Atheists do not go by reason, that is only their declaration they go by will, believe it?

Question

It is true, all rational thought leads to the idea of a beginiing for all, or a uncaused cause or ultimate cause, all serving the same function in a rational chain. Atheist deny the last link, they stop before the end, that is all. They have the same brains and wills that we do.The question is why do they stop before the end? the answer is simple, they wish to deny it.
Consider this startling admission by Nobel Prize winner George Wald (1906–1997):

There are only two possible explanations as to how life arose. Spontaneous generation arising to evolution or a supernatural creative act of God. . . . There is no other possibility. Spontaneous generation was scientifically disproved 120 years ago by Louis Pasteur and others, but that just leaves us with only one other possibility. . . that life came as a supernatural act of creation by God, but I can’t accept that philosophy because I do not want to believe in God. Therefore I choose to believe in that which I know is scientifically impossible, spontaneous generation leading to evolution.5

The first part is not a quote those are my statements, the second paragraph is the quote.

I don't mind if anyone says they don't have faith in an idea. But to deny the idea is rational or reasonable is something else and inconsistent and a lie. Many atheists , granted that they are not all intellectuals, but followers, do not admit that the theist position is more credible based on thought alone, which is the definition of rationalism. Atheist are not rationalist, they do not believe in or have confidence in what the mind concludes or can conclude according to reason and logic, they suspend this natural inclination and judgement, and substitute for it, sensual input. Again nothing wrong with testing that path and seeing what insight can be gained, but they do not amidt the truth of all htese things and most it seems don't even know it, because they do not know themsleves or how the mind works. The worlds deepest thinkers, always came to the conclusion that there is a Deity, without expalining it. To be a "scientist " does not mean a person is a deep thinker or skilled at it

Spontaneous generation does have everything to do with the fairy talle and modern myth of men, called evolution.
Because you cannot start with what you need to prove and assert arose spontaneously, without any parent form. It takes the same exact power and inteliigence to produce any life as it does to produce the whole universe. Making it smaller does ot change the complexity and miracle necessary. Keep studying my lad.
It takes more knowledge to believe than to disbelieve.

Answer 1

Sad...but true. They choose to believe something that is scientifically impossible, but yet they use science to "prove" their points.

Answer 2

That quote is ridiculous. The simple answer of "They wish to deny it" as to why atheists choose not to take a stance on how the universe was created, is such a strange comment. Of course they are going to deny their faith in that idea. Since NOBODY really knows how the universe was created, everyone just has hypotheses, why would a normal person who doesn't necessarily believe in god NOT deny it? And because atheists don't feel the need to join a club, and don't want to say they believe in something just because a lot of people around them believe in it, of COURSE atheists are going to wish to deny it. Is that so complicated? Atheists don't feel it, and will of course wish to deny it or not take a stance.

It blows my mind how people who want so bad to believe in something hate on other people who just plain don't believe in it. It's like ruining Christmas to your coworker because you don't celebrate christmas or something.

And also I agree with the comments above, there are more than two possible explanations.. There are countless explanations as to how life arose. I'll make a new one up for you. Just so there's three in your little world. Maybe in the beggining, there was only darkness, and then the almighty Jim (who was waiting in some cosmic space in a different dimension)popped in and said, "let there be dust". And it was good. And then after a nap Jim said, "let there be water.. and a sun two". And they were also good. And then Jim went back to his reality. And eventually after millions of years the dust and the water, each floating around out in space, finally collide in an orgasmic explosion. And they cause mold of course, and this is the first sign of life in the universe. And over much time the mold seperated and destroyed it's other half and therefore was something new, and so on and so on until it became all types of specials interacting randomly with eachother. And we're one of them. So hey.. There's a third explanation!!!! Now you can go back up there and edit it to say "There are only three possible explanations as to how life arose.."

Answer 3

Yes. George wald was a biochemist who studied the role of vitamin A in human vision. He won a Nobel prize in 1967(?) shared with two others. His views and statements about the disproving of abiogenesis might have been overstated. What killed the sontaneous generation of life theory in the 1800's was the work of Louis Pasteure. There were other experiments going on that Mr Wald should have been aware of.
Besides just because a chemical engineer says something about his faith does not mean that he is right. He won his award for measuring chemical changes in eyeballs,not for theology or for studying the beginnings of life.
This is one of the experiments he should have been aware of:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller-Urey_experiment

Answer 4

He's talking about the Ancient Greek concept of spontaneous generation.
This was based on observations of maggots "spontaneously" generating in meat.
Funnily everything we know about generation comes from science.
Christians don't seem to get is when science is proved wrong they don't keep banging out the wrong answers but discover the right ones and change.
Something no religion seems capable of!

Maybe you should read a little science history before you take such quotes out of context.

I think science has travel led a little further in the last 2000 years as opposed to religion.

Answer 5

Spontaneus generation of fully-formed life was disproven by Pasteur. Meaning that maggots cannot just appear out of nowhere on a piece of rotting food, that a fly had to lay eggs on the food in order for the maggots to appear. In other words, if a maggot appears, then there had to have been a fly around. Duh. This doesn't have anything to do with Evolution.

The early stages of life are a different thing all together. By your logic, pregnancy is impossible, as life cannot just spontaneously appear in the womb. It is all about the combinations of chemicals and a little physics thrown in for good measure.

I have a question for you, why do fundementalists like yourself always pick and choose the science you like and leave out the stuff you don't like? You do the same thing with your bible.

My answer? Grow up and get over yourself. You are not so special that you warrent a creator who give a flying hoot about you. If god does exist, I sure hope he/she/it has better things to do than listen to his/hers/its megolomanical followers.

Answer 6

They may say the same thing about believers... because there is no proof beyond firm faith for the latter...

Why should we get worried about those not accepting our theory? There is reason if we get worried about the believers who do not adhere to the teachings of their professed religion and thus give rise to doubts in the mind of sceptics about the veracity of our claims! You simply disobey the laws of the Almighty and still say that HE is all-knowing and all-powerful.. If He were really existing, (I speak from the shoes of the atheist) He should be more angry with the believer who claims to know Him but will not obey His commands... rather than one who does not believe in His existence...

Let them not follow the logic.. but let the theists be logical to stand by the tenets of their religion...

Answer 7

I'd refute that pathetic argument but people with the disease of faith are immune to rational argument and logic. Life can arise spontaneously. Experiments have been done in controlled conditions.

God doesn't exist. DEAL WITH IT.

Answer 8

7 good motives to no longer have faith in god. a million. All data factors to there being no God. 2. you reside via regulations made up via you. 3. No-one judges you different than your self 4. you're no longer made to sense in charge or valueless for doing what comes needless to say. 5. you're turning out to be greater time on your arms to study different books than the bible. 6. You understand that existence surely has no meaning. Sounds undesirable at first, yet you're surely set loose, and there's a weight lifted off your shoulders. 7. you could sleep in on Sundays! And now for something thoroughly distinctive, 7 good motives to have faith in God! a million. the regulations of existence are planned out, you do no longer even could think of. 2. in case you could behave on earth, you're able to do however you like for eternity in heaven. 3. loose wine and loose foodstuff with each communion! 4. All those holidays! And the delivers that comprise them! 5. Your existence without notice has a meaning, and you're compelled to be charitable. 6. you may besides have faith in God, by using fact in case you do no longer and there's a God, it somewhat is the fiery depths of hell for you! 7. You get to placed on a cricifix around your neck. (yet you could no longer placed on a guillotine, electric powered chair or the different approaches of capitol punishment)

Answer 9

you choose to deny god but you choose to believe god is power>science
science is the prove to all this have bean created!if you are really wise man just try to think use the science and try to believe there is have a god!

my answer:many people say human have a limit in their action but for me human don't have any limit in their action what make them be the aggressive creature in this earth.human always broken the law!why!it is because they want to deny it!they happy doing it even they know what will happen to them!

Answer 10

What did he win the Nobel Prize for? I'll bet it wasn't for religious insights...
Religion, atheism, faith, science - they're all the same under the Tau.

Answer 11

No.... those AREN'T the only two possibilities. This is what's called a "false dichotomy". It's a logical fallacy and it's really lame to try to use it as a defense for creationism.