Science may not know what caused the big bang or what was before it but that doesn't mean it is beyond its grasp. We can explain how the brain works, all-be-it its an emerging field but we still can (see Neuroscience, Psychology). We do know why we have emotions. Let's say under your right. Under your assumption we're only "20,000" years apart (more like 2.7 million I think) and technology should emerge on a similar time-line as ours. My question is, under your assumption, do you not think it is hypocritical to demand another species to advance itself by 20,000 years and go to the moon when we cannot advance ourselves a few hundred years and save us from fossil fuels? 20,000 years, though inaccurate, is a BIG number. It makes a difference. Consider that ALL the modernity you appreciate happened within the past 300 years. A BLINK of the eye on an anthropomorphic timescale. Let's say I believed a backpack full of lead weights would save me much better than a parachute would. It's my belief, it makes me happy and fills me with a sense of fulfillment. When I jump out of that plane and inevitably die (no matter how firm my conviction) do you not think that for a moment at least you could say, "boy, what stupid asshole..."? Let's try another analogy. Let's say I believed that I stand a much better chance not believing in a life saving parachute and that I'd be much better off on my own to jump out of that plane...etc. Do you believe this is an applicable analogy to atheism and why? On the internet, quite a few lol. Richard Dawkins gets hatemail. Youtube > Richard Dawkins reads Hate Mail. I've had two come to my door. Most proselytization occurs within Church premises now, which is a shame.
We still don't know much, I was trying to say is that science does not know everything, so it is still unreliable. But why are all the other species closer to each other in the sense of how they act, we are the only ones that no longer have survival instincts as our primary way of thinking, we don't go around lurking in the shadows stalking dogs, we don't go around killing for food with our spears. But do you see a Christian jumping off a plane and yelling "It's ok, I know God will save me." We still have "Common Sense" and we still think like a normal human does, we just believe that we were created by an almighty being. Richard Dawkins is an Idiot, I've seen his videos and quite frankly he is the most ignorant person on this planet, I'd much rather debate with you then with him. Two people is not a lot, is it? So why do Atheists always claim that they have Religious folks gnawing at their doors with bibles.
He doesn't get it. Also, I'm still waiting for your 1 good reason why you believe in Christianity. That shouldn't be too hard, I mean you have to have some kind of reason, right?
The reason is hope. People adopt religion because they hope that there is some higher power, hope that we have a greater purpose, hope that there is a more important reason for living than just living. There is no "good" reason or facts to base their faith on. Some people are fine with living their lives and not questioning their purpose or the meaning of everything. Others are more inquisitive and want a purpose. I find nothing wrong in believing in a god or a higher being. I personally don't believe such a thing exist, but I'm not going to question someone's faith or attempt to prove them wrong.
No, that's what this thread was meant to be about. However the people who post in this thread have turned it into a thread where they question people's faith.
We gained knowledge which changed/surpressed our natural instincts. Humans still have many instincts mostly in a survival mode so the body can survive. We still have urges to do things that seem primal but us being more educated has made us be able to control them. We became taimed in a sense and civilized. Other species do not have the communication , knowledge capacity , and or resourcefulness that humans have gained over the ages. We still do have people lurking in the dark stalking dogs they are called murderers or dog catchers ;]. Many 3rd world countries still have primal acting people based on the conditions they are stuck in. If you don't adapt/go back to your instincts you will die. Our knowledge has given us better weapons than spears but some countries still use spears to hunt. Tools are tools some are just easier to use.
They fact that they treat it as personal is too bad for them. Religion isn't sacred, nor is anything else, and if you can't bear to have it questioned then you shouldn't believe it in the first place.
If your friend believed whole-heartedly in unicorns, you'd owe it to them to debate with them to show them they aren't real. Stupid beliefs deserve to called out as stupid beliefs, and the only one I see here calling Atheists arrogant is you, which is ironic considering: Arrogant: making claims or pretensions to superior importance or rights; overbearingly assuming; insolently proud "Making claims or pretensions to superior importance or rights", like for instance, declaring people who debate against the existence of god arrogant and disrespectful.
When did being atheist become extremist? We don't kill in the name of atheism lol. Its not even considered a hostile group so how did it become "extremist"? Did I miss who or what you were calling extreme?
Religion may not be sacred to you, but it is obviously sacred to those who follow in it. And question isn't the word I meant to use. What I meant is that this thread has strayed from it's original purpose: to debate on whether or not you believe a god exists. It has turned into a thread where people attack others faith. It's fine to question someone's beliefs in the hope of gaining knowledge and discovering how others tick, but many people in this thread have resorted to calling others foolish and blind to common sense because of their belief. I really appreciate that. And, while I don't think a god exists, I would truly love to be proven wrong someday. The difference between what a god is commonly thought to be and a unicorn is that it can be proven that there is no such thing as a unicorn, at least within our current confines of the universe. While there is no undeniable evidence that a god exists, there is also no evidence that clearly proves that there is no such thing as a god.
Well unicorns are not that far fetched in my opinion there already are animals with a single horn on their skull. Narwhals are an example of this strange occurance. Many mammals have horns so a unicorn wouldn't be impossible.
I've always been annoyed by the "Well you can't prove it doesn't exist" argument. If something is not there it's not there. Schizophrenics can have intense hallucinations believing that they have people that are not really there, but no one would say they exist, except maybe the schizophrenic. I know I may have received this quote from a joke but it's true, if you are using regular logic when referring to an object you would say to a person "Is there a baseball in your hand?" If you do not have a baseball you say no, and if you do you say yes, it's there in front of you, it's real, it exists. If someone is to ask the same question about God there is no clear answer, he is not seen he does not exist, there are no strange anomalies in electric patterns, or magnetic patterns suggesting God is not there but a force, he straight is an imaginary friend millions of people claim to have. I apologize for harshness, but that's really all the realistic God argument there is.
If how gods are portrayed were just like any other thing in the universe, then that argument would be infallible, and it's pretty convincing even with the way gods are seen. But, if religions really did have an inkling of what a god was like, there would be no way for us to detect such a being existed. You can't argue a god doesn't exist due to the fact that it blatantly isn't standing right in front of you, because... well... that's not the way god works. But who am I to say that's now how a god would work. I don't understand how it functions, Christians don't understand (as much as they'd like people to think), nobody understands how a god would operate because nobody in today's modern world has ever seen, heard, smelled, felt, tasted, or come in contact with a god. Of course this is all based on believing a god does actually exist. Nobody can say a god exist. Nobody can say a god doesn't exist. It's the same as accusing a man of murder. You may have things that tip you off to believe that a certain man killed another, but unless you can provide undeniable proof that he did in fact kill someone, you cannot legally act upon him. Unless somehow somebody could come up with something that did in fact prove that no god exists or ever did exist, I will always believe that there is a chance that there could actually be a god. It sounds cliche, but I truly believe that almost anything is possible.
Proving Unicorns exist is in no way similar to proving a god exists. Unicorns as portrayed in cartoons and fairy tales are a physical organic life form. You could see a Unicorn, you could feel a Unicorn, you could smell a Unicorn. God as we understand him to be cannot be detected by any senses.
Not if unicorns are invisible, have the ability to phase through matter, and are odourless. You could keep finding holes in my "unicorns exist" argument, and I could keep making crap up, ignoring your logical points, or as a last resort, claiming I have faith in the unicorns. Either way, it's a stupid belief and obviously wrong, but that doesn't mean it isn't able to be debated.
@RabidZergling: Dude, you're being really really disrespectful towards non-atheists and God. If you don't believe in it, then go about your miserable life not believing in it. Don't tell people God is nothing because your logic is just terrible. You're using a rubric. You aren't just looking at it with a mind.. A simple human mind. You're using "facts" that just make me want to punch you in the face (no offense) and you aren't showing an ounce of acceptance towards.. anything, really. Stop being stubborn, or don't talk at all because you're using good logic, but poisoning it with your weird thoughts... ..and stop writing in red so I can actually quote easily. Now can we get on topic? Or are we going to keep talking about unicorns? Is there oxygen in the air? Oh, I can't see it, so it must not be there. Is it black in outer space? oh, I can't see it, so it must be white. Does Afghanistan actually exist? Must not because I've never been there. /better luck next time
Seriously, this is starting to turn into a fight rather then a debate. Prove to me God does not exist instead of insulting me, all it does is strengthen my beliefs regardless. I don't think I have yet insulted an Atheist, unless you think being called stubborn and ignorant a major insult. So why are you insulting us, calling us stupid because all we want is just a tiny piece of hope, you are starting to seem more like a devil then an actual debater. Shatakai was right to a certain extent you are not trying to prove God does not exist, you just keep wanting to get rid of our faith by bashing at us with what has already been said and constantly insulting us.
Are we about to assume that everyone who claims to have an experience with God is a schizo? No. Just to clarify: are you saying that God can't (or doesn't) exist because there is no evidence? I'd continue right here and now, but I won't bother unless I have an understanding on what you're saying. If a unicorn is invisible, how do we truly know its a unicorn? We can't determine physical traits because of the underlying premise of invisibility. Your statement is fallacious because invisible objects cannot be subject to a physical determination. Or, are you merely implying a "invisible pink unicorn" argument?