Is atheism a mental disorder?

[Dos Equis]

i had professors like that as well i also had professors that were the exact opposite of that also. Again though simply b/c somebody presents something in a non objective way doesnt mean you cant take a objective look at it. Church is not objective at all so should that stop ppl who have beliefs that contradict those being taught not go and take an objective look?

a 4.5 billion yr old earth does go against ID b/c like i said modern humans have only been around for about 250,000 yrs according to our dating methods, before that a species that was similar to humans but slightly different, before that a species that was similar to the last but slightly different and so on and so on. If God created us the way we stand today why arent there fossils like modern day humans that date back further then 250,000 yrs? Living things were made at the same time correct? if we were made at the same time we would find modern human fossils that date back to the same time as dinosaurs etc...so yes ID and radiometric dating do stand on opposite sides of the debate unless i missed something about ID

How do you take a truly objective look at a theory if you don't look at alternative theories?  For example, have you ever read about the theory of irreducible complexity?     

The earth being 4.5 billion years old doesn't conflict with intelligent design at all.  It's entirely possible the earth was around for a long time before life was created.

There are no transition fossils.  That's one of the major flaws in the macroevolution theory.  The oldest human fossils are human.  Same with all other animals.  If there were was this massive transition from one species to another the fossil record would be full of these hybrid creatures.  But this is probably the subject of another thread. 

We tend to repeat the same discussions on these boards. 

[tonymctones]

How do you take a truly objective look at a theory if you don't look at alternative theories?  For example, have you ever read about the theory of irreducible complexity?     

The earth being 4.5 billion years old doesn't conflict with intelligent design at all.  It's entirely possible the earth was around for a long time before life was created.

There are no transition fossils.  That's one of the major flaws in the macroevolution theory.  The oldest human fossils are human.  Same with all other animals.  If there were was this massive transition from one species to another the fossil record would be full of these hybrid creatures.  But this is probably the subject of another thread. 

We tend to repeat the same discussions on these boards. 

What are you talking about there are plenty of transition fossils? Theres plenty of evidence to show that there was a logical progression from one species to the next all the way to modern day humans.

What traits do you think about when you think about irreducible complexity?

The oldest fossils that are considered to be modern day homo sapiens are from what i remember 250,000 yrs old if you believe in modern day radiometric dating techniques why arent there modern day human fossils that date back to the time of dinosaurs? The bible says that all creatures where made together right? at the same time? if thats true then you would have modern day human remains found with ancient dinosaurs why dont we find this?

[Dos Equis]

What are you talking about there are plenty of transition fossils? Theres plenty of evidence to show that there was a logical progression from one species to the next all the way to modern day humans.

What traits do you think about when you think about irreducible complexity?

The oldest fossils that are considered to be modern day homo sapiens are from what i remember 250,000 yrs old if you believe in modern day radiometric dating techniques why arent there modern day human fossils that date back to the time of dinosaurs? The bible says that all creatures where made together right? at the same time? if thats true then you would have modern day human remains found with ancient dinosaurs why dont we find this?

No there aren't.  That's one of the gaping holes in the theory of evolution.  The oldest fossil of a human is human.  The oldest fossil of a dog is a dog.  Etc., etc. 

I don't think about traits when I think about irreducible complexity.  I think about how it's impossible for certain components of the body that are completely dependent on each to have evolved independently of each other.   

[wild willie]

NO...... JUST A COMPLETE AND UTTER LACK OF BELIEF. I think atheism is a joke.

[tonymctones]

No there aren't.  That's one of the gaping holes in the theory of evolution.  The oldest fossil of a human is human.  The oldest fossil of a dog is a dog.  Etc., etc. 

I don't think about traits when I think about irreducible complexity.  I think about how it's impossible for certain components of the body that are completely dependent on each to have evolved independently of each other.   

ok componenets?

Im not sure i understand what youre saying are you saying the austrolapithecus etc...was human? B/c there are plenty of transition fossils that are not taxonomically considered human that show a logical progression from one species to another up to us as we are now...are you saying that all those species are human?

please address the time difference issue for me, what arent human remains found with dinosaurs? Why arent fossils of all creatures that are known found within the same timeframe when we do radiometric dating? why is it that certain fossils only appear to come about at certain times? if all creatures were made together then their fossils would all be found in the same time frame correct?

[OzmO]

Here's what happened.

God took a snap shot of what "reality" would look like at a certain point in a "time line" if there was a big bang, evolution, dinosaurs etc.. And then created reality, the universe etc. based on that.  End of story.

There it is!  Nothing but net!

Don't even try and mess with me on this.

[Necrosis]

your logic is poor, simply b/c humans can produce life doesnt mean God didnt create life first does it? Humans producing life doesnt mean no God only that humans can make life as well...

where is the logic in that? why introduce a hypercomplex being into the equation when we have a perfectly natural and repeatable explanation?

I not sure you understand logic, because your scenario is not logically in the slightest.

[Necrosis]

No there aren't.  That's one of the gaping holes in the theory of evolution.  The oldest fossil of a human is human.  The oldest fossil of a dog is a dog.  Etc., etc. 

I don't think about traits when I think about irreducible complexity.  I think about how it's impossible for certain components of the body that are completely dependent on each to have evolved independently of each other.   

every fossil is a transitional fossil, you dont see hybrids because evolution is slow and the organism has to be able to survive.

Irreducibly complex is a joke and proven as such.

Again every fossil is a transitional fossil, your misunderstanding of evolution requires you demand a half bird/half human hybrid in order to be a transition, which is simply not reality.

[tonymctones]

where is the logic in that? why introduce a hypercomplex being into the equation when we have a perfectly natural and repeatable explanation?

I not sure you understand logic, because your scenario is not logically in the slightest.

very true, good point...religion isnt necessarily logical for the most part though i will say that...fact is though that man made life doesnt disprove Gods existance.

[Necrosis]

very true, good point...religion isnt necessarily logical for the most part though i will say that...fact is though that man made life doesnt disprove Gods existance.

agreed nothing can disprove gods existence as you cannot disprove something that is invisible, immaterial and everywhere.......

its make is less probable however.


religion is the very definition of irrational as faith is irrational at its core.

[garebear]

Thread reported to Jesus.

[big L dawg]

Thread reported to Jesus.

thread might as well be reported to Zeus or Thor.

[garebear]

thread might as well be reported to Zeus or Thor.

Watch out or they're next.

[MCWAY]

Does this mean you will not be joining a national atheist organization?  http://www.atheists.org/     http://www.atheistalliance.org/

Or watching the Atheist Viewpoint TV show?  http://atheistviewpoint.tv/

Or attending the national atheist convention?  http://www.atheists.org/convention/

Or attending an atheist church, aka "humanist centers"?  http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1686828,00.html

All this organizing around something they don't believe exists sounds a little nutty to me. 

National atheist convention?

Hmmmm.....isn't that the one that just happens to be held on the Resurrection Sunday/Easter weekend? I remember an atheist poster, with whom I once had a number of interesting debates on another forum, attending something like this every year.

[Hedgehog]

I think it can be seen as hopeful too.  I think it means they really are searching for or do have a genuine interest in God.  ...but maybe are angry at Him.

If there was ever any evidence of any kind of Divine Spirit, I would definitely believe it. Of course.

But since there has yet to be presented any, there is the state of no God.

So what we have are our own morals and I think that's a very interesting topic.

You don't see us frequenting leprochaun boards arguing against their existence.

You argue that God exists here.
Why are you doing that?
You have any kind of proof?


Seems like many people want God to be how they want Him to be. 

If there is no God, you can pretend that "God" is exactly the way you want, and that he/she/it is ok with anything you do. Eg, Bush claims that God was on his side when he started a war on Iraq.


Since we as humans are not omniscient, we simply can't understand why certain things are allowed to happen...like child abuse, etc. if there is an all-powerful God that could stop it.   

Since there is no God (at least there is no proof of a God yet) these horrible acts will "be allowed to happen". Since there is no one in control.

We can't understand all things and so become angry and reject the fact that He could be real...because in our minds, if He were real, these things would not take place. 

The big fear is probably that there is so much we cannot understand - so therefore we need to fill in the blanks with something. That "something" is "God". "God" becomes the great explanation for everything and also someone we can turn to when we are alone.



But the thing is, He gave us free-will.    And there are jag offs that do stupid and evil things.  And there are people that do things w/o intending to hurt others but it still can result in something terrible. 
Pure speculation on your part.

You have no proof that there is a God. So you cannot claim that a God gave us free will. The argument about "free will" is a big cop out for those who start question their faith IMO.

The first time you use the heroin, all you want is to get high, but later you hang yourself in a jail and your family and friends and your children are destroyed. 

How do you know this about heroin?

[Butterbean]

I think it can be seen as hopeful too.  I think it means they really are searching for or do have a genuine interest in God.  ...but maybe are angry at Him.

If there was ever any evidence of any kind of Divine Spirit, I would definitely believe it. Of course.

But since there has yet to be presented any, there is the state of no God.

So what we have are our own morals and I think that's a very interesting topic.

You don't see us frequenting leprochaun boards arguing against their existence.

You argue that God exists here.
Why are you doing that?
You have any kind of proof?

We are all stating our beliefs here.  You believe there is no God, I believe there is a God.  I converse here to learn, share what knowledge/beliefs I do have and hope to clear up misconceptions people have about the bible.   For instance, you have said before that in the bible Jesus never claimed to be God.   That is incorrect. 


Seems like many people want God to be how they want Him to be. 

If there is no God, you can pretend that "God" is exactly the way you want, and that he/she/it is ok with anything you do. Eg, Bush claims that God was on his side when he started a war on Iraq.

But do you see, even if there is a God, people can pretend He is exactly the way they want.


Since we as humans are not omniscient, we simply can't understand why certain things are allowed to happen...like child abuse, etc. if there is an all-powerful God that could stop it.   

Since there is no God (at least there is no proof of a God yet) these horrible acts will "be allowed to happen". Since there is no one in control.

We can't understand all things and so become angry and reject the fact that He could be real...because in our minds, if He were real, these things would not take place. 

The big fear is probably that there is so much we cannot understand - so therefore we need to fill in the blanks with something. That "something" is "God". "God" becomes the great explanation for everything and also someone we can turn to when we are alone.



But the thing is, He gave us free-will.    And there are jag offs that do stupid and evil things.  And there are people that do things w/o intending to hurt others but it still can result in something terrible. 
Pure speculation on your part.

You have no proof that there is a God. So you cannot claim that a God gave us free will. The argument about "free will" is a big cop out for those who start question their faith IMO.

I'm stating my beliefs.  How is believing that we have free will a cop out for people who start to question their faith?  I don't get this. 

The first time you use the heroin, all you want is to get high, but later you hang yourself in a jail and your family and friends and your children are destroyed. 

How do you know this about heroin?

This just happened to a guy I grew up with.  I'm not saying all heroin users do this or have children etc.  I was upset when I wrote it and probably unclear.

[Hedgehog]

I can definitely sympathize with you becoming frustrated in a situation like that.
The heroin addicted buddy I mean.

[Butterbean]

I can definitely sympathize with you becoming frustrated in a situation like that.
The heroin addicted buddy I mean.

Thanks Hedge.  The worst really was seeing all the youngsters crying so hard at the visitation. 

[Deicide]

I think it can be seen as hopeful too.  I think it means they really are searching for or do have a genuine interest in God.  ...but maybe are angry at Him.

If there was ever any evidence of any kind of Divine Spirit, I would definitely believe it. Of course.

But since there has yet to be presented any, there is the state of no God.

So what we have are our own morals and I think that's a very interesting topic.

You don't see us frequenting leprochaun boards arguing against their existence.

You argue that God exists here.
Why are you doing that?
You have any kind of proof?


Seems like many people want God to be how they want Him to be. 

If there is no God, you can pretend that "God" is exactly the way you want, and that he/she/it is ok with anything you do. Eg, Bush claims that God was on his side when he started a war on Iraq.


Since we as humans are not omniscient, we simply can't understand why certain things are allowed to happen...like child abuse, etc. if there is an all-powerful God that could stop it.   

Since there is no God (at least there is no proof of a God yet) these horrible acts will "be allowed to happen". Since there is no one in control.

We can't understand all things and so become angry and reject the fact that He could be real...because in our minds, if He were real, these things would not take place. 

The big fear is probably that there is so much we cannot understand - so therefore we need to fill in the blanks with something. That "something" is "God". "God" becomes the great explanation for everything and also someone we can turn to when we are alone.



But the thing is, He gave us free-will.    And there are jag offs that do stupid and evil things.  And there are people that do things w/o intending to hurt others but it still can result in something terrible. 
Pure speculation on your part.

You have no proof that there is a God. So you cannot claim that a God gave us free will. The argument about "free will" is a big cop out for those who start question their faith IMO.

The first time you use the heroin, all you want is to get high, but later you hang yourself in a jail and your family and friends and your children are destroyed. 

How do you know this about heroin?

Scandinavia=very irreligious=very good

[Dos Equis]

ok componenets?

Im not sure i understand what youre saying are you saying the austrolapithecus etc...was human? B/c there are plenty of transition fossils that are not taxonomically considered human that show a logical progression from one species to another up to us as we are now...are you saying that all those species are human?

please address the time difference issue for me, what arent human remains found with dinosaurs? Why arent fossils of all creatures that are known found within the same timeframe when we do radiometric dating? why is it that certain fossils only appear to come about at certain times? if all creatures were made together then their fossils would all be found in the same time frame correct?

There are lots of examples (the eye, etc.).  I think I mentioned a few in the "Darwin's Black Box" thread a while back. 

I don't believe there are any half-human transitional fossils.  If there is a fossil that isn't considered human, that's because it isn't human. 

Not sure what you want me to address regarding the time difference issue, because it's not an issue for me.  I don't know if human remains have been found with dinosaurs, etc.  There are actually far more and greater question regarding the monkey business than intelligent design.  You should check out the "Billions of Missing Links" thread (which I haven't updated in a while).     

[Dos Equis]

every fossil is a transitional fossil, you dont see hybrids because evolution is slow and the organism has to be able to survive.

Irreducibly complex is a joke and proven as such.

Again every fossil is a transitional fossil, your misunderstanding of evolution requires you demand a half bird/half human hybrid in order to be a transition, which is simply not reality.

We don't see any "hybrids" because they don't exist.   

[Necrosis]

We don't see any "hybrids" because they don't exist.   

everything is a hybrid, look at a platapus if you want to overt physical signs.

you dont understand what a transitional fossil is, everything is in transition.

[Deicide]

We don't see any "hybrids" because they don't exist.   

You sound like a caveman when you say that...

[Eisenherz]

Awsome, I'm a Hybrid 

[tonymctones]

There are lots of examples (the eye, etc.).  I think I mentioned a few in the "Darwin's Black Box" thread a while back. 

I don't believe there are any half-human transitional fossils.  If there is a fossil that isn't considered human, that's because it isn't human. 

Not sure what you want me to address regarding the time difference issue, because it's not an issue for me.  I don't know if human remains have been found with dinosaurs, etc.  There are actually far more and greater question regarding the monkey business than intelligent design.  You should check out the "Billions of Missing Links" thread (which I haven't updated in a while).     

if i remember correctly i believe the eye developed in its early form as a way of detecting sunlight underwater and eventually, everything has an explination beach...

Ok so humans now are the only way they have ever been is what you believe? again then why arent there human remains further back then 250.000 yrs? there arent b/c humans as we know them now didnt exist further back then that they developed from another species and that species from another and so on and so on. The reason i ask you is b/c as a person who believes in ID you probably believe that God made all creatures at the same time correct? if thats what you believe why do you think there is such descrepency in time between species? This descrepency falls right in line with evolution.

I really dont think you have studied evolution or more specifically the evolution of humans, there is a fairly clear logical progression in features and taxonomic classification from earliers species to modern day humans.