One of my pet peeves is multigrain labels emblazoned on foods lately. Technically the food has more than one grain in it, but they are touting the product as something healthy when they have still stripped all fiber and goodness out, so the health benefits are still lacking. This is very popular in cereals, and unless you read the label you’d think you were buying something healthy, when really it’s just as junky as cocoa puffs.

The “no sugar added” label is another one I find quite vague. There are several different iterations of this one. No sugar added, sugar free, the list goes on. What do they all mean? Again, you have to carefully read the nutrition facts and ingredients to get a better picture of what you’ll be buying.

I guess it’s basically the idea that advertisers must follow the letter of the law but not the spirit of it. So for something like Airborne (which I’ve ranted about before), they can make vague claims that basically say nothing to skirt the issue that there is no science behind their product. Then, to make it worse, they strategically make sure it’s placed near the pharmacy to appeal to authority. I think in some places they have signs saying that pharmacists recommend Airborne. But really, to make that claim you only have to pay two pharmacists to say what you want to be truthful.

I find it all incredibly frustrating and discouraging. And the only solution is to be aggressively proactive about shopping and watching ads or commercials. Be skeptical!

This is part one of tackling this topic for three reasons.

• One, I don’t think we can do it justice in one post.
• Two, I really want your feedback. What are your pet peeves in advertising? What examples stand out for you? What logical fallacies do you see in advertising and marketing?
• And three, I just got the new parts for my computer and have to build my newer, better, faster computer today (with the help of my geek friend, Gary. Thanks Gary!). This is my birthday present from my sweetie. Thanks, my love!

Ok, I’m off to go fiddle with my new computer parts. Hopefully it all goes well. I look forward to hearing from you about fallacies in advertising!

Related posts

• Logical Fallacies (0)
• Young Earth Invasion (6)
• What Are You Doing November 19? (10)
• Religulous: We’re On The Road To Nowhere (3)
• Occam’s Razor: Part 1 of Our Critical Thinking Toolkit (1)

Do you have the COURAGE to Read this whole E-Mail?????

The TRUTH about UNTIMELY DEATHS!

John Lennon (Singer):
Some years before, during an interview with an American Magazine, he said:
“Christianity will end, it will disappear. I do not have to argue about that. I am certain. Jesus was ok, but his subjects were too simple. Today we are
more famous than Him” (1966).
Lennon, after saying that the Beatles were more famous than Jesus Christ, was shot six times.

Is god lazy? Lennon said he was bigger than Jesus in 1966. Mark Chapman shot him in 1980.
Fourteen years later! Was god too busy all those years assassinating other sinners? Is he a procrastinator?
“Oh yeah, that one blasphemous beatle. I really should smite him.”
The next day:
“Crap! I forgot! again!”

And so on, for the next fourteen years!

MARILYN MONROE:
She was visited by Billy Graham during a presentation of a show. He is a preacher and Evangelist and the Spirit of God had sent him to preach to her.
After hearing what the Preacher had to say, she said: “I don’t need your Jesus”
A week later, she was found dead in her apartment.

Of course, the fact that Marilyn Monroe was Jewish is inconsequential!

Now consider:

Saloth Sar, better known as Pol Pot, was the leader of the Cambodian communist movement known as the Khmer Rouge
During his time in power, Pol Pot imposed a version of agrarian collectivization, forcing city dwellers to relocate to the countryside to work in collective farms and forced labor projects, toward a goal of “restarting civilization” in a “Year Zero”.
The combined effects of slave labor, malnutrition, poor medical care, and executions resulted in the deaths of an estimated 1.7 to 2.5 million people, approximately 21% of the Cambodian population.

Also, he was not a Christian. Also, he lived to be 70.

Aleister Crowley, born Edward Alexander Crowley, was an English occultist, writer, mountaineer, poet, playwright, yogi, and possible spy He was an influential member of occult organizations, including the Golden Dawn, the A∴A∴, and Ordo Templi Orientis (O.T.O.), and is known today for his magical writings, especially The Book of the Law, the central sacred text of Thelma. He gained notoriety during his lifetime, and was denounced in the popular press of the day as “The wickedest man in the world.”

And yet lived to be 72.

Donatien Alphonse François, Marquis de Sade, was a French aristocrat and writer famous for his libertine sexuality and lifestyle. His works include novels, short stories, plays, and political tracts; in his lifetime some were published under his own name, while others appeared anonymously and Sade denied being their author. He is best known for his erotic novels, which combined philosophical discourse with pornography, depicting bizarre sexual fantasies with an emphasis on violence, criminality, and blasphemy against the Catholic Church. He was a proponent of extreme freedom (or at least licentiousness), unrestrained by morality, religion or law.
The term “sadism” is derived from his name.

Lived to be 74.

Idi Amin Dada, The military dictator and President of Uganda from 1971 to 1979.
Amin’s rule was characterised by human rights abuses, political repression, ethnic persecution, extrajudicial killings, nepotism, corruption and gross economic mismanagement. The number of people killed as a result of his regime is estimated by international observers and human rights groups to range from 100,000 to 500,000.
A polygamist, Idi Amin married at least six women, three of whom he divorced. He married his first and second wives, Malyamu and Kay, in 1966. The next year, he married Nora and then Nalongo Madina in 1972. On 26 March 1974, he announced on Radio Uganda that he had divorced Malyamu, Nora and Kay.
Kay died on 13 August 1974, Her body was found dismembered.

Lived to the ripe old age of 78.

Finally, the REAL TRUTH comes out!

UNTIMELY DEATHS?

Every day, almost 16,000 children die from hunger-related causes–one child every five seconds.
In the time it takes you to read one E-mail full of “little lies for Jesus” at least 200 people will have died of starvation.
Over 4 million will die this year.

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh EVIL?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”

- Epicurus (Greek philosopher, BC 341-270)

Use Your Brains.

Charles already got an angry response and replied:

On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 5:35 PM, (unnamed Christian) wrote:

Man is where evil dwells not God. Don’t blame MAN’S shortcomings, cruelty, greed, racism, etc,,, on God!. Man has a choice….all of us have a choice. What we do with that choice is up to us. Our hand is not being forced by any being including God….use you brains!!!!!!!!!!

Charles’ reply:

An intelligent man would never blame god for any of those things, because he understands that god is but a creation of man.
Don’t devalue all humanity by blaming all the world’s injustice on them. You do not only the world, but yourself a disservice.
It is ludicrous to claim that the people who died in the earthquake in Haiti choose that to happen. As ridiculous as claiming that children choose to die of starvation.
Saying that “all of us have a choice” is the biggest “blame the victim” pile of steaming… well you get the idea, that religion ever propagated.

If you believe in god then you already believe in a place god created that is without suffering and yet all the people there still have free will, it is called heaven.
There is no reason an all powerful god couldn’t have made earth the same way. Unless he is just a dick?

But again, that would be silly to blame the world’s problems on an imaginary being. As silly as blaming people for things that they have no control over.

Things just happen, good and bad. It is a result of living on an imperfect natural world we have by chance evolved to live on.

Maybe someday you can see reality without the “Jesus glasses”. Good luck with that.

Related posts

• Young Earth Invasion (6)
• Religulous: We’re On The Road To Nowhere (3)
• Religious Murderers Get Off Easy (9)
• Religion’s Problem of Evil: The Top 15 Excuses Religious People Give For Their god (0)
• Conversation With Anne About Religion, Truth, Science and History (4)

Well I am new to religion totally as neither of my parents knew what to believe so they taught me nothing. I have so many questions and not nearly enough hours to google! lol jk

If you dont believe in a higher being such as God like the Christians what do you believe? (***Now please dont think I am questioning your beliefs I simply need a better understanding of what you hold to be true in this world.***) Do you believe that things happen simply because we choose that is how it should or is there a force behind events? I have gathered you believe in evolution but how were monkeys first placed on earth? And then how was earth created? I believe it is truely unknown to begin with but do you have a theory?

My reply:

First, question everything. Don’t take my word for it. Research everything yourself.

I have a couple of questions for you.

Your parents taught you nothing about religion? So you picked up bits and pieces as you grew up from other people? That’s interesting. Are they atheists then? Or do they just never talk about religion? Perhaps it just doesn’t seem like an issue to them? I am curious if they’ve said anything to you at all. What kind of school did you go to? Did you go to public, private or home school? In which state? And how old are you?

Raising a child without teaching them anything is not what I’d consider ideal. My idea of a great foundation for a child is to teach her how to think critically, to think for herself. I recommend teaching a child about all religions from around the world and throughout human history, then asking questions to help the child form her own understanding about it. I would also share my personal opinion on the subject. But most people don’t raise their kids to think for themselves.

It sounds like you’re searching for something to believe in, but I would ask why you need to believe in anything that isn’t real?

I will speak for myself only, as I’m sure other atheists have come to their lack of belief in different ways.

I grew up as a christian. I went to church and believed jesus died for my sins. I was terrified of burning in hell and got baptized 3 times in 3 different churches to try to make sure I’d get into heaven and not burn for all eternity after I died. Looking back I think it was a horrible burden as a child, to be so afraid of a god that was supposed to be loving. It made no sense.

I studied the three major religions (judaism, christianity and islam) in my 20′s and realized after several years that is was all created by man. It hit me about 10 years ago that I no longer believed in gods of any sort and I was actually an atheist. A more detailed history of my deconversion can be found here.

Your question is incorrect. You asked if I no longer believe in a god (or any gods for that matter) then what do I believe in. The answer is I go out of my way to avoid beliefs as a general rule. You see, I don’t want to believe, I want to know (Carl Sagan said that). I want evidence and reality. I prefer facts to fantasy or wishful thinking. I have no need of beliefs that are not based in reality.

What do I hold to be true in this world? That’s a different question. I guess the answer to that is what has been observed in our brief human history. I value the accomplishments of humans, the amazing wonders of nature in all its forms, the cosmos in its vast scale. I look at history and see how far humans have come. I see how we’ve evolved our culture and societies, how we’ve learned great, amazing technologies and thought deep, profound concepts that have advanced us tremendously in a relatively short period of time. These are all real things that we can look at and examine and understand to the best of our abilities. Something else I hold true is that I am fully responsible for my own actions, as well as my inactions. I can’t pawn that off on some fantasy being. Actions and inactions have consequences.

Do I believe things happen simply because we choose that is how it should be or is there a force behind events? No. Neither of those has any basis in reality. The first is wishful thinking and the power of suggestion. The second is looking for a supernatural god to explain things you don’t understand. Neither is real.

Something happens because of cause and effect. I hit a key on my keyboard and a letter pops up on my monitor. A thousand things happened to make it show up. Just thinking and wishing for the words to appear on the screen does nothing. Your thoughts do not leave your head and transform the universe. This is a common false belief in the new age worldview. It is completely bogus nonsense without any basis in fact. If you have a thought and then you take that thought and turn it into some kind of action, that’s when things start happening.

In all of science there is zero evidence of anything supernatural in the universe. Everything that has been explained is natural. While we don’t have all the answers (and probably never will) about the beginning of the universe as we know it, or how it will end, if it will, and other questions, we know an awful lot now and it’s all completely natural. There is no evidence of any sort of god needed to make it all work as it does. What we call the laws of nature work just fine without any kind of divine force.

So I guess what I trust is cause and effect, physics, and human interaction with the material world. No need for a god or a creator. It all works just fine on its own.

Yes, I accept evolution as a fact, as most scientists do. Your next statement is also quite wrong. Monkeys were never placed on earth. This would say that some divine being put monkeys on the planet like a child placing dolls in a toy house. Did you learn the prevailing theories of how the earth was formed through natural cosmic events 4.6 billion years ago (or thereabouts) in school?

To go back in time, and again this is my rough explanation (you really need to read up on the specifics as I am not a cosmologist or a geologist and I’m doing this from memory) about 14 billion years ago (roughly) there was the Big Bang. All of matter expanded from a singular source (called a singularity) outwards, and even now it continues to expand. Swirling gases condensed to form stars and crashed together and cooled to form planets. I guess you could say, after the Big Bang, the rest of the formation of stars and planets has been the effect of that event.
I recommend Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson as a great astrophysicist. He’s easy to understand and very interesting. Here’s a 5 minute video you might like.

Also, PBS has a timeline of the universe here.

These are rough and simple explanations of prevailing theories as I know them. As I’ve mentioned, no one knows how exactly the Big Bang happened, what the universe was before the Big Bang, or how exactly life on earth first formed. The thing about science is we never stop asking questions. Usually asking a question brings up a dozen more that are unanswered, but it’s all so exciting and thrilling to observe the universe in all its intricate and natural majesty, and to try to understand it. And again, there is no evidence of any sort of god or supernatural being. Everything so far discovered and understood is all natural.

While no one knows exactly how life first started on earth billions of years ago, we are coming up with interesting ideas for how amino acids (the building blocks of proteins) were first able to form in the primordial soup that was on the planet. It was a very different environment, and little one-celled organisms most likely formed bio-films on the ocean floor and probably in volcanic steam vents. (Again, this is my understanding. I am getting this from memory, not a science text, but I recommend you study it yourself so that you know a bit about it straight from different scientists)

Through natural selection and adaptation, the little bacteria evolved over billions of years, branching off, adapting to different environments and through different environmental pressures. We are not evolved from monkeys. But we share a common ancestor from long ago. In fact, I should make it clear, we now know that all of life is connected genetically. You have billions of bacteria living on you right now, and you share a common ancestor with that bacteria, your pet cat, the fish you ate for dinner, and the whales that live in the ocean. I recommend watching a great video and playing with an interactive tree of life here. Here is a link to the video with David Attenborough. It’s 6 and a half minutes long, basically just a rough overview but it will get you started. Here is another great tree of life video (10 minutes).

I hope that makes sense. Please consider looking into learning a basic understanding of biology and maybe some other science. It will help you understand so much more about the world. Get some good books on evolutionary biology, cosmology and astronomy. You might find it amazing and interesting. Look up the show Cosmos and Carl Sagan. He was so awesome at explaining the universe.

Look up David Attenborough. He’s a naturalist and explains natural history quite well. Try a museum of natural history. You could check out the NY Museum of Natural History and the Smithsonian in D.C., and look to your local library in the science section. Look for scientists who are peer reviewed and stick to subjects they are experts in. Follow up with other sources to verify what you read. Never take anything at face value.

I have to ask, why do you feel you have a need for a god and a religion? You were lucky not to be brainwashed into believing something false to control you. Why do you feel the need to grasp onto one now? Religion is about controlling how people think, feel and live through fear, guilt and promise of a reward after death, which can never be tested or proven.

Oh, and because it is often a reason people think they need religion, I will say that being a good person is its own reward and there is ample evidence that morals are evolutionary, not directed by a supreme being who likes the smell of burning goat-flesh. Millions of atheists are moral and happy without such delusional beliefs based on iron age goat-herders.

I hope I answered your questions. I hope you are now asking many more and that those questions will become a lifelong quest for information and knowledge about the world and the universe, and our humble place within it.

~

If you would like to add to what I have said, I would love links to great videos, sites or books that might be helpful in explaining the Tree of Life, evolution and the Big Bang, etc. Please don’t resort to ad hominem attacks. We all start somewhere. Let’s give Anne the benefit of the doubt and encourage her to ask questions and seek answers.

Related posts

• Why I Am Not A Christian (0)
• What Is Atheism To You? Conversations With Craig the Christian 1 (36)
• Let’s Stop Pussyfooting Around (46)
• Here We Go Again… (125)
• Conversations With Craig the christian 5 – More Interpretations (10)

Where was I? Oh, right. When someone comes to me and asks me to have a conversation with them about religion and atheism, I feel it’s my responsibility as an atheist to show that a discourse is possible. I want to show religious people that I am indeed a living, breathing ethical atheist. I am rather nice to people, especially if they aren’t visiting my home for more than one night. (Then all bets are off) I try to show people how to use reason, logic and facts to find out things for themselves.

Sure, sometimes I can get a bit testy when a christian insults my intelligence or pointedly tries to manipulate the discussion into an argument. I am not a debater, and I can’t stand logical fallacies, especially when employed specifically to win unfairly. This is unethical and inexcusable to me.

Of course, people often use logical fallacies because they don’t know any better. I will then happily teach a person about the logical fallacy being used, and will then expect that person to refrain from further use of it as we go through our discussions.

Of course, often a person will stubbornly cling to their beliefs and faith and eschew reason, logic and common sense. They will pull out dirty tricks to try to show their beliefs to be the “truth”.

This is where we are with Beth. And I have come to a decision. I’ve written a short note which I am sending to her in a few minutes. Here it is in its entirety:

Beth,
After careful thought, I have come to the conclusion that you are after confirmation in your faith. You want to know that the path you’re on is just and right. My many attempts to direct you to facts and historical information have been shunned and ignored in favor of apologetic christians bent on “proving” christianity with logical fallacies and misinformation.
Your refusal to even acknowledge the simple concept of cherry-picking in favor of blind faith has led me to the realization that this “conversation” is completely one-sided and closed.
What you seem to want is simple faith, based on your beliefs, culled from the best concepts of religion, the happiest and most loving ideas mashed together to suit your wish for a supreme being to watch over you, love you unconditionally, and give you eternal life.
Facts, science, reason and logic have no part in this quest of yours.
Therefore our conversation will never give you what you’re looking for. All it will ever do is frustrate you and cause you to burrow ever deeper away from reality and logic.
I wish you a pleasant journey down the path of faith and belief. Perhaps it can fulfill you and give you the peace you seem to be searching for.

You see, Beth and I have diametrically opposed goals for this discussion. This has become a stalemate. I feel, for my sake as well as yours, that there is little to no benefit with continuing this argument any further. I am still open to talking to other christians. Hell, I could even be talked into opening the dialogue with Beth again in the future, if she would simply be willing to learn new information, instead of just parroting tired old apologetic christians in an attempt to cling to preconceived myths and notions.

But for now, I think this path has reached a very definite dead end. Let’s call it a day and use our time for more productive and fun pursuits. What do you think?

Related posts

• Belief, Unbelief and The Scientific Method (24)
• Conversations With Ash: 1 – Answering Questions (9)
• Young Earth Invasion (6)
• Conversations With Craig The Christian 2 – Biblical Interpretations and A Logical Fallacy (11)
• Atheism at a glance- BBC Style (10)

I was bored out of my mind after about 12 minutes of sitting in the car, and started to find ways to occupy myself. I got out and wandered around to look at all the different lichens on the trees, but I didn’t have enough light to get any decent pictures. I paced , looking at ants, then sat in the car and read my book for awhile, tried not to think about how much Monster energy drink I had consumed on the way there, and let my mind generally wander around. It was excruciating.

At one point I noticed that there was a decorative wall that had the top knocked off, around a little flower garden near the front doors (which were locked so I couldn’t go in and get rid of the huge amount of Monster now making me miserable). Next to it were lots of bits of broken concrete, but among them, like a shining miracle, was a smooth brown river stone. I picked it up and thought how lucky I was to find something so wonderful in all that chaos.

Miracle: An event that appears inexplicable by the laws of nature and so is held to be supernatural in origin or an act of god.

Neece holding the Miracle Rock

Of course, I was just being silly. It was just a misplaced stone from another flower bed, but I was thinking how easily it is to see something that stands out as somehow special or miraculous. I slipped it in my pocket with a smirk. My sacred touch with the divine (NOT!). It reminded me of the way people see patterns in randomness and claim it to be divine, such as the magical stump and the magical bird shit. It’s really nothing more than pareidolia.

Back in the car, waiting patiently, I glanced up at the rear view mirror and saw a sticker that I had put there probably 10 years ago. Now, in the 10 years that we’ve had this car, this is the only sticker I’ve ever put on it that was not practical. We have the registration stickers, and the oil change one, but no bumper stickers except this one, which I had placed there because it meant so much to me back then. I wanted to see it every time I got in the car. I wanted to be reminded of this message, which was:

The Universe arranges itself to accommodate your picture of reality!

Now, if you read HDC regularly, I’m sure you are aware that this is utter pseudoscience bullshit. It is completely and totally wrong and anyone who holds this as truth is crazy. I was crazy back then. I believed that thoughts were powerful and could help shape the universe. I was wrapped up in a lot of “spiritual” thinking that was completely bogus.

It was easy to selectively enforce those beliefs back then though. To me, this statement was accurate. It never occurred to me how ridiculous and nonsensical it was. I was a believer in “energy” and a conscious universe (even though I was an agnostic).

So as I sat there, I was amazed at how far I’ve come over the years. I now embrace science, reason, skepticism and logic, which to me, is much more rewarding, and certainly more consistent and satisfying than the desperate beliefs that were based on nothing more substantial than wishful thinking.

Related posts

• What Is Atheism To You? Conversations With Craig the Christian 1 (36)
• The Law Of Attraction- And The Secret -Are Bullshit (114)
• Let’s Stop Coddling The Ignorant (3)
• Conversations with Roger The christian 1 – The Basics (20)
• Belief, Unbelief and The Scientific Method (24)

In my beginning, I was born to both a new mother and new father. My birth was a rather large event to my extended family, for I was the very first great grandchild. As my mother’s family is very close, of course many made an appearance. Near birth, I was blessed and baptized by my great grandfather under Christianity.

Under such pretenses I assume many would suspect that I was raised under a very religious setting. This was luckily not the case. It is worth mentioning that my mother’s ancestors stem from a long line of clergy, and they are all fairly religious… And while my mother is also mildly religious, my family couldn’t seem to find a church that we fit into.

Sure, my family tried—I understand that we were almost sucked into Mormonism. In the end, the situation basically turned out to be a lax kind of religious attitude. There was definitely more church attending during my younger years, but we went less as time progressed. Both my parents worked difficult and long jobs, and Sunday just needed to be an actual day of rest… as well as spending time with their kids.

I vaguely remember somewhere around the age of 10 or so… well, actually quite clearly, a day dining at a restaurant. My parents posed a question, of what we (the kids) thought of hell. My personal response gave the more “good” you where in life the better you would live in heaven… Hell didn’t really exist to me even at this point in my life. My sibling’s response was far cruder; basically amounting to saying a certain relative of ours should go there.

At this point, my parents informed us that our great grandfather had done some “research” into it (Biblical studying hardly amounts to research) and came to the conclusion that hell didn’t really exist as a place. All hell basically amounted to was nothing, you died and that was it. Much like the atheist point of view of death in general actually. This certainly made more sense at the time to me than some torturous place.

A little time later would be about the time I entered a Christian summer camp. A fun place really, but only posed to delay my atheism, if it even could. The reason for Jesus’ existence was answered here, being the sacrifice to end all the sacrifices… I remember this being an epiphany at the time, although it would of course only pose more questions later.

Some more background information here would be helpful before I move on. My life has been quite an easygoing one. I’ve led a very happy life, with few problems or hindrances to bar my path. So when it came to going to church gatherings and this camp, it of course wouldn’t bring me more happiness or joy than I already had.

When your life is full of strife and sadness, a good break every week is a nice and happy moment. I, as said above, had no need for this. It all comes into focus, when comparing myself with the rest of the congregation. They treat these meetings as something that brings them more happiness. For me, I was just as happy there as I was at any other time. You could say I was immune to the “joys” of the church.

So back at the camp, there would be nightly fireside chats. Other kids would share their god stories… where a prayer would be answered, or they were helped out through harsh times. Out came another problem… I simply didn’t have any. I tended to doubt each story as well—typically not the story itself, but the intervention or actual act of god in it.

Perfectly reasonable actions were attributed to god. Even worse, the positive actions of others were explained away as simply god’s plan. These stories did not sit well with me. I would ask myself, “Why do these people believe those were acts of god? What acts then do come from god?” Let me tell you, mind tangling questions…

The only real answer that even starts to work is god controls them all: good or bad. You know, god tests you… There was a big flaw here, coming from my situation: why wasn’t god “testing” me? Why was I so much more blessed than anyone else? Two cases then: I didn’t need it, but then why would anybody need it? Or I take the more egotistical approach that I was special.

As much as people like to assume, I’m not quite as egotistical as I would seem. I did not like the notion that I was special and that everybody else wasn’t based upon god’s seemingly random will. Let’s face it as well; the Bible never really helps unless you know where to look… And of course, depending on where you look, you’ll get different answers.

Upon leaving the camp, I would of course revert to what I normally did during summers… Programming video games and debating online. The programming is relatively irrelevant; the debating on the other hand consisted of all topics including religious ones. They were all of course very intellectually stimulating; debating such things as parallel universes, dimensions, the meaning of life, and so forth.

From all the experiences compacted with time, I would eventually start to become nonreligious. Unfortunately I would still consider myself Christian for quite a number of years, although quite clearly my beliefs did not match the title. In fact, I hardly doubt my beliefs ever really matched the title. It still would not be until the start of my college years that I would come to the notion that I was not a Christian, and was indeed nonreligious.

I still had a belief in god at this time mind you. My view of god consisted of basically the god that is just there in everything. I would come to understand that my views aligned with that of Pantheism a little while later. Fairly word for word, and for never hearing about Pantheism before I was quite surprised.

Finding a religion that pretty much directly coincided with my beliefs gave me gumption. Eureka was the thought, but I knew what this meant in its entirety. Pantheism is very agnostic in its nature; it basically amounts to feeling that it’s true and I had come to this conclusion. In fact, Pantheism is akin to atheism, except with a belief in god… it’s one of the most basic yet at the same time advanced forms of theism. Thus, I felt far more aligned to atheism than Christianity at this point in time.

My questioning wouldn’t stop there. The fundamental question that made the difference was “Why do I believe what I believe?” Why? Just to feel good? Just to fit in? Was it just easier to explain to the masses? In a way, yes was the reply to all of those questions.

A belief in god still felt good. A belief in god still allowed me to fit in. A belief in god was easier to explain. None of those answers were intellectually sound. Why should I believe something with such weak convictions such as those? The answer of course is I shouldn’t—or not that I shouldn’t but that I didn’t want to.

Of course this didn’t happen that quickly or easily, but progressed over quite a large sum of time. But when everything was said and done, I had become an atheist. Let’s make certain, debate and rigorous pursuit of knowledge has never stopped this whole time. It indeed continues to this day. Thus, the story does not end there.

Oh no, we have only gotten to the atheism, the question of how I came to be gnostic still remains. This is very much a recent change, as in, barely a week before I wrote this. There is a very exact process into which I came upon this as well. It happens to center around my confrontations with none other than professed agnostics.

First, let us clarify. Atheism means you don’t have a belief in god. On the other hand, being agnostic simply says you think god is impossible to prove or disprove, or in other words that you don’t know. Now you can be an agnostic theist… or you can be an agnostic atheist. Not knowing while also not believing is a fluffy way of saying you don’t have a belief in god (but may have one later), thus atheist (currently). The majority of atheists are agnostic.

So here’s the issue: I run across a lot of posts by claimed agnostics that being in a religion or being atheist is both equally ignorant. That’s putting it nicely.Constantly having to say they are actually atheists themselves, becomes quite a hassle—also put nicely. Now most claimed agnostics (that aren’t theists) claim to be agnostics for two reasons… first are the negative stereotypes against atheism, and second being they just don’t understand the terms. The agnostics that I’m talking about here also happen to be incredibly egotistical to boot. Here’s the funny bit, they seemed to be gnostic about their agnosticism…

This brings us to the question, what is knowledge? Knowing does not mean truth; it means you regard it as true. Knowing is paradoxical in its nature, how can anything be known with exact certainty? It can’t, but for the sake of progress we have to start at some point.

I’ve argued against countless excuses for god. I’ve found fundamental flaws against any kind of omni-ability. I’ve argued against not only the existence but the uselessness of a creator. Essentially, I’ve argued if god cannot be known in this reality then god has no basis in this reality. I’ve even argued the word classification of the word god even.

All and all, perhaps it’s just more honest. I have found flaws and argued against all types of gods, how much more must it take to know? I’ve argued against the whole notion, reason, and existence of god… why can I not be certain there is no god?

And that, is my story of why I am a gnostic atheist.

Related posts

• Atheism is the Default (46)
• Why I’m An Atheist, Not An Agnostic (19)
• Why Do Atheists Have To Rock The Boat? (22)
• What Is Atheism To You? Conversations With Craig the Christian 1 (36)
• The Truth About Atheism (5)

The guy who leads the Scientific Evaluation of Religion things for this location has done a pretty good job the two times I have gone. I really have to give him credit and say I was impressed at how he handled this meeting since IT GOT HIJACKED BY A GROUP OF YOUNG EARTH CREATIONISTS! That’s right, you heard me. It was pretty interesting for me to see first hand their pulling out all the old cliché arguments for Christianity. They got started when there was a chapter summary that mentioned that most religious people are skeptical of other peoples faiths but not their own, they took issue with that statement and then proceeded to confirm its accuracy with their actions.

One creationist gave everyone a four-page handout entitled “Evolution, Science or Religion?” which my friend sent me a few days later. Here it is as he sent it to me: (BEGIN LOGICAL FALLACY DRINKING GAME NOW)

Evolution, Science or Religion?

Operational Science by definition uses observable, repeatable, and verifiable experiments to try to discover truth.

Origin Science relies on presuppositions, interpretations, and theory based on artifacts and remains. Origin Science tries to determine the past. This in not real science for it is neither observable, repeatable, or verifiable. Origin Science are interpretations based on operational science.

Scientific Fact Observed- 85% of the world’s rock is sedimentary and is found all over the world.

Belief #1 – This rock took billions of years to form through wind and water erosion.

Belief #2 – This rock was formed by a worldwide flood.

Both are beliefs, interpretations of the facts. The question is: which best explains the facts?

Which of these beliefs better explains polystrate fossils? Fossilized trees that go through multiple rock layers? Did those layers form around ther trees over millions of years or was it rapid sedimentation that occurred? What belief better explains this fact?

Which of those beliefs better explain that there are fossilized clams that have been found on the top of Mount Everest?

Have you ever taken a look at Burlingame Canyon? It took 6 days for this canyon to form… it is verifyable.

Scientific Fact Observed- the moon is drifting away from the earth slowly.

Belief #1- The Universe is billions of years old.

Belief #2 – The Universe is only thousands of years old. Because if you trace the drifting of the moon back for millions of years the moon would be on top of the earth. If you trace it back even less than that the moon would be so much closer to the earth that our tides would be out of control.

Which of these beliefs best fit the Science that we observe?

Scientific Fact Observed – Neptune is a very active planet that is still producing heat, has winds that reach over 1300 MPH and it gives off over twice the amount of energy than what it receives from the sun.

Belief #1- The Universe is billions of years old.

Belief #2 – The Universe is only several thousand years old. If it were millions or billions of years old Neptune would have cooled off and become inactive by now because of its distance from the sun. But if it is only thousands of years old then it would still be cooling off.

Use your reason… Assuming man evolved over hundreds of thousands or even millions of years, using an average life span of 43 years per generation and a family producing an average of 2.5 children, accounting for natural depletion by wars, famines, and plagues, our world should be populated by trillions of people. If this is true, where are they and where are the mountains of skeletons they would have generated?

Scientific Fact Observed – Birds give birth to Birds, dogs give birth to dogs, monkeys give birth to monkeys, humans give birth to humans etc.

Belief #1- All living things have a common ancestor. Over a long period of time sea creatures mutated into reptiles, reptiles mutated into birds which eventually led to every living creature we have today. (This is oversimplified but you get the general idea.)

Belief #2- All creatures were created fully functional and give birth after their own kind.

Which belief better fits what we observe?

Scientific fact observed – There has never been a mutation that has ever produced an increase or addition of information to the genetic code.

Belief #1 – Mutations are the engine that has brought about the evolution of all living creatures from single celled organism into all the creatures we see today.

Belief #2 – Mutations do occur. Mutations occor within kinds. There is no way mutation can change a simpler organism into a more complex organism because they do not produce new genetic information. Felines change into different kinds of felines, canines into different kinds of canines, but never felines into canines or any other transition between kinds.

Scientific fact observed - Geological research shows no transitional fossils.

Belief #1 – It’s not that they never existed, it’s that the geological record isn’t complete. “The explanation lies, however, in the extreme imperfection of the geologic record” – Charles Darwin

Belief #2 – Transitions between kinds has never occurred.

“I fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossils or living, certainly I would have included it… I will lay it on the line. There is not one such fossil for which one might make a watertight argument”. – Dr. Colin Patterson, Director of the British Museum of Natural History. Well Respected evolutionist and author, Letter to Luther D Sunderland

When talking about transitional fossils Charles Darwin said, “Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic change, and this is perhaps the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory”

As stated above Darwin attributed this to the incompleteness of the exploration of the fossil record at the time. But today, well over a century after that time with thousands of tons of fossils from all over the world the lack of transitional fossils is still a problem.

Evolutionist David Raup reviews the evidence from us. He has been the curator of the famous Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago. That museum houses 20% of all fossil species known, so Raup is in a position to speak with considerable knowledge about fossil evidence. He says:

“Well, we are now about 120 years after Darwin, and knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded… Ironically, we have even fewer examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin’s time. By this I mean some of the classic cases of Darwinian change in the fossil record, such as evolution of the horse in North America, have had to be discarded or modified as a result of more detailed information.”

Which belief better fits the facts?

Scientific Fact observed- everything which has a beginning has a cause (Law of Cause and effect)

Belief #1- In the Beginning the universe caused itself.

Belief #2- In the Beginning God created the universe

If matter had a beginning, then belief number 1 cannot be true, the law of cause and effect shows that everything that has a beginning has a cause. Therefore one must conclude one of two things: either matter had no beginning or it had a cause.

Scientific Fact Observed – The 2nd Law of thermodynamics: The amount of energy available for work is running out, or entropy is increasing to a maximum.

Belief #1 – Matter had no beginning. The universe caused itself.

Belief #2 – Matter had a beginning, it was created by God.

If matter had no beginning then how can the 2nd law of thermodynamics be true? If the total amount of mass-energy is limited, and the amount of usable energy is decreasing, then the universe cannot have existed forever, otherwise it would already have exhausted all usable energy. Therefore if the universe has a beginning, it must have a cause (Law of cause and effect)

Which belief fits the facts? The universe had no cause, or God caused the universe?

One might ask “Well what/who caused God?”. Well that’s a good question. First I would say that logic demands that there be something which had no cause, something that is eternal. Because if I would answer who/what caused God, you would say “well who/what caused that?” and it would be an endless cycle. There had to have been something which had no beginning, and had no cause. These past two scientific facts prove that matter itself cannot be that which had no beginning or cause. Logic demands there must be something eternal, Science proves matter can’t be eternal, the Bible describes God as eternal. God is outside of time/space, He is eternal.

Scientific fact observed- Nonliving matter cannot produce living creatures. (Law of Biogenisis/Pasteur’s Law)

Belief #1- Life was spontaneously generated from nonliving matter, not from a Creator.

Belief #2- Life was created by God

Which answer best explains the facts? Science says spontaneous generation can’t happen, without God the first living organism would have had to have come from nonliving matter. But this is scientifically impossible.

Sir Ernest Chain, co-holder of the Nobel Prize for developing penicillin said this, “To postulate that the development and survival of the fittest is entirely a consequence of chance mutations seems to me a hypothesis based on no evidence and irreconcilable with the facts. These classical evolutionary theories are a gross over-simplification of an immensely complex and intricate mass of facts, and it amazes me that they are swallowed so uncritically and readily, and for such a long time, by so many scientists without a murmur of protest.”

Nobel Prize winning evolutionist and Harvard professor Dr George Wald answered this question when he said, “There are only two possible explanations as to how life arose. Spontaneous generation arising into evolution or the supernatural creative act of a God. There is no third possibility. Spontaneous generation, however, was scientifically disproved by Louis Pasteur and others. Therefore, that leaves only one possibility as to how life arose, that it was a supernatural creative act of a God. However, I choose not to believe this, because I do not want to believe in a God. Therefore I choose to believe that which I know is scientifically impossible.”

Why would Dr Wald, a man smart enough to win a Nobel prize, believe and teach something he considered to be scientifically impossible? Because he said he didn’t want to believe in a God. Why didn’t he want to believe in a God? Because if God is real then we will be accountable to Him one day.

If God is real you will stand in front of Him one day as well, how will you do? Here is a quick test: Have you ever lied? Have you ever stolen something? Jesus said ” If you have looked with lust you’ve committed adultery in your heart” Have you looked with lust? Have you ever murdered someone? Keep in mind Jesus said if you hate your brother or call your brother a fool you will be judged as a murderer. Have you ever taken God’s name in vain? This is called blasphemy. This is like taking God’s holy name, throwing it into the mud and stomping on it. Imagine if I took your mother’s name and used it in place of a 4 letter word. You’d be very offended wouldn’t you?… So how will you do? This is only four of the Ten Commandments, which is God’s standard of righteousness. When you stand before God will you be innocent or guilty? Will you be deserving of Heaven or Hell? Listen to your conscience, God gave you His moral code and a conscience so that you would know you are in need of Him.

Psalm 53:1 “The fool has said in his heart, There is no God.” When you look around and see design, order, art, and creation it is axiomatic that there is a designer, an orderer, an artist, and a creator behind it. We know there is design in something like a chair or an automobile. We know because the object itself is the evidence. You would not have to convince me that someone designed an automobile, I just know. Why then do we try to postulate (based on no facts, just guesses) that there is no designer or creator to nature, plants, animals, and humans?

If your conscience is telling you that you are guilty of breaking God’s commands that is a good thing. Listen to your conscience and understand that there is something wrong. Breaking God’s law will condemn you to Hell. Once you understand this you will understand that it is not God’s will to send anyone to Hell. Jesus Christ came to this earth (a historical fact that only extreme scoffers try to deny). Jesus said, “I am th way, the truth, and the life, no one comes to the Father except through me.” You see punishment that we all deserve for breaking God’s law was poured out on Christ. God loved us so much that He chose to cruch His own Son for our sake. The Bible tells us that Jesus became sin for us so that we might become the righteousness of God. There is no other belief, idea, person, religion, or anything that can save us from our sins. We must repent (turn from our sins) and believe the gospel. Don’t rely on blind faith any longer. Check out the claims of Christ and the Bible for yourself. Remember this story, many people came to Jesus and had objections to His message. He replied to them and said, “Unless you repent you will likewise perish.” Please do not be the kind of person that looks for any excuse to reject the message of salvation. Repent and believe the gospel today.

If you started the Logical Fallacy Drinking Game at the top, you are totally sloshed now, so you’re probably not even able to focus on the text anymore. Go pray to the white porcelain god for a bit then come back and tell us what you think.

My friend (who I am not naming because I didn’t ask his permission) says he’s going to go through and refute each point. Honestly this kind of dreck just makes me tired. I am posting it without comment for now. Feel free to pick it apart in the comments and maybe we can tackle different parts in different posts.

EDIT: I forgot that my friend (sorry, I really should have asked him if I could use his name, sorry) wrote a little creation story in response:

It’s obvious to anyone who looks at the evidence without some preconceived idea.
I mean we know for a fact that Odin, Vili and Ve killed Ymir, and his blood flooded the world and drowned all of the jötunn, except two.
But jötnar grew again in numbers and soon there were as many as before Ymir’s death.
Then the gods created seven more worlds using Ymir’s flesh for dirt, his blood for the Oceans, rivers and lakes, his bones for stone, his brain as the clouds, his skull for the heavens.
We know this because we see that the the earth is made from only a few “elements”. Just use your logic and the wisdom that comes from the all father, Odin.
Also “seven more worlds” right? 1 + 7 = 8 and now that we got the Pluto thing settled there are 8 planets in our solar system. Or should I say “Ymir’s left over body soup system” Slam dunk! Norse creation FTW! Jesus PWNED!
Sparks from Muspelheim flew up and became stars.
Sparks, am I right? We know stars are big burny things. That’s science people!
One day when the gods were walking they found two tree trunks. They transformed them into the shape of humans. We know this for a fact! Odin gave them life, Vili gave them mind and Ve gave them the ability to hear, see, and speak.
The gods named them Ask and Embla and built the kingdom of Middle-earth for them; and, to keep out the jötnar, the gods placed a gigantic fence made of Ymir’s eyelashes around Middle-earth.
Again, that is just science. Look down at your descended from tree truck people bodies and give thanks that we still have eyelashes keeping the jötnar at bay.

All hail the magic giant eyelash fence! WOOT! This is such a brilliant response. It makes way more sense though. LOL

Back to the creationist handout bullshit: I thought about removing the blatant proselytizing at the end, but then I figured you’re big people, you can handle it. Your comments are welcome and encouraged.

What’s your favorite bit that you find totally insanely stupid? Which fallacy does it commit? Why does it drive you mad?

Related posts

• Belief, Unbelief and The Scientific Method (24)
• Here We Go Again… (125)
• Conversations With Craig The Christian 2 – Biblical Interpretations and A Logical Fallacy (11)
• Atheism at a glance- BBC Style (10)
• What Is Atheism To You? Conversations With Craig the Christian 1 (36)