How many of you are atheists?

[hilts]

I could go through this in detail but i really can't be bothered as it is pretty much nonsense from beginning to end, the only thing i will say is i don't particularly care what you do or do not accept as it is not at all important to me

I may well have been born dumb but you must have worked pretty hard on your smugness

Yes, I can see how attacking the idea that some people are too stupid to understand physics and supporting the idea of a structure based education can come across as smug.

Sorry everybody, you're all too stupid to understand quantum physics because hilts said so.

Never said any of that in fairness, maybe comprehending peoples posts isn't your strong point, on this point you may be even dumber than me, and the poster was being smug plain and simple

 

[m7mcfc]

I could go through this in detail but i really can't be bothered as it is pretty much nonsense from beginning to end, the only thing i will say is i don't particularly care what you do or do not accept as it is not at all important to me

I may well have been born dumb but you must have worked pretty hard on your smugness

Yes, I can see how attacking the idea that some people are too stupid to understand physics and supporting the idea of a structure based education can come across as smug.

Sorry everybody, you're all too stupid to understand quantum physics because hilts said so.

Physics is simple understanding it is the hard part. I can honestly say that quantum physics blows my mind a little.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

Lot o' scousers joining since this afternoon.

 

[Damocles]

Never said any of that in fairness,

Really?

I would imagine only a very few can get their heads around quantum physics

I cannot for one moment accept though that some are "too stupid" to understand the nature of the Universe or the laws which govern it.

and even some who read up on it and spout theories may well be as clueless as the rest of us, trying to explain something so complicated which is a theory

You talk of theories as guesses which shows a lack of even a basic level of scientific education but then try to comment on an advanced scientific area and I don't think it's fair for you to do so.

Are you sure? Because the things that you posted disagrees with the things that you said you didn't post.

Maybe I am just stupid. I have this mad disease which forces me to read what people write and presume that they meant to write that. I'm seeing a Doctor about it on Tuesday.

 

[hilts]

Never said any of that in fairness,

Really?

I would imagine only a very few can get their heads around quantum physics

I cannot for one moment accept though that some are "too stupid" to understand the nature of the Universe or the laws which govern it.

and even some who read up on it and spout theories may well be as clueless as the rest of us, trying to explain something so complicated which is a theory

You talk of theories as guesses which shows a lack of even a basic level of scientific education but then try to comment on an advanced scientific area and I don't think it's fair for you to do so.

Are you sure? Because the things that you posted disagrees with the things that you said you didn't post.

Maybe I am just stupid. I have this mad disease which forces me to read what people write and presume that they meant to write that. I'm seeing a Doctor about it on Tuesday.

In this thread you and skashion maybe(don't want to re read it all) have posted certain explanations about physics. time, the universe etc... if these have anything to do with quantum physics i do not know, i have watched several programmes on the origins of the universe, matter and theories about space and time in general, i have never had a eureka moment, i haven't come away from these programmes or people posts on the matter any more clued up than when i started

I simply don't get it, i would saw i am not the stupidest person in the world, depending on how you judge intelligence i would most likely be slightly above average

So it isn't simple and it most certainly isn't easy to grasp, you don;t get many people down the dog and duck whipping theories of the space time conundrum on the darts blackboard after discussing Kelly Brooks norkage

And the post was smug and deserved what it got, that is my humble opinion, but as i don't shoot the breeze with Hawkins i could well be talking out of my arse

 

[kinkladz-ade]

Im Athenian

 

[I'm With Stupid]

I am. I'm not 100% sure a god doesn't exist, just think it's about the same likelihood of finding a winner's medal in David Moyes' house.

I actually think a lot of religious people aren't really convinced themselves, they just think that religion is a good thing for society. To paraphrase Christopher Hitchens (who may have been quoting someone else), "Believing in religion is one thing. Believing in God is the really crazy bit."

 

[Skashion]

Chris Hitchens was a fucking **** and absolutely wrong.

 

[Damocles]

Chris Hitchens was a fucking **** and absolutely wrong.

Absolutely wrong seems a bit harsh.

Selectively evil and intellectually dishonest is a better description for my money.

 

[Skashion]

Chris Hitchens was a fucking **** and absolutely wrong.

Absolutely wrong seems a bit harsh.

Selectively evil and intellectually dishonest is a better description for my money.

I'd say the idea that believing in God is far crazier than in religion is demonstrably absolutely wrong. Religion, all the major religions anyway, include various things we know are physically impossible. Resurrection, ascending to heaven literally, virgin births, parting the Red Sea etc. Much of it is self-contradictory even. However, God is not physically impossible. Indeed, one of the remaining mysteries of the universe, the appearance of fine-tuning, has a good explanation in a creator deity. It's been a bad few months for that explanation but if you were to put a creator deity on a scale of how substantially we can reject it vis-a-vis religion's 'miracles', clearly it is much easier to reject things we know are impossible, have no evidence, and have no gap in the narrative to fill.