What date do you estimate atheism will overtake theism in the world population

[Hydra009]

I was responding to Blackleaf's post.

Why did Blackleaf attribute my alleged position to his position?

Do you actually know Blackleaf's position?

Seems to me that he just stated the occam's razor retort to the theistic/religious claim that an uncaused God caused the universe to exist.

In truth, you haven't the foggiest what Blackleaf's position is and likely never cared.  You'd much rather bash what you consider the atheist position to be - the idea that everything came from nothing -  apparently while blind that to the fact that what you're criticizing is actually a common religious position.  It's the rhetorical equivalent of stabbing yourself in the foot and claiming that you savagely wounded the enemy.

Ex nihilo isn't a theistic position...its a religious one based on the bible.

And how many people in my neck of woods do you estimate are religious but not theistic or vice versa?  A trivial distinction, then.

You're sharp as a marble Hydra...

Insults from you mean nothing, because everyone knows by now that your assessments are reliably a 180 from reality.  Were I to be complemented by you, now that would give me pause.

[Baruch]

Cause/effect BS?  Cause/effect is pre-scientific.  Therefore it is BS.  Reality isn't an effect (but one can assume that), whatever the hell it is, it has no cause ... no matter your pull it out of my ass philosophy.  Also the usual view is cause/effect is temporal (rather than logical necessity ... in the correlation isn't causation problem).  Nobody understands time .. or space or for that matter/energy.  I suspect there are a lot more dimensions to reality than reductionism allows.  If time isn't linear ... we are only left with if-then logical necessities ... or sufficiencies as the case may be.  Aka naked empirical correlations and/or logical necessities (except QM violates conventional De Morgan's law).

[Drew_2017]

And since religions are largely built on unfalsifiable claims...

How would you go about falsifying your claim?

That's a big part of it, though not in the way that you think.  'Science doesn't have all the answers, therefore faith.  Better an answer than no answer at all!'  What a sad motto to live by.

Science doesn't have all the answers therefore belief. In your case atheism in my case theism. Atheism is an answer it means without God. No God(s) necessary. You've stated it plenty of times. Is this your new position now that you don't know but have faith God doesn't exist?

Some people manage to live with not having all the answers. 

Not you... you and many others consistently pretend its a fact there is no God or gods because you can't stand the idea of admitting atheism is simply a counter belief to theism. You pretend only knuckleheads believe in theism because the overwhelming preponderance of evidence (you fail to present) favors atheism. 

[Drew_2017]

Do you actually know Blackleaf's position?

Seems to me that he just stated the occam's razor retort to the theistic/religious claim that an uncaused God caused the universe to exist.

I responded to what he stated...do you think he lied?

In truth, you haven't the foggiest what Blackleaf's position is and likely never cared.  You'd much rather bash what you consider the atheist position to be - the idea that everything came from nothing -  apparently while blind that to the fact that what you're criticizing is actually a common religious position.  It's the rhetorical equivalent of stabbing yourself in the foot and claiming that you savagely wounded the enemy.
And how many people in my neck of woods do you estimate are religious but not theistic or vice versa?  A trivial distinction, then.

If Blackleaf was being disingenuous or employing a straw-man that's his fault. I stated ex nihlo is a religious belief so how was I blind to it?   

[PickelledEggs]

4444--if then.  Do NOT underestimate the stupidity of the average theist--or American voter!  It is just sooooooooo much easier to believe than to think or reason.  And the sheeple simply provide too much money to the 'shepherds'  for the fleecing to stop.  Or the election of Drump has me so depressed about things like this that I am not thinking straight.

Yeah, if any time, not in our lifetime.
I wouldn't say it's because of stupidity, but because of the want and desire to believe in something greater. Life sucks and people develop all sorts of coping mechanisms. Religion is a go-to for most

[Coveny]

As it stands now it's 1 that it will happen at some point and 9 that it won't. I believe it will, as atheism is in it's infancy, and the more globalized the world becomes the less it's possible to isolate and indoctrinate children before they hear about and experience opposing viewpoints.

[Mike Cl]

As it stands now it's 1 that it will happen at some point and 9 that it won't. I believe it will, as atheism is in it's infancy, and the more globalized the world becomes the less it's possible to isolate and indoctrinate children before they hear about and experience opposing viewpoints.

Yeah, I used to say that, too.  But after Bush took office and saw the inroads the religious fanatics made--and now they have a strangle hold on this country; I don't know.  We are falling backward at a frantic pace.

[trdsf]

My number's not up there.  2070 is too soon, and I don't think it will be 'never'.  I think there are centuries to go yet, but I don't think it will be 'never'.  I hold out hope that we grow up as a species.  Eventually.  Not within my (potential) lifetime.

[Unbeliever]

Modern science is still in its infancy too, and will eventually replace the outmoded ways of thought of the past generations. It will take at least a century, I think, probably longer, but maybe even less, Who knows? God-belief might become as rare as flat-Earthers are today, but it'll persist in small pockets for a long time. But technology and social media may inhibit the maintenance of small pockets.

[Cavebear]

Not anytime soon, but not "never" either.  Religion will eventually fade like flat-eartherism.  We will advance in thinking.

[Mike Cl]

Not anytime soon, but not "never" either.  Religion will eventually fade like flat-eartherism.  We will advance in thinking.

Flat earthism may have faded, but it is still with us.

[Cavebear]

Flat earthism may have faded, but it is still with us.

I expected that (really), and no insult meant at all saying that.  But if we could get theism down to the flat-earther level, that would be a great benefit to all humanity.  Pretty much laughed at and little attention paid.

[Blackleaf]

According to E O Wilson, humans are ants.  If he had studied cows, he would research publish that humans are cows.  If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.  If you are an unconscious, un-living chaos ... then modern materialism makes sense.  But not otherwise.

So is the study of humans called Anthropology or not?

More specifically, I understand anthropology to be the study of human societies as they change over time.

So is the nature of humans revealed in Human Psychology or not?

"Nature" is too vague a word. Psychology is the study of human behavior, and attempts to draw conclusions about the mind and how it works. It sometimes works in tandem with other sciences, such as medicine when dealing with drugs that affect the mind and behavior patterns.

Yes, studying other animals, and other animal behavior is ... illuminative.  But it isn't primary.  Unless you are an ant or a cow.

How do you know that?

[Baruch]

More specifically, I understand anthropology to be the study of human societies as they change over time.

"Nature" is too vague a word. Psychology is the study of human behavior, and attempts to draw conclusions about the mind and how it works. It sometimes works in tandem with other sciences, such as medicine when dealing with drugs that affect the mind and behavior patterns.

How do you know that?

1. Of course, but also how they change geographically and in non-physical dimensions.  Not just time.  That is history (when it isn't propaganda).

2. Nature means ... assume no gods (as in pagan gods, there weren't any monotheisms around then).  In Greek ... Phusis ... which evolved into physics, and physician.  But it is an assumption ... which is Drew't point.  If he was on-point he would defend the Olympian gods against impious heretics like Thales etc.

3. How do I know I am not a cow or ant?  Apparently you haven't looked in the mirror lately.  Or are you a nihilist?

[Cavebear]

More specifically, I understand anthropology to be the study of human societies as they change over time.

"Nature" is too vague a word. Psychology is the study of human behavior, and attempts to draw conclusions about the mind and how it works. It sometimes works in tandem with other sciences, such as medicine when dealing with drugs that affect the mind and behavior patterns.

How do you know that?

It is possible that both ants and cows think they are the epitome of evolution.