The 50 Most Brilliant Atheists of All Time

[Qasibr]

I am speechless now. Never even thought of these "concepts". Whew...



Convenient , not that I can fathom how that lines even remotely discuss black holes, a controversial topic. If tomorrow it is proven that black hole don't exist, it won't take a day for believers to come with new "explanation" for this.

But what about when the lowest geographical point on the planet was explicitly called the lowest point? What about the point that the Quran says the mountains "float", in 1969 when Neil Armstrong looked from space, he said the mountains looked like they were floating.

The Quran says that "We(Allah) have constructed the universe with might, and verily it is we who are steadily expanding it"(Surah Ad-Dhariyat, 47). How is it written in the Quran 1.5 millenniums ago, that the universe is expanding, when science discovered that after floating the Hubble telescope in the 80's? I've never seen scientists examine this scientifically, facts that support religion are never brought to the forefront, only facts that cast a doubt on religion are, to forward the atheistic worldview.

 

[Safriz]

on the other hwnd it should be appreciated tha cnturies before radio telescopes were invented.....islsm even mentioned something similar to a black.hole with a mention of life cycle and its properties..

but yes you are right.beleif is just beleif..it does not depend on science to be proved..as for beleivers their beleif is the proof.
tomorrow if blackholes are disproved...the beleif in hell will remain.as it is.

 

[jdme]

But what about when the lowest geographical point on the planet was explicitly called the lowest point? What about the point that the Quran says the mountains "float", in 1969 when Neil Armstrong looked from space, he said the mountains looked like they were floating.

The Quran says that "We(Allah) have constructed the universe with might, and verily it is we who are steadily expanding it"(Surah Ad-Dhariyat, 47). How is it written in the Quran 1.5 millenniums ago, that the universe is expanding, when science discovered that after floating the Hubble telescope in the 80's? I've never seen scientists examine this scientifically, facts that support religion are never brought to the forefront, only facts that cast a doubt on religion are, to forward the atheistic worldview.

Listen, I have no intention of debating religious "facts" with you. Most of these new-found Koranic scientific wisdom was "found" in 1970s due to paid translation by some Muslim country. It didn't exist for 1400 years. I will leave at that. I doubt anything I will ever say will sway your opinion.

 

[Raja.Pakistani]

What the heck is the difference between an 'atheist' and a 'nontheist'?

'a-theist' as in a- "without" + theos "a god"

Lack of belief is also a belief ..no difference..saying God exist is as valid belief as saying he dont exist.

Now believers should come up with their top 100 lists lol

 

[Qasibr]

Let me guess, you are not a scientist and you never will be. Fascinating opinion though. Science is a quest. It is human thirst to understand how things work. To study, to understand and to explore. Fascinating how you are mocking "science" and yet constantly telling everyone how "scientific" Koran is.

Let me guess, you must be a nobel prize winning scientist gracing us with your presence. And so get to have a say in who gets to be a scientist, and who "never will be". Must have a crystal ball as well, telling you what will or never will be.

If science gets excused for being wrong frequently because it's a "quest", then religion must also get excused similarly. If you had read what I'd said, you'd know I had unequivocally said the Quran is not a book of science, it does not provide detailed journals on scientific phenomenon. But even in passing, the things it mentions about the universe, it's origins, the origin of humanity, man who was weaker than other animals gaining supremacy with the development of the pre-frontal cortex in the brain which animals don't have. Everytime science has contradicted religion, eventually science caught up in it's development and it was proven that religion was right(Earth/Sun being the centre, big bang, etc).

The "big bang" was a name invented to ridicule the theory - Islam and Christianity supported this theory, science had a solid-state theory about the origin of the universe in the late 1940s, and scientists ridiculed that the Universe suddenly came into being with a "big bang". Then in the 80's, new scientific research showed that the "big bang theory" was right afterall.

These are scientific facts. Being the genius that you are, you can't debate on them. So come back when you get an education.

Listen, I have no intention of debating religious "facts" with you. Most of these new-found Koranic scientific wisdom was "found" in 1970s due to paid translation by some Muslim country. It didn't exist for 1400 years. I will leave at that. I doubt anything I will ever say will sway your opinion.

Now you are being even more "scientific" here in your vague accusations. So the Quran says in 51:47 that the universe is steadily expanding, and you are saying this has not been in the Quran for 1400 years? Even scientific opinion doesn't contradict that the Quran is the only religious book that still remains in it's original form, millions of people memorize the book, and have been doing so for 1400 years. Besides, it wasn't even known that the universe was expanding in the 70's, hubble went up in the late 80's.

It doesn't seem useful to have a scientific discussion with you, for all your claims of no-one else being a scientist, your scientific knowledge is quiet lacking.

 

[Raja.Pakistani]

Are these atheists brilliant because they are atheist ?

I guess most of them are brilliant because of their work which has nothing to do with their belief.

 

[AUz]

My God is No. 34, Richard Dawkins

Tell your God to debate Dr William Lane Craig....why is he running away from him?

Leave it. Dawkins would loose. Dr WLC is very experienced,educated and tricky professor..He is Shabbir Ally of Christians lol

 

[JustForFun]

Lack of belief is also a belief ..no difference..saying God exist is as valid belief as saying he dont exist.

Now believers should come up with their top 100 lists lol

Of course there is a middle way, the agnostic way. It doesn't say God exists or does not exist because neither can be proven.
This is probably the most scientific way to look at God. And the wisest way is to not try to prove either.

 

[JustForFun]

... a lot of stuff ...

Do not try to prove whatever is written in whatever holy book. If you do it by modern scientific standards you will only ridicule yourself. Just take it as faith and leave it in the realm of religion.
Every example you have given so far is more like a horoscope: "something good will happen to you today".
You can interpret it any way you want to and is it suites you then good for you. Just don't use your interpretation to prove something to others.

 

[Urbanized Greyhound]

Science definitely has it's usefulness. The problem arrises when people take science to be infallible, ridiculing everything else that doesn't exactly concur.

For nearly two millenniums the scientific view that all these so-called enlightened democratic gay greeks and everyone used to believe, was that the Earth was the centre of the universe, everything moving around it. Later on, it was believed that the Sun was the centre. Because Islam didn't concur with either of these views, it got alot of flak for centuries and centuries, until it was discovered that it was right afterall.

That is not right in my opinion. Scientists and proponents of science can be downright dogmatic - their word is sacred, questioning them will be ridiculed, despite their track record of being wrong many many times.

This is a very interesting point and I agree with this assumption ..that dogmatism on any level and at any point is unwanted.

However -- and herein lies the catch -- If we subject Science to such intense scrutiny and raise the point that Science may be "wrong " ..then by virtue of our stand we must equally agree that Religion is not perfect ...it can be wrong or faulty too .

This is the point of difference -- Religion does not accept that it is wrong ...take any religion for instance --will the proponents of religion ever agree ---that the Bible /Torah/Vedas/Quran/Guru Granth sahib etc etc etc is wrong ????

They will take it that it is the absolute truth.

While science is constantly updating itself which includes the acceptance that a law , a theory even an Axiom can be wrong .

Examples --Include the three angles of a triangle are > 180 and the three angles are < 180 is a direct contravention of the basic laws of Euclidean geometry . But still it is allowed to be implemented a.k.a Riemannian Geometry.

So therefore the chances of "dogmatism" in religion increases manifold in comparison to Science.


PS : I am no athiest but logic and reason can never be used as a yardstick for comparing Science and Religion.

Logic , Rationalism are scientific attributes. For religion we look to the emotional , mental and spiritual states of an individual. Trying to use logic to justify religion is as good as trying to use the unit Henry( for Inductance) as a yardstick to measure Temperature.

Albeit a poor analogy but one which expresses the absurdity of the case quite effectively from an engineers viewpoint .

 

[kavish]

God does not exist!!!!!!

religion/god all these stuffs were created by humans few thousands years ago at various places on earth!!!

 

[Soumitra]

Brilliant and Atheist, two words that can't mix.

What use is brilliance, by which I take is meant mental prowess, when you can't recall the fundamental contract alastu bi rabbikum!

Contract with whom?

 

[Qasibr]

Do not try to prove whatever is written in whatever holy book. If you do it by modern scientific standards you will only ridicule yourself. Just take it as faith and leave it in the realm of religion.
Every example you have given so far is more like a horoscope: "something good will happen to you today".
You can interpret it any way you want to and is it suites you then good for you. Just don't use your interpretation to prove something to others.

Again you aren't making a scientific argument here. Overly va Be specific. I have not talked about horoscopes, which of the examples I gave were like a horoscope in any way at all? The Quran says the universe is expanding. And it is discovered that it is, after thousands of years. It says the Earth was spread apart, and it was. I am not talking about horoscopes or anything of the sort at all.

Neither of these examples are ambiguous or vague in the least bit, even though dogmatic atheists who believe themselves to be superior to other religion would wish to think so. That is their dogmatic view, and scientific facts do not support their dogmatic crusade against religions. They are welcome to their facts, most religions accept atheism and secularism, just like religions teach tolerance towards people of other religions. It's these secularists and atheists that don't accept religion, and ridicule anyone who has the audacity to question their views - despite their "scientific" views being proven wrong many times in the course of history.

 

[jeypore]

^^according to your logic 90% of science is useless junk.
why should i care if black holes eat light?

and we just shouldnt be knowing for what purpose mountains are there?

The question is Why does it eat Light and matter? Well the best theory is put by Hawkins (which I think), he suggest that after the Black hole consumes to a point where it no longer can, it creates a big bang. Technically creating a new universe....

 

[Safriz]

Religiously speaking big bang was the moment when Allah said "happen" (kunn) and it all happened....
thats why no amount of scientific research could find what was there at the exact moment of big bang and before that..because there was nothing.

scientifically.....black holes seem to be the generators of gravitons....
sat at the center of every galaxy they generate gravity.