Comments on: I am a Scientific Atheist

By: Session.it » What kind of atheist are you?

Session.it » What kind of atheist are you? — Sun, 30 Sep 2007 13:30:40 +0000

[…] Similar to the previous post, I read an interesting post on Ugo’s blog, so I decided to reveal the nature of my atheism. […]

By: Massimiliano Dessì

Massimiliano Dessì — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 16:03:52 +0000

Sorry for delay
The Sikorsky’s phrase about hornet, it’s a metaphor, about “absolute” terms of truth of knowledge of nature of the scientific community.
When it’s not possible provide a positive o negative proof, it’s more correct not speak about a thing in absolute term, but it’s more correct add a term “it could exist”, otherwise a objective speech, it becomes a pub speech.

By: ugo

ugo — Mon, 11 Jun 2007 19:55:55 +0000

The fact that you cannot rule out something being real does not mean that you should believe it. It’s not possible to provide negative proof of most things, and lack of negative proof is not positive proof. It’s not even a strong hint.

As for Sikorsky’s phrase, I find it quite silly: hornets do fly and do so well within the boundary of physics, unless you want to argue that god performs a miracle every time a hornet flies.

By: Massimiliano Dessì

Massimiliano Dessì — Mon, 11 Jun 2007 19:17:15 +0000

I don’t have to convince nobody, but
I can make hypothesis and
I can’t exclude nothing,
without contrary demonstration.
It’s a like famous phrase of Igor Sikorsky:
“According to the laws of physics, hornets wouldn’t be able to fly. Hornets, however, don’t know this and fly anyway”.

By: ugo

ugo — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 21:24:36 +0000

This is a classical argument from ignorance: “since we don’t know everything, we can believe anything.” Sorry but that’s not a convincing argument.

By: Massimiliano Dessì

Massimiliano Dessì — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 21:19:54 +0000

Sounds strange that all rules in the universe are spontaneous without creator or architect. However until I don’t have a test that excludes whichever author, I don’t excludes all hypothesis, include a Creator-Architect-God , otherwise I must exclude all future discoveries, for the reason that now I don’t have a test that proven their existence.
The humans are too much small in order to understand the universe and its rules

By: ugo

ugo — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 05:42:45 +0000

The problem of abiogenesis (i.e. how life arose from non-life) is still very much unsettled, unfortunately. However, there is no reason to think that a “god” played some role in this process or that living things have some supernatural quality that non-living things don’t have.

Now, what was your point, again?

By: Massimiliano Dessì

Massimiliano Dessì — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 20:46:38 +0000

There is a misunderstanding due to my exposure in English tongue.
I mean say, if all starts with a Big Bang with only atomic subparticles without life, when and like appear organisms with life ?
Which are the rules in this evolution, the chaos ?

By: ugo

ugo — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 17:24:40 +0000

What makes you think thoughts and feelings cannot arise from matter? Are they supernatural? Do animals have thoughts and feelings?

By: Massimiliano Dessì

Massimiliano Dessì — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 17:14:32 +0000

The quiz it’s dinamic, the question now it’s a different number
My doubt born when i compare unanimate things with humans.
If both are made from subatomic particles when and why the human have earned the thought and the feelings ?

By: ugo

ugo — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 12:10:11 +0000

Massimiliano,

that one is question #28, not #3.

The answer is obviously “false”. You CAN create something out of nothing, witness subatomic particles, and, even if it turned out that you can’t, this still begs the question: who created God in the first place?

Now, what has it all to do with Monica Bellucci or humans in general, who, quite obviously, weren’t created but were born?

Or am I misunderstanding what you meant to say?

By: Massimiliano Dessì

Massimiliano Dessì — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 10:15:19 +0000

Refer to the question:
“You cannot create something from nothing, there must be a God!”

Where is the start of the humans if start all with a Big Bang ?

By: ugo

ugo — Wed, 06 Jun 2007 22:14:36 +0000

Nobody ever said that if you shake particles for a very long time you can obtain Monica Bellucci. That’s a very poor depiction of evolution. Hint: it’s not random at all.

By: Massimiliano Dessì

Massimiliano Dessì — Wed, 06 Jun 2007 20:28:09 +0000

For a question number three,
I’m a theist.
When I see Monica Bellucci I can say that God exist.
It’s a little bit hard to demonstrate that if you shake particles for a very long time you can obtain Monica Bellucci.
The author of the quiz knows Monica Bellucci ?

By: Bruno Schirch

Bruno Schirch — Tue, 29 May 2007 18:56:18 +0000

I’m a spiritual atheist according to the bas quizz. I;m fine with the result so whether is a bad quizz or not, who cares?

Cheers