"no, I'm actually an athiest"

Turtwig

ragg wrote: »

I think maybe i havn't show my hand here, i was raised a catholic, but wouldn't consider myself one. I don't follow any religion. in fact my opinion on the catholic church is that is really just a nice place to use for weddings, etc...

i do have a spiritual side but i don't feel need to talk about it.




That post is more closed minded then any thing a religious person would make, as far as im concerned.

Ok, so this begs the obvious question do you believe in a deity?

Galvasean

MrStuffins wrote: »

So let me get this straight! Your family were a militant group of athiests?

So, did you guys go door to door telling people how believing in God was wrong? Did you wear specific clothing?

I'm having trouble picturing what you believe are "militant athiests" and i REALLY have trouble believing your little story!

I think we have dealt Midlandmissus an unfair deal.
Behold door to door atheism!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMXD4iwklcI

(about 3 minutes in. There is a nice rant about 'door-to-doorism' before it though)

strobe

Einhard wrote: »

In fairness, whole generations of Catholics would have been hard pressed to educate their children were it not for the RCC. Of course, as you point out, there were distinct negatives to that too, but, it has to be said, such incidences were very much in the minority.

Were there no schools built in the world in countries without a RCC influence?

This myth that the RCC deserve some kind of credit for building schools in Ireland is one of my favourites. People say the primary schools were funded by the RCC. So the Vatican sent some of it's riches to Ireland to build the schools? Or maybe all those hard working preists went out, took on second jobs and then used the cash to build the schools? Or was it that the local people handed money, under penalty of the eternal torture of their immortal souls, over to the church and then the church spent a very small part of that on funding the schools?

Saying the church funded the building of the schools is fine but don't make out like it was some altruistic act, some sacrifice on their part for the good of the people, something which should grant them everlasting control of the system. Schools get built, in most cultures, not just ones with catholic or protestant influences. The people funded the building of the schools, the church just acted as middle men, or stand-over men if you prefer, and took their cut.

MagicMarker

midlandsmissus wrote: »

No I don't think it's the same as at all.

I don't know the ins and out of the theory of evolution, which I will gladly state now, so I can't have a well informed argument on it.

But I think what that poster was trying to get at, and I would actually like to ask as well, as I'm a novice in the understanding of evolution is:

If we are descended from apes why do they still exist? Surely if we 'evolve', the new better version (humans) should replace the old (apes)?

Again I don't know that much about it, but that is something I would like to ask?

We didn't evolve from modern day apes, we share a common ancestor with them, we have both evolved from that common ancestor.

ragg

Malty_T wrote: »

Ok, so this begs the obvious question do you believe in a deity?

Not something i feel the need to talk about in detail, but in some capacity i suppose i do.

liah

midlandsmissus wrote: »

No I don't think it's the same as at all.

I don't know the ins and out of the theory of evolution, which I will gladly state now, so I can't have a well informed argument on it.

But I think what that poster was trying to get at, and I would actually like to ask as well, as I'm a novice in the understanding of evolution is:

If we are descended from apes why do they still exist? Surely if we 'evolve', the new better version (humans) should replace the old (apes)?

Again I don't know that much about it, but that is something I would like to ask?

Do you have me on block or something?

Any way you can respond to my last two posts?

Mrmoe

Crikey, 49 pages, I would have thought that everybody would be cracking open each others heads and feeding on the goo inside at this stage.:eek:

/refills popcorn

midlandsmissus

MrStuffins wrote: »

So let me get this straight! Your family were a militant group of athiests?

So, did you guys go door to door telling people how believing in God was wrong? Did you wear specific clothing?

I'm having trouble picturing what you believe are "militant athiests" and i REALLY have trouble believing your little story!

You really have trouble believing my 'little' story? How lovely of you!

Do you even know what you're talking about? Have you looked up the term 'militant atheism'? It's an accepctable term of use BY atheists. Amazing that I seem to know more about atheism than you!

Saganist

PAULWATSON wrote: »

I don't pride myself on "the scientific method", or believe in evolution for that matter.

If you dont believe in evolution then why not say that you dont believe in gravity ? Evolution is, whether you like it or not a FACT.

Also, I dont see any connection between accepting evolution and being an atheist. Can you explain this for me ?

storm2811

The tags for this thread are great.:pac:

liah

Huh, apparently I'm on someone's ignore list. Who knew.

midlandsmissus

liah wrote: »

Do you have me on block or something?

Any way you can respond to my last two posts?

Hi Liah, how are you .

No, I've just been caught up in this rapidfire argument with two other posters and haven't had time to reply to anyone else!

I have read your well thought out post, and would like to reply to you later if that would be okay, just need to get something to eat !

MagicMarker

midlandsmissus wrote: »

You really have trouble believing my 'little' story? How lovely of you!

Do you even know what you're talking about? Have you looked up the term 'militant atheism'? It's an accepctable term of use BY atheists. Amazing that I seem to know more about atheism than you!

Any chance you can provide us with some info on these militant atheist groups? Lots of people have asked you but you've seem to have missed them all.

fontanalis

PAULWATSON wrote: »

These days, it seems everyone is tearing about the place mouthing off about "being an athiest".

Is this some sort of snobbish "new, new Ireland" thing that has passed me bye?

No bible basher myself, however I don't ever want to be confused with an athiest. I don't pride myself on "the scientific method", or believe in evolution for that matter.

One thing always bothered me about evolution, according to the theory the people around you are the fittest "best of the best" after two million years of dog eat dog. Now looking at this lot, what must the prototype have been like, a right clown I'd say.

(paedo this, paedo that, blah, blah, catholic church, blah, had enough, blah, superstition, blah, we're so educated, blah.)

Are you a smug little athiest?

There's another theory of evolution.

MrStuffins

midlandsmissus wrote: »

You really have trouble believing my 'little' story? How lovely of you!

Do you even know what you're talking about? Have you looked up the term 'militant atheism'? It's an accepctable term of use BY atheists. Amazing that I seem to know more about atheism than you!

Yes i don't believe you. I have asked you to elaborate on your story but you have failed to do so. So either your story is a twisting of actual events in order to have me believe a lie, or an out and out lie.

Also, it was YOU who used the tyerm "Militant Atheism" so i have asked you about it. I know what some people THINK that it means, but its a huge misconception.

I think that you have somehow be victim to this misconception and are now feeding it.

So aren't you going to answer any of my (or others) questions?

Jakkass

Jakkass wrote: »

And you have to actually be an atheist to make those assumptions.

Well, these aren't assumptions, please demonstrate some hard evidence that supports that any religious beliefs might actually be true.

Jakkass wrote: »

Pretty much, you're telling me that if you set up certain assumptions, you will come to a certain conclusion.

No I'm not, I'm saying that this religion was made up, by people, and based on religious text, people believe in "heaven", "hell", "reincarnation" and so on.

Jakkass wrote: »

Of course! - What matters is whether or not the assumptions are actually valid. Personally, I strain to see how one could verify this.

Well, I can't prove there isn't a small teapot that hides behind the sun to stay out of our sight. But because I can't demonstrate that it is not there for sure, does not then mean that the most likely thing is that it actually is there.

Religion works on that same basis.

philologos

You're assuming that it was made up. That's the point! The assumptions are fine, but we need to determine if they are valid rather than just assuming.

Ickle Magoo

midlandsmissus wrote: »

If we are descended from apes why do they still exist? Surely if we 'evolve', the new better version (humans) should replace the old (apes)?

Again I don't know that much about it, but that is something I would like to ask?

The easiest comparison is asking yourself why if irish people moved to the americas and are now americans with a different accent, culture and so on, there are still irish people.

liah

I think the misunderstanding of evolution is coming from those who think Darwin's theory is the one currently in use.

Evolution has been documented and has a lot of irrefutable evidence. It's like the holocaust deniers, I don't get how people don't "believe" in it, it's happened and there's proof.

Turtwig

midlandsmissus wrote: »

No I don't think it's the same as at all.

I don't know the ins and out of the theory of evolution, which I will gladly state now, so I can't have a well informed argument on it.

But I think what that poster was trying to get at, and I would actually like to ask as well, as I'm a novice in the understanding of evolution is:

If we are descended from apes why do they still exist? Surely if we 'evolve', the new better version (humans) should replace the old (apes)?

Again I don't know that much about it, but that is something I would like to ask?

If Americans came from Europe, why are there still Europeans?

The answer is simple even though Europeans left for America some stayed behind in Europe. The same is true of evolution. Even though some fish evolved limbs, others didn't and adapted in others way to survive in the sea. The reason there are still apes, is because those apes are on a different family tree line to us.

Well worth a watch.

MrStuffins

liah wrote: »

I think the misunderstanding of evolution is coming from those who think Darwin's theory is the one currently in use.

Evolution has been documented and has a lot of irrefutable evidence. It's like the holocaust deniers, I don't get how people don't "believe" in it, it's happened and there's proof.

Hahaha, i got an infraction today over in the CT forum for arguing with a Holocaust Denier! Madness :pac:

Galvasean

midlandsmissus wrote: »

I don't know the ins and out of the theory of evolution, which I will gladly state now, so I can't have a well informed argument on it.

But I think what that poster was trying to get at, and I would actually like to ask as well, as I'm a novice in the understanding of evolution is:

If we are descended from apes why do they still exist? Surely if we 'evolve', the new better version (humans) should replace the old (apes)?

Again I don't know that much about it, but that is something I would like to ask?

Well I am glad you are up front about it and asked. It is actually a very good question, but luckily it is one an interested lehman like myself can answer.

In the simplist (well shortest TBH) terms, humans are not decended from the apes we see today (chimps, gorillas etc.), but do share a common ancestor that lived some 7 million years ago. This explains why they are so similar to us genetically. Different populations of this 'ancestral ape' who were exposed to different environments and therefore different natural selection criteria split and changed to the point where they beacme different species which now occupy different niches.
To say humans are 'better' than modern apes is also a tad misleading. While yes we are leaps and bounds ahead of them in terms of intelligence, we are miles behind in terms of say physical strenght. The world's strongest man would be no match for even an average gorilla in a battle of brute strenght. The same way the smartest gorilla would be nowhere near as clver as the average human.
Hope this is helpful.

I have to head off now and wont be back for a day or two (so this thread will have likely gained an extra hundred pages) soif you wnat to ask me any specific follow up messages feel free to drop me a profile message or PM. Or even ask in Palaeontology (mention that I sent you there). There are a few regualr posters who are very interested in the topic of ape-human evolution and know even more than I do and will be happy to answer.

fontanalis

liah wrote: »

I think the misunderstanding of evolution is coming from those who think Darwin's theory is the one currently in use.

Evolution has been documented and has a lot of irrefutable evidence. It's like the holocaust deniers, I don't get how people don't "believe" in it, it's happened and there's proof.

It seems to me most of the people who don't believe in evolution confuse the theory of evolution with creation. Evolution explains the variety of life not it's creation.

midlandsmissus

MrStuffins wrote: »

Yes i don't believe you. I have asked you to elaborate on your story but you have failed to do so. So either your story is a twisting of actual events in order to have me believe a lie, or an out and out lie.

Also, it was YOU who used the tyerm "Militant Atheism" so i have asked you about it. I know what some people THINK that it means, but its a huge misconception.

I think that you have somehow be victim to this misconception and are now feeding it.

So aren't you going to answer any of my (or others) questions?

Interesting, so you think I would actually go to the length of making up a story to annoy atheists on here. To a scientific mind such as yours, what is the probability of that?
Or is there more probability that I am so annoyed about atheism having had it forced on me for most of my life?

I don't have to prove myself to you, and I couldn't care less if you believe me or not. If you go to the A and A forum you will see I have been posting about my childhood experiences for over three years there.
How arrogant of you to assume I would make up a 'little' story for you.

As I've said to Liah, though I said it nicer to her as she was nice to me, (maybe take a leaf out of her book), I don't live to answer your questions, and I am now going to get something to eat.

Ickle Magoo

Jakkass wrote: »

You're assuming that it was made up. That's the point! The assumptions are fine, but we need to determine if they are valid rather than just assuming.

Okay - well, what do we have to show us (me) that current deistic beliefs are any different to thor or estre or whatever? Not assuming is the very crux of why I am a defacto atheist.

liah

Jakkass wrote: »

You're assuming that it was made up. That's the point! The assumptions are fine, but we need to determine if they are valid rather than just assuming.

Jakkass, in fairness though, all we want is ONE documented, solid proof of the existence of a god. That's all we're asking for. Can you give us anything?

I'm not trying to instigate anything, I'd just love to see documented, verified proof, that's all.

I am kind of intrigued as to why you believe so strongly, if you ever have the time or the inclination maybe you could shoot me a pm as to what brought you to where you are now. We've had our run-ins in the past, but I've softened since then, and I'd genuinely like to be able to fully see your point of view in a non-fragmented way, as all I ever see are bits and pieces in threads, not the whole picture.

If not, I totally understand that too. I just want to open my mind a little.

MagicMarker

midlandsmissus wrote: »

Interesting, so you think I would actually go to the length of making up a story to annoy atheists on here. To a scientific mind such as yours, what is the probability of that?
Or is there more probability that I am so annoyed about atheism having had it forced on me for most of my life?

I don't have to prove myself to you, and I couldn't care less if you believe me or not. If you go to the A and A forum you will see I have been posting about my childhood experiences for over three years there.
How arrogant of you to assume I would make up a 'little' story for you.

As I've said to Liah, though I said it nicer to her as she was nice to me, (maybe take a leaf out of her book), I don't live to answer your questions, and I am now going to get something to eat.

So you're not going to tell us about these militant atheist groups that you say exist?

Jakkass

Jakkass wrote: »

You're assuming that it was made up. That's the point! The assumptions are fine, but we need to determine if they are valid rather than just assuming.

I get what you mean, but of course religious beliefs have been investigated to show they have no physical evidence to back them up whatsoever. So I'm not assuming anything, i'm going on scientific research that shows support towards theories (not hypo-theorems) that directly contradict religious beliefs and teachings.

Einhard

strobe wrote: »

Were there no schools built in the world in countries without a RCC influence?

This myth that the RCC deserve some kind of credit for building schools in Ireland is one of my favourites. People say the primary schools were funded by the RCC. So the Vatican sent some of it's riches to Ireland to build the schools? Or maybe all those hard working preists went out, took on second jobs and then used the cash to build the schools? Or was it that the local people handed money, under penalty of the eternal torture of their immortal souls, over to the church and then the church spent a very small part of that on funding the schools?

Saying the church funded the building of the schools is fine but don't make out like it was some altruistic act, some sacrifice on their part for the good of the people, something which should grant them everlasting control of the system. Schools get built, in most cultures, not just ones with catholic or protestant influences. The people funded the building of the schools, the church just acted as middle men, or stand-over men if you prefer, and took their cut.

Without the RCC, many of the schools either wouldn't have been built or adminstered. There's no need to question historical reality in the pursuit of an agenda. Edmund Rice funded his first Christian Bros school out of his own money. Most of the early CB schools were built with private donations and funds which the Church didn't have to make available for school building. Most of them were staffed by Christian Bros who got paid tiny salaries so that the remained could be re-invested in the schools themselves. Indeed, in my own secondary school, the brothers who taught in the school handed most of the pay cheque over to the Board of Governors for use in running the school, only keeping a small stipend for themselves. And this was in the 90s.

I think that one of the legitimate issues that believers have with some atheists, is their compulsion to paint a picture of the Church as entirely devoid of goodness, and of not tangible benefit to humanity in any form, at any time. And that's simply not the case. To deny this is, IMO, an abuse of history for a personal agenda.

strobe

midlandsmissus wrote: »

No I don't think it's the same as at all.

I don't know the ins and out of the theory of evolution, which I will gladly state now, so I can't have a well informed argument on it.

But I think what that poster was trying to get at, and I would actually like to ask as well, as I'm a novice in the understanding of evolution is:

If we are descended from apes why do they still exist? Surely if we 'evolve', the new better version (humans) should replace the old (apes)?

Again I don't know that much about it, but that is something I would like to ask?

Very easy to understand and well done explanation of how evolution works. Only takes about 30 mins to go through it.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/life/evolution/evolution.htm