Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Micro102]

That's because you are. The reaon Atheism doesn't qualify for a religion is because it does not attempt to explain the purpose of the universe. That is the important part.

I'm saying you using such generalized stances such as "you are wrong/missing the point" and "atheism isn't the same as science" is going to get us nowhere, they are meaningless without explanation. And Neruz I said it at least twice here and I'm sure you heard me, There is no purpose of the universe as everything is random. Someone else also said the same thing. Yet you keep repeating, like you know what we think, "Atheists don't have beliefs int he purpose of the universe".

Atheists have beliefs of every kind. Just constantly saying they don't doesn't mean we will all magically become ignorant about the universe. You have stereotyped atheists and put words inour mouths more time then I can count.

[G-Flex]

A purpose is not some sort of incredible godlike concept. My curtains have a purpose, their purpose is to cover my window and stop the sunlight getting in when they are closed. This is not part of some 'greater scheme', it's just their purpose. That's why they are the way they are.

A "purpose" implies some sort of intent, which implies an intelligent force external to the thing which is having a purpose thrust upon it. Your curtains have a purpose because you imbue them with one.

Actually Dolphins aren't a very good example. If you want a good example, remember that Cro Magnon (our ancestors) were not the only Human-type monkeys around. Off the top of my head i can only name the Neanderthals, but i'm pretty sure there were at least another three or four species (or subspecies, or whatever you want to call it)

I'm not sure if this is what you even mean, but Cro Magnon weren't "human-type monkeys"; they were humans, same species as us.

[Micro102]

I believe they were monkeys, which through a series of mutations became humans. They were half-way.

[Grakelin]

The belief an atheist has on the purpose of the universe is that there is no purpose to the universe. Let's stick to the definition Neruz provided, and that I posted from the dictionary website "beliefs about the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe", and not try to change the definition to suit our arguments.

The definition is not "what we think the purpose is", but "what we believe about the purpose". The former implies that we need to think there is a purpose. The latter allows the answer: "there is no purpose, because it was all just random chance".

[Ampersand]

I believe they were monkeys, which through a series of mutations became humans. They were half-way.

It doesn't matter what you believe about Cro Magnon Man, the indisputable facts are that Cro-Magnon Man was nearly indistinguishable from modern humans. The name only refers to the location were the skeletons were found, the cave of Cro-Magnon in southwest France. The important part of their name is what comes after Cro-Magnon. Man.

[Micro102]

Indistinguishable? You mean not more heavily hairy then humans today? with similar feet? I'm talking about genetically.

[Ampersand]

Do a little damn research before you start spouting off nonsense, Micro. seriously, you're not winning yourself any respect the way you're talking here.

Yes, I mean they were nearly indistinguishable from modern humans, in both the literal, and genetic sense. They were around a relatively short time ago, only as old as 34,000 to 36,000 years ago. They were what are called "Anatomically Modern Humans." Where as we are Homo sapiens sapiens, (the second is subspecies), they were Homo sapiens, no sub species.

There is no real 'half way' point between primeval Apes and humans, each and every individual step along the way is important and distinguishable. Apes, by the way, not monkeys. There is a difference and it is a difference worth mentioning.

If you want to talk about something approaching the middle point from the first species in the Genus Homo to the modern Homo sapiens sapiens, you'd have to go back in time approximately 2 million years.

[G-Flex]

Right. Prehistoric cro-magnon man was not identical to modern man, but then again, neither are any two groups of modern man in general, even today.

They weren't "monkeys"; they were the same damn species. If you want to compare the differences between our common ancestor with the other primates, and with cro-magnon, you will find that cro-magnon man is far, far, far more than "half-way" between. They'd be almost indistinguishable from us, just as a rainforest tribe isolated from the rest of humanity for 10,000 years more-or-less is.


The fact of the matter is that "cro-magnon" isn't even a scientific classification, and is just used to refer to the earliest modern humans living in Europe.

In fact, I believe that cro-magnon man were still considered the same subspecies as modern man is; other subspecies of Homo Sapiens go back over 100,000 years further in the past.


Seriously, like Ampersand said, you really ought to look this stuff up before you talk. We have enough people saying things without any real background knowledge working for them, and it's difficult enough to separate wheat from chaff; if you're going to bother talking about something like this, you could at least do everyone else the courtesy of trying to be informed. And if someone corrects you on something, you should maybe bother looking it up to see if it's true for yourself instead of just blindly contradicting it.

[Ampersand]

After re-checking sources and actually doing a little research to confirm whether or not Cro-magnon was in fact the same subspecies as modern humans, I have determined that he is, in fact, correct.

See how easy that is, Micro?

[Micro102]

I checked my memory but was wrong, Sue me.

[Ampersand]

Well i would at least like a reaction? Otherwise I think "O they have no comeback so I must be right".

You were the one who said you need to be called on it when you're wrong.

[dreiche2]

Let's calm down a little bit again, shall we?

The belief an atheist has on the purpose of the universe is that there is no purpose to the universe. Let's stick to the definition Neruz provided, and that I posted from the dictionary website "beliefs about the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe", and not try to change the definition to suit our arguments.

Change the definition to suit our arguments? Ahem.

You guys are not using the dictionary definition. You are using an incomplete definition. As evidenced by that Neruz couldn't come up with an example of a religion that wouldn't also fit one of the other criteria as described on that very dictionary. But hey, if you guys want to have your argument over that private definition of yours, why not. I'm out though!

[Micro102]

Well i would at least like a reaction? Otherwise I think "O they have no comeback so I must be right".

You were the one who said you need to be called on it when you're wrong.

I have no idea how in any way you related those 2 sentences....

[Andir]

Being an atheist and believing in any certain theory on how the universe was created are two different things.  Being an atheist simply means you are without theism.  You can fill in the blanks on of the the few theories on how the universe was formed or why you think we are here.  It has nothing to do with the fact that you reject gods.

Saying an atheist believes in science as the foundation of their belief is like saying all trucks are dumptrucks and that none of them can be snowplows.  You are making an assumption that since they don't believe in your god, and your god answers those questions that all atheists believe the same things regarding creation and purpose.

Being an atheist does not make one question purpose or creation...

Let's say being atheist is like being a police officer.  Let's also say that being a Christian is like being a fire fighter.  Fire Fighters put out fires, but not all police write parking tickets.  Some officers are detectives, some patrol, some fly helicopters...  Being an officer does not mean you must do a particular task.  That task you are assuming atheists do is question purpose, origin, and meaning.  You assume too much.

I don't know how many ways I can phrase that so it makes sense.

[Micro102]

Then please describe a religion who's beliefs are based on science and that doesn't believe in gods.