Attention Atheists.

Nah, that's not the big deal. Actually, that's a bit witty.

Oh, um thanks...I suppose.

I am deeply offended! >:( I'm gonna go write about it in my LiveJournal!




Seriously, I'm surpised how on track this topic is going.

Those people are in denial.

Surely they can say they know, but they only have balls if they admit that they have had their doubts.

actually, we do.

personally, i believe in the big bang and evolution, especially evolution, but only because I've neglected to study the big bang much yet

if that was true i would be being prejudice. which i am not.
i know about hinduism and polytheistic religions.
they are polytheistic, meaning many gods.
this topic was meant so i could see people's atheistic view, meaning no god.

if someone is in a theistic or polytheistic religion, its kind of obvious they believe everything started through a creator or some sort of intelligent design.

atheists don't have a set belief because it isn't a religion, therefore the range of theories is endless.

i was curious about the theories.




thank you everyone who has posted their views. =]

I basically consider "life" to be an arbitrary name for "really complicated system of atoms and particles"

I mean, astronomers recently discovered this self-replicating crystal substance in outer space, and they're debating on whether or not to call it "extra-terrestrial life", because one of the requirements for life is that you can reproduce, but this is basically just an autonomous system of gases. And by that definition, mules, and infertile men aren't considered "life".

So it's really complicated stuff.

But as for how "life" the way we know it today began, it started out with just the basic atoms like carbon, nitrogen, oxygen and whatnot. (As you may or may not know, we're made primarily out of hyrdrogen and carbon.)

So these atoms have these subatomic particles, protons, neutrons and electrons. The thing is, each one has a different amount. And because of that, they react differently when they come into contact to one another, because of gravity. So, say you have a bunch of particles that attract from one side, and repel from the other. If they form a sort of sphere, what you've got is a cell. And from there, you had evolution.

I know I'm not explaining it very well. There was a neat video I saw that explained it really well. You might want to watch it, it's pretty cool.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZtRn1fst-g&feature=related

interestingly, by those standards, a computer virus would be "life."

(a computer virus is any program that replicates itself onto the other programs in an "infected" system, and often attempts to spread to other systems as well)

Which is exactly why I have a problem with distinguishing certain things as "life" and others as not. As far as I'm concerned, we all just are. We can call life anything smart enough to know that it's life, but the concept will always be manmade.

This is a good question but I highly believe that it was the evolution of bacteria in a climate suitable for life to be the beginning of life. I don't think this to oppose religion, I think of this as the most logical reason seeing as how we are all organisms and regardless of how advanced we are; We are forms of bacteria.

MFGG is always hesitant to post after I do :|

I basically agree with you. I mean, that's pretty much fact by now.

The only thing is, we shouldn't differentiate, say, "organisms" from something like a rock. It's all just jumbles of atoms.

What the...?

Besides, this isn't really a debate thread and as such, I'm not going to do any 'arguing'.

Tip: There are people on MFGG who argue more than I do.

This post has been edited by Captain Cook on Jul 21 2008, 09:16 PM

A computer virus is a virus, and a virus is immune to antibiotics.

Viruses, computer or organic, aren't considered "life", because they can't reproduce by themselves (they hijack body cells to do this for them), and they don't breathe.

yes. I was just commenting on if we were to define "life" as "anything that replicates itself"

Do you think you could tone it down some on the harshness? It's not very welcoming (at least to me).


[As far as I see it,] people who have true faith don't have doubts. The term "leap of faith" where you jump into something, but know you will be better on the other side.

It sounds like (to ME), that you haven't understood the concept of true faith. I am not saying that to put you down in ANY way (because I was exactly like that). That's just what I see.


You see me posting a lot of affirmation that what I'm posting is only what I'm seeing through my eyes. I do this so my message of perception is crystal clear and no one gets the wrong idea (getting the wrong idea blows majrloy).

I don't care how all this **** got here, I just sit back and enjoy it.

Oh yeah: the guy who invented the word "agnostic" did so solely because he was sick of being called an atheist. : D

Keep in mind that replication and reproduction are very different concepts!!!

I've read up on QUITE a few religions.. and none of them make as much sense as the big bang theory and Evolution.. because for the latter.. there is at least proof.