Ask An Atheist Anything

reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact

Originally posted by Cosmic.Artifact
most scientist are atheists in this day and age are they not ?

then where or what purpose would they really serve if they did not ask the "why" ?

the "why" is what progresses their particular fields is it not ?

why then can atheists not bridge the gap ? are they not truly scientific minded ?

Because "why" relates to accepting a positive position, I think an example would be demonstrate this:

"Why do you like bananas?" Is what you ask someone who loves bananas.

"Why do you not like bananas?" Is something you ask someone who doesn't like bananas.

In asking an atheist, someone who rejects any religious proposition, what they are doing, you must ask them "Why not?" rather than "Why?" because they're not doing something rather than actively doing something.

btw: how ya doin' MIMS

I'm doing...busy. Busy busy busy. Hardly have time for posts on ATS, working between 14-18 hours a day due to university, the only thing that's keeping me on ATS is insomnia.

How about you? Cooled down a bit?

reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact


And here I thought things were going to be different...

Originally posted by Cosmic.Artifact
Atheism put a little more literally only means Anti-Christian, simple as that...

Incorrect, atheism most literally put means "no god(s)". And we do speak out against other religions, it's just that most western atheists tend to be surrounded by Christians rather than Hindus. What would be the point in criticizing Hinduism to Christians?

professed atheists are not interested in science otherwise they would not care a hoot about Christians or religion at all,

So...the vast majority of the National Academy of Sciences isn't interested in science? Over 70% of its membership express a disbelief in deities.

just as most "true" scientist do not choose to position themselves against anyone.

Except they do position themselves against those who promote ignorance. And what exactly is a 'true' scientist?

they usually keep it to themselves like matured knowledgeable individuals...

Ok, things have improved a bit, but you're still implying insults against atheists.

I can use this video from another topic for an important point to be made in this here topic



now listen closely, and mind you viewers "think about it"

Michio's little comment about what distinguishes science from religion serves no purpose other than to be able to determine how "his mind" is distinguished from truly great scientific minds such as Einstein.

for we know how cautiously the greatest minds treated this subject he so plainly quotes on...

sorry Mich, you are not doing a very good job convincing the majority of hard working taxpayers to give you money for your hand softening lotion...

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


yeah I'm doing good actually... nothing like a little hard heavy manual arsed labor to cure insomnia dude. My knuckles are busted on solid metal and scraped across sharp edges but its nothing new to me, it actually reminds me I am still alive.

Now I am actually at the point where I can create parts on the lathe (shop smith) in my work... usually only simple little things like mounting brackets and retainers & pulleys, but it feels great not having to wait around for the dealership or trying to source parts for those blasted nuage horses I have to work on.

hey... why do atheists not believe in love ?

reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact


He's referring specifically to what his theory seems to say. He's also saying "maybe" and "possibly". This was him explaining a particular theory he is working on, not claiming it to be fact.

He is a great scientific mind, all you're doing is defaming an individual because he's explaining a particular cosmological concept.

reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact


The atheists I know do believe in love, though I am aware of those that don't. I myself believe in love and am currently in love. I just don't believe that love is a exterior cosmic force, it's an incredibly pleasant result of chemical firings sustained by a relationship with an individual.

reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact


I am sorry but I can not leave another point out of this video, maybe it is just me ? but I do pay attention to what people say and their demeanor...

in the opening of this little clip the host asks if he believes in "his" theory she also uses the word "your"

but when our scientist answers he attaches all scientists to his personal theory using the word "we" and even when speaking about the LHC like it is his or something, again using the word "we"

but do not many scientist have many different theories and assertions of their own specific theory ?

gotta love the "we" in his comments, almost seemingly dividing himself and the small particular sect of scientists from the rest of humanity.

Did you know in another video also he seems to be saying particle physics can cure diseases ? like polio that's some smooth glossing over of the truth if you ask me, sounds fancy none the less...

Einstein was so much cooler...

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact

 

He's referring specifically to what his theory seems to say. He's also saying "maybe" and "possibly". This was him explaining a particular theory he is working on, not claiming it to be fact.

He is a great scientific mind, all you're doing is defaming an individual because he's explaining a particular cosmological concept.

well it is surely not an equal and balanced discussion, the way he uses the "we" puts the host as a lesser being than him and by his demeanor (on many shows other than this) only proves this fact.

that was the point I am really trying to make also, scientists are guilty of elevating themselves as gods by their own rite. But their rite is flawed and simplistic...

funny thing the pastor at my sisters church treats others like he knows nothing and the people hold the knowledge....

just sayin'

reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact

but when our scientist answers he attaches all scientists to his personal theory using the word "we" and even when speaking about the LHC like it is his or something, again using the word "we"

but do not many scientist have many different theories and assertions of their own specific theory ?

Maybe he's humble and honest to admit that he didn't come to the conclusions completely on his own accord. In science we stand on the shoulders of the people who paved the way, seeing for them also. He could be referring to a specific area of science in which many people are contributing to findings or maybe he refers to "WE" as the human race. More than 1 person can pursue a particular theory if they want, or they can develop their own unique theory as many scientists have and continue to do today.

i don't think this is relevant or potent point of contention.

Einstein was so much cooler...

Einstein was cool but not as cool as the person who proves him wrong is going to be (or at least develops his findings further)

Also Einstein wasn't a theist, he wasn't even a deist, he didn't believe in a personal anthropomorphic God, although he admitted that the universe was not "random" as we know it, that there is order, he asserted that "God does not play dice" - The universe isn't as random or spontaneous as we think.

Einstein did once comment that "God does not play dice [with the universe]." This quotation is commonly mentioned to show that Einstein believed in the Christian God. Used this way, it is out of context; it refers to Einstein's refusal to accept some aspects of the most popular interpretations of quantum theory. Furthermore, Einstein's religious background was Jewish rather than Christian. A better quotation showing what Einstein thought about God is the following: I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings. Einstein recognized Quantum Theory as the best scientific model for the physical data available. He did not accept claims that the theory was complete, or that probability and randomness were an essential part of nature. He believed that a better, more complete theory would be found, which would have no need for statistical interpretations or randomness.

So someone may develop Einstein's theories further, that doesn't mean their "idiots" because they didn't come up on it by thereselves. Again, a scientist may be cautious in using the word "I" because others have paved the way for his or her findings.

Originally posted by ACTS 2:38

Since you are an atheist you have to know everything, and since you know everything you must be a god yourself.

I know very little and I am by no means a god.

Just wondering because you know it all, if you know there is not a God.

I don't know that there is not a god. I simply don't believe others' claims that there are any.

Originally posted by Cosmic.Artifact
anything really ?

one simple question...

Why ?

Why what? Why am I an atheist?

Because I don't believe in the claims that gods exist.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


And now i'm in love with your mind

@traditionaldrummer

I'm sure you could whittle your responses down to 1 word and it wouldn't be any less profound and meaningful.

Also a question, are you willing to entertain the possibility that we exist out of infinity rather than the pre-supposing a creator? That's probably a retarded question, but could you entertain it as a possibility. Do you think such ideas as the mandelbrot set, the fibonacci sequence or pi add to this contention of our reality/universe(maybe multiverse) existence being infinity? I've often found the creationist argument results in an infinite regress of who created the creator of the creator of the creator - Does this also stand in contention of the idea of infinity? Perhaps this is unknowable, always will be.

Question for both madness and TD. Cheers

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
Also a question, are you willing to entertain the possibility that we exist out of infinity rather than the pre-supposing a creator?

Absolutely. Creationism relies on a presupposition: that there once was nothing and something appeared, or was created, out of it. However, there's no particular reason to assume that "nothing" is the default state of the universe.

Do you think such ideas as the mandelbrot set, the fibonacci sequence or pi add to this contention of our reality/universe(maybe multiverse) existence being infinity?

They're certainly examples of infinity. I have no idea if this indicates existence being infinity.

I've often found the creationist argument results in an infinite regress of who created the creator of the creator of the creator - Does this also stand in contention of the idea of infinity? Perhaps this is unknowable, always will be.

The infinite regress involved with contemplation of creators is a great argument against creationism, I always thought.

To me, if someone insists everything was created they need to show us the creator.

reply to post by traditionaldrummer


Thanks

As it's ask an Atheist anything.... who's your favourite drummer of all time?

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
who's your favourite drummer of all time?

Me, of course

Nah. I admire all the good drummers for different reasons. Some changed my life forever, some I like to steal from, some have a unique signature sound and feel, some have a "spirit" that you can "summon". My favorites change as often as the direction of the wind...

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact

 

but when our scientist answers he attaches all scientists to his personal theory using the word "we" and even when speaking about the LHC like it is his or something, again using the word "we"

but do not many scientist have many different theories and assertions of their own specific theory ?

Maybe he's humble and honest to admit that he didn't come to the conclusions completely on his own accord.

well I suppose it took somewhat more of a "humanist" to be able to explain that then for the rest of the viewers ? thanks I will consider that but still only weighed against his demeanor and the mass amount of other videos I have seen him on.

it seems the only level he can communicate his thoughts to others is on a kindergarten level with his analogies and his whimsical comedic comments about what separates science "from" religion, when in fact our cause is one and the same.

he still only believes in someone elses ideas and only what he can currently perceive, does he not have an opinion ?

have you seen him talking about aliens yet, and how he compares the universe to the internet ?

all very simple analogies a grade schooler could come up with, I am not impressed to say the least...

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Why what? Why am I an atheist?

Because I don't believe in the claims that gods exist.

"why" does God not exist ?

would be more along the lines of what I am looking for in this particular "why"

reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact


Being an atheist is not a matter of whether or not a deity exists. Being an atheist is a matter or not of believing it. A deity may exist. It might even be a deity that no human being is aware of. Hell, it might be a deity that was worshiped by a long dead civilization who didn't keep written records. Of course we cannot preclude these notions when we think about it. However, we're not going to be theists just because we can't be sure that a deity doesn't exist, we'll simply state that epistemological certainty is impossible. We are agnostic atheists.

Originally posted by Cosmic.Artifact
"why" does God not exist ?

would be more along the lines of what I am looking for in this particular "why"

I do not claim that god does not exist.
Other people claim that god does exist and I don't believe it.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


so now you are "not sure" ?

I can go with that, no problem...

but you are sure the Christians deity (God) does not exists correct ?

I ask atheists to prove that God does not exist that's all...