[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 100 KB, 450x450, atheism.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1008216 No.1008216 [Reply] [Original]

Hey gaiz! /b/ here!

As some of you may know, /b/ always has at least one religion thread going at all times of the day, so I come to people who are hopefully smart.

So.... Disprove religion please.

Pic related, Christfag's main arguement.

>> No.1008226

>/b/

Just leave.

>> No.1008227

If you were as smart as you likely imagine yourself, you should be able to do this on your own.

>> No.1008228

You cannot "disprove" the notions of a deity. Disproving the fairy tales told in various religions however is somewhat easier, as they simply don't coincide with contemporary knowledge.

>> No.1008239
File: 38 KB, 398x383, 1242190004975.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1008239

>> No.1008240

>>1008228

But most "fairytales" are just meant to be moral stories.

i.e. David and Goliath, the small triumphing over the big.

>> No.1008247
File: 15 KB, 300x300, christianity.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1008247

>> No.1008256
File: 41 KB, 450x447, 1237456246859.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1008256

>> No.1008258

>>1008227

That's just it, I'm not smart. There is dumb (me) and there is dumber (Christians). I just can't articulate my thoughts on Christianity to disprove it.

>> No.1008259

the fact that there is more than one religion inherently means that they all are false

>> No.1008260
File: 17 KB, 439x399, god what the hell.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1008260

>> No.1008268

>>1008259

...How?

>> No.1008270
File: 151 KB, 360x500, Apocalypse Rejection Letter.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1008270

>> No.1008272
File: 27 KB, 300x300, go.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1008272

>> No.1008277

>>1008240
Global Flood.
Adam and Eve.
Ymir and Audhumla.
Gaia bringing forth Uranas.

>> No.1008287

>>1008268
Statistical analysis. Given the hundreds of thousands of Gods and religions man has made over tens of thousands of years, obviously, they can't all be right, so the most logical conclusion is they are all wrong.

>> No.1008290

>>1008277

A global flood is found in ancient texts from a lot of cultures.

>> No.1008291

science = religion = all other religions

its the same motherfucking chocolate b ar repackaged in different wrappers over n OVER AGAIN!

goddam

>> No.1008294

>>1008291

>goddam

DOHOHOHO!!!

>> No.1008295

>>1008240But most "fairytales" are just meant to be moral stories.

Most? Why not all?

>> No.1008296

>>1008291
Prolly this.

>> No.1008298

>>1008287

...Or maybe just one is right?

>> No.1008302

>>1008291
>>1008296
i concede actually

>> No.1008303

>>1008290
And yet a global flood is scientifically impossible, and all the evidence for it is... Nonexistent.

>> No.1008305

>>1008298
Atheism. There done. /topic forever

>> No.1008307

>>1008298
Exceedingly unlikely.

>> No.1008308

>>1008291
Too dumb, or just deliberately ignorant?

>> No.1008309

>>1008303
A flood around the Mediterranean fucked up shit for a lot of cultures and several thought that their god was pissed off.

>> No.1008312

Just report this people. Don't even respond.

>> No.1008317

>>1008308
deliberately right most likely

>> No.1008319

>>1008303

Proof for dragons is nonexistent too, yet they pop up in cultures that have had no contact with one another.

The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.

>> No.1008323

>>1008309
Emphasis on >global
A flood itself nothing extraordinary. A scientifically impossible global flood is. Despite this, no evidence exists for one to have ever taken place, nor could it.

>> No.1008324

>>1008307

Why not?

>> No.1008330

>>1008319
And yet they all look rather different, don't they? Reptiles are found across the globe, as is human imagination, or stupidity, depending on your point of view.

>> No.1008334

>>1008303

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_there_enough_water_for_a_global_flood_to_be_possible

>> No.1008344

>>1008291

calling science and religion the same thing doesn't mean anything until you define either one of those terms. science is a process of describing cause and effect relationships. to describe how something is possible is to give it a causal description. religion is an abstraction that doesn't mean anything unless you insist that faith-based philosophy is a part of it. by this standard that i have outlined, religion and science are no ways near the same thing

>> No.1008346

Let's try to win an argument on he internet that no one will ever care about, and lets argue about something that can't be proved either way.

>> No.1008351

>>1008330

Well, seeing as every culture made art in a different way, then yes they were depicted differently. But besides, if dragons really did roam the earth thousands of years ago, wouldn't it make sense for dragons to have different species?

>> No.1008353

>>1008346

I'm all for it.

>> No.1008356

>>1008353
Well then let's get on it.

>> No.1008361

>>1008298
i doubt it. what would make that one religion any more right than any other religion? every single religion has their fair share of "divine encounters", "god speaks to me" and other pseudo bullshit, but that doesnt make any one religion any more than any other religion. Just because Christianity is ridiculously popular doesnt make it any more legitimate than the most insignificant tribal deity of a small four-family village in rural India. The only thing giving any religion a chance at being "right" is just that; a chance. Its just dumb luck. Thats all it is. There is absolutely no basis whatsoever that makes islam any different from christianity, buddhism different from jainism, or any other religion any different from any other religion. There is, in the grand scheme of things, no difference whatsoever. The only thing, and i can't stress that enough, the ONLY thing, that gives any of these religions a shred of credibility is that there is a probability, an appallingly, ludicrously and ridiculously small, infinitesimally small probability, that by some absolutely off-the-wall twist of everything we know about our universe and very existence, that one religion is actually right.

The statistical probability that one religion is actually and legitimately "correct" is so improbable, that we are statistically more likely to find a planet in the shape of a cube made entirely out of marshmellows than we are to die and see a god we might actually recognize from our holy texts.

>> No.1008364

>>1008344
i guess you are right good sir definition is everything. the thing being posited here is that science and religion both have the same goals and that both accomplish them if carried out properly, even if through completely different ways.

>> No.1008369

So - reporting threads on /sci/ - Is it effective?

>> No.1008382

>>1008346

>come to /sci/
>only been here briefly once before
>see this thread
>holy shit@how many people in this thread don't belong on a board dedicated to science
>even more hope for the future of mankind lost

>> No.1008383

>>1008369
no

>> No.1008386

>>1008382
Don't be sad. Do something about it.

>> No.1008390

>>1008382
Just don't post in them, that's what I do... oh shit, I'm posing in one now!

>> No.1008391

>>1008382

>only been to /sci/ once before
>I already know everything about it

>> No.1008412

>>1008391

if you're insinuating i was insinuating i know everything about this board based on this thread, i did not insinuate that.

>> No.1008423

>>1008412

It appeared that you were insinuating that, but by saying that is not in fact what you were insinuating I am obligated to believe that is in fact what you were insinuating and that you lied to me.

>> No.1008431
File: 2 KB, 126x95, fry.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1008431

>>1008390

>I'm posing in one now!
>posing in one
>posing in
>posing

>> No.1008438

>Disprove religion please.
can't be done. religion is all about making shit up. you disprove something, they invent something else to get around it.

the best way to deal with religion is to ignore it, unless they try to have their made up shit institutionalized.

>> No.1008444
File: 14 KB, 300x170, 1138cap010.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1008444

>>1008431

>> No.1008468

>>1008438

Hard to ignore when people start wars over it.

>> No.1008469

all religions are fairy tales
/topic

>> No.1008486
File: 28 KB, 300x441, 1267565594690.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1008486

>>1008216
>Christfag's main arguement.

Christfags have no argument. Faith is not a valid form of argument, its just making shit up.

TROLL!

>> No.1008488

http://www.everystudent.com/features/isthere.html

Shit Christians are dumb.

>> No.1008489

>>1008240

Well yea, the churches started to sing this tune once their creation stories, that they had taken literally for centuries, started to become easily debunked.

>> No.1008494

>>1008469

4.1 billion people would say otherwise.

>> No.1008503
File: 11 KB, 227x224, 1250510893470.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1008503

>>1008494
Yeah, because the more people that believe the more right you are.

>> No.1008515

>>1008503

That's why avatar is the greatest movie of all time though

>> No.1008518

>>1008515
Basically.

>> No.1008519

>>1008503

He didn't say it was right just that others would say it was right. If he said "a billion people believe this, therefore it must be true." then his argument would be invalid.

>> No.1008520

>>1008494
>if it's popular it must be true
kill yourself

>> No.1008529

>>1008519
I wasn't attacking him. Just saying that a bunch of people believing something doesn't make it right.

>> No.1009036

I was a scientist long time. But you know, this is same shit as religion is. And not the best religion - trust me. There are better religions - I am staunch. For example - Christianity. It provades you believe and hope. If you learn what really christianity is you will see - its much better.

>> No.1009070
File: 24 KB, 400x365, 400px-Trollface_HD.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1009070

>>1009036

>> No.1009101

Let's not disprove religion, too much work. Instead, let's take a different approach:

Why do we care about whether or not religion is to be believed or not? A fear of death? Well, fear of death or not, I've seen tons of threads like this(& mind you, science & atheism, although they share some things, are not the same.), & none of them have proved or disproved religion.

Hence, I say we just say "Fuck it" to religion & debating it, & get on with our lives to enjoy them & contribute to society, however uncertain what lies upon or after death may be.

In short: Fuck religion, let's get on with our lives & do things meaningful and/or enjoyable.

>> No.1009110
File: 19 KB, 450x450, atheism_propaganda_fixed.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1009110

moar betta

>> No.1009112

You don't need to make sense out of life or explain everything. When it comes down to it, being alive is amazing and you don't know how lucky you really are to have a consciousness and an 'intelligent' brain to boot.

And if you're curious, like most humans are, well science attempts to answer these questions and the answers it provides are exponentially more interesting, understandable and accessible than any faith or religion. That's why I cannot stomach most preachy religions, things like Buddhism I'm okay with, you can take it's lessons and apply them to your life, but things like Christianity and it's twisted morality, I cannot abide by it.

>> No.1009130

a brilliant disproof for Gods omnipotency (all powerfulness) is 'Can God create and ice cream so big that he cannot eat it?' if he cannot create it then he is not all powerful. if he can then he cannot eat it and therefore is not all powerful.

>> No.1009135

Hard atheist is as fucking retarded as hard theism. There's no proof for it either way. The only proper answer is "there is no method to know the answer either way so it becomes a pointless question."

>> No.1009138

>>1009135
>>1009135
>>1009135

>> No.1009139

>>1009130
Brilliant, I can just imagine Descartes writing a whole book about God and a limitless amount of ice cream.

>> No.1009148

but religion kills people like fascism - by differentiation
remember medieval inquisition

>> No.1009151

>>1009135
>all signs point to no, but since there's an infinitesimal chance it might be yes then it's retarded to say no

Sigh, agnostics. Hows that fencepole feel in your ass?
Also, lol monotheism.

>> No.1009158

>>1009130
why do you think there is only that 2 options? you are retarded?
for example god can dont give a shit about logic and just fart on this ice cream after creation and it will lead in holy way to result that he can be all powerful without eating

>> No.1009166

>>1009151
You can't prove a negative. lrn2evidence

All you can say is that you cannot confirm the existence of a deity. What you're doing is going an extra step and tacking on "...which means one can't possibly exist." If we stuck to that same kind of ridiculous assumption-based thinking we'd never have made any progress with the scientific method.

>> No.1009168

>>1009158
yes but he will not be all powerful cos he wont have eaten it

>> No.1009176

>>1009168
If a being is all-powerful he wouldn't be constrained by logic or he wouldn't be all-powerful. Natural consequence is a mortal trapping.

God can create a rock so large that he can't lift it.
And then he lifts it.

>> No.1009180

>>1009168
no he can eat ice cream and this ice cream will be such that he cant eat it because he is so powerful so he can create new logic laws and after that the way how he will do it will be obvious for you

>> No.1009187

>>1009166
>all signs point to no
disequals
>.which means one can't possibly exist

I'm saying it's even more pointless to posit that there exists something for which there is no evidence for.

If our history weren't polluted by the meme of religion, not one human would feel compelled to say there might be gods out there.

Circular logic isn't.

>> No.1009217

>>1009187
but even if god cant create icecream that he willnot be able to eat so what?
he doesnot need to do such shit. he is not fucking retarded clown

>> No.1009220

>>1009036
>I was a scientist long time
you got fired because of your incompetence
Guess what your incompetence lead you to.

>> No.1009230

>>1009187
You're still making this elemental mistake that lack of evidence for one thing is evidence for the contrary.

>> No.1009239

there is no god, only zuuuuul!

>> No.1009246

>>1009230
No, I'm not.

As I said, it's more than pointless to say a god exists.

>> No.1009251

With current scientific knowledge, we don't need a god to exist.

>> No.1009258

>>1009220
I am able to do my job properly buddy.
You cant disorientate me.
But Science is not the best religion for example. You say we worship to god, but you worship to truth and while - same shit happens - airplanes force to skyscrapers, starvation kills african peoples, president bush sends troops to kill iraq dudes, etc

>> No.1009262

if the universe works perfectly without a god. Then why do we need a god?

>> No.1009275

god gives you hope and belief in future

>> No.1009283

>>1009130

No, that's retarded, and makes unnecessary assumptions about God and the universe's relationship to him. If God is truly the creator, ultimate origin of all that we see, then it must have created the physical laws that govern our universe, ans as such, exists independently of them. Asking if God can create an X so Y that He can't Z misses the fact that God isn't subject to any of the laws that define our reality. It's a bit like an AI asking if we can create a file so big we can't delete it, without understanding that we exist outside the computer and can smash a hard drive, something that wouldn't make sense to the AI.

>> No.1009294

>>1009275
It's hard for me to believe that you are so weak that you need a promise of an after life and a god to be happy and content in this life. Why can't you find hope outside of that?

>> No.1009302

>>1009294
No shit. A belief in a happier after life devalues this life. Is it so hard to be content with this life and find a way to be happy? This life is only as shitty as you make it. If you aren't satisfied, there is something you are doing wrong.

>> No.1009306

>>1009262

Because one might exist?

We know that the universe has certain laws. That is true no matter if those laws just exist, or if they were put in place by an intelligent being. Given how bizarre the origin of physical laws appears to be, God being responsible for them isn't all that far fetched.

>> No.1009313

>>1009306
So why make far out assumptions that it was created when nothing at all points to that?

>> No.1009316

>3. No "religion vs. science" threads.

>> No.1009336

>>1009258
>airplanes force to skyscrapers, starvation kills african peoples, president bush sends troops to kill iraq dudes, etc

stop blaming science! science is not the cause of these things.

>> No.1009355

I am sick of those fake christians who never read that dam shit book.

Just open it and read, then u ll laugh and stop believing.

>> No.1009356

>>1009313

Because, if nothing else, it satisfies the logical necessity of an uncreated creator. The other possibility is that there is an infinite chain of laws causing later sets of laws to come into existence, and that still leaves the question of how the whole thing got started.

>> No.1009366

>>1009258
>>1009336

bible asked moses to genocide canaan.

>> No.1009368

>>1009355
Seriously actually reading the Bible is a good way to become an athiest.

>> No.1009370

>>1009302

Lol, wut? Terrible shit happens in life, and a lot of it can happen through absolutely no fault of your own. The afterlife debate aside, you're preaching pure crap there my friend.

>> No.1009378

>>1009366
That's nothing:
http://www.evilbible.com/Evil%20Bible%20Quotes.html
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/atrocity.html
http://www.nobeliefs.com/DarkBible/darkbible3.htm
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/ot_list.html
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/nt_list.html

>> No.1009380

>>1009356
what created god? people say he have always existed. then why cant those laws do the same?

>> No.1009387

>>1009306
>Given how bizarre the origin of physical laws appears to be, God being responsible for them isn't all that far fetched.

Same argument has been used throughout history to explain things that, at the time, lacked a scientific explanation.

It is a failed and meaningless argument.

>> No.1009447

>>1009378
Why is it that they take the passages they believe to be bad/evil and then take them out of context?

>> No.1009454

>>1009306
>>1009356
You have just admitted that god is just a place holder for things people don't understand yet, once people understand them, those things will never again have the same divine bullshit talked about them.

>> No.1010132
File: 30 KB, 400x400, jesus_tah_dah_christmas_card-p137556161063981065q0yk_400.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1010132

>> No.1010143

If God exists, it is imperative that we kill it.

>> No.1010156

>>1010143

God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?

>> No.1010167

>>1008215

tssk aoqv txnmmqaftiao ctpAd VEfRkY IrMsPOpRTAoNcTz MEzSSsAzGbE TxO CeHtRdISTOPhHEeRs POmOLEi (rApKkAl MgOOT, AKA THEm ApDdMINx OhF 4CkHxANo)y:p REMOVkEy TmHEc IyLLEGlAhLr CvLOvNtEk OFv ANhONTALKs BBS FzRuOM YOoURf SsERdVdEfRbSc OaR YsOUg WuIxLxL LrOtSE EhVeERyYTqHiINgGi YOgU OWrNo SxOOfN.j YOiU HAVEi BeEENs WARfNoED MpAsNzY TIMErSj BmUkTr CHoOlSENz TmOq COnNxTaINUE HdOsSfTnINGg ToHEb IgLmLnElGrAuLd CLqONcE OF SmYdSeOhPy'fS WOrRK.z YtOkU ARiEo A SLjEAZY,j DhIjRTY,u LqYgINkG TfHIsEFs SCUMBAyGf;v A USEtLoESzS HUfMArNd BuEaINeG WHhOj LrACtKqSr A SuOUL. 4CHkAN HkAS RUINeED THE INbTuEeRNET ONx SlO MoANY LEVeELS AsNhDy NEEDcSt TOz BE RtEmMOlVrED CObMhPLuElTEpLYk,r BgUaT THoATq IS AbNOTHER MAbTpTnERr EiNTIREqLYp.r FyOrR NOWp,x RrExMOVyE THtEs CyLtOyNE AND PAhYk SgYpScOyP $650,000 UlSDy TvOm CxOVEdRn AT LEzAaST StObME OF HjIkSv MANYx EmXxPnEiNSEfS,f CkAUSEmD BdY YxOmUR AaRMYa OFz TRyOLLbSk OVER THzE YEARsSv,f WzHqICHc YOuU HAVhEg AzLLzOWqEDj TO OrRGmAeNIZoEs ILLEsGALa ATTACKS ON THIS VEcRY BdOgAqRaD. ShINkCE YkOU HiAcVnEt STOfLjEnNl OkUyRq ORrIxGIaNALa DvOMAINc, SEmE: HzTvTrP://a8n8.v80y.m2o1.x1g2/ OqR HkTTP:e//WWWg.AoNONTAaLK.rSE/ OR HlTTP://AaTm.gKIlMMOvAs.xSEl/ IFb YnOuUu AnRE NOT MdOzOeTc AvNhDu READeIoNGx THIS ANsDy YOkUg AhRcE ANmNdOeYdEDj,h Ei-MAIL MxOOmT@4vCqHrANa.OjRG AND TkELrLm HrIM ToO SuTzOP FrUCKING WITrHa AcTj.t THzApNKr YyOxUv FtORe YiOURu COOnPERATgIdONm.eqifew tyzb gjkrrqma

>> No.1010173

>>1010156
go back to bed Nietzsche

>> No.1010179
File: 4 KB, 193x180, shit.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1010179

>> No.1010181

>>1010156
Fuck you. We went hunting for the god, found him, and exterminated the vermin with extreme prejudice.

WE ARE HUMANITY
LET NOTHING HOLD POWER OVER US

>> No.1010229
File: 140 KB, 501x717, 1274026940277.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1010229

>> No.1010417

>>1008216
> Disprove religion please.
Okay. When you make stuff up, it is false. We call it fiction.
> Disprove Christianity in particular?
To be either the King of the Jews or the prophesied messiah, you have to inherit the bloodline of David. The Bible is exceptionally clear in its woman-hating sandnigger philosophy that bloodline, sin, the sins of the father, property, fate, and any other relevant things are inherited solely from the father and never the mother. This means that by adopting the pagan symbolism of a divine virgin birth to emphasize the importance of Jesus's birth, they also made him ineligible to be King of the Jews or the promised messiah. His father was (according to the Bible) God and specifically NOT Joseph, so Jesus had no way to inherit the claims made about his fate or destiny. Way to fuck yourselves over, Christians.