Donating = Loving
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.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
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.
Donating = Loving
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.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
"What makes it (THE QUESTION) fallacious is the theistic assumption that an inability to answer the question (THE ANSWER) validates their belief in a deity (THE CONCLUSION)."
Correct, as this is the very definition of argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy.
Argument from ignorance (from Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents "a lack of contrary evidence") is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true. This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes a third option, which is that there may have been an insufficient investigation, and therefore there is insufficient information to prove the proposition be either true or false. Nor does it allow the admission that the choices may in fact not be two (true or false), but may be as many as four,
true
false
unknown between true or false
being unknowable (among the first three).
In debates, appeals to ignorance are sometimes used in an attempt to shift the burden of proof.
Which doesn't make the question of why a logical fallacy.
"Which doesn't make the question of why a logical fallacy."
What makes it fallacious is when being unable to answer a why question is cited by apologists as evidence. Which we have seen theists do countless times, and this is the very definition of an argument from ignorance *FALLACY. The clue is in the title there John.
I linked the definition for you already, so it;s hard to see why you keep ignoring what I am saying and going back to your straw man? Asking why isn't necessarily fallacious, but citing the inability to answer the why question as evidence for *ANYTHING is fallacious.
I'm not ignoring what you are saying; I'm pointing out it is irrelevant to what the Op said, and what I argued against: that asking "why" is a logical fallacy. I don't care about your beef with apologists.
It becomes a an appeal to ignorance fallacy when someone asks why, and then cites the lack of answer as evidence.
Ha ha ha ha ..... nonsense. We all agree with your fallacious BS. I can agree with anything I want to agree with. I am on Breezy's side. We are going to be best buds from this point forward. I will agree with everything he says.
@Sheldon
Most of the scientists in the US and the world believe in God or a Higher Power. The rest say I don't know and do NOT want to be associated with atheism at all (Like Tyson and Dawkins who have gone out of their way to publicly announce that they are not atheists with Tyson even making a youtube video about it). https://bigthink.com/think-tank/neil-degrasse-tyson-atheist-or-agnostic
So stop pretending they are agnostic/atheists too,. That is a made up term by the new atheists and no one's buying it. And the point is, what you stated is false. Every expert in science does not disagree with us. I could give you a recent list of over 500 scientists who are well educated and well known, who even deny the validity of the theory of evolution https://dissentfromdarwin.org/ And I am not even denying that evolution may be true, just pointing out that the first cause is very obviously higher intelligence. There is no other logical assumption. It is the only one.
And here is some interesting information about the 514 scientists alive today who don't even agree with the theory of evolution:
"The list of 514 signatories includes member scientists from the prestigious US and Russian National Academy of Sciences. Signers include 154 biologists, the largest single scientific discipline represented on the list, as well as 76 chemists and 63 physicists. Signers hold doctorates in biological sciences, physics, chemistry, mathematics, medicine, computer science, and related disciplines. Many are professors or researchers at major universities and research institutions such as MIT, The Smithsonian, Cambridge University, UCLA, UC Berkeley, Princeton, the University of Pennsylvania, the Ohio State University, the University of Georgia, and the University of Washington" https://evolutionnews.org/2006/02/over_500_scientists_proclaim_t/
http://www.atheistrepublic.com/forums/debate-room/specifically-senta-chr...
And like a Religious Absolutist Apologist, you neglect to include pertinent information. Basically you are Quote Mining to make something fit your presupossed assumptions. You neglected to add that BOTH Richard Dawkins AND Neil deGrasse Tyson have officially stated that they are first and foremost scientists. I loved the way Tyson put it in one interview when asked about the existence of a god: "I am not convinced. The evidence does not exist." Thus, my statement which you said is bullshit, "NO EVIDENCE = NO EXISTENCE."
Prove it. Put up or shut the fuck up about this. From mine own research through several sources (too many to list) the MEAN or AVERAGE of all these listings is that only 36% of scientists are religious. That basically means that 2 out of 3 scientists ARE NOT religious.
I ain't pretending. I know. I know how to research this shit. Additionally, since I am a working scientist, I have access to web portals that you do not. Web portals that way more accurate than your precious Discovery Institute which is nothing more than a Religious Absolutist pseudoscience organization of Religious Absolutist Apologists. The same as the Pew Research Center (PRC). The PRC is, as I admit, slightly better with their data handling, they are still a pseudoscience organization of religious and political conservatives serving the greater good of politics and religion. Just dig deeper.
Let's see, according to the sources I can tap into, approximately 99.3% of ALL scientists (about 8.44 million out of about 8½ million) on the ENTIRE Earth believe the Theory of Evolution is FACTS (Formulated Accurately Codified Truth in Science). Your 514 only accounts for about 0.006% of all scientists. Hmm...
Provide irrefutable objective hard empirical evidence. Otherwise, Hitchens's Razor accompanied by Arakish's Razor.
And from your last link: "Discovery Institute first published its Scientific Dissent From Darwinism list in 2001 to challenge false statements about Darwinian evolution"
Discovery Institute is the most disreputable organization to ever be founded. And it is tied with Answers in Genesis.
These are the two worst organizations to trust, for ANYTHING.
Furthermore, you are always claiming I know nothing about science. How much do you know?
The reason I talk the way I do on these forum boards is because it is an outlet for my atheism and dealing with Religious Absolutists (mainly my family). I come to these boards to also get away from work and act more like a normal person instead of the volcanologist. However, if you want to talk about geology, geomorphology, volcanology, then I just may never shut up. Ask everyone here how verbose I have been on these subjects. I also have been studying astrophysics, celestial mechanics, and orbital mechanics; I just do not work in those fields except voluntarily. Most of the time, I am at home, login to the work computer systems, and crunch data. That is why I have two computers. One is ultra-secured for my actual work. The other is just a piece of shit I use to surf the WWW and come here to AR.
And if you want to know why this is so:
It is because of Religious Absolutists who purposefully mentally retard themselves like you who are always asking those stupid and idiotic "WHY" questions of presupposed assumptions of the "Why the purpose of this" type of questions. As I said in my OP:
And I shall add the "Why first cause" type of questions. Most scientists ain't got the time to deal with you self-mentally-retarded Religious Absolutists and/or Religious Absolutist Apologists. Most of you are just too blinded and closed-minded by your religious beliefs to even be able to understand or comprehend the true truth. In other words, as Morpheus put it (paraphrased), "You are not ready to be unplugged." Basically, only you can unplug yourself from the Matrix of Religious Absolutism.
And here is an excerpt from something else I wrote:
And you can read the whole thing here: What I Believe.
Ta. Ta. Love ya. ***hand smooch... blow***
rmfr
P.S. — Cute! You edited your post while I was researching for data and writing a response. So what. You are getting my response no matter to whom you address your post. Because you can see the original text above before you edited.
***2nd hand smooch... blow***
EDIT: had to fix a data
Yes, in a reply to me own post. Just easier.
Although I did not copy and paste it over, here is the original post with the Date/Time Stamp
======================================================================
Tue, 11/06/2018 - 23:29
(Reply to #25) Permalink
Senta Christine
Senta Christine's picture
Most of the scientists in the US and the world believe in God or a Higher Power. The rest say I don't know and do NOT want to be associated with atheism at all (Like Tyson and Dawkins who have gone out of their way to publicly announce that they are not atheists with Tyson even making a youtube video about it). https://bigthink.com/think-tank/neil-degrasse-tyson-atheist-or-agnostic
So stop pretending they are agnostic/atheists too,. That is a made up term by the new atheists and no one's buying it. And the point is, what you stated is false. Every expert in science does not disagree with us. I could give you a recent list of over 500 scientists who are well educated and well known, who even deny the validity of the theory of evolution https://dissentfromdarwin.org/ And I am not even denying that evolution may be true, just pointing out that the first cause is very obviously higher intelligence. There is no other logical assumption. It is the only one.
And here; is some interesting information about the 514 scientists alive today who don't even agree with the theory of evolution:
The list of 514 signatories includes member scientists from the prestigious US and Russian National Academy of Sciences. Signers include 154 biologists, the largest single scientific discipline represented on the list, as well as 76 chemists and 63 physicists. Signers hold doctorates in biological sciences, physics, chemistry, mathematics, medicine, computer science, and related disciplines. Many are professors or researchers at major universities and research institutions such as MIT, The Smithsonian, Cambridge University, UCLA, UC Berkeley, Princeton, the University of Pennsylvania, the Ohio State University, the University of Georgia, and the University of Washington https://evolutionnews.org/2006/02/over_500_scientists_proclaim_t/
======================================================================
Ta. Ta. ***hand smooch... blow***
rmfr
Argumentum ad populum fallacy, appeal to authority fallacy, and as well as being fallacious it is in fact wrong. In the elite American Academy of sciences, where only the most eminent and well qualified scientists in the US are admitted, atheism is around 94%, this roughly mirrors theism in the general population.
The idea Richard Dawkins "doesn't want to be associated with atheism" is too stupid to warrant any reply, Try reading his best selling book "The God Delusion", large clue in the title for you there.
"So stop pretending they are agnostic/atheists too"
They are both atheists, and agnostics, I am not too sure why anyone would be so stupid as to try and claim otherwise. Not that it matters to me either way, unlike you I don't base belief on fallacious appeals to authority.
"That is a made up term by the new atheists and no one's buying it. "
What are you talking about, what term are you claiming is made up?
"nd the point is, what you stated is false. Every expert in science does not disagree with us. "
That's not remotely what I said, your grasp of English is execrable. However please cite a single peer reviewed paper that agrees with *YOUR assertion that the universe requires a designer / creator? I really can't tell if your being this obtuse on purpose.
-------------------------------------
"I could give you a recent list of over 500 scientists who are well educated and well known, who even deny the validity of the theory of evolution "
Not one of them has any work published or peer reviewed to support their creationist beliefs, so claiming they're scientists is again a fallacious appeal to authority. No experts in the field of biology or evolution deny the scientific fact of evolution, and no scientists have demonstrated any evidence to falsify any part of it in over 160 years of scientific scrutiny. These lists are creationist propaganda, and they have been roundly debunked, proper scientists regard them as a joke, hence the facetious petition of proper scientists (only whose first name is Steve) that support the fact of evolution, and this list has hundreds of thousands of names on it, so try project Steve for a start.
https://ncse.com/project-steve
Though again this has nothing at all to do with atheism, even in the astonishingly unlikely event evolution were entirely falsified tomorrow I would remain an atheist as no theist or religious apologist can demonstrate any objective evidence for any deity. I have asked you repeatedly and you have predictably ignored those requests, and of course we all know why.
"just pointing out that the first cause is very obviously higher intelligence. There is no other logical assumption. It is the only one."
Logic is not based on assumption for fuck sake, and what you just wrote is the every definition of an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy. Therefore BY DEFINITION it cannot be asserted as rational. Who knows what you hope to achieve by blindly repeating this fallacy to me, when I have repeatedly explained why it is a fallacy and therefore irrational, it's not as if I'm going to abandon logic for your irrational creationist spiel?
Your list is hilarious, as those are creationists and the list is creationist propaganda, anyone gullible enough to be taken in by that hokum I can only feel sorry for. It's also an appeal to authority fallacy again, since no one on that list has ever had any work scientific ally validated to support their claims. Scientific consensus underpins masses of peer reviewed work, and objective evidence, it's not a bare appeal to numbers, wish is what you are doing here. Again I can only feel sorry for anyone this woefully ill informed. I mean with Breezy it's sheer arrogant dishonesty, but you genuinely seem to not know anything at all.
It was 93% of scientists in the Academy and it was DISPROVEN AS FALSE AND INACCURATE because it only asked if they believed in a personal God who intervened in our lives. I don't even believe in that. Read more, be less ignorant about the facts. "According to a 2009 Pew Research poll of the members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, "just over half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deity or higher power; specifically, 33% of scientists say they believe in God, while 18% believe in a universal spirit or higher power." https://www.conservapedia.com/Atheists_and_the_National_Academy_of_Sciences
Conservapedia what a fucking joke, the site is a risible right wing biased propaganda machine.
You earlier lauded the objectivity of the PEW research centre so how come they disagree with those lying scumbags on conservapedia? You're hilarious, stop reading that shit, you'll get boils.
http://www.pewforum.org/2009/11/05/scientists-and-belief/
Well well, longstanding and substantive research by the PEW centre showing a negative correlation between religious beliefs among scientists, didn't you just claim the opposite, and claim the PEW centre was the best most objective research body globally?
Own fucking goal even by your laughable standards dear. Here's a sample...
"The recent survey of scientists tracks fairly closely with earlier polls that gauged scientists’ views on religion. The first of these was conducted in 1914 by Swiss-American psychologist James Leuba, who surveyed about 1,000 scientists in the United States to ask them about their views on God. Leuba found the scientific community equally divided, with 42% saying that they believed in a personal God and the same number saying they did not.
More than 80 years later, Edward Larson, a historian of science then teaching at the University of Georgia, recreated Leuba’s survey, asking the same number of scientists the exact same questions. To the surprise of many, Larson’s 1996 poll came up with similar results, finding that 40% of scientists believed in a personal God, while 45% said they did not. Other surveys of scientists have yielded roughly similar results."
Er, you claimed nearly all scientists believed in deity? So you were fucking spectacularly wrong then, but then you also claimed that 490 million atheists globally was "almost nobody" so your mendacious hyperbole is pretty well established on here. If you ever had any chance of being taken remotely seriously, that ship sailed some time ago, but now everyone can see you''re an unabashed liar, perfectly matched to fucking conservapedia.
@Senta Christine
"Most of the scientists in the US and the world believe in God or a Higher Power."
That is an incorrect assertion. According to a survey conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, within the scientific community 33% believe in a god, 18% do not believe in a god but a higher power, 41% do not believe, and the rest don't know.
http://www.pewforum.org/2009/11/05/scientists-and-belief/
So what if you get 514 members of the scientific community who do not agree with evolution? Do you have any idea on how many accept evolution? 98% of scientists connected to the American Association for the Advancement of Science say they believe humans evolved over time.
98%
Let us deal in percentages, because I can find 50 people who believe the earth is flat. Numbers does not make truth.
Senta, now you are dragging out opinions that are not truth.
Yes exactly and that means most (33+18%=51%) of the scientists believe God or a higher power, just as I stated. The rest are agnostic and it is because they are scientists who cannot prove to you that God exists.
"Yes exactly and that means most (33+18%=51%) of the scientists believe God or a higher power, just as I stated. "
Maths just isnlt for you dear.
Then again your grasp of English is also execrable, agnostics are often also atheists, I am both an atheist and agnostic. I don't think you understand either word judging from your risible claims about them. Your made up definitions seem to mirror fairly standard theistic misconceptions of them, used so often in religious apologetics they're considered a cliche by all objective educated people, theists and atheists alike.
You are wrong. It's just that simple. "Why are you a dumbshit?" If you do not see the assertion in that, no one can help you. You can say "I am not a dumbshit." That does not change the fact that the assertion is stated in the question.
Nor does it change the fact that she is a dumbshit.
rmfr
God is not evil. Only people who are intentionally hurting other people are evil.
@Senta Christine
"God is not evil."
Because of this statement, what god are you referring to? The christian god that endorses slavery, genocide, child mutilation?
I am not Christian. I think God is probably a massive form of energy. But what is it that makes you feel like our God would be evil? (aside from religious depictions that i think we both agree are man-made)
@ Senta: "But what is it that makes you feel like our God would be evil?"
Earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, volcanoes, tsunamis, Homo inscius.
A universe that wants nothing more than to exterminate our species. An Earth that wants nothing more than to exterminate our species. A universe in which 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of it is completely annihilative to our species.
rmfr
Who cares if some mold spores, plants, insects and animals went extinct? It was very likely for a good reason. And when you believe in God, you believe in eternal life, so none of those natural disasters even matter. We live on forever in a far better place than this.
Over 99% of all species have gone extinct.
From an evolutionary viewpoint, that makes sense. But from a "god" perspective it sure makes this god out to be a complete incompetent.
"I am not Christian. I think God is probably a massive form of energy."
Since we're making shit up I think if a deity exists it's slice of black forest gateaux, drizzled with fresh cream, and a shockingly good glass of chilled champagne to accompany it. Your deity sucks compared to mine.
@ Sheldon
***mouth salivating uncontrollably***
Hey Sheldon, can my deity, Lysantra, and I join you in the Holy Communion of your deity?
rmfr
Yes, my gateaux deity does not exclude anyone, except religious bigots. You are most welcome my friend.
@Senta Christine
"But what is it that makes you feel like our God would be evil?"
Do you believe that this god created everything?
Do you believe that this god is all-powerful and knows everything?
Why do children die from cancer?
God always has been and always will be, just like our higher selves. God created this planet and then used stardust and water to create our earthly bodies, perhaps through the process of evolution. Our lives here are up to us and everything here is man-made and no God does not intervene, because this is our challenge, not God's challenge. No one ever really dies of anything because we have eternal life. Each soul comes with a specific purpose to teach and to learn through struggles and pain, and through good times as well. Eventually we will all become better people (and animals) who are perfected and godlike and deserving of eternal paradise
@Senta, why do you need a god in your vision of nature?
Because there is obviously higher intelligence than mere humans in 200 billion galaxies. No human can create a universe. Also, as I said before, humans are very imperfect.
Pages