A recent thread got me to thinking: why are atheists so cranky?

I like to keep an open mind toward the pursuit of metaphysics. There are many things that the scientific process cannot prove or disprove, yet continue to empirically exist.

For example, is astrology just foolish magical thinking?

If it is, then why do hospitals and police stations quietly staff more people on the days surrounding the full moon? If women’s bodies have evolved their menstrual cycle to coincide with the moon's cycle, then why reject other people’s empirical observations of human reactions to other planetary cycles?

How about the placebo effect? Scientific thinking has no explanation for this. Yet science itself relies on the placebo effect for its drug studies. The placebo effect exists amidst a complete lack of evidence as to why. Neither can science explain cancer remission …yet it happens a lot, sometimes in seemingly scientifically impossible ways that greatly perplex the scientific community.

Some people reject ANY concept of psychic phenomenon ... but you can't convince an entire family who share observable psychic abilities that what they are empirically witnessing is not happening. Just because the scientific method fails to prove something does not mean it necessarily ceases to exist. Not being able to prove something doesn’t disprove it.

The scientific world of reason, while very good, and very useful, is still just a changing worldview based on our best knowledge to date. It changes as much as mormonism (although for different reasons, and we all know mormonism is bunk ...because it propose to help people, but empirically it doesn't help, it only hurts). Also, in mormonism we can find empirical evidence to dispute some very material claims. To my knowledge, no one has ever proved psychic phenomena has never happened. We have proof that it is rare, and that it is difficult to observe …but no proof that it has never actually existed. There are simply too many observations to the contrary to conclude this.

Also, remember that even Newton’s popular worldview is turning out to be more full of holes than a Swiss cheese under today’s better observation techniques. We just don’t always know what we don’t know.

These are some reasons why I prefer to keep an open mind regarding some metaphysics ... and I hope one day to see science and reason explain some of these things. Joseph Smith was a fraud taking advantage of poor naïve people with open minds, which is fairly obvious. However, I don't make this charge against some of the other metaphysical claims people have made throughout our history. Claims that others would label as delusional magical thinking.

These are just some of my thoughts that I wanted to share with my fellow atheists.

P.S. Did you ever hear that the lengths of the sides together with the angles at the base of the great pyramid in Egypt can be combined together mathematically to correlate to nearly the exact measurement which empirical calculations later agreed to be the circumference of the earth? It was soooo close, just off by a little. Just recently when we used GPS satellites to measure the TRUE circumference of the earth, we found that it bulges at the equator due to centrifugal force, and showed that our earth-based measurements have been slightly wrong. Now our measurement accurately matches those reflected in the great pyramid ... and it is a measurement with quite a few decimal places.

Go figure!

Does this prove God? Who cares... maybe it proves there were advanced civilizations in the distant past, or maybe it supports a premise of aliens, or maybe there is a force greater than ourselves that can communicate knowledge to us, I don’t really know. What it does prove to me is that there are a lot of things we don't know. I tend to think there is more that we don’t know, than there is of what we do.


Signed, an open-minded life-long atheist. Thanks for hearing me out.

yea....
>Some people reject ANY concept of psychic phenomenon

That's me. I think it is baseless, waste of time and stupid....
Does that make me appear cranky.....
whose fault is that?

It's like asking;
Why Believers are so stupid?

Now...is that nice thing to say?

I know many atheists besides myself, and none of them are cranky. I take exception to your assertion.

Cheryl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I take exception to your
> assertion.

I know more than one theist that would take that as being cranky.

What makes you think atheists are "cranky?"

Do you define "cranky" as "unwilling to believe unverified
stories of incredible happenings?"

You stated:

"For example, is astrology just foolish magical thinking?

"If it is, then why do hospitals and police stations quietly
staff more people on the days surrounding the full moon?"

Can you prove this? I keep hearing of this "full moon" effect
but I can never find any reliable verification of it. But I did find the following:

"EMERGENCY ROOM VISITS: Researchers examined 150,999 records of
emergency room visits to a suburban hospital. Their study,
reported in American Journal of Emergency Medicine in 1996,
found no difference at full moon vs. other nights."

http://www.livescience.com/7899-moon-myths-truth-lunar-effects.html

Back to your statement:

"If women’s bodies have evolved their menstrual cycle to
coincide with the moon's cycle, then why reject other people’s
empirical observations of human reactions to other planetary
cycles?"

You make a HUGE mistake here. You point to one phenomenon and
say it is no more THEORETICALLY different than another.
However, astrology has been debunked EMPIRICALLY. Studies have
shown that it flat doesn't work.

For every wild theory that anyone can think up there is a
similar valid theory that it can be compared to. That doesn't
hold any weight. What counts is does it actually work as
claimed?

Oh, and by the way, I called the local hospital and the local
police department and asked them if they did staff more people
on days surrounding a full moon. They said they didn't. One
of them chuckled at me and asked why I was calling. I said it
was to check out a rumor I'd been told.

That's the difference between many atheists and believers.
Atheists check things out rather than just believing what
they've been told. Maybe when you tell someone something and
they doubt you rather than just assuming you are correct, maybe
you interpret that as being "cranky."

Big edit added



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/05/2014 04:03PM by baura.

I'm an atheist and I'm only cranky five out of every 28 days...

I'm a cranky atheist accusing you of magical delusional thinking. Science has reasonable theories to explain the placebo effect and spontaneous cancer remission. The burden of proof is on the one making the outlandish claim. The Amazing Randi, if he's still around, offers one million dollars to anyone who can bring him a clairvoyant or psychic that can hold up to his scrutiny. He's never paid one dime. To all your claims I say pffft.

Wow. What a stew of ideas that have almost nothing to do with each other.

Atheists are cranky? Can you prove that?

Women's menstrual cycles coincide with the lunar cycle? If that were true, every woman would be on the same cycle.

Hospital and police staffing according to the lunar cycle? Proof please!

The placebo effect is completely understood.

Science doesn't change, it observes and reports and is testable. Our knowledge is increasing through science not changing.

Psychic phenomena is testable and have never been proven to exist. It is testable.

And your information about the Pyramids is just nonsense. They are built the way they are because of the shape of triangles and the weight of the rocks and the gravity of the earth. And they were built by trail and error.

Yeah, about the pyramid thing - that number would change drastically depending on your units. Are you using feet and degrees? Meters and radians? I bet I could "mathematically combine" all sorts of unrelated numbers into other numbers if you wanted. Throw in a couple unit conversions and *wave my hands*.

a lion in a den of Daniels.

Haha. I always enjoy your replies Don. Teach me to be witty.

donbagley Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> a lion in a den of Daniels.


LOL ... I knew what I was getting into.


Monty Python: "I will face the peril ... I am not afraid!"

Devoted Exmo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wow. What a stew of ideas that have almost
> nothing to do with each other.
>
> Atheists are cranky? Can you prove that?

Sense of humour people, please. You may have just offered proof to my point ... relax.

>
> Women's menstrual cycles coincide with the lunar
> cycle? If that were true, every woman would be on
> the same cycle.
>

Women spending periods of time (pardon the pun) often will synchronize thier cycles with each other ... it has been observed.

> Hospital and police staffing according to the
> lunar cycle? Proof please!
>

I have known many emergency room employees who have mentioned this ... independently.

> The placebo effect is completely understood.
>

Accepted, not understood ...can you explain why it works?

> Science doesn't change, it observes and reports
> and is testable. Our knowledge is increasing
> through science not changing.

Small particles are refuting some of Newtons claims recently. The science of metaphysics is also evolving through observation and re-evaluation.

>
> Psychic phenomena is testable and have never been
> proven to exist. It is testable.

I agree it is testable ... I test it a lot.

>
> And your information about the Pyramids is just
> nonsense. They are built the way they are because
> of the shape of triangles and the weight of the
> rocks and the gravity of the earth. And they were
> built by trail and error.

The measurments may be a coincidence, but not nonsense. How is taking some distances and multiplying them together and arriving at an answer nonsense. It's math ... a science.


Anyway ... I bet I will never keep up with the flaming, not such a good typist. LOL.

torturednevermo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Devoted Exmo Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Wow. What a stew of ideas that have almost
> > nothing to do with each other.
> >
> > Atheists are cranky? Can you prove that?
>
> Sense of humour people, please. You may have just
> offered proof to my point ... relax.

How are you measuring my crankiness as well as that of all other atheists?

> >
> > Women's menstrual cycles coincide with the
> lunar
> > cycle? If that were true, every woman would be
> on
> > the same cycle.
> >
>
> Women spending periods of time (pardon the pun)
> often will synchronize thier cycles with each
> other ... it has been observed.

This is not true. Women who live together often synch up over a long period of time. That is not what you asserted earlier. You said "If women’s bodies have evolved their menstrual cycle to coincide with the moon's cycle."


> > Hospital and police staffing according to the
> > lunar cycle? Proof please!
>
> I have known many emergency room employees who
> have mentioned this ... independently.

I've heard people say is not proof.


>
> > The placebo effect is completely understood.
> >
>
> Accepted, not understood ...can you explain why it
> works?

It works if people who are taking a pill, or a shot, or a substance they've been told will work in a particular way and they have a belief in the administration of the substance as well as the person administering the substance.

>
> > Science doesn't change, it observes and reports
> > and is testable. Our knowledge is increasing
> > through science not changing.
>
> Small particles are refuting some of Newtons
> claims recently. The science of metaphysics is
> also evolving through observation and
> re-evaluation.

Proof please, buy reputable sources that the science of metaphysics is evolving.

>
> >
> > Psychic phenomena is testable and have never
> been
> > proven to exist. It is testable.
>
> I agree it is testable ... I test it a lot.
>
> >
> > And your information about the Pyramids is just
> > nonsense. They are built the way they are
> because
> > of the shape of triangles and the weight of the
> > rocks and the gravity of the earth. And they
> were
> > built by trail and error.
>
> The measurments may be a coincidence, but not
> nonsense. How is taking some distances and
> multiplying them together and arriving at an
> answer nonsense. It's math ... a science.

Your assertion that the Pyramids footprint coincides with the circumference of the earth is the nonsense, not the measurements themselves.


> Anyway ... I bet I will never keep up with the
> flaming, not such a good typist. LOL.

No one is flaming you.

torturednevermo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Devoted Exmo Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Wow. What a stew of ideas that have almost
> > nothing to do with each other.
> >
> > Atheists are cranky? Can you prove that?
>
> Sense of humour people, please. You may have just
> offered proof to my point ... relax.
>


You accuse a whole class of people of being cranky and you think they are cranky if they ask you to prove your prejudicial statement? Sorry, demeaning a whole class of people is bigotry and the class of people can call you on such prejudice.

Devoted Exmo Wrote:
> Women's menstrual cycles coincide with the lunar
> cycle? If that were true, every woman would be on
> the same cycle.

Good grief.
There is so much ignorance in society in general about menstruation, that I'm almost willing to give the OP a pass.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/robynwilder/scientific-facts-about-women-according-to-men

OP, the menstrual cycle is different for every woman. If what you proposed was true about lunar cycle/menstruation, I wouldn't have woken up and said, "Oh, Good!" because it's nearly a full moon.

28 days is AVERAGE. We would ALL be fertile and ready to make babies ALL over the earth, for the next couple of days if the lunar-menstruation cycle was accurate. Then in a couple of weeks we'd all be rushing out to buy our preferred products.

Again, good grief.

I was referring to the evangelical vorasity that some people display when disputing other peoples experiences, it was meant as humour.

I guess I get put off when, for example, someone calls Buddism a cult or a stupid religion because that makes people feel embarassed for investigating it. I don't think Buddah was ever claimed to be a supernatural god ... just a dude with some good thoughts on how to live peacefully amongst our fellow humans.

Yet in the company of ardent athiests, I can see how a buddist would feel uncomfortable voiceing thier views. Atheist sometimes come accross so intense.

And I sympathize if you have never experienced any psychic phenominon. That doesn't mean I haven't. I am not trying to convince you, why are you so adamant to convince me about the invalidity of my experience?

I doubt anyone is trying to convince you of anything. We're just calling BS on stuff that is bogus. Believe whatever you wish.

"Atheist sometimes come accross so intense."

Yeah, and believers in religion, metaphysics and ancient aliens don't.

maybe it's from people making idiotic assumptions like 'atheists are cranky'.

anonrit3n0w Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> maybe it's from people making idiotic assumptions
> like 'atheists are cranky'.

You calling me an idiot is a good example what I meant by cranky.

I didn't use any ad-hominem attacks in my OP did I?

See if you can spot the difference:

"maybe it's from people making idiotic assumptions like 'atheists are cranky'."

and

You're an idiot.

As far as the lunar cycle theory, maybe human rhythms were at one time somewhat connected to the moon. On a night with a full moon, it is possible to see almost as well in the night as during the day. Meanwhile during a new moon at night humans are essentially blind. It's not some magical connection to planets though, it's just simple illumination. And it has nothing to do with whether there is a god or not.

That is the point I am trying to make ... some of these issues have rational explanations that we just haven't discovered yet.

I am an athiest ... I don't attribute anything to god.

I'm cranky because my placebo didn't work and the planets aren't aligned right. Plus, there's those invisible aliens who are putting acid on toilet paper where atheists live.

But you already knew that.

torturednevermo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A recent thread got me to thinking: why are
> atheists so cranky?

I'm not cranky at all. I do have a very low tolerance for nonsense and ignorance, especially when it's exhibited and claimed to be "fact" or "reasonable.

> I like to keep an open mind toward the pursuit of
> metaphysics.

For example, "metaphysics" isn't anything but a nonsense word. You used it as if it's some kind of real thing, or serious area of study. It's not.


> There are many things that the
> scientific process cannot prove or disprove, yet
> continue to empirically exist.

If something "empirically exists," it can be shown so by the scientific method. Your statement above is self-contradictory, and reflects more than a bit of ignorance about science. Not only that, but atheism is not science, science is not atheism.


> For example, is astrology just foolish magical
> thinking?

Yes, it's proven-false worthless nonsense.

> If it is, then why do hospitals and police
> stations quietly staff more people on the days
> surrounding the full moon?

Because people are ignorant and stupid. There have been *numerous* empirical, objective studies that show NO correlation between a full moon and increased crime or hospital admissions -- but because of ignorance, superstition, and confirmation bias, some places still pretend there is.

> If women’s bodies
> have evolved their menstrual cycle to coincide
> with the moon's cycle...

They didn't. They're not the same, they don't coincide, and there's no evidence there's any relationship.

> then why reject other
> people’s empirical observations of human
> reactions to other planetary cycles?

There aren't any such observations. What people *claim* (not observe) is that something happened, and it matched up to some "planetary cycle." But every single time such claims are examined objectively, they're found to be imagination, fraud, ignorance, and confirmation bias -- they're not found to be "empirical observations." You're using ignorance rather than information and reason to pretend these things are "real," when massive, objective, clear evidence shows they're not. Why should I or anyone else "respect" such ignorance and poor thinking?

> How about the placebo effect? Scientific thinking
> has no explanation for this.

False. First, the only "effect" is psychological -- no actual "healing" occurs. Second, "scientific thinking" understands it quite well. Once again, rather than go research what facts we've found out about this using science, you used ignorance to make a false claim. Why should anyone "respect" that?

> Yet science itself
> relies on the placebo effect for its drug studies.

No, it doesn't. Drug studies allow for its possible occurrence -- it's not relied on.

> The placebo effect exists amidst a complete lack
> of evidence as to why.

False again.

> Neither can science
> explain cancer remission …yet it happens a lot,
> sometimes in seemingly scientifically impossible
> ways that greatly perplex the scientific
> community.

False again.
> Some people reject ANY concept of psychic
> phenomenon ... but you can't convince an entire
> family who share observable psychic abilities that
> what they are empirically witnessing is not
> happening.

Such claims are rejected because *every single time* they're objectively tested, they are shown false. I don't care what ignorant, biased, un-objective, superstitious people can or can't be "convinced" of (and they're not "empirically witnessing" anything) -- I care about facts and evidence.

> Just because the scientific method
> fails to prove something does not mean it
> necessarily ceases to exist.

Never claimed that's the case. However, if objective, verifiable evidence can't be shown for a claim, the claim is worthless. It *might* be true, it might not -- but the only way to tell is with evidence, so without any, the claim is worthless. If you're going to claim something DOES exist, then the "burden of proof" is on YOU to provide evidence it does -- if you can't your claim is worthless.


> Not being able to
> prove something doesn’t disprove it.

Never said it did.

> The scientific world of reason, while very good,
> and very useful, is still just a changing
> worldview based on our best knowledge to date.

There is no "scientific worldview." There are facts we've learned using the scientific method that inform us how the world/universe are and work, but that's not a "worldview."

> It
> changes as much as mormonism

The scientific method never claimed to NOT "change." In fact, inherent in it is that any new evidence or knowledge is taken in and used. It practically *guarantees* change, as long as we keep observing, experimenting, and learning. Don't criticize it for being what it is, as if that's "bad" -- it's not.

> Also, in mormonism we can find empirical evidence
> to dispute some very material claims. To my
> knowledge, no one has ever proved psychic
> phenomena has never happened.

Sorry, that's complete BS. And claims are not true unless you can prove they DON'T happen -- claims are worthless unless and until there's evidence they DO happen. There is NO evidence to support "psychic phenomena." By the way, "unexplained" does not mean psychic, magical, supernatural, or anything of the sort. It just means "unexplained(as of now)."


> We have proof that
> it is rare, and that it is difficult to observe

Completely false.

> …but no proof that it has never actually
> existed. There are simply too many observations
> to the contrary to conclude this.

There are NO confirmed observations of "psychic phenomena." Not one. Anecdotal stories are not "observations."

> Also, remember that even Newton’s popular
> worldview is turning out to be more full of holes
> than a Swiss cheese under today’s better
> observation techniques. We just don’t always
> know what we don’t know.

Scientists knew Newton's ideas were incomplete (and in some cases wrong) as soon as he published them. You should really keep up.

> These are just some of my thoughts that I wanted
> to share with my fellow atheists.

Look, I'm not being "cranky." I'm just pointing out that your post was full of ignorance, fallacy, false "facts," and a huge lack of understanding of science and reason. If you have no interest in reason and knowledge, fine -- nobody says you have to use the scientific method. But if that's your choice, then you shouldn't be at all surprised when you spout off in public about proven-false nonsense or arguments from ignorance, and rational people call you on it.


> P.S. Did you ever hear that the lengths of the
> sides together with the angles at the base of the
> great pyramid in Egypt can be combined together
> mathematically to correlate to nearly the exact
> measurement which empirical calculations later
> agreed to be the circumference of the earth? It
> was soooo close, just off by a little. Just
> recently when we used GPS satellites to measure
> the TRUE circumference of the earth, we found that
> it bulges at the equator due to centrifugal force,
> and showed that our earth-based measurements have
> been slightly wrong. Now our measurement
> accurately matches those reflected in the great
> pyramid ... and it is a measurement with quite a
> few decimal places.
>
> Go figure!
>
> Does this prove God? Who cares... maybe it proves
> there were advanced civilizations in the distant
> past, or maybe it supports a premise of aliens, or
> maybe there is a force greater than ourselves that
> can communicate knowledge to us, I don’t really
> know. What it does prove to me is that there are
> a lot of things we don't know. I tend to think
> there is more that we don’t know, than there is
> of what we do.

All it "proves" is that you can twist nonsense around to fit nearly anything, and that you personally are prone to use fallacious and rather silly arguments from personal ignorance and incredulity. Nothing else.

I'd rather be a cranky atheist than a crank.

Going to cook supper now, excited to come back after and be served a second supper here!

Keep up the excellent schooling.

:/

More about Moon myths:

http://www.livescience.com/7899-moon-myths-truth-lunar-effects.html

escapedfromzion Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> More about Moon myths:
>
> http://www.livescience.com/7899-moon-myths-truth-l
> unar-effects.html

Did you read the comments on that page?
The OP should go read them -- a slew of people using arguments from ignorance and confirmation bias, and ignoring everything in the article. It's both hilarious and sad.

torturednevermo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> P.S. Did you ever hear that the lengths of the
> sides together with the angles at the base of the
> great pyramid in Egypt can be combined together
> mathematically to correlate to nearly the exact
> measurement which empirical calculations later
> agreed to be the circumference of the earth? It
> was soooo close, just off by a little. Just
> recently when we used GPS satellites to measure
> the TRUE circumference of the earth, we found that
> it bulges at the equator due to centrifugal force,
> and showed that our earth-based measurements have
> been slightly wrong. Now our measurement
> accurately matches those reflected in the great
> pyramid ... and it is a measurement with quite a
> few decimal places.

This is the purest crap. By pointing that out am I being
"cranky?"

I dunno, I just don't like people telling me falsehoods and
trying to get me to change my whole world view based on it. I
got enough of that as a Mormon.

A few facts:

We've known of the bulge at the earth's equator for well over
200 years. The size of the bulge of the Earth (it's "oblate
spheroid" shape) can be calculated by an undergraduate physics
major using physics that's been known for over 300 years.

The whole field of "pyramidology" has been debunked repeatedly
and is based on measurements and "calculations" done over a
century ago by people with an agenda. Flinders Petrie, one of
the giants of Egyptian archaeology, actually went to Egypt
originally to learn more about the claims of pyramidology and
found it was totally worthless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flinders_Petrie

The Egyptian idea of a Pyramid as a final burial structure
evolved gradually over centuries. From sand pit burials they
found that the sand would blow away and the bodies of grandpa
would be gnawed on by jackals. So they went to rock cut
enclosures under the sand with a stone lid to keep out the
jackals.

http://www.odysseyadventures.ca/articles/mastabas/predynasticburial.jpg

From that they built a temple above the spot of the burial
(called a "mastaba" today after the Arabic word for "bench").

http://www.gattours.com/photos/attractions/449_Beit_khallaf.jpg

The Pharaoh Djosser's architect, Imhotep (whose name was used
for the Mummy in the movie "The Mummy") noted that his complex
would be protected by a high wall around it and came up with
the idea of a mastaba on top of a mastaba on top of a mastaba
etc. to elevate it to where it will be visible from without the
walls. This led to the famous "step pyramid" of Djosser:

http://famouswonders.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Step-Pyramid.jpg

The next idea was to build a "true pyramid" where the sides
were straight and not stepped. This was done over a century
after Djosser by the great old-kingdom phraoh Sneferu (whos
name means "who causes goodness"). But it wasn't easy. He had
two failures along the way. First is the "collapsed pyramid:"

http://www.ancientegyptonline.co.uk/images/meidum-pyramid.jpg

Then there was the "bent pyramid:"

http://www.guardians.net/egypt/cyberjourney/dahshur/bentpyramid/images/Bent-NW-2001-2.jpg

Which started out too steep and began collapsing in on itself.
Inside are large cedar beams holding the walls apart. They got
half way done and then changed the angle. However it was not
stable and was never used for a burial.

Finally he made the first "true" pyramid, the "red pyramid" at
Dashur:

http://looklex.com/egypt/photos/dahshur_red01.jpg

It was Sneferu's son, Khufu, who built the Great Pyramid at
Giza. But it didn't require aliens. A project engineer has
looked at it and found a way that the ancient Egyptians using
technology available 4500 years ago could have built the Great
Pyramid in one year (they had over 20 to do it).

http://www.amazon.com/Building-Great-Pyramid-Year-Engineers/dp/0875865216

Actually KNOWING something is very difficult. It takes lots of
effort and skepticism. It's much easier to just accept
something that you've been told, or believe something that you
find comforting (such as "my race is superior" which was a
common bit of "knowledge" in years past).

<snort> This is an unsupportable overbroad assertion, donchyathink?

so anyone who calls you out on your lies is merely cranky ?

Apparently "cranky" means:

"You don't believe my nonsense, and you point out when I make ridiculous, unsupportable, or proven-false claims. How mean!"

:)

Hey everyone. Dinner was great. Thanks so much to the people who put such a great effort into your explanations. I have yet to visit some of the links to the Egypt stuff, but I will do that later tonight when things get quiet here.

I don't really live or die by the thoughts I expressed in the OP, they are just a mish mash of unexplained things I had gathered up in my head over a lifetime of being raised an athiest, by athiests. Books friends have given me, discussions with peers ...weird television programs, etc. etc. This stuff always catches my eye and fascinates me. Kind of too bad its all rubbish.

I saw the 'science' thread the other day and thought I would throw some of these thoughts out there and see how you would refute them. Now I feel like I wasted your valuable time, so sorry. Thanks for this, I have been schooled. I will reread the arguments, probably several times, as I am fascinated by your superior logic.

I have always known I am kind of dumb, and the topics I posted about have always been able to grab my attention and hold me in fascinattion. Here's a shout out as well to all those whose comments mocked me and made me feel bad for sharing. Touche!

I will slink away and lick my wounds, and then I'm going to read those Egypt links!!

Respectfully yours, me.

You're alright in my book. It's good to get the ideas out and let them get rightfully thought out.

There are a lot of really sharp posters her at RFM, so this is a great place to do this.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/05/2014 06:42PM by Devoted Exmo.

Unlike most adults, who have "made up (!) their minds" (interesting phrase), children realize that they don't yet know and so ask genuine questions, not ones with preconceived answers. Imagine how obnoxious a child would be if he or she insisted that everything not part of their kindergarten learning was "nonsense."

That was one of the great things about how my parents raised me. When I asked questions about God, they would talk about how they personally did not believe in God, but many other people do believe in God. They would go on to say that when we got old enough we would decide for ourselves.

My mother supported my 3 year investigation into the LDS church even though she hated Mormons. I later asked here why she didn't oppose my investigation. She replied that my father and her had raised us as skeptics. She was confident that I would have questions that I needed to have answered before I converted. She also knew that the LDS could not answer the questions I would be asking.

I wounder how many Christians would be as cranky as my mother.

I thought everyone did the same. I was rather surprised to find out that many parents teach their children to have faith in their religion rather than allow them to seek out their own beliefs.

Richard Foxe Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Unlike most adults, who have "made up (!) their
> minds" (interesting phrase), children realize that
> they don't yet know and so ask genuine questions,
> not ones with preconceived answers. Imagine how
> obnoxious a child would be if he or she insisted
> that everything not part of their kindergarten
> learning was "nonsense."

If kindergateners were being taught demonstrably false nonsense, I'd give high praise to those who noticed it.
And if they were being taught that "we don't know yet" means "it's magic/supernatural/psychic," they'd be right to call it nonsense.

Greta Christina does a good job of explaining it in general

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUI_ML1qkQE

As life long atheist, I finally got sick of having Theists forcing their religion on me, so I FINALLY started showing my anger of such obnoxious, rude, unwarranted, undeserved intrusions into my life.

As a gay man, I am cranky with religion because that has been the source of the overwhelming majority of the anti-gay hate in the USA.

As I said before on this board, I had nothing against religion and I did not say anything about my Atheism until too many people of religion felt the need to inflict their religion on me.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/05/2014 06:52PM by MJ.

I have met many kind atheists and also many militant ones that are just as closed minded and judgmental as TBMs and fundamental Christians.

it's the "false equivalency" logical fallacy once again.

Why don't you define "militant Atheist" for us.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/05/2014 07:14PM by Dave the Atheist.

It's the o'l Atheist are as bad as us theist BS. It is the same BS as calling atheism a religion.

isn't it true that some are born "nice atheists" and others "loud atheists"?

No one thinks I'm "cranky." You're making a generalization. If you want to see what cranky is, you should have heard the street preacher I ran into the other day. He consigned me to hellfire and was pretty nasty about it.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2014/09/megachurch-pastor-says-gays-must-be-put-to-death/

Then people say that I am cranky for standing up and opposing this sort of stuff. Geeezzzz



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/05/2014 07:17PM by MJ.