For lack of better Ranting place

Actually Atheists know what to believe. It is that no god exists. Ever. But mother nature has near godlike properties in creating the world, but even though the Earth has survived tons of catastrophic events, nature is extremely fragile since burning pollutants can kill it, but life on other planets is totally realistic (making life not fragile as it would seem).

Also, there are different branches of atheism. They all can disagree on thousands of properties, but they are united in this: No god exists.

Or at least no Christian God, as they find all others pretty tolerant.

Well, that seems true

although, really Mother Nature is a stupid idea

I was about to say exactly what Q said, but a dumber version xDD

(*disclaimer : so not here to make waves, just curious of opinions and whatnot)

Why is Mother nature a stupid idea??

I had a feeling SSS would ask that.

Now why would you just assume something like that, Kazekage?? ^^;

It wasn't an assumption, more like a prediction~ But Amaterasu made the Mother Nature being stupid comment, so I'll let him deal wit it.

Thanks much! Ama has an... interesting way of saying things - I wanted to hear it ^^

quater wrote:Actually Atheists know what to believe. It is that no god exists. Ever. But mother nature has near godlike properties in creating the world, but even though the Earth has survived tons of catastrophic events, nature is extremely fragile since burning pollutants can kill it, but life on other planets is totally realistic (making life not fragile as it would seem).

Also, there are different branches of atheism. They all can disagree on thousands of properties, but they are united in this: No god exists.

Or at least no Christian God, as they find all others pretty tolerant.

^i agree with this.

SickSelfishSycho wrote:(*disclaimer : so not here to make waves, just curious of opinions and whatnot)

Why is Mother nature a stupid idea??

It is a stupid Idea, because it says

1. Nature is a self spirit type thing that is powerful, and basicallycreated all life on earth and sustains. Almost like Gaia of the old Greco-Roman, except adopted into our beliefs.

2. Also it takes place of the real creator who reigns on his thrown.

3. Are we really going to believe that some type of "women" goes around and takes care of the world? That is most fable then reality.

i read this somewhere i cant remember it clearly tho but it went a little something like this i think...

"if there was a time when nothing existed, then nothing would exist now...since everything comes from somewhere we cant say that there was a time when there was nothing"
it kinda proves theres a creator....GOD

amaterasu wrote:

SickSelfishSycho wrote:(*disclaimer : so not here to make waves, just curious of opinions and whatnot)

Why is Mother nature a stupid idea??

It is a stupid Idea, because it says

1. Nature is a self spirit type thing that is powerful, and basicallycreated all life on earth and sustains. Almost like Gaia of the old Greco-Roman, except adopted into our beliefs.

2. Also it takes place of the real creator who reigns on his thrown.

3. Are we really going to believe that some type of "women" goes around and takes care of the world? That is most fable then reality.

~ It doesn't say nature is a spirit type thing that is powerful and created everything. It does sustain life. The earth provides you with food and water, without which you would die a horrid death.

~ Of course it does. If that's what you believe in.

~ This would be something of a bad place for a chick joke, if that's what this last part is.
If it's not - then it's ridiculous.

I can help Ama on this one, I think when he refers to Mother Nature being stupid I believe he means the entity of Nature being it's own cognizant entity. He refers to the mother of nature from Greco-Roman times and the way that Nature sometimes is believed to be a powerful being of it's own that can control things. It's really late, but people nowadays do still believe in that kind of thing. I remember I argued with a very intelligent Darwinist for 2 hours and when it came to the end of the day, he'd rather believe in a shapeless beingless all powerful Nature entity than admit their was a God that he couldn't understand and comprehend. Also, most enviro whack jobs talk about Mother Nature in this same worshipful way.

So I do believe he was referring to that kind of Mother Nature, not the kind of mother nature where you just talk about how loving Nature can be and how beautiful and providing it is. Which, by the way, suggest a creator, since random chance of volatile chemicals and atoms colliding into each other rarely make for beauty or provision.

Again, this is late so my normal clarity is lacking.

I see, I see.

Yes! That it does. Things in chaos, don't just organize themselves. It's like a box with a buch of mechanical parts in it. The parts (when put together) make up a car. Unless somebody actually goes in and pieces these parts together the chances of them coming together to form a functional car is rather limited ^^

Yeah. I couldn't tell by your grammar or anything xp

I do believe a few run on sentences got smudged in there, yes.

That's actually a pretty good argument I've heard a few times. It's really solid when you get to the biology of animals and people~ There are something like 216 bones in the human body, all in the same spot, shape, weight, and strength we need to work as humans and if any of those elements were drastically changed, say a rib bone went where a wrist bone should be, or a leg bone came in backwards, we'd be useless if not dead. Yet the chances of us just coming out perfectly when our bone structure came to be is so severely astronomical that the only thing of chance that it even dwarfs a President Obama spending plan.

I'm not sure I got that last sentence there O_o

I was saying it's a realllllly big chance that if it just happened spontaneously.

Gotcha.

No problems! Sowwy for my slurred sleepiness. 3 Am isn't my thing like it is yours!

It's alright - I was just hoping I didn't miss something. Isn't it closer to 4 there??

Mhm!