Free Will cannot exist.

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , on September 30, 2009 by atheistsnackbar

Our model of the universe is ever more revealing reality as a finite container in motion, moved by a reactive process.  A reaction is the opposition to an initializing action and is consequentially deprived the process of choice or will.  If all movement is confined to this reactive process, we must deduce all reactions impossible, with exception to a specific course of movement conducted by the initializing of matter itself.  (This of course, pertains to the container of our reality, and not an alternate realization or dimension forged in the ambiance of a greater reality, or ‘container of the container’.) ((or area otherwise reserved for infinity))

The perception of free choice is the inference that the reactive process is subject to alteration influenced by the algorithms of human thought.  A hypothetical free choice outside of this process nullifies the reactive mechanics attached to the container, and cannot accordingly exist, as implied by our current model of it.  We therefore, postulate the anomaly as an illusion in flux, falsely streaming implications that our everyday perception includes choices that redetermine the outcome for a process already determined by the initializing itself.

This illusion of free choice conflicts with deductions forced by the mechanics of reaction, which alternatively decree our choices to be calculated by sequencing, determined by an initial action preceding the process of reaction. 

The illusion of free will relies completely on human susceptibility towards assumptions that disregard the possibility, that the human process of decision, is a natural component in the mechanism of reaction. It is human awareness that must take responsibility for manifesting this illusion. We spectate through the lens of human paradigm, while completely attached to the reaction that is space/time, and our awareness creates the illusion that we are outside of this reaction.


Posted in Uncategorized on September 19, 2009 by atheistsnackbar

This is an open invitation for any person to debate me.  The debate is about whether or not god exists.  I will play the atheist and you the believer.  Or if any of my family or friends want to participate, they can also play the role of the atheist in their own match with someone.  The debate is a friendly one as long as you want it to be.  There will be passion behind our answers as this topic is one of vast and ancient importance, but this should not be confused with plain name calling.  If you are serious about a good debate about god then I strongly advise you to participate.  I would assume anybody that truly models his or her life around god to be confident enough to withstand the review of a fair atheist.  I will be fair and would expect the same from you.  However, I will also be a challenge for you.  If your not a person who can exercise a strong comprehension in the reasoning of responses in addition to possessing the ability to erect apt and reasonable responses in the process of such debating, then we will not get anywhere. 

Please, if you truly believe in your convictions, and are up to the challenge, I urge you to participate.  That is of course, unless your chicken🙂

On the illusion of free will

Posted in Uncategorized with tags on August 24, 2009 by atheistsnackbar

Let’s start off with a mental experiment. I want you to visualize a strait line with infinite length, and it must not vanish into the horizon as that would not be visualizing infinity, that would be picturing a line fading out into a finite length. I want you to really picture infinity, so take a moment…

All done? For those who were able to actually picture infinity, I must inform you, that you suffer a placebo and are most likely, very much susceptible to wishful thinking. The human consciousness is finite and cannot process the hypothetical mass of an infinite area. Infinity is incomprehensible to our species and should be to all potential biological intelligences restricted in finite space. If consciousness is materialized in space/time, it is restricted to finite limits relative to finite space. It cannot be infinite, and cannot therefore process an infinite mass of information. We must deduce infinite space to be a mathematical entity not to be confused with the experience of biological consciousness restricted in the universe. Freewill is an absolute, in that it dictates decisions free of influence from anything. Free will, like infinity, cannot fit into a finite mass, where all actions result from prior actions, which result from prior actions, and so on until the birth of the universe, or an equivalent initialization of matter. By definition, free will has to exist outside the realm of a reaction in order to function, it is otherwise determined by a force, that was itself determined. This is the inevitable result in all closed systems. We maintain this logic as long as there exists, no situation, that cannot be sequenced or composed by reactive processes.

Consciousness directly creates the illusion of freewill. The functionality of our awareness yields an increased complexity in the behavioral algorithms of our species, which seemingly appear non-algorithmic. However, Our closest biological competitors display most of the same behavior. Modernization has responded by the exponentiation of variables which create a non-linear effect in the observation of human kind. Resulting complexity builds on itself to increasingly higher complexity. However. the complexity achieved is only a greater definition of the same awareness and is subjected to the same limitations as anything in containment of finite space.

Let’s pretend the big bang is a recurring process. We must acknowledge two possible outcomes Either the big bang repeats its process in the exact same way, every time, or there is a randomization of material sequencing in the observation of space/time. Randomization does not warrant or suggest freewill, it only means you are the reactive process of our big bang. Free will, again, describes an immaterial idea that can only function within an infinite space, not choreographed by reaction. Free will must essentially be the same thing as infinity, and is not applicable in the mechanics of human behavior.

Even physical laws are only as absolute as space/time itself, which by its very finite beginning, forces an ending. As that which is infinite has no relationship with a beginning, as a beginning is exclusively finite.

 It may turn out that such materialized big bang explosions are finite parts of an infinite mechanism. Brief fireworks of matter in a sky of an unknown incomprehensible medium. It may turn out, as my best guess is, that infinite space is only infinite related to finite space. And that the universe as we know it, is finite, but only finite pressed against the backdrop of infinity.

I theorize the universe a container. This container may be parallel to other closed systems or dimensions, and may exist in a theoretical ambient infinity. Anyway, I’m just starting to teach myself advanced math so that maybe I can contribute beyond that of philosophical means, as these are just my logical assumptions based on what I currently know. I’ll give you an update when I learn more or when someone posts a comment to correct me.


Posted in Uncategorized on August 23, 2009 by atheistsnackbar

A common response to the atheist’s proclamation that the burden of proof rests on the outrageous claim of religion, is the theist’s declaration of categorical separation between the areas of existence religion explains, versus those of science. It is to suggest that, science covers its range of questions, and religion, another area. The omitting of science from being a force for explanation, is the assertion that some answers are not within range of logical interpretation. This, in addition to, religion presuming exclusive rights to some of the answers to these question, is just poor use of brain activity. Here are some examples of questions, supposedly outside the realm of science…

How do you know you love your wife?

 What do colors taste like?

 Why have the overwhelming majority of people who’ve ever existed, believe in God?

 Who designed the universe?

Lets start at the top…

1. How do you know you love your wife?

A. Because one feels a level of contentment sufficient enough to presume love. Endorphins, oxytocin, and other chemicals reward certain scenarios that may be advantageous to the survival of our genes. We live in small family herds and nurture and raise our offspring, as this directly lessens fatality rates. This is very straightforward in a Darwinian sense.

2. What do colors taste like?

A. There are actually people on the planet who can do this, however my answer pertains to the rest of us. This is supposed to be a philosophical question that science cannot answer. (By the way, not all questions are real questions just because you can make a valid sentence with non-sense…like if the question was, ‘what do colors think?’) Anyway, here’s your scientific answer. We don’t know what colors taste like, just as we don’t know what it sounds like on Pluto. That doesn’t mean, through research, we cannot get a better idea about the answer. And even if we could not, that doesn’t not create a religious exclusivity to the question.

To demand some areas untouchable by science is rather presumptuous coming from people who selectively discard scientific rationality, and then summon it when it suits their beliefs. Here’s a scenario… Imagine yourself in the bronze age. A close relative develops schizophrenia. This condition was not understood at this time. How could you explain the cause of this curious condition? With no scientific medical knowledge, by all accounts. we would and have. assumed a religious answer. Afterall, then current, medical knowledge was, at that time, far from the answer. It was obviously the devil possessing the relative. Of course, later on, by scientific means, we now know that it wasn’t god afterall. This is an example of how a religious question becomes a scientific one, as if god decided to reveal his holy magic trick. Astronomy is a good place to look for countless examples of these.

3. So why have the overwhelming majority of people whom have ever existed, believe in a god?

A. First off, I must say, that if you subscribe to religious dogma from a specific religion, and maintain the idea that your particular religion is the true faith, the fact that so many religions have existed doesn’t look good on your behalf. But the the comparably vague deist, lets address this question. To say that most people believed in god is incomplete. Most people believed in mysticism. It wasn’t that history is cluttered with people who believed in a non-dogmatic entity that created the big bang. These people believed in human sacrifice, witches, magic potions, evil spirits, homosexually inspired natural disasters, sea monsters, curses, spirits, angels, banshees, demons, the devil and so on. To suggest that because the vast majority of all people believed in angels doesn’t make a strong point for god. Usually those mystical outlooks contained a god or gods as there was no better explanation at the time. Of course a civilization, from a pre-Darwinian time, would not know any better as there wasn’t an alternative explanation until just 150 years ago. It was with careful observation that we now know the earth isn’t flat, that we’re not in the center of the universe, and that life results in complexity by gradual steps from simplicity. This idea can seem foreign to the observable mechanics of human life and behavior. However, quantum mechanics is strange and unlike anything we can relate to as well, but this doesn’t void its reality. And trust me, quantum theory is predictably accurate to a degree that would startle god. Actually if there is anything more strange than quantum theory, it would be the church of ladder day saints.

4. Who created the universe? Did it just come out of nothing?

A. I’ve addressed the improbability of god in my post entitled “no prevalence in the absence of physical laws” I’ll restated the idea, as I think its extremely important. God cannot exist in space/time as this makes him finite. It is consequentially believed, that god exists outside space/time. A hypothetical system outside space/time is a zero information system, as it pertains to human perception of it. In a zero information system, no prediction can be accurate as all outcomes remain possible This includes the assumption that the zero information system is in any way related to our space/time. No prediction about any information has prevalence over any other which makes it infinitely improbable to accurately predict the dynamics of a such hypothesized system, including it’s relationship to space/time as we know it. You got that?

Also I better say something about questions regarding evolution and its place for the science of human behavior, and neat stuff like that. There is so much evidence for evolution, you’ll shit your pants trying to lift it all. Bending at the knees, by the way, will not prevent this. There is much we, in a Darwinian sense, know about human behavior, however, we don’t have every answer. But our collection of answers is ongoing. Here’s an analogy to help explain. Say evolution was a puzzle. And the picture on this puzzle was the Mona Lisa. If 75 percent of the picture was revealed, you bet your ass you’d know that the picture was the Mona Lisa. In fact you’d know much sooner than 75 percent. So Charles Darwin paints a picture in the origin of species (a fine read, by the way) And we have 90 percent of the picture pieced together from massive amounts of evidence, and some people are still denying the content of the picture. Leave it to a homosapien to be in denial. (…or ignorant, I’d wager most creationists to not properly understand evolution at all.)

And it takes only one revealing fossil or irreducibly complex chunk or organic matter to debunk evolution altogether and this has yet to be found. It’s as evasive as Noah’s ark it seems. And perhaps as elusive as the creationist hiding in its own manufactured categories it needs to separate itself, so as to not look stupid standing next to science. There are no religious exclusives.

And while I’m here I’ll tell you another thing. If you think that you have a personal relationship with Jesus, you live the same placebo as the Muslim around the block. If you think that our morals were shaped, thanks to the abrahamic faiths, than you’ve not considered that the dogma and text surrounding the abrahamic religions, might have been shaped by the very morals themselves. That these religions could have been the product of a natural process of our consciously evolving morals that historically seem to self-correct and update, independent of sacred text. And by the way, since morals evolve, and quick enough that we can see it happening, why would god not instill the the right morals in us, in the first place? Why do we have to have human rights movements to treat black people the same? or women? or homosexuals? or atheists?! Way to go god. You see Jesus wasn’t against slavery (Luke 12:47) it took human beings to figure out that it was bad. Anyway, i digress… I’ll close by revealing a true scientific achievement made by religion –

“Science was not the first to clone a dumb sheep, religion was.”

                                                                                                                         – Me

Jesus’ so called sacrifice.

Posted in Uncategorized on August 17, 2009 by atheistsnackbar

Can someone please explain the big deal about Jesus giving his life?  Christians are quick to spit this non-sense exclamatory, viewing me as an unappreciative demon.  Perhaps these glitches in evolution forgot that just a few days later, he was resurrected.  Doesn’t sound like much of a sacrifice to me.  Because afterall, he was resurrected and brought to heaven, a paradise for fuck’s sake!  One day he was chilling in a time where he had to use his own bare hands to wipe the shit off his ass, and the next thing you know, he’s hanging out in an incomprehensible extacy of paradise, being pampered like he’s the son of god.  So where does the sacrifice fit in?
For god so loved man, he retracted his only begotten, spoiled rotten son from the humid bowels of earth and into the air-conditioned luxury resort of heaven.  This is lunacy of the highest caliber. 

On the other hand, countless humans have actually lost their lives for a cause without the luxury of resurrection.  Atrocities are happening as you read this text.  A baby could be getting its skull smashed in with a brick in order to torture the parents of an opposing political or religious agenda.  A parent could be, right now, having their jugular sliced open, the immediate area painted in fresh, warm blood.  Someone’s brother could be getting shot repeatedly in the upper torso, with a high-velocity, semi-automatic rifle with bullets that scatter shell fragments upon impact.  Someone’s sister could be slitting her wrists in the bath tub after being repeatedly and violently raped by a close uncle.  Someone’s cousin could be tied, gagged, and doused with lighter fluid only to ignite into shrieking screams as the flesh melts off the body, while cries that describe their transition into a dark death, as tones of pain, leaving whoever unfortunate enough to hear this grousom death, forever scarred and changed. And Christians have the audacity to tell me why I should appreciate Jesus’ sacrifice? The narcissism of Christianity is mind numbing at least.  Anyway that’s all for now… Amen.

no prevalence in the absence of physical laws

Posted in Uncategorized on August 17, 2009 by atheistsnackbar

Every now and then I’ll hear a creationist insist that since we assume, the physical rules before space/time, not to apply, it is therefore invalid to apply ideas like occam’s razor, or the questioning of whom god’s designer was. They assert this before-time scenario as a perfect fit for god’s domain. However, the clever deist seems to miss the fact that the very idea of a designer, was itself, birthed in the parameters of known space/time, and that there is no real reason to show prevalence over explanations devised on ideas comprehensibly attainable by our species, with respect to the mechanics related to the known universe. It is, that we, at this point, cannot know the dynamics of a system outside existence, nor can even my description of our non-comprehension, do any justice in accurately defining something outside the realm of definition, as definition itself, rests inside the parameters of our materialized existence.

intelligent design is a vein attempt at maintaining the idea of a god, in a world that increasingly dilutes it. The idea that the absence of physical laws, in any way suggests god’s existence is ignorant and stubborn. Such a non-law scenario can accept any theory, and cannot favor any other. In a system completely void of information, no predictions or assumptions can be made at all. It is by probability that, with an infinite number of possible outcomes, to rely on the prediction of one such specialized possibility, (in this case, god) proves not silly, but insane.

We as atheists use words like logic or evidence. Words that have attained bad stigma when used to explain existence. Yet these are terms that describe the functionality of all humans. Logic stops you from running out into the street without looking. Logic prevents you from sharing a warm bath with a cold toaster, and logic keeps me from wasting my time at church. Science is merely a term describing the logical assumptions we’ve made so far. A compiled understanding of mutually supporting clues that allow us to know a few things about the universe around us. And we learn more everyday. Religion in all its presumptuousness has people scoffing at science for not having all the answers, This is really strange, since it should be science scolding religion for not having any answers, well… No correct ones.

God – The immortal dick wad

Posted in Uncategorized on August 13, 2009 by atheistsnackbar

Let’s be clear, god is perfect. I wager it a tedious task, to discover a theist to disagree. However, as enthusiastic a man may be in reminding us of god’s flawlessness, perfection forces some profound conclusions about god. Along with god’s perfection comes the all powerful ability to, literally do anything. His powers are, in every way, infinitely limitless. He can, for instance, use magic x-ray vision to see through your clothes, or simply zap the shirt right off your hairy back. He can see the future, create a plague, read your mind, hell, he can create a whole universe for Christ sake! Everything that, has ever, and ever will happen, is done because the all mighty god designed it that way. So far, I would suspect not to be in disagreement with many theists just yet… But I must say I’m itching to confess, that I find it curious, that God would put hell in his sequencing of existence. Part of God’s divinely awesome plan was essentially, to reserve a number of his humans, for the sole purpose of watching them burn alive. Now, I know what your thinking. It was the devil, The evil Lucifer, whom is completely responsible for hell, sin, and bestiality. All that evil has nothing to do with good ol’ god. Well I say, no sir! afterall, Satan is a part of God’s design. God is the creative genius who drew the devil up, and made him such a big part of his super cool plan. If God didn’t, beforehand, know that the devil was going to fuck so much shit up, then God’s perfection is dismissed and the whole religious structure crumbles. It seems all too obvious, that God created Satan to do the dirty work while God watches. God is surely an entity of many fetishes. What I find most unfortunate, is that in God’s plan, somebody HAS to play the role of the hellbound sinner, no exceptions. If it wasn’t his plan it wouldn’t be written, and if came to pass, a no sinner scenario, than god would turn out to be quite the fibber. So let’s restate the holy scenario… A massive chunk of people are going to burn in fire for no less than an eternity. In all god’s perfection, he did not have to set it up that way. And yet he set it up that way on purpose. Since everything that comes to pass is God’s plan, and every thing you do is set up by god, beforehand, then you never had a choice in the first place. You had the illusion of choice. With this we conclude, that god, in his image, created a creature with countless nerve endings. These nerve endings happen to be very sensitive receptors to pain. He then decided to set aside a very massive number of these bio-pain receptors, we call humans, for purpose of tossing them into a giant hell fire, all while keeping these people alive for all of eternity, just so the screamingly enormous concentration of pain doesn’t die out with the sweet release of death, while he watches!… one might say, god is fucked in the head. The more I analyze the odd behavior of god the more he fits the profile of a serial killer. You see, the fact that god knows the outcome in advance, undermines any notion of free will. If god sees the results of all possible actions then of course he doesn’t operate under the mechanics of chance. If all actions unfold exactly as God designed, than what choices do we have? Where is free will supposed to fit, if everything, is all part of the plan? The fact that God would torture those whom he supposedly loves is by far the most cruel idea I’ve come across. And to anybody that subscribes to this religious bullshit, shame on you.