Atheism is a Mental Illness, a cry for attention.

Was this your tenth-grade term paper in Bible school?

Here, I'm an atheist and you have me on the ropes: explain why "order requires intelligent direction" and give some evidence for this claim. And don't just repeat the statement; that's not very intelligent.

You'll notice that I'm not trying to change the subject. I'm not "really pissed off" because I can't "overcome" this claim...the onus is on you to show that it's true. I'm asking you for an explanation, because having all the time and space you need, you didn't give any in this piece.

You might want to start by defining what you mean by "order".

Rayomatic, I responded to your comments on the original post.

Just keep in mind the fact that I do love you, regardless of your mental illness.

Dude I am religious not an atheist but it seem you are the one with mental illness. Intelligent order.....you came up with this idea to piss atheist which you believe helps you...other than that it has no premise. You yourself say "I dont know" than learn to accept when other people say that...I am not an atheist but When i believe in the one GOD I have my reasons and i try to find when atheist challenge that ....out I am not a christian.

lolcondescending

What was it you said about name calling at the end of your original post? Just because you're not actually calling somebody names doesn't mean you're not engaging in the same type of thing...

The only real argument in the article is that it is "common sense." Please explain.

PS: You also can't back up your argument by saying "It is really nothing more than common sense." One of the reasons science exists as a successful method for learning about the world is that "common sense" can often turn out to be wrong. Do you believe the sun revolves around the earth? Because common sense would indicate it. Common sense also might convince you that the world is flat. If you look at the world of particle physics, you'll see that in that field, common sense is as wrong as it can get. So appealing to common sense won't win your argument.

bah, particle physics. I hated that unit.

While very important, common sense is of no use outside of its daily application in deciding whether or not running a red light is worth saving 30 seconds off your daily trip to work or not. It especially has no place in such complex fields as say, particle physics, which you mentioned.

Good article, because the atheists are usually lefty loonies in this country, and their style of freedom actually is nothing more than bondage. Morality is repugnant to them, and most likely have had few truly intimate relationships because of it - since how in the world can you trust someone whose moral compass is merely whatever "feels good," and if you get hurt in a relationship with me, "that's your problem."

And freedom to foist their "religion," on the rest of the world is also much more vehemently pursued, than even the most evagelical pastor on most of these websites.

Thems Fighten Words! :^)

I'm an Atheist:

I've been married 26 years.
I have a son just graduated University
I've never been arrested
I'm the favourite Uncle to 30 nieces and nephews.
I always vote conservative.
I'm against abortion.
I have fond memories and respect for my old religion and wish them well.
I do not believe in God!

Science is to a point now that if there was a God we would be able to see some sign of him. This does not prove no God exists but makes it unlikely.

An omnipotent, omniscient creator that exists outside of space and time is no longer necessary to explain existence and is a logical contradiction in itself.

Therefore I no longer believe. I've adopted a humanistic outlook.

Humanist:
Morality is not "What Feels Good" it is seeking the path that does the least harm.
Problems can be solved by diplomacy, reason and technology.
Logic & reason tinged with compassion and empathy will produce a better society than hard coded rules written by bronze age barbarians.

bad comment, because the christians are usually right loonies in this country, and their style of freedom actually is nothing more than bondage, eg war in iraq. Morality is repugnant to them, thier bible condones slavery, child abuse, and discourages women's' rights, and most likely have had few truly intimate relationships because of it - since how in the world can you trust someone whose moral compass is merely whatever a 2000 year old book written by and meant for sheep farmers, and if you get hurt in a relationship with me, "that's god's problem."

And freedom to foist their religion on the rest of the world is also much more vehemently pursued, than even the most "militant" atheist on most of these websites.

I am not sure how you can look at yourself in the mirror each morning spouting lies and conjecture like that (although it IS very christian of you).

Atheists are not allergic to morality. We are not the ones denying health care to our children (scientologists), or condoms to aids ridden countries (the pope and Catholics), or forcing our children to feel guilt be cause they can never be good or worthy of salvation without gods "mercy" on them.

We are also not the ones making up statistics and facts merely to deride another group that we clearly have no understanding of merely because they disagree with our beliefs.

Atheism is not a belief or a denial. It is merely not buying into yours.

Peace

How is morality repugnant to atheists? Explain. And I like your resort to generalizations and oversimplifications, presumably because you lack specific instances and facts to support your outlandish claims.

Order? Think about your wristwatch. This represents order. However, that order did not simply happen without intelligent direction. Atheists believe such order can be produced without intelligent direction. That's impossible.

Order? Think about the orderliness of a human being? Or an eagle? What I am saying to you is these things represent ORDER which could not exist without an organizing intelligence.

Atheists, like you, simply choose to ignore common sense, and cry out for attention with your nonsensical arguments. You asked for PROOF?

How about a wristwatch, a human being and an eagle. Of course, there are literally billions of other examples of ORDERLINESS (ORDER) I could cite too. However, you are an atheist, which translates into idiot.

Oh, by the way, does the earth revolve around the sun? Heliocentrists believe it does but Geocentrists believe it does not. I am not sure. But, whatever is actually happening is ORDERLY!

Atheists, like you, are so clearly angry at organized religion for some reason, maybe your catholic priest rejected you after you fell in love with him? I don't know why you have become mentally ill, but to reason that highly complex, super sophisticated forms of ORDER just happened, just created themselves without any intelligence directing the process, is absolutely MENTAL ILLNESS.

Just think about how ridiculous you sound. You act as if I am rejecting science. No, I am simply rejecting your interpretation of science.

Like I asked before, NAME ONE ORDERLY PROCESS OR ORGANISM that did not require some directing intelligence and I'll kiss your atheistic ass.

You are just crying out for attention. Look at me! I'm an atheist. That's why I don't go to church. The universe and all the life in it was the product of NON INTELLIGENCE? Only the mentally ill can ignore this blatant error.

Crystals!

Now pucker up!


I live in a cold climate every winter morning beautiful orderly ice crystals form all by themselves on my bedroom window. Shapes that look like trees and leaves. Outside six sided orderly crystals fall from the sky. All this from the electrostatic properties of a triangular water molecule.

In Britain there are cliffs formed of perfect orderly hexagonal rocks.

In your refrigerator the oil and water in the salad dressings are slowly gaining order as they separate out all by themselves thanks to gravity and the chemical characteristics of oil and water. Just waiting for you to disorder them by shaking them up.

Some present and future products that will be on store shelves. To create highly optimized technological items engineers are making use of evolution software. They use super computers to randomly make changes to a product they're trying to optimize. If the change is beneficial it is kept if it is not it is deleted. After letting the program run day and night for months. It will have tested millions of random changes. The resulting product will be superior to anything that could have been designed. You could even say it would have been IMPOSSIBLE to have designed.

So Pucker UP!

You can't just give a bunch of examples of order that is created by intelligence as evidence that there is no other way for order to arise. That's like giving examples of ways fire is started by friction and then concluding there is no other way to start a fire.

An example of one orderly process that does not require directing intelligence is crystallization. It is an example of order arising from the bottom up. It is the properties of carbon atoms that make diamond form under intense heat and pressure, not god's hand putting each in the correct spot. Take some sea water and let it dry out. You will see order in the shape of the salt left behind.

DNA is the most amazing example of bottom-up order. It contains information needed to build the machinery that interprets it and replicates it. I know it seems like the DNA itself could never have come about without being designed, and science still hasn't figured out everything there is to know, but please understand that it is possible for order to emerge without intelligent direction.

If you would like to understand emergent order better, look at the software Breve for examples of complex behavior emerging from simple constraints.

Quotes from the articles

“By changing the way we mix the ingredients together, we managed to make ribonucleotides,” said Sutherland. “The chemistry works very effectively from simple precursors, and the conditions required are not distinct from what one might imagine took place on the early Earth.”

"Two essential elements of RNA have finally been made from scratch, under conditions similar to those that likely prevailed during the dawn of life."

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20227084.200-molecule-of-life-emerges-from-laboratory-slime.html

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/05/ribonucleotides/

Now KISS MY ASS

"Oh, by the way, does the earth revolve around the sun? Heliocentrists believe it does but Geocentrists believe it does not. I am not sure." Dude, you're arguing against geo-centricity? Geo-centricity is trivially provable - all you need is a pair of eyes, a night sky, and a calculator. Actually, forget the calculator. The retrograde motion of mars disproves heliocentricity. If you actually wanna observe Mars for a few months, you'll notice that Mars (and other astral bodies, but Mars is the easiest to notice as it's orbit is the fastest one that's longer than ours) seems to move backwards in the sky (relative to the stars). A traditional geo-centric model can't account for this*, whereas with a heliocentric model, it's simple geometry (and probably some algebra, but you get the idea). "Like I asked before, NAME ONE ORDERLY PROCESS OR ORGANISM that did not require some directing intelligence and I'll kiss your atheistic ass." Protein folding fits pretty much any definition of "order" you can come up with. Photosynthesis. Unless you're deliberately ignoring scientific definitions of "order" (as a synonym for ectropy), there's about a thousand processes under the Second Law of Thermodynamics that take input energy, release heat, and lower their entropy. The obvious response to this post is "But God's directing those!", which highlights the problem with your request: How do I find an example which satisfies you, if you immediate refuse any example based in this world? I'm assuming you'll also refuse fictional, counterfactual, or predicted/hypothetical examples, as they're not real, so let me know what class of example is good enough for you. That seems to be Rayomatic's issue as well. EDIT: So I just read your post, and apparently you want something that's not man-made, and also not "in nature". There's not a thing in the world that not either natural or man-made. * - the only way to account for it is to have Mars not have an orbital path, but rather some strange sort of spiral path, and give the entire rest of the known universe a slight spin in an off-plane direction to counter-act this hypothetical spiral. That works fine, until you realize that hundreds of objects in the solar system exhibit similar motion. By the time you re-design the model for that, you're adding differing spin rates to every object in the universe, which would obviously be detectable through red-shift, if nothing else.

You aren't doing your argument any favours by calling me names. "Idiot"? Is that your brain at work? Win many debates that way in college? Considering you "love" me, it's strange that you imply that I'm an idiot and call me ridiculous and mentally ill. Is this how you treat everyone you "love"? Do you mind if I say "no thanks" to that love?

Let's start with this quote about the earth going around the sun: "Heliocentrists believe it does but Geocentrists believe it does not. I am not sure." I'll help you out: One of these beliefs has overwhelming observational and theoretical evidence to support it, which is why it is accepted by (almost!) everyone, and the other is not. Guess which is which.

I'll name you an orderly process or organism (all of these, actually) that did not require directing intelligence, but only if you define "order" like I already asked you to (and only if you don't kiss anything, ok?). Define it in general terms, without resorting to examples (like watch, eagle, etc. - you have to tell me what it is they have in common that you call "order").

For the record, I didn't ask you for "proof" of anything, just evidence (there's a difference). I never even used the word. You'd do better than put words in your opponent's mouths, as you do when you claim "Atheists believe such order can be produced without intelligent direction" (at issue is whether the universe needed a creator or not...not things like watches, bird nests or spider webs). Atheists and scientists don't talk about "proof" because in the real world, nothing can be "proven" except for mathematical axioms. All we can do is gather evidence until the results are overwhelming. That DNA you talk about is actually a wonderful tool that gives evidence that we all evolved, despite your claim that "Science clearly reveals such ORDERLINESS as DNA could not have possibly been produced via some "mindless" process." Quote me ONE article in a scientific journal that makes this claim. (I'll give you all the Googling time you need.)

You still haven't defined "order". Instead you gave examples of things that you say "represent" order. Well, what is this "order" that they represent? Let's say there are three pennies arranged in a straight line. Would you call this "order"? Because if those pennies fell out of my pocket and happened to land that way, which is entirely possible, then "order" can come about without intelligence behind it. Oh wait, that's not what you mean? Then define it, please, because we can't move forward until you do. If order is just a collection of things that you've decided to call "order", without a precise definition, then your claim is too vague to be the magic bullet for the argument that you think it is. Certainly it's no yardstick for condemning people who don't accept it as being mentally ill. Then again, there's evidence that you've got a little thing for condemnation, don't you?

You and your friend Ross1776 spend a lot more energy attacking the supposed motives of atheists, speculating about their past history or insulting them, instead of dealing with concepts and providing evidence and reasoning. When it comes to that, all you seem to be able to do is repeat your mantras over and over again, in CAPS (save your shouting for children and dogs). It kind of shows the chink in your armour, even to people who might otherwise be inclined to agree with your view like Changez, here.

"Did you realize that Dawkins is not an atheist but really believes in Intelligent Design? He only claims to be an atheist and writes all his books about atheism to make millions off of morons who can't think for themselves." Another claim for which you provide no quotes, no evidence, not a shred. Sorry, but you weaken your position when it seems you're making stuff up on the fly. Here's a news flash: arguments from authority don't work with us atheists. Even if (for e.g.) Einstein on his deathbed denounced all his theories, they would still have influence because science has found so much evidence that they paint an accurate picture of the cosmos (until something better comes along). Einstein is respected because his theories were backed up by evidence and observations, not because he had some kind of authority. He would still be respected even if a better theory came along, just as Newton is still respected as a thinke even though his theory of gravitation has been replaced by Einstein's. So I don't care about Dawkins' sincerity, or his unnamed mentors, your unsubstantiated gossip, etc. In fact I've never read his books, but it's besides the point...this is another one of your red herrings. How can you honestly resort to such tactics and expect people to find you convincing?

You're some piece of work, and I invite anyone to compare our arguments. I never claimed to "love" you then insult you at the same time. I didn't try to disparage your views by implying that you arrived at them because of some personal flaw or a mental illness. All I did was ask for some evidence for your claims, something very specific, and you spout venomous insults, tell me you love me, offer to kiss my "atheist ass", speculate that I'm gay and had unrequited love for my priest, then offer me psychoanalysis???

And your advice to me is to stop telling people what my sincere beliefs are because they will think badly of me. So basically, you're telling me I should be insincere because I might get ridiculed. Is that what Jesus would do?

Wow, I've never been so glad NOT to be someone's child.

Rayomatic, have you fallen in love with Richard Dawkins? Did you realize that Dawkins is not an atheist but really believes in Intelligent Design? He only claims to be an atheist and writes all his books about atheism to make millions off of morons who can't think for themselves.

Rayomatic, prior to Dawkins being perceived as the most famous atheist in the world, one of his mentors at Oxford had the same title. Of course, his mentor changed his mind to believing in intelligent design after he studied the SCIENCE of DNA.

No, Rayomatic, your views are not scientific at all. Science clearly reveals such ORDERLINESS as DNA could not have possibly been produced via some "mindless" process as you and your mentally ill Atheist friends erroneously believe.

Rayomatic, you should stop telling the world that you are an atheist because all you are really saying is, "I am a lost, angry, and confused person only pretending to be an intellectual, but I really need someone to love me."

Oh, by the way, the psychoanalysis is on the house. Why? Because I love you Rayomatic. We are all brothers and sisters in the omnipresent oneness, which just happens to be 100% conscious. Imagine that!

I suggest you read Vital Dust: Life as a Cosmic Imperative, it explains how DNA came to be incrementally as result of the fundamental atomic nature of its constituents. It is not chance, it is not divinely guided. Please site your scientific reference supporting your position.

Just to start, I am not an atheist. Actually, if you think about it, human beings, eagles etc. do not represent order, they represent chaos. There are 65 billion functions performed in the human body every minute (I am fairly sure, maybe more). Billions of atoms, blood cells, electrical impulses etc. all bouncing around, colliding and interacting to produce a second-by-second incredible event (that we experience) called life. It is very tenuous and the smallest rupture of all those delicate operations can end it. "Of course, I don't know all the answers. Most believe this intelligence we call God has always been here. But this is not the argument, is it?" - this is pretty much where your argument fell to bits. Like I said, I am not an atheist, I simply believe God is infinitely bigger than a just supreme bring. ...and calling someone mentally ill for not agreeing with you is just plain rude.

Changez, what's wrong with telling the truth? If someone is mentally ill, what's wrong with saying it? Calling him an idiot was ugly, I admit. But mental illness is real. Also, you say eagles, humans, etc. don't represent order but CHAOS? I guess it's all in how you define things, but I wouldn't use chaos because this implies a lack of intelligence, doesn't it. And, any system or process involving 65 billion functions every minute had better be intelligently directed or it will soon go break down, right?

Seriously, my 7 year old would poke holes in your failed attempts at logic. Really though, the whole point of your post is just to try to annoy atheists.

And atheists, why are we wasting time on this retard? Would you waste your time arguing with a brick wall? It's really the same thing. The sooner you realize that you can't convert the insane into sane individuals the better off you will be. It's like trying to argue a clinically depressed individual into happiness by explaining that there is no reason to be sad.

Of course in this example, bwinwright is the clinically depressed individual and we would be the individuals wasting our time telling him to be happy.

You are drawing a false dichotomy between order and chaos here. The two ideas are mutually exclusive, but there is a lot of gray in between. That gray is called "natural selection." It is true that the genetic mutations that drive evolution are somewhat random in nature, but only advantageous mutations actually survive the gauntlet that is nature. The surviving organisms change incrementally over generations, getting better and better at adapting to their environment. Over billions of years these changes create wholesale transformations. That is where what you call "orderliness" comes in. It is simply identification of the results of natural selection, which is more like the actions of a blind tinkerer, not a god. If a god did create us, why so much BAD design? Why do we breathe through the same holes that we eat with? Are you aware at how many people a year die from choking? Have you ever looked at a human skeleton? Your entire upper body is supported solely by your back, which looks like a stack of coins with play-doh in between. It is terrible design. Also, a lot of the order you perceive is the type of order that a god would have to be subject to, not the creator of. Even the best Christian apologists admit that God cannot do anything that is logically inconsistent. He can't create a universe in which both an impenetrable shield and an unstoppable sword can exist, for example. Therefore a god would have to subject to some higher order. Where did that order come from?

I don't see how only accepting things for which we have solid evidence (i.e. PROOF) is a mental illness. And if you studied an ounce of thermodynamics you would quickly come to realize that we are merely a small deviation in the universe's inexorable slide into disorder. We only appear to be an ordered system on the microscale thanks to the sun's macroscale decay.

This is exactly why I don't visit the Atheist websites very much. They truly are mentally ill. They simply can not accept the idea that only intelligence can produce orderly things. You can call this intelligence by any name you so choose, but to deny it is to be, yes, an idiot.

But what about when you said: "I sometimes like visiting the James Randi Educational Foundation website just to duel with atheists"?

Someone who contradicts himself so much has no business calling others idiots.

You got it exactly right! Atheists "simply can not accept [an] idea". We accept evidence that can be observed and reproduced! You claim over and over that order can only be made through an intelligent process but never state any proof of your claim (rules of debate clearly state that the person making the positive claim, you in this case, must provide evidence of your claim.) This is akin to me saying that Pink unicorns exist and demanding that you prove me wrong. You can't.

Right above this comment you stated "any system or process involving 65 billion functions every minute had better be intelligently directed or it will soon go break down". I don't assume that this is true. I can imagine that this system might break down or it might not, but I don't know. You claim to know, so, please provide evidence of this. If you evidence is solid, and can be observed, than I will accept it. If you can't provide the evidence, then I will continue to not know.

As long as you continue to make claims with no evidence to back them up, then I will continue to dismiss your arguments with no evidence either.

a

Rayovac, I read your rather lengthy response and you've done it again. You keep dancing around in circles, asking me to define order when I've given you perfectly good examples of order. And, if 3 pennies fell out of your pocket and landed in a perfectly beautiful orderly line, how can we ever know that some part of your consciousness isn't responsible for this orderliness.

I'm sorry for calling you an idiot, but you simply aren't serious about this debate. You can not explain how orderliness can be produced without intelligent direction, you simply wish to give me 3 pennies falling from your pocket....a pocket made by intelligent direction, worn by a person possessing intelligent direction too.

Rayovac, just face the facts, you can not support your position. No atheist ever could. After you get over your anger issues, you mental illness, and start thinking clearly and honestly, you will not claim to believe in a "mindless" form of creation or evolution or natural selection.

Like the young priest in the Exorcist, sometimes I just get tired to talking to folks who are irrational. Your argument is irrational. This is the hallmark of delusional thinking, a sure sign of MENTAL ILLNESS.

I still love you, just don't like you very much.