Oh, no, calling you stupid was not my intention, far from it. But if we were to discuss what is and what isn’t, it helps to know the difference between a bad idea and a good one. Logical fallacies lead us to the former, and understanding logical fallacies helps us move to the latter.

In the internet content business, there’s a field called quality assurance (QA) that does nothing but check for typos, irregularities, inconsistencies in content. Think of this as QA for the brain: my purpose isn’t to slam you or insult you, but to gently remind you that “we must not fool ourselves… and we are the easiest persons to fool.”

The astronomer Carl Sagan outlined a concise list of ways we can fool ourselves. He called it a Baloney Detection Kit. http://users.tpg.com.au/users/tps-seti/baloney.html It can be quite handy sometimes!

It is not so much that I find it difficult to understand X, but that I find X too simple, or perhaps too outrageous, to be the reason behind all of this. Many people could call me stupid because I say that, and we all have the right to free speech, so go ahead if you want to.
Understand, of course, that your perception of the world and mine might be different, maybe even radically, and that with this kind of topic, it can be incredulously hard to reconcile our different views.

Thank you for the comments.

“I find it hard to dissolve the complexities of the world into mere numbers on a chalkboard.”

“A world whose meaning is purely made up of numbers and theorems sounds boring and pointless to me.”

“a barrage of facts and bizarre explanations as to how unprovable God’s existence is, using big words nobody understands.”

“that all life on Earth, all this diversity, started out from one bacterium in the big, blue ocean. Call me dumb, call me stupid and innocent, but that is just too flaky for me to believe.”

“as I’ve pointed out before, science’s ‘that’s it, plain and simple’ numbers-and-formula reasoning sounds a bit shady to me.”

“I can’t accept the theory that life played dice with the odds, that we simply pulled the right card out of a stack of billions.”

“All of this can’t be coincidental. Someone must have intervened.”

I’d like to introduce you to the Argument from Personal Incredulity.

Then I’d just go back to being a Catholic. I happen to still like the Catholic Church, except it’s quite difficult to be Catholic if you don’t believe in God.

“And, you said you wouldn’t assume that you would be bound for Hell. What if it was also proved to you that Hell would be where you would go when you breathe your last? (Not that I want you to go to Hell; I would never wish for something like that to happen to anybody, even to my worst enemy.)”

Ditto. But you have to realize that these scenarios are really no good until you can show evidence – we can debate all we like about Heaven, Hell, Nirvana, cherubim, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, but for me as an atheist, it just stinks of more unnecessary entities being created out of thin air.

It’s so easy to say, “what if x were true?”, then suppose a scenario that would prove you right. If X were true, I’d have no trouble admitting you were right, but x can be so many things! X only counts when you have evidence to back you up, but in your particular x, I think you don’t have any.

thank you for the comment.

Let me just say that when I said “God indeed exists,” the “God” I was referring to was the deity, the higher power, the omnipotent force… you know, that “force” whose existence is denied by atheists. Truth is, I believe that all religions, Christian or otherwise, worship (or at least try to worship, the same omnipotent authority.

I hope you understand what I’m trying to say here. What I meant by that question was, “what if atheism’s tenets were disproved beyond the shadow of a doubt?” And, you said you wouldn’t assume that you would be bound for Hell. What if it was also proved to you that Hell would be where you would go when you breathe your last? (Not that I want you to go to Hell; I would never wish for something like that to happen to anybody, even to my worst enemy.)

Thank you for the two cents. If you didn’t wholly understand this comment, my apologies. Feel free to comment back, or, if you please, post something on your blog about it. It always feels good to have Technorati authority. hehe.

“A good question to ask atheists would be, ‘What if you found out on your deathbed that God indeed exists? What if someone slapped cold hard evidence in your face that God indeed exists? Would you regret? How would you prepare for Hell?’ I’m not answering that. If any atheists happen to read this, then drop a comment, please.”

I’d like to parse this a bit – if I were on my deathbed, first I’d like to know if this were the Iglesia God, the Muslim God, the Catholic God, or the Hindu God, because there are totally different ways of propitiating each one.

Whatever happens, I wouldn’t regret. I would wonder why this evidence wasn’t presented earlier (let us suppose that this evidence is indeed much stronger than a Christian shoving the bible in my face, for that hardly counts as evidence!). I can’t regret a life of acting on limited information.

And I wouldn’t assume that I was bound for Hell, either. Why would God condemn me for hell for being truthful to my conscience?

Just my 2 cents.

I was an agnostic before, acknowledging the idea that the existence of a god can neithre be proved nor disproved.

One scientific argument, in the form of math states that “you cannot prove a negative”.

I believe in science and that it progresses, it has many breakthroughs. At least science is not judgmental, it does not reward nor punish. It just is.

I was an agnostic before, acknowledging the idea that the existence of a god can neithre be proved nor disproved.

One scientific argument, in the form of math states that “you cannot prove a negative”.

I believe in science and that it progresses, it has many breakthroughs. At least science is not judgmental, it does not reward nor punish. It just is.

You say: With all due respect to atheists and scientists, I find that both intelligent and cowardly. Intelligent, because I find it hard to dissolve the complexities of the world into mere numbers on a chalkboard. Cowardly, because they cannot get past those equations and numbers on their tables and ponder, even for a second, about the possibility of the existence of a supreme deity. A world whose meaning is purely made up of numbers and theorems sounds boring and pointless to me.

-Just a thought. Don't you think it'd be more cowardly to deny that we might've been wrong all along? That the preconception that God exists turns out to be false, that the main purpose why ancient and medieval power players only created the notion of God for social control–to control people, an excuse to take money from them and enslave them?

You say: All of this can’t be coincidental. Someone must have intervened.

This question has been asked by many for so many years now. They see something so complex, something they cannot understand that even until now still puzzles the very limited human mind. Why can't they just accept that nature is powerful in itself? Why can't we give the credit to nature? Is nature not great enough to earn our commendation as something that is very awe-inspiring? But no, we overlook that because we see nature everyday, we want to give the credit to something we have never seen, never felt, never even conceived of in a tangible sense.

You can see now, that I am an atheist. I do not claim atheism as a belief just as I do not consider baldness as a hairstyle. I do not have a religion, but I believe in kindness and compassion. I admire the Buddhist philosophy that states: “Our prime purpose in this world is to help others, and if we cannot help them, atl least lets not hurt them.”
I respect every person's belief as long as it is practiced in a reasonable manner. Faith with reason–Pope Ratzinger says. I share my convictions not to hurt nor to offend, but to help others understand, to show the truth that does not enslave. Your belief or the lack of it is yours.

Robert G. Ingersoll, a great agnostic and a good man, once said:

“If we had lived in Constantinople (Turkey), the most of us would have said: “There is no God but Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet.” If our parents had lived on the banks of Ganges, we would have been worshippers of Shiva, longing for the heaven of Nirvana.
As a rule, children love their parents, believe what they teach, and take pride in saying that the religion of mother is good enough for them.
The Scotch are Calvinists because their fathers were. The Irish are Catholics because their fathers were. The English are Episcopalians because their fathers were and the Americans are divided in a hundred sects because their fathers were. This is the general rule to which there are many exceptions.
Children SOMETIMES are superior to their parents, modify their ideas, change their customs, and arrive at different conclusions.”

You asked: A good question to ask atheists would be, “What if you found out on your deathbed that God indeed exists? What if someone slapped cold hard evidence in your face that God indeed exists? Would you regret? How would you prepare for Hell?” I’m not answering that. If any atheists happen to read this, then drop a comment, please.

The idea of heaven, hell, and the afterlife is born out of the human nature of REWARD and PUNISHMENT and the fear that there may be nothing for us after we die. We want to live forever, and the idea of our inexistence after death scares us immensely. What happens to a dog, or a cat, or an alligator when it dies? Do they have an afterlife? Why are we so special than these animals all of a sudden that we have a spirit and they dont? Don't we have the same set of hearts, brain, and skeletal structures?

Anyway, if there really is a god, then I will say that he did not leave much evidence to begin with. I lived my life with utter respect for living things and that is all that matters. A god who deserves worship should understand that.

You say: With all due respect to atheists and scientists, I find that both intelligent and cowardly. Intelligent, because I find it hard to dissolve the complexities of the world into mere numbers on a chalkboard. Cowardly, because they cannot get past those equations and numbers on their tables and ponder, even for a second, about the possibility of the existence of a supreme deity. A world whose meaning is purely made up of numbers and theorems sounds boring and pointless to me.

-Just a thought. Don’t you think it’d be more cowardly to deny that we might’ve been wrong all along? That the preconception that God exists turns out to be false, that the main purpose why ancient and medieval power players only created the notion of God for social control–to control people, an excuse to take money from them and enslave them?

You say: All of this can’t be coincidental. Someone must have intervened.

This question has been asked by many for so many years now. They see something so complex, something they cannot understand that even until now still puzzles the very limited human mind. Why can’t they just accept that nature is powerful in itself? Why can’t we give the credit to nature? Is nature not great enough to earn our commendation as something that is very awe-inspiring? But no, we overlook that because we see nature everyday, we want to give the credit to something we have never seen, never felt, never even conceived of in a tangible sense.

You can see now, that I am an atheist. I do not claim atheism as a belief just as I do not consider baldness as a hairstyle. I do not have a religion, but I believe in kindness and compassion. I admire the Buddhist philosophy that states: “Our prime purpose in this world is to help others, and if we cannot help them, atl least lets not hurt them.”
I respect every person’s belief as long as it is practiced in a reasonable manner. Faith with reason–Pope Ratzinger says. I share my convictions not to hurt nor to offend, but to help others understand, to show the truth that does not enslave. Your belief or the lack of it is yours.

Robert G. Ingersoll, a great agnostic and a good man, once said:

“If we had lived in Constantinople (Turkey), the most of us would have said: “There is no God but Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet.” If our parents had lived on the banks of Ganges, we would have been worshippers of Shiva, longing for the heaven of Nirvana.
As a rule, children love their parents, believe what they teach, and take pride in saying that the religion of mother is good enough for them.
The Scotch are Calvinists because their fathers were. The Irish are Catholics because their fathers were. The English are Episcopalians because their fathers were and the Americans are divided in a hundred sects because their fathers were. This is the general rule to which there are many exceptions.
Children SOMETIMES are superior to their parents, modify their ideas, change their customs, and arrive at different conclusions.”

You asked: A good question to ask atheists would be, “What if you found out on your deathbed that God indeed exists? What if someone slapped cold hard evidence in your face that God indeed exists? Would you regret? How would you prepare for Hell?” I’m not answering that. If any atheists happen to read this, then drop a comment, please.

The idea of heaven, hell, and the afterlife is born out of the human nature of REWARD and PUNISHMENT and the fear that there may be nothing for us after we die. We want to live forever, and the idea of our inexistence after death scares us immensely. What happens to a dog, or a cat, or an alligator when it dies? Do they have an afterlife? Why are we so special than these animals all of a sudden that we have a spirit and they dont? Don’t we have the same set of hearts, brain, and skeletal structures?

Anyway, if there really is a god, then I will say that he did not leave much evidence to begin with. I lived my life with utter respect for living things and that is all that matters. A god who deserves worship should understand that.