Go Back   AFA Forums > Atheism > General Chit Chat About Atheism

General Chit Chat About Atheism Something on your mind?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 11th May 2017, 05:17 PM
Madame Tarot Madame Tarot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 78
Default Does the evidence support no God or no Caring God

My assessment is there is no evidence of a caring God.

Re a Creator God, well it certainly did not happen as per ancient texts would have us believe.

But that said, our universe and all had to start with something so a name for that something could be "God" or "Wispofmagicsmokeanddoublesidedmirrors" or maybe something simple like "Fred."

My signature statement below might sound comical but it has as much cred as anything else I have come across.

So the Key words are:-

You can work out the key words for yourself.
__________________
God was a giant Queensland Blue Pumpkin. He was lonely and got bored so he blew himself up (aka the big bang) The pumpkin skin fragments became planets, the orange flesh vaporised into gasses and the seed fragments started life when conditions were right.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11th May 2017, 06:15 PM
Goldenmane's Avatar
Goldenmane Goldenmane is offline
Cuss-tard
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 7,397
Default Re: Does the evidence support no God or no Caring God

What makes you think anything had to be started?

Sent from my SM-G925I using Tapatalk
__________________
-Geoff Rogers

@Goldenmane3

Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11th May 2017, 06:36 PM
WesternGeo's Avatar
WesternGeo WesternGeo is offline
AFA Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Perth, WA
Posts: 573
Default Re: Does the evidence support no God or no Caring God

Seems a bit like the Kalam cosmological argument that theist routinely use.

I do not understand why people are just not comfortable enough to say we don't know.

The time to believe that "our universe and all had to start with something" is when there is evidence of such.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11th May 2017, 06:42 PM
Darwinsbulldog's Avatar
Darwinsbulldog Darwinsbulldog is offline
AFA Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Perth
Posts: 18,670
Default Re: Does the evidence support no God or no Caring God

Yeah, the "mystery, ergo god" line is pretty tired. Some serious self -dishonesty is required to subscribe to that sort of rubbish.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Epicurus1.jpg (89.1 KB, 56 views)
__________________
Just stick to the idea that science tests falsifiable hypotheses to destruction.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11th May 2017, 06:44 PM
Madame Tarot Madame Tarot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 78
Default Re: Does the evidence support no God or no Caring God

Quote:
Goldenmane said View Post
What makes you think anything had to be started?

Sent from my SM-G925I using Tapatalk
Weeeelll everthing on and around planet earth is basically cyclic.

The moon, the tides, seasons, animals, plants, algae, bacteria.

Everything is not "just is" but is in various stages of their cycles.

Cyclic means motion from somewhere and back and start again

Hence 'started" means put in motion.
__________________
God was a giant Queensland Blue Pumpkin. He was lonely and got bored so he blew himself up (aka the big bang) The pumpkin skin fragments became planets, the orange flesh vaporised into gasses and the seed fragments started life when conditions were right.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11th May 2017, 06:52 PM
Voltairine's Avatar
Voltairine Voltairine is offline
There will still be cheese
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: A pale blue dot
Posts: 3,051
Default Re: Does the evidence support no God or no Caring God

There is no evidence to support a god(s). Therefore, the "caring" part is irrelevant.
__________________
...
What, indeed, is an atheist? He is one who destroys delusions which are harmful to humanity in order to lead men back to nature, to reality, to reason. Baron d'Holbach

_____

If we go back to the beginnings of things, we shall always find that ignorance and fear created the gods; that imagination, rapture and deception embellished them; that weakness worships them; that custom spares them; and that tyranny favours them in order to profit from the blindness of men. Baron d'Holbach
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11th May 2017, 07:02 PM
WesternGeo's Avatar
WesternGeo WesternGeo is offline
AFA Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Perth, WA
Posts: 573
Default Re: Does the evidence support no God or no Caring God

Quote:
Madame Tarot said View Post
Weeeelll everthing on and around planet earth is basically cyclic.

The moon, the tides, seasons, animals, plants, algae, bacteria.

Everything is not "just is" but is in various stages of their cycles.

Cyclic means motion from somewhere and back and start again

Hence 'started" means put in motion.
That is a poor reason to think the universe has a cause. You cannot pick a bunch of random processes on this planet, describe them as 'cyclic' (even though that in itself is contestable) and then assume this trend extends to before time and space existed in this universe.
Reply With Quote
Like The Irreverent Mr Black, Stubby liked this post
  #8  
Old 11th May 2017, 07:11 PM
Loki's Avatar
Loki Loki is online now
You get what everyone gets....you get a lifetime
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Up the creek
Posts: 11,085
Default Re: Does the evidence support no God or no Caring God

__________________
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."Philip K. Dick

Reply With Quote
Like WesternGeo liked this post
  #9  
Old 11th May 2017, 08:05 PM
Madame Tarot Madame Tarot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 78
Default Re: Does the evidence support no God or no Caring God

Quote:
WesternGeo said View Post
That is a poor reason to think the universe has a cause. You cannot pick a bunch of random processes on this planet, describe them as 'cyclic' (even though that in itself is contestable) and then assume this trend extends to before time and space existed in this universe.
Thanks WesternGeo but why are you are misrepresenting what I said.

I did not mention a cause or assume when or where it started or extends to before time and space existed.

The things I mentioned are cyclic as everyone knows.
__________________
God was a giant Queensland Blue Pumpkin. He was lonely and got bored so he blew himself up (aka the big bang) The pumpkin skin fragments became planets, the orange flesh vaporised into gasses and the seed fragments started life when conditions were right.

Last edited by Madame Tarot; 11th May 2017 at 08:07 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11th May 2017, 09:07 PM
Goldenmane's Avatar
Goldenmane Goldenmane is offline
Cuss-tard
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 7,397
Default Re: Does the evidence support no God or no Caring God

Quote:
Madame Tarot said View Post
Quote:
Goldenmane said View Post
What makes you think anything had to be started?

Sent from my SM-G925I using Tapatalk
Weeeelll everthing on and around planet earth is basically cyclic.

The moon, the tides, seasons, animals, plants, algae, bacteria.

Everything is not "just is" but is in various stages of their cycles.

Cyclic means motion from somewhere and back and start again

Hence 'started" means put in motion.
It's an interesting contention. Certain Daoist traditions - those who could comfortably be described as of the Natural Pilosophy ilk - contended that such cyclical behaviours were so ubiquitous as to be the underlying principle upon which everything rested. The concept is given the name Taiji, which translates fairly directly as Supreme Ultimate and is symbolised by



The Daoist natural philosophers were some pretty smart cookies, but the fact that we see cycles everywhere doesn't actually mean that everything is cyclic.

And even if I grant you that shit seems, like, really fucking cyclic, man, that in no way supports your original contention that shit necessarily had to have been started. It could be that shit's just been going on forever, without a beginning. It could be that the apparent prevalence of cycles is an artifact of our fucking monkey brains, evolved within a system that does have cycle-like patterns at scales we can operate in. I mean, fuck, averaged out over forever, the life expectancy of a human is about 50 years. Gives us enough time to notice shit like seasons in the latitude we inhabit, over that lifespan, but doesn't take into account shit like the death of a star, or universal entropy.

We're really really good at noticing patterns, including things that seem like cycles and shadows that look like snakes. We've even got a fancy name for it: pareidolia. We see shit that isn't there, because in aggregate you're more likely to fuck if you flee every possible lion than if you don't. Because at some point or other, it's gonna be a fucking lion.

None of which goes any distance toward justifying the claim that shit had to be started. I mean, it seems intuitively true: there had to be a beginning. But cycles don't support that contention, and so far nothing else I've seen in this thread does either.

So, I'll ask you again: what makes you think shit had to be started?
__________________
-Geoff Rogers

@Goldenmane3


Last edited by Goldenmane; 11th May 2017 at 09:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
Thank 142857 thanked this post
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +11. The time now is 01:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.