Are you an atheist? (1 Viewer)

[Alc]

Not really much of a coincidence there. That's a very common tactic for any almost all religious fanatics. I can pretty much confirm they are not the same person. Aziz just hasn't been around in a long time.

Like I say, no accusation intended.

I liken it to the old expression about how you know you've understood something if you can explain it clearly to somebody else. If all you can do is parrot text from a book, without being able to explain why the text is correct, then you don't have much credibility.

 

[Vassago]

Like I say, no accusation intended.

No worries. I knew what you meant, just wanted to clear it up for anyone else who may not have understood the tongue in cheek.

 

[Mike375]

I thought by now we would have had the whole atheist issues solved

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Yeah, but to borrow a Woody Allen line (from What's Up, Tiger Lily), some people are sadistic, sodomistic necrophiles - they like to beat dead horses.

 

[Frothingslosh]

Aziz has been gone for a year or so. He's basically the Muslim version, with the same approach to discussion, the same standards of proof, and the same refusal to accept anything other than his holy book as evidence. One big difference is that I haven't seen Aziz ranting that liberals and progressives are willing and knowing participants in a grand conspiracy to destroy the US and murder all Christians (or Muslims, in this case).

Aziz does, however, insist that all people are born Muslim, and that anyone who isn't one now was either brainwashed away from it or chose to embrace evil.

 

[Alc]

Aziz does, however, insist that all people are born Muslim, and that anyone who isn't one now was either brainwashed away from it or chose to embrace evil.

Thank you! NOW I remember him.

 

[jeremy.lankenau]

I read an article in the Washington Post this morning that I think relevant, especially those of us who espouse a more scientific approach to reasoning. The article is entitled "How to Change Someone's Mind According to Science."

Some key points:
- After five rounds of back-and-forth comments between the original poster and the challenger, the challenger has virtually no chance of receiving a delta (the mathematical sign of change) [from the original poster indicating they changed their mind], they write.
- Numbers are important: The more people that try to persuade the original poster, the greater the likelihood of changing their view.
- So is timing: Those who write back first to the post first are more likely to persuade the original poster than those who write later

There are many other good tips to remember to help someone win a debate.

Full article can be found here

 

[AccessBlaster]

Some key points:
- After five rounds of back-and-forth comments between the original poster and the challenger, the challenger has virtually no chance of receiving a delta (the mathematical sign of change) [from the original poster indicating they changed their mind], they write.
- Numbers are important: The more people that try to persuade the original poster, the greater the likelihood of changing their view.
- So is timing: Those who write back first to the post first are more likely to persuade the original poster than those who write later

There are many other good tips to remember to help someone win a debate.

Full article can be found here

Hmm is this a how to brain wash 101? And if they don't change their minds what happens scientific waterboarding? lol

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Jeremy, in a "free-floating" topic that article might be correct, but when religion is involved, neither logic nor statistics have much effect. A zealot is a zealot and won't open his/her mind to the idea that their original position might be wrong. It takes a life-altering, ego-shattering, mind-bending event that reaches into the very core of your psyche to change your religious beliefs. (Or at least it did for me and for the people I know who used to be Christian and now are atheist.)

Until your beliefs are challenged by LIFE - not by people - you are probably not going to give up beliefs instilled into to by your parents, and that is the most common origin of your religious beliefs.

 

[aziz rasul]

This is in answer to those claim I don't regard science as important even though there are numerous times when I have quoted science. See my signature.

Here is something to ponder on regarding human reproduction in order to show where God’s creation matches God’s word.

The seminal fluid is created by secretions from the male reproductive organs. The 100-500 million spermatozoa (sperm) will move through the ejaculatory ducts to mix with fluid from the prostate, seminal vesicles and bulbourethral glands, forming semen.

The contributions and components of semen are:-

Gland Approximate (%)
Testes 2-5
Seminal vesicle 65-75
Prostate 25-30
bulbourethral glands Less than 1

Verily, We created man from a drop of mingled sperm (nutfahtin amchaj) …
Qur’an – Insan (Man) 76:2

· The seminal fluid, comprising of a mixture of four different liquids, travels from the male urinary tract to the female reproductive system.
· Only one spermatozoa will fertilise an egg in the fallopian tube.
· Once the egg enters into the egg, the fertilised egg goes into ‘lock down’ i.e. the single spermatozoa inside the egg cannot escape and no new spermatozoa can enter.
· Over two weeks, the fertilised egg becomes a clot.
· Thereafter, the clot travels down the fallopian tube and implants itself to the wall of the uterus. This is referred to as ‘implantation’. The levels of a pregnancy hormone (Human Chorionic Gonadotropin - HCG) increases which indicates that ‘implantation’ has occurred through a urine or blood test.
· Both men and woman have 23 pairs of chromosomes in each cell.
· Twenty two of these chromosome pairs (autosomes) are identical in both men and women.
· The twenty third pair, the sex chromosome (gonosomes), is an XX for women and an XY for men, thus men decide the gender of the child.

12. And [We] created man from an extract of clay (tiyn).
13. Moreover We placed him as a drop (nutfah) in a safe lodging.
14. Then We created the drop (nutfah) into a clinging clot (alaqah), and created the clinging clot (alaqah) into a lump of chewed flesh (mudrat), and created the chewed flesh (mudrat) into bones ('idham) and clothed the bones ('idham) with intact flesh (lahm); then We developed him into another creation. So blessed is Allaah, the best of creators.
15. Then indeed, after that you are to die.
16. Then indeed you, on the Day of Resurrection, will be resurrected.
Qur’an 23:12-16 See also 16:4, 22:5, 32:7-11, 75:37-38, 77:20-23 and 96:2

45. That He did create in pairs, male and female,
46. From a sperm (nutfah) drop when it is emitted.
Qur’an 53:45-46

The number of times the words man and woman occurs in the Qur'an is 23.

man (rajul)
2:282, 4:12, 6:9, 7:63, 7:69, 10:2, 11:78, 17:47, 18:37, 23:25, 23:28, 25:8, 28:20, 33:4, 34:7, 34:43, 36:20, 39:29 (thrice), 40:28 (twice) and 43:21

woman (aimra'a)
3:35, 3:40, 4:12, 4:128, 7:83, 11:71, 11:81, 12:21, 12:51, 15:60, 19:5, 19:8, 27:23, 27:57, 28:9, 29:32, 29:33, 33:50, 51:29, 66:10 (twice), 66:11 and 111:4

 

[scott-atkinson]

And your point is?

 

[aziz rasul]

That I don't ignore science as someone has accused me of.
Science or scientific laws is the creation of God just as the Qur'an is the word of God. Both should match.

 

[Frothingslosh]

Science or scientific laws is the creation of God just as the Qur'an is the word of God. Both should match.

And this right here is WHY you ignore science. You honestly believe that a bunch of iron age primitives hiding from demons at night actually knew everything there is to know.

 

[Galaxiom]

That I don't ignore science as someone has accused me of.

No Aziz, you don't ignore science. You look at science though a glass that is deeply tinged with your prejudiced exalting of Islam. Your Islam filter blocks out all observation that is not consistent with your faith.

Science or scientific laws is the creation of God just as the Qur'an is the word of God. Both should match.

Where there you go. By your own measurement the Qur'an comes up as a fail because it is not consistent with the observations made by science on many counts. Because of your filter, no matter what evidence or argument is advanced, you cannot see it.

We have been though this all before on this very thread. I remember the posts where you justified the Islamic laws that allow men to marry four women on there being more women in the world than men. You simply denied the contrary facts that I produced and claimed that you had a right to your own opinion.

Hopefully you will get someone else to have a discussion with this time around because I find it entertaining reading sometimes.

 

[aziz rasul]

Interesting to see that neither of you has even mentioned the detailed post I gave matching human reproduction to what the Qur'an states. Hmmmm, I wonder why that is?
Over the years I have consistently found that non believers go of at a tangent so you see at first their denials of the TRUTH. In the Hereafter there will be none of that going. You will have to face the TRUTH then.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Aziz, before we go around this mulberry bush again, please understand this distinction that I make.

You absolutely and always have the right to believe what you believe, and I will defend your right to that belief. Where we might have a dispute is more oriented to any attempt on your point to prove via some reasonable argument that you are correct. Whether you offer logic, science, or some other form of evidence, you open up those offerings to scrutiny, and some of us have viewpoints different than yours on the relevance or validity of your arguments.

My problem with your detailed "sperm and reproduction" article is that it is still merely an article about a primitive viewpoint of gestation.

14. Then We created the drop (nutfah) into a clinging clot (alaqah), and created the clinging clot (alaqah) into a lump of chewed flesh (mudrat), and created the chewed flesh (mudrat) into bones ('idham) and clothed the bones ('idham) with intact flesh (lahm); then We developed him into another creation. So blessed is Allaah, the best of creators.

Taken literally, this is not how gestation works, so is NOT a scientifically valid description. If you want to take it prima facie, it misses the idea.

Taken figuratively, the description uses incredibly crude descriptive terms that end with still claiming it to be a matter of creation. It also ignores a little factor called "gestational recapitulation" in which the human fetus goes through changes that resemble the evolutionary process compressed into a matter of a few weeks. But of course, evolution contradicts the ideas of direct creation so I'm sure that even if they knew it, the framers of the Quran would not have included such a concept.

Science or scientific laws is the creation of God just as the Qur'an is the word of God. Both should match.

Some of the principles of evolution and astronomy (and cosmology) are not consistent with various Holy books. I agree with your statement that the Word of God (in any of his/her/its myriad forms) and the findings of science should match. But when they don't, the problem is deciding which one is right. Most of the time (like, 99%+) we find that science is right and religion is wrong, but the folks who have been brainwashed by their clergy simply cannot accept the situation. It is because this divide exists between science and religion, and the divide keeps growing as the scientific evidence continues to increase, that some of us have given up entirely on religion as being unable to maintain credibility in light of ongoing scientific discoveries.

 

[Frothingslosh]

Aziz, what Galaxiom and I did would be better called 'not bothering to have a conversation with you'. You already believe you know everything, and your entire worldview is based around the assumption that you literally know everything and everyone else is wrong.

Pretty standard for a religious fanatic, honestly, and neither one of us is particularly interested in playing your game. You are utterly unwilling to accept that anyone else may ever have a point, and like Murderboy, we both know you will not only lie about and distort anything and everything in order to pull your preconceived ideas out of any information you may bring up, not only will you simply ignore any fact you can NOT twist to your satisfaction, but you will also lie about, twist, distort, misrepresent, and/or deliberately misunderstand any point we may choose to make.

Or to put simply, we are both fully aware that there is literally no value in attempting to have a conversation with you.

 

[scott-atkinson]

Aziz, you are entitled to your beliefs and to your viewpoint, as we are entitled to ours, trying to prove either side is fruitless as neither side will relent.

Lets just believe what we want to believe and live in peace.

 

[aziz rasul]

The_Doc_Man I agree that provable science must take precedence. I have no problems with that. If a 'holy' book says that the sun goes around the earth, then clearly the so called 'holy' book must be wrong. I am not oblivious to the fact that science is a standard we should use. However when looking at the various simple stages of human reproduction, we know certain factors which can be proven e.g.

only a single spermatozoon is required to fertilise the egg
the egg is a place in which the spermatozoon is lodged
the fertlised egg becomes a clot and eventually implants itself to the wall of the uterus

All the above factors are mentioned in the correct sequence in the verses I gave. If you find that crude, then that's your opinion which I don't share. We are, after all free thinking people. If someone puts a gun to my head and tells to not to believe in God, my thoughts will still remain in that direction.

People keep suggesting that non Muslims do not have a right to a view. Of course they do. I have simply given my point of view, that's all. Take it or leave it. Just as you may believe that I am brainwashed, I equally believe that non Muslims simply turn away from the TRUTH.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Aziz:

We have a very different interpretation of the meaning of the word 'clot' in any biological discussion. The other verses cannot be taken literally, either. Figuratively, they merely end with God having created someone, so we are back to personifying (or, more technically correct, anthropomorphizing) a natural phenomenon that doesn't need divinity to explain it.

If someone puts a gun to my head and tells to not to believe in God, my thoughts will still remain in that direction.

And, of course, in my case that belief in God cannot be threatened into existence by someone holding a gun to my head.

Belief must come from either faith or proof. In the absence of a direct visit by some divine entity (in the spiritual or mythological sense of the word 'divine'), I must say that I have too much doubt. Doubt that cannot be resolved by the word of a mortal person who has perhaps been deceived as a child and now cannot break out of the mental trap laid by his/her parents.

To me, it all comes back to whether you believe what you were told, and whether at some point that belief would be dispelled by deep introspection. Which is why I am atheist, by the way. My beliefs instilled during my childhood did not stand up to close scrutiny when I became an adult and starting thinking for myself instead of relying on the word of clergy. Oddly enough, it was in part due to the continued admonition among the Christian denominations that we had to make Jesus our PERSONAL savior. I.e. that belief could not come from anyone else, it had to come from within ourselves. And in my case, I could not find that belief within me.