Atheism to defeat religion by 2038?

Patrick Cleburne

shizz wrote: »

If this Isnt a joke it really is a scary way of thinking.

Not at all. Religious people should be entitled to worship in anyway they want. The New Atheism movement should not take that away from them.

af_thefragile

Patrick Cleburne wrote: »

Not at all. Religious people should be entitled to worship in anyway they want. The New Atheism movement should not take that away from them.

This makes sense though. Sorta.

Pushtrak

af_thefragile wrote: »

Sounds like fun... when is going to happen??

This isn't about every religious person becoming atheist. From the OP: "If fewer than 50 percent of the population agreed that religion was important to them, then the country has effectively crossed over to a secular majority. "

You could substitute globally for country if you wished.

oxo_

More Agnostic maybe, not Athiest.
You don't need a religion to believe in God(s).

Religion is man made, with the sole intention of power and controlling the population in one way or the other.

If we terraformed and populated Mars in the future, wouldn't we therefore be Gods ?
Who is to say similar didn't happen here ? No evidence for or against, even evolution would support it.

Me personally I think we were terraformed and bred by another "Alien" race, probably initially for food or some sick sexual gratification (I like it!) but then they just got tired of us and left.

oxo_

My previous comment may or may not have also been some weird computer game.

Pushtrak

oxo_ wrote: »

More Agnostic maybe, not Athiest.

Click

You don't need a religion to believe in God(s).

True. And even with a religion you don't necessarily have a god.

If we terraformed and populated Mars in the future, wouldn't we therefore be Gods ?

I'm sure there would be a subjective perspective that would say yes. I wouldn't hold to this notion though.

Who is to say similar didn't happen here ? No evidence for or against, even evolution would support it.

What do you hold? What stage do you think life was ceded seeded on this planet at? And how long ago do you think it happened?

oxo_

Oh well I'm not an Agnostic then, there's how much I know
I believe there *may* be a God or Gods, most likely not in the sense of what we were led to believe through man made religious teachings.
However I absolutely do not adhere or believe in any religion whatsoever.

So I'm not necessarily an Athiest though I could probably be considered one by others if I told them I also believe our Sun is an intelligent lifeform hitherto unknown to our own understanding of what life itself is and albeit unable to prove such scientifically either.

I couldn't answer your questions in regards times involved, I'm not that versed on such matters and could only put forward dates from others who might be.

Pushtrak

The problem with an "aliens ceded seeded life on to the planet" idea is that life started out here as unicellular organisms, and gradually increased in complexity. If an intelligent life were to exist and to have done so it was hardly an efficient means to do it. I don't find the notion credible, but if it were to be so, it would be by accident rather than by design.

whatdoicare

I reckon once Religion is gone from schools and there are more alternative options to marrying outside the church then we'll probably see a marked reduction in baptisms, communions, confirmations and catholic weddings.

Once people have to do that bit of extra work towards religion they'll be less likely to choose that route for marking milestones in their lives. At the moment it's too easy to just go along with what everyone else is doing- even if you don't believe at all.

You baptise your child to get them into school - this is far easier than trying to organise a non denominational school which may be in a different county as opposed to five minutes down the road. Let's face it, we're in a baby boom now so chances of getting on the lists are slim to none.

You give them communion and confirmation to get the party outfit, bouncy castle and money envelopes - it's far easier to do this than to give up your time to look after your child during times when others are doing religious classes/arguing and keeping tabs with teachers/having the awkward "mommy, why can't I do what all my pals are doing?" conversation. All this and you get rewarded with an excuse for a party and outfit.

You get married in a church as it's too complicated to do otherwise (believe me - we got married in an Athiest ceremony and we had to do some amount of hoop jumping and work on our own time)

At the moment, to be Athiest takes a lot of effort, time and determination.
The average Joe and Jane doesn't have the time or inclination to be like that so they become ala carte Catholic purely out of convenience.

The minute it takes effort, time and work to be a Catholic with little rewards is when it'll all fall apart!
If people have to drive to a specific Catholic school out of their way, go to mass every week to get to know their priest to be allowed baptise, marry etc, when they have to take their kids on their own time to religious teachings. When there's a church tax to pay for upkeep of building and it's priests based on what you tick on the census.

Then we'll see the true percentage of believers. It won't be anywhere near 83% - I can guarantee that.

oxo_

Pushtrak wrote: »

The problem with an "aliens ceded life on to the planet" idea is that life started out here as unicellular organisms, and gradually increased in complexity. If an intelligent life were to exist and to have done so it was hardly an efficient means to do it. I don't find the notion credible, but if it were to be so, it would be by accident rather than by design.

Possibly. Think about it for a minute though, if we were to cede life on another planet, where would you start ?

Basic life first. Maybe try fish in the seas and rivers next. Few birds maybe?
Feck that, we're advanced enough, let's try dinosaurs for a laugh.
Serious now, this is working out pretty good so far, sure let's try a few primate species...

That went well, sure let's drop in a horny bloke and a hot girl, see what happens, feck it, keep it simple and call yer man Adam and the hot chick Eve.

It's all as believable if not more so than the muck thought in any religion.

PS., it a right bollix to post on, these forums with an Android tablet

mickrock

Pushtrak wrote: »

but people will still ultimately be ruled by emotion in that they are still going to die. There doesn't have to be an imminent sense for a fear of not existing after this life. Or, this being all there is. Or reality.

You haven't died and so you don't know what happens at death. Nobody does for sure.

You have a belief but that's all it is, a belief.

nozzferrahhtoo

smash wrote: »

Well I'm pretty sure we've stopped burning witched and staking vampires...

Depends of course who you mean by "we". In Nigeria and many parts of Africa they still do. Quite often the target of accusation of witchcraft are children, and those children having been accused lose all rights and protection from society and often get sold into slavery, usually sexual, having been accused.

I had the wonderful fortune to meet Leo Igwe at the Atheist Alliance Convention in Cologne last month. He has spent a significant portion of his life trying to protect such children at the risk of not only his life but that of his loved ones... in fact only recently his father was attacked and beaten by faith heads and lost an eye from it. Leo has received his own fair share of attacks too.

Poor form therefore to see this asked....

philologos wrote: »

What does that have to do with belief in God exactly?

.... when it is passages from your precious masturbatory fairy tale book that are often used to justify the actions above. It is the atmosphere of superstition and nonsense maintained by your cohorts that allow for such ignorance to prevail. And it is your fellow Christians that use every trick in the book to silence those who show Religious claims to be false.

What has it got to do with belief in god? A hell of a lot and way more than you want it to or to admit to.

philologos wrote: »

I think a the vast majority of the claims made by atheists on boards.ie about Christianity in particular are actually baseless when one does some investigation into them.

But every time we try to investigate them such as to ask your simple questions you simply run a mile and pretend to have people on ignore when you do not and all kinds of other underhand and dirty tricks to avoid admitting you simply do not have the answers.

philologos wrote: »

It just shows me that people are more interested in making casual assumptions rather than probing into the truth.

Oh pot meet kettle. THIS from the guy who's entire defense of Christianity amounts to saying "It makes sense to me and atheism doesn't" over and over again. Irony metres all over After Hours have just exploded. And if they did not before they will after this....

philologos wrote: »

I'm interested in an actual discussion rather than a copy-pasta war.

.... given how readily you simply retreat from any discussion that you can not handle or answer.

nozzferrahhtoo

Sarky wrote: »

When will Nozzie arrive, point out every time philologos has run away from evidence or awkward questions and pretend to have people in ignore and banish his evangelism until the next time he talks about Christianity being logical without ever providing anything within sniffing distance of logic?

Sorry to keep you waiting. I do not actually read After Hours you see. I only find threads like this when someone PMs me asking me to comment.

nozzferrahhtoo

guitarzero wrote: »

I'm an atheist. I could not give a f*ck if people are religious. I dont know why atheists get so bothered. There are so many bigger issues in the world than people gathering at a mosque, kneeling in a church or even picketing against homosexuals in Tennessee.

If that was all they did you may have a point but the fruits of religion are much more than that. From destroying the lives of children accused of witchcraft, to destroying discourse between different religions by creating divides where none actually exist, to conning money out of the faithful, to trying to teach stultifying nonsense to children in schools all over the US and the world, to teaching some parents it is ok to watch your own child die of treatable Diabetes, to silencing free speech and free expression, to hindering the progress of science, to facilitating and protecting behind a veil of holyness the systematic abuse, often sexual, of children, to influencing government policy in damaging ways, to promoting hated towards minority groups such as homosexuals, to distributing false and damaging information on topics such as contraception, to to to... the list goes on.

nozzferrahhtoo

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Hey, anybody think that the huffington post is being a bit optimistic?

Absolutely. I work quite hard with Atheist Ireland, Atheist Alliance International and quite a few others to help work against the effects of Religion. People writing those articles tend to just see one happy statistic and run with it to create a whole article. There are many other such "happy Statistics" too floating around such as Atheism being the fastest growing minority in the US for example.

As someone "on the ground" as it were rather than sitting writing newspaper articles behind a desk I tend to look at all the statistics and while I do see some optimistic trends that give me some hope for the future, enough hope to be proud of the tiny near insignificant part I play in the whole thing, I do realize that "future" in this context should be measured in Centuries not Decades and certainly not 2 or 3 decades.

We are a very slow species to change and the virus of religion is one that has evolved to exploit aspects of the human conditions that are so central to us there is little hope to ever expect them to change. The "defeat" of religion is likely not something we will see for many generations to come.

I think though total and utter "defeat" of religion is not the goal of most atheists. If people want to think there is a god then fine, private belief is just fine. Few, despite how often theists want to paint it so, are out to take faith and religion away from people. The real battle is not to destroy belief in god, but just to put it in it's proper place and THAT is a battle we can win sooner, though again probably long after I have died off.

It does however still make me feel hopeful to wake up on mornings like today, log on to a forum like Atheist Ireland, and read something like this:

Congratulations to Michael Nugent on his ovation from Richard Dawkins' audience at the National Concert Hall yesterday evening. When Richard Dawkins' replied to a question from an auditor about how to further progress secularism in Ireland, Richard Dawkins referred to Atheist Ireland and to Michael Nugent, by name, which induced a widespread ovation throughout the National Concert Hall. It was an evening of which to be proud: Richard Dawkins received frequent spontaneous ovations and the audience's questions were overwhelmingly supportive of Richard Dawkins and his ideas. Yesterday evening proved that Ireland has matured and that Atheist Ireland, and Michael Nugent himself, can take some credit for that progress. It was auspicious to observe that the audience was disproportionately teenage, twenty-something and thirty-something which indicates further progress for Irish secularism throughout the century.

Pushtrak

oxo_ wrote: »

Possibly. Think about it for a minute though, if we were to cede life on another planet, where would you start ?

Basic life first. Maybe try fish in the seas and rivers next. Few birds maybe?
Feck that, we're advanced enough, let's try dinosaurs for a laugh.
Serious now, this is working out pretty good so far, sure let's try a few primate species...

Ah, so multiple ceding seedings over time. Not just a one off is your hypothesis. Any such life would have to be able to have adapted on where ever such life had brought life from, and then adapt to life here. Life on both worlds would likely be markedly different.

And depending on what stage of the planet was in, we would be thinking whether it was pre or post plant life being on the planet. Important because it would say whether our atmosphere was oxygen rich or not.

In a general sense of life existing on other planets though, if we look at our own planet and life.. There are extremophiles that are capable of sustaining life in conditions that I'd imagine would quite surprise anyone who didn't know of them.

These ideas changed when oceanographers explored hydrothermal vents, openings in the ocean floor where extremely hot, mineral-rich water erupts from the crust. Hydrothermal vents are located several miles below the surface, on the ocean floor, where the surrounding water is at or near freezing, it is absolutely dark and the pressure is high. In organized communities around the bases of these vents, called black smokers, scientists found clams, crabs and exotic, giant tubeworms measuring 6 feet (2 meters) long. The water coming out of these vents is 230 to 662 degrees Fahrenheit (110 to 350 degrees Celsius).

Life has been found in other extreme environments as well. Scientists discovered microcolonies of lichens called cryptoendoliths in rock samples of the Antarctic desert, where temperatures often drop to 100 degrees below zero and there is little or no liquid water. In contrast, thermophilic (heat-loving) bacteria have been found in hot springs where temperatures exceed the boiling point of water.

These specialized, rock-dwelling extremophiles are called endoliths (all underground bacteria are endoliths, but some endoliths are nonbacterial organisms). Scientists speculate that endoliths may absorb nutrients moving through rock veins or subsist on inorganic rock matter. Some endoliths may be genetically similar to the earliest forms of life that developed around 3.8 billion years ago. For comparison, Earth is about 4.5 billion years old, and multicellular organisms developed relatively recently compared to unicellular, microbial life.

An environment is called extreme only in relation to what's normal for humans, but for an extremophile, their favored environments are "normal." And beyond Earth, conditions that make life possible for humans are likely rare. In turn, so-called extreme environments and the extremophiles that populate them may be more commonplace. Here on Earth, a number of factors might earn a place the label "extreme," including the following:
Pressure
Radiation levels
Acidity
Temperature
Salinity
Lack of water
Lack of oxygen
Pollutants or toxins left behind by humans (oil, nuclear waste, heavy metals)

Life, then is adaptable. Well, at least from the point it gets a steady start. Which is a pretty big disclaimer. It's an interesting article in all, and worth reading. A lot I left out.

Obligatory video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Q55z6EsL8M

smash

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Depends of course who you mean by "we". In Nigeria and many parts of Africa they still do.

Well I'm obviously not talking about Africa. I'm talking about civilised and developed societies.

Wibbs

Pushtrak wrote: »

Ah, so multiple ceding over time.]

"Ceding" kinda works, but is it not "seeding"? At least that's the term I've read in connection with the panspermia hypothesis. If the correct term is seeding, then this thread shows how quickly memes can kick off.

As for multiple seeding(I've started so I'll finish ) over time, it seems unlikely on this planet anyway. We've only ever found one form of life on earth. All life is interrelated so had one common ancestor. We don't have any "aliens" here that we know of. Personally I find it far more likely that life kicked off here with little help from space(beyond original building blocks raining down in the early life of the earth).

oxo_ wrote:

If we terraformed and populated Mars in the future, wouldn't we therefore be Gods ?

I'm sure there would be a subjective perspective that would say yes. I wouldn't hold to this notion though.

Not on the level of terraforming a planet, though it would be somewhat "godlike". However if we(or another species) got to the point where we could create a universal singularity in the lab then we(or they) would to all intents and purposes be gods. Impossible? Maybe, though even at this stage in our understanding we are beginning to tease out the big book of "How the universe works". This has been achieved in the course of a few centuries and really only kicked of within the last century. What will we be capable of knowing in ten centuries? Once you have the ingredients and access to an oven, you can attempt to bake the cake. I've long had the mad notion(much fueled by moroccan woodbines back in the day) that if we extend the Gaia principle beyond the earth and see the universe as a "living" thing, then maybe intelligent life is the reproductive system of a universe. Well it made sense at the time

Paparazzo

whatdoicare wrote: »

I reckon once Religion is gone from schools and there are more alternative options to marrying outside the church then we'll probably see a marked reduction in baptisms, communions, confirmations and catholic weddings.

Once people have to do that bit of extra work towards religion they'll be less likely to choose that route for marking milestones in their lives. At the moment it's too easy to just go along with what everyone else is doing- even if you don't believe at all.

You baptise your child to get them into school - this is far easier than trying to organise a non denominational school which may be in a different county as opposed to five minutes down the road. Let's face it, we're in a baby boom now so chances of getting on the lists are slim to none.

You give them communion and confirmation to get the party outfit, bouncy castle and money envelopes - it's far easier to do this than to give up your time to look after your child during times when others are doing religious classes/arguing and keeping tabs with teachers/having the awkward "mommy, why can't I do what all my pals are doing?" conversation. All this and you get rewarded with an excuse for a party and outfit.

You get married in a church as it's too complicated to do otherwise (believe me - we got married in an Athiest ceremony and we had to do some amount of hoop jumping and work on our own time)

At the moment, to be Athiest takes a lot of effort, time and determination.
The average Joe and Jane doesn't have the time or inclination to be like that so they become ala carte Catholic purely out of convenience.

The minute it takes effort, time and work to be a Catholic with little rewards is when it'll all fall apart!
If people have to drive to a specific Catholic school out of their way, go to mass every week to get to know their priest to be allowed baptise, marry etc, when they have to take their kids on their own time to religious teachings. When there's a church tax to pay for upkeep of building and it's priests based on what you tick on the census.

Then we'll see the true percentage of believers. It won't be anywhere near 83% - I can guarantee that.

Imagine kids didn't do communion, confirmation, religion or confession in schools and the parents had to do bring their kids to it al in their own time? Catholic numbers would half over night.

coffee_cake

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Depends of course who you mean by "we". In Nigeria and many parts of Africa they still do. Quite often the target of accusation of witchcraft are children, and those children having been accused lose all rights and protection from society and often get sold into slavery, usually sexual, having been accused.

don't forget the gruesome murders of children in the UK after being accused of witchcraft

smash

Paparazzo wrote: »

Catholic numbers would half over night.

You're underestimating there. I reckon numbers would drop by over 90%.

Wibbs

smash wrote: »

Well I'm obviously not talking about Africa. I'm talking about civilised and developed societies.

It's not that long ago exorcisms took place in Ireland and the rites are still on the churches books and no doubt we would have regarded ourselves as civilised and developed. It's not that long ago hordes of people turned up to see concrete statues painted in best blue and white dulox do a little religious jig and we would have regarded ourselves as civilised and developed. It's not that long ago girls gave birth in fields because of the fear of god and the church and we would have regarded ourselves as civilised and developed. It's not that long ago when you couldn't get divorced, couldn't get johnnies in a chemist and being gay was illegal and we would have regarded ourselves as civilised and developed. Today abortion is still illegal and many thousands of women have to travel to procure one and we regard ourselves as civilised and developed.

smash

Wibbs wrote: »

It's not that long ago exorcisms took place in Ireland and the rites are still on the churches books and no doubt we would have regarded ourselves as civilised and developed. It's not that long ago hordes of people turned up to see concrete statues painted in best blue and white dulox do a little religious jig and we would have regarded ourselves as civilised and developed. It's not that long ago girls gave birth in fields because of the fear of god and the church and we would have regarded ourselves as civilised and developed. It's not that long ago when you couldn't get divorced, couldn't get johnnies in a chemist and being gay was illegal and we would have regarded ourselves as civilised and developed. Today abortion is still illegal and many thousands of women have to travel to procure one and we regarde ourselves as civilised and developed.

But nothing you just mentioned involves killing people because "they're evil".

Pushtrak

Wibbs wrote: »

"Ceding" kinda works, but is it not "seeding"? At least that's the term I've read in connection with the panspermia hypothesis. If the correct term is seeding, then this thread shows how quickly memes can kick off.

Yeah, true. Seeding does work a lot better. And it not being something I spend that much time thinking about I never questioned why I called it that. It was either in this thread or another that science and technology is a religion. Presumably, then, my changing my stance on this is my dogma changing. Wait, dogma can't change. Maybe that science and technology being a religion is nonsense :pac:

In all seriousness though, fortunately, most people know that science/technology as a religion is a silly idea.

coffee_cake

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-17006924

Wibbs

smash wrote: »

But nothing you just mentioned involves killing people because "they're evil".

It's the same nonsense that drives both. One could argue it's the same nonsense that has resulted in the violent deaths of thousands of people in the Troubles, when answering Catholic/Protestant to a question could mean a bullet in the brain. It's the same nonsense that finds a baby stabbed to death on a beach in Kerry. It's the same nonsense that condemned many thousands of children to a childhood and beyond in religious prisons, with many of them raped and otherwise abused. It's easy to point at the "primitive" burning witches, but less comfortable to look in the mirror at more "sophisticated" crimes against humanity.

smash

Wibbs wrote: »

It's the same nonsense that drives both. One could argue it's the same nonsense that has resulted in the violent deaths of thousands of people in the Troubles, when answering Catholic/Protestant to a question could mean a bullet in the brain. It's the same nonsense that finds a baby stabbed to death on a beach in Kerry. It's the same nonsense that condemned many thousands of children to a childhood and beyond in religious prisons, with many of them raped and otherwise abused. It's easy to point at the "primitive" burning witches, but less comfortable to look in the mirror at more "sophisticated" crimes against humanity.

I'm not arguing that it's nonsense, I merely pointed out that the majority of the global population have become more educated than to believe in witchcraft and the likes.

nozzferrahhtoo

smash wrote: »

Well I'm obviously not talking about Africa. I'm talking about civilised and developed societies.

Indeed, though I would hesitate to call them uncivilized either . The point I was trying to make though is that when I say "we", for example, I mean our species as a whole. And "we" very much still are killing, burning and enslaving witches. The catholic church among them so when "we" here in Ireland put money into the baskets in mass "we" are very much burning witches too by financing those that promote such thinking over there or by financing them in other places when they try to silence free speech. So "we" might not be directly performing these acts but many people in our country are complicit.

Leo Igwe was quite passionate to meet and listen to his talk. He spoke of how he has approached a few international Humanitarian and Humanist organisations about the problems he faces. His hope was, as he put it, to "walk with them" on his journey.

He did not conceal his anger and disappointment at how many of those organisations would not help for fear of "Ruining or damaging Nigerian/African culture" an excuse many in countries like our own use and hide behind to justify non action.

His passion in explaining that things like Witchcraft accusations, sexual slavery of children, and superstition "this is NOT our culture - do not protect us - do not pity us - HELP us" was very moving indeed. His passion and love for life and his fellow humans is a rarity to see. If you ever get a chance to see him speak, do not miss it.

paddyandy

There are very few atheists in dying rooms .Genesis is a very Opaque Book in many parts .....search the web .

paracelsso

we have to be more tolerants