use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g.reddit:pics site:imgur.com dog
reddit:pics site:imgur.com dog
see the search faq for details.
advanced search: by author, community...
1,479 users here now
Help Atheist Organizations! The Secular Student Alliance, Camp Quest, and Foundation Beyond Belief were all nominated for the Chase Community Giving program, which awards grants based on the votes of the public. Everyone gets 2 votes on Facebook, plus an additional one if they share a CCG page. The links for them are: SSA | CQ | FBB Voting runs from September 6-19
The Secular Student Alliance, Camp Quest, and Foundation Beyond Belief were all nominated for the Chase Community Giving program, which awards grants based on the votes of the public. Everyone gets 2 votes on Facebook, plus an additional one if they share a CCG page. The links for them are:
SSA | CQ | FBB
Voting runs from September 6-19
Welcome to r/atheism, the web's largest atheist forum. All topics related to atheism, agnosticism and secular living are welcome here. Please read our FAQ.
Please link directly to any images or use imgur to avoid being flagged as blogspam
Recommended reading and viewing
Thank you notes
Related Subreddits <--the big list
Chat: #reddit-atheism on irc.freenode.net
Watch: #/r/atheism on reddit.tv
Read The FAQ
Submit Rage Comic
Submit Facebook Chat
Submit Meme
Submit Something Else
reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own! learn more ›
Religious logic explained at its finest. (i.imgur.com)
submitted 9 months ago by Ezzar
[–]TheExtremistModerate 25 points26 points27 points 9 months ago
I'm skeptical that this ever appeared on Futurama. It seems like a photoshopped image of this onto a Futurama scene involving electrons and Grape Ape, I believe.
[–]ArcWinter 5 points6 points7 points 9 months ago
It is, but I approve anyway. Somehow the Professor just makes it so much better.
[–]Cyborg771 1 point2 points3 points 9 months ago
Ah, the mathematics of wanton burrito meals. I remember that class.
[–]rusty_chipmunk 2 points3 points4 points 9 months ago
Who needs proof when all you need is faith /sarcasm
[–]junglepoon 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
Right up there with bistronomics. If only we could build a spaceship the functioned on the laws of religion.
[–]probo1 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
You can't prove that futurama isn't the reality and we are just a creation of its lust for attention.
[–]darkjohnnyboy 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
so by process of elimination we now know that jebus tastes like grape aid
[–]CrazyMcfobo 1 point2 points3 points 9 months ago
What episode is this?
[–]Escheria 4 points5 points6 points 9 months ago
Somewhere else in the comments, TheExtremistModerate said,
[–]geargirl 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
The scene is from Season 1, Episode 11 - Mars University. Fry signs up for the Professor's class and sleeps in until 3pm. The professor was proving why a certain particle tastes like grape aid.
The picture was photoshoped, but I fully believe the Professor would agree. I mean, He had an entire episode on evolution.
[–]SGTBurke 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
Ahh how i love Futurama...
[–]andimatheist -11 points-10 points-9 points 9 months ago
It seems you're all ignoring the fact that... Well, you can't prove God doesn't exist, can you? So how come religious lack of proof is worthless while atheists walk around with the same exact lack of proof? Our community is really getting low these days...
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 9 months ago
Through Occam's Razor we can logically conclude that gods do not exist.
[–]andimatheist -3 points-2 points-1 points 9 months ago
Occam's razor, also known as Ockham's razor, and sometimes expressed in Latin as lex parsimoniae (the law of parsimony, economy or succinctness), is a principle that generally recommends from among competing hypotheses selecting the one that makes the fewest new assumptions.
Yes, yes, very deeply rooted in logic, this process of selecting hypotheses must be.
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 9 months ago
If there is a better method for determining the existence of gods, I'm all ears.
[–]Ragnalypse -4 points-3 points-2 points 9 months ago
Thanks, I'm getting sicker and sicker of seeing people misuse Occam's razor. I could come up with a hypothesis that explains everything with exactly one assumption, but that doesn't make it valid.
[–]TheExtremistModerate 3 points4 points5 points 9 months ago
The burden of proof is not on the faithless. For someone proposing a scientific hypothesis(which is what the God Hypothesis is), the burden of proof is on the proving, not the disproving.
[–]andimatheist 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
Mk. So now prove to me how the universe was created, what our meaning of life is, and how the world will end if not for any religious matter.
I can play this game all day.
[–]TheExtremistModerate 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
1) The Big Bang. If you want the details, ask an astrophysicist.
2) No one is claiming to know the meaning of life.
3) That last one doesn't even make any sense. "Prove to me how the world will end if not for any religious matter"?
[–]dispellado 2 points3 points4 points 9 months ago
Always bet on the null hypothesis until evidence proves or overwhemingly correlates otherwise.
[–]henstav 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
If the Idea of God (IoG) is a necesary part of the explenation of the universe God must exist, if not there is no reason to assume that God exists. All evidence presented the last 100 years indicate that the IoG is not necesary to explain the universe. Thus there is no reasonable argument to that we should assume God exist. Just because there is no proof that directly falsify the IoG, there is still proof that indicate there is no reason to belive in God.
[–]lucasup 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
Nope. You can't prove god (or at least, all possible gods) doesn't exist. But that doesn't matter. The burden of proof lies in showing one does, until that point we are justified to not believe. The guy might have a baseball, but I'm not going to just take his word for it. Doesn't matter I can't "prove" he doesn't.
[–]andimatheist -1 points0 points1 point 9 months ago
Did you know there is even more substantial, concrete evidence that God is real than that Osama Bin Laden is dead?
That could be true and still both claims end up being not sufficiently substantiated. But what is your "substantial, concrete evidence"?
all it takes is a username and password
create account
is it really that easy? only one way to find out...
already have an account and just want to login?
login
[–]TheExtremistModerate 25 points26 points27 points ago
[–]ArcWinter 5 points6 points7 points ago
[–]Cyborg771 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]rusty_chipmunk 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]junglepoon 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]probo1 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]darkjohnnyboy 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]CrazyMcfobo 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]Escheria 4 points5 points6 points ago
[–]geargirl 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]SGTBurke 0 points1 point2 points ago