What do atheists think?

Debate Room
1

For atheists that think all existence has always been here and always will be: Let me just ask you, if a storm didn’t begin today, wouldn’t there be no storm at all?

For atheist that think all existence is cyclical: What will be the magic that takes place to kickstart a dynamic existence after the all-encompassing heat death takes hold and existence becomes static?

Or are you an atheist that believes in a Multiverse and that other universes are exempt from heat death?

Or maybe you’re an atheist who thinks the power of infinite space will magically keep giving birth to dynamic universes.

Or maybe you’re an atheist who thinks all existence will remain static for eternity after heat death is complete.

Or are you an atheist who simply doesn’t know.

2

There wouldn’t be a storm today, but there might be one tomorrow - or the day after. That’s the way storms work.

What makes you think an all-encompassing heat death leads to existence becoming static? What makes you think there would be an all-encompassing heat death in a cyclic universe?

3

The majority of scientific community agrees that heat death is ultimately what the universe is headed for.

4

Personally from a practical standpoint I’m not very interested in what happens billions of years from now. No one really knows for sure, there are some decent hypotheses and those will be refined or discarded as appropriate. In the mean time I’m just trying to remain vertical, healthy, and solvent with a decent quality of life, and to not be a dick.

1 Like
5

In the end, that’s all that matters anyway. Being a good person. But when you know you know. Ya know?

6

I’m an atheist who doesn’t know. I do know that no one else knows either. So when people says otherwise, it makes it really easy to spot the liars.

1 Like
7

Eh, I know things in life. It’s all good.

8

I don’t believe in any deity or deities for one reason and one reason only, and that is that insufficient evidence has been offered to allay my doubts. Your string of straw man claims are irrelevant to that.

FYI it is fallacious to imply that a claim has merit because we lack an alternative explanation or evidence, this is called an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy.

9

Testable natural processes are NOT “magic”, except to simpletons incapable of understanding them, and who, as a corollary, think that “Magic Man did it” constitutes an explanation, instead of an admission of ignorance and intellectual incompetence. Learn this lesson to spare yourself further embarrassment.

Just because there happen to be open questions within the realm of cosmological physics, is NOT an excuse to engage in evidence-free fabrication about a cartoon magic man in the sky.

Oh wait, I’ve devoted numerous column inches here to questions in this field, and how at least one cosmological model has lethal implications for infantile ideas about a cartoon magic man in the sky.

1 Like
10

You’re kind of tying their hands now. :wink:

Hmm, I’m not overly optimistic on that either.

Pffttt, god’ll just magic your sciency stuff away mun. :face_with_raised_eyebrow:

1 Like