Eh, religion needs to be poked at. It's fucking foolish nonsense. Sure, you're allowed to believe, just as I'm allowed to say that religious beliefs are for idiots that don't know how to ask for evidence before believing what they're told.
@MyChallengeChannel Yes you atheists are just massive intellects... if anyone doesn't think for themselves it's the majority of atheists who just refer to scientific theories they've never even researched before to explain their own existence, and what they can't respond to they say "we'll figure out in the future", that's inquisitive. Most the scientists who's theories you use to explain the lack of God were religious themselves i.e., einstein.
"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it." -- Albert Einstein.
I'll take "deep as a puddle" over "wrong as a creationist" any day.
@IzaFaqat How much of the Bible have you "reasearched"? Have you ever seen a talking snake? Have you ever asked yourself how Noah found two of every land animal on Earth, not to mention built a boat big enough to hold them all? And what did the carnivores eat? Evolution can be researched by looking at the real world. If you want more, there are only about 7,000 books on the subject and museums full of fossils.
@Mozart1220 how is insulting atheists a move causing you to believe im pro-christian? again this is demonstrated as i said four months ago the shallow mindset of atheists. i dont mock even atheism, sure its easy to think there's not a god but the ATTITUDE of so many atheists (more so the ones who sit on their asses all day) that causes you to look like major dicks. in fact who the fuck says evolution is anti-theology, no religion specifies it, the pope is even for evolution. wake up ffs.
@IzaFaqat First, you strated theinsults, so I gave back, and second, I have a job. Two of them in fact. It's easy to "think" there's not a God because as long as humans have been alive there has not been one shred of actual observable measureable evidence of one existing. The question is, in this day and age, how can one still think there IS a "god" of any kind? You are the one namecalling, so who "looks like a dick"?
@Mozart1220 idc if you have a job? there's never been empirical evidence of god, yet people have always believed in one, what makes us different now than 1000 years ago? we think we know abt the universe but we simple dont i mean they just discovered particles that can travel faster than light, if thats true it rewrites physics. if we can scientifically prove god exists its proof he doesnt exist because then he is recreatable. hence, it's suppose to be, what? FAITH. whys tht concept so hard?
@IzaFaqat Little kids have always believed in santa Clause too. Why? Because someone told them too they grow past it. I just wanted to know if you knew the difference between what you WANT to be real, and what IS real. You do. God isn't REAL.
@Mozart1220 Wrong, no one ever believed in Santa maturely, it was always known to be a tradition. Religion is deeper because it is an "alternate" view to the universe. It has laws, and methodologies, i mean in science, if you explain the universe w/ the big bang one can always say well what was before than, and that and that infinity, neither religion or science empirically explains the universe, by nature of current science it's still an impossibility.
@Mozart1220 and just another point, there have been many "agnostic/atheist" intellects who challenged the concept of religion and god, both classical and modern, but the difference between the mainstream atheist and them, is they put a lot of deep thought into it, and more times than not, didn't rule out the existence of god; but kids these days who refer to these same intellects are atheist because of their upbringing,a nonreligious one and then a few comedians joke abt god n bam theyre atheist
@Mozart1220 Believing nothing created everything, and believe God created everything, is basically the same leap of faith. Atheists try to say oh well the big bang created everything, but FFS.. what about before that? who created the atmosphere for the big bang? it's an infinite problem. both beliefs theistic and atheistic have still not even came CLOSE to explaining how all this shit came from nothing. so you're just as delusional as a theist i guess.
@IzaFaqat Scientists do not believe "nothing created everything", they just haven't figured that part out yet. That's the beauty of science. Learning is ongoing, as opposed to religion which supposes it already knows everything we need to know. Something impossible? Never fear! God can fo anything he wants. And with science, there is no "leap of faith" since there is EVIDENCE for all to see. Again, not so with religion.
@Mozart1220 In itself it defies all our our scienfitic laws that something came from something so science as we know it today CANNOT explain it. It defies every bit of logic. Get a glass box, take everything out, even oxygen, and then create something in it. Impossible. So when theists look at this they laugh just as much as you laugh at them, BOTH are illogical. And besides i guarantee in 50 years half the theories u follow abt the universe will be obsolete. My point is who are u to insult any1
@IzaFaqat So how did "God" create everythingout of "nothing"? Please. Just because scinece hasn't provided ALL the answers does not mean the ones they HAVE found are wrong. And the fact that science EVOLVES only shows it's the better choice than religion, which assumes it already has all the answers and never changes. My point is, it's not insulting to suggest religion is obsolete right now, and that denying the truth helps no one.
@Mozart1220 No one SAID the ones they found are wrong, most I have NO problem with nor do they contradict religion, im saying the big bang isn't a replacement for god nor does it answer the question where everything came from. that is still unanswered. and if this universe can come from nothing why cant god come from nothing? if we can scientifically explain god however, thats proof god doesn't exist. hes not suppose to be explainable or recreatable. he is above science. obviously.
@IzaFaqat No one said anything came from "nothing". Obviously you have foound a misguided cliche to grab onto like a dog with a rag. There is EVIDENCE for the "Big bang". (expanding universe, radiation "echos"), but NONE for any "supreme being" of ANY KIND. Is Bigfoot "above science"? I ask because there is actually more evidence for the existance of Sasquatch (even though it's been admitted to have been faked) than for "God". Are Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny "above science"?
@Mozart1220 holy shit, this must be hurting your brain. once again i said no one said the scientific theories present today ARE WRONG, i believe the big bang happened but the big BANG IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR GOD OR AN EXPLANATION FOR WHERE THE UNIVERSE CAME FROM, because what was BEFORE the big bang and before that and before that, times infinity. inevitably you will have to come to a point where u say SOMETHING CAME FROM NOTHING. way beyond the big bang.
@IzaFaqat Holy shit this must be hurting YOUR brain! I NEVER SAID THE BIG BANG WAS A SUBSTITUTE FOR GOD. I SAID THERE IS NO GOD. Period. Just because we don't have all the answers YET, it does not even begin to suggest that THERE MUST BE A SUPREME BEING. The very idea of creation suggests "something from nothing" unless you want to explain where "god" came from. Irt stil comes down to "what came before?" And I choose to follw that which provides observable, measurable evidence, not myth.
@Mozart1220 see when you do what i did, it doens't work because i actually make sense. you said there's no evidence for god but there is for the big bang. but thats equating them (i.e., if big bang happened god is nonexistant) its untrue. see at some point in science you'd have to simply say the universe came from nothing, cuz but logic shit just cant be here. by the same token we say god came from nothing, kinda funny being that if the universe can be from nothing (making us) why cant god?
@IzaFaqat Yes, there is evidence for the big bang, but none for God. I never said the Big Bang proves there is no God. I said there is evidence for one, and none for the other. NO one EVER said the universe came from "nothing". Science just hasn't gotten that far back yet. Why you keep insisting that science claims the universe came from nothing is a mystery greater than the actual topic.
@Mozart1220 Of course no one would claim that, but it's the only logical solution. Because no matter what explanation given you can always say, what about before that; infinitely, and at one point you'll have to pack it in and admit at one point there was nothing. And we can't really study beyond the big bang because the BB created the universe AS WE KNOW IT, whatever was before it doesn't exist. Point is, so illogic is found in the pure-science folk and the religious folk, no diff whatsoever
@IzaFaqat At one point we couldn't concieve of the Big bang, because we didn't have pwerful enough telescopes, and no one knew about "red shift" that told us the universe was expanding. Just because we don't know how to detect whet was before the Big Bang right now does not mean we never will. And it's no reason to assume it must be a "god" of any kind. It doesn't mean it isn't, but so far there is no evidence of such.
@Mozart1220 the big bang theory wouldnt be inconceivable even if it hadn't been supported by strong evidence, but something coming from nothing is. like i said at one point you'll have to go back far enough to say this all came from nothing, its impossible according to our modern science.
@IzaFaqat I'm still wondering where you got this obsession with "something from NOTHING, which has never been claimed. No one knows where the matter and energy in the Big Bang came from, but it's a pretty safe bet it came from somewhere (or some TIME which is an interesting hypothosis) Other dimentions have even been discussed. But no one to my knowledge says it came from "nothing'. Maybe you should drop that argument now.
@Mozart1220 ok you still haven't grasped it i notice. lets say we start at the big bang then go to theory B that explains how the big bang came to be, then theory C that explains how theory B came to be and theory D which explains how theory C came to be. AT ONE POINT this will INEVITABLY reach a point where SOMETHING CAME FROM NOTHING. otherwise you're claiming SOMETHING was ALWAYS here. this is basic logic.
@IzaFaqat Ok, you are still not graspnig that NO ONE but you said ANYTHNG about things comng from nothing no matter how far back you go. Remember I mentioned TIME and other DIMENTIONS? You are arguing a nonsensical idea into circles of your own making. Since you can't stop obsessing on that idea, I'm finished.
"t I happen to be a religious man. I believe in God, I pray daily, and if I’ve ever gotten any direct instructions from my maker, they were that I’ll be judged by whether I tried to help other people, or hurt them. Also, that true belief should not be worn like a policeman’s club, nor used like one. And, finally, that I’m in big trouble for helping to introduce funny catchphrases into sportscasting. "
@TheTranceCartel If push comes to shove he would side with us I bet. Hah funny thing, I know a few religious people that would side with atheists if religions really tried to crack down on us again.
obermann FTW, pisses me off though that here in the uk we get fox news but no other yankee news networks... we get all your right and none of your left, leaving alot of us brits to falsley stereotype americans as bible bashing idiots... strong is the grip of old rupert
Another progressive bashing Christians. Mother Teresa was a Christian. He is making fun of all followers including Mother Teresa. What great humanitarian is Olbermann or any proggresive. All you do is hate Christians. Why, because you love to hate? Then you go out and tell us what great people you are. I would rather be associated with Mother Teresa and follow her perspective on life than any of you progressives with your twisted philosophy!
I'm sorry bud, but what the hell did mother Teresa ever do other than prevent people to get the medical help that they need, steal peoples money that she falsely told was going to be given to the poor, and take pleasure in people's pain?
@mueygringo Sorry you are taking accounts from Christopher Higgins and his self avowed atheism. Read his books I am sure you will believe every word. Apparently you didn't know that Mother Teresa was born into a wealthy family and chose to work with the poor and live in the ghetto in Calcutta. It is well documented what she has done.
@Dreamerx47 Sorry your well documented statement comes from Cristopher Higgins who cited many unverifiable and un-named sources. If you did your research you would find that most sources have verified her charitable works. I am confident you will cite more from Higgins or maybe Apollyon.
Mother Teresa (no matter how much good you think she did to the world) from denying abortions to rape victims, to stealing money, to refusing real medical help..
She cannot be cited as a religious example of a humunatarian, because she was an atheist.
@BelfastAtheist The atheist reference comes from an atheist who wants to sell books. Doubts in faith are a normal occurance. More citings from Christopher Higgins the book seller. What has he done to improve mankind? You can believe what you want from the man of shallow values. No one has ever shown the good works of Christopher Higgins.
Again..Christopher HITCHENS never wrote a book about Mother Teresa..
You are simply lying.
Actually Christopher HITCHENS doesn't exist to make the world a better place by your arbitrary standards, he has devoted his life to helping negate organized religion and that takes more guts than anything you've ever done.
Of course like any theist, you have been indoctrinated into not questioning your beliefs..so I won't go there..what with the fire-breathing dragons and shit.
Mother Teresa was a thief, a liar, a hypocrite, an atheist and a political tool against abortion. Accomplishments? All she did was let people die in horrible little death houses and then pretended to feel good about the fact she refused real medical help to anyone, she was a vile, vile...VILE person.
@BelfastAtheist Sounds like the credo of the Athiest. Sorry you will find more people who will atest to her charitable works then the lies perpetrated by a man trying to sell a book. My adopted niece was a Calcutta Baby. Mother Teresa, my sister brother in law have done more for humanity than you or Christopher Higgins.Vile take an honest look at yourself and Mr Higgins, maybe the truth will be revealed to you.
@Dreamerx47 An atheist quoting the BIBLE. Why don't you quote something from Apollyon. It is easy to tell who gets on these boards with limited intellect by their crass statements and constant use of particular deragatory words.
you are a clown just like olbermann that the other day seemed crazy talking about a mongoose that did not want to kill cobras and was a mongoosexual.like the romans that send christians to the lions,you like them will lose and be ruled by us
@namtesyalp i dont pretend im smart, and i dont think i control anything. I can just deal with the reality that we live in a natural world. A bigger majority of influential/famous/scientist/doctors/professors people have been non believers rather than believing in bronze age christian dogma that has no use what so ever in today's world. religion will forever separate the world!
@vwfreak23 perhaps you should stop believing junk science like global warming or your science that said it was fact that the cromagnon man evolved from the neanderthal man and anyone that did not belive it was stupid.turns out that believing this bull was the dumb thing after DNA PROVED IOT WAS A LIE
@namtesyalp so believing that a man lived in a whale is more rational? what about a 500 year old man who managed to put every species of animals on a wooden raft? or how about someone walking on water, raising from the dead, turning water into wine etc? science does not claim anything to be fact, unlike you christians who always have an answer for everything. GOD DID IT! at we have room for thought unlike you people who have had everything answered for you in a book full of fairytales
@vwfreak23 no more than a person living on an island all his life would believe you can talk to someone on the other side of the world,fly to the moon or an animal can talk(that is if he has never seen a parrot).you have a small mind that is like the "scientist"that laughed at the bible saying the world was a " sphere" when science knew it was a" fact" the world was flat.lol
@namtesyalp Isaiah 11:12 12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH. I think you have it backwards there bud. if it wasnt for science you wouldnt be alive. scientist have small minds??? are you on crack?
@vwfreak23 it refers to the 4 compass points stupid.yes ,some scientist are ignorant.scientist believed you could bleed disease out of people,darwin believed cells were simple,instead irt was his min.modern scientist admit most all of darwins beliefs were false
@namtesyalp most free thinking rationalists admit that your beliefs are false.
there is no better representation of DUMB than that of namtesyalp. just read any comment.. and i mean ANY comment, he leaves on youtube, and you just know it instantly. the clinically brain dead are smarter than this guy. just visit his page and see everyone laughing at his dumb ass.
@lacrymologyst this piece of trash was even condemned by fellow atheist when he said he would "f--k kids in the ass",youtube took down a vid he posted attacking a gulf war vet,he also defended NAMBLA .
@namtesyalp look around, dumbass. no one takes you seriously. everyone thinks you're either lying, or too stupid to understand the truth. it's probably a bit of both. i shit turds smarter than you.
the "vid" that was taken down attacked YOU, idiot. and it wasn't attacking a gulf vet, it was attacking a bigot. like i said before, watching the gulf war on TV doesn't count as serving in it, you fucking fake. you're such a disgrace! kill yourself!
@namtesyalp you are horribly mistaken and very narrowminded if you think scientist/free thinkers are ignorant. Do you take the bible seriously? Is it your universal truth?
Hell is a vile, abusive, disgusting concept. God buys love & loyalty with torture? A Gandhi, Teresa, Mandela would never think of torturing their enemies, whereas a Saddam, Hitler, Stalin would. This is the company that God keeps? Karma & Rebirth is the better, non-violent way. You are not punished, nor are you simply forgiven because you groveled enough. The most important aspect of Karma is that you are held accountable for your actions, you are reborn, given another chance to make amends.
Hmm if only that where possible. After death doctors take the corpse to do several things (autopsy la tee da) One of those things is to remove the blood and organs and replace it with another substance. THe reason they do this is simple, if they didn't the body would smell to high heaven in a matter of hours. So if your rising from the dead you'd die again in nanoseconds because you no longer have blood or organs.
Never said I did, just said that the standard protocol for most countries. the only exceptions to my knowlegde are several in Africa. They do the same in Chile to my knowlegde. Plus it is obvious he was doing this as a joke because if you where dead, then you woke up in a coffin I doupt you'd open it up and just ask for a glass of water.
sure, I get the reference, but how did he "own" Christianity? All he did was make a comparison and a joke. Is Christianity doomed now because of Keith Olbermann?
i dont happen to b an expert on th subject, but i do know it doesnt contradict itself, the problm is your just going by your biased/blind opinion, u can find experts that hav proof involed with the bible, it no doubt was not random and n e 1 shuld be able to see that. its actually completely idiotic to state something like tha without n e knowledge on the subject, although im not much better, the bible happens to b the most influentail book in history, and its not cuz it doesnt make n e sense xD
there is no proof that the bible stories and claims are true. none whatsoever. burden of proof is on those who make the claim. i have but to cite lack of evidence that you guys are bsing... just because people have been superstitious for a really long time doesnt mean the book isnt made up.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
well your drawing your conclusion out of biased ignorance, well if your an evolutionist there is no proof for that that all, although they claim it, watch the dbates of creationists vs evolutionists, evolutionists never offer "proof"
lol, evolutionists have tons of proof. evolution is an OBSERVABLE phenomenon, you can see it in real life, in real time it can be observed. its funny you bible thumpers choose to deny that one scientific theory, yet you have no problem enjoying all the benefits of the scientific method - the computer youre typing on, for example. vaccines and antibiotic prescriptions designed to combat viruses while taking evolution into account, etc. there are REAL miracles happening in nature ALL THE TIME.
By "evolutionists" do you mean people that understand modern biology? You know that bunch of liars an frauds that have developed cures for deadly diseases, antibiotics, greater understanding of the body, it's processes, extended lifespan, etc.
Heres some proof if you'd care to read it.
wikipedia . org / wiki / Evolution
wikipedia . org / wiki / Introduction_to_evolution
wikipedia . org / wiki / Evolution_as_theory_and_fact
Note all the references, for more evidence go and read them as well.
I'm anticipating your response of "oh wikipedia is biased" to which I respond, yes they are biased, they are biased towards neutrality and objective reality. Go look those terms up if you don't know what they mean.
Not pathetic. It is truly valid but you have no way to combat it so you try to pass it off as pathetic. It isn't "slightly less reliable" It's completly unreliable. Yeah I have one search of false information, but I can assure you, mine isn't the only one. There are other encyclopedias out there. All you got to do is look for them.
No I just thought I'd spare you the embarrassment, since the argument is so easily knocked down. A study done by none other than the journal Nature shows that Wikipedia is roughly as accurate as Encyclopedia Britannica.
news . cnet . com / Study -Wikipedia - as -accurate - as - Britannica / 2100 -1038 _ 3 - 5997332 . ht ml
Also secondary source is secondary, you ALWAYS confirm your information by visiting the primary source, that's what the links are for...
SO it's so reliable how come my false information has still yet to be changed. Not to mention the other false information on it. I'm sure there are some true sources on wiki, but since it has the option of "edit" on every page, nothing on that sigt can be trusted without proper backup.
I know you always have a secondary. But if you have wikipedia in the primary or secondary your research is not reliable.
If I tell you you'll go on and change it. I want to see how long it will go until it is changed so me telling you would just ruin it. But I will give you a hint. It involves the American Revolutionary war.
Link or it didn't happen, sorry, I don't do hints.
Also, what did I put in the original post?
"Note all the references, for more evidence go and read them as well."
So I guess your concerns are unfounded. Also the individual's understanding of evolution was so poor that reading through the wiki page would only help him.
Might I also point out that what you're doing is the equivalent of an editor of Britannica intentionally falsifying an article.
"If a single reference is false than all must be brought into question."
Fallacious argument is fallacious, I already referenced a much better study than your little "study". Also, since EB contains errors per said study you can't trust EB either, or any encyclopedia for that matter according to your metric since all contain errors, enjoy your ignorance.
"No it isn't. Simple because of our motive"
The motive isn't important, it's still an act of intellectual dishonesty.
You strike me as a xtian who essentially wants to argue against all knowledge but doesn't want to be so explicit. If that's the case I only wish there was a time machine so you could jump back to the dark ages.
Hmm your obviously not a (Quote Austin) reader. I'm using knowlegde to argue a true point. TIme travel is not possible. And why the hell would you go back to the dark ages? There are many better destinations to pick from.
1. You don't know the knowlegde at the time. We don't know very much about that time because all writings we can find from that time are few and vague.
2. Your twisting the actual history to fit you arguement. Right now I'm just waiting for you to start flat out lieing.
No, but Britannica doesn't have flat out lies like wikipedia.
No errors don't become lies, errors can be misinterpereted and turned to lies. And finally you get to the point of admitting the lies of wikipedia. My arguement is pathetic? You just killed your arguement.
Scientist don't know the exact date, and I doupt we will ever truly know. But the earth is about 4.6 billion years old according to scientist. How old do you think it is?
Yeah how about you actually answer instead of just saying "Hilarious" and pretending you made a worthwhile point, despite the fact that you have yet to make one.
I never said "Lies of Encyclopedia Britannica"
Well I have to go with what scientist say because I believe that the scientist know more about this planet than I do.
Actually this year was cooler than the last couple years, so I don't think you can say the Earth is heating up
You never said lies of wikipedia initially either but changed your tune once you realized your metric of "any error means the source is useless" was bullshit.
This is great.
"Well I have to go with what scientist say because I believe that the scientist know more about this planet than I do."
and then
"Actually this year was cooler than the last couple years, so I don't think you can say the Earth is heating up"
I may not have said it directly but I did imply it all the way through. So how about you stop making stuff up and hoping I change my view point. I don't take well to people pretending they know who I am and what I am thinking.
I don't listen to the the government lies when I have preformed actual test myself. This year the temperature was down an average of 4.65 degrees in my studies. I have also looked up unbiased studies (Something you really should do) and they have found the same thing.
You've only shown yourself to be a liar, having stated that you knowingly put false information up, although you refuse to show where said false information is. Overall you're a pretty reprehensible character.
"and hoping I change my view point"
I have no intention of the sort, as you've admitted to being irrational. I'm doing the literary equivalent of pointing and laughing.
I'm not going to tell you because you'd go on change it then come back and say that I was lieing. So I don't tell you so all you can do is post yourself the fool for accusing me a liar, yet having no proof.
Yes you do, if you didn't then you wouldn't have spent this much time argueing with me.
The governments of the world say to have done all these test, yet still find the earth warmer, yet in there test they have posted the temperatures from september as Novermber. (Accused and proven)
Actually either way you are a liar, if you were honest about your statement and actually put fraudulent info on wiki then obviously you'd be a liar. And if you were dishonest about posting fraudulent information then you'd still be a liar.
I find it amazing that if you argue with a fool long enough then you can't tell the difference. Yeah, I have a little lie posted on Wiki, but I also have it blatantly obvious it is a lie. So it something like me saying a lie, then telling you directly after its a lie. So yeah you could say "I'm a liar" but which is more of a lie, admiting the lie is a lie, or telling the lie and leaving it as is. Also I wasn't talking about the Wiki when you accused me of lieing, so your argument is out of place
Your not to bright are you? You obviously want to change my viewpoint other wise you would have wasted God knows how much time argueing with me, if you didn't you would have shut up right away. No you fool if a cat kills a mouse for food it eats it straight away, as does any carnivor.
Not a conspiracy nut, I just happen to have facts backing me up. Yeah the earth is still warmer than in 2000, but it has cooled since last year. You need to see past the obvious lies of the media.
Really? So my test results and the test results of others are funny. Hmm.
I never brought up 911 and I am not a "truther" about the whole thing. Just because I know the government is hiding things form it's people doesn't make me a truther for 911. As proof, right now do you believe the government is telling you everything they know? As in experiments or other types things?
I messured the temperatures daily for the past 3 years and this year was colder than the year prior. What else could I do? Make predictions, based on a few observations?
Yet this year was colder than the last and I have heard that a good number of these "Temperature readings" are fraud. Some of them have posted the temps from Sep. and used them for Oct. You call that accurate
Stop asking questions. What are you trying to prove, that the fool can make someone else look like a fool? Grow up!
Your assuming I just did it by my thermometer. Your wrong, not only did I do it in my town, I checked globally too, I'm not an idiot. I cant make an accurate world wide observation by what a town of under 2000 people gets.
Use knowlegde, yes, against knowlegde no.
How about this? Its known that the world spins, but as it spins it has a whobble according to scientist, in June the whobble will make it so the northern hemisphere will be on the dark side of the planet. What do you think of that
"Your wrong, not only did I do it in my town, I checked globally too"
Lol this is cute, and what peer reviewed journal did you publish in, and how do your "findings" fit in with the rest of the vast body of evidence which leads the scientific community to come to the exact opposite conclusion you do.
You didn't answer the question about evolution, creationist.
I didn't post my findings all around the web because fools would either not listen. It actually fit in really well, mine weren't the only one showing it. And the IPCC things, I found their temperatures where set for wrong months. What they found had in August was what I had in June.
Stop assuming things, I'm not a creationist. Intellegnt Design yes. But I have answered all your prior questions, yet you can't answer this one. Must be really lonly on that pillar you put yourself on.
Just another creationist arguing against all knowledge, enjoy your ignorance. And no I'm not trying to convince you of anything because your brain doesn't operate logically so it's impossible. You've proven to be both a liar and ignorant of how we know the things we know and instead create fictions to comfort yourself. Sad.
You are so foolish it's funny. You know Evolution is still a THEORY, not proven. Also there are some rather large holes, like how did differing sex come in the mix, where are all the "inbetween species," How come the Fossil Record doesn't agree with it, how come all these "Newly evolved species" die.
You've however not proven me a liar, not proven me ignorant and have only shut up whenever you feel I won, which is why you won't answer my question.
Yes you are, I agree. I'd start reading here if I were you to elevate your rather sad condition.
toarchive . org / origins / faqs . html
"THEORY"
So's gravity by the way. Yahweh (your god) is just an untestable hypothesis. Also I have evidence on my side, I win.
Also, learn the difference between the colloquial usage of the word theory and it's meaning in science, this is the argument the most ignorant of people make, so yeah, you just look stupid.
"You've however not proven me a liar, not proven me ignorant"
No, you did that on your own, lol.
Of course "proof" to you, and proof to a reasonable person are completely different things. Like I said, I'm not trying to convince you of anything, because you're irrational and will argue against or outright deny any knowledge that scares you. I'm just trying to make you look ridiculous to reasonable people. I'm doing quite well.
I never said all of what Wiki said where lies you utter complete fool. and I also never said I believe conspiracy theories.
And if you want an insult match, Tell me do you stay up all night thinking of how pitiful your life is? Or just how pitiful you can make the world? Actaully you probably cry yourself to sleep every night because you can't bring anyone down to your level. Hows that am I in the ballpark?
Next time you try to argue someone, 1 grow up, 2 don't lie, 3 try to learn from it.
I've been reading all your posts & I think you wasted your time talking to a brick wall who fails to see that proving evolution wrong doesn't prove intelligent design right.
Intellegent design is based on the belief God made life, let it live for some amount of time, then upgraded the formula, new species, so forth. So it's kinda hard to find evidence for that because miracles defy scientific explination. (Like the Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano) But say evolution is right. How does that disprove God? If evolution exist, why can't God? The way I see it is science is just humans trying to understand how God works when he isn't using miracles.
"But say evolution is right. How does that disprove God? If evolution exist, why can't God?"
Evolution doesn't even attempt to disprove God.Although certain things in it due prove that the earth is not 6000 years old.God can exist you just have to PROVE that he does.Than you would have to PROVE he is the one in the bible.Than you would have to submit it for peer review to the National Academy of Science.If it passes the rigorous tests involved you will be awarded the Nobel for your theory.
I was wondering when you would get around to this. How you been? Noticed how you said ID is undermined. You'd know all about that wouldn't you? I mean being an athiest and all.
"I was wondering when you would get around to making fun of me some more, after responding to Celticking36. You'd know all about making fun of retards like me wouldn't you? I mean being sane and all."
(If you insist) I'm not a bigot. A bigot is some intolerant of someone elses beliefs I really don't care what you believe so long as you do believe. Everyone is worth time! I really don't consider myself that ignoarnt, but you entitled to your opinion. And how do I have hate, I'm just asking "How have you been?" Sorry for trying to be friendly!
EXACTlY!!! they try to pretend it's not b/c they are embarrased that they believe the earth is 6k years old, and humans walked w/ dinosaurs. It's all b/c of fear my friend.
Like in the Intelligent Design textbooks, which where just Creationist textbooks where they replaced the word "Creationism" with "Intelligent Design"! LOL
Eh, religion needs to be poked at. It's fucking foolish nonsense. Sure, you're allowed to believe, just as I'm allowed to say that religious beliefs are for idiots that don't know how to ask for evidence before believing what they're told.
MyChallengeChannel 10 months ago 7
@MyChallengeChannel Yes you atheists are just massive intellects... if anyone doesn't think for themselves it's the majority of atheists who just refer to scientific theories they've never even researched before to explain their own existence, and what they can't respond to they say "we'll figure out in the future", that's inquisitive. Most the scientists who's theories you use to explain the lack of God were religious themselves i.e., einstein.
Kids these days. Deep as a fucking puddle
IzaFaqat 9 months ago
@IzaFaqat
"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it." -- Albert Einstein.
I'll take "deep as a puddle" over "wrong as a creationist" any day.
rkyeun 8 months ago 2
@IzaFaqat How much of the Bible have you "reasearched"? Have you ever seen a talking snake? Have you ever asked yourself how Noah found two of every land animal on Earth, not to mention built a boat big enough to hold them all? And what did the carnivores eat? Evolution can be researched by looking at the real world. If you want more, there are only about 7,000 books on the subject and museums full of fossils.
Mozart1220 5 months ago
@Mozart1220 how is insulting atheists a move causing you to believe im pro-christian? again this is demonstrated as i said four months ago the shallow mindset of atheists. i dont mock even atheism, sure its easy to think there's not a god but the ATTITUDE of so many atheists (more so the ones who sit on their asses all day) that causes you to look like major dicks. in fact who the fuck says evolution is anti-theology, no religion specifies it, the pope is even for evolution. wake up ffs.
IzaFaqat 5 months ago
@IzaFaqat First, you strated theinsults, so I gave back, and second, I have a job. Two of them in fact. It's easy to "think" there's not a God because as long as humans have been alive there has not been one shred of actual observable measureable evidence of one existing. The question is, in this day and age, how can one still think there IS a "god" of any kind? You are the one namecalling, so who "looks like a dick"?
Mozart1220 5 months ago
@Mozart1220 idc if you have a job? there's never been empirical evidence of god, yet people have always believed in one, what makes us different now than 1000 years ago? we think we know abt the universe but we simple dont i mean they just discovered particles that can travel faster than light, if thats true it rewrites physics. if we can scientifically prove god exists its proof he doesnt exist because then he is recreatable. hence, it's suppose to be, what? FAITH. whys tht concept so hard?
IzaFaqat 5 months ago
@IzaFaqat Little kids have always believed in santa Clause too. Why? Because someone told them too they grow past it. I just wanted to know if you knew the difference between what you WANT to be real, and what IS real. You do. God isn't REAL.
Mozart1220 5 months ago
@Mozart1220 Wrong, no one ever believed in Santa maturely, it was always known to be a tradition. Religion is deeper because it is an "alternate" view to the universe. It has laws, and methodologies, i mean in science, if you explain the universe w/ the big bang one can always say well what was before than, and that and that infinity, neither religion or science empirically explains the universe, by nature of current science it's still an impossibility.
IzaFaqat 5 months ago
@Mozart1220 and just another point, there have been many "agnostic/atheist" intellects who challenged the concept of religion and god, both classical and modern, but the difference between the mainstream atheist and them, is they put a lot of deep thought into it, and more times than not, didn't rule out the existence of god; but kids these days who refer to these same intellects are atheist because of their upbringing,a nonreligious one and then a few comedians joke abt god n bam theyre atheist
IzaFaqat 5 months ago
@IzaFaqat Until there is at least one shred of evidence supporting the existence of a "supreme being", I'll stick with saying there isn't.
Mozart1220 5 months ago
@Mozart1220 Believing nothing created everything, and believe God created everything, is basically the same leap of faith. Atheists try to say oh well the big bang created everything, but FFS.. what about before that? who created the atmosphere for the big bang? it's an infinite problem. both beliefs theistic and atheistic have still not even came CLOSE to explaining how all this shit came from nothing. so you're just as delusional as a theist i guess.
IzaFaqat 5 months ago
@IzaFaqat Scientists do not believe "nothing created everything", they just haven't figured that part out yet. That's the beauty of science. Learning is ongoing, as opposed to religion which supposes it already knows everything we need to know. Something impossible? Never fear! God can fo anything he wants. And with science, there is no "leap of faith" since there is EVIDENCE for all to see. Again, not so with religion.
Mozart1220 5 months ago
@Mozart1220 In itself it defies all our our scienfitic laws that something came from something so science as we know it today CANNOT explain it. It defies every bit of logic. Get a glass box, take everything out, even oxygen, and then create something in it. Impossible. So when theists look at this they laugh just as much as you laugh at them, BOTH are illogical. And besides i guarantee in 50 years half the theories u follow abt the universe will be obsolete. My point is who are u to insult any1
IzaFaqat 5 months ago
@IzaFaqat So how did "God" create everythingout of "nothing"? Please. Just because scinece hasn't provided ALL the answers does not mean the ones they HAVE found are wrong. And the fact that science EVOLVES only shows it's the better choice than religion, which assumes it already has all the answers and never changes. My point is, it's not insulting to suggest religion is obsolete right now, and that denying the truth helps no one.
Mozart1220 5 months ago
@Mozart1220 No one SAID the ones they found are wrong, most I have NO problem with nor do they contradict religion, im saying the big bang isn't a replacement for god nor does it answer the question where everything came from. that is still unanswered. and if this universe can come from nothing why cant god come from nothing? if we can scientifically explain god however, thats proof god doesn't exist. hes not suppose to be explainable or recreatable. he is above science. obviously.
IzaFaqat 5 months ago
@IzaFaqat No one said anything came from "nothing". Obviously you have foound a misguided cliche to grab onto like a dog with a rag. There is EVIDENCE for the "Big bang". (expanding universe, radiation "echos"), but NONE for any "supreme being" of ANY KIND. Is Bigfoot "above science"? I ask because there is actually more evidence for the existance of Sasquatch (even though it's been admitted to have been faked) than for "God". Are Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny "above science"?
Mozart1220 5 months ago
@Mozart1220 holy shit, this must be hurting your brain. once again i said no one said the scientific theories present today ARE WRONG, i believe the big bang happened but the big BANG IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR GOD OR AN EXPLANATION FOR WHERE THE UNIVERSE CAME FROM, because what was BEFORE the big bang and before that and before that, times infinity. inevitably you will have to come to a point where u say SOMETHING CAME FROM NOTHING. way beyond the big bang.
IzaFaqat 5 months ago
@IzaFaqat Holy shit this must be hurting YOUR brain! I NEVER SAID THE BIG BANG WAS A SUBSTITUTE FOR GOD. I SAID THERE IS NO GOD. Period. Just because we don't have all the answers YET, it does not even begin to suggest that THERE MUST BE A SUPREME BEING. The very idea of creation suggests "something from nothing" unless you want to explain where "god" came from. Irt stil comes down to "what came before?" And I choose to follw that which provides observable, measurable evidence, not myth.
Mozart1220 5 months ago
@Mozart1220 see when you do what i did, it doens't work because i actually make sense. you said there's no evidence for god but there is for the big bang. but thats equating them (i.e., if big bang happened god is nonexistant) its untrue. see at some point in science you'd have to simply say the universe came from nothing, cuz but logic shit just cant be here. by the same token we say god came from nothing, kinda funny being that if the universe can be from nothing (making us) why cant god?
IzaFaqat 5 months ago
@IzaFaqat Yes, there is evidence for the big bang, but none for God. I never said the Big Bang proves there is no God. I said there is evidence for one, and none for the other. NO one EVER said the universe came from "nothing". Science just hasn't gotten that far back yet. Why you keep insisting that science claims the universe came from nothing is a mystery greater than the actual topic.
Mozart1220 5 months ago
@Mozart1220 Of course no one would claim that, but it's the only logical solution. Because no matter what explanation given you can always say, what about before that; infinitely, and at one point you'll have to pack it in and admit at one point there was nothing. And we can't really study beyond the big bang because the BB created the universe AS WE KNOW IT, whatever was before it doesn't exist. Point is, so illogic is found in the pure-science folk and the religious folk, no diff whatsoever
IzaFaqat 4 months ago
@IzaFaqat At one point we couldn't concieve of the Big bang, because we didn't have pwerful enough telescopes, and no one knew about "red shift" that told us the universe was expanding. Just because we don't know how to detect whet was before the Big Bang right now does not mean we never will. And it's no reason to assume it must be a "god" of any kind. It doesn't mean it isn't, but so far there is no evidence of such.
Mozart1220 4 months ago
@Mozart1220 the big bang theory wouldnt be inconceivable even if it hadn't been supported by strong evidence, but something coming from nothing is. like i said at one point you'll have to go back far enough to say this all came from nothing, its impossible according to our modern science.
IzaFaqat 4 months ago
@IzaFaqat I'm still wondering where you got this obsession with "something from NOTHING, which has never been claimed. No one knows where the matter and energy in the Big Bang came from, but it's a pretty safe bet it came from somewhere (or some TIME which is an interesting hypothosis) Other dimentions have even been discussed. But no one to my knowledge says it came from "nothing'. Maybe you should drop that argument now.
Mozart1220 4 months ago
@Mozart1220 ok you still haven't grasped it i notice. lets say we start at the big bang then go to theory B that explains how the big bang came to be, then theory C that explains how theory B came to be and theory D which explains how theory C came to be. AT ONE POINT this will INEVITABLY reach a point where SOMETHING CAME FROM NOTHING. otherwise you're claiming SOMETHING was ALWAYS here. this is basic logic.
IzaFaqat 4 months ago
@IzaFaqat Ok, you are still not graspnig that NO ONE but you said ANYTHNG about things comng from nothing no matter how far back you go. Remember I mentioned TIME and other DIMENTIONS? You are arguing a nonsensical idea into circles of your own making. Since you can't stop obsessing on that idea, I'm finished.
Mozart1220 4 months ago
no one important pays attention to Olbermann.
rickster348 1 year ago
"t I happen to be a religious man. I believe in God, I pray daily, and if I’ve ever gotten any direct instructions from my maker, they were that I’ll be judged by whether I tried to help other people, or hurt them. Also, that true belief should not be worn like a policeman’s club, nor used like one. And, finally, that I’m in big trouble for helping to introduce funny catchphrases into sportscasting. "
--Keith Olbermann.
he isn't an atheist at all.
TheTranceCartel 1 year ago
@TheTranceCartel He is just a liar. Much worse.
amyalewine 1 year ago
@TheTranceCartel If push comes to shove he would side with us I bet. Hah funny thing, I know a few religious people that would side with atheists if religions really tried to crack down on us again.
s5b678 11 months ago
Goodness, why is everyone so angry and vindictive on here? Olbermanns comment was a playful jab, nothing malicious.
PhilWithCoffee 1 year ago 5
@PhilWithCoffee
Religion will do that!
123chugchug 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PhilWithCoffee
Religion will do that!
123chugchug 7 months ago
@PhilWithCoffee religion will do that to you!
123chugchug 7 months ago
haha, owned! but guess christian excuse it as a miracle of god and that he resurrected him in some magical way
sh0werp0wer 1 year ago
obermann FTW, pisses me off though that here in the uk we get fox news but no other yankee news networks... we get all your right and none of your left, leaving alot of us brits to falsley stereotype americans as bible bashing idiots... strong is the grip of old rupert
honkyxadonis 1 year ago
Another progressive bashing Christians. Mother Teresa was a Christian. He is making fun of all followers including Mother Teresa. What great humanitarian is Olbermann or any proggresive. All you do is hate Christians. Why, because you love to hate? Then you go out and tell us what great people you are. I would rather be associated with Mother Teresa and follow her perspective on life than any of you progressives with your twisted philosophy!
mueygringo 1 year ago
I'm sorry bud, but what the hell did mother Teresa ever do other than prevent people to get the medical help that they need, steal peoples money that she falsely told was going to be given to the poor, and take pleasure in people's pain?
JordanKimball 1 year ago 2
@mueygringo Sorry you are taking accounts from Christopher Higgins and his self avowed atheism. Read his books I am sure you will believe every word. Apparently you didn't know that Mother Teresa was born into a wealthy family and chose to work with the poor and live in the ghetto in Calcutta. It is well documented what she has done.
Mr Olbermann's and Mr Higgin's accomplishments?
mueygringo 1 year ago
"It is well documented what she has done."
yes she took money from the poor to build her own church and run a house for the dying where the people werent allowed to see their loved ones
thats real sainthood right there
Dreamerx47 1 year ago
@Dreamerx47 Sorry your well documented statement comes from Cristopher Higgins who cited many unverifiable and un-named sources. If you did your research you would find that most sources have verified her charitable works. I am confident you will cite more from Higgins or maybe Apollyon.
mueygringo 1 year ago
@mueygringo
Mother Teresa (no matter how much good you think she did to the world) from denying abortions to rape victims, to stealing money, to refusing real medical help..
She cannot be cited as a religious example of a humunatarian, because she was an atheist.
BelfastAtheist 1 year ago
@BelfastAtheist The atheist reference comes from an atheist who wants to sell books. Doubts in faith are a normal occurance. More citings from Christopher Higgins the book seller. What has he done to improve mankind? You can believe what you want from the man of shallow values. No one has ever shown the good works of Christopher Higgins.
mueygringo 1 year ago
@mueygringo
Again..Christopher HITCHENS never wrote a book about Mother Teresa..
You are simply lying.
Actually Christopher HITCHENS doesn't exist to make the world a better place by your arbitrary standards, he has devoted his life to helping negate organized religion and that takes more guts than anything you've ever done.
Of course like any theist, you have been indoctrinated into not questioning your beliefs..so I won't go there..what with the fire-breathing dragons and shit.
BelfastAtheist 1 year ago
@mueygringo
Mother Teresa was a thief, a liar, a hypocrite, an atheist and a political tool against abortion. Accomplishments? All she did was let people die in horrible little death houses and then pretended to feel good about the fact she refused real medical help to anyone, she was a vile, vile...VILE person.
BelfastAtheist 1 year ago
@BelfastAtheist Sounds like the credo of the Athiest. Sorry you will find more people who will atest to her charitable works then the lies perpetrated by a man trying to sell a book. My adopted niece was a Calcutta Baby. Mother Teresa, my sister brother in law have done more for humanity than you or Christopher Higgins.Vile take an honest look at yourself and Mr Higgins, maybe the truth will be revealed to you.
mueygringo 1 year ago
@mueygringo
Christopher Hitchens never wrote a book about Teresa you stupid shit....
He wrote an ARTICLE about her in a NEWSPAPER.
Good one on researching your information before you post! Typical Christian..
Why do you insist on calling him Higgins? Is that the best insult you pathetic close-minded brain can muster up?
The truth has been revealed to me, Teresa did what she did for non-religious reasons, as she was an atheist.
BelfastAtheist 1 year ago
@BelfastAtheist The Missionary Position? Oh sorry to hear about your hero!
mueygringo 1 year ago
@mueygringo
Christ I forgot about that..I haven't read it and wasn't aware of it's texts.
I usually research before I open my mouth, but there you go. I made a mistake and my apologies for any confusion caused?
You seem to feel pretty good about yourself, safe in the knowledge I made one minor mistake.
BelfastAtheist 1 year ago
ps:when jesus said "suffer the little children to "come unto me" he wasnt talking about anal sex you morons
Dreamerx47 1 year ago
@Dreamerx47 An atheist quoting the BIBLE. Why don't you quote something from Apollyon. It is easy to tell who gets on these boards with limited intellect by their crass statements and constant use of particular deragatory words.
mueygringo 1 year ago
@Dreamerx47 How do you know?
EPR89 1 year ago
Win.
RamboBunchie 1 year ago
you are a clown just like olbermann that the other day seemed crazy talking about a mongoose that did not want to kill cobras and was a mongoosexual.like the romans that send christians to the lions,you like them will lose and be ruled by us
namtesyalp 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
pay no mind to namtesyalp. he's only happy when he's spreading his hate and bigotry around.
look up a video called "the story of playsetman" to see what an idiot he is.
lacrymologyst 1 year ago
i lvoe olberman.. he seems liek a democrat and semi liberal.. is he atheist? if so hel be perfect!
llHyRaXll 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
christians rule,olbermann owns nothing
namtesyalp 2 years ago
@namtesyalp, christians rule at destroying the minds and behinds of young ones. christians suck and are useless in today's society
vwfreak23 2 years ago
@vwfreak23 like it or not,we run and rule this country.pretend that you are smart,pretend that you control something.you are clowns that we laugh at
namtesyalp 1 year ago
@namtesyalp i dont pretend im smart, and i dont think i control anything. I can just deal with the reality that we live in a natural world. A bigger majority of influential/famous/scientist/doctors/professors people have been non believers rather than believing in bronze age christian dogma that has no use what so ever in today's world. religion will forever separate the world!
vwfreak23 1 year ago
@vwfreak23 perhaps you should stop believing junk science like global warming or your science that said it was fact that the cromagnon man evolved from the neanderthal man and anyone that did not belive it was stupid.turns out that believing this bull was the dumb thing after DNA PROVED IOT WAS A LIE
namtesyalp 1 year ago
@namtesyalp so believing that a man lived in a whale is more rational? what about a 500 year old man who managed to put every species of animals on a wooden raft? or how about someone walking on water, raising from the dead, turning water into wine etc? science does not claim anything to be fact, unlike you christians who always have an answer for everything. GOD DID IT! at we have room for thought unlike you people who have had everything answered for you in a book full of fairytales
vwfreak23 1 year ago
@vwfreak23 no more than a person living on an island all his life would believe you can talk to someone on the other side of the world,fly to the moon or an animal can talk(that is if he has never seen a parrot).you have a small mind that is like the "scientist"that laughed at the bible saying the world was a " sphere" when science knew it was a" fact" the world was flat.lol
namtesyalp 1 year ago
@namtesyalp Isaiah 11:12 12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH. I think you have it backwards there bud. if it wasnt for science you wouldnt be alive. scientist have small minds??? are you on crack?
vwfreak23 1 year ago
@vwfreak23 it refers to the 4 compass points stupid.yes ,some scientist are ignorant.scientist believed you could bleed disease out of people,darwin believed cells were simple,instead irt was his min.modern scientist admit most all of darwins beliefs were false
namtesyalp 1 year ago
@namtesyalp most free thinking rationalists admit that your beliefs are false.
there is no better representation of DUMB than that of namtesyalp. just read any comment.. and i mean ANY comment, he leaves on youtube, and you just know it instantly. the clinically brain dead are smarter than this guy. just visit his page and see everyone laughing at his dumb ass.
lacrymologyst 1 year ago
@lacrymologyst this piece of trash was even condemned by fellow atheist when he said he would "f--k kids in the ass",youtube took down a vid he posted attacking a gulf war vet,he also defended NAMBLA .
namtesyalp 1 year ago
@namtesyalp look around, dumbass. no one takes you seriously. everyone thinks you're either lying, or too stupid to understand the truth. it's probably a bit of both. i shit turds smarter than you.
the "vid" that was taken down attacked YOU, idiot. and it wasn't attacking a gulf vet, it was attacking a bigot. like i said before, watching the gulf war on TV doesn't count as serving in it, you fucking fake. you're such a disgrace! kill yourself!
lacrymologyst 1 year ago
@namtesyalp you are horribly mistaken and very narrowminded if you think scientist/free thinkers are ignorant. Do you take the bible seriously? Is it your universal truth?
vwfreak23 1 year ago
@namtesyalp
I bet you go to all the cool parties, right?
BelfastAtheist 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hell is a vile, abusive, disgusting concept. God buys love & loyalty with torture? A Gandhi, Teresa, Mandela would never think of torturing their enemies, whereas a Saddam, Hitler, Stalin would. This is the company that God keeps? Karma & Rebirth is the better, non-violent way. You are not punished, nor are you simply forgiven because you groveled enough. The most important aspect of Karma is that you are held accountable for your actions, you are reborn, given another chance to make amends.
ramaraksha01 2 years ago
LOL
braydenbeautiful 2 years ago
this rules.
thename 2 years ago
LOL, this video is so uplifting. ^^
TAz69x 2 years ago
lol
avz2r 2 years ago
What ? The formaldehyde didn't kill him?
HelmutVonSphincter 2 years ago 12
Note to bed-side physician: Check pulse carefully before signing death certificate.
pitbull103 2 years ago 2
This guy is such a buffoon.
nmcnmb 3 years ago
Agreed.
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
I can't see how this could be taken as a poke against religion in general.
Hohlmackenreiter 3 years ago
Hmm if only that where possible. After death doctors take the corpse to do several things (autopsy la tee da) One of those things is to remove the blood and organs and replace it with another substance. THe reason they do this is simple, if they didn't the body would smell to high heaven in a matter of hours. So if your rising from the dead you'd die again in nanoseconds because you no longer have blood or organs.
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
Arod, you know the medical protocols in Chile?
Really?
shas1814 3 years ago
Never said I did, just said that the standard protocol for most countries. the only exceptions to my knowlegde are several in Africa. They do the same in Chile to my knowlegde. Plus it is obvious he was doing this as a joke because if you where dead, then you woke up in a coffin I doupt you'd open it up and just ask for a glass of water.
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
Olbermann is a Unitarian who's knocked the crap out of atheists more than once.
grazon 3 years ago
ooooo!!! lol
1dala 3 years ago
Aww Keith is cool.....sarcasm
AustinD88 4 years ago
sure, I get the reference, but how did he "own" Christianity? All he did was make a comparison and a joke. Is Christianity doomed now because of Keith Olbermann?
Just relax on the term "own" gees...
nathansmart 4 years ago 2
Think about it...
godspeedyoujustin 4 years ago
and why does Christianity get owned?
nathansmart 4 years ago
cuz its based on stuff a bunch of random dudes made up.
Pelonetillo 4 years ago
Pelonetillo
and your proof that its just what buncha random dudes made up?
audan2006 4 years ago
the proof: it is a buncha random dudes with made up stuff. do you have proof to the contrary? no...
Pelonetillo 4 years ago
i dont happen to b an expert on th subject, but i do know it doesnt contradict itself, the problm is your just going by your biased/blind opinion, u can find experts that hav proof involed with the bible, it no doubt was not random and n e 1 shuld be able to see that. its actually completely idiotic to state something like tha without n e knowledge on the subject, although im not much better, the bible happens to b the most influentail book in history, and its not cuz it doesnt make n e sense xD
audan2006 4 years ago
there is no proof that the bible stories and claims are true. none whatsoever. burden of proof is on those who make the claim. i have but to cite lack of evidence that you guys are bsing... just because people have been superstitious for a really long time doesnt mean the book isnt made up.
Pelonetillo 4 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
well your drawing your conclusion out of biased ignorance, well if your an evolutionist there is no proof for that that all, although they claim it, watch the dbates of creationists vs evolutionists, evolutionists never offer "proof"
audan2006 4 years ago
lol, evolutionists have tons of proof. evolution is an OBSERVABLE phenomenon, you can see it in real life, in real time it can be observed. its funny you bible thumpers choose to deny that one scientific theory, yet you have no problem enjoying all the benefits of the scientific method - the computer youre typing on, for example. vaccines and antibiotic prescriptions designed to combat viruses while taking evolution into account, etc. there are REAL miracles happening in nature ALL THE TIME.
Pelonetillo 4 years ago 16
there is no point in life
AllenFTW 3 years ago
I think you ought to know I'm feeling very depressed
jorrepor 3 years ago
By "evolutionists" do you mean people that understand modern biology? You know that bunch of liars an frauds that have developed cures for deadly diseases, antibiotics, greater understanding of the body, it's processes, extended lifespan, etc.
Heres some proof if you'd care to read it.
wikipedia . org / wiki / Evolution
wikipedia . org / wiki / Introduction_to_evolution
wikipedia . org / wiki / Evolution_as_theory_and_fact
Note all the references, for more evidence go and read them as well.
studio7manga 4 years ago 9
I'm anticipating your response of "oh wikipedia is biased" to which I respond, yes they are biased, they are biased towards neutrality and objective reality. Go look those terms up if you don't know what they mean.
studio7manga 4 years ago 2
You know wikipedia is far from a reliable source of information. I posted stuff thats absolute bull crap about 3 years ago. Has yet to be changed.
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
Do you know why it's slightly less reliable than other encyclopedias? Because of people like you.
Also, pathetic argument is pathetic, get a better one.
studio7manga 3 years ago
Not pathetic. It is truly valid but you have no way to combat it so you try to pass it off as pathetic. It isn't "slightly less reliable" It's completly unreliable. Yeah I have one search of false information, but I can assure you, mine isn't the only one. There are other encyclopedias out there. All you got to do is look for them.
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
"you have no way to combat"
No I just thought I'd spare you the embarrassment, since the argument is so easily knocked down. A study done by none other than the journal Nature shows that Wikipedia is roughly as accurate as Encyclopedia Britannica.
news . cnet . com / Study -Wikipedia - as -accurate - as - Britannica / 2100 -1038 _ 3 - 5997332 . ht ml
Also secondary source is secondary, you ALWAYS confirm your information by visiting the primary source, that's what the links are for...
studio7manga 3 years ago
SO it's so reliable how come my false information has still yet to be changed. Not to mention the other false information on it. I'm sure there are some true sources on wiki, but since it has the option of "edit" on every page, nothing on that sigt can be trusted without proper backup.
I know you always have a secondary. But if you have wikipedia in the primary or secondary your research is not reliable.
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
"how come my false information has still yet to be changed"
Where is it? I call bullshit.
studio7manga 3 years ago
If I tell you you'll go on and change it. I want to see how long it will go until it is changed so me telling you would just ruin it. But I will give you a hint. It involves the American Revolutionary war.
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
Link or it didn't happen, sorry, I don't do hints.
Also, what did I put in the original post?
"Note all the references, for more evidence go and read them as well."
So I guess your concerns are unfounded. Also the individual's understanding of evolution was so poor that reading through the wiki page would only help him.
Might I also point out that what you're doing is the equivalent of an editor of Britannica intentionally falsifying an article.
studio7manga 3 years ago
Link of course. If you don't do hints then you and I won't get along about anything, I like to leave hints.
You put how wikipedia could be reliable.
If a single reference is false than all must be brought into question.
My concerns are founded. They looked up evolution on Wikipedia? That search changes almost weekly.
No it isn't. Simple because of our motive. What I put up is easily seen as false. My reason is to keep people from using unreliable searches
My concerns are founded.
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
"If a single reference is false than all must be brought into question."
Fallacious argument is fallacious, I already referenced a much better study than your little "study". Also, since EB contains errors per said study you can't trust EB either, or any encyclopedia for that matter according to your metric since all contain errors, enjoy your ignorance.
"No it isn't. Simple because of our motive"
The motive isn't important, it's still an act of intellectual dishonesty.
studio7manga 3 years ago
You strike me as a xtian who essentially wants to argue against all knowledge but doesn't want to be so explicit. If that's the case I only wish there was a time machine so you could jump back to the dark ages.
studio7manga 3 years ago
Hmm your obviously not a (Quote Austin) reader. I'm using knowlegde to argue a true point. TIme travel is not possible. And why the hell would you go back to the dark ages? There are many better destinations to pick from.
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
"why the hell would you go back to the dark ages?"
Obviously missed the nod to the different attitudes towards knowledge that pervaded at the time.
"There are many better destinations to pick from."
That's the point, extreme skepticism towards knowledge and human frailty like yours will bring us back there.
And again Encyclopedia Britannica has errors in it, will you be throwing out your copy?
studio7manga 3 years ago
1. You don't know the knowlegde at the time. We don't know very much about that time because all writings we can find from that time are few and vague.
2. Your twisting the actual history to fit you arguement. Right now I'm just waiting for you to start flat out lieing.
No, but Britannica doesn't have flat out lies like wikipedia.
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
"No, but Britannica doesn't have flat out lies like wikipedia."
Oh cute, now errors become lies because you realize the err in your rather pathetic argument. Keep squirming.
Hey arod, how old is the Earth? Just curious what you think.
studio7manga 3 years ago
No errors don't become lies, errors can be misinterpereted and turned to lies. And finally you get to the point of admitting the lies of wikipedia. My arguement is pathetic? You just killed your arguement.
Scientist don't know the exact date, and I doupt we will ever truly know. But the earth is about 4.6 billion years old according to scientist. How old do you think it is?
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
"lies of wikipedia"
"lies of Encyclopedia Britannica"
Hilarious.
"according to scientist"
I didn't ask what scientists know, I asked you what you think it is.
Hey arod, the earth is warming up, why do you think that is? Just curious.
studio7manga 3 years ago
Yeah how about you actually answer instead of just saying "Hilarious" and pretending you made a worthwhile point, despite the fact that you have yet to make one.
I never said "Lies of Encyclopedia Britannica"
Well I have to go with what scientist say because I believe that the scientist know more about this planet than I do.
Actually this year was cooler than the last couple years, so I don't think you can say the Earth is heating up
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
"I never said "Lies of Encyclopedia Britannica""
You never said lies of wikipedia initially either but changed your tune once you realized your metric of "any error means the source is useless" was bullshit.
This is great.
"Well I have to go with what scientist say because I believe that the scientist know more about this planet than I do."
and then
"Actually this year was cooler than the last couple years, so I don't think you can say the Earth is heating up"
Lol, hilarious!
Try the IPCC
studio7manga 3 years ago
I may not have said it directly but I did imply it all the way through. So how about you stop making stuff up and hoping I change my view point. I don't take well to people pretending they know who I am and what I am thinking.
I don't listen to the the government lies when I have preformed actual test myself. This year the temperature was down an average of 4.65 degrees in my studies. I have also looked up unbiased studies (Something you really should do) and they have found the same thing.
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
You've only shown yourself to be a liar, having stated that you knowingly put false information up, although you refuse to show where said false information is. Overall you're a pretty reprehensible character.
"and hoping I change my view point"
I have no intention of the sort, as you've admitted to being irrational. I'm doing the literary equivalent of pointing and laughing.
"I don't listen to the the government lies"
HAHAHAHAHAHA, I knew it, what a kook.
Yup, typical xtian wingnut.
studio7manga 3 years ago
I'm not going to tell you because you'd go on change it then come back and say that I was lieing. So I don't tell you so all you can do is post yourself the fool for accusing me a liar, yet having no proof.
Yes you do, if you didn't then you wouldn't have spent this much time argueing with me.
The governments of the world say to have done all these test, yet still find the earth warmer, yet in there test they have posted the temperatures from september as Novermber. (Accused and proven)
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
"accusing me a liar, yet having no proof"
Actually either way you are a liar, if you were honest about your statement and actually put fraudulent info on wiki then obviously you'd be a liar. And if you were dishonest about posting fraudulent information then you'd still be a liar.
You're pretty stupid aren't you...
studio7manga 3 years ago
I find it amazing that if you argue with a fool long enough then you can't tell the difference. Yeah, I have a little lie posted on Wiki, but I also have it blatantly obvious it is a lie. So it something like me saying a lie, then telling you directly after its a lie. So yeah you could say "I'm a liar" but which is more of a lie, admiting the lie is a lie, or telling the lie and leaving it as is. Also I wasn't talking about the Wiki when you accused me of lieing, so your argument is out of place
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
Ah yes when your argument is destroyed, change the subject, that's two times you've done it now.
studio7manga 3 years ago
"Yes you do"
Ah you know my mind do you? Tell me when a cat plays with a mouse is it's intention always to eat it?
"The governments"
Conspiracy nut, lrn2 trend data.
studio7manga 3 years ago
Your not to bright are you? You obviously want to change my viewpoint other wise you would have wasted God knows how much time argueing with me, if you didn't you would have shut up right away. No you fool if a cat kills a mouse for food it eats it straight away, as does any carnivor.
Not a conspiracy nut, I just happen to have facts backing me up. Yeah the earth is still warmer than in 2000, but it has cooled since last year. You need to see past the obvious lies of the media.
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
"I just happen to have facts backing me up"
That is probably the funniest thing I've heard out of you yet.
Yeah just like the 911 truthers, lots and lots of facts.
studio7manga 3 years ago
Really? So my test results and the test results of others are funny. Hmm.
I never brought up 911 and I am not a "truther" about the whole thing. Just because I know the government is hiding things form it's people doesn't make me a truther for 911. As proof, right now do you believe the government is telling you everything they know? As in experiments or other types things?
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
"Really? So my test results and the test results of others are funny. Hmm."
Something tells me you aren't doing it scientifically.
IPCC results, ie. essentially the whole of the scientific community is roughly, the Earth is warming up, human created greenhouse gases are to blame.
Something wrong with their test results, hmm?
Hey Arod, what kind of animal do you think did humans evolve from?
Hey Arod, do you think the the earth flat or spherical?
studio7manga 3 years ago
*should read.
Hey Arod, what kind of animal do you think humans evolved from?
Hey Arod, do you think the earth is flat or spherical?
studio7manga 3 years ago
I messured the temperatures daily for the past 3 years and this year was colder than the year prior. What else could I do? Make predictions, based on a few observations?
Yet this year was colder than the last and I have heard that a good number of these "Temperature readings" are fraud. Some of them have posted the temps from Sep. and used them for Oct. You call that accurate
Stop asking questions. What are you trying to prove, that the fool can make someone else look like a fool? Grow up!
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
Lol, looking at your thermometer for 3 years is not an average of the global temperature average over the last few centuries. Fail.
Continue to argue against all knowledge.
studio7manga 3 years ago
Your assuming I just did it by my thermometer. Your wrong, not only did I do it in my town, I checked globally too, I'm not an idiot. I cant make an accurate world wide observation by what a town of under 2000 people gets.
Use knowlegde, yes, against knowlegde no.
How about this? Its known that the world spins, but as it spins it has a whobble according to scientist, in June the whobble will make it so the northern hemisphere will be on the dark side of the planet. What do you think of that
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
"Your wrong, not only did I do it in my town, I checked globally too"
Lol this is cute, and what peer reviewed journal did you publish in, and how do your "findings" fit in with the rest of the vast body of evidence which leads the scientific community to come to the exact opposite conclusion you do.
You didn't answer the question about evolution, creationist.
Again, continue to argue against all knowledge.
studio7manga 3 years ago
I didn't post my findings all around the web because fools would either not listen. It actually fit in really well, mine weren't the only one showing it. And the IPCC things, I found their temperatures where set for wrong months. What they found had in August was what I had in June.
Stop assuming things, I'm not a creationist. Intellegnt Design yes. But I have answered all your prior questions, yet you can't answer this one. Must be really lonly on that pillar you put yourself on.
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
Heh, yep I was right.
Just another creationist arguing against all knowledge, enjoy your ignorance. And no I'm not trying to convince you of anything because your brain doesn't operate logically so it's impossible. You've proven to be both a liar and ignorant of how we know the things we know and instead create fictions to comfort yourself. Sad.
"I'm not a creationist. Intellegnt design yes"
No difference, see the wedge strategy.
studio7manga 3 years ago
You are so foolish it's funny. You know Evolution is still a THEORY, not proven. Also there are some rather large holes, like how did differing sex come in the mix, where are all the "inbetween species," How come the Fossil Record doesn't agree with it, how come all these "Newly evolved species" die.
You've however not proven me a liar, not proven me ignorant and have only shut up whenever you feel I won, which is why you won't answer my question.
There is a difference.
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
"You are so foolish it's funny."
Yes you are, I agree. I'd start reading here if I were you to elevate your rather sad condition.
toarchive . org / origins / faqs . html
"THEORY"
So's gravity by the way. Yahweh (your god) is just an untestable hypothesis. Also I have evidence on my side, I win.
Also, learn the difference between the colloquial usage of the word theory and it's meaning in science, this is the argument the most ignorant of people make, so yeah, you just look stupid.
studio7manga 3 years ago 2
"You've however not proven me a liar, not proven me ignorant"
No, you did that on your own, lol.
Of course "proof" to you, and proof to a reasonable person are completely different things. Like I said, I'm not trying to convince you of anything, because you're irrational and will argue against or outright deny any knowledge that scares you. I'm just trying to make you look ridiculous to reasonable people. I'm doing quite well.
studio7manga 3 years ago
This is too cute to pass up...
Me: "And again Encyclopedia Britannica has errors in it, will you be throwing out your copy?"
You: "No, but Britannica doesn't have flat out lies like wikipedia."
You know, Britannica has the same basic info about evolution, the age of the earth and global warming as wikipedia.
lrn 2 internal consistency.
Oh wait right, it's a big conspiracy ooooo, but then Britannica doesn't have lies according to you, so what is it Arod. Lawl...
studio7manga 3 years ago
I never said all of what Wiki said where lies you utter complete fool. and I also never said I believe conspiracy theories.
And if you want an insult match, Tell me do you stay up all night thinking of how pitiful your life is? Or just how pitiful you can make the world? Actaully you probably cry yourself to sleep every night because you can't bring anyone down to your level. Hows that am I in the ballpark?
Next time you try to argue someone, 1 grow up, 2 don't lie, 3 try to learn from it.
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
"I never said all of what Wiki said where lies"
O rly? This is pretty close.
"If a single reference is false than all must be brought into question."
Ah yes, don't trust anything if you find one thing wrong, even if you were the one to put it in.
"I also never said I believe conspiracy theories"
But you do, weather you want to admit it or not.
Want to learn more about "the big evil lie of evolution" Arod? I'd get reading...
toarchive . org / origins / faqs . html
studio7manga 3 years ago
"Next time you try to argue someone, 1 grow up, 2 don't lie, 3 try to learn from it."
4 take your own advice. :)
studio7manga 3 years ago
I've been reading all your posts & btw proving evolution wrong doesn't prove intelligent design right.Where is your evidence for ID?
Celticking36 3 years ago
I've been reading all your posts & I think you wasted your time talking to a brick wall who fails to see that proving evolution wrong doesn't prove intelligent design right.
Celticking36 3 years ago
Intellegent design is based on the belief God made life, let it live for some amount of time, then upgraded the formula, new species, so forth. So it's kinda hard to find evidence for that because miracles defy scientific explination. (Like the Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano) But say evolution is right. How does that disprove God? If evolution exist, why can't God? The way I see it is science is just humans trying to understand how God works when he isn't using miracles.
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
"But say evolution is right. How does that disprove God? If evolution exist, why can't God?"
Evolution doesn't even attempt to disprove God.Although certain things in it due prove that the earth is not 6000 years old.God can exist you just have to PROVE that he does.Than you would have to PROVE he is the one in the bible.Than you would have to submit it for peer review to the National Academy of Science.If it passes the rigorous tests involved you will be awarded the Nobel for your theory.
Celticking36 3 years ago
Not sure if your an athiest or not. But look up the Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano for proof.
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
"Intellegent design is based on the belief God made life"
Lol, I love how people undermine the whole purpose of ID.
studio7manga 3 years ago
I was wondering when you would get around to this. How you been? Noticed how you said ID is undermined. You'd know all about that wouldn't you? I mean being an athiest and all.
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
"I was wondering when you would get around to making fun of me some more, after responding to Celticking36. You'd know all about making fun of retards like me wouldn't you? I mean being sane and all."
Huh?
studio7manga 3 years ago
I didn't say that. Don't know who did. So kinda hard for me to respond.
But you didn't answer me. So I ask again. How you been?
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
Speaking of bigotry, I do love how xtians throw around the atheist label like klansmen throw around nigger.
studio7manga 3 years ago 20
I'm not going on with this till you answer my question.
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
Then leave bigot, you aren't worth my time, take your ignorance and hate elsewhere.
studio7manga 3 years ago
(If you insist) I'm not a bigot. A bigot is some intolerant of someone elses beliefs I really don't care what you believe so long as you do believe. Everyone is worth time! I really don't consider myself that ignoarnt, but you entitled to your opinion. And how do I have hate, I'm just asking "How have you been?" Sorry for trying to be friendly!
ArodWingfoot 3 years ago
@studio7manga ...holy crap, man... just, holy crap.
IoEstasCedonta 1 year ago
@IoEstasCedonta
lol
studio7manga 1 year ago
EXACTlY!!! they try to pretend it's not b/c they are embarrased that they believe the earth is 6k years old, and humans walked w/ dinosaurs. It's all b/c of fear my friend.
CharismaticRecluse 3 years ago 2
Exactly dude, lol! It cracks me up how advocates of ID don't really know what it means!
Dusty341 2 years ago
Like in the Intelligent Design textbooks, which where just Creationist textbooks where they replaced the word "Creationism" with "Intelligent Design"! LOL
BoyintheMachine 2 years ago