Atheists still haven't answered my question on why science is their crutch?

Question

I posed the question about why atheist use science as a crutch when the very basis of their belief is contradictory? In one way or another I said, how can you believe in science if nothing in science evolves from nothing. How can you use science as a crutch if the very core of your belief is illogical...NOTHING in this entire universe evolves from nothing...so to use things such as evolution and any other means of proving why God doesn't exist is senseless. How can you believe in nothing, if nothing evolves from nothing?

Now I posed the same for infinite values, and as far as the leading scientists in this world, no infinite values exist either. Ok JP, there are black hole theories that constitute such probabilities, but they are not fact just theory.

SO Please atheists, instead of avoiding the question by attacking me with your typical defense mechanisms answer the question, NOTHING MORE. Something tells me you cant and you'll revert back to your typical petty responses.

Answer 1

ok. the very nature of the fundamental particals of this world impede us from understanding the universe. quantum mechanics has shown us that the objective world independent of all observers is out of our reach. so until some major advances are made the best that we can say about our universe is that we exist in a universe where we are possible. we know next to nothing about what makes that universe possible because the very act of observing it and being here changes its nature. this reality and all of our ideas in it are subjective, sujected to our emotions, pasts and thoughts. what we have to fill the gap in our understanding are concepts, concepts like truth, alternate realities, and god. these concepts are subjective, and we all conceive of them differently based on our subjective expiriences.
what sets science apart is data. there is no objective data for concepts, just thoughts and feelings. someone cannot pick up a concept like love and bring it to you. the data for love is our ideas about it, like truth or god, love is made out of the very thoughts and feelings concerning it. so we all work with different data when it comes to our concepts. but scienctists take data from independant experiments. these experiments are performed independantly of each other to make sure that the data obtained is as objective as possible. data has to agree and is heavily critisized in science before progress is made with it. then once all the data is compiled the the scienctist makes a subjective interpetation of the objective data and that interpretation is called a theory. the theory attempts to explain the data and by doing so will make falsifiable predictions that future expirements can prove wrong, or fail to prove wrong(there is no proven true in science). any theory that is untestable(god made the universe) doesn't fit within the realm of science. and every scientist will tell you theres alot left to learn.

basically religion is a set of lies that gives people emotional security.

science is a set of lies that is better suited to our curiosity and the continueing advancement of human knowledge



ps. a black hole may be invisible, but its effect on space and time is not. scienctists have pictures showing black holes bending the light of distant stars as they pass in front of them.

Answer 2

ASKER: "Now I posed the same for infinite values, and as far as the leading scientists in this world, no infinite values exist either. Ok JP, there are black hole theories that constitute such probabilities, but they are not fact just theory."

JP says: I'm not an athiest. I wouldn't be answering this, but I assume I'm the JP you are referring to.

Asker, why spend so much concern with what other people believe? You have some sort of difficulty keeping your mind on your own affairs?

Try praying the Sun God up mornings and down evenings for a while. It will get your mind off athiests and what other people believe, and onto something positive.

I've been studying that pic on your icon, and you appear to be a clean cut young man, probably an okay person who just never learned to respect the fact that choices others make in spiritual matters aren't your affair. You doubtless are ignorant about many important facets of your own faith, have bought into evangelism, and are just young and opinionated about a lot of issues you know nothing about. Including the history of your own religious doctrine and icons, and those of others.

Listen to yourself grasshopper. Listen and you'll eventually learn.

Answer 3

nicely final time you reported Darwin lots, and what you suggested approximately Darwin grow to be in simple terms nonsense. i will attempt to inspect what you're saying. i don't understand why there is a few thing instead of no longer something. in certainty, I have not have been given any theory. yet I do think of this has no longer something to do with believing in God or no longer. Genesis starts off: "interior the initiating God created the heavens and the earth." It would not say why he does it or why he exists. i'm no longer applying that as a controversy against God, yet to instruct you that the question why there is a few thing instead of no longer something is unanswerable and probable meaningless. Or do you propose that scientific theories are based on the theory that each and every thing has a reason? and how is that available without a typical reason? Is that what you propose? if so, i would be chuffed to tell you that i do no longer truthfully have confidence that. i think of that causality isn't area of the form of the universe, yet area of the form of concept and language. "A reasons B" would not truthfully propose something different than for recognizing the statistical development that B happens incredibly often (or continuously) after A. the finished of area-time is largely a 4-dimensional merchandise, and the features of any area of it do no longer reason the features of the different area of it to any extent further then any different way around. So no, i do no longer have confidence there is causality interior the universe itself. Causality is a thank you to organize the help we've approximately it. It helps us to make testable predictions with regard to the destiny. It has no longer something to do with the way the universe truthfully is, by using fact in its totality it would not artwork in any way, it in simple terms is. Stuff happens, with the objective to declare. i do no longer use something to instruct God would not exist. i do no longer have confidence such information is ever available. Why could we want it?

Answer 4

I'm not an aetheist either, so sorry that you're not getting the responses you want but...

You can't prove God exists. He's an unprovable theory, just like your black holes. Can you prove black holes don't exist? Can an aetheist prove God doesn't exist?

Your argument is illogical to me. Believing nothing comes from nothing supports both god-believers and non-god believers. For the science folks you're talking about there was only ever a scientific explanation for everything. For the religious, God.

It's just a matter of faith - belief based on something not necessarily proven - whether you're talking about evolution or God.

Answer 5

There is no 'belief', as there is no faith involved.

Science asserts only what can be tested, and (unlike people like yourself) ackowledge the potential for error, and change, growth, and deeper understanding.

It allows for concepts such as 'theory', and allows for bringing contradictory concepts to the table with the conflicts that develop from 'belief' based systems. (See The Spanish Inquisition, The War in Iraq, and of course 9/11.)

The nicest thing about religion is that is doesn't mandate the hatred that seems the final result of, oh, let us say Christianity, a religion whose primary precept is supposed to be 'love your neighbor', and 'love your enemy', but in practice teaches and preaches mostly hatred, bigotry and violence.

Answer 6

You are making several erroneous statements about evolution at the least. Let's try and clean them up a bit, shall we?

Evolution at no point talks about things coming from nothing. Really. What it talks about is things coming from other things. One lifeform developing from another. And perhaps living things coming from unliving things. All these changes require energy, so it's not even like the changes come from nothing either.

Further, the theory of evolution (which talks about how species change over time) is really quite separate from cladistic theories (which talks about how a particular species came to be). Even if it turns out that some entity - divine or otherwise - dropped one or all of our current lifeforms on the planet from outer space, it would screw up cladistics but possibly have no effect on evolution. Whether things are being created now or not, they are still changing.

How exactly is this supposed to be contradictory? Where did you get the idea that any of this says something comes from nothing? Perhaps that is why the people you are calling out haven't responded to your satisfaction.

Peace.

Answer 7

I think you're confused. Atheism, or anti-theism is merely a rejection of a theistic point of view about the nature of reality. People are entitled to that. Agnostics are the ones who aren't sure whether there is or is not a "God". They're entitled to that. Friend, any way you look at it, it you are religious and you are intolerant of the point of view of others - then your religion ain't workin'!

Answer 8

I'm not usually one to answer a question like this but...
I'm not an atheist but I would like to know why people feel we all need to agree. We can either agree to disagree, or attack each other forever. If you are about to say "we are not attacking"...wrong. If you attack a persons deep belief you are attacking the person. I have my own beliefs. I'm not going to defend them because there is no reason to. For that same reason I don't feel atheists need to defend themselves or what they believe (and they need to leave the rest of us alone too).

Answer 9

You seem to be talking specifically about the big bang. This one area of science has almost NOTHING to do with any other area of science other than physics.

It has nothing to do with:
biology
archeology
psychiatry
mathematics
anthropology
etc...

So what exactly are you asking?

Answer 10

It's just someone's belief. Science is a belief just as much as Christianity or Judaism or Muslim. Not a religion, but a belief, yes. They all have their holes.

EDIT: Keep in mind that I am in no way saying that I'm an athiest or that I'm not an athiest.