The kind of Valentines I get

From the comment form:

I don’t know what was more moronic, the hypothetical questions you posed to rebuke the validity of the existence of the alpha and the omega, or your assenine, poorly constructed responses to these. Why were these questions about why you don’t believe in god, posed with no philosophical merit and based completely on what seems to be the thought process of a 12 year old right wing, conservative, born again christian? Oh that’s right because you wrote them…its only fitting your questions would be as unintelligent, unimaginative,simplistic, and a complete marginalization of all of those highly cognitive and merit based philosophical questions we have posed through history to try and answer by any means but an existence. If you hold such a pragmatic view of life, which to an extent is very understandable, me being a PhD student in molecular genetics I can appreciate your refusal to not blindly accept things unproven. However, I still can’t understand how you can rationalize that regardless that the building block of most physics theories is the empirically proven fact: energy, just as anything in existence, can not be created or destroyed, it can only be transformed from one state, or physical property, to another. You can’t create something from nothing, as you can’t make something completely disappear. Even the big bang started with inert gases and a combustion. Gases aren’t nothing… Humans are the only species with such highly developed cognitive abilities as to permit a vague understanding of something bigger, by not continupusly questioning and changing your beliefs as you experience and learn and try and move to a self enlightenment, you’re just as bad as the people with defined religions who accept blindy and questioning nothing. An imagination is a terrible thing to waste, and on many accounts by some of the most important scientists of our times (einstein and kerry mullis who created polymerase chain reaction and is a self proclaimed acid head to name a few) it is unquestionably more valuable discovery than straight dry knowledge. Atheism is a step backwards in human existence to being animals. By refusing to give creedence to our ability as the only species alive to have an understanding of god, it marginalizes life as meaninless but to indulge our animalistic instincts to eat and fuck only. Our ability to comprehend the premise of god, despite personal perceptions of what where why and all the other things that will never be understood, in my mind gives more belief in our creation due to its spark. I don’t believe in a lot of conceived notions of god preached through religion because religion is just a beauracracy of spirituality and inhibits people from embracing their questioning nature required for actualization. But to believe so simplisticly in nothing but here and now, is in my opinion selfish hurtful, self capitulating, and unconscienable. The thought alone makes me feel like I walked up to my mother and punched her in the face.

(continued in a second comment)

I hope my message wasn’t too hard to read, I wrote it completely on a blackberry, which was no small task, as you could probably see. And the theory of energy construction/destruction is the theory of the conservation of energy. The second law of thermodynamics describes entropy, and its variable assignment to reactions and their tendencies to continuously move on a path to increasing disorder. I don’t quite see how this theory could be used to prove or disprove the existence. Either way, you’re entitled to your opinions, but by marginalizing the creation of everything you see, it must mitigate a lot of the appreciation in your existence.

In the first part of your message, you seem to be referring to one of the pages on which I present religious arguments, followed by equally ridiculous responses. You ask, “Why were these questions about why you don’t believe in god, posed with no philosophical merit and based completely on what seems to be the thought process of a 12 year old right wing, conservative, born again christian?” and then imply that the questions sound stupid because I am making them sound stupid. Sadly, every single one of these points has come up in multiple actual conversations I’ve had with real Christians, and they generally don’t sound any more intelligent live than they do on a Web page.

The balance of your message is a gross mischaracterization of atheism, at least as it applies to me and many modern atheists. Many of us are a lot more thoughtful and a lot less dismissive than you appear to believe.

Posted on February 14, 2011 at 7:49 am by ideclare · Permalink
In: Anti-atheist

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments via RSS

  1. Written by Victor
    on February 16, 2011 at 1:50 am
    Reply · Permalink

    I’m not going to argue, I dont follow religious beliefs and follow reasoning, but I dont deny the existance of something more, I’m just going to say this:

    We don’t know everything.

    That makes it look like an agnostic view on things, ok, I am agnostic, though I have a small desire to be called Jedi, denying something just because we can not prove it does exist makes us ignorant. And assuming something does exist because we say so is being even more ignorant and dangerous like religious dumasses.

    I take the middle point, is only the most rationalized on. Again, not trying to convince you of anything.

  2. Written by Vlad the Inhaler
    on August 4, 2012 at 8:01 am
    Reply · Permalink

    Holy wall of text, Batman!

    PhD student in molecular genetics, my ass. Most of those words don’t even mean what he seems to think they mean.

Subscribe to comments via RSS

Leave a Reply