>protons and neutrons use gluons to hold together in atoms 

>spacetime itself bends under the mass of accumulated atoms 

>electro-magnetism is not only the final ingredient keeping matter together and coalesced into large masses..

>it organizes it into all known shapes of matter, creates compounds and complex chemistry

>when run through circuits in specific ways it can do calculations, process data and even create sentient beings when run through the labyrinth of brain circuitry 

>all things heavier and more complex than hydrogen were forged in the hearts of stars and blasted out into the void in supernovae 



Even if it did turn out that there is no gods for sure and atheism is true, this universe is beautiful and endlessly fascinating. 

At the most straightforward conclusion we’re still basically in a realm of magic animating forces, ourselves made up of these same phenomena. 

It’s a shame that doesn’t get more play here.

yeah but the laws are not determined by a super structure, ie stemming form some constraints. nobody knows why the laws are what they are

“Why” might very well be a confused human projection where we’re trying to attribute motivation to something that doesn’t have one.

I’m not saying that’s definitely the case, I’m just saying if it were the universe would still be an incredible place.

>>14924424 (OP)

me likes splitting planets' moons and splitting solar systems' suns

http://www.cbat.eps.harvard.edu/lists/Supernovae.html

>>14924424 (OP)

One of the most decent post on /his/ in years

>>14924424 (OP)

I don’t get the butthurt, truly baffling to me. Why does it make you mad man?

Thanks bro

>>14924424 (OP)

>this universe is beautiful and endlessly fascinating. 

Said the ground beef in the butcher shop

>>14924424 (OP)

>Even if it did turn out that there is no gods for sure and atheism is true, this universe is beautiful and endlessly fascinating.

“God” as a concept matters more than the acktheist strawman of god being physically located somewhere in the world, pulling the strings of every event to ever happen. All animals have the ability to sense the environment, and any animal with the sufficient organizational capacity would be able to learn and catalog scientific truths about the environment. Humans are different in that our intellects are abstract, and tend towards concepts as nebulous as “God.” There would be no way to experience beauty or fascination without such concepts. Not to mention that there are no conclusions in science, only recursive questioning: today it’s gluons and electromagnetism, but this paradigm will shift as we learn more about how the physical world operates. This has little bearing on how human beings operate.



>“Why” might very well be a confused human projection 

This is borderline misanthropy, and it’s hypocritical that you would say a certain line of questioning is confused when the whole point of science is to ask and investigate questions about how the world works. I never understood why atheists object to groveling before the archetype of power and goodness, but they’ll do so for an empty void with bright lights and fun facts.



Why can’t atheists accept that science and religion aren’t mutually exclusive?

Anyone who doesn't already agree with you will consider this to be a very uncharitable interpretation of the OP.
