God gets credit

60 posts / 0 new
Last post
science's picture
So, theists live longer than

So, theists live longer than atheists? Where are you getting this information? Do you seriously think that even if this were true, that it has anything to do with religious beliefs? There are hundreds of millions of theists across the world, as compared to still only a fraction of that that are atheists. You can't even compare the numbers to make an acurate statement like that. And having more children? What is the significance of theists having more children? As long as you can afford them, and don't put the financial burden on the taxpayers, do what you want! Now it became an issue of outgrowing each other? That is what the theist is real good at... when common sense, logic, and science disprove their little "folly," talk about something ridiculous, and try to use that as justification to throw everything off the track of the real issue. I was watching an interview that Bill Maher did with one of these religious pastors. ( on youtube) Every logical question that Mr. Maher posed about the Bible, was met with a long, nonsensical explanation, to the point where the audience groaned, and Mr. Maher had to state over, and over again..." but you're not answering the question." Thats what these guys do...they study for years learning how to be " philisophical" but not give a logical answer... in other words, BEAT AROUND THE BUSH!!

anthony500's picture


Perhaps the philosophical/spiritual pursuit of man is the next step in the evolution of man. What do I mean? If, following the Big Bang in the beginning, we indeed all have ancestors that swam in the “primordial pond” and somehow evolved into man, perhaps man is now evolving beyond the natural world. Now men (and women) are evolving into spiritual/philosophical beings that for some reason are causing them to procreate at a greater rate than atheists. Perhaps the reason is to ensure the survival of mankind! If this trend continues for millions of years, then perhaps atheists will not exist because they are not procreating as much as people of faith.

I am joking of course, but if evolution is true, then that means we all came from the same starting point by natural processes over time. That makes us all related right? Some obviously want to pursue life through understanding philosophy, some through faith, and some through neither one of those.

I do have a couple of questions. Despite the claims that “evolution is established fact” and “there are tons of evidence for it”, why do you think so many people are trying to find purpose in life through philosophy or faith in a God/other gods? Is it as simple as “those people are delusionary or willfully ignorant of the evidence” or perhaps most people desire it because we have been created to worship God and seek meaning in life? Notice I said “created to” worship God. That certainly does not mean everyone will seek God. But they seek something nonetheless. Just a thought.

Nyarlathotep's picture
Curious - "Despite the claims

Curious - "Despite the claims that “evolution is established fact” and “there are tons of evidence for it”, why do you think so many people are trying to find purpose in life through philosophy or faith in a God/other gods?Is it as simple as “those people are delusionary or willfully ignorant of the evidence” or perhaps most people desire it because we have been created to worship God and seek meaning in life? "

The former. People is dumb.

science's picture
You keep saying,"science is

You keep saying,"science is limited." How is it "limited?" Because it dosen't explain a "purpose?" Science is reality, logic, and difinitive proof of something. Science DOES NOT LIE!! ( your DNA cannot be someone elses...thats how they solve crimes, or IDENTIFY things) Theists simply do not want to acknowledge that, because anything that has proof, that makes sense, you MUST ignore. Why does everything have to have a " purpose?" What is the "purpose" for "acts of God"...earthquakes, tornados, hurricanes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, monsoons, etc...other than to cause destruction, disease, and death? Why does 'god" want to do that?? What could be the purpose of a 16 ton meteor, traveling at 7 times the speed of light, the size of a school bus, crashing into the earth, as it did in Russia? Did God just decide to throw a rock? These things are just the tip of the iceberg...they are nature, science, biology...like a perfect storm, the power of those forces just happened to line up right, and it creates these powers of nature and science. There is no why. It is unfortunate that spirituality is on the rise...people are still being murdered over it to this day...just as they were thousands of years ago. The world would be a much more peaceful place WITHOUT religion.

Ilovequestions's picture
You are exactly right. My

You are exactly right. My point is not that YOU individually need a spiritual purpose to exist, but just due to the fact that science cannot explain the purpose to ANYTHING... maybe you can understand why spirituality is at an all time high. That's all I'm saying. Atheists love to point to science as their savior... but don't realize that philosophy is much more satisfying because it answers "why?" questions that EVERYONE asks at some point.

science's picture
As long as that "philosohpy"

As long as that "philosohpy" is what the theists want to hear, that is what they will accept. Any philosophy can say anything, but there is no PROOF to back anything up. Not everything in this world has a definitive "why" and dosen't need one. You are delving into things that we cannot comprehend...so just go on with your life, be as good a person as you can, and forget all this philosophy nonsense...philosophy dosen't PROVE anything. It is just another way the theist attempts to explain away something that is proveable, logical, and refutes their superstition. I'll take proof over philosophy ANY time. They don't solve murders and violent crimes with "philosophy."

science's picture
By the way, if philosophy

By the way, if philosophy explains everything...what is the philosophic explanation for murdered, diseased, molested, starving children? I'd love to hear the answer for THAT one!!

anthony500's picture
Why is science limited?

Why is science limited? Because it is people who conduct scientific discovery and we are not all-knowing and infallible. Your premise that “science does not lie” is false. Your are personifying the term science. Science cannot do anything. It not only cannot lie, it also cannot tell the truth. It also cannot think, smile, laugh, dance, etc. Again, it is people who do scientific discovery. It is people who make observations of events or phenomena, form a hypothesis, test the hypothesis, analyze the data, and then draw conclusions. Many times scientists have committed fraud when conducting research (yes, even in the fields of evolution and paleontology). It is my understanding that there are significant issues with fossils coming from China that have been proven to be fake. These fake fossils have been used in to make “exciting” conclusions about missing links.

Even when there has been no intent to commit fraud or falsify data, researchers have drawn the wrong conclusions and people will believe the results, especially if they are not trained in the field. Many people will simply believe that the conclusions are correct because the researchers are “trained experts” and “smart”. In other words, “the conclusions must be correct because the person has a PhD “(especially from a prestigious school). It is also my understanding that some of the icons of evolution that have been taught in high schools and colleges for decades have been proven either false (by evolutionists) or were found to be fraudulent. The sad fact is that some of those icons are still being taught today in textbooks even though they are known to be false! Why?

Also, how many times have scientists disagreed with the findings/conclusions of other scientists regardless of the field of study? I’m not even talking about “evolutionary scientists” vs. “creation scientists”. For example, when a fossil discovery has been made, it is my understanding that rarely will you get 100% agreement among all paleontologist researchers (who believe in evolution) even though they are looking at the same fossil evidence.

Another issue that limits science is the bias of researchers. Please do not believe for a moment that researchers are not biased when doing research. For example, if you do not believe in the supernatural, but only in the natural world, you will only look at the evidence from that perspective (i.e., all things must be explained through natural processes). If you believe in the supernatural, then you will be open to that possibly being a part of the equation when interpreting the evidence or data. What I am trying to say is that we all look at the same evidence (creationists, evolutionists, atheists, etc. alike), but we interpret the data based on our worldview. Again, we all have a bias.

Finally, research and the ultimate conclusions derived are also based on assumptions or presuppositions. It is most likely that not all the assumptions and presuppositions ever made are all correct. Unfortunately I do not believe that scientists really care to ultimately prove that these assumptions/presuppositions are correct, which is what they should do. After all, if it is foundational to doing research and drawing conclusions, should we not make sure they eventually are fact also?

In conclusion, your statement that “Science is reality, logic, and definitive proof of something” can only be true if we do science perfectly, which humans cannot. Therefore we are limited in truly understanding the natural and supernatural worlds. Again your statement is personifying science, but I get what you’re trying to say.

science's picture
Fossils are fossils, DNA is

Fossils are fossils, DNA is DNA ( crimes are SOLVED, AND PEOPLE ARE IDENTIFIED by SCIENCE...which "cannot do anything" as you put it), what the scientists see through a telescope is...SUPRISE, SUPRISE...REALLY THERE!!! The finding of paleontologists, archiologists, linking physical EVIDENCE to certain time lines, creatures, and events that have happened millions, even billions of years ago are.....REAL!!! No matter WHO looks at it, it IS THERE! Now, I know theists don't want to hear about this stuff, so your way out of it is to say some of it is "fake" ( but a man dying and rising out of his grave is supposed to be real) these "assuptions" are not always correct ( yet a "virgin" somehow got pregnant) people analyze these things and people make mistakes ( but not God) it was interpreted wrong...and yada, yada, yada. The scientists don't "really care to ultimately prove that these assumptions are all correct?" Are you nuts!!! Some scientists spend their LIVES working on a specific thing to FIND the truth...to FIND the cure, to FIND what happened, to FIND the person. What the hell are you smoking?? How do you think cures were found for the many diseases that plagued this earth and killed so many people...SCIENCE!! How do you think that murders are solved, and the offenders are caught...and in many instances, the wrongly convicted released...SCIENCE!!! Look, anyone can deny, or refuse to acknowledge proof when presented with it , until they are blue in the face...but who is being the FOOL??? Newsday several years ago ran a front page article with a computer generated picture of THE BIG BANG...A high powered telescope along with other sophisticated scientific equipment, was able to capture the gasses STILL in the atmosphere from the explosions that took place billions of years ago...it is THERE...it is REAL So, pooh-pooh it anyway you want, but who is kidding whom??

ThePragmatic's picture
Curious, your name should be

Curious, your name should be "Skewed" instead.
You are obviously not really curious, you want to filter out anything that doesn't fit the answer you have already decided that you want.

"Science cannot do anything."

What the hell were you typing your comment on? Animal skin? (Or perhaps an electronic device, built on years and years of scientific research?)
I hope you deny science as eagerly when your checked into a hospital, "No thanks, no electronic devices and no medicine for me. I'll pray instead."

"Your premise that “science does not lie” is false."

No, sorry but your premise that "“science does not lie” is false", is in turn false itself.
People lie, cheat, steal. And scientists are as you said, is conducted by people.

But science is intellectual honesty. Science is self-correcting.
If a scientist publishes a lie, it will eventually get found out. If science has gotten something wrong, it will eventually correct itself.

I know this level of intellectual honesty is completely alien to theists, and especially creationists, but that is how it works. Sorry.

It's good that you're "not even" taking about "creation scientists", because there is no such thing.

That scientists disagree, is called open discourse, and again is about intellectual honesty. As science progresses and more evidence is found, such disputes get solved.

"Another issue that limits science is the bias of researchers."

This is so ironic coming from a theist, that it hurts my brain! LoL.
Sure, people are bias, but as a scientist you still have to publish results to the scientific community of the entire world, where your findings will get scrutinized.

Y̲o̲u̲ w̲a̲n̲t̲ s̲c̲i̲e̲n̲t̲i̲s̲t̲s̲ t̲o̲ b̲e̲l̲i̲e̲v̲e̲ i̲n̲ t̲h̲e̲ s̲u̲p̲e̲r̲n̲a̲t̲u̲r̲a̲l̲ a̲n̲d̲ l̲o̲o̲k̲ f̲o̲r̲ e̲v̲i̲d̲e̲n̲c̲e̲ o̲f̲ t̲h̲e̲ s̲u̲p̲e̲r̲n̲a̲t̲u̲r̲a̲l̲?̲!̲ I started laughing so hard when I read that, it got really hard to type.
You make it so blatantly obvious that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. This is embarrassing!
What is the definition of supernatural? "attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature."

After showing how incredibly ignorant you are, you go with:

"In conclusion, ..."


You sir, have d̲i̲s̲q̲u̲a̲l̲i̲f̲i̲e̲d̲ y̲o̲u̲r̲s̲e̲l̲f̲ from any kind of grown up discussion.
Either go play in the sandbox with the other children, or go to a library or museum and try to learn something.

ThePragmatic's picture
You make a lot of assumptions

You make a lot of assumptions about "all" atheists. As if atheists are part of a religion with a common set of beliefs. Do we really have to regurgitate the definition of atheism?

Most of what your saying, depends on the definitions of the words you are using.
For example, the word "spiritual" can be used in a sense that does not refer to anything supernatural or any other hocus-pocus that suggest superstition. But you probably mean as in spirits and a world beyond...

Your post seems in general as an attempt at trying to insult atheists, and at the same time be "nice": "This is why reasonable, intelligent people are religious :)"
It is just offensive.

Your views of atheists and science seem very biased, narrow minded and down right ignorant.

cmallen's picture
ILQ probably meant that there

ILQ probably meant that there are reasonable, intelligent people who are religious, not that the only reasonable, intelligent people are religious. Or I could be wrong, in which case, yes, it is offensive.

Ilovequestions's picture
Thanks, brother. I completely

Thanks, brother. I completely mis-phrased what I meant to say :/ You're right, I meant the former!

Ilovequestions's picture
Whoops! You are right! I

Whoops! You are right! I meant to say "that's why there are reasonable, intelligent people who are religious." Completely my fault :/

SvanUlf's picture
Intelligent people are better

Intelligent people are better at rationalize stupid ideas... that's why "reasonably intelligent, sensible people" can believe in a god... or devils... or fairies.

HomunculusThor's picture
So I just read this whole

So I just read this whole thread, and commented upon it top down. And I must say that I side with "Reality" on the issue.

Here are my comments according to what I've read here:

Hello, Reality:
As myself now an A-theist, though for most of my life naively a Christian, or so I naively called myself, I thought back then that God was some Absolute Entity to whom applied a Personality, and so I, too, asked again and again the same heart-rending questions as here you proffer.

Now I have found, having lost my religion, that not only does the truth set you free, it also sucks!
Because the truth is, I believe, that God “is real” ONLY AS our next phase of human evolution (which is why the idea of God is in our heads at all, archetypally); and a lot of people do not want to hear this because it puts the onus on them to step up to the plate and “play God” (which “playing God” also, along with “acts of God”, has negative connotations).

For, if it IS up to us humans to bring God about on this planet as a reality (this being opposed to blindly following the self-fulfilling prophecy of the Armageddon that the majority of the world assents to and even wishes for--Goddamn them!), then we, as Humanity, must rise up and take over the world.
And yet this uprising is as equally naive now as was then my previous life as a Christian.

Fuck "Occupy Wall Street," that’s peanuts--We need an Occupy World Movement.
And perhaps Global Warming, which was phase 1 of our so-called Human fuck-up that has now so obviously led to phase 2--Global Climate Change--shall, when it reaches phase 3, Global Catastrophes as common everyday news, wake up those who remain to a real Humanity before the onset of phase 4, the next Ice Age.

As for Civil Order, Yes, it is all problematic! You cannot expect a civil standard to govern what is actually now closer to 9 billion people (than 7 billion); which makes the modern day scenario even more problematic--with ever more people on the way.

“Why can’t we all just get along?” is the naive question of a buffoon.
The world is too diversely split up; and the roots of those splits run too deep.
And so, even millennia ago people recognised this problematic factionalism and requisitioned, in the forms of religion, the Deus Ex Machina to solve the problem--which according to millennia of such like-unminded requisitioners = annihilation of the human race being tantamount to salvation, because then at least all undue suffering would cease.
And so people pray for Armageddon. And I say Fuck them! They should all go to hell and jump in a lake! Leaving the planet to humans.

What it all comes down to is a question of education. But it's too late for this.
We ARE headed for The Matrix and the Singularity; and technology is so autonomous at this point that the future of the human race is a moot point (not in the older sense of the word as still debatable, but in the modern sense as already finalized).

It makes me sad and oft depressed that we could have ushered into this world a new human individual/social paradigm referred to as God, being our next, given phase of conscious evolution--, but instead of this (and that, because of the actions of the so-called Church for the last few thousand years; the rational people running as far away as possible from said Church) we have turned to science too strongly, in order to get away from the heinousness of religion forever, but to the point where we have already crossed the evolutionary line and handed off the torch to AI, having sold ourselves out to our own technology: which is as equally heinous as anything the Church has ever done. For both Church and Artificial Intelligence spell out the end of Humanity.

In response to Pitar’s comment on this thread. Yes, you are exactly right. But you are only exactly right if humans are still going to be living on this planet in the next 100 years.
We’re not.
Therefore you are wrong in your gentle wisdomicile of hippie-like assuagement. I do not mean you offense as a person, but according to your “Don’t sweat it: let it go” attitude on this thread--: you REALLY DO NOT KNOW what’s going on on this planet, what's coming down the pike, do you?
On a Global scale: the shit’s about to hit the fan.
And I can see you there in that not too-distant future calmly playing your guitar before being incinerated by the nuclear blast that just went off a few major cities away from you.

But, Whatever. At that point it doesn't matter anyway; 'cause you've already realised the true...

I think you owe it to "Reality" to reread his post, and respond, not like some hippie heroin junkie (which IS how your response came across), but like a human being. The guy's asking world-important questions and it seems like you're just hanging out, telling him to be mellow, as you shit all over his feelings.

Pitar. That is how you come across.
Reality. Sorry.

science's picture
I read something in the paper

I read something in the paper last Sunday. The artice was talking about Easter, and the Resurrection...and it stated that some religious people home school their children because they don't want them learning about evolution. Now, I didn't know this. Everyone has the right to raise, and educate their children as they see fit,,,but to me, this idea is just plain wrong. Closing a childs mind to other possibilities, and other points of view about ANYTHING so that THEY may choose as they get older what makes sense to them...well, that is called brainwashing. There is absolute proof of evolution, the scientists, and archeologists have the fossils, bones, skulls, rocks, and what have you, and can link different species to different timelines, they recently found bones of an animal that they believe is linked to the first humans. These are things that have PROOF. But of course, in the theist world, anything that has proof, that makes sense..oh, can't have our child learning about THAT!! The world is messed up, and religion plays a major part in that. Being taught to believe such nonsense is being taught to completely ignore reality, and common sense.

HomunculusThor's picture
A note on Kurzweil and the

A note on Kurzweil and the Singularity.
He is right is what he says about it. But he is wrong if he thinks we are going to last long enough to be around for it.

And even there is a divide: even if we were going to last long enough to be around for it, how many humans do you think want to make the leaping transitional pseudo-evolutionary phases from human to cyborg to robot?
Percentage-wise, very few.

I just find it ridiculous how people who are so smart try to argue that Artificial Intelligence is part of our natural evolution. AI is going to annihilate not only the human race, but AI!

Thus as ridiculous as it is, there is no mental platform upon which to place the ridicule.

CyberLN's picture
Please provide a description

Please provide a description of the process by which this AI annihilation of humanity that you posit will happen.

HomunculusThor's picture
The descriptive process of

The descriptive process of human annihilation I posit is not just about AI.
It is more about the fact that the majority of people on this planet are oblivious to the Global effects of Climate Change--because these effects have not yet reached daily catastrophic levels.

To which I clarify: the powers that be in this world, being those who run it, are so intent on AI as the next phase of our individual and social evolution, that very little attention, percentage-wise, is being paid to the upcoming Global catastrophes that are going to end up basically wiping us out (and if not completely wiped out, then at least reducing the population so drastically that I do not think it hyperbole to guesstimate a 90% wipe-out rate of the world population).

So I am not saying that the end of humanity will be the direct fault of AI, but that AI is a major diverting factor gravitating attention away from Climate Change.
And I do not mean to come across as a doomsday sayer, but if one has not already noticed record-breaking weather patterns already in nascent effect around the globe, then: see what's going to happen in the next 10-20 years as Catastrophe becomes a daily occurrence. An "act of God" a day keeps the people away. Example of an unfunny joke.

This why I said in my previous post that "we have turned to science too strongly, in order to get away from the heinousness of religion": and so while we, as a human race (the powers that be as well as the consumers) are concentrating on AI more and more, the Global Climate will be getting more and more aggressive > to the point of daily catastrophes all over the globe.

So I cannot describe other than generally the process of our annihilation. But 1) all are to blame for it: the Church, the advocates of Robotism, the lying Politicians and suave World Leaders, the ignorant media-imbibing Public; and yet at the same time 2) there is no one to blame, because when all such are thrown into the mix, the outcome is inevitable: the end of the human race.
And this inevitability makes me sad. Because the entire world would have to slam on its brakes to keep this annihilation from happening; and that braking is not going to happen.

I remember Stephen Hawking saying something to the tune of "I we are going to survive, then we need to get or DNA off of this planet, because the planet's already fucked; it just hasn't happened yet." (And I'm sorry I can't find that reference for you.)

If I left something out, and this was too summary, just call me on it, and I'll respond.
But again, I am no seer of the future, and cannot explicate concise details: they, the details, are too interwoven throughout too many fields of action and thought to be decisively enumerated.

As for the thread topic, "God Gets Credit": Who will be left to give the credit for ending all human suffering by wiping it out? It was our collective fault, but we won't be here to receive the credit.

And as for AI, I am no Luddite, nor Saboteur, though I might come across that way; I just see AI as a major part of the mix that will aid in culminating in our end.

HomunculusThor's picture
Stephen Hawking paragraph

Stephen Hawking paragraph correction:

"If we are going to survive, then we need to get our DNA off of this planet...

Nyarlathotep's picture
AI is a joke, IMO. When you

AI is a joke, IMO. When you can make a robot that can do half of the following I'll get worried:

1) walk to my kitchen
2) find the refrigerator
3) find where my wife hid the eggs
4) retrieve 2 eggs
5) retrieve the cheese
6) retrieve an onion
7) find a bowl
8) grate the cheese into the bowl
9) clean and chop the onion and put in bowl
10) break the eggs into the bowl without putting in shells in
11) scramble the eggs in the bowl
12) find where my niece put the skillet
13) Oil and heat up the skillet to the right temperature
14) Add the mix and season it nicely
15) finish the omelet
16) Not step on the dog during this process, and prevent him from stealing any thing

Travis Hedglin's picture
Damnit, every time I visit

Damnit, every time I visit this thread I read this post, and every time it makes me want an omelet. I now have great will and determination to make just a robot, so the end of the world is nigh, and it is all YOUR fault.

Nyarlathotep's picture
Heh, the "resistance is

Heh, the "resistance is futile, but enjoy your omelet" robots are coming!

Travis Hedglin's picture
Damnit man, you and your

Damnit man, you and your desire for spiced and blended chicken ovum have killed us all! I can hear them coming, the clucking robots of doom are here, aaarrrgh....

HomunculusThor's picture
I know where your wife hid

I know where your wife hid the eggs ";" but where did stow or stuff away the cheese and the onion? It's probably where your niece stashed the skillet.
I am not sure if a robot is capable of not stepping on the dog while at the same time thus not preventing him (I assume the dog) from stealing anything.

Interesting. You use words in a sort of, though tight, mathematical differentiality. Nice.
Now where's that damn skillet! ha ha ha ha ha...

HomunculusThor's picture
Hey, wait there just a minute

Hey, wait there just a minute, buddy! Where's your kitchen?

HomunculusThor's picture
Hey, you juss wait there a

Hey, you juss wait there a minute, buddy! --Where's your kitchen?

HomunculusThor's picture
[Oh. Didn't see the page

[Oh. Didn't see the page-overlap]


Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.