Atheism

How do you interpret Einstein's quote as a failing? And what exactly about Hawking's understanding of event horizon's do you consider to be incorrect?

Your only contribution is to pop up and insult me ? Have you read what these fools think of theists ? They find the stupidest believers they can and laugh their little tits off at how silly all believers are...the last time we did that we needed gas ovens. Are they spreading hate like it was manure ?

Actually skirt chaser, it shows the level of intelligence of the anti-religious on this thread. Religious nuts like you are making outrageous claims about science which they clearly know nothing about and fools who think they are experts like **** for brains argue no government organisation has ever been anti-religious or atheistic. Taking the middle of the road is rather dangerous when fools are speeding past.

You are easily amused. Isnt there a squirrel you can chase ? It was a typo and when I saw some one else on this thread make EXACTLY the same mistake, I courteously pointed it out to them. You arent trying to spread dissension like the manure you think is history, are you **** for brains ?

Religious nutter, sexist, racist...is there anything you cant do ?

I would ask that you google for more info...I have to go out and it is a large topic. I would like you to ask more specific questions but in general almost everything Hawking wrote on the event horizon was wrong, and Einstein was very resistant to the true nature of Quantum mechanics.

It is a wonderful day in the neighborhood! Is the moon Changing, are we becoming lunatics or is that lunerticks? Or have some of us had to much to drink tonight?

I don't consider Einstein's resistance to quantum mechanics to be comparable to the level of ignorance displayed by Bill O'Reilly's comments. I doubt anyone would.

And I can't respond to your comparison to Hawking without knowing exactly what (out of the large body of knowledge that you refer to) you are offering as the comparison.

Hang in there, Ionus. I'm certain that they all feel that the speech they hate the most is the very speech that needs to be protected.

Does the US Air force have its on religion? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuoJX1StPwA

Here's an excellent clip from Carl Sagan's Cosmos series . . . a friend posted this at facebook, and i immediately thought the folks here would enjoy seeing it.

The guy's an effin troll. He doesn't give a crap about any of these topics so much as keeping everybody riled and off topic.

Thank you for sharing Setanta, I have always enjoyed this man's work and this is a new one to me!

I haven't looked at that Youtube bit yet, Set, but it reminded me - in the last day or so, I've read the book, The Glittering Prizes. Frederic Raphael the author. There was a Brit tv series on it, about a group of people who went to Cambridge in the early fifties, their heated discussions, and re their lives for the next thirty years. Lots of sarcastic, sardonic, wise, foolish, posturing, rich kind of dialog.

So, I was reading along and there were several pages of talk about atheism when they were all around nineteen that were like a set piece from a2k. It was one in the morning and I was howling laughing - both sides with good lines.

I liked the part about the cosmos being the dreams of the gods, or, perhaps, the gods are the dreams of men.

Thank you for that video.

I can't remember what was going on in my life during that series, but I never saw it.

Imagine, speech that keeps people riled. What is this world coming to!

Oh my god . . . i strongly urge you to do a simple search for "Carl Sagan+Cosmos." It was a 13 part series on PBS, and each video episode runs about 60 minutes. It is one of the greatest television series ever made.

I will, I will, believe me..


Checked - 1980, that was when I started landarch school and also worked full time. No wonder I didn't see it.

I look forward to this.

It happens a number of ways. One way may be that they recognize an association of some sort between a thought or feeling and a particular word. Another way is that the label is applied to them by someone else and they don't care enough to try and rebrand.


Correct.


Incorrect. They are agnostic if the believe the amount of information on given claim (in this case a god) is indeterminate. If after the theistic case is made, a person doesn't know, then they are agnostic. Not knowing is a form of being unconvinced.


In a conversation about a god, it is indeterminate (agnostic). In a conversation about God, it is false (atheism).


Atheism is not a belief in unbelief. This is a critical error in your understanding.


What does the term "anti-God" mean? It seems that many are very sensitive about the idea that others remain unconvinced and what that may suggest about the standards we hold ourselves too.


Incorrect. They are someone who is unconvinced there are any gods.


Incorrect. Agnosticism is about knowledge, not if you know. I don't know the height of the Empire state building. I do recognize that the knowledge exists on the height of the building. Me not knowing, versus there being an absence of knowledge are not the same.

Keep in mind, people who posit gods aren't suggesting random or vague beings. They are proposing very specific beings for whom they credit with being the catalyst for many events in human history. Without these specific claims, there exists no compelling reason to explore the notion of gods. Such may be the reason why we care so little about being agnostic with unicorns.


As opposed to someone who is unconvinced in the existence of a god? We need a term for a person whose belief is in the unbelief in God?

I think you only wish for such a designation because it fits with you views on what atheism is, despite being told numerous times otherwise. I think "atheist" and "agnostic" are useful terms and apply well here because they reflect the real feelings of others here. The creation of a special class of atheist for the purposes of making atheism into a faith based position is unnecessary.

But, you asked for it in my words, so I choose: "Pandas."

A
R
T