psychologytoday.com/blog/more-mortal/201504/atheists-love-aliens >The general position of what is often referred to as the New Atheist movement is that atheists approach life through logic and empirical evidence (science) whereas religious people rely on faith and feelings. Many atheists would argue that they do not believe in something unless there is a good reason for doing so. But is this true? >Atheists denounce the magical thinking that is derived from traditional religious narratives and faiths. However, they are open to other beliefs that lack scientific support. Turns out, even atheists are willing to take a leap of faith.
>has never seen evolution occur (one organism transforming into a completely different one) >has never seen aliens in real life (extraterrestrials actually making contact with humans) >believes in both
Being a fedora must feel like being clinically brain dead.
if you need an explanation on how fossils work, I can help
Asher Morales
Archaeopteryx (pic related) has been said to be descended from dinosaurs because of the similarities of the legs and hips of birds with those of dinosaurs. However, Archaeopteryx, like all birds, has a wishbone (analogous to the clavicle or collarbone in mammals) whereas dinosaurs did not have collarbones.
>no idea >Reuter's own words use the term "new information"
you don't know how fossil research works, don't you?
Ethan Collins
>new information
According to fedoras, Archaeopterx dates from the age of reptiles. Next, it is said to have vestigial characteristics fom its reptilian ancestors: claws on its feathered forelimbs, teeth in its beak, and a bony reptile-like tail. It possesses feathers and wings, but it does not possess the large pectoral muscles and deeply keeled breastbone that would enable it to fly. It must have been either fightless, like a chicken, or have been a glider. It also has a wishbone and this is proven as factual because you have an entire skeleton preserved intact.
The T-Rex Sue was no preserved intact and basically they change the skeletons shape in order to feed their own confirmation bias.
At this point, fedora alien theories have become old hat (pun intended). Most atheists, most notably Yudkowsky and his LessWrong cultist followers, have moved on to spooky AI theories, proving that in spite of their claims they don't actually care about "proof" or "evidence." Belief in the existence of extraterrestrials at least exists in a probabilistic grey area: we have a rough idea of how many planets exist in the universe, and though there is no way of knowing just how many of them are capable of supporting "intelligent" life, they may at least derive hope from the sheer vastness of the cosmos' scale.
Now see how casually they have moved on to ideas of AI, for which there is neither empirical evidence nor the advantage of statistical likelihood. They don't want hope, and they aren't seeking the truth. What they want is to destroy God. And they've blindly intuited that the easiest way to do so would be to blasphemously imitate the creation of man. Why do they insist on AI, on the "singularity?" To spit in the face of God, who created us in his image and with the capacity for intelligent thought. They want to say, "See? There is nothing special about us. We too are only machines."
They are worse than braindead. They are spiritually suicidal.
Christian Torres
/thread unknowing saying that there's no proof of evolution as well as saying fossils exist
Austin Bailey
Is that a dragon?
Bentley Adams
>no real proof for evolution other than scattered bones of extinct animals >no real succession of several skeletons proving how features developed over time >rearranging skeletons in order to fit your confirmation bias
The lack of transitional forms that show how all species developed over time is amazing . If snakes evolved from lizards there should be thousands of lizard skeletons with retracted limbs in various stages. But no, there aren't any. There should also be invertebrates with rudimentary backbones, fishes with incipient legs and reptiles with half-formed wings buried all over the place.
Those transitional forms should be pretty common and should be a rule rather than exception.
>humans are predisposed to systems of belief, especially from sources of high social capital, ie tribalist trust in a leader superseding :"logic" >carbon dating not reliable even going back a thousand years >they bash the old religions instead of the new ones ruling society, Feminism, Communism, mass corporate and state corruption
Atheism religion is also a construct from the corrupt state and corporations, though don't tell the low IQ that
In terms of consistency the laws of evolution pretty much would produce thousands of examples and yet you can only post two dead lizards (as in actual lizards and not transitional forms).
Morals, especially fundamental virtues (industry, celibacy, thrift, etc.) are useful for keeping & maintaining a functioning civilization. A functioning civilization is desirable because it leads to greater overall quality of life through increased access to better health, better wealth, & a better understanding of the functions of our universe. >inb4 "that's not morality, that's just being pragmatic" Pragmatism is morality.
Asher Wood
>fossils are somehow now not a rare occurrence
Josiah Parker
>You produced only two examples of evidence from the top of your head to prove your beliefs. And how many do you have of yours?
Better & more convincing proof than what I've seen from the various religions of the world. You still didn't provide me with any examples of evidence that your particular religion is correct.
Aaron Harris
>no proof to the contrary
less and less of you creationists are proof that something's evolving in the population
Robert Campbell
Why are the really obnoxious atheists almost always American? Is it because you guys are really open with your faith and they need to compensate?
Leo Torres
huehuehue
Nolan Thompson
They're angry conformists that spew whatever Richard Dawkins tell them.
you realise if you're going to move off of reddit and start engaging with people who actually know whta they're talk about (i.e. no "cuz ebic black science guy told me so), you don't just refute evidence with "hurr no it isn't"...
Unless you want to be sage'd I suggest you start posting some counter arguments. Or just go back to r/blacked or whatever you call your subreddits
Dylan Gutierrez
>copypastes Wikipedia articles >he knows what he's talking about
Have you seen the American Christian Fundamentalist? They too are obnoxious in their faith & shove it down everyone's throats at every opportunity they're given. They were the ones who helped get alcohol banned in America, leading to a massive wave in crime and many dollars unecessarily spent to prevent it. It was they who, in the 80s, started calling for the banning of anything unchristian (D&D, rock & roll, fantasy novels, etc.) & while their attacks on the modern deviancy of homosexuality probably come from a genuine place of concern, their over-reliance on the bible as the source of their opinions & their near constant preaching, both in the past & today, had caused most people to simply ignore them. When you have to deal with that, it's easy to fall into the well of obnoxiousness yourself. Or maybe Americans are just naturally that way.
Matthew Morales
t.Posted numerous pictures of guys in trilbies & called it an argument.
More proof than you've ever given me. Maybe if you started providing evidence for your religion rather than spending the past 27 posts of yours producing an inordinate supply of fedora memes, you'd actually have an argument & could actually convince us.
Nolan Reyes
t. still can't prove that all lizards evolve into snakes with an abundant fossil record showing thousands of transitonal forms
>but paper taught orally, passed down generations orally, re-written on paper, and translated numerous times through different languages from 2000 years ago tells me so
