Atheism is not a belief, so why would anyone lie that it is?

[rational experiences]

First human status. What does a human preach God is in science status?

O one position rock stone planet earth.

Who named it God?

Men did.

So if men said God is one position what did a theist achieve?

Gods removal. Gods destruction and made sin holes by science cause.

Why man of science taught God was not to be changed. As historic origin life fell into those holes he opened.

Claiming he would own gods O earth sun god as radiating nuclear earth metals.

Actually.

 

[Sheldon]

But will it fit on a business card?

It sounds more suited to a T shirt to be honest.

 

[Sheldon]

Feels like you're reaching now.

Irony?

 

[Sheldon]

There are samples from six (6) continents and islands of the sea where hundreds of such Flood legends are known.

Legend
noun

1. a traditional story sometimes popularly regarded as historical but not authenticated.

 

[stevecanuck]

Even scientists start with a belief.

I'm just going to pick a couple of your statements to address.

True scientists do NOT start with a belief. They start with a question they're trying to answer. Anyone who calls themselves a scientist and says, "I'm going to try to prove THAT ......", is not a scientist. They say, "I'm going to try to prove IF .....". See the difference?

Is religion really all bad? I have seen religious people doing great acts of kindness for others.

Religion is bad if it promotes hatred of 'the other', as Islam does. It's bad if it tells believers to fight unbelievers, as Islam does.

 

[Bird123]

"Mpemba effect," named after the Tanzanian high school student, Erasto Mpemba, who first observed it in 1963. The Mpemba effect occurs when two bodies of water with different temperatures are exposed to the same sub-zero surroundings and the hotter water freezes first.

I'd heard that one, bit it was a while ago. Salt content changes the freezing point of water, and air pressure changes the boiling point, that's how pressure cookers work.

ice maker effect: fill your ice maker trays one with cold and the other with hot. The cold freezes quicker. Swap trays. The tray that had the cold water now gets the hot while the tray that had the hot now gets the cold. Once again the cold water freezes quicker.

Reality Effect!!

You are right. Salt does change things, however salt was not involved in either experiment.

The Belief that hot water freezes quicker has been past on and on. It probably still is being spread. It probably stems from people having their hot water pipes freeze while their cold water pipes didn't. People didn't stop to realize all the different variable that go along with that one.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

Like I said. I am one who has to know so I put it to the test.

 

[Bird123]

To no end.

Can I really assume there is no reason, purpose or goal? If not, then why do it at all?? Maybe you are hiding the reason. Is it to somehow feed your Ego??

 

[wandering peacefully]

You're an ASHer!

I'm so bad a jokes...

 

[Sheldon]

ice maker effect: fill your ice maker trays one with cold and the other with hot. The cold freezes quicker. Swap trays. The tray that had the cold water now gets the hot while the tray that had the hot now gets the cold. Once again the cold water freezes quicker.

Reality Effect!!

You are right. Salt does change things, however salt was not involved in either experiment.

The Belief that hot water freezes quicker has been past on and on. It probably still is being spread. It probably stems from people having their hot water pipes freeze while their cold water pipes didn't. People didn't stop to realize all the different variable that go along with that one.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

Like I said. I am one who has to know so I put it to the test.

Determining whether or not hot water can freeze faster than cold water may seem like a no-brainer. After all, water freezes at 0 degrees Celsius.

This apparent quirk of nature is the "Mpemba effect," named after the Tanzanian high school student, Erasto Mpemba, who first observed it in 1963. The Mpemba effect occurs when two bodies of water with different temperatures are exposed to the same subzero surroundings and the hotter water freezes first.

Evaporation is the strongest candidate to explain the Mpemba effect. As hot water placed in an open container begins to cool, the overall mass decreases as some of the water evaporates. With less water to freeze, the process can take less time. But this doesn’t always work, especially when using closed containers that prevent evaporated water from escaping.

And evaporation may not be the only reason the water can freeze more quickly. There may be less dissolved gas in the warmer water, which can reduce its ability to conduct heat, allowing it to cool faster. However, Polish physicists in the 1980s were unable to conclusively demonstrate this relationship.

A non-uniform temperature distribution in the water may also explain the Mpemba effect. Hot water rises to the top of a container before it escapes, displacing the cold water beneath it and creating a "hot top." This movement of hot water up and cold water down is called a convection current. These currents are a popular form of heat transfer in liquids and gases, occurring in the ocean and also in radiators that warm a chilly room. With the cooler water at the bottom, this uneven temperature distribution creates convection currents that accelerate the cooling process. Even with more ground to cover to freeze, the temperature of the hotter water can drop at a faster rate than the cooler water.

It's very clear....

The phenomenon, when taken to mean "hot water freezes faster than cold", is difficult to reproduce or confirm because this statement is ill-defined.[3] Monwhea Jeng proposes a more precise wording:

There exists a set of initial parameters, and a pair of temperatures, such that given two bodies of water identical in these parameters, and differing only in initial uniform temperatures, the hot one will freeze sooner.[4]

However, even with this definition it is not clear whether "freezing" refers to the point at which water forms a visible surface layer of ice, the point at which the entire volume of water becomes a solid block of ice, or when the water reaches 0 °C (32 °F).[3] A quantity of water can be at 0 °C (32 °F) and not be ice; after enough heat has been removed to reach 0 °C (32 °F) more heat must be removed before the water changes to solid state (ice), so water can be liquid or solid at 0 °C (32 °F).

With the above definition there are simple ways in which the effect might be observed, such as if a warmer temperature melts the frost on a cooling surface and thus increases thermal conductivity between the cooling surface and the water container.[3] Alternatively, the Mpemba effect may not be evident in situations and under circumstances that may at first seem to qualify for it.

I don't think it is very clear, which is why I always try to keep an open mind....

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Legend noun 1. a traditional story sometimes popularly regarded as historical but not authenticated.

Yes, the Flood legend is a traditional story.
A world-wide story spanning continents and islands of the sea based on a common Deluge where only a few survivors were saved in a boat ____________

 

[wandering peacefully]

I hereby dismiss the words dismiss, and hereby and term. Sadly your sentence no longer makes any sense, but that is a price I'm prepared to pay.



From this day forward I will no longer listen to anyone who opens their dialogue with the words "from this day forward". As it is blindingly obvious everything is from this day and we can only go forward.

However I am also a secular humanist, as well as an agnostic atheist. No wonder my back hurts under the weight of these labels ...

So are you not in my camp of losing the label atheists as it seems a useless term other than to those of us who identify as atheists?

No one else seems to get it so why not try a different term?

You can remain under the apparently useless label of atheist. I'm moving on to the new age with or without you.

 

[Bird123]

Then you are being irrational. As the reason for not believing the claim that it is heads would be that you have insufficient evidence / reason to commit to that claim as being true.

The exact same reasoning would apply to the claim that it is tails.
You wouldn't be able to accept that as "true" for the exact same reasons.



In other words: you wouldn't accept the claim as true that it is heads, and you also wouldn't accept the claim that it is tails - until you have sufficient reason to commit to either one.

SO: exactly as I said. NOT believing it is heads DOES NOT imply that you'll believe it to be tails instead.


The end.



I'm not the one trying to have it both ways.




That's what was said. That not believing the claim "a god exists" must necessarily mean that one must believe a god does NOT exist.

My coin toss analogy shows that that isn't true at all.
Not believing a claim does NOT necessarily mean that one will believe the opposite, or that one will believe the claim to be false (believing that the claim "it's heads" is false, is the equivalent of believing it is heads).


With such binary things, 2 claims are possible:

1. It is heads / the defendant is guilty / god exists.

2. it is tails / the defendant is innocent / god does not exist


The thing that many people seem unable to comprehend is that in the whole theist / atheist debate, only claim 1 is being discussed.

Just like in court, one is only discussing the claim of guilt - NOT the claim of innocence.
This is why a judge will rule "guilty" or "not guilty" and not "innocent".

I rule god to be "not guilty" of existing.

I think you are playing with words. You asked what would I believe not what the truth was. You asked what belief I would accept. Beliefs merely point a direction by which one can search for the truth. In the coin flip, I said I would believe it's tail, however I would have to see the coin.

Now if you said heads and I did not believe you, then my belief would be that It's tail not that I did not have enough information to know the truth. It is a fact I did not have enough information to positively have the truth.

It's the very same with religion. One side believes God exists and the other side doesn't. Neither is willing to do what it takes to see the coin.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[Sheldon]

Can I really assume there is no reason, purpose or goal? If not, then why do it at all?? Maybe you are hiding the reason. Is it to somehow feed your Ego??

Well you're here, why assume the worst motives in others?

 

[URAVIP2ME]

First human status. What does a human preach God is in science status? O one position rock stone planet earth. Who named it God......

Except for Earth, it is men who named the other planets. God named this planet: Earth - Genesis 1:10.

 

[Sheldon]

So are you not in my camp of losing the label atheists as it seems a useless term other than to those of us who identify as atheists?

No one else seems to get it so why not try a different term?

You can remain under the apparently useless label of atheist. I'm moving on to the new age with or without you.

Bon voyage I wish you well, I shall cling to the identifier that currently best describes my cantankerous old carcass.

 

[rational experiences]

Except for Earth, it is men who named the other planets. God named this planet: Earth - Genesis 1:10.

Reasoning humans conscious awareness innate acute about earths atmosphere.

Movement of gases burning cooling clear and alight on the face of the great deep of space on water.

Man looking above him claiming words. The one word told him gods only name.

O gods heavenly body cooling medium. A model of O circulation as G spiral into O and O changing by magnetic force I into DD cooling by voiding back into OO.

The only one word as the word holiness GOD. Only God created GOOD to protect life. Known exactly.

Stated teaching by letter ...
IE...the example i.e. I as magnetism...so never change earths heavens or G O D will change and destroy you.

I said so. O by I into DD as O changed.

Relativity of a conscious human.

 

[wandering peacefully]

Bon voyage I wish you well, I shall cling to the identifier that currently best describes my cantankerous old carcass.

Very well then. Hold on tight to that sinking ship! I'll pluck you out of the sea on my way by should you change your mind.

I'm not good at being funny nor good at being serious either. But please do refer to me by my new label and respect my worldview/new religion should you ever address me again!

 

[Bird123]

I'm just going to pick a couple of your statements to address.

True scientists do NOT start with a belief. They start with a question they're trying to answer. Anyone who calls themselves a scientist and says, "I'm going to try to prove THAT ......", is not a scientist. They say, "I'm going to try to prove IF .....". See the difference?



Religion is bad if it promotes hatred of 'the other', as Islam does. It's bad if it tells believers to fight unbelievers, as Islam does.

Beliefs are important. Without beliefs we would all lock up just like my old computer when all the facts are not known.

You are right. It all does start with a Question. To Question is the start on the journey to Discovery. On the other hand, beliefs are involved as well since the facts are not know.

It's good you brought that up. Far too many people are happy accepting rather than question then seek answers.

Yes, many people in Islam are making bad choices. Look at Christianity in the middle ages. I think they look close.

People are learning and growing through their free choices. People are getting better. Could they do that without the catalyst that brings the choices to the surface?

I know mankind's goal is to have it made. Is that really God's goal? Look for the why and the pieces come together.

How does that song go? Carry on, There will be peace when you are done. The best choices will be learned. On the other hand, bad choices will be chosen just to Discover they were never good choices to begin with.

The dynamics of God's system are amazing. Everything stares us all in the face. So much more knowledge lives beyond the mere surface of things. It wait to be Discovered.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[Bird123]

It's very clear....



I don't think it is very clear, which is why I always try to keep an open mind....

Do the experiment yourself

 

[Bird123]

Well you're here, why assume the worst motives in others?

A question is no assumption. I await an answer. To question is to consider all possibilities.