If you had exercised some diligence in the matter of stating exactly what your status is with respect to various ideas, none of us would have needed to guess, would we?
Once again, learn the basic lesson that diligent effort is requiired in order to conduct discourse properly.
You obviously haven’t encountered the ones that turn up here. Whose obnoxiously vocal mendacity is obvious to anyone with a minimum of ten functioning neurons.
For which, as I have already stated, we have ZERO evidence. As opposed to the evidence for testable natural processes, documented in several million peer reviewed scientific papers, and which have been demonstrated to be SUFFICIENT to explain the vast body of observational data obtained over the past centuries.
Again, ZERO evidence exists for such an entity. Your inability to understand testable natural processes and their operation, does not validate fantasies about magic tinkerers.
Mere blind assertion. If a “designer” genuinely exists, there is no reason for said entity to use anything other than testable natural processes. Which have already been demonstrated to be sufficient for the purpose. Drop the infantile magical thinking.
Plus, what doesx “outside the universe” even mean? Apparently you’re blissfully unaware that you’ve opened up not just a can of cosmological physics worms with this assertion, but an entire cannery thereof. If the term “universe” is used as a shorthand for “all that exists”, then there is no “outside” BY DEFINITION.
If on the other hand, you want to ride on the coat yails of multiverse ideas from cosmological physics to prop up your apologetics, you have a ferocious level of labour awaiting you if you want to succeed at this.
Incidentally, choosing this route will see you being regarded as a heretic among the ID crowd, who rail against multiverse cosmology vehemently if the subject arises. Not least, because once again, ID is a product of fundamentalist Christian creationism, the cloaking of Christian mythology in a stolen lab coat, and I’ve already cited the Dover Trial as a venue where this was exposed. Though once again, evidence is revealed to be a fatal weak point in “design” apologetics.
All you’re doing here, is parading your gullibility before a global public audience. Was that your intent upon coming here?
Complete and utter poppycock.
NOT treating unsupported mythological assertions uncritically as fact, is the very ANTITHESIS of a “belief system”. Do learn the elementary concepts applicable here.
“I don’t treat your assertions uncritically as fact” isn’t “belief”.
Plus, atheism is a minor part of my understanding of the universe and its contents. A far greater contributor thereto has been the excellent scientific education I enjoyed, which has introduced me to concepts, entities and interactions thst most mythology fanboys don’t even know exist.
Wrong, you took the idea of a magic tinkerer seriously because you don’t understand even elementary scientific concepts.
Wrong.The most important thing we have, are ideas that can be rigorously tested to ensure their correctness. Without these, you are wallowing in epistemological quicksand.
You can entertain whatever fantasies you choose, but if REALITY says that your fantasies are wrong, it’s tough - those fantasies belong in the bin.
Just because pre-scientific humans concocted fantastic mythologies in the past, doesn’t mean for one moment that any of those mythologies, or the assertions contained therein, are correct. Indeed, one of the benefits of that scientific edication I enjoyed, was the ability to determine for myself how many of the assertions in question were not merely wrong, but fatuous and absurd.
We all saw how well that worked, or rather didn’t, during the Black Death.
Between 1348 and 1351, the Black Death ravaged comtinental Europe. Fully 25 million Europeans suffered an unpleasant death from the disease during this period. During this period, believers in a magic man from a particular Middle Eastern mythology kept begging said magic man to bring an end to the Black Death. NONE of their oleas resulted in any action.
Bear in mind that you can’t blame “atheists” for this one, because thanks to murderous enforcement of conformity to doctrine by the requisite mythology fanboys, most Europeans at the time, especially among the peasantry and indentured serfs, didn’t know that such a concept as atheism even existed. Belief in the magic man of a particular Middle Eastern mythology was effectively the only game in town.
As a corollary, 25 million devout believers in said magic man were snuffed out by a disease, that said magic man, if it existed, did nothing to stop.
Quite simply, treating unsupported assertions uncritically as fact, is not only foolish in the extreme, and a rampant abnegation of reason, but it’s dangerous.
Just recently we’ve had our own miniature version of the Black Death teach those ofvus who listen to reality the same lesson, but unfortunately we have a significant number of swivel-eyed loons entertaining various cretinous fantasies, some of whom paid the price for doing so. See for example Bob Enyart, former AM radio propagandist for fundamentalist Christianity, anti-vax loon and pedlar of lethal medical misinformation, who ended up dying from the disease he sneered at. He isn’t an isolated case.
Already covered why “belief” is worthless here above.
Apparently this has had no measurable effect upon you.
Poppycock. For the reasons I’ve already provided.
Oh, it’s this duplicitous apologetic faeces again. Wrong. The reason that the petition in question was presented, was to put in place legal protections against discrimination .
Do stop lying.
Poppycock. A couple of parody versions might exist, but that’s all they are.
Ahem, ANY song that doesn’t feature a religious deity as its conceptual centrepiece is an “atheist song” BY DEFINITION. That encompasses about 90% or more of the entire world’s lyric musical output.
And here my response is going to be forceful. Your assertion is BULLSHIT.
On the Origin of Species isn’t an “atheist bible” (this favourite trope of mythology fanboys being both an oxymoron AND moronic), it’s the first detailed scientific account of processes shaping the biosphere. One whose central concepts remain valid, even after 160+ years of continuous scientific advancement since the publication thereof, though additional mechanisms have subsequently been elucidated that were beyond Darwin’s remit.
This tiresome bullshit about his work being an “atheist bible” needs to die, because it’s a pathetic snd infantile creationist lie. Those of us who actually bothered to study evolutionary biology, regard his work simply as an important historical foundation upon which a gigantic body of subsequent knowledge, most of which Darwin would have marvelled at, was built. Indeed, when dealing with creationist lies snd bullshit, m9y first port of call isn’t Darwin, unless the lies in question relate specifically to his writings. Instead, my first port of call is relevant modern peer reviewed scientific papers documenting appropriate research.
Indeed, the three examples of successful direct experimental tests of evolution that can be performed in a high school laboratory, that I informed you about in my previous post, date back no earlier than 1989, and I suspect more recent speciation experiments awsit me in the post-2020 literature when I have time to search it properly
Indeed, if you bother exerting even the most elementary level of diligence with respect to my posts here, you will find I’ve devoted a LOT of column inches to exoositions of moder peer reviewed scientific papers, in direct response to creationist lies.
You are perfoming dismally here.
.