Feed on Posts or Comments 23 November 2014

Christianity &Islam &Judaism Thomas on 25 Jan 2012 12:09 am

Notice how the natural thing to do is to laugh at the creationist

If you watch this video, it comes to a point where the politician is backed into a corner, and the only thing that people can do is laugh at him. His creationist beliefs are ridiculous:

Ridiculous.

34 Responses to “Notice how the natural thing to do is to laugh at the creationist”

  1. on 25 Jan 2012 at 12:40 pm 1.Anonymous said …

    scale of mental retardation

  2. on 25 Jan 2012 at 12:50 pm 2.A said …

    http://fc03.deviantart.net/files/f/2007/120/c/b/Is_Your_Housemate_an_Atheist__by_LivelyIvy.jpg

  3. on 25 Jan 2012 at 1:03 pm 3.Anonymous said …

    A, #2

    Notice the words coming out of his mouth. He is a person who reads textbooks: A mark of intelligence few religious people posess. Once a person starts reading fact-based textbooks, the retardation caused by religion often dissipates.

    Try it.

  4. on 25 Jan 2012 at 2:27 pm 4.RevWillyNilly said …

    The Creationist believes that science today will discover more and more (perhaps eventually revealing that the earth is just about 10,000 years old?). Funny how theists often ignore the science until they can use it to prove their own points.

  5. on 25 Jan 2012 at 6:47 pm 5.T said …

    We do not know the age of the earth. To script, the arrogant Dawkins believes he knows all. Depending on the methodology which all have numerous assumptions, we guess. The Bible doesn’t actually give a date. The elite believe what any good liberal with letters after his name will tell them. Too bad the facts get in the way

  6. on 25 Jan 2012 at 8:30 pm 6.Anonymous said …

    “Too bad the facts get in the way”

    Which facts would those be? Where can we read about them?

  7. on 25 Jan 2012 at 10:05 pm 7.Lou said …

    People evolved from apes? That is so funny. That is hard to imagine people believe such nonsense. Where is the proof?

  8. on 25 Jan 2012 at 10:50 pm 8.MrQ said …

    #7 lou “People evolved from apes?” Look into the genetics. Dare to research.

    Maybe you think that Man came from Adam and Eve? That is hard to imagine people believe such nonsense. Where is the proof?

    #6 Anon – Don’t feed the Troll, T in #5. Like good ol’ lou, he has nothing.

  9. on 26 Jan 2012 at 12:29 am 9.Lou (DFW) said …

    7.Lou said …

    “People evolved from apes? That is so funny. That is hard to imagine people believe such nonsense.”

    If you’re a theist, then you will believe anything without evidence, so why do you need it now?

    “Where is the proof?”

    If nowhere else, then as Mr Q wrote – “Look into the genetics. Dare to research.”

  10. on 26 Jan 2012 at 2:24 am 10.40 year Atheist said …

    “Early in his career, the philosopher Karl Popper … called evolution via natural selection “almost a tautology” and “not a testable scientific theory but a metaphysical research program.” Attacked for these criticisms, Popper took them back. But when I interviewed him in 1992, he blurted out that he still found Darwin’s theory dissatisfying. ‘One ought to look for alternatives!’ Popper exclaimed, banging his kitchen table.”

    John Horgan, Cross-Check at Scientific American”

    I always wondered why Popper would eviscerate his own theories in order to support evolution. He caved under attack, professing to something he did not consider to be valid. The Atheo-Lefty Ad Hominem machine apparently was too much for him. I’m glad the true story is now out. It is odd, however, that the revelation comes from one of the Atheo-Leftist Ad Hominemers, but that just helps its credibility, in my book.

    Actually, the process of natural selection based on mutation should first be produced experimentally, and then the before/after data examined, if a scientific process is to be followed rather than a rush to publish inferences and fatuous stories based on belief systems. Given that virtually all “data” presented in support of speciating evolution by natural selection is, in fact, inferential, extrapolatory and not experimental, this is not new, except that the process is under what appears to be a valid mathematical and scientific attack by its own members who apparently are still believers, regardless.

  11. on 26 Jan 2012 at 4:06 am 11.Lou (DFW) said …

    “10.40 year Atheist said …

    “I always wondered why Popper would eviscerate his own theories in order to support evolution.”

    I wonder why theists like 40YA continue to post rambling attacks on evolution when it has been written here time and time again that it’s irrelevant to the argument about god’s existence as to whether or not, or even how it works, evolution is true.

    The only possible answer is that they have no evidence for their imaginary god.

  12. on 26 Jan 2012 at 4:16 pm 12.Your Opinion. said …

    Saying there is no facts to back up belief in God requires you to have facts. All you have are your own perceptions of what you call facts. Neither side can be proven but you coulod go on forever waisting your time. All there is is one’s own personal experince with God.

  13. on 26 Jan 2012 at 5:00 pm 13.DPK said …

    “All there is is one’s own personal experince (sic) with God.”

    This is true. Thank you for admitting it. ALL there is is what one would call their own “personal experience” with god. But let’s point out, that people have been claiming “personal experiences” with gods of all sorts, and yes, even alien visitors on UFO’s, Elvis, talking animals, and all sorts of other stuff for tens of thousands of years.

    I don’t know what belief system you have, but I assume that if I told you that I had a “personal experience” with the flying spaghetti monster, you would dismiss my “personal experience” as a delusion… correct? Or if I told you I had “personal knowledge” of leprechauns, unicorns, and fairies, or perhaps had a “personal relationship with Thor, the god of thunder, you would dismiss them as nonsense… correct?
    Now ask yourself what makes your god any different? The answer is absolutely nothing.

  14. on 26 Jan 2012 at 6:47 pm 14.Lou said …

    DFW

    The reason you are not debated is because all you have is red herrings. Space travel was a fairy tale too. Guess what?

    Point out some beliefs are false is irrelevant. I picked up a fake Rolex in NYC but so what? There are real ones.

    Nobody is arguing any of your childhood heroes are real so give it up. You remain totally fallacious. You chose not believe? Fine….but the more you argue and belittle the more uncertain you become.

    And no, the whole blog is not about evidence for God. Do you even read the threads. The subject of evolution is quite clear.

    40 YA
    Nice point on Popper.

  15. on 26 Jan 2012 at 9:06 pm 15.Lou (DFW) said …

    14.Lou said …

    “DFW

    The reason you are not debated is because all you have is red herrings.”

    I’m not here to “debate.” I’m here to refute all the lies and distractions that theists provide in lieu of any evidence for their imaginary god.

    “Space travel was a fairy tale too. Guess what?

    Point out some beliefs are false is irrelevant. I picked up a fake Rolex in NYC but so what? There are real ones.

    Nobody is arguing any of your childhood heroes are real so give it up. You remain totally fallacious. You chose not believe?”

    Are you on drugs, drunk, or simply incoherent?

    “Fine….but the more you argue and belittle the more uncertain you become.”

    In this regard there is one thing of which I am certain – you have no evidence for your imaginary god.

    “And no, the whole blog is not about evidence for God. Do you even read the threads. The subject of evolution is quite clear.”

    Wrong again.

    http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/blog/?page_id=2

    “About this blog

    WhyWontGodHealAmputees.com is a web site that explores the existence of God. This blog accompanies the site and explores God and religion in our world today.”

    Evolution neither confirms nor denies the existence of god. Arguments about evolution are a theist cop-out to avoid the conclusion that their imaginary god doesn’t exist. Even the pope accepts evolution and big-bang theory.

    Try to get this through your thick skull – arguments about evolution are irrelevant to this blog and discussions about your imaginary god.

    “40 YA
    Nice point on Popper.”

    Also irrelevant to any discussion about your imaginary god. Who cares if you think it’s a “Nice point on Popper?” (Somebody remove that point “on Popper” before he injures someone.)

  16. on 26 Jan 2012 at 11:21 pm 16.Xenon said …

    Lou

    Nobody pays attention the Lou the troll. He is not capable of debate or discussion nor does he understand what a thread is on a blog. Just type around his comments. If you read one post you read them all.
    However, there are some here who do from time to time offer some good points of discussion like 40ya. Haven’t see the others lately.

    40ya,

    I seem to recall Popper as being one of Observers favorite men to quote. He did make a habit of ignoring the quotes of Popper that did not support his preconceived worldview or making excuses for said quotes.

  17. on 26 Jan 2012 at 11:48 pm 17.Lou (DFW) said …

    16.Xenon said …

    “Nobody pays attention the Lou the troll.”

    Then that means you and Lou (not DFW) are “nobodies.”

    Or by “Nobody pays attention” you mean theists not responding to my requests for evidence of their imaginary god.

    “He is not capable of debate or discussion nor does he understand what a thread is on a blog.”

    Of course I do. A “thread” on evolution on this “blog” is irrelevant to its purpose, of which you continuously ignore. Are you now reduced to arguing over semantics?

    The existence of your imaginary god is not dependent upon whether or not evolution is true, is it? It seems for you it must be.

  18. on 27 Jan 2012 at 7:48 am 18.Anonymous said …

    Xenon, don’t be silly.

    Everyone can see that you come on here with your sock puppet accounts trying desperately to derail the conversation so as to avoid having to admit that you’d need to be mentally unstable or a complete asshole to believe in any god in this day and age.

    Yet, you believe in god which is really, really, odd, considering that you have no proof other than your desperation.

    Please go and do the maths.

  19. on 27 Jan 2012 at 11:05 am 19.Anonymous said …

    http://i.imgur.com/GsgH3.jpg

  20. on 28 Jan 2012 at 7:24 pm 20.Lou said …

    Xenon,

    I can of find this other Lou kind of entertaining. He really is pretty narcissistic with his “no proof” battle cry. He seems to think he is the judge and jury on such matters.

    Going back to Popper who I did have great respect for, he was like many scientist. There are lines you cannot cross in the world of academia. You can be a believer, as long as you do not discuss it. Believers far out number atheist from my experiences.

  21. on 28 Jan 2012 at 7:33 pm 21.Lou (DFW) said …

    20.Lou said …

    “He seems to think he is the judge and jury on such matters.”

    Wrong. In order for there to be a “judge and jury,” there must be some evidence to consider. You haven’t presented any.

    Come back when you have some.

  22. on 28 Jan 2012 at 9:49 pm 22.Lou (DFW) said …

    20.Lou said …

    “Believers far out number atheist from my experiences.”

    Therefore, god exists. (?)

    So much for your pseudo-intellectual posturing.

  23. on 29 Jan 2012 at 3:58 am 23.Anonymous said …

    So, once again Horatiio posts under multiple identities so that he can have a conversation with himself.

    The fascinating thing about these conversations is that the more Horatiio tries to argue that no-one has proved his delusion wrong, the more obvious his desperation to avoid facing reality becomes.

    Keep it up Hor, the more people like you post your nonsense, the easier it will be for us to put religion where it belongs – in books of fairy stories and its extreme advocates locked up for the good of society.

  24. on 01 Feb 2012 at 12:55 am 24.an said …

    If you truly look at the facts, not the facts that are published because they are all being hampered by gate keeping, but the actually facts, you will see that the world around had to be created, evolution is a religion in itself, at least its faith based. where does one start? if you look at the way things are dated you will know you are being lied to. when dating a fossil, you dont use carbon dating or any other dating, you use the soil or layer in which it was found. great that should work quite well right? well then how do you date the soil, well thats extremely simple, you date the soil by the fossils that are found in it. if you cant figure out where im going with this you really need to check peoples motives in pushing these theories. there are over 25 lies in most text books about evolution, they have been scientifically proven incorrect, yet they are still in text books as fact. if something is proven wrong and its still being used as a fact, there is clearly an agenda, you should look into that.

  25. on 01 Feb 2012 at 1:04 am 25.an said …

    the true reason this gentleman in the video was backed into a corner was either because he doesnt believe in creation or he was afraid to speak what he truly thought, the video, like so many other examples is a terrible example of a true debate. much like the question why doesnt God heal amputees, the video is made or at least used to lead you in one direction, causing you to not think but rather follow someone elses agenda.

  26. on 01 Feb 2012 at 3:11 am 26.Lou (DFW) said …

    24.an said …

    “evolution is a religion in itself, at least its faith based.”

    By definition, evolution cannot be a religion. Nor can it in any way be “faith-based.” You sir, are an idiot.

    “where does one start?”

    With you? First-grade.

  27. on 14 Mar 2012 at 12:41 pm 27.Matthew Chance said …

    All knowledge is based on human experiences over the course of millinia. Now, do we really trust a succession of minds that can have their perspective altered by the slightest physiological changes to somehow define absolute truth. Many followers of Christ read and understand text books, they just keep in mind while they’re reading that the books constantly have to be updated.

  28. on 14 Mar 2012 at 12:47 pm 28.Matthew Chance said …

    Boils down to this…

    Creator or Created, who do you trust?

  29. on 14 Mar 2012 at 4:33 pm 29.ReligionIsStupid said …

    Uneducated, illiterate, bronze-age goat-herder’s superstitious nonsense, or actual reality-based world. It’s not which do you prefer, it’s which one is real.

  30. on 14 Mar 2012 at 5:51 pm 30.alex said …

    Creator or Created, who do you trust?

    trot out the false dillema bullshit.

    pascal’s cousin.

    it’s either heaven or hell. your choice, atheist!

    …with us or against us?

    …black or white….blah! blather! blah!

    where’s the beef?

  31. on 14 Mar 2012 at 6:40 pm 31.Anonymous said …

    > Boils down to this… Creator or Created, who do you trust?

    Lets see. Science has a mountain of confirmable, reproducible evidence behind it. God and the Bible have zero evidence. Any intelligent person chooses science.

  32. on 14 Mar 2012 at 7:12 pm 32.ReligionIsStupid said …

    Now, do we really trust a succession of minds that can have their perspective altered by the slightest physiological changes to somehow define absolute truth.

    We get a lot of people in here who make those kind of comments. They usually claim to have some kind of “higher”, “universal”, or “absolute” truth. Are you saying you don’t trust people like yourself who think truth comes from fairy-tales? I would agree with you, and so would a lot of rational people.

    Many followers of Christ read and understand text books, they just keep in mind while they’re reading that the books constantly have to be updated.

    Agreed, not all Xtians are stupid, many just believe stupid things. The comment about updating things strikes me as odd. You say that as if it’s a bad thing.

    It’s as if given the choice between a comment written on Wednesday saying “Matthew complains a lot but doesn’t produce evidence” and a comment on Thursday saying “In hindsight, Matthew made a good point”, you’d rather the original comment about your whining stayed cast in stone because updating things is bad. Right?

  33. on 05 Apr 2012 at 9:27 pm 33.MattD said …

    “the true reason this gentleman in the video was backed into a corner was either because he doesnt believe in creation or he was afraid to speak what he truly thought, the video, like so many other examples is a terrible example of a true debate. much like the question why doesnt God heal amputees, the video is made or at least used to lead you in one direction, causing you to not think but rather follow someone elses agenda.”

    You find offense when people ask questions? Your appeal to ignorance is not original, but still just as stupid as it’s been for centuries past.

  34. on 22 May 2012 at 4:46 am 34.Sharks said …

    Dawkins & most atheists are not saying “Do not believe in God”. The real theme or message they are attempting to give you is to think for yourself.

    The message behind any and ALL religion is ‘DO NOT THINK’ at all, questions not allowed and requests for evidence are evil.

    Reality cannot be debated…. what you believe has no effect upon it. It is not a two sided debate, one side has mountains of falsifiable evidence and the other side has a belief in magic.

    Science is not a faith or a popularity poll, it is a tool to measure the reality in which we exist.

    To admit to being a theist is to admit to being too stupid or lazy to think.

    This clip embarrasses me no end. An aussie politician admitting to believing the earth is 10k old…. yo might as well believe that a guy can live in a whale …. oh wait…..

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply