Atheism has less tolerance than theism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-09-2014, 05:09 PM
Atheism has less tolerance than theism
I'm a student studying theoretical physics.

Here's the problem I have with fellow colleagues. They have no tolerance for anyone that goes against an establish theory whether its mathematics or physics. If you so much even say that the speed of light can be broken, you can expect backlash.

But here's the kicker, I'm a closet-theist in an organization that only lets in atheists. It's like a gay coming out in modern times as a comparison. But I dare not every mention to anyone that I believe in 'intelligent design' and that humanity will scientifically prove it.

I know a few other upcoming students who feel like Michaelango vs the Vatican in centuries ago. Today it is the atheist mainstream media who demonizes any physicist who so much even thinks intelligent design is possible.

Personally I think the universe was created by an advanced civilization, and the big bang is a big science experiment to them. Their creators were also other enlightened entities. We the humans will become gods one day to other primitive civilizations, one day creating their big bang. The question is 'who/what was the original source?", and no i find it hard to believe that it was a spontaneous hydrogen atom that came into existence who is our god.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-09-2014, 05:18 PM
Re: Atheism has less tolerance than theism
Young students frequently aren't as tolerant as they perceive.

To consider atheism the catalyst for such an attitude isn't quite valid at that stage of evidence.

I find it hard to believe isn't a great top notch reason, but I song really care about your religious reasoning currently.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-09-2014, 05:20 PM
RE: Atheism has less tolerance than theism
(01-09-2014 05:09 PM)OurFather Wrote:  I'm a student studying theoretical physics.

Here's the problem I have with fellow colleagues. They have no tolerance for anyone that goes against an establish theory whether its mathematics or physics. If you so much even say that the speed of light can be broken, you can expect backlash.

But here's the kicker, I'm a closet-theist in an organization that only lets in atheists. It's like a gay coming out in modern times as a comparison. But I dare not every mention to anyone that I believe in 'intelligent design' and that humanity will scientifically prove it.

I know a few other upcoming students who feel like Michaelango vs the Vatican in centuries ago. Today it is the atheist mainstream media who demonizes any physicist who so much even thinks intelligent design is possible.

Personally I think the universe was created by an advanced civilization, and the big bang is a big science experiment to them. Their creators were also other enlightened entities. We the humans will become gods one day to other primitive civilizations, one day creating their big bang. The question is 'who/what was the original source?", and no i find it hard to believe that it was a spontaneous hydrogen atom that came into existence who is our god.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/personal-incredulity

Also ID has been show to be nothing but creationism in a lab coat and under oath the main proponent of it said that to expand the definition of science to include it would mean that Alchemy was also a valid science.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Revenant77x's post
01-09-2014, 05:22 PM (This post was last modified: 01-09-2014 05:27 PM by OurFather.)
RE: Atheism has less tolerance than theism
(01-09-2014 05:18 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Young students frequently aren't as tolerant as they perceive.

To consider atheism the catalyst for such an attitude isn't quite valid at that stage of evidence.

I find it hard to believe isn't a great top notch reason, but I song really care about your religious reasoning currently.

"i find it hard to believe" can be replace with "I cannot find any scientific reason" why intelligent design is not possible.

If I said the world was round a few centuries ago, i'd be burnt to the stake.

Today if I say "intelligent design created the big bang" , i'd be shun in my field. So I play along with their closed minded game.

I feel I'm an atheist, but not a 21st century type of atheist. Today to be an atheist one has to believe that humans have no soul, yet they dont explain that you cant destroy energy that engulfs the body.

So here's what I believe in and what 22nd century atheists will likely believe in:
1. There is no GOD, but there are gods who created this universe and their universe and so forth.
2. All intelligent species in this universe have a soul, the intelligent design that created this dimension made it so so we can become gods one day.
3. Spirituality is more advanced than Science. One day both will come together as one. The theists and the atheists will agree on middle ground.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-09-2014, 05:25 PM
RE: Atheism has less tolerance than theism
(01-09-2014 05:22 PM)OurFather Wrote:  
(01-09-2014 05:18 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Young students frequently aren't as tolerant as they perceive.

To consider atheism the catalyst for such an attitude isn't quite valid at that stage of evidence.

I find it hard to believe isn't a great top notch reason, but I song really care about your religious reasoning currently.

"i find it hard to believe" can be replace with "I cannot find any scientific reason" why intelligent design is not possible.

If I said the world was round a few centuries ago, i'd be burnt to the stake.

Today if I say "intelligent design created the big bang" , i'd be shun in my field. So I play along with their closed minded game but the more I keep researching the more I keep losing faith in atheism.

It can make no prediction nor explanation, it uses a strawman version of evolution then dismisses evidence that shows it to be in error. It is nothing but a huge god of the gaps fallacy.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Revenant77x's post
01-09-2014, 05:27 PM
RE: Atheism has less tolerance than theism
(01-09-2014 05:22 PM)OurFather Wrote:  
(01-09-2014 05:18 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Young students frequently aren't as tolerant as they perceive.

To consider atheism the catalyst for such an attitude isn't quite valid at that stage of evidence.

I find it hard to believe isn't a great top notch reason, but I song really care about your religious reasoning currently.

"i find it hard to believe" can be replace with "I cannot find any scientific reason" why intelligent design is not possible.

If I said the world was round a few centuries ago, i'd be burnt to the stake.

Today if I say "intelligent design created the big bang" , i'd be shun in my field. So I play along with their closed minded game but the more I keep researching the more I keep losing faith in atheism.

Atheism doesn't require faith.

Science is the antithesis of faith. Science is a process that contains multiple and redundant checks, balances, and safeguards against human bias and error. Science has a built in corrective mechanism..hypothesis testing...that weeds out false claims. Claims that come about as a result of a scientific process are held as tentatively true by scientists..unlike claims of faith that are held as eternally true with zero evidence. Related to this, claims that come about as a result of a scientific process are falsifiable, that is, there is a way to show the claims are false. This is not the case with faith claims. For example, there's no way to falisify the claim that the norse god Loki was able ot assume other forms.

Scientists try to prove claims false (falsification), unlike faith leaders who unequivocally state their faith claims are true. If a scientist can demonstrate that a popular scientific claim is false, he or she can become famous, get tenure, publish books, earn more money and become respected by her or his peers. If a preacher states that the claims of his faith tradition are false, he's excommunicated, defrocked or otherwise forced to abandon his position...the stifling of growth and enlightenment basically.

Science is a method for advancing our understanding. It is process we can use to bring us closer to the truth, and to weed out false claims. Science thus is the best way we've currently found to explain and understand how the universe works...unlike the religious leaders who base it on a superstitious fictional book put together and sold to the masses.

Faith IS the delusion, belief without evidence. Faith is pretending to know things that you dont know. To say "I have faith in god" really means "I pretend to know things I don't know about god"....THINK about it, you dont know, you HOPE. Faith is an epistemology. It's a method and process people use to understand reality. Faith-based claims are knowledge claims. For example, "I have faith that jesus christ will heal my sickness because it says so in Luke" is a knowledge claim. The utterer of this statement is asserting jesus will heal her. Those who make faith claims are professing to know something about the external world. For example, when someone says "jesus walked on water" (matthew 14:22-33), that person is claiming TO KNOW there was an historical figure names jesus and that he, unaided by technology, literally walked across the surface of the water. This is a knowledge claim...an objective statement of fact.

Your religious beliefs typically depend on the community in which you were raised or lived. The spiritual experiences of people in ancient greece, medieval japan or 21st century saudia arabia do not lead to belief in christianity. It seems, therefore, that religious belief very likely tracks not truth but social conditioning.

Faith is a failed epistemology. Showing why faith fails has been done before and done well. (Bering 2011, Harris 2004, Loftus 2010, 2013, McCormick 2012, Schick & Vaughn 2008, Shermer 1997, 2011, Smith 1979, STenger & Barker 2012, Torres 2012, Wade 2009 etc)

If a belief is based on insufficient evidence, than any further conclusion drawn from the belief will at best be of questionable value. This can not point one to the path of truth. Here are five points believers/non believers should be able to agree upon.

1) There are different faith traditions.
2) Different faith traditions make different truth claims.
3) The truth claims of some faith traditions contradict the truth claims of other faith traditions. For example, Muslims believe muhammad (570-632) was the last prophet (Sura 33:40). Mormons believe Joseph Smith (1805-1844), who lived after muhammad was a prophet.
4) It cannot both be the case that muhammad was the last prophet, and someone who lived after him was also a prophet.
5) Therefore: At LEAST one of these claims must be false....perhaps both....

it is impossible to figure out which of these claims is incorrect if the tool one uses is faith. As a tool, as an epistemology, as a method of reasoning, as a process for knowing the world, faith cannot adjudicate between competing claims. The ONLY way to figure out which claims about the world are likely true, and which are likely false, is through reason and evidence. There is no other way...yet.

I do understand your debacle though, I had to hide for years among creationists, now I am confident enough on my knowledge and experience to be able to say firmly, no, I don't believe in a god, it is a man made fabrication.

Good luck in your journey though, if you have any questions about Xtianity, it is quite the personal passion of mine. I have taken many, many theology classes, and specialize in Xtianity, let me know....

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like goodwithoutgod's post
01-09-2014, 05:30 PM (This post was last modified: 01-09-2014 05:33 PM by Chas.)
RE: Atheism has less tolerance than theism
(01-09-2014 05:09 PM)OurFather Wrote:  I'm a student studying theoretical physics.

Here's the problem I have with fellow colleagues. They have no tolerance for anyone that goes against an establish theory whether its mathematics or physics. If you so much even say that the speed of light can be broken, you can expect backlash.

You'd better have some really good maths to back you up. Otherwise, the backlash is both understandable and deserved.

Quote:But here's the kicker, I'm a closet-theist in an organization that only lets in atheists. It's like a gay coming out in modern times as a comparison. But I dare not every mention to anyone that I believe in 'intelligent design' and that humanity will scientifically prove it.

Since it isn't science, I'm going with 'no' on that.

Quote:I know a few other upcoming students who feel like Michaelango vs the Vatican in centuries ago. Today it is the atheist mainstream media who demonizes any physicist who so much even thinks intelligent design is possible.

Stick to physics. Your knowledge of biology sucks.

Quote:Personally I think the universe was created by an advanced civilization, and the big bang is a big science experiment to them. Their creators were also other enlightened entities. We the humans will become gods one day to other primitive civilizations, one day creating their big bang. The question is 'who/what was the original source?", and no i find it hard to believe that it was a spontaneous hydrogen atom that came into existence who is our god.

You have a little problem of infinite regress going there, dude.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
01-09-2014, 05:30 PM
RE: Atheism has less tolerance than theism
Thank our mortal gods (annunaki) for the internet, because if my professors ever found out that what that what I've been taught for the past 8yrs is propaganda lies , i'd be kicked out. Yet I still get high marks, likely because I dwell deeper into each subject more than the average student would.

So here's what I believe in and what 22nd century atheists will likely believe in:
1. There is no GOD, but there are gods who created this universe and their universe and so forth.
2. All intelligent species in this universe have a soul, the intelligent design that created this dimension made it so so we can become gods one day.
3. Spirituality is more advanced than Science. One day both will come together as one. The theists and the atheists will agree on middle ground.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-09-2014, 05:32 PM
RE: Atheism has less tolerance than theism
(01-09-2014 05:20 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(01-09-2014 05:09 PM)OurFather Wrote:  I'm a student studying theoretical physics.

Here's the problem I have with fellow colleagues. They have no tolerance for anyone that goes against an establish theory whether its mathematics or physics. If you so much even say that the speed of light can be broken, you can expect backlash.

But here's the kicker, I'm a closet-theist in an organization that only lets in atheists. It's like a gay coming out in modern times as a comparison. But I dare not every mention to anyone that I believe in 'intelligent design' and that humanity will scientifically prove it.

I know a few other upcoming students who feel like Michaelango vs the Vatican in centuries ago. Today it is the atheist mainstream media who demonizes any physicist who so much even thinks intelligent design is possible.

Personally I think the universe was created by an advanced civilization, and the big bang is a big science experiment to them. Their creators were also other enlightened entities. We the humans will become gods one day to other primitive civilizations, one day creating their big bang. The question is 'who/what was the original source?", and no i find it hard to believe that it was a spontaneous hydrogen atom that came into existence who is our god.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/personal-incredulity

Also ID has been show to be nothing but creationism in a lab coat and under oath the main proponent of it said that to expand the definition of science to include it would mean that Alchemy was also a valid science.

I prefer "ID is creationism in a cheap tuxedo." Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
01-09-2014, 05:33 PM
RE: Atheism has less tolerance than theism
...OurFather, have you ever seen a psychiatrist? I ask this not to belittle you, but out of concern for you.

The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: