The Top 10 Reasons I Don’t Believe in God

Discussion in 'Religious Issues' started by Altaris, Sep 13, 2012.


  1. Cavalry Doc

    Cavalry Doc MAJ (USA Ret.)

    34,969
    0
    0
    But just how close can you attach these two events? 10 years, 100? 1000? It bears looking into, but it's not certain. Lots if things have happened that man was not around to witness.
     

    Wanna kill these ads? We can help!
  2. Geko45

    Geko45 Smartass Pilot
    CLM

    You are making an argument based on the validity and soundness of the evidence as it supports the proposed hypothesis. This is a reasonable thing to do (I'd disagree that the time interval in question is significant, but let's set that aside for a moment). My point in raising the issue was that King declared that there was no evidence at all.

    Clearly there is evidence. We have a global KT boundary with unusually high levels of iridium (as typically found in meteors). We have an impact crater of sufficient size to cause a global catalclysm (the Chicxulub Crater off the coast of the Yucatan Peninsula). We have the iridium samples from various locations around the worls that vary in direct proportion to their distance to the crater. And finally, we have the fossil record which shows a sudden extinction event centered on the KT boundary (with large amounts of species that existed before it, going extinct suddenly after it).

    Now, you can challenge any or all of those points on whatever grounds you like (which you have done, for instance) and we can discuss the relative merits of the argument as compared to the evidence, but that is not what King has done (and not what he typically does). He declares unilaterally that evidence does not exist and when someone like me posts such evidence, he never returns to the discussion (or at least doesn't acknowledge that his point has been countered). Invariably, some time later, he makes the same claim again, even though he knows that he was presented with evidence previously.

    That's disengenious.
     


  3. The Internet...Where religion goes to die!
     
    #243 High-Gear, Oct 1, 2012
    Last edited: Oct 1, 2012
  4. The sooner the better.
     
  5. Cavalry Doc

    Cavalry Doc MAJ (USA Ret.)

    34,969
    0
    0
    It's absolutely genuine. Some measurable facts like the KT boundary have been used by imaginitive people to tell a story. There are missing but critical pieces of the puzzle still. It's plausible, but not definite. But many people are uncomfortable with the fact that a lot of what has happened in the universe and on this planet are still really mysteries. It's narcissistic to pretend you have all the answers.
     
  6. Clutch Cargo

    Clutch Cargo Amsterdam Haze

    Cool. We can discuss theories how a lone guy hung and perfectly balanced a 9 ton coral rock gate you can move with a finger.:wavey:

    http://coralcastle.com/
     
  7. Clutch Cargo

    Clutch Cargo Amsterdam Haze

    Religion has killed millions upon millions of fellow human beings over time. I'm into faith, myself.:cool:
     
  8. Geko45

    Geko45 Smartass Pilot
    CLM

    Now you are being disengenious (again). I didn't claim to have all the answers, but I did show that there is evidence in support of the theory. You agreed there was evidence (although your position is that it is inconclusive), but then in the same breath claim King was not being disengenious.

    King claimed that there was absolutely no evidence at all, inconclusive or otherwise. Clearly there is at least some. You (and he) might not find it compelling, but to continually claim there is zero is just flat out wrong. And you sticking to your one trick pony argument when it's not even applicable to the point at hand is equally wrong.
     
  9. Have you not on several occasions claimed to be a Christian? So why are you bearing false witness against your neighbor, and on behalf of a false prophet's homicidal followers who are attacking us, no less?
     
  10. Geko45

    Geko45 Smartass Pilot
    CLM

    Serious question, why do you only seem to challenge athiests when they evaluate empirical evidence and come to a tentative conclusion, but never seem to challenge theists when they claim absolute certainty based on no evidence at all?

    It seems to me that if you believe that we are narcissitc for following the scientific method (which never claims absolute certainty) then you must also consider them to be that much more so since they claim divinely inspired absolutes based on faith alone?
     
  11. Oh, you mean like this? "No atheist has ever killed a human being because they were atheist. Ever, not one" (Glock36shooter, in post #153).
     
  12. You still haven't illustrated otherwise.
     

Share This Page