Its funny that theirs so many things being brought up about scientific research or proof of that bill is wrong in the points he made. I thought religous people dont beleive in studies and research because everthing is through god and everything you need to know is in which ever bible you believe. Theres no scientific proof that anything religous is real. Their are thousands of religions. So which one is right? Stop being a child. O and Snow White isnt real or Santa, Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy.
Memo: Religion has never been against,apart from or in condemnation of research. On the contrary, the lack of religion has opposed logic, reason and research.
Do not discuss what you have no knowledge of, let those of us in Religions deal with that. Who said only one must be right? lol. You lack so much information it's lil wonder you come out to embarrass yourself so.
Female dolphin virgins giving birth? What the fuck does that have to do with a woman carrying god's baby? Does god fuck dolphins too? That I might believe, they're cute.
Snakes communicate with each other therefore people can talk to snakes? No.
Also there is no way that fish could swallow a man, okay? No fucking way. not even a dwarf. No fucking way.
Thank god (hehe) the worlds scientists aren't as fucking retarded as this piece of shit. Go fuck yourself.
bahahahaha i have only just graduated school and i no more than u hahahaha if it were up to you we would have shorter life spans not have cars wouldnt no wich food would make us healthy and sick which is PROVED BY A STUDY!!!!!! we would not know the proper way to store food without making us sick and guess what computers with the internet and guess what no sewage system either like any one hear of the plague oh and as for athiests killing how bout when god killed everyone in a flood huh?
As to the vid maker's claim that circumsision reduces HIV transmission and therefore religion good-- sorry but there are many circumcized men with HIV, circumcision is not a protection against AIDS and most circumcisions are not done for religious reasons anyway, so your argument is pointless.
Maher's film allowed religious people to state there beliefs plainly; he did not distort what they hafe to say or use editing to give a misleading impression. They convicted themselves of stupidity out of their own mouths.
how do you get frozen in a fish?? wouldnt the fish be frozen too??... wait.... im sorry i forgot i dont care..... ignoramous, this video is literally as intuitive as a piece of shit
what is this shit? 10 minutes of my life wasted... snakes don't talk, a bush on fire eventually burns, a man inside of a whale gets totally fucked, and anyone who hears voices is crazy
AND Albert Einstein did not believe in the same god that this delusional guy believes it. When he said "god" he was referring to nature and the universe. Get your facts straight sir.
This is just one of the many delusional people who expect atheist's to prove completely beyond a doubt, our points. When they have no tangible proof at all. The only proof (if this is what you want to call it) they have is what 1 guy told another who told their kid who wrote it down a thousand years ago.
lmao ur comparing religion to food? food is proven to be real and we need it to live, religion is false and we do not need it, your a fucking idiot go off urself with a shotgun you fucking moron
@rroja haha its a good thing as well that the gideons put a bible in hotel rooms,it comes in handy if u run out of cigarette papers,keep up the good work gideons.
why dont you learn to speak english first before you start inturpeting the bible for us, you make zero sense, bill mahr makeing fun of christian ritualism , is the whole point of the segment you forgot to bring up, only pointing out basic contradiction in lazy self serving thinking "let go and let god" is how i think you assholes put it, get over yourself, no one know if there is or isnt a god , you are no different hypocryte!
I like that approach. According to this asshole you should go to church and argue the case that Jesus was the Sun. Just so you can hear both sides. But what you get is a one way serving of BULLSHIT!!!!! How one sided is your Sunday service. All one way. How about opening up the church to debate. Yeah, a Sunday debate about pagan origins of Jesus. Now were open to both sides!!!!
What is more likely, the laws of nature are suspended (virgin birth, talking snake, resurrection) or that a bunch of primitive men made up some stories to control you?
Free your mind of this sick indoctrination!
AgainstScienceCom, did you have the opportunity to become Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist etc etc?
Or were you indoctrinated with Christianity because that's what you were told as a child?
Science is as far form religion as one could possibly get. Science is based on logic, religion requires a lack of it, aka, faith. I don't know where you get these "facts" from. Honestly, get a grip.
The Source of science and the logic that understands and researches/searches it is God. God delivered religion to us. Science and true religion coincide.
Well whatever group that is missed the boat by like a few hundred years. Science has no need for God. God is a fairy tale. Pixies might as well have given us science. If you're just talking about nature or something being the source of science, well then that's redundant but right. But a supernatural being? No. The very opposite holds.
*facepalm*. Faith requires that you believe despite a complete lack of evidence. That's what faith is as far as the dictionary is concerned.
The concept of believing in a supernatural diety, or faith (correct me if I'm wrong), is built upon the concept of belief without any proof whatsoever. There is no logical reason in the book why one should, yet people do, and this is faith. Faith isn't really a lack of logic, it's a rejection of it.
The dictionary has nothing to do with Faith. Yes I'm correcting you, you're wrong on the topic. Belief without proof or reason is make believe; quite different from Faith which does not reject logic.
It might help your argument more if you could fucking pronounce the name of the movie and Bill Maher's name. After a mere 8 seconds, I'm already convinced you are retarded.
i suspected this would be another bullshit video bashing science. and wow all ur comments are so nice and wise. wow we should all look up to u now. u think bc u try to make us look like the bad guy by being so short and your little."oh im the bigger man im not bringin mself to your level" that makes u better or sumthin? dude your vid only shows one side of the story and its cut to distort the whole film so u can take it out of context. im not bashin u 4 believin im just sayin present better argu
Also, you cannot prove that Atheism or Agnosticism has killed more people than religion, because it's been proven false. More people have been killed in the name of religion than anything other cause.
This video does nothing but reassert the fact that most religious fanatics will stop at nothing blindly defending a cause they know little about. There are so many falacies and inaccuracies in this video, that you couldn't possibly hope to sway an educated viewer, and that's a fact.
Never said you were a Christian, I said that even Christians themselves, some of the more "rational" ones, dont believe in stories like the talking snake and Jonah and the whale. They're fairy tales, nothing more.
In order for something to exist, there has to be proof. The problem with religion is, it always falls short in that regard, and conveniently hides behind a requiement of "faith" in order to continue doing so.
This video is a joke. Anyone that listens to this whole thing should be laughing by the end of it.
You claim Bill did no homework yet you cant even remember the species of fish you are trying to cite in a hilariously ridiculous comparison of two different species having virgin births.
You also called a "grouper" a "cod". You also cited people survivng extreme cold for 30 minutes, not 3 days..
This is nothing but religious propoganda, awfully inaccurate and pathetically out of touch.
This is not a written, edited, directed movie. lol. You grab at straws. Google "Parthenogenesis". And the scripture I use did not mention '3 days' for Jonah. Even still, you can not disprove this frozen possibility of suspended animation. Cod it is.
There is no straws to grab at, unless this video is metaphorically an entire stack.
There are so many flaws in this video, it's untruthful, it's biased, it's overwhelmingly innaccurate, and I proved it, even though the burden of proof is on you, trying to get people to believe in things which dont scientifically exist. Most Christians at least admit stories like Jonah are fictitious. You're the one grasping at straws, friend.
yah i get that-and i will assume the answer to my question was no-the qeustion was the result of the first 45 seconds.If you did a documentary on religon would add the "what if"-as in rebutles for religon and how much bullshit it is.I am not interested in a slick religous minded response-or any for that matter.
I looked that term up. But it said no naturally occurring cases of parthenogenesis have ever been known to happen.
Could I get your opinion on when Bill pointed out that past religions around the Mediterranean in the BC era have had the same story of the virgin birth and wise men coming to bestow gifts upon him? It appears from that Christianity kind of stole that idea...no?
Well not exactly stole. I believe God creates generations in cycles and repeats similar events. Indeed Prophet Mohammed of Islam's tale is virtually identical to that of Moses, and it don't mean the Arabs stole the tale.
2ndly, there is an impossible barrier in deciphering hieroglyphs. That is- determining if tales are of past events or predictions. Perhaps the virgin tales were simple predictions of Mary..as (future events) are also written in past tense sometimes in the Bible.
I googled "The new york times parthenogenesis" just for you, found nothing to do with parthenogenesis in humans, would you be so kind as to provide a link?
there are NO natural occurrences of parthenogenesis in mammals.
Also to say "religion is right because circumcision reduces HIV transference" and then to say that bill only presents one side of the argument is hypocrisy of the highest order, bearing in mind the catholic church say that condoms ARE WORSE for HIV transfer.
Equally, there may well be other gospels but they still give completely differing accounts.
well i'm afraid it's the same in islam, AND the anglican church's posiiton on birth control is that of condemnation. the Christian institute also frowns on it. you're deluded if you think they don't count as religion.
Well i'm telling you now, parthenogenesis does not occur in mammals by natural means, it has to be induced in simple mammals like mice, and the process is too complex for the more extravogent genome of humans. onus of proof IS on you to show that it can occur.
I did not mention condoms here...what took this discussion to condoms? Wow?
Circumcision prescribed by Monotheism and ridiculed by your mentor, would have prevented the HIV crises we now have...and that is fact. Stay focused here...try to.
Parthogenesis is statistically 1/10,000,000 humans. No scientist can EVER prove it hasn't/doesn't occur by chance. Onus is on you deniers of these to prove their statistical and scientific impossibility.
you're missing the point, if you're going to say "religion would have prevented this" you must also accept the terrible things done in its name FOR INSTANCE saying that condoms increase the risk of contracting HIV, which is obviously a lie.
simply citing that you can't prove a negative don't give your claims credability.
And they're not the statistics at all, otherwise we'd see human parthonagenesis rarely, but we would see it.
well if you take sola scriptura than the incoherences are clear. which it seems as if you do.
RELIGION HAS A DIRECT RELATIONSHIP TO FAITH!!!
the point isn't suddenly invalid because you don't think it fits into the discourse of the movie. religion is solely responsible for the genital mutilation of young women, fact. now i can't see how you can defend faith by saying that it prescribes circumcision then when i cite that it abuses young girls USING THE SAME PIECE OF SCRIPTURE ignore it.
Also, who's grappling here? for you one minute to cite references to parthenogenesis then take a defensive position when i contradict them is grappling as far as i'm concerned. You're clearly trying to remedy your faith with science, or at the very least trying to undermine the science.
I bet you're the sort of person that uses the bible as a source text.
Just as I said in the video. Is this an attack on popular priests or Imams or practitioners or an attack on the fundamentals of religion? Define yourself. I can't defend erry priest or Imam that exists. I onli need defend religion as is in the Holy books. Get it now?
i can mock it, bearing in mind i already told you that it cannot occur in mammals by natural means, don't say you've proven otherwise because you haven't, there's NO EVIDENCE that parthenogenesis occurs in humans. you've yet to cite ONE piece of evidence that it does, and yet again the burden of proof lies with you.
equally a virgin birth is different to parthenogenesis, but i suppose it's easy for you to sweep that under the carpet, just as it is all your other misconceptions.
one, my mentor? two, did you not read the report i sent you a link to?
you've proven NOTHING, you've made NO citations, and as you can't prove a negative it falls on you, and the rest of your fundamentalist friends to prove that parthenogenesis is not only possible in mammals by natural means, but that it can then be possible in humans, AND EVEN THEN, even if you manage to show that jesus himself was a product of this, that's still not proof that he was the son of a deity.
Oh, that's where u coming from. Of course not. Jesus is and was NEVER and never said he was, the son of God. That's what created your aversion. ohhkay. Jesus himself is as averse to such ridiculous fallacy as you are, be assured.
Don't let mix ups, usually applied to Religion by atheists and disbelievers to let you loose the real true content.
No. God has no son...how can He? That's an oxymoron...and a total impossibility and contradiction. lol lol lol
what you're talking about is abiogenesis, i thought that someone who claims to be a doctor would know that.
the difference between my assertions and yours is that mine are backed up by science, yours are speculation, and not even logical or intelligent speculation at that. i child can see that the argument from design is fundamentally flawed.
go back to whatever two bit university you got your degree from and ask for a refund, may fund some research on parthenogenesis.
There is no unequivocal scientific evidence for abiogenesis or unintelligent evolution. Nor can there ever be...unless a time machine is created. And then it will be argued that the time machine distorted the observations.
The fact that these are THEORIES and not facts goes to show. Perhaps you didnt notice they are but 'theories'.
"..In mammals parthenogenesis can begin if an egg is accidentally or experimentally activated as if it had been fertilised - but this parthenote never grows past a few days.."
At a point, this was considered biologically impossible...now it has been found possible.
You need stop being an 'the-earth-is-flat' adherent, seriously.
this video just shows how far and deep religious people will go to defend religion. I followed it up until he tried to explain the virgin birth. then I laughed my but off and moved on. Some people are just to far gone. there is nothing we can do
Read the excerpts on the movie....and google it. Hitler was no christian. Or do u say he was a Muslim? Cuz he hated the church and jews(who christians adore) more than anything else.
There exists, not only the batisim and conformation records from the church in Austria, as well as the birth record which indicates his Christian birth.
I have read and written on the movie, which I watched in full on a couple of occassions. I found it to be highly ineffective as a documentary.
Why would you purport to say I would say Hitler was Muslim? That is perhaps a falicy best left to the revisionist mystics, don't you think?
Actually whilst stalin was an atheist he was actually on quite good terms with the russian orthodox church. he understood that he needed church support for the econd world war. he even instated its first patriarch.
ok at 1:30 i paused it. i paused it because it was too ridiculous to listen any further. please tell me that all nine plus minutes isn't you talking this crap
But really I could only listen to about 2 minutes of this before I could not listen to this bullshit anymore. You sir, obviosly were brainwashed by your parents at a young age.
comparing someone attacking religion to starving is moronic. I mean no offense to you, but comparing not eating to disproving magic is a childish thing to say.
The "What if'' you are trying to present is based on magic. There is no place for magic in a logical argument. Look up the definition of magic and power in the dictionary. You will find that when your "god" creates the earth he has magic. And when he influences people he uses power. The dictionary will back me on this. Bill Maher is attacking religion because it is based on adults believing in magic. Adults believing in magic is absurd in every sense of the term.
And yet another: Volume 9, Book 84, Number 58: This one is particularly long, and even more insane than the other, I beg you to read this and explain why this is something you consider moraly acceptible to tell little kids.
Sorry, I pasted the wrong references - here is the right one
Volume 9, Book 83, Number 17:
Narrated 'Abdullah:
Allah's Apostle said, "The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims."
I am fond of Buddhism, particularly because of it's acceptence of the scientific method, and its consistancy in promoting nonviolence to all sentient beings. . Have you read the Kalama Sutta?
I have not yet read it, but I will look for it and study it. I love many aspects of Buddhism. the fundamental doctrine of all religions is- 'Peace', Islam means peace. Christ said- he leaves us with 'Peace'. Peace is the code and no doubt Buddhists stamped that. I do have some problems with them though- idols, and revering their Prophet- Budha. Prophets are not to be revered, Christians revered Christ, Buddhists- Budha, etc. Kalama Sutta. i will get it. Thanks
Peace is important. Do you think that the Quran has been used inaproprialy by the Jihadi movement to carry out violence? We hear a lot in this country about a war on Islam. Why do Americans only see one side of this otherwise peaceful religion?
When Saudi sent Osama on exile, it was the CIA that took him in and trained him, and i never saw a memo where they fired him, so I believe he is still on their employ.
In same fashion, the entire Muslim world hated Saddam, he was known to have only one friend= USA. USA gave him WMD's to use on his people and Iran. I think the source of all the worst mischief, hate, wickedness and war on Earth is clear.
The Quran is the only scripture till date that there is evidence it has not been adulterated. The original Quran is still on earth with the UN. The post WWll treaty or Versailles makes mention of this first Quran still available. Authentic scripture is free of evil corruption. Till date I am yet to find a single error in the Book.
It is perfect, and the last revelation that safe guards all the rest before it, letting us know what's right from what's corrupted.
As for the Buddha. He means different things to different Buddhist sects. if you want to investigate the two most contrasting Buddha figures I would look up Pure Land , and then compare that to the oldest remaining sect Theravada.
Well I am going to turn in for the night. It was worthwhile talking to you. I think we have reached a better understanding of each others points of view. Sorry for the name calling, I need to demonstrate more patience, thats why I study Buddhism. Let me know what you reflections on the Kalama Sutta are some time. I am interested in how you will respond. Goodnight and God Bless
Thank you, was interesting talking to you too. Buddhism is beautiful, and we all need a piece of it...Yoga is great too for the mind and body environment, it helps the circulation. We all need more patience, i think I need it more than you.
Thanks for the challenge, and keep on challenging, stay blessed.
Mybe you need a lesson on Islam. According to saeveral scholarly references "The four major Sunni Madh'hab (schools of Islamic jurisprudence) and the Twelver Shi'a Jafari madhab agree that a sane adult male apostate must be executed." See verses [Qur'an 3:72], [Qur'an 3:90],[Qur'an 16:106],[Qur'an 4:137] and [Qur'an 5:54
You asked me what Quran says. Here are the verses, what about them?
[3.72] And a party of the followers of the Book say: Avow belief in that which has been revealed to those who believe, in the first part of the day, and disbelieve at the end of it, perhaps they go back on their religion.
or
[3.90] Surely, those who disbelieve a,fter their believing, then increase in unbelief, their repentance shall not be accepted, and these are they that go astray.
[16.106] He who disbelieves in Allah after his having believed, not he who is compelled while his heart is at rest on account of faith, but he who opens (his) breast to disbelief-- on these is the wrath of Allah, and they shall have a grievous chastisement.
[4.137] Surely (as for) those who believe then disbelieve, again believe and again disbelieve, then increase in disbelief, Allah will not forgive them nor guide them in the (right) path.
[5.54] O you who believe! whoever from among you turns back from his religion, then Allah will bring a people, He shall love them and they shall love Him, lowly before the believers, mighty against the unbelievers, they shall strive hard in Allah's way and shall not fear the censure of any censurer; ..
All these condemn people who do not believe in God anymore. So? Our duty on Earth is to be of the Religions, believers in Our Creator.
You were only part right to use Einstein as an example to support your claim. This is what he said on the matter.
Albert Einstein
"A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death. "
Keep in mind also that some people, galleleo, socrates, plato, etc.. were under enourmous amounts of pressure to conform to religious institutional power. You can't be entierly sure that everything religious institutions take credit for were really inspired by a divine being.
William Bateson (18611926): British geneticist, a Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge, where he eventually became Master. He was the first person to use the term genetics to describe the study of heredity and biological inheritance, and the chief populariser of the ideas of Gregor Mendel following their rediscovery.[5]
Patrick Blackett OM, CH, FRS (18971974): Nobel Prize winning English experimental physicist known for his work on cloud chambers, cosmic rays, and paleomagnetism.[6]
Quran first used the term- 'amshajin', which means 'gene strand'. And used the word to describe inheritance. The Prophet Mohammed expanded on it, referring to assortment, phenotypes, and the like. It's all on the AgainstScienceCom website. Check tag 'chromosomes' or search for it.
This is crap.
wjarnock44 4 weeks ago
This guy is a moron.
dd222111 10 months ago
@dd222111
..and it takes one to know one. lollll
drbrimah007 10 months ago
Circumcision reduces the incidence of HIV infection? It's a coincidence, not causation.
arrdeee 10 months ago
@arrdeee
Not really. Or rather- no.
drbrimah007 10 months ago
Against science? You're an idiot. Put down that keyboard caveboy.
maugustyniak 1 year ago
This guy is like a five year old. Bless his heart!
Northspears 1 year ago
Go do your skit in front of a mirror, and tell me what you think
kjmg65 1 year ago
Its funny that theirs so many things being brought up about scientific research or proof of that bill is wrong in the points he made. I thought religous people dont beleive in studies and research because everthing is through god and everything you need to know is in which ever bible you believe. Theres no scientific proof that anything religous is real. Their are thousands of religions. So which one is right? Stop being a child. O and Snow White isnt real or Santa, Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy.
hollyhillearly 1 year ago
@hollyhillearly
Memo: Religion has never been against,apart from or in condemnation of research. On the contrary, the lack of religion has opposed logic, reason and research.
Do not discuss what you have no knowledge of, let those of us in Religions deal with that. Who said only one must be right? lol. You lack so much information it's lil wonder you come out to embarrass yourself so.
drbrimah007 1 year ago
Female dolphin virgins giving birth? What the fuck does that have to do with a woman carrying god's baby? Does god fuck dolphins too? That I might believe, they're cute.
Snakes communicate with each other therefore people can talk to snakes? No.
Also there is no way that fish could swallow a man, okay? No fucking way. not even a dwarf. No fucking way.
Thank god (hehe) the worlds scientists aren't as fucking retarded as this piece of shit. Go fuck yourself.
CigarilloMan 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
if you are against science, how come you are using a computer?
Raptors09999 1 year ago
whoa..the maker of this video is naive and a fool!
bananacake100 1 year ago
@bananacake100
Then you must be the maker. lollllll
drbrimah007 1 year ago
somebody take that bucket of this dickheads head before he hurts mimself.
megamus3 1 year ago
bahahahaha i have only just graduated school and i no more than u hahahaha if it were up to you we would have shorter life spans not have cars wouldnt no wich food would make us healthy and sick which is PROVED BY A STUDY!!!!!! we would not know the proper way to store food without making us sick and guess what computers with the internet and guess what no sewage system either like any one hear of the plague oh and as for athiests killing how bout when god killed everyone in a flood huh?
12345gdaymate 1 year ago
What the fuck are you talking about?! I think you have a man crush on Bill
brauny1022 1 year ago
As to the vid maker's claim that circumsision reduces HIV transmission and therefore religion good-- sorry but there are many circumcized men with HIV, circumcision is not a protection against AIDS and most circumcisions are not done for religious reasons anyway, so your argument is pointless.
pwnUgood 1 year ago
Maher's film allowed religious people to state there beliefs plainly; he did not distort what they hafe to say or use editing to give a misleading impression. They convicted themselves of stupidity out of their own mouths.
pwnUgood 1 year ago
how do you get frozen in a fish?? wouldnt the fish be frozen too??... wait.... im sorry i forgot i dont care..... ignoramous, this video is literally as intuitive as a piece of shit
jssfrk01 1 year ago
@jssfrk01
I guess you have no knowledge of ocean temperatures and life. Oh my.
drbrimah007 1 year ago
what is this shit? 10 minutes of my life wasted... snakes don't talk, a bush on fire eventually burns, a man inside of a whale gets totally fucked, and anyone who hears voices is crazy
hellraiser313 1 year ago
this movie is super!
sunbeamcatcher 1 year ago
AND Albert Einstein did not believe in the same god that this delusional guy believes it. When he said "god" he was referring to nature and the universe. Get your facts straight sir.
Iceman910902 2 years ago
This is just one of the many delusional people who expect atheist's to prove completely beyond a doubt, our points. When they have no tangible proof at all. The only proof (if this is what you want to call it) they have is what 1 guy told another who told their kid who wrote it down a thousand years ago.
Iceman910902 2 years ago
waste of time to make this video
gachter 2 years ago
lmao ur comparing religion to food? food is proven to be real and we need it to live, religion is false and we do not need it, your a fucking idiot go off urself with a shotgun you fucking moron
Playmeforit 2 years ago
hahahaha you are retarded.
OfficerTrapis 2 years ago
i like this
"facts and mathematicians prove that evolution can not occur without guidance"
what are the facts and who are the mathematicians?
I also like how you believe that people learned that sex causes babies through organised religion.
A handful of made-up facts does not a valid argument create my good friend. I suggest you go back to the drawing board and regather your arguments.
stoltobot 2 years ago
i pity the fool who made this video
jeremyshambles 2 years ago
This poor man... the creator of this video is the victim of an aggressive and well-developed meme. His brain seems to have been hijacked...
dmcgraye 2 years ago 9
The Bible saves me lots of money on toilet paper
rroja 2 years ago 20
@rroja haha its a good thing as well that the gideons put a bible in hotel rooms,it comes in handy if u run out of cigarette papers,keep up the good work gideons.
megamus3 1 year ago
why dont you learn to speak english first before you start inturpeting the bible for us, you make zero sense, bill mahr makeing fun of christian ritualism , is the whole point of the segment you forgot to bring up, only pointing out basic contradiction in lazy self serving thinking "let go and let god" is how i think you assholes put it, get over yourself, no one know if there is or isnt a god , you are no different hypocryte!
triplecoiler01 2 years ago
I like that approach. According to this asshole you should go to church and argue the case that Jesus was the Sun. Just so you can hear both sides. But what you get is a one way serving of BULLSHIT!!!!! How one sided is your Sunday service. All one way. How about opening up the church to debate. Yeah, a Sunday debate about pagan origins of Jesus. Now were open to both sides!!!!
Maber01 2 years ago
What is more likely, the laws of nature are suspended (virgin birth, talking snake, resurrection) or that a bunch of primitive men made up some stories to control you?
Free your mind of this sick indoctrination!
AgainstScienceCom, did you have the opportunity to become Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist etc etc?
Or were you indoctrinated with Christianity because that's what you were told as a child?
mrmirth71 2 years ago 2
NOWHERE is there evidence that atheists kill 10 times more. Nowhere. So for me to disprove something you pulled out of your ass, is impossible.
whitenegro88 2 years ago
Watch my other video: ' Atheism Has Nothing On Religion' and let me know if you still feel the same. :)
Peace
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
@AgainstScienceCom atheist have the lowest crime rate of all minoritys and even majoritys dumbass
patrickledford420 1 year ago
9:18 where'd you get those numbers from
10 times more? That's bullshit.
whitenegro88 2 years ago
which numbers?
Please disprove me...
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
haha you are retarded
OfficerTrapis 2 years ago
@AgainstScienceCom its your claim so you prove it right
patrickledford420 1 year ago
6:54
That is Newtan's LAW not Einstein's theory. Do YOUR homework.
whitenegro88 2 years ago
Thanks
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
DOLPHINS??????? Dolphins are not people
whitenegro88 2 years ago
and saying DUHHH makes you sound like an idiot.
whitenegro88 2 years ago
Religious Leaders are smart people, the people who follow and believe them, are stupid! Simple as that!
Rikeeboy 2 years ago
If there was a way to argue with religius people, there would be no religius people - dr.House
paganfeaster 2 years ago
Go ahead and argue...
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
wow man great quote i havent heard that one.
guitaristcdc002 2 years ago
People, here is an excellent reason why you should not be religious. You end up like this guy. With an anti-science banner in your video.
YOU go live in the woods without science
WE'LL move humanity forward
SevenRiderAirForce 2 years ago
Against Science does NOT mean, anti-science. it means- Science leans against Religion. religion is the foundation of all science. Fact.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
Science is as far form religion as one could possibly get. Science is based on logic, religion requires a lack of it, aka, faith. I don't know where you get these "facts" from. Honestly, get a grip.
SevenRiderAirForce 2 years ago
The Source of science and the logic that understands and researches/searches it is God. God delivered religion to us. Science and true religion coincide.
Visit AgainstScience website to verify stuff.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
@AgainstScienceCom
Well whatever group that is missed the boat by like a few hundred years. Science has no need for God. God is a fairy tale. Pixies might as well have given us science. If you're just talking about nature or something being the source of science, well then that's redundant but right. But a supernatural being? No. The very opposite holds.
SevenRiderAirForce 2 years ago
Just because you say that does not make it true. You have no proof to back that up.
whitenegro88 2 years ago
@SevenRiderAirForce
Faith is NOT the lack of logic. You might learn something about the topic before forming opinions. Or not (LOL)
razeontherock 2 years ago
*facepalm*. Faith requires that you believe despite a complete lack of evidence. That's what faith is as far as the dictionary is concerned.
The concept of believing in a supernatural diety, or faith (correct me if I'm wrong), is built upon the concept of belief without any proof whatsoever. There is no logical reason in the book why one should, yet people do, and this is faith. Faith isn't really a lack of logic, it's a rejection of it.
SevenRiderAirForce 2 years ago
The dictionary has nothing to do with Faith. Yes I'm correcting you, you're wrong on the topic. Belief without proof or reason is make believe; quite different from Faith which does not reject logic.
razeontherock 2 years ago
It might help your argument more if you could fucking pronounce the name of the movie and Bill Maher's name. After a mere 8 seconds, I'm already convinced you are retarded.
badtown88 2 years ago
lol what quoting you "facts and mathematicians prove..." blah blah blah
listen up dumb fuck....what they prove is that Evolution is real.
if they prove the opposite (which is a lie)
send me the proof. Do why can't you? lol because you don't have it!
Hagar013 2 years ago
Did the video deny evolution. You could have tried to listen.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
bull fuck Science Is King of the world
and btw you guys also only present only one side of the argument.
You now deserve a spot on my wall on youtube.
Hagar013 2 years ago
Your video is total crap. A giant cod, auto insemination, please. I wish I could give this video less than 1 star.
dhmilo 2 years ago
wow i couldnt even begin to point out all of the fallacies in this video. ur on ur own to deal with your stupidity.
guitaristcdc002 2 years ago
I suspected you wouldn't be able to...
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
i suspected this would be another bullshit video bashing science. and wow all ur comments are so nice and wise. wow we should all look up to u now. u think bc u try to make us look like the bad guy by being so short and your little."oh im the bigger man im not bringin mself to your level" that makes u better or sumthin? dude your vid only shows one side of the story and its cut to distort the whole film so u can take it out of context. im not bashin u 4 believin im just sayin present better argu
guitaristcdc002 2 years ago
Also, you cannot prove that Atheism or Agnosticism has killed more people than religion, because it's been proven false. More people have been killed in the name of religion than anything other cause.
This video does nothing but reassert the fact that most religious fanatics will stop at nothing blindly defending a cause they know little about. There are so many falacies and inaccuracies in this video, that you couldn't possibly hope to sway an educated viewer, and that's a fact.
VodkaphileTTG 2 years ago
Watch my video: "Atheism has nothing on religion". the proof of the danger of atheism is in there.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
You offer no proof, only waxed figures and general religious propoganda.
VodkaphileTTG 2 years ago
ok...
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
Never said you were a Christian, I said that even Christians themselves, some of the more "rational" ones, dont believe in stories like the talking snake and Jonah and the whale. They're fairy tales, nothing more.
In order for something to exist, there has to be proof. The problem with religion is, it always falls short in that regard, and conveniently hides behind a requiement of "faith" in order to continue doing so.
VodkaphileTTG 2 years ago
This video is a joke. Anyone that listens to this whole thing should be laughing by the end of it.
You claim Bill did no homework yet you cant even remember the species of fish you are trying to cite in a hilariously ridiculous comparison of two different species having virgin births.
You also called a "grouper" a "cod". You also cited people survivng extreme cold for 30 minutes, not 3 days..
This is nothing but religious propoganda, awfully inaccurate and pathetically out of touch.
VodkaphileTTG 2 years ago
This is not a written, edited, directed movie. lol. You grab at straws. Google "Parthenogenesis". And the scripture I use did not mention '3 days' for Jonah. Even still, you can not disprove this frozen possibility of suspended animation. Cod it is.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
There is no straws to grab at, unless this video is metaphorically an entire stack.
There are so many flaws in this video, it's untruthful, it's biased, it's overwhelmingly innaccurate, and I proved it, even though the burden of proof is on you, trying to get people to believe in things which dont scientifically exist. Most Christians at least admit stories like Jonah are fictitious. You're the one grasping at straws, friend.
VodkaphileTTG 2 years ago
not a christian...
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
You sure make a good case for Atheism.
PotSmokingAtheist 2 years ago
if you made a movie about god would you include athiest-maybe highlight there best points and arguments.
milo555a 2 years ago
This movie was not about atheism....in fact it doesn't even deserve this attention, a comedy is all it was...comedy for money.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
yah i get that-and i will assume the answer to my question was no-the qeustion was the result of the first 45 seconds.If you did a documentary on religon would add the "what if"-as in rebutles for religon and how much bullshit it is.I am not interested in a slick religous minded response-or any for that matter.
milo555a 2 years ago
His movie- Religion is ridiculous. You must define what will be if it weren't ridiculous.
If a movie was- Atheism-ridiculous, of course we must define life without atheism.
Air-ridiculous - we must define life without air.
You agree?
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
You just said virgin births do occur. Can you provide me a name, just one please? I'm serious, I want to know out of curiosity.
Could you also give me the scientific explanation behind Noah's arc, and how a man lived many hundreds of years and collected every animal?
LeifEiriksson 2 years ago
In science the statistical occurence of Virgin births in human populations is 1/10,000,000
It's called Parthenogenesis. Read that up.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
I looked that term up. But it said no naturally occurring cases of parthenogenesis have ever been known to happen.
Could I get your opinion on when Bill pointed out that past religions around the Mediterranean in the BC era have had the same story of the virgin birth and wise men coming to bestow gifts upon him? It appears from that Christianity kind of stole that idea...no?
LeifEiriksson 2 years ago
Well not exactly stole. I believe God creates generations in cycles and repeats similar events. Indeed Prophet Mohammed of Islam's tale is virtually identical to that of Moses, and it don't mean the Arabs stole the tale.
2ndly, there is an impossible barrier in deciphering hieroglyphs. That is- determining if tales are of past events or predictions. Perhaps the virgin tales were simple predictions of Mary..as (future events) are also written in past tense sometimes in the Bible.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
Funnily enough, this somehow managed to be even more pathetic than most arguments I see coming from Christian apologetics.
superfob54 2 years ago
parthenogenesis does not occur in humans, period.
Richy15251 2 years ago
Prove it.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
The onus of proof is not on me, you asserted an idea, therefore the burden of proof is on you.
There are no documented cases of parthenogenesis occurring in humans.
Richy15251 2 years ago
Google it. It's 1/10 Million in humans (NY Times). Now the onus is on you and Bill Maher to prove it doesn't. If you cant...u are excused.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
I googled "The new york times parthenogenesis" just for you, found nothing to do with parthenogenesis in humans, would you be so kind as to provide a link?
Richy15251 2 years ago
I'm sorry. I meant 'washingtonpost'.
Archives of 2007/06/08
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
couldn't find it, if you could post a link.
Richy15251 2 years ago
there are NO natural occurrences of parthenogenesis in mammals.
Also to say "religion is right because circumcision reduces HIV transference" and then to say that bill only presents one side of the argument is hypocrisy of the highest order, bearing in mind the catholic church say that condoms ARE WORSE for HIV transfer.
Equally, there may well be other gospels but they still give completely differing accounts.
hitchy249 2 years ago
You are grappling.
Catholicism is not 'Religion'.
Not witnessed in recent science, does not mean 'not possible'/ 'doesn't occur'.
Thank me later.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
well i'm afraid it's the same in islam, AND the anglican church's posiiton on birth control is that of condemnation. the Christian institute also frowns on it. you're deluded if you think they don't count as religion.
Well i'm telling you now, parthenogenesis does not occur in mammals by natural means, it has to be induced in simple mammals like mice, and the process is too complex for the more extravogent genome of humans. onus of proof IS on you to show that it can occur.
hitchy249 2 years ago
I did not mention condoms here...what took this discussion to condoms? Wow?
Circumcision prescribed by Monotheism and ridiculed by your mentor, would have prevented the HIV crises we now have...and that is fact. Stay focused here...try to.
Parthogenesis is statistically 1/10,000,000 humans. No scientist can EVER prove it hasn't/doesn't occur by chance. Onus is on you deniers of these to prove their statistical and scientific impossibility.
U are boring us here now...
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
you're missing the point, if you're going to say "religion would have prevented this" you must also accept the terrible things done in its name FOR INSTANCE saying that condoms increase the risk of contracting HIV, which is obviously a lie.
simply citing that you can't prove a negative don't give your claims credability.
And they're not the statistics at all, otherwise we'd see human parthonagenesis rarely, but we would see it.
clinging to false hope much?
hitchy249 2 years ago
You have said nothing since we began our dialogue.
His movie was 'Religion-lous', not 'faith...or practice-luous'.
He attacked religion. Now I ask you for one incoherent thing in true scripture... Just 1 will suffice.
And he attacked circumcision blanketly. Wtf are you talking about? Where did he mention 'female'?
He ridiculed it...or you wish for adult circumcision to reduce HIV when they are already sexually active?
Geez...ok, you succeeded in becoming a bug.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
well if you take sola scriptura than the incoherences are clear. which it seems as if you do.
RELIGION HAS A DIRECT RELATIONSHIP TO FAITH!!!
the point isn't suddenly invalid because you don't think it fits into the discourse of the movie. religion is solely responsible for the genital mutilation of young women, fact. now i can't see how you can defend faith by saying that it prescribes circumcision then when i cite that it abuses young girls USING THE SAME PIECE OF SCRIPTURE ignore it.
hitchy249 2 years ago
Ok, let's solve this easily.
Please provide us a quote from authentic scripture that recommends genital mutilation of females...
Thanks in advance.
:)
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
Also, who's grappling here? for you one minute to cite references to parthenogenesis then take a defensive position when i contradict them is grappling as far as i'm concerned. You're clearly trying to remedy your faith with science, or at the very least trying to undermine the science.
I bet you're the sort of person that uses the bible as a source text.
hitchy249 2 years ago
Just as I said in the video. Is this an attack on popular priests or Imams or practitioners or an attack on the fundamentals of religion? Define yourself. I can't defend erry priest or Imam that exists. I onli need defend religion as is in the Holy books. Get it now?
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
right obviously if you're making this point you've misunderstood the whole film. It's the notion of faith he's attacking.
Also, bill doesn't attack circumcision as a medical procedure, he attacks it is forced upon children, which included female "circumcision".
if you're really defending the holy books i need say no more, they are immoral, incoherent, self refuting, historically inaccurate, babble.
then you go on to defend intelligent design, i mean this really is grasping at straws now.
hitchy249 2 years ago
No
I do not use Bible as source text. the Bible has been thoroughly corrupted...and I mentioned this in the video clip.
You can not mock my claim of parthenogenesis unless you prove that it has absolutely never occurred. Get it?
Till then, my belief is as possible as your belief on virgin births.... and scientifically and statistically such aberrations are POSSIBLE!
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
i can mock it, bearing in mind i already told you that it cannot occur in mammals by natural means, don't say you've proven otherwise because you haven't, there's NO EVIDENCE that parthenogenesis occurs in humans. you've yet to cite ONE piece of evidence that it does, and yet again the burden of proof lies with you.
equally a virgin birth is different to parthenogenesis, but i suppose it's easy for you to sweep that under the carpet, just as it is all your other misconceptions.
hitchy249 2 years ago
Prove that it can't and has never happened in mammals.
If you can't do so, then this is an open argument and not one that deserves your skewed, spinal reaction.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
OH MY GOD ARE YOU OFF YOUR ROCKER??? i just said, the burden of proof lays at YOUR door.
hitchy249 2 years ago
No Sr/Ma,
You and your mentor came out and called our claim impossible. I have proven it is possible and 1/10,000,000
It's for you guys to prove that that possibility is impossible.
Neeway, I am done beating this dead horse.
Neeother substantial query?
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
one, my mentor? two, did you not read the report i sent you a link to?
you've proven NOTHING, you've made NO citations, and as you can't prove a negative it falls on you, and the rest of your fundamentalist friends to prove that parthenogenesis is not only possible in mammals by natural means, but that it can then be possible in humans, AND EVEN THEN, even if you manage to show that jesus himself was a product of this, that's still not proof that he was the son of a deity.
nutjob
hitchy249 2 years ago
lol.
Oh, that's where u coming from. Of course not. Jesus is and was NEVER and never said he was, the son of God. That's what created your aversion. ohhkay. Jesus himself is as averse to such ridiculous fallacy as you are, be assured.
Don't let mix ups, usually applied to Religion by atheists and disbelievers to let you loose the real true content.
No. God has no son...how can He? That's an oxymoron...and a total impossibility and contradiction. lol lol lol
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
If you believe that the first bang could Big. That life could spark out of non-life.
Then you disagree that an event of parthenogenesis could have occured.
You certainly have the most awkward and unscaled system of acceptance and rejection of possibilities.
1/10,000,000 for parthenogenesis. Now, do you know the statistical possibility of unintelligent evolution?
lol
lol
lol
You should be on the hot seat defending the Big bang and uninteligent design possibility.
Pathetic.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
what you're talking about is abiogenesis, i thought that someone who claims to be a doctor would know that.
the difference between my assertions and yours is that mine are backed up by science, yours are speculation, and not even logical or intelligent speculation at that. i child can see that the argument from design is fundamentally flawed.
go back to whatever two bit university you got your degree from and ask for a refund, may fund some research on parthenogenesis.
hitchy249 2 years ago
foot in mouth again.
There is no unequivocal scientific evidence for abiogenesis or unintelligent evolution. Nor can there ever be...unless a time machine is created. And then it will be argued that the time machine distorted the observations.
The fact that these are THEORIES and not facts goes to show. Perhaps you didnt notice they are but 'theories'.
lol
lol
You are sport.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
a child not i child.
hitchy249 2 years ago
what???
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
Quoted from NewScientist 21 April 2004
Keyword- "accidentally"...miraculously.
"..In mammals parthenogenesis can begin if an egg is accidentally or experimentally activated as if it had been fertilised - but this parthenote never grows past a few days.."
At a point, this was considered biologically impossible...now it has been found possible.
You need stop being an 'the-earth-is-flat' adherent, seriously.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
this video just shows how far and deep religious people will go to defend religion. I followed it up until he tried to explain the virgin birth. then I laughed my but off and moved on. Some people are just to far gone. there is nothing we can do
SOEHS2YIMMT 2 years ago
Stupid Douche Bag
Do Re Mi....
DoucheBagster 2 years ago
Dude... there is NO god. Never was. Never will be.
Please snap out of it. It's 2009. It's embarrassing.
Krumbz2003 2 years ago
POOR vid
no1saphead 2 years ago
Religion is primitive superstition.
TheGodWhisperer 2 years ago
lol, you sir, are a fool
chaoszieg 2 years ago
dont compare religion to food seriously!
matteozinho 2 years ago
Stalin, Hitler and Mao. Of those three, only one - Stalin - was athiest. Hitler was a Christian (of the Catholic faith) and Mao was Taoist.
forloveoffilm 2 years ago
Read the excerpts on the movie....and google it. Hitler was no christian. Or do u say he was a Muslim? Cuz he hated the church and jews(who christians adore) more than anything else.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
There exists, not only the batisim and conformation records from the church in Austria, as well as the birth record which indicates his Christian birth.
I have read and written on the movie, which I watched in full on a couple of occassions. I found it to be highly ineffective as a documentary.
Why would you purport to say I would say Hitler was Muslim? That is perhaps a falicy best left to the revisionist mystics, don't you think?
forloveoffilm 2 years ago
Being born Christian and/or baptized means nothing as per his adult life?
In adult life he was the greatest enemy of christianity and its parent- Judaism. So what does that tell you? read his words. Did you?
That's why i said, that unless you suggest another faith, he was for a fact not Christian anymore.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
Christians dont adore jews!
Are you kidding me!?
matteozinho 2 years ago
Hitler was raised Catholic and came from a Catholic family.
Krumbz2003 2 years ago
Actually whilst stalin was an atheist he was actually on quite good terms with the russian orthodox church. he understood that he needed church support for the econd world war. he even instated its first patriarch.
hitchy249 2 years ago
6:54 When did Einstein plagerize Newton and take credit for Newton's law of action/reaction?
forloveoffilm 2 years ago
No, who said? My bad, u get the message.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
4:54 - I think I missed something somewhere. When did dolphins get re-classified from being mammals?
forloveoffilm 2 years ago
Twas actually sharks that that happened to.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
ok at 1:30 i paused it. i paused it because it was too ridiculous to listen any further. please tell me that all nine plus minutes isn't you talking this crap
TheSunsetHero 2 years ago
Idiot. Fail.
matthewschramm1983 2 years ago
you suck! i think you are religulous! how can you compare food with religion...retard
Hasher28 2 years ago
lol
visit the site ;)
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
What the hell are you talking about? He is making people think and ask questions. And you are doing a good job of making fun of yourself.
allme360mg 2 years ago 2
lol
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
But really I could only listen to about 2 minutes of this before I could not listen to this bullshit anymore. You sir, obviosly were brainwashed by your parents at a young age.
Zaphkielonoma 2 years ago 2
comparing someone attacking religion to starving is moronic. I mean no offense to you, but comparing not eating to disproving magic is a childish thing to say.
Zaphkielonoma 2 years ago
The "What if'' you are trying to present is based on magic. There is no place for magic in a logical argument. Look up the definition of magic and power in the dictionary. You will find that when your "god" creates the earth he has magic. And when he influences people he uses power. The dictionary will back me on this. Bill Maher is attacking religion because it is based on adults believing in magic. Adults believing in magic is absurd in every sense of the term.
Zaphkielonoma 2 years ago
And yet another: Volume 9, Book 84, Number 58: This one is particularly long, and even more insane than the other, I beg you to read this and explain why this is something you consider moraly acceptible to tell little kids.
whatisdrunkal 2 years ago
Sorry, I pasted the wrong references - here is the right one
Volume 9, Book 83, Number 17:
Narrated 'Abdullah:
Allah's Apostle said, "The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims."
whatisdrunkal 2 years ago
Let's stick with the Quran please.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
Why do you believe in the Quran?
whatisdrunkal 2 years ago
Yes, Quran100% and then I select from Hadith, and Apocrypha, and Hindu scripture and OT and NT, and Egyptian scripture, etc.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
I am fond of Buddhism, particularly because of it's acceptence of the scientific method, and its consistancy in promoting nonviolence to all sentient beings. . Have you read the Kalama Sutta?
whatisdrunkal 2 years ago
I have not yet read it, but I will look for it and study it. I love many aspects of Buddhism. the fundamental doctrine of all religions is- 'Peace', Islam means peace. Christ said- he leaves us with 'Peace'. Peace is the code and no doubt Buddhists stamped that. I do have some problems with them though- idols, and revering their Prophet- Budha. Prophets are not to be revered, Christians revered Christ, Buddhists- Budha, etc. Kalama Sutta. i will get it. Thanks
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
Peace is important. Do you think that the Quran has been used inaproprialy by the Jihadi movement to carry out violence? We hear a lot in this country about a war on Islam. Why do Americans only see one side of this otherwise peaceful religion?
whatisdrunkal 2 years ago
When Saudi sent Osama on exile, it was the CIA that took him in and trained him, and i never saw a memo where they fired him, so I believe he is still on their employ.
In same fashion, the entire Muslim world hated Saddam, he was known to have only one friend= USA. USA gave him WMD's to use on his people and Iran. I think the source of all the worst mischief, hate, wickedness and war on Earth is clear.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
P.S. You are dead right about USA's invilvement in promoting terrorism. No disagreement on that fact over here.
whatisdrunkal 2 years ago
The Quran is the only scripture till date that there is evidence it has not been adulterated. The original Quran is still on earth with the UN. The post WWll treaty or Versailles makes mention of this first Quran still available. Authentic scripture is free of evil corruption. Till date I am yet to find a single error in the Book.
It is perfect, and the last revelation that safe guards all the rest before it, letting us know what's right from what's corrupted.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
As for the Buddha. He means different things to different Buddhist sects. if you want to investigate the two most contrasting Buddha figures I would look up Pure Land , and then compare that to the oldest remaining sect Theravada.
whatisdrunkal 2 years ago
Well I am going to turn in for the night. It was worthwhile talking to you. I think we have reached a better understanding of each others points of view. Sorry for the name calling, I need to demonstrate more patience, thats why I study Buddhism. Let me know what you reflections on the Kalama Sutta are some time. I am interested in how you will respond. Goodnight and God Bless
whatisdrunkal 2 years ago
Thank you, was interesting talking to you too. Buddhism is beautiful, and we all need a piece of it...Yoga is great too for the mind and body environment, it helps the circulation. We all need more patience, i think I need it more than you.
Thanks for the challenge, and keep on challenging, stay blessed.
Peace.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
Mybe you need a lesson on Islam. According to saeveral scholarly references "The four major Sunni Madh'hab (schools of Islamic jurisprudence) and the Twelver Shi'a Jafari madhab agree that a sane adult male apostate must be executed." See verses [Qur'an 3:72], [Qur'an 3:90],[Qur'an 16:106],[Qur'an 4:137] and [Qur'an 5:54
whatisdrunkal 2 years ago
You asked me what Quran says. Here are the verses, what about them?
[3.72] And a party of the followers of the Book say: Avow belief in that which has been revealed to those who believe, in the first part of the day, and disbelieve at the end of it, perhaps they go back on their religion.
or
[3.90] Surely, those who disbelieve a,fter their believing, then increase in unbelief, their repentance shall not be accepted, and these are they that go astray.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
And-
[16.106] He who disbelieves in Allah after his having believed, not he who is compelled while his heart is at rest on account of faith, but he who opens (his) breast to disbelief-- on these is the wrath of Allah, and they shall have a grievous chastisement.
[4.137] Surely (as for) those who believe then disbelieve, again believe and again disbelieve, then increase in disbelief, Allah will not forgive them nor guide them in the (right) path.
what about them?
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
and this too...what about it?
[5.54] O you who believe! whoever from among you turns back from his religion, then Allah will bring a people, He shall love them and they shall love Him, lowly before the believers, mighty against the unbelievers, they shall strive hard in Allah's way and shall not fear the censure of any censurer; ..
All these condemn people who do not believe in God anymore. So? Our duty on Earth is to be of the Religions, believers in Our Creator.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
You were only part right to use Einstein as an example to support your claim. This is what he said on the matter.
Albert Einstein
"A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death. "
whatisdrunkal 2 years ago
What is the punishment for apostacy in the in Quran?
whatisdrunkal 2 years ago
There is no decree on apostasy in the Quran to the best of my knowledge.
Quran says- there is no compulsion in religion.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago
Keep in mind also that some people, galleleo, socrates, plato, etc.. were under enourmous amounts of pressure to conform to religious institutional power. You can't be entierly sure that everything religious institutions take credit for were really inspired by a divine being.
whatisdrunkal 2 years ago
William Bateson (18611926): British geneticist, a Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge, where he eventually became Master. He was the first person to use the term genetics to describe the study of heredity and biological inheritance, and the chief populariser of the ideas of Gregor Mendel following their rediscovery.[5]
Patrick Blackett OM, CH, FRS (18971974): Nobel Prize winning English experimental physicist known for his work on cloud chambers, cosmic rays, and paleomagnetism.[6]
whatisdrunkal 2 years ago
Quran first used the term- 'amshajin', which means 'gene strand'. And used the word to describe inheritance. The Prophet Mohammed expanded on it, referring to assortment, phenotypes, and the like. It's all on the AgainstScienceCom website. Check tag 'chromosomes' or search for it.
AgainstScienceCom 2 years ago