we are allowed to jump to conclusions based on unknowns. One could always be wrong about the color of the unicorn because the unicorn presented itself to Shepard as pink that that he could fulfill its laws. Still, it has always been known by wise men that the unicorn is a unknown variation of pink (call it cosmic pink).
  • ohhhla
    ohhhla Members Posts: 10,341 ✭✭✭✭✭
    TC, you have it all wrong. We're living organism while chairs, tables and etc are intelligently designed by humans themselves. Once you've point to the evidence saying that there is a Supreme Being creating all of this (Which you won't) your point is moot and laughable at best. There are two types of Atheists as well.
  • lostsamuraisotaku2
    lostsamuraisotaku2 Members Posts: 78 ✭✭
    YOU NEGROES ARE THE TRUE HEBREW ISRAELITES OF THE BIBLE
  • janklow
    janklow Members, Moderators Posts: 8,613 Regulator
    YOU NEGROES ARE THE TRUE HEBREW ISRAELITES OF THE BIBLE
    this is your warning (as far as i am concerned; won't speak for other mods) to knock it off with spamming the same post repeatedly

  • And_So_It_Burns
    And_So_It_Burns Members Posts: 921 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 2014
    Stiff wrote: »

    Even though you didn't see it, most reasonable people would reach the conclusion that at some point this table, these chairs, and this silverware was created by someone. And SOMEBODY set this table out in the desert, as odd as it seems. Who knows why, but they did it.
    This is because a table does not have a naturalistic origin. We can also observe a table being manufactured or look up table designs.
    Stiff wrote: »
    And yet we have a wide spread belief that an entire Universe can be put into existence randomly.

    Atheism, is just the disbelief or rejection of Gods or deities. It doesn't make any claims of how the universe started. This ideology is called naturalism. Atheism is as much as an ideology as the non-belief in the Easter bunny. At some point one could even argue that we're all atheists to some extent. I'm sure most people don't believe in the pagan gods.
    Stiff wrote: »
    I consider myself Christian, but if you look at Christian beliefs and be like "ehhh nah" then that's understandable. But to sit up and denounce all form of spirituality and deny that the universe has a creator just comes off as pretty unreasonable. A table can't set itself, but a universe can? Nah that's not adding up.

    But no one is arguing that. We understand a building must have a builder or a watch must have a watch maker because these things don't have naturalistic explanations and we can physically watch them being designed and made. Regardless, this is a poor reason to believe in a supernatural creator. Who created ? then? I think that's much more difficult to answer than what events lead to the creation of the universe because ? is infinitely complex. Besides, you shouldn't insert "We can't explain it right now so that must mean Gawd did it" argument at any time. This has always been wrong regarding natural phenomenon