The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!
Atheism IS a Religion
in Religion
Debra AI Prediction
Arguments
Obviously theist and atheist aren't normal antonyms either, or their definitions would reflect that. It's rare, but atheism/theism isn't the only word combination that doesn't quite match up. For instance;
Aceramic - not relating to the manufacture of any product (such as earthenware, porcelain, or brick) made essentially from a nonmetallic mineral (such as clay) by firing at a high temperature? No;
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/aceramic
The terms are similar to antonyms, but they are not direct antonyms. Like atheism/theism, aceramic does not mean entirely "without ceramics", but rather refers to a subset of "without ceramics" (the early Hacilar made structures with mud bricks, but had no pottery).
  Considerate: 88%  
  Substantial: 90%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 91%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.02  
  Sources: 4  
  Relevant (Beta): 61%  
  Learn More About Debra
Theist and atheist aren't antonyms?!?!? Wait what? You are of the position that atheist means "A person who believes god doesn't exist" and that theist means "A person who believes god exist" and somehow you are also of the position that they aren't antonyms? Really? Please explain those mental gymnastics.
Ceramic means pottery, so yes aceramic means without ceramics by your definitions
Pottery - a place where clayware is made and fired
To be fair though I had never heard the term aceramic before, so if you push back I may have to do some more research, but I expect it's a case of making the definition based on what's the norm rather than what's possible. Are there other nonmetallic minerals other than clay that they fire? I haven't heard of any, but again not a topic I've researched before.
  Considerate: 77%  
  Substantial: 89%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 92%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.88  
  Sources: 3  
  Relevant (Beta): 46%  
  Learn More About Debra
I don't expect for a second that he/she will explain how their idea can really work.
In the meantime though, I'm willing to play devil's advocate - let's assume that atheism is indeed the belief that there are no gods... a single such belief does not constitute a whole belief system, let alone a religion.
Please don't expect me to respond with insults and memes, I don't have time for it.
Please don't expect me to respond to Gish-galloping, I don't have time for it.
  Considerate: 78%  
  Substantial: 61%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 93%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.7  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 89%  
  Learn More About Debra
The first and most common atheist are those that try to prove a god or gods do not exist. It is not possible to prove whether a god or gods exist either way. For these people, atheism is a religion. Like all religions, their religion is based on the circular argument, otherwise known as 'faith'. This type often tries to use the Theory of Evolution as a proof, even though it is only a theory, and not even a scientific theory. It is just like faithful believers of a god or gods that try to prove their case using the Theory of Creation as a proof, even though it is only a theory, and not even a scientific theory.
The second is very uncommon. I have only met one of them in my travels. This type of atheist acknowledges that you can't prove the existence of a god or gods, and simply believes there isn't one, although we don't really know. He simply does not attribute anything in his experience to a god or gods. He recognizes that the Theory of Evolution, the Theory of Creation, and the Theory of Abiogenesis are theories, and that none of them are scientific theories since none of them are falsifiable. We can't go back to look to see what actually happened. We can only show what MIGHT have happened.
  Considerate: 93%  
  Substantial: 99%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 99%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.64  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 76%  
  Substantial: 97%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 89%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.04  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
Come to think of it, I've only ever experienced one or two of your first type of atheist.
Please don't expect me to respond with insults and memes, I don't have time for it.
Please don't expect me to respond to Gish-galloping, I don't have time for it.
  Considerate: 66%  
  Substantial: 50%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 98%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.18  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 85%  
  Learn More About Debra
Incorrect;
http://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/appeals/appeal-to-authority/
Just for a laugh, I thought I'd add wiki's entry;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
If you claim Wikipedia to be an authority, you are committing an appeal to authority fallacy by citing them as "proof" your position is correct. If you aren't claiming Wikipedia to be an authority, than who cares what the Wikipedia entry says?
Please don't comment until you have reread (or more likely, just read) and comprehended what I said;https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/aceramic
The terms are similar to antonyms, but they are not direct antonyms. Like atheism/theism, aceramic does not mean entirely "without ceramics", but rather refers to a subset of "without ceramics" (the early Hacilar made structures with mud bricks, but had no pottery).
A settlement can have buildings made of brick, jewelry made with ceramic beads, even home furnishings made of ceramics, yet be aceramic.
  Considerate: 84%  
  Substantial: 73%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 91%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.1  
  Sources: 6  
  Relevant (Beta): 61%  
  Learn More About Debra
I'm going to skip over the insults I'm not in the mood for smack talk today.
Citations needed for ceramics that are aceramic. As in get one of your authorities to state a product is both ceramic and a ceramic just in case you're not clear on the request.
  Considerate: 64%  
  Substantial: 89%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 94%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.46  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 95%  
  Learn More About Debra
As per the dictionary definition, anything that isn't pottery is aceramic, including things made of ceramics.
  Considerate: 79%  
  Substantial: 69%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 91%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.24  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 94%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 76%  
  Substantial: 58%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 85%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.1  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 88%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 95%  
  Substantial: 25%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 6.16  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 94%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 95%  
  Substantial: 91%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 94%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.76  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 98%  
  Learn More About Debra
Another quote for the wall of shame. Thanks.
Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.
The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.
Wayne Dyer
  Considerate: 59%  
  Substantial: 40%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 86%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.76  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 96%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 36%  
  Substantial: 28%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.22  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 98%  
  Learn More About Debra
Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.
The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.
Wayne Dyer
  Considerate: 15%  
  Substantial: 64%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 98%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 6.84  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
As a for the record thing I don't think I'm better than anyone. I know I'm smarter because I've taken IQ tests and score anywhere from 124 to 134, but I don't feel like intelligence is the only gauge of a human being. Einstein was "smart", and he understood this concept as well. When it comes to social skills I have trouble understanding things that others understand very easily, and that is only one other aspect that plays a huge role in a person's life, there are mean more.
You confuse smack talk with arrogance. I don't think I'm better than flat earthers, or anyone else. I've had experiences where someone who was much dumber than me succeeded (in some cases easily) where I failed. Intelligence is just one trait.
  Considerate: 39%  
  Substantial: 89%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.64  
  Sources: 2  
  Relevant (Beta): 98%  
  Learn More About Debra
No sir, when it comes to atheism, it's more like this:
-Do you believe I have a dog?
Me: I don't believe in cats.
-I asked you if you believe that I have a dog, not a cat!
Me: define your dog?
-A furry feline creature with long whiskers, tail and claws that likes to climb trees, and catch birds. Now do you believe I have a dog or not?
  Considerate: 85%  
  Substantial: 88%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 5.06  
  Sources: 1  
  Relevant (Beta): 93%  
  Learn More About Debra
The first and most common atheist are those that try to prove a god or gods do not exist. It is not possible to prove whether a god or gods exist either way. For these people, atheism is a religion. Like all religions, their religion is based on the circular argument, otherwise known as 'faith'. This type often tries to use the Theory of Evolution as a proof, even though it is only a theory, and not even a scientific theory. It is just like faithful believers of a god or gods that try to prove their case using the Theory of Creation as a proof, even though it is only a theory, and not even a scientific theory.
But gods do exist Nightwing, it's scientific fact, all you have to do is observe. I'm telling you that you can actually buy them gods on eBay. Any kind of god you want, made of any material of your choosing; wood, stone, bronze etc. OR, .. you can even make your own gods with holy-books to go along with them!
As for the "Theory of Creation", .. well you tell me?
Here is what I know, .. that in science, we are to "observe, examine and document the world around us", correct? OK then, so let's be scientists and examine the world around us?
I see mountains, trees and in-between them I see houses.
Hmm, .. the house is made out of trees (mostly anyways) and I see that we humans intelligently designed and made/built those houses from the trees.
So far, no other scientist has disputed this observation, so this is fact, .. wouldn't you agree?
Now let's observe the trees: Neither I, nor any other scientist has claimed that either he, nor anyone made those trees. So I start searching for information on what or who may have made those trees, because I do see that all the trees follow a specific order, which shows 'intelligent design', .. and after a lifelong in-depth search, I have found a "book" claiming that "yes, the trees, and everything else that we humans didn't create came about by a "Creator".
OK-then, so let's see if this could even be possible, .. you know, to intelligently design and create things? Or are we going by some baseless assumption?
From written history we learn that after 6,000 years, we come to a time when men have come up with an idea, not from observation that if you want something, you have to I.D. and create it, but from their rebellious imagination, that "just because we humans create everything by Intelligent Design doesn't mean that whatever we, nor anyone else claimed to have created, had to be intelligently designed and created!"
So we say: "Hmm, .. interesting! So tell us how the things that we humans didn't create came about then?"
So these dreamers dissect everything, and explain the order and the strict laws that 'everything we didn't create' follow, by which they themselves go by and create things, and say: "It all began long, long time ago before time existed, in a point in space before space existed, a singularity popped out of nothing, for no reason or plan of anyone nor anything, and it exploded with a Big Bang! Because we undoubtedly believe that sh*eet like this can happen!"
So we say: "Wow, that's some deranged thinking there buddy! Do you have ANY proof of anything like this happening that you, or anyone else observed? You know, where these 'singularities' appear out of nowhere, and into nothing, .. and with no plan or anyone's doing just 'evolved' everything that we didn't create? Can you show us evidence of any"thing" following this logic?"
Then of course, these people realizing the idiocy of what they just claimed backed down a bit, and slowly by the typical tactics of street hustlers, pimps and drug pushers, they hired dreamers, storytellers who for fame and money invented all these fantastic stories, some came from science fiction writers, movie makers showing cartoons and even movies of monkey-men walking the earth, and in heaven they invented Klingon planets, even renaming our stars in the heavens with names of their gods, until they got enough money to influence government officials, and even built schools and forced teachers to lie if they wanted to keep their jobs, until they convinced children that these lunatic ideas actually were real science!
This is why we buy Darth Wader helmets and Light-Sabers for our children at science fairs.
I mean it's like the saying: "It's all fun and games until someone looses an eye!"
Well that's exactly what happened, .. millions of children's eyes were poked out by these hoodlums, pimps, hustlers selling these ideas, where today, millions are walking around blind, unable to observe the world around them, instead walk through life by "blind faith", each lead by their individual religions and religious leaders with their crazy and even demented ideas.
This theism/atheism is the worst thing that has ever happened to mankind. We can R.I.P. science, and the little that is still alive, the technology part is used to further blind the new generations, and of course used to kill us.
"You like your I-Phone? Well you batter believe in BB-Evolution, because it all comes from the same people, from these scientists like at 666CRERN and snake-tongued NASA.
  Considerate: 88%  
  Substantial: 80%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 89%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.62  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 66%  
  Learn More About Debra
Science has nothing to do with whether a god or gods exist.
The existence of statues representing some deity is fine. That's a logical statement, not a scientific one.
This theism/atheism is the worst thing that has ever happened to mankind. We can R.I.P. science, and the little that is still alive, the technology part is used to further blind the new generations, and of course used to kill us.
You seem to have a very negative attitude about religions in general. It seems to stem from ignoring the good that various religions have done for the world. Charity is one aspect that comes out of religion, especially among the Christians. It stems from the belief that all men are brothers, and that we should help each other.
Religion is one of the founding pillars that inspired the founding of the United States and the Constitution it was founded under. That Constitution, if honored, is a powerful concept and document, providing a structure where liberty can prevail among men.
"You like your I-Phone? Well you batter believe in BB-Evolution, because it all comes from the same people, from these scientists like at 666CRERN and snake-tongued NASA.
I don't have an I-Phone. I prefer Android.
  Considerate: 84%  
  Substantial: 86%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 94%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.06  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 78%  
  Learn More About Debra
@Nightwing said - Science has nothing to do with whether a god or gods exist.
The existence of statues representing some deity is fine. That's a logical statement, not a scientific one.
Hello Nightwing, I understand what you're saying, it is how we were brainwashed into believing for millennia now, .. that "science and God don't mix", .. so Religions could survive with their make belief gods. This was so no one questions their existence, see what I mean?
Actually science has 'everything' to do with the existence of God, .. since He is the Creator.
so we ask; creator of what? Of every"thing".
What does science do?
We observe "things", this includes biological life. Isn't that like saying; "Science and Technology has nothing to do with Henry Ford, or Edison"?
Statues representing God is like a child that his mother tells him to go get his father, and comes back with a plastic toy soldier saying: "Here is daddy, mama!" I mean maybe for a child that be OK, but we couldn't let him play along like that for too long, right?
Yet this is exactly what happened with us. We have been fooled to accept our Infinite and Eternal Creator, our Heavenly Father as wood, stone and even plastic statues.
Nighthawk said - You seem to have a very negative attitude about religions in general. It seems to stem from ignoring the good that various religions have done for the world. Charity is one aspect that comes out of religion, especially among the Christians. It stems from the belief that all men are brothers, and that we should help each other.
I'm sorry to say my friend, but that does NOT come from Religion (I don't mean a religious act, I mean 'Religion', as in organized Religion like Christianity) what you said comes from the Bible, from God through His Son Word's teachings.
Now we can either do these good deeds from our hearts in honor of our Loving Creator, or for our Religion, but one will have no reward in it except praise from the Religious leaders ignoring what Jesus taught us: "
Galatians 1:9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you embraced, let him be under accursed! 10 Am I now seeking the approval of men, or of God? Or am I striving to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a servant of Christ. 11For I certify to you, brothers, that the gospel I preached is not devised by man.…
Like Mother Teresa, what she did was for her "Church" which was the Catholic Christian Religion, and to prove it, read up on her (Mother Teresa Beatified Oct 19 2003) she will have her reward, .. here, .. even long after she is dead. She offered idols to those she was involved with to worship, and she taught them to pray long, repetitious prayers to these idols which were carved from wood for the Christian Religion. They represented the Religion, the Pope and the man-made trinity-gods of Christianity. Not our Creator, nor His Son "Word".
Nighthawk said - Religion is one of the founding pillars that inspired the founding of the United States and the Constitution it was founded under. That Constitution, if honored, is a powerful concept and document, providing a structure where liberty can prevail among men.
Again, that was the Bible, not the Religion. Religion brought us the Statue of Liberty (The statue was dedicated on October 28, 1886. The Statue of Liberty is a figure of a robed woman representing Libertas, a Roman goddess Isis illuminating the world.)
ISIS, Illuminati-ng, .. ring a bell?
Google - The Statue of Isis was first known as Liberty Enlightening the World, but is now more commonly called, the "Statue of Liberty." However, we must ask ourselves, "Is she truly enlightening the world, or is she actually the Goddess who keeps our illumination in the shadows as she holds the light above in her torch, only to hide the truth from the profane (uninitiated) of the abyss (sea of humanity) who are kept in the dark?" A secret that keeps most of the population of the United States in complete ignorance as they are cast under the wicked spell of Isis. A goddess of both Heaven and Hell.
Religion has also brought us slavery,
the American civil war,
WWII,
Vietnam,
9-11,
Iraqi war,
.. nothing but death and destruction, .. while the Bible and its teachings held us together by a thread. Let's give credit where credit is due, and it is NOT to any organized Religion and their gods.
God bless you! (not any of the thousands of Greek/Roman/German theos/gods.)
  Considerate: 86%  
  Substantial: 73%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 91%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.84  
  Sources: 16  
  Relevant (Beta): 55%  
  Learn More About Debra
You seem to attribute everything to the Bible.
A few problems with your arguments:
First, you don't seem to understand what science is. Science is not observation. Science is a set of falsifiable theories that describe nature. How a new theory is inspired may be through a belief in God, or it may be through observing some experiment, or it may be through watching an episode of Sponge Bob. What makes a theory a scientific one is the test for falsifiability, and the theory surviving that test.
Science does not discuss God, does not acknowledge His existence, and does not deny His existence. Science is truly atheistic in it's approach. God is simply not required for science to work. It is incapable of proving or denying his existence.
This means that it just takes nature at face value. It does not care where it comes from.
While religion has certainly caused wars, it has also done a lot of good. For example, the organization known as the Free Masons are all ABOUT charity. It's a big reason why they exist. I know it's not organized as a religion, but it IS organized to require religion.
Organized religions created things like the Red Cross, The Salvation Army, the YMCA, various jobs and retraining programs, etc. You may say that's all from the Bible, but it is ALSO from the religious belief of the people that founded these organizations...in other words, their organized religion that brought them to this way of thinking.
Religion did not bring us slavery. Men did that. Religion eventually managed to abolish slavery as a legal practice in the United States though. The 'Civil' war (which is actually wasn't), was really a War of Secession, brought about not by slavery itself, but by violations of the 4th and 10th amendments of the Constitution by the Federal government. The slave was the property involved, among others. It was these violations that caused the southern states to secede from the Union and form their own nation known as the Confederacy.
Religion effectively DID cause the War of Secession. It was between people that figured the slave should be freed and treated like any other brother of man before God, vs the people that ignored the teachings of the Bible and wanted to keep slaves as property. The Federal government was trying to take their property away without compensation.
Your conclusion that religion had nothing to do with anything but death and destruction is simplistic and ignores the good that came from organized religion, which inspired many men to do great and wonderful things by teaching them the truths of things like the contents of the Bible.
  Considerate: 89%  
  Substantial: 98%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 98%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.66  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 97%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 78%  
  Substantial: 82%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 93%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.16  
  Sources: 9  
  Relevant (Beta): 97%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 76%  
  Substantial: 75%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.08  
  Sources: 10  
  Relevant (Beta): 92%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 85%  
  Substantial: 61%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.84  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 54%  
  Substantial: 80%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 99%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8  
  Sources: 2  
  Relevant (Beta): 84%  
  Learn More About Debra
http://utminers.utep.edu/omwilliamson/ENGL1311/fallacies.htm
  Considerate: 51%  
  Substantial: 95%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 6.1  
  Sources: 1  
  Relevant (Beta): 79%  
  Learn More About Debra
2) Oxford - A person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.
3) Urban - A person who lacks belief in a god or gods.
4) Your dictionary - The definition of an atheist is a person who does not believe in the existence of any kind of God or higher power.
5) Macmillian - someone who does not believe that God exists
6) Free Dictionary - a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being.
7) WordWeb - Someone who does not believe in god;
8) American Heritage - Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
9) Newbury - a person who does not believe in the existence of God
10) Atheist American - A lack of belief in gods.
11) Wiki - in the broadest sense, the absence of belief in the existence of deities.
12) All about philosophy - Atheist, in the strict and proper sense of the word, is one who does not believe in the existence of a god, or who owns no being superior to nature.
13) Thought co - anyone who doesn't believe in any gods.
14) The Secular Web - Disbelief in, or denial of, the existence of a god
15) Reasonable Faith - lack belief in God
Lacks, disbelieves, absence, or does not believe from 15 different sources as 10 was not enough for you. Atheism covers anyone who doesn't believe god(s) exist. It is a null value, it makes no claim. It is merely stating that I am NOT a part of your group with the prefix "A" in front of the group "theist". I am a non-theist if you just can't use the word atheist correctly. (they mean the SAME thing)
  Considerate: 58%  
  Substantial: 95%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 88%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.02  
  Sources: 20  
  Relevant (Beta): 66%  
  Learn More About Debra
Nightwing said:
Yes sir, .. since it covers everything from creation, the why's, the who's, everything, so yeah, it would be only reasonable to do so, right?
Nightwing - A few problems with your arguments:
First, you don't seem to understand what science is. Science is not observation. Science is a set of falsifiable theories that describe nature.
Ah, got it. So no 'observation' necessary, just throw some theories out there and go with that, .. is that what you're saying? Well that explains the Big Bang story, because I am 99.9999% sure that the Jesuit Priest George Lemaitre did NOT observe any speck popping out of nothing and Big-Banging some imaginary universe as described by NASA artists into existence!?
Nightwing - How a new theory is inspired may be through a belief in God, or it may be through observing some experiment, or it may be through watching an episode of Sponge Bob. What makes a theory a scientific one is the test for falsifiability, and the theory surviving that test.
Hmm, .. SpongeBob works at the Krusty Krab, so can you tell me how you could, .. through scientific experiment, prove if this is true or not?
OK, how about Henry Ford, who people say; was the Founder of the Ford Motor Company. How would you go about scientifically proving that one way or another? I say anyone, including Abe Lincoln could have Founded Ford. So I gave you a hypothesis, let's see how you will turn that into a theory?
Nightwing - Science does not discuss God, does not acknowledge His existence, and does not deny His existence. Science is truly atheistic in it's approach. God is simply not required for science to work. It is incapable of proving or denying his existence.
More like Theistic/Atheistic in its approach! The Big-Bang Evolution pseudoscience was built on theism/atheism aka 'Religion'.
No gods, well let's look at "Mother Nature"?
ShortSharpScience
Mother Nature’s protective care
"Apparently, morning sickness may be natures way of protecting unborn babies from harmful foodstuffs."
Nightwing - This means that it just takes nature at face value. It does not care where it comes from.
So you agree with me that the Big-Bang/Evolution stories have absolutely nothing to do with science!?
Nightwing - While religion has certainly caused wars, it has also done a lot of good. For example, the organization known as the Free Masons are all ABOUT charity. It's a big reason why they exist. I know it's not organized as a religion, but it IS organized to require religion.
No Organized Religion has ever done any good. As for Charities, I agree! That's how any and all religions survive and even flourish. Rule of thumb for all religions to survive; blind faith "thou shalt not asketh questions, just openeth you wallet and give us all ya got! Amen, and praise all the gods!"
Nightwing - Organized religions created things like the Red Cross, The Salvation Army, the YMCA, various jobs and retraining programs, etc. You may say that's all from the Bible, but it is ALSO from the religious belief of the people that founded these organizations...in other words, their organized religion that brought them to this way of thinking.
Yes Organized Religion sure Did, which explains why those Catholic, Hindu, Muslim countries remain soo poor!
Nighthawk - Religion did not bring us slavery. Men did that. Religion eventually managed to abolish slavery as a legal practice in the United States though. The 'Civil' war (which is actually wasn't), was really a War of Secession, brought about not by slavery itself, but by violations of the 4th and 10th amendments of the Constitution by the Federal government. The slave was the property involved, among others. It was these violations that caused the southern states to secede from the Union and form their own nation known as the Confederacy.
"Religion did not bring us slavery, .. Men did that", .. yes, but they were religious men; theist/atheists, religious Leaders that brought us slavery!
It was N.T. Bible thinkers and Believers that abolished slavery, by what Jesus taught: "If you want to be great in the Kingdom of heaven, ...." as he washed the Apostles feet!
Nighthawk - Religion effectively DID cause the War of Secession. It was between people that figured the slave should be freed and treated like any other brother of man before God, vs the people that ignored the teachings of the Bible and wanted to keep slaves as property. The Federal government was trying to take their property away without compensation.
Your conclusion that religion had nothing to do with anything but death and destruction is simplistic and ignores the good that came from organized religion, which inspired many men to do great and wonderful things by teaching them the truths of things like the contents of the Bible.
Men taught the Bible to men, while Religion robbed men from coming to know our One and Only Infinite Creator "I Am", and made sure they would never find God. That's why the ONLY god/gods you and everyone knows are the theos/gods, created by Religions. That's why Religion has taken over and reinterpreted the definition of science. Today, people can't differentiate between pseudoscience / science-fiction from real science!? People go to science fiction Movie Swap meets , .. buy Light sabers and Darth Wader helmets, .. thinking they were at a Science Fair. Sad, truly sad what Organized Religion has done to humanity!
This is why THEY-the Religious Leaders can do 9-11, and false-flag operations like this last Vegas shooting, and everyone (theist/atheists) just roll right along with it.
  Considerate: 87%  
  Substantial: 86%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 90%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.22  
  Sources: 2  
  Relevant (Beta): 19%  
  Learn More About Debra
Please don't expect me to respond with insults and memes, I don't have time for it.
Please don't expect me to respond to Gish-galloping, I don't have time for it.
  Considerate: 78%  
  Substantial: 66%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.06  
  Sources: 15  
  Relevant (Beta): 84%  
  Learn More About Debra
Just after the nearest atheist claiming the earth is actually pear shaped, they will then cite Neil Degrasse Tyson saying so as their proof. Another thing atheists can't seem to get straight is the height in which the supposed curvature becomes visible on their spinning cartoon pearoid. Some atheists will tell you they can see the curvature from on top of a mountain, while other atheists proclaim they can see the curvature from outside an airplane window. But the smartest of the atheists will contradict his fellow ball worshippers and proclaim that one must be much higher than that in order to see the supposed curvature of the magical tilting pearoid. This alone gives us some insight into the fast paced research of atheists. Because all they had to do at some point, was to open their minds and use the senses they were created with to find out. Despite this, these gullible globe guzzlers think they can make pronouncements about reality, even though they have never actually lived in it.
Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.
The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.
Wayne Dyer
  Considerate: 79%  
  Substantial: 80%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 97%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.66  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 50%  
  Learn More About Debra
Nobody has said that atheists only believe one thing. On the contrary, an atheist can have as many beliefs as they want as long as it doesn't include belief in the existence of any gods.
Please don't expect me to respond with insults and memes, I don't have time for it.
Please don't expect me to respond to Gish-galloping, I don't have time for it.
  Considerate: 72%  
  Substantial: 61%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 98%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.72  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 92%  
  Learn More About Debra
Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.
The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.
Wayne Dyer
  Considerate: 80%  
  Substantial: 25%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.56  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 98%  
  Learn More About Debra
Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.
The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.
Wayne Dyer
  Considerate: 78%  
  Substantial: 66%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.16  
  Sources: 15  
  Relevant (Beta): 84%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 44%  
  Substantial: 92%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.64  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 66%  
  Substantial: 92%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.36  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
I see a troll head at the last comment, I've got him ignored. If you would like to repeat and or back his statements, that's up to you, since you are the one I was conversing with.
Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.
The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.
Wayne Dyer
  Considerate: 54%  
  Substantial: 74%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 97%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.64  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.
The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.
Wayne Dyer
  Considerate: 76%  
  Substantial: 62%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 93%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.26  
  Sources: 1  
  Relevant (Beta): 67%  
  Learn More About Debra
(also, I don't hold the belief that there is no God)
Please don't expect me to respond with insults and memes, I don't have time for it.
Please don't expect me to respond to Gish-galloping, I don't have time for it.
  Considerate: 76%  
  Substantial: 36%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.2  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 97%  
  Learn More About Debra
Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.
The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.
Wayne Dyer
  Considerate: 78%  
  Substantial: 61%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.38  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 82%  
  Learn More About Debra
Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.
The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.
Wayne Dyer
  Considerate: 92%  
  Substantial: 8%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 2.76  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 98%  
  Learn More About Debra
Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.
The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.
Wayne Dyer
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 0.74  
  Sources: 2  
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 88%  
  Substantial: 67%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 91%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.5  
  Sources: 2  
  Relevant (Beta): 96%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 86%  
  Substantial: 89%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 92%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.96  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 26%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 86%  
  Substantial: 89%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 92%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.96  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 26%  
  Learn More About Debra
Please don't expect me to respond with insults and memes, I don't have time for it.
Please don't expect me to respond to Gish-galloping, I don't have time for it.
  Considerate: 79%  
  Substantial: 68%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.96  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 86%  
  Learn More About Debra
Science must turn to a closed system, such as mathematics, to gain the power of prediction. That process is called formalizing a theory.
Only a closed system has the formal proof and the power of prediction.
The Theory of the Big Bang is not falsifiable. We can't go back to actually see what happened.
The Theory of Evolution is not falsifiable. We can't go back to actually see what happened.
The Theory of Creation is not falsifiable. We can't go back to actually see what happened.
The Theory of Abiogenesis is not falsifiable. We can't go back to actually see what happened.
Science has NO theories about past unobserved events. They are not falsifiable.
All anyone can do is show it MIGHT have happened. The theory itself, however, remains unfalsifiable. The test for the null hypothesis must be available, be specific, and produce a specific result.
Supporting evidence is not used in science at all.
  Considerate: 86%  
  Substantial: 89%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 92%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.96  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 26%  
  Learn More About Debra
Since it is not possible to prove whether or not a god or gods exist, any attempt to do so must be based on an argument of faith. That makes it a religious argument.
There are really two kinds of atheists. Those that try to prove no god or gods exist, and others that just don't care, they just don't happen to believe a god or gods exist themselves. The second type does not try to prove it, not even to himself. He even allows for the possibility that he might be wrong. He is just basically just unconvinced. I have met exactly ONE example of the second type.
The first type is religious, the second type is not.
  Considerate: 87%  
  Substantial: 91%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 92%  
  Learn More About Debra
The Big Bang theory is falsifiable mathematical models didn't "work" to define location, or if we found out that we were calculating location incorrectly. If there wasn't the afterglow of radiation from the big bang, it would be false. If the big bang theory didn't take inflation and dark matter into account it would be proven false.
The theory of evolution is falsifiable, here is a wiki on the very topic so I'm not going to copy and paste. By extension this makes the theory of abiogenesis falsifiable as well, and just to be clear if you believe that god(s) created life from non-life you also believe in abiogenesis, but to be fair science doesn't "know" how abiogenesis took place even though we do have proof of it. https://phys.org/news/2015-06-evidence-emerges-life.html (but give us a few decades and I'm sure we'll have a better grasp of how it happened)
All of these scientific theories have mountains of supporting evidence, and many of these reach in the past like carbon dating, fossils, etc
Again the lack of scientific knowledge in the world is insane...
  Considerate: 89%  
  Substantial: 86%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 93%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.1  
  Sources: 1  
  Relevant (Beta): 17%  
  Learn More About Debra
You're also presuming to know the reasons someone would have, to cause their belief that there are no gods. In reality the reasons can be anything, the most reason is that there is no observable evidence that we can attribute with certainty to any gods (to do so would require faith), so if they had to come to a conclusion based on that, it would be that there are no gods. How would that be circular?
Even if we accept, for a moment, that atheism is religious, religious is not the same as a religion. Just because someone is adventurous it does not mean that they are on an adventure.
Also, I don't know how you've managed to think of circular reasoning and faith as being the same thing.
Please don't expect me to respond with insults and memes, I don't have time for it.
Please don't expect me to respond to Gish-galloping, I don't have time for it.
  Considerate: 89%  
  Substantial: 98%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 97%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.04  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 96%  
  Learn More About Debra
The Theory of Evolution, the Theory of Creation, and the Theory of Abiogenesis are also not theories of science.
I agree with you. May I ask you as to What is the "theory of creation"? What I mean is, let's say I pick up a rock, observe it and say: "This is a rock", .. is that a theory? Just asking?
Nightwing - None of these four theories are falsifiable.
Sure they are, the big-bang-evolution stories are, because they claim that a hot-rock subjected to the vacuum of space proves that it will create enough moisture to cover it completely and in 4 billion years life will sprout from it.
- Science has no theories about unobserved past events. There is no way to test such a theory to try to destroy it.
Well evolutionists 'observe' the rock in the present, so that's science, no? But their claim how it came about is not science, .. now that's easy to destroy.
- Supporting evidence is not used in science. It IS used in religions, however.
I don't understand? Are you just messing around? How can Religion, which requires 'blind faith' require supporting evidence?
Observations is not used in science. It is evidence only. It is subject to the problems of phenomenology. Everyone interprets what they observe in different ways, depending on their view of how the universe works. That view is as unique to each of us as a fingerprint.
Yep, .. your just messing around, .. typical of Religionists, theists/atheists.
- Take, for example, the sunrise. We observe it every day.
So what your saying is that a scientist wouldn't do that, .. you know, "observe the sun"?
- To those of us what grew up with things like the space program, we see the Earth rotating and causing the sunrise. To another culture, the SAME observation has a different cause, such as a god of some kind carrying the Sun across the sky, or the Sun orbits around the Earth (the so-called Terracentric universe).
Galileo showed the terracentric theory to be false, by showing that moon orbit Jupiter. This meant the Earth wasn't the center of everything. Galileo falsified the earlier theory. Copernicus had put forth a new theory, that the Earth orbited the Sun, which Galileo agreed with. That theory was not falsified until Einstein.
How could Einstein 'falsify' something that you claimed wasn't 'science' to begin with?
Today, the theory is that the Earth and the Sun orbit each other. It's all relative. Nothing is stationary, so nothing is a reference point except for what you choose it to be.
Theory? I thought you just said "it's not falsifiable"? Has anyone 'observed' the Flat Earth orbit the sun?
Besides, .. what does this have anything to do with the OP - "Atheism IS a Religion"???
  Considerate: 90%  
  Substantial: 74%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 91%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.84  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 34%  
  Learn More About Debra