Home › Forums › MGTOW Central › Does Atheistic secularism really promote violence?
This topic contains 212 replies, has 38 voices, and was last updated by 
X11 2 years, 2 months ago.
- AuthorPosts
Ah, so now you’re trying that tired old crap: the religious canard that just because a theory gets refined by new observations it must be all 100% wrong.
Sorry, but that’s just you making yet another baseless assertion, and also trying to argue from “authority” which also doesn’t cut it.
Again, if you see a ball fly past you away to your right, where do you think the ball came from?
sidecar, I’m not trying any old crap of any kind.
I put forward my points of view. You argued and dismissed those. So I thought I would quote a man who is knowledgeable in this field.
You attacked my arguments and inserted insults. But have not done the same with what Rupert Sheldrake has stated.
I wonder why that is?
If I had to guess, I would say that the last post pretty clearly spells out the lack of validity of what you have been trying to prop up as truth.
Care to try and bulls~~~ your away around what he has stated? Which is almost verbatim what I initially posted.
No, I suspect not. So do me a favor. Get off your high horse. We are all on equal footing here, and arguing for its own sake or resorting to insults when I am making legitimate points, is just petty.
“He who takes an eel by the tail, or a woman at her word, soon finds he holds nothing.”
Theoretical science is about as reliable as religious belief. Big bang theory – Garden of Eden. Neither are provable, or factual.
Yes we are not on an equal footing given you think there is the same amount of evidence and same scienctific credibility for the BB theory and the garden of eden, lol.
You in fact have not even once presented an argument, you make baseless assertions then act the victim.
Just post your best evidence for yahew’s existence and key claims in the bible and I will post my best evidence for the BB theory.
It is the Ego
There’s the rub.
Take the big bang for example. Which scientist can prove such a theory?
Yeah, Big Bang Theory is pretty much hors~~~, in my opinion. It was passed off to us a long time ago when we were young and believed anything. The “red shift” points to Big Bang?? Pleease.
On the religious side. The story of Adam and Eve. As told by whom? Who was there to witness these events? Or when God said, “Let there be light!” Again, who saw any of this, to then lay claim to it as fact. Let alone force these beliefs into the minds of people from a very young age?
The stories in the bible are those people’s interpretation of the world. It’s their understanding of the world. It’s their “Little Boy Who Cried Wolf” stories. They looked at the sky and said, “It’s good! God made it!” They looked at women’s behavior, and said, “Eve didn’t listen and F~~~ed EVERYTHING up for everyone!”, etc…
Once one understand this, the bible becomes quite a beautiful, and very truthful, book. But it must be understand from this perspective. It was their way of understanding the world around them. It’s like today’s version of “String theory” in physics. No different.
Atheists cannot disprove the existence of a God
“One is never called upon to disprove a negative” -Ayn Rand, to Donahue.
Atheists fall into the same trap, but from the other end. They follow a strict belief, of non-believing in anything outside of a very narrow band width. The one created by the 5 senses. Causing a similar effect, where no spiritual growth or development can take place.
There are way more than 5 senses!
Not all athiests follow a strict belief. I believe in the Bible 100%, because I believe I understand it. I don’t think Christians understand the bible. From what I see, Christians read the bible and get tempted by the same things Jesus gets tempted by, except that Jesus doesn’t fall for it, and the Christians do.
1. What did the Devil offer Jesus: Bread.
2. What did the Devil offer Jesus: Bodily Ascension and Angels
3. What did the Devil offer Jesus: The whole kingdom forever, if only Jesus would “worship” himJesus didn’t fall for any of it. That’s the lesson.
1. What does “church” offer the people? Bread
2. What does “church” offer the people? Jesus ascended bodily into heaven where there are angels
3. What does “church” offer the people? The kingdom of heaven, if only the people would worship together in church (which is explicitly banned in the Sermon on the Mount)So, yes, the bible is correct, if properly understood, and yes, the church is the devil’s creation, as explicitly taught and warned of in the bible. I would imagine that when Christians ponder on this, and suddenly open their eyes and realize they failed the temptations, and see the church for what it truly is (a interest charging bank, run by homosexual pedophiles), that they would have the exact same face expression as William Defoe in the Last Temptation of Christ, when, while playing the role of Jesus, he realizes he was being tempted by the devil this whole time, and he fell for it.
There is no holy book that will teach you any esoteric or hidden truths which lead to spiritual development.
I would say Taoism does.
Atheists do not believe in anything outside of what the 5 senses inform them.
Athiests do not believe in Organized Religion. What definition is this?
only life can give rise to life.
Assuming Earth was created at one point, as opposed to always existing, then this cannot be true, unless we believe in the fourth Indiana Jones movie.
X11: You cannot prove the universe existed billions of years ago because we cannot observe the past.
Oh but we can and do, just standard basic science.
Yeah, Big Bang Theory is pretty much hors~~~,
Laughable and ignorant baseless claim.
Please man up and present an actual argument, your personal opinion is of no value to science.
Please man up and present an actual argument
One is never called upon to prove a negative.
🙂
And by the way, I don’t “man up”, as that is only the call of a feminist. Just take it easy and stop getting triggered, buddy. No one has “offended” you by presenting an opinion that opposes your personal worldview.
X11: You cannot prove the universe existed billions of years ago because we cannot observe the past.
Oh but we can and do, just standard basic science.
X11 is correct in this case. Everything we ever see is in the past, because the photons took time to travel to our eyes.
One is never called upon to prove a negative.
But you aren’t being asked to prove a negative.
BB theory is a positive claim with supporting evidence and testable predictions can be made.
You are at free to refute it which is the honourable thing. (Which I wrongly labelled as man up, my error).
The hilarious thing is theists strawman their way out of debates with atheists by rambling about the BB or evolution.
The BB theory and evolution have nothing to do with my atheism.
Why you guys so quiet about god and just want to talk about BB.
So lol, god exists because I don’t believe in the BB.
Yeah, Big Bang Theory is pretty much hors~~~, in my opinion. It was passed off to us a long time ago when we were young and believed anything. The “red shift” points to Big Bang?? Pleease.
I’m of the same opinion Sandals. It’s quite literally speculation and theory. Nothing whatsoever rooted in fact. Yes, exactly, they drill these so called scientific truths into our heads when we are young. But if you scrutinize it, and go through their postulates, it’s just hot air.
Whoever thinks that science can factually explain the origins of the universe, outside of a plausible theory or model, is severely deluded.
Once one understand this, the bible becomes quite a beautiful, and very truthful, book. But it must be understand from this perspective. It was their way of understanding the world around them. It’s like today’s version of “String theory” in physics. No different.
There is a lot of beauty in the various holy books. I mostly take issue with the institution of organized religion. Mainly killings, efforts to control people’s minds and lives. But from a literary standpoint, there are some truly beautiful passages. That is quite true.
Not all athiests follow a strict belief. I believe in the Bible 100%, because I believe I understand it. I don’t think Christians understand the bible.
Now this I find very fascinating. Could you expand or explain what you mean? How do you understand it?
I would say Taoism does.
Yes, I should have been more clear. Most of the Eastern religions that are rooted in practice, seem to reveal a great deal more. Daoism, Hinduism and Buddhism have a very strong base for truths discovered through actual practice.
Also, there are way more than 5 senses!
Of course. But the faith based books, will not instruct on how to cultivate them. The ones rooted in practice do. So again, Daoism, Hinduism and Buddhism. They have excellent practices that can open a person to higher forms of perception.
The yoga sutras of Pantanjali. Qigong. So many variations of Buddhist practices.
Assuming Earth was created at one point, as opposed to always existing, then this cannot be true, unless we believe in the fourth Indiana Jones movie
I’m not sure that I follow. My point was observational. The succession of life, seems to only take place between living organism. One living thing giving rise to another. Could something inert or lifeless, give rise to the universe?
“He who takes an eel by the tail, or a woman at her word, soon finds he holds nothing.”
I’m of the same opinion Sandals. It’s quite literally speculation and theory.
You have showed your hand enough for me, you actually do not know what you are speaking about.
I would imagine that when Christians ponder on this, and suddenly open their eyes and realize they failed the temptations, and see the church for what it truly is (a interest charging bank, run by homosexual pedophiles), that they would have the exact same face expression as William Defoe in the Last Temptation of Christ,
We’re definitely in agreement here.
Sandals, I am curious. What are your thoughts about Eastern religions, contrasted against what you believe? I see your point about temptation. If a base desire is allowed to run rampant, it could lead a person into ruin. Drug addiction, or excessive eating. Any of the 7 deadly sins, can lead a person out of a state of balance.
A lot of the Eastern practices, are designed to open a person spiritually. With the ultimate end goal of union with the Divine. Yoga, meaning to yolk. To merge.
What are your thoughts, as a Christian, on Eastern religions?
“He who takes an eel by the tail, or a woman at her word, soon finds he holds nothing.”
X11: You cannot prove the universe existed billions of years ago because we cannot observe the past.
Oh but we can and do, just standard basic science.
There is uncertainty because we do not understand interactions at high energy levels, we cannot replicate them even in large particle accelerators. The four forces appear to have been unified at high densities at the beginning of the expansion.
We can say everything is moving away from a central point based upon red shift of the spectrum of radiation emitted from stars. The cosmic background radiation predicted by such an expansion from a single point, has also been observed. That is why inflation, or the Big Bang theory, has prevailed as most likely, since Edwin Hubble, going on what, 90 years or so.
We observe the past when we observe light or other electromagnetic radiation emitted from distant stars, since that light can take billions of years to reach us.
But one can not prove the universe was created with apparent age, already expanding and with background radiation. That is what I meant by not being able to directly observe the past.
I tend to favor Occam’s razor, the simplest explanation is usually correct, and thus, the Universe is close to 14billion years old.
Science certainly has a strong record of predictive success with its theories: eclipses, the motion of the planets, comets, etc, whereas the cosmologies of ancient holy texts are primitive and incorrect at a basic level. If divinely inspired, why don’t these books reveal the germ theory of disease, or Kepler’s laws of planetary motion?
It is interesting, nobody ever has issues with scientific theories or the scientific method, EXCEPT for evolution and the Big Bang, because they may clash with their religious ideas.
Science is inherently materialistic and mathematical. It quantifies reality. Experiments are performed in the material world and observations made. Even with its amazing track record, science has limits. For instance, it cannot prove whether we live in a simulated reality, because the observer could presumably not exit such a reality. I cannot prove you truly exist, and can feel pain, and that only I exist, and no others. This is more an argument that we are limited by our perceptions, in what can be known. I believe others do exist outside my mind, but something this basic, cannot be proved without accepting as axiom that are senses are real.
You attacked my arguments and inserted insults.
You haven’t made any arguments. You’ve only repeated baseless assertions and bad fallacies. And where have I insulted you?
Rupert Sheldrake
Argument by “authority” isn’t.
And again, if a ball flies past you to your right, where did it come from?
Why cannot you answer that simple question?
In order to refute a theory, you must offer an alternative theory.
Repeatedly saying the long winded equivalent of “nuh-uh” does not count.
For instance, it cannot prove whether we live in a simulated reality, because the observer could presumably not exit such a reality. I cannot prove you truly exist, and can feel pain, and that only I exist, and no others
Do you find it interesting that everybody is not insane acts like there is an external universe of things. You know we get up, eat, s~~~, work to pay bills, plan for the future, avoid jumping off buildings and touching hot things.
Solipsism is the most degenerate, useless philosophy that impacts nothing, changes nothing, solves nothing, predicts nothing.
When theists break out these but science can’t PROVE there is an external universe beyond our senses therefore God I want to shove my c~~~ in their ear and f~~~ some sense into them.
You haven’t made any arguments. You’ve only repeated baseless assertions and bad fallacies.
Your negation of my arguments, does not turn then into baseless assertions. This is just your failure to comprehend what I have put forward. You’re simply engaging in what you referred to, as willful ignorance.
Repeatedly saying the long winded equivalent of “nuh-uh” does not count.
You are repeatedly stating that same thing. Baseless assertions. As if saying it more will render your points correct or true.
If you want to read my arguments or point of view. My position. Go right ahead. It is all there. As for proof, do I need to prove to you that Santa Claus does not exist? It’s somewhat self evident no?
BB theory is a giant puff of smoke. I’ve said this. Rupert Sheldrake who is a scientist. He said it. You dismiss it as if only your point of view has legitimacy.
Science has proven and identified the origin of the universe? Using what instruments? Nothing we have, makes us qualified to do anything other than theorize. That is what Rupert concluded. That is what I have been saying, to which you are not grasping.
I can’t say it in simpler terms. Science does not know what it purports to know. It can create models, and theories. It can speculate. But ultimately, is severely limited in providing any proof towards the origin of the universe. Something that old and vast, is beyond what present day science can prove.
Theories are not proof. Models are not proof. Facts are proof. And BB theory is not based in fact. So your arguments are meaningless. Because you are arguing something that is not even rooted within what you referred to as provable.
What else can I possibly say? Believe whatever you wish to believe. The topic has been thoroughly exhausted. You’re repeating yourself. I’m repeating myself. And no one is the wiser. Nothing is gained.
One day science will discover and prove what you are claiming it has proven. It’s just not there yet. Human potential is tremendous. And models are needed. All the scientific methods are necessary, to move forward. And it will. If we don’t kill ourselves. But you are implying that they have reached such a point. When all they have done, is speculated in that direction. Which is nowhere close to proof.
You feel I need to prove that we lack the instrumentation and intellectual capacity to look back 13.8 billion years? And make sound conclusions? Grow up man. See past this religious, whimsical fabrication which they try to pawn off as science. It’s not. It’s really intricate guess work. At the very best. Nothing more.
“He who takes an eel by the tail, or a woman at her word, soon finds he holds nothing.”
Pretty much everything in the post above is incorrect and exposes complete lack of knowledge and total ignorance on the author.
Nothing to see here folks, just a new age guru inventing his own religion that demonstrates a third grader scientific knowledge.
I am sure he is next in line for a nobel prize for exposing the BB conspiracy theory.
Anonymous11The only comment I will make is that men of virtue are scarce. I prize these men. They stand as giants in a World of decadence.
Bwahahaha @stentorian.
Did I call it right, his “expert source” refuting all of physics and cosmology is a crop biologist who became a new age guru.
BWAHAHA, I called fraud first.
From wikepedia;
“Alfred Rupert Sheldrake (born 28 June 1942) is an English author,[3] and researcher in the field of parapsychology,[4] known for his “morphic resonance” concept.[5] He worked as a biochemist and cell biologist at Cambridge University from 1967 to 1973[3] and as principal plant physiologist at the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics until 1978.[6]”
Fraud, new age woo woo master.
BWAHAHAHA, from wiki profile of a fraud
”
Sheldrake and his supporters like to appeal to authority based on his credentials, often describing him as a “Cambridge University biologist”. To someone without an understanding of how science works (for example those without a background education in science), this may seem impressive. Further confusion arises because Sheldrake likes to use terminology that sounds impressive, and some points should be particularly noted:
Sheldrake describes himself as having been a “Research Fellow of the Royal Society”. The Royal Society’s Research Fellowship — essentially a grant for researchers in the early stages of their research career — can easily be confused with the highly prestigious election to the Fellowship of the Royal Society. Sheldrake has not been elected FRS.
Some of Sheldrake’s work has been funded by the Perrott-Warrick Project, a fund set up in the early-20th century to fund research in parapsychology, which Sheldrake points out is “administered by Trinity College, Cambridge”. However, the involvement of Trinity is limited to organising the finances — nobody at Trinity has any involvement with the committee that decides how the money is spent, and consequently Sheldrake has held no position on the faculty at Trinity. The then-Master of Trinity, Lord Rees, has on the record disowned Sheldrake and distanced him from Trinity, playfully suggesting that as a former fellow of Clare College, it was Clare that should receive “undiluted credit” for his work[1].
Sheldrake claims to have authored “more than 80 articles in peer-reviewed journals” [1]. However, excluding articles in pseudojournals that clearly weren’t peer reviewed, the true number is actually less that half (helpfully they’re on his website so you can count ’em). He hasn’t published any peer reviewed research since the mid-1980s.”- AuthorPosts
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
921526
921524
919244
916783
915526
915524
915354
915129
914037
909862
908811
908810
908500
908465
908464
908300
907963
907895
907477
902002
901301
901106
901105
901104
901024
901017
900393
900392
900391
900390
899038
898980
896844
896798
896797
895983
895850
895848
893740
893036
891671
891670
891336
891017
890865
889894
889741
889058
888157
887960
887768
886321
886306
885519
884948
883951
881340
881339
880491
878671
878351
877678
