Atheists: Why do many of you do this?

The Good Atheist:

"Hey man, I don't believe in God. You f*ck off from my belief and I f*ck off of yours"

Bad Atheist:

"LOL You stupid moron, God is not real. SCIEEEEEEEEEENNNNNCCCCCCCCEEEEEE FTW!!! Wait, what's the Law of Conservation? It's a Christian BS isn't it? Stupid religious moron!"

Hopefully that would answer your question. I like to have fun with the answers, but this one required a serious answer with some cheerful tone to it to make your evening (where I am) better.

Well, atheists don't believe in gods and this is a forum for people of all beliefs and none. You may have noticed Christians answering atheists to tell them they are wrong and a god does exist too? Most of us try not to say this rudely unless the christian is rude but its actually very difficult not to sound sarcastic sometimes even when you are completely sincere if the premise is ridiculous.

The concept of a god is no more or less ludicrous than the concept of fairies, mermaids and werewolves and people have believed in those every bit as sincerely in the past. They could exist - its not impossible and yet there is no reason to think they and much to suggest they are a human invention. Yes, we do not know what sparked the big bang but a god is not the first thing that leaps to mind. The origins of a god would be even harder to explain. A vast, chaotic and superquick expansion of matter seems more likely to happen naturally than an omnipotent, omniscient, immortal, creating, superbeing who reads minds suddenly appearing, don't you think?

If I am asked a question about god, and the fact that god does not exist makes the question irrelivant, then it is a sufficient answer.

The concept of god is pretty ludicrous. What you are talking about is the god of the gaps, religion tries to explain parts of science which are currently unknown with god, until they are known.

With the argument that something must have started the big bang, then it begs the question what created the creator. It is just skipping an unnecessary step to add god into the equation.

It is not closed minded to say something is preposterous when there is no evidence to support it, yes anything is always possible and we could all just be in the matrix, but colloquially we can refer to god as impossible.

There are thousands of possible gods. Some can be explicitly disproved, if they have explicit characteristics that make them impossible. None can be proved.

Yahweh is typically defined as omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent, and having free will. Such a god is internally and externally incongruent, and thus cannot logically exist. An omnipotent and omniscient god with free will can't exist, because it could not both know the future and change it. An omnipotent and omnibenevolent god can't exist and allow the true horrors that occur to sentient beings.

For thousands of years, people have said that their gods were behind what they didn't understand -- life, lightning, stars, earthquakes, the origin of life, the world or the universe, etc. Positing a god to supposedly answer a question solves nothing. It just adds an unwarranted level of complexity and stops you from asking more questions.

It used to be that science couldn't answer the question about the origin of the universe or of the Big Bang, but that didn't mean we should make up an answer (such as a god) and say that it was the cause. Within the last few decades scientists have discovered some good answers. Of course, a scientific explanation is more complex than simply saying, "God did it."

Quantum mechanics shows that "nothing," as a philosophical concept, does not exist. There is always a quantum field with random fluctuations.

There are many well-respected physicists, such as Stephen Hawking, Lawrence Krauss, Sean M. Carroll, Victor Stenger, Michio Kaku, Alan Guth, Alex Vilenkin, Robert A.J. Matthews, and Nobel laureate Frank Wilczek, who have created scientific models where the Big Bang and thus the entire universe could arise from nothing but a random quantum vacuum fluctuation in the quantum field -- via natural processes.

In relativity, gravity is negative energy, and matter and photons are positive energy. Because negative and positive energy seem to be equal in absolute total value, our observable universe appears balanced to the sum of zero. Our universe could thus have come into existence without violating conservation of mass and energy — with the matter of the universe condensing out of the positive energy as the universe cooled, and gravity created from the negative energy. When energy condenses into matter, equal parts of matter and antimatter are created — which annihilate each other to form energy. However there is a slight imbalance to the process, which results in matter dominating over antimatter.

I know that this doesn't make sense in our Newtonian experience, but it does in the realm of quantum mechanics and relativity. As Nobel laureate physicist Richard Feynman wrote, "The theory of quantum electrodynamics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And it agrees fully with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as she is — absurd."

For more, watch the video at the 1st link - "A Universe From Nothing" by theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss, read an interview with him (at the 2nd link), get his new book (at the 3rd link), or read an excerpt from his book (at the 4th link).

-

Here's something to think about: Everything made has a Maker.

>>>>>>>>>>>....

How We Can Know There Is a God

ONE way to determine whether there is a God is to apply this well-established principle: What is made requires a maker. The more complicated the thing made, the more capable the maker must be.

For example, look around your home. Tables, chairs, desks, beds, pots, pans, plates, and other eating utensils all require a maker, as do walls, floors, and ceilings. Yet, those things are comparatively simple to make. Since simple things require a maker, is it not logical that complex things require an even more intelligent maker?

So if an atheists or scientists don't believe that then these instruments just appeared from nowhere,

no intelligence required.

===================

Inclinometer, slope

Interferometer, optics, infrared light spectra

Magnetograph, magnetic field

Magnetometer, magnetic flux

Mass spectrometer, compound identification/characterization

Micrometer, distance

Microscope, optical magnification

NMR spectrometer, chemical compound identification, medical diagnostic imaging

Ohmmeter, electrical resistance/impedance

Oscilloscope, electric signal voltage, amplitude, wavelength, frequency, waveform shape/pattern

Seismometer, acceleration

Spectogram, sound frequency, wavelength, amplitude

Spectrometer, light frequency, wavelength, amplitude

Telescope, light magnification (astronomy)

Time-of-flight mass spectrometer, see mass spectrometer

Well to say god doesnt exist is in our beliefs as atheists. the major point for this belief is nothing for the matter proves the existence of any dieties. Christians many of them not all try to say god is outside the bounds of other gods. They denounce other gods as make believe a man made concept when in reality their god is also a man made concept. If moses if he even existed had never talked about a monotheist god wud anyone believe in it now? Wudnt it be just another man made concept. Christians tend to put their belief in god above others even judaism and islam. The next thing is I do not put insulting comments most of the time only to retarded & offensive questions. Also while i consider myself agnostic atheist i believe that while i do not know with 100% certainty that gods dont exist as I am not omniscience but I do not believe in them as i know gods are a man made concept and i'm pretty sure that the burning bush that moses was talking to was just making him hallucinate. Burning plants tend to have that effect.

Based on the answers, it appears that atheists are under the delusion that because they don't believe in something it must not be true...

Lake M : Given that you do not answer every question in this forum it must not be something you feel is required. If as you assert ", and the fact that god does not exist makes the question irrelivant (sic) then there is no reason to answer it at all. Given you have a choice to or not to answer questions (evidenced by there being many questions you do not answer) then why do you answer?

As one less then inteligent person here stated

QUOTE: Gautama Buddha said:

Believe nothing.........

END OF QUOTE

Then why believe to what Gautama Buddha said ? or in Gautama Buddha at all ? I believe this idiot never existed.

If something could always have existed, why MUST it be a god? Why can it not be the universe itself, existing uncreated?

Ask yourself, "Why does god deserve a special exemption from logic (being an uncreated singularity) that I will not give to the universe?"

God is an extra layer that explains nothing. Occam's Razor slit his throat.

This is what I typically do:

Gautama Buddha said:

Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.