Atheist Nexus Logo




We debate origins of the Universe, life, Earth, humans, religion, atheism, using common sense, evolution, cosmology, geology, archaeology, and other sciences, to repel biblical creationism and other religious beliefs.

Location: Oxford University, England
Members: 4173
Latest Activity: 5 hours ago

The portrait is Charles Darwin, age 31, in 1840

We welcome comments and the opening up of new discussions in this busy group. So join us if you are not already in the group.

N.B. At the end of every discussion page is a box that you can tick if you want to be notified by e-mail about the arrival of fresh comments.

Discussion Forum

Bud Light Withdraws Offensive Slogan

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Gerald Payne on Friday. 16 Replies

Dinosaur Highway

Started by Patricia. Last reply by Gerald Payne Apr 29. 8 Replies

Evolution is a FACT, not a theory.

Started by Idaho Spud. Last reply by Joseph P Apr 25. 15 Replies

L'homme "blanc" n'existe en Europe que depuis 6500 BC

Started by Dr. Terence Meaden. Last reply by Gerald Payne Apr 16. 1 Reply


Started by Dr. Terence Meaden. Last reply by Gerald Payne Apr 15. 196 Replies

Chimps Seen Making and Using Spears

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Donald L. Engel Apr 14. 3 Replies

Why sex? The evolution of sex

Started by Rick Springfield Apr 12. 0 Replies

Scientists Say not all Traits are Directly from DNA

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Donald L. Engel Apr 5. 6 Replies

Coffee Lowers Risk of Liver Cancer

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by John Jubinsky Apr 4. 20 Replies

Ice Age Floods - Columbia River Basalt Group

Started by Joan Denoo. Last reply by Donald L. Engel Mar 27. 5 Replies

Comment Wall


You need to be a member of ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN to add comments!

Comment by Dr. Terence Meaden on January 26, 2009 at 8:11am
To Susan Lacroix
Thank you Susan.
This suggestion as to what may have happened before the Big Bang I simplified from the proposals of a major physicist Prof. Vic Stenger.
It is based on his thinking that uses currently-known quantum physics to suggest an answer. I sent my summary to him for him to check out, which he did. I expect other theoretical physicists to propose other answers as the century unfolds but this one is a good logical start ibecause of its use of existing knowledge of physics.
Comment by Susan LaCroix on January 25, 2009 at 10:34am
Thanks Dr. Meaden, for your explanation of the "What existed before the Big Bang" question. I'm not as educated as most people here, but I've always wondered about it myself. You articulated it in a way that even the common folk can understand, and it makes perfect sense to me.

I enjoy reading most of the posts here, because I can learn new concepts here and find answers to some of the questions that have nagged at me my whole life. Scientific knowledge in this field has grown so rapidly over the past 10 yrs that I scarcely know where to begin!

I prefer to read the posts here and not comment on them most of the time, due to my ignorance of the laws of physics, and science in general. Though, I do hate to see a good discussion devolve into what seems like personal attacks on each others comments. I guess that's another reason why I rarely post comments:-)
Comment by Marc Draco on January 25, 2009 at 9:07am
Thanks Don. I'm heading over there now!
Comment by Dr. Terence Meaden on January 25, 2009 at 9:06am
Well spotted, Don.
Thanks for pointing this out.
The article makes a good read for everybody.
Comment by Marc Draco on January 24, 2009 at 12:05pm
I don't know much about what Benedict thinks XVI, but he's obviously mistaken - as are you, Claudia. It's I and not Alex who posted the remark about Humanism being the ultimate evolution.

Clearly anyone who relies on there being a god (or the appearance of one) for their income is hardly likely to find anything else- you tend to find what you seek especially if you start with the blinkers of unreason firmly glued to your optic nerve.

So far as I am aware, Professor Dawkin's claim for the non-existence of "god" is absolute and unshaken.
Comment by Marc Draco on January 24, 2009 at 9:44am
"I said they were primarily deists."

Which is a fairly accurate description. Given the day, it's hard to imagine any non-deists among their number. I think it's more a matter of how extreme their ideas were.
Comment by chris on January 24, 2009 at 4:18am
i love this shit dude
Comment by Marc Draco on January 22, 2009 at 5:01pm
"Mr. Draco, would you agree that if the ASA agrees the BHA is not in breach, than neither should be the Baptists, the Wikkans, or the Voodoo-ites?"

Sorry Marcus, I'm not quite sure I understand your question. Evangelical Christians ran an advert for the Alpha course some months ago and no one batted an eyelid.

The ASA (as per my post) and blog entry has made it perfectly clear that the BHA advert it not in breach.

All that's necessary is that an ad is honest and neither offensive nor misleading. The BHA ads run against the Alpha ads but neither one is misleading or inaccurate so far as I am aware. Anyone, even the Church of Scientology can advertise on a London bus (or TV come to that) provided the play within the very clear rules.

I think your point on Obama is right on the money. Christian values are good - if we remove the supernatural element - we've essentially got Humanism. Perhaps the altruism of Humanism has been subsumed by Christianity but I doubt that - recognition of altruism is a more modern concept. Perhaps one day, after we're all long since dead and gone, everyone will be Humanists.
Comment by Marcus Tullius Cicero on January 22, 2009 at 3:00pm
You're right, Don, if we were born into a Muslim nation we'd be Muslims. But if we were somehow otherwise, and professed our Christianity or Atheism, etc, we would indeed submit or lose our heads. Thankfully it has not come to that in the "battle' between Atheists and Christians, though I fear there are proponents on each side who would not be remiss to use the sword! Zealots come in all flavors. And so does hubris. That is why, over my many many years, I have stressed the need to abjure the jejune and the anecdotal. Ad hominum attacks and ranting, seen at times among both theists and atheists and, unfortunately more often than we should in this forum, are to me signs that one's belief conclusions are rooted in emotion and ignorance rather than intellectual analyses.

Vis-a-vis Obama's mother, where did she get the values she taught him? Let concede that in America thus far, milieu is definitely "Christianesque", and will remain so until secularism has grown more.

Mr. Draco, would you agree that if the ASA agrees the BHA is not in breach, than neither should be the Baptists, the Wikkans, or the Voodoo-ites?

Not so, Alex: the Founders were not all Deists, and they did allow State religions; just not an official and mandated National religion. Most people forget that the early U S was essentially a federation of almost autonomous states, and that the term state at that period in history connoted a national and political entity similar to Germany or Italy today. But you are right... moot point now.
Finally, Alex: being nice to each other is pretty simplistic if not put in the right context: I'm sure the Kmehr Rouge comrades were quite nice to each other as they cheerfully put plastic bags over the heads of 1/3 of the Cambodian population, ie their fellow citizens. And PS: they gave atheism a bad name ( just as the Inquisition gave Catholics a bad name).
Comment by Marc Draco on January 21, 2009 at 9:21am
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has concluded that the “There’s probably no God” bus ad campaign by the British Humanist Association is not in breach of the advertising code. The ASA will therefore not launch an investigation and the case is now closed.

The ASA carefully assessed the 326 complaints it received. Some complained that the ad was offensive and denigratory to people of faith. Others challenged whether the ad was misleading because the advertiser would not be able to substantiate its claim that God “probably” does not exist.

The ASA Council concluded that the ad was an expression of the advertiser’s opinion and that the claims in it were not capable of objective substantiation. Although the ASA acknowledges that the content of the ad would be at odds with the beliefs of many, it concluded that it was unlikely to mislead or to cause serious or widespread offence.

Members (4173)


© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service