Better, but I'm looking for something more... (shades of Bill O'Riely ugh) pithy.:chuckle:
Famous Atheist Quotes
- Thread starter Lion
- Start date
Better, but I'm looking for something more... (shades of Bill O'Riely ugh) pithy.:chuckle:
I have an atheist friend who once said, "If atheism is a religion than bald is a hair color." I don't know if the quote is his own material but I think it's pretty funny.
That's not bad... especially since in police work bald is considered a hair color.
atrol:
:think:...I suppose someone has already had at the old, reliable standby,
"IEEEEEOOOOYYAAAAA!" *crackle* "OOOOOEEEAAAAAAAAAA!"
lain:
"IEEEEEOOOOYYAAAAA!" *crackle* "OOOOOEEEAAAAAAAAAA!"
lain:
Bob,
Don't you find it curious that your list ends in the mid 1800's? And your other list of those believing in a created origins only has a single genetics scientist who also worked and died in the 1800's. Science has come a long way since then, and it has proved that natural means provides explanation for life diversity. The best you could make claim to is origin of life, and even that is a dangerous area to rest your faith in. Your most recent scientist is an agriculturalist....Need I say more?
I'm curious as to why you don't use modern god believing scientists in your list? Is it because they are all "evolutionists" as well?
(other than the quack Dr. Micheal Behe who was humiliated in the Dover Trials.)That's not bad... especially since in police work bald is considered a hair color.
Thanks for taking the wind outta my sails, ya big jerk
Nope. You're the first TH. Sweet! :first::think:...I suppose someone has already had at the old, reliable standby,
"IEEEEEOOOOYYAAAAA!" *crackle* "OOOOOEEEAAAAAAAAAA!"
Granite's signature/Russell's quote seems to indicate the gospels specifically and while wisdom is mentioned a few times throughout the course of all four, it doesn't seem to ever be praised as a virtue.
Thanks for taking the wind outta my sails, ya big jerk
Oooops. Sorry. But you know first cop to the doughnut wins! :banana:
noguru
Well-known member
Don't you think Ooooouuuuch!!!! is more accurate? Because if faith while one is alive is what saves us from the lake of fire, then there will be absolutely no judgement process when an atheist dies. :think:
noguru
Well-known member
Did he like fish, or was this a cheap shot at nature, italians, and fish?
Because if it is the later I am offended. I am Italian, I like fish and am fascinated by nature.
noguru
Well-known member
That was me back when I was agnostic, I can't believe it has become a famous quote. :noway: I said it one night at a keg party in college. Have you ever been to Connecticut?
Redstar91
New member
Last I checked "skepticism" is not upheld in the Bible as anything more than heresy.
I heard something on Comedy Central once...
"Why is it that we hate Lucifer when he gave us the most valuable aspect of humanity: intelligence?" - Anonymous.
It's from his book "Last Chance to See", about animal species either endangered or threatened with extinction, after seeing all the different colourful fish in the Great Barrier Reef. So unless you really, really don't like the stereotype that Italians are quite ... flamboyant, it's not an insult, no.
noguru
Well-known member
I was joking, I am not easily offended. I just got back from the Meso-American reef, none of those fish reminded me of my relatives. My grandparents generation dressed in either black or grey. My parents generation was also very conservative in dress (except around the holidays where the women liked to wear a lot of reds and greens). And my generation has become very anglicized. Of course we do tend to get a little more passionate about things than your average northern European.
My grandfather who was a bike messenger in the Italian army use to say things like "I use to rida my bika so fast, the bullets could nota catcha me." Perhaps he was referring to that kind of thing.
But genetic and cellular complexity do not provide evidence that life on earth is too complex to arise by chance (whatever you mean by chance) so your argument falls on an invalid assumption.
...and, despite the collective biological brilliance of Mendel, Pasteur and Lister, there is no predictive, falsifiable Theory of Divine Creation.
Could it be they were deluded?
Stuart
Darwinian natural selection has nothing to do with chance. It's a red herring to suggest that it does. From what I know about Dawkins, it's his contention that the complexity of nature excludes the possibility of a designer.
noguru
Well-known member
I agree. The concept of chance is simply how we classify what we see given a false dichotomy. The false dichotomy is between many various possiblilities that lead to an even greater plethora of possible outcomes as opposed to predestination or a program set into action by God for which no other outcome is possible. The fact is no one can run a control experiment to see whether things would have happened or will happen another way. What is clear is the chain of cause and effect relationships that can be traced back to some point in the past. Each thing that happened in the universe was the result or was affected by things that happened previously. And similarly what happens in the future is the result of the state of things as they are right now.
Even a car accident is not pure chance. There is a chain of events that unfolded that lead to the cars colliding. It was not intentional in many cases, but that does not make it a matter of pure chance. This is a false dichotomy that is created by people who think that anything that was not intentional was due to pure chance.
I do not know how Dawkins can make the claim that "the complexity of nature excludes the possibility of a designer". To me that is just as much a statement of faith as the IDer's statement that "The complexity of nature excludes the possiblity of natural causes."