Sordid, when the idea of animals changing even slightly over time (Darwin) was first introduced, people were confused and angry.
Wrong, evolution had been on the table for decades before Darwin came up with a plausible mechanism by which it works.
You think you find mocking other people entertaining?
I don't remember saying anything remotely like that.
Well then I don't think you're in any position to say what an omnipotent being, much more knowledgeable than you, and certainly more mature, would do.
I don't, the people who belive in that being make those claims. I only point out that the claims appear to be baseless.
And you said "invisible" - which merely defines it as not being visible (ie - undetectable with eyes).
That's her
name, you know. But she is undetectable.
A unicorn is not an omnipotent being and could be detected by some means.
True, regular unicorns are little more than horses with horn. Invisible unicorns, however, are omnipotent as a matter of fact.
The idea behind an omnipotent being is that it has no real tangible form.
Wrong, the idea behind an omnipotent being is that it is all-powerful. That would include being able to take on a physical form.
Again, you should now what you are talking about.
Right back at you.
Yes, you are mocking religion.
I'm sorry, I simply don't consider "you're wrong and here's why" to be mockery.
It's hard not to be mocking when you call a large number of people's beliefs ridiculous when you have no tangible reason to say that.
I don't have to, the burden of proof is on the believer.
You realize that it could be said that everthing just exploding out of a point in nothing spontaneously is ridiculous without some driving force, right? Has any one said that?
Yes, that claim is often made. It misses several key points, however, such as the fact that we do know that things can actually happen without any cause (the whole quantum insanity, again one of the things much harder to wrap one's mind around than evolution) and also that nobody claims the big bang began in a point. Singularity is what general relativity predicts, but at that scale general relativity doesn't work and we need a theory of quantum gravity, which we don't have yet. Basically, we don't know. That does not, however, automatically mean that God did it.
I personally don't believe the idea is ridiculous, but that is all a matter of perspective
No it isn't. It's a matter of evidence.
Just because you think you are a logical person who automatically comes up with the least ridiculous hypothesis does not mean you actually are.
Which is why I base my beliefs about the nature and origin of the cosmos on the findings of people much smarter and more educated than myself.
And what were the doctrines ripped from? The problem with many contemporary religions is they take things too literally, or not literally enough.
As far as I can tell, a lot of them have been simply made up. But then again so had been the holy books, so it doesn't really matter.
Hidden as in you don't know and can't find, no falsifiable hypothesis in what I was implying.
Cameras are physical objects, of course you can find them if you look hard enough. As an example of an unfalsifiable hypothesis they totally fail.
Like right now, you sitting at the computer, without being able to get up or look around or even look away from the monitor, is there a something watching you?
I am able to get up and look around whenever I please.
Alternatively: Is someone actively monitoring your internet activities (presuming you don't do anything that should deserve such attention)?
Are spy satellites looking at you right now?
Are we being monitored from space?
Even more abstract: Are we being monitored beyond our current abilities to detect?
You didn't say any of those, you said cameras in the apartment. These aren't falsifiable, cameras are.
Religion to me has always been like waving or smiling at the security cameras you pass: "I don't care if you're an ass, a good guy, or what I've heard you claim. Hi there. I'm willing to be cooperative. Don't blackmail me for stealing that pen if anyone there saw that."
It comes down to: What is in the dark (just outside of our perception)? Either you just walk straight through because you've yet to encounter anything, or you dance a your little jig as you go just in case. Dancing a jig is ridiculous from a perspective just as is asking to be caught flat-footed.
Look, you can see what I was getting at?
Sounds like a variation on Pascal's wager to me.
Or boiled even further down:
Problem: THERE'S NO FUCKING ABSOLUTE ANSWER!
A) DO SOMETHING!
B) DON'T DO ANYTHING!
Both A and B are stupid.
C) Keep looking.
Religion is not in and of itself a political tool.
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is."
- Mahatma Gandhi
That people use it as such is the fault of those people, not the religion.
Since they have been indoctrinated by the religion to think that religiosity is a virtue, yes it is the fault of the religion.
I don't cast out atheists, unless they are trying to prove religion wrong. It's fine if you don't believe, but acting like you are right about it is arrogant bigotry, just as casting out atheists is arrogant bigotry.
Oh this is priceless. Every religion on the whole damn planet can trumpet into the world that it alone is in the possession of the One Eternal Immutable Ultimate Truth and it's perfectly okay, but when an atheist dares say the same, nooooo,
that is offensive!
No. Fuck that shit. All religions are baseless, there's no evidence to even hint at the possibility that there is any higher power anywhere, and believing in it is irrational and a waste of a perfectly good brain.
You realize that there would have to be some point where everything was produced, big bang being the start or not?
No, actually, I don't realize that. I have often been told that infinite past is impossible, but never have I heard any coherent reason why that should be so. So no, I don't see why there should be some kind of ultimate beginning of everything.
You realize that belief doesn't automatically refer to omnipotent beings? You realize that small children will believe there are monsters under their beds, even if no one has told them such?
If only people grew out of belief in God the same way they grow out of belief in monsters...
You realize that in my first post I already said religious people can't find tangible evidence of God's existence either? So that, in part, you just agreed with me?
Right. There's no evidence. Then why believe in it?