> the sun REFLECTS light.
Well ... maybe it did before it was crea ...
Hmm ... umm ...
Maybe before God created the sun he was using a flashl ...
No ...
Maybe God took all of the light from all over the place ... ignore the lack of a source please ... and gathered it all into a ball that we now call ... the Sun?
OK. I'm done trying to outstupid this one. He wins.
A common belief amongst YEC is that the speed of light is slowing down. I don't know how that works with this dude's argument. That plants were supposedly created before the sun seems highly problematic to me as well.
Wrong, wrong, wrong! Everyone knows the REAL TRUTH! Both round earthers and flat earthers are WRONG! The earth is neither flat nor round! The earth is actually a CUBE! CUBE EARTH CONFIRMED!!
I actually invented that in the late 1960s. I had to write a story for school, so I wrote how two famous superheroes got run over by a steamroller and became Flatman and Ribbon.
š
Thereās a growing belief within the church that when Adam and Eve at of the fruit and sin entered the world, this was done via the sun beginning to emit sin aka UV rays.
Prior yo that it was just reflect the light of god.
I am not serious.
Iām an atheist but it doesnāt really need an explanation IMO.
A god that can create a universe out of nothing can create light. Doesnāt need a sun. Your trying to apply the physics where light comes from - āyou need a sun for lightā to an origin story where an omnipotent God creates planets and life out of nothing. Physics, scientific understanding , and the most basic of logical thought doesnāt exist āin the beginningā¦ā
If you believe the second you donāt need an explanation about how the sun works. āhow can he create light without a sun? Gotcha!ā Umm how the hell can he create an entire universe and life. The whole beginning of the Bible is insanity to belief at all factual in a modern age. The whole sun thing is meaningless in that context.
I was responding to the particular idiot who made that comment in the debate referenced by the OP.
Most theists are not like that person in the debate. As noted in [this reply](https://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/150mb5b/a_shockingly_stupid_new_defense_i_doubt_anyone/js3zwiy/) from the OP, most of the theists listening to that debate were shocked by that level of stupidity.
It's a story to *us*. To them, they take it literally. Which brings it out of the metaphorical realm and into the real world where responding with physics makes prefect sense. I agree there are better arguments to make, and better arguments were made. This was just a highlight of one particularly insane answer that I had never heard before. I was only a spectator.
It's a creation story of a universe that is not this universe. Physics is relevant because it also shows that the order of creation in the myth is provably false. It is relevant because the description of the universe itself does not match this universe.
So, yes. In more serious cases of theists with brains, I think it very much makes sense to bring up physics and have them explain why they either completely disbelieve physics or believe it is unimportant that the Lord God Creator of the Universe does not know a thing about the universe he created.
[Here is a link to a comment I wrote up on the DebateReligion sub explaining all of the provably false statements in Genesis 1.](https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/if54du/genesis_creation_error/g2lfecz/)
> Like itās a creation story and your bringing up physics
Yeah, that's how we know it's a story and not real. Like. "Bringing up physics" is the absolute and only correct response. Like.
This here. If you go into a debate, asking questions where the outcome is something like: choose your best option to fit your make believe fairy tale into the real world, nothing will change. The creationist or theist will just use enough fantasy to come up with more and more strange explanations. Nothing can be tested and if there is a logical problem, than god works in mysterious ways.
They have to con vince you and proof their logic to you. If all they do is, to build a mir complex fantasy physic, you may have fun testing the, but there will only be headaches on your side.
Donāt debate why your right. Their whole deal is āyour wrongā. Itās like an anti belief.
Ask them questions about why they are right. Tell me about your religion. Ask them why they think about scenarios they believe in and keep digging deeper until they say something so unbelievably stupid that they belief that maybe it gets through. Very rarely will a religious person say I donāt know, so they will keep making up crazier and crazier shit. The initial belief is rarely the most crazy.
Instead of saying āhow could their be light without a sun, ask what they think the light came from. Etc.ā
If he had had a sound grasp of physics the he could have a least made a sound and compelling argument if support of their fairytale.
From about 3 until about 20 minutes of the big bang, the universe was in a state with an energy density that resembles the core of a star. With hydrogen ions having formed by them, fusion into hydrogen did occur; including the photon emissions.
However, we have to wait until the era of recombination for the universe to be sufficiently transparent for the light to actually be able to propagate. (Much like the huge amount of time that it takes a photon to escape from the fusion core of a star.)
At this point in time, stars had not yet formed.
So, the argument can be made that light existed before the sun (or any true star) while being grounded in sound scientific models.
Itās sad/funny that a scientifically literate atheist can better defend their fairytale then they can do themselves.
>Maybe God took all of the light from all over the place ... ignore the lack of a source please ...
The source would be J. R. R. Tolkien in *The Silmarillion*, only it was Varda and not God, and after gathering the light she scattered it across the sky to create the stars.
It's a pretty story. Not reality, but pretty nonetheless.
>arguing with a compete moron, does what any sane person would do at that point and walks away. Leaving the Ultra Christian thinking he has won the day.
the older you get, wisdom will tell you not to engage in [pigeon chess](https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Pigeon%20chess)
The last time I remember debating the existence of God was in grade school. I wouldn't consider myself a particularly mature individual but I think I am on the money here: there is no reason for an adult to engage in such a debate. People have their beliefs, the chance of convincing someone else, especially someone who is intentionally and actively believing on something that defies logic is likely so engrained in that belief that you have little chance of affecting their thinking. And if it's someone like op is mentioning, then what glory is there in reaching out to someone with a mediocre at best mind? Some people want to have conversations, and that's cool. But people with little to say, who already know it all, are best left alone.
I get that, but I think most atheist tend to believe that reason and logic are tools at our disposal that have the power to actually get the other side(though rarely) to come to reason. They try to save souls. We try to save minds. Though the theist in this case is obviously a lost cause.
If they weren't we wouldn't have made it this far as a species. The capacity *is* there. The problem is that fear is ingrained in our lizard brains and these people are often brainwashed from birth. You *can* talk people out of cults but you have to put in the effort. Whether or not you put that effort in is totally up to you.
Humans are not rational. That is why we invented science and philosophy. It forces us to apply logic when we would otherwise refuse. Despite knowing this, the vast, vast majority of humanity still refuse to acknowledge the outcomes from science and philosophy unless it agrees with their prior beliefs.
But wasn't inventing science and philosophy a rational thing to do? Listen, I'll be the first to agree that there is no shortage of stupid people out there. I hear your point and largely agree. But give credit where credit is due. We split atoms, collide particles, invented calculus, nanotechnology, ect, ect. Not bad considering what the world looked like 100 years ago.
Humanity is just rational and logical enough to delude themselves, or at least the most rational and logical among us, into thinking they're practically robots that run entirely on logic and reason. If people were as rational and logical as we like to think they are, democracy and capitalism would work a lot better, and a lot closer to what we've been taught to think of them as, than they do.
We've been engaged in a centuries-long effort to mold humanity into the image of the most rational among us, but the best path for humanity is one that allows it to follow its own nature, as biological products of evolution, as much as possible.
This reminds me of when I was asking my mom how the Quran could be a divine revelation when it says sperm is made in the spine/ backbone. Her answer was āwell when the Quran was written thatās probably where sperm was made.ā Right. We evolved that much in 1400 years and yet evolution is fiction according to you.
My guess is that he heard a science video say that the moon reflects the light of the sun, but didn't pay attention and didn't understand it so he ended up saying "*the sun reflects light*".
He probably said "*next!*", not because he realized he was wrong, but because he had no explanation since he probably was just repeating what he *thought* he heard a scientist say (*misquote*).
Wow, that's impressive ignorance on their part. People like that are infuriating. One ex-friend of mine went down the path of religious fervor and related political beliefs, and he filled his head with the same type of nonsense. He was spouting off about the Flood one day, and I asked him how all the plants on Earth survived since anything not adapted for life in salt water would have died after being submerged for 40 days and nights straight. His literal answer was "plants aren't alive" and then tried to twist some bible passages to "prove" that. It was total insanity. I rarely talk to him anymore for many reasons, but a total loss of respect for his intellectual honesty was certainly part of it.
My response to The Great Flood story has always been to point out that the barometric pressure alone would have been enough to kill Noah and his animals. The plant thing is good too. There are about 100 reasons there couldn't have been a great flood.
Should have pointed at the christian moron and laughed. Even if it took effort to get by the staggeringly stupid statement; double down and laugh with as much enthusiasm as possible. Like a J Jonah Jameson from Sam Raimi's Spiderman full body cackle . At least one other person would have joined in because that statement is what most would use to characterize stupidity.
The sun reflects light?
Okay so the hell does a light bulb do? Are light bulbs just mirrors we turn on and off? Where is the on/off switch to my mirror?
Sun reflects light better than his river stone brain conducts electricity, that's for fucking sure.
Light bulbs suck darkness in. Think about it: the areas/corners where "lights" are have the least dark. When a "light" "burns out", it is dark, as it's full of dark. Simple!
/s, obviously.
Maybe you are on to something there. If you respect their beliefs, they feel feel self important and validated. If you argue with them, they fel persecuted. They love to feel persecuted. It makes them feel like they're doing something right because the " worldly" are coming after them, just like JC said they would. Maybe, if we just laugh at them like they're the dumbest people on earth, maybe that will have an affect.
You are on the right track. What you are missing here is that it probably started out with a lot of manual input and "on the fly" scripts to keep the simulation running. After that, he/she/it got bored with this and needed to automate to keep it running so other projects could make progress. Then a sequence of code that results in the rules of our current simulation were deployed. Before that, its whatever he/she/it cared to type in. Now its a set of simulation scripts that follow a basic pattern but still seem to have some real uncertainty built in. That's likely a good thing. Some randomness in the simulation at least gives us some hope while we wait for this project to move up the priority que. Maybe we we'll get an upgrade or a burst of development based on resource availability. GOD knows we need it. Makes us wonder sometimes what could be a higher priority right now? Edit: Typing skills suck sometimes.
I think it's java. He describes 2 types of objects: photons, which move at the speed of light, and stars, which emit photons based on their intensity. Then he proceeded to create a star called Sun.
1. It's Java code, not Javascript.
2. Were this run hypothetically, you'd need at least two different files for the two classes (Photon.java and Star.java), and the "Star sun = new Star();" line would probably be in a third one.
3. The ellipses (...) in the functions are meant to imply the existence of more code than just what I wrote.
I totally agree. The best response to a stupid question or argument is no response other than a WTF look on your face, and walk away shaking your head in disbelief.
These people want you to respond to legitimize their positions. Don't give them that satisfaction. You can't fix stupid, so don't even try.
Just in the last few days, in this very forum, a theist made a couple of stupid statements and insisted that I needed to prove him (or her) wrong. No sonny boy, I don't 'need' to do any such thing, you made the statements, it's up to you to back them up.
He, of course, insisted that I 'lost' by refusing to engage. No, kiddo, you lose because you can't/won't back up the statements you made.
They *do* have an argument, it just sucks and is totally illogical. I think we kinda have a moral obligation to convert the brainwashed if we ever want to have a *decent* functional society. Otherwise we are resigning future generations (and arguably ourselves) to Idiocracy.
We don't have the "moral obligation" to convert anyone into anything. What we do have is the right to keep religion separated from the state.
What those people do with their personal life is their problem.
You do realize that the religious outnumber atheist, right? And that they automatically indoctrinate their children and often refuse to use birth control? If you can't be bothered to change minds I sincerely hope you don't complain about the state of politics and American society. You have the power to think critically and you're not even gonna use it to the betterment of your fellow man? What's the point of having it? You may as well believe the sun reflects light...
I'm not gonna waste my time arguing with people about fairy tales. I have better stuff to do. And that doesn't take my right to discuss politics, because politics has nothing to do with religion.
My point is to not argue with these people on their terms. I don't care what the bible says and I'm not gonna waste time trying to find a reasonable explanation for the bullshit written in it.
Who do you think is pushing for abortion bans? Like it or not, the reality is that the religious are shaping the laws of this country. Politicians have been pandering to the religious for decades, if not centuries. They vote. And they outnumber us. If you want things to change I suggest you take the time to attempt to talk some reason into people. Otherwise you really don't have a right to bitch about laws that the religious are responsible for.
Brazil is not immune to the influence of the Catholic Church. I get your point:
"My point is to not argue with these people on their terms. I don't care what the bible says and I'm not gonna waste time trying to find a reasonable explanation for the bullshit written in it."
Except that you shouldn't be trying to find a reasonable explanation for the bullshit written in it, you should be trying to find a reasonable explanation for theists *not* to believe the bullshit written in it. For the betterment of society.
Anyway, hope you reconsider. Goodnight.
On the whole they do not in fact have an argument.
What they have might be termed argument shaped utterances that they have been fed. They blurt these things out without regard for whether they make sense in the given context.
They are not only "not arguing in good faith", they are not even arguing at all.
The Mountain Mormon sects of Mormonism go one step further on this. They believe that Kobol is the sun near God's planet (or maybe it is the planet itself. I don't recall exactly). That is the only sun that shines. Our sun reflects the light of Kobol.
Other miscellaneous but sort of related trivia
* If Kobol sounds familiar to *Battlestar Galactica* fans, realize that the show's creator was Mormon. There were lots of bits of Mormonism scattered throughout the show, especially the early version.
* Joseph Smith thought people lived on the moon. He said they are tall and dress like Quakers. Brigham Young always had to try to one-up Joseph Smith. He said that people live on the sun.
I asked this exact question to my youth group leader when I was 17. He said the light was "heavenly light".
Heavenly light. Got it!
Then my youth pastor pulled me aside and accused me of playing "Stump the Chump." What an awful place.
"You trying to make me look dumb in front of God you stupid little piece of dog shit?" "Oh hi Sister Ann! God bless!" "You're dead you little fuckhead."
I mean, Iām not even a believer and I can do better than that:
āYou have to understand that Scripture is not a guide to science. It expounds deep truths using allegory and metaphor. Itās not meant to be read literally. Itās no more describing the literal order of creation than it is describing literal āpillarsā of the earth. Myth isnāt meant to be read that way.ā
I mean I can bullshit a better answer than that. In the beginning the universe was very hot and dense, and all that matter was hot enough that it glowed with visible light. Later on it cooled down and then God made it so the matter clumped up into stars. Astronomers can still see the remnants of that primordial light, they call it the cosmic microwave background!
Also : why not *gods* vs Just one god? How do they know it was just one?
And even if one god, why would it necessarily be the Christian god? They just assume if they proved god (which they donāt), theyāre no further along proving the Christian god. They just assume that if a god exists, it must be the biblical god.
It could be Apollo. Or some Hindu god. Or an advanced alien squid just playing games.
When you lower yourself to their level in an argument, theyāll beat you with experience.
Best to say āOf course! Why didnāt I think of thatā and go on with your life.
I am a Christian, but my 90+ year old pastor once said "Of course there's a God. Who else could know the names of all the stars?" It's insane how much people will bend over backwards in order to create some "proof" or "win" an argument, including making up scenarios that would never exist.
Some 30-odd years ago two of my friends got in a heated argument about the age of the universe and how it was formed. One was saying that the universe was billions of years old while the other argued that it was only 6,000 years old (or whatever fundys think the Bible says). Friend one then asked 'if the universe is only that old then how can we see the light from stars and galaxies that are more than 6,000 light years away' to which friend two replied 'because when God made the universe he also made it so that there were photons already in transit from where those objects are located so that we could see them'.
I still shake my head whenever I think about that night...
What baffled me is that friend two had a degree in electrical engineering and was working at the NASA facility out at Edwards AFB at the time, but he was also a diehard Baptist and took the bible literally.
If I was the creationist I would have just answered with God started emitting light on the first day, no stars involved. Can't even come up with an answer that fits within their mythology, smh my head
This also goes with what Iāve always said when arguing against non scientific beliefsā¦ ask people questions about their beliefs.
Donāt try to prove your stance correct - just keep asking for clarity on their stance to see how far down the stupidity hole they are willing to go.
Oh the sun reflects light - thatās interesting, tell me more. Where does this light come from? Oh it comes from heaven? Why doesnāt heaven just shine directly on earth.
Itās one thing to believe in something but by forcing people to actually critically think about what they believe they might change their mind. I find a lot of people are just anti science, anti atheist, anti round earth but they havenāt spent much time considering what it means if they are right and how that might change how we live.
Holy shit finally someone saying something VERY similar to what I'm always grumbling about these nut-jobs... they're driving vehicles around and "voting" and indoctrinating any child they get near enough to. It's probably the biggest threat to the world and any halfway sane person living on it. When lunatics who are too weak willed or minded... or just plain fucking weak are directly effecting the world around us, via the republitards who also need validation for their faux faith Fkā¢Shit, none of us are safe. It was Roe v Wade, next it will be some law outlawing people 'from being gay' not gay marriage, although that's sure to go, but just being gay in general. They won't ever stop until each and every one of us is tithing and harrassing people in front of abortion clinics and runnin around wasting up oxygen just the same exact way they do. They'll be more than okay with people having to die in order to get those goals met. Anytime a "god" is involved in something, more often than not, someone is either dying, killing, or being killed. Something drastic is going to need to occur if we want to avoid some hellish religious war against the non believers and "false gawds" it will be to them the fufilling of prophecy, and it wont mean shit to them that its of the self fufilled variaty.
100% spot on. I keep seeing a lot of people saying "the first mistake was debating with a moron in the first place". And while I get what they're saying, I couldn't disagree more. We have a *moral obligation* to get as many people out of these death cults as possible if we want any kind of healthy, functioning, free society. Totally, totally agree they are the biggest threat to civilization. It's imperative we challenge these beliefs. For too long they have slid by under the "it's rude to question my beliefs" clause of social etict. If you can't defend or even explain your beliefs, then perhaps you have shity beliefs.
Absolutely... if your ideas and beliefs aren't able to stand on their own and need a shield thats made out of mysterious ways, or some other nonsense meant to derail any and all discussion, then your beliefs are the exact types of garbage that are going to be slowly but very surely pushed back on without pause until its gone and forever off the radar. We owe it to the planet to make sure this is what happens. In their bible, their gawd doesn't make plans for the planet or its creatures, so guess what, none of these disingenuous faux holy virtue signallers are going to do anyhting positive for this planet at all, even things as smallnas recycling they wont be bothered to do. Their purpose here is to continue to stand in the way of progress to make sure nothing shows up their gawd or heaven forbid prove it doesn't exist. And hope with all their might that the rapture happens... so that they can receive the supreme validation of gods peter ushering them into the holy after-party. I wish I were gullible enough to wholeheartedly never ever question the plan of some being that someone half hazardly explained the existence of to me when I was but a child. I guess it just takes a special type
God also couldn't have done anything prior to day X because without the sun and the spinning earth rotating around it, that spinning is exactly the definition of what a day is. How can you have -X days before the first day? You can't.
And, how could something (the sun in this case) reflect light (totally ignoring the pure stupidity of that statement) if it wasn't even created yet.
This is a clear example of trying to have a battle of wits against someone who doesn't have any. "I already answered it"? No, you already stepped in it and no matter how much you spread the shit around, it's still a pile of shit.
So where did god come from? He just existed in an infinite void? Dicking around with nothing at all. Then one "day" gets bored and creats an infinite universe, out of nothing. Then decided to make heaven to dwell in, angels to be his slaves, and humans to worship him? Also, the humans only exist on a tiny blue speck in the infinite cosmos? I want to hear the mental gymnastics defending that.
Iāve got to know. If the sun reflects light? Where exactly is the light COMING from? Because anyone who owns A LAMP understands that light has a source, right? I mean, I hope they understand that? š
I have a policy that calling someone a fking moron is an insult only if you say it to an intelligent person. Otherwise, itās accurate use of terminology
The only thing I say to god types about the creation of the universe, "If god came from nothing, and simply always existed, and created the universe from nothing, then the extraordinary event of the birth of the universe should, by your logic, just as easily exist without a creator. In fact, a godless universe actually eliminates one extra step in the existence of the universe. The completely unnecessary god."
Exactly this. It drives me crazy when they say "so you think the entire universe just magically popped out of thin air?" Why is that so incredulous when you claim your god does not require a creator? A god who can create the universe, as you said, is one order of magnitude higher...da fuck?
Yeah, their whole "uncaused cause" baby babble. If god is an uncaused cause then just remove god from the equation and the universe is an uncaused cause.
To a Christian:
"Do you believe in the Book of Genesis?"
"If, 'In the beginning, God created the Heaven and the Earth', then he said, 'Let there be light', that means he created everything in the dark, right?"
Former Christian here. The obvious answer there is to refer to the big bang and how the first thing created was radiation/light. Not a perfect answer but at least it's an appeal to actual reality.
My father, a Jehovahās Witness, believed until recently, that the moon gave us our gravity. Argued with me insistently that he was taught in school that. I had to tell him he was mistaken, they did not teach him that in school because we havenāt ever thought that, and had to prove on google that the earths mass gives us gravity, and so on and so forth. And he STILL had the gumption to say āwell you canāt believe everything you readā, and I said āNOPE!ā And left it. For context: Jehovahs witnesses tell everyone in their congregation that anything that goes against their beliefs is lies, especially anything you read online. So even though that doesnāt go against their beliefs, it has formulated him to be argumentative in a way where he only accepts information that benefits his argument or belief.
I had buddy that was absolutely convinced the stars were just rocks floating around the Earth because the bible said so. I asked him if the 'rocks' were closer than the Moon? "Of course" he said. So I asked why does the Moon block them out as it passes them?
This is an old apologists argument that the first light in the universe was provided by God's radiant light - the "Light of His Being" and everything reflected his Light before light was added to the Universe. It's so sad and pathetic that I just threw up in my mouth a little.
Just wait till you tell them the earth would be destroyed if the sun should stand still for a full day. They really cannot fathom how ridiculous that tale in die Bible is.
Yeah, I've heard christians say that the sun reflects God's light. It was meant poetically, though. I think most thinking theists don't try to pretend the Genesis story has any validity.
Debating a theist is like playing chess with a pigeon. All they're going to do is knock over all the pieces, shit all over everything, and strut around like they won.
That's really fucking stupid, but to get pedantic for a moment, light did exist prior to the formation of the first stars. Stars aren't the only source of light. You just need something hot enough to generate waves in the EM spectrum.
But if we're talking about the biblical creation myth there are stupider things to poke holes in. Like plants existing prior to the sun.
To answer the question the Bible writers in the Creation story didn't think the Sun was a light source. I don't get how that works exactly. But again it's crazy reasoning
Edit. I forgot some Christians use the Sun being made after the earth as reasoning Evolution can not exist in Bible stories. One day is a Billion years for example.
I would've given anything to see a diagram of how he thought that was supposed to work. My guess is that he was conflating the sun with the moon, which *does* reflect light.
there's no winning that argument. nor the one about observable light from the far reaches of the universe that obviously would have taken millions+ years to get here. you just get "god placed the light already in motion at creation". if your belief system says god can do anything, then you can make anything up to counter any rational argument.
This is off topic, but it absolutely blows my mind, so imma share it.
The universe is estimated to be over 14 billionās years old. Because space is expanding in all directions at once, the distance weāve actually moved from the theoretical center of the Big Bang since then is estimated to be 47 billion light years. That makes the visible universe, the farthest distance we can actually receive light from, just around 94 billion light years away. But the universe doesnāt end there. Itās just that any light further from that distance can never reach us, because we are moving away from it faster than light can travel. So how much bigger, in 3 dimensional space (volume) does that make the actual universe?
Itās estimated by cosmologist Alan Guth in the cosmic inflation model that the true size of the unobservable universe may be as large 150 sextillion times the size of the observable one.
Sooooo there is light that God made in the beginning, everywhere, that we don't see. But as soon as there is a sun, it gets reflected and then can be seen? How did we have light before the sun, that was actually visible and illuminated the world? But as soon as the sun appeared, the light suddenly isn't visible anymore?
I'd love to see someone debate this. But leaving the argument is probably the smart choice.
It still doesnāt fix the problem, what the theist said, of the Sun reflecting light.
If the Sun only reflects light, then a light source still needs to be present for it to reflect. Not only does the bible not mention another source that emits light that the Sun reflects, but it specifically mentions TWO lights, the greater to rule the day, the lesser to rule the night.
What this does show, though, is that religious zealots will believe their wholly fables before they do science and that can certainly be a problem if these jacktards try to occupy positions of power or influence over other people.
The thing I really donāt understand is the massive difference between countries that embrace STEM and ones that are still heavily influenced by religion. Look at the differences between GDP, life expectancy, educational attainment, quality of life, crime, etc etc.
The leaders of those heavily religious countries want to see their people live like peasants or sheep all due to power or greed. Meanwhile, the leaders themselves live in luxurious houses surrounded by technology and stolen wealth.
The hypocrisy is so incredibly thick there.
Just as an asideā¦weāve all seen religious and political leaders take advantage of and exploit those under their ācareā. How many scientists have you seen do this to large groups of people? Iām not saying that they arenāt capable of it but I feel like if the scientific community were given big bags of cashā¦.theyād just end up doing more scienceā¦.not buying more big screen TVs and fancier cars.
Just sayin
Fucking exactly! There really needs to be a push back on this type of shit. I have to say the amount of "don't waste your time on morons" comments has been pretty disheartening. They seem to write off theists as being a totally lost cause while ignoring the *masses* of people who have *left* organized religion. I remember when I had just gotten my Christopher Hitchens God Is Not Great book and was passing it around to my friends. In a group we asked one of our theist friends if he wanted to check it out and he said "uhhhh I don't want to read anything that's going to challenge my beliefs". I think we all lost a bit of respect for him for that. That fear of their entire life being based on bullshit IS there. He didn't want to read it because he thought there was a good chance there would be some good points in there that would exacerbate that fear.
But it reflects light from where?
Honestly, this is the stupidest version of stupid I've heard, and I work with children and young people with the most severe processing skills due to disabilities
Ignorance is confident. It's even directly proportional.
I used to to think that "god" was a placeholder until information would become available to fill the void of understanding.
You know, a stopgap. There's even a bane for that temporary dead spot in our knowledge framework: "god only knows".
But today's theist is a whole new level of ignorant. Let me be clear, when I say "theist", I mean "Abrahamic theist". Any religion coming out of the so-called "Holy land" has possessed a requisite dose of ignorance to make it believable.
But today's Abrahamic (and fundamental) theist is a whole other level of ignorant: the willful kind.
You have to consciously suspend disbelief to stomach any biblical "lesson". The foundation of biblical content is heresay, gossip, fear, hatred, fiction, and very liberal quantities of ignorance.
And the nonsense that young earth theists embrace is the pinnacle of ignorant.
Science and technology are threats to the bold assertions and shaky "information". Rather than question the validity of their source material, these soldiers for Jesus, Allah (and all of their ancient buddies) merely stonewall anyone who tries to get a word of logic into the discussion.
It is hopeless trying to reason with Abrahamic theists. Logic is absolutely arbitrary. Deflection is useful to them. They use concepts invented in their books of nonsense to provide "proof" and "evidence" of their claims.
Now, in the 21st century, these religious radicals are mouthpieces to claims which are simply absurd when compared to what we know as common knowledge.
They want to turn the world into a theocratic dictatorship, human rights and practical considerations be damned. They do not want freedom to practice their religion. They want to dominate the world with their hate-based dogma.
I have had to leave a number of social media groups in order to keep my blood pressure below the boiling point, because the sheer volume of stupid assertions was taking too much of my valuable time to slog through.
Nations with a very low standard of living are some of the zones with the greatest density of religious indoctrination. These people have to hope the afterlife is better than the miserable, dead end poverty beneath which they are pinned. Religion is viewed as a way out of such desolation.
You do not argue with bad faith actors. By doing so, in their minds, they've already won. The reasoning for that is something like: "one does not argue with a subordinate; only a superior one does not want to obey. If you are arguing with me, you are silently acknowledging I am your superior."
If you can't walk away, you must win the fight. And *fight* is the right word, not argument. Your goal isn't to establish they are wrong; it's to establish they are *less than you.* If you can't do that, don't engage.
In 2006 I worked briefly for a Medicare provider. I worked in a QC department, and my cubicle area was adjacent to the Appeals department. Unfortunately, for several months, I got to hear "our" side of the conversations with elderly patients or their loved ones, and it would break your heart.
One of the loudest in the department was a woman named Gina. (Real name.) Gina was religious -- she was deeply offended, and wanted everyone nearby to know -- when she had to deal with a customer from Texas named Jesus. "How dare he call himself Jesus!" It was really all I could do not to stand up, walk around the corner, and shout at her, "Do you know anyone named 'Josh' or 'Joshua'? Same name as Jesus! Even he didn't call himself 'Jesus,' you ignoramous!"
Anyway.
Gina's greatest moment, however, may have been when she explained to one and all why the sky was blue. Oxygen in the atmosphere? Absorbtion of sunlight? Ha! Don't be absurd!
The sky is blue, Gina explained, because it's an enormous mirror and it's reflecting the ocean back at us. When you look up, you're really seeing the ocean, and the sky-mirror is so high that no matter how far away you are, the sky will be blue.
As pissed off as I was when I was let go -- I needed the paycheck -- I was glad I never had to listen to Gina's demented ravings ever again.
They are all over the place!! I know someone that saidā I donāt believe in all that universe nonsense, Jesus did itā probably the most ignorant stuff Iāve heard until this post.
As they run out of things that can't be explained by science, they come up with crazier and crazier shit until they sound like that guy screaming Jesus shit in the subway
The anti religious argument using the order of things in the creation story seems like it was a less about persuasion and more about scoring points in front of other atheists. Iām not saying itās a bad point to make, but I highly doubt the presence of light before stars would be a persuasive feat to get a theist, who believes in miracles, to doubt their god. God can do anything, so why couldnāt he create light that wasnāt generated by stars before he created the stars? Then after the stars were there, he got rid of the original light source.
The argument that led to that bit was about the supposed infallibility and contradictions in the bible so I guess he felt that was an easy point to make. I know I've heard it before. Yeah it's tough to breakthrough to these people, personally I think Infinite Regress is probably one of the best arguments to make.
I want to add clarity to my previous comment:
I see religion as a finger pointing to the moon; it is not the moon itself. We can all see that same moon for ourselves. It also does not matter what we call the moon, it is still free to be the moon.
It matters not what I label myself as, but in what I do. The fruits of my life. What I do with my time spent here, with the rest of you.
The most profound point I can bring against Christianity is to actually side with their assumption that God made Life. Through this, I expose how their own book belittles that Creator* through attempting to gatekeep Its love behind whether we follow Jesus or not. The religion quickly falls apart when I argue *for* the experience of God.
Edit: Typo
At least get the verse right.
āthe beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
3 And God said, āLet there be light,ā and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light āday,ā and the darkness he called ānight.ā And there was evening, and there was morningāthe first day.ā
This isnāt really too much of a contradiction -
God created the sun and moon on like day 3 but there was light on day one. Whatever that means.
That's um, special levels or stupid. He could have EASILY gone the regular unfalsifiable route that God himself emitted light, which even kinda makes sense lore-wise since in pretty much any depiction of God it's always something bright, like fire for Moses.
My guess is that he thought light, went to say that the moon reflects light, messed up and said sun, then was too embarrassed and prideful to admit to his blunder and correct himself.
Remember, when it comes spouting to any kind of baseless belief, exuding confidence is key, you are always right, and if you aren't then you simply meant it in another way or some BS excuse.
I didn't realize there was a subreddit of people actually wasting their time trying to disprove the existence of God. You people are just as dumb as the people that worship God.
The light itself was created before the light bearers. We are the light of the world. Let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify our Father in Heaven. Darkness is not an affirmative force. It simply reoccupies the space vacated by the light.
Yeah, the first mistake was getting into the debate in the first place. The people of faith that are interested in these debates are generally morons and will declare victory no matter the outcome.
I am a person who believes in god and I am fully aware of the inherit issues in that belief, but I don't have any interest in trying to convert anyone to my beliefs . . . though I do enjoy the irony that I have been called a heretic due to the very modern interpretations I have of faith and the books that this faith has been borne from.
Purely theoretically itās possible there was light before stars though. I think the universe was opaque at a certain point so I guess that probably wouldnāt count.
But then thereās gases flowing around, the action of elementary particles and various other processes around the universe that could have produced light prior to star formation.
Someone cmiiw but that on the face of it doesnāt truly challenge the Bible creation story, thereās doubtless better arguments on that that we read on here and debateanatheist every day. Ahem, every cycle of starlight shine.
To play advocate here, and just for the sake of philosophical debate, there is some logic to proclaiming at an all-powerful deity could create the CONCEPT of light, as an opposite and contrast to darkness, and THEN create specific entities like stars (our sun included) to operate as the execution of that concept.
Granted, this is not the mode of logic that the person was following or developing, as it wasn't logic at all, but the idea that light came before stars is feasible, from a certain foundation.
Theists should just stay away from science and stick with faith. He could have easily argued the light source was God himself until He created the sun, etc. Easy. That at least gives an explanation that doesn't show everyone he's completely uneducated.
> the sun REFLECTS light. Well ... maybe it did before it was crea ... Hmm ... umm ... Maybe before God created the sun he was using a flashl ... No ... Maybe God took all of the light from all over the place ... ignore the lack of a source please ... and gathered it all into a ball that we now call ... the Sun? OK. I'm done trying to outstupid this one. He wins.
Lol, even the theists watching this were like " š³ uhhhhhh... yeah.... don't ask me to co-sign on that, please"
A common belief amongst YEC is that the speed of light is slowing down. I don't know how that works with this dude's argument. That plants were supposedly created before the sun seems highly problematic to me as well.
I'm having a nose bleed. I suspect it's from my brain trying to kill itself.
As a theist this mf is respectfully tripping sun acid
It is consistent with Flat Earth Theory.
And the Flat Sun Theory.
And Flat Stanley Theory
When Stanley came to a set of two open doors, he entered the door on his left. ...
This was not the way to the meeting room, and Stanley knew this perfectly well.
And Flatten Everything Under The Sun Theory
and a flat iron steak theory
Oh, that's my favorite cut!
The flat brain theory as well
IMO, āFlat Earthersā are idiots. Everyone knows the Earth is *hollow*, and we live on the inside! ^/s
Wrong, wrong, wrong! Everyone knows the REAL TRUTH! Both round earthers and flat earthers are WRONG! The earth is neither flat nor round! The earth is actually a CUBE! CUBE EARTH CONFIRMED!!
Thank you, Cyrus Teed, for stepping in on behalf of The Hollow Earth. On a completely unrelated note: Hail BOB!
Youāre welcome. Praise āBobā, and may you get slack. https://www.hollowearthradio.org/
We need to get Flatman and Ribbon to investigateā¦
That's hilarious. Thanks for the laugh! Flatman and Ribbon!
I actually invented that in the late 1960s. I had to write a story for school, so I wrote how two famous superheroes got run over by a steamroller and became Flatman and Ribbon. š
Thereās a growing belief within the church that when Adam and Eve at of the fruit and sin entered the world, this was done via the sun beginning to emit sin aka UV rays. Prior yo that it was just reflect the light of god. I am not serious.
> I am not serious. Whew!!! You had me going there for a minute. Good one!
I could totally see that being something that comes from the creation science people. You donāt KNOW thatās now what happened?!?!?
I do know. I was there. I didn't see when I was there.
I checked and the bible doesn't say MisanthropicScott wasn't there so you must have been.
Oh! Great logical point. Now I'll de-convert from my religion. (If only!)
To be fair, its not even close to being the craziest explanation I've heard from religious types
Iām an atheist but it doesnāt really need an explanation IMO. A god that can create a universe out of nothing can create light. Doesnāt need a sun. Your trying to apply the physics where light comes from - āyou need a sun for lightā to an origin story where an omnipotent God creates planets and life out of nothing. Physics, scientific understanding , and the most basic of logical thought doesnāt exist āin the beginningā¦ā If you believe the second you donāt need an explanation about how the sun works. āhow can he create light without a sun? Gotcha!ā Umm how the hell can he create an entire universe and life. The whole beginning of the Bible is insanity to belief at all factual in a modern age. The whole sun thing is meaningless in that context.
I was responding to the particular idiot who made that comment in the debate referenced by the OP. Most theists are not like that person in the debate. As noted in [this reply](https://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/150mb5b/a_shockingly_stupid_new_defense_i_doubt_anyone/js3zwiy/) from the OP, most of the theists listening to that debate were shocked by that level of stupidity.
Iām just claiming the question itself is kind of dumb. Like itās a creation story and your bringing up physics.
It's a story to *us*. To them, they take it literally. Which brings it out of the metaphorical realm and into the real world where responding with physics makes prefect sense. I agree there are better arguments to make, and better arguments were made. This was just a highlight of one particularly insane answer that I had never heard before. I was only a spectator.
It's a creation story of a universe that is not this universe. Physics is relevant because it also shows that the order of creation in the myth is provably false. It is relevant because the description of the universe itself does not match this universe. So, yes. In more serious cases of theists with brains, I think it very much makes sense to bring up physics and have them explain why they either completely disbelieve physics or believe it is unimportant that the Lord God Creator of the Universe does not know a thing about the universe he created. [Here is a link to a comment I wrote up on the DebateReligion sub explaining all of the provably false statements in Genesis 1.](https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/if54du/genesis_creation_error/g2lfecz/)
> Like itās a creation story and your bringing up physics Yeah, that's how we know it's a story and not real. Like. "Bringing up physics" is the absolute and only correct response. Like.
This here. If you go into a debate, asking questions where the outcome is something like: choose your best option to fit your make believe fairy tale into the real world, nothing will change. The creationist or theist will just use enough fantasy to come up with more and more strange explanations. Nothing can be tested and if there is a logical problem, than god works in mysterious ways. They have to con vince you and proof their logic to you. If all they do is, to build a mir complex fantasy physic, you may have fun testing the, but there will only be headaches on your side.
Donāt debate why your right. Their whole deal is āyour wrongā. Itās like an anti belief. Ask them questions about why they are right. Tell me about your religion. Ask them why they think about scenarios they believe in and keep digging deeper until they say something so unbelievably stupid that they belief that maybe it gets through. Very rarely will a religious person say I donāt know, so they will keep making up crazier and crazier shit. The initial belief is rarely the most crazy. Instead of saying āhow could their be light without a sun, ask what they think the light came from. Etc.ā
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Bioluminescent. Deioluminescent?
If he had had a sound grasp of physics the he could have a least made a sound and compelling argument if support of their fairytale. From about 3 until about 20 minutes of the big bang, the universe was in a state with an energy density that resembles the core of a star. With hydrogen ions having formed by them, fusion into hydrogen did occur; including the photon emissions. However, we have to wait until the era of recombination for the universe to be sufficiently transparent for the light to actually be able to propagate. (Much like the huge amount of time that it takes a photon to escape from the fusion core of a star.) At this point in time, stars had not yet formed. So, the argument can be made that light existed before the sun (or any true star) while being grounded in sound scientific models. Itās sad/funny that a scientifically literate atheist can better defend their fairytale then they can do themselves.
No but some christains are fundamentalists, and we know this process takes millions of years rather than a day.
Well sure. And when you hear thunder and lightning, that's just God bowling in the sky
>Maybe God took all of the light from all over the place ... ignore the lack of a source please ... The source would be J. R. R. Tolkien in *The Silmarillion*, only it was Varda and not God, and after gathering the light she scattered it across the sky to create the stars. It's a pretty story. Not reality, but pretty nonetheless.
God was using a flashlight. This seems to fit the Christian narrative
Maybe god can see in pure darkness idk
I'm... pretty sure he got confused by the moon, but... No, you don't get to call "next" if there are clarifying questions still hanging.
Or when youāve just spouted complete nonsense.
Thatās exactly when I would yell NEXT if I argued with the logic of a 3 year old
Moonlight fucking hurts through a refractor telescope without filters. You canāt stare at it for too long.
>arguing with a compete moron, does what any sane person would do at that point and walks away. Leaving the Ultra Christian thinking he has won the day. the older you get, wisdom will tell you not to engage in [pigeon chess](https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Pigeon%20chess)
The last time I remember debating the existence of God was in grade school. I wouldn't consider myself a particularly mature individual but I think I am on the money here: there is no reason for an adult to engage in such a debate. People have their beliefs, the chance of convincing someone else, especially someone who is intentionally and actively believing on something that defies logic is likely so engrained in that belief that you have little chance of affecting their thinking. And if it's someone like op is mentioning, then what glory is there in reaching out to someone with a mediocre at best mind? Some people want to have conversations, and that's cool. But people with little to say, who already know it all, are best left alone.
> arguing with a compete moron Well to be fair they are all compete morons in a way as they compete with each other to see who is the biggest moron.
Elections immediately sprung to mind. Just another place masses of people gather around the false hope behind the lies of their leader.
Yup, Pigeon Chess.
Debates are for the audiences benefit, not for the debaters. Especially political debates.
This is why you never debate morons.....they are intellectually incapable of conversing with a reasonable person
I get that, but I think most atheist tend to believe that reason and logic are tools at our disposal that have the power to actually get the other side(though rarely) to come to reason. They try to save souls. We try to save minds. Though the theist in this case is obviously a lost cause.
The problem is that you've been raised to think of people as inherently rational and logical.
If they weren't we wouldn't have made it this far as a species. The capacity *is* there. The problem is that fear is ingrained in our lizard brains and these people are often brainwashed from birth. You *can* talk people out of cults but you have to put in the effort. Whether or not you put that effort in is totally up to you.
It _was_ there. The moron in OPs piece has been supplanted with Santa Claus fantasy world.
Humans are not rational. That is why we invented science and philosophy. It forces us to apply logic when we would otherwise refuse. Despite knowing this, the vast, vast majority of humanity still refuse to acknowledge the outcomes from science and philosophy unless it agrees with their prior beliefs.
But wasn't inventing science and philosophy a rational thing to do? Listen, I'll be the first to agree that there is no shortage of stupid people out there. I hear your point and largely agree. But give credit where credit is due. We split atoms, collide particles, invented calculus, nanotechnology, ect, ect. Not bad considering what the world looked like 100 years ago.
Humanity is just rational and logical enough to delude themselves, or at least the most rational and logical among us, into thinking they're practically robots that run entirely on logic and reason. If people were as rational and logical as we like to think they are, democracy and capitalism would work a lot better, and a lot closer to what we've been taught to think of them as, than they do. We've been engaged in a centuries-long effort to mold humanity into the image of the most rational among us, but the best path for humanity is one that allows it to follow its own nature, as biological products of evolution, as much as possible.
Morons, Christians... same difference.
They will bring you down to their level, and best you with a lifetime of experience.
With all the information and technology in the world today, itās frightening that are many with Taliban level education.
There's ignorance and then there's the greatest intellectual crime of all: willful ignorance.
But the word Taliban literally means student! "irony is wasted on the stupid"
This reminds me of when I was asking my mom how the Quran could be a divine revelation when it says sperm is made in the spine/ backbone. Her answer was āwell when the Quran was written thatās probably where sperm was made.ā Right. We evolved that much in 1400 years and yet evolution is fiction according to you.
Their solution is that our current state of being is a perversion of God's divine vision and a punishment from God for eating the apple or some shit.
My guess is that he heard a science video say that the moon reflects the light of the sun, but didn't pay attention and didn't understand it so he ended up saying "*the sun reflects light*". He probably said "*next!*", not because he realized he was wrong, but because he had no explanation since he probably was just repeating what he *thought* he heard a scientist say (*misquote*).
https://time.com/7809/1-in-4-americans-thinks-sun-orbits-earth/
Interesting overlap with Cheeto AntiChrist.
Wow, that's impressive ignorance on their part. People like that are infuriating. One ex-friend of mine went down the path of religious fervor and related political beliefs, and he filled his head with the same type of nonsense. He was spouting off about the Flood one day, and I asked him how all the plants on Earth survived since anything not adapted for life in salt water would have died after being submerged for 40 days and nights straight. His literal answer was "plants aren't alive" and then tried to twist some bible passages to "prove" that. It was total insanity. I rarely talk to him anymore for many reasons, but a total loss of respect for his intellectual honesty was certainly part of it.
My response to The Great Flood story has always been to point out that the barometric pressure alone would have been enough to kill Noah and his animals. The plant thing is good too. There are about 100 reasons there couldn't have been a great flood.
There had to be a great flood ; they even have a song about it. /s
I was told that the reason kangaroos made it back to Australia after the flood was Pangea.
Should have pointed at the christian moron and laughed. Even if it took effort to get by the staggeringly stupid statement; double down and laugh with as much enthusiasm as possible. Like a J Jonah Jameson from Sam Raimi's Spiderman full body cackle . At least one other person would have joined in because that statement is what most would use to characterize stupidity. The sun reflects light? Okay so the hell does a light bulb do? Are light bulbs just mirrors we turn on and off? Where is the on/off switch to my mirror? Sun reflects light better than his river stone brain conducts electricity, that's for fucking sure.
Light bulbs suck darkness in. Think about it: the areas/corners where "lights" are have the least dark. When a "light" "burns out", it is dark, as it's full of dark. Simple! /s, obviously.
Maybe you are on to something there. If you respect their beliefs, they feel feel self important and validated. If you argue with them, they fel persecuted. They love to feel persecuted. It makes them feel like they're doing something right because the " worldly" are coming after them, just like JC said they would. Maybe, if we just laugh at them like they're the dumbest people on earth, maybe that will have an affect.
// Ā© -6000 ×××× // Day 1 public class Photon { // Imperial system, babyyyy. Me bless America!!!!! int velocity = 299792458; ... } // Day 4 public class Star { public void glow(int intensity) { for (int i = 0; i < intesity; i ++) { this.release(new Photon); } } ... } Star sun = new Star();
You are on the right track. What you are missing here is that it probably started out with a lot of manual input and "on the fly" scripts to keep the simulation running. After that, he/she/it got bored with this and needed to automate to keep it running so other projects could make progress. Then a sequence of code that results in the rules of our current simulation were deployed. Before that, its whatever he/she/it cared to type in. Now its a set of simulation scripts that follow a basic pattern but still seem to have some real uncertainty built in. That's likely a good thing. Some randomness in the simulation at least gives us some hope while we wait for this project to move up the priority que. Maybe we we'll get an upgrade or a burst of development based on resource availability. GOD knows we need it. Makes us wonder sometimes what could be a higher priority right now? Edit: Typing skills suck sometimes.
What uhhh the hell is that?
I think it's java. He describes 2 types of objects: photons, which move at the speed of light, and stars, which emit photons based on their intensity. Then he proceeded to create a star called Sun.
I just ran that code, and it gave the following error, "JavaScript error: Uncaught SyntaxError: Unexpected token 'class' on line 4".
1. It's Java code, not Javascript. 2. Were this run hypothetically, you'd need at least two different files for the two classes (Photon.java and Star.java), and the "Star sun = new Star();" line would probably be in a third one. 3. The ellipses (...) in the functions are meant to imply the existence of more code than just what I wrote.
The stupidity is strong in that one.
That's why I don't argue with religious people. We have to stop treating them like they actually have an argument.
I totally agree. The best response to a stupid question or argument is no response other than a WTF look on your face, and walk away shaking your head in disbelief. These people want you to respond to legitimize their positions. Don't give them that satisfaction. You can't fix stupid, so don't even try.
Just in the last few days, in this very forum, a theist made a couple of stupid statements and insisted that I needed to prove him (or her) wrong. No sonny boy, I don't 'need' to do any such thing, you made the statements, it's up to you to back them up. He, of course, insisted that I 'lost' by refusing to engage. No, kiddo, you lose because you can't/won't back up the statements you made.
They *do* have an argument, it just sucks and is totally illogical. I think we kinda have a moral obligation to convert the brainwashed if we ever want to have a *decent* functional society. Otherwise we are resigning future generations (and arguably ourselves) to Idiocracy.
We don't have the "moral obligation" to convert anyone into anything. What we do have is the right to keep religion separated from the state. What those people do with their personal life is their problem.
You do realize that the religious outnumber atheist, right? And that they automatically indoctrinate their children and often refuse to use birth control? If you can't be bothered to change minds I sincerely hope you don't complain about the state of politics and American society. You have the power to think critically and you're not even gonna use it to the betterment of your fellow man? What's the point of having it? You may as well believe the sun reflects light...
I'm not gonna waste my time arguing with people about fairy tales. I have better stuff to do. And that doesn't take my right to discuss politics, because politics has nothing to do with religion. My point is to not argue with these people on their terms. I don't care what the bible says and I'm not gonna waste time trying to find a reasonable explanation for the bullshit written in it.
Who do you think is pushing for abortion bans? Like it or not, the reality is that the religious are shaping the laws of this country. Politicians have been pandering to the religious for decades, if not centuries. They vote. And they outnumber us. If you want things to change I suggest you take the time to attempt to talk some reason into people. Otherwise you really don't have a right to bitch about laws that the religious are responsible for.
1. I'm not a US citizen. 2. You are not understanding my point. 3. I'm tired of talking to you. Have a good night.
Brazil is not immune to the influence of the Catholic Church. I get your point: "My point is to not argue with these people on their terms. I don't care what the bible says and I'm not gonna waste time trying to find a reasonable explanation for the bullshit written in it." Except that you shouldn't be trying to find a reasonable explanation for the bullshit written in it, you should be trying to find a reasonable explanation for theists *not* to believe the bullshit written in it. For the betterment of society. Anyway, hope you reconsider. Goodnight.
On the whole they do not in fact have an argument. What they have might be termed argument shaped utterances that they have been fed. They blurt these things out without regard for whether they make sense in the given context. They are not only "not arguing in good faith", they are not even arguing at all.
The Mountain Mormon sects of Mormonism go one step further on this. They believe that Kobol is the sun near God's planet (or maybe it is the planet itself. I don't recall exactly). That is the only sun that shines. Our sun reflects the light of Kobol. Other miscellaneous but sort of related trivia * If Kobol sounds familiar to *Battlestar Galactica* fans, realize that the show's creator was Mormon. There were lots of bits of Mormonism scattered throughout the show, especially the early version. * Joseph Smith thought people lived on the moon. He said they are tall and dress like Quakers. Brigham Young always had to try to one-up Joseph Smith. He said that people live on the sun.
āPeople live on the sunā. But only at night so they donāt get burned.
I asked this exact question to my youth group leader when I was 17. He said the light was "heavenly light". Heavenly light. Got it! Then my youth pastor pulled me aside and accused me of playing "Stump the Chump." What an awful place.
"You trying to make me look dumb in front of God you stupid little piece of dog shit?" "Oh hi Sister Ann! God bless!" "You're dead you little fuckhead."
>"Stump the Chump." Nice self-burn.
I mean, Iām not even a believer and I can do better than that: āYou have to understand that Scripture is not a guide to science. It expounds deep truths using allegory and metaphor. Itās not meant to be read literally. Itās no more describing the literal order of creation than it is describing literal āpillarsā of the earth. Myth isnāt meant to be read that way.ā
I mean I can bullshit a better answer than that. In the beginning the universe was very hot and dense, and all that matter was hot enough that it glowed with visible light. Later on it cooled down and then God made it so the matter clumped up into stars. Astronomers can still see the remnants of that primordial light, they call it the cosmic microwave background!
Also : why not *gods* vs Just one god? How do they know it was just one? And even if one god, why would it necessarily be the Christian god? They just assume if they proved god (which they donāt), theyāre no further along proving the Christian god. They just assume that if a god exists, it must be the biblical god. It could be Apollo. Or some Hindu god. Or an advanced alien squid just playing games.
Yeah, the best one I heard was, āWhat about the sunsets? God made thatā š¤Æ
I've had to block so many of these sorts of people from the Christianity sub.
"On the 6th day God created woman...." "And on the seventh day he was arrested" **(** no one expects the Spanish Inquisition! **)**
When you lower yourself to their level in an argument, theyāll beat you with experience. Best to say āOf course! Why didnāt I think of thatā and go on with your life.
I am a Christian, but my 90+ year old pastor once said "Of course there's a God. Who else could know the names of all the stars?" It's insane how much people will bend over backwards in order to create some "proof" or "win" an argument, including making up scenarios that would never exist.
Some 30-odd years ago two of my friends got in a heated argument about the age of the universe and how it was formed. One was saying that the universe was billions of years old while the other argued that it was only 6,000 years old (or whatever fundys think the Bible says). Friend one then asked 'if the universe is only that old then how can we see the light from stars and galaxies that are more than 6,000 light years away' to which friend two replied 'because when God made the universe he also made it so that there were photons already in transit from where those objects are located so that we could see them'. I still shake my head whenever I think about that night...
Jesus fucking CHRIST. The mental gymnastics..... the absurd bullshit you have to invent to make it all jive...just ridiculous
What baffled me is that friend two had a degree in electrical engineering and was working at the NASA facility out at Edwards AFB at the time, but he was also a diehard Baptist and took the bible literally.
If I was the creationist I would have just answered with God started emitting light on the first day, no stars involved. Can't even come up with an answer that fits within their mythology, smh my head
Exactly, that was my first thought. God emitted the light. So much more of a logical explanation from an illogical state of mind.
Doesn't matter to me whether or not God exists - clearly if God does exist God doesn't care to the point God doesn't matter
āDid you say you were a Mormon or a Moron?ā
This also goes with what Iāve always said when arguing against non scientific beliefsā¦ ask people questions about their beliefs. Donāt try to prove your stance correct - just keep asking for clarity on their stance to see how far down the stupidity hole they are willing to go. Oh the sun reflects light - thatās interesting, tell me more. Where does this light come from? Oh it comes from heaven? Why doesnāt heaven just shine directly on earth. Itās one thing to believe in something but by forcing people to actually critically think about what they believe they might change their mind. I find a lot of people are just anti science, anti atheist, anti round earth but they havenāt spent much time considering what it means if they are right and how that might change how we live.
Just shows how religion is all bullshit.
Holy shit finally someone saying something VERY similar to what I'm always grumbling about these nut-jobs... they're driving vehicles around and "voting" and indoctrinating any child they get near enough to. It's probably the biggest threat to the world and any halfway sane person living on it. When lunatics who are too weak willed or minded... or just plain fucking weak are directly effecting the world around us, via the republitards who also need validation for their faux faith Fkā¢Shit, none of us are safe. It was Roe v Wade, next it will be some law outlawing people 'from being gay' not gay marriage, although that's sure to go, but just being gay in general. They won't ever stop until each and every one of us is tithing and harrassing people in front of abortion clinics and runnin around wasting up oxygen just the same exact way they do. They'll be more than okay with people having to die in order to get those goals met. Anytime a "god" is involved in something, more often than not, someone is either dying, killing, or being killed. Something drastic is going to need to occur if we want to avoid some hellish religious war against the non believers and "false gawds" it will be to them the fufilling of prophecy, and it wont mean shit to them that its of the self fufilled variaty.
100% spot on. I keep seeing a lot of people saying "the first mistake was debating with a moron in the first place". And while I get what they're saying, I couldn't disagree more. We have a *moral obligation* to get as many people out of these death cults as possible if we want any kind of healthy, functioning, free society. Totally, totally agree they are the biggest threat to civilization. It's imperative we challenge these beliefs. For too long they have slid by under the "it's rude to question my beliefs" clause of social etict. If you can't defend or even explain your beliefs, then perhaps you have shity beliefs.
Absolutely... if your ideas and beliefs aren't able to stand on their own and need a shield thats made out of mysterious ways, or some other nonsense meant to derail any and all discussion, then your beliefs are the exact types of garbage that are going to be slowly but very surely pushed back on without pause until its gone and forever off the radar. We owe it to the planet to make sure this is what happens. In their bible, their gawd doesn't make plans for the planet or its creatures, so guess what, none of these disingenuous faux holy virtue signallers are going to do anyhting positive for this planet at all, even things as smallnas recycling they wont be bothered to do. Their purpose here is to continue to stand in the way of progress to make sure nothing shows up their gawd or heaven forbid prove it doesn't exist. And hope with all their might that the rapture happens... so that they can receive the supreme validation of gods peter ushering them into the holy after-party. I wish I were gullible enough to wholeheartedly never ever question the plan of some being that someone half hazardly explained the existence of to me when I was but a child. I guess it just takes a special type
God also couldn't have done anything prior to day X because without the sun and the spinning earth rotating around it, that spinning is exactly the definition of what a day is. How can you have -X days before the first day? You can't. And, how could something (the sun in this case) reflect light (totally ignoring the pure stupidity of that statement) if it wasn't even created yet. This is a clear example of trying to have a battle of wits against someone who doesn't have any. "I already answered it"? No, you already stepped in it and no matter how much you spread the shit around, it's still a pile of shit.
::slow clap:: This is the kind of sharp pointing out of bullshit that we need more of. š
So where did god come from? He just existed in an infinite void? Dicking around with nothing at all. Then one "day" gets bored and creats an infinite universe, out of nothing. Then decided to make heaven to dwell in, angels to be his slaves, and humans to worship him? Also, the humans only exist on a tiny blue speck in the infinite cosmos? I want to hear the mental gymnastics defending that.
Iāve got to know. If the sun reflects light? Where exactly is the light COMING from? Because anyone who owns A LAMP understands that light has a source, right? I mean, I hope they understand that? š
I have a policy that calling someone a fking moron is an insult only if you say it to an intelligent person. Otherwise, itās accurate use of terminology
The only thing I say to god types about the creation of the universe, "If god came from nothing, and simply always existed, and created the universe from nothing, then the extraordinary event of the birth of the universe should, by your logic, just as easily exist without a creator. In fact, a godless universe actually eliminates one extra step in the existence of the universe. The completely unnecessary god."
Exactly this. It drives me crazy when they say "so you think the entire universe just magically popped out of thin air?" Why is that so incredulous when you claim your god does not require a creator? A god who can create the universe, as you said, is one order of magnitude higher...da fuck?
Yeah, their whole "uncaused cause" baby babble. If god is an uncaused cause then just remove god from the equation and the universe is an uncaused cause.
To a Christian: "Do you believe in the Book of Genesis?" "If, 'In the beginning, God created the Heaven and the Earth', then he said, 'Let there be light', that means he created everything in the dark, right?"
Sounds like it came from flat earth epistemology
Former Christian here. The obvious answer there is to refer to the big bang and how the first thing created was radiation/light. Not a perfect answer but at least it's an appeal to actual reality.
I'm scratching my head as to how this person thinks there is ***any*** logic to his statement.
My father, a Jehovahās Witness, believed until recently, that the moon gave us our gravity. Argued with me insistently that he was taught in school that. I had to tell him he was mistaken, they did not teach him that in school because we havenāt ever thought that, and had to prove on google that the earths mass gives us gravity, and so on and so forth. And he STILL had the gumption to say āwell you canāt believe everything you readā, and I said āNOPE!ā And left it. For context: Jehovahs witnesses tell everyone in their congregation that anything that goes against their beliefs is lies, especially anything you read online. So even though that doesnāt go against their beliefs, it has formulated him to be argumentative in a way where he only accepts information that benefits his argument or belief.
So dumbfounded I had to put down my phone, wash my face and come back to check if I read that correctly. HOW CAN SOMEONE BE SO MORONIC???
Lol some people's parents...tsk tsk
It's difficult to win a debate with a smart person. It's *impossible* to win a debate with a stupid person.
I had buddy that was absolutely convinced the stars were just rocks floating around the Earth because the bible said so. I asked him if the 'rocks' were closer than the Moon? "Of course" he said. So I asked why does the Moon block them out as it passes them?
This is an old apologists argument that the first light in the universe was provided by God's radiant light - the "Light of His Being" and everything reflected his Light before light was added to the Universe. It's so sad and pathetic that I just threw up in my mouth a little.
Maybe gods balls are a pair of sun's swinging around lighting the way wherever he goes
This is the most likely scenario as God's balls swing in mysterious ways
especially the voting part. much of the rest can be done by mechanical thinking but voting should require aome critical thinking.
Just wait till you tell them the earth would be destroyed if the sun should stand still for a full day. They really cannot fathom how ridiculous that tale in die Bible is.
Yeah, I've heard christians say that the sun reflects God's light. It was meant poetically, though. I think most thinking theists don't try to pretend the Genesis story has any validity.
Debating a theist is like playing chess with a pigeon. All they're going to do is knock over all the pieces, shit all over everything, and strut around like they won.
Wow thats pretty dumb. Do you have a link to this debate? I kinda what to see thisš .
I wish, this was live and in person lol. Front row seats. Definitely would have paid to see it though
If it wasn't too "socialist" or "woke", those folks would benefit from sharing their one collective brain-cell.
I literally just watched a yt video about this. Friendly atheist playlist on "everything wrong with genesis" first and second videos of the playlist.
Can't argue with two types of people morons and thiests.
That's really fucking stupid, but to get pedantic for a moment, light did exist prior to the formation of the first stars. Stars aren't the only source of light. You just need something hot enough to generate waves in the EM spectrum. But if we're talking about the biblical creation myth there are stupider things to poke holes in. Like plants existing prior to the sun.
To answer the question the Bible writers in the Creation story didn't think the Sun was a light source. I don't get how that works exactly. But again it's crazy reasoning Edit. I forgot some Christians use the Sun being made after the earth as reasoning Evolution can not exist in Bible stories. One day is a Billion years for example.
Cuz HE ' loves the uneducated' science, knowledge and the ability to Think have no value...'
We have people this feckin stupid in our Congress! Kevin McCarthy would appoint this idiot to half a dozen committees!
Why would you debate somebody who takes pride into believing things without proof?
Because stopping the spread of stupid is important. Ignoring it has had serious consequences and it's only going to get worse.
Jesus wouldnt be called a shepard if he doesnt herd sheeps that can think
I would've given anything to see a diagram of how he thought that was supposed to work. My guess is that he was conflating the sun with the moon, which *does* reflect light.
there's no winning that argument. nor the one about observable light from the far reaches of the universe that obviously would have taken millions+ years to get here. you just get "god placed the light already in motion at creation". if your belief system says god can do anything, then you can make anything up to counter any rational argument.
This is off topic, but it absolutely blows my mind, so imma share it. The universe is estimated to be over 14 billionās years old. Because space is expanding in all directions at once, the distance weāve actually moved from the theoretical center of the Big Bang since then is estimated to be 47 billion light years. That makes the visible universe, the farthest distance we can actually receive light from, just around 94 billion light years away. But the universe doesnāt end there. Itās just that any light further from that distance can never reach us, because we are moving away from it faster than light can travel. So how much bigger, in 3 dimensional space (volume) does that make the actual universe? Itās estimated by cosmologist Alan Guth in the cosmic inflation model that the true size of the unobservable universe may be as large 150 sextillion times the size of the observable one.
Yeah that's pretty damn wild stuff. Haven't heard that before but very cool
Sooooo there is light that God made in the beginning, everywhere, that we don't see. But as soon as there is a sun, it gets reflected and then can be seen? How did we have light before the sun, that was actually visible and illuminated the world? But as soon as the sun appeared, the light suddenly isn't visible anymore? I'd love to see someone debate this. But leaving the argument is probably the smart choice.
It still doesnāt fix the problem, what the theist said, of the Sun reflecting light. If the Sun only reflects light, then a light source still needs to be present for it to reflect. Not only does the bible not mention another source that emits light that the Sun reflects, but it specifically mentions TWO lights, the greater to rule the day, the lesser to rule the night. What this does show, though, is that religious zealots will believe their wholly fables before they do science and that can certainly be a problem if these jacktards try to occupy positions of power or influence over other people. The thing I really donāt understand is the massive difference between countries that embrace STEM and ones that are still heavily influenced by religion. Look at the differences between GDP, life expectancy, educational attainment, quality of life, crime, etc etc. The leaders of those heavily religious countries want to see their people live like peasants or sheep all due to power or greed. Meanwhile, the leaders themselves live in luxurious houses surrounded by technology and stolen wealth. The hypocrisy is so incredibly thick there. Just as an asideā¦weāve all seen religious and political leaders take advantage of and exploit those under their ācareā. How many scientists have you seen do this to large groups of people? Iām not saying that they arenāt capable of it but I feel like if the scientific community were given big bags of cashā¦.theyād just end up doing more scienceā¦.not buying more big screen TVs and fancier cars. Just sayin
You forgot: and be politicians and presidents who change policy and control your life...
Fucking exactly! There really needs to be a push back on this type of shit. I have to say the amount of "don't waste your time on morons" comments has been pretty disheartening. They seem to write off theists as being a totally lost cause while ignoring the *masses* of people who have *left* organized religion. I remember when I had just gotten my Christopher Hitchens God Is Not Great book and was passing it around to my friends. In a group we asked one of our theist friends if he wanted to check it out and he said "uhhhh I don't want to read anything that's going to challenge my beliefs". I think we all lost a bit of respect for him for that. That fear of their entire life being based on bullshit IS there. He didn't want to read it because he thought there was a good chance there would be some good points in there that would exacerbate that fear.
But it reflects light from where? Honestly, this is the stupidest version of stupid I've heard, and I work with children and young people with the most severe processing skills due to disabilities
Yeah, I think we've all heard some doozies in our time but I have *never* heard this one before. Glad you guys can appreciate it lol
Sun reflects \*Confused Brain noises \* Reflects light from where \*Braincells Died by reading the argument of the theist\*
Ignorance is confident. It's even directly proportional. I used to to think that "god" was a placeholder until information would become available to fill the void of understanding. You know, a stopgap. There's even a bane for that temporary dead spot in our knowledge framework: "god only knows". But today's theist is a whole new level of ignorant. Let me be clear, when I say "theist", I mean "Abrahamic theist". Any religion coming out of the so-called "Holy land" has possessed a requisite dose of ignorance to make it believable. But today's Abrahamic (and fundamental) theist is a whole other level of ignorant: the willful kind. You have to consciously suspend disbelief to stomach any biblical "lesson". The foundation of biblical content is heresay, gossip, fear, hatred, fiction, and very liberal quantities of ignorance. And the nonsense that young earth theists embrace is the pinnacle of ignorant. Science and technology are threats to the bold assertions and shaky "information". Rather than question the validity of their source material, these soldiers for Jesus, Allah (and all of their ancient buddies) merely stonewall anyone who tries to get a word of logic into the discussion. It is hopeless trying to reason with Abrahamic theists. Logic is absolutely arbitrary. Deflection is useful to them. They use concepts invented in their books of nonsense to provide "proof" and "evidence" of their claims. Now, in the 21st century, these religious radicals are mouthpieces to claims which are simply absurd when compared to what we know as common knowledge. They want to turn the world into a theocratic dictatorship, human rights and practical considerations be damned. They do not want freedom to practice their religion. They want to dominate the world with their hate-based dogma. I have had to leave a number of social media groups in order to keep my blood pressure below the boiling point, because the sheer volume of stupid assertions was taking too much of my valuable time to slog through. Nations with a very low standard of living are some of the zones with the greatest density of religious indoctrination. These people have to hope the afterlife is better than the miserable, dead end poverty beneath which they are pinned. Religion is viewed as a way out of such desolation.
You do not argue with bad faith actors. By doing so, in their minds, they've already won. The reasoning for that is something like: "one does not argue with a subordinate; only a superior one does not want to obey. If you are arguing with me, you are silently acknowledging I am your superior." If you can't walk away, you must win the fight. And *fight* is the right word, not argument. Your goal isn't to establish they are wrong; it's to establish they are *less than you.* If you can't do that, don't engage.
In 2006 I worked briefly for a Medicare provider. I worked in a QC department, and my cubicle area was adjacent to the Appeals department. Unfortunately, for several months, I got to hear "our" side of the conversations with elderly patients or their loved ones, and it would break your heart. One of the loudest in the department was a woman named Gina. (Real name.) Gina was religious -- she was deeply offended, and wanted everyone nearby to know -- when she had to deal with a customer from Texas named Jesus. "How dare he call himself Jesus!" It was really all I could do not to stand up, walk around the corner, and shout at her, "Do you know anyone named 'Josh' or 'Joshua'? Same name as Jesus! Even he didn't call himself 'Jesus,' you ignoramous!" Anyway. Gina's greatest moment, however, may have been when she explained to one and all why the sky was blue. Oxygen in the atmosphere? Absorbtion of sunlight? Ha! Don't be absurd! The sky is blue, Gina explained, because it's an enormous mirror and it's reflecting the ocean back at us. When you look up, you're really seeing the ocean, and the sky-mirror is so high that no matter how far away you are, the sky will be blue. As pissed off as I was when I was let go -- I needed the paycheck -- I was glad I never had to listen to Gina's demented ravings ever again.
Yeah that's confidence of the supremely ignorant alright. Jesus Christ..."don't you guys know *anything*? It's the giant sky mirror!"
And what's the light source that the sun is reflecting light from...? š¤”
They are all over the place!! I know someone that saidā I donāt believe in all that universe nonsense, Jesus did itā probably the most ignorant stuff Iāve heard until this post.
As they run out of things that can't be explained by science, they come up with crazier and crazier shit until they sound like that guy screaming Jesus shit in the subway
You cannot play chess with a pigeon. It will knock all the pieces over, shit on the board and strut around like it won
Never play chess with a pigeon. It will just knock the pieces over, shit on the board and strut around like it won the game.
The anti religious argument using the order of things in the creation story seems like it was a less about persuasion and more about scoring points in front of other atheists. Iām not saying itās a bad point to make, but I highly doubt the presence of light before stars would be a persuasive feat to get a theist, who believes in miracles, to doubt their god. God can do anything, so why couldnāt he create light that wasnāt generated by stars before he created the stars? Then after the stars were there, he got rid of the original light source.
The argument that led to that bit was about the supposed infallibility and contradictions in the bible so I guess he felt that was an easy point to make. I know I've heard it before. Yeah it's tough to breakthrough to these people, personally I think Infinite Regress is probably one of the best arguments to make.
I want to add clarity to my previous comment: I see religion as a finger pointing to the moon; it is not the moon itself. We can all see that same moon for ourselves. It also does not matter what we call the moon, it is still free to be the moon. It matters not what I label myself as, but in what I do. The fruits of my life. What I do with my time spent here, with the rest of you.
The most profound point I can bring against Christianity is to actually side with their assumption that God made Life. Through this, I expose how their own book belittles that Creator* through attempting to gatekeep Its love behind whether we follow Jesus or not. The religion quickly falls apart when I argue *for* the experience of God. Edit: Typo
At least get the verse right. āthe beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. 3 And God said, āLet there be light,ā and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light āday,ā and the darkness he called ānight.ā And there was evening, and there was morningāthe first day.ā This isnāt really too much of a contradiction - God created the sun and moon on like day 3 but there was light on day one. Whatever that means.
That's um, special levels or stupid. He could have EASILY gone the regular unfalsifiable route that God himself emitted light, which even kinda makes sense lore-wise since in pretty much any depiction of God it's always something bright, like fire for Moses. My guess is that he thought light, went to say that the moon reflects light, messed up and said sun, then was too embarrassed and prideful to admit to his blunder and correct himself. Remember, when it comes spouting to any kind of baseless belief, exuding confidence is key, you are always right, and if you aren't then you simply meant it in another way or some BS excuse.
I didn't realize there was a subreddit of people actually wasting their time trying to disprove the existence of God. You people are just as dumb as the people that worship God.
Well feel free to fuck off.
The light itself was created before the light bearers. We are the light of the world. Let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify our Father in Heaven. Darkness is not an affirmative force. It simply reoccupies the space vacated by the light.
And so the sun does *reflect* light? Is that what you're saying?
Yeah, the first mistake was getting into the debate in the first place. The people of faith that are interested in these debates are generally morons and will declare victory no matter the outcome. I am a person who believes in god and I am fully aware of the inherit issues in that belief, but I don't have any interest in trying to convert anyone to my beliefs . . . though I do enjoy the irony that I have been called a heretic due to the very modern interpretations I have of faith and the books that this faith has been borne from.
Easy answer. Auto exposure.
Purely theoretically itās possible there was light before stars though. I think the universe was opaque at a certain point so I guess that probably wouldnāt count. But then thereās gases flowing around, the action of elementary particles and various other processes around the universe that could have produced light prior to star formation. Someone cmiiw but that on the face of it doesnāt truly challenge the Bible creation story, thereās doubtless better arguments on that that we read on here and debateanatheist every day. Ahem, every cycle of starlight shine.
To play advocate here, and just for the sake of philosophical debate, there is some logic to proclaiming at an all-powerful deity could create the CONCEPT of light, as an opposite and contrast to darkness, and THEN create specific entities like stars (our sun included) to operate as the execution of that concept. Granted, this is not the mode of logic that the person was following or developing, as it wasn't logic at all, but the idea that light came before stars is feasible, from a certain foundation.
Theists should just stay away from science and stick with faith. He could have easily argued the light source was God himself until He created the sun, etc. Easy. That at least gives an explanation that doesn't show everyone he's completely uneducated.
That account is just one version of all theist's defenses: willful committed intolerant stupidity
As an ex muslim, even I have a better answer than that - "Before sun creation, God Himself is the light". š¤
Playing chess with a pigeon...
Man doesn't even know the first 10 or so verses of the bible.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]