why are you atheist?

[Clifford the Big Red Bong]

seems whenever i talk to an atheist about why they think the way they do, i get pretty lame answers.. "its just wishful thinking", "if you read the bible the way it was ment to be read you would understand", "because prayers go unanswered", "because there is unhappiness".

why exactly are you atheist? and please, no vague or stupid answers. atheists tend to be more intelligent, so i expect an intelligent discussion.

[Clifford the Big Red Bong]

oh i forgot to mention.. im working under the assumption atheists do not believe in a soul/afterlife AND god. i have heard some things here and there the led me to think maybe they simply do not believe in god. i may have used the wrong word to describe the people im actually talking about.

[The_Big_Beef]

Because the only evidence for God is purely speculation. Contrary to what most theists think the burden of proof lies with those who make the extraordinary declarations (ie God exists). Usually the people who believe in God give unsatisfying answers like "well where did the universe come from??" and the all time favorite "because the Bible said so." If you believe in something without evidence such as God then you might as well believe in fairies, tiny celestial tea pots, and invisible pink unicorns (all of which have no contradictory evidence and therefore equally plausible).

[gadzooks]

Because I don't believe in any supernatural forces unless I witness them first hand.

It really is that simple. I don't see how this can be drawn out into a discussion.

It's funny how atheists always have to explain the reasons behind their views. Religion is a mental illness, a belief in the paranormal. Atheism is completely normal, and a product of more evolved minds that don't require primitive fairy tales to dictate how to live, or to explain the unexplainable.

[Clifford the Big Red Bong]

i think that burden of proof thing is also pretty silly. i think we know just enough about the universe to know we can never fully understand it, impossible things are continually proven to not be impossible, and unthinkable things just so happen to be the very fabric of reality. i dont see how its so silly to think that maybe, just maybe, there is a "soul" made out of stuff we can not yet detect and examine. i think its silly to assume we know enough at this point in time to say no, there isnt.

you can use what ever word salad you want to try to say im wrong, but saying you know beyond doubt one way or the other, is just silly.

[gadzooks]

Originally Posted by Clifford the Big Red Bong

i think that burden of proof thing is also pretty silly.

Of course the burden of proof is on the one with outrageous claims.

If you don't know about Russell's Teapot, you should get acquainted with it. It explains this in better terms than I ever could:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot

[Clifford the Big Red Bong]

weird, your link wasnt clickable?

i only read to slightly past this, "n his 2003 book A Devil's Chaplain, Richard Dawkins developed the teapot theme a little further", because it seemed to be getting into religion, which this is not about.

quantum mechanics shows that indeed such a thing is possible. assuming time is infinite, it is not only possible, but will happen. all things (within the laws of physics) are possible. at any given time, a pink pony could appear out of no where. it does not require googolpex times googolplex squared years to happen either. these things can happen at any time.

so yes, somewhere out there, perhaps now, there is a creature who is as similar to the flying spaghetti monster as allowed by physics.

[gadzooks]

Quantum mechanics is all theory as well.

And besides, I don't think that Atheism necessarily implies a total denial of any possibility of any supernatural entities. Atheism is more of a form of skepticism. As in, show me proof, then I'll consider believing.

Which is why Atheism just generally makes a LOT more sense than any form of Theism, as an Atheist has a nearly infinitely higher chance of being right.

[Clifford the Big Red Bong]

i dont see how they have any more or less chance of being right than someone who just thinks "maybe there is, maybe there isnt". the fact that it is more logical doesnt make it more right necessarily.

[gadzooks]

Originally Posted by Clifford the Big Red Bong

i dont see how they have any more or less chance of being right than someone who just thinks "maybe there is, maybe there isnt". the fact that it is more logical doesnt make it more right necessarily.

One can try to rationalize whatever belief they want. But if the pursual of truth is their ultimate goal, then they stand a VERY high chance of being wrong.