DOES God Exist? – A Rebuttal to Wired’s Article “The New Atheism”

24 10 2006

This Post is subject to major editing as I am shaged out from lack of sleep and a crap job. However, this needs to be said, even if it is said poorly. TRDQ

I just got the latest issue of Wired today and the Cover article is about Science and “The New Atheism” (in the 11.09 Issue), or Science as the “New Religion”, without “God”.

I could only find one other reference to this article: beta » Blog Archive » The new atheism, the new faith. I’m not surprised its not even on the shelves or on Wired’s website yet.

Let me preface this rebuttal with the fact that I am a non-believer. I have no faith. I do not believe in God. I have however, spent a large portion of my adult life studying world religions in order to try and find God, but to no avail. I found only more questions and no answers. The only help whatsoever were the writings of Joseph Campbell. But still, I lack faith. I lack belief.

To sum up the article, God does not exist and science says so along with these random old people. These people, who call themselves “The New Atheists”, want you to join them in their fight against organized religion.

To start, why are people always trying to get other people to “join their side”, especially atheists. If one does not believe that God exists, then why go to such trouble to “rally the troops” so to speak? If the world ends in a ball of nuclear flame does it matter? There is no God, why do you care? I’ll answer for you, because you are committing the same sin that most organized religions and all politicians commit, you have an agenda to push. Well fuck you and your agenda. You tarnish the word atheist, you sanctimonious pricks.

Wired, this latest shenanigan on atheism is at best spectacle newstertainment, and at worst sociologically damaging. There is a reason the forefathers of the United States of America kept church and state separate, simply because they should be kept separate. Human law represents logic whilst religion represents a leap of faith, or to put it more crudely, a leap of logic. One can not mix logic and illogic, the results have been and will always be disastrous (See: The Spanish Inquisition, The Salem Witch Hunts etc etc). However, the roadblock goes both ways.

Science has no more business meddling in the affairs of religion any more than the Vatican had a right to condemn Galileio for supposing that the earth was not the center of the known galaxy.

If these people were true scientists or mathematicians they would know that there is no scientific or mathematical way to prove or disprove the existence of God. Let me repeat that, THERE IS NO LOGICAL WAY TO PROVE OR DISPROVE THE EXISTENCE OF “GOD”. If they were true keepers of knowledge they’d already know what I am about to explain.

To start it is mathmatically impossible to prove a negative. So, no one can prove that God doesn’t exist. Check.
Now, to mix Nietze and Schrodinger, lets say that “God” is in a box right now, he/she/it is either Religion-Alive or Nitze-Dead (like Schrodinger’s cat). According to Schrodinger the phenomenon of “God’s” state of existance is BOTH/NEITHER alive and/nor dead until the phenomenon is measured in some manner. To put it more eloquently, well, lets let Schrodinger explain it:

Schroedinger’s Equation is:

-((h/2π)2/2m)(∂2Ψ(x,t)/∂x2)+V(x,t)Ψ(x,t) = j(h/2π)(∂Ψ(x,t)/∂t)

That is to say that at any given point in time it is impossible to know where a particle is or what it is doing, without measuring it. Its a fact of nature. So, no way to prove God exists without somehow measuring the phenomenon. Check again.

Atheism is as much a belief as organized religion. Atheist believe that there is no God. That is why I do not call myself an Atheist. To be frank I haven’t a clue one way or the other on this timeless debate.

So, Wired et al, now that you have used the belief structure of “The New Atheist” to push your agenda, what are you going to do with it? You have touted these so called “atheists”, who claim to not believe in God, but are really pushing their “peace via no religion” agenda, and to what end?

Religion, with its many many faults is all people have sometimes. So what if they are wrong? No harm no foul as long as Church and state are separate. So what if I am wrong? What if God does exist? It all means nothing. To quote Shakespeare “Life is a tale, told by an idiot, signifying nothing.”

Now, Quit your bullshit newstertainment Wired. Get back to the basics, when you were more about tech and less about pop culture. And tell those “New Atheists” to piss off, they have no place in a technical magazine and are just a bunch of old people trying to make order out of things before they die. There is no order you fucktards. Check and mate. K?thx.byenow.
BTW – Your gagdet guide sucked ass. It was a teeny tiny pamphlet with a few adds for products that suck. Cut down on the ads all together. Its hard to even read the magazine now, with all the bind in ads and the “promotional sections”. Either be Maxim or be Wired. Make a choice you spineless shills for the almighty adspace dollar. No wonder everyone has dumped you for the likes of Reddit. Stop being complete and utter TWATS.


Some Notes For future edits (if I decide I give a rats ass):

“atheists” (from the latin a, loosly meaning none, and “theist”, lossly meaning God or religion)

Check the article title agian.

Make sure that that is the correct equation that Schrodinger used as a basis for the thought experiment about the cat.

Start writing this type of shit earlier.



4 responses

26 10 2006 beta » Blog Archive » Faith and atheism

[…] Well, we had a lot of thoughtful comments, email, pingbacks et al. on the topic of faith and atheism. Thanks to all for their input… we will definitely be pursuing this, an essay is in the works. This will just take some time to research,  think through and organize… […]

6 12 2006

What do you suppose the probability is that a particular rock is a being able to control events on Earth? Many cultures ascribed agency to inanimate objects. They worshipped the rock god or the tree god…or the cargo god…hoping for its favor in the hunt, or in life. We see such conduct and know that what these primitives believe is extremely improbable. Is it any less so when it is a sky god we worship?

You fall prey to the bad statistics fallacy. It is true that a particular god either exists or does not exist. That does not make the liklihood that it exists 50%. To call such a fallacy a belief or to say it cannot be proved and therefore to ignore the probabilities is begging the question. We cannot prove that an atom exists, but we can do chemistry based on the probabilities. Try doing miracles based on belief.

6 12 2006

@ jalberion

My point wasn’t so much that God does or does not exist in any form whatsoever. My point was that atheists shouldn’t go around meddling in other peoples lives. Just like I expect no one to stop me from aborting an unwanted child, I expect that I shall not try and convert some Christian to atheism.

Would you want a “New Atheist” trying to tell you what to believe in? Then what? Why create a structure of non belief? Power, attention, and infamy is what they want. They want to influence people and their beliefs. How is that any better than the Spanish inquisition?

I am sorry if I did not make this point more clear in the posted article. I guess I made too much of the probability’s and the ability or lack there of to prove the existance of any God. However, now that my point is clear, do you understand what I’m trying to get at?

25 04 2007

Thank You

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: