My argument against atheism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 2 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-09-2013, 06:30 AM
RE: My argument against atheism
(02-09-2013 05:58 AM)fullerm Wrote:  
(02-09-2013 03:53 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Once again, I am left in awe of Bucky's complete destruction of the OP. I have nothing more I could add. Well played sir, well played.

You're in awe of a gigantic equivocation/straw man fallacy? I guess that says a lot. Equivocating phenomena from one level of reality to another (cellular to atomic to energy) is completely moronic. With a human being there is no blood at the atomic level (just atoms) or the energy level (just energy). There is thought though. He can't explain that (or even imagine that) so he ridiculously confines himself to the cellular level.


Note your thread title. The only argument you can make is to present evidence for the existence of any god.
You have not done that - you have presented no argument.

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
[+] 4 users Like Chas's post
02-09-2013, 08:25 AM
RE: My argument against atheism
(02-09-2013 06:30 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(02-09-2013 05:58 AM)fullerm Wrote:  You're in awe of a gigantic equivocation/straw man fallacy? I guess that says a lot. Equivocating phenomena from one level of reality to another (cellular to atomic to energy) is completely moronic. With a human being there is no blood at the atomic level (just atoms) or the energy level (just energy). There is thought though. He can't explain that (or even imagine that) so he ridiculously confines himself to the cellular level.


Note your thread title. The only argument you can make is to present evidence for the existence of any god.
You have not done that - you have presented no argument.

See this? This is Chas handling fullerm his ass on a platter. Oh please do finally present your evidence fullerm. I've been gone for a while, and I'd love to break you in as part of my return.

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
02-09-2013, 09:07 AM
Re: My argument against atheism
I posted my fully reply in the comments on the article. I got one asinine reply

http://skeptopathy.com/wp/?p=71
Drinking Beverage For someone who seems like they have a lot to say, you sure don't say much. Consider

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
03-09-2013, 02:24 PM
RE: My argument against atheism
Late to the party. TheBeardedDude got owned, looks like! Nice job!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2013, 02:41 PM
RE: My argument against atheism
(03-09-2013 02:24 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Late to the party. TheBeardedDude got owned, looks like! Nice job!

No, he didn't. Why do you think so? More of your misreading and misunderstanding?

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
03-09-2013, 02:56 PM (This post was last modified: 09-09-2013 11:31 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: My argument against atheism
(02-09-2013 05:58 AM)fullerm Wrote:  
(02-09-2013 03:53 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Once again, I am left in awe of Bucky's complete destruction of the OP. I have nothing more I could add. Well played sir, well played.

You're in awe of a gigantic equivocation/straw man fallacy? I guess that says a lot. Equivocating phenomena from one level of reality to another (cellular to atomic to energy) is completely moronic. With a human being there is no blood at the atomic level (just atoms) or the energy level (just energy). There is thought though. He can't explain that (or even imagine that) so he ridiculously confines himself to the cellular level.

Mentation happens AT THE MOLECULAR level, not the atomic level.
His argument is what is called a "red herring". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring
You have no degree in Psych. You can't possibly.
The level of matter/reality IS very important, in understanding mentation.
It's not a straw man, pointing out the fallacious assertion that mentation occurs at the atomic level, as there is NOT ONE Neuro-scientist who asserts that.
No Psychologist asserts that. No Psychiatrist says that. A sophomore in high school knows better than that.
Obviously this dude knows NOTHING about brain biology, structure and function.
He totally MISSED the point I made about blood flow and the levels of anatomical organization, which produce various bodily functions.
There is thought. It does NOT, and cannot, occur at the atomic level, as he asserts, (just as blood flow does not, and cannot, occur at the atomic level, just as "sight" requires more complex structures to produce "vision", than atoms.)
These functions all occur at higher, more organized levels, than the atomic, ie AT THE MOLECULAR, cellular, tissue, and organelle, and organ levels of organization. NOT the atomic level.

Mentation arises in the brain in certain specific places, under certain specific conditions, which are known, and documented by various types of scans, by scientists all over the world.

Thus his argument (about atoms), is a "RED HERRING argument".

In order to get "thought", you need systems for sensory input, (visual, auditory, or some form of detection/feeling), a way to retain the input, and organize it, (which we call "memory"), and a way to re-organize the inputs, and reference THAT to memory. None of that happens at the atomic level, (mostly it happens at the cellular and organ system level), and every bit of it, is at least understood in a rudimentary way. None of it requires a god, or points to a god. Evolution produced it all many times, in many different iterations.

Without intact functioning brain SYSTEMS, and complex structures, THERE IS NO "THOUGHT". Does he get that ? I doubt it. Atoms are irrelevant.
I don't need to explain thought at the atomic level. NOT ONE SCIENTIST on the face of the Earth thinks it arises form that level.
He is THE ONLY PERSON on Earth asserting that.

He also failed to explain why he settled on the atomic level. It is not even the smallest, most basic, level of matter. His choice of "atomic" is 100 % capricious.
So there is something he capriciously landed on, that he can't explain, so (surprise, surprise), ... the gods must have done it.
His REAL problem, is he is ignorant of how brains work, how perceptions, and memories are formed, and stored, and all the other brain functions.
(Which is really ironic, as he says he has a degree in a Neuro-science.)
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/201...102140.htm

BTW, he was not even honest enough to post the reply that I put his site.
I see he was not up to replying to it, just as he didn't really reply to TBD's post.

Many bodily functions occur at the level of molecules, organelles, cells, proteins, complex molecules, organs, and the tissue levels.
He can't post a reference to ONE scientific article or paper that posits human consciousness, (or any other animal thought processes) arise at the atomic level.

Most important, in the end, no matter what he says or doesn't say about the level at which mentation arises, it's just another argument from ignorance, and a "god of the gaps" argument for the gods. He doesn't get how mentation happens, so ...... "oh I know .... the gods must have done it".
Boring.

(02-09-2013 05:58 AM)fullerm Wrote:  With a human being there is no blood at the atomic level (just atoms) or the energy level (just energy).

Duh.

I thought he claimed he was intelligent.
The POINT was, MENTATION (thoughts), ALSO does not occur at the atomic level, or the energy level.

Don't they require Physiology for a Psych major ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
03-09-2013, 03:13 PM
RE: My argument against atheism
(03-09-2013 02:24 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Late to the party. TheBeardedDude got owned, looks like! Nice job!

Laughat Funny way to get owned.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
03-09-2013, 03:20 PM
RE: My argument against atheism
(03-09-2013 03:13 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(03-09-2013 02:24 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Late to the party. TheBeardedDude got owned, looks like! Nice job!

Laughat Funny way to get owned.

No, The Bearded Dude got ignored. The other guy used the old "I don't have time to point out all the ways you're wrong" response.

Why is it that those with the least amount of knowledge in a particular subject area are almost always the loudest? If I want to know how something in the brain works, I'm going to get my information from the people who have dedicated their lives to its study. This guy reminds me of Ray Comfort trying to explain evolution.

If Jesus died for our sins, why is there still sin? If man was created from dust, why is there still dust? If Americans came from Europe, why are there still Europeans?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like guitar_nut's post
03-09-2013, 03:24 PM
RE: My argument against atheism
(02-09-2013 05:58 AM)fullerm Wrote:  Equivocating phenomena from one level of reality to another (cellular to atomic to energy) is completely moronic.

No, because one relates to the other. This is called emergence.

Also, there is no such thing as a discrete 'level' of interaction in any case. There are fundamental forces and their consequences.

Also, it doesn't make sense to characterize 'energy' as a 'level' even if such a thing did exist.

Can you read? Learn something.

(02-09-2013 05:58 AM)fullerm Wrote:  With a human being there is no blood at the atomic level (just atoms) or the energy level (just energy).

This is literally incoherent. It is meaningless. Those are all real words, but the sequence does not parse.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2013, 03:33 PM
RE: My argument against atheism
(03-09-2013 03:20 PM)guitar_nut Wrote:  
(03-09-2013 03:13 PM)morondog Wrote:  Laughat Funny way to get owned.

No, The Bearded Dude got ignored. The other guy used the old "I don't have time to point out all the ways you're wrong" response.

Why is it that those with the least amount of knowledge in a particular subject area are almost always the loudest? If I want to know how something in the brain works, I'm going to get my information from the people who have dedicated their lives to its study. This guy reminds me of Ray Comfort trying to explain evolution.

Is was sarcasm or an approximation to the same Weeping PJ probably didn't even click the link.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: