SoG,

This is getting repetitive, but at least some onlookers or genuine fence-sitters may find some value in it, so I’ll persist for the time being.

<<The only point I have bleated on about is the conclusiveness of your stance without one iota of empirical proof.>>

You are the only one who has spoken of conclusiveness. There is nothing to say that an atheist cannot change their mind if the evidence dictates, or leave it open for other possibilities.

Like I said before, disbelief is the default position.

<<There is no creator….fine….prove it.>>

Again, burden of proof.

<<You believe that there is no creator and I say that we do not know.>>

Yes, “believe” and “know”.

I also don’t think that we can know, but that doesn’t mean we can’t hold a belief.

You’re REALLY struggling with this, aren’t you.

<<You qualify your conviction with such terms as “burden of proof” or “high degree of certainty” which is rubbish verbiage meant to enhance your lack of facts.>>

Yes, that’s been your allegation. Yet you still have not been able to back it with any evidence or reasoned argument to demonstrate that this is so.

<<The human hands that wrote all the texts for all religions intimate or stated that mankind is singular as the top of the food chain.>>

So what? Ten points to them for observation, eh?

If you’re referring to our apparent uniqueness as humans, then I’d remind you of the other various homininae found in the fossil record and in remote parts of the planet, such as the Neanderthal, whom we wiped out.

<<No mainstream religions acknowledge life except on earth again intimating that we are the creator’s only plaything. The Jews, Christians, and the Muslims even believe we were made in his image.>>

And they would too. They’re all Abrahamic religions with the same origins, and none of those primitive people could have imagined that the specs of light in the night sky were other “suns” with planets. Heck, they thought the entire universe was just a big dome with a flat earth.

Continued…

…Continued

<<The universe is a big place and 13 billion years is a while, countless beings should have evolved and declined, but we can find no proof...>>

Yes, the universe is a big place and our limited ability to investigate other bodies in the universe, along with the unique conditions required for life, don’t make this at all surprising.

This is not evidence for a creator and nor does it suggest that there is any truth to the claims of the Abrahamic religions. To imply otherwise is an Argument from Ignorance fallacy.

<<We still have not found any anomalies that have been repeated … our primitive society has been seeding the universe since Marconi’s first transmission and another low technology civilization can read our footprint. But we have found nothing.>>

Marconi’s first signal would have only traveled about 0.11% of our galaxy’s diameter (and let’s not forget the billions of other galaxies In the universe), so it’s not unusual that we haven't found anything.

<<If anything could be gleaned from this it is that we are possibly alone….>>

Possibly, but even if only a very small portion of the billions of stars, in each of the billions - possibly trillions - of galaxies, had planets, then the chances that we are alone in the universe are still extremely small.

<<…if that is so it is marker towards a creator given religions all say that we and the creatures of the earth were created as a singularity.>>

Not really, because it doesn’t say anything for why they actually made those claims. Holy books also imply that the Earth is flat. Is that evidence against a creator?

Of course it isn’t.

<<…when I asked you to qualify what “was” before the big bang…..silence.>>

Utter rubbish. You were given an answer. “I don’t know” is still an answer even if it’s not a satisfying one. Your claim that there was silence was simply inserted for dramatic effect to make us sound clueless - as the rest of your post explicitly alleges.

You have been totally dishonest every step of the way here.

David,

A slight correction here. I wasn't making a sweeping statement that this is our only life. What I said was that for myself it is [purely my own] belief. I do not presume to state that my belief should apply for everyone. To each his own.

Many people do good deeds which are directly attributable to the teachings of their church. Many atheists also do good deeds simply because they are good people.

I do not decry my friend's religion which sees them go down to Mexico once a month to distribute food and clothing to the needy. This is a direct result of what they hear in their [born again] christian church.

By the same token, we as atheists have also contributed food and clothing to those less fortunate than ourselves.

I therefore don't see big differences between believers and non believers, but more as a difference between good and bad, or caring humans as opposed to selfish ones.

Being rather outside the main stream on this issue I never attempt to argue my theory, but am content that, as I said previously, I can live my life without the stress of examining in more depth a matter I resolved years ago.

Sonofgloin,
My love for my mother transcended my own ideals. And I still don't regret it. Such a small sacrifice on our part as a token of my love for her, who had made so many big sacrifices for her children - as did my father. Love is a 2 way street.

worldwatcher,

I said, “You made a very important point that this is the only life and we must live it knowing that.” I was pointing out something that is important to remember and you also had that thought personally. I’m not suggesting you want all to accept that.

Sorry if there was ambiguity in the way I expressed it. I make that statement reasonably often as do other atheists as a way to place focus on an idea that some are not used to or have not contemplated.

I agree, doing good deeds is a human and not solely a religious imperative. Although, I can imagine some religious folk do good deeds to get into heaven. The paying of ‘indulgences’ to the RC Church was a reasonably good example of that. I think, that even though the official practice has ceased, the idea remains.

To me, sitting on the fence of ‘live and let live’ breaks down as one side is not fulfilling its ‘let live’ part of the bargain. I therefore stand against it. This does not mean that everyone should do likewise, but those who see the problems with religion have an obligation to take that into account at the polling booth. That is if the idea of equality in democracy is important to them.

David

David,

I did a quick survey of the 7 currently-employed state school teachers I know. None of them are aware of any instances where kids in state schools are taught fire and brimstone type religion. So you are basically calling for a system that is already in place. No religion in state schools, anything goes in private schools as regards religious instruction. Glad we got there.

David wrote:"So, you are saying, that when people become frightened, poor and insecure that they turn to a god. Do you really consider that is a good thing? Does that somehow make the god exist?"

Its neither a good thing nor a bad thing. Its just a truth of the human condition. Remember those atheistic regimes I mention earlier? They also wanted to change the human condition. The Soviets called is perfecting man.
Belief doesn't make God exist. The deity exists (or doesn't) irrespective of belief.

"I’m not denying that the existence of a god is important to impoverished people because that is all they have. I would not wish to take that away from them. But it is a very poor argument to say that educated prosperous nations should turn to a god for that reason."

It goes deeper than that. We in the west have divorced ourselves from the essential life forces. People don't see miracle of birth and renewal. Even the birth of our own progeny is mired in tubes, forceps and chemicals. And likewise, death is hidden away and sanitised. Poorer people are closer to the essential life forces and are therefore more likely to see the wonder of life. That's why they believe in the deity.

"It is only in your mind that science is applauding itself for defeating religion."
Well since that's not what I said at all, it probably isn't in my mind. You've spent so much time putting words in my mouth I've had to increase my dental hygiene regime.

AJ Philips>> You have been totally dishonest every step of the way here.<<

Sorry you feel that way AJ, I found you committed and succinct, but I still don't agree with your rationalization of what is.

ALoAI>> Here’s a challenge for you. How about sign up to the AFA Forums, introduce yourself and then tell all those ‘dumb’ atheists they have all got it wrong and explain why that is so <<

David old bean, thanks for the offer but the atheist/ agnostic debate is too circular for me to dive into another forum to continue it…..Why don’t you bring the guys to this forum if you are having difficulty overcoming me. David tell them that OLO is like the Darwin philosophy forum used to be….a lot of bright people no matter what their opinions,…. they might like it….Hang on…is it not poor form trying to poach posters from other sites? Nah, I’m staying put for now.

>>Are you trying to impress anyone with your scientific expertise because you dabble in amateur astronomy and run the SETI program on your computer? If so, you have failed dismally<<

Yeah sure David, I’m a stargazer, I’m the oracle………Yeah, get the other boys to come over you are doing terrible.