Archaeology of the New Testament

[Cypress]

Agreed.

As others have pointed out, where religion is concerned, the primary religion in the US is Christian. Rebellious teenagers and 20somethings would focus on Christianity to express their angst. Calling Jesus a "zombie" or otherwise denigrating Christianity is equal to political rebellious behavior like denigrating the flag or blaming the US for all the ills of the world.

Likewise, since "whites" constitute 72% of the population**, it fits that most militant atheists would be white. A little deeper dive would reveal they are also mostly upper middle-class. That doesn't explain the militancy, only the higher number of atheists and agnostics since, IMO, it implies higher education. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2016/10/11/how-income-varies-among-u-s-religious-groups/

Males tend to be more aggressive although there's a debate about how much is genetic and how much is cultural. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6318556/

Normal people outgrow their rebellious natures, but that doesn't convert them to any particular belief system.

**it's more accurate these days, and in the near future, to label it "white culture" AKA Euro-American culture versus asserting it by skin-tone.

Good summary.

Even accounting for demographic racial percentages, I thought that white Euro-Americans were just more likely to be atheist than other ethnic groups.

Once when I asked this question to a JPP atheist (I think it was Perry) they implied white males happened to be more atheist because they are just more intelligent and rational. They quickly realized what they were saying and back tracked, lol

 

[ZenMode]

I believe the most logical inference for the cause of a mathematically rational and lawful universe is some kind of timeless immaterial rational organizing agency or principle.

I don't believe a witch did it.

So, this "thing" isn't conscious, but decided to inject the laws of physics into matter?

You reference agency:
Agency—the capacity to act, make choices, and cause effects in an environment

 

[Into the Night]

It's like you try to sound as dumb as possible.

What? Mentioning your religions? You just called your own religions dumb!

 

[Into the Night]

Again, it's the celestial equivalent of a witch, not a literal witch.

The 'celestial equivalent of a witch'?? Not a literal witch??

 

[Into the Night]

Okay, so you have no examples from anywhere in human myth, story, or legend about witches being the cause of the universe and the laws of physics.

So when we talk about the cause of the universe and the origin of the laws of physics, it really is quite silly to be bringing witches, warlocks, and sorcerers into the discussion.

The Universe is not a cause.
The Universe is not physics.
The Universe is not a law.

Physics was created by Man.
Stories of witches, warlocks, sorcerers, etc were created by Man.

Did you know that some of the early chemists were considered sorcerers?

 

[Into the Night]

Thanks for this contribution. But a speculative multiverse still is not an explanation for the origin of it all. The BGV theorem proved mathematically 20 years ago that there has to be a finite spacetime boundary somewhere in the past. In other words, an origin. Multiverse also does not explain the origin of the laws of physics and the fundamental forces.

No such proof.
There is no known boundary of the Universe.
There is no known origin of the Universe.
Physics was created by Man.
The fundamental forces were named and created by Man.

The Universe is not physics.
The Universe is not a law.
The Universe not a 'spacetime'.
Time has no meaning in the Universe.

The Universe is unorganized.

 

[Into the Night]

You are focused on an irrelevant distinction.

You believe that a conscious being some how injected laws into existing matter.

Man is a conscious being, and he did just that.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Good summary.

Even accounting for demographic racial percentages, I thought that white Euro-Americans were just more likely to be atheist than other ethnic groups.

Once when I asked this question to a JPP atheist (I think it was Perry) they implied white males happened to be more atheist because they are just more intelligent and rational. They quickly realized what they were saying and back tracked, lol

Perry has "issues". He probably has a caretaker or someone checking on him periodically. IMO, a parent. When one or both are gone, he might end up a ward of the state.

 

[Into the Night]

It made it crystal clear to physicists that you could get an enormous amount of energy from just a tiny bit of matter, since E =MC^2 showed matter and energy were interchangeable. That is the idea that lead to a theory of nuclear fission and ultimately the atomic bomb.

The speed of light in a vacuum, 'c' is a fundamental property of the universe independent of space, time and matter.

Again you deny the Theory of Special Relativity, a theory of science.

It is not possible to convert matter to energy.
It is not possible to convert energy to matter.
The speed of light is denoted in a unit of time AND a unit of space.
It has nothing to do with matter.
It is not possible to destroy matter into nothing.
It is not possible to destroy energy into nothing.
It is not possible to create matter from nothing.
It is not possible to create energy from nothing.
You still don't understand nuclear fission.
Matter is not energy.
Energy is not matter.
Matter and energy are NOT interchangeable.
E=mc^2 does NOT show matter and energy are interchangeable.
You are ignoring the rest of the equation.
The value of 'c' was created by Man, and is designed to convert the relationship to units of measurement also created by Man.

Nuclear fission does not destroy matter.
Nuclear fission does not convert matter into energy.

I don't think you know how to build ANY type of bomb, much less a fission bomb.
This is probably a good thing for you.

 

[Into the Night]

I posted their own words.
Their words corroborated what I told you originally.

If me, the premier European physics lab, and the U.S. national physics lab at Brookhaven are all saying the same thing, the odds are it's an accurate description of the current state of science.

A guy at CERN is not CERN.
A guy at a physics lab is not the physics lab.

False authority fallacy.
Courtier's fallacy.

Math error: Failure to declare boundary. Failure to declare randX.

Science is not a state.
Science is not a casino.
Science is not a government agency.
Science is not a guy on a website.

Matter cannot be destroyed into nothing.
Energy cannot be destroyed into nothing.
Matter cannot be created out of nothing.
Energy cannot be created out of nothing.
Matter is not energy.
Energy is not matter.
You cannot convert matter to energy.
You cannot convert energy to matter.
Matter and energy are NOT interchangeable.

 

[Into the Night]

Atomic matter obeys the laws of physics.

Word game.

Matter and energy obey the laws of physics, which are fundamental properties of the universe.
Space and time are not uniform and obey the fundamental underlying properties of the laws of nature.

Space is not time.
Time is not space.
Space is uniformly measured using our systems of measurement, created by Man.
Time is uniformly measured using our systems of measurement, created by Man.
Time has no meaning outside of Man.
There is no 'fundamental law of nature'.
The Universe is not a law.

The Universe is unorganized.

Since time, space, and matter had an origin point sometime in the distant past, whatever created it was outside time. That is to say timeless, spaceless, and immaterial. In other words, eternal and uncreated.

There no known origin of the Universe.
You cannot have a 'creator' outside the universe, or it isn't the Universe.
You just said God is nothing.

 

[ZenMode]

Again you deny the Theory of Special Relativity, a theory of science.

It is not possible to convert matter to energy.
It is not possible to convert energy to matter.
The speed of light is denoted in a unit of time AND a unit of space.
It has nothing to do with matter.
It is not possible to destroy matter into nothing.
It is not possible to destroy energy into nothing.
It is not possible to create matter from nothing.
It is not possible to create energy from nothing.
You still don't understand nuclear fission.
Matter is not energy.
Energy is not matter.
Matter and energy are NOT interchangeable.
E=mc^2 does NOT show matter and energy are interchangeable.
You are ignoring the rest of the equation.
The value of 'c' was created by Man, and is designed to convert the relationship to units of measurement also created by Man.

Nuclear fission does not destroy matter.
Nuclear fission does not convert matter into energy.

I don't think you know how to build ANY type of bomb, much less a fission bomb.
This is probably a good thing for you.
Space is not time.
Time is not space.
Space is uniformly measured using our systems of measurement, created by Man.
Time is uniformly measured using our systems of measurement, created by Man.
Time has no meaning outside of Man.
There is no 'fundamental law of nature'.
The Universe is not a law.

The Universe is unorganized.

There no known origin of the Universe.
You cannot have a 'creator' outside the universe, or it isn't the Universe.
You just said God is nothing.

No such proof.
There is no known boundary of the Universe.
There is no known origin of the Universe.
Physics was created by Man.
The fundamental forces were named and created by Man.

The Universe is not physics.
The Universe is not a law.
The Universe not a 'spacetime'.
Time has no meaning in the Universe.

The Universe is unorganized.

It's pretty amazing that you are able to post so many words while contributing slightly more nothing of value to any conversation.

 

[Into the Night]

Words have meanings.

Not to you. You keep using numerous buzzwords.

Precision in language is a goal for every educated person.

Buzzwords are not precision. They are part of no language.

Witches, wizards, and conscious beings are not accurate descriptions of what I believe.

You do not believe you are conscious??

You are going to have to accept the words that I think most accurately describe what I believe.

So you believe in numerous buzzwords that have no meaning. Gotit.

I told you ninety three times before that the best explanation for the universe and the laws of nature appears to be some rational organizing principle that is immaterial, eternal, uncaused.

Buzzword fallacies (universe, laws of nature, rational, organizing principle, immaterial, eternal, uncaused).

The Universe needs no explanation.
The Universe is not a law.
The Universe is not a division.
The Universe is material.
The Universe is not a cause.
The Universe is not an uncause.

The Universe is unorgnized.

 

[Into the Night]

He did then you accused him of nit-picking.

Have you considered switching to decaf? Space-Time began with the Big Bang. Since you seem confused on this point, let me help you:

Overview - NASA Science

The origin, evolution, and nature of the universe have fascinated and confounded humankind for centuries. New ideas and major discoveries made during the 20th

science.nasa.gov

Cosmic Inflation​

Around 13.8 billion years ago, the universe expanded faster than the speed of light for a fraction of a second, a period called cosmic inflation. Scientists aren’t sure what came before inflation or what powered it. It’s possible that energy during this period was just part of the fabric of space-time. Cosmologists think inflation explains many aspects of the universe we observe today, like its flatness, or lack of curvature, on the largest scales. Inflation may have also magnified density differences that naturally occur on space’s smallest, quantum-level scales, which eventually helped form the universe’s large-scale structures.

As noted several times previously in this 3,500+ thread, why the BB happened is unknown and, at present, unknowable.

What 'Big Bang'?
The Universe has no known boundary. What is 'expanding'? What is 'inflating'?
The Universe is not flat.
Space is not a quanta.
The Universe is not a structure.

The Universe is unorganized.

 

[Into the Night]

Are you in the habit of forcing words into other people's mouths?

It's ridiculous to hold the belief that a witch created the universe and the laws of physics. Absolutely nothing in human myth and legend attributes that kind of power to witches.

See the Zelda series.

 

[Into the Night]

Again, if you don't like witch, sky wizard, etc then pick the word you like.

So.....

You believe that a conscious (your word of choice) didn't create matter, but injected the laws of physics into existing matter, correct?

Why would he choose your Sky Wizard? Would you rather have him choose your Farting Rainbow Unicorn?
Why would he choose any of your gods?

 

[Into the Night]

He's pretty funny....in a weird funny way. Like all militant atheists over 30, he obviously has a lifelong trauma associated with Christians and, therefore, the idea some people believe on God greatly disturbs him.

There is no such thing as a 'militant atheist'.
ZenMode has described recently two gods that he believes in.

 

[Into the Night]

I would say that ninety percent of self identified atheists are not actually free thinking, dispassionate non-theists without an axe to grind. Rather, this ninety percent are angry, upset, distressed about Christianity in particular.

Atheists are not angry about any religion. They simply don't have one themselves.
Go learn what 'atheist' means.

Science is completely atheistic.
Mathematics is completely atheistic.
Logic is completely atheistic.
By your own argument, relating each of these somehow to the Universe, you are saying the Universe is completely atheistic.

This is actually a sound argument.
The Universe is not a person.
The Universe is not a god.
The Universe is not a religion.

The Universe is unorganized.

I think even Einstein said most militant atheists were traumatized by the church their parents dragged them to.

There is no such thing as a 'militant atheist'.
Buzzword fallacy. Go learn what 'atheist' means.

 

[Into the Night]

There must be psychological reasons why atheists are overwhelmingly young, male, and white. That kind of monochromatic and youthful self-selecting group doesn't happen by accident. Any idea why they are overwhelmingly male and white?

Go stuff your racism up your butt, Cyborg.

 

[Into the Night]

Agreed.

As others have pointed out, where religion is concerned, the primary religion in the US is Christian. Rebellious teenagers and 20somethings would focus on Christianity to express their angst. Calling Jesus a "zombie" or otherwise denigrating Christianity is equal to political rebellious behavior like denigrating the flag or blaming the US for all the ills of the world.

Likewise, since "whites" constitute 72% of the population**, it fits that most militant atheists would be white. A little deeper dive would reveal they are also mostly upper middle-class. That doesn't explain the militancy, only the higher number of atheists and agnostics since, IMO, it implies higher education. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2016/10/11/how-income-varies-among-u-s-religious-groups/

Males tend to be more aggressive although there's a debate about how much is genetic and how much is cultural. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6318556/

Normal people outgrow their rebellious natures, but that doesn't convert them to any particular belief system.

**it's more accurate these days, and in the near future, to label it "white culture" AKA Euro-American culture versus asserting it by skin-tone.

Go stuff your racism up your butt, Sybil.
There is no such thing as 'militant atheism'.
Buzzword fallacy. Go learn what 'atheist' means.
Psychoquackery.