Judging from all the calamity in this world, even if there was a god, he's either apathetic or extremely sadistic.
That aside, we atheists don't need to shove our lack of belief into every conversation. If someone wants to believe in a god then I usually just smile and walk away. It's when they start telling other people to believe in this man-in-the-sky-who-will-send-you-to-hell-for-not-believing-in-him that intervention becomes necessary.
Back to the original discussion though, how can anyone actually dispute global warming? The evidence is pretty much undisputable. It's on the same level as preaching young-Earth creationism while disregarding all scientific data stating the contrary.
That aside, we atheists don't need to shove our lack of belief into every conversation. If someone wants to believe in a god then I usually just smile and walk away. It's when they start telling other people to believe in this man-in-the-sky-who-will-send-you-to-hell-for-not-believing-in-him that intervention becomes necessary.
Back to the original discussion though, how can anyone actually dispute global warming? The evidence is pretty much undisputable. It's on the same level as preaching young-Earth creationism while disregarding all scientific data stating the contrary.
Mooninites wrote:
im still waiting for the global warming community and al gore to prove that global warming is man-made
manbearpig. that is all.
Bioalchemist wrote:
manbearpig. that is all.
Pheyniex wrote:
earth has a large water content so you have to consider condensation and vaporization cycles for water, so that water doesn't really get hotter, it uses the energy to vaporize (or condense) since it has a rather large latent heat value.
also remember that water cycle is not that long when compared to the mentioned 20k years.
Dude, he was obviously kidding >.>
"Moral justification is a powerful disengagement mechanism. Destructive conduct is made personally and socially acceptable by portraying it in the service of moral ends." - Albert Bandura
"Ultimately, if people lose their willingness to recognize that there are times in our history when legality becomes distinct from morality, we aren't just ceding control of our rights to government, but our futures." - Edward Snowden
"Ultimately, if people lose their willingness to recognize that there are times in our history when legality becomes distinct from morality, we aren't just ceding control of our rights to government, but our futures." - Edward Snowden
SkidmarkD wrote:
And going from what is considered these days as scientific research, people still can'tmake correct deductions. They usually already have an opinion and search to find data that proves it, ignoring data that disproves what they think is right.
Global warming is not an exception. :D
I really love this part of your post specifically. This is sooooo true. People have an idea in mind, do some research to find as many things as they can to prove it right and simply ignore everything else (I know I just said what you said in other words lol).
And that's so freaking annoying because when you tell someone that he is doing this, he's like ''dude the proofs are there''. -_-
DarkPercy wrote:
I really love this part of your post specifically. This is sooooo true. People have an idea in mind, do some research to find as many things as they can to prove it right and simply ignore everything else (I know I just said what you said in other words lol).
And that's so freaking annoying because when you tell someone that he is doing this, he's like ''dude the proofs are there''. -_-
Again: does that statement not apply to itself?
Stop the stupidity.
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." - Christopher Hitchens
IShouldGetALife wrote:
Actually theism can be disproved and if you ever see any debates between atheists and theists (professional debates) the atheists always win.
I would like a response derp.
I don't see how bringing in debate records justifies your point that theism can be disproved.
Debates don't involve stuff that CAN be proved. Debates are all about persuasion. Not facts.
Debates use facts to strengthen their argument, but they don't justify their point.
Now can we stop this silliness? I hate seeing obnoxious christians think they're superior to all because they have God and want to "spread the happiness" just as much as I hate seeing mentally incapable atheists ridiculing every single religion without any factual and explicit disproof of the beliefs.
If you want to debate, debate properly.
IShouldGetALife
<Member>
<Member>
@ embracing sorry didn't know you responded and theism (in this case catholocism) can be disproved in many ways, now I'm not saying I know all these reasons off the top of my head but I have seen many debates and articles where there has been outstanding eveidence for atheism/creationism/science w/e one of the many is that how could there be an omnipotent being with us having no knowledge of it, probably not the strongest and neither is the next example I'm gonna give which is that God couldn't have created earth in 7 (6) days because of the evidence that we have of life from hundreds of millions if not billions of years ago, also where in the bible does it mention Dinosaurs or the single cellular organisms and bacteria that came before animals.
Also even the most devout priests have no answer as to why God does exist, most of them say that he just does and that there should be no reason to doubt it, with no evidence that he actually does, so therefore if the people that so much believe in him can't find a reason then what reason is there?
Also even the most devout priests have no answer as to why God does exist, most of them say that he just does and that there should be no reason to doubt it, with no evidence that he actually does, so therefore if the people that so much believe in him can't find a reason then what reason is there?
If I have helped in anyway at all a +rep will be appreciated lots
Thanks to LaCorpse, Hogopogo and JhoiJhoi for the amazing sigs
You need to log in before commenting.
EDIT: you sure the earth is getting warmer?
Cause we've had the coldest may since 1962. :D
earth has a large water content so you have to consider condensation and vaporization cycles for water, so that water doesn't really get hotter, it uses the energy to vaporize (or condense) since it has a rather large latent heat value.
also remember that water cycle is not that long when compared to the mentioned 20k years.
My earlier comment was mostly a troll regarding Pheyniex. I agree and disagree with some of the statements made by either of them.
please, go hide in your uselesness. your lack of opinion doesn't help.