A Tripolation

I think it's ridiculous to say a transcendental being would not be allowed to interfere in a universe he exists outside of. They are not bound by any rules. I'm saying that someone who can't explain tides isn't good at maths or physics. Since both physics and deities are an attempt at explaining the observable phenomena of the universe, someone who cannot grasp basic physics is in no position to state that religion is a scam. And I'm not making that argument because I'm not saying, "You haven't found a complete theory of everything? The answer is Goddidit." IMO, no. They can be atheists. I just would never take their arguments seriously.

What do you need advice about? FAFSA? Admissions? Coursework involved? You have a lot of computer experience. I doubt the CS courses will challenge you until you reach the 300 or 400 level courses.

This question? If so, I believe it is bad from for religious people to go around preaching or attempting to change anyone's mind. It's rude and annoying. Those arguments all treat the Judeo-Christian God as if he were bound by the morals and laws that humanity has. While they are all valid arguments, I really don't think they can apply to an omnipotent, omniscient entity. And by valid, I mean they are logically sound constructs.

No. But it would make you stupid if you called a programmer who was trying to use an odd esoteric language to build AI or such a fool. They can't explain their computer. Their arguments have no merit. As such, Silverman is in no place to tell me that my God does not exist. He can't explain tides. He's not someone whose opinion I would respect. Yes. But the people who do not believe in the existence of those things do not go around raising billboards and preaching about the easily manipulated Christians, or their lack of the cognizant capacity to think rationally. They disbelieve and that's it. They see no reason to go about attempting to change peoples' minds via ad hom arguments.

He can say anything he wants. I agree that it's the credibility of speech that is affected. And you're right that Bill O' Reilly is an idiot with no credibility. I just also think that Silverman is an idiot as well. IMHO, they both adamantly believe in a religion. Silverman just glosses his up with claiming to be a critical thinker. Yet the concept of gravity eludes him...

You know that it operates on electrical pulses. That's more than this guy knows about physics. And I'm not saying that not understanding something completely means you can't be an atheist, or that you're stupid. I'm saying that showing a lack of knowledge on even the most rudimentary topics means that you lose your ability to tell Christians that they're being taken in by a scam. I agree it's only true of some atheists. I understand some atheists are not dogmatic in the slightest, and really couldn't give a damn about what people believe. My apologies for not clarifying that.

How so? This was precisely my point. He just knows he's an atheist. He doesn't know WHY. If he can't answer such a simple question, he's not equipped to understand the maths that explain the universe, thus, he's denouncing the existence of god(s) without any reason at all. He's trusting the people that are smarter than him, he has blind faith in them. Of course the scientists and engineers he's listening to are right to an extent; I just don't get how someone can repeatedly call religion a scam when they do not understand one of the most basic tenants of physics, eg, gravity.

If that's what you choose to believe. Have fun. Not necessarily, but they did repeatedly ask me to "listen to reason". I supposed I should've written, "atheists in a religious debate about a supreme creator".

It could be confirmation bias. I just know that the majority of atheists I've talked to have responded to my theism with a certain amount of vitriol that is unbecoming of a "logical" person. You say it's a worldview. That there are no principals. But in my experience, most view theists as inherently inferior, intellectually. Or they think we are emotionally susceptible to touchy-feel-good garbage. A lot of preconceived notions. So basically, a superiority complex.

No. It's a doctrine though. I don't see it as a religion because it's not about god(s). Atheism is. And they are very dogmatic. A few are even hateful in their disdain of religion. In your experience, is that framing common? Most of my theist friends are intelligent enough to know how easily that can be turned against them. EG, Where did God come from? Is that the norm for Christians you know?

Holy crap Cap'n. That's gorgeous! When will this be released? And can normal people use it without crying?

I think it's sad the emissary of atheists didn't know why the tides go in and out. And don't say it was because he was confused. I could answer that if someone drug me out of the bed at four A.M. A side note though, this is why I (along with others) consider Atheism a religion. They're erecting billboards... They're proselytizing. They're trying to change how people believe. That's what religions do. If they wanted everyone to be better-educated, then they would spend their money funding schools or bills that would improve our educational system...not making billboards.

If only. I would be ecstatic if my Christian God had the amount of evidence supporting his existence as relativity or gravity does. Want to try again?

Ah. Sorry. Capn, if you would be so kind to remove this post and the "BINGO?" one I made?

BINGO?

Trust me. Everyone here already knows that.

I don't see how anyone that could create a universe, even one with flaws, could be classified as a buffoon. If you only inhabit that creation, what does that make you? And thanks for that meaning of life thing. I take it you've never seen The Matrix.

I think my irreducibly-complex-omnipotent-deity makes more sense than the ideas you are espousing.

What all is wrong with the electric-universe idea? What does it say? Where's a place to go to read reliable information about it?

This? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law

Yeah. That's precisely it.

Like, take a human, deconstruct them down to the smallest particle, and then recreate them in a digitized version in a world controlled by electrical pulses?

You don't recommend studying different areas of science?