Nocturne

[Hasbinbad]

You can look at the studies on fruit flies and see that these mutations are almost always harmful.
This sentence is wrong, and everything you write after it is moot.

DNA is an incredibly redundant and changeable molecule. Each gene codes for only one protein, and there are many copies of most genes on every strand of DNA (redundancy). If one gene's expression is fucked up by mutations on that part of the DNA sequence, most often what happens is that the gene isn't expressed because the proper start/stop DNA sequences get messed up in that region. In the rare cases where they are expressed anyway, an altered protein can result. This new protein can then: do NOTHING (most of the time), floating around in cell space; rarely be harmful, either directly poisoning the organism or causing some anomaly (say, blood clotting); or rarely causing some beneficial anomaly, such as a color change in the organism (rare). On top of all that, it is usually not one mutation that causes a trait change, but the accumulation of many. This accumulation of many mutations that all have to do with the same thing enough to cause a change in train is exceedingly rare, beneficial or harmful. Benign mutations literally happen all the time with no change in the organism.

Don't speak unless you know what the fuck you're talking about kthx.

[Hasbinbad]

I can't believe people seriously argue with Naez. Why not go start a dialogue with some crazy homeless person.
It's useful for me in the same way target practice is useful for the marksman.

[Hasbinbad]

Hottest woman in GoT.

The bathtub scene with Jamie? Oh man.
I dunno man, I kind of wanna see Meera and Osha work out their tensions on a pile of furs.

[Autotune]

You can do it again, but after you've seen it, you go on faith that it would work like that again. Granted this is a well-founded faith, but, like anything beyond the sensation / perception wall, you can't "prove" it. Actual scientists don't use words like "proof" so loosely as lay people because they understand this concept.

This is pretty much what I'm saying honestly. I'm not saying the real world isn't out there, but I am saying for sure that we've never experienced it.

There are things you can prove with science. We both know this.

After you've tested something and it is shown to work time and time again, you don't go on faith that it will work the next time. Your knowledge and experience of the test is what you fall back on, not so much faith of a religious aspect. Sure you can argue that Faith is just trust... okay, you are trusting that your knowledge and experience will not fail you. Faith from a religious standpoint is completely within one's own beliefs, not from religious tests to which have been proven to work consistently. You are putting your faith/trust into something that you have no experience or test results to back.

Don't go throwing around faith so freely when it heavily relies on one's experience in one aspect and isn't needed in the other.

BTW, you can experience something and still not fully understand it. Everyone has experienced the real world and it's highly doubtful anyone ever understood it completely.

[Autotune]

Who thinks its either evolution or god?

whynotboth.jpg

[Hasbinbad]

Faith has nothing to do with religion. As you say, it amounts to trust.

[Hasbinbad]

And, from a philosophical standpoint, science can prove nothing. Only mathematics and logic, and their derivatives, can be "proven," if you're talking about the scientific jargon rather than the legal jargon definition of the word "proven."

[Hasbinbad]

And the only reason they can be proven is that they exist fully within the conceptual framework, on "our side" of the sensation/perception wall.

[Hasbinbad]

Someone please explain this concept to the derps, I have tried over and over again and they keep being like BUT U CAN PROOOOOVE THINGS DERP

[Hasbinbad]

Everyone has experienced the real world and it's highly doubtful anyone ever understood it completely.
Actually, this is my point here, NO YOU HAVE NOT EVER DONE ANY SUCH THING as experiencing the real world.

You have experience perceptions of what your sensory organs TELL YOU about the real world.

There is a huge difference.

[Hasbinbad]

And this, pretty much, is why you must take science, along with all physical experience on faith.

[Autotune]

And, from a philosophical standpoint, science can prove nothing. Only mathematics and logic, and their derivatives, can be "proven," if you're talking about the scientific jargon rather than the legal jargon definition of the word "proven."

Philosophically you can kiss my ass.

[Hasbinbad]

Yeah no. Don't be mad coz your understanding of the world is suspect. :)

[Autotune]

And this, pretty much, is why you must take science, along with all physical experience on no... not on fucking faith.

If someone tells you something is such a way in science you do not take it on faith that it is correct. You challenge it and test it so that your knowledge and experience are what you take it on, not fucking faith.

That is the entire premise of science. You've even mentioned it before with scientists disproving each other. If they all took Science on faith, it would be where religion is today.

[Hitchens]

Something kind of odd about a grown man who lives with his mom telling everyone else about reality.

[Autotune]

Actually, this is my point here, NO YOU HAVE NOT EVER DONE ANY SUCH THING as experiencing the real world.

You have experience perceptions of what your sensory organs TELL YOU about the real world.

There is a huge difference.

That's me bro.

[Hasbinbad]

That's me bro.
No, it's not.

[Hasbinbad]

ad hominem not addressing the point.
Am I wrong?

[Autotune]

No, it's not.

Yes, yes it is.

[Hasbinbad]

If someone tells you something is such a way in science you do not take it on faith that it is correct. You challenge it and test it so that your knowledge and experience are what you take it on, not fucking faith.

That is the entire premise of science. You've even mentioned it before with scientists disproving each other. If they all took Science on faith, it would be where religion is today.
So what happens when new information becomes available that disproves your best information and testing?

[Hasbinbad]

No scientist will ever tell you anything about "certainty," and I know you don't understand the spirit of modern science because you obviously don't get that.

[Hasbinbad]

Yes, yes it is.
You're so wrong about this and it's fucking funny. Go take a psych 101 class bro.

[Autotune]

Am I wrong?

HBB is stating that your reality is all perspective and that you don't know what is real because you're only experiencing it through what you perceive via your senses.

Basically, you can't experience something outside of yourself, therefore you can't actually know what that cup on the table looks like without seeing it through your own eyes, feeling it with your hands, etc.

Your reality, and everyone else's, isn't the one true reality. The reality viewed through no "looking glass".

There is actually some guru/mystic who talks about this, I knew what he was getting at the entire time, but it's still funny to mess with him.

[Hasbinbad]

Basically, you can't experience something outside of yourself, therefore you can't actually know what that cup on the table looks like without seeing it through your own eyes, feeling it with your hands, etc.
Naw, even when you see it with your eyes, it still has to get translated several times. It's like listening to someone through an interpreter. I'm not saying the person isn't talking, but YOU can't understand it and need a little help.

[Autotune]

<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/RbNtB1yLcJA?version=3&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/RbNtB1yLcJA?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

[Hitchens]

Am I wrong?

I can't very well tell you that your philosophical views are "wrong," but I find them kind of silly.

[Hasbinbad]

I can't very well tell you that your philosophical views are "wrong," but I find them kind of silly.
What I was saying about the nature of reality and our relationship with it are not philosophical.

[Hasbinbad]

My grammar are amazing.

[Nihilist_santa]

Who thinks its either evolution or god?

I am not saying that there are only two choices. I am saying that the evolution debate is presented that way. It is a logical fallacy of false dichotomy.

[Nihilist_santa]

Please elaborate on this tidbit.
*Gets popcorn*

Do not misunderstand. I am not saying paleontology is false. I am saying that evolutionary thought uses the findings from paleontology to back up their claims. Just like paleontology uses geology's findings for dating their finds with the various geologic strata the fossils are found in etc. Science is interrelated disciplines and if you introduce one false premise then it can affect the findings in other fields.

[Nihilist_santa]

If someone tells you something is such a way in science you do not take it on faith that it is correct. You challenge it and test it so that your knowledge and experience are what you take it on, not fucking faith.

That is the entire premise of science. You've even mentioned it before with scientists disproving each other. If they all took Science on faith, it would be where religion is today.

This is the opposite of what most people in this thread propose. You do not personally test every hypothesis you come across. You rely on experts to decide that knowledge for you.

People should read some of Bertrand Russell's work on the Scientific Outlook. He goes into some interesting points drawn from speculating the effects of science on societies. He mentions what he calls a society of learned experts. You wont have to question anything because a learned expert will be there to tell you what is right. Quite interesting stuff. This was written around or prior to WWII I believe and it is strange how he keeps referring to Soviet Russia as a great experiment in scientific dictatorships. He ties this all in with social sciences and propaganda , resource management, population control, it is a very cold and analytic piece. Gets right to the heart of the scientific mindset. Not this romanticized Mr. Wizard idea people have grown up with.

[Autotune]

This is the opposite of what most people in this thread propose. You do not personally test every hypothesis you come across. You rely on experts to decide that knowledge for you.

People should read some of Bertrand Russell's work on the Scientific Outlook. He goes into some interesting points drawn from speculating the effects of science on societies. He mentions what he calls a society of learned experts. You wont have to question anything because a learned expert will be there to tell you what is right. Quite interesting stuff. This was written around or prior to WWII I believe and it is strange how he keeps referring to Soviet Russia as a great experiment in scientific dictatorships. He ties this all in with social sciences and propaganda , resource management, population control, it is a very cold and analytic piece. Gets right to the heart of the scientific mindset. Not this romanticized Mr. Wizard idea people have grown up with.

Was more of a general you than a literal. However, that is not to say people shouldn't educate themselves on the subject enough to have a better formed opinion on what "experts" deem correct or incorrect.

I was getting at the fact that if a person can challenge and test a possibly theory, then he/she should and not take it on faith. If a person isn't in the position, he should educate himself to a point he can make an informed decision with the findings of people who can challenge and test. If a person isn't in the position and doesn't want to educate himself, he probably shouldn't go around acting as such.

[gotrocks]

even though i <3 you both, this thread should be less autotune vs hbb and more everyone vs nocturne.

[Black Jesus]

Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please

evoluton = hoax

[Zadrian]

You must be able to tell the future if you know what we will be able to invent.

I'll say again though, it is funny to see a person who seems to follow a religion that preaches humility, acting so arrogantly.

Please continue to wonder why people don't just take the bible as "evidence" for a god

[Rhambuk]

Funny how you people think God is based on faith. Actually the Bible says

[Daldolma]

Funny how you people think God is based on faith. Actually the Bible says that God is obvious and that faith is not blind but rather that everything that exists is literal proof of Gods existence.



Evolution requires far more faith than belief in God. Nihilist nailed it on the head earlier but of course it goes ignored by the ignorant ones. You morons just insert "time did it" whenever asked to explain why nobody has ever actually seen evolution cause one species to become another entirely.

If you seriously think that something as advanced as DNA(more advanced than anything man has ever or will ever make) can form randomly in nature than your brain simply does not work correctly and there is literally something mentally wrong with you. Honestly it doesn't even matter anymore, there is literally zero point in even having a debate. You are set in your ignorant ways and literally nothing short of divine intervention will do anything to help you.

not sure if srs

[Hitchens]

http://i.imgur.com/Ay4aFEz.gif

[Black Jesus]

thanks r/atheism

[Black Jesus]

Ya that's the reason why people don't take the bible as evidence lol. What a joke you and those people are. You should judge the Bible based on the merit of it's content, not by the men who preach it. As if to say if I came humbly presenting the information I have that I would be met with the same. Been there, done that, doesn't really do shit. Your kind is ALWAYS arrogant so how about being less of a hypocrite maybe.

As for knowing the future of what man will invent. I don't need to know the future to know that we will never be able to surpass the abilities of God. Why else do you think that we still to this day, with the most brilliant minds in the history of the world working around the clock, cannot recreate DNA. How can something form randomly in nature that is so unbelievably complex, even we cannot duplicate it? Does this really make sense to you? Complex things can't just form randomly. They are ALWAYS the product of intelligent intervention. This should be the most basic of basic common sense.

The intricate machinery of nature and mathematical perfection of the universe and things like DNA databases led me to deism.

[Hasbinbad]

http://i.imgur.com/Ay4aFEz.gif
I have never seen an animated gif that more perfectly describes my facial expressions.

[Ahldagor]

what's all this talk about god? you can't kill something that never existed. and stop with the whole platonized notions of christianity because they destroy your own arguments. sad this thing has gone on long. evolution is pretty much proven, incomplete fossil record is dependent upon one missing part in the chain which is putting too much trust in a notion that if one is missing then it must all be wrong. well, if god is all good and all powerful then why is there evil in the world?

[Ahldagor]

god exists you will find out one day, i will be pissing on you from heaven.

if you look like milla jovovich then you can anytime

[Hasbinbad]

what's all this talk about god? you can't kill something that never existed. and stop with the whole platonized notions of christianity because they destroy your own arguments. sad this thing has gone on long. evolution is pretty much proven, incomplete fossil record is dependent upon one missing part in the chain which is putting too much trust in a notion that if one is missing then it must all be wrong. well, if god is all good and all powerful then why is there evil in the world?
I explained perfectly clearly why there are "gaps" in the fossil record. It is not, in fact, incomplete, in the sense that you're using that word.

[Hasbinbad]

if you look like milla jovovich then you can anytime
http://i.imgur.com/e7PjQ91.jpg

[Ahldagor]

I explained perfectly clearly why there are "gaps" in the fossil record. It is not, in fact, incomplete, in the sense that you're using that word.

with you on this one. and nice pic. she alone is the proof i need.

[Tiggles]

http://www.project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?t=25458

[Kagatob]

Funny how you people think God is based on faith. Actually the Bible says that God is obvious and that faith is not blind but rather that everything that exists is literal proof of Gods existence.



Evolution requires far more faith than belief in God. Nihilist nailed it on the head earlier but of course it goes ignored by the ignorant ones. You morons just insert "time did it" whenever asked to explain why nobody has ever actually seen evolution cause one species to become another entirely.

If you seriously think that something as advanced as DNA(more advanced than anything man has ever or will ever make) can form randomly in nature than your brain simply does not work correctly and there is literally something mentally wrong with you. Honestly it doesn't even matter anymore, there is literally zero point in even having a debate. You are set in your ignorant ways and literally nothing short of divine intervention will do anything to help you.

The bible cannot prove the bible, the bible cannot prove god. Where's your evidence?

[Black Jesus]

I explained perfectly clearly why there are "gaps" in the fossil record. It is not, in fact, incomplete, in the sense that you're using that word.

proofs in the puddin and you admit there is no puddin

[Hasbinbad]

proofs in the puddin and you admit there is no puddin
ok bill cosby

[Nihilist_santa]

The bible cannot prove the bible, the bible cannot prove god. Where's your evidence?

He does not need the bible to prove anything about God. That was his point. It is self evident. You are trying to disprove an axiom here. You are saying that o+o = 1. The big bang is like a half truth only people's ego wont allow them to see the whole truth. I mean even if we look at the physics of it you have to have a cause before an effect. Before everything there would be no time. Causality exist in relation to time. For there to be a bang/first cause you have to introduce time or a cause. Life or existence or the universe is the effect, God is the cause. The prime mover.

The fine tuning of the universe is the evidence of a maker. The constants for the laws of the universe are so narrowly defined that if they were changed even minutely life would not exist.

If people base their ideas on lack of knowledge and half truths that is their deal. I cant help it if people cant humble themselves to believe in a God because they lack the imagination to ponder something that is so great and nearly unknowable that you have reduced it to a fairy tale about a man in the clouds with a beard wagging a finger.

[gotrocks]

http://i.imgur.com/e7PjQ91.jpg

<3


continue on with your regular scheduled shit throwing.

[Hasbinbad]

The law of biogenesis states that evolution and abiogenesis are impossible.
The "law" of biogenesis was developed by a dude trying to disprove the idea that rats were created because you left lint and crumbs in a pile with bits of string, which was the prevailing notion at the time (spontaneous generation), and has absolutely nothing to do with the conversation about the first life on earth. It is a useful concept, but is not what you're making it out to be.

[Hasbinbad]

Don't get me wrong, it was ground breaking work that made a lot of things obvious after understanding it, but it doesn't have the import you're saying it does.

[Hitchens]

If god were to use his design for the human body on his resume, no self respecting engineering firm would hire him. Our sinuses and genitals alone are enough to send god packing back to McDonalds.

[Hitchens]

How the fuck can you even say that

Pretty easily. I strike certain keys and the words appear.

[Kagatob]

He does not need the bible to prove anything about God. That was his point. It is self evident.

It's not self evident, it's self evident to him because he has an extremely narrow pre-determined view of the universe. Something is amazing ergo god. Something is amazing ergo faeries, something is amazing ergo flying spaghetti monster. What's the difference?

[Kagatob]

How the fuck can you even say that considering if you were to take a team of 1 million of the smartest people in the world, they still couldn't produce anything with even 1/10th the complexity. Its statements like this that make me wonder if we were to open up your skull, would we find an actual brain or a pile of shit. Our bodies are so complex that even after thousands of years of studying it we still don't fully understand it.

I use the same pathway to breathe that I do to eat and drink, that lets me choke. Intelligent design. :)

[Hitchens]

Gives our species pores, invents things to clog them. Thanks god.

[Hasbinbad]

Gives people the miracle of birth.

Invents depleted uranium so that babies can be born without eyes.

Thanks God.

[Kagatob]

Don't forget how many women die during birth, as god intended.

[Hitchens]

That's just a test of faith, like dinosaur bones.

[Kagatob]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wJC4KZ_RGk
52 seconds in.
This is why nobody takes you idiots seriously, maybe after hearing someone else say something as stupid as the drivel you've been typing you'll understand just what you are.

[Hasbinbad]

Give our species sex.

Makes some people fat, ugly, and rageful.

Thanks for rape, God.

[Hasbinbad]

Creates the existence in seven days 6,000 years ago.

Fills the layers of earth with bones that appear to be millions of years old and rock formations that appear to be billions of years old.

Thanks God.

[Hitchens]

Sorry having a little fun offends your spergsense.

[Kagatob]

Dinosaurs are mentioned in the Bible actually. Not really sure why this is even a point continually brought up by atheists but I suppose it's par for the course with atheist thinking. Talk first, think later and such.

Is this the same passage that talks about the sea serpents/leviathans that have never existed? Or are you taking half of it literally and the other half symbolically?

People only choke when they are too fucking retarded to know how to eat properly. It's called being careful. Hey you can stub your toes too, I guess that means we aren't intelligently designed guys! Having to be careful must mean we aren't intelligently designed, makes perfect sense!

Very scientific and observational explanation there. I'm sure you are the intellectual in your group of friends too. :rolleyes:

No it's self evident to anyone with common sense. All you do is take God and replace it with "time did it".
You're the only person who ever said that time did something. Time never does anything, time isn't a thing which can perform actions.
Time cannot cause impossible things to occur.
You don't seem to understand the difference between "impossible" which can't be qualified/quantified no matter how hard you try and "Impossible within our current realm of understanding". 1000 years ago it was "impossible" to cure a simple disease such as malaria, 100 years ago it would was "impossible" to launch rockets into orbit or to other bodies within the solar system.
God on the other hand can.
So can Q in star trek, doesn't make him any more real than your god is. Evidence please (oh wait, I've asked you 10 times for evidence and you have none, you keep spouting "common sense")
Massive solar system with a super complex star at the center of it, ergo time did it! Super complex planet with a self sustaining ecosystem and millions of different complex species created by self replicating microscopic biomachinary...time did it!
Actually the sun is simply made of Hydrogen and Helium super-heated due to a combination of the pressure caused it's own gravitational force and motion caused by interstellar constants. That heat causes fission which allows simpler atoms/elements to combine into more complex elements.
The earth is a result of the combination of many more elements that were created in the cores of older generations of stars coming together because of the same forces but because there is less mass involved it turned into the rocky planetoid that you know as earth. It's not very difficult, it's only "common sense" :)

As for the rest of that, you're talking about Abiogenesis, and since you're the only one in this thread that cares about abiogenesis and it has nothing to do with evolution, you can stop talking about it or go fuck yourself. Your choice.
It's common sense that the more complex something is, the more intelligent the person that made it. When confronted with something that is seemingly infinitely complex, logic suggests that a being with seemingly infinite intelligence probably made it. There is nothing narrow with this view of the universe. Suggesting that everything is just a random product of time + chance is whats truly narrow.
You don't seem to understand the concepts of common sense or logic. Coming to the most convenient conclusion that has zero evidence is neither of those things.
"God did it" isn't an answer, it's an escape from having to ask questions because you are afraid to come up with real answers.

[Hitchens]

Praise Moloch.

http://i.imgur.com/fecLnla.gif

[Kagatob]

There is scientific evidence of Gods involvement all over the place. All science even does is reverse engineer the systems which govern the universe. Where did these things come from? The only logical conclusion is that they came from a being of infinite intelligence. There is a direct relationship between how complex something is and how intelligent the person that made it is. For instance look at the difference between cars now and cars when they were first invented. Now that we have become more intelligent and have a far better understanding of how things like aerodynamics, engines etc work, we are able to make much better cars. This same logic can literally be applied to every single thing a human has ever made proving there is a direct correlation between complexity and intelligence.
You're banned from using the word logic. You didn't use it correctly before, you are still not using it correctly now.
Having a magical "answer" (it's in quotes because it's not actually an answer) to every single solitary unknown is the very thing that logic prevents intelligent people from having. You don't just leave a problem with all of the variables unsolved and call the problem solved, you also don't change all of those variables into ones and call it solved either. That's as illogical of a conclusion that can possibly be reached.
Now let's take a look at a star. Essentially it's just a massive self-sustaining nuclear reactor that is capable of generating energy for billions of years. Scientists have been able to reverse engineer the processes that allow a star to do what it does, only on a much smaller and far less efficient scale. The more we learn about nuclear fission and other related sciences the better the nuclear reactor we are able to make. So knowing that a star is really just a much more advanced version of a nuclear reactor that man is capable of making, doesn't it stand to reason that it was created by a much more intelligent being? I know common sense and atheists go together like oil and water but seriously this is such basic shit that even a 1st grader could grasp it.
Fusion and Fission are two very different things (they are actually the exact opposite of one another). Einstein did not reverse engineer a star to create the first nuclear reactor, he used the scientific method and extrapolated upon knowledge that already existed using a method of weeding out the bad information both which already existed and had come up in his own theories only to be left with information that was testable and provable and most importantly, worked.
Inserting God into the equation has nothing to do with our lack of understanding something but actually the exact opposite. We have such a good understanding that the only way most things are even possible is there HAS to be a being with seemingly infinite intelligence. How can something so unbelievably advanced like a star, just form randomly and for no reason? Nuclear fission requires an extremely advanced knowledge of multiple scientific fields and requires extremely precise calculations, so precise in fact that you literally have to be completely brain dead to think it could ever happen by chance.
We can see them forming in nebulae right now, gravity is not "random", and taking an excess of 'x' amount of hydrogen and allowing gravity to do the rest is not something that takes complex or precise calculations to happen.
Stop talking about scientific fields as if you know anything about them because you have proven yet again that you know absolutely nothing about any of these subjects.

You've also yet to provide one single shred of evidence.
"Hey look around", "It's obvious", "logically, (insert barf of illogic here)" are not evidence.

[Glitch]

Can I just point out that every single person in this thread is getting blatantly trolled?

[Glitch]

well, most of them anyways

[Hitchens]

http://i.imgur.com/83MvG8C.jpg

[Black Jesus]

<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/6pOq4hyoX9g?hl=en_US&amp;version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/6pOq4hyoX9g?hl=en_US&amp;version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

[Nihilist_santa]

Can I just point out that every single person in this thread is getting blatantly trolled?

I am aware of this I just do not like to see people trying to dump all over someone for their beliefs especially to the point of trying to insinuate someone is a subhuman genetic inferior redneck for being religious.

I don't know who Nocturne is or who is being serious in this thread and who is just trolling , but I find it hypocritical of some of the posters to claim that there is no absolute truth while insisting on being right.

[Autotune]

I am aware of this I just do not like to see people trying to dump all over someone for their beliefs especially to the point of trying to insinuate someone is a subhuman genetic inferior redneck for being religious.

I don't know who Nocturne is or who is being serious in this thread and who is just trolling , but I find it hypocritical of some of the posters to claim that there is no absolute truth while insisting on being right.

The troll is attempting to troll glitch.

[Kagatob]

Troll or not, that's the exact same kind of discussion (argument) it boils down to when you come across or try to teach any of the blindly bible faithful.

[gotrocks]

Can I just point out that every single person in this thread is getting blatantly trolled?
I figured this out a while ago, its why i've only posted ~twice.

[gotrocks]

btw, guarantee human beings will have the knowledge to manufacture our own planets (ecosystems) within ~500 years. Probably much, much sooner

Create our own DNA in 50.

Nocturne im convinced you are a troll, but i still must point out that your 'evidence' is once again a pile of shit that you've molded into a statue. its still a pile of shit.

Things being 'infinitely complex' (they're not, by the way) is not a sign of an 'infinitely intelligent' creator. And your explanations for the things i've asked about are based on your opinions/interpretations of the bible (which, by the way, are rejected by most of the christian/catholic faith). And i'm sorry, but you don't get to simply pick and choose which sections of the bible are metaphorical and which are literal to make them fit what your idea of the universe is. it just doesn't work that way.

The most likely explanation for why our 'infinitely complex' planet came to be is not as divine as you seem to think. More likely than not the reason why things work the way they do (ie, perfect distance from the sun, handy placement for the moon, ecosystems set up the way they are) is simply that this is the optimal configuration for life. There are billions of planets in the universe, and we developed on one of them because even if the chances of the perfect conditions for life are .0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000001 percent, it had to happen somewhere, and it happened here and therefore we are here as well. i can't remember what this theory is called, but I'm sure it would be pretty simple to find as it's pretty popular.

Basically when you take the number of stars and planets that exist, there will inevitably be a few that can support life. Even though the chances of that happening are next to nothing, there's just so many out there that its dumb luck that makes it happen. We exist because the universe set us up a perfect little melting pot for life. There is probably a planet somewhere in galaxy xyz123 that the exact same thing happened (and god forbid an alien race ever makes itself known to us - religion will collectively shit its pants, in particular the higher ups in various churches because suddenly they will have to rewrite everything in order to continue to make money and live like millionaires).

i am however, convinced you are a troll, because your arguments are so thick headed it must be so. You're not even a creationist, you're some kind of in-between freak/reject that probably can't find a home on either team, so instead you take your angst out by being a douche in an online mmorpg (i've read your previous posts - you are most certainly a douche). i highly recommend making some good friends and maybe finding a sexy girlfriend to improve your life, if you are able.

more likely than not no one can stand you and thats why you are who you are :)

<3

[Kagatob]

The most likely explanation for why our 'infinitely complex' planet came to be is not as divine as you seem to think. More likely than not the reason why things work the way they do (ie, perfect distance from the sun, handy placement for the moon, ecosystems set up the way they are) is simply that this is the optimal configuration for life. There are billions of planets in the universe, and we developed on one of them because even if the chances of the perfect conditions for life are .0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000001 percent, it had to happen somewhere, and it happened here and therefore we are here as well. i can't remember what this theory is called, but I'm sure it would be pretty simple to find as it's pretty popular.


Drake's equation?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/9/2/d/92df3d5260eaca523ca8bcfd474d3aaa.png

where:
N = the number of civilizations in our galaxy with which communication might be possible (i.e. which are on our current past light cone);
and
R* = the average number of star formation per year in our galaxy
fp = the fraction of those stars that have planets
ne = the average number of planets that can potentially support life per star that has planets
fl = the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop life at some point
fi = the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop intelligent life (civilizations)
fc = the fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that releases detectable signs of their existence into space
L = the length of time for which such civilizations release detectable signals into space

[Kagatob]

Nocturne thinks that stars are made of godmagic and not Hydrogen though so I don't think he'd be able to comprehend even something as simple as that. :)

[gotrocks]

Its directly related to drake's equation. Actually that may be exactly what it is because they are basically the same.

[Kagatob]

There was a nice youtube video I saw once of Bill Nye talking about the equation. Another one with Nye describing how he's ashamed that there are people out there who claim to be scientists yet believe the earth is 6000 years old is a good watch.

[gotrocks]

Just hard to believe that after all we know we still get people insisting the earth is 6k years old and that we all came from two idiots who ate a magic fruit in a garden of perfection.

Then we have people like nocturne who take idiocy one step further by cherry picking from their own religious text and then waving it in people's faces and insisting that they are dumb for not seeing 'the truth'. You've got to be fucking kidding me. It takes a special brand of stupid to act this way.

"The bible says its metaphorically so based on my interpretation, and the proof is in the fact that cells, ecosystems, and stars exist and are impossible to comprehend by stupid people like me." ........................what?

[Mandalore93]

The fact that we're still taking a book that was created by dirt eating Jews several thousand years ago in literally (almost) BFE is among the most hilarious/disturbing/unfucking believable things that I have found in life.

Now, don't get me wrong I don't mind the Jews as long as they keep their religious shit turned down to an acceptable level, but the fact is that just like most of their neighboring civilizations they were dirt eating clods in comparison to say the Han Dynasty. Why God continually decided to show up in the middle of fucking no where really beats me. Also the fact he has done a lot less significant work since the invention of instant communication and video capture causes a lot of questions.

[Daldolma]

^ this guy very interested in consumption of dirt

[Mandalore93]

Dirt consumption confirmed impetus for seeing God

[Daldolma]

There is scientific evidence of Gods involvement all over the place. All science even does is reverse engineer the systems which govern the universe. Where did these things come from? The only logical conclusion is that they came from a being of infinite intelligence. There is a direct relationship between how complex something is and how intelligent the person that made it is. For instance look at the difference between cars now and cars when they were first invented. Now that we have become more intelligent and have a far better understanding of how things like aerodynamics, engines etc work, we are able to make much better cars. This same logic can literally be applied to every single thing a human has ever made proving there is a direct correlation between complexity and intelligence.

Now let's take a look at a star. Essentially it's just a massive self-sustaining nuclear reactor that is capable of generating energy for billions of years. Scientists have been able to reverse engineer the processes that allow a star to do what it does, only on a much smaller and far less efficient scale. The more we learn about nuclear fission and other related sciences the better the nuclear reactor we are able to make. So knowing that a star is really just a much more advanced version of a nuclear reactor that man is capable of making, doesn't it stand to reason that it was created by a much more intelligent being? I know common sense and atheists go together like oil and water but seriously this is such basic shit that even a 1st grader could grasp it.

Inserting God into the equation has nothing to do with our lack of understanding something but actually the exact opposite. We have such a good understanding that the only way most things are even possible is there HAS to be a being with seemingly infinite intelligence. How can something so unbelievably advanced like a star, just form randomly and for no reason? Nuclear fission requires an extremely advanced knowledge of multiple scientific fields and requires extremely precise calculations, so precise in fact that you literally have to be completely brain dead to think it could ever happen by chance.

the above post is noteworthy for its bold and decisive departure from the bounds of logic

press on, young trailblazer

[Daldolma]

ps if that guy thinks nuclear fission is so complicated that it could only happen via deity, he's gonna be super excited when he reaches the 20th century in his history book

[gotrocks]

ps if that guy thinks nuclear fission is so complicated that it could only happen via deity, he's gonna be super excited when he reaches the 20th century in his history book

LOL

bam!

[Kagatob]

ps if that guy thinks nuclear fission is so complicated that it could only happen via deity, he's gonna be super excited when he reaches the 20th century in his history book

Made my night for sure.

[Glitch]

Drake's equation

Drake's equation: Started from the bottom, now we here


Think about it in an evolutionary sense.


profound.

[smokemon]

This belongs here too.

1. Spontaneous Generation

“Never will the doctrine of spontaneous generation recover from the mortal blow of this simple experiment. No, there is now no circumstance known in which it can be affirmed that microscopic beings came into the world without germs, without parents similar to themselves.” Louis Pasteur, addressing the French Academy of Science in the 19th century

“…the how part has everyone stumped. Nobody knows how lifeless chemicals organized themselves into the first living cell.” Paul Davies, quoted in article “Born Lucky” in New Scientist, 7/12/03, p32

“I think we have to admit that we're looking through a glass darkly here . . .

We don't know how life started on this planet. We don't know exactly when it started, we don't know under what circumstances. It's a mystery that we're going to chip at from several different directions.” Andrew Knoll,Harvard paleobiologist, Fisher Professor of Natural History, Dept of Earth and Planetary Sciences, author of “Life on a Young Planet: The First Three Billion Years of Life,” interviewed 5/3/2004 on PBS NOVA



“The chemical steps that led to life on Earth remain a matter of intense speculation.” An article “Geochemical Influences of Life’s Origins and Evolution,” Elements, (vol 1, June 2005), p151

In order for Darwin to be right, then the most solid law of biology would have to not be right—the Law of Biogenesis—often called “the cornerstone of modern biology.”



2. Prokaryote to Eukaryote (said like “pro-care-ee-oat” and “you-care-ee-oat”)

“Gradual accumulation of mutations is never the way eukaryotes evolve … the Cambrian Explosion was caused by symbiosis—not mutation. All symbionts are new species.” Prof. Lynn Margulis, U of Mass-Amherst, in a lecture at U of Cincinnati, 3/1/07

This is a “missing link” that is second only to the origin of life, in the nightmares of the evolution-believers. How did bacteria turn into cells hundreds of times bigger than them, which have things inside them like the nucleus and other organelles? There is a giant total blank in the evolution story right here. Evolutionists will tell you and teach you that mutations did it all—but there is no way to even imagine how mutations could ever create new and original genetic information that would be needed to make the jump from bacteria to cells like amoebas, and then on to creatures made of many such cells, like fish, lizards, and people.



3. Cambrian Explosion (said like “came-bree-in” explosion)

"The fossil record had caused Darwin more grief than joy. Nothing distressed him more than the Cambrian explosion, the coincident appearance of almost all complex organic designs…” Stephen Jay Gould, in his book, The Panda's Thumb (1980) p238-9

“As Darwin noted in the Origin of the Species, the abrupt emergence of arthropods in the fossil record during the Cambrian presents a problem for evolutionary biology.” American Scientist, May/June 1997, p244

The Creation Model says that all life forms were created during the same week. The Evolution Model says it took three and a half billion years. What do we find in the deepest layers that contain fossils?—just bacteria. What do we find in the deepest muds today?—just bacteria. What do we find in the fossils just above the bacteria? We find representatives from every one of the Phyla (said “fye-lah”; singular Phylum) of living things, even the vertebrates. The sudden boundary-line of so many living things, with no “missing links” leading up to them, only goes along with the Creation Model—and only goes against the Evolution Model. The data says Darwin is wrong.



4. Missing Links

“The number of intermediate varieties, which must have formerly existed on the earth, [must] be truly enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graded organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory.” Charles Darwin, “Origin on the Species” (1859)

“All paleontologists know that the fossil record contains precious little in the way of intermediate forms; transitions between major groups are characteristically abrupt. Gradualists usually extract themselves from this dilemma by invoking the extreme imperfection of the fossil record.” Stephen J. Gould, in article “The Return of Hopeful Monsters,” Natural History, (1977) 86(6): p22-30

“The evidence for the big transformations in evolution are not there in the fossil record. It’s difficult to explore a billion-year-old fossil record. Be patient!” William Provine, biology professor at Cornell University, The Washington Post, May 15, 2005, p D6

Everyone has heard the term “missing link” so many times that we tend to forget what it really says to us. Fossils that could show the evolution of any one original kind of life into any one new kind of life are—missing! Evolution requires these “missing link” fossils to be real, for the theory to have any proof from the fossils. All arguing aside—there really aren’t any that have ever been found. Darwin-followers have even quit trying to find the “missing links” for land plants and for all of the many kinds of insects.



5. Stasis of Living Things

“Stasis, or nonchange, of most fossil species during their lengthy geological lifespans was tacitly acknowledged by all paleontologists, but almost never studied explicitly because prevailing theory treated stasis as uninteresting nonevidence for nonevolution. ...The overwhelming prevalence of stasis became an embarrassing feature of the fossil record, best left ignored as a manifestation of nothing (that is, nonevolution).” Stephen J. Gould, "Cordelia's Dilemma," Natural History, 1993, p15

Evolution-believers don’t like to talk about this problem—so they usually don’t mention stasis. The Creation Model says that all of the kinds of living things should stay pretty much the same, up until the time when they might go extinct and then just disappear forever. The Evolution Model says that all kinds of living things should constantly be changing! That’s how worms turned into us, according to their theory. The ancient coelacanth fish (said like “see-luh-kanth”) is just one example. Its fins have small bones in them. So, evolutionists thought those might have evolved into fingers by the time the coelacanth evolved into us. Then we found coelacanths alive in the Indian Ocean—and they look exactly like their fossils do! Sad and disappointed, evolutionists picked another fish-cousin of the coelacanth, to be our great grandfather. They forgot to think about one problem though. Why and how could evolution take one fish and turn it into dinosaurs, birds, rats, elephants, seagulls, turtles, whales, horses, and hummingbirds, and leave the coelacanth totally the same all through this same period of time? There is no answer—except that Darwin is wrong. As a matter of fact, all life forms on the growing list of “living fossils” cause this same contradiction for an evolutionist. These “living fossils” have never changed —never “evolved” at all—since the beginning of the world. And they are not rare. They are “overwhelmingly prevalent” in the fossil record. They are the rule, not the exception.


6. Ancient Biomolecules

“I looked at this and I looked at this and I thought, this can’t be. Red blood cells don’t preserve.” Mary H. Schweitzer, in an article, “Dinosaur Shocker” By Helen Fields http://www.smithsonianmagazine.com/issues/2006/may/dinosaur.php

"I am quite aware that according to conventional wisdom and models of fossilization, these structures aren't supposed to be there, but there they are, and I was pretty shocked." Mary H. Schweitzer, evolutionary paleontologist at North Carolina State U, in Science, vol 307, no 5717, p1952-55, 3/25/2005 http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/3411/01.html

“… it was exactly like looking at a slice of modern bone. But of course I couldn’t believe it…the bones after all are 65 million years old. How could blood cells survive that long?” from article “Dino DNA: The Hunt and the Hype,” Science, July 9, 1993, p60

“Ohio State University geologists isolated the oldest complex organic compounds found in a fossil. They found the compounds in 350-million-year-old fossils of sea creatures known as crinoids.” www.researchnews.osu.edu/archive/foscolor.htm 10/23/2006

Here is another big problem for Darwin-believers. Scientists have discovered preserved bits of the original flesh, blood, and bone of forms of life that the Evolution Model says went extinct—way too long ago for these things to still be around without having petrified into rock first. Such molecules have been verified in the remains of Neanderthal humans, mammoths, moa birds, dinosaurs (t-rex, triceratops, maiasaur), and even creatures that the Evolution Model says should be five times older than the dinosaurs! Biological molecules like collagen, hemoglobin, and color pigments, should have been rotted away by now if the fossils really are very much older than the time of Noah’s Flood (less than 4400 years ago). But they aren’t—they’re not millions of years old, and they’re not decayed into dust. That’s why they are still around to be discovered. Darwin is wrong about his whole time scale of things, which goes completely against the findings of science truth—and makes evolution a science-fantasy.



7. DNA fingerprinting for Adam & Eve

They “…looked at an international assortment of genes and picked up a trail of DNA that led them to a single (individual) woman from whom we are all descended.” “We are finding that humans have very, very shallow genetic roots which go back very recently to one ancestor.” Michael Hammer, University of Arizona, Newsweek, 1-11-1988

“That indicates that there was an origin in a specific location on the globe and then it spread out from there.” U.S. News and World Report, 12-4-1995

“Regardless of the cause, evolutionists are most concerned about the effect of a faster mutation rate. For example, researchers have calculated that ‘mitochondrial Eve’—the woman whose mtDNA was ancestral to that in all living people—lived 100,000 to 200,000 years ago in Africa. Using the new clock, she would be a mere 6000 years old. No one thinks that’s the case…” Ann Gibbons, “Calibrating the Mitochondrial Clock,” Science, Jan. 2, 1998, page 28.

“By analyzing DNA from people in all regions of the world, Wells has concluded that all humans alive today are descended from a single man also known as Y-chromosomal Adam.” Wells wrote the book The Journey of Man: A Genetic Odyssey (2002). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spencer_Wells

Darwin said we would find millions of monkey fossils showing how they all gradually evolved into humans. That’s the Evolution Model. The Creation Model says the human race began with only two people (and hasn’t changed much since). The science of DNA has now proven—all humans come from one man and one woman. Is that really a surprise? Biblical Creation is right!



8. Four Human Gene Pools

The evolutionist book and documentary mentioned above in #7 by Darwin-believer Spencer Wells, also contains the finding that all humans come from only one of four distinct gene pools. The significance of this has slipped past the evolutionists. It has not slipped past the creationists. Think about our ancestors. There was one time in the history of mankind when everybody was killed—all except for just eight humans. These were Noah’s family—including his three sons and their wives. The Noah gene pool was on the Ark—plus the three extra family blood lines from the three wives. That makes four. DNA proves that the Biblical history of Noah’s Ark is right.

Not only human DNA, but also goat and sheep DNA—all living goats are descended from five ancient females. All sheep come from four ancestral ewes (Science News, 10/14/06, p245). But didn’t Noah take “two of every kind” on the Ark? No—not all. He took more of the “clean” animals. If all goats came from just one female, it might make the Ark history seem to be in question. If all came from twenty goats, then it could actually prove that Noah’s Ark was just a fairy tale. But science truth verifies the claims of the Creation Model time and time again. So Bible-believers need not fear the newest scientific findings. Science truth is on our side! Science truth shows Darwin-believers are wrong. “They did not like to retain God in their knowledge.” Romans 1:28



9. Phylogerontology (said like “fye-loh-jaron-tah-loh-jee”)

The terms “geriatrics” or “gerontology” might sound familiar. They involve the study of old age. Phylogerontology is the study of the aging of family lines. In biology, this means the aging and the decaying of the DNA in any line of ancestors leading up to the living members of any kind of living thing existing today. The DNA of Adam & Eve was perfect. But since the Fall of Man in the Garden of Eden, decay has been happening. Not only did humans gradually begin to experience sickness and death, but the DNA of the entire human race soon began to become filled up with mutations—in the form of copy-mistakes in the DNA of every new generation. Since everyone has two versions of most of their chromosomes, we’ve all got a “spare” for most of our genes. So if one becomes non-functional because of the gradual buildup of mutations in the human genome, the other one can do the whole job alone. Since people in the same families will have more of the same mutations, it is not good to marry a close relative and have children with them. This is called “inbreeding.” Until there were large numbers of bad mutations in the genome, inbreeding would not have been so much of a medical problem. In early Bible times, inbreeding was not forbidden until the time of Moses. Before that, Abraham married his half-sister Sarah. All of Adam & Eve’s children married their brothers and sisters (or at least their nieces and nephews). It was not forbidden before Moses, and it would not have been medically dangerous yet, either. Now today, people cannot even marry their distant cousins without being in danger of expressing lethal mutations in their children. This would be true after only 600 generations. That’s how many there have been in the 6000 years since Adam & Eve. According to the Evolution Model, there has been 200,000 years of time for humans to buildup bad mutations in their DNA—and over three billion years of us evolving and mutating from bacteria before that! None of our DNA should still be able to work if that was true. The wear-and-tear from mutations would have ruined it all by this time—if Darwin was right.



10. Information in DNA

“Information is information, neither matter nor energy. Any materialism that fails to take account of this will not survive one day.” Norbert Weiner (1894-1964), MIT mathematician and the “Father of Modern Cybernetics”

“DNA is like a computer program, but far far more advanced than any software we’ve ever created.” Bill Gates, in the book “The Road Ahead” (Boulder: Blue Penguin, 1996), p228 http://www.arn.org/docs/dewolf/guidebook.htm

Most people have heard of DNA, and many know that it is a complex molecule found in our chromosomes, deep inside the nucleus of every cell in our bodies. It was a great breakthrough in science when we finally discovered the structure of the DNA molecule. It was an even greater breakthrough when we translated the code for the information storage system in DNA. These things are amazing. But there is something hundreds of times more impressive about the DNA molecules in the chromosomes of all living things—they contain information! The molecule and its code have been used to do a job “by someone”—to carry a message. That message contains instructions on how to make protein molecules and how to coordinate their manufacture throughout the life-stages of all of the living things known to man. It is against all of the known principles of information science that these instructions might have happened all by themselves, and by accident. That is impossible. That is illogical. This is perhaps the most scientifically important proof of all of the Top Ten that—Darwin is wrong.

[Hitchens]

Smokemon's source:

http://www.creationtruth.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=196&Itemid=196

0/10, too easy to Google.

[Black Jesus]

all 100% true though

[Kagatob]

Smokemon's source:

http://www.creationtruth.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=196&Itemid=196

0/10, too easy to Google.

[gotrocks]

There was a very recent experiment (2012) that started showing the first step in the creation of simple organisms under the right conditions without the need for life to already be present was possible.

I really wish I could remember where this came from, as I'm not sure how biased the research may have been, but I'm sure someone could dig it up fairly easily. It was kind of a big deal. I doubt many christian's would have heard of it by reading the bible or their church's website.

[gotrocks]

by the way, fuckin LOL at smokemons source.

You don't think thats a little biased...?

[Llodd]

all 100% true though

110% true

[Black Jesus]

There was a very recent experiment (2012) that started showing the first step in the creation of simple organisms under the right conditions without the need for life to already be present was possible.

I really wish I could remember where this came from, as I'm not sure how biased the research may have been, but I'm sure someone could dig it up fairly easily. It was kind of a big deal. I doubt many christian's would have heard of it by reading the bible or their church's website.

doesn't believe in jesus

believes in hokus pokus demon painting

[Autotune]

Things can't just make themselves.


Things make themselves all the time.

[Black Jesus]

make me a sandiwch, bitch

[gotrocks]

doesn't believe in jesus

believes in hokus pokus demon painting

i lol'd so hard, this was good.

doesn't believe in jesus

believes in a higher power (god)

[Hasbinbad]

I believe in Jesus but not any god.

Jesus was a cool dude for his time with some radical ideas. Do I think anything ever said about him is true? No, but he is a pretty great character in a fable.

[Black Jesus]

There is more proof for Jesus' divinity on Earth than there is for evolution in the insufficiently scarce fossil record.

[Hasbinbad]

^madfatbadsadwrong

[Llodd]

but who created god? the chicken or the egg?

[Hasbinbad]

http://i.imgur.com/mGBRj2t.jpg

[Splorf22]

No retard. My point was that if it takes teams of the most brilliant minds to recreate the technology that is similar to what a star is then logic suggests that it took an even more brilliant mind to create the stars themselves. A star is just a much more massive and more complex version of what we as humans are able to produce. My point was that stars didn't just form by chance due to gravity and time but rather they were made by someone far more intelligent than us. Things can't just make themselves.

Actually stars are very simple: put a fucking huge amount of hydrogen in one area, wait a few hundred million years or so. The logistics are difficult but the idea is one a three year old could handle . . . assuming that three year old had been carefully kept away from silly fundamentalist churches. You know if I wasn't such a libertarian I would almost consider raising a child in a fundamentalist christian household abuse.

[Black Jesus]

you are inherently wrong, because of entropy

[Black Jesus]

nocturne literally smartest person in this thread

[Kaym]

Anyone know anything about his educational background? Because this shit is gold.

[Splorf22]

Ok so someone had to put the hydrogen in one area and waited a few hundred million years. That's where God comes in. Unless of course you're telling me that hydrogen is alive and was able to will itself together into one place.

I guess making a nuclear reactor is easy too. I mean all you need is a particle accelerator and some uranium and bam, nuclear energy! So simple a three year old could understand it! Unless of course they were indoctrinated into a Christian household then making nuclear energy might not be so easy!

You could be the poster child for the motto "easier said than done". Hey guys, driving a car is really easy so that must mean that making one is also! All you need is some metal, some rubber and some fuel! So Simple a three year old could handle it!

I think you are just trolling me at this point.

Nuclear reactors don't use particle accelerators.

Not to mention that your comparisons don't make sense anyway: putting a bunch of shit in a pile and letting it sit there is conceptually simple, making a nuclear reactor or even a car is not.

And why is gravity not a reasonable mechanism for hydrogen atoms to appear in one place?

[Guybrush]

I think you are just trolling me at this point.

Nuclear reactors don't use particle accelerators.

Not to mention that your comparisons don't make sense anyway: putting a bunch of shit in a pile and letting it sit there is conceptually simple, making a nuclear reactor or even a car is not.

And why is gravity not a reasonable mechanism for hydrogen atoms to appear in one place?

Listen you stupid fucking shit farter ass baton, have you ever heard of this little book called the BIBLE?! Yeah. I have. I heard of it when I was too young to hear even. Now if you weren’t so STUPID and RETARDED and used a little COMMON SENSE, you would know that everything that you don’t understand was done by magic. Take my phone for instance, it has a camera in it! Now I’ve seen cameras before and they are MUCH bigger than a phone. So how can a phone have a camera you may ask? Duh, you stupid mongoloid shit-chucker, God did it with magic. Now you may be wondering why the God from the Old Testament and not the gods from the hundred other religions that exist? Well if you took the time to read the BIBLE, AKA The True Encyclopedia of Smart-Guy Knowledge For True Geniuses (TTEoSGKFTG), you dumbass fucking anal reaming ass-poker, you would know that it mentions dinosaurs. QED.

[Kagatob]

Ok so someone had to put the hydrogen in one area and waited a few hundred million years. That's where God comes in. Unless of course you're telling me that hydrogen is alive and was able to will itself together into one place.

I guess making a nuclear reactor is easy too. I mean all you need is a particle accelerator and some uranium and bam, nuclear energy! So simple a three year old could understand it! Unless of course they were indoctrinated into a Christian household then making nuclear energy might not be so easy!

This shit is gold! This thread... keeps me from falling asleep at work. :)

[Zadrian]

This shit is gold! This thread... keeps me from falling asleep at work. :)

If someone needs to put the H atoms together, and gravity didn't exist until Isaac Newton told us that it is there, logic would dictate that Isaac Newton is God.

[Black Jesus]

a bunch of hydrogen sitting around isn't going to fucking spontaneously combust

all the stars will one day go dark (pun intended) . the only violation (aka SUPERNATURAL FORCE) of the 2nd law of thermodynamics (entropy) occurred at the big bang, partly because there was no universe for laws to exist in. either way, the evidence is clear that God made the universe, and impregnated the virgin mary with jesus to die for our sins 32 years later

[Kagatob]

logic would dictate that Isaac Newton is God.

This post still contains less illogic than any of Nocturne's posts in this thread.

[gotrocks]

this shit gets more ridiculous by the page.

im gonna use my particle fuckin accelerator to magic up some freaky ass fuckin stars while i drive my car through a nuclear reactor.

because TTEoSGKFTG

[Kagatob]

BlackJesus and all of his posts are gone. The thread is half as stupid as it was before :D

[Nihilist_santa]

You guys know less about stars than evolution apparently. How about that fine tuning argument again? If you did not have universal constants like Strong's force your stars would not form or any of the other elements necessary for life as we know it.

Kagatob, put down that broom a minute and ask one of the scientist where you work about this.

[Hasbinbad]

santa's argument:

I rolled a 20 on a 20 sided die once.

God made it happen.

[Nihilist_santa]

santa's argument:

I rolled a 20 on a 20 sided die once.

God made it happen.

Your argument is that the die rolled a 20 without anyone to throw it.

[Black Jesus]

Your argument is that the die rolled a 20 without anyone to throw it.

[Black Jesus]

atheists so fucking retarded they like WHERES UR PROOF im like oh u kno just literally EVERYTHING

[Strifer]

this thread is 41 pages man ther is some hostility up in hurrr

[Droog007]

TL;DR

If Theists really want to make a sound argument against science, they really just need to stick to their guns and claim that the devil planted all the evidence that supports evolution in order to make it harder for [smart] people to get into heaven.

[Black Jesus]

That might be nice to do if there was any actual fucking evidence planted at all

[Droog007]

On flapping moon flags and multiple shadows: Could it be some gasses were expelled into the vacuum by nearby equipment? So hard to believe there were multiple sources of light?

On evolution pre-supposing abiogenesis: Maybe our planet was seeded by a resident of another planet where biogenesis makes a lot more sense? But then his spaceship would have needed to be encased by 9 feet of lead so there goes that theory ... shit.

[Black Jesus]

the 2 shadows on the moon came solely because it was filmed in a hollywood studio. The common explanation used, the anyone with even a basic understanding of physics knows is false, is that the 2 shadows are from the sun, and from the reflection of light on Earth. However, if this were truly the case, then the Earth would have 2 shadows as well from the reflections of the moon.

The ships did not expel enough exhause to create an artificial atmosphere. The flag also was not made of paper or cloth like a normal flag, it was (allegedly) made of tin foil, thus making it even harder to flap in the breeze, unless youre in a hollywood basement with giant industrial fans to keep the crew cool.

[Hasbinbad]

People should start doing debates as battle raps, that way we could determine if there is a god or not by applause -- the most scientific of all metrics.

<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/eFQcyAHCT9s?hl=en_US&amp;version=3&amp;rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/eFQcyAHCT9s?hl=en_US&amp;version=3&amp;rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

[Nihilist_santa]

People should start doing debates as battle raps, that way we could determine if there is a god or not by applause -- the most scientific of all metrics.

<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/eFQcyAHCT9s?hl=en_US&amp;version=3&amp;rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/eFQcyAHCT9s?hl=en_US&amp;version=3&amp;rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

Why, is your tactic of ignoring questions and logic and posting "funny" videos/pictures no longer working?

[Hasbinbad]

Why, is your tactic of ignoring questions and logic and posting "funny" videos/pictures no longer working?
Back at you. I've done plenty of explaining that hasn't been answered by anyone in your camp (e.g. the topic and directly related replies of the OP). I don't really see the need to engage in other topics, in this thread, while my very solid statements have been ignored.

Tl;dr: backatchya.

[Black Jesus]

i basically disproved the lunar landing in like 5 sentences

[Hasbinbad]

you sure did bro

[Black Jesus]

Cell theory states all cells come from pre-existing cells. Every single one. No exceptions. Abiogenesis assumes that cells can in fact come into existence without the need for a previously existing cell of that type.
AKA SCIENCE CONTRADICTS ITSELF

MORE THAN BIBLE (0 times)

[Hasbinbad]

y is chemical reactions "impossibre"

[Hasbinbad]

Your argument is that the die rolled a 20 without anyone to throw it.
You are absolutely attributing something to me that anyone can tell you is bullshit. I am a hardline agnostic and never say anything about the existence or non-existence of any deity. My only positions are that evolution is a real thing that happens, and that all cult/religious dogma, rhetoric, ritual, sacrifice, etc., is wrong and baseless and that forcing those traditions on children is child abuse.

I absolutely concede that there is no evidence either way for a prime mover, and as such I find that particular debate infinitely pointless. Whether or not that idea has merit, my opinion is that we should find out how things are.

[Hasbinbad]

I find atheists equally repugnant as theists.

[Hasbinbad]

Also I consider them to be very cultish.

[Kagatob]

Kagatob, put down that broom a minute and ask one of the scientist where you work about this.

Broom? How would a broom help a Cardiac Tech? Also it's a Catholic hospital so there aren't any scientists here only slaves of Phyzer and a few surgeons here and there. :)

[Kagatob]

Sciences own theories and laws are the best evidence against scientific hypothesis. Explain how cell theory and abiogenesis can co-exist. Cell theory states all cells come from pre-existing cells. Every single one. No exceptions. Abiogenesis assumes that cells can in fact come into existence without the need for a previously existing cell of that type. Abiogenesis however is just a hypothesis. Cell theory is an actual theory completely accepted by the entire scientific community.

According to you a theory is supposedly the highest achievement of scientific knowledge. Why then do you assume that some day the hypothesis of abiogenesis will some day be proven when there is a scientific theory that has never once been seen to be even so much as remotely not true. A theory which literally says that what this hypothesis is asserting is an impossibility according to every single ounce of knowledge we possess on the subject.

Sounds to me like desperation. Desperate to believe in anything other than what the evidence is blatantly telling us. According to cell theory, no cells should even exist at all. At one point no cells existed but they all have to come from one another and even then, they can only be the exact type of cell that they were produced from. This defies possibility. How can a scientific theory that literally contradicts itself even exist? The evidence is overwhelming is why. The important part of this theory is that it proves an "impossible" event occurred at one point in history. The "impossible" event of course being the creation of the first cell. The only logical explanation for an impossible event occurring that shows clear characteristics of intelligent involvement, would be God.

But of course, it can't be God, he doesn't exist! Anything but God!! How bout soup! Primordial soup! Everyone likes soup!!! Impossible things can just randomly occur on their own for no actual reason!


Completely unable to follow even the most basic instructions... no wonder you wallow in perpetual ignorance.
Thread has your name on it and I'm not even paying attention to your posts any more.

[Hasbinbad]

Thread has your name on it and I'm not even paying attention to your posts any more.

[Hasbinbad]

Thread confirmed more famous / popular than its namesake.

[Hitchens]

Also I consider them to be very cultish.

Jeez, is it really that big of a deal that I didn't accept your friendship request?

[Hasbinbad]

Jeez, is it really that big of a deal that I didn't accept your friendship request?
lol

[Hitchens]

Supposedly the Reddit atheism forum has all of the terrible characteristics that people associate with atheists.

[Hasbinbad]

I think you can't get more eloquent than Hitchens or Dawkins on the question of atheism, and even Dawkins is a self-admitted agnostic de facto, no matter how much they try to change the definitions of words.

I haven't heard anyone make a cogent argument on the subject that didn't originate with the thinking of these men, and they usually ignore tidbits like "god is just as likely as fairies"-dawkins in their cultish certainty and parroted positions.

[Black Jesus]

no even hitchens and dawkins are total fucking fart sniffin idiots

[Black Jesus]

Saudi Arabia is working to reverse decades of favoring religious over scientific studies in schools and universities. The country is pouring billions into improving science curricula, endowing new research-oriented universities and establishing scientific agencies.


not sure replacing 1 set of crackpot theories for another is gonna do them any good

[Hitchens]

I think you can't get more eloquent than Hitchens or Dawkins on the question of atheism, and even Dawkins is a self-admitted agnostic de facto, no matter how much they try to change the definitions of words.

I haven't heard anyone make a cogent argument on the subject that didn't originate with the thinking of these men, and they usually ignore tidbits like "god is just as likely as fairies"-dawkins in their cultish certainty and parroted positions.

I dunno about any of that, I just know they write good books.

[kenzar]

I think you can't get more eloquent than Hitchens or Dawkins on the question of atheism

No Sam Harris?

[kenzar]

I haven't heard anyone make a cogent argument on the subject that didn't originate with the thinking of these men
I'd take it one step further and postulate that Russell was doing it well before Hitch or Dawkins were out of diapers.

[Black Jesus]

all blowhards

[Ahldagor]

been away for a while. people still babbling about these shenanigans? mila is proof of evolution people.

[Black Jesus]

As a supporter of the Great Ape Project—a movement to extend certain moral and legal rights to all great apes—Dawkins contributed



....

JAJAJA dude really thinks hes a fucking monkey what the fuck

that is the most retarded braindead liberal sentence ive ever read

[Kagatob]

Speaking of Dawkins I'm very happy that the guy has calmed his ass down the past few years, it's almost as if he's given up his zealous quest to be right and embraced logic or something.
Also don't worry too much about lables, when Dawkins admitted to being agnostic it was when he was cornered in a debate, you can be an atheist and still acknowledge the possibility that some sort of greater force could exist as long as you are denouncing the gods of the mainstream religions of man. Something Dawkins certainly does. :)

[Hasbinbad]

I dunno about any of that, I just know they write good books.
I actually haven't read any Hitchens. I read the god delusion, liked some of it but am turned off by his certainty and attempt to redefine words. Speaking of:
Also don't worry too much about lables, when Dawkins admitted to being agnostic it was when he was cornered in a debate, you can be an atheist and still acknowledge the possibility that some sort of greater force could exist as long as you are denouncing the gods of the mainstream religions of man. Something Dawkins certainly does. :)
Bolded is a false statement. I do not cotton to the "strong," "weak," and "agnostic" type atheists. I think Dawkins here tries to relabel agnostics in an attempt to make a mass movement against religion "seem" to have a harder stance, making it more accessible to reactionaries. While I applaud his efforts to undermine religion, I think the methods are suspect. If you are "not certain" or "without knowledge" on the question of whether or not there is a higher power, you are by definition an agnostic on the topic, regardless of any unsubstantiated view or opinion you may have. People who are certain one way or the other are theists and atheists, and in my view equally dogmatic / stupid.

[Hasbinbad]

I dunno about any of that, I just know they write good books.
I was referencing their debates, which I have spent many, many hours watching.

Both men speak incredibly well, and imho Dawkins speaks better than he writes.

[Hasbinbad]

denouncing the gods of the mainstream religions of man
Atheism is not the same as anti-religion. One has to do with the nature of the universe, the other to do with the nature of something some person said and/or wrote down.

[Hasbinbad]

I am at once agnostic about whether or not there is a higher power and certain that all religions are wrong.

[Alawen]

There seems to be a common assertion that all religions are theist. This is provably false.

[Zadrian]

<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/JxDvjWTCmIY?version=3&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/JxDvjWTCmIY?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

[Black Jesus]

how come monkeys didnt evolve allong side man

why we the only 1s with speech and automobiles

answer: jesus

[kenzar]

how come monkeys didnt evolve allong side man

why we the only 1s with speech and automobiles

answer: jesus

Ray Comfort? Is that you?

[Hitchens]

<object width="420" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/2z-OLG0KyR4?version=3&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/2z-OLG0KyR4?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="420" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

[Recycled Children]

Atheists spend way too much time focusing on science when philosophy is a lot more interesting in questioning the existence of a god. It's a road to nowhere really because you're using natural methods to explain the supernatural or the lack of supernatural.

In the end, who cares? If you're not on the fence about whether a god exists or doesn't people's bitching isn't going to sway stubborn opinions.

[Kagatob]

<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/JxDvjWTCmIY?version=3&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/JxDvjWTCmIY?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

:D

[Kagatob]

There seems to be a common assertion that all religions relevant to this topic are theist. This is provably true.

:)

[Ahldagor]

http://i.imgur.com/e7PjQ91.jpg

WE CANNOT FORGET THE PROOF GRANTED TO US BY THE MILA!

[gotrocks]

this shit gets more ridiculous by the page.

im gonna use my particle fuckin accelerator to magic up some freaky ass fuckin stars while i drive my car through a nuclear reactor.

because TTEoSGKFTG

still relevant almost 10 pages later

[Ahldagor]

here's a nice vid to sum up everything

<object width="420" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/r5J0cSnYnFg?version=3&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/r5J0cSnYnFg?version=3&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="420" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

embed fail?

[Ahldagor]

da fuq?

<object width="420" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/X4FOsxvCOc4?hl=en_US&amp;version=3&amp;rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/X4FOsxvCOc4?hl=en_US&amp;version=3&amp;rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="420" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

[Ahldagor]

what it will take to ensure the end of this debate.

<object width="420" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/VYKMCU4JTjw?version=3&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/VYKMCU4JTjw?version=3&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="420" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

[Ahldagor]

<object width="420" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/aLqQttJinjo?version=3&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/aLqQttJinjo?version=3&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="420" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

[gotrocks]

^^rofl