From atheist to EX atheist . Hello.

[Kate]

[Ex Atheist]

The Judge wrote

A more pertinent question would be why do you think atheists "don't want" a personal creator? It's like you're waving a fistful of what you think are dollar bills at us and cannot imagine why we don't want it; it turns out that we've taken a closer look at your bogus cash and seen it's only Monopoly money.
Your questions belie the falsehood of your claim to be an ex-atheist. It's a cheap trick but you me going for a while at least. No one who has ever been an atheist would ask such a question.

Monopoly Money are
rocks, dirt, and planets spewing forth the highly complex PERSONAL and INFORMATION . So now, how come you want monopoly money instead of the real cold hard cash ???? How does monopoly money benefit you -- give us the specific ways please. Thanks.

[Irreligious]

Ex Atheist wrote

Monopoly Money are
rocks, dirt, and planets spewing forth the highly complex PERSONAL and INFORMATION . So now, how come you want monopoly money instead of the real cold hard cash ???? How does monopoly money benefit you -- give us the specific ways please. Thanks.

Who is us? Are there other Christians participating in this thread?

And why do you keep asking the atheist posters on this forum to explain this retarded assertion of yours about rocks and dirt giving birth to complex, biological organisms? From where did you acquire this notion? You certainly didn't learn it from studying biology or physics.

[Ex Atheist]

Irreligious wrote

Who is us? Are there other Christians participating in this thread?

And why do you keep asking the atheist posters on this forum to explain this retarded assertion of yours about rocks and dirt giving birth to complex, biological organisms? From where did you acquire this notion? You certainly didn't learn it from studying biology or physics.

'US' is me and everyone else reading this thread. I agree...it IS a retarded philosophy to jettison our Creator, but, this is what one believes in if they are a Materialist / Naturalist . Do you hold to a Materialist worldview ? Are you familiar with a materialist worldview ?

[psychodiva]

Irreligious wrote

Who is us?

his other personalities

[antix]

Ex Atheist wrote

Monopoly Money are
rocks, dirt, and planets spewing forth the highly complex PERSONAL and INFORMATION .

pssst... you left out some things involved in the emergence of life such as various elements and energy sources. Just throwing that out there for you. You know, so you don't end up looking stupid or anything...

[The Judge]

Ex Atheist wrote

Monopoly Money are rocks, dirt, and planets spewing forth the highly complex PERSONAL and INFORMATION...

The first sentence just simply does not make grammatical sense.

Do it again.

When it is syntactically correct, then I shall give you a response.

[Irreligious]

Ex Atheist wrote

'US' is me and everyone else reading this thread.

Does it really strike that anyone else, besides you, participating in this thread is dying to know how Monopoly money might benefit The Judge?

I mean, he never even claimed that there was any benefit to possessing Monopoly money outside of a Monopoly game. In fact, he implied the opposite by comparing your empty suit of a god to possessing Monopoly money. The Judge was saying, in effect, that you are the one who finds value in something that has no inherent value and is, therefore, the equivalent of Monopoly money. But, somehow, that fact seems to have escaped you, and only you.

Ex Atheist wrote

I agree...it IS a retarded philosophy to jettison our Creator, but, this is what one believes in if they are a Materialist / Naturalist . Do you hold to a Materialist worldview ? Are you familiar with a materialist worldview ?

With whom are you agreeing? Yourself? I neither said nor implied that it was retarded to jettison your conception of a supreme creator. I said it was retarded for you to assert that atheists claim a reasonable alternative to believing in your god is the belief that life evolved from rocks and dirt. Your assertion is completely unfounded. It's a lie.

And I am no more a materialist or naturalist than you are. You're a liar if you claim that you don't acknowledge material things or the things that are borne of of the natural world. We all do. We have no choice.

I understand that you go a step further by acknowledging allegations, such as the existence of a purported supernatural and a magic god/man, which are not in evidence. But the fact that you do has got nothing to do with me or the other atheists here, unless you're prepared to present us with some evidence for your extraordinary claims. Of course, you haven't done that.

We're still waiting. But we won't hold our breath while we wait.

[Jimble]

Ex Atheist wrote

Monopoly Money are
rocks, dirt, and planets spewing forth the highly complex PERSONAL and INFORMATION . So now, how come you want monopoly money instead of the real cold hard cash ???? How does monopoly money benefit you -- give us the specific ways please. Thanks.

No. We answered lots of your questions, which you didn't even acknowledge.
Answer ours for a change. We have one we've asked over and over since you got here?

Evidence for God?

Tangible evidence, not appeals to emotions or arguments from ignorance.
"I can't see how life could arise with properties like intelligence, emotion and consciousness, from only planets, gases...etc, etc." Is an argument from ignorance. Just because you haven't bothered to learn how something could happen, and so it escapes your imagination, does not make that something impossible.

[Ex Atheist]

Jimble wrote

No. We answered lots of your questions, which you didn't even acknowledge.
Answer ours for a change. We have one we've asked over and over since you got here?

Evidence for God?

Tangible evidence, not appeals to emotions or arguments from ignorance.
"I can't see how life could arise with properties like intelligence, emotion and consciousness, from only planets, gases...etc, etc." Is an argument from ignorance. Just because you haven't bothered to learn how something could happen, and so it escapes your imagination, does not make that something impossible.

The norm is for atheists to declare 'I dont see any evidence of a personal Creator' .... so..... if you dont, then how about telling us by what NON intelligent / NON willful natural or material source does vast amounts of highly complex specific informational instructions come to be in the first DNA molecule when the very CoFounder of the dna structure , Dr. Francis Crick, affirms the probability of the first DNA cell coming about by atheistic means at 1 to the 40,000 th power chance ? How did the 150 plus razor edge precise Physics Constants which are ALL needed and work simultaneously to allow Earth to be the kind of planet it is so we can live on it , and why the alleged atheist is afraid of wanting a personal theistic Creator to exist for the personal cosmos, earth, human anatomy that we all have ?

Please...take your time and give your answer some good serious thought then cogently list it in your reply using good reasoning and rationale drawing on science and past repeatable experience of simular things. Ive given in this thread much scientific evidence which you and your cohorts dont want to consider, think it isnt enough, isnt the right kind, and other lame excuses, ad infinitum, ad nauseum....so please ....appealing to your concrete apriori addiction to atheism please give a very scholarly answer to just the couple of examples i listed above . Please dont resort to saying we cover all this already, etc...Id like to hear your own personal explanation from a scholarly atheist perspective that makes good enough sense for anyone to logically want to become an atheist. Thanks in advance. Also, an answer that has 'I dont know but neither do you' in it is disqualified.

[dogpet]

Ex Atheist wrote

Crick, affirms the probability of the first DNA cell coming about by atheistic means at 1 to the 40,000 th power chance ?

Compared to what? Wanker.

[Irreligious]

Ex Atheist wrote

The norm is for atheists to declare 'I dont see any evidence of a personal Creator' .... so..... if you dont, then how about telling us by what NON intelligent / NON willful natural or material source does vast amounts of highly complex specific informational instructions come to be in the first DNA molecule when the very CoFounder of the dna structure , Dr. Francis Crick, affirms the probability of the first DNA cell coming about by atheistic means at 1 to the 40,000 th power chance ?

And what are the odds that an allegedly invisible, all-powerful magic man existing in some inaccessible nether region supplied the instructions for the first DNA molecule? I suspect those odds are much, much higher. After all, there is no direct, concrete evidence, whatsoever, that an all-powerful magic man even exists outside of the ravings of adamantly wishful speculators, such as yourself. None. At all.

It's just absurd speculation. Instead of admitting that you don't actually know what gave rise to the abundant variety of living organisms on Earth, you are content to hold firm to the nonsensical belief that a magical human-like entity is at the helm of it, while completely ignoring that you do not possess one shred of quantifiable evidence for this wild claim of yours.

Atheists don't claim to know exactly how life began on Earth, no matter how often you keep insisting that we do. All we profess is a lack of belief in your claim that an all-powerful, magic man in "nether space" is the agent that gave rise to life.

Most of us are fairly comfortable living with the uncertainty of that question. Clearly, you are not comfortable with that state of affairs. Apparently, it frightens you to not know, so you are compelled to believe in something that you find personally comforting, no matter how far-fetched.

It vexes the hell out of you that we are neither comforted by your baseless assertions nor frightened into believing them purely on faith or your adamant and woefully ignorant say-so.

Ex Atheist wrote

How did the 150 plus razor edge precise Physics Constants which are ALL needed and work simultaneously to allow Earth to be the kind of planet it is so we can live on it , and why the alleged atheist is afraid of wanting a personal theistic Creator to exist for the personal cosmos, earth, human anatomy that we all have ?

Again, you are the frightened one, beseeching us to bow down to a figment of your paranoid imagination. Making shit up is not the same as knowing. That's why you need copious amounts of faith (and outside affirmation from complete strangers) to believe the nonsense that you do.

The odds for a lot of things existing are staggering if you don't actually know how all the pieces to the puzzle fit. And none of us do. Least of all, you.

Ex Atheist wrote

Please...take your time and give your answer some good serious thought then cogently list it in your reply using good reasoning and rationale drawing on science and past repeatable experience of simular things. Ive given in this thread much scientific evidence which you and your cohorts dont want to consider, think it isnt enough, isnt the right kind, and other lame excuses, ad infinitum, ad nauseum....so please ....appealing to your concrete apriori addiction to atheism please give a very scholarly answer to just the couple of examples i listed above . Please dont resort to saying we cover all this already, etc...Id like to hear your own personal explanation from a scholarly atheist perspective that makes good enough sense for anyone to logically want to become an atheist. Thanks in advance. Also, an answer that has 'I dont know but neither do you' in it is disqualified.

Bullshit. You don't know. That's a fact you just don't want to face. Of course, there's nothing we can do about that, except to keep reminding you that faith is not a reasonable substitute for knowledge.

We've tried goading you into presenting some evidence for your claims but, deep down, even you know you don't have any, so all such entrities by us will continue to go ignored by you. Meanwhile, you will stubbornly and stupidly demand that we provide a simple alternative to your own, likewise simple--and frankly dumb-- assertions about the still largely inscrutable force[s] behind existence: Goddidit.

Well, that's not an answer, either. It explains nothing, least of all how one can objectively verify any of the assertions you keep making about an alleged "personal theistic creator." Your personal testimony-- sans proper evidence-- is not the least bit compelling to those of us who are not under the thrall of magical thinking.

[Irreligious]

And one other thing, Formerly Rebellious Christian, stop trying defend your unfounded assertions of the supernatural by scientific means. That's a foolhardy pursuit. There is simply no evidence for a supernatural. It is an allegation that cannot be tested by scientific means or, quite frankly, any means that we know of.

Edited: Oh, and I misspelled "entreaties" in my Post #1077, in case any of you Grammar and Spelling Nazis caught that.

[antix]

Ex Atheist wrote

The norm is for atheists to declare 'I dont see any evidence of a personal Creator' .... so..... if you dont, then how about telling us by what NON intelligent / NON willful natural or material source does vast amounts of highly complex specific informational instructions come to be in the first DNA molecule when the very CoFounder of the dna structure , Dr. Francis Crick, affirms the probability of the first DNA cell coming about by atheistic means at 1 to the 40,000 th power chance ?

What the fuck is "atheistic means"? I'd say that the chances of a human who lacks belief in gods having anything to do with the emergence of DNA is a lot worse than 1 to the 40,000th power. But then, I don't expect that you understand a fucking thing about what you wrote.

How did the 150 plus razor edge precise Physics Constants which are ALL needed and work simultaneously to allow Earth to be the kind of planet it is so we can live on it , and why the alleged atheist is afraid of wanting a personal theistic Creator to exist for the personal cosmos, earth, human anatomy that we all have ?

You're putting the cart ahead of the horse. You are assuming that the universe needed to exist in such precise ways so that we humans could sing god's praises.

We say that the universe is the way it is, and as such, it happens to allow for the emergence of life as we know it. Had any of those 150 pluse razor edge precise physics constants been different in some way, maybe we'd exist, maybe not. The universe isn't capable of giving a shit.

Please...take your time and give your answer some good serious thought then cogently list it in your reply using good reasoning and rationale drawing on science and past repeatable experience of simular things. Ive given in this thread much scientific evidence which you and your cohorts dont want to consider, think it isnt enough, isnt the right kind, and other lame excuses, ad infinitum, ad nauseum....so please ....appealing to your concrete apriori addiction to atheism please give a very scholarly answer to just the couple of examples i listed above . Please dont resort to saying we cover all this already, etc...Id like to hear your own personal explanation from a scholarly atheist perspective that makes good enough sense for anyone to logically want to become an atheist. Thanks in advance. Also, an answer that has 'I dont know but neither do you' in it is disqualified.

Well shit, professor. Those are some mighty high standards you require of us on an anonymous internet forum. I can't show my answer though, because I'm instead going to submit it to the science journal "Nature" You can read all about it there. It'll knock your socks right off, and you'll be laughing at how silly the notion of god is.

[Brick]

Ex Atheist wrote

The norm is for atheists to declare 'I dont see any evidence of a personal Creator' .... so..... if you dont, then how about telling us by what NON intelligent / NON willful natural or material source does vast amounts of highly complex specific informational instructions come to be in the first DNA molecule when the very CoFounder of the dna structure , Dr. Francis Crick, affirms the probability of the first DNA cell coming about by atheistic means at 1 to the 40,000 th power chance ? How did the 150 plus razor edge precise Physics Constants which are ALL needed and work simultaneously to allow Earth to be the kind of planet it is so we can live on it , and why the alleged atheist is afraid of wanting a personal theistic Creator to exist for the personal cosmos, earth, human anatomy that we all have ?

I have never heard about this supposed probability from Crick. Do you have a link for it?

To answer your question, life at its most basic level, is a self-replicating molecule. These are more common in nature than you might think. A prion for example, is a protein which can turn other proteins into copies of itself. Mad Cow disease is transmitted by a prion.

Furthermore, it's nonsense to say the odds of such-and-such a molecule arising by chance are X. Molecules have the forms they do because they are stable- this is the same reason why a soap bubble is round and never a cube.

Most importantly, chemical reactions are not random, although randomness plays a part. Some are much more likely to occur than others. No one has observed a crude cell arising on its own, but it's certainly possible given what is known about chemistry.