Atheist Census

[cptdodger]

So have scientists proved that God is just a fairy tale, Flynn? I'd like a link to that. Can you prove this Santa Claus/fairy tale claim of yours?

Here endeth the lesson!

And I would like you to provide a link that proves god exists, but I know for a fact you cannot do that. It is as simple as this - you either believe in god or you do not. If you do, you will spend your life asking people to prove god does'nt exist, just as you have done. In my case, I do not believe in god, and I will not unless I see substantial proof that god - any god exists. I have nothing against people believing in god, half my family are very religious, my late sister in law was the first female professor of theology at Edinburgh University. So, I have heard all the arguments for and against, and all you will do is end up going round in circles

[joxville]

I'm an atheist...and I pray to God I stay that way ;-)

[Oddquine]

Now, now, what does it matter whether we are atheists,agnostics or believers?
What does matter is that we respect our fellow man and our environment and we can only do that if we recieve an education that promotes us to question,investigate,take nothing for granted and form our OWN judgemants.

Exactly! (10 flaming characters)

[Flynn]

So have scientists proved that God is just a fairy tale, Flynn? I'd like a link to that. Can you prove this Santa Claus/fairy tale claim of yours?

Here endeth the lesson!

I'd like a link to prove the existence of a giant invisible person in the sky with magical powers. Would you also have us believe the universe and everything in it was magicked into existence in seven days and that people were magicked out of mud by this genie you think lives in the sky?

I think Richard Dawkins said it best:

"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: Jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."

[M Swanson]

I'm an atheist...and I pray to God I stay that way ;-)

LOL. Bless you Jox.

[maverick]

I'd like a link to prove the existence of a giant invisible person in the sky with magical powers. Would you also have us believe the universe and everything in it was magicked into existence in seven days and that people were magicked out of mud by this genie you think lives in the sky?

I think Richard Dawkins said it best:

"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: Jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."

Is that the same Richard Dawkins who only attacks the Christian faith, because he fears for his life if he attacks the Islamic faith?

[Serenity]

Is that the same Richard Dawkins who only attacks the Christian faith, because he fears for his life if he attacks the Islamic faith?

No it must be a different one.

http://richarddawkins.net/news_artic...from-islanders

That is just the first of many from a quick Google search (and that link links to a Scotsman article as it's source but I couldn't copy the link).

[Rheghead]

Is that the same Richard Dawkins who only attacks the Christian faith, because he fears for his life if he attacks the Islamic faith?

That isn't true. He has attacked Islam in the past as well as other faiths.

Richard Dawkins accepts that there is a minute chance that there may be a god. But he says that the only one which is possible is one which set off the Big Bang and left us to it without further interference. There isn't one which answers your prayers or guides your life.

[M Swanson]

Yes, Dawkins has attacked Islam. Isn't it strange though, that such an avowed atheist accepts "there's a minute chance that there may be a God?" He would attempt to destroy a persons faith on the premise that there might, or might not, be a God? And to reinforce this peculiar atheism he points to the Big Bang, which has not and never will in my opinion, prove there wasn't, or was a God. At the end of the day, all he, or any of us can claim, is the right to believe, or not, for ourselves, with no proof available either way. Anyway, Professor Higgs has challenged his position and good for him, I say:-

"Well, all that has changed, because the theoretical physicist Peter Higgs, who predicted the existence of the Higgs boson, or “God particle”, has entered the ring. “Iron Pete” Higgs is not only nimble on his feet, but has a tasty left hook. Not since the Thrilla in Manila has there been a more eagerly awaited bout.

Higgs has accused Dawkins of adopting a “fundamentalist” approach when dealing with believers. He argues that belief and science can co-exist and that a lot of scientists in his field are people of faith. “I don’t happen to be one myself, but maybe that’s just more a matter of my family background than that there’s any fundamental difficulty about reconciling the two.” This is a low blow, because one of Dawkins’ favourite tricks is to exchange the word atheist for scientist, as if it is impossible for a scientist to be religious, as in his line .”

[Flynn]

I like how people who 'believe' are very selective in their 'belief'. If they believe in their own 'god' then that means everyone else's 'god' must also be real. 'Believers' cannot say other 'gods' don't exist, that would make them hypocrites.

[Rheghead]

Does Peter Higgs believe in God?

[M Swanson]

No, but he doesn't have to in order to validate his position. That makes him much worthier of listening to than the Dawkins 'there may be a God, but like everybody else I can't prove it' atheist, imo. Professor Higgs has gone way up in my estimation. Good for him.

[Rheghead]

No, but he doesn't have to in order to validate his position. That makes him much worthier of listening to than the Dawkins 'there may be a God, but like everybody else I can't prove it' atheist, imo. Professor Higgs has gone way up in my estimation. Good for him.

Higgs is just saying along the lines of "live and let live Mr Dawkins, stop being so vocal about your views, please change the record". Would you expect the Archbishop of Canterbury to say the same sort of thing to the Pope? I don't think so.

[M Swanson]

So what are you saying Rheg? That Higgs shouldn't have the right to an opinion and express it, on the grounds that Archie, (we have a history, ) wouldn't be expected to hold similar ones on the Pope? The Boson has had religion thrust on to it and that gives Higgs the right to say whatever he likes on the subject, doesn't it? Dawkins hasn't been slow to take the 'God particle,' opportunity on-board and run with it. Has he?

[Flynn]

Higgs is just saying along the lines of "live and let live Mr Dawkins, stop being so vocal about your views, please change the record". Would you expect the Archbishop of Canterbury to say the same sort of thing to the Pope? I don't think so.

I've never yet seen any religion or religious believer who can honestly say they live and let live - this thread being the classic example of theists not exercising live and let live - except perhaps for some zen buddhists.

[M Swanson]

Then you should get out more Flynn! There's loads of us out there. Perhaps, you're too blinded by prejudice to see us? Live and let live does it for me and mine everytime! Believe me.

[M Swanson]

Before I have to fold my tent, I'd just add one final thing, Flynn. As I've previously mentioned, one of my family is an eminent scientist, who was the head of a team of researchers and is credited with a breakthrough in the treatment of cancer. He lectures and is known worldwide. He is also a practicing Christian. Live and let live? You'd better believe it.

[rob1]

Isn't it strange though, that such an avowed atheist accepts "there's a minute chance that there may be a God?" <font color="#282828"><span style="font-family: georgia"></span></font>

Not strange at all.&nbsp; Dawkins is a scientist.&nbsp; I am also a scientist and athiest and I see his reasoning.&nbsp; You can't, no matter how hard you try, prove that something does not exist.&nbsp; It doesn't matter whether it is a chair, Atlantis or a god. Therefore the only acceptable conclusion that can be drawn is that there is a possibility that in this case a god may exist. On the other side you can prove that something does exist. This is done by observation and interpritation of available data. To prove that a chair exists for example, you can see it, touch it, sit on it, measure its volume, mass. To date no credible observations have been made that can be interprited as the existance of a god.
Religion exist soley on its followers' belief and faith that their god is real without any evidance to support their claim. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;

[M Swanson]

Not strange at all.&nbsp; Dawkins is a scientist.&nbsp; I am also a scientist and athiest and I see his reasoning.&nbsp; You can't, no matter how hard you try, prove that something does not exist.&nbsp;

That's about it in a nutshell, Rob. No argument here, except that Dawkins has declared himself an agnostic, not an atheist. Now that makes a lot more sense to me. Especially in the light of him stating that there is a chance, that God exists. Makes me wonder what all the fuss is about and why atheists are swinging from his shirt tails.

I had to laugh, when at the end of an interview, he became so frustrated that he said, "Oh! God."

[Rheghead]

Especially in the light of him stating that there is a chance, that God exists. Makes me wonder what all the fuss is about and why atheists are swinging from his shirt tails.

Well when a scientist draws a conclusion in a scientific way, shouldn't they explain their observations with the simplest explanation? If the chance of a god is extremely small then is it proper to jump to the god explanation? Who created god? And who created what created god? It seems there needs to be an ever increasing road of complexity if you go down the religious road. At least gleeber got it right when he said a simpler thing created a complex universe, it follows the laws of thermodynamics.

I wouldn't substitute lack of knowledge with a God if there is no evidence, and history has shown that enlightenment has pushed the space for a God beyond what can be touched and explored, Dawkins acknowledges this. God is in a book, written by an unenlightened man and that is all is to be said about that.