Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM until Bible is destroyed
I have no problem with Atheists who don't believe in God. Its something I don't know and don't care. But I do have problem with Atheists who don't believe in ghosts. In fact its a big problem for you guys. All I can say to you guys is what a wise guy told me once "Those who don't believe in them will attract their attention".
Listen, I only want to help you. A wise guy told me once that "Those who believe in ghosts, will draw unwanted focus from invisible space-goblins!".
You can't see them, touch them, smell them. Occasionally if you hear a creaking in your house, thats probably them. Sometimes they open cupboards and turn on TVs when you're not around. But they will find you, mark my words.
@leftovers0 Allrite dude. Say whatever you want. Wait till you SAW one. Your idea of the world will come tumbling down. I'm telling this from personal experience.
Personal experience cannot be corroborated, and is fallible.
It is far more likely that you experienced a delusion (helped and reinforced by the fact that you actually believe this crap), than the laws of physics were suspended in your favour.
I have no doubt that events occur around the world that could not currently be explained, but if I saw one, I wouldn't place my own explanation on it. Especially not one based on human superstition and mythology.
1) Lunchtime discussion on Oxford on the 'Oxford Debate'
2) "Is God a Delusion?" lecture with panel response (unless Dawkins shows up to debate!)
Run, Dawkins, run!! Keep running from Dr. Craig, from debate. That's the best thing you can do to keep your followers.
In case you followers don't know, he's been avoiding Dr. Craig, for he... is afraid to death of debating him! LOL... Even an atheist publicly accused him of cowardice!
@unamaxify No, When WLC Debated Sam *Harris*. Sam Harris did not rebuttle any of WLC statements.When WLC was talking about Design,Harris was talking about Morality and so fourth. I would say WLC took that one or maybe even a Stalemate.
Well i agree that Sam Harris is wrong for saying morality to be objective
without a universal lawgiver such as a deity.
Without a deity all morality probably is subjective.
The point is there is no empirical evidence for god's existence, Craig just went ahead an skipped a step and tried to attribute Morality to god without proving god's existence first.(logical fallacy)
Sam kinda went ahead and plowed over Craig and did no longer answer any of Craig's points after the logical fallacy
The controversy is within science itself. Neo-Darwinian evolution is an inadequate explanation for many features of the living world. It isn't just the ID proponents saying this. In the popular sector, this kind of propaganda appeals to secularists. But if you actually examine the state of affairs within science, you will clearly see that evolution is not a fact, but an assumption. It follows on a definition of science that rules out any other explanation by definition. In other words, corrupt.
@circusOFprecision There are reasonable disputes within the scientific community about the exact nature of evolution. For example punctuated evolution vs. the mainstream of phyletic gradualism. I'm a proponent for the first. Science only rules out hypotheses by means of the scientific method & is yet to be falsified. I.D. is a set of claims rigged to fit an assumption. You have every right to try and falsify the claim. I doubt you will come up with anything that will convince me though.
Body language says it all.....Dawkins scratches his head after saying "ID versus Evolution is just not a real controversy after all". Maybe he can fool you but he cant fool me with his ape gestures!!!
Topics: The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com etc.
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
or
figure4etc3.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
To say that God created himself is the same as the world on the back of a turtle arguement; then what is the turtle on? It's funny how they'll say they don't believe in evolution because they can't see how something can come from nothing, (not what evolution says) yet they believe God created himself/ is eternal= came from nothing. By that logic, who's to say the universe didn't create itself? That perhaps every life in existense is one of many brain cells that form a "god"?
@blackkakari Baruch Spinoza and Albert Einstein — considered God to be essentially the sum total of the physical laws which describe the universe."An atheist has to know a lot more than I know. An atheist is someone who knows there is no god. By some definitions atheism is very stupid seeing as the idea of a creator of the universe is as difficult to prove or disprove .
do u know how long it would take for erosion , like rain and rivers to wash away everything above seal level? 14 million years, if the earth were one billion years old, our continents would have eroded away some 70 times. total amount of sediment flowing into the ocean is 2.5 billion tons every year. There are 30.4 million cubic miles of continental crust above sea level having a mass of 383 million tons. 383 million billion tons+27.5billion tons per year = 14 million years.
do u know how long it would take for erosion , like rain and rivers to wash away everything above seal level? 14 million years, if the earth were one billion years old, our continents would have eroded away some 70 times. total amount of sediment flowing into the ocean is 2.5 billion tons every year. There are 30.4 million cubic miles of continental crust above sea level having a mass of 383 million tons. 383 million billion tons+27.5billion tons per year = 14 million years.
in common vernacular: glory hole, a place a male can receive sexual gratification
in mining vernacular: glory hole, a naturally occurring well at the base of a waterfall where precious metals collect in a rich vein.
Just becuase a word is the same doesn't meen the meaning is the same. A scientific theory is a testable and observable explination that takes a full or best accounting for all the facts. In common vernacular it means a guess.
@1billion1deaths1 A scientific theory comprises a collection of concepts, including abstractions of observable phenomena expressed as quantifiable properties, with rules (called scientific laws) that express relationships between observations of such concepts. A scientific theory is constructed to conform to available empirical data about such observations, and is put forth as a principle or body of principles for explaining a class of phenomena. Look up "empirical" and even you can get this.
@1billion1deaths1 Evolution is a theory the way gravity is a theory or Germ Theory, or atoms. The word "theory" is not the same in a scientific context.
@SecretAgent194 they are many theorys, diffrent type of theorys, I have my own theorys... doesnt make every theory a Fact..otherwise we wouldnt be having this convo , its that simple, Facts are things we can phisically observe and visually state its true.. not predict or assumed well studied but still assumpt,,if it was 100% accurate it would be a fact but guess wat..its not.
@MrJohnnyrace Baruch Spinoza and Albert Einstein — considered God to be essentially the sum total of the physical laws which describe the universe."An atheist has to know a lot more than I know. An atheist is someone who knows there is no god. By some definitions atheism is very stupid seeing as the idea of a creator of the universe is as difficult to prove or disprove .
Sorry Mr Dawkins but the evidence for a species radically changing its protein fold & morphing into another species is non evident. Many living fossils going to 525MYO (Rhabdopleura) & a plethora of "stasis in the fossil record" quotes from paleontologist tell us you sly pseudo intellectual liberal philosophers have pulled a fast one on slow minds.
The Altenberg 16 understand random copying errors & selection (the only mechanisms an atheist has) will never produce what is claimed.
@toobsucker Yeah, what a copout you dishonest bastard. "I can't think of an argument so you know, there WILL be one". I'm not gunna' take your word for it and neither will anyone else with more than 6 brain cells.
@toobsucker I was explaining how what you said is bullshit. I don't have a vast knowledge of evolution but I clearly know a damn sight more than you do.
Humanity's "common sense" often doesn't apply to many things in the universe. Our "common sense" develops through our upbringing and experiences which are really limited when you consider the scope of the universe.
Atheists: Rationalize your faith that life, consciousness, the universe were created without intent, by presenting an example of uniqueness unintentionally coming into being.
Stop being obnoxious and let people (dis)believe what they want, it hardly matters to you. A youtube comment is not going to change people's minds about something that they feel deeply about, ESPECIALLY religion.
Some people try to live moral lives, and ultimately that matters more than how the universe was created or how life was formed.
Are you an Atheist, wimp? If you need to rationalize the Atheist faith that life and the universe were created without intent, present an example of oximoronic Unintentional Creationism.
I don't like to pretend to know how the universe and life were created. You said you are religious, so why the sensitivity about the word faith? Faith means confidence or trust. That's the definition. Atheism is faith in the irrational. That life and the universe are unintended. Unintentional Creationism is oxymoronic and believing that molecules of RNA acid grew into consciousness is idiotic.
@onefodderunit There's no sensitivity, but seeing as it has /heavily/ religious connotations I wondered why you used it.
You say you don't 'like to pretend to know how the universe or life was created' yet you know that athiests are, and I am, wrong? That doesn't make sense - how do you know? It seems like you're sitting on the fence and hurling abuse onto both sides
You're heavily opinionated on something that you don't seem to have an opinion about.
Yes, Atheists have faith that RNA, an acid, grew or 'evolved' into consciousness. This is irrational. Not based on observation or understanding of nature.
What rationale compels you to have faith in gods of ancient Greece?
You seem to revel in redundancy. Once again: I know the universe and life were created by intent rather than by accident, because intent is creative, and accidents are destructive. I did not say your polytheism is wrong, I only asked for the rationale which compels you to worship ancient Greek gods.
there doesn't have to be a rationale, just faith. While there is a reason, I'm certainly not going to explain it to you and certainly not in 500 characters.
While I might agree that in some people's eyes, atheism doesn't add up, they're free to think whatever they want.
And you kinda did say it was wrong - 'irrational faith in the mythical'.
My point still stands though, in that unless you /absolutely know/ how the universe was created, you cannot rule /anything/ out.
You choose not to attempt to rationalize your polytheism. That's understandable.
Yes, Atheists are free to have faith in the absurd belief that the universe and life are accidental rather than intentional creations, and that their mothers are pointless primates with no soul.
@onefodderunit You can't rationalize your monotheism anymore than MikeGasm can rationalize his polytheism. All religions are pretty much the same - they all believe in some magical, almighty, invisible person (or people) that, for some reason, got lonely and decided to create an entire universe out of nothing for their entertainment, or some reason unbeknown to us. Religion was mainly created out of people's immense fear of death and from simple fear in general.
I'm not religious and commonsense isn't a rationalization. Creativity requires intent. There's no evidence that the universe and life were each created unintentionally. There are only irrational suppositions, Big Bang and Aniogenesis, which attempt to validate these Athestic beliefs.
Atheists place matter before mind and coincidence before intelligence. It's Orthodox Materialism.
Set beliefs in Big Bang and Abiogenesis to explain the origin of the universe and life defines religion.
@onefodderunit We see evolution in the many different evidences found out there, including genetics, fossil records, bacterial resistance, etc... We don't need faith to believe in it. We just need to observe it.
Trying to find some super-natural explanation for something that's observable and largely explainable , requires not only faith, but the ability to shut down the rational mind, logic and knowledge.
"Animals don't gradually change species. New species always appear abruptly. "
Yes, they do. There are plenty of fossil records of animals to support that. For example, there is a complete set of dinosaur-to-bird transitional fossils with no morphological "gaps" cataloged. There are also complete series of fossils for the reptile-mammal intermediates as well. Not to mention the more recent ape-to-human records ranging from Sahelanthropus tchadensis all the way to us.
There is not a continuous fossil trail linking two different species. What is the specific source for your claim that there is a continuous fossil trail linking apes to humans, Atheist?
@onefodderunit I just listed a series of fossils found that transition between especies. If you google them, you'll not only be able to see their pictures, but also find research papers on them.
I have already wasted too much of my time discussing this with you.
The simple fact is this: You think there should be a reason for your existence and life, therefore , you want to shape reality in a way it will make sense to you. If that means denying the work of 100 thousand scientists, so be it.
Your pointless copy/paste demonstration affirms your knowledge that there is no continuous fossil trail linking two species and that you are a commonly dishonest Atheist. Darwinist Bolsheviks aren't remembered for integrity, either.
Isn't it your Atheist belief that life and the universe were each created without intent and that your mother is a soulless, pointless primate?
One thing you should understand about atheists, is that the only thing we have in common is that we don't believe in a creator. We have no similar patterns of behavior when it comes from anything else. We don't subscribe to the same political affiliations. We don't share the same views on life, morality, education, art, sports or anything else.
PS: By continuing to bring up Bolsheviks in these discussions, the only thing you're proving, is that you're not entirely sane.
Darwin was mandated by Bolsheviks in Soviet schools. It is dispiriting and dehumanizing. Karl Marx approved of Darwin because it suited his "material life" ideals. Atheism is Orthodox Materialism. It places matter before mind.
Where is the "complete series of fossils"? You said you could link apes to humans. You think you can get away with such sophomoric lies? What an Atheist.
Scientific evidence that creativity requires intent is endless. There's no evidence to support the belief that the universe and life were each created without intent. Unintentional Creationism is anti-science.
no because there was a got a super intelligent being that was ah well omnipotent that came to existance out of nothing. and then it thought he lets not to create another omnipotent being. no.. I god will create an complex universe for the sole purpose of one planet that contained some primitive primates that were arrogant enough to think this omnipotent being for witch there was no prove to be on there side.
There is no scientific evidence supporting the Atheist beliefs that either the universe or life were created by accident. Accidents are a destructive force. Intent is creative.
What do you believe is the purpose of consciousness, Atheist?
"Dawkins is a Darwinist. So were the Bolsheviks. It's an outdated belief."
Darwin set the framework for evolutionary science. This theory has been greatly revised and improved upon, for 150 years. No scientist has ever been able to find an contraditory evidence against it. And not for the lack of trying.
As to the Bolsheviks comparison...seriously? Comparing a political movement ideology with a scientific theory is just ridiculous.
Bolsheviks forced dehumanizing, dispiriting Darwin on schoolchildren while they starved and slaughtered tens of millions of civilians, mainly Christian.
Atheists need Darwin.
Animals don't gradually change species. Radiation affects embryonic mutation. Note the Cambrian explosion and sudden appearance of wide variety of new species during the period. New species appear abruptly. Always. Gradual change is an outdated myth for the unsophisticated. Such as Bolsheviks.
"Bolsheviks forced dehumanizing, dispiriting Darwin on schoolchildren while they starved and slaughtered tens of millions of civilians, mainly Christian."
The study of science, doesn't dehumanize anyone. Would they be dehumanized for learning germ theory? Astronomy? Chemistry?
If they forced children to learn how to play the violin, at gun point, would it make violin an evil instrument?
I repeat , the communist party's behavior has nothing to do with any scientific theory
intelligent design is observable. Each choice you make, based on information, has an effect. There is no intelligent design vs evolution. Evolution is exclusively about a change in frequency of alleles within a gene pool from one generation to the next.. Intelligent design is about volitional effects which can affect frequency of alleles within a gene pool from generation to the next.
@se7ensnakes that sounds a lot like religious backtracking. When science explains something, religion says "well, god made it that way" It adds nothing to the discussion. Volitional effects of allele frequency is a fancy way of describing domestic breeding.
@jns124able Idid not know that the bible discuss Autopoiesis? Could you show me the chapter? Am sorry for my ignorance, being an atheist i dont bother reading the bible at all.
@se7ensnakes autopoiesis? As in creating itself? Couple things...if you are going to make any kind of intelligent remarks in a debate about a religion...you absolutely SHOULD read the bible. It's "being informed".
As an atheist MYSELF, I find your ignorance a bit offensive...but my offense nor you ignorance can be helped I suppose...
You seem to have a problem with religion. I dont care about religion either for or against. If you want to debate religion there are a variety of other places to post. I am discussing the theory of intelligent design.
@se7ensnakes Actually, intelligent design is steeped in religion. How are you managing to isolate the two and carry on a meaningful debate about it? Thats seems rather simplstic..
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.
The one and only irrefutable intelligence that we are certain of is animal intelligence. Not simply intelligent choices that animals make but also the possibility that the thought process affect brain physiology (directed neural plasticity).
The intelligent design theory may well be greatest thing coming in this century. A human has certain elements which have not been fully examine. I believe that there are energies in the human body which affect evolution volitionally. While I fully realize that the Christian fundamentalist have hijack the theory, I am also aware that anti-religious groups want to stop any research into the matter.
Yes there is great evidence for these energies, however, your next sentence shows me that i will be wasting my time trying to explain: There is no research that can be done on creationism. Who is talking about creationism?
you are so blind for your hatred of religion that you wont be able to see any evidence, or what i am talking about. You are the polar opposite of the christian fundamentalist.
Presenting evidence about Intelligent design theory to you would be like presenting evolutionary evidence to a fundamentalist Christian. No difference both you and the fundy are closed minded.
@ThePsychoReturns You have evidence for natural selection, but you have no evidence that that is the one and only means which speciation occurs. What more you have no evidence that disproves that the individual organism is not taking INTENTIONAL steps to alter his being. I believe you may not even understand what i just wrote.
@se7ensnakes So you have. Evidence vs. no evidence... and you go with the no evidence, seems logical...
If there are 2 roads in a stormy night, and on the radio you heard them saying the "We have no idea what state the eastern road is in, but we have reports from people that the western road is free from flooding." Would you go with the eastern road?
@se7ensnakes I speak of evidence, whatever could I mean? If anyone wants to make other people believe what they themself believe, has to show something that indicates this to be true. So far I have not seen anything that's based on more than personal belief or personal opinion. I base all my beliefs in evidence. I let the evidence point me towards the truth. I don't point the evidence towards whatever truth I wan't it to point.
or a thought's affect on any change in the frequency of alleles within a gene pool from one generation to the next. The fact that religions hijack the intelligent design theory is immaterial. I am only interested in facts.
@se7ensnakes I think i see what youre talking about...what you are actually talking about then is not Intelligent Design. I mean, you can call it that...but ID holds a very different meaning in our culture. You are going to run into all sorts of misguided debates trying to make a case for human influence and choice in affecting genetic content...that is not what ID is known as. Would be a good discussion with the wrong terminology..
Evolution was called "Mohammedan theory of evolution" by western scientists in Darwin's time. Evolution is an Islamic theory, NOT an atheist theory. I have proved that beyond any doubt with a historical document from Darwin's time. watch my video: Richard Dawkins Exposed - Evolution Proves God.
@helasmoh i know of this in fact the islamic knowledge of this is from your robery of the greek scientific knowledge plus that doesnt prove god so please fuck off no evidence is what you have keep that poison faith away from people of good sense okay.
I presented public historical documents by non-Muslim scientists and proved that evolution was an Islamic theory long before Darwin, it was called "Mohammedan Theory of Evolution". If you have anything to support your claim then present it instead of making stupid of yourself with such manners.
@helasmoh please present proof also yes it was a theory of yours lol,but you retards said fucking allh makes it all happen which is the fatal non scientific flaw plus google it it came from greece like all other science you had in your islamic empire read a history book.
@helasmoh lol what the fuck? So, what about the Quran stating that the entirety of humans was from a man called adam and a piece of his rib Eve? Lmao. Oh man Islamic apologists are the best. Especially when they try to reconcile their 1400 year old fantasy book to modern science. It gives me a good laugh.
You are confusing the Quran with the Bible, there is no such thing as Eve created from Adam's rib. Watch the video I made about evolution and click on the attached link. The theory of evolution was called "Mohammedan Theory of Evolution" by non-Muslim scientists in Darwin's time, evolution is a theistic theory, your atheism strongest foundation is destroyed, and that is the real LOL.
@helasmoh Oh man your utter ignorance and lack of knowledge on this subject is staggering. Who in the fuck ever claimed the theory of evolution to be Atheistic? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds? It is like me saying the theory of relativity is a Jewish theory. The theory of evolution is a scientific theory regardless of it being "theistic" or "atheistic". It has nothing to with God, nor does it disprove or prove God. Go read a fucking book, and make sure it isnt 1400 years old
@helasmoh Yes I agree. Someone like you doesnt deserve to be conversed with. You are a disgrace to your own religion. You try to speak for Allah and manipulate the Quran to your own liking and then you have the nerve to preach the religion. I don't agree with the Quran, nor do I like it but I respect it as it is. You need to learn some of that, because I know many Muslims would be angry to see their religion manipulated by people trying to save face like yourself
@helasmoh Lol. You believe that evolution is compatible with Islam? Fail. The Quran specifically states that humans in its entirety came from an Adam and an Eve. No credible Muslim or Islamic scholar puts evolution as compatible with Islam. What an ignorant idiot, doesn't even know about his own religion and he is here preaching.
Don't believe me and call me whatever you want but evolution in Darwin's time used to be called "Mohammedan Theory of Evolution" by western scientists. In my video (Richard Dawkins Exposed - Evolution Proves God) I presented two public documents, one is 400 years before Darwin and the other one is from Darwin's contemporary, Sir William Draper. Both documents are available online to prove my claim. Please watch the video.
@helasmoh Rather than peddle your videos...how about rising to the challenge to simply explain it in a debate rather than use it as a convenient "go to" reference. Lets assume you are right for giggle's sake: where is the theism in Darwin's Book "On the Origin of Species"? Have you read this book? Might you send me to the passages in his book that indicate it is theistic? Or are u actually saying someone elses theory on evolution was theistic?
There seems to be a lot of people who are dogging Dawkins on this video. If you haven't read his books I would encourage you to do so. I know many people who have criticized Dawkins and normally they are quite scathing in their attacks. However none of the many people I know that criticize him have ever read any of his books. I think that people should atleast give him a chance before they say what they say. Just my two cents though
great video thanks
simysimss 1 week ago
some sweet info here
msjessypp 1 week ago
Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me.
007TruthSeeker 3 weeks ago
@007TruthSeeker hahaha what rubbish. Classic religious comment. Void of any reason, logic, facts or evidence. Shame on you.
itchygonads 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
PILTDOWN MAN
MrCobra811 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM until Bible is destroyed
SpencerBenedict2nd 3 months ago
I have no problem with Atheists who don't believe in God. Its something I don't know and don't care. But I do have problem with Atheists who don't believe in ghosts. In fact its a big problem for you guys. All I can say to you guys is what a wise guy told me once "Those who don't believe in them will attract their attention".
giriisindahouse 3 months ago
@giriisindahouse
Wait, you believe in ghosts!?
Listen, I only want to help you. A wise guy told me once that "Those who believe in ghosts, will draw unwanted focus from invisible space-goblins!".
You can't see them, touch them, smell them. Occasionally if you hear a creaking in your house, thats probably them. Sometimes they open cupboards and turn on TVs when you're not around. But they will find you, mark my words.
leftovers0 3 months ago
@leftovers0 Allrite dude. Say whatever you want. Wait till you SAW one. Your idea of the world will come tumbling down. I'm telling this from personal experience.
giriisindahouse 3 months ago
@giriisindahouse
Personal experience cannot be corroborated, and is fallible.
It is far more likely that you experienced a delusion (helped and reinforced by the fact that you actually believe this crap), than the laws of physics were suspended in your favour.
I have no doubt that events occur around the world that could not currently be explained, but if I saw one, I wouldn't place my own explanation on it. Especially not one based on human superstition and mythology.
leftovers0 3 months ago
Just realised the Matrix was a film about a Christian taking the green pill & becoming an Atheist
directtalk1 3 months ago
England - Tue Oct 25, 2011
1) Lunchtime discussion on Oxford on the 'Oxford Debate'
2) "Is God a Delusion?" lecture with panel response (unless Dawkins shows up to debate!)
Run, Dawkins, run!! Keep running from Dr. Craig, from debate. That's the best thing you can do to keep your followers.
In case you followers don't know, he's been avoiding Dr. Craig, for he... is afraid to death of debating him! LOL... Even an atheist publicly accused him of cowardice!
Evidence: FAKE INTELLECTUAL
feanando 3 months ago
@feanando
wasn't Craig the guy who got utterly destroyed by Sam Harrison ?
unamaxify 3 months ago
@unamaxify No, When WLC Debated Sam *Harris*. Sam Harris did not rebuttle any of WLC statements.When WLC was talking about Design,Harris was talking about Morality and so fourth. I would say WLC took that one or maybe even a Stalemate.
KEGGAE45 3 months ago
@KEGGAE45 Sorry I dont mean "Design" i mean God being the source of Good.
KEGGAE45 3 months ago
@KEGGAE45
Well i agree that Sam Harris is wrong for saying morality to be objective
without a universal lawgiver such as a deity.
Without a deity all morality probably is subjective.
The point is there is no empirical evidence for god's existence, Craig just went ahead an skipped a step and tried to attribute Morality to god without proving god's existence first.(logical fallacy)
Sam kinda went ahead and plowed over Craig and did no longer answer any of Craig's points after the logical fallacy
unamaxify 3 months ago
@unamaxify Well we all have our opinions.
KEGGAE45 3 months ago
@KEGGAE45
yes some of are true others aren't
unamaxify 3 months ago
The controversy is within science itself. Neo-Darwinian evolution is an inadequate explanation for many features of the living world. It isn't just the ID proponents saying this. In the popular sector, this kind of propaganda appeals to secularists. But if you actually examine the state of affairs within science, you will clearly see that evolution is not a fact, but an assumption. It follows on a definition of science that rules out any other explanation by definition. In other words, corrupt.
circusOFprecision 5 months ago
@circusOFprecision There are reasonable disputes within the scientific community about the exact nature of evolution. For example punctuated evolution vs. the mainstream of phyletic gradualism. I'm a proponent for the first. Science only rules out hypotheses by means of the scientific method & is yet to be falsified. I.D. is a set of claims rigged to fit an assumption. You have every right to try and falsify the claim. I doubt you will come up with anything that will convince me though.
MrLittletomdj 4 months ago
knox sent me
tat3r0sal3d 5 months ago 4
I love knox for this :D among many other reasons as well.
SuperKoolPlace 5 months ago 3
@RayWilliamJohnson You watched this too?!?!?! But why?? IT IS STUPID!!
xUtuber117x 5 months ago
@xUtuber117x Yeah actually RWJ is very liberal and non-religious. That makes him even more awesome!
kekene719 5 months ago
@kekene719 I am an atheist...
xUtuber117x 5 months ago
Dawkins is the man.
KnoxsKorner1 5 months ago 23
@KnoxsKorner1
You can say that again.
scatamalaka 5 months ago
@KnoxsKorner1 I'm s glad that you're awesome, and not some Christian right-wing fundamentalist! Love your vids!!!
kekene719 5 months ago 2
@KnoxsKorner1 <3 Love your vids bro.
chsiao999 5 months ago
@KnoxsKorner1 Can't deny that.
emperorpsymon 5 months ago
@KnoxsKorner1 Strait up Robert!
Severynofarbor 5 months ago
Body language says it all.....Dawkins scratches his head after saying "ID versus Evolution is just not a real controversy after all". Maybe he can fool you but he cant fool me with his ape gestures!!!
dannywizz 6 months ago
@dannywizz This just in! Scientist scratches face, proves that creationism is fact!
liOVERLOADil 5 months ago 8
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK FOR DEBATES AND GOVERNANCE
Topics: The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com etc.
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
or
figure4etc3.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
TheServiceWeb 6 months ago
Creationism refuted:
To say that God created himself is the same as the world on the back of a turtle arguement; then what is the turtle on? It's funny how they'll say they don't believe in evolution because they can't see how something can come from nothing, (not what evolution says) yet they believe God created himself/ is eternal= came from nothing. By that logic, who's to say the universe didn't create itself? That perhaps every life in existense is one of many brain cells that form a "god"?
blackkakari 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@blackkakari Baruch Spinoza and Albert Einstein — considered God to be essentially the sum total of the physical laws which describe the universe."An atheist has to know a lot more than I know. An atheist is someone who knows there is no god. By some definitions atheism is very stupid seeing as the idea of a creator of the universe is as difficult to prove or disprove .
1billion1deaths1 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
still not a fact.
1billion1deaths1 6 months ago
do u know how long it would take for erosion , like rain and rivers to wash away everything above seal level? 14 million years, if the earth were one billion years old, our continents would have eroded away some 70 times. total amount of sediment flowing into the ocean is 2.5 billion tons every year. There are 30.4 million cubic miles of continental crust above sea level having a mass of 383 million tons. 383 million billion tons+27.5billion tons per year = 14 million years.
1billion1deaths1 6 months ago
do u know how long it would take for erosion , like rain and rivers to wash away everything above seal level? 14 million years, if the earth were one billion years old, our continents would have eroded away some 70 times. total amount of sediment flowing into the ocean is 2.5 billion tons every year. There are 30.4 million cubic miles of continental crust above sea level having a mass of 383 million tons. 383 million billion tons+27.5billion tons per year = 14 million years.
1billion1deaths1 7 months ago
@1billion1deaths1 you are ignoring continental uplift and erosion-retardant agents such as plants.
Helge129 6 months ago
@Helge129 its still not enough, and its not 100% proof that will happen, good theorys though
1billion1deaths1 6 months ago
@1billion1deaths1 Yeah, like you're going to know it better than every geologist on the Planet, Riiight.
Helge129 6 months ago
@Helge129 they would tell u its all theory work.
1billion1deaths1 6 months ago
@1billion1deaths1 ITT: People not knowing that a theory is.
A scientific theory is the highest form of "proved" you can get in science.
Helge129 6 months ago
@Helge129 highest form of a theory, highest making of a guess, not to be confused with factuality.
1billion1deaths1 6 months ago
@1billion1deaths1 No. A scientific theory is far superior to a fact. A theory is made of facts, laws, and observations.
Helge129 6 months ago
@Helge129 u mean made up of facts, laws and observation,
its still made up, not fact.
1billion1deaths1 6 months ago
@1billion1deaths1 No, I mean made of, not made up of.
Helge129 6 months ago
@1billion1deaths1
in common vernacular: glory hole, a place a male can receive sexual gratification
in mining vernacular: glory hole, a naturally occurring well at the base of a waterfall where precious metals collect in a rich vein.
Just becuase a word is the same doesn't meen the meaning is the same. A scientific theory is a testable and observable explination that takes a full or best accounting for all the facts. In common vernacular it means a guess.
LucianUramu 6 months ago
@LucianUramu still theory! even if its all suger coated ..still theory!
but watever lets u sleep atnight i guess.
1billion1deaths1 6 months ago
@1billion1deaths1
god damn you are fucking stupid... just keep tying yourself to the bed since gravity is only a theory.
LucianUramu 6 months ago
@LucianUramu come back wen u have facts, not theorys, mystical theorys hahaha
1billion1deaths1 6 months ago
@1billion1deaths1 A scientific theory comprises a collection of concepts, including abstractions of observable phenomena expressed as quantifiable properties, with rules (called scientific laws) that express relationships between observations of such concepts. A scientific theory is constructed to conform to available empirical data about such observations, and is put forth as a principle or body of principles for explaining a class of phenomena. Look up "empirical" and even you can get this.
ndrthrdr1 6 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 still no fact, no 100% accurate awnser, Can u grasp on that?
1billion1deaths1 6 months ago
@1billion1deaths1 Evolution is a theory the way gravity is a theory or Germ Theory, or atoms. The word "theory" is not the same in a scientific context.
SecretAgent194 6 months ago
@SecretAgent194 they are many theorys, diffrent type of theorys, I have my own theorys... doesnt make every theory a Fact..otherwise we wouldnt be having this convo , its that simple, Facts are things we can phisically observe and visually state its true.. not predict or assumed well studied but still assumpt,,if it was 100% accurate it would be a fact but guess wat..its not.
1billion1deaths1 6 months ago
@1billion1deaths1 Oh my gumby !! RU serious??
MrJohnnyrace 6 months ago
@MrJohnnyrace wat did u actually think evolution theory had absolute 100% proof? "theory"
1billion1deaths1 6 months ago
@1billion1deaths1 I look at the facts. The transitional fossils and the DNA science. If you think theres a creator, your retarded.
MrJohnnyrace 6 months ago
@MrJohnnyrace Baruch Spinoza and Albert Einstein — considered God to be essentially the sum total of the physical laws which describe the universe."An atheist has to know a lot more than I know. An atheist is someone who knows there is no god. By some definitions atheism is very stupid seeing as the idea of a creator of the universe is as difficult to prove or disprove .
1billion1deaths1 6 months ago
@1billion1deaths1 Your quoting pre DNA. That says it all.
MrJohnnyrace 6 months ago
@MrJohnnyrace Dna proves intelligent design.
1billion1deaths1 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@1billion1deaths1 You really are retarded.
MrJohnnyrace 6 months ago
@LucianUramu FTW!
ndrthrdr1 6 months ago
Sorry Mr Dawkins but the evidence for a species radically changing its protein fold & morphing into another species is non evident. Many living fossils going to 525MYO (Rhabdopleura) & a plethora of "stasis in the fossil record" quotes from paleontologist tell us you sly pseudo intellectual liberal philosophers have pulled a fast one on slow minds.
The Altenberg 16 understand random copying errors & selection (the only mechanisms an atheist has) will never produce what is claimed.
TEACH IT.
toobsucker 7 months ago
@toobsucker Learn the theory or fuck off. I know more than you and I am 16 years old.
Very small changes happen at a time. A species does change from one to another in one go. Very small changes happen.
So please, do not use this argument again as you are talking out your arsehole.
Oh, I forgot, you will use it again because "LALALALALALA".
oliethefolie 7 months ago
@oliethefolie
Within 10 years evolution will be falsified. mark it down.
toobsucker 7 months ago
@toobsucker Yeah, what a copout you dishonest bastard. "I can't think of an argument so you know, there WILL be one". I'm not gunna' take your word for it and neither will anyone else with more than 6 brain cells.
oliethefolie 7 months ago
@oliethefolie
You have no idea every prediction evolution has made has been falsified.
toobsucker 7 months ago
@toobsucker *cough* bullshit *cough*
The similarities in DNA was predicted by evolution. The fossil record was predicted by evolution.
Don't you dare bring up transitional forms because every fossil is a transitional form.
Yes. You just got pwned by a 16 year old motha' fucka'!
oliethefolie 7 months ago
@oliethefolie
"Yes. You just got pwned by a 16 year old"
Right. You win. that was amazing how you proved evolution in two lines of text. Im in awe of your expertise
toobsucker 7 months ago
@toobsucker I was explaining how what you said is bullshit. I don't have a vast knowledge of evolution but I clearly know a damn sight more than you do.
oliethefolie 7 months ago
Christianity Vs. Shinto and Buddhism. Teach the controversy!
artgoat 9 months ago
Has anyone here ever seen the movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed? If not then I think it would interest anyone that is interested in science.
BDAWG1040 9 months ago
Humanity's "common sense" often doesn't apply to many things in the universe. Our "common sense" develops through our upbringing and experiences which are really limited when you consider the scope of the universe.
nagnirahs1 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There is no scientific evidence to support Darwin Evolution - Darwin Evolution is purely a myth.
FindingTruthToday 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There is no scientific evidence to support Darwin Evolution - Darwin Evolution is purely a myth.
FindingTruthToday 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There is no scientific evidence to support Darwin Evolution - it is purely a myth.
FindingTruthToday 9 months ago
Atheists: Rationalize your faith that life, consciousness, the universe were created without intent, by presenting an example of uniqueness unintentionally coming into being.
onefodderunit 9 months ago
@onefodderunit
"an example of uniqueness unintentionally coming into being. "
You. But whether you're unique or not is arguable. /jk
XineohpEmalf 9 months ago
@XineohpEmalf
Pregnancy is a result of an intentional action. That's the closest you can come rationalizing your Atheist faith?
onefodderunit 9 months ago
@onefodderunit
Stop being obnoxious and let people (dis)believe what they want, it hardly matters to you. A youtube comment is not going to change people's minds about something that they feel deeply about, ESPECIALLY religion.
Some people try to live moral lives, and ultimately that matters more than how the universe was created or how life was formed.
TL;DR - Back the fuck up.
'let he who is without sin cast the first stone'
MikeGasm 9 months ago
@MikeGasm commands "Stop being obnoxious"
Are you an Atheist, wimp? If you need to rationalize the Atheist faith that life and the universe were created without intent, present an example of oximoronic Unintentional Creationism.
onefodderunit 9 months ago
@onefodderunit
Personally, I'm with MikeGasm but out of curiosity, how exactly would you define "oximoronic Unintentional Creatonism"?
nagnirahs1 9 months ago
@nagnirahs1
If you believe the universe and life came to be without intent, then you have faith in Unintentional Creationism.
onefodderunit 9 months ago
@onefodderunit
No. I'm a Hellenistic Polytheist
Now what?
MikeGasm 9 months ago
@MikeGasm
You have irrational faith in the mythical as do Atheists who believe in creation without intent.
onefodderunit 9 months ago
@onefodderunit so why is your religion less mythical and more rational than mine?
MikeGasm 9 months ago
@MikeGasm
I'm not religious. My faith is in commonsense. Atheists have abandoned commonsense for faith in oxymoronic Unintentional Creationism.
onefodderunit 9 months ago
@onefodderunit 'Faith' is a heavily religious word.
Anyway, we're still waiting to hear your version of the creation story and how it's more right than any of the other religious creation stories
MikeGasm 9 months ago
@MikeGasm
I don't like to pretend to know how the universe and life were created. You said you are religious, so why the sensitivity about the word faith? Faith means confidence or trust. That's the definition. Atheism is faith in the irrational. That life and the universe are unintended. Unintentional Creationism is oxymoronic and believing that molecules of RNA acid grew into consciousness is idiotic.
onefodderunit 9 months ago
@onefodderunit There's no sensitivity, but seeing as it has /heavily/ religious connotations I wondered why you used it.
You say you don't 'like to pretend to know how the universe or life was created' yet you know that athiests are, and I am, wrong? That doesn't make sense - how do you know? It seems like you're sitting on the fence and hurling abuse onto both sides
You're heavily opinionated on something that you don't seem to have an opinion about.
Also, Ribose Nucleic Acid acid - really?
MikeGasm 9 months ago
@MikeGasm
Yes, Atheists have faith that RNA, an acid, grew or 'evolved' into consciousness. This is irrational. Not based on observation or understanding of nature.
What rationale compels you to have faith in gods of ancient Greece?
onefodderunit 9 months ago
@onefodderunit I know what RNA is, I was referencing the department of redundancy department.
What rationale compels you to ignore everything I wrote but the last sentence?
MikeGasm 9 months ago
@onefodderunit
You seem to revel in redundancy. Once again: I know the universe and life were created by intent rather than by accident, because intent is creative, and accidents are destructive. I did not say your polytheism is wrong, I only asked for the rationale which compels you to worship ancient Greek gods.
onefodderunit 9 months ago
@onefodderunit
there doesn't have to be a rationale, just faith. While there is a reason, I'm certainly not going to explain it to you and certainly not in 500 characters.
While I might agree that in some people's eyes, atheism doesn't add up, they're free to think whatever they want.
And you kinda did say it was wrong - 'irrational faith in the mythical'.
My point still stands though, in that unless you /absolutely know/ how the universe was created, you cannot rule /anything/ out.
MikeGasm 9 months ago
@MikeGasm
You choose not to attempt to rationalize your polytheism. That's understandable.
Yes, Atheists are free to have faith in the absurd belief that the universe and life are accidental rather than intentional creations, and that their mothers are pointless primates with no soul.
onefodderunit 9 months ago
@onefodderunit You can't rationalize your monotheism anymore than MikeGasm can rationalize his polytheism. All religions are pretty much the same - they all believe in some magical, almighty, invisible person (or people) that, for some reason, got lonely and decided to create an entire universe out of nothing for their entertainment, or some reason unbeknown to us. Religion was mainly created out of people's immense fear of death and from simple fear in general.
tecitup 9 months ago
@tecitup
I'm not religious and commonsense isn't a rationalization. Creativity requires intent. There's no evidence that the universe and life were each created unintentionally. There are only irrational suppositions, Big Bang and Aniogenesis, which attempt to validate these Athestic beliefs.
Atheists place matter before mind and coincidence before intelligence. It's Orthodox Materialism.
Set beliefs in Big Bang and Abiogenesis to explain the origin of the universe and life defines religion.
onefodderunit 9 months ago
@onefodderunit We see evolution in the many different evidences found out there, including genetics, fossil records, bacterial resistance, etc... We don't need faith to believe in it. We just need to observe it.
Trying to find some super-natural explanation for something that's observable and largely explainable , requires not only faith, but the ability to shut down the rational mind, logic and knowledge.
iamnicompoop 8 months ago
@iamnicompoop
Yes, evolution can be seen in consciousness. Wisdom evolves except in those who believe they already know.
Animals don't gradually change species. New species always appear abruptly. There is no continuous fossil trail linking two species.
Dawkins is a Darwinist. So were the Bolsheviks. It's an outdated belief.
Evidence that the universe and life were created by intent rather than by accident is in the fact that intent creates, and accidents destroy.
Mind before matter.
onefodderunit 8 months ago
@onefodderunit
"Animals don't gradually change species. New species always appear abruptly. "
Yes, they do. There are plenty of fossil records of animals to support that. For example, there is a complete set of dinosaur-to-bird transitional fossils with no morphological "gaps" cataloged. There are also complete series of fossils for the reptile-mammal intermediates as well. Not to mention the more recent ape-to-human records ranging from Sahelanthropus tchadensis all the way to us.
iamnicompoop 8 months ago
@iamnicompoop
There is not a continuous fossil trail linking two different species. What is the specific source for your claim that there is a continuous fossil trail linking apes to humans, Atheist?
onefodderunit 8 months ago
@onefodderunit
Dinossaurs-to-birds
Eoraptor, Herrerasaurus, Ceratosaurus, Allosaurus, Compsognathus, Sinosauropteryx, Protarchaeopteryx, Caudipteryx, Velociraptor, Sinovenator, Beipiaosaurus, Sinornithosaurus, Microraptor, Archaeopteryx, Rahonavis, Confuciusornis, Sinornis, Patagopteryx, Hesperornis, Apsaravis, Ichthyornis, and Columba
Google each of these species.
iamnicompoop 8 months ago
@onefodderunit
Reptiles-to-mammals
Paleothyris, Protoclepsydrops haplous, Clepsydrops, Archaeothyris, Varanops, Haptodus, Dimetrodon,Biarmosuchia,Procynosuchus, Dvinia,Thrinaxodon,Cynognathus, Diademodon ,Probelesodon, Probainognathus, Exaeretodon, Oligokyphus, Kayentatherium, Pachygenelus, Diarthrognathus, Adelobasileus, Sinoconodon,Kuehneotherium, Eozostrodon, Morganucodon, Peramus, Endotherium,Kielantherium,Aegialodon,Steropodon galmani,Vincelestes neuquenianus,Pariadens kirklandi
iamnicompoop 8 months ago
@iamnicompoop
Pick two species which you claim have a "complete series of fossils' linking them, and list the source which you allege substantiates the claim.
onefodderunit 8 months ago
@onefodderunit I just listed a series of fossils found that transition between especies. If you google them, you'll not only be able to see their pictures, but also find research papers on them.
I have already wasted too much of my time discussing this with you.
The simple fact is this: You think there should be a reason for your existence and life, therefore , you want to shape reality in a way it will make sense to you. If that means denying the work of 100 thousand scientists, so be it.
iamnicompoop 8 months ago
@iamnicompoop
Your pointless copy/paste demonstration affirms your knowledge that there is no continuous fossil trail linking two species and that you are a commonly dishonest Atheist. Darwinist Bolsheviks aren't remembered for integrity, either.
Isn't it your Atheist belief that life and the universe were each created without intent and that your mother is a soulless, pointless primate?
That's how Dawkins rates her.
onefodderunit 8 months ago
@onefodderunit
One thing you should understand about atheists, is that the only thing we have in common is that we don't believe in a creator. We have no similar patterns of behavior when it comes from anything else. We don't subscribe to the same political affiliations. We don't share the same views on life, morality, education, art, sports or anything else.
PS: By continuing to bring up Bolsheviks in these discussions, the only thing you're proving, is that you're not entirely sane.
iamnicompoop 8 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@iamnicompoop
Darwin was mandated by Bolsheviks in Soviet schools. It is dispiriting and dehumanizing. Karl Marx approved of Darwin because it suited his "material life" ideals. Atheism is Orthodox Materialism. It places matter before mind.
Where is the "complete series of fossils"? You said you could link apes to humans. You think you can get away with such sophomoric lies? What an Atheist.
onefodderunit 8 months ago
@iamnicompoop
Scientific evidence that creativity requires intent is endless. There's no evidence to support the belief that the universe and life were each created without intent. Unintentional Creationism is anti-science.
onefodderunit 8 months ago
@onefodderunit
no because there was a got a super intelligent being that was ah well omnipotent that came to existance out of nothing. and then it thought he lets not to create another omnipotent being. no.. I god will create an complex universe for the sole purpose of one planet that contained some primitive primates that were arrogant enough to think this omnipotent being for witch there was no prove to be on there side.
don't say something ridiculous.
weswes666 7 months ago
@weswes666
You are an anti-Christ? How comical.
There is no scientific evidence supporting the Atheist beliefs that either the universe or life were created by accident. Accidents are a destructive force. Intent is creative.
What do you believe is the purpose of consciousness, Atheist?
onefodderunit 7 months ago
@onefodderunit that's retarded. seek help.
cruciphile 8 months ago
@onefodderunit
"Dawkins is a Darwinist. So were the Bolsheviks. It's an outdated belief."
Darwin set the framework for evolutionary science. This theory has been greatly revised and improved upon, for 150 years. No scientist has ever been able to find an contraditory evidence against it. And not for the lack of trying.
As to the Bolsheviks comparison...seriously? Comparing a political movement ideology with a scientific theory is just ridiculous.
iamnicompoop 8 months ago
@iamnicompoop
Bolsheviks forced dehumanizing, dispiriting Darwin on schoolchildren while they starved and slaughtered tens of millions of civilians, mainly Christian.
Atheists need Darwin.
Animals don't gradually change species. Radiation affects embryonic mutation. Note the Cambrian explosion and sudden appearance of wide variety of new species during the period. New species appear abruptly. Always. Gradual change is an outdated myth for the unsophisticated. Such as Bolsheviks.
onefodderunit 8 months ago
@onefodderunit
"Bolsheviks forced dehumanizing, dispiriting Darwin on schoolchildren while they starved and slaughtered tens of millions of civilians, mainly Christian."
The study of science, doesn't dehumanize anyone. Would they be dehumanized for learning germ theory? Astronomy? Chemistry?
If they forced children to learn how to play the violin, at gun point, would it make violin an evil instrument?
I repeat , the communist party's behavior has nothing to do with any scientific theory
iamnicompoop 8 months ago
@iamnicompoop wrote: "There are also complete series of fossils . . . Not to mention the more recent ape-to-human records . . . . all the way to us."
That is a false statement, Atheist. Do you believe that the universe and life were both created without intent?
onefodderunit 8 months ago
Comment removed
MikeGasm 9 months ago
DARWIN WAS RIGHT! ANYONE WHO THINKS DIFFERENT WAS BRAINWASHED AT A YOUNG AGE! GOD DID NOT CREATE MAN,MAN CREATED GOD!
kodiak1966 10 months ago
BTW the concept of "free thinker" is an oxymoron. Every thought has a history, and that history makes you dependent...of course.
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
intelligent design is observable. Each choice you make, based on information, has an effect. There is no intelligent design vs evolution. Evolution is exclusively about a change in frequency of alleles within a gene pool from one generation to the next.. Intelligent design is about volitional effects which can affect frequency of alleles within a gene pool from generation to the next.
se7ensnakes 11 months ago
@se7ensnakes that sounds a lot like religious backtracking. When science explains something, religion says "well, god made it that way" It adds nothing to the discussion. Volitional effects of allele frequency is a fancy way of describing domestic breeding.
jns124able 10 months ago
@jns124able Idid not know that the bible discuss Autopoiesis? Could you show me the chapter? Am sorry for my ignorance, being an atheist i dont bother reading the bible at all.
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
@se7ensnakes autopoiesis? As in creating itself? Couple things...if you are going to make any kind of intelligent remarks in a debate about a religion...you absolutely SHOULD read the bible. It's "being informed".
As an atheist MYSELF, I find your ignorance a bit offensive...but my offense nor you ignorance can be helped I suppose...
jns124able 10 months ago
@jns124able
You seem to have a problem with religion. I dont care about religion either for or against. If you want to debate religion there are a variety of other places to post. I am discussing the theory of intelligent design.
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
@se7ensnakes Actually, intelligent design is steeped in religion. How are you managing to isolate the two and carry on a meaningful debate about it? Thats seems rather simplstic..
jns124able 10 months ago
@jns124able
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.
The one and only irrefutable intelligence that we are certain of is animal intelligence. Not simply intelligent choices that animals make but also the possibility that the thought process affect brain physiology (directed neural plasticity).
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
@se7ensnakes There's no such thing as the "theory of intelligent design".
ThePsychoReturns 10 months ago
@ThePsychoReturns
The intelligent design theory may well be greatest thing coming in this century. A human has certain elements which have not been fully examine. I believe that there are energies in the human body which affect evolution volitionally. While I fully realize that the Christian fundamentalist have hijack the theory, I am also aware that anti-religious groups want to stop any research into the matter.
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
@se7ensnakes No, it isn't. It's another attempt by the religious to insert their religion into public schools.
What "elements"? Do you have evidence of these "energies"?
There is no research that can be done on creationism, because it invokes the supernatural. It's just a waste of time.
ThePsychoReturns 10 months ago
@ThePsychoReturns
Yes there is great evidence for these energies, however, your next sentence shows me that i will be wasting my time trying to explain: There is no research that can be done on creationism. Who is talking about creationism?
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
@se7ensnakes You don't have any evidence.
Creationism and intelligent design is the same thing, whatever it's followers like to claim.
ThePsychoReturns 10 months ago
@ThePsychoReturns
There is no evidence because you first have to learn what to look for. And no creationism is not intelligent design.
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
@se7ensnakes There's no evidence, period. Otherwise you could publish it in a scientific journal so your claims would be easy to verify.
Yes, it is. Intelligent design is creationism in a cheap tuxedo.
ThePsychoReturns 10 months ago
@ThePsychoReturns
you are so blind for your hatred of religion that you wont be able to see any evidence, or what i am talking about. You are the polar opposite of the christian fundamentalist.
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
@se7ensnakes You are projecting your own flaws onto me.
You won't present any evidence because you don't have any.
ThePsychoReturns 10 months ago
@ThePsychoReturns
Presenting evidence about Intelligent design theory to you would be like presenting evolutionary evidence to a fundamentalist Christian. No difference both you and the fundy are closed minded.
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
@se7ensnakes There's a big difference. The difference is that I have evidence to present. You don't.
ThePsychoReturns 10 months ago
@ThePsychoReturns You have evidence for natural selection, but you have no evidence that that is the one and only means which speciation occurs. What more you have no evidence that disproves that the individual organism is not taking INTENTIONAL steps to alter his being. I believe you may not even understand what i just wrote.
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
@se7ensnakes Speciation is when a new species evolves from an existing one. It is natural selection by definition.
You got that right. What you wrote was complete nonsense.
ThePsychoReturns 10 months ago
@ThePsychoReturns
Now you are creating your own definition...There is no specifity as to what speciation is.
Speciation: The process in which new genetically distinct species evolve usually as a result of genetic isolation from the main population.
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
@se7ensnakes That's basically what I said. Either way, speciation is a pretty sure indication that evolution is occurring.
ThePsychoReturns 10 months ago
@ThePsychoReturns
Hmmmmmm....I wonder. Do you have a reading deficit? Evolution is obviously happening, the question is .....WHAT ARE THE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO IT!
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
@se7ensnakes Mutations and environmental stresses.
ThePsychoReturns 10 months ago
@se7ensnakes So you have. Evidence vs. no evidence... and you go with the no evidence, seems logical...
If there are 2 roads in a stormy night, and on the radio you heard them saying the "We have no idea what state the eastern road is in, but we have reports from people that the western road is free from flooding." Would you go with the eastern road?
Corqable 10 months ago
@Corqable Evidence of what? Lets see if you read the previous post.
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@se7ensnakes Let's see if you can figure it out for yourself.... I speak of evidence, what can I possibly mean?
Corqable 10 months ago
@se7ensnakes I speak of evidence, whatever could I mean? If anyone wants to make other people believe what they themself believe, has to show something that indicates this to be true. So far I have not seen anything that's based on more than personal belief or personal opinion. I base all my beliefs in evidence. I let the evidence point me towards the truth. I don't point the evidence towards whatever truth I wan't it to point.
Corqable 10 months ago
@jns124able
or a thought's affect on any change in the frequency of alleles within a gene pool from one generation to the next. The fact that religions hijack the intelligent design theory is immaterial. I am only interested in facts.
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
We should be looking for evidence how the mind molds the individual.
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
@se7ensnakes I think i see what youre talking about...what you are actually talking about then is not Intelligent Design. I mean, you can call it that...but ID holds a very different meaning in our culture. You are going to run into all sorts of misguided debates trying to make a case for human influence and choice in affecting genetic content...that is not what ID is known as. Would be a good discussion with the wrong terminology..
jns124able 10 months ago
Evolution was called "Mohammedan theory of evolution" by western scientists in Darwin's time. Evolution is an Islamic theory, NOT an atheist theory. I have proved that beyond any doubt with a historical document from Darwin's time. watch my video: Richard Dawkins Exposed - Evolution Proves God.
/watch?v=Ugu3cZN-3jU
helasmoh 11 months ago
@helasmoh i know of this in fact the islamic knowledge of this is from your robery of the greek scientific knowledge plus that doesnt prove god so please fuck off no evidence is what you have keep that poison faith away from people of good sense okay.
312haku 11 months ago
@312haku
I presented public historical documents by non-Muslim scientists and proved that evolution was an Islamic theory long before Darwin, it was called "Mohammedan Theory of Evolution". If you have anything to support your claim then present it instead of making stupid of yourself with such manners.
helasmoh 11 months ago
@helasmoh please present proof also yes it was a theory of yours lol,but you retards said fucking allh makes it all happen which is the fatal non scientific flaw plus google it it came from greece like all other science you had in your islamic empire read a history book.
312haku 11 months ago
@helasmoh lol what the fuck? So, what about the Quran stating that the entirety of humans was from a man called adam and a piece of his rib Eve? Lmao. Oh man Islamic apologists are the best. Especially when they try to reconcile their 1400 year old fantasy book to modern science. It gives me a good laugh.
AFGknight 11 months ago
@AFGknight
You are confusing the Quran with the Bible, there is no such thing as Eve created from Adam's rib. Watch the video I made about evolution and click on the attached link. The theory of evolution was called "Mohammedan Theory of Evolution" by non-Muslim scientists in Darwin's time, evolution is a theistic theory, your atheism strongest foundation is destroyed, and that is the real LOL.
helasmoh 11 months ago
@helasmoh Oh man your utter ignorance and lack of knowledge on this subject is staggering. Who in the fuck ever claimed the theory of evolution to be Atheistic? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds? It is like me saying the theory of relativity is a Jewish theory. The theory of evolution is a scientific theory regardless of it being "theistic" or "atheistic". It has nothing to with God, nor does it disprove or prove God. Go read a fucking book, and make sure it isnt 1400 years old
AFGknight 11 months ago
@AFGknight
I think there is no need for conversation when you have such stupid manners, learn some then we can talk.
helasmoh 11 months ago
@helasmoh Yes I agree. Someone like you doesnt deserve to be conversed with. You are a disgrace to your own religion. You try to speak for Allah and manipulate the Quran to your own liking and then you have the nerve to preach the religion. I don't agree with the Quran, nor do I like it but I respect it as it is. You need to learn some of that, because I know many Muslims would be angry to see their religion manipulated by people trying to save face like yourself
AFGknight 11 months ago
@helasmoh Lol. You believe that evolution is compatible with Islam? Fail. The Quran specifically states that humans in its entirety came from an Adam and an Eve. No credible Muslim or Islamic scholar puts evolution as compatible with Islam. What an ignorant idiot, doesn't even know about his own religion and he is here preaching.
AFGknight 11 months ago
@helasmoh wow...that is stupid. Perhaps you are not, but your post certainly screams it...
explain, if you will, how Darwin's Theory of evolution by Natural Selection is a theistic one...
jns124able 10 months ago
@jns124able
Don't believe me and call me whatever you want but evolution in Darwin's time used to be called "Mohammedan Theory of Evolution" by western scientists. In my video (Richard Dawkins Exposed - Evolution Proves God) I presented two public documents, one is 400 years before Darwin and the other one is from Darwin's contemporary, Sir William Draper. Both documents are available online to prove my claim. Please watch the video.
/watch?v=Ugu3cZN-3jU
helasmoh 10 months ago
@helasmoh Rather than peddle your videos...how about rising to the challenge to simply explain it in a debate rather than use it as a convenient "go to" reference. Lets assume you are right for giggle's sake: where is the theism in Darwin's Book "On the Origin of Species"? Have you read this book? Might you send me to the passages in his book that indicate it is theistic? Or are u actually saying someone elses theory on evolution was theistic?
jns124able 10 months ago
@helasmoh
I think you are thinking of abiogenesis. not evolution. Evolution is simply changes that inhertiable.
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
Who says there's controversy?
EddieTheFishReturns 11 months ago
@EddieTheFishReturns Intelligent Design advocates.
BigLundi 11 months ago
@BigLundi: Oh, they wish. Drama queens!
EddieTheFishReturns 11 months ago
There seems to be a lot of people who are dogging Dawkins on this video. If you haven't read his books I would encourage you to do so. I know many people who have criticized Dawkins and normally they are quite scathing in their attacks. However none of the many people I know that criticize him have ever read any of his books. I think that people should atleast give him a chance before they say what they say. Just my two cents though
Sattelight897 11 months ago