Atheists: BELIEVE IN SCIENCE OR YOU'RE A FUCKING RETARD

>Atheists: BELIEVE IN SCIENCE OR YOU'RE A FUCKING RETARD
>also atheists: Oh woops looks like we were wrong about science again

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=P0S84QIw4tA
youtube.com/watch?v=2Ct6h7rs6XU
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

...

that map isn't even true

Oh boy another stupid nigger.
We don't say believe in science. Atheism has nothing to do with science. It's simply a lack of a belief in a god. Buddhists happen to be an atheistic religion. Please, kys you stupid faggot.

That's exactly right. We don't know everything, so we will always need to correct scientific belief. But ignoring what we currently know to be correct in liue of an old story book is retarded.

there is literally no clash between science and religion you self-absorbed r/atheist faggot.

>Buddhists happen to be an atheistic religion

No it's not you retard. What do you think reincarnation is.

Oh fuck off, cuckboy. Atheists by and large elevate science from uncaring nothing to anthropomorphic deity. It's embarrassing when they get offended in behalf of science. Science doesn't give a shit!

it's because they don't technically believe in a god.

>ignoring what we do know which will change in five years
>extrapolate facts to fit an agenda as every human does

It's like atheists are autistic and don't understand what the real issue is.

The earth is flat you fucking moronic jew

The idea of blinding believing an idea while having no desire to prove it is against scientific thought

this.

Oh my god..... being this retarded.
>Looks at flag
>Not surprised anymore
There are atheists who believe in angels you stupid fucking sand nigger.
Reincarnation ISN'T A DEITY. My god. You fucking retard.

No they don't. You're being retarded for the sake of straw-manning atheists.
What I do as an atheist is say I don't believe in a god. Then what I do as a person who views science as the way forward is study what interests me (such as particle physics) and try to push said fields forward or advocate for others to pay attention to certain fields I feel are important.

That's not true either. The position taken is that it's not important. In that sense it's more agnostic.

This, a Jew posted something good for once

I lose literally nothing from not believing in certain science things like evolution so it doesn't really matter

Pretty sure you're the retarded one.

"There are atheists who believe in angels you stupid fucking sand nigger."

Then those people are fucking stupid too. You can't disassociate angels from god without coming off like a retard.

Oh my god you stupid fucking leaf. Day of the rake when?
Agnosticism isn't a word for belief. It is a knowledge claim.
Agnostic means lacking knowledge. I'm an agnostic atheist. I don't know if god exists but I lean heavily towards him not existing. Please fucking kill yourself for being this fucking stupid.

from what you've posted, you are indeed the retard.

its the only thing that changes as knew knowlege is aquired, how is tha tworse than believing soemthing that hasnt changed in 2000 years

science is no different from faith. it's just another type of belief.

pretty subversive

Ad hominem. No argument. Seems about right from a stupid nigger.

My problem with science is that it depends on causality completely.

Causation simply cannot be squared with the universe spontaneously coming into being at one point in time and space. But the scientists and empiricists just ignore the fact that causal thinking seems to only apply to the physical things of the world as opposed to the meta-physical. Yet they try in vain to apply causation to questions outside of the causal purview (like the question being itself).

My worldview is that causation is a very finite/small phenomena that applies to the simplistic physical interactions, while the big metaphysical aspects of the universe have no such causal boundry it would seem. This does not stop atheists from asserting their causal nonsense into areas of metaphysics condescendingly though.

Then it's not atheist either by your definition you dumbass

>(((blindly)))

Stay mad, cucks.

forgot link

Kill yourself, you and your thoughts are worthless, thank you

Shitty Youtube Videos aren't proof, im afraid..

Did I say they were smart? No I simply stated they exist.
The laws of physics apply to the inside of the universe. Not the universe itself. Fun fact though. The total energy of the universe is 0. So in fact the universe could have been created from nothing.
Atheism - Lacking a belief in a god. Not my definition. The actual definition of the word. Buddhists do not believe in a deity. No matter if they see it as important or not. This is a fact and another fact is you're a fucking dumb leaf like always.

I don't think you understand the issues. There are religious scientists and irreligious scientists.

The diffinition is not believing in God or gods but it really should be not believing in supernatural stuff.

Buddihsm is still counted as a religion

Uncomfortable?

Bump. Science is not a body of knowledge it's a method of testing.

Yes. It's a religion. Doesn't mean it's not atheistic. You can have religions that don't believe in a god.
Also, no. Atheism is derived from theism. Basically being the opposite to belief in a god.
Supernatural shit is still on the table. While I think they are retarded for believing in that shit as much as people who need a sky daddy to keep them from slaughtering their neighbors, they still exist.

no u

>being this ignorant of what Christianity is

Christ man at least read up on Buddhism before you pretend to know what you're talking about. Buddhists are NOT atheist. They don't not believe in a diety. They claim its simply not important and to focus on yourself here on earth. Which is why I say it's closer to an agnostic viewpoint.

This diagram you provided BTFO of atheists who are just too stupid too realize it.

Given the vastness of the region we are able to observe and the fact that the distribution of elements by all standards should be dispersed somewhat evenly from centre if we are to believe the big bang, the very fact that in all that region we haven't been able to detect a single life form more or less advanced that us in any form.

There is not a valid explanation for the uniqueness for life on earth especially when we consider the diagram you presented. Thanks Menachem.

Theists also believe in science you literal faggot

To be honest I have never heard a more foolhearty and moronic statement than
>The total energy of the universe is zero.

This is exactly the type of idiotic "scientific" hubris I see so often. You not anyone else can tell me anything about the entire universe. We can't even take a photo of our galaxy, how could you know anything about the state of the entire universe with any certainty- much less an exact number representing its total energy. You are working off of a theory which could possible explain the universe and you are asserting it as fact.

Next time you make up nonsense and try to pass it off as a measurable fact, you should at least pick one that is remotely possible to even be measured by humans. It's like trying to tell me you know in inches, the exact distance of the universe from one edge to another- it's impossible to ascertain that figure.

But to the point- the universe either came into being spontaneously or it is eternal? Humor me- is there a third option?

...

>referring to god as sky daddy

Don't forget your fedora

No-fap is pretty good though, don't really see it as an argument AGAINST Christianity.

God was atleast right on that issue

(((shitty)))

you also probably didn't scroll down or even actually click on them.

You still don't know what the fuck agnosticism is faggot.
I'm tired of you retarded faggots using words incorrectly.
Oh look another stupid nigger.
You don't even understand where this hypothesis arises from. Nor will you ever understand it.
The hypothesis arrives at this conclusion because the positive energy of matter is canceled out by the negative energy of gravity.
By the way, using theory incorrectly Woooo 10 points to gryffindor. Gravity is "just a theory."
Um you mean like the total percentage of certain matter in the universe? Cause we've got that nailed. What even is math amiright?
Define spontaneously you fucking Reddit fag. Because time didn't exist before the universe. And seeing as we see the ballooning effect on all galaxies that are moving away from us, we know the universe came from a central point. The Cosmic microwave background also proves the big bang. Which should be renamed under inflation instead. We can bring the universe back to less than a second after the big bang. We can never know what happened before it though. Cause you know, physics and all that shiz. Please stop being a retarded nigger.

me moving my arm takes energy and im in the universe. so it isnt 0

>Gravity is "just a theory."
someone has been watching their new atheist videos

More like-

>All the evidence seems to point to this, so it sounds reasonable until someone finds more evidence that refutes it.

No, I didn't click on them. If someone is setting out to objectively prove something they don't make a video and post it to YouTube. That's something you do when you want to present shitty flawed evidence so that you can convince dumb cunts of your positon

Oh my god. What even is thermodynamics? The universe is a closed system (as far as we know). The TOTAL energy is 0. But much like how Earth gets energy from the sun, the energy that exists in material form is dispersed. You simply lack the understanding of the topics at hand. Go sit in your corner like a good nigger.
What even is a scientific theory amiright?

chile out my friend, you don't believe in science, per definition

Most people believe that they can sense, either in what they can see or touch, but also what they can "feel". During prayer people can feel the presence of God. If that feeling isn't real then one has to question everything about reality, because all we have are our senses to tell us about the world.

see also either the universe creates energy out of no where or it has a ginite amount

You clearly just spout off new atheist videos debunking fundamentalist creationists faulty interpretations of genesis. You actually believe science and Christianity is at odds.

Your """senses""" and your actual senses are two different things. Touch, taste, smell, sight, hearing are all physically things that can be shown and measured. Your "sense and feel" that God exists is not

Sup Forums is too smart to fall for NASA lies and CG globes.

Like I said. You don't understand the topic at hand nigger.
No. I don't even watch atheism videos. But nice try though.
"Moses turned his staff into a snake." "Moses turned the river into blood." "Woman born of males rib." "Male born of clay." "Fire tornadoes lit the way for the Israelites." "Earth existed before light." "Separate the water from the water." Oh shit that giant floating layer of water didn't kill all of humanity due to greenhouse effect? Wtf? "A magic man curing blindness by touch." "Angels." Like. Just stop. I get you're one of them new Christians who thinks that science just backs up the bible. But science is moving further and further away from their needing to be a god.

Wow, lots of Fedora threads popping up. I guess Atheists are feeling pretty blown the fuck out seeing as their whole humans started in africa "theory" just got chopped to pieces.

How does it feel when the building blocks of what you believe to be established truths get torn down one by one ? Does it feel like you've been lied to yet anons ? Does it feel like you faith in science is just a bit poorly placed ?

Yeah, that's how evidence-based conclusions work, when there's new evidence you have new conclusions. It might not be as convenient as just making shit up and therefore never having to change but its more honest.

Nigger surveillance OPs checking in:
youtube.com/watch?v=P0S84QIw4tA

Yeah, they seem to believe life started on earth 3 billion years ago and the universe 13 billion. if they were to be right about that then some life would have has to of formed around 10-11 billion years ago. like imagine what we would be able to do in 8 billion years.

>Word soup to justify the moronic notion that you or anyone else has some how managed to measure the entire energy of the universe.

You don't know the percentage of matter in the universe, or the total energy- not for a fact. You can extrapolate figures using some physics framework but it's all a projection. The notion that you know *anything* specific about the universe *for factual certainty* is akin to religious faith. When you are able to measure it- then you have a fact, and to my knowledge we have no technology capable of measure such an immense set of data points as "the entire universe itself." It's almost like you have picked the most immeasurable thing on earth and are suggesting it's measurable. Like some sort of theoretical argument where you are trying to prove literally the most unprovable thing imagineable- I have to admit your argument is nothing if not bold.

Your confidence in human logic has been taken to truly appalling levels of absurdity- worse than the religious almost.

But like a real dingus I see you have avoided the question. The universe is either eternal or came into being spontaneously. Both of those deny strict causality. So surely you must have a third explanation which maintains causal thought while allowing for the universe to exist.

>Sponantously came into being.
>Constant and eternal.
>Hereforeto unknown third option.

Choose one and explain how it maintains causation. That's all I really want to hear. I'm not even concerned with argument- I would seriously like a reasonable answer so I could have a little more faith in the scientific community.

>I get you're one of them new Christians who thinks that science just backs up the bible.

Holy fucking shit burger bro do you even know what scholasticism is? Do you know those old testament stories (for the most part) are specifically put in to be mythologies? Serious Christians for thousands of years were not once delusional enough to think Job was a real person who really went on a tour of the cosmos with God. Fuck off.

>also atheists: Oh woops looks like we were wrong about science again
Meh? Leave the indoor kids alone, after all everything is only chemicals and water when you never leave the city. That's the starting reference point, not to mention all the NASA scientist attention you get from such a dogmatic, hipster belief system. God and especially agnosticism are taboos in a secular, govt mandated society even if (((Darwin))) was proven wrong repeatedly.

It's almost like science changes to suit the most conclusive evidence whilst religion rots for thousands of years.

it's parts from a documentary jackass

Yeah exactly and have never really provided a sufficient "theory" for the uniqueness of life on earth.

They claim that with the right "ingredients" it will form on it's own but can't explain why, despite the ingredients being distributed from a point source, we cant detect anything resembling life for the 13B light years that we can observe with the Hubble.

It's that kind of hubris that makes it so delicious when they eat crow like they are today. They should really just be answering all future philosophical questions with "not sure" and stick to the observing. Drawing inferences from inconclusive data just provides erroneous conclusions.

How is that any better?

>hypothesis
>proof

>Oh woops looks like we were wrong about science again
The nature of science is that it must be falsifiable. If your model of the universe does not change whenever new evidence comes up that contradicts it, or your model is designed in such a way that it cannot be contradicted, then your model sucks.

You should be changing your mind over the course of your lifetime many times.

Oh boy you don't even understand that science doesn't find "truth." Science makes predictive models that we can use to PREDICT things that will happen in the universe.
You know theories are above facts right?
We know how the universe originated. The big bang theory accompanied with inflation gives us a very good predictive model that has been proven to be true on countless occasions. See the CMB. Through this model we can extrapolate the number of particles per element in the universe. Again what is math?
Our theories open up a lot of doors. Such as the higgs boson which was only relatively recently discovered. But was predicted for years beforehand by the standard model.
Everything inside the universe is measurable.
Actually no. I go with the scientific method, not human logic.
Um no. I said define spontaneous. That means instantly. There was no time before the big bang so it's kinda a moot point. We don't know where the universe came from. I fall into the camp behind the black hole theory but there isn't solid evidence from it so it's just my opinion at this point.
All evidence points to it not being eternal. What even is the ballooning effect? amiright? All other galaxies besides andromada are moving away from us. We know this because of the red shifting of the light from these galaxies. We also know, that the further galaxies are moving away from us faster than the closer ones. So either there is some MASSIVE gravitational pull behind the CMB that we can't detect (even though we can detect the graviational waves from a system with 2 black holes spinning around eachother) or the universe is still expanding just at a much slower rate.
Um if you're really gonna want to make a watch maker argument, then you should also know how easily the watch maker argument is destroyed.
causation has already been disproven to some degree. Not everything needs a first cause. Subatomic particles seem to move without a cause.

Science is a process by which you test explanations and theories until you find the correct one.

Being wrong and finding incorrect answers is inherent to that process.

The difference is that Religion doesn't change in the face of new information, while that is the entire point of the scientific process.

A religious leader will never say

>Oh jeez, you know, in the face of this new evidence, maybe we were wrong about Jesus/Muhammad/Moses and stuff, we had better get to work finding out what the deal REALLY is.

While this seems to be true with our current evidence, it could be disproven in the future due to more forces being discovered. Such at the hyperspace hypothesis that is coming to light. String theory and the like 13 or so dimensions. (If it's true which it looks to be the case so far.)
We can never know the exact origin of the universe as far as I know. Sorry to say it but until we can leave the universe, it's a sad fact of reality.

>The difference is that Religion doesn't change in the face of new information, while that is the entire point of the scientific process.
Or is it that the concept of a creator just stands up to scrutiny better because it's true?

because they went out to prove it and someone else saw the documentary and posted it to youtube.

It really doesn't.
Oh so like I said, you're one of those new christians where literally everything is a metaphor except certain things but then those become metaphors are the drop of a hate because convenience.

The nice thing about science is that you don't have to believe in it.

Imagine if we find something to disprove evolution. And the (((scientists))) don't hide it.

>We know how the universe originated.
Is that you or your African/European/tommorow's new monkey brain talking?

> science = narrative
> hail the state science institute
> hail minitrue
> hail hydra

Careful. "Scientists" often don't understand this simple idea at all.

Leaf, stop talking. Your country is more cucked than ours. So you really have no room to talk sand nigger.

>Gravity is "just a theory."
think again
youtube.com/watch?v=2Ct6h7rs6XU

Again, you don't use film to prove an idea, you use it to bring dumb cunts over to your side.

Scientists treat science like a dogma and are too stubborn to realize it. That's why new science that disproves old models and old ways of thinking get super suppressed and shunned in the scientific community. They are a sad bunch and are worse than the worst cases of theists.

I'm going to assume this a troll post because nobody can be this stupid.

well they need a solid scientific backing to genocide the shitskins out of Europe, cant just be becuz we don't like them, needs solid footing. first we'll tell them to go back, then we start deporting them forcefully, then comes the genocide, and we take it all the way to africa

It's really pathetic how simple it is. How could you sleep at night knowing your worldview is completely refuted by the existence of the universe itself?

I was trying to be polite too by saying well maybe finite things are causal even though the larger universe isn't, but these dunder heads never seem to get that they MUST explain the existence of the universe to be compatible with causality or their worldview is even more ridiculous than the religious.

I also like the framing of the conversation as "creationists vs science." To my understanding everyone is pretty much a creationist. I mean since Hubble no one believes the universe is eternal- the only disagreement is whether god initiated creation or not. Everyone is a creationist.

The phenomenon of gravity is not a theory, but our model that explains gravity is a theory. It's not one I personally object to, but in a million years from now we might have a new and sophisticated model for it that completely erases our current model and highlights areas we were flat out wrong.

...

What the fuck are you talking about burger? It is a theory. There is no definite proof of why gravity exists. There are only equations that can predict it's behavior based on observation.

Religion:
A = B because our book says so.

Science:
A = B according to our current knowledge, let's try to disprove it!

God is gay

You realize that's what science does right? Makes predictive models. Is this lost on you or something?
Also, the theory of relativity does for the most part explain why gravity exists.

How is a documentary worse than an article on a website? Are you saying you never got any of your beliefs/theories from documentaries?

Your entire comment is pure circumlocution.

First of all- science is not meant to just predict things. For example the geocentric model could predict eclipses just like the heliocentric model but that doesn't make it correct. The how and the why are critical to applying that prediction or having any true understanding.

However I'm not so stupid to indulge in anymore of your frantic comments other than to, yet again, demand that you drop the rhetoric, put your cards on the table, and simple chose one of the following in regards to the origin of our universe... of you cannot choose one it doesn't matter because they both deny causation. So what I'm really asking you is whether there is a third option which maintains strict causation aka the bedrock of scientific thought.