20th anniversary survey


Hi blog readers,

On The Atheist Experience today, we will be announcing a survey we’ve created in order to learn about your interests and needs. We would love to get feedback from anyone who can respond, whether you’re an Atheist Community of Austin member, a viewer/listener of the Atheist Experience and the Non-Prophets, or just an atheist with a casual interest in providing feedback. By responding, you will also be able to enter in a random drawing for free gear from our EvolveFish store. Thanks!

Take the survey

Comments

  1. Russell Glasser says

    I’m aware of the issue with the missing Christian options, and it will be fixed soon.

  2. Bob Worthley says

    It is a hallucination. I have taken both psilocybin and belladonna and had “spiritual” experiences. It was the workings of my own mind conjuring up some very “real feeling” hallucinations. Probably how the bible and religion in general got started by the ancient dwellers consuming plants that cause hallucinations.

  3. StonedRanger says

    I have tried three times and the survey just freezes up. Windows tries to recover the page and it freezes again. Oh well.

  4. Ed says

    I’ve attempted to participate in the survey but the website that hosts the survey appears to be very unresponsive and buggy while trying to answer the survey questions using the latest version of the Google Chrome web browser with a fairly decent desktop PC. The responsiveness of the website in regards to seeing a mark appear when I click on one of the buttons to mark my answers is very slow and sometimes doesn’t happen at all. In other words, I click on a button, and then nothing happens and I notice a delay between when I use my mousewheel to try and scroll the page up and down and when the scrolling actually happens. As of right now, I cannot complete the survey because of these issues. I’ve noticed a warning message when going to the site with Mozilla Firefox regarding a “buggy script”. I haven’t had any of these problems with other website I’ve visited and browsed today which leads me to suspect it’s more likely to be a problem with the website rather than my browsers or my PC. Is anyone else having the same issues as me?

  5. Raucous Indignation says

    Done. I have donated to The ACA, but I don’t think I’m an up to date member.

  6. Minus says

    I’m not either one but I always think there is a hidden agenda when Catholic and Christian are separate categories.

  7. Yonadav Tapuchi says

    It just crashed twice several minutes into the survey… I’ll try again tomorrow maybe.

  8. sparky45 says

    Russell, You seem like a good guy, and I’ve been a fan of the show for years. I think Matt, Tracy, and especially John l., would be better as the hosts. Let me explain. You really can come across as dismissive, arrogant, and condescending, right out of the gate, many times. I don’t think you do this on purpose, and this is only my opinion, after all. I really don’t think you’re aware of it. But, if you think that sounds like complete BS to you, then ask someone who will not BS you about it. I’m sorry, I think you’d be fun to talk to in person, but you just come across on the show as almost instantly dismissive, and arrogant. Not everyone that calls in has a huge IQ, and, maybe hasn’t thought things through the way you have. What is wrong with just laying down the facts, and at the same time trying to show some compassion, which you are capable of, and talk with these folks. A lot of the time it seems like you are just wanting to hit the button for the next caller….IOW….next! I think you’re a good guy, ask Tracy about this. She seems to really listen to the caller, and doesn’t sound…judgemental…when answering. Save the dismissing thing for the assholes. Thanks!

  9. Milton says

    I’m a deist/theist. I believe in a Creator God Force. I make decisions based on logic and probability. I believe it is more probable that intelligent design was created by an intentional force rather than an accidental random force. In reality all people are agnostics since no one can either prove or disprove the existence of God. We base our beliefs on our own individual interpretation of reality. I think its good to teach people about the flaws in all organized religions because they are all man made inventions but Its totally ignorant to argue about the existence or non existence of God since neither side can provide enough evidence to win a debate

  10. Monocle Smile says

    @Milton
    Do you mind showing your work that leads to your deist conclusion? Because I’ve never gotten anything resembling a coherent explanation.

    but Its totally ignorant to argue about the existence or non existence of God since neither side can provide enough evidence to win a debate

    I think this is nonsense. Plenty of god claims are open to empirical inquiry and “unfalsifiable” god claims aren’t worth considering.

  11. Milton says

    Hello, as I stated, my Deist belief can’t be proven to others. I simply believe in a creator because the probability of a random accidental intelligent design of the Universe is much lower than the probability of an intentional intelligent designer of the Universe. In other words its more likely that there is a creator force. It is very ignorant to argue about the existence or non existence of any Gods or God because neither side can provide empirical evidence. It is valid to point out the flaws in all the Holy Books because then many people can break free of their childhood brainwashing

  12. Monocle Smile says

    @Milton
    I did not ask you to repeat yourself. I asked for something specific.

    I simply believe in a creator because the probability of a random accidental intelligent design of the Universe is much lower than the probability of an intentional intelligent designer of the Universe

    This does not jive with your statement that you “can’t prove it to others.” That’s not how this works. If you think so, then you need an epistemology 101 crash course.

    It is very ignorant to argue about the existence or non existence of any Gods or God because neither side can provide empirical evidence

    That’s not true. We have quite a bit of evidence that nothing like a god exists, and plenty of god claims purport to either have or expect empirical evidence.

  13. Milton says

    Hello, I don’t feel the need to prove or convert anyone to Deism. I’m not a Deist evangelical. In addition I have viewed dozens of the Atheist Experience videos and you haven’t convinced me that God doesn’t exist. You seem to be the Atheist evangelicals since you try to convert people to Atheism but you have no evidence. Its an impossible argument. . I watch the shows to study all the errors, mistakes and absurdities in the Bible but you sure can’t prove that God does not exist. This is merely your opinion.

  14. Monocle Smile says

    @Milton
    “You can’t disprove X” is not an argument in your favor, and it doesn’t matter one bit if you’re not “evangelical.”

    you try to convert people to Atheism but you have no evidence

    Again, this is wrong. We have a ton of evidence that nothing resembling a god exists. You’re refusing to engage with even a modicum of honesty (as you’re ignoring my posts and merely repeating yourself with added pejoratives), which makes me wonder why you posted in the first place.

  15. Milton says

    I wasn’t convinced by your lectures that God does not exist. What is your “tons of evidence”? I think you should change the name of your show to “Atheist who like to argue” Circular arguments which only use circumstantial evidence. All you ever do is argue with callers and berate them. You seen like very unhappy miserable people.

  16. Milton says

    There you go again just berate people you disagree with and still not provide evidence that I asked you for

  17. steele says

    @Milton

    Monocle doesn’t have any evidence or good arguments against God as you have correctly identified. Most of your interwebz slacker atheists like Monocle find you as abhorrent as they do Christians so hence the anger and flailing (and failing) attacks. Monocle assumes atheism is correct and you correctly point out he avoids giving you any evidence but just links you to some half ass link about methodological naturalism (as if that is somehow a disproof of God that you asked for).

    I used to be a deist (I am a Christian now) like yourself and I found it odd that atheist hacks would try to use the same shoddy methods of attack against me as they would against Christians when I wasn’t promoting a specific god and took the balance of the evidence as you have to show at least some creator force/god. Most of these “atheists” are really just lazy agnostic hacks that don’t really have a good reason for claiming God doesn’t exist but they sure are vociferous in their unsupported opinions.

    Lastly Milton I hope one day you will be a Christian

    http://www.reasonablefaith.org/deism-and-christian-theism

    Acts 26:29

    29 And Paul said, “Whether short or long, I would to God that not only you but also all who hear me this day might become such as I am—except for these chains.”

    but if not at least you see these atheist types on here as they are.

  18. Monocle Smile says

    Oh, is the resident fuckweasel returning to his former histrionic bible-verse-spamming glory? This is definitely on my list of favorite pastimes, right past repeatedly slamming my fingers in the car door.

    I love the “half ass link” quip right before you do nothing to bolster your laughable case for god except drop a Kalamity Kraig link.
    For the record, promoting “not a specific god” is incredibly dishonest, and even more dishonest when questions concerning the definition or even any aspects of said god are ignored.

  19. Milton says

    Monocle, you seem to be a militant atheist. Maybe you could use some anger management therapy. Also using foul language hurts your cause. Debating with insults is immature and shows no class. The previous poster is correct you have no proof that God doesn’t exist. The page you posted is not evidence.

  20. Jon Gass says

    I was thinking of joining the Atheist Experience Facebook page. I’d like to be a part of a group of people that like and know the show but it’s full of bullies. Unfortunately, the bullies are the mods! Now I know people don’t like to follow rules and it’s hard to keep an orderly space without some disgruntled users – BUT this is different. Have you looked at what’s going on? My degree is in Human Communication Studies and I’m telling you, that page is home to some defective processes: rampant aggression, hostility, badgering, and it’s widespread. It is very cult-like in it’s treatment of insiders, (conformists) vs outsiders (questioners). You’re driving people away. I’ve noticed the page is well attended, but sick is sick. If you decide you are happy with it, it might make a great location for a qualitative study. Scholarly work on Internet communication is still lagging. Who would I contact about that?

  21. Jon Gass says

    MIlton,

    You must realize the there are logical absurdities with god belief. You also must have hear that no one can prove a negative statement. However, one can point out that if a described deity cannot exist, then by its own definition, it is logical that it does not exist. Not proof, but as close as you’ll get. If the remaining chance is what you hang your hat on, good luck.

    ‘)’on

  22. steele says

    @Milton

    Monocle, you seem to be a militant atheist.</blockquote

    Actually Monocle is a militant a$$hat, LOL. Sorry it's immature but I just couldn't resist.

  23. Monocle Smile says

    @Milton
    The term “militant atheist” is ludicrous.
    http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-88i9d7W7LrQ/TWXNDa5oCiI/AAAAAAAAADw/x3-3jwT1VCU/s1600/militant_atheists.jpg
    http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_gHFdIh-9Thk/SxglI7HHqqI/AAAAAAAAAiA/kaQJtjQF7Zs/s320/Comic.jpg

    I have a history with steele. This whole blog has a history with steele. Stay out of shit you don’t understand. Steele is a troll.
    As for you…maybe if you engaged honestly and actually answered questions with the intent of furthering discussion, I wouldn’t be so hostile. I’m not even being hostile, anyway…you’re just being intentionally offended to avoid answering questions. I wager you’d be much happier if atheists just shut the fuck up and submitted to theocracy, wouldn’t you?

  24. Milton says

    No actually I don’t care what other people believe. I’m not an evangelical Deist. I will never convince you and you will never convince me. Its pointless to argue about the existence of God. It is beneficial to discuss the mistakes, errors, absurdities and impossibilities in the Bible Koran, and Talmud. I personally support the immigrant ban of all religious fanatics in to America not just Muslims. I think religious Jews are the most dangerous people on Earth. Just read the Talmud to see what they think about all Gentiles. I think all delusional religious people should e banned from entering America

  25. RationalismRules says

    @Milton #27

    I personally support the immigrant ban of all religious fanatics in to America not just Muslims

    I’m pretty sure you’ll find that those who have publicly advocated violence in the name of their religion would already be excluded under existing laws.
    What additional tests would you propose to distinguish ‘religious fanatics’ from ‘religious believers’?

  26. Milton says

    “What additional tests would you propose to distinguish ‘religious fanatics’ from ‘religious believers?” Well IMO if they believe literally the words of their Holy Books they could be dangerous. All Holy Books are primitive mythology and dangerous to the mental stability of the human race. That is a sign that a person is delusional and not rational. Some examples: A Christian may think its ok to kill an abortion doctor. A Christian may believe its ok to start genocidal war/wars to expedite Armageddon and the return of Jesus. Just ask George Bush why he really invaded Iraq. The Jews of course believe that all non Jews are Goyim or animals. They believe its ok to kill Gentiles. steal from Gentiles, enslave the Gentiles, start wars to kill non Jews/Arabs etc. etc. The Muslims believe that they will be rewarded in heaven with virgins of they are a martyr for Islam. They believe in Sharia law. Honor killing of Women. Death penalty for gays etc. etc. All mythological religions contain primitive ideas that are bad for humanity. Of course some religions have more political power than others which is why Trump will never vet/ban Jews or Christians from trying to enter America.

  27. RationalismRules says

    @Milton #29
    When I asked “what tests would you propose?” what I meant was “what tests would you propose?”.

    I even started you off:
    Test 1: (already in place) Has the person publicly advocated violence in the name of their religion? (this is a matter of public record, so not too difficult to ascertain)

    So let’s hear it – what tests do you propose that will reliably distinguish peaceful believers from dangerous fanatics? You’ve explained that you think all literalist believers are dangerous (completely ignoring interpretation, which is key to any religion’s relationship to their holy text). But even if we accept this premise, how do you propose to identify these literalists?

    Test 2: Ask them? All this will do is send away all the honest ones, while admitting all those who are prepared to lie. Doesn’t strike me as a very effective way to screen out potential terrorists…
    Test 3: ?

  28. Milton says

    I would agree with you that it will be hard to vet out all religious dangerous people. Trump has a few different ideas besides asking them. We do have lie detectors that I think could be used to help catch dangerous individuals. You can also check data bases for any previous criminal behavior. I never said that it will be 100 percent effective.. Your asking me what I would do. I don’t have an infallible plan but my criteria would be to ban anyone who believes everything in their holy book is the literal word of God. I believe in the quote “people who believe in absurdities are willing to commit atrocities”. I’m pointing out that when President Trump is trying to protect America by vetting and banning dangerous Muslims from entering the country the same criteria needs to be applied to ban Jews and Christians who believe in dangerous and hateful ideology. In a perfect world if I was in charge I would ban all religion and all religious people from entering my country. I think religion is bad for humanity and the cause of many wars and much human suffering. That being said having a belief in a creator does not make you religious

  29. Laura Adamson says

    I’ve been trying now for half an hour and youtube will not let me connect to the show.
    Other watchers are getting in–I’ve been watching the number go up while I get nothing but excuses.

  30. Milton says

    Yes because you are secretly a religious fanatic I bet and I would ban you. You also love to argue about impossible subjects to prove. Is that your hobby?

  31. RationalismRules says

    @Milton #31

    You can also check data bases for any previous criminal behavior.

    The US already excludes people based on their criminal record. But that’s about excluding people based on their actions, which is not your proposal. Your proposal is about excluding people based on their thoughts. And your best suggestion (in fact, your only suggestion) is ‘lie detector’. Seriously?

    The thing about simplistic ‘solutions’ is they don’t solve anything. All they do is allow you to stop thinking. You get as far as “we should ban all religious fundamentalists”, and you don’t bother to think any further. No consideration to whether your ‘solution’ is actually achievable in practice (it clearly isn’t), or fair (it clearly isn’t), or in line with the principles on which enlightened societies are based (it clearly isn’t). Or, most importantly, whether it will actually make any progress towards solving the problem it claims to address (it obviously doesn’t).

    You’ve clearly applied the same level of thought to this as you have to arrive at your deistic belief – ie. basically none.

  32. Milton says

    You seem like a person who doesn’t look at all the available information to form an opinion. Let me guess do you believe the government version of 911 that the attacks were done be Arabs flying 2 planes that brought down 3 buildings in New York?

  33. Milton says

    The official government version of 911 is the conspiracy theory. You just proved my point that you don’t investigate all available evidence. In other words you are total sheep. You don’t even understand the laws of physics and science and you call yourself a rational atheist. You should go back to school and take a physics class.

  34. Monocle Smile says

    @Laura
    If other watchers are fine and you’re having problems, it’s likely the issue is with your machine or browser. No “excuses” needed.

  35. Milton says

    Rationalisn Rules said “The US already excludes people based on their criminal record. But that’s about excluding people based on their actions, which is not your proposal. Your proposal is about excluding people based on their thoughts. And your best suggestion (in fact, your only suggestion) is ‘lie detector’. Seriously?” Im commenting on what our President is currently doing or trying to do which I think is a good idea which is to keep all people out of the country that won’t respect American values. I’m not in charge of implenting the policy. If you belive in honor killings. If you belive in killing gay people, if you believe in stoning long haired men to death, If you belive in stoning adulterers to death, etc etc etc no delusional people should be allowed in.

  36. Milton says

    I think you are just upset that trump won and is going to make America great again and put a real border up.. You wouldn’t leave the door to your house or apartment unlocked but you think the American people should leave the door to their country unlocked.

  37. RationalismRules says

    @Milton #47
    As a member of the-rest-of-the-world I can assure you that your election of Trump has had quite the reverse effect to ‘making America great’ on the world stage. Your country’s international credibility has taken a serious hit.

    I am not the least bit surprised that you are a Trump supporter – he is the epitome of what I said in my previous comment – simplistic ‘solutions’ that solve nothing. It takes a lot more than populist sloganeering to ‘make a country great’, and so far slogans seem to be all Trump offers. But you’re buying into it, because it allows you to stop thinking.

    As to your “unlocked door” analogy, you are right that I control who enters my house. What I don’t do is ban everyone from the neighboring street because a couple of thieves live in #57a. You see, I don’t assume that everyone who lives in the same street as a thief is themself a thief, and I also understand that banning everyone from that street from entering my house by the front door will not in any way stop thieves from breaking into my house if they want to get in. Like I said, simplistic ‘solutions’ solve nothing.

  38. Milton says

    Yes in 3 weeks Trump already brought 100,000 jobs to America and saved the tax payers millions of dollars by negotiating but you wouldn’t care because you are Communist. You would prefer Hillary Clinton was elected so you could have socialism. You want to save the world with other people’s money. Yes common sense is simple but you have none.

  39. RationalismRules says

    @Milton Amazon adds 100,000 jobs because it continues to grow in a market where ebusiness is steadily taking over from traditional retail, and you claim this is Trump ‘bringing jobs to America’? I see your analysis is on a similar level to your ‘solutions’.

    Again, don’t bother to think past the headline. Don’t think about the fact that Amazon is steadily growing, and would have added those jobs regardless. Don’t consider that those additional Amazon jobs will be counterweighed by jobs lost from traditional retailers as ecommerce takes over. Just don’t think…

    I think I’ll just leave you to your Kool-Aid.

  40. Monocle Smile says

    We’ve got a Breitbart subscriber here.

    You want to save the world with other people’s money

    If I could actually save the world with other people’s money, I would do it in less than a heartbeat and you are a shitstain of a human being if you’d rather people die in droves than relinquish your precious dollars.

    @RR
    Milton represents a big chunk of the US, but about half of us are not feces-minded drones.

  41. Milton says

    The country could end up in a civil war because we are a divided country. It would be great if liberals like you would all move to the east coast. Yes I would prefer that nature takes its course on the human race. I don’t believe in entitlements. I believe in strict liability. Since God or nature doesn’t care about human suffering as its part of evolution why should anyone else. If you feed wild animals then they lose the ability to fend for themselves just like people. Through welfare we have created de evolution which is the opposite of Darwinism . It has become survival of the weakest.

  42. steele says

    Milton shows the flaws of Deism, Ann Randian selfishness, Trumpism, and plus being a 9/11 truther doesn’t help him either. While I agree with Milton about atheists he is wrong; God does care about everybody

    John 3:16-17

    16 “For God so loved the world,[i] that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.

    Atheism is by definition nihilistic but the Deism/Losertarian that Miltion espouses is equally repulsive in it’s inhumanity.

  43. nacasius says

    Steele
    A-theism is the logical negation of A god claim.
    It provides no assertion beyond a rebuttal to a claim.
    Morals are neither biblical nor divine in origin.
    It can not therefore refute Morals, which is a key component of Nihilism.

  44. Milton says

    Its much better to be a 911 Truther than 911 Liar. .Steele, I used to believe the Bible until I investigated where it came from. Its a forgery copied over a 1,000,000 times originally written in Greek about a man who spoke Aramaic and none of it written by eyewitnesses. The clincher for me was when Jesus is quoted as believing in Noah! What a bunch of crap mythology the great flood is! In addition Jesus thought he would return in the clouds by the time those he was taking with would face death. He was a false prophet by this standard. He did not know history either. Jesus never mentions the dinosaurs who walked the earth millions of years ago. Jesus thought the world was created 5000 years ago. How can any rational person believe these absurdities?

  45. steele says

    @54

    nacasius you are wrong ….let me school as I have had to do for Monocle multiple times. It’s hard being the only John Wayne left in this town, LOL

    1. If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.

    2. Objective moral values do exist.

    3. Therefore, God exists.

    4. Atheism is the denial of God

    https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/

    ‘Atheism’ means the negation of theism, the denial of the existence of God.

    http://www.reasonablefaith.org/definition-of-atheism

    For the assertion that “There is no God” is just as much a claim to knowledge as is the assertion that “There is a God.”

    so atheism a positive truth claim that must be rationally defended and not simply by your weak assertion you state:

    It provides no assertion beyond a rebuttal to a claim.

    Pony of your disproof of God and stop being a lazy agnostic putz

    5. Atheism is nihilistic by definition
    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nihilism

    b : a doctrine that denies any objective ground of truth and especially of moral truths

    Given atheism denies God who is the objective source of morals, truth, and goodness it is nihilistic by definition.

    Q.E.D

  46. steele says

    @Milton

    I didn’t know Jesus talking about dinosaurs was so important, he didn’t mention rocket ships either…is that somehow critical to salvation somehow?

    http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/evidence-suggests-biblical-great-flood-noahs-time-happened/story?id=17884533

    http://townhall.com/columnists/marykatharineham/2007/09/11/top-5-911-truther-myths-you-should-be-prepared-to-debunk-n1383957

    9/11 truthers like yourself Milton aren’t rational people so it is hard to use reason to show you where you are wrong but you seriously need to reevaluate the claims of the Bible. Seriously having to correct conspiracy nutters and atheists in the same day is tiring….LOL

  47. steele says

    @nacasius

    I wish this dang site had an edit button on it for comments but none the less I wanted to respond to one of your other asinine comments

    Morals are neither biblical nor divine in origin.

    http://www.str.org/articles/test-article

    Tell me nacasius where do morals come from then and if you say evolution well that is nothing and really less then nothing so you might as well be like Milton and crush the poor under you feet (survival of the fittest is nature too). While the 1st premise basically implies God is the source I thought I would help make it a little more explicit so you didn’t have to think so hard, LoL.

    Burden of proof is on you at this point if you deny premise 1 and if you deny premise 2 you are automatically nihilistic so you are kinda boxed in already but hey thanks for playing and better luck next time 😉

  48. EnlightenmentLiberal says

    2. Objective moral values do exist.

    Citations please.

    4. Atheism is the denial of God

    No it’s not. Basically all self-identified published atheist writers of the modern era, starting from Baron d’Holbach and Jean Meslier, do not use that term in that way. They use the word simply to refer to anyone who is not a believer (in a religion), including those who say “I don’t know”, and those who say “I know there is no god”.

    Christians get to own the word “Christian” and define it how they want. It would be absurd for an atheist to tell a Christian what a Christian needs to believe to be a Christian. Atheists deserve the same respect and deference in defining their word.

    5. Atheism is nihilistic by definition

    Your definition of nihilism is wanting. For example, atheists can be humanists, and humanists are definitely not nihilists.

  49. Milton says

    “9/11 truthers like yourself Milton aren’t rational people so it is hard to use reason to show you where you are wrong but you seriously need to reevaluate the claims of the Bible. Seriously having to correct conspiracy nutters and atheists in the same day is tiring….LOL”

    People who believe in absurdities commit atrocities. The same people who believe that Muhammed Atta’s passport floated down out of a controlled demolition and miraculously was found by an FBI agent are the same people who believe in Noah’s Ark, Adam and Eve, and weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

  50. steele says

    @EL

    Seriously EL if you deny premise 2 you are automatically nihilistic, you sure you want to go that route…lol.

    http://www.reasonablefaith.org/warrant-for-the-moral-arguments-second-premiss

    As far as defining atheism I am using what atheists (classical mostly and not lazy say)

    http://www.evilbible.com/definition-of-atheism/

    Sure you can water down what the word atheism means but you are just shooting yourself in the foot and making yourself incoherent. I am open to a more Comprehensive definition of atheism as the evilbible link suggests but your weak ass definition EL is rather pathetic IMO. So go ahead and define it your way but when you tell me there is no God, you still have to back it up or you can pound sand if you want me to believe you.

    I am using the dictionary definition of nihilism and just applying it to atheism which denies (kinda where I get it’s wrong by definition; literally the dictionary definition).

  51. EnlightenmentLiberal says

    I think its good to teach people about the flaws in all organized religions because they are all man made inventions but Its totally ignorant to argue about the existence or non existence of God since neither side can provide enough evidence to win a debate

    I can. In the normal sense of “prove” where “demonstrate beyond all reasonable doubt, but not beyond all possible doubt”, I can do that. It’s quite trivial, honestly. The whole history of science attests to the success of naturalism and materialism, so much that modern scientists have provisionally adopted the principle that they will only consider natural explanations in the future. This provisional adoption of methodological naturalism can only be logically grounded in the belief that the natural is all there is. The history of science has conclusively shown the truth of philosophical naturalism, and that is the basis of provisional methodological naturalism.

    In other words, at this point in time, it’s perverse to suggest that there is some future experiment which will be better explained by appeal to the supernatural than the natural.

    And that which cannot be observed is indistinguishable from that which does not exist.

    For further reading:

    > The Dragon In My Garage
    > by Carl Sagan
    http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/Dragon.htm

    Im commenting on what our President is currently doing or trying to do which I think is a good idea which is to keep all people out of the country that won’t respect American values.

    The biggest threat to American values and the American form of government are the many Christians in America who want a theocracy, and who want a return of Jim Crow, and want to subjugate women in addition to racial minorities. This rather large sect of American Christian Taliban is responsible for the election of Trump, which is the most horrifying event in my entire life by quite a wide margin. For example, I know live in a reasonable fear that we will have concentration camps in my lifetime in this country.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internment_of_Japanese_Americans
    https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/18/us/politics/japanese-internment-muslim-registry.html?_r=0

    This should be absolutely horrifying. Our country survived the Sept 11 attacks just fine. It’s questionable whether our country will survive the American Christian Taliban fascist aftermath of the Sept 11 attacks. Whether it’s warrantless tapping of all phones, email, etc., or killing of Americans overseas with practically zero court oversight, or the regular use of military power in foreign countries without consent without a declaration of war (a long-existing problem in America, starting after WW2, made worse with unmanned drone strikes), the use of torture on POWs, the indefinite detainment of POWs without charge or trial, … I can go on and on. Again, this should be absolutely horrifying to anyone. We as a society and culture are in serious trouble.

  52. EnlightenmentLiberal says

    Seriously EL if you deny premise 2 you are automatically nihilistic, you sure you want to go that route…lol.

    Nihilist doesn’t mean that. Nihilism is the absence of values.A nihilist is some (hypothetical) person who doesn’t have any values. I have values. I’m a humanist. I have lots of values. I simply don’t accept your claim regarding the “existence” of “objective values”, whatever that means.

    Similarly, we atheists get to define our word, just like you Christians get to define your word. You don’t get to tell us what we believe, just like we don’t get to tell you what you believe. This meaning of “atheist” has been in consistent usage for many hundreds of years. Only with the advent of Huxley’s word “agnostic” has there been confusion. In short, Huxley invented the word “agnostic” to mean the same thing as atheist, but to sound less horrible while doing so, which led to this wrong-headed belief that “atheist” must mean something different than “agnostic”, and that “agnostic” and “atheist” do not overlap.

  53. steele says

    @EL

    You can split hairs down to needed an electron microscope level but nihilist means what it means. You don’t like that implies for you but that is immaterial to the point. It’s nice you have values EL but that doesn’t mean Ted Bundy should listen to them for any reason. Like I said define atheism however you want but you still have to prove by some method there is no God and just trying to shoot potholes in my arguments doesn’t get you there.

    I know how you like to bloviate but it it doesn’t change the facts, which you are not in possession of by any means from all the crapola I have seen you post. So EL put up the proof you have of no God and we can discuss your reasoning but if you just want to verbal diarrhea it to death, afraid I don’t have time for that.

  54. EnlightenmentLiberal says

    “Objective values” in that sense is a contradiction in terms. There is no such thing, no such argument, that will ever convince Ted Bundy to take some course of action, if that argument does not appeal to values that Ted Bundy already has.

    If you mean “it’s an argument that /should/ appeal to him”? “Should” in what sense? Should in the context of the values that you claim are objective? Pretty circular. How did you come to the conclusion that your values are objective, and Ted Bundy’s values are not objective? Fiat? Revelation? Because it’s in a particular book? All arbitrary. Even if it comes from a creator god itself, it’s still arbitrary. Might does not make right. The mere opinions of a god, and that’s all they are – opinions – are no more special than my opinions.

  55. Monocle Smile says

    @steele

    So EL put up the proof you have of no God

    He did. Your addled troll ass totally missed it.
    At any rate, you’re a creationist, which means your god’s existence is fully dependent on events that did not happen. Your delusions do not change this.

    It’s nice you have values EL but that doesn’t mean Ted Bundy should listen to them for any reason

    Inventing a god does absofuckinglutely nothing to solve this problem, dickhole. “Because god says so” isn’t a reason to do anything. How many times does this need to be explained? Also, an appeal to consequences is not how you prove premise 2. You’re boring.

  56. Monocle Smile says

    HIVEMIND again!
    I’ve also taken my turn, so EL, take a few D6 rolls while I go on alcohol holiday.

  57. Milton says

    The definition of insanity is repeating the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Why don’t people just agree to disagree about the existence or non existence of God? The majority of people will never change their minds. I think its because that would take away the entire premise of the TV show Atheist Experience. It should be called “Atheists who like to argue” They love to argue and insult Theists. You can tell they enjoy it. They always shut the phone calls down and start laughing. They get off on it.

  58. EnlightenmentLiberal says

    To Milton
    If you bring good evidence, we will change our minds. I agree with you that you are unlikely to change your mind, no matter how much evidence that I bring.

  59. Milton says

    I have a question for the religious people. Since we can observe that the World is full of people going through horrible pain and suffering. Children dying painful deaths from cancer, People starving to death during famines. Tsunamis killing 300,000 people in just one day, etc. etc. How can you conclude that God actually cares about human pain and suffering?

  60. KJWalker says

    Here i thought he would finally answer a thousand year old question.
    Mores the pity.

    “nacasius you are wrong …(.)let me school (*you) as I have had to do for Monocle multiple times. It’s hard being the only John Wayne left in this town, LOL(.)
    1. If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.”

    “What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.” Christopher Hitchens and every Lawyer ever.

    Done in 1.
    Which God?

    Perhaps before continuing, Theists in this argument should decide which god you are talking about.
    The Catholic God which requires worship of a Triune God plus Mary and the saints for acceptable worship?
    The Calvinist God who says that nothing you do matters as God has already chosen the final saved people.
    The Mormon God who insists you wear your magic underwear.
    The Baptist God who requires full body immersion to be an acceptable follower.
    The Pentecostal God who requires you to be saved just once, then its Once Saved Always Saved unless you turn Apostate.
    The Evangelical God who requires Works over Faith to be considered acceptable.

    Perhaps we should round up all Christians and toss them in a pit and let them fight it out until we FINALLY have just 1 God we are supposed to talk about,
    instead of Thousands and Thousands of Different versions of God.
    I mean seriously, how can you expect an Atheist to take you seriously when all you Theists can’t even agree on the basics??

    That aside, WTH is an objective moral value?
    Name one. Anyone.
    And before you try pointlessly and explain WHAT an “objective moral value”is, i am asking you to state, for the record, any “objective moral value ever”.

  61. steele says

    @MS

    Awe MS I just want you to open your eyes, lol, then you will see what I am talking about 😛

    John 9:10-11

    10 So they said to him, “Then how were your eyes opened?” 11 He answered, “The man called Jesus made mud and anointed my eyes and said to me, ‘Go to Siloam and wash.’ So I went and washed and received my sight.”