Dear Yahweh 2

Tim 'Timbo' Buckley is a plumber down on earth working around the time of Noah's flood. He works directly for God (Yahweh) and tries to keep all the water systems up and running for the supreme lord.

After rain for five days straight, Timbo sends Yahweh and email...

Dear Yahweh,

Mate, it’s been raining a solid 5 days down here and a few of the boys are a bit worried that we’re going to have some issues if it continues much longer. Any idea when you’re going to turn this off?

Dear Timbo,

No spoilers, but...you’re looking at a fair while yet.

Dear Yahweh,

Oh fair dinkum. We simply don’t have the capacity to deal with this. We don't have storm water drains like we will 6000 years in the future you know, and even then they wouldn’t cope with this kind of deluge. Seriously if this continues much longer whole towns are going to flood!

Dear Timbo,

hehehe.

Dear Yahweh,

WTF? How is that something to laugh at? Mate, I’m not sure what’s going on here but if this continues people are GOING TO DIE. I mean...it’s weird because I know you know this, but how can you let this happen?

Dear Timbo,

I don’t like the way things have become down on earth. The people...they all got wicked. They...they’re not as nice as I hoped they’d be. So… How to tell you. I’m going to make it rain for 40 days and 40 nights and ….well….I’m going to drown them all.

No! Wait, that sounds bad. Not *all* as such. Do you know Noah? (He did that Abraham impression at the party a few months back?) Anyway, I’m going to spare him and his family. Drown everyone else.

Dear Yahweh,

What the fuck is wrong with you?

Dear Timbo,

Watch your tone sunshine. I’m not above smiting people you know.

Look Timbo, we go back a long way. Hell, we’ve known each other since Adam was a boy. So let me tell you, I know that on the surface wiping out an entire population of humans, save for one family, and having that one family collect two of each kind of animal *seems* like a totally ridiculous idea when I am a ‘god’ and not only are these people behaving exactly as I planned but I could also fix this in an instant without the need to wipe out the planet, but you don’t yet see the full picture!

Dear Yahweh,

Sorry - I didn’t mean to upset you. Please hold off on the smiting for now if you could. Not that it fucking matters because apparently I’ll be dead soon anyway, you prick.

I’ve got to ask - you do know you’re a god, right? I mean you can do ANYTHING. If you want people to stop being ‘wicked’ just blink or wiggle your nose or wave a fucking wand or something and STOP them being wicked! Just get into the goddamned heads and remove wickedness! Why do you have to kill them? Seriously mate, this is GENOCIDE

And what the fucking fuck do you mean ‘Two of each kind of animal’? You’re going to drown MILLIONS of animals...what did they ever do? Stupid bloody waste if you ask me. Why did you even bother creating them. You KNEW this was going to happen right? And how the bloody hell do you plan on saving these ‘two of every kind’? And while we’re on it...........the fuck is a ‘kind’ anyway? You can’t just make shit up you know. Well...you can, clearly, but don’t you think having some kind of coherence to your plan would be helpful? I’m lost for words. I just can’t see how you can possibly, even for a moment, think this is a decent plan.

Also, what do you mean I don’t see the big picture? What could possible make this okay?

Dear Timbo,

Rainbows. lol!

Dear Yahweh,

You’re mental.

New To Atheism Part 3 - Resources

If you're a new atheist, especially one that feels the need to keep this information from family and friends, you may feel a sense of loss, and a sense of loneliness. Of course you may be happy to be known as an atheist but have no one within your community or family to talk to about it. 

It's not that atheism is necessarily a topic that is going to generate hours and hours of conversation, but I'm sure there's part of us all that wants to be able to tell someone close how we feel about something and receive back an 'I agree' or 'Yep, I know what you mean'. We all have a sense of wanting to belong, somewhere where we can feel included and that we're accepted for who we are. 

With atheism in many parts of the world, this simply not possible. From the possibility that people may lose their jobs, be ostracised from their community, or be shunned by their family to the extreme, sad, and horrific reality that there are people in the world who are imprisoned, maimed and sometimes even killed for being for an atheist. 

This is, of course, a completely unacceptable situation. There is simply no opinion/point of view that anyone can hold that should see them physically harmed for holding it. And yes, this extends to extremely racist or sexist or other unsavoury points of view. I'm not suggesting society should respect these points of view, but to harm people for having them - that's just unacceptable. 

For atheism specifically there should be no adverse implications at all. It is a single position on a single question. It's not discriminatory, it's not judgemental, it's not sexist nor is it racist. When someone becomes an atheist after having been a theist for a period of time they are the same person they always were. What is happening is that the answer to a question has changed - Instead of 'yes' the answer to 'Do you believe a god exists' becomes 'no'. It doesn't mean the person suddenly hates theists, it doesn't mean the person suddenly thinks all theists are morons, it doesn't mean the person is suddenly an arrogant individual with no morals. What it shows is that the person has put some time and thought into the idea of 'god' and is no longer convinced that the claims that a god exists are true. 

So what is a person new to atheism to do? Where can a person new to atheism turn to get the contact, interaction, and information they desire? For many, online - the internet - is clearly the answer. The online world, particularly the applications known as social media, is - dare I say it? - the Mecca for atheists. 

Through my twitter account @MrOzAtheist I have come to speak to, interact with, and even become friends with atheists all over the world. There is a vibrant and lively atheist community on twitter which welcomes life long atheists right through to people who are still theists but are having doubts about their beliefs. I've seen a number of examples of people new to atheism thanking others for the help and support they've been given. I've seen people tweet things about feeling alone in their real life community but feeling like they belong to a group online. 

When it comes to who I follow I couldn't recommend anyone in particular here and do justice to all the atheists on twitter who are tweeting their thoughts. I follow just over 500 quality people, and almost all are atheists. Many of them tweeting atheism majority of the time and others tweeting all kinds of topics, both serious, and seriously funny. If you are interested in who I follow on twitter you can see the list here. Of course these people will follow some people I don't and so on. If twitter is your thing, I recommend having a look at the #atheist and #atheism tags and seeing who is tweeting on the subject and when you find someone you like - follow them. (Of course, if twitter is your thing, I'm sure you're aware of how this all works!)

It really is quite heart-warming to be part of a community that provides an avenue for people who would otherwise feel lonely without it, to feel like they belong somewhere. Things such as The Not Alone Project which has recently been started by Martin Pribble (@MartinPribble) have provided an avenue for atheists to post their story in "a place where the non-believers stories can be published, in a completely safe environment, which doesn't judge its participants in any way." There's also Gamma Atheist's blog where he's publishing guest posts by atheists outlining their paths to atheism (or back to - depending on your point of view). There are many, many quality atheist blogs where everyday, average atheists, are talking about many issues affecting atheists in particular and society in general. 
I can highly recommend the following:

Rosa Rubicondior http://rosarubicondior.blogspot.com.au/
Martin Pribble http://martinspribble.com/
Joshua http://joshuadamnit.wordpress.com/
Melissa http://reasonlogicreality.wordpress.com/
Rachel (Atheistic in Alabama) http://atheisticinalabama.blogspot.com.au/
Green Fille http://greenfille.wordpress.com/

Of course this is not an exhaustive list and I suggest searching around for any blog whose words ring true for you. 

Another popular way for atheists to learn from others and to feel part of a the community is through podcasts. As with the atheist blogs, there are too many to list them all so here are just three:

The Imaginary Friends Show: http://imaginaryfriendsshow.com/

The Herd Mentality Podcast: http://herdmentalitypodcast.com/

The No God Cast: http://nogodcast.com/

The Thinking Atheist Podcast http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/podcast
 The Scathing Atheist http://scathingatheist.com/

There are more, please take the time to look for them, ask people on twitter who they like listening to and go from there. 

YouTube is another place where atheists connect and learn from each other. Number one for me, and the people I learned more about discussing this topic than anyone else is The Atheist Experience. It is actually a public access television show out of Austin, Texas and is run by the Atheist community of Austin. A quick search on YouTube of The Atheist Experience will bring back some great responses. I also recommend searching particularly for Matt Dillahunty (my biggest influence) and Tracie Harris. All the hosts and co-hosts on The Atheist Experience are fantastic, but Matt and Tracie are my two favourites. 

I also recommend:

Theoretical Bullshit

The bible reloaded

QualiaSoup

Non Stamp Collector  

I also recommend the early Thunderf00t videos dealing with creationism. I also recommending looking up debates and discussions. Obviously those involving Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and the late Christopher Hitchens come to mind

There's going to be way too many to list, but many areas these days have local atheist groups, atheist or sceptical meetups and the like. Have a look on Google and see if there's one in your local area. If not..be bold and start one! 

Of course then there are books. Probably not so high on the 'connect to other atheists' scale but there can be a comfortable feeling in reading the works of people who are expressing the thoughts you've held for sometime but haven't been able to express. 

Recommendations:
The God Delusion - Richard Dawkins. Probably the most well known book on the subject having sold over 2 million copies. 

God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything - Christopher Hitchens

What Are You Without God?: How to Discredit Religious Thought and Rebuild Your Identity - Christopher Krzeminski 

I also recommend (though I haven't got to it myself) reading books by Friedrich Nietzsche. 

If you are new to atheism or new to wanting to connect with other atheists I hope I have provided some information you find helpful. If you are a follower on twitter and you have further questions please don't hesitate to ask. 

Thanks,
Donovan

New to Atheism Part 2 - Being a vocal atheist

In this post I'd like to give some advice to those not just new to atheism (whether that's after theism, or new to being an 'out' lifelong atheist)  but who also want to be vocal about it. Perhaps there's something there for those who've been out and vocal for some time too. I hope so. 

I'm not an expert on the atheism/theism debate, but I've been involved for a little while now and I like to think I've learnt a few things on how to get the message to people in an interesting and engaging way. 

I would also like to say that I'm not telling anyone what kind of atheist they should be and I'm not demanding anyone follow any of the advice I give below. I'm just making some suggestions from what I've learnt over the past two and a bit years being active on twitter. This is my advice on how to to be heard, how to be listened to, how to be taken seriously, and how to make a difference. The advice below largely relates to twitter as that's where I'm most vocal about atheism but I hope I've written in a way that can be easily translated into other formats - particularly when it's a debating style of communication.

First of all listen to others - on both sides of the debate. And I mean listen - without joining in. Take the time to learn what each side is saying - even the side you're not on. Don't make the mistake of being someone who has never read, studied, or considered the alternate position. A person best argues against a position when they have a very good understanding of it. Time and time again I've discussed atheism or evolution with people who oppose them but don't know what they are. It's a rookie error and makes them look amateur. Know your opposition.

It's a mistake to think atheists = smart, theists = stupid. This is simply not the case. There are some very smart theists out there - yes, really. Some of the most influential and intelligent atheists I know used to be theists. None of these people got 'smarter' the day they became atheists. They have become more informed or have learned to think and assess information in a manner different to how they had previously. Conversely, not all atheists are smart. There have been more times than I care for that atheists, particularly on twitter, have shown themselves to be ridiculous to the point of embarrassing. It doesn't make them look good and can sometimes be detrimental to atheism as a whole (if such thing can be said to exist). 

Insults don't help. At all. I'm at fault here too. I know I've called someone a moron or a fucking idiot or something similar -  but it doesn't help. All it does is get their back up and the cries of 'ad hominem' soon follow*. I know it can be quite frustrating to keep a level head and to keep the insults at bay when discussing something with someone who can't seem to grasp even the most basic of the points, but once you start calling them names you're not going to get anywhere. I will often quote theists making a stupid comment and make my own comment. I do this because I want to share with my followers something I think is either funny or thoughtful (though I suspect too often it's neither). This approach opens up my tweets to receiving replies from the people who follow me - and this is fine. It's all about communication and getting our thoughts and ideas across and the more people get involved in that, the better. However I too often get copied on replies that are just insults - even one word like moron or idiot. There's no thought there, there's no humour. I can't stop this from happening, but I really wish it wouldn't. I'm not a patient person and I think patience can be a flaw as often as it is a virtue - but remember, I'm talking here about getting the message across, about being heard. Flat out insults are not going to get either of these things to happen. 

Be funny. People love a laugh. I know, as I'm sure you do too, that religion can have very serious consequences for people. It's a genuine problem and can and does ruin people's lives. But we don't have to take the whole thing seriously ALL the time. There is opportunity to make people laugh. So if you see something ridiculous and you think of something funny to say, say it. 

If you want to engage with theists, be kind, be understanding. Don't yell at them immediately don't rip into them after a single tweet if that tweet is a genuine question or a simple misunderstanding. Theists, like anyone, are much more likely to respond in kind. If you're rude and aggressive, they'll be rude and aggressive too. If you're patient and understanding, they are more likely to talk to you in a similar manner. They are, after all, people themselves, not just words on a screen. 

Having said that, there is a difference between an ignorant but genuine person and an arsehole. If someone is being mean or rude, kindness and patience are wasted. If you feel the need to tweet to these kinds of people - go for it. Some of the funniest and most entertaining tweets on my timeline are from people getting stuck into theists who are being beyond ridiculous. We don't have to tolerate intolerance and we don't have to be courteous to rudeness. Try to learn to spot the difference. Being rude to someone just wanting to learn will reflect poorly on you.

If twitter is your avenue for being vocal consider your 'stand alone' tweets too. These are tweets where you're just giving your opinions, your thoughts, or asking questions. They don't involve replying to anyone - whether that's a theist or an atheist. My advice here is be thoughtful and/or be funny. I'm sometimes being philosophical (Socractic method almost), sometimes being funny (well...at least striving to be) and sometimes just letting loose - speaking without reservation and telling 'religion' exactly what I think of it. These are what I call my rants. I love replies that I see to theists, but I also love reading what people have to say on their own and I don't think twitter has enough of it. 

There are other avenues for getting your voice heard in the atheist community online apart from twitter, of course. In part three of this series I highlight some of the blogs, podcasts, books, and YouTube accounts that I find most informative and entertaining. Even though the format is different I think the message is the same and obvious - capture your audience, entertain them, be thoughtful, be funny. Whatever media you choose, read/watch/listen to plenty of it. Try to find a voice that makes you unique, find an angle that you've not seen yet. If you're too similar to others you may not get noticed. If you're writing, give people something they can relate to - such as your 'why I'm an atheist' story. I know plenty of atheists who love reading these stories. 

There's no point wanting to be vocal in the atheist community and doing it in a way that doesn't reach an audience. If you don't reach an audience, you may as well just write on a notepad. If you want to have a voice, you need to think about how to get that voice heard. Bring something to the table, provide something that people want to hear. Look at what's being done in the format you're interested in and see if you can find something missing. 

Getting yourself heard will be helped by engaging with people. Talk to other atheists and listen to them. Ask about their experiences, and, if they're interested, share yours. People are far more likely to listen to what you have to say if they know you're prepared to listen to what they have to say too. If you're blogging, read other blogs and let people know you've done it. If YouTube is your thing same applies - watch the work of others. Apply this to whichever format you want to be heard in.

I have found the atheist community online is very welcoming. I have retweeted many people who are new to atheism or new to being able to say they're an atheist and it is always a case of being welcomed with open arms (as much as that can be done online, in text). I've not ever seen a new atheist shunned by the people I follow. 

Myself - I have met some wonderful people through my MrOzAtheist account, people I would now call genuine friends. If you find people who are 'speaking your language' then don't be shy, engage. You're not going to have a connection with everyone of course, but you won't know until you try. Don't be shy, say hello.

I encourage all people willing and able to add their voice to the atheist community - in whatever way you want that voice to be added. The more voices added, the more people will feel comfortable in being able to say, "I too am an atheist". Once we have enough people doing that saying won't even matter any more. And that's where we should all be hoping to get.

Thanks,
Donovan

*an insult is not an ad hominem. An ad hominem fallacy is when you claim someone is wrong because of a flaw in their character EG "you're wrong because you're a moron" There's a difference between this and "you're wrong, AND you're a moron" you may go on to logically defeat their argument but the insult is still not a good look - avoid.

New To Atheism - Part 1 "Welcome to atheism"

Dear reader,

Welcome to atheism. 

I guess that's a strange thing to say. Coming 'to' atheism isn't really a thing. What is atheism really but a doubt in the claims that a god exists? There are some who say that in order to be an atheist, the question itself never had to be considered. These people say that atheism is the default - that we are atheists the moment we're born. So maybe I should be saying 'welcome back to atheism'? 

Regardless, whether you consider yourself new to atheism, returning to atheism, or new to coming out as the atheist you've always been. I'm glad you've found your way here. I hope that I've written something below that you find helpful. 

The first, and most important point to make - you are NOT alone. There are atheists everywhere. Millions of us in fact. You may think there are none in your house, your street, or even your town - but there's a chance someone you know is thinking exactly the same thing. The question is...how do you find these people? How do you connect? 

The obvious answer (for those who can access it) - is the internet. I have had more than a few people tell me, or mention to others, that they didn't know any other atheists, until they came online. They honestly thought they were *alone*. As I've said on twitter -

I wish theists would understand that #atheists are not vocal just to argue with them, we're vocal so other atheists know they're not alone.
— Donovan (@MrOzAtheist) February 23, 2012

In part 3 of this 3 part series of blogs on 'New To Atheism' I highlight some of the ways someone new to atheism can find other atheists to interact with. Given that you've found your way to my blog, you've clearly got internet access - this is a wonderful place to start. 

Becoming an atheist after years of theism can often be daunting. You might be turning your entire world upside down, everything you thought about the universe and our world within it is suddenly 'wrong'. 

Some people can make this change without issue. For others, it's a very trying and testing time. It's common to be angry at the loss of one's understanding. You might feel cheated and\or lied to. You might feel that you can no longer trust anyone, especially if the beliefs you previously held were given to you by an authority figure (which is likely the case).

I understand why these negative emotions come about but they are not permanent. Once you learn to see the universe for the natural wonder that it is, the feeling of being cheated and disappointed will disperse. You'll need to train yourself to look forward, and not backward, to celebrate what you have, not lament what you don't. 

How? Recognise that this IS the life you get and that time wasted is time you'll never get back. You've come this far with a false idea of 'creation' and a false idea that a 'god' is watching and caring about everything you do. But you've given up that idea and come to the realisation that the universe is a natural place. Rejoice in this. Celebrate it. Look at the universe without the god-shaped blind spot in front of your eyes.

It is an amazing thing that you are here at all. For 'you' to be in existence, an extraordinary number of coincidences must have fallen into place, make the most of this. 

Understand that people who brought you to theism probably didn't do it with malice. They, like you before, more than likely believed what they told you. They haven't deceived you deliberately. Anger at these people is wasted. It will serve you no purpose. I understand the need to vent and I'm sure the need to question the people who convinced you that theism was correct will be strong, but confronting them in anger will not help you in the long run. If you feel the need to question any of the people who were involved in you becoming a theist, do so with kindness and understanding. Remember that they still believe the falsehoods that you've now given up. Ask them your questions if you need to, but keep in mind how you would feel if someone confronted you angrily when you've told them what you thought was true. 

We're told that as atheists we must have nothing to live for - of course we have everything to live for. There's nothing for us once we die. I've written a blog here about the claim that atheists have nothing to live for. Obviously you can adjust this how you see fit - but it does show that in a world without a 'god' there is PLENTY for atheists to live for. If you feel that leaving theism has left a gap in your life, I hope you can find some ideas which give your life some meaning. 

There are also people who've been atheists their whole lives but are still 'in the closet'. They don't have the same issue of having their understanding of the universe drastically altered but the thought of coming out as an atheist can still be a frightening idea, especially if there's a threat of losing family or friends if you 'come out'. 

One thing to keep in mind here is that announcing that you're an atheist is not an obligation. If you don't feel safe or comfortable, keeping atheism to yourself is okay. There are plenty of atheists I interact with on twitter who are anonymous because of the potential impacts in their real life. This is where the online atheist community thrives. It's a wonderful place for people who don't have another avenue to connect with people who share their point view. 

So whether you are a lifelong atheist or one who's recently turned away from theism, coming out can lead to alienation of friends and family. It can lead to being ostracised. I've read a case of family being forced out of town,  I've read how being an atheist can lead to imprisonment and even death in some parts of the world. This is, of course, totally unacceptable. It's not all negative though. Not by a long way. Being an atheist can also lead to any number of positive feelings. The idea that you can  'finally' talk to someone who shares your point of view. The opportunity to share your thoughts and ideas on how theism impacts the world and how we can do things better. There's the wonder at the natural beauty of the universe and what seems like a strange mixture of chaos and order. There's the thrill of learning how something really works versus the notion that we must be satisfied with 'god did it'. Being an atheist when coming from theism can be liberating. It is the clichéd weight being lifted off one's shoulders. I look at world and know that I am lucky to be here and that life is to be valued. As atheists we need not think that we're in god's waiting room, we're not here to pass some bizarre character test in order get a 'pass' into the afterlife. We no longer claim that we're being good just because some overlord is watching our every move - we can be good for goodness sake. We can have sex without worrying that any number of our dead relatives might be watching. 

I'm confident that there will come a time where being an atheist - everywhere - is not only acceptable, it's irrelevant. Because that's what it should be. It shouldn't matter. We should accept people based on their actions, based on how they treat others, based on the value and ideas they bring to the community. I hope we get to the point where we stop accepting or rejecting people based on which version of the creation myth they do or don't believe. 

For this to happen we need all atheists to feel that can say it with no expectation of negative reaction. For some of us it's easy, the more we do it, the more we say it, the easier it will become for everyone. 

Until this happens, being an atheist is going to be a struggle for many people. If you are one of them, please know you're not alone, I commend you for beginning and being on this journey. I hope you learn to be comfortable as an atheist, I hope you can be comfortable with all your family and friends knowing that you're an atheist and that you don't have to hide it. If you wish to, seek out other atheists, say hello, interact, get to know them. Speak up if you feel the need and most of all, don't allow anyone to make you feel bad for being who you are. You are an atheist, and this is nothing to be ashamed of. 

Thanks for reading
~Donovan

________________________________________________

This is part 1 of a 3 part series of blogs title 'New To Atheism'. 

Part 2 is a guide to being a vocal atheist. It's not a set of rules, more a series of tips and advice that I've learnt from my time as a vocal atheist - particularly on twitter. 

Part 3 is a resource guide. It will detail blogs, books, podcasts and other methods where people new to atheism (and others) can find information about atheism and atheists. 

Dear Yahweh

Dear Yahweh, 

Regarding your application for permission to create a universe. I've taken a look at your plans and before I can give you my decision there are some things I need to highlight. 

First thing I'd like to address is the size of your universe. If I'm reading this correctly, you're building hundreds of billions of galaxies, each with hundreds of billions of stars. However you plan on putting life on only one planet. Although I can understand that such a universe would look spectacular, I'm concerned at the waste of materials that your proposal would generate. 

I fail to understand why you're going to create everything in six days but all evidence will point to the universe being billions of years old. Are you deliberately trying to delude the humans? Is it your goal to make the people who literally believe your story look like morons? I can't understand why you'd do that if these are the people who will be your biggest supporters. This is a big area of concern. 

As Earth is the only planet on which you plan to place life, I'll concentrate the rest of my review there.  

You're starting with just two people, though leaving evidence that evolution is actually responsible for the diversity of life. Again I must ask, are you deliberately trying to make your biggest supporters look stupid? Why would you do that? Regarding your original two people, it seems you plan on 'tricking' these people, with talking snake I might add, into eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil - even though you don't actually want them to. You're then going to cast them out of this 'Garden of Eden' for doing this? I hate to sound rude, but are you crazy? If you don't want them to gain knowledge of good and evil...why put the tree there in the first place? What's wrong with you? Then you plan on labelling all humans from this point on as 'sinners' because of this one event, this 'original sin' in their past. Do you understand the descendants of these people had no control over this event? More on that later. 

Moving on a little - After a few generations you're flooding entire planet. Again, I need to ask, what is wrong with you? You seem to fail to understand these people are going to behave AS YOU CREATED THEM! It is completely insane to wipe out the planet when the people are as you intend them to be. You have foreknowledge, remember? Why create these people if they're going to be so 'sinful' that you will then feel the need to wipe them out? I don't think you've considered this at all. Then to continue on with the human race you're going to save some bloke called Noah and his family. You're going to have him load millions of animals onto a boat. Seven pairs of each kind of clean animal and one pair of each kind of unclean. I've seen the dimensions you propose for this boat. It's simply not going to work. He's going to need a bigger boat. 

At this point I will need to skip forward a bit because, well, to put it bluntly, your plan involves an incredible amount of nonsense and I simply don't have time to address each and every issue I've found in your submission. I would like to say though that your plan of having a rape victim marry the rapist is simply outrageous and one of the most disgusting things I've ever been presented in Universe Planning. I saw too that you include a guide for people regarding how much they can beat their slaves. I'm struggling to understand how you can plan on being a god of your own universe yet still think that slavery is an acceptable idea. 

I'm sure you were aware this was coming - we need to have a talk about this Jesus character. So many problems here. Not the least of which is that you're going to go to earth...but not as you, as your son. Then you will sacrifice yourself as your son...to yourself as 'God', to save people from...you? You are joking, right? First of all, you wipe out the planet with a flood, then the humans go 'bad' again so you want to save them with human sacrifice? I'm really not sure how you can expect people to take this plan seriously. You say that 'Jesus' will die for the humans' sins but again you seem to completely fail to understand that YOU are creating all these humans with sin to begin with. This is amateur to say the least. 

You say that for humans to come to you in heaven once they die they will have to accept you - but as Jesus - as their lord and saviour. However I've looked at the numbers and by the year they call 2013, only 2 in every 7 humans on Earth will believe the Jesus story. I cannot highlight the significance of this enough. You are starting what is essentially a cult of human sacrifice in order to have humans 'saved' from sins which, as previously mentioned, THEY didn't commit. This is just preposterous. I can see why so few humans are going to be convinced by this story. It's completely asinine. And for this imagined 'crime' of not being able to believe this ridiculous story, your plan is to sentence these humans, by the billions, to eternity in 'Hell'? How can you claim to be an 'all-loving' god and condemn billions of these humans you claim to 'love' to eternity in hell? I'm staggered. I highly recommend you have a cup of tea and a sit down. 

This leads me to my next point. You state that you want want to be known as an all-loving, all-powerful, all-knowing god yet no aspect of your plan points to this being the case.

All-loving: As previously stated, billions of people will end up in hell under your plan. For centuries women are going to be treated as subservient to men. Homosexuals are going to be persecuted and receive disgusting treatment because of your teachings, and millions and millions of people are going to be killed by people who believe in you because they don't like the way other people believe in you. How can you expect to be considered 'all-loving'? All loving, but 'conditions apply' perhaps. 

All-powerful: First - Satan. How do you expect to be considered all-powerful when you allow a nemesis, which you created, to have control over people? Your plan involves Satan bringing people to evil and having them do things you'd rather them not do. It seems pointless to point out to you that an all-powerful god would defeat this 'Satan' character in an instant if he didn't want him doing these things, but what's worse is that you KNOW this is going to happen. You needn't defeat him, you needn't create him in the first place. Why have him in your plan at all? You plan to allow evil and tragedy but do nothing about it. Your plan has you nowhere near 'all-powerful'. 

All-knowing: You expect to be considered 'all-knowing' but you make mistakes? You're *twice* going to set in motion plans to right the wrongs of the humans. You're going to send humans to hell knowing in advance what 'sins' they're going to commit, and knowing that billions of them won't be able to believe in your story. Your plan also includes you being 'tricked' by Satan. You're going to kill Job's children, kill his livestock, then you're going to torture Job and you're then going to tell Satan that he, Satan, caused you to move against Job without cause. You *know* this is going to happen because it's part of your plan yet you're going to try the 'The Devil made me do it' excuse? I cannot, for a single moment, understand how you would think any reasonable person would consider you all-knowing if you're going to claim to be tricked when it's all part of your plan! 

Yahweh, your plan is atrocious. You're going to sit idly by why children are raped, yet intervene on Earth to allow already millionaire sports people become richer by helping them win sporting events. You're going to allow millions of children to starve to death while accepting praise from privileged people sitting down to meals that are essentially feasts. You're going to send millions of genuinely kind, caring, honest people to hell because they can't accept the Jesus story, whilst allowing life long thieves, paedophiles, rapists, and murderers into heaven if they accept Jesus and are saved. You're going to send natural disasters to earth killing tens, hundreds, thousands and on occasion millions of people at a time, so you can be praised for sparing one life. You're going to provide absolutely nothing a critically thinking person could accept as evidence you exist and then demand that they believe in you anyway. I could go on and on about how ridiculously bad this plan is but I have neither the time nor inclination. 

Yahweh - it's not going to come as a surprise, but your submission is terrible. Your application to create a universe is, without reservation, denied. 

As an atheist

We atheists often get told that we can't be good without god in our lives. We can't be 'moral' and we've no reason to live. 

When people tell us this they are, of course, wrong. 

As an atheist I can give my life my own goals and I need not exist simply to please an overlord.

As an atheist I can do good for goodness sake. 

As an atheist I can strive for societal improvement for the sake of future generations.

As an atheist I can do good because I'm driven by conscience, not because I'm trying to pass a test to get into 'heaven'.

As an atheist I can accept people for who they are and not need to condemn them for acts imagined to be 'sinful'.

As an atheist I can base my decisions on empathy, logic, reason, and understanding, and not some antiquated, superstitious scripture.

As an atheist I will never hold a sign condemning people to hell.

As an atheist I will never hold a sign declaring that people who disagree with me should be beheaded.

As an atheist I will never wish violence on those with opposing views.

As an atheist I will never threaten someone with eternal damnation for the crime of 'not being convinced'.

As an atheist I will never think that a child, friend, or even stranger is an abomination for being gay. 

As an atheist I will never let my child die while I pray instead of seeking medical attention.

As an atheist I will never set fire to a human being because I think them a witch. 

As an atheist I can appreciate the natural wonder of the universe.

As an atheist I can condemn tragic acts without excusing them as being part of 'god's plan'. 

As an atheist I can freely admit that I don't know something without the need to make up an answer. 

As an atheist I understand that unexplained and unexplainable are two different things. 

As an atheist my life's goal can be a healthy planet and a healthy and happy population (including non-human animals)

As an atheist I can be good without god.

What is God?

When we talk about God (capital G God) we're talking about what theists believe is the creator of the universe. I know there's pretty much as many definitions as there are theists but I think it's safe to say that most people think of God as the being that created everything and is in control of everything and who decides who gets to heaven and, if that religion has it, hell. Some people believe this being to be real. Others don't. Then there are poly-theists who believe in gods and goddesses rather than a single God.

But what is God really?

God is sometimes presented as a 'model' for the creation of the universe. God isn't a model. It isn't even a hypothesis. It's a wild guess at the very best. The 'god' answer to how the universe was 'created' is barely worth considering. It's a wild stab in the dark dreamt up by people who didn't yet know how to rationally investigate anything.

You might hear that 'someone' must have created the universe. But of course this is not true. What's more accurate is that 'someTHING' must have caused the universe to be in the form we see it today. There is no evidence to suggest that our universe was ever deliberately created.

When people posit God as a reasonable explanation for the existence of the universe they seem to be forgetting something - God has never been the verifiable conclusion to any mystery. Ever. There is no exception. To suggest that God created the universe is to go from the understanding that God is not demonstrably responsible for anything, to claiming that God is magically responsible for everything. We used to think God was responsible for lightning, eclipses, thunder, tides, epileptic fits, mountains, and so on. Investigation into these things shows they all have natural explanations - no god needed.

So God becomes the ultimate give-up answer. It's your answer when you can't be bothered looking any longer or the question seems too hard. God is how ancient peoples said 'I don't know'. Ancient people didn't investigate lightning and reach a verifiable conclusion that a god was throwing it across they sky. They had no idea what was causing it. They didn't yet have the means to investigate what was happening. They didn't know - so they called it God.

It's the classic argumentum ad ignorantiam or argument from ignorance. There is a gap in knowledge and rather than performing a thorough and detailed investigation, the claimant says 'God did it' and is very often believed but never, ever validated. 

Then there's the personal side of God. The part that people think answer prayers and gets us through tough times. Now we know prayer doesn't work. It's been shown time and time again and I needn't go into it here. If you doubt me (and you should) just give it a quick google.

Another part of the emotional god is the god that will get you through tough times. People will pray to this god for strength. They'll praise it when the tide turns and things look bright again. We all go through incredibly hard times in life, not all of us are praying to any god to get through them. But we still manage it and we know that it was us relying on other people (family, friends, colleagues, professionals) in combination with our own inner strength.

I recently had this exchange on twitter with a lady who I'll call S:

Me: I think a question theists don't ask enough is not why god, but why THEIR god? Why are they the religion they are and not another. I bet it's rare that they reached the age of reason and did a thorough, in-depth analysis of the various claims and came to a conclusion - - that just one of the religions was right and they therefore decided to join. No, it's that they are the religion of their parents. S: I was not baptised at birth and my father was Anglican I chose Catholicism. I do not subscribe to any now and yes I know that I baffle the crap out of ya. :( but generally speaking you would be correct. Children are usually baptised into the religion of the parents without a choice Me: And that's how religion survives. Imagine if you weren't allowed to teach religion to people until they were 25 and already had a scientific understanding of the universe. Religion would all but disappear in a generation. S: I understand what you are saying but it makes me sad to a degree. God has been my rock for many years. Me: I would suggest that YOU have been your rock. You've just labelled that part of you god. :)

S: Through my tears I want to say I love you for saying that and thank you. :)

I have no doubt that S is convinced that the god she happens to believe in was her 'rock' but I stand by what I said to her - SHE is the rock. Whatever she needed a rock for it was HER that got her through it. Her own strength was what she relied on, she just called it God. This leads to one of the things that bugs me about religion - it teaches people to discredit their own qualities.

Without any good reason to do so some people think they have a soul and this soul 'lives on' after a person dies. Many people don't want to think that this life is it, that dead is truly the end. To avoid this confrontational thought they imagine an afterlife where they hope to live 'forever' and, of course, to see loved ones again. God, they think, is this hope.

Another thing that happens is that people want to discriminate and oppress. Have a problem with homosexual people? Blame Leviticus 18:22. Want women to be submissive to their husbands? Ephesians 5:22-24. Or Qur'an 4:34 for instructions on how much a man can beat his wife. I could fill an entire blog on its on with instructions from the bible and the Qur'an on how to discriminate against and oppress people. The avenue that 'allows' this kind of thinking is, obviously, the word of 'God'. 

So what does it boil down to? What is God?

God is a cheat for intellectual laziness, a crutch for emotional frailty, a pacifier for the fear of death and an excuse for prejudice and discrimination.

Let's try to find out

I'm glad people are moving away from 'god did it' and are going with 'let's try to find out'. We no longer need to rely on faith for the answers to anything. We have investigative methods that we can use to show us actual answers. Verifiable answers. Answers that are unambiguous and need no interpretation. 

The problem with 'god did it' is that it's the ultimate non-answer. It's totally intellectually unsatisfying. Once you've assumed god did it where's the desire to pursue knowledge? What fuels the quest to find out more? If one assumes that our universe was created by a god and that all that we see is part of this god's plan then why would we bother to try to find out what's really going on? We would stop looking because we assume we already have the answer - 'God'. 

Alternately the joy of learning is fuelled by the desire to know more. It's curiosity about what we don't know but want to know. We investigate, study and analyse. We show our results to our peers and get them to check that what we've done is valid. We ask them to look into things too and see if their findings are the same as ours. We're not satisfied with knowledge gaps and nor should we be.

We should be comfortable with not knowing everything *yet*. Comfortable that we have a gap in our knowledge, while we actively try to fill that gap. What we shouldn't be comfortable with is trying to fill that gap with the strange superstitions of pre-science shepherds. When we do this 'God' basically becomes a synonym for 'I don't know and I'm either too stupid or too lazy to find out'. How can anyone possibly find that satisfying?

Imagine the possibilities if everyone thought 'hey, let's look into that' instead of praying to deity that's never going to answer them. I wonder how many bright minds have been wasted by the thought 'god did it' rather than 'how do you suggest we find out?'

As a society I think we'll benefit far more if we are driven by the desire for knowledge rather than being held back by the desire to worship. I want our children to reject the idea that we should rest our understanding of the universe on 'well how else did we get here?' Instead of 'Well if god isn't real, where did all this stuff come from?' We need only ask, 'From where did all this stuff come?' 

If we investigate and find that the superstitious writings of pre-science shepherds are actually accurate then, and only after this investigation, should we accept them. And if this happens I'll stand on a busy street corner and shout 'I was wrong!'

But until this happens, let's not settle. Let's not rely on the guesses and assumptions of people that didn't have investigative skills. Let's keep looking. Let's keep investigating and testing and experimenting and checking. 

I much prefer 'this is what we think and this is why we think it' over 'you just need to have faith'. I don't want to accept anything on faith - I want evidence. I don't understand why anyone is happy to have 'faith'. 

An open letter to argumentative evolution deniers.

I've read many and been part of many conversations about evolution. It's always atheists (often biologists) on one side and theists (never biologists) on the other. Most commonly it's theists refusing to accept any argument for evolution whilst continuing  to argue against something that evolution is not. 

It includes tweets that  show a lack of understanding that we are animals, that we "believe evolution as fact without evidence" and the old standard "r u saying u believe evolution to b 100% true? U just admitted its a theory."

It's a shame and a frustration that people think like this. I was part of yet another one of these conversations yesterday. For some reason it felt more frustrating than usual. There was something about the dogged determination of the people on the denial side. That happens all the time, but...there was a level to this that went beyond what I'd seen before. I then happened across a tweet that said 'It's like talking to a brick wall'. This was not one of the biologists to another biologist (which would have been perfectly understandable), but one of the theists to the other. It prompted me to send a few tweets which I'm turning into an open letter to argumentative evolution deniers.

Dear Evolution Denier. 

I understand that talking to someone who won't accept the evidence before them can be likened to talking to a brick wall. There's a unique frustration when presenting someone with evidence and they have a steadfast refusal to accept it. 

It does seem, though, that  you have a terrible misunderstanding of what evolution is. Actually, it seems that you're completely clueless as to what evolution is. Evolution: the change in the inherited characteristics of biological populations over successive generations. Is that really so hard to understand? Now don't get me wrong, there's a lot more to understanding evolution than just that, but that's it at its most basic definition. 

It takes no 'faith' to accept this. It's not a belief or a religion. It is an observable and demonstrable fact. As species reproduce, things change and we can see it happen. We can MAKE it happen. We can see it happen with Ring Species, we've made it happen with dogs (modern canines are descendants of long-ago wolves). These are just two examples. The process is slow. For example, mouse sized mammals to elephants took around 24 million generations. The changes are slight, not dramatic. If you follow your evolutionary path back to the origin of life, you'll see that each generation is as similar to the previous as you are to your own parents. Evolution takes A LONG TIME. To quote a shampoo commercial, it doesn't happen over night, but it does happen. 

What evolution is NOT is one species giving birth to a new species. A monkey is not going to give birth to a human (more on why there are still monkeys later). Evolution is also NOT the existence of strange half-breeds such as the Crocoduck. What you evolution deniers fail to understand is that a monkey giving birth to a human being or the sudden appearance of the Crocoduck would actually DISPROVE the theory of evolution. This is how much you misunderstand what evolution is. One species suddenly appearing, fully formed, as the very next generation to a different species is NOT what the theory of evolution says. Remember what I wrote about each generation being as similar to the previous as you are to your parents? THAT is what evolution says. So please, quit demanding that we show you a Crocoduck, and quit asking for a monkey to give birth to a human being. Saying these things only confirms your massive misunderstanding of what evolution is. 

Speaking of monkeys, why are there still monkeys? It's a very common question about evolution. As I child I asked the question myself. Evolution deniers get it into their heads that human beings evolved from modern day monkeys or apes. If that is the case, they ask, how is it that we can still see monkeys? Surely if we evolved from them, they should be extinct! And here in lies the problem, yet another misunderstanding. We humans did NOT evolve from modern monkeys or apes. We ARE apes and we evolved WITH the other apes. A term you should familiarise yourself with is 'common ancestor'. Humans and the other apes share a common ancestor. We ALL evolved from it. Our evolutionary timelines split at different stages. Our common ancestor with the Orang-utan is a lot further back than our common ancestor with Gorillas. Our common ancestor with Gorillas is a lot further back than our common ancestor with Chimps. Chimps and Bonobos share a closer common ancestor again, one that we don't share with them. Professor Richard Dawkins explains this below. It's just 1 minute a 47 seconds. Please spare the time...

If you have a bit more time (7 minutes 2 seconds for example) please watch the fantastic presentation by Steve Shives. Steve goes into a bit more detail and also explains how one species can still exist even if another has evolved from it. 

I hope you took the time to watch them, they are short, but really quite informative videos. 

As Steve explains in his video. part of the issue with 'why are there still monkeys' is the assumption that humans are further along the evolutionary ladder than the monkey. That if we 'the new and improved model' exist, how can the old and inferior model exist? I need to point out here that evolution is not a ladder, it's not lineal and there is no reason to think that humans are evolution's 'goal'. (If evolution did have a goal, I would certainly hope that humans were not it!) Evolution is a tree, not a ladder. There are millions of branches and we are as evolved as all other current species. Part of the blame for this misunderstanding must lie with pictures like this: 

This picture makes it look a chimpanzee gave birth to a more upright monkey/ape type thing and this process repeated as we stood straighter and straighter, lost most of our hair until out of an ancestor hominid popped 'modern man'. As discussed above, this is not how evolution works. 

This picture:

Is a MUCH better graphical example of how evolution works. For a larger version of this picture, click here. As you will see, fungi, centipedes, sea urchins, and salmon are as far, in terms of years, from the start of evolution as elephants, rabbits, and humans. They have just evolved down different paths. They have branched differently to the path taken to get humans. And to reinforce an earlier point, take a look at the number of years involved...evolution takes a long time!

Now if you've made it this far, and thank you if you have, you're possibly thinking to yourself 'How can you be going on about this, evolution is just a theory'. Yes, well the short answer is 'so is gravity, but I bet you won't leave a tall building via a 12th storey window'. 

The longer answer is that when we say 'theory' in everyday language, we're using it as synonymous with 'guess' or a 'hunch' or perhaps it's even a little more solid than that. But this is not what's meant by 'theory' in 'scientific theory'. Eugenie Scott describes scientific terms, including Theory, here. Briefly, a scientific theory is an explanation of observed phenomena. Laws are used to describe facts and observations and theories are used to describe laws. Theories are "the most important things in science". Theories don't "grow" to become laws, laws are part of the group of data that contributes to a theory. Theories are the TOP of the scientific tree. Theories are built on mountains of evidence. They exist because all the relevant evidence supports them and no evidence disproves them. 

Important to note - Evolution is a FACT (remember, evolution is: "The change in the inherited characteristics of biological populations over successive generations") The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection and Genetic Mutation is the scientific explanation of this fact. It has been studied, scrutinised and tested for 150 years and is supported by all the relevant evidence. As with asking for a crocoduck and asking why there are still monkeys, when you say 'just a theory' you are immediately exposing to everyone that you have no idea what you're talking about. Don't do it. 

Micro v Macro evolution. This is another old chestnut that we hear from creationists. When evolution was proven beyond reasonable doubt, and some evolution deniers finally realised evolution is observable, they had little room to hide. So the claims that 'micro' evolution is true but 'macro' evolution is false, because it's never been observed, started to rise. What you don't understand when you don't understand evolution is that micro and macro are the same process - macro is just over a longer time period. Macroevolutionary studies focus on change that occurs above the level of species. Microevolutionary studies focus on change that happens within a species. To say that micro evolution can happen but macro evolution can't happen is like saying you can build a brick wall, but you can't build a brick house. Or that you can move ten metres, but you can't walk 10 kilometres. 

Put simply, macro evolution is the result of micro evolution happening a lot. Remember, evolution is change over time and differences in generations take a long time to happen. Even if that change is very, very slight, do it enough and eventually you're going to end up with something very different from where you started. 

Just quickly - don't come at me with 'there's no transitional fossils.' There ARE. There are, in fact, thousands of them. Here is a great FAQ about them. When you say there's no transitional fossils, you are exposing to everyone that you have no idea what you're talking about.

My last point I'd like to address is the claim that evolution is not supported by evidence and that it requires just as much faith as religion. Wrong. Evolution is OBSERVABLE. That's right, evolution - the change in the inherited characteristics of biological populations over successive generations - can be OBSERVED. It's not a guess. It's not a hunch. It's observed and verified and if you bothered to do a little bit of research you would know this. The study of evolution is something you learn in university, years of university. Then you do lab work and field work and more research and more study. The basics of evolution are - basic, but evolution is complex. It's a massive area of science and it is NOT something you can expect to learn on twitter at 140 characters a time. I have never met anyone that both understands and rejects evolution. As Professor Richard Dawkins says - Evolution is almost universally accepted among those who understand it and almost universally rejected by those who don't. I can almost guarantee that you argue against evolution because you have some misunderstanding about it. 

The good thing is that there are several wonderful resources available on the internet to get a basic understanding of evolution and to allow yourself to move from uneducated and ignorant evolution denier to educated evolution accepter. Below are some of the best...

www.talkorigins.org A massive resource. Probably the best on the internet. Pages and pages of data, explanations and references. If you read your way through this website with an open mind and STILL reject evolution then I don't know what else I can do for you. 

www.evolutionfaq.com As the name suggest a list of frequently asked questions about evolution. Great to get a basic understanding evolutionary terms and introductory level information. There's also some articles and videos. 

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/ Again, as the name suggests, this is the Berkeley university 'Evolution 101' website. A wonderful resource for beginning your journey to understanding the fact of evolution.. 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Evolution Over 300,000 scientific articles citing evolution.

http://scholar.google.com.au/s cholar?hl=en&q=evolution&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_sdtp= Over 4 million pieces of scholarly literature when searching evolution. 

There are also some books that you should read:

The Greatest Show On Earth, the Case for Evolution - Richard Dawkins

Why Evolution is True - Jerry Coyne (there's also a YouTube video of the same name by Jerry which is very much worth watching). 

Evolution vs. Creationism: An Introduction - Eugenie C. Scott

Well congratulations for making it to the end. I hope you have actually paid attention and have learnt something. I hope you take these points on board and if you do, for some strange reason, still feel the need to argue against evolution, please don't use any of the arguments above, because as I've said a number of times, saying those things doesn't disprove evolution, saying those things proves you don't know what you're talking about. 

Thanks for your time.