Want Some Answers ???

Atheism
Back
Home
Intro


Sent: Friday, January 01, 2010 11:46 PM

Subject: *****SPAM***** The Atheist Foundation of Australia Inc in question


Dear Sir / Madam

I'm shocked that atheists of such profile turned down this debate. This is utterly disgraceful. Read -

http://creation.com/global-atheists-reject-debate-challenge

Anybody who reads that all the way through realizes this has totally destroyed the creditability of atheism as a belief worth defending or promoting. This was a chance to completely demolish some of the world’s most prominent proponents of scientific creationism in one sitting, and in public. And it was turned down - utterly disgraceful !
Regards, Mark Purchase



David is chair of the Atheist Foundation of Australia Inc


Hi David,

Thanks for the reply.


>>Hello Mark, Thanks for your email. Let me firstly correct you on a common misconception. Atheists do not have ‘beliefs’ about Atheism. <<

Thanks but surely atheism is a belief that “God” doesn’t exist. A belief because one can't be dogmatically certain there’s no God.

>>Those proposing that there are gods and supernatural realms have to produce the evidence supporting such claims. No such evidence has ever been forthcoming.<<

Yes evidence for pagan 'gods' and their 'supernatural' is poor. However, today creation scientists have heaps evidence for ‘God’. Not just ideas but a whole host of arguments with PhD scientists in every field of science.

You believe '
no evidence forthcoming'. But to remain an atheist, one must reject God-evidence by default. And one can bring evidence to an atheist but you can't make them think.

My belief in God, is based on what I know, not on what I don’t know. Its not a religious idea from a nebulous faith but based on what men commonly know is true. Belief in God isn't crazy, all you need is a brain that works and eyes that see. The best an atheist can say about the big questions of life is that he doesn't know.


>>The very high profile presenters at the Global Atheist Convention have all waived their normal fees for the occasion. It is the policy of the Global Atheist Convention not to abuse such generosity by making other arrangements for them. I’m sure you will understand that point. Our program is very full and even if we wished for the creationists to have time on stage with our speakers, no such time is available.<<

Or we don’t want them made fools of because creationist win debates. It suggests atheism is indefensible or its believers lack confidence. Dawkin's turns down cash rather than debate. But people love a good debate rather than listening preaching to the converted.

>>Let us cut to the chase here. The creationists have no accredited science behind their claims with which to debate.<<

Not so. What of the thousand of accredited scientists who for scientific reasons reject the theory of evolution and believe in God? They say evolution is not only bogus science, it offers no hope for humanity. Belief in God has no trouble with real science, and there are many things we can't prove by science yet believe exist.

>>Are you suggesting if the Raelians wished to debate with our scientists that we all came from another planet and were blown up in a volcano, then our eminent speakers should oblige? Or should they debate those who say they have been abducted by aliens and have been experiment on? These things are not in the realm of science but mythology as none is evidenced. <<

Why not? I'm surprised if alien-busters avoid debates with alien researchers. If one's whole life is writing books refuting belief in aliens, travelling the world & preaching the same, & going to anti-alien conventions etc, then certainly. If it’s so obvious there’s no “God” an expert atheist should be eager to waste a mad belief. Belief in God is held by millions worldwide, that demands attention, belief in aliens doesn't compare. Surely the purpose of an atheist is to prove there is no God, refute contrary evidence, demonstrate the Bible a fraud, and establish the credibility of atheism.

Otherwise one assumes there's no God-disproving evidence - Atheists have no evidence they simply believe, and pretend there’s no God.


>>As a Doctor, I am sure you understand that point. Why would a scientist bother doing that? If the scientists in question wished on their own behalf to debate any of these mythologists, then they are free to do so.<<

What makes a good scientist is their quest to discover and discuss. It amazes me to find an intelligent person who fights against something which he does not at all believe exists. As a PhD I’m not convinced belief in God is mythology. God’s existence is written in history and supported by science. Its in harmony with history, man's mental and moral nature, as well as the nature of the material universe.

>>This is the largest Atheist Convention the planet has seen and it is not about mythology. Creationists have every right to conduct their own convention and I believe they will be doing so in Melbourne about the same time as the Global Atheist Convention next March. Kindest regards, David <<

What you call ‘
mythology’ is the most popular belief in the world - in every country, tongue, young and old. But it’s the atheist who needs the creationist. Atheism is only intelligible in a theistic context, it can only be seen as real where God has been seen as real. If God didn't exist, the atheist wouldn't have something to not believe in.

I've always wondered why an atheist, who says he doesn’t believe God exists, uses His name as a curse word.

Kind Regards Mark

Home
Intro
Back
Reply