Question for the resident AT atheists

[CoinOperatedBoy]

Originally posted by: polarbear6
Well .. Certain proof that god exists that is .. Our planetary motion ..

If a big ball explodes into pieces ... How the hell will the parts starts moving around the remaining mass, instead of falling right on to it .. ??

I just realised that this can happen .. If only the pieces are projected at a angle with the original big ball's normal ... Could any one confirm this for me ..

WTF are you even asking? Are you asking someone to explain the behavior of objects in orbit? Is it evidence of God's existence because you don't understand it?

 

[A5]

Originally posted by: polarbear6
Well .. Certain proof that god exists that is .. Our planetary motion ..

If a big ball explodes into pieces ... How the hell will the parts starts moving around the remaining mass, instead of falling right on to it .. ??

I just realised that this can happen .. If only the pieces are projected at a angle with the original big ball's normal ... Could any one confirm this for me ..

Your ignorance of math and physics is not a proof of God.

 

[Blackjack200]

Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy

Originally posted by: polarbear6
Well .. Certain proof that god exists that is .. Our planetary motion ..

If a big ball explodes into pieces ... How the hell will the parts starts moving around the remaining mass, instead of falling right on to it .. ??

I just realised that this can happen .. If only the pieces are projected at a angle with the original big ball's normal ... Could any one confirm this for me ..

WTF are you even asking? Are you asking someone to explain the behavior of objects in orbit? Is it evidence of God's existence because you don't understand it?

lol, the "big ball explodes into pieces" is a hilarious display of astronmical ignorance.

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy

Originally posted by: polarbear6
Well .. Certain proof that god exists that is .. Our planetary motion ..

If a big ball explodes into pieces ... How the hell will the parts starts moving around the remaining mass, instead of falling right on to it .. ??

I just realised that this can happen .. If only the pieces are projected at a angle with the original big ball's normal ... Could any one confirm this for me ..

WTF are you even asking? Are you asking someone to explain the behavior of objects in orbit? Is it evidence of God's existence because you don't understand it?

Don't be absurd. He's only asking to explain why objects orbit each other in the first place, not what they do once they start orbiting. Give him some credit... or something.

 

[Blackjack200]

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy

Originally posted by: polarbear6
Well .. Certain proof that god exists that is .. Our planetary motion ..

If a big ball explodes into pieces ... How the hell will the parts starts moving around the remaining mass, instead of falling right on to it .. ??

I just realised that this can happen .. If only the pieces are projected at a angle with the original big ball's normal ... Could any one confirm this for me ..

WTF are you even asking? Are you asking someone to explain the behavior of objects in orbit? Is it evidence of God's existence because you don't understand it?

Don't be absurd. He's only asking to explain why objects orbit each other in the first place, not what they do once they start orbiting. Give him some credit... or something.

How Orbbit is formed?

 

[CoinOperatedBoy]

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy

Originally posted by: polarbear6
Well .. Certain proof that god exists that is .. Our planetary motion ..

If a big ball explodes into pieces ... How the hell will the parts starts moving around the remaining mass, instead of falling right on to it .. ??

I just realised that this can happen .. If only the pieces are projected at a angle with the original big ball's normal ... Could any one confirm this for me ..

WTF are you even asking? Are you asking someone to explain the behavior of objects in orbit? Is it evidence of God's existence because you don't understand it?

Don't be absurd. He's only asking to explain why objects orbit each other in the first place, not what they do once they start orbiting. Give him some credit... or something.

Well, obviously God made some things explode and other things orbit and that's just the way it is. This guy polarbear6 shouldn't ask so many goddamn questions.

 

[rudeguy]

Originally posted by: jagec

Originally posted by: NSFW
I'd say that I have been doing a lot of reading lately. My theological journey turned to philosophy which has now turned more towards science.

Theology and philosophy ask the same questions. Science and theology do not.

Sure they do.

 

[surfsatwerk]

Originally posted by: NSFW

Originally posted by: jagec

Originally posted by: NSFW
I'd say that I have been doing a lot of reading lately. My theological journey turned to philosophy which has now turned more towards science.

Theology and philosophy ask the same questions. Science and theology do not.

Sure they do.

God is not at the end of any questions that science asks.

God is at the end of every question Theology asks.

 

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: polarbear6
Well .. Certain proof that god exists that is .. Our planetary motion ..

If a big ball explodes into pieces ... How the hell will the parts starts moving around the remaining mass, instead of falling right on to it .. ??

I just realised that this can happen .. If only the pieces are projected at a angle with the original big ball's normal ... Could any one confirm this for me ..

Jeesh..what the hell man?

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
What does God need with a starship?

i lold

 

[Turin39789]

Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy

Originally posted by: Nik

Originally posted by: skace

Originally posted by: Nik

Atheism != Agnosticism

Don't get them mixed up.

Go learn what Atheism encompasses please.

Did I post something incorrect? Please, correct me.

Agnosticism could be considered a subset of atheism.

Theism = active believe in a god
Atheism = no active belief in a god

gnostic = knowing
Agnostic = not so sure


Gnostic Atheist = I damn sure know there is be no god okay
Agnostic Atheist = I don't believe in a god, but I don't claim to know 100% that it doesn't exist

 

[TridenT]

Originally posted by: schneiderguy

Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

lol

Give me one scientific fact that proves Unicorns, fairies, and leprechauns don't exist.

You can't prove they don't exist, therefore they must exist

Originally posted by: venkman
flame bait thread is flame bait

Originally posted by: Pheran

Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

/facepalm

I hope this is an intentional trolling attempt and not a serious question.

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: Turin39789

Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy

Originally posted by: Nik

Originally posted by: skace

Originally posted by: Nik

Atheism != Agnosticism

Don't get them mixed up.

Go learn what Atheism encompasses please.

Did I post something incorrect? Please, correct me.

Agnosticism could be considered a subset of atheism.

Theism = active believe in a god
Atheism = no active belief in a god

gnostic = knowing
Agnostic = not so sure


Gnostic Atheist = I damn sure know there is be no god okay
Agnostic Atheist = I don't believe in a god, but I don't claim to know 100% that it doesn't exist

There's also:

It is not humanly possible to know if "God" exists, so I consider the question irrelevant.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

Originally posted by: Turin39789

Theism = active believe in a god
Atheism = no active belief in a god

gnostic = knowing
Agnostic = not so sure


Gnostic Atheist = I damn sure know there is be no god okay
Agnostic Atheist = I don't believe in a god, but I don't claim to know 100% that it doesn't exist

failbarge

theism = with god
athism = without god

gnostic = knowledge
agnostic = without knowledge

 

[GagHalfrunt]

Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

If God existed he'd give his believers more ammunition to work with so that they wouldn't be forced to start such lameass threads.

 

[TridenT]

Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt

Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

If God existed he'd give his believers more ammunition to work with so that they wouldn't be forced to start such lameass threads.

:thumbsup:

 

[JTsyo]

Originally posted by: polarbear6
Well .. Certain proof that god exists that is .. Our planetary motion ..

If a big ball explodes into pieces ... How the hell will the parts starts moving around the remaining mass, instead of falling right on to it .. ??

I just realised that this can happen .. If only the pieces are projected at a angle with the original big ball's normal ... Could any one confirm this for me ..

Now try it a with a ball that's spinning. The angular momentum needs to be conversed and orbits are formed. Look at all the celestial bodies, what percent about the size of our moon or larger spin?

And for the OP, Text

I wish people would stop with trying to tie religion and science. Religion is a spiritual matter, not one that falls under physical analysis. If you try to justify religion through science chances are you'll fail. Or if you use religion for the physical world. But when it comes to other matters, religion can serve you much better than science.

 

[CoinOperatedBoy]

Originally posted by: Turin39789

Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy

Agnosticism could be considered a subset of atheism.

Theism = active believe in a god
Atheism = no active belief in a god

gnostic = knowing
Agnostic = not so sure


Gnostic Atheist = I damn sure know there is be no god okay
Agnostic Atheist = I don't believe in a god, but I don't claim to know 100% that it doesn't exist

Like I said. Agnostic atheism is a subset of atheism, and I believe this is what most people mean when they describe themselves as agnostic. You might say that agnosticism or "agnostic atheism," if you prefer, is another term for weak atheism. But inevitably, a self-described agnostic will come along and insist that they not be identified as an atheist.

The problem is that these terms get bandied about so much that they don't really help anybody accurately describe what they do or do not believe, because some smartass will always come along to challenge the label and force the addition of an extra modifier.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

Christians don't believe in Allah
Muslims don't believe in Gaia
Wiccians don't believe in Jesus

I just happen to agree with all three on those particular points

There have been Greek gods, Roman gods, Mayan gods, Aztek gods, Chinese gods, and Japanese gods. And Christians dismiss all of them as easily as I dismiss the Christian god.

 

[pray4mojo]

http://atheistmovies.blogspot....here-is-no-god-in.html

 

[GagHalfrunt]

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth
Christians don't believe in Allah
Muslims don't believe in Gaia
Wiccians don't believe in Jesus

I just happen to agree with all three on those particular points

There have been Greek gods, Roman gods, Mayan gods, Aztek gods, Chinese gods, and Japanese gods. And Christians dismiss all of them as easily as I dismiss the Christian god.

I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. ? Stephen Roberts

 

[CoinOperatedBoy]

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: Turin39789

Theism = active believe in a god
Atheism = no active belief in a god

gnostic = knowing
Agnostic = not so sure


Gnostic Atheist = I damn sure know there is be no god okay
Agnostic Atheist = I don't believe in a god, but I don't claim to know 100% that it doesn't exist

There's also:

It is not humanly possible to know if "God" exists, so I consider the question irrelevant.

I find it funny there are even specific labels for this type of position. If you say, "I don't know, I can't know, and I don't care to waste time on thinking about it or justifying my position," someone will be glad to tell you you're a strong agnostic. You can put that on resumes.

 

[SWScorch]

Hmm, I guess this is why I'm a self-described agnostic. I don't believe in god, but given that it's impossible to prove one way or the other, I'm open to the fact that I guess it is theoretically possible for an invisible, undetectable, omnipresent, omniscient sentient force to exist, but I just don't think so. But I'm not arrogant enough to say that I know for sure one way or the other. But the very premise just seems laughable to me.

 

[coloumb]

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS

Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

I would say that most people are not really concerned with god at all. I think people are much more concerned with what comes after they die. It is scary to think that once you die here that you will not continue elsewhere.

Dying and not coming back isn't what scares me. I don't believe in a god, but I do believe we either are reincarnated or forced to walk the earth in a ghostly form until we can be reincarnated.

The end of the universe is what does scare me - that's when nothing can return [I have this vivid view of the end of the universe - collapses into permanent nothingness]

Scientific proof that a "god" does not exist? Are humans the only creatures that believe in a higher power which they label as "god"? Is it possible humans didn't start believing in god until they could understand reading/writing?

This would probably prove there is no god:

Send a new born to an island cut off from the rest of the world [think of the tv show LOST -without all of the drama and people] - ensure the child is equipped for survival for at least 100 years. Highly advanced and infallible robots raise the child and stay with the child during it's entire life. Everything the child learns is devoid of any reference to a "god".

Would that child ever think or believe in a "god"? I don't think the child would because he/she was never taught a god exists.

The question reminds me of the question asked in the movie Contact:

"Prove that your father loved you."

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: coloumb
This would probably prove there is no god:

Send a new born to an island cut off from the rest of the world [think of the tv show LOST -without all of the drama and people] - ensure the child is equipped for survival for at least 100 years. Highly advanced and infallible robots raise the child and stay with the child during it's entire life. Everything the child learns is devoid of any reference to a "god".

Would that child ever think or believe in a "god"? I don't think the child would because he/she was never taught a god exists.

Um... no. Replace god with "In & Out Burger" and the same conclusion could be drawn based on your strange logic above, yet we know they exist.