'Splain this one Atheists...

[Seth]

When you get the study done, verified and peer-reviewed, then you can make such claims. Until then it's merely an ex-recto assertion.

Interesting. Because that applies to every religion too.

But at least it's not a 2,000 year old ex-recto assertion. It's still fresh and steaming.

Just makes it stink worse. I do love your admission that Atheism is a stinking pile of shit though. Thanks for that.

Where did I say that?

Right here: "But at least it's not a 2,000 year old ex-recto assertion. It's still fresh and steaming.

Have you been making stuff up again?

Have you stopped beating your wife?

[rainbow]

Won't somebody please think of the kittehs!

Oh wait - there are no Atheists posting here. None that I know of, anyway. The kittehs are safe.

Ever been to a rural Chinese meat market? And just because you don't think you know any Atheists doesn't mean you don't, or that they aren't posting here, it just means you are ignorant of the facts.

And, just because you think you do know some Atheists or that you think some persons meet your definition of Atheist doesn't mean they do, or that they are posting here, it just means you are ignorant of the facts.

Exactly.
Atheists do not exist.

Sadly, they do. Poor things.

You cannot prove it.

[mistermack]

When you get the study done, verified and peer-reviewed, then you can make such claims. Until then it's merely an ex-recto assertion.

Interesting. Because that applies to every religion too.

But at least it's not a 2,000 year old ex-recto assertion. It's still fresh and steaming.

Just makes it stink worse. I do love your admission that Atheism is a stinking pile of shit though. Thanks for that.

Where did I say that?

Right here: "But at least it's not a 2,000 year old ex-recto assertion. It's still fresh and steaming.

And how do you get from that to "Atheism is a stinking pile of shit" ?
The only shit here is between your ears.

[Animavore]

Lol. This thread has become a farce.

[Svartalf]

Wasn't it one from the very start?

[Animavore]

I guess it was the moment the OP demanded atheists answer a medical question which has nothing to do with atheism. It would've been more productive to email the doctors involved directly than ask random internet people. But how did it get from a barely interesting example of unexplained remission to what it is now?

[Svartalf]

Especially since the "medical" question regards a likely fictitious case.
and the thing got filtered and redirected through the special magics of the Int@rwebz in general and Ratz in particular...
additionally, I'm not fully conscious of the full evolution of the case since I don't read what Seth posts.

[Forty Two]

What has any of this shite you're all talking about, and whatever the other eejit is saying, got to do with the story in the OP?

It demonstrates the religious nature of the Atheist mindset,

Assuming arguendo the truth of that assertion, is that a bad thing, in your view?

No. Why should it be? There's nothing inherently bad or wrong with religion or religious belief. It is and has been a civilizing and pacifying force throughout history and by and large it helps individuals cope with the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune. I consider it a heinous and evil act to try to convince people that there is no God if their belief in God makes them happier and gives them peace and solace, as it so obviously does for billions of people.

O.k., so the alleged religious nature of the Atheist mindset is not a bad thing. Good.

As such, the religious nature of the Atheist mindset would fall within the civilizing and pacifying force, allowing individuals to cope with the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune. Further, trying to convince Atheists that there is a God would be just as heinous and evil an act because if the lack of believe in a God makes them happier and gives them peace and solace, then it would be evil and heinous to try to convince them that they are wrong.

While he was referring to small "a" atheism and not your specially defined big "A" Atheism, his point is true in my view when Isaac Asimov said - "Although the time of death is approaching me, I am not afraid of dying and going to Hell or (what would be considerably worse) going to the popularized version of Heaven. I expect death to be nothingness and, for removing me from all possible fears of death, I am thankful to atheism. "

In that sense, a person who has found peace and solace in atheism is just as justified in defending his view as a person who believes in God. Both are defending their peace and solace. Do you scorn God-believers when they advance their religious beliefs, exercising their first amendment rights to both hold and express their religious views? Do you find it evil for them to try to convince atheists or Atheists of God's existence, when so many atheists and Atheists would say that they find peace and solace in the absence of gods?

There's nothing inherently superior about Atheism or the belief that gods don't exist.

Agreed. There is nothing INHERENTLY superior. There is nothing INHERENTLY superior in anything. It could be argued that there is nothing INHERENTLY superior in truth over lies, life over death, pleasure over paid, receiving fellatio over not receiving fellatio. There is no "inherent" superiority in them.

My experience is that it makes those who believe that way unsociable and unpleasant to be around.

Your experience is your experience, and is also colored by your preference. There are people one person finds disagreeable and loathsome, but another person might find them pleasant and even be their best friend. Some people don't like other people, and some people don't like what other people say and do.

In my experience, people who wear their religions on their sleeves are unsociable and unpleasant to be around, and those that preach and proselytize are even moreso. That's my view of it. That's why I rarely, if ever, bring up atheism with anyone. It just isn't a topic I discuss with people in social contexts. Internet discussion forums are a better and more appropriate forum, because, like this thread, topics are opened to people with an interest.

The Atheist obsession with interfering in other people's practice of their religious beliefs is one of the most pernicious, cruel and downright antisocial aspects of the religion.

Any practice in "interfering" in other people's practice of religious beliefs is pernicious, cruel and antisocial. However, I've never seen an atheist "interfere" with another person's practice of religion. Discussions on internet forums are not "interference."

If by "interfering" you mean "persuading" others to change their view, then atheists don't hold a candle to the religious. I get religious people at my door telling me I have to believe what they believe. I've never gotten that knock on the door from an atheist. Devout Christians and Muslims have no qualms about proselytizing and trying to convince atheists out of their atheism.

For something they don't believe in, Atheists seem to spend far more time ranting and raving about somebody else's beliefs than they do thinking about the essentially nihilistic nature of their own system of beliefs and practices.

Perhaps so, but that isn't "interfering" in another person's beliefs. It's no worse than Christians and Muslims trying to convert people to their religion, and that's an avoid mission of many religions.

Atheism is not nihilism, by the way. I am an atheist, but I'm not a nihilist. Nihilism posits that nothing in the world has real existence. I don't hold to that, and as atheists tend to be materialists, it is probably true that MOST atheists are not nihilists.

Further, many atheists, like Buddhist atheists and Jain atheists and Jewish atheists, have religious beliefs and practices, and are far from nihilists.

Most Atheists would be far nicer people if they would just shut the fuck up and mind their own business.

This is a true statement of almost everyone. If Christians and Muslims would shut the fuck up and mind their own business, there would be a far less need for "activist" atheists in the world. The reason a lot atheists don't shut the fuck up is because atheists are inundated with the messages of Christians and Muslims. If the Christians and Muslims don't need to "shut the fuck up" then I certainly feel no compulsion to leave their assertions unanswered.

"If belief in heaven was private, like the tooth fairy, I’d say fine. But tooth fairy supporters don’t come around to your house and try to convert you. They don’t try to teach your children stultifying pseudo-science in school. They don’t try to prevent access to contraception. The religious won’t leave us alone. These are not just private delusions, they’re ones they want to inflict on other people." - Christopher Hitchens.

Now, leave aside his view that they are delusions. Assume they are not delusions, but merely differences of opinions. The point still stands. They won't leave us alone. They want to get us to accept their religious opinions, and they come around knocking on our doors to do it, and they feel no shame in doing so.

And that's why I'm not an Atheist, I'm a non-theistic Tolerist™ who is satisfied to let people believe as they like so long as their actions are peaceable and they do not initiate force or fraud against others.

Except that you seem to be very tolerant of the proselytizing and persuasion, free expression of belief, on the part of god-believers, but you aren't very tolerant of the same from atheists. Or, maybe I'm getting you wrong. Are you o.k. with atheists speaking their minds, advancing their nonbelief, and looking for converts to atheism or Atheism? Or, are you not o.k. with it? If you aren't o.k. with it, are you equally not o.k. with the same conduct from god-believers?

That's why I'm not an Atheist, I'm a non-theistic Tolerist™. I really don't mind what you believe or do as long as you don't harm others.

Here again you change terms. What "harm" are you suggesting atheists cause? By persuasion? By speaking their minds? Or, are they doing something else? Like,...... engaging in violence?

What of the traditional systemic discrimination against atheists in the law -- disqualifications from public service? Disqualification from testifying as a witness? Disqualification from public office? These are real legal disabilities that god-believers and religious folks imposed on atheists. I don't know any atheists who would disable religious people with similar laws.

Does demonstrating the religious nature of "Atheism" refute it? Reduce it in some way? Make it less likely to be true?

It highlights the essential hypocrisy of Atheism. In the battle against religion, Atheism is the most devoutly religious crusader of the age.

Well, it's impossible to answer that because I am still unclear what you mean by "Atheism" with a capital A, and how many people actually even arguably fall within this label of capital A Atheism. Can you define Atheism for me? If you already have done so, I'm sorry, but I really don't know what you mean by that. It's not a common term.

I think there is no hypocrisy in "atheism" per se. And, most atheists are not religious at all, as far as I can tell.

It also demonstrates how intellectually inferior Atheists actually are by demonstrating that their own dogmas violate their own dogmas, resulting in a real dog's breakfast of irrationality and unreason. Whether or not God exists is a quintessentially scientific question, but Atheists try to use pseudo-scientific reasoning to imply (or prove) that God does not exist by claiming that God is "supernatural"

That's not normally an atheist claim, per se. That's a claim made by many religious people - that God is outside the natural universe, that he is super-natural. He can't be detected by scientific means -- that's a thing I've heard religious people, including Christians commonly say.

I would be happy indeed if Christians would apply the same scientific standards and concepts to their God as they do to nature in general. If they did that, then we would speak the same language about it. But, they generally don't. It's from Christians that you hear -- god works in mysterious ways and anything is possible with god and various references to miracles (which are deviations from nature -- super-natural).

and therefore cannot exist while at the same time being entirely unable to provide a scintilla of scientific evidence of their assertions. The twists and turns of their labyrinthine minds rival the home of the Minotaur.

One might suppose that those who claim rationalism might actually demonstrate a smidgen of rational thought from time to time...but noooooooo!

So, the Atheists are just as irrational as the Christians and Muslims, then?

[Forty Two]

Won't somebody please think of the kittehs!

Oh wait - there are no Atheists posting here. None that I know of, anyway. The kittehs are safe.

Ever been to a rural Chinese meat market? And just because you don't think you know any Atheists doesn't mean you don't, or that they aren't posting here, it just means you are ignorant of the facts.

And, just because you think you do know some Atheists or that you think some persons meet your definition of Atheist doesn't mean they do, or that they are posting here, it just means you are ignorant of the facts.

Sadly, I'm not. I've spent a quarter century studying Atheists and Atheism and my conclusions are sound and proven and re-proven nearly every day now.

Just because you think you're not, doesn't mean you're not.

[Forty Two]

Sadly, they do. Poor things.

You are a non-theistic Tolerist.

Now, in my understanding, that means the following:

Nontheistic -- not having or involving a belief in gods.
Tolerism - Toleration; universal toleration -- to allow without interference differences of opinion, viewpoints, religions, preferences, ways of life, etc., even those which one disagrees with.

Based on those definitions, I am both nontheistic and a tolerist. Yet, I'm an atheist, because I am a person who does not believe in a god or gods - disbelief in the concept of a god or supreme being.

You have branded Tolerism with a TM as if you're claiming a trademark in it. What's the significance, in your view, of using the TM next to Tolerist?

[Forty Two]

'It was the hand of God': 'Brain-dead' girl who was pulled off life support AWAKES from coma after chiropractor's prayer session and makes full recovery

Taylor Hale, then 14, suffered traumatic brain injury when she fell off hood of car while horsing around with friends in 2011
She spent a week in medically induced come to help her brain heal, but she suffered a brain hemorrhage
Doctors declared Taylor brain dead and took her off life support, but hours later she woke up
Right before Taylor came out of coma, a devout family friend visited her and prayed for her recovery
Jeff Stickel, a chiropractor, laid his hand on Taylor's neck while praying with family
Hale, now 17, will be graduating high school Monday

By Snejana Farberov For Dailymail.com

Published: 11:07 EST, 14 May 2015 | Updated: 14:35 EST, 14 May 2015

When Taylor Hale was declared brain dead in September 2011 after a terrible accident, the 14-year-old girl's parents could hardly imagine she would ever wake up, let alone walk in her graduation ceremony.

But come Monday, the 17-year-old Waukee High School senior will don her cap and gown and ascend the stage at Knapp Center in De Moines, Iowa, as part of the graduating class of 2015 to accept her hard-fought diploma.

Hale and her family are painfully aware how close she came to missing that special moment, along with the rest of her life.
In September 11, Taylor Hal,e then 14, fell off the hood of a car and suffered an irreversible brain injury.
+10
Against all odds, she recovered and was able to attend her senior prom last month
+10

Comeback kid: In 2011, Taylor Hale, then 14 (left), had an accident and suffered a brain injury. Against all odds, she recovered and was able to attend her senior prom last month (right)
Fateful night: After a football game in September 2011, Hale was hanging out with friends in this Waukee, Iowa, neighborhood when she fell off the hood of a car while horsing around and hit her head on the pavement
+10

Fateful night: After a football game in September 2011, Hale was hanging out with friends in this Waukee, Iowa, neighborhood when she fell off the hood of a car while horsing around and hit her head on the pavement

On the night of September 11, 2011, Taylor was hanging out with friends after a football game when one of them said he had to go.

Hale, then 14 years old, and another girl playfully hopped on the hood of his car to stop him from leaving.

When the boy unwittingly put the vehicle in reverse, Hale and her friend were thrown to the ground. While the other girl escaped unharmed, Taylor banged her head against the pavement and lost conciseness, reported Des Moines Register.
Point of no return: Hale spent the next seven days in a medically induced coma, until on September 17 she suffered what was described as an irreversible brain hemorrhage
+10

Point of no return: Hale spent the next seven days in a medically induced coma, until on September 17 she suffered what was described as an irreversible brain hemorrhage

The girl was rushed to a hospital where doctors told her parents, Stacey Hennigsen and Chuck Hale, that their daughter has a traumatic brain injury.

Hale spent the next seven days in a medically induced coma to help her brain heal, but her prospects were bleak.

Then on September 17, the comatose teen suffered a brain hemorrhage that resulted in her brain partially sliding into her spinal canal - a medical 'point of no return' that is considered irreversible and almost always fatal.

Taylor's doctors informed her devastated parents that their child, who only a week ago was a lively, sociable high school freshman, was now brain dead and it was time for them to start thinking about donating her organs and making preparations for her funeral.

But a visit from a family friend seemingly changed everything.

Jeff Stickel, a chiropractor and a devout Christian, came by the hospital that afternoon telling them he felt God was calling him to help heal Taylor.

Taylor’s parents told Stickel their daughter was unconscious and there was nothing he could do for her.

Stickel asked if he could pray with the family for Taylor, and they agreed. He then placed his hand on the comatose girl's neck and asked God to spare the 14-year-old's life.

Later that day, after Stickel had departed, Hale's doctors took her off life support, but instead of flatlining the girl struggled to draw a breath on her own.

For the next several hours, Taylor, now back on life support, started showing visible signs of improvement: her brain activity picked up, her eyelids were aflutter, and for the first time in a week she was trying to talk.
Family friend Jeff Stickel, a chiropractor and a devout Christian, visited Taylor in the hospital and prayed for her recovery, placing his hand on the back of her neck
+10
Hours after Stickel's visit, Taylor woke up
+10

'Miracle' worker: Family friend Jeff Stickel, a chiropractor and a devout Christian, visited Taylor in the hospital and prayed for her recovery, placing his hand on the back of her neck. Hours later, she woke up, even though she had been taken off life support
Baby steps: Taylor spent the next several months re-learning how to do everything, from eating on her own to walking and talking
+10

Baby steps: Taylor spent the next several months re-learning how to do everything, from eating on her own to walking and talking

Eventually, against overwhelming odds, Taylor Hale awoke from her coma.

‘It was the hand of God at work,’ Chuck Hale told the paper. ‘That's the only thing that can explain it.’

Slowly but surely, Taylor was on the road to recovery.

She would spend the next several months re-learning how to do everything, from eating on her own to walking and talking.

‘It was just like a painful stressful recovery. But I pushed through it because you just got to do what you got to do,’ Taylor told the station KCCI.

The arduous process was not without its low points and setbacks, as Taylor struggled to regain her cognitive ability and grew frustrated because her long-term memory was gone.

She eventually returned to school, where Taylor now had to work harder than anyone else to pass tests and make her grades.
Once back in school, Taylor had to work harder than anyone else to pass tests and make her grades
+10
In 2013, she met her boyfriend, Jontrell
+10

Fighter: Once back in school, Taylor had to work harder than anyone else to pass tests and make her grades. In 2013, she met her boyfriend, Jontrell (right)
Momentous occasion: Next week, the 17-year-old Waukee High School senior will don her cap and gown and ascend the stage at Knapp Center in De Moines, Iowa, to accept her hard-fought diploma
+10

Momentous occasion: Next week, the 17-year-old Waukee High School senior will don her cap and gown and ascend the stage at Knapp Center in De Moines, Iowa, to accept her hard-fought diploma

She said it was especially difficult because most of the friends she had before the accident have inexplicably turned their backs on her.

But her progress, given the severity of her injury, has been tremendous: Taylor has learned to drive a car, started dating and, as of late, her childhood memories have been coming back to her in bits and pieces.

Looking back on the dramatic events of the fall of 2011, Taylor and her family are convinced that the girl cheated death because of divine intervention.

‘I'm always thankful to all the doctors and nurses and therapists who helped me get better, but God did most of the saving,’ she told the paper.

Taylor Hale plans to enroll in a community college next year and study event planning.

This atheist cannot explain it.

Question for Seth - Can a nontheistic Tolerist explain it?

Followup question for Seth - Does the inability to explain it mean something? If so, what?

Another followup question for Seth -- Taylor and her family are, according to the article, convinced that the girl cheated death because of divine intervention. The only facts presented in the article for divine intervention are that a chiropractor put his hand on the back of her neck and prayed (he says) for her recovery. Hours later, she awoke, and has since made what appears to be a full recovery. The chiropractor said that he thinks the only explanation is divine intervention. Is that the only explanation? If not, what other explanations might there be?

[Seth]

You cannot prove it.

I don't have to, they prove it every day. Ipse dixit, quod erat demonstrandum

[Seth]

I guess it was the moment the OP demanded atheists answer a medical question which has nothing to do with atheism. It would've been more productive to email the doctors involved directly than ask random internet people. But how did it get from a barely interesting example of unexplained remission to what it is now?

The usual way: Atheist misdirection, derail, denial, evasion and mendacity of course.

This is quite typical of Atheist argumentation. Rather than actually address the OP in a rational manner they engage in every sort of evasive tactic known to man because they know full well that they cannot actually address the OP because they don't have a "scientific" answer and so any actual intellectual participation in the debate would make them look foolish precisely because they cannot simply admit that they don't know what happened and that what happened could be the result of "divine intervention" because, of course, they do not actually know whether God exists or not, can not provide any sort of credible scientific proof that God does NOT exist, but are unable to simply admit this fact and admit that there are things they don't know or understand.

The utterly irrational moral certainty with which Atheists defend the non-existence of God is the entire point of the thread, and all of the specious and off-topic rhetoric you see is proof positive of my claims with respect to the utter inability of Atheists to engage in rational and reasonable debate on this subject.

[Seth]

Sadly, they do. Poor things.

You are a non-theistic Tolerist.

Now, in my understanding, that means the following:

Nontheistic -- not having or involving a belief in gods.

Not exactly. I have beliefs about god(s) that, at this time, do not involve a firmly held belief in the existence of god(s).

Tolerism - Toleration; universal toleration -- to allow without interference differences of opinion, viewpoints, religions, preferences, ways of life, etc., even those which one disagrees with.

With provisos, yes. The fundamental proviso is that I tolerate only the peaceable actions and beliefs of others.

Based on those definitions, I am both nontheistic and a tolerist.

Do you wish to join Tolerism™? Please PM me for information and costs associated with being a member of this religious organization.

Yet, I'm an atheist, because I am a person who does not believe in a god or gods - disbelief in the concept of a god or supreme being.

Glad to hear it. But are you also an Atheist?

You have branded Tolerism with a TM as if you're claiming a trademark in it. What's the significance, in your view, of using the TM next to Tolerist?

The names "Tolerist™" and "Tolerism™" are, like "Scientology™" trademarks of my religion, and yes, I am claiming trademark status for them because I coined them and actively use them as part of my religious activities.

[Seth]

This atheist cannot explain it.

Question for Seth - Can a nontheistic Tolerist explain it?

No.

Followup question for Seth - Does the inability to explain it mean something? If so, what?

It means that I acknowledge that my knowledge of the universe and it's characteristics and functions is imperfect.

Another followup question for Seth -- Taylor and her family are, according to the article, convinced that the girl cheated death because of divine intervention. The only facts presented in the article for divine intervention are that a chiropractor put his hand on the back of her neck and prayed (he says) for her recovery. Hours later, she awoke, and has since made what appears to be a full recovery. The chiropractor said that he thinks the only explanation is divine intervention. Is that the only explanation? If not, what other explanations might there be?

I don't know.